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

kabayiri

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Interesting comment. Precisely what you expect the EU to do or offer an IScotland to resolve the situation? Sovereign states are still responsible for their own financial management i.e. budgets. The Greeks aren't going to very happy if IScotland was to receive preferential treatment. Nor the electorate in other southern states. Who have suffered years of severe austerity.

The SNP can't go demanding financial support from the EU.

They have spent the last X years telling everyone how Scotland is one of the richest places on the planet.

Why, it's almost like the narrative changes daily

Shaka_Zulu

Shakethedisease wrote: »

. Ordinary voters aren't interested in all that crap.

Perhaps, perhaps not but one thing they are interested in is people that can do the job they are paid for and there are virtually none in the SNP that have any gravitas or knowledge.

Most can't even talk the talk so walking the walk is totally beyond them.

As I have said before the SNP have now been tested and they have been found wanting, a busted flush!

Thrugelmir

Shakethedisease wrote: »

You managed all of that without bothering to mention what's going to happen in rUK when Scotland goes at the same time as you leave the EU and Single Market ? Credit ratings ? The £ ? Trade deals, Trade deficit ?

No doubt there's though times ahead. In or out of Europe. The UK had and still has difficult choices to make. In order to bring the UK's finances under control and finally start the long road of rebalancing the economy. Away from services, property and public sector employment to more productive and wealth producing activities. If your not at the coal face I appreciate it's difficult to understand the amount of work that's going on behind the scenes. Like steering an oil supertanker. An economy is a long slow process to turn around. With decisions today taking years to show real benefits and savings.

Shakethedisease

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

I apologise in advance, perhaps I'm more versed on these matters than I should expect yourself to be.

But in terms of looking at the data, if I have 2 people called John Doe saying they live at the same address, how do you determine which John Doe is the real John Doe? Looking at the electoral roll isn't going to help you do that when all of the other identifying data is the same. The only way I can see to validate the data would be to go around all of the addresses that filled it in, confirming email addresses to reconcile what is false and what is not. That's if they even want to give it to you...

You've put your foot in it this time and got it all over your clothes, a right mess.

This is absolutely 100% my bag when it comes to software development, data management, data quality, data warehousing, business intelligence, management information, big data, data integrity and validation, data mining, statistical analysis, trends, etc...

Therefore the results of the "conversation" cannot be relied upon even if checked against the electoral roll. There have to be further checks, in person or over the phone, which is a colossal undertaking.

John Doe of 11 Haggis Road filled in the survey 10 times.

"Which answers did you actually put down sir? And what is your email address?"

Like I said before, it's open to fraud and it's an exercise in futility. Money that would have been better spent elsewhere, even more so if they actually do try to verify the data! Another slow hand clap for the politicians in the north.

Hahaha. :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :T

Also a slow hand clap for yourself in saying exactly the same thing about the UK government online petition asking for there not to be a 2nd referendum. It does indeed suffer from the same exploits, there's no way around that and I don't expect the UK government to employ an army of people, or even if they're volunteers, to go around asking if people are who they say they are to validate the data. Yet you deny that the SNP's "national conversation" suffers from the same issues?

Honestly, take it as a forgone conclusion, I'm right on both counts and you look silly trying to defend the SNP's survey. It further speaks to your perspective on the entire topic of Scottish independence in my view. Defending it to the last even when you're so blatantly wrong. I got as far as having details of someone living in Scotland ready to input my hard-line anti-independence answers into the SNP's survey, I didn't because it'd be wrong of me to abuse it. But I wanted to prove it possible to deceive it.

Online petitions are a waste of time. The fact that Scottish Tories and folks like yourself and Jock on here have suddenly started taking them oh so seriously and as an actual serious factor, which absolutely must be considered going forward. Rather than real voters in real elections is simply grasping at some very flimsy straws.

The SNP survey was obvious in it's intentions. Separate the solid No's and Yes's out from those waverers in the middle so they know exactly where to concentrate efforts next time round ( the waverers/could be persuaded ). Davidson used the same tactics in the last Holyrood election and was open about doing so.

TrickyTree83

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Online petitions are a waste of time. The fact that Scottish Tories and folks like yourself and Jock on here have suddenly started taking them oh so seriously and as an actual serious factor, which absolutely must be considered going forward. Rather than real voters in real elections is simply grasping at some very flimsy straws.

The SNP survey was obvious in it's intentions. Separate the solid No's and Yes's out from those waverers in the middle so they know exactly where to concentrate efforts next time round ( the waverers/could be persuaded ). Davidson used the same tactics in the last Holyrood election and was open about doing so.

I don't believe I've ever said they were cast iron, I even tried to tell you that you're correct to hold suspicion regarding the UK government petition, but incorrect, grossly incorrect, to not apportion that same suspicion towards the SNP survey.

I don't think you acknowledged anything that I posted. You attempted to defend the SNP survey after castigating the UK government petition. I laughed so hard I had to get it off my chest and write my previous post.

Either you think online petitions and surveys are open to fraudulent submission and manipulation or you don't, you can't say the UK's petition is utter crap but the SNP's smells sweeter than most because they can check the electoral roll!!!

Come on...

Shakethedisease

kabayiri wrote: »

Suppose Brexit does go bad in the short term. Don't you think trying to achieve Scottish independence alongside such a calamitous event is just a tad risky?

I don't see how it helps your cause really. In fact, it bolsters the argument that it's not a great time for Scottish independence.

Have patience. Come back to us in a decade's time; maybe oil will even be worth something then.

