Indy Ref 2

[RyeSloan]

I think the Scottish economy was doing quite well in the run up to the first indyref. As has been mentioned, it would be interesting to see the stats region by region to see if areas outside the south east are performing as poorly as Scotland

I'm not sure but I would hazard a guess that the neverendum has significantly impacted investment and therefore figures like we have seen today start to appear sometime later...permanent uncertainty on Scotlands place in the U.K. will surely make business think twice about spending on existing business here or investing in new business.

Then there is the slump in the oil sector...on average I think this has the highest wages of all areas of the economy so was sure to have an impact.

Then of course there is the steady loss of financial services roles to countries like Poland, again on average at the higher end of the spectrum in salary terms. A real and long term dent in Scotlands economy and a rather obvious but less highlighted cost of being in the EU and its single market.

Finally you have the large public sector in Scotland, the comparisons to somewhere like the south east are quite dramatic so you have a structural issue in terms of matching economic performance before you even start...

And while I don't buy into the 'blame the SNP' for a whole countries economic performance they have to carry some of the blame for the uncertainty of the neverendum and their complete lack of baws in enacting structural reform to Scotlands rather large public sector.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I think the Scottish economy was doing quite well in the run up to the first indyref. As has been mentioned, it would be interesting to see the stats region by region to see if areas outside the south east are performing as poorly as Scotland

I agree it would be interesting, but surely the point is that english regions dont have entire governments and parliaments with fairly extensive powers to make a difference. Otherwise what is the point of devolution?

Of course some of the problems wont be solveable from here, but even if they have some responsibility, then added to the struggling NHS, educatiob doing poorly, the police scotland fiasco, it starts to add up to a government whose record can be really questioned, especially as so much of their resources amd attention that has been focussed on campaigning amd fighting for refs / indy since 2012/13, potentially until the early 2020s.

Of course brexit doesnt help either, amd that is the fault of rhe UK govt.

Im not blaming the SNP for everything, but equally you camt be in power for a decade, gettinf ever more extensive powers then claim 'its not our fault'.

[northstandhibby]

I think the Scottish economy was doing quite well in the run up to the first indyref. As has been mentioned, it would be interesting to see the stats region by region to see if areas outside the south east are performing as poorly as Scotland

The question would have to be - Why attempt to improve a nations finances when one is trying break it apart from the collective?

Answer - Make it less prosperous and blame it on being part of the collective would seem logical.

glory glory

[JeMeSouviens]

I agree it would be interesting, but surely the point is that english regions dont have entire governments and parliaments with fairly extensive powers to make a difference. Otherwise what is the point of devolution?

Of course some of the problems wont be solveable from here, but even if they have some responsibility, then added to the struggling NHS, educatiob doing poorly, the police scotland fiasco, it starts to add up to a government whose record can be really questioned, especially as so much of their resources amd attention that has been focussed on campaigning amd fighting for refs / indy since 2012/13, potentially until the early 2020s.

Of course brexit doesnt help either, amd that is the fault of rhe UK govt.

Im not blaming the SNP for everything, but equally you camt be in power for a decade, gettinf ever more extensive powers then claim 'its not our fault'.

Touching naivety. The point of devolution was to shut up whinging jocks aka "kill nationalism stone dead". It certainly wasn't to make Scotland perform better economically.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Touching naivety. The point of devolution was to shut up whinging jocks aka "kill nationalism stone dead". It certainly wasn't to make Scotland perform better economically.

Aww, thanks for enlightening me. I will try to be less naive in the future.

[allmodcons]

I'm not sure but I would hazard a guess that the neverendum has significantly impacted investment and therefore figures like we have seen today start to appear sometime later...permanent uncertainty on Scotlands place in the U.K. will surely make business think twice about spending on existing business here or investing in new business.


Of course that’s just what it is – a guess. Funny how, in the run up to the first Independence Referendum, that Scottish inward investment hit a 16 year high. For you to suggest that Indyref2 is having a significant effect on the economy is pure guesswork, compounded by the fact that you completely fail to factor in the real threat of Brexit.


Then there is the slump in the oil sector...on average I think this has the highest wages of all areas of the economy so was sure to have an impact.


Yes this is having an impact but, if it’s the blame game you’re playing you might want to ask yourself what powers the Scottish Government has available to it to make significant improvements in the sector? For what it’s worth, brent crude is trading at $55 today. This sector will turn the corner (again) and become (again) an important area of the Scottish Economy. Here’s hoping the next 20 years of oil wealth are better managed by Central Government than the last 40.


Then of course there is the steady loss of financial services roles to countries like Poland, again on average at the higher end of the spectrum in salary terms. A real and long term dent in Scotlands economy and a rather obvious but less highlighted cost of being in the EU and its single market.

This I find incredible. Here you choose to ignore the real possibility that Brexit could restrict the free movement of banking professionals between Europe and the UK. No big deal when experts are predicting that the loss of passporting rights could potentially see exports of financial services to the EU halve to around £10bn.


Finally you have the large public sector in Scotland, the comparisons to somewhere like the south east are quite dramatic so you have a structural issue in terms of matching economic performance before you even start...


As I said before we are where we are in the Union. Again, tell me what significant powers the Scottish Government has to address the issue. Too much capital expenditure in London and the SE and an over reliance on that area of the country to sustain growth are problems made in Westminster.


And while I don't buy into the 'blame the SNP' for a whole countries economic performance they have to carry some of the blame for the uncertainty of the neverendum and their complete lack of baws in enacting structural reform to Scotlands rather large public sector.


Finally you’re back to uncertainty with reference to a possible second Independence referendum but not a word of Brexit.

[northstandhibby]

Touching naivety. The point of devolution was to shut up whinging jocks aka "kill nationalism stone dead". It certainly wasn't to make Scotland perform better economically.

Maybe it was because they (English Welsh Northern Irish) wanted us to stay in the UK while giving us some control over some governmental areas. The rest of the UK seem to want us and its really only the SNP who want to separate and break away save for their Welsh counterparts Plaid Cymru.

Just a few years ago Scotland voted to remain part of the UK convincingly so the only 'Jocks' who are 'whinging' are the SNP and their brethren.

glory glory

[allmodcons]

Maybe it was because they (English Welsh Northern Irish) wanted us to stay in the UK while giving us some control over some governmental areas. The rest of the UK seem to want us and its really only the SNP who want to separate and break away save for their Welsh counterparts Plaid Cymru.

Just a few years ago Scotland voted to remain part of the UK convincingly so the only 'Jocks' who are 'whinging' are the SNP and their brethren.

glory glory

It's a political choice. A political debate. You're a dyed in the wool Unionist and I'm a Scottish Nationalist.

I don't see anybody whinging, but can spy an angry 'No' voter.

[northstandhibby]

It's a political choice. A political debate. You're a dyed in the wool Unionist and I'm a Scottish Nationalist.

I don't see anybody whinging, but can spy an angry 'No' voter.

I certainly wouldn't define myself as a 'dyed in the wool Unionist'. I'm more of an 'anti Nationalist'. I've travelled the length and breadth of the UK and Ireland and enjoy the fact I can do so freely with a common bond as part of an inclusive UK. I've also met many English folk who in the main have been particularly welcoming and friendly.

I also enjoyed being part of the EU and sadly brexit won the day and I've accepted the vote just as I would accept a vote for Scottish Nationalism but I would be just as sad at leaving the UK. However what sets me apart from the Scottish Nationalists is I would not lobby anyone or argue for another vote to re-join the UK so I think that contradicts you're terming me as a 'dyed in the wool Unionist'.

However feel free to term me as you wish despite my explaining my honest position for political debate can be a dirty business.

glory glory

[JeMeSouviens]

I certainly wouldn't define myself as a 'dyed in the wool Unionist'. I'm more of an 'anti Nationalist'. I've travelled the length and breadth of the UK and Ireland and enjoy the fact I can do so freely with a common bond as part of an inclusive UK. I've also met many English folk who in the main have been particularly welcoming and friendly.

I also enjoyed being part of the EU and sadly brexit won the day and I've accepted the vote just as I would accept a vote for Scottish Nationalism but I would be just as sad at leaving the UK. However what sets me apart from the Scottish Nationalists is I would not lobby anyone or argue for another vote to re-join the UK so I think that contradicts you're terming me as a 'dyed in the wool Unionist'.

However feel free to term me as you wish despite my explaining my honest position for political debate can be a dirty business.

glory glory

And did you find folk in the Republic of Ireland any less welcoming or friendly? You don't have to become a region of someone else's country to be friends with them, you know?

[JeMeSouviens]

Aww, thanks for enlightening me. I will try to be less naive in the future.

Excellent. :aok:

[allmodcons]

I certainly wouldn't define myself as a 'dyed in the wool Unionist'. I'm more of an 'anti Nationalist'. I've travelled the length and breadth of the UK and Ireland and enjoy the fact I can do so freely with a common bond as part of an inclusive UK. I've also met many English folk who in the main have been particularly welcoming and friendly.

Me too. Do you seriously think that would change if Scotland was to become an Independent country.


I also enjoyed being part of the EU and sadly brexit won the day and I've accepted the vote just as I would accept a vote for Scottish Nationalism but I would be just as sad at leaving the UK. However what sets me apart from the Scottish Nationalists is I would not lobby anyone or argue for another vote to re-join the UK so I think that contradicts you're terming me as a 'dyed in the wool Unionist'.

You think I should drop my political beliefs just because we lost the vote?


However feel free to term me as you wish despite my explaining my honest position for political debate can be a dirty business.

glory glory

Like someone trying to conflate Scottish Nationalism with Nazis?

[Moulin Yarns]

I certainly wouldn't define myself as a 'dyed in the wool Unionist'. I'm more of an 'anti Nationalist'. I've travelled the length and breadth of the UK and Ireland and enjoy the fact I can do so freely with a common bond as part of an inclusive UK. I've also met many English folk who in the main have been particularly welcoming and friendly.

I also enjoyed being part of the EU and sadly brexit won the day and I've accepted the vote just as I would accept a vote for Scottish Nationalism but I would be just as sad at leaving the UK. However what sets me apart from the Scottish Nationalists is I would not lobby anyone or argue for another vote to re-join the UK so I think that contradicts you're terming me as a 'dyed in the wool Unionist'.

However feel free to term me as you wish despite my explaining my honest position for political debate can be a dirty business.

glory glory

Living in a tourist town, I found some English folks were "Not coming back" if it had been a yes vote in 2014. A strange reaction if you ask me. I won't stop going to Europe once Brexit has occurred, Nothing actually changes other than security and customs will be tighter, but Duty Free will be available again.

[northstandhibby]

And did you find folk in the Republic of Ireland any less welcoming or friendly? You don't have to become a region of someone else's country to be friends with them, you know?

I don't view Scotland as a 'region' of England. I did indeed find the ROI a beautiful and welcoming country but it doesn't change my view on the UK. I don't have a problem having a devolved union with the Irish Welsh and English who are my (our) nearest neighbours and we can seek to change or amend from within.

glory glory

[northstandhibby]

Like someone trying to conflate Scottish Nationalism with Nazis?

Instead of making such contentious remarks why don't you concentrate on making a case for Scottish Nationalism?

glory glory

[G B Young]

Touching naivety. The point of devolution was to shut up whinging jocks aka "kill nationalism stone dead". It certainly wasn't to make Scotland perform better economically.

I guess that might be a 'whinging jock' (ie SNP) interpretation of it but it's not my take on devolution. For me it was a good thing for Scotland and backed by a landslide majority (although IIRC voter turnout was not especially high). Since then we've seen the Scottish Parliament grow in prowess and powers and for a majority of voters in Scotland that is a perfectly adequate state of affairs, hence the rejection of independence in 2014. What's frustrating for such voters is that while Scotland's NHS, schools and local services continue to decline, the SNP place using these extensive powers a long way behind the pursuit of independence at all costs. When, for example, did they last pass a new law?

Yes, Brexit has given them the trigger/mandate they've been searching for ever since 2014, but the mantra that 'the will of the Scottish people must be respected' is a facade. The SNP's hoped-for surge in support of independence has failed to materialise because for most voters it seems not unreasonable that as the UK government tries to figure out how best to extricate ourselves from one union the prospect of fighting to save another is not something they are likely to welcome. As a result we've seen the the mantra shift from being the 'will of the Scottish people' to the 'will of the Scottish parliament' (ie the SNP backed by the ever-pliant Greens).

Nobody yet knows how Brexit will pan out and while Nicola Sturgeon claims the UK government are 'feart' of losing a Scottish referendum, you could argue that she herself is 'feart' that Brexit may not end up conforming to all the SNP's scaremongering sound bites - hence her haste to railroad through an independence referendum at all costs. And if Brexit is uncertain, what of Scottish independence? The SNP have had since 2014 to come up with the answers to the questions (currency, fiscal union, oil, borders...) they failed to address last time round, yet those issues seem as unclear as ever. And why the reluctance to confirm that post-independence Scotland would be full members of the EU? Presumably because a third of SNP voters also voted for Brexit.

While the last referendum was a long way from the joyous celebration of democracy that the SNP would have us believe, at least it was fought in the wake of a cross-party consensus for the Edinburgh Agreement. This time round the Article 30 vote was unanimously opposed by all Tory, Labour and Lib Dem MSPs - an indication that were another referendum ever to go ahead, the hugely unpleasant divisiveness of 2014 would seem like a minor spat.

I accept that the SNP's raison-d'etre is to make Scotland an independent country, but when that obsession overtakes all else it seems to me a dereliction of their duty as Scotland's governing body.

OK, Friday afternoon rant over...time to switch the focus to life's finer considerations such as can Hibs all but seal the title at Cappielow tomorrow?

[Hibrandenburg]

I guess that might be a 'whinging jock' (ie SNP) interpretation of it but it's not my take on devolution. For me it was a good thing for Scotland and backed by a landslide majority (although IIRC voter turnout was not especially high). Since then we've seen the Scottish Parliament grow in prowess and powers and for a majority of voters in Scotland that is a perfectly adequate state of affairs, hence the rejection of independence in 2014. What's frustrating for such voters is that while Scotland's NHS, schools and local services continue to decline, the SNP place using these extensive powers a long way behind the pursuit of independence at all costs. When, for example, did they last pass a new law?

Yes, Brexit has given them the trigger/mandate they've been searching for ever since 2014, but the mantra that 'the will of the Scottish people must be respected' is a facade. The SNP's hoped-for surge in support of independence has failed to materialise because for most voters it seems not unreasonable that as the UK government tries to figure out how best to extricate ourselves from one union the prospect of fighting to save another is not something they are likely to welcome. As a result we've seen the the mantra shift from being the 'will of the Scottish people' to the 'will of the Scottish parliament' (ie the SNP backed by the ever-pliant Greens).

