Sign in to follow this  
Alex MacLeod

EU In or Out

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Kingsmills said:

As usual, CB's arguments are at least half a century out of date and wholly irrelevant to the present day.

Coming from a supporter of a party which wants to turn the clock back to 1706 and beyond...... that's an interesting viewpoint!

  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too many jobs at stake if we pull out. So many industries trading with Europe.

The Farmers need the subsides, we have seen recently on the news the amounts they receive and need to compete.

Far be it from me to agree with what that man  PM says

But we have to stay in

Scotland may have a referendum if we vote to leave,  An Independent Scotland in the EU and England not in, impossible to comprehend.

But that would be horrendous, most of  he Scottish trade is not with the E U but with England

A different system in the south will not help any one. The border will be manned by the English desperate to keep out the immigrants ( allowed into Scotland by the EU )  determined  to get to the  South of England. I see nothing but chaos ahead if there is a vote to leave.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Canadian News flashes on the T V over here state that a poll shows that good proportion of Scots now prefer to stay with Europe rather than in the U K?

Correct?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Scarlet Pimple said:

Canadian News flashes on the T V over here state that a poll shows that good proportion of Scots now prefer to stay with Europe rather than in the U K?

Correct?

I would say yes Scarlet but there might be a few that would disagree :wink:

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see Sturgeon has finally given up any pretence of having any respect for the democratic process.  She has announced that the SNP will be campaigning for a 2nd indy referendum regardless of how the EU vote goes.  It is no longer a question of making a reasoned (albeit flawed) argument that a Brexit, despite a Scottish vote to stay in the EU, is a sufficient change in circumstances to justify a 2nd referendum.  They are going for a 2nd "once in a generation" referendum come what may and before they have even bothered to see how the new devolved powers work.  It really is quite shameful.

On the plus side, it does mean that the EU debate in Scotland can be about the EU and not about Independence.  Not that anyone in the SNP will be wanting to debate the EU much.  To do so would only draw attention to the absurdity of wishing to remain part of a massive bureaucracy in which an independent Scotland would have little influence but would be increasingly bound by it's very extensive legislation, yet at the same time, wanting to leave a long standing union in which it has major influence and from which it is increasingly getting devolved powers.

  • Agree 2
  • Disagree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Caley Stan said:

SNP in favour of Scottish independence. Shocking and disgraceful.

They can be in favour of what they want, but having been firmly told to take a hike in 2014 it would be really nice if this divisive rabble would desist from boring the backside off the majority of us about this pathetic, parochial sideshow.

On the other hand I can see that they are getting desperate in case time runs out on them. After all, the very same global trend of "angry politics" which is contributing to support for nutters like Trump and Corbyn, the resurgent German right wing and that "Chorizo" party in Greece whose grasp of economics is about as loopy as the SNP's is also currently boosting crank organisations like the SNP. Things will move on though. They always do.

They therefore need to get their second referendum before sanity and reality return to world politics. But should they get one and win it, when can we expect a third one once the economic realities sink in of half price oil, no Barnet Formula, the problems of being semi detached to a competitive non-EU neighbour with an economy 11 times as big and the departure there of high achieving high earners who will hence no longer be subsidising the lifestyles of the group which predominantly voted for separation?

 

  • Disagree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interestingly, the latest opinion poll is putting support for independence at just 40%. It seems as though support for independence has peaked and this would explain the SNP's desperation to reinvigorate the debate before support for independence and the SNP falls to a level where not even the most fanatical of Nats could justify a further referendum.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DoofersDad said:

Interestingly, the latest opinion poll is putting support for independence at just 40%. It seems as though support for independence has peaked and this would explain the SNP's desperation to reinvigorate the debate before support for independence and the SNP falls to a level where not even the most fanatical of Nats could justify a further referendum.

Whilst obviously warmly welcoming this, I am also reminded of the rogue poll which prompted the completely unnecessary "vow" which led to powers which the SNP now seem too scared to use - a literal case of inability to put their money where their rather large mouth is. I would therefore like to see more of the same - or better!

