As a conspiracy theorist, I just cannot accept that anybody could be as bad as that pair. It has to all have been a cunning plan.Quote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee
Printable View
As a conspiracy theorist, I just cannot accept that anybody could be as bad as that pair. It has to all have been a cunning plan.Quote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee
A cunning plan like losing seven votes in a row to take away the fear of losing seven votes in a row, or something even more cunning than that? :hmmm:Quote:
Originally Posted by Cataplana
So cunning it is beyond my imagination.Quote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee
The "moderates" strike again.
https://evolvepolitics.com/jo-swinso...privatisation/
Utter charlatans! :grr:
https://i.ibb.co/418DShc/charlatans.png
The problem isn’t the LibDems. It the Tory rebels who will never support Corbyn. Swinson is only guilt of pointing out the bleeding obvious.Quote:
Originally Posted by Northernhibee
I like Jo Swinson and her party. My own constituency M.P Christine Jardine has proved to be both competent and hard working. Their stance on revoking Brexit entirely is one I'm firmly behind. I'd like to see them make inroads into winning a great deal more seats across the board in future elections.
Equally, what is the problem for Corbyn if its one month of Harriet Harman, for example?Quote:
Originally Posted by Northernhibee
Funny. She's my MP also and just like Hamilton, she's never anywhere to be seen.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankhfc
As for Jo Swinson. Her and her party are proving once again that they're fully on board with the tory NHS privitization agenda with the US. Which is directly linked to Brexit.
Just because they won't support Corbyn, doesn't necessarily mean they'll back Boris either. The Lib Dems know they could be the key difference. Which is why they keep making up one pathetic excuse after another not to back a Labour Government.Quote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
It's incredible how there are still people who can't see them for what they blatantly are.
You think the Tory rebels could stomach Corbyn as even a stop gap PM?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee
It’s not a pathetic excuse, it’s smart politics. In the areas where the Lib Dem’s have a chance of beating the Tories, Jeremy Corbyn is seen as the great Satan. If she aligns with Corbyn now they have no chance of taking those seats.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
They're centrists. That's what they are. They won't be fans of the far left so they won't be into Jeremy Corbyn or his cronies. Equally, they won't be very much into Boris or his buddies on the further right end of the spectrum.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee
Just because you might have a more left-leaning tendency doesn't mean that everyone to the right of you are in cahoots with each other.
The LibDems have as much to gain from moderate Labour voters disillusioned from their party's lurch to the left as they do picking up moderate Tories, and cosying up to Boris, Rees-Mogg and Cummings will alienate a part of the electorate they stand to potentially gain huge support from.
Their reasons not to back a Labour government are not pathetic excuses. In a changing political landscape they'd be daft to chain themselves to a party who have a recent track record of infighting, unpopularity and dithering.
It doesn't make any difference if they can't stomach Boris Johnson either. They'll just void their votes.Quote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
The tories are going to gain more seats than they lose. Watch them do a deal with the brexit party and the vast majority of brexiteers will unite behind them. Meanwhile, the Lib Dems will split remainers right down the middle. It'll be a cakewalk for the conservatives and their hard brexit agenda.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
You're right though. It's certainly smart, the way they've conned so many people.
There is no such thing as "centrist". It's a modern political trope that all large parties claim to be. The "centre ground" is exactly where you place it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartie
The Tories and the DUP will not back Corbyn as interim PM. That's an undeniable fact, so if the opposition want to use a vote of confidence successfully, they have to agree an acceptable candidate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartie
The Liberals could back him to the hilt, but it wouldn't do any good, because he wouldn't be appointed by Parliament. If that happens, we get the general election that Boris Johnson wants.
If a less divisive candidate was agreed, we could see the Government resign and a new, non-Tory government take its place until no-deal is guaranteed, and hopefully a second referendum scheduled.
It's not difficult to understand. Ironically, the last time there was a successful VONC, it was in 1979 when the SNP helped pave the way for over a decade of Margaret Thatcher.
