General Election 2019

[Victorian]

4 minutes ago, jack D and coke said:

Proper devolution is the answer imo. I don’t think anyone would vote against that tbh. Why won’t they offer that? Why do you think? 

 

People absolutely would vote against devoMAX.     Simply out of fearing the government would be SNP.      Lots of people would rather still be governed by the Scottish branch office of the Tory Party than by the SNP.

[jack D and coke]

1 minute ago, Victorian said:

 

People absolutely would vote against devoMAX.     Simply out of fearing the government would be SNP.      Lots of people would rather still be governed by the Scottish branch office of the Tory Party than by the SNP.

Hmm who knows but don’t think so personally. 
DevoMax or proper federalism is the answer but they won’t go down that road. There’s no way to scare you off other than say constant SNP is there. All the other bollocks wouldn’t apply. 

[Brighton Jambo]

16 minutes ago, jack D and coke said:

Proper devolution is the answer imo. I don’t think anyone would vote against that tbh. Why won’t they offer that? Why do you think? 

I agree that very few people would vote against it.  I wouldn’t.  I don’t know why they don’t offer it but have they been asked?  If the Scottish government said we will drop any ask for a second referendum on the condition that we get more powers on X, Y, Z it would be interesting to see what the UK government would say.  Also if SNP ran on that as a manifesto pledge I would bloody vote for them.  Imagine the scale of the vote % they would get the UK government would have to listen.  People are just too obsessed with independence to ever consider this approach though.  

[jack D and coke]

Just now, Brighton Jambo said:

I agree that very few people would vote against it.  I wouldn’t.  I don’t know why they don’t offer it but have they been asked?  If the Scottish government said we will drop any ask for a second referendum on the condition that we get more powers on X, Y, Z it would be interesting to see what the UK government would say.  Also if SNP ran on that as a manifesto pledge I would bloody vote for them.  Imagine the scale of the vote % they would get the UK government would have to listen.  People are just too obsessed with independence to ever consider this approach though.  

Again I’m not so sure. I’m not hell bent on independence but I don’t like the fact we get told when we can have referendum. Someone puts it in their manifesto, it gets enough votes or seats then we have it, end of. 
Just like I would have no qualms about a party putting re-joining the union in their manifesto. If they got the required numbers then you can’t argue. 
I don’t think proper devolution has ever been offered except by Gordon Brown at the last indyref despite him having absolutely authority to do so. 
It would be interesting to see what would happen if offered imo. 

[Brighton Jambo]

Labour manifesto just being debated on TV right now.

 

Basically saying there is no country in the world that can demonstrate that level of spending without tax increases across all people. Simply not credible to suggest this gets paid for by the wealthy.  

 

They described a world where people wake up in their state owned house, log into their state owned/run internet before getting their state run mail and jumping on state owned public transport.  FFS do people really see this as being the vision for 21st century Britain.  

 

At least we now have a definition of wealthy.  Everyone who earns above £80k will be paying for this brave new world.  

 

Christ if he gets into power even I might vote for independence! 

[Justin Z]

5 minutes ago, jack D and coke said:

I don’t think proper devolution has ever been offered except by Gordon Brown at the last indyref despite him having absolutely authority to do so.

 

No, but even the small measures promised weren't followed through on.

 

It's not obsession with independence as you rightly point out, it's a lack of trust in a broken constitutional system where devolution cannot work because the devolved bodies have no legal sovereignty at all.

[jack D and coke]

1 minute ago, Justin Z said:

 

No, but even the small measures promised weren't followed through on.

 

It's not obsession with independence as you rightly point out, it's a lack of trust in a broken constitutional system where devolution cannot work because the devolved bodies have no legal sovereignty at all.

Sort of what I meant too👍🏼

[Brighton Jambo]

6 minutes ago, jack D and coke said:

Again I’m not so sure. I’m not hell bent on independence but I don’t like the fact we get told when we can have referendum. Someone puts it in their manifesto, it gets enough votes or seats then we have it, end of. 
Just like I would have no qualms about a party putting re-joining the union in their manifesto. If they got the required numbers then you can’t argue. 
I don’t think proper devolution has ever been offered except by Gordon Brown at the last indyref despite him having absolutely authority to do so. 
It would be interesting to see what would happen if offered imo. 