But it does seem to me that the days worldwide of the lunatic fringe invading the mainstream may be numbered - although I'm not sure if this will happen early enough to prevent more expenses-hunting undesirable, brainless apparatchiks being elected as Holyrood lobbyfodder, or indeed The Donald becoming the next US President.

Edited by Charles Bannerman
  • Disagree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree you need to treat individual polls with caution but I have quoted the latest YouGov poll as tracked on the "whatscotlandthinks.org website.  A growing surge of support for independence since the referendum is, of course, an urban myth put forward by the SNP.  The truth is that of 34 polls tracked since the referendum, only 8 have shown a majority in favour of independence and only one poll has shown support at more than 50%.  More recently, only one of the last 10 has shown a majority in favour of independence with the latest poll at 40% showing the lowest level of support since the referendum.  It is perhaps too early to say whether this is the start of a discernible shift away from a pro-independence view.  What is clear is that there is absolutely no move of opinion towards a level of support for independence which would justify a second referendum.  Support for independence is and always has been a view held by a minority of people in Scotland.

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Rabble" is an interesting choice of word, Charles. Given the SNP's focused and organised electoral achievements over the past decade, you can only be using this word as an expression of your contempt for the working people who now form the bedrock of their support. The use of such language implies nostalgia for a time when the lower orders routinely voted for ennobled aristocrats in the misguided belief that their betters knew better. 

Things are moving on, Charles, but they do seem to be moving rather more quickly than usual. Trump, Le Pen, Corbyn, SYRIZA, Podemos and the SNP may come from wide range of the political spectrum, but they all find their base in the working-class, or "rabble" as you call them.

The working-class has been successfully subdued by easy access to property and cheap consumer goods for the past 35 years while social security, workers rights and the welfare state have been steadily (and stealthily) eroded. Now that property has been removed from that equation for many, the scales are looking a bit less steady - an increasing number of people have realised that they don't have anything to lose from upsetting the political apple-cart. Property? Pensions? Job Security? Those are the things that keep people in line, but if you don't have those things, then there is no risk attached to demanding significant change from the political system.

  • Agree 2
  • Disagree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Caley Stan said:

"Rabble" is an interesting choice of word, Charles. Given the SNP's focused and organised electoral achievements over the past decade, you can only be using this word as an expression of your contempt for the working people who now form the bedrock of their support. The use of such language implies nostalgia for a time when the lower orders routinely voted for ennobled aristocrats in the misguided belief that their betters knew better. 

Things are moving on, Charles, but they do seem to be moving rather more quickly than usual. Trump, Le Pen, Corbyn, SYRIZA, Podemos and the SNP may come from wide range of the political spectrum, but they all find their base in the working-class, or "rabble" as you call them.

The working-class has been successfully subdued by easy access to property and cheap consumer goods for the past 35 years while social security, workers rights and the welfare state have been steadily (and stealthily) eroded. Now that property has been removed from that equation for many, the scales are looking a bit less steady - an increasing number of people have realised that they don't have anything to lose from upsetting the political apple-cart. Property? Pensions? Job Security? Those are the things that keep people in line, but if you don't have those things, then there is no risk attached to demanding significant change from the political system.

Power to the peepullll Wolfie Smith/ Comrade Stan! New black beret for the next Caledonian Socialist Workers' Congress, maybe?

Your problem is that in a democracy, as opposed to the former Soviet Union etc, if the loony lefties get into power all the cash and money-making expertise will clear off elsewhere.

So in the event of the nightmare scenario of  a Scottish Yesserendum, in addition to the oil going t!tsup and possibly having a half arsed EU newcomer attached to a competitive and much larger non-EU sterling economy, you will also find that many of the NO voting benefit subsidisers will go elsewhere, leaving the yes voting benefit dependers to whistle for their public subsidies.

