Nicola Sturgeon

[The Real Maroonblood]

4 hours ago, ri Alban said:

Yawn!

[sandyk]

I have a genuine question.  Being resident down here in the land of Eng, I do not get caught up in all the Indy talk so please forgive me if it is a stupid question.

 

If the total number of UK Parliament electors in Scotland was 3,925,800 (Dec 18), and the SNP poled 1,242,380 votes in yesterday election (around 32 %), why is there so much confidence in there being a 'Yes' indy vote, should there be one.  Who did the 2.5 million others vote for? If they didn't vote SNP, why??

As I say, genuine question, not trying to mix it up or anything like that!

 

 

[XB52]

Well done Nicola and the SNP. Yet more evidence that Scotland is a totally different country to the rUK. They have lurched further to the right and I worry about their future but the turkey's voted for Christmas so tough. The mandate for a second independence is clear and inevitable

[XB52]

Just now, sandyk said:

I have a genuine question.  Being resident down here in the land of Eng, I do not get caught up in all the Indy talk so please forgive me if it is a stupid question.

 

If the total number of UK Parliament electors in Scotland was 3,925,800 (Dec 18), and the SNP poled 1,242,380 votes in yesterday election (around 32 %), why is there so much confidence in there being a 'Yes' indy vote, should there be one.  Who did the 2.5 million others vote for? If they didn't vote SNP, why??

As I say, genuine question, not trying to mix it up or anything like that!

 

 

Maybe, if you are really interested and not just being smart, you can check the results and see who voted for who and in what numbers

[sandyk]

4 minutes ago, XB52 said:

Maybe, if you are really interested and not just being smart, you can check the results and see who voted for who and in what numbers

Genuinely not being smart, just thought I would ask a question that has been in my mind.

 

Thanks for the constructive response though.

[Boab]

Just now, sandyk said:

I have a genuine question.  Being resident down here in the land of Eng, I do not get caught up in all the Indy talk so please forgive me if it is a stupid question.

 

If the total number of UK Parliament electors in Scotland was 3,925,800 (Dec 18), and the SNP poled 1,242,380 votes in yesterday election (around 32 %), why is there so much confidence in there being a 'Yes' indy vote, should there be one.  Who did the 2.5 million others vote for? If they didn't vote SNP, why??

As I say, genuine question, not trying to mix it up or anything like that!

 

 

 Because an Indy Ref is a different beast from a GE, Sandy.

69.1% of the electorate voted in Scotland as opposed to 84.6% in the Indy Ref in 2014.

The crucial thing to remember of course is that in an Indy Ref you’re not voting for a party. 
Don’t confuse SNP with YES voters. 
Largely they are of course, I’ll concede that, but I voted YES but do not vote SNP.

Edited December 13, 2019 by Boab

[sandyk]

1 minute ago, Boab said:

 Because an Indy Ref is a different beast from a GE, Sandy.

69.1% of the electorate voted in Scotland as opposed to 84.6% in the Indy Ref in 2014.

The crucial thing to remember of course is that in an Indy Ref you’re not voting for a party. 
Don’t confuse SNP with YES voters. 
Largely are are of course, I’ll concede that but I voted YES but do not vote SNP.

Thank Boab, that makes sense to me now.  As I said in my original post, I have been rather detached from the day-to-day goings on with regards to Indy.

 

Appreciate your response

[Boab]

Just now, sandyk said:

Thank Boab, that makes sense to me now.  As I said in my original post, I have been rather detached from the day-to-day goings on with regards to Indy.

 

Appreciate your response

No worries, Sandy.

[hughesie27]

20 minutes ago, sandyk said:

I have a genuine question.  Being resident down here in the land of Eng, I do not get caught up in all the Indy talk so please forgive me if it is a stupid question.

 

If the total number of UK Parliament electors in Scotland was 3,925,800 (Dec 18), and the SNP poled 1,242,380 votes in yesterday election (around 32 %), why is there so much confidence in there being a 'Yes' indy vote, should there be one.  Who did the 2.5 million others vote for? If they didn't vote SNP, why??

As I say, genuine question, not trying to mix it up or anything like that!

 

 

SNP polled 45% of the actual turnout. 

[manaliveits105]

The most recent  poll showed 56% against indyref2 - people have voted yesterday for snp so Scotland have a say at Westminster (ony up .8% !! ) which Jimmy Krankie will try and show is a sign for indyref2 and further austerity for Scotland - quite happy if she brought it on as it will fail and we will be rid of her at last - however Boris wont allow anyway .