I agree with you that it doesn’t seem right that Scotland gets told it can’t have a referendum.  I know it drives people mad but Alex Salmond saying this was once in a generation was a huge mistake in the heat of the moment as it gives the WM parties an excuse to deny it.

 

i read this week that the criteria will be an SNP majority at the 2021 Scottish elections, that would be the trigger.  Interestingly they were clear it had to be an SNP majority and not a majority of pro Indy parties. So no alliance with greens.  

 

No doubt people will scream that’s not fair but the UK government can play hardball and if that’s the terms then I think SNP will need to accept.  

[Brighton Jambo]

5 minutes ago, Justin Z said:

 

No, but even the small measures promised weren't followed through on.

 

It's not obsession with independence as you rightly point out, it's a lack of trust in a broken constitutional system where devolution cannot work because the devolved bodies have no legal sovereignty at all.

Interesting that shipyards in England and NI have shut down while Scottish yards are bulging with work.  The 13 ships promised have been delivered in full.  So on shipbuilding the vow has been delivered.

 

its simply too simplistic to say it wasn’t delivered, sure some of it wasn’t but in other areas it was.  

 

 

[Justin Z]

2 minutes ago, Brighton Jambo said:

I agree with you that it doesn’t seem right that Scotland gets told it can’t have a referendum.  I know it drives people mad but Alex Salmond saying this was once in a generation was a huge mistake in the heat of the moment as it gives the WM parties an excuse to deny it.

 

i read this week that the criteria will be an SNP majority at the 2021 Scottish elections, that would be the trigger.  Interestingly they were clear it had to be an SNP majority and not a majority of pro Indy parties. So no alliance with greens.  

 

No doubt people will scream that’s not fair but the UK government can play hardball and if that’s the terms then I think SNP will need to accept.  

 

And in one post you basically lay down that even if it were obsession with independence, that tack would be 100% justified.

 

Another thing in the just released Labour manifesto: Renewal of Trident. Yet another reason why devolution is not the answer.

[jack D and coke]

2 minutes ago, Brighton Jambo said:

I agree with you that it doesn’t seem right that Scotland gets told it can’t have a referendum.  I know it drives people mad but Alex Salmond saying this was once in a generation was a huge mistake in the heat of the moment as it gives the WM parties an excuse to deny it.

 

i read this week that the criteria will be an SNP majority at the 2021 Scottish elections, that would be the trigger.  Interestingly they were clear it had to be an SNP majority and not a majority of pro Indy parties. So no alliance with greens.  

 

No doubt people will scream that’s not fair but the UK government can play hardball and if that’s the terms then I think SNP will need to accept.  

It was a remark of the fact we hadn’t really ever had one before and and encouragement to vote and not let it pass you by. 
Does Boris now have to be dead in a ditch for example? I mean he said he’d rather be than extend the brexit deadline? Difference being what exactly?

[Justin Z]

Just now, Brighton Jambo said:

Interesting that shipyards in England and NI have shut down while Scottish yards are bulging with work.  The 13 ships promised have been delivered in full.  So on shipbuilding the vow has been delivered.

 

its simply too simplistic to say it wasn’t delivered, sure some of it wasn’t but in other areas it was. 

 

Ah okay, so off-the-cuff remarks by singular politicians are grounds for ignoring a democratic will--backing that nonsense is not too simplistic--but a vow made by the leaders of three major parties is broken and it's too simplistic to say it's not been delivered.

[Brighton Jambo]

3 minutes ago, jack D and coke said:

It was a remark of the fact we hadn’t really ever had one before and and encouragement to vote and not let it pass you by. 
Does Boris now have to be dead in a ditch for example? I mean he said he’d rather be than extend the brexit deadline? Difference being what exactly?

I totally understand and don’t disagree but my point is opposition leaders have grabbed that sound bite and are going to keep using it as a justification for obstructing a second one.  I am agreeing with you.  