Edited by Charles Bannerman
  • Agree 1
  • Disagree 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What an utterly bizarre post from Caley Stan!  Things are indeed moving on but evidently not in the world of left wing political thought. I just love the phrase " The working-class has been successfully subdued by easy access to property and cheap consumer goods for the past 35 years"!  What this implies is that 35 years of steadily rising living standards for much of the poorer sections of our society is not seen as a positive thing, but as a cynical subjugation of the "working class" by the ruling classes! 

I put "working class" in quotes because in this day and age surely the very use of the phrase is evidence of long outdated reactionary thought.   This outdated left wing thinking requires a "them and us" philosophy.  It requires social division in order to find a cause on which to base a culture of  victimisation and grievance.  This then allows the left wing leaders to satisfy their egos by leading the "people" in  "demanding significant change from the political system". Using the phrase "working class" denies the significant progress that has been made over recent decades in improving the lot of the poorest in our society and in enabling people from poorer backgrounds to succeed in life on the strength of their ability rather than their background.  It is no coincidence that most working people now enjoy a far better standard of living since the old style union barons had their power removed and the concept of partnership working was established.

Of course there is still far too much unfairness in our society, but the way to address that is not to return to the confrontational "them and us" politics of the past, but to build on the consensual politics of the centre and the partnership approach.  The electorate's failure to understand that coalition Government requires political compromise has shifted votes to both the left and right and has opened the door for an unfettered Tory party to take office.  Osborne's appalling proposal to raise the threshold for the 40% tax rate at a time of austerity is clear evidence that the curse of negative "them and us" politics has returned on both sides of the political spectrum.

Caley Stan is right to lump the awful Donald Trump in with the SNP, but it is not a "working class" base that unites them.  Rather it is an exploitation of the "them and us" philosophy and the unremitting exploitation of the perceived fears of their supporters.  Trump stokes up fears about Muslims and Mexicans, so proposes to ban Muslims from entry to the country and build a wall to keep the Mexicans out. The SNP stokes up fears about the impact of years of Tory rule on the Scottish "working class" and proposes to break up a long standing and highly successful partnership.  Both, in their different ways, are examples of reactionary and divisive political ideology.

At a time when we need political leaders to work together in a spirit of partnership and understanding and to demonstrate fairness and compassion, we see politicians of both left and right going back to the failed divisive and sectional politics of the past.  It's all very sad.

  • Agree 2
  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, DoofersDad said:

Using the phrase "working class" denies the significant progress that has been made over recent decades in improving the lot of the poorest in our society and in enabling people from poorer backgrounds to succeed in life on the strength of their ability rather than their background.

Socioeconomic background remains the ultimate determinant of future prosperity. There's no hiding from the facts on that one, regardless of the number of anecdotes you may offer as counter arguments. Our society is divided and the political changes we are seeing simply reflect the growth of those divisions. 

It is true that class alone cannot explain the divide. Your own belief in the existence of meritocracy and progress are great examples of the generational divide. Try looking back to when you first started looking for jobs and property. What were your prospects and what are the prospects of someone doing so today? How difficult was it for you to find secure employment with a decent pension? How difficult was it for you to get a mortgage? What percentage of your annual income was the deposit and what percentage of your monthly income were the repayments? Make these comparisons and then come back and tell me about the great progress we've made. 

  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stan's aphorisms in defence of the grievance dogma would do credit to theThoughts Of Chairman Mao. And I wonder when his train is due to arrive at the Finland Station?

However I don't think he's going to convince the large number of people who no longer live in council schemes, wearing hand-me-downs and their parents only able to get to work on a bike.

And after all this progress has been made, you find Sturgeon and Salmond asking us to pee it all against the wall by voting yes.

  • Disagree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DD your references to Donald the Trumpeter need embellishing. Hillary make squeak in but the omens are not good for the  Establishment elites (who are hated by the average tax payer in America) since the Donald is not only still on the move but increasing his power base at every step. He's the attraction for the support of the "great unwashed" because he speaks  the language of the average disenfranchised, bitter and very angry average resident of America many of whom were wiped out financially by the power brokers of Wall Street  when the Ponzie Scheme crash erupted like an atom bomb  in Wall Street. If you stopped the flow of illegal Mexicans coming into the U S and sent them all back home again, then the economic life of these southern communities would be in crisis since they are employed to run these businesses.

