Indy Ref 2 - Page 769 - Anything Goes - Other topics not covered elsewhere - Tartan Army Message Board Jump to content

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, kumnio said:

You think Sturgeon is damaged goods, but want Salmond to play a bigger part, cmon tae fuck.

And I say that as someone who thinks Salmond has been screwed over massively.

Salmond is definitely damaged goods thanks to the stitch up however, there’s is a significant portion of voters who he appeals to especially in the northeast,, businesses trust him also. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Squirrelhumper said:

 

The SG need to be accountable for their errors/mistakes but anyone in the party who doesn't tow the party line (Cherry et al) get pounced on by uber SNP fanboys/girls. 

They also get pounced on by the unionist media . ‘ SNP Civil War’ !! by the usual newspapers.
They are in a no win situation which is shit . 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Squirrelhumper said:

TBF, i've voted for her party non stop for almost two decades and i can't be arsed listening to her soundbites half the time! 

As mentioned above, it would be the same vitriol whoever is in charge, be it Sturgeon, Swinney, Yousaf or whoever. The visceral hatred of all things nationalist has to be seen to be believed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Alibi said:

The leave vote was 38% against 62% remain on a 67.2% turnout.  That means that about 25% of voting-age Scots voted leave and 42% voted remain with around a third not voting.

EFTA membership is a no-brainer as it destroys the argument about the EU more or less completely, and makes the border issue pretty much irrelevant.  If the SNP said that although they supported EU membership, they would put the various options to a vote after indy, it would maximise the yes vote.  However I suspect Sturgeon will continue to insist that independence means we automatically apply to join the EU on day one, whereas it should be a matter that all parties can decide on for their manifestos in the first post indy election.  The SNP can say what they would do in an indy Scotland but they shouldn't assume that scots will vote them in automatically and that their policies will be set in stone in indy Scotland.

I believe the reason why Norway and Iceland aren't members of the EU comes down to their fishing industries. EFTA membership allows them to opt-out of the CFP. Fishing was, IIRC, the only area where Scotland is more Eurosceptic than England. That would be another argument against independence headed off by going down the EFTA path.

Part of the reason why independence support changed a huge amount since 2016 is down to the Yes/Leave voters switching to No, counterbalancing the No/Remain voters switching to Yes. In some areas in 2014, the argument of Scotland not getting into the EU would've ironically been a vote winner for Yes in some Leave-minded areas in Scotland (Banff and Buchan for example).

I've not seen a study of the impact of EFTA membership, with a free trade deal with the UK, compared to EU membership - as almost all studies focus on the economic impact of whether independent Scotland would be an EU member or not (assuming if we're not in the EU, we'd have no trade deals with anyone). I imagine EFTA membership would bring us closer to our economic position pre-Brexit than EU membership (at least in the short term), prior to making any economic changes as a result of independence. EU membership could then be debated once we're independent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Clyde1998 said:

Part of the reason why independence support changed a huge amount since 2016 is down to the Yes/Leave voters switching to No, counterbalancing the No/Remain voters switching to Yes. In some areas in 2014, the argument of Scotland not getting into the EU would've ironically been a vote winner for Yes in some Leave-minded areas in Scotland (Banff and Buchan for example).

 

More than counterbalances them.  No/Remain->Yes is around twice Yes/Leave->No.  

That people dismiss this and advocate for a position to bring the Yes/Leave back into the fold or not upset them I just can’t understand in terms of numbers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/21/2022 at 2:15 PM, Clyde1998 said:

This was the state of play in 2012 from the No campaign's internal segmentation study:

SegmentationIndyRef2012.PNG.46e66686d78571f852b9e0b0a0828827.PNG

Only 37% were committed to the union - the phrase "Hardpressed Unionist" doesn't seem particularly promising for emotional attachment - while 29% would vote for independence in basically any context. A third of 55% is ~18% of the total electorate - comparable to the size of the "Mature Status Quo" group.

Of the middle group, the target audience for the No campaign, a significant majority noted risk was the reason for not backing independence - not any sort of attachment to the UK.

SegmentationIndyRef2012-2.PNG.744fe060a3ab01ade3e80a8dee5e1322.PNG

The segmentation study would almost certainly look different right now, due to the effects of Brexit, but it follows the point that few people in Scotland are actively feel attached to the UK.

