What you want to believe
This site has repeatedly – much to the displeasure of some readers – expressed the view in 2019 that the SNP doesn’t know what it’s doing with regard to Brexit. But it turns out we’re not the only people who feel that way.
Last week we commissioned a Panelbase poll of SNP voters only (specifically those currently planning to use their Holyrood constituency vote for the party in 2021), and these were the results.
In other words, nobody has a clue what the goal is, let alone the strategy.
SNP voters were pretty much in an even three-way split about what they THOUGHT the party is trying to achieve – completely stopping Brexit, stopping a no-deal only, or letting Brexit happen but securing special terms for Scotland.
Interestingly, only 8% of people thought it was a fiendish ploy to LOOK like they were doing everything possible to stop it, so they could say to Remain voters in Scotland “Hey, we tried our best in good faith to do what was best for the whole UK, but Brexit happened anyway so now your only escape is independence.”
That’s curious because on social media it’s a very widespread belief that that’s the real plan. When we did a non-scientific poll of our Twitter followers at the weekend, the numbers were very different.
SEPARATE DEAL
Panelbase poll: 31%
Twitter poll: 9%
STOP BREXIT ALTOGETHER
Panelbase poll: 30%
Twitter poll: 41%
STOP NO-DEAL
Panelbase poll: 26%
Twitter poll: 27%
ONLY PRETENDING
Panelbase poll: 8%
Twitter poll: 23%
(NB Twitter polls only allow four options max.)
But back at the real poll, there was another striking fact. When we asked people what they thought the SNP’s policy SHOULD be, rather than what they thought it actually WAS, we got this:
In other words, almost completely identical numbers to the first question, even though there was an extra option this time (to cater to SNP Leave voters – we don’t believe that anyone genuinely thinks the SNP is trying to let no-deal Brexit happen simply on its own merits, so we didn’t put it in the first Q).
Of course, we can’t be certain that it was the same people giving the same answers to both questions, but it does seem overwhelmingly likely that the ones who thought the SNP should be (say) trying to stop Brexit altogether are the same people who thought that’s what the SNP actually was doing.
tl;dr: people believe what they want to believe.
What we can state with certainty from these findings is that only 30% of SNP voters want Brexit stopped entirely, while 63% of them want to let it happen in some form or another. That is dramatically at odds with the party’s publicly stated aims.
The bottom line, though, is that three-and-a-half years after the EU referendum vote SNP voters still really don’t know what the party is trying to achieve, and they’re hugely divided over the details of what that should be. So it probably shouldn’t be all that surprising that the party itself doesn’t appear to be clear on the question either.
It should be noted that the veracity of a claim is not contingent on the number of people who believe it.
Shouldnt have asked
I suppose it all comes down to whether SNP supporters have confidence in the party’s leadership to deliver the single most important thing which is independence.
We know Scotland will receive no quarter from Westminster under any Brexit scenario, despite all the faux hugs and kisses.
Time to spell it out and take a stand. No more indirectness.
The SNP isn’t trying to achieve one single outcome, it’s trying to achieve the best outcome it can from a prioritised list. Maybe if you had asked respondents which outcomes, and in which order of priority, they thought the SNP were aiming for you would see that they are not mutually exclusive goals, and their supporters are not as confused as you make out.
Let’s be fair – none of the parties knows what they are doing with Brexit.
Let’s hope that by installing a Corbyn caretaker government the SNP both stop Brexit and gain a Section 30 order.
Many of us seem to want the UK to suffer a hard Brexit because that will make a YES vote more likely. However, I donl;t think this has been sufficiently analysed – and neither is it very fair on our neighbours.
Maybe if the SNP change their initials to SIP
Scottish Independence Party, that will remind them of what the political party true goals are and focus on achieving that goal and then upon independence, change it back to SNP, the Scottish National Party.
Problem “Solved” and everyone would be in do doubt as to what it stands for.
I am starting to lose faith in all honesty in all ever seeing Scotland being independent in my lifetime.
It’s likely that SNP members, like myself, believe that the SNP want to stop BREXIT altogther, failing that, stay in the CU SM, failing that, separate Scottish outcome. Its what Alex Salmond once described as an “all or something” outcome.
Where poll answers land on that particular trajectory may reflect where people believe us to be at the moment.
I wonder what the result would have been if there was an option of Leaving England to get on with it ( as that is what they voted for )and going for an independence referendum?
I am putting my faith in a cunning plan.
In the local elections I am amazed that the tory vote is holding up. Obviously labour are finished and deservedly so.
The main enemies remains the dishonest BBC and the british nationalist MSM.
P.S.I wonder if archie “blame catholic schools” mcpherson saw the twitter video of the Belfast couple’s wedding? And I would be grateful if he would tell us which catholic school they attended.
P.P.S. Arthur Montford was a gentleman and a legend. Archie is a bellend.
I think it’s a fiendish ploy to make independence as difficult as possible so they can avoid having to answer to the electorate about why it hasn’t progressed.
Honestly, I’m fed up saying this but here we go again. The ONLY way that Scotland can remain a part of the EU is by remaining a part of the UK. As soon as Scotland becomes independent from rUK, then it’s out of the EU.
So if the SNP and others manage to stop Brexit, it means that Scotland has to remain a part of rUK otherwise Sturgeon and the rest have an awful lot of explaining to do about why they will be taking Scotland out of the EU as a result of independence, especially since the majority of Scotland voted to remain in the EU.
Try selling THAT to the people of Scotland.
That’s why I believe that Sturgeon and the SNP are lying to the people of Scotland. Unfortunately, they’re more concerned about going for a march than looking at what’s really happening.
Stop Brexit and stop no-deal Brexit add up to 56% or 52%, depending which set of answers is used. 68% via Twitter poll.
That’s conclusive to some degree.
Probably no surprise, these findings, as I think the policy has looked like nearly all the options in that question at one point or another.
That the three which ultimately mean staying in the UK, at least for now, are scoring much higher than the “pretending” one only emphasises how much more bothered the SNP have appeared about stopping Brexit than independence in recent times.
In shorter words, nobody knows for sure Just as we are arguing on this site over the very same things, thus it is reflected in your poll results.
2014.
NS. We want independence.
EU. Yeah well, that would cause us some risk.
2016
NS. We still want independence.
EU. With the UK wanting out causing us serious loss we could offset the damage if you remained in the EU as an independent country.
NS. Ok, you help and we will see what we can do. Oh! But BTW since you didn’t ask, we would like to also remain the dominant party down the road.
EU. Sure, whatever! Oh but meanwhile see what you can do to reduce the effects of Brexit, maybe even get it canceled!
NS. Ah yes but if we get it canceled then what’s in it for us?
EU. Never mind being the dominant party, your be the only party, wink wink.
NS. Ahhhh!! Smiley face. Win win as far as we are concerned.
EU. Yeah yeah whatever, just don’t forget to bring your oil!
What rubbish Stuart !
SNP voters, based on the info above, clearly know what the SNP is doing.
They identified correctly all the main objectives of the SNP AND agreed with what the SNP were doing is what they should be doing – based on your figures
There is no contradiction in trying to tackle the Brexit madness from the UK Government in multiple ways IE
– stopping it
– or trying to protect Scotland from the worst of it
– or trying to stop a no-deal
I have occasionally not agreed with one of your posts, but had to concede you had a point of view in those cases
BUT on this one you appear to be lost in an echo chamber of ‘SNP bad’ despite the evidence of your own polling figures above to the contrary
I would say the SNP’s plan has been to look and sound responsible, sensible, and moderate. Be the voice of compromise and stability. And exactly how that appears changed/changes with the developments in Brexit.
Their intention will have been to contrast with both the extremism of hard core English Nationalists and the incompetence of Labour. And by extension, show the Union to be a shitshow while independence is presented as a safer option than 2014.
If I am correct, then it has been successful.
When the extremists say they want a hard Brexit, the SNP responds with a comprehensive soft plan.
When the extremists give up negotiating and want to crash out, the SNP cooperate with others to stop that.
When NI is offered a special arrangement, the SNP say “us too”.
Like most Yessers I’m deeply frustrated that we just don’t move onto a solid campaign for Indy, but I still have faith that the end I want will be achieved by the means I observe.
parties dont have plans, they have tactics.
if politics is like a chess game, i would say i wish we were not in this particular game, but 55% voted no in 2014, so we are.
to that end, the snp plans and tactics are dependent on how their opponents move.
had you asked the question, “do you think boris is planning to leave the eu with no deal”? what do you think the response would have been?
why?. because the snp’s plans and tactics have no choice but to take this into account.
failure to do so is the same as “one hand clapping”
i have sympathy for those desparate and demanding indyref2 now! I’m scunnered too. but go ask the party quebecois if they think they held indyref2 too soon?, or the catalans if they should have made different choices?
the future is unknown, regardless of how certain you are of the righteousness of your opinion.
ergo, if you believe that boris probably wants to leave the eu with no deal and that in a ge he will probably win an outright majority, then the snp’s plans and tactics of opposing no deal brexit are probably the right move.
probably 🙂
The SNP are the professional politicians.
I am not.
Stuart Campbell certainly is not.
My faith remains in the efforts of the SNP.
This website used to be about holding the media to account. What direction is Wings heading now???
Nicola Sturgeon has said on countless occasions that she wants No Brexit ,not just for Scotland but for the whole of the UK because it will be disastrous for everyone , what can be clearer than that . She has been the only leader from the very start of the whole Tory conspired debacle to be very clear what her objectives are.
As for some Machiavellian plan , absolute garbage .
After the decision has been made to dissolve the Union I assume there will be a time before we actually leave then a transition period. During that time we will have negotiated terms to remain in EU.
We all have EU citizenship. EU will NOT remove that citizenship from the peoples of a country which is negotiating their own EU membership.
We would not be leaving UK or EU the day of the announcement of the YES result.
The manner of that YES decision being won is the only uncertainty here. The rest is common sense, even when we are negotiating with Little England.
Thinking more about these poll options(Stop brexit vs stop no-deal), it occurred to me that the technique of splitting one largely cohesive group by offering two subtly different but heavily overlapping options seemed familiar for a reason.
link to wingsoverscotland.com
So it appears that many voters, even SNP/independence voters, still think as themsleves being British to some extent. And even although they must know that their opinion does not count in any respect.
This is what the SNP should be addressing.
When a party is in a position like this, where no sod knows what it stands for or what, if anything, it’s trying to achieve, that’s down to the leader.
oh Lord help us. The SNP are not bad mob are in full defensive mode about a poll conducted from SNP members.
Perhaps you should be picking on them rather than the guy who conducted the poll. Just a thought.
Court refuses the Cherry case! BBC.
Ghillie
Agree.
Here is my survey
Do I know what Wos are up too? — Possibly
Do I care? – Not really
What is WoS goal? You tell me.
This is like the usual interview on the streets where a very general question is asked of a member of the public.
From the MoP perspective they do not know, care or understand what the reason the question is being asked of them or whether the interviewer has an agenda. (MANY DO). So the response is I don’t know, yes / no followed by a giggle and running off- to get rid of the interviewer.
Do I care as an SNP member what non snp members think. In all honesty No.
Tough life isn’t it.
better still how many snp members still alive today,
1. supported the snp mps voting for a referendum bill in 1979 which had a 40% rule?
2, voted ou jim callaghan on a VONC after the vote?
it probably seemed like the right thing to do at the time but what do they think now?
hindsight is the only exact sience. opinion is not
Stuart Campbell is not a politician.
Or even a professional pollster.
I don’t think he pretends to be either.
He is just himself.
@Hamish100,
“Do I care what non SNP members think? Not really”
Way to go Hamish. That guarantees 120,000 votes for indy.
England and Wales voted to leave while Scotland and Northern Ireland voted to stay in the EU. Respecting THAT result is what the SNP and everyone else SHOULD be doing.
“The SNP isn’t trying to achieve one single outcome, it’s trying to achieve the best outcome it can from a prioritised list. Maybe if you had asked respondents which outcomes, and in which order of priority, they thought the SNP were aiming for you would see that they are not mutually exclusive goals, and their supporters are not as confused as you make out.”
You’ve never commissioned a poll, have you?
“It’s likely that SNP members, like myself, believe that the SNP want to stop BREXIT altogther”
Is it? Based on what? Why would members be any more united than voters?
“Stop Brexit and stop no-deal Brexit add up to 56% or 52%, depending which set of answers is used. 68% via Twitter poll.
That’s conclusive to some degree.”
How do you figure? One of those is Leaving, one is Remaining. From an SNP perspective, one invalidates the indyref mandate, one doesn’t. How can you possibly lump them together?
bob mack
well the 120000 – can vote as they like.
I know a SNP councillor that voted No during 2014.– they still got pushed as a candidate– and I mean pushed by their MSP. I am happy about that . No. Will I vote tory in anger No.
and as for all the greeters they can vote for the snp or nor or independence or not.
Obvious really.
Now
Has the Mr Campbell got a personal interest in this? Y/N/ Don’t Care/ Mind your own business/ Your banned!!
Scottish judge dismisses a case forcing Boris Johnson to seek an extension
link to bbc.co.uk
“England and Wales voted to leave while Scotland and Northern Ireland voted to stay in the EU. Respecting THAT result is what the SNP and everyone else SHOULD be doing.”
We’ve got some polling on that too…
Stu is good at taking the MSM to bits.
The SNP definitely seems directionless at the moment. I’m really not sure who there is who could bring back some vision and determination to the leadership.
(Whisper) Alex Salmond?
“There is no contradiction in trying to tackle the Brexit madness from the UK Government in multiple ways IE
– stopping it
– or trying to protect Scotland from the worst of it
– or trying to stop a no-deal”
You… you don’t see any contradiction in simultaneously trying to stop Brexit (invalidating the indyref mandate) and trying to let Brexit happen in various vastly different forms (thereby maintaining the mandate)? In literally campaigning for every possible outcome at once?
Uh… okay.
Let the farmers start slaughtering their animals as they can’t get them to market, the fishermen not sailing as they can’t sell their fish with a 40 tariff and the holiday makers join the non eu queue in the airport while they get their visa checked oh and let the petrol shortage start then call indy ref 2
Scotland doesn’t wish to leave the EU and Scotland is well aware that the SNP is steadfastly opposed to leaving the EU.
So where is the problem?
And the trolls gotta do what the trolls gotta do.
C’est la vie =)
“Scotland doesn’t wish to leave the EU and Scotland is well aware that the SNP is steadfastly opposed to leaving the EU.”
Even 65% of SNP VOTERS don’t appear to be aware of that.
My worry is that, if the parliament does not allow the government to enact the referendum result, all future referendums are not worth the paper they are printed on, as this can happen to them also. As this is the only legal route to Scottish independence the SNP are helping to defeat their own aims and all the so called allies from the other parties will be first in the que to do so.
I may be the only one who does but I do not think the 3 first options in that poll are mutually exclusive so I quite understand why it is being seen as the SNP is fighting on 3 fronts, because it is and it has to.
By stopping brexit you will stop a no deal brexit and will achieve a good deal for Scotland: the one it currently has and that happens to be the best deal on offer and the only one Scotland gave a mandate for.
We all know the English establishment, and particularly all those hedge funds, foreign interests, taxhavens and ViP taxdodgers behind de Pfeffel, Cummings, Farage and brexit will not allow brexit not to go ahead.
This is where stalling brexit by the SNP for as long as possible and thwarting the current England MP acting as PM’s undemocratic antics becomes the real trojan horse, Scotland’s political weapon of choice. It would be greatly aided if the EU sent an ultimatum whereby should another extension for A50 be requested, and the tax avoidance laws should be implemented in full. This sends a very strong message to those behind brexit:
Or Scotland gets its independence or those taxdodgers, hedge funds and foreign interests will not get rid of EU regulations and tax avoidance laws.
Clearly, only desperation to impose brexit could have driven an unelected PM and a thoughtless monarch to attempt to unlawfully prorogue the UK parliament. Even more desperation has led the England supreme court to rule in favour of the supreme Scottish court rather than the English one. So it is evident to me that the SNP plan is working and working well.
What do those 3 options have in common? they are attempting to protect Scotland’s interests. It looks like the overwhelming majority of those completing the poll do indeed believe the SNP is working hard to protect Scotland’s interests and that is what really matters.
Frankly, Stuart, everything in that poll makes perfect sense from where I am standing.
Rev. Stuart Campbell says:
You… you don’t see any contradiction in simultaneously trying to stop Brexit (invalidating the indyref mandate) and trying to let Brexit happen in various vastly different forms (thereby maintaining the mandate)?
————————-
if you believe that a no deal brexit will happen anyway, then no, there is no contradiction
political parties do this all the time.
holding a populist position, when in opposition is easy. the problem for nicola only arises if the snp actually stop brexit.
personally, i dont believe they can, brexit is gonna happen ergo, if the position they are taking at the moment wins support from no supporting remainers, what’s the problem?
welcome to politics 1001
Y’know, there will be moments where we have to hear things we don’t like. Putting aside my lifelong skepticism of the relationship between polls and actual outcome, this is one of them, and thank the stones that someone is asking questions where the answer may be hard to swallow.
Now the smart response is, “OK, why, and what might we do about this?”
Scotland is going to be dragged down with England’s Brexit because the SNP persists in the delusion that Brexit can be fixed.
Well I and many many others are aware of it.
Scotland voted 62% to remain in the EU.
That battle is now being fought.
Whatever the outcome of that battle, Scotland – mostly through the efforts of the Scottish National Party – will continue to fight for Independence.
Every step taken thus far has been to that end. With integrity.
Solid steps that will be upheld in the highest Scottish Courts and in the eyes of the International arena.
Nothing less will do.
We are moving forward. Steadily forward.
INDEPENDENCE IS COMING 🙂
delusion pete?
i dont think the snp are delusional, they know how impotent their mps are at wm. same as the scotlab feeble 50 were.
the snp mps actions at wm are not designed to stop brexit, they know they can and never will do this
the snp mps actions at wm are designed to win support for yes.
hint, admittedly very slowly, they are doing this in the polls.
