The New Fat Scotland 'Thanks for all the Fish' Thread.

Shakethedisease

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Shakey is stuck in the groove. That's the problem for most overtly political types. While the world is progressively changing. To remain wedded to their principles to change with the times.

It's not a groove. I'm just finding it difficult to see where this sudden inference that a Westminster GE or vote share correlates with independence is coming from.

Mainly because the last time Salmond called a referendum he had only 6, and I'll repeat that again for the hard of reading SIX MP's at Westminster. I don't get the point Tricky, Molly and Jock are trying to make and none of them can explain it other than carping on about dead dreams, defacto referendums and mythical and arbitary vote shares.

If Salmond can call a referendum vote with 6 MP's and a majority at Holyrood. Why on earth can't Sturgeon do the same with 40+ and a majority of pro-indy MSP's at Holyrood and a vote already passed on it ?

Davidson and the media churning out anti-ref soundbites are just that, soundbites. If Tricky and others have been suckered in by it all that's hardly my fault. But at the end of the day if Salmond can do it with 6, Sturgeon can certainly do it with 40 or more, never mind any vote share. Therefore this GE doesn't make any real difference going forward. And it's time some posters here woke up to it.

Shakethedisease

elantan wrote: »

Another day of it Shake ? Ahhh glad I'm busy just now and have very little time to spend on here

Has the argument moved on at all or i's it still the same old same old ?

Not long now till June 8th and we will see what Scotland ( and the rest of the UK) decides, it does appear that May is becoming more and more like Thatcher every day ... that's always a good help for the indy cause

Every cloud and all that

Same old really. Some posters think we're having a referendum next month and not a General Election. Shaka is posting huge big slightly fuzzy pics up of every single bit of anti-SNP stuff he/she can find. Molly thinks it's hugely popular to start calling me grandma like it's some kind of weirdo affliction I have to be ashamed of.

Nothing new

Shakethedisease

Nearly forgot, string wanted to know a few pages back if you as a Green voter think Harvie has a mandate and the Greens have the right to back an second indy ref.

Shaka_Zulu

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Therefore this GE doesn't make any real difference going forward. And it's time some posters here woke up to it.

This quote needs to be saved for posterity.

The only people about to have a rude awakening (in Scotland) on the 8th June are the nats. The people of Scotland have had the scales lifted from their eyes and can now see the Emperor has no clothes.

Thrugelmir

Shakethedisease wrote: »

It's not a groove. I'm just finding it difficult to see where this sudden inference that a Westminster GE or vote share correlates with independence is coming from.

Once independence is achieved, the SNP simply dissipates. As mission accomplished. That leaves one heck of a void to be filled. A new independent country with complete lack of a path or direction. Understandable while remaining in the EU holds much importance. Doubt that the other nations will be quick to give handouts though. The Scottish version of UKIP.

Shakethedisease

Shaka_Zulu wrote: »

This quote needs to be saved for posterity.

The only people about to have a rude awakening (in Scotland) on the 8th June are the nats. The people of Scotland have had the scales lifted from their eyes and can now see the Emperor has no clothes.

May can already say No to a referendum right now even if there wasn't a GE coming up. And you've forgotten that Salmond called one with a 19.9% vote share in Scotland at the GE a year before he did so. Sturgeon's going to do much better than that.

You're all over the place with this and rude awakenings. Davidson has suckered you in big style believing all sorts of crap about vote shares and MP numbers. They didn't make any difference to Salmond on 19.9% of the vote and 6 MPs at a GE, and they really won't make any difference to Sturgeon after this one either. You're in for a bit of a disappointment.

May's going to try and block it, that much has been clear for a while but she won't be able to use this GE as justification. And Sturgeon/the SNP/Greens/Scottish Parliament certainly won't accept it as one.

elantan

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Nearly forgot, string wanted to know a few pages back if you as a Green voter think Harvie has a mandate and the Greens have the right to back an second indy ref.

