Maq Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 Of course, that's another factor relevant to Flure's point about the responsibility of the editor. I can imagine the reaction if the editor of a 'liberal' newspaper told his lead political cartoonist that he wouldn't publish an offensive cartoon - "You ing what? We died for the right to be utter twats!" Absolutely. They have a right to print the cartoon. And we have the right to say that we think it's an unfunny, xenophobic, piece of shiite. I'm not really advocating that Steve Bell should be lynched. Just find it curious that The Guardian editor would want to publish that. Their choice though. And it's no great loss to them, offending me, I stopped buying the Guardian ages ago Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonnyTJS Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 Absolutely. They have a right to print the cartoon. And we have the right to say that we think it's an unfunny, xenophobic, piece of shiite. I'm not really advocating that Steve Bell should be lynched. Just find it curious that The Guardian editor would want to publish that. Their choice though. And it's no great loss to them, offending me, I stopped buying the Guardian ages ago That's not really my point though. I was suggesting that for all we know the editor didn't want to publish but recent events have him over a barrel - Rusbridger wouldn't have the g'nads to deal with Bell in full martyr mode (is Rusbridger still editor of t'Grauniad?). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maq Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 Ah, I see, Yeah, he's still the editor, currently. Though I think he's standing down Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotlad Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 I still don't get it I don't think there's much to get Maq. It's just Bell exploiting another opportunity to have a xenophobic dig at Scots. Quite where the venom comes from, however, I don't know. I think if I was Nicola Sturgeon I'd be more offended at him making me look like Susan Boyle. Right someone with photoshop skills copy that prikk Bell's sig onto them Mohammed cartoons and email them to ISIS. :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rossy Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 My personal favourite at the moment is the king of Uncle McTom's, Alan Cockring at The Telegraph. His hatred of the SNP is so ingrained, so boiling over, that every article he pens these days is a vicious, unsubstantiated pack of lies and nonsense. His latest...actually, he's been at this for the last few weeks... is a desperate plea for a Labour/Tory 'alliance' so these Separatists can be stopped at any cost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orraloon Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 With the usual caveat that I haven't a clue what's going on, The polls feel pretty much spot on to me at the moment. What are you basing that judgement on? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonnyTJS Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 What are you basing that judgement on? From what I know of human nature, having kicked about for quite a while now. Do you disagree with any of the bits you cut from my post in your quote? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auld_Reekie Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 What are you basing that judgement on? I'm still assuming that the SNP will be doing well to hit 25. I just cannot accept that we're looking at 40+ SNP MPs nevermind 50+. That said, the most telling/exciting thing Ive seen that makes me think something incredible could be about to happen, was some of the comments coming from anonymous sources at Scottish Labour conference. Privately, some are admitting that they are about to get an absolute beasting - anecdotal evidence from canvassing where they are struggling to find any Labour voters at all, some arguing that the West of Scotland (the f***ing West of Scotland!) should be abandoned by the Labour Party no less because it's a lost cause, some protesting that money is being piled in trying to save Margaret Curran, etc. All far more illuminating that polling numbers. The sheer panic is incredible. Still time for something major to happen to stop the SNP tide, but there's certainly an increasing feeling from beyond official polling figures that Labour is looking at a serious humiliation. I was devastated by September 18th. This is going a long way to make up for it. Just hope there's not a similar crushing disappointment... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Dod Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 Vote SNP get Tory blah blah blah. Xenophobic and hysterical London press - whodathunk it? Ask yourself this, who would the tories rather you voted for in Scotland? The answer is plain even though it could cost them the election. That's how scared they are. The only people better together are Labour and the tories. Real democracy scares the shite out of them. https://weegingerdug.wordpress.com/2015/03/08/can-you-smell-the-fear/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orraloon Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 From what I know of human nature, having kicked about for quite a while now. Do you disagree with any of the bits you cut from my post in your quote? No, I don't disagree with what you are saying apart from maybe the turnout bit. I think NO voters might be more determined than some folk think. They want to stop the SNP any way they can. I just don't trust opinion polls and find it hard to believe the SNP can get the size of swings being talked about. I would love to be wrong about this though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perthTam Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 I'm still assuming that the SNP will be doing well to hit 25. I just cannot accept that we're looking at 40+ SNP MPs nevermind 50+. Twenty five would be amazing - a quadrupling of the current SNP westminster representation. Throwing figures of 50+ MPs about allows the media to portray "just" 30 seats as a "failure". Keep it realistic but work like hell to get 50! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomtscotland Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 I am a wee bit concerned that so many folk seem to think that the SNP have already won 40 or 50 seats based on not much more than a few opinion polls. I still think the SNP will win no more than 15 to 20 seats. And that would be an excellent achievement. I really hope I am wrong. These opinion polls will encourage Scottish Tories to get out and use their vote tactically. They will turn out in huge numbers, just like they did in the referendum. If it was a normal election turnout of 60-65% them maybe the SNP would get this landslide but I think the turnout will be close to the referendum turnout and the Tories will do whatever they need to, to try and stop the SNP. I also think the Tories will win the general election. All this vitriolic anti Scottish stuff in the MSM will be enough to scare the English into voting Tory to make sure they don't end up being ruled by a bunch of uppity Jocks. It's better to be cautious and guard against complacency - so to that extent I agree with your reasoning. I'm very optimistic that SNP will have a landslide - The polls have consistently shown a huge swing to SNP. SNP's membership must be close to 100,000. SNP activists are already campaigning and will win the ground war as well as social media. Most of the 45% yes vote will likely vote SNP and be committed to vote. The 55% no vote is split between other parties and I'm not sure tactical voting against SNP will be very effective. The tories scare tactics re SNP will help them win England but will backfire in Scotland. Their latest billboard showed Salmond to be strong and Miliband a muppet. SNP are being bigged up by the media as bogeymen but the more they do that the more Scots will realise just how much influence they could have at Westminster - all publicity gratefully accepted. They spent the first 15 minutes of today's Daily Politics discussing the Tory scare tacticts re SNP and whether Ed should rule out deals with SNP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auld_Reekie Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 Twenty five would be amazing - a quadrupling of the current SNP westminster representation. Throwing figures of 50+ MPs about allows the media to portray "just" 30 seats as a "failure". Keep it realistic but work like hell to get 50! My concern here is why the SNP are not doing more to manage expectations. The party seem content to ride the wave for now but it's not sustainable. Im hoping they see the current momentum as being damaging to Labour so are happy to let it continue, but are waiting until the last week or two to cool everyone's jet's. We cannot go into the election with Scotland expecting 50+ SNP MPs! Utter madness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jie Bie Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 I'm hoping we can get to 30 as it would give the SNP a majority in terms of Scottish MPs which would be very symbolic. Any more than that is a bonus. Hopefully the SNP can force the largest party to push through full home rule following such a victory as part of a confidence and supply deal. Although whether or not they could countenance doing so with the Tories is an interesting question (and one I hope doesn't need to be answered). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parklife Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 I'm hoping we can get to 30 as it would give the SNP a majority in terms of Scottish MPs which would be very symbolic. Any more than that is a bonus. Hopefully the SNP can force the largest party to push through full home rule following such a victory as part of a confidence and supply deal. Although whether or not they could countenance doing so with the Tories is an interesting question (and one I hope doesn't need to be answered). I've got to be honest, if the SNP propped up either a Labour or Tory Government, i'd struggle to ever vote for them again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jie Bie Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 I've got to be honest, if the SNP propped up either a Labour or Tory Government, i'd struggle to ever vote for them again. Even if the price paid was home rule, so the Scottish Parliament was given responsibility for everything except Defence and Foreign Affairs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kumnio Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 Even if the price paid was home rule, so the Scottish Parliament was given responsibility for everything except Defence and Foreign Affairs? I know this is obviously aimed at Parky, but I agree with him, the SNP must not enter any formal agreement with Labour, it would be incredibly toxic for them to do so. They simply cant do it, it would be absolute folly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antidote Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 "I've got to be honest, if the SNP propped up either a Labour or Tory Government, i'd struggle to ever vote for them again." The SNP have said they will not have any dealings with the blue tories. They have said they will prop up a red tory government on a case by case basis. Their goal is to get as much power for Scotland as possible. If, or when we get these extensive powers then imo the English will want rid of us ASAP as they have no further use for us. Job done!