General Election 2015

[Crùbag]

[Crùbag]

Why would someone mock that up?

Daily Record bottling a pro-Labour splash sounds too bizarre. But good.

[kevthedee]

Labour/lib dems minority coalition goverment has been mentioned as a possible outcome.

[boabinoban]

I still don't think they would get it though and see any unfairness. I think they could very easily ignore that amount of SNP MPs because their vow certainly add up to very much, then it was suddenly business as usual.

my prediction is 43 seats anyway but I'm preparing myself for some inevitable skullduggery, goalpost moving and some kind of political shafting.

forgive me if its just pre election jitters!

[kevthedee]

While the UK needs the resources which Scotland contributes to the treasury, the WM parties will continue to throw the occasional bone north to keep the natives subdued. It isn't in their interests to alienate the people of Scotland at the moment, however inferior they may deem them. I don't believe they'd want to be seen to actively "freeze out" such a large group of MPs.

If they did, though, it would show once and for all that Scotland, and the Scots, are irrelevant to the UK Government. They would see the Nation as being put firmly in their box, and the only possible responses for Scotland would be acceptance of eternal servitude, or UDI. Sadly, I think I know which way it would go.

Wont be udi.

[MacGafraidh]

While the UK needs the resources which Scotland contributes to the treasury, the WM parties will continue to throw the occasional bone north to keep the natives subdued. It isn't in their interests to alienate the people of Scotland at the moment, however inferior they may deem them. I don't believe they'd want to be seen to actively "freeze out" such a large group of MPs.

If they did, though, it would show once and for all that Scotland, and the Scots, are irrelevant to the UK Government. They would see the Nation as being put firmly in their box, and the only possible responses for Scotland would be acceptance of eternal servitude, or UDI. Sadly, I think I know which way it would go.

UDI I would hope, if so Sturgeons played a blinder!

[WhiteRoseKillie]

Jesus, the troll agrees with me - although I'd like to think that there's more than blind optimism behind MacGafraidh's post.

[oddly optomistic]

While the UK needs the resources which Scotland contributes to the treasury, the WM parties will continue to throw the occasional bone north to keep the natives subdued. It isn't in their interests to alienate the people of Scotland at the moment, however inferior they may deem them. I don't believe they'd want to be seen to actively "freeze out" such a large group of MPs.

If they did, though, it would show once and for all that Scotland, and the Scots, are irrelevant to the UK Government. They would see the Nation as being put firmly in their box, and the only possible responses for Scotland would be acceptance of eternal servitude, or UDI. Sadly, I think I know which way it would go.

There could be an option of another referendum in a few years time. Obviously it would all depend on the numbers and how all the parties played the hands they're dealt. I was just saying that it would be risky to freeze out a large number of Scottish MPs democratically elected. If the 45% remain committed then antagonising no voters that vote SNP may not help the unionist cause. All speculation of course

[WhiteRoseKillie]

There could be an option of another referendum in a few years time. Obviously it would all depend on the numbers and how all the parties played the hands they're dealt. I was just saying that it would be risky to freeze out a large number of Scottish MPs democratically elected. If the 45% remain committed then antagonising no voters that vote SNP may not help the unionist cause. All speculation of course

If Scotland's representatives are being ignored, though, then WM will simply say "stick your referendum up your arse, Jockos". Then it's a case of has Scotland got the balls to say "Fúck you, then - we'll take our chances".

[H Wragg]

Scotland's football trophies are only allowed to be won by a team with United in it's name. Propose that and I'll back you

Kez is on the edge

Seems an opportune moment for me to ask a question that I was going to post in the Quick Question thread.

Why do the opposition leaders always start off by asking a 'non question' about what the first minister is doing for the rest of the day, when is she next meeting the prime minister etc?

Obviously some sort of parliamentary protocol but I'm not sure why they need to do it?

[Mr Bairn]

Seems an opportune moment for me to ask a question that I was going to post in the Quick Question thread.

Why do the opposition leaders always start off by asking a 'non question' about what the first minister is doing for the rest of the day, when is she next meeting the prime minister etc?

Obviously some sort of parliamentary protocol but I'm not sure why they need to do it?

The reason for this is that the First Minister gets to see the main question that the opposition leaders plan to ask but not any follow up questions. It happens at PMQs as well.

