What happens to the Scons over the next two years if the non-Scottish-constituency Tory MPs continue to resemble some of the less mobile organisms in the tanks at Plymouth Marine Aquarium? Mr Johnson will still be i/c at the next GE - and the next Holyrood election for all I know.
If the members had picked Murdo Fraser rather than Ruth Davidson as leader and split off from the London-based party when things were quiet, they'd be insulated.
Now, if they split off, they're basically admitting that the SNP were right all along to demand independence from Westminster and the UK. Edit: and some other truly Unionist party will be along in a moment to siphon off some of the vote. In fact there's already one - Ms Ballantyne's lot.
But if they don't, they'll be competing with Slab for third place.
How to resolve that, I have no idea.
Perhaps they have already created the required distance. Time will tell.
Doubt it. All they are doing, every tine they say " a big dog left the mess not me" is admitting how shite the governing party of the UK is, every day. And they are the ones who demand subservience to that government.
I love the emotive language "subservience". In the event of Scottish Independence, do you think Orkney should have to show "subservience" to Edinburgh? I mean, surely if the argument that it was "unfair for rUK to have "dragged" Scotland out of EU, surely the same logic is that it is unfair that Glaswegians should "drag" Orkney (and other regions of Scotland) out of UK? I believe some Nats say that the devolved nations should have been able to veto Brexit (and I have some sympathy with that view), so surely the islanders of Orkney should be able to do the same by the same logic?
What happens to the Scons over the next two years if the non-Scottish-constituency Tory MPs continue to resemble some of the less mobile organisms in the tanks at Plymouth Marine Aquarium? Mr Johnson will still be i/c at the next GE - and the next Holyrood election for all I know.
If the members had picked Murdo Fraser rather than Ruth Davidson as leader and split off from the London-based party when things were quiet, they'd be insulated.
Now, if they split off, they're basically admitting that the SNP were right all along to demand independence from Westminster and the UK. Edit: and some other truly Unionist party will be along in a moment to siphon off some of the vote. In fact there's already one - Ms Ballantyne's lot.
But if they don't, they'll be competing with Slab for third place.
How to resolve that, I have no idea.
Perhaps they have already created the required distance. Time will tell.
Doubt it. All they are doing, every tine they say " a big dog left the mess not me" is admitting how shite the governing party of the UK is, every day. And they are the ones who demand subservience to that government.
I love the emotive language "subservience". In the event of Scottish Independence, do you think Orkney should have to show "subservience" to Edinburgh? I mean, surely if the argument that it was "unfair for rUK to have "dragged" Scotland out of EU, surely the same logic is that it is unfair that Glaswegians should "drag" Orkney (and other regions of Scotland) out of UK? I believe some Nats say that the devolved nations should have been able to veto Brexit (and I have some sympathy with that view), so surely the islanders of Orkney should be able to do the same by the same logic?
Orkney isn't a nation. It would be more akin to the occasional oddballs who want an independent Yorkshire.
Except there is a registered Yorkshire Party (isn’t Pb’s Herdson a supporter/member?) while no such equivalent exists for Orkney or Shetland. I suppose the occasional Libdem, tabloid editorial or online Yoon who floats the idea of indy for O&S as a stunning rhetorical argument against Scottish indy would qualify as oddball mind.
Orkney (and the Shetlands) do have a distinct history and a distinct political culture compared to the rest of Scotland. Indeed, they are distinct genetically! The average person in Scotland is more closely related to the average person in England than to the average person in O&S.
What happens to the Scons over the next two years if the non-Scottish-constituency Tory MPs continue to resemble some of the less mobile organisms in the tanks at Plymouth Marine Aquarium? Mr Johnson will still be i/c at the next GE - and the next Holyrood election for all I know.
If the members had picked Murdo Fraser rather than Ruth Davidson as leader and split off from the London-based party when things were quiet, they'd be insulated.
Now, if they split off, they're basically admitting that the SNP were right all along to demand independence from Westminster and the UK. Edit: and some other truly Unionist party will be along in a moment to siphon off some of the vote. In fact there's already one - Ms Ballantyne's lot.
But if they don't, they'll be competing with Slab for third place.
How to resolve that, I have no idea.
Perhaps they have already created the required distance. Time will tell.
Doubt it. All they are doing, every tine they say " a big dog left the mess not me" is admitting how shite the governing party of the UK is, every day. And they are the ones who demand subservience to that government.
I love the emotive language "subservience". In the event of Scottish Independence, do you think Orkney should have to show "subservience" to Edinburgh? I mean, surely if the argument that it was "unfair for rUK to have "dragged" Scotland out of EU, surely the same logic is that it is unfair that Glaswegians should "drag" Orkney (and other regions of Scotland) out of UK? I believe some Nats say that the devolved nations should have been able to veto Brexit (and I have some sympathy with that view), so surely the islanders of Orkney should be able to do the same by the same logic?
Orkney isn't a nation. It would be more akin to the occasional oddballs who want an independent Yorkshire.
Orkney has it's own culture and very independent history and was annexed to Scotland in 1471. Suggest you look up history before posting rebuttals and making ludicrous false comparisons maybe?
We finally found a type of nationalism you adore. Hurray. What makes Orcadians so unique?
I don't adore any kind of nationalism. Nationalism requires a belief in exceptionalism, which is genuinely silly and irrational. It can be a rallying point where there is genuine national threat or repression (such as Ireland), but Scotland is not repressed. For large part of history they have been very enthusiastic oppressors!
How many more elections do the SNP have to win before it passes for repression? One, two, three, ten, one hundred?
Nah.
If we really wanted to oppress the SNP we would follow the Spanish route and not only ban indyref2 but arrest Sturgeon too, suspend Holyrood and impose UK government direct rule on Scotland
I suspect the current situation suits the ruling SNP regime just fine.
What happens to the Scons over the next two years if the non-Scottish-constituency Tory MPs continue to resemble some of the less mobile organisms in the tanks at Plymouth Marine Aquarium? Mr Johnson will still be i/c at the next GE - and the next Holyrood election for all I know.
If the members had picked Murdo Fraser rather than Ruth Davidson as leader and split off from the London-based party when things were quiet, they'd be insulated.
Now, if they split off, they're basically admitting that the SNP were right all along to demand independence from Westminster and the UK. Edit: and some other truly Unionist party will be along in a moment to siphon off some of the vote. In fact there's already one - Ms Ballantyne's lot.
But if they don't, they'll be competing with Slab for third place.
How to resolve that, I have no idea.
Perhaps they have already created the required distance. Time will tell.
Doubt it. All they are doing, every tine they say " a big dog left the mess not me" is admitting how shite the governing party of the UK is, every day. And they are the ones who demand subservience to that government.
I love the emotive language "subservience". In the event of Scottish Independence, do you think Orkney should have to show "subservience" to Edinburgh? I mean, surely if the argument that it was "unfair for rUK to have "dragged" Scotland out of EU, surely the same logic is that it is unfair that Glaswegians should "drag" Orkney (and other regions of Scotland) out of UK? I believe some Nats say that the devolved nations should have been able to veto Brexit (and I have some sympathy with that view), so surely the islanders of Orkney should be able to do the same by the same logic?
Orkney isn't a nation. It would be more akin to the occasional oddballs who want an independent Yorkshire.
Orkney has it's own culture and very independent history and was annexed to Scotland in 1471. Suggest you look up history before posting rebuttals and making ludicrous false comparisons maybe?
We finally found a type of nationalism you adore. Hurray. What makes Orcadians so unique?
I don't adore any kind of nationalism. Nationalism requires a belief in exceptionalism, which is genuinely silly and irrational. It can be a rallying point where there is genuine national threat or repression (such as Ireland), but Scotland is not repressed. For large part of history they have been very enthusiastic oppressors!
What happens to the Scons over the next two years if the non-Scottish-constituency Tory MPs continue to resemble some of the less mobile organisms in the tanks at Plymouth Marine Aquarium? Mr Johnson will still be i/c at the next GE - and the next Holyrood election for all I know.
If the members had picked Murdo Fraser rather than Ruth Davidson as leader and split off from the London-based party when things were quiet, they'd be insulated.
Now, if they split off, they're basically admitting that the SNP were right all along to demand independence from Westminster and the UK. Edit: and some other truly Unionist party will be along in a moment to siphon off some of the vote. In fact there's already one - Ms Ballantyne's lot.
But if they don't, they'll be competing with Slab for third place.
How to resolve that, I have no idea.
Perhaps they have already created the required distance. Time will tell.
Doubt it. All they are doing, every tine they say " a big dog left the mess not me" is admitting how shite the governing party of the UK is, every day. And they are the ones who demand subservience to that government.
I love the emotive language "subservience". In the event of Scottish Independence, do you think Orkney should have to show "subservience" to Edinburgh? I mean, surely if the argument that it was "unfair for rUK to have "dragged" Scotland out of EU, surely the same logic is that it is unfair that Glaswegians should "drag" Orkney (and other regions of Scotland) out of UK? I believe some Nats say that the devolved nations should have been able to veto Brexit (and I have some sympathy with that view), so surely the islanders of Orkney should be able to do the same by the same logic?
Orkney isn't a nation. It would be more akin to the occasional oddballs who want an independent Yorkshire.
Orkney has it's own culture and very independent history and was annexed to Scotland in 1471. Suggest you look up history before posting rebuttals and making ludicrous false comparisons maybe?
On a PB point of order: Orkney was part of the Norwegian kingdom at that time. The 1471 event was not a de novo annexation but a transfer between kingdoms, together with Shetland.
Was there a referendum of Orcadians at the time, or was this just a stitch up by the elite?
We should right this long standing injustice and have one if Scotland becomes independent.
So merely a change of leader by the Tories will not be enough for them to win another majority at the next general election. That is especially given few policy differences between Sunak and Boris, unlike the policy differences on Brexit between Boris and May or on the poll tax between Thatcher and Major when the Tories changing PM midterm did put them back in the lead and see them win the next general election.
Unless Labour gets a clear and consistent 10%+ lead in most polls, which it still does not have and the Tories turn to Sunak to save the furniture then I suspect Boris will stay. Unless there are criminal charges against him from the Met once their inquiry concludes
Why do you assume that there are few policy differences between Sunak and Boris? We really have no idea what Sunak or any other contender would actually do because at the moment they work for Boris, he’s the boss, he decides the direction, the priorities etc.
If Sunak suddenly becomes PM do you not think that unshackled from Boris’ “vision” his policies could be vastly different - maybe for the better or the worse but it seems like you use these polls to buttress your belief that Boris must not go - “see, the polls say it wouldn’t change anything so best we stick with Boris”.
These polls are not stuck in aspic and so I think it’s a false comfort blanket to Boris supporters but also dangerous as it holds back the chance of much needed change if there are too many Tory MPs with this “thought” process.
Boris should stand for re-election, put his vision to the test against other visions and see what happens if he believes he’s the best man for the job…..
Yep, Big Clown has less balls than John Major.
John Major only stood for re election as leader in 1995 as he knew his only opponent was likely to be John Redwood, who he easily beat.
