Political round up.............

First topic message reminder :

LionsV2 wrote:

Galted wrote:

As much as I agree with you that much of the reason for the Leave vote was the racism and pig-ignorance of the likes of Lionsv2 and old people, I'm not sure the questions you're asking are particularly relevant.  I'd quite like a cut in local crime but couldn't name a single local criminal.

I beg your pardon?

No doubt the mods will do nothing about that.

He said you were “PIG IGNORANT”. I’ve heard of hard of hearing before but not hard of reading.

Scottrf wrote:

Dave. wrote:I can get the link between Momentum and Stalinist policies. I can't get the link between certain Tories and Nazis.

If you don't agree with his point of views you're either stupid (leavers/Trump supporters) or evil racists (Tories apparently).

You said it, not me. I'm not sure you have an actual position - on anything.

Again, strangely, you don't pick me up on the 'Stalinist' comment. Says more about your biases than much else.

navyblueshorts wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

Dave. wrote:I can get the link between Momentum and Stalinist policies. I can't get the link between certain Tories and Nazis.

If you don't agree with his point of views you're either stupid (leavers/Trump supporters) or evil racists (Tories apparently).

You said it, not me. I'm not sure you have an actual position - on anything.

Again, strangely, you don't pick me up on the 'Stalinist' comment. Says more about your biases than much else.

I actually do have an opinion on most topics.

It's just impossible to discuss them here because people just identify with a party and criticise anything coming from the other side, and don't discuss topics objectively.

Or that or simply whinge about Trump. What is interesting to discuss about that?

It would be nice to read about them sometimes. Otherwise, why do you bother posting if all it's doing is contributing additionally to the issues you dislike so much here?

navyblueshorts wrote:It would be nice to read about them sometimes. Otherwise, why do you bother posting if all it's doing is contributing additionally to the issues you dislike so much here?

Read a lot of the old threads on here that aren't simply partisan bickering.

navyblueshorts wrote:

Ent wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Ent wrote:Would you want to go into public life at the moment?

I wouldn't be an MP for all the tea in china.

I hear what you're saying, but it's not like they're helping themselves are they? i've come across primary school kids that're more professional than most of that shower. We've got potentially one of the biggest political and economic events of recent times on the horizon and all they can come up with is this pathetic internecine party bickering.

This is the era of the easily offended and the twitter lynch mob, you can't do anything in public life without someone trawling through decades of your life looking for something the holier than thou nobodies can start a witch hunt over.

I'd love people to just start ignoring this guff and just get on with what they are doing/their job instead of placating idiots.

Yep, true and definitely not one of the better things about 'social media'. Perhaps if they actually did anything of moment competently, the 'guff' wouldn't attract such interest?

They aren't given a chance. Calls for people to quit their posts the day they are appointed.

We are rapidly becomig a race too stupid to survive.

Ent wrote:They aren't given a chance. Calls for people to quit their posts the day they are appointed.

We are rapidly becomig a race too stupid to survive.

Or to quit because of things somebody else said...

Last I heard Ben Bradley the Tory party vice chair for youth was still in his job after....

Calling Scottish people thick....Saying unemployed people should have vasectomies...calling other down on their luck types "wasters...."

Mps used to be forced to resign when they were having affairs twenty years..

Your argument isn't really that strong..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Last I heard Ben Bradley the Tory party vice chair for youth was still in his job after....

Calling Scottish people thick....Saying unemployed people should have vasectomies...calling other down on their luck types "wasters...."

Mps used to be forced to resign when they were having affairs twenty years..

Your argument isn't really that strong..

That literally just happened, wait and see. Jared O'Mara forced to resign. When was someone hounded to resign 20 years ago because of something their girlfriend said? For touching someones leg?

Scottrf wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Last I heard Ben Bradley the Tory party vice chair for youth was still in his job after....

Calling Scottish people thick....Saying unemployed people should have vasectomies...calling other down on their luck types "wasters...."

Mps used to be forced to resign when they were having affairs twenty years..

Your argument isn't really that strong..

That literally just happened, wait and see. Jared O'Mara forced to resign. When was someone hounded to resign 20 years ago because of something their girlfriend said? For touching someones leg?

He would of resigned by now if he was going....It has been two weeks.....