[jack D and coke]

1 minute ago, Brighton Jambo said:

I totally understand and don’t disagree but my point is opposition leaders have grabbed that sound bite and are going to keep using it as a justification for obstructing a second one.  I am agreeing with you.  

But it’s total and utter deflection. There nothing written anywhere and nothing was signed. 
I accepted the No vote in 2014 and I wouldn’t be saying we should have another one if the brexit vote hadn’t happened. I don’t see how anyone can argue we don’t deserve to ask the question again seeing we voted overwhelmingly to remain. 
If this is truly a union of two equals (remember David Cameron trelling us that repeatedly in the build up) then it must happen. 

[Brighton Jambo]

4 minutes ago, Justin Z said:

 

Ah okay, so off-the-cuff remarks by singular politicians are grounds for ignoring a democratic will--backing that nonsense is not too simplistic--but a vow made by the leaders of three major parties is broken and it's too simplistic to say it's not been delivered.

That’s the nature of politics.  A sound bite that is easily quoted and understood is more powerful than an educated opinion that the vow has not been delivered.  Parts of the vow haven’t been delivered, parts have and people disagree to the extent across both camps.  The problem is most people don’t care, they hear the arguing, the opinions and probably most people don’t remember what was in the vow anyway.  

 

How many members of the public do you think could say what was in the vow and honestly evaluate whether it has or hasn’t been delivered? 

 

How many members of the public could quote Alex Salmonds like about once in a generation.

 

im not saying it’s right, I know for those of you who care deeply it is frustrating but that is politics and public perceptions in a nutshell 

[Justin Z]

Just now, Brighton Jambo said:

im not saying it’s right, I know for those of you who care deeply it is frustrating but that is politics and public perceptions in a nutshell 

 

Fair enough, and you're right of course. However on here I rather prefer discussing these things as people, not politicians--transcending the shite if you like.

[Brighton Jambo]

2 minutes ago, jack D and coke said:

But it’s total and utter deflection. There nothing written anywhere and nothing was signed. 
I accepted the No vote in 2014 and I wouldn’t be saying we should have another one if the brexit vote hadn’t happened. I don’t see how anyone can argue we don’t deserve to ask the question again seeing we voted overwhelmingly to remain. 
If this is truly a union of two equals (remember David Cameron trelling us that repeatedly in the build up) then it must happen. 

You make a good point about Brexit.  What happened to seeing how that turned about before a second Indy ref vote? 

 

What if there is a hung parliament, as a result a second referendum on brexit and we then vote to remain.

 

the substantial change that was the trigger for a second Indy ref would have gone away and so I assume calls for a second vote would be dropped?  Am I correct? 

[Victorian]

24 minutes ago, Brighton Jambo said:

Labour manifesto just being debated on TV right now.

 

Basically saying there is no country in the world that can demonstrate that level of spending without tax increases across all people. Simply not credible to suggest this gets paid for by the wealthy.  

 

They described a world where people wake up in their state owned house, log into their state owned/run internet before getting their state run mail and jumping on state owned public transport.  FFS do people really see this as being the vision for 21st century Britain.  

 

At least we now have a definition of wealthy.  Everyone who earns above £80k will be paying for this brave new world.  

 

Christ if he gets into power even I might vote for independence! 

 

Tories promise spending = we'll pay it back at negative interest rates.   It's all affordable (aye because the poorest will be paying for it).   

 

Labour promise spending = aye they're just Marxists stuck in the 70s.    They'll crash the economy.   It's not affordable because you can't ask the well off to contribute more.    We must allow the private sector to run everything 'cos they'll look after the interests of the end user and not the shareholders and executives.    Amirite?

[jack D and coke]

15 minutes ago, Brighton Jambo said:

You make a good point about Brexit.  What happened to seeing how that turned about before a second Indy ref vote? 

 

What if there is a hung parliament, as a result a second referendum on brexit and we then vote to remain.

 

the substantial change that was the trigger for a second Indy ref would have gone away and so I assume calls for a second vote would be dropped?  Am I correct? 

Im not sure. I think the SNP approach is if there’s a Tory majority it won’t matter. They won’t permit an indy2 and we’ll get a harder brexit. 
They’ve been pretty consistent tbf. 

