Will You Be Shopping At Boots This...
News1 min ago
Mikey Slacking!
28 Answers
Poll of polls has Labour only 2pts Clear....
http://
Methinks more will be needed!
http://
Methinks more will be needed!
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
As you yourself say, NJ, "It will take far longer than...two years...to achieve full separation."
If I understand your earlier posts aright, you think that all voters in Scotland should be disenfranchised until it IS achieved. That is, despite the clear fact that they would be affected by legislation set by the Westminster parliament throughout that years-long period, during which the UK as it now is would still exist. You must be joking!
To me, that smacks of the need for a rallying-cry along the lines of "No taxation without representation!" That seemed to work for the American rebels; in the case of Scotland's voters, perhaps 'legislation' should replace 'taxation'.
If the 'Yes' vote should prevail next month - highly unlikely, I know - Westminster would eventually be denuded of the 59 MPs who currently represent Scottish constituencies there. This would be the boundary-change to trump all boundary-changes! More to the point, as far as YOU are concerned, you'd be rid of us at last. But, believe me, "we're goin' nowhere, pal" without having as much of a say in matters as you'd have!
If I understand your earlier posts aright, you think that all voters in Scotland should be disenfranchised until it IS achieved. That is, despite the clear fact that they would be affected by legislation set by the Westminster parliament throughout that years-long period, during which the UK as it now is would still exist. You must be joking!
To me, that smacks of the need for a rallying-cry along the lines of "No taxation without representation!" That seemed to work for the American rebels; in the case of Scotland's voters, perhaps 'legislation' should replace 'taxation'.
If the 'Yes' vote should prevail next month - highly unlikely, I know - Westminster would eventually be denuded of the 59 MPs who currently represent Scottish constituencies there. This would be the boundary-change to trump all boundary-changes! More to the point, as far as YOU are concerned, you'd be rid of us at last. But, believe me, "we're goin' nowhere, pal" without having as much of a say in matters as you'd have!
TTT...just to show I am trying to be fair-minded, here is dave's best Poll for years ! :::
http://
http://
I cant believe the British public want to let Labour back in power. Have they learnt nothing? If only income tax payers had the vote that would be a lot fairer than those who pay nothing in having a say over how tax payers money is spent. It's like being a member of a club but not paying any membership fee.
I don't know Mikey, I really cant understand it, it doesn't make any sense, it's totally illogical. I worry sometimes about the intelligence of my fellow countrymen.
The only explanation i can come up with is that the last Labour government intentionally increasing their client base by huge increases in immigration, benefit claimants and public sector workers.
The only explanation i can come up with is that the last Labour government intentionally increasing their client base by huge increases in immigration, benefit claimants and public sector workers.
Dave...benefit claimants have been on the increase for many years, under successive Governments, which is to our universal shame. Immigration has been increasing also, and hasn't stopped under this present Tory Government.
In fact it has gone up !
The reality is perhaps, that dave has not been able to persuade as many people that his Party is the best, and Labour has. I am on record here of saying that dave has had an open goal with the two Eds, and yet he has been unable to get ahead since just after the last Election. Lets not forget that dave had to go into a sort-of coalition with the LibDems in order to get into Number Ten. Many people argue, me amongst them, that if Labour had fought the 2010 Election under Blair, he would have won outright and won a forth successive victory. I am the first person to suggest that Brown was a complete disaster as Leader and PM.
In fact it has gone up !
The reality is perhaps, that dave has not been able to persuade as many people that his Party is the best, and Labour has. I am on record here of saying that dave has had an open goal with the two Eds, and yet he has been unable to get ahead since just after the last Election. Lets not forget that dave had to go into a sort-of coalition with the LibDems in order to get into Number Ten. Many people argue, me amongst them, that if Labour had fought the 2010 Election under Blair, he would have won outright and won a forth successive victory. I am the first person to suggest that Brown was a complete disaster as Leader and PM.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.