If H & M have split then @MarqueeMark has won the PB Scoop of the Year award. Maybe the decade
Two minor celebs, living abroad, split?
Get a grip, man.
They are absolutely not “minor celebs”. They are two of the most famous people on the planet
That makes them celebs. Doesn't stop them being minor.
Mind you, the fact we're talking about them at all suggests they aren't minor.
They are not minor. They may be trivial or foolish or talentless or undeserving of fame - but in terms of global celebrity status they are Tier 1 gold plated copper bottomed mega famous
eg try and think of another couple whose marital split would cause such huge news (if this is true)
It’s not easy. Even Prince wills and Kate aren’t as box office as Harry and Meghan. Who else?
Biden? Who cares. Who else? Xi? Is he even married? Some pop star? Some actor? They split all the time. The beckhams? Ronaldo?
In terms of famously married couples Harry and Meghan are as famous as it gets
'Kate Forbes said in 2014 letter that women should not be church ministers as God does "not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man" within the church.'
If she seriously believes that, why on earth is she standing?
Surely being First Minister of Scotland is far more important in its impacton people's lives than being a minister in a fringe evangelical church sect?
I think the key to understanding that is the phrase "in the church", and life in the public realm not being subject to a practice that only applies in the 'private' realm. Ironically many of those stating that she is not suited to be FM because of her church membership would affirm the split as reflecting laicite a la France.
It would be interesting to see if her views have changed between 23 and 32 years old.
You have the wrong end of the stick here.
The issue is that she has - albeit marginally - overstepped the line into looking like she wanted to impose her private religious beliefs on the public.
Now people are digging up more detail on those private beliefs which increasingly look, in the secular light of 2023, to be quite odd.
This is not about Forbes’s Wee Free Christianity getting a hard ride compared to Humza’s Islamic faith.
Humza has fronted the issue and provided sufficient reassurance that whatever the teachings of Islam, he himself is happy to lead and represent a modern and progressive Scottish community.
Forbes just failed to do that.
Humza is, I think, threading a careful line of being progressive, without actually speaking out against the teachings of much of the Islamic movement.
To put it bluntly, I think he is the position of those Catholics who ditch the Churches teaching on these areas.
Forbes has said that she would use her private beliefs to guide her votes. At which point her private beliefs become public beliefs.
I think that sums it up very well. And the more we can keep people and views like Kate’s in the spotlight, the more it can reform religions taking them further along the road in the right direction.
We are on the wide straight roads of the Lord, but we aren’t at the end of the road yet, God only reveals what we need to know at the time of his choosing, Thomas More and Kate Forbes need to realise this so their own homes are no longer torture chambers. Christianity has always been about asking the big questions of each other, protest, reform, and progress further along the journey God has set us on.
I was so bored this morning I tried to fly IMMEDIATELY to Rangoon
I spent 3 hours getting all the paperwork in order, insurance, mad covid shit, endless red tape, got it all done, was congratulating myself, Evisa sorted, then I got an email telling me my instant e-visa would actually take 3 working days minimum
That’s when I popped a trammy, and drank half a bottle of 19 crimes shiraz, at 10 am
Turns out that’s quite superb for curing monotony. Add a couple of salty margaritas. Some modestly kinky porn. A chapter of Simon Sebag Montefiore’s WORLD HISTORY. An hour in the sun, half an our in the gym. The day passes
How can you live like that FFS? I’ve been working diligently for 22 years as a solicitor and I’ve nearly earned enough to buy a 2014 Nissan Juke. If you’d applied yourself you could have had the same.
Do you honestly think any of this is real? It's fiction.
I can assure you that my imminent purchase of a 64 Reg Automatic Nissan Juke is very real!
The Nissan Juke is surely the ugliest car ever made?
Hmmm.
Multipla?
I think I may have told this before but I saw a dealer sticker on a Multipla that said something like "If you think the back is bad, wait until you see the front."
If H & M have split then @MarqueeMark has won the PB Scoop of the Year award. Maybe the decade
Two minor celebs, living abroad, split?
Get a grip, man.
They are absolutely not “minor celebs”. They are two of the most famous people on the planet
That makes them celebs. Doesn't stop them being minor.
Mind you, the fact we're talking about them at all suggests they aren't minor.
They are not minor. They may be trivial or foolish or talentless or undeserving of fame - but in terms of global celebrity status they are Tier 1 gold plated copper bottomed mega famous
eg try and think of another couple whose marital split would cause such huge news (if this is true)
It’s not easy. Even Prince wills and Kate aren’t as box office as Harry and Meghan. Who else?
Biden? Who cares. Who else? Xi? Is he even married? Some pop star? Some actor? They split all the time. The beckhams? Ronaldo?
In terms of famously married couples Harry and Meghan are as famous as it gets
"another couple whose marital split would cause such huge news"
'Kate Forbes said in 2014 letter that women should not be church ministers as God does "not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man" within the church.'
If she seriously believes that, why on earth is she standing?
Surely being First Minister of Scotland is far more important in its impacton people's lives than being a minister in a fringe evangelical church sect?
I think the key to understanding that is the phrase "in the church", and life in the public realm not being subject to a practice that only applies in the 'private' realm. Ironically many of those stating that she is not suited to be FM because of her church membership would affirm the split as reflecting laicite a la France.
It would be interesting to see if her views have changed between 23 and 32 years old.
You have the wrong end of the stick here.
The issue is that she has - albeit marginally - overstepped the line into looking like she wanted to impose her private religious beliefs on the public.
Now people are digging up more detail on those private beliefs which increasingly look, in the secular light of 2023, to be quite odd.
This is not about Forbes’s Wee Free Christianity getting a hard ride compared to Humza’s Islamic faith.
Humza has fronted the issue and provided sufficient reassurance that whatever the teachings of Islam, he himself is happy to lead and represent a modern and progressive Scottish community.
Forbes just failed to do that.
Humza is, I think, threading a careful line of being progressive, without actually speaking out against the teachings of much of the Islamic movement.
To put it bluntly, I think he is the position of those Catholics who ditch the Churches teaching on these areas.
Forbes has said that she would use her private beliefs to guide her votes. At which point her private beliefs become public beliefs.
Based upon their respective records, I consider that Humza Youssaf would be more likely than Kate Forbes to restrict personal freedom.
If H & M have split then @MarqueeMark has won the PB Scoop of the Year award. Maybe the decade
Two minor celebs, living abroad, split?
Get a grip, man.
They are absolutely not “minor celebs”. They are two of the most famous people on the planet
That makes them celebs. Doesn't stop them being minor.
Mind you, the fact we're talking about them at all suggests they aren't minor.
They are not minor. They may be trivial or foolish or talentless or undeserving of fame - but in terms of global celebrity status they are Tier 1 gold plated copper bottomed mega famous
eg try and think of another couple whose marital split would cause such huge news (if this is true)
It’s not easy. Even Prince wills and Kate aren’t as box office as Harry and Meghan. Who else?
Biden? Who cares. Who else? Xi? Is he even married? Some pop star? Some actor? They split all the time. The beckhams? Ronaldo?
In terms of famously married couples Harry and Meghan are as famous as it gets
"another couple whose marital split would cause such huge news"
His da and step-ma.
I don’t think they quite compare. They are old. And not beautiful. And both are already widowed/divorced
And Meghan is “American” and their whole marriage is a huge story in itself, as we have seen
I honestly can’t think of another marital split which would cause a similarly huge storm of interest
There is absolutely nothing on Ye Twytter about Harry and megs re a split
As I understand it, MM's good lady has many celebrity friends in LA, and would know.
To me, it's nowhere near the news story it would be if William and Kate split, that would be significant for the constitution, and would be the cause of endless speculation, and lead to a new, glamorous 'Kate, Princess of Wales' on the dating scene. But they are one of the most famous couples. It's just they're an LA couple - a divorce was all but inevitable.
'Kate Forbes said in 2014 letter that women should not be church ministers as God does "not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man" within the church.'
If she seriously believes that, why on earth is she standing?
Surely being First Minister of Scotland is far more important in its impacton people's lives than being a minister in a fringe evangelical church sect?
I think the key to understanding that is the phrase "in the church", and life in the public realm not being subject to a practice that only applies in the 'private' realm. Ironically many of those stating that she is not suited to be FM because of her church membership would affirm the split as reflecting laicite a la France.
It would be interesting to see if her views have changed between 23 and 32 years old.
You have the wrong end of the stick here.
The issue is that she has - albeit marginally - overstepped the line into looking like she wanted to impose her private religious beliefs on the public.
Now people are digging up more detail on those private beliefs which increasingly look, in the secular light of 2023, to be quite odd.
This is not about Forbes’s Wee Free Christianity getting a hard ride compared to Humza’s Islamic faith.
Humza has fronted the issue and provided sufficient reassurance that whatever the teachings of Islam, he himself is happy to lead and represent a modern and progressive Scottish community.
Forbes just failed to do that.
Humza is, I think, threading a careful line of being progressive, without actually speaking out against the teachings of much of the Islamic movement.
To put it bluntly, I think he is the position of those Catholics who ditch the Churches teaching on these areas.
Forbes has said that she would use her private beliefs to guide her votes. At which point her private beliefs become public beliefs.
Based upon their respective records, I consider that Humza Youssaf would be more likely than Kate Forbes to restrict personal freedom.
'Kate Forbes said in 2014 letter that women should not be church ministers as God does "not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man" within the church.'
If she seriously believes that, why on earth is she standing?
Surely being First Minister of Scotland is far more important in its impacton people's lives than being a minister in a fringe evangelical church sect?
I think the key to understanding that is the phrase "in the church", and life in the public realm not being subject to a practice that only applies in the 'private' realm. Ironically many of those stating that she is not suited to be FM because of her church membership would affirm the split as reflecting laicite a la France.
