Jump to content

The Politics Thread


shull

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, stlucifer said:

Well your last word is NONSENSE. She won the mandate as it was clearly part of the manifesto. What's not to get here? Is it different for the SNP from Labour and the Tories? The claim is that Brexit was ratified because they won the most votes in the RoUK. An election by the way that showed the SNP as by far the most popular party in Scotland with a pro independence manifesto. You claim to be intelligent but your posts on here say something entirely different.

They say that although he claims to be a scientist his grasp of the English language is somewhat lacking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I would argue they DO have a mandate as the UK government is in the process of removing us from the EU.
I get where you're coming from, and can see the merit in that thinking, but what would happen if Brexit is abandoned after Indyref2 is arranged? I think that's why the SNP hasn't proposed anything yet.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, salmonbuddie said:
2 hours ago, stlucifer said:
I would argue they DO have a mandate as the UK government is in the process of removing us from the EU.

I get where you're coming from, and can see the merit in that thinking, but what would happen if Brexit is abandoned after Indyref2 is arranged? I think that's why the SNP hasn't proposed anything yet.

That would simply mean some people would have different reasons for voting however they vote. But I hope they take on board the fact that this is not the first, or likely to be the last time we, as a nation, have been ignored or used as a guinea pig for whatever Westminster dictates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Donald Trump president of USA, Boris Johnson prime minister. Jimmy Krankie leading Scotland doesn't seem that bad at all. We have an abundance of intelligence North of the border and guaranteed more people will step up to the mark if independence is achieved. The fecking lack of focus and ambition of the scottish people mainly due to the historic feck ups of the southern based parties is kind of understandable. Many don't vote as historically it meant nothing. Surely the feck up of Brexit is the final straw and some lunatic funds a "get us the feck out of the UK" as they are feckin hopeless. Transfer Sevco down south and let Celtic win the Irish League for 10 fecking years in a row. Ban twitter, facebook, restrict mobile usage to emergencies or at least import shit. Life would be life again (but not as we know it). Beam me the feck up Scotty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest TPAFKATS
My last word on this is that she needs to go to the electorate proactively saying that a vote for the SNP at the next Holyrood election is a vote for Indyref2 to be held within the lifetime of that parliament.
That didn't happen in 2016 and she must do this before she can claim a mandate for it. She didn't do it in 2016 and therefore has no explicit mandate YET.
And that is the end of my involvement in this "discussion".
Yeah a vote for a party whose whole ethos is founded on Scottish independence is in no way supporting another independence referendum [emoji3]
You keep telling yourself that they never promoted it, despite having it in the manifesto they were elected on.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest TPAFKATS
They would huv to change the wording of the question on another neverendum on separation from Westminster if and when there is one . The last question was something like "do you think Scotland should be an independant country" , now whilst most Scotmen would answer yes to that , the Sturge+n regime don't want to deliver that , they want a paradox - Independance in Europe - a simple contradiction of terms from whatever sort of LaLa land of swivel-eyed' nationalism Sturge+n lives in these days .
Maybe the question should read more like -do you want Scotland to be free of whatever control England has left here - because you are certainly not getting independance onher watch . The SNP was a party of independance up until about 1987 when Jim Sillars started getting bothered about unionists calling him a seperatist , he then came up with the term independance in Eur+pe which was still the old EEC trade club at the time.  since Jim Sillars came up with that term we have been suckered into Europe+n Empire and I suspect he didn't see the political union coming
Daily mail website comments page where certain words are misspelled to get by the t'internet polis.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest TPAFKATS
Jim Sillars is not the only SNP supporter to speak out about European membership in Scotland . You will probably remember that Alex Neil the former cabinet secretary also revealed he voted to leave Europe . In fact according to Jim Sillars agin they are not alone
“And I’m not alone in that; there’s something like 350,000 to 400,000 of people like me who voted to come out of the EU and under no circumstances would vote to go back in.”
Jim Sillars
Sturgeon has made a big miscalculation according to Jim Sillars too ; “That means Ruth Davidson, the leader of the Tory party, and all the Tories who voted to Remain, would in fact vote to leave the United Kingdom and take a Scottish state into the European Union. I think that’s fantasy.” These are the facts , some SNP supports have noticed the paradox
 
