Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Shakethedisease

skintmacflint wrote: »

Strange this as obviously I don't support SNP, but did envisage the SNP surge being reflected in the GE 2015, and even worse the implications for the Holyrood 2016 elections. Their ardent wish for FFA at the moment IMO rings hollow.

Well you were one of the few. Because I remember following the polls in the ref and mentioning here a few times that the SNP was creeping well up in Westminster voting intentions and wouldn't it be ironic if...( no-one took me seriously anyway here ). A quick glance at most articles and comment round that time universally were of the opinion that a No vote would smash the SNP to pieces for good... and they would return to the fringes. Labour commentary at the time was particularly sure of the above scenario playing out.

SNP made their position in Westminster and their feelings toward it as an institution of government crystal clear from the 19th September.

That there had been a No vote, and they were still part of it... ( sadly ) time to make the best of it.

Trying to change their stance into the anti austerity party or alliance for the entire UK is also IMO hollow. Wales, NI and the Greens should be wary of Greeks offering false gifts. SNP have made it very clear they don't believe in sharing anything from finances to power .

It's offering clear ground between Tory and Labour proposals. Which both seem a bit interchangable at the moment. One the one hand you have Rachel Reeves dropping a clanger saying that Labour didn't want to be seen as the representing those on benefits, and that Labour was a party for hard working families.. Oops. Then you have Ed Balls today after roundly criticsing the the budget. Then going on to say that he wouldn't be reversing any of it. Both parties together voted for 30 billion worth of cuts a few weeks ago.

skintmacflint

Shakethedisease wrote: »

The problem is that it's very childish.. the same as people who constantly post of Ca-moron, or Milli-bland, Liebore etc etc. Most of us left that kind of name calling behind in the playground where, imho, it belongs. It's not about 'getting personal'.. it's about what kind of debate you wish to have. If you want a childish one that involves infantile name-calling. Then go ahead. I can't be bothered with that sort of malarkey.

And there was me thinking it was language a nationalist would understand and be happy with. Eg Salmonds and Sturgeons references like 'the 3 Amigoes' when referring to the BT party leaders, or ' political flummery' 'powder puff' and all that malarkey etc etc But then maybe when the new dawn rises on enlightened Scotland these things will be outlawed.

Also note George Osbourne laughed at his photoshop front cover in The Sun.

Fortunately ,or unfortunately perhaps for you , this is not your forum. You are entitled to find posts however you see fit, as is anyone else. There are as I think you've mentioned ignore buttons and forum moderators, along with forum rules, none of which have been broken or stepped outside of.

Note SNP however have no qualms when their much loved ex FM when he felt the need. In Salmonds words after interrupting a Westminster budget statement to get himself noticed , he said ' so what I did was I learned the rules of the institution so that I could deploy these rules to make the case I wanted . Occasionally stepping outside the rules perhaps , but always knowing what the rules were, which is more than they did then, or even now'

So knowing the rules made his actions it alright then. This isn't Westminster but an MSE forum.

Shakethedisease

skintmacflint wrote: »

And there was me thinking it was language a nationalist would understand and be happy with. Eg Salmonds and Sturgeons references like 'the 3 Amigoes' when referring to the BT party leaders, or ' political flummery' 'powder puff' and all that malarkey etc etc But then maybe when the new dawn rises on enlightened Scotland these things will be outlawed.

Also note George Osbourne laughed at his photoshop front cover in The Sun.

Fortunately ,or unfortunately perhaps for you , this is not your forum. You are entitled to find posts however you see fit, as is anyone else. There are as I think you've mentioned ignore buttons and forum moderators, along with forum rules, none of which have been broken or stepped outside of.

Note SNP however have no qualms when their much loved ex FM when he felt the need. In Salmonds words after interrupting a Westminster budget statement to get himself noticed , he said ' so what I did was I learned the rules of the institution so that I could deploy these rules to make the case I wanted . Occasionally stepping outside the rules perhaps , but always knowing what the rules were, which is more than they did then, or even now'

So knowing the rules made his actions it alright then. This isn't Westminster but an MSE forum.

