General Election 2015

[miga]

.

[numbers]

I think the anti-English sentiment and divisiveness that has been created has been extremely unsavoury. Nicola Sturgeon was not taken to task on any of the recent debates but came across well as a good debater. Does make me wonder how many would tolerate 'English Nationalists' as much as they appear to murmur their support for the Scots Nats.

Am loathe to say this but I doubt that many outside of Scotland have a real understanding of the damage they have reaped over the referendum etc. They are keen to blame Westminster (the 'English'/London) for things that they already have control of. Privatisation of the NHS? How about giving all healthcare records over to a private company? Socialists my arse. As maxxi said, they will say whatever it takes to get a grip on power but for them its nationalism at all costs. They based a lot of their promises to the country on ridiculous sums e.g oil price that has collapsed but hey...they have Scotland's best interest at heart?! (er...NO, they don't).

Scottish voters feel massively let down by Labour and we have the YESNP who will capitalise on anything and promise everything (7 years in power and people say Sturgeon was refreshing?! WTF)

[Louisa]

The John Major intervention today was less than helpful, and again reinforces the disingenuous stereotype of westminster politics. Angry young Scots riding high on a wave of nationalism will be swayed towards the SNP bandwagon simply out of anti everything coming out of London, reinforced by Sturgeon. I don't think any short term gain the tories may get from exposing the SNP/Labour deal post May 7 will do our country any good long term.

Louisa.

[Loz]

I heard an interesting theory on the Beeb today about current Tory fixation with the SNP. The main tactic is to highlight the danger of SNP holding some sort of leverage over a minority Labour government, in the hope that drives possible UKIPers back to the Tories. UKIP is polling about 12-14% at the moment - if they can get that down to 8-10% with the difference going to the Tories, that is a million more Tory votes. So, Tory MPs.

But, 'the danger' also plays well with the Scots (who think it's a good idea) and drives them away from Labour to the SNP. So, less Labour MPs.

Double win for the Tories.

[miga]

.

[Jeremy]

There are many different facets of "nationalism"... they may all share a belief in sovereignty and a strong national identity, and while excessive flag-waving patriotism has never sat comfortably with me, nationalism in itself is not necessarily such a terrible thing. It doesn't necessarily involve racism, xenophobia or any notion of superiority. Ganhi and Mandela could be described as nationalists.

[miga]

zackly.

[Blah Blah]

Isn't it all just the result of major parties having reached a point of desperation? Instead of facing the truth, that neither Labour nor the Tories are popular enough, they are clutching at straws in a desperate attempt to avoid the inevitable hung parlioament. The media has also been totally complicit in pushing the SNP and UKIP into the limelight as well.

For me personally, I have found the Tory behaviour quite off putting. They have been far worse than Labour with scaremongering and put downs. Cameron never answers a single question or point made about their failings over the past five years. I think that alone has cost them wavering voters. I've gone from abivalence towards him, to a total disrespect.

[Otta]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/rupert-murdoch-berated-sun-journalists-for-not-doing-enough-to-attack-ed-miliband-10191005.html

[Blah Blah]

And Murdoch wonders why anyone would want to break up his newpaper empire?

[Earl Aelfheah]

Murdoch is a such lovely old man.

[JohnL]

Has Shapps edited this thread yet?

Is there a Milifandom club?

[Loz]

I originally read that hashtag as milffandom.

[maxxi]

Surely it's time to forget the SNP sideshow as irrelevant. If Milliband stands up to them they are stuffed - in the event of a Lab maj. (and no formal coalition) they can't vote against Labour on a vote-by-vote basis because it will always mean voting with the Tories, alienating their core support.

ETA: obvs I mean a teeny tiny not-overall-type majority.

[Loz]

Part of the problem lies in the rules around forming a government. Even if he wins the most seats, until such time as Ed can show he can form a stable government (or "one that can retain the confidence of the House of Commons"), Cameron remains PM. And, at the moment, it looks like only a Lab + SNP deal can get them over the line, so Ed has to strike some sort of deal with them.

But, yes, going to a second election wouldn't be in the interests of either Labour or the SNP. But who will blink first?

[FraddsMan]

I despair of the current trend across the world to develop ever smaller groupings of 'them and us', using small differences to generate a sense of injustice and persecution. Scotland is a fantastic place but it, and every other nation of the United Kingdom, will be and will achieve more together than they ever will be do as disparate countries.

The reductio ad absurdum of this world wide political fragmentation would be a return to city states, then tribes then individual selfish family units in an anarchic chaos.

To an extent the SNP is acting rationally - it is engaging with the national politic to promote its views.

However, there is a logical flaw at the heart of its current argument.

The SNP doesn't want the rest of the UK to have any control over Scotland. Yet its current General Election stance is to promise control over England, Wales and Northern Ireland; it has stated very clearly its intention to vote at Westminster on matters that do not affect Scotland, such as the NHS and education, to extend a 'progressive' (aka socialist) agenda.

