Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Ipsos Scotland poll has the SNP winning 56 of the 57 Scottish seats – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,220
edited December 2022 in General
Ipsos Scotland poll has the SNP winning 56 of the 57 Scottish seats – politicalbetting.com

???????BREAKING: SNP would win 56 of 57 seats (new boundaries)? SNP 53% (+9)? LAB 24% (+1)? CON 13% (-6)? LD 6% (-4)? GRN 2% (-1)This would result in the SNP winning 56 of 57 seats under new boundaries (+8), with Labour on 1 (-)Via @IpsosUK, 28 Nov-5 Dec (+/- since May) pic.twitter.com/2qHOobRnac

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,981
    One Party statelet.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,943
    edited December 2022
    Perhaps the SNP should field candidates across the UK.

    Oh, and second, in that instance, like the Conservatives.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,048
    On less than 55% of the vote
  • This is the problem with FPTP.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,972
    In reality the LDs would probably hold Orkney and Shetland.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,354
    Stats for Lefties again!

    More believable than their last effort, granted, but still.
  • Stats for Lefties? The people that re-weighted the polls in 2019 to make it look like Corbyn would win?
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 5,067
    Looks like Scots are not impressed with being denied a democratic route to Independence.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,048

    Looks like Scots are not impressed with being denied a democratic route to Independence.

    They had one in 2014 and voted to stay in the UK in a once in a generation referendum. This Tory government respects that and the SC has confirmed it can refuse indyref2.

    If Labour wins the next election as is likely but needs SNP support for a majority then it will be their problem whether to grant indyref2 or not and their problem to win it with Brown's devomax etc
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,311
    Sunak doing his best Claude Rains impression.

    MICHELLE MONE

    Sunak: “Like everyone else I was absolutely shocked to read about the allegations. It’s absolutely right that she is no longer attending the House of Lords and therefore no longer has the Conservative Whip.”

    https://mobile.twitter.com/danbloom1/status/1600462541213368320
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 5,067
    HYUFD said:

    Looks like Scots are not impressed with being denied a democratic route to Independence.

    They had one in 2014 and voted to stay in the UK in a once in a generation referendum. This Tory government respects that and the SC has confirmed it can refuse indyref2.

    If Labour wins the next election as is likely but needs SNP support for a majority then it will be their problem whether to grant indyref2 or not and their problem to win it with Brown's devomax etc
    You phrase “whether to grant indyref2 or not” encapsulates the lack of democracy.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 5,067
    Nigelb said:

    Sunak doing his best Claude Rains impression.

    MICHELLE MONE

    Sunak: “Like everyone else I was absolutely shocked to read about the allegations. It’s absolutely right that she is no longer attending the House of Lords and therefore no longer has the Conservative Whip.”

    https://mobile.twitter.com/danbloom1/status/1600462541213368320

    Has he asked for the money back that he gave her when he was Chancellor?
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,929
    53% does seem relatively high.

    It does add credence to one of my pet theories though. Decisions by judges create a political backlash. We shouldn't celebrate too much judicial oversight.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,048

    HYUFD said:

    Looks like Scots are not impressed with being denied a democratic route to Independence.

    They had one in 2014 and voted to stay in the UK in a once in a generation referendum. This Tory government respects that and the SC has confirmed it can refuse indyref2.

    If Labour wins the next election as is likely but needs SNP support for a majority then it will be their problem whether to grant indyref2 or not and their problem to win it with Brown's devomax etc
    You phrase “whether to grant indyref2 or not” encapsulates the lack of democracy.
    We are a representative not direct democracy, tough
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,048
    Since becoming PM Sunak has increased the Tory average voteshare from 23% to 27% and cut Labour's average lead from 30% to 20%.

    He has also cut Starmer's lead from 29% over Truss as best PM to just 5%

    https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1600428270264033280?s=20&t=ILTzUd1ztqnZV4ktRm8OKA
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,667
    edited December 2022
    HYUFD said:

    Since becoming PM Sunak has increased the Tory average voteshare from 23% to 27% and cut Labour's average lead from 30% to 20%.

    He has also cut Starmer's lead from 29% over Truss as best PM to just 5%

    https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1600428270264033280?s=20&t=ILTzUd1ztqnZV4ktRm8OKA

    You missed out 'but a very long way to go'
  • The image of the source has been deleted and the account posting is habitually full of shit, are we sure it's real?
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,223
    Tweet deleted…
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,311

    Nigelb said:

    Sunak doing his best Claude Rains impression.

    MICHELLE MONE

    Sunak: “Like everyone else I was absolutely shocked to read about the allegations. It’s absolutely right that she is no longer attending the House of Lords and therefore no longer has the Conservative Whip.”

    https://mobile.twitter.com/danbloom1/status/1600462541213368320

    Has he asked for the money back that he gave her when he was Chancellor?
    Still in shock, I guess.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,223
    https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/yes-pulls-ahead-and-snp-strengthens-support

    Headline UK General Election voting intention figures for Scotland are:
    SNP: 51% (+7 compared with May 2022 Ipsos poll)
    Scottish Conservatives: 13% (-6)
    Scottish Labour: 25% (+2)
    Scottish Liberal Democrats: 6% (-4)
    Scottish Green Party: 3% (unchanged)
    Other: 2% (unchanged)
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,311
    I wonder which side of this debate Driver is on ?

    Arizona GOP legislator: Danger to democracy in Supreme Court case isn’t theoreticaL
    https://www.politico.com/news/2022/12/07/arizona-legislator-danger-to-democracy-00072580
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,311
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,484
    edited December 2022
    Nigelb said:

    Sunak doing his best Claude Rains impression.

    MICHELLE MONE

    Sunak: “Like everyone else I was absolutely shocked to read about the allegations. It’s absolutely right that she is no longer attending the House of Lords and therefore no longer has the Conservative Whip.”

    https://mobile.twitter.com/danbloom1/status/1600462541213368320

    This one may come back to bite Sunak. The allegations have been around for over a year, so I can't see how he's suddenly 'absolutely shocked' just because there's now a better evidence trail.

    £29m profit, allegedly, lodged in an account whose beneficiaries are the family in the case. Just think about that - £29m profit through using the VIP lane. And the lies (allegedly). It's a huge scandal, it really is.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,320
    Sunak and Gove should be under investigation. I doubt they are personally culpable, but the scale of ordure demands full transparency.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,311
    Revealed: Second firm pushed by Michelle Mone was secret entity of husband’s office
    Revelation that LFI Diagnostics was entity of office that manages wealth of Douglas Barrowman deepens controversy over Tory peer
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/dec/06/revealed-second-firm-pushed-by-michelle-mone-was-secret-entity-of-husbands-office
  • The image of the source has been deleted and the account posting is habitually full of shit, are we sure it's real?

    Corrected version gives SNP only 55 of 57
    https://twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1600471864832192513
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,311

    Nigelb said:

    Sunak doing his best Claude Rains impression.

    MICHELLE MONE

    Sunak: “Like everyone else I was absolutely shocked to read about the allegations. It’s absolutely right that she is no longer attending the House of Lords and therefore no longer has the Conservative Whip.”

    https://mobile.twitter.com/danbloom1/status/1600462541213368320

    This one may come back to bite Sunak. The allegations have been around for over a year, so I can't see how he's suddenly 'absolutely shocked' just because there's now a better evidence trail.