Nobody yet knows how Brexit will pan out and while Nicola Sturgeon claims the UK government are 'feart' of losing a Scottish referendum, you could argue that she herself is 'feart' that Brexit may not end up conforming to all the SNP's scaremongering sound bites - hence her haste to railroad through an independence referendum at all costs. And if Brexit is uncertain, what of Scottish independence? The SNP have had since 2014 to come up with the answers to the questions (currency, fiscal union, oil, borders...) they failed to address last time round, yet those issues seem as unclear as ever. And why the reluctance to confirm that post-independence Scotland would be full members of the EU? Presumably because a third of SNP voters also voted for Brexit.

While the last referendum was a long way from the joyous celebration of democracy that the SNP would have us believe, at least it was fought in the wake of a cross-party consensus for the Edinburgh Agreement. This time round the Article 30 vote was unanimously opposed by all Tory, Labour and Lib Dem MSPs - an indication that were another referendum ever to go ahead, the hugely unpleasant divisiveness of 2014 would seem like a minor spat.

I accept that the SNP's raison-d'etre is to make Scotland an independent country, but when that obsession overtakes all else it seems to me a dereliction of their duty as Scotland's governing body.

OK, Friday afternoon rant over...time to switch the focus to life's finer considerations such as can Hibs all but seal the title at Cappielow tomorrow?

Yet people decided to vote SNP into all but 3 Scottish seats on the last general election whilst knowing the main aim of the SNP is independence.

[Colr]

Yet people decided to vote SNP into all but 3 Scottish seats on the last general election whilst knowing the main aim of the SNP is independence.

I think a lot of people vote for the SNP because they think they will do a better job of standing up for Scotland's interests.

[ronaldo7]

I certainly wouldn't define myself as a 'dyed in the wool Unionist'. I'm more of an 'anti Nationalist'. I've travelled the length and breadth of the UK and Ireland and enjoy the fact I can do so freely with a common bond as part of an inclusive UK. I've also met many English folk who in the main have been particularly welcoming and friendly.

I also enjoyed being part of the EU and sadly brexit won the day and I've accepted the vote just as I would accept a vote for Scottish Nationalism but I would be just as sad at leaving the UK. However what sets me apart from the Scottish Nationalists is I would not lobby anyone or argue for another vote to re-join the UK so I think that contradicts you're terming me as a 'dyed in the wool Unionist'.

However feel free to term me as you wish despite my explaining my honest position for political debate can be a dirty business.

glory glory

And yet you were one of those screaming the loudest about our First Minister going over to the States, securing jobs, and signing deals. All this when the parliament was in recess.:rolleyes:

[Jack]

I'm not sure but I would hazard a guess that the neverendum has significantly impacted investment and therefore figures like we have seen today start to appear sometime later...permanent uncertainty on Scotlands place in the U.K. will surely make business think twice about spending on existing business here or investing in new business.

Then there is the slump in the oil sector...on average I think this has the highest wages of all areas of the economy so was sure to have an impact.

Then of course there is the steady loss of financial services roles to countries like Poland, again on average at the higher end of the spectrum in salary terms. A real and long term dent in Scotlands economy and a rather obvious but less highlighted cost of being in the EU and its single market.

Finally you have the large public sector in Scotland, the comparisons to somewhere like the south east are quite dramatic so you have a structural issue in terms of matching economic performance before you even start...

And while I don't buy into the 'blame the SNP' for a whole countries economic performance they have to carry some of the blame for the uncertainty of the neverendum and their complete lack of baws in enacting structural reform to Scotlands rather large public sector.

This post could apply equally if not more so to Brexit and the UKs place in the world. But that's described by Westminster as an opportunity!

[makaveli1875]

And yet you were one of those screaming the loudest about our First Minister going over to the States, securing jobs, and signing deals. All this when the parliament was in recess.:rolleyes:

she went to America , proclaimed herself the Queen of scotland , talked about independence and came back with a handful of jobs that were already secured :rolleyes: all payed for by the taxpayer

[ronaldo7]

she went to America , proclaimed herself the Queen of scotland , talked about independence and came back with a handful of jobs that were already secured :rolleyes: all payed for by the taxpayer

You're Stephen Daisley, and I claim my £5 :greengrin

[Slavoj Zizek]

Ok Flash:aok:

No worries Ace. So no comeback about the delay of benefit transfer or the pathetic £150m over five years to deal with the 14 weeks you will have to wait for a mental health appointment. We all await what Edinburgh North and Leith SNP branch tell you what to think...:na na:

[stoneyburn hibs]

she went to America , proclaimed herself the Queen of scotland , talked about independence and came back with a handful of jobs that were already secured :rolleyes: all payed for by the taxpayer

So it wasn't a worthwhile exercise?

[Slavers]

I have no problem with Angela Sturgeon going to the USA to drum up business but i object to her using the trip as a platform to promote Scottish Independence as she did with her university visit over there using tax payers money to do so, its even more insulting when the majority of scottish tax payers voted NO!

[cabbageandribs1875]

NHS A&E services performs the best in the UK...for the 23rd month running, so proud of our Government :agree:

[CropleyWasGod]

I have no problem with Angela Sturgeon going to the USA to drum up business but i object to her using the trip as a platform to promote Scottish Independence as she did with her university visit over there using tax payers money to do so, its even more insulting when the majority of scottish tax payers voted NO!
Angela makes me so angry when she freeloads on Nicola's trips.

Gladys May is the same.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

[Slavers]

Angela makes me so angry when she freeloads on Nicola's trips.

Gladys May is the same.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

Haha have you seen this video?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fin6aP1WbaA

Was just poking fun at Sturgeon calling her Angela.

[ronaldo7]

No worries Ace. So no comeback about the delay of benefit transfer or the pathetic £150m over five years to deal with the 14 weeks you will have to wait for a mental health appointment. We all await what Edinburgh North and Leith SNP branch tell you what to think...:na na:

:faf:

The Labour party lists are a bit out of date bud. You best get back to the long lists of SNP achievements, you've a bit to go.

Cheers Champ.:aok:

[ronaldo7]

Haha have you seen this video?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fin6aP1WbaA

Was just poking fun at Sturgeon calling her Angela.


You are a cad. You must be a real treat at Parties.

[ronaldo7]

she went to America , proclaimed herself the Queen of scotland , talked about independence and came back with a handful of jobs that were already secured :rolleyes: all payed for by the taxpayer

You must really hate it, that the First Minister of Scotland is lauded and feted in the States, and just about anywhere else she goes. I'd suggest you actually listen to her speeches she made in the States, it was very much more than an Independent Scotland.

It's oozing from your every pore.:greengrin

Just after her visit to California, the Governor, Jerry Brown, has declared the emergency drought over, after 5 parched years. She can even bring water to the masses:thumbsup:

All hail Nicola, Queen of Scotland.:aok:

[makaveli1875]

You must really hate it, that the First Minister of Scotland is lauded and feted in the States, and just about anywhere else she goes. I'd suggest you actually listen to her speeches she made in the States, it was very much more than an Independent Scotland.

It's oozing from your every pore.:greengrin

Just after her visit to California, the Governor, Jerry Brown, has declared the emergency drought over, after 5 parched years. She can even bring water to the masses:thumbsup:

All hail Nicola, Queen of Scotland.:aok:

Lauded and feted , il have some of what your smoking . Everyone in the states think our First Minister is over there to perform the Krankies. If she were that important she would be meeting the President not the beaten crooked Hillary Clinton.

[stoneyburn hibs]

Lauded and feted , il have some of what your smoking . Everyone in the states think our First Minister is over there to perform the Krankies. If she were that important she would be meeting the President not the beaten crooked Hillary Clinton.

Pathetic

[ronaldo7]

Lauded and feted , il have some of what your smoking . Everyone in the states think our First Minister is over there to perform the Krankies. If she were that important she would be meeting the President not the beaten crooked Hillary Clinton.

:greengrin All hail Queen Nicola.

Did you listen to her speeches?

I suppose it's better to get a photo with a real person instead of a cardboard cut out though.

18337 18338

[marinello59]

Lauded and feted , il have some of what your smoking . Everyone in the states think our First Minister is over there to perform the Krankies. If she were that important she would be meeting the President not the beaten crooked Hillary Clinton.

I'd agree that lauded and feted is over egging things a bit but she was treated with respect.

[makaveli1875]

:greengrin All hail Queen Nicola.

Did you listen to her speeches?

i read it. She just waffles about independence and greets about brexit. Thats all she's done for about the last 8 months

[ronaldo7]

i read it. She just waffles about independence and greets about brexit. Thats all she's done for about the last 8 months

She made more than one.

I thought you'd be following Queen Nicola more closely. She was also on live feeds. Did you not view them?

[ronaldo7]

I'd agree that lauded and feted is over egging things a bit but she was treated with respect.

I had to up the Anti, as Big Mak had mentioned our FM had Queen status.:greengrin

[Hibrandenburg]

Lauded and feted , il have some of what your smoking . Everyone in the states think our First Minister is over there to perform the Krankies. If she were that important she would be meeting the President not the beaten crooked Hillary Clinton.

Always a sure sign the argument is being lost when personal insults about someone's appearance get an airing.

[JeMeSouviens]

Lauded and feted , il have some of what your smoking . Everyone in the states think our First Minister is over there to perform the Krankies. If she were that important she would be meeting the President not the beaten crooked Hillary Clinton.

The Krankies? How utterly hilarious and breathtakingly original. Got any bang on trend Braveheart gags? :rolleyes:

[allmodcons]

Instead of making such contentious remarks why don't you concentrate on making a case for Scottish Nationalism?

glory glory

Ha ha ha. You were the one conflating Scottish Nationalism with Nazis. Have you forgotten? This whole thread is littered with arguments for Scottish Independence but i appreciate as a dyed in the wool Unionist that youre not for turning.

[northstandhibby]

Ha ha ha. You were the one conflating Scottish Nationalism with Nazis. Have you forgotten? This whole thread is littered with arguments for Scottish Independence but i appreciate as a dyed in the wool Unionist that youre not for turning.

This is the kind of mudslinging that turns folk off from debating politics. I explained my reasoning to you for wishing to remain part of the UK yet you still insist on nasty gutter type name calling. If you say so.

:wink:

glory glory

[ronaldo7]

This is the kind of mudslinging that turns folk off from debating politics. I explained my reasoning to you for wishing to remain part of the UK yet you still insist on nasty gutter type name calling. If you say so.

:wink:

glory glory

I take it you don't like being branded a Dyed in the wool Unionist?:greengrin

[northstandhibby]

I take it you don't like being branded a Dyed in the wool Unionist?:greengrin

Brand me whatever you like if it makes you happy and avoids genuine reasoning and debate.

glory glory

[marinello59]

I had to up the Anti, as Big Mak had mentioned our FM had Queen status.:greengrin

If she manages to get us Independence she can take what ever title she wants. :greengrin

[ronaldo7]

Brand me whatever you like if it makes you happy and avoids genuine reasoning and debate.

glory glory

I'm not branding you with that term, just asking if you like it or not?

[northstandhibby]

I'm not branding you with that term, just asking if you like it or not?

It was you who coined the 'Queen' Nicola wasn't it?

glory glory

[johnbc70]

I take it you don't like being branded a Dyed in the wool Unionist?:greengrin

You had a go at me for using 'everything is awesome' But you continually call people Unionist?

[ronaldo7]

It was you who coined the 'Queen' Nicola wasn't it?

glory glory

Nope. You need to read the thread. Makaveli's your man.

[Hibrandenburg]

You had a go at me for using 'everything is awesome' But you continually call people Unionist?

Stick and stones and all that. Call me what you like, nationalist, separatist or even Nazi, it doesn't mean anything if I see myself as a civic nationalist other than you've failed to understand me.

[allmodcons]

This is the kind of mudslinging that turns folk off from debating politics. I explained my reasoning to you for wishing to remain part of the UK yet you still insist on nasty gutter type name calling. If you say so.

:wink:

glory glory

You really are a top example of someone who dishes it out but just can't take it when the boot's on the other foot. Knew before I posted how you'd react. Would like to apologise for conflating Scottish Nationalism with Nazis?

[northstandhibby]

Nope. You need to read the thread. Makaveli's your man.

Gotcha.

:wink:

As for the other point I think we should avoid falsely labelling folk as it doesn't help the debate.

glory glory

[northstandhibby]

You really are a top example of someone who dishes it out but just can't take it when the boot's on the other foot. Knew before I posted how you'd react.

I've never been called predictive before but there is always a first time I suppose.

:greengrin

glory glory

[ronaldo7]

Gotcha.

:wink:

As for the other point I think we should avoid falsely labelling folk as it doesn't help the debate.

glory glory

I don't think their are any Nazi's on here either.:wink:

[northstandhibby]

I don't think their are any Nazi's on here either.:wink:

Any proof I called someone a Nazi on here? I certainly can't recall the occasion.

I appreciate the special attention I'm receiving from the Independeteers (refraining from Nationalists now) as I must be putting up a decent argument for remaining within the UK.

:greengrin

glory glory

[allmodcons]

I've never been called predictive before but there is always a first time I suppose.

:greengrin

glory glory
Would you like to apologise for conflating my views with Nazis? Maybe then we can have a reasoned debate.

[Moulin Yarns]

I take it you don't like being branded a Dyed in the wool Unionist?:greengrin

I object to Unionists being described as wool. Wool is natural while unionists are manufactured like polyester

[ronaldo7]

You had a go at me for using 'everything is awesome' But you continually call people Unionist?

I think I said, childish, which it was.

[ronaldo7]

Any proof I called someone a Nazi on here? I certainly can't recall the occasion.

I appreciate the special attention I'm receiving from the Independeteers (refraining from Nationalists now) as I must be putting up a decent argument for remaining within the UK.

:greengrin

glory glory

Someone need to accuse you of it first.

[northstandhibby]

Would you like to apologise for conflating my views with Nazis? Maybe then we can have a reasoned debate.

Please remind me of the alleged conflation?

:greengrin

glory glory

[allmodcons]

Any proof I called someone a Nazi on here? I certainly can't recall the occasion.

I appreciate the special attention I'm receiving from the Independeteers (refraining from Nationalists now) as I must be putting up a decent argument for remaining within the UK.

:greengrin

glory glory

I'm happy to be called a Scottish Nationalist for I know what it means. You've conflated that a couple times during this thread with Nazis. Your terms "rampant nationalism" and "SNP storm troopers". You care to expand?

[northstandhibby]

I'm happy to be called a Scottish Nationalist for I know what it means. You've conflated that a couple times during thus thread with Nazism. Your terms "rampant nationalism" and "SNP storm troopers"

I'm against Nationalism for sure as its caused all sorts of historical problems throughout history. Its why I'm for the EU a supra national body. Why are you a Scottish Nationalist?

glory glory

[allmodcons]

I'm against Nationalism for sure as its caused all sorts of historical problems throughout history. Its why I'm for the EU a supra national body. Why are you a Scottish Nationalist?

glory glory
Not big enough to apologise despite me quoting you? Usual deflection. Check my post history if you want to see my reasons for supporting an Independent Scotland.

