Measure of a Man is season 2!

I’d start with Strange New Worlds. It’s very classic Trek in terms of its themes and stories, but as it’s still being made it has contemporary audiences in mind. If you like it, I would then go to TNG.

Exactly. I think Labour would do it, more than happily, were it not for the housing crisis. They understandably want to build a lot, quickly, but they need to be convinced that the crisis won’t really be ‘solved’ without medium- long-term thinking, which includes eco-friendly standards.

Yeah, no room for complacency! But that’s why we need to do the difficult things quickly (e.g., building all the pylons we need to link up new green energy developments) and also do things that aren’t likely to be undone (which is why Labour shouldn’t drop the requirement for new homes to have solar panels).

In the UK, the environmental movement has actually won the argument, but I don’t think we’ve fully realised it, yet. Even Conservative voters (if not MPs) want climate action as a high priority.

I’m sceptical, but I think that as long as carbon capture happens alongside shutting down fossil fuels, it’s at least worth a try.

I’m not going to go through this point by point. Some of it I think is probably about right and some not. What I will say is that I don’t think it’s consistent to say people were crying wolf over Trump, who tried to overthrow one election and would have done the same with this one had he lost, and then in the same place to suggest that a Harris win would’ve resulted in the end of democracy based entirely on a loosely defined notion of elitism.

Yeah, if I was in charge I’d build council housing for the rich, too (like the Barbican). Then the money currently going on rent and mortgages could be better invested elsewhere!

sell them for full market value and put any profit into a fund to build more council houses

This is probably the way to go, because then the Tories won’t be able to run on ‘Bring Back Right To Buy’.

My point was that if the man is still ‘armed’, he hasn’t been ‘disarmed’, he just has one less (type of) gun. For example, if I told you that there was a man in my street with two guns, and then added that he’d now been disarmed (forcibly or otherwise), you would assume that he now had zero guns.

The fact that he didn’t call them trash is the salient point here.

I mean, apart from anything else, the word he used, whatever it was applied to, was ‘garbage’.

disarm

If a man had an assault rifle and a handgun, and he put down the assault rifle, would you describe him as ‘unarmed’? If so, I don’t think you can describe removing assault rifles as ‘disarming’ people.

No, he didn’t. Both the context and the grammar make it clear that my interpretation is correct. Even if you interpret it unsumpathetically, the inference that it’s ‘all’ Trump supporters is something you’ve added.

Any Trump supporter pretending to be offended by what Biden didn’t actually say is in any case a massive hypocrite, because Trump built his political career on being offensive. They can’t turn around now and act all offended unless they also repudiate Trump.

That’s part of the reason I’m sharing it here!

Anyway, I’m sure there’s a non-zero number of conservative-leaning readers of the NYT. Every one of them who’s swayed away from Trump is a win.

He didn’t. “The only garbage I see is his supporter’s” garbage, i.e, it’s the possessive “'s”. The clue here is ‘is’, singular. If he meant a group of people, he’d have said ‘are’, plural.

Anyway, Trump called the whole country a garbage can, so if you’re so desperately offended by your misunderstanding of Biden’s comments, I guess you’re also pretty torn up about Trump’s actual comments, right?

He was a secret Marxist all along. The Daily Mail was right!

Missing the vital context that Trump keeps praising Hitler, and that’s the reason people are making the comparison.

Just nationalise it already.

Like I’ve said, it’s not a matter of owing her votes. I just think that you shouldn’t use your vote in a way that will make things worse.

I’ve not ascribed any views to you beyind what you’ve said here, and I’d appreciate if you didn’t do the same to me. I don’t think you support Trump, but it is a fact that your current plans make a Trump win more likely. It’s precisely because I don’t believe you support Trump (and in particular what he’d do in Gaza) that I think you should reconsider that plan.

Anyway, we’re going round in circles here. Unless you can show to me that voting for Stein will have something other than a wholly negative outcome for Gaza or anywhere else, I’m not going to change my view that it’s a mistake for you to do so.

And if she doesn’t, you’ll use your vote to make things worse? As I say, doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.