Wel! said Peter Bell. Some share that de!usion
There should be a new Referendum;
Withdrawal Agreement
or
No Deal Exit
(but onlyEngland and Wales should be allowed tovote)
“This website used to be about holding the media to account. What direction is Wings heading now???”
This website is, and always has been, about independence. Holding the media to account is a means to that, not an end in itself. If it’s necessary to also hold the SNP to account in the pursuit of independence, we’ll do that too.
“Stuart Campbell is not a politician.
Or even a professional pollster.”
I’m certainly not a professional pollster. But Panelbase are. What’s your point?
“By stopping brexit you will stop a no deal brexit and will achieve a good deal for Scotland”
Don’t be daft. The options are clear in context: stopping a no-deal Brexit (when there’s already an option for stopping Brexit entirely) can only mean Brexit with a deal.
“It’s likely that SNP members, like myself, believe that the SNP want to stop BREXIT altogther”
Is it? Based on what? Why would members be any more united than voters?
Based on the many statements to that effect made by Nicola Sturgeon and other SNP MPs since 2016. I’m not saying it’s what the members all want. I’m saying it’s what the members believe to be the SNP goal, which is the question polled.
Also, for decades the SNP mantra has been “Independence in Europe”. That hasn’t changed AFAIK.
“splitting one largely cohesive group by offering two subtly different but heavily overlapping options seemed familiar for a reason”
Just so we’re clear: in the context of a poll on Brexit, you think Brexit happening and Brexit not happening are “heavily overlapping options”?
Righto.
Rev. Stuart Campbell says:
I’m certainly not a professional pollster. But Panelbase are. What’s your point?
—————
true, Panelbase are professional pollsters
doesnt the person who commissions the poll get any say in what questions are asked?
asking for a friend. 🙂
“I’m not saying it’s what the members all want. I’m saying it’s what the members believe to be the SNP goal, which is the question polled.”
Uh, we polled BOTH those questions. Did you read the whole article?
HYUFD says:
7 October, 2019 at 1:05 pm
Scottish judge dismisses a case forcing Boris Johnson to seek an extension
link to bbc.co.uk
Oh, dear. You really believe that, do you?
The court judgement actually says it has accepted the assurance of the PM that HE WILL COMPLY WITH THE BENN ACT and that he is fully aware of his legal responsibilities under the Act and will not try to frustrate them!!!!
link to scotcourts.gov.uk
Read it and weep!
Oh, and keep taking the tablets.
“Well I and many many others are aware of it.
Scotland voted 62% to remain in the EU.
That battle is now being fought.
Whatever the outcome of that battle, Scotland – mostly through the efforts of the Scottish National Party – will continue to fight for Independence.
Every step taken thus far has been to that end. With integrity.
Solid steps that will be upheld in the highest Scottish Courts and in the eyes of the International arena.
Nothing less will do.
We are moving forward. Steadily forward.
INDEPENDENCE IS COMING”
Gargle blargle wargle. Slogans. Empty bullshit. Are you actually the SNP press office?
“Oh, dear. You really believe that, do you?”
I imagine he believes it because it’s precisely what just happened.
question stu
1. do you think boris intends/plans etc to leave the eu with no deal?
2. do you think the uk will leave the eu with no deal?
“doesnt the person who commissions the poll get any say in what questions are asked?”
Same question: what’s your point?
Rev, has Pete Wishart on your twitter account just said that no matter how many SNP members are elected, it wil! be down to poll percentage. numbers to decide if an indy ref could be he!d? Maybe I read that wrong.
“I would say the SNP’s plan has been to look and sound responsible, sensible, and moderate. Be the voice of compromise and stability. And exactly how that appears changed/changes with the developments in Brexit.”
In order to achieve what, and how? I’m getting SO tired of people going “Nicola’s got this, there’ll be a genius plan that we mortals can’t comprehend that’s going to be sprung any minute now”.
Exactly what is the point of jumping around from one position to the other depending on what other people do? Isn’t that precisely what we justifiably slag Labour off for?
Rev. Stuart Campbell says:
“doesnt the person who commissions the poll get any say in what questions are asked?”
Same question: what’s your point?
—————-
same point as previous caller, panel base are professional pollster. you arnt
“same point as previous caller, panel base are professional pollster. you arnt”
That’s an observation of the bleeding obvious, not a point.
“Rev, has Pete Wishart on your twitter account just said that no matter how many SNP members are elected, it wil! be down to poll percentage. numbers to decide if an indy ref could be he!d? Maybe I read that wrong.”
Yes, that’s what he said (well, he was essentially talking about declaring independence, not a referendum, but the underlying point is the same) and he’s right.
“1. do you think boris intends/plans etc to leave the eu with no deal?
2. do you think the uk will leave the eu with no deal?”
Yes and probably.
Rev. Stuart Campbell says:
That’s an observation of the bleeding obvious, not a point.
————–
then why did you raise it? your comment. not mine
re
Rev. Stuart Campbell says:
I’m certainly not a professional pollster. But Panelbase are. What’s your point?
“personally, i dont believe they can, brexit is gonna happen ergo, if the position they are taking at the moment wins support from no supporting remainers, what’s the problem?”
So you’re one of the 8% who think it’s option 4? Glad we cleared that up.
“then why did you raise it? your comment. not mine”
You’re getting really dangerously close to being told to fuck off now.
re reply
thanks for your reply stu,
btw, i agree 100% with your prediction
i just think it is with this in mind we should consider the present snp plan/tactic/position
not really sure how or why i have upset you stu??
not my intention but apologies if i have
“ Schrödinger’s cat says Stu Campbell says @ @0120 pm “ you don’t see any contradiction etc etc ( context regarding the mandate ) . The mandate from 2016 HE actually is two -fold
1) we believe that the Scottish Parliament should have the right to hold another referendum if there is CLEAR and SUSTAINED EVIDENCE that Independence has become the PREFERRED option of the Scottish people ( No Brexit context here) or
2)
If there is a significant change in material circumstances that prevailed in 2014 such as Scotland being TAKEN OUT of the EU against our will .
Uh, we polled BOTH those questions. Did you read the whole article?
Yes I did. I quite agree that SNP members have different opinions on staying in the EU. Why anyone who wants out of Europe would join a political party so committed to staying in the EU is a mystery. But people are strange.
But the SNP has a website with many articles on their attitude towards the EU, the UK, Boris Johnston, the Tories and Scottish independence. etc. You don’t have to be a member to read it.
Here’s a video from their website of Nicola Sturgeon explaining to Alistair Carmichael the danger of being dragged out of the EU if still in the UK (from 2013).
link to snp.org
Rev. Stuart Campbell says:
7 October, 2019 at 1:30 pm
“Don’t be daft”
I am not being daft. Thank you.
“The options are clear in context”
They may be for you. The are not for me. From where I am standing there has never been any other brexit than a no deal brexit. Why? Because that is the only one that will allow all those VIP taxdodgers in the paradise and panama papers to avoid EU tax avoidance laws, Tax Havens to escape forced transparency and American corporations wanting to take over our economy and food industry to escape EU standards.
As per the “special deal for Scotland in the UK”, I think we all know here that the only special deal Scotland can get in the UK is for the whole of the UK to remain in the EU, as anything other would cut right through those articles of the treaty of union that state that trade advantages must apply the same all over the kingdom of Great Britain. In other words, such “special deal” would end at all effects the union.
I think I am quite safe in saying that I am not the only one here that feels that a miraculous deal that will allow all the above to escape what they want to escape while still enjoying the perks of the Single Market and Custom Union is anything other than utopia. Should this not be the case and Mogg would not have moved the offices of his invested company to Dublin.
So, from where I am standing, the only way to stop/stall “no deal” and get that “special deal” for Scotland while still in the UK is by stopping/stalling brexit altogether and that is what I think the SNP is trying to do and I hope they may long continue with any tool they can use until all those vested interests behind brexit give in or let Scotland go.
i’m not sure i am category 4, but i take yer point.
what one wants/wishes for are not the same as what is politically expedient to obtain ones ultimate goal, in this case independence.
nice when they overlap (as i think they do in nicola’s case) but not necessary, especially when one is in opposition as one is in westminster
eg, i know very few snp members who give a fig about the monarchy but retaining it is a means to an end. ie. independence. it is politically expedient. nothing more
@Mist001
That right, aye?
We see you.
Brexit for the SNP is a minefield.
Having it provides the triple locked mandate for Indy 2, but Scots rejected it.
No deal is horrific because it sets grounds for an awful trade deal for Scotland should we become independent, RUK being our biggest market. This will be unionist gold during the referendum campaign.
It seems that leaving with a deal is the best outcome, we have our Indy2 and a decent trading relationship on leaving RUK. On balance the SNP should have voted for Theresa’s deal then went for a section 30, but the SNP would suffer badly at the polls for helping to facilitate a “Tory Brexit” and going against the wishes of most Scots.
North chiel
genuinely not sure what your point is
@ Hyufd
The court did nothing of the kind. They accepted as honest( surprised I am) the assurance from Johnston tgat he would not seek to break the law, that he would comply with statute laid down by the Benn act and that he would as ordered by Parliament write to the EU asking for an extension. Because the court have accepted his statement, he must comply or face charges of contempt of court, which means prison.
Your a proper Tory Hyufd, and I don’t mean that as a compliment.
Hmmm. Based on the rule of thumb that 10% of the population will believe any nonsense, I’ve just discovered that my thinking the SNP’s plan is to cunningly *pretend* to stop Brexit puts me in the same category as those who think the moon landings were faked 🙁
I answered the Twitter poll and chose “Only Pretending”
I would like to think that multiple possible outcomes are being considered and that one of them is to allow England to drown in English Nationalism.
I believe that English Nationalism was foreseen as a very likely outcome of Scottish Devolution (read Fintan O’Toole everyone) and that the SNP gamed such a possibility.
Of course the SNP couldn’t possibly have articulated such an approach to Independence but let’s face it – an implosion of English society is happening in front of us.
The SNP are feeding the flames with court cases etc and totally pissing off English public opinion.
Why not exploit that?
And if that isn’t the game plan then the SNP are doing a great job of convincing conspiracy theorists that it actually is.
On your Twitter poll I voted “Stopping Brexit altogether for whole of UK” because:
a) I actually want to stay in EU.
b) I think it’s best for rUK.
c) It’ll have rabid, swivel-eyed Brexiteers in Angerland demanding their own IndyRef to leave the UK cuz then they’d be automatically out of the EU (© Blair McDougall).
I can think of several tactical reasons why others might have given other responses that were not necessarily what they truly thought. After all, 62% in Scotland (and probably more now) want to remain in the EU.
Rev. Stuart Campbell says:
“1. do you think boris intends/plans etc to leave the eu with no deal?
2. do you think the uk will leave the eu with no deal?”
Yes and probably.
—————
thats my point, the snp position only becomes a contradiction if that doesnt happen
if a no deal brexit does happen, then the snp’s position becomes a vote winner!
your poll reveals that many snp voter struggle to understand this, but hey, this brexit fiasco has left everyone scratching their heads. no big deal
As clear as mud. And just as messy…
Craig P
mmm, there is nothing too ridiculous that the credulous wont believe
Proud Cybernat @2:07pm:
It was a couple of days ago and so I could be remembering wrongly but wasn’t the twitter poll asking what you thought the SNP were doing rather than what you wanted them to be doing?
Looking at the second question then 80% of SNP voters want Scotland to stay in the EU, they just have different opinions on how this is best achieved. This seems to conflict with the often quoted over 30% of SNP voters want to leave the EU. In fact only 7% seemed to want a no deal brexit.
I feel obliged to point out that the following option as a bare minimum is missing:
“All of the above”.
It’s therefore not interpretable, as it forces people to choose just one option. Sorry Rev.
HYUFD says:
7 October, 2019 at 1:05 pm
Scottish judge dismisses a case forcing Boris Johnson to seek an extension
Because BawJaws lawyers – during the case- submitted to the judge a letter from BawJaws stating that he will comply with the law. There was no need then for the judge to issue a Court Order. The court obviously trusts BawJaws.
Maria F says:
from where I am standing, the only way to stop/stall “no deal” and get that “special deal” for Scotland while still in the UK is by stopping/stalling brexit altogether and that is what I think the SNP is trying to do and I hope they may long continue with any tool they can use until all those vested interests behind brexit give in or let Scotland go.
nice sentiment Maria F
alternatively
When the water reaches the upper deck, follow the rats
dadsarmy says:
“All of the above”.
It’s therefore not interpretable, as it forces people to choose just one option. Sorry Rev.
————
as i said, panelbase are professional pollsters 🙂
A poll that asks questions about what people think or believe politicians are thinking, or what the politicians motives might be for what the questioned think they’re thinking, and if the politicians are thinking what the questioned think the politicians are thinking then the poll has proven that the politicians are definitely thinking the wrong thing
I harbour no displeasure over this poll at all
but I personally believe as a SNP voter, it’s comedy gold
Giving Goose – that makes two of us!
Scenario 1: Brexit happens. We go for another indy ref.
Scenario 2: SNP stops Brexit. Gammons either declare independence from Scotland on behalf of England, Wales & Northern Ireland, or make life in Scotland so difficult that the current finely balanced polling becomes a landslide in favour of Yes.
That’s how it works out in my head anyway…
lol @dr jim
Rev, if you were in Nicola’s position what would you be doing right now??
I’m far from a political expert buddy and not intending this question to sound sarcastic mate.
Just would like your opinion on what could and should be getting done the now.
Dr Jim
It’s not comedy.
It’s hopeless that the SNP’s own voters don’t have a clue what they are up to.
While it is indeed impossible to know what is going on high heid yins heads’ (hence why there is confusion about their actual goal in all this) it still makes sense to ask, because it tells you what the SNP’s various voters expect from them due to what they are being led to expect and illuminates groups which might become disappointed.
Some very disillusioned people incoming.
@Dr Jim,
Utter gobbldegook. You know fine wel! the questions are about what SNP voters think is happening. Too over eager to try and disguise it.
I’m also not very sure of the purpose and it could be trying to do a number of things. As you have pointed out Rev stopping Brexit completely would remove the prime motivation of indyref2. So either the leadership thinks it would be the best thing anyway or Sturgeon is trying hard to be able to say to all and sundry ‘okay we tried everything and this is our only option now’.
The latter could be it because if we cannot get a Section 30 and have to use a Plan B then the international community who we will need to recognise us after a Yes vote will recognise that.
It could be that the Catalan experience is in fact weighing heavily in their calculations even though many EU figures and other EU govts, MEPs etc have said they would welcome us in contrast to the reaction to the Catalan prospect and even Spain’s position. But the Spanish might not recognise us if we use a Plan B if they think it doesn’t satisfy their strictures.
It could also be that No10 is using the Madrid playbook against us as well. Realpolitik analysis would tend to suggest that. Ruling it out would not be possible.
I say all that despite being as frustrated as anyone else and absolutely champing at the bit to have a formal campaign. But none of that means my mind has stopped thinking and analysing.
Imagine we employ a PlanB and No10 says ‘meh we don’t care’. How exactly do we make them. Do a Sinn Fein and withdraw our MPs? that’s worked well for them, hasn’t it?
Short of a UDI and daring No10 to send in the troops against the Polis what can we do?
schrodingers cat says:
7 October, 2019 at 2:24 pm
“alternatively When the water reaches the upper deck, follow the rats”
The only rats I see jumping, and doing some hell of acrobatic jumps without a safety net, are those in the Conservative party and the LibDems.
It may be just nice or actually it may be a realistic thought, I do not know. Frankly, after seeing the gerrymandering that took place in 2014, with the Civil Service, the BBC, all MSM, the electoral commission, the monarch and every political arm of the English establishment interference, I do believe that the only possible way Scotland will ever get independence is if the gammons in control of England realise that keeping it is more a burden than it is worth.
From where I am standing stopping no deal brexit (the only brexit the gammons are after) is the only way Scotland will become independent.
Johnny says:
It’s not comedy.
It’s hopeless that the SNP’s own voters don’t have a clue what they are up to.
————-
you think anyone in the uk knows what is really happening at the moment?
this fiasco is entirely of the unionists making
however, i would point you to a comment on the previous thread
Bob Mack says:
What a time to be alive. This week,indeed fortnight will
dictate possibly the future of these islands for decades to come.
then everyone will know.
personally, i would have saved wos money and carried out a poll of all scots 2 days after………….jus’ saying
“ Schrödinger’s cat @0201 pm “ what I am saying is that (“ trying to stop Brexit” )does NOT INVALIDATE the Indyref2 mandate .
\Schrodingers cat,
He might well do that
Have to agree, don’t really understand what strategy the SNP are employing to gain Independence ?
At a recent meeting of Prestwick SNP it seemed clear that no one at branch level has a definite idea of the way forward either. SNP leadership should have a cast iron way forward if the London overlords keep saying ” now is not the time “, have they ? If they do have a plan then the troops on the ground don’t know wat it is. If there is a general election in the near future then the SNP need to put Independence as the main way forward and how we can achieve it even if the English/UK government decline to allow us a new referendum.
We need to know Nicola what is the way you gain Independence without London’s permission ?
All the answers on the survey are correct simultaneously. Stopping a no-deal is a subset or stage on route to stopping Brexit completely so both can be policy. A separate deal for Scotland would be nice if we fail to stop Brexit and opportunities arise so that is policy too. If it all goes tits up it will be good to have appeared to have tried even if we really have – we can pretend we were pretending if need be.
Are you losing your survey writing mojo Stu?
And what is the official Stuart Campbell position on Brexit that the SNP should be adopting today?As we used to say to the kids in the car, you can’t moan about where we are going without suggesting somewhere else.
Maria F says:
From where I am standing stopping no deal brexit (the only brexit the gammons are after) is the only way Scotland will become independent.
