Even More SNP Nonsense

[Sraman]

1 minute ago, jambo lodge said:

Dear oh dear, where to begin. What makes you think that the elite in Scotland, many in the Civil Service and judiciary, will not continue to run Scotland the way they always have. Holyrood is no advert for an Independent Scotland. The SNP government is incompetent and can't evn administer the block grant from Westminster far less having the responsibility to both raise their own funds and spend it wisely.  

 

 

Who's run Scotland the way they always have?

 

Holyrood. Is that the place set up by Westminster?

 

I only stated they were correct. Not once have I even implied that they were competent.

[jambo lodge]

32 minutes ago, Sraman said:

 

 

Who's run Scotland the way they always have?

 

Holyrood. Is that the place set up by Westminster?

 

I only stated they were correct. Not once have I even implied that they were competent.

Holyrood is one of the most powerful devolved parliaments in the world, voted for by the Scottish electorate and set up by Scottish politicians. If Holyrood is not making a difference to the lives of the Scottish people then it is only because the SNP government who have been in power for the last 11 years have not used the tax raising and other powers it already has. They are incompetent.      

[Sraman]

3 minutes ago, jambo lodge said:

Holyrood is one of the most powerful devolved parliaments in the world, voted for by the Scottish electorate and set up by Scottish politicians. If Holyrood is not making a difference to the lives of the Scottish people then it is only because the SNP government who have been in power for the last 11 years have not used the tax raising and other powers it already has. They are incompetent.      

 

 

Very good, but why are you quoting me?

[Space Mackerel]

10 hours ago, jambo lodge said:

So back on topic Nats , why did the SNP want to chat to Cambridge Analytica ?

 

They have released all email correspondence, check out the SNP’s Twitter feed.

 

You won’t get it on the normal tele. 

 

 

[Space Mackerel]

3 hours ago, jambo lodge said:

Holyrood is one of the most powerful devolved parliaments in the world, voted for by the Scottish electorate and set up by Scottish politicians. If Holyrood is not making a difference to the lives of the Scottish people then it is only because the SNP government who have been in power for the last 11 years have not used the tax raising and other powers it already has. They are incompetent.      

 

There are states in the USA that have more tax raising powers than Holyrood. 

 

Youre off your heed. 

Edited April 28, 2018 by Space Mackerel

[jambo lodge]

6 minutes ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

There are states in the USA that have more tax raising powers than Holyrood. 

 

Youre off your heed. 

 

6 minutes ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

There are states in the USA that have more tax raising powers than Holyrood. 

 

Youre off your heed. 

The United States have a Federal system as I'm sure you know so not a valid comparison.

[jambo lodge]

17 minutes ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

They have released all email correspondence, check out the SNP’s Twitter feed.

 

You won’t get it on the normal tele. 

 

 

The hypocrisy of the Snats at Westminster over this issue. Mind you that was before Mr Murrell published the details.

[Thunderstruck]

54 minutes ago, jambo lodge said:

The hypocrisy of the Snats at Westminster over this issue. Mind you that was before Mr Murrell published the details.

 

It’s interesting to note that it is emails (plural) given that both Sturgeon and Russell were forcefully asserting that it was only one contact. Who is the “lying cowboy” now, Mr Russell?

 

I would be interested to know where they eventually went for the data that they were quite clearly aiming to buy. Presumably, not to “cowboy” purveyors of data but to honest, upright and reliable purveyors of our personal data. 

 

Edited April 28, 2018 by Thunderstruck

[JamboX2]

19 hours ago, Boris said:

Big data is now a thing. So someone spoke to CA and quickly saw them for the charlatans they are. 

 

I agree there appears to be little in this story. But it's bad media management that given the SNP's statement on what happened they didn't just open up on this earlier. The drip drop approach on it gives the wrong impression.

[JamboX2]

15 hours ago, Sraman said:

 

 

Who's run Scotland the way they always have?

 

Holyrood. Is that the place set up by Westminster?

 

I only stated they were correct. Not once have I even implied that they were competent.

 

The judiciary, civil service and landed wealth of Scotland. I'd include the local authorities in that.