Very interesting categories. Of course biased to No and with a Blair McDougall patronising belittling attitude.

Presumably "Mature Status Quo" is their label for "Unshiftable Diehard Exceptionalist British Nationalists" 🏴.

I think Yessers could be probably divided (at least) into Scottish Nationalists proper (patriotic, indy the first priority on political agenda) and maybe Scottish 'normalists' (who just want to be a normal democratic country, it's not necessarily number one priority but if asked, the answer is Yes or at least, why not?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, aaid said:

More than counterbalances them.  No/Remain->Yes is around twice Yes/Leave->No.  

That people dismiss this and advocate for a position to bring the Yes/Leave back into the fold or not upset them I just can’t understand in terms of numbers. 

I mean counterbalancing in terms of changing the leading outcome (ie. from No -> Yes), rather than the specific percentages. If Yes had gained No/Remain voters they have without losing Yes/Leave voters - we'd have a flipped outcome atm.

Either way, you've not just got to look at the raw swaps, but the potential of people to actually change sides and their reasons for doing so. A lot of No/Remain voters won't consider independence simply because of our EU status - to them other issues around independence issue outweigh the EU issue and a change in position regarding the EU would make no impact on their vote. A decent number of No/Remain voters would've voted against both propositions for the same reason - uncertainty or the belief the change would lead to a worse situation than the status quo, as opposed to innate opposition to the proposals.

Yes/Leave voters have supported independence in the past, but many have switched due to the EU issue being more prominent to them. These people are unlikely to be inherently opposed to independence, but aren't willing to support the current proposition. Their may be less of them, but their increased chance of supporting independence as a bloc could mean traction is easier to make among the group than with No/Remain voters.

If there's a greater chance of winning a referendum by softening the EU stance slightly and bringing Yes/Leave voters who switched to No back into the fold, then that's the path we should be pursuing in a referendum. Of course, both routes likely have the potential to produce a majority.

There's a secondary point about the impact of EFTA membership over EU membership: the ability of formulating our own trade deal with the UK. If we'd be able to negotiate a more favourable trade deal with the UK than the EU's deal, whilst having Single Market membership, that could be what convinces the No/Remain voters to vote for independence - through the increased chances of independence leading to a better economic and social situation than the new status quo (should analyses show that).

I'm not saying we should definitely go down that path, but feel it should be seriously weighed up as a potential option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

4 hours ago, hampden_loon2878 said:

Salmond is definitely damaged goods thanks to the stitch up however, there’s is a significant portion of voters who he appeals to especially in the northeast,, businesses trust him also. 

The whole point of the stitch up was to damage him.

He is 'damaged goods'... only in the eyes of the ignorant or those who tried to stitch him up. Personally I now recognize Salmond as a great man in Scottish history... betrayed by the Dreghorn hairy.

I don't give a fuck if he is talking to church halls again now with a hundred people in it, that is how he started.

This is the moral and intellectual leader of the independence movement for me by a million miles compared to that utter sham and her husband who have co-opted the SNP and the Independence movement.

I will never ever have anything to do with this current incarnation of the SNP. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Clyde1998 said:

I mean counterbalancing in terms of changing the leading outcome (ie. from No -> Yes), rather than the specific percentages. If Yes had gained No/Remain voters they have without losing Yes/Leave voters - we'd have a flipped outcome atm.

Either way, you've not just got to look at the raw swaps, but the potential of people to actually change sides and their reasons for doing so. A lot of No/Remain voters won't consider independence simply because of our EU status - to them other issues around independence issue outweigh the EU issue and a change in position regarding the EU would make no impact on their vote. A decent number of No/Remain voters would've voted against both propositions for the same reason - uncertainty or the belief the change would lead to a worse situation than the status quo, as opposed to innate opposition to the proposals.

Yes/Leave voters have supported independence in the past, but many have switched due to the EU issue being more prominent to them. These people are unlikely to be inherently opposed to independence, but aren't willing to support the current proposition. Their may be less of them, but their increased chance of supporting independence as a bloc could mean traction is easier to make among the group than with No/Remain voters.