    £29m profit, allegedly, lodged in an account whose beneficiaries are the family in the case. Just think about that - £29m profit through using the VIP lane. And the lies (allegedly). It's a huge scandal, it really is.
    Her husband trousered £65m from the same source, reportedly.
  • Nigelb said:

    Sunak doing his best Claude Rains impression.

    MICHELLE MONE

    Sunak: “Like everyone else I was absolutely shocked to read about the allegations. It’s absolutely right that she is no longer attending the House of Lords and therefore no longer has the Conservative Whip.”

    https://mobile.twitter.com/danbloom1/status/1600462541213368320

    This one may come back to bite Sunak. The allegations have been around for over a year, so I can't see how he's suddenly 'absolutely shocked' just because there's now a better evidence trail.

    £29m profit, allegedly, lodged in an account whose beneficiaries are the family in the case. Just think about that - £29m profit through using the VIP lane. And the lies (allegedly). It's a huge scandal, it really is.
    Assuming that the story as reported is true, then the way that she appears to have used the pandemic to enrichen her family at the public expense via the VIP channel for people with political connections to the government is utterly sickening. But surely the scandal is the existence of the VIP channel in the first place.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,981

    HYUFD said:

    Since becoming PM Sunak has increased the Tory average voteshare from 23% to 27% and cut Labour's average lead from 30% to 20%.

    He has also cut Starmer's lead from 29% over Truss as best PM to just 5%

    https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1600428270264033280?s=20&t=ILTzUd1ztqnZV4ktRm8OKA

    You missed out 'but a very long way to go'
    But 2 years to do it.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,311
    No doubt the directors who signed off on this fraud (Trump) are shocked, too.

    Trump Organization guilty of tax fraud, New York jury finds
    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/dec/06/trump-organization-guilty-verdict-tax-fraud
    ...The case does not bring to a close the legal challenges facing Trump and his businesses – far from it. Bragg has said that a related investigation he inherited from his predecessor, district attorney Cyrus Vance Jr, is “ongoing”. In that case, investigators are reportedly focused on assessing the integrity of the Trump Organization’s financial statements...
  • DriverDriver Posts: 5,027
    Nigelb said:

    I wonder which side of this debate Driver is on ?

    Arizona GOP legislator: Danger to democracy in Supreme Court case isn’t theoreticaL
    https://www.politico.com/news/2022/12/07/arizona-legislator-danger-to-democracy-00072580

    I can't see how the proposed changes solve any of the problems of the US political system - that said, many of the objections do seem hysterical.

    Obviously majority parties shouldn't be drawing electoral maps, but it's a grand old tradition in both red and blue states.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606
    Big lead for YES as well


    BREAKING: New poll shows support for Scottish independence rising to 56%.

    https://twitter.com/stvnews/status/1600460244680904709?s=46&t=zQTOzJLnfDApvmBvXDgjIA
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 5,006

    Nigelb said:

    Sunak doing his best Claude Rains impression.

    MICHELLE MONE

    Sunak: “Like everyone else I was absolutely shocked to read about the allegations. It’s absolutely right that she is no longer attending the House of Lords and therefore no longer has the Conservative Whip.”

    https://mobile.twitter.com/danbloom1/status/1600462541213368320

    This one may come back to bite Sunak. The allegations have been around for over a year, so I can't see how he's suddenly 'absolutely shocked' just because there's now a better evidence trail.

    £29m profit, allegedly, lodged in an account whose beneficiaries are the family in the case. Just think about that - £29m profit through using the VIP lane. And the lies (allegedly). It's a huge scandal, it really is.
    I don't think we have heard the end of this one by a long-shot. It has the capacity to become the poster child for sleaze and incompetence in the run up to the next GE. I imagine Gove and a few others are sweating right now.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,311
    Driver said:

    Nigelb said:

    I wonder which side of this debate Driver is on ?

    Arizona GOP legislator: Danger to democracy in Supreme Court case isn’t theoreticaL
    https://www.politico.com/news/2022/12/07/arizona-legislator-danger-to-democracy-00072580

    I can't see how the proposed changes solve any of the problems of the US political system - that said, many of the objections do seem hysterical.

    Obviously majority parties shouldn't be drawing electoral maps, but it's a grand old tradition in both red and blue states.
    It's about rather more fundamental stuff than the drawing of election maps.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,048
    edited December 2022
    Leon said:

    Big lead for YES as well


    BREAKING: New poll shows support for Scottish independence rising to 56%.

    https://twitter.com/stvnews/status/1600460244680904709?s=46&t=zQTOzJLnfDApvmBvXDgjIA

    So what, the Supreme Court confirmed the UK government can refuse indyref2 indefinitely as Spain did in Catalonia.

    Though note the poll also states most Scots don't want indyref2 next year anyway and it is only 56% excluding don't knows
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,311
    edited December 2022
    GOP smells blood with wounded Trump
    https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3764391-gop-smells-blood-with-wounded-trump/

    The window for profitably shorting his 2024 ambitions might be starting to close.
    Lumping on for a bit more today.

    Even a pack of craven curs can take down an old bear if they sense weakness.
  • WillGWillG Posts: 2,366
    Leon said:

    Big lead for YES as well


    BREAKING: New poll shows support for Scottish independence rising to 56%.

    https://twitter.com/stvnews/status/1600460244680904709?s=46&t=zQTOzJLnfDApvmBvXDgjIA

    If we get rid of Scotland and Northern Ireland, would we save more or less than 350m a week?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,048
    WillG said:

    Leon said:

    Big lead for YES as well


    BREAKING: New poll shows support for Scottish independence rising to 56%.

    https://twitter.com/stvnews/status/1600460244680904709?s=46&t=zQTOzJLnfDApvmBvXDgjIA

    If we get rid of Scotland and Northern Ireland, would we save more or less than 350m a week?
    We would also lose much North Sea oil and have a hard border from Northumberland to Cumbria hitting both sides exporters as well as the Irish Sea
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,049
    edited December 2022
    I know I'm slightly late with this about Jan 6th but "Four Hours at the Capitol" (Netflix) makes it clear that this was not a coup. It was a bunch of malcontents marching on the seat of power to protest their perceived grievances.

    A bit like the Stop the War or Liberty & Livelihood Marches. But with a bit more violence, as is often the case in the US.
  • WillGWillG Posts: 2,366
    Nigelb said:

    Driver said:

    Nigelb said:

    I wonder which side of this debate Driver is on ?

    Arizona GOP legislator: Danger to democracy in Supreme Court case isn’t theoreticaL
    https://www.politico.com/news/2022/12/07/arizona-legislator-danger-to-democracy-00072580

    I can't see how the proposed changes solve any of the problems of the US political system - that said, many of the objections do seem hysterical.

    Obviously majority parties shouldn't be drawing electoral maps, but it's a grand old tradition in both red and blue states.
    It's about rather more fundamental stuff than the drawing of election maps.
    Yes, it would effectively allow the yahoo Republicans in a couple of swing states to overthrow the election. Gerrymandering exists in both blue and red states but is far more prevalent in red ones.
  • DJ41DJ41 Posts: 792
    edited December 2022
    The SNP have chips on their nasty xenophobic shoulders and snouts in the trough of corruption. Scotland has always voted Unionist in every single Scotland-wide vote there has ever been, whether for Westminster or for Holyrood. If the SNP really thought the mood of the country had changed, they would trigger a Scottish general election in the expectation that a majority of voteshare would be won by pro-independence candidates. Then there would have to be a referendum. (Not legally, but it would obviously be right for there to be one.) They're too scared because they might lose all the money they make out of being in government at Holyrood. They don't want their fingers prised off of THAT. So rather than actually putting their money where their mouths are, they prefer to whip up xenophobia in the population, saying "Scotland" is being denied what it wants by "Westminster". What a disgusting bunch of wretches. This is not at all funny and there is a non-negligible possibility that it will lead to violence.