————-
some very valid points maria
From where I am standing stopping no deal brexit……….good
From where I am standing not stopping no deal brexit…….good, indy is a certainty in this case
not sure why stu doesnt seem to get this!!
regardless of how i veiw this issue, the only position that makes any sense is for the snp to try and block no deal!!
whats the alternative? a JC approach backing both leave and remain? i dont think so
if stu is serious about setting up a political party to contest list seats (an idea i have championed here on wings since i dunno when) you need to put forward an alternative
Roger Hyam
snap
Surely England voted for Brexit and we should let them get on with it. Surely the job of the SNP is to remove Scotland from the UK? Or am I missing something?
@Johnny 2:35pm
Thank goodness most voters don’t use the internet to help them think in the way that internet users think they do, because if they did I think I’d be able to rule the world
Or do you think you know something more about what people think, because in your second sentence you agree that it’s impossible to know what people think
It’s not difficult to pose questions to which there are various replies even from the same people questioned within 20 minutes of the first questions asked when they’re designed to elicit a required response from the questioner
Newspapers and TV do it all the time then print or report their findings as facts which I’ll bet any money on have made you annoyed on more than one occasion because you *personally believe* the poll was mendacious mince and you didn’t *think* it was correct
*I can’t believe it’s not butter* well most people actually can believe it’s not butter, no matter how many times the advertising people tell them it is
How is this for an SNP plan? No deal Brexit or a deal in spite of promises Scotland etc against our will. I think a Brexit cancellation is now permanently off the cards
Pete Wishart makes it clear that indyref will probably depend on election polling numbers at the next elections(Westminster).
Or perhaps Pete doesnt know either.
If he doesnt know who does?
The people of Scotland voted by a clear two-thirds to one-third majority, that Scot6land ought to remain within the EU. This is, as far as we can understand – the clearly-expressed will of the people of Scotland, democratically arrived at, via a referendum.
Therefore, regardless of what those Scottish MPs representing UK parties attempt to do, it is incumbent on the SNP MPs to stand-up for the expressed will of the people of Scotland and demand that Scotland remains within the EU.
They should therefore support this, and only this outcome. They ought to be, at every turn, reminding the House of Commons – the House represents the only two kingdoms who are signatories to the Treaty of Union which formed that said UK – and if one of these kingdoms chooses to leave, then it should be free to do so. However, if the other Kingdom chooses to stay, it must be allowed to remain, and, if remaining means the end of the UK, then so be it.
Remind me. Has anyone else seen Stu,s numerous tweets and posts about his desire to see the SNP establish the legal right in court to hold an indyref 2 ?.
Did you miss this?
@Bob Mack
Try this one:
Which of these do you personally like with regard to food?
Vegetables
Pasta
Rice
Noodles
Meat
Fish
Something else
Mmm, it’s making me hungry 🙂
OT
Anyways, from Jolyon’s twitter, for those who couldn’t access the letter by UK Gov submitted to the CoS last minute, which the Outer House has ruled removes the need for an Order hence the first instance reject, here it is:
link to dropbox.com
As Maugham says:
“The eagle eyed will want to compare (broader) paragraph 42 of the judgement today with (narrower) what the PM offered in paragraph 8(d) of the Answers.”
Re the Indy Ref, I don’t think the way it works is to take it to court to see if the ScotGov can do it, the way it works is they go ahead and see if there’s a challenge. Same thing as driving along the road, or walking down town, you don’t go to town to prove you can do!
A doctor maybe …
schrodingers cat says:
7 October, 2019 at 2:56 pm
“From where I am standing not stopping no deal brexit…….good, indy is a certainty in this case”
That is where you and I disagree. Not stopping no deal brexit may be a situation where the support for independence will raise, I do agree with that, but that does not necessarily lead to independence. In fact, I am fearful that it will not.
We have just seen how a rogue, unelected FM of England acting as PM of the UK got given consent by the monarch to unlawfully prorogue the UK parliament. Yet, there they are, scot free and just with a slap in the wrist and ready to do it all over again.
We have seen how the so called UK supreme court turned a blind eye to the theft of 24 devolved powers from Scotland by England MPs and threw the hot potato of Scotland’s right to veto brexit onto the so called UK parliament knowing the result of that.
We have seen how that allegedly democratic UK parliament, where 90% of the seats are held by the Kingdom of England, proceeded not only to deny Scotland’s veto, but also self-award themselves a veto to Stop Scotland remaining in the EU.
So, I ask, what are the odds that as soon as the 31st October all those England MPs, England FM, monarch and English establishment political arms, desperate for keeping their cash cow would descend upon Scotland’s parliament and close it down?
What is stopping them? Our mandate from 1979, 1997 and 2014? A section 30? The vow? Well, none of that stopped this gov of rogues stealing 24 powers from us nor making the Sewell convention worthless nor unilaterally rewrite law without Scotland’s consent to retrospectively declare our own, perfectly legitimate bill, illegitimate.
A court rule? We have just seen how the buffoon refused to take on Scotland’s court ruling regarding the prorogation until the Supreme court issued its ruling.
We have heard how undemocratic English establishment idiots from labour, tories and libdems queued up to tell us in no uncertain terms that they “will not allow” an indyref even if we have a democratic mandate for it. If Scotland has been able to reconvene its parliament it is because we are in the EU. Take us out of the EU and these rogue England MPs in Westminster will close it as that is the only way they can revert fracking and any other law/bill that stand in their way to bleed us dry.
So no, I do not think allowing a “no deal” scenario will ensure we get our independence, not for a while because they will require Scotland’s resources for England to keep afloat and to negotiate that toxic USa-UK deal.
“regardless of how i veiw this issue, the only position that makes any sense is for the snp to try and block no deal!!”
which from where I am standing is the same as blocking brexit altogether. The only way for Scotland to get independence is for it to stop England getting what it wants.
“whats the alternative? a JC approach backing both leave and remain? i dont think so”
I agree. Frankly, what difference does it make to have an undemocratic brexiteer tory colonialist sitting in n10 than having an undemocratic brexiteer labour colonialist?
None in my books.
@Dadsarmy,
Noodles,especially Singapore variety.
Ill tell you something. I wAtch Ian Blackford tel! media interviews that the SNP already has a mandate for a referendum. Great. Then I see Pete Wishart state a referendum mandate wil! come from numbers polling for the SNP in an electlon.
Now Im confused
Nicola writes to Theresa wanting to taLk apparently about somethinv or other,but Thersa says no. No follow up that we know of.o
You see Dads, the SNP menu is just as complicated re indy. Nobody seems to know what to pick or shat their fellow diners would like.
what not shat. Though I dont know.
@Bob Mack
Wishy-washy is quite slim, so it’s likely he looks at the menu and says he’ll wait for the new menu to come out in 2 years time.
I on the other hand …
@Bob Mack
Pete Wishart only personally thinks what he thinks at any given moment in time, he doesn’t get to decide, that’s done by people like, well me and the other 127.000 members when we’re asked what we think at another time, and then the executive decide what they think of that, and they decide
All SNP representatives no matter their position within the party work for us the people, not the other way round
In the current political climate the situation is ever changing and the SNP doesn’t have access to thousands of civil servants brains working for them as does the UK government, so there are times like these when everybody cannot be informed of every moving part, it’s just impossible
Our team is doing their absolute utmost with both hands tied behind their backs, we don’t have any access to anything the UK are doing and they have the power and resources to do it at a moments notice, the SNP have no such resource backing, no information and no help because we’re the bad guys remember
It doesn’t help Scotland’s cause when folk are fed misinformation lies and are subjected to nonsense disguised as supporting Independence but are *concerned* when they are really not with this constant drip drip of *we should all be worried*
At the end of the day when it’s all over and done the outcome will be good or bad depending on your point of view, but what it won’t be is altered by a load of people on the internet who feel they deserve more input than they can intellectually decipher at the speed required and want to shout about it
The general public are not up to this level of decision making that’s why we employ politicians to do it for us then fire them if we don’t believe they did a good job, but shouting at them while they’re doing it serves no purpose except to vent individual unhappiness
You wouldn’t shout at a mechanic while he was bending over your car for fear he’d tell you to get another mechanic somewhere else to fix your car
If folk aren’t happy there’s an election coming up where people can vote for real tried and tested know what you’re going to get unhappiness
In the meantime I’m sticking with the team I voted for
Gavin Alexander 11.59
I’m sorry but there is only one outcome that should have priority and that is independence. So with respect i haven’t a clue what you are on about. The SNP has disappeared into a fog and I can’t see which direction they are taking.
@Dr Jim,
Pete Wishart is a helluva lot closer to SNP discussions than you I imagine, though you may be an SNP MP in cognito
@Dr Jim,
Forgot to add. Maybe you and the other 127000 members should ask for an indepedence referendum date seeing you have so much clout with the party. However I bet thats been tried already.
I’ve heard it said a lot “Scotland voted to remain in the EU” but that’s not strictly true, Scotland voted for the UK to remain in the EU,
Which is exactly what the SNP are attempting to do.
They’re simply carrying out the will of the Scottish people to the letter,
It could be that they’re banking on losing the fight (which they probably will) but they won’t be accused of not trying or weaponizing Brexit to gain independence
Once Brexit is set in stone deal or no deal then they can go for Indyref2 then we win, I don’t think it’s any more complicated than that
After all is said and done, there’s a lot more said than done. I have no more idea than anyone else what’ll happen next.
2020? Independence referendum. Will we win? Yup. Nuff said.
Bob Mack @ 13:37, 15:02, 15:24,
Rev. Stuart Campbell @ 13:40,
A superficially-reasonable test of strength, but, but, but…
+ Wishart will bring his own 60% poison-pill baggage,
+ UKGEs are inherently multi-dimensional and distractional, and it’s difficult in any case for the SNP to get fair media exposure in such a context (unlike Jo Swansong’s little band, for example), so it would be a stonking miracle if any single-issue result were truly predominant,
+ Come the inevitable next UKGE, for the SNP not to extract the most possible propaganda value out of a likely resurgence in number of MPs – as the Tories did in 2017 – would be absolutely criminal. Far too often, SNP reps seem to miss an open PR goal, but silly diversional post-election noodling from the inveterate fearty delayers (of any party or none) would be totally unforgiveable.
Ever heard of “Expectation Management”.? Frustrated hopes on!y have one outcome___ Anger.
Managing this cosists of a particular skillset which I do not believe the SNP have considered.
Time they did.
OT again, court of Session:
“So, a technical loss for the petitioners in the Vince case, but a de facto win, because they forced the govt to give assurances that it will comply with the Benn Act. Sensible for the court not to question those assurances IMO.”
link to twitter.com
That’;s what I thought too. Great minds!
dadsarmy says:
7 October, 2019 at 4:32 pm
OT again, court of Session:
“So, a technical loss for the petitioners in the Vince case, but a de facto win, because they forced the govt to give assurances that it will comply with the Benn Act. Sensible for the court not to question those assurances IMO.”
link to twitter.com
That’;s what I thought too. Great minds!
Me too. It looks more and more like the court has given Johnson enough rope to hang himself.
Just because someone says they are a snp voter/member in a poll doesn’t mean they are.
Anyway im pro independence and will fight in thecampaing proper when it comes.
OT
This is interesting, look at Peers’s reply, and think Scotland maybe:
link to twitter.com
“Don’t know if this a serious possibility, but could an issue in EU law arise If the British government or PM prime tries to exit the EU unlawfully? Unlawfully, that is, in the sense of acting against the express wishes of parliament, and contrary to an undertaking given in court?”
reply:
“I think it’s possible but much better to sort out in UK political/legal framework.”
I am taking it out of context, well, mostly.
@Admiral. Read para 45 of the judgement – a shot across the bows
@Bob Mack
You’re endowing me with positions I don’t hold then inventing power or authority I don’t possess
But I do know more than a little about human behaviour the analysis of it, how it’s used and its methods of implementation for desired outcomes
Or simply put, I know when people are falling for a crock of shit and when and who’s peddling it
Think you’r being a little disingenuous.
There isn’t a lot of room for the SNP to move. It’s future is being decided by a shrinking group in Westminster.
Obstructing Brexit, to force a General Election, may not be your preferred option, but an attack such as you’ve made here is self serving.
“Think you’r being a little disingenuous.
There isn’t a lot of room for the SNP to move. It’s future is being decided by a shrinking group in Westminster.
Obstructing Brexit, to force a General Election, may not be your preferred option, but an attack such as you’ve made here is self serving.”
What attack? But there’s plenty room for the SNP to move. They just haven’t got the bollocks to actually do politics, because they’re scared what the press might say.
@Alex Birnie
“As for the deletion of your comment on SGP, you know full well that it was your abusive language that he took umbrage with.”
Are you one of these SGP sycophantic people who thinks it wrong to respond without subservience, saying “get to fuck, dickwad” to a dickwad who calls people “cowardly?” Splash your boots, here’s his “abusive language” reply to a completely sensible comment:
“My patience is wearing a bit thin with that sort of cowardly jibe from anonymous commenters.”
when what I posted was this, on his website that doesn’t make it possible (or at least easy) to post with your own name:
“It depends on the percentage of the SNP vote that Wings can take. I worked it out for West of Scotland on the basis of Wings taking 50% of the SNP list vote, resulting change from 2016 would have been +3 Wings, -1 Green, 0 SNP as there were 0 SNP on the list.
In fact in 2016 there were only 2 regions the SNP got any MSPs on the list, 1 in H&I, and 3 in South Scotland.
I looked quickly at the data on the Wings article and it looks about right to me, and I did stats at Uni for what that’s worth.
James, you are dismissing this without ANY data analysis. That’s just plain wrong, sorry pal. You’re better than this.”
Do you want to try vainly to point out the “abusive language” in what I posted on SGP there? He was the one who unprovoked used provocative language.
And the post pointing out the incompetence of his questions was totally non-abusive (though you won’t be able to see it as he deleted it) – apart from calling the questions (not him) incompetent. Which they were and are. Same as the question in this article.
The guy effectively censors at least some opinions that don’t agree with him. While abusing people in his actual articles.
Nice attempt at deflection, and trying to discredit someone Alex, but no cigar.
70% want to stop Brexit (28% with a separate deal for Scotland).
Totally consistent with the 68% electoral mandate to stop Brexit and keep Scotland in the EU.
The SNP are totally following the mandate given by the electorate in Scotland.
testing
Dr Jim
What can possibly be “a crock of shit” about asking someone what they think a party’s policy is?
I presume whenever anyone points to anything suggesting that Labour voters are confused about what THEIR policies on Brexit are, you exclaim “how can the Labour voters know? What a crock of shit!”.
All that matters here is what the individuals *think* the policy/goal is.
It’s my view that it’s “stop Brexit altogether for the whole UK”, but it’s evident that that’s not so clear that “everyone knows it”.
Is that simply a failure of communicating it well? Or is it because the policy has shifted over time? Or what?
It’s an interesting point of discussion because of the fact that the party’s own voters are not 100% sure what they are doing.
@Alex Birnie
Nice attempt at deflection, and trying to discredit someone Alex, but no cigar. He was the first to be abusive.
Full reply in moderation for some reason, it could sit there for hours, days even, by which time nobody see it.
@Dr Jim,
Me too. Want to compare qualifications? You sound like a sewage operative.
Rev Stu 1:08pm
“..literally campaigning for every possible outcome at once?”
Bingo, we have a winner.
Yes, that’s contradictory, all politics is and the electorate are a bag of contradictions. The SNP is a plethora of contradictions; in that their Party voters are the minority of Yes voters, but their actual Government represents the majority of Yes voters – simultaneously they represent No voters, who outnumber their own Party’s Yes voters.
The SNP Government also represents a majority of the enfranchised Scottish electorate at Holyrood, yet their majority of MP’s at Westminster do not. (under Fptp, age etc) The Scottish electorate don’t know whether they are being drilled, bored, punched, countersunk or riveted – only that they are taking it up the arse and they don’t like it.
If pushed, I’d say any effort, for any form of Brexit, is a dereliction of the expectations of both their Party members and their Scottish Governed electorate.
The decision to “Govern wisely” even if that means moving against an electorates direct will, is the prerogative of ‘representatuve sovereign government’ – an “alien device” in Scottish politics – Under Westminster, the SNP MP’s have the prerogative to pursue any form of Brexit (or government) they choose – Under Holyrood and Scottish Government, SNP MSP’s have no such mandate from the electorate.
The SNP cannot choose seperate methods of government, nor serve two masters. Perhaps the time has come for them to choose – not just us. It may just clarify the minds of the Scottish electorate as well… Nah, that’s asking too much, ha!
Ah, OK, I see what’s going on.
Faith = belief, despite the absence of evidence.
Once the referendum bill makes its way through Holyrood (estimated time end October) the earliest referendum on any subject may be held within a reasonably expected campaign time frame of six months that would put it between April 2020 and October 2020 but I’m open minded to discussion as to exact dates or even subjects of referendum but the question to be asked in the case of an Independence referendum will be the same as 2014 as it is a tried and tested question and has been used I think about 56 times since then so I see no reason to change it now
Michael Russell
Adam Tomkins and Murdo Fraser expressed their unhappiness and willingness to vote against it but accepted it, the referendum bill was passed by committee at stage one, that was around 3 weeks ago give or take so stage two may be already over and it will go through because the SNP and Greens are the majority and if the Scottish government make a law the UK government will be forced to go to court to have that law struck down, but how can they strike down a law that they themselves wrote and agreed to
They’re not doing nothing, work is ongoing
@ dastardly.
Only works if bojo acts against the will of Parliament, therefore the UK isn’t leaving the EU adhering to the constitutional process in the UK. The EU can suspend leaving the EU unroll it meets the constitutional requirements. I wonder if the EU are considering this ‘re Scotland.
@Johnny
Try reading again
Stu Campbell
I would have liked to have seen:
The SNP want the One Nation British People’s Vote.
So the “British” Brexiteers, the vast majority of whom are in England, again decide Scotland’s future.
