BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?

Subject: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 24 Mar 15 - 04:23 PM

i am increasingly confused by the insistent and angry comment on scotland in the media. surely unionist supporters were pleased with the result of the referendum and pleased that scotland would continue to be a valued and close partner in the uk. so why all the insults at the prospect of scotland having a say in the post-election government? folk in the north of our islands would seem to prefer a more sensible and slightly more centre-left/progressive direction. there are many thousands in england who would like this too. labour party used to aspire to something similar. it's thoroughly depressing (again) to see the response from the labour party. and just ridiculous is the hysterical nonsense fro the tories and their friends.
there is no need to go over the referendum debate (yet) again - the scots won't be off within the next parliamentary term and the political parties will have to work together to some extent. why all the pre-match abuse?

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Mar 15 - 07:46 PM

It's all posturing. The realpolitik will kick in after the election, unless by some miracle and act of Godly mercy Labour gets an overall majority. Here's how it goes for now:

*The SNP know full well that if they wipe Labour out in Scotland there will be another Cameron government, the worst possible outcome for Scotland, so today Alex has said that he'll bring the Tories down as soon as he can if they win. In other words, vote fearlessly SNP and leave the Tories to us. The only problem with that is that an early second election fought in that scenario would put the Tories in for sure.

*The Tories are being quiet in Scotland because they want the SNP to wipe Labour out. They're scared of a Labour recovery there, so they have to keep bleating on about how Labour will end up consorting with the party that would break up the Union. At the same time, by using that specious argument the Tories have burned what bridges there might have been between them and the SNP.

*Labour can't be seen to be courting the SNP for the reason given above, though they will jump at as close a liaison as possible, even a coalition, if they get half a chance if Ed is the biggest party but with no overall majority.

So they all have to be seen as hating one another's guts. There is no scintilla of cross-party friendship that wouldn't have contumely instantly raining down on it. So they have all got to be seen to be nasty to each other.

My view is that by far the least damaging outcome for everyone would be a coalition between Labour and the SNP, and I wouldn't mind betting that, secretly, most members of both parties would go for that, though they daren't say anything until after polling day. Ah yes, democracy, who needs it...

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: Mrrzy
Date: 24 Mar 15 - 07:46 PM

Thought it was the canadians you had to love, eh? Aren't the scots the ones you have to love, och?

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: Ed T
Date: 24 Mar 15 - 07:53 PM

Here's to the Scottish Canadians, eh-och.

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: Musket
Date: 25 Mar 15 - 02:45 AM

This is what happens when Tam Dalyell's West Lothian question gets answered. Possibly best if it hadn't been asked in the first place!

We voted to stay in the union. That means Westminster MPs North of the border. But the falling over each other of party leaders to court us means Scottish MPs will be able to influence English affairs but the opposite doesn't really apply.

A dogs dinner really. Not sure of the answers but a Labour majority is the least damaging outcome. So long as Ed Balls can balance fiscal prosperity with social inequality and do a better job than Osborn in addressing the one with the other.

But don't look up here for answers. This lot of jokers with good intention relied on oil to realise their dreams. Just as the price plummeted and unemployment in Aberdeen started rising.....

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Mar 15 - 03:56 AM

The SNP don't want a "coalition with Labour or anyone else... their raison d'etre is to make Scotland an independent country, then put their really important policies into action.


Does anyone think politicians tell the truth, or reveal their motives?
If so those who do are extremely stupid, politicians use every means at their disposal to gain power.

Just look at how all Westminster parties have adopted THE CONCEPT of immigration regulation, just because it is seen as popular.....after demonising UKIP and Mr Farage as a racist for espousing the very same policies a couple of years ago.
I would like to see a hugely improved retraining programme for our young folks, and heavily capped immigration from the EU.
Within a few years, I would like to see Scotland leave the EU
I would like to see a withdrawal from NATO and the removal of weapons of mass destruction,from our soil.
I would like to see the people of Scotland represented by the MSPs they elect and Scotland a sovereign nation once again.