That way, if the first question is just about her plans for the day, then she doesn't really gain an advantage by knowing that it's coming, so the tactic is to put a "non question" in first, and then when she answers that, follow it up with something that might put her in a tricky situation.

[strichener]

Seems an opportune moment for me to ask a question that I was going to post in the Quick Question thread.

Why do the opposition leaders always start off by asking a 'non question' about what the first minister is doing for the rest of the day, when is she next meeting the prime minister etc?

Obviously some sort of parliamentary protocol but I'm not sure why they need to do it?

Because the question is public record before FMQs. The follow up question doesn't have to be disclosed.

ETA: 'sake beaten to it by someone who should be STUDYING FOR FRIDAY!!!

[invergowrie arab]

Seems an opportune moment for me to ask a question that I was going to post in the Quick Question thread.

Why do the opposition leaders always start off by asking a 'non question' about what the first minister is doing for the rest of the day, when is she next meeting the prime minister etc?

Obviously some sort of parliamentary protocol but I'm not sure why they need to do it?

Questions must be tabled in advance but supplementaries don't so you can go off topic with the follow up

[Granny Danger]

Questions must be tabled in advance but supplementaries don't so you can go off topic with the follow up

It's an incredibly stupid tradition that was adopted from Westminster. You would have thought when they created a more modern Parliament in Edinburgh that they wouldn't have adopted such a stupid and archaic procedure.

[Mark Connolly]

One of my friends has just liked a page on facebook called "What's on on East Renfrewshire".

On further investigation, I am appalled at the lack of "Telling Jim Murphy to f*ck off" in East Ren's announced upcoming plans.

[Mr Bairn]

It's an incredibly stupid tradition that was adopted from Westminster. You would have thought when they created a more modern Parliament in Edinburgh that they wouldn't have adopted such a stupid and archaic procedure.

"The Right honourable member for...."

[MacGafraidh]

Jesus, the troll agrees with me - although I'd like to think that there's more than blind optimism behind MacGafraidh's post.

Blind optimism so far, but I was right about the referendum result being marginally no!

[Fotbawmad]

The only way Scotland can be "shut out" really would be if Labour and the Tories work together

The only other nightmare scenario that could maybe see the SNP shut out would be Labour retaining 10-12 seats in Scotland and the Tories having a really disappointing night down South, opening up the possibility of a Lab-Lib coalition hitting the magic number of 321

There is a definite possibly this could happen, but they would never do it publicly. Just collude with each other in order to pass votes.

[Granny Danger]

There is a definite possibly this could happen, but they would never do it publicly. Just collude with each other in order to pass votes.

Don't agree. I think if Labour and the LibDems could get 323 votes between they would enter into a formal coalition in a heartbeat. Some on the Labour left wouldn't like it but they'd suck it up.

[glasgow-sheep]

Herald Drinking game:

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/the-heraldscotland-general-election-drinking-game-your-guide-to-making-the-night-bear.1430931768

• A fancy graphic sticks on-screen, causing minor but professionally-masked panic Take a drink
• Katie Hopkins tweets something offensive about a living person Take two drinks
• Katie Hopkins tweets something offensive about a dead person Take two drinks
• The words 'we've got a long night ahead of us' are mentioned Take a drink
• Jackie Bird swooshes her lovely flame-coloured mane Take three drinks
• Someone misses their cue on a live link Take a drink
• Glenn Campbell makes a verbal slip-up, fundily-mundily style Take a drink
• A clip is shown of George Galloway in a jaunty hat Take two drinks
• The back of a branded laptop is covered by a funky decal pertaining to the TV channel Take a drink
• The word 'kingmaker' is mentioned Take a sip
• The colour of BBC political editor Brian Taylor's braces shows his party preference Take a drink
• When a presenter thanks Brian Taylor, he closes his eyes and nods deeply Take two drinks
• Any results that are announced in the dead-zone of 10-12pm Take three drinks
• Someone references Scandinavian peacenik sauna republik-gate Take three drinks
• A reporter studies their clipboard frantically when a link goes wrongTake a drink
• Every ten times someone says 'swing' Take one drink
• The phrase 'the most unpredictable general election in years' is mentioned Take a drink
• A party member stamps on their rosette in frustration Take three drinks
• Labour lose a seat to the SNP Take a sip
• Bernard Ponsonby forgetting to enunciate a word perfectly Take three drinks