Anyways, long but interesting reading (the conclusions):
link to scotcourts.gov.uk
On a general note, this is important for Scots Law, but is similar in “UK” law as well:
“[51] In a matter of this importance, I would be most reluctant in any event to decide the case on the basis of a point of some considerable technicality.”
Webster tried that and was put down.
One in the eye for the BBC, as a Scottish couple wins the £4250 jackpot on Pointless by picking five-letter words in Flower of Scotland.
I can envisage a top-level inquiry as to who allowed a couple of Sweaties to get through to the final and be able to pick that question.
Or am I being cynical?
There is NO resolution which permits Scotland being Brexited against it’s will which is compatible with Scotland’s Constitutional Sovereignty. NONE. Any acquiescence to go along with Brexit, hard Brexit, soft Brexit, ANY Brexit, is an abandonment of Scotland’s sovereign principle and constitutional integrity.
It is a complete red herring to conflate Sovereignty with needing a democratic mandate, and maintain that asserting Scottish Sovereignty might be compromised if it isn’t backed by a majority. That isn’t true. Sovereignty is a legal definition of constitutional status which does NOT require any democratic prerequisite or validation. We are not creating a ‘new’ sovereign entity. We already are Sovereign, or we are not Sovereign, by absolute legal definition. -Not as the consequence of some ephemeral Democratic whim.
It is inexcusable to be muddle headed and confused about these fundamental Constitutional essentials, and squander so much time, resource and energy meddling with a dangerous and false alternative reality which might yet see Scotland’s Sovereign strength and the will of our people unlawfully, and it would seem ‘inadvertently’ subjugated. Heads should properly roll is such a calamity it allowed to happen. Once upon time, heads literally would roll after such an unconstitutional sell out.
Scotland HAS a constitutional Backstop to defeat Brexit and stop it happening, and leave the UK Union undone and untenable in the process… a legitimate end to the Union, brought about not by Scotland’s will, but by the reckless culpability and ill informed misadventure launched and pursued by a grossly unprofessional and inexpert UK Government. We HAVE that watertight Backstop at our fingertips, but unfortunately we also have an enigmatic, pig headed Scottish Government acting as a law unto itself which refuses to put Scotland’s Constitutional integrity at the top of the agenda, and get it’s hands dirty in a Constitutional fight to the death of the Union.
“Some of us” don’t see any muddle at all, but see the scenario in clearest possible 20/20 vision.
As for the Court of Session judgement, I rather hope Boris Johnson sees it as a victory and is fortified in his belief that he can circumvent Scotland’s benchmark requirement. The Court of Session will now look foolish if Johnson does try to pull a fast one, and he probably ought to think twice about doing that… but being such an arse, he won’t, and Scots Law will bring down a UK Prime Minister, and, we must hope, defend the fuller all round principles of Scotland’s Constitutional Sovereignty in the process. We must hope Joanna Cherry uses her particular expertise to steer events in this direction, and redeem the SNP’s enigmatic procrastination in so doing.
Mmm, the court case seems to be going to be on BBC Reporting Scotland because it’s a Scottish court and judge, but England and Wales knife crime is on “national” news, because it’s ummmm, England and Wales.
Dr Jim:
I can read just fine, thanks.
Don’t try and insult my intelligence.
What the Scottish[SNP] Government will get is an independent Scotland. The Sovereign people of Scotland will then decide about membership of the EU. What don’t you get about that?
@Breeks:
“We already are Sovereign, or we are not Sovereign, by absolute legal definition. -Not as the consequence of some ephemeral Democratic whim.”
Legally, Breeks, you would first have to very clearly and unambiguously define who “We” is, and I’m not being pedantic. It’s the first question a court would want established, any court, never mind a Scottish one. Is “we” the “Estates”, the barons, the court party, the males only who own land? Is it a majority of them?
Or is it “we”, posters on Wings but not elsewhere? Is it only people who want Independence, not people who don’t? Or is it a majority of the People of Scotland, and if so, how does the assertion it’s a majority be tested?
“Joanna Cherry”
She’s an SNP MP, Breeks. She IS one of the SNP, a member, one of 127,000.
Not really that surprising. Brexit is a mess, a bigger mess than anyone predicted.
The SNP campaigned for Remain and did so as effectively as anyone. Scotland voted emphatically to remain so to oppose Brexit for Scotland or to seek a deal for Scotland is not unreasonable. I think the expectation is that this will fail because England wants Brexit. The logical follow on from that is that Scotland should be allowed to consider its position in the Union. Unfortunately the Tories have spent the last 3.5 years kicking the crap out of each other rather than resolving Brexit.
I oppose Brexit and it us not a contradiction to believe my voice will be ignored totally and that I should at the same time as opposing Brexit be preparing for Indyref2. If Boris does ask for an extension the Tory party could implode (again). Not sure where that would take us. An ERG BP pact? A very scary thought.
On the poll, the same question asked of the other parties would likely produce a similar spaghetti tangle.
Two simple questions for you to ask. Vote for independence Yes? No? To remain in the EU yes? no?
Do not ask about other silly options.
@dads army
I should have used the word swearing, rather than abusive language. As I said, I don’t agree with his chippiness and the inconsistent way he deals with some comments, hence my comment about GWC.
I am not trying to discredit anybody, neither am I sycophantic. I just don’t see the point of using language that offends, unless my goat gets up, when I can give as good as I get. I thought both you and he were aggressive, condescending and … eventually abusive. I’ve never received any adverse comments from Mr Kelly, and I regard myself as being pretty forthright.
My sole point on mentioning the incident on here, was because I felt you were giving the impression that your post was deleted simply because he disagreed with you, and as we all know, he has an aversion to using foul language, and that’s why he did what he did. I make no judgement as to the rightness or wrongness of it, but that’s what caused the stooshie between him and Stu, as I understand it.
We are all opinionated egomaniacs, otherwise we wouldn’t be publicly opening as we do.
Anyways, before I have my tea I’m delighted to say that I scored 100% on question 1, and 93% on Question 2, as I answered YES to all the options bar Q2 option 4 🙂
I’m getting good at this Politics deal or no-deal, where’s my prize?
As someone with more than twelve years of experience in Customer Analytics including setting, commissioning, interpreting and acting on research, i’d like to point out that most polling companies, including Panelbase, subscribe to a code of conduct and ethics that they stick to without question.
If they believe a question is badly worded, or misleading, or not clear, or not representative, they will tell you and suggest a better alternative and will often just plain refuse to run with leading or badly worded, or badly intended questions.
Questions are often tested as to their meaning, with a small sample before a full poll is run, if a client is not following best practise.
There have been cases in recent years of political parties, notably the Conservatives, using polling companies that do not subscribe to these guidelines and principles and using very leading querstions to try and predetermine the results.
Panelbase are *not* one of those companies.
It makes sense if the SNP is now a UK party doing what they think is best for the UK.
What a waste of a poll how about a poll do you want rubbish like this on wings or just close it haha
Simple question, how did you get hold of the SNP, Members? Was this a random selection given by SNP, HQ? or was it by Members just volunteering to take part? and if so, how was their Membership verified?
I doubt SNP, HQ would co-operate given the conditions laid upon it by Data Protection. So, if it was self-selecting we all know the dangers of taking all results as gospel.
“Simple question, how did you get hold of the SNP, Members”
Voters, not members. If it meant members it would have said members.
Dr Jim
The important part is that it is a piece of Scottish legislation, the tricky part is defining that.
Is it a piece of Scottish legislation or, does it become a part of UK legislation – a UK Act by proxy. If it does, then it becomes an advisory referendum held under the aegis of the UK Parliament.
Any referendum held to be advisory is worthless. It is why with SNP MP’s, the SNP can pursue any form of Brexit, despite not having a mandate to do so in Scotland. Conversely, a Scottish Indyref would be open to the same ‘amending or rejection’
There is plenty of high talk of Scottish claims of right, sovereignty and parliamentary sovereignty (I indulge also)
One core principle of this, is that a plebiscite in Scotland is binding, unless otherwise indicated. Under which aegis will any potential Scottish Indyref be held? I cannot see how (under Scotland Act S30 etc etc) it could be anything other than a piece of UK constitutional legislation and therefore ‘advisory’
We have suffered that duality for decades, this is one piece of legislation, which needs to test the UK’s Parliamentary sovereignty and suzereinty over the Scottish Parliament, prior to being passed. A little better proofreading and a heavy dunt to any claim of Parliamentary Sovereignty – that “Alien Device”.
There’s a big test coming up for the SNP. There will be a general election, one way or another.
Johnson will get an overall majority if he stands on a hard line ticket. He will be empowered and aggressive. The overall policy thrust will be deregulation and the advancement of English nationalism,
SNP should get a landslide if they campaign properly (not 2017 style).
What have the SNP got planned for these circumstances?
Well, only the inner circle know. There are those who probably believe there is no plan. I have faith there is. The ‘perfect storm’ is raging, I just cannot believe the opportunities it presents will be missed.
If SNP voters don’t know what the party’s Brexit position is, or what they think it should be, it suggests the party could say what they like re Brexit and not lose support.
So why risk losing the ‘support’ of non SNP voters (undecideds who are pro indy but might not bother voting for the SNP given a reason) by appearing to forfeit the mandate for iref2 with an unnecessarily interventionist view towards Brexit?
It’s a position that the party would do well to explain, at least for their voters who seem as scoobied as the rest of us.
@Iain Mhor
I’m just going to throw this in, from 2012:
https://www.scottishconstitutionalfutures.org/OpinionandAnalysis/ViewBlogPost/tabid/1767/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/468/Aileen-McHarg-The-Legal-Effects-of-the-Edinburgh-Agreement–Again.aspx
and now re-read it myself!
Oh arrr, and forgot this one:
link to scottishconstitutionalfutures.org
Christine Bell was referenced by Alex Salmond in Holyrood, and both the above started neutral and came over to YES – they say so in a blog somewhere on that great website.
Speaking to some diehard SNP members at the march on Saturday, their hoping things start moving shortly but were saying it might be an idea if Scotland had another Independence Party that was more radically minded, all that people who marched on Saturday, hardly any press coverage & nothing on the Television seems we haven’t any say or power at all not one bit further on.
“What a waste of a poll how about a poll do you want rubbish like this on wings or just close it haha”
Yeah, it’s “rubbish”.
Why the hell would anyone want to know what SNP voters think, eh?
More like some seem unwilling to learn that not everyone (even among SNP voters) thinks the same way or reads the same things into what the leadership is doing.
I find this really informative because I *want* to know what other SNP voters are thinking to see if they read the same things into events as me.
Mmm, still valid I think, except that this from Bell’s piece might not actually be true any more as it seems the UK Gov just don’t care what everyone thinks about it (except maybe Trump):
“As regards reputation, whichever party breaches this agreement will look bad, be seen as unreliable in the future, and will be less likely to have people sign credible agreements with it. These costs of breach are real for the UK Government, which holds itself out as a credible deal-maker on the international plane, but also as regards other devolved regions where stakes may be even higher (Northern Ireland). ”
Anyway, since it seems the Edinburgh Agreement maybe had no real legal power, same thing would go really for an Indy Ref without an EA2, or an S30(2).
Which is quite interesting when you consider the price of apples and pears.
All this dancing on the head of a pin with heavy side of navel gazing is making my head explode. I want Indy,I marched on Saturday for Indy, I will vote for Indy when the time comes.
Its non-negotiable
@Iain mhor 6:43pm
Agreed, it’s a problem alright but I remembered the FM saying that (paraphrasing) “The people of Scotland will have a choice on their future and it will be put beyond any legal challenge” until or unless that’s proven we wait and hope
Whatever we folk say on the internet is of little or no consequence and will make not a lot of difference because all we see and hear is the top ten percent of what’s going on, the 90% lies underneath so everybody has a guess at it and allows themselves the luxury of having a row over something none of us know for sure
Folk argue blind faith is bad but it’s a bit disengenuous of them to vote for people only to complain about what they don’t know they’re not doing because they didn’t tell them every five minutes
Before the internet that didn’t exist, now everybody’s an expert politico and refuse to slow themselves down unless it becomes like a reality TV show and happens before their eyes, vote them off get somebody else like Love Island or something
But yes I totally agree with everything you write, we’re stuck between two politics trying to get down to one while at the same time arguing both and trying to create one result, a world of madness
I know I couldn’t do the job because like most folk I’d become impatient and shout a somebody and end up out on my ear
If the Scottish parliament is to be properly recognised by the people who don’t want it, difficult decisions and choices will be forced on it and people made angry because of it, and that could be us just as well as the opposers, but without forcing the issue at some point things will not change, or unless one other party in Holyrood climbs down from their high horse and puts Scotland first (flying pigs there) but I believe that would seal the deal and solve endless problems
Let’s hope the SNP can keep as many ducks floating, let alone in a row to get some of this right
Also thank you for your comment, much appreciated today
galamcennalath said:
7 October, 2019 at 6:44 pm
There’s a big test coming up for the SNP. There will be a general election, one way or another.
Johnson will get an overall majority if he stands on a hard line ticket. He will be empowered and aggressive. The overall policy thrust will be deregulation and the advancement of English nationalism,
SNP should get a landslide if they campaign properly (not 2017 style).
What have the SNP got planned for these circumstances?
—-
And here, for me is the nub and rub if the while thing.
If you want to unite people, you need a goal and a strategy.
For many the goal of the SNP appears to be, stop Brexit and the strategy is completely opaque … As you have Joanna Cherry doing and saying one thing, Pete Wishaw doing and saying another, Nicola Sturgeon doing and saying a third.
I’m not being critical for the same of it, I’m pointing out that the SNP leadership team are simply not leading.
You need a central idea, a core goal for people to focus on and coalesce around and I simply don’t see the SNP doing that at present.
The effect this has is to bleed away energy from the Indy movement and leave a gap that others feel compelled to fill, such as AUOB, so that the membership may feel AUOB are providing direction and not the SNP leadership.
That’s a very dangerous position to be in.
RE: the court case today at the Court Of Session.
BBBC Reporting Scotland said that the judge had dismissed the case because existing legislation covered it.
Which kinda concurs with what a number of commenters have posted here today.
The UK government’s QC, on Friday, presented evidence to the court that the UK government would comply with the Benn Act and ask for an extension if no deal is achievable by the 19th October.
If they don’t, then it would appear to be Contempt Of Court – and you CAN be imprisoned for that.
Things are getting…
link to youtube.com
Always hearing about these SNP leave voters. I seem to recall there was a thing in the lead up to the EU Ref where lots of people were considering voting leave to help independence along.
With that in mind,every time I see people saying that “x amount of snp voters voted leave” I always think to myself “yes,they did,but not for the same reasons as you voted for”.
The SNP is not two faced but two hatted.
Hat 1 as the Scottish Government; they have a 60% instruction to Remain from the 2016 ref. They and their MPs have been firm in their opposition to any form of Brexit.
Hat 2 as a members interest group; they were mandated 37% a call for independence IF 1) there was a substatial and sustained swing to indy OR 2) we were taken out of the EU against our will. Neither 1 nor 2 has happened yet so they have no mandate to make the call.
@BDTT
Pretty much. I’d like to see O’Neill get some of the contempt angle clarified tomorrow – or even better, the NobOff awarded perhaps conditionally. Anyway, it exercises the arguments, and as long as everyone can go back to court after the 19th on a 24 hour or 48 hour basis, then it’s fine.
Now, that’s the Brexit angle, of more interest to many is perhaps the Indy angle. Well, the vitally important thing there that absolutely nobody has spotted so far is [redacted redacted redacted redacted redacted] and you can take that to the bank!
RM at 706pm The march was on reporting Scotland STV news with interviews and the 24hr news around 9pm it was on BBC News and STV news websites it was also in the Sunday press as was Nicolas with you in spirit but not in person comment .
Joanna Cherries speech was shown with interview .
In fact STV had an interview with AUOB on Friday night and BBC red button news had it all day including start time and route.
Today Johnson moans that EU won’t say what’s wrong with this plan.
EU sent list of problems with it last Friday (Guardian has leaked copy).
This shows Johnson’s response to everything is more lies. That is what we are up against and he isn’t going away anytime soon.
People voted for Tony Blair because he was better looking than Margaret Thatcher, they didn’t vote for Ed Miliband because the media said he looked stupid and was not handsome when chewing food
They hated Alex Salmond because they were told he was a bad Scottish man stealing their money, Nicola Sturgeon was Britains most dangerous woman
I even remember one headline that said *Sturgeon masses troops on the border* and you can check that one because it’s part of the backdrop on Mock the Week
Folk vote for and against stuff for endless amounts of reasons at any given moment that they might never repeat again, or like their Daddies and Daddies before them back before time began they vote the same way and forget all about it till the next time they’re told to blame somebody for something
The media does tend to *suggest* what many people should vote for or America wouldn’t have gotten Donald Trump, it cost a lot but they *persuaded* folk he was the good guy
Our media tells us that although Boris Johnson is an inveterate liar, a womaniser, a lawbreaker, and as Foreign Secretary he was positively a danger to international safety, he’s still really just a bit of a scamp,
Whereas Corbyn is the Jewish hating IRA supporting ISIS loving spawn of the devil only waiting to condemn us all to the hell that is Venezuela, which of course everybody knows for sure that must be a bad place even though most probably couldn’t point to it on a map but it’s bad coz, the telly
Same newspapers that put up photos of Judges and call them enemies of the people
I’ll stick with the SNP, a lot less problems
OT
But I think this was the start of Saturday’s march.
link to twitter.com
The UK has ultimate sovereignty within the EU, in that without EU consent, it has unilaterally chosen to withdraw from the EU.
The EU has an Article 50 process where the UK member state’s withdrawal can be made and it remains compliant with the EU until the UK has exited.
Until the UK has officially left the EU, the UK is bound by EU law.
——————————————————————
Now, compare Scotland in the UK Union.