Missed that one ... I vote green mainky ... i also vote SNP and even once upon a time I voted Lib Dem ( I know ... what was I thinking ) ... yep I do reckon Harvie has the right to back a second indy ref hell I think if even Molly wanted to she would have the right to back a second indy ref

Don't think I'm ever gonna be a gran .. so sadly I might not be able to share your affliction

.string.

elantan wrote: »

Missed that one ... I vote green mainky ... i also vote SNP and even once upon a time I voted Lib Dem ( I know ... what was I thinking ) ... yep I do reckon Harvie has the right to back a second indy ref hell I think if even Molly wanted to she would have the right to back a second indy ref

Don't think I'm ever gonna be a gran .. so sadly I might not be able to share your affliction

Yes I did ask you a question, you will have missed it being away.

But Shakey did not relay it accurately. Can't think why.

Please refer back to post 10197 which explains the question and later to post 10216 where I asked you to comment.

Shaka_Zulu

The party only ever has one real priority, and that is winning independence. All else is a means to end. It is utterly obsessed, but the majority of Scottish voters who do not share the obsession have started to notice that rather than the Nationalists offering technocratic devolved competence, as promised, they instead serve up worse than mediocre fare.

There were flashes of the old assured Sturgeon on Marr and Peston this weekend. She gets on, she said, with the “girl job” of running the country and her husband does the cooking, a riff on May’s “girl and boy jobs” remarks in the BBC’s One Show interview last week. Actually, the assertion by Sturgeon was a bit disingenuous. Sturgeon’s husband is chief executive of the SNP. Is there a more relentlessly political couple this side of the Clintons?

Unfortunately for Sturgeon, the puffed-up SNP is now suffering the Scottish equivalent of trouble in Michigan, with voters who had been taken for granted growing sceptical and the leadership reduced to doing what used to work – shouting evil “Torees” – in the hope that it magically starts working again. It is not working, yet, although it is conceivable it could rally support in the final weeks.

The media is biting back too. On the Marr show on Sunday, in particular, Sturgeon was most unconvincing on the state of Scotland’s schools.

Added to that, the party’s Brexit strategy is very obviously and publicly unravelling. After Scotland voted Remain (62-38) and the rest of the UK did otherwise, the SNP thought that it would infuriate Scots and power the final push to independence. That simply didn’t happen because many people sensibly see that the negotiations will be complex and think it is probably best getting all that done before even thinking about overturning the 2014 pro-Union vote. This realism gives an extra piquancy to the SNP failing to get on with its devolved day job.

Sturgeon is now stuck. Her case on the EU defies basic logic. Brexit and leaving the EU is supposedly so terrible that there should be a second independence referendum within two years, to get Scotland back into the EU. Yet now, because a third of Nats voted for Brexit, the SNP has shifted away from EU membership, the very thing which is supposed to necessitate independence. Sturgeon will probably soon have to commit to a referendum on the EU, if she wants to deal somehow with the contradiction.

The unravelling is so rapid and interesting precisely because the three aspects of the SNP’s problem – being exposed on Brexit, domestic policy failure and the perception of Sturgeon having fallen for her own hype – are mutually self-reinforcing. Each when mentioned amplifies the other.

The SNP will, of course, win the most seats in Scotland on June 8th. It made such vast advances in 2015 – winning 56 out of 59 seats – that it could not do otherwise. The SNP election machine is formidable and honed to something akin to perfection. But the party on current trends is headed backwards, when, as I keep pointing out, its entire schtick is supposed to be forward momentum towards the supposedly glorious day of independence.

In response, the clearly spooked SNP leadership is behaving just as parties on the turn usually behave. After the extraordinary rise and years of ceaseless advance, the SNP leadership has grown a wee bit too smug and finds itself ill-equipped to adapt or respond to changed circumstances. It’s very funny to watch.


https://reaction.life/nicola-sturgeon-snp-unravelling-rapidly/

.string.

On the matter of what difference Tory MPs will make, well I can only state what I think should happen

The SNP presence in Westminster has not been constructive, being obsessed with whingeing all the time.

Tory MPs however, can be used very visibly to accentuate the beneficial aspects of the Union. I would expand the work done at Westminster and put those Scottish MPs at the centre of such work and activities of particular interest to Scotlandof as part of the Government. As a consequence there would be much more air time for Union-friendly voices to counter the excess of moans and groans from the SNP.

The situation would be even better if some Lib Dem & Labour Scottish MPs would also arrive at Westminster.

There's no doubt in my mind that increased and relevant visible involvement of Scottish MPs in Parliament will further the Union.