Ah, that old chestnut again, which has already been covered a thousand times on here. Labour had the chance to remain in government and turned the offer down. Next.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibbyradge
and sufferd for their sinsQuote:
Originally Posted by Hibbyradge
Quote:
The Scottish National Party also suffered in the 1979 general election, with its group reduced from 11 members to just two.The incoming Conservative government repealed the Scotland Act and devolution was not enacted until the 1997 referendum.
Indeed. It seems highly unlikely that something like that could happen again, but it's not outwith the realms of possiblity.Quote:
Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns
The SNP are playing their own political games, just like the Liberals. Understandably so.
Sturgeon went on record last week as saying that she wouldn't support a coalition with Labour unless a second referendum was guaranteed. "Don't even pick the phone up".
If, after the next GE, no party has won an overall majority, but Labour refuses to guarantee Indy2, would the SNP allow the Tories to govern?
If so, how would that sit with the Scottish electorate. Scottish Labour would love that to happen.
It's a daft hypothesis which isn't really worth considering, isn't it. Isn't it?
Strange comment.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee
What do you mean by it? Missing when/where?
I've always found her welcoming and very willing to help her constituents.
She's never in her office. I've lived here for the best part of 5 years and the only 1 time ive seen her is at a polling station.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankhfc
I've met her several times in her constituency office. She was great with me and helped me considerably with the matters I presented to her. I know of other constituents who have found her and her office team very willing to aid them with their issues.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee
Sounds as if you're letting you're partisan glasses view the current Lib Dem M.P incumbent.
I tell you what. I'll pay a wee visit to her office tomorrow to see if she's there. I'll even take a picture of the empty office while i'm there. :aok:Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankhfc
If you're not willing to either listen to or take on board a fellow hi bees actual experiences and their opinion then I'm not interested in yours either. Do as you wish and take as many photos as you want and I'll continue to base my opinion on my actual dealings with her and her office which was excellent as she helped solve my issues.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee
I don't know if you even live in this constituency, have ever met Jardine or been to a Hibs game in your life. You're another faceless stranger to me on here. So forgive me if i'm somewhat hesitant to take your comments as gospel.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankhfc
I'm surprised the admins allow you to post on here with these type comments.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee
With very few exceptions, most on here will not have met many other posters but the whole point of the forums is debate. How are we to know that you even know where the constituency office is and when it is open? Or even that you actually intend going tomorrow?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee
How did you get on with this yesterday?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee
I came home to a Lib Dem flyer, announced that Swinson is the next UK Prime Minister, wonder if you can do them for false advertising
Any chance of an image?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mon Dieu4
Attachment 22660Here you go, can't be arsed working out how to turn it roundQuote:
Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns
https://mobile.twitter.com/ArthurStr...59312522465281
Some clips of Andrew Neil interviewing Jo Swinson who had some difficulty in explaining why they can have talks with Plaid Cymru on election strategies but not SNP.
She looks very uncomfortable there. Comes across as being disingenuous.Quote:
Originally Posted by CloudSquall
I think the Lib Dems will do ok in the GE, particularly in England but nowt to do with Swinson and all to do with Brexit. Don't rate her.
She always looks uncomfortable when pressed. Much like Ruth Davidson did. I just don't understand the fawning over people like her and Davidson. They're utterly horrific politicians.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Harp Awakes
You'd think she'd work harder on getting solid answers with confident delivery to these questions as she must know she's going to be asked them and her stuttering doesn't look good.
Is it beyond the wit of the LibDem spin doctors to come up with an answer as to why she'd deal with the Welsh nationalists but not the Scottish ones?
I'm surprised she gets herself in such a fiddle over being in the position of supporting the UK being in the European Union and Scotland remaining within the UK. It's not that unreasonable a position, many people will agree with her and have an interest in voting for her but she is utterly unconvincing. I'm sure I could cobble together an excuse for wanting one referendum repeated but not the other, practice it a bit and deliver it with a bit of conviction when pressed, even if I didn't believe it.
