politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Sign In Register

Categories

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Salmond needs a convincing win in Tuesday’s big IndyRef TV

SystemSystem Posts: 12,213
edited August 2014 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Salmond needs a convincing win in Tuesday’s big IndyRef TV debate to move the polls to YES

One of the big moments in Alex Salmond’s career was a big TV debate of Scottish party leaders in late March 2011. At the time the SNP was trailing LAB in the Holyrood polling and it did look as though SLAB was going to return to power.

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    There does seem to be a rising sense of panic in the YeSNP ranks.

    They are trying to play down the debate in case Eck loses badly. Meanwhile...
    Peevishness seems to be seeping into the “yes” camp. The SNP MP Angus Robertson tweeted pictures of “yes” posters graffittied over with “nae” and alleged that this fairly standard episode of electioneering high jinks amounted to “criminal damage”. And for all his claims that Cameron was “feart” to debate him, Salmond is now creating difficulties with the BBC and Sky News about plans for further debates against Darling.
    http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/comment/columns/adamboulton/article1441860.ece
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Wee Eck against Wee Darling

    Some choice ....
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Will there have been any polls conducted between the Commonwealth Games and the debate?
  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    I wonder if quel ciccione del Primo Ministro insisted on top billing in the Salmond & Darling debate ?
  • Edin_RokzEdin_Rokz Posts: 516
    JackW said:

    Wee Eck against Wee Darling

    Some choice ....

    Oh I don't know, if Darling pisses over Salmond, then game over for Yes.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Edin_Rokz said:

    JackW said:

    Wee Eck against Wee Darling

    Some choice ....

    Oh I don't know, if Darling pisses over Salmond, then game over for Yes.
    And Darling will have his pick of Labour jobs, north or south of the border. Has he expressed a preference for next Chancellor or next First Minister?
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704
    As the debate approaches it becomes even more obvious that Darling is the right choice, when the alternative is Cameron.

    Just by being English Cameron would lose.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Edin_Rokz said:

    JackW said:

    Wee Eck against Wee Darling

    Some choice ....

    Oh I don't know, if Darling pisses over Salmond, then game over for Yes.
    I have no doubt that Darling will perform decently - he incisive, waspish, quick on his feet and has gravitas. Salmond is a better debater but will hubris be his undoing in a situation where he needs a game changer ?

  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    edited August 2014
    According to the Guardian, Salmond has employed “a lifestyle coach and happiness guru” in advance of his crucial televised debate against Alistair Darling.

    Must admit I’ve never thought of the FM as the happy, smiley face of Scotland, but, hey ho…
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,142
    Edin_Rokz said:

    JackW said:

    Wee Eck against Wee Darling

    Some choice ....

    Oh I don't know, if Darling pisses over Salmond, then game over for Yes.
    Weren't you the bright spark who at one point suggested George Galloway was a pal of Salmond's and a supporter of indy?

    Perhaps we should have a quick count of PBers who have actually seen any of Darling's indy related performances - those who haven't might be in for a shock. I also think that Darling may have a problem with unfriendly questions from the public. Two years of invitation-only meetings with vetted audiences aren't the ideal prep for these situations.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    Scott_P said:

    There does seem to be a rising sense of panic in the YeSNP ranks.

    They are trying to play down the debate in case Eck loses badly. Meanwhile...

    Peevishness seems to be seeping into the “yes” camp. The SNP MP Angus Robertson tweeted pictures of “yes” posters graffittied over with “nae” and alleged that this fairly standard episode of electioneering high jinks amounted to “criminal damage”. And for all his claims that Cameron was “feart” to debate him, Salmond is now creating difficulties with the BBC and Sky News about plans for further debates against Darling.
    http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/comment/columns/adamboulton/article1441860.ece

    You really are a Lord haw Haw.
  • Innocent_AbroadInnocent_Abroad Posts: 3,294
    Theuniondivvie said:

    Edin_Rokz said:

    JackW said:

    Wee Eck against Wee Darling

    Some choice ....

    Oh I don't know, if Darling pisses over Salmond, then game over for Yes.
    Weren't you the bright spark who at one point suggested George Galloway was a pal of Salmond's and a supporter of indy?

    Perhaps we should have a quick count of PBers who have actually seen any of Darling's indy related performances - those who haven't might be in for a shock. I also think that Darling may have a problem with unfriendly questions from the public. Two years of invitation-only meetings with vetted audiences aren't the ideal prep for these situations.
    It's obvious. No-one with any intelligence, optimism or even plain humanity would go anywhere near the Labour Party. Neither now nor forty years ago.

    And all those who did should be exterminated as vermin. Vermin, I say: vermin!

    LET'S KILL LEFTIES!!!! ALL POWER TO THE TORY PEEBIES!!!!
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    MonikerDiCanio said:

    I wonder if quel ciccione del Primo Ministro insisted on top billing in the Salmond & Darling debate ?

    It was done by toss of coins , which both went in favour of YES team. Salmond to open and to close the debate.
  • Max_EdinburghMax_Edinburgh Posts: 347
    Theuniondivvie said:

    Edin_Rokz said:

    JackW said:

    Wee Eck against Wee Darling

    Some choice ....

    Oh I don't know, if Darling pisses over Salmond, then game over for Yes.
    Weren't you the bright spark who at one point suggested George Galloway was a pal of Salmond's and a supporter of indy?

    Perhaps we should have a quick count of PBers who have actually seen any of Darling's indy related performances - those who haven't might be in for a shock. I also think that Darling may have a problem with unfriendly questions from the public. Two years of invitation-only meetings with vetted audiences aren't the ideal prep for these situations.
    I've seen plenty of his performances and I suspect we both know he'll do just fine. Alex Salmond on the other hand may struggle without the help of a partisan presiding officer and the support of his nodding dogs behind him. It's the last throw of the dice for a Yes campaign that has pretty much blown it.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    edited August 2014
    Edin_Rokz said:

    JackW said:

    Wee Eck against Wee Darling

    Some choice ....

    Oh I don't know, if Darling pisses over Salmond, then game over for Yes.
    You on drugs. Darling has zero charisma and would bore the pants off you. Watch his eyebrows twitch as he lies and lies.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    malcolmg said:

    Edin_Rokz said:

    JackW said:

    Wee Eck against Wee Darling

    Some choice ....

    Oh I don't know, if Darling pisses over Salmond, then game over for Yes.
    You on drugs
    Oh I don't know malc, if he does it literally, it would brighten up the dullest campaign ever.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    JackW said:

    Edin_Rokz said:

    JackW said:

    Wee Eck against Wee Darling

    Some choice ....

    Oh I don't know, if Darling pisses over Salmond, then game over for Yes.
    I have no doubt that Darling will perform decently - he incisive, waspish, quick on his feet and has gravitas. Salmond is a better debater but will hubris be his undoing in a situation where he needs a game changer ?

    The arse has spoken, usual output.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    SimonStClare said:

    According to the Guardian, Salmond has employed “a lifestyle coach and happiness guru” in advance of his crucial televised debate against Alistair Darling.

    Must admit I’ve never thought of the FM as the happy, smiley face of Scotland, but, hey ho…

    Simon, that shows you know little of him , like most on here, you however are not rabid like most of them. Do not be taken in by London newspapers and idiots like Scottp.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    Innocent_Abroad said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Edin_Rokz said:

    JackW said:

    Wee Eck against Wee Darling

    Some choice ....

    Oh I don't know, if Darling pisses over Salmond, then game over for Yes.
    Weren't you the bright spark who at one point suggested George Galloway was a pal of Salmond's and a supporter of indy?