It would be interesting to see if her views have changed between 23 and 32 years old.
You have the wrong end of the stick here.
The issue is that she has - albeit marginally - overstepped the line into looking like she wanted to impose her private religious beliefs on the public.
Now people are digging up more detail on those private beliefs which increasingly look, in the secular light of 2023, to be quite odd.
This is not about Forbes’s Wee Free Christianity getting a hard ride compared to Humza’s Islamic faith.
Humza has fronted the issue and provided sufficient reassurance that whatever the teachings of Islam, he himself is happy to lead and represent a modern and progressive Scottish community.
Forbes just failed to do that.
Humza is, I think, threading a careful line of being progressive, without actually speaking out against the teachings of much of the Islamic movement.
To put it bluntly, I think he is the position of those Catholics who ditch the Churches teaching on these areas.
Forbes has said that she would use her private beliefs to guide her votes. At which point her private beliefs become public beliefs.
The other point is, of course, that the SNP currently has the image of a progressive party, however accurate that might be.
No one cares about (eg) Mogg’s religious views, as whatever they are, they’re not going to bother the Tories much. Whereas if (eg) Biden were to have come out against abortion and same sex marriage, he’d never have been nominated.
Concerned to see a post earlier today from Leon suggesting that he is enjoying the recreational use of Tramadol.
We've had quite a few adventuring journalist-types over the years on PB, and several have disappeared from the site shortly after making similar comments. All are much missed. I hope he doesn't go the same way.
'Kate Forbes said in 2014 letter that women should not be church ministers as God does "not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man" within the church.'
If she seriously believes that, why on earth is she standing?
Surely being First Minister of Scotland is far more important in its impacton people's lives than being a minister in a fringe evangelical church sect?
I think the key to understanding that is the phrase "in the church", and life in the public realm not being subject to a practice that only applies in the 'private' realm. Ironically many of those stating that she is not suited to be FM because of her church membership would affirm the split as reflecting laicite a la France.
It would be interesting to see if her views have changed between 23 and 32 years old.
You have the wrong end of the stick here.
The issue is that she has - albeit marginally - overstepped the line into looking like she wanted to impose her private religious beliefs on the public.
Now people are digging up more detail on those private beliefs which increasingly look, in the secular light of 2023, to be quite odd.
This is not about Forbes’s Wee Free Christianity getting a hard ride compared to Humza’s Islamic faith.
Humza has fronted the issue and provided sufficient reassurance that whatever the teachings of Islam, he himself is happy to lead and represent a modern and progressive Scottish community.
Forbes just failed to do that.
Humza is, I think, threading a careful line of being progressive, without actually speaking out against the teachings of much of the Islamic movement.
To put it bluntly, I think he is the position of those Catholics who ditch the Churches teaching on these areas.
Forbes has said that she would use her private beliefs to guide her votes. At which point her private beliefs become public beliefs.
The other point is, of course, that the SNP currently has the image of a progressive party, however accurate that might be.
No one cares about (eg) Mogg’s religious views, as whatever they are, they’re not going to bother the Tories much. Whereas if (eg) Biden were to have come out against abortion and same sex marriage, he’d never have been nominated.
The LDs succeeded when they didn't define themselves too tightly, such that they could appeal to disillusioned Conservative and Labour voters alike. Then along came Clegg and the coalition, and they couldn't sit on the fence any more.
The SNP's electoral success similarly depended on an appeal to Scottish nationalism that wasn't too tightly defined on the left-right spectrum, beyond a vague progressive tinge necessary in a country that had been returning mostly Labour MPs.
Kate Forbes seems to want to follow a quite different course. If a potential leader wears socially conservatism on her chest as a badge of honour, then it will potentially put quite a lot of people off voting for that party. Opposition to gay marriage smacks of prejudice against gays, and opposition to women as church ministers smacks of misogyny. Those views, unlike her views on the GRR bill, are clearly also at odds with majority public opinion. Her views are out there, they say a lot about her, and if her party votes her in as leader it will say a lot about her party too.
'Kate Forbes said in 2014 letter that women should not be church ministers as God does "not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man" within the church.'
Surely the Nits can’t be mad enough to elect the South Uist Salafist?
She will never escape this. It will be hurled at her continuously and do endless damage
It’s even more over for her than it was before.
Not per the betting it isn't. Forbes and Yousaf are either side of evens and close. Regan - who does come over as the most lightweight to me - is the one out with the washing.
I’m with Leon on this. It’s the reason I want her to win.
Kates views on no sex before marriage is laugh out loud funny. But the thought of her being a parent to someone who is gay isn’t funny at all. So I think this makes her my preference for winning this, because her prejudice will be very much in the spotlight throughout her time as leader, this will get people talking and arguing and thinking about prejudice based positions like opposing all sex marriage, and that would be really good, exactly what the world actually needs to focus on outdated outgoing philosophies built on prejudice, and expunge them as soon as possible now. So I can see how a lot of good can come from such a senior UK political leader holding such views as hers, helping to maintain the spotlight on such things.
In terms of the independence politics of it, none of them seem to have come up with very good responses in interviews about how to achieve it from here. I don’t understand why there is so much hostility to using all Westminster elections and Scottish government elections as pleblicites on support for independence - it’s a fantastic idea for maximising SNP vote every time.
The best result for unionists, would be Ash, as her interviews are car crashes, she’s out of her depth. The worst result for Conservatives would be Kate, as she seeks independence but has social and economic values closer to conservatives. Best result for Labour, Kate, for same reasons in reverse to why she is worst for Conservative vote.
Who do I think wins? Kate. Even if Humza has the SNP establishment support, for, as someone wittily put it, applauding everything Sturgeon said and done like a demented seal, I still don’t think that’s enough to stop Kate now.
Bit all over the place here, confused London by looks of it.
You are not even in the SNP party. Do you vote Alba - So why are you so interested?
“In terms of the independence politics of it, none of them seem to have come up with very good responses in interviews about how to achieve it from here.” That’s true isn’t? So how would you do it?
You don’t have an answer do you.
Becuase you know I am right. I’m the only one with the answer.
The truth here Malc, since accepting London’s devolved parliament, that’s not remotely independence, the push for independence has become confused and all over the place. If anyone in Scotland was a wee bit interested in independence now, they would have identical attitude to working so hard in a devolved parliament they don’t want to exist they would have to their MPs going to Westminster and working so hard there without remotely wanting to be part of it.
If any nationalist in Scotland wants independence they need to shun Londons devolved assembly trap, let the labour tory unionists run that in coalition, and go on civil disobedience against anything to do with union.
Today, Scottish Nationalism has become weak. Limp. Half hearted and confused. In comparison to how history of the world people have worked harder than this for their freedom.
Come back Malc and stop hiding, I haven’t finished with you yet.
tell me, how can there be a passionate push for independence, with absolutely zilch happening to achieve it? Scottish Nationalists are too busy painting fake windows onto the side of ferry’s. 🤷♀️
How many do you currently have in jail as political prisoners due to civil disobedience against the Union?
'Kate Forbes said in 2014 letter that women should not be church ministers as God does "not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man" within the church.'
If she seriously believes that, why on earth is she standing?
Surely being First Minister of Scotland is far more important in its impacton people's lives than being a minister in a fringe evangelical church sect?
I think the key to understanding that is the phrase "in the church", and life in the public realm not being subject to a practice that only applies in the 'private' realm. Ironically many of those stating that she is not suited to be FM because of her church membership would affirm the split as reflecting laicite a la France.
It would be interesting to see if her views have changed between 23 and 32 years old.
You have the wrong end of the stick here.
The issue is that she has - albeit marginally - overstepped the line into looking like she wanted to impose her private religious beliefs on the public.
Now people are digging up more detail on those private beliefs which increasingly look, in the secular light of 2023, to be quite odd.
This is not about Forbes’s Wee Free Christianity getting a hard ride compared to Humza’s Islamic faith.
Humza has fronted the issue and provided sufficient reassurance that whatever the teachings of Islam, he himself is happy to lead and represent a modern and progressive Scottish community.
Forbes just failed to do that.
If so, she'll have to front up and herself and explain her position. Which will be a test of her quality (or otherwise).
One thing that interests me is whether the bounds of the domain of acceptable conscience issues for politicians have shifted over time - is gay marriage accepted as a question where the Parliamentary vote can be a conscience call for the politician still? can abortion? particular versions of gender reassignment? drug law?
It's often the dream of every campaign that their view of their issue become an orthodoxy.
If Harry and Meghan have split then PB has the scoop of the century. I also hope they haven't because they've got kids and whatever one thinks of Meghan a whole family is better than a broken one.
Concerned to see a post earlier today from Leon suggesting that he is enjoying the recreational use of Tramadol.
We've had quite a few adventuring journalist-types over the years on PB, and several have disappeared from the site shortly after making similar comments. All are much missed. I hope he doesn't go the same way.
He should stick to midget gems. That's what gets me through the long dark nights of the soul.
'Kate Forbes said in 2014 letter that women should not be church ministers as God does "not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man" within the church.'
If she seriously believes that, why on earth is she standing?
Surely being First Minister of Scotland is far more important in its impacton people's lives than being a minister in a fringe evangelical church sect?
I think the key to understanding that is the phrase "in the church", and life in the public realm not being subject to a practice that only applies in the 'private' realm. Ironically many of those stating that she is not suited to be FM because of her church membership would affirm the split as reflecting laicite a la France.
It would be interesting to see if her views have changed between 23 and 32 years old.
You have the wrong end of the stick here.
The issue is that she has - albeit marginally - overstepped the line into looking like she wanted to impose her private religious beliefs on the public.