Portillo, the Sunak of his day at the end of the last Tory government, stayed in Cabinet and refused to stand against Major
I remember the events very well, and I have met John Major on a number of occasions. He didn't know that at all. Please reign in your propensity for talking bollox.
Serves them right. They had various key moments in last couple of weeks when they should have resigned from Cabinet and forced a leadership election.
They have to seize the crown in this case.
Sorry, but why do they? to please Keir Starmer? to please the Guardian? to please the BBC? to please the SNP? to please the Liberal Democrats? to please the many on here who never vote tory but want Johnson gone? to please those tories like Scott who want to replace Johnson with someone more remain friendly?
Last night Johnson offered his MPs a big dollop of conservatism. They will sack him if he doesn't deliver. On their time and their agenda.
What happens to the Scons over the next two years if the non-Scottish-constituency Tory MPs continue to resemble some of the less mobile organisms in the tanks at Plymouth Marine Aquarium? Mr Johnson will still be i/c at the next GE - and the next Holyrood election for all I know.
If the members had picked Murdo Fraser rather than Ruth Davidson as leader and split off from the London-based party when things were quiet, they'd be insulated.
Now, if they split off, they're basically admitting that the SNP were right all along to demand independence from Westminster and the UK. Edit: and some other truly Unionist party will be along in a moment to siphon off some of the vote. In fact there's already one - Ms Ballantyne's lot.
But if they don't, they'll be competing with Slab for third place.
How to resolve that, I have no idea.
Perhaps they have already created the required distance. Time will tell.
Doubt it. All they are doing, every tine they say " a big dog left the mess not me" is admitting how shite the governing party of the UK is, every day. And they are the ones who demand subservience to that government.
I love the emotive language "subservience". In the event of Scottish Independence, do you think Orkney should have to show "subservience" to Edinburgh? I mean, surely if the argument that it was "unfair for rUK to have "dragged" Scotland out of EU, surely the same logic is that it is unfair that Glaswegians should "drag" Orkney (and other regions of Scotland) out of UK? I believe some Nats say that the devolved nations should have been able to veto Brexit (and I have some sympathy with that view), so surely the islanders of Orkney should be able to do the same by the same logic?
Orkney isn't a nation. It would be more akin to the occasional oddballs who want an independent Yorkshire.
Except there is a registered Yorkshire Party (isn’t Pb’s Herdson a supporter/member?) while no such equivalent exists for Orkney or Shetland. I suppose the occasional Libdem, tabloid editorial or online Yoon who floats the idea of indy for O&S as a stunning rhetorical argument against Scottish indy would qualify as oddball mind.
There was a brief spasm called Wir Shetland in the 2010s but it seems to have disappeared without trace. Like many ideas it survives more strongly in certain people’s imaginations than in the harsh light of electoral reality.
I hesitate to discuss this in any detail, because this is a polity within a polity than I am not part of, but the concept which is often floated is Orkney and Shetland having an equivalent relationship with the UK as Jersey and Guernsey. Which I can see the attraction of. But the impression I get is that constitutional change is not a particularly hot topic in the far north. The lack of overt enthusiasm for Sindy is at least matched by the lack of overt enthusiasm for any other arrangement. Would be very interesting to hear from anyone with local knowledge - although diverse as we are I don't recall every hearing from an Orcadian or Sheltander on here?
What happens to the Scons over the next two years if the non-Scottish-constituency Tory MPs continue to resemble some of the less mobile organisms in the tanks at Plymouth Marine Aquarium? Mr Johnson will still be i/c at the next GE - and the next Holyrood election for all I know.
If the members had picked Murdo Fraser rather than Ruth Davidson as leader and split off from the London-based party when things were quiet, they'd be insulated.
Now, if they split off, they're basically admitting that the SNP were right all along to demand independence from Westminster and the UK. Edit: and some other truly Unionist party will be along in a moment to siphon off some of the vote. In fact there's already one - Ms Ballantyne's lot.
But if they don't, they'll be competing with Slab for third place.
How to resolve that, I have no idea.
Perhaps they have already created the required distance. Time will tell.
Doubt it. All they are doing, every tine they say " a big dog left the mess not me" is admitting how shite the governing party of the UK is, every day. And they are the ones who demand subservience to that government.
I love the emotive language "subservience". In the event of Scottish Independence, do you think Orkney should have to show "subservience" to Edinburgh? I mean, surely if the argument that it was "unfair for rUK to have "dragged" Scotland out of EU, surely the same logic is that it is unfair that Glaswegians should "drag" Orkney (and other regions of Scotland) out of UK? I believe some Nats say that the devolved nations should have been able to veto Brexit (and I have some sympathy with that view), so surely the islanders of Orkney should be able to do the same by the same logic?
Orkney isn't a nation. It would be more akin to the occasional oddballs who want an independent Yorkshire.
Orkney has it's own culture and very independent history and was annexed to Scotland in 1471. Suggest you look up history before posting rebuttals and making ludicrous false comparisons maybe?
We finally found a type of nationalism you adore. Hurray. What makes Orcadians so unique?
I don't adore any kind of nationalism. Nationalism requires a belief in exceptionalism, which is genuinely silly and irrational. It can be a rallying point where there is genuine national threat or repression (such as Ireland), but Scotland is not repressed. For large part of history they have been very enthusiastic oppressors!
How many more elections do the SNP have to win before it passes for repression? One, two, three, ten, one hundred?
Nah.
If we really wanted to oppress the SNP we would follow the Spanish route and not only ban indyref2 but arrest Sturgeon too, suspend Holyrood and impose UK government direct rule on Scotland
So pre 1999 Scotland was oppressed in HYFUD world. Interesting.
Separatre legal system with no real control over it (only when MPs for other constituencyes let them). Became very apparent with the poll tax. That was what really drove devolution and indy movcements.
• Colour me x • It's a view • Irregular verbs • Dockside • First • I'm no Trump supporter, but • War with France
Irregular verbs was amusing at first, but has been aired too often. Agree with the rest: it’s a view is particularly grating.
I’d add +1 and this. Use the like button if you agree with something someone has said.
"It's a view" is an egregious truism – was probably written somewhere on the internet once by some nerd who thought they were being airily clever, then was adopted by PB and stuck around for what seems like decades.
On the Shetland thing, it's quite interesting how violent the reaction is when someone brings it up, even as a joke. Touches a button.
I was canvassed by a SNP MSP (Biagi) in 2014 and asked him whether the Borders, with their own distinct identity (see all the place names), proximity to England, and Tories, would be allowed to remain in the UK. He didn't have a good answer.
What happens to the Scons over the next two years if the non-Scottish-constituency Tory MPs continue to resemble some of the less mobile organisms in the tanks at Plymouth Marine Aquarium? Mr Johnson will still be i/c at the next GE - and the next Holyrood election for all I know.
If the members had picked Murdo Fraser rather than Ruth Davidson as leader and split off from the London-based party when things were quiet, they'd be insulated.
Now, if they split off, they're basically admitting that the SNP were right all along to demand independence from Westminster and the UK. Edit: and some other truly Unionist party will be along in a moment to siphon off some of the vote. In fact there's already one - Ms Ballantyne's lot.
But if they don't, they'll be competing with Slab for third place.
How to resolve that, I have no idea.
Perhaps they have already created the required distance. Time will tell.
Doubt it. All they are doing, every tine they say " a big dog left the mess not me" is admitting how shite the governing party of the UK is, every day. And they are the ones who demand subservience to that government.
I love the emotive language "subservience". In the event of Scottish Independence, do you think Orkney should have to show "subservience" to Edinburgh? I mean, surely if the argument that it was "unfair for rUK to have "dragged" Scotland out of EU, surely the same logic is that it is unfair that Glaswegians should "drag" Orkney (and other regions of Scotland) out of UK? I believe some Nats say that the devolved nations should have been able to veto Brexit (and I have some sympathy with that view), so surely the islanders of Orkney should be able to do the same by the same logic?
Orkney isn't a nation. It would be more akin to the occasional oddballs who want an independent Yorkshire.
Except there is a registered Yorkshire Party (isn’t Pb’s Herdson a supporter/member?) while no such equivalent exists for Orkney or Shetland. I suppose the occasional Libdem, tabloid editorial or online Yoon who floats the idea of indy for O&S as a stunning rhetorical argument against Scottish indy would qualify as oddball mind.
There was a brief spasm called Wir Shetland in the 2010s but it seems to have disappeared without trace. Like many ideas it survives more strongly in certain people’s imaginations than in the harsh light of electoral reality.
I hesitate to discuss this in any detail, because this is a polity within a polity than I am not part of, but the concept which is often floated is Orkney and Shetland having an equivalent relationship with the UK as Jersey and Guernsey. Which I can see the attraction of. But the impression I get is that constitutional change is not a particularly hot topic in the far north. The lack of overt enthusiasm for Sindy is at least matched by the lack of overt enthusiasm for any other arrangement. Would be very interesting to hear from anyone with local knowledge - although diverse as we are I don't recall every hearing from an Orcadian or Sheltander on here?
Most talk is from the PBTories who can't cope with an independence movement without wanting to commit Partition yet again. It is a bit as if the SNP were to demand a referendum for the Isle of Wight to join an independent Scotland. Partly trolling.
What happens to the Scons over the next two years if the non-Scottish-constituency Tory MPs continue to resemble some of the less mobile organisms in the tanks at Plymouth Marine Aquarium? Mr Johnson will still be i/c at the next GE - and the next Holyrood election for all I know.
If the members had picked Murdo Fraser rather than Ruth Davidson as leader and split off from the London-based party when things were quiet, they'd be insulated.
Now, if they split off, they're basically admitting that the SNP were right all along to demand independence from Westminster and the UK. Edit: and some other truly Unionist party will be along in a moment to siphon off some of the vote. In fact there's already one - Ms Ballantyne's lot.
But if they don't, they'll be competing with Slab for third place.
How to resolve that, I have no idea.
Perhaps they have already created the required distance. Time will tell.
Doubt it. All they are doing, every tine they say " a big dog left the mess not me" is admitting how shite the governing party of the UK is, every day. And they are the ones who demand subservience to that government.
I love the emotive language "subservience". In the event of Scottish Independence, do you think Orkney should have to show "subservience" to Edinburgh? I mean, surely if the argument that it was "unfair for rUK to have "dragged" Scotland out of EU, surely the same logic is that it is unfair that Glaswegians should "drag" Orkney (and other regions of Scotland) out of UK? I believe some Nats say that the devolved nations should have been able to veto Brexit (and I have some sympathy with that view), so surely the islanders of Orkney should be able to do the same by the same logic?
Orkney isn't a nation. It would be more akin to the occasional oddballs who want an independent Yorkshire.
As expected, no green light from Germany to the delivery of weapons from Estonia to Ukraine. Berlin is not willing to see deterrence as a factor that can prevent escalation. An even bigger question is, will Germany strengthen its contribution to NATO's deterrence vis à vis Russia?
On the Shetland thing, it's quite interesting how violent the reaction is when someone brings it up, even as a joke. Touches a button.
I was canvassed by a SNP MSP (Biagi) in 2014 and asked him whether the Borders, with their own distinct identity (see all the place names), proximity to England, and Tories, would be allowed to remain in the UK. He didn't have a good answer.
