According to post Euro Ref polling the average SNP voter was more likely to be a Brexiter than the average member of the Scottish public.
The SNP lost a big chunk of Brexiter voter between 2015 and 2017. I wonder if they got them back in 2019?
So why, with a few exceptions, does the party hierarchy not reflect this?
Also, that suggests one reason why the Tories struggled in Scotland - Brexiteers who want independence were hardly likely to vote for them!
Because the party hierarchy likes to set themselves against the English. If the Tories were saying lets join the EU and the Euro the SNP would be saying the Euro is a terrible idea and they need independence to save the pound.
For those interested in the Scottish question there is a devastating analysis of the economics of independence by the BBC's economics editor Douglas Fraser on the Beeb website. There is no way Scots will vote Indy if it hurts their pensions and savings.
Five years ago, Alex Salmond and the 'yes' campaign could portray independence as requiring very little change, at least of the type that would be disruptive or threatening to people's finances. We were reassured that the currency would remain the same, the border would be open, and Scotland and England would share regulation of finance and much else besides. That's not so easy to argue after Brexit. The SNP's new currency is already a more complex offer: use sterling, but without any joint controls, get ready for Holyrood to create a Scottish currency, and from there, decide if it's in the country's interests to join the euro. That's harder to sell on the doorstep, particularly one owned by a resident with a mortgage, pension and savings all in sterling.
Let me guess your conclusion: the analysis is so devastating it's not worth even considering another indy ref.
Not sure about that. In my view Brexit and a real border between England and Scotland in the event of IndyRef would be a good platform for a unionist defence during a referendum. But the arguments about the currency and the deficit would be clinchers because of the real implications for savings and pensions. Don't really see how the Nats could win in those circumstances TBH.
Agree. The whole island must be either in or out of the EU, or it will be chaotic, and Britain only makes sense in a post tribal world as a single state. SNP is a reactionary dream from the past.
Far better just to deal with present and future reactionary dream.
Unlike past bad royal adivisors, Milne and Murphy haven't yet had their heads mounted on pikes.
If you suggest a law that'd stick Corbyn and McDonnell's heads on pikes then I'm all for it. I'd go for the "heads lost in ditches" vote mainly though.
For those interested in the Scottish question there is a devastating analysis of the economics of independence by the BBC's economics editor Douglas Fraser on the Beeb website. There is no way Scots will vote Indy if it hurts their pensions and savings.
Five years ago, Alex Salmond and the 'yes' campaign could portray independence as requiring very little change, at least of the type that would be disruptive or threatening to people's finances. We were reassured that the currency would remain the same, the border would be open, and Scotland and England would share regulation of finance and much else besides. That's not so easy to argue after Brexit. The SNP's new currency is already a more complex offer: use sterling, but without any joint controls, get ready for Holyrood to create a Scottish currency, and from there, decide if it's in the country's interests to join the euro. That's harder to sell on the doorstep, particularly one owned by a resident with a mortgage, pension and savings all in sterling.
Let me guess your conclusion: the analysis is so devastating it's not worth even considering another indy ref.
Not sure about that. In my view Brexit and a real border between England and Scotland in the event of IndyRef would be a good platform for a unionist defence during a referendum. But the arguments about the currency and the deficit would be clinchers because of the real implications for savings and pensions. Don't really see how the Nats could win in those circumstances TBH.
Agree. The whole island must be either in or out of the EU, or it will be chaotic, and Britain only makes sense in a post tribal world as a single state. SNP is a reactionary dream from the past.
Brexit is the reactionary dream.
What a shame you voted to stay in the U.K. which voted to leave the EU. Screwed the pooch with that one didn't you? You should have voted to leave when you had the chance.
Uncharacteristically nasty post for you.
I thought that victory might soften the edges, but Brexit really has brought out the very worst in people. The atmosphere is toxic. Reminds me of the 1980s.
You are just pissed off that the "sainted" Nicola didn't get the overwhelming mandate she thought she would get. NO referendum… suck it up.
