I have no sympathy at all for anybody who voted No on the grounds of the pledges by Brown, Miliband, Cameron and Clegg about constitutional change, and is now whingeing about the blatant dishonour of those pledges. I cannot understand how anybody could be so stupid as to have believed them, and yet have a brain capable of sparking respiration.
Labour is interested in losing no influence of Scottish Labour MPs on any UK or English matters. It wants greater powers to English metropolitan councils which are controlled by Labour – because that will give Labour careerists more jobs and access to contracts. Those are Labours “constitutional reform” goals. The Conservatives “constitutional reform” goals are to keep Scotland’s tax on oil revenues and tax on whisky coming to Westminster, while loading greater responsibilities but no more money on the Scottish parliament, and stopping Scottish MPs voting on English matters thus guaranteeing conservative apparatchiks continued jobs and access to contracts.
Both Tories and Labour want to keep the appalling corrupt and undemocratic House of Lords for its jobs for apparatchiks, access to contracts etc.
Nobody cares what the Lib Dems think anyway.
I ask again – what did you expect?
This is the collective wisdom of Andy Myles and myself, over an excellent mackerel breakfast at Nom De Plume.
It’s a short life, and many bullies choose to spend it trying to irritate and get at people.
Is it me or do many in this society obviously not mature and realize what this behaviour signifies. Deep insecurity with themselves.
Is our nation more than a gang of thugs and thieves. Cowards in the dark.
Me at 1.17pm
On re-reading the quote from Bruce, it is not clear whether he is referring to the postal ballot or the polling station one. Ruth Davidson was definitely referring to the postal ballot.
Pinocchio is an excellent story for kids about corruption. I wonder how popular it is now… would suspect that it is being quietly put to bed.
“I saw that interview too and was also intrigued. Presumably the practice is legal otherwise Ruth Davidson and Malcolm Bruce (below) wouldn’t have been bragging about it, but at the very least, it proves that the postal ballot was opened and handled long before the actual official count. Very peculiar.”
I don’t know if it is standard practice or not but it certainly makes sense.
I would say it is a good thing if the very first thing they do, before the ballot slips are handled by lots of people, is that the representatives of both sides take a random sample and count them. If the final result then doesn’t match the sample result then they know the odds of there being fowl play somewhere in between.
Ps, Just to note. I’v been using an email address I typed wrong (a mix of two I have) when I first stared commenting on this blog. I just noted on my last post it said invalid. (perfectly true) i’d continued to use it as it was working and I thought why give out my email on something I don’t need to.
I guess looking back it could have been someones else’s and maybe I should not have used it. But it was my real address wording, just with wrong company ending.
I just wanted to clear that up, I assume the site has been updated or something.
Considering that, it would have been even simpler for any observer to type some address in and mimic someone.
Mr Google preserves an eerie silence on the subject of sampling a UK poll before it closes. The Representation of the People Act 1983 hints at illegality:
(3)No person shall—
(a)…
(b)otherwise obtain or attempt to obtain in a polling station information as to the candidate for whom a voter in that station is about to vote or has voted;
and
(4)
(d) attempt to ascertain at the proceedings in connection with the receipt of the ballot papers the candidate for whom any vote is given in any particular ballot paper or communicate any information with respect thereto obtained at those proceedings.
@Fred: Just because something is illegal doesn’t mean people won’t publicly brag about it. You’ve only got to cast your mind back to Rebekah Brooks and the House of Commons media etc. committee
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1AJjnl2y8U
Ishmael 22 Sep, 2014 – 1:46 pm
“Ps, Just to note. I’v been using an email address I typed wrong … [snip] …. Considering that, it would have been even simpler for any observer to type some address in and mimic someone.”
But the observer would have to register a real email address with Gravitar in order to do imitate John in the way he has done.
“Mr Google preserves an eerie silence on the subject of sampling a UK poll before it closes. The Representation of the People Act 1983 hints at illegality:
(3)No person shall—
(a)…
(b)otherwise obtain or attempt to obtain in a polling station information as to the candidate for whom a voter in that station is about to vote or has voted;
and
(4)
(d) attempt to ascertain at the proceedings in connection with the receipt of the ballot papers the candidate for whom any vote is given in any particular ballot paper or communicate any information with respect thereto obtained at those proceedings.”
The first of those says that it’s illegal to stand in a polling station asking people who they are going to vote for or have just voted for. That is why exit polls are exit polls conducted outside.
The second looks to me like it is to prevent someone trying to find out who a particular individual voted for.
“@Fred: Just because something is illegal doesn’t mean people won’t publicly brag about it. You’ve only got to cast your mind back to Rebekah Brooks and the House of Commons media etc. committee”
So what are you telling me for?
RoS eff off. While some of the ww2 stuff you cut and pasted was of genuine historical interest and worth examination and debate, it wasn’t original, wasn’t yours, and certain posts: the list of expulsions and the piece about blue eyes, was off-the-wall and cannot be interpreted in any way other than pro-nazi. I think it was right you were called out on it. With Habbaduk, you pair have become a right little noisy, distracting double act. Desist I say both of you.
