The 2015 General Election Megathread

[aussieh]

Your use of the word underclass is correct. Socio ABCs voted massively for No, Socio DEs were for Yes. That was shown in every poll, from every pollster. Its a fact i'm afraid.

So why did you vote, No?. To see how it felt.

[aussieh]

See when this pish is all over and Aussieh, Bob Gristle, Nicola Sturgeon and co. are in their beds, I will be buying steaks, cooked how they bloody well like, for Mag, JamboX2, jambos are go!, Mainga the Swinga, Arnold Rothstein, Thunderstruck, jambo 1185, etc.

 

PM me lads when the glorious day comes!

Takes a man, not his breakfast.

[Gorgiewave]

Takes a man, not his breakfast.

 

It takes solid foundations, not good feelings.

 

[aussieh]

It takes solid foundations, not good feelings.

 

Fear of failure, stops you lot fae trying.

My biggest strength is patience, no one, not nobody, not anyone can stop Scottish Independence.

 

 

 

Oh, watch Panarama tonight.

Edited May 28, 2015 by aussieh

[jambos are go!]

Fear of failure, stops you lot fae trying.

My biggest strength is patience, no one, not nobody, not anyone can stop Scottish Independence.

Oh, watch Panarama tonight.

Last September a rampant and hugely popular SNP could not stop the embedded support for the Union in Scotland gaining a decisive victory. Nobody, nobody or no one on the YES side could stop it. Fact.

[Gorgiewave]

Fear of failure, stops you lot fae trying.

My biggest strength is patience, no one, not nobody, not anyone can stop Scottish Independence.

 

 

 

Oh, watch Panarama tonight.

 

Aye, fear of failure. The same reason we always play a goalkeeper and 11 players.

[Boris]

Last September a rampant and hugely popular SNP could not stop the embedded support for the Union in Scotland gaining a decisive victory. Nobody, nobody or no one on the YES side could stop it. Fact.

 

You are correct.  The YES campaign couldn't make a coherent argument on the practicalities of what Independence would mean, which for the SNP is surprising giving that is the raison d'etre of their party!

 

That said, they still polled 45% of the votes cast which, given that opinion polls usually had independence at the 30% mark, shows a marked increase.

 

The seed has been planted, the return of 56 SNP MP's also shows, imo, a new dynamic in Scottish, and by association, UK, politics.

 

The article by Paul Mason that JamboX2 linked to, and the interview with Stiglitz that I linked to, says to me that the rise of the SNP/feelings for independence, is not out of some woad face painted nationalism, but a shift because the main parties (Con, Lib, Lab) are not engaging with the electorate.  They are not listening to what the average Joe needs/wants.  The economic crisis and consequences of that appear to be more detrimental to those with less, and also those who were less responsible.  Those culpable seem to be getting away with it and getting richer into the bargain.  It's a basic argument, but that's just my sense of how it is, or rather, how it is perceived.  Greece, Spain and now Poland have all elected political representatives outwith the mainstream political parties, arguably Scotland has done the same.  UKIP in rUK too.  What's happening is not unique to Scotland.  It is, rather, a crisis of neo-liberal capitalism and how those political monoliths deal with the situation allowed under their watch.

[Mikey1874]

Is there not a new law now saying that it and vat can't be increased? Or does that exclude Scotland?

good question - not sure

 

its certainly interesting as a low tax consensus has been in place for at least 15 years

 

SNP dropped the promise of increasing tax - 'penny for Scotland' after defeat at 1999 Scottish Parliament election. Take it not everyone knows we have had power to vary income tax by 3p since 1999.

 

And of course we've had the council tax freeze.

 

So is the SNP planning to raise taxes in Scotland to tackle austerity?

 

I know it seems to want to cut certain business taxes hence wanting power, which we aren't getting, to vary corporation tax.

 

Will be a debate soon which is healthy.

[jambos are go!]

You are correct.  The YES campaign couldn't make a coherent argument on the practicalities of what Independence would mean, which for the SNP is surprising giving that is the raison d'etre of their party!

 

That said, they still polled 45% of the votes cast which, given that opinion polls usually had independence at the 30% mark, shows a marked increase.

