Tories

[Bishop Hibee]

I'm not on the Holy Ground often but as I sit here bored waiting for no.3 child to come out the cinema, I am wondering who on here votes Tory? There must be some of you? It can't only be Brian Monteith 😉. Reasons why appreciated also.

Personally I vote SNP at Scottish and UK elections at present as it seems the best hope of a left of centre government if/when Scotland becomes independent. Little chance of it at UK level.

[Colr]

Is this question in reference to Scotland?

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I'm not on the Holy Ground often but as I sit here bored waiting for no.3 child to come out the cinema, I am wondering who on here votes Tory? There must be some of you? It can't only be Brian Monteith 😉. Reasons why appreciated also.

Personally I vote SNP at Scottish and UK elections at present as it seems the best hope of a left of centre government if/when Scotland becomes independent. Little chance of it at UK level.

Im an unashamedly floating voter, but i voted tory at the last holyrood elections.

Two reasons -

Tactical vote, i wanted to vote out my local MSP (who was SNP, but it was a personal reason) and tories were strong opposition

I knew the SNP would win, and since indyref i feel sturgeon had turned them into more of a lefty, weegie type party (undeestandably, to consolidate their gains in the west) but with that, the greens being quite extreme left, and thd labour and lib dems, i felt we needed s strong centre right voice in hlyrood to counter that.

[Pretty Boy]

I never really understand the SNP being described as a 'lefty' party. Whilst they clearly have some policies that are left of centre they also have a number that are most definitely to the right of centre.

For many years the SNP drew much of their support from the ex Tory voters of Perthsire and other rural areas. As the Tory brand becomes less toxic in Scotland, and there is evidence it is doing so to some extent, the SNP will have to work harder to maintain those voters.

The SNP has a broad range of people with varied political beliefs which is bound together by the ultimate goal of independence. I'd be surprised if the party in anything resembling it's current guise survived more than a decade if they secured a yes vote.

Broadly speaking I don't think I've ever felt so disengaged from politics in the party political sense. I always said I would never choose not to vote but if there was a general election tomorrow I wouldn't bother.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I never really understand the SNP being described as a 'lefty' party. Whilst they clearly have some policies that are left of centre they also have a number that are most definitely to the right of centre.

For many years the SNP drew much of their support from the ex Tory voters of Perthsire and other rural areas. As the Tory brand becomes less toxic in Scotland, and there is evidence it is doing so to some extent, the SNP will have to work harder to maintain those voters.

The SNP has a broad range of people with varied political beliefs which is bound together by the ultimate goal of independence. I'd be surprised if the party in anything resembling it's current guise survived more than a decade if they secured a yes vote.

Broadly speaking I don't think I've ever felt so disengaged from politics in the party political sense. I always said I would never choose not to vote but if there was a general election tomorrow I wouldn't bother.

I agree with you about the nats, but it was the direction of travel that concerned me, and from what i see and hear, i think sturgeon is on the left of rhe SNP.

But given the way the other parties were arranged, i thought rhey would be more likely to be pulled left too.

I voted SNP both votes 2011, and 2007. Cant remember before that, i think i gave a second vote to greens once, believe it or not, and possibly the liv dems too. Dont think i ever voted labour.

[Hibrandenburg]

The Tories are playing a blinder. They're out of sight of Labour in UK polls and no signs of Labour catching up anytime soon. They've consolidated their grip on the centre and have now made positives moves on the far right by adopting UKIP policies and populism post brexit vote. There's growing consensus amongst some academics that brexit has turned out exactly as the Tories intended it to and that brexit will see long term tory domination of Westminster for the foreseeable future. An utterly contemptuous party that have somehow convinced the many that the interests of the few are what's best for the country.

[Colr]

The Tories are playing a blinder. They're out of sight of Labour in UK polls and no signs of Labour catching up anytime soon. They've consolidated their grip on the centre and have now made positives moves on the far right by adopting UKIP policies and populism post brexit vote. There's growing consensus amongst some academics that brexit has turned out exactly as the Tories intended it to and that brexit will see long term tory domination of Westminster for the foreseeable future. An utterly contemptuous party that have somehow convinced the many that the interests of the few are what's best for the country.

They're benefitting from the most incompetant Labour administration ever.

[Hibrandenburg]

They're benefitting from the most incompetant Labour administration ever.

:agree: add that to the mix.

[Colr]

The Tories are an establishment preserving party who count on the middle classes as footsoldiers by providing sops to give them a sense of superiority over working class people and limit social mobility.

Much as I like the lifestyle, I find the English middle classes to be a self-serving, nasty, entitled bunch of ****s so I don't think I will find a motivation to vote Tory although I don't rule it out if other candidates are more objectionable.

[Smartie]

The Tories are playing a blinder. They're out of sight of Labour in UK polls and no signs of Labour catching up anytime soon. They've consolidated their grip on the centre and have now made positives moves on the far right by adopting UKIP policies and populism post brexit vote. There's growing consensus amongst some academics that brexit has turned out exactly as the Tories intended it to and that brexit will see long term tory domination of Westminster for the foreseeable future. An utterly contemptuous party that have somehow convinced the many that the interests of the few are what's best for the country.

I think they need to be a bit careful.

As they chase those votes for the lunatic right wing fringe (where everyone seems to think that the English consensus lies at the moment) they risk alienating the moderate centre right voters within their voter base.

Whilst 52% of the UK voted to leave the EU, that was still a sizeable 48% who wanted to remain, and their votes are up for grabs as the Tories appear to be lurching to the right.

I've taken a long time to understand my own political beliefs - I think they end up cancelling each other out somewhere in the middle but I have right wing beliefs on some subjects, left wing on others and probably end up just to the left. From there, it is much easier to find things in common with the centre-right than the far left or certainly the far-right.

I don't think the Tory brand being as toxic as it is is helpful for Scotland. The amount of success you can have in an argument by referring to red Tories or tartan Tories is childish and really unhelpful.

I suppose the Labour brand, those "red Tories" is severely damaged as well.

What I'd love to see would be an Independent Scotland, where the SNP dissolve and the Labour and Conservative parties re-launch and re-brand as something different. We can then have an adult conversation with meaningful contributions from all parts of the political spectrum and Scotland can take it in the direction it sees fit.

I'm not a Tory, not by a long shot, but I do quite like Ruth Davidson and the way she carries her unpopular message to much of Scotland. I wouldn't rule to voting for a centre-right party post-Independence.

When I was a lot younger I was a very left-wing idealist. I work in the healthcare sector though, and that is probably what I understand best and know most about. It's quite an eye-opener to see the NHS for what it is and how it is abused by politicians, patients and often clinicians yet seemingly is immune to criticism. It is a fantastic idea which deserves so much better, yet the reality is somewhat different.

[CropleyWasGod]

Scottish Tories have, IMO, generally always had more of an acceptable nature about them than their English counterparts. I'm not sure why that should be, but I'm more comfortable with them being part of the process of Government up here than driving it at Westminster.

As a related aside, but not wanting to hijack the debate, a school mate of mine.....

http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/politics/former-tory-leader-on-edinburgh-council-dies-1-4409165

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I think they need to be a bit careful.

As they chase those votes for the lunatic right wing fringe (where everyone seems to think that the English consensus lies at the moment) they risk alienating the moderate centre right voters within their voter base.

Whilst 52% of the UK voted to leave the EU, that was still a sizeable 48% who wanted to remain, and their votes are up for grabs as the Tories appear to be lurching to the right.

I've taken a long time to understand my own political beliefs - I think they end up cancelling each other out somewhere in the middle but I have right wing beliefs on some subjects, left wing on others and probably end up just to the left. From there, it is much easier to find things in common with the centre-right than the far left or certainly the far-right.

I don't think the Tory brand being as toxic as it is is helpful for Scotland. The amount of success you can have in an argument by referring to red Tories or tartan Tories is childish and really unhelpful.

I suppose the Labour brand, those "red Tories" is severely damaged as well.

What I'd love to see would be an Independent Scotland, where the SNP dissolve and the Labour and Conservative parties re-launch and re-brand as something different. We can then have an adult conversation with meaningful contributions from all parts of the political spectrum and Scotland can take it in the direction it sees fit.

I'm not a Tory, not by a long shot, but I do quite like Ruth Davidson and the way she carries her unpopular message to much of Scotland. I wouldn't rule to voting for a centre-right party post-Independence.

When I was a lot younger I was a very left-wing idealist. I work in the healthcare sector though, and that is probably what I understand best and know most about. It's quite an eye-opener to see the NHS for what it is and how it is abused by politicians, patients and often clinicians yet seemingly is immune to criticism. It is a fantastic idea which deserves so much better, yet the reality is somewhat different.

Good post mate.

I also think it is limiting to have the debate curtailed so much. The levels of hatred for the tories has always puzzled me. I think a lot of it comes down to the fact that theu effectively won rhe great ideological battles of the 60s and 70s, and effectively gutted the left and labour, eho subsequently hate them for it.

I also think there is something offensive and sanctimonious about much of the left, a sensr that they are the only ones who care, and that anyone who disagrees is bad. I think partly this tendency to foam at the mouth, dismiss opponents as 'tories' or argue back with some obscure piece of academic theory/ideology is why they are now doing so badly.

I also believe they are very consrvative, particularly labour here in Scotland, who fought against change so often,and still view fhe world as it was in the 70s rather than how it is now. Its why the SNP were such an invigorating force when they swept them away.

Add in that most, if not all, practical experiments with sociaism have been horrible, dehumanisng and have failed spectacularly, i can see why the left are so embittered.

What i find odd, and actually damaging to us all, is the complete intellectual bankruptcy that seems to exist now. We need good ideas from the left, but they are sadly lacking. Ironically, it is their consrvatism that is seeing them beco.e consigned to history.

[Pretty Boy]

Good post mate.

I also think it is limiting to have the debate curtailed so much. The levels of hatred for the tories has always puzzled me. I think a lot of it comes down to the fact that theu effectively won rhe great ideological battles of the 60s and 70s, and effectively gutted the left and labour, eho subsequently hate them for it.

I also think there is something offensive and sanctimonious about much of the left, a sensr that they are the only ones who care, and that anyone who disagrees is bad. I think partly this tendency to foam at the mouth, dismiss opponents as 'tories' or argue back with some obscure piece of academic theory/ideology is why they are now doing so badly.

I also believe they are very consrvative, particularly labour here in Scotland, who fought against change so often,and still view fhe world as it was in the 70s rather than how it is now. Its why the SNP were such an invigorating force when they swept them away.

Add in that most, if not all, practical experiments with sociaism have been horrible, dehumanisng and have failed spectacularly, i can see why the left are so embittered.

What i find odd, and actually damaging to us all, is the complete intellectual bankruptcy that seems to exist now. We need good ideas from the left, but they are sadly lacking. Ironically, it is their consrvatism that is seeing them beco.e consigned to history.

I can certainly sympathise with your 2nd paragraph given my experience with and involvement in left wing movements at uni and beyond. A hell of a lot of people involved were undoubtedly intelligent but they were lazy barstewards who wanted to give the illusion of caring and helping without ever actually rolling their sleeves up and doing any graft. I was regularly ridiculed for doing charity work as it 'enforced the system in which the goverment shirks it's duties and the public picks up the pieces'. Whilst I broadly agree with the sentiment I am also rooted enough in the real world to realise that that isn't going to change in the next week, month, year or decade so going out and being of some practical help is more useful than smoking a joint and quoting everyone from Marx to Benn to Chomsky constantly.

There are certainly a lot of good people on the left but the issue is that in one of it's key grassroots areas, student politics, it is dominated by a group of people who have no practical experience of the struggles faced by those they claim to want to 'emancipate'.

[Moulin Yarns]

I never really understand the SNP being described as a 'lefty' party. Whilst they clearly have some policies that are left of centre they also have a number that are most definitely to the right of centre.

For many years the SNP drew much of their support from the ex Tory voters of Perthsire and other rural areas. As the Tory brand becomes less toxic in Scotland, and there is evidence it is doing so to some extent, the SNP will have to work harder to maintain those voters.

The SNP has a broad range of people with varied political beliefs which is bound together by the ultimate goal of independence. I'd be surprised if the party in anything resembling it's current guise survived more than a decade if they secured a yes vote.

Broadly speaking I don't think I've ever felt so disengaged from politics in the party political sense. I always said I would never choose not to vote but if there was a general election tomorrow I wouldn't bother.

Second paragraph, I recently saw a projection for all Scottish Council Elections and Perth and Kinross (my LA) is projected to go from minority SNP to minority Conservative led. That will be the first time in 28 years that the Conservatives have been in ascendancy in Perthshire. I mentioned it to my manager and he went white!! he knows the current administration well and is not excited by the change, and not for political reasons.

[G B Young]

I voted Labour up until 2015 but like many voters in Scotland have since switched to the Tories - primarily as an anti-SNP vote but I've subsequently been impressed by Ruth Davidson and am not surprised to read she's the bookies' favourite to become Scotland's next First Minister.

In terms of 'Tory' Hibs fans, I posted similar on a thread in the main forum but in addition to the aforementioned Brian Monteith, the following are/were Tories:

The late Sir Alex Fletcher (long-serving Conservative MP for Edinburgh North and Leith in the days when the Tories still returned a respectable number of Scottish MPs to Westminster)
The late Brian Meek (veteran Edinburgh councillor and journalist). I once spotted fellow Conservative Sir Malcolm Rifkind sitting with him in the old centre stand at Easter Road but was never sure if Rifkind was actually a Hibs fan.
Ramsay Dalgety QC (former vice-chairman of the Hibs Supporters Association and leading player in the Hands Off Hibs campaign).
John Gibson (long-time Edinburgh Evening News columnist)

[Colr]

I voted Labour up until 2015 but like many voters in Scotland have since switched to the Tories - primarily as an anti-SNP vote but I've subsequently been impressed by Ruth Davidson and am not surprised to read she's the bookies' favourite to become Scotland's next First Minister.

In terms of 'Tory' Hibs fans, I posted similar on a thread in the main forum but in addition to the aforementioned Brian Monteith, the following are/were Tories:

The late Sir Alex Fletcher (long-serving Conservative MP for Edinburgh North and Leith in the days when the Tories still returned a respectable number of Scottish MPs to Westminster)
The late Brian Meek (veteran Edinburgh councillor and journalist). I once spotted fellow Conservative Sir Malcolm Rifkind sitting with him in the old centre stand at Easter Road but was never sure if Rifkind was actually a Hibs fan.
Ramsay Dalgety QC (former vice-chairman of the Hibs Supporters Association and leading player in the Hands Off Hibs campaign).
John Gibson (long-time Edinburgh Evening News columnist)

Rifkind was my MP when I was growing up which is why my already bog-standard education was continually interupted by unions who targetted my school for strikes and a ban on teachers supervising after-school activities thus exascerbating the advantage of the privately educated elite!

