The Dirty Independence Question

[eFestivals]

Or maybe they're just going by experience rather than promises?

yeah, because even nasty old Blair continued with Major's tory economic policies, right?

Yes-ers are as much on the money with that as they are are with the nutty idea (including from you specifically, from your posts here) pushed forwards now that "Westminster won't deal with the SNP just because they're Scottish".

Cos it's funny, I don't remember the huge anti-Scottish fuss about the UK having two Scottish born PM's in succession, two Scottish chancellor's in succession, or even anything about our current Scottish heritage PM.

Vote SNP, where if the facts don't fit we'll invent some new facts.

Edited March 14, 2015 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

PS: if you think Scotland won't notice the £3Bn yearly difference between what the tories and Labour will give to Scotland as its 'block grant', you should give up your vote to a five year old.

Vote SNP, to shit on the Scottish poor worse than Labour will.

[LJS]

yeah, because even nasty old Blair continued with Major's tory economic policies, right?

Pretty much,he did. in the first term there were a few good things but you only need to go & read what you have said elsewhere for expert opinion saying labour ain't much better than the Tories.

Yes-ers are as much on the money with that as they are are with the nutty idea (including from you specifically, from your posts here) pushed forwards now that "Westminster won't deal with the SNP just because they're Scottish".

The "nutty idea" does not come from me. it comes from the tory party, the mail , the telegraph, the sun & even , heaven help us, from stev bell in the Guardian.

Cos it's funny, I don't remember the huge anti-Scottish fuss about the UK having two Scottish born PM's in succession, two Scottish chancellor's in succession, or even anything about our current Scottish heritage PM.

The nationlaity of MP's , ministers & PM's is entirely irrelevant unless someone somewhere was arguing for Scottish Exceptionalism.

Vote SNP, where if the facts don't fit we'll invent some new facts.

Now as for your poll results, would you care to share which poll it was. I've looked at the most recent Scottish YouGov poll & whilst I can see how you might interpret that in the way you have but it would take a pretty selective reading of the results to come up with your conclusion - I'm sure you woudl never be guilty of that.

Edited March 14, 2015 by LJS

[eFestivals]

Pretty much,he did. in the first term there were a few good things but you only need to go & read what you have said elsewhere for expert opinion saying labour ain't much better than the Tories.

He didn't at all.

There's an awful lot that's shit about Blair, but he was still a very long way from being as shit as the tories.

The "nutty idea" does not come from me. it comes from the tory party, the mail , the telegraph, the sun & even , heaven help us, from stev bell in the Guardian.

Which part of "it's got fuck all to do with the fact of the SNP being Scottish" do you have such a problem understanding?

If it was merely about being "Scottish", all of the same would have happened around Brown. It didn't.

But don't let that stop you from making it up - as yes-ers always do, to void the true facts.

The nationlaity of MP's , ministers & PM's is entirely irrelevant unless someone somewhere was arguing for Scottish Exceptionalism.

It's fuck all to do with the claimed-but-non-existant exceptionalism either.

But don't let that stop you from making it up - as yes-ers always do, to void the true facts.

Now as for your poll results, would you care to share which poll it was. I've looked at the most recent Scottish YouGov poll & whilst I can see how you might interpret that in the way you have but it would take a pretty selective reading of the results to come up with your conclusion - I'm sure you woudl never be guilty of that.

Care to tell me how direct questions are selective reading?

If the SNP win a large number of seats from Labour at the general election this year, do you think it...

Makes no difference to whether there is a Conservative or Labour led government after the election?

There would be little difference for Scotland between a Labour led government under Ed Miliband and a Conservative led government under David Cameron?

http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/2i4cik3x8y/Times_Scotland_150312_Website.pdf

And here's what I actually read before I made the post .....

Scottish and Welsh polls

YouGov also produced Scottish and Welsh polls this week. The Welsh polling is here, and had topline Westminster figures of CON 25%, LAB 39%, LDEM 5%, Plaid 10%, UKIP 14%.

The Scottish polling is here and has topline figures of CON 18%, LAB 27%, LDEM 4%, SNP 46%, UKIP 2%. The SNP lead is down two points since the previous YouGov Scottish poll at the start of February, but remains at a formidable 19 points.