If there's a greater chance of winning a referendum by softening the EU stance slightly and bringing Yes/Leave voters who switched to No back into the fold, then that's the path we should be pursuing in a referendum. Of course, both routes likely have the potential to produce a majority.

There's a secondary point about the impact of EFTA membership over EU membership: the ability of formulating our own trade deal with the UK. If we'd be able to negotiate a more favourable trade deal with the UK than the EU's deal, whilst having Single Market membership, that could be what convinces the No/Remain voters to vote for independence - through the increased chances of independence leading to a better economic and social situation than the new status quo (should analyses show that).

I'm not saying we should definitely go down that path, but feel it should be seriously weighed up as a potential option.

Well said, And I'm not sure why it is so difficult for some to understand. We need to have a strategy that will bring as many people on board as possible and clearly the best way forward for this is going for the compromise of pushing for EFTA membership and having a referendum on EU membership at some later date. If we don't win the referendum then nothing else is going to matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, thplinth said:

 

The whole point of the stitch up was to damage him.

He is 'damaged goods'... only in the eyes of the ignorant or those who tried to stitch him up. Personally I now recognize Salmond as a great man in Scottish history... betrayed by the Dreghorn hairy.

I don't give a fuck if he is talking to church halls again now with a hundred people in it, that is how he started.

This is the moral and intellectual leader of the independence movement for me by a million miles compared to that utter sham and her husband who have co-opted the SNP and the Independence movement.

I will never ever have anything to do with this current incarnation of the SNP. 

 

I completely and totally agree, ignorance regarding what happened is so widespread unfortunately. It will take a while to rebuild his reputation but I do think if a referendum happens that it will propell him right into the centre of Scottish politics,, sturgeon is petrified that this will happen 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, hampden_loon2878 said:

I completely and totally agree, ignorance regarding what happened is so widespread unfortunately. It will take a while to rebuild his reputation but I do think if a referendum happens that it will propell him right into the centre of Scottish politics,, sturgeon is petrified that this will happen 

Top commentary from Mr. “I don’t hate Sturgeon”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Clyde1998 said:

I believe the reason why Norway and Iceland aren't members of the EU comes down to their fishing industries. EFTA membership allows them to opt-out of the CFP. Fishing was, IIRC, the only area where Scotland is more Eurosceptic than England. That would be another argument against independence headed off by going down the EFTA path.

Part of the reason why independence support changed a huge amount since 2016 is down to the Yes/Leave voters switching to No, counterbalancing the No/Remain voters switching to Yes. In some areas in 2014, the argument of Scotland not getting into the EU would've ironically been a vote winner for Yes in some Leave-minded areas in Scotland (Banff and Buchan for example).

I've not seen a study of the impact of EFTA membership, with a free trade deal with the UK, compared to EU membership - as almost all studies focus on the economic impact of whether independent Scotland would be an EU member or not (assuming if we're not in the EU, we'd have no trade deals with anyone). I imagine EFTA membership would bring us closer to our economic position pre-Brexit than EU membership (at least in the short term), prior to making any economic changes as a result of independence. EU membership could then be debated once we're independent.

Agreed.  Now just need the SNP to adopt this stance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, aaid said:

More than counterbalances them.  No/Remain->Yes is around twice Yes/Leave->No.  

That people dismiss this and advocate for a position to bring the Yes/Leave back into the fold or not upset them I just can’t understand in terms of numbers. 

Why does it have to be one or the other?  EFTA membership would win back former Yes/Leave voters, would leave the possibility of EU membership open if we decided to go for that in due course, would at least for the duration of the campaign neuter the No side's arguments about EU membership meaning a hard border (and don't forget that any hard border is England's fault as they voted to cut themselves off from the EU).  EFTA would also be acceptable to those who want EU membership as it would give immediate or rapid free movement and single market access.  I don't think it would mean a hard border with rUK although I'm not certain of the exact implications there, but almost certainly it would allow a pragmatic border.  I can't understand why the SNP is so dogmatic that indy means definite EU membership when there are ways to work round that issue and make a Yes vote far more likely.  Almost as if some within the SNP are trying to put up barriers to indy.  Indy should come with as few preconditions as possible so that Scotland can start from scratch and reconsider every treaty and agreement rather than just accepting things imposed on us within the UK.  Stop apologising to witches and let's look to the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, thplinth said:

I feel like people are entering a fantasy land on this thread at times.