Now people are digging up more detail on those private beliefs which increasingly look, in the secular light of 2023, to be quite odd.
This is not about Forbes’s Wee Free Christianity getting a hard ride compared to Humza’s Islamic faith.
Humza has fronted the issue and provided sufficient reassurance that whatever the teachings of Islam, he himself is happy to lead and represent a modern and progressive Scottish community.
Forbes just failed to do that.
If so, she'll have to front up and herself and explain her position. Which will be a test of her quality (or otherwise).
One thing that interests me is whether the bounds of the domain of acceptable conscience issues for politicians have shifted over time - is gay marriage accepted as a question where the Parliamentary vote can be a conscience call for the politician still? can abortion? particular versions of gender reassignment? drug law?
It's often the dream of every campaign that their view of their issue become an orthodoxy.
Unacceptable personal beliefs for politicians have moved over time.
Time was being an atheist would have been disqualifying.
If Harry and Meghan have split then PB has the scoop of the century. I also hope they haven't because they've got kids and whatever one thinks of Meghan a whole family is better than a broken one.
I think the reality is more complex than that, with all respect. Whole unhappy families are not automatically given to be better than broken families if the parents recognise that they're parents first and foremost.
If the reports are to be believed, both the partial sucessor seats to Fareham might go with the other MP with a claim on the seat, even though they are both relative nobodies.
'Kate Forbes said in 2014 letter that women should not be church ministers as God does "not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man" within the church.'
If she seriously believes that, why on earth is she standing?
Surely being First Minister of Scotland is far more important in its impacton people's lives than being a minister in a fringe evangelical church sect?
I think the key to understanding that is the phrase "in the church", and life in the public realm not being subject to a practice that only applies in the 'private' realm. Ironically many of those stating that she is not suited to be FM because of her church membership would affirm the split as reflecting laicite a la France.
It would be interesting to see if her views have changed between 23 and 32 years old.
You have the wrong end of the stick here.
The issue is that she has - albeit marginally - overstepped the line into looking like she wanted to impose her private religious beliefs on the public.
Now people are digging up more detail on those private beliefs which increasingly look, in the secular light of 2023, to be quite odd.
This is not about Forbes’s Wee Free Christianity getting a hard ride compared to Humza’s Islamic faith.
Humza has fronted the issue and provided sufficient reassurance that whatever the teachings of Islam, he himself is happy to lead and represent a modern and progressive Scottish community.
Forbes just failed to do that.
Humza is, I think, threading a careful line of being progressive, without actually speaking out against the teachings of much of the Islamic movement.
To put it bluntly, I think he is the position of those Catholics who ditch the Churches teaching on these areas.
Forbes has said that she would use her private beliefs to guide her votes. At which point her private beliefs become public beliefs.
The other point is, of course, that the SNP currently has the image of a progressive party, however accurate that might be.
No one cares about (eg) Mogg’s religious views, as whatever they are, they’re not going to bother the Tories much. Whereas if (eg) Biden were to have come out against abortion and same sex marriage, he’d never have been nominated.
The LDs succeeded when they didn't define themselves too tightly, such that they could appeal to disillusioned Conservative and Labour voters alike. Then along came Clegg and the coalition, and they couldn't sit on the fence any more.
The SNP's electoral success similarly depended on an appeal to Scottish nationalism that wasn't too tightly defined on the left-right spectrum, beyond a vague progressive tinge necessary in a country that had been returning mostly Labour MPs.
Kate Forbes seems to want to follow a quite different course. If a potential leader wears socially conservatism on her chest as a badge of honour, then it will potentially put quite a lot of people off voting for that party. Opposition to gay marriage smacks of prejudice against gays, and opposition to women as church ministers smacks of misogyny. Those views, unlike her views on the GRR bill, are clearly also at odds with majority public opinion. Her views are out there, they say a lot about her, and if her party votes her in as leader it will say a lot about her party too.
I'm not sure that's a correct analysis. The SNP didn't act equidistant, even if something called unionism was apparent at voter level. Informed people wouldn't have put the SNP closer to Johnson than to Corbyn, let alone Starmer; and I don't think "half and half" was the answer either.
If the reports are to be believed, both the partial sucessor seats to Fareham might go with the other MP with a claim on the seat, even though they are both relative nobodies.
That's gotta sting.
But we are regularly assured that she is the toast of the moonbats in the back country.
If the reports are to be believed, both the partial sucessor seats to Fareham might go with the other MP with a claim on the seat, even though they are both relative nobodies.
That's gotta sting.
But we are regularly assured that she is the toast of the moonbats in the back country.
It's the Priti Patel conundrum.
Liberal people cannot stand her for neo fascist tendencies and anti immigration people hate her for her failure to stop the boats/immigration.
'Kate Forbes said in 2014 letter that women should not be church ministers as God does "not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man" within the church.'
If she seriously believes that, why on earth is she standing?
Surely being First Minister of Scotland is far more important in its impacton people's lives than being a minister in a fringe evangelical church sect?
I think the key to understanding that is the phrase "in the church", and life in the public realm not being subject to a practice that only applies in the 'private' realm. Ironically many of those stating that she is not suited to be FM because of her church membership would affirm the split as reflecting laicite a la France.
It would be interesting to see if her views have changed between 23 and 32 years old.
You have the wrong end of the stick here.
The issue is that she has - albeit marginally - overstepped the line into looking like she wanted to impose her private religious beliefs on the public.
Now people are digging up more detail on those private beliefs which increasingly look, in the secular light of 2023, to be quite odd.
This is not about Forbes’s Wee Free Christianity getting a hard ride compared to Humza’s Islamic faith.
Humza has fronted the issue and provided sufficient reassurance that whatever the teachings of Islam, he himself is happy to lead and represent a modern and progressive Scottish community.
Forbes just failed to do that.
Humza is, I think, threading a careful line of being progressive, without actually speaking out against the teachings of much of the Islamic movement.
To put it bluntly, I think he is the position of those Catholics who ditch the Churches teaching on these areas.
Forbes has said that she would use her private beliefs to guide her votes. At which point her private beliefs become public beliefs.
The other point is, of course, that the SNP currently has the image of a progressive party, however accurate that might be.
No one cares about (eg) Mogg’s religious views, as whatever they are, they’re not going to bother the Tories much. Whereas if (eg) Biden were to have come out against abortion and same sex marriage, he’d never have been nominated.
The LDs succeeded when they didn't define themselves too tightly, such that they could appeal to disillusioned Conservative and Labour voters alike. Then along came Clegg and the coalition, and they couldn't sit on the fence any more.
The SNP's electoral success similarly depended on an appeal to Scottish nationalism that wasn't too tightly defined on the left-right spectrum, beyond a vague progressive tinge necessary in a country that had been returning mostly Labour MPs.
Kate Forbes seems to want to follow a quite different course. If a potential leader wears socially conservatism on her chest as a badge of honour, then it will potentially put quite a lot of people off voting for that party. Opposition to gay marriage smacks of prejudice against gays, and opposition to women as church ministers smacks of misogyny. Those views, unlike her views on the GRR bill, are clearly also at odds with majority public opinion. Her views are out there, they say a lot about her, and if her party votes her in as leader it will say a lot about her party too.
I'm not sure that's a correct analysis. The SNP didn't act equidistant, even if something called unionism was apparent at voter level. Informed people wouldn't have put the SNP closer to Johnson than to Corbyn, let alone Starmer; and I don't think "half and half" was the answer either.
That's right in the Scottish context; if anything, it was Slab who was trying to go half and half, appealing to Conservative unionists and progressives alike and failing somewhat. Unionism, after all, is quite well correlated with conservatism, especially the variety espoused by the Conservative Party.
'Kate Forbes said in 2014 letter that women should not be church ministers as God does "not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man" within the church.'
If she seriously believes that, why on earth is she standing?
Surely being First Minister of Scotland is far more important in its impacton people's lives than being a minister in a fringe evangelical church sect?
I think the key to understanding that is the phrase "in the church", and life in the public realm not being subject to a practice that only applies in the 'private' realm. Ironically many of those stating that she is not suited to be FM because of her church membership would affirm the split as reflecting laicite a la France.
It would be interesting to see if her views have changed between 23 and 32 years old.
You have the wrong end of the stick here.
The issue is that she has - albeit marginally - overstepped the line into looking like she wanted to impose her private religious beliefs on the public.
Now people are digging up more detail on those private beliefs which increasingly look, in the secular light of 2023, to be quite odd.
This is not about Forbes’s Wee Free Christianity getting a hard ride compared to Humza’s Islamic faith.
Humza has fronted the issue and provided sufficient reassurance that whatever the teachings of Islam, he himself is happy to lead and represent a modern and progressive Scottish community.
Forbes just failed to do that.
Humza is, I think, threading a careful line of being progressive, without actually speaking out against the teachings of much of the Islamic movement.
To put it bluntly, I think he is the position of those Catholics who ditch the Churches teaching on these areas.
Forbes has said that she would use her private beliefs to guide her votes. At which point her private beliefs become public beliefs.
The other point is, of course, that the SNP currently has the image of a progressive party, however accurate that might be.
No one cares about (eg) Mogg’s religious views, as whatever they are, they’re not going to bother the Tories much. Whereas if (eg) Biden were to have come out against abortion and same sex marriage, he’d never have been nominated.
The LDs succeeded when they didn't define themselves too tightly, such that they could appeal to disillusioned Conservative and Labour voters alike. Then along came Clegg and the coalition, and they couldn't sit on the fence any more.
The SNP's electoral success similarly depended on an appeal to Scottish nationalism that wasn't too tightly defined on the left-right spectrum, beyond a vague progressive tinge necessary in a country that had been returning mostly Labour MPs.
