Indyref 2 (2) - Page 11 - Anything Goes - Other topics not covered elsewhere - Tartan Army Message Board Jump to content

Indyref 2 (2)


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Malcolm said:


agreed, I don’t think there can be any attempt to try and conflate the idea that voting snp and supporting independence are the same thing.

Half the people on this board who are pro independence have been pointing that out to me for months so I think it’s a bit rich to then suggest there could be any concept of a defacto referendum.

 

Doesn't really matter what you think though does it?  I don't mean that in a disrespectful way.  If enough of your fellow people understand the concept then it should matter.

If people vote on a one word, clearly defined manifesto I'm not sure what more can be asked of people at this stage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 5.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

5 hours ago, hampden_loon2878 said:

i am a snp member and i would struggle to vote for the current snp as it stands, i simply do not trust them. i want independence more than anything but some of the actions and behaviors of folk in the party has been shady to say the least 

You're entitled to your vote like anyone else.  

It's not clear that the Yes movement will only count votes from the SNP, other pro indy parties or set up a Yes Scotland party.  If it's the former, I'd suggest getting on board with political reality but that's up to every voter.  

I'm sort of done with attempting to change people's minds now.  This way forward allows people to make their voice heard.  We either support it or we don't.  If we do, let's see how Westminster reacts.  If we don't, we don't deserve independence.  No Molly coddling or moaning about it.  You're either a country or you're not.  We only need to put a vote in a box.  There's good argument for and against.  At least it'll bring it to a head.

 

Edited by PapofGlencoe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, aaid said:

In this respect at least that doesn’t appear to be happening.

When you look at polling data by age groups you see that slowly the older age groups are becoming more pro - or less anti - indy.  For example, I don’t think that’s about people changing their minds, rather it’s as people get older and move up the brackets, they’re not changing their minds  

What must be remembered are the people aged 50+ and 60+ now are those that were school leavers or in their 20s during the Thatcher years at which point the rise in support for independence began. Many of those 50 and 60 plusses today were probably those so offended by Thatcher's reign and the unfairness of how she treated Scotland. 

Now back in 2014 the 50 and 60 year-olds were No voters but they were largely starting out in the working world in the 60s and 70s - generally accepted as a happier time with a very pro-union upbringing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Orraloon said:

How can he be in breach of his membership if he isn't a member?

In common with most - if not all - political parties, the SNP rules state that you cannot be a member of the SNP if you are a member of another political party that competes with the SNP.  So, if you live in Wales you can also be a member of Plaid Cymru, if you live in England you can also be a member of the Green Party of England and Wales.  If you live in Scotland, you can’t be a member of Alba.  HL - by his own admission joined Alba and at that point ceased to be a member of the SNP.  That he hasn’t informed either his branch or head office of that is irrelevant but speaks to his character.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, aaid said:

In common with most - if not all - political parties, the SNP rules state that you cannot be a member of the SNP if you are a member of another political party that competes with the SNP.  So, if you live in Wales you can also be a member of Plaid Cymru, if you live in England you can also be a member of the Green Party of England and Wales.  If you live in Scotland, you can’t be a member of Alba.  HL - by his own admission joined Alba and at that point ceased to be a member of the SNP.  That he hasn’t informed either his branch or head office of that is irrelevant but speaks to his character.  

I dont think it really matters to be honest.  Certainly doesn't speak to someone's "character".  It's no a crime ffs.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, hampden_loon2878 said:

i am a snp member and i would struggle to vote for the current snp as it stands, i simply do not trust them. i want independence more than anything but some of the actions and behaviors of folk in the party has been shady to say the least 

You see that is just the wrong mindset. The end goal is Scottish Independence - the end of 300+ years of living under Westminster rule. The opportunity of self-governance. The opportunity to choose our own path in this world. The opportunity to choose our own government that makes ALL the decisions. I'd bet a bottom dollar you stand far more chance of ousting the SNP if we gain independence than if we remain in this union. 

Now IF the next election is defacto referendum then I am sure each party will make it clear which side they are on. If you so wish you vote Alba or Scottish Greens or the SSP. It is still a vote for the cause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I wondered yesterday, and to be clear its something id not suggest in any way was whether in the event of a democratic route to independece being blocked, whether there would be anybody in Scotland that might turn to more violent measures.

We could easily end up in a situation where UK gov say no to a vote, we get 51%+ at next election. New UK gov say no. 51%+ at next Scottish election but UK gov say no. In such a scenario (which isnt unlikely) there would appear to be no democratic route to independence.

Under such circumstances change is rarely brought about without violence (historically in other countrys). Can anybody see a situation where a group in Scotland go down this path? Maybe not bombings etc but something more targeted, perhaps towards MPs or leading figures of media etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, PapofGlencoe said:

I dont think it really matters to be honest.  Certainly doesn't speak to someone's "character".  It's no a crime ffs.

