[Closed] Election Stuff - One for the Scots

Or, as I suspect, is Alex Salmond an attention seeking cock.

+1

Or, as I suspect, is Alex Salmond an attention seeking cock.

No, NO, NO!*

*Yes.

Wasnt he raising funds to legal challenge him not being allowed on the 3 leader debate.

If Ryanair ever lose their CEO he could always take over.

The Lib Dems are never going to form a government in their own right in this election.

So any party that may take part in a coalition should be represented on that stage. Even ones you don't like 🙂

MP in "attention seeking cock" shocker - hardly news?

As far as I am aware aren't the SNP limited to Scotland?

Back to school - they can get in to Westminster (IIRC Salmond is an MP)

So any party that may take part in a coalition should be represented on that stage

Yes. How many seats does the SNP currently have in Westminster though? 🙄

I think it highlights the absurdity of having a Scottish parliament [b]and[/b] a UK parliament.

Just dissolve the Union and have done with it.

The Tories are the forth party in Scotland (with one MP) because there are only four parties in Scotland.

Love or hate the SNP, he is standing up for the party and democracy.

I think we can all agree the country is London centric and it could be argued that Scotland has been given an unfair hand.

could be argued that Scotland has been given an unfair hand

cut them loose.

I too despise Alex Salmond, although he kind of has a point I would reluctantly concede.

However this is nasty stuff, and thinly disguised anti-England posturing to try and garner the Ignorant Vote.

However this is nasty stuff, and thinly disguised anti-England posturing to try and garner the Ignorant Vote

Or maybe he thinks Scotland could do better on its own

 

yep LHS +1
A - UK - same rules EVERYWHERE - 1 set of tossers, sorry MPs (think of the salary, building, expense, consultancy fees, hanger on posts and final salary pension scheme savings)
B - independence - various sets of tossers (funded SOLELY by OWN country) Suggest doing some history research into the Union - history has a tendency to repeat itself
http://scottishhistory.suite101.com/article.cfm/darien_scottish_colonial_disaster_in_1700

Or, as I suspect, is Alex Salmond an attention seeking cock.

That's pretty much how I see it.

Back to school - they can get in to Westminster (IIRC Salmond is an MP)

Well yes but [i]he[/i] isn't standing for a Westminster seat as he is First Minister so why he thinks he should be allowed to take part in the debate is beyond me.

Yes. How many seats does the SNP currently have in Westminster though?

Smartass answer is none as Parliament has been dissolved, but before that I think it was 7 which is about 12% of the seats in Scotland.

Or maybe he thinks Scotland could do better on its own

By joining the "Arc of Prosperity" with Iceland and the Scandinavian countries as he suggested just before Iceland disappeared up it's own arse.

Cameron, Clegg and Brown are all leaders of parties contesting the upcoming election - so is Salmond and a bunch of other folk. Until we've voted they're all equal.

Thes debates have utterly dominated the election press - it's an utter %*@#-up.

By joining the "Arc of Prosperity" with Iceland and the Scandinavian countries as he suggested just before Iceland disappeared up it's own arse

Or maybe he thinks Scotland could do better [s]on its own[/s] without England.
Happy now Coyote

Cameron, Clegg and Brown are all leaders of parties contesting the upcoming election - so is Salmond and a bunch of other folk. Until we've voted they're all equal.

C, C & B are all leaders of parties that any voter in the UK may support (or not), S is a leader of a party whose potential support is restricted to about 8% of the UK electorate, so they're not that equal really......

Why is it unreasonable that parties standing in the election are given what amounts to a massive amount of free advertisement of their wares. Are you lot really claiming the election broadcasts have not affected the vote for say the Lib Dems or even the election outcome? If we exclude parties from thsi democratic process surely that is inherently unfair whether it is the nationalists or the fringe parties like the [spit]BNP [/spit] or UKIP. As poster above notes they are not equal in terms of support but this exclusion promotes and reinforces the inequality when surely every party should get an even amount of air time /publicity?
He is trying to have it stopped in Scotland no tthe enitr country. This semms reasonable with only one MP the tories have no legitimate right [or point] to broadcast to the Scots.

As poster above notes they are not equal in terms of support but this exclusion promotes and reinforces the inequality when surely every party should get an even amount of air time /publicity?

I don't think it's a matter of 'how much' support but the fact that 90% of the UK couldn't vote SNP even if they were swayed by Salmond's sparkling wit, engaging personality and cheery demeanour.