These are the main reasons I vote SNP....to do so I have to accept the populist drivel of a mythical equality agenda which is crippling our country in society and in the workplace.
This mythical agenda is of course aimed at a hopeless and workless generation of young people, who are under the misconception that "equality" can be gained by talking about gender incessantly, without any pain or action being taken.

Real equality involves hard work, a lowering of personal living standards....for everyone, not just the hopeless and workless.

If I was a Conservative or Labour voter, I would be "very afraid" about the consequences of the coming election.

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Mar 15 - 05:28 AM

Just snippets from the above nonsense...

Does anyone think politicians tell the truth, or reveal their motives?
If so those who do are extremely stupid, politicians use every means at their disposal to gain power...

...I would like to see the people of Scotland represented by the MSPs they elect and Scotland a sovereign nation once again.

And it wonders why people ridicule it. Scottish politicians are different from other politicians in which way?

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: Musket
Date: 25 Mar 15 - 06:21 AM

Well we voted to remain British subjects so it really is drivel he us coming out with. Not to mention disrespectful towards the inhabitants of Scotland. Not just me and my husband for once, but all of us.

Even SNP for that matter. They are a party that away from their Rob Roy fixation are committed to an equality agenda Labour could only dream of. The embedding of LBGT equality is topmost in Sturgeon's dream of a successful Scotland.

To quote the SNP leader the other week; "Equality leads to prosperity."

Domestically, I could vote for them if they concentrated on sorting out Scotland ie what they are supposed to be doing. But as Akenaton has demonstrated, they will never be fully credible till they ditch the loony fringe who disagree with everything the party stands for on the basis they also want to be independent. We spoke. About time they listened.

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: Stu
Date: 25 Mar 15 - 06:59 AM

I'm hoping that Labour gain enough of a majority in the UK to form a coalition with the SNP, who wipe out Labour in Scotland and unseat Danny Alexander. That way we get a left of centre government influenced by a genuinely progressive party who will hold Labour to account for their actions.

Meanwhile: the tories get a stuffing in the north and working class south again, the Greens gain two seats, Farage fails in South Thanet and the kippers vote collapses under the weight of their hypocrisy and general unpleasantness..

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Mar 15 - 07:01 AM

I think they would be Labour's best partners by a country mile. If Labour teams up with Clegg I'm going to fly a vomit-laden drone over Number Ten and take aim very carefully. I've had lessons from the Bude herring gulls, so, Ed, be warned.

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Mar 15 - 07:02 AM

Yeah, Stu, let's see the ginger rodent unseated!

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Mar 15 - 07:03 AM

"General unpleasantness".... they're all pretty unpleasant Stu.

Time for something "completely different".....but I can't guarantee that it will be "pleasant".

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Mar 15 - 07:23 AM

Labour are more likely to "team up" with the Tories and Lib Dems than SNP....they are not THAT stupid.

There could be a war after the election.....a war against the people.

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Mar 15 - 07:29 AM

Dave....I have no reason to believe that our politicians are any less devious than those in the major parties, but the difference is that they are working for me and my view of how Scotland should be governed.

You turkeys vote for Christmas EVERY time....   :0)

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Mar 15 - 07:34 AM

So, ake, you believe one set of politicians over another simply on the grounds that they are of a different nationality? Speaks volumes really.

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Mar 15 - 07:51 AM

You don't half talk some rubbish at times Dave.

Nice to see you have stopped referring to me as "it" :0)....I suppose EVERYONE grows up sometime?

I don't give a Flying F**k what nationality or gender they are as long as they work for a free Scotland.

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Mar 15 - 07:59 AM

So, the only politicians you care about are the ones who work for a free Scotland? (Whatever that may mean) How many of those are of other nationalities? And you accuse me of talking rubbish.

No, I will still refer to you as it when you are not addressing me directly, which I would prefer you not to do anyway. Musket refers to you as worm. I think that is too kind. Worms are useful and I would feel guilty about hitting a worm with a spade.