Thanks, brother-****ers!

[Peevemor]

Malcolm Rifkind was a very good constituency MP even after he became a cabinet minister. He attended meetings in our house fairly often (my mum was involved in various community groups/initiatives) and, regardless of what Thatcher was doing at the time, he was always very supportive and managed to pull strings when required.

I remember one Monday night I had a game of 5s after work and eventually got home about 9ish - I nearly crapped myself when I walked in the front door to be confronted by 2 bodyguards (Rifikind was Foreign Secretary at the time IIRC).

[allmodcons]

The Tories are playing a blinder. They're out of sight of Labour in UK polls and no signs of Labour catching up anytime soon. They've consolidated their grip on the centre and have now made positives moves on the far right by adopting UKIP policies and populism post brexit vote. There's growing consensus amongst some academics that brexit has turned out exactly as the Tories intended it to and that brexit will see long term tory domination of Westminster for the foreseeable future. An utterly contemptuous party that have somehow convinced the many that the interests of the few are what's best for the country.

:agree:

[Pretty Boy]

Rifkind was also my local MP when growing up and I always remember him being very visible at community events.

My Grandad was and is as anti Tory as you can get but even he had a grudging respect for Rifkinds attitude to his constituency work.

[Smartie]

Rifkind has never been my cup of tea at all, in fact I've always thought of him as one of the worst.

https://tompride.wordpress.com/2015/02/24/rifkind-firm-awarded-nhs-contract-despite-charging-7-million-more-than-nhs/

Scots at Westminster have often been my least favourite politicians and the utterly repugnant Michael Gove is continuing that fine tradition of really grinding my gears.

It was always the Ken Clarke end of the party that I found the most acceptable.

I used to detest Michael Forsyth but the last couple of times I saw him on TV I was disgusted to find myself agreeing with him.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

:agree:

Have you ever considered thatnthe majority vote for them because they are right?

[Moulin Yarns]

Have you ever considered thatnthe majority vote for them because they are right?

36.9% is in no way a majority (2015 General Election)

Nor is 22% (2016 Scottish Election)

But don't let the truth get in the way of your facts.

[Colr]

Rifkind was also my local MP when growing up and I always remember him being very visible at community events.

My Grandad was and is as anti Tory as you can get but even he had a grudging respect for Rifkinds attitude to his constituency work.

I certainly remember him coming to the door to canvas votes. He was on his own doing it.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

36.9% is in no way a majority (2015 General Election)

Nor is 22% (2016 Scottish Election)

But don't let the truth get in the way of your facts.

Well you generallu dont!

Ok, you got me on a technical point.

Perhaps why they are the most populat party nationwide, and sdcond most popular in scotland.

[allmodcons]

Have you ever considered thatnthe majority vote for them because they are right?

Majority?

22% of the constituency vote at the 2016 Scottish Election.

1 MP from 59 Westminster constituencies.

Even UK wide they only polled 37%.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Majority?

22% of the constituency vote at the 2016 Scottish Election.

1 MP from 59 Westminster constituencies.

Even UK wide they only polled 37%.

I corrected the point above.

Not the majority, but more than other parties?

[allmodcons]

I corrected the point above.

Not the majority, but more than other parties?

.......but not even close in Scotland

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

.......but not even close in Scotland

But we arent talking about just Scotland.

And historically they habe been very strong in Scotland, amd have now risen to be the official opposition. Must be doing something right...

[Mon Dieu4]

I voted Labour up until 2015 but like many voters in Scotland have since switched to the Tories - primarily as an anti-SNP vote but I've subsequently been impressed by Ruth Davidson and am not surprised to read she's the bookies' favourite to become Scotland's next First Minister.

In terms of 'Tory' Hibs fans, I posted similar on a thread in the main forum but in addition to the aforementioned Brian Monteith, the following are/were Tories:

The late Sir Alex Fletcher (long-serving Conservative MP for Edinburgh North and Leith in the days when the Tories still returned a respectable number of Scottish MPs to Westminster)
The late Brian Meek (veteran Edinburgh councillor and journalist). I once spotted fellow Conservative Sir Malcolm Rifkind sitting with him in the old centre stand at Easter Road but was never sure if Rifkind was actually a Hibs fan.
Ramsay Dalgety QC (former vice-chairman of the Hibs Supporters Association and leading player in the Hands Off Hibs campaign).
John Gibson (long-time Edinburgh Evening News columnist)

There is more chance of me signing for Hibs, scoring the winner in the champions league final then nailing Mila Kunis on a rocket to mars than Davidson becoming the next first minister

[allmodcons]

But we arent talking about just Scotland.

And historically they habe been very strong in Scotland, amd have now risen to be the official opposition. Must be doing something right...

I was (talking about Scotland) or do you now dictate the content of the debate?

Historically being the 1950's?

There will always be a core Conservative vote, mainly made up of those who want to protect what they've got. Thatcherites I'd call them.

[allmodcons]

There is more chance of me signing for Hibs, scoring the winner in the champions league final then nailing Mila Kunis on a rocket to mars than Davidson becoming the next first minister

I did have a laugh at that but, genuinely, didn't think it worthy of a response.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I was (talking about Scotland) or do you now dictate the content of the debate?

Historically being the 1950's?

There will always be a core Conservative vote, mainly made up of those who want to protect what they've got. Thatcherites I'd call them.

No i dont dictate, the person who made the point i was answering dictated the terms.

[allmodcons]

No i dont dictate, the person who made the point i was answering dictated the terms.

So I changed the terms of the debate. Now answer my question. Are you harking back to the 1950's?

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

So I changed the terms of the debate. Now answer my question. Are you harking back to the 1950's?

Ok, very cathroesque of you, to shift the paradigm..!

Not necessarily. While undountedly their heyday, i think they still did ok into the 70s and possibly even early 80s. But i may be wrong on that so happy to stand corrected.

Obviously they collapsed into the 90s, faced the new labour years in rhe UK, and also struggled as the SNP were the main opposition to the lib-labs up here.

But for a party full of horrible, despised avaricious monsters, to help beat off the yes side, then surge at Holyrood to become fhe official opposition pulling around 20% of the vote, an awful lot of Scots must be horrible people too.

Will ne interesting to see if they can make gains at council elections.

[Moulin Yarns]

Let us look at the facts (for Scotland)

GE 2015


Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson and her team are said to have felt a mixture of relief and disappointment after the election results came in.

Strategists were happy to avoid a wipeout - the party held on to sole MP David Mundell - but the Conservatives again failed to make progress.

The harsh truth is that the 14.9% vote share was the worst result since the Scottish Tories were formed in 1965.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Let us look at the facts (for Scotland)

GE 2015

So worst ever, and still polled 15% of the vote.

How did they do at the subsequent holyrood elections a year later?

[allmodcons]

Ok, very cathroesque of you, to shift the paradigm..!

Not necessarily. While undountedly their heyday, i think they still did ok into the 70s and possibly even early 80s. But i may be wrong on that so happy to stand corrected.

Obviously they collapsed into the 90s, faced the new labour years in rhe UK, and also struggled as the SNP were the main opposition to the lib-labs up here.

But for a party full of horrible, despised avaricious monsters, to help beat off the yes side, then surge at Holyrood to become fhe official opposition pulling around 20% of the vote, an awful lot of Scots must be horrible people too.

Will ne interesting to see if they can make gains at council elections.

I've never suggested Conservative voters are horrible people, indeed, I have friends who vote Conservative.

What I will say though is that they (including my friends) are firmly in the 'charity begins at home' camp.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I've never suggested Conservative voters are horrible people, indeed, I have friends who vote Conservative.

What I will say though is that they (including my friends) are firmly in the 'charity begins at home' camp.

Ok apologies, it was the party you agreed were contemptuous, not the people who voted for it. I misrepresented what you said, my mistake.

[Moulin Yarns]

No i dont dictate, the person who made the point i was answering dictated the terms.

Actually... seeing you like majorities, most of the posts on this thread refer to Scotland in some way.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Actually... seeing you like majorities, most of the posts on this thread refer to Scotland in some way.

WTF, so you are now challenging me on what i thought i was answering, when i answered someone referring to the UK?

Wow.

[allmodcons]

Ok apologies, it was the party you agreed were contemptuous, not the people who voted for it. I misrepresented what you said, my mistake.

No need to apologise SHB. All good fun.

[Moulin Yarns]

So worst ever, and still polled 15% of the vote.

How did they do at the subsequent holyrood elections a year later?

Seeing you asked.

First votes SNP 1,059,897 Con 501,844 Lab 514,261

So not even 2nd for peoples first vote.....

[allmodcons]

Seeing you asked.

First votes SNP 1,059,897 Con 501,844 Lab 514,261

So not even 2nd for peoples first vote.....



























:agree: and that's with Labour in freefall apparently

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

[QUOTE=Golden Fleece;5001474]Seeing you asked.

First votes SNP 1,059,897 Con 501,844 Lab 514,261

So not even 2nd for peoples first vote.....


Thats a VERY selective way to use facts, in a system where you get two votes.

But even allowing for that, they are almost exactly half as popular as the SNP. Not bad for such a contemptable party.

And of course the 2nd biggest party at holyrood, which you well know.

You will also know they habe 30 odd seats, amd saw their share of the vote rise by far more than any other party, and actually gained ground on the nats.

[Moulin Yarns]

Thats a VERY selective way to use facts, in a system where you get two votes.

But even allowing for that, they are almost exactly half as popular as the SNP. Not bad for such a contemptable party.

And of course the 2nd biggest party at holyrood, which you well know.

You will also know they habe 30 odd seats, amd saw their share of the vote rise by far more than any other party, and actually gained ground on the nats.


You asked, I answered. FPTP votes, tories were third. it is a fact the figures don't lie.

Now the good news, they doubled the number of seats from before. But the Greens trebled theirs. See what I did.

you can make things look good, on the surface, but the underlying facts sometimes reveal something very different.

[ronaldo7]

On a day the Conservative and Unionist party, as the UK gov, introduce a form you have to fill in if you want to claim child tax credits for your 3rd child, after being raped, I never thought they could stoop so low.

This is what some on here are voting for.

From the mouths of the poor, so the rich can plant conifers. That's the modern day Tory party.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/real-life/theresa-dining-one-most-oppressive-10157080

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

On a day the Conservative and Unionist party, as the UK gov, introduce a form you have to fill in if you want to claim child tax credits for your 3rd child, after being raped, I never thought they could stoop so low.

This is what some on here are voting for.

From the mouths of the poor, so the rich can plant conifers. That's the modern day Tory party.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/real-life/theresa-dining-one-most-oppressive-10157080

Sorry mate, refuse to click on link to that rag.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

You asked, I answered. FPTP votes, tories were third. it is a fact the figures don't lie.

Now the good news, they doubled the number of seats from before. But the Greens trebled theirs. See what I did.

you can make things look good, on the surface, but the underlying facts sometimes reveal something very different.

Ha ha ha, indeed you can.

Im not really sure what point you are arguing though?

I originally said more people voted tory than for any other party in the UK - i.e. they are our UK govt.

My point was, they must be doing something right. As your facts above show, doubling their seats at holyrood, in a country where they have previously been toxic, would i think, back that up.

I get many on here dont like them (althougj as i said earlier, i find the visceral hatred puzzling) but obviously many do.

[ronaldo7]

Sorry mate, refuse to click on link to that rag.


I normally don't link to the Record, however, the lass covers it very well imo.


Search "RAPE CLAUSE", and you'll soon find out what the Tory party are all about.

[Moulin Yarns]

Ha ha ha, indeed you can.

Im not really sure what point you are arguing though?

I originally said more people voted tory than for any other party in the UK - i.e. they are our UK govt.

My point was, they must be doing something right. As your facts above show, doubling their seats at holyrood, in a country where they have previously been toxic, would i think, back that up.

I get many on here dont like them (althougj as i said earlier, i find the visceral hatred puzzling) but obviously many do.


Which has already been proved wrong. No matter how often you repeat it, it is still not true.

Here are some facts.

UK electorate in 2015 = 44.7million

Conservative votes in 2015 = 11.3milion

So 25% of the electorate voted Conservative.

37% votes cast for Conservatives resulted in 51% seats

61% of votes cast for other parties resulted in 49% seats

Now that is worth a WOW.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Which has already been proved wrong. No matter how often you repeat it, it is still not true.

Here are some facts.

UK electorate in 2015 = 44.7million

Conservative votes in 2015 = 11.3milion

So 25% of the electorate voted Conservative.

37% votes cast for Conservatives resulted in 51% seats

61% of votes cast for other parties resulted in 49% seats

Now that is worth a WOW.

I said more people voted tory than for any other party.

What you are trying to prove (i think) is that i said they won more than all other parties combined. I dont think i have ever said that, becaise im not stupid amd i know that's not true.

So in your big book of highly selective facts, which other party got more votes than the tories?

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I normally don't link to the Record, however, the lass covers it very well imo.


Search "RAPE CLAUSE", and you'll soon find out what the Tory party are all about.

Ok, read it in the guardian.

So what is your issue with that?

That they have to prove rape occurred, or how they have to prove rape occurred, or that there is any exemption at all?

[Moulin Yarns]

Have you ever considered thatnthe majority vote for them because they are right?



Ok, you got me on a technical point.

Perhaps why they are the most populat party nationwide, and sdcond most popular in Scotland.


I said more people voted tory than for any other party.

What you are trying to prove (i think) is that i said they won more than all other parties combined. I dont think i have ever said that, becaise im not stupid amd i know that's not true.

So in your big book of highly selective facts, which other party got more votes than the tories?

.

[Bishop Hibee]

Interesting points. It strikes me that none of the posts have specific policies that attract posters to the Tories or any other party. A lot seem to be voting anti the party they can't stand.

As I get older I do see that what your politics are does not make you a nice or good person. I worked in the Scottish Parliament for a bit and Tommy Sheridan treated the civil servants like something on the sole of his shoe whereas Lord James Douglas Hamilton was a really nice guy (although a bit 'Tim Nice-but-Dim' at times).

The Tories social policies mean I could never vote for them though. The stopping of benefits for a third child is actually the complete opposite of what should be happening if you are planning to curb immigration and have an aging population. I'm with those who would like to see a new realignment of political parties post-independence with the chance of progressive left of centre ideas.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

.

You are a desperado.

I corrected the 'majority' comment ages ago, after allmodcons had pointed it out.