 

[Pans Jambo]

1 minute ago, manaliveits105 said:

The most recent  poll showed 56% against indyref2 - people have voted yesterday for snp so Scotland have a say at Westminster (ony up .8% !! ) which Jimmy Krankie will try and show is a sign for indyref2 and further austerity for Scotland - quite happy if she brought it on as it will fail and we will be rid of her at last - however Boris wont allow anyway .

 

Yeah youre right. They should just pack it in eh?

Edited December 13, 2019 by Pans Jambo

[manaliveits105]

or hope for a bad winter to kill off your fellow countrymen and women as you said in the GE thread 

Gnats have leant nothing from Indyref1 and doomed to fail yet again.

[sandyk]

23 minutes ago, hughesie27 said:

SNP polled 45% of the actual turnout. 

 

Thanks for that, a figure I couldn't find despite trawling (obviously not looking hard enough)

[hughesie27]

I hope there isn't an indyref2 any time soon. It's clear it would get voted down again at this stage. They need to really sit down and create a bulletproof plan.

 

 

[Boab]

Just now, manaliveits105 said:

or hope for a bad winter to kill off your fellow countrymen and women as you said in the GE thread 

Gnats have leant nothing from Indyref1 and doomed to fail yet again.

I won’t use that language but the undeniable fact is, as more young people are eligible to vote, the outcome cannot be confidently predicted. Either way !

If the people are told the truth then no more can be asked. They won’t though.

[The Real Maroonblood]

33 minutes ago, manaliveits105 said:

The most recent  poll showed 56% against indyref2 - people have voted yesterday for snp so Scotland have a say at Westminster (ony up .8% !! ) which Jimmy Krankie will try and show is a sign for indyref2 and further austerity for Scotland - quite happy if she brought it on as it will fail and we will be rid of her at last - however Boris wont allow anyway .

 

Tears and snotters.

[Famous 1874]

57 minutes ago, sandyk said:

I have a genuine question.  Being resident down here in the land of Eng, I do not get caught up in all the Indy talk so please forgive me if it is a stupid question.

 

If the total number of UK Parliament electors in Scotland was 3,925,800 (Dec 18), and the SNP poled 1,242,380 votes in yesterday election (around 32 %), why is there so much confidence in there being a 'Yes' indy vote, should there be one.  Who did the 2.5 million others vote for? If they didn't vote SNP, why??

As I say, genuine question, not trying to mix it up or anything like that!

 

 

There’s not more confidence. Indy ref 2 would result in another no vote, which would mean the SNP would demand a third referendum as that is their mentality.

[ri Alban]

The tears and snorters are strong in the onionists.

[AlphonseCapone]

18 minutes ago, The Real Maroonblood said:

Tears and snotters.

 

He's so bitter. His posts warm my heart 😂

[manaliveits105]

Enjoying a bottle of Pol Roger white foil celebrating Boris landslide and my hedge fund profit 

Ive only ever seen people in tears over a political vote once in my life and that was some tartan clad weirdos in 2014 

[scott herbertson]

55 minutes ago, manaliveits105 said:

The most recent  poll showed 56% against indyref2 - people have voted yesterday for snp so Scotland have a say at Westminster (ony up .8% !! ) which Jimmy Krankie will try and show is a sign for indyref2 and further austerity for Scotland - quite happy if she brought it on as it will fail and we will be rid of her at last - however Boris wont allow anyway .

 

 

Factually incorrect

 

The most recent poll (2 days ago)

 

 

 

[The Real Maroonblood]

5 minutes ago, AlphonseCapone said:

 

He's so bitter. His posts warm my heart 😂

[The Real Maroonblood]

4 minutes ago, manaliveits105 said:

Enjoying a bottle of Pol Roger white foil celebrating Boris landslide and my hedge fund profit 

Ive only ever seen people in tears over a political vote once in my life and that was some tartan clad weirdos in 2014 

[NANOJAMBO]

7 minutes ago, manaliveits105 said:

Enjoying a bottle of Pol Roger white foil celebrating Boris landslide and my hedge fund profit 

Ive only ever seen people in tears over a political vote once in my life and that was some tartan clad weirdos in 2014 

Wow Kickback even has trolls on non football related stuff now. 

[Nucky Thompson]

46 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

The tears and snorters are strong in the onionists.

I think the Unionists are sitting rather smugly today 

[Ron Burgundy]

27 minutes ago, NANOJAMBO said:

Wow Kickback even has trolls on non football related stuff now. 

If you can't see that that is happening on both sides then you're very blinkered.

[Nucky Thompson]

Referendum zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

 

It's no happening Nippy 

[Justin Z]

40 minutes ago, NANOJAMBO said:

Wow Kickback even has trolls on non football related stuff now. 