People were forced to quit after being caught with their pants down 20 years ago and this guy has said hugely offensive things and the news cycle has moved on...

It kind of disputes claims that Mps get away with less now......Now doesn't it ??

No it doesn't. It proves that not everyone who does something wrong is sacked. But it's one case and you haven't compared it with anything equivalent historically so it's not really evidence of anything.

I don't have to compare it to any case in history.....Because I am replying to the argument that Mps can't get away with anything anymore unlike in years past..

By making the case..

1. They used to resign when committing infidelity....Tim Yeo....David Mellor etc..

Gavin Williamson hasn't been asked to resign..

2. This guy's comments are horrendous and he still is in his job...

Enough rebuttal there..

Ent wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Ent wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Ent wrote:Would you want to go into public life at the moment?

I wouldn't be an MP for all the tea in china.

I hear what you're saying, but it's not like they're helping themselves are they? i've come across primary school kids that're more professional than most of that shower. We've got potentially one of the biggest political and economic events of recent times on the horizon and all they can come up with is this pathetic internecine party bickering.

This is the era of the easily offended and the twitter lynch mob, you can't do anything in public life without someone trawling through decades of your life looking for something the holier than thou nobodies can start a witch hunt over.

I'd love people to just start ignoring this guff and just get on with what they are doing/their job instead of placating idiots.

Yep, true and definitely not one of the better things about 'social media'. Perhaps if they actually did anything of moment competently, the 'guff' wouldn't attract such interest?

They aren't given a chance. Calls for people to quit their posts the day they are appointed.

We are rapidly becomig a race too stupid to survive.

That's just symptomatic of their ridiculous inability to make a coherent argument for or against anything. Everyone talks cr@p and says things that perhaps shouldn't have. In most cases, so what?

In fact, WTF are they even on 'social media' for?

Because nobody reads anything longer than 140 characters or watches anything longer than 10 seconds.

Scottrf wrote:Because nobody reads anything longer than 140 characters or watches anything longer than 10 seconds.

Yet form an opinion and call for action based on that amount of information.

The guy young quit his advisors role after a week because of old tweets, governments anti extremism person has calls to quits on day 1 of role, Phil Neville being accused of hate crimes the day he is appointed.

Who would want any sort of public role at the minute?

The general public set and expect standards from public figures that they no way meet or adhere to themselves.

Ent wrote:

Scottrf wrote:Because nobody reads anything longer than 140 characters or watches anything longer than 10 seconds.

Yet form an opinion and call for action based on that amount of information.

The guy young quit his advisors role after a week because of old tweets, governments anti extremism person has calls to quits on day 1 of role, Phil Neville being accused of hate crimes the day he is appointed.

Who would want any sort of public role at the minute?

People that aren't bigoted scum...Perhaps ??

In brighter news, Bombardier win their case over tariffs - that's a massive number of jobs secure in Belfast now. Unexpected win, too.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-northern-ireland-42825916

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Ent wrote:

Scottrf wrote:Because nobody reads anything longer than 140 characters or watches anything longer than 10 seconds.

Yet form an opinion and call for action based on that amount of information.

The guy young quit his advisors role after a week because of old tweets, governments anti extremism person has calls to quits on day 1 of role, Phil Neville being accused of hate crimes the day he is appointed.

Who would want any sort of public role at the minute?

People that aren't bigoted scum...Perhaps ??

To clarify you think Phil Neville, Sara Khan and Toby Young are bigoted scum?

Dave. wrote:In brighter news, Bombardier win their case over tariffs - that's a massive number of jobs secure in Belfast now. Unexpected win, too.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-northern-ireland-42825916

That is a relief, 1000s good jobs in Belfast saved.

Ent wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Ent wrote:

Scottrf wrote:Because nobody reads anything longer than 140 characters or watches anything longer than 10 seconds.

Yet form an opinion and call for action based on that amount of information.

The guy young quit his advisors role after a week because of old tweets, governments anti extremism person has calls to quits on day 1 of role, Phil Neville being accused of hate crimes the day he is appointed.

Who would want any sort of public role at the minute?

People that aren't bigoted scum...Perhaps ??

To clarify you think Phil Neville, Sara Khan and Toby Young are bigoted scum?

I don't think that but to me this is more a case of daft moments of people either not realising that that it's public forum or in the case of Young chickens coming home to roost as he spent his time actively winding people up.