You were the one hoping that the "sainted" Nicola was going to get a 'kicking' from voters. How pissed off must you be (quite, judging by the tenor of your posts)?
On a serious point, almost every argument for Scottish independence is also an argument for Britain to leave the EU. Let’s take control of our destiny and not have greedy foreigners who don’t get us doing it - check. We can join with other, bigger markets and sell into them - check. We need to sort out our own finances and being wrapped in this comfort blanket masks our problems - check. We’re a proud nation with a long history and should stand on our own feet - check. There might be some economic damage, but it’s not as bad as people say it will be - check.
Similarly, of course, the arguments against can be readily compared. Let’s not cut off our biggest market. The disruption won’t be worth it. The economics doesn’t stack up. Small nations need to be in big trading blocks to make themselves count these days.
About the only really significant difference is over currency. Which is hardly the most vital of questions, to be honest. If Montenegro could get round it, I’m sure Scotland could manage somehow.
It has therefore always baffled me how great a correlation there is between Eurosceptics and Unionists, and between ScotNats and Europhiles (yes, I know there are exceptions including several on this board). The inconsistency of their arguments is beyond daft.
Ultimately I think what both groups in both arguments are trying to hide is that these are marginal decisions. Neither the UK nor Scotland will face Armageddon should they leave the EU or UK, and equally neither will find it’s actually a solution to the problems they face (as Ireland found it was not). So there is an overwhelming tendency to exaggerate, divide, obfuscate and conceal even from themselves the reality of the situation.
That's superficially true, but I think you can make a case for a "European Scottish Independence" or for a "my union is better than your union British independence", even though I wouldn't as I'm currently in favour of all the unions all the time.
The case for a European Scottish Independence is that the quasi-federal/intergovernmental nature of the European Union gives more power to small nations of the EU than small parts of the UK have. The last few years make a convincing case for Ireland having more influence as a smaller part of the EU than Scotland has as a relatively larger part of the UK.
The case for a superior British Union might reference ideas about the Common Law legal system compared to the Napoleonic Code, language, history, population transfers, etc.
According to post Euro Ref polling the average SNP voter was more likely to be a Brexiter than the average member of the Scottish public.
The SNP lost a big chunk of Brexiter voter between 2015 and 2017. I wonder if they got them back in 2019?
Ancient history was never my strong point, but wasn't the 2016 referendum question about whether or not the UK should leave the EU, and not whether Scotland should or should not leave the EU?
You are just pissed off that the "sainted" Nicola didn't get the overwhelming mandate she thought she would get. NO referendum… suck it up.
You were the one hoping that the "sainted" Nicola was going to get a 'kicking' from voters. How pissed off must you be (quite, judging by the tenor of your posts)?
She did. She thought she was going to be kingmaker with enough MPs to extract a referendum from Corbyn. She failed to do so.
That failure mostly rests on Corbyn's shoulders but she chose to tie her cart to his horse so she failed by proxy.
Its funny seeing SNP supporters on here acting as if their side won rather than lost the UK's General Election.
According to post Euro Ref polling the average SNP voter was more likely to be a Brexiter than the average member of the Scottish public.
The SNP lost a big chunk of Brexiter voter between 2015 and 2017. I wonder if they got them back in 2019?
So why, with a few exceptions, does the party hierarchy not reflect this?
Also, that suggests one reason why the Tories struggled in Scotland - Brexiteers who want independence were hardly likely to vote for them!
Because the party hierarchy likes to set themselves against the English. If the Tories were saying lets join the EU and the Euro the SNP would be saying the Euro is a terrible idea and they need independence to save the pound.
You are just pissed off that the "sainted" Nicola didn't get the overwhelming mandate she thought she would get. NO referendum… suck it up.
You were the one hoping that the "sainted" Nicola was going to get a 'kicking' from voters. How pissed off must you be (quite, judging by the tenor of your posts)?
She did. She thought she was going to be kingmaker with enough MPs to extract a referendum from Corbyn. She failed to do so.
