Trump and bleach

UKworkshop.co.uk

Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Yesterday's (or was it Thursday night??) bleach and UV light conference was depressing.

I hope this is an absolute low point for the orange ***** and that people will now abandon him in droves.
 
Chippyjoe":1wn169oz said:
What borders Insanity ?











Mexico and Canada, apparently.


Don't think there isn't a little insanity here either. (homer) The borders have gotten a little fuzzy these days. :wink:

Pete
 
Saw this today
 

Attachments

  • IFLG1722.JPG
    IFLG1722.JPG
    58.2 KB
At least we know that Trump does not have hemorrhoids. He is a perfect as.....

It really beggars belief that out of a population of 300000000, it came down to a choice between Trump and Clinton, and even then the one with fewer votes actually won. Totally bizarre.
 
Steve Maskery":3g62dl4a said:
...It really beggars belief that out of a population of 300000000...
Ahh well, there'll be a few less this election.

And related...
Iceberg.jpg


Cheers, Vann.
 

Attachments

  • Iceberg.jpg
    Iceberg.jpg
    61.8 KB
Trainee neophyte":206ojgyw said:
Poor old Trump is such an easy target - it's not really sporting.

Good old H L Mencken: "On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron."

He also said, "The men the American people admire most extravagantly are the most daring liars; the men they detest most violently are those who try to tell them the truth."

I am in agreement with virtually all his quotes - it doesn't make me popular at dinner parties.
He also said that democracy is the idea that the common man knows what he wants, and deserves to get it , good and hard. Or words to that effect. He would probably be considered a racist, misogynist(spelling?) these days, but a product of his era.
 
Terry - Somerset":2wmjihb9 said:
In the UK conventional constitutional wisdom is that ministers sit at the top of the tree and take responsibility for the actions of the departments of state for which they are responsible.

The reality is that the typical minister has either limited or (often) no experience of the activities of the department he/she has been given responsibility for.

Nick Hancock, pivotal in the CV-19 outbreak as Health minister, has no experience of medicine other than (probably) the occassional visit to a GP etc. He is a PPE graduate from Oxford, who spent time in the family computer software business before working as an economist in the Bank of England.

The minister sets priorities (based inevitably on advice and input from civil servants) and is the departments budget champion in cabinet discussions.

Effective power rests with a permanent Civil Service whose role is to support governments of all persuasions. They try to resist political interference, mostly successfully. The nature of a permanent civil service may be very different in other countries where political patronage dominates.

So ministers get the blame for the inadequacies of Civil Servants, and take the credit for their successes. This may be a fair balance, although rather than blaming ministers for deficiencies in contingency planning, resources, testing, etc, we should probably place a greater focus on the civil servants who over the years have advised ill informed ministers.

You do know that Yes Minister was a satire, right Terry? PS so was In the Thick of It.
 
D_W":2br6shn0 said:
John Brown":2br6shn0 said:
Good try, D_W. Especially the comparison with Obama.

I'm off to grate some chalk for my pizza.

But, let's be clear, most people here don't care at all what other countries think about the politicians, just as most English folks would find it appalling that most americans don't follow much of anything about international politics.

We'll see people in Spain and England telling us we should be embarrassed, but we think you need to stiffen your wrists a little bit if you're that insecure.

The problem is that, having been instrumental in driving globalization and the inter-dependency of nations, the US can't now simply turn is back and say, "We don't care what you think."
If it weren't for that and the nuclear arms question, I doubt that the rest of the world would give a damn about who was President of the US.
Pete
 
D_W":18iha232 said:
John Brown":18iha232 said:
Good try, D_W. Especially the comparison with Obama.

I'm off to grate some chalk for my pizza.

That's how a lot of people over here think - a distrust for all politicians. We suspect the folks like Hillary and Obama (and George Bush Sr) who are more calculating about their personal appearance really don't have a lot of good for anyone, either.

Maybe that's a foreign concept over there.

The 25% partisans on each end are idiots. The folks who go from making fun of russia being a threat to telling us how big of a threat they are without noticing not many years have passed, and the people who try to tell us that Trump is misunderstood and it's all the media.

