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

Shakethedisease

Tromking wrote: »

Bottom line, Sturgeon will not call a referendum she cannot win and is a referendum that isn't SEC 30 compliant, a referendum at all?

Sturgeon has stated since the Brexit result was announced that she'll call a referendum if all else fails in keeping Scotland in the EU and or Single Market. She's already called it. Scottish Parliament has given the green light.

I`m not sure PM May denying Sturgeon`s planned indyref2 will cause the groundswell of indignation that you claim, especially with 60%+ of Scots agreeing with her about the timing.

As things stand the timing of a referendum/vote is nearly two years off yet. I'd wait to see what happens with that in terms of Scots wanting a referendum. They might be absolutely gagging for one by then. It's sitting at 50/50 now for a vote within two years.

As usual you extrapolate too much from votes cast for the SNP and the resultant seats gained in a nice safe non-referendum ballot.
A significant reduction in the share of the vote for the SNP at the GE, regardless of seats lost, kills independence stone dead till 2022, unless Brexit of course is a complete disaster then everything is again ups for grabs, including the UK bottling Brexit completely to keep Scotland within the Union.:)
Lest we forget only Glasgow in indyref1 voted for indpendence in 2014.Thats your problem, not justifying a mandate for a second referendum gained from a Westminster or Holyrood election.

You're mixing elections and referendums up. One minute talking about people considering voting Tory in order to lessen the risk of an indy ref. The next saying an election is not a referendum. You aren't making any sense. Plus the figures I gave you are from an Ipsos Mori director, I'm hardly extrapolating, I'm quoting him directly as he wrote it this morning.

THIS GE changes nothing as far as referendum requests for Section 30's go. It doesn't matter what happens, what the vote share is, or how many seats the Tories, Labour, Lib Dems, SNP gain or lose. The Scottish Parliament officially want a second referendum and they're not going to stop wanting a second referendum based on a few Westminster seats changing hands. Nothing at all which happens from this GE will kill independence stone dead and certainly not crappy, desperate clinging to straws debates about 'vote shares' lol. That's wishful thinking.

Sturgeon sits at Holyrood not Westminster. And Holyrood has already asked nicely. If May says no she'll have to go via by another route. One she's no doubt already planned and primed well in advance for. Am looking forward to hearing it myself, lots of constitutional grey areas around the England/Scotland Union, Devolution and the right to self-determination ( Scottish ) have never been tested in law in either UK or in international courts.

I suspect a few are about to be.

Shakethedisease

mrginge wrote: »

Great to see Nicola begging labour and lib dems to help them out in their cause.

Also great to see both of them telling her where to go.

But then again, after spending years slagging both parties off and discounting them as busted flushes it's hardly surprising.

At least we know that it'll be painted as the great Nicola holding out the hand of friendship and the establishment giving [STRIKE]her[/STRIKE] sorry I meant all of scotland a slap. Again.
All good propoganda for operation independence eh shakey!

Yes, it's always suuuuuch a good look for Labour leaning voters in Scotland to see their party refusing a helping hand in keeping the Tories out of office. Did their vote in Scotland absolute wonders in 2015 I can tell you. They managed to save 1 MP out of it.

All other parties in Scotland should follow their lead I definitely 100% agree with that. Eh ginge !

Mistermeaner

whats the snp going to do with its 2 suspended members (both of whom incidently voted against the election)

Shakethedisease

Mistermeaner wrote: »

whats the snp going to do with its 2 suspended members (both of whom incidently voted against the election)

The NEC will decide this weeked. McGarry has already announced a pregnancy so is unlikely to stand again. Thompson probably won't be either, they've both got too much baggage imo even if unjustified ( neither have been found guilty of anything ).. round them right now.

I've also seen announcements on Twitter of others who are putting names forward for candidacy in those seats.

Tromking

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Sturgeon has stated since the Brexit result was announced that she'll call a referendum if all else fails in keeping Scotland in the EU and or Single Market. She's already called it. Scottish Parliament has given the green light.

As things stand the timing of a referendum/vote is nearly two years off yet. I'd wait to see what happens with that in terms of Scots wanting a referendum. They might be absolutely gagging for one by then. It's sitting at 50/50 now for a vote within two years.

You're mixing elections and referendums up. One minute talking about people considering voting Tory in order to lessen the risk of an indy ref. The next saying an election is not a referendum. You aren't making any sense. Plus the figures I gave you are from an Ipsos Mori director, I'm hardly extrapolating, I'm quoting him directly as he wrote it this morning.

THIS GE changes nothing as far as referendum requests for Section 30's go. It doesn't matter what happens, what the vote share is, or how many seats the Tories, Labour, Lib Dems, SNP gain or lose. The Scottish Parliament officially want a second referendum and they're not going to stop wanting a second referendum based on a few Westminster seats changing hands. Nothing at all which happens from this GE will kill independence stone dead and certainly not crappy, desperate clinging to straws debates about 'vote shares' lol. That's wishful thinking.

