Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
17:30 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"27 seats declared SNP 24 Lib Dems 3 Lab 0 Cons 0
17:30 "Hmmm. Fairly sure I remember several.confident predictions in here of an snp demise. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Constituency results starting to come in... Turnout is up Very early, but there may be some concern for the SNP in terms of their share of the vote. Watching the tactical voting and how that affects SNP vote share is going to be very interesting. " Wasnt in5eresting at all to be honest Just another walknin the park fir the SNP | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Comparing these results to 2016 ... nothing has really changed. Adding up all the votes for pro independence parties and comparing this to all the pro union parties - its 50/50. Early analysis of the list votes is showing very clear tactical voting. Not really a “clear mandate” " How much of a mandate did Johnson have for brexit ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Comparing these results to 2016 ... nothing has really changed. Adding up all the votes for pro independence parties and comparing this to all the pro union parties - its 50/50. Early analysis of the list votes is showing very clear tactical voting. Not really a “clear mandate” " Good thing is you don’t live in Scotland so you don’t get a say in whether we go for independence or not  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Comparing these results to 2016 ... nothing has really changed. Adding up all the votes for pro independence parties and comparing this to all the pro union parties - its 50/50. Early analysis of the list votes is showing very clear tactical voting. Not really a “clear mandate” Good thing is you don’t live in Scotland so you don’t get a say in whether we go for independence or not "Lol, that’s what you think  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Highest number of votes in a Scottish Parliament election Highest vote share of any UK party for more than half a century Highest share of constituency seats of any UK party since modern democracy began " Impressive .... so where is the outright majority. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Highest number of votes in a Scottish Parliament election Highest vote share of any UK party for more than half a century Highest share of constituency seats of any UK party since modern democracy began Impressive .... so where is the outright majority. " I’m a system designed specifically to prevent a majority ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Highest number of votes in a Scottish Parliament election Highest vote share of any UK party for more than half a century Highest share of constituency seats of any UK party since modern democracy began Impressive .... so where is the outright majority. I’m a system designed specifically to prevent a majority ? " So nothings really changed..... 50/50 pro- union / pro-indi | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Highest number of votes in a Scottish Parliament election Highest vote share of any UK party for more than half a century Highest share of constituency seats of any UK party since modern democracy began Impressive .... so where is the outright majority. I’m a system designed specifically to prevent a majority ? So nothings really changed..... 50/50 pro- union / pro-indi " Think you’ll find a pro indy majority | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Highest number of votes in a Scottish Parliament election Highest vote share of any UK party for more than half a century Highest share of constituency seats of any UK party since modern democracy began " But no majority.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Changing the subject slightly but as someone who isn’t that interested in what happens with Scotland, surely any referendum which takes place should have a clear majority before independence is agreed? In the last referendum the vote was roughly 55% to stay in the Union and 45% to go and yet the 45% are going to get a second chance. If at the next referendum the result is 50.1% for independence then that will be the end of it! The 49.9% won’t get another chance when in fact if another referendum was held a few weeks later the result could easily go the other way. My view is there should be at least 55% in favour before independence happens." Ahhh, is that how this works? 2019 General Election: Pro-Tory parties: 13,966,454 votes Non-Tory parties: 18,165,575 votes I look forward to Boris accepting that he has no mandate. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Changing the subject slightly but as someone who isn’t that interested in what happens with Scotland, surely any referendum which takes place should have a clear majority before independence is agreed? In the last referendum the vote was roughly 55% to stay in the Union and 45% to go and yet the 45% are going to get a second chance. If at the next referendum the result is 50.1% for independence then that will be the end of it! The 49.9% won’t get another chance when in fact if another referendum was held a few weeks later the result could easily go the other way. My view is there should be at least 55% in favour before independence happens. Ahhh, is that how this works? 2019 General Election: Pro-Tory parties: 13,966,454 votes Non-Tory parties: 18,165,575 votes I look forward to Boris accepting that he has no mandate. "It's not a multi answer question though. There is only yes/no. Would you like us to just vote on the 2 biggest parties? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Changing the subject slightly but as someone who isn’t that interested in what happens with Scotland, surely any referendum which takes place should have a clear majority before independence is agreed? In the last referendum the vote was roughly 55% to stay in the Union and 45% to go and yet the 45% are going to get a second chance. If at the next referendum the result is 50.1% for independence then that will be the end of it! The 49.9% won’t get another chance when in fact if another referendum was held a few weeks later the result could easily go the other way. My view is there should be at least 55% in favour before independence happens. Ahhh, is that how this works? 2019 General Election: Pro-Tory parties: 13,966,454 votes Non-Tory parties: 18,165,575 votes I look forward to Boris accepting that he has no mandate.
It's not a multi answer question though. There is only yes/no.
Would you like us to just vote on the 2 biggest parties?"That’s why 890,000 snp votes were binned because the of the PR system. If it were first past the post like a general election the SNP would have the equivalent firepower of the tories in England | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Isnt the Scottish parliamentary system designed so no one gets a majority?" Exactly, a majority was achieved in a system designed to prevent one in 2011. Back then tactical voting wasn’t a thing. To actually be on 1 short of breaking a system again is quite frankly some achievement in its own. As I said earlier, the media and unionist will spin this as a failure in a system designed to prevent a outright majority. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Changing the subject slightly but as someone who isn’t that interested in what happens with Scotland, surely any referendum which takes place should have a clear majority before independence is agreed? In the last referendum the vote was roughly 55% to stay in the Union and 45% to go and yet the 45% are going to get a second chance. If at the next referendum the result is 50.1% for independence then that will be the end of it! The 49.9% won’t get another chance when in fact if another referendum was held a few weeks later the result could easily go the other way. My view is there should be at least 55% in favour before independence happens." I'm not that politically astute but I believe there were a few untruths fed to the people of Scotland prior to that referendum hence the sense of it having been an unrepresentative outcome... Am I wrong? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Changing the subject slightly but as someone who isn’t that interested in what happens with Scotland, surely any referendum which takes place should have a clear majority before independence is agreed? In the last referendum the vote was roughly 55% to stay in the Union and 45% to go and yet the 45% are going to get a second chance. If at the next referendum the result is 50.1% for independence then that will be the end of it! The 49.9% won’t get another chance when in fact if another referendum was held a few weeks later the result could easily go the other way. My view is there should be at least 55% in favour before independence happens. Ahhh, is that how this works? 2019 General Election: Pro-Tory parties: 13,966,454 votes Non-Tory parties: 18,165,575 votes I look forward to Boris accepting that he has no mandate.
It's not a multi answer question though. There is only yes/no.
Would you like us to just vote on the 2 biggest parties?
That’s why 890,000 snp votes were binned because the of the PR system.
If it were first past the post like a general election the SNP would have the equivalent firepower of the tories in England "They weren't 'binned'. If it was truly FPTP the SNP wouldn't have the votes as there would be no regionals. Likely more seats could open up and SNP would win those seats but it either changes or you live with the system you have. Isn’t it said that PR actually benefits the larger parties? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Changing the subject slightly but as someone who isn’t that interested in what happens with Scotland, surely any referendum which takes place should have a clear majority before independence is agreed? In the last referendum the vote was roughly 55% to stay in the Union and 45% to go and yet the 45% are going to get a second chance. If at the next referendum the result is 50.1% for independence then that will be the end of it! The 49.9% won’t get another chance when in fact if another referendum was held a few weeks later the result could easily go the other way. My view is there should be at least 55% in favour before independence happens. Ahhh, is that how this works? 2019 General Election: Pro-Tory parties: 13,966,454 votes Non-Tory parties: 18,165,575 votes I look forward to Boris accepting that he has no mandate.
It's not a multi answer question though. There is only yes/no.
Would you like us to just vote on the 2 biggest parties?
That’s why 890,000 snp votes were binned because the of the PR system.
If it were first past the post like a general election the SNP would have the equivalent firepower of the tories in England
They weren't 'binned'. If it was truly FPTP the SNP wouldn't have the votes as there would be no regionals.
Likely more seats could open up and SNP would win those seats but it either changes or you live with the system you have.
Isn’t it said that PR actually benefits the larger parties?"There are over 200 variations of the d’hondt system. The SNP was saying both votes snp which cast hundreds of thousands of votes in the bin. If every snp member voted green as a second vote the unionists would be near wiped out completely | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Changing the subject slightly but as someone who isn’t that interested in what happens with Scotland, surely any referendum which takes place should have a clear majority before independence is agreed? In the last referendum the vote was roughly 55% to stay in the Union and 45% to go and yet the 45% are going to get a second chance. If at the next referendum the result is 50.1% for independence then that will be the end of it! The 49.9% won’t get another chance when in fact if another referendum was held a few weeks later the result could easily go the other way. My view is there should be at least 55% in favour before independence happens. Ahhh, is that how this works? 2019 General Election: Pro-Tory parties: 13,966,454 votes Non-Tory parties: 18,165,575 votes I look forward to Boris accepting that he has no mandate.
It's not a multi answer question though. There is only yes/no.