  • Leon said:

    Big lead for YES as well


    BREAKING: New poll shows support for Scottish independence rising to 56%.

    https://twitter.com/stvnews/status/1600460244680904709?s=46&t=zQTOzJLnfDApvmBvXDgjIA

    Goodness me, whoever could have foreseen that telling Scots to STFU, that their votes don't matter, and that they can't control their own future democratically might have been counterproductive to the Union? 🤔
  • WillGWillG Posts: 2,366
    HYUFD said:

    WillG said:

    Leon said:

    Big lead for YES as well


    BREAKING: New poll shows support for Scottish independence rising to 56%.

    https://twitter.com/stvnews/status/1600460244680904709?s=46&t=zQTOzJLnfDApvmBvXDgjIA

    If we get rid of Scotland and Northern Ireland, would we save more or less than 350m a week?
    We would also lose much North Sea oil and have a hard border from Northumberland to Cumbria hitting both sides exporters as well as the Irish Sea
    The Scotland subsidy is 41bn a year. North Sea oil revenues are 8bn a year and on a downward trend.

    Can we put in some immigration controls as well?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,048

    Leon said:

    Big lead for YES as well


    BREAKING: New poll shows support for Scottish independence rising to 56%.

    https://twitter.com/stvnews/status/1600460244680904709?s=46&t=zQTOzJLnfDApvmBvXDgjIA

    Goodness me, whoever could have foreseen that telling Scots to STFU, that their votes don't matter, and that they can't control their own future democratically might have been counterproductive to the Union? 🤔
    It isn't, as long as the UK government can refuse indyref2 as the Supreme Court confirmed there is a 100% chance it stays in the UK, see Spain and Catalonia.

    As soon as indyref2 is allowed there is a 50% chance Scotland votes for independence even before this poll however.

    So this Tory government should refuse indyref2 indefinitely. If Labour get in and grant one it is their problem to win it
  • BozzaBozza Posts: 37

    HYUFD said:

    Since becoming PM Sunak has increased the Tory average voteshare from 23% to 27% and cut Labour's average lead from 30% to 20%.

    He has also cut Starmer's lead from 29% over Truss as best PM to just 5%

    https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1600428270264033280?s=20&t=ILTzUd1ztqnZV4ktRm8OKA

    You missed out 'but a very long way to go'
    But 2 years to do it.
    Looking like we are moving in the right direction. Labour looking very weak in Scotland with no hope of them Dysoning up those seats they need and we don't. Steady as she goes.
  • TOPPING said:

    I know I'm slightly late with this about Jan 6th but "Four Hours at the Capitol" (Netflix) makes it clear that this was not a coup. It was a bunch of malcontents marching on the seat of power to protest their perceived grievances.

    A bit like the Stop the War or Liberty & Livelihood Marches. But with a bit more violence, as is often the case in the US.

    It wasn't a coup but it might have been part of a coup.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,311
    TOPPING said:

    I know I'm slightly late with this about Jan 6th but "Four Hours at the Capitol" (Netflix) makes it clear that this was not a coup. It was a bunch of malcontents marching on the seat of power to protest their perceived grievances.

    A bit like the Stop the War or Liberty & Livelihood Marches. But with a bit more violence, as is often the case in the US.

    Only as it turned out.

    The alleged intent, as discussed on the last thread, was the creation of sufficient mayhem for a state of emergency to be declared by the President.

    Speculation, of course. But not at all like any of the above mentioned marches.
    Which British cabinet ministers justifiably feared for their lives as a result of those ?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,049

    TOPPING said:

    I know I'm slightly late with this about Jan 6th but "Four Hours at the Capitol" (Netflix) makes it clear that this was not a coup. It was a bunch of malcontents marching on the seat of power to protest their perceived grievances.

    A bit like the Stop the War or Liberty & Livelihood Marches. But with a bit more violence, as is often the case in the US.

    It wasn't a coup but it might have been part of a coup.
    Hmm. Not really.

    If another 100,000 people in each state and the entire police and military had joined in then yes it might have been part of a coup but they didn't' and so it wasn't.

    Otis Ferry breaking into the HoC might have been a plot to overthrow the government by force if another three million people had followed his lead but they didn't and hence it wasn't.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,515
    Zelensky is apparently Time's Person of the Year.

    A good choice IMO. It had t be either him or Putin - and I reckon Zelensky has had more forceful impact, in a way.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,049
    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    I know I'm slightly late with this about Jan 6th but "Four Hours at the Capitol" (Netflix) makes it clear that this was not a coup. It was a bunch of malcontents marching on the seat of power to protest their perceived grievances.

    A bit like the Stop the War or Liberty & Livelihood Marches. But with a bit more violence, as is often the case in the US.

    Only as it turned out.

    The alleged intent, as discussed on the last thread, was the creation of sufficient mayhem for a state of emergency to be declared by the President.

    Speculation, of course. But not at all like any of the above mentioned marches.
    Which British cabinet ministers justifiably feared for their lives as a result of those ?
    Yes they were heated. But many were just pushing from the back, others were stoned, others were just on protest tourism. Some were "serious" but there were cries of no violence [against people] resonating throughout the day.

    I can guarantee that if they had had murderous intent there would have been murders.

    That is of course not to diminish the fear that those locked down inside were feeling at what was happening outside.
  • DJ41DJ41 Posts: 792
    edited December 2022
    Leon said:

    Big lead for YES as well


    BREAKING: New poll shows support for Scottish independence rising to 56%.

    https://twitter.com/stvnews/status/1600460244680904709?s=46&t=zQTOzJLnfDApvmBvXDgjIA

    ...among those who rate themselves as at least 90% likely to vote.

    The poll (the actual results, rather than a comment by a user of Sh*tter, are here) also shows this:

    image

    Sturgeon's satisfaction ratio, i.e. opinions on whether she has been doing well or badly as FM:

    * among those who would vote for independence: +82 -15
    * among those who would vote for the Union: +18 -78
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,109
    🚨 BREAKING: Former health secretary Matt Hancock has said he will not stand for the Conservatives in the next general election https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/12/07/matt-hancock-stand-mp/?utm_content=politics&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1670420017-2
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 28,466
    edited December 2022

    Zelensky is apparently Time's Person of the Year.

    A good choice IMO. It had t be either him or Putin - and I reckon Zelensky has had more forceful impact, in a way.

    There was no betting on it this year, sfaict, presumably because the SMO made it a foregone conclusion.

    ETA Oddschecker is still showing odds from a previous year; whether that's a failure of Oddschecker's coders or the bookies is left as an exercise for the reader. Probably both.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,048
    Scott_xP said:

    🚨 BREAKING: Former health secretary Matt Hancock has said he will not stand for the Conservatives in the next general election https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/12/07/matt-hancock-stand-mp/?utm_content=politics&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1670420017-2

    No surprise, he will use his 3rd place in I'm a Celeb to launch a career as a minor celebrity
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,484
    Scott_xP said:

    🚨 BREAKING: Former health secretary Matt Hancock has said he will not stand for the Conservatives in the next general election https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/12/07/matt-hancock-stand-mp/?utm_content=politics&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1670420017-2

    I wonder which party he will stand for then, if not the Conservatives?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,712
    Nigelb said:

    GOP smells blood with wounded Trump
    https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3764391-gop-smells-blood-with-wounded-trump/

    The window for profitably shorting his 2024 ambitions might be starting to close.
    Lumping on for a bit more today.