Support for YES has literally flat lined since 2014.

The SNP since 2014 have not sold the case for independence at all, nor have they removed the project fear hotspots like currency or a hard border with England (a real possibility if we joined the EU).

Plus why leave a trade union with rUK when it accounts for something like 60% of our exports versus the EU which is more like 20% from memory (maybe 15%). It makes zero sense to exit a trade union with rUK in order to enter one with the EU. It is common sense, we share the same island and they are much bigger economically so of course most of our trade is done with England.

As Craig Murray points out Sturgeon completely hogs the media. And IMHO she is about as charismatic and persuasive as a plank of wood and that was before the stitch-up. But now she comes across as down right nasty and evil. And this is your person to win the YES... don't see it.

Plus I believe Wings wrote about any referendum (advisory or otherwise) that is not approved by WM. Those councils not under SNP control will refuse to participate and the NO voters will simply boycott it also. It will be utterly farcical and meaningless and waste another XY years.

It is going to be painful viewing. Sturgeon has surrounded herself with people less 'talented' than herself. Consequently the quality of the SNP is so dire at the leadership levels I fear it will be a bloodbath of incompetence.

Its called ‘hope’. You are letting your hatred of NS become all consuming. Thats not to say you dont have genuine concerns,  but it sounds like you are almost ‘willing’ independence not to happen. I doubt many folk other than uber unionists or Salmond fanatics look at her and think ‘  she is right nasty and evil’. 

The current gap between yes and no is in no way insurmountable . I think you are right however regarding the EU and I agree with the others that say EFTA should be the target to overcome one large obstacle. 
However , on the other hand, you could argue that the Baltic nations should never have left Russia if trade was going to be an issue..And as far as close proximity goes, I dont think Ireland is doing too badly since the UK left the EU. 

If we start from a base of ‘ it will never happen’ then it really is never going to happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Freeedom said:

Well said, And I'm not sure why it is so difficult for some to understand. We need to have a strategy that will bring as many people on board as possible and clearly the best way forward for this is going for the compromise of pushing for EFTA membership and having a referendum on EU membership at some later date. If we don't win the referendum then nothing else is going to matter.

Yes I agree there. The Yes side need to be canny and use as many opportunities it can to turn No or Don't Knows to Yes - that is what will get us across the line nothing else. EU membership is a trump card to use as a carrot pushing for EFTA membership would bring some on board who may not have been before. We should also be pushing the facts to how much Scottish tax payers money is being spent on projects with nothing at all to do with Scotland. Projects such as HS2 getting no further north than Leeds. Projects such as the hundreds of millions going to the refurb of the Houses of Parliament. Projects such as the hundreds of millions going to the refurb of Buck House. That is many millions of pounds that would be spent on Scotland only in an independent Scotland.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, hampden_loon2878 said:

I completely and totally agree, ignorance regarding what happened is so widespread unfortunately. It will take a while to rebuild his reputation but I do think if a referendum happens that it will propell him right into the centre of Scottish politics,, sturgeon is petrified that this will happen 

He is leagues above Sturgeon in terms of competence and she knows it.

The Craig Murray piece I linked to above highlights how Sturgeon carefully controls her ministers media time making sure she hogs it. She has also surrounded herself with ministers who she perceives are no threat to her and that means people less competent than her, i.e. woke grovelers.

This another reason you don't want an indyref, who in the SNP can shift support for YES.

No one, as evidenced by the last 8 years. It was under Alex Salmond's leadership it grew.

Folk seem to forget that support for YES being so low was the only reason David Cameron felt confident agreeing to an indyref in the first place. That is the only reason we got it. He would never have agreed had he known what was coming. Never. Just as Bojo the Clown wont agree (unless the fix is in). Support for YES grew so much in the small window during 2014 and so fast the Queen shat her pants, they all did, and then all hell broke lose, the vow etc etc all documented in that documentary I posted from the same Craig Murray piece. It was disgraceful and people were far too accepting of it and still are.

There was a massive buzz that built up during 2014, I have never seen / felt anything remotely like it in UK politics before never mind Scottish politics, it was palpable. This is when the YES needle really started to move. All of this was under Alex Salmond. He frightened them so much they tried to destroy him, came within a whisker.