That failure mostly rests on Corbyn's shoulders but she chose to tie her cart to his horse so she failed by proxy.
Its funny seeing SNP supporters on here acting as if their side won rather than lost the UK's General Election.
Agreed. She'd hoped to have the leverage to extract another referendum from Labour but failed. The only way that she can get that is for Labour to be in power but in order for that to happen they to start winning significant numbers of seats in Scotland again.
There's nothing that she can do if Boris just keeps saying no to another referendum. Constitutionally it's the power of his government and not her government. Over the course of a few elections (local and SP) the tories may start to suffer in Scotland but they could also unite the unionist vote. (especially as SLab are still a mess).
I have been doing a little research. I could be wrong, but I think this is the first time since 1919 that Labour have not held a seat in Staffordshire and the first time ever that the Tories have held them all.
Considering this is still an industrial and ex-mining County, it does go to show the collapse of traditional Labour support.
You are just pissed off that the "sainted" Nicola didn't get the overwhelming mandate she thought she would get. NO referendum… suck it up.
You were the one hoping that the "sainted" Nicola was going to get a 'kicking' from voters. How pissed off must you be (quite, judging by the tenor of your posts)?
She did. She thought she was going to be kingmaker with enough MPs to extract a referendum from Corbyn. She failed to do so.
That failure mostly rests on Corbyn's shoulders but she chose to tie her cart to his horse so she failed by proxy.
Its funny seeing SNP supporters on here acting as if their side won rather than lost the UK's General Election.
Let's not dress up managing to keep 6 MP's North of the border as some sort of win. It's a crumb of comfort that a total tsunami was avoided. Other than that I'd say game to Sturgeon, Boris to serve.
You are just pissed off that the "sainted" Nicola didn't get the overwhelming mandate she thought she would get. NO referendum… suck it up.
You were the one hoping that the "sainted" Nicola was going to get a 'kicking' from voters. How pissed off must you be (quite, judging by the tenor of your posts)?
She did. She thought she was going to be kingmaker with enough MPs to extract a referendum from Corbyn. She failed to do so.
That failure mostly rests on Corbyn's shoulders but she chose to tie her cart to his horse so she failed by proxy.
Its funny seeing SNP supporters on here acting as if their side won rather than lost the UK's General Election.
Let's not dress up managing to keep 6 MP's North of the border as some sort of win. It's a crumb of comfort that a total tsunami was avoided. Other than that I'd say game to Sturgeon, Boris to serve.
Game, Set and Match Boris. He has the UK majority and Sturgeon needs a UK majority to support what she wants.
The only way Sturgeon gets a second Indyref any time soon is if she convinces Boris its in his interest to let her have it. So how's she going to do that now?
Indeed. The decision whether to hold a vote in the first place belongs to the General Populations UK Parliament which has a Tory majority and voters to that one overwhelmingly think there should not be another vote.
You are just pissed off that the "sainted" Nicola didn't get the overwhelming mandate she thought she would get. NO referendum… suck it up.
You were the one hoping that the "sainted" Nicola was going to get a 'kicking' from voters. How pissed off must you be (quite, judging by the tenor of your posts)?
She did. She thought she was going to be kingmaker with enough MPs to extract a referendum from Corbyn. She failed to do so.
That failure mostly rests on Corbyn's shoulders but she chose to tie her cart to his horse so she failed by proxy.
Its funny seeing SNP supporters on here acting as if their side won rather than lost the UK's General Election.
Let's not dress up managing to keep 6 MP's North of the border as some sort of win. It's a crumb of comfort that a total tsunami was avoided. Other than that I'd say game to Sturgeon, Boris to serve.
Game, Set and Match Boris. He has the UK majority and Sturgeon needs a UK majority to support what she wants.
The only way Sturgeon gets a second Indyref any time soon is if she convinces Boris its in his interest to let her have it. So how's she going to do that now?
Boris, and the UK as a whole, will have won, when the overwhelming majority of Scottish people reject the notion of leaving the UK as not just a bad idea but as a totally redundant one - the answer to a question that only the odd crank would ever ask. Having the legal ability to prevent a second referendum is not the same.
