EU Referendum

[andymac]

1 minute ago, aaid said:

And a pro-rate share of the UK's currency reserves would more than cover that.

Along with a  pro-rate share of the debt I assume.

i have made comment about independence. Sort out the currency issue is all I am saying. The default of the Uk on debts is a world problem. Lending to a new country is a different issue.

Just have a clear plan.

 

You reckon the U.K. Still has currency reserves? ?

 

 

[aaid]

6 minutes ago, andymac said:

Along with a  pro-rate share of the debt I assume.

i have made comment about independence. Sort out the currency issue is all I am saying. The default of the Uk on debts is a world problem. Lending to a new country is a different issue.

Just have a clear plan.

 

You reckon the U.K. Still has currency reserves? ?

 

 

They do but they're worth about 15% less than it was six months ago. ? 

SG always said they would accept a fair share of the debt *as long as* there was a fair share of the assets.

FWIW, I suspect that the preferred currency option put forwards next time will be a Scottish currency - the Poond to suitably windup the uber Yoons - pegged to Sterling for the foreseeable future.

Edited January 18, 2017 by aaid

[Glasgowmancity]

48 minutes ago, Auld_Reekie said:

There needs to be empathy more than ever IMO. The chances of winning over a No voter is almost always massively improved if the Yes campaigner manages to resist any hint of smugness or superiority complex. Many Unionists are probably now sitting in their bunker having defended the Union for the best part of 4 years and wondering how it has come to this. You dont get them out the trenches by pointing the finger and exasperated finger-pointing when they try and explain their previous position and their concerns. Because they'll be bang on the money when they point out currency was (and still is) a huge weakness and the SNP and wider Yes campaign have done next to f***-all about it (probably because they assumed, not entirely unreasonably, that they had more time to consider options). And they'll have a very valid point when they highlight the fact that rUK market is the most important to Scotland. These are reasonable objections and it isn't sufficient to react with rage and scream "But Brexit!".

Absolutely certain we're looking at another referendum in 2018, possibly March. That would allow a year of negotiations to materialise, with a year to get our $hit sorted after a Yes vote. This means we've got the best part of a year to get working on No voters and already there are a worrying number of Yes supporters frothing at the mouth, being a bit shouty about it all, and being driven by emotion rather than intellect.

Our game needs to be lifted since the one we played in 2014, and substantially on the one we've played since then. We've got more strings to our bow and it's massively important we don't forget the lessons of 2014. Some we've barely started (such as currency), but we're well versed in the need to fight a positive, inclusive, respectful campaign.

If we can't win this next one given that absolute $hit-fest that UK politics finds itself, there really will be little hope left. Let's not f*** it up by going all William Wallace on the electorate. Got to be smarter than that.

Probably one of the most sensible posts I've read on here with regards to Independence

[Flure]

5 minutes ago, Glasgowmancity said:

Probably one of the most sensible posts I've read on here with regards to Independence

Shut it you.

FREEEEDOMMMM!

[Glasgowmancity]

7 minutes ago, Flure said:

Shut it you.

FREEEEDOMMMM!

Normality has resumed - good to see  

[andymac]

15 minutes ago, Flure said:

Shut it you.

FREEEEDOMMMM!

Shut it Harold or I will import the picture from FB.

[aaid]

37 minutes ago, andymac said:

Shut it Harold or I will import the picture from FB.

Louis van Gaal indeed. 

[Flure]

47 minutes ago, andymac said:

Shut it Harold or I will import the picture from FB.

LOL

Shut!

[Rossy]

2 hours ago, Auld_Reekie said:

There needs to be empathy more than ever IMO. The chances of winning over a No voter is almost always massively improved if the Yes campaigner manages to resist any hint of smugness or superiority complex. Many Unionists are probably now sitting in their bunker having defended the Union for the best part of 4 years and wondering how it has come to this. You dont get them out the trenches by pointing the finger and exasperated finger-pointing when they try and explain their previous position and their concerns. Because they'll be bang on the money when they point out currency was (and still is) a huge weakness and the SNP and wider Yes campaign have done next to f***-all about it (probably because they assumed, not entirely unreasonably, that they had more time to consider options). And they'll have a very valid point when they highlight the fact that rUK market is the most important to Scotland. These are reasonable objections and it isn't sufficient to react with rage and scream "But Brexit!".

