While the SNP and UKIP may claim to different positions on the mythical left-right axis, from my point. of view they are two sides of the same coin. Both promote nationalism, both see external forces as the root of political problems. They rely on charamatic leaders who evoke a bygone age. Their supporters are equally evangelical.
The old biddies and shriekers in SCON appear to have overlooked the obvious, as usual.
The Panelbase survey shows that 45 per cent of people in Scotland believe that Labour has been damaged by being associated with the Conservatives in the 'No' campaign.
According to the poll, that compared to just 24 per cent who do not believe that the party has been damaged.
SNP Westminster leader Angus Robertson MP said: "Their alliance with the Tories has backfired badly on the Labour Party.
"By a majority of two-to-one, people in Scotland believe that Labour have been damaged by ganging up with the Tories in the anti-independence campaign - which is two-thirds of people excluding 'don't knows' ".
Mr Robertson added: "A Yes vote in September is about achieving the powers to build a fair society and prosperous economy in Scotland - and having relationship of friendship and equality with the rest of the UK.
"It is a positive vision, which is already attracting the support of over a quarter of Labour voters - and the gap between Yes and No is now down to just 5 points.
"Labour, by contrast, have chosen to stand with the Tories instead of standing up for Scotland - and are paying a heavy price for that foolish decision."
The 'progressive' (LOL) lib dems are now seen as little more than unprincipled yellow tories and they are now a political irrelevance in scotland with a taxi full of MSPs thanks to their 'love in' with the toxic tories.
It means Putin is running rings round the Western donkeys and pretty soon he will kick them in the goolies. The pathetic sanctions crap will come back to haunt them.
Off topic (but then - isn't everything here these days?)
If a welfare cap is a good idea, why is it also a good idea to exclude pensions? So far as I can see, it's because we effectively have open borders for people of working age but pensioners are pretty immobile. If I were governing a state east of Berlin or Venice, I'd be looking to do something about that.
I'm increasingly of the view that all parties are more or less racist. If you lot want a betting tip it is for race riots in our inner cities on a large scale this summer (assuming it's not a cool, wet one - when did we last have one of those?). Apart from anything else, I suspect such riots would quietly suit the Coalition's electoral planning...
I don't see pensions as welfare unless they have not been funded by contributions. Indeed I would distinguish all benefits in that way. If you have contributed to any pension , unemployment, sickeness, etc scheme it for me resemble an insurance policy for which you are receving paid for benefits when you claim. The problem lies instead with those receiving benefits who have not been contributing.
While the SNP and UKIP may claim to different positions on the mythical left-right axis, from my point. of view they are two sides of the same coin. Both promote nationalism, both see external forces as the root of political problems. They rely on charamatic leaders who evoke a bygone age. Their supporters are equally evangelical.
It's hard to argue with that. The SNP believes that Labour voters in Glasgow share more common interests with Tory voters in Edinburgh than they do with Labour voters in Newcastle, Liverpool or Cardiff; although, ironically, in the pursuit of independence they are happy to sign up to a policy that will allow Tory governments in Westminster to dictate the Scottish government's monetary and fiscal policies.
Doesn't do you any favours either as it loses all effect.
You can't seriously think that's the first time any of the PB tories and their hangers on have tried that particular spin on me can you? Didn't work the first 20 times, won't work now.
It is, however, completely true no matter which side of the political spectrum it comes from. To intentionally use him as an example over and over, Dan Hodges tells us Ed M is crap all the time, so when he wants us to know he really really means it this time, he cannot, because we already know that was what he was going to say. Similarly, I think the Yes side is going to win the referendum later this year, and I think Labour will win in 2015. But if I am told by supporters of either of those positions that any action or word from their opponents is disastrous and laughable, I will find it impossible to take it seriously after awhile, because it is clearly done without any thought at all, it is automatic. That means I will miss the occasions where supporters of those positions point out something highly relevant, because I'll assume it's more partisan bullcrap that was going to be trotted out regardless of what was said or done.
Thankfully my opinion on such matters is of course irrelevant to people supportive of such positions, but you will surely accept it as not being 'spin' to agree that making the same joke over and over a million times, no matter how funny or bitingly satirical it may have initially been, makes it lose its effectiveness, even if the point is still true.
Good night all.
Do you really think the Scot Nats will win the referendum? That's interesting.
I know nothing of the independent Scotland debate and I couldn't give a monkey's who wins, although I would think it funny that Labour lose all those MPs voting as a herd on matters that don't affect them.
But you seem in a minority of people who actually think Salmond will win it.
I suspect the No campaign will win handsomely. Largely because I can't see all those Scots voting for such a massive change.
It may be a minority opinion in deepest Surrey , but it is far from it where the voting will take place. have a look online and see how many YES sites and organisations there are and then try and find the equivalent unionist sites. The movement is all one way and it is not towards NO.
Scottish Labour move left in bid to outflank the SNP
SCOTTISH Labour leader Johann Lamont will today describe Alex Salmond's economic policies as "Osborne Max" in a hard-hitting attack designed to position Labour firmly to the left of the SNP.
LOL, she has enough problems remembering her name. labour will do nothing , they know regardless of what happens that they are stuffed in 2016. Waiting on London orders and Milliband ones at that is not doing "something". Dire conference yesterday, poorly attended and only mince on offer. They are circling the drain.
Thank you for your analysis Malcolm, objective as ever......The Herald has perhaps a slightly more nuanced view.....
Miliband holds key role in referendum Ed Miliband's argument that independence for Scotland would cause a "race to the bottom" is a curiously narrow one.
Off topic (but then - isn't everything here these days?)
If a welfare cap is a good idea, why is it also a good idea to exclude pensions? So far as I can see, it's because we effectively have open borders for people of working age but pensioners are pretty immobile. If I were governing a state east of Berlin or Venice, I'd be looking to do something about that.
I'm increasingly of the view that all parties are more or less racist. If you lot want a betting tip it is for race riots in our inner cities on a large scale this summer (assuming it's not a cool, wet one - when did we last have one of those?). Apart from anything else, I suspect such riots would quietly suit the Coalition's electoral planning...
I don't see pensions as welfare unless they have not been funded by contributions. Indeed I would distinguish all benefits in that way. If you have contributed to any pension , unemployment, sickeness, etc scheme it for me resemble an insurance policy for which you are receving paid for benefits when you claim. The problem lies instead with those receiving benefits who have not been contributing.
I don't think anyone's contributions meet your criterion, Felix. Or, to put it another way, as Nye Bevan said: "there ain't no fund".
But it's a convenient fantasy, and as such politicians of all parties have to take notice of it.
Scottish Labour move left in bid to outflank the SNP
SCOTTISH Labour leader Johann Lamont will today describe Alex Salmond's economic policies as "Osborne Max" in a hard-hitting attack designed to position Labour firmly to the left of the SNP.
LOL, she has enough problems remembering her name. labour will do nothing , they know regardless of what happens that they are stuffed in 2016. Waiting on London orders and Milliband ones at that is not doing "something". Dire conference yesterday, poorly attended and only mince on offer. They are circling the drain.
Thank you for your analysis Malcolm, objective as ever......The Herald has perhaps a slightly more nuanced view.....
Miliband holds key role in referendum Ed Miliband's argument that independence for Scotland would cause a "race to the bottom" is a curiously narrow one.
It means Putin is running rings round the Western donkeys and pretty soon he will kick them in the goolies. The pathetic sanctions crap will come back to haunt them.
Scottish Labour move left in bid to outflank the SNP
SCOTTISH Labour leader Johann Lamont will today describe Alex Salmond's economic policies as "Osborne Max" in a hard-hitting attack designed to position Labour firmly to the left of the SNP.
LOL, she has enough problems remembering her name. labour will do nothing , they know regardless of what happens that they are stuffed in 2016. Waiting on London orders and Milliband ones at that is not doing "something". Dire conference yesterday, poorly attended and only mince on offer. They are circling the drain.
Thank you for your analysis Malcolm, objective as ever......The Herald has perhaps a slightly more nuanced view.....
Miliband holds key role in referendum Ed Miliband's argument that independence for Scotland would cause a "race to the bottom" is a curiously narrow one.
And rUk too malc honey. You see we have plenty in common - please stay old thing.
Too late , we are out of here , big time.
Remember to pack those 49 lab MPs when you head off...
Try looking up the McKay Commission. The ConDem coalition has the power to remove or drastically change their ability to vote on non-devolved matters right now.
