French Elections 2017

f2wohf said:
As I said in the post before, I deeply hate Macron
Click to expand...
So you're abstaining then? If I had a vote I'd simply throw it behind the candidate that pisses the EU off the most, but if I genuinely despised both candidates ... mmm ... I'd probably go to vote and write the most vile insults I can imagine on the ballot paper instead of an 'X'.
 
NarrowBandFtw said:
So you're abstaining then? If I had a vote I'd simply throw it behind the candidate that pisses the EU off the most, but if I genuinely despised both candidates ... mmm ... I'd probably go to vote and write the most vile insults I can imagine on the ballot paper instead of an 'X'.
Click to expand...

Save for a major event between the second round, yes.
 
Unhappy438 said:
Do allegations without proof make you worried too?
Click to expand...

Proof? :crylaugh: what is this foreign concept?!? There's no place for proof in a world where unilateral sanctions can be implemented and 59 tomahawks can fly based on nothing more than a convenient fit for the chosen narrative.
 
NarrowBandFtw said:
Proof? :crylaugh: what is this foreign concept?!? There's no place for proof in a world where unilateral sanctions can be implemented and 59 tomahawks can fly based on nothing more than a convenient fit for the chosen narrative.
Click to expand...

So you go by that standard now? Or can we simply dismiss your post?
 
Unhappy438 said:
So you go by that standard now? Or can we simply dismiss your post?
Click to expand...
Who is this 'we'? You're the only one throwing the troll bait out there, not my fault it's weak stuff :D

To answer your loaded question: consistency is key, we either always demand proof, or never. The world is certainly in a 'never' cycle currently, so the fair and consistent thing to do would be to assume Macron is guilty without seeing any proof.
 
NarrowBandFtw said:
Who is this 'we'? You're the only one throwing the troll bait out there, not my fault it's weak stuff :D

To answer your loaded question: consistency is key, we either always demand proof, or never. The world is certainly in a 'never' cycle currently, so the fair and consistent thing to do would be to assume Macron is guilty without seeing any proof.
Click to expand...

You're the one that isn't being consistent, just in the last page you were asking for proof on an allegation. Now you're asking if people are worried about allegations without proof.

Pointing out your logical inconsistencies isn't trolling and it wont get you away from your inability to be consistent.

Oh and we refers to like minded forumites and dont worry they exist ;)
 
f2wohf said:
Save for a major event between the second round, yes.
Click to expand...

Abstaining is how the USA got Trump and the UK got Brexit. Just because you can easily leave to go to a different country doesn't mean others can. If Le Pen wins the disintegration of the EU is almost certain, and the ramifications of that are truly worrying.

Macron may not be great, but he is very much the lesser of two evils.
 
Unhappy438 said:
You're the one that isn't being consistent, just in the last page you were asking for proof on an allegation. Now you're asking if people are worried about allegations without proof.

Pointing out your logical inconsistencies isn't trolling and it wont get you away from your inability to be consistent.

Oh and we refers to like minded forumites and dont worry they exist ;)
Click to expand...
Seems I need to slow it down to pre-primary school speed ... here we go:

I consistently demand proof, you would know that from topics like Syria, f2wohf however seems less concerned about hard evidence, if he is willing to judge Le Pen based in part on allegations, then for him to be consistent he would also judge Macron based on the same.

A consistency that he does indeed seem to demonstrate, so all is well. I offered no judgement or opinion on the Macron allegations, hell I specifically called them what they are: allegations, and then posed the question to f2wohf that they should worry him.

That clear enough (and perfectly consistent mind you) or do I need to break out the crayons?
 
The_Assimilator said:
Abstaining is how the USA got Trump and the UK got Brexit. Just because you can easily leave to go to a different country doesn't mean others can. If Le Pen wins the disintegration of the EU is almost certain, and the ramifications of that are truly worrying.

Macron may not be great, but he is very much the lesser of two evils.
Click to expand...

Which is why I say save for a major event.

Macron will win without's the right's votes. Should there be a major wave for Le Pen or an attack I will go vote.
 
The_Assimilator said:
"Trump will never win"
"Brexit will never pass"

Please don't tempt fate.
Click to expand...

Worst case, we still have round 3 and 4, the parliament elections.

And in french politics, a president without majority is useless.
 
NarrowBandFtw said:
Seems I need to slow it down to pre-primary school speed ... here we go:

I consistently demand proof, you would know that from topics like Syria, f2wohf however seems less concerned about hard evidence, if he is willing to judge Le Pen based in part on allegations, then for him to be consistent he would also judge Macron based on the same.

A consistency that he does indeed seem to demonstrate, so all is well. I offered no judgement or opinion on the Macron allegations, hell I specifically called them what they are: allegations, and then posed the question to f2wohf that they should worry him.

That clear enough (and perfectly consistent mind you) or do I need to break out the crayons?
Click to expand...

Oh you're playing pretend, i get that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X