The Scottish poll also included some questions designed to tease out how effective Labour attempts to fight the SNP with a “vote SNP get Tory” sort of message. The short answer is not very. Essentially, for such an approach to work SNP voters would need to believe that returning SNP MPs really would make a Tory government more likely, would need to think a Conservative government was significantly worse than the alternative and would need to consider avoiding a Tory government as more important to them than the opportunity of returning lots of SNP MPs. All of these requirements are quite weakly represented amongst SNP voters – only 27% of SNP voters buy the argument that more SNP MPs will make a Conservative government more likely and while 38% of SNP voters think a Labour government at Westminster would be better for Scotland than a Tory one, only 15% think there’s “much” difference, and 49% think there’s little difference at all. Finally, even if SNP voters did think that returning SNP MPs would make a Tory government more likely, by 46% to 31% they’d rather have a Tory government and lots of SNP MPs than a Labour government and not many.

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/

And while you're at UK Polling Report, do notice how the tories are heading for victory because Scotland won't vote Labour.

Vote SNP, get tory.

You can reject that claim if you like, but you won't be able to reject the tory govt you stand a big chance of causig. But hey, if you're a typical anti-Labour Scot, you don't care, and you're quite happy for poorer Scots to suffer worse than they might otherwise.

Still, that only matches the SNP MPs who didn't vote against the bedroom tax. The SNP want a tory govt, the party they're happy to do deals with.

Edited March 14, 2015 by eFestivals

[LJS]

So you said "very nearly half of those people who will vote SNP don't care if there's a tory govt," which may be backed up by your quote which is pretty selective in the figures it quotes & the slant it puts on them.

if we go to the poll itself, it asks the question:

"Thinking about the possible governments that could be formed after the election and what would be best for Scotland, which of the following best reflects your view?"

Of All voters 37% said a Labour led government was either much or a little better as opposed to 19% who preferred a tory government.

Amongst SNP voters 38% preferred Labour while a massive 4% preferred the Tories.

So in fact SNP voters are significantly less in favour of a Tory government than the electorate as a whole.

Of course what you omit from your rants analysis is the possibility that some people actually decide their vote on the basis of their beliefs rather than as a tactical exercise.

http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/2i4cik3x8y/Times_Scotland_150312_Website.pdf

Edited March 14, 2015 by LJS

[eFestivals]

So in fact SNP voters are significantly less in favour of a Tory government than the electorate as a whole.

they have little greater want of a Labour govt either, as that poll proves.

What those people want is an SNP govt of an indie Scotland, and in the absence of an SNP govt of an indie Scotland, they don't give a shit - and that includes them not giving a shit if the people of Scotland suffer more greatly via a tory govt.

But hey, you don't do slanting with your own take, eh?

What that polling proves more than anything else is either that those Scots are politically inept, or they don't care if people in Scotland suffer while they pursue "the cause".

Either way, you're aligned with a bunch of fruitcakes no less nutty than those who'll vote UKIP - "the cause" before all bad effects.

Edited March 14, 2015 by eFestivals

[LJS]

they have little greater want of a Labour govt either, as that poll proves.

What those people want is an SNP govt of an indie Scotland, and in the absence of an SNP govt of an indie Scotland, they don't give a shit - and that includes them not giving a shit if the people of Scotland suffer more greatly via a tory govt.

But hey, you don't do slanting with your own take, eh?

What that polling proves more than anything else is either that those Scots are politically inept, or they don't care if people in Scotland suffer while they pursue "the cause".

Either way, you're aligned with a bunch of fruitcakes no less nutty than those who'll vote UKIP - "the cause" before all bad effects.

All who dare disagree with the mighty Rev. Neil are fruitcakes.

Superb. If you can't win the argument insult your opponent.

[LJS]

they have little greater want of a Labour govt either, as that poll proves.

It's normal for voters to want their own party to win so for the level of support for a Labour government to be 1% higher among SNP voters than the electorate as a whole is pretty high I'd say, but I'll concede it is open to interpretation. What the figures don't support is your assertion that SNP voters don't care if they get a Tory government.

What those people want is an SNP govt of an indie Scotland, and in the absence of an SNP govt of an indie Scotland, they don't give a shit - and that includes them not giving a shit if the people of Scotland suffer more greatly via a tory govt.

That is no doubt true of some SNP voters & indeed it would be remarkable if it wasn't what neither you nor I know is how many think that way. I would certainly imagine the number who would express it in the way you have is very small because you've done what you always do, take someone's opinion, put your interpretation of the outcome that view will lead to & then assert that the original someone is in favour of your outcome. Quite clever, but not clever enough.

