The Dirty Independence Question

[LJS]

yes LJS, the righteous yes-ers condemning anyone who was no is nothing of the point you're making.

I wasn't condemning him, merely pointing out his role in the no campaign & querying whether that might hinder his job of winning back disillusioned Labour voters.

[eFestivals]

I wasn't condemning him, merely pointing out his role in the no campaign & querying whether that might hinder his job of winning back disillusioned Labour voters.

Which is at least a recognition that yes-ers have lost the plot, being unable to recognise the difference between an indie question and what is left and right, and that they're so self-righteous they believe that anyone who opposed them equals tory.

It's just like the UKIP voters in England - unable to engage their brain onto the facts, and where instead the scenario they've self-invented has become the truth.

[LJS]

Which is at least a recognition that yes-ers have lost the plot, being unable to recognise the difference between an indie question and what is left and right, and that they're so self-righteous they believe that anyone who opposed them equals tory.

It's just like the UKIP voters in England - unable to engage their brain onto the facts, and where instead the scenario they've self-invented has become the truth.

I know it's a constant regret for you, Neil, that none of the pro Indy posters on here were raving cybernats. Although that never stopped you pretending wee were. So, just for the record, whatever some crazies on line may think, I never said all no voters are Tory nor would anyone with a grain of sanity.

So, Neil, is eggman Murphy the answer to slab's woes? Mind, he says Labour will lose no Scottish seats in the GE!

Do you think his role in the No campaign will help or hinder him in saving Scottish Labour?

[Big Vern]

they're so self-righteous they believe that anyone who opposed them equals tory.

Funny, there's plenty of lefties on here who are exactly the same if you don't wholeheartedly agree with them

[eFestivals]

I know it's a constant regret for you, Neil, that none of the pro Indy posters on here were raving cybernats. Although that never stopped you pretending wee were. So, just for the record, whatever some crazies on line may think, I never said all no voters are Tory nor would anyone with a grain of sanity.

And yet you mentioned that supporting 'no' was somehow a negative point against Labour.

That pans out as being that it was impossible to be (somehow) 'politically good' unless you supported yes, at least in some people's minds (and in this case, it's in a large number of yes-ers minds).

You mentioned it; you recognise it a solid theme, even if that's not you.

So either you already know a large proportion of yes-ers have lost the political plot because they've been doing this, or you truly believe that you can't be left wing unless you were a yes-er.

Care to tell me which it is then?

So, Neil, is eggman Murphy the answer to slab's woes? Mind, he says Labour will lose no Scottish seats in the GE!

Do you think his role in the No campaign will help or hinder him in saving Scottish Labour?

Oh, undoubtedly it'll hinder him - because so many Scots clearly can't recognise what is left wing and what is an indy campaign.

[eFestivals]

Funny, there's plenty of lefties on here who are exactly the same if you don't wholeheartedly agree with them

It depends what is being discussed, so all instances are not equal.

Scotland's indyref was not a left/right issue - tho huge numbers of Scots now believe that it can only ever be that.

[russycarps]

I read lots of times people saying "I cant believe george galloway has gone over to the right" when he was campaigning for No.

[LJS]

And yet you mentioned that supporting 'no' was somehow a negative point against Labour.

That pans out as being that it was impossible to be (somehow) 'politically good' unless you supported yes, at least in some people's minds (and in this case, it's in a large number of yes-ers minds).

You mentioned it; you recognise it a solid theme, even if that's not you.

So either you already know a large proportion of yes-ers have lost the political plot because they've been doing this, or you truly believe that you can't be left wing unless you were a yes-er.

Care to tell me which it is then?

...sighs....I thought you were meant to be smart. I'be not been judging the Labour party here. I've been speculating about how much of the ground it's lost it is likely to regain in the next 6 months under Jim Murphy.

Unless the polls are wildly wrong, it has lost a barrowload of support & it is reasonable to suppose that some of that support will be related to the 20-30 Labour supporters who voted yes. They might have been expected to return to the fold after the referendum bit that has not been the case.

I have criticised Labour & Murphy before & I shall no doubt do so again. But that is not what I'm doing here.

I've not mentioned left or right wing on all this & have never suggested if you are of the left you must be pro yes. As you correctly point out indy is not a left/right issue: although many like myself saw it as an opportunity to breathe mee life into the left.

Edited December 15, 2014 by LJS

[eFestivals]

...sighs....I thought you were meant to be smart. I'be not been judging the Labour party here. I've been speculating about how much of the ground it's lost it is likely to regain in the next 6 months under Jim Murphy.

Unless the polls are wildly wrong, it has lost a barrowload of support & it is reasonable to suppose that some of that support will be related to the 20-30 Labour supporters who voted yes. They might have been expected to return to the fold after the referendum bit that has not been the case.

