Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Shakethedisease

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Anything that keeps the SNP to a one term wonder is worth it.

How are Scots going to feel when they realise a vote for SNP is a wasted vote despite Nippy Sweety's promises to the contrary? (hint: Indy isn't the answer)

As WM and the Scottish Exec will have 5 years to instigate a thorough, complete and comprehensive spending review as further fiscal powers are transferred to Scotland.

So there will be plenty of time to demonstrate that the annual subsidy of billions is beyond a doubt factual and incontestable.

All your thousands of posts, thinking the SNP had the upper hand, hopefully you won't get too upset when you realise your lot have been given just enough rope to hang themselves with....

The 'Helicopter of Hubris' is starting to look a bit ridiculous now....

Is too late Hamish. The Tories are about to pull the plug on Scotland if they get more seats than Labour. Whether you like it or not. They don't want the MP's Scotland will vote for there. ( which like it or not you have to admit look like being mostly SNP ).

I'm afraid it's only you that's going to look ridiculous. Because you'll still be blaming the SNP. In fact, you're trying to do so now.

Better get those moving south plans in the works. There's a big FFA black hole coming your way. From the Tories ! Expect a huge push this week of complete hysteria about the SNP .. which will solidify and garner support up here ( see last few weeks polls as they've started ramping ). Either that or hope Labour gets in.

hint : You may be getting indy/FFA/FFR whether you want it or not. You just haven't realised it yet. Miliband just sealed the deal on Question Time. And the Tories have been chuntering for months already about offering it.

Lets see anyway.

Generali

Shakethedisease wrote: »

If Labour won't work with the SNP or Plaid..then of course the SNP are not legitimate at Westminster. That he said it so 'sincerely' on Question Time on National tv.. How the Tories must've laughed.

I'm not sure why you don't understand this bit so I'll try again using very short words. The important bit is in bold, I'm not being shouty, just using it for emphasis.

The parties that win the three largest numbers of seats get to have a member on each select committee. As a result, the SNP will have to work with Labour and the Conservatives and Labour and the Conservatives will have to work with the SNP. If they don't there'll be chaos.

However, no party is obliged to include any other party in any sort of a deal.

The current PM gets the first go at setting up a Government. If (s)he is confident that he can then he will go to the Queen to ask if he can prepare the Queen's Speech. If he can't then the leader of the next biggest group gets a go and so on. If Cam or Miliband can't do it then Ms S would get a chance. Perhaps she could persuade enough of the Labour Left plus some odds and sods to form a Government or perhaps she can't. Perhaps she won't even get the chance because someone else will get in there first.

If nobody can form a Government, Cameron remains as PM and a new election is called.

elantan

I really dont get why wanting to live in an independent country makes me a racist, and a cybernat? its not like I have ever said we need to stop immigration, or I hate people of a different colour, religion etc, and yet I am constantly accused of being a racist or cybernat.

During the indy ref I was referred to as Jacobite nazi separatist scum when out campaigning, what is so scary about wanting your country to be able to stand on it's own two feet

Generali

elantan wrote: »

I really dont get why wanting to live in an independent country makes me a racist, and a cybernat? its not like I have ever said we need to stop immigration, or I hate people of a different colour, religion etc, and yet I am constantly accused of being a racist or cybernat.

During the indy ref I was referred to as Jacobite nazi separatist scum when out campaigning, what is so scary about wanting your country to be able to stand on it's own two feet

It's the violence towards the leader of a legitimate political party that did it for me and Salmond's refusal to say anything to suggest that the 'protestors' (violent thugs in reality) had done anything wrong.

I don't claim and have never claimed that every SNP supporter is a racist. The SNP is a racist organisation however.

CLAPTON

elantan wrote: »

I really dont get why wanting to live in an independent country makes me a racist, and a cybernat? its not like I have ever said we need to stop immigration, or I hate people of a different colour, religion etc, and yet I am constantly accused of being a racist or cybernat.

During the indy ref I was referred to as Jacobite nazi separatist scum when out campaigning, what is so scary about wanting your country to be able to stand on it's own two feet

you already live in a democratic, free, rich, law abiding and independent country that stands on its own feet.

what makes you a racist is why you feel that you are a distinct subgroup/sect and differ from your fellow citizens.

Fella

chewmylegoff wrote: »

Labour have confirmed there will be no deal of any sort with the SNP and the Lib Dems have also said they wouldn't be involved in a govt including the SNP. This leaves the SNP on the sidelines rather like a bigger and more delusional version of UKIP.