Would you like us to just vote on the 2 biggest parties?"But this is a completely different situation, Scotland isn’t voting for something which decides the next few years it is voting for its future forever, like you say it is a yes/no answer but with no opportunity to go back if the answer is yes. Like I said it doesn’t matter to me either way but if it’s a yes and in a couple of years the SNP have messed up and there is a clear majority wishing to rejoin the Union will they get another referendum, no! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Changing the subject slightly but as someone who isn’t that interested in what happens with Scotland, surely any referendum which takes place should have a clear majority before independence is agreed? In the last referendum the vote was roughly 55% to stay in the Union and 45% to go and yet the 45% are going to get a second chance. If at the next referendum the result is 50.1% for independence then that will be the end of it! The 49.9% won’t get another chance when in fact if another referendum was held a few weeks later the result could easily go the other way. My view is there should be at least 55% in favour before independence happens. Ahhh, is that how this works? 2019 General Election: Pro-Tory parties: 13,966,454 votes Non-Tory parties: 18,165,575 votes I look forward to Boris accepting that he has no mandate.
It's not a multi answer question though. There is only yes/no.
Would you like us to just vote on the 2 biggest parties?
But this is a completely different situation, Scotland isn’t voting for something which decides the next few years it is voting for its future forever, like you say it is a yes/no answer but with no opportunity to go back if the answer is yes. Like I said it doesn’t matter to me either way but if it’s a yes and in a couple of years the SNP have messed up and there is a clear majority wishing to rejoin the Union will they get another referendum, no! "Here’s a question then, how many countries of the former British empire asked to “come back” ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Changing the subject slightly but as someone who isn’t that interested in what happens with Scotland, surely any referendum which takes place should have a clear majority before independence is agreed? In the last referendum the vote was roughly 55% to stay in the Union and 45% to go and yet the 45% are going to get a second chance. If at the next referendum the result is 50.1% for independence then that will be the end of it! The 49.9% won’t get another chance when in fact if another referendum was held a few weeks later the result could easily go the other way. My view is there should be at least 55% in favour before independence happens. Ahhh, is that how this works? 2019 General Election: Pro-Tory parties: 13,966,454 votes Non-Tory parties: 18,165,575 votes I look forward to Boris accepting that he has no mandate.
It's not a multi answer question though. There is only yes/no.
Would you like us to just vote on the 2 biggest parties?
That’s why 890,000 snp votes were binned because the of the PR system.
If it were first past the post like a general election the SNP would have the equivalent firepower of the tories in England
They weren't 'binned'. If it was truly FPTP the SNP wouldn't have the votes as there would be no regionals.
Likely more seats could open up and SNP would win those seats but it either changes or you live with the system you have.
Isn’t it said that PR actually benefits the larger parties?
There are over 200 variations of the d’hondt system.
The SNP was saying both votes snp which cast hundreds of thousands of votes in the bin.
If every snp member voted green as a second vote the unionists would be near wiped out completely "How do the SNP know both votes were SNP? Are they checking ballot papers against people? Anyway, the point stands that if it was a true FPTP then there would be no regionals and less votes. Although, that would give the SNP a large majority. I don't care too much as it doesn't affect me where I live but it just seems 'here we go again' | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Highest number of votes in a Scottish Parliament election Highest vote share of any UK party for more than half a century Highest share of constituency seats of any UK party since modern democracy began But no majority.." | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Highest number of votes in a Scottish Parliament election Highest vote share of any UK party for more than half a century Highest share of constituency seats of any UK party since modern democracy began But no majority.. "System designed to prevent a majority prevents a majority. Go figure | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Highest number of votes in a Scottish Parliament election Highest vote share of any UK party for more than half a century Highest share of constituency seats of any UK party since modern democracy began But no majority..
System designed to prevent a majority prevents a majority. Go figure "No one said it would be easy.. I think what this set of results indicate given the tactical voting that went on is that a majority in s vote. (if granted) will not be forthcoming.. Although I doubt it will stop Nicola spunking more tax payers money on it.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Highest number of votes in a Scottish Parliament election Highest vote share of any UK party for more than half a century Highest share of constituency seats of any UK party since modern democracy began But no majority.." On their own. The voters of Scotland have, whether you accept it or not, returned a majority of MSPs who campaigned for the possibility of a second referendum. I, more or less, predicted this result. Alba maybe getting one seat and the Greens increasing their number of seats, I didn't get right - and I'm happy to be wrong. Personally, I'm pleased with the result. I'm pro-independence but I don't believe the SNP should be unfettered. Having the Greens keep an eye on them works for me. If you don't think it worked last time; you'd have to ask why the people of Scotland voted for more of the same. It has to be said though, the UK is definitely not united any more; certainly not politically. Even though only 50% of Scots favour independence - and the other 50% fear it - well over 70% of us will not vote Tory under any circumstance. As long as there is a UK Tory Government, there will be an SNP Scottish Government to oppose it. That's going to be very difficult to sustain, over the long term. Scotland is anti-Tory and England is pro-Tory, which is fair enough; but it's not healthy, in UK terms. Neither Scotland nor England is, in any way, a 'one party state' - but the political gulf between them is unlikely to narrow any time soon. And Labour? Well, you could say it's all their fault, for taking working class voters for granted and trying to be Tory-lite - because it worked for Blair - rather than opposing the Tories. They got found out. First, in Scotland, from 2007 onwards; and then in England, leading to the coalition in 2010. Now, due to a long string of self-inflicted wounds, they find themselves surplus to requirements both north and south of the border. Anas Sarwar being unable to become Leader of the Opposition in Scotland - when his only competition was Douglas Ross - is, like Hartlepool, an indication of how weak labour really are, UK wide. On Douglas Ross ... well, Nicola won't even have to tear him a new one every FMQs; Angus Robertson is back (he took Ruth Davidson's seat). She can put her feet up and let him take care of it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Highest number of votes in a Scottish Parliament election Highest vote share of any UK party for more than half a century Highest share of constituency seats of any UK party since modern democracy began But no majority.. On their own. The voters of Scotland have, whether you accept it or not, returned a majority of MSPs who campaigned for the possibility of a second referendum. I, more or less, predicted this result. Alba maybe getting one seat and the Greens increasing their number of seats, I didn't get right - and I'm happy to be wrong. Personally, I'm pleased with the result. I'm pro-independence but I don't believe the SNP should be unfettered. Having the Greens keep an eye on them works for me. If you don't think it worked last time; you'd have to ask why the people of Scotland voted for more of the same. It has to be said though, the UK is definitely not united any more; certainly not politically. Even though only 50% of Scots favour independence - and the other 50% fear it - well over 70% of us will not vote Tory under any circumstance. As long as there is a UK Tory Government, there will be an SNP Scottish Government to oppose it. That's going to be very difficult to sustain, over the long term. Scotland is anti-Tory and England is pro-Tory, which is fair enough; but it's not healthy, in UK terms. Neither Scotland nor England is, in any way, a 'one party state' - but the political gulf between them is unlikely to narrow any time soon. And Labour? Well, you could say it's all their fault, for taking working class voters for granted and trying to be Tory-lite - because it worked for Blair - rather than opposing the Tories. They got found out. First, in Scotland, from 2007 onwards; and then in England, leading to the coalition in 2010. Now, due to a long string of self-inflicted wounds, they find themselves surplus to requirements both north and south of the border. Anas Sarwar being unable to become Leader of the Opposition in Scotland - when his only competition was Douglas Ross - is, like Hartlepool, an indication of how weak labour really are, UK wide. On Douglas Ross ... well, Nicola won't even have to tear him a new one every FMQs; Angus Robertson is back (he took Ruth Davidson's seat). She can put her feet up and let him take care of it." To be fair this is a good read
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Highest number of votes in a Scottish Parliament election Highest vote share of any UK party for more than half a century Highest share of constituency seats of any UK party since modern democracy began But no majority.. On their own. The voters of Scotland have, whether you accept it or not, returned a majority of MSPs who campaigned for the possibility of a second referendum. I, more or less, predicted this result. Alba maybe getting one seat and the Greens increasing their number of seats, I didn't get right - and I'm happy to be wrong. Personally, I'm pleased with the result. I'm pro-independence but I don't believe the SNP should be unfettered. Having the Greens keep an eye on them works for me. If you don't think it worked last time; you'd have to ask why the people of Scotland voted for more of the same. It has to be said though, the UK is definitely not united any more; certainly not politically. Even though only 50% of Scots favour independence - and the other 50% fear it - well over 70% of us will not vote Tory under any circumstance. As long as there is a UK Tory Government, there will be an SNP Scottish Government to oppose it. That's going to be very difficult to sustain, over the long term. Scotland is anti-Tory and England is pro-Tory, which is fair enough; but it's not healthy, in UK terms. Neither Scotland nor England is, in any way, a 'one party state' - but the political gulf between them is unlikely to narrow any time soon. And Labour? Well, you could say it's all their fault, for taking working class voters for granted and trying to be Tory-lite - because it worked for Blair - rather than opposing the Tories. They got found out. First, in Scotland, from 2007 onwards; and then in England, leading to the coalition in 2010. Now, due to a long string of self-inflicted wounds, they find themselves surplus to requirements both north and south of the border. Anas Sarwar being unable to become Leader of the Opposition in Scotland - when his only competition was Douglas Ross - is, like Hartlepool, an indication of how weak labour really are, UK wide. On Douglas Ross ... well, Nicola won't even have to tear him a new one every FMQs; Angus Robertson is back (he took Ruth Davidson's seat). She can put her feet up and let him take care of it. To be fair this is a good read
