2NaFish Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Sturgeon's speech today marks the difference between the SNP and the old system at Westminster. It shows that the SNP understand the people and can see outwith the narrow parameters of the anachronistic boys club that currently rules over us. Sturgeon's speech today highlights just how scared she is of Jim Murphy. She knows her only hope of holding on to this lead in the polls is to manufacture a position where Scottish Labour have to distance themselves from the UK party's stance on austerity. It's cheap politics and shows how little positivity the SNP bring to the table. You guys can just copy and paste one or the other as you see fit. Jambox2, i expect your essay on my desk by tuesday week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mighty Thor Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 (edited) Sturgeon's speech today highlights just how scared she is of Jim Murphy. She knows her only hope of holding on to this lead in the polls is to manufacture a position where Scottish Labour have to distance themselves from the UK party's stance on austerity. It's cheap politics and shows how little positivity the SNP bring to the table. I didn't pick that up from the obviously edited version of her speech that i saw. In fact she didn't even mention or allude to the branch office manager at all. Edited February 11, 2015 by The Mighty Thor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2NaFish Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 I didn't pick that up from the obviously edited version of her speech that i saw. In fact she didn't even mention or allude to the branch office manager at all. My point was more about the spin of followers. In this case opponents of the SNP will say that, knowing murphy has to match or outdo them at everything, this is a cynical attempt to set him at odds with labour HQ. A ploy that will either lead to a falling out or a chance for the SNP to say that murphy is just a westminster lapdog. By doing this opponents to the SNP can say "the snp are running scared of jim murphy" and all they have to do is say every snp announcement is secretly about jim murphy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mighty Thor Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 My point was more about the spin of followers. In this case opponents of the SNP will say that, knowing murphy has to match or outdo them at everything, this is a cynical attempt to set him at odds with labour HQ. A ploy that will either lead to a falling out or a chance for the SNP to say that murphy is just a westminster lapdog. By doing this opponents to the SNP can say "the snp are running scared of jim murphy" and all they have to do is say every snp announcement is secretly about jim murphy. You're probably right in a lot of what you say. Murphy will have to get some kind of point of difference for both himself and his party's branch office in the campaign which will undoubtedly place him at odds with his HQ. I can't see how he can avoid it. It's an issue that Ruth Davidson won't face at all as the Tories are an irrelevance up here anyway, and the Lib Dems are even more so. I'm not sure that the SNP will be making it all about Jim Murphy ( I actually think the only person that thinks it all about Jim Murphy is, Jim Murphy) they won't need to. It's all about who best represents Scottish issues in Westminster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2NaFish Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 You're probably right in a lot of what you say. Murphy will have to get some kind of point of difference for both himself and his party's branch office in the campaign which will undoubtedly place him at odds with his HQ. I can't see how he can avoid it. It's an issue that Ruth Davidson won't face at all as the Tories are an irrelevance up here anyway, and the Lib Dems are even more so. I'm not sure that the SNP will be making it all about Jim Murphy ( I actually think the only person that thinks it all about Jim Murphy is, Jim Murphy) they won't need to. It's all about who best represents Scottish issues in Westminster. Fear not, the tories and the lib dems are more than capable of creating pretend disagreements where none exist for the purposes of pantomime. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcVcS_8fsk8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamboX2 Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Sturgeon's speech today marks the difference between the SNP and the old system at Westminster. It shows that the SNP understand the people and can see outwith the narrow parameters of the anachronistic boys club that currently rules over us. Sturgeon's speech today highlights just how scared she is of Jim Murphy. She knows her only hope of holding on to this lead in the polls is to manufacture a position where Scottish Labour have to distance themselves from the UK party's stance on austerity. It's cheap politics and shows how little positivity the SNP bring to the table. You guys can just copy and paste one or the other as you see fit. Jambox2, i expect