The Dirty Independence Question

[eFestivals]

Have you seen recent Scottish opinion polls? The losers are winning & the winners are losing.

and now, tho, the losers are starting to go on a losing streak again. Have you not noticed, their support is starting to fall?

There's only a small amount of mileage in Salmond's bullshit. People are wising up.

I'm not quite sure why people expect a party whose main aim is independence to stop campaigning for it. That would be distinctly odd.

True.

And it would be no less odd for the govt of the UK to invite a party that doesn't want a govt of the UK to be part of the govt of the UK.

Some people are able to recognise both of these ideas, but few in Scotland it seems.

[eFestivals]

the losers we winning right up until people actually had to vote. They then realised the absurdity of St Alex's vision of independence and followed their heads and voted No.

The yes-ers narrative says they only voted 'no' because 'no' lied to them.

The yes-ers narrative doesn't narrate anything about Salmond's lies tho. Funny that.

[eFestivals]

Have you seen recent Scottish opinion polls?

There's all sorts of wonderful things to be found in Scottish opinions, but most of them make the yes-ers cry.

Mind you, when i just saw that over 50% of Scotland thinks Scotland is subsidising the UK, I cried - at such stupidity.

[LJS]

True.

And it would be no less odd for the govt of the UK to invite a party that doesn't want a govt of the UK to be part of the govt of the UK.

Some people are able to recognise both of these ideas, but few in Scotland it seems.

Ok, let's play a little game...

I'm sure you like games

here is the 2015 UK General election result

LABOUR 300

TORY 256

SNP 29

LIB DEM 10

UKIP 6

GREEN 3

DUP 8

SINN FEIN 5

SDLP 4

PLAID CYMRU 3

it is mathematically impossible for the Tories to form a majority without the support of the SNP which is , shall we say, "unlikely"

If Labour are to get a majority without the support of the SNP they will need the support of at least 4 parties - i don't think UK politics is ready for that do you?

Of course Labour could try & govern as a minority government without any sort of arrangement with anyone.

Or they could strike some sort of deal with the SNP.

Knowing the lust for power that drives politician's, would Milliband be tempted to try & cut some sort of deal with the SNP.

Is it really totally impossible?

& if he doesn't (for all the excellent reasons you have given) what will happen?

This game is open to anyone to play, sadly there are no prizes. For clarity, I have no idea what would happen in these circumstances. My guess is there would be a clear statement of "no deal with the Nats" followed by the Nats happening to find they are able to support a raft of legislation which by sheer chance would include some measure that the cynical might interpret as favourable to the Nats. ( I seem to remember this sort of thing going on with the ulster Unionists in the 70's - oh look the unionists are supporting the government in this crucial vote - oh look here's a nice order for a Belfast shipyard)

[Comfy Bean]

Ok, let's play a little game...

I'm sure you like games

here is the 2015 UK General election result

LABOUR 300

TORY 256

SNP 29

LIB DEM 10

UKIP 6

GREEN 3

DUP 8

SINN FEIN 5

SDLP 4

PLAID CYMRU 3

it is mathematically impossible for the Tories to form a majority without the support of the SNP which is , shall we say, "unlikely"

If Labour are to get a majority without the support of the SNP they will need the support of at least 4 parties - i don't think UK politics is ready for that do you?

Of course Labour could try & govern as a minority government without any sort of arrangement with anyone.

Or they could strike some sort of deal with the SNP.

Knowing the lust for power that drives politician's, would Milliband be tempted to try & cut some sort of deal with the SNP.

Is it really totally impossible?

& if he doesn't (for all the excellent reasons you have given) what will happen?

This game is open to anyone to play, sadly there are no prizes. For clarity, I have no idea what would happen in these circumstances. My guess is there would be a clear statement of "no deal with the Nats" followed by the Nats happening to find they are able to support a raft of legislation which by sheer chance would include some measure that the cynical might interpret as favourable to the Nats. ( I seem to remember this sort of thing going on with the ulster Unionists in the 70's - oh look the unionists are supporting the government in this crucial vote - oh look here's a nice order for a Belfast shipyard)

I suppose what we " know " is that the SNP will NOT deal with the Tories and I`d guess the Ulster folks would. I don`t think it`s " impossible " that Labour would do a deal with the SNP but for sure it`s unlikely. I think NS is playing them with this talk of a possible deal IF Labour drop the Trident plans. She is obviously expecting Murphy to win and knows he is pro-Trident, war etc

In the interests of taking part I would guess that the number of parties involved would be a clusterfuck so Labour would try and go it alone and that would also end in the same clusterfuck so....for me based on the numbers dealt above it`s :

A. Labour try and go it alone.

[Comfy Bean]

Interesting that you picked SNP 29 sir. Is this your guesstimate ?

