Scottish nationalists set for record majority, boosting independence push

[StreetCowboy]

5 hours ago, Sujo said:

And you are assuming the people want snp, and eu. 

 

Let them decide what they want.

I think that was clear.  Scots were in favour of remaining in the EU, and voted to do so twice.  Once, by a small majority, when it meant remaining united with the rest of the UK, and a second time by a greater majority, when the question was put more directly.

 

Sadly, our choice was irrelevant.

 

Brexit was Christmas for the Nationalists, and they will remain the  party of Scottish government for a generation, or until it secedes. 

[JonnyF]

13 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

 

I'm sure that one vote would have made a tremendous difference to the result.

We were told that if we wanted to remain in the EU we had to vote to remain in the UK.

England and Wales then voted us out of the EU.

You could call that back stabbing. 

 

 

If everyone took the opinion that "one vote doesn't make a difference" then nobody would vote and Democracy would cease to function. I seem to remember that you didn't bother to vote on Brexit and have been moaning about the result ever since. So I would have thought you would have learned the principle by now?

 

As for back stabbing, of course it was true that to remain in the EU you had to remain in the UK. That was an incontrovertible fact since by leaving the UK you would have also left the EU and you may or may not have been allowed to rejoin a decade or so later. I don't recall anyone telling the Scots that a vote to Remain in the UK would mean the UK would stay in the EU forever, certainly the English/Welsh electorate was not telling you that and when they voted for Brexit I'd imagine Scotland's 2014 vote was the last thing on their minds, same as the Scots don't really give a second thought to what the English and Welsh want. It goes both ways.

 

If anyone really did tell you a Remain vote meant remaining in the EU forever (I don't believe they did), you would have been foolish to believe them. Sometimes you have to use your judgement when politicians tell you something, same as I make a judgement call that Sturgeon is lieing through her teeth in the Salmond coverup.   

 

 

[sandyf]

16 hours ago, Jimbo53 said:

'Far too much rhetoric from the brexiteers that stabbed Scotland in the back'..

Thats a bit rich..

Are they only supposed to vote the way you want them too?? they use their Democratic right to vote as they see fit,and for that you call them back back stabbers!!

I wasn't allowed to vote,as i was not being located in Scotland at the time of the election,,but i would have been a Brexiteer,and also have voted to remain in the Union,which,i am sure has the best interests of Scotland at heart,rather than be handcuffed to masters/dictators in Brussels.

In 2014 one of Westminster's main arguments to the people of Scotland was that by remaining in the UK they would have a secure position in the EU. That was said at a time when they had already initiated secret plans to hold the brexit referendum.

Back stabbing or what?

Why hasn't there been an investigation into the Westminster behaviour during the Scottish referendum campaign?

I believe that it was the right result in 2014, but withholding the plans for the EU referendum was effectively voter manipulation.

 

Asked about the calling of the referendum on leaving the European Union, the former Tory leader said: “The Brexit referendum was discussed and called in 2013, two years before the general election and three years before the referendum itself”.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-cameron-national-security-strategy-committee-boris-johnson-theresa-may-b1809851.html

 

As a brexiteer it is the height of hypocrisy to claim you have the best interests of Scotland at heart. It was obvious from day one that brexit would be a disaster for the onshore fishing industry.

More back stabbing from the Westminster brexiteers.

[RayC]

On 3/2/2021 at 4:17 PM, RuamRudy said:

 

If you apportion the 90%  of the £16 billion that is in the 'extraregio territory' to Scotland (because - why wouldn't you?) that makes Scotland's per capita contribution above £32K exceeding every other part of the UK with the exception of London and the South East. 

 

 

You may be correct that if extra-regio figures are allocated, then Scotland's per capita GDP exceeds all other UK regions with the exception of London and the South East. However, even if this is true, it does not alter the fact that the per capita GDP for England as a whole is greater than that of Scotland (https://fraserofallander.org/scottish-gdp-guide/#uk-comparison; chart 8: Unfortunately, this chart does not show England separately but, given that the figures for Wales and NI drag down the figures for the UK as a whole you will, no doubt, agree that this is intuitively obvious). I would suggest that it is reasonable to assume that the figures for 2020 will show the gap widening given the negative effects of the current crisis on the energy sector.