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: Stu
Date: 25 Mar 15 - 09:47 AM

""General unpleasantness".... they're all pretty unpleasant Stu."

True, but UKIP is like the dustbin of UK politics; full of cast-off tories, miscreants, criminals and cowardly right-wingers to scared to join the EDL. They're in state of semi-collapse at the moment and it's obvious that the whole shebang is a one-man show, and that man is as much a money-grabbing wannabe as any in the main parties. If the only person you can parachute in as a PPC to a seat is slimy uber tory twat Neil Hamilton* then the party is royally fucked.


*He was rejected as PPC.

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Mar 15 - 11:22 AM

I might agree if UKIP was only garnering votes from frustrated Tories, but it a appears large numbers of Labour voters in the North of England are also prepared to give their support to Mr Farage.

Unregulated immigration from Eastern Europe has decimated the British working class....it has become obvious that the playing field is heavily tilted in favour of immigrants......and more importantly those who benefit from their basic living conditions and poor wages.

This state of affairs did not happen by accident, but was engineered by the Capitalist system in an attempt to make this country "competitive" (code for profitable to a few)

Always remember Blair's immortal words "immigration will make the UK competitive in the global market place".
Blair was leader of the Labour Party at that time.
I vowed never ever to vote Labour again.

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 25 Mar 15 - 11:37 AM

'it has become obvious that the playing field is heavily tilted in favour of immigrants' - just realised why you get so much stick, ake. this is shite. surely anyone can see that the (soon to be sold off) playing field is (and always has been) overwhelmingly tilted in favour of the wealthy and well-connected. granted if you are a very wealthy immigrant you will receive tax breaks and other incentives to park your business here and take the profits back home but - as ever-it's not a nationality problem, it's a problem with the 1%

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: Musket
Date: 25 Mar 15 - 11:49 AM

SNP are a business friendly, inclusive, inward investment, pro immigration party who put equality at the heart of their agenda. With over 10% of NHS clinical posts remaining empty, the Scottish government is sending people, me amongst them, to tour universities in the Indian subcontinent speaking with post graduate deans regarding registrars about to get their consultant number and staff grade doctors.

I fly to Mumbai in three weeks time.

Presumably Alex has an alter ego because Akenaton could never support SNP.

Or he is as confused as he is disgraceful to his species..

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Mar 15 - 11:50 AM

Not only is it shite, it is also the precise opposite of socialist thinking.

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Mar 15 - 11:50 AM

That's exactly what I was saying, I don't blame the immigrants, they are doing the best they can for themselves and their families the poor wages and basic living conditions are worth it considering what they have in their own country.
As you say the only people in the UK who benefit are unscrupulous landlords and employers.....any benefit to the exchequer is offset by more capital expenditure on infrastructure.

I don't give a sfuff what you or anyone else THINKS of me, I tell it like it is. Try to keep civil.

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Mar 15 - 12:00 PM

Try to keep it civil? You were calling us turkeys a little while ago.

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Mar 15 - 12:04 PM

If the Scottish government don't start addressing the problems of youth unemployment when we become independent, and start a massive training and re-training programme, then they will be in for a short sharp shock.

We cannot rely on immigrant labour when so many of our people are without work, and without a future.


"Not only is it shite, it is also the precise opposite of "socialist thinking." :0)

Don't lecture me on politics Steve, you wouldn't know a real socialist if you found one in your soup.

I never met a "liberal" socialist in my life, usually they are committed to the important issues like changing the economic system.
They know you cant "fix" capitalism. They know that under capitalism equality is a myth....and a dangerous lie.

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Mar 15 - 12:18 PM

I pasted this into another thread but it is worth repeating here.

Echoing the rather arcane language of the legislation, "idiots" may not vote and "lunatics" only during their lucid periods. Those compulsorily detained in psychiatric hospitals, for example, cannot vote.

I have never, until now, suggested that anyone should be refused a vote but in light of the obvious fact that 'lucid moments' are beyond it, I would make an exception here.