 
 
 
 
I don't read the Daily Ma+l Buddie but it does sound like you do
 
I know Jim sillars views as they are continually trumpeted by BBC Scotland and the Scottish press as being representative of a split in the SNP leadership
Sillars is a maverick on the fringes of the SNP, not a senior figure, who appears to be tolerated due to his previous achievements.
The fact that he only supports independence on his terms speaks volumes about him.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, theknickerwetter said:

It does speak volumes about Jim Sillars -it says that he still supports Scottish independence and is still a Nationalist , unlike the current leadership you speak of who want to drag us out of one union they have been rightly telling us for generations is undemocratic if you live in Scotland , with the then intention of flipping us into another union which is even more undemocratic than the one they want us out of .

FFS...

How is the EU more undemocratic than the UK?

Parliament in Westminster has 650 seats. Of those, 533 are English. Scotland, Wales and NI have 117 between them. This means that even if three countries join together, they can still be heavily outvoted by the English. What England wants, England gets, and the others have to fall in line. It’s near enough a dictatorship. Scotland has had countless Tory governments forced on them and NI don’t even vote for the main UK parties, not to mention that both are being dragged out of the EU against their will. If that isn’t enough, we have over 800 unelected Lords including those who are there purely through religion (ex-Bishops) and through bloodline (hereditary). Meanwhile we also have an unelected Monarchy.

The EU allows countries to have vetoes, and generally there has to be full agreement before laws are passed. Of the UK’s 34,000 laws, only 4,000 are EU based. Of those, only 72 laws were “forced” on the UK - that’s less than 1% of all UK laws.

There is a lot more equality in the EU parliament than the UK one dictated by England. Anti-EU people claim Germany and France run the show without ever backing it up. I’ve just shown you exactly how England runs the UK and how the other three countries have to step in line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, TPAFKATS said:

Yeah a vote for a party whose whole ethos is founded on Scottish independence is in no way supporting another independence referendum emoji3.png
You keep telling yourself that they never promoted it, despite having it in the manifesto they were elected on.

Tony, I have long given up hope of you ever being able to correctly interpret the words of other posters on here.

Congrats on another brilliant example. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Cornwall_Saint said:

Parliament in Westminster has 650 seats. Of those, 533 are English. Scotland, Wales and NI have 117 between them. This means that even if three countries join together, they can still be heavily outvoted by the English. What England wants, England gets, and the others have to fall in line. 

That's only relevant if you see the UK as four separate nations rather than one united block.

If you see Britain as mainly or purely Britain (as I suspect most No voters do) then this argument doesn't hold water at all.

I think that's what Yes voters don't understand about No voters so the main Yes argument about Indyref2 leading to more democracy for Scotland simply doesn't work because it's recursive (Inverness gets whatever Edinburgh and Glasgow wants is the obvious perfectly valid response). Yes needs arguments which can't descend into this nonsense.

Your comment about how the EU is more democratic is a pretty reasonable one but there's not much democracy involved if 27 nations plus their combined citizens support a law and one single tiny nation can hold everyone else to ransom to get what they want under threat of veto. I don't consider that to be an  ideal scenario at all. What it DOES do is essentially prevent a damaging hardcore left or right law being introduced across all EU nations and for that it can be useful. No law is better than bad law so on that score I would probably prefer that if Scotland WAS independent that we should be part of the EU.

Edited by oaksoft
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, theknickerwetter said:

It does speak volumes about Jim Sillars -it says that he still supports Scottish independence and is still a Nationalist , unlike the current leadership you speak of who want to drag us out of one union they have been rightly telling us for generations is undemocratic if you live in Scotland , with the then intention of flipping us into another union which is even more undemocratic than the one they want us out of.

Jim is not alone in this view but you are wrong to suggest that this is either a majority view or even a large minority view within the wider Independence movement (which is more than the SNP). He is perfectly entitled to his views.

Of course you are being a dick about all of this to try and get emotional responses from posters, who are no better than brainwashed SNP lapdogs who can't think for themselves, and the usual idiots on here are, as usual, very obliging in providing those responses. 🤣

Edited by oaksoft
Link to comment
Share on other sites



...no better than brainwashed SNP lapdogs who can't think for themselves...