 

I limit my comments to the most recent years. I do not - and have not - made any comment about the historic situation. The original statement, which is the bone of contention, was: "England IS (my caps) being financed by Scotland". Using GDP per capita as the measurement tool, I hope you will now agree that this statement is false.

[RuamRudy]

3 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

You may be correct that if extra-regio figures are allocated, then Scotland's per capita GDP exceeds all other UK regions with the exception of London and the South East. However, even if this is true, it does not alter the fact that the per capita GDP for England as a whole is greater than that of Scotland (https://fraserofallander.org/scottish-gdp-guide/#uk-comparison; chart 8: Unfortunately, this chart does not show England separately but, given that the figures for Wales and NI drag down the figures for the UK as a whole you will, no doubt, agree that this is intuitively obvious). I would suggest that it is reasonable to assume that the figures for 2020 will show the gap widening given the negative effects of the current crisis on the energy sector.

 

I limit my comments to the most recent years. I do not - and have not - made any comment about the historic situation. The original statement, which is the bone of contention, was: "England IS (my caps) being financed by Scotland". Using GDP per capita as the measurement tool, I hope you will now agree that this statement is false.

 

Would it be fair to say, then, that Scotland supports England with the exclusion of SE and London? Actually, I am being facetious; forgive me. In my opinion the issue is moot. The treasury is printing money at a startling rate as our national debt grows to astronomic levels. Other than possibly London, there is no one part of the UK that I can see (from my position of ignorance, at least) as a net contributor - they are all net receivers to a certain extent. So the oft heard cry of England subsidising Scotland is as incorrect as the opposite. 

 

Of course, the benefit that North Sea oil brought to the SE of England over the decades, and how that infrastructure investment continues to benefit it now is a different matter. 

[RayC]

On 3/2/2021 at 4:07 PM, RuamRudy said:

 

Because there is historical evidence to suggest that it has. 

Also, although I am not convinced that the article backed up the assessment of the poster, I felt that the article itself was of interest, hence my 'like'.

But if you are equally as uncertain of the relative positions, why did you rush to try to disprove the article such that you cited data from two very different periods as evidence? 

 

If you are going to fundamentally change the nature of the statement to fit your narrative, then I don't know what to say (an unusual occurrence).

 

The original PROPOSITION does NOT read: "England WAS (my caps) being financed by Scotland" but "  ... IS (again my caps).." Obviously two completely different statements.

 

At least you now - finally - concede that the article does not support the proposition although you stop short of stating that as a piece of statistical analysis, it is flawed. At the same time, you are quick to infer that any comment of mine should be treated as questionable ("Are there any more inaccuracies in your 'logic'?"). 

 

"But if you are equally as uncertain of the relative positions why did you rush ... to disprove the article such that you cited data from two very different periods as evidence?"

 

I was hasty and made a stupid oversight. You keep referring to this error: I have acknowledged it and am currently irritated by the sackcloth that I am wearing as a penance. What more do you want me to do/say?  

 

Even so, using GDP per capita as a measurement tool, my error changes nothing. There is little evidence to suggest that Scotland is currently financing England. It is surprisingly difficult to find consistent data for the two countries, but I did reference the Fullfact article (a credible source) which suggested that GDP per head is lower in Scotland than in the wider UK. I have also replied to another of your posts recently and the contents are relevant here.

 

[RuamRudy]

2 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

If you are going to fundamentally change the nature of the statement to fit your narrative, then I don't know what to say (an unusual occurrence).

 

The original PROPOSITION does NOT read: "England WAS (my caps) being financed by Scotland" but "  ... IS (again my caps).." Obviously two completely different statements.