your essay on my desk by tuesday week. If it strengthens Milibands more hardened policy over Balls's centrist third way ways then fair cop. Agree with both sentiments you've espoused. Both will be used often. And it is her trying to maintain her poll lead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamboX2 Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 I agree it's about compromise, but it never really looked like the Tories compromised on anything, whereas the LD's sold out. AV instead of PR and student fees are why the LD's are (rightly imo) despised. That and the way they hoodwinked the electorate into thinking they weren't really Tories after all, but actually were, post Kennedy. Hell mend them! AV was always a half way house. He'd hope it got through. Folk get used to ranking MPs and then boom here comes STV. A key point seldom considered is that the Liberals have tempered and gotten some concessions; No new subsidies for new nuclear Pupil Premium Faster implementation of the Calman Act Higher personal allowance on the income tax bands Relinking the pension to inflation And forcing us in the EU Don't underestimate the importance they've played on the last point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IMac Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 I agree it's about compromise, but it never really looked like the Tories compromised on anything, whereas the LD's sold out. AV instead of PR and student fees are why the LD's are (rightly imo) despised. That and the way they hoodwinked the electorate into thinking they weren't really Tories after all, but actually were, post Kennedy. Hell mend them! What nonsense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IMac Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 AV was always a half way house. He'd hope it got through. Folk get used to ranking MPs and then boom here comes STV. A key point seldom considered is that the Liberals have tempered and gotten some concessions; No new subsidies for new nuclear Pupil Premium Faster implementation of the Calman Act Higher personal allowance on the income tax bands Relinking the pension to inflation And forcing us in the EU Don't underestimate the importance they've played on the last point. Add to that Shared parental leave Blocked Snoopers charter Preserved the human rights act Free school meals Free childcare (15h) from 2 yrs (means tested) Changes to income tax and the idea that this is how we should proceed will make a huge difference long term. I don't think anyone should underestimate how aweful things would have been without the Lib Dems in coalition. It has brought stability when needed and although they have given a lot they have made a big difference and I think have made the country a better place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 What nonsense. It may well be, but tell that to the electorate! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IMac Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 It may well be, but tell that to the electorate! One flaw of a democratic system. Oh well. Will bounce back. Fingers crossed there is enough Lib Dem MPs left to give liberalism a voice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussieh Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 (edited) Deputy Prime Minister of the UK Alex Salmond MP. Coming soon. Tick Tock. Edited February 13, 2015 by aussieh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arnold Rothstein Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 Deputy Prime Minister of the UK Alex Salmond MP. Coming soon. Tick Tock. In a coalition with who? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussieh Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 I don't care who, It's going to be good Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arnold Rothstein Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 I don't care who, It's going to be good Cool Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 I like it when people become fan boys in politics and treat it like they are supporting a football team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussieh Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 (edited) Scotland's turn to call the shots. Plan B in motion. Edited February 13, 2015 by aussieh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arnold Rothstein Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 Scotland's turn to call the shots. The SNP's aim should be for an overall Westminster majority tbh. No ****ing about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussieh Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 (edited) The seethe of the no voters, if the Salmondator becomes deputy PM will be glorious, and I can't wait to see it. Never voted SNP at an general election before, something new, sad times as i've always been labour. Edited February 13, 2015 by aussieh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorgiewave Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 (edited) The seethe of the no voters, if the Salmondator becomes deputy PM will be glorious, and I can't wait to