On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:38:30 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by James Christophers Post by Tony Post by James Christophers Post by Tony Post by James Christophers Post by Tony Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
On Tuesday, November 10, 2020 at 5:14:57 PM UTC+13, Rich80105
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot
Post by Tony
Post by Willy Nilly Post by Rich80105 Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105 Post by Willy Nilly Post by Willy Nilly
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all.
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of
that only fools take them seriously.
So you say.
In which case know that political polling provides a sampled overview of the
swings in public sentiment during the run-up to an election. These same polls
are assiduously tracked and analysed by local and international finance because
they know sentiment has as much to do with the way economies behave as does any
other factor. For verification, look only to the behaviour of stock markets
where killings are to be made by the mere whiff of a trend in sentiment one way
or the other, this behaviour being even more pronounced when competing policies
are significantly diverse and opposed. The sentiment in this instance is
twofold: greed and fear.
Anyone who uses polls as a basis for making important decisions is at best a
gambler and at worst stupid.
Categorically unequivocal, one notes, but conveying not one iota of substance
or learning in your foolish and precipitate absolutism. You do rather a lot of
it too, don't you?
Then know that political polls are only one of the myriad factors in making
decisions, political, financial and otherwise; "basis" being the sum total of
these - i.e. the foundation - on which any such judgements and decisions are
Polls are of no actual value, something that you should know but refuse to
address with any intelligent argument.
As I have shown, the evidence is irrefutably otherwise, and you know it. All you have left to you you is your obduracy in the face of fact-borne evidence - childish foot-stamping of the intellectually stunted whose only recourse when on the back foot is to try to browbeat and dominate the discourse. And you do a lot of it, too, don't you?
Post by Tony Post by James Christophers Post by Tony Post by James Christophers Post by Tony Post by Rich80105 Post by Tony
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection. Just another
nasty bit of silliness.
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by people like
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
Without doubt, Trump appeals first and foremost to the unyielding and
tone-deaf authoritarian turn of mind, whoever, whatever and wherever it may be
and no matter what the underlying ideology. Birds of a feather...
(Note appropriate use of the ellipsis.)
Not an appropriate use at all - just scotch mist and vapours.
Wrong again. Fact is, it's 100% appropriate, as are your last five words which, ironically, together characterise your infantile recalcitrance in the face of reasoned discourse. You are not a debater in any rational sense of the term; you are wholly and solely an inveterate stousher of the Trumpian stripe and you cannot show otherwise. Period.
I suspect at times that Tony merely criticises for the sake of
criticism - and when called on his criticism actually being wrong is
likely to say it was just an opinion. I took the time today to search
for ellipsis, and can confirm that the use of it in "Birds of a
feather... : is absolutely correct, both grammatically and in my
opinion correctly applied to Tony. I did find that there is some
disagreement as to whether it should be "..." or ". . .", but that is
relatively minor - both appear to be used and widely accepted.
As to the issue of Trumpism in New Zealand generally, I was not able
ot find the radio report that I referred to - RNZ podcasts are not
easily searched for such content - but I did find the following link
which is I think the study referred to by RNZ:
from which I found this of interest - it does appear to describe at
least two of the contributors to this thread:
"In general, Kiwi Trumpers see society as more discontented, and
politicians as less trustworthy, than the average New Zealander.
Some 47.5% of the Trump supporters endorsed conspiracy theories about
the COVID-19 virus. For them, it was either an invention of shadowy
forces that want to control us (11%) or a biological weapon created
by one of the worlds super-powers (35.5%).
Only 7.7% of Trump opponents ticked either of those statements. And,
overall, 85.8% of the sample agreed that the virus came from a natural
Moreover, only 11.7% of Trump supporters agreed the New Zealand
government was taking the right approach to dealing with the economic
impact of COVID-19, while 62% of Trump opponents agreed.
And 84% of the Kiwi Trumpers preferred the government take a cautious
and sceptical approach to climate change, compared with 23.8% of