 

At least you now - finally - concede that the article does not support the proposition although you stop short of stating that as a piece of statistical analysis, it is flawed. At the same time, you are quick to infer that any comment of mine should be treated as questionable ("Are there any more inaccuracies in your 'logic'?"). 

 

"But if you are equally as uncertain of the relative positions why did you rush ... to disprove the article such that you cited data from two very different periods as evidence?"

 

I was hasty and made a stupid oversight. You keep referring to this error: I have acknowledged it and am currently irritated by the sackcloth that I am wearing as a penance. What more do you want me to do/say?  

 

Even so, using GDP per capita as a measurement tool, my error changes nothing. There is little evidence to suggest that Scotland is currently financing England. It is surprisingly difficult to find consistent data for the two countries, but I did reference the Fullfact article (a credible source) which suggested that GDP per head is lower in Scotland than in the wider UK. I have also replied to another of your posts recently and the contents are relevant here.

 

 

I am confused. I made no further reference to your oversight. 

[Rookiescot]

19 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

I have acknowledged it and am currently irritated by the sackcloth that I am wearing as a penance. 

 

 

Most of us have to pay extra for such treatment and you are getting it for free?

[NiceGuyEddy]

Oh dear, I've just been catching up on the big enquiry thats going on in Scotland. Not a good advert for the Scottish Nationalists Party. They make the Tories look like choir boys.

[RuamRudy]

Remarkable - support for Welsh independence has swelled to 39%. What an achievement - the only way is up...

 

Poll shows highest support for Welsh independence ever recorded

 

An ITV poll has shown the highest support for independence ever recorded with 39% of Welsh people saying they would now vote ‘yes’ in a referendum.

The poll in collaboration with Savanta ComRes is for a special programme UK: The End of the Union? which will air tonight, 4 March at 7:30pm.

Excluding don’t know answers, 39% said they would vote ‘Yes’ if a referendum was held tomorrow. This outstrips the previous high of 32% in a YouGov poll in August 2020.

[onthedarkside]

A post linking to a non-news source website has been removed.

 

[bkkcanuck8]

8 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

Remarkable - support for Welsh independence has swelled to 39%. What an achievement - the only way is up...

 

Poll shows highest support for Welsh independence ever recorded

 

An ITV poll has shown the highest support for independence ever recorded with 39% of Welsh people saying they would now vote ‘yes’ in a referendum.

The poll in collaboration with Savanta ComRes is for a special programme UK: The End of the Union? which will air tonight, 4 March at 7:30pm.

Excluding don’t know answers, 39% said they would vote ‘Yes’ if a referendum was held tomorrow. This outstrips the previous high of 32% in a YouGov poll in August 2020.

That is a big surprise...

[nausea]

I'm not sure Scotland, or Wales for that matter, has a strong enough sense of national identity to go independent; unlike say Éire, or India, which were always totally different countries, culture wise. Irn Bru and The Gorbals doesn't really cut it. Yeah, I'm using hypebole to make a point. During the course of my life I've met guys from Scotland, guys from Wales, and even guys from N.Ireland, and we always got on well, due to a common cultural heritage. Full disclosure, I'm half Irish, and to my mind these two halves don't mix well, but with the Scottish, Welsh, and N.Ireland guys, no problem. 

[IvorBiggun2]

Do SNP supporters genuinely believe the EU is gonna let them join?       

[RuamRudy]

21 minutes ago, IvorBiggun2 said:

Do SNP supporters genuinely believe the EU is gonna let them join?       

 

Yes. 

[IvorBiggun2]

17 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

Yes.

Spain is definitely not going to allow Scotland  to join. It only takes one member to say no and that's it. Why waste ones time on something which is never gonna happen?

[RuamRudy]

7 minutes ago, IvorBiggun2 said:

Spain is definitely not going to allow Scotland  to join. It only takes one member to say no and that's it. Why waste ones time on something which is never gonna happen?

Did Spain tell you that?

[stevenl]

2 hours ago, IvorBiggun2 said:

Spain is definitely not going to allow Scotland  to join. It only takes one member to say no and that's it. Why waste ones time on something which is never gonna happen?