"Agreed.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Scotland goes snp Wales goes left Big chunks of England go right A disunited kingdom." I corrected that for you | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Number of Labour seats in each Holyrood election - 1999: 56 2003: 50 2007: 46 2011: 37 2016: 24 2021: 22 Anas Sarwar: "We're on a journey, I recognise that." Aye down the plug hole You certainly are. "Can we do a Tory version please ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Scotland is fast becoming polarised. They are choosing their own direction. The tory party in the UK is a populist English national party, the Scottish tory Party are deeply struggling with this position in Scotland. Some hard facts: Record 90% of constituency seats won by snp.... They did so well here that they struggled to win list seats... Unlike 2011 when they did not do as well with the constituency seats. Record turnout ever. Record nationalist vote. Nationalist vote share up Unionist vote share down. Snp vote is just under 50%.... Snp one short of a majority, however the greens 8 seats (they policy is for a ref) means a pro indy majority in parliament. Majority of seats for unionist parties gained on the list (the snp removed from this because they won the constituency seats) except in two seats where they squeezed the last seat in two areas. Scotland is the home of democracy.... Check out the enlightenment if you don't believe me. This was a huge landslide for them on a system the at is designed to not have majorities. The quicker the UK gov realise this the better.... They have facilitated over a border on the Irish sea splitting up the union against the wishes of the people of Northern Ireland whilst preaching to the people of Scotland who have now voted with a clear message they want their say. How long can the tories keep this up? Interesting times. We are meant to be a democracy. "A sensible Party in Westminster would acknowledge that things have changed since 2014. There are no legitimate excuses. Johnson cannot really use the excuse of Coronavirus when he made the biggest constitutional change in 40 years by leaving the EU at the height of the pandemic. If he was certain of the success of the Union argument he would allow the referendum to go ahead. It is his fear of Scotland pulling away that is behind the rejection of a referendum. Yet by continuing to disallow it, the United Kingdom is becoming an undemocratic union that is being held together against the will of its people. I think that the Brexit fallout is going to carry on for absolutely years to come, with a slow erosion of this great, great country. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Scotland is fast becoming polarised. They are choosing their own direction. The tory party in the UK is a populist English national party, the Scottish tory Party are deeply struggling with this position in Scotland. Some hard facts: Record 90% of constituency seats won by snp.... They did so well here that they struggled to win list seats... Unlike 2011 when they did not do as well with the constituency seats. Record turnout ever. Record nationalist vote. Nationalist vote share up Unionist vote share down. Snp vote is just under 50%.... Snp one short of a majority, however the greens 8 seats (they policy is for a ref) means a pro indy majority in parliament. Majority of seats for unionist parties gained on the list (the snp removed from this because they won the constituency seats) except in two seats where they squeezed the last seat in two areas. Scotland is the home of democracy.... Check out the enlightenment if you don't believe me. This was a huge landslide for them on a system the at is designed to not have majorities. The quicker the UK gov realise this the better.... They have facilitated over a border on the Irish sea splitting up the union against the wishes of the people of Northern Ireland whilst preaching to the people of Scotland who have now voted with a clear message they want their say. How long can the tories keep this up? Interesting times. We are meant to be a democracy. "The devil in me is saying just let Scotland go. Tell Nicola Sturgeon that come January 1st 2021, they are independent. But when they are independent, I'm sure that this democracy will extend to the Shetland and Orkney Islands, when they come calling for Independence. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Scotland is fast becoming polarised. They are choosing their own direction. The tory party in the UK is a populist English national party, the Scottish tory Party are deeply struggling with this position in Scotland. Some hard facts: Record 90% of constituency seats won by snp.... They did so well here that they struggled to win list seats... Unlike 2011 when they did not do as well with the constituency seats. Record turnout ever. Record nationalist vote. Nationalist vote share up Unionist vote share down. Snp vote is just under 50%.... Snp one short of a majority, however the greens 8 seats (they policy is for a ref) means a pro indy majority in parliament. Majority of seats for unionist parties gained on the list (the snp removed from this because they won the constituency seats) except in two seats where they squeezed the last seat in two areas. Scotland is the home of democracy.... Check out the enlightenment if you don't believe me. This was a huge landslide for them on a system the at is designed to not have majorities. The quicker the UK gov realise this the better.... They have facilitated over a border on the Irish sea splitting up the union against the wishes of the people of Northern Ireland whilst preaching to the people of Scotland who have now voted with a clear message they want their say. How long can the tories keep this up? Interesting times. We are meant to be a democracy.
The devil in me is saying just let Scotland go. Tell Nicola Sturgeon that come January 1st 2021, they are independent.
But when they are independent, I'm sure that this democracy will extend to the Shetland and Orkney Islands, when they come calling for Independence. "You are believing what you read again. There is more of a push for independence in Yorkshire and Cornwall than Shetland. As for letting Scotland go....that very statement is the problem. Its not Englands decision to make. The union is 4 nations coming together voluntarily..... Just now all four nations are pushing in different different but are being forced to go the way of the biggest nation. There needs urgent acknowledgement that Northern Ireland has been treated horrendously, Wales does not view life the same way and the Scots are not happy. The tory party have become the English nationalist party. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Highest number of votes in a Scottish Parliament election Highest vote share of any UK party for more than half a century Highest share of constituency seats of any UK party since modern democracy began But no majority.. On their own. The voters of Scotland have, whether you accept it or not, returned a majority of MSPs who campaigned for the possibility of a second referendum. I, more or less, predicted this result. Alba maybe getting one seat and the Greens increasing their number of seats, I didn't get right - and I'm happy to be wrong. Personally, I'm pleased with the result. I'm pro-independence but I don't believe the SNP should be unfettered. Having the Greens keep an eye on them works for me. If you don't think it worked last time; you'd have to ask why the people of Scotland voted for more of the same. It has to be said though, the UK is definitely not united any more; certainly not politically. Even though only 50% of Scots favour independence - and the other 50% fear it - well over 70% of us will not vote Tory under any circumstance. As long as there is a UK Tory Government, there will be an SNP Scottish Government to oppose it. That's going to be very difficult to sustain, over the long term. Scotland is anti-Tory and England is pro-Tory, which is fair enough; but it's not healthy, in UK terms. Neither Scotland nor England is, in any way, a 'one party state' - but the political gulf between them is unlikely to narrow any time soon. And Labour? Well, you could say it's all their fault, for taking working class voters for granted and trying to be Tory-lite - because it worked for Blair - rather than opposing the Tories. They got found out. First, in Scotland, from 2007 onwards; and then in England, leading to the coalition in 2010. Now, due to a long string of self-inflicted wounds, they find themselves surplus to requirements both north and south of the border. Anas Sarwar being unable to become Leader of the Opposition in Scotland - when his only competition was Douglas Ross - is, like Hartlepool, an indication of how weak labour really are, UK wide. On Douglas Ross ... well, Nicola won't even have to tear him a new one every FMQs; Angus Robertson is back (he took Ruth Davidson's seat). She can put her feet up and let him take care of it. To be fair this is a good read
"Thank you. I know we don't agree on the independence issue - and I still don't think it will happen in my lifetime; but it is, depending upon how the UK Government handle things, a distinct possibility. The argument to hold IndyRef2 sooner, rather than later, is a sound one, from a Unionist point of view. However, it is not without risk. The 52/48 Brexit vote clearly demonstrates that. Something else that's very clear is that a second 'No' vote, whilst certainly killing off the possibility of a third one - for decades - is not going to change the nature of Scotland's opposition to Tory rule. So, what would? Well, even though the pandemic has forced the Tories into it, their very largely socialist reaction to its effects has been the right thing to do. Initially, Boris got plenty wrong and over 100,000 are dead because of it. Since January, he has clearly taken a far more cautious approach - as had already been taken in Scotland and Wales. If - and it's a very big if - the Tories continue to steal Labour's clothes (a reverse Blair, if you will), of their own accord; it's going to reduce opposition to them. Even up here. Boris has just offered a UK summit with the devolved leaders; so, he appears to take the recent election results seriously. However, talk of "tearing our country apart" isn't going to help him. Why? Well, there is no "our country" as he puts it. The UK is a union of four countries - it's an organisation, not a country. The Americans call it England - and that's how most Tories think of it; especially since the three, much smaller, countries have no real influence - under FPTP - in determining the composition of its Westminster Parliament. Also, where is the "tearing apart", in the exercise of a democratic process? The EU wasn't torn apart when the UK left it, after a vote, was it? To be fair to Boris, it may be that he realises the Brexit result tore the UK apart - and he's keen to avoid it going all the way into Scotland leaving the UK, the way the UK left the EU. One thing which would go a long way to preserving the Union would be the adoption - UK wide - of the same PR system of voting, for choosing a national government, that applies in Scotland, New Zealand and Germany. Why? Because everyone's vote would be meaningful - it just isn't under pure FPTP. It won't happen because it's already been rejected once (in 2011, I think) and, more importantly, FPTP allows for a majority of seats in Westminster, on significantly less than 50% of the vote. We have just seen that, with 49% of the vote, in Scotland, the SNP have gained 49% of the seats in Holyrood. The Tories, even though hardly any of them were directly elected, have 24%. The Scottish Greens, 6% - all list candidates - but an accurate representation of what the voters wanted. Would electing the UK Government under such a system be so terrible? Well, you can - rightly - argue that it would mean lots of minority Tory governments in the future; mainly because nobody would want to work with them. That's not necessarily a bad thing, if it forces them to arrive at policies the other parties can support. It would mean that anything they did had the backing of over 50% of the electorate. I suppose the bottom line - and it seems to be dawning on Boris - is that the "shut up, take this money and know your place" approach to Scotland isn't going to work; he disapproves of the CCP using it in Hong Kong - and rightly so. That old story about the wind and the sun trying to get a man to take his coat off; maybe that's the way to go, to save the UK? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The devil in me is saying just let Scotland go. Tell Nicola Sturgeon that come January 1st 2021, they are independent. But when they are independent, I'm sure that this democracy will extend to the Shetland and Orkney Islands, when they come calling for Independence. " It's not just a devil in you; lots of English people feel the same way. However, you know as well as I do that no UK Government - especially a Tory one (and it's going to be, for many years yet) - is going to voluntarily give up a third of the UK's landmass, all the territorial waters surrounding it and a place to park Trident. They'd happily be rid of the Scots - even the few that vote for them - but giving up all that other stuff without a struggle? Won't happen. Btw, on Trident; the missiles can reach Moscow, Teheran, Beijing and Pyongyang even if they're launched from the Thames. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The devil in me is saying just let Scotland go. Tell Nicola Sturgeon that come January 1st 2021, they are independent. But when they are independent, I'm sure that this democracy will extend to the Shetland and Orkney Islands, when they come calling for Independence. It's not just a devil in you; lots of English people feel the same way. However, you know as well as I do that no UK Government - especially a Tory one (and it's going to be, for many years yet) - is going to voluntarily give up a third of the UK's landmass, all the territorial waters surrounding it and a place to park Trident. They'd happily be rid of the Scots - even the few that vote for them - but giving up all that other stuff without a struggle? Won't happen. Btw, on Trident; the missiles can reach Moscow, Teheran, Beijing and Pyongyang even if they're launched from the Thames." Our Trident cabability is going to the US, if its kicked out of Scotland. It will come at a price that Nicola Sturgeon has to factor in. The loss of tens of thousand well paid jobs. And that will also include Royal Navy ship building capacity in Scotland. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
We need to show the spirit which we used to beat the pandemic...the same spirit which was led to over 120,000 deaths. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"the savings from not having to prop up the unecessary massive nuclear white elephant which drains the economies of the four nations would also be a boost to growth." You have to pay for defence it doesn't come free and is part of the 2% of gdp committed for being part of NATO. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The devil in me is saying just let Scotland go. Tell Nicola Sturgeon that come January 1st 2021, they are independent. But when they are independent, I'm sure that this democracy will extend to the Shetland and Orkney Islands, when they come calling for Independence. It's not just a devil in you; lots of English people feel the same way. However, you know as well as I do that no UK Government - especially a Tory one (and it's going to be, for many years yet) - is going to voluntarily give up a third of the UK's landmass, all the territorial waters surrounding it and a place to park Trident. They'd happily be rid of the Scots - even the few that vote for them - but giving up all that other stuff without a struggle? Won't happen. Btw, on Trident; the missiles can reach Moscow, Teheran, Beijing and Pyongyang even if they're launched from the Thames." During indy 1 the trident issue came up as you would expect and the navy had found an alternative place to base it. Not as good as the current location but it was doable. Reaching Moscow from the Thames is irrelevant as they would launch from well out to sea anywhere on the planet. The base is just that, a base not a launch pad. It looks increasingly likely indy 2 will happen in the not too distant future. Will there be an Indy 3 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"the savings from not having to prop up the unecessary massive nuclear white elephant which drains the economies of the four nations would also be a boost to growth. You have to pay for defence it doesn't come free and is part of the 2% of gdp committed for being part of NATO." utterly irrelevant | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"the savings from not having to prop up the unecessary massive nuclear white elephant which drains the economies of the four nations would also be a boost to growth. You have to pay for defence it doesn't come free and is part of the 2% of gdp committed for being part of NATO. utterly irrelevant " Why? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"you appear to believe that scotland would want to be part of nato and vice versa, but mostly because 2% of scotlands projected GDP would be far less than they pay now to support englands defence spend." i thought your original post said its a drain on the 4 nations not just scotland  so no its not a drain its a necessity. Hence my post. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Changing the subject slightly but as someone who isn’t that interested in what happens with Scotland, surely any referendum which takes place should have a clear majority before independence is agreed? In the last referendum the vote was roughly 55% to stay in the Union and 45% to go and yet the 45% are going to get a second chance. If at the next referendum the result is 50.1% for independence then that will be the end of it! The 49.9% won’t get another chance when in fact if another referendum was held a few weeks later the result could easily go the other way. My view is there should be at least 55% in favour before independence happens. Ahhh, is that how this works? 2019 General Election: Pro-Tory parties: 13,966,454 votes Non-Tory parties: 18,165,575 votes I look forward to Boris accepting that he has no mandate.
It's not a multi answer question though. There is only yes/no.
Would you like us to just vote on the 2 biggest parties?
That’s why 890,000 snp votes were binned because the of the PR system.
If it were first past the post like a general election the SNP would have the equivalent firepower of the tories in England
They weren't 'binned'. If it was truly FPTP the SNP wouldn't have the votes as there would be no regionals.
Likely more seats could open up and SNP would win those seats but it either changes or you live with the system you have.
Isn’t it said that PR actually benefits the larger parties?
There are over 200 variations of the d’hondt system.
The SNP was saying both votes snp which cast hundreds of thousands of votes in the bin.
If every snp member voted green as a second vote the unionists would be near wiped out completely "I havent done the arithmetic on this years votes yet, but in 2016 if all the SNP list votes has gone to the greens, they would have picked up 37 seats, caveat to this is that it doesnt factor in tactical voting by pro-union parties. But a pact between SNP/Grn in 2016 could have seen them take 98 seats, again dependent on how pro-union parties/voters behaved. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The devil in me is saying just let Scotland go. Tell Nicola Sturgeon that come January 1st 2021, they are independent. But when they are independent, I'm sure that this democracy will extend to the Shetland and Orkney Islands, when they come calling for Independence. It's not just a devil in you; lots of English people feel the same way. However, you know as well as I do that no UK Government - especially a Tory one (and it's going to be, for many years yet) - is going to voluntarily give up a third of the UK's landmass, all the territorial waters surrounding it and a place to park Trident. They'd happily be rid of the Scots - even the few that vote for them - but giving up all that other stuff without a struggle? Won't happen. Btw, on Trident; the missiles can reach Moscow, Teheran, Beijing and Pyongyang even if they're launched from the Thames." Wee nicola is not stupid she knows its too early for an indy ref 2 the numbers dont add up for a guaranteed win.Im looking forward to it tbh i would like to know what they propose on things like money,defence,the boarder and rejoining the eu. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You have to pay for defence it doesn't come free and is part of the 2% of gdp committed for being part of NATO." Due to its strategic position, an independent Scotland would be welcomed into NATO and it wouldn't, necessarily, be spending 2% of GDP on defence. Iceland spends 0.26% of GDP and has no standing army. It has a Coastguard consisting of three patrol vessels, one aircraft and three helicopters. Perhaps you think it should be kicked out of NATO for not carrying its weight? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You have to pay for defence it doesn't come free and is part of the 2% of gdp committed for being part of NATO. Due to its strategic position, an independent Scotland would be welcomed into NATO and it wouldn't, necessarily, be spending 2% of GDP on defence. Iceland spends 0.26% of GDP and has no standing army. It has a Coastguard consisting of three patrol vessels, one aircraft and three helicopters. Perhaps you think it should be kicked out of NATO for not carrying its weight?" Not at all they have had a bi lateral agreement with the USA since 1951 are you now telling me that Scotland will get the same? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The devil in me is saying just let Scotland go. Tell Nicola Sturgeon that come January 1st 2021, they are independent. But when they are independent, I'm sure that this democracy will extend to the Shetland and Orkney Islands, when they come calling for Independence. It's not just a devil in you; lots of English people feel the same way. However, you know as well as I do that no UK Government - especially a Tory one (and it's going to be, for many years yet) - is going to voluntarily give up a third of the UK's landmass, all the territorial waters surrounding it and a place to park Trident. They'd happily be rid of the Scots - even the few that vote for them - but giving up all that other stuff without a struggle? Won't happen. Btw, on Trident; the missiles can reach Moscow, Teheran, Beijing and Pyongyang even if they're launched from the Thames. During indy 1 the trident issue came up as you would expect and the navy had found an alternative place to base it. Not as good as the current location but it was doable. Reaching Moscow from the Thames is irrelevant as they would launch from well out to sea anywhere on the planet. The base is just that, a base not a launch pad. It looks increasingly likely indy 2 will happen in the not too distant future. Will there be an Indy 3" If a base is just a base, why not nearer to London, then? You've just said it makes no difference. If IndyRef2 is another 'No', then IndyRef3 won't happen before most of us on here have died; if at all. Which is fair enough. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You have to pay for defence it doesn't come free and is part of the 2% of gdp committed for being part of NATO. Due to its strategic position, an independent Scotland would be welcomed into NATO and it wouldn't, necessarily, be spending 2% of GDP on defence. Iceland spends 0.26% of GDP and has no standing army. It has a Coastguard consisting of three patrol vessels, one aircraft and three helicopters. Perhaps you think it should be kicked out of NATO for not carrying its weight?Not at all they have had a bi lateral agreement with the USA since 1951 are you now telling me that Scotland will get the same?" Why not? You don't think we're worth it? For the sake of NATO? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The devil in me is saying just let Scotland go. Tell Nicola Sturgeon that come January 1st 2021, they are independent. But when they are independent, I'm sure that this democracy will extend to the Shetland and Orkney Islands, when they come calling for Independence. It's not just a devil in you; lots of English people feel the same way. However, you know as well as I do that no UK Government - especially a Tory one (and it's going to be, for many years yet) - is going to voluntarily give up a third of the UK's landmass, all the territorial waters surrounding it and a place to park Trident. They'd happily be rid of the Scots - even the few that vote for them - but giving up all that other stuff without a struggle? Won't happen. Btw, on Trident; the missiles can reach Moscow, Teheran, Beijing and Pyongyang even if they're launched from the Thames. Our Trident cabability is going to the US, if its kicked out of Scotland. It will come at a price that Nicola Sturgeon has to factor in. The loss of tens of thousand well paid jobs. And that will also include Royal Navy ship building capacity in Scotland. " Why the US? Why not an English port that could do with the jobs? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You have to pay for defence it doesn't come free and is part of the 2% of gdp committed for being part of NATO. Due to its strategic position, an independent Scotland would be welcomed into NATO and it wouldn't, necessarily, be spending 2% of GDP on defence. Iceland spends 0.26% of GDP and has no standing army. It has a Coastguard consisting of three patrol vessels, one aircraft and three helicopters. Perhaps you think it should be kicked out of NATO for not carrying its weight?Not at all they have had a bi lateral agreement with the USA since 1951 are you now telling me that Scotland will get the same? Why not? You don't think we're worth it? For the sake of NATO?" I have no idea and as i said in a previous thread i would like to know the answer to this question and many others and would think the people of Scotland would too before a vote. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The devil in me is saying just let Scotland go. Tell Nicola Sturgeon that come January 1st 2021, they are independent. But when they are independent, I'm sure that this democracy will extend to the Shetland and Orkney Islands, when they come calling for Independence. It's not just a devil in you; lots of English people feel the same way. However, you know as well as I do that no UK Government - especially a Tory one (and it's going to be, for many years yet) - is going to voluntarily give up a third of the UK's landmass, all the territorial waters surrounding it and a place to park Trident. They'd happily be rid of the Scots - even the few that vote for them - but giving up all that other stuff without a struggle? Won't happen. Btw, on Trident; the missiles can reach Moscow, Teheran, Beijing and Pyongyang even if they're launched from the Thames. During indy 1 the trident issue came up as you would expect and the navy had found an alternative place to base it. Not as good as the current location but it was doable. Reaching Moscow from the Thames is irrelevant as they would launch from well out to sea anywhere on the planet. The base is just that, a base not a launch pad. It looks increasingly likely indy 2 will happen in the not too distant future. Will there be an Indy 3 If a base is just a base, why not nearer to London, then? You've just said it makes no difference. If IndyRef2 is another 'No', then IndyRef3 won't happen before most of us on here have died; if at all. Which is fair enough." Because the current location is a very deep water port making it possible for the subs to come and go deeply submerged. As I say an alternative has been identified though not quite as good its doable. If Scotland votes out and the subs have to move then the jobs move with them sadly. I asked about Indy 3 as heard an interview with an SNP person on the radio who would not answer that question regardless of the outcome of Indy 2 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What you have to realise is that for the SNP independance trumps any other consideration. They have acknowledged that it will be a bumpy ride for "A few years" but as someone who works in the financial markets i am sure it will be a long decade after any Yes vote. The other very real problem is the financial flight which will almost certainly occur.It will certainly be an interesting time, but for people like me i will need to move south which i will be very reluctant to do ,but may well have to ." And that is the whole truth of it. Wanting self-determination is great, and I support it, but being able to pay your mortgage while it all gets sorted is entirely another. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The devil in me is saying just let Scotland go. Tell Nicola Sturgeon that come January 1st 2021, they are independent. But when they are independent, I'm sure that this democracy will extend to the Shetland and Orkney Islands, when they come calling for Independence. It's not just a devil in you; lots of English people feel the same way. However, you know as well as I do that no UK Government - especially a Tory one (and it's going to be, for many years yet) - is going to voluntarily give up a third of the UK's landmass, all the territorial waters surrounding it and a place to park Trident. They'd happily be rid of the Scots - even the few that vote for them - but giving up all that other stuff without a struggle? Won't happen. Btw, on Trident; the missiles can reach Moscow, Teheran, Beijing and Pyongyang even if they're launched from the Thames. Our Trident cabability is going to the US, if its kicked out of Scotland. It will come at a price that Nicola Sturgeon has to factor in. The loss of tens of thousand well paid jobs. And that will also include Royal Navy ship building capacity in Scotland. Why the US? Why not an English port that could do with the jobs?" Someone in the know told me when Indyref1 was doing the rounds. What is the SNP policy on defence? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The devil in me is saying just let Scotland go. Tell Nicola Sturgeon that come January 1st 2021, they are independent. But when they are independent, I'm sure that this democracy will extend to the Shetland and Orkney Islands, when they come calling for Independence. It's not just a devil in you; lots of English people feel the same way. However, you know as well as I do that no UK Government - especially a Tory one (and it's going to be, for many years yet) - is going to voluntarily give up a third of the UK's landmass, all the territorial waters surrounding it and a place to park Trident. They'd happily be rid of the Scots - even the few that vote for them - but giving up all that other stuff without a struggle? Won't happen. Btw, on Trident; the missiles can reach Moscow, Teheran, Beijing and Pyongyang even if they're launched from the Thames. During indy 1 the trident issue came up as you would expect and the navy had found an alternative place to base it. Not as good as the current location but it was doable. Reaching Moscow from the Thames is irrelevant as they would launch from well out to sea anywhere on the planet. The base is just that, a base not a launch pad. It looks increasingly likely indy 2 will happen in the not too distant future. Will there be an Indy 3 If a base is just a base, why not nearer to London, then? You've just said it makes no difference. If IndyRef2 is another 'No', then IndyRef3 won't happen before most of us on here have died; if at all. Which is fair enough. Because the current location is a very deep water port making it possible for the subs to come and go deeply submerged. As I say an alternative has been identified though not quite as good its doable. If Scotland votes out and the subs have to move then the jobs move with them sadly. I asked about Indy 3 as heard an interview with an SNP person on the radio who would not answer that question regardless of the outcome of Indy 2 " Well, I'm not so restricted. LOL Deep water is a pretty feeble excuse these days; but if it's required, there are plenty of other places with it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The devil in me is saying just let Scotland go. Tell Nicola Sturgeon that come January 1st 2021, they are independent. But when they are independent, I'm sure that this democracy will extend to the Shetland and Orkney Islands, when they come calling for Independence. It's not just a devil in you; lots of English people feel the same way. However, you know as well as I do that no UK Government - especially a Tory one (and it's going to be, for many years yet) - is going to voluntarily give up a third of the UK's landmass, all the territorial waters surrounding it and a place to park Trident. They'd happily be rid of the Scots - even the few that vote for them - but giving up all that other stuff without a struggle? Won't happen. Btw, on Trident; the missiles can reach Moscow, Teheran, Beijing and Pyongyang even if they're launched from the Thames. Our Trident cabability is going to the US, if its kicked out of Scotland. It will come at a price that Nicola Sturgeon has to factor in. The loss of tens of thousand well paid jobs. And that will also include Royal Navy ship building capacity in Scotland. Why the US? Why not an English port that could do with the jobs? Someone in the know told me when Indyref1 was doing the rounds. What is the SNP policy on defence? " I've not looked into it yet. I can't imagine it's comprehensive, though. Apart from anything else, why would anyone attack Scotland? What's to be gained? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The devil in me is saying just let Scotland go. Tell Nicola Sturgeon that come January 1st 2021, they are independent. But when they are independent, I'm sure that this democracy will extend to the Shetland and Orkney Islands, when they come calling for Independence. It's not just a devil in you; lots of English people feel the same way. However, you know as well as I do that no UK Government - especially a Tory one (and it's going to be, for many years yet) - is going to voluntarily give up a third of the UK's landmass, all the territorial waters surrounding it and a place to park Trident. They'd happily be rid of the Scots - even the few that vote for them - but giving up all that other stuff without a struggle? Won't happen. Btw, on Trident; the missiles can reach Moscow, Teheran, Beijing and Pyongyang even if they're launched from the Thames. Our Trident cabability is going to the US, if its kicked out of Scotland. It will come at a price that Nicola Sturgeon has to factor in. The loss of tens of thousand well paid jobs. And that will also include Royal Navy ship building capacity in Scotland. Why the US? Why not an English port that could do with the jobs? Someone in the know told me when Indyref1 was doing the rounds. What is the SNP policy on defence? I've not looked into it yet. I can't imagine it's comprehensive, though. Apart from anything else, why would anyone attack Scotland? What's to be gained?" How about the boarder with England any idea on that policy? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You have to pay for defence it doesn't come free and is part of the 2% of gdp committed for being part of NATO. Due to its strategic position, an independent Scotland would be welcomed into NATO and it wouldn't, necessarily, be spending 2% of GDP on defence. Iceland spends 0.26% of GDP and has no standing army. It has a Coastguard consisting of three patrol vessels, one aircraft and three helicopters. Perhaps you think it should be kicked out of NATO for not carrying its weight?Not at all they have had a bi lateral agreement with the USA since 1951 are you now telling me that Scotland will get the same? Why not? You don't think we're worth it? For the sake of NATO? I have no idea and as i said in a previous thread i would like to know the answer to this question and many others and would think the people of Scotland would too before a vote." You have no idea if it's worth having Scotland in NATO? As for being able to afford an army, navy and airforce goes; I guess we'll see. Much smaller than the UK's, obviously - maybe about what the ROI can manage? As I said in another reply; who's going to attack us? What would be the point? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The devil in me is saying just let Scotland go. Tell Nicola Sturgeon that come January 1st 2021, they are independent. But when they are independent, I'm sure that this democracy will extend to the Shetland and Orkney Islands, when they come calling for Independence. It's not just a devil in you; lots of English people feel the same way. However, you know as well as I do that no UK Government - especially a Tory one (and it's going to be, for many years yet) - is going to voluntarily give up a third of the UK's landmass, all the territorial waters surrounding it and a place to park Trident. They'd happily be rid of the Scots - even the few that vote for them - but giving up all that other stuff without a struggle? Won't happen. Btw, on Trident; the missiles can reach Moscow, Teheran, Beijing and Pyongyang even if they're launched from the Thames. Our Trident cabability is going to the US, if its kicked out of Scotland. It will come at a price that Nicola Sturgeon has to factor in. The loss of tens of thousand well paid jobs. And that will also include Royal Navy ship building capacity in Scotland. Why the US? Why not an English port that could do with the jobs? Someone in the know told me when Indyref1 was doing the rounds. What is the SNP policy on defence? I've not looked into it yet. I can't imagine it's comprehensive, though. Apart from anything else, why would anyone attack Scotland? What's to be gained?How about the boarder with England any idea on that policy? " Feel free not to answer the question. The border with England will remain as it is, until such time as we rejoin the EU - if we're allowed to - unless Westminster insists on there being one before that. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You have to pay for defence it doesn't come free and is part of the 2% of gdp committed for being part of NATO. Due to its strategic position, an independent Scotland would be welcomed into NATO and it wouldn't, necessarily, be spending 2% of GDP on defence. Iceland spends 0.26% of GDP and has no standing army. It has a Coastguard consisting of three patrol vessels, one aircraft and three helicopters. Perhaps you think it should be kicked out of NATO for not carrying its weight?Not at all they have had a bi lateral agreement with the USA since 1951 are you now telling me that Scotland will get the same? Why not? You don't think we're worth it? For the sake of NATO? I have no idea and as i said in a previous thread i would like to know the answer to this question and many others and would think the people of Scotland would too before a vote. You have no idea if it's worth having Scotland in NATO? As for being able to afford an army, navy and airforce goes; I guess we'll see. Much smaller than the UK's, obviously - maybe about what the ROI can manage? As I said in another reply; who's going to attack us? What would be the point?" No as i said i have no idea if its worth having scotland in Nato obviously if they are contributing to it the answer is yes but if not thats up to the nato countries that do i guess. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The devil in me is saying just let Scotland go. Tell Nicola Sturgeon that come January 1st 2021, they are independent. But when they are independent, I'm sure that this democracy will extend to the Shetland and Orkney Islands, when they come calling for Independence. It's not just a devil in you; lots of English people feel the same way. However, you know as well as I do that no UK Government - especially a Tory one (and it's going to be, for many years yet) - is going to voluntarily give up a third of the UK's landmass, all the territorial waters surrounding it and a place to park Trident. They'd happily be rid of the Scots - even the few that vote for them - but giving up all that other stuff without a struggle? Won't happen. Btw, on Trident; the missiles can reach Moscow, Teheran, Beijing and Pyongyang even if they're launched from the Thames. During indy 1 the trident issue came up as you would expect and the navy had found an alternative place to base it. Not as good as the current location but it was doable. Reaching Moscow from the Thames is irrelevant as they would launch from well out to sea anywhere on the planet. The base is just that, a base not a launch pad. It looks increasingly likely indy 2 will happen in the not too distant future. Will there be an Indy 3 If a base is just a base, why not nearer to London, then? You've just said it makes no difference. If IndyRef2 is another 'No', then IndyRef3 won't happen before most of us on here have died; if at all. Which is fair enough. Because the current location is a very deep water port making it possible for the subs to come and go deeply submerged. As I say an alternative has been identified though not quite as good its doable. If Scotland votes out and the subs have to move then the jobs move with them sadly. I asked about Indy 3 as heard an interview with an SNP person on the radio who would not answer that question regardless of the outcome of Indy 2 Well, I'm not so restricted. LOL Deep water is a pretty feeble excuse these days; but if it's required, there are plenty of other places with it." It's very important especially given the nature of the subs. As said the current location is ideal for the subs and indeed the jobs they bring. I did point out that other places have been identified . They are not as ideal but doable. Of course it means the jobs no e with them | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The devil in me is saying just let Scotland go. Tell Nicola Sturgeon that come January 1st 2021, they are independent. But when they are independent, I'm sure that this democracy will extend to the Shetland and Orkney Islands, when they come calling for Independence. It's not just a devil in you; lots of English people feel the same way. However, you know as well as I do that no UK Government - especially a Tory one (and it's going to be, for many years yet) - is going to voluntarily give up a third of the UK's landmass, all the territorial waters surrounding it and a place to park Trident. They'd happily be rid of the Scots - even the few that vote for them - but giving up all that other stuff without a struggle? Won't happen. Btw, on Trident; the missiles can reach Moscow, Teheran, Beijing and Pyongyang even if they're launched from the Thames. Our Trident cabability is going to the US, if its kicked out of Scotland. It will come at a price that Nicola Sturgeon has to factor in. The loss of tens of thousand well paid jobs. And that will also include Royal Navy ship building capacity in Scotland. Why the US? Why not an English port that could do with the jobs? Someone in the know told me when Indyref1 was doing the rounds. What is the SNP policy on defence? I've not looked into it yet. I can't imagine it's comprehensive, though. Apart from anything else, why would anyone attack Scotland? What's to be gained?" The same can be said for many countries who take their defence seriously and are part of NATO. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Further analysis of the voting. The constituency seat vote had unionist parties votes higher than indy votes. The list seats had indy votes higher than unionist votes. Altogether.... Indy votes top unionist votes just. " snp took 85% of the constituency votes | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I seem to remember in Indyref1, that Faslane would be vacated by the RN, and become a conventional naval base for the Scottish Navy. Direct and indirect jobs would decrease by 80%." having worked at faslane 95% of the workforce are english,only about 500 scots actually work there,also the majority of scots dont want it in our country and when we are independent it will be gone | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I seem to remember in Indyref1, that Faslane would be vacated by the RN, and become a conventional naval base for the Scottish Navy. Direct and indirect jobs would decrease by 80%. having worked at faslane 95% of the workforce are english,only about 500 scots actually work there,also the majority of scots dont want it in our country and when we are independent it will be gone" Weather they are English or Scottish does not change the fact that they will be moved to England. It's not just the jobs but also the money spent by the workers in the local area. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Further analysis of the voting. The constituency seat vote had unionist parties votes higher than indy votes. The list seats had indy votes higher than unionist votes. Altogether.... Indy votes top unionist votes just. snp took 85% of the constituency votes " Pro-union votes - 1,354,177 Pro-independence votes - 1,326,204 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Further analysis of the voting. The constituency seat vote had unionist parties votes higher than indy votes. The list seats had indy votes higher than unionist votes. Altogether.... Indy votes top unionist votes just. snp took 85% of the constituency votes Pro-union votes - 1,354,177 Pro-independence votes - 1,326,204 " my mistake was 85% of constituency seats | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I seem to remember in Indyref1, that Faslane would be vacated by the RN, and become a conventional naval base for the Scottish Navy. Direct and indirect jobs would decrease by 80%. having worked at faslane 95% of the workforce are english,only about 500 scots actually work there,also the majority of scots dont want it in our country and when we are independent it will be gone Weather they are English or Scottish does not change the fact that they will be moved to England. It's not just the jobs but also the money spent by the workers in the local area." most workers stay on base so not much being spent in local area | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I understand why Scots get frustrated at the fairly stereotypical tropes that get thrown into the conversation by many English people. “You couldn’t afford to go it alone” “You couldn’t afford to defend yourself” “You need to be in the United Kingdom, more than we need you to be in it.” “Barnet Formula” “You will lose Trident and all the jobs that go with it” I think that far too many English simply project their sense of English Exceptionalism into the debate and assume that Scots would understand how being ‘perceived’ as being rich, powerful, influential and domineering. The history of former colonies being told by Britain that they were not rich enough, stable enough, or economically astute enough to go their own way is well documented. It was as nonsense an argument then and is a nonsense argument in the Scotland debate. There are countless successfully independent countries that are the same size or even smaller than Scotland in Europe and around the world. They may well make their own choices on economic and defence matters - just like all those other countries. Scots perhaps just don’t want to think like, and be like English people anymore. " nailed it | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Further analysis of the voting. The constituency seat vote had unionist parties votes higher than indy votes. The list seats had indy votes higher than unionist votes. Altogether.... Indy votes top unionist votes just. snp took 85% of the constituency votes Pro-union votes - 1,354,177 Pro-independence votes - 1,326,204 my mistake was 85% of constituency seats " Which is nice .... However there’s no escaping the clear sign that 50% of votes are not for the SNP/Greens | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Further analysis of the voting. The constituency seat vote had unionist parties votes higher than indy votes. The list seats had indy votes higher than unionist votes. Altogether.... Indy votes top unionist votes just. snp took 85% of the constituency votes Pro-union votes - 1,354,177 Pro-independence votes - 1,326,204 my mistake was 85% of constituency seats Which is nice .... However there’s no escaping the clear sign that 50% of votes are not for the SNP/Greens" This is why there will not be an indy2 anytime soon its all just media hype as usual.She is not stupid and knows that it is not a guaranteed win and the numbers are too close to call,if they lose the next referendum the dream will be dead and buried like it should have been after the 1st one. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The SNP and Greens stood on a manifesto backing indy ref 2 The people of Scotland democratically endorsed that mandate emphatically. Seems mandates are only democratic if it’s from unionists. If you play your rivals and get pumped 5-0, you're the real winner because you stopped them from scoring 6. "It depends how you look at it snp 48% greens 1% = 49% Tory 22% labour 22% others 7% = 51% Thats not saying all those who voted for the tories etc dont want a referendum just as its not a given that all snp voters want one either. As i said before its too close to call at the moment and she wont take that chance. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The SNP and Greens stood on a manifesto backing indy ref 2 The people of Scotland democratically endorsed that mandate emphatically. Seems mandates are only democratic if it’s from unionists. If you play your rivals and get pumped 5-0, you're the real winner because you stopped them from scoring 6. It depends how you look at it
snp 48% greens 1% = 49%
Tory 22% labour 22% others 7% = 51%
Thats not saying all those who voted for the tories etc dont want a referendum just as its not a given that all snp voters want one either.