Says the man who can't see the link between a manifesto statement and a mandate when the same manifesto wins an election.

Too emotional for you?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎6‎/‎19‎/‎2019 at 8:32 AM, theknickerwetter said:

Sounds like a bit of a rant your are having. Scotland gets 6 seats in Europe out of a total 751 , land locked Luxembourg for instance has more power over our fishing rights -  Europe has an unelected , self selected commission , I could go on but l can still see the viens sticking out on your heed so best leave that the noo.

THe SNP have maybe turned against independence by wanting to be in another union but they haven't become republican yet so you would be stuck with your constitutional monarchy. Fo a guy who lives in England , ironnically you sound a bit anti-English . Does sound like a bit of a rant you are having.

Disagree, we just want a different form of independence - one that recognises it's the 21st century.

*************************

Scotland pop 5424800 - MEPs 6

Slovenia Slovakia pop 5450421 - MEPs 14

So we would more than double our representation in the European parliament if we were independent and the EU would have us even if just to say GIRFUY to England..    

Also, given that current Scotland's fishing rights are the product of being in the EU during 40 years of alternating Cons/Labour administrations followed by Theresa May admitting they were part of our exit negotiating strategy I don't see how it can be portrayed as SNPs fault.

Edited by Bud the Baker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/16/2019 at 8:38 PM, TPAFKATS said:

Yeah a vote for a party whose whole ethos is founded on Scottish independence is in no way supporting another independence referendum emoji3.png
You keep telling yourself that they never promoted it, despite having it in the manifesto they were elected on.

I think it's how high up the agenda it was during the '16 Holyrood elections - like @oaksoft I don't remember it being that high.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said:

I think it's how high up the agenda it was during the '16 Holyrood elections - like @oaksoft I don't remember it being that high.

 

The big push for the SNP at that election was education.

They received a lot of heat for pushing indyref2 well down the priority list.

Given that they had just lost the 2014 vote by a clear margin this was a good strategy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest TPAFKATS
Sounds like a bit of a rant your are having. Scotland gets 6 seats in Europe out of a total 751 , land locked Luxembourg for instance has more power over our fishing rights -  Europe has an unelected , self selected commission , I could go on but l can still see the viens sticking out on your heed so best leave that the noo.
THe SNP have maybe turned against independence by wanting to be in another union but they haven't become republican yet so you would be stuck with your constitutional monarchy. Fo a guy who lives in England , ironnically you sound a bit anti-English . Does sound like a bit of a rant you are having.
Yes Luxembourg does have more power over Scotland's fishing rights.
Thus is because Scotland isn't an independent nation and fishing like agriculture is "managed" on our behalf by Westminster.
You've made a decent point there about being independent in or out of EU. [emoji1303]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, theknickerwetter said:

I don't know of a"form of independence"  that involves being in a Union. 

It sounds like you are another anti-England poster rather than a supporter of independence. 

 

Nice.

I do..... The form of independence that gives you a choice of any Union you choose to be in,  or out for that matter.....  What's it called again 🤔  oh aye independence,  brexiteers called it TAKING BACK CONTROL 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Bud the Baker said:

Disagree, we just want a different form of independence - one that recognises it's the 21st century.

*************************

Scotland pop 5424800 - MEPs 6

Slovenia pop 5450421 - MEPs 14

So we would more than double our representation in the European parliament if we were independent and the EU would have us even if just to say GIRFUY to England..    

Also, given that current Scotland's fishing rights are the product of being in the EU during 40 years of alternating Cons/Labour administrations followed by Theresa May admitting they were part of our exit negotiating strategy I don't see how it can be portrayed as SNPs fault.

Slovenia's population is only around 2million,  am guessing you mean Slovakia ?? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, theknickerwetter said:

Sounds like a bit of a rant your are having. Scotland gets 6 seats in Europe out of a total 751 , land locked Luxembourg for instance has more power over our fishing rights -  Europe has an unelected , self selected commission , I could go on but l can still see the viens sticking out on your heed so best leave that the noo.