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: Thompson
Date: 25 Mar 15 - 12:44 PM

I don't have a dog in this fight - not my country - but wouldn't Scotland work better if people didn't turn on each other but worked together for a better Scotland?
"Equality Leads to Prosperity" - I like that. True, too.

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: Ed T
Date: 25 Mar 15 - 12:59 PM

Wasn't Adam Smith a pioneer Scottish social philosopher and political economist?
Should he not be forgiven for his influence on capitalism, as we know it?

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 26 Mar 15 - 02:30 AM

You know to tell you the truth Scots will be kind of demonised by sections of the London media, and the Conservative Party in England, whatever we do. If we did swing back to Labour and it tipped the scales in an election then Scots would be blamed for forcing Labour on to a Tory voting England. We've been kind of accused of that already even though the Blair/Brown gvts all had a majority of seats in England anyway. If we stick to voting for who we actually want to then at the moment Labour are going to get cuffed in Scotland. Unlikely to make much difference to the overall Tory number of seats. Then Scotland will be castigated, as it already is being, for daring to send MPs from a party that has no mandate in England - depsite the fact that Northern Irish voters have been doing that for 90 years or so! The continual drip drip demonising of Sturgeon, Salmond and the SNP (and by association nearly half of voting Scots) by English Tories may be meant to scare floating English voters away from Ed Miliband but in tandem with that it is consolidating Nat support in Scotland and dismaying some No voters who thought we were better together and know that Scottish constituencies are just as British as constituencies in Surrey hence have as much right to their say at Westminster than anyone else. Here is one recent blog from Alex Massie - hardly a friend to the SNP.

   http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/03/the-tory-partys-attitude-towards-scotlandisasstupidasitiscynical/

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 26 Mar 15 - 02:48 AM

Thompson I think the original thread is not about Scots turning on each other. We don't generally do that. Yes there was real differences in the referendum but all in all the process, with some flaws, was a democratic success story with ethnicity etc largely irrelevant to the debate. The original posts asked why all the insults at the prospects of Scots having a say in gvt after the election. The barbs thrown at the idea of Scots MPs having some input in to supporting a minority Labour gvt, even on a vote to vote basis, haven't been coming from other Scots!

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Mar 15 - 03:30 AM

FWIW I would welcome a minority Labour government with support from the SNP as a very good alternative to continuing with the present administration. As a life long supported of the Labour movement I was very much in a cleft stick about continuing to support them in the light of the cock-ups the last lot made. I would not, however, support any party that penalises the poor while lining their own and their cronies pockets. I think the SNP, outside the whip of any major party, could well be the hand that creates stability.

Trouble is the media is owned by the rich and they are feeding the masses a line about how our country is being ruined by foreign invaders, ranging from Romania to Scotland. Sadly, some people still believe them.

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Mar 15 - 06:05 AM

What would SNP demand in return?
Nothing of benefit to UK obviously.

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: GUEST,Sol
Date: 26 Mar 15 - 06:28 AM

Nothing to the further benefit of the extreme right, so you're part right I suppose.

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 26 Mar 15 - 06:37 AM

they may well offer a more thoughtful alternative. as a wealthy nation we do not always have to be so backward, so negative and so keen to flog off all that is worthwhile about our country. snp in government have tried to preserve the NHS and social services for example and have had some success in the face of westminster opposition. if they could encourage the rest of us just to think a bit differently, i am sure they could get the support of the vast majority of english voters - and the labour party might actually start to remember what they are supposed to be about.

if they can offer 5 years of tories out of office that is a massive gift to all the countries in the uk

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Mar 15 - 06:57 AM

Well said, achmelvich. If they can offer a serious alternative to the tired old platitudes of all the major parties without sinking to the depths of needless nationalism that UKRAP do, I would also welcome them holding the balance of power.

