SNP are lying b******s as well !

[grunt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I came to that conclusion because if the EU factor was a major issue it would have scored higher than most of the other major issues, it didn't.

You're not paying attention.

[He's here!]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Cut a deal??? Where is your proof? 1 vote, out of more than 20. Go on prove that the single vote was an snp vote!!!

There's nothing to 'prove'. The irrefutable fact is that the SNP agreed to vote with the Tories. Without that agreement Thatcher would obviously not have gone ahead with the vote of no confidence. It wasn't as though there was a sharp intake of breath as the 'Tartan Tories' walked through the lobby with the Tories. She knew she had them in her pocket.

As Callaghan put it during the no-confidence debate: "We can truly say that once the Leader of the Opposition discovered what the Liberals and the SNP would do, she found the courage of their convictions. So, tonight, the Conservative Party, which wants the Act repealed and opposes even devolution, will march through the Lobby with the SNP, which wants independence for Scotland, and with the Liberals, who want to keep the Act. What a massive display of unsullied principle! The minority parties have walked into a trap. If they win, there will be a general election. I am told that the current joke going around the House is that it is the first time in recorded history that turkeys have been known to vote for an early Christmas."

[He's here!]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Maybe you could read this from someone who was there. It might refresh your memory.

It might even give you an incite into what actually happened. The deal that could have kept Callaghan in government which they decided not to do, and much more. Poor old Alfred Broughton was told not to bother turning up for the vote.

I get that Britnats will want to bash the Scotnats at all times, but their was too much going on in 1979, and the proceeding years to pin it all on the SNP, although that's been your want.

Happy reading.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...-1979-thatcher

The post you've replied to was in relation to Salmond's once in a generation/lifetime quote, but thanks for this anyway. I've read that Hattersley piece before but will do so again when I have time to wade through it as I remember it being excellent. I've also seen James Graham's play This House, which relates to the Broughton issue and is also superb. Hard to imagine such honour among whips these days.

I've never suggested the downfall of that Labour government could all be pinned on the SNP. However, there's simply no way of getting round the fact they voted with the Tories and in doing so helped to hasten the election which ushered in the Thatcher era.

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

There's nothing to 'prove'. The irrefutable fact is that the SNP agreed to vote with the Tories. Without that agreement Thatcher would obviously not have gone ahead with the vote of no confidence. It wasn't as though there was a sharp intake of breath as the 'Tartan Tories' walked through the lobby with the Tories. She knew she had them in her pocket.

As Callaghan put it during the no-confidence debate: "We can truly say that once the Leader of the Opposition discovered what the Liberals and the SNP would do, she found the courage of their convictions. So, tonight, the Conservative Party, which wants the Act repealed and opposes even devolution, will march through the Lobby with the SNP, which wants independence for Scotland, and with the Liberals, who want to keep the Act. What a massive display of unsullied principle! The minority parties have walked into a trap. If they win, there will be a general election. I am told that the current joke going around the House is that it is the first time in recorded history that turkeys have been known to vote for an early Christmas."

I don't suppose the defections of 3 labour mps in 1976 would have helped 🤣🤣🤣

Or indeed the lib-lab pact hadn't collapsed in 1978

Or maybe, just maybe, a Labour mp in England hadn't rigged the devolution referendum in March 1979.


If all of these things hadn't happened before the vote of confidence in Callaghan's government then thatcher might have been a bit more cautious about calling the VOC.

But, of course it's all the SNP fault 🙄

[Hibrandenburg]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Eh? Not even 2 out of 10 people said it was a major issue. That makes it NOT a major factor for the vast majority by some considerable margin.

Eh! 2 out of 10 is 20%. In a vote that ended 55% to 45% that makes it a huge factor.

[James310]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Eh! 2 out of 10 is 20%. In a vote that ended 55% to 45% that makes it a huge factor.

What?

Sure ok it was a massive issue and scored above Pensions, the economy, the NHS, the pound, defence and security and tax and public spending.

I mean it's such a huge issue now that the polls for Yes have moved significantly since 2016 and then the disaster that is Brexit.

[Hibrandenburg]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

What?

Sure ok it was a massive issue and scored above Pensions, the economy, the NHS, the pound, defence and security and tax and public spending.

I mean it's such a huge issue now that the polls for Yes have moved significantly since 2016 and then the disaster that is Brexit.

If 20% of the electorate were swayed by the fact (for fact read lie) that voting no meant Scotland would stay in the EU then that has major implications for the validity of the last referendum. If that fact (lie) was why 20% voted for No, then it had a major impact on the results of the 2014 referendum.

