Jump to content

The 56 in Westminster!


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Sturgeon must condemn.

No. Kyle, you're not getting it. What do you think will happen if she condemns it? Do you think The Spectator will shake her by the hand and thank her for her kind words? No, they'll say she's lost control of her party, or she's duplicitous, or there's talk of a backbench revolt. It surely hasn't escaped your notice that The Spectator doesn't like the SNP. This isn't a civil disagreement among friends. This is an attempted takedown and it should be treated as such. To wit, Sturgeon (and the rest of the SNP) need to beat The Spectator at their own game. The Twitter responses are a decent - if a little bit passive-aggressive - start at this, but really, any unsourced claims from The Spectator should be treated with harsh laughter and ridicule. There is no way a Tory magazine with a UK-wide circulation of 50,000 should be setting the agenda for the SNP. None. They are the fucking enemy, Kyle. They're not looking for condemnation, they're not looking for discourse - they are looking to end the SNP (and, by extension, Scottish independence) as a political force.

Here is what Sturgeon's prepared statement should say:

"I have heard about the clams in a Tory fanzine about SNP conduct on a night out, but suffice it to say I'll take the words of my esteemed parliamentary colleagues over those of a simpering dissembler like Alex Wickham. If he's not aware of what a boisterous night out looks like, that's really his loss and not something we need to concern ourselves with. In the meantime the 56 (fifty-six) of us sent to Westminster by the people of Scotland like to work hard and play hard, so let's get back to doing just that."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...