The Panelbase survey shows that 45 per cent of people in Scotland believe that Labour has been damaged by being associated with the Conservatives in the 'No' campaign.
Ah! PanelBase!
And what, Mr Pork, were the four questions that preceded that one?
And why have they been suppressed not yet published?
"The problem lies instead with those receiving benefits who have not been contributing."
So my 87 year old mother in law, who did not work after she married in 1947, is a problem. What do we do with her?
I accept that there is an anomaly regarding the contributions of women during years affected by the birth of children and maybe also for those from the generation when it was the norm for women not to work when married but with those provisos I do not believe that the benefits given to those who choose not to work should be the same as those who do work and pay contributions.
While the SNP and UKIP may claim to different positions on the mythical left-right axis, from my point. of view they are two sides of the same coin. Both promote nationalism, both see external forces as the root of political problems. They rely on charamatic leaders who evoke a bygone age. Their supporters are equally evangelical.
Perceptive analysis. The other difference is they rarely, if ever, criticise their Leadership, unlike Con or Lab for example.......
FPT: Mr. Pagan, a nice idea, but the world's pre-gunpowder. I didn't know that about the various ingredients... might use it (on an accidental explosive basis) later, perhaps.
Scottish Labour move left in bid to outflank the SNP
SCOTTISH Labour leader Johann Lamont will today describe Alex Salmond's economic policies as "Osborne Max" in a hard-hitting attack designed to position Labour firmly to the left of the SNP.
LOL, she has enough problems remembering her name. labour will do nothing , they know regardless of what happens that they are stuffed in 2016. Waiting on London orders and Milliband ones at that is not doing "something". Dire conference yesterday, poorly attended and only mince on offer. They are circling the drain.
Thank you for your analysis Malcolm, objective as ever......The Herald has perhaps a slightly more nuanced view.....
Miliband holds key role in referendum Ed Miliband's argument that independence for Scotland would cause a "race to the bottom" is a curiously narrow one.
Mick - Lab got 42% in the last GE in Scotland - a feat unlikely to be repeated. However a few % may not cost them many MPs though.
SLAB knows perfectly well what will happen if it's seen as the mouthpiece and eager partner of Osborne or Cameron. It watched the lib dems get annihilated in the scottish elections and wants no part of that. Hence SLAB's current desperate attempts to deflect from the fact that little Ed and Labour are triangulating on the tories on almost everything these days as they return to their pitiful Blairite ways. Little Ed certainly has no vision or overarching moral crusade as a bedrock. He simply reacts and often reacts far too little and far too late. Falkirk was a long time in the making but no surprise whatsoever to anyone familiar with SLAB and Labour's continual infighting and incompetence. The Brown Blair feuds have not gone away in scotland. They continue to this very day.
"The problem lies instead with those receiving benefits who have not been contributing."
So my 87 year old mother in law, who did not work after she married in 1947, is a problem. What do we do with her?
I accept that there is an anomaly regarding the contributions of women during years affected by the birth of children and maybe also for those from the generation when it was the norm for women not to work when married but with those provisos I do not believe that the benefits given to those who choose not to work should be the same as those who do work and pay contributions.
I think you'll find another anomaly in the seriously disabled. Let's keep going, there may be even more yet...
THE attack on BBC broadcaster Andrew Marr offers a terrifying glimpse of what Scotland might become, writes Brian Wilson
‘There will be consequences for Andrew Marr,” tweeted the SNP’s spokesman on broadcasting, Peter Wishart MP, in perfect symphony with the toe-curling unpleasantness of The Leader’s fury.
@Morris_Dancer Larder is full of flour, corn flour or another powder in a fine dust, after a door is opened, some one enters the room with a unguarded flame...
"The problem lies instead with those receiving benefits who have not been contributing."
So my 87 year old mother in law, who did not work after she married in 1947, is a problem. What do we do with her?
I accept that there is an anomaly regarding the contributions of women during years affected by the birth of children and maybe also for those from the generation when it was the norm for women not to work when married but with those provisos I do not believe that the benefits given to those who choose not to work should be the same as those who do work and pay contributions.
I think you'll find another anomaly in the seriously disabled. Let's keep going, there may be even more yet...
I think that point is unfair if you read what I wrote again "benefits given to those who choose not to work". Let's not get silly to make cheap political points.
THE attack on BBC broadcaster Andrew Marr offers a terrifying glimpse of what Scotland might become, writes Brian Wilson
‘There will be consequences for Andrew Marr,” tweeted the SNP’s spokesman on broadcasting, Peter Wishart MP, in perfect symphony with the toe-curling unpleasantness of The Leader’s fury.
The Panelbase survey shows that 45 per cent of people in Scotland believe that Labour has been damaged by being associated with the Conservatives in the 'No' campaign.
THE attack on BBC broadcaster Andrew Marr offers a terrifying glimpse of what Scotland might become, writes Brian Wilson
‘There will be consequences for Andrew Marr,” tweeted the SNP’s spokesman on broadcasting, Peter Wishart MP, in perfect symphony with the toe-curling unpleasantness of The Leader’s fury.
THE attack on BBC broadcaster Andrew Marr offers a terrifying glimpse of what Scotland might become, writes Brian Wilson
‘There will be consequences for Andrew Marr,” tweeted the SNP’s spokesman on broadcasting, Peter Wishart MP, in perfect symphony with the toe-curling unpleasantness of The Leader’s fury.
THE attack on BBC broadcaster Andrew Marr offers a terrifying glimpse of what Scotland might become, writes Brian Wilson
‘There will be consequences for Andrew Marr,” tweeted the SNP’s spokesman on broadcasting, Peter Wishart MP, in perfect symphony with the toe-curling unpleasantness of The Leader’s fury.
"The problem lies instead with those receiving benefits who have not been contributing."
So my 87 year old mother in law, who did not work after she married in 1947, is a problem. What do we do with her?
I accept that there is an anomaly regarding the contributions of women during years affected by the birth of children and maybe also for those from the generation when it was the norm for women not to work when married but with those provisos I do not believe that the benefits given to those who choose not to work should be the same as those who do work and pay contributions.
I think you'll find another anomaly in the seriously disabled. Let's keep going, there may be even more yet...
I think that point is unfair if you read what I wrote again "benefits given to those who choose not to work". Let's not get silly to make cheap political points.
All right, I'm stupid and/or vicious and you're sensible, moderate and now doubt irresistible sexually. Happy now? There's an old phrase: "no case - abuse plaintiff's attorney".
If you think my contributions here are "cheap" you can always ask OGH to ban me.
The Panelbase survey shows that 45 per cent of people in Scotland believe that Labour has been damaged by being associated with the Conservatives in the 'No' campaign.
Ah! PanelBase!
SHRIEK!!
*chortle*
Typical Nat engagement with the argument....
So what are the suppressed questions?
And why haven't they been published?
Pity PanelBase does not do as YouGov for example does and publish the whole poll.......
THE attack on BBC broadcaster Andrew Marr offers a terrifying glimpse of what Scotland might become, writes Brian Wilson
‘There will be consequences for Andrew Marr,” tweeted the SNP’s spokesman on broadcasting, Peter Wishart MP, in perfect symphony with the toe-curling unpleasantness of The Leader’s fury.
THE attack on BBC broadcaster Andrew Marr offers a terrifying glimpse of what Scotland might become, writes Brian Wilson
‘There will be consequences for Andrew Marr,” tweeted the SNP’s spokesman on broadcasting, Peter Wishart MP, in perfect symphony with the toe-curling unpleasantness of The Leader’s fury.
It means Putin is running rings round the Western donkeys and pretty soon he will kick them in the goolies. The pathetic sanctions crap will come back to haunt them.
"The problem lies instead with those receiving benefits who have not been contributing."
So my 87 year old mother in law, who did not work after she married in 1947, is a problem. What do we do with her?
I accept that there is an anomaly regarding the contributions of women during years affected by the birth of children and maybe also for those from the generation when it was the norm for women not to work when married but with those provisos I do not believe that the benefits given to those who choose not to work should be the same as those who do work and pay contributions.
I think you'll find another anomaly in the seriously disabled. Let's keep going, there may be even more yet...
I think that point is unfair if you read what I wrote again "benefits given to those who choose not to work". Let's not get silly to make cheap political points.
All right, I'm stupid and/or vicious and you're sensible, moderate and now doubt irresistible sexually. Happy now? There's an old phrase: "no case - abuse plaintiff's attorney".