    Even a pack of craven curs can take down an old bear if they sense weakness.

    Bit of slow steady market drift coming, I sense. Just checked in on my Big Short - the biggest Betfair politics position I've ever taken - and he's sat there chuckling quietly in the attic. "Said not to worry, didn't I?" he said, when he saw my head pop into view. "Yeah, ok, smugface," I said, but with a wink and a smile. "Wanna hang for a while?" he asked me. Told him I didn't and closed the trapdoor. He'll be fine.
  • Scott_xP said:

    🚨 BREAKING: Former health secretary Matt Hancock has said he will not stand for the Conservatives in the next general election https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/12/07/matt-hancock-stand-mp/?utm_content=politics&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1670420017-2

    Having effectively deselected himself.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,943
    Scott_xP said:

    🚨 BREAKING: Former health secretary Matt Hancock has said he will not stand for the Conservatives in the next general election https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/12/07/matt-hancock-stand-mp/?utm_content=politics&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1670420017-2

    Quick, find him a travelog to front or a presenter role on GMB.
  • Suckers, you Scots had your chance in 2014.

    But who could have foreseen denying the people their repeated wish for Indyref2 would have electoral consequences?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606
    edited December 2022
    Remarkably, ChatGPT has now become one of my default go-to search options, if I need help from the Net. It is already supplanting Google

    And this is seven days after it launched, in Beta Mode, with plenty of bugs and glitches and annoying limitations. It it still better than Google for lots of searches. How good will it be with GPT4 under the hood and a year of polishing and refining?

    Google HQ must be unusually concerned
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,048

    Suckers, you Scots had your chance in 2014.

    But who could have foreseen denying the people their repeated wish for Indyref2 would have electoral consequences?

    What electoral consequences? SNP had a majority of Scottish Westminster seats before and might have a slightly bigger majority of them on this poll.

    Westminster though can still refuse indyref2 indefinitely post SC judgement
  • GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,860
    Scott_xP said:

    🚨 BREAKING: Former health secretary Matt Hancock has said he will not stand for the Conservatives in the next general election https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/12/07/matt-hancock-stand-mp/?utm_content=politics&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1670420017-2

    To quote walking thoughtpod/human router Stuart Pearson "Will we cope? Can we even carry on? Oh, it doesn't seem to have changed anything."
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,988
    edited December 2022
    HYUFD said:

    Suckers, you Scots had your chance in 2014.

    But who could have foreseen denying the people their repeated wish for Indyref2 would have electoral consequences?

    What electoral consequences? SNP had a majority of Scottish Westminster seats before and might have a slightly bigger majority of them on this poll.

    Westminster though can still refuse indyref2 indefinitely post SC judgement
    There’s a morality and democracy angle you miss.

    You are the sort of person who would have dehors the suffragettes the vote.

    You’re approach guarantees Scotland votes to leave eventually.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,950
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Looks like Scots are not impressed with being denied a democratic route to Independence.

    They had one in 2014 and voted to stay in the UK in a once in a generation referendum. This Tory government respects that and the SC has confirmed it can refuse indyref2.

    If Labour wins the next election as is likely but needs SNP support for a majority then it will be their problem whether to grant indyref2 or not and their problem to win it with Brown's devomax etc
    You phrase “whether to grant indyref2 or not” encapsulates the lack of democracy.
    We are a representative not direct democracy, tough
    The 'tough' element of that post is the undemocratic bit regardless of whether we have a representative or direct democracy. In a democracy the majority (regardlessly of how defined) respects and considers the views of the minority. It is what defines a civilised society.
  • DJ41DJ41 Posts: 792
    edited December 2022

    Suckers, you Scots had your chance in 2014.

    But who could have foreseen denying the people their repeated wish for Indyref2 would have electoral consequences?

    The people? You mean the ruling Partei and the minority of the population who vote in support of its main aim.

    Slab, Scon and SLD should all tell the SNP that it's time for an SGE. This makes perfect sense both for voters who want independence and for those who want to keep the Union.

    Perhaps someone will start an online petition for one if the politicians won't step up. (Chortle.)
  • This is quite different from the Redfield Wilton poll.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,048

    HYUFD said:

    Suckers, you Scots had your chance in 2014.

    But who could have foreseen denying the people their repeated wish for Indyref2 would have electoral consequences?

    What electoral consequences? SNP had a majority of Scottish Westminster seats before and might have a slightly bigger majority of them on this poll.

    Westminster though can still refuse indyref2 indefinitely post SC judgement
    There’s a morality and democracy angle you miss.

    You are the sort of person who would have dehors the suffragettes the vote.

    You’re approach guarantees Scotland votes to leave eventually.
    No it doesn't, see Spain and Catalonia.

    Plus in any case Scots are more likely to vote Yes in an indyref2 under a Tory majority government post Brexit than a Labour government and if indyref2 ever happens it will almost certainly be under a Starmer government.

    Indeed even the poll shows the median time Scots want indyref2 is 2024-26 not next year as Sturgeon wanted, by which time Starmer will almost certainly be PM anyway
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,311
    TOPPING said:

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    I know I'm slightly late with this about Jan 6th but "Four Hours at the Capitol" (Netflix) makes it clear that this was not a coup. It was a bunch of malcontents marching on the seat of power to protest their perceived grievances.

    A bit like the Stop the War or Liberty & Livelihood Marches. But with a bit more violence, as is often the case in the US.

    Only as it turned out.

    The alleged intent, as discussed on the last thread, was the creation of sufficient mayhem for a state of emergency to be declared by the President.

    Speculation, of course. But not at all like any of the above mentioned marches.
    Which British cabinet ministers justifiably feared for their lives as a result of those ?
    Yes they were heated. But many were just pushing from the back, others were stoned, others were just on protest tourism. Some were "serious" but there were cries of no violence [against people] resonating throughout the day.

    I can guarantee that if they had had murderous intent there would have been murders.

    That is of course not to diminish the fear that those locked down inside were feeling at what was happening outside.
    There was organisation, thankfully fairly incompetent.
    Had the more energetic leaders of the actual assault encountered either Pelosi or Pence, it's quite conceivable there could have been murder.

    There is at the very least circumstantial evidence that Trump et al colluded to ensure a very slow response to the events in the hope that they escalated further. What's very clear indeed is that Trump did his best to incite disorder of some nature.

    That it was a disorganised mess doesn't demonstrate that it wasn't a coup attempt.

    As I said, speculative for now. But your comparison with the UK demonstrations is absurd.
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 4,047
    edited December 2022
    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-63891100

    "Matt Hancock to stand down at next election"

    ... surprise.

    [Edit: oh, I see I'm late to the party]
  • HYUFD said:

    Suckers, you Scots had your chance in 2014.

    But who could have foreseen denying the people their repeated wish for Indyref2 would have electoral consequences?

    What electoral consequences? SNP had a majority of Scottish Westminster seats before and might have a slightly bigger majority of them on this poll.

    Westminster though can still refuse indyref2 indefinitely post SC judgement
    There’s a morality and democracy angle you miss.

    You are the sort of person who would have dehors the suffragettes the vote.

    You’re approach guarantees Scotland votes to leave eventually.
    I don't think he cares. The line is always "As long as Boris Johnson is PM there will not be a second referendum". We've had two changes of PM since and even HY recognises the Tories are heading for the political cliff edge. And yet the same anti-democratic guff.