———————-
Tony M
The item about blues was taken from the ITV 6 pm news, so I take it ITV must be Nazi’s then, what an idiot you are, one minute, you’re moaning about grammar spelling, the next you’re complaining about an ITV article about blue eyes, sounds like you’re going through the menopause.
And on top of all that the sodding panda’s not pregnant.
“But the observer would have to register a real email address with Gravitar in order to do imitate John in the way he has done.”
But anyone who already knew John’s email address could simply type it into the comment form, and gravatar.com would do the rest.
Whatever, Fred. But I’m not seeing any legally enforceable distinction between getting the gen on one voter’s ballot paper and on hundreds. Or between asking the punters and examining their ballots. Those distinctions would be specified if they existed. This is a legal document. Maybe I need to clean the screen.
Earlier on, Fred, you reinforced (by quoting without challenging) an earlier piece from Node that the tory lady was bragging about looking at ballot papers, and that was an indication that it was legal.
To both of you then… like with Rebekah Brooks, this is more like an indication of stupidity… or thinking they are above the law (!)
Correction, that was RepublicOfScotland, not Anon1 who felt ashamed of voting No.
———————-
ABE get your facts right, I was a YES voter and like Alex Salmond said, the rocks will melt with the sun, before I would vote no, I thought my user name would have been a clue.
“Whatever, Fred. But I’m not seeing any legally enforceable distinction between getting the gen on one voter’s ballot paper and on hundreds. Or between asking the punters and examining their ballots. Those distinctions would be specified if they existed. This is a legal document. Maybe I need to clean the screen.”
So go to the police and report it.
“Earlier on, Fred, you reinforced (by quoting without challenging) an earlier piece from Node that the tory lady was bragging about looking at ballot papers, and that was an indication that it was legal. ”
Look if Node says something that’s him saying it and if I say something it’s me saying it.
I refuse to be held responsible for what somebody else says just because I didn’t bother to challenge it.
Take it up with Node.
In the absence of any information from Google, I’ve emailed the following query to the Electoral Commission for Scotland. I’ll post any eventual reply on this thread.
IOW I’ve got a point and your comment was questionable.
You’re a very bad loser, Fred.
Check this out….
http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-independence-labour-to-look-at-yes-voters-1-3548328
Now, Chunkymark. I love this guy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QdHRQYetF3A
Former Labour MP Tam Dalyell,has called for the abolition of the Scottish Parliament following a No vote.
Dalyell, says now that 55% of Scots voted no Holyrood no longer, represents Scottish interests.
Dreoilin 22 Sep, 2014 – 2:21 pm
“But anyone who already knew John’s email address could simply type it into the comment form, and gravatar.com would do the rest.”
Good point, Dreoilin, it’s even easier than I thought.
Meanwhile the Catalonian Parliament passed a law on Friday,enabling regional head, Artur Mas to demand an indy vote.
However the Spanish government have pledged to block any attempt, of Catalonian independence in the courts.
=========================
Hopefully the Catalonian’s will get their vote, and then vote yes, unlike residents in Scotland who were gutless, about taking charge of their own future.
Fred
In balance, it is good – and admirable – that you should keep responding those who cannot swallow the fact that the people of Scotland voted by a majority, in a free and democratic referendum, against independence.
It is not only good, but also necessary, that someone should keep doing so, lest the result-deniers on here should think that their thesis of ballot-rigging and so on is being accepted by default.
The fact that some people on here are still going on about ballot-rigging (whereas, as I think you pointed out, the SNP itself and other interested parties are not making those accusations) is beginning to look obsessional.
Perhaps you can now begin to understand the frequency of my comments on certain other themes about which I judge some posters here show a similarly obsessive streak….
“IOW I’ve got a point and your comment was questionable.”
No, you are just arguing for the sake of argument now.
If you think what was done was illegal then go to the police.
If you don’t think it was illegal then why are you trying to argue it was?
“Hopefully the Catalonian’s will get their vote, and then vote yes, unlike residents in Scotland who were gutless, about taking charge of their own future.”
Not to be negative, but it seems appropriate that a dispirited Orwell returned from Catalonia and spent his final days on a Scottish isle; Jur I believe.
RepublicOfGassingDeniers informs us that
“Former Labour MP Tam Dalyell,has called for the abolition of the Scottish Parliament following a No vote.
Dalyell, says now that 55% of Scots voted no Holyrood no longer, represents Scottish interests.”
______________________
Tam’s suggestion – for which I note that ROGD gives no source nor date – is, of course, one way of solving the West Lothian question.
To be noted that Tam is the country’s greatest expert on the West Lothian question.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“If you don’t think it was illegal then why are you trying to argue it was?”
Why do you keep repeating the ‘report it to the police’ canard? It’s getting ridiculous.
Perhaps you can now begin to understand the frequency of my comments on certain other themes about which I judge some posters here show a similarly obsessive streak….
———————
My thoughts exactly, I couldn’t have put it any better,you described yourself to a T.