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: GUEST,BrendanB
Date: 26 Mar 15 - 07:09 AM

I have just caught up with this thread so forgive me for commenting on a post some distance back. Akenaton stated that he tells it as it is. That is monstrous arrogance. He tells it as he sees it. He is not omniscient.
In conversations I have had it has been interesting to note that a number of people who I would consider moderate and reasonable (these are virtues in my estimation) have reservations about the SNP; these seem to centre around the primary aims of the party. In among their various centre left, socially progressive policies lies the principle upon which they are founded (check their name).
I can entirely sympathise with someone voting SNP with the expectation that the party will concentrate its efforts on improving the lot of Scotland and the Scots, for the party not to do so might even be seen as a dereliction of duty. The problem is that a majority of the population of the UK do not live in Scotland. Can a party founded on the principle of independence for one part of the UK be trusted to act in the interests of the whole of the UK?
I really do not know the answer to that but the fact that a political party which could have a significant impact after the election stands only in one clearly defined part of the UK seems somehow out of kilter with democracy - even if I cannot quite explain why.

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: akenaton
Date: 26 Mar 15 - 07:25 AM

Keith is quite correct in what he says....the most likely scenario is a loose coalition of Labour and Tory to "Save the Union"...just as happened in the referendum.

Once they get used to their new positions, their new ministerial briefs they will come to like it very much......the poor the workless and worthless will at last see the reality.

Perhaps, if the Scottish people are demonised enough by the establishment, sanctions against us would be a possibility.....force? not again surely?

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 26 Mar 15 - 07:41 AM

Can a party founded on the principle of independence work for the benefit of all in a UK institution? Of course they can and the Nats have a history of doing just that in the Scottish Parliament which is of course itself a UK insitution. And during their first term they worked with other parties for the whole of their term as they were a minority administration so they arguably have more form on that than any of the UK wide parties.

And remember they aren't suggesting a coalition (Sturgeon herself said that would be unlikely) and are not looking for gvt positions. They simply said that they could work with Labour on an issue by issue basis. In other words there are some issues where they wouldn't back the gvt. Just as there were some things they couldn't go ahead with in their first term at Holyrood as they were a minority.

The line taken by the London media seems to be that they would only be at Westminster to mischief make - which is an absurd line to take as there is no history to back that up.

They could well look for some things from Labour. Some which are achievable for instance having Ed Miliband look for the Vow on Scotland's constitutional future to be upheld. Other things are unlikely to be agreed - like the scrapping of Trident's upgrade. There would be no benfit of the SNP even thinking about voting against Labour on a confidence vote over that. It wouldn't be logical as the Tories are even more in favour of the upgrade. Again from their own history in gvt the Nats are used to getting what they can and not getting all they want!

As to what would they give to benefit the UK as a whole! Well that depends on your viewpoint. If you are right of centre then I imagine you'd think the Nats have nothing to give. If you are left of centre then they may well be espousing ideas that you agree with. But again remember they are not particularly looking to be in gvt anyway!!

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: Teribus
Date: 26 Mar 15 - 07:50 AM

"GUEST,Allan Conn - 26 Mar 15 - 02:48 AM

Thompson I think the original thread is not about Scots turning on each other. We don't generally do that. Yes there was real differences in the referendum but all in all the process, with some flaws, was a democratic success story with ethnicity etc largely irrelevant to the debate."

GUEST,Allan Conn IIRC comes from the Scottish Borders where 67% of the 95,533 electorate voted NO - Overall 55% of those who voted voted NO as opposed to 45% who voted YES, now if indeed the referendum was the democratic success that Alan Conn claims then a Scottish National Party shoulld not even be standing for election. It is a single issue party by definition and the electorate of Scotland all 4,283,392 of them rejected independence as follows:

1,617,989 voted YES - i.e. they wanted an independent Scotland
2,001,926 voted NO - i.e. actively rejected the idea of an independent Scotland preferring to stay within the UK.
660,048 Did not vote - i.e. electorally they couldn't care less/ perfectly happy with the status quo, if they weren't then they should have voted.

So it is not simply a case of 44.7% saying YES and 55.3% saying NO - the fact is that taking the electorate of Scotland as a whole only 37.8% supported and wanted an Independent Scotland while 62.2% were happy with things they way they are with Scotland being part of the United Kingdom.