The difference between now and previous years is simply that instead of private messages on MSN or yahoo everything is public and people are held to account on what they say.

I think the major problem is the public bodies or companies who react like they did to H&S rules rather stupidly and actually giving in to this pressure. If this nonsense pressure actually worked then Jeremy hunt, IDS, Liam Fox, Boris Johnson etc would have been fired long ago. The HR people need to stop bottling it.

I wouldn't want to be an mp at this moment not because of this public pressure crap but because the electorate has hamstrung government by voting leave and May has exacerbated the problem by triggering article 50 before we were ready.

Now the government is left with the unenviable task of Brexit which is 40 plus years of integration needing to be unraveled in three without a crippling blow to business and jobs . This task is so vast that domestic policy is left by the wayside and wholesale cuts will be needed. That said austerity has already cut thsee departments to the bone so they can't even fall back on that.

There is nowhere for the government to go.

Being an MP is a very unenviable job: long hours, lots of travel, job security not great (unless you’re in a safe seat!), actual security issues,  local media spotlight (maybe national) and many other personal expenses. I don’t think the pay, relatively speaking, is that great either.

I nearly stood as a candidate in the last GE (decided against in the end), so had to give these issues consideration (even though I would have had about a 0.01% chance of getting elected!).

My brother stood as a candidate many years ago. My step-dad also stood and, in the last election, a good mate stood.
But, like Duty, it was just as token candidates opposing safe seats - but they all seemed to enjoy the campaigning, hustings etc. You should give it a go, if you're interested.

Ent wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Ent wrote:

Scottrf wrote:Because nobody reads anything longer than 140 characters or watches anything longer than 10 seconds.

Yet form an opinion and call for action based on that amount of information.

The guy young quit his advisors role after a week because of old tweets, governments anti extremism person has calls to quits on day 1 of role, Phil Neville being accused of hate crimes the day he is appointed.

Who would want any sort of public role at the minute?

People that aren't bigoted scum...Perhaps ??

To clarify you think Phil Neville, Sara Khan and Toby Young are bigoted scum?

I never mentioned Phil Neville who made a harmless joke about Women and kitchens hardly in the same league as Young and Bradley..

When people are abusing the disabled and other less fortunate people with the most disgusting attacks..

I have a problem with it because my taxes are paying for them..

I expect a certain level of behaviour from adults in public life..

Well you might be in luck as Williamson has fessed up to an affair.

Poor old May has to clarify her Brexit position whilst being three or four letters from flying over a cliff.

Good luck finding a position that placates both sides..

NC....Should we change the voting system ??

Yes.....36 (-9)
No......54 (+10)

Seems now the Tories are struggling the voting system isn't so bad after all...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42885211

Anyone else see this? Looks worrying - could Capita be the next Carillion? The Carillion story has gone a bit low profile now (much of media has attention span of a toddler and can only cope with 1 big story a week before moving on to something else) but I think its going to have huge repercussions for both their supply chain and clients.

MrI

The take on this is that Capita's new boss is trying to get ahead of any issues so that they don't become the next Carillion. Yes, they do have some issues, but their basic position is not as weak as Carillion's was (I have been told via someone that worked for Carillion about 7 or 8 years ago that even then it was widely known within the company that they were operating most PFI contracts essentially at cost).

It could just be because of my professional persepective, but I always thought of Carillion as primarily a building contractor who added the facilities / services string to their bow, whereas Capita has always been more focussed on facilities as their fundamental business. As for the knock-on effects of Carillion's demise, in the short term it is likely to cause some pain, but things will either continue through joint venture partners (HS2 for example) or be re-contracted (after all, someone still needs to supply the services, and the Gov aren't going to take things back in house), so I don't think the effects will be as bad as some of the bleaker reports.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:NC....Should we change the voting system ??

Yes.....36 (-9)
No......54 (+10)

Seems now the Tories are struggling the voting system isn't so bad after all...

Typical. When will people wake up to the fact the existing system isn't fit for purpose? Never I guess.

MrInvisible wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42885211

Anyone else see this?  Looks worrying - could Capita be the next Carillion?  The Carillion story has gone a bit low profile now (much of media has attention span of a toddler and can only cope with 1 big story a week before moving on to something else) but I think its going to have huge repercussions for both their supply chain and clients.

