The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland


Another crushing defeat

Posted on October 28, 2018 by

From today’s Scottish Mail On Sunday:

Blimey, a “hammering”? Well, we suppose after 14 years in power they’ll have had a good run, so who’s going to replace them as the next Scottish Government?

Oh, the sort of “hammering” where you still win in a canter and have nearly twice as many seats as the next-biggest party, and would be set – despite having to contend with a proportional-representation electoral system – to rack up the longest continuous period of government of any party in the UK (19 years) since the Tories ruled for 21 years from 1807 to 1828. That sort of hammering. Right.

Print Friendly

    451 to “Another crushing defeat”

    1. Q. says:

      And this is being muted as a worst-case scenario? Fake news of the Unionist variety.

    2. Dr Jim says:

      The media will try and try but the people of Scotland would be completely bonkers to remove their protection from London politics by NOT voting SNP

      If we get as far as the next elections my guess is rather than the SNP vote going down as the media hope, it will in all likelyhood go up

      Labour Tory and Lib Dems will co-operate as one party the Greens will co-operate with themselves so it makes total sense the SNP must be first and second choice every time if only to prevent the gridlock of Tory Labour coalition no matter what your personal preference might be or you get Jackson Carlaw as FM and Richard Leonard as deputy

      What a bloody thought

    3. bobajock says:

      Zooooom – the yoonz are spinning them faster that a fast thing from Fasterton.

    4. call me dave says:

      Jings! I was worried there for a moment. 🙂

    5. John Moss says:

      Oh my God..what a headline!

      A wee scary story from wee scary people all in time for Hallowe’en.

      I’m sure there’s more to come 🙂

    6. Gavin says:

      Wow, they can see three years I to the future?

      Do they have the lottery numbers for next weekend? ?

    7. Ian brice says:

      Trouble is it does give the yoons a majority and all the yoons will unite to get the SNP out of power so they can neutralise holyrood for Westminster benifit. It’s nota disaster but it’s also not very good news either

    8. TJenny says:

      bobajock – aye, faster than big bags o’ fast things. No wonder they cannae think straight.

    9. Bob Mack says:

      The Tories favour the rich by claiming only the rich will invest and so must be encouraged to get richer at the expense of everybody who is not rich.

      Labour favours apparent public ownership claiming that it will even out the playing field for the many at the expense of the rich.

      I suppose the truth lies somewhere in between. I have no problem with people making money as long as they are fair to their workers at the same time. I have no problem allowing those in unfortunate circumstances to live in dignity at public expense.

      In my experience only the SNP fulfils this role on these islands. They may be assailed on all sides by jealous or aggrieved opponents, but in truth I for one, a former Labour voter, would always now vote SNP. The others are extremists for one cause or another.

      Independence is very very important to me . Decency and fairness is also up there. I know from my 60 odd years who provides those options the best.

    10. Fred says:

      A very wee slice of cake for the Greens, I thought they were a power in the land tae!

    11. HandandShrimp says:

      So the SNP and Greens could potentially be a couple of votes short of a majority? The real test of whether Labour are anything other than Ruth’s mini me Unionists would be if they sided with Tory policy they claim to hate in order to block the SNP.

    12. Dr Jim says:

      The media keeps going on about obeying the will of the people and yet when the people vote SNP the media keep trying to convince everybody in some magical way that that’s not the will of the people

      See what they mean is we’re all stupid but they haven’t the guts to actually say it because they’d be openly exposed as the biased hypocrites they are

      We’re obviously not stupid though because we don’t buy their newpapers anymore because they stupidly keep writing the same pish calling us stupid

    13. Macart says:

      They might want to watch their blood pressure.

    14. Iain says:

      The most stupid aspect of the article is presenting “2021” in the headline.

      A prediction based on one poll, three years before an election? This is infantile.

    15. HandandShrimp says:

      In other news the nurse that treated McCrae in the Aberdeen ICU says the bullet wound was at the back of the head. I confess I never understood how qualified medical people could have missed a bullet wound to the temple.

      State execution…but I think we all knew that anyway.

    16. Capella says:

      The poll, for the Daily Record, showed Labour up by 5 seats.

      I wonder if the Labour supporting Daily Record and its union supporting editor David Clegg, timed this poll to guage the effect of the much publicised (by the Daily Record and Labour Party) strike for equal pay?

    17. Legerwood says:

      This story or similar seems to be doing the rounds of the newspapers this week-end. The Herald on Sunday has covered it and I think the Daily Record has something on some poll or other.

    18. Welsh Sion says:

      News just in from 07 May 2021

      BLOW TO STURGEON

      Nationalists win Scottish General Election (again).

      Set to form Government (again).

      Sturgeon’s Party biggest Party (again).

      Unionist Parties struggling to make up the numbers (again.) [You’re fired. Ed.]

    19. Roland Smith says:

      I still believe the answer is tor every independence supporter to vote SNP constituency, Green list.

      You can see now that the Britnats are interchangeable between Labour and the Tories in a PR election. We need to be just as smart.

    20. Alex says:

      Literally seconds of thought went into that piece.

      Recall being interviewed by phone post-2014 and firmly asserting my support for Scotland to rule herself. They used some quantitative and qualitative PR processes, and, near the end, I said I would bet they wouldn’t be in touch with me again given my unequivocal belief in Scottish independence.

      And they never did.

      Funny that, eh?

      The point is that results can be skewed any way you wish depending on the questions or if a Likert Scale is being used.

      And that’s why BritNat prophets of doom and gloom for those of us who support democracy should be treated with the utmost suspicion.

    21. Thepnr says:

      I have a real problem in believing these figures.

      Something stinks. I’m calling bullshit on this poll.

    22. John Lamb says:

      I’ve tried the daily mail but always an Andrex roll works better.

    23. It just goes on and on if the unionist media believe they are wining their argument why do they have to go on about it all the time ??? The truth is they know they are losing the argument but are as usual in selfe denial they live in their fantasy little world trying to hold back Scottish FREEDOM

    24. mr thms says:

      Elections were devolved in the Scotland Act 2016. The method for selecting List MSPs could change by then.

      For example, the current system uses ‘Regional’ voting for the election of List MSPs.

      The next election could change that method to ‘National’ voting.

    25. Illy says:

      “Roland Smith says:
      28 October, 2018 at 12:13 pm

      I still believe the answer is tor every independence supporter to vote SNP constituency, Green list.”

      List vote says who you want for government. So that makes no sense whatsoever.

      Can we not start this pish again please?

    26. Ken500 says:

      Do not vote anything but SNP/SNP. Their vote share could go up further. Never trust anyone else. Their lies and duplicity. They will renege. Just SNP/SNP for good governance. Vote for Independence. To have a prosperous, more equal, fair, happy and cohesive Gov and country. Vote SNP/SNP. They need the majority. Even if they don’t get it. Will be the same in any case. It needs SNP/SNP to get over the line.

      How anyone believes being in a unionist Party or voting for a unionist Party will give them Independence. It is just delusional. They oppose with a venom of hard core ignorance and incompetence and irrationality. Not having the confidence to run their own economy.

      Like Margo said, ‘Just inform one person to the cause’ . Independence is won. Can’t wait for that day to come.

      This is a Poll for three years hence. No doubt manipulated. To influence the vote. No one has a crystal ball in any case. Just an irrelevant joke. Trying to manipulate folk.

      D’Hond’t is a joke. The electorate does not even know how it works. Neither does anyone else. Encourages folk to vote for someone else other than their preference. A complicated system. To give the unionists unfair advantage. Just as was intended but not reflect the views of the electorate. The 3rd rate loser wins. The list. The voters can’t get rid of people they can’t stand the sight of. Back they come of the list, smirking all the way. They can’t believe their luck of incompetence and useless ignorance. Dragged off the street.

    27. Peter A Bell says:

      It is foolish to be complacent about the implications of a seat projection which gives the British parties an overall majority while the very real threat looms of a British Nationalist ‘grand coalition’ justified by the need to ‘save’ Scotland from the ‘threat’ of getting the government it just voted for.

      The entire strategy of the British parties in Scotland is currently geared, not to winning power for either British Labour or their Tory allies, but to defeating the hated SNP and getting back to ‘normal’ British politics. The British parties are not seeking to take votes from the SNP. They know this to be a forlorn hope. The intention is to maximise the effectiveness of tactical voting so as to engineer a situation which favours, or at least facilitates, a grand coalition of British parties.

      With 68 seats taken by Unionists, this will be claimed as a vote for the Union.

      The Scottish Greens are the backup. Should some permutation of British parties not suffice, the Greens will be lured with the offer of a ministerial post or two. Please don’t suppose them to be incapable of rationalising such a betrayal.

      Remember the mantra of British Nationalism – THE UNION AT ANY COST!

    28. Richard McHarg says:

      On these figures, we could be looking at a coalition of Labour and the Toraidhs, unless something very sensible happens in the meantime.

    29. Thepnr says:

      Survation have already completed two polls this month. One for the Sunday Post with fieldwork between 28th September and 2nd October.

      The other for the SNP with fieldwork between the 3rd-5th October.

      https://www.survation.com/archive/2018-2/

      The Daily Record results are here. http://archive.fo/AXGLA

      For the constituency vote with undecided removed, the results are:

      Sunday Post SNP 42.7%
      SNP poll has SNP 44.4%
      Daily Record SNP 38%

      For the list vote:

      Sunday Post SNP 32.2%
      SNP poll has SNP 39.7%
      Daily Record SNP 32%

      Ignore the polls. He who pays the piper calls the tune it seems.

    30. Richard Hunter says:

      I do feel that the Green party is beginning to outstay its welcome. In England, I’ve normally voted Green, but not once have I ever received any election literature from them nor being visited by any canvassers. In short, they seem to be completely invisible. I’ve even thought about joining the local party just to try and kick them into shape.

      It seems to be the same across the world. In the USA for example, despite Jill Stein’s success in Presidential elections, they seem to have no strategy for either campaigning on issues or for elections. They benefit from voters desperate for a progressive third party and lots of coverage from the media that wants something else to mix things up a bit.

      It’s disappointing, and the conclusion I draw is that they really aren’t that motivated. I hate to vote Labour or the Lib Dems in England but neither do I want to give my vote to a party that doesn’t seem to want to earn it.

    31. dakk says:

      British State sponsored’local democracy’ reporting at it’s best from the ‘Scottish’ Mail on Sunday.

      I’ll stick to honest,fair and accurate journalism from Wings over Scotland thanks very much.

    32. mr thms says:

      Article 50 is part of the Treaty of Lisbon and it allows a current member state to leave the EU, and following its dissolution for its successor states to rejoin the EU under Article 49 under ‘transitional areangements’.

      The transitional arrangements for the UK end on the 31st December 2020.

      It is possible for Scotland to become independent on the 6th April 2020, the 700th Anniversary of the Declaration of Arbroath.

      That would give Scotland several months whereby the UK negotiates with the EU the the terms for the successor states rejoining.

      So, by the time of the next election Scotland could independent.

    33. Ken500 says:

      By 2021 the Herald and the Daily Record could be gone. Quite likely. They are determined to ruin their own industry and lead to their own demise. Another Independence newspaper might be giving more realistic Polls. Or Scotland might be Independent by then. Another circumstance entirely.

      The Herald will definitely be gone. The National will have surpass it. The Daily Record will be in dire states by them. No doubt. They will not be able to peddle their nonsense anymore.

    34. Capella says:

      It’s always worth checking out James Kelly – Scot Goes Pop -whenever a poll is published. He identifies a couple of issues with this poll i.e. not comparing like with like and possible sampling differences, as an explanation for the unjustified claims.

      The truth is out there, but not as we know it.

      http://scotgoespop.blogspot.com/2018/10/snp-with-12-point-holyrood-lead-in-new.html

    35. Ottomanboi says:

      ‘We are better off as part of the UK’……may those who believe that live long enough to gravely regret it.
      I consider we need the equivalent of a strategic baseball bat to deal with this thick skulled blockage in our body politic. We’ve been just too nice, too honest, too much into playing by the BritState rules. Enough!

    36. Doug McGregor says:

      All I see is Conlab having 58 , that along with the LibDums 10 is a majority Unionist government. Cos that’s the way it works in Scotland , unionists get three bites at the cherry. Is there some way we could have SNP red and SNP blue to cover all angles of the electorate?

    37. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      The Labour figure in this poll is completely ludicrous.

      An “Independence Coalition” should be formed to contest list seats.

    38. starlaw says:

      By 2021 a helluva water will hae gone under a helluva loat oh bridges, We could all be living in a different country, a country without unionist parties. Roll on the day.

    39. Dan Huil says:

      But but but, British nationalists vowed that devolution would kill the Scottish independence movement “stone dead”.

    40. galamcennalath says:

      Presumably given the result shown, the Lib-Lab-Con Party aka the Unpopular Front against the Liberation of Scotland, would form the government.

      Sad to say, but that would be an UTTER DISASTER!

    41. Ken500 says:

      Just wait till Brexit happens. Implosion at the Daily Record and Herald. All the non Dom tax evaded MSM will be going berserk. The BBC in high pitch alarm at breaking point. Imagine the squeals of the pigs at Westminster. Fancy their bacon will be gone into the fat fryer. The Tories will be on their bikes followed by the other squealers. Imagine the fall in the £pound. The UK/world economy trashed again by Westminster ignorant incompetent. The usual ten year cycle of Westminster bile of total ignorance.

    42. Thepnr says:

      @Capella

      Thanks for the link to Scot Goes Pop, I should have went there first.

    43. Cubby says:

      You would be as well reading the Beano or the the Dandy than reading any of the propaganda, foreign owned, so called newspapers in Scotland.

      Scotland is treated like a colony by Westminster.

    44. CameronB Brodie says:

      These fuds must have a pretty low opinion of their intended customers. Or are they simply flawed characters who are blind to their misdeeds? Whatever, they’re undermining democracy in Scotland.

      Professional Identity and Roles of Journalists

      Summary and Keywords

      The study of journalists’ professional roles is a principal avenue to understand journalism’s identity and place in society. From the perspective of discursive institutionalism, one could argue that journalistic roles have no true “essence”; they exist as part of a wider framework of meaning—of a discourse. At the core of this discourse is journalism’s identity and locus in society. As structures of meaning, journalistic roles set the parameters of what is desirable in the institutional context of journalism: they are subject to discursive (re)creation, (re)interpretation, appropriation, and contestation. In other words, the discourse of journalistic roles is the central arena where journalistic culture and identity is reproduced and contested; it is the place where the struggle over the preservation or transformation of journalism’s identity takes place.

      Journalists articulate and enact journalistic roles on two analytically distinct levels: role orientations (normative and cognitive) and role performance (practiced and narrated). The four categories of journalistic roles—normative, cognitive, practiced, and narrated roles—correspond to conceptually distinct ideas: what journalists ought to do, what they want to do, what they really do in practice, and what they think they do.

      Normative roles encompass generalized and aggregate expectations that journalists believe are deemed desirable in society. Most normative roles of journalists are derived from a view that emphasizes journalism’s (potential) contribution to the proper workings of democracy….

      http://communication.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228613-e-95

      Uses of democratic theory in media and communication studies
      http://www.scielo.mec.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1646-59542013000300001

      Handbook of Critical Policy Studies
      Handbooks of Research on Public Policy series

      Chapter 9: Discursive institutionalism: understanding policy in context

      Discursive institutionalism is an umbrella concept for approaches that concern themselves with the substantive content of ideas and the interactive processes of discourse in institutional context. This chapter shows the relevance of discursive institutionalism to policy studies in a critical vein by considering both the wide range of ideas in discourse and the ways in which ‘sentient’ (thinking and speaking) agents articulate such ideas as policy actors in a ‘coordinative discourse’ of policy construction and as political actors in a ‘communicative discourse’ of political legitimation.

      The chapter also elaborates on the dual nature of the institutional context by considering not just the external formalized institutions that constrain action but also the structures and constructs of meaning. These help explain not only how agents are able to create and maintain institutions via their ‘background ideational abilities’ but also how they change or maintain institutions via their ‘foreground discursive abilities’ of communication. But although meaning is socially constructed, the chapter builds on the work of Wittgenstein to show that this does not lead to radical relativism because knowledge comes with different kinds of certainty. Finally, the chapter also theorizes about the nature of the power of ideas, in particular through discourse.

      https://www.elgaronline.com/view/9781783472345.00016.xml

    45. Marcia says:

      And if the next poll has an increase in SNP voting support will we see front page headlines?

    46. Andy-B says:

      I’m just surprised how well we’ve done, and how long the SNP have been in government, especially with the media (excluding the National newspaper and other magazines such as IScot) being vehemently against us.

      Of course in part it’s no small thanks to people like you Rev, and social media.

    47. Ian Foulds says:

      This is presuming we are still shackled to Westminster by then?

      It probably helps us focus greater efforts on being on our own and, if not by then, focus on trouncing these self serving Unionist parties with a 1st, 2nd Place vote at the election.

    48. Ken500 says:

      Does anyone really believe Labour up five seats? They really are having a laugh. More like to oblivion. Wishful thinking. Or guess work. Or the Tories. Their fall from grace could be even harder then is contemplated.

      Three years with the elderly keeling over and the young folk coming on board. Definately not taken into the equation. SNP/Independence up 10%+ Demographics.

      The Indyref will be won by those who never vote. The 30%. They will decide. So these Polls are irrelevant on that scale.

    49. Nigel says:

      2021 election? Three years’ away. Lots of water to flow under that particular bridge in that time…BREXIT being the first Tsunami to hit.

      Wait until the New Year – get the Christmas hype and the NY sales out of the way. Suddenly, BREXIT won’t be ‘next year’ but more immediate in peoples minds and during the January blues too.

    50. Arthur thomson says:

      Yet another example of Corbyn’s Labour using media spin to undermine the independence movement.

      As much as I detest the Tories for deliberately destroying the lives of the vulnerable, I have even less respect for Labour before and since Corbyn for colluding in the process. Their goa! is to destroy the SNP by coalition. They are completely aware that this will adversely affect the lives of the vulnerable but they don’t care because, to them, the vulnerable are no more than the suckers they use to their own ends – exactly as the Tories view them.

      The only hope of avoiding this lies in individual Scots throwing off their slave mentality. It is precisely because Wing exposes and rejects the slave mentality that it is so hated by the Britnats – especially Corbyn’s .

    51. Gordon Forrest says:

      So if all the yoons stick together and if labour manage to rise again from their coffin and if the lib dums join with the tories totally forgetting what happened last time they did they will give the meedya what they crave for…. Ruthie as first minister! no I dont think so! plus look at the embarrasment they would have as minister for social security fol just aint that dumb politically anymore!

    52. John Gowrie says:

      The Indy parties better get a move on if they want indy2 because if they wait any longer they lose control of the parliament on these figures. Or is that what especially the SNP want ?

    53. Robert Peffers says:

      @Andy-B says: 28 October, 2018 at 1:09 pm:

      ” … I’m just surprised how well we’ve done, and how long the SNP have been in government, especially with the media (excluding the National newspaper and other magazines such as IScot) being vehemently against us.”

      Let me pose a question – If the SNP had adopted the oft claimed policy here on Wings by certain commenters of lowering their high standards to match those of every other party in Scotland, including the Greens, and been attempting to kick the guts out of the Unionists, and so justified the, oft heard claim on Scottish doorsteps, of, “Aw they bliddy politicians ir the same”, would the SNP have stayed in power for so long?

      Say what you like but the proof is that a majority of voters see the SNP as honest, reliable and with Scotland’s best interests at heart.

    54. Thepnr says:

      @Gordon Forrest

      Ruthie as first minister! no I dont think so! plus look at the embarrasment they would have as minister for social security…

      When you put it like that, Ruthie and then Michelle Ballantyne as Minister for Social Security. Oh my God! LOL

    55. Dr Jim says:

      The Green party can never be a government or anything even close to it so what is their function, well it’s to oppose the government, in the exact same way as the Lib Dems which exposes the lie that somehow the Greens are an asset, they’re not

      Don’t allow people to start this con trick all over again

      There’s a time and place for more parties in Holyrood and that’s after Independence when it might make a difference not vote splitting before it

    56. orri says:

      D’Honey isn’t that hard to understand.

      If it wasn’t for there being a constituency vote it’d be far easier.

      Suppose you have only one seat to allocate. Then simply give it to the party with the most votes.

      However suppose you add a seat. Then your first thought I’d give it to the party who came second.

      Hold on a minute, what if the party that came first got more than twice as many votes than the one in second place? Under D’Hondt you check, you compare the number of votes they need per seat with the party in second place.

      As each seat is added you ask the same question. Which party if they were allocated this seat would have the highest average vote per each seat.

      You could as easily just pick a number based on the number of votes cast divided by seats as a starting point and lower it until all seats are allocated.

      It’s simply one of many ways of finding a tariff per seat.

      The advantage is that D’Hondt can be started with seats already given out which is ideal for Holyrood. Although it does mask those times when a party has already gained as many, if not more, seats than it’d get on a purely proportional share of the regional vote.

      That last point is important when proposing doing away with the regions. A second point of proposing a solely national list is the loss of regional links for some parties. For instance if the main support for a minority party is in the highlands but their MSP comes from the central belt.

      Added to which weather has an effect on turnout so you’d have a parliament biased towards where the sun shone. Random climactic variation on a single day isn’t a sound basis for deciding something for the next 5 years.The

      A possible replacement might be an STV with constituency MSPs still determined on the first round but additional members added by voters giving a preference either to a party or candidate.

    57. frogesque says:

      We could be hit by chuffin’ big space rock before 2021 that would make the dinasaor barbecue look like a teddy bear’s picknic but I dont see that making politically motivated headlines.

      Methinks someone is afraid, very, very afraid.

    58. Marie Clark says:

      Dear god, a poll projecting voting intentions for 2021. REALLY.

      Remember with polls, he who pays the piper calls the tune.

      Who amongst us knows where we will be next January, never mind 2021. Things could look very different by then, we may be facing another EU ref, or a GE, or mabye even indyref 2. Nobody, but nobody knows the answer to any of it do they. God forbid we do get the britnats forming a coalition at Holyrood, I would have great fears for this country. But, we have to wait and see, hopefully we’ll have voted for independence by then.

      As for this pish with voting for the Greens, just don’t blooming start that again, just don’t.

    59. Mike says:

      Are we still referring to Tory party communication spin doctor wannabes as Main stream media?

      Hm. Doesn’t that just encourage them to continue to butcher news and grind it into mince?

    60. Muscleguy says:

      @Mr thms

      I have long agreed, the regional list thing was always set up to work against the SNP as their vote was distributed way back in ’98. New Zealand does not have regional lists just one National List. The party bigwigs are always top banana, just in case, though they almost always win their seats, a bit like Nicola Sturgeon.

      Mind you we the people pretty much imposed that on unwilling pollies by petition and then two referenda. Cowed and afraid of us they acceded. Contrast that with the UK’s design by smoke filled room. The problem is the political class in the UK is not afraid of the supine populace.

    61. Referendum1707 says:

      Cubby 12.59

      Ahem, Scotland IS a colony.

      For the time being at least.

    62. Dr Jim says:

      Just look at the newspaper headline, that tells you everything you need to know, notice how it’s NOT SNP could face hammering it’s *Nationalists* because that word means Baad

      Scottish National team is good English National team is good
      but a Scottish National politician is Baad because they’ve added an *ist*

    63. Thepnr says:

      @Dr Jim

      Good point, the attempt at brainwashing of the public never stops.

    64. Athanasius says:

      On that showing, the unionist party would have 69 seats, albeit divided among its three administrative units.

    65. Clootie says:

      Now this isn’t very scientific but my gut tells me that the LibDems and Labour are never going to gain those seats.
      I put no value in a poll this far out and with the Independence arguement just building afresh a lot can change.
      Unionist media will try hard to deliver it but I have faith that more and more of my fellow Scots will start to see through their propaganda.

    66. Clootie says:

      @Roland Smith

      No Thanks. I will not support a Party that puts THEIR success before Independence Have you looked at their behaviour recently?
      When they finally wake up to the fact that Independence comes FIRST and that is how we build a better Scotland.

    67. HandandShrimp says:

      A poll three years before the election date doesn’t tell us much other than the SNP are still by far the most popular party despite being midway through a third term. The big story from the numbers above is that Ruthie is no longer the official opposition. However, like others I would take the Labour gains with a pinch of salt. Three years is a lot of time for more Labour foot shooting.

    68. ScottieDog says:

      “On that showing, the unionist party would have 69 seats, albeit divided among its three administrative units.”

      Which is why we need to get more pro-indy candidates amongst the list vote. Dilute the lib-lab-Tory pact.

    69. Clootie says:

      Now Dave McEwan Hill’s proposal I could support fully. It should not be difficult for the SNP/Greens to allocate selected candidates on the list with alternate SNP/Green ranking in one region and Green/SNP in another…It would give the Greens seats (and the SNP). However I have encountered too many Greens who always see Independenceas as secondary…this is not something you find with SNP voters.

      Trust me – I want to contribute to saving the planet but it easier as a nation to implement those policies.

      I have always thought that we should align under ONE Party banner until Independence was achieved. After that I don’t care how many parties form at Holyrood.

      I like Dave’s idea…I just don’t see the evidence from the Greens that they could get onboard.