[northstandhibby]

Not big enough to apologise despite me quoting you? Usual deflection. Check my post history if you want to see my reasons for supporting an Independent Scotland.

I've never found it difficult to apologise for anything I've said or done wrongfully however you seem to want me to apologise for the things I've never done (no apologies for the Jam quote by the way, probably my favorite ever band).

glory glory

[allmodcons]

I've never found it difficult to apologise for anything I've said or done wrongfully however you seem to want me to apologise for the things I've never done (no apologies for the Jam quote by the way, probably my favorite ever band).

glory glory

No apology but some common ground! Will settle for that for now. Goodnight.

[northstandhibby]

No apology but some common ground! Will settle for that for now. Goodnight.

:greengrin

All it took was a quote from probably the greatest ever band in the world ever? No malice from me for sure. Goodnight :thumbsup:

glory glory

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

My understanding of civic nationalism is that it is about political decisions lying with the people who live somewhere and nothing about blood and soil.

So, serious question. Given our FMs precedent of being able to retrospectively opt out of the result of votes if they result in a material change of circumstances that didnt go the way you voted, would nats on here support all regions / council areas of Scotland that voted to remain to be given special status and to remain in the UK, ceding from Scotland?

A la isle of mann, jersey etc?

[JeMeSouviens]

My understanding of civic nationalism is that it is about political decisions lying with the people who live somewhere and nothing about blood and soil.

So, serious question. Given our FMs precedent of being able to retrospectively opt out of the result of votes if they result in a material change of circumstances that didnt go the way you voted, would nats on here support all regions / council areas of Scotland that voted to remain to be given special status and to remain in the UK, ceding from Scotland?

A la isle of mann, jersey etc?

Neither the Isle of Man nor Jersey are part of the UK.

A better example would be the 1921 partition of Ireland but in that case Fermanagh and Tyrone had nationalist majorities which were ignored in order to carve out the largest area possible with a stable Protestant majority. That hasn't gone too well.

However, I personally see the logic in your point and if a democratic movement emerged with such a proposal and could secure a majority then subject to the practicalities of borders etc I wouldn't oppose it I don't think.

I very much doubt there is any serious appetite fir it though. There's a big difference between voting No and wanting Scotland partitioned if the result is Yes.

[JeMeSouviens]

Neither the Isle of Man nor Jersey are part of the UK.

A better example would be the 1921 partition of Ireland but in that case Fermanagh and Tyrone had nationalist majorities which were ignored in order to carve out the largest area possible with a stable Protestant majority. That hasn't gone too well.

However, I personally see the logic in your point and if a democratic movement emerged with such a proposal and could secure a majority then subject to the practicalities of borders etc I wouldn't oppose it I don't think.

I very much doubt there is any serious appetite fir it though. There's a big difference between voting No and wanting Scotland partitioned if the result is Yes.

Should also add that it runs counter to the accepted Unionist position that Scotland as an entity with its current borders entered the 1707 union by treaty and its that entity that has the right to withdraw from the union democratically. But accepting that sort of argument means no Catalan or Basque independence ever, for example. I think the will of people who organise together and want to run their own home should be respected. And I infinitely prefer that to be nothing to do with ethnicity.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Neither the Isle of Man nor Jersey are part of the UK.

A better example would be the 1921 partition of Ireland but in that case Fermanagh and Tyrone had nationalist majorities which were ignored in order to carve out the largest area possible with a stable Protestant majority. That hasn't gone too well.

However, I personally see the logic in your point and if a democratic movement emerged with such a proposal and could secure a majority then subject to the practicalities of borders etc I wouldn't oppose it I don't think.

I very much doubt there is any serious appetite fir it though. There's a big difference between voting No and wanting Scotland partitioned if the result is Yes.

Agree it woyld never happen, certainly not on the mainlanf - orkney / shetland possibly, but difficult. Just thought it was an interesting scenario, and a natural extension of the FMs logic.

[Moulin Yarns]

My understanding of civic nationalism is that it is about political decisions lying with the people who live somewhere and nothing about blood and soil.

So, serious question. Given our FMs precedent of being able to retrospectively opt out of the result of votes if they result in a material change of circumstances that didnt go the way you voted, would nats on here support all regions / council areas of Scotland that voted to remain to be given special status and to remain in the UK, ceding from Scotland?

A la isle of mann, jersey etc?

Already happening. Even in 2014 they were examining ways to remain in the UK if the vote had gone the other way. It is their oil after all. :wink:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/02/orkney-explore-independence-scotland-uk-following-brexit/

However you are forgetting that all 32 electoral regions voted Remain.

http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/find-information-by-subject/elections-and-referendums/past-elections-and-referendums/eu-referendum/electorate-and-count-information

[Jack]

Lauded and feted , il have some of what your smoking . Everyone in the states think our First Minister is over there to perform the Krankies. If she were that important she would be meeting the President not the beaten crooked Hillary Clinton.

Diplomatic conventions would not allow for the President of the USA to meet with our First Minister, at least publicly, during such a visit to the States.

On the other hand an opposition leader meeting an opposition leader, home or away, is quite normal.

[johnbc70]

Diplomatic conventions would not allow for the President of the USA to meet with our First Minister, at least publicly, during such a visit to the States.

On the other hand an opposition leader meeting an opposition leader, home or away, is quite normal.

What diplomatic convention? Ed Milliband of all people met with Obama.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Diplomatic conventions would not allow for the President of the USA to meet with our First Minister, at least publicly, during such a visit to the States.

On the other hand an opposition leader meeting an opposition leader, home or away, is quite normal.

Are you saying she is an opposition leader?

Quite an admission. Possibly a freudian slip.

[Jack]

What diplomatic convention? Ed Milliband of all people met with Obama.

Officially leaders only meet with leaders. As I said though what happens privately is something else.

[Jack]

Are you saying she is an opposition leader?

Quite an admission. Possibly a freudian slip.

She is the leader of the SNP, a party that makes up a significant element of the opposition in the UK parliament.

[makaveli1875]

Officially leaders only meet with leaders. As I said though what happens privately is something else.

I thought sturgeon was our leader , the Dear Leader . The eternal 1st minister of the Peoples Republic of Scotland.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

She is the leader of the SNP, a party that makes up a significant element of the opposition in the UK parliament.

Still, quite an admission from a party of government, allneit devolved govt.

It explains her constant state of grievance, its what opposition parties do.

Muat be nice getting that whopping FM's salary while she leadd the opposition mind.

[weecounty hibby]

I thought sturgeon was our leader , the Dear Leader . The eternal 1st minister of the Peoples Republic of Scotland.
Mate, you make yourself look stupid with posts like that. Try making some reasoned arguments and you may find that folk come round to your way of thinking. That is precisely why the opposition both in Scotland to the SNP and the UK to the Tories is struggling so badly. Throw in some "funny" name calling, question peoples dress sense, looks etc but whatever you do don't have any sensible suggestions, policies or real debate

[marinello59]

Mate, you make yourself look stupid with posts like that. Try making some reasoned arguments and you may find that folk come round to your way of thinking. That is precisely why the opposition both in Scotland to the SNP and the UK to the Tories is struggling so badly. Throw in some "funny" name calling, question peoples dress sense, looks etc but whatever you do don't have any sensible suggestions, policies or real debate

You get exactly the same from SNP supporters though. Question their policies and you are a Yoon, a Red Tory, anti-Scottish etc etc etc.

[weecounty hibby]

You get exactly the same from SNP supporters though. Question their policies and you are a Yoon, a Red Tory, anti-Scottish etc etc etc.

I get that and it doesn't make for good debate and they look equally stupid. But the opposition both in Scotland and UK appear to have nothing else at the moment

[JeMeSouviens]

Are you saying she is an opposition leader?

Quite an admission. Possibly a freudian slip.

She is head of a regional government. Unless/until that changes she's not going to be accorded the status of a head of a real government.

[Jack]

Still, quite an admission from a party of government, allneit devolved govt.

It explains her constant state of grievance, its what opposition parties do.

Muat be nice getting that whopping FM's salary while she leadd the opposition mind.

It was Westminster that originally decided that the rates pay for Holyrood mirrored that of MPs and other benefits too such as pensions.

As far as I am aware MSPs of all parties vote on the benefits they receive and pretty much keep them in line with Westminster.

She doesn't decide her salary nor have any of her predecessors.

I'm surprised you were not aware of this.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

It was Westminster that originally decided that the rates pay for Holyrood mirrored that of MPs and other benefits too such as pensions.

As far as I am aware MSPs of all parties vote on the benefits they receive and pretty much keep them in line with Westminster.

She doesn't decide her salary nor have any of her predecessors.

I'm surprised you were not aware of this.

Good bit of avoidance there Jack.

I never questioned what she is paid, or how it is calculated. Just that she is drawing that salary while acting as 'opposition', in your words.

Shows where her priorities lie in the leader of scottish government / leader of the SNP dichtomy.

Elsctorare, and tax payers, take note

[Moulin Yarns]

Good bit of avoidance there Jack.

I never questioned what she is paid, or how it is calculated. Just that she is drawing that salary while acting as 'opposition', in your words.

Shows where her priorities lie in the leader of scottish government / leader of the SNP dichtomy.

Elsctorare, and tax payers, take note

First Minister declared an income of £104,000, despite being eligible for £144,687
She did this as part of a voluntary pay freeze pegging her salary to 2008 levels


Jeremy Corbyn £139,500
Theresa may £143,462

[Jack]

Good bit of avoidance there Jack.

I never questioned what she is paid, or how it is calculated. Just that she is drawing that salary while acting as 'opposition', in your words.

Shows where her priorities lie in the leader of scottish government / leader of the SNP dichtomy.

Elsctorare, and tax payers, take note

I don't see how her priorities are in any way related to her salary.

Perhaps you could explain?

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I don't see how her priorities are in any way related to her salary.

Perhaps you could explain?

I think you explained it perfectly when you described her as acting like the opposition.

Not what she is getting paid 100k plus to do.

So i agree, her salary does not seem to be related to her priorities.

[Mr Grieves]

I thought sturgeon was our leader , the Dear Leader . The eternal 1st minister of the Peoples Republic of Scotland.

Pathetic. Are you still pretending you're impartial?

[G B Young]

Yet people decided to vote SNP into all but 3 Scottish seats on the last general election whilst knowing the main aim of the SNP is independence.

The flip side of that is that all but four of the 32 Scottish voting regions voted against independence in 2014. In those circumstances the voting system works well for the pro-union parties when their combined voters were enough to defeat the SNP in almost every region. However, it works against them when it comes to an election when the SNP can rely on the default support of yes voters, whereas the rest of the vote is split across the other parties, thus diluting the chances of anything but an SNP win. Hence the somewhat inflated SNP representation at Westminster.

[pacoluna]

The flip side of that is that all but four of the 32 Scottish voting regions voted against independence in 2014. In those circumstances the voting system works well for the pro-union parties when their combined voters were enough to defeat the SNP in almost every region. However, it works against them when it comes to an election when the SNP can rely on the default support of yes voters, whereas the rest of the vote is split across the other parties, thus diluting the chances of anything but an SNP win. Hence the somewhat inflated SNP representation at Westminster.
Yet SNP have more seats than Labour, Tories and libdems put together.

[Slavoj Zizek]

Ok Flash:aok:

No worries Ace and no answers. I work 12 hours for theNHS so have no time for this utterly tiresome echo chamber. How is the Edinburgh East branch getting on with their "deselecting" for the forthcoming election. A long wait for PIP to be abolished in Scotland. One would assume you stood with us outside High Riggs: http://edinburghagainstpoverty.org.uk/node/230

[Slavoj Zizek]

Yet SNP have more seats than Labour, Tories and libdems put together.

My dad is bigger than yours. How pathetic.

[CropleyWasGod]

My dad is bigger than yours. How pathetic.

Is it pathetic to say that the electorate made that choice?

[Slavoj Zizek]

Is it pathetic to say that the electorate made that choice?

Not when 55% voted No. It is called "Civic Nationalism" #MyDadHasLessSeats

[CropleyWasGod]

Not when 55% voted No. It is called "Civic Nationalism" #MyDadHasLessSeats

He didn't mention the referendum. This is what he said....

Yet SNP have more seats than Labour, Tories and libdems put together.

[JeMeSouviens]

Not when 55% voted No. It is called "Civic Nationalism" #MyDadHasLessSeats

Got to say, I liked this better:


Globalisation means that Scotland wants independence or at least more autonomy; you Basques, as well... That in itself is a good phenomenon. These new entities that want to separate they donʼt want only to obtain a nation-state old-style but a new autonomous entity, with much more free space also at the cultural level. Globalisation doesnʼt mean that we are all going to end up eating hamburgers, it means that it will be easier for you, for instance, to express your identity in the world. Thatʼs the good side of globalization. So we should use that possibility (he knocks the table lightly with his forefinger). We should not be conservative or afraid about it

[JeMeSouviens]

Sorry, still quoting, I really like this guy. :aok:


fact I think that the stronger the European Union the bigger your room for autonomy will be. To the extent that Europe is more united it will become more of a Europe of regions and not so much of nation-states. It is a very nice paradox: to the extent that you demand total autonomy from the Spanish state your defense constitutes the highest universal space. You shouldnʼt be afraid of Europe. Be careful with those false leftists followers of Habermas: they say that the European Union is a tool of the International Monetary Fund, of international capital ant all that, as a consequence, it is the task of the Left to return to a strong nation-state; they think that only strong nation-states can save what is left of the welfare


It is a false idea of the universalist Left that we should forget about our identity because no one lives in an abstract space. The dialectic here is very clear: since you have a hierarchical space of a universal Europe and underneath you have the nation-states, those who undermine the sovereignty of nation-states from inside are allied to universality. In fact, you are more universal to the extent that you act against the Spanish nation-state. This is what your argument should be. The force of universality is in you, not in the Spanish state. And I think that this is necessary for the European Union. And I still have hope in Europe because if not there are only two models: the Anglo-Saxon liberal model and the authoritarian capitalism of China, Japan and so

[G B Young]

Yet SNP have more seats than Labour, Tories and libdems put together.

Yes and I tried to point out why (to a large extent) that has happened, but maybe didn't make myself very clear. Basically, when it came down to a straight choice between independence and staying part of the UK, the majority of voters across all but four regions opted to stay part of the UK. But when it comes to electing parliamentary candidates, the 45% who voted for independence by and large voted for the SNP candidate in their constituency, thereby giving those candidates a telling advantage because Labour, Conservative and Lib Dem voters are no longer united.

Bottom line, the SNP may have the mandate to govern (I'm not trying to argue otherwise) but their majority presence at both Westminster and Holyrood doesn't tell the whole story.

[JeMeSouviens]

He seems to have Scottish Labour's Brexit position nailed too!


. But I say it again, the problem with cynicism is that it is an impossible position. If pure cynicism was possible, then yes, I agree, weʼd have a problem because the critique of ideology would not function anymore. Whatever youʼd said to him the complete cynic would answer: “Ok, **** it! I accept it and I carry on.

