|
Post by jamo on Feb 25, 2021 19:29:23 GMT 1
Fascinating story developing north of the border. The two modern day heavyweights of Scottish politics on a seeming irreversible collision course.
No idea where the truth in this story lies as it is unquestionably deeply immersed in the nationalist story and the individuals personalities and ambitions. For what it’s worth I think Sturgeon is the stand out leader in British politics- whether you agree with her agenda or otherwise, she certainly has a presence and commands respect for her unwavering pursuit of her political ambition. The same I suppose could be said of Salmon but somehow he always comes across to me as a slightly duplicitous character.
This is going to be well worth a watch in the coming days, and could inadvertently lead to the nationalist cause being blown completely out of the water.
Wonder what Highlandshrews take on this is ?
|
|
|
Post by armchairfan on Feb 25, 2021 19:46:41 GMT 1
Fascinating story developing north of the border. The two modern day heavyweights of Scottish politics on a seeming irreversible collision course. No idea where the truth in this story lies as it is unquestionably deeply immersed in the nationalist story and the individuals personalities and ambitions. For what it’s worth I think Sturgeon is the stand out leader in British politics- whether you agree with her agenda or otherwise, she certainly has a presence and commands respect for her unwavering pursuit of her political ambition. The same I suppose could be said of Salmon but somehow he always comes across to me as a slightly duplicitous character. This is going to be well worth a watch in the coming days, and could inadvertently lead to the nationalist cause being blown completely out of the water. Wonder what Highlandshrews take on this is ? I think I asked that on another thread, but can't recall his response. Two rather distasteful individuals, from my point of view, but if our Scottish friends are content with that choice in the Independence movement, who are we to judge? I hope that both their careers come to an end, the sooner the better.
|
|
|
Post by zenfootball2 on Feb 25, 2021 19:56:39 GMT 1
this has been simmering for some time and the whole thing is toxic and does not show anyone involved in a good light and it puts a light on the dark and murkey world of modern politics, sturgeon has run rings round boris and i think is untouchable (but a day is a long time in politics)the bit i could not get my head round how can the same person be the legal advisor to the scottish goverment and also be in a position to block evidence been submitted in the case against Sturgeon ?
|
|
|
Post by armchairfan on Feb 25, 2021 20:05:44 GMT 1
this has been simmering for some time and the whole thing is toxic and does not show anyone involved in a good light and it puts a light on the dark and murkey world of modern politics, sturgeon has run rings round boris and i think is untouchable (but a day is a long time in politics)the bit i could not get my head round how can the same person be the legal advisor to the scottish goverment and also be in a position to block evidence been submitted in the case against Sturgeon ? Whatever the reasons for that apparently potential conflict of interest, I am sure it is entirely permissible under Scottish Law; as for the rest, it all LOOKS terribly, well, just wrong.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Feb 25, 2021 20:20:53 GMT 1
I'm trying to keep up with things but things seem to change with regards to Salmond’s submission being denied, then accepted, then called back to be redacted. And as I understand it this all determines whether Salmond will speak at the inquiry as he can only discuss and be questioned on those points in his submission to the inquiry (I think so anyhow).
All a bit of a mess really and as I mentioned elsewhere, I still can't get my head around why anyone would go after him anyhow (and using the methods they are accuse of using).
|
|
|
Post by jamo on Feb 25, 2021 20:36:29 GMT 1
I may have got this the wrong way around but I’m not sure that this is now about anyone going after Salmon. I see this as a settling of scores by Salmon and that he is the one driving the agenda as a way of destroying Sturgeons career. May have got it wrong though, it’s certainly all a bit murky
|
|
|
Post by Red Rose In Exile on Feb 25, 2021 20:53:36 GMT 1
Talking to one of my suppliers today who are based in Scotland.
Allegedly the redacted information implicates current politicians at the highest level.
|
|
|
Post by armchairfan on Feb 25, 2021 21:35:12 GMT 1
I may have got this the wrong way around but I’m not sure that this is now about anyone going after Salmon. I see this as a settling of scores by Salmon and that he is the one driving the agenda as a way of destroying Sturgeons career. May have got it wrong though, it’s certainly all a bit murky You may have got it right though - its eminently possible! The trouble is that the mud at the bottom of the SNP pond has been given a thoroughly good stir, so it is hardly surprising that its all a bit "murky". Either Mr Salmond or Ms Sturgeon leading an independent Scotland.... ? Ye gods, someone needs to get a grip!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2021 7:42:27 GMT 1
Met Salmond once when he was MP of Buchan and Banff.
