Jump to content

Scottish Referendum thread ( Merged )


Zlatanable

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Joey J J Jr Shabadoo said:

There's an election this year. Clearly your constant greeting about an off the cuff remark 7 or 8 years ago is impairing your thought process.

whos greetin was stating a fact, too much for you to take on board. my thought process

aye very witty.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 459
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Ainsley Harriott

    58

  • Pans Jambo

    49

  • ri Alban

    36

  • Zlatanable

    31

Joey J J Jr Shabadoo
Just now, Harry Potter said:

whos greetin was stating a fact, too much for you to take on board. my thought process

aye very witty.

Apologies, edited my reply. Thought it came from someone else.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

Thanks for clearing that up, doug. 

 

I'm always glad to intervene when i consider a poster is needlessly scaremongering.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Governor Tarkin
1 minute ago, coconut doug said:

 

I'm always glad to intervene when i consider a poster is needlessly scaremongering.

 

You've mistaken 'genuine and valid concerns' with 'scaremongering', doug. I thought that would be obvious by the trailing question.

 

Your confusion is not unexpected, mind, such is the nature of the overly defensive. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, coconut doug said:

 

Which "nationalist cause" Scottish or British? Using the term nationalist for Scottish Indy is not helpful. It is not they who seek to isolate and ally with Trump's USA. There is no nationalist cause in Scotland, just a desire to take our own decisions and shape our own future.

I meant the Scottish Nationalist cause - in the same was as supported by the Scottish National Party.

 

Happy to rephrase it as independence cause.

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Cruyff said:

Surely that would be the end of the SNP in the same way Labour became an Irrelevance in the last decade or so? 

I'm not convinced that would happen.  Labour disappeared up its own arse for different reasons.

 

There are some people with really strong feelings for independence.  Would those subside in the even of the union prevailing in a referendum?  I suspect not.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Candy said:

I'm not convinced that would happen.  Labour disappeared up its own arse for different reasons.

 

There are some people with really strong feelings for independence.  Would those subside in the even of the union prevailing in a referendum?  I suspect not.

 

I don't know tbh.

 

I think that there is somewhat of a cult following the SNP but probably not enough to gain a majority in the Scottish Parliament.

 

Many Independence supporters don't particularly like the SNP so I don't think they have a monopoly over the Indy Supporting Electorate. 

 

Although I do suspect that support for Independence will remain high until the UK becomes a Federation or some other Alternative comes about. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ainsley Harriott
20 minutes ago, Cruyff said:

I don't know tbh.

 

I think that there is somewhat of a cult following the SNP but probably not enough to gain a majority in the Scottish Parliament.

 

Many Independence supporters don't particularly like the SNP so I don't think they have a monopoly over the Indy Supporting Electorate. 

 

Although I do suspect that support for Independence will remain high until the UK becomes a Federation or some other Alternative comes about. 

Indy is high just now for a few reasons. Boris is red rag to a bull with lots of scots, emotions are high due to a pandemic and Brexit. A more moderate government in Westminster, Sturgeons daily propaganda show cancelled and debates about the economics of independence and it will likely fall back to it's old levels.

Link to post
Share on other sites
jack D and coke
1 hour ago, Candy said:

I'm not convinced that would happen.  Labour disappeared up its own arse for different reasons.

 

There are some people with really strong feelings for independence.  Would those subside in the even of the union prevailing in a referendum?  I suspect not.

 

I don’t think anyone could seriously campaign for another indyref if the next one fails. If that comes about with in the next year or two that is. 
Id certainly take nothing to do with it and close anyone down that started it all again. 


 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Candy said:

I meant the Scottish Nationalist cause - in the same was as supported by the Scottish National Party.

 

Happy to rephrase it as independence cause.

 

Fair enough. I'm sure you will understand the connotations with the use of the word Nationalist. Despite being warned for his misuse previously the PM chose to again use the word in relation to the SNP at pmqs today. Only recently we had a poster desperate to attach the nationalist label to the SNP and then try to associate the SNP with the misdeeds of other parties with national in their names whether they came from different places or different times. 

   There is still a big debate to be had here but calling people names and denying them the right to vote isn't working for those who do it.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jack D and coke said:

I don’t think anyone could seriously campaign for another indyref if the next one fails. If that comes about with in the next year or two that is. 
Id certainly take nothing to do with it and close anyone down that started it all again. 


 

 

I don't think many were keen to have Indyref 2 for the same reason however leaving the EU has changed that. Its only the over 60 age group that supports the Union in Scotland now so even if Indyref2 failed the political complexion of the country would change significantly in a relatively short period. It may be the case that leaving it a few years will improve indy chances of success and that's another reaon they will try to stop it.

         I do think it's now or never though and like you i'm not sure if we have the bottle. You can win all the arguments but if you don't have the courage then it's all academic and those telling us we have a grievance culture would be right.