I do not think the Scots per se are being criticised in the media, I think one or two prominent Scottish politicians are, and quite rightly. No coincidence that they are the same ones who lied to, and deliberately mislead, the electorate of Scotland throughout the Referendum campaign, the same ones who made very public statements about accepting the will of the people, supporting the democratic process and working for the good of the nation as a whole (Which by the way means the United Kingdom in light of the referendum result) and then reneged on every single statement. Sturgeon and Salmond have no interest in doing what is best for Scotland and they never have.

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: GUEST,Howard Jones
Date: 26 Mar 15 - 08:05 AM

The issue is not Scotland having a say in the election, Scots are still citizens of the UK and as entitled to vote as the rest of us. What is of concern is the prospect of a particular party with an agenda expressly dedicated to the break up of the UK holding the balance of power, and using it to promote that agenda rather than the interests of the UK as a whole.

I suspect Salmond's strategy will be to make Scotland so unpopular among the English that come the next independence referendum we'll all be campaigning to see the back of you.

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 26 Mar 15 - 08:26 AM

Teribus stop twisting my words I said the referendum was a democratic success which it obviously was. That is turnout was just shy of 85%; the electorate was engaged; and it was for the most part a completely peaceful process - with the only real blight being the BNP type mini riot the day after. I did not suggest the Yes side won or anything like that merely stated it was a success for democracy!

As to the figures sorry but you can't count people who didn't vote as being on one side of the argument or the other. The facts are that 15% of people didn't vote so they din't vote. That can just as much be described as them not caring about saving the union as not caring about independence. 53.23% of people either voted to end the union or apparently didn't care whether it was saved or not. Referendums don't work like that though. We only counted the people who actually voted.

As to my area well of course what counts is the votes in the country as a whole - and not one local gvt area. But your words don't take account of what has happened since either. The membership of the SNP has quadrupled during the intervening period and now sits on 100,000 people. In the polls for both the forthcoming Westminster and next year's Holyrood elections they have left Labour trailing in their wake and it has been increasing in all areas of Scotland. Even the local Tory Party here now see Michael Moore as dead and buried and the main rival being the SNP candidate!

The SNP may only have got 10% of the vote in the last General Election here but they then got 24% of the vote in the Holyrood election and some pundits even have them in front now for the election. Personally I think that John Lamont will get in here for the Tories. The pundits predicting 50 or more SNP seats base that on uniform voting across the country not taking account of local factors. Seemingly the Nat leadership themselves are expecting something short of 40 seats.

As to your last paragraph well sorry I read things completely different from you. I don't see where the leadership has either lied or renaged on their promises and as per the first post in this thread there is plenty evidence of an anti-Scottish attitude from the Tory party in England and some of the media. You choose to not recognise it but I do, it made Achmelvich start this thread; and it even has die in the wool unionists like Alex Massie baulking.

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: GUEST,Sol
Date: 26 Mar 15 - 08:34 AM

"Ed T - Wasn't Adam Smith a pioneer Scottish social philosopher and political economist? Should he not be forgiven for his influence on capitalism, as we know it?"

Naw.

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Mar 15 - 09:14 AM

May as well ask the tide to stop, Allan. You are not related to an old Norse king who is an anagram of something that may be deleted are you? :-)

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: GUEST,HiLo
Date: 26 Mar 15 - 09:38 AM

A number of years ago Canada found itself with a Quebec Separatists party, Parti Quebecois, as the official opposition. This party ran only in Quebec, the rest of the country could not vote for or against them. The Problem with arrangement was that it served no ones interest. Years of squabbling over Separatism nearly ruined that country. So be careful what you wish for.

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 26 Mar 15 - 10:05 AM

If Scotland achieved independence how would it be funded?
Before the referendum Alex Salmond seemed to assume Scotland could live off its North Sea Fuel income.
Since then estimates of available fuel have dropped sharply, as has the price such fuel obtains.