No you carry on...doing exactly what you say you so despise in what Salmond does in the 'name calling' stakes. I'll pass thanks, it's still childish and petulant looking. The sexism towards Nicola Sturgeon though, is not something I personally welcome in national newspapers. And it's not only myself that is of the same view. It's probably actually boosting the SNP vote women wise.

And you're right about Salmond knowing the rules of the HOC backwards. Am sure he'll use them well if he's voted in again.

Scottish voting intentions for the May 2015 UK general election (Survation, 12th - 17th March) :
SNP 47.1% (n/c)
Labour 26.1% (-1.9)
Conservatives 15.5% (+1.0)
UKIP 4.3% (+0.9)
Liberal Democrats 4.0% (n/c)
Greens 2.2% (-0.1)

skintmacflint

Shakethedisease wrote: »

No you carry on...doing exactly what you say you so despise in what Salmond does in the 'name calling' stakes. I'll pass thanks, it's still childish and petulant looking. The sexism towards Nicola Sturgeon though, is not something I personally welcome in national newspapers. And it's not only myself that is of the same view. It's probably actually boosting the SNP vote women wise.

And you're right about Salmond knowing the rules of the HOC backwards. Am sure he'll use them well if he's voted in again.

Simply an observation of double standards in play here. But happy we might agree in some small regard.

Moving on care to comment on their tendency for finishing a sentence or debating point with a snide remark? Maybe there is more common ground to be found here than originally thought.

And would you extend your description of childishness and petulance to the hordes of SNP supporters who lap up this type of comment or phrasing and hang off every word. By mere association?

Neither my wife nor any other female member of my family felt the tartan Tarzan photoshot was sexist. But they were raised to be confident strong equal individuals. I'm aware the subject remains a sensitive issue in certain areas, and more work is needed.

However a powerful FM of Sturgeons quality can do better than simply commenting it could put young girls off going into politics .Irreverence to people in the public eye including politicians has been going on and increasing for decades. Goes withe territory. What is different is the constant use and addiction of instant social media and technology, to make a point. She could have used this issue differently.

Shakethedisease

skintmacflint wrote: »

Simply an observation of double standards in play here. But happy we might agree in some small regard.

Moving on care to comment on their tendency for finishing a sentence or debating point with a snide remark? Maybe there is more common ground to be found here than originally thought.

And would you extend your description of childishness and petulance to the hordes of SNP supporters who lap up this type of comment or phrasing and hang off every word. By mere association?

Not really.. as I think most politicians make snide remarks about others, especially those from other parties. The PM and Milliband do it every Prime Minister's Questions.. 'despicable' was Cameron's buzzword this week I think ?

Neither my wife nor any other female member of my family felt the tartan Tarzan photoshot was sexist. But they were raised to be confident strong equal individuals. I'm aware the subject remains a sensitive issue in certain areas, and more work is needed.

However a powerful FM of Sturgeons quality can do better than simply commenting it could put young girls off going into politics .Irreverence to people in the public eye including politicians has been going on and increasing for decades. Goes withe territory. What is different is the constant use and addiction of instant social media and technology, to make a point. She could have used this issue differently.

Ruth Davidson, and Kezia Dugdale were also all over twitter condemning the Sun's wrecking ball article, and those like it since. Are they not sensible confident strong individuals too ? Women in general, as far as I can assertain on social media ( we can discount the newspapers who like the controversy ).. aren't happy with Nicola Sturgeon being portrayed in this sort of fashion. It's not just one article, it's repeatedly. 'Wee lassie' at the Labour conference wasn't it ?

The Daily Record must be really gritting their teeth having to publish their polls lately..

Exclusive: Bombshell Daily Record poll shows majority of Scots now support independence...