It's not all about Mexicans  and Muslims etc. - they will come in  come-what-may,  whether it be by means of ladders to go over the new Berlinesque wall or through the existing tunnels under the  ground from Mexico. 

It's mostly about the simmering (now  exploding) anger and resentment of the proletariat against the "Establishment"--the upper echelons of power who merely change camels at every election but still remain wealthy, privileged, well-connected and powerful and suck up, not to mention spend and dissipate, the country's wealth to suit their own purposes without regard (despite the hand-on-heart protestations of the likes of Hillary and some others) for the powerless peasants, the latter having no say in how the country's wealth is mis-spent at all. The Donald, shrewdly, bluntly enunciates what they feel and thus garners support at every turn. He's the current champion on a white horse  -the escape valve for their inner rage.

The huge financial crises of a few years ago, in which the  U.S. Federal Government handed out  literally TRILLIONS of dollars of the country's wealth to the City  (Wall street bankers), to prevent them all from going bankrupt from the falling apart of their bank's PONZIE schemes, saved their fortunes but left  the Real Estate market in the U. S. in desperate ruin, bankruptcies and defaulting  financial crises everywhere. The rational from the Administration was that "Well, the city was too big to fail."  Or to out it bluntly, same old, same old.

 Then the Feds turned round and put a person in charge of the Government finances who was directly responsible for aiding and abetting the whole rotten business not to mention many other lesser lights who also aided and abetted  the schemes that bankrupted many ordinary folks, leaving their homes worthless. You can now buy lovely property in the U.S. with very large plots of land for much less than you would pay in the likes of Vancouver or Toronto (Canada).

Meantime, back at the ranch, the public still does not have a Government sponsored Medical Plan for all and hospitals charge so much money that if you fall sick your life's savings can be wiped out in a few months. The surgeon who did the 6 hour operation (in Canada) on my son's heart to save his life told me personally  several years ago that if that operation had been done in the U.S.  it would have cost the patient $500,000.

So , good luck you-all with your challenges, power and politics. This is just another little bit of back talk from the Workers Compensation Board.

At least, here in La La Land, we do have a stuttering Medical plan that will at least stop us from going bankrupt in a dire emergency but I just spent $1900 on medical supplies /prescriptions during 2015 and relied on Jolly Justin Trudeau's new Liberal Government to use that figure to offset my annual tax bill.....and be thankful for small mercies.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Caley Stan said:

Socioeconomic background remains the ultimate determinant of future prosperity. There's no hiding from the facts on that one, regardless of the number of anecdotes you may offer as counter arguments. Our society is divided and the political changes we are seeing simply reflect the growth of those divisions. 

It is true that class alone cannot explain the divide. Your own belief in the existence of meritocracy and progress are great examples of the generational divide. Try looking back to when you first started looking for jobs and property. What were your prospects and what are the prospects of someone doing so today? How difficult was it for you to find secure employment with a decent pension? How difficult was it for you to get a mortgage? What percentage of your annual income was the deposit and what percentage of your monthly income were the repayments? Make these comparisons and then come back and tell me about the great progress we've made. 

On your first point I would argue that if society is becoming more divided it is a result of an abandonment of the political centre ground and a shift to the divisive politics of left and right.  As has been said before, the SNP needs to foster a sense of injustice otherwise why would people choose to break away from a union that has delivered such positive change in recent years.

In relation to looking for jobs and property it is clear we have made very considerable progress.  In the early years of my working life unemployment was running at around double what it is now and job vacancy rates were very much lower, power crazed union bosses of the loony left were holding the country to ransom through restrictive practices, secondary picketting etc and benefits for those out of work were meagre.  It was a very unsettling time.  Now we have far better rights for workers thanks to much of the EU legislation.  Vastly improved childcare and family friendly legislation has allowed women far more access to the workplace and millions of the lowest paid workers no longer pay any income tax as a result of successive increases in the level of the tax free allowance. People are hugely better off than they were 35 years ago.

