Jump to content

The General Election Thread


The Devil's Point
 Share

Recommended Posts

if that post had come from anyone else i would have said they were taking the piss but from you, no.

 

first point, why couldn't it have been the yes side that cheated(but still lost), if it had been the other way i would have accepted it, No matter how much i disagreed with it.

 

if you have proof that there was cheating take it to the police otherwise give us all peace and get on with your life.

 

second point, people voted NO because the snp/yes camp failed in anyway to prove there case and refused to answer basic question on the likes of the EU and currency which were very important points. to say that it was because of the rubbish that brown and co came out with shows an almost delusional view that you were robbed.

 

and to prove they were wrong just look at the oil now which a Scotland under independence would have had to depend on massively has dropped to $62 from $113 that salmond said it would stay at, add to that the re-newable firms going bust because (and this was only news to the yes camp it seems) it is very expensive.

 

I have no proof, but that doesn't mean that it didn't happen.

 

Scotland is not massively dependent on oil; oil is a bonus, one that Westminster is desperate to keep hold of. Oil prices go up and down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So how would an amateur like you get rid of these votes, get all these people to turn up (In false glasses and false mustaches) have all these people turning up for 2nd homes AND get away with it??

 

Accept democracy and get the tin foil hat off your napper

 

...AND get away with it??

 

--Easy: There was NO verification of identity whatsoever. In fact it's so easy that people won't believe it could happen. Just like dossiers can't get lost at Westminster, for example.

 

I've accepted what passes for democracy in Britain; that doesn't mean that I have to change my beliefs about what happened and what is happening.

 

It's democracy that will see the Scottish people get another, fairer chance of regaining independence in the not-too-distant future.

Edited by Jaggernaut
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no proof, but that doesn't mean that it didn't happen.

 

Scotland is not massively dependent on oil; oil is a bonus, one that Westminster is desperate to keep hold of. Oil prices go up and down.

 

How deluded are you, scotland runs at a deficit NOW of aprox £8bn a year (and thats with ALL the oil income) so yes it would be massively dependent on oil, it would only be a bonus if we ran at a credit without it and yes prices go up and down, but the yes camp were working on that being around $10 not $60. :no:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How deluded are you, scotland runs at a deficit NOW of aprox £8bn a year (and thats with ALL the oil income) so yes it would be massively dependent on oil, it would only be a bonus if we ran at a credit without it and yes prices go up and down, but the yes camp were working on that being around $10 not $60. :no:

 

The deluded are the unionists who whistle in the dark about the UK's unserviceable 1.3 TRILLION plus debt! And worse, the Scots unionists who somehow believe that the rampant poverty levels among Scottish families, again getting worse, is proof that we are "better together." But there you go.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The deluded are the unionists who whistle in the dark about the UK's unserviceable 1.3 TRILLION plus debt! And worse, the Scots unionists who somehow believe that the rampant poverty levels among Scottish families, again getting worse, is proof that we are "better together." But there you go.

 

 

we are trying to deal with that debt and deficit, what were the snp/yescamp going to do.......oh that's right they refused to answer us, scotland under independence would have been far worse off that is clear and is why we voted no.

Edited by jaggybunnet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

if you have proof that there was cheating take it to the police otherwise give us all peace and get on with your life.

 

i have heard of some voters being given "blank ballots", where it was printed one side with vote options for yes or no, but the other side was blank. all ballotpapers were supposed to have a barcode on the "blank" side.

this wasn't just one polling station, or one region.

i know some of these people have contacted police scotland over this irregularity, how many in total have, and what stage (or result of any) investigations are at, you'd have to contact police scotland.

 

while it takes a giant leap from hearing of a few people i know having being handed, what they are led to believe (only after hearing about barcode after the vote), was potentially a "dodgy ballot" at their polling station ..... to it being a massive conspiracy involving potentially 100's of thousands of votes ..... the fact i personally did hear of these "blank ballots" existence from people i know, and again i reiterate the point they are from not only differing polling stations, but some differing regions, leads me to at least think it's possible there was some illegal activity going on. how much? not a clue. that's what is police's job to try find out. or not. did you for example have a barcode on your ballot jb?