If you think my contributions here are "cheap" you can always ask OGH to ban me.
Oh dear we are touchy - but i think you are over-reacting ( except for the irrestibly sexy bit - it's a cross I've had to bear for many years!!). I was genuinely trying not to be political on this as I think there is broad party agreement that those who can contribute should and that if they do then they are entitled to the relevant benefits. If you think I have no case fair enough - we agree to differ.
THE attack on BBC broadcaster Andrew Marr offers a terrifying glimpse of what Scotland might become, writes Brian Wilson
‘There will be consequences for Andrew Marr,” tweeted the SNP’s spokesman on broadcasting, Peter Wishart MP, in perfect symphony with the toe-curling unpleasantness of The Leader’s fury.
THE attack on BBC broadcaster Andrew Marr offers a terrifying glimpse of what Scotland might become, writes Brian Wilson
‘There will be consequences for Andrew Marr,” tweeted the SNP’s spokesman on broadcasting, Peter Wishart MP, in perfect symphony with the toe-curling unpleasantness of The Leader’s fury.
Wishart has really made an arse of himself by threatening just about everyone who disgrees with him. Maybe we should invite him on PB ;-)
He hasnt''made any death threats unlike some of your PB chums. :-)
early days Mick, let's get him on and find out. I'll see if we can also get some 12 year olds he can snitch on.
Again you're confusing him with one of your PB chums who maliciously revealed a posters wife and children's details.
Not at all Mick we're all on here for the hot indy action as divvie would say and Peter Warshit sounds just like the kind of guy to make us all rue the day.
It would be hard on the moderators though as he'd be appealing every post.
Scottish Labour move left in bid to outflank the SNP
SCOTTISH Labour leader Johann Lamont will today describe Alex Salmond's economic policies as "Osborne Max" in a hard-hitting attack designed to position Labour firmly to the left of the SNP.
LOL, she has enough problems remembering her name. labour will do nothing , they know regardless of what happens that they are stuffed in 2016. Waiting on London orders and Milliband ones at that is not doing "something". Dire conference yesterday, poorly attended and only mince on offer. They are circling the drain.
Thank you for your analysis Malcolm, objective as ever......The Herald has perhaps a slightly more nuanced view.....
Miliband holds key role in referendum Ed Miliband's argument that independence for Scotland would cause a "race to the bottom" is a curiously narrow one.
The Panelbase survey shows that 45 per cent of people in Scotland believe that Labour has been damaged by being associated with the Conservatives in the 'No' campaign.
Ah! PanelBase!
SHRIEK!!
*chortle*
Typical Nat engagement with the argument....
So what are the suppressed questions?
And why haven't they been published?
Pity PanelBase does not do as YouGov for example does and publish the whole poll.......
Typical Tory unionist , if you don't get the answers you like just infer that the polling company are bent.
It means Putin is running rings round the Western donkeys and pretty soon he will kick them in the goolies. The pathetic sanctions crap will come back to haunt them.
that's what i was thinking
There's little doubt that Putin has won this.
What could the West have done differently to alter the outcome?
David Cameron cares about Sport Relief. Not enough to actually change policy he has control over. But enough to do a jog in front of cameras
PR Fop.
Hollow words Mr Pork, you would have been criticising Cameron if he did not support Sport relief, so for you its lose lose, and you resort to rather pathetic smearing
BBC: “Cameron aide arrested in `child abuse imagery’ inquiry”.He was behind the UK Internet filter design. Hypocrisy. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-26428308 …
We could also move onto Climate Change as one of the many things the PB tories want to pretend Cammie isn't fully signed up to. They love being reminded of that.
THE attack on BBC broadcaster Andrew Marr offers a terrifying glimpse of what Scotland might become, writes Brian Wilson
‘There will be consequences for Andrew Marr,” tweeted the SNP’s spokesman on broadcasting, Peter Wishart MP, in perfect symphony with the toe-curling unpleasantness of The Leader’s fury.
Wishart has really made an arse of himself by threatening just about everyone who disagrees with him. Maybe we should invite him on PB ;-)
Marr made a real arse of himself by forgetting he is an interviewer and not a spokesperson for Better Together. Rich it coming from Wilson , former labour trougher who made plenty whilst labour Minister, no axe to grind there.
Surely SLAB OUGHT to be to the left of the SNP. The latter’s main aim is an independent Scotland, and that’s an aim which can be shared by free-marketeers, social democrats and libertarians. If a socialist party isn’t to the left of such a grouping, what’s it for at all?
Unless of course SLAB isn’t really a socialist party!
What Malkie conveniently forgets to mention is that the SNP is a coalition from all political sides, and to be quite honest, Salmond has done a brilliant job of keeping most of them on board during the campaign.
To the Greens, he is all windmills (and according to the Sunday Post, has wasted £1.8 billion). To the socialists, he is all about wealth distribution and get a referendum on the monarchy (after Independence). To the Royalists, keep the Queen. To the banks and businesses, keep the pound, pay lower taxes and stay in the EU. To the oil companies, promises of tax breaks (after Independence). To the anti nuclear brigade, no new power stations and close Faslane. To BAE, keep building ships (including nuclear). To Kippers (or the nearest that we have), we may not join the EU and even if we did, we won't have the Euro. Etc. Etc. Etc.
There is a large minority within the SNP who do not trust Salmond and are biting their collective tongue in the hope that he can pull the Referendum out of the bag.
Once the referendum is won or lost, it will be interesting to see how long the SNP can keep going before the expected implosion.
Too many promises, winks and nudges have been made or acknowledged to too many people. Competing expectations will surely leave many people disappointed with the result. And there's nothing so angry than an ex-believer who has found their promised personal heaven on earth doesn't exist and never did.
It means Putin is running rings round the Western donkeys and pretty soon he will kick them in the goolies. The pathetic sanctions crap will come back to haunt them.
that's what i was thinking
There's little doubt that Putin has won this.
Yeah, just a question if he goes in for the kill or not.
While the SNP and UKIP may claim to different positions on the mythical left-right axis, from my point. of view they are two sides of the same coin. Both promote nationalism, both see external forces as the root of political problems. They rely on charamatic leaders who evoke a bygone age. Their supporters are equally evangelical.
Perceptive analysis. The other difference is they rarely, if ever, criticise their Leadership, unlike Con or Lab for example.......
LOL, just as you two are cheeks of the same arse and are talking out of it.
F1: Ladbrokes have a few more (8) markets on Malaysia. I wouldn't advise betting until nearer the time, as the weather forecast can prove critical. The race is often dry, but can also suffer (literally) monsoon rains.
The Williams was notable for being very quick in the dry race and severely hampered in wet qualifying (9th and 10th, on pace). The Red Bull may have been a bit better in the wet (probably due to downforce supremacy), although it was also pretty tasty in the dry.
Scottish Labour move left in bid to outflank the SNP
SCOTTISH Labour leader Johann Lamont will today describe Alex Salmond's economic policies as "Osborne Max" in a hard-hitting attack designed to position Labour firmly to the left of the SNP.
LOL, she has enough problems remembering her name. labour will do nothing , they know regardless of what happens that they are stuffed in 2016. Waiting on London orders and Milliband ones at that is not doing "something". Dire conference yesterday, poorly attended and only mince on offer. They are circling the drain.
Thank you for your analysis Malcolm, objective as ever......The Herald has perhaps a slightly more nuanced view.....
Miliband holds key role in referendum Ed Miliband's argument that independence for Scotland would cause a "race to the bottom" is a curiously narrow one.
Surely SLAB OUGHT to be to the left of the SNP. The latter’s main aim is an independent Scotland, and that’s an aim which can be shared by free-marketeers, social democrats and libertarians. If a socialist party isn’t to the left of such a grouping, what’s it for at all?
Unless of course SLAB isn’t really a socialist party!
What Malkie conveniently forgets to mention is that the SNP is a coalition from all political sides
You seem to be amusingly clueless about what a coalition actually is. Here's hint, there's one in westminster governing right now and there's been two previously governing at the scottish parliament.
The Panelbase survey shows that 45 per cent of people in Scotland believe that Labour has been damaged by being associated with the Conservatives in the 'No' campaign.
Ah! PanelBase!
SHRIEK!!
*chortle*
Typical Nat engagement with the argument....
So what are the suppressed questions?
And why haven't they been published?
Pity PanelBase does not do as YouGov for example does and publish the whole poll.......
Typical Tory unionist , if you don't get the answers you like just infer that the polling company are bent.