[James310]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If 20% of the electorate were swayed by the fact (for fact read lie) that voting no meant Scotland would stay in the EU then that has major implications for the validity of the last referendum. If that fact (lie) was why 20% voted for No, then it had a major impact on the results of the 2014 referendum.

It wasn't 20% it was 15% of No voters who said it was in the top 2 or 3 major issues. Which means it wasn't a top 2 or 3 major issue for 85% of No voters.

It wasn't a lie as in 2014 nobody could predict the future.

But believe whatever you like.

[ronaldo7]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The post you've replied to was in relation to Salmond's once in a generation/lifetime quote, but thanks for this anyway. I've read that Hattersley piece before but will do so again when I have time to wade through it as I remember it being excellent. I've also seen James Graham's play This House, which relates to the Broughton issue and is also superb. Hard to imagine such honour among whips these days.

I've never suggested the downfall of that Labour government could all be pinned on the SNP. However, there's simply no way of getting round the fact they voted with the Tories and in doing so helped to hasten the election which ushered in the Thatcher era.

I suppose if labour had done the deal with the liberals, Maggie wouldn't have got her chance, well, at least for another 6 months.

[Hibrandenburg]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It wasn't 20% it was 15% of No voters who said it was in the top 2 or 3 major issues. Which means it wasn't a top 2 or 3 major issue for 85% of No voters.

It wasn't a lie as in 2014 nobody could predict the future.

But believe whatever you like.

Just trying to use the figures you mentioned, even a 15% sway would have validity implications for the 2014 referendum. No need to predict what would happen regarding Brexit today, it's already happened.

[Hibrandenburg]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Who is the EU? It's an organisation and she worked for it in a senior position.

The EU is a democratically elected organisation, I know you Tories don't understand that but it makes democratic decisions based on its treaties agreed upon by each member state. Reding isn't the EU's dictator, she is one voice amongst many.

[Keith_M]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Eh? Not even 2 out of 10 people said it was a major issue. That makes it NOT a major factor for the vast majority by some considerable margin.

You really are into selective reading.

I mentioned a number of issues that, when added together, makes a significant difference in a vote that ended 55 to 45.

But if you want to take the EU issue alone, that's 15% of the 55% that voted No.

If even two thirds of those had voted otherwise on what they felt was a major issue, the vote would have been 50.5% Yes and 49.5% No.


Are you getting it yet?

[James310]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The EU is a democratically elected organisation, I know you Tories don't understand that but it makes democratic decisions based on its treaties agreed upon by each member state. Reding isn't the EU's dictator, she is one voice amongst many.

That's fine, you went from denying any statement had been made to rubbishing the statement that had been made. It was a clear statement from someone senior in the EU, that's good enough for me. I am sure if it said the opposite it would be used as evidence of the opposite. The policies the SNP had in 2014 made it clear we would have left the EU and had to apply to rejoin, things like not having your own currency and central bank being one such policy.

[Hibrandenburg]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

That's fine, you went from denying any statement had been made to rubbishing the statement that had been made. It was a clear statement from someone senior in the EU, that's good enough for me. I am sure if it said the opposite it would have it being used as evidence of the opposite. The policies the SNP had in 2014 made it clear we would have left the EU and had to apply to rejoin, things like not having your own currency and central bank being one such policy.

No, I've went from saying the EU didn't make a statement to saying the EU as an organisation didn't make a statement because you can't distinguish between an individual in the EU and the EU.

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

That's fine, you went from denying any statement had been made to rubbishing the statement that had been made. It was a clear statement from someone senior in the EU, that's good enough for me. I am sure if it said the opposite it would be used as evidence of the opposite. The policies the SNP had in 2014 made it clear we would have left the EU and had to apply to rejoin, things like not having your own currency and central bank being one such policy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m__wmsIn99E

[James310]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

No, I've went from saying the EU didn't make a statement to saying the EU as an organisation didn't make a statement because you can't distinguish between an individual in the EU and the EU.

It's a moot point at the end of the day, the policies of the SNP meant Scotland could never have just automatically joined the EU upon Independence, not when they would be using the pound in an unofficial currency union and still relying on the Bank of England which would basically be a foreign countrys central bank.

[James310]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m__wmsIn99E

What on earth is that?

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It's a moot point at the end of the day, the policies of the SNP meant Scotland could never have just automatically joined the EU upon Independence, not when they would be using the pound in an unofficial currency union and still relying on the Bank of England which would basically be a foreign countrys central bank.

None will be an issue next time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[James310]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

None will be an issue next time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Is that true? We have Ian Blackford saying Sterling will be used for "years" and then the SNP pass policies at conference saying 6 tests need to be met before a new currency is introduced and then others saying a new currency would be introduced within weeks of Independence. It's still all over the place.