I must be a more skilled liar than I thought.
Stuttering is a symptom of saying things that you're not really thinking. That's why she stutters. She doesn't believe most of the guff that comes out of her own mouth. She's a tory without the ability to tell a convincing lie.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartie
It is not just me who says it. Do you ever feel uncomfortable about the fact that you consistently target women? What is wrong with you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee
Haha they're doing the Davidson thing where they don't mention the partyQuote:
Originally Posted by Mon Dieu4
Interesting that she is excluded from the TV election debate. I suppose after Clegg made Cameron and Brown look like a pair of stuffed shirts they don’t want a repeat but having these two old farts debate will be like a rerun of Baddiel and Newman
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aEQcsuXnnnc
Swinson gets called out on Lib Dems dodgy bar charts :greengrin
https://twitter.com/michaeljswalker/...69677050200064
Are you suggesting that Nicola Sturgeon, Leanne Wood and Caroline Lucas are not women. But Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage and Alex Cole-Hamilton are? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mibbes Aye
Do you ever feel uncomfortable about your generalized sweeping inaccurate statements?
Another disastrous interview from Swinson (who i'm not allowed to criticize because she's a woman....)
https://twitter.com/toryfibs/status/...uefwGbamjuzaIo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPLB_IsUBH0
I don’t really take your judgements on me that seriously. You are hard to take seriously as a poster. You pontificate, and then when called out for inaccuracy or lies disappear only to re-emerge after a gap. And that’s not my opinion. Other posters called you out for it before I did.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee
I, and other posters, have called you out because you seem to direct your venom at women politicians. Own it.
You're right, I do direct venom at politicians who happen to be women. I also happen to direct venom at politicians that happen to be men.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mibbes Aye
But in your "totally non-sexist" mind, women are too delicate to face criticism on the level that men do.
Get out of the 60s.
And you’re not the first person to post that but I am not seeing what was disastrous about it. I am a member of a different party than hers but she responded fairly and accurately.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee
I think Jo Swinson scares the likes of folk like you, that’s why there is so much venom and vitriol poured at her, from you. Unfortunately it just makes you look worse.
Is it because she is a woman? Is it because she scares you? I don’t know but I don’t think for a second you will be honest about it.
Fairly and accurately? Her party has been sending out data that simply doesn't exist. Everything from graphs generated from non-existent data to claims that Jo Swinson is going to be the Primeminister after the election. Are you sure you're not just 100% completely blinkered?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mibbes Aye
‘Directing venom’ is a pretty sad place to find yourself in. Is that where you find yourself in life? ‘Directing venom’? You are an adult I assume.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee
The reason you are getting called out for it, and not just by me, is it appears to be directed more at women, which is worrying. Any grown-up should be able to recognise that.
I simply used your own words seeing as you associate any perfectly legitimate criticism I aim towards female politicians on here as "directing venom".Quote:
Originally Posted by Mibbes Aye
Seeing as you're the only person on here that seems to "recognise" it, perhaps you actually have a lot of growing up to do. It's generally little children who see things that aren't there.
But seeing as you rightfully pointed out that the interview had already been posted by another poster. I'll be more than happy to post yet another car crash interview involving Jo Swinson.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xno5AohYS8&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR1p 9NxCR_KHYLzDF-CIvwdyjoSjeb_JLgankbpq2lTV--Fe3T2AfXtz7u4
Okay.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee
So you come on a Hibs fans website, and post pretty much on the non-football threads and say you direct venom at women politicians. That is your words, even if you deleted the post it would still show in my reply.
In the current climate that isn’t acceptable, nor is it acceptable towards male MPs, but you really need a refresher class on equality, given some of your previous posts.
This is a forum for debate, not for venom. Did no one explain that to you?