Quelle surprise! This type of company clearly bids for Government contracts at a rate for which they can't possibly supply the service for any length of time. They lie and quote a false price and some d!ckhead in Government awards them the contract, probably so they can trumpet what great 'value for money' it is and how they've saved the taxpayer loads. In reality, it just delays the doo-doo hitting the fan.
It happens all the time, at national level as well as local. Pathetic.

Tory mp moaning that her own Brexit minister may have misled the house...

Brexit is a killer...Labour might as well go on vacation and let the remainers and Brexiteers in Tory land get on with it..

In other news it would seem like the Scottish 'flash in the pan' Tory bubble has burst:-

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/tory-revival-hits-buffers-party-11948745

When Ruth Davidson gets off her stern-headmistress routine with the forever present pout and deep set frown, then the Torys might actually like the climate in Scotland again. This 'I'm a tough Bitch' brand can only last so long before the Spitting Image laughs start rolling in.. the aisles.

SecretFly wrote:When Ruth Davidson gets off her stern-headmistress routine with the forever present pout and deep set frown, then the Torys might actually like the climate in Scotland again.  This 'I'm a tough Bitch' brand can only last so long before the Spitting Image laughs start rolling in.. the aisles.

That's not the reason. Ruth Davidson has struck this pose throughout her political career without adverse effects. Her pout was in place when (according to some) she was leading the Tory rebirth in Scotland. The reason is that people are seeing the Tories for what they are - Westminster puppets. They voted recently to pass a Brexit Bill because Westminster Tories ordained it even though it was a detriment to Scotland. Whatsmore they got seats promising they'd get better deals for Scottish fishermen but that is proving to be more BS.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

SecretFly wrote:When Ruth Davidson gets off her stern-headmistress routine with the forever present pout and deep set frown, then the Torys might actually like the climate in Scotland again.  This 'I'm a tough Bitch' brand can only last so long before the Spitting Image laughs start rolling in.. the aisles.

That's not the reason. Ruth Davidson has struck this pose throughout her political career without adverse effects. Her pout was in place when (according to some) she was leading the Tory rebirth in Scotland. The reason is that people are seeing the Tories for what they are - Westminster puppets. They voted recently to pass a Brexit Bill because Westminster Tories ordained it even though it was a detriment to Scotland. Whatsmore they got seats promising they'd get better deals for Scottish fishermen but that is proving to be more BS.

Oh...so you mean there are Real reasons why Tories are dropping off?

Disappointed in that. I'd prefer the facile reason myself.

SecretFly wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

SecretFly wrote:When Ruth Davidson gets off her stern-headmistress routine with the forever present pout and deep set frown, then the Torys might actually like the climate in Scotland again.  This 'I'm a tough Bitch' brand can only last so long before the Spitting Image laughs start rolling in.. the aisles.

That's not the reason. Ruth Davidson has struck this pose throughout her political career without adverse effects. Her pout was in place when (according to some) she was leading the Tory rebirth in Scotland. The reason is that people are seeing the Tories for what they are - Westminster puppets. They voted recently to pass a Brexit Bill because Westminster Tories ordained it even though it was a detriment to Scotland. Whatsmore they got seats promising they'd get better deals for Scottish fishermen but that is proving to be more BS.

Oh...so you mean there are Real reasons why Tories are dropping off?

Disappointed in that.  I'd prefer the facile reason myself.

Well like I said Davidson's pout has been constant. Her pout was in place when (supposedly) the Scottish Tories were sweeping all before them. And her pout is still there when the Scottish Tories 'blink and you'll miss it' rise is dropping. So her pout is not the reason. Her pout is a constant unlike Scottish Tory popularity.

I think her (and their) problems are that the Tories are Unionist, along with several other parties up there. Only one independence party. Probably also increasing support for La-La-Land Corbyn I shouldn't wonder.

Forgive me, but I'm past giving a damn about it any more. Close the door on the way out.

Wrong thread.

I see jezza has released his tax return and asked may to do the same.

navyblueshorts wrote:I think her (and their) problems are that the Tories are Unionist, along with several other parties up there. Only one independence party. Probably also increasing support for La-La-Land Corbyn I shouldn't wonder.

