Bearman 9 Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 Cameron was a buffoon who allowed the SNP to set he referendum question IIRC.The question should have been whether Scotland should have separated from the UK or not. If so I think the 55 percent would have been greater Bet you wouldn't want to put that theory to the test? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,268 Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 Bet you wouldn't want to put that theory to the test? No just my opinion. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEARGER 1,829 Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 Rangers were founded by the four lads as a football team with no religious or political connotations. Some groups within the fan base try to align the club as Protestant for example, when in reality more and more of us lead a secular life with no time for religion of any hue. Anyone can support Rangers, that includes those who voted yes, atheists, socialists etc. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy steel 0 Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 Now that Corbyn has been turning Labour back to traditional labour values we may find that the SNP starts to lose its appeal as an alternative opposition. The polls suggest not at present, but who knows what will happen in politics? Spot on. And that means three things: 1. The SNP are bad for us as Rangers fans. 2. The country at large is against us. 3. We have to unite and fight against it. Today's SNP is a left-wing republican party not unlike SInn Fein or Irish Republicanism. Past history is irrelevant. Good examples of why we shouldn't discuss politics! Infantile fantasy in both posts. The country at large is against the best supported team in Scotland, that really makes sense. On the other hand, if you're right and if the country at large is against the things you feel the need to shout about at the football, then that must include Rangers fans and might give you pause for thought - but that's expecting this kind of mindset to actually examine what it does and the effect it has on our club, which isn't going to happen. As for the second post quoted, it equates any Rangers fan who voted SNP or joined the party with Gerry Adams and his murderous crew. The poster might want to be careful who he says that to in person as I'd imagine few will take it as a compliment! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,268 Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 The polls suggest not at present, but who knows what will happen in politics? Good examples of why we shouldn't discuss politics! Infantile fantasy in both posts. The country at large is against the best supported team in Scotland, that really makes sense. On the other hand, if you're right and if the country at large is against the things you feel the need to shout about at the football, then that must include Rangers fans and might give you pause for thought - but that's expecting this kind of mindset to actually examine what it does and the effect it has on our club, which isn't going to happen. As for the second post quoted, it equates any Rangers fan who voted SNP or joined the party with Gerry Adams and his murderous crew. The poster might want to be careful who he says that to in person as I'd imagine few will take it as a compliment! Anyone who votes SNP needs to know what they're voting for & the consequences of that. FWIW I think an independent Scotland would be catastrophic not least with its new currency & evaporating oil revenues. We should all(as Rangers supporters) be very concerned about what an independent Scotland would be like for us with a government with the likes of Roseanna Cunningham, Michael Mather, Brendan O'Hara etc in it 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy steel 0 Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 You're a drag, man. Defo not Rangers chat so I'm off. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexscottislegend 2,084 Posted January 3, 2016 Author Share Posted January 3, 2016 Anyone who votes SNP needs to know what they're voting for & the consequences of that. FWIW I think an independent Scotland would be catastrophic not least with its new currency & evaporating oil revenues.We should all(as Rangers supporters) be very concerned about what an independent Scotland would be like for us with a government with the likes of Roseanna Cunningham, Michael Mather, Brendan O'Hara etc in it You are probably right about the mixed messages the SNP was sending about currency etc. But any future government would also include some MP's of Muslim origin amongst others; the names you mention do not set the agenda and maybe the problem with SNP is that it lacks at present any coherent ideology so that it has both right wing and left elements within. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ranger_syntax 3,779 Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 You are probably right about the mixed messages the SNP was sending about currency etc. But any future government would also include some MP's of Muslim origin amongst others; the names you mention do not set the agenda and maybe the problem with SNP is that it lacks at present any coherent ideology so that it has both right wing and left elements within. What mixed messages about currency? I thought it was quite clear. The SNP don't think that Scotland could have a currency of its own. The SNP want to enter into a currency union with Europe or the UK. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ranger_syntax 3,779 Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 Anyway, since we are all posting off-topic rubbish in Rangers Chat I will add my off-topic rubbish. Has anybody noticed how common it is for people to misuse the term false dichotomy? A recent example from my painful working life: 1. I listen to colleague A insist that two things, x and y, are equal. 2. I claim that x is slightly better than y so they are not equal. 3. I listen to colleague B insist that I have presented a false dichotomy. 4. I scratch my head since I never even presented a dichotomy. I started to wonder why I'm hearing this term so often. Did someone awful like Stephen Fry, or Prof Brian Cox, say it on television thus making all of the viewers repeat it? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexscottislegend 2,084 Posted January 3, 2016 Author Share Posted January 3, 2016 Anyway, since we are all posting off-topic rubbish in Rangers Chat I will add my off-topic rubbish. Has anybody noticed how common it is for people to misuse the term false dichotomy? A recent example from my painful working life: 1. I listen to colleague A insist that two things, x and y, are equal. 2. I claim that x is slightly better than y so they are not equal. 3. I listen to colleague B insist that I have presented a false dichotomy. 4. I scratch my head since I never even presented a dichotomy. I started to wonder why I'm hearing this term so often. Did someone awful like Stephen Fry, or Prof Brian Cox, say it on television thus making all of the viewers repeat it? It's a bit of an oxymoron isn't it? A dichotomy has by definition I think to be equal: if one classification is false then they cannot be equal!? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.