They're two different sides of pro-wrestling booking.

But, let's be clear, most people here don't care at all what other countries think about the politicians, just as most English folks would find it appalling that most americans don't follow much of anything about international politics.

The media pushed Obama for us and really curated his image - they adored him. He gave us a ton of debt and a promise to make it easier for China to transfer wealth without much oversight, and his bookers (pro wrestling term) decided that the main event would be anti Russia after Mitt (who seems sleazy to me, too) said only a few years before that russia was a bigger threat than terrorists and was ridiculed into revising his stance.

You may not see these things from outside the US. I don't favor another term of Trump, but there's some safe feeling in the fact that he can't hide anything. Our government is divided up into its administrative form (which is 90% of it) and elected officials. What the 90% of the government does (I work with that part on a regular basis) doesn't change much no matter what the booked message is. I think Biden will be elected and the gaffes will be different but the day to day running of the country won't change much.

We'll see people in Spain and England telling us we should be embarrassed, but we think you need to stiffen your wrists a little bit if you're that insecure.
Sorry, but no.
I have a large American family by virtue of having an American wife. We had our weekly Zoom meeting this evening. They all think your man is a total moron. Stiffen our wrists? Insecure? You're joking, surely?
 
Steve Maskery":21gly2hs said:
It really beggars belief that out of a population of 300000000, it came down to a choice between Trump and Clinton, and even then the one with fewer votes actually won. Totally bizarre.

Narrowing the field down to Clinton and Trump is another unfortunate disaster, but Trump winning is due to the Electoral College, not the popular vote. Trump once called the Electoral College a disaster for democracy. Unfortunately, he was correct.
 
I do not disagree. We have the same flawed system over here, actually. I can't remember if it was Wilson or Heath, but I believe one of them became PM after winning fewer votes than the other. It is quite possible because of the constituency system.
It doesn't make it right, of course.
 
I was sent this the other evening after Trumps disinfectant ramblings with the caption “cheers”

A13F945B-96AE-42E8-8051-7A96168F246E.png
 

Attachments

  • A13F945B-96AE-42E8-8051-7A96168F246E.png
    A13F945B-96AE-42E8-8051-7A96168F246E.png
    764.3 KB
Steve Maskery":exjc21v8 said:
I do not disagree. We have the same floored system over here, actually. I can't remember if it was Wilson or Heath, but I believe one of them became PM after winning fewer votes than the other. It is quite possible because of the constituency system.
It doesn't make it right, of course.

No, just flawed. :D
 
Make Hillary Clinton and the promise of increasing globalism (which has led to shuttering of facilities one after another in the US for the last 30 years) and then it makes more sense.

It's a 50/50 thing here. People vote and hold their nose. Those on the endpoints who buy into the pro wrestling style promotion (if you hear someone start with "you know, none of this is true, they're just trying to take down Trump", then it's time to wander away. Or if you hear "all ___ are evil, and the _______ party is really about helping people. Some people are selfish, though and that's why they're not on board".....then it's time to wander away).

The people on the endpoints turn the TV (or subscriptions, phones, etc) on and just look to get mad, and maybe get on facebook and bash each other (twitter, instagram, whatever the favorite platform is), but most of the rest of us in the middle don't really turn it on and watch it at all. We go to the dr. to get medical advice and financial websites or advisors to get financial advice, and we walk down the street and talk with our neighbors (now from a moderate distance) and discuss pleasant things that have nothing at all to do with politics.
 
garethharvey":cvwu7guc said:
I just don't understand how he's there.

360 million Americans can't be that thick!

The voting age population of the U.S. in 2016 was about 250 million, but only about 56 percent turned out for the presidential election. Unfortunately, it is the Electoral College and the "winner takes all" laws in most U.S. states that won the election for the Orange One.

It might be easier to explain the rules of cricket to a caveman than try to understand the rules of the Electoral College.
 
& now the orange moron denies any responsibility for the spike in disinfectant abuse since his press conference were he talked about disinfectant being a possible cure.
Staggering
 
Back
Top