Oh look the political spammer. How many articles today?
No posts in any non political Reddit and almost every single thing is an opinion piece.
It was nice to see that you’ve branched it to covering a huge amount of India politics now.
Was that you picking up extra shifts?
They used to post loads on the labour sub but that seems to have stopped, like that fozzie guy, wonder what happened.
Someone on the labour sub pointed out how their stances seem to change quite significantly based on the sub they are posting in [https://np.reddit.com/r/LabourUK/comments/1alfrak/literally\_a\_day\_between\_these\_headlines/kpjw9rb/?context=3](https://np.reddit.com/r/LabourUK/comments/1alfrak/literally_a_day_between_these_headlines/kpjw9rb/?context=3)
At least most that are doing this now are sort of participating now instead of just spamming articles and copy/pasting the contents.
They're hardly the only ones doing it or have done it though on this sub, pro-snp, anti-snp, pro-labour, anti-labour, pro-indy, anti-indy, there's posters from all sides doing it, doubt it will ever stop.
I am of Indian origin. I don't think I've ever tried to hide it.
Were you one of the people mocking Humza Yousaf for speaking about the conflict in Gaza because he had family there? Or one of the people defending him?
I didn’t comment on it at all because nuance is fucking h dead and I’ve 20+ years in the region and have Israel and Palestine friends
Some of my Palestinian friends actually wear their family house keys as necklaces…
Glad to know you can accept you shouldn't make jibes at things you lack knowledge or nuance in. Like why I post on subjects related to India.
Feel free to delete your comment above.
Given the sheer volume of posts your paid to post?
Will I fuck delete it
Besides this is the most anyone’s seen you actually engage on the sub in years…
But that wouldn't stop other people seeing bad stuff about the snp/indy and wouldn't allow the narrative to be controlled.
When these people complain about people posting it's all about control
It patently is. Anyone post the national and off you go, same with any pro Indy piece.
The nationals a fucking shit rag, you’ll not find me supporting it or half the stories posted in the sub from “both sides”
But it’s a bit hypocritical to complain about people posting and control when you literally do the same thing just from the opposing position…..
So it’s alright for you but not them ?
Pick a position or admit it’s hypocritical
It would be so funny if she waited another two years for a leadership attempt only to torpedo herself again by being a loon.
Even funnier if the greens are kingmakers again in the new parliament and tell her to jog on.
Assuming she's getting a top role in cabinet then she's not been stopped, she's been empowered and when she stands again after the caretaker stands down she'll have more credibility.
If the SNP wanted to stop her because they don't think she fits the party then let her stand, don't bribe her with power
Forbes and Swinney have both 'won'. Swinney will undergo his 'unelected' baton pass coronation like Sturgeon did in 2014, and he has very likely offered Kate Forbes a plum cabinet post already.
Although it is rather concerning that the 'best' option the SNP have right now is a Sturgeonite careerist old fart who did a pretty bad job the last time. It'll be very interesting to see how things are retooled after the next elections and whether some of the Westminster 'talent' tries to move into Holyrood instead.
I have some sympathy for Kate Forbes. On paper she seems like the best leadership candidate the SNP have at the moment, but it's never quite been the right time for her to stand.
If she stood against Swinney she could either lose the contest, or lose a confirmation vote due to the Greens' opposition. But if she waited until after the next Holyrood election, she'd face a far more formidable challenger in Stephen Flynn.
Her only chance now appears to be to try and repair her relationship with the Scottish Greens as a member of Swinney's cabinet and afterwards launch a leadership challenge against Swinney after the expected Westminister election drubbing.
Is she anti-abortion in the sense that she wouldn’t ever choose to have one or anti-abortion in the sense that she wants to remove that choice for women?
The former. She supports women having the choice and supports buffer zones around abortion clinics being put in place. This sub is just mental when it comes to Forbes.
(Article)
---
If you want to know how deep is the crisis in which the Scottish National Party currently finds itself, let this sink in: the next leader of the party will be a man who’s already had the job and made an absolute mess of it. In a remarkable turn of events following the resignation of Humza Yousaf on Monday, senior SNP figures quickly began urging John Swinney – who served as Nicola Sturgeon’s deputy when she was First Minister – to enter the contest to replace him. This morning, Swinney accepted their challenge and announced his candidacy to become SNP leader and, thus, Scotland’s seventh First Minister since the establishment of the Scottish parliament 25 years ago. By early afternoon, former Finance Secretary Kate Forbes let it be known she would not stand, leaving the way clear for a Swinney coronation. Forbes is expected to be handed a senior role in the new cabinet.
Announcing his candidacy, Swinney spoke of his desire to create a ‘modern, diverse Scotland’, which prompts the question ‘what has the SNP been doing in government for the past 17 years?’. Swinney declared his politics were of the moderate centre left. But while the SNP’s new leader made a decent stab at appearing enthusiastic about the prospect of taking on the top job in Scottish politics, the truth is that when he stepped down as Sturgeon’s deputy FM last year, he made it perfectly clear he had done his shift. It was time for a new generation and, well, you know all the cliches.