 

if or how any electoral fraud was executed, who was in on it, what level of organisation it took,and a multitude of other questions that arise from such a scenario, who knows, that's why anyone who has doubts over their vote, should contact police scotland.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i have heard of some voters being given "blank ballots", where it was printed one side with vote options for yes or no, but the other side was blank. all ballotpapers were supposed to have a barcode on the "blank" side.

this wasn't just one polling station, or one region.

i know some of these people have contacted police scotland over this irregularity, how many in total have, and what stage (or result of any) investigations are at, you'd have to contact police scotland.

 

while it takes a giant leap from hearing of a few people i know having being handed, what they are led to believe (only after hearing about barcode after the vote), was potentially a "dodgy ballot" at their polling station ..... to it being a massive conspiracy involving potentially 100's of thousands of votes ..... the fact i personally did hear of these "blank ballots" existence from people i know, and again i reiterate the point they are from not only differing polling stations, but some differing regions, leads me to at least think it's possible there was some illegal activity going on. how much? not a clue. that's what is police's job to try find out. or not. did you for example have a barcode on your ballot jb?

 

if or how any electoral fraud was executed, who was in on it, what level of organisation it took,and a multitude of other questions that arise from such a scenario, who knows, that's why anyone who has doubts over their vote, should contact police scotland.

 

Again, you are taking that if that is the case it wasn't yes camp that were doing it, as for the bar code i don't know.

 

in a nutshell the yes camp kept going on about how bad things were , yet the still failed to get a landslide vote for yes, surely give how bad thing are it would be the easiest thing in the world to show how we would be better off under independence.......but they couldn't because we would have been far worse off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, you are taking that if that is the case it wasn't yes camp that were doing it, as for the bar code i don't know.

 

in a nutshell the yes camp kept going on about how bad things were , yet the still failed to get a landslide vote for yes, surely give how bad thing are it would be the easiest thing in the world to show how we would be better off under independence.......but they couldn't because we would have been far worse off.

 

where in my post do i state for which side, any potential electoral fraud was carried out? could have been either side, or both, for all you or i know. it's dangerous to make assumptions jb.

 

you really should try remember about whether your vote had a barcode or not. it's your vote, it's important. ask your friends if they recall a barcode or not on theirs.

 

on your other point, i could quite easily see a yes voter saying with equal justification .....

in a nutshell the no camp kept going on about how bad things would be in an independent scotland, yet they still failed to get a landslide vote for no, surely given how bad things would have been, it would be the easiest thing in the world to show how we would be better off staying in the union (by getting a landslide vote reflective of that)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The deluded are the unionists who whistle in the dark about the UK's unserviceable 1.3 TRILLION plus debt! And worse, the Scots unionists who somehow believe that the rampant poverty levels among Scottish families, again getting worse, is proof that we are "better together." But there you go.

 

The UK's debt is currently being serviced, the UK is also owed significant money from other countries which off sets this debt, the UK also owns plenty of assets which enables the debt to be serviceable, what the government it attempting to do is to bring the value of that debt down, the way in which they are doing it is perhaps questionable but it is coming down

Link to comment
Share on other sites

given your pro yes camp posts before it wasn't really was it :thumbsup2:

 

doesn't negate the fact if there was electoral fraud, i for one would like to know about it, so that any questionable practices or individuals are exposed and not able to affect any future elections. no matter what side they are on. wouldn't you? the snp has it's own bampots (see the 4 councillors who filmed themselves burning the smith commission for example), it's not just the domain of labour, torys or libdims.

 

no one can argue we had an invigorating and inspiring indyref campaign (on both sides), that every scot can be proud of. i have no reason to disbelieve friends, colleagues or acquaintances (both yes and no voters) some who have recalled barcodes on their votes, and some who recall no barcode.

 

anyway jb, i was simply commenting on a point you made about any proof of electoral fraud should be directed to the police, with some recounting of discrepancies in ballot papers that i have heard of, not here to rerun the referendum or debate it all over again - we'll have plenty of time to do that in 2021 ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The UK's debt is currently being serviced, the UK is also owed significant money from other countries which off sets this debt, the UK also owns plenty of assets which enables the debt to be serviceable, what the government it attempting to do is to bring the value of that debt down, the way in which they are doing it is perhaps questionable but it is coming down

 

when you say "the uk's debt is currently being serviced" don't you mean "added to"?

 

uk debt coming down? you sure?