 

The seed has been planted, the return of 56 SNP MP's also shows, imo, a new dynamic in Scottish, and by association, UK, politics.

 

The article by Paul Mason that JamboX2 linked to, and the interview with Stiglitz that I linked to, says to me that the rise of the SNP/feelings for independence, is not out of some woad face painted nationalism, but a shift because the main parties (Con, Lib, Lab) are not engaging with the electorate.  They are not listening to what the average Joe needs/wants.  The economic crisis and consequences of that appear to be more detrimental to those with less, and also those who were less responsible.  Those culpable seem to be getting away with it and getting richer into the bargain.  It's a basic argument, but that's just my sense of how it is, or rather, how it is perceived.  Greece, Spain and now Poland have all elected political representatives outwith the mainstream political parties, arguably Scotland has done the same.  UKIP in rUK too.  What's happening is not unique to Scotland.  It is, rather, a crisis of neo-liberal capitalism and how those political monoliths deal with the situation allowe under their watch.

A few quick points

 

The SNP held a large lead in polls for Westminster throughout the Referendum Campaign. Even when support for the Union was at its highest. Secondly, for each and every person who apparently became a YEs supporter after September there are, IMO, more YES folk who think the issue has been resolved and don't want another Referendum.

 

I think you are right in suggesting there is a wide movement for change across Europe in the wake of the Economic Crisis of 2008. More on that later.

[Boris]

A few quick points

 

The SNP held a large lead in polls for Westminster throughout the Referendum Campaign. Even when support for the Union was at its highest. Secondly, for each and every person who apparently became a YEs supporter after September there are, IMO, more YES folk who think the issue has been resolved and don't want another Referendum.

 

I think you are right in suggesting there is a wide movement for change across Europe in the wake of the Economic Crisis of 2008. More on that later.

 

True, but I was surprised how much they delivered on the day.

 

Don't disagree with your comments re indy for/against.

[aussieh]

good question - not sure

 

its certainly interesting as a low tax consensus has been in place for at least 15 years

 

SNP dropped the promise of increasing tax - 'penny for Scotland' after defeat at 1999 Scottish Parliament election. Take it not everyone knows we have had power to vary income tax by 3p since 1999.

 

And of course we've had the council tax freeze.

 

So is the SNP planning to raise taxes in Scotland to tackle austerity?

 

I know it seems to want to cut certain business taxes hence wanting power, which we aren't getting, to vary corporation tax.

 

Will be a debate soon which is healthy.

Vat needs to be reduced, minimum wage at ?8.50 an hr, and an income tax rise.

Regeneration, and infrastructure projects.

And a new City needs built.

[deesidejambo]

Vat needs to be reduced, minimum wage at ?8.50 an hr, and an income tax rise.

Regeneration, and infrastructure projects.

And a new City needs built.

A new City?  Where and why?

[deesidejambo]

True, but I was surprised how much they delivered on the day.

 

Don't disagree with your comments re indy for/against.

Boris - whats your views on the dichotomies (if thats a word) SNP now face.........

 

To get Independence, they need to show Westminster "Isnt Working for Scotland". However they are a now major part of Westminster, and the concessions being now given to Scotland will weaken the argument for full Independence amongst many in the electorate,    How will SNP handle that?

 

Also, to get Independence, they badly need a vote for UK to exit from the EU, thus providing the "material change required" for another IndyRef.   but as Europhiles, won't the SNP be bound to campaign for UK to remain in?  Will they abstain?

 

I see the case for full Independence being now undermined by the SNP themselves!   That beats the irony of Nicola scaring English voters into voting Tory at the last minute!

[Mikey1874]

Vat needs to be reduced, minimum wage at ?8.50 an hr, and an income tax rise.

Regeneration, and infrastructure projects.

And a new City needs built.

good stuff - if Scotland can do all that, as I'm a bit hasy on the new powers

 

certainly it is a good debate and SNP can back up their words on austerity by actions and show a different way

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

"A new city needs to be built"

 

How the **** is that getting paid for?

[deesidejambo]

"A new city needs to be built"

 

How the **** is that getting paid for?

I can see the sense in that - build a city up a valley in the Highlands, then move the Yes-Voters from Dundee and Weeg there.    Then partition the country so they get Independence, and leave the rest of us in peace.  Then demolish Dundee and Weeg.  Everybody gets what they want!

