Yet another attack by the Anti-Rangers Party (SNP)

[aweebluesoandso 290]

13 hours ago, Briton said:

Most of the people of the world are republicans. The idea that people are repugnant because they don't want to be 'reigned over' by someone just because they are, or claim to be, the descendant of some ancient scummy war lord (no, they aren't really majestic).  Get a grip.

I'm talking about the vile republicans that glorify in bombing and killing British citizens, that have attached, infiltrated and virtually taken over the SNP and fine you know it.

[Bill 13,717]

16 hours ago, Briton said:

Most of the people of the world are republicans. The idea that people are repugnant because they don't want to be 'reigned over' by someone just because they are, or claim to be, the descendant of some ancient scummy war lord (no, they aren't really majestic).  Get a grip.

The Russians are ruled by a king. The Chinese are ruled over by a king. The PRK is ruled by a king. Same in Egypt, Iran, and the entire Arab world. Kazakhstan, all the other Stans and most of Africa are ruled by kings. So many it's going to be boring to mention them all. They can't all be wrong. ?

 

What ... was king not the right word?

[Gaffer 1,665]

I find a lot of this thread very interesting, and it just shows the various assumptions that some of us can make about people based on their voting preferences.  Even when I did vote for any party (many many years ago), I don't know what anyone could really take from it, unless they knew which specific policy drove me to vote for them.  Are people so entrenched in a particular party that these assumptions are reasonable?

 

I've seen statements on here saying that the SNP supporters are anti unionist, and that they are republicans, etc.  Really?  I understand a lot of people are, but it's too much to assume that the majority are.  I've voted SNP (along with many other parties) in the past but it was for very specific policies that were important to me at the time.  So what would you call me?  I could be regarded as unionist because I prefer being part of a United Kingdom.  But I could be anti union since I want to leave the EU (but please don't get me started on that can of worms).  I have to say though that if I thought an independent Scotland would be better, I'd vote for that in a referendum.  I don't, so I don't.  Having had such a landslide victory at the polls for the SNP a few years ago, those that believe that all SNP supporters are pro independence would have expected a clear victory in that regard at the referendum.  That didn't happen, so why do we persist with this desire to lump people together in simple boxes?  That doesn't make sense to me.

 

My point is that it is surely almost impossible to know much about someone based on a box they tick at the polls.  Having said that, I create my own box which reads "None of the above" so I agree that tells you a bit about how I think, but let's leave that aside.  What I can tell you is that I am not thinking about my role as a Rangers fan when I'm at the polls and doubt many people are.  Instead they'll be thinking about their families, job, health, wealth, and other such issues.  Equally however, I think people DO think about how trustworthy (or not) certain politicians have proven to be, and vote accordingly.  It's for that reason, and that reason alone that I think many voters will turn against these moronic politicians who spout such open bias or lies.  The problem (as I've found) is who to then vote for.  Maybe the reason so many people turn out for referendums and yet so few for general elections demonstrates that people ARE politically minded, but they just dislike career politicians.

 

Its funny how quick so many people are to condemn others (especially fellow fans) for voting SNP.  If you consider the injustices perpetrated by Labour and the Tories, are any of their voters able to take a moral high ground?  I wouldn't think so.

[buster. 5,194]

@Gaffer....... the WHOLE shooting match seems to be a race to the bottom in any direction you, me or whoever points toward.

 

Edited November 6, 2018 by buster.

[Bill 13,717]

10 minutes ago, Gaffer said:

I've voted SNP (along with many other parties) in the past but it was for very specific policies that were important to me at the time.  So what would you call me?  I could be regarded as unionist because I prefer being part of a United Kingdom.  But I could be anti union since I want to leave the EU (but please don't get me started on that can of worms).  I have to say though that if I thought an independent Scotland would be better, I'd vote for that in a referendum.  I don't, so I don't. 

Reformed? Rehabilitated?

 

 

13 minutes ago, Gaffer said:

 That didn't happen, so why do we persist with this desire to lump people together in simple boxes?  That doesn't make sense to me.

Surely the SNP IS a simple box. "Independence at all costs." Nothing else matters, everything else is sacrificed for that one goal. If ever there was a simple box, it would have SNP stamped on the side.

 

 

17 minutes ago, Gaffer said:

What I can tell you is that I am not thinking about my role as a Rangers fan when I'm at the polls and doubt many people are.  Instead they'll be thinking about their families, job, health, wealth, and other such issues. 