So will you engage with the main point, or continue to try and prove something you know to be true wrong, on a technicality?

Edit - it was YOU i corrected myself to!

The fact you will go to such weird lengths to try and make some technical point is actually quite instructive, going back to the original post.

[Slavers]

I voted Conservative as a protest vote against the SNP.

But for me I don't want big government so I will more than likely vote Conservative in the coming Elections in May. I like Ruth Davidson and what she has to say.

[RyeSloan]

I voted Conservative as a protest vote against the SNP.

But for me I don't want big government so I will more than likely vote Conservative in the coming Elections in May. I like Ruth Davidson and what she has to say.

That's a valid point...if you don't want big government and believe that more government and more tax is not the answer to our ills then there is little or no choice.

No choice really as the Tories have proven inept at shrinking the state or its influence and Gideon in particular loved to meddle and fiddle (and not just with himself [emoji12])

[Slavers]

That's a valid point...if you don't want big government and believe that more government and more tax is not the answer to our ills then there is little or no choice.

No choice really as the Tories have proven inept at shrinking the state or its influence and Gideon in particular loved to meddle and fiddle (and not just with himself [emoji12])

Probably one of the main reasons in voting to leave the EU. Why do we need all this government in our lives. For me the EU is the gravy train to end all gravy trains, the money wasted or spent it depends how you see it - On politicians and their salaries and perks is just sickening. I can never understand people who seem to support a political party like its their football team, or an ideology before whats good for the people.

At one point we had EU, UK & Scottish Parliaments deciding on policy. That to me is too much government, too much tax payers money being spent on government, lavish lavish government.

I just dont agree with taxing the middle classes to pay for the poor, if people have made sacrifices in life to work hard and earn good money then they should be allowed to keep it for them and their family.

I think a new kind of socialism is required where peoples time is taxed, like community service that everyone has to do, rich included, help thy neighbour kind of thing, this idea needs a lot of work i know lol

[ronaldo7]

Ok, read it in the guardian.

So what is your issue with that?

That they have to prove rape occurred, or how they have to prove rape occurred, or that there is any exemption at all?

Common decency is a good place to start.

[G B Young]

There is more chance of me signing for Hibs, scoring the winner in the champions league final then nailing Mila Kunis on a rocket to mars than Davidson becoming the next first minister

...or of Donald Trump being elected US President?

I'm not saying it's going to happen but 2021 is a long way off and few would probably have bet on Davidson's party pushing Labour into third place in last year's Scottish Parliamentary elections. She's done a good job so far as leader and as well as providing a strong pro-UK voice for those who have no wish for indyref2 (in comparison to Labour's muddled approach to the matter) her everyday demeanour and 'non posh' Buckhaven High education has probably attracted a number of voters who would not previously have voted Tory.

Anyway, the odds were there for anyone to see:

https://sports.ladbrokes.com/en-gb/betting/politics/british/next-first-minister/next-scottish-first-minister/223105584/

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/uncategorized/733438/ruth-davidson-is-shock-favourite-to-be-next-scottish-first-minister-bookies-revealed-today/

[G B Young]

As I get older I do see that what your politics are does not make you a nice or good person. I worked in the Scottish Parliament for a bit and Tommy Sheridan treated the civil servants like something on the sole of his shoe whereas Lord James Douglas Hamilton was a really nice guy (although a bit 'Tim Nice-but-Dim' at times).

It's a good point. I also know from civil servants of my acquaintance that Salmond was loathed by most during his time at Holyrood and that for them FM privately stood for Fat Man.

As I've flagged up before somewhere on these forums, Mhairi Black's comments about Jacob Rees-Mogg were refreshing (although probably indicative of how unpleasant political relationships can be in general):

"I could sit and listen to him all day, I disagree with him 99.9 per cent of the time, but I love listening to him, his knowledge is incredible, and he’s so polite."

[G B Young]

Which has already been proved wrong. No matter how often you repeat it, it is still not true.

Here are some facts.

UK electorate in 2015 = 44.7million

Conservative votes in 2015 = 11.3milion

So 25% of the electorate voted Conservative.

37% votes cast for Conservatives resulted in 51% seats

61% of votes cast for other parties resulted in 49% seats

Now that is worth a WOW.

How about 3.9 million votes cast for UKIP resulting in 1 MP (the largest vote to seat ratio in British political history), 1.1 million Green votes resulting in 1 MP and 1.45 million votes for the SNP resulting in 56 seats. A bigger WOW surely?

So the first past the post system isn't perfect, but under proportional representation we'd have more than 80 UKIP MPs and barely 30 SNP MPs. A scary prospect.

Yet you also cite the (arguably fairer) list system deployed in Scotland to downplay the Tory performance in last year's Scottish parliamentary elections so I'm not sure if I understand your point.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Common decency is a good place to start.

So ask for no evidence? You really dont think people would abuse that system?

Or ask for a criminal conviction - but then they are notoriously difficult to get.

[ronaldo7]

So ask for no evidence? You really dont think people would abuse that system?

Or ask for a criminal conviction - but then they are notoriously difficult to get.

Why have the policy in the first place?

[Mon Dieu4]

...or of Donald Trump being elected US President?

I'm not saying it's going to happen but 2021 is a long way off and few would probably have bet on Davidson's party pushing Labour into third place in last year's Scottish Parliamentary elections. She's done a good job so far as leader and as well as providing a strong pro-UK voice for those who have no wish for indyref2 (in comparison to Labour's muddled approach to the matter) her everyday demeanour and 'non posh' Buckhaven High education has probably attracted a number of voters who would not previously have voted Tory.

Anyway, the odds were there for anyone to see:

https://sports.ladbrokes.com/en-gb/betting/politics/british/next-first-minister/next-scottish-first-minister/223105584/

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/uncategorized/733438/ruth-davidson-is-shock-favourite-to-be-next-scottish-first-minister-bookies-revealed-today/

Then when I get back to earth I find that Cathro has said something cohesive

Bookies odds change dependent on bets put on, the next election is 4 years away, someone has stuck £100 on her and she goes straight to being the favourite

I don't mind Ruth Davidson one bit, I think she is a very capable politician, she does however get a tad shouty for my liking and in the last 2 years mentioned independence more than the SNP ever did, being a Tory Leader in Scotland is an easy job contrary to what people claim any gain and you are seen as some political genius but getting 23% of a vote when Labour have went into Nuclear meltdown was actually pretty rank in my opinion and about the best they can possibly hope for

As for Trump, we weren't talking about two popular people in that election, Sturgeon has the highest rating of any leader(well last time I checked) a better comparison would be Davidson V someone like Jim Murphy, do you want a poke in the eye or a boot in the baws

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Why have the policy in the first place?

Ah, so its not the 'rape clause' thats the problem, its simply that its a UK, tory govt policy - therefore bad.

You know why the policy has been implemented, and it would start another circular argument we have had before.

Suffice to say, the democratically elected UK govt habe enacted the measurr to help reduce govt spending. Agree with it or not, but dont pretend your outrage is anything other that inspired by narrow partisanship.

[ronaldo7]

Ah, so its not the 'rape clause' thats the problem, its simply that its a UK, tory govt policy - therefore bad.

You know why the policy has been implemented, and it would start another circular argument we have had before.

Suffice to say, the democratically elected UK govt habe enacted the measurr to help reduce govt spending. Agree with it or not, but dont pretend your outrage is anything other that inspired by narrow partisanship.

Of course it's the rape clause. The clause being implemented by the UK Gov.

This is the country you wish to live in, alternatively, I want to live in a country that wouldn't implement such a draconian law.

The choice to be made is whether you agree with your Government implementing such a law, and it seems you do, or mine which wouldn't.

[marinello59]

Ah, so its not the 'rape clause' thats the problem, its simply that its a UK, tory govt policy - therefore bad.

You know why the policy has been implemented, and it would start another circular argument we have had before.

Suffice to say, the democratically elected UK govt habe enacted the measurr to help reduce govt spending. Agree with it or not, but dont pretend your outrage is anything other that inspired by narrow partisanship.

It's an awful policy no matter who introduced it. Looks like May's Tories are just as nasty as any other Tories.

[Colr]

Of course it's the rape clause. The clause being implemented by the UK Gov.

This is the country you wish to live in, alternatively, I want to live in a country that wouldn't implement such a draconian law.

The choice to be made is whether you agree with your Government implementing such a law, and it seems you do, or mine which wouldn't.

Are you opposed to a limit on child benefit?

[Hiber-nation]

It's a good point. I also know from civil servants of my acquaintance that Salmond was loathed by most during his time at Holyrood and that for them FM privately stood for Fat Man.

As I've flagged up before somewhere on these forums, Mhairi Black's comments about Jacob Rees-Mogg were refreshing (although probably indicative of how unpleasant political relationships can be in general):

"I could sit and listen to him all day, I disagree with him 99.9 per cent of the time, but I love listening to him, his knowledge is incredible, and he’s so polite."



Not in my experience. He had his moments but was generally fine.

The 2 worst by a mile were Michael Forsyth and Wendy Alexander. Both nasty pieces of work.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Of course it's the rape clause. The clause being implemented by the UK Gov.

This is the country you wish to live in, alternatively, I want to live in a country that wouldn't implement such a draconian law.

The choice to be made is whether you agree with your Government implementing such a law, and it seems you do, or mine which wouldn't.

What is draconian, the rule capping benefits at two children, or the 'rape clause'?

I can see why people might not agree with the cap at two children, but i would hardly call it draconian. All benefits habe to be limited at some point.

[Colr]

What is draconian, the rule capping benefits at two children, or the 'rape clause'?

I can see why people might not agree with the cap at two children, but i would hardly call it draconian.

Or means testing it. Used to be a universal benefit.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Or means testing it. Used to be a universal benefit.

Sure, but hardly draconian. Its a mildly controversial at most, change to criteria for a benefit.

I get child benefit, while useful (what money isnt?) we dont depend on it, and id be happy for that money to be used elsewhere or saved.

[Colr]

Sure, but hardly draconian. Its a mildly controversial at most, change to criteria for a benefit.

I get child benefit, while useful (what money isnt?) we dont depend on it, and id be happy for that money to be used elsewhere or saved.

...and that is the thin end of the wedge that the tories have inserted which leads us back to the means tested system of the 1930s.

[Hibernia&Alba]

I would nail my baws to a plank of wood with rusty nails before I'd vote Tory - ever. Almost every piece of progressive legislation in Britain has been passed in spite of them, not because of them. Some I despise more than others; a very small number I only mildly dislike.

The latest set of Tory benefit cuts started this week.

[ronaldo7]

Are you opposed to a limit on child benefit?

I'm in favour of giving our children the opportunities in life that they deserve. All Children. If a government decides to introduce policies that restrict that, then yes.

Bairns not Bombs as they say.

[Colr]

I'm in favour of giving our children the opportunities in life that they deserve. All Children. If a government decides to introduce policies that restrict that, then yes.

Bairns not Bombs as they say.

We're on to the deserving and undeserving poor. Tory win!

[ronaldo7]

We're on to the deserving and undeserving poor. Tory win!

I don't accept the term deserving/undeserving poor. If they're poor, they're poor.

[Colr]

I don't accept the term deserving/undeserving poor. If they're poor, they're poor.

Me neither!

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I'm in favour of giving our children the opportunities in life that they deserve. All Children. If a government decides to introduce policies that restrict that, then yes.

Bairns not Bombs as they say.


If there is a more stupid, meaningless and trite poltical slogan, i have yet to read it.

What does it even mean? Are you saying we should cut all our defence spending and give it to child benefit? Or are you saying we should habe a military and not give them any bombs?

Or are you saying we should fire bairns out of our artillery? Then child benefit would be someone elses problem i suppose.

[ronaldo7]

If there is a more stupid, meaningless and trite poltical slogan, i have yet to read it.

What does it even mean? Are you saying we should cut all our defence spending and give it to child benefit? Or are you saying we should habe a military and not give them any bombs?

Or are you saying we should fire bairns out of our artillery? Then child benefit would be someone elses problem i suppose.

:tee hee:

You're all over the place tonight, China. Best you get some rest and come to it with a clear head in the morning.

:aok:

[Hiber-nation]

If there is a more stupid, meaningless and trite poltical slogan, i have yet to read it.

.

Although I am an SNP supporter who despises the tories, I agree with that!

[Hibrandenburg]

If there is a more stupid, meaningless and trite poltical slogan, i have yet to read it.

What does it even mean? Are you saying we should cut all our defence spending and give it to child benefit? Or are you saying we should habe a military and not give them any bombs?

Or are you saying we should fire bairns out of our artillery? Then child benefit would be someone elses problem i suppose.

This post probably says more about you than the rest of your posts put together.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I'm in favour of giving our children the opportunities in life that they deserve. All Children. If a government decides to introduce policies that restrict that, then yes.

Bairns not Bombs as they say.

I absolutely agree, all children should get the best start possible.

But that has to be realistic too. A govt cant legislate away feckwit parents. There has to be parentl responsibility.

And this is where politics becomes much more difficult than easy slogans, because at some point, going out of your way to help some kids means that others start being disadvantaged, one way or another. Its not as simple as all that.

And of course someone has to pay for it. That will be those middle classes again eh, those kulaks who work hard, do the right things and take advantage of our free, universal education to get good jobs. Yeah, hit them, those bourgeois wannabe tories. Theu deserve it.

[Colr]

I absolutely agree, all children should get the best start possible.

But that has to be realistic too. A govt cant legislate away feckwit parents. There has to be parentl responsibility.

And this is where politics becomes much more difficult than easy slogans, because at some point, going out of your way to help some kids means that others start being disadvantaged, one way or another. Its not as simple as all that.

And of course someone has to pay for it. That will be those middle classes again eh, those kulaks who work hard, do the right things and take advantage of our free, universal education to get good jobs. Yeah, hit them, those bourgeois wannabe tories. Theu deserve it.


Education, education, education!

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

:tee hee:

You're all over the place tonight, China. Best you get some rest and come to it with a clear head in the morning.

:aok:

Am i?

Becaause i think the world is more complicated than an SNP bumper sticker suggests?

Ok then mate. When you grow up, maybe you will see the world isnt black and white.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Although I am an SNP supporter who despises the tories, I agree with that!

Does it.

[Hibrandenburg]

I absolutely agree, all children should get the best start possible.

But that has to be realistic too. A govt cant legislate away feckwit parents. There has to be parentl responsibility.

And this is where politics becomes much more difficult than easy slogans, because at some point, going out of your way to help some kids means that others start being disadvantaged, one way or another. Its not as simple as all that.