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: Teribus
Date: 26 Mar 15 - 10:14 AM

Allan if the Independence referendum was such a success for democracy care to tell us all why you have a former Scottish First Minister, who:

1: Promised to abide by the will of the electorate;
2: Stated that the referendum was "generational";
3: Left Westminster accepting the £65,000 package as payment for costs associated with returning to "normal" life as a member of the public;
4: Loses the Independence referendum;
5: Resigns as First Minister and Leader of the SNP.

THEN:
1: Ignores the declared wishes of the electorate by;
2: Chattering on about another referendum within the term of the next Parliament and encourages his successor to add weight to that plan
3: Promptly announces that no-longer being the Leader of the SNP, or First Minister in the Scottish Parliament, he will now stand for election to Westminster - where he is there to serve whose interests exactly? His party's, his constituents?

Statements by Alex Salmond:

"If you don't want me running England better vote Tory"

"I'll bring down the Tories and install Milliband"

"I will help write Ed Balls' first Budget"

Statements by Sturgeon:

"SNP: We have the right to dictate policy for all Britain"

Rather amused by this:

"As to the figures sorry but you can't count people who didn't vote as being on one side of the argument or the other." - Allan Conn

Don't be ridiculous of course you can - had they wanted to vote for independence then they, the world, it's dog and it's uncle, knew they would have to cast a vote - fact is they didn't - other unalterable fact is that only 37.8% of the electorate of Scotland voted for independence - the rest didn't.

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 26 Mar 15 - 10:28 AM

Though HiLo the issue here is not over seperatism per se. It is over whether MPs from Scottish constituencies where SNP members have been voted in have a legitimate right to their voice in the UK parliament. We were told (by the English Tories amongst other) that we were better together and they wanted us to remain in the UK. But now we have things like Tory minister Grant Schapps saying that if the SNP members decided to side with Labour if they were only the second largest party then it'd be a "threat to undermine the gvt chosen by the British people" which of course is nonsense. If the SNP and Labour combined have more seats in the House than the Tories then that is because a higher number of British constituencies would have voted for one of those parties. You can't say "please stay in the UK but don't expect to try and have any kind of sway in the UK parliament"? It doesn't work like that.

I'm still baffled by a Question Time programme several weeks ago too where one of the audience asked the question "would a Labour/SNP alliance be a betrayal to the English people?" and the Tory on the panel said it would! I'm still trying to figure out what Nicola Sturgeon or anyone else in the SNP have ever done to English voters to warrant that.

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: GUEST,HiLo
Date: 26 Mar 15 - 10:50 AM

Yes, I see your point. The issues are different in many respects. But the constant threat of referenda does tend to destabilise things.

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 26 Mar 15 - 10:52 AM

Look sorry this is getting absurd. People either vote in any election/referendum or they don't vote. The question was a Yes/No question and people made their choice. 55% voted No and 45% voted Yes. It is ludicrous to suggest everyone who didn't vote were No voters! They were non voters! If you are counting the whole electorate then only 46.77% of Scots voted No. I wouldn't even try to claim that it then means that 53.33% wanted independence. It is a very silly argument.

As to the little snippets you've quoted I'm not going to go through every one and try and figure out where it was said etc and what context it was said in. I googled the Sturgeon example and only came up with one hit from a girl called Emma!!! But I did watch Andrew Marr on Sunday morning where Salmond gave a reasonable explanation as to how as leader of a minority gvt he had to work with other parties to get measures through and that Labour would have the same issues and that the SNP were likely to be a party they'd need support from. So as a minority party they could be in positions of strength and they are not hiding that as their aim. Why should they? They have as much right to have an influence on the UK parliament as any member from Surrey or Bedfordshire etc. Not much difference from last time when Nick Clegg was saying the same thing - the only difference being he wasn't viewed by the media as a threat to British democracy!

As to Salmond standing for Westminster come on he has every right to stand for Westminster! It will be up to the electorate as to whether he gets in or not!

Subject: RE: BS: scots - ye have to love them eh?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 26 Mar 15 - 11:51 AM

Ah well, that was mildly amusing in places. Gorballs!