 

It’s not a crime but it does indicate a level of dishonesty and untrustworthiness.

Edit. I’m going to revise that.  It could also indicate someone who can’t make their mind up and wants to have it both ways.  Classic cakeism 

Edited by aaid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Diamond Scot said:

One thing I wondered yesterday, and to be clear its something id not suggest in any way was whether in the event of a democratic route to independece being blocked, whether there would be anybody in Scotland that might turn to more violent measures.

We could easily end up in a situation where UK gov say no to a vote, we get 51%+ at next election. New UK gov say no. 51%+ at next Scottish election but UK gov say no. In such a scenario (which isnt unlikely) there would appear to be no democratic route to independence.

Under such circumstances change is rarely brought about without violence (historically in other countrys). Can anybody see a situation where a group in Scotland go down this path? Maybe not bombings etc but something more targeted, perhaps towards MPs or leading figures of media etc.

No I don't see that situation ever arising to be honest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, aaid said:

It’s not a crime but it does indicate a level of dishonesty and untrustworthiness.

 

Is there more to this I've missed since I've not been on here for a long time? To be a member of two politics parties is no serious or semi serious issue.  Try telling it to someone out loud today.  I think you're getting a bit carried away in all honesty.  I don't agree with practically anything the poster says (unlike your posts) but let's get things in perspective.  There stuff on here I think does go to that but not this membership nonsense.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Diamond Scot said:

One thing I wondered yesterday, and to be clear its something id not suggest in any way was whether in the event of a democratic route to independece being blocked, whether there would be anybody in Scotland that might turn to more violent measures.

We could easily end up in a situation where UK gov say no to a vote, we get 51%+ at next election. New UK gov say no. 51%+ at next Scottish election but UK gov say no. In such a scenario (which isnt unlikely) there would appear to be no democratic route to independence.

Under such circumstances change is rarely brought about without violence (historically in other countrys). Can anybody see a situation where a group in Scotland go down this path? Maybe not bombings etc but something more targeted, perhaps towards MPs or leading figures of media etc.

 

Non-violent civil disobedience may happen if it's clearer than 60% in my view at any stage.  Westminster and the Scottish Govt should sit down and create a mechanism so that this is never a possibility.  Kenny farquarsom writes on this today in the Times.  For once, a good article from him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, PapofGlencoe said:

 

Non-violent civil disobedience may happen if it's clearer than 60% in my view at any stage.  Westminster and the Scottish Govt should sit down and create a mechanism so that this is never a possibility.  Kenny farquarsom writes on this today in the Times.  For once, a good article from him.

I agree but any sensible way forward depends on the UK gov acting in an appropriate manner. Its clear that isnt going to happen under a tory gov and i personally cant see it happening under the current Labour leadership.

In a way, the SNP becoming so dominant in Scotland works against us at a UK level as there is no incentive for Tory and increasingly labour to try and get Scottish favour or votes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, aaid said:

It’s not a crime but it does indicate a level of dishonesty and untrustworthiness.

Edit. I’m going to revise that.  It could also indicate someone who can’t make their mind up and wants to have it both ways.  Classic cakeism 

It doesn't indicate any of those.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Diamond Scot said:

I agree but any sensible way forward depends on the UK gov acting in an appropriate manner. Its clear that isnt going to happen under a tory gov and i personally cant see it happening under the current Labour leadership.

In a way, the SNP becoming so dominant in Scotland works against us at a UK level as there is no incentive for Tory and increasingly labour to try and get Scottish favour or votes.

That’s true.  Kenny Farquharson appears to be a unionist who has inherent faith that the UK will do the right thing despite rafts of evidence to the contrary. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Diamond Scot said:

One thing I wondered yesterday, and to be clear its something id not suggest in any way was whether in the event of a democratic route to independece being blocked, whether there would be anybody in Scotland that might turn to more violent measures.

We could easily end up in a situation where UK gov say no to a vote, we get 51%+ at next election. New UK gov say no. 51%+ at next Scottish election but UK gov say no. In such a scenario (which isnt unlikely) there would appear to be no democratic route to independence.

Under such circumstances change is rarely brought about without violence (historically in other countrys). Can anybody see a situation where a group in Scotland go down this path? Maybe not bombings etc but something more targeted, perhaps towards MPs or leading figures of media etc.

I think you might get one or two who would be willing to turn to armed conflict but i doubt the ppl of scotland would back them enough for it to ever be a serious resistance in the same way the ira or pira were. 

Scotlands nationalist population is just too small and mentally weak to be fighting any kind of war against the uk. 