Surprised by that. One very good reason is that the national border runs where it does and a rUK enforced partition would be an act of hostility. The Borderers are of course entitled to ask for a referendum of their own accord.
• Colour me x • It's a view • Irregular verbs • Dockside • First • I'm no Trump supporter, but • War with France
Irregular verbs was amusing at first, but has been aired too often. Agree with the rest: it’s a view is particularly grating.
I’d add +1 and this. Use the like button if you agree with something someone has said.
"It's a view" is an egregious truism – was probably written somewhere on the internet once by some nerd who thought they were being airily clever, then was adopted by PB and stuck around for what seems like decades.
What happens to the Scons over the next two years if the non-Scottish-constituency Tory MPs continue to resemble some of the less mobile organisms in the tanks at Plymouth Marine Aquarium? Mr Johnson will still be i/c at the next GE - and the next Holyrood election for all I know.
If the members had picked Murdo Fraser rather than Ruth Davidson as leader and split off from the London-based party when things were quiet, they'd be insulated.
Now, if they split off, they're basically admitting that the SNP were right all along to demand independence from Westminster and the UK. Edit: and some other truly Unionist party will be along in a moment to siphon off some of the vote. In fact there's already one - Ms Ballantyne's lot.
But if they don't, they'll be competing with Slab for third place.
How to resolve that, I have no idea.
Perhaps they have already created the required distance. Time will tell.
Doubt it. All they are doing, every tine they say " a big dog left the mess not me" is admitting how shite the governing party of the UK is, every day. And they are the ones who demand subservience to that government.
I love the emotive language "subservience". In the event of Scottish Independence, do you think Orkney should have to show "subservience" to Edinburgh? I mean, surely if the argument that it was "unfair for rUK to have "dragged" Scotland out of EU, surely the same logic is that it is unfair that Glaswegians should "drag" Orkney (and other regions of Scotland) out of UK? I believe some Nats say that the devolved nations should have been able to veto Brexit (and I have some sympathy with that view), so surely the islanders of Orkney should be able to do the same by the same logic?
Orkney isn't a nation. It would be more akin to the occasional oddballs who want an independent Yorkshire.
On the Shetland thing, it's quite interesting how violent the reaction is when someone brings it up, even as a joke. Touches a button.
I was canvassed by a SNP MSP (Biagi) in 2014 and asked him whether the Borders, with their own distinct identity (see all the place names), proximity to England, and Tories, would be allowed to remain in the UK. He didn't have a good answer.
Surprised by that. One very good reason is that the national border runs where it does and a rUK enforced partition would be an act of hostility. The Borderers are of course entitled to ask for a referendum of their own accord.
I don't think that's a good answer - a random, historic line in the moor that moved around a lot until quite recently.
It's a weakness in the argument for independence (among other strengths).
Serves them right. They had various key moments in last couple of weeks when they should have resigned from Cabinet and forced a leadership election.
They have to seize the crown in this case.
Sorry, but why do they? to please Keir Starmer? to please the Guardian? to please the BBC? to please the SNP? to please the Liberal Democrats? to please the many on here who never vote tory but want Johnson gone? to please those tories like Scott who want to replace Johnson with someone more remain friendly?
Last night Johnson offered his MPs a big dollop of conservatism. They will sack him if he doesn't deliver. On their time and their agenda.
When oh when will you learn? Johnson is not remotely interested in delivery. He is a lazy oaf.
On the Shetland thing, it's quite interesting how violent the reaction is when someone brings it up, even as a joke. Touches a button.
I was canvassed by a SNP MSP (Biagi) in 2014 and asked him whether the Borders, with their own distinct identity (see all the place names), proximity to England, and Tories, would be allowed to remain in the UK. He didn't have a good answer.
Surprised by that. One very good reason is that the national border runs where it does and a rUK enforced partition would be an act of hostility. The Borderers are of course entitled to ask for a referendum of their own accord.
I don't think that's a good answer - a random, historic line in the moor that moved around a lot until quite recently.
It's a weakness in the argument for independence (among other strengths).
What would you envisage as the hypothetical mechanism for being 'allowed to remain in the UK'? A political movement, representatives being elected on a platform of remain and a referendum, or it being okayed just because David Mundell feels it in his watter?
Listen to the second item on the WATO - about the appalling conduct and culture of policemen at Charing Cross police station.
The first item is pretty horrific too - on child sexual abuse.
Then remember what the PM said yesterday in Parliament and weep at the state of our public life.
I would say that this is is yet another reason why Ms Dick should disappear from view. But what is the point? Incompetence is irrelevant. Shamelessness and hanging onto power are the only "qualities" which matter these days.
I will have more to say about this - as you might expect. Sorry.
What happens to the Scons over the next two years if the non-Scottish-constituency Tory MPs continue to resemble some of the less mobile organisms in the tanks at Plymouth Marine Aquarium? Mr Johnson will still be i/c at the next GE - and the next Holyrood election for all I know.
If the members had picked Murdo Fraser rather than Ruth Davidson as leader and split off from the London-based party when things were quiet, they'd be insulated.
Now, if they split off, they're basically admitting that the SNP were right all along to demand independence from Westminster and the UK. Edit: and some other truly Unionist party will be along in a moment to siphon off some of the vote. In fact there's already one - Ms Ballantyne's lot.
But if they don't, they'll be competing with Slab for third place.
How to resolve that, I have no idea.
Perhaps they have already created the required distance. Time will tell.
Doubt it. All they are doing, every tine they say " a big dog left the mess not me" is admitting how shite the governing party of the UK is, every day. And they are the ones who demand subservience to that government.
I love the emotive language "subservience". In the event of Scottish Independence, do you think Orkney should have to show "subservience" to Edinburgh? I mean, surely if the argument that it was "unfair for rUK to have "dragged" Scotland out of EU, surely the same logic is that it is unfair that Glaswegians should "drag" Orkney (and other regions of Scotland) out of UK? I believe some Nats say that the devolved nations should have been able to veto Brexit (and I have some sympathy with that view), so surely the islanders of Orkney should be able to do the same by the same logic?
Orkney isn't a nation. It would be more akin to the occasional oddballs who want an independent Yorkshire.
Orkney has it's own culture and very independent history and was annexed to Scotland in 1471. Suggest you look up history before posting rebuttals and making ludicrous false comparisons maybe?
We finally found a type of nationalism you adore. Hurray. What makes Orcadians so unique?
I don't adore any kind of nationalism. Nationalism requires a belief in exceptionalism, which is genuinely silly and irrational. It can be a rallying point where there is genuine national threat or repression (such as Ireland), but Scotland is not repressed. For large part of history they have been very enthusiastic oppressors!
Nationalism does not require a belief in exceptionalism.
Can I strongly encourage you to actually learn a bit about the phenomenon of nationalism? It's really a lot more interesting than you think, and a well-rounded view of it would take in not just the variants you seem focused on. A good place to start would be a detailed exploration of the (failed) revolutions of 1848. It's really hard to read through those without having at least a little sympathy with the nationalist elements. Nationalism was more than just a "rallying point". In my view it was an essential curative to not just the continental empires of the day, but as a binding force that was needed to overcome the ideological terrors. When caught between the prongs of conservative absolutism and proto-socialist unrest, some of the liberals of the day turned to nationalism to try to cement the democratic reforms and keep order. In my reading, these were largely the good guys of the period, and though they lost they set in train a number of important reforms. The elevation of Hungary from province to an equal with Austria, the binding together of Italy and the removal of the Pope's absolutist secular authority, the ending of the Roman-style use of cross provincial soldier-police forces. These were the genies that nationalism let out of the bottle that, by the end of the century, had markedly improved the lives of the people.
It's not all a one-way street of nationalism = Nazis = bad. It's a lot more of a mixed bag than you are willing to admit.
What happens to the Scons over the next two years if the non-Scottish-constituency Tory MPs continue to resemble some of the less mobile organisms in the tanks at Plymouth Marine Aquarium? Mr Johnson will still be i/c at the next GE - and the next Holyrood election for all I know.
If the members had picked Murdo Fraser rather than Ruth Davidson as leader and split off from the London-based party when things were quiet, they'd be insulated.
Now, if they split off, they're basically admitting that the SNP were right all along to demand independence from Westminster and the UK. Edit: and some other truly Unionist party will be along in a moment to siphon off some of the vote. In fact there's already one - Ms Ballantyne's lot.
But if they don't, they'll be competing with Slab for third place.
How to resolve that, I have no idea.
Perhaps they have already created the required distance. Time will tell.
Doubt it. All they are doing, every tine they say " a big dog left the mess not me" is admitting how shite the governing party of the UK is, every day. And they are the ones who demand subservience to that government.
I love the emotive language "subservience". In the event of Scottish Independence, do you think Orkney should have to show "subservience" to Edinburgh? I mean, surely if the argument that it was "unfair for rUK to have "dragged" Scotland out of EU, surely the same logic is that it is unfair that Glaswegians should "drag" Orkney (and other regions of Scotland) out of UK? I believe some Nats say that the devolved nations should have been able to veto Brexit (and I have some sympathy with that view), so surely the islanders of Orkney should be able to do the same by the same logic?
Orkney isn't a nation. It would be more akin to the occasional oddballs who want an independent Yorkshire.
Except there is a registered Yorkshire Party (isn’t Pb’s Herdson a supporter/member?) while no such equivalent exists for Orkney or Shetland. I suppose the occasional Libdem, tabloid editorial or online Yoon who floats the idea of indy for O&S as a stunning rhetorical argument against Scottish indy would qualify as oddball mind.
There was a brief spasm called Wir Shetland in the 2010s but it seems to have disappeared without trace. Like many ideas it survives more strongly in certain people’s imaginations than in the harsh light of electoral reality.
I hesitate to discuss this in any detail, because this is a polity within a polity than I am not part of, but the concept which is often floated is Orkney and Shetland having an equivalent relationship with the UK as Jersey and Guernsey. Which I can see the attraction of. But the impression I get is that constitutional change is not a particularly hot topic in the far north. The lack of overt enthusiasm for Sindy is at least matched by the lack of overt enthusiasm for any other arrangement. Would be very interesting to hear from anyone with local knowledge - although diverse as we are I don't recall every hearing from an Orcadian or Sheltander on here?
Living in Scotland for a very long time I have never ever heard anyone from Orkney or Shetland Isles saying they wanted independence from Scotland or to be part of any other country.
On the Shetland thing, it's quite interesting how violent the reaction is when someone brings it up, even as a joke. Touches a button.
I was canvassed by a SNP MSP (Biagi) in 2014 and asked him whether the Borders, with their own distinct identity (see all the place names), proximity to England, and Tories, would be allowed to remain in the UK. He didn't have a good answer.
Scotland is not Northern Ireland. In NI, there are clear geographical boundaries, often physical walls, between Unionist and Nationalist areas. In Scotland you would have to cut double beds in half.
On the Shetland thing, it's quite interesting how violent the reaction is when someone brings it up, even as a joke. Touches a button.
I was canvassed by a SNP MSP (Biagi) in 2014 and asked him whether the Borders, with their own distinct identity (see all the place names), proximity to England, and Tories, would be allowed to remain in the UK. He didn't have a good answer.