But hey, you don't do slanting with your own take, eh?

I have regularly acknowledged that you can spin statistics any way you want. I simply posted some figures form the poll that contradicted your interpretation. Had I been posting these first (i.e. not in response to you) I would have prefaced my post with some sort of "depending on the question you look at, you can put other interpretations" sort of comment & I would have included a link to the poll. You regularly post unlinked assertion & declare them as fact.

What that polling proves more than anything else is either that those Scots are politically inept, or they don't care if people in Scotland suffer while they pursue "the cause".

Or...

What that polling proves more than anything else is either that those Scots are voting for a principle they believe in, because they believ in the long term that will be best for the people of Scotland.

Take your pick

Edited March 14, 2015 by LJS

[LJS]

Instead of running around shouting "vote SNP get Tory", making up stuff about the NHS, or encouraging people to get drunk & sing sectarian songs at football matches, perhaps Scottish Labour should be looking at this poll & asking themselves why only 20% of voters think Labour are the best party at protecting the NHS in Scotland.

In an amusing (but fairly trivial) side note, the 4 Scottish party leaders attended a meeting at Glasgow University yesterday.

"SNP First Minister Nicola Sturgeon, Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson and Liberal Democrat leader Willie Rennie told students at a debate at the University of Glasgow that they had tried cannabis in their youth, after being questioned about their policy on decriminalising the drug."

So far so normal, it's now OK for politicians to admit to dabbling with drugs in their youth as long as they didn't enjoy it (heaven forbid!) or it made them feel sick & the 3 guys above all duly ticked the "I used to be a real person" box

What about Jim?

"Mr Murphy, who is teetotal, said that "glue sniffing was the thing" in the Glasgow housing estate he grew up in. When asked whether he had tried it, he replied: "I don't remember", before adding: "At that time, drugs, and I'm giving away my age, it was just a kind of working class thing to do, kind of sniffing glue out of crisp pokes. It was a dreadful, harmful thing that was in that community at the time."

OK, I get the street cred - us working class kids used to sniff glue thing. But he "coudn't remember?" really? Anyone here not remember whether they've taken drugs or sniffed glue?

However it turns out this was only short term memory loss, for lo & behold, a wee while later...

"A spokesman for Scottish Labour later said that the party leader had "never taken drugs" and that he had been making the point that "when he was growing up drugs weren't as widespread and that the harmful thing for many people back then was glue sniffing." He added: "For the record that's not something Mr Murphy has tried either.""

I'm curious as to what happened here. Did Jim have to call London to find out what the official line was on whether he was a reformed smackhead or not? Did he have to quickly convene a focus group to find out which answer would gain the most votes.

As I said at the start its a pretty trivial point but it does indicate something about the state of Jim Murphy & Scottish Labour.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/scottish-politics/three-party-leaders-admit-cannabis-use-and-jim-murphy-remembers-he-didnt-.120640563

Edited March 14, 2015 by LJS

[eFestivals]

All who dare disagree with the mighty Rev. Neil are fruitcakes.

Superb. If you can't win the argument insult your opponent.

for me to have any chance of winning the argument, you'd first have to reference the facts. It's because you won't reference the facts that you're a fruitcake.

But you knew that already.

And to prove the point, what does GERS say aboutn the state of the Scottish economy, again?

[eFestivals]

It's normal for voters to want their own party to win

But the party you act in support of can't win. They can only win 59 seats out of 650.

What the figures don't support is your assertion that SNP voters don't care if they get a Tory government.

Yes they do. They don't care whether it's tory or labour.

That is no doubt true of some SNP voters & indeed it would be remarkable if it wasn't what neither you nor I know is how many think that way. I would certainly imagine the number who would express it in the way you have is very small because you've done what you always do, take someone's opinion, put your interpretation of the outcome that view will lead to & then assert that the original someone is in favour of your outcome. Quite clever, but not clever enough.

and your normal thing? Ignore all facts, and make it up out of nothing or find a squirrel.

I have regularly acknowledged that you can spin statistics any way you want. I simply posted some figures form the poll that contradicted your interpretation. Had I been posting these first (i.e. not in response to you) I would have prefaced my post with some sort of "depending on the question you look at, you can put other interpretations" sort of comment & I would have included a link to the poll. You regularly post unlinked assertion & declare them as fact.