see it. Never voted SNP at an general election before, something new, sad times as i've always been labour. What is it about the former oil economist and best buddy of Rupert Murdoch that appeals to an ex-Labour man? Edited February 13, 2015 by Gorgiewave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IMac Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 What is it about the former oil economist and best buddy of Rupert Murdoch that appeals to an ex-Labour man? Shhh. Stick to the narrative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rand Paul's Ray Bans Posted February 13, 2015 Author Share Posted February 13, 2015 Oh dear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamboX2 Posted February 14, 2015 Share Posted February 14, 2015 (edited) Oh dear. Meh. Offering sky tax cuts in Scotland outweighs holding a newspaper. Then again the press boys for Ed clearly don't remember the hatred the Sun generates in Labours Liverpool heartland. Then again, you've made a point for GW, in what way is Salmond or the SNP different from those they make a point of making out are corrupted by the forces of News International? Answer, he's not and nor are the SNP. It's Scottish New Labour in the SNP at the moment. Edited February 14, 2015 by JamboX2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussieh Posted February 14, 2015 Share Posted February 14, 2015 (edited) What is it about the former oil economist and best buddy of Rupert Murdoch that appeals to an ex-Labour man? Nothing n everything, the knowledge that Scottish labour will be pummelled at the polls will do for me, then it'll be time up for Skeletor and Evil Lynn when Holyrood Elections come around. Edited February 14, 2015 by aussieh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cade Posted February 14, 2015 Share Posted February 14, 2015 How many SNP donors had secret tax avoiding bank accounts in HSBC?????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted February 14, 2015 Share Posted February 14, 2015 How many SNP donors had secret tax avoiding bank accounts in HSBC??????I'd ask Brian Soutar that question before throwing it round! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMaganator Posted February 14, 2015 Share Posted February 14, 2015 How many SNP donors had secret tax avoiding bank accounts in HSBC??????Not sure. But Jim McColl (sp) gives them lots of cash and is a tax exile in Monaco. Oh, and Brian Soutar is a huge SNP donor but is a homophobic bigot. That doesn't seem to bother them though. All parties have financial skeletons in their clostets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cade Posted February 14, 2015 Share Posted February 14, 2015 ""Red"" Ed is taking a huge risk with his stance on the HSBC scandal. Pissing off lots of rich people but playing up to the middle class and working poor. It's brave! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamboX2 Posted February 14, 2015 Share Posted February 14, 2015 ""Red"" Ed is taking a huge risk with his stance on the HSBC scandal. Pissing off lots of rich people but playing up to the middle class and working poor. It's brave! Good. That HSBC thing is a scandal. Margaret Hodge was laying into HMRC as well via the Public Audit committee for all allowing it to go unchallenged for so long. I'm glad Labour are actually making something of this. Cameron can't, Clegg isn't and I've heard little from the SNP on the subject. As for your donor point, as Mag says all parties have donor issues. The SNP have been influenced on policy for years by Soutar from Section 28 to re-regulation of bus services and McColl pretty much wrote the tax cut proposals. All parties are noses in the trough arses in the air. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMaganator Posted February 14, 2015 Share Posted February 14, 2015 ""Red"" Ed is taking a huge risk with his stance on the HSBC scandal. Pissing off lots of rich people but playing up to the middle class and working poor. It's brave!We constantly hear that labour are red Tories up here. Surely taking this stance is exactly what his traditional support would like? I often wonder if there's anything that labour could do that wouldn't result in scorn from the nationalist. I wonder if people are just looking to justify their nationalism to themselves sometimes (that's not aimed at you btw) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted February 14, 2015 Share Posted February 14, 2015 ""Red"" Ed is taking a huge risk with his stance on the HSBC scandal. Pissing off lots of rich people but playing up to the middle class and working poor. It's brave!He would be mad not to. Plus all the Blairite donors seem to have fecked off anyway, leaving Labour almost bankrupt, so why not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