It's a debate about national (not nationalist) politics so is shown on national TV, seems logical to me.....

Only 8%, eh. Hardly worth representing.

those in Scotland could vote SNP and he has asked for it to be banned there so in the places he is standing they get free air time and the SNP get none...surely unfair?

Junkyard - who asked for what to be banned where?

Gordy - Member
Only 8%, eh. Hardly worth representing.

🙄

SNP election broadcast banned- transmission- scotland only.

Gordy - Member
Junkyard - who asked for what to be banned where?

SNP wanted debates not screened in Scotland but it was pointed out it was not technically possible to put the whole of Scotland under an 'information balckout' and that many Scottish voters may be in other parts of the UK at time of broadcast.....

Sheesh - you mess up one attempt at Colonial expansionism and nobody lets you forget it...

We have a building named after Darien at my work, have often wondered if it was tongue in cheek.

Salmond strikes me as a reasonably sensible guy (well, some of the time). I'm pretty sure he realises that he's not relevant to the vast majority of the broadcast's viewers, and to include the SNP (and by extension Plaid Cymru, Greens, UKIP) would be enormously impractical for the TV debates.

Seems likely that he sees this legal challenge as a (clever, cynical?) way to gain some form of exposure from the issue. I doubt that he really thought he'd realistically get a spot on the debates.

The SNP have said all along that they don't want to stop the broadcast but they want an SNP politician included.

They might be lying, right enough, or they might have changed their tune, but that's what they've been saying.

A rather foolish attempt to get some attention - managing to raise £50k to do the legal action when that £50k could be spent on better things...waste of time and a waste of effort that makes him look rather small-minded and childish...

A waste of time and I suspect has lost him a few more votes as it does look like a silly distraction...

Or maybe he thinks Scotland could do better on its own without England.
Happy now Coyote

No need to get chippy,I am in no way anti scottish and never meant to come across that way. Scotland is a fantastic place.

I was merely asking why the leader of a party that the majority of the population cannot vote for thinks he should share the same platform. Surely attending a debate relevant to the people who can vote for him, i.e. those living in Scotland, would be more appropriate?

The SNP have said all along that they don't want to stop the broadcast but they want an SNP politician included

but without the scots and welsh MP's that makes England Tory forever ...he who laughs last laughs longest 👿

Surely attending a debate relevant to the people who can vote for him, i.e. those living in Scotland, would be more appropriate?

Back at the start, Plaid Cymru and the SNP suggested an extra debate to cover relevant topics to the devolved nations.

but without the scots and welsh MP's that makes England Tory forever ...he who laughs last laughs longest

Totally wrong I'm afraid. I challenge you to find one election outcome when the govenrment of the day did not win the majority of seats in England (Hung parliaments excluded). Even in the last general election the Labour party had an overall majority of seats in England. The simple fact is that the government is decided by the voters of England and provided we don't end up with a tyranny of the majority this is perfectly right and proper.

Back at the start, Plaid Cymru and the SNP suggested an extra debate to cover relevant topics to the devolved nations

Sounds sensible.

There is no doubt that TV coverage of politics is badly skewed in favour of the main marties. The SNP are th largest party in Scotland and their votes could make the difference in a hung parliament. SNP could have 10 - 20 seats. I expect them to make serious gains.

Scenario - Cameron is 5 short of a majority - Promises Salmond a proper referendum on Scottish independence in exchange for supporting a Tory Queens speech. Votes for the SNP become rather important then? There is also the ulster unionists - they might support a Tory Queens speech.

So - its the latest in a series of structural issues that reduce media coverage for the SNP and other smaller / regional parties. Thats what he is whinging about. I think the court case is a mistake tho.

gonefishin

"The simple fact is that the government is decided by the voters of England "

"More people voted for the Conservatives in England than for Labour - but the Conservatives won 92 seats less than Labour within England (285 to 193). The Conservatives received 60,000 more votes than Labour in England."

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/2005_british_general_election.htm

Salmond is Gordon Brown on an "E" We are a wee bit shown up by his constant sabre-rattling.A childish-small-minded bully IMO.I may be biased as I work in education,scene of his biggest foul-ups.

BTW;I liked the recent uk gov poll where 55% of Southern Britons said they would not be bothered if Scotland left the Union.......But 95% said they should not keep the oil if they did!

So if Scotland does ever become fully independent does that imply it becomes a discrete country with it's own passport, head of state, currency etc...

The simple fact is that the government is decided by the voters of England and provided we don't end up with a tyranny of the majority this is perfectly right and proper.