Edited May 28, 2015 by deesidejambo

[Nookie Bear]

Vat needs to be reduced, minimum wage at ?8.50 an hr, and an income tax rise.

Regeneration, and infrastructure projects.

And a new City needs built.

 

You're going to have to elaborate on that

[HaymarketJambo]

Joanna Cherry (SNP) my MP made her maiden speech at Westminster today and what a brilliant speech it was, she talked about Edinburgh South West and the famous name of Heart of Midlothian Football Club got a big mention as well, brilliant stuff from the lady.  

[Boris]

Boris - whats your views on the dichotomies (if thats a word) SNP now face.........

 

To get Independence, they need to show Westminster "Isnt Working for Scotland". However they are a now major part of Westminster, and the concessions being now given to Scotland will weaken the argument for full Independence amongst many in the electorate,    How will SNP handle that?

 

Also, to get Independence, they badly need a vote for UK to exit from the EU, thus providing the "material change required" for another IndyRef.   but as Europhiles, won't the SNP be bound to campaign for UK to remain in?  Will they abstain?

 

I see the case for full Independence being now undermined by the SNP themselves!   That beats the irony of Nicola scaring English voters into voting Tory at the last minute!

 

I think you make some good points.  I suspect the SNP thought they would have more "power" either in coalition or supporting a Labour administration, which of course would be more palatable to the Scottish electorate I imagine.  How they vote at Westminster will be interesting.  I can imagine a few abstentions using the "nothing to do with Scotland" excuse.

 

I'm not convinced that more powers will necessarily dilute the argument for full independence.  Devolution was supposed to do that and look where we are now!

 

Regards the EU vote, I guess the SNP will be pro-EU and will argue the case for it, no doubt heavily caveated with how good it would be if it were Scotland in the EU as an independent country!

 

Not sure if it was Nicola Sturgeon that scared the English voters to vote Tory.  I think that was Lynton Crosby & DC etc etc etc etc that did that.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Question on the Europe referendum. Let's say the UK votes to stay in (ignoring any pish about "quad locks" and all that stuff).

 

Do you think that then infers that the UK would cede more powers to Brussels without future referendums or that the current "status" of the relationship is approved? In other words, the 1975 referendum didn't discuss the Treaty of Rome but essentially argued the toss about the Common Market, with the argument resolving around free trade versus protectionism (save for the likes of Ian Paisley who wanted out based on the Treaty, probably because it was a Papist conspiracy ).

 

Since then the Single European Act of 1986, Maastricht and Lisbon have all happened. So when the next European change occurs, should that also be the subject of a referendum or does this referendum give a binding approval for future decisions?

[Rand Paul's Ray Bans]

Question on the Europe referendum. Let's say the UK votes to stay in (ignoring any pish about "quad locks" and all that stuff).

 

Do you think that then infers that the UK would cede more powers to Brussels without future referendums or that the current "status" of the relationship is approved? In other words, the 1975 referendum didn't discuss the Treaty of Rome but essentially argued the toss about the Common Market, with the argument resolving around free trade versus protectionism (save for the likes of Ian Paisley who wanted out based on the Treaty, probably because it was a Papist conspiracy ).

 

Since then the Single European Act of 1986, Maastricht and Lisbon have all happened. So when the next European change occurs, should that also be the subject of a referendum or does this referendum give a binding approval for future decisions?

 

I would assume the current policy of a referendum in the event of Brussels wanting more powers from member states still stands after a prospective In result in the EU referendum. 

[Rand Paul's Ray Bans]

Also a riff on the free market argument (which I, on the whole, am supportive of): it's pretty ironic since, throughout its whole history in negotiating and even after enacting trade agreements, the EU is inherently protectionist in regards to goods coming in from outside its borders. See CAP, textiles debacle with China, etc. 

 

I would like that to change, but, alas, is much easier said than done. 

[deesidejambo]

Question on the Europe referendum. Let's say the UK votes to stay in (ignoring any pish about "quad locks" and all that stuff).

