banterman86 Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 They're saying that Salmond is the feart one, and media spin doesn't need to adhere to any particular logic, as we have seen. Really, the Scottish media has been saying Salmond is afraid to debate Cameron? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 Really, the Scottish media has been saying Salmond is afraid to debate Cameron? The BT's certainly have (Sarwar said it on QT last week, for instance), ably assisted and quoted by the MSM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davi3j Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 Really, the Scottish media has been saying Salmond is afraid to debate Cameron? Now your just being a cnut that was just showing a way in which the media can spin any angle against Yes Scotland. Now why do you think the UK government would give the SNP / Yes scotland full detailed access to the UKs accounts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enigma Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 Some amount of whoooshing there. What I think he really means is buying Jaffa cakes from a Tesco in Glasgow... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banterman86 Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 The BT's certainly have (Sarwar said it on QT last week, for instance), ably assisted and quoted by the MSM. Sarwar wasn;t on QT last week - and i don't see why a Labour MP would be pushing for a tory to debate Salmond. If anything it appears to em they have been actively avoiding the debate. Now why do you think the UK government would give the SNP / Yes scotland full detailed access to the UKs accounts. Well, i'm talking about SG civil servants writing the White Paper. I also laid out a hypothetical were it could have been a negotiating tool to score poltical points in the EA But, on the other hand, once we factor in cross border exports and the like, it may end up helping the No sides argument that independence would create extra beuracracy and red tape for business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banterman86 Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 Some amount of whoooshing there. What I think he really means is buying Jaffa cakes from a Tesco in Glasgow... Ach, that was going to be my next one. Or books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 Sarwar wasn;t on QT last week - and i don't see why a Labour MP would be pushing for a tory to debate Salmond. If anything it appears to em they have been actively avoiding the debate. Well, i'm talking about SG civil servants writing the White Paper. I also laid out a hypothetical were it could have been a negotiating tool to score poltical points in the EA But, on the other hand, once we factor in cross border exports and the like, it may end up helping the No sides argument that independence would create extra beuracracy and red tape for business. Would you not have been better just saying that then, obviously you didn't get anything with your maggot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banterman86 Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 Would you not have been better just saying that then, obviously you didn't get anything with your maggot. Not really, especially factoring in the currency union i don't think it'd be as useful for No as it would be for Yes. I get you think i;m hinting at the figures not being that impressive for yes - far from it - i suspect they;d be signifcantly more impressive to voters than GERS, taht's why i don;t understand why the SG haven't a.) Pursued it or b.) caused a stink about not getting it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vacamion Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 Okay, you get my point. buying childrens clothes from Tesco in Glasgow then. Some amount of whoooshing there. What I think he really means is buying Jaffa cakes from a Tesco in Glasgow... OK, you got me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 Sarwar wasn;t on QT last week - and i don't see why a Labour MP would be pushing for a tory to debate Salmond. If anything it appears to em they have been actively avoiding the debate. Sarwar said it the last time I saw his pus then. They're writing in the Daily Mail now, you've been asleep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 But, on the other hand, once we factor in cross border exports and the like, it may end up helping the No sides argument that independence would create extra beuracracy and red tape for business. I doubt it, we'd have heard about it by now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 Not really, especially factoring in the currency union i don't think it'd be as useful for No as it would be for Yes. I get you think i;m hinting at the figures not being that impressive for yes - far from it - i suspect they;d be signifcantly more impressive to voters than GERS, taht's why i don;t understand why the SG haven't a.) Pursued it or b.) caused a stink about not getting it. A/ They've no hope of getting them B/ It would cost a mint, which would cause an even bigger stink. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banterman86 Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 Sarwar said it the last time I saw his pus then. They're writing in the Daily Mail now, you've been asleep. what did he say? be specific And writing what in the Daily Mail? Salmond is afarid of debating Cameron? I doubt it, we'd have heard about it by now. Perhaps if the SG had psuhed for the detaisl fo getting as clear a picture of Scotland;s economy we would have. As i said, if Scotland votes "Yes" this is something the treasury will have to consider in terms of loss of earnings,anyway, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 Not really, especially factoring in the currency union i don't think it'd be as useful for No as it would be for Yes. I get you think i;m hinting at the figures not being that impressive for yes - far from it - i suspect they;d be signifcantly more impressive to voters than GERS, taht's why i don;t understand why the SG haven't a.) Pursued it or b.) caused a stink about not getting it. Because we'd get bogged down in something costing 2p in the £ to businesses rather than discussing any positives, you might not have been following everything but I'm voting YES because of all the deflective shite I've witnessed since the white paper was rolled out, if you're losing the economic argument then confusion is your only weapon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banterman86 Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 A/ They've no hope of getting them B/ It would cost a mint, which would cause an even bigger stink. But at least asking the question would be worth it for the poltical capital. How much is "a mint" btw, relevant to other Government spending? and would you concede the UK treasury would need to do it anyway in the event of a Yes vote? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banterman86 Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 Because we'd get bogged down in something costing 2p in the £ to businesses rather than discussing any positives, , if you're losing the economic argument then confusion is your only weapon. in that case, why wouldn't the Treasury do it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 what did he say? be specific And writing what in the Daily Mail? He said "It's Salmond that's scared". Independence debate BBC, last week-ish. They're writing in the Daily Mail about all sorts, they've joined the Tories in order to defend the union. Haven't you heard? Perhaps if the SG had psuhed for the detaisl fo getting as clear a picture of Scotland;s economy we would have. How do you kinow they haven't pushed for details? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 But at least asking the question would be worth it for the poltical capital. How much is "a mint" btw, relevant to other Government spending? and would you concede the UK treasury would need to do it anyway in the event of a Yes vote? A "mint" is whatever the MSM say it is. HTH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 in that case, why wouldn't the Treasury do it? Because it will be time consuming and costly, the Treasury will only do it when they have to ie a YES vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banterman86 Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 He said "It's Salmond that's scared". Independence debate BBC, last week-ish. They're writing in the Daily Mail about all sorts, they've joined the Tories in order to defend the union. Haven't you heard? How do you kinow they haven't pushed for details? What was he saying Salmond was scared of? Cameron? that's what you claimed. why did you bring the daily mail into it? are they saying salmond is scared of cameron? I could belive that actually... If they have then they should have made a stink about it, somewhere. It'd be very useful politcally. Do you think they have? A "mint" is whatever the MSM say it is. HTH. And what do you think it is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.