    Perhaps we should have a quick count of PBers who have actually seen any of Darling's indy related performances - those who haven't might be in for a shock. I also think that Darling may have a problem with unfriendly questions from the public. Two years of invitation-only meetings with vetted audiences aren't the ideal prep for these situations.
    It's obvious. No-one with any intelligence, optimism or even plain humanity would go anywhere near the Labour Party. Neither now nor forty years ago.

    And all those who did should be exterminated as vermin. Vermin, I say: vermin!

    LET'S KILL LEFTIES!!!! ALL POWER TO THE TORY PEEBIES!!!!
    I almost agree with you , however you lost me with the last line, bit over the top even for on here.
  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    malcolmg said:

    MonikerDiCanio said:

    I wonder if quel ciccione del Primo Ministro insisted on top billing in the Salmond & Darling debate ?

    It was done by toss of coins , which both went in favour of YES team. Salmond to open and to close the debate.
    " Salmond to open and close the debate". So much for fair-play. More North Korea than North Britain.

  • Innocent_AbroadInnocent_Abroad Posts: 3,294
    malcolmg said:

    Innocent_Abroad said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Edin_Rokz said:

    JackW said:

    Wee Eck against Wee Darling

    Some choice ....

    Oh I don't know, if Darling pisses over Salmond, then game over for Yes.
    Weren't you the bright spark who at one point suggested George Galloway was a pal of Salmond's and a supporter of indy?

    Perhaps we should have a quick count of PBers who have actually seen any of Darling's indy related performances - those who haven't might be in for a shock. I also think that Darling may have a problem with unfriendly questions from the public. Two years of invitation-only meetings with vetted audiences aren't the ideal prep for these situations.
    It's obvious. No-one with any intelligence, optimism or even plain humanity would go anywhere near the Labour Party. Neither now nor forty years ago.

    And all those who did should be exterminated as vermin. Vermin, I say: vermin!

    LET'S KILL LEFTIES!!!! ALL POWER TO THE TORY PEEBIES!!!!
    I almost agree with you , however you lost me with the last line, bit over the top even for on here.
    Just try a bit harder.

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    Alanbrooke said:

    malcolmg said:

    Edin_Rokz said:

    JackW said:

    Wee Eck against Wee Darling

    Some choice ....

    Oh I don't know, if Darling pisses over Salmond, then game over for Yes.
    You on drugs
    Oh I don't know malc, if he does it literally, it would brighten up the dullest campaign ever.
    Alan, it is impossible, unfortunately I have seen and heard him speak, it just makes you want to get the whisky and the service revolver. He also is very poor at answering anything other than patsie scripted questions. He will not get beyond sharing and pooling , no currency , better bigger. I would expect most people will turn off long before the end.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    MonikerDiCanio said:

    malcolmg said:

    MonikerDiCanio said:

    I wonder if quel ciccione del Primo Ministro insisted on top billing in the Salmond & Darling debate ?

    It was done by toss of coins , which both went in favour of YES team. Salmond to open and to close the debate.
    " Salmond to open and close the debate". So much for fair-play. More North Korea than North Britain.

    You thick turnip , did you read the post , his minions could not even guess what side of a coin would come up , sums up the unionists.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,142
    Max_Edinburgh said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Edin_Rokz said:

    JackW said:

    Wee Eck against Wee Darling

    Some choice ....

    Oh I don't know, if Darling pisses over Salmond, then game over for Yes.
    Weren't you the bright spark who at one point suggested George Galloway was a pal of Salmond's and a supporter of indy?

    Perhaps we should have a quick count of PBers who have actually seen any of Darling's indy related performances - those who haven't might be in for a shock. I also think that Darling may have a problem with unfriendly questions from the public. Two years of invitation-only meetings with vetted audiences aren't the ideal prep for these situations.
    I've seen plenty of his performances and I suspect we both know he'll do just fine. Alex Salmond on the other hand may struggle without the help of a partisan presiding officer and the support of his nodding dogs behind him. It's the last throw of the dice for a Yes campaign that has pretty much blown it.

    Uhuh.
    You're the pom pom boy for Bettertogether's ground campaign, ain't you? You'd better get your finger out in Glasgow. So far at my address one Westminster funded scare booklet, no phone or doorstep canvassing, no sign of a street campaign (unless you count the Orange Walk). In Glasgow itself, not one single open meeting held or attended by Bettertogether.


  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    Max_Edinburgh said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Edin_Rokz said:

    JackW said:

    Wee Eck against Wee Darling

    Some choice ....

    Oh I don't know, if Darling pisses over Salmond, then game over for Yes.
    Weren't you the bright spark who at one point suggested George Galloway was a pal of Salmond's and a supporter of indy?

    Perhaps we should have a quick count of PBers who have actually seen any of Darling's indy related performances - those who haven't might be in for a shock. I also think that Darling may have a problem with unfriendly questions from the public. Two years of invitation-only meetings with vetted audiences aren't the ideal prep for these situations.
    I've seen plenty of his performances and I suspect we both know he'll do just fine. Alex Salmond on the other hand may struggle without the help of a partisan presiding officer and the support of his nodding dogs behind him. It's the last throw of the dice for a Yes campaign that has pretty much blown it.
    I have seen some deluded half witted stuff on here but you take the biscuit. You are not right in the head if you believe that guff.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    malcolmg said:

    Alanbrooke said:

    malcolmg said:

    Edin_Rokz said:

    JackW said:

    Wee Eck against Wee Darling

    Some choice ....

    Oh I don't know, if Darling pisses over Salmond, then game over for Yes.
    You on drugs
    Oh I don't know malc, if he does it literally, it would brighten up the dullest campaign ever.
    Alan, it is impossible, unfortunately I have seen and heard him speak, it just makes you want to get the whisky and the service revolver. He also is very poor at answering anything other than patsie scripted questions. He will not get beyond sharing and pooling , no currency , better bigger. I would expect most people will turn off long before the end.
    Er which one malc, Salmond or Darling ? Or do you mean both of them ?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    Alanbrooke said:

    malcolmg said:

    Alanbrooke said:

    malcolmg said:

    Edin_Rokz said:

    JackW said:

    Wee Eck against Wee Darling

    Some choice ....

    Oh I don't know, if Darling pisses over Salmond, then game over for Yes.
    You on drugs
    Oh I don't know malc, if he does it literally, it would brighten up the dullest campaign ever.
    Alan, it is impossible, unfortunately I have seen and heard him speak, it just makes you want to get the whisky and the service revolver. He also is very poor at answering anything other than patsie scripted questions. He will not get beyond sharing and pooling , no currency , better bigger. I would expect most people will turn off long before the end.
    Er which one malc, Salmond or Darling ? Or do you mean both of them ?
    Alan, I will not demean myself by answering that , you know very well you are being a naughty boy.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,561
    Loads of YouGov leadership questions, which boil down to "I think Cameron looks more like a PM but it shouldn't matter what politicians look like (80-14 margin), though I think it matters to others (55-37)". Some illumination on why Cameron's lean as "seen as PM" isn't producing many votes: Miliband is seen as looking more awkward (37-3) and geeky (26-1) but having the less bad policies (-7 net vs -23 for Cameron) and more honest (15-7), less sleazy (6-14) and, perhaps most importantly, less out of touch (19-42). None of these supposed characteristics gets anywhere near 50%, suggesting that there isn't really an overpowering view of either in any particular sense.
  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    malcolmg said:

    MonikerDiCanio said:

    malcolmg said:

    MonikerDiCanio said:

    I wonder if quel ciccione del Primo Ministro insisted on top billing in the Salmond & Darling debate ?

