Test – politicalbetting.com

StuartDickson said:

Scottish independence vote will happen if public wants it, says Michael Gove

…Westminster has repeatedly rejected requests from the Scottish government for the necessary powers to hold another vote but the Cabinet Office minister said if the public desire a second referendum, “one would occur”.

… Gove told the Sunday Mail: “The principle that the people of Scotland, in the right circumstances, can ask that question again is there. I just don’t think that it is right, and the public don’t think it is right, to ask that question at the moment. If it is the case that there is clearly a settled will in favour of a referendum, then one will occur.”

It is unclear what would convince the UK government that another vote is the “settled will” of Scots but it could mean positive election results for independence parties or continuous polling in favour for a certain period of time.

… Gove also rejected the chance of a third tilt at the leadership of the Conservatives, after failing in 2016 and 2019. “Historically, people who have run to be prime minister in the Tory party and don’t make it don’t subsequently make it,” he said. “I’ve had two goes and got bronze both times. I don’t think I’ll get the gold medal and I have to recognise that. I think Boris will be prime minister for a good while yet and there is a crop of younger people coming up who would be much better equipped than me.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/aug/01/scottish-independence-vote-will-happen-if-public-wants-it-says-michael-gove

Giving no timeframe at all, so nothing to stop an indyref2 not happening for 40 years given Gove has ruled out an indyref2 this parliament or indeed in his political lifetime.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9715025/Michael-Gove-says-IndyRef2-not-happen-general-election.html

Plus in any case Boris is PM not Gove and Boris will decide and Boris has made clear there should be no indyref2 allowed for 40 years

DougSeal said:

Can we just put a note at the top of every thread with HYUFD’s position on a Scottish Independence referendum so save him from having to repeat the same point every single bloody day.

I will keep repeating the point as long as Nats keep pushing for indyref2

malcolmg said:

squareroot2 said:

If there is no further vote on Independence whilst there is Tory Govt and wee Jimmy Krankie throws her toys of of her pram in Holyrood.. who cares? Few I would venture to suggest, bar diehard Nits.
There is still the prospect of the law courts causing problems in Scotland.

Sturgeon does not want a referendum, that is painfully obvious to a blind man.

Indeed MalcG, at least you are realistic on the situation unlike most Nationalists on here and hence your support for Alba, even if I disagree with your views on independence you recognise the reality with Sturgeon as FM

Malmesbury said:

kinabalu said:

Northern_Al said:

contrarian said:

DougSeal said:

contrarian said:

DougSeal said:

contrarian said:

DougSeal said:

contrarian said:

rcs1000 said:

YoungTurk said:

On-topic, because it's about the idea of experimentation, lol:

FPT

CarlottaVance said:

"I'm not taking part in this vaccine experiment"

You are. You're the control group.
Currently around 10% in the UK
....and 80% in ICU

https://twitter.com/Holbornlolz/status/1421527009549856772?s=20

This is getting crazy. Some anti-vaxers say the state wants to get rid of them so that there is no unvaxed control group to compare the vaxed with, and now anti-anti-vaxers are telling anti-vaxers that they've got news for them and in fact they ARE the control group. Few on either side understand where the other side is coming from.

Also, if the state was going to exterminate one group, it wouldn’t be the compliant group who did what they were told.

It makes you wonder why the Democrat administration of America is so anxious to get all those Trump republicans vaxxed.

To stop them getting ill and dying?

LOL

Some people care about their fellow human beings. You’re not one of them.

The notion that Democrats 'care' about the health of Trumpist Republicans is one of the more interesting delusions I have read on here.

Hardly delusional. My wife is a registered Democrat and I confirm she cares more about her fellow human beings, including Republicans many of whom are in her family, than you probably care about any other person.

We need hardly look further than the appalling case of the Lambeth care homes to find out how much the left 'care' about their fellow human beings.

Wow. In the league table of non-sequiturs, that's pretty high up there.

It is. Although yesterday from a different source we saw one setting the bar high - the Aztecs were an absolutely ghastly bunch so why on earth is anybody bothered about gender pronouns.

Though it did remind me of the occasion that that nice Mr Blair praised a nicely decorated bowl as evidence of the high culture and civilisation of the Aztecs. The said bowl being the one used to hold the hearts ripped out of human sacrifices.....

Which puts the whole worship of "other cultures" as wonderful into a certain perspective.

My first date with my wife, in 2003, was an exhibition of Aztec Art at the Royal Academy, a high proportion of which was made out of, or decorated with, human skin.

Malmesbury said:

kinabalu said:

Northern_Al said:

contrarian said:

DougSeal said:

contrarian said:

DougSeal said:

contrarian said:

DougSeal said:

contrarian said:

rcs1000 said:

YoungTurk said:

On-topic, because it's about the idea of experimentation, lol:

FPT

CarlottaVance said:

"I'm not taking part in this vaccine experiment"

You are. You're the control group.
Currently around 10% in the UK
....and 80% in ICU

https://twitter.com/Holbornlolz/status/1421527009549856772?s=20

This is getting crazy. Some anti-vaxers say the state wants to get rid of them so that there is no unvaxed control group to compare the vaxed with, and now anti-anti-vaxers are telling anti-vaxers that they've got news for them and in fact they ARE the control group. Few on either side understand where the other side is coming from.

Also, if the state was going to exterminate one group, it wouldn’t be the compliant group who did what they were told.

It makes you wonder why the Democrat administration of America is so anxious to get all those Trump republicans vaxxed.

To stop them getting ill and dying?

LOL

Some people care about their fellow human beings. You’re not one of them.

The notion that Democrats 'care' about the health of Trumpist Republicans is one of the more interesting delusions I have read on here.

Hardly delusional. My wife is a registered Democrat and I confirm she cares more about her fellow human beings, including Republicans many of whom are in her family, than you probably care about any other person.

We need hardly look further than the appalling case of the Lambeth care homes to find out how much the left 'care' about their fellow human beings.

Wow. In the league table of non-sequiturs, that's pretty high up there.

It is. Although yesterday from a different source we saw one setting the bar high - the Aztecs were an absolutely ghastly bunch so why on earth is anybody bothered about gender pronouns.

Though it did remind me of the occasion that that nice Mr Blair praised a nicely decorated bowl as evidence of the high culture and civilisation of the Aztecs. The said bowl being the one used to hold the hearts ripped out of human sacrifices.....

Which puts the whole worship of "other cultures" as wonderful into a certain perspective.

I've moved on. Aztec is just a chocolate bar to me.

Sebastian Vettel = Legend

FIA = A bunch of tossers.

https://twitter.com/LukeSmithF1/status/1421864196833267716

malcolmg said:

squareroot2 said:

If there is no further vote on Independence whilst there is Tory Govt and wee Jimmy Krankie throws her toys of of her pram in Holyrood.. who cares? Few I would venture to suggest, bar diehard Nits.
There is still the prospect of the law courts causing problems in Scotland.

Sturgeon does not want a referendum, that is painfully obvious to a blind man.

