Alibi

How stupid are these people? Labour is every bit as unionist as the Tories; they support Brexit; they want to bring back tuition fees, prescription charges, car parking charges, bridge tolls, you name it, they want to bring Scotland into line with England. They will refuse a section 30 for at least ten years (said by David Lammy just a few days ago). They are de facto Tories, if maybe from a few years ago rather than the current iteration. Why the fuck would anyone who has the remotest interest in winning back our independence vote for these charlatans? Let any yoon party get control of Scotland and devolution will be neutered and once that is done the only way to indy is a full scale revolution. But hey, let's give Labour their turn until the Tories get back in in a few years and nothing changes. I have a slight chance of getting a Ukrainian passport (and possibly a Russian one (as Lithuania was apparently part of Russia when my paternal grandfather was born there). No idea how to go about it but it's becoming a tempting idea.

Yes, without elections having a consequence (independence) not only will the vote for indy parties drop, it's likely that the turnout at elections will also plummet. I for one will never vote for a party that doesn't support indy because if I did vote for a yoon party, they might take my vote as an indication that I'm happy with unionism. If we're going to have to live in a situation where indy is not being promoted by anyone, then fuck politics. Democracy is dead.Until such time as the infiltrators presently calling the shots are dragged screaming from parliament and burned at the stake. (metaphorically speaking, not literally).

I think a lot of countries would be happy to recognise an indy Scotland. However some might try to quash the idea - England and the US for example. They are two of the bullies of international relations, and an indy Scotland would affect their own personal agendas.

The very definition of a coercive relationship. We in Scotland do not have democracy as our votes can easily be cancelled out by the electorate in England. If Scotland voted 100% for independence, we still wouldn't get it because any PM from any of the English parties would just say no, and what could we do about it? We were only "allowed" a referendum in 2014 because they thought they would win it easily. Now, they know they would almost certainly lose and given that indy support is at 50% or slightly more even with absolutely no campaigning going on, there is no chance it would be allowed. Starmer has made it clear he won't accede to a vote in Scotland to have a referendum; David Lammy said the same in even stronger terms the other week (and claimed that the branch office would be of the same view). Not sure where we go from here, but the British establishment will stop at nothing to prevent Scotland becoming independence, ever. They'd be quite happy to invade us if it came to that. with the approval of the USA likely, given Faslane. We like to think we have a free democracy. We don't really.

My SNP membership has expired and I haven't bothered renewing. I have no interest in going to local branch meetings where all they do is read out reports on how many members the branch has. There is no actual discussion of policies or ideas. I'm fairly sure most of them have meekly fallen in line with gender self-ID and I'm pretty sure the recently elected convener is of the wokerati persuasion. Having seen the statements coming out of the conference, I am not inspired. Marcus Carlaw, whoever he is, seems to have taken it upon himself to dampen expectations and prevent any progress with indy. The leadership, collectively, are a bunch of virtue signalling nobodies and there is zero chance of them achieving anything. Fairly sure several of them are shall we say compromised. I really don't know where we go from here, but Yousaf is not the answer. He's a fucking liability, bowing to the will of the unionist press, scared to take any meaningful action on anything, and making daft virtue signalling statements that are almost designed specifically to shed votes. He's no Alex Salmond, that's for sure. I did wonder if the current ongoing police investigation is not actually about money but about the failed plot to have Salmond imprisoned, although I'd have no faith in the police service doing the right thing there. Seriously considering moving abroad for my retirement.

Probably because a lot of folk can't be bothered with conferences. Doesn't mean they won't vote when an election comes round. Enthusiasm has slumped but folk still want indy. We need a charismatic leader to get things moving again.

FFS, that by-election had other yoon parties voting for Labour - tactical voting - and also vast numbers of SNP voters just didn't vote. It's a one off. Fairly sure that won't be repeated at a general election. I would hope by that time, Labour's actual policies - such as no to indy/indyref ever, and their pro Brexit stance to name just 2 things - will be publicised properly and their vote share will drop like a stone. Pro-indy voters are generally not going to vote for a unionist party, and if they do they deserve everything they get.

The thing about the majority of seats proposal, and the criticism of it on the basis that by that yardstick we already have an apparent mandate for indy is that the last GE wasn't fought on a manifesto stating that a vote for indy parties was a vote for indy. If the SNP were to have a one line manifesto and people voted for it, they would have an undeniable mandate for indy as WM elections are done under FPTP. I would imagine the SNP would lose some seats as folk who vote SNP but don't want indy would revert to other parties, but a majority of seats based on a direct yes/no manifesto would be what was acceptable as a trigger prior to referendums becoming fashionable. Of course getting a majority of votes would be even better but that's not the way WM elections work - however if that could be achieved, it would make the argument a lot simpler. For the SNP, who are never going to be in government at WM, a WM election is an opportunity to do things differently. and by that I don't mean Sturgeon's ridiculous "Stop Brexit" campaign in 2017.

👍

As title. Best bar or restaurant to watch Scotland game? In Malaga.

Actually they should have started at about Inverness and worked south. That would have given them an imperative to complete it.

My membership of the SNP has, I think, run out. I haven't bothered renewing so far as I have no intention of going to branch meetings or being active, at least until we are doing something to progress indy. Since about 2017 the SNP has been a disaster, loony policies that few want. The GRR has been an unmitigated disaster and is a large part of the reasons behind support for the SNP dropping. I'm sure that is not an accident. Anyway I think I'll remain politically homeless for now, although it's not so much homeless as coming home and finding a bunch of squatters in my house. And today I read about Alister Jack and Douglas Ross proposing to fund things in Scotland directly rather than going through the Scottish government - if that's not tearing up devolution, what is? I am waiting to hear any real protests from our governing party, or indeed from any Scottish opposition parties - suspect I'll be waiting a long time for that useless fuckwit Yousaf to grow a spine.

