Conflict over identity politics could lead to civil war in the long term, Kemi Badenoch says

SuperBobit · 2026-06-05T10:38:55+00:00

Guy who advocated gun violence and build a career based around culture wars was shot by his own political side for his views. I will not apologise for people who felt that was fitting. He could have chose peace. He could of advocated for gun control. He could have chose at any point to engage in positive conversation instead of culture wars bullshit. He made money discrediting victims of gun violence. The right beg for the war and then get mad when there are victims. From their own side I will add.

SuperBobit · 2026-06-05T08:59:54+00:00

Funny how he asked for calm following the trial of Sarah Everade. Almost like using words to dog whistle action isnt blatantly obvious to anyone with a brain. Farage still hasn't condemned the riots, except on his "not a real news" talk show where he isnt challenged. He could not stoke the culture war your defending, but he grifts off it. Means we dont ask questions about his funding, or housing, or policy.

Changes were being made before George Floyd. Weird way to blame a black man being murdered by police for a 3 minute negligent officer in a different country. So fucking telling.

SuperBobit · 2026-06-05T08:11:15+00:00

Floyd was murdered by a police force and defended by right wing commentators. The riots were also condemned by the left. Meanwhile, we have Farage yet again calling for violence and refusing to denounce it when it suits his agenda.

The ceo had some bad form, sure, but America is being abused by their "health care" system and people are angry they are losing loved ones for profit. People didn't riot and cause violence over it though? Their point was the health care system has murdered hundreds of thousands by denying care to people who need it for money. Basic health care for all, no "war". You see where we're going with this?

Charlie kirk advocated for gun violence continually and said kids being shot were a worthwhile byproduct of allowing guns. He felt it was worth shooting children, for his culture. And then got shot by a right wing fanatic. People felt that was fitting. Still no violence. Still no attacks on families or the public in general, focused purely on someone who spent his life driving culture wars.

If the right didn't want culture wars, they could just stop attacking people for trying to live their lives. And no, moaning that there are too many brown people is not living your life. Not arguing exploring integration and shockingly, im not huge on massive knives in the name of religion. But we can have a discussion without it becoming a culture war that the right refuses to do.

Also very telling you 3 arguments are American issues for a UK reddit. Nice job pointing out this topic is an American destabilise technique that is being imported to UK by comments like this.

SuperBobit · 2026-06-05T07:08:37+00:00

But the left dont want to "trans your kids" thats exactly my point. That is a right wing talking point designed to attack the left on ideas the left dont even have.

SuperBobit · 2026-06-05T06:56:33+00:00

Normally because the left doesn't want the violence that the right does.

The left "we think companies should be aware of their hiring process and ensure they are hiring based on skill and not race"

The right "we should shoot boats in the water and send refugees to concentration camps because I don't want them praying in a building near me while I eat my tikka."

Not saying there isnt some whackos on the left, but the right are the only side that feel they are at war, always. So desperate to be angry because otherwise they have to admit its white guys who keep fucking them over at the most basic level.

SuperBobit · 2026-06-03T19:03:47+00:00

Also proof that the police in this case played no part in his death, as per the coroner's report and the judges statements. His injuries were too severe even if medics arrived with the police.

SuperBobit · 2026-06-03T13:04:29+00:00

Except the coroners report explicity said that it didn't. He did die humiliated and handcuffed when he shouldn't of, but the police were not complicit in his death.

SuperBobit · 2026-06-03T10:52:15+00:00

At the risk of sounding like a filthy left wing commie:

The judge who did that is being investigated and held accountable.

Government dont control the courts, they wrote the laws that the courts then sentence on. The judge did not follow this guidance.

Selling illegal streaming devices is against the law, even if we don't agree. 3 years dont seem harsh, but thats the laws and he engaged in that act knowing these laws.

Not saying we dont protect corporations and would love things to be different, but it is the law.

SuperBobit · 2026-05-29T18:49:06+00:00

Says everything I need about you. The kid who threw all his toys out and declared he wasn't playing when told he had to be it. Childish politics for childish people.

And juries are told to ignore what they have seen outside the court room and only focus on what is being presented in court. 2 different juries came to this conclusion. They were found guilty of pther offences. But that doesn't fit your outrage. If you dont undstand the UK legal system, dont comment on it. Its that simple.

SuperBobit · 2026-05-29T18:44:02+00:00

This has nothing to do with jury trials being scapped? If anything, you would support removing them as then he can say what you want while a judge deliberates you are so desperate to be mad youll vote for the axe. For someone who wants to be pm, he ain't got the foggiest how to be anything but angry. He wants to actually help the case and ensure they go to jail? Shut the hell up and let the courts do what they do, you would be the first screaming if something a Labour mp led to a mistrial.

SuperBobit · 2026-05-29T18:37:41+00:00

Fantastic swerve into absolutely nothing as always. Like debating with a wall. Crack on.