Is it she does not want one, or that she does not care when it happens (since she is riding on top regardless and can afford to wait), or is worried if it is lost?

kle4 said:

malcolmg said:

squareroot2 said:

If there is no further vote on Independence whilst there is Tory Govt and wee Jimmy Krankie throws her toys of of her pram in Holyrood.. who cares? Few I would venture to suggest, bar diehard Nits.
There is still the prospect of the law courts causing problems in Scotland.

Sturgeon does not want a referendum, that is painfully obvious to a blind man.

Is it she does not want one, or that she does not care when it happens (since she is riding on top regardless and can afford to wait), or is worried if it is lost?

Worried if it is lost.

Just imagine the Unionists prevail again and Scotland votes No, that really would settle it for a generation.

"The West isn’t dying – its ideas live on in China

What the Western world confronts is not the threatening advance of alien civilisations, but its own dark shadows moving through China and Russia.

BY JOHN GRAY


The retreat of the West began with the fall of communism in 1989. Our triumphal elites lost their sense of reality, and in a succession of attempts to remake the world in their image went on to vacate some of the planet’s most strategically decisive regions. The end result of their attempt to export their system of government is that Western states are weaker and more endangered than they were at any point in the Cold War."

https://www.newstatesman.com/world/asia/2021/07/west-isn-t-dying-its-ideas-live-china

HYUFD said:

DougSeal said:

Can we just put a note at the top of every thread with HYUFD’s position on a Scottish Independence referendum so save him from having to repeat the same point every single bloody day.

I will keep repeating the point as long as Nats keep pushing for indyref2

Let's try a hypothetical:

Assuming a future minority Labour administration offers a referendum and the outcome is a vote for independence.

The negotiations for the "divorce" might take several months, if not years, as the UK's exit from the European Union demonstrated.

Would you accept that, during the period of the divorce negotiations, Scotland would remain part of the United Kingdom and could elect MPs to Westminster?

kinabalu said:

kle4 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

kle4 said:

I wasn't watching, but the way this is reported makes it sound lovely, but was it out of sportsmanship? I mean, had they gone to a jump-off presumably one of them would have missed out on the gold, so avoiding that took away the risk for either. So even if they were being entirely noble, they happened to benefit.

An incredible Olympic high jump final ended with both Qatar's Mutaz Essa Barshim and Italy's Gianmarco Tamberi taking gold medals...

The athletes were offered an opportunity to take part in a jump-off.

But in a moment of sportsmanship, they agreed to share the title, sparking huge celebrations.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/58048827

They'd been at it for two hours and could not be split. My guess is they were both knackered in the Tokyo heat so any result would not have reflected their merit.

Take an example everyone (of a certain age) remembers, the Dennis Taylor/Steve Davis snooker final. Classic. 18 million viewers staying up past midnight. But when you watch the ending on Youtube, both players are out on their feet, missing gimmes and even having trouble walking.

Split the gold? I'd rather they came back tomorrow but that wasn't an option so why not?

I agree why not - but it still doesn't seem like it was out of sportsmanship when it conveniently means neither risks losing out for being .1% less fit or some such. Same logic would suggest you call a world cup win after 90 minutes since they are tired at the end so it wouldn't reflect true merit.

I don't think that cynical thought will have been in their minds, but the fact is both benefit from the move, so I think it is valid to note that their sportsmanlike conduct is convenient for them, whether they intended it or not.

I was surprised it was offered but not surprised the offer was accepted. They both get gold. It's a total win win. That's rare in life. It's usually just a soundbite not a literal truth.

I wonder if in the morning one will regret it when they look at the Wikipedia entry?

tlg86 said:

kinabalu said:

kle4 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

kle4 said:

I wasn't watching, but the way this is reported makes it sound lovely, but was it out of sportsmanship? I mean, had they gone to a jump-off presumably one of them would have missed out on the gold, so avoiding that took away the risk for either. So even if they were being entirely noble, they happened to benefit.

An incredible Olympic high jump final ended with both Qatar's Mutaz Essa Barshim and Italy's Gianmarco Tamberi taking gold medals...

The athletes were offered an opportunity to take part in a jump-off.

But in a moment of sportsmanship, they agreed to share the title, sparking huge celebrations.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/58048827

They'd been at it for two hours and could not be split. My guess is they were both knackered in the Tokyo heat so any result would not have reflected their merit.

Take an example everyone (of a certain age) remembers, the Dennis Taylor/Steve Davis snooker final. Classic. 18 million viewers staying up past midnight. But when you watch the ending on Youtube, both players are out on their feet, missing gimmes and even having trouble walking.

Split the gold? I'd rather they came back tomorrow but that wasn't an option so why not?

I agree why not - but it still doesn't seem like it was out of sportsmanship when it conveniently means neither risks losing out for being .1% less fit or some such. Same logic would suggest you call a world cup win after 90 minutes since they are tired at the end so it wouldn't reflect true merit.

I don't think that cynical thought will have been in their minds, but the fact is both benefit from the move, so I think it is valid to note that their sportsmanlike conduct is convenient for them, whether they intended it or not.

I was surprised it was offered but not surprised the offer was accepted. They both get gold. It's a total win win. That's rare in life. It's usually just a soundbite not a literal truth.

I wonder if in the morning one will regret it when they look at the Wikipedia entry?

Is the Italian, Tamberi, dating the Portuguese triple jumper who won the silver medal? He is a character and she is very attractive

Carnyx said:

StuartDickson said:

Scottish independence vote will happen if public wants it, says Michael Gove

…Westminster has repeatedly rejected requests from the Scottish government for the necessary powers to hold another vote but the Cabinet Office minister said if the public desire a second referendum, “one would occur”.

… Gove told the Sunday Mail: “The principle that the people of Scotland, in the right circumstances, can ask that question again is there. I just don’t think that it is right, and the public don’t think it is right, to ask that question at the moment. If it is the case that there is clearly a settled will in favour of a referendum, then one will occur.”

It is unclear what would convince the UK government that another vote is the “settled will” of Scots but it could mean positive election results for independence parties or continuous polling in favour for a certain period of time.

… Gove also rejected the chance of a third tilt at the leadership of the Conservatives, after failing in 2016 and 2019. “Historically, people who have run to be prime minister in the Tory party and don’t make it don’t subsequently make it,” he said. “I’ve had two goes and got bronze both times. I don’t think I’ll get the gold medal and I have to recognise that. I think Boris will be prime minister for a good while yet and there is a crop of younger people coming up who would be much better equipped than me.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/aug/01/scottish-independence-vote-will-happen-if-public-wants-it-says-michael-gove

Given the majorities in Westminster and Holyrood, and explicit mandate, one wonders what would convince Mr Gove.

It's a conundrum alright. Pretty sure that when there were 20 polls favouring Yes on the trot BJ was just as much a bottler on the matter as he is now.

TheScreamingEagles said:

ydoethur said:

StuartDickson said:

… Gove also rejected the chance of a third tilt at the leadership of the Conservatives, after failing in 2016 and 2019. “Historically, people who have run to be prime minister in the Tory party and don’t make it don’t subsequently make it,” he said. “I’ve had two goes and got bronze both times. I don’t think I’ll get the gold medal and I have to recognise that. I think Boris will be prime minister for a good while yet and there is a crop of younger people coming up who would be much better equipped than me.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/aug/01/scottish-independence-vote-will-happen-if-public-wants-it-says-michael-gove

I was pondering this. Does anyone have a more recent example of a former also ran who made it to the Tory than Austen Chamberlain (forced to withdraw in 1911, became leader in 1921)?