In stark contrast to the European Union, the British political parties have said Scotland cannot have Scotland’s version of Article 50 without prior consent from the UK Union.
UK constitutional law says UK parliament is sovereign (Cherry and Others v Advocate General for Scotland [2019] UKSC 41 at paragraph
41.”Two fundamental principles of our constitutional law are relevant to the present case. The first is the principle of Parliamentary sovereignty: that laws enacted by the Crown in Parliament are the supreme form of law in our legal system, with which everyone, including the Government, must comply…As Lord Browne-Wilkinson observed in that case at p 552, “the constitutional history of this country is the history of the prerogative powers of the Crown being made subject to the overriding powers of the democratically elected legislature as the sovereign body” “.
———————————————–
UK Supreme Court case law says the Parliament of the United Kingdom of GB and N.I is sovereign. Therefore, it follows that if UK Parliament is sovereign, for as long as Scotland is bound by UK law, UK Parliament can refuse Scotland the right to exercise self-determination or independence.
Until such case law establishes Scotland is ultimately sovereign or that UK Parliament cannot prevent Scottish self-determination ( for example it being a contravention of internationally accepted legal principles of self-determination),
the fact is: UK Parliament can do whatever it likes and the SNP accept that that’s the case.
So, Scotland does have the need for legal answers to self-determination. It suits the UK state not to answer that question: they hold all the power for as long as that position remains unchallenged.
When Ms Cherry and co now spend so much time in court getting answers about Boris and UK Parliament, it begs the questions: When won’t the SNP ask about Scotland’s legal position regarding self-determination and dissolving the Union?
That they won’t ask those questions suggests to me one thing: their expectation is that they wouldn’t like the answers a court would give.
Have you turned against Independence? as you seem to be doing the Yoons work for them. What is with the constant attacks on the SNP you know full well that only they can deliver both a future referendum and with that a Yes vote. You seem to be hell bent on nit picking at them is this so you can try and take voters away from the SNP over to the Party that you want to set up? Where is your piece on the fantastic turnout in Edinburgh on Saturday? I can tell you that people are commenting on your actions on Facebook and are wondering which side you are really on.
OT
Mmm, if you want a laugh check the end of this thread (it wasn’t me) if it’s still there:
link to scotgoespop.blogspot.com
People are giving the SNP their support because it’s all there is
There’s no other Scottish Independence Party they can support
So when you ask them what they think is the SNP,s plan
They will just recite what they have read in the papers or heard on the tv or radio which is that the SNP are trying to stop brexit and in particular are trying to stop NO DEAL brexit
Knowing why the SNP are trying to stop brexit when it’s likely that brexit happening will increase support for Scottish independence in Scotland is a mystery not only to many SNP voters but also to many SNP members but it’s only a mystery because people reckon that surely the SNP should just let England drag Scotland out of the EU against its will if it will make independence more certain.
Perhaps the SNP believe that they will be blamed for doing nothing g to stop brexit if they just stand bye idly watching Westminster drag Scotland out of the EU and perhaps they think that being blamed in that way somehow reduces their authority to have another Scottish independence referendum.
The Rev has suggested taking List seats only. I know its hard to remember these things,bur____
Paul @ 8:01pm:
I agree that the SNP is the only party that can deliver a referendum.
I don’t agree that this means they can never be questioned about the apparent lack of urgency.It’s quite natural that their supporters will want to see them deliver and that some will be more vocal than others about the need for urgency.
I want to vote Yes ASAP; I don’t see how that means I am somehow “on the other side” because I want the SNP to be clearer how they are going to get round a section 30 refusal and show more urgency about doing things they have mandates for.
We often baulk at accusations that “Yes” is a herd-like cult, with no divergence of thought, yet when some ask questions (thus proving that it’s not a hive-mind) then they are apparently not really Yessers because they don’t agree with everything.
Frankly, that’s preposterous. A family of four will have disagreements about everything under the sun, far less 1.6m (and counting) yessers!
WOS is reflecting the view of SNP voters,going to upset SNP members,thats their problem and SNP inner circle making this happen.
Hi Johnny.
Are you the windae cleaner that was at the WOS get-together at Invergowrie – with the car?
Oh my goodness, he now thinks all Anonymous posters are the same person. Wow.
There has been a sea change in the Rev’s attitudes ever since he lost the Dugdale case.
I can understand his disappointment, but not his change in attitude to the SNP – even accepting he wants to be a new Party leader to oppose them.
When I first came to WoS in early 2014, it was full of positive people (Rock, excepted, of course) and I always felt lifted when I visited, even immediately following the Indy defeat. I was happy to donate to Wings (even the legal challenge), but from now the SNP will get my largesse.
Now WoS just depresses me, and there seems to be no point in continuing to support a site that does that. Good luck to those trying to change it! SNP/SNP the only way.
Just finished work. Re the Rev’s poll, the response to option 4 seems surprisingly low.
Maybe the use of the pejorative term “pretending” deterred some SNP voters from choosing that option even if they were initially drawn towards it.
Perhaps there was an instinctive aversion associate the party they support with sleekitness or double dealing – even although reality suggests the SNP are indeed having to adopt “maskirovka” tactics to beat the unionists at their own game.
What would the response have been to option 4 without the “pretending” preface?
Or to this: “Having done everything possible to preserve Scotland’s membership of the EU through the U.K., re-establish it by winning an independence referendum next year?”
I suspect it may have been somewhat different, showing that what you put into a question can influence positively or negatively the response to it.
That is one reason why the Electiral Commission want to get their grubby hands on the IndyRef2 question – and why the ScotGov told them to feck off.
”
“Should Scotland be an independent country? Will do nicely.
I agree with Breeks at 5.59 pm.
When Nicola S said that SHE was willing to compromise in regard to Scotland’s continued full membership of the EU, she spoke only for herself, not for the Scottish people. I have no idea if she THOUGHT she was speaking for the Scottish people, but if she did, she will have to realise that she had no constitutional right or capacity to do so in that way.
Constitutionally, no matter what her title is – First Minister, or whatever – she simply has no power or capacity whatsoever to overrule the Scottish people’s clearly expressed (62%) will to remain IN the EU. If she attempted to do so it would be invalid – every bit as ‘null and void’ as Boris Johnson’s prorogation of the Westminster parliament when he misled and misadvised the Queen.
As ‘First Minister’ of the government of the Scottish people, she is accountable to that people. Whatever authority she wields has ultimately come to her from – i.e. been given to her by – the Scottish people. She is constitutionally bound to uphold their wishes.
The ‘compromise’ she proposed was that the UK, and therefore Scotland within the UK, would remain IN BOTH the Single Market AND the Customs Union of the EU, but NOT as a member state.
If that compromise had been achieved Nicola could not, in my opinion, have agreed to it or validly signed off on it without it being endorsed by the Scottish people. Such endorsement would have required her to hold another referendum in Scotland. That further referendum would have been a choice between two options: Do you, the Scottish people, wish to remain within the Eu as part of a member state (as 62% of you previously voted)? Or will you, instead, be content with membership of the EU’s Single Market and Customs Union, as negotiated by the UK government?
If, in those circumstances, a majority of the Scottish people then voted for the second option, that would have been the end of the matter. The UK government would have negotiated a manner of leaving which safeguarded Scotland’s perceived economic interests by staying in the Single Market and the Customs Union, and the Scottish people would have endorsed that ‘compromise’.
In other words, Nicola’s ‘compromise’ would now have been valid, and would have gone through. And there would be no further need or justification for Indyref2 ON ACCOUNT OF BREXIT. There could still be an Indyref2 at some time in the future, but it would have been for another reason – NOT because of Brexit.
However, if the Scottish people had indicated that membership of the CU and the SM were not sufficient for them, having voted instead – in that further referendum – to retain their full membership and citizenship of the EU, then the constitutional requirement to hold Indyref2 would have been indisputable. So too would have been its obvious legitimacy. The UK government would have had no grounds whatsoever, in any form of law – constitutional or international – to prevent it.
I am not saying that was actually in Nicola’s mind when she started offering her suggested ‘compromise’. Only that it might have been. We just don’t know. And even if it wasn’t – even if she did think she could steamroller her suggested compromise over the Scottish people, without getting their endorsement for it – I think there would have been enough constitutionally educated voices in the SNP to rein her in, reminding her of the limits of her powers and of the people’s sovereignty over her.
Joanna Cherry, for a start, would not have let that point slip, and Nicola would not have got away with it …
Of course, such a vote on the part of the Scottish people – to retain our European membership and citizenship – would have made an Indyref2 inevitable, even if the UK government had followed Nicola’s advice / proposed compromise. It was always going to be highly unlikely that a Conservative government would in fact retain both CU and SM membership. So, there is just the possibility that Nicola S knew that, and was banking on it.
Meanwhile, she would give the UK government the opportunity to avoid Indyref2 if it really wanted to – but the UK government too, in that case, would have to compromise. The fact that it obviously isn’t going to, and that there is no prospect whatsoever of any Conservative UK government ever accepting both her conditions, means – in my view – that she should have been on the offensive much earlier than she has been.
Nevertheless, to be fair, maybe she has been. … But the Press simply ignore her, and do not report what she says. I really don’t know.
Whatever the case, it is for sure that the SNP still has a huge problem communicating to the wider public, on account of the way the mainstream media oppose, ignore and distort everything they say. Including not only everything the SNP say but, in particular, everything Nicola S says.
Despite that, and despite my own frustrations and deep disappointment with the way she has gone about quite a large number of things, I think she is still a considerable asset. Especially in regard to the kind of soft ‘No voters’ who might eventually become ‘Yes voters’. I am personally aware of quite a few who like and admire her … She appeals to them in a way that those on the Yes side who adopt a more rumbustuous or, let us say, ‘aggressive’ approach do not, and never will.
I am not personally against that more rumbustuous/ aggressive style – I like it a lot, in fact – and I do not believe there should be even the slightest hint of any compromise when it comes to basic principles. Especially constitutional ones. And I am also of the opinion that these are far more important than ‘tactics’, especially in the long view. I freely admit that ‘tactics’ is a part of politics which interests me not at all – it bores me to death; I even have a distaste and a disdain for it – but I also agree that it does matter.
And I still have a sneaking feeling that Nicola S’s tactics and calculations – whatever they are (she surely knows a huge amount more than I do about all that) – will still finally (even very soon) get us over the line, to the place where we want to be.
My guess would be that what she has been aiming at all along is a combination of three things which are going to be very hard to achieve simultaneously, but which do make sense: i) an independent Scotland which is (ii) a full member state of the EU, yet (iii) without any kind of hard border with England, even if England (and whatever other parts of the EU remain with England) exits the EU, as it surely will.
I think that threefold combination is her aim. It’s a very tall order. If she gets all three, it will be an enormous achievement. I hope she does.
Yet, I also expect, if push comes to shove, and it turns out she can only get two of them, her priorities will be independence and EU membership. Some kind of hard border with England will be highly regrettable, and the prospect of it will certainly cause difficulties during the independence campaign. But I think, in the last resort, if there really is no way round it, she will accept that regrettable fact in order to gain the two points that matter most.
And if she doesn’t – well, it will be her successor who accepts that reality, and goes full blast for Scotland’s independence in Europe – as a full member state of the EU. Which has in any case been SNP official policy for decades … and still is.
Sassenach@9.01pm
“There has been a sea change in the Rev’s attitudes ever since he lost the Dugdale case.
I can understand his disappointment, but not his change in attitude to the SNP”
That’ll be the SNP that officially congratulated Dugdale on seeing off nasty, bullying Stuart Campbell. The Rev then met another individual who’d been shafted by elements in the SNP a short time later. I’m sure they shared their views on the matter and the need for a greater focus towards indy. Was a plan hatched? Will we see ‘The return of the King’ at the head of a new army?
Now wouldn’t that be something…?
Just thinking out loud.
Some nice press recently from the folk you’ve been exposing as hypocrites and liars these past 6 years. We interviews here and there, tv coverage. Interesting. Very interesting. Now the SNP are being undermined and the Greens dismissed as ‘far left wankers’.
@Rev
The case that was lost today in the OUTER House of the Court of Session was NOT the nobile officium case. That is tomorrow in the INNER House, the only House that has the power to hear or grant it.
dadsarmy @ 9-29pm
Since O’Neil presented the Court last week with the UK Gov document ‘assuring compliance’ I never really expected this case to succeed.In truth,it is a better result for the complainants in my opinion.Had the Court found in favour of Cherry/Vince/Maugham…Johnson would always have had someone else to blame when he ultimately fails..”My hands were tied!..dont blame me!.”
No more ‘wriggle room ‘left for this mendacious charlatan.
Brian @ 8:58pm:
No.
Just spotted your comment, and don’t want someone else getting the blame for my blatherings 🙂
@Tam the Bam
Yes it is a better result I think, from the Brexit point of view.
I’ll maybe post a bit more opinion the end of this week 🙂
Gordie @ 9:27pm:
LOL, I think Stu and certain of the Greens have been at loggerheads for years? Don’t think that’s new by any means.
Paul says:
” you know full well that only they [the SNP] can deliver both a future referendum and with that a Yes vote”.
While I agree that the likelihood of an independence referendum is directly proportional to the electoral support of the SNP, it is not unquestioning allegiance to the SNP that will carry us across the line.
Not that long ago the only people in Scotland who self-identified as Unionist, did so entirely in a quasi-religious Northern Ireland tribal solidarity context and hard- left and most Labour activists struggled or even refused to acknowledge Scotland as a separate political entity.
Those dragons have been slain, by the SNP becoming an electoral force and to some extent by them deliberately stealing the clothes of the party who had been by far the most popular for fifty or more years.
Even if they wanted to (which they don’t) the SNP can’t change the policy direction they have been traveling in for twenty odd years.
So in order to persuade enough those who have been hitherto unimpressed by or even hostile to some of the SNP’s political stances, to join us at the barricades (and we do need them) – it is vital that there is a substantial and vocal presence demanding Independence who clearly and unambiguously see no conflict in doing so despite their reservations about the SNP.
P.S. 10/10 to the FM for not showing up at the A.U.O.B. event on Saturday.
well said @ Ross 2.34
My only worry is that brexit ends up not happening and we go back to a minority in favour of Scottish independence
But I think the chances of brexit not happening are slim
I haven’t read all the posts on this topic yet. However it seems to me that the SNP should be using as many tactics and methods as possible in order to thwart the UK being removed from the EU against the will of the Scottish people. In order to do this, sowing confusion amongst the opposition must be a primary goal. This poll shows that even the SNPs own membership is confused so the tactic is working. Keep ’em guessing. When the time comes, strike hard and fast and cut off the head before it can react.
From where I am sitting its almost “game over”.
wull says:
“Some kind of hard border with England will be highly regrettable”
I used to cross that non-border every Monday and Friday, because I couldn’t find a decent steady job in Scotland, and fantasize about Minefields, Machinegun Towers, Floodlights and barbed wire stretching as far as the eye could see.
Mmm, Andy MacIver (?) has a point, wash my mouth out with soap.
However, the YES march is not just a “leftist” march. And as Shafi says, people go away invigorated and that’s important – look at the warfare that breaks out anytime someone expresses a view. There’s a difference between interacting online, and face to face, not surprisingly!
@dadsarmy 6:59pm
Thanks for the links, hadn’t come across those pieces before.
Curious, in that indeed (though not specific to the articles) the 2014 referendum was ‘advisory’ however, it was informed by both the EA & the MoU. How binding would the result have been (*shakes magic 8 ball – ‘reply hazy, try again’)
Such questions are, as one of the articles suggests ‘legal hypotheticals’, though no less important for that.
Second time around may be much the same, ‘advisory’, challengable, nothing specifically binding and surrounded by a quantum haze of hypothetical probabilities.
Unless (as @Dr Jim 7:25pm reminded me) in the interrim such issues have been well adressed and continue to be, such that “The people of Scotland will have a choice on their future and it will be put beyond any legal challenge”
@Dr Jim 7:25
Thanks for reminding me about that opening quote.
Well, What can we do but take it at face value, there have been 5 years for the legal profession to get their teeth into it and worry it like a terrier. Let’s hope they’ve dug up something juicy.
Hi Johnny.
Thanks for your reply. Just trying to put faces to names in my head.
@Iain mhor
I think there’s a background of that happening, some planned, some opportunistic. But who knows, it might just be the straightforward action of the ScotParl passing the Scotland (Referendums) Bill and getting Royal Assent within 28 days unless challenged – and the PO has passed it as being within its power (intra vires).
Added of course to the judgement on the EU Continuity Bill which ruled that bar one blatant section, that would have been intra vires at the time but only wasn’t because of subsequent changes. I personally think that bill wasn’t important, just a means of testing the proof in court but who knows!
The great thing about it is that even though I have from a previous life a fair amount of analytical skills, and have been following this constitutional stuff since the 90s, I haven’t got a scoobie what’s going on, so the Unionists are well screwed!
A bit, in fact, like the questions of this thread. If the SNP voters are confused, imagine how many circles the Unionist agitators are running around in, like headless chickens.
But that’s another story …
Spent yet another day getting mucky under a beautiful German model from the 80s (It’s become a habit for me but we’re talking cars here before anyone gets the wrong idea…)
Anyway, there’s “a card” of a unionist that occasionally pops into the garage, and today as I was lying under the car dropping the engine and gearbox out he starts telling me there was an SNP march at the weekend that 20k folk turned up for…
“Oh aye” thinks I, so I slowly rolls out from under the car and proceeds to alter his comprehension on the matter.
Over the years I’ve shot so many fish in his barrel I’m concerned I might actually shoot through not just the arse of his barrel, but the earth’s crust and cause a fuckin magma flow!
@Iain mhor “there have been 5 years for the legal profession to get their teeth into it”
*cough*
In the case of Wolffe, at least 24 years. And ones like Walker I think is the name, yes, David Walker, 12 years or more:
link to journalonline.co.uk
revisited I just found:
link to journalonline.co.uk
This has all been around a long, long time. Sadly some people like Walker are deid, but he was 83 at the time it seems!