As i said before its too close to call at the moment and she wont take that chance."Percentages of voters i meant to say. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The SNP and Greens stood on a manifesto backing indy ref 2 The people of Scotland democratically endorsed that mandate emphatically. Seems mandates are only democratic if it’s from unionists. If you play your rivals and get pumped 5-0, you're the real winner because you stopped them from scoring 6. It depends how you look at it
snp 48% greens 1% = 49%
Tory 22% labour 22% others 7% = 51%
Thats not saying all those who voted for the tories etc dont want a referendum just as its not a given that all snp voters want one either.
As i said before its too close to call at the moment and she wont take that chance."And that’s on a turnout of around 62 per cent and the non voters tend to be no voters She has no chance so will not go till COVID issues fixed and she will still not win Rule Britannia and GSTQ and here here for Barnet | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think I saw a recent (pre-election) poll showing 43% in favour of Independence. Certainly the people the BBC interviewed in Leith yesterday, said its too early for IndyRef2. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think I saw a recent (pre-election) poll showing 43% in favour of Independence. Certainly the people the BBC interviewed in Leith yesterday, said its too early for IndyRef2. " 21 polls pre election showed a majority for indy. Don’t believe anything the brit nat media rolls out they have a list of “staunch” to just happen to portray as the normal individual on the street. The media jobs depend on the status quo. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think I saw a recent (pre-election) poll showing 43% in favour of Independence. Certainly the people the BBC interviewed in Leith yesterday, said its too early for IndyRef2. 21 polls pre election showed a majority for indy. Don’t believe anything the brit nat media rolls out they have a list of “staunch” to just happen to portray as the normal individual on the street. The media jobs depend on the status quo. " Are you saying that the polls which support indy are correct but the ones that don't are wrong? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think I saw a recent (pre-election) poll showing 43% in favour of Independence. Certainly the people the BBC interviewed in Leith yesterday, said its too early for IndyRef2. 21 polls pre election showed a majority for indy. Don’t believe anything the brit nat media rolls out they have a list of “staunch” to just happen to portray as the normal individual on the street. The media jobs depend on the status quo. Are you saying that the polls which support indy are correct but the ones that don't are wrong? "Merely giving credence to 1 poll against. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I am only counting the votes for parties which have representation in the Scottish Parliament here as that seems sensible. So, in the constituency vote, the SNP got 1,291,204 votes. The Greens got 34,990 votes. That gives a total of 1,326,194 constituency votes for Yes. The Tories got 592,598 constituency votes, Labour got 584,392 and the Lib Dems got 187,746. That gives a combined total of 1,364,736. So slightly more votes for unionist parties in the constituency vote. Now let's look at the regional vote. The SNP got 1,094,347 regional votes and the Greens got 220,324. That gives a total of 1,314,698 votes for Yes parties. The Tories got 637,131 regional votes, Labour got 488,819 and the Lib Dems 137,152 - giving a total of 1,263,102. Less than for Yes parties. Let's add the constituency and regional votes up. (This makes zero sense in electoral terms but, if we are counting votes, we all got two of them so we may as well add them up. So, the SNP & the Greens got a combined total of 2,640,892 constituency and regional votes. The Tories, Labour and the Lib Dems got a combined total of 2,627, 838 constituency and regional votes. The unionist only want the constituency highlighted which is just weird. The other point to make, of course, is that the fact someone voted Labour, Lib Dem or Tory does not tell you what they think about a second indyref. We vote on a whole range of issues in elections. There are many from the tories, Labour and dems who want an independent Scotland. Thankfully someone done the math I’ve just lifted it. "Waste of time even lifting it. Tells you almost nothing about indy opinion. And again, many Scots would be surprised how little many English care whether you stay or not. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I am only counting the votes for parties which have representation in the Scottish Parliament here as that seems sensible. So, in the constituency vote, the SNP got 1,291,204 votes. The Greens got 34,990 votes. That gives a total of 1,326,194 constituency votes for Yes. The Tories got 592,598 constituency votes, Labour got 584,392 and the Lib Dems got 187,746. That gives a combined total of 1,364,736. So slightly more votes for unionist parties in the constituency vote. Now let's look at the regional vote. The SNP got 1,094,347 regional votes and the Greens got 220,324. That gives a total of 1,314,698 votes for Yes parties. The Tories got 637,131 regional votes, Labour got 488,819 and the Lib Dems 137,152 - giving a total of 1,263,102. Less than for Yes parties. Let's add the constituency and regional votes up. (This makes zero sense in electoral terms but, if we are counting votes, we all got two of them so we may as well add them up. So, the SNP & the Greens got a combined total of 2,640,892 constituency and regional votes. The Tories, Labour and the Lib Dems got a combined total of 2,627, 838 constituency and regional votes. The unionist only want the constituency highlighted which is just weird. The other point to make, of course, is that the fact someone voted Labour, Lib Dem or Tory does not tell you what they think about a second indyref. We vote on a whole range of issues in elections. There are many from the tories, Labour and dems who want an independent Scotland. Thankfully someone done the math I’ve just lifted it.
Waste of time even lifting it.
Tells you almost nothing about indy opinion.
And again, many Scots would be surprised how little many English care whether you stay or not. "It tells you that the manifesto from the snp and greens was endorsed by the electorate reg indy ref 2 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I am only counting the votes for parties which have representation in the Scottish Parliament here as that seems sensible. So, in the constituency vote, the SNP got 1,291,204 votes. The Greens got 34,990 votes. That gives a total of 1,326,194 constituency votes for Yes. The Tories got 592,598 constituency votes, Labour got 584,392 and the Lib Dems got 187,746. That gives a combined total of 1,364,736. So slightly more votes for unionist parties in the constituency vote. Now let's look at the regional vote. The SNP got 1,094,347 regional votes and the Greens got 220,324. That gives a total of 1,314,698 votes for Yes parties. The Tories got 637,131 regional votes, Labour got 488,819 and the Lib Dems 137,152 - giving a total of 1,263,102. Less than for Yes parties. Let's add the constituency and regional votes up. (This makes zero sense in electoral terms but, if we are counting votes, we all got two of them so we may as well add them up. So, the SNP & the Greens got a combined total of 2,640,892 constituency and regional votes. The Tories, Labour and the Lib Dems got a combined total of 2,627, 838 constituency and regional votes. The unionist only want the constituency highlighted which is just weird. The other point to make, of course, is that the fact someone voted Labour, Lib Dem or Tory does not tell you what they think about a second indyref. We vote on a whole range of issues in elections. There are many from the tories, Labour and dems who want an independent Scotland. Thankfully someone done the math I’ve just lifted it.
Waste of time even lifting it.
Tells you almost nothing about indy opinion.
