xbl Posted May 10, 2011 Author Share Posted May 10, 2011 and get the two merged...... Independence merits at least single thread of its own, and there will be many of them in the next few years. I am positively in favour of keeping this thread distinct. Eventually, after the election, this thread will die off and a Scottish politics thread will be back to replace it. But independence is a big enough issue to remain distinct. No to merging! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted May 10, 2011 Share Posted May 10, 2011 Politics Subforum anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xbl Posted May 10, 2011 Author Share Posted May 10, 2011 Politics Subforum anyone? Leave it alone! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banterman86 Posted May 10, 2011 Share Posted May 10, 2011 xbl taking this "separist" stuff a tad literally. Although perhaps not literally enough for Ad Lib.... basically Kiwi is a craven unionist. Unlucky mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiwififer Posted May 10, 2011 Share Posted May 10, 2011 Politics Subforum anyone? I'd vote for it. It would be better used than the highland league one anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enigma Posted May 10, 2011 Share Posted May 10, 2011 Politics Subforum anyone? No. A lot of stuff discussed in politics threads on P&B is current affairs type stuff, this should remain on General Nonsense. We should move the TV forum back to Gen. nonsense imo, not that I have a say or anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon EF Posted May 10, 2011 Share Posted May 10, 2011 And another thing. How many times has the word "craven" actually been used by nationalists to describe unionists? Either in the campaign in general or even on P&B. It seems all the unionists are getting in a tizzy over being called craven but I can't actually remember seeing that term banded about by anyone but them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tryfield Posted May 10, 2011 Share Posted May 10, 2011 What an utterly redundant point. How do you think the votes would have stacked up in a two-option ballot ie SNP or Labour? SNP or Lib Dem? SNP or Tory? as opposed to winning a huge plurality of the vote in a multiparty election, with dozens of list parties standing? The important figure is that the SNP had as many votes in the Constuencies as the next two largest parties put together, and even more in the List. They have one of the largest popular mandates in modern political history. Explain why it's redundant? Hopefully any referendum will be a two option vote, but I doubt that. Without votes, politicians can't get in. Without majorities, parties can't get in. The SNP have done very well in the "Scottish" vote. As for your two option ballot, have a guess where most votes would go in a two option referendum right now? I'll give you a wee hint, it's not for independence. The 54% constituency votes against the SNP and the 53% against the SNP in the regional will show that the people of Scotland do not want separation at this moment in time. Gie yersel a shake, study the results, absorb and digest the truth. That will help you in future years young man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon EF Posted May 10, 2011 Share Posted May 10, 2011 The 54% constituency votes against the SNP and the 53% against the SNP in the regional will show that the people of Scotland do not want separation at this moment in time. No it doesn't. You moron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tryfield Posted May 10, 2011 Share Posted May 10, 2011 No it doesn't. You moron. Clueless. Fcuk me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted May 10, 2011 Share Posted May 10, 2011 Explain why it's redundant? Hopefully any referendum will be a two option vote, but I doubt that. I already have in the post you've quoted. Re-read it. Without votes, politicians can't get in. Without majorities, parties can't get in. The SNP have done very well in the "Scottish" vote. Uh huh. So why were you trying to pick non-existent holes in the "Scottish" vote? Contradiction. As for your two option ballot, have a guess where most votes would go in a two option referendum right now? I'll give you a wee hint, it's not for independence. That wasn't the question. the question was in a two-party ballot. The SNP would walk all over any other party in a direct fight, therefore your idea that not having an absolute majority in vote share will 'keep them on their toes' is redundant. The 54% constituency votes against the SNP and the 53% against the SNP in the regional will show that the people of Scotland do not want separation at this moment in time. So now you think 46-47% of the population have just de facto voted in favour of independence? A startling admission. The votes weren't 'against the SNP', they were for all manner of cold, dead Unionist parties (and a small group for Greens etc), whose arguments were comprehensively drubbed and their leaders turfed out within five days of defeat. Gie yersel a shake, study the results, absorb and digest the truth. That will help you in future years young man. My analysis is far superior to yours, you boring, hectoring old fud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tryfield Posted May 10, 2011 Share Posted May 10, 2011 I already have in the post you've quoted. Re-read it. Uh huh. So why were you trying to pick non-existent holes in the "Scottish" vote? Contradiction. That wasn't the question. the question was in a two-party ballot. The SNP would walk all over any other party in a direct fight, therefore your idea that not having an absolute majority in vote share will 'keep them on their toes' is redundant. So now you think 46-47% of the population have just de facto voted in favour of independence? A startling admission. The votes weren't 'against the SNP', they were for all manner of cold, dead Unionist parties (and a small group for Greens etc), whose arguments were comprehensively drubbed and their leaders turfed out within five days of defeat. My analysis is far superior to yours, you boring, hectoring old