The New Fat Scotland 'Thanks for all the Fish' Thread.

Shakethedisease

antrobus wrote: »

I see; "made up rubbish", you would know all about that, wouldn't you?

Your debating skills are still unmatched.

Did the Daily Express claim that America is going to invade Scotland? Or is that something you have just made up?

And for the third time, satire seems to have passed you by.

Shakethedisease

Hintza wrote: »

To keep the ball moving along since Shakey is looking a tad shaky on Nicola's lack of statesmanship. We don't want to be accused of mocking the afflicted.

What about that secret Chinese deal?

You remember the one that was signed in secret.

I gather it failed because of the other parties were nasty about it and not because the SNP couldn't organise a pith up in a brewery? Or so says Nicola poor deluded soul that she is, surrounded by a party that has no gravitas.

Oh gawd, not this post again. This must be about the 100th one of yours I've seen saying the same thing since 2014.

antrobus

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Your debating skills are still unmatched. .....

You don't actually provide much in the way of competition, so that's not really much of a compliment. But thanks anyway.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

.. And for the third time, satire seems to have passed you by.

Satire;


the use of humour, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people's stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues.

It doesn't mean making stuff up to try and cover up the fact that you have nothing to say.

.string.

Moto2 wrote: »

Hell no, but you don't do it in public if you represent a government, you do it through channels and summits/meeting etc.

You've picked up on a very sensible, and pragmatic, way to interact with Trump. He has made some illadvised comments which if followed through would hurt a lot of people. The pragmatic way to approach him now is not to harp on those previous statements because to do so will drive him on to do them out of pride or stubbornness or simply because of not having constructive alternatives put before him. Better to engage him with other ways of thinking and let the normal process, which I believe is common with new leaders, of letting him grow into the personality his role expects.

Before he was elected it was easy and even fun to make all sorts of disparaging comments about him but now that needs to stop; he needs space and time to soften his approach. We here don't really figure in that but loud public statements by politician do matter whoever they are.

As a slight diversion I wonder if his (enforced) detachment from his commercial life will affect things. In principle I would assume in the USA conflict of interest is to be avoided and he may detach himself from his Scottish adventure or let his sons deal with it or even divest himself of it since he won't have the time to run a business even if he still had the inclination .

Hintza

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Oh gawd, not this post again. This must be about the 100th one of yours I've seen saying the same thing since 2014.

Deflection again Shakey...........

Guess you missed First Minister's questions today?

Shakethedisease

antrobus wrote: »

I see; "made up rubbish", you would know all about that, wouldn't you?

Ach you're more interested in taking pops at other posters and talking about me than anything going on in Scotland. *bored face*

Did the Daily Express claim that America is going to invade Scotland? Or is that something you have just made up?

I don't know, I don't read the Express, which is why I asked the question. I didn't claim anything. You might want to read posts a little more thoroughly. ----> Me

Do the Express think America is going to invade

A few other posters are bigging up things about Sturgeon having to stay in Trump's good books because he hold's grudges. I just wondered what exactly they were trying to get at ? Nothing revealed as yet. Are you any the wiser perhaps ?

kabayiri

.string. wrote: »

You've picked up on a very sensible, and pragmatic, way to interact with Trump. He has made some illadvised comments which if followed through would hurt a lot of people. The pragmatic way to approach him now is not to harp on those previous statements because to do so will drive him on to do them out of pride or stubbornness or simply because of not having constructive alternatives put before him. Better to engage him with other ways of thinking and let the normal process, which I believe is common with new leaders, of letting him grow into the personality his role expects.
...

The aftermath of a pretty divisive election campaign was the time for singular, rather dull, mildly welcoming messages in my opinion.

For me, PM May's statement was inoffensive enough.

The ideal thing to do is wait until Trump has a team around him when in office; a team he trusts; and then engage with him and the team as a whole to work through any new working arrangements.

Well, I would have suggested inviting him over, but Tasmina "any party will do" has suggested banning him. Fortunately she won't get to decide on who comes to the UK.

Shakethedisease

kabayiri wrote: »

The aftermath of a pretty divisive election campaign was the time for singular, rather dull, mildly welcoming messages in my opinion.

For me, PM May's statement was inoffensive enough.

The ideal thing to do is wait until Trump has a team around him when in office; a team he trusts; and then engage with him and the team as a whole to work through any new working arrangements.

Well, I would have suggested inviting him over, but Tasmina "any party will do" has suggested banning him. Fortunately she won't get to decide on who comes to the UK.

I'm no fan of Tasmina. However, Trump had said he wants to ban her and indeed everyone who is of her faith from the USA. I assume that would include Brits as he didn't elaborate at the time. Fair's fair after all.

You talk like everyone in the UK when he came out with all his Muslim and Mexican stuff should all have been nodding along in sage agreement. In reality everyone from Boris Johnson, Ruth Davidson and lots of other MP's, MSP's thought he was the biggest big mouthed buffoon ever. And a dangerous one at that. Petitions galore to block him from the UK. You must have a short memory.

Lots of 'whoops I shouldn't have said that' bowing and scraping backtracking going on right now, all feverently hoping for the best rather than the worst. The SNP is unlikely to be among those.

markwilkinson

If Scots really want to leave the Union, it's quite simple, I'm suprised they didn't think of it themselves - give the vote to the English!

kabayiri

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I'm no fan of Tasmina. However, Trump had said he wants to ban her and indeed everyone who is of her faith from the USA. I assume that would include Brits as he didn't elaborate at the time. Fair's fair after all.
...

Diplomacy is more a matter of sucking up at the right time, than eye for an eye.

We should allow Trump to expand on what he believes, whether we like it or not.

His comment on banning Muslims was on the back of concerns from other republicans that said they did not have adequate methods of vetting new arrivals.

I think there is validity in these concerns, but I also expect Trump will dump much of his election rhetoric.

Re: Tasmina, I was a bit disappointed in her performance on QT tbh. There were a couple of worked-up panellists and she got caught up in the mood a bit. It was an ideal opportunity for someone like Alex Salmond. He talked earlier about Trump with a sense of balance, and wry humour. I might not agree with Salmond on things but I find him engaging.