Absolutely certain we're looking at another referendum in 2018, possibly March. That would allow a year of negotiations to materialise, with a year to get our $hit sorted after a Yes vote. This means we've got the best part of a year to get working on No voters and already there are a worrying number of Yes supporters frothing at the mouth, being a bit shouty about it all, and being driven by emotion rather than intellect.

Our game needs to be lifted since the one we played in 2014, and substantially on the one we've played since then. We've got more strings to our bow and it's massively important we don't forget the lessons of 2014. Some we've barely started (such as currency), but we're well versed in the need to fight a positive, inclusive, respectful campaign.

If we can't win this next one given that absolute $hit-fest that UK politics finds itself, there really will be little hope left. Let's not f*** it up by going all William Wallace on the electorate. Got to be smarter than that.

I not sure this even comes close to representing your average independence supporter.  Maybe I'm wrong though and there are hordes of 'Yes' voters roaming the streets of Fife and Ayrshire in kilts, threatening No voters with claymores and copies of the declaration of Arbroath.

What I do notice is the entrenched, abusive, aggressive hatred from many Unionists to anyone connected with the SNP or independence. 

Make no mistake, the 2nd referendum campaign will be fought against a backdrop of utter hostility from the Unionist camp. The abuse will be louder, the lies more extreme.

I agree that the Yes campaign should be reasoned and persuasive, and the issue of currency should be tackled head on.

However, independence won't be won unless the Yes campaign hammers home the lies of the No campaign and negative aspects of remaining part of the Union. 

Fire has to be fought with fire this time around.

[ErsatzThistle]

34 minutes ago, Rossy said:

I not sure this even comes close to representing your average independence supporter.  Maybe I'm wrong though and there are hordes of 'Yes' voters roaming the streets of Fife and Ayrshire in kilts, threatening No voters with claymores and copies of the declaration of Arbroath.

What I do notice is the entrenched, abusive, aggressive hatred from many Unionists to anyone connected with the SNP or independence. 

Found that too. Never saw any haggis bashing, tartanized version of the Yes campaign that the previous poster was alluding too.

Never saw any Yes campaigners threatening teenage girls, smashing shop windows or making fascist salutes. The No crowd however........

Btw is Eric Joyce of all people trying to tell us something about himself ? 

 

Edited January 18, 2017 by ErsatzThistle

[TDYER63]

2 hours ago, Auld_Reekie said:

There needs to be empathy more than ever IMO. The chances of winning over a No voter is almost always massively improved if the Yes campaigner manages to resist any hint of smugness or superiority complex. Many Unionists are probably now sitting in their bunker having defended the Union for the best part of 4 years and wondering how it has come to this. You dont get them out the trenches by pointing the finger and exasperated finger-pointing when they try and explain their previous position and their concerns. Because they'll be bang on the money when they point out currency was (and still is) a huge weakness and the SNP and wider Yes campaign have done next to f***-all about it (probably because they assumed, not entirely unreasonably, that they had more time to consider options). And they'll have a very valid point when they highlight the fact that rUK market is the most important to Scotland. These are reasonable objections and it isn't sufficient to react with rage and scream "But Brexit!".

Absolutely certain we're looking at another referendum in 2018, possibly March. That would allow a year of negotiations to materialise, with a year to get our $hit sorted after a Yes vote. This means we've got the best part of a year to get working on No voters and already there are a worrying number of Yes supporters frothing at the mouth, being a bit shouty about it all, and being driven by emotion rather than intellect.

Our game needs to be lifted since the one we played in 2014, and substantially on the one we've played since then. We've got more strings to our bow and it's massively important we don't forget the lessons of 2014. Some we've barely started (such as currency), but we're well versed in the need to fight a positive, inclusive, respectful campaign.

If we can't win this next one given that absolute $hit-fest that UK politics finds itself, there really will be little hope left. Let's not f*** it up by going all William Wallace on the electorate. Got to be smarter than that.