[Brighton Jambo]

1 minute ago, jack D and coke said:

Im not sure. I think the SNP approach is if there’s a Tory majority it won’t matter. They won’t permit an indy2 and we’ll get a harder brexit. 
They’ve been pretty consistent tbf. 

But in my scenario there wouldn’t be a Tory majority.  In fact there might not even be a Tory government.

 

so if we had a second Brexit vote and vote to remain and there is a labour led government (propped up by SNP) so people of Scotland couldn’t say they didn’t get government they voted for the request for second referendum should be dropped.  

 

What grounds could there be for having one? 

[jack D and coke]

1 minute ago, Brighton Jambo said:

But in my scenario there wouldn’t be a Tory majority.  In fact there might not even be a Tory government.

 

so if we had a second Brexit vote and vote to remain and there is a labour led government (propped up by SNP) so people of Scotland couldn’t say they didn’t get government they voted for the request for second referendum should be dropped.  

 

What grounds could there be for having one? 

Not sure. If brexit happens at all then they’ll probably think they had grounds I’d imagine. 
Them propping up a labour government sounds unlikely to me. 

[Brighton Jambo]

So to all independence supporters I have a question:

 

If there is no Tory led government after the Election as there is a Labour/SNP coalition (formal or informal arrangement) and if that leads to a second Brexit referendum in which we to remain will the demand for a second independence referendum be dropped?

 

if not, what would be the rationale for still having one? 

Edited November 21, 2019 by Brighton Jambo

[Brighton Jambo]

4 minutes ago, jack D and coke said:

Not sure. If brexit happens at all then they’ll probably think they had grounds I’d imagine. 
Them propping up a labour government sounds unlikely to me. 

I agree, if Brexit happens that is a fair enough change to demand a second vote.  If it doesn’t then a vote for independence takes Scotland out of Europe, oh the irony!  Imagine that being played out in a campaign!! 

[Justin Z]

3 minutes ago, Brighton Jambo said:

So to all independence supporters I have a question:

 

If there is no Tory led government after the Election as there is a Labour/SNP coalition and if that leads to a second Brexit referendum in which we to remain will the demand for a second independence referendum be dropped?

 

if not, what would be the rationale for still having one? 

 

I think you could reasonably argue the change in circumstances had not materialised after all.

 

I think you would also find that it would be members of the public who'd remember the likes of Boris railing against even having a referendum as a "politics and public perceptions in a nutshell" thing.

 

The SNP, if they chose to go that route, would say "it's always been our position that we could join the EU as an independent country so this doesn't change anything". How well that would play, I guess we'd have to see.

[jack D and coke]

6 minutes ago, Brighton Jambo said:

I agree, if Brexit happens that is a fair enough change to demand a second vote.  If it doesn’t then a vote for independence takes Scotland out of Europe, oh the irony!  Imagine that being played out in a campaign!! 

Well exactly. It’s kind of what a big part of the No vote was about too. 
Bringing that up seemingly isn’t allowed either though but once in a generation is fine🤷🏽‍♂️

[Justin Z]

4 minutes ago, jack D and coke said:

Well exactly. It’s kind of what a big part of the No vote was about too. 
Bringing that up seemingly isn’t allowed either though but once in a generation is fine🤷🏽‍♂️

 

Still there.

 

 

Edited November 21, 2019 by Justin Z

[Pans Jambo]

1 hour ago, Brighton Jambo said:

See I think this is a very good post.  I have been very open about my opposition to independence but a genuine move towards a federalist system or much greater devolved powers I could support.   I don’t think many people in Scotland would be against more powers but those who want independence wouldn’t support it as it could undermine the ultimate goal.  

If they had done exactly that after the 2014 referendum then we wouldnt be where we are now however; the VERY MORNING AFTER the 2014 vote Cameron just couldn't contain his excitement and announced on the steps of number 10 that Scotland  has had its say, needs to STFU and crawl back inside it's box and then announced EVEL DESPITE promising Scotland the earth prior to the vote.