 

Scotland is run very small "c" conservative. And despite having the power to change that we've seen little in opening up our courts and officialdom to working and the lower classes. Land ownership remains under a cloak of massive inequality and uncertain ownership. The landed wealth in Scotland has huge sway over the local authorities their planning decisions and ideas on the use of land and the resources. The legal service is still heavily populated with your privately educated merchant school kids, the judiciary predominantly led by the Oxbridge educated of Scotland and those from the premier Scottish universities. The Lord Advocate - the government appointed legal adviser - still heads the prosecution service and runs all prosecutions in Scotland. The civil service in Scotland is no different or better placed than the UK one as a whole. Local authorities have less freedom to make decisions, are prevented by doing so by their funding agreements with central government and have barely had a fresh idea on running services since the 70s.

 

I don't mean to talk Scotland down. I talk down any notion of a better run state or a less closed off elite.

 

Edinburgh. The UK's second city. Second in cost of living. Second in cost of housing. Huge levels of investment alongside Glasgow compared to elsewhere. Higher salaries compared to other parts of Scotland. Effectively a Scottish London. So again - these are inherent faults which we see on a UK level and Scottish one. Will independence change that? I think not because much of this is ALREADY open to government to change here now and has been since 1999. 

Edited April 29, 2018 by JamboX2

[XB52]

11 hours ago, Thunderstruck said:

 

It’s interesting to note that it is emails (plural) given that both Sturgeon and Russell were forcefully asserting that it was only one contact. Who is the “lying cowboy” now, Mr Russell?

 

I would be interested to know where they eventually went for the data that they were quite clearly aiming to buy. Presumably, not to “cowboy” purveyors of data but to honest, upright and reliable purveyors of our personal data. 

 

Where are the details from the other parties?? The SNP have stated they had contact with CA but quickly realised they were shysters. Now up to the others to let us know what they did

[XB52]

54 minutes ago, JamboX2 said:

 

I agree there appears to be little in this story. But it's bad media management that given the SNP's statement on what happened they didn't just open up on this earlier. The drip drop approach on it gives the wrong impression.

How can we manage the right wing media. They totally ignore anything positive about the SNP/Scotland and give huge headlines to any negativity. Just like the unionist posters on here. 

[Boris]

57 minutes ago, JamboX2 said:

 

I agree there appears to be little in this story. But it's bad media management that given the SNP's statement on what happened they didn't just open up on this earlier. The drip drop approach on it gives the wrong impression.

Agreed. 

[JamboX2]

4 minutes ago, XB52 said:

How can we manage the right wing media. They totally ignore anything positive about the SNP/Scotland and give huge headlines to any negativity. Just like the unionist posters on here. 

 

I think that attitude is part of the failings of modern politics. Everyone cries conspiracy at our media - which is a check to power. It may just be given everyone is at it that the media are doing a good job. The other is heading to a Pravda style system of a government press. 

 

The SNP have handled this atrociously from a media management perspective. It also to me begs a follow up question- what data providers have or did they use instead? How is their social media policy run? And what's their views on data ownership in general? All of which they and other parties haven't really grasped.

[XB52]

1 hour ago, JamboX2 said:

 

I think that attitude is part of the failings of modern politics. Everyone cries conspiracy at our media - which is a check to power. It may just be given everyone is at it that the media are doing a good job. The other is heading to a Pravda style system of a government press. 

 

The SNP have handled this atrociously from a media management perspective. It also to me begs a follow up question- what data providers have or did they use instead? How is their social media policy run? And what's their views on data ownership in general? All of which they and other parties haven't really grasped.

Every main paper and the government tv channel is anti-independence. The SNP have carried out miracles to have been in power for so long against these odds. The SNP came out and told the truth about CA and that has been totally ignored. How in hell can they do any more

[Adam Murray]

What ever happened to the SNP's National Survey of 2016? 

 

What data gathering organisation did they use, were CA ever approached?

 

Are the details of the survey ever going to be released?

 

What happens to the data the SNP gathered?

 

 

[Sraman]

2 hours ago, JamboX2 said:

 

The judiciary, civil service and landed wealth of Scotland. I'd include the local authorities in that.