Typical Nat - avoid the substance, attack the poster.....
I do not impugn Panelbase' integrity - I am sure the data they publish reflects the responses to the questions they asked - questions set by their client WingsOverSomerset......so why have the four questions that preceded the 'Labour damaged' one not been published? Could they in any way have influenced the result of that question? When will we be told?
Surely SLAB OUGHT to be to the left of the SNP. The latter’s main aim is an independent Scotland, and that’s an aim which can be shared by free-marketeers, social democrats and libertarians. If a socialist party isn’t to the left of such a grouping, what’s it for at all?
Unless of course SLAB isn’t really a socialist party!
What Malkie conveniently forgets to mention is that the SNP is a coalition from all political sides, and to be quite honest, Salmond has done a brilliant job of keeping most of them on board during the campaign.
To the Greens, he is all windmills (and according to the Sunday Post, has wasted £1.8 billion). To the socialists, he is all about wealth distribution and get a referendum on the monarchy (after Independence). To the Royalists, keep the Queen. To the banks and businesses, keep the pound, pay lower taxes and stay in the EU. To the oil companies, promises of tax breaks (after Independence). To the anti nuclear brigade, no new power stations and close Faslane. To BAE, keep building ships (including nuclear). To Kippers (or the nearest that we have), we may not join the EU and even if we did, we won't have the Euro. Etc. Etc. Etc.
There is a large minority within the SNP who do not trust Salmond and are biting their collective tongue in the hope that he can pull the Referendum out of the bag.
Once the referendum is won or lost, it will be interesting to see how long the SNP can keep going before the expected implosion.
Too many promises, winks and nudges have been made or acknowledged to too many people. Competing expectations will surely leave many people disappointed with the result. And there's nothing so angry than an ex-believer who has found their promised personal heaven on earth doesn't exist and never did.
If there is a Yes on 18th September then the SNP has achieved its aim. That most of what it has said to get the Yes will turn out to be wrong is of absolutely no importance - the Yes means independence and no turning back. The clue is in the Nationalist part of the name.
It means Putin is running rings round the Western donkeys and pretty soon he will kick them in the goolies. The pathetic sanctions crap will come back to haunt them.
that's what i was thinking
There's little doubt that Putin has won this.
What could the West have done differently to alter the outcome?
For a start they could have kept out of Ukraine's internal affairs and not supported the overthrow of the democratically elected government. Then when called out by Putin they could have avoided looking like pathetic cretins with their pansy potter sanctions, banning 9 Russians and then shock horror making it 20. Far better to have done as Hague did and just stay down behind the sofa.
While the SNP and UKIP may claim to different positions on the mythical left-right axis, from my point. of view they are two sides of the same coin. Both promote nationalism, both see external forces as the root of political problems. They rely on charamatic leaders who evoke a bygone age. Their supporters are equally evangelical.
Perceptive analysis. The other difference is they rarely, if ever, criticise their Leadership, unlike Con or Lab for example.......
LOL, just as you two are cheeks of the same arse and are talking out of it.
And the last time a Nat criticised Salmond was.......?
Surely SLAB OUGHT to be to the left of the SNP. The latter’s main aim is an independent Scotland, and that’s an aim which can be shared by free-marketeers, social democrats and libertarians. If a socialist party isn’t to the left of such a grouping, what’s it for at all?
Unless of course SLAB isn’t really a socialist party!
What Malkie conveniently forgets to mention is that the SNP is a coalition from all political sides, and to be quite honest, Salmond has done a brilliant job of keeping most of them on board during the campaign.
To the Greens, he is all windmills (and according to the Sunday Post, has wasted £1.8 billion). To the socialists, he is all about wealth distribution and get a referendum on the monarchy (after Independence). To the Royalists, keep the Queen. To the banks and businesses, keep the pound, pay lower taxes and stay in the EU. To the oil companies, promises of tax breaks (after Independence). To the anti nuclear brigade, no new power stations and close Faslane. To BAE, keep building ships (including nuclear). To Kippers (or the nearest that we have), we may not join the EU and even if we did, we won't have the Euro. Etc. Etc. Etc.
There is a large minority within the SNP who do not trust Salmond and are biting their collective tongue in the hope that he can pull the Referendum out of the bag.
Once the referendum is won or lost, it will be interesting to see how long the SNP can keep going before the expected implosion.
Too many promises, winks and nudges have been made or acknowledged to too many people. Competing expectations will surely leave many people disappointed with the result. And there's nothing so angry than an ex-believer who has found their promised personal heaven on earth doesn't exist and never did.
If there is a Yes on 18th September then the SNP has achieved its aim. That most of what it has said to get the Yes will turn out to be wrong is of absolutely no importance
Well a bitter and angry Spanish Nationalist would say that wouldn't they?
Meanwhile Clegg and his 'Elvis Bus Pass' party have returned yet again to Gove in a 'not desperate at all' attempt at differentiation.
Second, I think those of who are in some sense on the left (or perhaps "other-directed" in another discourse) just have to accept that we will be on the receiving end of irate if not actually abusive posts from right-wingers. It is, after all, pretty difficult to be on the right, politically, without considering oneself in some sense better than other people.
Finally, I will simply say this: anyone - no matter their ethnicity - who prefers their own children to other people's is necessarily a racist. But if you don't, you've got other problems. Boy, have you ever. Many people do of course manage to walk the tightrope, although spending time on a comments column like this doesn't help much...
Surely SLAB OUGHT to be to the left of the SNP. The latter’s main aim is an independent Scotland, and that’s an aim which can be shared by free-marketeers, social democrats and libertarians. If a socialist party isn’t to the left of such a grouping, what’s it for at all?
Unless of course SLAB isn’t really a socialist party!
What Malkie conveniently forgets to mention is that the SNP is a coalition from all political sides, and to be quite honest, Salmond has done a brilliant job of keeping most of them on board during the campaign.
To the Greens, he is all windmills (and according to the Sunday Post, has wasted £1.8 billion). To the socialists, he is all about wealth distribution and get a referendum on the monarchy (after Independence). To the Royalists, keep the Queen. To the banks and businesses, keep the pound, pay lower taxes and stay in the EU. To the oil companies, promises of tax breaks (after Independence). To the anti nuclear brigade, no new power stations and close Faslane. To BAE, keep building ships (including nuclear). To Kippers (or the nearest that we have), we may not join the EU and even if we did, we won't have the Euro. Etc. Etc. Etc.
There is a large minority within the SNP who do not trust Salmond and are biting their collective tongue in the hope that he can pull the Referendum out of the bag.
Once the referendum is won or lost, it will be interesting to see how long the SNP can keep going before the expected implosion.
Too many promises, winks and nudges have been made or acknowledged to too many people. Competing expectations will surely leave many people disappointed with the result. And there's nothing so angry than an ex-believer who has found their promised personal heaven on earth doesn't exist and never did.
Exactly , it is a coalition for all of Scotland which is why YES will win. The only people on the outside are the elite and the status Quo troughing unionist parties. After the initial 2016 election things will change and real political parties will emerge from the Tory , labour and Lib Dumb puppet regimes. Hopefully minus the current useless troughers , especially the ones at Westminster.
THE attack on BBC broadcaster Andrew Marr offers a terrifying glimpse of what Scotland might become, writes Brian Wilson
‘There will be consequences for Andrew Marr,” tweeted the SNP’s spokesman on broadcasting, Peter Wishart MP, in perfect symphony with the toe-curling unpleasantness of The Leader’s fury.
Wishart's claim to support St Johnstone is almost certainly spurious. Ambitious Scottish politicians go to great lengths to distance themselves from the Old Firm but Wishart is very probably Celtic.
Mr. G, isn't it unfair to suggest Scots who are for the union are not part of 'all Scotland'? [Implied, given you said Yes was a coalition for all Scotland].
For such a charismatic and astute politician, Alec Rue the Day Salmond appears to have a low opinion of criticism. Compare his responses to the Economist and Andrew Marr, and the fall back position to blame the Tories, Lib Dems and the Bank of England for raising silly questions about a currency union, pensions, the UK's position on the UN, NATO, World Bank, WTO, EU, amongst other things. What would Scotland's position be on all of those bodies, other than a job creation scheme for lawyers, economists? The cyber nats seem very quiet when it comes to consideration of Salmond's weaknesses a political strategist.
When the going gets tough, that tough goes around trying to heid butt his critics. Is Salmond Devo Macs the flat track bully? Is the referendum a strategy to lever more powers from Westminster rather than full independence which upsets more than one apple cart?