I know the polls are showing a higher crazy number but I`d go with anything from 15-25. I think the big SNP numbers will come in 2016 but a lot can change of course.

Do you think Salmond will win his seat ? Looks like he is hunting down a 7000 majority for the Lib Dems but as we know he`s a shrewd cookie and I doubt he would have went after a seat he didn`t think he`d win. Maybe he`s determined to shake off the tag that " he will die a failure " that oor Neil gave him. I wanted him to take a run at Danny Alexander after Neil championing Alexander on this very thread. That would have been interesting ! The fact that he will soon be stepping back into the shadows ( Danny not Neil ) is a good thing for us all in my opinion.

I agree with Neil that it would seem bonkers for Labour to have the SNP " on board " but where greed is good and power is the prize anything can happen.

I`m disappointed that Labour look like going with Murphy but no doubt it will be good news for the SNP in 2016. A Blairite type is the last thing that Scottish Labour need in my view.

[Comfy Bean]

the losers were winning right up until people actually had to vote. They then realised the absurdity of St Alex's vision of independence and followed their heads and voted No.

Russy. How`s it going sir ?

Are you sure about this version of events ?

[Comfy Bean]

it's going to take another 15 years, and a second Quebec.

Or perhaps in 15 years time it'll be clear to Scotland that their economy isn't all that's claimed for it by the SNP? That'll definitely be how it is if the oil price stays low.

Yip. 10-15 years would be my bet. Can you imagine how much debt we will be in by then ? It`s scarey

The NHS will be unrecognisable ( not in a good way ) and the public sector will be going down the same road. No-one will be calling it privatisation of course. " Soft market testing " will be the name of the game for our public services.

The next Indy campaign could be less about oil ( it will have ran out by then right ) and more about taking the stuff that should be " ours " back.

The gap between rich and poor will also be even wider by then and the old fashioned ideas of Westminster and a Union will seem even more fecked up. Who knows where will will sit Europe wise. No doubt some will still be claiming were better together and Scotland couldn`t manage to run it`s own affairs but maybe someday......

[Comfy Bean]

at least the SNP can debate in a mature and adult manner. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-30302865 When will this party accept they lost? They lost to the most inept campaign ever conducted. I'm amazed they have the front to stay in the public eye.

I`m sorry you had to get upset by this mate. Couple of eejits for sure. As LJS already pointed out, NS has dealt with it so hopefully you can move on

Just to put your mind at ease, here is the article showing that our Leader has smacked them down.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-30310906

[Comfy Bean]

Since we like a bit of whataboutery on here. I`m surprised you haven`t taken the time Russy to post this article up ?

Hopefully your our Leader will issue the same rapid response to this clown.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30375609

Edited December 8, 2014 by comfortablynumb1910

[Comfy Bean]

This is the real disgrace in amongst today`s news stories.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-30346060

[eFestivals]

Or they could strike some sort of deal with the SNP.

Knowing the lust for power that drives politician's, would Milliband be tempted to try & cut some sort of deal with the SNP.

Is it really totally impossible?

Yes.

He has the LibDumbs for reference.

My guess is there would be a clear statement of "no deal with the Nats" followed by the Nats happening to find they are able to support a raft of legislation which by sheer chance would include some measure that the cynical might interpret as favourable to the Nats. ( I seem to remember this sort of thing going on with the ulster Unionists in the 70's - oh look the unionists are supporting the government in this crucial vote - oh look here's a nice order for a Belfast shipyard)

You're just not getting the massive difference between the SNP and the UU's, are you?

As I say, you need to stop looking at this from a purely Scottish perspective. No matter how you choose to view them, the SNP are not just another political party. And that matters, a LOT!

[eFestivals]

I think NS is playing them with this talk of a possible deal IF Labour drop the Trident plans.

The SNP wanting no Trident is the guarantee that it would be renewed or kicked into the long grass - but not cancelled - by a minority Labour govt.