As for mortgages, I'm really not sure what your point is.  Sure, if you had a job back then it was easier to get a mortgage, but the issue is what standard of housing you have, not whether or not you own it.  Interestingly in the EU there seems to be an inverse relationship between home ownership and national prosperity.  Home ownership is highest in Romania, followed by Lithuania and Slovakia.  It is lowest in Germany, Austria and Denmark.  Non EU but very prosperous Switzerland has an even lower level of home ownership than Germany.  It really is self evident that the general quality of accommodation available now, whether rented or owner occupied, is vastly superior to what it was 35 years ago.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 Investors from the economically depleting Chinese mainland, desperate to get their money out before it is worthless,  are now throwing money at the Vancouver Real Estate market to buy Canadian houses here. The net result of that is that  house prices have escalated like you could never believe.

My next door neighbour has just sold the identical house she has to mine for $711,000 when the Assessed Value from the Provincial Assessors put the value at $580,000.. A Realtor (Real Estate Agent ) told me bluntly that  all sellers now are advised to just list at $150,000 over the Assessed values of their home, leaving me almost speechless. If this madness were to continue then within 2-3 years max., I could be selling my 3,200 square foot, 4-year-old  house on a 5,000 square foot lot  for $1,000,000. Truthfully ,stranger things have happened. A friend of mine who formerly lived here in the Lower mainland  did very well out of home sales and has retired to the SW of England with his Chinese wife who has, incidentally, told me that she will buy my house if I want to sell it to her for a present for her spoilt daughter who is still living in Vancouver city. Stone the crows., Jennie  must have a wealthy father because I don't think that she  has done a day' work in her life. Nice lady but ...? Oh well, Paully Wally is happy with her so  all the power to their elbows..eh?:wink:

The thing is ...is it worth considering coming back to Britain? Pounds are so expensive to buy in Canadian dollars now , due to the  downward spiral of the dollar re the oil crisis here in the province of Alberta and around the world?  How have house prices reacted in Scotland over the past 10 years? Are those new homes out Dores way expensive and what size are they ..please advise?

 

Thanks guys and gals, back to the grindstone. Are you going to stay in the EU--looks like it.?.  :smile:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/17/2016 at 0:07 PM, DoofersDad said:

I see Sturgeon has finally given up any pretence of having any respect for the democratic process.  She has announced that the SNP will be campaigning for a 2nd indy referendum regardless of how the EU vote goes.  It is no longer a question of making a reasoned (albeit flawed) argument that a Brexit, despite a Scottish vote to stay in the EU, is a sufficient change in circumstances to justify a 2nd referendum.  They are going for a 2nd "once in a generation" referendum come what may and before they have even bothered to see how the new devolved powers work.  It really is quite shameful.

On the plus side, it does mean that the EU debate in Scotland can be about the EU and not about Independence.  Not that anyone in the SNP will be wanting to debate the EU much.  To do so would only draw attention to the absurdity of wishing to remain part of a massive bureaucracy in which an independent Scotland would have little influence but would be increasingly bound by it's very extensive legislation, yet at the same time, wanting to leave a long standing union in which it has major influence and from which it is increasingly getting devolved powers.

No she didn't. What she actually said was ' This summer the SNP will embark on a new initiative to build support for independence'. Nothing about campaigning but more about getting everything right before embarking on a new campaign. This will all be about getting the right people in place. Doing all the necessary research. Having all the answers to all the questions etc.

Then, of course, they'll need to find a way around election fixing. Dead men voting
  https://docs.google.com/document/d/13OPs4c91U4ggD1XrHWGAig8YOoXbehVSEpGwaJJWtpc/pub

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Alex MacLeod said:

 

Then, of course, they'll need to find a way around election fixing. Dead men voting
  https://docs.google.com/document/d/13OPs4c91U4ggD1XrHWGAig8YOoXbehVSEpGwaJJWtpc/pub

Look Comrades, just get used to it......YOU LOST!