THe SNP have maybe turned against independence by wanting to be in another union but they haven't become republican yet so you would be stuck with your constitutional monarchy. Fo a guy who lives in England , ironnically you sound a bit anti-English . Does sound like a bit of a rant you are having.

An independent Scotland may keep the monarchy for the time being but at least they’d be free of the 800 mainly Con/Lab peers who should have no place in our political decisions. 

Im not anti-English. Most of my friends are English, my two boys were born down here. I’m anti-Westminster - that’s completely different. I disagree with the English dictatorship Scotland, NI and Wales are ruled under - that isn’t the fault of my English friends, but the fault of the politicians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Cornwall_Saint said:

An independent Scotland may keep the monarchy for the time being but at least they’d be free of the 800 mainly Con/Lab peers who should have no place in our political decisions. 

Im not anti-English. Most of my friends are English, my two boys were born down here. I’m anti-Westminster - that’s completely different. I disagree with the English dictatorship Scotland, NI and Wales are ruled under - that isn’t the fault of my English friends, but the fault of the politicians.

That's ridiculous bud.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's get to the facts here. Scotland would run it's own affairs if independent. It would not be ruled by the EU. Just as the UK is not ruled by the EU. Every nation has a veto on major policies. Yes there are rules. Just as there will be rules in any partnership drawn up outwith the EU. in fact I think those who believe we'll be better out and trying to make deals with America will soon wish they never voted OUT. The anti EU fervour down south is due to lies and little ENGLANDER mentality. The English as a nation are obsessed with "rule Britannia". They actually believe that, by leaving the EU, the influx of foreigners would suddenly cease. They actually believe that the UK would save £350 million quid a year by jeopardising a massive trading partnership.

An independent Scotland would have a say in anything that would affect them. They would most likely be net gainers from the EU purse. The UK benefitted from being part of a massive trading sector without tariffs. Scotland would also benefit but even more so.

Yes. There are many flaws inside the EU and they need to change but I firmly believe that will happen. IF I had an option I would certainly have preferred it still to be a common market without the extra tiers of bureaucracy but, as it is, I feel we are better fighting from within rather than looking from the outside and having us fawning over America begging for their scraps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, theknickerwetter said:

Ah  , there's that paradox again.

Nearly every country in the world is in some sort of union, trading block, etc. Australia, NZ, Canada, US are all involved in some sort of version.

Many Brexiteers are saying the UK should go No Deal then go to WTO. There is only one country in the world who purely trades on WTO terms - Mauritania. Hardly inspiring.

2 hours ago, oaksoft said:

That's ridiculous bud.

It depends how you look at it.

For myself and many other Indy supporters, England will always get their own way. I’ve already mentioned the 533 English MPs v 117 Scots/Welsh/NI MPs, and of course, two countries voted to Remain in the EU while two voted to Leave. Where Scotland and England’s views differ, England will always come out on top. The rest of the UK cannot outvote England. It’s the only country of the four that could single handedly give us a majority government.

I do remember your comment about how some No voters don’t see the split in countries, and treat each vote as a UK vote instead of Sco/Eng/Wal/NI votes. I do think it’s a fair comment you made, which I can agree that some will see it that way, a very valid point indeed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Cornwall_Saint said:

It depends how you look at it.

For myself and many other Indy supporters, England will always get their own way. I’ve already mentioned the 533 English MPs v 117 Scots/Welsh/NI MPs, and of course, two countries voted to Remain in the EU while two voted to Leave. Where Scotland and England’s views differ, England will always come out on top. The rest of the UK cannot outvote England. It’s the only country of the four that could single handedly give us a majority government.

I do remember your comment about how some No voters don’t see the split in countries, and treat each vote as a UK vote instead of Sco/Eng/Wal/NI votes. I do think it’s a fair comment you made, which I can agree that some will see it that way, a very valid point indeed.

I think the problem in thinking the way you do is that you have a very high risk (and I'm not saying you are like this) of resentment brewing. It's a very short step from there to "chip on shoulder" attitude, anti-English sentiment and then outright racism. Personally I just don't think it's a view which leads anywhere healthy but I respect your opinion on that and I can see where you are coming from. Again, I'm not saying you suffer from any of that but I am concerned about how many knuckle-draggers would go down the route I've described.

Link to comment
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.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...