Maybe if the irish and scots were to combine forces then there might be an uprising to be taken seriously but i doubt the scottish side could ever match the irish ppls commitment. 

Ppl in scotland are just too comfortable to be resorting to widespread violence in a way the other commonwealth countries were forced to under the british empire. 

I also think its important to remember that the nationalist population in scotland is probably only 3m ppl at most. 3m up against more than 60m and the might of the british armed forces is a mismatch and i genuinely hope no hardline scots decide to take up arms as they will be lambs to the slaughter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Caledonian Craig said:

What must be remembered are the people aged 50+ and 60+ now are those that were school leavers or in their 20s during the Thatcher years at which point the rise in support for independence began. Many of those 50 and 60 plusses today were probably those so offended by Thatcher's reign and the unfairness of how she treated Scotland. 

Now back in 2014 the 50 and 60 year-olds were No voters but they were largely starting out in the working world in the 60s and 70s - generally accepted as a happier time with a very pro-union upbringing.

I'm now closer to 60 than 50 and in the age group you are talking about. Another thing about "my generation" is that, although we remember how bad the Thatcher years were, we also know the the recent Tory bunch on mobsters are even worse. We had some hope that Tony B. Liar would be an improvement but in many ways his administration was just as bad as Thatchers. I spend quite a bit of time with auld codgers (aye, even older than me 😂) folk who are 10, 20 or 30 years older than me. In my experience the difference in attitudes that that 10+ years makes is huge. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, aaid said:

In common with most - if not all - political parties, the SNP rules state that you cannot be a member of the SNP if you are a member of another political party that competes with the SNP.  So, if you live in Wales you can also be a member of Plaid Cymru, if you live in England you can also be a member of the Green Party of England and Wales.  If you live in Scotland, you can’t be a member of Alba.  HL - by his own admission joined Alba and at that point ceased to be a member of the SNP.  That he hasn’t informed either his branch or head office of that is irrelevant but speaks to his character.  

If he still pays his membership (which he does) he can still take part in SNP votes. He is still a member unless his branch decide to kick him out. It doesn't happen automatically. Quite a few SNP members are members of other parties. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Diamond Scot said:

One thing I wondered yesterday, and to be clear its something id not suggest in any way was whether in the event of a democratic route to independece being blocked, whether there would be anybody in Scotland that might turn to more violent measures.

We could easily end up in a situation where UK gov say no to a vote, we get 51%+ at next election. New UK gov say no. 51%+ at next Scottish election but UK gov say no. In such a scenario (which isnt unlikely) there would appear to be no democratic route to independence.

Under such circumstances change is rarely brought about without violence (historically in other countrys). Can anybody see a situation where a group in Scotland go down this path? Maybe not bombings etc but something more targeted, perhaps towards MPs or leading figures of media etc.

Were you by any chance listening to the John Beattie radio program yesterday? There was no doubt in my mind that some of the folk on there were just itching for some shenanigans to kick off at the rallies last night. The BBC is filled with devious, odious fukers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ironically I can see independence (rather than the SNP) becoming more popular precisely because it's unachievable.

A bit like Bobo Balde becoming Celtic's best centre half the longer he was out the team.😅

There's no scope for independence actually happening now so the risks associated with the opinion have evaporated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Orraloon said:

Were you by any chance listening to the John Beattie radio program yesterday? There was no doubt in my mind that some of the folk on there were just itching for some shenanigans to kick off at the rallies last night. The BBC is filled with devious, odious fukers.

I wasnt no. It came about after a conversation with a colleague where we were talking about "what now".

Ive no doubt that Scotland will continue to move slowly towards indy support however not in huge volumes. I also believe that we will continue to vote SNP at UK and Scot elections. This will leave us in a position where a UK gov can continue to use retoric such as "now isnt the time" or "its not the clear will of the Scottish people" etc.

Taking such a stance against the Scots actually increases poplularity in England which is the only fighting ground for UK power so theres no reason for any UK gov to be progressive or allow a referendum.

Under such a scenario I believe indy voters will largely split into 2 camps. 1, those who just get on with the day to day life, not happy with the approach of the UK gov but not vocal and pretty much scunnered by the entire drawn out affair. 2, those who become more entrenched, more angry etc. I can see the 2nd group becoming more distruptive in terms of protests etc but ultimately they get you nowhere. 

Im just wondering if a very small number, (im talking 5 to 10 people) take things further in such a scenario.

I cant ever see an IRA type movement as the landscape wouldnt allow it, also these organisations are so closely linked in with organsied crime etc. I can see one off incidents by individuals though. Whether that would help or hinder the cause by that stage im less sure about tbh.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, PapofGlencoe said:

It's now upto the people to support the cause in sufficient numbers.  No splits, no name calling.  A new, energised campaign of party and non-party.