"Venom" was your choice of word. Which indicates to me, like so many of your other posts on here that you're not here to have a grown up debate with anyone.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mibbes Aye
There is no debating with someone who sees things that are not, but can't see things that are.
She is Tory lite; diet Tory. Appalling.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee
Playing devils advocate here but weren't the snp called 'tartan tories' at one time too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibernia&Alba
Aye, they have become more progressive since that time, but are to the right of a party I would vote for.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankhfc
You said you direct venom at politicians who are women. Your words, not mine.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee
You have been accused by what I would suggest are reasonable posters on here as having problems with female politicians. I would suggest that you can’t refute that. If you could then you should and would have by now.
Well here's an idea. Why don't you make a case for that party instead of calling the Lib Dems 'appalling tory lites' when there's people like me who are anti tory but find the Lib Dems an appealing anti Brexit party. It doesn't make for decent reading or debate when name calling, It doesn't attract anyone who might wish to make a different point for fear of being heckled.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibernia&Alba
I do have a problem with female politicians though, bad female politicians.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mibbes Aye
Your problem is, you live in a bubble where people aren't allowed to call out politicians on their BS is they just so happen to be female. Which seems kind of sexist to me.
You can make any point you wish and nobody will heckle you. If you wish to support the Lib Dems, good luck to you. There are a wide range of views on this forum regarding Brexit, Scottish independence and many other things. Nobody is censored from expressing their views nor are they heckled. I think Swinson is terribly inept, but wouldn't shout anybody down who supports her. I was merely giving my view, not castigating anyone of a different opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankhfc
By the way, this thread specifically asks for thoughts on Jo Swinson, so you shouldn't be surprised when opinions are offered, and of course not all will be positive.
Could you rank our political leaders in order of ineptness?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibernia&Alba
I'm going to have to review my ignore list.
I'm obviously missing out on too much fun! :greengrin
Which echoes the point I made earlier.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee
You either don’t understand or don’t want to understand, or choose not to understand inequality, which is why you say that males should be treated the same way as females, even though all the evidence points out to how women are disadvantaged in comparison.
And (I think it was you, I can check) white people can be racially discriminated against, even though racism is very much structured on an axis of white people dominating others. So again, you can’t apply the same rules.
And likewise, gay people have faced discrimination in so many ways that straight people can’t imagine.
If I live in a bubble I bet it is a bubble that more people would want to live in than yours.
That's a tough yin; the competition is fierce. :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Hibbyradge
As a HoC performer, 1. CorbynQuote:
Originally Posted by Hibbyradge
All round ineptness, 1. Johnson
In fairness to Swinson she is a reflection of the horrendous standard of political leaders we have. These are the worst in my lifetime. Worse than Kinnock,milliband,hague,Howard,etc. Oh for a John Smith or Charles Kennedy. Real people instead of schemers only doing what suits their ends. No principles or morals. What have we done to deserve these phonies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee
Vote for them. :dunno:Quote:
Originally Posted by mjhibby
Inequality is subjective. Don’t just assume that your own personal take on the issue is the version everybody buys into. It’s not all anti-women, men can also be disadvantaged in certain situations. We’re just not as loud about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mibbes Aye
It makes no difference to me if a woman is paid less for either working less or doing a job where the demand for the Labour isn’t strong enough to pay well. It’s a Labour driven economy and business won’t pay anybody more than they need to.
I’m wasting my time here though, because these are concepts you just don’t grasp.
I think it's got a bit dull now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankhfc
The Tories did a lot of damage to a lot of people in Scotland, particularly during Thatcher in the 1908s. During that time the "Tory brand" suffered irreparable damage, and rightly so.
Since then, calling folk Tories of various descriptions - red Tories, tartan Tories etc has been a go to insult.
It's dull and it is irrelevant. Just because something is a wee bit to the right of where you happen to sit doesn't make them a Tory. Just because something is a wee bit to the left doesn't make them a communist.
It's lowest common denominator rubbish and it turns a lot more people off than it actually has a positive effect on.