Sturgeon sits at Holyrood not Westminster. And Holyrood has already asked nicely. If May says no she'll have to go via by another route. One she's no doubt already planned and primed well in advance for. Am looking forward to hearing it myself, lots of constitutional grey areas around the England/Scotland Union, Devolution and the right to self-determination ( Scottish ) have never been tested in law in either UK or in international courts.

I suspect a few are about to be.

Look, I get that you and all the other SNP acolytes have totally bought into Sturgeon's 'plan' and like all cults you have almost blind faith in her. What scuppers her plan is other Scots, not Tories or Westminster. Public opinion is King in these situations.
Sturgeon will have given herself some wriggle room for the inevitable indyref2 U-turn I'm sure.:)

Thrugelmir

Shakethedisease wrote: »

they've both got too much baggage imo even if unjustified

Let's not deflect from reality.

Natalie McGarry, the MP for Glasgow East, has been charged with embezzlement

Rather embarrassing I would say.

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Nonsense string. The key issue is not their share on the popular vote at all. It's securing over 50% of 59 MP seats. Vote shares are irrelevant, why would they matter ? They don't anywhere else in the UK at election time, so why do you think they do in Scotland ?

The formal request has been made. Sturgeon sent the letter asking for a Section 30 the day after May triggered Article 50.

One side always has to initiate and express their wishes to leave any Union. But those wishes in a political union must be expressed via a ballot box. May seems intent on making sure Scots voters never get to the ballot box and express their opinion on their own future. Not good.

I have no idea why you think going to the ballot box itself is a 'hostile act' lol. You're talking of the electorate in Scotland voting by the way, not the SNP.

On your "nonsense" nonsense, Shaka_Zulu has replied to your remark -- it seems you did not get my meaning.

Shaka_Zulu wrote: »

How does that get you to your goal of independence?

It is quite conceivable that you get 50% of the 59 seats with only 25% of the popular vote. What that then would signify is that independence is dead in the water.

For the SNP arguments to hold any water they must get damn near 50% of the popular vote otherwise it is game over.

Although many take Sturgeon's letter as a request, you took pains to inform me that it was not a request: are you now saying it was, actually a request --- or was it just a little game?

May making sure that Scots can't express their opinion? Where has she said that; it's about timing as you yourself have said.

As for the hostile nature of the SNP Neverendum, it's "requested" at the worst possible time for the UK in terms of getting a good negotiation with the EU. It's a wrecking gambit, a transparently hostile act. The SNP is fooling nobody.

TrickyTree83

.string. wrote: »

On your "nonsense" nonsense, Shaka_Zulu has replied to your remark -- it seems you did not get my meaning.


Although many take Sturgeon's letter as a request, you took pains to inform me that it was not a request: are you now saying it was, actually a request --- or was it just a little game?

May making sure that Scots can't express their opinion? Where has she said that; it's about timing as you yourself have said.

As for the hostile nature of the SNP Neverendum, it's "requested" at the worst possible time for the UK in terms of getting a good negotiation with the EU. It's a wrecking gambit, a transparently hostile act. The SNP is fooling nobody.

Did you catch FMQ's today?

Nicola saying a vote for the SNP is the only vote for opposition to <insert derogatory term here> conservative "rule" or words to that effect.

I'm sure all the seals will clap at that but if you were to look at what she's saying, she's completely and utterly wrong.

In actual fact a vote for Labour or the Lib Dem's is a vote against a Conservative government, because those parties may form a coalition, one of them could win outright even. But the SNP can NEVER win outright and Labour has certainly ruled out a coalition with the SNP and it's highly unlikely (if not impossible) a Lib Dem/SNP coalition could take power.

The SNP members in the chamber lap it up, the SNP support outside the chamber laps it up, and the lie persists.

Will these lies be addressed? No. Honestly don't know why Kezia and Ruth tiptoe around the edges, just go for the jugular and call a spade a spade, it's a waste of a vote if you're concerned about Conservative government. A complete waste.

Shakethedisease

Tromking wrote: »

Look, I get that you and all the other SNP acolytes have totally bought into Sturgeon's 'plan' and like all cults you have almost blind faith in her. What scuppers her plan is other Scots, not Tories or Westminster. Public opinion is King in these situations.
Sturgeon will have given herself some wriggle room for the inevitable indyref2 U-turn I'm sure.:)

Well if what you say really is true, then May should have no probs whatsoever with issuing a section 30. Public opinion is King. May's too scared to ask what it is, Sturgeon isn't. Simple as that.

There won't be any U turn. But truly, try and grasp the fact that this GE has no bearing on the recent Scottish Govt seeking a section 30 for a second referendum whatever happens. It'll still be sought, or else bypassed.

.string.

No TT I did not see that , I'd heard somewhere about her declaring the SNP to be the only real oposition, I guess that was part of it.

It's all going to her head - it must be her new title "Queen of Scotland". No doubt HRH would have something to say about that.

My take is that it's all about the SNP's fatal flaw, an inability to hear anything but their own opinions.

Edit: I did see an FMQ a little while ago when Davidson told her to SIT DOWN when Sturgeon tried to interject when Davidson was speaking ... Priceless.

I agree about your remark on Spade calling, time to burst the bubble of self engrandisement.