Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

So UK troops abroad, British embassies and trade agreement negotiations don't help the lives of Scots in your opinion.

It's ridiculous. You had a chance to vote to leave the UK and you blew it. As a result you are a part of the UK not a separate country so Scotland gets to help pay for some shared stuff like the military.

EVEL says we are a separate country though. You can't pull the 'part of the UK card'.. then not whenever it suits. In my view that's a big part of the problem. Devolved and reserved issues are confused and conflated whenever the debate calls for it. ie 'the SNP 'blaming Westminster for reduced funding for'.. then a few pages later 'but Scotland is part of the UK so shouldn't be allocated blah blah'.. 'Oil prices are bad for Scottish economy'.. oh but No, HS2 is good for the UK !

No separate country, no EVEL. And if you're fully behind EVEL.. then Scotland is a separate country with separate laws. You and lots of others here should make up your minds which it's to be. Because at the moment it's part of the UK when it's convenient, then it's not when things like GERS come out and suddenly Scotland magically has an entirely separate economy.. which has nothing to do with Westminster !

Shakethedisease

HornetSaver wrote: »

That's not exclusively a Scottish thing.

A lot of the hysteria in England around a Labour-SNP Westminster agreement in the run up to the general election stemmed from anti-Salmond sentiment as much as anti-nationalist. To paraphrase Scottish political scientist Frankie Boyle (talking about something other than politics): had Salmond responded to the referendum by describing his party as a load of useless ****s that he'd never work with again, English swing voters would've been far less receptive to the argument that an SNP influence was a reason not to vote Labour.

Sturgeon on the other hand is someone who will play the issue rather than the sentiment. When she argues down another point of view, you feel that her primary motivation is to argue her point of view, rather than to give the other person a kicking. As a result she is surprisingly popular down south given her primary political aim.

Yes but you have to weigh that up against 'personality' politics. And how many times you heard 'Ed Miliband doesn't look like a PM' ? Things like that ? The hysteria in England was centred round Salmond as a focal point at first. But from the studies and books I've read since... there was a lot of 'don't want the Scots running things' sentiment in general in response. 'Ajockalypse now' wasn't it from Boris ?

It will happen again next time too. And I'm afraid in Scotland, rightly or wrongly, it was most definitely perceived as 'anti-Scottish' sentiment. For all Salmond was polarising, he was still the most popular politician in Scotland by absolute miles, and had been for years. For older Scottish Labour voters however, he was really despised with a lot of baggage. A big proportion of those, voted No thinking Miliband and Labour would be in No 10 ( all the UK wide polls were pointing to that at the time ).

Salmond's not in charge anymore. And won't be front and centre of any future referendum campaign either. Sturgeon will. Neither is Labour going to be in No10 anytime soon based on the current state of play.

skintmacflint

Shakethedisease wrote: »

ps It's a bit sad that you don't like to see poorer people from deprived housing estates getting out and voting on issues that affect them as much as anyone else. But given your current voting preferences, hardly a surprise.

Spoken like a true recently converted middle earning nationalist. From reasonable earning , Labour working class parents.

Just my opinion of course, but you do rather seem to perfectly fit the Tartan Tory stereotype.

My wife and I gave years of our life to volunteer work with people in disadvantaged circumstances , including taking abused and the drug addicted into our family home over the years. So don't even try your your flippant, sanctimonious, patronising piffle with me hen. I mean mate.

Have you ever sat on a children's panel deciding an abused child's future when the parents can't even turn up, as they're lying comatose on some stranger's floor yet again. When you have, come back and tell me you still believe Independence and the cuts to existing services, or SNPs populist sounding simplistic rhetoric on how to change the mindset of these areas by throwing them a few more benefits, is the answer.

And I'll call you a liar or a liberal do good fool. Or both.

baldelectrician

skintmacflint wrote: »

Spoken like a true recently converted middle earning nationalist. From reasonable earning , Labour working class....


with me hen.

Nothing like a patronising start to the morning to cheer us all up.

If you really think the tories are the answer then there's no hope.

The point of independence is not to do the same in a Scottish way, it's to do better with similar resources, not a land of milk and honey but the chance to make a difference without hands tied behind our back- minimum price anyone?

We can decide not to spend money on Trident or stop victimising people on benefits using sanctions - it's all about choices we will make.