   The SNP are then seriously damaged if we lose a referendum and finished if we win. Its much better for them to continually call for a referendum without ever intending to have one and much better for the Tories to pretend that Indyref2 is all they are interested in as it distracts UK nationalists from their corruption and ineptitude.

   IMO it needs to stop and a referendum will do that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
jack D and coke
1 hour ago, coconut doug said:

 

I don't think many were keen to have Indyref 2 for the same reason however leaving the EU has changed that. Its only the over 60 age group that supports the Union in Scotland now so even if Indyref2 failed the political complexion of the country would change significantly in a relatively short period. It may be the case that leaving it a few years will improve indy chances of success and that's another reaon they will try to stop it.

         I do think it's now or never though and like you i'm not sure if we have the bottle. You can win all the arguments but if you don't have the courage then it's all academic and those telling us we have a grievance culture would be right.

   The SNP are then seriously damaged if we lose a referendum and finished if we win. Its much better for them to continually call for a referendum without ever intending to have one and much better for the Tories to pretend that Indyref2 is all they are interested in as it distracts UK nationalists from their corruption and ineptitude.

   IMO it needs to stop and a referendum will do that. 

Leaving the EU is a big material change regardless of how often anyone wants to say you’ve had a referendum. If a party puts a referendum in its manifesto and it gets the necessary support then I’m afraid WM needs to get out of the way. Not again and again but if we vote convincingly for another one then it does much more damage than good by saying you’re not getting to hold it. This once in a generation nonsense was never written or signed anywhere but it’s their go to to close the argument down.  
Im still almost 100% convinced we’d bottle it again anyway and that would be the end of the matter. Certainly for me anyway and probably most sensible people. 
Im not hankering for another one btw but I’ll argue if the necessary votes are returned then you can’t argue with it.  
Im sure we’d all like to put it to bed one way or another tbh. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, jack D and coke said:

Leaving the EU is a big material change regardless of how often anyone wants to say you’ve had a referendum. If a party puts a referendum in its manifesto and it gets the necessary support then I’m afraid WM needs to get out of the way. Not again and again but if we vote convincingly for another one then it does much more damage than good by saying you’re not getting to hold it. This once in a generation nonsense was never written or signed anywhere but it’s their go to to close the argument down.  
Im still almost 100% convinced we’d bottle it again anyway and that would be the end of the matter. Certainly for me anyway and probably most sensible people. 
Im not hankering for another one btw but I’ll argue if the necessary votes are returned then you can’t argue with it.  
Im sure we’d all like to put it to bed one way or another tbh. 

 

I agree, especially with the bit in bold. I'm absolutely of the view that you cannot hold referendums every other year, nor can you do it until you get the result you want. Thats not actually very democratic and had Brexit not happened, the door would have remained closed for at least another decade, maybe more. But it didn't. A key cornerstone of the Better together campaign was that the only way to protect our membership of the EU was to vote No. Once in a generation would have stood (despite not being agreed) had there not been such a material change in circumstance to our place in the world. 

 

Its like if you buy a car and you get home the bloody thing doesn't have an engine (**** knows how you'd get home with no engine, but anyway). Do you not have a right to return it? In that same vein, we absolutely are entitled to revisit the issue and put this matter to bed. I'm a Yes voter, but I'm keen to see the constitutional question get settled. Our politics is not better for it continuing to wrangle on. I want to see an end to the SNP so our politics can actually become normal. 

 

To me any attempt to try and avoid another referendum is straight up democracy denying in this circumstance. We were promised the moon and stars to stay in the Union and yet we've been ignored every step of the way since. Even our Tory MPs couldn't work with the government to gain any concessions which might benefit Scotland post-Brexit. There is no democratic argument to remaining in the union and there is absolutely none to continue to deny Scottish people the opportunity to revisit this question and answer it definitively. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
manaliveits105

an hour to get a response nationalism is definitely on the wane - I remember the halcyon days of nationalism when I would have got 3 insults and a smiley by now :cornette_dog:

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jack D and coke said:

Leaving the EU is a big material change regardless of how often anyone wants to say you’ve had a referendum. If a party puts a referendum in its manifesto and it gets the necessary support then I’m afraid WM needs to get out of the way. Not again and again but if we vote convincingly for another one then it does much more damage than good by saying you’re not getting to hold it. This once in a generation nonsense was never written or signed anywhere but it’s their go to to close the argument down.  
Im still almost 100% convinced we’d bottle it again anyway and that would be the end of the matter. Certainly for me anyway and probably most sensible people. 
Im not hankering for another one btw but I’ll argue if the necessary votes are returned then you can’t argue with it.  
Im sure we’d all like to put it to bed one way or another tbh. 