[JeMeSouviens]

Yes and I tried to point out why (to a large extent) that has happened, but maybe didn't make myself very clear. Basically, when it came down to a straight choice between independence and staying part of the UK, the majority of voters across all but four regions opted to stay part of the UK. But when it comes to electing parliamentary candidates, the 45% who voted for independence by and large voted for the SNP candidate in their constituency, thereby giving those candidates a telling advantage because Labour, Conservative and Lib Dem voters are no longer united.

Bottom line, the SNP may have the mandate to govern (I'm not trying to argue otherwise) but their majority presence at both Westminster and Holyrood doesn't tell the whole story.

The effect of the solid SNP block on Westminster fptp seats is much as you say but Holyrood tells a more interesting story. SNP+Green+minor Indy parties total just over 50% of the vote, Lib/Lab/Tory just under. Of course some votes leak tactically in either direction but to me the narrative is of a country on the edge of asserting its independence. Nobody diametrically opposed to iScotland would even toy with a pro indy party. There is now a solid pro Indy block and a large enough persuadable bunch of waverers. It's going to be closer than last time I reckon and you just never know, Hibs did win that damned cup. :wink:

[CropleyWasGod]

Yes and I tried to point out why (to a large extent) that has happened, but maybe didn't make myself very clear. Basically, when it came down to a straight choice between independence and staying part of the UK, the majority of voters across all but four regions opted to stay part of the UK. But when it comes to electing parliamentary candidates, the 45% who voted for independence by and large voted for the SNP candidate in their constituency, thereby giving those candidates a telling advantage because Labour, Conservative and Lib Dem voters are no longer united.

Bottom line, the SNP may have the mandate to govern (I'm not trying to argue otherwise) but their majority presence at both Westminster and Holyrood doesn't tell the whole story.

I'd posit (:greengrin) that the Holyrood seats are a reasonably accurate reflection of the electorate's choices.

Westminster isn't, of course. Does anyone know what the allocation of Scottish seats would be if they used the Holyrood PR system?

[ronaldo7]

No worries Ace and no answers. I work 12 hours for theNHS so have no time for this utterly tiresome echo chamber. How is the Edinburgh East branch getting on with their "deselecting" for the forthcoming election. A long wait for PIP to be abolished in Scotland. One would assume you stood with us outside High Riggs: http://edinburghagainstpoverty.org.uk/node/230

The two branches you've tried, and missed on both occasions. This echo chamber is getting a rise out of you though.:greengrin

That's the only rise, Labour will be getting :aok:

Sounds like you've forgotten that your party were the least supportive of welfare powers, and more, being devolved to Holyrood. #soldoutsmith

[G B Young]

I'd posit (:greengrin) that the Holyrood seats are a reasonably accurate reflection of the electorate's choices.

Westminster isn't, of course. Does anyone know what the allocation of Scottish seats would be if they used the Holyrood PR system?

As I mentioned in an earlier post, I recall reading that under proportional representation we'd have more than 80 UKIP MPs and barely 30 SNP MPs. Not sure if that's based on the same PR as the Holyrood system though.

[CropleyWasGod]

As I mentioned in an earlier post, I recall reading that under proportional representation we'd have more than 80 UKIP MPs and barely 30 SNP MPs. Not sure if that's based on the same PR as the Holyrood system though.

I meant for Scotland, if that's possible.

[RyeSloan]

I meant for Scotland, if that's possible.

Sure I read that the SNP would have 32 seats or something along those lines..not sure the article gave numbers for who would have got the rest.

[HiBremian]

I see these nice Scottish Conservatives are ignoring the SNP's obsession with independence, and fighting the council elections on the local issues that really matter to people.

https://wingsoverscotland.com/tory-council-election-manifesto-launched/


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I see these nice Scottish Conservatives are ignoring the SNP's obsession with independence, and fighting the council elections on the local issues that really matter to people.

https://wingsoverscotland.com/tory-council-election-manifesto-launched/


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


So are you saying it is the Scottish tories' who are keeping indy on the agenda, nothing to do with the scot govt constantly campaigning for it.

I find this line of argument from nats to be a bit odd. Saying it isnt them keeping it on the agenda.

[Just Alf]

So are you saying it is the Scottish tories' who are keeping indy on the agenda, nothing to do with the scot govt constantly campaigning for it.

I find this line of argument from nats to be a bit odd. Saying it isnt them keeping it on the agenda.

It's a strange one I agree, I also think maybe they would want it include reference to it in their flyers etc (use every tool at your disposal sort of thing) but this seems to be showing Indy as their main driver!
I want to know about roads, trams (yes/no/maybe) etc etc. For me the independence question doesn't enter my thinking in local elections and I don't think I've even voted SNP in them.

Caveat... It is a "wings" link so maybe what's shown is the cherry picked worst, maybe not all the non SNP ones are as bad.

Edit: ps was there not an article somewhere referencing a study that of the Scottish leaders it was Ruth Davidson that actually brought up independence more than the rest?

[ronaldo7]

Leaders ratings in the latest Ashcroft poll show the FM Leading the way again. Ruth Davidson is more popular than the FM...in England.:greengrin

https://t.co/G3sVHrWvBI

https://t.co/G3sVHrWvBI

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

It's a strange one I agree, I also think maybe they would want it include reference to it in their flyers etc (use every tool at your disposal sort of thing) but this seems to be showing Indy as their main driver!
I want to know about roads, trams (yes/no/maybe) etc etc. For me the independence question doesn't enter my thinking in local elections and I don't think I've even voted SNP in them.

Caveat... It is a "wings" link so maybe what's shown is the cherry picked worst, maybe not all the non SNP ones are as bad.

Edit: ps was there not an article somewhere referencing a study that of the Scottish leaders it was Ruth Davidson that actually brought up independence more than the rest?

Totally agree mate - indy shouldnt come into it for local elections, unless its about special status for lothian in the future...!

There was i think, but possibly related to FMQs, so not sure what it actually tells us.

[ronaldo7]

I see these nice Scottish Conservatives are ignoring the SNP's obsession with independence, and fighting the council elections on the local issues that really matter to people.

https://wingsoverscotland.com/tory-council-election-manifesto-launched/


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

This is a letter sent by Prof A Tomkins, and Annie Wells, both Tory MSP's to a local Green party candidate looking to be elected to his local council. They seem to want to talk about one thing only. It's all they've got to offer.

18344

[JeMeSouviens]

So are you saying it is the Scottish tories' who are keeping indy on the agenda, nothing to do with the scot govt constantly campaigning for it.

I find this line of argument from nats to be a bit odd. Saying it isnt them keeping it on the agenda.

Obviously the Scot gov has put independence back on the table but it's also true that the Tories want to talk about *nothing* else. They are operating a clear strategy of Unionism-max to try and eat into the remnants of the Lab/Lib vote.

[G B Young]

I see these nice Scottish Conservatives are ignoring the SNP's obsession with independence, and fighting the council elections on the local issues that really matter to people.

https://wingsoverscotland.com/tory-council-election-manifesto-launched/


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I gather that the guy who runs that blog/website is so passionate about Scotland that he lives in the the Tory heartland of Bath.

[Peevemor]

I gather that the guy who runs that blog/website is so passionate about Scotland that he lives in the the Tory heartland of Bath.

Does that make his output less valid?

[Moulin Yarns]

I see these nice Scottish Conservatives are ignoring the SNP's obsession with independence, and fighting the council elections on the local issues that really matter to people.

https://wingsoverscotland.com/tory-council-election-manifesto-launched/


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Considering the first manifesto launch is today, by the Scottish Greens, I find it a bit odd this claim the tories have anything out yet.

[G B Young]

Obviously the Scot gov has put independence back on the table but it's also true that the Tories want to talk about *nothing* else. They are operating a clear strategy of Unionism-max to try and eat into the remnants of the Lab/Lib vote.

The SNP are in no position to accuse the Tories of political opportunism given the gleeful haste with which they jumped on Brexit to ramp up the rhetoric for a new independence referendum.

In 2014 it was the settled will of the Scottish Parliament that there be a referendum (as well as a general acceptance among voters in Scotland that this was something that justified a vote). This time round, the only 'settled will' is that of the SNP (propped up by an obsequious handful of Greens) and the deep resentment felt towards them by those who believed the issue was put to bed is, I sense, greater than the SNP realise. The Tories are correct to reflect that anger because if another such vote does ever come to pass, the 'no' side need to be better prepared for battle than they were last time, despite the fact the quiet majority prevailed by a distance.

It's a pity that the local elections will be dominated not by local issues but by constitutional sniping, but the only party to blame for that is the SNP.

[Moulin Yarns]

The SNP are in no position to accuse the Tories of political opportunism given the gleeful haste with which they jumped on Brexit to ramp up the rhetoric for a new independence referendum.

In 2014 it was the settled will of the Scottish Parliament that there be a referendum (as well as a general acceptance among voters in Scotland that this was something that justified a vote). This time round, the only 'settled will' is that of the SNP (propped up by an obsequious handful of Greens) and the deep resentment felt towards them by those who believed the issue was put to bed is, I sense, greater than the SNP realise. The Tories are correct to reflect that anger because if another such vote does ever come to pass, the 'no' side need to be better prepared for battle than they were last time, despite the fact the quiet majority prevailed by a distance.

It's a pity that the local elections will be dominated not by local issues but by constitutional sniping, but the only party to blame for that is the SNP.


I don't know how often it needs to be said, but the Scottish Green Party are not propping up the SNP, they have voted against and won votes and amendments against the SNP at Holyrood.

[Peevemor]

The SNP are in no position to accuse the Tories of political opportunism given the gleeful haste with which they jumped on Brexit to ramp up the rhetoric for a new independence referendum.

In 2014 it was the settled will of the Scottish Parliament that there be a referendum (as well as a general acceptance among voters in Scotland that this was something that justified a vote). This time round, the only 'settled will' is that of the SNP (propped up by an obsequious handful of Greens) and the deep resentment felt towards them by those who believed the issue was put to bed is, I sense, greater than the SNP realise. The Tories are correct to reflect that anger because if another such vote does ever come to pass, the 'no' side need to be better prepared for battle than they were last time, despite the fact the quiet majority prevailed by a distance.

It's a pity that the local elections will be dominated not by local issues but by constitutional sniping, but the only party to blame for that is the SNP.

So we should simply forget the continued EU membership argument used by Better Together prior to the 2014 referendum?

The Brexit vote and Westminster's treatment of Scotland since (since 2014 for that matter) have left the SNP with no option but to push for Indyref2. I don't understand why you can't see that.

[ronaldo7]

Does that make his output less valid?

No. It's fine however, if Dan snow and his cohorts get involved.

[JeMeSouviens]

The SNP are in no position to accuse the Tories of political opportunism given the gleeful haste with which they jumped on Brexit to ramp up the rhetoric for a new independence referendum.

In 2014 it was the settled will of the Scottish Parliament that there be a referendum (as well as a general acceptance among voters in Scotland that this was something that justified a vote). This time round, the only 'settled will' is that of the SNP (propped up by an obsequious handful of Greens) and the deep resentment felt towards them by those who believed the issue was put to bed is, I sense, greater than the SNP realise. The Tories are correct to reflect that anger because if another such vote does ever come to pass, the 'no' side need to be better prepared for battle than they were last time, despite the fact the quiet majority prevailed by a distance.

It's a pity that the local elections will be dominated not by local issues but by constitutional sniping, but the only party to blame for that is the SNP.

I don't know if the SNP are accusing the Tories of opportunism and I certainly accept there is opportunism on both sides - that's just politics. You might want to ignore it but if you really don't think there is a political strategy behind making the Tories the ueber champions of the Union, then I've got a bridge going cheap you might be interested in?

In 2011, it was obvious given the SNP's manifesto and ability to get a vote through parliament that a referendum was coming. The Unionists thought they would skoosh it and wanted to make it a straight Y/N question so they accepted that.

In 2017, it is obvious given the SNP's manifesto and ability to get a vote through parliament that another referendum is coming. This time the Unionists fear they might lose.

Your "quiet majority" chat is wishful thinking. There were a host of reasons to reject independence (including uncertainty over continuing EU membership and the hope of "safer, better, faster" change). There is Y->N switching going on over economic uncertainty (oil price) and Euroscepticism and there is N->Y switching going on over the EU and the prospect of endless Tory governments. It's going to be tight but there is room for a Yes win.

And your last sentence is just rubbish.

[pacoluna]

The SNP are in no position to accuse the Tories of political opportunism given the gleeful haste with which they jumped on Brexit to ramp up the rhetoric for a new independence referendum.

In 2014 it was the settled will of the Scottish Parliament that there be a referendum (as well as a general acceptance among voters in Scotland that this was something that justified a vote). This time round, the only 'settled will' is that of the SNP (propped up by an obsequious handful of Greens) and the deep resentment felt towards them by those who believed the issue was put to bed is, I sense, greater than the SNP realise. The Tories are correct to reflect that anger because if another such vote does ever come to pass, the 'no' side need to be better prepared for battle than they were last time, despite the fact the quiet majority prevailed by a distance.

It's a pity that the local elections will be dominated not by local issues but by constitutional sniping, but the only party to blame for that is the SNP.
BREXIT was driven by English nationalism, unfortunately the democratic deficit means the Scottish electorate has no real option other than to follow like a dog on a leash or the chained unicorn on your passport unless of course there was an alternative route we could take....

[HiBremian]

I gather that the guy who runs that blog/website is so passionate about Scotland that he lives in the the Tory heartland of Bath.

Maybe I should consider myself banned from this thread, guilty of the crime of falling in love with a German lassie.:cb

[speedy_gonzales]

or the chained unicorn on your passport
For the sake of clarity, I'd like to point out it was the Scots that put the chains on the unicorn.
Let's not go down the road that it was the English or others that tethered Scotland's national beast, and by extension its people.

[JeMeSouviens]

For the sake of clarity, I'd like to point out it was the Scots that put the chains on the unicorn.
Let's not go down the road that it was the English or others that tethered Scotland's national beast, and by extension its people.

It's not just a "horse with the horn" either:
The unicorn has the head, body and mane of a horse, a goat-like beard, the cloven hoofs of a deer, the tail of a lion and a prominent long spiraling horn which is set in its forehead.

http://www.heraldicsculptor.com/royal%20unicorn.htm

[pacoluna]

For the sake of clarity, I'd like to point out it was the Scots that put the chains on the unicorn.
Let's not go down the road that it was the English or others that tethered Scotland's national beast, and by extension its people.

I was speaking figuratively.

once again drawing comparison - Similar to how the poor planning and provisioning of the Darien scheme lead to the act of Union.

The poor planning and provisioning of BREXIT could lead to Scottish independence.

[IWasThere2016]

We need a two part vote, Yes/No on Independence and Yes/No on EU membership .. and it should be mandatory to vote IMHO.

[johnbc70]

We need a two part vote, Yes/No on Independence and Yes/No on EU membership .. and it should be mandatory to vote IMHO.

