Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

You're obsessed with the SNP so of course you view any outcome after the election as being about the SNP.

Let's say that Labour get 300 seats and as the largest party the Lib Dems do a deal with them and get to ~320. It would be perfectly reasonable for the Tories to say, "You won it and the fact you are slightly short of a majority is immaterial in terms of forming a Government. We'll abstain on your budget and Queen's speech as long as they're not absurd and then vote with or against you on a case by case basis"

No reference to the SNP. The SNP aren't even in the picture. Who cares about them. They're a party fighting in a few seats that will get the 5th or 6th largest number of votes.

The Home Counties vote consistently for the Tories and often get Labour Governments and seem to manage to deal with that okay. Perhaps some of the Scottish people should learn the same humility rather than ranting about how a minority party standing for election by less than 10% of the population should be able to dictate how the other 90% live.

That's not what the polls are saying Generali. They're all pointing to the Tories having the largest number of seats, but not enough support to form government.

As a consequence, they've put the klaxon calls out that if Labour doesn't secure the largest number of seats..then they won't be legitimate in forming government with anyone else. It just so happens that this is the SNP. The fact it IS the SNP looking to be the third largest party.. has lead to some pretty nauseating headlines and articles during this campaign. And tonight it has stepped up a gear once again.

Scots voters who are considering voting SNP are not now politically 'legitimate' it seems, as Leanne and Zag have politely tried to point out. What are your own views on that ? And what are the Tories, Teresa May, Boris Johnson, Nick Clegg and their tame rags trying to achieve pumping out headlines like below ? And you think the Scottish people should show 'humility' do you. How would they do that ? That's a terribly arrogant thing to say. And why should they in fact ? And we already know there won't be any Labour-SNP 'pact' if it's vote by vote.

To be honest, I'll be surprised if you answer any of the above. Mabye too difficult for you...

SNP-Labour pact would spark biggest constitutional crisis since the abdication of Edward VIII

Home Secretary claims voters 'would not accept legitimacy' of the alliance
Compared it to Kind Edward's abdication which 'paralysed governing class'
Tories believe fear of pact would convince floating voters to support them
One in three voters would consider coalition 'illegitimate', new poll showed

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3055575/Theresa-SNP-Labour-pact-spark-biggest-constitutional-crisis-abdication-Edward-VIII.html

A Labour-SNP pact would be an outrage to democracy

We face the terrifying proposition of a Left-and-further-Left alliance governing without any political legitimacy

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/11561626/A-Labour-SNP-pact-would-be-an-outrage-to-democracy.html

And tonights Scottish poll

Scottish voting intentions for the May 2015 UK general election (Panelbase) :
SNP 48% (+3)
Labour 27% (-2)
Conservatives 16% (+2)
Liberal Democrats 4% (n/c)
UKIP 3% (-1)
Greens 2% (n/c)

ps this thread is entirely about the SNP if you haven't noticed yet. If you don't want to engage with people talking about the SNP, don't read or post on it mabye ?

Generali

zagubov wrote: »

In a FPTP system, isn't it the case that the election result is decided by a small number of swing voters anyway?

Very true. It just might not be the small number of Scottish voters that decide it.

In pretty much any democratic system, a small population (Scotland, Surrey) is always going to be swamped by the larger part.

That's the same no matter how you split things up. In the Scottish parliament I doubt that the Highlands and Islands have much of a voice versus the huge mass of people that live in the Central Belt.

zagubov wrote: »

I'm still skeptical that the SNP will grab so many seats. I'd be surprised if the unionist parties came out of the referendum debate looking to the voters as if they respected them. They ( especially the Labour Party) reminded me of the story of the East German writers' union distributing leaflets warning that the people had lost the trust of the government and could only earn it back by renewed effort and loyalty.

They're about to be told which way round the loss of trust has happened.;)

I suspect that's nothing compared to the tsunami of hate that will greet the SNP if they get FFA.

Generali

Shakethedisease wrote: »

That's not what the polls are saying Generali. They're all pointing to the Tories having the largest number of seats, but not enough support to form government.

My point works either way. Perhaps Labour give passive support to a Tory Government.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

As a consequence, they've put the klaxon calls out that if Labour doesn't secure the largest number of seats..then they won't be legitimate in forming government with anyone else. It just so happens that this is the SNP. The fact it IS the SNP looking to be the third largest party.. has lead to some pretty nauseating headlines and articles during this campaign. And tonight it has stepped up a gear once again.

Scots voters who are considering voting SNP are not now politically 'legitimate' it seems, as Leanne and Zag have politely tried to point out. What are your own views on that ? And what are the Tories, Teresa May, Boris Johnson, Nick Clegg and their tame rags trying to achieve pumping out headlines like below ? And you think the Scottish people should show 'humility' do you. How would they do that ? That's a terribly arrogant thing to say. And why should they in fact ? And we already know there won't be any Labour-SNP 'pact' if it's vote by vote.

