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

Shakethedisease

A_Medium_Size_Jock wrote: »

Yet again we see you run away from facts and dodge the issues.
Let's see if you can salvage your credibility by answering the following - WITHOUT obfuscation or deception.

*1 - Enlighten us as to where in this thread the "inaccurate statements such as Scotland has already put in an application to the EU" is?
We can all see "Sturgeon got her come-uppance on June 30th on an application to join the EU" (#2861) - which is NOT what you are saying has been said. At best, you appear to be attempting to misinterpret what has been said; more-so given the link in that post which very clearly explains what this statement refers to.

I think the comment rather speaks for itself.

As far as I can discern, Anderson wrote his article before he was aware that Sturgeon got her come-uppance on June 30th on an application to join the EU.

Sturgeon put an application in to join the EU and got her comeuppance. There's no misinterpreting there as it's there in black and white. Patently along the lines of complete nonsense and rightly challenged.

*2 - Meaningless waffle tbh. As has been seen in the UK's EU referendum, second-guessing the general public's intentions is not easy.
In fact it does rather appear that Scot's don't (yet?) even want another vote, with 50% stating they did not want a second referendum.
A YouGov poll Aug29-3 asking about voting intent in an independence referendum; Yes = 46%, No = 54%
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/09/01/davidson-now-more-popular-sturgeon-scotland/

One Yougov poll. Ok.*rolls eyes* I've already been over poll accuracy in this thread both with my own take and with their very obvious failings both in the last GE and the recent EU referendum <--- both of which are facts incidentally.
There's also a question mark over whether EU nationals are even included given the extensive cross tabbing in the tables with the last GE ( where they cannot vote ). 16-17 year olds were also excluded from the last two YouGov polls.

I'm not second guessing. It's a perfectly logical conclusion to make that since EU nationals in the last referendum voted No to preserve their EU status in the UK. That given Theresa May has so far failed to reassure them of their status in a non-EU UK.. that they would probably vote Yes in any future Scottish referendum to keep their status in a Scotland within the EU. Previous Labour No voters are also reconsidering given the results of the last GE, what's likely to be the next and the Brexit vote.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Have you forgotten about Guy Verhofstadt already ? A few days ago ? His stance would seem to counter your own regarding any comeuppance and he's one of the three chief EU negotiators. Also as covered many times here, Scotland would be looking to Remain. Not re-apply.

That has absolutely nothing to do with .string's post.
Pure deflection on your part.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I think the comment rather speaks for itself.

Sturgeon put an application in to join the EU and got her comeuppance. There's no misinterpreting there as it's there in black and white. Patently along the lines of complete nonsense and rightly challenged. Sadly you are at best being disingenuous. See #2889 AND #2890



One Yougov poll. Ok.*rolls eyes* I've already been over poll accuracy in this thread both with my own take and with their very obvious failings both in the last GE and the recent EU referendum <--- both of which are facts incidentally.
There's also a question mark over whether EU nationals are even included given the extensive cross tabbing in the tables with the last GE ( where they cannot vote ). 16-17 year olds were also excluded from the last two YouGov polls.

I'm not second guessing. It's a perfectly logical conclusion to make that since EU nationals in the last referendum voted No to preserve their EU status in the UK. That given Theresa May has so far failed to reassure them of their status in a non-EU UK.. that they would probably vote Yes in any future Scottish referendum to keep their status in a Scotland within the EU. Previous Labour No voters are also reconsidering given the results of the last GE, what's likely to be the next and the Brexit vote.

Sadly it seems that you prefer to ignore fact.
As in the post above this.
You are, as I say above, at best being disingenuous.

Shakethedisease

A_Medium_Size_Jock wrote: »

That has absolutely nothing to do with .string's post.
Pure deflection on your part.

Yes it was. He was saying that German, Spanish, the French and the EU had given Sturgeon her comeuppance. I reminded him of Guy Verhofstadt in case this development had bypassed him somehow.

She was talking with the EU people on the subject of making an application for Scotland to join the EU. She got her come-uppance though. That's what the quotes from the Spanish, the French and the EU officials were about.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Yes it was. He was saying that German, Spanish, the French and the EU had given Sturgeon her comeuppance. I reminded him of Guy Verhofstadt in case this development had bypassed him somehow.

Which indeed was the case - but the appointment of Guy Verhofstadt had not happened on June 30th this year!
And therefore is irrelevant in the original context.

Shakethedisease

A_Medium_Size_Jock wrote: »

Sadly it seems that you prefer to ignore fact.
As in the post above this.
You are, as I say above, at best being disingenuous.