Hold on a minute, let's look at the record. Swinson was happy to serve in a coalition government with a Tory government which imposed unnecessary suffering on the poorest during years of austerity. She voted for those policies, yet she says she wouldn't do the same for Labour if required. She is one of those 'Orange Book' free marketeer Lib Dems who lean more towards the Tory view. Her claim she couldn't support a Labour government because Corbyn hasn't been tough enough on anti-Semitism is disingenuous. Charles Kennedy, for example, was on the more progressive wing of the party.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartie
Whatever Fife's faults are on here, you put those words into his emmm... fingers, backed him into a corner insisting he has sexist tendencies. And your relentless pursuing of him, because he's an advocate of Scottish independence, is getting a bit tiresome.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mibbes Aye
So what if he posts mainly in the holy ground? It's entirely up to him and he's not the only one.
What any politician says about what they would and wouldn't do if they were in a hung parliament should be taken with a huge pinch of salt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibernia&Alba
No, I'm wrong, it should be totally ignored.
Every word they say is designed to make them more attractive to their target audience.
She'll deal with Labour in a hung parliament if it's expedient to do so. The reverse is also true, although Labour would currently deny that.
:agree:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibernia&Alba
Racism and Islamophobia in the tory party has never been a problem for Jo Swinson. But we're supposed to believe that she cares so deeply about the Jewish community. She's quite clearly full of it. It's not even remotely subjective.
She could quite literally come out and say "i'm a tory" and there would be lib dem supporters still claiming that she isn't.
How can you be so sure that is the case? She could just say "let's wait and see what happens". But she is flat our refusing to work with a Corbyn Labour government, but hasn't shown nearly as much resentment towards Boris Johnson.... who, let's be honest, is the plonker of all plonkers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibbyradge
I find it a bit strange to be defending her here as I'm not a fan, and the most Tory thing that I can see about her is that she's an opportunist. She is savvy enough to spot that Corbyn is deeply unpopular with the public (especially moderates) and it would do her not favours whatsoever to be aligning herself with him, so she's not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibernia&Alba
If the Labour party were in a slightly more moderate (or even popular) place then I think she'd be happy to work with them.
She's making decent political capital out of Boris' lack of popularity amongst moderate Tories and their lurch to the right.
Rather than an ideological position, I think she's just spotted an opportunity and gone for it. The centre ground has been there for the taking. It's not going to be popular with ideologues on either end of the political spectrum but there you go.
I don't like her voting record in government, but at the end of the day she was part of that government, the country's finances weren't in great shape and she did what she thought she had to do.
True.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee
Because as long as she's the leader of the Liberal Democrats she's not a Tory, irrespective of what she or anyone else says.
As soon as she leaves to join the Conservative Party, she's a Tory.
As i've stated before. Toryism isn't a party, it's an ideology. What the party is actually named is utterly irrelevant. A tory leader of any party not called The Conservatives is still very much a tory party.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartie
Her rhetoric about Corbyn is much more negative than anything she ever says about the Conservatives. I'm not convinced she would allow the Lib Dems to support Labour in any hung parliament. The fact is she voted for all of the Cameron government's austerity policies plus things like tripling university tuition fees. No party which calls itself progressive should have done that to the most vulnerable; it was unforgivable. Her record is there; her and her party have a lot of bridges to build.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibbyradge
What about Liberalism?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee
Same. The clue isn't in the name of the party, it's in what the party actually does. What did the "Liberal" Democrats do in coalition with the tories that could be considered remotely "liberal"?Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartie
Would a party that's truly Liberal enter an unfavourable coalition with a party that is distinctly anti-liberal and vote in unity with that party for distinctly anti-liberal policies?
Again i'll make the point. The name of the party doesn't matter. It's just there to fool people who can't be bothered to follow a parties actual track record.