Kate Forbes seems to want to follow a quite different course. If a potential leader wears socially conservatism on her chest as a badge of honour, then it will potentially put quite a lot of people off voting for that party. Opposition to gay marriage smacks of prejudice against gays, and opposition to women as church ministers smacks of misogyny. Those views, unlike her views on the GRR bill, are clearly also at odds with majority public opinion. Her views are out there, they say a lot about her, and if her party votes her in as leader it will say a lot about her party too.
I'm not sure that's a correct analysis. The SNP didn't act equidistant, even if something called unionism was apparent at voter level. Informed people wouldn't have put the SNP closer to Johnson than to Corbyn, let alone Starmer; and I don't think "half and half" was the answer either.
Nevertheless the SNP managed to break out from its ‘Tartan Tory’ pitch and win seats beyond the heartland nationalist areas of Angus and the like, biting into Labour’s previously safe seats. Whether Forbes’s pitch is the right one to hold onto those seats is the question - I suppose it could be argued that her pitch might shape up well against Labour’s Camden/Islington set?
All very well but any deal without DUP approval is pointless as the main point of negotiations is to get them, as largest Unionist party in Northern Ireland, back into the Stormont Executive
If the choice is:
1. A deal, no trade war with the EU and no NI Assembly
Or
2. No deal, a trade war with the EU and no NI Assembly
There really is only one choice in the national interest.
We already have a deal and no trade war with the EU, the one Boris negotiated in 2019 and Parliament passed in January 2020.
All Sunak is trying to negotiate is a deal to get no border in the Irish Sea but anything that sees the ECJ have jurisdiction over GB will be voted down by the ERG and anything which cements ECJ jurisdiction over Northern Ireland will be vetoed by the DUP
At this point I'd still take Forbes and her beliefs over Yousaf, who is just hopeless in every respect. If Yousaf wins I'm ditching my membership.
It only becomes a real problem with Forbes if her beliefs leak into her policies, which to this point at least doesn't seem to be a problem.
Ideally Regan wins and puts all that to bed but not sure that's very likely.
Forbes and Regan are likely to pick up each other’s second preferences. Yousaf is going to have to be well ahead on first preferences in order to win. Although, like Malc, I am very concerned about Murrell being in charge of the counting.
'Kate Forbes said in 2014 letter that women should not be church ministers as God does "not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man" within the church.'
Surely the Nits can’t be mad enough to elect the South Uist Salafist?
She will never escape this. It will be hurled at her continuously and do endless damage
It’s even more over for her than it was before.
Not per the betting it isn't. Forbes and Yousaf are either side of evens and close. Regan - who does come over as the most lightweight to me - is the one out with the washing.
I’m with Leon on this. It’s the reason I want her to win.
Kates views on no sex before marriage is laugh out loud funny. But the thought of her being a parent to someone who is gay isn’t funny at all. So I think this makes her my preference for winning this, because her prejudice will be very much in the spotlight throughout her time as leader, this will get people talking and arguing and thinking about prejudice based positions like opposing all sex marriage, and that would be really good, exactly what the world actually needs to focus on outdated outgoing philosophies built on prejudice, and expunge them as soon as possible now. So I can see how a lot of good can come from such a senior UK political leader holding such views as hers, helping to maintain the spotlight on such things.
In terms of the independence politics of it, none of them seem to have come up with very good responses in interviews about how to achieve it from here. I don’t understand why there is so much hostility to using all Westminster elections and Scottish government elections as pleblicites on support for independence - it’s a fantastic idea for maximising SNP vote every time.
The best result for unionists, would be Ash, as her interviews are car crashes, she’s out of her depth. The worst result for Conservatives would be Kate, as she seeks independence but has social and economic values closer to conservatives. Best result for Labour, Kate, for same reasons in reverse to why she is worst for Conservative vote.
Who do I think wins? Kate. Even if Humza has the SNP establishment support, for, as someone wittily put it, applauding everything Sturgeon said and done like a demented seal, I still don’t think that’s enough to stop Kate now.
Bit all over the place here, confused London by looks of it.
You are not even in the SNP party. Do you vote Alba - So why are you so interested?
“In terms of the independence politics of it, none of them seem to have come up with very good responses in interviews about how to achieve it from here.” That’s true isn’t? So how would you do it?
You don’t have an answer do you.
Becuase you know I am right. I’m the only one with the answer.
The truth here Malc, since accepting London’s devolved parliament, that’s not remotely independence, the push for independence has become confused and all over the place. If anyone in Scotland was a wee bit interested in independence now, they would have identical attitude to working so hard in a devolved parliament they don’t want to exist they would have to their MPs going to Westminster and working so hard there without remotely wanting to be part of it.
If any nationalist in Scotland wants independence they need to shun Londons devolved assembly trap, let the labour tory unionists run that in coalition, and go on civil disobedience against anything to do with union.
Today, Scottish Nationalism has become weak. Limp. Half hearted and confused. In comparison to how history of the world people have worked harder than this for their freedom.
Come back Malc and stop hiding, I haven’t finished with you yet.
tell me, how can there be a passionate push for independence, with absolutely zilch happening to achieve it? Scottish Nationalists are too busy painting fake windows onto the side of ferry’s. 🤷♀️
How many do you currently have in jail as political prisoners due to civil disobedience against the Union?
I am back and you sound more like Leon's female equivalent by the day. I have been stating on here for a considerable time that Imelda and her cabal of weirdo's, troughers and sockpuppets have no interest in independence. Big big changes needed and every election should be counted as a vote on independence , if 50%+1 votes are placed for independence parties then negotiations should start immediately. No mere Leon impersonator can dictate mince to the special one.
If Harry and Meghan have split then PB has the scoop of the century. I also hope they haven't because they've got kids and whatever one thinks of Meghan a whole family is better than a broken one.
I think the reality is more complex than that, with all respect. Whole unhappy families are not automatically given to be better than broken families if the parents recognise that they're parents first and foremost.
Great that Fred and Rose stuck it out, said no one.
No Brexit drama is complete without its central character. Boris Johnson last week went public with his belief that Sunak should press ahead with the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill, drawn up when Johnson was PM, to get more leverage against the EU. The bill would give Britain the right to unilaterally suspend aspects of the protocol in an emergency.
Privately, Johnson was more robust in an extraordinary confrontation in the Commons chamber with his former lord chancellor, Sir Robert Buckland, who lobbied Johnson to back the deal, arguing that it was necessary to cement relations with President Joe Biden. In a move that startled MPs, Johnson was overheard replying: “F*** the Americans!”
Allies of Johnson say he is contemplating another scene-stealing act to torpedo the deal and undermine Sunak, who it is said he still hopes to oust from Downing Street.
No Brexit drama is complete without its central character. Boris Johnson last week went public with his belief that Sunak should press ahead with the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill, drawn up when Johnson was PM, to get more leverage against the EU. The bill would give Britain the right to unilaterally suspend aspects of the protocol in an emergency.
Privately, Johnson was more robust in an extraordinary confrontation in the Commons chamber with his former lord chancellor, Sir Robert Buckland, who lobbied Johnson to back the deal, arguing that it was necessary to cement relations with President Joe Biden. In a move that startled MPs, Johnson was overheard replying: “F*** the Americans!”
'Kate Forbes said in 2014 letter that women should not be church ministers as God does "not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man" within the church.'
Surely the Nits can’t be mad enough to elect the South Uist Salafist?
She will never escape this. It will be hurled at her continuously and do endless damage
It’s even more over for her than it was before.
Not per the betting it isn't. Forbes and Yousaf are either side of evens and close. Regan - who does come over as the most lightweight to me - is the one out with the washing.
I’m with Leon on this. It’s the reason I want her to win.
Kates views on no sex before marriage is laugh out loud funny. But the thought of her being a parent to someone who is gay isn’t funny at all. So I think this makes her my preference for winning this, because her prejudice will be very much in the spotlight throughout her time as leader, this will get people talking and arguing and thinking about prejudice based positions like opposing all sex marriage, and that would be really good, exactly what the world actually needs to focus on outdated outgoing philosophies built on prejudice, and expunge them as soon as possible now. So I can see how a lot of good can come from such a senior UK political leader holding such views as hers, helping to maintain the spotlight on such things.
In terms of the independence politics of it, none of them seem to have come up with very good responses in interviews about how to achieve it from here. I don’t understand why there is so much hostility to using all Westminster elections and Scottish government elections as pleblicites on support for independence - it’s a fantastic idea for maximising SNP vote every time.
The best result for unionists, would be Ash, as her interviews are car crashes, she’s out of her depth. The worst result for Conservatives would be Kate, as she seeks independence but has social and economic values closer to conservatives. Best result for Labour, Kate, for same reasons in reverse to why she is worst for Conservative vote.
Who do I think wins? Kate. Even if Humza has the SNP establishment support, for, as someone wittily put it, applauding everything Sturgeon said and done like a demented seal, I still don’t think that’s enough to stop Kate now.
Bit all over the place here, confused London by looks of it.
You are not even in the SNP party. Do you vote Alba - So why are you so interested?
“In terms of the independence politics of it, none of them seem to have come up with very good responses in interviews about how to achieve it from here.” That’s true isn’t? So how would you do it?
You don’t have an answer do you.
Becuase you know I am right. I’m the only one with the answer.
The truth here Malc, since accepting London’s devolved parliament, that’s not remotely independence, the push for independence has become confused and all over the place. If anyone in Scotland was a wee bit interested in independence now, they would have identical attitude to working so hard in a devolved parliament they don’t want to exist they would have to their MPs going to Westminster and working so hard there without remotely wanting to be part of it.
If any nationalist in Scotland wants independence they need to shun Londons devolved assembly trap, let the labour tory unionists run that in coalition, and go on civil disobedience against anything to do with union.