And of course someone has to pay for it. That will be those middle classes again eh, those kulaks who work hard, do the right things and take advantage of our free, universal education to get good jobs. Yeah, hit them, those bourgeois wannabe tories. Theu deserve it.

Jeez, you make it sound like it's the middle class are the only ones who put in a shift. You're just trolling now and attacking the man not the ball. You know fine well he meant that he'd prioritise education over expensive status symbol defence systems. That's a fair argument and undeserving of your embarrassingly obnoxious attempt at ridicule.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Jeez, you make it sound like it's the middle class are the only ones who put in a shift. You're just trolling now and attacking the man not the ball. You know fine well he meant that he'd prioritise education over expensive status symbol defence systems. That's a fair argument and undeserving of your embarrassingly obnoxious attempt at ridicule.

I didnt know that at all. We were talking about child benefit, not education. Two very different things. Amd i used ridicule to illustrate how pathetic that slogan is. I wasnt ridiculing ronaldo, i was ridiculing the slogan he quoted.

[Hibrandenburg]

I didnt know that at all. We were talking about child benefit, not education. Two very different things. Amd i used ridicule to illustrate how pathetic that slogan is. I wasnt ridiculing ronaldo, i was ridiculing the slogan he quoted.

Child benefit, education, nurseries, free school meals, child protection, child health care and anything else to ensure our kids have every chance to ensure our future as opposed to atomic weapons that have no other purpose than to insure the UK has a seat at the top table. You know fine well what he meant. Bairns not bombs.

[weecounty hibby]

I get child benefit, while useful (what money isnt?) we dont depend on it, and id be happy for that money to be used elsewhere or saved.
Very kind and public spirited of you. You don't have to receive child benefit, all you have to do is call the relevant government agency and ask for it to be stopped. As you are happy for it to be used elsewhere or saved I'm sure the government will be delighted to help you with that

[G B Young]

Child benefit, education, nurseries, free school meals, child protection, child health care and anything else to ensure our kids have every chance to ensure our future as opposed to atomic weapons that have no other purpose than to insure the UK has a seat at the top table. You know fine well what he meant. Bairns not bombs.

It is a pretty rubbishy slogan though.

[Hibrandenburg]

It is a pretty rubbishy slogan though.

No, it's concise and to the point. Pretty much the point of a slogan.

[weecounty hibby]

It is a pretty rubbishy slogan though.

Not as good as the "£350m per week to the NHS from Europe" slogan unfortunately as obviously that whopper was believed by quite a few folk.

[weecounty hibby]

No, it's concise and to the point. Pretty much the point of a slogan.

Yip. Was very obvious to those who wanted to understand exactly what it meant.

[Hibrandenburg]

Not as good as the "£350m per week to the NHS from Europe" slogan unfortunately as obviously that whopper was believed by quite a few folk.

:greengrin

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Ok, so just so i understand.

Trite, reductive political slogan that grossly and dangerously oversimilifies something nuanced amd complicated by party you dpnt like = bad

Trite, reductive political slogan that grossly and dangerously oversimplifies something nuanced and complicated ny party you do like = good

Good too see objectivity amd reasoned analysis is alive and well.

[Hiber-nation]

Does it.

Eh? What does that mean?

[marinello59]

Ok, so just so i understand.

Trite, reductive political slogan that grossly and dangerously oversimilifies something nuanced amd complicated by party you dpnt like = bad

Trite, reductive political slogan that grossly and dangerously oversimplifies something nuanced and complicated ny party you do like = good

Good too see objectivity amd reasoned analysis is alive and well.

The message on the Brexit bus was a barefaced lie rather than a slogan though.

[ronaldo7]

If there is a more stupid, meaningless and trite poltical slogan, i have yet to read it.

What does it even mean? Are you saying we should cut all our defence spending and give it to child benefit? Or are you saying we should habe a military and not give them any bombs?

Or are you saying we should fire bairns out of our artillery? Then child benefit would be someone elses problem i suppose.


I absolutely agree, all children should get the best start possible.

But that has to be realistic too. A govt cant legislate away feckwit parents. There has to be parentl responsibility.

And this is where politics becomes much more difficult than easy slogans, because at some point, going out of your way to help some kids means that others start being disadvantaged, one way or another. Its not as simple as all that.

And of course someone has to pay for it. That will be those middle classes again eh, those kulaks who work hard, do the right things and take advantage of our free, universal education to get good jobs. Yeah, hit them, those bourgeois wannabe tories. Theu deserve it.


Child benefit, education, nurseries, free school meals, child protection, child health care and anything else to ensure our kids have every chance to ensure our future as opposed to atomic weapons that have no other purpose than to insure the UK has a seat at the top table. You know fine well what he meant. Bairns not bombs.

I thought you were well up in slogans of the politicos too.

If you didn't understand what I was meaning, sorry about that. Hibrandenburg has covered it well enough.

I get your position on this. You want children to get the best possible start, but only if the parents are not feckwits, and only if they do what you did, and get educated to make something of themselves. Let's call them the Kulaks and be done with it eh.

Watch yourself now, you might be stepping on a child's head whilst climbing that middle class ladder. Oh, and watch yourself on the way down. It's a hard landing. I just hope that safety net is there to catch you when you fall.:aok:

Here's yer Tories.

18334

[Mr Grieves]

It's an awful policy no matter who introduced it. Looks like May's Tories are just as nasty as any other Tories.

And Ruth Davidson's Scottish Tories aren't any better.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/scottish-tories-make-pathetic-defence-10175151

“That’s exactly what this measure does in the most sensitive way possible.”

[Moulin Yarns]

Am i?

Becaause i think the world is more complicated than an SNP bumper sticker suggests?

Ok then mate. When you grow up, maybe you will see the world isnt black and white.

What SNP bumper sticker?

http://scraptrident.org/bairns-not-bombs/

CND, not SNP.

Trident not all defence sending.:rolleyes:

[G B Young]

No, it's concise and to the point. Pretty much the point of a slogan.

I just didn't really know what it meant until I read up on it. If somebody had previously asked me what it meant I'd have guessed it was a vaguely humorous Scottish adaptation of the old hippy mantra 'make love not war'. Now that I know it's an anti-Trident slogan I get it, although I'd always thought bombs were dropped from planes while Trident submarines fired missiles. Nit picking I know and I guess 'make love not missiles' doesn't really work...

For those who remember The Clash, perhaps their reversal of another hippy mantra 'peace and love' to 'Hate and War' better sums up the world we live in today.

[CropleyWasGod]

So ask for no evidence? You really dont think people would abuse that system?

Or ask for a criminal conviction - but then they are notoriously difficult to get.


Why have the policy in the first place?

This particular topic is worth a thread on its own.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I thought you were well up in slogans of the politicos too.

If you didn't understand what I was meaning, sorry about that. Hibrandenburg has covered it well enough.

I get your position on this. You want children to get the best possible start, but only if the parents are not feckwits, and only if they do what you did, and get educated to make something of themselves. Let's call them the Kulaks and be done with it eh.

Watch yourself now, you might be stepping on a child's head whilst climbing that middle class ladder. Oh, and watch yourself on the way down. It's a hard landing. I just hope that safety net is their to catch you when you fall.:aok:

Here's yer Tories.

18334

Id always thought it was a generic, anti-war, 'for good things and against bad things' type of slogan. I didnt realise it was specifically anti-trident. Thats a whole other discussion!

I said i dont believe the government can legislate away feckwit parents. There is a limit to what policy interventions can do, and that is where people/society/family have to step in amd take responsibility.

No, nobdoy has to do what i did, i dont think i said that. But what is the point in having universal benefits, like free education, that we all, collectively pay for as a society, if we then decry those that take advantage of them for 'getting educated amd making something of themselves'.

Anyway, we are touching on trident, general political theory, so i think we are digressing a tad.

Lets agree to disagree on this one mate?

[ronaldo7]

[QUOTE=SouthsideHarp_Bhoy;5002092]Id always thought it was a generic, anti-war, 'for good things and against bad things' type of slogan. I didnt realise it was specifically anti-trident. Thats a whole other discussion!

I said i dont believe the government can legislate away feckwit parents. There is a limit to what policy interventions can do, and that is where people/society/family have to step in amd take responsibility.

No, nobdoy has to do what i did, i dont think i said that. But what is the point in having universal benefits, like free education, that we all, collectively pay for as a society, if we then decry those that take advantage of them for 'getting educated amd making something of themselves'.

Anyway, we are touching on trident, general political theory, so i think we are digressing a tad.

Lets agree to disagree on this one mate?[QUOTE]

Every time.

Especially when you're supporting a Government who's policies will traumatise women.

The Tories, against Baby Boxes, but in favour of Rape Clauses.

[RyeSloan]

[QUOTE=SouthsideHarp_Bhoy;5002092]Id always thought it was a generic, anti-war, 'for good things and against bad things' type of slogan. I didnt realise it was specifically anti-trident. Thats a whole other discussion!

I said i dont believe the government can legislate away feckwit parents. There is a limit to what policy interventions can do, and that is where people/society/family have to step in amd take responsibility.

No, nobdoy has to do what i did, i dont think i said that. But what is the point in having universal benefits, like free education, that we all, collectively pay for as a society, if we then decry those that take advantage of them for 'getting educated amd making something of themselves'.

Anyway, we are touching on trident, general political theory, so i think we are digressing a tad.

Lets agree to disagree on this one mate?[QUOTE]

Every time.

Especially when you're supporting a Government who's policies will traumatise women.

The Tories, against Baby Boxes, but in favour of Rape Clauses.

Baby boxes...now there is a classic politicians pet project. Shame they don't really have any scientific evidence to support them.

Anyhoo the rape clause thing just shows what a stupid rule the 2 kids thing is...anything that needs a clause where you need to evidence you were raped to get extra benefit is clearly a daft idea.

[Hibernia&Alba]

The answer to Toryism is a socialist analysis of injustice; of a methodology which rejects money as the fundamental building block of society, in favour of a values based relationship. We must not condemn ourselves to the money system of value, for it's a man made system which rewards narrow self-interest. I firmly believe we can do better.

[ronaldo7]

The Tory RAPE clause.

70+ psychologists write to warn that Tax Credits ‘Rape clause’ will cause "significant psychological harm" It's what Tories do.

https://t.co/xPARXglK8n

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

The Tory RAPE clause.

70+ psychologists write to warn that Tax Credits ‘Rape clause’ will cause "significant psychological harm" It's what Tories do.

https://t.co/xPARXglK8n

Yeah i think causing psychological harm is in their manifesto.

[ronaldo7]

Yeah i think causing psychological harm is in their manifesto.

It's a reflection of their policies.

[makaveli1875]

how many SNP ministers does it take to change a lightbulb ?

none they'd rather sit in darkness and blame the tories !

[ronaldo7]

Yeah i think causing psychological harm is in their manifesto.


how many SNP ministers does it take to change a lightbulb ?

none they'd rather sit in darkness and blame the tories !

Care to comment on the link I've posted?

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Care to comment on the link I've posted?

They should just not have the clause?

I agree it sounds a bit daft, but i can just imagine how it woyld have come about. I would guess that as the govt consulted on this policy (2 children on child benefit), they would have been lobbied by some group or other, and asked 'well what if someone has a fhird child through rape'.

Terrified of the being hung up over that, they would have rushed-in this clause.

Ironically, the whole thing has blown up anyway.

Perhaps they should scrap the clause amd just say only children born of a rape proven in court are exempt?

Or perhaps scrap the clause completely, and monitor how much it aplears to be abused?

[-Jonesy-]

Let's be clear here about what the family cap and rape clause really are. If you are wealthy, have all the babies you want, if you are on minimum wage or dependent on state benefits be sure to not have more than two children as the state won't help you pay for their upbringing. This is tacit social engineering from a party that has always put the needs of the rich first.

[speedy_gonzales]

Let's be clear here about what the family cap and rape clause really are. If you are wealthy, have all the babies you want, if you are on minimum wage or dependent on state benefits be sure to not have more than two children as the state won't help you pay for their upbringing. This is tacit social engineering from a party that has always put the needs of the rich first.

Couple that with the irony that rich folk tend to have less children than poor folk.
Lots of studies highlighting the issue of r-selection & K-selection. Poor(either financial or education) apparently have multiple children but invest little in them where as rich(financial or education) have fewer offspring but tend to nurture & invest a lot more.
I don't agree with all the reasons behind the papers but the evidence seems pretty clear.
Personally, as an individual or family, I think that if you want something that incurs a cost(time/money/resource) then that should be considered thoroughly in advance.
With respect to children, as shocking as it may seem, if you feel you can't provide fully for them if you don't receive approx the £20 per week (child benefit) then I'd suggest life is going to be tough however many kids you have.

I opted for the cowards way out, I couldn't afford more than one kid at the time my wife and I wanted to start a family so we just had the one. 13 years later we're in a better position and could now have more but feel the age gap and going back to square 1 would be too much,,,,we're both now regretting being financially sensible and overly hesitant all those years back.

[Colr]

Let's be clear here about what the family cap and rape clause really are. If you are wealthy, have all the babies you want, if you are on minimum wage or dependent on state benefits be sure to not have more than two children as the state won't help you pay for their upbringing. This is tacit social engineering from a party that has always put the needs of the rich first.
Its about time they reintroduced the universality of child benefit. This was its setting the middle classes and working classes against each other whilst the wealthy take off financially.

[JeMeSouviens]

Another Orange card playing Tory (and possible racist) standing in the council elections:

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15224625.Tory_candidate_denies_BNP_link_despite_de tails_in_database/


In March 2014, Mr Graham shared a Facebook post by the “Proud to be a Protestant banter” group which showed a picture of the Parachute Regiment during Bloody Sunday, when soldiers shot 26 people, 13 fatally, on a civil rights march in Derry in 1972.

Mr Graham’s post contained the phrase “How many likes for the Paras?”

[JeMeSouviens]

I think broadly speaking the right is dominated by the desire to retain (conserve) wealth, privilege and power among those who already enjoy them. In order to build a large enough electoral coalition in a democracy they have to offer enough of a carrot for the aspirational to think they might be able to cross the bridge and in order to actually get elected it has to be watered down to the extent they are pulling the centre rightwards.

What we saw in the 80s and are probably beginning to see again is what happens when you take away the threat of electoral punishment due to a shambolic opposition. They do what the **** they want and mostly it's pretty scary.

[RyeSloan]

Let's be clear here about what the family cap and rape clause really are. If you are wealthy, have all the babies you want, if you are on minimum wage or dependent on state benefits be sure to not have more than two children as the state won't help you pay for their upbringing. This is tacit social engineering from a party that has always put the needs of the rich first.

