Council elections - Page 10 - Anything Goes - Other topics not covered elsewhere - Tartan Army Message Board Jump to content

Council elections


Guest flumax

Recommended Posts

Just now, DonnyTJS said:

:lol:  He came across as a bit of a scary mad bloke on here (to my innocent way of reading posts at the time, any road).

He can have his moments and I don't think he's been on the board for years. He's one of the few people I would trust to do the right thing for other folk even if it didn't suit him. 

Definitely a good politician (I've seen how he copes with his sisters!) and he's a local boy and well known face. 

But definitely capable of scary. ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 394
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1 hour ago, Orraloon said:

Do you not make use of the dental check ups and eye tests? If not, why not? This might sound a bit dramatic but they could help to prevent you from developing serious illnesses and possible even save your life. Dentists don't just check your teeth they can also spot the early signs of mouth cancer which kills many people very year. Your eye test can pick up early signs of a number of serious illnesses (eg diabetes). Picking these things up at an early stage can not only help you live a longer and healthier life, but can also save the NHS a lot of money in the long run.

Sometimes you need to look at the bigger picture.

 

maybe he needs his eyes tested first ? :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, RenfrewBlue said:

He can have his moments and I don't think he's been on the board for years. He's one of the few people I would trust to do the right thing for other folk even if it didn't suit him. 

Definitely a good politician (I've seen how he copes with his sisters!) and he's a local boy and well known face. 

But definitely capable of scary. ?

Aye, that's how he came across - sound as but not to be messed with. Good to hear he's got a council seat.

I doubt there's anything left of his on the archived board now - as you say, he moved on years back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, phil said:

  Add to that, Ruth D has been superb despite the avalanche of vile abuse that rains down on her; and Theresa May has handled Sturgeon adroitly, making her appear shrill and desperate by comparison.  

Trolly, yer, off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HUNTINGMcGREGOR said:

maybe he needs his eyes tested first ? :D

:lol:

Then again that might just help him focus on the smaller picture again? It's no easy, you try to help folk but they just won't listen. Maybe he needs a hearing test as well?;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mariokempes56 said:

Trolly, yer, off.

Couldn't agree more Mario. ?

Ruth Davidson is a serial liar who when caught out, hides. Absolutely no leadership potential whatsoever. She'll make a great successor to the English Tories invisible leader Theresa Maybe. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DonnyTJS said:

That's standard practice. Since there cannot be a like-for-like comparison, they approximate a notional like-for-like comparison. It's happened in GEs where boundary changes have occurred for as long as I can remember. I think you're being a little overly conspiratorial here tbh.

Yes it's done for boundary changes if for example the old constituency Brigadoon becomes Brigadoon & Kailyard South. But for a national total, the 'constituency' has not changed, has it? Scotland is still Scotland, no?

But actually it seems it's more complex than that, as the explanation of the figure seems to be a straight subtraction of the 'seats at dissolution' from seats now. But that's not the explanation circulating, it seems the 'controversy' is about the BBC hypotheticals. Not sure why that is but we shall see.

In the current climate - where the editorialising of the BBC and others are emphasising Tory 'success' at every turn, it's not unreasonable to be suspicious when decisions are being made on how to present stats. They could easily have chosen the straight comparison with 2012, and leave it to the partisan right-wing press find a more convenient statistic for their graphs. They didn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cumnock  votes in a fuuuuuukin tory , I really  do despair at the local lodge / rangers supporters 

This whole area was destroyed  by thatchers government  and these people who are all in someway connected to the mining industry in which working opportunities  relied on vote in a tory ,hope they are so fuuuukin proud of themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, fishcumnock said:

 

This whole area was destroyed  by thatchers government 

These are the soundbytes the SNP should be using ad nauseum

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:

These are the soundbytes the SNP should be using ad nauseum

The Tories had a councillor in this ward from 2007 to 2012, I don't recall people going batshit about it then.

Edited by aaid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This wooing and galvanising of the orange vote is a bit scary. They've always been there but were largely labour types with some old queen saluting soldier guys voting tory. The orange vote has clearly been whipped up and grouped together into a solid tory vote.

Shotts voted in a tory. I know Shotts well and I know there's not enough actual conservative types around to get a councilor in. So clearly the Orange Lodge has been involved.

The tories are playing with fire if they're getting into bed with these scum. We can refer to them as scum because they are total racist bigoted scum and they'd rather cut their own nuts off than vote yes to independence anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, thewelk said:

This wooing and galvanising of the orange vote is a bit scary. They've always been there but were largely labour types with some old queen saluting soldier guys voting tory. The orange vote has clearly been whipped up and grouped together into a solid tory vote.

Shotts voted in a tory. I know Shotts well and I know there's not enough actual conservative types around to get a councilor in. So clearly the Orange Lodge has been involved.

The tories are playing with fire if they're getting into bed with these scum. We can refer to them as scum because they are total racist bigoted scum and they'd rather cut their own nuts off than vote yes to independence anyway.

Those voters were already out there though. All they are doing is changing allegiance from Labour to Tory as they recognize that vote as the best chance of preventing the break-up of the union. They will always vote for a pro-union party come what may. All that has changed is that they are throwing their unionist vote increasingly at one party. The council elections showed us that the SNP remain the biggest party and the main opposition has switched from Labour to Tory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Caledonian Craig said:

Those voters were already out there though. All they are doing is changing allegiance from Labour to Tory as they recognize that vote as the best chance of preventing the break-up of the union. They will always vote for a pro-union party come what may. All that has changed is that they are throwing their unionist vote increasingly at one party. The council elections showed us that the SNP remain the biggest party and the main opposition has switched from Labour to Tory.

They were largely Labour before but were a bit splintered into Tory or BNP and more recently UKIP. But now if they're grouping together they could cause some damage. Particularly if the lodgers (who are quite well organised) can get the more 'football oriented unionists' voting the same way too. Which it seems they must have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, aaid said:

The Tories had a councillor in this ward from 2007 to 2012, I don't recall people going batshit about it then.

I was meaning in general not just that ward

Radio, TV, Newspaper, debates - every interview just slip it in

Play on the conscience

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

4 hours ago, thewelk said:

This wooing and galvanising of the orange vote is a bit scary. They've always been there but were largely labour types with some old queen saluting soldier guys voting tory. The orange vote has clearly been whipped up and grouped together into a solid tory vote.

Shotts voted in a tory. I know Shotts well and I know there's not enough actual conservative types around to get a councilor in. So clearly the Orange Lodge has been involved.

The tories are playing with fire if they're getting into bed with these scum. We can refer to them as scum because they are total racist bigoted scum and they'd rather cut their own nuts off than vote yes to independence anyway.

i think folk are using "Orange" as a convenient bogeyman word

non-indy folk just switched from Labour to Tory ffs

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, thewelk said:

They were largely Labour before but were a bit splintered into Tory or BNP and more recently UKIP. But now if they're grouping together they could cause some damage. Particularly if the lodgers (who are quite well organised) can get the more 'football oriented unionists' voting the same way too. Which it seems they must have.

The fact that they are willing to sell their soul to the devil by going from Labour to Tory in a bid to protect their union just says how worried they are. It was bound to happen eventually I reckon. I think to counter that somewhat the SNP have to look to ways to appeal to Labour voters looking for an alternative who aren't keen on voting Tory. That would help maintain their position of great strength.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the "orange" thing is being overplayed, unionists would probably be sufficient.

Alex Salmond and now Nicola Sturgeon are the bogeyman to these people. For no valid reason if you ever ask for one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, sbcmfc said:

I think the "orange" thing is being overplayed, unionists would probably be sufficient.

Alex Salmond and now Nicola Sturgeon are the bogeyman to these people. For no valid reason if you ever ask for one.

I agree.

People have various reasons for choosing to vote the way they do. Some will never change the way they vote no matter what it is the waiverers that are the important targets for the SNP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 'left' is losing ground because they have adopted insidious tactics. 

The SNP is losing ground to the tories because they are sucking up to the left.

This is not that difficult.

Stop sucking leftie tadge is the simple solution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, thplinth said:

The 'left' is losing ground because they have adopted insidious tactics. 

The SNP is losing ground to the tories because they are sucking up to the left.

This is not that difficult.

Stop sucking leftie tadge is the simple solution.

No it is simpler than that. The SNP are on the independence road with only the Scottish Greens for company. You won't get unionist Tories or unionist Labour voters voting SNP but you may be able to attract Labour voters who are open-minded on independence and less keen on the Tories manifesto than Snp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...



×
×
  • Create New...