And again, many Scots would be surprised how little many English care whether you stay or not. "Another country that wants to leave the ‘empire’ . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I am only counting the votes for parties which have representation in the Scottish Parliament here as that seems sensible. So, in the constituency vote, the SNP got 1,291,204 votes. The Greens got 34,990 votes. That gives a total of 1,326,194 constituency votes for Yes. The Tories got 592,598 constituency votes, Labour got 584,392 and the Lib Dems got 187,746. That gives a combined total of 1,364,736. So slightly more votes for unionist parties in the constituency vote. Now let's look at the regional vote. The SNP got 1,094,347 regional votes and the Greens got 220,324. That gives a total of 1,314,698 votes for Yes parties. The Tories got 637,131 regional votes, Labour got 488,819 and the Lib Dems 137,152 - giving a total of 1,263,102. Less than for Yes parties. Let's add the constituency and regional votes up. (This makes zero sense in electoral terms but, if we are counting votes, we all got two of them so we may as well add them up. So, the SNP & the Greens got a combined total of 2,640,892 constituency and regional votes. The Tories, Labour and the Lib Dems got a combined total of 2,627, 838 constituency and regional votes. The unionist only want the constituency highlighted which is just weird. The other point to make, of course, is that the fact someone voted Labour, Lib Dem or Tory does not tell you what they think about a second indyref. We vote on a whole range of issues in elections. There are many from the tories, Labour and dems who want an independent Scotland. Thankfully someone done the math I’ve just lifted it.
Waste of time even lifting it.
Tells you almost nothing about indy opinion.
And again, many Scots would be surprised how little many English care whether you stay or not.
It tells you that the manifesto from the snp and greens was endorsed by the electorate reg indy ref 2 "An endorsement on a manifesto as a whole doesn't tell you that a single issue is endorsed though. Every single election i read manifestos and never have I ever agreed with everything in any of them. It's a case of taking a balanced point and casting your vote. I'd imagine that's likely the same for most rational people | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The SNP and Greens stood on a manifesto backing indy ref 2 The people of Scotland democratically endorsed that mandate emphatically. Seems mandates are only democratic if it’s from unionists. If you play your rivals and get pumped 5-0, you're the real winner because you stopped them from scoring 6. It depends how you look at it
snp 48% greens 1% = 49%
Tory 22% labour 22% others 7% = 51%
Thats not saying all those who voted for the tories etc dont want a referendum just as its not a given that all snp voters want one either.
As i said before its too close to call at the moment and she wont take that chance."there are many labour voters who support independence | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I am only counting the votes for parties which have representation in the Scottish Parliament here as that seems sensible. So, in the constituency vote, the SNP got 1,291,204 votes. The Greens got 34,990 votes. That gives a total of 1,326,194 constituency votes for Yes. The Tories got 592,598 constituency votes, Labour got 584,392 and the Lib Dems got 187,746. That gives a combined total of 1,364,736. So slightly more votes for unionist parties in the constituency vote. Now let's look at the regional vote. The SNP got 1,094,347 regional votes and the Greens got 220,324. That gives a total of 1,314,698 votes for Yes parties. The Tories got 637,131 regional votes, Labour got 488,819 and the Lib Dems 137,152 - giving a total of 1,263,102. Less than for Yes parties. Let's add the constituency and regional votes up. (This makes zero sense in electoral terms but, if we are counting votes, we all got two of them so we may as well add them up. So, the SNP & the Greens got a combined total of 2,640,892 constituency and regional votes. The Tories, Labour and the Lib Dems got a combined total of 2,627, 838 constituency and regional votes. The unionist only want the constituency highlighted which is just weird. The other point to make, of course, is that the fact someone voted Labour, Lib Dem or Tory does not tell you what they think about a second indyref. We vote on a whole range of issues in elections. There are many from the tories, Labour and dems who want an independent Scotland. Thankfully someone done the math I’ve just lifted it.
Waste of time even lifting it.
Tells you almost nothing about indy opinion.
And again, many Scots would be surprised how little many English care whether you stay or not.
It tells you that the manifesto from the snp and greens was endorsed by the electorate reg indy ref 2
An endorsement on a manifesto as a whole doesn't tell you that a single issue is endorsed though.
Every single election i read manifestos and never have I ever agreed with everything in any of them. It's a case of taking a balanced point and casting your vote.
I'd imagine that's likely the same for most rational people"Manifesto aside the clues in the initials SNP | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I am only counting the votes for parties which have representation in the Scottish Parliament here as that seems sensible. So, in the constituency vote, the SNP got 1,291,204 votes. The Greens got 34,990 votes. That gives a total of 1,326,194 constituency votes for Yes. The Tories got 592,598 constituency votes, Labour got 584,392 and the Lib Dems got 187,746. That gives a combined total of 1,364,736. So slightly more votes for unionist parties in the constituency vote. Now let's look at the regional vote. The SNP got 1,094,347 regional votes and the Greens got 220,324. That gives a total of 1,314,698 votes for Yes parties. The Tories got 637,131 regional votes, Labour got 488,819 and the Lib Dems 137,152 - giving a total of 1,263,102. Less than for Yes parties. Let's add the constituency and regional votes up. (This makes zero sense in electoral terms but, if we are counting votes, we all got two of them so we may as well add them up. So, the SNP & the Greens got a combined total of 2,640,892 constituency and regional votes. The Tories, Labour and the Lib Dems got a combined total of 2,627, 838 constituency and regional votes. The unionist only want the constituency highlighted which is just weird. The other point to make, of course, is that the fact someone voted Labour, Lib Dem or Tory does not tell you what they think about a second indyref. We vote on a whole range of issues in elections. There are many from the tories, Labour and dems who want an independent Scotland. Thankfully someone done the math I’ve just lifted it.
Waste of time even lifting it.
Tells you almost nothing about indy opinion.
And again, many Scots would be surprised how little many English care whether you stay or not.
It tells you that the manifesto from the snp and greens was endorsed by the electorate reg indy ref 2
An endorsement on a manifesto as a whole doesn't tell you that a single issue is endorsed though.
Every single election i read manifestos and never have I ever agreed with everything in any of them. It's a case of taking a balanced point and casting your vote.
I'd imagine that's likely the same for most rational people
Manifesto aside the clues in the initials SNP "And? So everyone who votes for a party which has National in their name must want independence? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m referring to the SNP and what they stand for. "Oh I do apologise. I assumed you were referring to the manifesto they stood on to get elected. How silly of me to read what you actually wrote | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m referring to the SNP and what they stand for.
Oh I do apologise. I assumed you were referring to the manifesto they stood on to get elected. How silly of me to read what you actually wrote "Try keep up | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I seem to remember in Indyref1, that Faslane would be vacated by the RN, and become a conventional naval base for the Scottish Navy. Direct and indirect jobs would decrease by 80%. having worked at faslane 95% of the workforce are english,only about 500 scots actually work there,also the majority of scots dont want it in our country and when we are independent it will be gone Weather they are English or Scottish does not change the fact that they will be moved to England. It's not just the jobs but also the money spent by the workers in the local area. most workers stay on base so not much being spent in local area " So they don't eat or drink or buy stuff, pay Bill's, and all the other day today expenses then | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I seem to remember in Indyref1, that Faslane would be vacated by the RN, and become a conventional naval base for the Scottish Navy. Direct and indirect jobs would decrease by 80%. having worked at faslane 95% of the workforce are english,only about 500 scots actually work there,also the majority of scots dont want it in our country and when we are independent it will be gone Weather they are English or Scottish does not change the fact that they will be moved to England. It's not just the jobs but also the money spent by the workers in the local area. most workers stay on base so not much being spent in local area So they don't eat or drink or buy stuff, pay Bill's, and all the other day today expenses then" Quite right- they don’t. Everything they need is onsite, from food to ‘stuff’ to entertainment and all/any bills go to HMG. Very little is contributed to the local economy. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I seem to remember in Indyref1, that Faslane would be vacated by the RN, and become a conventional naval base for the Scottish Navy. Direct and indirect jobs would decrease by 80%. having worked at faslane 95% of the workforce are english,only about 500 scots actually work there,also the majority of scots dont want it in our country and when we are independent it will be gone Weather they are English or Scottish does not change the fact that they will be moved to England. It's not just the jobs but also the money spent by the workers in the local area. most workers stay on base so not much being spent in local area So they don't eat or drink or buy stuff, pay Bill's, and all the other day today expenses then Quite right- they don’t. Everything they need is onsite, from food to ‘stuff’ to entertainment and all/any bills go to HMG. Very little is contributed to the local economy." The Faslane bases employ 3300 civilian and local contractors, and 4000 jobs in the local supply chains. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I seem to remember in Indyref1, that Faslane would be vacated by the RN, and become a conventional naval base for the Scottish Navy. Direct and indirect jobs would decrease by 80%. having worked at faslane 95% of the workforce are english,only about 500 scots actually work there,also the majority of scots dont want it in our country and when we are independent it will be gone Weather they are English or Scottish does not change the fact that they will be moved to England. It's not just the jobs but also the money spent by the workers in the local area. most workers stay on base so not much being spent in local area So they don't eat or drink or buy stuff, pay Bill's, and all the other day today expenses then Quite right- they don’t. Everything they need is onsite, from food to ‘stuff’ to entertainment and all/any bills go to HMG. Very little is contributed to the local economy." The bill will be for HMG but where is the food coming from and the drinks, entertainment ect. As someone also pointed out several thousand jobs in the supply and support rely on it. Remember its not the UK wanting to move it its the SNP | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