Bloke was an @rse.
Anyway, carry on.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Feb 26, 2021 9:06:04 GMT 1
I may have got this the wrong way around but I’m not sure that this is now about anyone going after Salmon. I see this as a settling of scores by Salmon and that he is the one driving the agenda as a way of destroying Sturgeons career. May have got it wrong though, it’s certainly all a bit murky Could be. I certainly wouldn't argue otherwise to be honest. It's all a bit of a mess. It really is a wait and see (and that's even if we get there).
|
|
|
Post by martinshrew on Feb 26, 2021 9:30:27 GMT 1
For what it’s worth I think Sturgeon is the stand out leader in British politics Stopped at this point, absurd suggestion.
|
|
|
Post by zenfootball2 on Feb 26, 2021 10:02:14 GMT 1
they are both as bad as each other www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9298715/Alex-Salmond-allies-claim-Nicola-Sturgeon-forced-quit.html"Civil servants have so far refused to explain why they redacted the most explosive 474 words of Mr Salmond's testimony that could force the SNP leader to resign. Politicians said the separation of power between prosecutors, the civil service and the SNP had become 'indistinguishable' and Scotland's public institutions were allowing themselves to be used for political purposes. "
|
|
|
Post by zenfootball2 on Feb 26, 2021 10:04:30 GMT 1
this has been simmering for some time and the whole thing is toxic and does not show anyone involved in a good light and it puts a light on the dark and murkey world of modern politics, sturgeon has run rings round boris and i think is untouchable (but a day is a long time in politics)the bit i could not get my head round how can the same person be the legal advisor to the scottish goverment and also be in a position to block evidence been submitted in the case against Sturgeon ? Whatever the reasons for that apparently potential conflict of interest, I am sure it is entirely permissible under Scottish Law; as for the rest, it all LOOKS terribly, well, just wrong. it may be legal but is it transparent or ethical www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9298715/Alex-Salmond-allies-claim-Nicola-Sturgeon-forced-quit.html"Civil servants have so far refused to explain why they redacted the most explosive 474 words of Mr Salmond's testimony that could force the SNP leader to resign. Politicians said the separation of power between prosecutors, the civil service and the SNP had become 'indistinguishable' and Scotland's public institutions were allowing themselves to be used for political purposes."
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on Feb 26, 2021 10:09:44 GMT 1
they are both as bad as each other www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9298715/Alex-Salmond-allies-claim-Nicola-Sturgeon-forced-quit.html"Civil servants have so far refused to explain why they redacted the most explosive 474 words of Mr Salmond's testimony that could force the SNP leader to resign. Politicians said the separation of power between prosecutors, the civil service and the SNP had become 'indistinguishable' and Scotland's public institutions were allowing themselves to be used for political purposes. " Looking from afar there does appear to be some issues around suitable gaps between the independence of some Civil Servants, the prosecution service and Scottish Government which is never good UK government is no better and worrying issues are emerging there too, about the distinction between Civil Service and Government departments - particularly legal ones - and some clear blue water between the two is much needed
|
|
|
Post by zenfootball2 on Feb 26, 2021 10:18:01 GMT 1
they are both as bad as each other www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9298715/Alex-Salmond-allies-claim-Nicola-Sturgeon-forced-quit.html"Civil servants have so far refused to explain why they redacted the most explosive 474 words of Mr Salmond's testimony that could force the SNP leader to resign. Politicians said the separation of power between prosecutors, the civil service and the SNP had become 'indistinguishable' and Scotland's public institutions were allowing themselves to be used for political purposes. " Looking from afar there does appear to be some issues around suitable gaps between the independence of some Civil Servants, the prosecution service and Scottish Government which is never good UK government is no better and worrying issues are emerging there too, about the distinction between Civil Service and Government departments - particularly legal ones - and some clear blue water between the two is much needed i agree that the uk is no better and both need to be changed as it is bad for democracy
|
|
|
Post by highlandshrew on Feb 26, 2021 11:25:38 GMT 1