And yet those questions are clear, as are the answer to them.

Tory or Labour, it matters not to those people - who'll happily shit on Scotland's poor.

They're more against what you say you want than I am!!!! But it's me that the weirdo for pointing it out, and not you for associating yourself with theose fruiitcakes.

What that polling proves more than anything else is either that those Scots are voting for a principle they believe in, because they believ in the long term that will be best for the people of Scotland.

Are facts against their principles? It certainly looks like it.

They might as well be voting for world peace and momma's apple pie.

----

Have you looked at WoS's take on GERS btw? It's comedy gold, and these are the nutters you support.

Edited March 14, 2015 by eFestivals

[LJS]

Nice to see a counterblast to the perceived wisdom that there is no alternative but to pander to apparent racism of the British electorate.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/immigration-as-a-votewinner-the-two-fastestgrowing-parties-are-positive-about-it-10109651.html

[eFestivals]

Nice to see a counterblast to the perceived wisdom that there is no alternative but to pander to apparent racism of the British electorate.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/immigration-as-a-votewinner-the-two-fastestgrowing-parties-are-positive-about-it-10109651.html

Careful, someone might mention how the SNP has anti-English policies enshrined in law.

Cue the normal "nothing of that is racist" response.

To which the reply is always "care to say how you'd react if English law had similar anti-Scottish elements?"

Edited March 16, 2015 by eFestivals

[gary1979666]

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/03/13/snp-remains-course-landslide/

Was surprised to see the lib dems down as far as this in Scotland. Similarly surprised that the Tories are holding their share of the vote since the 2010 GE. Not really looked at the Scottish polls, so interesting to see.

[eFestivals]

just out of interest, what's the SNP's stance - excluding independence - on electoral reform for the UK?

Are they solidly in favour - with a published policy - of PR for the UK?

And if they are, when they've got 90%-ish of the seats via around 45%-ish of the votes (as looks likely), will they nstill want PR, or will they do the same self-interest thing as parties normally do?

I'm wondering cos I'm aware of their current conflicting policies for stuff like this, such as devolution within the UK being a good thing for Scotland, but devolution within Scotland being an absolute red-line.

(Just to be clear, this isn't any trick question, I'd just like to know what their policy is, or what you think it is if you're a yes-er and don't know for sure).

[gary1979666]

just out of interest, what's the SNP's stance - excluding independence - on electoral reform for the UK?

Are they solidly in favour - with a published policy - of PR for the UK?

And if they are, when they've got 90%-ish of the seats via around 45%-ish of the votes (as looks likely), will they nstill want PR, or will they do the same self-interest thing as parties normally do?

I'm wondering cos I'm aware of their current conflicting policies for stuff like this, such as devolution within the UK being a good thing for Scotland, but devolution within Scotland being an absolute red-line.

(Just to be clear, this isn't any trick question, I'd just like to know what their policy is, or what you think it is if you're a yes-er and don't know for sure).

But PR would mean about 12 Tory MP's in Scotland - don't think they could bring themselves to permit that.

[eFestivals]

But PR would mean about 12 Tory MP's in Scotland - don't think they could bring themselves to permit that.

It's why I'm asking. Everything I've ever read about the SNP implies they've even bigger control freaks than the tories or Labour (see what I said about devolution), but I'd still like to know what the official position is.

[LJS]

just out of interest, what's the SNP's stance - excluding independence - on electoral reform for the UK?

Are they solidly in favour - with a published policy - of PR for the UK?

And if they are, when they've got 90%-ish of the seats via around 45%-ish of the votes (as looks likely), will they nstill want PR, or will they do the same self-interest thing as parties normally do?

I'm wondering cos I'm aware of their current conflicting policies for stuff like this, such as devolution within the UK being a good thing for Scotland, but devolution within Scotland being an absolute red-line.

(Just to be clear, this isn't any trick question, I'd just like to know what their policy is, or what you think it is if you're a yes-er and don't know for sure).

All I know is they were in favour in the av referendum. How much they'll be in favour when they have 50 mp's, I don't know.

As for control freakery, it is something I have criticised them for in the past. However,the anti devolving power locally thing is not quite as much an open and shut case as you make out

http://www.gov.scot/Publications/2014/06/2708

[eFestivals]

Thanks LJS.