    But - and its a big but - Labour are frit as well. Their Brownian package of reforms fails to address any of the big problems - lack of an English parliament, lack of clarity as to the shape of the UK vs the 3 devolved nations and the 4th non-devolved one, remaining married to FPTP etc etc.
  • M45M45 Posts: 216

    HYUFD said:

    Suckers, you Scots had your chance in 2014.

    But who could have foreseen denying the people their repeated wish for Indyref2 would have electoral consequences?

    What electoral consequences? SNP had a majority of Scottish Westminster seats before and might have a slightly bigger majority of them on this poll.

    Westminster though can still refuse indyref2 indefinitely post SC judgement
    There’s a morality and democracy angle you miss.

    You are the sort of person who would have dehors the suffragettes the vote.

    You’re approach guarantees Scotland votes to leave eventually.
    Autocorrect trolling you in French?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,203

    HYUFD said:

    Suckers, you Scots had your chance in 2014.

    But who could have foreseen denying the people their repeated wish for Indyref2 would have electoral consequences?

    What electoral consequences? SNP had a majority of Scottish Westminster seats before and might have a slightly bigger majority of them on this poll.

    Westminster though can still refuse indyref2 indefinitely post SC judgement
    There’s a morality and democracy angle you miss.

    You are the sort of person who would have dehors the suffragettes the vote.

    You’re approach guarantees Scotland votes to leave eventually.
    I would utilise the methodology of Hermann the Fourteenth of Saxe-Drachsen-Wachtelstein.
  • TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    I know I'm slightly late with this about Jan 6th but "Four Hours at the Capitol" (Netflix) makes it clear that this was not a coup. It was a bunch of malcontents marching on the seat of power to protest their perceived grievances.

    A bit like the Stop the War or Liberty & Livelihood Marches. But with a bit more violence, as is often the case in the US.

    It wasn't a coup but it might have been part of a coup.
    Hmm. Not really.

    If another 100,000 people in each state and the entire police and military had joined in then yes it might have been part of a coup but they didn't' and so it wasn't.

    Otis Ferry breaking into the HoC might have been a plot to overthrow the government by force if another three million people had followed his lead but they didn't and hence it wasn't.
    I meant that Trump was trying to use the threat of violence and unrest to pressure officials to overturn the result. A number of senior politicians' lives were also put in danger. It was definitely more than a regular protest, even a regular violent protest, and could have become part of a much wider assault on the 2020 election result. It didn't succeed in part thanks to Pence and probably wouldn't have ever succeeded because of the armed forces but I wouldn't play it down as an insignificant incident. It was agenuinely dangerous moment for American democracy.
  • DJ41DJ41 Posts: 792
    edited December 2022
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Suckers, you Scots had your chance in 2014.

    But who could have foreseen denying the people their repeated wish for Indyref2 would have electoral consequences?

    What electoral consequences? SNP had a majority of Scottish Westminster seats before and might have a slightly bigger majority of them on this poll.

    Westminster though can still refuse indyref2 indefinitely post SC judgement
    There’s a morality and democracy angle you miss.

    You are the sort of person who would have dehors the suffragettes the vote.

    You’re approach guarantees Scotland votes to leave eventually.
    No it doesn't, see Spain and Catalonia.

    Plus in any case Scots are more likely to vote Yes in an indyref2 under a Tory majority government post Brexit than a Labour government and if indyref2 ever happens it will almost certainly be under a Starmer government.

    Indeed even the poll shows the median time Scots want indyref2 is 2024-26 not next year as Sturgeon wanted, by which time Starmer will almost certainly be PM anyway
    Catalonia shouldn't be your model. I take it you agree that avoidance of violence ought to be a desideratum? Your second and third paras suggest you live in an ivory tower. If a majority really do want an indyref2 there should be one. And soon. But I don't accept that opinion polls are the way to find out. An obvious way exists: a Scottish general election.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,341
    edited December 2022
    The state of the criminal justice system in this country - Part 3,874:

    "The trial of a man accused of threatening to kill a solicitor at one of the biggest immigration legal aid firms in the country will take place nearly three years after the alleged incident, the Gazette has learned.

    Cavan Medlock, of Harrow, north west London, faces trial in relation to an alleged incident at Duncan Lewis in September 2020.

    The trial was due to begin this week at Kingston Crown Court. However, the Crown Prosecution Service told the Gazette that it will now take place on 26 June 2023.

    The CPS confirmed that on 21 December last year, Medlock pleaded not guilty to preparation of terrorist acts and making a threat to kill. The trial next June will deal with these two counts.

    The CPS said Medlock entered guilty pleas to threatening with a bladed article in a public place, battery, and racially aggravated alarm and harassment or distress in relation to other individuals."

    It was this incident amongst others that led the Law Society to write to the Home Secretary (Priti Patel) warning of the consequences of inflammatory language.

    And now we have ..... Suella Braverman.

    Dominic Grieve's words (here - https://rozenberg.substack.com/p/grieve-for-the-rule-of-law) should - but won't be - heeded. And so the degradation of an essential part of any civilised state, our governance and the forum for public discourse continues.

  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,203

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    I know I'm slightly late with this about Jan 6th but "Four Hours at the Capitol" (Netflix) makes it clear that this was not a coup. It was a bunch of malcontents marching on the seat of power to protest their perceived grievances.

    A bit like the Stop the War or Liberty & Livelihood Marches. But with a bit more violence, as is often the case in the US.

    It wasn't a coup but it might have been part of a coup.
    Hmm. Not really.

    If another 100,000 people in each state and the entire police and military had joined in then yes it might have been part of a coup but they didn't' and so it wasn't.

    Otis Ferry breaking into the HoC might have been a plot to overthrow the government by force if another three million people had followed his lead but they didn't and hence it wasn't.
    I meant that Trump was trying to use the threat of violence and unrest to pressure officials to overturn the result. A number of senior politicians' lives were also put in danger. It was definitely more than a regular protest, even a regular violent protest, and could have become part of a much wider assault on the 2020 election result. It didn't succeed in part thanks to Pence and probably wouldn't have ever succeeded because of the armed forces but I wouldn't play it down as an insignificant incident. It was agenuinely dangerous moment for American democracy.
    If Trump had got some group of officials to declare an emergency after the murder of Pence/the result being chucked out, then there was a real prospect of a chunk of the American state following him. He has a large following.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,311
    M45 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Suckers, you Scots had your chance in 2014.

    But who could have foreseen denying the people their repeated wish for Indyref2 would have electoral consequences?

    What electoral consequences? SNP had a majority of Scottish Westminster seats before and might have a slightly bigger majority of them on this poll.

    Westminster though can still refuse indyref2 indefinitely post SC judgement
    There’s a morality and democracy angle you miss.

    You are the sort of person who would have dehors the suffragettes the vote.

    You’re approach guarantees Scotland votes to leave eventually.
    Autocorrect trolling you in French?
    Up yours, dehors ?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,048
    edited December 2022

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    I know I'm slightly late with this about Jan 6th but "Four Hours at the Capitol" (Netflix) makes it clear that this was not a coup. It was a bunch of malcontents marching on the seat of power to protest their perceived grievances.

    A bit like the Stop the War or Liberty & Livelihood Marches. But with a bit more violence, as is often the case in the US.

    It wasn't a coup but it might have been part of a coup.
    Hmm. Not really.

