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

mollycat

Herzlos wrote: »

This is the first part of their "Key Pledges" from their manifesto (page 4):
So whilst they never said "Independence", it's a clear theme that's obviously central to their manifesto, and part of the reason they got 48 seats.

Which is what I said. Thanks.

Herzlos

mollycat wrote: »

Which is what I said. Thanks.

You also said "keeping absolutely silent about independence" when they mentioned it constantly, just not using the word "independence". There's no way anyone looking at SNP literature would think they weren't campaigning with independence in mind.

Malthusian

What you actually said is that they kept absolutely silent about independence, which they plainly didn't.

And both you and Herzlos are wrong, they didn't "never" say independence - "We believe that the best future for Scotland is to be!an independent, European nation".

You could at least wait until a new page before contradicting yourself.

Malthusian

In any case if there is any doubt over whether the Scottish voted in droves for the independence party because they wanted independence, the answer is simple - hold a referendum.

"Just because someone voted for the Scottish independence party who spoke about the case for independence in the first line of their manifesto doesn't mean they want independence, there were other issues like stopping Brexit by gaining independence and then joining the EU" is only an argument against an immediate declaration of independence without consulting the voters further. Not against a referendum.

mollycat

Malthusian wrote: »

In any case if there is any doubt over whether the Scottish voted in droves for the independence party because they wanted independence, the answer is simple - hold a referendum.

"Just because someone voted for the Scottish independence party who spoke about the case for independence in the first line of their manifesto doesn't mean they want independence, there were other issues like stopping Brexit by gaining independence and then joining the EU" is only an argument against an immediate declaration of independence without consulting the voters further. Not against a referendum.

So just keep having one till the desired reult is achieved?

Don't think so.

Shakethedisease

mollycat wrote: »

So just keep having one till the desired reult is achieved?

Don't think so.

The SNP were voted in on a landslide in Scotland promising to give Scots the right to choose. That's what they feel they have to do because thats what the electorate instructed them to do. The other 3 parties policies lost in most constituencies. That's the way First Past the Post works molly..and that's why there will be a ballot so the Scottish electorate do indeed get the right to choose. It's called democracy.

Tromking

Just watched a rather testy exchange between Sturgeon and a tv news chap. She didn't like one bit being challenged on whether there will definitely be an indyref later this as she's promised.
Poor Nicola,caught between a rabidly pro indyref core support and the wishes of the majority of Scots who just want her to get on with the day job. I'm not surprised there's some on here doubting her separatist credentials and talking about other vehicles to reach the holy grail of independence. All good news for the Union of course, factionalism is our friend.
Good to see a more pro-active case for the Union being made by HMG, lots of videos I see on social media aimed at Scots informing them of the benefits of the pooling and sharing of resources with the rUK.
Please don't tell me Shakey that the SNP's only plan is hold a cringeworthy and embarrassing #pretendyref that no one other than greivance addled nationalists will bother voting in?

abz88

Shakethedisease wrote: »

The SNP were voted in on a landslide in Scotland promising to give Scots the right to choose. That's what they feel they have to do because thats what the electorate instructed them to do. The other 3 parties policies lost in most constituencies. That's the way First Past the Post works molly..and that's why there will be a ballot so the Scottish electorate do indeed get the right to choose. It's called democracy.

It's not what the electorate instructed them to do. There is no way to distinguish what SNP votes were from voters wanting independence and what SNP votes were tactical votes to try and stop Brexit. Even Sturgeon has stated "I do not assume that everyone who voted SNP last week is yet ready to vote for independence"

It's also not what their manifesto stated, "In order to put a referendum beyond legal challenge,
we will seek a transfer of power, such as a section 30 order under The Scotland Act." They have sought the transfer of power and been told no so manifesto fulfilled, move on.

And the whole "its a dramatic change since Indy Ref due to Brexit" is wrong. If we had voted for independence, we would have been out of the EU so we are in the exact same situation now, albeit out as part of the UK and not as an independent Scotland. There is also no guarantee we would get back in the EU, our finances do not meet the requirements (whether you blame Westminster or the SNP for this, either way they need sorted) and given the issues Spain is having with Catalonia just now its not clear if they would veto our membership or not. You then have to factor in that by the time we have moved ahead with sorting everything we would need to join the EU, pass the veto issue with Spain etc, we would likely need to have another EU referendum to decide if we like the deal being offered to join. There is no guarantee on how that would go (and if you say we voted to remain in EU so that won't change, well, we voted to remain in the UK as well...)

mollycat

Malthusian wrote: »

Ok, let's look at the message then. Scotland has fallen slightly down the OECD rankings (as all countries will at times, they're not written on golden tablets) and this is evidence that Scotland should carry on as it is now... how exactly?

The implication that it's all devolution's fault is complete nonsense unless you can show a direct causation. Was Scotland the Garden of Eden before 1997?

"Scotland is going to hell in a handbasket, we must do absolutely nothing before it's too late." Genius.

At the point made ^^^^.

With respect, I think you are missing the whole point of those who oppose independence in Scotland. It may be because you do not live in Scotland, (I did ask you politely before, but I don't recall an answer).

Far from "going to hell in a handbasket", I think living in Scotland and the UK in a whole is fantastic. To be born in the UK is a huge stroke of fortune that billions around the world who are in poverty, victims of injustice etc envy. We are educated, prosperous have free education and an NHS, and despite the news media attempting to persuade people otherwise, comparitively stable government and fiscal security.

These are precisely the reasons I am opposed to Independence; to put in jeopardy all of the above for what? Manufactured grudge and grievance from a minority of the disaffected with no insight into their good fortune, nor the potential harm independence will bring.

Of course posts from others regarding the lack of attention to the day job from Sturgeon are respected, welcomed and thanked by myself; after all any stick used to beat down Independence is a good stick as far as i am concerned.

But for clarity, I will repeat the 2 points I consistently make regarding the folly of seperation.

1. How does an iScotland raise the massive amounts of tax revenue it needs to provide it's citizens with basic services without the support (read subsidy) of the wider rUK economy?

The only answer is all or any combination of higher taxes/extreme austerity/cutting essential services.

2. Why focus on a purely geographical basis within the UK? I will have more in common with people from Cardiff, Wigan etc than I do with someone that lives a mile away. rUK posters on this thread will have more in common with myself rather than Farage/ Corbyn/Boris, (delete as applicable). People throughout the UK will have links through trade unionism, party affiliations, professional bodies etc, etc.

There is a huge distrust of WM within the Independence movement, (they don't have the insight to realise this is a common theme throughout the UK), but it seems illogical to mistrust a politician based there whilst being prepared to trust one based in either Edinburgh or Brussels.

SNP (wrongly in my view), say the wider UK gives us little respect; why then will making ourselves more isolated in the world with less influence in Brussels than we have in WM help?

People in the wider UK, I think see the Independence movement as a heroic liberal minded force taking on the Tory government. I think there is support for that movement in the wider UK as people see the potential for the government to be given a bloody nose.

The reality is the only people with bloody noses following any Independence will be the 6 million people that live north of Hadrian's Wall.

mollycat

Shakethedisease wrote: »

The SNP were voted in on a landslide in Scotland promising to give Scots the right to choose. That's what they feel they have to do because thats what the electorate instructed them to do. The other 3 parties policies lost in most constituencies. That's the way First Past the Post works molly..and that's why there will be a ballot so the Scottish electorate do indeed get the right to choose. It's called democracy.

The way First Past The Post works in a UK wide General Election is to decide the composition of the government of the UK.

Nothing else; (as much as you would like it to).