    70. Dr Jim says:

      Maybe we should advertise the SNP as the party who wants to keep Indian curries Chinese takeaways Polish meatballs German sausage Turkish & Greek kebabs Italian ham French baguettes Spanish chorizo and the people who came here to introduce us to those delights and hang around till all hours of the night to cook it for us to earn a living so their kids can grow up to be our Doctors and Nurses our Carers when we’re old and the taxpapyers we need to fund ourselves in these endeavours

      Vote SNP the party who actually likes people

      You have to laugh at all these football nutters who’s teams are full of folk from countries they don’t want anything to do with

    71. Rock says:

      “Oh, the sort of “hammering” where you still win in a canter and have nearly twice as many seats as the next-biggest party

      SNP 52 + Greens 9 = 61

      Labour 29 + Tories 29 + LibDems 10 = 68

      Hammering or not, Scotland can forget about independence for the next 622 years.

      Does any poster have the guts to go on the record and state that there will definitely be an independence referendum before Brexit has been completed?

    72. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      Actually, a result like this one is probably what the BritNat coalition would prefer most. It would stymie any future indyref while leaving the SNP in office to carry the “mitigation” can, so they can avoid any responsibility for what their favoured London government imposes.

      As we’ve seen with the GCC equal-pay farrago, the name of their game is avoiding the blame.

    73. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      This of course is all pish and referring to the likely result in an election years away on the basis of a poll printed in the Mail on Sunday today is even more pish than usual.

      Nice to see Rock providing the Sunday entertainment.

    74. Les Wilson says:

      Polls, to my knowledge are all english based entities,they are and will be used as a drop in SNP popularity.
      I do not think we should take them too seriously, yet with some they think they are always correct and are always fair on how they operate.

      Huh? They are English and as such based down south as they are, the will not show accurate figures due to polling questions and how they gather their “facts” to produce the poll. I hardly think they will show any allegiance of fairness to Scots or SNP at all. Expect some weird results as things progress towards Indy2.

    75. Thepnr says:

      Lets have a Wings Independence Party stand for the list seats. Put the Rev as No 1 on the list of course, then Nana and Rock for the sake of balance LOL

    76. schrodingers cat says:

      the issue of tactical voting is confused with who to actually vote for

      eg, in 7 out of the 8 regions the snp won one list msp. i repeat…..one

      it cant be beyond the bounds of the arithmetic abilities of those on this thread to understand that if the yes supporters could back a tactical vote then this number would increase.

      the problem is the greens. i campaigned for an snp1green2 vote in the last election in fife and mid scotland. of the 7 list seats available, the snp won none and the greens won 1 and the unionists the remaining 6

      point of arithmatic, had all those who voted green on the list in this region voted snp, the unionists woukld have won all 7.

      but i would hardly call winning one seat out of the 7 (for an indy supporting green candidate) a huge success. Indeed, i considered it an abject failure.

      vote snp1green2 failed last time and will fail again next time. the indy supporters dont trust the greens probably with good reason

      that doesnt mean that tactical voting wouldnt work, one snp msp out of a possible 49 is an irrefutable statistic, for it to work you would need a group of people that the indy supporters trusted with their list vote.

      this rules out the greens. I joked with yesindyref2 (dadsarmy) that we should set up a new party called SNP2 🙂

    77. Dr Jim says:

      The North Scotrean press

      Everybody will sing God save the Queen wear a Poppy or you’re unpatriotic and deserve to die and hate who we tell you to hate…..but defo not the Saudis no way Nooo

    78. Rock says:

      Dave McEwan Hill says:
      28 October, 2018 at 4:16 pm

      “Nice to see Rock providing the Sunday entertainment.”

      For the record, I can say with 100% confidence that cautious Establishment lawyer Nicola does not have the guts to defy Saint Theresa and hold an illegal independence referendum without Westminster’s permission before Brexit has been completed.

      Do you have the guts to go on the record and state that there will definitely be an independence referendum before Brexit has been completed?

      No guts no independence.

      Why else would Scotland still be a colony of England after 311 years when the poorest African countries became independent decades ago?

    79. schrodingers cat says:

      Thepnr says:
      Lets have a Wings Independence Party stand for the list seats. Put the Rev as No 1 on the list of course

      I would vote for that party on the list

    80. Hamish100 says:

      rock and St Theresa== never seen them in the same room.

      Case proved. ROCK+TROLL= BOT

    81. Rock says:

      Scotland could and should have been an independent country long before 2021 if only Nicola had some guts.

      Rock (27th August 2017 – “Underneath the Goodyear blimp”):

      “Scotland was on the verge of independence immediately after the Brexit vote.

      The unionist parties were without leaders and completely lost, the SNP had 56 out of 59 MPs and 50% of the vote, the EU’s eyes were (favourably) on Scotland.

      But Nicola squandered a once in a 1000 years golden opportunity by wasting more than a year flogging a dead horse – a separate deal for Scotland which was never going to happen.

      The result: Nicola outsmarted by the collusion between Saints Theresa and Ruth on one hand, and Corbyn on the other, fall in SNP support from 50% to 37%.

      It is my prediction that there will be a “snap” Brexit and the SNP will be caught napping and unable to hold a second independence referendum.

      Or another “snap” Westminster election with the SNP again losing support.

      Despite the pretendy “sovereignty” and boasting of the clueless pompous armchair pundits posting here, Scotland is again as far away from independence as ever.

      If they succeed in neutralising the Rev. Stuart Campbell and WOS, independence will be “stone dead” for at least 620 years.”

      Challenge to the usual suspects:

      Does a single one of you have the guts to go on the record and state that there will definitely be an independence referendum before Brexit has been completed?

    82. schrodingers cat says:

      Does any poster have the guts to go on the record and state that there will definitely be an independence referendum before Brexit has been completed?

      im not sure i know what you mean by “before Brexit has been completed” …….. hint, nor does anyone else at the moment, but if you mean by 29/03/19, i think it is highly unlikely that indyref2 will happen before then

    83. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Anybody who doe not have a copy of today’s Sunday National should dash out and get one before the shops close. It is a keeper. Today’s front story blows apart the always untenable story of Willie MacCrae’s “suicide” and, should it be correct prove not only was he murdered which is important enough but that the establishment quite deliberately covered up his murder which is much worse. And even worse still – and very likely – that elements in the establishment were behind his murder.

    84. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Rock at 4.25

      “Why else would Scotland still be a colony of England after 311 years when the poorest African countries became independent decades ago?”

      Because the “poorest African countries” had nothing much for the imperial UK to steal anymore,you dumbo

    85. Thepnr says:

      I can smell your fear and desperation from here Rock hahahaha

    86. orri says:

      I voted SNP/SNP but there was always a possibility that the smart ticket was SNP/Green. The problem is that you can’t tell until after the vote. Certainly if the SNP won a regional seat then my vote was the way to go.

      Self evidently the Greens have their own agenda. Also beware of assuming that every SNP/Green vote is automatically an SNP supporter, it could be a Green.

      Also due to the D’Hondt system the party with the last allocated seat is the one with no wasted votes according to that tariff. There’s still a possibility they might have gained it with less votes. That means every other party has excess votes that might be sufficient in one combination or another to meet the tariff. On a bad day that could mean one less than the number of parties involved. So 3 unionist parties risk losing 2 seats against 2 Indy parties losing 1. Probably not a clear cut given there’s more chance of the last seat going to one of those 3. A 3rd Indy party loses that advantage.

    87. schrodingers cat says:

      i think the issue of tactical voting in the next holyrood election can wait, it is years away. we have more immediate pressing issues, a general election very soon i believe, and in that election it must be snp all the way

    88. Frazerio says:

      Read the headline again folks, they didnt specify whit type of nationalist. Should read ‘British Nationalists could face hammering…”

    89. schrodingers cat says:

      orri says:
      A 3rd Indy party loses that advantage.
      ———-

      my point about tactical voting is you need enough people to back the idea. that didnt happen (in any big way) with the greens last time and i doubt it will happen with the greens next time. the vast majority of yes supporters simply dont trust them.

      thats the point about tatical voting, or indeed voting of any description. trust. without it, you lose.

      so here’s a test, can we even get a majority on this thread to agree?

      if in your region (not the south obviously) would you give your list vote to a group of people standing for a yes alliance?

      1. stu campell
      2. peter bell.
      3. james kelly
      4. a.n.other

    90. Anne Meikle says:

      Can anyone seriously rule out a grand unionist coalition just to keep out the SNP and the chance of another referendum (if we’ve not had it by then). Tests underway already in Councils across Scotland.

    91. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      These polls and the distribution of Ruthie questionaire’s all round the country make me suspect we have another “snap” General Election as a possibility

    92. galamcennalath says:

      Tactical voting … spit 🙁

      In 2011 the SNP got 0.9m votes, in 2016 it was 1m.

      At the 2014 referendum Yes got 1.6m. And 1.5m in the 2015 GE.

      What we need is for everyone who believes in Indy to get off their arses and vote SNP in the constituency, then the pro-Indy party of their choice in the region.

      Politics in Scotland is about getting votes out. Unfortunately the the Tories are getting good at motivating their smaller support.

    93. schrodingers cat says:

      Anne Meikle says:
      28 October, 2018 at 5:01 pm
      Can anyone seriously rule out a grand unionist coalition just to keep out the SNP
      ———–

      nope

      ———-

      @gala

      yes, GOTV is always key, but the unionist are able to vote tactically in constituency votes to keep out the snp. why cant we vote tactically on the list?

    94. Rock says:

      Dave McEwan Hill says:
      28 October, 2018 at 4:40 pm

      “Rock at 4.25

      “Why else would Scotland still be a colony of England after 311 years when the poorest African countries became independent decades ago?”

      Because the “poorest African countries” had nothing much for the imperial UK to steal anymore,you dumbo”

      More likely that their people were not as dumb and gutless as a majority of the “sovereign” Scots.

      The “imperial UK” was thrown out from everywhere, it did not leave voluntarily from anywhere.

      Did any African country have an independence referendum?

      If Scotland still has much to steal from, only the most stupid people on earth would have voted No in an independence referendum.

      Apart from a couple, the clueless pompous armchair pundits posting here don’t even have the guts to go on the record and state that there will definitely be an independence referendum before Brexit has been completed.

    95. Gary45% says:

      Two blokes sitting in the pub, one of them says he is having trouble lighting his coal fire, the other one asks, what are you doing? the guy says I am rolling up pages of old newspapers tightly as fire starters just as my grandfather told me, the other guy asks which papers are you using? The guy says most of the Daily/Sunday newspapers you buy in the shops.
      Ah Ha says the guy, that’s your problem, don’t you know
      Sh*te doesn’t burn.

    96. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      Surely the fact that comes out from every poll, no matter how unreliable otherwise, and every actual result heretofore, is that the SNP vote is always lower in the lists than in the constituencies.

      It would be interesting to know how that mismatch comes about, but one obvious step forward is to disabuse people from the all-too-common notion (even expressed upthread) that the damned list provides some kind of “alternative” or “second chance” vote.

      Whereas in fact, since it is only the list votes which determine the composition of Parliament, it has a crucial influence on the composition of the Scottish Government.

      That having been said, I still trust in IR2 being called well before 2021 (whatever Alex Neil may hope or think) and I believe we can win it.

      (After which we will hopefully exterminate the damned two-vote monster, and the whole issue becomes moot.)

    97. Rock says:

      schrodingers cat says:
      28 October, 2018 at 4:32 pm

      “but if you mean by 29/03/19, i think it is highly unlikely that indyref2 will happen before then”

      So you think indyref2 might happen after the UK is out of the EU and Scotland is at the mercy of Westminster?

      And you think Yes will have a chance of winning it?

    98. Rock says:

      Thepnr says:
      28 October, 2018 at 4:44 pm

      “I can smell your fear and desperation from here Rock hahahaha”

      Which genuine Scottish independence supporter would not feel desperate knowing that the gutless Nicola is not going to hold an independence referendum before Brexit has been completed and Scotland is at the mercy of Westminster?

    99. schrodingers cat says:

      Robert J. Sutherland says:
      since it is only the list votes which determine the composition of Parliament, it has a crucial influence on the composition of the Scottish Government.
      ———

      correct, in 7 of the 8 regions, the snp won one list msp, the greens won 4.

      the unionists won 44

      thats because yes supporters wouldnt back the greens in sufficient numbers

      if there was an alternative which was supported by the majority of yes supporters, it could easily become the opposition. relegating the tories to the cheap seats at the back along with the libdems and greens

      the only real question is trust, who would yes supports trust enough to give them their list vote?

      i think it is time the rev gave up his self imposed exile to return to scotland

    100. Rock says:

      Anne Meikle says:
      28 October, 2018 at 5:01 pm

      “Can anyone seriously rule out a grand unionist coalition just to keep out the SNP and the chance of another referendum (if we’ve not had it by then).”

      Rule out?

      I can rule it in with 100% confidence.

      That is their sole aim – get the SNP out – and they will use all available means, legal and illegal, to succeed in achieving their aim.

      Nicola squandered a once in a 1000 years golden opportunity to win independence and despite the pretendy “sovereignty” and boasting of the clueless pompous armchair pundits posting here, Scotland is again as far away from independence as ever.

      Less than six months before the UK is out of the EU, the usual suspects can’t even dare anticipate indyref2 before it happens.

    101. Mogabee says:

      As a genuine Scottish indy supporter, personally my dearest Rock you are boring the rest of us silly. Be constructive, be critical but being unreasonable gets you nowhere.

    102. Dr Jim says:

      You’ve gotta laugh *The gutless Nicola Sturgeon* crap from a wee gutless coward who can do nothing but troll the internet with a secret identity hoping folk don’t find out who he is his sole ambition being to annoy folk he wouldn’t dare to do in public because he and his like are the actual gutless ones

      A pathetic wee gutless Nyaff

    103. galamcennalath says:

      Talk of Brexit plan B.

      ‘Norway’ with a time limit until trade deal is worked out.

      Why is that different from a transition period of ‘business as usual’, with the possibility of an extension, until a trade deal is worked out?

      Sounds like repackaging the same piggy in a different poke.

    104. schrodingers cat says:

      Robert J. Sutherland says:

      It would be interesting to know how that mismatch comes about, but one obvious step forward is to disabuse people from the all-too-common notion (even expressed upthread) that the damned list provides some kind of “alternative” or “second chance” vote.
      —————–
      in fife and mid scotland the unionists won 6 out of the 7 list seats. the greens won one

      even if all those who voted green on the list in this region had voted snp………the unionists would have won all 7

      fact. the numbers dont lie

      —————

      (After which we will hopefully exterminate the damned two-vote monster, and the whole issue becomes moot.)
      ———

      the snp would still need to fight a holyrood election using this system after a yes in indyref2
      so tactical voting in the next holyrood election, to stop a unionist coalition stopping or reversing a yes vote in indyref2, will still be required.

    105. sassenach says:

      Dr Jim says @ 5-44pm

      Excellent post.

      Could we all start referring to ” the gutless Rock” ?

    106. Frank says:

      @Dave McEwan Hill. 4.40 About colonial freedoms.

      From Hansard, 21st. Feb 1946.
      Aneurin Bevan says, “ I am not prepared to sacrifice the British Empire because I know that if the British Empire fell it would mean the standard of living of our constituents would fall considerably”

      So we can see how the Labour Party has always regarded the well-being of us ‘colonials’.

    107. ahundredthidiot says:

      Ken500 at 12:44 pm says

      ‘By 2021 the Herald and the Daily Record could be gone’

      ……if we’re no independent by 2021, I’ll BE F**KING GONE!!

    108. CameronB Brodie says:

      “More likely that their people were not as dumb and gutless as a majority of the “sovereign” Scots.”

      A goldfish is the last to become aware that water exists, or something. It’s not easy to see the colonial nature of the nation you have grown up in, especially when your national culture is interwoven with that of your ‘coloniser’. Then there’s the BBC in Scotland, who are charter bound to pimp British nationalism. So it is not easy to spot the fact, let alone accept, Westminster does not value the basic human rights of Scottish residents.

      What moral foundations are British constitutionalism and Parliamentary sovereignty based on? Since when does Scots law allow English law to disrupt and supersede the international rule of law? Why am I unable to access my inalienable human “Right to Development”? Oh yeah, narcissistic, paternalistic, cognitively bound, British/English nationalism.

      Scottish lawyers need to step up to the plate, IMHO, or they might get done for false advertising.

    109. schrodingers cat says:

      @cam
      A goldfish is the last to become aware that water exists, or something

      ———-

      lol
      a bird in the hand gathers no moss, or something

    110. Bill Hume says:

      2021?…..at least one GE before then (probably quite soon).

    111. ahundredthidiot says:

      sassenach at 5:48 pm
      Dr Jim says @ 5-44pm
      Excellent post.
      Could we all start referring to ” the gutless Rock” ?

      Entitled to your opinion of course, and so is a 13 year old school girl ganging up on ugly kid with her stuck up mates.

      Rock is what he is, you don’t need to agree, but maybe just get on with it without the immaturity. Another poor post at 5:44 from Dr Jim I hasten to add.

      Cue the vengeance – suggest it starts with ‘nasty’ or includes ‘nasties’.

    112. schrodingers cat says:

      79 mins
      GOAL Aberdeen 1-0 Rangers

      i doubt the rev is reading this thread

      🙂

    113. geeo says:

      It’s as if they have forgotten that the SNP Scotsgov already have a mandate to hold indyref2 anytime they like BEFORE 2021.

    114. CameronB Brodie says:

      schrodingers cat
      Too many cooks skinning cats and gifting horses. 😉

    115. Bob Mack says:

      Rock is an interesting study. He or she has obviously had a judgement of court against them at some point and felt aggrieved. I would guess a letter to Nicola then followed on and Rock was told that nothing could be done.

      The level of venom towards legal services and lawyers ,of which Nicola is one. Cue resentment all round to anyone that supports Nicola. She was too gutless to help him or her,so she will be gutless for indy, and all who support her will be gutless too. Right Rock?

      Anger often leads to lack of reason.

    116. crazycat says:

      @ Robert J Sutherland at 5.23

      … the SNP vote is always lower in the lists than in the constituencies.

      It would be interesting to know how that mismatch comes about, but one obvious step forward is to disabuse people from the all-too-common notion (even expressed upthread) that the damned list provides some kind of “alternative” or “second chance” vote.

      It’s worth disabusing people in any case, but surely the fact that there are parties which are (voluntarily) mostly or entirely confined to the list, forcing their supporters to make another choice in the constituencies, is at least as big a factor?

    117. schrodingers cat says:

      CameronB Brodie says:

      Too many cooks skinning cats …………

      ouch

      the cows are coming home to roost now 🙂

    118. Cactus says:

      Nice bday present you got there from the Dons, Rev 🙂

      Another crushing defeat, for the Rangers.

      Scotland X.

    119. schrodingers cat says:

      dons 1 rangers 0

      the rev will be in a good mood now
      is it time to ask him to come home?

    120. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      schrodingers cat @ 17:46,

      If I recall correctly, I think that you have previously conceded that this region of “yours” is not typical of most of the others. At the last ScotGE, I tended to agree with you that a tactical vote, in some well-chosen places, would be a better pro-indy option. Now I’m not so sure.

      Of course, once you have “hoovered-up” most or all of the constituencies in a region, it gets much harder anyway to win through on the list as well. But was it possibly the case last time round that the SNP didn’t do as well in the list even where they didn’t get all the constituencies?

      I suppose it depends on how the support falls. If there are many voters “lending” votes to the SNP to win the constituencies, then it makes sense to encourage tactical voting in the list. But if it’s ignorant SNP supporters mistakenly thinking that they’ve got to vote for another party instead, tactical voting is just a patch instead of a fix.

      After all, what did the SNP manage to do differently in the historic 2011 SGE, against all the odds?

      (Yes, a 2021 election would likely have to be fought on the existing system, unless it were changed in the meantime, but the SNP would surely benefit from an indy win bounce. Some people like to vote for winners. Besides, whatever its composition, no new SG would be able to overturn an IR2 win for yes. Even an “advisory” one. BritNats hoisted by their own petards, heh, heh.)

    121. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      crazycat @ 18:22,

      Yes, of course. I partly addressed that in my recent response to s~cat before reading your posting. But that kind of “drift” could in principle occur away from all the “main” contenders. But does it?

      The first parliament was much more diverse than of late, polarised perhaps by the “indy” question.

      (I’m just asking, not trying to make a rhetorical point…)

    122. schrodingers cat says:

      crazycat says:

      It’s worth disabusing people in any case, but surely the fact that there are parties which are (voluntarily) mostly or entirely confined to the list, forcing their supporters to make another choice in the constituencies, is at least as big a factor?
      ——–
      it might be, but as robert peffers has pointed out on many occassions, the snp is a democratic party and when at conference someone brings forward a motion to change the system, and members vote for it, it then goes into the manifesto for the next election. which , as i pointed the snp will need to fight under the present system, before the would have a mandate to change it

      so we are talking about 2026 before this happens.

      i dont particularly like the system, i believe it was slab and the lib dems who made it, but until it changes, that is the system we have to work with.

      what we need to disabuse is the idea that voting snp in the list somehow makes a difference. it doesnt

      1 snp list msp out of 49 in 7 of the 8 regions.

      you can argue all you want about how peoples list vote influences the government you get and other such mindless rhetoric, but the figures quite clearly tell a different story

      1 snp list msp out of 49 in 7 of the 8 regions.

      you can have your own opinions but not your own facts

      btw, im no longer advocating a snp1green2 policy, it didnt work last lime and it wont work the next.

      i’m merely pointing out the reality of the numbers, tactical voting will work, but only if we have people to vote for in the list that the voters trust

    123. The Dog Philosopher says:

      My first reaction on reading this focuses on the strange accusation that the SNP has to ‘stop obsessing about independence’. Are they unaware that the whole reason for the existence of the SNP is to win Scotland its freedom so that it can take its rightful place with the other independent nations of the world? Therefore the SNP is being nothing but honest about its objectives.

      But then this thought leads on to a more intriguing question. What now is the actual purpose of all the unionist parties in a devolved Scotland? What exactly is their purpose? Are they being honest with the people of Scotland? Or are they now merely agents of a foreign power? Is their true mission now to damage Scotland in any way possible so as to undermine the confidence of its people?

    124. schrodingers cat says:

      Robert J. Sutherland says:
      The first parliament was much more diverse than of late, polarised perhaps by the “indy” question.
      ———–
      I think that is true, but even the snp complained about how voters thought that the 2nd vote was a free vote. it wasnt.

      but people need time to bed in and understand a new system and once driven, eg by the indy debate, the unionists are more able to vote tactically as seen in the last general election.

      i cant see why we cant learn to vote tactically too

    125. CameronB Brodie says:

      re. Aneurin Bevan and the socialist principle underpinning the concepts of a national health service and health care free at the point of delivery. This is one of the targets of Brexit, along with food, medical and general health and safety standards. Not to mention the “precautionary principle”. Carefull now, I said don’t mention the precautionary principle.

      Here’s an audio lecture from Professor Vernon Bogdanor FBA CBE.

      Aneurin Bevan and the Socialist Ideal

      Aneurin Bevan was the leading postwar representative in Britain of the socialist ideal. He is best remembered for the creation of the National Health Service which he regarded as a symbol of applied socialism, a national service free at the point of use and available to all. But, even before he resigned from the postwar Labour government in 1951, this ideal was being eroded. Were his hopes doomed to disappointment?

      http://www.gresham.ac.uk/lectures-and-events/aneurin-bevan-and-the-socialist-ideal

      P.S. roosting cows? Better get the elephant rifle.

    126. Fergus Green says:

      I’m all in favour of a YES alliance for the list vote, as going by the last Holyrood and WM elections,the BritNats have wisened up on the tactical voting front and it has paid dividends for them.

      We have to be smarter and with the SNP likely to hoover up most of the constituencies again, they might face another wipe-out in most of the regions on the list vote.

      Remember, the SNP got more votes in 2016 than in 2011, but lost their majority. That was all down to tactics, but two can play at that game.

      I would relish the opportunity of casting my second vote for a YES Alliance with a prominent figure such as Lesley Riddoch or Gordon Ross at the head of the list.

      This needs to be taken on board by the SNP though and I can understand the difficulty with opting not to field candidates for any part of any election in Scotland.

      However, of they want to achieve their ultimate goal, perhaps this is the time to introduce an element of pragmatism.

    127. schrodingers cat says:

      The Dog Philosopher says:
      Is their true mission now to damage Scotland in any way possible so as to undermine the confidence of its people?
      ————-
      yes. the union at all cost
      the only manifesto comitment by the tories is no means no, slab, vote tory in traditional labour heartlands

      tells you everything you need to know

    128. Phil says:

      Roland Smith says: 28 October, 2018 at 12:13 pm

      “I still believe the answer is tor every independence supporter to vote SNP constituency, Green list.

      You can see now that the Britnats are interchangeable between Labour and the Tories in a PR election. We need to be just as smart.”

      Except it is not necessarily ‘just as smart’ to offer Greens a vote. SNP programme and SNP objectives do not equate in every case to Green’s.

      If you want independence vote for it – twice.

    129. ScottieDog says:

      @The Dog Philosopher

      “Are they unaware that the whole reason for the existence of the SNP is to win Scotland its freedom so that it can take its rightful place with the other independent nations of the world? Therefore the SNP is being nothing but honest about its objectives.”

      Thing is, the SNP are actually arguing that the U.K. should remain in the SM+CU – the acceptance of whIch would preserve the union! Not too many political pundits talk about that do they.?