Forgive me, but I'm past giving a damn about it any more. Close the door on the way out.

Survation...

SNP 39
Lab 27
Con 24

Con finished above Lab in June........Labour seem a little hampered up there by having a Yorkshire man leading the Scottish Labour party..

I agree with Secretfly........The Rottweiller...True blue... Modern Woman act from Davidson is probably wearing a little thin...

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:I think her (and their) problems are that the Tories are Unionist, along with several other parties up there. Only one independence party. Probably also increasing support for La-La-Land Corbyn I shouldn't wonder.

Forgive me, but I'm past giving a damn about it any more. Close the door on the way out.

Survation...

SNP 39
Lab 27
Con 24

Con finished above Lab in June........Labour seem a little hampered up there by having a Yorkshire man leading the Scottish Labour party..

I agree with Secretfly........The Rottweiller...True blue... Modern Woman act from Davidson is probably wearing a little thin...

Seems a heck of a lot like straw clutching. Just months ago the yoons were prancing around like it was the Tories second coming in Scotland and predictions were (from them) that they'd be in power at the next election in Scotland. So what has happened? Her pout/pose means Jack in the world of politics. What does matter is how party's are performing. The Tories (Scottish branch) just last week voted to back a Brexit Bill that they had been moaning about in Holyrood so chose to tow the Westminster partyline rather than stand up for what was best for the contituents that voted them in. Also they won fishermen's votes claiming they'd improve fishermen's rights in Scotland....and they haven't. Those are the reasons that sway polls. Or if you wish (though I suspect many on here don't) it is because the SNP are performing well.

Con 43
Lab 39.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:I think her (and their) problems are that the Tories are Unionist, along with several other parties up there. Only one independence party. Probably also increasing support for La-La-Land Corbyn I shouldn't wonder.

Forgive me, but I'm past giving a damn about it any more. Close the door on the way out.

Survation...

SNP 39
Lab 27
Con 24

Con finished above Lab in June........Labour seem a little hampered up there by having a Yorkshire man leading the Scottish Labour party..

I agree with Secretfly........The Rottweiller...True blue... Modern Woman act from Davidson is probably wearing a little thin...

Seems a heck of a lot like straw clutching. Just months ago the yoons were prancing around like it was the Tories second coming in Scotland and predictions were (from them) that they'd be in power at the next election in Scotland. So what has happened? Her pout/pose means Jack in the world of politics. What does matter is how party's are performing. The Tories (Scottish branch) just last week voted to back a Brexit Bill that they had been moaning about in Holyrood so chose to tow the Westminster partyline rather than stand up for what was best for the contituents that voted them in. Also they won fishermen's votes claiming they'd improve fishermen's rights in Scotland....and they haven't. Those are the reasons that sway polls. Or if you wish (though I suspect many on here don't) it is because the SNP are performing well.

Another unmitigated SNP triumph.  

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/07/scottish-government-criticised-over-us-military-use-of-airport

superflyweight wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:I think her (and their) problems are that the Tories are Unionist, along with several other parties up there. Only one independence party. Probably also increasing support for La-La-Land Corbyn I shouldn't wonder.

Forgive me, but I'm past giving a damn about it any more. Close the door on the way out.

Survation...

SNP 39
Lab 27
Con 24

Con finished above Lab in June........Labour seem a little hampered up there by having a Yorkshire man leading the Scottish Labour party..

I agree with Secretfly........The Rottweiller...True blue... Modern Woman act from Davidson is probably wearing a little thin...

Seems a heck of a lot like straw clutching. Just months ago the yoons were prancing around like it was the Tories second coming in Scotland and predictions were (from them) that they'd be in power at the next election in Scotland. So what has happened? Her pout/pose means Jack in the world of politics. What does matter is how party's are performing. The Tories (Scottish branch) just last week voted to back a Brexit Bill that they had been moaning about in Holyrood so chose to tow the Westminster partyline rather than stand up for what was best for the contituents that voted them in. Also they won fishermen's votes claiming they'd improve fishermen's rights in Scotland....and they haven't. Those are the reasons that sway polls. Or if you wish (though I suspect many on here don't) it is because the SNP are performing well.

Another unmitigated SNP triumph.  