Did we not have those votes already? We voted No to independence and No to being part of the EU. Yes the second vote was a UK wide vote, but as per the first vote we voted to remain part of the UK hence why we also voted in the second.

[ronaldo7]

Murdo Fraser's letter to constituents in Fife. :rolleyes:

18348

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Murdo Fraser's letter to constituents in Fife. :rolleyes:

18348

What point are you making?

[weecounty hibby]

So voting Tory in the LOCAL elections will stop a 2nd referendum. Again the Tories using the I word. I have seen The local SNP leaflets and guess what? No mention of anything other than local issues. Just how desperate are the Tories " use your 2nd, 3rd votes to vote for anyone but the SNP"

[Just Alf]

I tell you.what, if any Labour canvassers lead with the Referendum they'll instantly lose my vote.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[ronaldo7]

What point are you making?

A few posters seem to think the only party bringing up Independence for Scotland at the local elections are the SNP. On the contrary, they've been canvassing on local issues, whereas the Tories have deliberately been using Indyref2 in their literature. That's their right of course, however, it's all a bit ironic seeing senior Tory MSP's sending out the letters I've referenced.

[snooky]

Murdo Fraser's letter to constituents in Fife. :rolleyes:

18348

That's pretty pathetic.
If all they're about is stopping another party getting in then it speaks volumes about their own confidence and also zero about their policies.
You know, politics is just a sick joke these days.

[ronaldo7]

I tell you.what, if any Labour canvassers lead with the Referendum they'll instantly lose my vote.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

https://t.co/fC4MgBhAbd

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

A few posters seem to think the only party bringing up Independence for Scotland at the local elections are the SNP. On the contrary, they've been canvassing on local issues, whereas the Tories have deliberately been using Indyref2 in their literature. That's their right of course, however, it's all a bit ironic seeing senior Tory MSP's sending out the letters I've referenced.

Fair enough, i dont pay much attention to local elections, so i dont know if thats true.

Havent a clue who to vote for in Edinburgh.

[steakbake]

I've had Labour, SNP and Green leaflets. Not one mention of indy. It's only the Ruth Party that are obsessed but she got well and truly speared today when she had to speak up to defend the rape clause - through a spokesperson. Coward.

See, her stock in trade to detoxify the Tories is to pretend they're a different party to south of the border. You could see she was uncomfortable having to defend a policy from the party she's a member of which has rightly horrified people.

[Glory Lurker]

Fair enough, i dont pay much attention to local elections, so i dont know if thats true.

Havent a clue who to vote for in Edinburgh.

May I suggest SNP? :greengrin

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

May I suggest SNP? :greengrin

If i knew how to do smileys, i would!

Who knows... i genuinely dont think it makes much difference at local level.

[steakbake]

If i knew how to do smileys, i would!

Who knows... i genuinely dont think it makes much difference at local level.

Where do you stay? Have you got any independents there?

Kind of find in local elections, the party is less significant. When you look down the list there's usually one or two folks you'll recognise from doing good work locally.

[The Green Goblin]

Fair enough, i dont pay much attention to local elections, so i dont know if thats true.

Havent a clue who to vote for in Edinburgh.

Why wouldn't it be? Hasn't R7 just provided the evidence in his link? :wink:

[pacoluna]

Where do you stay? Have you got any independents there?

Kind of find in local elections, the party is less significant. When you look down the list there's usually one or two folks you'll recognise from doing good work locally.
A lot of ex labour councillors are standing as "independent" I wonder why?

[ronaldo7]

For those who have the time, BBC radio Scotland today at 12.30, Professor Richard Murphy discussing everyone's favourite political subject, GERS.

Kevin Hague, the Unionist blogger, and dog food salesman will be up against the Prof.

https://t.co/gb8MtvUMaw

[ronaldo7]

Did we not have those votes already? We voted No to independence and No to being part of the EU. Yes the second vote was a UK wide vote, but as per the first vote we voted to remain part of the UK hence why we also voted in the second.

I think this piece by Kenny Farquharson from the Times(not known for their Independence stance) was written just for you.:wink:

I've picked this bit from the article as it answers the questions you've asked.:greengrin

Let us take a step back here. The SNP won last year’s Holyrood election on a manifesto promise to consider a referendum if the UK voted for Brexit against Scotland’s wishes, a scenario that duly materialised. This position has since been backed by the Greens, making it the majority view of the Scottish parliament.
Holyrood therefore has a cast-iron mandate to hold a referendum before the end of the current parliamentary term. Objections that this was settled in 2014, in a vote described by the SNP as “once in a generation”, are trumped by the subsequent mandate the SNP sought and won. Voters can punish the SNP for bad faith at the next Holyrood election, if they so wish.

This is how democracy works, whether or not you like the result.

What part of it don't you understand?

https://t.co/8TrDvrnRHL

[G B Young]

I've had Labour, SNP and Green leaflets. Not one mention of indy. It's only the Ruth Party that are obsessed but she got well and truly speared today when she had to speak up to defend the rape clause - through a spokesperson. Coward.

See, her stock in trade to detoxify the Tories is to pretend they're a different party to south of the border. You could see she was uncomfortable having to defend a policy from the party she's a member of which has rightly horrified people.

In my constituency we've had leaflets from Labour and the Lib Dems so far, with both candidates making particular reference to the independence question and reaffirming that they are strongly opposed. We've also had a lengthy letter from Kezia Dugdale dedicated solely to Labour's stance against independence. I've not seen any literature from the Tories, SNP or the Greens yet so can't comment on what those candidates are prioritising.

[ronaldo7]

In my constituency we've had leaflets from Labour and the Lib Dems so far, with both candidates making particular reference to the independence question and reaffirming that they are strongly opposed. We've also had a lengthy letter from Kezia Dugdale dedicated solely to Labour's stance against independence. I've not seen any literature from the Tories, SNP or the Greens yet so can't comment on what those candidates are prioritising.

Which constituency are you in?

[G B Young]

I don't know if the SNP are accusing the Tories of opportunism and I certainly accept there is opportunism on both sides - that's just politics. You might want to ignore it but if you really don't think there is a political strategy behind making the Tories the ueber champions of the Union, then I've got a bridge going cheap you might be interested in?

In 2011, it was obvious given the SNP's manifesto and ability to get a vote through parliament that a referendum was coming. The Unionists thought they would skoosh it and wanted to make it a straight Y/N question so they accepted that.

In 2017, it is obvious given the SNP's manifesto and ability to get a vote through parliament that another referendum is coming. This time the Unionists fear they might lose.

Your "quiet majority" chat is wishful thinking. There were a host of reasons to reject independence (including uncertainty over continuing EU membership and the hope of "safer, better, faster" change). There is Y->N switching going on over economic uncertainty (oil price) and Euroscepticism and there is N->Y switching going on over the EU and the prospect of endless Tory governments. It's going to be tight but there is room for a Yes win.

And your last sentence is just rubbish.

I didn't say I was ignoring the fact the Tories have positioned themselves as the champions of the union. As you say, political opportunism is rife on all sides but there's more to it than that. Those who decisively rejected independence in 2014 need a strong voice to stand up to the neverendum policy of the SNP and Ruth Davidson is doing a good job in that respect.

I also think my quiet majority 'chat' holds water when applied to the 2014 campaign. Based on the number of Yes stickers, posters and misappropriated Saltires on view you'd have assumed independence was a shoe-in. Yet, it was those living behind the windows without posters and driving cars without stickers who prevailed by a distance.

And why is my last sentence 'just rubbish'? My point is simply that with the SNP pursuing a mantra of independence above all else, the issue was bound to impact on the local elections.

[ronaldo7]

Mair pish fae the Tories.

18349

Also the Tory candidate for the Western Isles and his respect agenda.:greengrin

https://t.co/9KbcJJvcH0

Looks like the guy's been suspended.:aok:

https://t.co/vvrt2i9meq

[JeMeSouviens]

I didn't say I was ignoring the fact the Tories have positioned themselves as the champions of the union. As you say, political opportunism is rife on all sides but there's more to it than that. Those who decisively rejected independence in 2014 need a strong voice to stand up to the neverendum policy of the SNP and Ruth Davidson is doing a good job in that respect.

I also think my quiet majority 'chat' holds water when applied to the 2014 campaign. Based on the number of Yes stickers, posters and misappropriated Saltires on view you'd have assumed independence was a shoe-in. Yet, it was those living behind the windows without posters and driving cars without stickers who prevailed by a distance.


Based on the propaganda spun by Unionists since the result, you'd have assumed Scotland was a country with a massive solid block of Union Jack waving, Land-of-hope-and-glory singing true blue Brits (albeit behind their curtains). There are folk like that and Ruth Davidson does indeed stand up for them in strident tones. However, there are plenty of waverers as well. There were "not-yets" as well as firm "nos" and the Unionist side would be wise not to overlook that. (Which, to be fair they didn't last time hence "Project Fear" rather than anything other than a token attempt to sell the virtues of the union.) There was a majority against independence rather than a positive endorsement of the UK.



And why is my last sentence 'just rubbish'? My point is simply that with the SNP pursuing a mantra of independence above all else, the issue was bound to impact on the local elections.

Your last sentence:

"It's a pity that the local elections will be dominated not by local issues but by constitutional sniping, but the only party to blame for that is the SNP."

cf. Theresa May in February, while the Scot gov was still waiting for a response to its compromise proposals*, the SP vote hadn't even been called for, let alone debated and, as far as I can make out, nobody else had even started talking about the local elections:

"We will also be looking forward to the local elections in May, when voters across Scotland will have the chance to send a clear message to the SNP that they do not want a second independence referendum, by voting Scottish Conservative and Unionist".

Ok, maybe only the last clause is rubbish. :wink:



* afaik they're still waiting. And whether you think the proposals were set up to fail (Labour MEP David Martin doesn't think so) isn't it at least a bit less confrontational to send a response?

[One Day Soon]

Am I right in thinking that Sturgeon explicitly stated in the last Scottish Parliament elections that a vote for the SNP wasn't a vote for independence?

Yes, here's the quote: "A vote for the SNP is not a vote for another referendum. It is a vote to have Scotland's voice heard at Westminster." Guardian, 8th April 2015.

So now we are being told the same bull in a different election. That a vote for the SNP in Council elections isn't a vote for Indyref2. My ar5e it isn't.

Just like the votes of EU Remain voters like me have been hijacked and and turned into a pretext for Indyref2, Nats will do exactly the same with the votes they get in Council elections.

Twisting, turning, spinning, focusing on their own obsessions rather than getting on with what needs done. Not so different from Westminster after all...

[JeMeSouviens]

Am I right in thinking that Sturgeon explicitly stated in the last Scottish Parliament elections that a vote for the SNP wasn't a vote for independence?

Yes, here's the quote: "A vote for the SNP is not a vote for another referendum. It is a vote to have Scotland's voice heard at Westminster." Guardian, 8th April 2015.

So now we are being told the same bull in a different election. That a vote for the SNP in Council elections isn't a vote for Indyref2. My ar5e it isn't.

Just like the votes of EU Remain voters like me have been hijacked and and turned into a pretext for Indyref2, Nats will do exactly the same with the votes they get in Council elections.

Twisting, turning, spinning, focusing on their own obsessions rather than getting on with what needs done. Not so different from Westminster after all...

No, you're not. Check your dates. :wink:

[One Day Soon]

Based on the propaganda spun by Unionists since the result, you'd have assumed Scotland was a country with a massive solid block of Union Jack waving, Land-of-hope-and-glory singing true blue Brits (albeit behind their curtains). There are folk like that and Ruth Davidson does indeed stand up for them in strident tones. However, there are plenty of waverers as well. There were "not-yets" as well as firm "nos" and the Unionist side would be wise not to overlook that. (Which, to be fair they didn't last time hence "Project Fear" rather than anything other than a token attempt to sell the virtues of the union.) There was a majority against independence rather than a positive endorsement of the UK.



Your last sentence:

"It's a pity that the local elections will be dominated not by local issues but by constitutional sniping, but the only party to blame for that is the SNP."

cf. Theresa May in February, while the Scot gov was still waiting for a response to its compromise proposals*, the SP vote hadn't even been called for, let alone debated and, as far as I can make out, nobody else had even started talking about the local elections:

"We will also be looking forward to the local elections in May, when voters across Scotland will have the chance to send a clear message to the SNP that they do not want a second independence referendum, by voting Scottish Conservative and Unionist".

Ok, maybe only the last clause is rubbish. :wink:



* afaik they're still waiting. And whether you think the proposals were set up to fail (Labour MEP David Martin doesn't think so) isn't it at least a bit less confrontational to send a response?



By definition it was both.

[JeMeSouviens]

By definition it was both.

I suppose technically you're right but I think you know what I'm trying to get at.

[One Day Soon]

No, you're not. Check your dates. :wink:


You're quite right. It was the last UK General Election in 2015 she was referring to.

What did the SNP 2016 election manifesto commit to?

[One Day Soon]

I suppose technically you're right but I think you know what I'm trying to get at.


I do, which is why I am refuting it. I think you are taking a question that was kite-marked by the Electoral Commission and then putting your own spin on what it meant. The majority answer was No to Independence and Yes to the UK.

[JeMeSouviens]

You're quite right. It was the last UK General Election in 2015 she was referring to.

What did the SNP 2016 election manifesto commit to?

ronaldo will be along shortly with the wording but basically another referendum given either evidence of a big change of mind* or a material change in circumstances such as the UK leaving the EU when a majority of Scots voted to remain.


* Personally I thought that was a bit pish, how are you supposed to determine that, opinion polls? Thankfully the 2nd part is much clearer and we are in exactly those circumstances.

[Just Alf]

Those who decisively rejected independence in 2014 need a strong voice to stand up to the neverendum policy of the SNP and Ruth Davidson is doing a good job in that respect.

.

My in-laws both voted no last time, after discussion there were two critical reason top of their list. 1st was the promise that voting no was the only way to guarantee remaining in Europe and the 2nd was the big negative impact on their private pension if Scotland was independent.

They now have a very different view of things and look forward to the chance of "correcting" their vote after they felt they were hoodwinked previously.


Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[One Day Soon]

My in-laws both voted no last time, after discussion there were two critical reason top of their list. 1st was the promise that voting no was the only way to guarantee remaining in Europe and the 2nd was the big negative impact on their private pension if Scotland was independent.

They now have a very different view of things and look forward to the chance of "correcting" their vote after they felt they were hoodwinked previously.


Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk


My in-laws both voted Yes last time, after discussion there were two critical reasons top of their list. 1st was the SNP promise on Scotland's finances and how voting Yes was the only way to protect that 2nd was the big negative impact of Scotland staying in the EU with the UK.

They now have a very different view of things and look forward to the chance of "correcting" their vote after they felt they were hoodwinked previously. :wink:

[JeMeSouviens]

My in-laws both voted Yes last time, after discussion there were two critical reasons top of their list. 1st was the SNP promise on Scotland's finances and how voting Yes was the only way to protect that 2nd was the big negative impact of Scotland staying in the EU with the UK.