Surprised by that. One very good reason is that the national border runs where it does and a rUK enforced partition would be an act of hostility. The Borderers are of course entitled to ask for a referendum of their own accord.
I don't think that's a good answer - a random, historic line in the moor that moved around a lot until quite recently.
It's a weakness in the argument for independence (among other strengths).
Weakness my arse, jsut as likely the English borders would prefer to be with an independent Scotland.
An interesting aspect of current polling is the Tories are doing very poorly, yet there is no corresponding boost to a UKIP/Brexit/Reform type party. Instead, the Greens have the most notable pick-up. That may mean fewer naturally Conservative protest poll responses that will come easily come home in a proper contest.
But let's keep things in context. 2 months of good Labour leads and 27 months until the most likely next election date. There's a long way to go.
What happens to the Scons over the next two years if the non-Scottish-constituency Tory MPs continue to resemble some of the less mobile organisms in the tanks at Plymouth Marine Aquarium? Mr Johnson will still be i/c at the next GE - and the next Holyrood election for all I know.
If the members had picked Murdo Fraser rather than Ruth Davidson as leader and split off from the London-based party when things were quiet, they'd be insulated.
Now, if they split off, they're basically admitting that the SNP were right all along to demand independence from Westminster and the UK. Edit: and some other truly Unionist party will be along in a moment to siphon off some of the vote. In fact there's already one - Ms Ballantyne's lot.
But if they don't, they'll be competing with Slab for third place.
How to resolve that, I have no idea.
Perhaps they have already created the required distance. Time will tell.
Doubt it. All they are doing, every tine they say " a big dog left the mess not me" is admitting how shite the governing party of the UK is, every day. And they are the ones who demand subservience to that government.
I love the emotive language "subservience". In the event of Scottish Independence, do you think Orkney should have to show "subservience" to Edinburgh? I mean, surely if the argument that it was "unfair for rUK to have "dragged" Scotland out of EU, surely the same logic is that it is unfair that Glaswegians should "drag" Orkney (and other regions of Scotland) out of UK? I believe some Nats say that the devolved nations should have been able to veto Brexit (and I have some sympathy with that view), so surely the islanders of Orkney should be able to do the same by the same logic?
Orkney isn't a nation. It would be more akin to the occasional oddballs who want an independent Yorkshire.
Don’t feed the troll.
On this site trolls outnumber non-trolls, or haven't you noticed?
What happens to the Scons over the next two years if the non-Scottish-constituency Tory MPs continue to resemble some of the less mobile organisms in the tanks at Plymouth Marine Aquarium? Mr Johnson will still be i/c at the next GE - and the next Holyrood election for all I know.
If the members had picked Murdo Fraser rather than Ruth Davidson as leader and split off from the London-based party when things were quiet, they'd be insulated.
Now, if they split off, they're basically admitting that the SNP were right all along to demand independence from Westminster and the UK. Edit: and some other truly Unionist party will be along in a moment to siphon off some of the vote. In fact there's already one - Ms Ballantyne's lot.
But if they don't, they'll be competing with Slab for third place.
How to resolve that, I have no idea.
Perhaps they have already created the required distance. Time will tell.
Doubt it. All they are doing, every tine they say " a big dog left the mess not me" is admitting how shite the governing party of the UK is, every day. And they are the ones who demand subservience to that government.
I love the emotive language "subservience". In the event of Scottish Independence, do you think Orkney should have to show "subservience" to Edinburgh? I mean, surely if the argument that it was "unfair for rUK to have "dragged" Scotland out of EU, surely the same logic is that it is unfair that Glaswegians should "drag" Orkney (and other regions of Scotland) out of UK? I believe some Nats say that the devolved nations should have been able to veto Brexit (and I have some sympathy with that view), so surely the islanders of Orkney should be able to do the same by the same logic?
Orkney isn't a nation. It would be more akin to the occasional oddballs who want an independent Yorkshire.
Orkney has it's own culture and very independent history and was annexed to Scotland in 1471. Suggest you look up history before posting rebuttals and making ludicrous false comparisons maybe?
We finally found a type of nationalism you adore. Hurray. What makes Orcadians so unique?
I don't adore any kind of nationalism. Nationalism requires a belief in exceptionalism, which is genuinely silly and irrational. It can be a rallying point where there is genuine national threat or repression (such as Ireland), but Scotland is not repressed. For large part of history they have been very enthusiastic oppressors!
Nationalism does not require a belief in exceptionalism.
Can I strongly encourage you to actually learn a bit about the phenomenon of nationalism? It's really a lot more interesting than you think, and a well-rounded view of it would take in not just the variants you seem focused on. A good place to start would be a detailed exploration of the (failed) revolutions of 1848. It's really hard to read through those without having at least a little sympathy with the nationalist elements. Nationalism was more than just a "rallying point". In my view it was an essential curative to not just the continental empires of the day, but as a binding force that was needed to overcome the ideological terrors. When caught between the prongs of conservative absolutism and proto-socialist unrest, some of the liberals of the day turned to nationalism to try to cement the democratic reforms and keep order. In my reading, these were largely the good guys of the period, and though they lost they set in train a number of important reforms. The elevation of Hungary from province to an equal with Austria, the binding together of Italy and the removal of the Pope's absolutist secular authority, the ending of the Roman-style use of cross provincial soldier-police forces. These were the genies that nationalism let out of the bottle that, by the end of the century, had markedly improved the lives of the people.
It's not all a one-way street of nationalism = Nazis = bad. It's a lot more of a mixed bag than you are willing to admit.
Philip Bobbitt is very good on nationalism.
That reminds me, I've got a book of his I haven't read yet.
I've only read the "main" two (are they still main!?).
Listen to the second item on the WATO - about the appalling conduct and culture of policemen at Charing Cross police station.
The first item is pretty horrific too - on child sexual abuse.
Then remember what the PM said yesterday in Parliament and weep at the state of our public life.
I would say that this is is yet another reason why Ms Dick should disappear from view. But what is the point? Incompetence is irrelevant. Shamelessness and hanging onto power are the only "qualities" which matter these days.
I will have more to say about this - as you might expect. Sorry.
The Met needs rebuilding from ground up. But given the current police leadership, and current government, I'd not have much confidence even if such a project were announced today.
Serves them right. They had various key moments in last couple of weeks when they should have resigned from Cabinet and forced a leadership election.
They have to seize the crown in this case.
Sorry, but why do they? to please Keir Starmer? to please the Guardian? to please the BBC? to please the SNP? to please the Liberal Democrats? to please the many on here who never vote tory but want Johnson gone? to please those tories like Scott who want to replace Johnson with someone more remain friendly?
Last night Johnson offered his MPs a big dollop of conservatism. They will sack him if he doesn't deliver. On their time and their agenda.
When oh when will you learn? Johnson is not remotely interested in delivery. He is a lazy oaf.
Stuart quick q.
Is your avatar a picture of BoJo as a child? If so I find it rather distasteful. Although he is far from a child (in lived years) there is something not on in pillorying him at that time.
What happens to the Scons over the next two years if the non-Scottish-constituency Tory MPs continue to resemble some of the less mobile organisms in the tanks at Plymouth Marine Aquarium? Mr Johnson will still be i/c at the next GE - and the next Holyrood election for all I know.
If the members had picked Murdo Fraser rather than Ruth Davidson as leader and split off from the London-based party when things were quiet, they'd be insulated.
Now, if they split off, they're basically admitting that the SNP were right all along to demand independence from Westminster and the UK. Edit: and some other truly Unionist party will be along in a moment to siphon off some of the vote. In fact there's already one - Ms Ballantyne's lot.
But if they don't, they'll be competing with Slab for third place.
How to resolve that, I have no idea.
Perhaps they have already created the required distance. Time will tell.
Doubt it. All they are doing, every tine they say " a big dog left the mess not me" is admitting how shite the governing party of the UK is, every day. And they are the ones who demand subservience to that government.
I love the emotive language "subservience". In the event of Scottish Independence, do you think Orkney should have to show "subservience" to Edinburgh? I mean, surely if the argument that it was "unfair for rUK to have "dragged" Scotland out of EU, surely the same logic is that it is unfair that Glaswegians should "drag" Orkney (and other regions of Scotland) out of UK? I believe some Nats say that the devolved nations should have been able to veto Brexit (and I have some sympathy with that view), so surely the islanders of Orkney should be able to do the same by the same logic?
Orkney isn't a nation. It would be more akin to the occasional oddballs who want an independent Yorkshire.
Except there is a registered Yorkshire Party (isn’t Pb’s Herdson a supporter/member?) while no such equivalent exists for Orkney or Shetland. I suppose the occasional Libdem, tabloid editorial or online Yoon who floats the idea of indy for O&S as a stunning rhetorical argument against Scottish indy would qualify as oddball mind.
There was a brief spasm called Wir Shetland in the 2010s but it seems to have disappeared without trace. Like many ideas it survives more strongly in certain people’s imaginations than in the harsh light of electoral reality.
I hesitate to discuss this in any detail, because this is a polity within a polity than I am not part of, but the concept which is often floated is Orkney and Shetland having an equivalent relationship with the UK as Jersey and Guernsey. Which I can see the attraction of. But the impression I get is that constitutional change is not a particularly hot topic in the far north. The lack of overt enthusiasm for Sindy is at least matched by the lack of overt enthusiasm for any other arrangement. Would be very interesting to hear from anyone with local knowledge - although diverse as we are I don't recall every hearing from an Orcadian or Sheltander on here?
Living in Scotland for a very long time I have never ever heard anyone from Orkney or Shetland Isles saying they wanted independence from Scotland or to be part of any other country.
Jeez Malc do you think anyone would dare to do so in your presence.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
On the Shetland thing, it's quite interesting how violent the reaction is when someone brings it up, even as a joke. Touches a button.
I was canvassed by a SNP MSP (Biagi) in 2014 and asked him whether the Borders, with their own distinct identity (see all the place names), proximity to England, and Tories, would be allowed to remain in the UK. He didn't have a good answer.
Scotland is not Northern Ireland. In NI, there are clear geographical boundaries, often physical walls, between Unionist and Nationalist areas. In Scotland you would have to cut double beds in half.
On every map I have ever seen there are clear markings of the border, it is not rocket science , just the usual unionist mince when they are sh***ing their pants.
Serves them right. They had various key moments in last couple of weeks when they should have resigned from Cabinet and forced a leadership election.
They have to seize the crown in this case.
Sorry, but why do they? to please Keir Starmer? to please the Guardian? to please the BBC? to please the SNP? to please the Liberal Democrats? to please the many on here who never vote tory but want Johnson gone? to please those tories like Scott who want to replace Johnson with someone more remain friendly?
Last night Johnson offered his MPs a big dollop of conservatism. They will sack him if he doesn't deliver. On their time and their agenda.
When oh when will you learn? Johnson is not remotely interested in delivery. He is a lazy oaf.
I agree completely. And any MP who takes Johnson at his word needs their head examined. But I think the MPs will wait until this is obvious before moving.
What happens to the Scons over the next two years if the non-Scottish-constituency Tory MPs continue to resemble some of the less mobile organisms in the tanks at Plymouth Marine Aquarium? Mr Johnson will still be i/c at the next GE - and the next Holyrood election for all I know.