    130. Cactus says:

      R@ Gareth Rose says…

      “We are better ‘off’ as part of the UK”

      Tell me lies, tell me sweet little why’s, Gareth.

      Whom is “we” and where be ye from?

      Name one reason…

      NB the United Kingdom is not a united kingdom.

      “Oh it’s 7 o’clock, time furra soiree”

    131. Brian Powell says:

      Though it does look like Scottish voters are about to sh.t on their own doorstep up the stairs and into their own bed.

      The UK Government won’t care what mishmash of a Government is in Holyrood, they will put in place whatever policies that want until Scotland is bankrupt or Holyrood is run by Westminster.

      Then hell mend the pretendy nation of of Scots, no one will respect it.

    132. Clootie says:

      Safe to come back? It looks like Rock’s shift has ended.

    133. schrodingers cat says:

      in traditional labour

      should read, outwith traditional labour heartlands

    134. schrodingers cat says:

      ScottieDog says:
      Thing is, the SNP are actually arguing that the U.K. should remain in the SM+CU – the acceptance of whIch would preserve the union! Not too many political pundits talk about that do they.?
      —————-
      true
      but nicola needs to walk a fine line between appeasing yes/snp supporters but also the remainers

      the position of staying in the cu/sm does both
      incidently, this is fast becoming the plan b of lab/tory/remainers and even a few brexiteers too, the fact it has consistently been nicolas position is ignored by the media

    135. schrodingers cat says:

      Phil says:
      28 October, 2018 at 6:54 pm
      Roland Smith says: 28 October, 2018 at 12:13 pm

      “I still believe the answer is tor every independence supporter to vote SNP constituency, Green list.

      You can see now that the Britnats are interchangeable between Labour and the Tories in a PR election. We need to be just as smart.”

      Except it is not necessarily ‘just as smart’ to offer Greens a vote. SNP programme and SNP objectives do not equate in every case to Green’s.

      If you want independence vote for it – twice.
      ————-
      once again, the issue of tactical voting is confused with voting for the greens

      a word of advice. dont
      it didnt work the last time and it wont the next. people imply dont trust the greens

      then again, 850234 people voted snp in the list vote in 7 of the 8 regions and the snp won 1 list msp

      ill repeat that for the hard of thinking

      850234 people voted snp in the list vote in 7 of the 8 regions and the snp won 1 list msp

      if you dont think that we could tactically vote for someone else and improve on this high point of ..er one….then there is a good chance you are ESN

    136. wull says:

      With regard to second votes, apart from the SNP, there will never be another genuine pro-independence Party that Yes voters can trust. Even if it were possible to set up such a Party, it would take far too long to do so. Who has the profile, the public trust and the organisational ability to do such a thing? No one. And who needs a competitor to the SNP? The idea is a non-runner.

      The Greens are not sufficiently stable on the independence issue to be trusted. If they ever did become a bigger force in the parliament, they would use their increased clout to promote themselves as an alternative to the SNP. In other words they would continually cause trouble to the SNP, and seek to embarrass them. That would be their strategy, in the hope of winning seats from the SNP next time round.

      The only alternative to the SNP that might work that I can think of would be a List comprising well-known pro-Indy people, who would turn themselves into a grouping called something like ‘Independents for Independence’. They would promote themselves as 100% in favour of independence, and likely to vote the same way as the SNP on most things, but without being whipped into doing so and reserving the right of conscience to vote independently whenever they saw fit.

      If you want to give another name to it, you could call it after someone who has great respect, and basically did that during the latter part of her career: The Margo MacDonald Party! It could also be called the Pro-Independence Conscience (List) Party (PicLip?!).

      They would vote together, en bloc, for everything that the SNP does to promote independence. On other issues they would have a free vote. That might mean that individual members might vote in different ways on issues where they have strongly-held opinions that differ from each other. Nevertheless, most of them would usually vote with the SNP on most things.

      Their willingness to work together with the SNP, and to support an SNP government, would be explicitly stated in their manifesto. At the same time, it would also be stressed that they are independents, and therefore in no way members of the SNP and not simply taking orders from the SNP leadership.

      If you got the right kind of people on the list, who already have a public profile and who can be trusted, and so long as they were listed in the right kind of order, they might do well. I am thinking of people like James Kelly of Scot Goes Pop.

      Obviously the people on the List would have to agree the ground-rules with each other. They would need to be clear (at least among themselves) where they are going to be able to act in unison, and where they might disagree with each other. They would become Independent MSPs (as was Margo), yet in real association with each other.

      Besides Margo at Holyrood, Martin Bell at Westminster is another example of the kind of respect in which Independents can often be held in great respect, and very deservedly so. Some of us will remember the day when there used to be a lot of Independents elected at local government level, who were really known locally and many of whom worked very well even if they were Part-timers, before the Party machines moved in (and turned a lot of things sour).

      If my memory is right, that Party-machine takeover, together with the reduction in the number of Independent representatives, was very much facilitated by Ted Heath’s re-organisation of local government, which also abolished a political geography that may have been piecemeal, but which had long historical roots that were still worth preserving.

      Since the SNP wins by far the biggest number of constituencies, the dice are loaded against them on the 2nd vote. If they only got 4 List MPs it is not just because they got less second votes than first votes. It is also because of the way the system works.

      In order to beat the system, don’t we need an SNP-supporting List which, all the same, is NOT the SNP?

      I don’t know if any of this is in any way realistic. It is just a speculation. 4 List seats to the SNP seems derisory to me – there must be a legitimate way of increasing that. Though I know most will keep saying SNP-SNP is the only way, and they are probably right. But how do you convince folk?

    137. starlaw says:

      The SNP are exhausting all avenues in their attempt to keep Scotland in EU knowing full well that they will be ignored. When Indy ref kicks of they will be offered all scenario’s to appease the Scottish people (remember the vow) SNP will be able to say “we tried that” and were refused.

    138. Cactus says:

      It was another crushing defeat… but then a hero arrives…

      There is some Dick on the ‘Scottish’ railroad tracks:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUQg07Jf9XM

      “Where did that train come from?”

      Hahahahaha.

    139. schrodingers cat says:

      @wull

      who said it needed to be a genuine indy party?

      the comedians elected by the unionists are as genuine and convincing as PVC leather

      no one mentioned creating a new political party, just giving indy supporters somebody to vote for on the list so their votes arnt wasted

      i think i included james kelly already and mentioned a yes alliance party (if james and the rev. agreed with this, it would be done in hours)

      i dont think it is a huge difficulty to do this, a bigger difficulty would be convincing james and the rev

    140. Robert Peffers says:

      @orri says:28 October, 2018 at 1:53 pm:

      ” … D’Honey isn’t that hard to understand.”

      Not for you, me and the rest of the Wingers but we are at least politically aware. Many of yer average voters who just really are not that interested. In any case that is not the real problem of the d’Hondt, system.

      It is that the voters don’t know or choose the person who will be elected from the lists of the individual parties. That allows the parties to put placemen and place women on their list and it is this dead wood favoured by the party that gets in and often they wouldn’t get enough votes to save their deposits.

      If the individual parties chose their lists on merit – but they do not. Then the parties often shove their placemen & placewomen into posts they are just not competent to hold down

      For example Murdo, (The boot boy for the Queen’s 11), has never gained a seat by a straight vote in his life.

      Wouldn’t be so bad if those on the List had to gain a certain percentage of the personal votes of the public – but they don’t.

    141. schrodingers cat says:

      who would turn themselves into a grouping called something like ‘Independents for Independence’

      or yes alliance, or yes, thing is they would need to be a group to win. individuals are not elected on the list, only groups/parties etc

    142. crazycat says:

      @ RJS at 6.42

      But that kind of “drift” could in principle occur away from all the “main” contenders. But does it?

      Maybe. But the list-only unionist parties are smaller than the Greens+Rise+Solidarity, I think. It may even be that UKIP was the only one, and they had a number of constituency candidates too.

      There may be information about where and how split-voting occurred*. But I suspect that for the unionists it was more tactical** (Tories and LDs on the list, voting for SLab in Edinburgh Southern, East Lothian, and West Dumbartonshire for instance, despite there being candidates from their favoured parties also standing) rather than having to choose between abstaining, voting SNP, or deprioritising independence and voting eg LD which will have been the case for every Green outwith the 3 constituencies where they had a candidate.

      *Tables from opinion polls are potentially a source for assessing the intention to split a vote, and which parties could benefit. There may be no data about actual instances.

      **Tactical voting really does work in constituencies. I’d still argue that it can’t on the list, with any apparent successes being fluke, but that would just be going over old ground which has already proved unproductive.

    143. schrodingers cat says:

      crazycat says:
      28 October, 2018 at 7:30 pm
      @ RJS at 6.42

      Maybe. But the list-only unionist parties are smaller than the Greens+Rise+Solidarity, I think. It may even be that UKIP was the only one, and they had a number of constituency candidates too.
      —————–
      list only unionist parties??
      the normal unionists won 44 of the 49 available seats in 7 of the 8 regions in scotland
      ————–

      There may be information about where and how split-voting occurred*.

      on the list, there is, not information, actual figures, facts etc, snp won one seat out of 49 in 7 of the 8 regions in scotland,
      —————–
      But I suspect that for the unionists it was more tactical** (Tories and LDs on the list, voting for SLab in Edinburgh Southern, East Lothian, and West Dumbartonshire for instance, despite there being candidates from their favoured parties also standing) rather than having to choose between abstaining,
      ————-
      people always vote tactically in constituencies, thats why corbyn did well in the ge in england. remainers didnt have a choice.

      —————–
      voting SNP, or deprioritising independence and voting eg LD which will have been the case for every Green outwith the 3 constituencies where they had a candidate.
      ————-

      except the tactical voting being discussed is about the list vote in a holyrood election.people should vote snp in any constituency vote whether in a he or a ge. no question

      —————————-
      *Tables from opinion polls are potentially a source for assessing the intention to split a vote, and which parties could benefit. There may be no data about actual instances.
      ——————
      **Tactical voting really does work in constituencies. I’d still argue that it can’t on the list,
      ====================

      1 list snp msp out of a possible 49 in 7 of 8 regions. you genuinely dont think yes supporters can do better??????

      ——————

      with any apparent successes being fluke, but that would just be going over old ground which has already proved

      ————
      proved? by who? certainly not you crazy cat.
      fact. in mid scotland and fife, 6 unionists and 1 green were elected. had all the green voters on the list voted snp, there would have been 7 unionists msps for this region. fact

      as you said, figures are available, try looking at them sometime

    144. Cactus says:

      This is a dedication to…

      All you excellent Teachers out there… YOU are HOT!:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6M4_Ommfvv0

      British Nationalists should face another hammering at 2021 election.

      Hey Teachers of Scotland, thank you for teaching us all how…

      To learn.

      RULE #1: Don’t drive on the RR tracks X.

    145. Clachangowk says:

      In Germany they use the D’hondt system in some elections but there it is 50/50 constituency and list for number of seats. The list vote is considered the most important because it determines the number of seats a party gets. In Scotland the wating is in favour of Constituency seats so winning sufficient seats with low list percentage can get majority.

      The risk in diminishing the value of list votes comes in being over confident in getting all expected constituency seats. Failure to win expected seats makes list votes essential.

      To avoid confusion best to simply focus everywhere on both votes for SNP and get this message out everywhere. Problem is if we can’t agree here how can we expect average voter to know what is best. Keep it simple

    146. schrodingers cat says:

      tis late
      as has been said by others, we have many other battles to fight before we need to address this issue but it wont and cant go away if we want to win an independent scotland and then keep it.

      saying that, i have seen no real argument put forward by anyone on this thread which in anyway disproves anything i have said, indeed, those avoiding the actual figures and facts, clinging to empty rhetoric, do themselves a dis service and only dig a deeper hole for themselves

      fact

    147. Thepnr says:

      A third party that genuinely supported Independence and was trusted could make a huge difference to the number of pro-indy MSP’s elected.

      How about the Scottish Independence Convention getting some of their high profile supporters to stand on the list as there are a lot of them.

      Elaine C. Smith, Pat Kane, Wee Ginger Dug, Lesley Riddoch, Robin McAlpine to name but a few and I’ll bet you could find a good few more to add to that list.

      They’re having a fundraiser now and intending to employ up to 5 people full time, that’s no doubt more than the Greens or the Lib Dems employ and could be more than even Labour or the Tories in Scotland. They have the organisation and support.

      https://thisisit.scot/

      No doubt that if they did get MSP’s elected they would not support the SNP on every issue but who cares, that wouldn’t matter at all as long as they supported them on the only issue that counts and that is gaining Independence.

      I’d vote for them on the list as I believe I’d rather see one of them win a seat than a British Nationalist candidate.

    148. Gfaetheblock says:

      schrodingers cat

      Margo MacDonald got elected as an independent on the Lothian list

    149. Cactus says:

      Unless of course you are this excellent guy…

      RULE #1: Drive on the railroad tracks:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHpXxAW3p_o

      Put on your seatbelt.

    150. Dr Jim says:

      Welsh accused of speaking a foreign language by English people leading to them not feeling welcome…Aw diddums

      …Don’t let them take away your culture Wales

    151. schrodingers cat says:

      Gfaetheblock says:
      28 October, 2018 at 8:06 pm
      schrodingers cat

      Margo MacDonald got elected as an independent on the Lothian list
      —————-

      jeezo, where to start with this, so 800,000 snp voters on thelist vote for margo and would elect………..er just margo.

      they only way these 800k voters votes would count is if they voted for a group, a party etc, with multiple members. how do you think murdo fraser keeps getting in to holyrood? cos he’s an independent?

    152. Cactus says:

      A friendly nod to ye’s Gary45% and Ghillie.

      They teach us well.

    153. Ken500 says:

      Just vote SNP/SNP to get over the line. The Greens got more list seats because.SNP gave them their second vote. If they had given the SNP their second vote the SNP would have got more list seats. It is important to get over the line. A majority. That is the most important thing.

      People who are in unionists Parties or vote unionists will never get Independence by voting for them. They are blocking Independence by voting for Unionists parties. These psrtiesvare totally against it with a venom. They are paid by London HQ’s. People are delusional if they think they will get Independence by voting for Unionist Parties.

    154. Robert Louis says:

      In the light of some of the discussion about elections, was it not the case, that the only reason Davidson won her seat in Edinburgh, was because the pro indy vote was split between green and SNP? Prior to that she only ever managed to do a Murdo – and get on the list.

      Please correct me if I am wrong.

      If correct, it is worth bearing in mind, with all these talks of alliances and multiple pro indy candidates etc..

    155. galamcennalath says:

      schrodingers cat says:

      the unionist are able to vote tactically in constituency votes to keep out the snp. why cant we vote tactically on the list?

      That (to my mind) is why the SNP need to get as many votes on the list as possible in every region.

      The BritNats have a tactic open to them which has no obvious counter. Any one or two BritNat parties can put up a paper candidate, spend no money, do zero campaigning, just don’t try. Meanwhile, the one with the best chance puts up a strong candidate, spends money, actively campaigns, and has a high profile. That combined with the single policy on No-to-Indy across all three will mean a lot of their BritNat vote will focus on one.

      The alternative of publishing plans to get voters to actively choose to vote tactically gets limited backing.

      If Indy is your primary focus then you need to get out and vote SNP – SNP. If your primary choice of party is the SNP then you must vote SNP in your region.

      Next time (if there is a next time pre IndyRef2) the BritNats will take more constituencies. The SNP need as close to 50% on both votes.

      I accept there are Greens who want a green political presence, perhaps even as a priority. If Indy is important too, however, they need to vote SNP at constituency level.

      2011 was such a big success because the result was 45.4% and 44.0%. That high gave 16 list seats to add to 53 constituencies.

      2016 was 46.5% giving 59 constituencies and 41.7% giving only 4 extra.

      It’s a complicated equation, but I fairly certain the Greens going from 2 to 6 was because SNP voters gave their list vote to Greens. If they didn’t in 2011, why did they do so in 2016? Probably because the internet was full of tactical voting suggestions. One in ten SNP voters did so. It didn’t hit the BritNats at all. The pro Indy majority was kept, but is that as effective in the cause of Indy as an SNP majority?

    156. crazycat says:

      @ S’s C

      I think your post at 7.45 misunderstands a lot of what I was trying to say at 7.30, so I need to rephrase it.

      list-only unionist parties

      I had previously pointed out to RJS that those who would like to vote Green can only do so on the list. Therefore they (everywhere except 3 constituencies) have to do something else in the constituency vote, and that this may be a cause of the SNP’s vote share drop on the list.

      He then suggested that might also be true for other “main” parties – ie supporters of list-only parties gave these “main” parties their constitiuency votes. These “main” parties are all unionist. Therefore, the equivalent of the Greens would have to be “list-only unionist parties”.

      The fact that the “main” unionist parties won 44/49 seats merely underlines that any “list-only unionist parties” have negligible support and are therefore unlikely to make any difference by “lending” their constituency votes.

      on the list, there is, not information, actual figures, facts etc, snp won one seat out of 49 in 7 of the 8 regions in scotland,

      I’m talking about information about how many people voted for one party in the constituency and for another on the list, and which parties they voted for. – detailed information, not the cumulative end result of thousands of individual choices, which is what “the SNP won 1 seat” equates to.

      1 list snp msp out of a possible 49 in 7 of 8 regions. you genuinely dont think yes supporters can do better??????

      It is not possible to be certain of doing better. I have argued with you and a few other people at some length about this. I did not convince you – that’s fair enough. I did not want to go over it all again because that would just be going over old ground which has already proved UNPRODUCTIVE.

      You quoted that last sentence of mine omitting the final word. I wasn’t trying to prove anything about the result in Mid Scotland and Fife – or any other region.

    157. schrodingers cat says:

      If they had given the SNP their second vote the SNP would have got more list seats. It is important to get over the line. A majority. That is the most important thing.
      ————-
      not true
      the snp got over 800k votes in 7 of the 8 regions of scotland and won only one list msp, marie todd
      you can have your own opinion ken, but not yer own facts

      with the snp vote slipping, the only way to ensure an indy majority is to vote tactically on the list vote.

      how can it backfire when the snp won only 1 of 49 possible seats?

      if an indy majority is no longer possible via the constituency vote via the snp, why cant yes supporters vote tactically to ensure one?

    158. schrodingers cat says:

      1 list snp msp out of a possible 49 in 7 of 8 regions. you genuinely dont think yes supporters can do better??????

      It is not possible to be certain of doing better
      —————–

      i suggest you grow a pair

    159. schrodingers cat says:

      @gala
      The BritNats have a tactic open to them which has no obvious counter.
      ———-
      yes we do, we for a yes party with folk voters trust to stand in the list

      @ken
      People who are in unionists Parties or vote unionists will never get Independence by voting for them. They are blocking Independence by voting for Unionists parties. These psrtiesvare totally against it with a venom. They are paid by London HQ’s. People are delusional if they think they will get Independence by voting for Unionist Parties.
      ————–
      Im proposing we form a yes party we can vote for on the list, led by stu campbell. are you saying the rev is a unionist?

    160. schrodingers cat says:

      I have argued with you and a few other people at some length about this. I did not convince you – that’s fair enough. I did not want to go over it all again because that would just be going over old ground which has already proved UNPRODUCTIVE.
      —————
      you are right, you avoid the discussion because it is unproductive
      ………1 of 49 unproductive. please go over it again cos we will have another election soon, and id love to hear why arguing against 1 of 49 is unproductive

    161. Robert Peffers says:

      Breaking News 2 Hours ago, (Alyn Smyth):-

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFcpUX5WdHU&t=69s

    162. schrodingers cat says:

      If Indy is your primary focus then you need to get out and vote SNP – SNP. If your primary choice of party is the SNP then you must vote SNP in your region.
      ———
      bollox. i have voted snp all my life and indy is most defo my aim. but i am pointing out that a grand unionist coalition could force us out of power

      how does it help the indy cause if snp voters vote snp on the list 800k of them and we get 1 snp list msp and unionist get 44?

      empty rhetoric doesnt replace hard fact

    163. schrodingers cat says:

      I did not want to go over it all again because that would just be going over old ground which has already proved UNPRODUCTIVE.
      ============
      not by you thats for fuckin sure
      1 of 49
      proof?

    164. schrodingers cat says:

      @ gala
      i get your point about the greens keeping a pro indy majority at holyrood but the fact is the vat majority of yes np voters didnt give them their vote

      as a voting tactic, vote green2 failed

      we could do much much better with a group that people actually trust and as the polls and margins narrow, we need to

    165. galamcennalath says:

      Quite a few stories in the media point out that Leavers still believe a lot of bollocks.

      – EU immigrants take more than they give. Bollocks. They actually give £2400 more than UK folks!

      – crime has increased because of EU immigrants. No evidence whatsoever.

      – they overestimate the % of EU immigrants in the UK by a factor of three.

      – UK pays £350m a week to the EU. Nope, about £160m and it’s bloody good value for money.

      – the NHS will be getting £350m a week extra. What a sad joke.

      To me, all this sounds astonishing. But research shows this is what Leavers STILL believe.

      What sort of state ends up with large sections of its population believing utter drivel? One with dodgy politicians, corrupt media, and the mega rich exercising too much influence over so called democratic politics

    166. galamcennalath says:

      The biggest impact which could be achieved would be getting Indy supporters to use postal votes.

      Turn out percentage on postal votes is in the 90s.

      Turnout on the day, walking in is 50-70%.

      The Tories know this well.

      I know some folks have doubts about postal voting but it’s a tactic we must catch up on the BritNats with.

    167. Cactus says:

      BREAKING REALITY CHECK! Update:
      https://interactive.news.sky.com/2017/brexit-countdown/

      3 nights remaining to go…

      Spooky time again.

      152.

    168. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      galamcennalath at 9.06

      I agree we have to deal with the postal vote situation but postal vote turnout is usually in the region of 72 – 75%. It has never reached the 95% plus that it did in five constituencies at the independence referendum and that figure is in all reality impossible. It was just over 70% in Glasgow for instance and about 80% in lots of the others.

    169. schrodingers cat says:

      @gala
      GOTV, postal voting, sure we could do better but getting 3 or 4 yes candidates elected in 7 of the 8 regions would have a far bigger impact than either of those issues

      fact

    170. Thepnr says:

      Do I really care about an election in 2021?

      Nope not really, I fully expect a referendum to happen before then and win or lose the next election is made more or less irrelevant unless we are electing the first government of an Independent Scotland.

      So for now I think I prefer to keep my eye on the target that is immediately in front of me and that is winning a referendum.

    171. Jon in Chicago says:

      Richard Hunter @ 12:41 —
      What success of Jill Stein‘s are you talking about? Getting to sit at the same table as Michael Flynn and Vladimir Putin? Her only electoral success was in Lexington, Massachusetts,as a town meeting representative (roughly equivalent to a city councilor, I think) in 2005 and 2008. Otherwise, bupkis.

      Over here, the Greens are utterly useless. In some states, they’ve gotten or taken money from the Republicans to get on the ballot (a Google search of “Green party and republican money” will do the trick). Over here, Green = Getting Republicans Elected Every November.

    172. Old Pete says:

      Best way forward is to have a referendum on independance next year and if refused by Westminster then make the next Scottish election a vote for independance or not. If the SNP and Greens gain a majority of seats with a mandate to declaire Scottish Independance.
      If we can secure a majority in the Scottish Parliment supporting Independance then make this the objective if we don’t we will never get another opportunity.
      A bit of realism folks, the last council election results were a great deal poorer than expected.
      If the SNP can fight a campaign and turn it into a vote on Independence then I have no doubt they will win it. Otherwise and we will be told “now is not the time” forevermore!

    173. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      wull at 7.14

      That is exactly what I mean. An “independence coalition” of trusted supporters of independence like Lesley Riddoch, Paul Kavanagh, Gordon McIntyre Kemp, Carolyn Leckie etc

      The vast majority of SNP votes on the list last time were wasted because of the SNP success on the FPTP. An “Independence Coalition” vote onthe list would not be affected by SNP votes on FPTP.

      Actually I don’t think our list system actually works as it is meant to – or perhaps it does in making it very difficult for the SNP to get a parliamentary majority

    174. Thepnr says:

      According to a piece in the Torygraph tonight, Robert the Bruce was born in Essex. LOL

      Her latest work, “Traitor, Outlaw, King”, is the first in a trilogy about Robert the Bruce, and focuses on his family background, his upbringing and the pivotal years leading to his crowning as King of Scots at Scone in 1306.

      “The truth may be unpalatable for some, for a chronicler from Southern England states categorically that Robert belonged to ‘the English nation’ and, more specifically, that he came into this world surrounded by the pleasant meadows, vineyards, grass and grain of Essex.”

      http://archive.fo/q0ZJQ

    175. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Ken500 at 8.28

      Not correct. Giving their second vote to SNP instead of the Greens would likelier have put in more Tories or Labour as SNP.

    176. Cactus says:

      Ahm onna bus into the city…

      Looked oot the windae and saw the moon waning frae ra north west…

      One was puzzled…

      Turns out it was just ra flection.

      Our moon is waning frae north east.

      Can U see.

      Could be a ‘burp’ night…

      Almost X…

    177. Golfnut says:

      @ Thepnr

      I suppose it makes a change from claiming he was born in France, they’ll be claiming they own Scotland next, oh!