Mmm, yeah there’s this bit from Walker it’s good to re-read:
“The fundamental cause of the continued misunderstandings since 1707 has been the continuing failure of the Westminster Parliament, and its advisers and draftsmen, to appreciate that the Union was made by a treaty within international law and merely ratified by the parliaments of the two uniting states under their domestic laws, so as to put themselves out of existence and create a new sovereign state in lieu. The Westminster Parliament could possibly repeal parts of the two ratifying Acts, but that would leave the Treaty standing because it is part of international law affecting Britain and the whole world, and not merely part of domestic law.”
The importance of this might be paramount – or negligible in the weeks to come. And of course there’s this tasty bit earlier:
“It cannot, however, be conceded that because Parliament has purported to do something, it had legal power to do so.”
That was of course just the opinion of Walker. And others, however.
@ Rev. Stuart Campbell 1.08
You are not making sense – how can it be good for the SNP to be seen to be the midwife of Brexit?
Rev. Stuart Campbell says:
7 October, 2019 at 7:03 pm
“Simple question, how did you get hold of the SNP, Members”
Voters, not members. If it meant members it would have said members.
Oh that’s ok. Most members are better clued up I feel from information at branch meetings and internal information.
Maybe the Rev is wanting to join the libDems “dawn south” and can’t quite say it. Lol
Sigh. I’ve followed you and shared your posts since before Indyref1. I’ve defended you, cheered you, and given you money. Thanks in particular for the Wee Blue Book.
I now have serious concerns about what you’re trying to achieve, and it saddens me.
Thank you for all your work in the past, sorry to see you go down the road you appear to have chosen, so close to where we all want to be. I sincerely hope I’ve misunderstood.
“Just thinking out loud.”
Best not bother if all you can come out with is more dumb ass comments.
“Will we see the return of the King at the head of a new army”
If this King has people like you in his army he is not going to last long.
Ot
Does this indicate they way we are going? With Unionists wanting the Saltire to be replaced in all areas by the apron?
link to m.youtube.com
Hamish 100 @ 1.01
Brilliant.
Hamish 100 @1.01
Wonderful.
I’ M inspired and invigorated by the Edinburgh march. Thanks to all who attended, even the Union jocks confirmed where things are. The Bon homie on such a scale is not to be taken for granted.
If the uk folk had just a few hundred they would have attacked the peaceful protest in my opinion. So well done.
I live in south England. Please don’t believe they all support the empire. Many don’t and they are as many global kin on the same side for a different future.
The final , most decisive break in the uk empire is between Scotland and England. We have a hell of a responsibility.
None of us doubts the perfidious nature of the opposition. Global eyewitness is there .
Testing times. If you want self determination for Scotland then remember it has little value if we sacrifice a better future for all others.
Slanj
Will @0915 pm , indeed a very interesting and perceptive post . As you say 2 out of three of the FM’s “ possible” objectives would be acceptable . All three would be check mate.
@John D 1:55 am
Self determination for Scotland is not based on others in England being sacrificed, Scotland is only regaining its equality, England sacrificed Scotland a long time ago and didn’t notice or care when it did it just as the history of England has been the sacrifice of every country they ever colonised and they ignored that too because it profited them to do so
If England suffers as a consequence of Scotland regaining its identity and self worth then maybe the people of England will realise after countless years that the system of governance under which they exist needs changing because they’ll have run out of countries to plunder and might take a proper look at why other countries want nothing to do with their corrupt political system and exceptionalist arrogant behaviour
But you know what, I doubt it
dadsarmy says:
7 October, 2019 at 6:17 pm
@Breeks:
“We already are Sovereign, or we are not Sovereign, by absolute legal definition. -Not as the consequence of some ephemeral Democratic whim.”
Legally, Breeks, you would first have to very clearly and unambiguously define who “We” is, and I’m not being pedantic…
Be pedantic. For, as long as but a hundred of us remain alive, by literal definition, the sovereign Nation of Scotland is quorate.
A monarchy is sovereign under one monarch. A dictatorship or autocracy is sovereign under a dictator or autocrat. Sovereignty is NOT dependent upon numbers, but definitive legal principle.
Morning C. Womble.
Still thinking inside the box?
That’s got us where exactly? On the brink of maybe something definitely happening very soon, like it was last year and the year before that.
But, don’t worry. When THE PLAN is unleashed it will be so staggeringly unexpectedly genius that the Yoons will be like rabbits in the headlights, running scared, tails between legs, yada yada yada….
I believe the results of the questions in this poll are designed for one purpose only; to make us all believe more and more that the SNP are clueless, as each one of the results is published, and therefore SNP voters are disillusioned with them. Then Stuart will pull out his ace card, which is the results on his question on an alternative pro independence party on the list vote. This will no doubt “prove” that only a Wings party can save our pro-indy majority at the next Holyrood election! Stuart knows exactly what he’s doing; undermine the SNP to further the idea of the Wings Party.
Clickbait
Col.Blimp IV says:
7 October, 2019 at 10:48 pm
wull says:
“Some kind of hard border with England will be highly regrettable”
I used to cross that non-border every Monday and Friday, because I couldn’t find a decent steady job in Scotland, and fantasize about Minefields, Machinegun Towers, Floodlights and barbed wire stretching as far as the eye could see.
If you want to feel benign about a hard border, just think back to 2001 when England could neither contain nor control the spread of foot and mouth disease, to the consternation and alarm of Scottish farmers. Scotland was more ruthless in controlling the spread of the disease, and saved much of its livestock as a consequence.
Then in 1986 there was BSE, mad cow disease which also required draconian controls.
Even in this farce of a Union, there are times when Scotland needs a hard border with England for controlling disease and curtailing the movement of livestock.
But it’s much worse than that. Once Scotland is in the EU and maintaining production to EU standards, while England is out the EU and deregulating it’s production methods to inferior US standards, where rat shit, animal hairs and contamination needs controlled by chlorination, then Scotland will both want and demand a hard border with customs control.
If memory serves correctly, part of the reason England couldn’t control its foot and mouth outbreak was a failure in traceability of its livestock. Scotland has always been more exacting in its attitudes towards standards. The reputation of Scottish farmers is not fiction.
Disease control is a time of emergency, it’s true, but after Brexit, England’s deregulation of standards will be an explosion across the board, a bit like every industry having its own foot and mouth outbreak simultaneously across the whole spectrum. Once compliance standards are lost, or in other words, IF Scotland allows itself to be Brexited, it will not be a five minute job to reestablish compliance, but a real headache for all concerned, with suddenly deregulated produce needing to be traced and isolated, and treated as ‘contaminant’ and Scotland will be ‘quarantined’ by Europe until the spread of deregulated contamination is resolved. Instead of Europe quarantining us, Scotland must be ready to quarantine England and stop the ‘spead’ of deregulation.
Scotland really, really, does need to stay in Europe with NO period of time exposed to deregulated trade, manufacture, or movement of goods. Leaving Europe to join later is not a matter to taken lightly. It would very much be a disaster. The status quo will no longer exist. Scotland will both need and want a border, and we will all regret not having one…
what kind of person votes for Lib Dem’s when they are so untrustworthy
Here’s Mrs Swinson hiding a large sum of money from the EU
link to nyebevannews.co.uk
Johnny, his blog is successful because it holds our political opponents to account. Now he is holding the SNP to account and dismissing the greens who would be the the party to use on the list vote in a Scottish election. Another pro indy party splits that list vote. He’s at it.
@ dadsarmy 11:43.
Good stuff, had read the first but not the second.
That Crawford and Boyle’s opinion was politically motivated is to my mind pretty clear, but not I think because of mainland UK assets, rather overseas territory’s. Thanks
Scotland will still gain more with a border. Scotland will be £Billions better off.
No more illegal wars, tax evasion, Gov fraud. Costing £Billions. Scotland loses £Billions to the UK Union every year, £20Billion. A £20Billion gain is well worth any lose having a border.
UK union membership costs Scotland £20Billion every year.
EU membership costs Scotland nothing but brings in £Billions, CAP payments, shared lower Defence costs. A 400million pop market. Even more trade and jobs. ECB investments. Investment and loans in renewables. Good social, employment laws abd rughts. EU membership gains Scotland £Billion.
Two totally different unions.
The UK union, Totally deficit. Costing Scotland £Billions. The UK union imposed Barnett Formula. Taking £Billions from Scotland. Poor totally bad Westminster decisions affecting the economy, Scotland out voted 10 to 1. Poor economic management from Westminster. Oil & Gas, fishing, farming sector totally mismanaged by Westminster bad decisions. Controls 70% of Scottish finances.
The EU Union. Totally different. Costs Scotland nothing. Only covers 10% of trade laws/rules. For the benefit. Just brings benefit. CAP payments, shared lower Defence costs. International trade co operation. Prevents war and starvation in Europe.(world). Nearest biggest market for goods and services. 495miliin pop. Beneficial Trade and grants. Good employment bad social Laws. Helps people. Invests in renewables and beneficial projects. Invests in much needed workers. Less red tape.
Devolution/Independence. founded and based on ECHR and principles of the rights to self determination and self government. If people vote for it. The reason Holyrood was once sgsib established,
The EU Union (10% regulation) benefits Scotland £Billion.
The UK Union takes £Billions from Scotland. Bad administration. Poor Westminster unionist decisions. Bad, poor Westminster Gov management. (70% of regulation and control of finances).
The EU union benefits Scotland. The UK union takes from Scotland.
Two very different organisations. Two very different Unions. One beneficial, One totally negative.
Just bringing this to folks attention again..
link to wingsoverscotland.com
Worrying trend developing on this site. Anything that is not SNP dogma is becoming unacceptable to many,who threaten to leave or withdraw funding because the Re. is not “on message”
by refusing to gloss kver what the SNP are doing re indy.
Oscar Wilde stated” Each man kills the thing he loves”and he was right. Only in this case it is the readership trying to censor the writer because he dares to tell his truth.Familiar?
At this rate Wings will die to be replaced by a more compliant blog which will give you soothing stories of indy and patience and masterplans in the background. Thats what you appear to want. No criticism, no individua! thought, but just blind allegiance and faith to something untangible and greater than yourselves. That is reckless and the path to de struction.Keep it.
Gordie:
But what if folk don’t want to use their list vote on the Greens and do want another choice? Are you saying it’s not allowed?
Bob Mack:
Certainly some appear to want it to be what its critics have usually accused it of being – an SNP fan site.
Thing is, I am a fan of the SNP and vote for them.
But there has to be room for the view that a little more urgency is required regarding indy. You can disagree about the actual need for it, but how someone pushing for us to be given the choice ASAP can be lambasted as “probably a Yoon” and “on the other side” is beyond me.
At worst, some might be impatient. And that’s all.
Equally, you can argue the need for patience and that’s valid too. But shouting down people and saying they are “on the other side” is not debating properly whether urgency is required. It’s trying to invalidate the views of anyone who is worried, and is playing the man not the ball (“you are on the other side so you can only be at it” as opposed to maybe something like “the SNP haven’t let us down on this yet, give them time to prove you wrong”).
The SNP plans for a No Deal Brexit could be very revealing.
Lorry parks and customs posts at Gretna and Berwick? Or acquiescence to subjugation… Ladies and Gentlemen, place your bets…
@Johnny,
I have no problem re indy. I want it as soon as we can. I do have a problem with the party sending out conflicting mess ages from its elected officials about how that is going to be done.
The Rev is right!y pointing out this inconsistency.
Note wel! that if we Brexit with no deal ghen ths a very limited time frame to gain indy. People wil! adapt to possible shortages and inconveniences and accept them as the status quo. They have done so for centuries.
Timing is of the essence.
Concern troll,
Urban Dictionary defines a concern troll as “someone who is on one side of the discussion, but pretends to be a supporter of the other side with ‘concerns.'”
In other words, it’s someone who pretends to support you but couches their disagreements in the form of “concerns,” which allows them to justify criticism as the result of worrying about you.
“I’m on your side,” they say, “but you shouldn’t do X, Y, and Z. It looks bad to some people — not that I agree, but I thought you should know.”
`i want Indy but am concerned about Nicola/SNP`, yada yada yada just a thought.
@Scot Finlayson
Did you clear that thought with party HQ first?
Bob Mack says:
8 October, 2019 at 9:28 am
Worrying trend developing on this site. Anything that is not SNP dogma is becoming…
My “criticism” of the SNP reflects a sincere and devout belief that they are getting their strategy catestrophically wrong, and rather than engaging constructively to address legitimate concerns, (very difficult to do when your Leadership gives no lead), SNP commentators double down on their own mute uncertainty and criticise dissent as treacherous.
If they don’t like hearing dissent or want more constructive dialogue, then “they” need to put their house in order and present cohesive proposals to defend Scotland’s Constitutional integrity and sovereign will to remain in Europe.
In changing times with a rolling horizon, we need a leader who can think on their feet. Current SNP strategy is as far removed from thinking on its feet as it is possible to be. As a result, we are disinterested bystanders looking on from the periphery, when we ought to be seeing our Constitutional Backstop sharing top billing with the Irish Backstop.
Therein lies my support for Joanna Cherry. She very much does think on her feet, and presents Westminster with fast moving thorny challenges to it’s reckless misadventure. There is a sense Joanna is building a dossier of Constitutional benchmarks, and when ready, she will hit the big Constitutional dispute of sovereignty like the proverbial ton of bricks, and crush anyone who gets in her way.
Not just securing seminal victories, which is impressive enough, Joanna Cherry is giving both Scottish and English observers an education in the latent power and process Scotland has at its disposal. She is preparing the ground for what may follow, and I don’t think that’s merely a Section 30 agreement or permission to think about having an IndyRef .
I am truly perplexed by SNP people who are so docile, complacent and comfortable about Scotland’s imminent Constitutional peril, and hostile towards those other people who are ringing the alarm bells. Their hubris seems misplaced and wholly inappropriate. There are none so blind as those who will not see, and they deserve to be challenged for the common good, and yes, for their own good too.
Divide and rule will not succeed. It ever does. The only way for a successful campaigns to remain united. Under one banner. The vehicle the SNP. Decimated, ordinary people who have come together for the good of people. To improve the economy. A caring, sharing community, Many have worked for years to make it happen. Donated. Campaigned put in the hours. To deviate now would be a mistake. It is a strong solid community which anyone can join to partake in the principles.
The community needs all the help it can get. Even in spite of Westminster unionist intransigence. One Campaign at a time. People can vote for it. Once enough people vote for it. It will succeed. Voting is as important as marching. Even more important. Just put a x in the box. The S30 can be achieved through the Ballot Box or the Courts. Then the time is right. When the time is right.
Vote SNP/SNP. Vote for Independence, get another to vote as well.
No one needs to attack the SNP to start up a political Party. Even Rev Stu.
@Breeks
Totally agree.
Some people did not receive a reply to two e-mails. Now cause great offence. Cutting off their nose to spite their face. Typical losers. Repetitive nonsense.
@Ken500
Divide and rule what.? I am one of the MAJORITY, who vote for indy but is not an SNP member. Try to femember that simple fact
Joanna Cherry is financed and supported by SNP members. Selected by them. Nicola Sturgeon is the elected leader as per the Constitution. Both do an extremely good job for Scotland, Never put a foot wrong, Both bring women on board in order to succeed. (50% of the pop). Divide and Rule will not work. They mutually respect one another, without reservation.
Scotland has never been better run or in a better place since 1928. Universal suffrage. Everyone can use their vote to continue to make that happen. Despite non members constant criticism. Standing in the side lines. With envy trying to confuse. They will not succeed, constantly trying to make a negative, unwarranted contribution. Just being extremely annoying.
So what. Everyone can vot3 how they like. Remember that.
‘Concern’ like ‘grievance’ has become another word that is loaded depending on where you stand. Concerns, like grievances, can be valid.
It has become impossible to have a rational discussion here if your allegiances are always questioned and anything you say is deemed loaded with ulterior motives.
What exactly is gained from this? Is this coming from the SNP itself? Are they encouraging this attacking of anyone critical of them online at their party meetings?
There are other sites where people can indulge their need for comfort and security that everything will be alright no matter what. It is different here because we challenge everything, the MSM, Green and fringe Indy madness and yes even SNP strategy.
The SNP party machine should be big enough to argue their case without encouraging the trashing of anyone who even questions them and their methods.
@Ken500,
I think Joanna and Nicola both have well paid jobs to support them at the moment.
Stop gibbering. In terms of the indy vote the SNP membership are actually a minority.You do get that?
Trying to play one against the other will not succeed. Nicola and Joanna are united in their purpose. Just hear them speak tells the narrative. Nicola and Joanna are respected in the community throughout Scotland. Extremely popular. Like no others. They care about other people.
Breeks @10.27 ‘There are none so blind as those who will not see’…do you really think that Nicola doesn’t approve and support what Joanna is doing?? Do you really think that Joanna Cherry is a ‘rogue cannon’ going off on her own without the rest of the SNP being part of a broader strategy?
@Ken,
Your beginning to sound like a bot.
I actually like your invo posts but you have become an automoton.
“Does not compute” stuff going on there
Any concern troll on the ‘other side’ right now would be encouraging the SNP to keep doing what they’re doing, steady as she goes and all that. Or saying nothing at all, on the thinking that you should never interrupt your enemy when they’re making a mistake.
They are not only extremely popular among SNP members. They are extremely popular among the voters, who vote for them. That gives them endorsement and authority. Try and keep up. Even the dissenters, stop speaking nonsense. Actually campaigning against the party/candidate for which the people vote. Start complaining when people do not vote for them. Not when they do. That is something to worry about. Not when there is success and people are succeeding. In standing up for Scotland at last, and support is needed. Less of the negativity. When everything is so positive for once. Holding the line. Independence has never been closer in history.
