Sign in to follow this  
rik2304

Indy Ref 2

Recommended Posts

 

It's not a queue, it's a list, as you know perfectly well. Countries are admitted as they qualify, not by when they apply. Otherwise, perhaps you could explain why Turkey has been "in the queue" for about forty years whilst a dozen other countries have joined? And a Guardian journalist is not "the Nats". It's a Guardian journalist. 

Are you really going to conduct this on the same zero-fact, fibbing basis as last time?

Do you have a vow for us?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

It's not a queue, it's a list, as you know perfectly well. Countries are admitted as they qualify, not by when they apply. Otherwise, perhaps you could explain why Turkey has been "in the queue" for about forty years whilst a dozen other countries have joined? And a Guardian journalist is not "the Nats". It's a Guardian journalist. 

Are you really going to conduct this on the same zero-fact, fibbing basis as last time?

Do you have a vow for us?

Disappointed you can't resist the ad hominem AS, I was hoping it would be different this time.  To the best of my knowledge Turkey's membership been stalled due to their human rights record and the small matter of the illegal occupation of member state.  I try hard to deliver 'facts' as I see them, its up to you to present alternatives.....or you could keep slinging petty abuse?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Loki is a laughing stock amongst Yes voters.

To be honest I know very little about this guy, I'm not surprised he is a 'laughing stock amongst Yes voters'.  He fundamentally challenges the faux moralistic fantasies of the evangelistic element of the Nationalists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Disappointed you can't resist the ad hominem AS, I was hoping it would be different this time.  To the best of my knowledge Turkey's membership been stalled due to their human rights record and the small matter of the illegal occupation of member state.  I try hard to deliver 'facts' as I see them, its up to you to present alternatives.....or you could keep slinging petty abuse?  

What ad hominem? "You" obviously referred to the No movement. You are a decent guy, despite your horrendously muddled political stance. "No" lied repeatedly. OK, so according to the "fact" that EU membership is considered in order of application, in a queue, no country can have joined the EU since Turkey applied. Yes?

Turkey applied in 1987. Since then, 17 countries have joined the EU. NONE of those counties already complied 100% with EU legislation as Scotland does, as a constituent part of a current member. Unless you are claiming that the UK membership is illegal?

So why were 17 countries, all much less ready to comply on application, able to skip this fabled "queue", but Scotland can't? Or to put it in the terms under which the EU ACTUALLY operates, why would we not be top of the list?

And why did the BBC cover an interview with the EU head guy on membership today saying, yes Scotland would have to leave and re-apply, but that the negotiations would be "very easy" because of our current 100% level of compliance? 

But it goes further than this. Why would the EU choose to exclude an I Scotland which commands a significant % of total EU resources, spectacularly so in the case of fishing, gas and oil, green energy? Why would it choose to exclude a nation totally in tune with progressive European politics in numerous ways? 

It is completely bonkers to suggest that Scotland would not gain EU membership. And I think that, whilst the technical position is that we would have to leave and apply, you miss the point that the EU, above all else, is pragmatic. It is entirely possible - possible, no more, so don't focus on this point above all others - that the EU will either accelerate our membership, or even skip the application process altogether.

What frustrates Yessers about intelligent Nawbags like yourself is that these issues must be obvious to you. Many, many, no's have crossed over. The Labour vote in the polls is in the 12-15% range. You have 1 MP, you're third in the Scottish Parliament - thanks only to the PR system, and you're facing certain wipeout in the Council Elections.

I truely, genuinely, do not understand why you persist in spouting Labour/No lies. What you don't get is that the SNP ARE the Labour Party you joined - pretty much everyone except you and the Rangers mob have left.

You would be a big asset to SNP and Yes. It's where all the other Smarmarabs now live.

Have a think about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well AS, I think accusing me of pedalling lies fits with ad hominem. Could it not be that I draw different conclusions?  

Sometimes I wonder if you read my posts? I was careful to point out that iScotland would be admitted to the EU, but would need to renegotiate the substantial opt outs the UK enjoyed.  I have yet to see a shred of evidence to suggest the EU will bypass the system and 'skip the application process altogether'. The EU will not simply wave the rules and leave everything as was.....how is it working out for Greece? and that is with having a deficit smaller than Scotland's.  