If he loses the vote in September, he can at least blame Nicola Sturgeon, but if The SNP win what is going to happen to Labour and LIb Dem Westminster seats? What would Cameron's future look like? Not all voters would be keen on a party leader who enabled the break up of the Union with Scotland. The Scottish Referendum does have the potential to destroy some reputations, and shift the political geography of the UK.
Yes, the shriekers have indeed moved on to the 'game changer' of football referees and supporting St Johnstone. Hard to believe they completely failed to see just how amusing Grant Shapps incompetence was.
The Panelbase survey shows that 45 per cent of people in Scotland believe that Labour has been damaged by being associated with the Conservatives in the 'No' campaign.
Ah! PanelBase!
SHRIEK!!
*chortle*
Typical Nat engagement with the argument....
So what are the suppressed questions?
And why haven't they been published?
Pity PanelBase does not do as YouGov for example does and publish the whole poll.......
Typical Tory unionist , if you don't get the answers you like just infer that the polling company are bent.
Typical Nat - avoid the substance, attack the poster.....
I do not impugn Panelbase' integrity - I am sure the data they publish reflects the responses to the questions they asked - questions set by their client WingsOverSomerset......so why have the four questions that preceded the 'Labour damaged' one not been published? Could they in any way have influenced the result of that question? When will we be told?
LOL, you don't even know your websites, Newsnet has no connection with Wings over Scotland. Your rubbishing of someone choosing to live in Bath and ply his trade across the UK is a bit sinister to say the least. Do you ever impugne all the main newspapers owned and run from England or America or is it just your unionist wish to suppress views that are not your own and to traduce polling companies who do not post the results you wish to see. What will you seek next , burning of Scottish books.
Surely SLAB OUGHT to be to the left of the SNP. The latter’s main aim is an independent Scotland, and that’s an aim which can be shared by free-marketeers, social democrats and libertarians. If a socialist party isn’t to the left of such a grouping, what’s it for at all?
Unless of course SLAB isn’t really a socialist party!
What Malkie conveniently forgets to mention is that the SNP is a coalition from all political sides, and to be quite honest, Salmond has done a brilliant job of keeping most of them on board during the campaign.
To the Greens, he is all windmills (and according to the Sunday Post, has wasted £1.8 billion). To the socialists, he is all about wealth distribution and get a referendum on the monarchy (after Independence). To the Royalists, keep the Queen. To the banks and businesses, keep the pound, pay lower taxes and stay in the EU. To the oil companies, promises of tax breaks (after Independence). To the anti nuclear brigade, no new power stations and close Faslane. To BAE, keep building ships (including nuclear). To Kippers (or the nearest that we have), we may not join the EU and even if we did, we won't have the Euro. Etc. Etc. Etc.
There is a large minority within the SNP who do not trust Salmond and are biting their collective tongue in the hope that he can pull the Referendum out of the bag.
Once the referendum is won or lost, it will be interesting to see how long the SNP can keep going before the expected implosion.
Too many promises, winks and nudges have been made or acknowledged to too many people. Competing expectations will surely leave many people disappointed with the result. And there's nothing so angry than an ex-believer who has found their promised personal heaven on earth doesn't exist and never did.
If there is a Yes on 18th September then the SNP has achieved its aim. That most of what it has said to get the Yes will turn out to be wrong is of absolutely no importance - the Yes means independence and no turning back. The clue is in the Nationalist part of the name.
It's not a 'Nationalist' party - look at the actual name.
The Panelbase survey shows that 45 per cent of people in Scotland believe that Labour has been damaged by being associated with the Conservatives in the 'No' campaign.
Ah! PanelBase!
SHRIEK!!
*chortle*
Typical Nat engagement with the argument....
So what are the suppressed questions?
And why haven't they been published?
Pity PanelBase does not do as YouGov for example does and publish the whole poll.......
Typical Tory unionist , if you don't get the answers you like just infer that the polling company are bent.
Typical Nat - avoid the substance, attack the poster.....
I do not impugn Panelbase' integrity - I am sure the data they publish reflects the responses to the questions they asked - questions set by their client WingsOverSomerset......so why have the four questions that preceded the 'Labour damaged' one not been published? Could they in any way have influenced the result of that question? When will we be told?
Dr. Spyn, I don't think Cameron would or should get flak if Yes won. He didn't want the SNP to win a majority and a refusal to support a referendum would've been undemocratic given the way the Scots voted. He also didn't needlessly create a lopsided and indefensible brand of devolution.
If Yes wins then, given the current state of the economy, I suspect the break-up of the UK would be the defining feature of the 2015 General Election. This would aid the Conservatives as they cannot remotely be accused of being a 'Scottish' party or of having split loyalties. Indeed, Osborne's reputation for being as cuddly as a cactus would probably help. People won't want nice when it comes to negotiating a permanent separation.
When the going gets tough, that tough goes around trying to heid butt his critics.
Are you sure he doesn't throw a deep fried mars bar at them while wearing a kilt? It's a complete mystery why the PB tories are so hilariously out of touch with scottish public opinion, isn't it? Nor is this site often flagged up on other scottish political websites as one of the most amusing examples of westminster bubble thought for nothing.
Mr. G, didn't Parliament vote to axe Yanukovych[sp]?
I do agree the situation isn't black and white, although I do not support the Russian annexation of Crimea.
MD , Would you be happy if labour voted out the current government and announced themselves in power the next day, I think not. How toppling a democratic government is applauded by the west as opposed to Russia who actually gave the Crimean people a chance to vote can be compared is unbelievable. Russia come out of this looking far more democratic than the west.
The Panelbase survey shows that 45 per cent of people in Scotland believe that Labour has been damaged by being associated with the Conservatives in the 'No' campaign.
Ah! PanelBase!
SHRIEK!!
*chortle*
Typical Nat engagement with the argument....
So what are the suppressed questions?
And why haven't they been published?
Pity PanelBase does not do as YouGov for example does and publish the whole poll.......
Typical Tory unionist , if you don't get the answers you like just infer that the polling company are bent.
Typical Nat - avoid the substance, attack the poster.....
I do not impugn Panelbase' integrity - I am sure the data they publish reflects the responses to the questions they asked - questions set by their client WingsOverSomerset......so why have the four questions that preceded the 'Labour damaged' one not been published? Could they in any way have influenced the result of that question? When will we be told?
For such a charismatic and astute politician, Alec Rue the Day Salmond appears to have a low opinion of criticism. Compare his responses to the Economist and Andrew Marr, and the fall back position to blame the Tories, Lib Dems and the Bank of England for raising silly questions about a currency union, pensions, the UK's position on the UN, NATO, World Bank, WTO, EU, amongst other things. What would Scotland's position be on all of those bodies, other than a job creation scheme for lawyers, economists? The cyber nats seem very quiet when it comes to consideration of Salmond's weaknesses a political strategist.
When the going gets tough, that tough goes around trying to heid butt his critics. Is Salmond Devo Macs the flat track bully? Is the referendum a strategy to lever more powers from Westminster rather than full independence which upsets more than one apple cart?
If he loses the vote in September, he can at least blame Nicola Sturgeon, but if The SNP win what is going to happen to Labour and LIb Dem Westminster seats? What would Cameron's future look like? Not all voters would be keen on a party leader who enabled the break up of the Union with Scotland. The Scottish Referendum does have the potential to destroy some reputations, and shift the political geography of the UK.
Salmond is a brilliant political strategist. He knows exactly what he wants to achieve and he develops positions to get there. Whether they are coherent or honest is irrelevant. Unlike most other UK parties the SNP has one specific aim and one only - an independent Scotland. Once that is achieved there is no need for an SNP anymore. That means Salmond never has to worry about being held to account: a Yes cannot be undone in the way that a government party can be thrown out of office.
The Panelbase survey shows that 45 per cent of people in Scotland believe that Labour has been damaged by being associated with the Conservatives in the 'No' campaign.
Ah! PanelBase!
SHRIEK!!
*chortle*
Typical Nat engagement with the argument....
So what are the suppressed questions?
And why haven't they been published?
Pity PanelBase does not do as YouGov for example does and publish the whole poll.......
Typical Tory unionist , if you don't get the answers you like just infer that the polling company are bent.
Typical Nat - avoid the substance, attack the poster.....