You are just pissed off that the "sainted" Nicola didn't get the overwhelming mandate she thought she would get. NO referendum… suck it up.
You were the one hoping that the "sainted" Nicola was going to get a 'kicking' from voters. How pissed off must you be (quite, judging by the tenor of your posts)?
Hmm. 7 Scottish seats traded for a big chunk of the Labour Red Wall and a majority of 80 you say?
Give us a while and we'll get back to you on that trade.....
You are just pissed off that the "sainted" Nicola didn't get the overwhelming mandate she thought she would get. NO referendum… suck it up.
You were the one hoping that the "sainted" Nicola was going to get a 'kicking' from voters. How pissed off must you be (quite, judging by the tenor of your posts)?
She did. She thought she was going to be kingmaker with enough MPs to extract a referendum from Corbyn. She failed to do so.
That failure mostly rests on Corbyn's shoulders but she chose to tie her cart to his horse so she failed by proxy.
Its funny seeing SNP supporters on here acting as if their side won rather than lost the UK's General Election.
Let's not dress up managing to keep 6 MP's North of the border as some sort of win. It's a crumb of comfort that a total tsunami was avoided. Other than that I'd say game to Sturgeon, Boris to serve.
Game, Set and Match Boris. He has the UK majority and Sturgeon needs a UK majority to support what she wants.
The only way Sturgeon gets a second Indyref any time soon is if she convinces Boris its in his interest to let her have it. So how's she going to do that now?
Boris, and the UK as a whole, will have won, when the overwhelming majority of Scottish people reject the notion of leaving the UK as not just a bad idea but as a totally redundant one - the answer to a question that only the odd crank would ever ask. Having the legal ability to prevent a second referendum is not the same.
That's not going to happen. In the meantime Boris claims the mandate to reject another referendum "for a generation" and has the numbers to do so. Sturgeon's side lost the 2019 elections - better luck next time.
Look on the bright side: Next time it will be closer to a generation.
For those interested in the Scottish question there is a devastating analysis of the economics of independence by the BBC's economics editor Douglas Fraser on the Beeb website. There is no way Scots will vote Indy if it hurts their pensions and savings.
Five years ago, Alex Salmond and the 'yes' campaign could portray independence as requiring very little change, at least of the type that would be disruptive or threatening to people's finances. We were reassured that the currency would remain the same, the border would be open, and Scotland and England would share regulation of finance and much else besides. That's not so easy to argue after Brexit. The SNP's new currency is already a more complex offer: use sterling, but without any joint controls, get ready for Holyrood to create a Scottish currency, and from there, decide if it's in the country's interests to join the euro. That's harder to sell on the doorstep, particularly one owned by a resident with a mortgage, pension and savings all in sterling.
Let me guess your conclusion: the analysis is so devastating it's not worth even considering another indy ref.
Not sure about that. In my view Brexit and a real border between England and Scotland in the event of IndyRef would be a good platform for a unionist defence during a referendum. But the arguments about the currency and the deficit would be clinchers because of the real implications for savings and pensions. Don't really see how the Nats could win in those circumstances TBH.
Agree. The whole island must be either in or out of the EU, or it will be chaotic, and Britain only makes sense in a post tribal world as a single state. SNP is a reactionary dream from the past.
Far better just to deal with present and future reactionary dream.
Indeed. The decision whether to hold a vote in the first place belongs to the General Populations UK Parliament which has a Tory majority and voters to that one overwhelmingly think there should not be another vote.
How are you going to square that circle?
It’s also worth noting Scots themselves are split straight down the middle too.
About Lady Hale's statements, I think a UK written constitution on the lines of the US constitution is a good idea.
A strong separation of powers in a strong federation will kill both the ability of biased judges to make their own laws, and kill the SNP since it would make secession illegal and give regions equal representation in a senate.
According to post Euro Ref polling the average SNP voter was more likely to be a Brexiter than the average member of the Scottish public.