"Once in a generation" was in the 2014 white paper 

 

https://www.gov.scot/publications/scotlands-future/

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9142755/Raven-Tower-London-feared-died.html
 

Tower of London's 'Queen' Raven Merlina is feared to have died... in ominous step closer to 'fall of United Kingdom' if 350-year-old myth about death of all six birds is true

'Free-spirited' Merlina left the Tower several weeks ago and not been seen since

Legend dictates there must be six ravens at the Tower or the kingdom will fall 

Thankfully seven ravens are still in residence even after Merlina's departure 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
jack D and coke
3 hours ago, OTT said:

 

I agree, especially with the bit in bold. I'm absolutely of the view that you cannot hold referendums every other year, nor can you do it until you get the result you want. Thats not actually very democratic and had Brexit not happened, the door would have remained closed for at least another decade, maybe more. But it didn't. A key cornerstone of the Better together campaign was that the only way to protect our membership of the EU was to vote No. Once in a generation would have stood (despite not being agreed) had there not been such a material change in circumstance to our place in the world. 

 

Its like if you buy a car and you get home the bloody thing doesn't have an engine (**** knows how you'd get home with no engine, but anyway). Do you not have a right to return it? In that same vein, we absolutely are entitled to revisit the issue and put this matter to bed. I'm a Yes voter, but I'm keen to see the constitutional question get settled. Our politics is not better for it continuing to wrangle on. I want to see an end to the SNP so our politics can actually become normal. 

 

To me any attempt to try and avoid another referendum is straight up democracy denying in this circumstance. We were promised the moon and stars to stay in the Union and yet we've been ignored every step of the way since. Even our Tory MPs couldn't work with the government to gain any concessions which might benefit Scotland post-Brexit. There is no democratic argument to remaining in the union and there is absolutely none to continue to deny Scottish people the opportunity to revisit this question and answer it definitively. 

Yeah agree with all that mate. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jack D and coke said:

It wasn’t in the Edinburgh agreement. That’s what matters. 

Perhaps, but I was responding to your point saying it was "never written".  Clearly it was written - in a document espousing independence - by the Scottish Govt.

Link to post
Share on other sites
jack D and coke
12 minutes ago, Candy said:

Perhaps, but I was responding to your point saying it was "never written".  Clearly it was written - in a document espousing independence - by the Scottish Govt.

Yeah fair enough. I meant in anything legal. 
Of course I know it was said many times it was certainly never in anything binding. 
The WM govt use it to make it sound like this was actually what both parties agreed on.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Joey J J Jr Shabadoo said:

Scotland will decide, not them. It's simple.

Scotland has decided. Twice. 

 

You either respect democracy, or you don't. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jack D and coke said:

It wasn’t in the Edinburgh agreement. That’s what matters. 

If the Edinburgh Agreement matters, and you just said it matters, then you need to acknowledge that no matter what votes occur in the Scottish Parliament, it needs Westminster to enable another Scottish Referendum. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
jack D and coke
Just now, Zlatanable said:

If the Edinburgh Agreement matters, and you just said it matters, then you need to acknowledge that no matter what votes occur in the Scottish Parliament, it needs Westminster to enable another Scottish Referendum. 

 

Did the Edinburgh agreement say it was once in a generation? 
Cheers👍🏼

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jack D and coke said:

Did the Edinburgh agreement say it was once in a generation? 
Cheers👍🏼

Hi Clever McClever brain, hows it going?

Clever people like you that say such clever things like that, are overwhelmingly clever. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Konrad von Carstein
44 minutes ago, Zlatanable said:

Hi Clever McClever brain, hows it going?

Clever people like you that say such clever things like that, are overwhelmingly clever. 

 

 

Unlike you Mr Obtuse who slavers pish all the live long day and is overwhelmingly dull and well, obtuse...

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Konrad von Carstein said:

 

Unlike you Mr Obtuse who slavers pish all the live long day and is overwhelmingly dull and well, obtuse...

Always nice to hear from you. The definition of a nobody. 

Nobody thoughts, nobody comments, nobody opinions. 

You are grey porridge.

Edited by Zlatanable
Link to post
Share on other sites

Once in a generation was never agreed, it was a line used to underpin the importance of the event. However, had Brexit not gone ahead, there would be no need to revisit the issue. Sadly, Brexit did go ahead and so presents a material change in circumstances of the Union Scotland was sold in 2014. 
 

As a result of Brexit it is fair to say a lot of voters would have voted differently if they knew this was what the future held. Its only fair to ask the question again. 17 consecutive polls shows that there is a need to revisit this. 
 