I've posted on here several times that if I believed independence could reasonably offer better life prospects for me and my family then I would be giving it serious consideration. It clearly doesn't, by any measure I can see. Taking that together with the disastrous failure of the current administration to carry out the responsibilities of government, I'm utterly bemused why anyone would be voting SNP and yet many obviously do ... so why is that and isn't the pursuit of an honest answer worth the candle? Families, job, health, wealth, and other such issues ... do you really think that's what drives the average SNP voter?

 

 

22 minutes ago, Gaffer said:

It's funny how quick so many people are to condemn others (especially fellow fans) for voting SNP.  If you consider the injustices perpetrated by Labour and the Tories, are any of their voters able to take a moral high ground?  I wouldn't think so.

Other than the SNP, the only other party I've seen in govt in Scotland is Labour and that was only slightly less mired in the politics of bigotry than the SNP. As for being quick to condemn SNP voting Rangers fans, I think we need to be careful not to allow false indignation to colour the facts. As far as I can remember, no one has said to anyone they shouldn't vote SNP. What HAS been said is that, for obvious reasons that have been outlined time and again on here, anyone who votes SNP and professes to support Rangers must inevitably be conflicted and that the equally inevitable outcome of that has to be a reinvention of one or the other. As far as I'm concerned they can kiss Elsie's arse twice daily, so long as they don't continue to revise what Rangers has been and largely still is. Which they always do.

 

I don't belong to any political party either. Nor do I have any allegiance to one although I'm sure the assumption is I'm a tory, which I'm not. There are people here who would gnaw their thumbs off to see Corbyn in power (it's easy when you don't actually live in this country) while I wouldn't give MAY another day in No 10. If I vote, which I usually do it is based on which party can best limit the damage perpetrated by the worst choice. For many years now that has meant voting for whoever could best limit the chaos of the SNP. 

 

BTW, a really good post. I seldom read more than a couple of lines of anything but I enjoyed yours to the end.

[Gaffer 1,665]

23 minutes ago, Bill said:

Reformed? Rehabilitated?

 

 

Surely the SNP IS a simple box. "Independence at all costs." Nothing else matters, everything else is sacrificed for that one goal. If ever there was a simple box, it would have SNP stamped on the side.

 

 

I've posted on here several times that if I believed independence could reasonably offer better life prospects for me and my family then I would be giving it serious consideration. It clearly doesn't, by any measure I can see. Taking that together with the disastrous failure of the current administration to carry out the responsibilities of government, I'm utterly bemused why anyone would be voting SNP and yet many obviously do ... so why is that and isn't the pursuit of an honest answer worth the candle? Families, job, health, wealth, and other such issues ... do you really think that's what drives the average SNP voter?

 

 

Other than the SNP, the only other party I've seen in govt in Scotland is Labour and that was only slightly less mired in the politics of bigotry than the SNP. As for being quick to condemn SNP voting Rangers fans, I think we need to be careful not to allow false indignation to colour the facts. As far as I can remember, no one has said to anyone they shouldn't vote SNP. What HAS been said is that, for obvious reasons that have been outlined time and again on here, anyone who votes SNP and professes to support Rangers must inevitably be conflicted and that the equally inevitable outcome of that has to be a reinvention of one or the other. As far as I'm concerned they can kiss Elsie's arse twice daily, so long as they don't continue to revise what Rangers has been and largely still is. Which they always do.

 

I don't belong to any political party either. Nor do I have any allegiance to one although I'm sure the assumption is I'm a tory, which I'm not. There are people here who would gnaw their thumbs off to see Corbyn in power (it's easy when you don't actually live in this country) while I wouldn't give MAY another day in No 10. If I vote, which I usually do it is based on which party can best limit the damage perpetrated by the worst choice. For many years now that has meant voting for whoever could best limit the chaos of the SNP. 

 

BTW, a really good post. I seldom read more than a couple of lines of anything but I enjoyed yours to the end.

I suspect you are right about the simplicity as far as the MSPs are concerned, but I don't think it's a simple box for the voters.  I think it's very presumptive to say that those who vote SNP are voting based on a single policy to achieve independence.  I wonder if others can shed some light on that because I'm only going by what some friends/family members tell me their reasons are.