You think I should jump ship?  I go to some time and trouble to engage in these debates, and Nawbag or not, I have the right to adopt any position my conclusions lead me to.  Its not like buying a set of ****ing curtains! :) 

I have not met a single individual who has gone from No to Yes, not one.  I have met several who have gone the other way, and several who are spitting blood at the way NS has demanded EU membership, almost as a condition of indy.....and they are party members.  

Why is it that anyone who disagrees with the idea of independence is a liar?  This zealotry sells well with the initiated, but take it from me, the middle ground who might be persuaded do not respond well to rallies draped in flags and blue faces, or gob-shites spouting off in the pub about how passionate and patriotic they are. I teach hundreds of Students each semester, and have done for over a decade.  My subject covers this very topic, every semester!  My (entirely unscientific) assessment of the mood is that nothing has changed, the divide is pretty much as it was.....so far this week most of those who are 'non-committed', for want of a better phrase, tend to raise their eyeballs when the Bravehearts start snarling at anyone who disagrees with them.....you know....like you do :) 

I even paid tribute to NS's strategic nous, but you probably missed it in your haste to HIT BACK AT MY LIES!

I am thinking of coming off social media for the duration, this format of discussion is wearing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I have not met a single individual who has gone from No to Yes, not one.  

 

Smarmy, I'm one. As an exile in England, I'm so disillusioned by the Brexit vote it has made me reassess the indy vote.

You may not have met them sleepless, but it is becoming evident that they are there. I have met two, not a lot granted...but I suppose I am only one of 5 million.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only a few years ago, Yes was polling in the mid-twenties. It now hovers around 50%. A quarter of the voting population has moved from no to yes. Unless you are a recluse, it is literally impossible for anyone not to have met someone who has moved from no to yes.

This is blindingly obvious, and anyone who denies it is, quite simply, lying. Fibbing is so baked into the Unionist approach now that it seems somehow normal and acceptable. It is not.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

You may not have met them sleepless, but it is becoming evident that they are there. I have met two, not a lot granted...but I suppose I am only one of 5 million.

Agreed Havana. That first sentence wasn't me, but a quote. The quotes function on here doesn't work.

I think it will be an interesting debate second time round because the ground has shifted so much since the last one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Only a few years ago, Yes was polling in the mid-twenties. It now hovers around 50%. A quarter of the voting population has moved from no to yes. Unless you are a recluse, it is literally impossible for anyone not to have met someone who has moved from no to yes.

This is blindingly obvious, and anyone who denies it is, quite simply, lying. Fibbing is so baked into the Unionist approach now that it seems somehow normal and acceptable. It is not.

 

 

IMG_0735.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Well AS, I think accusing me of pedalling lies fits with ad hominem. Could it not be that I draw different conclusions?  

Sometimes I wonder if you read my posts? I was careful to point out that iScotland would be admitted to the EU, but would need to renegotiate the substantial opt outs the UK enjoyed.  I have yet to see a shred of evidence to suggest the EU will bypass the system and 'skip the application process altogether'. The EU will not simply wave the rules and leave everything as was.....how is it working out for Greece? and that is with having a deficit smaller than Scotland's.  

You think I should jump ship?  I go to some time and trouble to engage in these debates, and Nawbag or not, I have the right to adopt any position my conclusions lead me to.  Its not like buying a set of ****ing curtains! :) 

I have not met a single individual who has gone from No to Yes, not one.  I have met several who have gone the other way, and several who are spitting blood at the way NS has demanded EU membership, almost as a condition of indy.....and they are party members.  