    178. Capella says:

      @ Crazycat – I agree. I think Greens voted SNP in the constituency thus boosting the SNP vote. But they voted Green in the list, which was the only place they could vote Green. This deflated the SNP vote.

      So, far from SNP voters mistakenly voting Green in the list vote, the SNP benefited from other voters voting SNP in the constituency because they support independence.

      @ Wull – sounds like a great idea. Elaine C Smith would be a shoo in wherever she stood IMO. But would people stand?

    179. Cubby says:

      Churchill was born in India and Thatcher was born in Perth.

    180. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      schrodingers cat @ 20:40:

      with the snp vote slipping, the only way to ensure an indy majority is to vote tactically on the list vote.

      Well, there’s only so far you can get by “playing” the list when your vote is slipping.

      I would prefer a more positive outlook, in which the SNP came out forcefully and inspired people such that the vote rises rather than slips.

      After all, that’s what the “good governance” agenda is intended to address (and why the BritNats repeatedly try to undermine it, of which we have seen only too much of late). But “doing the day job” well is only part of the story. Mitigation is necessary, but not sufficient. People need hope that a better future is on offer, and imminently at that.

      It is not impossible. In 2011 it worked. Better surely to work out why and do the same again..?

    181. orri says:

      I would not vote for a Yes alliance in the list. The SNP can’t recommend that as it’d be counted as an alliance and be of no benefit. If there was solid sustained polling that the SNP would gain no seats on the list I might be prepared to vote Green.

      The Greens have a mission that they will not drop and which only independence might achieve. No unionist party at the moment is against Trident. That’s why they might be flaky and chance their arm at times but when it comes right down to it they’ve little choice but to support the SNP even after independence until the nukes are gone.

      Also remember that the SNP are determined to raise Scotland’s renewable energy capacity to not only cover our needs but leave some for export. Cheap energy is attractive not only to the public but also business. Another thing the Greens can get behind.

    182. Phronesis says:

      There are 3 (surely the list is increasing) problems with conservatism – it is ‘Inoperative, Unprincipled, Dangerous’
      That sums up the British State, stuck in the past, wanting to revisit the past (not the aspirational post WW2 past but the Dickensian past).Old, tired, lacks vision, endorses a punitive agenda, its moral compass is broken.
      Scotland is not on this trajectory- forward looking to its future horizon in charge of its destiny.

      ‘Firstly, conservatism is inoperative; it is incapable of giving any guidance whatsoever for dealing with the future. In its crudest version, it can do no more than look at the past to identify those social arrangements that have been useful and then advocate for their protection and reproduction…The answer is not straightforward, and conservatives therefore appear to be defending an arbitrary freeze of time when appealing to tradition…

      conservatism is devoid of content since it lacks criteria to determine what is good and what is not…Consequently, conservatism can at the most aspire to be an accompanying attribute of other, complete ideologies—one could, for instance, think of “conservative liberals” or “conservative socialists”—a fact which should remind conservatism’s followers that their puzzle of the world is lacking a substantial piece…

      Thirdly and perhaps most importantly, conservatism can ultimately carry intolerable consequences…Conservatives, therefore, ought to make sure that their support of traditional institutions springs from solid reasoning and not the fideistic glorification of oldness’
      https://www.libertarianism.org/columns/three-problems-conservatism?utm_

    183. Jock McDonnell says:

      re Postal Votes – Maybe there should be a re-registration phase, for the next referendum & perhaps beyond. Mail to all those currently registered requiring reregistering. The whole PV system is open to abuse at the moment.

    184. Fred says:

      Great wee prog’ on Caesar! tonight on the young guy who has been elected chief of the clan MacGillivray, a farmer from Fearn he can play the pipes & fiddle & talks the Gaelic. A bit of a contrast to the usual chinless-wonder with a bool in his mooth that we’re used to. Like the wan who sits behind Ruth Davidson for example!

    185. Fred says:

      That should be Caesar!, who the hell is Caesar?

    186. Fred says:

      Must be a prohibited word eh?

    187. John Wood says:

      It’s a poll for the Daily Cracked Record. It’s even less believable than the ‘Vow’ and that’s saying something. The British Nationalists are pulling out all the stops they are absolutely desperate because they actually know Indyref2 is coming and they know they will lose. Labour are taking the lead trying to bankrupt the Scottish government and bring the country to a halt. Because they and the Tories know that anything the Tories do or say will backfire on them.

      The British Nats will stop at nothing to keep their precious Union. They simply can’t afford to let Scotland have its independence. Obvious lies like this are nothing. Expect more fixed elections and referenda, and if all else fails, close down the Scottish Parliament and put troops on the streets. Provoke an armed resistance who can then be labelled terrorists and used to justify more repression. It’s how they operate. But the sun has set long ago on the Empire. But the US – they want our oil. Watch out for them, their ruthlessness makes even the British look tame. And these days it’s they who call the shots.

    188. Thepnr says:

      Jair Bolsonaro declared Brazil’s next president

      http://archive.fo/mm1N8

      This is not unexpected but definitely not good.

    189. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      orri at 10.21

      Your first paragraph makes absolutely no sense. Kindly elucidate.

    190. Footsoldier says:

      The SNP has become simply another political party competing with others for votes.

      They must up their game by pushing the benefits of independence as the only game in town and all the time. Sadly in this current lull period – it is silence.

      Where is Keith Brown’s rebuttal unit and why are the hierarchy not rebutting every time they are live on air?

    191. Robert Peffers says:

      @Old Pete says: 28 October, 2018 at 9:40 pm:

      ” … Best way forward is to have a referendum on independance next year and if refused by Westminster then make the next Scottish election a vote for independance or not.”

      We do not require Westminster permission to hold a referendum.

      Show your evidence that we do?

      Here is what a section 30 Order is:-

      http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/LIF-2017-0036/LIF-2017-0036.pdf

      To put that in non-legalistic language:

      The people of Scotland, under the independent laws of Scotland, are legally sovereign.

      Under English law The Queen of England is Legally Sovereign. However, in 1688 the Parliament of the still independent Kingdom of England, forced William & Mary to legally delegate their legal sovereignty to the Parliament of England, (NOT to the Parliament of the United Kingdom not to the independent Parliament of the Kingdom of Scotland. Then, in 1707, the English parliament put itself into Permanent recession. It is still in that recession and The Kingdom & Country of England has no elected as such parliament ever since.

      The Old Scottish parliament was only prorogued and was reconvened when Holyrood began. Prorogued means only in temporary recess and on being reconvened is the Old Scottish Parliament legally sitting again.

      You will note that the Westminster Parliament failed to contest the Scots Law Lord’s assertion of the Scottish Claim of Right in the Westminster Supreme Court, (The Claim of Right is the claim of the legally sovereign People of Scotland to their legal sovereignty).

      The Supreme court ruled in favour of Scotland and Westminster has appealed the decision.

      However, the Scots raised the matter with the ECJ, (The World Court), who have fast tracked it as a matter of Urgency and expect their decision by Christmas.

      However, as the people of Scotland are declared as legally sovereign in the Treaty of Union that formed the two kingdom United Kingdom, there is little chance that the ECJ can do other than declare the People of Scotland are Legally Sovereign.

      For if they do not it means the Treaty of Union has never legally existed so is not now legally in force and if that were so there is no United Kingdom and we wouldn’t even need a referendum to confirm it as Nicola already has our mandate.

      Now I say again – where is your evidence that a Section 30 Order is Westminster’s permission?

      Indyref1’s section30 was an agreement between David Cameron for the United Kingdom, (Westminster), Parliament and by Alex Salmond for the Holyrood Parliament that the Indyref1 result would be respected by both parliaments and it also agreed the wording of the Question.

      Furthermore, Unless specifically agreed beforehand all referendums were previously only legally considered as advisory.

      However, Theresa May and the Westminster Parliament held the EU referendum without prior agreement that the result would be legally binding on both parties, (Leavers & Remainers), but since then Westminster has set a legal precedent by insisting it is undemocratic and holding the result must be upheld.

      Do you imagine the ECJ doesn’t take all that into account when judging matters?

      In any case as we do not need anyone’s permission to hold an advisory referendum then we hold one and do what Westminster did and declare it is the will of the people and must be implemented like Westminster and the EU referendum.

      Matter of fact, Joanne Cherry MP, who is a fully qualified lawyer, is saying that legally we can have full indy without even holding a referendum.

      I’ll check for your reply, and evidence, tomorrow for Ah’m awa tae ma bed noo.

    192. Hamish100 says:

      footsoldier — you need to remove your head out of your shoe. Your hearing should improve. Its votes that count.

    193. Ken500 says:

      US fracked gas is imported into Grangemouth. The US are sellling fracked gas all over the world. Undermining the Oil price. That was one of the reason given for the fall in the Oil price worldwide. Oil and petrol prices are lower in the US. It is not taxed so much as in the UK. Not do highly taxed, They often travel long distances in the States. It is so vast.

      The US emission level allowed are lower in the US. 20%? Although the car manufsctirers were cheating the system. Emissions allowed in Europe are 4 times more. 80%. 4 times higher than the US. Some car manufacturer where cheating the system, They had to pay £Billions in compensation. Especially the German ones. A scandal.

    194. Capella says:

      @ Fred, the filters won’ allow expressions like S a o u r A l b a because people used to sign their comments so the words are automatically changed to Hail Caesar. Makes it difficult to ralk about BBC Caesar! though sometimes it gets through.

    195. Cactus says:

      In toon now and whom knows now like now eh.

    196. Fred says:

      Thanks Capella, thought I was cracking up! A great prog’ it was on at 9 o clock!

    197. Capella says:

      @ Thepnr – another dictator “wins” election.
      Roger Waters was threatened with imprisonment if he said anything critical of Bolsonaro after 10 pm.
      He went to visit Lula in prison but was refused permission. But he did indicate support during his concert last night at 9.59. So I hope he has not been arrested. He must be getting on.

    198. Fred says:

      Thanks Capella, thought I was cracking up, excellent prog it was on at 9 o clock!

    199. Robert Peffers says:

      Thepnr says: 28 October, 2018 at 9:47 pm:

      ” … According to a piece in the Torygraph tonight, Robert the Bruce was born in Essex. LOL
      Her latest work, “Traitor, Outlaw, King”, is the first in a trilogy about Robert the Bruce, and focuses on his family background, his upbringing and the pivotal years leading to his crowning as King of Scots at Scone in 1306.”

      Where do these idiots get their history education?

      The period was the repercussions of the Norman Conquest of England. Normans were so called as a corruption of, “Norsemen”, who got the same kind of deal on the other side of the channel.

      That was they got lands in what became France if they would stop raiding there. They were thus just another branch of the Germanic Tribes that got the same deal in what they gave the name AngleLand to.

      However, the Norman Conquest never came to Scotland as the North Britons did as they do now. If they tried to invade they got repulsed but if they came in peace there were assimilated and, as today became new Scots.

      Both the Bruce and Wallace families were Norman Knights whose forbearers were Normans who conquered Anlgeland but came to Scotland and married Gaelic Aristocracy. Bruce had lands in both Kingdoms but, just like today, gave up his lands in England and became King of Scots. His Main claim was from his mother Marjorie, Countess of Carrick.

      Bruce was no more English than David Cameron was Scottish.

    200. Dr Jim says:

      When there are elections the SNP advice is to vote SNP X 2 for the best chance of maximising their vote

      I kinda think they know what they’re asking us to do and why so I’ll just be sticking with that advice and not going with the convoluted 100 ifs

      If you want to bang a nail in you use a big hammer and hit it a batter you don’t start offering out lots of little hammers for everybody to have a wee tap in the hope they *might* hit the nail

      Homespun philosophy there

    201. HYUFD says:

      Robert Peffers If the Scottish people are ‘legally sovereign’ then by definition that means independence can only be achieved by 51% of Scottish voters voting for it in a referendum.

      If not Westminster would have every right to follow the Spanish route and suspend Holyrood if it declared independence with no referendum.

    202. sandy says:

      Re Willie MacRae murder:

      Yes, murder. Whole thing rotten to the core. Not a very well planned assassination. Even the cover-up is full of holes.

      The other thing that irks me is the Dunblane cover-up. The 100 year gagging order. Dunblane is not such a big place & with something like that happening, it would be impossible for some locals not to know the truth. Notaries in the area & elsewhere were previously known to be involved in nefarious on-goings.

      I believe parliamentary privilege is also applicable to Holywood. Is there any parliamentarian there honourable/moral enough to make a statement naming names, including those who, perhaps, went on to greater things.

    203. HYUFD says:

      Thepnr Lopez Obrador a populist leftist won in Mexico, now Bolsonaro, a hard right candidate has won in Brazil as Latin America swung away from the centre this year

    204. Cactus says:

      Hi HYUFD…

      Long time no see.

      How are you, ahm calling out neutrally.

      How are your tories.

      What are they and you up tae?

      Almost Monday ra 29th.

      Regs.

    205. Thepnr says:

      @Capella

      I read an article by a well known international journalist about Jair Bolsonaro four or five weeks ago. It was the first time I’d ever heard of the guy but it was horrific.

      Seriously it was very scary to think how these far right wing views have become mainstream in many countries. I’ve tried without success yet to find that article but when I do I’ll post it. It was eye openly gobsmacking.

    206. Cactus says:

      Good morning Thepnr…

      How do buddy.

      Scotland X.

    207. Cactus says:

      Fuck.

      To be FREE.

      Scotland only has to choose to be.

      Ahm back inna Catty.

      It’s weigh past midnight.

      Why vote not?

      Why.

      Previous naw voters…

      Ahm looking at you!

      Robert P kens.

      Kilo Yankee 21.

      17.

    208. Thepnr says:

      @Cactus

      I’m good so cheers, have a good time and make sure you convert at least one No to Yes on your travels tonight.

      Every little bit counts 🙂

    209. HYUFD says:

      Cactus I do not intend to make many more regular visits you will be pleased to hear though I will browse the site from time to time and maybe make the occasional comment like tonight.

      We Tories are of course celebrating Ruth’s baby

    210. Cactus says:

      Cheers for your reply HYUFD.

      Aye am pleased either way.

      Try iScotland…

      Visit away…

    211. Thepnr says:

      If the Tories get their way they’ll be a lot more babies born in stables to celebrate every year. Everyday a holiday.

    212. Cactus says:

      Ah mean… ra tories…

      Why HYUFD.

      Convince me the way of your union…

      Neutrally like.

    213. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      I see a lot of people on here who don’t understand how the list system works.It was designed to make it almost impossible for any party (ie the SNP)to get an overall majority in the Scottish Parliament.
      The fact that the SNP breached that was miraculous.
      But at the last Scottish election it took over 200,000 votes for every list seat the SNP got. However vote SNP 1 and 2 was the only tactic the SNP could use and several factors – ie the Green vote and the division of the left independistas meant the SNP didn’t get the ridiculous massive vote for the handful of seats it needed to repeat its majority. Actually the division on the list gave the Tories more seats.

      However a united but non SNP independence group – an independence coalition – would not see its return of MSPs affected by the huge SNP FPTP result.
      But we may face a similar unionist coalition the next election.

    214. Thepnr says:

      @Dave McEwan Hill

      Yes I agree, to maximise the pro-indy MSP’s another group to vote for on the list would be a knockout blow for the British Nationalist parties.

      See my earlier post at 8:05

      <i"Elaine C. Smith, Pat Kane, Wee Ginger Dug, Lesley Riddoch, Robin McAlpine to name but a few and I’ll bet you could find a good few more to add to that list."

    215. Cactus says:

      Glasgow shall vote Yes2…

      Gimme some Lovin’ HYUFD.

      AGAIN.

      Good to see you regular TJenny xx.

      Scotland is Scotland!

      Ken500, cheers.

    216. Cactus says:

      More good cheeers to you, Petra.

      Ahm doon on the Devilgate.

      HYUFD, your stage…

      Drive.

    217. Thepnr says:

      We could add Craig Murray, Peter Bell and Nana to that list 🙂

    218. Cactus says:

      One has stashed a Glasgow beer in Midland St.

      Party at yours…

      Gaun there.

      Rockers!

    219. Thepnr says:

      FMQ’s on a Thursday would be interesting hahahaha.

    220. Thepnr says:

      Oops forget the Rev, that would make FMQ’s even more interesting.

    221. Cactus says:

      iGlasgow is gonna be awesome!

      Just like iScotland.

      Dr J, come in…

      #Indy.

    222. Thepnr says:

      Stick in Tommy Sheridan, Johnathon Shafi and Caroline Leckie too.

      We’re a broad church and the first thing we have to do is win that election. Lets start as we mean to go on and we really could have 2/3rds of the seats at Holyrood if we put our minds and our efforts into doing so.#

      T’d rather have any of those mentioned than wee Wullie Rennie, Murdo Fraser, Prof Adam Tomkins or thicko Annie Wells.

      So why not a grand coalition of Yes grass roots to run for election on the list vote? I say AYE.

    223. Cactus says:

      Mon the Don’s.

      Rev knows.

      Here we go.

      Ahm inna nightclub.

    224. Cactus says:

      Fuck the haters…

      Love the Love.

      Ra Love X.

      17’s RP m.

    225. Cactus says:

      Somewhere between now and here…

      THEY are gonna try their shit.

      Be aware Scotland.

      Be aware.

    226. smithie says:

      Last 2 comments^^^^^….how interesting

    227. Cactus says:

      We Love you smithie…

      We have history.

      We do.

    228. Cactus says:

      Try moi…

    229. smithie says:

      Cactus…i know…no offence meant mate but …a bit much, sorry

    230. twathater says:

      @ thepnr 1.08am je agree also as someone said Gordon Ross indycar I say AYE

    231. Cactus says:

      Hey y’all… ma moby fone died on me.. twas a low battery.

      Aye ahm HOME now.

      One was ah baw hair away frae gaun tae ra casino…

      Nah… ah’ll WIN here.

      Anybuddy feeling offended this morning…

      Good, well it is v important.

      What is a bit much?

      With Love xx.

    232. smithie says:

      Cactus….now i feel bad….good to know you had a good night and are safely home….all the best

    233. winifred mccartney says:

      Loved some of the ideas on this thread – what about Scottish Independents made up of many of the names mentioned eg Leslie Riddoch, Elaine C, Paul Kavanagh, James Kelly (the one with the brain) Peter A Bell, Nana and many of the above mentioned.

      We should make the list vote count for us.

    234. Fergus Green says:

      @Thepnr 1.08.

      Not sure about Shafi or Sheridan, but add Gordon Ross and Stuart Campbell to your list and we have a formidable alliance.

      All we need is 50 constituency SNP MSPs plus 2 YES Alliance MSPs in each region and we have 66 pro-indy seats in Holyrood. We would even be able to elect an SNP/YES Speaker and still hold a majority.

      Any other names?

    235. schrodingers cat says:

      But we may face a similar unionist coalition the next election.

      unless slab/tories/libdem unite into one party, which i dont see happening, then the fptp constituency vote wont be effected. if they are stupid enough to stand a unionist party on the list, it will only take seats from unionist parties, remember that in 7/8 regions the snp have 1, greens4 the other 44 are already held by unionists.

      the snp would and should continue with a vote snp 1 and 2 campaign. to do otherwise could encurr the wrath of the electoral commission. not an issue though, slab/tory/libdems campaigned for a 1 and 2 vote in their respective campaigns but the unionist voters were still able to vote tactically to keep out the snp. I see no reason why indy supporters couldnt do the same.

      @pnr, not johnathon shafi, indeed i would rule out any of the old left wing, the idea is to unite the indy supporters behind people they want to vote for, not divide them. better to select less well known but less controvertial candidates eg indycardiver, nana, macart etc

    236. schrodingers cat says:

      Fergus Green
      snap

      their are already big hitters on the list, wgd, peter bell, stu campbell, james kelly

      we could always approach…..shh. alex salmond he isnt in the snp at the mo 🙂

      not everyone need be high profile. time for new faces to emerge.

    237. Nana says:

      http://www.businessforscotland.com/why-neo-liberal-brextremists-really-want-a-no-deal-brexit/

      https://thoughtcontrolscotland.com/2018/10/27/scots-are-more-dissatisfied-with-the-bbc-than-any-other-group/

      Tories sending letters with postal vote papers enclosed. Should you just bin them or send the letters back?
      https://www.facebook.com/indycargordonross/videos/1854986501263331/?t=26

      Mark Frankland speaking this week during Social Security Committee at the Scottish Parliament on the challenges facing Scottish food banks.
      https://twitter.com/EmmaHarperMSP/status/1055858774777434112

    238. Nana says:

      I was commissioned to take an independent look at Scottish social media to see if I found Scots or bots. Instead, I discovered an opportunity to drive the debate on from whether we have a problem to how we fix it…
      https://www.byline.com/column/67/article/2327

      Oh well, that’ll be fine then
      http://archive.is/DrBI3

      Teachers’ pay rise a con-trick, says Carwyn Jones
      http://archive.is/6oVUj

      http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2018/10/27/if-only-i-was-reasonable-2/

    239. Nana says:

      The Tories are trying to pull a fast one on NHS privatisation – here’s how
      http://archive.is/rRisR

      ‘Long-term pay growth has been highest in Scotland & lowest in Wales’ says @ONS.
      https://twitter.com/WelshConserv/status/1056522079581995014

      How universal credit is fuelling Britain’s homelessness crisis
      http://archive.is/7zlS6

      https://www.rte.ie/news/analysis-and-comment/2018/1027/1006996-brexit-negotiation-teams/

    240. Nana says:

      UK has ‘rolled over’ only 14 out of 236 EU international treaties
      http://archive.is/XoJXk

      https://www.politico.eu/article/chancellor-philip-hammonds-deal-or-no-deal-brexit-uk-budget/

      Brexit: taking back control
      http://eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=87038

      A likely Budget cut in VAT on online publications will be presented as a boost for journalism. In reality it is a bung for the pro-Tory billionaires behind the Mail, the Sun and the Telegraph
      https://www.byline.com/column/68/article/2328

    241. Nana says:

      Unbelievable as it’s being reported Theresa May’s Tories are making Terminally ill cancer sufferers wait 5 weeks for the horrific Universal Credit.. Esther McVey slams the door on reporter asking about Universal Credit
      https://twitter.com/chunkymark/status/1055795040843223041

      Brexit’s lead economist Prof Patrick Minford on UK car industry: “You are going to have to run it down … in the same way we ran down the coal industry and steel industry. These things happen.”
      https://twitter.com/mikegalsworthy/status/1056490686638383104

      Every day we remain part of this damned union, Scots are being tainted by Westminster.
      Warning following two links are distressing -Yemen
      http://archive.is/bjcLn

      Khashoggi was to disclose Saudi use of chemical weapons in Yemen
      http://archive.is/i212e

    242. Fergus Green says:

      SchrodCat, I like your thinking. The opportunity to vote for a non-aligned Alex Salmond in NE Scotland would be fantastic.

      Lesley Riddoch or Speaker, would take no shit from anyone.

    243. Ken500 says:

      Vote SNP/SNP. To get the SNP over the line. Do not vote for other Parties. The majority is the main thing. Everything else will follow,

      How can people in Unionists Parties or who vote unionist think they will get Independence by doing so. They must be completely delusional. The unionists Parties will screw Scotland in every way they can and do. They are part of the British establishment who have been illegally and secretly taking £Billions from Scotland for ever lying and keeping it secret under the Official Secrets Act. Scotland is losing £Billions because of them.

      There was never any need for austerity. None whatsoever. It has cost more, The sanctioning and starving people. The cuts to NHS, Education and Welfare cuts were totally unnecessary, The tax take has gone up. The tax revenues have gone up. There was absolutely no need for austerity.

      The Westmibster unionists are the most unbelievable fools ever put in the Planet. There was absolutely no need for the ConDems ‘austerity’. Elected to protect NHS, Education and vulnerable people. The cut them, Taking a sleigh hammer to the funding. Cut NHS/Education and Welfare. Sanctions and starving people. Cruel, evil and nasty.

      Now Clegg has gone to work for the biggest crook in the world for £Millions Breaking International Law. Caneron is fleecing the Chinese- British Consortium for £Millions. The Tory slush fund wasting £Billions of public money. Cameron had bought another holiday home for £Millions. Crime and illegal activities does pay. Especially for these Westminster unionists breaking the Law.

      Their illegal wars have cost £Billions causing the worse migrate crisis since the 11WW. Death and destruction. The financial fraud and tax evasion are committed by Westminster unionist and their associates, They have taken £Billions from Scotland for years and lied about. Thry have ruined the Oil & Gas sector with high Tories tax affecting production. The Tories have ruined the fishing industry by not using bigger nets and introducing better term and conditions for sustainable fishing, Then lied about it.

      Hinkley Point and HS2 are a total waste of money with no business case. There are better, cheaper alternatives. More waste of £Billions. Trident is a complete waste of time and money. The unionists parties are wasting money all over Scotland and are not supporting essential services.

      Iraq, Dunblane and Lockerbie kept secret for 100 years.

      Brexit will cost Scotland even more. It will affect Scotland and the NE the most in the UK. The EU costs Scotland nothing and brings in benefits. EU grants and funding for investment and development of renewable energy etc. Lots of EU tourists and students come to Scotland. It is reciprocal. The university sector lose out in research grants etc. World research and medical expertise is being threatened. Costing jobs, income and investment.