 

Scotland is run very small "c" conservative. And despite having the power to change that we've seen little in opening up our courts and officialdom to working and the lower classes. Land ownership remains under a cloak of massive inequality and uncertain ownership. The landed wealth in Scotland has huge sway over the local authorities their planning decisions and ideas on the use of land and the resources. The legal service is still heavily populated with your privately educated merchant school kids, the judiciary predominantly led by the Oxbridge educated of Scotland and those from the premier Scottish universities. The Lord Advocate - the government appointed legal adviser - still heads the prosecution service and runs all prosecutions in Scotland. The civil service in Scotland is no different or better placed than the UK one as a whole. Local authorities have less freedom to make decisions, are prevented by doing so by their funding agreements with central government and have barely had a fresh idea on running services since the 70s.

 

I don't mean to talk Scotland down. I talk down any notion of a better run state or a less closed off elite.

 

Edinburgh. The UK's second city. Second in cost of living. Second in cost of housing. Huge levels of investment alongside Glasgow compared to elsewhere. Higher salaries compared to other parts of Scotland. Effectively a Scottish London. So again - these are inherent faults which we see on a UK level and Scottish one. Will independence change that? I think not because much of this is ALREADY open to government to change here now and has been since 1999. 

 

 

All the Queens men.

 

Can you imagine wee Jimmy Boig with his two CSE's from WHEC being recommended by Government for the position, what do you think the Queens answer would be?

 

Another picture of despair, so elegantly painted, of life in the Union.

 

 

 

 

 

[Sraman]

CA is a story about the Tories. A tory led organisation, backed by Tories, run by Tories for Tories. It was never about the SNP but some Tory said "Look over there" and everyone did.

[The Brow]

Genuine question....

 

do any of you actually support any party, and if so, why? 

 

Each party seems to be filled with fantasists and charlatans and none of them seem to have the temerity to stop arguing among themselves and each other, and admit their shortcomings and leave all the whatabootery and insults behind. All you get is he said/she said (this thread is another example). 

 

Politics is ****ing tedious and its getting worse. Adults refusing to grow spines and work for the people. What a system..... 

 

Amber Rudd tho. **** me. What a cretin. 

[JamboX2]

1 hour ago, XB52 said:

Every main paper and the government tv channel is anti-independence.

 

Dubious. The Herald and Scotsman regularly commission articles and provide column inches to pro-indy writers. Added to this the SNP get a lot of tv coverage as well in both a UK and BBC Scotland / STV angle as well.

 

1 hour ago, XB52 said:

 

The SNP have carried out miracles to have been in power for so long against these odds.

 

Given they spend a lot more in each Scottish election compared to their competitors kinda puts pay to that. Not to mention the SNP have won the backing of high readership papers like the Sun, the Herald and in 2011 even the Scotsman doffed it's cap to them this is barely a Goliath v David issue.

 

1 hour ago, XB52 said:

 

The SNP came out and told the truth about CA and that has been totally ignored. How in hell can they do any more

 

It hasn't. In fact it's part of the story. It's their handling of it which has been criticised. Added to that there are still questions - for all parties - on data usage in elections and who other than CA has been selling data. 

[jambo lodge]

Nicola has lost the plot completely claiming today in the Herald and Scotsman that the Tories are out to destroy devolution, just a few days after extra welfare powers are transferred to Holyrood and much more from Brexit to come. Couldn't make it up, living in cloud cuckoo land.   

[JamboX2]

1 hour ago, Sraman said:

 

 

All the Queens men.

 

Can you imagine wee Jimmy Boig with his two CSE's from WHEC being recommended by Government for the position, what do you think the Queens answer would be?

 

Another picture of despair, so elegantly painted, of life in the Union.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Not an answer to the question at all. Your issue applies to Tommy Thomson in Hartlepool and to Dafyd Jones of the Valleys. Even to Billy Brixton in London. 

 

That's an issue of class and not an issue nationalism or self-determination solves.