Edited by thplinth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, TDYER63 said:

Its called ‘hope’. You are letting your hatred of NS become all consuming. 

Stopped reading after that. This is aaid level shit. And it is mostly always the ones throwing out the accusations that are guilty of it themselves. The only person posting on this board / thread who has displayed anything coming close to genuine 'hatred' is aaid. It has been visceral at times and not just towards Salmond but also Loon and others (myself included). But of course that 'hatred' you don't see. Any one might think it is (yet another) cheap smear to tarnish opinions you (plural) don't like. I guess we've been called all the '...ists' so now we are on to 'haters' . Fucking yawn. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, thplinth said:

 

The whole point of the stitch up was to damage him.

He is 'damaged goods'... only in the eyes of the ignorant or those who tried to stitch him up. Personally I now recognize Salmond as a great man in Scottish history... betrayed by the Dreghorn hairy.

I don't give a fuck if he is talking to church halls again now with a hundred people in it, that is how he started.

This is the moral and intellectual leader of the independence movement for me by a million miles compared to that utter sham and her husband who have co-opted the SNP and the Independence movement.

I will never ever have anything to do with this current incarnation of the SNP. 

 

Salmond is not a great man, a great man doesn't do the things he admitted to. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Squirrelhumper said:

Salmond is not a great man, a great man doesn't do the things he admitted to. 

Thankfully it will be for history to decide and not you. (You'll see I said 'personally' above.)

And the only thing he admitted to was extra marital affairs, if you are such a prude that this negates his massive achievements and contribution to the independence movement then that is up to you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, thplinth said:

Stopped reading after that. This is aaid level shit. And it is mostly always the ones throwing out the accusations that are guilty of it themselves. The only person posting on this board / thread who has displayed anything coming close to genuine 'hatred' is aaid. It has been visceral at times and not just towards Salmond but also Loon and others (myself included). But of course that 'hatred' you don't see. Any one might think it is (yet another) cheap smear to tarnish opinions you (plural) don't like. I guess we've been called all the '...ists' so now we are on to 'haters' . Fucking yawn. 

Perhaps my definition of ‘hate’ is different from yours. Would you not agree this is how you feel towards NS ? 

00644968-2847-4113-99B6-B89DB074F206.jpeg.72e2464e2ebeb5696fc28b6c9f662175.jpeg


I am not getting into personal insults between posters , I am talking about independence and how you view the leader of the only party that will get us there. I dont care if you hate her, you are not alone, I just think you need to see beyond the personal feelings and look for other positives.  


 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah the clue is in the word 'extreme'. Hate is an extremist term. Not applicable to a mild discussion about politics and politicians on the TAMB.

So if you 'hate' Nicola Sturgeon then what must you feel about someone who for example massacres your family. Are they up there on the 'extreme' shelf with Nicola? So it is a ridiculous term to use in this and most contexts but it is also a smear as it implies you are a 'hater' of course. Personally I don't hate anything and would not invest the energy required to do so. But if I did it would not be some distant politician in a discussion on an unread football message board. Who gives a shit... And of course your (plural) opinions come from reason and logic but the ones you don't agree with you ascribe to 'hate'. How convenient.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, thplinth said:

Yeah the clue is in the word 'extreme'. Hate is an extremist term. Not applicable to a mild discussion about politics and politicians on the TAMB.

So if you 'hate' Nicola Sturgeon then what must you feel about someone who for example massacres your family. Are they up there on the 'extreme' shelf with Nicola? So it is a ridiculous term to use in this and most contexts but it is also a smear as it implies you are a 'hater' of course. Personally I don't hate anything and would not invest the energy required to do so. But if I did it would not be some distant politician in a discussion on an unread football message board. Who gives a shit... And of course your (plural) opinions come from reason and logic but the ones you don't agree with you ascribe to 'hate'. How convenient.

People use the word hate all the time. I hate honey , it makes me boak. If it makes you feel any better i will change it to ‘ your extreme dislike of her ‘. 

 

17 minutes ago, thplinth said:

Who gives a shit... 

Well,  you obviously give a shit or you wouldn’t spend so much time on here moaning about her. 

 

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...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...