Fascinating story developing north of the border. The two modern day heavyweights of Scottish politics on a seeming irreversible collision course. No idea where the truth in this story lies as it is unquestionably deeply immersed in the nationalist story and the individuals personalities and ambitions. For what it’s worth I think Sturgeon is the stand out leader in British politics- whether you agree with her agenda or otherwise, she certainly has a presence and commands respect for her unwavering pursuit of her political ambition. The same I suppose could be said of Salmon but somehow he always comes across to me as a slightly duplicitous character. This is going to be well worth a watch in the coming days, and could inadvertently lead to the nationalist cause being blown completely out of the water. Wonder what Highlandshrews take on this is ? My take on this is that it's a mess. I don't have access to more information than anyone else. It's obviously headline news in Scotland, but with lockdown it's quite hard to gauge the opinions of friends and colleagues. It may be hard to believe this 'down south', but my experience is that people in Scotland have been quite reserved with their public views on the votes for independence and leaving the EU. The whole independence referendum was conducted in a fairly civil manner in Scotland (certainly when compared to the UK-wide fiasco surrounding the 'Brexit' referendum). As for the current issues between Sturgeon & Salmond - they can't both be telling the truth (although I guess they could both be lying). Sturgeon is adamant that Salmond has produced no proof to back his accusations and the Crown Office's justification for wanting to redact his statements (to protect the anonymity of whistle-blowers, and thus avert a contempt of court charge) seems plausible to me. Despite Martinshrew's opinion, the polls still show massive support for Sturgeon ( I would be VERY interested to know who he thinks is a better political leader in the UK at the moment) and my feeling is that most people don't want to believe that she has acted duplicitously in this matter. Conversely, Salmond is seen by many as a bit 'sleazy', not helped by his admissions of infidelity during his recent court case (largely overlooked by the media as not that newsworthy, I guess following in the footsteps of Trump and Johnson). On top of this all the opposition parties are (naturally) trying to make political capital from the side-lines, ahead of an election in May where they currently trail the SNP by a long, long way. My best guess is that Sturgeon will survive, Salmond will continue to protest his innocence and the SNP will increase it's majority in the next Scottish parliament. As someone else has already observed 'a week is a long time in politics' and proceedings later today could be quite interesting, but I think that Sturgeon's subsequent evidence to the inquiry, where she will have the chance to rebut anything Salmond says, will probably be a more defining moment.
|
|
|
Post by shropshirelad42 on Feb 26, 2021 11:28:56 GMT 1
I'm trying to think of any politician who ever told the truth, the whole truth & nothing but the truth !!!!!
This could be the longest think in history.
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Feb 26, 2021 11:44:25 GMT 1
I'm trying to think of any politician who ever told the truth, the whole truth & nothing but the truth !!!!! This could be the longest think in history. There might be one, but it would be someone who always evaded the questions.
|
|
|
Post by another fine mess on Feb 26, 2021 12:12:52 GMT 1
There are two stories.
One is about whether Salmond was the victim of a conspiracy. The other is about the Scottish legal system is operating over all this.
The first of these is fun and potentially scandalous but the second one is a far bigger issue and there doesn’t look to be any way that the SNP can come out of it looking good.
The UK media have been shamefully slow to understand or take an interest in all this. Sturgeon is given a remarkably easy ride by the media and it’s time there was proper scrutiny.
I’d concede that she’s a fluent and convincing speaker but her government’s performance has been disastrous in a number of areas and now it appears to be corrupt.
|
|
|
Post by neilsalop on Feb 26, 2021 12:36:25 GMT 1
If you've ever looked at the differences on the front page of the S*n and the Scottish S*n you will have have been able to work out what the end game is for the establishment. In the Scottish versions of the papers you find at least some support for the SNP and in the English editions you will find support for the Tories. The result is a broad swathe of the country pushed away from voting for Labour.
The MSM know full well that the Tories under Thatcher were hated in Scotland (and that the Scots have long memories) and that most of their MP at that time were Labour ones. They also know that Labour can't hope to regain power without the majority of the Scottish constituencies returning a Labour MP. They realise that it'd be an absolute waste of newsprint to try to get most Scots to vote Tory, so they throw their tacit support behind the SNP to split the anti-Tory vote, which gives them the odd MP, but more importantly stops Labour from winning the seats.