 

http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_national_debt

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_national_debt

 

didn't osbornes own latest budget report project it would continue rising for another four financial years yet.? and even then that's based on assuming his measures of austerity and tax raising meet his (some argue overtly ambitious and unachievable) projected savings and income.

 

as it is, this year the total uk national debt will be 100% GDP, give or take a few quid.

 

one. hundred. percent.

 

and rising.

 

is that really servicing the debt?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The UK's debt is currently being serviced, the UK is also owed significant money from other countries which off sets this debt, the UK also owns plenty of assets which enables the debt to be serviceable, what the government it attempting to do is to bring the value of that debt down, the way in which they are doing it is perhaps questionable but it is coming down

 

It'll be at a similar level by the time all of us are deid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

when you say "the uk's debt is currently being serviced" don't you mean "added to"?

 

uk debt coming down? you sure?

 

didn't osbornes own latest budget report project it would continue rising for another four financial years yet.? and even then that's based on assuming his measures of austerity and tax raising meet his (some argue overtly ambitious and unachievable) projected savings and income.

 

as it is, this year the total uk national debt will be 100% GDP, give or take a few quid.

 

one. hundred. percent.

 

and rising.

 

is that really servicing the debt?

 

yes debt is going up and will continue to for a few years yes but at a lower rate, it is the deficit that the government say is coming down which is a different thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, you are taking that if that is the case it wasn't yes camp that were doing it, as for the bar code i don't know. in a nutshell the yes camp kept going on about how bad things were , yet the still failed to get a landslide vote for yes, surely give how bad thing are it would be the easiest thing in the world to show how we would be better off under independence.......but they couldn't because we would have been far worse off.

 

It would have taken a swing of 200k votes to affect the outcome of the referendum. That's a heck of a lot of fraudulent ballot papers and impersonators. It also assumes that only the No campaign were involved. Impersonation fraud is much more difficult when there is a high turnout, especially over 80%. There would have been more opportunity in areas where the turnout was lower, i.e. Glasgow and Dundee which (ironically) voted Yes.

 

Where the turnout is high, there is a very high probability that real voter will turn up. He or she will find that AN Other has already voted in his or her name. The voter should then report the fraud to the police. The polling clerk would report the allegation to the returning officer. The returning officer could identify the ballot paper by its number at the count and remove it. I believe that RO could issue a replacement ballot paper to the voter who had been impersonated after verifying the voter's identity.

 

Another nail in the coffin of the Yes conspiracy theory is that result was predicted accurately by Yougov on polling day, both before and after the polls closed. If the majority of voters had really supported independence, the opinion polls would have predicted a Yes win. (The margin of error in such polls is 3% at most, usually much less.) The Yes campaign would have been yelling "fraud' in the media and online but Salmond conceded as soon as the decisive result was declared.

 

It is time that Juggernaut stopped insulting our intelligence with his ludicrous claims and conspiracy theories that can be debunked very easily. He even claimed that two SNP holds in council by-elections last week were a new protest or the start of a major backlash against the "lies". A little research would have shown them to be utter nonsense.

Edited by kni
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kni, is there any hope that you might stop posting rude rubbish? Your assertion about what I "claimed" is demonstrably false. Check my post; I asked people what they thought of the by-election results; I claimed nothing.

 

Here: I'll cut and paste what I wrote; people can see who is condescendingly preaching about doing "a little research" while plainly believing that he himself doesn't need to.

 

"I see the SNP recently comfortably won local council by-elections in two areas that were reported as voting "no" in the referendum. Any thoughts? Are these victories (1) some kind of protest vote (if so, against whom)?; (2) the start of a backlash by "no" voters against the lies of the "vow?" (3) further evidence that the declared outcome of the referendum was a stitch-up, i.e. the vote was rigged?"

 

Presumably you recognise what's a claim and what's a question.

 

Now, to borrow from Jim Murphy: back off, attack dog!

Edited by Jaggernaut
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure it was very wise of Jim Murphy to say in his acknowledgement speech that he has always dreamed of being the captain of a team in the East End. Isn't that half of Glasgow's votes gone? Or perhaps I am being overly serious.