They now have a very different view of things and look forward to the chance of "correcting" their vote after they felt they were hoodwinked previously. :wink:

And happily, thanks to the Scottish Parliament endorsing a second referendum, your in-laws will get that chance! Everyone's a winner. :aok:

[JeMeSouviens]

I do, which is why I am refuting it. I think you are taking a question that was kite-marked by the Electoral Commission and then putting your own spin on what it meant. The majority answer was No to Independence and Yes to the UK.

Ok fair enough, stick to rigid black and white.

[ronaldo7]

ronaldo will be along shortly with the wording but basically another referendum given either evidence of a big change of mind* or a material change in circumstances such as the UK leaving the EU when a majority of Scots voted to remain.


* Personally I thought that was a bit pish, how are you supposed to determine that, opinion polls? Thankfully the 2nd part is much clearer and we are in exactly those circumstances.

Right to a Referendum

We believe that independence offers the best future for Scotland. However, Scotland will only become independent when a majority of people in Scotland choose that future in a democratic referendum – it will not happen just because the SNP wants it to, or because there is an SNP government.
At the same time if there is a clear demand for a referendum no politician has the right to stand in the way of the people of Scotland to choose their own future.

We believe that the Scottish Parliament should have the right to hold another referendum if there is clear and sustained evidence that
independence has become the preferred option of a majority of the Scottish people – or if there is a significant and material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2014, such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will.
In the next parliament, we will work hard to persuade a majority of the Scottish people that being an independent country is the best option for our country. We will listen to the concerns of people who voted No in 2014 and seek to address them. The case we make will be relevant to the complex world we live in today

Happy to help.:greengrin

[ronaldo7]

For those who have the time, BBC radio Scotland today at 12.30, Professor Richard Murphy discussing everyone's favourite political subject, GERS.

Kevin Hague, the Unionist blogger, and dog food salesman will be up against the Prof.

https://t.co/gb8MtvUMaw

Kevin Hague finally admits.

"Nobody suggests that the GERS figures suggest what a future independent Scotland would look like" - Kevin Hague, 2017

[One Day Soon]

Kevin Hague finally admits.

"Nobody suggests that the GERS figures suggest what a future independent Scotland would look like" - Kevin Hague, 2017


They are the Scottish Government's own figures showing what Scotland raises and spends right now though. That's the starting point.

[One Day Soon]

Right to a Referendum

We believe that independence offers the best future for Scotland. However, Scotland will only become independent when a majority of people in Scotland choose that future in a democratic referendum – it will not happen just because the SNP wants it to, or because there is an SNP government.
At the same time if there is a clear demand for a referendum no politician has the right to stand in the way of the people of Scotland to choose their own future.

We believe that the Scottish Parliament should have the right to hold another referendum if there is clear and sustained evidence that independence has become the preferred option of a majority of the Scottish people – or if there is a significant and material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2014, such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will.
In the next parliament, we will work hard to persuade a majority of the Scottish people that being an independent country is the best option for our country. We will listen to the concerns of people who voted No in 2014 and seek to address them. The case we make will be relevant to the complex world we live in today

Happy to help.:greengrin

Seems like the first point is in conflict with the second as there appears to be clear and sustained evidence that independence has not become the preferred option of a majority of the Scottish people.

[Hibrandenburg]

They are the Scottish Government's own figures showing what Scotland raises and spends right now though. That's the starting point.

Yes but without the ability for Scotland to set VAT, National Insurance or Corporation tax to suit Scottish needs the figures are meaningless.

[One Day Soon]

Yes but without the ability for Scotland to set VAT, National Insurance or Corporation tax to suit Scottish needs the figures are meaningless.


That's the get-out now for being unable to wish away giant deficit between what we raise and what we spend is it?

Can you point me to where Sturgeon or Swinney say that their own figures are meaningless? These are the same figures that they were so comfortable praying in aid of their financial case during Indyref BTW.

[JeMeSouviens]

Seems like the first point is in conflict with the second as there appears to be clear and sustained evidence that independence has not become the preferred option of a majority of the Scottish people.

You do know what "or" means, right?

[JeMeSouviens]

That's the get-out now for being unable to wish away giant deficit between what we raise and what we spend is it?

Can you point me to where Sturgeon or Swinney say that their own figures are meaningless? These are the same figures that they were so comfortable praying in aid of their financial case during Indyref BTW.

True, and the Scotgov is host by its own petard there. They were happy to use a dodgy bunch of estimates when they were boosted by a high oil price and looked better than the UK average.

But, as I'm sure you were told at primary school, 2 wrongs don't make it right. :wink:

[Moulin Yarns]

Kevin Hague finally admits.

"Nobody suggests that the GERS figures suggest what a future independent Scotland would look like" - Kevin Hague, 2017

I found this interesting piece about GERS


Why, when Scotland is a country with an embarrassment of economic advantages that any small to medium-sized independent country would give their left arm for, do we have a financial deficit greater than any other independent European nation of similar size? Why, if we really are Better Together and the basis of our economy is so strong are we not doing better than those we would benchmark against?Why, when being run from Westminster is supposed to be such an advantage, does GERS (the Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland) report clearly demonstrate that it isn’t. Look at benchmark nations, ones with a similar-sized population to Scotland that coexist in the same Western European geographic, economic and political environment, but are independent. According to GERS all Scotland’s benchmark independent EU members (and Norway) are financially better off than Scotland – how come?
Those nations would love to have Scotland’s oil and use it for the good of their own citizens, Norway is far more reliant on oil than Scotland, but it has been saving up for a rainy day and can increase investment to stimulate growth and save jobs by investing from its oil fund when the best the UK government did for Aberdeen was a city deal that involved less cash per head than Manchester, a city that by comparison is booming. Sure the UK Government gave big tax breaks to the big corporates that run the oil industry but the jobs still melted away, as always they help the big corporates and not the people.
Denmark would love to have a national drink that generated £120 of exports per second, that generates massive tax takes in the locations it is sold throughout the UK. Scotch whisky companies would gladly sell you a bottle of whisky for £4, the rest you pay is the UK tax.

Sitting in Edinburgh the city is alive with the Edinburgh Festival and Fringe, the world’s largest arts festival attracting 500,000 visitors and adding £261m to Scotland’s economy. Belgium would love to have such a tourist attraction, never mind the beauty of wild Scotland or golf tourism.
Ireland would kill to have Scotland’s online gaming industry which has grown over 600 per cent – GTA the world’s best-selling game is made in Scotland and industry experts claim the gaming sector could grow to be worth more to Scottish economy than oil ever was.
Sweden would like to match Scotland educationally, (according to the Office of National Statistics) the adult population of Scotland is the most educated in the whole of Europe. Forty-five per cent of people in Scotland aged between 25 and 64 have experienced tertiary education – including university degrees and further education. Luxembourg, Finland and Ireland (all benchmark independent nations) vie for second place as the only other countries to get more than 40 per cent.
Finland must be massively envious that Scotland possesses 25 per cent of the EU’s entire tidal and wave energy potential, a source of energy that doesn’t pollute, won’t run out and, given Aberdeen energy sector leadership, we are better placed than anyone else to create a world centre for renewable energy, but no – Westminster prefers nuclear.
We got lucky with oil and now again with renewables lets not make the same mistake and see either the sector under-invested in or milked by Westminster. As part of the UK billions that should have been invested in Scotland and the North East were siphoned away when we should have been investing in, diversifying and strengthening our economy instead of paying off UK debt – Westminster and the unionist media never said thanks for all those years when Scotland bailed the UK out with our surpluses, but now we have two years where our figures are worse than the UK’s apparently we are the basket case.



The simple fact is GERS figures tell us nothing about how Scotland would have fared as an independent country under the same circumstances, as we would have implemented bespoke economic policies, had different tax rates and with either a sovereign oil fund or massive capital investment – we would have a radically different fiscal starting place.
It does tell us that our core onshore economy is strong, growing £1.9bn in tough conditions. But to see how Scotland would fare as an independent nation look at every benchmark country and ask how, when added together they can hardly match Scotland’s economic advantages, do they somehow manage to have smaller financial deficits than Scotland.
The difference is they get to make decisions for themselves, the people who choose economic strategies and investment policies are those closest to the problems and opportunities of the country and with their country’s best interest at heart.

[Geo_1875]

They are the Scottish Government's own figures showing what Scotland raises and spends right now though. That's the starting point.

Only it's before the starting point which would include a "statement" of UK assets and liabilities. That deficit would be hugely reduced if UK assets were apportioned to Scotland on a similar basis. In fact, some say it might disappear altogether.

[Moulin Yarns]

Only it's before the starting point which would include a "statement" of UK assets and liabilities. That deficit would be hugely reduced if UK assets were apportioned to Scotland on a similar basis. In fact, some say it might disappear altogether.


Scotland's share has been estimated variously between £109 and £125 billion. so even at the lower end Scotland would start with a surplus, even taking account of some assets we would want to keep, but not including Trident, obviously, at somewhere north of £20 to 40 billion. not great, but not the deficit the doom-mongers would have you believe

[JeMeSouviens]

Only it's before the starting point which would include a "statement" of UK assets and liabilities. That deficit would be hugely reduced if UK assets were apportioned to Scotland on a similar basis. In fact, some say it might disappear altogether.

You're confusing debt and deficit. Debt is the historical **** mountain we'll inherit from the UK, deficit is the current rate of **** arriving on the mountain. Even if we reduce the mountain to a molehill we have to sort out the incoming **** rate to stop it becoming another mountain.

Or

we could stay in the union, hope we can sponge off the English and they don't notice. Self respect, who needs it? :wink:

[RyeSloan]

Scotland's share has been estimated variously between £109 and £125 billion. so even at the lower end Scotland would start with a surplus, even taking account of some assets we would want to keep, but not including Trident, obviously, at somewhere north of £20 to 40 billion. not great, but not the deficit the doom-mongers would have you believe

Are we not getting deficit and national debt mixed up here?

As for GERS...sure it's inaccurate but if it's so inaccurate and such an affront to the Independence cause there must be some way to at least estimate more accurate figures?

I really don't get the argument that the figures are 'nonsense' yet have no counter as to what might closer reflect reality.

[Moulin Yarns]

Are we not getting deficit and national debt mixed up here?

As for GERS...sure it's inaccurate but if it's so inaccurate and such an affront to the Independence cause there must be some way to at least estimate more accurate figures?

I really don't get the argument that the figures are 'nonsense' yet have no counter as to what might closer reflect reality.

The biggest problem in using, or disputing the GERS figures is that they reflect Scotland's fiscal performance in the UK.

[johnbc70]

Saw Nicola Sturgeons comments today and looks like they will give more detailed information on things like what currency Scotland would have. Just hope she does not say the UK pound and the UK government turn around and say no you can't. Hope that lesson has been learnt from last time.

A Yes we can, no you can't slanging match is not what we want again.

[IWasThere2016]

Did we not have those votes already? We voted No to independence and No to being part of the EU. Yes the second vote was a UK wide vote, but as per the first vote we voted to remain part of the UK hence why we also voted in the second.

Indeed - but if we are to vote on Indy again, I'd like it alongside the EU vote (particularly if another significant Country were to depart meantime)


I think this piece by Kenny Farquharson from the Times(not known for their Independence stance) was written just for you.:wink:

I've picked this bit from the article as it answers the questions you've asked.:greengrin

Let us take a step back here. The SNP won last year’s Holyrood election on a manifesto promise to consider a referendum if the UK voted for Brexit against Scotland’s wishes, a scenario that duly materialised. This position has since been backed by the Greens, making it the majority view of the Scottish parliament.
Holyrood therefore has a cast-iron mandate to hold a referendum before the end of the current parliamentary term. Objections that this was settled in 2014, in a vote described by the SNP as “once in a generation”, are trumped by the subsequent mandate the SNP sought and won. Voters can punish the SNP for bad faith at the next Holyrood election, if they so wish.

This is how democracy works, whether or not you like the result.

What part of it don't you understand?

https://t.co/8TrDvrnRHL

So, the NO/Remain vote then? And how does 'democracy' work in Brussels?

[johnbc70]

Indeed - but if we are to vote on Indy again, I'd like it alongside the EU vote (particularly if another significant Country were to depart meantime)


What if people voted No to Independence but Yes to EU membership? How would we deliver that?

Sorry if I am not following your logic.

[JeMeSouviens]

What if people voted No to Independence but Yes to EU membership? How would we deliver that?

Sorry if I am not following your logic.

Me neither. Of the previous 4 options No/Remain is no longer available. It's Yes/Remain, Yes/Leave or No/Leave.

I suppose you could have:

1. Should Scotland be an independent country?

2. If the result for Q1 is Y, should that country apply for EU membership?

[Hibrandenburg]

Me neither. Of the previous 4 options No/Remain is no longer available. It's Yes/Remain, Yes/Leave or No/Leave.

I suppose you could have:

1. Should Scotland be an independent country?

2. If the result for Q1 is Y, should that country apply for EU membership?

The simplest question should be:

Do you want Scotland to be an independent country that can decide its affairs for itself?

Or

Should Scotland let Westminster decide its affairs for us?

:wink:

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

You're quite right. It was the last UK General Election in 2015 she was referring to.

What did the SNP 2016 election manifesto commit to?

It commited to an undefined set of circumstances, that may or may not habe included brexit, thay would be determined by the SNP and would be enough for indyref2.

Of course they did worse electorally than last time, so have had to rely on the greens breaking their manifesto pledge to get their vote through parliament.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Yes but without the ability for Scotland to set VAT, National Insurance or Corporation tax to suit Scottish needs the figures are meaningless.

Funny, because when they are good they dont seem to be meaningless.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

The simplest question should be:

Do you want Scotland to be an independent country that can decide its affairs for itself?

Or

Should Scotland let Westminster decide its affairs for us?

:wink:


It should just be the same question, but personally i would like devo-max federalism optiob in there aswell. Cant see it though.

Anyway, there is no second ref until well afyer brexit, which from speaking to people i think most see that as reasonable. We want to see if brexit UK is better or worse, and then address the indy question from there.

I think i agree with this position.

[Moulin Yarns]

It should just be the same question, but personally i would like devo-max federalism optiob in there aswell. Cant see it though.

Anyway, there is no second ref until well afyer brexit, which from speaking to people i think most see that as reasonable. We want to see if brexit UK is better or worse, and then address the indy question from there.

I think i agree with this position.

You must be Theresa May and I claim my prize of a brand new pound coin. Nobody else knows when the referendum will be.

[ronaldo7]

Seems like the first point is in conflict with the second as there appears to be clear and sustained evidence that independence has not become the preferred option of a majority of the Scottish people.

Both bases were covered as well you know.

[ronaldo7]

Indeed - but if we are to vote on Indy again, I'd like it alongside the EU vote (particularly if another significant Country were to depart meantime)



So, the NO/Remain vote then? And how does 'democracy' work in Brussels?