That Channel 4 poll is incredible.  50% Yes, 34% No, 16% undecided.  Assuming it's an outlier (although it is a full scale poll, if it's real and sustainable new ball game entirely)...

The uncomfortable truth is the last Scottish election showed our country is split.  While that is the case, Unionists can arguably claim authority to block a vote.  However, the moment clear majorities emerge for independence this intransigence loses all democratic legitimacy.  This appears to be the trajectory.

The elephant in the room is independence support is on the rise.  Unionism is falling.  It's been slow but we've gone from 45% to 50% in 8 years.  Unionists can no longer claim with certainty there is a majority for their position.  That wasn't the case before.  There has been a shift.

I think it's obvious to any fair minded person... younger, educated people support independence in larger numbers than their predecessors.   And I don't mean 16 year olds.  I mean 30-45 year olds...the middle managers, the graduates, the firemen and the nurses... It's not an issue that's going away.  The UK will hope to wait it out and support to fade but I just don't see it reversing with this legal ruling and the powerful demographic shift that is underway.    I think unionists are now worried as by 2024, there is a good possibility of 50+1% being not only achievable but more likely than not. 

Whether that is enough is another question.  If you're a democrat, it should be.  However, we live in post 2014, post Brexit world.  I think the result does need to be stronger than that to carry acceptance amongst the defeated as well as the victor.

We'll see what happens in 2024 but if it ever becomes clear that an obvious majority of Scottish citizens desire independence and it is denied, I don't like where that can lead.  Democratic paths for legitimate opinions must be available.  It's not perfect but it's the best model we have. 

The problem for Yes is short term.  The problem for Unionism is long term. 

 

Once don't know are removed from that poll, it works out about 59.5% Yes,  40.5% No.  That's pretty clear, roughly 3 to 2.  With don't know, I suspect they would either not vote or split in roughly the same ratio.

Important to have the 16/17 year olds included in voting - which means using a Scottish election unless the franchise can be altered - which WM would be unlikely to allow.  There's that word "allow" again.  It's an abomination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Alibi said:

Once don't know are removed from that poll, it works out about 59.5% Yes,  40.5% No.  That's pretty clear, roughly 3 to 2.  With don't know, I suspect they would either not vote or split in roughly the same ratio.

Important to have the 16/17 year olds included in voting - which means using a Scottish election unless the franchise can be altered - which WM would be unlikely to allow.  There's that word "allow" again.  It's an abomination.

I know, it's poor but it's where we are.

I'm not sure the Scottish election provides the necessary attention or gravitas unfortunately for a disputed vote.  unionists will feel they need to participate in a GE.

The next test is 2024 unless an early Scottish election is called.

i.e. In raw demographic numbers, an early Scottish election includes current 16/17 year olds that will be 18 in 2024 so you're not losing these but an early Scottish election includes more older people...  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Orraloon said:

If he still pays his membership (which he does) he can still take part in SNP votes. He is still a member unless his branch decide to kick him out. It doesn't happen automatically. Quite a few SNP members are members of other parties. 

He can vote but technically he isn’t a member.  The regulations state that you cease to become a member once you breach the rules, not when the party finds out about it.  The fact he knows this means he is being disingenuous.

54 minutes ago, Orraloon said:

I'm now closer to 60 than 50 and in the age group you are talking about. Another thing about "my generation" is that, although we remember how bad the Thatcher years were, we also know the the recent Tory bunch on mobsters are even worse. We had some hope that Tony B. Liar would be an improvement but in many ways his administration was just as bad as Thatchers. 

That is me in a nutshell.  If anything, I’m more to the left in my fifties than I was in my thirties, but still not as far as I was in my teens. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, hampden_loon2878 said:

i am a snp member and i would struggle to vote for the current snp as it stands, i simply do not trust them. i want independence more than anything but some of the actions and behaviors of folk in the party has been shady to say the least 

^^^ This.  I rejoined recently after a gap of about 18 months, went to a branch meeting and found that the remaining members didn't seem to like anyone expressing anything but blind loyalty to Nicola.  I won't be going to any more branch meetings, that's for sure, and I've had to email the minutes secretary to object to the way some of my comments were minuted.  Didn't even get as far as touching on the self-ID nonsense, just my reservations about things like the "stop brexit" election strategy.  They really don't like any open debate or discussion.  I would still vote for the SNP as I first joined before NS was even born and there's no other viable vehicle for indy.  if she pulls off indy, I'll be the first to congratulate her but I hae ma doubts.  I feel the party has been infiltrated by some pretty nasty characters who seem to have the FM's ear.  As in most things, follow the money, and I suspect ultimately it probably comes from some organ of the UK state.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

Loading...



×
×
  • Create New...