      Tidal energy has been compromised by the Westminster intransigence to renewables, Development firms in the Highlands and Islands are going elsewhere and Scotland is losing out in investment, initiative and growth of cheap renewable energy and the expertise that could be develop and sold to provide it. Along with CCS projects now abandoned because of Westminster intransigence and ignorant. Fracking Gas instead of supporting renewables, A disastrous, incomprehensible policy. Fracking and nuclear instead of renewables. Unbelievable foolish and ignorant. Just plain stupid.

      Scotland as part of the EU would receive higher CAP payments. Shared EU Defence keeps costs down. EU membership for Scotland costs nothing and brings in benefits. Nearest biggest market.

      The Westminster unionist government is totally useless, incompetent and lying. Lie after lie after lie. They are disgusting, parasites out to ruin the world economy in order to line their own pockets.

      Vote SNP/SNP. Vote for Independence.

    244. orri says:

      Early on Labour tried the same on a more official capacity. Turns out any formal alliance between parties can be treated as a single party by the Electoral Commission. So the SNP can’t endorse a second party. Without that endorsement you’re back to RISE where I doubt a third Indy party, including Greens, would get enough votes for a seat. Even if they did the might divert enough those from the other two so that they don’t get a seat they might otherwise have got.

      Until the list, at least, is changed to some kind of STV two parties is the most we can afford. Picking the one you fancy is also the best strategy.

      A National list only works in Australia because they have mandatory voting.

    245. Capella says:

      @ Thepnr – I picked it up from Glen Greenwald’s twitter, he’s a journalist/lawyer based in S America and founder of The Intercept. Maybe that’s where you read about it.

      His partner, David Miranda, was detained at a UK airport a few years ago and his laptop ransacked by UK security – probably because they were reporting on Chelsea Manning and the Snowden revelations about surveillance.

    246. Ken500 says:

      If there is any attempt to divide and rule. You will lose. Put up any other candidates. You will lose. Playing right Ito the unionists hands, Now is not the time for division. It is beyond comprehension and foolish. Beyond stupid. Just when the chance has come to get over the line. Do not do it. All out SNP push will do it, There is not the luxury of green navel grazing. They are totally incompetent and useless in any case. They could muck up Independence. The most unpopular Party with the most unpopular policies. Hanging on to the SNP shirttails to get votes. Then trying to put the boot in.

      The ones who will decide are the 30% who normally do not vote. Or the people voting for unionists Parties or in them who support Ibdependence. They will never get Independence doing that. These unionist Parties are against it with a venom, They will do anything to stop Independence. To line their own pockets. Leopards never change their spots. Vultures never cease. They cheat. Lie and over spend. Break electoral rule at every opportunity, These unionist Parties are funded from London HQ’s. Precisely to deny democracy.

      Democraphically support will,increase. The elderly keeling over. The youngster coming on board. 4% a year. Elderly voted lost 3% . Youngster coming in 1%. A 4% or more gain. It could be even more. 50,000 deaths a year. More NO voter lost proportionately. Young voters gain. Some folk want it done before they keel over. Count them in, count them out. Yes, yes, YES at last. No disappointment this time.

    247. Nana says:

      @Thepnr

      Catching up with the thread and just wanted to say thanks for the vote of confidence. However, being someone who doesn’t suffer fools gladly, I would have a hard time holding back.
      I think it’s best I stick to helping out where I can and leave the difficult stuff to people with more control of their tongues:)

      Re BOLSONARO I posted articles last month and think this may have been one of them
      https://theintercept.com/2018/10/28/jair-bolsonaro-elected-president-brazil/

    248. Ottomanboi says:

      The SNP should not be seeking ‘alliances’ with anti Scottish independence Unionist parties over the UK’s quitting the EU. Once again the party leadership proves its strategic banality.

    249. Robert Peffers says:

      @Footsoldier says: 28 October, 2018 at 10:53 pm:

      ” … The SNP has become simply another political party competing with others for votes.”

      So are you suggesting they should NOT be competing with others for votes?

      ” … They must up their game by pushing the benefits of independence as the only game in town and all the time. Sadly in this current lull period – it is silence.”

      Strange that, as the SNP’s core policy has always been Scottish independence since it was formed in 1934 by an amalgamation of two other Scottish independence parties. It has had its main policy as independence for Scotland all my life.

      Now, thing is you are quick to condemn, but I cannot recall you ever coming up with any, or even hinting at, how you expect the SNP to propagate, Keith Brown’s rebuttals. They certainly seem not to be promulgated by any newspaper YOU seem to read nor by any broadcaster YOU seem to view or listen to.

      The SNP could, and do, send out press releases to such as the Daily Distress, Daily Fail, and Daily Wrecker but the SNP have no way to force these to publish them.

      If these anti-SNP, anti-independence, Westminster owned or Westminster controlled medias even mention anything by the SNP it is biased, picked over and criticised, by unionist people like Brian Taylor and Douglas Fraser, who slant things against both the SNP and Scottish independence.

      ” … Where is Keith Brown’s rebuttal unit and why are the hierarchy not rebutting every time they are live on air?”

      They are but, first of all there is no such thing as, “Live on air”, footsoldier.

      I’ve explained that fact often enough here on Wings. Here’s a hint for you – how do the broadcasters, “beep”, out offensive swearwords from, “Live”, commentaries or other programmes they claim to be live?

      Now put yourself in the Studio control room and imagine yourself as the producer. How could you manage to beep out a swear word from a live commentary? The word comes to you from the commentator and it is live. So when you hear the offensive word it would already be being heard live by the listeners too. So just how do you react fast enough to press the beep button?

      The answer is that it is impossible to do if the commentary is live. Broadcasts, both video & audio are now digitised and, just as, “Photoshop”, can alter photos so can digital delays be applied to broadcasts and the delays are variable.

      I remember a broadcast on TV some years ago and they were interviewing Alex Salmond in his North of Scotland home. They were also linking to the President of the USA via a satellite link.

      There was a ridiculously long audio delay between the studio presenter asking Salmond a question and Salmond giving his answer. Yet while we could see Alex live on video there was a noticeably long audio delay.

      Next they cut to the White House and there was only a very short
      delay between the studio questions and the POTUS’s replies.

      So how come it took the signal a great deal longer to get from the North of Scotland to Glasgow than it did from the USA White House?

      If you want to know what the SNP are saying and doing you are not going to know what it is unless you use the Holyrood live TV link:-

      https://www.scottishparliament.tv/

      Or the SNP website:-

      https://www.snp.org/

      Perhaps also such as, “The National”, website or one of the news agency websites but even these often only push the unionist press releases.

      You simply will not get the SNP’s or their MEPs, MPs and MSPs press releases on the unionist owned media. You might also try reading Prof John Robertson’s on-line stuff. For example:-

      https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/john-robertson/bbc-bias-and-scots-referendum-new-report

      footsoldier? Indeed you are sounding more and more like one of the foot-soldiers from the 77th Brigade of, “The British”, army.

    250. Clootie says:

      Well done Aberdeen. I’m not a great footie fan but when Rangers fans hold up placards with “proudly Scottish and fiercely British” I picked a side.

    251. Capella says:

      @ SC – you said upthread that the unionist parties would not form one party. That’s true. But what they do is collude (illegally) to downplay the weaker parties in any given area so that the one with the best chance will gain most votes.

      In Alex Salmond’s constituency, Gordon, they also phoned round and advised people who to vote for to get Alex out.

    252. Baldeagle58 says:

      Nana said:

      Tories sending letters with postal vote papers enclosed. Should you just bin them or send the letters back?
      https://www.facebook.com/indycargordonross/videos/1854986501263331/?t=26

      Nana, I just tried to look at the indycargordonross video on Facebook. When Facebook came up, there was the following message:

      Sorry, this content isn’t available at the moment

      The link you followed may have expired, or the Page may only be visible to an audience that you aren’t in.

      Is it just me, or has someone at Facebook ‘blocked’ the indycargordonross account?
      Do other Wingers want to try the link to see if they get the same message?

    253. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      orri at 7.46
      Who’s suggesting a “formal alliance” with another party? Where did that come from.

    254. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Ottomanboi at 8.59
      Why exactly?

    255. Nana says:

      Morning Baldeagle

      I’ve checked and it’s working fine for me. Try switching your computer off for a few minutes and maybe clear cookies etc.

      @Dave McEwan Hill

      http://www.thenational.scot/news/17185040.blackford-renews-brexit-unity-plea-to-labour-after-peer-tells-corbyn-to-step-up/?ref=twtrec

    256. Marie Clark says:

      Baldeagle58 @ 9.16, Nana’s link is working fine for me, so I don’t know what’s gone wrong for you.

    257. jfngw says:

      Herald covers a important issue with ridiculous headline ‘Working for Pennies a Minute’. Unless you are earning over £109k then we are all working for pennies a minute, I personally have never met many on £60/hr.

      Also gives the impression that this is a uniquely Scottish phenomenon, but as it’s about employment law then it is not devolved.

      Is this the next line of attack for the Unions, just waiting for Labour to pitch in and infer it is a SNP issue.

    258. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Perhaps somebody can put up an easy to understand description of how the list system actually works so we can have an informed debate.
      The only way to guarantee an SNP majority under the present system is that no other parties stand at all or nobody votes for any other party.
      It is DESIGNED to prevent any party getting a majority.

      What actually happened at the last election is that the SNP actually got more votes and got fewer seats.

    259. jfngw says:

      Just spotted the Brexit 50p coin, ‘Friendship with all Nations’. They presumably originally intended to have ‘Trade Deals with All Nations’ on it but had to knock out this rushed ill-prepared alternative.

    260. CameronB Brodie says:

      Scotland is truly bless to have the paternalistic love of English Tories, such a caring and forward looking bunch. Sound on economics and sound on social policy, never mind the unavoidable fact that they are responsible for creating hardship where there was none. Forget the IMF defined Brexit as a neo-liberal con-job, English cultural chauvinism will sort things out and right-wing populism ensure the ‘nation’ is blessed with only the finest of leaders.

      @HYUFD
      Couldn’t resist your inner fascist right-wing English/British nationalist, Toryboy?

    261. Nana says:

      Germany’s Angela Merkel ‘to abandon key party role’
      http://archive.is/u1Phd

      That’s all for now

    262. Ken500 says:

      Dugdale illegally telling people to vote Tory. Lost a Labour higher majority (in the UK) she mucked up the Labour vote.

      SNP/SNP is the only way to get over the line. Best bet. Any other will divide the vote. The 3rd rate unionists will get in any way but with a reduced vote.A minority.

      The electorate should never been put in the position of not understanding the electoral system. To illegally suit Unionists. Incompetence and ignorance Not democratic, but they knew that. No Democracy for Scotland is their mantra. They have had a lot of practise and are experts at it. Lies and deceit to try and fool the electorate. On broken promises and cruelty. They are despicable. Just report them to the EU/UN again.

    263. Robert Peffers says:

      @HYUFD says: 28 October, 2018 at 11:38 pm:

      ” … If the Scottish people are ‘legally sovereign’ then by definition that means independence can only be achieved by 51% of Scottish voters voting for it in a referendum.”

      There is no, “if”, HYUFD, Not only is it a basic tenet of the independent, “Scottish Rule of Law”, but that tenet is enshrined in the Treaty of Union, 1706/7. In such Treaties each, “Article of Union”, is a legal agreement in it’s own right. Go read Article of Union number 19. Furthermore, there has been a, “Scottish Claim of Right”, (sovereignty), going back a long way before the Treaty that formed the United KINGDOM.

      That is a bipartite treaty between only the signatory kingdoms of Scotland and England. It forms a united kingdom – not a united country for it contains four countries but three of them form the Kingdom of England.

      The union is NOT a union of four countries but does contain four distinct countries. BTW – Ireland is one country first politically partitioned by Westminster by creating, “The Irish Free State”, which was not factually free because it was a created a British Empire Dominion just like, for example, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.

      Westminster really had nothing to do with the formation of, “The Republic of Ireland”, for that was the Republic declaring itself a republic and a republic cannot be part of a Monarchy. The UK had no choice in the matter.

      ” … If not Westminster would have every right to follow the Spanish route and suspend Holyrood if it declared independence with no referendum.”

      Not true. Here is a cut & paste about the Scottish Law Lord:-

      “The Lord Advocate and the Solicitor General for Scotland (formally known as the Scottish Law Officers) are the principal legal advisers to the Scottish Government. One of their roles is to provide legal opinions to Scottish Ministers in cases where advice at the highest level is required.”

      The Lord Advocate made a claim of the Scottish Claim of Right, (Sovereignty), to the Westminster Supreme Court. Westminster did not contest it and in law that is tantamount to agreeing with it.

      Subsequently Westminster appealed but the matter arrived at, “The World Court”, (the ECJ), and the ECJ issued a press report they had fast tracked it as a matter of urgency and said they hoped to have a decision by Christmas.

      If the ECJ upholds the Scottish Claim of Right then the people of Scotland are internationally confirmed as having been sovereign since long before the Treaty of Union. This leaves the Lord Advocate with the option to claim that as Westminster has never, since 1707, treated the Kingdom of Scotland as an Equally Sovereign partner that the union has always been an illegal sham.

      This especially since the introduction of devolution that split the union as a quadratic union of countries with Westminster as the de facto Parliament of the country of England and using EVEL to enforce English rule upon the other three countries.

      Therefore, if Westminster has always been illegally operating, and there has never been an elected Parliament of England since 1707, then the union is over and the Kingdom of Scotland could even claim compensation for all the cash scammed by Westminster from Scotland since 1707.

      If you need confirmation of those facts then try a Google with the question, “ECJ on Scottish question”. You will get loads of stuff that seems to have flown over the general public’s head yet was indeed reported in the MSM.

    264. mike cassidy says:

      Dave McEwan Hill 9.32

      “Perhaps somebody can put up an easy to understand description of how the list system actually works so we can have an informed debate.”

      This was all debated here at the last election.

      Nothing has changed.

      A voting system which demands explanation – for understanding or gaming – is not fit for purpose.

      With a bit of luck we won’t need it.

      If 2021 Holyrood elections are required, the voting system will be the least of Scotlands problems.

    265. Giving Goose says:

      Those Rangers fans who held up placards with “proudly Scottish and fiercely British” are not Scottish.
      I will not recognise them as Scottish.
      They have an identity which is not Scottish.
      British = English.

    266. Robert Peffers says:

      @Thepnr says: 29 October, 2018 at 12:42 am:

      ” … See my earlier post at 8:05
      <i"Elaine C. Smith, Pat Kane, Wee Ginger Dug, Lesley Riddoch, Robin McAlpine to name but a few and I’ll bet you could find a good few more to add to that list.""

      Sigh! What a great idea – NOT.

      In the first place the list is drawn up by the existing parties. That means your list of potential candidates would first have to set themselves up as a new distinct political party and register as such with Westminster. So they would also need to all agree to do so.

      Then they would have to agree on a leader and the usual posts of a regular political party and form branches to choose candidates and all of which would drag indy voters away from the SNP.

      All it would achieve is to split the list voters into more choices on the ballot paper and confuse the more politically more un-aware votes even more so.

    267. frogesque says:

      @Giving Goose: 10.18

      Unionists, never knowingly backing a winning side!

    268. Dr Jim says:

      Adam Boulton Sky news says :

      Are we expecting the chancellor hand out any treats in the budget all will it just be all tricks

      That in a nutshell should inform everybody what we’re living with when it’s *expected* that the UK government will be attempting to lie to the people and get away with it

    269. Capella says:

      @ Robert Peffers – you may be right. I thought it a good idea too. I assumed that, for the list vote there would only be 8 regions so only 8 candidates max. They could stand in fewer regions and only aim to get 4 voted in. They wouldn’t need to have any constituency candidates. The campaign access to media would be an advantage etc etc.

      But I don’t really understand how the d’Hondt system can be gamed. I did read, in 2014, that it is used widely in Europe but that there the list section is smaller thus favouring constituency candidates.
      In Scotland, the unionist parties campaign as one party, three panel guests versus one SNP OR Green for example, thus offering an appearance of “choice” which fools voters.

    270. wull says:

      jfngw says:
      29 October, 2018 at 9:47 am
      Just spotted the Brexit 50p coin, ‘Friendship with all Nations’

      Which brings to mind the old saying: ‘With friends like these, who needs enemies?’

      Maybe this Brexit 50p coin is intended to replace the GB Pound. In the vain hope that the continually sinking post-EU GBP might still be worth that amount – the present 50p.

      Maybe the Brexiteers are being overly-optimistic with that projected calculation?

      Never mind, all you merry gentlemen in the officers’ mess of the good ship Brexit. The more the pound plummets the more the stock market will keep rising.

      Maybe the ship needs to be re-named ‘The Bounty’. Full, as it is, of bounty-hunting pirates. Or ‘The Boris’, seeing that BJ assured us all that Brexit was the opportunity of a lifetime.

      Opportunity? Certainly … but for whom?

    271. CameronB Brodie says:

      @HYUFD
      Given you’re a Toryboy living in England, I thought you could do with some skooling in social ethics and moral psychology. Get stuck in to some humanity lad and remember, Britain is a voluntary yoonyawn of nations, England does not dictate to Scotland.

      The Ethics of Brexit?

      ….Particularism, in the context of ethics, is the claim that each particular community has its own specific set of moral values—what we think is good or just or proper in religious, sexual and economic relations. Members of a community are socialized into its particular beliefs and values. The emphasis, morally speaking, is on distinctive identities: ethnic, religious, or cultural.

      This means that criticism of beliefs and values must be made internal to a community, e.g., outsiders do not have the perspective needed to make valid criticisms. One also cannot rightly criticize other communities. One might ignore, tolerate, seek to convert, or conquer another community, but valid criticism of others is not possible. Nor can one’s own moral values be rightly criticized by others.

      The paradox of moral particularism is that communities usually want a socio-political mechanism to protect their distinctive identities, say, the UN, NATO, EU Financial Zone, or other international (e.g. non-particular) institutions. And yet by the logic of particularism it is not possible to grant the global ethical validity of those institutions.

      However, deeper issues are involved than procedural ones. These issues strike to the meaning of “Europe” as well as to the form that moral consciousness should take in our age. The cultural philosopher and critic George Steiner, in his profound little book, The Idea of Europe: An Essay, has argued persuasively that Europe—a continent with an odd and often conflicted relation of Greek thought and Biblical morality—has represented and must represent a form of humanism that seeks “the realization of wisdom, the disinterested pursuit of knowledge, the creation of beauty.” Not surprisingly, debates about how to configure the EU have whirled around these ideas, values, and historical legacy.

      Yet what matters most is a commitment to a form of humanism that, at least in principle, works against the tribalism that might appear in the wake of Brexit. This form of humanism challenges current far right political movements and does so in the name of a shared—and thus universal—human dignity. Shared human dignity obviously can only be lived by particular peoples with distinctive identities. Ironically, a commitment to shared human dignity is the necessary moral orientation needed for sustaining and enhancing peoples’ distinctive identities. It is the awareness of this irony that is missing in the current discussion….

      https://divinity.uchicago.edu/sightings/ethics-brexit

      Brexit and the Moral Vision of Nationhood

      A Divided Nation

      The seismic shock of this referendum has exposed the depth of the rifts within contemporary British society. It has revealed the gulfs that exist between England and the rest of the Union and especially Scotland, between London and the rest of England, between the young and the old, between post-nationalist cosmopolitans and more provincial nationalists, between non-White British and White British, between progressives and social conservatives (see some of the polls here), between intellectuals, experts, and the political class and those who distrust them….

      https://mereorthodoxy.com/political-social-earthquake-brexit-future-britain/

      Brexit, psychotherapy and moral psychology: individualism versus the common good

      So, following Brexit in June 2016, should we rename our journal The European and Un-United United Kingdom Journal for Psychotherapy and Counselling? And, what role if any should psychotherapists have in influencing clients’ politics? There are many possible theories we might draw on in exploring conscious and unconscious forces in the UK voting for Brexit. We might, for example, look to our theories in attempting to explain apparent instinctual reactions about immigration and giving away money ‘without getting anything in return’. However, I would like to focus on the extent to which psychological therapists’ default position is the promotion of individualism at the expense of the common good (and, it might be argued, the individual). Also how together with the rise of the populist likes of Nigel Farage, Boris Johnson, Marine Le Pen and other politicians across Europe who some would see as encouraging
      racism, moral psychology is also, perhaps helpfully, in the ascendency. This notion of how we consider right from wrong, regardless of whether we see it as ‘universal’ or culturally influenced’, is not usually directly a subject for psychotherapy training. So is there perhaps too much of a tendency to attempt to free our clients from the constraints of others and not enough attention paid to how our clients constrain and detrimentally affect others’ lives?

      https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13642537.2016.1215812

    272. Thepnr says:

      @Capella

      Yes you’re right the article was by Glenn Greenwald, here’s the link. Scary person to have running a country the size of Brazil.

      https://theintercept.com/2018/10/08/brazils-bolsonaro-led-far-right-wins-a-victory-far-more-sweeping-and-dangerous-than-anyone-predicted-its-lessons-are-global/

    273. Thepnr says:

      @Nana

      Yes I thought it was one of your links else it’s something I would never had read otherwise. Cheers for all the links 🙂

    274. CameronB Brodie says:

      @HYUFD
      Remember Toryboy, you’re the English/British nationalist, I’m the Scottish patriot. Here’s some more social ethics and moral philosophy to get your head around.

      David Miller’s Nationalism: A Critique

      Abstract
      This thesis examines David Miller’s defence of nationalism. It considers what is termed “the compatriot partiality thesis”, that is, the view that we are justified in giving our compatriots more moral consideration than we give to outsiders. It examines the debate between Miller’s own ethical particularism and the ethical universalist position. Miller’s particularist view rests in part on his view that political theory must embrace a feasibility constraint, and his case for that is examined. Finally, Miller claims that his defence of nationalism is consistent with the endorsement of human rights. The thesis examines his attempt to incorporate an idea of human rights, and concludes that his attempt to do so is inconsistent with his ethical particularism.

      https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f081/b761a01625d3a9eaf9fea9b87b155804b85c.pdf

      The Ethics of Secession and a Normative Theory of Nationalism

      Extract

      The three major normative theories of secession are just-cause theories, choice theories, and national self-determination theories. Just-cause and choice theories are problematic because they view secession in terms of the application of liberal theories of justice or a liberal principle of autonomy, without regard for the dynamics of nationalist mobilitization and national politics. National self-determination theories can be supported by a collective autonomy argument. This is related to a particular view of the relationship between collective self-government and territory.

      https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/canadian-journal-of-law-and-jurisprudence/article/ethics-of-secession-and-a-normative-theory-of-nationalism/448144AE0A48202434369F63196DC3DA

      Culture and the Morality of Nationalism

      Introduction
      Nationalism, its theories, causes and consequences, represents a tradition that has generated a literature so massive that even the most conscientious of scholars will find it difficult to investigate and imbibe all that has been written on the topic. This paper takes a tentative step toward explaining and evaluating nationalism and the various aspirations it inspires. The task at hand eschews a comprehensive analysis of nationalism in place of a more focused and rigorous understanding of how moral argument can reveal important insights into the phenomenon of nationalism.

      Drawing heavily on aspects of Charles Taylor, I develop the concept of “culture as framework” as a moral framework that both houses the traditional components of culture (language, religion, history) and generates questions that speak to the goods that have value for a particular conception of the nation. I deal with the more prosaic understanding of culture and its affects on a definition of citizenship and emphasize the types of moral questions culture elicits within nationalist arguments. The general assault on the inclusion of culture within political theory can be characterized as a failure to definitively establish the normative value of religion, language, etc for the category of citizenship. I hope to show that what makes culture valuable when speaking about membership in a given political community has as much to do with its content as with the questions it generates and forces upon us within a moral
      context.1 Culture thus represents certain attributes and a moral framework that helps explicate belonging and membership….

      https://www.cpsa-acsp.ca/papers-2006/Patel.pdf

    275. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Robert Peffers at 10.21

      You obviously don’t understand what is being discussed.

      (Gets oneself ready for rude and offensive response)

    276. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      mike cassidy at 10.14

      I sincerely hope so.

    277. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Just to clarify what I originally suggested I did NOT at any point suggest that the plethora of good people who would make up an “Independence Coalition” for the list vote would stand individually named.
      On the voting paper would be “Independence Coalition” or similar.

      Just to make it clearer. One might have expected that a left wing independence supporting candidate would have been voted in on the Glasgow list. However he division between SNP, Greens, Solidarity, SSP on the Glasgow list gave us Annie Wells

    278. schrodingers cat says:

      Ken500 says:
      29 October, 2018 at 8:03 am
      If there is any attempt to divide and rule. You will lose. Put up any other candidates. You will lose. Playing right Ito the unionists hands, Now is not the time for division. It is beyond comprehension and foolish. Beyond stupid. Just when the chance has come to get over the line. Do not do it. All out SNP push will do it,
      —————–
      you mean we might lose the one and only snp list msp we have in 7 of the 8 regions ?????????????

      shock, horror, jings crivens an help ma boab…

      yer right son, its too big a gamble, that and the possibilty of the sky falling in on yer head.

      too risky

      grow a pair!!

    279. Cactus says:

      A very good morning to you smithie, we’re all doing good this side of the city, was cool to chat with ye in the early oors, everything is excellent.

      Call me out anytime, anywhere, anyplace 🙂

      Cheers to ye mate et aussi everybuddy else aye named.