Very good post, as usual. 

Without nailing the currency issue we will be going through the same old motions, and empathy is key to getting anywhere with No voters. My concerns are also with apathy. I hope I am alone in feeling there are a lot of people out there just fed up with the whole thing. I feel part of the country groaning at another Referendum. 

The main concern for many is simply how their own pocket is affected, they do not feel massively scottish and are happy just to bob along with the flow so long as they are doing ok. If a referendum was to be held in early 2018 I am not sure the affects of Brexit will have really hit pockets hard enough by then, I think it will take longer. The currency issue therefore needs to be water tight. 

[Rossy]

I've never in my life agreed with anything that Eric Joyce has uttered. Until now. These are fine words..

 

If you’re a Scottish unionist after today’s speech by Theresa May, this is what you support:

Scotland out of the single European market and probably the customs union too; the protections of the ECHR and ECJ gone; a UK Tory government made up entirely* of English politicians acting out English imperatives as articulated by UKIP and the right wing of the Tory Party; the UK becoming a nation of low taxation and therefore greatly reduced expenditure on public services; complete political domination of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland by an England which now votes so strongly Tory that Labour expects to have half the MPs the Tories do following the next UK election (assuming there is one…); a long Conservative ascendancy which squeezes Scotland’s instinctual social democratic values until the pips squeak. 

Plenty of Scots like this stuff, of course. But what if you’re not a Tory?

Until the Brexit vote, anti-independence arguments by Labour politicians, activists and supporters reflected a genuine and deeply-held view that Scots were better off in the long run as part of the UK. Sometimes we were on what seemed firm ground with arguments about possible economic risk extending from, say, an independent Scotland being forced out of the EU. Sometimes our arguments were tactical and, like you get on all sides in politics, disingenuous – nonsense about hard borders and highly arguable assumptions about taxation revenue.

In the end, of course, people’s views on the the big issues usually come from the heart. Then the brain follows on with justifying rationales. That’s not to pit heart against brain – it’s simply to say that we start out with instincts, weigh things up in ways more profound and complex that we can convey in words, then feel viscerally the right way to go.

So the biggest question we 2014 NO voters of the centre/left need to ask ourselves now is: What’s in my heart?

If you decide that, first and foremost, the union is what your heart desires, then you should certainly vote No at the now-inevitable second referendum.

But what if your heart yearns most for social democratic values, human dignity, being in control of your own destiny, or the best near and long term future of your family? Well, on the basis that the conditions which existed in 2014 are so irrevocably changed now it would be surely be irrational to vote No again without a genuine re-appraisal or the merits of No and Yes?

Maybe a lot of former No voters of the centre/left will look again, and seriously, at the rival social and economic arguments for and against independence, but still reluctantly choose years of Tory ascendancy. In which case, that’s their democratic call and fair play to them. But a lot of former No voters will conclude the opposite. As will folk who voted Yes and have since moved to No on the understandable but mistaken assumption that it was all over for another generation.

This terrible, hard English Brexit, day is the time for folk who are neither instinctual Tories nor SNP supporters to look above the old party enmities and finally choose what’s truly in our hearts and brains. Surely to God.

 

[phart]

Good to see that currency is being recognised as the main issue.

[aaid]

15 minutes ago, ErsatzThistle said:

Found that too. Never saw any haggis bashing, tartanized version of the Yes campaign that the previous poster was alluding too.

Never saw any Yes campaigners threatening teenage girls, smashing shop windows or making fascist salutes. The No crowd however........

Btw is Eric Joyce of all people trying to tell us something about himself ? 

 

Eric Joyce came out for independence some time ago.  The clue is in the URL, "fromnotoyes". 

[antidote]

5 hours ago, Parklife said:

He always destroys her at PMQ's.

Every. Single. Week. 

Iv'e got to say that the small clip I seen of Corbyn today he did have her on the ropes.

So did Angus Robertson. 

[Toepoke]

Baw Jaws doing his bit to make sure the UK gets an even worse deal, nice work...

http://news.sky.com/story/boris-johnsons-hollande-gaffe-distracts-from-pms-brexit-speech-10733844

 

[antidote]

The trickle has started.