Why is it that anyone who disagrees with the idea of independence is a liar?  This zealotry sells well with the initiated, but take it from me, the middle ground who might be persuaded do not respond well to rallies draped in flags and blue faces, or gob-shites spouting off in the pub about how passionate and patriotic they are. I teach hundreds of Students each semester, and have done for over a decade.  My subject covers this very topic, every semester!  My (entirely unscientific) assessment of the mood is that nothing has changed, the divide is pretty much as it was.....so far this week most of those who are 'non-committed', for want of a better phrase, tend to raise their eyeballs when the Bravehearts start snarling at anyone who disagrees with them.....you know....like you do :) 

I even paid tribute to NS's strategic nous, but you probably missed it in your haste to HIT BACK AT MY LIES!

I am thinking of coming off social media for the duration, this format of discussion is wearing.

2.0 Smarmy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Only a few years ago, Yes was polling in the mid-twenties. It now hovers around 50%. A quarter of the voting population has moved from no to yes. Unless you are a recluse, it is literally impossible for anyone not to have met someone who has moved from no to yes.

This is blindingly obvious, and anyone who denies it is, quite simply, lying. Fibbing is so baked into the Unionist approach now that it seems somehow normal and acceptable. It is not.

 

I think  the point here is whether anyone has moved from No to Yes since 9/14.  I do not think my experience is statistically relevant and I freely admit to moving in No circles but I can honestly say I do not know of one switch from No to Yes since Indy1. From my days in the North East I do know of two Yes to No switches, both fishing industry related.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, this is obviously an issue of some interest, and it's no mystery - there have been numerous polls. I've been polled twice myself in the last couple of weeks, one by phone (which got no further than the first question because I was too old!) and once online by YouGov. 

There have been two kinds of movement. Firstly, the average for Yes in the polls has increased by around 10%, from just under 45% in 9/14, to around 49%. Given the standard margin of error, that's pretty much a dead heat. Some of this is demographics at work - older people tend strongly towards no, and have a habit of dying, being replaced by younger voters, who tend strongly towards Yes, and tend to stay alive. Someone calculated the other day that simply because of this, the no vote will fall by a further 1% by a 2018/19 referendum. It's a delicate topic, but the reason why many non SNP figures admit independence is eventually inevitable is because no voters die in much greater numbers than yes voters (hence why Rik's couple of hard winters joke actually is no joke at all!). This is compounded by the fact that older people actually get off their arse and vote. So mortality disproportionately removes nailed on no votes. But mortality alone can't explain a 10% rise, so it is reasonable to assume that some people are changing their minds. Not all that many, but the campaign hasn't started yet. The last one took Yes from 28% to 45%.

The second major movement is because of Brexit. This is harder to nail down for all sorts of reasons, but there seems something of a consensus that around 15% of each side have crossed over because of it, effectively cancelling each other out. I dont actually think Indyref 2 will be the UK v EU debate many expect, but we shall see.

On the fishermen, I totally respect their position. They regard themselves as having suffered terribly from the EU, and basically will follow any cause likely to get them out of it, but there's really not very many of them, errr because of the EU.

I don't know if you are on Twitter - there's not a day goes by when individuals don't announce they are moving to yes, some of them surprisingly prominent (e.g. Steven Purcelll, Malcolm Chisholm, Henry McCleish, might not have spelled these correctly).

Edited by Abernethy Saint

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Incidentally, I have two VERY English daughter in laws, both strongly no in 2014. One is now full-on yes, the other is a bawhair away, and will be assimilated by the collective in plenty of time. I think it's too early for mass defections, but there does seem to be something of a movement from no chance to hmmm mebbee I'll think about this. The estimate of floaters is about 15%, and the result depends on persuading them. Like last time, it will be an almost universally Unionist media versus the Yes movement's army of grassroots activists focusing on these poor souls!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I think  the point here is whether anyone has moved from No to Yes since 9/14.  I do not think my experience is statistically relevant and I freely admit to moving in No circles but I can honestly say I do not know of one switch from No to Yes since Indy1. From my days in the North East I do know of two Yes to No switches, both fishing industry related.

That is exactly the point SI.  There is no doubt Scottish nationalism has grown and flowered over the last generation in ways that would have surprised the most committed political nationalist, but a switch from No to Yes, by definition can only have happened in since Sept 2014.   (But if AS troubled himself with such details, he wouldn't be able to shout about 'LIARS!' ;) ).

