lichtgilphead Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 nice anecdote So, which part of the story do you, Ecto & Reynard find just that little bit unbelievable? 1) That she voted for the Unionist/Conservative candidate in every election between 1929 & 1979? 2) That Thatcher made an extra cold weather payment to most UK pensioners in the winter of 1981/82 (the coldest winter in a very long time), yet didn't make the payment to pensioners in Scotland because they were "used to it"? 3) That my grandmother believed that this showed that the Tories were willing to treat UK citizens differently based purely upon their geographic location? 3) That she walked all of 300 metres round to the SNP offices in Brothock Bridge? 4) That she joined the SNP? 5) That the Tory vote in Scotland dropped by nearly 115,000 (more than 12.5%) between the 1979 & 1983 General Elections, and that their vote is now significantly lower than either of these figures? 6) That she continued her SNP membership until her death in 1991? 7) That she voted SNP at every possible opportunity after she joined the party? Please be specific. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 So, which part of the story do you, Ecto & Reynard find just that little bit unbelievable? 1) That she voted for the Unionist/Conservative candidate in every election between 1929 & 1979? 2) That Thatcher made an extra cold weather payment to most UK pensioners in the winter of 1981/82 (the coldest winter in a very long time), yet didn't make the payment to pensioners in Scotland because they were "used to it"? 3) That my grandmother believed that this showed that the Tories were willing to treat UK citizens differently based purely upon their geographic location? 3) That she walked all of 300 metres round to the SNP offices in Brothock Bridge? 4) That she joined the SNP? 5) That the Tory vote in Scotland dropped by nearly 115,000 (more than 12.5%) between the 1979 & 1983 General Elections, and that their vote is now significantly lower than either of these figures? 6) That she continued her SNP membership until her death in 1991? 7) That she voted SNP at every possible opportunity after she joined the party? Please be specific. You missed one:-8.) That I had a grandmother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotbawmad Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 I don't get this obsession with vote SNP and you'll get the Tories. When there isn't a damn bit of difference between the two. Labour have already admitted they'll be continuing the same Tory policies after the election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 I don't get this obsession with vote SNP and you'll get the Tories. When there isn't a damn bit of difference between the two. There's a Rizla paper between all three. All are centre right parties. It makes very little difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cairn Terrier Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 There's a Rizla paper between all three. All are centre right parties. It makes very little difference. Couple of minor little differences. Nuclear weapons. Invading other countries on a regular basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Couple of minor little differences. Nuclear weapons. Invading other countries on a regular basis. So an indy Scotland wouldn't have been in NATO then? Oh... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 So an indy Scotland wouldn't have been in NATO then? Oh... Maybe the kumbaya brigade will manage to veto this commitment once they are allowed to vote on policy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cairn Terrier Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 So an indy Scotland wouldn't have been in NATO then? Oh... They would not have nuclear weapons based on home soil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Maybe the kumbaya brigade will manage to veto this commitment once they are allowed to vote on policy? It's a hard and fast commitment - agreed on at conference. Like re-regulating the buses, unanimously agreed on at conference Oh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 They would not have nuclear weapons based on home soil. Uh huh. But the "invading other countries" bit - we'd have been doing that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cairn Terrier Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Uh huh. But the "invading other countries" bit - we'd have been doing that? Ooh, funny guy. Argument lost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Ooh, funny guy. Argument lost. Yes, I doubt you've ever "won" an argument to be honest. Still, I'm happy to educate you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cairn Terrier Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Yes, I doubt you've ever "won" an argument to be honest. Still, I'm happy to educate you. So, to sum up there were a couple of little policy differences that you could just possibly squeeze a "Rizla" paper between. Glad we've cleared that up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 So, to sum up there were a couple of little policy differences that you could just possibly squeeze a "Rizla" paper between. Glad we've cleared that up. Yes, ones you've managed to mangle. Seems like you are completely unaware of what being in NATO actually involves. Do you know which countries had troops in Afghanistan for example? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cairn Terrier Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Yes, ones you've managed to mangle. Seems like you are completely unaware of what being in NATO actually involves. Do you know which countries had troops in Afghanistan for example? Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Yes. Right. So we would have been invading foreign countries, whether independent or not. Glad we've cleared that up, and you were talking nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 I don't get this obsession with vote SNP and you'll get the Tories. It's all Labour has got. The general seethe/obsession with the SNP is hilarious though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crùbag Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 There's a Rizla paper between all three. All are centre right parties. It makes very little difference. Unless you count removing nuclear weapons, not sending our children to fight in illegal wars, protecting the NHS - and not using PFI either, independence from the UK and promoting renewable energy over nuclear as being 'small' issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Unless you count removing nuclear weapons, not sending our children to fight in illegal wars, protecting the NHS - and not using PFI either, independence from the UK and promoting renewable energy over nuclear as being 'small' issues. Another idiot. "not sending our children to fight in illegal wars" - which illegal wars were these? "protecting the NHS " - Weightwatchers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gullane No 4 Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/01/follow-every-prediction-and-make-your-own-may2015-s-election-forecasting-machine Interesting stuff on here. All that stuff and nonsense about the Kippers and it looks like they will get between 2-5 seats. BBC debates with the 'top' party leaders blown out of the water. For once Cameron is correct to include The Greens but why does he and the BBC not mention the Uk's third largest political party? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.