    It was done by toss of coins , which both went in favour of YES team. Salmond to open and to close the debate.
    " Salmond to open and close the debate". So much for fair-play. More North Korea than North Britain.

    You thick turnip , did you read the post , his minions could not even guess what side of a coin would come up , sums up the unionists.
    Brian Glover as Eck Salmond;

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=v3cayRMnVb8
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,142
    Innocent_Abroad said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Edin_Rokz said:

    JackW said:

    Wee Eck against Wee Darling

    Some choice ....

    Oh I don't know, if Darling pisses over Salmond, then game over for Yes.
    Weren't you the bright spark who at one point suggested George Galloway was a pal of Salmond's and a supporter of indy?

    Perhaps we should have a quick count of PBers who have actually seen any of Darling's indy related performances - those who haven't might be in for a shock. I also think that Darling may have a problem with unfriendly questions from the public. Two years of invitation-only meetings with vetted audiences aren't the ideal prep for these situations.
    It's obvious. No-one with any intelligence, optimism or even plain humanity would go anywhere near the Labour Party. Neither now nor forty years ago.

    And all those who did should be exterminated as vermin. Vermin, I say: vermin!

    LET'S KILL LEFTIES!!!! ALL POWER TO THE TORY PEEBIES!!!!
    Are you sure you've replied to the right post? Ironically you've landed on a thread where PB Tories are rather plaintively extolling the virtues of a Labour back bencher.
  • Max_EdinburghMax_Edinburgh Posts: 347
    malcolmg said:

    Max_Edinburgh said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Edin_Rokz said:

    JackW said:

    Wee Eck against Wee Darling

    Some choice ....

    Oh I don't know, if Darling pisses over Salmond, then game over for Yes.
    Weren't you the bright spark who at one point suggested George Galloway was a pal of Salmond's and a supporter of indy?

    Perhaps we should have a quick count of PBers who have actually seen any of Darling's indy related performances - those who haven't might be in for a shock. I also think that Darling may have a problem with unfriendly questions from the public. Two years of invitation-only meetings with vetted audiences aren't the ideal prep for these situations.
    I've seen plenty of his performances and I suspect we both know he'll do just fine. Alex Salmond on the other hand may struggle without the help of a partisan presiding officer and the support of his nodding dogs behind him. It's the last throw of the dice for a Yes campaign that has pretty much blown it.
    I have seen some deluded half witted stuff on here but you take the biscuit. You are not right in the head if you believe that guff.
    Your usual unpleasant, inane contribution I see. Given you've been wrong every step of the way on the referendum why on earth should we believe you'll be proven right this time? Lets be honest you have no insight into how either camp is doing, no idea of what's happening on the ground, all you have to offer is increasingly tedious rants that serve only to make you look ever more like a delusional fool.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Tuesday night on PB is going to be interesting, though it would be useful if our Scots PBers reported some of the statements as well as their customary interpretations.

    What time is kick off?

    I notice that Malcolm has his customary good humour on today! I am sure that he will be in form on Tuesday.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,173
    Innocent_Abroad said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Edin_Rokz said:

    JackW said:

    Wee Eck against Wee Darling

    Some choice ....

    Oh I don't know, if Darling pisses over Salmond, then game over for Yes.
    Weren't you the bright spark who at one point suggested George Galloway was a pal of Salmond's and a supporter of indy?

    Perhaps we should have a quick count of PBers who have actually seen any of Darling's indy related performances - those who haven't might be in for a shock. I also think that Darling may have a problem with unfriendly questions from the public. Two years of invitation-only meetings with vetted audiences aren't the ideal prep for these situations.
    It's obvious. No-one with any intelligence, optimism or even plain humanity would go anywhere near the Labour Party. Neither now nor forty years ago.

    And all those who did should be exterminated as vermin. Vermin, I say: vermin!

    LET'S KILL LEFTIES!!!! ALL POWER TO THE TORY PEEBIES!!!!
    Lol - so early for the post of the day - missing all the points so spectacularly!!
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    felix said:

    Innocent_Abroad said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Edin_Rokz said:

    JackW said:

    Wee Eck against Wee Darling

    Some choice ....

    Oh I don't know, if Darling pisses over Salmond, then game over for Yes.
    Weren't you the bright spark who at one point suggested George Galloway was a pal of Salmond's and a supporter of indy?

    Perhaps we should have a quick count of PBers who have actually seen any of Darling's indy related performances - those who haven't might be in for a shock. I also think that Darling may have a problem with unfriendly questions from the public. Two years of invitation-only meetings with vetted audiences aren't the ideal prep for these situations.
    It's obvious. No-one with any intelligence, optimism or even plain humanity would go anywhere near the Labour Party. Neither now nor forty years ago.

    And all those who did should be exterminated as vermin. Vermin, I say: vermin!

    LET'S KILL LEFTIES!!!! ALL POWER TO THE TORY PEEBIES!!!!
    Lol - so early for the post of the day - missing all the points so spectacularly!!
    Innocent Abroad is doing his best to win the trophy he suggested yesterday that OGH awarded, for the most pointless, tedious and childish comment. Its up there at NO 1 at the moment
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    Salmond has been very high on emotional nationalism and very weak on facts and well-developed outcomes. Darling probably will be bristling with facts and well-calculated projections. Should be an interesting debate, though if Salmond argues and reacts like malcolmg, then he'd best be advised to advance his retirement plans.

    Will the result of this debate affect 2015 voting, presuming that NO wins.
  • Innocent_AbroadInnocent_Abroad Posts: 3,294
    felix said:

    Innocent_Abroad said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Edin_Rokz said:

    JackW said:

    Wee Eck against Wee Darling

    Some choice ....

    Oh I don't know, if Darling pisses over Salmond, then game over for Yes.
    Weren't you the bright spark who at one point suggested George Galloway was a pal of Salmond's and a supporter of indy?

    Perhaps we should have a quick count of PBers who have actually seen any of Darling's indy related performances - those who haven't might be in for a shock. I also think that Darling may have a problem with unfriendly questions from the public. Two years of invitation-only meetings with vetted audiences aren't the ideal prep for these situations.
    It's obvious. No-one with any intelligence, optimism or even plain humanity would go anywhere near the Labour Party. Neither now nor forty years ago.

    And all those who did should be exterminated as vermin. Vermin, I say: vermin!

    LET'S KILL LEFTIES!!!! ALL POWER TO THE TORY PEEBIES!!!!
    Lol - so early for the post of the day - missing all the points so spectacularly!!
    Oh what a shame. Please remind me what "all the points" were, since you're evidently the one in control of reality...
  • Innocent_AbroadInnocent_Abroad Posts: 3,294
    SquareRoot said:

    felix said:

    Innocent_Abroad said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Edin_Rokz said:

    JackW said:

    Wee Eck against Wee Darling

    Some choice ....

    Oh I don't know, if Darling pisses over Salmond, then game over for Yes.
    Weren't you the bright spark who at one point suggested George Galloway was a pal of Salmond's and a supporter of indy?

    Perhaps we should have a quick count of PBers who have actually seen any of Darling's indy related performances - those who haven't might be in for a shock. I also think that Darling may have a problem with unfriendly questions from the public. Two years of invitation-only meetings with vetted audiences aren't the ideal prep for these situations.
    It's obvious. No-one with any intelligence, optimism or even plain humanity would go anywhere near the Labour Party. Neither now nor forty years ago.

    And all those who did should be exterminated as vermin. Vermin, I say: vermin!

    LET'S KILL LEFTIES!!!! ALL POWER TO THE TORY PEEBIES!!!!
    Lol - so early for the post of the day - missing all the points so spectacularly!!
    Innocent Abroad is doing his best to win the trophy he suggested yesterday that OGH awarded, for the most pointless, tedious and childish comment. Its up there at NO 1 at the moment
    Indeed, I forgot to suggest you chaired the judging panel.

  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @ScotCen: Survation Suggest The Games Have Had Little Impact, new @WhatScotsThink post http://t.co/WiW9DNlTqs #Glasgow2014 #indyref
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    Max_Edinburgh said:

    malcolmg said:

    Max_Edinburgh said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Edin_Rokz said:

    JackW said:

    Wee Eck against Wee Darling

    Some choice ....

    Oh I don't know, if Darling pisses over Salmond, then game over for Yes.
    Weren't you the bright spark who at one point suggested George Galloway was a pal of Salmond's and a supporter of indy?

    Perhaps we should have a quick count of PBers who have actually seen any of Darling's indy related performances - those who haven't might be in for a shock. I also think that Darling may have a problem with unfriendly questions from the public. Two years of invitation-only meetings with vetted audiences aren't the ideal prep for these situations.
    I've seen plenty of his performances and I suspect we both know he'll do just fine. Alex Salmond on the other hand may struggle without the help of a partisan presiding officer and the support of his nodding dogs behind him. It's the last throw of the dice for a Yes campaign that has pretty much blown it.
    I have seen some deluded half witted stuff on here but you take the biscuit. You are not right in the head if you believe that guff.
    Your usual unpleasant, inane contribution I see. Given you've been wrong every step of the way on the referendum why on earth should we believe you'll be proven right this time? Lets be honest you have no insight into how either camp is doing, no idea of what's happening on the ground, all you have to offer is increasingly tedious rants that serve only to make you look ever more like a delusional fool.
    Turnip head, explain where I have been wrong and then defend the utter drivel you posted.
    Give me any example of anything Darling has ever done that was successful , he wrecked the country, fiddled expenses, got chucked out the faculty of advocates and is the most boring bas**** to listen to on the planet.
    Go listen to this video and see the nutjob you try to pretend is great.
    http://wingsoverscotland.com/younger-leopard-same-spots/
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    Financier said:

    Salmond has been very high on emotional nationalism and very weak on facts and well-developed outcomes. Darling probably will be bristling with facts and well-calculated projections. Should be an interesting debate, though if Salmond argues and reacts like malcolmg, then he'd best be advised to advance his retirement plans.

    Will the result of this debate affect 2015 voting, presuming that NO wins.

    LOL, now we have the site dummy on expounding wisdom. Desperate times when Tories like you have to depend on failed Labour backbenchers to fight your battles for you and actually try to defend their failures.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,173
    Innocent_Abroad said:

    felix said:

    Innocent_Abroad said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Edin_Rokz said:

    JackW said:

    Wee Eck against Wee Darling

    Some choice ....

    Oh I don't know, if Darling pisses over Salmond, then game over for Yes.
    Weren't you the bright spark who at one point suggested George Galloway was a pal of Salmond's and a supporter of indy?

    Perhaps we should have a quick count of PBers who have actually seen any of Darling's indy related performances - those who haven't might be in for a shock. I also think that Darling may have a problem with unfriendly questions from the public. Two years of invitation-only meetings with vetted audiences aren't the ideal prep for these situations.
    It's obvious. No-one with any intelligence, optimism or even plain humanity would go anywhere near the Labour Party. Neither now nor forty years ago.

    And all those who did should be exterminated as vermin. Vermin, I say: vermin!

    LET'S KILL LEFTIES!!!! ALL POWER TO THE TORY PEEBIES!!!!
    Lol - so early for the post of the day - missing all the points so spectacularly!!
    Oh what a shame. Please remind me what "all the points" were, since you're evidently the one in control of reality...
    Read what all the posters are saying m8 - you even lost MalcG:)))))
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,173
    OT - I am fairly sure Salmond will win the debate - Darling has qualities but not of the sort that will show especially well in TV debates. However, I do doubt if anything will now change enough minds to affect the overall result. I suspect that most Scots simply haven't got the nerve for independence. I doubt if Salmond wants it really - there'd be no-one left to blame when things go wrong.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    foxinsoxuk said:

    Tuesday night on PB is going to be interesting, though it would be useful if our Scots PBers reported some of the statements as well as their customary interpretations.

    What time is kick off?

    I notice that Malcolm has his customary good humour on today! I am sure that he will be in form on Tuesday.

    Fox, I will be busy watching the debate. I have to say that the level on drivel on here is unbelievable ( not aimed at yourself ). The level of debate from posters who claim to be intelligent , ie fools like financier , JackW and many others ) is indeed breathtaking. I come on here for a good laugh but at times am amazed at some of the posting by people who purport to be in high positions. It is no wonder the UK is about to be finished.
  • volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078
    Darling's main tactic will be to make his answers indecipherable,tedious and soporific,the equivalent to a mug of Horlicks to the extent people turn off or turn over the TV to listen to something exciting like the shipping forecast.Now,Gordon Brown would be another matter altogether but I think I'll give this contest a miss.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    Innocent_Abroad said:

    SquareRoot said:

    felix said:

    Innocent_Abroad said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Edin_Rokz said:

    JackW said:

    Wee Eck against Wee Darling

    Some choice ....

    Oh I don't know, if Darling pisses over Salmond, then game over for Yes.
    Weren't you the bright spark who at one point suggested George Galloway was a pal of Salmond's and a supporter of indy?

    Perhaps we should have a quick count of PBers who have actually seen any of Darling's indy related performances - those who haven't might be in for a shock. I also think that Darling may have a problem with unfriendly questions from the public. Two years of invitation-only meetings with vetted audiences aren't the ideal prep for these situations.
    It's obvious. No-one with any intelligence, optimism or even plain humanity would go anywhere near the Labour Party. Neither now nor forty years ago.

    And all those who did should be exterminated as vermin. Vermin, I say: vermin!

    LET'S KILL LEFTIES!!!! ALL POWER TO THE TORY PEEBIES!!!!
    Lol - so early for the post of the day - missing all the points so spectacularly!!
    Innocent Abroad is doing his best to win the trophy he suggested yesterday that OGH awarded, for the most pointless, tedious and childish comment. Its up there at NO 1 at the moment
    Indeed, I forgot to suggest you chaired the judging panel.

    No need, plenty of others well qualified to understand the irrelevance of your comments.
  • Max_EdinburghMax_Edinburgh Posts: 347
    malcolmg said:

    Max_Edinburgh said:

    malcolmg said:

    Max_Edinburgh said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Edin_Rokz said:

    JackW said:

    Wee Eck against Wee Darling

    Some choice ....

    Oh I don't know, if Darling pisses over Salmond, then game over for Yes.
    Weren't you the bright spark who at one point suggested George Galloway was a pal of Salmond's and a supporter of indy?