The ‘concerned’ trolls are easily noted,
@The Buchan Loony,
Wby if it sas an SNP strategy,was the case funded and raised by the Good law Centre and by Jolyn Maugham QC? The main funding came from AN ENGLISH BUSINESSMAN.
This was never an SNP strategy. Joanna waS a co appe!ant not the SNP.
Some people are being to sound monotonous. Divide and rule will not succeed. It never does generally. United people stand. Divided they fall. The sniping at the corners will not work. When people are doing a good job and succeeding. Standing up for Scotland. Each giving a beneficial contribution,
“I do have a problem with the party sending out conflicting mess ages from its elected officials about how that is going to be done. The Rev is right!y pointing out this inconsistency.”
Absolutely nothing wrong in sending out conflicting messages if it keeps your opponents wandering what you’re really up to. If that means the membership has to be kept in the dark too, so be it. Why should SNP or ScotGov reveal its true hand? They’re innit tae winnit.
@Ken500
You are beginning to sound like something out of Big Brother.
@
Proud Cybernat,
Two words.
Expectation Management. Very destructive if left unchecked.
@Ken,
Were not talking about SNP domestic governance. Tbat is just fabu!ous.
We are talking about the indyref NATIONAL agenda
It is good an English business man stands up for Scotland. Welcome in board. They could/might might support Independence. Sure they do support democracy, the vote, the right to self determination and self government. If people vote for it. One person, one vote. Not a PR mish mash. To confuse the electorate. Many people elsewhere support Independence for Scotland, worldwide. Including the EU/UN principles under International Law.
Some people are taking confused rubbish. Including the MSM. Non dependable or defendable.
Big brothers can be helpful or a menace. Take your pick. You can’t chose your family but you can chose your friends,
Bob Mack @11.01 Why was it funded by an English businessman then Bob? I’m not saying it was originated by the SNP but (if someone wants to pursue an objective similar to yours)then who probably knows Scots law and SNP objectives better than some…Joanna Cherry? All I’m saying is Nicola knows and approves fine well the objectives of these court cases.
Brexit talks run into the sand. No to Boris deal says Merkel.
All going nicely then with the Tories splashing out £27bn more than they said in their budget to buy votes in the GE when it comes.
Scotland looks on ignored and unable to decide it’s own fate, what should the people do, stick or twist? 🙁
Stephen Gethins on big auntie TV accuses Boris of bullying and bluster flouting the courts bla bla etc!
Doubling down on a no deal Brexit disaster looming.
@The Buchan Loony,
Perhaps Nicola did know, but more importantly, why did the Scottish Government not fund the case taking part in a Scottixh Court to protect Scottish rights.
That needs answering
Now it’s Angela Merkel’s fault says No 10
Boris the buffoon will be threatening gunboats again (damn Gerries)
They don’t learn, they don’t apologise, they don’t regret, but they do repeat those words interminably, meaning they haven’t learned what the words mean, they’re not sorry for misusing them and they don’t care if they did
Xenophobic England’s media will agree with Johnson and England’s voters will renew their hatred of all things and people foreign as if led by the nose ring and England will
*Stand alone*
It’s like reading a commando comic from the 50s
O/T
Jings! England rugby people and the BBC openly suggesting that it’s best to be beaten in their next game in order to finish 2nd in the group to avoid NZ in the next round. That’s not cricket! 🙂
Johnson must feel like Colonel John ‘Hannibal’ Smith this morning, “I love it when a plan comes together”.
1. Waste time (tick)
2. Set things up so you don’t get blamed (tick)
3. Put forward last minute crap ‘deal’ (tick)
4. With media help, pretend to be serious (tick)
5. Get crap ‘deal’ rejected (tick)
… then …
6a) Crash out on ‘no deal’
or
6b) Win an election on a ‘no deal’ ticket
7) Wallow in success because Brexit delivered as promised
I hope others plans are are in place!
TheBuchanLoony says:
8 October, 2019 at 10:52 am
Breeks @10.27 ‘There are none so blind as those who will not see’…do you really think that Nicola doesn’t approve and support what Joanna is doing?? Do you really think that Joanna Cherry is a ‘rogue cannon’ going off on her own without the rest of the SNP being part of a broader strategy?
That isn’t the point. I expect Nicola probably does support what Joanna is doing, but Joanna should have been cut loose to pull the wheels off Brexit on constitutional grounds three years ago, but instead the Leadership set off on its own unconstitutional misadventure to pursue a Soft Brexit option of staying in the Single Market.
I have no idea whether these constitutional improprieties were made clear to the SNP leadership, but whatever the thinking was, we were steered away from a legal / Constitutional strategy which would have secured a Constitutional Backstop for Scotland.
I have been banging on about the constitutional ramifications for as long as I can remember, with nobody providing any adequate counter argument, or alternate justification for ignoring Scotland’s unique sovereign status.
It seems, finally , that Joanna Cherry is leading us towards the light, but big questions remain why we have squandered 3 years plus stumbling in the dark.
We are not out of the woods yet, and it seems perfectly credible the SNP will yet forfeit the Constitutional Standoff which Brexit delivers in order to pursue a democratic exercise which the UK Establishment will skew and distort just like the last one.
As far as I know, Nicola’s strategy is to have a referendum next year. Our unconstitutional Brexit will be a burned out car wreck by then.
The SNP cannot use taxpayers money to fund court cases it would be misappropriation of finances
The Scottish government could if sanctioned by parliament
The case at the Inner House will decide much today. Perhaps the very future of ourr beloved country lets wish them well in their efforts
@Dr Jim,
Did they ask?
Does the difference in beliefs held by SNP supporters in relation to the SNP’s possible strategy, not confirm that their tactics are working to some extent.
IE. Sun Tzu and Vladislav Surkov wouldn’t just telegraph their one and only plan to their adversaries and thus allow it to be attacked from all angles.
I say to some extent though, and this is the nub of the matter for me. If the SNP are utilising a smoke and mirrors approach to confuddle their enemies, a drawback to that method is that it makes it somewhat difficult for YES activists to campaign as they tend to work on hard statistics and logical due process to bring swithering folk over to the positive attributes of Scotland having control of its own destiny.
I always prefer straight up true and honest policies, which probably stems from being an engineer where working with woolly and inaccurate data leads to a compromised objective.
It’s a catch 22 situation that YES folks really need to deal with rather than divide ourselves over.
“Does the difference in beliefs held by SNP supporters in relation to the SNP’s possible strategy, not confirm that their tactics are working to some extent.”
Working to what end? Tactics aren’t the same as goals. What is it that the SNP are trying to ACHIEVE? If it’s independence, how does invalidating their mandate for a second indyref help that? Honestly, I’m all ears, someone explain to me how you get from A to B, if A is stopping Brexit and B is independence.
@Dan,
Nail on head
An excellent pro Indy video. Should be spread far and wide …
link to youtube.com
Extreme negative personal views are unhelpful and out of step with the electorate. There is no mystic meg. So far the views and predictions express have always been wrong. Learn from experience. Not ignorance and arrogance. Some people never learn,
Lots of sense from Dan, there.
I’d agree totally with the idea that it’s sensible to not convey all your tactics to oppo but also stress that it should be no surprise when your supporters don’t know what you are doing either.
I think the nub of all this is that the strategy has to come to the fore eventually, right around the time that the Westminster government stops moving the goalposts.
Then we will know where we stand.
So, any more polling result reports due? LOL.
Great vid. Just what is needed. Positivity. It is infectious. Just like the positivities of the Marches and voters. They want a better future.
@Ken,
Personal views unhelpful? what next?
@Bob Mack
Even if they had decided to ask parliament the Unionist parties would have voted against it, possibly the Greens as well and the time taken to debate it, so a risk better avoided
But even had the parliament passed the use of taxpayers money in that way the press would have filled the front pages with stories of misappropriation and complaints that half the country 38% (in newspaper terms we know that 38% is almost half) voted for the Brexit proposition anyway, again avoid the risk
The court cases are share funded by the SNP and other interested litigants
Since 2014 the SNP have been putting together a sizeable *war chest* to do exactly what they’re doing now and to finance Indyref
They knew then that being outspent by the British was going to be a problem so the leadership asked us for money and this is just them using some of it now
The SNP back in 2012 couldn’t have done any of this, we didn’t have enough money, the new leadership gamed and planned the need for cash from 2014
The UK government just pluck money from anywhere and spend it with impunity knowing they can get away with it, they even use our own Scottish taxpayers money to fight against us under the pretence that the Union must be defended
The whole useless Scotland office is paid for by us for Alister Jack to use against us (Mundell previously)
Look at the fuss they make over the FMs helicopter hire constantly banging on about taxpayers money
I pay for that helicopter along with thousands others of us because it means she can keep her profile and presence high by visiting as many places as possible in a day
The Brits just don’t like it
“Still thinking inside the box”
I’ve been well out of the Britnat box for a long long time – unlike you Mr Britnat. Nae money to get back home to your supposed home town for the biggest indy march aye right. Try hitchhiking then. You are a phoney who posts nothing but negative concern troll posts. I bet you have never attended a march in your life.
You posted I was too dumb to see the big picture. Go on then splurge out your big picture. Spell it out – what is this big picture that you alone can see from Essex.
You’re all worried about the wrong things!
Its the bean bags you have to watch out for!
link to twitter.com
Maybe the term “concern troll” was invented by a concern troll.
Anyways, back to Michael Gray’s account, catching up on CoS.
link to twitter.com
If you look at Trumps antics in the USA that is what we have ahead of us if we are trapped in a UK with Johnson as PM. Johnson is working from Bannons playbook.
Hey dadsarmy away back to playing with your model ships.
QED
QED is that the latest type of frigate. Wee boys playing with their model ships.
“how does invalidating their mandate for a second indyref help that”
Cuz if Brexit doesn’t happen, Scotland will be blamed, England will go full tonto and demand its own IndyRef to leave the UK so that it can (as per Blair McDougall 2014) get kicked out of the EU.
The mandate is not only predicated on Brexit. It says also a majority of the people of Scotland want a 2nd IndyRef. That is now the position (according to recent opinion polls) and I think that position will become stronger still over the coming months.
Or maybe its the breastfeeders!
The breastfeeders on bean bags against independence.
Damn them all!
link to archive.is
Mmm, as well as the argument that judgement can be made and deferred which is what I’d like to see, I think this is a telling arguiment, particularly “b)”:
link to twitter.com
“O’Neill: There is: a) urgency (the ticking deadline clock), b) signs of a willingness to evade, c) an order that would provide an effective remedy (court sending the letter).”
Seems to me O’Neill doesn’t have to prove BJ WILL evade, just that there’s signs of a WILLINGNESS to do so, and it seems to me there’s plenty of support for that.
@Cubby
Your sole purpose seems to be to distract and deter, and disrupt threads, I’m going to totally ignore you as the waste of space you are.
suspended not deferred. It would be 21st October, the Monday. The letter has to be sent by the 19th which is a Saturday, court might not be available till the Monday, then there’s a hearing, judgement the next day, appeal to the UKSC, which is unlikely to succeede but wastes time, it’s perilously close to the 31st October and leaves no spare time even if it’s enough time.
Dadsarmy or whatever you take to call yourself in the future you are the one who made the initial comment so give it a rest with your rubbish. You are a waste of my time so totally ignore me that’s fine. I will do the same for you – I won’t miss your boring crap about rugby and model ships. Let’s see if you can stick to your promise. I doubt it – you like to portray yourself as someone above the fray but you are the one who got banned. Probably reading this right now aren’t you.
PS Captain Mainwaring was in the army not the Navy.
Until we are Independent.
Vote SNP/SNP nothing else, after we are Ind you can vote for whoever you like.
@Rev. Stu at 12.14pm
If the SNP are indeed using misdirection tactics to stifle and deflect from being attacked by their adversaries; I stated it appears to be working to some extent as even their own supporters aren’t in alignment with policy.
I’ve also occasionally witnessed the FM, Ian Blackford, and Joanna Cherry (amongst other SNP politicians) on state broadcasting media give differing stances, so even the MSM media with their constant SNP infatuation are assisting to a degree in a misdirection narrative across wider society.
The next part of my post then clarified my view that such a tactic does not really help achieve their supposed ultimate goals because it stalls the wider YES movement’s ability to crack on with a definite objective and timetable. So I am also frustrated with this situation.
The fact you are carrying out these polls is a necessary way to finding out what makes folks tick, and I agree that will be extremely useful data to know in forming a better plan to ultimately achieve our common goals.
I can’t campaign honestly with folk when I don’t actually know what the plan is.
I’ve always been careful on here not to be overly critical of our supposed best vehicle carrying us towards destination Indy for the inevitable backlash I’d get for being a troll or the like.
That said, I’ve been disappointed with the situation where the SNP gained a huge amount of new members but they struggled to make use of the potential that might have offered.
I understand it may have been overwhelming for the party, but years have passed since 2014 and I’m not aware of any significant involvement of those new members or increased local activist activity in my local areas.
I left the SNP because of this as my input and suggestions were ignored, and then joined my local YES group where my efforts would be more beneficial.
I believe the poster YesIndyref2 had similar experiences in this regard.
Ignore the first couple of paragraphs but the latter part of this post sums up more about how I feel about where we are.
link to wingsoverscotland.com
“Working to what end? Tactics aren’t the same as goals. What is it that the SNP are trying to ACHIEVE? If it’s independence, how does invalidating their mandate for a second indyref help that? Honestly, I’m all ears, someone explain to me how you get from A to B, if A is stopping Brexit and B is independence.”
We need to be careful what we wish for. There’s no point in an independent Scotland if it’s not a better place than it is now. Can it be a better place wi5th a basket case rUK for a neighbour? There’s more to “better place” than money – but money helps. A hasd border at Berwick would cost us. Best to have A and B together, if it can be done.
Terry callachan said at 7:40 am:
“what kind of person votes for Lib Dem’s when they are so untrustworthy
Here’s Mrs Swinson hiding a large sum of money from the EU
link to nyebevannews.co.uk ”
Thanks Terry callachan for the ‘Nye Bevan News’ link to the Swinson/Hames story.
The story begins:
“She voted for the LibCon Bedroom Tax that mired millions of the poorest in costs they could not afford.
She voted for the LibCon Welfare reforms which attacked the finances of those least able to withstand the onslaught.
She voted for the LibCon policy to treble the tuition fees of students least able to pay.
Could it get worse for Jo Swinson? In a word, yes…….”
READ ON DEAR READER…..!
Cubby
The bigger picture is the debate going on across these pages about how to achieve independence and whether the actions of the SNP are helping or hindering.
Please, please, in the name of all that is holy, you must appreciate that there is such a thing as constructive criticism, that dissenting voices lead to a stronger argument and that it’s ok for many people with the same goal to have differing views on how to get there.
For further enlightenment, please take time to have a look in on the Rev’s twitter account. Lots of very bright, very committed Yessers who aren’t at all convinced about the SNP’s chosen path to indy and who are putting forward potential alternatives without calling each other Britnats, concern trolls, phoney indy supporters and all the rest of it.
@Alex Birnie
Just checking back through and saw your posting, which was presumably moderated for a time.
He’s quite entitled to delete a posting saying “Get to …” etc. But he deleted the follow-up completely clean postings, and the ones afterwards too, In fact he seems to have found a way to delete or discard my postings completely. Which is why
I haven’t even tried to post there for over 2 weeks
I’ll repeat that:
I haven’t even tried to post there for over 2 weeks
which makes a nonsense of his latest on that thread:
———
“Quite so. And I would actually have deleted Anon’s latest cowardly comment if there hadn’t already been five replies. Because this blog does actually have a moderation policy, and crazy though it may seem, one of the things that triggers that moderation policy is telling the author of the blog to “get to f**k, d***wad”.
If the penny hasn’t dropped yet, I’ll spell it out: you are no longer welcome to comment here, Anon.”
————
Alex, more than half the comments that aren’t his, SS’s or GWCs are Anon. It’s his stupid blogger software, I’m not doing a google account to get on it.
But as for “Anon” SGP not only replies to Anons that agree with him, he even quotes one in an article:
——–
“UPDATE: Unfortunately it looks like Mr Campbell hasn’t asked a credible question in his poll – see the comment from Anon at 4:06pm below. If anything it looks slightly worse than the Archie Stirling and Change UK questions that produced such misleading results.”
———
I think:
1). He’s naive and not very experienced in internet terms
2). Doesn’t actually have enough self-confidence, so uses abuse instead
3). Unable to identify genuine posters and troublemakers
4). A nice misguided guy who does great opinion polls but has become obsessed with his previous pal taking a different tack from him.
and one for you:
What is your purpose of pursuing this issue on this blog, when it relates to something that happens on another blog? Are you trying to exploit what you see as division?
Would you agree that, once we’re up to Indy Ref 2 actually happening, it would be better for Independence if The Rev and Scot Goes Pop who run two of the top pro-Indy blogs make up and support each other – and all of us along with it?
Mr no show at marches from Essex I ignored a couple of your earlier, for no reason, derogatory comments about me in the hope you would desist. But no because there was no response from me you continued on with your dumbass comment that I was too dumb to see some sort of bigger picture. You are now back to acting the victim – pathetic.
So that is the great big surprise picture – ha ha ha – that I am too dumb to be aware of. Well what a surprise there are some people who like to criticise the SNP.
How exactly is the SNP hindering independence Mr smart ass.
I have no problem with constructive criticism. You hide behind other genuine supporters and post your sneaky derogatory comments with the aim of lowering the morale.
Rev Stu @12.14 ‘someone explain to me how you get from A to B, if A is stopping Brexit and B is independence.’ Stu, Brexit is UNSTOPPABLE and Nicola knows this. Just like Independence for Scotland is unstoppable but we don’t actually know yet when it will happen. England and the powers therein will make sure Brexit happens sometime. There is no going back to ‘England/UK as it was normality’. Brexit probably won’t happen on the 31st but it WILL happen. That’s why Nicola can confidently be the voice of sensible reason and bang on about stopping Brexit ‘cos she knows she’s not going to succeed in stopping it. Changing it to a less disastrous situation?…the SNP and others have already achieved that, but stopping it no.