number-16 Posted February 14, 2015 Share Posted February 14, 2015 (edited) There seems to be a bit of a misunderstanding about what State Guardians actually do (and that they've already been in place in several parts of Scotland for several years). Most appointed state guardians will be midwives or headteachers and this can be delegated down to year guidance teachers. Their role with most children is just to chat with them for a couple times a year about their lives, grades and any issues they might have. For children where there are issues - this can include lomg term illness, mental health problems, serious injury, bullying, abuse, bereavement, etc - then the role of the guardian is to coordinate what's going on. This followed complaints by parents that, at whatbwas already a difficult time, they were having to tell the same things to several organisations (NHS, schools, social work, police), that the organisations weren't working well together and that nobody was taking a lead in coordinating things. Guardians do have access to information but only if there is a legitimate concern and specific to that concern. This follows on to holding information from parents in some circumstances. Information will only be passed on where there is consent or a risk to a child's welfare. Edited February 14, 2015 by number-16 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMaganator Posted February 15, 2015 Share Posted February 15, 2015 There seems to be a bit of a misunderstanding about what State Guardians actually do (and that they've already been in place in several parts of Scotland for several years). Most appointed state guardians will be midwives or headteachers and this can be delegated down to year guidance teachers. Their role with most children is just to chat with them for a couple times a year about their lives, grades and any issues they might have. For children where there are issues - this can include lomg term illness, mental health problems, serious injury, bullying, abuse, bereavement, etc - then the role of the guardian is to coordinate what's going on. This followed complaints by parents that, at whatbwas already a difficult time, they were having to tell the same things to several organisations (NHS, schools, social work, police), that the organisations weren't working well together and that nobody was taking a lead in coordinating things. Guardians do have access to information but only if there is a legitimate concern and specific to that concern. This follows on to holding information from parents in some circumstances. Information will only be passed on where there is consent or a risk to a child's welfare. I don't think there's any confusion at all. Read your last paragraph again - you'll find that most people that have a problem with this will cite that as the reasoning. I see that is being reported today that the state minders' role will start during pregnancy. Just to make sure you're doing everything in preparation for the birth at a state approved level. That'll be a nice thing for expectant families to have to deal with. http://m.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/named-persons-role-to-start-before-child-s-birth-1-3690680#.VOBfrE3J7-Y.twitter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2NaFish Posted February 15, 2015 Share Posted February 15, 2015 why wouldn't it be. pregnancy can be scary. lots of people struggle at that point and need help. they'll get it. those that don't won't. for someone without kids you seem very certain of what they go through. Dunning Kruger strikes again - revelling in ignorance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMaganator Posted February 15, 2015 Share Posted February 15, 2015 why wouldn't it be. pregnancy can be scary. lots of people struggle at that point and need help. they'll get it. those that don't won't. for someone without kids you seem very certain of what they go through. Dunning Kruger strikes again - revelling in ignorance. Give it a rest with your petty insults. If you're not telling someone how stupid you think they are you're telling them how much of a terrible person you think they are. For the record, you can have opinions on things that don't directly effect you. I plan on having kids in the future - I'm entitled to an opinion in the matter - even if it doesn't agree with yours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2NaFish Posted February 15, 2015 Share Posted February 15, 2015 (edited) justifying your opinion based on ignorance is, at best, weak. I'm not saying you're not welcome to an opinion - that's a cheap strawman - merely that its poor. You're welcome to your opinion as am i and my opinion of your opinion is that its a poor opinion - or am i not entitled to an opinion? All for liberty you, except when its someone else's. Unless they're rich. And if you think my referencing one of the fundamental psychological principles of the modern era is a petty insult then you need to stop being so precious. still, this is better than the time you had a go at me for using evidence to support my arguments. Edited February 15, 2015 by 2NaFish Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMaganator Posted February 15, 2015 Share Posted February 15, 2015 justifying your opinion based on ignorance is, at best, weak. I'm not saying you're not welcome to an opinion - that's a cheap strawman - merely that its poor. You're welcome to your opinion as am i and my opinion of your opinion is that its a poor