..OUR stunning survey shows Yes would win a new referendum while our poll also points to the SNP winning an astonishing 53 of Scotland's 59 seats in May. A MAJORITY of Scots now back independence just six months after the referendum No vote, according to a sensational new poll.
The bombshell Daily Record survey shows that a repeat vote on Scotland’s future would see the public narrowly back a split by 51 per cent to 49 per cent.
The poll of more than 1000 Scots also found a growing appetite for another referendum on independence in the near future.
And in more bad news for unionists, the SNP has increased its already commanding lead over Labour at Westminster – they’re now on course for an astonishing 53 of the 59 seats at May’s general election.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/exclusive-bombshell-daily-record-poll-5366657

Gerry Hassan has written a fantastic overall analysis of how things stand (for anyone interested, it's a longish read).

Scotland is marking out a direction and territory of its own. This is increasingly defined by a de jure independence – what I have described as an ‘independence of the Scottish mind’ – whereby Scottish politics, public life and the public sphere act in an increasingly autonomous and distinct way as if Scotland were independent in how it thinks, acts and sees itself. One illustration of this is an Edinburgh University study this week which showed that 69% of Scots believe it is inevitable that Scotland will be independent.

Scotland is not going back to normal service now or anytime post-May general election. The same of course is true of UK politics. The difference is with the UK that statement underlines the sense of doubt, fatalism and fear over the future which characterises the dynamic of Westminster politics. Whereas north of the border, for all the political imperfections, there is a genuine sense of optimism, hope and belief that a better collective future can be created – qualities singularly missing from British politics.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/gerry-hassan/tartan-tsunami-and-how-it-will-change-scotland-and-uk-for-good

kabayiri

If Scotland is following an inexorable path to independence I'd prefer the next party in power to focus on the 'Northern Powerhouse' (meaning NW and NE) to develop, along with the other regions south of the Scottish border.

There seems to be little point ploughing money into long term development of infrastructure in Scotland if ultimately they choose to separate.

We need to focus on making the committed part of the UK profitable and ready to take on an increasingly challenging world economy.

browniej

Shakethedisease wrote: »

The Daily Record must be really gritting their teeth having to publish their polls lately

Perhaps people will change their mind again or will they be happy to be misled?


Nicola Sturgeon admits SNP got North Sea oil sums wrong in race for independence.

NICOLA Sturgeon has admitted the SNP’s oil price predictions for independence were wrong.

She bowed to the facts after figures blew a multi-billion-pound hole in the Nationalists’ case for an independent Scotland’s finances.

Shakethedisease

browniej wrote: »

Perhaps people will change their mind again or will they be happy to be misled?


Nicola Sturgeon admits SNP got North Sea oil sums wrong in race for independence.

No she said 'everyone had got their North Seal oils sums wrong'. The Daily Record do like to put their own slant on things somewhat.

The White Paper figures ( Nov 13 ) came from the OBR after all ! ( as well as DECC and various oil and gas experts ). They all got them wrong too. Alas with oil prices, no-one has access to a crystal ball.

browniej

Shakethedisease wrote: »

No she said 'everyone had got their North Seal oils sums wrong'.

So you're agreeing with me then - the SNP got their sums wrong and based their figures for an Independent Scotland on them.

The White Paper figures ( Nov 13 ) came from the OBR after all ! ( as well as DECC and various oil and gas experts ). They all got them wrong too. Alas with oil prices, no-one has access to a crystal ball.

And yet when Sir Ian Wood stated that gas and oil was on a downward spiral, Salmond stated he was wrong and was scaremongering.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Shakethedisease wrote: »

No she said 'everyone had got their North Seal oils sums wrong'.

The SNP got their sums more wrong than anyone else though....

Last summer I posted about forecasts of the impending oil glut on the indy thread.

Last summer Nanny Sturgeon et al made announcements of a coming 'oil boom' and based the finances of an iScotland on $113 a barrel oil.

Which one of us was wrong?:rotfl: