SNP leadership election

[aaid]

4 minutes ago, ParisInAKilt said:

😂😂 fuck sake 

“We’ve got thirty years before we need to stop using oil” is what he said. 

He’s an oil worker, that’s why he has such a hardon for the greens. 

[hampden_loon2878]

5 minutes ago, aaid said:

About what I’d expect from a climate change shoulder shrugger.

a thing you should know about me is that my side hobby is a meteorologist, i love forecasting the weather that all started due to watching the charts to see when i could get up boarding, when have i ever stated that climate change is not a thing?  i am sure you will tell me that i am somehow wrong and you are obviously right but you don't have a clue about me,, you are indeed a weapon, a weapon that doesn't even stay in Scotland who runs a snp London branch that is full of rockets,, instead of thinking you know how the Scottish public are think from your cosy London home, maybe start listening to what people are saying instead of imposing your superior intellect over them 

[aaid]

Just now, hampden_loon2878 said:

a thing you should know about me is that my side hobby is a meteorologist, i love forecasting the weather that all started due to watching the charts to see when i could get up boarding, when have i ever stated that climate change is not a thing?  i am sure you will tell me that i am somehow wrong and you are obviously right but you don't have a clue about me,, you are indeed a weapon, a weapon that doesn't even stay in Scotland who runs a snp London branch that is full of rockets,, instead of thinking you know how the Scottish public are think from your cosy London home, maybe start listening to what people are saying instead of imposing your superior intellect over them 

You think I’m Ian Blackford’s wife, you think I live in London, neither is true.

I’ll say this once and once only - the weather is not the climate.  

I used the term shoulder shrugger because that’s what you do, you know it’s real but you just don’t care.  

[hampden_loon2878]

3 minutes ago, aaid said:

You think I’m Ian Blackford’s wife, you think I live in London, neither is true.

I’ll say this once and once only - the weather is not the climate.  

I used the term shoulder shrugger because that’s what you do, you know it’s real but you just don’t care.  

climate is weather patterns

[vanderark14]

28 minutes ago, aaid said:

About what I’d expect from a climate change shoulder shrugger.

grow up min

[aaid]

14 hours ago, Squirrelhumper said:

Gilruth standing?

She's just backed Yousaf.

[duncan II]

11 hours ago, aaid said:

 

Kate Forbes is a bonfire, Humza Yousaf hasn’t put a foot wrong so far 

You genuinely believe this? Or is it just the latest head office narrative that must be followed? I honestly never thought you were this reactive, but you seem to be caught up in the nastiness of this leadership thing.

Just recently the Scottish government apologised for the persecution of witches. This relentless pursuit of Forbes is unsavoury. If I was still in the SNP I'd want nothing to do with it. It's sickening. Called a bigot all over Twitter. If this is progression, count me out. Never thought I'd say that.

[aaid]

4 minutes ago, duncan II said:

You genuinely believe this? Or is it just the latest head office narrative that must be followed? I honestly never thought you were this reactive, but you seem to be caught up in the nastiness of this leadership thing.

Just recently the Scottish government apologised for the persecution of witches. This relentless pursuit of Forbes is unsavoury. If I was still in the SNP I'd want nothing to do with it. It's sickening. Called a bigot all over Twitter. If this is progression, count me out. Never thought I'd say that.

Nice selective quoting there.  I see you've cut off the part where I say "but I'm sure he will do soon".  If you want to point out to me where in the campaign he's put a foot wrong, go ahead.

So just for the record - although I think I've made this clear already.  

• All three candidates are poor.
• I'm struggling to work out which one is the least worst - I'm sure who the worst is though
• Kate Forbes is entitled to hold those personal beliefs, I'm not criticising her for holding them.  What is not acceptable is using those beliefs to drive policy when they run contrary to reality.  

[duncan II]

3 minutes ago, aaid said:

Nice selective quoting there.  I see you've cut off the part where I say "but I'm sure he will do soon".  If you want to point out to me where in the campaign he's put a foot wrong, go ahead.

So just for the record - although I think I've made this clear already.  

• All three candidates are poor.
• I'm struggling to work out which one is the least worst - I'm sure who the worst is though
• Kate Forbes is entitled to hold those personal beliefs, I'm not criticising her for holding them.  What is not acceptable is using those beliefs to drive policy when they run contrary to reality.  

But she hasn't said she'll use her beliefs to drive policy!

[Malcolm]

there is a far greater chance of independence in the medium term if the snp ditch the arrangement with the far left greens, and bring in a moderate leader with some capability.

the electorate don’t like extremism.  Compare and contrast an electable labour under tony Blair and then Michael foot.

 

[aaid]

3 minutes ago, duncan II said:

But she hasn't said she'll use her beliefs to drive policy!

She hasn't said she wouldn't either.   

She said she would vote against equal marriage though and that should raise question marks over what she would do there were similar situations in the future.

The next one coming through is a private members bill on assisted dying.  She is on record saying she is opposed to it in principle.  What will her position be as leader, will she allow a free vote, will she whip the SNP to oppose it?  Assisted dying is a complex issue but telling someone how has a terminal illness and faces a painful death, "sorry but it's God's will" isn't good enough for me.

I think when the Equal Marriage act was passed, support was something like 68%, I suspect that would be much much higher now.   This is not even mainstream Christian theology despite what she might say.

[aaid]

5 minutes ago, Malcolm said:

there is a far greater chance of independence in the medium term if the snp ditch the arrangement with the far left greens, and bring in a moderate leader with some capability.

the electorate don’t like extremism.  Compare and contrast an electable labour under tony Blair and then Michael foot.

 

I'm old enough to have voted for Michael Foot, he was absolutely savaged by the British media.

 

[Orraloon]

8 minutes ago, duncan II said:

But she hasn't said she'll use her beliefs to drive policy!

She has in fact said the exact opposite. That she wouldn't do that. And, she has said this numerous times in the past. And she wouldn't be able to do that even if she wanted to. Yet people are allowing the UK media machine (both MSM and social media) to distort this into something that it is not. And it seems to be working on some people who I thought might understand how the British establishment operates. They clearly want to destroy Forbes before she gets into power by trying to manipulate folk into voting for somebody else. As soon as that somebody else gets elected they will then try to destroy that person as well. It is so bloody obvious what they are doing, but folk are still getting sucked in by it. This will be a test of the too stupid part of the old "Too wee, too poor, too stupid" line of argument.

[Orraloon]

11 minutes ago, aaid said:

She hasn't said she wouldn't either.   

She said she would vote against equal marriage though and that should raise question marks over what she would do there were similar situations in the future.

The next one coming through is a private members bill on assisted dying.  She is on record saying she is opposed to it in principle.  What will her position be as leader, will she allow a free vote, will she whip the SNP to oppose it?  Assisted dying is a complex issue but telling someone how has a terminal illness and faces a painful death, "sorry but it's God's will" isn't good enough for me.

I think when the Equal Marriage act was passed, support was something like 68%, I suspect that would be much much higher now.   This is not even mainstream Christian theology despite what she might say.

And she would have been part of the 32%. So what?

 

[duncan II]

7 minutes ago, Orraloon said:

She has in fact said the exact opposite. That she wouldn't do that. And, she has said this numerous times in the past. And she wouldn't be able to do that even if she wanted to. Yet people are allowing the UK media machine (both MSM and social media) to distort this into something that it is not. And it seems to be working on some people who I thought might understand how the British establishment operates. They clearly want to destroy Forbes before she gets into power by trying to manipulate folk into voting for somebody else. As soon as that somebody else gets elected they will then try to destroy that person as well. It is so bloody obvious what they are doing, but folk are still getting sucked in by it. This will be a test of the too stupid part of the old "Too wee, too poor, too stupid" line of argument.

Yeah, it's all very depressing. I've seen this film before. She's not some dictator who is going to force her morals on us all. But that's the narrative being driven in mainstream media and on social media. I think we are too stupid. Slowly coming around to that viewpoint. Christ... (sorry, Kate). 

[Ally Bongo]

Fiona Robertson is vehemently against her which should be a good enough reason to get Forbes in as FM

[Malcolm]

25 minutes ago, aaid said:

I'm old enough to have voted for Michael Foot, he was absolutely savaged by the British media.

 

You and a handful of others only.  the country wanted a change from being held to ransom by the unions.  If he had got in inflation would never have been brought to heel and we would have continued to subsidise loss making industry.

[Orraloon]

19 minutes ago, duncan II said:

Yeah, it's all very depressing. I've seen this film before. She's not some dictator who is going to force her morals on us all. But that's the narrative being driven in mainstream media and on social media. I think we are too stupid. Slowly coming around to that viewpoint. Christ... (sorry, Kate). 

One difference here is that they are trying manipulate the vote of SNP members. Anybody who can be bothered joining and contributing to a political party (any political party), are usually fairly set in their ways about their own political views and so are maybe less open to this kind of media onslaught? Not everybody obviously. 

[hampden_loon2878]

1 hour ago, duncan II said:

But she hasn't said she'll use her beliefs to drive policy!

thats what the london snp have advised her/him to say

[hampden_loon2878]

55 minutes ago, Orraloon said:

She has in fact said the exact opposite. That she wouldn't do that. And, she has said this numerous times in the past. And she wouldn't be able to do that even if she wanted to. Yet people are allowing the UK media machine (both MSM and social media) to distort this into something that it is not. And it seems to be working on some people who I thought might understand how the British establishment operates. They clearly want to destroy Forbes before she gets into power by trying to manipulate folk into voting for somebody else. As soon as that somebody else gets elected they will then try to destroy that person as well. It is so bloody obvious what they are doing, but folk are still getting sucked in by it. This will be a test of the too stupid part of the old "Too wee, too poor, too stupid" line of argument.

if they cant destroy forbes just now they wont manage whe she is FM,, huzma they will wait until he is FM  and then destroy him.. ash i know nothing about and its worrying me that she isnt getting scrutinized like forbes as if she is no threat

[hampden_loon2878]

20 minutes ago, Orraloon said:

One difference here is that they are trying manipulate the vote of SNP members. Anybody who can be bothered joining and contributing to a political party (any political party), are usually fairly set in their ways about their own political views and so are maybe less open to this kind of media onslaught? Not everybody obviously. 

very much all the snp members i have spoken to who have been in the party a long time will be voting for forbes, all the green hangers on who joined in the last few years are following the Patrick Harvey agenda

[PapofGlencoe]

I'm starting to come round to the idea that ANY majority vote for the SNP/pro-indy at ANY westminster election is a mandate for independence.  What else can it be?

If you get it, fine.  Push the case to Westminster.  Ball is in their court.  They'll probably refuse, the outtrage feeds the next election.  You hope to build that majority, build the case until it's unmanageable for London.  It may take years, it may never happen but you have a strategy.

If you don't get it, fine.  Move onto the next election and build the case for the next one.

Ultimately it's up to the people.  I can't see how else we can proceed.  If you delibrately kick it into the long grass, I don't see how you build the case when you don't have a strategy and have handed Westminster a veto.

Unless you set a deliberately high bar most Scots can live with; something like if pro-indy parties/SNP gain 60% of the vote or more we will expect this unambiguous result to ensure independence negotiations?  that then leaves the gradualists the opportunity to continue to make the case until it enjoys the consensus support of things iike dare i say gay marriage..

The one thing they can't do is hand a veto to westminster.  I don't see the point in an SNP MP if that's the case.

 

PS saying all this, the SNP will be lucky to get 30% they way things are going.  There appears to be no talent after the big two with a force of personality to take this forward.  and the rest are fighting like rats.  I think they're forgetting many vote SNP as it's felt to be a competent government.  They're going to lose this the more they attack each other.  

[aaid]

https://ep.ft.com/permalink/emails/eyJlbWFpbCI6ImEyMGNlN2I4YjNjZWMzMTdkYWIzYWNiM2E1YzE1OWQ1YzFkMjI3OThiNTY0M2RlYmRhMjFlZWI3ZDc4MzQwOTAwOCIsInRyYW5zYWN0aW9uSWQiOiI2NWMwMDAzMi0wYzgwLTRkNTAtODdjYi1iN2M4NTQ2NGM4YzUifQ%3D%3D
 

 

[TDYER63]

2 hours ago, aaid said:

Badenoch, she’s using the Equalities Act to fight her ideological battles.  She’s the one that’s blocked the GRR bill, Alister Jack was just the messenger.  

Whether Badenoch practices what she preaches is irrelevant, shock horror a hypocritical politician . It doesn’t make what she is saying incorrect. 

[aaid]

3 minutes ago, TDYER63 said:

Whether Badenoch practices what she preaches is irrelevant, shock horror a hypocritical politician . It doesn’t make what she is saying incorrect. 

It does mean she is being selective when it comes to which ideological battles she supports and which ones she doesn’t.

Joanna Cherry was railing yesterday on Twitter on the abuse that Kate Forbes was getting for her views.  Until someone dug out tweets from her from 2017 when she was calling out Tim Farron for holding exactly the same views.  A lesbian backing up someone who doesn’t believe in equality for lesbian,

People have very strange bedfellows these days.  It’s almost like what’s most important here to some is whether or not you support the GRR Bill.