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/07/scottish-government-criticised-over-us-military-use-of-airport

Undoubtedly the fault of the Westminster Government...

superflyweight wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:I think her (and their) problems are that the Tories are Unionist, along with several other parties up there. Only one independence party. Probably also increasing support for La-La-Land Corbyn I shouldn't wonder.

Forgive me, but I'm past giving a damn about it any more. Close the door on the way out.

Survation...

SNP 39
Lab 27
Con 24

Con finished above Lab in June........Labour seem a little hampered up there by having a Yorkshire man leading the Scottish Labour party..

I agree with Secretfly........The Rottweiller...True blue... Modern Woman act from Davidson is probably wearing a little thin...

Seems a heck of a lot like straw clutching. Just months ago the yoons were prancing around like it was the Tories second coming in Scotland and predictions were (from them) that they'd be in power at the next election in Scotland. So what has happened? Her pout/pose means Jack in the world of politics. What does matter is how party's are performing. The Tories (Scottish branch) just last week voted to back a Brexit Bill that they had been moaning about in Holyrood so chose to tow the Westminster partyline rather than stand up for what was best for the contituents that voted them in. Also they won fishermen's votes claiming they'd improve fishermen's rights in Scotland....and they haven't. Those are the reasons that sway polls. Or if you wish (though I suspect many on here don't) it is because the SNP are performing well.

Another unmitigated SNP triumph.  

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/07/scottish-government-criticised-over-us-military-use-of-airport

And on issues closer to home Scottish Tory MP's were saying they'd vote to have amendments made to the Brexit Bill and the following week they reneged and voted to back their Tory Westminster masters even though it was seen as detrimental to the Scottish constituents they were elected to represent. Me thinks that was part of the reason a chunk went out of the Tory support in the latest opinion polls.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

superflyweight wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:I think her (and their) problems are that the Tories are Unionist, along with several other parties up there. Only one independence party. Probably also increasing support for La-La-Land Corbyn I shouldn't wonder.

Forgive me, but I'm past giving a damn about it any more. Close the door on the way out.

Survation...

SNP 39
Lab 27
Con 24

Con finished above Lab in June........Labour seem a little hampered up there by having a Yorkshire man leading the Scottish Labour party..

I agree with Secretfly........The Rottweiller...True blue... Modern Woman act from Davidson is probably wearing a little thin...

Seems a heck of a lot like straw clutching. Just months ago the yoons were prancing around like it was the Tories second coming in Scotland and predictions were (from them) that they'd be in power at the next election in Scotland. So what has happened? Her pout/pose means Jack in the world of politics. What does matter is how party's are performing. The Tories (Scottish branch) just last week voted to back a Brexit Bill that they had been moaning about in Holyrood so chose to tow the Westminster partyline rather than stand up for what was best for the contituents that voted them in. Also they won fishermen's votes claiming they'd improve fishermen's rights in Scotland....and they haven't. Those are the reasons that sway polls. Or if you wish (though I suspect many on here don't) it is because the SNP are performing well.

Another unmitigated SNP triumph.  

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/07/scottish-government-criticised-over-us-military-use-of-airport

And on issues closer to home Scottish Tory MP's were saying they'd vote to have amendments made to the Brexit Bill and the following week they reneged and voted to back their Tory Westminster masters even though it was seen as detrimental to the Scottish constituents they were elected to represent. Me thinks that was part of the reason a chunk went out of the Tory support in the latest opinion polls.

Sorry, the point raised wasn't about the Tories. Care to comment on the SNP issue raised?

navyblueshorts wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

superflyweight wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:I think her (and their) problems are that the Tories are Unionist, along with several other parties up there. Only one independence party. Probably also increasing support for La-La-Land Corbyn I shouldn't wonder.

Forgive me, but I'm past giving a damn about it any more. Close the door on the way out.

Survation...

SNP 39
Lab 27
Con 24

Con finished above Lab in June........Labour seem a little hampered up there by having a Yorkshire man leading the Scottish Labour party..

I agree with Secretfly........The Rottweiller...True blue... Modern Woman act from Davidson is probably wearing a little thin...