Spain has said differently.

 

But who cares, not being able to join the EU is only used by the English as an argument against Scottish independence. Since it is a strawman argument, only the gullible fall for it.

[vogie]

6 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Spain has said differently.

 

But who cares, not being able to join the EU is only used by the English as an argument against Scottish independence. Since it is a strawman argument, only the gullible fall for it.

Do you have a link to "Spain has said differently"?

[Surelynot]

7 minutes ago, vogie said:

Do you have a link to "Spain has said differently"?

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1048158/brexit-news-scottish-independence-spain-catalonia-nicola-sturgeon-spanish-foreign-minister

 

Can't argue with that...straight from the Bible.

7 minutes ago, vogie said:

Do you have a link to "Spain has said differently"?

https://www.aol.co.uk/news/2019/06/06/spain-would-not-block-independent-scotland-from-joining-eu-dipl/

 

 

https://www.euroweeklynews.com/2019/06/06/spain-would-welcome-independent-scotland-into-the-eu/

Edited March 5, 2021 by Surelynot

[stevenl]

10 minutes ago, vogie said:

Do you have a link to "Spain has said differently"?

Has been done many times already, thanks to @Surelynot for doing it this time.

[RuamRudy]

27 minutes ago, Surelynot said:

Can't argue with that...straight from the Bible.

33 minutes ago, vogie said:

[vogie]

23 minutes ago, Surelynot said:

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1048158/brexit-news-scottish-independence-spain-catalonia-nicola-sturgeon-spanish-foreign-minister

 

Can't argue with that...straight from the Bible.

https://www.aol.co.uk/news/2019/06/06/spain-would-not-block-independent-scotland-from-joining-eu-dipl/

 

 

https://www.euroweeklynews.com/2019/06/06/spain-would-welcome-independent-scotland-into-the-eu/

You can read into this as you will. At the end of the day would it be in Spains interest to allow Scotland to join the EU, common sense might say otherwise, but it gives people living the dream of William Wallace and the others hoping for the implosion of the UK something to cling on to I suppose.

 

“In this regard, I would like to make the following points: The Spanish Minister for Foreign Affairs Mr Josep Borrell has recently declared that Spain will not block Scotland’s entry into the European Union if independence is legally achieved and such has always been the intention of the Spanish Government. The Spanish Government has not and never will intervene in the internal affairs of the United Kingdom or any other state and expects the same reciprocal attitude."

 

The consul in Edinburgh was fired by the Spanish government for making an equally profound statement.

 

"SPAIN has fired its most senior diplomat in Edinburgh after he said the country would not veto an independent Scotland joining the EU.

Madrid newspapers this weekend reported that Consul-General Miguel Ángel Vecino Quintana, 65, would be formally told of his dismissal on Monday."

 

 

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/17694680.madrid-fires-consul-spanish-veto-letter---mean/

 

[Surelynot]

4 minutes ago, vogie said:

You can read into this as you will.

Cheers

[Surelynot]

6 minutes ago, vogie said:

You can read into this as you will. At the end of the day would it be in Spains interest to allow Scotland to join the EU, common sense might say otherwise, but it gives people living the dream of William Wallace and the others hoping for the implosion of the UK something to cling on to I suppose.

 

“In this regard, I would like to make the following points: The Spanish Minister for Foreign Affairs Mr Josep Borrell has recently declared that Spain will not block Scotland’s entry into the European Union if independence is legally achieved and such has always been the intention of the Spanish Government. The Spanish Government has not and never will intervene in the internal affairs of the United Kingdom or any other state and expects the same reciprocal attitude."

 

The consul in Edinburgh was fired by the Spanish government for making an equally profound statement.

 

"SPAIN has fired its most senior diplomat in Edinburgh after he said the country would not veto an independent Scotland joining the EU.

Madrid newspapers this weekend reported that Consul-General Miguel Ángel Vecino Quintana, 65, would be formally told of his dismissal on Monday."