Once we recover from the hilarity of unearthing a body actually  called the "Democratic Socialist Federation" (that will be as in German Democratic Republic and sundry other total misnomers, and with Wolfie Smith as President for Life?) we then start reading the delusional script.... where nobody has obviously thought through the maths (or been capable of it).

Let's also recognise that their whole beef is based simply on the fact that reality didn't relate to what, with hallmark naive optimism, they RECKONED SHOULD be the case, based on householders winding them up on doorsteps. Very scientific, I must say! 

Now for the numbers. The People's Paranoia Party say they RECKON it SHOULD have been 53-47 to them in postal votes but they also RECKON that the actual postal outcome was 70-30 against them - presumably because some conspiracy had led to the postal votes being laced with false "NO" votes. Now IF that were to have been the case, then fairly simple maths shows that for this to happen, for every 100 postal votes cast,  a massive 77 dodgy ones would have had to have been added. Furthermore, for the postal turnout to have reached 96.4% after these additions, the original "genuine" postal vote turnout would have had to be an grossly unbelievably low 54.6%. And from there the conspiracy deepens yet further since, apart from the large number of election people (none of whom has subsequently come forward) needed physically to supplement the PVs by a whopping 77% and to instigate and coordinate this fraud on a massive scale, it seems that the nasty unionist BBC is also in on this conspiracy up to the armpits by way of covering up this fraud through deliberately not having an exit poll. Now I do realise that your average Nat tends not to be the brightest of characters and that in any case a great many of them live in this magical fantasy world, especially when it comes to economics.

But this latest series of paranoid ramblings quite simply transcends all else - including Grand Theft Auto!

Edited by Charles Bannerman
  • Agree 1
  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Alex MacLeod said:

No she didn't. What she actually said was ' This summer the SNP will embark on a new initiative to build support for independence'. Nothing about campaigning but more about getting everything right before embarking on a new campaign. This will all be about getting the right people in place. Doing all the necessary research. Having all the answers to all the questions etc.

Then, of course, they'll need to find a way around election fixing. Dead men voting
  https://docs.google.com/document/d/13OPs4c91U4ggD1XrHWGAig8YOoXbehVSEpGwaJJWtpc/pub

It's just semantics.  The SNP has been involved in an initiative to build support for independence since the day it came into being.  What you know and I know and the large audience she addressed the remarks to know, is that what is planned is to build a case for a second referendum as soon as possible.  I rather doubt she will have all the answers to all the questions seeing as they had no answers to most of the questions last time.  However, if she can get answers to questions such as what currency an independent Scotland would use or on what terms an independent Scotland might enter the EU, then that would be useful as it would allow people to make an informed choice.

As for the dead men voting paper, you are surely not seriously suggesting that massive fraud by MI5 affected the referendum result? The paper is far too long to address all the incorrect assumptions and conclusions but let me make a few points.  Firstly, why on earth would they feel the need to take such massive risks when up until late in the campaign it always looked as though there would be a comfortable "no" vote?  If there was a underhand operation in place, why then did the establishment go along with the panicked vow nonsense at the end?  Just think, if such a fraud was uncovered it would be the biggest scandal in British political history - it would have destroyed the UK establishment and the backlash would have handed Scotland independence on a plate.

There are, however some interesting debating points.  The author goes on and on about the high postal vote turnout and high proportion of No votes in the postal ballot.  He sees this as sinister but common sense tells us it is to be expected.  Let's face it, if someone has bothered to obtain and then complete an application form for postal voting, then you would expect them to vote. You can apply to be permanently on the postal vote register but remember that this is updated annually and requires the voter to have been recorded as eligble to vote on the annual return.  Councils will also have processes to remove from the register people who die or move in the meantime.  Add to this the fact that a lot of people applied specifically to vote by post in the referendum then you would expect a significantly higher postal vote % turnout than polling station turnout.   When you then consider that the overall turnout was a staggering 84.6% it  is clear that the figures of 90% plus for postal vote turnout, far from being sinister, should have been expected.  Also, those who needed to have a postal vote will tend towards the demographic groups which were more strongly No voters.