HSBC, UBS to shift 1,000 jobs each from UK in Brexit blow to London

http://uk.reuters.com/article/us-davos-meeting-hsbc-idUKKBN1520SO

[Toepoke]

Got to have a bit of sympathy for remain voting London there.

Might take some heat out of their housing market though.

[mariokempes56]

53 minutes ago, antidote said:

Iv'e got to say that the small clip I seen of Corbyn today he did have her on the ropes.

So did Angus Robertson. 

May is a one trick poney (one sound - bite trick, and dressed like a Bay City Roller granny) - she cannot deal with an interaction other than pretend to be Mrs T (embarrassingly badly) and it makes her look pathetic. Corbyn (who I do not particularly like), while bumbling does at times make her look stupid. He thinks on his feet marginally better than her. Two very poor leaders,

[antidote]

38 minutes ago, mariokempes56 said:

May is a one trick poney (one sound - bite trick, and dressed like a Bay City Roller granny) - she cannot deal with an interaction other than pretend to be Mrs T (embarrassingly badly) and it makes her look pathetic. Corbyn (who I do not particularly like), while bumbling does at times make her look stupid. He thinks on his feet marginally better than her. Two very poor leaders,

Yes, I've noticed the new sound bite phrase 'global Britain' being banded about often enough.

Yes she stutters, pauses too much and gives the impression that she's been caught out.

Corbyn is a poor leader and can be susceptible to easy ridicule. He's never going to be the PM.

I agree with your assessment. 

 

On the other hand.

 

Political Scrapbook‏@PSbook

Whoever writes Angus Robertson's questions at #PMQs - give him/her a medal. Always on point

 

• RETWEETS17
• LIKES33
• 

4:17 AM - 18 Jan 2017

e

Edited January 18, 2017 by antidote

[Glasgowmancity]

20 hours ago, andymac said:

Shut it Harold or I will import the picture from FB.

 

19 hours ago, Rossy said:

I not sure this even comes close to representing your average independence supporter.  Maybe I'm wrong though and there are hordes of 'Yes' voters roaming the streets of Fife and Ayrshire in kilts, threatening No voters with claymores and copies of the declaration of Arbroath.

What I do notice is the entrenched, abusive, aggressive hatred from many Unionists to anyone connected with the SNP or independence. 

Make no mistake, the 2nd referendum campaign will be fought against a backdrop of utter hostility from the Unionist camp. The abuse will be louder, the lies more extreme.

I agree that the Yes campaign should be reasoned and persuasive, and the issue of currency should be tackled head on.

However, independence won't be won unless the Yes campaign hammers home the lies of the No campaign and negative aspects of remaining part of the Union. 

Fire has to be fought with fire this time around.

I think a lot of that is to do with being a "yes" supporter.  It's far easier to see the problems in the other camp than it is in your own camp.

 

From what I've seen - mainly Unionists on FB & Nationalists on here there's a fairly even split of over the top people between the 2 camps.

[Auld_Reekie]

1 hour ago, Glasgowmancity said:

From what I've seen - mainly Unionists on FB & Nationalists on here there's a fairly even split of over the top people between the 2 camps.

I'd kinda agree with that.

However, I wouldn't say there's the same, even distribution of people who are willing to openly debate the merits/flaws of their own stance/campaign. IMO, this is to the great credit of the Yes campaign where there's far more people willing to debate flaws, strategy, ideas, etc. This is something that is sadly lacking on the No side, and is hugely detrimental to the Union. There's very superficial noises from Scottish Labour about federalism but by and large, No campaigners online spend almost all of their time looking at and attacking "Nats" rather than self-reflection and introspection. And while Im not one of the frothing-mouthed Nats who campaign outside BBC headquarters, too many journalists allow themselves to look like Unionists by doing exactly the same as No campaigners - you only have to look at the scrutiny and criticism leveled at the independence White Paper and any similar reaction to the lack of substantial blueprint or White Paper on the future of the Union, or the sheer void of the Leave campaign to see the problem.