Is absolutely fine by me that you personally think so. People here can read and take away from my posts what they will regarding the actual issues we're debating on a debate forum though.

There was no application made to the EU from Sturgeon. All polling is flawed at the present time. Most Yes voters from 2014 will vote Yes again. Most EU nationals will change from No to Yes, and a fair few Labour voters in light of this new Conservative govt looking like being around for a while will also be reconsidering should a second referendum occur.

My cards are all on the table. Feel free to disagree with any of the points I've raised, I'd welcome it. But it would be good if you could back up your own points with some evidence occasionally rather than just throwing random soundbites about ignoring facts around a lot.

Everyone can see what string posted ( and edited ). He clearly referred to an application being made. However, now we're getting into petty posting semantics instead of debating anything of note. String and I are old friends on these boards. I don't really think he needs you to fight his corner. He's perfectly capable of doing so on his own and I'm well aware of the fact.

Shakethedisease

A_Medium_Size_Jock wrote: »

Which indeed was the case - but the appointment of Guy Verhofstadt had not happened on June 30th this year!
And therefore is irrelevant in the original context.

What do you think about his appointment though. Which after all is the important thing in terms of this particular debate around Scotland and the EU ?

A_Medium_Size_Jock

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Is absolutely fine by me that you personally think so. People here can read and take away from my posts what they will regarding the actual issues we're debating on a debate forum though.

There was no application made to the EU from Sturgeon. All polling is flawed at the present time. Most Yes voters from 2014 will vote Yes again. Most EU nationals will change from No to Yes, and a fair few Labour voters in light of this new Conservative govt looking like being around for a while will also be reconsidering should a second referendum occur.

My cards are all on the table. Feel free to disagree with any of the points I've raised, I'd welcome it. But it would be good if you could back up your own points with some evidence occasionally rather than just throwing random soundbites about ignoring facts around a lot.

Everyone can see what string posted ( and edited ). He clearly referred to an application being made. However, now we're getting into petty posting semantics instead of debating anything of note. String and I are old friends on these boards. I don't really think he needs you to fight his corner. He's perfectly capable of doing so on his own and I'm well aware of the fact.

It has nothing to do with "fighting his corner" but EVERYTHING to do with your inaccuracies,obfuscation and innuendo.
As in your "back up your own points with some evidence occasionally" comment above; nearly all my posts contain not only quotations but also links in support of my so-called "random soundbites" - which (as you say) people here can read.
They are there to see.
Which is some justification for my opinion.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

Shakethedisease wrote: »

What do you think about his appointment though. Which after all is the important thing in terms of this particular debate around Scotland and the EU ?

I think I will reserve my opinion until such a time as discussions actually commence.
Since much can (and I feel sure will) happen between now and then.

zagubov

.string. wrote: »

I would imagine that the reverse scenario is more likely, the SNP being hell bent on "handing control to the EU", to re-phrase a Brexit slogan.

Anyway, now I have your attention; you have mentioned EFTA as an alternative economic grouping to the EU.

I also think it is an option for Brexit, but in a somewhat Machiavellian way.

The UK has history with EFTA of course, being a founder member way back (1958? I forget, ... doesn't matter). So considering it would be sensible. If the UK were to rejoin it, possible attracting others outside the EU, it would represent a bigger market than the UK alone (100 million, say) and could present an opportunity to work through a better deal than the UK would otherwise have got and in the process improve the situation of existing EFTA members.

I think it would be good to have exploratory talks with EFTA along those lines.

Machiavellian? Yes, in this way. Such a grouping may prove to be attractive to other countries presently in the EU and we could see one or two other Fexits or Hexits or Pexits or whatever. On balance I think that unlikely but in a negotiation one needs pressure points, virtual or real, and should the EU lot in Brussels get hostile such a scenario could make them more compliant.

As shakey points out, I don't know whether EFTA wants to take in a country five times its own size (they've been hanging around the last half dozen SNP conferences, but you can see how Scotland would be a good fit size-wise).

I think EFTA would be a very good place for the UK to be, full stop. They're all in Schengen but there's no need to be. We could be in the EEA but there's no pressure to be. And we'd be able to attend EEA conferences and meetings as observers like the Swiss. The Norwegians pay as much as us for EEA membership but it's proportionally less compared to their income.

This would reduce current pressure for an indyref, especially if the powers currently used by the EU were returned directly to Scotland and the other home nations. Interesting.