Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Generali

Leanne1812 wrote: »

An EU referendum was only promised by the tories. At that time it was an election pledge. They may well have lost so not quite true that we knew it would happen.

Do you really think that everyone that doesn't vote SNP is stupid enough to believe this stuff? Is that really the best argument you can come up with?

That's worse than the vapid rubbish the SNP could manage on QT.

Oh and UKIP, who gained well over twice the votes that the SNP could manage, in fact closer to three times, also promised a referendum on EU membership. Over half the British electorate voted for a candidate standing for an EU referendum.

Of course Scottish voters could have decided to remove themselves from British politics but on reflection felt they were better off voting to Remain.

SNP support is at an all time high and, let's face it, only has one way to go from here. As a result of losing the 'opportunity' to go it alone that record, probably highest ever support is about one twentieth of the British people.

Leanne1812

Generali wrote: »

Do you really think that everyone that doesn't vote SNP is stupid enough to believe this stuff? Is that really the best argument you can come up with?

That's worse than the vapid rubbish the SNP could manage on QT.

You're trying to tell me that it's untrue? Well, prove it. Nonsense, had labour won the election there would be no EU referendum. Is that untrue?

Generali

Leanne1812 wrote: »

You're trying to tell me that it's untrue? Well, prove it. Nonsense, had labour won the election there would be no EU referendum. Is that untrue?

It's disingenuous.

Over half the British population voted for a candidate standing on an EU referendum platform. The then main party of Government made it clear that it was standing on an EU Referendum platform.

It was a UK election so it matters what the people of the UK think. You can sulk in your corner if you like but the SNP won probably the largest proportion of the popular vote they ever will at a General Election and won 5% of the vote. UKIP won 13%.

You can't even out-poll a bunch of swivel-eyed racists.

Leanne1812

Generali wrote: »

It's disingenuous.

Over half the British population voted for a candidate standing on an EU referendum platform. The then main party of Government made it clear that it was standing on an EU Referendum platform.

It was a UK election so it matters what the people of the UK think. You can sulk in your corner if you like but the SNP won probably the largest proportion of the popular vote they ever will at a General Election and won 5% of the vote. UKIP won 13%.

You can't even out-poll a bunch of swivel-eyed racists.

No it's not. What you stated was blatantly untrue.

There was no guarantee of a conservative majority. Hung parliament, coalition was expected if you recall.

I never said it didn't matter what the people of the U.K. think.

It also matters what the people of Scotland think & how they voted.

I'm not sulking, just stating a fact. To compare a uk wide parties vote % to a Scotland only party is hardly fair.

Generali

Leanne1812 wrote: »

To compare a uk wide parties vote % to a Scotland only party is hardly fair.

Aye and there's the rub.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'fair'. UKIP, Labour, SNP, Conservative all stood in the General Election in the UK and decided which seats to contest.

The majority of both votes and seats went to parties supporting a referendum on the EU. 5% of votes went on a platform that the SNP stood on.

The Scots voted to remain in the United Kingdom and so any party (Commonweal anyone?) that only stands in Scottish seats is going to be a very minor party. FPTP has given the SNP a far louder voice in the UK than it should have.

By the electoral system they prefer they should have 30 odd seats.

kabayiri

There is nothing stopping the SNP trying to extend it's reach outside Scotland. It seems churlish to complain about lack of representation when you choose to limit your campaign in a UK-wide election.

SNP could of course try and draw on the nationalism / division in the Union presented by some of the voter base in UKIP.

But then, this would conflict with the SNP socialist agenda and the right of centre typical UKIP view.

Damn principles stop them achieving their goals.

Leanne1812

Generali wrote: »

Aye and there's the rub.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'fair'. UKIP, Labour, SNP, Conservative all stood in the General Election in the UK and decided which seats to contest.

The majority of both votes and seats went to parties supporting a referendum on the EU. 5% of votes went on a platform that the SNP stood on.

The Scots voted to remain in the United Kingdom and so any party (Commonweal anyone?) that only stands in Scottish seats is going to be a very minor party. FPTP has given the SNP a far louder voice in the UK than it should have. By the electoral system they prefer they should have 30 odd seats.

I think it's easy enough to understand what I meant....

I didn't think the SNP would win the election! but they certainly did in Scotland. Agreed, they did benefit from the FPTP system which they oppose. Ah diddums:) suppose it was all their fault too....

.string.

Regarding the neverendum discussion - It was cringe-worthy for Swinney to spout on about the decision on whether to have another referendum being the choice of the Scottish people. He was quizzed a bit on how the matter would be decided and really let the cat out of the bag.

It was a great pity no-one took him up on the remark he made which was (para-phrasing), a Referendum will be held ... "If the Scottish people want it and IF THERE IS A CLEAR MAJORITY FOR INDEPENDENCE".

That showed very clearly that a decision would be nothing to do with the will of the Scottish people, it was simply a tool of SNP Party Policy.

Suppose that there was a clear majority for staying in the Union (as there would be now I suspect), or if the general mood was that a Referendum should be held to put the question to bed (not the case now) would they hold a Referendum? Of course not.

Unfortunately no-one hammered him on that one.

.string.

Leanne1812 wrote: »

I think it's easy enough to understand what I meant..../QUOTE]

Regarding the matter of whether there would be an EU referendum or not and whether the UK would stay in the EU ...

The Scottish Electorate (I refer to the the No voters mainly who are not as thick as you seem to think by the way) knew that if the Tories won there would be a referendum and if, on the other hand, the Labour won then there would be no referendum and therefore no departing the EU.

So either option did not involve deceit the position was rather clear in each case.

Deceit is in SNP expertise methinks.

So what was the point again?

Leanne1812

.string. wrote: »

Leanne1812 wrote: »

I think it's easy enough to understand what I meant..../QUOTE]

Regarding the matter of whether there would be an EU referendum or not and whether the UK would stay in the EU ...

The Scottish Electorate (I refer to the the No voters mainly who are not as thick as you seem to think by the way) knew that if the Tories won there would be a referendum and if, on the other hand, the Labour won then there would be no referendum and therefore no departing the EU.

So either option did not involve deceit the position was rather clear in each case.

Deceit is in SNP expertise methinks.

So what was the point again?

The point was countering generali's post which stated we all knew an EU ref was on the cards. I pointed out it depended on who won the election. At that point no-one knew who would.

Simples......

I never insinuated No voters were thick, not ever.