Diversity, self-criticism and debate are the keys to the evolution of an idea. It's why the independence movement will eventually win - they're at least trying to bring the electorate and their campaign closer together, Meanwhile, Unionists sit and fling $hit at everything.

Both campaigns have their fair share of idiots, but only one campaign seems to be proactive.

[Orraloon]

23 hours ago, andymac said:

 

You reckon the U.K. Still has currency reserves? ?

 

 

About $140,000,000,000 worth the last time I counted it. Took me a while, right enough. I am assuming that he is talking about foreign currency reserves here. 

[Orraloon]

23 hours ago, aaid said:

They do but they're worth about 15% less than it was six months ago. ? 

 

Now, I could be wrong here (it has happened before) but I think he is talking about foreign currency reserves here? In which case, would they not actually be worth more now? If we converted them to GBP that is. It's all relative, I suppose. 

[aaid]

7 minutes ago, Auld_Reekie said:

However, I wouldn't say there's the same, even distribution of people who are willing to openly debate the merits/flaws of their own stance/campaign. IMO, this is to the great credit of the Yes campaign where there's far more people willing to debate flaws, strategy, ideas, etc. This is something that is sadly lacking on the No side, and is hugely detrimental to the Union. There's very superficial noises from Scottish Labour about federalism but by and large, No campaigners online spend almost all of their time looking at and attacking "Nats" rather than self-reflection and introspection. And while Im not one of the frothing-mouthed Nats who campaign outside BBC headquarters, too many journalists allow themselves to look like Unionists by doing exactly the same as No campaigners - you only have to look at the scrutiny and criticism leveled at the independence White Paper and any similar reaction to the lack of substantial blueprint or White Paper on the future of the Union, or the sheer void of the Leave campaign to see the problem.

Diversity, self-criticism and debate are the keys to the evolution of an idea. It's why the independence movement will eventually win - they're at least trying to bring the electorate and their campaign closer together, Meanwhile, Unionists sit and fling $hit at everything.

Both campaigns have their fair share of idiots, but only one campaign seems to be proactive.

I think a lot of balanced journalists and broadcasters - there are some - would admit, if only privately, that they as a whole did not put the same level of scrutiny towards the Better Together case as they did to Yes Scotland.  I've certainly heard James Cook say exactly that.   I think to an extent that's understandable as you could argue that as Yes was the "change" option and BT was the status quo, it was incumbent on them to prove their case, perhaps a view that "well we know what things are like now, it's how things will be different in the future that's important".   I'm giving a really big benefit of the doubt here.    

The broadcasters - and BBC in particular - really didn't get it the whole idea of balance either at first.   They seemed to be stuck in the mindset of political balance meaning that they had to give an equal say to each party, whenever it was party politicians involved.  Of course the problem with that was that meant a three v one as Labour, Tories and Lib Dems all lined up against the SNP, the Greens were also pretty sidelined.   As an aside, I think there is some convention or regulation within the Scottish Parliament that a party has to have a minimum of five seats to be considered as an official political group.  With that comes a lot of rights when it comes to parliamentary time, funding and treatment by the media.   I picked up on this on the night of last year's Scottish Elections where someone pointed out that the Lib Dems just scraped over the line and the look of horror on the Lib Dem spokesperson on the panel was palpable.   

This changed a bit during the official campaign as it went straight down Yes Scotland/Better Together lines.   Once the referendum was over though, it was right back to normal and the best example was the 4-1 gang up on Sunday Politics Scotland - here.

I'd like to think that things will be different with the next referendum and I strongly suspect that Yes will be better supported in the print media - for example, I fully expect the Daily Record to endorse independence this time around - but the problem with the BBC and News and Current Affairs is that they do not seem to be capable of the self-reflection and introspection you are talking about as they seem to flat out admit that they might be wrong or have made mistakes.   The current example of BBC News' reaction to the BBC Trust's review of Laura Kuenssberg's report on Jeremy Corbyn brings that into sharp focus.  

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/jan/18/bbc-trust-says-laura-kuenssberg-report-on-jeremy-corbyn-was-inaccurate-labour