The SNP lost a big chunk of Brexiter voter between 2015 and 2017. I wonder if they got them back in 2019?
So why, with a few exceptions, does the party hierarchy not reflect this?
Also, that suggests one reason why the Tories struggled in Scotland - Brexiteers who want independence were hardly likely to vote for them!
Because the party hierarchy likes to set themselves against the English. If the Tories were saying lets join the EU and the Euro the SNP would be saying the Euro is a terrible idea and they need independence to save the pound.
They’re expert harvesters of grievance.
You only have to look at the sparkling personalities of some of the regulars on here to see how that manifests itself.
You are just pissed off that the "sainted" Nicola didn't get the overwhelming mandate she thought she would get. NO referendum… suck it up.
You were the one hoping that the "sainted" Nicola was going to get a 'kicking' from voters. How pissed off must you be (quite, judging by the tenor of your posts)?
She did. She thought she was going to be kingmaker with enough MPs to extract a referendum from Corbyn. She failed to do so.
That failure mostly rests on Corbyn's shoulders but she chose to tie her cart to his horse so she failed by proxy.
Its funny seeing SNP supporters on here acting as if their side won rather than lost the UK's General Election.
Let's not dress up managing to keep 6 MP's North of the border as some sort of win. It's a crumb of comfort that a total tsunami was avoided. Other than that I'd say game to Sturgeon, Boris to serve.
Game, Set and Match Boris. He has the UK majority and Sturgeon needs a UK majority to support what she wants.
The only way Sturgeon gets a second Indyref any time soon is if she convinces Boris its in his interest to let her have it. So how's she going to do that now?
Boris, and the UK as a whole, will have won, when the overwhelming majority of Scottish people reject the notion of leaving the UK as not just a bad idea but as a totally redundant one - the answer to a question that only the odd crank would ever ask. Having the legal ability to prevent a second referendum is not the same.
That's not going to happen. In the meantime Boris claims the mandate to reject another referendum "for a generation" and has the numbers to do so. Sturgeon's side lost the 2019 elections - better luck next time.
Look on the bright side: Next time it will be closer to a generation.
For those interested in the Scottish question there is a devastating analysis of the economics of independence by the BBC's economics editor Douglas Fraser on the Beeb website. There is no way Scots will vote Indy if it hurts their pensions and savings.
Five years ago, Alex Salmond and the 'yes' campaign could portray independence as requiring very little change, at least of the type that would be disruptive or threatening to people's finances. We were reassured that the currency would remain the same, the border would be open, and Scotland and England would share regulation of finance and much else besides. That's not so easy to argue after Brexit. The SNP's new currency is already a more complex offer: use sterling, but without any joint controls, get ready for Holyrood to create a Scottish currency, and from there, decide if it's in the country's interests to join the euro. That's harder to sell on the doorstep, particularly one owned by a resident with a mortgage, pension and savings all in sterling.
Let me guess your conclusion: the analysis is so devastating it's not worth even considering another indy ref.
Not sure about that. In my view Brexit and a real border between England and Scotland in the event of IndyRef would be a good platform for a unionist defence during a referendum. But the arguments about the currency and the deficit would be clinchers because of the real implications for savings and pensions. Don't really see how the Nats could win in those circumstances TBH.
Agree. The whole island must be either in or out of the EU, or it will be chaotic, and Britain only makes sense in a post tribal world as a single state. SNP is a reactionary dream from the past.
Brexit is the reactionary dream.
Apart from it actually happening.
It hasn't yet. Time for Boris to pivot to the other letter to save the country and his legacy.
According to post Euro Ref polling the average SNP voter was more likely to be a Brexiter than the average member of the Scottish public.
The SNP lost a big chunk of Brexiter voter between 2015 and 2017. I wonder if they got them back in 2019?
So why, with a few exceptions, does the party hierarchy not reflect this?
Also, that suggests one reason why the Tories struggled in Scotland - Brexiteers who want independence were hardly likely to vote for them!
