Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

elantan

foxtrotoscar wrote: »

Then don't mention it at all. Put up or shut the **** up comes to mind...back up what you say or back off.
You do not disappoint (see the difference....?) me tly what I expect, it's who you are.

Lol hahaha .... You do make me laugh

Generali

elantan wrote: »

P's as for the potential vote rigging ( I ain't positive it was remember). Well I have my reasons to query things.... As previously stated however I ain't sharing them online ... Sorry to dissapoint

What a load of rubbish.

Generali

elantan wrote: »

Lol hahaha .... You do make me laugh

To be fair, the post is rather better than your approach to debate which we could charitably call 'making it up'. Rather like the Yes economic argument really.

foxtrotoscar_2

elantan wrote: »

Lol hahaha .... You do make me laugh

...you make me despair !

Shakethedisease

foxtrotoscar wrote: »

Then don't mention it at all. Put up or shut the **** up comes to mind...back up what you say or back off.
You do not disappoint (see the difference....?) me..it's exactly what I expect, it's who you are.

We all accept that the referendum was free and fair. But there is no denying that there were 'oddities' with it. The most glaring being no exit poll on the stroke of 10. For one of the biggest questions that's faced the UK in 300 years.. Weird, and why not ?

Postal voting also really, really needs looking at again.

AN INDEPENDENT inquiry has been launched into the loss of important documents from the Glenrothes by-election
... after it was revealed the marked voter register from last November's poll had gone missing from the sheriff clerk's office in Kirkcaldy. These papers show who came out to vote.

Question marks had already been raised over the turnout at the by-election – it was, unusually, much higher than in the general election – and the number of postal votes, which was four times the average.

The Labour party has been warned by the Electoral Commission over its handling of postal vote applications after it investigated alleged irregularities in last year's Glasgow North East byelection.

The commission said an unusually high number of last minute postal vote applications were made in Glasgow North East, with 1,800 forms submitted less than three days before the registration deadline – more than a quarter of the total number received.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/feb/23/labour-postal-voting-glasgow-north-east

There are lots of reports of how postal voting is 'wide open to fraud' about as well. Ruth Davidson blurting out about how 'her people' had been 'sampling the postal votes' as they were opened, for weeks in advance around the country. Wasn't perhaps the best way of indicating a straight down the line playing field either. Imagine having access to that sort of information before a single vote has been counted.

Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson said Better Together agents took "tallies" of postal votes at sample openings held before the count. Election rules state the results of these openings must be kept secret. The Crown Office has now instructed police to conduct an investigation into the complaints.

Ms Davidson told the Scotland Decides programme: "We have had people at every sample opening around the country over the last few weeks... and we have been incredibly encouraged by the results from that.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-29489288

The 2014 referendum is over now. And 'rigged' probably isn't the word for it. However, if the NO/Leave side start gaining a bit of traction in the EU ref ? I personally wouldn't be surprised if those 'postal votes' start showing a 'record turnout' a few weeks out from the vote. And that's a bad thing to be thinking.

Things need tightened up so there are not even the slightest doubts in future over election results. Glenrothes is universally seen as a 'rigged and dodgy vote' in Scotland. Ruth Davidson openly admitting that there was counting going on of supposedly sealed/secret ballot papers didn't help either. There is no room for dodgy vote results from 'wide open to fraud' methods of voting these days.

Let's face it, when you've got the RUSSIAN'S of all people complaining about procedure.. there's got to be a few problems there. As the title of the article on Time.com states..they should know..

Scotland’s historic election on independence did not meet international standards for constitutional referendums, the head of a Russian voting rights organization has said, with procedures that left the result subject to rigging and vote-tampering...

...Borisov said the chief concern in Scotland was the counting of the votes, which he alleges was not secure and was open to potential voter fraud and rigging. Borisov noted that the vote-counting room was the size of an “aircraft hangar,” which opened up the democratic process to tampering. “Even if you want to, it’s impossible to tell what’s happening,” he said.

“It’s also unclear where the boxes with ballot papers come from.”

http://time.com/3414430/russia-scotland-independence-referendum/

Shakethedisease

foxtrotoscar wrote: »

...you make me despair !

Is there a point to your posts other than slagging a complete stranger in the internet off from the safety of behind your keyboard ? There's a word for that..

Generali

Joining the deluded bandwagon I see STD. So to paraphrase, 'the referendum was a little bit rigged'. Twaddle. Just making stuff up to fill the gap between your dreams and reality.

islandannie

There is as much point to their posts as there are to yours.
Your rambling verbose nonsense posts which never actually clarifiy the snp position on the yawning gap between expenditure and income are actually more disingenuous than the straight forward post you criticise.

In fact Elantans posts also make me despair.

zagubov

TBH, we're struggling to keep this in the economy part of the forum.

Clearly what's happened is that Scotland's attempt to secede from the joint parliament was met with a one-sided media onslaught followed by a victory where five out of nine voters accepted the status quo.

I personally feel there should be a period of stability now before revisiting the issue.

However, I don't know if it's more about the economy now than about trust between the electorate of Scotland and the joint parliament in Westminster.

All this talk about "holding the SNP to account" is secondary to the people holding Westminster to account. And the last election seemed to show that voters in Scotland are keen to put Westminster very much under the microscope.;)

Generali

zagubov wrote: »

All this talk about "holding the SNP to account" is secondary to the people holding Westminster to account. And the last election seemed to show that voters in Scotland are keen to put Westminster very much under the microscope.;)

I do wonder if there is a genuine desire to see the SNP in power or whether this simply reflects the broader rejection of BAU politics that parties from Syriza to UKIP to the Greens to the FN to (at a stretch) Mr Corbyn represent.

After all you do know one thing if you vote SNP in a Westminster election: there is no way that the vast majority of policies you a 'voting for' will make it through the process of coalition government. No matter how deeply held your beliefs as a junior coalition partner you are realistically only going to get one or two things through into law and then in a pretty watered down way. Ms Sturgeon and Mr Salmond can bang on about conviction all they want but they can't ignore the political realities of not contesting the vast majority of the seats up for grabs in an election.