What’s your most controversial opinion? **Read OP** **Mod Warning in Post #8023**

Nobody apart from those involved knows for sure what happened. But there was certainly highly unreliable accounts of events given to Gardai, given the cctv contradicted much of those accounts.

I think Howard Dean had the right idea about the "50 State Strategy" in the US in 2006. Unfortunately the lessons were forgotten. To persuade voters you sometimes need to speak their political language. While I am sceptical of theology, I think there are a lot of religious, but economically leftwing, American voters who vote Republican because they don't like the secularism of the Democratic Party.

A solution is not to ditch secularism as main ideology, but rather to allow in such people to be candidates for the party. They did this in 2006 with candidates like Heath Schuler in North Carolina and Kay Hagan (a pastor) in NC also. It doesn't even mean ditching social liberalism. It just means choosing candidates who can explain it to voters in language they like, such as James Talarico in Texas.

One of the reasons FDR was able to overcome resistance to the New Deal in 1933-45 was support from a section of the Evangelical movement. Even Jimmy Carter won about 49% of them. Since Reagan they have voted Republican in presidential elections by about 85-15.

If the Democrats were a company they would be lecturing the market for not buying their products.

Article here on "How the Evangelical Left became the Religious Right". I think the writer is a social conservative so I don't agree with him on those issues, but he does make a good point that this demographic used to support the Democrats because of the economic issues.

Initially the Southern Baptists (the largest single Evangelical Protestant Church) were not specifically a pro-life organisation. They started to pass anti-abortion resolutions in the late 1970s. Around the same time, a more rightwing leadership took over the National Rifle Association too.

Ah yes the CCTV that you’ve seen first hand? I’m sure you’re completely educated on the entire case and not just “asking questions” about a woman who has won her civil case. CmcG lost his appeal, his “witnesses” didn’t turn up to court this week, and the victim could be awarded damaged as the high court awarded judgments against the couple of “witnesses”.

But sure, you know better.

Haven't seen it yet but I've hard a lot of people say that it really is being overhyped.

Also Im wary of it because of the Irish prescence and the overhyping of anything connected with Ireland in the Irish media.

Jess buckley is an absolute pain in the hole and faker than rocking horse sh1t

I probably struggled to articulate my point succinctly the more I tried to rationalise my thought process; and potential way of looking at to make it less “damaging” or offensive. The worse it got.

Just after I wrote that previous post. A man with Tourette’s used a racial slur at a black actor at an awards show. The actor was American I believe.

It was interesting angle. Did the white Tourette’s man use his disability tick to hide his racism? Or was it genuine? Should the black man have been offended or should he have tried to understand the Tourette’s as a disability?

Plus again, I believe if the person had self worth knew they were not “subhuman” or inferior. Surely the level of offence is mitigated if you have that state of mind? If anything it was the Tourette’s man who was inferior or “other” in the scenario.

Based on the evidence that was reported I don't think he did it. His story was consistent and backed up by cctv footage. Whereas the other story was not, quite the contrary. There is a reason the DPP rejected the case.

So you’ve seen the cctv have you?

He was judged conclusively to be liable by a jury of 12 random people who have seen all the evidence. Why do you think you know better than them when they’ve seen all the evidence and you haven’t?

I've read what was on the cctv footage. I've read how one person's account of events was just completely wrong, and proven wrong due to the cctv footage. I don't think he did it.

The facts are the facts, they got it wrong in my opinion.

I think Bono can still sing.

But I think he was less political in the past. But I think he is correct on this occasion. Celebrities in the 1980s showed with Live Aid that they can be a catalyst of change. Although I think in the age of the internet the traditional media and celebrities have less influence than back then. Influencers can grow a following without the usual gatekeepers.

Terrorists bombing city centres and modes of transport are wasting their time, they need to target what people care about like the set of corrie, eastenders or love island, bombing a bus in London city centre will be forgotten about the week after but blowing up Ken Barlow or Kat Slater would cause huge psychological damage to millions

Nobody knows all the facts other than those involved. Based on what was reported I don't think he did it.