 

The same applies to wee Jimmy getting from the WHEC to a top Scottish uni to get into the Scottish Government as a civil servant or to the Scottish legal profession. Or a doctor or accountant. The UK - and Scotland - has a huge inequality of opportunity created by wealth inequality and that is reflected in the top professions. I don't see how being independence is a solution to any of these issues. 

 

It may create the space for a change to happen but given devolution was also supposed to do that I seriously doubt that.

[Thunderstruck]

5 hours ago, XB52 said:

Where are the details from the other parties?? The SNP have stated they had contact with CA but quickly realised they were shysters. Now up to the others to let us know what they did

 

What-a-bout-ery. 

 

What is is the title of this thread?

 

That said, surely you can’t have missed the hypocrisy of the smug finger pointing at other parties - before that smugness evaporated in a instant when they were outed by CA. 

[Captain Sausage]

3 hours ago, The Brow said:

Genuine question....

 

do any of you actually support any party, and if so, why? 

 

Each party seems to be filled with fantasists and charlatans and none of them seem to have the temerity to stop arguing among themselves and each other, and admit their shortcomings and leave all the whatabootery and insults behind. All you get is he said/she said (this thread is another example). 

 

Politics is ****ing tedious and its getting worse. Adults refusing to grow spines and work for the people. What a system..... 

 

Amber Rudd tho. **** me. What a cretin. 

 

Agree to all of this. 

 

Like a different breed. All they do is bicker like little kids. Shower of deplorable stains on the pants of our nation. 

Edited April 29, 2018 by houstonjambo

[jack D and coke]

4 hours ago, The Brow said:

Genuine question....

 

do any of you actually support any party, and if so, why? 

 

Each party seems to be filled with fantasists and charlatans and none of them seem to have the temerity to stop arguing among themselves and each other, and admit their shortcomings and leave all the whatabootery and insults behind. All you get is he said/she said (this thread is another example). 

 

Politics is ****ing tedious and its getting worse. Adults refusing to grow spines and work for the people. What a system..... 

 

Amber Rudd tho. **** me. What a cretin. 

That’s how I feel. I hate the lot of them. 

For every policy or person I like in a party there ends up being ten why I end up despising them. 

 

[deesidejambo]

6 hours ago, The Brow said:

Genuine question....

 

do any of you actually support any party, and if so, why? 

 

Each party seems to be filled with fantasists and charlatans and none of them seem to have the temerity to stop arguing among themselves and each other, and admit their shortcomings and leave all the whatabootery and insults behind. All you get is he said/she said (this thread is another example). 

 

Politics is ****ing tedious and its getting worse. Adults refusing to grow spines and work for the people. What a system..... 

 

Amber Rudd tho. **** me. What a cretin. 

Anyone who supports any party is  imo less able to think for themselves.

 

Vote on issues, not for parties.

[Doogz]

27 minutes ago, deesidejambo said:

Anyone who supports any party is  imo less able to think for themselves.

 

Vote on issues, not for parties.

Aye - loyalty is for family, friends and football teams not for any political party that will likely change their policies depending on what they think will win votes.

[Sraman]

6 hours ago, JamboX2 said:

 

Not an answer to the question at all. Your issue applies to Tommy Thomson in Hartlepool and to Dafyd Jones of the Valleys. Even to Billy Brixton in London. 

 

That's an issue of class and not an issue nationalism or self-determination solves.

 

The same applies to wee Jimmy getting from the WHEC to a top Scottish uni to get into the Scottish Government as a civil servant or to the Scottish legal profession. Or a doctor or accountant. The UK - and Scotland - has a huge inequality of opportunity created by wealth inequality and that is reflected in the top professions. I don't see how being independence is a solution to any of these issues. 

 

It may create the space for a change to happen but given devolution was also supposed to do that I seriously doubt that.

 

Of course it does. I never said it didn't. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that they are more than welcome to join us.

 

Remaining the same and fighting like bears to change things against extremely large odds, as we have been doing for at least the last hundred years, isn't working. We took two steps forward after the war, we have already travelled very close to one step backwards and are looking like being dragged even further back by the current incompetents (at least they are to the likes of you and me). It will remain this way for as long as we have this system in place a system that doesn't want to change. I prefer the odds of an Independent Scotland, an Independent Scotland that wouldn't have a parliament that is able to hide behind "traditions" and allow those to hold it back. As I say, they can join us if they wish, I'm more than open to re-drawing the borders. 

