JohnMc 2,473 Posted December 7, 2016 Share Posted December 7, 2016 There is much generalisation going on. I suspect most bears don't vote for the SNP as they oppose and deteste what the stand for. Which is the break up of the union and the formation of sovereign Scottish state. It can't be argued that our club and its heritage is a constant thorn in its side, as we promote, on the whole, unionist values. The SNP's anti Rangers undercurrent has manifested itself in plain view over recent months by the tolerance of attacks of all kinds, religious, sporting and political on our club.I am sure many Rangers fans still vote labour. However the reason why the SNP are a poisonous entity, imo, is clear for all to see. I don't believe the SNP is "anti-Rangers". I think a lot of people involved in the SNP do have a basic antipathy towards people signing 'Rule Britannia' and waving union flags. But then I'm not a member or supporter of the SNP and I've no time for either of those two things either. I suspect a fair number of 'bears' vote SNP, I'm sure some are fully supportive of Scottish independence, I'm sure some just didn't fancy the alternatives on offer at election time and some thought Nicola Sturgeon would make a better First Minster than Jim Murphy. Any 'poison' is clear to you perhaps, but not to everyone. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,258 Posted December 7, 2016 Share Posted December 7, 2016 (edited) There is much generalisation going on. I suspect most bears don't vote for the SNP as they oppose and deteste what the stand for. Which is the break up of the union and the formation of sovereign Scottish state. It can't be argued that our club and its heritage is a constant thorn in its side, as we promote, on the whole, unionist values. The SNP's anti Rangers undercurrent has manifested itself in plain view over recent months by the tolerance of attacks of all kinds, religious, sporting and political on our club.I am sure many Rangers fans still vote labour. However the reason why the SNP are a poisonous entity, imo, is clear for all to see. The SNP now have the 'Coatbridge vote' which used to be SLAB. People opened their eyes to SLAB when McConnell became FM & Reid become the yahoos chairman. When McConnell starting introducing so-called anti-sectarian legislation who was he targeting ? And it was fairly obvious(to me anyway) Reid was involved in some way in our financial downfall whether with HMRC and/or LBG. Many turned their back on SLAB and went to the SNP. Many yahoos did likewise as they always vote together for whoever is in government and try to get their own into positions of power I don't think the SNP was always anti-Rangers but those in control today are generally anti-Rangers such as Michael Matheson, Brendan O'Hara, Roseanna Cunningham etc Edited December 7, 2016 by RANGERRAB 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cooponthewing 1,139 Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 (edited) It certainly seems, and to be fair is, an extremely polarising issue. It's actually quite difficult to discuss serious politics on a forum, very easy to not make a point clearly and can be misunderstood. It does seem there is no middle ground though? The electorate either support the SNP fully or reject them out of hand(the latter camp for me). I guess that's the nature of the beast with nationalism. This particular hybrid for of nationalism disguised with a left wing mantra hiding its indigenous right wing roots leaves a very unpleasant aftertaste. Worse than waking up after a night on the lash and lying next to a dodgy bhoona!! Apologies, I've gone way off topic. Espanyol?? Edited December 8, 2016 by cooponthewing 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.