Today, Scottish Nationalism has become weak. Limp. Half hearted and confused. In comparison to how history of the world people have worked harder than this for their freedom.
Come back Malc and stop hiding, I haven’t finished with you yet.
tell me, how can there be a passionate push for independence, with absolutely zilch happening to achieve it? Scottish Nationalists are too busy painting fake windows onto the side of ferry’s. 🤷♀️
How many do you currently have in jail as political prisoners due to civil disobedience against the Union?
I am back and you sound more like Leon's female equivalent by the day. I have been stating on here for a considerable time that Imelda and her cabal of weirdo's, troughers and sockpuppets have no interest in independence. Big big changes needed and every election should be counted as a vote on independence , if 50%+1 votes are placed for independence parties then negotiations should start immediately. No mere Leon impersonator can dictate mince to the special one.
Amongst all that, you are inching towards agreeing with me, that this is the most lily livered separatist campaign in world history.
So how would you do it? Absolutely zilch happening in push for independence at the moment, so tell us what should be happening.
If Harry and Meghan have split then PB has the scoop of the century. I also hope they haven't because they've got kids and whatever one thinks of Meghan a whole family is better than a broken one.
I think the reality is more complex than that, with all respect. Whole unhappy families are not automatically given to be better than broken families if the parents recognise that they're parents first and foremost.
Great that Fred and Rose stuck it out, said no one.
They were reasonably happy with each other though, weren't they?
I suppose it shows the importance of having shared hobbies and interests.
'Kate Forbes said in 2014 letter that women should not be church ministers as God does "not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man" within the church.'
Surely the Nits can’t be mad enough to elect the South Uist Salafist?
She will never escape this. It will be hurled at her continuously and do endless damage
It’s even more over for her than it was before.
Not per the betting it isn't. Forbes and Yousaf are either side of evens and close. Regan - who does come over as the most lightweight to me - is the one out with the washing.
I’m with Leon on this. It’s the reason I want her to win.
Kates views on no sex before marriage is laugh out loud funny. But the thought of her being a parent to someone who is gay isn’t funny at all. So I think this makes her my preference for winning this, because her prejudice will be very much in the spotlight throughout her time as leader, this will get people talking and arguing and thinking about prejudice based positions like opposing all sex marriage, and that would be really good, exactly what the world actually needs to focus on outdated outgoing philosophies built on prejudice, and expunge them as soon as possible now. So I can see how a lot of good can come from such a senior UK political leader holding such views as hers, helping to maintain the spotlight on such things.
In terms of the independence politics of it, none of them seem to have come up with very good responses in interviews about how to achieve it from here. I don’t understand why there is so much hostility to using all Westminster elections and Scottish government elections as pleblicites on support for independence - it’s a fantastic idea for maximising SNP vote every time.
The best result for unionists, would be Ash, as her interviews are car crashes, she’s out of her depth. The worst result for Conservatives would be Kate, as she seeks independence but has social and economic values closer to conservatives. Best result for Labour, Kate, for same reasons in reverse to why she is worst for Conservative vote.
Who do I think wins? Kate. Even if Humza has the SNP establishment support, for, as someone wittily put it, applauding everything Sturgeon said and done like a demented seal, I still don’t think that’s enough to stop Kate now.
Bit all over the place here, confused London by looks of it.
You are not even in the SNP party. Do you vote Alba - So why are you so interested?
“In terms of the independence politics of it, none of them seem to have come up with very good responses in interviews about how to achieve it from here.” That’s true isn’t? So how would you do it?
You don’t have an answer do you.
Becuase you know I am right. I’m the only one with the answer.
The truth here Malc, since accepting London’s devolved parliament, that’s not remotely independence, the push for independence has become confused and all over the place. If anyone in Scotland was a wee bit interested in independence now, they would have identical attitude to working so hard in a devolved parliament they don’t want to exist they would have to their MPs going to Westminster and working so hard there without remotely wanting to be part of it.
If any nationalist in Scotland wants independence they need to shun Londons devolved assembly trap, let the labour tory unionists run that in coalition, and go on civil disobedience against anything to do with union.
Today, Scottish Nationalism has become weak. Limp. Half hearted and confused. In comparison to how history of the world people have worked harder than this for their freedom.
Come back Malc and stop hiding, I haven’t finished with you yet.
tell me, how can there be a passionate push for independence, with absolutely zilch happening to achieve it? Scottish Nationalists are too busy painting fake windows onto the side of ferry’s. 🤷♀️
How many do you currently have in jail as political prisoners due to civil disobedience against the Union?
I am back and you sound more like Leon's female equivalent by the day. I have been stating on here for a considerable time that Imelda and her cabal of weirdo's, troughers and sockpuppets have no interest in independence. Big big changes needed and every election should be counted as a vote on independence , if 50%+1 votes are placed for independence parties then negotiations should start immediately. No mere Leon impersonator can dictate mince to the special one.
Forbes' views on sexuality are a closer fit to the DUP, Malc.
"The problem is that growing salad vegetables in the UK has been made economically unviable, both by those shortsighted supermarkets and in large part by Brexit. Growers in the Lea Valley around London, regarded as Britain’s salad bowl, have started applying to knock down dozens of acres of greenhouses so the land can be used more profitably for houses. As the Lea Valley Growers Association has explained, the post-Brexit seasonal workers’ scheme only granted six-month visas when they were needed for nine months. It meant bringing in two cohorts and double the training. That means extra costs which are not being met by supermarkets."
Clarkson complained it was actually very difficult to sell his vegetables when he'd grown them.
Of course, how truthful he was being is another question. But AIUI they are a sod of a crop. A bugger to grow and selling them fresh is a pain, while selling them in any way other than fresh is an even bigger pain.
He was probably demanding the cost of growing them plus a profit. That kind of fascist thinking would never pass the muster at Tesco.
I had a look round today - the supermarkets have a fair amount of fresh veg. The specialty shops around here - higher quality, more expensive produce - are stacked to the ceiling with veg.
Yup. If you’re willing to pay, the veg is there. No shortages in Waitrose or Aldi locally.
Looks like this is the mid-range supermarkets fighting for their lives against being squeezed from both ends & finding that their history of stiffing their suppliers is backfiring on them?
Tesco in particular has spent many, many years making themselves extremely unpopular with the UK farming industry & now the boot is on the other foot they’re finding that they don’t have anyone the can call on. Couldn’t happen to a nicer company I’m sure.
'Kate Forbes said in 2014 letter that women should not be church ministers as God does "not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man" within the church.'
Surely the Nits can’t be mad enough to elect the South Uist Salafist?
She will never escape this. It will be hurled at her continuously and do endless damage
It’s even more over for her than it was before.
Not per the betting it isn't. Forbes and Yousaf are either side of evens and close. Regan - who does come over as the most lightweight to me - is the one out with the washing.
I’m with Leon on this. It’s the reason I want her to win.
Kates views on no sex before marriage is laugh out loud funny. But the thought of her being a parent to someone who is gay isn’t funny at all. So I think this makes her my preference for winning this, because her prejudice will be very much in the spotlight throughout her time as leader, this will get people talking and arguing and thinking about prejudice based positions like opposing all sex marriage, and that would be really good, exactly what the world actually needs to focus on outdated outgoing philosophies built on prejudice, and expunge them as soon as possible now. So I can see how a lot of good can come from such a senior UK political leader holding such views as hers, helping to maintain the spotlight on such things.
In terms of the independence politics of it, none of them seem to have come up with very good responses in interviews about how to achieve it from here. I don’t understand why there is so much hostility to using all Westminster elections and Scottish government elections as pleblicites on support for independence - it’s a fantastic idea for maximising SNP vote every time.
The best result for unionists, would be Ash, as her interviews are car crashes, she’s out of her depth. The worst result for Conservatives would be Kate, as she seeks independence but has social and economic values closer to conservatives. Best result for Labour, Kate, for same reasons in reverse to why she is worst for Conservative vote.
Who do I think wins? Kate. Even if Humza has the SNP establishment support, for, as someone wittily put it, applauding everything Sturgeon said and done like a demented seal, I still don’t think that’s enough to stop Kate now.
Bit all over the place here, confused London by looks of it.
You are not even in the SNP party. Do you vote Alba - So why are you so interested?
“In terms of the independence politics of it, none of them seem to have come up with very good responses in interviews about how to achieve it from here.” That’s true isn’t? So how would you do it?
You don’t have an answer do you.
Becuase you know I am right. I’m the only one with the answer.
The truth here Malc, since accepting London’s devolved parliament, that’s not remotely independence, the push for independence has become confused and all over the place. If anyone in Scotland was a wee bit interested in independence now, they would have identical attitude to working so hard in a devolved parliament they don’t want to exist they would have to their MPs going to Westminster and working so hard there without remotely wanting to be part of it.
If any nationalist in Scotland wants independence they need to shun Londons devolved assembly trap, let the labour tory unionists run that in coalition, and go on civil disobedience against anything to do with union.
Today, Scottish Nationalism has become weak. Limp. Half hearted and confused. In comparison to how history of the world people have worked harder than this for their freedom.
Come back Malc and stop hiding, I haven’t finished with you yet.
tell me, how can there be a passionate push for independence, with absolutely zilch happening to achieve it? Scottish Nationalists are too busy painting fake windows onto the side of ferry’s. 🤷♀️
How many do you currently have in jail as political prisoners due to civil disobedience against the Union?
I am back and you sound more like Leon's female equivalent by the day. I have been stating on here for a considerable time that Imelda and her cabal of weirdo's, troughers and sockpuppets have no interest in independence. Big big changes needed and every election should be counted as a vote on independence , if 50%+1 votes are placed for independence parties then negotiations should start immediately. No mere Leon impersonator can dictate mince to the special one.