 

You don't see it changing anything. That's up to us. As I say I prefer the odds in an Independent Scotland to get the changes we need as a country and, most importantly, as a people, not just Scots per se, but the people of Scotland (cannae believe I have to add that caveat but it is kickback and you know how the old firm fans like a wee look now and then). I do think and firmly believe that we would be able to focus more on education, health, infrastructure, manufacturing, agriculture, etc. as we wouldn't be as heavily involved (financially at least) in the World Police Project (WPP at your service ma'm  ) for a start.  

 

I don't see us as a people as small c conservative, I see us more as big C Canny, it's a different concept altogether.

 

I hope that answers my question. I think I was the only one that asked any?

 

 

 

[shaun.lawson]

12 hours ago, The Brow said:

Genuine question....

 

do any of you actually support any party, and if so, why? 

 

Each party seems to be filled with fantasists and charlatans and none of them seem to have the temerity to stop arguing among themselves and each other, and admit their shortcomings and leave all the whatabootery and insults behind. All you get is he said/she said (this thread is another example). 

 

Politics is ****ing tedious and its getting worse. Adults refusing to grow spines and work for the people. What a system..... 

 

Amber Rudd tho. **** me. What a cretin. 

 

I agree with you completely on the hopeless Punch and Judy nature of it all. But having hitherto supported the Lib Dems until 2011, I switched to Labour, who I now happily back (albeit, I'm not a member).

 

Why do I do so? Because I believe in social democracy. I didn't like Ed Miliband's leadership but loved the 2015 manifesto (which was to the left of the SNP). I also haven't liked Corbyn's leadership much either... but adored the 2017 manifesto.

 

In a political party of hundreds of thousands of members, of course there's gonna be plenty of zoomers. And in a 24/7 media age, obsessed with personality, not policy, of course there's gonna be constant 'gotcha' politics and dead cats thrown onto the table. But our political culture itself is endemically tribal - and the public are as responsible for that as the politicians.

 

I do believe, though, there is a huge thirst for real change out there - and that Corbyn's Labour represent it. I've taken much of the constant abuse towards him, McDonnell and Abbott as a sign that he frightens the establishment like nothing else... not because he's the dangerous ogre he's continually painted as (yesterday's Sunday Times headline a case in point), but because he threatens the very vested interests which have led to the UK becoming one of the most unequal societies in the Western world.

 

In sum: as long as Labour are closest to the social democracy I believe in, they'll get my vote.

Edited April 30, 2018 by shaun.lawson

[deesidejambo]

5 hours ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

I agree with you completely on the hopeless Punch and Judy nature of it all. But having hitherto supported the Lib Dems until 2011, I switched to Labour, who I now happily back (albeit, I'm not a member).

 

Why do I do so? Because I believe in social democracy. I didn't like Ed Miliband's leadership but loved the 2015 manifesto (which was to the left of the SNP). I also haven't liked Corbyn's leadership much either... but adored the 2017 manifesto.

 

In a political party of hundreds of thousands of members, of course there's gonna be plenty of zoomers. And in a 24/7 media age, obsessed with personality, not policy, of course there's gonna be constant 'gotcha' politics and dead cats thrown onto the table. But our political culture itself is endemically tribal - and the public are as responsible for that as the politicians.

 

I do believe, though, there is a huge thirst for real change out there - and that Corbyn's Labour represent it. I've taken much of the constant abuse towards him, McDonnell and Abbott as a sign that he frightens the establishment like nothing else... not because he's the dangerous ogre he's continually painted as (yesterday's Sunday Times headline a case in point), but because he threatens the very vested interests which have led to the UK becoming one of the most unequal societies in the Western world.

 

In sum: as long as Labour are closest to the social democracy I believe in, they'll get my vote.

But isn’t a root cause the shite electoral system that blocks out the middle ground.

 

Its time for PR.  LibDem this time Shaun please.    Agree with you on Labour, although I call it Social Justice as that is a better way to describe their credo.