A more logically consistent stance would be to win the seats but not take them up - as Sin Fein do. It would be a powerful political message, less antagonising to rUK and at a stroke demolish the 'fear' campaigns currently running by both Labour and the Conservatives.

[maxxi]

FraddsMan Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> A more logically consistent stance would be to win

> the seats but not take them up - as Sin Fein do.

> It would be a powerful political message, less

> antagonising to rUK and at a stroke demolish the

> 'fear' campaigns currently running by both Labour

> and the Conservatives.

Yes but there are those voting SNP who didn't vote for independence yet want a party that DOES vote on non-Scots UK matters in Westminster in order to get thrown a bone for Scotland.

They don't want a noble abstention to get a referendum rerun, they want to see how much they can squeeze out of a Government that they feel deserted them the minute they said "No" to independence.

Strugeon is walking a tightrope between these new SNP supporters and the traditional members. Her 1st demand, though, is sure to be a call for another indy vote down the line (whatever she claims now) which will give her time to build support. This is all the SNP cares about and I doubt it will settle for less.

[Blah Blah]

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I originally read that hashtag as milffandom.

Ha Ha, best line of the thread so far :D

[numbers]

miga Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> numbers Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > how many would tolerate 'English Nationalists'

> as

> > much as they appear to murmur their support for

> > the Scots Nats.

>

> I think you perhaps misunderstand me.

>

> What I meant is that the official conception of

> Scottishness espoused by the SNP is not ethnically

> based, unlike say the BNP's line of repatriating

> people to Africa etc.

>

> People have a right to self-determination, it

> would be hypocritical to deny them that given

> British support to various claims around the globe

> on lesser historical grounds than the Scottish.

> The correct thing happened in Scotland, they had a

> referendum. But if Scotland wants to join the EU

> after any subsequent referendum and eventual

> independence then they'll have to abide by EU

> rules as regards minority rights, including of

> those who self identify as English. Perhaps the

> anti-English sentiment is more about Westminster

> power than hatred of the English?

miga, reading it back i did not mean that comment to be aimed specifically at yours. I do get what you mean about ethnically based nationalism and yes of course there are many different facets, not all sinister.

That saying, I'd be inclined to disagree that a lot of the anti-English sentiment rearing its ugly head throughout the indyref before and beyond is more about Westminster powers.

[BigED]

Of course the SNP vote on so-called "English matters". It's because a lot of Scottish funding is linked to funding in England (or England and Wales), so they have a clear vested interest in the outcome of votes that may affect funding for Scotland.

What I wonder about is why the Conservatives and their rich non-dom press-baron friends are bigging up Nicola Sturgeon at the same time as they demonise her. Anyone would think they really want the SNP to do well (almost entirely at the expense of Labour) while giving them a new stick with which to beat Miliband. Whiloe this may work, it has a downside in a close election - the LibDems will lose almost all of their Scottish seats making it harder for the Tories to put together a workable majority without getting into bed with the northern Irish unionists and UKIP (one MP, tops).

Poster war in ED (the bits I have seen) - Lib Dem 2, Labour 2, Green 1, Con 0

[Blah Blah]

I think there will be no coalition (to give a majority) possible for either Labour or the Tories. I think we are heading for minority government and may see another General Election within 2 years. The conservatives are now starting to sound like a broken record on the SNP thing. I tend to think that floating voters will be choosing the best of a pretty unimpressive bunch, or not voting at all. Neither of the two main parties has done anything to try and woo new votes, mainly because the Tories have been too busy trying to negate the impact of UKIP on them and Labour have been reeling from the prospect of losing seats to the SNP in Scotland. Thjere's not really much from any of them to get excited about imo.

[Tarot]

Amazing you can read the news.Wow.

[KirstyH]

For those interested in SNP and what's going on in Scotland, with some history, this may be an interesting piece: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/apr/26/snp-nicola-sturgeon-westminster-independence-future-of-scotland

One of the challenges down in London is that there was very little coverage of what kind of democractic debate / changes were occurring in Scotland following the referendum. The 'national' press were too focused on showing they were right to editorialise in favour of the No vote, and in GE2015 the independence/break up the union rhetoric is an easy way to make divisions and score points, as we are seeing.

Frankly I think Sturgeon is impressive, she speaks plainly (rather that the over media-trained, over focus-grouped main leaders) and she has principles, whether you agree with them or not. She is also much less polarising than Salmond in Scotland. I'm personally a 'nae bothered' on Scottish independence, but I am bothered about how the current style and content of politics is leaching out the foundations of engagement/accountability (beyond regulatory affairs industry).

Anyway, still to find out if any of the main Westminster parties will really stand up for anything.

[JohnL]

Marr apologised for the fox hunting comment to DC.

Then sounded like he was going to be ill - must have got to him..

[JohnL]

Milliband versus Boris today - for 2 minutes - was the closest we got

to a proper face to face debate.

To be honest Ed is quite good at debating face to face - so nobody will.