Seems a heck of a lot like straw clutching. Just months ago the yoons were prancing around like it was the Tories second coming in Scotland and predictions were (from them) that they'd be in power at the next election in Scotland. So what has happened? Her pout/pose means Jack in the world of politics. What does matter is how party's are performing. The Tories (Scottish branch) just last week voted to back a Brexit Bill that they had been moaning about in Holyrood so chose to tow the Westminster partyline rather than stand up for what was best for the contituents that voted them in. Also they won fishermen's votes claiming they'd improve fishermen's rights in Scotland....and they haven't. Those are the reasons that sway polls. Or if you wish (though I suspect many on here don't) it is because the SNP are performing well.

Another unmitigated SNP triumph.  

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/07/scottish-government-criticised-over-us-military-use-of-airport

And on issues closer to home Scottish Tory MP's were saying they'd vote to have amendments made to the Brexit Bill and the following week they reneged and voted to back their Tory Westminster masters even though it was seen as detrimental to the Scottish constituents they were elected to represent. Me thinks that was part of the reason a chunk went out of the Tory support in the latest opinion polls.

Sorry, the point raised wasn't about the Tories. Care to comment on the SNP issue raised?

If I am honest - it doesn't bother me in the slightest. Is it detrimental to Scotland in anyway? No. Is it affecting Scots in anyway? No. Also it is so relevant it hasn't even made local news bulletins.

Now onto this yellow Tory issue. Thoughts?

The coastal airport, 32 miles south of Glasgow, was bought for £1 by the Scottish government in November 2013, when Alex Salmond was first minister, to save it from closure. Between then and April 2017 the airport lost £26.5m as 500,000 civilian passengers a year went to rival airports.

It is eligible for another £7.7m in government loans this year to cover its continuing losses, which would take its total debts to the taxpayer to nearly £48m, plus interest. That is more than double the £21m ministers originally said would be needed to help return the airport to profit.

Did you read it at all?

Yes I read it but question the source and accuracy. Evidently, must be questionable since it has not been picked up on any of today's TV news bulletins and the newspaper reporting this is a staunch unionist newspaper.

EDIT: STV News has a piece on it saying: Speaking at First Minister's Questions on Thursday, Harvie asked how many American military strikes had been facilitated by the use of Prestwick.

The First Minister said the airport, which was taken into public ownership by the Scottish Government in 2013, had been providing a refuelling service to military aircraft around the world for decades.

She said the report in The Guardian was not a "revelation" but "a load of bunkum".

The story, published on Wednesday, reveals official memos obtained under freedom of information detailing Prestwick use in "active duty" US Air Force missions last year, as well as visits to American military fairs by airport executives.

It also showed that Transport Scotland officials lobbied Scottish ministers to meet Trump Organisation representatives, US Air Force commanders and other US officials to promote the airport's business interests during an official ministerial tour of the US in 2015.

Sturgeon said no such meetings ever took place and has previously pointed out that ministers are not involved in Prestwick's business dealings.

In 2016-17, Prestwick Airport reduced its losses to £8.6m, down from £9.2m the year before, boosted by a rise in rise in military aircraft refuelling activity.

Bunkum is pretty likely given how the unionist media love to 'invent' anti-SnP stuff to such a degree that the Daily Mail last week had to retract a totally false report and apologise to Nicola Sturgeon.

The level of adoration is admirable, but it’s utterly mad.

It’s ok to criticise a political party when they f*ck up.  It’s healthy, in fact.  What’s not healthy is to reduce all political discourse to whataboutery and fake news.  

I only posted the article as a response to your unstinting faith in a political party that does some things right and does some things wrong.

superflyweight wrote:
I only posted the article as a response to your unstinting faith in a political party that does some things right and does some things wrong.

Well I'd say that is a first right there.

And who says I say the SNP do nothing wrong? Huge assumption there. My affinity with the SNP is their end goal - an independent Scotland away from the incompetence of Westminster rule. I also see fit to give a modicum of balance to discussions here. All Tory/Labour good and SNP bad views would leave little to discuss.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

superflyweight wrote:
I only posted the article as a response to your unstinting faith in a political party that does some things right and does some things wrong.

Well I'd say that is a first right there.

And who says I say the SNP do nothing wrong? Huge assumption there. My affinity with the SNP is their end goal - an independent Scotland away from the incompetence of Westminster rule. I also see fit to give a modicum of balance to discussions here. All Tory/Labour good and SNP bad views would leave little to discuss.

We can only work with what you give us, bud. You refuse to accept any criticism of them whatsoever.