 

 

[shaun.lawson]

5 minutes ago, deesidejambo said:

But isn’t a root cause the shite electoral system that blocks out the middle ground.

 

Its time for PR.  LibDem this time Shaun please.    Agree with you on Labour, although I call it Social Justice as that is a better way to describe their credo.

 

 

 

Absolutely - without a doubt. And my biggest problem with Corbyn is he hasn't come round to PR. As for the Lib Dems: they stood on a platform demanding PR for almost 20 years. Then they sold out for a referendum on AV, about the only electoral system on Earth which is even worse and less proportional than FPTP!

 

Obviously, there were plenty of other things they did which pissed me off (bedroom tax, legal aid cuts: the latter helped contribute to Grenfell) - but AV was the biggest reason I abandoned them.

 

Nationally (though not locally), the Lib Dems now are a shell of a party. Back when they had 40-60 MPs, the chances of them holding the balance of power were much higher than they are now. And I simply can't see the point of voting for a party which is so soft, so weak, so 'nice'. Even with so many Remainers unrepresented by either major UK party, and with UKIP finished, the Lib Dems have hardly picked up at all. This could've been their chance to gobble up millions of disenfranchised, unhappy voters. Instead, they're an irrelevance.

 

[deesidejambo]

2 minutes ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

Absolutely - without a doubt. And my biggest problem with Corbyn is he hasn't come round to PR. As for the Lib Dems: they stood on a platform demanding PR for almost 20 years. Then they sold out for a referendum on AV, about the only electoral system on Earth which is even worse and less proportional than FPTP!

 

Obviously, there were plenty of other things they did which pissed me off (bedroom tax, legal aid cuts: the latter helped contribute to Grenfell) - but AV was the biggest reason I abandoned them.

 

Nationally (though not locally), the Lib Dems now are a shell of a party. Back when they had 40-60 MPs, the chances of them holding the balance of power were much higher than they are now. And I simply can't see the point of voting for a party which is so soft, so weak, so 'nice'. Even with so many Remainers unrepresented by either major UK party, and with UKIP finished, the Lib Dems have hardly picked up at all. This could've been their chance to gobble up millions of disenfranchised, unhappy voters. Instead, they're an irrelevance.

 

Too defeatist!

 

The issue at stake is a bent electoral system that procreates the tribal behaviours and ultimately the policies that we all hate.

 

Maybe LibDem are weak in other policies but as a principle isn’t it worth sacrificing that for one election and voting for electoral change, hence fixing the long-term unfairness in British Govt choice?

 

 

[shaun.lawson]

14 minutes ago, deesidejambo said:

Too defeatist!

 

The issue at stake is a bent electoral system that procreates the tribal behaviours and ultimately the policies that we all hate.

 

Maybe LibDem are weak in other policies but as a principle isn’t it worth sacrificing that for one election and voting for electoral change, hence fixing the long-term unfairness in British Govt choice?

 

 

 

Not when they have such a massive credibility gap. I don't think I'll ever trust them again - and that they continue to stand against Labour, with the effect of letting the Tories in again and again, winds me up like almost nothing else. 

 

I'd like to see a Lib Dem leader call for talks with their Labour counterpart in the name of setting up a comprehensive anti-Tory bloc: whereby all members of this electoral coalition wouldn't stand against each other at the next GE. Under my idea, it'd be a straight Tory v anti-Tory contest in every seat; and if I were Labour leader, I wouldn't stand against the SNP, because they'd be part of this bloc too. 

 

Then, the moment we were elected, I'd legislate for both PR (because it'd have been the central plank of our manifesto) and a second indy referendum. The moment PR was enacted, all sorts of new parties would probably form, because both Labour and the Tories would split into something representative, rather than the nonsense we have now. 

 

But none of this will happen. No-one in British politics has the vision necessary. Too many petty fiefdoms to protect instead. 

[deesidejambo]

3 minutes ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

Not when they have such a massive credibility gap. I don't think I'll ever trust them again - and that they continue to stand against Labour, with the effect of letting the Tories in again and again, winds me up like almost nothing else. 