I get your point but it's not entirely accurate. Child benefit is but a tiny portion of what the state will provide for children. You then need to add in personal responsibility to the mix.

That said the changes in child benefit are clearly far too complex and fiddly to be really worth the effort...pure tinkering that will probably gain the square root of **** all.

[ronaldo7]

I think broadly speaking the right is dominated by the desire to retain (conserve) wealth, privilege and power among those who already enjoy them. In order to build a large enough electoral coalition in a democracy they have to offer enough of a carrot for the aspirational to think they might be able to cross the bridge and in order to actually get elected it has to be watered down to the extent they are pulling the centre rightwards.

What we saw in the 80s and are probably beginning to see again is what happens when you take away the threat of electoral punishment due to a shambolic opposition. They do what the **** they want and mostly it's pretty scary.

In their response to the rape clause yesterday, it looks like they want the Scottish Parliament to raise taxes in Scotland to enable them to mitigate a Tory policy from London.

Oh well. Higher rate tax payers, prepare to pay.

[-Jonesy-]

In their response to the rape clause yesterday, it looks like they want the Scottish Parliament to raise taxes in Scotland to enable them to mitigate a Tory policy from London.

Oh well. Higher rate tax payers, prepare to pay.

Ruth Davidson walks into your house, takes a big steaming jobby on your coffee table, pulls up her breaks and says "What? You've got a bottle of pledge under the kitchen sink!"

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

In their response to the rape clause yesterday, it looks like they want the Scottish Parliament to raise taxes in Scotland to enable them to mitigate a Tory policy from London.

Oh well. Higher rate tax payers, prepare to pay.

They already do pay more in scotland.

[ronaldo7]

They already do pay more in scotland.

Even more, after all that's what Ruth has recommended.

I thought you were handing back your child benefit though😨

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Even more, after all that's what Ruth has recommended.

I thought you were handing back your child benefit though😨

So wait... are you now having a go at the tories for being too left wing?

Thats a bit odd, i thought you were all fpr higher taxes?

Or are you just annoyed it highlights rhe SNPs cowardice to put their money where their mouths are, raise taxes and pay the electoral price?

On child benefit, when did i say i would give it back? I dont recall that, and im not at the threshold whete you can opt out or get means tested anyway. I think i said i dont rely on it, and i wouldnt mind if it were used elsewhere for those who needed it more. But i certainly wouldnt hand any money back, as it is, it pays for my childs swimming classes.

[ronaldo7]

So wait... are you now having a go at the tories for being too left wing?

Thats a bit odd, i thought you were all fpr higher taxes?

Or are you just annoyed it highlights rhe SNPs cowardice to put their money where their mouths are, raise taxes and pay the electoral price?

On child benefit, when did i say i would give it back? I dont recall that, and im not at the threshold whete you can opt out or get means tested anyway. I think i said i dont rely on it, and i wouldnt mind if it were used elsewhere for those who needed it more. But i certainly wouldnt hand any money back, as it is, it pays for my childs swimming classes.

:tee hee: Tories, left wing.

Just pointing out that Ruth has asked the Scottish Gov to mitigate the Rape clause bandits from Westminster, whilst she's not asked them to do so.

Maybe WM will give us some of the cash they save from the policy they've just enacted, we can then hand it back to those in need.

I was sure you said you didn't need child benefits, so why not send them back? I'm sure someone else who's more in need would benefit from your benevolence.:greengrin

[Moulin Yarns]

:tee hee: Tories, left wing.

Just pointing out that Ruth has asked the Scottish Gov to mitigate the Rape clause bandits from Westminster, whilst she's not asked them to do so.

Maybe WM will give us some of the cash they save from the policy they've just enacted, we can then hand it back to those in need.

I was sure you said you didn't need child benefits, so why not send them back? I'm sure someone else who's more in need would benefit from your benevolence.:greengrin

Tories don't do benevolence. Dontchaknow

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

:tee hee: Tories, left wing.

Just pointing out that Ruth has asked the Scottish Gov to mitigate the Rape clause bandits from Westminster, whilst she's not asked them to do so.

Maybe WM will give us some of the cash they save from the policy they've just enacted, we can then hand it back to those in need.

I was sure you said you didn't need child benefits, so why not send them back? I'm sure someone else who's more in need would benefit from your benevolence.:greengrin

Im not that benevolent! I dont need it, in the sense that i dont depend on it. But im not gonna turn down money.

Ok, so what is your concern about that? Ismt that how devolution is supposed to work?

I dont understand your issue with this?

[ronaldo7]

Im not that benevolent! I dont need it, in the sense that i dont depend on it. But im not gonna turn down money.

Ok, so what is your concern about that? Ismt that how devolution is supposed to work?

I dont understand your issue with this?

We've already mitigated over £400Million worth of policies which have been foisted onto us. Lucky we have a Government who look after the people rather than shaft them eh. :wink:

Why would Ruth want us to mitigate a policy her own party foisted on us? Why is she not telling those at WM to mitigate it?

Take, take, take, it's all you Tories do.:greengrin

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

We've already mitigated over £400Million worth of policies which have been foisted onto us. Lucky we have a Government who look after the people rather than shaft them eh. :wink:

Why would Ruth want us to mitigate a policy her own party foisted on us? Why is she not telling those at WM to mitigate it?

Take, take, take, it's all you Tories do.:greengrin

You havent answered the question though. The elected govt of the UK enacted a policy, the scottish goct doesnt agree, and has both the means and the power to do something about that - so why wont they?

Let me suggest it may be because the SNP need to have 'tory (i.e. english) policies to fuel the grievance they rely on, and also, that they dont want to expose the lie that actually, despite all of the 'scots are more socialist' pish, we dont like tax rises anymore than those English tories do.

Either of those close to the mark?

[weecounty hibby]

Im not that benevolent! I dont need it, in the sense that i dont depend on it. But im not gonna turn down money.

Ok, so what is your concern about that? Ismt that how devolution is supposed to work?

I dont understand your issue with this?
Without going back through your posts I'm pretty sure you said you didn't depend on it and would be happy to see it spent elsewhere. If you did say that can I take it what you actually meant was that you wanted to keep yours but were happy to see others who may actually depend on it lose theirs so it could be spent elsewhere.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Without going back through your posts I'm pretty sure you said you didn't depend on it and would be happy to see it spent elsewhere. If you did say that can I take it what you actually meant was that you wanted to keep yours but were happy to see others who may actually depend on it lose theirs so it could be spent elsewhere.

How do you get that? No, you would be absolutely wrong to say that.

I would be happy if the benefit was not universal, and me and others who dont need it didnt get it.

But if the govt says i should have it, then i will take it.

[ronaldo7]

You havent answered the question though. The elected govt of the UK enacted a policy, the scottish goct doesnt agree, and has both the means and the power to do something about that - so why wont they?

Let me suggest it may be because the SNP need to have 'tory (i.e. english) policies to fuel the grievance they rely on, and also, that they dont want to expose the lie that actually, despite all of the 'scots are more socialist' pish, we dont like tax rises anymore than those English tories do.

Either of those close to the mark?

Tax Credits are a reserved issue are they not. So you are proposing that the SG sets up new payments to pay those disadvantaged by the UK gov. Seems a bit of a waste of money to me, with all those set up costs.

You seem to think money grows on trees, should we take it out of the Education budget, or maybe the NHS budget, Local government? You choose, where will it come from?

Now if only the Tories, and Labour parties had decided not to block the Welfare powers at SMITH, which we need to look after those in poverty.

I'd rather we had all the levers of power to enable us to do the job correctly, instead of mitigating bad policies from WM.

18370 Our lever is on the right.:greengrin

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Tax Credits are a reserved issue are they not. So you are proposing that the SG sets up new payments to pay those disadvantaged by the UK gov. Seems a bit of a waste of money to me, with all those set up costs.

You seem to think money grows on trees, should we take it out of the Education budget, or maybe the NHS budget, Local government? You choose, where will it come from?

Now if only the Tories, and Labour parties had decided not to block the Welfare powers at SMITH, which we need to look after those in poverty.

I'd rather we had all the levers of power to enable us to do the job correctly, instead of mitigating bad policies from WM.

18370 Our lever is on the right.:greengrin

Ha ha, i think money grows on trees?? Have we swapped roles?!

They could raise taxes i think? I dont know about tax credits, i thought we were talking about child benefit? That may be reserved to, i dont know


The rest of your post is classic SNP under sturgeon - moaning about things in the past, and all of the things that you cannot do, while ignoring all the things that could be done.

By the way just for clarity, im not advocating this. Im just pointing out that the SG could alter things for scotland if thdy chose to. You seem to be advocating, bizarrely, that they dont.

I can't imagine why...

[ronaldo7]

Ha ha, i think money grows on trees?? Have we swapped roles?!

They could raise taxes i think? I dont know about tax credits, i thought we were talking about child benefit? That may be reserved to, i dont know


The rest of your post is classic SNP under sturgeon - moaning about things in the past, and all of the things that you cannot do, while ignoring all the things that could be done.

And so...We're back to my original point. Your taxes are having to go up to pay for Ruth's plan. Don't get all hot under the collar when they do though.:greengrin

Which taxes should we raise then, or are you cutting the budgets to the NHS, Education, Local Gov, over to you.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

And so...We're back to my original point. Your taxes are having to go up to pay for Ruth's plan. Don't get all hot under the collar when they do though.:greengrin

It seems to be you and your dear leader who is baulking at tax rises.

Why is that?

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

And so...We're back to my original point. Your taxes are having to go up to pay for Ruth's plan. Don't get all hot under the collar when they do though.:greengrin

Which taxes should we raise then, or are you cutting the budgets to the NHS, Education, Local Gov, over to you.

Well, the council tax, which youd party forced councils to freeze for years, despite their protestations.

Or perhaps income tax? We argued very hard for those powers.

Why are the nats, a left of centre party, so reluctant to use their powers?

Is it because they like amd need the grievance? In which case they are sacrificing vulnerable people for their own political ends.

Or is it because it exposes the fact that scots dont like payimg taxes as much as anyone else?

Or is it another reason?

[ronaldo7]

It seems to be you and your dear leader who is baulking at tax rises.

Why is that?

You argued earlier on that we were paying more than enough, which is it today, more, or less?

What's it to be mate, a hit on Education, Nhs, local gov?

Dear Leader, nice touch, you're mask has well and truly slipped today.:greengrin

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

You argued earlier on that we were paying more than enough, which is it today, more, or less?

What's it to be mate, a hit on Education, Nhs, local gov?

Dear Leader, nice touch, you're mask has well and truly slipped today.:greengrin

Im not arguing for anything here.

It is you who is arguimg against something (uk benefit reform) but are refusing to say why your party wont take the necessary steps to ameliorate them?

Have you not got your lines throug from crichton's close yet?

[ronaldo7]

Well, the council tax, which youd party forced councils to freeze for years, despite their protestations.

Or perhaps income tax? We argued very hard for those powers.

Why are the nats, a left of centre party, so reluctant to use their powers?

Is it because they like amd need the grievance? In which case they are sacrificing vulnerable people for their own political ends.

Or is it because it exposes the fact that scots dont like payimg taxes as much as anyone else?

Or is it another reason?

Good, let's tax those high earners more, and we can link it to tax credits for the needy, whilst thanking Ruth all the time. Win, win.:aok:

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Good, let's tax those high earners more, and we can link it to tax credits for the needy, whilst thanking Ruth all the time. Win, win.:aok:

Ok, so why is your party so keen to avoid that?

Are you saying that you think an SNP policy is wrong?

Why do you think they are so reluctant to do it?

[makaveli1875]

You argued earlier on that we were paying more than enough, which is it today, more, or less?

What's it to be mate, a hit on Education, Nhs, local gov?

Dear Leader, nice touch, you're mask has well and truly slipped today.:greengrin

if the dear leader gets her way and we become the peoples republic you will have to worship her statue every day or face the possibility of joining me and southside in the gulags :greengrin

[johnbc70]

You seem to think money grows on trees, should we take it out of the Education budget, or maybe the NHS budget, Local government? You choose, where will it come from?


Got to laugh at your comment the amount of times your solution for the issue of the day is spending money or disagreeing with any cut backs that are being made, blaming everyone but you know who.

I have first hand experience of how badly our education system is letting down children with additional needs, every time I raise concerns it's the same answer I get, lack of budget. Remind who is responsible for education in this country again?

[ronaldo7]

Ok, so why is your party so keen to avoid that?

Are you saying that you think an SNP policy is wrong?

Why do you think they are so reluctant to do it?

Evidence was against it. I on the other hand would tax the rich to the hilt.:greengrin

[ronaldo7]

Got to laugh at your comment the amount of times your solution for the issue of the day is spending money or disagreeing with any cut backs that are being made, blaming everyone but you know who.

I have first hand experience of how badly our education system is letting down children with additional needs, every time I raise concerns it's the same answer I get, lack of budget. Remind who is responsible for education in this country again?

I don't need to remind you on Education,you know already. Our budget on the other hand...

Still not received the answers on how to pay though, when we're already paying for so many other things.

[johnbc70]

Ev

Evidence was against it. I on the other hand would tax the rich to the hilt.:greengrin

Can you define rich? How much do you need to earn to be rich in your eyes?

[johnbc70]

I don't need to remind you on Education,you know already. Our budget on the other hand...

So accepting no blame or responsibility what so ever? Yes or No will do.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Ev

Evidence was against it. I on the other hand would tax the rich to the hilt.:greengrin

What evidence was that?

Yeah i know, which is why i found your defence of your party so bizarre, amd why i used dear leader - because the strict diacipline imposed by the SNP on their officials is easy to satire as north korean.

I am also convinced that the lengths you go to to avoid any criticism of the party, means that you work for them.

[johnbc70]

What evidence was that?

Yeah i know, which is why i found your defence of your party so bizarre, amd why i used dear leader - because the strict diacipline imposed by the SNP on their officials is easy to satire as north korean.

I am also convinced that the lengths you go to to avoid any criticism of the party, means that you work for them.

Maybe you have hit the nail on the head? R7 do you work for the SNP? Your defence of them is admirable but bordering on the bizarre in some cases.

[ronaldo7]

So accepting no blame or responsibility what so ever? Yes or No will do.

The budget is pre set. I'd thought you'd have known that, and the constant cuts from Westminster won't help. You seem happy with that.

[ronaldo7]

What evidence was that?

Yeah i know, which is why i found your defence of your party so bizarre, amd why i used dear leader - because the strict diacipline imposed by the SNP on their officials is easy to satire as north korean.