We're still part of the UK are we not? That means the result was/is respected. Manifestos after that date can shape and change the landscape, as the 2016 SNP manifesto did.

As for Brussels, I'm sure you can google it. You'll find lots on it there.:aok:

[Hibrandenburg]

Funny, because when they are good they dont seem to be meaningless.

When they're good they're brilliant considering its a calculation designed to show Scotland's finances in an unflattering light.

[cabbageandribs1875]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-39580304


A Conservative candidate for May's council elections has been suspended from the party after posting "extremely offensive" online comments about First Minister Nicola Sturgeon.




sounds exactly like a few on here(four to be exact) that have made disparaging comments about the first minister of this wonderful country :aok:

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

You must be Theresa May and I claim my prize of a brand new pound coin. Nobody else knows when the referendum will be.

But she has said thats when it will be.

Things might change of course, but i doubt it.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

When they're good they're brilliant considering its a calculation designed to show Scotland's finances in an unflattering light.

Ill take your word on that.

[Moulin Yarns]

But she has said thats when it will be.

Things might change of course, but i doubt it.

You need to check. Theresa May has still not replied to the official request


As well you know

[ronaldo7]

In my constituency we've had leaflets from Labour and the Lib Dems so far, with both candidates making particular reference to the independence question and reaffirming that they are strongly opposed. We've also had a lengthy letter from Kezia Dugdale dedicated solely to Labour's stance against independence. I've not seen any literature from the Tories, SNP or the Greens yet so can't comment on what those candidates are prioritising.


Which constituency are you in?

I'm interested in what these local councillors are saying. Can you name them, or your constituency/ward?

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

You need to check. Theresa May has still not replied to the official request


As well you know

Well ive seen her, amd the secretary of state for Scotland say it wont happen until after brexit, with mundell taking it further amd saying until the outcomes are known (or words to that effect)

Whether or not there has been any official reply, i dont know but i havent seem or heard anything so we have to assume not.

[snooky]

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15221099.Sturgeon_has__quot_lost_the_plot_quot__on _referendum__claims_LibDem_leader/?ref=mrb&lp=13

Kettle says teapot has lost the plot. :crazy:

[JeMeSouviens]

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15221099.Sturgeon_has__quot_lost_the_plot_quot__on _referendum__claims_LibDem_leader/?ref=mrb&lp=13

Kettle says teapot has lost the plot. :crazy:

http://viz.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Screen-Shot-2014-10-16-at-09.55.41.png

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

http://viz.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Screen-Shot-2014-10-16-at-09.55.41.png

Its hard to dislike willie rennie, but a political heavyweight he will never be!!

[Moulin Yarns]

Its hard to dislike willie rennie, but a political heavyweight he will never be!!

There was me thinking it was Jeremy Corbyn.

[ronaldo7]

In my constituency we've had leaflets from Labour and the Lib Dems so far, with both candidates making particular reference to the independence question and reaffirming that they are strongly opposed. We've also had a lengthy letter from Kezia Dugdale dedicated solely to Labour's stance against independence. I've not seen any literature from the Tories, SNP or the Greens yet so can't comment on what those candidates are prioritising.

Any chance of that info? :aok:

It wasn't this guy, was it?

https://t.co/D3SwTWn8GA

[Jack]

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15221099.Sturgeon_has__quot_lost_the_plot_quot__on _referendum__claims_LibDem_leader/?ref=mrb&lp=13

Kettle says teapot has lost the plot. :crazy:

He reminds me of the big boy in the nursery who gets over excited when his favourite game is being played. Hard to believe he's 49 going on 50 and not 4 going on 5.

I think he may be right about the LibDems improving their position from previous elections though. But then only the Libdems could contrive to sink further than rock bottom!

[ronaldo7]

In my constituency we've had leaflets from Labour and the Lib Dems so far, with both candidates making particular reference to the independence question and reaffirming that they are strongly opposed. We've also had a lengthy letter from Kezia Dugdale dedicated solely to Labour's stance against independence. I've not seen any literature from the Tories, SNP or the Greens yet so can't comment on what those candidates are prioritising.


Which constituency are you in?


I'm interested in what these local councillors are saying. Can you name them, or your constituency/ward?

Anything yet GB? The elections are getting close now:greengrin

[stoneyburn hibs]

anything yet gb? The elections are getting close now:greengrin

sw1a 2aa 😁

[ronaldo7]

sw1a 2aa 😁

:faf:

[heretoday]

It should just be the same question, but personally i would like devo-max federalism optiob in there aswell. Cant see it though.

Anyway, there is no second ref until well afyer brexit, which from speaking to people i think most see that as reasonable. We want to see if brexit UK is better or worse, and then address the indy question from there.

I think i agree with this position.

Hear hear. It might not be too bad for Scotland. And so a giant step in the dark like Indy won't be required. Or is that what Nicola is frightened of?

[HiBremian]

Hear hear. It might not be too bad for Scotland. And so a giant step in the dark like Indy won't be required. Or is that what Nicola is frightened of?

Brexit is a "giant step in the dark". It's now about which darkness you prefer, the Tory variety or the Indy variety.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Brexit is a "giant step in the dark". It's now about which darkness you prefer, the Tory variety or the Indy variety.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

But its quite a leap to make the case to people that you can mitigate the effects of one leap into the dark, by taking anorher even more disruptive and radical leap into fhe dark at the same time.

The sensible option for most will be, imo, to wait amd see how things pan out.

As yesterday showed, there is much that can happen and muxh water to flow under the bridge still.

[heretoday]

Brexit is a "giant step in the dark". It's now about which darkness you prefer, the Tory variety or the Indy variety.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yes but you don't know that the Tory variety will be as dark as all that. Wait and see is what I'm saying.

The trouble is that folk like Nicola have Indy in their veins and want it tomorrow whether it's good for us or not.

[pacoluna]

But its quite a leap to make the case to people that you can mitigate the effects of one leap into the dark, by taking anorher even more disruptive and radical leap into fhe dark at the same time.

The sensible option for most will be, imo, to wait amd see how things pan out.

As yesterday showed, there is much that can happen and muxh water to flow under the bridge still.

Not sensible at all giving the fact scotland don't want BREXIT or a conservative government, But to hell with it we cant do anything about it anyway :rolleyes:.. or we could take an alternative route, one that the Scottish electorate has voted for!

cue the response - it was a UK vote.

[HiBremian]

Yes but you don't know that the Tory variety will be as dark as all that. Wait and see is what I'm saying.

The trouble is that folk like Nicola have Indy in their veins and want it tomorrow whether it's good for us or not.

If indyref1 showed anything, it was that the unionist side won on the "not interested in politics", "wait and see", "don't rock the boat" set of tickets as much as project fear. Regardless of indy, I'd say the sensible thing to do these days is to pay attention. There's a general election coming. :-)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

Not sensible at all giving the fact scotland don't want BREXIT or a conservative government, But to hell with we cant do anything about it anyway :rolleyes:.. or we could take an alternative route, one that the Scottish electorate has voted for!

cue the response - it was a UK vote.

One of the things the Unionist side like to raise is the oft quoted 30% of SNP voters voted to Leave the EU. What isn't mentioned is the obviously higher proportion of referendum No voters that voted to remain in the EU.

This election in June will be fought in Scotland on both Independence and Brexit and it will be interesting to see which way the pendulum swings.

[JeMeSouviens]

But its quite a leap to make the case to people that you can mitigate the effects of one leap into the dark, by taking anorher even more disruptive and radical leap into fhe dark at the same time.

The sensible option for most will be, imo, to wait amd see how things pan out.

As yesterday showed, there is much that can happen and muxh water to flow under the bridge still.

Personally, when in a ship heading for the rocks I'd rather take my chances in the lifeboat than "see how it pans out".

[pacoluna]

One of the things the Unionist side like to raise is the oft quoted 30% of SNP voters voted to Leave the EU. What isn't mentioned is the obviously higher proportion of referendum No voters that voted to remain in the EU.

This election in June will be fought in Scotland on both Independence and Brexit and it will be interesting to see which way the pendulum swings.
Scottish Tories seem to be confident that they will gain seats, Can anyone tell me what constituencies could swing to the tories? I see this is an opportunity for scotland to be Tory free .. what is more probable?

They will act triumphant and claim a change of electorate persuasion if they get 2 seats! after all it will be a 100% improvement on the one they have. They have literally nothing to lose in Scotland adding to the political opportunism that they are exploiting

[Moulin Yarns]

Scottish Tories seem to be confident that they will gain seats, Can anyone tell me what constituencies could swing to the tories? I see this is an opportunity for scotland to be Tory free .. what is more probable?

They will act triumphant and claim a change of electorate persuasion if they get 2 seats! after all it will be a 100% improvement on the one they have. They have literally nothing to lose in Scotland adding to the political opportunism that they are exploiting

Here are the SNP targets

Dumfiresshire, Clydesdale and TweeddaleCON 20,759 SNP 19,961
Edinburgh South LAB 19,293 SNP 16,656(Hearts *******!)
Orkney and Shetland LIB DEM 9,407 SNP8,590

Most at risk SNP seat
Berwickshire, Roxburgh &Selkirk – SNP majority only 328 over the Tories….. but it's a 3 way fight with LibDems


SNP seats where Cons were second


Aberdeenshire West andKincardine SNP 22,949 CON 15,016
Angus SNP 24,130 CON 12,900

Banff and Buchan SNP 27,487 CON13,148
Dumfries and Galloway SNP 23,440CON 16,926
Moray SNP 24,384 CON 15,319
Perth and North Perthshire SNP27,379 CON 17,738

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Not sensible at all giving the fact scotland don't want BREXIT or a conservative government, But to hell with it we cant do anything about it anyway :rolleyes:.. or we could take an alternative route, one that the Scottish electorate has voted for!

cue the response - it was a UK vote.

But voting indy now wont stop brexit. It has happened, and whatever happens with Scotland now, we will leave the EU in some form or another (or certainly most likely).

If Scotland is to become an independent nation, i want it to be a positice decision made by a good majority of the people from a position of informed strength.

Not some vague proposition rushed through as a reaction to somehing else you dont like.

Also, if there is a vote, and it is lost, that is a potentially mortal blow to the indy campaign for a long time. Why take that risk?

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Personally, when in a ship heading for the rocks I'd rather take my chances in the lifeboat than "see how it pans out".

Yeah but once you are on the lifeboat, you cant reverse the decision.

If you hold off, you cam see how the rocks affect the ship, then jump on the lifeboat of you meed to.

Afterall, a big ship is more likely to withstand a collision with those rocks than a lifebaot.

I think i may habe ovrdone your metaphor i tad....!

[Moulin Yarns]

Yeah but once you are on the lifeboat, you cant reverse the decision.

If you hold off, you cam see how the rocks affect the ship, then jump on the lifeboat of you meed to.

Afterall, a big ship is more likely to withstand a collision with those rocks than a lifebaot.

I think i may habe ovrdone your metaphor i tad....!

I'll keep the metaphor going, the lifeboat is smaller and more manouverable through the rocks compared the huge lumbering ship that is difficult to change direction.

Anyway, the BBC (I know) has a decent bit of analysis on the Scottish angle (I really can't believe I said that!!)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-39632813?intlink_from_url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-39628713&link_location=live-reporting-story

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Scottish Tories seem to be confident that they will gain seats, Can anyone tell me what constituencies could swing to the tories? I see this is an opportunity for scotland to be Tory free .. what is more probable?

They will act triumphant and claim a change of electorate persuasion if they get 2 seats! after all it will be a 100% improvement on the one they have. They have literally nothing to lose in Scotland adding to the political opportunism that they are exploiting

I dont think scottish tories will make big strides, i doubt that they do either.

But to make strides in a fptp system, you have to make gains in vote share over a few elections, generally. And so for the tories, if for example they could half the majorities in snp / tory marginals, that would be success as it woyld bring those seats into play at the next again election.

The way the SNP landalide happened, and its extent meant that no party, not even labour, could make a huge dent on those gains in one election, unless something amazing amd very unlikely happened.

Rhe only downside for the nats is that they habe very little to gain, so startling was their success last time.

They could unseat mundell maybe, possibly win edinburfh south but thats a three way marginal i think, and orkney / shetland is unlikely to change.

[JeMeSouviens]

Yeah but once you are on the lifeboat, you cant reverse the decision.

If you hold off, you cam see how the rocks affect the ship, then jump on the lifeboat of you meed to.

Afterall, a big ship is more likely to withstand a collision with those rocks than a lifebaot.

I think i may habe ovrdone your metaphor i tad....!

If you hold off the lifeboat might be lost in the wreckage, or you so badly wounded you can't get to it. The effect of rocks on ships is fairly predictable.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

If you hold off the lifeboat might be lost in the wreckage, or you so badly wounded you can't get to it. The effect of rocks on ships is fairly predictable.

Yeah but the original big ship might have the power to get away from the rocks, as it has the 5th or 6th biggest engines in rhe world.

It seems this metaphor doesnt help!

As a general rule, if there are two courses of action, one of which is quick but irreversable, the other is more considered, but doesnt preclude you getting to the same place anyway, i think most people take the second option.

[JeMeSouviens]

I dont think scottish tories will make big strides, i doubt that they do either.

But to make strides in a fptp system, you have to make gains in vote share over a few elections, generally. And so for the tories, if for example they could half the majorities in snp / tory marginals, that would be success as it woyld bring those seats into play at the next again election.

The way the SNP landalide happened, and its extent meant that no party, not even labour, could make a huge dent on those gains in one election, unless something amazing amd very unlikely happened.

Rhe only downside for the nats is that they habe very little to gain, so startling was their success last time.

They could unseat mundell maybe, possibly win edinburfh south but thats a three way marginal i think, and orkney / shetland is unlikely to change.

I think the Tories will win maybe 3 or 4 gains and hold onto Mundell which, given the disaster they're starting from, will be heralded from the rooftops by a compliant media as a triumphant return to form.

The SNP result last time was stellar. Anything around or above 40 seats should be seen as a spectacularly good result but you can bet your last $ it won't get reported like that. I think they'll hold the vast majority of their seats. The Tories have somewhat consolidated the Unionist vote behind them, the Libs might get a small Brexit revival (bigger down South) and Labour (everywhere) might as well reach for the whisky and revolvers now ...

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I think the Tories will win maybe 3 or 4 gains and hold onto Mundell which, given the disaster they're starting from, will be heralded from the rooftops by a compliant media as a triumphant return to form.

The SNP result last time was stellar. Anything around or above 40 seats should be seen as a spectacularly good result but you can bet your last $ it won't get reported like that. I think they'll hold the vast majority of their seats. The Tories have somewhat consolidated the Unionist vote behind them, the Libs might get a small Brexit revival (bigger down South) and Labour (everywhere) might as well reach for the whisky and revolvers now ...

I agree on the SNP, its the downside of doing so well. Still a downside all would be happy to deal with though.