    280. Cactus says:

      Hey Thepnr, aye ah was dancing and spinning around in the nightclub wearing my Yes2 badge and ah got talkin’ to twa girlies dressed up for the Halloween… when sitting down, Morticia said she voted no last time but will vote Yes this time.

      Sometimes ye don’t have to persuade people… they learn themselves.

      Sometimes all ye have to do is wear it!

      Just keep smiling. 🙂

    281. Thepnr says:

      In the 2016 Election the SNP had 953,987 votes and won 4 seats on the regional list.

      The Tories 524,222 list votes and won 24 seats.
      Labour had 435,919 list votes and won 21 seats.
      Greens had 150,426 votes winning 6 seats.
      Lib Dems 119,284 votes and won 1 seat.

      These numbers tell a story, an Independence coalition could expect around 20 seats for half of the SNP list vote.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_Parliament_election,_2016

    282. Thepnr says:

      @Cactus

      Job done then, good work 🙂

    283. CameronB Brodie says:

      @HYUFD
      Would you say you’re a bit of a misogynist, Toryboy? That would certainly fit with a support for Brexit. You do support Brexit, Toryboy?

      Gender differences in moral reasoning

      Abstract

      This research tests Gilligan’s hypothesis that men are more likely to consider moral dilemmas chiefly in terms of justice and individual rights, whereas women are more likely to be chiefly concerned with questions of care and relationships with others. In addition, we have investigated the effects of dilemma content upon orientation of moral judgment. Protocols from interviews with 50 college students, half women and half men, to three moral dilemmas were coded according to moral orientation. Results indicated that both moral orientations were widely used by both men and women, but that women were more likely to employ prodominantly care considerations. In a test of mean differences in proportion of justice responses, content of the specific moral dilemma showed a strong influence upon moral reasoning. Results suggest that both gender and situational factors need to be considered in our understanding of moral reasoning.

      Keywords
      Gender Difference College Student Social Psychology Strong Influence Moral Judgment

      https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00288220

      Gender differences in moral identity?
      https://www.researchgate.net/post/Gender_differences_in_moral_identity

      SEX DIFFERENCES IN MORAL REASONING:
      THE ROLE OF INTELLIGENCE AND LIFE HISTORY STRATEGY

      ABSTRACT
      The manner in which sex interacts with intelligence and life history strategy to predict moral reasoning was examined using a sample of early adolescents. Hierarchal regression revealed that for males, intelligence was positively and significantly associated with the level of moral reasoning. However, for females intelligence was not predictive of the level of moral reasoning. Alternatively, for females slow life history strategy was positively associated with the level of moral reasoning, while for males it was not. The results add to the growing understanding of individual differences in moral decision making. However, some caution is warranted when drawing conclusions given the size of the sample.

      Key words: Sex differences, moral reasoning, life history strategy, intelligence

      ishe.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/HEB_2016_31_2_5-16.pdf

    284. Ian McCubbin says:

      fake news again. So glad I don’t read this.
      It does not agree with late summer canvasing for the SNP.
      i can see a rise in Lib dems and Greens if we don’t have independence by 2021. In fact i might defect by then also. If SNP dont take us out of the union by then they will have missed the opportunity and like many i will be looking for other avenues or even somewhere else to live.

    285. Iain mhor says:

      @11:38pm
      That’s some twisted logic going on.
      For internal consistency reverse.
      Only if 51% vote Independence and only in a referendum can all Scots be considered sovereign. That is imposing terms. That is not the definition of Scots Sovereignty at all.

      Scots are sovereign no matter what they vote or what their political views. As such no other agent may constrain them and their choice of how their sovereignty manifests.
      Currently it manifests in the Parliament and Government of Scotland. There are a few simple tenets which operate in democratic parliaments of which I’m sure people are aware. Even those who hold to systems of Parliamentary Sovereignty, Divine right of Kings, Crown Prerogatives and suchlike – Majority being one. Legitimacy of the actions of that Majority being another.
      So a declaration of Independence may be achieved via Parliament by any manner of means available to said Parliament and Government. Holyrood could be declared suspended unlawfully by Westminster, if they cared to try. That would be an easy route to instant, lawful declaration of Independence. Similarly any attempt to remove powers of said Scottish Parliament.

      The vast majority of Scots, across all persuasions, vested their sovereignty in the Scottish Parliament. It exists because they willed it. Within that Parliament the majority willed an Independence referendum – twice. One has ocurred and the decision was not to declare Independence.
      The decision was not “Remain in the Union” nor was it “Extinguish Scotland” it was not an affirmation of the Union or the powers of Westminster over the Scottish Parliament, nor the powers or legitimacy vested in the Scottish Parliament, nor an abrogation of the sovereignty of the Scottish people – that was not the question addressed in the referendum. The decision taken at that time was “Not to become an Independent Country” – continuing within the Union was merely the status quo. There is a difference. The other subsequent referendum is now pending. That is the difference.
      No other agent may gainsay that. Neither Westminster, Crown, UK Supreme court or any representative on earth of a plethora of gods. No-one gets to overrule the sovereign will of the Scottish people except unlawfully by force.

      The Scottish people also vested their sovereignty in their representatives to the Westminster Parliament. But the sovereignty of the Scottish people is not vested within the Westminster Parliament, nor Government.
      The Westminster Parliament was not a creation by the will of the majority of sovereign Scots. The Scottish Parliament was. It therefore, is the supreme arbiter of the sovereign will of the Scottish people and not Westminster, until such times as they people of Scotland decide otherwise.

      This “Union” is a Treaty between partners recall.
      If the terms are to be dictated to them, then the people are not sovereign and not partners. If the majority chose a referendum then a referendum it is. If the majority vest their sovereignty in a Parliament and Government of Scotland, then the actions of that Parliament will be and it will be lawful. If the majority subsequently take issue with the actions of their own Parliament and believe it has misrepresented their sovereign will, then that parliament will be struck down and corrected – No agency may gainsay this – Importantly, not even another agency within Scotland, the law follows the will of the people.

      Quite simply : Whatever the majority of the Scottish people say must occur, eventually does occur and does so lawfully. External agencies can scream into the night all they like, they have no lawful action to take against it. They may if they choose take many unlawful actions.

      Bear in mind that the prime external agent in most of these discussions is Westminster which is a perfidious agreement and treaty breaker.
      In the referendum of 2014 a diplomatic protocol was instituted. The relevant ‘Section’ amendment was made to a UK Act (as it had to be, the Section of the Act being unlawful in Scotland) an ‘Agreement’ was made and a ‘Memorandum of understanding. Westminster breached the latter two and invidiously, also breached a Scottish Act of Parliament (Independence Referendum 2013) These breaches did not go unnoticed internationally. Such breaches lower status and adversely affect standings in subsequent international negotiations; as we observe from recent Brexit & WTO dealings. Westminster was shown to be perfidious and previously open diplomatic doors were closed.
      There is to be no diplomatic “understanding” when Westminster negotiates internationally “its feet are to be held to the fire, not just by Scotland”

      Tl;dr – The Westminster Parliament governs two partners in Union. It has no lawful Parliamentary Sovereignty or Crown Supremacy over the Scottish Parliament, nor the lawful right to impose such sovereignty or dictate the terms of their sovereignty on the people of Scotland against their will.
      It has the right to do so for the peoples of the KoE and its Crown protectorates only.

      Note well, that should Scotland one day declare Independence at no point will it be “Granted” Independence it is not, nor ever was, anyone’s ‘Dominion’. The recurrent useage of the phrase in relation to Scotland illuminates the mindset of those who employ it.

    286. Thepnr says:

      @Iain mhor

      Thanks for that, some very good points I thought.

    287. Golfnut says:

      @ Iain Mhor,

      Good read, pity its at the end of the thread. A good example of Westminster acting, in my opinion, illegally is the Withdrawal Bill. The people of Scotland voted by majority to remain in the EU. Scotland’s Parliament rejected the Withdrawal Bill by majority. And Scotland’s MP’s voted against the Withdrawal Bill by majority.

    288. Rock says:

      Bob Mack says:
      28 October, 2018 at 6:18 pm

      “Rock is an interesting study. He or she has obviously had a judgement of court against them at some point and felt aggrieved. I would guess a letter to Nicola then followed on and Rock was told that nothing could be done.

      The level of venom towards legal services and lawyers ,of which Nicola is one. Cue resentment all round to anyone that supports Nicola. She was too gutless to help him or her,so she will be gutless for indy, and all who support her will be gutless too. Right Rock?

      Anger often leads to lack of reason.”

      Mostly wrong.

      Let us see YOUR sound reasoning.

      Should Nicola hold an independence referendum before Brexit has been completed or should she wait until Brexit has been completed and the UK is out of the EU?

      Do you have the guts and/or reasoning power to answer?

      Any “pleb” who has ever had anything to do with “justice” in Scotland knows that the Scottish justice system is rotten to the core and the vast majority of lawyers, especially judges, are the lowest of the low.

      Carmichael libeled Nicola Sturgeon before the last Westminster election and got away with it.

      Would you say that Scottish justice did the right thing?

      Do you have the guts and/or reasoning power to answer?

    289. HYUFD says:

      Ian Mhor If an SNP First Minister declared independence without a referendum that would of course not respect the will of the Scottish people which can only be determined in an official independence referendum. The SNP got less than half the vote at the 2016 Holyrood election and the 2017 general election after all and not all SNP voters back independence

    290. HYUFD says:

      Westminster and the UK PM would therefore quite correctly immediately suspend Holyrood if UDI was declared without an official independence referendum just as the Spanish government did with the Catalan Parliamemt on its UDI declaration and as Westminster and the British government has most of the military and police in the British Isles the SNP could do nothing about it

    291. HYUFD says:

      Cameron B Brodie I voted Remain though I respect the Leave vote

    292. HYUFD says:

      Robert Peffers Even if the ECJ affirms the Scottish people as legally sovereign they would still have to endorse an independence vote that would end a Union the 1707 Scottish Parliament voted for in a referendum. EVEL of course only relates to English laws ie matters Holyrood, Cardiff Bay and Stormont already decides for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland

    293. HYUFD says:

      Personally I would prefer an English Parliament to EVEL and make Westminster the Federal UK Parliament but that is another matter

    294. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Some commenters on Wings are rather aggressive in their demands for other commenters to explain themselves.

      Iye?

    295. yesindyref2 says:

      @HYUFD
      I voted Remain, and I respect the 62% Remain vote in Scotland, the 56% Remain vote in NI, and the 52% Leave vote in England and Wales. Westminster doesn’t, neither does your Conservative party.

    296. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi HYUFD.

      I don’t believe you are correct in your musings.

      Maggie Thatcher made it perfectly clear. A quote from The Scotsman:

      “Scotland should now take its lead from the redoubtable Maggie Thatcher, who famously declared in 1988, “Scotland will become an independent country when it can send a majority of SNP MPs to Westminster”. Well, we certainly did just that in 2015! If this can be replicated there is no need for a second referendum as the stated will of the Scottish nation will be settled and in Winnie Ewing’s historic words of 50 years ago: “Stop the world. Scotland wants to get on.””

      The problem with 2015 was that in the SNP’s manifesto for that election, there was nothing about a majority of independence-supporting MPs being elected would give the Scottish Government the popular power to declare that Scotland would revert to being an independent country.

      There was nothing along the same lines in the manifesto for the 2016 Holyrood election, nor the 2017 snap general election.

      However, if there is a snap 2018 or 2019 general election, all the SNP have to do is insert that commitment into their manifesto for that election and, if a majority of SNP MPs are elected, the sovereign people of Scotland will have made their wishes clear.

      That will be when the union’s ba’ is up on the slates…

    297. CameronB Brodie says:

      Brian Doonthetoon
      Brexit articulates structural misogyny, as does British nationalism, in a metaphysical sense. Britain is not an equal partnership, as there is no democratic infrastructure to enable the joint sharing of power between Scotland and England. Scotland is the abused wife (see Brexit).

    298. HYUFD says:

      Yesindyref2 Scotland voted to stay in the UK in 2014, it cannot stay in the UK which voted to Leave the EU and the EU at the same time.

    299. HYUFD says:

      Brian Doonthetoon Thatcher was wrong on that and you cannot take one quote from Thatcher and agree with it when you disagree with her on everything else. The only people who can decide Scotland’s future are the Scottish people in an independence referendum even if the SNP won 100% of MPs and MSPs that would not give them a mandate to declare independence without over 50% voting for it in an official referendum especially as you can win almost 100% of Scottish MPs with under 50% of the vote. Westminster would quite rightly ignore it and still legislate over Scotland, indeed if Holyrood declared UDI without an offical independence referendum Westminster would correctly suspend Holyrood and impose direct rule on Scotland

    300. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      No, HYUFD, you are totally missing the point.

      If a political party (the SNP?) enters general election warfare with a manifesto that says that if a majority of independence-supporting MPs are elected, then that will provide the party with a mandate to negotiate independence, I understand that the international community would go along with that.

      Y’know, the right to self determination and all that. You are typing from a Britnat handbook that has been discredited.

      Tell me why I’m wrong.

    301. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Thepnr at 12.13

      Thank you. It is a relief to see something from somebody that understands

    302. yesindyref2 says:

      HYUFD says: “Yesindyref2 Scotland voted to stay in the UK in 2014, it cannot stay in the UK which voted to Leave the EU and the EU at the same time.

      Yup, you got it in a oner.

      Welcome to YES.

    303. Iain mhor says:

      Yeah, I think the HyFuD missed the bit about which Parliament was the supreme arbiter of the sovereign will of Scots. It isn’t Westminster. Westminster has no authority over the Scottish Parliament. Westminster is merely an administrative unit. The only way Westminster can claim sovereignty over the Scottish Parliament, is if it also claims sovereignty over the people of Scotland.
      That issue has already been addressed. Not by me I might add. Westminster has already conceded it has no claim to Sovereignty over the people of Scotland. So this is not just some gibbering pish personal opinion.
      I can only repeat:
      Scotland’s sovereignty is invested in its Parliament, any decision of its Parliament is a matter for the people of Scotland. The majority in the Parliament may declare independence in any way it chooses – or not as it sees fit.
      If a declaration of Independence is unacceptable to the people of Scotland, they and only they, will strike down that Government and Parliament, Westminster has no authority to do so.
      All the wishes in the world that it is otherwise does not make it so. Scotland is not a Colony nor a Dominion, nor a Crown protectorate. Should HyFud care to dispute that then fire away. Explain why Westminster has Sovereign power over the Scottish people and by extension over their Parliament.
      Make it good and cc Westminster in, because they failed to make the case and obviously missed that insight.
      There is a clear and simple way for Westminster to have solved this conundrum at any time – claim the Parliamentary Sovereignty and Crown prerogative and dissolve or suspend Holyrood. Dissolve the Treaty and annexe Scotland is even better. It requires only the same authority, no more no less than that which is required to dissolve Holyrood.
      It hasn’t, because it has not that authority or it would have been done lang-syne.

    304. CameronB Brodie says:

      So HYUFD does understand the concept of democratic mandate, he simply thinks Britain is one nation. I’m still not sure if it’s willful blindness to the simple logic of Scotland’s democratic deficit, ’cause the lad’s quite edumicated. I want to believe it’s not simply cultural chauvinism that flavours his outlook. Supremacist views are sooooooo unbecoming.

    305. yesindyref2 says:

      @CBB
      It’s a puzzler. He does indeed totally ignore Scotland’s right to decide for ourselves, perhaps he considers us as a region like Essex? Maybe even a part of an enlarged England?

    306. yesindyref2 says:

      Techincally speaking by the way, Scotland did NOT vote “to stay in the UK in 2014”, that was NOT the question asked. The question was:

      Should Scotland be an independent country?

      The answer, at that time, was NO, with promises of further devolution, whether delivered or not. The NO was a self-determination to keep the status quo (with further powers), a status quo which included staying in the EU.

      That is now not the case, and we have seen in the UKSC appeal, the importance of wording, in referendum questions as well.

      Unionists are on a sticky wicket with their assertions about “voted to stay in the UK” which would not hold water in a court of law. I think the courts would call that a googly.

    307. HYUFD says:

      Brian Doonthetoon You are wrong, as the complete lack of support for Catalonia when the Catalan Parliament declared UDI from Spain from the international community proved

    308. HYUFD says:

      Ian mhor Holyrood is just a creation of Westminster, the original Scottish Parliament which voted to absorb itself into Westminster is still part of Westminster through Scottish MPs.

    309. HYUFD says:

      Yesindyref2 Wrong, the question in 2014 was ‘Do you want Scotland to be an independent country?’ not ‘Do you want Scotland to be an independent country if the UK ever leaves the EU?’ In which case the answer is they never really wanted Scotland to be independent at all but simply to ensure that it was part of the UK and EU rather than truly independent which would require leaving both.

    310. Thepnr says:

      @Dave McEwan Hill

      It’s not really difficult to see the anomaly is it?

      Labour and the Tories between then got less list votes than the SNP on their own yet ended up with 45 seats while the SNP got 4.

      A good sound trustworthy Independence Coalition would mop up many of their seats and guarantee a pro-indy majority in Holyrood. The Tories and Labour parties would become also rans.

    311. yesindyref2 says:

      the complete lack of support for Catalonia

      Apples and oranges, Spain has a territorial integrity clause in its written Constitution and a constitutional court, the UK has no such clause in its unwritten constitution, and doesn’t have a constitutional court. The UK, of course, is actually in breach of Spain’s territorial integrity clause over Gibraltar, but that’s by the by.

    312. Cubby says:

      To all above who engage with the British Nationalist HYUFD

      I admire your patience in trying to get your points across to the Britnat but don’t see much point to it. He clearly is either an idiot or just plain refuses to acknowledge the truth. He gives the game away when he says Westminster controls the Army and the Police. Last resort of the fascist – threaten violence. The British empire answer to its unruly subjects throughout history – the bayonet and the bullet.

    313. Thepnr says:

      The Yes grass roots movement would do well to get their head around that anomaly and the SIC in particular should give serious consideration to this. There’s absolutely nothing to stop them becoming the political wing of the grass roots.

      Just my opinion.

    314. yesindyref2 says:

      @HYUFD
      You do talk some dog’s diarrhoea.

      When you get a question like “Do you want Scotland to be an independent country?” and the answer is NO, that NO means no change from the status quo based on the status quo being as it was then. Which inlcuded the UK being in the EU, as an important constitutional arrangement.

      You can’t have it both ways you know, take your pick of one!

    315. CameronB Brodie says:

      I’m not suggesting the lad is consciously a supremacist, it’s just that Britain does have a problem with structural racism. The history of Britain is also one of Anglo-centered global colonialism and cultural imperialism, so HYUFD may simply be articulating internalised values in English culture. There’s probably also a bit of a response to a perceived threat of loss. Whatever, he’s not got a vote. 🙂

      PSYCHOANALYSIS AND RACISM – READING THE OTHER SCENE

      Introduction

      ….As we will see, there are many different schools of thought within psychoanalysis, each with its own preferred strategy for defining and reading the symptomatic signs of racism, each claiming to be the royal road to a proper interpretation of the phenomenon. Nevertheless there are some common denominators, and these may provide us with a starting point.

      The first is the concept of The Unconscious itself. For psychoanalysis, this does not simply denote a lack of consciousness or reflexive awareness, a kind of ‘absent mindednesses’, nor is it that which is not consciously intended’; rather the Unconscious is defined positively as constituting an autonomous domain of psychic reality and its representation. Unconscious phantasy may not directly accessible, but through the coded forms of dreams, bodily symptoms and slips of the tongue, through certain characteristic frames of mind and forms of symbolization, it does speak.

      What it speaks about are elemental feelings of rage, persecution, anger, and jealousy consequent on primordial fears of separation, abandonment, loss or death; and the no less strong impulses to possess and bond with people or things that are felt to offer safety and protection against these destructive drives. It is with these Other scenes – scenes initially dominated by extreme ambivalence towards the (m)other and with the defenses that are mobilised by the child in order to deal with it – that psychoanalysis is primarily concerned, both as a general theory of human development and as a specific practice of therapeutic intervention.

      From a psychoanalytic standpoint, ‘unconscious racism’ is therefore, first and foremost a description of what happens to certain elementary structures of feeling and phantasy when they become racialised. Or to put in another way, we are looking at how processes of racialization (which may be variously political, cultural and/or economic, institutional or informal, depending on context and conjuncture) engage with and affect the ‘other scenes’ of self identification. The staging of these transformations, in both public and private settings is the story of how the Unconscious (que ‘discourse of the Other’) animates racist practices (que strategy for excluding or eliminating the Other from the body politic)….

      http://philcohenworks.com/pcowwp/wp-content/uploads/Psychoanalysis-and-racism-reading-the-other-scene-final-version.website.pdf

      Perspectives – Vol. 6, No. 1 – A Primer on Narcissism – Page 1 of 3

      NARCISSISM (n. sing.)

      A pattern of traits and behaviours which signify infatuation and obsession with one’s self to the exclusion of all others and the egotistic and ruthless pursuit of one’s gratification, dominance and ambition….

      http://metapsychology.mentalhelp.net/poc/view_doc.php?type=de&id=419

      FAIRBAIRN’S STRUCTURAL THEORY

      Conclusion

      It has been shown that Fairbairn’s structural model of the psyche is in no way the same as Freud’s drive/structure model. Fairbairn’s theory is achetypally a relational/structure model. Based on the assumption that the fundamental human motivation is for self-expression in relationship, it is a theory that takes as the fundamental structural building block the constellation of self, other, and relationship between. Substructures of the self naturally are seen as conforming to this same pattern. Furthermore, the theory is predicated on a radically different notion of the nature of structure itself.

      Fairbairn’s insistence that structure implies pathology and that wholeness and integration imply health is unique among psychoanalytic theories. It presupposes a notion of the self that is in itself a radical departure. For Fairbairn, the self is not reducible to a self-concept, or a self-representation, or a system of reflected appraisals. It is a self-generating center of origin which, while it is shaped and changed in relation to its objects (or, more accurately, its “others”) and does in part define itself in terms of those relationships, has an expressive, experiencing existence separate from, and prior to, these relationships.

      There is room in Fairbairn’s theory to accommodate identifications and representations of self and objects, as there is room to accommodate systems of reflected appraisals. These can be viewed as aspects of the self’s experience of itself and its world. The major innovative insight of Fairbairn was that these phenomena do not in any way require structural differentiation of the self. Rather, he made a clear and crucially useful distinction between these non-structuring internalizations, which are far more related to memory and the progressive organization of experience (and which do involve representations of self and object), and the internalizations which involve actual segments of the self (not representations thereof) and that therefore create real structures within the self-crystallized subsystems which function within the self with a dissociated life of their own.

      http://www.columbia.edu/~rr322/FAIRBAIRN.html

    316. HYUFD says:

      Thepnr There would then be a Unionist list coalition too

    317. HYUFD says:

      Yesindyref2 The whole principle of the UK’s unwritten constitution is Westminster is supreme and effectively whatever legislation Westminster passes goes without challenge.

      98% of Gibraltarians voted to remain British in a 2002 referendum

    318. Thepnr says:

      “Thepnr There would then be a Unionist list coalition too

      Hahaha who cares, it’s Labour and the Tories with 45 seats already on the list who have everything to lose. So what if a Unionist coalition picked up their seats instead.

      The Independence Coalition in other words could take up to half the list seats regardless. Put your thinking cap on man.

    319. HYUFD says:

      Yesindyref2 No, you either want to be an independent country or not. If you rejected independence once, as Scots did in 2014 but then decide you want to leave the UK if the UK leaves the EU which, including EU regulations and directives, provided most of UK law you are not really seeking independence anyway, just swapping legislative power from Westminster with legislative power from Brussels

    320. Thepnr says:

      In the constituency vote in 2016 Labour and the Tories won 10 seats between them. The SNP won 59, that’s not going to change anytime soon believe me.

      It’s all about the list, an Independence Coalition party could make both Labour and Tory virtually extinct in Holyrood.

    321. yesindyref2 says:

      @HYUFD
      You’re all over the place. First you try to assert that the Indy Ref NO vote meant Scotland voted to stay in the UK, and then when it’s shown to you that that wasn’t the question, that a NO vote meant the constitutional status quo which included the UK being independent in the EU, you’re now trying to define or redefine what the word “independent” means.

      It’s simple. Independence means being able to make your own choices who you want to form partnerships with, and lend part of your sovereingty to. Saying NO to that means staying as you are. Which meant being part of the UK AND being part of the EU, being in a partnership within both.

      Scotland now has the choice of one or the other. Staying part of the UK, or dissolving its partnership in the UK and being in a partnership as part of the EU. Scotland can’t have both any more, so the NO vote of 2014 is not the status quo it seemed to be at the time.

    322. Thepnr says:

      “if the UK leaves the EU which, including EU regulations and directives, provided most of UK law you are not really seeking independence anyway, just swapping legislative power from Westminster with legislative power from Brussels”

      You really are a bit of a mental case. Did you hear the budget today? Did the EU decide the UK’s tax rates or where the money should be spent?

      Did they decide between welfare spending and the NHS and raising the 40% threshold to £50,000? That’s Westminster’s decisions. All we seek is the same for Scotland and as a Remain voter yourself you obviously believe we’re better in than out.

      Square that circle.