I am also convinced that the lengths you go to to avoid any criticism of the party, means that you work for them.

Google is your friend. :aok:

:rotflmao::rotflmao::rotflmao:

[northstandhibby]

What evidence was that?

Yeah i know, which is why i found your defence of your party so bizarre, amd why i used dear leader - because the strict diacipline imposed by the SNP on their officials is easy to satire as north korean.

I am also convinced that the lengths you go to to avoid any criticism of the party, means that you work for them.

This is the danger of rampant nationalism and a desire to do things differently just for the sake of it, there is a real threat the country could lapse into authoritarianism, communism and dictatorship if nationalism wins out.

glory glory

[ronaldo7]

So accepting no blame or responsibility what so ever? Yes or No will do.

The Scottish Government are doing a grand job. So says the opinion polls. Responsibility taken in every aspect. How are the Tories doing on the rape clause?

[ronaldo7]

Maybe you have hit the nail on the head? R7 do you work for the SNP? Your defence of them is admirable but bordering on the bizarre in some cases.

Your defence of the Tories and the rape clause is anything but admirable.

[johnbc70]

The budget is pre set. I'd thought you'd have known that, and the constant cuts from Westminster won't help. You seem happy with that.

Can you answer the question though? You have a great habit of avoiding the question, maybe a career in politics beckons, but please answer the question. Yes or No?

[johnbc70]

Your defence of the Tories and the rape clause is anything but admirable.

Show me once where I have defended it?

[ronaldo7]

Can you answer the question though? You have a great habit of avoiding the question, maybe a career in politics beckons, but please answer the question. Yes or No?

Post 153

Responsibility taken.

[ronaldo7]

Show me once where I have defended it?

So you don't agree with it then.

Sorry, I thought you'd defended it. Apologies.

[johnbc70]

So you don't agree with it then.

Sorry, I thought you'd defended it.

Actually I don't agree with it, so you will have never seen me defend it.

[johnbc70]

Post 153

Responsibility taken.

On a phone so can't see that post, so was it a Yes or no?

[ronaldo7]

Actually I don't agree with it, so you will have never seen me defend it.

Good. Hopefully you can persuade some of your Tory chums to ditch it.:greengrin

[ronaldo7]

On a phone so can't see that post, so was it a Yes or no?

It was Responsibility taken, even with our budgets being cut to the tune of £2.9Billion up to 2020. It's a wonder how they do it.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Google is your friend. :aok:

:rotflmao::rotflmao::rotflmao:

But you disagree, so you think your party is wrong?

[ronaldo7]

But you disagree, so you think your party is wrong?

I've already said I'd tax the rich more. I'm more in tune with the Green policy on taxing the lords and ladies.

[northstandhibby]

I've already said I'd tax the rich more. I'm more in tune with the Green policy on taxing the lords and ladies.

Authorities taking the wealth out the public domain massively impacts on job creation and businesses. The lords and ladies will soon turn into the ordinary hard pressed public's money being drained when the lords and ladies money has been spent. If excessively high taxation is the independeteers answer they will take Scotland to the junk level status already predicted by the financial experts.

glory glory

[johnbc70]

I've already said I'd tax the rich more. I'm more in tune with the Green policy on taxing the lords and ladies.

Will ask again, define 'rich' for you or your party?

[ronaldo7]

Authorities taking the wealth out the public domain massively impacts on job creation and businesses. The lords and ladies will soon turn into the ordinary hard pressed public's money being drained when the lords and ladies money has been spent. If excessively high taxation is the independeteers answer they will take Scotland to the junk level status already predicted by the financial experts.

glory glory

That's why the SG are not taxing them too much(in their opinion)

[ronaldo7]

Will ask again, define 'rich' for you or your party?

Monetary value of Dan Snow is rich. I'd tax people on lower incomes though.

[johnbc70]

Monetary value of Dan Snow is rich. I'd tax people on lower incomes though.

Not really sure that's an answer for a definition of rich but hey ho, your an expert in not actually answering the question, what constituency are you standing in?

[northstandhibby]

That's why the SG are not taxing them too much(in their opinion)

They would say that yet I've heard many stories recently from local businesses stating they're close to going out of business due to the latest round of tax hikes.

glory glory

[ronaldo7]

They would say that yet I've heard many stories recently from local businesses stating they're close to going out of business due to the latest round of tax hikes.

glory glory

Really?

Which ones?

[ronaldo7]

Not really sure that's an answer for a definition of rich but hey ho, your an expert in not actually answering the question, what constituency are you standing in?

You maybe see £'s shillings and pence as a definition. That totally up to you. :aok:

As for your last bit...Don't be silly.

[northstandhibby]

Really?

Which ones?

Local Florists, Barbers, Newsagents etc all of whom were telling me they are struggling to survive due to recent tax hikes.

glory glory

[johnbc70]

You maybe see £'s shillings and pence as a definition. That totally up to you. :aok:

As for your last bit...Don't be silly.

It was you that said you would tax the rich more, you have to have a £ figure in mind otherwise how would it work? How else does a tax work if not based on £ and P limits?

[ronaldo7]

It was you that said you would tax the rich more, you have to have a £ figure in mind otherwise how would it work? How else does a tax work if not based on £ and P limits?

Their's more to tax than just income.

[johnbc70]

Their's more to tax than just income.

Yes capital gains tax is based on £ and P, so is Corporation tax etc so what's your tax plans not involving £ and P limits

[ronaldo7]

Yes capital gains tax is based on £ and P, so is Corporation tax etc so what's your tax plans not involving £ and P limits

You'd have to start a thread all on it's own for that one.

Safe to say, low fruits are available in Gibraltar, and Panama.

[Moulin Yarns]

Local Florists, Barbers, Newsagents etc all of whom were telling me they are struggling to survive due to recent tax hikes.

glory glory

Is that not to do with the local rates re evaluation

[ronaldo7]

Local Florists, Barbers, Newsagents etc all of whom were telling me they are struggling to survive due to recent tax hikes.

glory glory

Which tax hikes?

[northstandhibby]

Is that not to do with the local rates re evaluation

It was indeed.

glory glory

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

You'd have to start a thread all on it's own for that one.

Safe to say, low fruits are available in Gibraltar, and Panama.

Your solution to the tories benefit tax, amd the SG amelioratimg its effects is to tax panama amd gibraltar?!

Seriously, i dont think that is what you are suggesting, and i agree that the dodgy tax status of our overseas protectorarea ahould be looked at.

However none of this answers the questiob that you seem very reluctant to answer, amd that is why are your party so reluctant to reverse, or at least lessen, the uk govt cuts by using the hard won tax powers they have?

[ronaldo7]

Your solution to the tories benefit tax, amd the SG amelioratimg its effects is to tax panama amd gibraltar?!

Seriously, i dont think that is what you are suggesting, and i agree that the dodgy tax status of our overseas protectorarea ahould be looked at.

However none of this answers the questiob that you seem very reluctant to answer, amd that is why are your party so reluctant to reverse, or at least lessen, the uk govt cuts by using the hard won tax powers they have?

Correct.

I'm suggesting that instead of introducing a policy that has a Rape clause, now on statute, the UK government should be looking elsewhere for their cash. Gibraltar and Panama would be a good place to start, and tax credits are a reserved matter, penalising a woman who's been raped to have to choose between going through all that trauma again, and seeking benefits for her child is, in my view, wrong, and disgusting.

What's your view? and will you fight against it, or just roll over and wait for the fall out?

On the Scottish Gov, the policy came into effect on April 6th, we've been fighting this all the way through WM to no avail it seems. The Tories want to plough ahead, regardless. Take a look at how my vote is used. I elect people who fight for those in need, not the takers of this world.

https://www.snp.org/the_rape_clause_explained_in_200_words

This is the other stuff we're mitigating from your UK gov. Just think, some of this money could have gone into Health and Education. You ask us to continue to mitigate bad policies from WM, is this the Union dividend you keep espousing?

The SNP Scottish Government has taken steps to mitigate the worst aspects of Westminster’s welfare reform. Since 2013, the Scottish Government has spent nearly £400 million in an effort to alleviate Tory cuts to household incomes
We are fully mitigating the Bedroom Tax in Scotland, and we have pledged to abolish the tax completely when we have the powers to do so.
We are providing help through the Scottish Welfare Fund, which consists of Crisis Grants for when someone experiences a disaster or emergency, and Community Care Grants to enable independent living.
We have restored Westminster’s cut to Council Tax support through the creation of Council Tax Reductions - protecting the incomes of over half a million people on low incomes.
We have extended the child allowance in the Council Tax Reduction scheme by 25 per cent, benefiting 77,000 households by an average of £173 per year or around £15 per month. This boost for low-income families will help nearly 140,000 children across Scotland.
We are also safeguarding the support for over 2,800 disabled people across Scotland with the new Scottish Independent Living Fund, which was set up in July 2015.
And we have extended the Scottish Welfare Fund on an interim basis to mitigate the UK government's decision to remove Housing Benefit for 18-21 year olds.

The views on the third sector in this are well known, and yet they are thrust to the side and the policy is steamrollered through parliament.

Finally, I find it rather ironic, that, on a thread about the Tories, here we are once again, speaking about the SNP, and what they're going to do. Most of the points, above, show that we are mitigating. It's just a pity we have to.

Maybe you should turn your ire against those who started this whole process, instead of those of us who wish to scrap it.

[Hibrandenburg]

Correct.

I'm suggesting that instead of introducing a policy that has a Rape clause, now on statute, the UK government should be looking elsewhere for their cash. Gibraltar and Panama would be a good place to start, and tax credits are a reserved matter, penalising a woman who's been raped to have to choose between going through all that trauma again, and seeking benefits for her child is, in my view, wrong, and disgusting.

What's your view? and will you fight against it, or just roll over and wait for the fall out?

On the Scottish Gov, the policy came into effect on April 6th, we've been fighting this all the way through WM to no avail it seems. The Tories want to plough ahead, regardless. Take a look at how my vote is used. I elect people who fight for those in need, not the takers of this world.

https://www.snp.org/the_rape_clause_explained_in_200_words

This is the other stuff we're mitigating from your UK gov. Just think, some of this money could have gone into Health and Education. You ask us to continue to mitigate bad policies from WM, is this the Union dividend you keep espousing?

The SNP Scottish Government has taken steps to mitigate the worst aspects of Westminster’s welfare reform. Since 2013, the Scottish Government has spent nearly £400 million in an effort to alleviate Tory cuts to household incomes
We are fully mitigating the Bedroom Tax in Scotland, and we have pledged to abolish the tax completely when we have the powers to do so.
We are providing help through the Scottish Welfare Fund, which consists of Crisis Grants for when someone experiences a disaster or emergency, and Community Care Grants to enable independent living.
We have restored Westminster’s cut to Council Tax support through the creation of Council Tax Reductions - protecting the incomes of over half a million people on low incomes.
We have extended the child allowance in the Council Tax Reduction scheme by 25 per cent, benefiting 77,000 households by an average of £173 per year or around £15 per month. This boost for low-income families will help nearly 140,000 children across Scotland.
We are also safeguarding the support for over 2,800 disabled people across Scotland with the new Scottish Independent Living Fund, which was set up in July 2015.
And we have extended the Scottish Welfare Fund on an interim basis to mitigate the UK government's decision to remove Housing Benefit for 18-21 year olds.

The views on the third sector in this are well known, and yet they are thrust to the side and the policy is steamrollered through parliament.

Finally, I find it rather ironic, that, on a thread about the Tories, here we are once again, speaking about the SNP, and what they're going to do. Most of the points, above, show that we are mitigating. It's just a pity we have to.

Maybe you should turn your ire against those who started this whole process, instead of those of us who wish to scrap it.

:applause:

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Correct.

I'm suggesting that instead of introducing a policy that has a Rape clause, now on statute, the UK government should be looking elsewhere for their cash. Gibraltar and Panama would be a good place to start, and tax credits are a reserved matter, penalising a woman who's been raped to have to choose between going through all that trauma again, and seeking benefits for her child is, in my view, wrong, and disgusting.

What's your view? and will you fight against it, or just roll over and wait for the fall out?

On the Scottish Gov, the policy came into effect on April 6th, we've been fighting this all the way through WM to no avail it seems. The Tories want to plough ahead, regardless. Take a look at how my vote is used. I elect people who fight for those in need, not the takers of this world.

https://www.snp.org/the_rape_clause_explained_in_200_words

This is the other stuff we're mitigating from your UK gov. Just think, some of this money could have gone into Health and Education. You ask us to continue to mitigate bad policies from WM, is this the Union dividend you keep espousing?

The SNP Scottish Government has taken steps to mitigate the worst aspects of Westminster’s welfare reform. Since 2013, the Scottish Government has spent nearly £400 million in an effort to alleviate Tory cuts to household incomes
We are fully mitigating the Bedroom Tax in Scotland, and we have pledged to abolish the tax completely when we have the powers to do so.
We are providing help through the Scottish Welfare Fund, which consists of Crisis Grants for when someone experiences a disaster or emergency, and Community Care Grants to enable independent living.
We have restored Westminster’s cut to Council Tax support through the creation of Council Tax Reductions - protecting the incomes of over half a million people on low incomes.
We have extended the child allowance in the Council Tax Reduction scheme by 25 per cent, benefiting 77,000 households by an average of £173 per year or around £15 per month. This boost for low-income families will help nearly 140,000 children across Scotland.
We are also safeguarding the support for over 2,800 disabled people across Scotland with the new Scottish Independent Living Fund, which was set up in July 2015.
And we have extended the Scottish Welfare Fund on an interim basis to mitigate the UK government's decision to remove Housing Benefit for 18-21 year olds.

The views on the third sector in this are well known, and yet they are thrust to the side and the policy is steamrollered through parliament.

Finally, I find it rather ironic, that, on a thread about the Tories, here we are once again, speaking about the SNP, and what they're going to do. Most of the points, above, show that we are mitigating. It's just a pity we have to.

Maybe you should turn your ire against those who started this whole process, instead of those of us who wish to scrap it.

I see you got your lines through then...!

Thats a long and very detailed post, thanks for taking the time to do it.

I agree the rape clause seems like poor legislation, but rhe wider statute is perfectly reasonable, although obviously it wont please everyone.

The tories are the govt of the UK, democratically elected amd with a mandate. Youay not like what they are doing, but it is legitimate.

Devolution means that the SG can take difderent choices. If it was up to me, all power would sit with holyrood apart from the big macro issues, in a federal settlement, so i take your poiny about some issue still being reserved.

But this is the (current) settlement that scottish people voted for, and this is the settlemrnt into which the SNP stood amd were elected, knowingly.