I do not impugn Panelbase' integrity - I am sure the data they publish reflects the responses to the questions they asked - questions set by their client WingsOverSomerset......so why have the four questions that preceded the 'Labour damaged' one not been published? Could they in any way have influenced the result of that question? When will we be told?
Newsnet has no connection with Wings over Scotland.
My apologies, but it is easy to confuse the Bath & Gloucester branches......(they are only 50 miles apart, and over 300 from Edinburgh.....)
Surely SLAB OUGHT to be to the left of the SNP. The latter’s main aim is an independent Scotland, and that’s an aim which can be shared by free-marketeers, social democrats and libertarians. If a socialist party isn’t to the left of such a grouping, what’s it for at all?
Unless of course SLAB isn’t really a socialist party!
What Malkie conveniently forgets to mention is that the SNP is a coalition from all political sides, and to be quite honest, Salmond has done a brilliant job of keeping most of them on board during the campaign.
To the Greens, he is all windmills (and according to the Sunday Post, has wasted £1.8 billion). To the socialists, he is all about wealth distribution and get a referendum on the monarchy (after Independence). To the Royalists, keep the Queen. To the banks and businesses, keep the pound, pay lower taxes and stay in the EU. To the oil companies, promises of tax breaks (after Independence). To the anti nuclear brigade, no new power stations and close Faslane. To BAE, keep building ships (including nuclear). To Kippers (or the nearest that we have), we may not join the EU and even if we did, we won't have the Euro. Etc. Etc. Etc.
There is a large minority within the SNP who do not trust Salmond and are biting their collective tongue in the hope that he can pull the Referendum out of the bag.
Once the referendum is won or lost, it will be interesting to see how long the SNP can keep going before the expected implosion.
Too many promises, winks and nudges have been made or acknowledged to too many people. Competing expectations will surely leave many people disappointed with the result. And there's nothing so angry than an ex-believer who has found their promised personal heaven on earth doesn't exist and never did.
If there is a Yes on 18th September then the SNP has achieved its aim. That most of what it has said to get the Yes will turn out to be wrong is of absolutely no importance - the Yes means independence and no turning back. The clue is in the Nationalist part of the name.
It's not a 'Nationalist' party - look at the actual name.
And the German Democratic Republic was not Democratic.....but it said so in the name.....
Mr. G, that's not a valid comparison because we have a parliamentary democracy and the numbers don't stack up for Labour.
If we had Con 300, Lab 290 and Lib Dem 40 then such a toppling of a Con-Lib coalition (to a Lab-Lib one) could occur. I would not be delighted, but that would be in line with the way the system is set up.
It's also worth mentioning Yanukovych's riot police did kill a number of protestors.
Also, I don't have any faith in the referendum (in Crimea, of course). It was held at very short notice, boycotted by many people, yet managed to have both a very high and almost uniformly pro-Russian turnout. Russian democracy is something of an oxymoron.
@Mick_Pork how much of the donation to Sports Relief ends up with contributions from tax payers - gift aid scheme and all that.
I dislike the way in which it is hard to escape the enforced jollity and the attempts to compel people to contribute. If Cameron has done his bit for sports relief by jogging, it then begs questions about Salmond, Miliband, Clegg, Lamont, et al. Why not tell the organisers to bugger off for once. Just because the BBC promote doesn't make it compulsory to take part.
Surely SLAB OUGHT to be to the left of the SNP. The latter’s main aim is an independent Scotland, and that’s an aim which can be shared by free-marketeers, social democrats and libertarians. If a socialist party isn’t to the left of such a grouping, what’s it for at all?
Unless of course SLAB isn’t really a socialist party!
What Malkie conveniently forgets to mention is that the SNP is a coalition from all political sides, and to be quite honest, Salmond has done a brilliant job of keeping most of them on board during the campaign.
To the Greens, he is all windmills (and according to the Sunday Post, has wasted £1.8 billion). To the socialists, he is all about wealth distribution and get a referendum on the monarchy (after Independence). To the Royalists, keep the Queen. To the banks and businesses, keep the pound, pay lower taxes and stay in the EU. To the oil companies, promises of tax breaks (after Independence). To the anti nuclear brigade, no new power stations and close Faslane. To BAE, keep building ships (including nuclear). To Kippers (or the nearest that we have), we may not join the EU and even if we did, we won't have the Euro. Etc. Etc. Etc.
There is a large minority within the SNP who do not trust Salmond and are biting their collective tongue in the hope that he can pull the Referendum out of the bag.
Once the referendum is won or lost, it will be interesting to see how long the SNP can keep going before the expected implosion.
Too many promises, winks and nudges have been made or acknowledged to too many people. Competing expectations will surely leave many people disappointed with the result. And there's nothing so angry than an ex-believer who has found their promised personal heaven on earth doesn't exist and never did.
If there is a Yes on 18th September then the SNP has achieved its aim. That most of what it has said to get the Yes will turn out to be wrong is of absolutely no importance - the Yes means independence and no turning back. The clue is in the Nationalist part of the name.
It's not a 'Nationalist' party - look at the actual name.
From the OED: "nationalism: 2. a policy of national independence"
The Panelbase survey shows that 45 per cent of people in Scotland believe that Labour has been damaged by being associated with the Conservatives in the 'No' campaign.
Ah! PanelBase!
SHRIEK!!
*chortle*
Typical Nat engagement with the argument....
So what are the suppressed questions?
And why haven't they been published?
Pity PanelBase does not do as YouGov for example does and publish the whole poll.......
Typical Tory unionist , if you don't get the answers you like just infer that the polling company are bent.
Typical Nat - avoid the substance, attack the poster.....
I do not impugn Panelbase' integrity - I am sure the data they publish reflects the responses to the questions they asked - questions set by their client WingsOverSomerset......so why have the four questions that preceded the 'Labour damaged' one not been published? Could they in any way have influenced the result of that question? When will we be told?
Are you not mistaken about the client?
Yes, but not (yet) about the publication of the missing questions......
While the SNP and UKIP may claim to different positions on the mythical left-right axis, from my point. of view they are two sides of the same coin. Both promote nationalism, both see external forces as the root of political problems. They rely on charamatic leaders who evoke a bygone age. Their supporters are equally evangelical.
Perceptive analysis. The other difference is they rarely, if ever, criticise their Leadership, unlike Con or Lab for example.......
LOL, just as you two are cheeks of the same arse and are talking out of it.
And the last time a Nat criticised Salmond was.......?
I presume when he has done something that deserves to be criticised. He is very careful and promotes Scotland's interests at all times so is hard to find fault with that. The continued popularity of the government after 7 years proves that. For sure he will get very short shrift if he is found wanting. However you do seem unable to get to grips with the fact that many of us on here are for independence for Scotland but are not "Nats" as you put it. I myself am at least centre right but they have my vote till we are independent and/or have a credible alternative party that have any interest in the people of Scotland.
Surely SLAB OUGHT to be to the left of the SNP. The latter’s main aim is an independent Scotland, and that’s an aim which can be shared by free-marketeers, social democrats and libertarians. If a socialist party isn’t to the left of such a grouping, what’s it for at all?
Unless of course SLAB isn’t really a socialist party!
What Malkie conveniently forgets to mention is that the SNP is a coalition from all political sides, and to be quite honest, Salmond has done a brilliant job of keeping most of them on board during the campaign.
To the Greens, he is all windmills (and according to the Sunday Post, has wasted £1.8 billion). To the socialists, he is all about wealth distribution and get a referendum on the monarchy (after Independence). To the Royalists, keep the Queen. To the banks and businesses, keep the pound, pay lower taxes and stay in the EU. To the oil companies, promises of tax breaks (after Independence). To the anti nuclear brigade, no new power stations and close Faslane. To BAE, keep building ships (including nuclear). To Kippers (or the nearest that we have), we may not join the EU and even if we did, we won't have the Euro. Etc. Etc. Etc.
There is a large minority within the SNP who do not trust Salmond and are biting their collective tongue in the hope that he can pull the Referendum out of the bag.
Once the referendum is won or lost, it will be interesting to see how long the SNP can keep going before the expected implosion.
Too many promises, winks and nudges have been made or acknowledged to too many people. Competing expectations will surely leave many people disappointed with the result. And there's nothing so angry than an ex-believer who has found their promised personal heaven on earth doesn't exist and never did.
If there is a Yes on 18th September then the SNP has achieved its aim. That most of what it has said to get the Yes will turn out to be wrong is of absolutely no importance - the Yes means independence and no turning back. The clue is in the Nationalist part of the name.