 

Do you think that then infers that the UK would cede more powers to Brussels without future referendums or that the current "status" of the relationship is approved? In other words, the 1975 referendum didn't discuss the Treaty of Rome but essentially argued the toss about the Common Market, with the argument resolving around free trade versus protectionism (save for the likes of Ian Paisley who wanted out based on the Treaty, probably because it was a Papist conspiracy ).

 

Since then the Single European Act of 1986, Maastricht and Lisbon have all happened. So when the next European change occurs, should that also be the subject of a referendum or does this referendum give a binding approval for future decisions?

It should be "Once in a generation".  Although I've heard that one before somewhere........................

[Boris]

It should be "Once in a generation".  Although I've heard that one before somewhere........................

 

Events can move faster than a generation can age.

Edited May 28, 2015 by Boris

[deesidejambo]

Events can move faster than a generation can age.

He qualified it by saying its a rabbits generation, not human, so all is good.

[jambo1185]

Just a small point going back to aussieh post. VAT can't be devolved due to EU Law otherwise it would have been included in the Torys Strathclyde commission which formed the basis of Smith.

 

Instead we get control of a chunk of VAT receipts.

[Boab]

It doesn't matter what he's posted in the past. He clearly doesn't understand the word that he was using to describe me.

 

Which was ?

[Don Draper]

Fed up with bias reporting in the MSM, they turn to Wings, Business for Scotland and the National to get their 'balanced' coverage. 

 

Don't want to conflate you with all this talk of thick jocks and class CDE chat but can i be the umpteenth poster on here to tell you that the past tense of bias is biased.

 

I thought i'd better tell you since you are so keen on telling other posters they do not understand the words they are using .

 

 

The use of bias there was present tense, CD. Nice try though.

 

Point of order:

 

Coconut Doug is correct that 'bias' is erroneous here, but it has nothing to do with tenses. 'Bias' is the noun and 'biased' is the adjective. In your sentence, it should therefore read 'biased reporting'.

 

As you were.

[Cade]

[SE16 3LN]

Boris - whats your views on the dichotomies (if thats a word) SNP now face.........

 

To get Independence, they need to show Westminster "Isnt Working for Scotland". However they are a now major part of Westminster, and the concessions being now given to Scotland will weaken the argument for full Independence amongst many in the electorate,    How will SNP handle that?

 

Also, to get Independence, they badly need a vote for UK to exit from the EU, thus providing the "material change required" for another IndyRef.   but as Europhiles, won't the SNP be bound to campaign for UK to remain in?  Will they abstain?

 

I see the case for full Independence being now undermined by the SNP themselves!   That beats the irony of Nicola scaring English voters into voting Tory at the last minute!

Has this myth become a fact in Nationalist circles now. The research shows that a Tory strategy to target Minority ethic groups (Specifically Sikhs and Hindus) in key constituencies swelled the Tory vote and gave the their majority. Not as exciting as stirring up a bit of post election xenophobic hatred I admit, but more realistic all the same.

Edited May 28, 2015 by hydeparkhearts

[TheMaganator]

Point of order:

 

Coconut Doug is correct that 'bias' is erroneous here, but it has nothing to do with tenses. 'Bias' is the noun and 'biased' is the adjective. In your sentence, it should therefore read 'biased reporting'.

 

As you were.

Well taken

[aussieh]

A new City?  Where and why?

Just a small point going back to aussieh post. VAT can't be devolved due to EU Law otherwise it would have been included in the Torys Strathclyde commission which formed the basis of Smith.

Instead we get control of a chunk of VAT receipts.

Is there no plans to reduce VAT at UK level?

Would be a good move.

[aussieh]

A new City?  Where and why?

Unionists have no vision, still stuck in the Empirial past.

And dee what causes this Social pish you go on about, the British class system?.

Maybe it was a good time to change it for the better, if people have no hope, they've desire, no faith, no drive to be better.

A New City needs built, it could be funded from the oil, negotiated off Westminster, creating jobs, jobs, and more jobs for thousands, I'm quite sure investors would be won.

Come on get on board, build a greater Scotland.

You know it makes sense.

[JyTees]

Fear of failure, stops you lot fae trying.

My biggest strength is patience, no one, not nobody, not anyone can stop Scottish Independence.

 

 

 

Oh, watch Panarama tonight.