    Perhaps we should have a quick count of PBers who have actually seen any of Darling's indy related performances - those who haven't might be in for a shock. I also think that Darling may have a problem with unfriendly questions from the public. Two years of invitation-only meetings with vetted audiences aren't the ideal prep for these situations.
    I've seen plenty of his performances and I suspect we both know he'll do just fine. Alex Salmond on the other hand may struggle without the help of a partisan presiding officer and the support of his nodding dogs behind him. It's the last throw of the dice for a Yes campaign that has pretty much blown it.
    I have seen some deluded half witted stuff on here but you take the biscuit. You are not right in the head if you believe that guff.
    Your usual unpleasant, inane contribution I see. Given you've been wrong every step of the way on the referendum why on earth should we believe you'll be proven right this time? Lets be honest you have no insight into how either camp is doing, no idea of what's happening on the ground, all you have to offer is increasingly tedious rants that serve only to make you look ever more like a delusional fool.
    Turnip head, explain where I have been wrong and then defend the utter drivel you posted.
    Give me any example of anything Darling has ever done that was successful , he wrecked the country, fiddled expenses, got chucked out the faculty of advocates and is the most boring bas**** to listen to on the planet.
    Go listen to this video and see the nutjob you try to pretend is great.
    http://wingsoverscotland.com/younger-leopard-same-spots/
    Beyond irony. You call someone a nutjob and then post a link to Wings over Bath. I doubt you'd be quite so hate-filled if you genuinely believed Yes were going to win. If Darling is so useless why do you think No are winning?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,864
    edited August 2014
    Philph Cameron is of course part Scot, his father's family estate was in Aberdeenshire. There have TheUnionDivvie There have been more newspaper reports of BT together ground war canvassing and delivering and fewer meetings, as opposed to Yes (with the exception of Galloway's 'Just Say Naw' campaign, so maybe Yes is preaching more to the converted.

    On the debates, Salmond is expected to win in all the polls, but then so was Obama against Romney, and yet the supposedly deathly dull Mitt won big in the first debate. Charisma does not always project in a debate setting and if Darling is clued up on the facts anything could happen. Remember too even Mondale beat Reagan in their first debate, and David Davis beat Cameron in the 2005 leadership debate

    Darling is also a former chancellor, Iain Grey a Scottish opposition leader, a different league.
    In any case the alleged 'stunning turnaround' in 2011 is overstated, for example in November 2009 a TNS poll had the SNP leading Labour 40-32% and in Feb 2010 Mori had the SNP ahead 36%-29%, Yes has never polled a lead of anything like that level.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_in_the_Scottish_Parliament_election,_2011
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Max_Edinburgh said:

    malcolmg said:

    Max_Edinburgh said:

    malcolmg said:

    Max_Edinburgh said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Edin_Rokz said:

    JackW said:

    Wee Eck against Wee Darling

    Some choice ....

    Oh I don't know, if Darling pisses over Salmond, then game over for Yes.
    Weren't you the bright spark who at one point suggested George Galloway was a pal of Salmond's and a supporter of indy?

    Perhaps we should have a quick count of PBers who have actually seen any of Darling's indy related performances - those who haven't might be in for a shock. I also think that Darling may have a problem with unfriendly questions from the public. Two years of invitation-only meetings with vetted audiences aren't the ideal prep for these situations.
    I've seen plenty of his performances and I suspect we both know he'll do just fine. Alex Salmond on the other hand may struggle without the help of a partisan presiding officer and the support of his nodding dogs behind him. It's the last throw of the dice for a Yes campaign that has pretty much blown it.
    I have seen some deluded half witted stuff on here but you take the biscuit. You are not right in the head if you believe that guff.
    Your usual unpleasant, inane contribution I see. Given you've been wrong every step of the way on the referendum why on earth should we believe you'll be proven right this time? Lets be honest you have no insight into how either camp is doing, no idea of what's happening on the ground, all you have to offer is increasingly tedious rants that serve only to make you look ever more like a delusional fool.
    Turnip head, explain where I have been wrong and then defend the utter drivel you posted.
    Give me any example of anything Darling has ever done that was successful , he wrecked the country, fiddled expenses, got chucked out the faculty of advocates and is the most boring bas**** to listen to on the planet.
    Go listen to this video and see the nutjob you try to pretend is great.
    http://wingsoverscotland.com/younger-leopard-same-spots/
    No are winning?
    But No aren't winning! The polls are (all) wrong! It's all to do with canvas returns and GOTV! Or something like that....

  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @jimmurphymp: Here's a revealing picture of 'Labour for Independence' campaigners. #indyref http://t.co/0hPbpDpZ8e
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    Max_Edinburgh said:

    malcolmg said:

    Max_Edinburgh said:

    malcolmg said:

    Max_Edinburgh said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Edin_Rokz said:

    JackW said:

    Wee Eck against Wee Darling

    Some choice ....

    Oh I don't know, if Darling pisses over Salmond, then game over for Yes.
    Weren't you the bright spark who at one point suggested George Galloway was a pal of Salmond's and a supporter of indy?

    Perhaps we should have a quick count of PBers who have actually seen any of Darling's indy related performances - those who haven't might be in for a shock. I also think that Darling may have a problem with unfriendly questions from the public. Two years of invitation-only meetings with vetted audiences aren't the ideal prep for these situations.
    I've seen plenty of his performances and I suspect we both know he'll do just fine. Alex Salmond on the other hand may struggle without the help of a partisan presiding officer and the support of his nodding dogs behind him. It's the last throw of the dice for a Yes campaign that has pretty much blown it.
    I have seen some deluded half witted stuff on here but you take the biscuit. You are not right in the head if you believe that guff.
    Your usual unpleasant, inane contribution I see. Given you've been wrong every step of the way on the referendum why on earth should we believe you'll be proven right this time? Lets be honest you have no insight into how either camp is doing, no idea of what's happening on the ground, all you have to offer is increasingly tedious rants that serve only to make you look ever more like a delusional fool.
    Turnip head, explain where I have been wrong and then defend the utter drivel you posted.
    Give me any example of anything Darling has ever done that was successful , he wrecked the country, fiddled expenses, got chucked out the faculty of advocates and is the most boring bas**** to listen to on the planet.
    Go listen to this video and see the nutjob you try to pretend is great.
    http://wingsoverscotland.com/younger-leopard-same-spots/
    Beyond irony. You call someone a nutjob and then post a link to Wings over Bath. I doubt you'd be quite so hate-filled if you genuinely believed Yes were going to win. If Darling is so useless why do you think No are winning?
    Surprised , you obviously cannout rebut t heWOS facts and surprised you did not counter with a link to your BT partners , Orange Order , BNP , Vitoil , etc. Only in the heads of nutjobs like yourself is NO winning. I doubt you can see into the future when you are so wrong about the present. You will be looking forward to your friends parading in your home town soon, able to meet up with your partners.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,864
    Interesting article by Denis Macshane on life behind bars
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2714199/MacSHAMED-The-diary-jailed-MP-Sweeping-floors-Soho-Nail-Bomber-mocked-fiddling-expenses-fed-VERY-inferior-tuna-baguettes-brilliantly-observed-account-politicians-lot-bars.html
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    CarlottaVance said:

    Max_Edinburgh said:

    malcolmg said:

    Max_Edinburgh said:

    malcolmg said:

    Max_Edinburgh said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Edin_Rokz said:

    JackW said:

    Wee Eck against Wee Darling

    Some choice ....

    Oh I don't know, if Darling pisses over Salmond, then game over for Yes.
    Weren't you the bright spark who at one point suggested George Galloway was a pal of Salmond's and a supporter of indy?