Amongst all that, you are inching towards agreeing with me, that this is the most lily livered separatist campaign in world history.
So how would you do it? Absolutely zilch happening in push for independence at the moment, so tell us what should be happening.
As I said every election is a referendum and if independence parties gain 50%+1 then they start negotiating the split, simple as that no begging the colonial masters for anything , just get on with it.
If Harry and Meghan have split then PB has the scoop of the century. I also hope they haven't because they've got kids and whatever one thinks of Meghan a whole family is better than a broken one.
I think the reality is more complex than that, with all respect. Whole unhappy families are not automatically given to be better than broken families if the parents recognise that they're parents first and foremost.
Great that Fred and Rose stuck it out, said no one.
They were reasonably happy with each other though, weren't they?
I suppose it shows the importance of having shared hobbies and interests.
They stuck together for the kids.
Sorry, a bit sick even by my dismally low standards.
No Brexit drama is complete without its central character. Boris Johnson last week went public with his belief that Sunak should press ahead with the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill, drawn up when Johnson was PM, to get more leverage against the EU. The bill would give Britain the right to unilaterally suspend aspects of the protocol in an emergency.
Privately, Johnson was more robust in an extraordinary confrontation in the Commons chamber with his former lord chancellor, Sir Robert Buckland, who lobbied Johnson to back the deal, arguing that it was necessary to cement relations with President Joe Biden. In a move that startled MPs, Johnson was overheard replying: “F*** the Americans!”
Allies of Johnson say he is contemplating another scene-stealing act to torpedo the deal and undermine Sunak, who it is said he still hopes to oust from Downing Street.
It is absolutely despicable that those lobbying on behalf of Sunak's deal are selling it on the basis of appeasing a foreign President. Johnson's response was both eloquent and justified.
If Harry and Meghan have split then PB has the scoop of the century. I also hope they haven't because they've got kids and whatever one thinks of Meghan a whole family is better than a broken one.
I think the reality is more complex than that, with all respect. Whole unhappy families are not automatically given to be better than broken families if the parents recognise that they're parents first and foremost.
Great that Fred and Rose stuck it out, said no one.
They were reasonably happy with each other though, weren't they?
I suppose it shows the importance of having shared hobbies and interests.
Nobody complained about Fred West's building work.
"The problem is that growing salad vegetables in the UK has been made economically unviable, both by those shortsighted supermarkets and in large part by Brexit. Growers in the Lea Valley around London, regarded as Britain’s salad bowl, have started applying to knock down dozens of acres of greenhouses so the land can be used more profitably for houses. As the Lea Valley Growers Association has explained, the post-Brexit seasonal workers’ scheme only granted six-month visas when they were needed for nine months. It meant bringing in two cohorts and double the training. That means extra costs which are not being met by supermarkets."
Clarkson complained it was actually very difficult to sell his vegetables when he'd grown them.
Of course, how truthful he was being is another question. But AIUI they are a sod of a crop. A bugger to grow and selling them fresh is a pain, while selling them in any way other than fresh is an even bigger pain.
He was probably demanding the cost of growing them plus a profit. That kind of fascist thinking would never pass the muster at Tesco.
I had a look round today - the supermarkets have a fair amount of fresh veg. The specialty shops around here - higher quality, more expensive produce - are stacked to the ceiling with veg.
Yup. If you’re willing to pay, the veg is there. No shortages in Waitrose or Aldi locally.
Looks like this is the mid-range supermarkets fighting for their lives against being squeezed from both ends & finding that their history of stiffing their suppliers is backfiring on them?
Tesco in particular has spent many, many years making themselves extremely unpopular with the UK farming industry & now the boot is on the other foot they’re finding that they don’t have anyone the can call on. Couldn’t happen to a nicer company I’m sure.
Our delivery from Natoora arrived just fine this week. But not everyone wants to spend that kind of money.
Also, find of the week, Selfridges do Ortiz tuna at £7 for the 250g can. It's an indulgence, but the tuna really is the best available.
If Harry and Meghan have split then PB has the scoop of the century. I also hope they haven't because they've got kids and whatever one thinks of Meghan a whole family is better than a broken one.
I think the reality is more complex than that, with all respect. Whole unhappy families are not automatically given to be better than broken families if the parents recognise that they're parents first and foremost.
Great that Fred and Rose stuck it out, said no one.
They were reasonably happy with each other though, weren't they?
I suppose it shows the importance of having shared hobbies and interests.
Nobody complained about Fred West's building work.
Indeed. He was a flawed man, nobody is denying that. But he also laid a lovely patio for me back in 1982. So it's light and shade with all these things, and many are too quick to judge.
Kate Forbes is voters’ preferred choice as Scottish first minister, according to a new poll that comes as pressure builds on Humza Yousaf to provide full disclosure about missing a vote on same-sex marriage.
The Panelbase survey for The Sunday Times puts the finance secretary in pole position despite a dreadful start to her leadership bid, dominated by criticism of her views as a Free Church member on gay marriage and sex outside of wedlock.
Nearly a quarter of those surveyed (23 per cent) would like Forbes to succeed Nicola Sturgeon, who announced her resignation this month, while 15 per cent favour Yousaf and 7 per cent prefer Ash Regan, the former community safety minister....
...Panelbase also found that candidates’ religious views may have little impact on voter sentiment. Electing an SNP leader who is a practising Christian would make 12 per cent of voters more likely to vote SNP and 10 per cent less likely, while the vast majority (70 per cent) said it would make no difference.
Similarly, electing a Muslim as SNP leader would make 5 per cent more likely and 14 per cent less likely to vote SNP
'Kate Forbes said in 2014 letter that women should not be church ministers as God does "not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man" within the church.'
Surely the Nits can’t be mad enough to elect the South Uist Salafist?
She will never escape this. It will be hurled at her continuously and do endless damage
It’s even more over for her than it was before.
Not per the betting it isn't. Forbes and Yousaf are either side of evens and close. Regan - who does come over as the most lightweight to me - is the one out with the washing.
I’m with Leon on this. It’s the reason I want her to win.
Kates views on no sex before marriage is laugh out loud funny. But the thought of her being a parent to someone who is gay isn’t funny at all. So I think this makes her my preference for winning this, because her prejudice will be very much in the spotlight throughout her time as leader, this will get people talking and arguing and thinking about prejudice based positions like opposing all sex marriage, and that would be really good, exactly what the world actually needs to focus on outdated outgoing philosophies built on prejudice, and expunge them as soon as possible now. So I can see how a lot of good can come from such a senior UK political leader holding such views as hers, helping to maintain the spotlight on such things.
In terms of the independence politics of it, none of them seem to have come up with very good responses in interviews about how to achieve it from here. I don’t understand why there is so much hostility to using all Westminster elections and Scottish government elections as pleblicites on support for independence - it’s a fantastic idea for maximising SNP vote every time.
The best result for unionists, would be Ash, as her interviews are car crashes, she’s out of her depth. The worst result for Conservatives would be Kate, as she seeks independence but has social and economic values closer to conservatives. Best result for Labour, Kate, for same reasons in reverse to why she is worst for Conservative vote.
Who do I think wins? Kate. Even if Humza has the SNP establishment support, for, as someone wittily put it, applauding everything Sturgeon said and done like a demented seal, I still don’t think that’s enough to stop Kate now.
Bit all over the place here, confused London by looks of it.
You are not even in the SNP party. Do you vote Alba - So why are you so interested?
“In terms of the independence politics of it, none of them seem to have come up with very good responses in interviews about how to achieve it from here.” That’s true isn’t? So how would you do it?
You don’t have an answer do you.
Becuase you know I am right. I’m the only one with the answer.
The truth here Malc, since accepting London’s devolved parliament, that’s not remotely independence, the push for independence has become confused and all over the place. If anyone in Scotland was a wee bit interested in independence now, they would have identical attitude to working so hard in a devolved parliament they don’t want to exist they would have to their MPs going to Westminster and working so hard there without remotely wanting to be part of it.
If any nationalist in Scotland wants independence they need to shun Londons devolved assembly trap, let the labour tory unionists run that in coalition, and go on civil disobedience against anything to do with union.
Today, Scottish Nationalism has become weak. Limp. Half hearted and confused. In comparison to how history of the world people have worked harder than this for their freedom.
Come back Malc and stop hiding, I haven’t finished with you yet.
tell me, how can there be a passionate push for independence, with absolutely zilch happening to achieve it? Scottish Nationalists are too busy painting fake windows onto the side of ferry’s. 🤷♀️
How many do you currently have in jail as political prisoners due to civil disobedience against the Union?
I am back and you sound more like Leon's female equivalent by the day. I have been stating on here for a considerable time that Imelda and her cabal of weirdo's, troughers and sockpuppets have no interest in independence. Big big changes needed and every election should be counted as a vote on independence , if 50%+1 votes are placed for independence parties then negotiations should start immediately. No mere Leon impersonator can dictate mince to the special one.
Amongst all that, you are inching towards agreeing with me, that this is the most lily livered separatist campaign in world history.
So how would you do it? Absolutely zilch happening in push for independence at the moment, so tell us what should be happening.
How did your horses get on , I had winner Our Power each way in the big one and got a Trixie up as well so not a bad day overall
No Brexit drama is complete without its central character. Boris Johnson last week went public with his belief that Sunak should press ahead with the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill, drawn up when Johnson was PM, to get more leverage against the EU. The bill would give Britain the right to unilaterally suspend aspects of the protocol in an emergency.
Privately, Johnson was more robust in an extraordinary confrontation in the Commons chamber with his former lord chancellor, Sir Robert Buckland, who lobbied Johnson to back the deal, arguing that it was necessary to cement relations with President Joe Biden. In a move that startled MPs, Johnson was overheard replying: “F*** the Americans!”