 

I'd like to see a Lib Dem leader call for talks with their Labour counterpart in the name of setting up a comprehensive anti-Tory bloc: whereby all members of this electoral coalition wouldn't stand against each other at the next GE. Under my idea, it'd be a straight Tory v anti-Tory contest in every seat; and if I were Labour leader, I wouldn't stand against the SNP, because they'd be part of this bloc too. 

 

Then, the moment we were elected, I'd legislate for both PR (because it'd have been the central plank of our manifesto) and a second indy referendum. The moment PR was enacted, all sorts of new parties would probably form, because both Labour and the Tories would split into something representative, rather than the nonsense we have now. 

 

But none of this will happen. No-one in British politics has the vision necessary. Too many petty fiefdoms to protect instead. 

Good idea but too defeatist again! It could work - in fact you should stand for Parliament - I’d vote for you.

[shaun.lawson]

5 minutes ago, deesidejambo said:

Good idea but too defeatist again! It could work - in fact you should stand for Parliament - I’d vote for you.

 

Check my location.  

[deesidejambo]

2 minutes ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

Check my location.  

Ok maybe I’ll ask Boris to stand.

[shaun.lawson]

11 minutes ago, deesidejambo said:

Ok maybe I’ll ask Boris to stand.

 

 

As an aside: since Uruguay's formation in 1830, this place's politics was completely dominated by two parties, the Blancos (conservatives, based in the countryside) and Colorados (classical liberals based in the cities). The left never got a look-in - albeit, the Colorados did implement one of the world's first welfare states just over a century ago, long before the UK followed suit. 

 

On the left are communists, liberals, socialists, social democrats and centrists. Yet they put all their differences behind them to form one leftist bloc: which won by a landslide in 2004, and has remained in power ever since. Delivering constant economic growth, socialised healthcare, one laptop for every child, and the lowest levels of both poverty and inequality in Latin America... as well as legalising abortion and gay marriage and regulating cannabis use, in a country with the highest levels of press freedom in Latin America (ranking much, much higher than the UK, as it does for democracy itself: voting is compulsory here, which ensures everyone has a stake, and politicians can't ignore them).

 

They still argue with each other. They argue all the time, and the unions are frequently impossible. But few on the left have lost sight of the bigger picture, the common enemy, if you like. And they've done all this in a very ageing country, which we might imagine would lean to the right. Instead, extraordinarily, when the right organised a referendum to lower the criminal age of responsibility from 18 to 16 (in England and Wales, it's 10!), they lost. 

 

From this, you may discern why I have no desire to return to the Tory-infested UK any time soon. And yes, we have PR here. It makes such an enormous difference.

Edited April 30, 2018 by shaun.lawson

[XB52]

20 hours ago, Sraman said:

CA is a story about the Tories. A tory led organisation, backed by Tories, run by Tories for Tories. It was never about the SNP but some Tory said "Look over there" and everyone did.

Exactly

[XB52]

19 hours ago, jambo lodge said:

Nicola has lost the plot completely claiming today in the Herald and Scotsman that the Tories are out to destroy devolution, just a few days after extra welfare powers are transferred to Holyrood and much more from Brexit to come. Couldn't make it up, living in cloud cuckoo land.   

Wow, I find it hard to believe that anyone could hate the snp so much they could type so much garbage. Cuckoo says it all about you.

[XB52]

16 hours ago, Thunderstruck said:

 

What-a-bout-ery. 

 

What is is the title of this thread?

 

That said, surely you can’t have missed the hypocrisy of the smug finger pointing at other parties - before that smugness evaporated in a instant when they were outed by CA. 

Yet again you miss the point. The SNP have stated they talked to CA, and realised they were not people they wanted to have anything to do with, end of story. but the Tories has to try and divert attention from their use of CA so then come their stooges headlines about the SNP.  SNP then prove the facts but that makes no difference to the media or posters like you who can't understand a political party that actually tells the truth

[jambo lodge]

5 minutes ago, XB52 said:

Wow, I find it hard to believe that anyone could hate the snp so much they could type so much garbage. Cuckoo says it all about you.