    Perhaps we should have a quick count of PBers who have actually seen any of Darling's indy related performances - those who haven't might be in for a shock. I also think that Darling may have a problem with unfriendly questions from the public. Two years of invitation-only meetings with vetted audiences aren't the ideal prep for these situations.
    I've seen plenty of his performances and I suspect we both know he'll do just fine. Alex Salmond on the other hand may struggle without the help of a partisan presiding officer and the support of his nodding dogs behind him. It's the last throw of the dice for a Yes campaign that has pretty much blown it.
    I have seen some deluded half witted stuff on here but you take the biscuit. You are not right in the head if you believe that guff.
    Your usual unpleasant, inane contribution I see. Given you've been wrong every step of the way on the referendum why on earth should we believe you'll be proven right this time? Lets be honest you have no insight into how either camp is doing, no idea of what's happening on the ground, all you have to offer is increasingly tedious rants that serve only to make you look ever more like a delusional fool.
    Turnip head, explain where I have been wrong and then defend the utter drivel you posted.
    Give me any example of anything Darling has ever done that was successful , he wrecked the country, fiddled expenses, got chucked out the faculty of advocates and is the most boring bas**** to listen to on the planet.
    Go listen to this video and see the nutjob you try to pretend is great.
    http://wingsoverscotland.com/younger-leopard-same-spots/
    No are winning?
    But No aren't winning! The polls are (all) wrong! It's all to do with canvas returns and GOTV! Or something like that....

    Max, you have support , Carlotta has rolled out of bed and raised the union jack.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    HYUFD said:

    Philph Cameron is of course part Scot, his father's family estate was in Aberdeenshire. There have TheUnionDivvie There have been more newspaper reports of BT together ground war canvassing and delivering and fewer meetings, as opposed to Yes (with the exception of Galloway's 'Just Say Naw' campaign, so maybe Yes is preaching more to the converted.

    On the debates, Salmond is expected to win in all the polls, but then so was Obama against Romney, and yet the supposedly deathly dull Mitt won big in the first debate. Charisma does not always project in a debate setting and if Darling is clued up on the facts anything could happen. Remember too even Mondale beat Reagan in their first debate, and David Davis beat Cameron in the 2005 leadership debate

    Darling is also a former chancellor, Iain Grey a Scottish opposition leader, a different league.
    In any case the alleged 'stunning turnaround' in 2011 is overstated, for example in November 2009 a TNS poll had the SNP leading Labour 40-32% and in Feb 2010 Mori had the SNP ahead 36%-29%, Yes has never polled a lead of anything like that level.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_in_the_Scottish_Parliament_election,_2011

    You forget Darling was as big a failure as chancellor as Grey was as leader of the regional party. Bankrupting the country and fiddling your expenses is not something to put on your CV.
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    HYUFD said:

    Interesting article by Denis Macshane on life behind bars
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2714199/MacSHAMED-The-diary-jailed-MP-Sweeping-floors-Soho-Nail-Bomber-mocked-fiddling-expenses-fed-VERY-inferior-tuna-baguettes-brilliantly-observed-account-politicians-lot-bars.html

    Perhaps more politicians should share his experience - they certainly deserve it.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    Scott_P said:

    @jimmurphymp: Here's a revealing picture of 'Labour for Independence' campaigners. #indyref http://t.co/0hPbpDpZ8e

    here is a better one of BT supporters. The few labour people that Tories and BT are depending on for victory. You could not make it up, what kind of dumpling would you have to be to pick these clowns to fight your battles for you.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZoVoBWjcXdU
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVM0Rllhw2A&list=UU0B7pV3h_2ywIZve15FYf5w
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zji4dTx-j8w&feature=youtu.be
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    malcolmg said:

    Financier said:

    Salmond has been very high on emotional nationalism and very weak on facts and well-developed outcomes. Darling probably will be bristling with facts and well-calculated projections. Should be an interesting debate, though if Salmond argues and reacts like malcolmg, then he'd best be advised to advance his retirement plans.

    Will the result of this debate affect 2015 voting, presuming that NO wins.

    LOL, now we have the site dummy on expounding wisdom. Desperate times when Tories like you have to depend on failed Labour backbenchers to fight your battles for you and actually try to defend their failures.
    You are so busy frothing at the mouth, that you cannot see beyond your own froth to get your facts right. Firstly I have never been a member of the Conservative party and secondly, Darling was not a back-bencher, but a Minister of State. If Salmond follows your example he may as well give up now.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    I read the McShane article and note its £20 for the book. Is he donating the proceeds to charity? is he allowed to make money out of having had to do time?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    Scott_P said:

    @jimmurphymp: Here's a revealing picture of 'Labour for Independence' campaigners. #indyref http://t.co/0hPbpDpZ8e

    Scottp, too thick to look at the comments before he posts the usual lies, up to usual high standards.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,864
    malcolmg Well Salmond used to work for RBS and proclaimed it as a Scottish icon just months before it went bust, neither will come out well if the debate goes on the crash.

    In any case, Darling can also say he raised the top tax rate to 50%, something Salmond has refused to match if the debate goes on inequality
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,014
    I will be with a group of friends watching the debate so I am unlikely to be able to post until afterwards. I hope those south of the border who want to see it have found a way.

    My guess is that like most political debates it will be frustrating and dull in turn with both participants more focussed on not making a mistake than winning. Salmond has to go for it more because he is behind and his campaign has no momentum at the moment. That will suit him fine because he is better at attack than defence.

    Darling will want to focus on the killer issue of the currency and the risks to our financial services industry but I hope he also focusses on the positive benefits Scotland gets from the Union. Going purely negative was a mistake in the early part of the campaign which has been more balanced of late.

    The Commonwealth Games brought a lot more Scots into touch with the English than is usually the case and showed they were a lot more like us than the SNP would have us believe. I think this will prove a net benefit to BT in the longer run (TSE is excluded from this generality for obvious reasons).
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    Financier said:

    malcolmg said:

    Financier said:

    Salmond has been very high on emotional nationalism and very weak on facts and well-developed outcomes. Darling probably will be bristling with facts and well-calculated projections. Should be an interesting debate, though if Salmond argues and reacts like malcolmg, then he'd best be advised to advance his retirement plans.

    Will the result of this debate affect 2015 voting, presuming that NO wins.

    LOL, now we have the site dummy on expounding wisdom. Desperate times when Tories like you have to depend on failed Labour backbenchers to fight your battles for you and actually try to defend their failures.
    You are so busy frothing at the mouth, that you cannot see beyond your own froth to get your facts right. Firstly I have never been a member of the Conservative party and secondly, Darling was not a back-bencher, but a Minister of State. If Salmond follows your example he may as well give up now.
    You really are stupid, Darling is a back bench MP, does not ever attend mind you and has made £250K speaking about how duff he is and how you bankrupt a country. You and your Tory pals have no cojones and depend on the likes of that failure to fight your battles and try to save your stinking union so you can keep your snout in the trough. You should be ashamed of yourself you are spineless.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    All of you can waste as much time as you like. The result in pre-ordained. 60 - 40 to the NOes.

    From my point of view, an independent Scotland would probably have been better for the Scottish people but I would like if Better together wins.


    Why ? I don't want splits anymore. I would , in fact, like an United Europe much like Churchill dreamt iof it, free movement of capital, people, mosquitos , anything. One Country. Then we expand that.

    I would also like a referendum in the UK re: Europe to lance this boil for the next 50 years. When the real campaign starts, I know what the results will be:

    60 - 40 to stay IN !
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    DavidL said:

    I will be with a group of friends watching the debate so I am unlikely to be able to post until afterwards. I hope those south of the border who want to see it have found a way.

    My guess is that like most political debates it will be frustrating and dull in turn with both participants more focussed on not making a mistake than winning. Salmond has to go for it more because he is behind and his campaign has no momentum at the moment. That will suit him fine because he is better at attack than defence.

    Darling will want to focus on the killer issue of the currency and the risks to our financial services industry but I hope he also focusses on the positive benefits Scotland gets from the Union. Going purely negative was a mistake in the early part of the campaign which has been more balanced of late.