 

 

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/17694680.madrid-fires-consul-spanish-veto-letter---mean/

 

I imagine if they had made comments/statments to the converse they might have faced the same punishment.....it is not for them to be announcing policy.......

[vogie]

7 minutes ago, Surelynot said:

I imagine if they had made comments/statments to the converse they might have faced the same punishment.....it is not for them to be announcing policy.......

If you can foretell the future I can only assume that you must have inherited Spideys Crystal ball. Do you honestly think it is as straight forward as that, we could be talking 10 years into the future here and that is on proviso that Boris grants permission for yet another neverendum, and the chances of that is about as much chance of N Sturgeon saying anything but "I can't remember, not to my recollection and I don't know" She must be the most amnesiatic politician in these British Isles.

[bkkcanuck8]

15 hours ago, IvorBiggun2 said:

Spain is definitely not going to allow Scotland  to join. It only takes one member to say no and that's it. Why waste ones time on something which is never gonna happen?

Spain allowed for other states that were formerly part of other countries to join the EU, if the UK dissolves with the acceptance from all parties Spain would not have an issue with it.   UK,  by it's name and stated existence - is supposedly made up of different countries and thus Scotland would just be leaving the union in the same way the UK has left the EU.

 

Spain will still argue that Catalan's situation is different since it has always been part of Spain since Spain existed and therefore is not divisible under Spanish law. 

[vogie]

For all the posters that think that opinion polls are sacred, here is the latest one since Mrs Sturgeon gave her evidence at the inquiry. Published in the Guardian the Savanta poll suggests that 'no' is 52% and 'yes' is at 48% in favour of remaining in the union, also there has been a lot of trust lost for Sturgeon and Salmond. 

 

"Most Scots would vote to remain in the UK if an independence referendum were held tomorrow, a new poll has found.

The survey of 1,015 Scots suggests that 46% would vote against Scottish independence, compared with 43% in favour.

 

However, when unsure voters are excluded, the poll by Savanta ComRes for the Scotland on Sunday newspaper indicates 52% to 48% in favour of the union.

The poll is the first to be carried out since Nicola Sturgeon and Alex Salmond gave evidence to the Holyrood inquiry into the investigation of the former first minister."

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/mar/07/most-scots-would-back-remaining-in-uk-new-poll-suggests

 

[sandyf]

On 3/5/2021 at 12:28 PM, stevenl said:

Spain has said differently.

 

But who cares, not being able to join the EU is only used by the English as an argument against Scottish independence. Since it is a strawman argument, only the gullible fall for it.

Exactly, the EU issue would be an natural progression if independence were to come about.

Despite what the brexit brigade would want to make out, independence is not the most pressing issue.

The real problem is the morality of Scotland not being able to ask the question.

If a married couple renew their vows and then shortly after one has an affair. Does the length of the time interval determine if there are grounds for divorce or not?

Historical precedence is no justification for the continuity of inequality and injustice.

[Rookiescot]

2 hours ago, vogie said:

For all the posters that think that opinion polls are sacred, here is the latest one since Mrs Sturgeon gave her evidence at the inquiry. Published in the Guardian the Savanta poll suggests that 'no' is 52% and 'yes' is at 48% in favour of remaining in the union, also there has been a lot of trust lost for Sturgeon and Salmond. 

 

"Most Scots would vote to remain in the UK if an independence referendum were held tomorrow, a new poll has found.

The survey of 1,015 Scots suggests that 46% would vote against Scottish independence, compared with 43% in favour.

 

However, when unsure voters are excluded, the poll by Savanta ComRes for the Scotland on Sunday newspaper indicates 52% to 48% in favour of the union.

The poll is the first to be carried out since Nicola Sturgeon and Alex Salmond gave evidence to the Holyrood inquiry into the investigation of the former first minister."

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/mar/07/most-scots-would-back-remaining-in-uk-new-poll-suggests

 

 

Excellent.

Now you would have nothing to fear by holding a referendum and killing off calls for independence.