 

"Now"? All this poster does is troll half-literately through political posts

[Ray Gin]

Imagine wanting Boris Johnson to decide the future of Scotland and not Scottish people. 

 

 

[XB52]

1 hour ago, manaliveits105 said:

The most recent  poll showed 56% against indyref2 - people have voted yesterday for snp so Scotland have a say at Westminster (ony up .8% !! ) which Jimmy Krankie will try and show is a sign for indyref2 and further austerity for Scotland - quite happy if she brought it on as it will fail and we will be rid of her at last - however Boris wont allow anyway .

 

Vote was up 8% actually

[manaliveits105]

Did I miss the bit on the ballot paper which said a vote for snp was a vote for an independence referendumb 

Is she just thick 

[XB52]

1 hour ago, sandyk said:

 

Thanks for that, a figure I couldn't find despite trawling (obviously not looking hard enough)

Sorry for my earlier reply to you. Just used to so many trolls on here, hard to accept genuine questions

[XB52]

1 hour ago, Famous 1874 said:

There’s not more confidence. Indy ref 2 would result in another no vote, which would mean the SNP would demand a third referendum as that is their mentality.

Support for independence is about 20% higher than before the indyref campaign

[Ray Gin]

52 minutes ago, scott herbertson said:

 

Factually incorrect

 

The most recent poll (2 days ago)

 

 

 

 

That will have no doubt changed with even more for yes this morning now that we know for certain that we face a BoJo government for 5 years and a potential no-deal Brexit.

 

[Ray Gin]

2 minutes ago, manaliveits105 said:

Did I miss the bit on the ballot paper which said a vote for snp was a vote for an independence referendumb 

Is she just thick 

 

I think you missed the bit where the Scottish Tories ran a campaign based almost entirely on "Say no to indy ref 2" and Scotland told them unequivocally to bolt.

 

 

[XB52]

3 minutes ago, manaliveits105 said:

Did I miss the bit on the ballot paper which said a vote for snp was a vote for an independence referendumb 

Is she just thick 

I know you just troll, which I thought was against the rules but hey ho. If you didn't see/hear the SNP stating that a win for the SNP would show a clear mandate for indyref2 then it's clear that Sturgeon isn't the thick one

[The Real Maroonblood]

8 minutes ago, manaliveits105 said:

Did I miss the bit on the ballot paper which said a vote for snp was a vote for an independence referendumb 

Is she just thick 

[Justin Z]

8 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

 

I think you missed the bit where the Scottish Tories ran a campaign based almost entirely on "Say no to indy ref 2" and Scotland told them unequivocally to bolt.

 

6 Scottish seats for a net -7

 

“What is clear for voters in Scotland is that the Union will be on the ballot paper." -Jackson Carlaw

 

 

"The Scottish Conservatives have had a catastrophic result tonight, they have lost the election, they have lost seats and their argument has been rejected." -Nicola Sturgeon

 

 

Man alive, they took a dive.

 

Edited December 13, 2019 by Justin Z

[Nucky Thompson]

Apart from the division another referendum will cause, you have to take into account the cost to the tax payer.

It cost £15.8m the last time, so you're taking £20m if they have another one.

No doubt Nippy would keep wanting them until they won one.

The money would be better spent on things that actually matter

[Harry Potter]

2 minutes ago, Nucky Thompson said:

Apart from the division another referendum will cause, you have to take into account the cost to the tax payer.

It cost £15.8m the last time, so you're taking £20m if they have another one.

No doubt Nippy would keep wanting them until they won one.

The money would be better spent on things that actually matter

Said this over and over again, money for her life long obsession, imagine if she lost which is a good possibility.

We had the vote, was a NO get over it and move on.

[Justin Z]

1 minute ago, Harry Potter said:

We had the vote, was a NO get over it and move on.

 

We had the vote, was a NO, so now no matter what England and Westminster do in direct contravention of what they said they'd do in 2014, get over it and move on.

 

In a word: No.

 

Edited December 13, 2019 by Justin Z

[Nucky Thompson]

4 minutes ago, Justin Z said:

 

We had the vote, was a NO, so now no matter what England and Westminster do in direct contravention of what they said they'd do in 2014, get over it and move on.

 

In a word: No.

 

So we keep having referendums every time Westminster does something that upsets Sturgeon?

[Justin Z]

Just now, Nucky Thompson said:

So we keep having referendums every time Westminster does something that upsets Sturgeon?