    323. Iain mhor says:

      Dunno if anyone is still on this thread but-
      I engage because I try and find the thinking behind British Nationalists. Also to try where my understanding is in error.
      Anyway some long balls are telegraphed.
      At its heart, what it apparently distills to, is that the Treaty of Union (and subsequent Acts) extinguished all entities other than England. That’s it, anywhere else is a region. Westminster is the de-facto parliament of England governing its regions, colonies and dependencies (no more Dominions, but perhaps Scotland could apply for Dominion status like other ex-nations such as Canada)
      Or alterantively; There slant that England was also extinguished and what exists is an entirely new homologous nation called something vague : Britain/UK/Great Britain. This one is where most of the cognitive dissonance lies I feel but I digress.
      I’m not quite sure which of the two HYUFD falls into, perhaps he could clarify.

      So, I’m not uncomfortable with either of the above views, those holding them can argue with a general logical consistency, against any Scottish assertions, though less the wider constitutional issues. It is where the logic breaks down we see cracks. The trick really is to have the courage of the conviction in the first place and most logical inconsistancies fall away. What I find is that few are prepared to do that.By this I mean, state clearly the base position from whence the logical argument stems.

      For example, as devils advocate, ‘I hold that all prior national entities were subsumed and extinguished and a new nation called -ok, the UK – was created. Westminster is its parliament. Since Westminster, in its gift, has devolved powers to some regional assemblies, Westminster is the Sovereign Parliament of the nation under the Crown. All citizens of the UK are subjects of the Crown’
      Absolutely fine.
      Many of the points HYUFD makws here are logical and consistent given a position close to that. Its just all the rest surrounding the actual reality within the government and “constitution” of the UK which falls on its arse if this position is held. There has to be a lot of finger in the ear lalala to hold that ground.

      My actual personal position is that Westminster is an administrative unit of government for the two United Kingdoms. The Scottish Parliament was reconvened at the behest of Scotland (as opposed to a gift of Westminster) to assume governance where Westminster was failing its constitutional and democratic responsibility. This was done as a last desperate attempt to preserve the Union. The Union and Treaty had already been breached. The only alternative was the dissolution of Union or dissolution of Scotland. The Parliament of Scotland is not a regional administrative unit in the gift of Westminster. It is the de-facto parliament of Scotland pre-union, reconvened.

      I really do like the logical judo in “the original Parliament of Scotland was subsumed and exists folded within Westminster and embodied by Scottish MP’s” (sic) – thats a 12/10.- Which position makes Holyrood what? Well it can only be a “pretendy wee parliament” in effect an administrative arm of well I’m not sure… Which represents, again not clear, with responsibilities and authority to act which differ from the Scotland Office within Westminster in ways I am at a loss to explain.
      Perhaps HYUFD could clarify.
      Though I”d be grateful again if he could give a default starting position anent the whole extinguished, remains, newly created britishy thing. Just for consistency.
      I will not argue whether the position is correct to hold (that is another discussion entirely) I’m interested in how the arguments on both sides hold up with the starting position taken as a given.

    324. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      “you are not really seeking independence anyway, just swapping legislative power from Westminster with legislative power from Brussels…”

      I know which scenario I would prefer.

      https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DD9U4xbXYAAAR7E.jpg

    325. gus1940 says:

      Where is Boris?.

      Has he been locked up in some Tory dungeon as he seems to have been struck dumb?

    326. HYUFD says:

      Thepnr At the 2017 general election Labour and the Tories and LDs won 24 constituencies combined, the SNP 35 constituencies so I would not be so sure about that

    327. HYUFD says:

      Yesindyref2 Scots voted No to independence in 2014. If the only reason they might change their mind now is they want to stay in the EU then that is not really a vote for independence it is a vote to stay in the EU and keep Brussels regulations and directives as part of Scottish law

    328. HYUFD says:

      Thepnr I have never claimed to be a nationalist, I believe in the UK and maintaining a close relationship with the EU even if I respect the Leave vote. If you are a nationalist and want true independence for Scotland then that means Holyrood and Holyrood alone deciding all Scottish laws without any laws and legislation coming from Westminster, Brussels and Strasbourg

    329. HYUFD says:

      Ian Mhor Personally I support an English Parliament with Westminster as the Federal UK Parliament and devomax for Holyrood as the Scottish Parliament ultimately. Westminster though would remain the supreme body of a Federal UK but mainly focused on some tax and foreign affairs and defence with most domestic policy and the rest of tax decided by the English and Scottish Parliaments and the Welsh and Northern Irish Assemblies

    330. Cubby says:

      This HYUFD is such a diddy. He thinks you are only a Nationalist if you have previously claimed to be a Nationalist.

      What a waste of time trying to debate with a British Nationalist who does not even know he is a British Nationalist. There have been some Britnat diddies on Wings in the past but this guy is right up there with the best(worse).

    331. yesindyref2 says:

      @HYUFD
      The only remote chance a federal UK might have would be if Westminster was sold off as a tourist attraction, and the UK parliament moved to somewhere north of Birmingham, maybe Derby. Plus the English parliament would have to have a totally separate building and MPs of its own, and its own town, say Coventry.

      Then you might not get so many truly thicko Tory MPs thinking York is in Scotland!

    332. HYUFD says:

      No, Westminster is the UK Parliament and an icon of the nation and recognised across the world and must remain so. Though I would have no problem with an English Parliament in York, some Tory leaders have even come from Yorkshire, William Hague for example

    333. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi HYUFD at 8:49 pm.

      You professed,

      “No, Westminster is the UK Parliament and an icon of the nation and recognised across the world and must remain so.”

      Aherm…

      Westminster is NOT an icon of a NATION – it is the current government of the UNITED KINGDOM, which comprises the kingdom of England and the kingdom of Scotland.

      You don’t really understand the setup of the UK, do you?

      There are at least 4 NATIONS in the uk – one is Scotland and the other three are are parts of the kingdom of England.

      Why do you keep coming on to WOS and exhibiting your ignorance of FACTS?

    334. HYUFD says:

      The United Kingdom is the only independent nation in Great Britain (plus Northern Ireland) with its own passport, its own currency, a presence at the UN, the G7 and the G20.

      In case you had forgotten Scots were asked in the 2014 referendum whether they wanted to become an independent nation? 55% of them voted No but to remain a constituent part of the United Kingdom and part of the UK Westminster Parliament alongside England, Wales and Northern Ireland. So if anyone is ignorant of the facts it is you!

    335. yesindyref2 says:

      No, Westminster is the UK Parliament and an icon of the nation and recognised across the world and must remain so.

      Nope, won’t work. It would have to be central in the UK, near equidistant to all four parts. Westminster is well out of order. England can have its parliament wherever it wants, it can buy Westminster at market value (a genuine one) and all 4 nations get a share – an equal share – of the proceeds.

      Derby sounds about right for the new UK parliament, it was of course in Scottish hands at one time …

    336. Breeks says:

      When you engage with HYUFD, it is the online equivalent of stepping out a YES march to stop and speak to the UKIP reject with the megaphone and dirty Union Jack shirt. He is only making a fool of himself spouting pish which nobody listens to, and you couldn’t decipher it even if you did, and all the sensible people just walk on by. If you stop and try to engage, you would give him the double reward of rudely snubbing you and reward him success in disrupting the march, if only to a minute degree.

      He doesn’t go to YES marches to be reasoned with or persuaded, he simply wants to be a nuisance that gets under our skins. It’s very same reason HYUFD comes here. He’s just another wannabe fly in your ointment.

      Let him stew in impotent frustration that nobody here is listening to the clown. It really isn’t that difficult.

    337. HYUFD says:

      Yesindyref2 London is the capital of the UK and must be the home to the UK Parliament.

      An English Parliament in York or Derby though would be acceptable

    338. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      That’s an interesting ‘point to ponder’.

      The UK is a union of two kingdoms, which are also unique nations and countries.

      Prior to The Treaty of Union, each kingdom had its own capital – Edinburgh and London.

      WHO decided that London would be the capital of the union, rather than Edinburgh? Why has the UK parliament stuck to sitting in London, rather than sitting in both capitals cyclically?

      Could it have been (and still is) that England perceived itself as ‘the boss’ of the union?

    339. yesindyref2 says:

      @HYUFD
      I think you’re missing the point, and not thinking outside yourself. I want Independence for Scotland, a federal UK would just be another step on the way, if it fails, then Independence is one step nearer again. You’re the one wants the Union to survive.

      Do you get it now?

    340. HYUFD says:

      Brian Doonethetoon Even in 1707 Westminster was the Parliament for England AND Wales containing both English and Welsh MPs, not just English MPs alone

    341. HYUFD says:

      Yesindyref2 Well obviously you are still a Nat and I have never said otherwise. I want a long term and permanent Federal UK, you at most clearly would just try and use it as a step to an independent Scotland

    342. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      “Brian Doonethetoon Even in 1707 Westminster was the Parliament for England AND Wales containing both English and Welsh MPs, not just English MPs alone”

      So I guess Ireland wasn’t a province/dominion/part of England in 1707?

      The location of the parliament was what I questioned and you didn’t address.

      So, how about it? Why was London chosen as the capital of the UK, when, according to you, my illustrations should have included Cardiff?

      (You do realise you’re losing this argument, iye?)

    343. Cubby says:

      Guys either you are debating with the village idiot with clearly demonstrated learning difficulties or he is taking the piss.

      Thought HYUFD was a complete diddy but now I think he is just taking the piss and as Breeks says above he is just another Britnat disrupter. Please give it a rest he will not learn anything because he does not wish to learn anything. What do you Independence supporters get out of this? Trying to understand the mind of a village idiot or a deliberate disrupter.

      Please just give it a rest.

    344. HYUFD says:

      Ireland did not join the Union until 1800 when the first Irish MPs arrived at Westminster, the Laws in Wales Acts which saw Wales gain MPs were passed in 1535 and 1542.

      London is the largest and wealthiest city in the UK and in England and Wales and the home of the monarch as well so of course it was going to be the capital of the UK and the home of the UK Parliament. Cardiff is now home to the Welsh Assembly anyway

    345. yesindyref2 says:

      @HYUFD
      Excellent, you’re half-way there. Now try to get the other half by revisiting what was said about the seat of that federal UK parliament and decide what kind of advice I’m giving, hostile, or sensible. From the point of view of optimising the chances of such a Union surviving, do you see?

    346. Cubby says:

      Hey guys try and get the historical facts correct. I expect the piss taker who is just another Britnat who supports the union but does not understand his precious Union to get it wrong. Very few of them ever do understand the Union. It’s not only in Scotland that this part of history is not taught. Wonder why that is?

      The Kingdom of England as one of two signatories to the treaty of union in 1707 contained the country of Ireland. Therefore Ireland was part of the union in 1707.

    347. HYUFD says:

      The best chance of the Union surviving is devomax for Holyrood and an English Parliament and Westminster as the UK Federal Parliament

    348. HYUFD says:

      Ireland was not part of the Union until 1800. In fact there was no Union until 1707, just England and Wales who were the only 2 nations with Westminster MPs

    349. HYUFD says:

      Ireland had its own Parliament until 1800 though it shared a monarch with Great Britain

    350. yesindyref2 says:

      @HYUFD: “The best chance of the Union surviving is devomax for Holyrood and an English Parliament and Westminster as the UK Federal Parliament

      That’s the spirit HYUFD, a man after my own heart – a YES man 🙂

    351. Cubby says:

      This guy HUYFD clearly doesn’t know his arse from his elbow and sees everything as is usual from an English Britnat Westminster perspective. In summary HYUFD is either ignorant or he just puts out wrong info to drag people into correct him.

      HYUFD check your facts on Ireland you diddy -done correcting you – waste of time.

      HYUFD some advice just piss off.

    352. yesindyref2 says:

      @Cubby
      His history ain’t good. For instance, there were supposedly Scottish MPs at Westminter BEFORE the Union with England Act 1707. But there was as much legal standing for them in Scotland, as in Malawi if Holyrood appointed a dozen MSPs from Malawi.

      The poor fellow has a total institutional and incorrect bias to his history, he just can’t help it.

    353. HYUFD says:

      Yesindyref2 No, that is the best way to defeat Yes

    354. HYUFD says:

      Cubby My facts on Ireland were of course absolutely correct, Ireland did not join the Union until 1800 and had its own version of the House of Commons and Lords and its own Parliament before then

    355. HYUFD says:

      Yesindyref2 Before the Act of Union there was a personal union of Scotland and Ireland with England and Wales as they all shared the same monarch but until the 1707 and 1800 Acts of Union both Scotland and Ireland had their own Parliaments separate from Westminster. It was the Acts of Union that merged those Parliaments into Westminster

    356. HYUFD says:

      Westminster then created the Scottish Parliament, Welsh and Northern Irish Assemblies in the late 20th century

    357. Cubby says:

      HFYUD why don’t you just pissoff with all your misinformation that you call facts. You don’t know your arse from your elbow. Stop posting a lot of crap. You can have your own opinion but stop posting Britnat misinformation about historical fact.

      You are wrong re Ireland and the Union. Like all Britnats and their precious Union they think everything revolves around Westminster.

      Britnats get it wrong every time about their precious Union. So you are just another diddy or you just like posting crap.

      So stop posting your crap as fact and pissof.

    358. yesindyref2 says:

      personal union

      Oh dear, that sounds naughty, probably with issues.

      Well, you can take water to the horse but you mussn’t drown it.

    359. HYUFD says:

      Cubby Everything I said was absolutely correct, if you don’t like the facts then tough

    360. yesindyref2 says:

      Well, that’s what happens when you plug two 3Kw fan heaters into the one double socket.

    361. Hamish100 says:

      Hfud. Scots parliament was suspended
      Then reinstated. Whats your problem? Scots Parliament existed way before brit nats invented.

    362. Cubby says:

      There are none so stupid as Britnats over their precious Union. They do not even understand what their precious Union is.

      It is not my job to educate silly Britnats. Tough – I ain’t helping you any more.

      So just pissof.

      It is the biggest joke about Britnats. They are so keen to preserve their so precious Union but they do not even understand what it is they want to preserve.

    363. HYUFD says:

      Hamish100 There was no Scottish Parliament for almost 300 years from 1707 until 1999 when Westminster created the Holyrood Scottish Parliament as affirmed by a majority of Scots voting for devolution in the 1997 referendum

    364. yesindyref2 says:

      The Scottish Parliament was adjourned on 25 March in the year 1707. It is hereby reconvened. (12th May 1999).

    365. yesindyref2 says:

      That of course is legally watertight, end of story for the Union.

    366. HYUFD says:

      The original Scottish Parliament transferred its membership to Westminster in 1707, it is still technically there through Scottish MPs.

      Holyrood was a creation of Westminster statute endorsed by the 1997 devolution referendum in Scotland

    367. Cubby says:

      Note for any independence supporters reading the misleading crap of HYUFD.

      HYUFD is a British Nationalist who posts on Wings to disrupt with his tactics of posting part truths mixed with incorrect information. Pretty much what the Britnat media does in Scotland.

      Britnats throughout the centuries just cannot keep their hands off other countries resources. Long overdue for England to stand on its own and stop looting other countries wealth.

      HYUFD – just pissoff.

    368. yesindyref2 says:

      Nope.

      The Scottish Parliament was dissolved by proclamation by Queensberry, the Queen’s Commissioner, 3 days before she or he would have had the legal authority to do so.

      Parliament was adjourned on 25th March and the Estates were ordered to reconvene on 22nd April. No such meeting appears to have taken place and on 28th April the Scottish Parliament was dissolved by proclamation. The Treaty and Act of Union came into effect on 1st May 1707 having swiftly passed through both Houses of Parliament in England.

      That’s from your own unionist BBC:

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/politics97/devolution/scotland/briefing/1707.shtml

      Read it and weep. Your Union is illegal, it was unable to come into being without the Scottish parliament being legally dissolved in 1707, before the 1st May when the Acts came into effect. It wasn’t,it was only adjourned, and was due to reconvene on 22nd April. Presumably, and nobody knows, that was prevented by bribery, blackmail and threats.

      That’s what you previous Union is built on, intimidation.

    369. yesindyref2 says:

      Precious Union, not previous union, though there again …

    370. HYUFD says:

      Cubby It was Scots who voted to stay part of the Union in 2014, English voters did not get a say.

      The richest area of the UK is London and the Home Counties

    371. HYUFD says:

      Yesindyref2 Yep. The Scottish Parliament as that very article confirms voted for the Union on 10th January 1707 by 110 votes to 67. The fact the Estates did not bother to reconvene as a Scottish Parliament again means nothing as Scottish MPs reconvened at Westminster.

      So you can do your Nat whinging and complaining as much as you want it will not change the fact the Scottish Parliament voted for the Act of Union

    372. HYUFD says:

      Or 16th January 1707 by 110 votes to 67

    373. Cubby says:

      HYUFD – pissoff you ignorant British Nationalist.

    374. yesindyref2 says:

      The fact the Estates did not bother to reconvene as a Scottish Parliament again means nothing as Scottish MPs reconvened at Westminster.

      Good Heavens, a new candidate for geopolitical ignoramus of the week.

      So you can do your Nat whinging and complaining as much as you want it will not change the fact the Scottish Parliament voted for the Act of Union.

      Oh dear, you spat your dummy. Here, let me clear it up with some Milton and give it back to you, there there, rock a bye baby, on the treetops. When your wind blows, the penny will drop.

      The Precious Union had shaky foundations, ain’t legal, and is coming to its unnatural end.

    375. HYUFD says:

      The Union was voted for by the Scottish Parliament in 1707 and by 55% of Scottish voters in 2014 despite the whinging from you and the other Nats in the 45%

    376. yesindyref2 says:

      But the Parliament never dissolved itself, so the Union was illegal, as it would have been able to repeal the Act of Union, if it so chose, and indications were it would have done just exactly that, hence the intimidation of which, by the way, increasing evidence is being uncovered by historians from previously private archives.

      Your Union, I’m afraid, is rotten to the core, and hasn’t got long now.

    377. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      It’s like we Scots all fell asleep in the early 18th Century and the alarm has just gone off to wake us up again.

    378. HYUFD says:

      The Scottish Parliament voted for the Union. Scottish MPs then moved to Westminster. 55% of Scots then also voted for the Union in the 2014 referendum. End of story

    379. HYUFD says:

      Meanwhile the South Pacific territory of New Caledonia is voting on whether to become independent from France today

      https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-46087053

    380. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      “End of story”?

      Aye right!

    381. HYUFD says:

      New Caledonia rejects independence with 56% voting to remain part of France on an 80% turnout
      https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-46087053

    382. yesindyref2 says:

      End of story

      I’m afraid gunboats have lost their significance in inter-geopolitical jurisprudence.

    383. Cubby says:

      End of story.

      I wish it was the end of your story HYUFD. But just like all lying Britnats when you said you would not be posting much in future you failed to keep your promise. Pretty much par for the course for Britnats.

      Pissoff you Britnat diddy.

    384. HYUFD says:

      Cubby Well when whinging cybernats like you do nothing but take issue with every post I write or be rude what do you expect!

    385. yesindyref2 says:

      @HYUFD
      Well when whinging cybernats like you do nothing but take issue with every post I write or be rude what do you expect!

      Talk about one standard for others, and another for yourself, what do you think of this posting of yours:

      The Union was voted for by the Scottish Parliament in 1707 and by 55% of Scottish voters in 2014 despite the whinging from you and the other Nats in the 45%

      Do you think that’s polite parlance, or what passes for polite discourse in Tory circles?

      That’s the thing with you and your ilk, you twist everything to suit your opinion, and you try to bend the facts to suit your agenda. Either that or you’re plain ignorant, take your pick, it’s one or the other.

      Bring back sensibledave, he had a civil tongue in his head, he had some manners.

    386. Cubby says:

      HYUFD = British Nationalist Diddy and eejit.

      You know why the South east and London is so rich. It’s heritage of looting the worlds riches and living off slavery etc. Proud to be a British looter are you. You deserve no respect. When England stands on its own two feet and stops plundering other countries wealth England may start to get respect. Until then why don’t you pissoff and take your patronising and misleading comments with you. Britnats like you have a common failing – never recognising when you are not wanted.

      SO I REPEAT JUST PISSOFF. You are not wanted.

    387. HYUFD says:

      Yesindyref2 Not quite the same as telling someone to piss off, in any case saying Nats have been whinging ever since they lost the 2014 referendum on Scottish independence is a statement of fact

    388. HYUFD says:

      Cubby Almost 50% of the population of London is non white and most of them contribute to London’s wealth and economic growth too, London is a centre of IT, creative industries, the media and law and financial services. British involvement in the slave trade ended 200 years ago

    389. yesindyref2 says:

      @HYUFD
      That second reply I quoted was to me, and I never told you to piss off, so the rudeness and lack of good manners is totally from you, and typifies the self-unaware and historically distorted Tory who is ruining the Conservative party in not just Scotland, but the UK as a whole.

      But hey, keep it up.

    390. Cubby says:

      HYUFD – just pissoff. Britnats never realise they are not wanted.

      You are a patronising diddy and eejit.

      Britnat Tories looting other countries wealth and killing people on benefits deserve no respect and you won’t get it from me.

      SO PISSOFF and stop whinging about being told to pissoff. PISSOFF.

      BRITNATS Are always whinging when told where to go. They don’t like the people in the colonies not knowing their place.

      PISSOFF

    391. HYUFD says:

      Yesindyref2 You may never have told me to Piss Off, Cubby most definitely has as he has shown again above.

      The Tories are doing quite nicely in Scotland thankyou very much, with 13 Scottish MPs and set to win more MSPs in 2021 according to Scottish Parliament polls

    392. HYUFD says:

      Cubby Thankyou for yet again your lack of eloquence, true Unionists of course could not care less what angry Nats think of them, the angrier they get the more the Unionists are winning the argument.

      Of course 55% of Scots voted to stay in the Union in 2014 despite your whinging and Scotland with representation at both Westminster and Holyrood is by no definition a colony. Unemployment in the UK also half the rate it was in 2010

    393. yesindyref2 says:

      @HDUFY
      So, no apology? That’s no surprise. As for the VI, steady overall trend downwards for the Tories in Scotland since the 2017 GE, upwards for the SNP and I’m sure you’ll agree that’s likely to continue, considering the (total lack of) performance of your wonderfully inept and chaotic party.

      https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/scotland.html

      Tories peaked in Scotland, now they’re going down.

    394. Cubby says:

      HYUFD = BRITISH NATIONALIST DIDDY AND EEJIT.

      Stop whinging about being told to pissof.

      Nothing like a pathetic whinging British Nationalist trying to convince himself that the British Empire was and is a great thing.

      HYUFD just PISSOF.

    395. Cubby says:

      Colony : A country or area under the full or partial political control of another country and occupied by settlers from that country.

      Wales = Colony
      Scotland = Colony
      N. Ireland = Colony

      HYUFD – you do not know your arse from your elbow. You are a Tory Britnat who supports policies that loot other countries wealth and kills people on benefits. You do not deserve and will not get any respect from me. You try to claim you are a unionist but you do not even understand your own union. You are a British nationalist coloniser of the worst variety – a Tory.

      Two points (of many) that Britnats never go near. 1. Why can England just not stand on its own two feet. Why must it keep looting other countries wealth. 2. The infamous vow.

      Britnat liars are everywhere and that includes you.

      No respect for Britnats. HYUFD just pissof.

    396. HYUFD says:

      Yesindyref2 The SNP still well down on their 2015 general election total in polls.

      In Holyrood polls the SNP will lose their majority with the Greens in 2021 and Sturgeon will need Tory confidence and supply from Ruth Davidson to stay First Minister

    397. HYUFD says:

      Cubby Utter rubbish but expected from you when you are on a Nat rant. Scotland has its own Parliament, Wales and Northern Ireland their own Assemblies and all 3 have representation at Westminster. On no definition are they colonies.

    398. HYUFD says:

      I could of course not care less what you think of me but it was Scots who voted 55% for the Union in 2014, English voters did not get a say. Holyrood also got more powers under the Scotland Act 2016

    399. Cubby says:

      HYUFD

      Just like all Britnat diddies HYUFD cannot stand the truth. Pointless debating with Britnats. Cannot address facts/truths when they are inconsistent with Britnat propaganda.

      Colony definition = Ireland Wales Scotland. Read it again numskull.

      Britnats cannot explain why England won’t stand on its own 2 feet. England loves being a colonial power – Britnats like you just cannot admit the truth.

      Britnats cannot explain the infamous vow away. “Holyrood got more powers under the 2016 Scotland act” what a colonial statement. Wow thank you so much my colonial master. More crumbs from the colonial masters table. Britnats decide what crumbs are passed to Holyrood. Britnats decided the whole design of the Parliament to ensure no party can get a decent majority. A colonial set up.

      I’ve come across quite a few Britnat diddies but you are right up there with the biggest eejit. You know nothing that is important about Scotland but you come on here with your poorly informed mind distorted with Britnat Tory crap and talk like a colonising Britnat.

      “English voters did not have a say” – you really are an idiot. Scotland was full of English voters having a say during the referendum. They were pouring up on trains and planes to tell us how much they loved Scots ( they really meant our resources) The tv/. Radio/ newspapers were full of English voters having a say. One day one lot of English voters would say how much they loved us the next day other English voters would have their say by threatening us. The next day other English voters would say we were too stupid too wee too poor to be a NORMAL independent country.