Because the party hierarchy likes to set themselves against the English. If the Tories were saying lets join the EU and the Euro the SNP would be saying the Euro is a terrible idea and they need independence to save the pound.
They’re expert harvesters of grievance.
You only have to look at the sparkling personalities of some of the regulars on here to see how that manifests itself.
Indeed. That's why no Indyref2 seems like an inevitable win/win given the UK election result.
Tories win by not having an Indyref and its aftermath dominate politics in the next few years. SNP win by having something to whine over for years to come.
Indeed. The decision whether to hold a vote in the first place belongs to the General Populations UK Parliament which has a Tory majority and voters to that one overwhelmingly think there should not be another vote.
How are you going to square that circle?
God knows. Given that, unlike in many formal federations, the Union is understood and accepted not to be indissoluble, the politicians then have to balance the right of malcontent states to contemplate secession against the right of the remaining members to fair treatment.
On the one hand, Scotland keeps voting in nationalist Governments that then lobby for independence. On the other hand, it expects equitable treatment from the remainder of the UK in terms of its right to transfer payments and a fair share of central Government largesse in other respects - notably the fact that many UK-wide administrative functions are based in Scotland. In fact, the total number of UK Government civil servants based in Scotland exceeds the complement of the entire devolved administration. This is a risk to the rest of the country in terms of the need to onshore all of these functions in the event of secession.
Now, if the Scottish Government keeps threatening to secede all the time then how best should the rest of the country respond to the instability that this creates? Should the UK let Scotland have as many votes as it wants on independence? Should it declare a moratorium after each unsuccessful vote for, say, 20 or 30 years? Should it adopt the position of a Germany or a Spain and legislate to make the Union indissoluble? Or should it conclude that the ongoing uncertainty can only be resolved through dissolution and invite Scotland to go?
According to post Euro Ref polling the average SNP voter was more likely to be a Brexiter than the average member of the Scottish public.
The SNP lost a big chunk of Brexiter voter between 2015 and 2017. I wonder if they got them back in 2019?
So why, with a few exceptions, does the party hierarchy not reflect this?
Also, that suggests one reason why the Tories struggled in Scotland - Brexiteers who want independence were hardly likely to vote for them!
Because the party hierarchy likes to set themselves against the English. If the Tories were saying lets join the EU and the Euro the SNP would be saying the Euro is a terrible idea and they need independence to save the pound.
They’re expert harvesters of grievance.
You only have to look at the sparkling personalities of some of the regulars on here to see how that manifests itself.
It isn't just that. It's also that the long term 'plan' is to be an EU client state. 'Independence' is somewhat of a misnomer - it's separation from England. Scotland could be as dependent as on pretty much anyone else after that for all anyone in the SNP cares. Jim Sillars represents the wing that was after 'true' independence (as well as wanting to stick it to England - that's a constant ), but his views seem a quaint period piece now.
Slow on here again. Have all the socialists emigrated to Venezuela or are they just dug in for the moment
It's mostly just a bunch of Tories wanking each other off on here these days. If I'd wanted to see that I'd have gone to Oxford.
And to think, how much we watched six weeks of Labour bots fellating Jeremy on here, with such joy in our hearts.....
The ramping got beyond a joke.
Isn't it rather sickening too to see some posters who denied any problems with the Corbyn project now completely changing their minds - apparently they hated him too, they were just prepared to have that vile sickness in power as it wore their team colours
Bloody hell. Has the BBC literally lost its mind? In the very week Johnson announces a review of funding/licence etc etc, the BBC chooses to drop News at 10pm for a half hour of 'You are hired' follow-on fluff from the Apprentice.
Brexiteers have more in common with ScotNats than either would care to admit.
There is a lot in common, absolutely. And there are things that are different. So many Scotnats have related formative experiences of feeling mortified by snobbish or overbearing English people. There is a background of anger and hurt, and real and imagined slights there that doesn't have a parallel in UK/Europe relations.