You sound like one of the Celtic fans standing in the Roseburn last season. Ignorant, irresponsible, gullible, misguided and clueless!

 

Nats who play the "fear" card are scraping the bottom of the barrel and have completely lost touch with reality.

 

The SNP indoctrine really has affected some of society's "special" cases.

[Thunderstruck]

A New City needs built, it could be funded from the oil...

Hmmm, Legoland?

[aussieh]

You sound like one of the Celtic fans standing in the Roseburn last season. Ignorant, irresponsible, gullible, misguided and clueless!

Nats who play the "fear" card are scraping the bottom of the barrel and have completely lost touch with reality.

The SNP indoctrine really has affected some of society's "special" cases.

Wierd post. Edited May 28, 2015 by aussieh

[JyTees]

I can see the sense in that - build a city up a valley in the Highlands, then move the Yes-Voters from Dundee and Weeg there. Then partition the country so they get Independence, and leave the rest of us in peace. Then demolish Dundee and Weeg. Everybody gets what they want!

Where do I sign?

[JyTees]

Wierd post.

The irony.

[aussieh]

The irony.

for some reason, you and some others think that only Celtic or Catholics voted yes, or yes voters are some kind of terrorists.

Shocking views.

Edited May 28, 2015 by aussieh

[ToadKiller Dog]

John Bercow wants ?3bn to stop Westminister sinking into the Thames .

I am sure we will find the money easy enough just take it off the folk on benefits

[TheMaganator]

John Bercow wants ?3bn to stop Westminister sinking into the Thames .

I am sure we will find the money easy enough just take it off the folk on benefits

Or we could put them to work reinforcing the foundations - earn their keep.

[Boab]

Or let it sink.

[Harry Palmer]

Or we could put them to work reinforcing the foundations - earn their keep.

 

With a decent wage to survive in London too. 

[TheMaganator]

Or let it sink.

It's only sinking now because of the extra weight of fatty Salmond in it.

[TheMaganator]

With a decent wage to survive in London too.

Agreed. Win win

[Hasselhoff]

Unionists have no vision, still stuck in the Empirial past.

And dee what causes this Social pish you go on about, the British class system?.

Maybe it was a good time to change it for the better, if people have no hope, they've desire, no faith, no drive to be better.

A New City needs built, it could be funded from the oil, negotiated off Westminster, creating jobs, jobs, and more jobs for thousands, I'm quite sure investors would be won.

Come on get on board, build a greater Scotland.

You know it makes sense.

Did you seriously accuse someone else of living in Lala land the other day?

[Boab]

It's only sinking now because of the extra weight of fatty Salmond in it.

Thank **** Ruth's up here, eh !

[aussieh]

Did you seriously accuse someone else of living in Lala land the other day?

As I was saying to aslan, just there, bratz have no desire.

Stockholm he said.

[aussieh]

Thank **** Ruth's up here, eh !

She was on the beach the other day, the locals tried to roll it back in the sea. Edited May 28, 2015 by aussieh

[JamboX2]

You are correct. The YES campaign couldn't make a coherent argument on the practicalities of what Independence would mean, which for the SNP is surprising giving that is the raison d'etre of their party!

 

That said, they still polled 45% of the votes cast which, given that opinion polls usually had independence at the 30% mark, shows a marked increase.

 

The seed has been planted, the return of 56 SNP MP's also shows, imo, a new dynamic in Scottish, and by association, UK, politics.

 

The article by Paul Mason that JamboX2 linked to, and the interview with Stiglitz that I linked to, says to me that the rise of the SNP/feelings for independence, is not out of some woad face painted nationalism, but a shift because the main parties (Con, Lib, Lab) are not engaging with the electorate. They are not listening to what the average Joe needs/wants. The economic crisis and consequences of that appear to be more detrimental to those with less, and also those who were less responsible. Those culpable seem to be getting away with it and getting richer into the bargain. It's a basic argument, but that's just my sense of how it is, or rather, how it is perceived. Greece, Spain and now Poland have all elected political representatives outwith the mainstream political parties, arguably Scotland has done the same. UKIP in rUK too. What's happening is not unique to Scotland. It is, rather, a crisis of neo-liberal capitalism and how those political monoliths deal with the situation allowed under their watch.

Spot on Boris.