fud. Stick tae fitba son, your lost on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon EF Posted May 10, 2011 Share Posted May 10, 2011 Clueless. Only a little disrespect here, but you're clearly one of the less intelligent contributors to this thread. Nationalists have been saying for years that elections (British and Scottish) are not referendums on independence, whether it's % of the vote or % of seats in parliament. And that's true. We all know that some people who voted SNP last week will vote 'no' in the upcoming referendum and we all know some people who voted Labour or Lib Dem or Tory last week will vote 'yes' in the referendum. Scotland has never had a serious, devoted, discussion, debate or campaign about independence. This is unavoidable now. Some people know how they will vote in a few years and I'll wager that a lot do not know or will change their minds between now and then. What's obvious is that Thursday was not a referendum on independence, only the referendum on independence will be a referendum on independence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tryfield Posted May 10, 2011 Share Posted May 10, 2011 What's obvious is that Thursday was not a referendum on independence, only the referendum on independence will be a referendum on independence. Bring it on. As for the rest of your shite, take a beta blocker, calm doon. I suggest you learn Gaelic if you hate everything connected to England and the English language. Ta Ta auld spud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon EF Posted May 10, 2011 Share Posted May 10, 2011 Bring it on. As for the rest of your shite, take a beta blocker, calm doon. I suggest you learn Gaelic if you hate everything connected to England and the English language. Ta Ta auld spud. See what I mean? You're a complete fool. Everything you write reeks of utter stupidity. I wonder if you realise this but try not to show it or whether you think it's everyone else that's the idiot. I don't actually know what's sadder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiwififer Posted May 10, 2011 Share Posted May 10, 2011 Scotland has never had a serious, devoted, discussion, debate or campaign about independence. I suspect it could descend into farce, a bit like a debate about immigration. We prob could do with an adult one about that as well, but any attempts get highjacked by either the BNP or folk shouting 'rascist' at every turn... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tryfield Posted May 10, 2011 Share Posted May 10, 2011 See what I mean? You're a complete fool. Everything you write reeks of utter stupidity. I wonder if you realise this but try not to show it or whether you think it's everyone else that's the idiot. I don't actually know what's sadder. I'll post a sensible response to a sensible remark. So far, you've yet to demand a deep thought from me. You don't make me think with your banal, fashionable and "in the spirit of the time" comments. You and others like you are caught up in a craze of 'here and now' Nationalism which is somewhat disturbing. Racists via a ballot box? Or xenophobes via financial greed for self satisfaction and the dislike of sharing a common wealth. A bit BNPish if you ask me. It's guys like you who hate the English Nationalists, but don't see any wrong in being Scottish Nationalists. Confusing? You bet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xbl Posted May 10, 2011 Author Share Posted May 10, 2011 I'll post a sensible response to a sensible remark. So far, you've yet to demand a deep thought from me. You don't make me think with your banal, fashionable and "in the spirit of the time" comments. You and others like you are caught up in a craze of 'here and now' Nationalism which is somewhat disturbing. Racists via a ballot box? Or xenophobes via financial greed for self satisfaction and the dislike of sharing a common wealth. A bit BNPish if you ask me. It's guys like you who hate the English Nationalists, but don't see any wrong in being Scottish Nationalists. Confusing? You bet. This post makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tryfield Posted May 10, 2011 Share Posted May 10, 2011 This post makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside. As well as all fuzzy outside? Glad to be of help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon EF Posted May 10, 2011 Share Posted May 10, 2011 I'll post a sensible response to a sensible remark. So far, you've yet to demand a deep thought from me. You don't make me think with your banal, fashionable and "in the spirit of the time" comments. You and others like you are caught up in a craze of 'here and now' Nationalism which is somewhat disturbing. Racists via a ballot box? Or xenophobes via financial greed for self satisfaction and the dislike of sharing a common wealth. A bit BNPish if you ask me. It's guys like you who hate the English Nationalists, but don't see any wrong in being Scottish Nationalists. Confusing? You bet. Seriously pal, I think you're about as capable of deep thought as a Labrador. I have no idea what you're alluding to with your 'spirit of the time' or 'here and now Nationalism'. My own opinions on the matter have been fairly consistent all through my adult life (which admittedly hasn't been a great deal of time). And what evidence do you have that I, or Scottish nationalists, in general are racists or xenophobes? Your own fantasies? You're completely betraying your own insecurities and paranoia on the subject with your previous comments about me hating everything English. That's a ludicrous accusation and one you can't possibly back up. Besides, I would like to see Scotland gain independence from the United Kingdom, not England. Are you saying now that I want independence because I know Scotland will be richer outside the UK than in it? Again, a fairly stunning admission from a unionist. As for a dislike for sharing the common wealth, everybody is in that boat I'm afraid. Who here would click their fingers and equalise the wealth of the world among every nation? Not many I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.