 

Had he followed through (along with the VOW arseholes) and delivered "as close to federalism as is possible" then Scottish Independence would now be as dead as a dodo but naw! Cant trust tories (or red tories) and since that event, we have been ignored, shat on, had powers taken off us and been forced down a tory led Brexit that Scotland voted to stay in (twice).

 

It should have been dead, its now bigger than it was in 2014. Hell mend them!

[jack D and coke]

7 minutes ago, Justin Z said:

 

Still there.

 

 

Haha unreal man. 

[Zico]

1 hour ago, Brighton Jambo said:

Labour manifesto just being debated on TV right now.

 

Basically saying there is no country in the world that can demonstrate that level of spending without tax increases across all people. Simply not credible to suggest this gets paid for by the wealthy.  

 

They described a world where people wake up in their state owned house, log into their state owned/run internet before getting their state run mail and jumping on state owned public transport.  FFS do people really see this as being the vision for 21st century Britain.  

 

At least we now have a definition of wealthy.  Everyone who earns above £80k will be paying for this brave new world.  

 

Christ if he gets into power even I might vote for independence! 

Coincimentally, comrade jezza and pals’ salaries are a fraction under £80k. And fortunately, for Jezza and pals, they and/or their kids have already been to private school so don’t have to worry about the fee increases. 
 

All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others...

[Brighton Jambo]

53 minutes ago, Justin Z said:

 

Still there.

 

 

I suppose they have kept it as if we did have a second Brexit referendum and vote to remain that tweet would be accurate again......

[RobboM]

Rachel Riley in the news today sporting a photoshopped t shirt.

As an anti apartheid campaigner back in the day, at around the time this photo was taken Tory students at university were wearing "Hang Nelson Mandela" t shirts and badges.

I'm surprised at just how offensive I find this.

Is Apartheid Denial now a thing?

[John Findlay]

9 minutes ago, Zico said:

Coincimentally, comrade jezza and pals’ salaries are a fraction under £80k. And fortunately, for Jezza and pals, they and/or their kids have already been to private school so don’t have to worry about the fee increases. 
 

All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others...

5,4,3,2,1.........

[Justin Z]

Her erasure of the horrors of Apartheid in the name of fighting antisemitism is beyond comical. Not surprised how offensive you find it in the least. It's between her and Katie Hopkins now for the title of looniest female right wing nutball in the UK. Hopefully Channel 4 do the right thing.

 

Speaking of which, she was trying to get someone fired for joking that Carol Vorderman put a muzzle on her

 

 

She's actually mental.

 

 

Edited November 21, 2019 by Justin Z

[RobboM]

5 minutes ago, Justin Z said:

.....

 

She's actually mental.

 

 

 

It's bizarre.

What next? She'll be dececrating a Jewish cemetery and spray painting swastikas saying "Look what Corbyn wants to do next!"

[RobboM]

5 minutes ago, Barack said:

Would though. The thinking man's nutter. 

 

Understandable but here's why I'm out! .....

[Victorian]

Dirty ****ing election is this.    The Tories and their crazed legions have turned it into the radiological device election.     Lobbing around every immoral,   filthy trick for short term gain and long term political armageddon.

[Cruyff Turn]

24 minutes ago, Barack said:

Would though. The thinking man's nutter. 

 

Above an 8 hot but a 9 crazy 😁

 

 

[dobmisterdobster]

Instead of harassing Jewish celebrities like Rachel Riley. Corbyn supporters could be doing literally anything else with their day.

[Unknown user]

Tory wankers, lies and shenanigans all the way

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tory-fake-labour-manifesto-website-fact-check-general-election-a9212076.html

[Cade]

Gobshite Patel claiming that the rise in poverty rates since 2009 has nothing to do with central government, but is the fault of local authorities.

 

Local authorities who have been starved of central government funding since 2009.

 

[King prawn]

18 minutes ago, dobmisterdobster said:

Instead of harassing Jewish celebrities like Rachel Riley. Corbyn supporters could be doing literally anything else with their day.

Couldn’t you be doing anything else with your day instead of writing a post about Corbyn supporters harassing Rachel Riley?