    If another 100,000 people in each state and the entire police and military had joined in then yes it might have been part of a coup but they didn't' and so it wasn't.

    Otis Ferry breaking into the HoC might have been a plot to overthrow the government by force if another three million people had followed his lead but they didn't and hence it wasn't.
    I meant that Trump was trying to use the threat of violence and unrest to pressure officials to overturn the result. A number of senior politicians' lives were also put in danger. It was definitely more than a regular protest, even a regular violent protest, and could have become part of a much wider assault on the 2020 election result. It didn't succeed in part thanks to Pence and probably wouldn't have ever succeeded because of the armed forces but I wouldn't play it down as an insignificant incident. It was agenuinely dangerous moment for American democracy.
    If Trump had got some group of officials to declare an emergency after the murder of Pence/the result being chucked out, then there was a real prospect of a chunk of the American state following him. He has a large following.
    More likely the US would have split, Biden would still have ended up President eventually given both Chambers of Congress did not object to the EC results but Trump would have created a breakaway new Confederacy under his leadership focused on the South and border states
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,929
    edited December 2022
    Cyclefree said:

    The state of the criminal justice system in this country - Part 3,874:

    "The trial of a man accused of threatening to kill a solicitor at one of the biggest immigration legal aid firms in the country will take place nearly three years after the alleged incident, the Gazette has learned.

    Cavan Medlock, of Harrow, north west London, faces trial in relation to an alleged incident at Duncan Lewis in September 2020.

    The trial was due to begin this week at Kingston Crown Court. However, the Crown Prosecution Service told the Gazette that it will now take place on 26 June 2023.

    The CPS confirmed that on 21 December last year, Medlock pleaded not guilty to preparation of terrorist acts and making a threat to kill. The trial next June will deal with these two counts.

    The CPS said Medlock entered guilty pleas to threatening with a bladed article in a public place, battery, and racially aggravated alarm and harassment or distress in relation to other individuals."

    It was this incident amongst others that led the Law Society to write to the Home Secretary (Priti Patel) warning of the consequences of inflammatory language.

    And now we have ..... Suella Braverman.

    Dominic Grieve's words (here - https://rozenberg.substack.com/p/grieve-for-the-rule-of-law) should - but won't be heeded. And so the degradation of an essential part of any civilised state, our governance and the forum for public discourse continues.

    The trouble is concerns about not using inflammatory language are often abused and used as an excuse for silencing people e.g grooming gangs.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,048

    HYUFD said:

    Suckers, you Scots had your chance in 2014.

    But who could have foreseen denying the people their repeated wish for Indyref2 would have electoral consequences?

    What electoral consequences? SNP had a majority of Scottish Westminster seats before and might have a slightly bigger majority of them on this poll.

    Westminster though can still refuse indyref2 indefinitely post SC judgement
    There’s a morality and democracy angle you miss.

    You are the sort of person who would have dehors the suffragettes the vote.

    You’re approach guarantees Scotland votes to leave eventually.
    I don't think he cares. The line is always "As long as Boris Johnson is PM there will not be a second referendum". We've had two changes of PM since and even HY recognises the Tories are heading for the political cliff edge. And yet the same anti-democratic guff.

    But - and its a big but - Labour are frit as well. Their Brownian package of reforms fails to address any of the big problems - lack of an English parliament, lack of clarity as to the shape of the UK vs the 3 devolved nations and the 4th non-devolved one, remaining married to FPTP etc etc.
    An English parliament would certainly solve the problem of the SNP portraying Westminster as the English rather than UK Parliament
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,311
    Cyclefree said:

    The state of the criminal justice system in this country - Part 3,874:

    "The trial of a man accused of threatening to kill a solicitor at one of the biggest immigration legal aid firms in the country will take place nearly three years after the alleged incident, the Gazette has learned.

    Cavan Medlock, of Harrow, north west London, faces trial in relation to an alleged incident at Duncan Lewis in September 2020.

    The trial was due to begin this week at Kingston Crown Court. However, the Crown Prosecution Service told the Gazette that it will now take place on 26 June 2023.

    The CPS confirmed that on 21 December last year, Medlock pleaded not guilty to preparation of terrorist acts and making a threat to kill. The trial next June will deal with these two counts.

    The CPS said Medlock entered guilty pleas to threatening with a bladed article in a public place, battery, and racially aggravated alarm and harassment or distress in relation to other individuals."

    It was this incident amongst others that led the Law Society to write to the Home Secretary (Priti Patel) warning of the consequences of inflammatory language.

    And now we have ..... Suella Braverman.

    Dominic Grieve's words (here - https://rozenberg.substack.com/p/grieve-for-the-rule-of-law) should - but won't be - heeded. And so the degradation of an essential part of any civilised state, our governance and the forum for public discourse continues.

    And three years almost counts as speedy justice these days.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,048
    DJ41 said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Suckers, you Scots had your chance in 2014.

    But who could have foreseen denying the people their repeated wish for Indyref2 would have electoral consequences?

    What electoral consequences? SNP had a majority of Scottish Westminster seats before and might have a slightly bigger majority of them on this poll.

    Westminster though can still refuse indyref2 indefinitely post SC judgement
    There’s a morality and democracy angle you miss.

    You are the sort of person who would have dehors the suffragettes the vote.

    You’re approach guarantees Scotland votes to leave eventually.
    No it doesn't, see Spain and Catalonia.

    Plus in any case Scots are more likely to vote Yes in an indyref2 under a Tory majority government post Brexit than a Labour government and if indyref2 ever happens it will almost certainly be under a Starmer government.

    Indeed even the poll shows the median time Scots want indyref2 is 2024-26 not next year as Sturgeon wanted, by which time Starmer will almost certainly be PM anyway
    Catalonia shouldn't be your model. I take it you agree that avoidance of violence ought to be a desideratum? Your second and third paras suggest you live in an ivory tower. If a majority really do want an indyref2 there should be one. And soon. But I don't accept that opinion polls are the way to find out. An obvious way exists: a Scottish general election.
    Apart from a few riots at the time Catalonia has largely settled down.

    It is up to the UK government to decide when and if an indyref2 should ever take place and on what terms as the Supreme Court confirmed, not the Scottish government
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,320
    Apparently Matt Hancock’s decision to step down is not entirely voluntary.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,311
    edited December 2022
    "For whatever reason"...

    Fox News' Sean Hannity: "I think Republicans have been unwilling, for whatever reason ... to voting early and voting by mail."
    https://twitter.com/therecount/status/1600316231285755904

    Republicans ought to ostracise whoever is responsible.
  • DJ41DJ41 Posts: 792
    edited December 2022
    The reporting in the British media on today's armed coup prevention operation in Germany involving 3000 police and raids on 130 properties has been somewhat unimpressive. One of the searches seems to have been at the barracks of the KSK, Germany's special forces command. (Prosecutors wouldn't confirm or deny this.)

    I love the way the BBC say "The Reichsbürger movement is estimated to have as many as 21,000 followers, of whom around 5% are considered to belong to the extreme right." Presumably the other 95% are fairly liberal when it comes down to it, believing in live and let live, feeling that everyone should have their say, and being neutral or even positive about immigration.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,929
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Suckers, you Scots had your chance in 2014.

    But who could have foreseen denying the people their repeated wish for Indyref2 would have electoral consequences?

    What electoral consequences? SNP had a majority of Scottish Westminster seats before and might have a slightly bigger majority of them on this poll.

    Westminster though can still refuse indyref2 indefinitely post SC judgement
    There’s a morality and democracy angle you miss.