It's not a 'Nationalist' party - look at the actual name.
OK, it is a nationalist party that uses the term National in its name.
What defines the SNP philosophy is that those living in Scotland have much more in common with each other than they do with people living anywhere else and that people outside of Scotland are holding Scotland back. That is nationalism.
Surely SLAB OUGHT to be to the left of the SNP. The latter’s main aim is an independent Scotland, and that’s an aim which can be shared by free-marketeers, social democrats and libertarians. If a socialist party isn’t to the left of such a grouping, what’s it for at all?
Unless of course SLAB isn’t really a socialist party!
What Malkie conveniently forgets to mention is that the SNP is a coalition from all political sides, and to be quite honest, Salmond has done a brilliant job of keeping most of them on board during the campaign.
To the Greens, he is all windmills (and according to the Sunday Post, has wasted £1.8 billion). To the socialists, he is all about wealth distribution and get a referendum on the monarchy (after Independence). To the Royalists, keep the Queen. To the banks and businesses, keep the pound, pay lower taxes and stay in the EU. To the oil companies, promises of tax breaks (after Independence). To the anti nuclear brigade, no new power stations and close Faslane. To BAE, keep building ships (including nuclear). To Kippers (or the nearest that we have), we may not join the EU and even if we did, we won't have the Euro. Etc. Etc. Etc.
There is a large minority within the SNP who do not trust Salmond and are biting their collective tongue in the hope that he can pull the Referendum out of the bag.
Once the referendum is won or lost, it will be interesting to see how long the SNP can keep going before the expected implosion.
Too many promises, winks and nudges have been made or acknowledged to too many people. Competing expectations will surely leave many people disappointed with the result. And there's nothing so angry than an ex-believer who has found their promised personal heaven on earth doesn't exist and never did.
If there is a Yes on 18th September then the SNP has achieved its aim. That most of what it has said to get the Yes will turn out to be wrong is of absolutely no importance - the Yes means independence and no turning back. The clue is in the Nationalist part of the name.
It's not a 'Nationalist' party - look at the actual name.
It means Putin is running rings round the Western donkeys and pretty soon he will kick them in the goolies. The pathetic sanctions crap will come back to haunt them.
that's what i was thinking
There's little doubt that Putin has won this.
Really?
He's revealed what he is (most people knew, but pretended to deny it) in return for a small, relatively non-strategic (but emotionally important) piece of territory. If the West has the courage to continue to freeze him out then I am not sure that the prize was worth it.
Two terms as the governing party in scotland compared to calamity Clegg smashing the lib dem base and vote with his unprincipled tory 'love in' would tend to indicate you're full of it.
Mr. G, isn't it unfair to suggest Scots who are for the union are not part of 'all Scotland'? [Implied, given you said Yes was a coalition for all Scotland].
MD, Yes, poorly written , should have been for all points of view related to looking after Scottish interests. Of course people are entitled to their opinion, YES or NO.
It means Putin is running rings round the Western donkeys and pretty soon he will kick them in the goolies. The pathetic sanctions crap will come back to haunt them.
that's what i was thinking
There's little doubt that Putin has won this.
Really?
He's revealed what he is (most people knew, but pretended to deny it) in return for a small, relatively non-strategic (but emotionally important) piece of territory. If the West has the courage to continue to freeze him out then I am not sure that the prize was worth it.
While the SNP and UKIP may claim to different positions on the mythical left-right axis, from my point. of view they are two sides of the same coin. Both promote nationalism, both see external forces as the root of political problems. They rely on charamatic leaders who evoke a bygone age. Their supporters are equally evangelical.
Perceptive analysis. The other difference is they rarely, if ever, criticise their Leadership, unlike Con or Lab for example.......
LOL, just as you two are cheeks of the same arse and are talking out of it.
And the last time a Nat criticised Salmond was.......?
many of us on here are for independence for Scotland but are not "Nats" as you put it. I myself am at least centre right
Then I am surprised you find Salmond's record and plans so far beyond criticism.....If I thought you were SNP, I would say so, you are however a Nat(ionalist) who never criticises the leader of a party well to the left of your own position....which I find curious......
When the going gets tough, that tough goes around trying to heid butt his critics.
Are you sure he doesn't throw a deep fried mars bar at them while wearing a kilt? It's a complete mystery why the PB tories are so hilariously out of touch with scottish public opinion, isn't it? Nor is this site often flagged up on other scottish political websites as one of the most amusing examples of westminster bubble thought for nothing.
You have to wonder where people like this get their information, can only assume Spyn is limited to a few London newspapers given his knowledge re Alex Salmond appears to be zero
Finally, I will simply say this: anyone - no matter their ethnicity - who prefers their own children to other people's is necessarily a racist. But if you don't, you've got other problems. Boy, have you ever. Many people do of course manage to walk the tightrope, although spending time on a comments column like this doesn't help much...
I absolutely disagree.
For me a "racist" is someone who makes judgments about people based on their race/ethnicity as a primary factor.
Someone who prefers their own children to other people's is (presumably) making that judgement based on their close genetic relationship rather than ethnicity.
Surely SLAB OUGHT to be to the left of the SNP. The latter’s main aim is an independent Scotland, and that’s an aim which can be shared by free-marketeers, social democrats and libertarians. If a socialist party isn’t to the left of such a grouping, what’s it for at all?
Unless of course SLAB isn’t really a socialist party!
What Malkie conveniently forgets to mention is that the SNP is a coalition from all political sides, and to be quite honest, Salmond has done a brilliant job of keeping most of them on board during the campaign.
To the Greens, he is all windmills (and according to the Sunday Post, has wasted £1.8 billion). To the socialists, he is all about wealth distribution and get a referendum on the monarchy (after Independence). To the Royalists, keep the Queen. To the banks and businesses, keep the pound, pay lower taxes and stay in the EU. To the oil companies, promises of tax breaks (after Independence). To the anti nuclear brigade, no new power stations and close Faslane. To BAE, keep building ships (including nuclear). To Kippers (or the nearest that we have), we may not join the EU and even if we did, we won't have the Euro. Etc. Etc. Etc.
There is a large minority within the SNP who do not trust Salmond and are biting their collective tongue in the hope that he can pull the Referendum out of the bag.
Once the referendum is won or lost, it will be interesting to see how long the SNP can keep going before the expected implosion.
Too many promises, winks and nudges have been made or acknowledged to too many people. Competing expectations will surely leave many people disappointed with the result. And there's nothing so angry than an ex-believer who has found their promised personal heaven on earth doesn't exist and never did.
If there is a Yes on 18th September then the SNP has achieved its aim. That most of what it has said to get the Yes will turn out to be wrong is of absolutely no importance - the Yes means independence and no turning back. The clue is in the Nationalist part of the name.
It's not a 'Nationalist' party - look at the actual name.
The principle of self-determination is I'm afraid something that doesn't go down well with the more illiberal and Blairite types.They prefer their own brand of BritNat Nationalism. Blaming immigrants, the poor and asylum seekers. "British jobs for British workers" etc.
Comments
@chunkymark Labour just said they support the pension reforms, add that to #helptobuy benefit cap and the rest and what's the point of them?
'Osborne max' indeed.
Paul @bitoclass
Imagine being Tony Blair and actually thinking the worst thing your government had done was introducing the Freedom of Information Act.
barefootmower @barefootmower 17m
Tony Benn's diaries on @bbcradio4 Who knew Tony Blair was such a snide? #Everyone
Sèvres @SeeverJaff 3m
Scores killed in wave of #Iraq bombings http://aje.me/1d7ZTvU@AJEnglish
So my 87 year old mother in law, who did not work after she married in 1947, is a problem. What do we do with her?
But it's a convenient fantasy, and as such politicians of all parties have to take notice of it.
So why don't they?
My sister in law doesn't work, when she's 87 should she be entitled to a state pension given she's made sweet FA in contributions ?
And what, Mr Pork, were the four questions that preceded that one?
And why have they been suppressed not yet published?
I accept that there is an anomaly regarding the contributions of women during years affected by the birth of children and maybe also for those from the generation when it was the norm for women not to work when married but with those provisos I do not believe that the benefits given to those who choose not to work should be the same as those who do work and pay contributions.
FPT: Mr. Pagan, a nice idea, but the world's pre-gunpowder. I didn't know that about the various ingredients... might use it (on an accidental explosive basis) later, perhaps.