 

Well, if the polls are accurate then a significant number of Glaswegian voters look poised either to defect from Labour to the SNP or have done so already, so if that comment manages to claw back half of them then it should be regarded as a stroke of genius. :)

 

if that post had come from anyone else i would have said they were taking the piss but from you, no. first point, why couldn't it have been the yes side that cheated(but still lost), if it had been the other way i would have accepted it, No matter how much i disagreed with it. if you have proof that there was cheating take it to the police otherwise give us all peace and get on with your life. second point, people voted NO because the snp/yes camp failed in anyway to prove there case and refused to answer basic question on the likes of the EU and currency which were very important points. to say that it was because of the rubbish that brown and co came out with shows an almost delusional view that you were robbed. and to prove they were wrong just look at the oil now which a Scotland under independence would have had to depend on massively has dropped to $62 from $113 that salmond said it would stay at, add to that the re-newable firms going bust because (and this was only news to the yes camp it seems) it is very expensive.

 

Do you not think there might be geopolitical reasons for the oil price being low, like the US trying to f*ck up Russia's economy to put pressure on Putin, for instance?

 

Even so, oil prices have always been cyclical. It is maybe a moot point now but it has been shown over and over that Scotland's economy is viable, even without oil. Even the No campaign acknowledged that Scotland could survive as an independent country.

 

correct me if i am wrong but is that not what you have done by the very post i highlighted. as for debate it has been tried but anyone who dare to bring up immigration as a point is classed as a racist or a fascist which as i said is bollocks. my view on the lib dems, for years they were happy to come out with policies that were in most cases unrealistic but that didn't matter because if they were being honest they never thought they would be in power so would have to justify them, then oh bugger they were in power and then realism has to come into play for those that had to make the decisions. anyone who goes into uni and come out with a good job at the end should have to pay for that education and anyone who doesn't understand the system and doesn't go to uni because of it maybe shouldn't in the first place as they obviously are not that bright. In summery lib dems ...very naive

 

Terms like 'fascist' and, especially, 'racist' are overused and often wrongly applied these days. I wouldn't describe Ukip as a fascist or a racist party per se and I agree that dismissing anyone who raises concerns over immigration as a racist is unhelpful and doesn't move the debate forward.

 

However, much of Ukip's policy marks them down as an avowedly right-wing party and one of the most concerning consequences of the mass media exposure they enjoy is that the working classes - particularly in England - appear to be starting to view them as a viable alternative to the mainstream parties. I say it is concerning because Ukip's social and economic policies suggest little that might be expected to improve the lives of ordinary working people.

 

Incidentally, as far as Scotland specifically is concerned, I would say that emigration rather than immigration has caused far much more pain over the years.

 

i have heard of some voters being given "blank ballots", where it was printed one side with vote options for yes or no, but the other side was blank. all ballotpapers were supposed to have a barcode on the "blank" side. this wasn't just one polling station, or one region. i know some of these people have contacted police scotland over this irregularity, how many in total have, and what stage (or result of any) investigations are at, you'd have to contact police scotland. while it takes a giant leap from hearing of a few people i know having being handed, what they are led to believe (only after hearing about barcode after the vote), was potentially a "dodgy ballot" at their polling station ..... to it being a massive conspiracy involving potentially 100's of thousands of votes ..... the fact i personally did hear of these "blank ballots" existence from people i know, and again i reiterate the point they are from not only differing polling stations, but some differing regions, leads me to at least think it's possible there was some illegal activity going on. how much? not a clue. that's what is police's job to try find out. or not. did you for example have a barcode on your ballot jb? if or how any electoral fraud was executed, who was in on it, what level of organisation it took,and a multitude of other questions that arise from such a scenario, who knows, that's why anyone who has doubts over their vote, should contact police scotland.

 

I think it would naïve to discount the possibility of the vote being rigged in some way. The British state has never let any part of its Empire cede without putting up some sort of a fight, and when they want to they can get down and dirty with the best of them. Come to think of it, the idea that the powers that be just sat there in London with their fingers crossed going “please vote No, please vote No” is absurd almost to the point where it’s laughable.

 

Now, whether dodgy dealings went on to the extent where it would have affected the overall result I am not sure; the result was within the margins of error of most opinion polls of the time so it doesn’t seem unfeasible. Then again, if you are going to rig an election you should at least make it look plausible.

 

That said, I wouldn’t completely discount the possibility that the Scottish Government attempted underhand tactics either, although if they did they didn’t do a very good job. In fairness, they have a lot less experience in the dark arts than their counterparts at Westminster.