    The Commonwealth Games brought a lot more Scots into touch with the English than is usually the case and showed they were a lot more like us than the SNP would have us believe. I think this will prove a net benefit to BT in the longer run (TSE is excluded from this generality for obvious reasons).

    Dear Dear David, that is just bollocks. You are down at Scottp levels there, "Scots will realise that the English are just like them". I have seen some lying patronising pish posted but that really is pathetic.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    HYUFD said:

    malcolmg Well Salmond used to work for RBS and proclaimed it as a Scottish icon just months before it went bust, neither will come out well if the debate goes on the crash.

    In any case, Darling can also say he raised the top tax rate to 50%, something Salmond has refused to match if the debate goes on inequality

    Who signed off the RBS bid again and who gave out the knighthoods , it was that genius Darling and his pal Brown, slightly different from Salmond having worked there 25 years before the disaster I think.
    Tax policy in an independent government will be up to the party in Government in 2016, Salmond cannot say what it will be at this time.
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    malcolmg said:

    Financier said:

    malcolmg said:

    Financier said:

    Salmond has been very high on emotional nationalism and very weak on facts and well-developed outcomes. Darling probably will be bristling with facts and well-calculated projections. Should be an interesting debate, though if Salmond argues and reacts like malcolmg, then he'd best be advised to advance his retirement plans.

    Will the result of this debate affect 2015 voting, presuming that NO wins.

    LOL, now we have the site dummy on expounding wisdom. Desperate times when Tories like you have to depend on failed Labour backbenchers to fight your battles for you and actually try to defend their failures.
    You are so busy frothing at the mouth, that you cannot see beyond your own froth to get your facts right. Firstly I have never been a member of the Conservative party and secondly, Darling was not a back-bencher, but a Minister of State. If Salmond follows your example he may as well give up now.
    You really are stupid, Darling is a back bench MP, does not ever attend mind you and has made £250K speaking about how duff he is and how you bankrupt a country. You and your Tory pals have no cojones and depend on the likes of that failure to fight your battles and try to save your stinking union so you can keep your snout in the trough. You should be ashamed of yourself you are spineless.

    I do not have my snout in any public sector trough as you so boldly say. Unless you publicly withdraw that remark unreservedly, I shall ask OGH for all your contact details so that litigation may commence.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,864
    Financier Several other MPs were jailed over expenses, plus some Lords, and of course Archer and Aitken served time too
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    MG .. Bye Bye..
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    richardDodd said:

    MG .. Bye Bye..

    Another idiot who has no idea.
  • saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245
    Please ignore obvious trolling, it destroys these threads, thanks.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    saddened said:

    Please ignore obvious trolling, it destroys these threads, thanks.

    You should ask JackW to petition to have the troll Financier banned, he is good at it.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Sad to note the whole thread has been polluted by the resident abuse troll.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    JackW said:

    Sad to note the whole thread has been polluted by the resident abuse troll.

    Look who pops up just in time. Go sobbing to OGH to have me banned. Jessie.
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    MG ..Sorry lad, but you have completely lost it today..Bye Bye..
  • PBModeratorPBModerator Posts: 665
    Malcolm.

    You and other posters have been previously warned and banned for swearing at other posters.

    A further repeat and your ability to instantly publish will be revoked.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    It is getting boring baiting Tory dullards, I shall be off and leave you Tories to congratulate each other on how wonderful you are and how horrible it would be if the plebs got back in power. Spearing fish in a barrel becomes tedious.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    PBModerator said:

    Malcolm.

    You and other posters have been previously warned and banned for swearing at other posters.

    A further repeat and your ability to instantly publish will be revoked.

    Apologies I did not realise that was considered a swear word. I shall refrain from its use in future.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    richardDodd said:

    MG ..Sorry lad, but you have completely lost it today..Bye Bye..

    You came to your senses yet or do you still think it is OK to lob shells into civilians houses just in case there is a bad man within a few miles.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,864
    MalcolmG The issue hits both Salmond and Darling
  • TwistedFireStopperTwistedFireStopper Posts: 2,538
    Financier said:

    malcolmg said:

    Financier said:

    malcolmg said:

    Financier said:

    Salmond has been very high on emotional nationalism and very weak on facts and well-developed outcomes. Darling probably will be bristling with facts and well-calculated projections. Should be an interesting debate, though if Salmond argues and reacts like malcolmg, then he'd best be advised to advance his retirement plans.

    Will the result of this debate affect 2015 voting, presuming that NO wins.

    LOL, now we have the site dummy on expounding wisdom. Desperate times when Tories like you have to depend on failed Labour backbenchers to fight your battles for you and actually try to defend their failures.
    You are so busy frothing at the mouth, that you cannot see beyond your own froth to get your facts right. Firstly I have never been a member of the Conservative party and secondly, Darling was not a back-bencher, but a Minister of State. If Salmond follows your example he may as well give up now.
    You really are stupid, Darling is a back bench MP, does not ever attend mind you and has made £250K speaking about how duff he is and how you bankrupt a country. You and your Tory pals have no cojones and depend on the likes of that failure to fight your battles and try to save your stinking union so you can keep your snout in the trough. You should be ashamed of yourself you are spineless.

    I do not have my snout in any public sector trough as you so boldly say. Unless you publicly withdraw that remark unreservedly, I shall ask OGH for all your contact details so that litigation may commence.
    Bloody hell, you really do need to have a word with yerself.

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    HYUFD said:

    MalcolmG The issue hits both Salmond and Darling

    To an extent , but Darling most as he gave the approval on the deal and he was involved in the subsequent knighthoods. Regardless Darling can hardly boast about financial probity given his track record both as chancellor and personal, only people he is above are those that went to jail for fiddling, otherwise he is financially incompetent except for making money for himself which he manages to excel at somehow.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    TwistedFireStopper said:

    Financier said:

    malcolmg said:

    Financier said:

    malcolmg said:

    Financier said:

    Salmond has been very high on emotional nationalism and very weak on facts and well-developed outcomes. Darling probably will be bristling with facts and well-calculated projections. Should be an interesting debate, though if Salmond argues and reacts like malcolmg, then he'd best be advised to advance his retirement plans.

    Will the result of this debate affect 2015 voting, presuming that NO wins.

    LOL, now we have the site dummy on expounding wisdom. Desperate times when Tories like you have to depend on failed Labour backbenchers to fight your battles for you and actually try to defend their failures.
    You are so busy frothing at the mouth, that you cannot see beyond your own froth to get your facts right. Firstly I have never been a member of the Conservative party and secondly, Darling was not a back-bencher, but a Minister of State. If Salmond follows your example he may as well give up now.
    You really are stupid, Darling is a back bench MP, does not ever attend mind you and has made £250K speaking about how duff he is and how you bankrupt a country. You and your Tory pals have no cojones and depend on the likes of that failure to fight your battles and try to save your stinking union so you can keep your snout in the trough. You should be ashamed of yourself you are spineless.

    I do not have my snout in any public sector trough as you so boldly say. Unless you publicly withdraw that remark unreservedly, I shall ask OGH for all your contact details so that litigation may commence.
    Bloody hell, you really do need to have a word with yerself.

    Think he has been reading Rumpole of the Bailey and got confused.
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 5,006
    As someone has already said Salmond successfully appeals to emotional nationalism - and will appeal to the heart. Darling will aim to come across as reassuring (dull even) but appeal to the head. At the end of the day I think No will win the ref comfortably because when the chips are down most people will vote with their head not their heart. I think the same dynamic would lead to a comfortable "In" vote if ever any EU ref takes place.
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @OllyT
    I doubt either Darling or Salmond's performance in the "debates" will shift many votes one way or the other.
    The only people who seem to be arguing are those at the polar opposites, while those of us in the "middle" just quietly despair about the lack of rational information from either side.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    OllyT said:

    As someone has already said Salmond successfully appeals to emotional nationalism - and will appeal to the heart. Darling will aim to come across as reassuring (dull even) but appeal to the head. At the end of the day I think No will win the ref comfortably because when the chips are down most people will vote with their head not their heart. I think the same dynamic would lead to a comfortable "In" vote if ever any EU ref takes place.