THE attack on BBC broadcaster Andrew Marr offers a terrifying glimpse of what Scotland might become, writes Brian Wilson
‘There will be consequences for Andrew Marr,” tweeted the SNP’s spokesman on broadcasting, Peter Wishart MP, in perfect symphony with the toe-curling unpleasantness of The Leader’s fury.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/brian-wilson-sinister-signals-transmitted-by-snp-1-3350058
Unfortunately a scan of the online edition results in nowt. Presumably it's presently only available in the print edition.
*chortle*
If you think my contributions here are "cheap" you can always ask OGH to ban me.
So what are the suppressed questions?
And why haven't they been published?
Pity PanelBase does not do as YouGov for example does and publish the whole poll.......
Sun Politics @Sun_Politics 1h
EXCL: Boris will run as an MP in 2015 now - but suspicions grow he has done a deal with the PM for No10: http://bit.ly/OIBuSn
Wayne Halton @haltosaur 30m
Has the door just opened for Boris? MP Sir Peter Tapsell quits leaving way for Boris Johnson's return to Westminster http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/466244/MP-Sir-Peter-Tapsell-quits-leaving-way-for-Boris-Johnson-s-return-to-Westminster …
it's a conspiracy !
Grant Shapps: I love bingo and beer just like other hardworking people http://gu.com/p/3nmtj/tw via @guardian
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQWPR9TM0Gk
I was genuinely trying not to be political on this as I think there is broad party agreement that those who can contribute should and that if they do then they are entitled to the relevant benefits. If you think I have no case fair enough - we agree to differ.
Scottish MP Pete Wishart wants all referees in Scotland to be forced to declare which team they support.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/scotland/9196192.stm
It would be hard on the moderators though as he'd be appealing every post.
David Cameron cares about Sport Relief. Not enough to actually change policy he has control over. But enough to do a jog in front of cameras
PR Fop.
Graham Wettone @grahamwettone
Cameron wants to re introduce 'snoopers' charter because 'it works on the telly'? Seriously? CBB next in law then! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10608439/David-Cameron-TV-crime-dramas-show-need-for-snoopers-charter.html …"
Arrigo Triulzi @cynicalsecurity
BBC: “Cameron aide arrested in `child abuse imagery’ inquiry”.He was behind the UK Internet filter design. Hypocrisy. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-26428308 …
We could also move onto Climate Change as one of the many things the PB tories want to pretend Cammie isn't fully signed up to. They love being reminded of that.
Rich it coming from Wilson , former labour trougher who made plenty whilst labour Minister, no axe to grind there.
To the Greens, he is all windmills (and according to the Sunday Post, has wasted £1.8 billion). To the socialists, he is all about wealth distribution and get a referendum on the monarchy (after Independence). To the Royalists, keep the Queen. To the banks and businesses, keep the pound, pay lower taxes and stay in the EU. To the oil companies, promises of tax breaks (after Independence). To the anti nuclear brigade, no new power stations and close Faslane. To BAE, keep building ships (including nuclear). To Kippers (or the nearest that we have), we may not join the EU and even if we did, we won't have the Euro. Etc. Etc. Etc.
There is a large minority within the SNP who do not trust Salmond and are biting their collective tongue in the hope that he can pull the Referendum out of the bag.
Once the referendum is won or lost, it will be interesting to see how long the SNP can keep going before the expected implosion.
Too many promises, winks and nudges have been made or acknowledged to too many people. Competing expectations will surely leave many people disappointed with the result. And there's nothing so angry than an ex-believer who has found their promised personal heaven on earth doesn't exist and never did.
The Williams was notable for being very quick in the dry race and severely hampered in wet qualifying (9th and 10th, on pace). The Red Bull may have been a bit better in the wet (probably due to downforce supremacy), although it was also pretty tasty in the dry.
No need to Mr P0rk, my point is well made, its what you do .
I do not impugn Panelbase' integrity - I am sure the data they publish reflects the responses to the questions they asked - questions set by their client WingsOverSomerset......so why have the four questions that preceded the 'Labour damaged' one not been published? Could they in any way have influenced the result of that question? When will we be told?
Far better to have done as Hague did and just stay down behind the sofa.
Meanwhile Clegg and his 'Elvis Bus Pass' party have returned yet again to Gove in a 'not desperate at all' attempt at differentiation.
UK Education Matters @SchoolDuggery 33m
Gove not radical, says Clegg. http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4041637.ece …
I do agree the situation isn't black and white, although I do not support the Russian annexation of Crimea.
Alan Dean @CllrAlanDean 2m
Win FREE TICKETS to watch Nick Clegg debate Nigel Farage live in the studio #NickvNigel http://www.libdems.org.uk/win_tickets_to_nick_v_nigel?recruiter_id=59089 …
Second, I think those of who are in some sense on the left (or perhaps "other-directed" in another discourse) just have to accept that we will be on the receiving end of irate if not actually abusive posts from right-wingers. It is, after all, pretty difficult to be on the right, politically, without considering oneself in some sense better than other people.
Finally, I will simply say this: anyone - no matter their ethnicity - who prefers their own children to other people's is necessarily a racist. But if you don't, you've got other problems. Boy, have you ever. Many people do of course manage to walk the tightrope, although spending time on a comments column like this doesn't help much...
When the going gets tough, that tough goes around trying to heid butt his critics. Is Salmond Devo Macs the flat track bully? Is the referendum a strategy to lever more powers from Westminster rather than full independence which upsets more than one apple cart?
If he loses the vote in September, he can at least blame Nicola Sturgeon, but if The SNP win what is going to happen to Labour and LIb Dem Westminster seats? What would Cameron's future look like? Not all voters would be keen on a party leader who enabled the break up of the Union with Scotland. The Scottish Referendum does have the potential to destroy some reputations, and shift the political geography of the UK.
If Yes wins then, given the current state of the economy, I suspect the break-up of the UK would be the defining feature of the 2015 General Election. This would aid the Conservatives as they cannot remotely be accused of being a 'Scottish' party or of having split loyalties. Indeed, Osborne's reputation for being as cuddly as a cactus would probably help. People won't want nice when it comes to negotiating a permanent separation.
Are you sure he doesn't throw a deep fried mars bar at them while wearing a kilt?
It's a complete mystery why the PB tories are so hilariously out of touch with scottish public opinion, isn't it? Nor is this site often flagged up on other scottish political websites as one of the most amusing examples of westminster bubble thought for nothing.
LOL
If we had Con 300, Lab 290 and Lib Dem 40 then such a toppling of a Con-Lib coalition (to a Lab-Lib one) could occur. I would not be delighted, but that would be in line with the way the system is set up.
It's also worth mentioning Yanukovych's riot police did kill a number of protestors.
Also, I don't have any faith in the referendum (in Crimea, of course). It was held at very short notice, boycotted by many people, yet managed to have both a very high and almost uniformly pro-Russian turnout. Russian democracy is something of an oxymoron.
I dislike the way in which it is hard to escape the enforced jollity and the attempts to compel people to contribute. If Cameron has done his bit for sports relief by jogging, it then begs questions about Salmond, Miliband, Clegg, Lamont, et al. Why not tell the organisers to bugger off for once. Just because the BBC promote doesn't make it compulsory to take part.
Sam Coates Times @SamCoatesTimes 3m
Michael Gove isn't as radical or as competent as he claims, says Nick Clegg. Vicious stuff. Expect return fire pic.twitter.com/xhKjfBc181
However you do seem unable to get to grips with the fact that many of us on here are for independence for Scotland but are not "Nats" as you put it. I myself am at least centre right but they have my vote till we are independent and/or have a credible alternative party that have any interest in the people of Scotland.
What defines the SNP philosophy is that those living in Scotland have much more in common with each other than they do with people living anywhere else and that people outside of Scotland are holding Scotland back. That is nationalism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_nationalist_parties_in_Europe
Rather a motley crew in that list.
He's revealed what he is (most people knew, but pretended to deny it) in return for a small, relatively non-strategic (but emotionally important) piece of territory. If the West has the courage to continue to freeze him out then I am not sure that the prize was worth it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYMN7l_wo5U
Two terms as the governing party in scotland compared to calamity Clegg smashing the lib dem base and vote with his unprincipled tory 'love in' would tend to indicate you're full of it.
Of course people are entitled to their opinion, YES or NO.
For me a "racist" is someone who makes judgments about people based on their race/ethnicity as a primary factor.
Someone who prefers their own children to other people's is (presumably) making that judgement based on their close genetic relationship rather than ethnicity.