[JeMeSouviens]

Yeah but the original big ship might have the power to get away from the rocks, as it has the 5th or 6th biggest engines in rhe world.

It seems this metaphor doesnt help!

As a general rule, if there are two courses of action, one of which is quick but irreversable, the other is more considered, but doesnt preclude you getting to the same place anyway, i think most people take the second option.

Veering off metaphor, it never ceases to amaze me how much store people put in this largest economy stuff. Large population, large economy, who cares? Would you really rather wave the UK's willy against Switzerland's or Norway's?

Per capita, UK GDP Is 25th - http://statisticstimes.com/economy/gdp-capita-ranking-2017.php

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Veering off metaphor, it never ceases to amaze me how much store people put in this largest economy stuff. Large population, large economy, who cares? Would you really rather wave the UK's willy against Switzerland's or Norway's?

Per capita, UK GDP Is 25th - http://statisticstimes.com/economy/gdp-capita-ranking-2017.php

Not necessarily, but the point is that isnt the choice. It is to leave a successful country, to jump into the unknown...

[PeeJay]

I think the Tories will win maybe 3 or 4 gains and hold onto Mundell which, given the disaster they're starting from, will be heralded from the rooftops by a compliant media as a triumphant return to form.

The SNP result last time was stellar. Anything around or above 40 seats should be seen as a spectacularly good result but you can bet your last $ it won't get reported like that.

This baffles me: If what you suggests happens and the SNP result is clearly significantly down (-26%) from the last election, how could you possibly suggest it is a "spectacularly good result"? :confused:

[makaveli1875]

Not necessarily, but the point is that isnt the choice. It is to leave a successful country, to jump into the unknown...

if the SNP are to be believed its not a jump into the unknown .
Super sturgeon is going to eradicate poverty , reverse all tory cuts , increase public spending and make us all the masters of our own destiny. She is going to pay for it all with chocolate buttons

[Moulin Yarns]

if the SNP are to be believed its not a jump into the unknown .
Super sturgeon is going to eradicate poverty , reverse all tory cuts , increase public spending and make us all the masters of our own destiny. She is going to pay for it all with chocolate buttons

Good to see the debate has reached a new level, pity it is downwards.:rolleyes:

[JeMeSouviens]

if the SNP are to be believed its not a jump into the unknown .
Super sturgeon is going to eradicate poverty , reverse all tory cuts , increase public spending and make us all the masters of our own destiny. She is going to pay for it all with chocolate buttons

If you haven't got anything grown up to contribute, any chance you could just go and play with your crayons or something?

[JeMeSouviens]

This baffles me: If what you suggests happens and the SNP result is clearly significantly down (-26%) from the last election, how could you possibly suggest it is a "spectacularly good result"? :confused:

If HIbs were to go and beat Celtic 6-0 at Parkhead then next season "only" beat them 4-0, would you consider that a spectacularly good result or not?

[makaveli1875]

If you haven't got anything grown up to contribute, any chance you could just go and play with your crayons or something?

i cant afford crayons because the big bad tories stole all my oil and benefits

[JeMeSouviens]

Not necessarily, but the point is that isnt the choice. It is to leave a successful country, to jump into the unknown...

Successful as in previously extremely successful but in long term decline and having recently turned on a very dubious course.

Unknown yes, but with all the tools necessary to flourish and a host of helpful friends ready to offer encouragement.

[JeMeSouviens]

i cant afford crayons because the big bad tories stole all my oil and benefits

:yawn2:

[marinello59]

i cant afford crayons because the big bad tories stole all my oil and benefits

No need is there? People on both sides are having some decent and respectful debate. Just stay clear if you can't do that.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Successful as in previously extremely successful but in long term decline and having recently turned on a very dubious course.

Unknown yes, but with all the tools necessary to flourish and a host of helpful friends ready to offer encouragement.

Granted, but that takes me back to my original point, about mitigating one dubious choice with another (potentially) dubious choice.

Or we could wait and and see how that dubious course plays out, and then make a more informed and considered choice, rather than reacting to something that we dont know how will play out, or even if it will happen as we all believe (GE could precipitate a 'soft brexit'?)

[JeMeSouviens]

Granted, but that takes me back to my original point, about mitigating one dubious choice with another (potentially) dubious choice.

Or we could wait and and see how that dubious course plays out, and then make a more informed and considered choice, rather than reacting to something that we dont know how will play out, or even if it will happen as we all believe (GE could precipitate a 'soft brexit'?)

Yeah, we're going round in circles. If we do get stuck in the UK then I hope I'm wrong and Brexit isn't the disaster I fully expect it to be but for now I'm in Pte Fraser mode ...

[G B Young]

If HIbs were to go and beat Celtic 6-0 at Parkhead then next season "only" beat them 4-0, would you consider that a spectacularly good result or not?

I don't think that's a valid comparison, hypothetical as it may be. If you're comparing Scottish political parties to football teams and the clout they carry in terms of seats, then the SNP are Celtic. For Hibs (or indeed any other Scottish team) to win 6-0 at Parkhead would be equivalent to the Tories winning a majority of Scottish seats ie neither event will ever happen.

If the SNP were to win only 40 or so seats this time that would surely rank as a near humiliation given it's only two years since they won all but three and bearing in mind the in-built advantage the first past the post system gives them? Assuming they retain the default 'yes' vote then they should again win in all but a handful of constituencies. Shambolic as Labour are, I just can't see enough of their voters defecting to the Tories to enable the unionist vote amounting to significant seat-winning numbers. Wonderful as it would be to think voter anger at the SNP's wearisome obsession with a new referendum could deal them a bloody nose at the ballot box, it seems all but certain things will change not a jot in terms of Scotland's political landscape.

[PeeJay]

If HIbs were to go and beat Celtic 6-0 at Parkhead then next season "only" beat them 4-0, would you consider that a spectacularly good result or not?

I wasn't sure how a 26% loss of a vote can be deemed to be a "spectacularly good result" - your response hasn't really enlightened me ... :greengrin

[JeMeSouviens]

I don't think that's a valid comparison, hypothetical as it may be. If you're comparing Scottish political parties to football teams and the clout they carry in terms of seats, then the SNP are Celtic. For Hibs (or indeed any other Scottish team) to win 6-0 at Parkhead would be equivalent to the Tories winning a majority of Scottish seats ie neither event will ever happen.

If the SNP were to win only 40 or so seats this time that would surely rank as a near humiliation given it's only two years since they won all but three and bearing in mind the in-built advantage the first past the post system gives them? Assuming they retain the default 'yes' vote then they should again win in all but a handful of constituencies. Shambolic as Labour are, I just can't see enough of their voters defecting to the Tories to enable the unionist vote amounting to significant seat-winning numbers. Wonderful as it would be to think voter anger at the SNP's wearisome obsession with a new referendum could deal them a bloody nose at the ballot box, it seems all but certain things will change not a jot in terms of Scotland's political landscape.

Jeez some folk have short memories. In 2010 the SNP won 6 seats. By historical standards that wasn't a bad result, the most they'd *ever* won was 11. Until 2014 anybody suggesting the SNP would ever win a majority of Westminster seats, let alone all but 3, would have been locked up.

Some context please!

[JeMeSouviens]

I wasn't sure how a 26% loss of a vote can be deemed to be a "spectacularly good result" - your response hasn't really enlightened me ... :greengrin

A 26% loss of seats could be achieved with no loss of vote, such are the vagaries of fptp. If the Unionist vote coalesces behind the Tories.

I have no idea why you weren't enlightened. I don't really see how I could make it simpler. By all means disagree but it would be nice if you didn't play dumb.

[Smartie]

Granted, but that takes me back to my original point, about mitigating one dubious choice with another (potentially) dubious choice.

Or we could wait and and see how that dubious course plays out, and then make a more informed and considered choice, rather than reacting to something that we dont know how will play out, or even if it will happen as we all believe (GE could precipitate a 'soft brexit'?)

I think the point is that in 2014 we were faced with a stark choice - something safe, comfortable and nice or a mystery box that nobody quite knew what it contained.

The safe, comfortable and nice option is a bit less certain now, so the mystery box MAY to some people just be a bit less unappealing.

I was a mystery box man then, and I'm a mystery box man now. Or a lifeboat man, if you would prefer.

I think that if the GE did precipitate a "soft brexit" then it would be of far greater comfort to many people and may well stop Independence in its tracks.

[Swedish hibee]

I laugh every time "Norway" is mentioned by the independent supporters. Scotland can never be like Norway- the set up & mind set of the Norwegians are totally different to that of the Scots. From tax, housing, to education, health care, child care, fitness..
I have friends who do 'normal' jobs that pay 40% plus tax.

[Smartie]

I wasn't sure how a 26% loss of a vote can be deemed to be a "spectacularly good result" - your response hasn't really enlightened me ... :greengrin

There are different variations on a good result.

The result for the SNP at the last election was super-fandabidozi-extra-wonderful (add as many superlatives as you wish to emphasise how good its was).

They may not do as well next time, but could still be way beyond the "no too bad" level of general acceptability to be found in Scotland.

But no doubt a rabid right wing press and triumphant Unionists would paint a very good result as some sort of failure.

[Peevemor]

I laugh every time "Norway" is mentioned by the independent supporters. Scotland can never be like Norway- the set up & mind set of the Norwegians are totally different to that of the Scots. From tax, housing, to education, health care, child care, fitness..
I have friends who do 'normal' jobs that pay 40% plus tax.

It's not how much tax you pay that matters to most people, it's how much you take home and the spending power that it gives you.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_countries_by_average_wage

[allmodcons]

I don't think that's a valid comparison, hypothetical as it may be. If you're comparing Scottish political parties to football teams and the clout they carry in terms of seats, then the SNP are Celtic. For Hibs (or indeed any other Scottish team) to win 6-0 at Parkhead would be equivalent to the Tories winning a majority of Scottish seats ie neither event will ever happen.

If the SNP were to win only 40 or so seats this time that would surely rank as a near humiliation given it's only two years since they won all but three and bearing in mind the in-built advantage the first past the post system gives them? Assuming they retain the default 'yes' vote then they should again win in all but a handful of constituencies. Shambolic as Labour are, I just can't see enough of their voters defecting to the Tories to enable the unionist vote amounting to significant seat-winning numbers. Wonderful as it would be to think voter anger at the SNP's wearisome obsession with a new referendum could deal them a bloody nose at the ballot box, it seems all but certain things will change not a jot in terms of Scotland's political landscape.

None more so wearisome than you and your right wing Tory friends.
I mean, ffs, the Conservatives are standing for the council elections on a "stop Indyref2" ticket!!! Ask yourself, who is it that's wearisome and obsessed?
What a message at the council elections, "**** local issues let's save the Union".

[JeMeSouviens]

I laugh every time "Norway" is mentioned by the independent supporters. Scotland can never be like Norway- the set up & mind set of the Norwegians are totally different to that of the Scots. From tax, housing, to education, health care, child care, fitness..
I have friends who do 'normal' jobs that pay 40% plus tax.

Granted it's a distant prospect, but "never"? Is there any harm in a long term aspiration?

[ronaldo7]

Jeez some folk have short memories. In 2010 the SNP won 6 seats. By historical standards that wasn't a bad result, the most they'd *ever* won was 11. Until 2014 anybody suggesting the SNP would ever win a majority of Westminster seats, let alone all but 3, would have been locked up.

Some context please!

Spot on.

I said pre 2015 if we could get 30 seats we'd be delighted. To get 56 was astounding. We can but try again though.

[Swedish hibee]

Granted it's a distant prospect, but "never"? Is there any harm in a long term aspiration?

You can aspire to anything always- but reality needs to be spoken.

[G B Young]

Jeez some folk have short memories. In 2010 the SNP won 6 seats. By historical standards that wasn't a bad result, the most they'd *ever* won was 11. Until 2014 anybody suggesting the SNP would ever win a majority of Westminster seats, let alone all but 3, would have been locked up.

Some context please!

The context is the 2014 referendum and massive shift in the Scottish political landscape in brought with it. Its legacy is an entrenched division of our nation and one that the SNP thrive on by continuing to stoke the flames of independence. There's simply no comparison to the lie of the land in 2010.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I think the point is that in 2014 we were faced with a stark choice - something safe, comfortable and nice or a mystery box that nobody quite knew what it contained.

The safe, comfortable and nice option is a bit less certain now, so the mystery box MAY to some people just be a bit less unappealing.

I was a mystery box man then, and I'm a mystery box man now. Or a lifeboat man, if you would prefer.

I think that if the GE did precipitate a "soft brexit" then it would be of far greater comfort to many people and may well stop Independence in its tracks.

Yeah i agree with that.

I also agree that the safe union options looks a lot less safe, hence why the SNP are so emboldened and why they want to rush through another vote soon.

I have always felt that there is something incongruous about May since becoming PM. I wonder whether she is actually been playing to the audience a tad (her own right wing). So it will be fascinating to see if she secures a good majority amd mandate, how that plays out.

But i do still suspect that she may have some more surprises up her sleeve re brexit. Maybe thats why 'now is not the time'.

I dont know anything, just pure speculation on my part, but the rush to hard brexit has always seeemed a bit odd to me.

[pacoluna]

The context is the 2014 referendum and massive shift in the Scottish political landscape in brought with it. Its legacy is an entrenched division of our nation and one that the SNP thrive on by continuing to stoke the flames of independence. There's simply no comparison to the lie of the land in 2010.
One thing's for sure my generation are now engaged in politics more than any other generation before in Scotland.. Perhaps that's why the political landscape will never be the same again?

Demographics is on the side of nationalists.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

One thing's for sure my generation are now engaged in politics more than any other generation before in Scotland.. Perhaps that's why the political landscape will never be the same again?

Demographics is on the side of nationalists.

Not really. We are an ageing country surely?

[pacoluna]

Not really. We are an ageing country surely?
A Generational shift IMO makes independence a certainty.

Younger population are more inclined to vote for independence . Don't think there is any debate regarding that.

[JeMeSouviens]

Not really. We are an ageing country surely?

Depends whether you think the huge concentration of No voters in the over 60s is because they are of their time, ie. a time when Britain had not long fought a war, survived its aftermath, built the NHS and welfare state etc, or because there is a natural tendency to a "safety first" outlook as you get older.

All current polling puts all other age groups as Yes majority, so Unionists better hope it is either the latter or they are about to drum up some mighty powers of persuasion they haven't shown so far. :wink:

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Depends whether you think the huge concentration of No voters in the over 60s is because they are of their time, ie. a time when Britain had not long fought a war, survived its aftermath, built the NHS and welfare state etc, or because there is a natural tendency to a "safety first" outlook as you get older.

All current polling puts all other age groups as Yes majority, so Unionists better hope it is either the latter or they are about to drum up some mighty powers of persuasion they haven't shown so far. :wink:

Or it could be that people get more conservatibe and less radical as they get older?

Either could be right.

Bit demographics wont win it, because we are an ageing society.

Its not like in NI where i believe the republicans are, to put it very crudely, simply outbreeding the unionists?