opinion - or am i not entitled to an opinion? All for liberty you, except when its someone else's. Unless they're rich. And if you think my referencing one of the fundamental psychological principles of the modern era is a petty insult then you need to stop being so precious. still, this is better than the time you had a go at me for using evidence to support my arguments. I've justified my opinions on state guardians many times on this thread and others. We've had discussions on this before - I didn't think I needed to repeat myself. You use that principle as an insult. You do it repeatedly and you know you do it. Telling someone they're revelling in their own ignorance is an insult. I'm not being previous. It doesn't bother me. I just think it's petty and boring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2NaFish Posted February 15, 2015 Share Posted February 15, 2015 yes. you're not bothered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorgiewave Posted February 15, 2015 Share Posted February 15, 2015 Tuna is a more articulate, less witty version of C.L., but still of the same stripe. Reminiscent of David Foster Wallace and Bill Hicks, which isn't a Good Thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2NaFish Posted February 15, 2015 Share Posted February 15, 2015 one plays the victim then the other comes in with the abuse. quite the tag team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorgiewave Posted February 15, 2015 Share Posted February 15, 2015 one plays the victim then the other comes in with the abuse. quite the tag team. Cheer up, man. You're not going to find the range of well-informed and elegantly expressed opinions on a football forum you'll get in a literary review or whatever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamboX2 Posted February 16, 2015 Share Posted February 16, 2015 http://blogs.channel4.com/paul-mason-blog/labour-snp-greens-business/3305 Good and interesting article by Paul Mason on changes to economic modelling which could help the left after an election win and help the Treasury view the economy in the round more than they do now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djf Posted February 16, 2015 Share Posted February 16, 2015 http://www.buzzfeed.com/jamieross/alex-salmond-played-a-ghost-in-a-bollywood-soap-opera This 100 days of UKIP stuff is hilarious. Nobody does trolling like C4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RosscoC Posted February 17, 2015 Share Posted February 17, 2015 (edited) Appears Scottish Labour have been caught fiddling their stats on the NHS and Jim Murphy has been deleting tweets all over the shop. Edited February 17, 2015 by RosscoC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris Posted February 17, 2015 Share Posted February 17, 2015 Appears Scottish Labour have been caught fiddling their stats on the NHS and Jim Murphy has been deleting tweets all over the shop. Source? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cade Posted February 17, 2015 Share Posted February 17, 2015 (edited) Appears Scottish Labour have been caught fiddling their stats on the NHS and Jim Murphy has been deleting tweets all over the shop. Edited February 17, 2015 by Cade Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussieh Posted February 17, 2015 Share Posted February 17, 2015 Aye, but what of the overwhelming majority of untroubled kids who are safely at home with their families at that time of night? There's no doubt the vulnerable need assistance - but every single kid and family? Same for speed limits etc..., not everyone needs protected, but to protect the ones who do, it has to be everyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flecktimus Posted February 17, 2015 Share Posted February 17, 2015 Source? http://www.snp.org/media-centre/news/2015/feb/murphy-must-apologise-outrageous-nhs-claims http://www.politwoops.co.uk/p/ukmps/jimmurphymp/567423041937113088?utm_source=politwoops.co.uk&utm_medium=twitter&utm_content=567423041937113088&utm_campaign=repost Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted February 17, 2015 Share Posted February 17, 2015 (edited) Same for speed limits etc..., not everyone needs protected, but to protect the ones who do, it has to be everyone. Yes, because a state run bureaucracy is often the best way of delivering a desired outcome!i I would be seriously at the thought of some jumped up bureaucrat with a sociology degree from Napier being appointed a 'guardian' of my kids. Thankfully, I don't need to concern myself with such a Soviet idea now that I don't live in the People's Republic of Caledonia! Edited February 17, 2015 by Geoff Kilpatrick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris Posted February 17, 2015 Share Posted February 17, 2015 http://www.snp.org/media-centre/news/2015/feb/murphy-must-apologise-outrageous-nhs-claims http://www.politwoops.co.uk/p/ukmps/jimmurphymp/567423041937113088?utm_source=politwoops.co.uk&utm_medium=twitter&utm_content=567423041937113088&utm_campaign=repost Thanks. Not disbelieving RosscoC, but like to see it for myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.