      English voters did not have a say – what a joke comment. You know next to nothing about why Scots want independence but you certainly add to why we need independence. Britnats like you telling us what we should think and know. Colonialism.

      Britnats have control of all the media in Scotland – another colonial prerequisite and if that isn’t not enough Britnat diddies like you come (an English voter having their say) on Wings with their colonial attitude.

      Your colonial paper in Scotland the Scottish (ha ha ) Daily Mail front page headline “the English won it for us”. They of course were referring to the English settlers in Scotland. I refer you to the definition of a colony. The Daily Mail creating harmony as usual – not.

      You are not welcome. Just pissof.

      Stop whining about being told to pissof. Try living in an English colony.

    400. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi Cubby at 6:17 pm.

      You typed,
      “Scotland was full of English voters having a say during the referendum. They were pouring up on trains and planes to tell us how much they loved Scots (they really meant our resources)…”

      That SO reminded me of this classic clip from 2014.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiMXuEmqAHA

      (Half a million views, BTW.)

    401. Cubby says:

      Brian Doonthetoon @7.55pm a classic – probably will be shown in school classrooms in years to come.

      Thanks for the link. I remember it well. Enjoyed looking at it again. Scottish/Glasgow humour at its best. The only bit I didn’t like was the statue of the diddy dewar in Buchan st. I avoid looking at in when in Glasgow. Now dewar, he was an even bigger diddy than HYUFD. Why has there not been a crowd funder to remove the statue. Labour can’t pay woman in Glasgow council equal pay but find the money to erect this horrible statue.

      What a tiny no crowd to welcome them in Buchanan st. Never mind the Britnat media would have made it look like 30 thousand were there.

      It was interesting to spot the Britnats even though most tried to avoid the camera. I’m sure I saw Jeremy hunt. Faisal Islam as well. Of course Kelly as well the MSP famed for repealing the OBF act. Kelly gone to ground since the violence at football grounds starting up again. Britnats – left wing right wing red Tories blue Tories showed their true colours in 2014.

      Some of them looked like they couldn’t believe the sun was shining this far north. Others looked like they were about to have a nose bleed as they had never been this far north before. All of them were carrying large suitcases – must have been all the postal votes preprinted NO.

      Our colonial masters paying us a very rare visit. A bit like Harry and Meghan visiting the old colonies in the Pacific.

    402. HYUFD says:

      Cubby So you would expel all English people living in Scotland, if that is not the definition of ethnic nationalism then I do not know what is? Plus plenty of Scots live in England and vote in English local elections and for English MPs

    403. yesindyref2 says:

      @HYUFD
      So you would expel all English people living in Scotland

      What a desperate dick you are, trying to twist the words of Cubby into some sort of anti-English fantasy of your own furtive, what passes for a tragically underdevoloped, imagination.

      Can you not understand simple English, and I quote Cubby:

      Our colonial masters paying us a very rare visit.

      How does your even dismal comprehension of the written word, manage to translate “a rare visit” to someone living in Scotland?

      You really are a dunce.

    404. yesindyref2 says:

      Jings, BDTT even posted a link to it two postings above yours, and Cubby commented on it IN THE COMMENT YOU REPLIED TO.

      Such inability to follow a thread is clearly the prime essential entry requirement for membership of the Tory party. Either that or the Tory party consider this to be an activist training aid:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5ba1OKY7Xc

    405. Cubby says:

      A pathetic reply – HYUFD

      The last resort of some one who has no decent argument -just make up things. I never said that and you know that. You are just making yourself look an even bigger diddy.

      You really should just pissof now – you are becoming a laughing stock. All you can do is write statements of the bleeding obvious e.g. “Plenty of Scots live in England and vote” – well well what a revelation – nobody in Scotland knew that. Are you still at school? Is that it? That’s the best you can do. You are totally lost outside your Britnat propaganda comfort zones. Primary 9 in Scotland could debate better than this.

      Scotland allowed English and EU citizens to vote in indyref. Colonial UK said no no no vote for EU citizens in EU ref. That’s your English ethnic nationalism right there – plonker.

      PS immigration is a reserved matter for Westminster. Wonder why – eh.

      The infamous vow – Scotland was promised a banquet of powers – devomax – we got crumbs. The vow promised the permancy of the Scottish parliament. We got the power grab. Lying Britnats do what they are best at – lying. Idiots like you come on Wings and prattle on about federalism – you just embarrass yourself. Britnats have been lying about devolution powers in Scotland since the first referendum in 1979.

      You really should pissof as all you are doing is demonstrating your lack of knowledge about Scotland and your precious Union. There have been a lot more smarter and better informed Britnats on Wings than you.

      Britnats across the globe always outstay their welcome. In your case you were never welcome in the first place. Just another ignorant and arrogant Britnat.

    406. HYUFD says:

      Yesindyref2 Direct quote from Cubby ‘Your colonial paper in Scotland the Scottish (ha ha ) Daily Mail front page headline “the English won it for us”. They of course were referring to the English settlers in Scotland. I refer you to the definition of a colony’.

      So apparently because English people live in Scotland that makes Scotland a colony? Hence by definition Cubby is an ethnic nationalist who wants to expel English born people from Scotland

    407. HYUFD says:

      Cubby EU citizens are not British citizens if they live in the UK unlike English people living in Scotland, Scotland also still being part of the UK as affirmed by 55% of Scots in 2014. EU citizens can also vote in UK local elections and May has affirmed their rights to stay in the UK after Brexit.

      Nats like you will of course whinge regardless of anything short of independence but the Scotland Act 2016 gave Scots legislative control over onshore oil and gas extraction, rail franchising, consumer advocacy and advice amongst others by devolution of powers in relation to these fields to the Ministers of the Scottish Parliament, control over Income Tax rates and bands on non-savings and non-dividend income, control over Air Passenger Duty and the British Transport Police in Scotland. It also recognised the permanence of the Scottish Parliament and Executive with a referendum required to abolish them

    408. Cubby says:

      HYUFD you are a laughing stock.

      “May has affirmed their rights to stay in the UK after Brexit” what a joke.

      The word of a lying Britnat as much use as a chocolate teacup. The three lying Britnat amigos (Cameron Clegg Milliband) also promised the Vow to the people of Scotland. Only idiots believe the word of lying Britnats. Your great leader May lies all the time e.g. The Tories are getting the debt down. The Tories are reducing the national debt. She says this all the time at PMs questions. UK national debt has gone up from £1 trillion in 2010 to over £1.7 trillion.

      The Daily Record in Scotland printed a front page headline saying the vow had been fully implemented had to subsequently publish a retraction confirming that was not the case. Britnat media lying as usual. Murray Foote the editor of the Record at the time subsequently confirmed it was all a lie. Just a Britnat con.

      Like your great leader May your posts are full of lies and misrepresentation. The main talent Britnats like you have. You are a nat as well – just own it – plonker. A Britnat plonker.

      Why would I want to expel English people from Scotland. I marched with English Scots for independence at independence marches. My son was born in the Midlands. Do you think I want to expel my son. You are just a complete diddy. Lies and more lies. When have you marched with Scottish English for keeping Scotland in the union(colony)?

      You love quoting election results and polls. Here’s one for you – recent poll states that approx 50% of English would be happy for the UK to terminate ( NIreland and Scotland leaving) to get their Brexit. Obviously some English are happy for England to go it alone. Like all Britnats you cannot answer: why will England not stand on its own 2 feet and stop looting other nations resources.

      Here’s another chance for you to give us another laugh. I challenge you to give your definition of your precious Union. I said you do not understand your own precious Union that 50% of your own country men don’t seem too bothered about keeping. Prove me wrong – give me an accurate description of your precious Union. Please keep it clean, no nasty Orange Order kafflick hating statements like – we are the people – no surrender – up to our knees in fenian blood etc etc. No you must love the DUP type of comment. A precise statement of what your precious Union is. Must be easy for you as you are a member of the Conservative and unionist party. If you are struggling you can always put your hand up and ask your teacher.

      Seriously – you really should just pissof as you promised. Glad to see you have stopped whining about being told to pissof. Pity you broke your promise about taking your leave. Just another Britnat broken promise.

    409. Cubby says:

      Yesindyref2 @12.53am

      I think I saw Cameron, Johnston, Osborne and Clegg running about on the video.

      Independence is not about kicking English out of Scotland it is about running our own affairs and not having our resources looted. It certainly is also not being governed by upper class twits.

    410. HYUFD says:

      And only in the event of a forced choice between Brexit and the Union. Here is another poll for you even in the event of No Deal Brexit Scots are not guaranteed to vote No, Panelbase had an indyref2 52% No 48% Yes even in the event of No Deal Brexit https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/no-deal-brexit-pushes-scots-to-break-from-the-uk-shows-poll-5kkpfb2dv.

      The Union benefits us all so we can all pool our cultural, military and economic assets together whether in the G7 and G20,or the UM Security Council or through British film and plays and of course most Scottish exports go to England and most English exports to Scotland

    411. HYUFD says:

      Or the UN Security Council

    412. Cubby says:

      HYUFD another pathetic reply.

      More tripe from you. Copying Conservative office leaflets now. Pooling resources in the U.K. is code for Westminster looting Scotlands resources.

      Where is your definition of your precious Union?

      Too hard for you to do. Can’t find it in a Tory leaflet. A Britnat who can’t define his precious Union. Laughable.

      Still can’t say why England won’t stand on its own 2 feet. Can you. Independence is normal.

      If you can get help from your teacher and come up with a definition of your union then I have another challenge for you. Why could the super British empire not find someone who could write a constitution in over 300 years. It’s not acceptable to say everyone has been too busy invading other countries and looting their wealth. It’s not acceptable to give the usual crap about how brilliant it is to have an unwritten constitution. Go on give your brain a real workout. The UK and that other pleasant Kingdom (Saudi Arabia) share the common position of no written constitution.

      You really should just pissof.

    413. HYUFD says:

      It is a fact that the only parts of the UK which contribute more in tax than they receive in spending are London, the South East and the East, Scotland is a net recipient of UK Treasury spending.
      https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/may/23/uk-budget-deficit-grows-to-more-than-10bn-as-people-spend-less

      I know you are a diehard Nat who will never do anything but whinge about a Union 55% of Scottish voters voted for without a single resident of England having a vote and have the audacity to blame Scotland being in the UK on England ‘not standing on its own two feet’, as for ‘independence’ that is for residents to decide, see Pacific New Catalonia which voted 56% to stay a French territory on Sunday. It is impossible for the UK to have a written constitution as UK government is based on parliamentary sovereignty, no Parliament can bind its successors thus any constitution could be repealed.

    414. Cubby says:

      HYUFD laughable and pathetic.

      A Britnat who cannot describe his own precious Union. As I’ve said before you really do not know your arse from your elbow. Your head is full of Britnat propaganda.

      A Britnat referencing a Britnat paper to claim that stupid spending claims are true. Comedy gold. You obviously do not read the Wings post at the top of the page or you wouldn’t have the brass neck to post that crap. Britnats told the Americas colony that they would not survive without the support of the Britnats. Britnats told them they were lucky to have Britnats as their generous masters. Not one colony throughout the world has ever wanted to come back under Westminster control. More colonial crap from a colonial Tory.

      What sort of crap is that you have posted about why there is no written constitution. Truly laughable. On that basis no country would have a written or unwritten constitution. I knew you would provide some laughs. It is clear you have no clue at all why there is no written UK constitution. Clueless HYUFD. Try reading Wings and just stop posting you may learn something.

      Keep going – try describing your precious Union.

      It is clear you come on Wings but learn nothing at all. So just why are you here – plonker.

      There are two categories of Britnats. 1. The Britnats who tell the lies and know they are lies. 2. The Britnats who believe the lies told by category 1 Britnats. Guess which type of Britnat you are.

      You are a pretty pathetic Britnat. You try the old English hating smear you try the old whinging diehard nat cliche. You are a whinging nat as well. A Britnat who cannot even describe his precious Union.

      Seriously you should just pissof as you promised.

      At least you had the good sense not to challenge my point re Britnats lying all the time. UK national debt decreasing under the Tories – what a porker.

      I

    415. Cubby says:

      HYUFD

      You write so much crap that It is hard to find the time to expose your crap.

      “Without a single resident of England having the vote” – you know that for a fact do you. So people normally resident in England with a holiday home in Scotland did not switch for the indyref.
      So Scots who are resident in England did not use their parents home to switch for the indyref.

      Why did so many English politicians and celebrities play such a big part in indyref. Why did the Britnat parties make all the threats. Why did the Britnat parties break the Edinburgh agreement by making all the broken promises of the vow. Why is all the media in Scotland controlled by Britnats. Labour Party phoned up pensioners and told them their pensions would stop the next day if they voted for independence. Britnats are liars with low morals. You think Scots just voted to stay in the UK nice and simple. Crap. A world record for postal votes in indyref which Truthless Davidson said she knew they were heavily for no on live BBC before the count had started. Tories break electoral law time after time. Tories believe the law does not apply to them.

      I do have the audacity to say that England should stand on its own two feet. It’s called independence. It’s normal. England will be the better for it.

      You do not have a clue about what happened in indyref. You have a colonial mindset that thinks Scotland is your possession.

    416. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi HYUFD.

      WOS is a pro Scottish independence blog. As such, the vast majority of readers are pro Scottish independence.

      I’ve got a couple of questions, coz I’ve been wondering.

      1. What is it about WOS that you find so attractive, that you feel you must contribute to ongoing discussions?

      2. Do you believe that your input here will change any reader from YES to ‘Better Together’?

      3. If not, what’s the point in wasting your time here?

    417. HYUFD says:

      Cubby Technically wrong, look at the Falkland Islands who gladly welcomed the British back when they freed them from Argentine rule and who voted 99% to stay British in 2013. Hong Kong too may well have voted to stay British in 1999 but the lease of the territory from China had expired. Most nations which created constitutions e.g. the USA, the Italian and German Republics, Australia etc were new nations starting from scratch. Deficit well down under the Tories. As long as you insist on posting your Nat rants here I will respond

    418. HYUFD says:

      If you have a home in Scotland you have a vested asset in Scotland and are invested in the Scottish economy, if your parents are Scottish on your definition you are an ethnic Scot anyway. I know you are the worst kind of sore loser who will blame everything under the sun for your defeat, you nats lost, end of conversation

    419. HYUFD says:

      Brian Doonethetoon I know 99% of posters on this blog are Yes voters, that did not stop me taking the argument to them. However I have not posted that much recently other than responding to Cubby, though I may still lurk from time to time

    420. yesindyref2 says:

      @BDTT
      I think he enjoys suffering another crushing defeat.

    421. Cubby says:

      HYUFD – what a clown.

      “Taking the argument to them” That’s a joke. You are delusional.

      Still can’t find a sentence(s) to describe your precious Union can you.

      Still can’t understand why all the great minds of the British empire have not written a UK constitution for over 300 years.

      Not as smart as you think you are.

      Coming on Wings prattling on about how great the union is and you don’t know your arse from your elbow. I suggest you go away and lurk for about ten years and then when you have finally worked out what your precious Union is come back and let us know. I’ll say one thing for Britnat Tories they are not easily embarrassed by their lack of knowledge.

      The Falklands – the Britnat Tory wet dream. Surprised you haven’t brought Dunkirk into your posts yet. Just diversions. You don’t have a clue what your precious Union is.

      “End of conversation” “end of story” – you Britnat colonialists may wish that was the case but it ain’t. The only thing that will be ending is the Union – the dirty fag end of the British Empire.

      The UK annual deficit is not the UK national debt. Britnats lie through their teeth.

      Wrong again – I don’t blame everything under the sun just cheating lying dirty Britnats.

    422. Cubby says:

      Yesindyref2

      I am beginning to think that HYUFD is one of these masochistic weirdo Tories who gets of on suffering humiliation and as you say crushing defeats.

      Beginning to think it is like when many years ago when I used to complain to BBC Scotland about their anti Scottish reports I came to realise that in fact my complaints were just confirming to the Britnats at Propaganda Quay that they were doing their job. This then allowed them to prove that they were delivering their Britnat propaganda as instructed by their bosses in London. Decided not to help them anymore by complaining. Pointless.

    423. HYUFD says:

      Cubby I have made my arguments but as you are a fanatical Nat you will never agree with the Union whatever the argument so it is pointless endlessly making them to you. As I said no Parliament can bind its successors so a written constitution is impossible for Westminster to make permanent. 99% of Falkland Islanders voted to stay British in a 2013 referendum which is almost double the 55% of Scots who voted to stay in the UK in 2014 and although a majority of Scots voted to stay in the UK the Falklands is more pro British than Scotland is. Without reducing and ending the deficit first you cannot cut the debt

    424. Cubby says:

      HYUFD

      “You will never agree with the Union”

      What union is that. Oh that’s right it’s the Union you cannot even describe.. The only fanatics are BRITNATS who claim loyalty to a union that they cannot describe and do not understand.

      Now that is real fanaticism.

      The DUP another Britnat mob of fanatics. The Orange Order another mob of Britnat fanatics.

      I know what the deficit is. The point is that BRITNATS KEEP LYING ABOUT reducing the UK national debt. In particular the Tory prime minister does it all the time. Lying BRITNATS.

      HYFUD you are a fanatical lying BRITNAT Tory who does not know his arse from his elbow. You have the opportunity to learn when logging on to Wings but like all Category 2 Britnats you prefer to stick your head in the sand while humming rule Britannia.

      As I said previously your comment on why there is no UK written constitution is laughable. Even a primary school pupil could see that it is nonsense. I’ll give you credit for one thing – you don’t easily get embarrassed. But that is pretty much the case for Britnat fanatics – walking about with orange sashes and wee bowler hats.

    425. Cubby says:

      HYUFD

      “Without reducing and ending the deficit first you cannot cut the debt”

      Wrong again.

      1. Thatcher sold off large national industries to the private sector and used the money to pay off part of the national debt at the time. A Tory who does not know this – how embarrassing.

      2. Brown sold off gold reserves to pay off part of the national debt.

    426. Cubby says:

      HYUFD

      You seem to love the Falkland Islands.

      Your post on UK constitution is absolute nonsense.

      Funny how tiny British Falklanders manage to have a written constitution ( and they have changed it) but the great UK has been unable to do so for over 300 years. The much larger USA seems to be able to make amendments to its constitution eg the second amendment.

      It’s a long time since I’ve come across a Britnat like you.

      HYUFD the Britnat that keeps on giving – laughs.

      Still waiting for your description of your precious Union.

    427. HYUFD says:

      I described my belief in the Union earlier, you as a diehard Nat dismissed it, it is pointless repeating me it to a diehard Nat.
      Reducing the deficit faster would require even more austerity and cuts to public services or higher taxes slowing economic growth and job creation. There is not much left to nationalise but interesting you are backing Thatcherite privatisations

    428. HYUFD says:

      The USA created its constitution at exactly the same time it was created as a nation, impossible for the UK and its amendments are defined in that constitution.

    429. HYUFD says:

      The Falkland Islands were granted a constitution as they have a Legislative Assembly but no MPs at Westminster. However as the Falkland Islands are a British Overseas territory Westminster could repeal it though they are unlikely to do so

    430. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      It was opined,
      “The USA created its constitution at exactly the same time it was created as a nation, impossible for the UK and its amendments are defined in that constitution.”

      The United Kingdom was created as a new entity in 1707. It hadn’t existed before the Treaty of Union.

      Why was it impossible to construct a written constitution for that new entity?

      (Apart from wanting to keep the ability to fudge issues, as we are seeing regarding withdrawal from the EU.)

    431. Cubby says:

      HYUFD The lying Britnat diddy that keeps on giving. Laughable nonsense you post.

      Still can’t describe your precious Union. A Britnat fanatic that is loyal to a union that he can’t describe and doesn’t understand. You may have described your BELIEF in the union but as you well know I asked you to describe WHAT your precious Union is.

      A Britnat who can’t work out why the UK has not got a written constitution so he posts a lot of irrelevant diversionary facts.

      A Britnat who has obviously never engaged his brain to think about what his precious Union is and why the UK has no written constitution. A Category 2 Britnat.

      “Interesting you are backing Thatcherite privatisations”. Never said that and you know it. Just another lie. Whenever I prove that your comments are nonsense you come back with a mixture of lies and irrelevant statements to deflect from the fact that you are wrong wrong and wrong. Britnats really love their lies. They never leave home without a handy pack of lies in their pocket.

      Put yourself out of your embarrassing misery and just admit you are loyal to a union that you do not have a clue what it is. Now that is truly fanaticism. Some consolation for you HYUFD – you are not alone – MOST OF YOUR FELLOW Britnats don’t have a clue what they are loyal to either. Most Britnats are Category 2 like you.

    432. yesindyref2 says:

      The problem with being Diehard with a Britnat is that it’s only a movie.

    433. yesindyref2 says:

      @Bob Mack “For clarity.

      The case going to the ECJ is nothing to do with sovereignty.

      The case itself isn’t no. It’s the getting there is about the sovereignty of the Scottish Courts though, hence the UK Gov sending their top guy, Keen, who, to be fair, was bound to fail.

    434. HYUFD says:

      Brian Doonethetoon As its Parliament was Westminster which Scotland joined and which was already built on and remains built on the principle of Parliamentary sovereignty and no Parliament can bind its successors

    435. HYUFD says:

      The Union is defined as a Union of the Nations of England, Scotland and Wales and the province of Northern Ireland. Westminster is built on the principle no Parliament can bind its successors making a permanent written constitution by definition impossible. You said quite clearly the funds from privatisations could be used to pay down debt.

    436. Cubby says:

      HYUFD

      You really don’t have a clue do you.

      Why don’t you just say I’m British and I want to stay British and drop all the crap you post. I do not have a problem with someone saying they are British. I do have a problem with people coming on Wings and posting a lot of ill informed uneducated Britnat crap. I also have a problem with people misrepresenting what I say in my posts and lying. I also have a problem with people saying I want to kick the English out of Scotland and that I am an ethnic nationalist.

      “The Union is defined as a Union of the nations of England Scotland and Wales and the province of Northern Ireland” A very precise definition but totally wrong as usual. Where and when did this imaginary Union of yours take place?

    437. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      “As its Parliament was Westminster which Scotland joined…”
      and
      “The Union is defined as a Union of the Nations of England, Scotland and Wales and the province of Northern Ireland.”

      I’ll pardon your ignorance (must be the English teaching of false history).

      The Scottish parliament was prorogued, then reconvened in 1999. The English parliament was dissolved so Scotland could not (and did not) “join” anything. A new UNITED KINGDOM parliament was created, utilising the building that HAD housed the dissolved English parliament.

      “The Union” was (and is) a union of the Kingdom of Scotland and the Kingdom of England. It was never (and still isn’t) a union of three nations and a province.

      Yoiu really have to brush up on the facts, rather than typing here that which you would like to be true, because you believe the ‘fake news’ that has been spread since 1707.

    438. Cubby says:

      Brian Doonthetoo@11.20am

      Hey Brian you are spoiling my fun. I was hoping to see what sort of other crap he would post.

      The biggest crap to date(as distinct from his simple lies) are his comments on why there is no written constitution. Infantile made up nonsense.

      However I have to say that a lot of the Britnat union crap was also taught in Scottish schools. Westminster trying to create its own facts as usual. When you have the Britnat labour leader Corbyn who wants to be UK PM admitting he did not know Scotland has its own legal system it brings it home how pervasive the lies are. A guy wanting to be PM of the UK but doesn’t understand the entity he wants to become PM of. Corbyn just another London centric colonist. Red Tories and blue Tories all Britnats most of whom do not have a clue what there precious Union is.

      If the Britnat HYUFD cannot see that he has been fed a lot of Britnat lies and has swallowed them whole then he really is a Britnat carrying around a bucket of sand to stick his head in whilst humming rule Britannia. A Category 2 Britnat as I call them. No better than a flat earth believer. People who will not accept the truth.

      HYUFD — the clues in the name United KINGDOM.

    439. yesindyref2 says:

      @Cubby
      As Brucie would have said “Good game, good game”.

    440. Cubby says:

      @yesindyref2

      Thanks for the laugh.

      Hey but don’t go considering buying the Sun. Just because it does not tell as many lies as previously it is still a Britnat propaganda phamlet that has the distinction of once supporting independence then doing a Sunday Herald about turn.

    441. HYUFD says:

      Cubby Do you have another definition of the Union? No. Yes I am British and proud to be so so I will give you that

    442. HYUFD says:

      Westminster became the Parliament of the UK, but the Westminster Parliament which contained English and Welsh MPs added Scottish MPs and the principle of parliamentary sovereignty and that no parliament could bind its successors remained. Wales is part of the UK too and Welsh MPs were part of the House of Commons which voted for the Union in 1707, Ireland joined the Union in 1800 with Northern Ireland replacing it within the UK in 1921

    443. Cubby says:

      HYUFD

      You have just confirmed that you indeed are a Category 2 Britnat who carries around his bucket of sand and a handy pack of lies in your pocket. A true flat earth denier. A Britnat fanatic. You will never learn so I will no longer point out where you are wrong. You are happy in your ignorance but stop posting it on Wings.

      I am sure CameronB Brodie will have some thoughts on why some people will hold onto their beliefs that have been drummed in to them in spite of facts/evidence to the contrary.

      To me you are just a clown who provided some laughs but are no longer funny just irritating. In the same way a drunk in the pub might be funny at first but then becomes just annoying after hearing too much crap from them.



    Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.




    ↑ Top