Think about it. How do you think it would sit with the rest of the (majority of the) UK to have their defence policy set via the political blackmailing of a party that wants the UK to not exist?

It's for similar reasons that Labour would be signing their own death warrant to have a formal coalition with the SNP.

Even without a formal coalition there's a lot of danger for Labour to be supported by the SNP, because the perception will always be there that Labour might be selling out the UK for the support of a non-UK party. Just think how much fun the right wing media will have with that.

Meanwhile, i'm sure if you asked Scotland if they'd like their biggest site of employment shut down, the answer would be 'no'. It's not all as clear-cut as some want to think.

[eFestivals]

Interesting that you picked SNP 29 sir. Is this your guesstimate ?

I know the polls are showing a higher crazy number but I`d go with anything from 15-25. I think the big SNP numbers will come in 2016 but a lot can change of course.

Latest polling suggests that the SNP will find it hard to win any of Labour's Scottish seats, but are likely to pick up most of the LibDem seats.

I'll keep my fingers crossed that that's true. Anything less than a Labour majority will cause all sorts of long term issues that will benefit the right.

Do you think Salmond will win his seat ? Looks like he is hunting down a 7000 majority for the Lib Dems but as we know he`s a shrewd cookie and I doubt he would have went after a seat he didn`t think he`d win.

The bookies have him as clear favourite, but the fact that the area voted 'no' to indy and is a mainly (small 'c') conservative area could make it interesting.

Maybe he`s determined to shake off the tag that " he will die a failure " that oor Neil gave him.

Nope, he's being governed by his ego.

And you'll be less-governed by that parliament you put so much faith in, as the real power heads back south with Alex.

I wonder if Nicola can feel the blood running down her back yet?

I wanted him to take a run at Danny Alexander after Neil championing Alexander on this very thread.

Eh? I see you're still not referencing the facts.

I`m disappointed that Labour look like going with Murphy

Scotland has chosen for that to happen. Why be upset at your own choices?

[LJS]

Yes.

He has the LibDumbs for reference.

You're just not getting the massive difference between the SNP and the UU's, are you?

As I say, you need to stop looking at this from a purely Scottish perspective. No matter how you choose to view them, the SNP are not just another political party. And that matters, a LOT!

So, Neil, you've told is lots of what wouldn't happen in my hypothetical scenario.

Tell us, oh wise one, what would happen?

[eFestivals]

Yip. 10-15 years would be my bet. Can you imagine how much debt we will be in by then ? It`s scarey

and with Scotland being the one that's added the (proportional) most, how do you think that indyref might go?

It makes me laugh how nat's go on about the debt, as tho they have more of a solution to it than the tories do - when the numbers and policies show beyond all doubt that the SNP and Scottish politics only has ways of increasing that debt.

The NHS will be unrecognisable

perhaps have the SNP stop cutting its funding, then? And selling bits off?

The next Indy campaign could be less about oil ( it will have ran out by then right ) and more about taking the stuff that should be " ours " back.

it' clear by how often Barnet is mentioned and protected like a god that Scotland paying its own way is not what the Scottish people want.

The gap between rich and poor will also be even wider by then and the old fashioned ideas of Westminster and a Union will seem even more fecked up.

it will when Scotland has no interest in reforming it, only fucking it up even more than it already is.

Who knows where will will sit Europe wise.

wherever we might be with that, Scotland will have no choice but to sit in the same place as England.

The guaranteed way for an iScotland to disappoint its population would for there to be a physical border because one side is in the EU and the other is not.

No doubt some will still be claiming were better together and Scotland couldn`t manage to run it`s own affairs but maybe someday......

Scotland could run its own affairs, no matter the situation.

What no one references tho is what those affairs might be. 20% lesser public services would make Scottish affairs very different to what people know.

[eFestivals]

So, Neil, you've told is lots of what wouldn't happen in my hypothetical scenario.

Tell us, oh wise one, what would happen?

As I keep saying, there won't be a formal coalition between Labour and the SNP.

So that leaves whatever might be cobbled together by the largest party, and my guess would be that the tories would implicitly support Labour as the govt in return for the same in the future with the situations reversed.

There's toxicity for Labour within that too, but far less to damage them long-term.

