From the beginning I said a No vote with just a 4% margin.......if only I'd placed a bet I might be able to bet that Pikes Peak! Can I vote SNP here in London?
theirs a few misguided people that compare snp to the bnp sorry ukip so suppose you could vote bnp sorry ukip. or you could do what i have just done not 5mins ago and join the S.N.P. labour/liberals/ tories. G.T.F. :Finger::smile:
Was Camaroon giving a warning shot to the rest of the UK that England was also going to have more say in their own affairs so butt out kind of attitude.
SNP are worse than UKIP. UKIP are Britain for Britain, doesn't matter if your have ginger hair or not, or what accent or parentage. SNP are for Scots for Scots, fuck the English and hope they feel pain. IMO obviously.
I can see nationalism as a movement based upon a desire for independence but if that is no longer a possibility what does it become ? Why, now that the independence question has been decided for a generation or more, is the SNP any different from UKIP ?
You may sneer at UKIP Fin but the SNP have at least one thing in common with them and that is that Westminster will regard large scale electoral support for them as a mere protest vote, a letting off of steam. In public they will put on their best humble we-hear-you face while behind closed doors their primary concern will not be accommodating the voice of democracy but finding a way of stopping it from interfering again. You can expect piffling placatory measures presented fraudulently as major reform and delivered by a Dickensian bureaucracy so grindingly slow that they never actually happen. Westminster has heard you and they will now try to reinterpret what you have said until it fits in with what they want. Already, before anyone has had the chance to sweep up in George Square, the Westminster parties are trying to work out how the new political reality in the UK can be met with as little change to their own establishment as possible.
As the name suggests UKIP are or were a Unionist party. But Farage was one of the first to start talking about the UK as a federal alliance as the level of support for Scottish independence became apparent. Their aim is a full restoration of UK (or English if we do go federal) sovereignty outside the EU. They've always talked of associate non-member status like Switzerland and Norway which means maintaining trade without political or monetary union or pooled sovereignty. Which is hardly extremist and is in fact more or less the reality Mr Cameron is talking about with his renegotiated terms just for Britain, except his route of unilateral special privileges negotiated from within are a legal impossibility. And he knows it. He's making soothing noises but he isn't serious. And it's little different to the kind of relationship Salmond was vaguely sketching for Scotland and the UK. Farage's aims won't end with a sort of Anglo Kristallnacht and a fortress Britain with jackboots on the streets, that is pure leftist hysteria; but they might well end, like Salmond's, in heroic failure just shy of a referendum majority with the Westminster establishment falsely claiming the result as a vindication of business as usual. I think that if Scots had been asked the hypothetical question "do you favour the concept of independence" the result would have been an overwhelming yes. How many NO voters were positively voting for the Union? I suspect few. I'll bet a majority were voting against uncertainty. Salmond did not offer a route map to his destination and unfortunately neither does Farage to his which is why both are easy prey to doomsday fantasising from opponents to change, though in both cases several options exist. It is not divisive or destabilising to talk hard details rather than trading in mere passion. It is the opposite. The political reality in the UK has changed. Our politicians must accept now that the electorate are not children and nothing is set in stone any more. Rhetoric won't do. We must have detail about the Union and our relationship with the EU.
I am sure the Schools Nutrition Programme will welcome your support and that of many others who have joined them recently....
Yep, done that and I wouldn't change a word. But then why should I? I'm a tax-paying voter expressing my opinion on an internet forum which is what they're for. I'm not an elected politician paid from the public purse to administer the affairs of state.
you have to remember gimlet, pete as much as i like and value his on line persona, is a member or at least a supporter of the old establishment and will do what he can to promote it, but pete will have to accept changes are coming.
Extraordinary! I have always been very interested in constitutional change, since undergraduate days, but it has always been a minority sport. Public interest in constitutional matters has traditionally been virtually nil. The list of constitutional changes over the past 20 years is quite long, and all good, but has been of quite low perceived importance in the political pecking order. If there is an upsurge in interest now at last, that is a good thing and I am pleased to see it - if a little surprised. What I fear may happen, however, is a hasty, blundering rush into back-of-a-fag-packet changes for short-term reasons - not thought through, having unintended consequences, and ultimately proving unworkable and unpopular. A wide range of constitutional structures has been tried out in various countries both historically and today, some successfully but others catastrophically. I favour learning the lessons won by other countries' hard experiences. Sadly there are some people keen to repeat in the UK experiments which have failed elsewhere, of which they seem ignorant.
That is the absolute truth and we are on that path already. Cameron set the trap and Labour walked straight in. I do believe he is genuinely serious about federalism, as he should be. It is the right thing to do. non english MPs should not be voting on English matters. labour do not want federalism, they cant afford to lose Scots and Welsh MPs. No agreement on more Devo will be reached. In 2015 labour will get thumped in the general election as the Tories will rightly blame them for scuppering constitutional reform and endangering the Union. Having said that, labour is finished in Scotland. Glasgow and many other parts of labours power base voted YES. We bare a grudge like no one else, and they will get routed in Scotland in 2015. Right now the SNP is about to overtake the LibDems to become the 3rd largest party in The UK. The greens and SSP have also increased membership. The SNP are sitting at 50% in the polls. So the Tories will romp the 2015 election. Moving to 2016, and the Scottish elections. the SNP and Greens will do very well, so well they May declare independence off the back of the size of their victory, and of course the broken promises made by Westminster. ........I agree. The three stooges made promises they could not keep to a ridiculous timescale. I'd they stick to it, it will be a disaster, and if they don't it will the end of the Union.
There is no comparison between the SNP and UKIP. The SNP has members of all colours, creeds and accents. There are SNP MSPs who are English. It is not an anti English movement. It is for immigration, as it is a method of redressing the balance of the population with respect to pensions. It is pro EU. UKIP on the other hand...... I find it disappointing that many on this forum do not look beyond the surface or maintain their preconceptions. The rest of the UKs population should be looking at the referendum and realise. 1) ordinary people can scare the crap out of the establishment to the point they will capitulate 2) that you can get ordinary people engaged in the political process 3) that the media can be manipulated by the establishment to convince the population that lies are in fact true. YOU MUST WATCH THIS-THINK ABOUT THE UPCOMING EU REFERENDUM I am actually at the point where I am inviting Bradders and Mrs Bradders up to stay for a weekend, so he can see for himself. He can meet Mrs749er (English) who cried at the result. He can meet many more too. So come on Paul, get yer bags packed, there's a great curry house nearby.
Yeah why not Derek Thing is even many scots I talk to find it racist, Salmonds approach that is. All I have is evidence which is presented to me: rhetoric from those in charge about too many years under English rule and the like; English students and parentage treated differently to that of other nationalities; Scot MPs voting for English students to pay £9k then giving their own students it for free Tbh if it wasn't for my son being of that age, so i have a vested interest, I wouldn't really know anything other than what 99% of England are fed via the media I like to think Scots are no more or less racist than English! But them I don't really get racism at all...