 

What we can point to with a degree of certainty was the underhand campaign strategy adopted by the No camp: the relentlessly negative multi-media campaigning; deliberately trying to frighten vulnerable segments of society such as OAPs and immigrants; and, of course, The Vow. I said at the time that I thought The Vow was a pig in a poke, but if even 10% of the people who voted No were considering voting Yes but held back on the basis that Scotland would get 'devo-max' (as implied by The Vow and its architect, Gordon Brown) then that will have been enough to affect the overall outcome of the referendum.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kni, is there any hope that you might stop posting rude rubbish? Your assertion about what I "claimed" is demonstrably false. Check my post; I asked people what they thought of the by-election results; I claimed nothing.

 

Here: I'll cut and paste what I wrote; people can see who is condescendingly preaching about doing "a little research" while plainly believing that he himself doesn't need to.

 

"I see the SNP recently comfortably won local council by-elections in two areas that were reported as voting "no" in the referendum. Any thoughts? Are these victories (1) some kind of protest vote (if so, against whom)?; (2) the start of a backlash by "no" voters against the lies of the "vow?" (3) further evidence that the declared outcome of the referendum was a stitch-up, i.e. the vote was rigged?"

 

Presumably you recognise what's a claim and what's a question.

 

Now, to borrow from Jim Murphy: back off, attack dog!

 

Rude? That's rich coming from you who smear anyone who disagrees with your narrow nationalism as a British Nationalist. You have dished out insult after insult on here and other threads but can't even take the mildest criticism. Your "questions" were obviously rhetorical, a common debating advice. I debunked all three possibilities with facts, i.e. that both seats were SNP holds, a possibility that you obviously did not even consider.

 

As far as "back off" is concerned, I am not going be moderated by you. Your Scottish Nationalism Socialism has a nauseating authoritarian tone. I am not going back off, i.e. bullied by you, and will continue debunk your nonsense with evidence and facts. If you can't stand the proverbial heat, get out of the kitchen.

 

ETA - my last vote, a few years, was cast for the Greens who supported the Yes campaign. You don't have to be an SNP bully to advocate independence. The SNP and UKIP have a similar nationalist mindset - UKIP blames immigrants for our problems, the SNP blames the English or Westminster. I certainly will not be voting for them next year and will probably abstain again.

Edited by kni
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

yes debt is going up and will continue to for a few years yes but at a lower rate, it is the deficit that the government say is coming down which is a different thing.

 

forgive me if i'm wrong with this ageing memory of mine, but weren't we told by osborne four and a half years ago that the deficit would be eradicated by now/next year? and that our debt would have been substantially lower than it is now?

 

labour have shown many times before they can't be trusted with the economy, osborne and cameron are showing they are as equally clueless and useless, so why should any voter give either of these two self-serving parties their vote?

 

the days of deciding which is the lesser of two evils (shit or shite) to elect every 4 or 5 years are over. voters (in england, wales and n.irn now, as well as scotland) are realising with increasing numbers, there are better alternatives with better morals and ambitions than the tired, stale, dying traditional political parties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

forgive me if i'm wrong with this ageing memory of mine, but weren't we told by osborne four and a half years ago that the deficit would be eradicated by now/next year? and that our debt would have been substantially lower than it is now?

 

labour have shown many times before they can't be trusted with the economy, osborne and cameron are showing they are as equally clueless and useless, so why should any voter give either of these two self-serving parties their vote?

 

the days of deciding which is the lesser of two evils (shit or shite) to elect every 4 or 5 years are over. voters (in england, wales and n.irn now, as well as scotland) are realising with increasing numbers, there are better alternatives with better morals and ambitions than the tired, stale, dying traditional political parties.

 

it was tougher that we thought, still better off than under independence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

forgive me if i'm wrong with this ageing memory of mine, but weren't we told by osborne four and a half years ago that the deficit would be eradicated by now/next year? and that our debt would have been substantially lower than it is now? labour have shown many times before they can't be trusted with the economy, osborne and cameron are showing they are as equally clueless and useless, so why should any voter give either of these two self-serving parties their vote? the days of deciding which is the lesser of two evils (shit or shite) to elect every 4 or 5 years are over. voters (in england, wales and n.irn now, as well as scotland) are realising with increasing numbers, there are better alternatives with better morals and ambitions than the tired, stale, dying traditional political parties.