If the members had picked Murdo Fraser rather than Ruth Davidson as leader and split off from the London-based party when things were quiet, they'd be insulated.
Now, if they split off, they're basically admitting that the SNP were right all along to demand independence from Westminster and the UK. Edit: and some other truly Unionist party will be along in a moment to siphon off some of the vote. In fact there's already one - Ms Ballantyne's lot.
But if they don't, they'll be competing with Slab for third place.
How to resolve that, I have no idea.
Perhaps they have already created the required distance. Time will tell.
Doubt it. All they are doing, every tine they say " a big dog left the mess not me" is admitting how shite the governing party of the UK is, every day. And they are the ones who demand subservience to that government.
I love the emotive language "subservience". In the event of Scottish Independence, do you think Orkney should have to show "subservience" to Edinburgh? I mean, surely if the argument that it was "unfair for rUK to have "dragged" Scotland out of EU, surely the same logic is that it is unfair that Glaswegians should "drag" Orkney (and other regions of Scotland) out of UK? I believe some Nats say that the devolved nations should have been able to veto Brexit (and I have some sympathy with that view), so surely the islanders of Orkney should be able to do the same by the same logic?
Orkney isn't a nation. It would be more akin to the occasional oddballs who want an independent Yorkshire.
Orkney has it's own culture and very independent history and was annexed to Scotland in 1471. Suggest you look up history before posting rebuttals and making ludicrous false comparisons maybe?
We finally found a type of nationalism you adore. Hurray. What makes Orcadians so unique?
I don't adore any kind of nationalism. Nationalism requires a belief in exceptionalism, which is genuinely silly and irrational. It can be a rallying point where there is genuine national threat or repression (such as Ireland), but Scotland is not repressed. For large part of history they have been very enthusiastic oppressors!
Nationalism does not require a belief in exceptionalism.
Can I strongly encourage you to actually learn a bit about the phenomenon of nationalism? It's really a lot more interesting than you think, and a well-rounded view of it would take in not just the variants you seem focused on. A good place to start would be a detailed exploration of the (failed) revolutions of 1848. It's really hard to read through those without having at least a little sympathy with the nationalist elements. Nationalism was more than just a "rallying point". In my view it was an essential curative to not just the continental empires of the day, but as a binding force that was needed to overcome the ideological terrors. When caught between the prongs of conservative absolutism and proto-socialist unrest, some of the liberals of the day turned to nationalism to try to cement the democratic reforms and keep order. In my reading, these were largely the good guys of the period, and though they lost they set in train a number of important reforms. The elevation of Hungary from province to an equal with Austria, the binding together of Italy and the removal of the Pope's absolutist secular authority, the ending of the Roman-style use of cross provincial soldier-police forces. These were the genies that nationalism let out of the bottle that, by the end of the century, had markedly improved the lives of the people.
It's not all a one-way street of nationalism = Nazis = bad. It's a lot more of a mixed bag than you are willing to admit.
Philip Bobbitt is very good on nationalism.
That reminds me, I've got a book of his I haven't read yet.
I've only read the "main" two (are they still main!?).
Shield, and Terror, I guess? I haven't read Terror and Consent yet, though it's been on my shelf for years.
Yep they are both pretty good imo as I remember (was years ago) about the state nation, nation state, and then market state and I like his definition of epochs.
Damn I will have to re-read it to remind myself of the nuances.
John Bercow might have hauled him in, only to be shouted down with howls of politicising his role, or stepping outside it. Hence we have a quieter speaker - and more pliable - speaker , instead.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
He should, but I'd be very surprised. He was feeble yesterday.
What happens to the Scons over the next two years if the non-Scottish-constituency Tory MPs continue to resemble some of the less mobile organisms in the tanks at Plymouth Marine Aquarium? Mr Johnson will still be i/c at the next GE - and the next Holyrood election for all I know.
If the members had picked Murdo Fraser rather than Ruth Davidson as leader and split off from the London-based party when things were quiet, they'd be insulated.
Now, if they split off, they're basically admitting that the SNP were right all along to demand independence from Westminster and the UK. Edit: and some other truly Unionist party will be along in a moment to siphon off some of the vote. In fact there's already one - Ms Ballantyne's lot.
But if they don't, they'll be competing with Slab for third place.
How to resolve that, I have no idea.
Perhaps they have already created the required distance. Time will tell.
Doubt it. All they are doing, every tine they say " a big dog left the mess not me" is admitting how shite the governing party of the UK is, every day. And they are the ones who demand subservience to that government.
I love the emotive language "subservience". In the event of Scottish Independence, do you think Orkney should have to show "subservience" to Edinburgh? I mean, surely if the argument that it was "unfair for rUK to have "dragged" Scotland out of EU, surely the same logic is that it is unfair that Glaswegians should "drag" Orkney (and other regions of Scotland) out of UK? I believe some Nats say that the devolved nations should have been able to veto Brexit (and I have some sympathy with that view), so surely the islanders of Orkney should be able to do the same by the same logic?
Orkney isn't a nation. It would be more akin to the occasional oddballs who want an independent Yorkshire.
You don't think the Orcadians (and the Shetlanders) would like to return to Norwegian rule?
Utter rubbish, usual old tripe trawled up when unionists are bricking it.
It is entirely plausible. If the Orkneys joined Norway they would solve all the Single Market bollocks, because Norway is in EFTA, but avoid all the joining-the-EU euro bollocks, plus they would immediately become citizens of one of the richest, most solvent nations on earth - Norway. With a GDP per capita to match, in short order
The more you think about it, the more sense if makes for both archipelagos, Shetland too. Skint and fucked with bankrupt Indy Scotland, or rich and sorted with Norway?
An interesting aspect of current polling is the Tories are doing very poorly, yet there is no corresponding boost to a UKIP/Brexit/Reform type party. Instead, the Greens have the most notable pick-up. That may mean fewer naturally Conservative protest poll responses that will come easily come home in a proper contest.
But let's keep things in context. 2 months of good Labour leads and 27 months until the most likely next election date. There's a long way to go.
I wonder if you are confusing 2 different things there.
And we have Corbynite Labour voters heading towards the Greens (think @bigjohnowls ) while discontent middle of the road voters are swapping directly from the Tories to Labour.
In an election a lot of that Green vote will return to Labour but the Labour to Tory vote is in all likelihood lost to Labour or at greater risk of disappearing than it was when it seemed Boris was going to be replaced.
An interesting aspect of current polling is the Tories are doing very poorly, yet there is no corresponding boost to a UKIP/Brexit/Reform type party. Instead, the Greens have the most notable pick-up. That may mean fewer naturally Conservative protest poll responses that will come easily come home in a proper contest.
But let's keep things in context. 2 months of good Labour leads and 27 months until the most likely next election date. There's a long way to go.
I wonder if you are confusing 2 different things there.
And we have Corbynite Labour voters heading towards the Greens (think @bigjohnowls ) while discontent middle of the road voters are swapping directly from the Tories to Labour.
In an election a lot of that Green vote will return to Labour but the Labour to Tory vote is in all likelihood lost to Labour or at greater risk of disappearing than it was when it seemed Boris was going to be replaced.
I'm a (right of) middle of the road discontent voter and I haven't swapped directly from the Tories to Labour. I am holding my vote and waiting to see who's doing what when I am able to use it.
On the Shetland thing, it's quite interesting how violent the reaction is when someone brings it up, even as a joke. Touches a button.
I was canvassed by a SNP MSP (Biagi) in 2014 and asked him whether the Borders, with their own distinct identity (see all the place names), proximity to England, and Tories, would be allowed to remain in the UK. He didn't have a good answer.
Surprised by that. One very good reason is that the national border runs where it does and a rUK enforced partition would be an act of hostility. The Borderers are of course entitled to ask for a referendum of their own accord.
I don't think that's a good answer - a random, historic line in the moor that moved around a lot until quite recently.
It's a weakness in the argument for independence (among other strengths).
The English - Scottish border was settled on the Tweed-Solway line in 1018, precisely one thousand years ago, and formally ratified in the Treaty of York in 1237. It's one of the most stable land borders in the world - whole countries have come and gone since.
* Quibble about Berwick, but offering them a place in independent Scotland isn't within the SNP's gift.
An interesting aspect of current polling is the Tories are doing very poorly, yet there is no corresponding boost to a UKIP/Brexit/Reform type party. Instead, the Greens have the most notable pick-up. That may mean fewer naturally Conservative protest poll responses that will come easily come home in a proper contest.
But let's keep things in context. 2 months of good Labour leads and 27 months until the most likely next election date. There's a long way to go.
I wonder if you are confusing 2 different things there.
And we have Corbynite Labour voters heading towards the Greens (think @bigjohnowls ) while discontent middle of the road voters are swapping directly from the Tories to Labour.
In an election a lot of that Green vote will return to Labour but the Labour to Tory vote is in all likelihood lost to Labour or at greater risk of disappearing than it was when it seemed Boris was going to be replaced.
An interesting phenomenon.
There isn't much green about the Corbynites. But then again, there is too much Corbynism in the Green Party.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
He should, but I'd be very surprised. He was feeble yesterday.
He is feeble all the time, scared to say boo to Boris. Pathetic.
What happens to the Scons over the next two years if the non-Scottish-constituency Tory MPs continue to resemble some of the less mobile organisms in the tanks at Plymouth Marine Aquarium? Mr Johnson will still be i/c at the next GE - and the next Holyrood election for all I know.
If the members had picked Murdo Fraser rather than Ruth Davidson as leader and split off from the London-based party when things were quiet, they'd be insulated.
Now, if they split off, they're basically admitting that the SNP were right all along to demand independence from Westminster and the UK. Edit: and some other truly Unionist party will be along in a moment to siphon off some of the vote. In fact there's already one - Ms Ballantyne's lot.
But if they don't, they'll be competing with Slab for third place.
How to resolve that, I have no idea.
Perhaps they have already created the required distance. Time will tell.
Doubt it. All they are doing, every tine they say " a big dog left the mess not me" is admitting how shite the governing party of the UK is, every day. And they are the ones who demand subservience to that government.
I love the emotive language "subservience". In the event of Scottish Independence, do you think Orkney should have to show "subservience" to Edinburgh? I mean, surely if the argument that it was "unfair for rUK to have "dragged" Scotland out of EU, surely the same logic is that it is unfair that Glaswegians should "drag" Orkney (and other regions of Scotland) out of UK? I believe some Nats say that the devolved nations should have been able to veto Brexit (and I have some sympathy with that view), so surely the islanders of Orkney should be able to do the same by the same logic?
Orkney isn't a nation. It would be more akin to the occasional oddballs who want an independent Yorkshire.
Orkney has it's own culture and very independent history and was annexed to Scotland in 1471. Suggest you look up history before posting rebuttals and making ludicrous false comparisons maybe?
We finally found a type of nationalism you adore. Hurray. What makes Orcadians so unique?
I don't adore any kind of nationalism. Nationalism requires a belief in exceptionalism, which is genuinely silly and irrational. It can be a rallying point where there is genuine national threat or repression (such as Ireland), but Scotland is not repressed. For large part of history they have been very enthusiastic oppressors!