As for control freakery, it is something I have criticised them for in the past. However,the anti devolving power locally thing is not quite as much an open and shut case as you make out

http://www.gov.scot/Publications/2014/06/2708

anything the islands like then, as lonbg as it's SNP approved - which means not everything the islands might like.

What happened with the teachers thing, btw, where the SNP were trying to force local councils to run up bigger debts because the SNP have taken their money for pet projects?

[eFestivals]

I noticed last week that NS is 100% full-on in the SNP tradition of being puritanical.

I was quite amused by it being the tory whose hidden-subtext was "drugs? I've done them all, but shhh, don't tell anyone".

Vote SNP for an up-tight Scotland?

[eFestivals]

I see Labour have no cvonfirmed categorically that SNP-ers woill be votinbg SNP aqnd getting marginalised - just as i said would be the case.

So now the SNP have a dilemma. Do they stitch up their voters and do a deal with the tories*, or do they support Labour and get nothing for doing so?

* and before you start with "they'll never do a deal with the tories", you're forgetting the Scottish govt from 2007 to 2011 when the SNP did a deal with the tories, and the rumours flying around that discussions have already taken place with the tories around a deal for after May.

Edited March 16, 2015 by eFestivals

[zahidf]

I see Labour have no cvonfirmed categorically that SNP-ers woill be votinbg SNP aqnd getting marginalised - just as i said would be the case.

So now the SNP have a dilemma. Do they stitch up their voters and do a deal with the tories*, or do they support Labour and get nothing for doing so?

* and before you start with "they'll never do a deal with the tories", you're forgetting the Scottish govt from 2007 to 2011 when the SNP did a deal with the tories, and the rumours flying around that discussions have already taken place with the tories around a deal for after May.

Hasn't Cameron's 'SNP want to kill the UK' stopped that?

i assume it will be a 'supply' agreement where SNP will vote for certain policies and against or abstain from others.

[eFestivals]

Hasn't Cameron's 'SNP want to kill the UK' stopped that?

you'd think so, wouldn't you?

But there's nothing as greedy as the unprincipled with their eyes on power, so the tories and SNP are a perfect pairing.

i assume it will be a 'supply' agreement where SNP will vote for certain policies and against or abstain from others.

The SNP version of 'supply' is one where they get a deal of some sort, of something in return for their support.

That was made 100% clear by Sturgeon's "we're prepared to compromise over Trident" statement of a week or so ago. If it's just voting for what they support and against what they don't, there'd have been no need for those Trident words.

So the SNP are now painted into a corner, where they have to be the lackies of one or other party. The tories will offer FFA for SNP support, tho it's hugely amusing that the SNP are likely to turn it down despite it being what they claim to want - because then the SNP's need for cutting spending would get exposed, and then the indie idea is fucked for all time.

So all that's left is "Vote SNP, get marginalised".

[LJS]

I see Labour have no cvonfirmed categorically that SNP-ers woill be votinbg SNP aqnd getting marginalised - just as i said would be the case.

So now the SNP have a dilemma. Do they stitch up their voters and do a deal with the tories*, or do they support Labour and get nothing for doing so?

* and before you start with "they'll never do a deal with the tories", you're forgetting the Scottish govt from 2007 to 2011 when the SNP did a deal with the tories, and the rumours flying around that discussions have already taken place with the tories around a deal for after May.

Labour have confirmed categorically that they will not form a coalition with the SNP & there will be no SNP ministers in a future Labour government. Which is fine except no one was suggesting either of these things was at all likely... Except for the Tories & some barmies in the English press.

"The BBC's assistant political editor Norman Smith noted that Mr Miliband had not ruled out a more informal arrangement whereby the SNP could offer a Labour minority government support on a vote-by-vote basis, known as "confidence and supply"."

[LJS]

I noticed last week that NS is 100% full-on in the SNP tradition of being puritanical.

I was quite amused by it being the tory whose hidden-subtext was "drugs? I've done them all, but shhh, don't tell anyone".

Vote SNP for an up-tight Scotland?

No idea what you're on about here, Neil. Nicola, Willie & Ruth all "confessed" to taking drugs although they didn't enjoy them (of course!) Jim Murphy "couldn't remember" although later on his memory returned (presumably after consulting Labour HQ) & a spokesdude confirmed he had not taken drugs.

So the only puritan is Murphy.

do keep up.