Because I can’t think of one.

Boris Johnson?

Forced to withdraw in 2016 went on to win it in 2019.

Michael Howard, lost in 1997 and became leader in 2003.

Howard, yes, I had a nagging feeling there was somebody.

Johnson never actually entered the 2016 race, AIR? So not directly comparable.

isam said:

kinabalu said:

kle4 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

kle4 said:

I wasn't watching, but the way this is reported makes it sound lovely, but was it out of sportsmanship? I mean, had they gone to a jump-off presumably one of them would have missed out on the gold, so avoiding that took away the risk for either. So even if they were being entirely noble, they happened to benefit.

An incredible Olympic high jump final ended with both Qatar's Mutaz Essa Barshim and Italy's Gianmarco Tamberi taking gold medals...

The athletes were offered an opportunity to take part in a jump-off.

But in a moment of sportsmanship, they agreed to share the title, sparking huge celebrations.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/58048827

They'd been at it for two hours and could not be split. My guess is they were both knackered in the Tokyo heat so any result would not have reflected their merit.

Take an example everyone (of a certain age) remembers, the Dennis Taylor/Steve Davis snooker final. Classic. 18 million viewers staying up past midnight. But when you watch the ending on Youtube, both players are out on their feet, missing gimmes and even having trouble walking.

Split the gold? I'd rather they came back tomorrow but that wasn't an option so why not?

I agree why not - but it still doesn't seem like it was out of sportsmanship when it conveniently means neither risks losing out for being .1% less fit or some such. Same logic would suggest you call a world cup win after 90 minutes since they are tired at the end so it wouldn't reflect true merit.

I don't think that cynical thought will have been in their minds, but the fact is both benefit from the move, so I think it is valid to note that their sportsmanlike conduct is convenient for them, whether they intended it or not.

I was surprised it was offered but not surprised the offer was accepted. They both get gold. It's a total win win. That's rare in life. It's usually just a soundbite not a literal truth.

The BBC showed the conversation between competitors and officials - the Qatari kind of jokingly said something like "Cant we have two golds", and the official said "its possible", so they both shook hands - reminded me of a London marathon finish in the 80s where the two leaders crossed the line together, unless I am remembering it incorrectly

Or couple of golf ones. The famous Nicklaus concession to Jacklin in the Ryder Cup. And the agreed shared President's Cup when Els and Woods were still locked after 7 holes of sudden death in the last match with the light going.

ydoethur said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

ydoethur said:

StuartDickson said:

… Gove also rejected the chance of a third tilt at the leadership of the Conservatives, after failing in 2016 and 2019. “Historically, people who have run to be prime minister in the Tory party and don’t make it don’t subsequently make it,” he said. “I’ve had two goes and got bronze both times. I don’t think I’ll get the gold medal and I have to recognise that. I think Boris will be prime minister for a good while yet and there is a crop of younger people coming up who would be much better equipped than me.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/aug/01/scottish-independence-vote-will-happen-if-public-wants-it-says-michael-gove

I was pondering this. Does anyone have a more recent example of a former also ran who made it to the Tory than Austen Chamberlain (forced to withdraw in 1911, became leader in 1921)?

Because I can’t think of one.

Boris Johnson?

Forced to withdraw in 2016 went on to win it in 2019.

Michael Howard, lost in 1997 and became leader in 2003.

Howard, yes, I had a nagging feeling there was somebody.

Johnson never actually entered the 2016 race, AIR? So not directly comparable.

Johnson was effectively voted out of the race by Gove before he entered it

spudgfsh said:

ydoethur said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

ydoethur said:

StuartDickson said:

… Gove also rejected the chance of a third tilt at the leadership of the Conservatives, after failing in 2016 and 2019. “Historically, people who have run to be prime minister in the Tory party and don’t make it don’t subsequently make it,” he said. “I’ve had two goes and got bronze both times. I don’t think I’ll get the gold medal and I have to recognise that. I think Boris will be prime minister for a good while yet and there is a crop of younger people coming up who would be much better equipped than me.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/aug/01/scottish-independence-vote-will-happen-if-public-wants-it-says-michael-gove

I was pondering this. Does anyone have a more recent example of a former also ran who made it to the Tory than Austen Chamberlain (forced to withdraw in 1911, became leader in 1921)?

Because I can’t think of one.

Boris Johnson?

Forced to withdraw in 2016 went on to win it in 2019.

Michael Howard, lost in 1997 and became leader in 2003.

Howard, yes, I had a nagging feeling there was somebody.

Johnson never actually entered the 2016 race, AIR? So not directly comparable.

Johnson was effectively voted out of the race by Gove before he entered it

Well, even Gove had to do something useful once in his life.

ydoethur said:

spudgfsh said:

ydoethur said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

ydoethur said:

StuartDickson said:

… Gove also rejected the chance of a third tilt at the leadership of the Conservatives, after failing in 2016 and 2019. “Historically, people who have run to be prime minister in the Tory party and don’t make it don’t subsequently make it,” he said. “I’ve had two goes and got bronze both times. I don’t think I’ll get the gold medal and I have to recognise that. I think Boris will be prime minister for a good while yet and there is a crop of younger people coming up who would be much better equipped than me.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/aug/01/scottish-independence-vote-will-happen-if-public-wants-it-says-michael-gove

I was pondering this. Does anyone have a more recent example of a former also ran who made it to the Tory than Austen Chamberlain (forced to withdraw in 1911, became leader in 1921)?

Because I can’t think of one.

Boris Johnson?

Forced to withdraw in 2016 went on to win it in 2019.

Michael Howard, lost in 1997 and became leader in 2003.

Howard, yes, I had a nagging feeling there was somebody.

Johnson never actually entered the 2016 race, AIR? So not directly comparable.

Johnson was effectively voted out of the race by Gove before he entered it

Well, even Gove had to do something useful once in his life.

Oh, but where would we be had Johnson won in 2016?

tlg86 said:

ydoethur said:

spudgfsh said:

ydoethur said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

ydoethur said:

StuartDickson said:

… Gove also rejected the chance of a third tilt at the leadership of the Conservatives, after failing in 2016 and 2019. “Historically, people who have run to be prime minister in the Tory party and don’t make it don’t subsequently make it,” he said. “I’ve had two goes and got bronze both times. I don’t think I’ll get the gold medal and I have to recognise that. I think Boris will be prime minister for a good while yet and there is a crop of younger people coming up who would be much better equipped than me.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/aug/01/scottish-independence-vote-will-happen-if-public-wants-it-says-michael-gove

I was pondering this. Does anyone have a more recent example of a former also ran who made it to the Tory than Austen Chamberlain (forced to withdraw in 1911, became leader in 1921)?

Because I can’t think of one.

Boris Johnson?

Forced to withdraw in 2016 went on to win it in 2019.

Michael Howard, lost in 1997 and became leader in 2003.

Howard, yes, I had a nagging feeling there was somebody.

Johnson never actually entered the 2016 race, AIR? So not directly comparable.