But the whole suggested process of large scale fraud is laughable.  Assuming MI5 did have access to computer files of who was on the postal vote register and who had actually returned their ballots, how would they decide which voters to fraudulently "vote" for?  I like the thought of dozens of MI5 officers being despatched into hostile territory north of the border to put forged ballot papers into post boxes the length and breadth of Scotland!  

The paper then simply ignores the many ways such a fraud would likely be detected.  I won't bore you with examples but I will finish by picking up the point the author makes that such a fraud would have been sanctioned by the Prime Minister.  Frankly, if he was to have been so stupid to approve such a mad scheme, I would have thought he would be urging the fraudsters to put a cross in the "Yes" box.  After all, he's spent the last few years behaving as though he would be delighted if the Scots went their own way and left him with a comfortable majority down South.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope one of our members domiciled in Inverness can answer my question about the cost of houses, in Dores and elsewhere, etc. as asked above.

Failing which I may well be prostate with grief and filled with grief if my prostrate gets  any more swollen than it already is. Thank goodness I can swallow one Arthrotec pill once or twice  per day to put a damper on the production of prostaglandins , an action which cuts down the inflammation and makes the pain disappear. 

Still don't know what I am talking about-?-No problem, just wait until you enter the beginning of your dotage, laddies, you are ALL going to get an enlarged and inflamed prostate which is another way of saying, according to my Doctor who proclaims that ALL men after age 70 develop this form of slow-growing cancer, your number is on it just like my father before me.

Hoping to hear from you, much obliged.:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/20/2016 at 2:54 PM, Charles Bannerman said:

Look Comrades, just get used to it......YOU LOST!

Once we recover from the hilarity of unearthing a body actually  called the "Democratic Socialist Federation" (that will be as in German Democratic Republic and sundry other total misnomers, and with Wolfie Smith as President for Life?) we then start reading the delusional script.... where nobody has obviously thought through the maths (or been capable of it).

Let's also recognise that their whole beef is based simply on the fact that reality didn't relate to what, with hallmark naive optimism, they RECKONED SHOULD be the case, based on householders winding them up on doorsteps. Very scientific, I must say! 

Now for the numbers. The People's Paranoia Party say they RECKON it SHOULD have been 53-47 to them in postal votes but they also RECKON that the actual postal outcome was 70-30 against them - presumably because some conspiracy had led to the postal votes being laced with false "NO" votes. Now IF that were to have been the case, then fairly simple maths shows that for this to happen, for every 100 postal votes cast,  a massive 77 dodgy ones would have had to have been added. Furthermore, for the postal turnout to have reached 96.4% after these additions, the original "genuine" postal vote turnout would have had to be an grossly unbelievably low 54.6%. And from there the conspiracy deepens yet further since, apart from the large number of election people (none of whom has subsequently come forward) needed physically to supplement the PVs by a whopping 77% and to instigate and coordinate this fraud on a massive scale, it seems that the nasty unionist BBC is also in on this conspiracy up to the armpits by way of covering up this fraud through deliberately not having an exit poll. Now I do realise that your average Nat tends not to be the brightest of characters and that in any case a great many of them live in this magical fantasy world, especially when it comes to economics.

But this latest series of paranoid ramblings quite simply transcends all else - including Grand Theft Auto!

But this latest series of paranoid ramblings quite simply transcends all else

 

It's not paranoia and it's not rambling. We lost the referendum. Fair enough. There might have been some shenanigans in the count. Who knows? 

But why dismiss nearly 50% of the Scottish electorate as 'not the brightest characters'? 

Edited by Whippet
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.