 

http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2017/03/the-legacy-of-indyref1-new-scottish-social-attitudes-report/

 

There does appear to have been movement over the Brexit debacle, but it is as yet unclear who, if any side has gained. I voted remain, but resent the SNP co-opting my Remain vote as some proxy for indy, there are others who believe Scotland's interests are best served outwith the UK, and in the EU.........but I find they tend think Scotland's interests are always best served out with the UK.....(insert any alternative you can think of here).  Whenever the issue of EU membership was raised in 2014 supporters of Yes just shrugged with indifference ......yet now its the big deal breaker?  Who is kidding who?  

 

Remember this?   http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/alex-salmond-caught-out-on-eu-legal-advice-8229386.html

 

IMO the real driver for the ref asap is the continued trauma facing the public services.  Whilst NS was agitating in Bute House on Monday morning (she looked kinda nervous, more nervous than usual?)  The Courier's from page was how Blairgowrie High School had been asking if any of the parents could pop along a few mornings a week and teach maths.  Blair of course is in Education minister John Swinney's constituency.  Breathtaking!  I was speaking to a civil servant who works on Holyrood's fiance committee recently his take was that the cuts coming down the line are so severe that the (any) sitting government will find themselves facing some intense shit creek action, ergo if the SNP wait 5 years they may be a bit light on credibility.  On the plus side for the SNP on this timescale, would be the full implications of Brexit filtering through (can't see that going well) but it would still be a huge gamble to wait.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must admit that I find the whole thing very difficult to get my head around.  The pro-union argument seems to be a complex mix of logic, facts and lies, and the independent Scotland argument seems to be a mix of flags and bagpipes, lies, we've got all the oil and Tory hating.

 

For someone who isn't a political or economic expert, its pretty difficult to make informed decisions. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Monty, basically the key is to ignore the main stream media and join the discussion on-line. Wings over Scotland, who is pro-Indy but not SNP, does a Braw job debunking the media lies. There are many pro union voices as well. The TV debates can be useful. I'd watch C4 news for a better, less hysterical  take on things than the BBC or STV. But once the campaign starts, if you contact the campaigns locally, either side, they will send someone round to answer questions. If you choose to vote, just ask yourself what kind of country do you want your kids to live in?

If you really don't want to engage, don't. No one should be forced to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

That is exactly the point SI.  There is no doubt Scottish nationalism has grown and flowered over the last generation in ways that would have surprised the most committed political nationalist, but a switch from No to Yes, by definition can only have happened in since Sept 2014.   (But if AS troubled himself with such details, he wouldn't be able to shout about 'LIARS!' ;) ).

 

http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2017/03/the-legacy-of-indyref1-new-scottish-social-attitudes-report/

 

There does appear to have been movement over the Brexit debacle, but it is as yet unclear who, if any side has gained. I voted remain, but resent the SNP co-opting my Remain vote as some proxy for indy, there are others who believe Scotland's interests are best served outwith the UK, and in the EU.........but I find they tend think Scotland's interests are always best served out with the UK.....(insert any alternative you can think of here).  Whenever the issue of EU membership was raised in 2014 supporters of Yes just shrugged with indifference ......yet now its the big deal breaker?  Who is kidding who?  

 

Remember this?   http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/alex-salmond-caught-out-on-eu-legal-advice-8229386.html

 

IMO the real driver for the ref asap is the continued trauma facing the public services.  Whilst NS was agitating in Bute House on Monday morning (she looked kinda nervous, more nervous than usual?)  The Courier's from page was how Blairgowrie High School had been asking if any of the parents could pop along a few mornings a week and teach maths.  Blair of course is in Education minister John Swinney's constituency.  Breathtaking!  I was speaking to a civil servant who works on Holyrood's fiance committee recently his take was that the cuts coming down the line are so severe that the (any) sitting government will find themselves facing some intense shit creek action, ergo if the SNP wait 5 years they may be a bit light on credibility.  On the plus side for the SNP on this timescale, would be the full implications of Brexit filtering through (can't see that going well) but it would still be a huge gamble to wait.