Bloody hell. Has the BBC literally lost its mind? In the very week Johnson announces a review of funding/licence etc etc, the BBC chooses to drop News at 10pm for a half hour of 'You are hired' follow-on fluff from the Apprentice.
Slow on here again. Have all the socialists emigrated to Venezuela or are they just dug in for the moment
It's mostly just a bunch of Tories wanking each other off on here these days. If I'd wanted to see that I'd have gone to Oxford.
And to think, how much we watched six weeks of Labour bots fellating Jeremy on here, with such joy in our hearts.....
The ramping got beyond a joke.
Isn't it rather sickening too to see some posters who denied any problems with the Corbyn project now completely changing their minds - apparently they hated him too, they were just prepared to have that vile sickness in power as it wore their team colours
Who was it posting queues of students at London polling stations every five minutes accompanied by “I’m not saying it means anything... but if I were a Tory I’d be worried.”
I believe there were allegations about another pc in was it Rotherham?
Stories like this keep popping up but then mostly seem to disappear from the media. It's not just an issue of punishing criminals but prevention. Warboys is a perfect example of a wet judicial system having to be held to account by victims - I daresay Starmer would approve of the process.
Slow on here again. Have all the socialists emigrated to Venezuela or are they just dug in for the moment
It's mostly just a bunch of Tories wanking each other off on here these days. If I'd wanted to see that I'd have gone to Oxford.
And to think, how much we watched six weeks of Labour bots fellating Jeremy on here, with such joy in our hearts.....
The ramping got beyond a joke.
Isn't it rather sickening too to see some posters who denied any problems with the Corbyn project now completely changing their minds - apparently they hated him too, they were just prepared to have that vile sickness in power as it wore their team colours
Who was it posting queues of students at London polling stations every five minutes accompanied by “I’m not saying it means anything... but if I were a Tory I’d be worried.”
Kinabalu? Horse Battery?
Despite the fact it was forecast to rain heavily later in the day. You can include the constant posting of the registration figures too. I doubt we'll be seeing that next time either.
Slow on here again. Have all the socialists emigrated to Venezuela or are they just dug in for the moment
It's mostly just a bunch of Tories wanking each other off on here these days. If I'd wanted to see that I'd have gone to Oxford.
And to think, how much we watched six weeks of Labour bots fellating Jeremy on here, with such joy in our hearts.....
The ramping got beyond a joke.
Isn't it rather sickening too to see some posters who denied any problems with the Corbyn project now completely changing their minds - apparently they hated him too, they were just prepared to have that vile sickness in power as it wore their team colours
Who was it posting queues of students at London polling stations every five minutes accompanied by “I’m not saying it means anything... but if I were a Tory I’d be worried.”
Kinabalu? Horse Battery?
Despite the fact it was forecast to rain heavily later in the day. You can include the constant posting of the registration figures too. I doubt we'll be seeing that next time either.
It were MysticRose! Doubt we’ll hear much more from her. The Apocalypse is back coincidentally
Slow on here again. Have all the socialists emigrated to Venezuela or are they just dug in for the moment
It's mostly just a bunch of Tories wanking each other off on here these days. If I'd wanted to see that I'd have gone to Oxford.
And to think, how much we watched six weeks of Labour bots fellating Jeremy on here, with such joy in our hearts.....
The ramping got beyond a joke.
Isn't it rather sickening too to see some posters who denied any problems with the Corbyn project now completely changing their minds - apparently they hated him too, they were just prepared to have that vile sickness in power as it wore their team colours
Who was it posting queues of students at London polling stations every five minutes accompanied by “I’m not saying it means anything... but if I were a Tory I’d be worried.”
Kinabalu? Horse Battery?
Despite the fact it was forecast to rain heavily later in the day. You can include the constant posting of the registration figures too. I doubt we'll be seeing that next time either.
Registration figures are my penultimate perennial favourite, after the importance of "tactical voting". Every time "this time is different" due to tactical voting, because "don't you realise the Tories are hated" - by people who have hated the Tories every time.