How many more elections do the SNP have to win before it passes for repression? One, two, three, ten, one hundred?
Nah.
If we really wanted to oppress the SNP we would follow the Spanish route and not only ban indyref2 but arrest Sturgeon too, suspend Holyrood and impose UK government direct rule on Scotland
Clearly you've thought it through in exacting detail.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
An interesting aspect of current polling is the Tories are doing very poorly, yet there is no corresponding boost to a UKIP/Brexit/Reform type party. Instead, the Greens have the most notable pick-up. That may mean fewer naturally Conservative protest poll responses that will come easily come home in a proper contest.
But let's keep things in context. 2 months of good Labour leads and 27 months until the most likely next election date. There's a long way to go.
I wonder if you are confusing 2 different things there.
And we have Corbynite Labour voters heading towards the Greens (think @bigjohnowls ) while discontent middle of the road voters are swapping directly from the Tories to Labour.
In an election a lot of that Green vote will return to Labour but the Labour to Tory vote is in all likelihood lost to Labour or at greater risk of disappearing than it was when it seemed Boris was going to be replaced.
I'm a (right of) middle of the road discontent voter and I haven't swapped directly from the Tories to Labour. I am holding my vote and waiting to see who's doing what when I am able to use it.
Edit: and obviously as I go so do millions...
Remember we are looking at the votes of people who have expressed a preference when asked. You are among the 25% of Tory, 11% Labour and 22% of Lib Dems who don't know yet
Honestly I doubt border quibbles or potential secession would feature much in any Sindy. As thought exercises or points of principle they might be sound, what if in theory x wanted y, but it would really crop up?
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
Hoyle has been a pretty woeful appointment as speaker. He is a toothless performer.
Bring back Jonny Bercow – all is forgiven!
My MP, Dame Eleanor Laing, is still available as Deputy Speaker while Bercow has now left the Commons.
Dame Eleanor got the most votes of the Tory candidates in the Speaker ballot Hoyle won which was held in November 2019, when we still had a hung parliament and before the Tory majority we now have
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
This feels like a bad call from Hoyle. He works off precedent, but a highly defamatory remark by one parliamentarian on another that is only protected by parliamentary privilege is not in any shape or form a good precedent for him to follow.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
See my comment towards the end of the last thread. I think it's a deliberate dead cat and we should decline to even discuss it, because the whole idea is likely to be that we talk about that instead of Partygate.
If only there was some kind of way he could speak to an international ally and colleague over the internet, perhaps with video too, to save all that hassle of flying over...
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
This feels like a bad call from Hoyle. He works off precedent, but a highly defamatory remark by one parliamentarian on another that is only protected by parliamentary privilege is not in any shape or form a good precedent for him to follow.
As someone observed upthread and I noted yesterday - they wanted a damp squib as a speaker and they now have one. Bring back Bercow.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
So lies are in order, and calling out the liar out of order ? Well done Mr Speaker.
It really is pathetic all round. Mostly from the PM, but also the people who knowingly put him there, and the archaic old boy club rules that must be upheld even whilst they are being ruthlessly and cynically exploited.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Which is why it would be a good idea for the speaker to force Boris to give his evidence or retract and apologise. It's one thing for a random to believe a conspiracy or facebook meme, it's another for the PM to use parliamentary privilege to defame the leader of the opposition.
What happens to the Scons over the next two years if the non-Scottish-constituency Tory MPs continue to resemble some of the less mobile organisms in the tanks at Plymouth Marine Aquarium? Mr Johnson will still be i/c at the next GE - and the next Holyrood election for all I know.
If the members had picked Murdo Fraser rather than Ruth Davidson as leader and split off from the London-based party when things were quiet, they'd be insulated.
Now, if they split off, they're basically admitting that the SNP were right all along to demand independence from Westminster and the UK. Edit: and some other truly Unionist party will be along in a moment to siphon off some of the vote. In fact there's already one - Ms Ballantyne's lot.
But if they don't, they'll be competing with Slab for third place.
How to resolve that, I have no idea.
Perhaps they have already created the required distance. Time will tell.
Doubt it. All they are doing, every tine they say " a big dog left the mess not me" is admitting how shite the governing party of the UK is, every day. And they are the ones who demand subservience to that government.
I love the emotive language "subservience". In the event of Scottish Independence, do you think Orkney should have to show "subservience" to Edinburgh? I mean, surely if the argument that it was "unfair for rUK to have "dragged" Scotland out of EU, surely the same logic is that it is unfair that Glaswegians should "drag" Orkney (and other regions of Scotland) out of UK? I believe some Nats say that the devolved nations should have been able to veto Brexit (and I have some sympathy with that view), so surely the islanders of Orkney should be able to do the same by the same logic?
Orkney isn't a nation. It would be more akin to the occasional oddballs who want an independent Yorkshire.
Orkney has it's own culture and very independent history and was annexed to Scotland in 1471. Suggest you look up history before posting rebuttals and making ludicrous false comparisons maybe?
We finally found a type of nationalism you adore. Hurray. What makes Orcadians so unique?
I don't adore any kind of nationalism. Nationalism requires a belief in exceptionalism, which is genuinely silly and irrational. It can be a rallying point where there is genuine national threat or repression (such as Ireland), but Scotland is not repressed. For large part of history they have been very enthusiastic oppressors!
How many more elections do the SNP have to win before it passes for repression? One, two, three, ten, one hundred?
Nah.
If we really wanted to oppress the SNP we would follow the Spanish route and not only ban indyref2 but arrest Sturgeon too, suspend Holyrood and impose UK government direct rule on Scotland
So pre 1999 Scotland was oppressed in HYFUD world. Interesting.
Scotland was not, as it had MPs at Westminster and Brown, Cook, Dewar etc in Blair's Cabinet and Rifkind, Laing etc in Major's Cabinet were all Scots.
The SNP were as they only surged post devolution
Looking at the Westminster results, the SNP were on 11%-14% before the Poll Tax, and then knocking around the 20% mark afterwards. It was a 50-100% increase in the vote share. That was the foot in the door. The first decade of devolution saw very little change in the SNP vote. Only in 2015 did it suddenly shoot up to 50%.
Poll tax and indyref were the inflection points. Devolution was not.
The SNP got 14% in 1987 pre poll tax and 3 MPs. They still only got 3 MPs in 1992 post poll tax and after Major scrapped it, even if their voteshare went up a little.
It was only devolution which gave the SNP the platform to get over 30% of the vote, as they did by the 2007 Holyrood election when they got 32%, which they built on to get 45% and a majority in 2011.
45% was then what Yes got in 2014 even before the Brexit vote.
I dunno this case, but it is from ten years ago, AND he was never convicted?!
Is Val McDonut saying any man ever accused of rape must never be allowed to pursue a career ever again, even if he is not convicted? Bit tough on your lifelong political hero, Alex Salmond, if so
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
He should, but I'd be very surprised. He was feeble yesterday.
What happens to the Scons over the next two years if the non-Scottish-constituency Tory MPs continue to resemble some of the less mobile organisms in the tanks at Plymouth Marine Aquarium? Mr Johnson will still be i/c at the next GE - and the next Holyrood election for all I know.
If the members had picked Murdo Fraser rather than Ruth Davidson as leader and split off from the London-based party when things were quiet, they'd be insulated.
Now, if they split off, they're basically admitting that the SNP were right all along to demand independence from Westminster and the UK. Edit: and some other truly Unionist party will be along in a moment to siphon off some of the vote. In fact there's already one - Ms Ballantyne's lot.
But if they don't, they'll be competing with Slab for third place.
How to resolve that, I have no idea.
Perhaps they have already created the required distance. Time will tell.
Doubt it. All they are doing, every tine they say " a big dog left the mess not me" is admitting how shite the governing party of the UK is, every day. And they are the ones who demand subservience to that government.
I love the emotive language "subservience". In the event of Scottish Independence, do you think Orkney should have to show "subservience" to Edinburgh? I mean, surely if the argument that it was "unfair for rUK to have "dragged" Scotland out of EU, surely the same logic is that it is unfair that Glaswegians should "drag" Orkney (and other regions of Scotland) out of UK? I believe some Nats say that the devolved nations should have been able to veto Brexit (and I have some sympathy with that view), so surely the islanders of Orkney should be able to do the same by the same logic?
Orkney isn't a nation. It would be more akin to the occasional oddballs who want an independent Yorkshire.
Orkney has it's own culture and very independent history and was annexed to Scotland in 1471. Suggest you look up history before posting rebuttals and making ludicrous false comparisons maybe?
We finally found a type of nationalism you adore. Hurray. What makes Orcadians so unique?
I don't adore any kind of nationalism. Nationalism requires a belief in exceptionalism, which is genuinely silly and irrational. It can be a rallying point where there is genuine national threat or repression (such as Ireland), but Scotland is not repressed. For large part of history they have been very enthusiastic oppressors!
Nationalism does not require a belief in exceptionalism.
Can I strongly encourage you to actually learn a bit about the phenomenon of nationalism? It's really a lot more interesting than you think, and a well-rounded view of it would take in not just the variants you seem focused on. A good place to start would be a detailed exploration of the (failed) revolutions of 1848. It's really hard to read through those without having at least a little sympathy with the nationalist elements. Nationalism was more than just a "rallying point". In my view it was an essential curative to not just the continental empires of the day, but as a binding force that was needed to overcome the ideological terrors. When caught between the prongs of conservative absolutism and proto-socialist unrest, some of the liberals of the day turned to nationalism to try to cement the democratic reforms and keep order. In my reading, these were largely the good guys of the period, and though they lost they set in train a number of important reforms. The elevation of Hungary from province to an equal with Austria, the binding together of Italy and the removal of the Pope's absolutist secular authority, the ending of the Roman-style use of cross provincial soldier-police forces. These were the genies that nationalism let out of the bottle that, by the end of the century, had markedly improved the lives of the people.
It's not all a one-way street of nationalism = Nazis = bad. It's a lot more of a mixed bag than you are willing to admit.
Philip Bobbitt is very good on nationalism.
Nationalism to me recalls the Blackadder spies stuff from General Melchett:
English Nationalism - 'nasty, racist scum, pursuing their evil perverted view of foreigners...' Scottish Nationalim - 'warm, welcoming to all, celebrating diversity within the context of the great Scottish nation...'
Its quite possible to love ones country and think other countries are great too.
I dunno this case, but it is from ten years ago, AND he was never convicted?!
Is Val McDonut saying any man ever accused of rape must never be allowed to pursue a career ever again, even if he is not convicted? Bit tough on your lifelong political hero, Alex Salmond, if so
There is an interesting wiki editing war taking place on his page.
Edit: the cached version shown first upon googling him is indicative of this.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Sounds like you are defending 'Team Boris', as you so obsequiously put it.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Which is why it would be a good idea for the speaker to force Boris to give his evidence or retract and apologise. It's one thing for a random to believe a conspiracy or facebook meme, it's another for the PM to use parliamentary privilege to defame the leader of the opposition.
The problem is that the Speaker has just found the limit of his power. Short of Boris being caught outright lying to Parliament there is nothing the Speaker and do. And even then Boris will pretend the lie was inadvertent rather than intentional.