Utter pish. I was talking about no or yes in the 1970's. 

Edited by Abernethy Saint
The trauma facing public services is a direct result of Tory austerity, which Labour in Westminster has enabled over and over again by voting for it, or abstaining.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Utter pish. I was talking about no or yes in the 1970's. 

 

Every nation in Europe is skint, and making major cutbacks, and yes Westminster is as guilty as anyone else, however the whole point of a devolved administration is to tailor solutions specific to the devolved region.  As I have told you before the Scottish Government has always had power to raise revenue, since the SNP tool control they have cut government income for reasons of political expediency (eg. council tax freeze, universalist approach to health and  higher education) very popular, but unsustainable.  IMO they should have reviewed these practices and mitigated cuts from Westminster, and more importantly to address need.  They have not for the simple reason that the SNP machine has carefully nurtured the new middle class in a gamble that they would be on board enough by the 2014 ref, this strategy has failed and now the chickens are coming home to roost, but they can't get in because of the all the wolves gathering at the door.................lets see if I can squeeze another metaphor in..........................................................................................................................................(no that's enough). 

We should have seen steady tax increases over the last 10 years, to address the needs of our ageing demographic, instead we have seen defacto tax cuts.  This is a problem for the SNP, you are correct to blame Westminster to an extent, but when a political party has such dominant control over parliament, local authorities and in control of substantial areas of service provision, with revenue raising powers sooner or later they must take some ****ing responsibilities and stop whining about 'Toareez'.  Police, Education, Health, transport are all facing substantive criticism from auditors and regulators in both the operational and strategic spheres......Audit Scotland, Pisa rankings cannot be readily accused of the usual 'SNP BAAAD' nonsense. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I must admit that I find the whole thing very difficult to get my head around.  The pro-union argument seems to be a complex mix of logic, facts and lies, and the independent Scotland argument seems to be a mix of flags and bagpipes, lies, we've got all the oil and Tory hating.

 

For someone who isn't a political or economic expert, its pretty difficult to make informed decisions. 

I think you are on the money with that summary MS....that is a pretty comprehensive assessment of the terrain.  

As for Wings Over Scotland, I would not accept it as a bona fide academic source.  It could be used for certain purposes of critique or an analysis of new media, but its kind of up there with Migration Watch, or Spiked online.  Have a wee read of this....does it remind you of anyone?.........;) 

 

https://ahdinnaeken.wordpress.com/2015/10/06/what-reading-a-wings-over-scotland-rant-does-for-the-nat-mind/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

 

Every nation in Europe is skint, and making major cutbacks, and yes Westminster is as guilty as anyone else, however the whole point of a devolved administration is to tailor solutions specific to the devolved region.  As I have told you before the Scottish Government has always had power to raise revenue, since the SNP tool control they have cut government income for reasons of political expediency (eg. council tax freeze, universalist approach to health and  higher education) very popular, but unsustainable.  IMO they should have reviewed these practices and mitigated cuts from Westminster, and more importantly to address need.  They have not for the simple reason that the SNP machine has carefully nurtured the new middle class in a gamble that they would be on board enough by the 2014 ref, this strategy has failed and now the chickens are coming home to roost, but they can't get in because of the all the wolves gathering at the door.................lets see if I can squeeze another metaphor in..........................................................................................................................................(no that's enough). 

We should have seen steady tax increases over the last 10 years, to address the needs of our ageing demographic, instead we have seen defacto tax cuts.  This is a problem for the SNP, you are correct to blame Westminster to an extent, but when a political party has such dominant control over parliament, local authorities and in control of substantial areas of service provision, with revenue raising powers sooner or later they must take some ****ing responsibilities and stop whining about 'Toareez'.  Police, Education, Health, transport are all facing substantive criticism from auditors and regulators in both the operational and strategic spheres......Audit Scotland, Pisa rankings cannot be readily accused of the usual 'SNP BAAAD' nonsense. 

I stopped reading when you referred to Scotland as a Region. The cringe is mighty with you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this