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

EVEL says we are a separate country though. You can't pull the 'part of the UK card'.. then not whenever it suits. In my view that's a big part of the problem. Devolved and reserved issues are confused and conflated whenever the debate calls for it. ie 'the SNP 'blaming Westminster for reduced funding for'.. then a few pages later 'but Scotland is part of the UK so shouldn't be allocated blah blah'.. 'Oil prices are bad for Scottish economy'.. oh but No, HS2 is good for the UK !

No separate country, no EVEL. And if you're fully behind EVEL.. then Scotland is a separate country with separate laws. You and lots of others here should make up your minds which it's to be. Because at the moment it's part of the UK when it's convenient, then it's not when things like GERS come out and suddenly Scotland magically has an entirely separate economy.. which has nothing to do with Westminster !

What a load of prejudiced drivel.

It says a lot about your degenerated arguments Shakey in that now you really can't now tell the difference between SNP spin and an objective viewpoint. Or maybe you can and you see the drip drip drip of anti Westminster/Tory/English diatribe as just a tactic and to the devil with honesty.

Just because it's SNP spin does not make it so.


I see that you are now claiming that a vote for the SNP is a vote for independence, a reversal of your previous stance but indicative, as always of the latest favoured SNP spin.

(cue for remark on a poll about the ... whatever)

.string.

baldelectrician wrote: »

Nothing like a patronising start to the morning to cheer us all up.

If you really think the tories are the answer then there's no hope.

The point of independence is not to do the same in a Scottish way, it's to do better with similar resources, not a land of milk and honey but the chance to make a difference without hands tied behind our back- minimum price anyone?

We can decide not to spend money on Trident or stop victimising people on benefits using sanctions - it's all about choices we will make.

I don't know how you think you answered to skintmacflint's post because your comments were not relevant to it.

But just on your post, you should choose, a different word to "similar", "reduced" would be a better choice methinks.

.. And your choices would perforce not result in the same country as Scotland is now. You should understand that there would be huge pressure on the capability to protect the low paid, and the UK Government expenditure cuts would seem as nothing, compared with what would result from benefiting from the UK security blanket.

You really have swallowed that SNP guff extolling the virtues of their future, undeclared, economic policies for Natland.

Tromking

Shakethedisease wrote: »

No, it really is independence. The SNP are simply the vehicle and the means. There are a lot of votes going to the SNP in May, from those who don't agree with much of what they stand for ( see polls). But will vote for them realising that an SNP majority is the only means by which to call another independence referendum. Apart from Labour and the Tories... every single other ( smaller ) left leaning party in Scotland is for independence. There will be a lot of 'lending votes' even though the leaders of the smaller parties despair at the thought. The time for smaller parties to gain ground is after independence. It's a widely held view, as far as I can asertain.

The thing that blows a hole in that particular argument was the large amount of dyed-in-the-wool SNP voters away from the central belt, that decided to vote NO when push came to shove in the indyref. If I recall correctly Salmond remarked how crucial that fact was at the time. As long as the economic case is not made clear for these people, that situation will be repeated ad infinitum at every subsequent indyref in my opinion.

foxtrotoscar_2

I see the usual 'I'm not an SNP member' cybernats are back with their vitriol:-


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3393862/Good-riddance-maybe-unionism-gives-cancer-Scottish-Nationalists-troll-David-Bowie-death-pleaded-Scotland-stay-UK-2014.html

elantan

foxtrotoscar wrote: »

I see the usual 'I'm not an SNP member' cybernats are back with their vitriol:-


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3393862/Good-riddance-maybe-unionism-gives-cancer-Scottish-Nationalists-troll-David-Bowie-death-pleaded-Scotland-stay-UK-2014.html

One of then Atleast is a unionist . Do keep up old chap

Mistermeaner

It's interesting that none of the regular pro Indy supporters in this thread ever seem to post in any of the other threads, most of which tend be pan UK if not globally significant

If I was to hazard a guess I would presume it's because for them scotland is a little bubble that needn't trouble itself with such things.

I wonder if this is the symptom of being an unweened petulant teenager - grand ideas about its own self importance and arrogance regards it's independence but basically pig ignorant regards what goes on in the world. It'll soon find out if it chooses to leave home.

Mum how do I boil an egg?