If those so vocal in their defence of the union were so confident in victory, would there be so much resistance to another referendum? Surely this is the time to get in writing ‘once in a generation’ and iron clad that with a time period on what exactly a generation is? The reality is that there isn’t a positive case to staying in the Union and they damn well know that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, OTT said:

Once in a generation was never agreed, it was a line used to underpin the importance of the event. However, had Brexit not gone ahead, there would be no need to revisit the issue. Sadly, Brexit did go ahead and so presents a material change in circumstances of the Union Scotland was sold in 2014. 
 

As a result of Brexit it is fair to say a lot of voters would have voted differently if they knew this was what the future held. Its only fair to ask the question again. 17 consecutive polls shows that there is a need to revisit this. 
 

If those so vocal in their defence of the union were so confident in victory, would there be so much resistance to another referendum? Surely this is the time to get in writing ‘once in a generation’ and iron clad that with a time period on what exactly a generation is? The reality is that there isn’t a positive case to staying in the Union and they damn well know that. 

Nonsense. I know this is nonsense. @OTT knows this is nonsense. Even the SNP politiciticans know this is nonsense.

 

Edited by Zlatanable
Link to post
Share on other sites
Konrad von Carstein
Just now, Zlatanable said:

Fire away pal. 

Your obvious nonsense, won't change.

 

 

Seriously, is English your second language?

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Konrad von Carstein said:

 

Seriously, is English your second language?

Well, I am #ActuallyAutistic, so my relationship to spoken and written language, is not easy to explain. 

I am fluent in Scots and English. 

Edited by Zlatanable
Link to post
Share on other sites
Konrad von Carstein

So you can be a patronising, arrogant, dismissive bumhole to folk because of this seeing as that seems to be your posting "style"?

 

...I'll bow out now

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Zlatanable said:

Nonsense. I know this is nonsense. @OTT knows this is nonsense. Even the SNP politiciticans know this is nonsense.

 

 

 

Ahhh don't worry Z, we'll have you a proud yes voter by the time the second indyref rolls round next year!! :) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
manaliveits105
9 hours ago, Zlatanable said:

Always nice to hear from you. The definition of a nobody. 

Nobody thoughts, nobody comments, nobody opinions. 

You are grey porridge.

:greggy:

Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, scott herbertson said:

Hardly a surprise.

 

Some sort of poll was going to come out after Salmonds allegations last week.  That's been the MO for a while now after a bad news story.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
BarneyBattles
8 minutes ago, Candy said:

Hardly a surprise.

 

Some sort of poll was going to come out after Salmonds allegations last week.  That's been the MO for a while now after a bad news story.

 

 

57% Yes after a 'bad news story'. Just imagine what the Yes percentage will be like after another majority is delivered in May.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Seymour M Hersh
3 hours ago, OTT said:

 

 

Ahhh don't worry Z, we'll have you a proud yes voter by the time the second indyref rolls round next year!! :) 

 

What if the question is should Scotland remain an integral part of the United Kingdom?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

What if the question is should Scotland remain an integral part of the United Kingdom?

 

That would never pass in the Referendum question assessment guidelines as the word “integral” is ambiguous, encourages voters to consider one response more favourably than another, is not neutral language, and is arguably misleading... just at a blush

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ainsley Harriott
22 hours ago, jack D and coke said:

Leaving the EU is a big material change regardless of how often anyone wants to say you’ve had a referendum. If a party puts a referendum in its manifesto and it gets the necessary support then I’m afraid WM needs to get out of the way. Not again and again but if we vote convincingly for another one then it does much more damage than good by saying you’re not getting to hold it. This once in a generation nonsense was never written or signed anywhere but it’s their go to to close the argument down.  
Im still almost 100% convinced we’d bottle it again anyway and that would be the end of the matter. Certainly for me anyway and probably most sensible people. 
Im not hankering for another one btw but I’ll argue if the necessary votes are returned then you can’t argue with it.  
Im sure we’d all like to put it to bed one way or another tbh. 

Only issue there is manifesto or not with a majority win theres still no authority to hold a legally binding referendum without a section 30. Why would Boris risk holding one knowing all too well defeat would mean the end of his political career? As far as hes concerned the question was asked and the answer given.

Link to post
Share on other sites
jack D and coke
5 minutes ago, Ainsley Harriott said:

Only issue there is manifesto or not with a majority win theres still no authority to hold a legally binding referendum without a section 30. Why would Boris risk holding one knowing all too well defeat would mean the end of his political career? As far as hes concerned the question was asked and the answer given.

I don’t think Boris will be around for an awful lot longer tbh. He’s way out of his depth for me and his cabinet is full of wrong uns. I don’t see Labour getting in Starmer is an empty suit and he’s not even in the door and he’s telling scotland what it wants. He’s toast already here. 
Who knows man but I feel if it’s part of the manifesto and the required votes come in then they have to let it happen. Otherwise they continue to give the SNP the fuel they need and the grievance grows. 
Saying no isn’t going to make this go away. 
I don’t think anyway. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...