    You are the sort of person who would have dehors the suffragettes the vote.

    You’re approach guarantees Scotland votes to leave eventually.
    I don't think he cares. The line is always "As long as Boris Johnson is PM there will not be a second referendum". We've had two changes of PM since and even HY recognises the Tories are heading for the political cliff edge. And yet the same anti-democratic guff.

    But - and its a big but - Labour are frit as well. Their Brownian package of reforms fails to address any of the big problems - lack of an English parliament, lack of clarity as to the shape of the UK vs the 3 devolved nations and the 4th non-devolved one, remaining married to FPTP etc etc.
    An English parliament would certainly solve the problem of the SNP portraying Westminster as the English rather than UK Parliament
    I don't know how many times I have to point this out but the UK is unlikely to survive an English parliament. So if your concern is preserving the Union, which it doesn't have to be, it's the worst idea imaginable.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,441
    edited December 2022
    HYUFD said:

    DJ41 said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Suckers, you Scots had your chance in 2014.

    But who could have foreseen denying the people their repeated wish for Indyref2 would have electoral consequences?

    What electoral consequences? SNP had a majority of Scottish Westminster seats before and might have a slightly bigger majority of them on this poll.

    Westminster though can still refuse indyref2 indefinitely post SC judgement
    There’s a morality and democracy angle you miss.

    You are the sort of person who would have dehors the suffragettes the vote.

    You’re approach guarantees Scotland votes to leave eventually.
    No it doesn't, see Spain and Catalonia.

    Plus in any case Scots are more likely to vote Yes in an indyref2 under a Tory majority government post Brexit than a Labour government and if indyref2 ever happens it will almost certainly be under a Starmer government.

    Indeed even the poll shows the median time Scots want indyref2 is 2024-26 not next year as Sturgeon wanted, by which time Starmer will almost certainly be PM anyway
    Catalonia shouldn't be your model. I take it you agree that avoidance of violence ought to be a desideratum? Your second and third paras suggest you live in an ivory tower. If a majority really do want an indyref2 there should be one. And soon. But I don't accept that opinion polls are the way to find out. An obvious way exists: a Scottish general election.
    Apart from a few riots at the time Catalonia has largely settled down.

    It is up to the UK government to decide when and if an indyref2 should ever take place and on what terms as the Supreme Court confirmed, not the Scottish government
    But you are wrong even under your own terms. UKG is empowered only under an Act of Parliament, and quite a recent one too, so it's really up to Parliament.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,320

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Suckers, you Scots had your chance in 2014.

    But who could have foreseen denying the people their repeated wish for Indyref2 would have electoral consequences?

    What electoral consequences? SNP had a majority of Scottish Westminster seats before and might have a slightly bigger majority of them on this poll.

    Westminster though can still refuse indyref2 indefinitely post SC judgement
    There’s a morality and democracy angle you miss.

    You are the sort of person who would have dehors the suffragettes the vote.

    You’re approach guarantees Scotland votes to leave eventually.
    I don't think he cares. The line is always "As long as Boris Johnson is PM there will not be a second referendum". We've had two changes of PM since and even HY recognises the Tories are heading for the political cliff edge. And yet the same anti-democratic guff.

    But - and its a big but - Labour are frit as well. Their Brownian package of reforms fails to address any of the big problems - lack of an English parliament, lack of clarity as to the shape of the UK vs the 3 devolved nations and the 4th non-devolved one, remaining married to FPTP etc etc.
    An English parliament would certainly solve the problem of the SNP portraying Westminster as the English rather than UK Parliament
    I don't know how many times I have to point this out but the UK is unlikely to survive an English parliament. So if your concern is preserving the Union, which it doesn't have to be, it's the worst idea imaginable.
    There is never any point arguing with HYUFD.
    He hasn’t changed his mind about anything since 1986, when he moved from Weetabix to Special K.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,320
    Hancock implies in his resignation letter that the Tories will be out of power for two terms.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,441

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Suckers, you Scots had your chance in 2014.

    But who could have foreseen denying the people their repeated wish for Indyref2 would have electoral consequences?

    What electoral consequences? SNP had a majority of Scottish Westminster seats before and might have a slightly bigger majority of them on this poll.

    Westminster though can still refuse indyref2 indefinitely post SC judgement
    There’s a morality and democracy angle you miss.

    You are the sort of person who would have dehors the suffragettes the vote.

    You’re approach guarantees Scotland votes to leave eventually.
    I don't think he cares. The line is always "As long as Boris Johnson is PM there will not be a second referendum". We've had two changes of PM since and even HY recognises the Tories are heading for the political cliff edge. And yet the same anti-democratic guff.

    But - and its a big but - Labour are frit as well. Their Brownian package of reforms fails to address any of the big problems - lack of an English parliament, lack of clarity as to the shape of the UK vs the 3 devolved nations and the 4th non-devolved one, remaining married to FPTP etc etc.
    An English parliament would certainly solve the problem of the SNP portraying Westminster as the English rather than UK Parliament
    I don't know how many times I have to point this out but the UK is unlikely to survive an English parliament. So if your concern is preserving the Union, which it doesn't have to be, it's the worst idea imaginable.
    There is never any point arguing with HYUFD.
    He hasn’t changed his mind about anything since 1986, when he moved from Weetabix to Special K.
    TBF he has changed from sometimes voting PC to never voting PC. But then he didn't have much choice - he moved from Wales.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,441

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Suckers, you Scots had your chance in 2014.

    But who could have foreseen denying the people their repeated wish for Indyref2 would have electoral consequences?

    What electoral consequences? SNP had a majority of Scottish Westminster seats before and might have a slightly bigger majority of them on this poll.

    Westminster though can still refuse indyref2 indefinitely post SC judgement
    There’s a morality and democracy angle you miss.

    You are the sort of person who would have dehors the suffragettes the vote.

    You’re approach guarantees Scotland votes to leave eventually.
    I don't think he cares. The line is always "As long as Boris Johnson is PM there will not be a second referendum". We've had two changes of PM since and even HY recognises the Tories are heading for the political cliff edge. And yet the same anti-democratic guff.

    But - and its a big but - Labour are frit as well. Their Brownian package of reforms fails to address any of the big problems - lack of an English parliament, lack of clarity as to the shape of the UK vs the 3 devolved nations and the 4th non-devolved one, remaining married to FPTP etc etc.
    An English parliament would certainly solve the problem of the SNP portraying Westminster as the English rather than UK Parliament
    I don't know how many times I have to point this out but the UK is unlikely to survive an English parliament. So if your concern is preserving the Union, which it doesn't have to be, it's the worst idea imaginable.
    Just as a matter of interest, why do you think that? (Briefly, but I must have missed it.)

    I don't think they would accept it anyway - but just wondering.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,712
    edited December 2022
    TOPPING said:

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    I know I'm slightly late with this about Jan 6th but "Four Hours at the Capitol" (Netflix) makes it clear that this was not a coup. It was a bunch of malcontents marching on the seat of power to protest their perceived grievances.

    A bit like the Stop the War or Liberty & Livelihood Marches. But with a bit more violence, as is often the case in the US.

    Only as it turned out.

    The alleged intent, as discussed on the last thread, was the creation of sufficient mayhem for a state of emergency to be declared by the President.

    Speculation, of course. But not at all like any of the above mentioned marches.
    Which British cabinet ministers justifiably feared for their lives as a result of those ?
    Yes they were heated. But many were just pushing from the back, others were stoned, others were just on protest tourism. Some were "serious" but there were cries of no violence [against people] resonating throughout the day.