I suspect that is why SKS has been laying the traps he has so that when Boris is found to have lied he can't claim it was inadvertent.
What happens to the Scons over the next two years if the non-Scottish-constituency Tory MPs continue to resemble some of the less mobile organisms in the tanks at Plymouth Marine Aquarium? Mr Johnson will still be i/c at the next GE - and the next Holyrood election for all I know.
If the members had picked Murdo Fraser rather than Ruth Davidson as leader and split off from the London-based party when things were quiet, they'd be insulated.
Now, if they split off, they're basically admitting that the SNP were right all along to demand independence from Westminster and the UK. Edit: and some other truly Unionist party will be along in a moment to siphon off some of the vote. In fact there's already one - Ms Ballantyne's lot.
But if they don't, they'll be competing with Slab for third place.
How to resolve that, I have no idea.
Perhaps they have already created the required distance. Time will tell.
Doubt it. All they are doing, every tine they say " a big dog left the mess not me" is admitting how shite the governing party of the UK is, every day. And they are the ones who demand subservience to that government.
I love the emotive language "subservience". In the event of Scottish Independence, do you think Orkney should have to show "subservience" to Edinburgh? I mean, surely if the argument that it was "unfair for rUK to have "dragged" Scotland out of EU, surely the same logic is that it is unfair that Glaswegians should "drag" Orkney (and other regions of Scotland) out of UK? I believe some Nats say that the devolved nations should have been able to veto Brexit (and I have some sympathy with that view), so surely the islanders of Orkney should be able to do the same by the same logic?
Orkney isn't a nation. It would be more akin to the occasional oddballs who want an independent Yorkshire.
Orkney has it's own culture and very independent history and was annexed to Scotland in 1471. Suggest you look up history before posting rebuttals and making ludicrous false comparisons maybe?
We finally found a type of nationalism you adore. Hurray. What makes Orcadians so unique?
I don't adore any kind of nationalism. Nationalism requires a belief in exceptionalism, which is genuinely silly and irrational. It can be a rallying point where there is genuine national threat or repression (such as Ireland), but Scotland is not repressed. For large part of history they have been very enthusiastic oppressors!
How many more elections do the SNP have to win before it passes for repression? One, two, three, ten, one hundred?
Nah.
If we really wanted to oppress the SNP we would follow the Spanish route and not only ban indyref2 but arrest Sturgeon too, suspend Holyrood and impose UK government direct rule on Scotland
So pre 1999 Scotland was oppressed in HYFUD world. Interesting.
Scotland was not, as it had MPs at Westminster and Brown, Cook, Dewar etc in Blair's Cabinet and Rifkind, Laing etc in Major's Cabinet were all Scots.
The SNP were as they only surged post devolution
Looking at the Westminster results, the SNP were on 11%-14% before the Poll Tax, and then knocking around the 20% mark afterwards. It was a 50-100% increase in the vote share. That was the foot in the door. The first decade of devolution saw very little change in the SNP vote. Only in 2015 did it suddenly shoot up to 50%.
Poll tax and indyref were the inflection points. Devolution was not.
The SNP got 14% in 1987 pre poll tax and 3 MPs. They still only got 3 MPs in 1992 post poll tax and after Major scrapped it, even if their voteshare went up a little.
It was only devolution which gave the SNP the platform to get over 30% of the vote, as they did by the 2007 Holyrood election when they got 32%, which they built on to get 45% and a majority in 2011.
45% was then what Yes got in 2014 even before the Brexit vote.
45% was a threat to the Union, 20% was not
Labour and the LDs saw even 15-20% SNP vote as a serious threat and took steps to deal with it in the 1990s. This did take time to push through - look up 'Constitutional Convention'. Which brings us to the late 1990s and the reconvening of the Scottish Parliament.
Then it was not so much independence as devolution that was being debated - and Labour and the LDs would gain from that and the Tories would lose.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
He should, but I'd be very surprised. He was feeble yesterday.
It was a sign of panic rather than malice.
Whichever, it was unacceptable. And he has cabinet colleagues ("just the normal rough and tumble") defending it.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Which is why it would be a good idea for the speaker to force Boris to give his evidence or retract and apologise. It's one thing for a random to believe a conspiracy or facebook meme, it's another for the PM to use parliamentary privilege to defame the leader of the opposition.
It’s quite ugly, I agree. However politics is a rough old game. I am less OMG-its-a-fox, flustered-young-chicken than you. Perhaps it is just because I am cynical and aged
The Left, allied with Remoaners, and - ironically - Dom Cummings - has embarked on a dedicated campaign to destroy Boris Johnson and they are happy to say virtually anything about him, much true, much not. I’m not surprised he is fighting back quite hard
I dunno this case, but it is from ten years ago, AND he was never convicted?!
Is Val McDonut saying any man ever accused of rape must never be allowed to pursue a career ever again, even if he is not convicted? Bit tough on your lifelong political hero, Alex Salmond, if so
I would have thought the civil findings against him were sufficient for McDermid's position.
On the Shetland thing, it's quite interesting how violent the reaction is when someone brings it up, even as a joke. Touches a button.
I was canvassed by a SNP MSP (Biagi) in 2014 and asked him whether the Borders, with their own distinct identity (see all the place names), proximity to England, and Tories, would be allowed to remain in the UK. He didn't have a good answer.
Surprised by that. One very good reason is that the national border runs where it does and a rUK enforced partition would be an act of hostility. The Borderers are of course entitled to ask for a referendum of their own accord.
I don't think that's a good answer - a random, historic line in the moor that moved around a lot until quite recently.
It's a weakness in the argument for independence (among other strengths).
The English - Scottish border was settled on the Tweed-Solway line in 1018, precisely one thousand years ago, and formally ratified in the Treaty of York in 1237. It's one of the most stable land borders in the world - whole countries have come and gone since.
* Quibble about Berwick, but offering them a place in independent Scotland isn't within the SNP's gift.
Here's a quiz question for you...
Which is the only part of Scotland south of the Tweed where the Tweed otherwise forms the border?
I dunno this case, but it is from ten years ago, AND he was never convicted?!
Is Val McDonut saying any man ever accused of rape must never be allowed to pursue a career ever again, even if he is not convicted? Bit tough on your lifelong political hero, Alex Salmond, if so
Didn't he lose a civil case regarding the (alleged) rape?
I dunno this case, but it is from ten years ago, AND he was never convicted?!
Is Val McDonut saying any man ever accused of rape must never be allowed to pursue a career ever again, even if he is not convicted? Bit tough on your lifelong political hero, Alex Salmond, if so
No, she's saying she no longer wants to give the club money. There's a difference. (Also, on the rape, there was a civil case that went against him, as did the appeal - which is presumably why she feels able to state what she says as fact).
I completely uphold the right of the Conservative party to have Boris Johnson as their leader. I no longer want to give that party my vote.
(Or, given I haven't voted Conservative for at least a decade, more apt for me to say that I, as a 2015 Labour voter, upheld the Labour Party's right to choose Corbyn as leader, but refused to give a Corbyn-led Labour Party my vote.)
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Which is why it would be a good idea for the speaker to force Boris to give his evidence or retract and apologise. It's one thing for a random to believe a conspiracy or facebook meme, it's another for the PM to use parliamentary privilege to defame the leader of the opposition.
The Left, allied with Remoaners, and - ironically - Dom Cummings - has embarked on a dedicated campaign to destroy Boris Johnson
“Indeed, the total number of property transactions in 2021 was the highest since 2007 and around 25% higher than in 2019, before the pandemic struck. At the same time, the stock of homes on estate agents’ books has remained extremely low, which is contributing to the continued robust pace of house price growth.”
Gardner noted that house price growth had outpaced wage growth by a wide margin since the coronavirus pandemic struck. For example, a 10% deposit on a typical first-time buyer home is now equivalent to 56% of total gross annual earnings, a record high. Similarly, a typical mortgage payment as a share of take-home pay is now above the long-run average despite mortgage rates remaining close to all-time lows.
One would think that Covid has increased the demand for residential property (particularly larger ones outside city centers), and reduced demand for commercial property.
In the longer term, that means offices will be converted. But in the short term, it means higher prices.
I dunno this case, but it is from ten years ago, AND he was never convicted?!
Is Val McDonut saying any man ever accused of rape must never be allowed to pursue a career ever again, even if he is not convicted? Bit tough on your lifelong political hero, Alex Salmond, if so
Wiki says there was a private case where the judge called them (two defendants) rapists, so I guess she is basing it on that.
The Speaker needs to haul Boris into Parliament and make him apologise to Keir Starmer over the Jimmy Savile claim. It's such an outrageous claim with absolutely zero evidence (in fact Starmer was someone who helped uncover Savile's horrific legacy of rape and abuse). These kinds of claims need to be corrected and the Speaker should ask Boris to present evidence for his claim or make a retraction and apology.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
I make no argument either way about Boris’ pretty OTT Savile remarks. Nonetheless Team Boris have done their research. This is a meme floating around, and it hovers over Starmer
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
Which is why it would be a good idea for the speaker to force Boris to give his evidence or retract and apologise. It's one thing for a random to believe a conspiracy or facebook meme, it's another for the PM to use parliamentary privilege to defame the leader of the opposition.
It’s quite ugly, I agree. However politics is a rough old game. I am less OMG-its-a-fox, flustered-young-chicken than you. Perhaps it is just because I am cynical and aged
The Left, allied with Remoaners, and - ironically - Dom Cummings - has embarked on a dedicated campaign to destroy Boris Johnson and they are happy to say virtually anything about him, much true, much not. I’m not surprised he is fighting back quite hard
Quite right. Poor old Boris. He's a saint, and they're all just picking on him.
PS: Could you give some precise examples from the campaign to destroy Boris that are not true? Thanks.
On the Shetland thing, it's quite interesting how violent the reaction is when someone brings it up, even as a joke. Touches a button.
I was canvassed by a SNP MSP (Biagi) in 2014 and asked him whether the Borders, with their own distinct identity (see all the place names), proximity to England, and Tories, would be allowed to remain in the UK. He didn't have a good answer.
Surprised by that. One very good reason is that the national border runs where it does and a rUK enforced partition would be an act of hostility. The Borderers are of course entitled to ask for a referendum of their own accord.
I don't think that's a good answer - a random, historic line in the moor that moved around a lot until quite recently.
It's a weakness in the argument for independence (among other strengths).
Apart from Berwick, the border was actually extremely stable from since before the Norman Conquest, so stable that you can see where a Scottish village won the last annual footie match with the English village on the other side of the border (the Tweed: the pitch remained the territory of the winner till the next match, which for some reason never happened ...).
The one bit that was a bit iffy was a small patch, the Debatable Lands which was never properly sorted out as the locals exploited the legal ambiguity that it had for some reason, but that was dealt with by treaty sometime like 1550.
I dunno this case, but it is from ten years ago, AND he was never convicted?!
Is Val McDonut saying any man ever accused of rape must never be allowed to pursue a career ever again, even if he is not convicted? Bit tough on your lifelong political hero, Alex Salmond, if so
Didn't he lose a civil case regarding the (alleged) rape?
Yes, and an appeal.
It's nearly as bad as trying to defend Owen Paterson.
Ukranian MPs hold up the flags of the UK, USA, Denmark, Turkey and Canada, Poland and the Czech Republic in their parliament after they offered to help Ukraine against Russian threats.
What happens to the Scons over the next two years if the non-Scottish-constituency Tory MPs continue to resemble some of the less mobile organisms in the tanks at Plymouth Marine Aquarium? Mr Johnson will still be i/c at the next GE - and the next Holyrood election for all I know.
If the members had picked Murdo Fraser rather than Ruth Davidson as leader and split off from the London-based party when things were quiet, they'd be insulated.
Now, if they split off, they're basically admitting that the SNP were right all along to demand independence from Westminster and the UK. Edit: and some other truly Unionist party will be along in a moment to siphon off some of the vote. In fact there's already one - Ms Ballantyne's lot.
But if they don't, they'll be competing with Slab for third place.
How to resolve that, I have no idea.
Perhaps they have already created the required distance. Time will tell.
Doubt it. All they are doing, every tine they say " a big dog left the mess not me" is admitting how shite the governing party of the UK is, every day. And they are the ones who demand subservience to that government.
I love the emotive language "subservience". In the event of Scottish Independence, do you think Orkney should have to show "subservience" to Edinburgh? I mean, surely if the argument that it was "unfair for rUK to have "dragged" Scotland out of EU, surely the same logic is that it is unfair that Glaswegians should "drag" Orkney (and other regions of Scotland) out of UK? I believe some Nats say that the devolved nations should have been able to veto Brexit (and I have some sympathy with that view), so surely the islanders of Orkney should be able to do the same by the same logic?
Orkney isn't a nation. It would be more akin to the occasional oddballs who want an independent Yorkshire.
Except there is a registered Yorkshire Party (isn’t Pb’s Herdson a supporter/member?) while no such equivalent exists for Orkney or Shetland. I suppose the occasional Libdem, tabloid editorial or online Yoon who floats the idea of indy for O&S as a stunning rhetorical argument against Scottish indy would qualify as oddball mind.
There was a brief spasm called Wir Shetland in the 2010s but it seems to have disappeared without trace. Like many ideas it survives more strongly in certain people’s imaginations than in the harsh light of electoral reality.
I hesitate to discuss this in any detail, because this is a polity within a polity than I am not part of, but the concept which is often floated is Orkney and Shetland having an equivalent relationship with the UK as Jersey and Guernsey. Which I can see the attraction of. But the impression I get is that constitutional change is not a particularly hot topic in the far north. The lack of overt enthusiasm for Sindy is at least matched by the lack of overt enthusiasm for any other arrangement. Would be very interesting to hear from anyone with local knowledge - although diverse as we are I don't recall every hearing from an Orcadian or Sheltander on here?
Most talk is from the PBTories who can't cope with an independence movement without wanting to commit Partition yet again. It is a bit as if the SNP were to demand a referendum for the Isle of Wight to join an independent Scotland. Partly trolling.
We’ve a tad stronger case for becoming another Channel Island, being actually in the Channel and all…
On the Shetland thing, it's quite interesting how violent the reaction is when someone brings it up, even as a joke. Touches a button.
I was canvassed by a SNP MSP (Biagi) in 2014 and asked him whether the Borders, with their own distinct identity (see all the place names), proximity to England, and Tories, would be allowed to remain in the UK. He didn't have a good answer.
Surprised by that. One very good reason is that the national border runs where it does and a rUK enforced partition would be an act of hostility. The Borderers are of course entitled to ask for a referendum of their own accord.
I don't think that's a good answer - a random, historic line in the moor that moved around a lot until quite recently.
It's a weakness in the argument for independence (among other strengths).
The English - Scottish border was settled on the Tweed-Solway line in 1018, precisely one thousand years ago, and formally ratified in the Treaty of York in 1237. It's one of the most stable land borders in the world - whole countries have come and gone since.
* Quibble about Berwick, but offering them a place in independent Scotland isn't within the SNP's gift.
Here's a quiz question for you...
Which is the only part of Scotland south of the Tweed where the Tweed otherwise forms the border?
And why is that land Scottish?
Ah, sorry, just answered that completely by accident ...
Comments
We should right this long standing injustice and have one if Scotland becomes independent.
He will hold a press conference this afternoon
How many questions will be about Jimmy Saville?
Last night Johnson offered his MPs a big dollop of conservatism. They will sack him if he doesn't deliver. On their time and their agenda.
Which I can see the attraction of. But the impression I get is that constitutional change is not a particularly hot topic in the far north. The lack of overt enthusiasm for Sindy is at least matched by the lack of overt enthusiasm for any other arrangement.
Would be very interesting to hear from anyone with local knowledge - although diverse as we are I don't recall every hearing from an Orcadian or Sheltander on here?
"It's a view" is an egregious truism – was probably written somewhere on the internet once by some nerd who thought they were being airily clever, then was adopted by PB and stuck around for what seems like decades.
I was canvassed by a SNP MSP (Biagi) in 2014 and asked him whether the Borders, with their own distinct identity (see all the place names), proximity to England, and Tories, would be allowed to remain in the UK. He didn't have a good answer.
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/g-xatw#2aad4834
Day trip:
APOLOGIES FOR DELAY
Berlin is not willing to see deterrence as a factor that can prevent escalation.
An even bigger question is, will Germany strengthen its contribution to NATO's deterrence vis à vis Russia?
https://twitter.com/KristiRaik/status/1488425954414317572?s=20&t=Y6r2wi2Vjfwjsq79dNDXHQ
It's a weakness in the argument for independence (among other strengths).
Adding half the Green share to Labour's share leaves Labour 11 short of an absolute majority with the LibDems holding 19 seats.
The first item is pretty horrific too - on child sexual abuse.
Then remember what the PM said yesterday in Parliament and weep at the state of our public life.
I would say that this is is yet another reason why Ms Dick should disappear from view. But what is the point? Incompetence is irrelevant. Shamelessness and hanging onto power are the only "qualities" which matter these days.
I will have more to say about this - as you might expect. Sorry.
But let's keep things in context. 2 months of good Labour leads and 27 months until the most likely next election date. There's a long way to go.
In a strange, sleepy way, international tourism is reviving. This is good. Not least for desperately impoverished Sri Lanka. Cheers PB
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/feb/01/met-officers-joked-raping-women-police-watchdog-racist
The Met needs rebuilding from ground up.
But given the current police leadership, and current government, I'd not have much confidence even if such a project were announced today.
Is your avatar a picture of BoJo as a child? If so I find it rather distasteful. Although he is far from a child (in lived years) there is something not on in pillorying him at that time.
Perhaps it's just me, that said.
Of all the stupid things Boris said yesterday in the house, the claim about Starmer was the worst he's come out with in a very long time. It's a complete falsehood, a known complete falsehood and the PM has abused parliamentary privilege to slander Keir Starmer.
Sam Coates Sky
@SamCoatesSky
Commons Speaker Lindsay Hoyle says that while Boris Johnson’s comments on Keir Starmer and Jimmy Saville yesterday were not out of order, he’s far from happy with them
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1488492460754051077
Damn I will have to re-read it to remind myself of the nuances.
He was feeble yesterday.
The more you think about it, the more sense if makes for both archipelagos, Shetland too. Skint and fucked with bankrupt Indy Scotland, or rich and sorted with Norway?
And we have Corbynite Labour voters heading towards the Greens (think @bigjohnowls ) while discontent middle of the road voters are swapping directly from the Tories to Labour.
In an election a lot of that Green vote will return to Labour but the Labour to Tory vote is in all likelihood lost to Labour or at greater risk of disappearing than it was when it seemed Boris was going to be replaced.
Edit: and obviously as I go so do millions...
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/met-police-stitch-up-claim-26102172?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar
* Quibble about Berwick, but offering them a place in independent Scotland isn't within the SNP's gift.
There isn't much green about the Corbynites. But then again, there is too much Corbynism in the Green Party.
Bring back Jonny Bercow – all is forgiven!
Well done Mr Speaker.
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/1hndsx8vfr/TheTimes_VI_220127_W.pdf
Looking at that I may have been too simplified though it seems there is a lot of Lib Dem to Labour switches as well.
https://twitter.com/valmcdermid/status/1488423803998846977?s=20&t=uCifleCMT76UAZyVqJQ-Hg
https://twitter.com/valmcdermid/status/1488424524907429889?s=20&t=uCifleCMT76UAZyVqJQ-Hg
Dame Eleanor got the most votes of the Tory candidates in the Speaker ballot Hoyle won which was held in November 2019, when we still had a hung parliament and before the Tory majority we now have
“Whether it’s fake news or not, Keir Starmer is actually remembered for the one that let Jimmy Savile get away. He was in charge of the CPS at the time. And I still don’t know who he is. He’s not made that impression.”
From an October 2021 focus group
It was only devolution which gave the SNP the platform to get over 30% of the vote, as they did by the 2007 Holyrood election when they got 32%, which they built on to get 45% and a majority in 2011.
45% was then what Yes got in 2014 even before the Brexit vote.
45% was a threat to the Union, 20% was not
Is Val McDonut saying any man ever accused of rape must never be allowed to pursue a career ever again, even if he is not convicted? Bit tough on your lifelong political hero, Alex Salmond, if so
English Nationalism - 'nasty, racist scum, pursuing their evil perverted view of foreigners...'
Scottish Nationalim - 'warm, welcoming to all, celebrating diversity within the context of the great Scottish nation...'
Its quite possible to love ones country and think other countries are great too.
Edit: the cached version shown first upon googling him is indicative of this.
And to think I thought you'd discovered a moral backbone these days? Perhaps I was misinformed?
I suspect that is why SKS has been laying the traps he has so that when Boris is found to have lied he can't claim it was inadvertent.
Then it was not so much independence as devolution that was being debated - and Labour and the LDs would gain from that and the Tories would lose.
And he has cabinet colleagues ("just the normal rough and tumble") defending it.
The Left, allied with Remoaners, and - ironically - Dom Cummings - has embarked on a dedicated campaign to destroy Boris Johnson and they are happy to say virtually anything about him, much true, much not. I’m not surprised he is fighting back quite hard
Which is the only part of Scotland south of the Tweed where the Tweed otherwise forms the border?
And why is that land Scottish?
https://twitter.com/joshberrycomedy/status/1488235908642050052?s=21
I completely uphold the right of the Conservative party to have Boris Johnson as their leader. I no longer want to give that party my vote.
(Or, given I haven't voted Conservative for at least a decade, more apt for me to say that I, as a 2015 Labour voter, upheld the Labour Party's right to choose Corbyn as leader, but refused to give a Corbyn-led Labour Party my vote.)
In the longer term, that means offices will be converted. But in the short term, it means higher prices.
PS: Could you give some precise examples from the campaign to destroy Boris that are not true? Thanks.
The one bit that was a bit iffy was a small patch, the Debatable Lands which was never properly sorted out as the locals exploited the legal ambiguity that it had for some reason, but that was dealt with by treaty sometime like 1550.
It's nearly as bad as trying to defend Owen Paterson.
Notably absent, the flags of Germany and France
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-60212716