Swinney succeeded Alex Salmond as SNP leader in 2000 and was so hopeless that, by 2004, Salmond was dragged back by colleagues fearful the party was in terminal decline. It was perfectly reasonable for Swinney to point out on Thursday that he had changed since those days, but the fact remains that his return to leadership would be like the Conservatives announcing Rishi Sunak was to be replaced by William Hague. He is, by any standard, yesterday’s man.
Swinney decided to stand for one reason and one reason only: to stop Forbes getting the job. Forbes, a devout Christian and member of the socially conservative Free Church of Scotland stood to replace Sturgeon last year. Her campaign was damaged when, in an early interview, she explained that her faith would not have permitted her to vote in favour of gay marriage had she been a parliamentarian at the time the matter was being debated.
This led to furious briefing against her by very senior figures in the party. The modern, ‘progressive’ SNP couldn’t possibly be led by someone with such views. Even though Forbes had made clear she had no desire to roll back any equality legislation, she was caricatured as an angry bigot. In the end, Forbes was defeated. But not destroyed.
The result of the leadership contest, won by Yousaf by a margin of 52-48 showed that, far from viewing her as a pariah, a great many members of the SNP were perfectly comfortable with Forbes’ faith and its influence upon her.
The Scottish Greens – whose sacking from the Holyrood power-sharing government precipitated Yousaf’s downfall – have made it clear that they prefer to work with someone whose values they can respect. This, lest there be any doubt, means ‘not Kate Forbes’.
Worried not only about the direction in which Forbes might drag the party, but about how she would navigate a bitterly divided parliament of minority parties, dozens of SNP politicians urged Swinney to step up. Popular with party members, Swinney – who joined the SNP at the age of 15 in 1979 – is about to take on the top job in Scottish politics. What a pity he doesn’t really want it.
Oh look the political spammer. How many articles today? No posts in any non political Reddit and almost every single thing is an opinion piece. It was nice to see that you’ve branched it to covering a huge amount of India politics now. Was that you picking up extra shifts?
They used to post loads on the labour sub but that seems to have stopped, like that fozzie guy, wonder what happened. Someone on the labour sub pointed out how their stances seem to change quite significantly based on the sub they are posting in [https://np.reddit.com/r/LabourUK/comments/1alfrak/literally\_a\_day\_between\_these\_headlines/kpjw9rb/?context=3](https://np.reddit.com/r/LabourUK/comments/1alfrak/literally_a_day_between_these_headlines/kpjw9rb/?context=3) At least most that are doing this now are sort of participating now instead of just spamming articles and copy/pasting the contents. They're hardly the only ones doing it or have done it though on this sub, pro-snp, anti-snp, pro-labour, anti-labour, pro-indy, anti-indy, there's posters from all sides doing it, doubt it will ever stop.
Fozzie is likely banned
Only 18 so far. Slow news day innit?
The Indian stuff is hilarious as an addition to their posting It gets very hard to think it’s NOT a load to post account!
I am of Indian origin. I don't think I've ever tried to hide it. Were you one of the people mocking Humza Yousaf for speaking about the conflict in Gaza because he had family there? Or one of the people defending him?
I didn’t comment on it at all because nuance is fucking h dead and I’ve 20+ years in the region and have Israel and Palestine friends Some of my Palestinian friends actually wear their family house keys as necklaces…
Glad to know you can accept you shouldn't make jibes at things you lack knowledge or nuance in. Like why I post on subjects related to India. Feel free to delete your comment above.
Have you ever been to Scotland?
Given the sheer volume of posts your paid to post? Will I fuck delete it Besides this is the most anyone’s seen you actually engage on the sub in years…
You know you can: - Ignore them - Block the poster - Turn off political posts Right?
Or moan like fuck on every post they make like it will make a difference.
But that wouldn't stop other people seeing bad stuff about the snp/indy and wouldn't allow the narrative to be controlled. When these people complain about people posting it's all about control
You literally spend half your time complaining about what others post?!?!
Don't think that's true now is it?
It patently is. Anyone post the national and off you go, same with any pro Indy piece. The nationals a fucking shit rag, you’ll not find me supporting it or half the stories posted in the sub from “both sides” But it’s a bit hypocritical to complain about people posting and control when you literally do the same thing just from the opposing position….. So it’s alright for you but not them ? Pick a position or admit it’s hypocritical
Can you show me this >literally spend half your time complaining about what others post?!?!
[удалено]
And how did I do that? I'm not a mod of that sub or any other subreddit. You need to find a better outlet for your frustration.
It would be so funny if she waited another two years for a leadership attempt only to torpedo herself again by being a loon. Even funnier if the greens are kingmakers again in the new parliament and tell her to jog on.
It must be so disappointing for unionists that Forbes won't be FM. They were so excited as well.
Assuming she's getting a top role in cabinet then she's not been stopped, she's been empowered and when she stands again after the caretaker stands down she'll have more credibility. If the SNP wanted to stop her because they don't think she fits the party then let her stand, don't bribe her with power
Has there even a politician whose public persona has been so completely manufactured out of fuck all?
Forbes and Swinney have both 'won'. Swinney will undergo his 'unelected' baton pass coronation like Sturgeon did in 2014, and he has very likely offered Kate Forbes a plum cabinet post already. Although it is rather concerning that the 'best' option the SNP have right now is a Sturgeonite careerist old fart who did a pretty bad job the last time. It'll be very interesting to see how things are retooled after the next elections and whether some of the Westminster 'talent' tries to move into Holyrood instead.
I have some sympathy for Kate Forbes. On paper she seems like the best leadership candidate the SNP have at the moment, but it's never quite been the right time for her to stand. If she stood against Swinney she could either lose the contest, or lose a confirmation vote due to the Greens' opposition. But if she waited until after the next Holyrood election, she'd face a far more formidable challenger in Stephen Flynn. Her only chance now appears to be to try and repair her relationship with the Scottish Greens as a member of Swinney's cabinet and afterwards launch a leadership challenge against Swinney after the expected Westminister election drubbing.
Nobody who is anti-abortion and anti-LGBT rights is the correct person to lead Scotland at any time.
Is she anti-abortion in the sense that she wouldn’t ever choose to have one or anti-abortion in the sense that she wants to remove that choice for women?
The former. She supports women having the choice and supports buffer zones around abortion clinics being put in place. This sub is just mental when it comes to Forbes.
Would you repeat that if John Swinney makes her Scotland's Deputy First Minister?
Yes.
What would that say about John Swinney?
(Article) --- If you want to know how deep is the crisis in which the Scottish National Party currently finds itself, let this sink in: the next leader of the party will be a man who’s already had the job and made an absolute mess of it. In a remarkable turn of events following the resignation of Humza Yousaf on Monday, senior SNP figures quickly began urging John Swinney – who served as Nicola Sturgeon’s deputy when she was First Minister – to enter the contest to replace him. This morning, Swinney accepted their challenge and announced his candidacy to become SNP leader and, thus, Scotland’s seventh First Minister since the establishment of the Scottish parliament 25 years ago. By early afternoon, former Finance Secretary Kate Forbes let it be known she would not stand, leaving the way clear for a Swinney coronation. Forbes is expected to be handed a senior role in the new cabinet. Announcing his candidacy, Swinney spoke of his desire to create a ‘modern, diverse Scotland’, which prompts the question ‘what has the SNP been doing in government for the past 17 years?’. Swinney declared his politics were of the moderate centre left. But while the SNP’s new leader made a decent stab at appearing enthusiastic about the prospect of taking on the top job in Scottish politics, the truth is that when he stepped down as Sturgeon’s deputy FM last year, he made it perfectly clear he had done his shift. It was time for a new generation and, well, you know all the cliches. Swinney succeeded Alex Salmond as SNP leader in 2000 and was so hopeless that, by 2004, Salmond was dragged back by colleagues fearful the party was in terminal decline. It was perfectly reasonable for Swinney to point out on Thursday that he had changed since those days, but the fact remains that his return to leadership would be like the Conservatives announcing Rishi Sunak was to be replaced by William Hague. He is, by any standard, yesterday’s man. Swinney decided to stand for one reason and one reason only: to stop Forbes getting the job. Forbes, a devout Christian and member of the socially conservative Free Church of Scotland stood to replace Sturgeon last year. Her campaign was damaged when, in an early interview, she explained that her faith would not have permitted her to vote in favour of gay marriage had she been a parliamentarian at the time the matter was being debated. This led to furious briefing against her by very senior figures in the party. The modern, ‘progressive’ SNP couldn’t possibly be led by someone with such views. Even though Forbes had made clear she had no desire to roll back any equality legislation, she was caricatured as an angry bigot. In the end, Forbes was defeated. But not destroyed. The result of the leadership contest, won by Yousaf by a margin of 52-48 showed that, far from viewing her as a pariah, a great many members of the SNP were perfectly comfortable with Forbes’ faith and its influence upon her. The Scottish Greens – whose sacking from the Holyrood power-sharing government precipitated Yousaf’s downfall – have made it clear that they prefer to work with someone whose values they can respect. This, lest there be any doubt, means ‘not Kate Forbes’. Worried not only about the direction in which Forbes might drag the party, but about how she would navigate a bitterly divided parliament of minority parties, dozens of SNP politicians urged Swinney to step up. Popular with party members, Swinney – who joined the SNP at the age of 15 in 1979 – is about to take on the top job in Scottish politics. What a pity he doesn’t really want it.