What a very grown up response from the individual who loves to lower every debate to insults and silly name calling. Thankfully, since your ally geeo left / got booted off there’s approx 50% less of it on here these days.
As countless others have concluded, it is simply impossible to have any sort of debate with you that involves anything that you don’t completely agree with. That you can’t see that or refuse to change is indicative of quite a serious personality flaw.
But hey, it’s all been said by plenty of people many times and yet here we are again.
We do well ignoring each other most of the time as every time we clash it’s the same old story. I’m a Britnat and you’re not very bright.
I’m done for this round.
Essexexile AFC.
@Essexexile
The postings speaks for themselves, just treat them with the contempt they deserve and ignore them. That’ll cut down the ad hominems and disruption. And yes, I’ll take my own advice. Don’t feed, etc.
As for a London march, there’s an active London branch of the SNP I believe, but to be honest I wouldn’t go and I doubt many would from Scotland. It’s too far, too long and far too expensive – even including bus passes only going as far as Carlisle 🙂
For me I’m afraid, London is the capital of a foreign country. A great place to go as a tourist!
@Essexexile
link to londonsnp.com
SNP London Branch
The London Branch of the SNP website
Monthly meeting tonmight at 7.30 pm, be quick!
“at St Anne’s Church 55 Dean St, Soho, London W1D 6AF, UK.”
@Essexexile
Just one more, in my days of posting on the Grun in 2012 before I got kidnapped by the Herald, the London branch was mentioned a bit and I think there were 2 or 3 posters members there, and again a vague memory, they were well-informed – as quite a few of the Grun posters were (and are).
If you’re feeling isolated in Essex, could be worth a try, they probably allow visitors for a meeting.
Dadsarmy and your pal Essexexile
You are the people who attack me in the first instance so just give it a rest with your nonsense. You just don’t like a response that puts you in your place. Essexexile when have you ever debated anything with me or attempted to do so – never. You started the insults and you like to keep it going. So away with your lying hypocrisy. A pair of disrupters who refuse to take responsibility for their own words/ posts.
Dadsarmy You even broke your promise you just made above to keep away from commenting about me. I thought it wouldn’t last. You are a disrupter.
More than happy to have nothing to do with you pair of pratts but you just can’t leave it alone can you.
Essexexile I’ll repeat the question you did not reply to – you said the SNP are hindering progress to independence – just how exactly are they doing this.
Dadsarmy you are living proof that even Independence supporters can be ignorant pratts. You have a long track record on Wings of ad Homs so what does that make your comments.
Give it a rest the pair of you. If you keep making derogatory comments about me I will respond. If you don’t like that then stop your derogatory comments. It’s that simple.
Never had the need to quote myself before but here goes:
At 2.20pm Yours truly said:
“The bigger picture is the debate going on across these pages about how to achieve independence and whether the actions of the SNP are helping or hindering.”
So this statement from your good self…:
“You said the SNP are hindering progress to independence – just how exactly are they doing this.”
…is tripe.
It’s that old ‘not reading posts carefully’ chestnut again, I’m afraid.
@Essexexile
Any interest in the London SNP info I posted? You’ve still got 6 minutes to get there!
Dadsarmy
I’ll certainly have a look. Never been a member of a political party and never voted SNP (even on the few occasions I was able to). Tbh, right at this moment I think they’re moving away from my standpoint on a few issues, indy being one of them regrettably.
A southern based Yes movement though, I’m in. Not that I’d dare tell my other half. She gets annoyed at me spending so much time organising the works five-a-side team!
You obviously cannot read. I said it’s simple just leave it alone but no you cannot do this can you.
I’ll repeat it’s simple (for the hard of reading like you) just leave it alone but you just want to keep it going don’t you. You are nothing but a Britnat disrupter.
You posted the SNP are hindering progress to independence as a viewpoint – so you were asked to clarify – no clarification as to how they are possibly hindering independence from you. Stop trying your stupid word games. The only tripe is coming from you.
So how in your experience are the SNP hindering independence. My original question was as follows: “How exactly is the SNP hindering independence Mr smart ass”
Just like your pal dadsarmy you make statements that I am the one who insults but you are always the one who kicks it off. That makes the pair of you the disrupters. I just respond. You two have the solution in your own hands – JUST LEAVE IT ALONE – but no you cannot can you. Dadsarmy broke his promise right away.
You must be taking lessons from Trump in how to read your own words.
@Essexexile
Unlike branches in Scotland the London one has no elections to run apart from its office bearers, so it should be Indy, Indy and more Indy.
Hi Cubby.
At 2.20 this afternoon, Essexexile commented,
“The bigger picture is the debate going on across these pages about how to achieve independence and whether the actions of the SNP are helping or hindering.”
Later on, you decided, from that,
“You posted the SNP are hindering progress to independence as a viewpoint”
I’ll repeat, Essexexile commented,
“The bigger picture is the debate going on across these pages about how to achieve independence and whether the actions of the SNP are helping or hindering.”
Why do you ignore “helping” and focus on “hindering”?
You have now decided that dadsarmy is a “pal” of Essexexile; like when you declared that Terry Callachan was a “pal” of mine – even although I have never met the man as, I would think, dadsarmy has never met Essexexile.
The BIG HEAD doesn’t know what is going on in your head and transmits that the BIG HEAD thinks that neither do you.
Get a grip!
Hey Brian I don’t remember you jumping in and saying the same to others including Essexexile who said on numerous occasions that Geeo was a pal of mine despite me saying I don’t know the person and have never met Geeo also on numerous occasions. Some also said we were the same person.
Why would the SNP be hindering independence Brian. Want to take it up on behalf of Essexexile who I am sure is not your pal. Why mention that possibility at all. The SNP has always been a party for Scottish independence and until I see evidence and facts that say otherwise I will hold that view. A lot of people also hold that view – not surprisingly. So why would they not be helping independence. I am all ears. Evidence please. Perhaps you are more informed than me.
No idea what your second last sentence is going on about. Perhaps you need to get a grip.
Is this have a go at Cubby night.
BDDT
A question for you Brian. If you were at the meadows on Sat you may have heard Tommy Shephards speech. I did and he clearly stated that our independence movement is nothing like the English nationalism but it is a civic nationalism. Do you agree?
If you didn’t hear his speech you may want to view it.
Cubby,
I’m loath to post in this one again but after your recent comment I just wanted to reiterate something.
I’m sure you are a decent, family man (I’m certain you’ve said as much in previous posts somewhere). Believe me, I am too.
We just happen to have a disagreement on a particular political issue. That is all.
OK, we’ve both chucked in a few insults at times but I would hope not with genuine malice.
Pushing each others buttons once in a while is one thing, getting under each others skin to a degree which potentially extends outside these pages is quite another.
I would bloody love it if we could make a genuine pact to ignore each other, not comment on each others posts, shake hands digitally and agree to push for indy in our separate ways.
You have my word.
Please?
.
Brian Doonthetoon.
Well said.
Enjoyed your THIRD PLANET FROM THE SUN reference.
This wee YES voter would like to buy you a pint someday.
I like your posts and your style.
—————–
Essexexile,
Please keep on posting. I enjoy your decent approach.
There is a definite bunker-mentality in some old-school SNP quarters. It is VERY understandable given the almost universally hostile MSM and so many dreadfully written, bias SNP-Bad durges.
The sad thing is that the Venn diagram on this website should have most of us in the YES TO INDYREF2 VOTE circle.
Yet, time after time after time, a very noisy few take aim and either shoot themselves in the foot, or hit some innocent YES voting bystander.
Sad and very counter-productive.
Al -Stuart@11.21pm
I am not a member of the SNP so I cannot be an old school SNP quarter or half or any fraction you care to mention.
I make no apology for being a life long Scottish independence supporter.
Essexexile cannot vote for yes and by his own admission has never voted for the SNP.
I guess it is have a go at Cubby night.
Cheers Al – Stuart. You are entitled to your opinion but I find it offensive and you are just adding fuel to the fire.
BDDT
Brian. I accept your word that Callachan is not a friend of yours but you did say in the past you were a friend or a colleague or both of his wife. I may have mistaken your words in a previous post where I thought you said I would meet up with Callachan at the Wings stall.
Essexexile@11.04pm
“You have my word.”
Well I hope it’s s lot better than your pal dadsarmy who broke his promise right away and of course Callachan who did the same then made a second promise.
I will add you to my scroll past list. Remember you were the one who kicked this off again with your gratuitous insults and I let it go twice but you continued on. We’ll see if your word means anything.
I know his wife as a work colleague. I only know him from his comments on WOS.
BDTT
Happy to accept, as I said in a post above, I got it wrong in saying Callachan is or was your pal. My apologises if that annoyed or upset you.
Care to answer my question at 10.45pm. Do you think it is acceptable to hold non civic nationalism views in general and secondly do you think it is acceptable to hold these views and still be a member of the SNP when the SNP expressly says the opposite.
I find it unacceptable that someone says my son should not be able to vote because he was born in England, lived there for the first two years of his life, and then the rest of his life in Scotland.
Your previous posts attacked me and appeared to support Callachans views. Want to clarify once and for all your position and then we can move on?
Hi Cubby.
My opinion is… T. Callachan’s view is that what happened in Wales at the EU referendum also happened in Scotland in 2014.
I don’t think that pointing out the possibility amounts to blood and soil nationalism.
link to theguardian.com
Brian thanks for the courtesy of a reply.
I interpret that as you saying my son should not get a vote in the forthcoming indyref. He says English born should not get a vote. That is blood and soil nationalism that morphs very easily into racism. The SNP say EVERYONE should get a vote that lives in Scotland but he says he is a member.
I am not disputing the voting patterns – never have – that is just deflection.
Who else that lives in Scotland do you think should not get a vote. On second thoughts don’t answer don’t want to hear any more.
There is no chance of me ever visiting Wings stall again.
Disgusted.
Hi Cubby.
It’s obvious from your reply to me that you are wallowing in a sea of negativity; looking for stuff to get upset about.
NOWHERE in my comment above did I offer any personal opinion on who should get, or not get, a vote in a possible Indy referendum. I merely pointed out my impression of what T. Callachan believed.
You are reading things that haven’t even been typed!
I’m beginning to think (a personal opinion) that you are on a ‘crusade’ to set as many Wingers against other Wingers as you can. Why do you do it?
I offer an opinion of what I think T. Callachan thinks and suddenly, according to you, that’s what I think? A crock of $h!†, cultivated in your warped brain, I would suggest.
Don’t presume to tell me what I believe, according to your own prejudices. Try sticking to what people actually type, instead of moulding their comments to your own train of thought, which, I would suggest, is suspect.
BDTT
Now you are just talking a lot of deflecting rubbish. The point at hand is very simple. How many times do I have to explain it. I asked you simple questions you prevaricate and deflect. All you had to say was I choose not to answer or even ignore the question but now you go off on a lot of conspiracy theory crap.
My prejudices – you are just back to defending the indefensible. My thoughts are susceptible – aye you are the guy defending another poster on Wings who posts very clearly blood and soil Nationalist crap. So if someone is on Wings then that means that they are beyond criticism. What utter nonsense.
I will remind you that you are the one who keeps attacking me on this subject. I repeat you are the one who keeps attacking me on this subject. Yet you stupidly claim that I am on some sort of crusade. Why do you keep getting involved in this Brian. If I was to use your warped logic I would suggest some sort of daft conspiracy theory.
Brian you need to get a grip. You really really need to get a grip with all this conspiracy crap. I suggest a long lie down.
I am so glad I never went near the Wings stall on Sat if this is the sort of crap that I would have had to deal with. Your post above is some of the biggest pile of nonsense ever dumped on Wings.
I can tell I am wasting my time trying to have a reasonable discussion with you on this matter.
Why don’t you just stop attacking me on this subject matter – that will quickly put an end to your crazy crusade conspiracy theory.
link to youtube.com
BDTT
In fact why don’t you just not comment on my posts and I will totally ignore yours as well. How does that work for you Brian. Puts a lid on your nutty crusade crap. Go on then just agree. Happy never to have any interaction with you ever again. Of course If you don’t agree maybe I should just use your logic and say you are the disrupter.
Stupidly I once thought you were a decent guy. Just stick to your whisky and iron bru and stay away from me.
Hi Cubby.
I repeat,
NOWHERE in my comment above did I offer any personal opinion on who should get, or not get, a vote in a possible Indy referendum. I merely pointed out my impression of what T. Callachan believed.
You are reading things that haven’t even been typed!
You really have to improve your comprehension skills.
Brian
I asked you simple questions you deflect and don’t answer. I draw my own conclusions from that.
I repeat for you – you are the one who keeps jumping in on this matter and attacking me so I wrongly thought it was because Callachan was your pal. I took your word that he was not and apologised and asked you for YOUR views – your personal views – not your thoughts on what you think Callachan thinks ( which by the way you are wrong ). You deflect with stupid offensive crusade conspiracies. I’ll drop off some tin foil at the Wings stall if there is a march next year.
I know Callachans views on this. He has been crystal clear. I asked you for your views. You deflect.
You post again and do not say what YOUR views are. Again I draw my own conclusions from that.
An independent Scotland that excludes people who live in Scotland is not a Scotland that I want. It is also not the type of Scotland that the Yes movement wants – I don’t remember Tommy Shepherd being booed when he stated we were a civic nationalism.
You really have to stop defending someone who hold these views unless of course you hold these views as well. You have had plenty of opportunity to state YOUR views but silence from BDTT.
Happy never to have any interaction with you again after your offensive accusations. So instead of dragging this out just agree to my proposal @10.56am.
I’ll repeat for you again just agree to my proposal @10.56am. Bridges are well and truly burnt down by your offensive crap.
Right Cubby.
This page is not about who should and should not vote in a possible indyref but you appear to have made it so. Thus you have changed the subject. Fine.
I repeat again,
I merely pointed out my impression of what T. Callachan believed.
You are reading things that haven’t even been typed!
My putting forward my impression of T. Callachan’s thoughts on the subject of franchise then led you to assert that I was deflecting and not stating who I think should be able to, or not able to, vote in an indyref, although that wasn’t what was being discussed.
Your nosy gene is obviously working overtime and I have caused it frustration so I’ll put it out of its misery before it wets itself.
I am of the opinion that anyone normally resident in Scotland should be able to vote, possibly with a time qualification.
Now that I have answered your spurious question, I’ll expect an answer from you to this spurious question:
What is your opinion on self-identification of gender and gender-neutral toilets?
Brian
You have a problem reading. Bridges are burnt. Do you agree to my proposal at 10.56pm or not. A simple question – only needs a yes or no answer. If it is a no then you are the one who started this and you are the one who keeps it going but you stupidly accuse me of being the one on a crusade.
Yes or no. Just go away and give it a rest. Fed up reading your nonsense.
Hello Brian Doonthetoon,
I went up to the Wings Stall on Saturday to say hello, but you weren’t there. Next time.
Keep well and keep posting.
Cheerie.
Hi Daisy Walker.
I got there near the start of the march’s arrival at The Meadows. Guess it must have been just after two. ‘Twas a bra’ day, apart from the rain and mud…
_______________________________________________________
Cubby – I answered your question. You not gonna have the courtesy to answer mine?
BDTT
You have not answered plenty of my questions but the main one is yes or no. Now you complained about me reading a conclusion into your non reply previously so I’m flagging up to you now if you keep this going I will take that as a no and you have totally undermined your own nonsensical crusade crap.
Courtesy – you are having a joke. I apologised to you for my mistake in claiming Callachan was your pal and said I was sorry if it annoyed you. Did you have manners to graciously accept it – NO.
No acknowledgement at all. You just went off on some silly offensive conspiracy theory with a whole bundle of highly offensive personal remarks. So courtesy and manners – you are having a joke.
So Brian you are the person who started this and you are the one who keeps it going. I’ll repeat your earlier sentence to me: ” WHY DO YOU DO IT ”
YES OR NO As far as I am concerned I am sick of reading your crap.
BDTT
” You not gonna have the courtesy to answer mine”
Your nosy gene is obviously working overtime.
Are you on a crusade to set Wingers against each other.
These are some of your words/accusation to me. They can apply just as easily to your question.
I have answered your question and you can find it where it should be – on the latest thread. Now do me a favour say YES to my suggestion and just go away.
Sigh…
You are really proving yourself to be an @r$€, eh Cubby? How many comments are you gonna post while I don’t respond to you? You do realise that others are reading your crap assertions?
Nighty night. I’ll check in tomorrow to read what new pearls of wisdom you have sent onto the web.
BDTT
See when you are away doon the toon perhaps you should reflect on your conduct.
What crap assertions would that be? I have proposed an end to this and you refuse to agree. It’s as simple as that.
[…] SNP doesn’t know what it’s doing with regard to Brexit,” blog author Stuart Campbell complained this […]
Wing Over Scotland is published on the World Wide Web. As such, anyone in the world can read the articles and below the line (btl) comments.
They can read every comment, or can choose to skip some, if they so desire. They do not need agreement with anyone, as to whether they read or skip. It’s entirely their choice.
Well knock me over with a feather – I never knew that.
Been on the whisky and irn bru and worked up some courage to post have you.
Calling me an arse – a classic sign that you have no case to argue – just bad language and insults.
“You do realise that others are reading your crap assertions” – not many I would have thought. Most would be bored by now but you want to just keep on going eh Brian. Not as boring as your voting CV post mind you.
I just KNEW that you’d be checking the “Recent Comments” bit at the right hand side of any WOS page and would be compelled to comment!
So predicable…
Gie it up…
And onnyhoo…
Tonight, I have mostly been partaking of Southern Comfort and lemonade so, once again, your presumptions are erroneous, like many before…
BTW: what does “your voting CV post mind you.” mean?
Ah weel, I kinda worked it out.
Got there in the end.