We're just not as loud about it? If ever a single sentence summed up your total inability to understand equality it's that one. Your constant attempts to redefine sexism to 'prove' it doesn't exist and to justify your own outlook on life fools nobody.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee
Here's what you posted on the BBC Bias thread before scuttling off the other day, as you do. The bits in bold are where you attack women specifically. That really doesn't look like the views of somebody who isn't a misogynist does it? ,
Quote:
Just because a group whinges louder, doesn't mean they're subjected to a higher level of abuse compared to those who handle it in a more subtle manner. You assume women are subject to more abuse than men, because you hear about it more. The reason you hear about it more is because they make a louder spectacle over the criticism they receive. Even if that criticism doesn't even criticise them for being women at all.
Crying sexism whenever somebody is given a hard time who just so happens to be a women is the argument of someone who doesn't even have one.
I'm simply pointing out a fact. For example, a man is far less likely to come forward if he is receiving domestic abuse from a woman than vice versa. I'm not saying it's right that men are quieter about the abuse they recieve, i'm simply pointing out that it's the case that they are quieter about these types of inequalities. Your anger at me for pointing out the blatantly obvious is irrelevant to me to be quite honest.Quote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
And whose fault was it the finances weren't in great shape? The banks, who got a 180 billion pound bail out, which Swinson and her pals thought would be best re-paid by groups like the disabled and students. As soon as they had a sniff of ministerial posts their progressive claims were binned and the poorest paid the price. How moderate were those years of austerity? She had no issue with hardline policies then.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartie
I agree with your last line, but you have to remember that she was in coalition deal which required the Liberals to support David Cameron. It wasn't her decision to go into such a formal arrangement, but it was required of her at the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibernia&Alba
Past behaviour in politics is no barometer for the future. Boris Johnson voted against May's Brexit deal on 3 occasions for political expediency. Now he'd bite your hand off to get it done.
However, she's already shown that she's willing to work with other parties to stop Brexit.
The SNP have had the luxury of offering potential future support to Labour, "Just pick up the phone" etc, and I have no doubt that she would do the same if it came to it.
Obviously she'd be looking for concessions, but she would not side against Labour if it meant helping the Tories take us out of Europe.
Hopefully, we'll get the chance to find out I.e. I hope the Tories don't win a majority.
What are peoples views on Jo Swinsons willingness to strike a deal with Plaid Cymru, but not the SNP?
I find it peculiar and I’d like to hear a decent answer from her on it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee
She told Andrew Neil in the video posted above that she wouldn't work with a Corbyn minority government, even if it means the Lib Dems don't get a second EU referendum. She also said she will work with Plaid Cymru but not the SNP. She's all over the place.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibbyradge
She attempted to answer it in the interview with Andrew Neil. I wouldn't grade her answer as decent though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartie
I don't believe any of that. If push comes to shove, she'll do deals. Edit: She's probably all over the place, right enough, but it seems to me that they all are! :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Hibernia&Alba
The Liberals said in 2010 that student fees were a red line and that they wouldn't do deals.
The Liberals have a lot more to lose in Scotland than Wales and they see themselves picking up Scottish WM seats.
The SNP have said they'd help a Labour minority but we all know that if Indy2 wasn't granted, they wouldn't.
The DUP only supported May's government when it suited them etc etc etc.
Deals will be done if it comes to it.
I'm voting tactically and it'll be for Labour so I'm not sure why I'm bothering with this hypothetical discussion. Better than despairing over Hibs maybe.
Would Labour repeat the antics of 79, selling Scotland out at the cost of a tory government? People in Scotland are generally far more clued up these days and they would have no problem understanding why the SNP turned them down this time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibbyradge
Only time will tell. I fear a Tory majority, then, once out of the EU and its social protections, it's a race to the bottom. The wet dream of Johnson, Rees-Mogg, and the hardline Brexiteers who remain in the Tory Party.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibbyradge
Her answer was all over the place.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee
The honest answer is that there are rich pickings there for the taking for her in middle England right now. The SNP are toxic there, Plaid less so (right now, we'll see what happens if Wales has an independence referendum) so it doesn't do her any favours to be in any way pro-SNP in the eyes of the people who are her biggest target.