Johnson was effectively voted out of the race by Gove before he entered it

Well, even Gove had to do something useful once in his life.

Oh, but where would we be had Johnson won in 2016?

Probably still in the EU and endlessly bickering about the Irish border, given how good he is at doing the opposite of what he intended.

solarflare said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

kle4 said:

malcolmg said:

squareroot2 said:

If there is no further vote on Independence whilst there is Tory Govt and wee Jimmy Krankie throws her toys of of her pram in Holyrood.. who cares? Few I would venture to suggest, bar diehard Nits.
There is still the prospect of the law courts causing problems in Scotland.

Sturgeon does not want a referendum, that is painfully obvious to a blind man.

Is it she does not want one, or that she does not care when it happens (since she is riding on top regardless and can afford to wait), or is worried if it is lost?

Worried if it is lost.

Just imagine the Unionists prevail again and Scotland votes No, that really would settle it for a generation.

That might make some sense if the SNP and Scottish Government had made any attempt to move the independence debate on in the last parliament, but they didn't.

And their visceral reaction to Alba (and most of the indy bloggers who decided the SNP were just beginning to take the piss) basically just suggested that they were only really afraid someone else might come along and threaten their very cosy position. OK, one does not expect them to roll out the welcome mat, but they went OTT.

The SNP use independence as a cheap GOTV tactic in an election (and there's always another one of them to come along in a minute...) but there's little evidence to suggest anything other than that at the moment.

Oh, and being skint also seems to be a handy reason for not wanting to do anything to progress independence at any pace other than glacial.

Agreed 100%. I recommend that fellow PBers read Indyref threads and comments with the mindset that Sturgeon’s SNP don’t want independence, but daren’t admit it.

stodge said:

Evening all

A busy autumn of elections across Europe and some interesting latest polls.

Germany votes on 26 September - the latest INSA poll (changes on the last Bundestag election):

Union (CDU/CSU): 27% (-6)
Greens: 18% (+9)
Social Democrats: 17% (-4)
Free Democrats: 13% (+2)
Alternative for Germany: 11% (-2)
Left: 6% (-3)
Others: 8% (+4)

Two continuing trends - the recovery of both the SPD and the FDP - the latter approaching their second best result since 1945. Also worth noting the decline of Linke and the question is whether they will get over the 5% threshold for representation.

Greens+SPD+FDP = 48% Union plus Greens = 45%.

The Czech Republic votes on 8-9 October. The latest CVVM poll (changes from last election):

ANO 2011: 23.5% (-6)
Together: 21.5% (-1)
Pirates & Mayors: 21% (+5)
Freedom & Direct Democracy: 9% (-1.5)
Communists: 8% (nc)
Social Democrats: 7% (-1)
Prisaha (anti-corruption): 3% (+3)

The current Government is a coalition of Babis's ANO 2011 and the Social Democrats.

Don't forget Norway votes on September 13th and Iceland on September 25th.

Doesn't die Linke have a couple of directly elected FPTP seats? If they do and retain them, the 5% threshold doesn't matter.

Fairliered said:

HYUFD said:

There will certainly not be a legal indyref2 sanctioned by the UK government as long as the Tories remain in power, Boris has said another indyref should not be allowed for 40 years.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/wait-40-years-for-another-scottish-independence-vote-says-boris-johnson-kwb7njq99

Sturgeon has also ruled out a wildcat referendum and declaring UDI, hence some hardline Nats have defected from the SNP to Alba.

So unless and until we get a PM Starmer getting confidence and supply from the SNP in a hung parliament after the next general election, indyref2 is off the agenda

If Sturgeon is still SNP leader after the next GE, I would expect her to find an excuse to avoid a coalition or even confidence and supply. As MalcolmG has correctly pointed out, Sturgeon doesn’t want a referendum. She has a cultural revolution to implement first.

The problem for the SNP with independence is that they'll have no-one to blame for their problems (just like the Tories can no longer blame the EU). The UK finances are not impacted as much by Brexit (although they are more than was said during the referendum) as the Scottish finances will be.

Off topic.

First small Blueberry harvest of the year. Interestingly off the Bluecrop not the Earliblue.

A month later than expected, but then April was a frost-out.

Only 50g, but Waitrose say that is worth a whole £1. Enough for tomorrow' porridge.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Fuck you Fernando.

Nonsense.
He possibly took it right to the limit if what’s acceptable, but that was so,e excellent racing between the two of them.
Verstappen might learn something if he watched it.

TheScreamingEagles said:

tlg86 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Fuck you Fernando.

That was moderately entertaining. Funny how a track with a bad reputation actually produces good racing.

Yup.

I reckon but for Alonso then Hamilton would have won this race.

Undoubtedly.
That’s what made it good (much as I would have liked to see Hamilton win).

South Africans: We demand answers on the slow vaccine rollout, widespread violence, corruption and looting.

Cyril Ramaphosa: My fellow South Africans, you can buy alcohol again.

South Africans: Nevermind.

kinabalu said:

solarflare said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

kle4 said:

malcolmg said:

squareroot2 said:

If there is no further vote on Independence whilst there is Tory Govt and wee Jimmy Krankie throws her toys of of her pram in Holyrood.. who cares? Few I would venture to suggest, bar diehard Nits.
There is still the prospect of the law courts causing problems in Scotland.

Sturgeon does not want a referendum, that is painfully obvious to a blind man.

Is it she does not want one, or that she does not care when it happens (since she is riding on top regardless and can afford to wait), or is worried if it is lost?

Worried if it is lost.

Just imagine the Unionists prevail again and Scotland votes No, that really would settle it for a generation.

That might make some sense if the SNP and Scottish Government had made any attempt to move the independence debate on in the last parliament, but they didn't.

And their visceral reaction to Alba (and most of the indy bloggers who decided the SNP were just beginning to take the piss) basically just suggested that they were only really afraid someone else might come along and threaten their very cosy position. OK, one does not expect them to roll out the welcome mat, but they went OTT.

The SNP use independence as a cheap GOTV tactic in an election (and there's always another one of them to come along in a minute...) but there's little evidence to suggest anything other than that at the moment.

Oh, and being skint also seems to be a handy reason for not wanting to do anything to progress independence at any pace other than glacial.

But they lost the vote only in 2014. It's Brexit that put Sindy back on the agenda and as soon as that was settled along comes a black swan public health emergency. Against this backdrop I don't see what more Sturgeon and the SNP could be expected to do to advance things over and above what they've done. They stuck Sindy2 front and centre of their platform for the Holyrood elections, won, and say they will agitate for it once the pandemic is over. What's so wimpy about that? Makes perfect sense to me. It could possibly be they don't really in their heart of hearts want to fight a Sindy Referendum, either because they're scared of losing it (killing the dream), or scared of winning it (oh god now what?), but I don't see the evidence for that.