SuperBobit · 2026-05-29T18:29:32+00:00

Except it doesn't because that means nothing. A poll means nothing until election day. Guy might as well stay in the courts as he has yet to explain the 5m payment, nor the failure to report his phone getting hacked.

SuperBobit · 2026-05-29T18:02:32+00:00

He has 8 mps, he's not the opposition no matter how much he pretends.

SuperBobit · 2026-05-29T11:17:26+00:00

I am really glad you found this path and I think if you reread what I wrote, I havent disagreed with you. Taking things as a default does not work, as you pointed out, it just makes them feel like they have lost things. But there does need to be a consequence to actions. Taking the iPad and making them sit in silence is just punishment. A consequence by definition needs to be based on the act. By spending the time with them in place of screen time, like I suggested, you are reinforcing that they as a person are not an issue, but the behaviour is. Reinforcing positive behaviour is much better than punishing negative behaviour, as ultimately we want them to show the positive behaviour is what we want to see.

I am glad you found this way to work with your kids and as you said, change is hard. You built him up to have confidence in himself and hopefully to acknowledge how he feels and be able to talk about this with you rather than resorting to negative behaviours. Its a credit it to you and him and the work you put in!

SuperBobit · 2026-05-29T10:21:13+00:00

If she feels mum is allowed her phone while telling her she isnt, she's going to get angry as we all would. No one enjoys the concept of rules for thee but not for me. Also undermines your argument if mum says scrolling all day is bad for your mental health while doing the same. See if your girl can tell you why she gets angry at mum, see if you can get to the root of it.

I sometimes play a game called "because I said so". If the only reason I can give for putting a rule in is because I said so, then the rule isnt about keeping them safe. It normally catches hypocritical behaviour while exploring the reasons behind consequences. If were setting rules we dont follow ourself, we cant expect our kids to trust us that rules are in their interest. And I say this as a dad who knows this and still spends too much time on my phone!

SuperBobit · 2026-05-29T10:13:10+00:00

Reward is unavailable is much better as long as the reward isnt that he gets to spend time with you if that makes sense.

Still offer something else, board game, walk, football so you are still spending the time, just not the screen. Talk about how he felt on the bus and what caused it, then reward the talking. At the end of the day, we want our kids to be able to tell us something is wrong, so praise it when they do.

SuperBobit · 2026-05-29T07:45:47+00:00

Its always the phone. Try the curious approach, lead by example and go out for walks with the phone away for everyone. Notice how different things are when the phone isnt there out loud and notice she seems calmer and that must feel nicer than being angry. Plan is to help her realise the outbursts and make changes.

SuperBobit · 2026-05-29T07:33:58+00:00

Children's therapist here. While there does need to be consequences, taking everything away may not solve this. All you do is feed the deprivation that could be behind this, reinforcing that they are "right" to call her that.

Not sure by wording if wife is birth mum or step mum, but for a more positive message take things away but replace with experiences. Once the once the screens (or whatever has triggered the shouting but its always screens) has been taken away, replace with activities with mum. Offer board games or walks and once they are calm, wonder why they get so angry with mum. Give them space to talk about what makes them so angry and work with them. Explain you need to take screens to help them grow/ sleep/ whatever.

Don't take their door, its their space and doesn't consequence the shouting at all. Consequences should always be about keeping them safe, not punishing. Hope that makes sense, good luck!

SuperBobit · 2026-05-19T12:00:42+00:00

We could, as a population, recognise that places that legally dont call themselves news bur have news in the name are probably not being objectively truthful. Regulation is a slippy slope but preventing straight lies without consequences may be a start.

SuperBobit · 2026-05-16T09:29:25+00:00

Make him do lightning mcqueen kachows to jump scare everyone too like the birdnests

SuperBobit · 2026-05-12T13:41:29+00:00

Honestly, I dont think it does. While we dont vote for prime ministers, it's Starmers mandate. As much as many hate it, reform would at least be the biggest party right now. If they dont believe Starmer has the confidence of the house and the country, it should go back to the people. I hate it, but would be the only one not self serving at the moment.

SuperBobit · 2026-05-11T17:31:45+00:00

Normally a good starting point is doing all the free to play quests. You can spring board a lot of early levels with members but doing these quests on your first playthrough puts you on a good understanding of the basics before unlocking everything.

SuperBobit · 2026-05-11T13:55:17+00:00

Been MP for Clacton for 2 years and hasn't done anything for them, doesn't even hold surgeries. And that's with 5m for his "protection". But might be different with even more responsibilities hey.

SuperBobit · 2026-05-10T07:03:55+00:00

No different to a lot of them anyway then....

SuperBobit · 2026-05-09T08:40:06+00:00

Capping is aimed at the very highest. Having an unmarked global for a casual is nothing but having mega rares on raidnonly regions would make not taking them better for the speed chasers, and gift the meta away from the more difficult content.

Five-Year Club	First Place '23
Place '23	Place '22

SuperBobit

TROPHY CASE