 

I agree but did you honesty believe that Gideon Osborne could deal with the deficit? He had very little or no real life experience before entering Parliament. Osborne had been a researcher/adviser (poorly paid) at Conservative Central Office before becoming a SpAd in Whitehall. His wealthy family or trust fund paid for his Kensington/Notting Hill lifestyle. Then he got Neil Hamilton's old Tatton seat. There is no evidence, however, that any of the other main parties (including Nicola's Numpties) have the answer. Do you really want to endorse these thick dumplings by voting for their inane and nonsensical policies?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rude? That's rich coming from you who smear anyone who disagrees with your narrow nationalism as a British Nationalist. You have dished out insult after insult on here and other threads but can't even take the mildest criticism. Your "questions" were obviously rhetorical, a common debating advice. I debunked all three possibilities with facts, i.e. that both seats were SNP holds, a possibility that you obviously did not even consider.

 

As far as "back off" is concerned, I am not going be moderated by you. Your Scottish Nationalism Socialism has a nauseating authoritarian tone. I am not going back off, i.e. bullied by you, and will continue debunk your nonsense with evidence and facts. If you can't stand the proverbial heat, get out of the kitchen.

 

ETA - my last vote, a few years, was cast for the Greens who supported the Yes campaign. You don't have to be an SNP bully to advocate independence. The SNP and UKIP have a similar nationalist mindset - UKIP blames immigrants for our problems, the SNP blames the English or Westminster. I certainly will not be voting for them next year and will probably abstain again.

 

OK, Britnat, so let's just trade insults, shall we?: For you, anybody who supports independence appears to be a bully; you don't get the irony of your own posts, do you? You "debunked all three possibilities" only in your own mind, which seems in need of some serious treatment.

 

Even if my questions were rhetorical, which they were not, you knowingly and explicitly stated that I "claimed" something that I did not, which in my eyes makes you a liar.

 

I, and I suspect many others, don't care who you voted for previously, or why you did it, or whether or not you'll abstain and for what reason.... your pronouncements are important for everybody else in your troubled mind only.

 

And you bleat about being bullied? Take a look at yourself, if you are capable.

 

As I indicated before, I find your posts tiresome. But then I suppose it's mutual.

Edited by Jaggernaut
Link to comment
Share on other sites

it was tougher that we thought, still better off than under independence.

 

who's this "we"?

 

 

I agree but did you honesty believe that Gideon Osborne could deal with the deficit? He had very little or no real life experience before entering Parliament. Osborne had been a researcher/adviser (poorly paid) at Conservative Central Office before becoming a SpAd in Whitehall. His wealthy family or trust fund paid for his Kensington/Notting Hill lifestyle. Then he got Neil Hamilton's old Tatton seat. There is no evidence, however, that any of the other main parties (including Nicola's Numpties) have the answer. Do you really want to endorse these thick dumplings by voting for their inane and nonsensical policies?

 

thanks for the background info on osborne. knew some of it, but not all, so filled in a couple of blanks.

 

as for did i "honesty believe that Gideon Osborne could deal with the deficit?", no, but that's one of the reasons i didn't vote for them.

 

as for "no evidence" of any parties having the answer (i'll ignore your continued hatred name calling of the sturge, as it says more about you), i'd say the snp under salmonds leadership has improved scotland further than any of the previous westminster or holyrood governments has in previous terms. the fact the scottish electorate promoted them from a minority government to a majority at the last election only proves i am not alone in believing that. i'd guess in the next 18 months the scottish electorate will return an equal or better outcome than that of the last two (uk and scottish) elections. if that is the case, wouldn't you agree that it must mean scotlands majority must think the snp must have policies which are not inane or nonsensical policies?

(the above is of course based on where we are now, with snp and labour just changed leaders. how the snp do under nicolas leadership is an unknown, as is labours. but based on the pulse of the scottish electorate right now, it appears from the polls snp are well ahead of the other parties)

 

and for the record, i do not agree with all snp policies, the greens in scotland also have some good policies and candidates, as well as some more radical parties and individuals. while it may be true of westminster parties that all they offer is inane and nonsensical policies, i think you are being less than generous in your assessment of the depth of talented, passionate, determined, socially just and honest politicians and voters there is in scotland. though perhaps being detached from it all down in deepest england, you don't see that from your window to the world?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...