A governmeny that hasnt got enough of a vision, idea or energy to bring a single piece of legislation through parliament in ober a year needs to answer some serious questions about why not?

And i notice you still haven't answered my question about wjy you think the nats are so reluctant to use their tax powers, despitee asking it directly four or five times.

Did HQ not give you a line on that?

Also, the more i think about your complaints about not having enough money to do everything, well welcome to real, grown-up politics. Govts have to make tough decisions, they habe to prioritise spending, they have to leave some people unhappy. No govt has enough money to do everything they want, thats why its difficult.

[ronaldo7]

I see you got your lines through then...!

Thats a long and very detailed post, thanks for taking the time to do it.

I agree the rape clause seems like poor legislation, but rhe wider statute is perfectly reasonable, although obviously it wont please everyone.

The tories are the govt of the UK, democratically elected amd with a mandate. Youay not like what they are doing, but it is legitimate.

Devolution means that the SG can take difderent choices. If it was up to me, all power would sit with holyrood apart from the big macro issues, in a federal settlement, so i take your poiny about some issue still being reserved.

But this is the (current) settlement that scottish people voted for, and this is the settlemrnt into which the SNP stood amd were elected, knowingly.

A governmeny that hasnt got enough of a vision, idea or energy to bring a single piece of legislation through parliament in ober a year needs to answer some serious questions about why not?


And i notice you still haven't answered my question about wjy you think the nats are so reluctant to use their tax powers, despitee asking it directly four or five times.

Did HQ not give you a line on that?

A rather poor post, even by your standard SB.:rolleyes:

I'll answer you last para only, as the rest is just mince.

The law came into effect 9 days ago. Do you really think "ANY" government could respond to this draconian law any quicker?

I know the SNP are good, but at least let us take things one step at a time.

I've answered you questions on the SG and given you detailed analysis of what we're doing. If that's not enough for you, then sorry about that.

I'm off to see the Hibees.

I'll view your drivel when I get home.:greengrin

Something for you to peruse while I'm away.:aok:

http://www.thenational.scot/news/15226300.Scottish_Tories_engulfed_in_racism_scanda l_with_at_least_seven_council_candidates_now_in_th e_spotlight/?ref=mr&lp=1

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

A rather poor post, even by your standard SB.:rolleyes:

I'll answer you last para only, as the rest is just mince.

The law came into effect 9 days ago. Do you really think "ANY" government could respond to this draconian law any quicker?

I know the SNP are good, but at least let us take things one step at a time.

I've answered you questions on the SG and given you detailed analysis of what we're doing. If that's not enough for you, then sorry about that.

I'm off to see the Hibees.

I'll view your drivel when I get home.:greengrin

Something for you to peruse while I'm away.:aok:

http://www.thenational.scot/news/15226300.Scottish_Tories_engulfed_in_racism_scanda l_with_at_least_seven_council_candidates_now_in_th e_spotlight/?ref=mr&lp=1

Sorry, i dont read party publications, they tend to not be too balanced.

Well you guys seemed to respond the triggering of article 50npretty quick. It probably just shows where the SNPs priorities are.

And what do you mean the policy was just steamrollered through parliament? Was there not a series of votes, a committee stage, and a passage through a revising chamber?


And no you havent answered the question on raising tax. But i think your silence says enough.

And dismissing my post as mince is a poor argument from you.

But ill let you off because we all have other priorities today!!

[Moulin Yarns]

Unless everyone has forgotten, the Scottish Government has been in recess. That is why the first minister took the chance to go to the US. The day job could be put on hold.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Unless everyone has forgotten, the Scottish Government has been in recess. That is why the first minister took the chance to go to the US. The day job could be put on hold.

Ha ha ha, i can absolutely promise you that the Scottish Government is not in recess!!

[Moulin Yarns]

Ha ha ha, i can absolutely promise you that the Scottish Government is not in recess!!

Really??? Then their website is wrong, or perhaps you are!!!

I wonder???

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Really??? Then their website is wrong, or perhaps you are!!!

I wonder???

The Scottish Government website says that the Scottish Government is on recess?

Who the hell is running the country then?

Edit - maybe you should tell their media teams, because they are still putting out news releases - https://news.gov.scot/

[johnbc70]

Really??? Then their website is wrong, or perhaps you are!!!

I wonder???

I think you mean the sitting of Parliament? The government and parliament are different.

[weecounty hibby]

This hash tag day job bull**** is exactly that bull****. So whenever a member of any govt leaves the country to attend meetings with other politicians, or to try to better trade and education links etc this means they're not doing their day job. Embarrassing straw clutching from the usual suspects. Very tiresome

[makaveli1875]

This hash tag day job bull**** is exactly that bull****. So whenever a member of any govt leaves the country to attend meetings with other politicians, or to try to better trade and education links etc this means they're not doing their day job. Embarrassing straw clutching from the usual suspects. Very tiresome

not quite , most governments manage to leave thecountry but still keep doing the job of governing . All Sturgeon has managed to do in the last year is greet about brexit and call for a referendum , she has not done a stitch of governing in that time #dayjob

[grunt]

not quite , most governments manage to leave thecountry but still keep doing the job of governing . All Sturgeon has managed to do in the last year is greet about brexit and call for a referendum , she has not done a stitch of governing in that time #dayjobDrivel.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Really??? Then their website is wrong, or perhaps you are!!!

I wonder???

Well, are you still wondering?

There is a third option, that maybe you are wrong?

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Drivel.

I dont think it is black and white, but there is no doubt that Sturgeon's time as FM has to date beem defined by grievance about brexit and campaigning for another ref.

Of course that doesnt mean that her government isnt governing, they are, but it does mean that their focus is not on 'dayjob' issues, but is instead on political campaigning.

Not a single piece of legislatiob has gone through parliament in over a year now. Normally when a new leader takes over, with a fresh mandate, we see a burst of energy.

Thats not to say it wont come, but i dont think we have seen it so far.

I would say there are some mitigating circumstances, but i think she seems very inferior to Salmond as our FM so far.

[ronaldo7]

Meanwhile, back with the Tories, or should that be UKIP:wink: This boy seems to have let the cat out of the bag.

https://t.co/thAHBPGJGb

[weecounty hibby]

not quite , most governments manage to leave thecountry but still keep doing the job of governing . All Sturgeon has managed to do in the last year is greet about brexit and call for a referendum , she has not done a stitch of governing in that time #dayjob
You are a bore. At least you didn't call her childish names that time. Well done

[Just Alf]

not quite , most governments manage to leave thecountry but still keep doing the job of governing . All Sturgeon has managed to do in the last year is greet about brexit and call for a referendum , she has not done a stitch of governing in that time #dayjob
Thats not yer best!

On a personal level I LOVE threads like this as it shows that the Hibees truly are a "broad church"and I enjoy the chat... That though didn't help any of your points you've been trying to make.

Politicians role is to set direction etc, there's a whole government apparatus employed to actually govern day to day dependent on the direction they've been given.


Edit... Soz just noticed I'm not the only my one to reply... Not meaning to look like I'm ganging up on you!

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[Glory Lurker]

Thats not yer best!

On a personal level I LOVE threads like this as it shows that the Hibees truly are a "broad church"

Church, eh? Nae atheists allowed? Typical dot net cliqueism. :grr:







:greengrin

[Just Alf]

Church, eh? Nae atheists allowed? Typical dot net cliqueism. :grr:







:greengrin

Ha ha! ..... Dearie me!

:thumbsup:

[ronaldo7]

Paul Henke, former Chairman of UKIP in Scotland now standing for the Tories. They should just merge, and be done with it.:greengrin

https://t.co/1PSEqsVgUr

[snooky]

My dear mother used to say "If you can't say something nice about someone, don't say anything at all"

So..... :lips seal

[ronaldo7]

As they slash the benefits for disabled people and take away their cars, the Trussell trust have to hand out more food parcels in Scotland.

10 years of stagnating wages, benefit cuts, zero hour contracts, and all the time the Tories are giving their pals tax cuts, and looking the other way for BIG business tax avoidance. I wish they'd get on with the day job.

https://t.co/OEVvULHcmk

Meanwhile, does anyone know where Theresa has gone?

18430

[northstandhibby]

As they slash the benefits for disabled people and take away their cars, the Trussell trust have to hand out more food parcels in Scotland.

10 years of stagnating wages, benefit cuts, zero hour contracts, and all the time the Tories are giving their pals tax cuts, and looking the other way for BIG business tax avoidance. I wish they'd get on with the day job.

https://t.co/OEVvULHcmk

Meanwhile, does anyone know where Theresa has gone?

18430

Some of the snp pals certainly don't stand up to scrutiny either.

Pot and kettle here from Ronaldo.

Whatever happened to the £10 Billion deal with the snp pals Chinese firms proven to be guilty of human rights act abuses?

The snp attempted to hush up the deal with their human rights act abusers until it was brought out into the light.

Dearie me.

glory glory

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

As they slash the benefits for disabled people and take away their cars, the Trussell trust have to hand out more food parcels in Scotland.

10 years of stagnating wages, benefit cuts, zero hour contracts, and all the time the Tories are giving their pals tax cuts, and looking the other way for BIG business tax avoidance. I wish they'd get on with the day job.

https://t.co/OEVvULHcmk

Meanwhile, does anyone know where Theresa has gone?

18430


You are of course aware that they gave everyone tax cuts.

Maybe the just think the best people to dexide how to spend your money is you?

[greenlex]

Some of the snp pals certainly don't stand up to scrutiny either.

Pot and kettle here from Ronaldo.

Whatever happened to the £10 Billion deal with the snp pals Chinese firms proven to be guilty of human rights act abuses?

The snp attempted to hush up the deal with their human rights act abusers until it was brought out into the light.

Dearie me.

glory glory
A Tory lecturing on human rights!!!!! Deary me!!!

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

If, and it is still a big if, the tories can unseat a few of the nat big beasts who represent heartland SNP seats, that will be a strong indication that the SNPs right, its traditional suppory base is starting to weaken?

And if so, are the tories strong enough to capitalise? I have my doubts, but it does show that sturgeon is not up to the job of being all things to all people on the same way ad salmond was?

Or the nats coyld of course storm the electiob and sweep the board!

[JeMeSouviens]

If, and it is still a big if, the tories can unseat a few of the nat big beasts who represent heartland SNP seats, that will be a strong indication that the SNPs right, its traditional suppory base is starting to weaken?

And if so, are the tories strong enough to capitalise? I have my doubts, but it does show that sturgeon is not up to the job of being all things to all people on the same way ad salmond was?

Or the nats coyld of course storm the electiob and sweep the board!

If the SNP's vote declines, yes. If it's because of a big Lab->Tory swing and the SNP vote is more or less static, then no.

2 polls over the weekend put the SNP down a bit over 5 points versus 2015 but that's only just below where they were on the Holyrood 2016 constituency vote anyway and I would expect Green tactical votes will pull them up a point or 2.

Meanwhile the Tories are up by 13-18% on 2015 and 6-11% on 2016. Labour are down 6-11% on 2015 and 5-10% on 2016.


2015 GE:
SNP 50
Lab 24
Tory 15

2016 Scot GE (cons):
SNP 46
Lab 23
Tory 22

2017 Survation Poll:
SNP 43
Tory 28
Lab 18

2017 Panelbase Poll:
SNP 44
Tory 33
Lab 13

[RyeSloan]

If, and it is still a big if, the tories can unseat a few of the nat big beasts who represent heartland SNP seats, that will be a strong indication that the SNPs right, its traditional suppory base is starting to weaken?

And if so, are the tories strong enough to capitalise? I have my doubts, but it does show that sturgeon is not up to the job of being all things to all people on the same way ad salmond was?

Or the nats coyld of course storm the electiob and sweep the board!

Hard to tell with FPTP and of course the SNP have pretty much only one way to go seats wise.

So far though it does seem the Tories have a bit of momentum north of the border and to some degree that's as a direct result of the SNP tactics.

Your point about Salmond is a good one...he was pretty sly in how he worked, happy to pin the blame on Westminster and the Tories when needed but could also bend the rhetoric sometimes as well. Under Sturgeon the Tory attack has become constant and I have think some people are maybe starting to think it's a bit like the boy who cried wolf...you can't always always blame everything on someone else, especially after 10 years in power in Scotland.

Will certainly be interesting to see how this plays out but few would have imagined an SNP landslide like the last time a few years ago and some must be wondering just where the Tories are getting a near 30% poll rating from, not something that many would have envisaged even 2 years ago. One poll had the Tories only 11% behind the SNP...that's a dramatic swing.

The SNP seem to have decided they want a straight fight with the Tories to ensure a clear dividing line and thus a base to build a majority position for Indy...seems like they are getting that fight but you do wonder if they have miscalculated just how strong an embattled and emboldened Scottish Conservative vote might be.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Hard to tell with FPTP and of course the SNP have pretty much only one way to go seats wise.

So far though it does seem the Tories have a bit of momentum north of the border and to some degree that's as a direct result of the SNP tactics.

Your point about Salmond is a good one...he was pretty sly in how he worked, happy to pin the blame on Westminster and the Tories when needed but could also bend the rhetoric sometimes as well. Under Sturgeon the Tory attack has become constant and I have think some people are maybe starting to think it's a bit like the boy who cried wolf...you can't always always blame everything on someone else, especially after 10 years in power in Scotland.

Will certainly be interesting to see how this plays out but few would have imagined an SNP landslide like the last time a few years ago and some must be wondering just where the Tories are getting a near 30% poll rating from, not something that many would have envisaged even 2 years ago. One poll had the Tories only 11% behind the SNP...that's a dramatic swing.

The SNP seem to have decided they want a straight fight with the Tories to ensure a clear dividing line and thus a base to build a majority position for Indy...seems like they are getting that fight but you do wonder if they have miscalculated just how strong an embattled and emboldened Scottish Conservative vote might be.


Sturgeon apparently claimed yesterday that anything over half the seats would be a victory. Seems an awfy low bar to set when you already have all but three seats.

[Moulin Yarns]

Polls

[northstandhibby]

A Tory lecturing on human rights!!!!! Deary me!!!

Eh?

Another baffling post by snp fanatic. If your'e not with them they try to smear folk.

The £10 Billion snp deal with chinese human rights abusers they tried to keep quiet was nothing short of disgusting.

The tories and snp are two hypocritical cheeks of the same behind if you ask me.

glory glory

[ronaldo7]

Some of the snp pals certainly don't stand up to scrutiny either.

Pot and kettle here from Ronaldo.

Whatever happened to the £10 Billion deal with the snp pals Chinese firms proven to be guilty of human rights act abuses?