Allies of Johnson say he is contemplating another scene-stealing act to torpedo the deal and undermine Sunak, who it is said he still hopes to oust from Downing Street.
It is absolutely despicable that those lobbying on behalf of Sunak's deal are selling it on the basis of appeasing a foreign President. Johnson's response was both eloquent and justified.
Johnson is toxic and hopefully will be sent packing by his constituents if not the privileges committee
No Brexit drama is complete without its central character. Boris Johnson last week went public with his belief that Sunak should press ahead with the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill, drawn up when Johnson was PM, to get more leverage against the EU. The bill would give Britain the right to unilaterally suspend aspects of the protocol in an emergency.
Privately, Johnson was more robust in an extraordinary confrontation in the Commons chamber with his former lord chancellor, Sir Robert Buckland, who lobbied Johnson to back the deal, arguing that it was necessary to cement relations with President Joe Biden. In a move that startled MPs, Johnson was overheard replying: “F*** the Americans!”
Allies of Johnson say he is contemplating another scene-stealing act to torpedo the deal and undermine Sunak, who it is said he still hopes to oust from Downing Street.
It is absolutely despicable that those lobbying on behalf of Sunak's deal are selling it on the basis of appeasing a foreign President. Johnson's response was both eloquent and justified.
If Harry and Meghan have split then PB has the scoop of the century. I also hope they haven't because they've got kids and whatever one thinks of Meghan a whole family is better than a broken one.
I think the reality is more complex than that, with all respect. Whole unhappy families are not automatically given to be better than broken families if the parents recognise that they're parents first and foremost.
Great that Fred and Rose stuck it out, said no one.
Well I suppose Meghan and Harry will be aiming higher than Fred and Rose, but I guess anything's possible.
Kate Forbes is voters’ preferred choice as Scottish first minister, according to a new poll that comes as pressure builds on Humza Yousaf to provide full disclosure about missing a vote on same-sex marriage.
The Panelbase survey for The Sunday Times puts the finance secretary in pole position despite a dreadful start to her leadership bid, dominated by criticism of her views as a Free Church member on gay marriage and sex outside of wedlock.
Nearly a quarter of those surveyed (23 per cent) would like Forbes to succeed Nicola Sturgeon, who announced her resignation this month, while 15 per cent favour Yousaf and 7 per cent prefer Ash Regan, the former community safety minister....
...Panelbase also found that candidates’ religious views may have little impact on voter sentiment. Electing an SNP leader who is a practising Christian would make 12 per cent of voters more likely to vote SNP and 10 per cent less likely, while the vast majority (70 per cent) said it would make no difference.
Similarly, electing a Muslim as SNP leader would make 5 per cent more likely and 14 per cent less likely to vote SNP
If Harry and Meghan have split then PB has the scoop of the century. I also hope they haven't because they've got kids and whatever one thinks of Meghan a whole family is better than a broken one.
I think the reality is more complex than that, with all respect. Whole unhappy families are not automatically given to be better than broken families if the parents recognise that they're parents first and foremost.
Great that Fred and Rose stuck it out, said no one.
They were reasonably happy with each other though, weren't they?
I suppose it shows the importance of having shared hobbies and interests.
Nobody complained about Fred West's building work.
Indeed. He was a flawed man, nobody is denying that. But he also laid a lovely patio for me back in 1982. So it's light and shade with all these things, and many are too quick to judge.
Woke political correctness gone mad. You never heard Fred lecturing us on climate change or 'yuman rites'.
'Kate Forbes said in 2014 letter that women should not be church ministers as God does "not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man" within the church.'
Surely the Nits can’t be mad enough to elect the South Uist Salafist?
She will never escape this. It will be hurled at her continuously and do endless damage
It’s even more over for her than it was before.
Not per the betting it isn't. Forbes and Yousaf are either side of evens and close. Regan - who does come over as the most lightweight to me - is the one out with the washing.
I’m with Leon on this. It’s the reason I want her to win.
Kates views on no sex before marriage is laugh out loud funny. But the thought of her being a parent to someone who is gay isn’t funny at all. So I think this makes her my preference for winning this, because her prejudice will be very much in the spotlight throughout her time as leader, this will get people talking and arguing and thinking about prejudice based positions like opposing all sex marriage, and that would be really good, exactly what the world actually needs to focus on outdated outgoing philosophies built on prejudice, and expunge them as soon as possible now. So I can see how a lot of good can come from such a senior UK political leader holding such views as hers, helping to maintain the spotlight on such things.
In terms of the independence politics of it, none of them seem to have come up with very good responses in interviews about how to achieve it from here. I don’t understand why there is so much hostility to using all Westminster elections and Scottish government elections as pleblicites on support for independence - it’s a fantastic idea for maximising SNP vote every time.
The best result for unionists, would be Ash, as her interviews are car crashes, she’s out of her depth. The worst result for Conservatives would be Kate, as she seeks independence but has social and economic values closer to conservatives. Best result for Labour, Kate, for same reasons in reverse to why she is worst for Conservative vote.
Who do I think wins? Kate. Even if Humza has the SNP establishment support, for, as someone wittily put it, applauding everything Sturgeon said and done like a demented seal, I still don’t think that’s enough to stop Kate now.
Bit all over the place here, confused London by looks of it.
You are not even in the SNP party. Do you vote Alba - So why are you so interested?
“In terms of the independence politics of it, none of them seem to have come up with very good responses in interviews about how to achieve it from here.” That’s true isn’t? So how would you do it?
You don’t have an answer do you.
Becuase you know I am right. I’m the only one with the answer.
The truth here Malc, since accepting London’s devolved parliament, that’s not remotely independence, the push for independence has become confused and all over the place. If anyone in Scotland was a wee bit interested in independence now, they would have identical attitude to working so hard in a devolved parliament they don’t want to exist they would have to their MPs going to Westminster and working so hard there without remotely wanting to be part of it.
If any nationalist in Scotland wants independence they need to shun Londons devolved assembly trap, let the labour tory unionists run that in coalition, and go on civil disobedience against anything to do with union.
Today, Scottish Nationalism has become weak. Limp. Half hearted and confused. In comparison to how history of the world people have worked harder than this for their freedom.
Come back Malc and stop hiding, I haven’t finished with you yet.
tell me, how can there be a passionate push for independence, with absolutely zilch happening to achieve it? Scottish Nationalists are too busy painting fake windows onto the side of ferry’s. 🤷♀️
How many do you currently have in jail as political prisoners due to civil disobedience against the Union?
I am back and you sound more like Leon's female equivalent by the day. I have been stating on here for a considerable time that Imelda and her cabal of weirdo's, troughers and sockpuppets have no interest in independence. Big big changes needed and every election should be counted as a vote on independence , if 50%+1 votes are placed for independence parties then negotiations should start immediately. No mere Leon impersonator can dictate mince to the special one.
Amongst all that, you are inching towards agreeing with me, that this is the most lily livered separatist campaign in world history.
So how would you do it? Absolutely zilch happening in push for independence at the moment, so tell us what should be happening.
As I said every election is a referendum and if independence parties gain 50%+1 then they start negotiating the split, simple as that no begging the colonial masters for anything , just get on with it.
We are inching closer to agreement here. So I will answer my own questions to you to comment on.
I’m not saying the problems are insurmountable at all preventing break up of UK, only it’s all very slim on actual answers to the main questions isn’t it? Where are the answers?
How an independent Scotland would join the EU and Euro? And once in, how borders with the rest of the UK would work?
And, I think the big one is break up negotiations would divide up the assets, but also the debts and liabilities, such as paying pensions. When would Scotlands coffers and economy be ready for guarantied debts and liabilities, other than reply at some point join EU and Euro?
I’m not hostile to Scottish Independence. But as I said before, if Scotland left and was very poor, I would not call that real freedom, if there was no money in the pockets of people whilst the factories, businesses, land and homes owned by the English and other foreigners. And this is the crux of achieving the win in the vote isn’t it, substance to this economic argument - and where is this substance?
Do you have answers of substance to these simple economic questions I have just put here?
What I want to see from Scottish Nationalist’s to show they are actually serious.
1. senior EU leaders coming to Scotland for top level meetings on how to join the EU and Euro after succession. 2. Send MSPs to devolved Scottish Parliament government on ‘Independence ASAP’ ticket, but refuse to form a Scottish Government. Sending MPs to Westminster not to play a part but disrupt, whilst forming governments in a devolved assembly only prolongs membership of Uk - it does not add up. 3. Civil Disobedience. 4. Mass rallies and shut downs.
There is currently nothing, zilch, happening to achieve Independence.
Kate Forbes is voters’ preferred choice as Scottish first minister, according to a new poll that comes as pressure builds on Humza Yousaf to provide full disclosure about missing a vote on same-sex marriage.
The Panelbase survey for The Sunday Times puts the finance secretary in pole position despite a dreadful start to her leadership bid, dominated by criticism of her views as a Free Church member on gay marriage and sex outside of wedlock.
Nearly a quarter of those surveyed (23 per cent) would like Forbes to succeed Nicola Sturgeon, who announced her resignation this month, while 15 per cent favour Yousaf and 7 per cent prefer Ash Regan, the former community safety minister....
...Panelbase also found that candidates’ religious views may have little impact on voter sentiment. Electing an SNP leader who is a practising Christian would make 12 per cent of voters more likely to vote SNP and 10 per cent less likely, while the vast majority (70 per cent) said it would make no difference.
Similarly, electing a Muslim as SNP leader would make 5 per cent more likely and 14 per cent less likely to vote SNP
No Brexit drama is complete without its central character. Boris Johnson last week went public with his belief that Sunak should press ahead with the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill, drawn up when Johnson was PM, to get more leverage against the EU. The bill would give Britain the right to unilaterally suspend aspects of the protocol in an emergency.