    I would expect the opposite , ie heart before head to be a majority. Wonder if there is any data on the topic.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,864
    malcolmG Salmond offered personal support to Fred Goodwin over the disastrous RBS takeover of ABN Amro, as I said, neither comes out smelling of roses from the Crash!
    http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/politics/revealed-salmond-s-support-for-goodwin-over-disastrous-rbs-deal-1.1046662
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,376
    edited August 2014
    For anybody not in Scotland that want's to watch the debate, STV have their own "player" which also contains a live feed option;

    http://player.stv.tv/live/

    It seems you have to sign up for an account, but this could be the best way for the rest of the United Kingdom to see the event as it unfolds.

    Failing that you'll have to wait until after the debate when it's bound to be put on YouTube.

    (Don't forget to tick the "no emails" option if you don't want to be pestered by spam email from STV for years to come ;) )
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    edited August 2014
    malcolmg said:

    OllyT said:

    As someone has already said Salmond successfully appeals to emotional nationalism - and will appeal to the heart. Darling will aim to come across as reassuring (dull even) but appeal to the head. At the end of the day I think No will win the ref comfortably because when the chips are down most people will vote with their head not their heart. I think the same dynamic would lead to a comfortable "In" vote if ever any EU ref takes place.

    I would expect the opposite , ie heart before head to be a majority. Wonder if there is any data on the topic.
    Ironically, a couple of decades back Alex Salmond distinguished Scottish from Welsh nationalism on those grounds.

    Edited to add: So I'd expect Salmond to make the economic case. The "Braveheart" votes are already in the bag.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,808
    In my opion, similar to OllyT, they will both play to their audiences, in line with the way the campaign has progressed so far. Salmond will be the more assertive/aggressive of the two, and will doubtless 'run rings' around Darling, to the very vocal twitter delight of his cheerleaders. Darling will be polite, boring, bloodied by Salmond, and his sympathisers will be silent and cowed, but privately their dislikes of the yes campaign will be reinforced. If it plays out this way, it will not change the debate at all, because it will broadly speaking favour no.

    Darling would be best served in painting a really positive case of Scotland within the UK (helped by the Commonwealth games ironically), confounding inevitable attempts to paint him as negative and fear-mongering. This will put Salmond in the position of having to diminish Scotland. Salmond would be best served ignoring Darling, and talking over him to Scotland, going for the heartstrings. Most Scottish people, no or yes, are deeply patriotic -the yes argument makes no sense if you think about it, so he needs people's emotions to overcome their cerebral side. He could even try choking up and going for a suspiciously watery eye at one point, though not full on tears, that would cross into weird.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    Smarmeron said:

    @OllyT
    I doubt either Darling or Salmond's performance in the "debates" will shift many votes one way or the other.
    The only people who seem to be arguing are those at the polar opposites, while those of us in the "middle" just quietly despair about the lack of rational information from either side.

    Smarm, given none of them have a clue what the position will be next year never mind 5 , 10 or 20 is it any surprise. If you ever look back it shows clearly that politicians and their tame statisticians are for whatever reason always miles out.
    Any claim by any person to have them show what will happen in coming years is just bluster, neither side has a clue given the huge variables involved. It will will all come down to our mentality and to fear or hope, negative or positive, losers or winners.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    HYUFD said:

    malcolmG Salmond offered personal support to Fred Goodwin over the disastrous RBS takeover of ABN Amro, as I said, neither comes out smelling of roses from the Crash!
    http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/politics/revealed-salmond-s-support-for-goodwin-over-disastrous-rbs-deal-1.1046662

    Yes and I agreed, however it was Darling that had all the numbers and approved the deal and him that bankrupted the UK. Bit like saying I punched someone and you punched 30 people so we are the same.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,950
    Good morning, everyone.

    Seems slightly odd the debate (what're the timings?) won't be aired UK-wide.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    Luckyguy1983 said:

    In my opion, similar to OllyT, they will both play to their audiences, in line with the way the campaign has progressed so far. Salmond will be the more assertive/aggressive of the two, and will doubtless 'run rings' around Darling, to the very vocal twitter delight of his cheerleaders. Darling will be polite, boring, bloodied by Salmond, and his sympathisers will be silent and cowed, but privately their dislikes of the yes campaign will be reinforced. If it plays out this way, it will not change the debate at all, because it will broadly speaking favour no.

    Darling would be best served in painting a really positive case of Scotland within the UK (helped by the Commonwealth games ironically), confounding inevitable attempts to paint him as negative and fear-mongering. This will put Salmond in the position of having to diminish Scotland. Salmond would be best served ignoring Darling, and talking over him to Scotland, going for the heartstrings. Most Scottish people, no or yes, are deeply patriotic -the yes argument makes no sense if you think about it, so he needs people's emotions to overcome their cerebral side. He could even try choking up and going for a suspiciously watery eye at one point, though not full on tears, that would cross into weird.

    Good post but some strange thinking as well. I fail to see how you can say that the YES argument makes no sense other than the fact that you are obviously for NO.
    There are many reasons for YES and may even be reasons for NO which we may hear before the vote but they are leaving it late to present them.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,376
    edited August 2014
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Seems slightly odd the debate (what're the timings?) won't be aired UK-wide.

    Tuesday 8pm until 10pm.

    http://player.stv.tv/schedule/?date=2014-08-05

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,864
    MalcolmG The point is there is no capital for Salmond on the Crash
    ThanksGIN1138 Have signed up ready for Tuesday
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @malcolmg
    You are correct, none of us know the future, but one thing we do know is that neither the hyperbole, or the doom mongering we hear are likely to be correct.
    Tone it down a few notches, and it might be possible to shift some votes, otherwise all that happens is a hardening of peoples natural bias.
    Westminster, and indeed all governments could do with learning this simple fact (and PB as well).
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    GIN1138 said:

    For anybody not in Scotland that want's to watch the debate, STV have their own "player" which also contains a live feed option;

    http://player.stv.tv/live/

    It seems you have to sign up for an account, but this could be the best way for the rest of the United Kingdom to see the event as it unfolds.

    Failing that you'll have to wait until after the debate when it's bound to be put on YouTube.

    (Don't forget to tick the "no emails" option if you don't want to be pestered by spam email from STV for years to come ;) )

    Many thanks for this - I have just registered - much appreciated.
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    edited August 2014
    MG Can you point out where I said it was ok to lob shells into civilians properties.. anywhere.. you wont be able to..because I never posted that....maybe you should take some time away from your rants and actually read the posts.
    You seem to be comfortable with Hamas sending 3000 rockets into Israel to do just that.
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    edited August 2014
    Off topic, but does anyone know if it would be common for a soldier to be given another regimental number if for example, he had been wounded and in hospital when his original battalion left for a different theatre of war (WW1)?
    Edit :- i.e. a temporary transfer
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,950
    Cheers, Mr. Gin. Straight after Farscape.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,376
    edited August 2014
    No problem guys.

    It's a sign of the times that a debate that could decide the future of the United Kingdom as we know it, isn't being screened across the ITV network.

    There does seem to be a tremendous antipathy about what's going on in Scotland within the London-centric media...
This discussion has been closed.