Read about it somewhere a few months ago but can't recall where - the line was that rather than adopt an existing scheme that worked, she wanted to to do it her own way. In my own view if there is a working scheme anywhere (I think Germany has one) why not just copy that rather than start from scratch. Based on my own household, there is no chance that any coke can will ever reach one of these recycling machines without being crushed in the middle. Where are you meant to store loads of uncrushed cans at home so that they can be scanned in? The council bin collection scheme seems to be far simpler and much more convenient.

He opposes the deal with the Greens. He thinks Lorna Slater has made a right royal mess of the DRS. Hard to disagree with him tbh, she did. In my view actually, it would have made sense to discuss such a scheme with governments in England & Wales, and NI possibly, to agree a joint strategy given that all the nations tend to be dealing with the same problem. It might not have been possible to negotiate an agreed approach, but it would have been worth trying. We have the right to do things differently, but if we had a sensible scheme maybe others would have joined in rather than reinventing the wheel. Taking the logic further, our scheme should have been nicked from a European nation that has such a scheme in place, possibly with local adaptation to suit our own circumstances. from what I hear, Slater tried to start from scratch. No wonder nobody has any confidence in her.

Deleted as re-posted by accident.

Really? So why the fuck did they vote for it? Why did they not support any of the amendments, at least the ones that were worthy of support? Most of them bent the knee and voted as they were told to. I for one don't want an MSP who doesn't have the guts to stand up for what they actually believe, especially when they must have known that this issue was controversial to say the least, never mind that most folk who actually took an interest in the matter were opposed to it, either in full or in part. Had Sturgeon been able to get away with expelling them, I don't doubt she would have.

The SNP is meant to be about indy first and foremost. If anyone thinks GRR is a ridiculous clusterfuck and refuses to adhere to the ridiculous mantra that "transwomen ARE women", it shouldn't make a blind bit of difference as far as their qualities as a candidate are concerned. I'd wager that more than half of current SNP MPs and MSPs do not actually think TWAW but they just daren't express that view publicly on pain of excommunication. Whereas with other less controversial policies some leeway is often allowed.

It is indeed, but seems to be what happens when you don't toe the line on the things that matter to the leadership - like GRR. As a member (until my membership runs out in a few days at least) I am repeatedly appalled at what the SNP has become. Mindless acceptance of any edicts handed down from the top or you will be hounded out. What happened to the independence party that I used to know? Worst thing Salmond ever did was hand unfettered control over to Sturgeon. We need a revolution.

Wings produced the wee blue book in 2014 ffs. He's not against indy, he's against the stupid unpopular shite that the SNP has been pushing since Sturgeon took over. The real question here is why Sturgeon and her cronies decided to fuck things up when they had everything going for them. Is their GRR obsession really worth it or is that just a wrecking ball tactic?

I don't entirely disagree; However a majority of MPs in a FTTP vote was accepted as being what was required - the difference being that at that time the establishment parties believed that it was an impossible target to reach. Simply put, rule britannia, britannia waives the rules. If we ever got another referendum and support was at 70% in the polls, they would make it a 90% threshold. They will do whatever it takes to prevent indy - up to and including killing people.

I'm coming to the conclusion that Yousaf isn't very bright. It used to be the case that a majority of MPs was accepted as being the threshold for independence but the goals keep getting moved to make indy as unachievable as possible. Unlike PapofGlencoe I wouldn't change sides but the strategy needs to be better defined, and with clarity. What threshold in a general election would be acceptable? We can be sure that even if we got 50+ % of the votes, Westminster wouldn't co-operate. They will never co-operate.

I think when we get to the point of actually being able to vote on it, he will vote for indy. Criticising the utter clusterfuck that the SNP leadership are making of the whole thing at the moment is a reasonable reaction. I do it myself. However when it comes down to it, we who actually want indy will all be voting Yes.

My view is that indy takes priority and should not come with any rigid policy conditions attached - we can decide everything for ourselves after indy. In particular although I am very pro-Europe, I believe that our relationship with Europe post-indy should be a matter for the electorate to decide, whether EU, EFTA or outside. At the first post-indy election, we can elect whichever party or parties we judge to have the best policies. I think in Wings' case, he has judged that the current and recent leadership of the SNP have put things other than indy at the top of their priority list, and it's hard to disagree given the pernicious attitude of the wokerati who seem to want to link indy directly to LGBT etc. issues and who seem to have captured the previous FM and bound her to their cause for whatever reason. Why that has happened is the million dollar question but without a doubt it has caused immense harm to the indy movement, at least in the short term. for reasons for all this, probably, as usual, follow the money.

Yes, fair point that it is James Kelly doing the misrepresentation, but on reading the Wings article it doesn't actually say what Kelly is claiming - he is embellishing and distorting for his own ends. Campbell specifically states that he would never vote no (not that he has a vote due to where he currently resides). For Kelly to claim that Campbell is now a unionist is spectacularly missing the points that Campbell makes in his article. Rather than a unionist, he is a very pissed off indy supporter, much like many of us really.

I went to look at the Wings article to which that blog post refers, and it does not say that Stu Campbell opposes independence; it says that if the wokeist nutters were in charge of an indy Scotland, it would not be a pleasant place. Hard to disagree with what he writes frankly. I think you are wilfully misrepresenting his views, and doing it quite deliberately.