No matter what I might want politically, it's not my view that counts - it's the view of the British population. And that British population will not accept being held to ransom by 4% of the country.

[russycarps]

Why are the Yes voters so convinced a majority of scots want rid of trident anyway? I suspect that wouldnt be the case in the rest of the UK, so why would scotland be any different? In fact, there may well be more support for it in scotland, considering the jobs issue.

And the evidence does point towards this, as the Yes campaign actively stated trident would be scrapped. And lest we forget, the Yes campaign was comprehensively defeated.

[eFestivals]

Why are the Yes voters so convinced a majority of scots want rid of trident anyway? I suspect that wouldnt be the case in the rest of the UK, so why would scotland be any different? In fact, there may well be more support for it in scotland, considering the jobs issue.

And the evidence does point towards this, as the Yes campaign actively stated trident would be scrapped. And lest we forget, the Yes campaign was comprehensively defeated.

I've just looked at the 'trident' questions at What Scotland Thinks, and while there's clear opposition to Trident via some questions, other questions suggest it's not as clear-cut as many Scots like to think.

Like so many Scottish issues, it's clouded in bullshit. The common refrain is about "England wouldn't allow nukes so close to centres of population", but that only gets to show that Scots are crap at geography.

[LJS]

Why are the Yes voters so convinced a majority of scots want rid of trident anyway? I suspect that wouldnt be the case in the rest of the UK, so why would scotland be any different? In fact, there may well be more support for it in scotland, considering the jobs issue.

And the evidence does point towards this, as the Yes campaign actively stated trident would be scrapped. And lest we forget, the Yes campaign was comprehensively defeated.

Nuclear weapons are a very very expensive way of creating very few jobs. Spend the money on just about anything else & you will create many many more jobs.

[kaosmark2]

I've just looked at the 'trident' questions at What Scotland Thinks, and while there's clear opposition to Trident via some questions, other questions suggest it's not as clear-cut as many Scots like to think.

Like so many Scottish issues, it's clouded in bullshit. The common refrain is about "England wouldn't allow nukes so close to centres of population", but that only gets to show that Scots are crap at geography.

Considering that there isn't anywhere in the UK that isn't that close to centres of population?

I don't think the Scottish are that much more anti-trident than anyone else, it's just that the political parties are for it. I genuinely don't think nukes are that big an issue to most people in the UK. I'd have more respect for a politician that was prepared to stand up and say we don't need nukes, but not as much as one who said immigration was a good thing and the general political rhetoric on it fluctuates between retarded and racist.

[eFestivals]

Considering that there isn't anywhere in the UK that isn't that close to centres of population?

There's greater population near to Aldermaston/Burghfield than there is to the nukes on the Clyde, plus the risks of an accident at Aldermaston/Burghfield are greater than the risk of one on the Clyde.

As I said, Scots must be crap at geography.

[russycarps]

Nuclear weapons are a very very expensive way of creating very few jobs. Spend the money on just about anything else & you will create many many more jobs.

I'm as anti-nuclear weapons as anyone on this forum. But we are not representative of the UK population unfortunately.

A yes/no vote on whether we should scrap trident would see a heavy yes win, I am certain.

Very many people are proud the UK is in the nuclear club as they think it makes us a player on the world stage.

Others believe they create jobs.

Others think that without them we'd be at risk of invasion by "commies" or some other faceless enemy.

It's a losing battle. (I hope I'm wrong though)

Edited December 9, 2014 by russycarps

[eFestivals]

Others believe they create jobs.

All military spending is very poor value for the number of jobs created for the money spent.

But that's merely the direct spending. There's no doubt that having nukes increases the UK's profile in the world, and who knows what extra business that higher profile brings us?

So it might be the case that a genuine economic case can be made for the UK having nukes.

That doesn't mean we should have them tho. An economic case can also be made for slavery.

[kaosmark2]

I'm as anti-nuclear weapons as anyone on this forum. But we are not representative of the UK population unfortunately.

A yes/no vote on whether we should scrap trident would see a heavy yes win, I am certain.

Very many people are proud the UK is in the nuclear club as they think it makes us a player on the world stage.

Others believe they create jobs.

Others think that without them we'd be at risk of invasion by "commies" or some other faceless enemy.

It's a losing battle. (I hope I'm wrong though)

Nukes are the only thing that keep Putin from riding into our homes on horseback firing a musket though.