Privately, Johnson was more robust in an extraordinary confrontation in the Commons chamber with his former lord chancellor, Sir Robert Buckland, who lobbied Johnson to back the deal, arguing that it was necessary to cement relations with President Joe Biden. In a move that startled MPs, Johnson was overheard replying: “F*** the Americans!”
Allies of Johnson say he is contemplating another scene-stealing act to torpedo the deal and undermine Sunak, who it is said he still hopes to oust from Downing Street.
It is absolutely despicable that those lobbying on behalf of Sunak's deal are selling it on the basis of appeasing a foreign President. Johnson's response was both eloquent and justified.
Comments
But then that’s never worried them before
Mind you, the fact we're talking about them at all suggests they aren't minor.
eg try and think of another couple whose marital split would cause such huge news (if this is true)
It’s not easy. Even Prince wills and Kate aren’t as box office as Harry and Meghan. Who else?
Biden? Who cares. Who else? Xi? Is he even married? Some pop star? Some actor? They split all the time. The beckhams? Ronaldo?
In terms of famously married couples Harry and Meghan are as famous as it gets
Hope English smash the strikers.
We are on the wide straight roads of the Lord, but we aren’t at the end of the road yet, God only reveals what we need to know at the time of his choosing, Thomas More and Kate Forbes need to realise this so their own homes are no longer torture chambers. Christianity has always been about asking the big questions of each other, protest, reform, and progress further along the journey God has set us on.
His da and step-ma.
Harry, and therefore by extension his wife, maintain constitutional significance in the United Kingdom.
It is also plausible to argue that their activities have promoted republican sentiment, for eg in the Caribbean.
And Meghan is “American” and their whole marriage is a huge story in itself, as we have seen
I honestly can’t think of another marital split which would cause a similarly huge storm of interest
Just logged on and am not surprised if it is true but do you know the source of this story ?
To me, it's nowhere near the news story it would be if William and Kate split, that would be significant for the constitution, and would be the cause of endless speculation, and lead to a new, glamorous 'Kate, Princess of Wales' on the dating scene. But they are one of the most famous couples. It's just they're an LA couple - a divorce was all but inevitable.
I hate fascists!
I was there in middle Unite Against Fascism took on the EDL in Piccadilly Gardens in 2009.
https://twitter.com/ShippersUnbound/status/1629524013537001473?s=20
Most reactions from right leaning PB’ers had them revelling in their ignorance;
“I haven’t read it, why would I want to read it” or some such.
If you had read it, you might have an inkling of where the story might now go.
Harry’s allegations of violence by William are key. Why did he include it? What was/is his context? Who decided to include it?
What else did he say?
What else did he say?
Think about the psychology. Think about it some more.
What might Meghan’s narrative be if the relationship hits turbulence?
As I replied, to the PB righties, at the time:
You should read the book.
No one cares about (eg) Mogg’s religious views, as whatever they are, they’re not going to bother the Tories much. Whereas if (eg) Biden were to have come out against abortion and same sex marriage, he’d never have been nominated.
Markle.
An impressive Brexit dividend... For the Irish port of Rosslare.
Last I heard about 80% of ROI imports came via the landbridge and 20% via direct ferries - previously there were very few or no direct ferries.
We've had quite a few adventuring journalist-types over the years on PB, and several have disappeared from the site shortly after making similar comments. All are much missed. I hope he doesn't go the same way.
The SNP's electoral success similarly depended on an appeal to Scottish nationalism that wasn't too tightly defined on the left-right spectrum, beyond a vague progressive tinge necessary in a country that had been returning mostly Labour MPs.
Kate Forbes seems to want to follow a quite different course. If a potential leader wears socially conservatism on her chest as a badge of honour, then it will potentially put quite a lot of people off voting for that party. Opposition to gay marriage smacks of prejudice against gays, and opposition to women as church ministers smacks of misogyny. Those views, unlike her views on the GRR bill, are clearly also at odds with majority public opinion. Her views are out there, they say a lot about her, and if her party votes her in as leader it will say a lot about her party too.
Journos rushing to publish, perhaps.
It’s one helluva book. Any journalist of old, worth their salt, would spend days or weeks poring over every word.
tell me, how can there be a passionate push for independence, with absolutely zilch happening to achieve it? Scottish Nationalists are too busy painting fake windows onto the side of ferry’s. 🤷♀️
How many do you currently have in jail as political prisoners due to civil disobedience against the Union?
One thing that interests me is whether the bounds of the domain of acceptable conscience issues for politicians have shifted over time - is gay marriage accepted as a question where the Parliamentary vote can be a conscience call for the politician still? can abortion? particular versions of gender reassignment? drug law?
It's often the dream of every campaign that their view of their issue become an orthodoxy.
https://www.indy100.com/politics/suella-braverman-mp-safe-seat
It only becomes a real problem with Forbes if her beliefs leak into her policies, which to this point at least doesn't seem to be a problem.
Ideally Regan wins and puts all that to bed but not sure that's very likely.
Time was being an atheist would have been disqualifying.
What do people reckon the list is these days?
That's gotta sting.
I can't even think of one.
Even Sir John Denham's famous plea on behalf of George Wither doesn't really apply, as Michael Fabricant is apparently standing again.
Normally they are so in demand because of their excellence.
Liberal people cannot stand her for neo fascist tendencies and anti immigration people hate her for her failure to stop the boats/immigration.
Braverman
Burgon
Spielman.
That's a fairly hefty list on the debit side.
Even if there are others who are more to the university's credit.
Big big changes needed and every election should be counted as a vote on independence , if 50%+1 votes are placed for independence parties then negotiations should start immediately. No mere Leon impersonator can dictate mince to the special one.
Privately, Johnson was more robust in an extraordinary confrontation in the Commons chamber with his former lord chancellor, Sir Robert Buckland, who lobbied Johnson to back the deal, arguing that it was necessary to cement relations with President Joe Biden. In a move that startled MPs, Johnson was overheard replying: “F*** the Americans!”
Allies of Johnson say he is contemplating another scene-stealing act to torpedo the deal and undermine Sunak, who it is said he still hopes to oust from Downing Street.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/angry-boris-johnson-kept-in-the-dark-as-tories-turn-fire-on-each-other-p9zk9pbrl
https://variety.com/2023/gaming/news/hogwarts-legacy-sales-850-million-1235533614/
So how would you do it? Absolutely zilch happening in push for independence at the moment, so tell us what should be happening.
I suppose it shows the importance of having shared hobbies and interests.
But still, a win is a win
Looks like this is the mid-range supermarkets fighting for their lives against being squeezed from both ends & finding that their history of stiffing their suppliers is backfiring on them?
Tesco in particular has spent many, many years making themselves extremely unpopular with the UK farming industry & now the boot is on the other foot they’re finding that they don’t have anyone the can call on. Couldn’t happen to a nicer company I’m sure.
Sorry, a bit sick even by my dismally low standards.
Also, find of the week, Selfridges do Ortiz tuna at £7 for the 250g can. It's an indulgence, but the tuna really is the best available.
Kate Forbes is voters’ preferred choice as Scottish first minister, according to a new poll that comes as pressure builds on Humza Yousaf to provide full disclosure about missing a vote on same-sex marriage.
The Panelbase survey for The Sunday Times puts the finance secretary in pole position despite a dreadful start to her leadership bid, dominated by criticism of her views as a Free Church member on gay marriage and sex outside of wedlock.
Nearly a quarter of those surveyed (23 per cent) would like Forbes to succeed Nicola Sturgeon, who announced her resignation this month, while 15 per cent favour Yousaf and 7 per cent prefer Ash Regan, the former community safety minister....
...Panelbase also found that candidates’ religious views may have little impact on voter sentiment. Electing an SNP leader who is a practising Christian would make 12 per cent of voters more likely to vote SNP and 10 per cent less likely, while the vast majority (70 per cent) said it would make no difference.
Similarly, electing a Muslim as SNP leader would make 5 per cent more likely and 14 per cent less likely to vote SNP
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/kate-forbes-is-voters-choice-as-first-minister-poll-finds-tdp6ggpw0
I just hope it doesn't negatively impact the book sales or the Spotify or Netflix deals.
I’m not saying the problems are insurmountable at all preventing break up of UK, only it’s all very slim on actual answers to the main questions isn’t it? Where are the answers?
How an independent Scotland would join the EU and Euro? And once in, how borders with the rest of the UK would work?
And, I think the big one is break up negotiations would divide up the assets, but also the debts and liabilities, such as paying pensions. When would Scotlands coffers and economy be ready for guarantied debts and liabilities, other than reply at some point join EU and Euro?
I’m not hostile to Scottish Independence. But as I said before, if Scotland left and was very poor, I would not call that real freedom, if there was no money in the pockets of people whilst the factories, businesses, land and homes owned by the English and other foreigners. And this is the crux of achieving the win in the vote isn’t it, substance to this economic argument - and where is this substance?
Do you have answers of substance to these simple economic questions I have just put here?
What I want to see from Scottish Nationalist’s to show they are actually serious.
1. senior EU leaders coming to Scotland for top level meetings on how to join the EU and Euro after succession.
2. Send MSPs to devolved Scottish Parliament government on ‘Independence ASAP’ ticket, but refuse to form a Scottish Government. Sending MPs to Westminster not to play a part but disrupt, whilst forming governments in a devolved assembly only prolongs membership of Uk - it does not add up.
3. Civil Disobedience.
4. Mass rallies and shut downs.
There is currently nothing, zilch, happening to achieve Independence.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fiv4NLqKogM