 

Not only do I think that people DO vote based on their families, job, health, and wealth, but it actually astonishes me that you doubt that.  I think you really believe they'd vote independence at all costs.  Maybe you're right, but I'd be surprised if that's the case.  Again, maybe an appropriate person can comment.  I do know though that if I was certain that a particular party could do wonders for my family, but at the expense of my football team, I'd vote for them.  Like you though, I don't think any of these parties really have the desire and ability to make the sort of changes that could really make a difference.

 

Buster's earlier observation may be correct that it's a race to the bottom.  I don't believe that politicians start off life in that sphere to screw things up, so is their inability to make things better just a result of their incompetence?  I'd prefer more people outside of politics to get involved, even to resolve single issues.  I can't blame those that don't though.  I wouldn't.  I like to base decisions on facts, and all the misinformation would just frustrate me.  I understand the economics of Scotland, UK, and the EU and it amazes me how all sides blatantly manipulate the same facts to support their arguments.

 

And since we are on the subject of facts, we are just 4 points behind Celtic, and with their inability to continue at the same level of funding in their team in 2019, it's only a matter of time before they implode.  So, unless much of our debt is converted to equity (as has been suggested), maybe the old firm clubs are also in a race to the bottom too.  As long as we get 55 before that happens, I'll be happy.

[Bill 13,717]

42 minutes ago, Gaffer said:

 I think it's very presumptive to say that those who vote SNP are voting based on a single policy to achieve independence.

I don't think it's presumptive at all, since the SNP only has one policy. What else COULD they be voting for? Better healthcare, better education, better law & order? Better local government? Fairer taxes? More personal freedoms? No, looking at the SNP's record in power, it can't be any of those and THAT is precisely the problem. Hope over disappointment.

[Bill 13,717]

49 minutes ago, Gaffer said:

Not only do I think that people DO vote based on their families, job, health, and wealth, but it actually astonishes me that you doubt that.

But they didn't get any of those things. Not the first time, not the second time, not the third time either. So what ARE they voting for? Your faith in human nature is touching but we're beyond tales of idealism where the SNP is concerned. The tories had to be judged in 1997. Labour had to be judged in 2010. Now judgement of the SNP can no longer be avoided.

Edited November 6, 2018 by Bill

[Darthter 542]

1 hour ago, Bill said:

I don't think it's presumptive at all, since the SNP only has one policy. What else COULD they be voting for? Better healthcare, better education, better law & order? Better local government? Fairer taxes? More personal freedoms? No, looking at the SNP's record in power, it can't be any of those and THAT is precisely the problem. Hope over disappointment.

Wee bit more than that....

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40091999

 

Quote

Key policies

• A plan for an "alternative to austerity" that could release almost £120bn for public spending across the UK over the next parliament
• This would mean balancing the UK budget for day-to-day spending by the end of the parliament, and after that borrowing only to invest
• Hold a second independence referendum "at the end of the Brexit process"
• Protect Scotland's place in the single market and demand for the Scottish government a place at the table in Brexit negotiations
• Secure a mandate for Scotland having a choice on its future when the terms of Brexit are clear
• A living wage, by the end of the next UK parliament, that will be slightly more than £10 per hour
• Call on the new UK government to increase health spending per head of population in England to the current Scottish level, which is 7% higher
• This would result in an extra £1bn for Scotland, on top of planned increases
• Support an increase across the UK in the Additional Rate of income tax - for those earning more than £150,000 - from 45p to 50p
• Press for the abolition of the two-child cap on tax credits and the associated "rape clause".
• Seek to protect the triple lock on pensions
• Stop cuts to the winter fuel allowance
• No increase in taxation on the low paid, in National Insurance or in VAT.
• A call for Scotland to have control over immigration
• Removal of the 1% pay cap on public sector pay
• Stand against all of the further planned cuts to social security,
• Demand reversal of the cut to Employment and Support Allowance that is removing £30 per week in vital support from disabled people
• Oppose the freeze on working age benefits
• Always protect free personal and nursing care
• Continue to extend free childcare
• Campaign to restore the post-study work visa so students can stay in Scotland after graduation.
• No support for further reductions to the headline rate of corporation tax
• Support an increase in the Investment Allowance to encourage businesses to invest more in plant and machinery

 

[Bill 13,717]

13 minutes ago, Darthter said:

Wee bit more than that....

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40091999

 

 

That's not policies, that's wrapping paper.