Was in both papers yesterday. She is clearly trying to keep the political agenda away from Health, Education, Police etc.   She is just playing politics.

[XB52]

3 minutes ago, jambo lodge said:

Was in both papers yesterday. She is clearly trying to keep the political agenda away from Health, Education, Police etc.   She is just playing politics.

Oh my God, thanks for proving my point, in the papers????. Best NHS in the UK,  best crime and arrest figures for 40 years, so why would the snp want to divert attention?? Education must do better so will give you that

[jambo lodge]

20 minutes ago, XB52 said:

Oh my God, thanks for proving my point, in the papers????. Best NHS in the UK,  best crime and arrest figures for 40 years, so why would the snp want to divert attention?? Education must do better so will give you that

Perhaps its you that lives in cloud cuckoo land with all the other Snats.

[Thunderstruck]

22 minutes ago, XB52 said:

Yet again you miss the point. The SNP have stated they talked to CA, and realised they were not people they wanted to have anything to do with, end of story. but the Tories has to try and divert attention from their use of CA so then come their stooges headlines about the SNP.  SNP then prove the facts but that makes no difference to the media or posters like you who can't understand a political party that actually tells the truth

 

I am not missing any point. There was a lie of omission (they only felt like talking about it AFTER they were outed by CA) and then the lie on extent of engagement. All of that overlaid in hypocrisy. 

 

[SpruceBringsteen]

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-43951071

 

****ING SNP

[Space Mackerel]

6 minutes ago, SpruceBringsteen said:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-43951071

 

****ING SNP

 

Lol

[Cade]

The power grab by Westminster is astonishing and a Labour-led Wales letting them get away with it is even more astonishing.

 

In the devolution bill, there were powers that were supposed to be granted to Scotland. However, they fell under the umbrella of EU-centred powers, so the EU controlled them.

 

Now that the UK is leaving the EU, logic dictates that the powers should be given straight to Scotland, as per the devolution agreement.

 

But naw, Westminster has decided to keep them instead.

 

When Wales stood together with Scotland, we managed to browbeat Westminster into devolving a big chunk of those powers, but not all of them.

 

It's a shameful display of arrogance by Westminster and undermines devolution as a whole.

[jambo lodge]

2 hours ago, Cade said:

The power grab by Westminster is astonishing and a Labour-led Wales letting them get away with it is even more astonishing.

 

In the devolution bill, there were powers that were supposed to be granted to Scotland. However, they fell under the umbrella of EU-centred powers, so the EU controlled them.

 

Now that the UK is leaving the EU, logic dictates that the powers should be given straight to Scotland, as per the devolution agreement.

 

But naw, Westminster has decided to keep them instead.

 

When Wales stood together with Scotland, we managed to browbeat Westminster into devolving a big chunk of those powers, but not all of them.

 

It's a shameful display of arrogance by Westminster and undermines devolution as a whole.

Utter nonsense, the only reason for holding on to some powers initially is to ensure there is joined up policy in agriculture and Fisheries for the whole of the UK......Westminster doing its job. Holyrood seeking more powers in respect of agriculture is a joke when they can even make payments to farmers due to a duff IT system. As for Fisheries the SNP wants to hand back powers to Brussels when they re-join the EU.

[Sraman]

6 minutes ago, jambo lodge said:

Utter nonsense, the only reason for holding on to some powers initially is to ensure there is joined up policy in agriculture and Fisheries for the whole of the UK......Westminster doing its job. Holyrood seeking more powers in respect of agriculture is a joke when they can even make payments to farmers due to a duff IT system. As for Fisheries the SNP wants to hand back powers to Brussels when they re-join the EU.

 

 

[Space Mackerel]

8 minutes ago, jambo lodge said:

Utter nonsense, the only reason for holding on to some powers initially is to ensure there is joined up policy in agriculture and Fisheries for the whole of the UK......Westminster doing its job. Holyrood seeking more powers in respect of agriculture is a joke when they can even make payments to farmers due to a duff IT system. As for Fisheries the SNP wants to hand back powers to Brussels when they re-join the EU.

 

You just cannae beat the Daily Express updates and opinions on here