The only way for Labour to reclaim the Scottish seats that they have lost over the years is to fight back against the press and the Tories and the only way I can see them doing that is by backing a 2nd vote. Not in the next couple of years, but find a time-frame that would be acceptable to a decent proportion of Scots, say 8 or 10 years, which would allow them to fight back and maybe even get back into power and have time to then make Scotland a powerhouse that is intricately tied in to the UK economy, so much so that it would obvious to most voters that it would be harmful for Scotland to secede from the Union.
|
|
|
Post by armchairfan on Feb 26, 2021 12:40:54 GMT 1
There are two stories.
One is about whether Salmond was the victim of a conspiracy. The other is about the Scottish legal system is operating over all this.
The first of these is fun and potentially scandalous but the second one is a far bigger issue and there doesn’t look to be any way that the SNP can come out of it looking good.
The UK media have been shamefully slow to understand or take an interest in all this. Sturgeon is given a remarkably easy ride by the media and it’s time there was proper scrutiny.
I’d concede that she’s a fluent and convincing speaker but her government’s performance has been disastrous in a number of areas and now it appears to be corrupt. You may well be right, but polling evidence suggests that it is a non-issue; It may be because the media hasn't yet cottoned on to the gravity of the matter, of course, but whatever - I am sure the Scottish people deserve better than these two numpties.
|
|
|
Post by Exkeeper on Feb 26, 2021 12:52:56 GMT 1
For what it’s worth I think Sturgeon is the stand out leader in British politics Stopped at this point, absurd suggestion. Well I think that she is, but she hasn’t got much to beat.
|
|
|
Post by armchairfan on Feb 26, 2021 12:55:33 GMT 1
If you've ever looked at the differences on the front page of the S*n and the Scottish S*n you will have have been able to work out what the end game is for the establishment. In the Scottish versions of the papers you find at least some support for the SNP and in the English editions you will find support for the Tories. The result is a broad swathe of the country pushed away from voting for Labour.
The MSM know full well that the Tories under Thatcher were hated in Scotland (and that the Scots have long memories) and that most of their MP at that time were Labour ones. They also know that Labour can't hope to regain power without the majority of the Scottish constituencies returning a Labour MP. They realise that it'd be an absolute waste of newsprint to try to get most Scots to vote Tory, so they throw their tacit support behind the SNP to split the anti-Tory vote, which gives them the odd MP, but more importantly stops Labour from winning the seats.
The only way for Labour to reclaim the Scottish seats that they have lost over the years is to fight back against the press and the Tories and the only way I can see them doing that is by backing a 2nd vote. Not in the next couple of years, but find a time-frame that would be acceptable to a decent proportion of Scots, say 8 or 10 years, which would allow them to fight back and maybe even get back into power and have time to then make Scotland a powerhouse that is intricately tied in to the UK economy, so much so that it would obvious to most voters that it would be harmful for Scotland to secede from the Union.
That all seems very learned from a psepholohical angle, but the meaning of your second paragraph escapes me: in whose interests is it to "split the anti-Tory vote" if any hint of support for the Conservative Party would in any case be "a waste of newsprint". I would have thought that tacit support for the SNP is more likely to split the pro-Labour vote. A genuine question.... I'm probably missing something 🤔🤣!
|
|
|
Post by neilsalop on Feb 26, 2021 13:17:49 GMT 1
If you've ever looked at the differences on the front page of the S*n and the Scottish S*n you will have have been able to work out what the end game is for the establishment. In the Scottish versions of the papers you find at least some support for the SNP and in the English editions you will find support for the Tories. The result is a broad swathe of the country pushed away from voting for Labour.
The MSM know full well that the Tories under Thatcher were hated in Scotland (and that the Scots have long memories) and that most of their MP at that time were Labour ones. They also know that Labour can't hope to regain power without the majority of the Scottish constituencies returning a Labour MP. They realise that it'd be an absolute waste of newsprint to try to get most Scots to vote Tory, so they throw their tacit support behind the SNP to split the anti-Tory vote, which gives them the odd MP, but more importantly stops Labour from winning the seats.
The only way for Labour to reclaim the Scottish seats that they have lost over the years is to fight back against the press and the Tories and the only way I can see them doing that is by backing a 2nd vote. Not in the next couple of years, but find a time-frame that would be acceptable to a decent proportion of Scots, say 8 or 10 years, which would allow them to fight back and maybe even get back into power and have time to then make Scotland a powerhouse that is intricately tied in to the UK economy, so much so that it would obvious to most voters that it would be harmful for Scotland to secede from the Union.
That all seems very learned from a psepholohical angle, but the meaning of your second paragraph escapes me: in whose interests is it to "split the anti-Tory vote" if any hint of support for the Conservative Party would in any case be "a waste of newsprint". I would have thought that tacit support for the SNP is more likely to split the pro-Labour vote. A genuine question.... I'm probably missing something 🤔🤣! The SNP are hardly what you could describe as left wing, Liberal at best, but they are a bit of a one trick pony and they do play that trick very well. The dislike of the Tory party in most of Scotland is obvious, but they still managed to get 6 MPs with only 25% of the vote. In most of the constituencies that returned a Tory MP the margin of victory was negligible and without the split in the anti-Tory vote they would have lost the seat.
The only way Labour can ever hope to be returned to power is to come to arrangements with parties like the SNP, Plaid, the Greens and yes, even the LibDems to stand down in certain constituencies in order to unseat the Tories that are there now. Even though Johnson, Gove and Rees-Mogg would still be quite safe in their Tory heartland seats, there are many Tory MPs that would be alarmed at the thought of going into an election against a concerted effort from all the other parties.
|
|
|
Post by davycrockett on Feb 26, 2021 13:41:53 GMT 1
Whatever the reasons for that apparently potential conflict of interest, I am sure it is entirely permissible under Scottish Law; as for the rest, it all LOOKS terribly, well, just wrong. it may be legal but is it transparent or ethical www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9298715/Alex-Salmond-allies-claim-Nicola-Sturgeon-forced-quit.html"Civil servants have so far refused to explain why they redacted the most explosive 474 words of Mr Salmond's testimony that could force the SNP leader to resign. Politicians said the separation of power between prosecutors, the civil service and the SNP had become 'indistinguishable' and Scotland's public institutions were allowing themselves to be used for political purposes." Isn’t the reason the redacted words make it obvious who one of his accusers was who has the right to remain anonymous
|
|
|
Post by servernaside on Feb 26, 2021 13:42:48 GMT 1
If you've ever looked at the differences on the front page of the S*n and the Scottish S*n you will have have been able to work out what the end game is for the establishment. In the Scottish versions of the papers you find at least some support for the SNP and in the English editions you will find support for the Tories. The result is a broad swathe of the country pushed away from voting for Labour.
The MSM know full well that the Tories under Thatcher were hated in Scotland (and that the Scots have long memories) and that most of their MP at that time were Labour ones. They also know that Labour can't hope to regain power without the majority of the Scottish constituencies returning a Labour MP. They realise that it'd be an absolute waste of newsprint to try to get most Scots to vote Tory, so they throw their tacit support behind the SNP to split the anti-Tory vote, which gives them the odd MP, but more importantly stops Labour from winning the seats.
The only way for Labour to reclaim the Scottish seats that they have lost over the years is to fight back against the press and the Tories and the only way I can see them doing that is by backing a 2nd vote. Not in the next couple of years, but find a time-frame that would be acceptable to a decent proportion of Scots, say 8 or 10 years, which would allow them to fight back and maybe even get back into power and have time to then make Scotland a powerhouse that is intricately tied in to the UK economy, so much so that it would obvious to most voters that it would be harmful for Scotland to secede from the Union.
Ah! It's all the fault of the press once again. How insulting to the electorate to imagine that they meekly vote one way or another by simply reading a newspaper. I notice you refrain from criticising the role played by the left-leaning BBC and other television media.
|
|
|
Post by zenfootball2 on Feb 26, 2021 14:01:20 GMT 1
it may be legal but is it transparent or ethical www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9298715/Alex-Salmond-allies-claim-Nicola-Sturgeon-forced-quit.html"Civil servants have so far refused to explain why they redacted the most explosive 474 words of Mr Salmond's testimony that could force the SNP leader to resign. Politicians said the separation of power between prosecutors, the civil service and the SNP had become 'indistinguishable' and Scotland's public institutions were allowing themselves to be used for political purposes." Isn’t the reason the redacted words make it obvious who one of his accusers was who has the right to remain anonymous it seems to be but then if that is the case why was it allowed to be sumbitted in full but at the last moment stoped so late
|
|
|
Post by jamo on Feb 26, 2021 14:02:09 GMT 1
My take on this is that it's a mess. I don't have access to more information than anyone else. It's obviously headline news in Scotland, but with lockdown it's quite hard to gauge the opinions of friends and colleagues. It may be hard to believe this 'down south', but my experience is that people in Scotland have been quite reserved with their public views on the votes for independence and leaving the EU. The whole independence referendum was conducted in a fairly civil manner in Scotland (certainly when compared to the UK-wide fiasco surrounding the 'Brexit' referendum). As for the current issues between Sturgeon & Salmond - they can't both be telling the truth (although I guess they could both be lying). Sturgeon is adamant that Salmond has produced no proof to back his accusations and the Crown Office's justification for wanting to redact his statements (to protect the anonymity of whistle-blowers, and thus avert a contempt of court charge) seems plausible to me. Despite Martinshrew's opinion, the polls still show massive support for Sturgeon ( I would be VERY interested to know who he thinks is a better political leader in the UK at the moment) and my feeling is that most people don't want to believe that she has acted duplicitously in this matter. Conversely, Salmond is seen by many as a bit 'sleazy', not helped by his admissions of infidelity during his recent court case (largely overlooked by the media as not that newsworthy, I guess following in the footsteps of Trump and Johnson). On top of this all the opposition parties are (naturally) trying to make political capital from the side-lines, ahead of an election in May where they currently trail the SNP by a long, long way. My best guess is that Sturgeon will survive, Salmond will continue to protest his innocence and the SNP will increase it's majority in the next Scottish parliament. As someone else has already observed 'a week is a long time in politics' and proceedings later today could be quite interesting, but I think that Sturgeon's subsequent evidence to the inquiry, where she will have the chance to rebut anything Salmond says, will probably be a more defining moment. It will be interesting to see how this pans out, my view is that Sturgeon may be manoeuvred into a position whereby resignation is her only real option, although you make fair point in that she will at least have 4 of 5 days to prepare a response after Salmon has addressed the committee this afternoon, that has to be to her advantage. Wherever this falls, and there will probably be no personal winners, do you see this as being a massive fillip for the continuance of The Union ?
|
|
|
Post by MetaShrew on Feb 26, 2021 14:07:38 GMT 1
Covid-19 has done more to advance any break-up of the United Kingdom than any individual politician.
|
|
|
Post by armchairfan on Feb 26, 2021 14:08:37 GMT 1
That all seems very learned from a psepholohical angle, but the meaning of your second paragraph escapes me: in whose interests is it to "split the anti-Tory vote" if any hint of support for the Conservative Party would in any case be "a waste of newsprint". I would have thought that tacit support for the SNP is more likely to split the pro-Labour vote. A genuine question.... I'm probably missing something 🤔🤣! The SNP are hardly what you could describe as left wing, Liberal at best, but they are a bit of a one trick pony and they do play that trick very well. The dislike of the Tory party in most of Scotland is obvious, but they still managed to get 6 MPs with only 25% of the vote. In most of the constituencies that returned a Tory MP the margin of victory was negligible and without the split in the anti-Tory vote they would have lost the seat.
The only way Labour can ever hope to be returned to power is to come to arrangements with parties like the SNP, Plaid, the Greens and yes, even the LibDems to stand down in certain constituencies in order to unseat the Tories that are there now. Even though Johnson, Gove and Rees-Mogg would still be quite safe in their Tory heartland seats, there are many Tory MPs that would be alarmed at the thought of going into an election against a concerted effort from all the other parties.
Thanks for that, Neil. I can't fully go along with the first line of your response, but that apart, I now understand what you are getting at. 👍👍 As to your possible solutions for Labour getting back into power, all fine and dandy in principle, but any "arrangements" with other parties would necessarily require a dilution of each party's "non-negotiable" principles, and we are all well-aware how much fun that can be..... the merging of ideologies is never straightforward! I guess that, were I a member of the Labour Party, my approach would be too pragmatic for most, as I would be guided, above pretty well all other issues, by my desire to see a Labour government; it all boils down to electability, which I think you and I have discussed in the past As a side issue, I feel a tad uncomfortable with a "ganging-up" approach - I have never, or would ever, cast my vote negatively (simply to prevent another party winning, as opposed to wanting another party to win)..... If the result of such naive simplicity is the election of a Labour government, then so be it.....I do understand your quandary though..... good luck (but not too much of it lol)
|
|