 

Don't ask silly rhetorical questions. It's rude. You are well aware of the vow, you are well aware of the No campaign's claim the only way for Scotland to remain in the EU was to vote no to independence, you are not a ****ing idiot.

 

Or maybe you are and that was a genuine question, but you can't have it both ways.

[Ray Gin]

 

19 minutes ago, Harry Potter said:

Said this over and over again, money for her life long obsession, imagine if she lost which is a good possibility.

We had the vote, was a NO get over it and move on.

 

Why should the Scottish public be held to that vote forever when the Tories haven't been held to the promises they made in the campaign? (i.e. that we'd get devolution max powers and it would guarantee our place in the EU).

 

 

[Harry Potter]

7 minutes ago, Nucky Thompson said:

So we keep having referendums every time Westminster does something that upsets Sturgeon?

 

1 minute ago, Ray Gin said:

 

 

Why should the Scottish public be held to that vote forever when the Tories haven't been held to the promises they made in the campaign? (i.e. that we'd get devolution max powers and it would guarantee our place in the EU).

 

 

What currency do you fancy Ray ?.

[Ray Gin]

Just now, Harry Potter said:

 

What currency do you fancy Ray ?.

 

What difference does that make as to whether Scotland should get to decide its own future in a referendum?

 

For what it's worth, I'm not fussed. But we'd be keeping the pound.

 

 

[SE16 3LN]

It was the best result and the worst result fot the nationalists  Can't see Boris offering anything so the SNP will have to do a Catalonia.  Has Nicola got the strength to do it or will she shout from the sidelines. 

[Dunks]

Just on the 'support' for independence, there have been many swings over the years as circumstances and opinion change. 

 

Historical Polling for Independence

1998    52%

2000    47%

2007    40%

2013    29%

2014    49%

2016    45%

2018    43%

2019    46%

 

I've taken a very rough polling result from the very many polls held throughout the year. Of note is that you need to go back to the last century to see consistent polling in favour of independence. In terms of the impact of a campaign on polls, we seen a dramatic rise from pre-2014 up to the actual vote, albeit the starting point appears low in comparative terms. Whether a new campaign combined with anti-tory feeling pushes opinion beyond 50% for a new vote, who knows.

 

My personal view is that a new vote now would see the same outcome as 2014. The Yes movement would require a strong campaign to turn it round and would need to go some way to separating the constitutional question from the political one. They failed to do that in 2014. Conversely, the No movement really needs to come up with a compelling argument as to why we should remain under Westminster control. Something better than 'because'. And we shouldn't discount the chance of further devolution being offered as a sweetener. This happened late in the 2014 campaign.

 

Interesting times ahead 

 

 

[Harry Potter]

2 minutes ago, Dunks said:

Just on the 'support' for independence, there have been many swings over the years as circumstances and opinion change. 

 

Historical Polling for Independence

1998    52%

2000    47%

2007    40%

2013    29%

2014    49%

2016    45%

2018    43%

2019    46%

 

I've taken a very rough polling result from the very many polls held throughout the year. Of note is that you need to go back to the last century to see consistent polling in favour of independence. In terms of the impact of a campaign on polls, we seen a dramatic rise from pre-2014 up to the actual vote, albeit the starting point appears low in comparative terms. Whether a new campaign combined with anti-tory feeling pushes opinion beyond 50% for a new vote, who knows.

 

My personal view is that a new vote now would see the same outcome as 2014. The Yes movement would require a strong campaign to turn it round and would need to go some way to separating the constitutional question from the political one. They failed to do that in 2014. Conversely, the No movement really needs to come up with a compelling argument as to why we should remain under Westminster control. Something better than 'because'. And we shouldn't discount the chance of further devolution being offered as a sweetener. This happened late in the 2014 campaign.

 

Interesting times ahead 

 

 

Very good post Dunks , still say again a 2nd vote would set a president for future voting, keep voting till its the right 

result for some, that is not democracy.

 

[Justin Z]

3 minutes ago, Harry Potter said:

Very good post Dunks , still say again a 2nd vote would set a president for future voting, keep voting till its the right 

result for some, that is not democracy.

 

There is a general election every five years--or less. How is that not democracy?

 

The problem is systems where constitutional change can be enacted with a simple majority. That goes for Brexit and Scottish Independence. But it's the system in the UK. It's not the SNP or Indy supporters' ****ing fault it is that way, is it?

 

Not only is it absolutely, definitionally, democracy, it's democracy on steroids--that is the problem. Limits on democracy, protections against the tyranny of the majority, are necessary for a functioning democracy, and the UK simply does not have them. The Union is not fit for purpose.

 

Edited December 13, 2019 by Justin Z