The snp attempted to hush up the deal with their human rights act abusers until it was brought out into the light.

Dearie me.

glory glory

Dearie me indeed.

What about the substance of my post?

Not sure if you're an actual Tory, or a wavering labour voter going over to your better together pals.

Whatever it is, your lack of comment on the subject of my post leads me to believe the former.

You seem happy for the Tories to run ragged through the country.

I've got you now. Kipper come BNP. 😊

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Dearie me indeed.

What about the substance of my post?

Not sure if you're an actual Tory, or a wavering labour voter going over to your better together pals.

Whatever it is, your lack of comment on the subject of my post leads me to believe the former.

You seem happy for the Tories to run ragged through the country.

I've got you now. Kipper come BNP. 😊


Im interested Ronaldo, what would you say would be good, acceptable and bad results for your nats at the GE?

[ronaldo7]

Im interested Ronaldo, what would you say would be good, acceptable and bad results for your nats at the GE?

45👍

[WeeRussell]

I make no secret of my disdain for The Tory party, or of my left wing tendencies. However, one of my best pals is the same about being a Tory.

We have a lot in common, including interests/lifestyle/personalities.. almost everything bar our political stance. I'll never understand why he is that way, but I don't lecture him or even argue.. we simply try not to talk politics in each other's company. This is maybe partly because I know he'll just admit that his stance is self-serving (there are a number of people whose explanation translates as "f*** the rest) which makes it hard to believe you can sway him another way.

I've always been SNP (largely due to independence interests) but I've never described myself as anti-tory more than I feel today. My SNP support may change in the future depending on what it brings.

Right now I feel more ABT, than anything else.

[northstandhibby]

Dearie me indeed.

What about the substance of my post?

Not sure if you're an actual Tory, or a wavering labour voter going over to your better together pals.

Whatever it is, your lack of comment on the subject of my post leads me to believe the former.

You seem happy for the Tories to run ragged through the country.

I've got you now. Kipper come BNP. ��

Coming from a hypocrital tartanite tory in disguise like yourself who thinks its perfectly fine for Ms Nicola Thatcher to make deals with chinese firms with proven track record on human rights abuses I couldn't care less about your unfounded hysterical remarks of me.

I've posted many times on here I'm hugely in favor of remaining with the EU and its institutions which are a force for good on human rights in direct contrast to the firms Ms Nicola Thatcher was doing deals with on the qt.

glory glory

[DaveF]

Coming from a hypocrital tartanite tory in disguise like yourself who thinks its perfectly fine for Ms Nicola Thatcher to make deals with chinese firms with proven track record on human rights abuses I couldn't care less about your unfounded hysterical remarks of me.

I've posted many times on here I'm hugely in favor of remaining with the EU and its institutions which are a force for good on human rights in direct contrast to the firms Ms Nicola Thatcher was doing deals with on the qt.

glory glory

Is the level of debate now. Nicola Thatcher - really?

No wonder I tend to give this forum more of a miss nowadays.

[cabbageandribs1875]

Coming from a hypocrital tartanite tory in disguise like yourself who thinks its perfectly fine for Ms Nicola Thatcher to make deals with chinese firms with proven track record on human rights abuses I couldn't care less about your unfounded hysterical remarks of me.

I've posted many times on here I'm hugely in favor of remaining with the EU and its institutions which are a force for good on human rights in direct contrast to the firms Ms Nicola Thatcher was doing deals with on the qt.

glory glory


what's with all the utter juvenile p"sh you come out with, dear leader etc etc ffs so bizarre


oh PS Glory Glory

[northstandhibby]

Is the level of debate now. Nicola Thatcher - really?

No wonder I tend to give this forum more of a miss nowadays.

That's a wee bit unfair bud as I'm merely throwing a bit mud back that was started by a nat undeservedly wrongly labeling folk. Surely its okay to give a bit back?

glory glory

[northstandhibby]

what's with all the utter juvenile p"sh you come out with, dear leader etc etc ffs so bizarre


oh PS Glory Glory

The nats can dish it out okay but can't seem to take it back without resorting to smearing folk so who's the real juvenile?

glory glory

[DaveF]

That's a wee bit unfair bud as I'm merely throwing a bit mud back that was started by a nat undeservedly wrongly labeling folk. Surely its okay to give a bit back?

glory glory

Bash on, but I won't be reading it. I only viewed the last post which was yours and it killed any interest I fleetingly had.

[Moulin Yarns]

That's a wee bit unfair bud as I'm merely throwing a bit mud back that was started by a nat undeservedly wrongly labeling folk. Surely its okay to give a bit back?

glory glory


I remember when 2 wrongs didn't make a right. Obviously no longer applies if that is your criteria. I'm sure you can do better than lowering yourself to that level, but maybe not.

[northstandhibby]

I remember when 2 wrongs didn't make a right. Obviously no longer applies if that is your criteria. I'm sure you can do better than lowering yourself to that level, but maybe not.

Normally I don't react as strongly but I would expect anyone to when they're being deliberately wrongly labelled.

Very fair minded point you make.

:wink:

glory glory

[CapitalGreen]

Is the level of debate now. Nicola Thatcher - really?

No wonder I tend to give this forum more of a miss nowadays.

I'm with you on this, changed days from the sometimes heated but for the most part respectful discussions held a couple of years back.

[Geo_1875]

Eh?

Another baffling post by snp fanatic. If your'e not with them they try to smear folk.

The £10 Billion snp deal with chinese human rights abusers they tried to keep quiet was nothing short of disgusting.

The tories and snp are two hypocritical cheeks of the same behind if you ask me.

glory glory

Did I miss something here? Do the Scottish National Party have a sponsorship deal with some shady Chinese characters? Or are you talking about the memorandum of understanding that the Scottish Government negotiated with a Chinese business consortium which was subsequently dropped after the outcry in the media? Can't be having talks with damn foreigners, after all it's just not British. http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/theresa-may-visit-china-she-eyes-post-brexit-trade-deal-1605315

[northstandhibby]

Did I miss something here? Do the Scottish National Party have a sponsorship deal with some shady Chinese characters? Or are you talking about the memorandum of understanding that the Scottish Government negotiated with a Chinese business consortium which was subsequently dropped after the outcry in the media? Can't be having talks with damn foreigners, after all it's just not British. http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/theresa-may-visit-china-she-eyes-post-brexit-trade-deal-1605315

It's not enough is it just to make what may have been a valid point for some, you have to then add in the snide bit at the end. No one said it was wrong to talk with other foreign businesses (hopefully ones without a track record of human rights abuses) and no one mentioned British.

glory glory

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

45👍

Yeah that would seem a fair enough number.

I would be surprised if it dropped below that.

[DaveF]

It's not enough is it just to make what may have been a valid point for some, you have to then add in the snide bit at the end. No one said it was wrong to talk with other foreign businesses (hopefully ones without a track record of human rights abuses) and no one mentioned British.

glory glory

But the point stands.

Every government - even Labour ones - have cuddled up to despotic regimes because there is something in it for them. Yet you seem to be banging on and on about this one as if it is the only time it's ever happened. A bit boring if you ask me.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

It's not enough is it just to make what may have been a valid point for some, you have to then add in the snide bit at the end. No one said it was wrong to talk with other foreign businesses (hopefully ones without a track record of human rights abuses) and no one mentioned British.

glory glory

I had always thought the problem with the whole thing was that the announcement was all nonsense and bluster in the first place?

An MOU is still a long way from a deal being agreed isnt it?

[northstandhibby]

But the point stands.

Every government - even Labour ones - have cuddled up to despotic regimes because there is something in it for them. Yet you seem to be banging on and on about this one as if it is the only time it's ever happened. A bit boring if you ask me.

I fully understand the point made its just some were being a tad hypocritical earlier on and was merely reminding them of the pretty murky deal being potentially done with the chinese firms who have a track record of human rights abuses.

I'll certainly put that one to bed now.

:greengrin

glory glory

[Moulin Yarns]

But the point stands.

Every government - even Labour ones - have cuddled up to despotic regimes because there is something in it for them. Yet you seem to be banging on and on about this one as if it is the only time it's ever happened. A bit boring if you ask me.

Better that that banging on and on about some utopian vision of a city to house every refugee, immigrant and homeless person in the middle of Assynt. IMO :wink:

[speedy_gonzales]

I've nothing to add to the political ongoings here but I despise the memes and incorrect names (Tony Bliar/Wee Fat Eck etc) folk post either here or on other social media platforms, but how is it people are quick to pick on the (alleged) unionist posts here but nobody bats an eyelid when someone posts a fake(I'm hoping) BBC screenshot of a search party for a missing PM?

[DaveF]

I fully understand the point made its just some were being a tad hypocritical earlier on and was merely reminding them of the pretty murky deal being potentially done with the chinese firms who have a track record of human rights abuses.

I'll certainly put that one to bed now.

:greengrin

glory glory

Thank God \ Nicola Thatcher \ Dear Leader for that!

[ronaldo7]

As they slash the benefits for disabled people and take away their cars, the Trussell trust have to hand out more food parcels in Scotland.

10 years of stagnating wages, benefit cuts, zero hour contracts, and all the time the Tories are giving their pals tax cuts, and looking the other way for BIG business tax avoidance. I wish they'd get on with the day job.

https://t.co/OEVvULHcmk

Meanwhile, does anyone know where Theresa has gone?

18430


I fully understand the point made its just some were being a tad hypocritical earlier on and was merely reminding them of the pretty murky deal being potentially done with the chinese firms who have a track record of human rights abuses.

I'll certainly put that one to bed now.

:greengrin

glory glory

You could have commented on a thread about the Tories, well, about the Tories.

You didn't, you decided to try and deviate from the points I was making with an attack on the SNP. That's your prerogative, I'd really have like to have known what your thoughts were on the bits in bold.

You seem happy to try and deflect from our current UK governments position on all of the above, that would seem to me quite normal for me to assume you support the Tories/Kippers.

If you're happy to support the UK gov and the cuts to the disabled benefits, the increase in foodbanks, and stagnating wages, I wish you'd stop sitting on the fence, and just say so.

[northstandhibby]

You could have commented on a thread about the Tories, well, about the Tories.

You didn't, you decided to try and deviate from the points I was making with an attack on the SNP. That's your prerogative, I'd really have like to have known what your thoughts were on the bits in bold.

You seem happy to try and deflect from our current UK governments position on all of the above, that would seem to me quite normal for me to assume you support the Tories/Kippers.

If you're happy to support the UK gov and the cuts to the disabled benefits, the increase in foodbanks, and stagnating wages, I wish you'd stop sitting on the fence, and just say so.

I'm very happy to very heavily criticise both the tories and snp on virtually everything. Gordon Brown did more for those on benefits and the vulnerable than both the tories and snp ever would of whom appear to me to be both much of same cheeks of the same behind. GB would have made a brilliant pm and could still have a pivotal voice in the future of the country.

glory glory

[ronaldo7]

I'm very happy to very heavily criticise both the tories and snp on virtually everything. Gordon Brown did more for those on benefits and the vulnerable than both the tories and snp ever would of whom appear to me to be both much of same cheeks of the same behind. GB would have made a brilliant pm and could still have a pivotal voice in the future of the country.

glory glory

I've got news for you...Gordon Brown was actually the PM. He was the one who sold the gold, and raided the pension pots of millions.:aok:

I don't think we can get anywhere near that hypothetical arse of yours, Red and Blue have positioned themselves on each cheek.

Still nothing on the subject matter though.:rolleyes:

[northstandhibby]

I've got news for you...Gordon Brown was actually the PM. He was the one who sold the gold, and raided the pension pots of millions.:aok:

I don't think we can get anywhere near that hypothetical arse of yours, Red and Blue have positioned themselves on each cheek.

Still nothing on the subject matter though.:rolleyes:

You must have known what I meant as to him not being pm as per being elected. He's vastly more known for his record as chancellor.

The other point being I think I've already answered that by my previous posts. I'm very happy to criticise both the tories and snp alike.

glory glory

[ronaldo7]

You must have known what I meant as to him not being pm as per being elected. He's vastly more known for his record as chancellor.

The other point being I think I've already answered that by my previous posts. I'm very happy to criticise both the tories and snp alike.

glory glory

Really?

Nothing then.:rolleyes:

[northstandhibby]

Really?

Nothing then.:rolleyes:

Why are you so upset Gordon Brown sold off UK gold? I'd have thought that would have only upset the tories?

:wink:

glory glory

[ronaldo7]

Why are you so upset Gordon Brown sold off UK gold? I'd have thought that would have only upset the tories?

:wink:

glory glory

18437

:faf:

[northstandhibby]

18437

:faf:

Not a shabby response, laughed out loud at that one.

:greengrin

Nice retort.

glory glory

[snooky]

18437

:faf:

Which one is Gordon Brown again? :confused:

[ronaldo7]

Theresa May promised to help the Just managing, and to work for all.

The Trussell trust are having to support more families than ever. Typical Tories.

https://t.co/EIzBVy5rWn

[greenlex]

Eh?

Another baffling post by snp fanatic. If your'e not with them they try to smear folk.

The £10 Billion snp deal with chinese human rights abusers they tried to keep quiet was nothing short of disgusting.

The tories and snp are two hypocritical cheeks of the same behind if you ask me.

glory glory
Please accept my apology in calling you a Tory. It's hard to tell the difference these days. You've got me labelled wrong too. I'm not for the SNP but I am for independence and a non Tory government.

[northstandhibby]

Please accept my apology in calling you a Tory. It's hard to tell the difference these days. You've got me labelled wrong too. I'm not for the SNP but I am for independence and a non Tory government.

I will humbly accept your apology fellow hibby if you will accept mine as well. Seems I judged you wrongly too.

:aok:

glory glory

[greenlex]

I will humbly accept your apology fellow hibby if you will accept mine as well. Seems I judged you wrongly too.

:aok:

glory glory
Consider it done.:aok: Peace Brother.

[northstandhibby]

Consider it done.:aok: Peace Brother.

And peace be with you too fellow hibby brother.

:aok:

glory glory

[High-On-Hibs]

There is one reason and one reason only that the Conservatives have had such a surge and that is the British propaganda machine owned 90%+ by tories and hard right lunatics.

It infuriates me when I hear people (mostly too old to use internet types) use BBC soundbites to back up their argument for switching from Labour to Tory.

Keep reiterating that Theresa May is a strong, stable leader (despite the tories BNP manifesto) and that Corbyn is an incompetent clown (despite the majority of the electorate supporting his manifesto) and people will accept it as absolute fact, without giving it a second thought or doing any research of their own! :fuming: