The Labour Party. All discussion here please

[Mister M 1,608]

Within the Tory party he is identified as the Tory who allowed himself to be duped into supporting Salmond.

 

---------- Post added 07-05-2015 at 11:16 ----------

 

 

Absolutely correct. A brilliant politician, but, the stakes are too high to allow this man any where near power in Westminster. He has to have an agenda that makes the UK fail. He cannot do otherwise.

 

His ambition is to make Scotland independent, having lost the independence vote he must seek other ways to do achieve his lifes desire. He will be prepared to alienate the English to suit his own ends. To do this he will make the country ungovernable.

 

Remember, before you poo/poo the above, no one ever thought the SNP would take power in Scotland, they now look set to take literally every constituency.

 

But Michael Forsyth lost his seat in parliament in 1997!

The now ennobled Lord Forsyth, recently spoke against the Tory Tactic of:

 

"appearing to embrace Scottish nationalism, in order to undermine Labour's chances of winning seats in the General Election, was a approach that could threaten the Union.

We've had the dilemma for Conservatives, which is they want to be the largest party at Westminster and therefore some see the fact that the nationalists are going to take seats in Scotland will be helpful," he told The Guardian.

But that is a short-term and dangerous view which threatens the integrity of our country."

 

So I'm not sure where Lord Forsyth made deals with the SNP.

 

---------- Post added 07-05-2015 at 11:26 ----------

 

The clue is in the bit in bold, t'was a case of "keeping your enemy closer" at the time. The SNP isn't exactly a minority government anymore. Love or loathe him (2nd for me), Salmond has played the Tories and Labour in equal measure and given them a political masterclass which will take them (and/or any other non-nationalist party) years and years to overcome. Credit to the man, as best a case 'well played Sir' as I've seen in a long time.

 

So it's for Cameron if the Tories do a deal with the SNP, however it would be a "coalition nightmare" if Labour did one with the SNP?

Okay.

[L00b 441]

So it's for Cameron if the Tories do a deal with the SNP, however it would be a "coalition nightmare" if Labour did one with the SNP?Okay.

That's quite a disingenuous question, Mister M

 

Salmond used the Cons, not the other way around (contrary to what the Cons were expecting from this deal).

 

At the time of the Cons-SNP deal, as you rightly noted the SNP was still not in a position to call the shots north of Hadrian's Wall, never mind the rest of the UK.

 

That position has changed fairly substantially since (the Cons couldn't hope to form a working coalition with the SNP in 2010) and will change further still after tonight if polls are to be believed.

 

The SNP is just like UKIP, a one-item party, and theirs is independence for Scotland. The Referendum gave the wrong answer, they'll just keep plugging until it goes their way, because that's their mandate from their electorate (exact same as will happen with UKIP if that Referendum to come gives the wrong answer).

 

But unlike UKIP, the SNP are going to be in a position to call shots after tonight. And drag the UK blanket majorly their Scottish way for the next 5 years if they get into power.

[Mister M 1,608]

That's quite a disingenuous question, Mister M

 

Salmond used the Cons, not the other way around (contrary to what the Cons were expecting from this deal).

 

At the time of the Cons-SNP deal, as you rightly noted the SNP was still not in a position to call the shots north of Hadrian's Wall, never mind the rest of the UK.

 

That position has changed fairly substantially since (the Cons couldn't hope to form a working coalition with the SNP in 2010) and will change further still after tonight if polls are to be believed.

 

The SNP is just like UKIP, a one-item party, and theirs is independence for Scotland. The Referendum gave the wrong answer, they'll just keep plugging until it goes their way, because that's their mandate from their electorate (exact same as will happen with UKIP if that Referendum to come gives the wrong answer).

 

But unlike UKIP, the SNP are going to be in a position to call shots after tonight. And drag the UK blanket majorly their Scottish way for the next 5 years if they get into power.

 

It's an inconvenient one, I'll grant you that.

But the former Tory Scottish Secretary, and ardent Thatcherite, Michael Forsyth, quoted above, believes that:

'The Tories are playing a “short term and dangerous” game which could threaten the security of the United Kingdom'.

[Alan Ladd 10]

But Michael Forsyth lost his seat in parliament in 1997!

The now ennobled Lord Forsyth, recently spoke against the Tory Tactic of:

 

"appearing to embrace Scottish nationalism, in order to undermine Labour's chances of winning seats in the General Election, was a approach that could threaten the Union.

We've had the dilemma for Conservatives, which is they want to be the largest party at Westminster and therefore some see the fact that the nationalists are going to take seats in Scotland will be helpful," he told The Guardian.

But that is a short-term and dangerous view which threatens the integrity of our country."

 

So I'm not sure where Lord Forsyth made deals with the SNP.

 

---------- Post added 07-05-2015 at 11:26 ----------

 

 

So it's for Cameron if the Tories do a deal with the SNP, however it would be a "coalition nightmare" if Labour did one with the SNP?

 

 

Okay.

 

Forsyth was the man behind the negotiations. In or out of power he was the Tory grandee who did the deal.

[L00b 441]

It's an inconvenient one, I'll grant you that.

Not inconvenient in the least, since quite clearly disingenuous: your posts are so phrased as to transpose the SNP-Cons deal of 2007-2011 as if it was still recent/ongoing (it's been dead and buried for the majority of the last Parliament/last 4 years), and the SNP has rejected the possibility of a Cons-SNP Coalition out of hand.

But the former Tory Scottish Secretary, and ardent Thatcherite, Michael Forsyth, quoted above, believes that:

'The Tories are playing a “short term and dangerous” game which could threaten the security of the United Kingdom'.

Because he considers that Cameron is going to allow Salmond to play the same move again. Which I very much doubt. Regardless of rosette, all politicians (but particularly at party leadership level) are fast learners with elephant-grade memories

[Mister M 1,608]

Forsyth was the man behind the negotiations. In or out of power he was the Tory grandee who did the deal.

 

That's quite a claim! Do you have a link to show that Forsyth was the man behind the negotiations? If so, that would threaten his integrity - publically criticising his own party, for something he allegedly initiated in private.

[sgtkate 10]

Interestingly, if the SNP were a UK-wide party I think a lot of people would vote for them (without the Scottish-centric policies of course!).

 

I'm v torn. I can't stand the idea of another Tory led government but I'm not sure I'm totally comfortable with the SNP being in power either. Rock/hard place.

 

---------- Post added 07-05-2015 at 12:29 ----------

 

Let me chip in.

 

People should remember that Labour policy also resulted in a million dead in the Middle East during their time in power. It fuelled terrorism that left us with the legacy of constant threat, billion pound bills to police and erosion of hard won freedoms. Unforgivable in my books.

 

I'm fairly sure if the Tories had been in power at the time the outcome would have been the same. But the point stands and I'll never forgive Blair for it. But as I've said on other threads I've tried to forget anything the parties have done in the past and focus on what they bring to the future. So I'll delete the Thatcher years from the Tories past and Blair from Labours etc.

[L00b 441]

I'm fairly sure if the Tories had been in power at the time the outcome would have been the same.

I'm not so sure. Chirac (who was France's "Tory" president at the time, with a rightwing majority Gvt) stayed out in the end. Hague is a consummate diplomat and, had the Tories won the 2001 GE and he been the PM, it's not completely inconceivable that a rightwing British Gvt would have stayed out as well. Then again, there has long been this 'special relationship' business...

[Alan Ladd 10]

That's quite a claim! Do you have a link to show that Forsyth was the man behind the negotiations? If so, that would threaten his integrity - publically criticising his own party, for something he allegedly initiated in private.

 

You seem a little uninformed about how these things work. Remember Camerons mention of "conversations in dark rooms" ? Same happened here Forsyth boobed.

 

---------- Post added 07-05-2015 at 13:07 ----------

 

Interestingly, if the SNP were a UK-wide party I think a lot of people would vote for them (without the Scottish-centric policies of course!).

 

I'm v torn. I can't stand the idea of another Tory led government but I'm not sure I'm totally comfortable with the SNP being in power either. Rock/hard place.

 

---------- Post added 07-05-2015 at 12:29 ----------

 

 

I'm fairly sure if the Tories had been in power at the time the outcome would have been the same. But the point stands and I'll never forgive Blair for it. But as I've said on other threads I've tried to forget anything the parties have done in the past and focus on what they bring to the future. So I'll delete the Thatcher years from the Tories past and Blair from Labours etc.

 

If you are, at heart a Labour supporter, then do the right thing. Do not vote for Milliband.

 

Labour is the party of Attlee, Benn, Bevin and Bevan, of Callaghan, Jenkins and Kinnock. Let them lose in 2015.

 

Allow those in the party who care as those I mention did regroup, come back refreshed in 2020.

 

Milliband has his fathers instinct at heart, a revolutionery marxist who, despite the Milliband brothers protestations, did say in 1940 after he had been saved by us from the nazis, "this war would be a good one for the British to lose".

 

Milliband is no patriot, he will ally himself with the SNP who hate the UK.

[flamingjimmy 10]

Let me chip in.

 

People should remember that Labour policy also resulted in a million dead in the Middle East during their time in power. It fuelled terrorism that left us with the legacy of constant threat, billion pound bills to police and erosion of hard won freedoms. Unforgivable in my books.

 

Didn't the Tories back all of Labour's warmongering?

[ronthenekred 10]

Didn't the Tories back all of Labour's warmongering?

 

Minus a couple, yes, without any equivocation. Some Labour ministers resigned their posts I believe.

[Mister M 1,608]

You seem a little uninformed about how these things work. Remember Camerons mention of "conversations in dark rooms" ? Same happened here Forsyth boobed.

 

---------- Post added 07-05-2015 at 13:07 ----------

 

 

If you are, at heart a Labour supporter, then do the right thing. Do not vote for Milliband.

 

Labour is the party of Attlee, Benn, Bevin and Bevan, of Callaghan, Jenkins and Kinnock. Let them lose in 2015.

 

Allow those in the party who care as those I mention did regroup, come back refreshed in 2020.

Milliband has his fathers instinct at heart, a revolutionery marxist who, despite the Milliband brothers protestations, did say in 1940 after he had been saved by us from the nazis, "this war would be a good one for the British to lose".

 

Milliband is no patriot, he will ally himself with the SNP who hate the UK.

 

Ahh, you've let the mask slip, now it's back to the Daily Mail smear of Ed Miliband's Dad hating Britain. That piece of vitriol was universally savaged by all concerned, as a nasty minded piece of filth.

And as you admitted only a few posts ago, the Tories also allied themselves with the SNP, who apparently hate the UK.

The Sheffield Forum multi username club are certainly out in force today, of all days - and they all share a common theme of being right wing. I wonder what the connection is?