And the associated costs of running defence etc......One of the reasons for the rough wooing in the first place.We wiz pure borassic man!

Edit;Junkyard, since we are not independent countries,the majority will over the whole of the UK is the government. None of the nationalist parties have managed an overall majority in Wales Scotland,or correct me if I am wrong, Yorkshire.However the counter to that is Tam Dayell's West lothian question,one of the interesting paradoxes in UK politics.

SNP are not a UK party. So why have them in the debate. You gonna ask Salmond what he's going to do when he's PM? No, cos he's not going to be.

And on a more amusing note - did anybody see Tommy Sheridan's party political broadcast the other day ? Hilarious home-made ad !!

He'd get my vote anyway after Hooker-gate (for the entertainement value) - but sadly they don't even attempt to run in my electorate.

gusamc, I know that in 2005 there were more votes cast for the Conservative government in England that for Labour however the fact still remains that the Labour party won a majority of [i]seats[/i] and if the Westminter parliament were decided solely on the election results in England, the Labour party would still have formed the government. Any argument against this is an argument against our electoral system, but it does not support the notion that without Scottish and Welsh Labour MPs, England would be permanantly Tory.

So it is right and proper that English people decide who rules in Scotland and Wales then....

Insofar as it is right for the majority of the population to decide on the outcome of an election yes that is right and proper.

...as indeed did the people of Scotland and Wales when they had to endure Thatcher and Nu Labour.

Yes we did have to endure a Conservative government that we didn't vote for, but then so did areas like Yorkshire and the North East of England (I think!).

They don’t represent the UK that’s it finish story over!

[i]

hilldodger - Member
So if Scotland does ever become fully independent does that imply it becomes a discrete country with it's own passport, head of state, currency etc...

and its own navy, army, and airforce to defend its oil and fishing interests 🙂

Wonder what we would do with our share of the nuclear armament? Doubt we would want it - no point nuking England, and they're the only obvious target. Maybe sell them - bound to be a keen market.

None of the nationalist parties have managed an overall majority in Wales Scotland,or correct me if I am wrong, Yorkshire

Yes we did have to endure a Conservative government that we didn't vote for, but then so did areas like Yorkshire and the North East of England (I think!).

where as most people in Yorkshire, begrudgingly, do accpet that they are English just

Only in a dual nationality sort of way 🙂

I notice that the English dislike of Ecky Salmond is directly related to how effective you lot think he's being.
I wasn't originally an SNP supporter, more on the old-Labour side, but have been fairly (Trump aside) impressed with their conduct and aims- largely to the left of Labour. I think thats very in tune with the majority of Scots, and I'm confident their share of the vote will go up.
Anyway good luck to them over their challenge.

SNP lost;So PC won a majority in two elections,that suprises me.Fair enough,but what about Scotland and Yorkshire? SNP can't claim a majority and Indy is a very strong point of their manifesto. Talk of Scotland being able to run a navy etc are way wide of the mark.Our Navy at the time of the Union consisted of three unseaworthy Barges.(seriously)

So I see, the joys of being out all day.

trailmonkey - Member
I think it highlights the absurdity of having a Scottish parliament and a UK parliament.

Just dissolve the Union and have done with it.

+1.

[i]

duckman - Member
...Talk of Scotland being able to run a navy etc are way wide of the mark...

We are no longer being ruled by genocidal Stuart kings, so I'm sure we'd manage a navy ok.

Ah, what a fine party - The English Democrats Party.

Loved the all-inclusive nature of their recent political broadcast indeed.

Salmond? Would not vote for his party, being a Scot who thinks we have no need for that farce in Edinburgh, but.....I reckon he could run rings round the other 3 chaps in open discussion.

Perhaps the Beeb fear that he and Gordie will get revenge by turning up in plaid and sending the other 2 home to think again?

Sadly, in terms of hydrocarbon resources and the EU, perhaps the UK should have looked to Norway for some assistance....but only until the hydrocarbons are finally expended of course.

We are no longer being ruled by genocidal Stuart kings, so I'm sure we'd manage a navy ok.

We could be! The line is alive and well and in France.One of them keeps trying to sue the "British" Government to demand his country back.He comes across as nutty as any of his Ancestors!

We are no longer being ruled by genocidal Stuart kings, so I'm sure we'd manage a navy ok.

Not enough of you or enough cash to buy the kit, it'd be a bunch of neds in hijacked ferries 😉

<runs and hides with the mad grin of a maniac>