Unfortunately it's a thoroughly disingenous statement. Labour know full well they don't have to do a deal, certainly not any formal one. They're hoping to get in as a minority Govt with the SNP giving them the votes they need everytime they need to get something through. All the wiggle room in the world for Labour & the SNP to be colluding like mad unofficially. It would be a dreadful outcome.

kabayiri

Shakethedisease wrote: »

...
Mabye that No vote last Sept, and the union didn't mean so much to the Tories after all, eh Hamish.. Fiscal oblivion it seems, may be on the cards quite soon then if Labour don't take more seats than the Tories in England on Thursday.
...

You are Tory obsessed. I think you forget that we have had a coallition in power. All the main parties are Unionist. Why don't you complain about Labour and their lack of interest, or LibDems?

It's equally baffling when you hear SNP supporters in the media go on about Thatcher and the poll tax.

*Do these people live in the past?*

This election is about UK wide interests, not SNP minority interests. It's about securing our collective future, not furthering the interests of a 1/10th of the population.

.string.

kabayiri wrote: »

You are Tory obsessed. I think you forget that we have had a coallition in power. All the main parties are Unionist. Why don't you complain about Labour and their lack of interest, or LibDems?

It's equally baffling when you hear SNP supporters in the media go on about Thatcher and the poll tax.

*Do these people live in the past?*

This election is about UK wide interests, not SNP minority interests. It's about securing our collective future, not furthering the interests of a 1/10th of the population.

The obsession with the wicked Tories is mostly a child-like fear of a monster from old fairy tales, not any rational stance from the world of today; as you put it "living in the past".

But I think also it is a euphemism, like "Westminster" which is aka "The English" and used by the SNP as a weapon to forment division. Time and again one hears the rant that "THEY" don't take care of, or care about, Scotland, a charge which panders to both tribal conceit and xenophobia, and is at the same time division-stiring nonsense. If the contribution of Scots at the top levels of UK Goverment are mentioned, they are all too often dismissed as neo-Tories, somehow not as Scottish as an SNP supporter..

Whether those that post here harbour racist feelings, I don't know but doubt I would use that word. However posts are often dripping with invective against the rest of us in the Union and with gleeful anticipation of the chaos the SNP MPs hope to cause.

Not nice.

kabayiri

.string. wrote: »

The obsession with the wicked Tories is mostly a child-like fear of a monster from old fairy tales, not any rational stance from the world of today; as you put it "living in the past".
...

A Tory dominated Scotland would be a sign of good times returning to Scotland.

It would indicate a breaking free from this modern day scourge of depending on the state for everything.

Rather than hate Westminster and London why doesn't Scotland try to outcompete London.

Oh, I forgot - it's because of the evil Tories holding them back; even though they get billions and billions in subsidy.

It's like some boring broken old record.

Shakethedisease

kabayiri wrote: »

You are Tory obsessed. I think you forget that we have had a coallition in power. All the main parties are Unionist. Why don't you complain about Labour and their lack of interest, or LibDems?

It's equally baffling when you hear SNP supporters in the media go on about Thatcher and the poll tax.

*Do these people live in the past?*

This election is about UK wide interests, not SNP minority interests. It's about securing our collective future, not furthering the interests of a 1/10th of the population.

I'm stating facts. The Tories are lining up to cut Scotland loose by delegitimising any Labour govt needing SNP votes. They'll kill two birds with one stone. Labour in Scotland, and a Labour government for the next five years in a second election in October. Who will have lost loads of voters in disgust that they didn't take the chance to form a government when they could have... and 'let the Tories in'.

And see that 'let the Tories in' line ? That's been on replay in Scotland since 1979 against the SNP. So don't be worrying about the SNP and Thatcher. It's been Scottish Labour that's been the main architect in demonising both her and the SNP for the last 36 years. In fact the current Scottish Labour campaign relies almost totally on 'Vote SNP, get the Tories'. I agree that they are living in the past.

So you've got that one slightly wrong. And how are UK wide interests reflected when Scottish voters are being told their elected representatives are likely to be treated akin to leprosy carriers in Westminster exactly ? You'd be happy for that for your own area's MP's I suppose ?

I also think you're forgetting that at the current time, Scotland has 1 Tory MP. Yet has had Tory policies foisted on it regardless for the last five years. Your post smacks of having things both ways. On the one hand going on like the toothache about UK wide interests. And on the other failing to recognise that Scotland has to abide by what UK democracy throws at it. Even if it is only 1 Tory MP. You're not so keen when the same 'UK wide' democracy throws the same back at all ?