The SNP have learnt something from Brexit. Most brexit leaning Tory MPs didn't actually want brexit, they wanted a grievance that they could blame for problems of their own making. They also didn't actually have a plan for Brexit and couldn't agree one between themselves. The SNP are in the same situation (as the last ref showed)

ydoethur said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

ydoethur said:

StuartDickson said:

… Gove also rejected the chance of a third tilt at the leadership of the Conservatives, after failing in 2016 and 2019. “Historically, people who have run to be prime minister in the Tory party and don’t make it don’t subsequently make it,” he said. “I’ve had two goes and got bronze both times. I don’t think I’ll get the gold medal and I have to recognise that. I think Boris will be prime minister for a good while yet and there is a crop of younger people coming up who would be much better equipped than me.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/aug/01/scottish-independence-vote-will-happen-if-public-wants-it-says-michael-gove

I was pondering this. Does anyone have a more recent example of a former also ran who made it to the Tory than Austen Chamberlain (forced to withdraw in 1911, became leader in 1921)?

Because I can’t think of one.

Boris Johnson?

Forced to withdraw in 2016 went on to win it in 2019.

Michael Howard, lost in 1997 and became leader in 2003.

Howard, yes, I had a nagging feeling there was somebody.

Johnson never actually entered the 2016 race, AIR? So not directly comparable.

Although he nonetheless did sell the country down the river in anticipation of aiding his (aborted) tilt at the leadership.

Nigelb said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Fuck you Fernando.

Nonsense.
He possibly took it right to the limit if what’s acceptable, but that was so,e excellent racing between the two of them.
Verstappen might learn something if he watched it.

I reckon there were a couple of times where if Hamilton had been aggressive they might have collided and it would probably have been Alonso’s fault. But Lewis is smart and knows when to take risks. No good having the moral high ground if you’re out of the race.

Stocky said:

@MarqueeMark just read your post this morning.

Even I, who doesn't rate Johnson as PM, agree that the anti-Johnson criticism on here is incessant and often pathological - but please don't leave the site.

I find the same on twitter, people that I follow for other reasons (mainly football), constantly attacking Johnson for everything that happens regardless of the merits of their arguments. The worst I've unfollowed, some of them I ignore, the rest I correct. Don't get me wrong I'm not a supporter of Johnson but some of the problems are not of his making.

TheScreamingEagles said:

tlg86 said:

ydoethur said:

spudgfsh said:

ydoethur said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

ydoethur said:

StuartDickson said:

… Gove also rejected the chance of a third tilt at the leadership of the Conservatives, after failing in 2016 and 2019. “Historically, people who have run to be prime minister in the Tory party and don’t make it don’t subsequently make it,” he said. “I’ve had two goes and got bronze both times. I don’t think I’ll get the gold medal and I have to recognise that. I think Boris will be prime minister for a good while yet and there is a crop of younger people coming up who would be much better equipped than me.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/aug/01/scottish-independence-vote-will-happen-if-public-wants-it-says-michael-gove

I was pondering this. Does anyone have a more recent example of a former also ran who made it to the Tory than Austen Chamberlain (forced to withdraw in 1911, became leader in 1921)?

Because I can’t think of one.

Boris Johnson?

Forced to withdraw in 2016 went on to win it in 2019.

Michael Howard, lost in 1997 and became leader in 2003.

Howard, yes, I had a nagging feeling there was somebody.

Johnson never actually entered the 2016 race, AIR? So not directly comparable.

Johnson was effectively voted out of the race by Gove before he entered it

Well, even Gove had to do something useful once in his life.

Oh, but where would we be had Johnson won in 2016?

I have a couple of what if threads lined up for later on this month.

One of them covers what would have happened if Johnson had stood in 2016.

(The other is what would have happened if John Major had resigned after winning the 1995 leadership contest. Portillo as leader at GE 1997 and he loses his seat?)

Would he still have lost his seat had he been leader? It was pretty close as it was.

squareroot2 said:

Stocky said:

@MarqueeMark just read your post this morning.

Even I, who doesn't rate Johnson as PM, agree that the anti-Johnson criticism on here is incessant and often pathological - but please don't leave the site.

Seconded.. Stuart Dixon started off in filthy mode this morning. I pointed out to him that he wouldn't like it if La Sturgeon was so castigated.

Why is Starmer is c*** acceptable yet Johnson is c*** is unacceptable?

What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, surely?

ydoethur said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

tlg86 said:

ydoethur said:

spudgfsh said:

ydoethur said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

ydoethur said:

StuartDickson said:

… Gove also rejected the chance of a third tilt at the leadership of the Conservatives, after failing in 2016 and 2019. “Historically, people who have run to be prime minister in the Tory party and don’t make it don’t subsequently make it,” he said. “I’ve had two goes and got bronze both times. I don’t think I’ll get the gold medal and I have to recognise that. I think Boris will be prime minister for a good while yet and there is a crop of younger people coming up who would be much better equipped than me.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/aug/01/scottish-independence-vote-will-happen-if-public-wants-it-says-michael-gove

I was pondering this. Does anyone have a more recent example of a former also ran who made it to the Tory than Austen Chamberlain (forced to withdraw in 1911, became leader in 1921)?

Because I can’t think of one.

Boris Johnson?

Forced to withdraw in 2016 went on to win it in 2019.

Michael Howard, lost in 1997 and became leader in 2003.

Howard, yes, I had a nagging feeling there was somebody.

Johnson never actually entered the 2016 race, AIR? So not directly comparable.

Johnson was effectively voted out of the race by Gove before he entered it

Well, even Gove had to do something useful once in his life.

Oh, but where would we be had Johnson won in 2016?

I have a couple of what if threads lined up for later on this month.

One of them covers what would have happened if Johnson had stood in 2016.

(The other is what would have happened if John Major had resigned after winning the 1995 leadership contest. Portillo as leader at GE 1997 and he loses his seat?)

Would he still have lost his seat had he been leader? It was pretty close as it was.

I reckon he would have lost even more bigly in the country and in his seat.

Not quite the Conservatives in Canada 1993 bad but I reckon the Tories would have ended up closer 100 seats than 200 seats.

CarlottaVance said:

The US method of tallying medals is not without merit....



https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/sports/olympics/medal-count-results.html

Yes, but what will the revised table in 10 years look like when all the drug cheats have been stripped of their medals?

kinabalu said:

Fairliered said:

solarflare said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

kle4 said:

malcolmg said:

squareroot2 said:

If there is no further vote on Independence whilst there is Tory Govt and wee Jimmy Krankie throws her toys of of her pram in Holyrood.. who cares? Few I would venture to suggest, bar diehard Nits.
There is still the prospect of the law courts causing problems in Scotland.

Sturgeon does not want a referendum, that is painfully obvious to a blind man.

Is it she does not want one, or that she does not care when it happens (since she is riding on top regardless and can afford to wait), or is worried if it is lost?

Worried if it is lost.

Just imagine the Unionists prevail again and Scotland votes No, that really would settle it for a generation.

That might make some sense if the SNP and Scottish Government had made any attempt to move the independence debate on in the last parliament, but they didn't.

And their visceral reaction to Alba (and most of the indy bloggers who decided the SNP were just beginning to take the piss) basically just suggested that they were only really afraid someone else might come along and threaten their very cosy position. OK, one does not expect them to roll out the welcome mat, but they went OTT.

The SNP use independence as a cheap GOTV tactic in an election (and there's always another one of them to come along in a minute...) but there's little evidence to suggest anything other than that at the moment.

Oh, and being skint also seems to be a handy reason for not wanting to do anything to progress independence at any pace other than glacial.

Agreed 100%. I recommend that fellow PBers read Indyref threads and comments with the mindset that Sturgeon’s SNP don’t want independence, but daren’t admit it.

This view keeps being put forward - both by Scots and non Scots on here - backed by no evidence other than a presumed ability to read the mind of Nicola Sturgeon. A mind that apparently harbours thoughts and desires totally at odds with those she expresses.

I think you’re all talking bollocks. She does want Sindy. It's the basis of her whole political career. It's just a matter of how best to get there. She has to balance the risks and rewards of various courses of action. Essentially the challenge is to build momentum and force a Referendum at a time when it's winnable. It's a massive challenge but I think if anyone can do it she can.

That's partially true:
1) All politicians want power and NS is no different. She knows that losing an IndiRef will be the end of her career.
2) She also knows that another referendum will be as close as the last one
3) keeping herself primarily and the SNP secondarily in power is what matters and using an Indiref is a good mechanism to do this.

if they wanted independence they would have spend more of the last 7 years actually convincing people of its merits rather than just using it as a grievance to GotV.

isam said:

Mexicanpete said:

squareroot2 said:

Stocky said:

@MarqueeMark just read your post this morning.

Even I, who doesn't rate Johnson as PM, agree that the anti-Johnson criticism on here is incessant and often pathological - but please don't leave the site.

Seconded.. Stuart Dixon started off in filthy mode this morning. I pointed out to him that he wouldn't like it if La Sturgeon was so castigated.

Why is Starmer is c*** acceptable yet Johnson is c*** is unacceptable?

What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, surely?

Do people say how disgusted they are at the thought of Sir Keir’s wife sleeping with him? I can’t remember it.

I have never said that.

My beef with Johnson is, that in my opinion, he chose what was best for himself, rather than what he thought was best for the country.

Additionally I wouldn't run my personal life in the way he runs his, and I don't think he is a good role model, but that is entirely his own business.

FrancisUrquhart said:

Thinking about the high jump shared gold, i might be a bit annoyed if i was the spanish bloke in the floor gymnastics, got the same total score, i believe same score for execution, but israeli won because of higher difficulty score (but lost points for a penalty).

I'm not annoyed, they've created a precedent for the England football team when they next reach the final of a major tournament and it is about to go to penalties.

kinabalu said:

solarflare said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

kle4 said:

malcolmg said:

squareroot2 said:

If there is no further vote on Independence whilst there is Tory Govt and wee Jimmy Krankie throws her toys of of her pram in Holyrood.. who cares? Few I would venture to suggest, bar diehard Nits.
There is still the prospect of the law courts causing problems in Scotland.

Sturgeon does not want a referendum, that is painfully obvious to a blind man.

Is it she does not want one, or that she does not care when it happens (since she is riding on top regardless and can afford to wait), or is worried if it is lost?

Worried if it is lost.

Just imagine the Unionists prevail again and Scotland votes No, that really would settle it for a generation.

That might make some sense if the SNP and Scottish Government had made any attempt to move the independence debate on in the last parliament, but they didn't.

And their visceral reaction to Alba (and most of the indy bloggers who decided the SNP were just beginning to take the piss) basically just suggested that they were only really afraid someone else might come along and threaten their very cosy position. OK, one does not expect them to roll out the welcome mat, but they went OTT.

The SNP use independence as a cheap GOTV tactic in an election (and there's always another one of them to come along in a minute...) but there's little evidence to suggest anything other than that at the moment.

Oh, and being skint also seems to be a handy reason for not wanting to do anything to progress independence at any pace other than glacial.

But they lost the vote only in 2014. It's Brexit that put Sindy back on the agenda and as soon as that was settled along comes a black swan public health emergency. Against this backdrop I don't see what more Sturgeon and the SNP could be expected to do to advance things over and above what they've done. They stuck Sindy2 front and centre of their platform for the Holyrood elections, won, and say they will agitate for it once the pandemic is over. What's so wimpy about that? Makes perfect sense to me. It could possibly be they don't really in their heart of hearts want to fight a Sindy Referendum, either because they're scared of losing it (killing the dream), or scared of winning it (oh god now what?), but I don't see the evidence for that.

You may well be right. It may well be the case. But all they've done from your post is just the cheap talk bit. They're not actually DOING anything to progress the case. I'm not saying the SG/SNP should have been dedicating itself to independence campaigning over the pandemic period, but over the course of the last full parliament they didn't do anything of any sort of concrete use. All they have done is a bit of cheap talk in the election run up, including campaign slogans that conveniently forgot some of the stuff they were supposedly asking people to vote for them for in 2016.

Perhaps they did need to wait out the Brexit crystallisation, and no-one could have foreseen what a drawn out crock of shit that process was. But all that dithering over that period achieved for them is a lot of empty rhetoric and missing the best window of opportunity they had to actually justify pushing for the vote. ​And now, blaming covid isn't really an excuse when they managed to have a Holyrood election through it, and it would not have stopped some of the policy work that could have been done to help prepare the case for independence when any referendum actually came about. No, they just chose not to do anything about it.

​For what it's worth I hope you're right and I'm wrong. Any argument for delaying because of covid is not one that will have much credence for a great deal longer, when the last few restrictions are dropped in a week's time other than some masks and continued recommendation for home working. So I assume we will be in a position to see fairly soon if I am barking completely up the wrong tree.

But too many things have gone wrong internally within the SNP for me to believe otherwise. It got suspicious when they shut down all internal party conference talk about "Plan B" routes for achieving independence without a Section 30 order and nothing they've done since then (including doing everything they could to undermine the Martin Keatings case) has reversed the impression that they have become determined to find reasons to stall on doing anything, that they have become increasingly autocratic and paranoid about their position. They only throw out crumbs to the indy faithful when it becomes clear that the Yes movement are having a bit of a wobble about persisting with the SNP and you only have to look at the National front pages to see the number of times that that has happened, generally with some pretence about some date that never manifests itself, until the next promised date. At the very least all they have done is cried wolf one too many times.

But I guess we'll see soon enough if they really are serious or not.

spudgfsh said:

kinabalu said:

Fairliered said:

solarflare said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

kle4 said:

malcolmg said:

squareroot2 said:

If there is no further vote on Independence whilst there is Tory Govt and wee Jimmy Krankie throws her toys of of her pram in Holyrood.. who cares? Few I would venture to suggest, bar diehard Nits.
There is still the prospect of the law courts causing problems in Scotland.

Sturgeon does not want a referendum, that is painfully obvious to a blind man.

Is it she does not want one, or that she does not care when it happens (since she is riding on top regardless and can afford to wait), or is worried if it is lost?

Worried if it is lost.

Just imagine the Unionists prevail again and Scotland votes No, that really would settle it for a generation.

That might make some sense if the SNP and Scottish Government had made any attempt to move the independence debate on in the last parliament, but they didn't.

And their visceral reaction to Alba (and most of the indy bloggers who decided the SNP were just beginning to take the piss) basically just suggested that they were only really afraid someone else might come along and threaten their very cosy position. OK, one does not expect them to roll out the welcome mat, but they went OTT.

The SNP use independence as a cheap GOTV tactic in an election (and there's always another one of them to come along in a minute...) but there's little evidence to suggest anything other than that at the moment.

Oh, and being skint also seems to be a handy reason for not wanting to do anything to progress independence at any pace other than glacial.

Agreed 100%. I recommend that fellow PBers read Indyref threads and comments with the mindset that Sturgeon’s SNP don’t want independence, but daren’t admit it.

This view keeps being put forward - both by Scots and non Scots on here - backed by no evidence other than a presumed ability to read the mind of Nicola Sturgeon. A mind that apparently harbours thoughts and desires totally at odds with those she expresses.

I think you’re all talking bollocks. She does want Sindy. It's the basis of her whole political career. It's just a matter of how best to get there. She has to balance the risks and rewards of various courses of action. Essentially the challenge is to build momentum and force a Referendum at a time when it's winnable. It's a massive challenge but I think if anyone can do it she can.

That's partially true:
1) All politicians want power and NS is no different. She knows that losing an IndiRef will be the end of her career.
2) She also knows that another referendum will be as close as the last one
3) keeping herself primarily and the SNP secondarily in power is what matters and using an Indiref is a good mechanism to do this.

if they wanted independence they would have spend more of the last 7 years actually convincing people of its merits rather than just using it as a grievance to GotV.

Last 7 years -

2014 - they had a vote and lost it. No choice but to take a pause.

2016 - EU ref. Leave. Oh yikes.

Next 3 years. Brexit wrangling. SNP build the grievance of being ignored. Put Sindy back on the agenda.

COVID PANDEMIC rudely interrupts everything.

2021. Win Holyrood election with Sindy2 commitment.

Say it must happen once the Sickness is gone.

This looks to me like somebody seriously pursuing the cause of Scottish Independence.

Bugger.

Lewis Hamilton believes he may still have not fully recovered from contracting Covid-19 after he experienced fatigue and dizziness at the Hungarian Grand Prix. The British driver finished third in a monumental effort to come back from last place at the Hungaroring but admitted he fears he may be suffering from long Covid.

After his immense recovery drive Hamilton missed the start of the post-race press conferences as he was being attended to by his Mercedes team doctor for fatigue. Afterwards he admitted that he did not feel he had fully recovered from the effects of the virus he contracted in December last year.

“I have been fighting all year with my health after what happened at the end of last year and it is still a battle,” he said. “I had really big dizziness and everything got a bit blurry on the podium.”

The race at the Hungaroring is hot and physically demanding but Hamilton conceded that he may be experiencing the symptoms of the form of the virus where health problems remain for months after it is first contracted.

“I haven’t spoken to anyone particularly about it but I think it is lingering,” he said. “I remember the effects when I had it. The training has been different since then and the levels of fatigue you get are different and it’s a real challenge. So [I am] just continuing to try and train and prepare the best way I can. Who knows what it is today? Maybe it’s hydration but I’ve definitely not had that experience. I had something similar in Silverstone but this is way worse.”

Hamilton also gave his wholehearted support to Sebastian Vettel who was issued with a reprimand by the FIA for not removing his rainbow-coloured T-shirt with the words “Same Love” on it, in support of the LGBTQ+ community in Hungary who are being targeted by repressive laws.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/aug/01/lewis-hamilton-fears-he-has-long-covid-after-hungarian-gp-exhaustion?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Mexicanpete said:

isam said:

Mexicanpete said:

squareroot2 said:

Stocky said:

@MarqueeMark just read your post this morning.

Even I, who doesn't rate Johnson as PM, agree that the anti-Johnson criticism on here is incessant and often pathological - but please don't leave the site.

Seconded.. Stuart Dixon started off in filthy mode this morning. I pointed out to him that he wouldn't like it if La Sturgeon was so castigated.

Why is Starmer is c*** acceptable yet Johnson is c*** is unacceptable?

What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, surely?

Do people say how disgusted they are at the thought of Sir Keir’s wife sleeping with him? I can’t remember it.

I have never said that.

My beef with Johnson is, that in my opinion, he chose what was best for himself, rather than what he thought was best for the country.

Additionally I wouldn't run my personal life in the way he runs his, and I don't think he is a good role model, but that is entirely his own business.

I don’t know how many kids Johnson has. But then I don’t know how many Starmer has either. And I don’t care, but it seems to wind up people.

spudgfsh said:

kinabalu said:

Fairliered said:

solarflare said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

kle4 said:

malcolmg said:

squareroot2 said:

If there is no further vote on Independence whilst there is Tory Govt and wee Jimmy Krankie throws her toys of of her pram in Holyrood.. who cares? Few I would venture to suggest, bar diehard Nits.
There is still the prospect of the law courts causing problems in Scotland.

Sturgeon does not want a referendum, that is painfully obvious to a blind man.

Is it she does not want one, or that she does not care when it happens (since she is riding on top regardless and can afford to wait), or is worried if it is lost?

Worried if it is lost.

Just imagine the Unionists prevail again and Scotland votes No, that really would settle it for a generation.

That might make some sense if the SNP and Scottish Government had made any attempt to move the independence debate on in the last parliament, but they didn't.

And their visceral reaction to Alba (and most of the indy bloggers who decided the SNP were just beginning to take the piss) basically just suggested that they were only really afraid someone else might come along and threaten their very cosy position. OK, one does not expect them to roll out the welcome mat, but they went OTT.

The SNP use independence as a cheap GOTV tactic in an election (and there's always another one of them to come along in a minute...) but there's little evidence to suggest anything other than that at the moment.

Oh, and being skint also seems to be a handy reason for not wanting to do anything to progress independence at any pace other than glacial.

Agreed 100%. I recommend that fellow PBers read Indyref threads and comments with the mindset that Sturgeon’s SNP don’t want independence, but daren’t admit it.

This view keeps being put forward - both by Scots and non Scots on here - backed by no evidence other than a presumed ability to read the mind of Nicola Sturgeon. A mind that apparently harbours thoughts and desires totally at odds with those she expresses.

I think you’re all talking bollocks. She does want Sindy. It's the basis of her whole political career. It's just a matter of how best to get there. She has to balance the risks and rewards of various courses of action. Essentially the challenge is to build momentum and force a Referendum at a time when it's winnable. It's a massive challenge but I think if anyone can do it she can.

That's partially true:
1) All politicians want power and NS is no different. She knows that losing an IndiRef will be the end of her career.
2) She also knows that another referendum will be as close as the last one
3) keeping herself primarily and the SNP secondarily in power is what matters and using an Indiref is a good mechanism to do this.

if they wanted independence they would have spend more of the last 7 years actually convincing people of its merits rather than just using it as a grievance to GotV.

It’s more nuanced than that. Sturgeon definitely wants independence, and she absolutely believes in it. This is clear. It’s visceral for her - as it is for many Nats, which makes them quite formidable. See the loyalty they show each other on here. Even when Stuart Dickson goes full-on Blood and Soil Tartan Gestapo, they close ranks.

However, Sturgeon is also clever. She knows there are enormous problems with Indy as a project. The currency is just one. They still haven’t got a solution. Because there is no easy solution. Then there’s the debt, the divorce, the central bank, the English border, the EU. Sindy would be a ten year nightmare during which most Scots would feel notably poorer and more isolated.

Sturgeon believes in Sindy as Jacob Rees Mogg believes in Brexit. ‘The proof of its correctness will be obvious in 50 years time’

Most voters don’t have 50 year time scales in mind. They look about 5 months ahead. If Sturgeon ever gets the chance to call a vote she will probably do it, but she will do it knowing there is a great risk of losing (for the reasons adduced), which scuppers the project for 30 years or more.

So even tho she is passionately pro-Indy, there must be a large part of her which is quietly relieved another vote is unlikely on her watch

Gallowgate said:

CarlottaVance said:

The market at work:

Aldi has increased its wages for lorry drivers amid a chronic shortage of drivers across the industry.

The supermarket chain confirmed the rise following similar incentives by grocers to attract HGV drivers.

The lack of drivers has caused disruption and delays in various supply chains, which has led to product shortages in some industries.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58047483

Yes but that's only good if there's more lorry drivers coming into the system. If there isn't the problem still remains.

Wages rising will attract more lorry drivers to enter the system.

If the problem remains, then wages haven't risen high enough yet.

spudgfsh said:

Stocky said:

@MarqueeMark just read your post this morning.

Even I, who doesn't rate Johnson as PM, agree that the anti-Johnson criticism on here is incessant and often pathological - but please don't leave the site.

I find the same on twitter, people that I follow for other reasons (mainly football), constantly attacking Johnson for everything that happens regardless of the merits of their arguments. The worst I've unfollowed, some of them I ignore, the rest I correct. Don't get me wrong I'm not a supporter of Johnson but some of the problems are not of his making.

I think it is just funny that he makes people so mad. Why get upset about it?

turbotubbs said:

Mexicanpete said:

isam said:

Mexicanpete said:

squareroot2 said:

Stocky said:

@MarqueeMark just read your post this morning.

Even I, who doesn't rate Johnson as PM, agree that the anti-Johnson criticism on here is incessant and often pathological - but please don't leave the site.

Seconded.. Stuart Dixon started off in filthy mode this morning. I pointed out to him that he wouldn't like it if La Sturgeon was so castigated.

Why is Starmer is c*** acceptable yet Johnson is c*** is unacceptable?

What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, surely?

Do people say how disgusted they are at the thought of Sir Keir’s wife sleeping with him? I can’t remember it.

I have never said that.

My beef with Johnson is, that in my opinion, he chose what was best for himself, rather than what he thought was best for the country.

Additionally I wouldn't run my personal life in the way he runs his, and I don't think he is a good role model, but that is entirely his own business.

I don’t know how many kids Johnson has.

"You're joking - not another one!"

ydoethur said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

CarlottaVance said:

The market at work:

Aldi has increased its wages for lorry drivers amid a chronic shortage of drivers across the industry.

The supermarket chain confirmed the rise following similar incentives by grocers to attract HGV drivers.

The lack of drivers has caused disruption and delays in various supply chains, which has led to product shortages in some industries.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58047483

Yes but that's only good if there's more lorry drivers coming into the system. If there isn't the problem still remains.

Wages rising will attract more lorry drivers to enter the system.

If the problem remains, then wages haven't risen high enough yet.

Hi Philip, completely off topic but I have a quick question.

I’m looking at buying a new vacuum cleaner. I think you once said you had a Shark? If that’s so, what are they like?

Wow you have a good memory.

I'm very impressed by the Shark. Much better than the Dyson that it replaced. Would highly recommend, but please don't hold it against me if you don't like it.

Philip_Thompson said:

ydoethur said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

CarlottaVance said:

The market at work:

Aldi has increased its wages for lorry drivers amid a chronic shortage of drivers across the industry.

The supermarket chain confirmed the rise following similar incentives by grocers to attract HGV drivers.

The lack of drivers has caused disruption and delays in various supply chains, which has led to product shortages in some industries.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58047483

Yes but that's only good if there's more lorry drivers coming into the system. If there isn't the problem still remains.

Wages rising will attract more lorry drivers to enter the system.

If the problem remains, then wages haven't risen high enough yet.

Hi Philip, completely off topic but I have a quick question.

I’m looking at buying a new vacuum cleaner. I think you once said you had a Shark? If that’s so, what are they like?

Wow you have a good memory.

I'm very impressed by the Shark. Much better than the Dyson that it replaced. Would highly recommend, but please don't hold it against me if you don't like it.

Oh, I won’t, don’t worry. I just wondered if it was any good. If it is, I’ll give one a go as they’re on offer at Amazon at the moment.

Dust is the problem in my house, because I’m very bad at dusting. It keeps clogging up the vacuums I buy.

Gallowgate said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

CarlottaVance said:

The market at work:

Aldi has increased its wages for lorry drivers amid a chronic shortage of drivers across the industry.

The supermarket chain confirmed the rise following similar incentives by grocers to attract HGV drivers.

The lack of drivers has caused disruption and delays in various supply chains, which has led to product shortages in some industries.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58047483

Yes but that's only good if there's more lorry drivers coming into the system. If there isn't the problem still remains.

Wages rising will attract more lorry drivers to enter the system.

If the problem remains, then wages haven't risen high enough yet.

There isn't an infinite pool of British workers to pick from. A lorry driver earns more than double what I earn per hour but I'm not about to quit my job to drive lorries.

Moreover, there is a shortage of instructors and examiners.

ydoethur said:

Philip_Thompson said:

ydoethur said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

CarlottaVance said:

The market at work:

Aldi has increased its wages for lorry drivers amid a chronic shortage of drivers across the industry.

The supermarket chain confirmed the rise following similar incentives by grocers to attract HGV drivers.

The lack of drivers has caused disruption and delays in various supply chains, which has led to product shortages in some industries.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58047483

Yes but that's only good if there's more lorry drivers coming into the system. If there isn't the problem still remains.

Wages rising will attract more lorry drivers to enter the system.

If the problem remains, then wages haven't risen high enough yet.

Hi Philip, completely off topic but I have a quick question.

I’m looking at buying a new vacuum cleaner. I think you once said you had a Shark? If that’s so, what are they like?

Wow you have a good memory.

I'm very impressed by the Shark. Much better than the Dyson that it replaced. Would highly recommend, but please don't hold it against me if you don't like it.

Oh, I won’t, don’t worry. I just wondered if it was any good. If it is, I’ll give one a go as they’re on offer at Amazon at the moment.

Dust is the problem in my house, because I’m very bad at dusting. It keeps clogging up the vacuums I buy.

FWIW I’m on my second shark and they’ve both been good. If you can remember or be bothered give the filters a clean from time to time and they are great.

darkage said:

spudgfsh said:

Stocky said:

@MarqueeMark just read your post this morning.

Even I, who doesn't rate Johnson as PM, agree that the anti-Johnson criticism on here is incessant and often pathological - but please don't leave the site.

I find the same on twitter, people that I follow for other reasons (mainly football), constantly attacking Johnson for everything that happens regardless of the merits of their arguments. The worst I've unfollowed, some of them I ignore, the rest I correct. Don't get me wrong I'm not a supporter of Johnson but some of the problems are not of his making.

I think it is just funny that he makes people so mad. Why get upset about it?

Or why get upset about people who are made mad by him. Bit snowflakey imo.