The truth of the matter is that it is highly hypocritical for her deal with one but not the other.
The LibDems will have target seats North of the border as well, so by fudging on this issue she stands to lose ground.
It is negligent of the LibDem spin doctors to be rolling her out to the media without a well-rehearsed answer to this question. They should be working overtime right now thinking of a suitable answer (just because we don't agree with it doesn't mean that such an answer doesn't exist).
Yes, that's a very real worry and there seems very little prospect of Labour getting itself sorted as a credible opposition for 2024.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibernia&Alba
At least you've got the hope of independence to cling on to. I'm f*****.
Hopefully, I'll be able to come home sometime.
Lib Dems will be hoping to pick up a few SNP seats, either where they are very close now like in North East Fife where the SNP has a majority of 2 or in other seats like Ross, Skye and Locharber where they will hope a bit of tactical voting will see them pip the SNP (Blackford's seat).
I imagine a lot of the vote they could pick up from the Tories would be the soft Tory type that Ruth Davidson picked up, voters who will want to see opposition to a new independence referendum and support for remaining in the EU.
Plaid Cyrmu and Welsh Independence are pretty much irrelevant currently so there's no issue there in forming an alliance.
Obviously Swinson can't come out and admit that so we'll probably see a few more dodgy interviews :greengrin
Honestly, I don't think they can give definitive answers to a lot of things without losing ground. Remaining ambiguous gives them plenty of wriggle room to do whatever they see fit regardless of the election outcome.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartie
The only thing we know about the Lib Dems is that they'll continue to campaign against Brexit after Brexit. But aren't prepared to do whatever it takes to stop Brexit if an opportunity in this election opens up for them to do so. Which should be raising alarm bells right across the UK.
Can't agree with that. Past behaviour is all you really have to go on when voting for politicians, if what they say they're going to do has no relationship with what they've done in the past, then they have little or no credibility.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibbyradge
Who is angry?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee
You have hung yourself by your own words. Ignoring the words you posted the other day doesn't mean you didn't say them. They were cleary sexist, no ifs, buts or maybes.
:agree:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibrandenburg
It's like Boris Johnson and his "we're the party of the NHS" bull****. Anybody with sense will look at their previous records regarding the NHS and will come to the conclusion that they quite clearly are not the party of the NHS.
It should be no different with Jo Swinson.
I haven't ignored anything. I just won't waste my time attempting to have grown up discussions with someone who throws false accusations around. I haven't said anything remotely sexist on here, even if that is your own personal perception.Quote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
I'm the one who believes women should be treated the same as men. It's you and your pal MA who are arguing against equality with your skewed perception of reality, not me.
In that case the relevant past behaviour is that politicians say one thing to get your vote, then frequently do the exact opposite.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibrandenburg
Just the number of broken manifesto promises must number thousands.
Political parties drop commitments without compunction when it suits them. The Tories always promise to reduce the national debt, but it has risen every year since they won office.
If the Liberals dropped their anti-Brexit commitment, they really would be finished so they'll deal with Labour if the opportunity arises.
They might try to have another go at PR or whatever, but they won't sit back and let the Tories take us out of Europe.
I accept that there's also the possibility of her offering to prop up a minority Tory government in return for a second referendum, but that would be harder to achieve.
As much as I dislike the tories, it wasn't the debt they commited to reducing, but the deficit. Which they have done by quite some margin. However, they've done so by flogging off public assets and services to private interests which will soon see the deficit sky rocket again. The tories biggest challenge isn't staying in government, it's trying to get out of government.
My pal MA? I don't know him but I agree with some things he says and disagree with others.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee
Your own words have exposed your bigotry as they have done on several other topics in the past. You just don't get it so it really is pointless carrying on this conversation.