Then you get the models and Tweets saying "if only everyone who isn't a Tory votes tactically we can win this seat". Or due to tactical voting the Tories could be 11% in the lead and we'd be in Hung Parliament territory . . .
Comments
A double coming-out though is quite an event! Is there a party planned?
The case for a European Scottish Independence is that the quasi-federal/intergovernmental nature of the European Union gives more power to small nations of the EU than small parts of the UK have. The last few years make a convincing case for Ireland having more influence as a smaller part of the EU than Scotland has as a relatively larger part of the UK.
The case for a superior British Union might reference ideas about the Common Law legal system compared to the Napoleonic Code, language, history, population transfers, etc.
That failure mostly rests on Corbyn's shoulders but she chose to tie her cart to his horse so she failed by proxy.
Its funny seeing SNP supporters on here acting as if their side won rather than lost the UK's General Election.
There's nothing that she can do if Boris just keeps saying no to another referendum. Constitutionally it's the power of his government and not her government. Over the course of a few elections (local and SP) the tories may start to suffer in Scotland but they could also unite the unionist vote. (especially as SLab are still a mess).
...yup, you're right. Whew...
...thinks...
...wait a minute, let me look at timeline-remainvictory.
OH, GODSDAMMIT!
Mandate.
The only way Sturgeon gets a second Indyref any time soon is if she convinces Boris its in his interest to let her have it. So how's she going to do that now?
Meanwhile, Keir Starmer's tilt at the leadership provides lots of silver fox action for the ladies.
How are you going to square that circle?
Give us a while and we'll get back to you on that trade.....
Yeah OK, we'll take it.
Look on the bright side: Next time it will be closer to a generation.
A strong separation of powers in a strong federation will kill both the ability of biased judges to make their own laws, and kill the SNP since it would make secession illegal and give regions equal representation in a senate.
You only have to look at the sparkling personalities of some of the regulars on here to see how that manifests itself.
He’s gone out to 4.1 and back in to 3.3 in the last 20 minutes, before stabilising at around 3.7.
Edgy market.
Tories win by not having an Indyref and its aftermath dominate politics in the next few years.
SNP win by having something to whine over for years to come.
On the one hand, Scotland keeps voting in nationalist Governments that then lobby for independence. On the other hand, it expects equitable treatment from the remainder of the UK in terms of its right to transfer payments and a fair share of central Government largesse in other respects - notably the fact that many UK-wide administrative functions are based in Scotland. In fact, the total number of UK Government civil servants based in Scotland exceeds the complement of the entire devolved administration. This is a risk to the rest of the country in terms of the need to onshore all of these functions in the event of secession.
Now, if the Scottish Government keeps threatening to secede all the time then how best should the rest of the country respond to the instability that this creates? Should the UK let Scotland have as many votes as it wants on independence? Should it declare a moratorium after each unsuccessful vote for, say, 20 or 30 years? Should it adopt the position of a Germany or a Spain and legislate to make the Union indissoluble? Or should it conclude that the ongoing uncertainty can only be resolved through dissolution and invite Scotland to go?
Must be bittersweet for him, about to win a grand off Bryonic SeanT but has seen his hopes of Remain evaporate.
https://medium.com/@laura.pidcock.mp/letter-to-the-people-i-represented-406aea893243
TL/DR: Definitely not Jezza's fault.
A policeman......
I believe there were allegations about another pc in was it Rotherham?
Isn't it rather sickening too to see some posters who denied any problems with the Corbyn project now completely changing their minds - apparently they hated him too, they were just prepared to have that vile sickness in power as it wore their team colours
I don’t want them to help Trump but I think they will. Just as Grieve, Soubry et al played into Boris’ hand so are the Democrats with Trump.
Insane.
But not Jezza.
Kinabalu? Horse Battery?
Ministry of workers rights o_O
https://twitter.com/BBCNews/status/1207424022629289984
Then you get the models and Tweets saying "if only everyone who isn't a Tory votes tactically we can win this seat". Or due to tactical voting the Tories could be 11% in the lead and we'd be in Hung Parliament territory . . .