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auld_Reekie Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 Even if the price paid was home rule, so the Scottish Parliament was given responsibility for everything except Defence and Foreign Affairs? Im with Parklife. It is not acceptable for the SNP to prop up either the Tories or Labour now. Mainly from a principled stance, but it would be suicidal politics to even entertain the notion. Just take one look at the Liberal Democrats. The last thing the SNP should be doing is trying to play the Westminster game. I like the cut of your jib though - if the SNP is invited to any negotiations, they should play along but the price should be devo max. Nothing less. And they should make it a very public negotiation because there will only be one reply to that request - no. I really hope this is why Trident is being sidelined a bit. Any negotiation the SNP shows up to should be to demand what was Scotland was promised: federalism, devo max, home rule. It's right, it's relevant and it has public opinion on their side. There's no way they will agree to it though which is why they should be asked. I really hope this happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaid Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 No, I don't disagree with what you are saying apart from maybe the turnout bit. I think NO voters might be more determined than some folk think. They want to stop the SNP any way they can. I just don't trust opinion polls and find it hard to believe the SNP can get the size of swings being talked about. I would love to be wrong about this though. If it were one or two polls then you could be right but this has been pretty consistent across pretty much every poll for months now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parklife Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 Even if the price paid was home rule, so the Scottish Parliament was given responsibility for everything except Defence and Foreign Affairs? That'd make full independence almost impossible, so would possibly be the most stupid move they could ever make (considering their goal is independence). Standing shoulder to shoulder with folk who want to renew trident, cut the welfare budget and led us in to Iraq/Afghanistan is not acceptable to me. They'd lose my vote forever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toepoke Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 (edited) Im with Parklife. It is not acceptable for the SNP to prop up either the Tories or Labour now. Mainly from a principled stance, but it would be suicidal politics to even entertain the notion. Just take one look at the Liberal Democrats. The Lib Dems entered into a formal coalition though. I don't think the SNP would plan to sit anywhere other than the opposition benches... Edited March 9, 2015 by Toepoke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jie Bie Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 Im with Parklife. It is not acceptable for the SNP to prop up either the Tories or Labour now. Mainly from a principled stance, but it would be suicidal politics to even entertain the notion. Just take one look at the Liberal Democrats. The last thing the SNP should be doing is trying to play the Westminster game. I like the cut of your jib though - if the SNP is invited to any negotiations, they should play along but the price should be devo max. Nothing less. And they should make it a very public negotiation because there will only be one reply to that request - no. I really hope this is why Trident is being sidelined a bit. Any negotiation the SNP shows up to should be to demand what was Scotland was promised: federalism, devo max, home rule. It's right, it's relevant and it has public opinion on their side. There's no way they will agree to it though which is why they should be asked. I really hope this happens. Why wouldn't they agree to it? Dangle the keys to Downing Street in front of Ed or Dave and they'd probably agree to anything! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auld_Reekie Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 The Lib Dems entered into a formal coalition though. I don't think the SNP would plan to sit anywhere other than the opposition benches... Formal or informal. Doesn't matter. What matters is perception. If the SNP start propping up a Labour government, they are a coalition partner in all but name. And I'd argue that it could be more damaging than a formal coalition. With a formal coalition, the programme of government is explicitly laid out and agreed - we'd at least be seeing exactly what we were getting and there would be stability. An informal, confidence based agreement is more unstable and it will become expected that the SNP support a Labour Government - when that doesn't happen, the SNP will be the fall guys. Especially if it leads to a collapse of the government and the Tories getting back power. The SNP demands must be huge to the point of being undeliverable. That's the point of having a strong hand. Propping up a Labour government based on Trident alone or even the austerity stuff Nicola has been talking about isn't even close to being worth it. The SNP must not allow themselves to be tainted by failure. Labour and the Tories want power in Westminster more than the SNP want it - let them have it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auld_Reekie Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 Why wouldn't they agree to it? Dangle the keys to Downing Street in front of Ed or Dave and they'd probably agree to anything! There is absolutely no way they've just won an historic independence referendum, and fudged the Smith Commission to be utterly toothless, to then give up devo max, full fiscal autonomy and everything else because the SNP had a great election. They'd sooner rerun the election or go into government together. (And this is where I disagree with Parklife. If devo max was somehow offered (and I don't think there is any chance it will), the SNP must take it. It is too good an offer to refuse. There is no way I would gamble full fiscal autonomy in the hope the next referendum was successful.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.