 

I already can see what’s about to happen in response to this  

[King prawn]

1 minute ago, Cade said:

Gobshite Patel claiming that the rise in poverty rates since 2009 has nothing to do with central government, but is the fault of local authorities.

 

Local authorities who have been starved of central government funding since 2009.

 

She is a dangerous individual 

[JamboX2]

3 hours ago, jack D and coke said:

Again I’m not so sure. I’m not hell bent on independence but I don’t like the fact we get told when we can have referendum. Someone puts it in their manifesto, it gets enough votes or seats then we have it, end of. 
Just like I would have no qualms about a party putting re-joining the union in their manifesto. If they got the required numbers then you can’t argue. 
I don’t think proper devolution has ever been offered except by Gordon Brown at the last indyref despite him having absolutely authority to do so. 
It would be interesting to see what would happen if offered imo. 

 

Thing is not all the powers promised in 2016 have been delivered. In part because setting up separate welfare and tax centres is complicated and costs money and takes time.

 

Independence would equally take a long time to bed in before you'd say really big structural changed develop. It's just the reality of it.

[Victorian]

Nothing's the Tories' fault.     They were having a pizza that decade.

[JamboX2]

3 hours ago, Brighton Jambo said:

Labour manifesto just being debated on TV right now.

 

Basically saying there is no country in the world that can demonstrate that level of spending without tax increases across all people. Simply not credible to suggest this gets paid for by the wealthy.  

 

They described a world where people wake up in their state owned house, log into their state owned/run internet before getting their state run mail and jumping on state owned public transport.  FFS do people really see this as being the vision for 21st century Britain.  

 

At least we now have a definition of wealthy.  Everyone who earns above £80k will be paying for this brave new world.  

 

Christ if he gets into power even I might vote for independence! 

 

In Germany, France, Holland, Austria, Denmark and many other neighbouring nations more people live in secure rents and social housing, wake up to mail delivered by a state mail company and travel to work on state run transport (trains and busses). Why can't it be done here?

 

The internet one I'm confused about the anger of. Openreach is hugely subsidised and has not delivered. Also the idea to get everyone accessing information is basically public libraries for the 21st century.

Edited November 21, 2019 by JamboX2

[Brighton Jambo]

14 minutes ago, JamboX2 said:

 

In Germany, France, Holland, Austria, Denmark and many other neighbouring nations more people live in secure rents and social housing, wake up to mail delivered by a state mail company and travel to work on state run transport (trains and busses). Why can't it be done here?

 

The internet one I'm confused about the anger of. Openreach is hugely subsidised and has not delivered. Also the idea to get everyone accessing information is basically public libraries for the 21st century.

It can be done I just don’t think it is a good use of tax payers money.  

[Justin Z]

2 minutes ago, Brighton Jambo said:

It can be done I just don’t think it is a good use of tax payers money.  

 

Neither did Thatcher or Reagan, and that's why the UK and US have third world quality internet compared to East Asia and much of Europe

 

[dobmisterdobster]

I don't care who owns the post offices or the trains and I am not prepared to pay higher taxes just to bring them in-house.

[jack D and coke]

17 minutes ago, JamboX2 said:

 

In Germany, France, Holland, Austria, Denmark and many other neighbouring nations more people live in secure rents and social housing, wake up to mail delivered by a state mail company and travel to work on state run transport (trains and busses). Why can't it be done here?

 

The internet one I'm confused about the anger of. Openreach is hugely subsidised and has not delivered. Also the idea to get everyone accessing information is basically public libraries for the 21st century.

Im baffled at the anger that ones caused an all. 
Not everyone can afford everything. Internet is pretty much a necessity now. It might be a given for most of us working and earning decent but some people haven’t always got and being able to look for or apply for jobs or just keep in touch isnt a bad thing surely. 

 

[jack D and coke]

2 minutes ago, dobmisterdobster said:

I don't care who owns the post offices or the trains and I am not prepared to pay higher taxes just to bring them in-house.

Why would it cost more? Don’t we actually subsidise rail travel anyway and the money goes to private companies? So you’re effectively paying a fare and money to their shareholders through your taxes?

And the PO sell off was scandal. It was making money. 

Edited November 21, 2019 by jack D and coke