English people feel much the same way about the SNP that I suspect most black people feel about the BNP. There is a legitimate fear and hatred of a party that is specifically there to advantage an in group over an out group.

We all know that 'Westminster' is just a PC way of saying 'English people'. Nationalists the world over use hatred and division to get their ends. These stories are the end result of the seeds that the SNP has sow.

I don't think the Scottish people should learn humility and nor did I say that, I think that some of the Scottish people should learn humility. In case I didn't make it clear enough I will spell it out: SNP supporting extremists that think they will be running the country on 4-5% of the popular vote and <10% of the seats should learn some humility.

.string.

Leanne wrote:

string wrote:

You people need to get it into your heads once and for all that the SNP does not equate to Scotland. The Scots are bigger than that

this post confirms the blind fury for anyone who supports SNP.

I do, so do many others. Accept it or don't. Carry on with your bitter hate filled rants. It won't make me change my views.

... And you merely confirms a tendency to knee jerk into persecuted mode, lashing out with personal insults.

I'll explain more simply; it is very common for the SNP, when reacting to anything unfavourable to the SNP World View, to claim that their views are shared by all Scots. Such is clearly not a universal truth. Such could be taken for minor semantic slips were it not for the fact that I don't think I've ever read such qualifiers as "probably most Scots" or " arguably ..." etc and also for the general approach by the SNP of stirring up enmity by use of the classic Us versus Them technique.

Generali

.string. wrote: »

... And you merely confirms a tendency to knee jerk into persecuted mode, lashing out with personal insults.

I'll explain more simply; it is very common for the SNP, when reacting to anything unfavourable to the SNP World View, to claim that their views are shared by all Scots. Such is clearly not a universal truth. Such could be taken for minor semantic slips were it not for the fact that I don't think I've ever read such qualifiers as "probably most Scots" or " arguably ..." etc and also for the general approach by the SNP of stirring up enmity by use of the classic Us versus Them technique.

Yup.

It's a normal ruse of Nationalists the world over. Conflate the Nation with the party representing part of the Nationalist movement. An attack on (or more likely an attempt of reasoned debate with) Nationalists is an attack on the Nation as a whole. The Nation must be protected by any necessary means so the party must be protected by any necessary means.

The SNP isn't Scotland and Scotland isn't the SNP. STD and Leanne don't seem to understand those very simple things and it's that attitude that makes groups like the SNP extremely dangerous.

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

You have completely failed to grasp how a minority government works and gets votes and legislation through. So am not even going to bother correcting you on any of the above. Salmond knows far more than you I'm afraid, that's for sure. Sorry.

But you're are right, the SNP will get their vote like everyone else. I think that's what all the panic is about isn't it ? 'Holding to ransom' and 'coups'.. Why would David Cameron be saying things like that then if he didn't mean them ? Surely he's not just whipping up anti-SNP/Scots feeling as an ugly campaign tactic. How awful if so...

On the contrary, Shakey, you seem to think that the SNP is the only player out there; on a vote-by-vote basis all parties get to have their say - that is the point that you seem to be missing, as my post and that by Generali was pointing out. It is not going to be just about what the S NP want.

As for Salmond knowing more than I, in some things he undoubtedly does, in others undoubtedly not, but my point was that it is not realistic to expect him to be "the smartest strategist in Parliament" which is another matter entirely.

Enterprise_1701C

.string. wrote: »

You people need to get it into your heads once and for all that the SNP does not equate to Scotland. The Scots are bigger than that.

If this is the case then come May 7th get your people out and vote against SNP.

Froggitt

Leanne1812 wrote: »

I'm not mocking Clapton. I very much believe in equality. It's one of the reasons I voted Yes.

However, I'm not getting drawn into a debate with you about Barnett. I'll just say this, for all those who feel aggrieved that Scotland gets free prescriptions & higher education I'd say why aren't you lobbying your government for this instead of feeling bitter at what others get?

Because the country cant afford it......it would be more bust than it currently is.

Froggitt

And whoever is running the next government needs to grow a pair and end this iniquitous Scottish bribe.......per capita equality is the only fair route forward.

Leanne1812

.string. wrote: »

... And you merely confirms a tendency to knee jerk into persecuted mode, lashing out with personal insults.

I'll explain more simply; it is very common for the SNP, when reacting to anything unfavourable to the SNP World View, to claim that their views are shared by all Scots. Such is clearly not a universal truth. Such could be taken for minor semantic slips were it not for the fact that I don't think I've ever read such qualifiers as "probably most Scots" or " arguably ..." etc and also for the general approach by the SNP of stirring up enmity by use of the classic Us versus Them technique.

I don't think I've ever stated that SNP views are shared by all scots. It's pretty clear post referendum that we don't. However, there is evidence, if the polls play out that some who voted no will support SNP in this election. My bugbear is those of us who do support are frequently regarded as idiots or extremists.