    I can guarantee that if they had had murderous intent there would have been murders.

    That is of course not to diminish the fear that those locked down inside were feeling at what was happening outside.
    It was insurrection but attempted 'coup' isn't quite right imo. There was no controlling intelligence - such being by definition impossible with anything pertaining to Donald Trump. Whilst the mayhem was raging he was clueless and still obsessing about Pence blocking the results certification - something only he and Rudi Guiliani truly believed had a chance of happening. The guy has constructed a fantasy world. He lives exclusively in that and his power comes from the 30m Americans who buy into it. His personal base. He's fully capable of trashing American democracy but not in a way that involves joined up thinking. He'll do it - given the chance - by the capricious sublimation of everything and everybody to his 'impulses', ie just by being himself.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,048
    Taliban conduct their first public execution since return to power

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-63884696
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,441
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Suckers, you Scots had your chance in 2014.

    But who could have foreseen denying the people their repeated wish for Indyref2 would have electoral consequences?

    What electoral consequences? SNP had a majority of Scottish Westminster seats before and might have a slightly bigger majority of them on this poll.

    Westminster though can still refuse indyref2 indefinitely post SC judgement
    There’s a morality and democracy angle you miss.

    You are the sort of person who would have dehors the suffragettes the vote.

    You’re approach guarantees Scotland votes to leave eventually.
    I don't think he cares. The line is always "As long as Boris Johnson is PM there will not be a second referendum". We've had two changes of PM since and even HY recognises the Tories are heading for the political cliff edge. And yet the same anti-democratic guff.

    But - and its a big but - Labour are frit as well. Their Brownian package of reforms fails to address any of the big problems - lack of an English parliament, lack of clarity as to the shape of the UK vs the 3 devolved nations and the 4th non-devolved one, remaining married to FPTP etc etc.
    An English parliament would certainly solve the problem of the SNP portraying Westminster as the English rather than UK Parliament
    But it *is* the English parliament de facto for a number of functions, such as planning, and so on. You can't have a dual function parliament and complain when it is described as the English one for certain of its functions.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,048
    UK house prices fell 2.3% in November

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-63886983
  • DJ41DJ41 Posts: 792
    edited December 2022
    kinabalu said:

    TOPPING said:

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    I know I'm slightly late with this about Jan 6th but "Four Hours at the Capitol" (Netflix) makes it clear that this was not a coup. It was a bunch of malcontents marching on the seat of power to protest their perceived grievances.

    A bit like the Stop the War or Liberty & Livelihood Marches. But with a bit more violence, as is often the case in the US.

    Only as it turned out.

    The alleged intent, as discussed on the last thread, was the creation of sufficient mayhem for a state of emergency to be declared by the President.

    Speculation, of course. But not at all like any of the above mentioned marches.
    Which British cabinet ministers justifiably feared for their lives as a result of those ?
    Yes they were heated. But many were just pushing from the back, others were stoned, others were just on protest tourism. Some were "serious" but there were cries of no violence [against people] resonating throughout the day.

    I can guarantee that if they had had murderous intent there would have been murders.

    That is of course not to diminish the fear that those locked down inside were feeling at what was happening outside.
    It was insurrection but attempted 'coup' isn't quite right imo. There was no controlling intelligence - such being by definition impossible with anything pertaining to Donald Trump. Whilst the mayhem was raging he was still obsessing about Pence blocking the results certification - something only he and Rudi Guiliani truly believed had a chance of happening. The guy has constructed a fantasy world. He lives exclusively in that and his power comes from the 30m Americans who buy into it. His personal base. He's fully capable of trashing American democracy but not in a way that involves joined up thinking. He'll do it - given the chance - by the capricious sublimation of everything and everybody to his 'impulses', ie just by being himself.
    It would be a mistake to consider him as governed solely by impulse. See how he rates C G Jung's "Memories, Dreams, Reflections" for starters.

    Agreed he is insane and dangerous. It's worrying how slow the progress is in the various legal cases against him. Best for those who don't want an explosion of violence would be if he could be removed ASAP. If he isn't, he will soon find some kind of focus I think for the next stage.
  • Hancock implies in his resignation letter that the Tories will be out of power for two terms.

    He should know, he was part of the problem.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,048

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Suckers, you Scots had your chance in 2014.

    But who could have foreseen denying the people their repeated wish for Indyref2 would have electoral consequences?

    What electoral consequences? SNP had a majority of Scottish Westminster seats before and might have a slightly bigger majority of them on this poll.

    Westminster though can still refuse indyref2 indefinitely post SC judgement
    There’s a morality and democracy angle you miss.

    You are the sort of person who would have dehors the suffragettes the vote.

    You’re approach guarantees Scotland votes to leave eventually.
    I don't think he cares. The line is always "As long as Boris Johnson is PM there will not be a second referendum". We've had two changes of PM since and even HY recognises the Tories are heading for the political cliff edge. And yet the same anti-democratic guff.

    But - and its a big but - Labour are frit as well. Their Brownian package of reforms fails to address any of the big problems - lack of an English parliament, lack of clarity as to the shape of the UK vs the 3 devolved nations and the 4th non-devolved one, remaining married to FPTP etc etc.
    An English parliament would certainly solve the problem of the SNP portraying Westminster as the English rather than UK Parliament
    I don't know how many times I have to point this out but the UK is unlikely to survive an English parliament. So if your concern is preserving the Union, which it doesn't have to be, it's the worst idea imaginable.
    Why? Every other Federal nation gives every state or province or region within it its own Parliament too with all electing representatives to the main Federal Parliament.

    Given it would probably take devomax for Scotland to vote No in any indyref2 and then only narrowly, the UK government's power outside England would already be significantly reduced anyway outside of foreign and defence policy and some taxes like income tax, so why not give England the same power over its domestic policies as the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish Parliaments have?

    At the moment the SNP conflating the UK Parliament with an English Parliament is a big boost for them, however misleading
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,929
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Suckers, you Scots had your chance in 2014.

    But who could have foreseen denying the people their repeated wish for Indyref2 would have electoral consequences?

    What electoral consequences? SNP had a majority of Scottish Westminster seats before and might have a slightly bigger majority of them on this poll.

    Westminster though can still refuse indyref2 indefinitely post SC judgement
    There’s a morality and democracy angle you miss.

    You are the sort of person who would have dehors the suffragettes the vote.

    You’re approach guarantees Scotland votes to leave eventually.
    I don't think he cares. The line is always "As long as Boris Johnson is PM there will not be a second referendum". We've had two changes of PM since and even HY recognises the Tories are heading for the political cliff edge. And yet the same anti-democratic guff.

    But - and its a big but - Labour are frit as well. Their Brownian package of reforms fails to address any of the big problems - lack of an English parliament, lack of clarity as to the shape of the UK vs the 3 devolved nations and the 4th non-devolved one, remaining married to FPTP etc etc.
    An English parliament would certainly solve the problem of the SNP portraying Westminster as the English rather than UK Parliament
    I don't know how many times I have to point this out but the UK is unlikely to survive an English parliament. So if your concern is preserving the Union, which it doesn't have to be, it's the worst idea imaginable.
    Just as a matter of interest, why do you think that? (Briefly, but I must have missed it.)

    I don't think they would accept it anyway - but just wondering.
    It would be far too dominant an entity. Where is there a successful example of devolution to such a majority demographic with a state?
This discussion has been closed.