No, if Brexit is going to be bad then it's best to get out before the worst of it hits. And anyway the way the Scottish Govt and Scottish voters have been treated since the Brexit vote is a sobering indicator of what the Union has in store for Scots on a political level for the next decade or more, and it isn't looking so good at all.

The reason Brexit justifies calling a referendum on Scottish independence lies not in the fact that the Brexit referendum produced different results in England and in Scotland, but in the London government’s reaction to this fact.

Scotland’s government, virtually all its MPs, and a clear majority of its people, are opposed to leaving the EU. That fact, as far as London is concerned, is irrelevant. It is there that the democratic outrage lies. It would still be a democratic outrage regardless of what the particular issue was. The point is the negation of Scotland’s democratic will, not the EU question as such.

..It is hard to avoid the conclusion that at least some of the support for the Union is based on a sense of ‘ownership’ of Scotland, rather than any sense of ‘national’ solidarity. Brexit is clearly English nationalism in disguise, and it will not let the Union stand between it and its object of desire if a choice must be made.

If Mrs May wants to head off Scottish nationalism, she needs to take cognisance of Scottish opposition to being dragged out of the Single Market. In short, she needs to take Scottish democracy seriously. What makes this unlikely is that to do so, she would have to risk running foul of English nationalism. Given that Scotland returns exactly one Conservative MP, and England hundreds, this is not likely to happen.

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/what-justifies-indyref2/ ( full article at link ).

Things are moving well beyond Brexit consequences now. And this is on top of the already 45% of Scots who wanted out before the EU referendum was even a twinkle in Cameron's eye with the majority to do it.

A lot of posters on sites like these seem to know an awful lot about the finest details of how Scotland will fare after independence ( badly apparently). Yet seem very reluctant to look round and face the possible consequences of an rUK no longer in the EU/Single Market and no Scotland. The Brexit thread here is article after article of echo chamber stuff only focusing on the 'possible' positives imo. If there's one thing you cannot accuse any facet of any Scottish discussion going on online.. it's that it only ever has positive outcomes thrown at it like 99% of the media does for Brexit.

Shakethedisease

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Interesting comment. Precisely what you expect the EU to do or offer an IScotland to resolve the situation? Sovereign states are still responsible for their own financial management i.e. budgets. The Greeks aren't going to very happy if IScotland was to receive preferential treatment. Nor the electorate in other southern states. Who have suffered years of severe austerity.

I don't expect them to offer anything. But having a deficit in itself is no barrier to joining the EU. Yet I keep seeing the same '3% GDP' before Scotland can even join being thrown about as 100% true. In actual fact what they are referring to is joining the Eurozone, not the EU.

Kirsty Hughes‏ @KirstyS_Hughes Feb 20

@kevverage @BraidenHT on deficit, Scotland would need an agreed convergence/reduction plan with EU but won't have to be at 3% pre-accession

I'm posting this tweet from Kirsty Hughes (Director, Scottish Centre on European Relations, Writer and commentator on international and European politics )...since it saves me having to post screeds of technical stuff and it condenses the situation down in a nutshell.

Shakethedisease

Shaka_Zulu wrote: »

Perhaps, perhaps not but one thing they are interested in is people that can do the job they are paid for and there are virtually none in the SNP that have any gravitas or knowledge.

Most can't even talk the talk so walking the walk is totally beyond them.

As I have said before the SNP have now been tested and they have been found wanting, a busted flush!

Get back to me when the Scottish Tories, Labour and Lib Dems actually come up with any policies beyond stopping a referendum ( or in the Lib Dems case, stopping a Scottish one because we had one in 2014 but calling for another EU one even though the last one was 9 months ago ).

Shakethedisease

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

I don't believe I've ever said they were cast iron, I even tried to tell you that you're correct to hold suspicion regarding the UK government petition, but incorrect, grossly incorrect, to not apportion that same suspicion towards the SNP survey.

I don't think you acknowledged anything that I posted. You attempted to defend the SNP survey after castigating the UK government petition. I laughed so hard I had to get it off my chest and write my previous post.

Either you think online petitions and surveys are open to fraudulent submission and manipulation or you don't, you can't say the UK's petition is utter crap but the SNP's smells sweeter than most because they can check the electoral roll!!!

Come on...

The SNP didn't share their results, they are for internal use and many were collected face to face on doorsteps, town centers and via their own members asking family and friends to fill them in.

Your online petitions and selective reading of polling is being used for one thing and one thing only. To de-legitimise something Scots voters endorsed last May in an official Scottish General Election. Shady stuff but understandable given what's at stake and no one can be sure of a No win anymore.

TrickyTree83

Shakethedisease wrote: »

The SNP didn't share their results, they are for internal use and many were collected face to face on doorsteps, town centers and via their own members asking family and friends to fill them in.

Your online petitions and selective reading of polling is being used for one thing and one thing only. To de-legitimise something Scots voters endorsed last May in an official Scottish General Election. Shady stuff but understandable given what's at stake and no one can be sure of a No win anymore.

My petition?

De-legitimise? Sturgeon did that herself, from her own mouth on many many occasions. The things she said just before and just after 2014 are at odds with the SNP manifesto.

And I never asked if they shared the results and I don't believe they knocked on 4m doors. So... Do you want to tell us if the SNP survey was as flawed as every other online survey that does not require extensive verification? Name, address and email not being extensive.

You say shady but I'm sure the majority of Scots find what Sturgeon is doing after what she said is a more accurate definition of shady.