I have criticised Labour & Murphy before & I shall no doubt do so again. But that is not what I'm doing here.

I've not mentioned left or right wing on all this & have never suggested if you are of the left you must be pro yes. As you correctly point out indy is not a left/right issue: although many like myself saw it as an opportunity to breathe mee life into the left.

blah blah blah ... and avoid what I asked.

You pointed out an idea that is held by a very large number of yes-ers - that it's impossible to be politically left-wing unless you supported 'yes'.

Have these yes-ers lost the plot, or have they nailed it?

It has to be one or the other, so which is it in your opinion?

You clearly have an opinion on it, or you wouldn't be putting it forwards as an idea (even if it's not an idea you personally subscribe to).

And once you've used your brain and stated that they've lost the plot and are not responding to actual events with actual sense, perhaps you'd like to compare how such vacuous stupidity perfectly matches the UKIP supporters, making them two sides of the same coin?

Edited December 16, 2014 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

... the 20-30 Labour supporters who voted yes.

PS: why never any mention of the 30 to 40% of SNP voters who voted no?

Why do you only ever mention the Labour voters who voted yes, as tho that says something meaningful about Labour, while SNP voters who voted no say nothing about the SNP?

[eFestivals]

Had Scotland voted 'yes', just about now Salmond would be starting to put together the first independence budget for 2016 - with extra planning time quite reasonably needed to create something that's not previously existed.

So he'd now be writing into stone a massive cut in Scottish public spending "for the future good of the Scottish nation" - so it's not bankrupt in it's first year.

Cos he can't magic money out of thin air. Funny that, eh? Vote for "the left" (laughable!), and get something more extreme than the tories give you.

[eFestivals]

I see that the first dose of reality has emerged from the SNP's bunker, with Sturgeon having admitted what I've not seen admitted by a single yes voter - that the SNP lost because the SNP's financial plans were laughable in the minds of most people in Scotland.

[LJS]

PS: why never any mention of the 30 to 40% of SNP voters who voted no?

Why do you only ever mention the Labour voters who voted yes, as tho that says something meaningful about Labour, while SNP voters who voted no say nothing about the SNP?

Because I'm discussing the Labour party & to what extent it can win back lost voters.

And for the billionth time I have never said anything about only yes voters being lefty or no voters being Tory. Nor, do I think it is a view held by many although I have no doubt it exists particularly in the murky newspaper comments sections you love to frequent.

I think an interesting battle lies ahead as both Nicola & Jim seek to claim the slightly left of centre ground.

Oh, & you'll be glad to know i'm unlikely to be " bringing about Tory rule" by sending an Snp mp to Westminster. I checked the % in my constituency at the last GE.

Lab:46

Lib dem: 35

SNP: 10

If Labour lose that, they might as well give up!

[eFestivals]

Because I'm discussing the Labour party & to what extent it can win back lost voters.

And I keep on asking you if they've got that chance under any circumstances at all.

The word from Scotland is not a feckin' chance. Because they voted no, that makes them tories irregardless of any policy position they might take.

You've mentioned that in your own words. You recognise this situation.

So I keep asking you: does it make those people sane, or does it make them political vacuous?

And once you're able to admit that they're politically vacuous because they can't be swayed by policies (only dogma), you might stop and ask yourself where those vacuous people might lead you.

The answer is: to the same place as UKIP.

Oh, & you'll be glad to know i'm unlikely to be " bringing about Tory rule" by sending an Snp mp to Westminster. I checked the % in my constituency at the last GE.

The incumbent PM gets first shot at forming a govt if it's a hung parliament, so at the very least you'll be voting in support of giving Dave a free pass.

But more likely you'll be voting in support of him ruling over you. Your vote does not work in isolation from all other votes.

Edited December 16, 2014 by eFestivals

[LJS]

And I keep on asking you if they've got that chance under any circumstances at all.

The word from Scotland is not a feckin' chance. Because they voted no, that makes them tories irregardless of any policy position they might take.

You've mentioned that in your own words. You recognise this situation.

So I keep asking you: does it make those people sane, or does it make them political vacuous?

And once you're able to admit that they're politically vacuous because they can't be swayed by policies (only dogma), you might stop and ask yourself where those vacuous people might lead you.

The answer is: to the same place as UKIP.

I must be even more stupid than you think. I genuinely have absolutely no idea what relationship your responses have to anything I have said, so if it's all very well with you we'll just leave it there.

The incumbent PM gets first shot at forming a govt if it's a hung parliament, so at the very least you'll be voting in support of giving Dave a free pass.

But more likely you'll be voting in support of him ruling over you. Your vote does not work in isolation from all other votes.

Oh, so you're now saying that FPTP accurately reflects the way people vote are you?

[eFestivals]

I must be even more stupid than you think. I genuinely have absolutely no idea what relationship your responses have to anything I have said, so if it's all very well with you we'll just leave it there.

You said: "he was a very high profile & outspoken member of the No campaign".

I'm asking you: what relevance is that to any political position in Scotland now the indyref is over?

Whether someone was yes or no has fuck all to do with any other policy positions they might take within the UK parliament.

After all, it's not like Salmond will be sat at Westminster saying "I won't talk to any of you until I get indie". Indy gets put aside* to deal with the real meaningful business of today.

(* in theory, anyway. We all know that Salmond will be trying to use Westminster to strengthen support for indie).

The fact that many in Scotland see Murphy's support for 'no' as a betrayal of Scotland just because he disagreed with them and was on the other side of that one particular non-left/right issue says those people have lost the political plot.

If Murphy takes a good position over (say) the NHS then what has his support for 'no' got to do with that? An intelligent mind would support that good position over the NHS, and not reject it only because it was coming from a no-er.

Ultimately, you're saying that those who reject Murphy because he supported 'no' are politically stupid.

Either that, or you're doing the exact same thing and making yourself....?

You got it now?

I'm asking you: are you politically sane, or are you politically stupid?

The politically stupid are the ones who will punch themselves in the face out of self-sadness that yes lost; that reject good ideas on the basis of an irrelevance; that reject democracy itself.

Edited December 17, 2014 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

Oh, so you're now saying that FPTP accurately reflects the way people vote are you?

Nope.

I'm saying that FPTP is the system we have and the system that votes made in Scotland (and everywhere else in the UK) have influence within, and not any other system.

Voting as tho it was the same system as is used for Holyrood is daft. It's throwing away your vote and giving greater strength to the votes of those whose policies you 100% reject (and reject more-so than you do Labour's policies).

Why vote in a way that gives the tories power? That's what votes for the SNP in the GE are likely to be.

Pretending that a vote for the SNP doesn't give the tories extra power is the political equivalent of punching yourself in the face.

[eFestivals]

I'm wondering if many in Scotland are noticing what's happening to the countries that are dependent on oil and gas money?

Or are there loads of people detached from reality?

Under newspaper articles, mostly I'm seeing people detached from reality, but I'm wondering how big that body of opinion really is?

The current opinion polls from Scotland suggest that it's very common for Scots to be detached from reality.

But what are Scots really saying about it to each other?

[LJS]

Nope.

I'm saying that FPTP is the system we have and the system that votes made in Scotland (and everywhere else in the UK) have influence within, and not any other system.

Voting as tho it was the same system as is used for Holyrood is daft. It's throwing away your vote and giving greater strength to the votes of those whose policies you 100% reject (and reject more-so than you do Labour's policies).

Why vote in a way that gives the tories power? That's what votes for the SNP in the GE are likely to be.

Pretending that a vote for the SNP doesn't give the tories extra power is the political equivalent of punching yourself in the face.

My point was that whatever way I vote Labour are liely to win my my constituency ( as has been the case for most of my voting life) I have used this as a justification for voting as I please & not "needing" to vote tactically as I have rarely if ever lived in one of the 50to 100 constituencies that actually decide who wins elections under FPTP.

[LJS]

You said: "he was a very high profile & outspoken member of the No campaign".

I'm asking you: what relevance is that to any political position in Scotland now the indyref is over?

Whether someone was yes or no has fuck all to do with any other policy positions they might take within the UK parliament.

After all, it's not like Salmond will be sat at Westminster saying "I won't talk to any of you until I get indie". Indy gets put aside* to deal with the real meaningful business of today.

(* in theory, anyway. We all know that Salmond will be trying to use Westminster to strengthen support for indie).

The fact that many in Scotland see Murphy's support for 'no' as a betrayal of Scotland just because he disagreed with them and was on the other side of that one particular non-left/right issue says those people have lost the political plot.

If Murphy takes a good position over (say) the NHS then what has his support for 'no' got to do with that? An intelligent mind would support that good position over the NHS, and not reject it only because it was coming from a no-er.

Ultimately, you're saying that those who reject Murphy because he supported 'no' are politically stupid.

Either that, or you're doing the exact same thing and making yourself....?

You got it now?

I'm asking you: are you politically sane, or are you politically stupid?

The politically stupid are the ones who will punch themselves in the face out of self-sadness that yes lost; that reject good ideas on the basis of an irrelevance; that reject democracy itself.

I think it is likely there is some link between slab's plummeting poll ratings & the Indy campaign. That can be true without people believing no=Tory.

Part of the explanation could be the breaking of a lifelong "habit" of voting Labour. It has long been joked that in vast swathes of Scotland SLAB could pin a red rosette on a monkey & it would get elected. (some would say this has actually happened on a few occasions but I'm not that cruel)

In other words folk have voted Labour without thinking. Indyref made some of these people think. And some of them may even have carried on thinking post indyref.

The Labour party did not help matters by standing shoulder to shoulder with the Tories which forced them on occasions to effectively support the record of the Tories. This was unnecessary. They could have campaigned on their own outside the BT campaign. This would have allowed them to campaign against indy AND against the Tories. By the end of the campaign, this is pretty much where they ended up & many would argue that's what won the vote.

To talk of left & right is hardly relevant as there is no major party in this country that can in any realistic way be described as left.

[kaosmark2]

The Labour party did not help matters by standing shoulder to shoulder with the Tories which forced them on occasions to effectively support the record of the Tories. This was unnecessary. They could have campaigned on their own outside the BT campaign. This would have allowed them to campaign against indy AND against the Tories. By the end of the campaign, this is pretty much where they ended up & many would argue that's what won the vote.

#FallenforSNPPropaganda

[LJS]

#FallenforSNPPropaganda

#bollocks

[eFestivals]

My point was that whatever way I vote Labour are liely to win my my constituency ( as has been the case for most of my voting life) I have used this as a justification for voting as I please & not "needing" to vote tactically as I have rarely if ever lived in one of the 50to 100 constituencies that actually decide who wins elections under FPTP.

But I'm not talking about you in particular, I'm talking about Scotland in general.

But anyway, going by those Scottish polls, isn't Labour meant to lose a very big chunk of it's seats? I keep hearing that how people voted last time isn't much of a reference point for this time (and it's actually like that in my own English constituency too).

If Scotland votes mostly SNP, it changes who are the "50to 100 constituencies that actually decide who wins elections under FPTP", but not the fact of it working like that.

And, if it pans out as I'm thinking (which is certainly possible), what those Scots will have decided for "who wins elections under FPTP" will be that the tories should be the winners.

This is what I'm getting at. Scots cannot cast their vote and pretend that if they're not voting for the winner the outcome is nothing to do with them. FPTP doesn't work like that; the result in every constituency affects the overall make-up, and affects who ends up with control.

Despite the indy myth that Scottish votes count for nothing at Westminster, this time ity's looking like they'll count for a tory victory by causing Labour to not win more seats.

Pretending reality is different to what it is might give Scotland a bad outcome.

[Comfy Bean]

#FallenforSNPPropaganda

You don`t need to take anyone on here`s word for it mate , although LJS`s is spot on as normal - the red rosette on a monkey line has been used for decades up here, why not listen to the Leader of Scottish Labour during the Indy campaign. She walked and took her deputy with her describing the Scottish Labour party as being a " branch office " of the Westminster Party. Brown and Darling were not far behind her. We found out yesterday that Darling phoned Dave 2 hours before his 7am speech " begging " him not to include the English votes thing in his victory speech. Dave ignored him ( after getting Darling to lead the BT campaign ) and as we all agreed at the time ( i think ) Dave ignored him and played them like a fiddle. As far as I know SNP MP`s will not vote on matters that only affect England so no matter what Neil believes, if the good folks in England choose to vote for the Tories in the General Election then they will have Tories making the decisions which kind of seems fair enough ! I don`t think that we will see anything like 40+ SNP MP`s anyway but if they aren`t going to vote on English matters anyway then this all seems a bit of a red herring ( involving the SNP ). For me this more about Dave taking Labour down and using our unsuccessful Indy campaign as his excuse. He`s trolled them big time

[eFestivals]

The Labour party did not help matters by standing shoulder to shoulder with the Tories which forced them on occasions to effectively support the record of the Tories. This was unnecessary. They could have campaigned on their own outside the BT campaign. This would have allowed them to campaign against indy AND against the Tories. By the end of the campaign, this is pretty much where they ended up & many would argue that's what won the vote.

That last line makes me laugh. The cybernats would say that's how their victory was stolen from them, while also saying that lots of postal voters would have voted yes and not no if they'd have heard those things earlier - it doesn't get much more ridiculous.

But anyway, thanks for clarifying that you're one of those who's lost the political plot. What Labour were doing was defending the record of the UK - warts and all - because the UK is all of the Labour voters and the others.

You know, just like iScotland wouldn't have been a socialist wonderland, but would instead have been politically driven by the always-changing political views of the people in the country.

You do know that Scotland was the last 'nation' of the UK to vote as a majority for the tories*, don't you? It can happen again - tho going by those cybernats, all tory thinkers in iScotland will have been shot, expelled or had their voting rights revoked, cos they certainly don't feature in their view of Scottish opinion or future politics.

(* it was actually the Unionist Party at that time [1950's], but who were tories in all other ways).

To talk of left & right is hardly relevant as there is no major party in this country that can in any realistic way be described as left.

Not even in Scotland!

Which seems to be passing Scotland by.

And that's because...? The left does not have the public support that many Scots imagine it to do.

It's all very well wanting a particular outcome, but you only get it if the votes are restricted to people who think like you.