I am sure the paper on currency whenever it's due will give us some insight.

[grunt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It's still all over the place.

One day you complain that the ScotGov is wasting money planning for a referendum and the next day you complain that all the details for independence aren't completely worked out (and published so you can trash them). You're nothing if not inconsistent.

[James310]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

One day you complain that the ScotGov is wasting money planning for a referendum and the next day you complain that all the details for independence aren't completely worked out (and published so you can trash them). You're nothing if not inconsistent.

I do think that ultimately it's going to be a waste of money yes, and effort and resources that could be put into something else. But the more I think about it the more I believe what's happening now is best for Nicola Sturgeon, rather than what's best for the Independence movement. She can leave office in a few years and say well I did all I could. But if the Supreme Court rules as expected and there is no referendum next year and she turns the General Election into a "defacto referendum" and gets less than 50% then basically that's IndyRef2 lost, and that could put back the Independence movement years. But she will be fine, did all she could etc, time for someone else to take it forward. Off to some UN job somewhere no doubt.

I know I am pretty much alone in thinking this but even some SNP and Indy supporters must be having some doubts.....

[weecounty hibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I do think that ultimately it's going to be a waste of money yes, and effort and resources that could be put into something else. But the more I think about it the more I believe what's happening now is best for Nicola Sturgeon, rather than what's best for the Independence movement. She can leave office in a few years and say well I did all I could. But if the Supreme Court rules as expected and there is no referendum next year and she turns the General Election into a "defacto referendum" and gets less than 50% then basically that's IndyRef2 lost, and that could put back the Independence movement years. But she will be fine, did all she could etc, time for someone else to take it forward. Off to some UN job somewhere no doubt.

I know I am pretty much alone in thinking this but even some SNP and Indy supporters must be having some doubts.....

That is another straw that is being clutched at by unionists. And the Indy supporters you see claiming that are the ones who are still clinging to the hope that Salmond is going to ride in on his charger shouting a freedom and unite everyone behind Alba. Never going to happen! NS has spent her entire adult life campaigning for independence. I’m sure she will still do so after the next referendum if it doesn’t go the right way. Albeit not as FM or leader of the SNP.

[JeMeSouviens]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

One day you complain that the ScotGov is wasting money planning for a referendum and the next day you complain that all the details for independence aren't completely worked out (and published so you can trash them). You're nothing if not inconsistent.

That's actually grossly unfair.

There is an iron consistency there in saying absolutely anything and everything that's anti-Indy regardless of truth, context, internal logical conistency etc, etc.

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I do think that ultimately it's going to be a waste of money yes, and effort and resources that could be put into something else. But the more I think about it the more I believe what's happening now is best for Nicola Sturgeon, rather than what's best for the Independence movement. She can leave office in a few years and say well I did all I could. But if the Supreme Court rules as expected and there is no referendum next year and she turns the General Election into a "defacto referendum" and gets less than 50% then basically that's IndyRef2 lost, and that could put back the Independence movement years. But she will be fine, did all she could etc, time for someone else to take it forward. Off to some UN job somewhere no doubt.

I know I am pretty much alone in thinking this but even some SNP and Indy supporters must be having some doubts.....

Here we go again. NS is both obsessed by gaining independence but also willing to set it back to protect her legacy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ronaldo7]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Here we go again. NS is both obsessed by gaining independence but also willing to set it back to protect her legacy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Someone mentioned being all over the place earlier on. 🙈

[James310]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

That's actually grossly unfair.

There is an iron consistency there in saying absolutely anything and everything that's anti-Indy regardless of truth, context, internal logical conistency etc, etc.

Why do you always reply to other posters to make your little points against me, you can reply to me as well you know. You are like the boy who punches from behind and then runs away.

[JeMeSouviens]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Here we go again. NS is both obsessed by gaining independence but also willing to set it back to protect her legacy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A legacy of late ferries and that time she took her mask off. Sad times.

[Skol]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

None will be an issue next time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I thought the policy was still to use the pound, so that is still true

[Keith_M]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

A legacy of late ferries and that time she took her mask off. Sad times.

She should really have resigned for that, TBF.

[Keith_M]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I thought the policy was still to use the pound, so that is still true

Is that the case now? I'm not really up to date on that part, so I honestly don't know.


My preference would be to (eventually) adopt the Euro, but there's usually some scare stories going round about that and I wonder if they're worried if that might put some people off.

It's a bit like retaining Royalty. I don't believe many people in the SNP genuinely want to do it, but I suspect it's an attempt to appeal to certain demographics.