Scottish General Election

[Differentforgirls]

Who are Scottish people voting for next month?

How do you think the UK Government have performed since September 2014?

Because, although we’re allowed to do bits and pieces, they’re still in charge of the shitshow that is currently the UK. All debts, no assets.

I think SNP will gain the most seats.
I’m voting Labour in my constituency vote as only SNP and Labour have local candidates tackling local issues. My regional vote will be Conservative (for the first time ever). Many of their policies feel refreshingly like common sense after the lunacy of the past 5 years and they’ll be stronger in opposition than Labour.

We are discussing the Scottish election

You're the one espousing continued UK governance and claiming you'd be worried for your DC's futures without it, so it's a perfectly reasonable question to ask.

Your quote shows that your claim that generation is defined there is completely untrue. The word is not even used.

In the context of Scotland being part of the UK.

It doesn't appear anywhere in the Edinburgh Agreement either, but unionists still continually refer to it as if it was codified rather than a throwaway comment.

It appears in the white paper.

Which ceased to have any relevance whatsoever after the 2014 "No" vote.

You think that because it shows that your claim that once in a generation was just a throwaway comment is not true. It appears 3 times in the white paper.

No, I think that because the White Paper is and was nothing more than a prospectus, not a legally binding document, an Act of Parliament, or any sort of document that bound anyone to anything regardless of the outcome of the 2014 vote, so there are no grounds whatsoever for unionists to point to it as a basis for denying all and any future potential Referenda.

The Edinburgh Act is legally binding piece of codified legislation. It says nothing whatsoever about 2014 being a one-off that precludes any further consideration of Constitutional change.

But it does show that the expectation was not to rerun the referendum anytime soon. It wasn’t just a throwaway comment as you claimed but was in the documentation, the case for independence provided by the Scottish government.

and no unionist has said there should never be another referendum, that’s just a strawman.

Even in NI there hasn’t been another referendum because there hasn’t been the case to, just like in Scotland there is no good case based on voting patterns.

and no unionist has said there should never be another referendum, that’s just a strawman

This is entirely specious because the point at hand is the "once in a generation" thing, which unionists have spent most of the past decade reiterating endlessly despite the fact that there is no consensus on what constitutes a "generation" in political terms. You could make a perfectly cogent argument that it is as little as five years, given that's what is generally considered to be the maximum reasonable lifespan of a government before it should be tested electorally.

Even in NI there hasn’t been another referendum because there hasn’t been the case to, just like in Scotland there is no good case based on voting patterns

Which "voting patterns" particularly?

Margaret Thatcher, Douglas Alexander, Ruth Davidson, all publicly asserted that all Scotland needs to do to achieve Indi was return a majority of pro-Indi MP's and MSP's. We're past that yardstick, and still no Independence, so it seems that no matter what unionists assert is the watermark, it will simply be ignored if it's attained and the goalposts moved again.

Curious you bring up NI given that the criterion for a Border Poll are encoded and quite unambiguous. When are we similarly going to be told what the democratic route out of this "voluntary" union is? At the moment you'd be forgiven for interpreting the fact that there appears to be none is due to the fact the Union is not "voluntary" at all. Generally speaking, the term "voluntary" is taken to mean participation at your discretion, not participation because another participant says you can not leave.

lol. I didn’t bring up Northern Ireland first. And no, that wording isn’t unambiguous at all.

The Good Friday Agreement says: “if it appears likely to the UK Secretary of State that a majority of voters in Northern Ireland would vote for a united Ireland, a border poll must be called.”

That’s an incredibly broad and subjective test. It gives enormous discretion to one politician. Compare that to Scotland: we had a voluntary referendum in 2014 precisely because it appeared likely to the government at the time that a majority might vote for independence. The threshold and subjectivity are actually quite similar.

The SNP’s “once in a generation” comment was clearly meant to describe a rare, historic opportunity, in fact Salmond himself used the word “rare” to describe it.

And it’s a bit rich to dismiss the 2014 White Paper as ancient history while treating throwaway lines from Thatcher or random comments from decades ago as some sacred “yardstick.”

lol. I didn’t bring up Northern Ireland first. And no, that wording isn’t unambiguous at all

I didn't suggest you "brought it up first". You did however make reference to it in your post, hence why I referred to it in turn. I'm unsure why you apparently find this humorous.

Compare that to Scotland: we had a voluntary referendum in 2014 precisely because it appeared likely to the government at the time that a majority might vote for independence

Well this is a palpably ridiculous claim, since at the point when the Edinburgh Act was ratified Independence was polling at around 26%. Of course, the Act itself did not appear overnight and was months in the making, so the 26% figure would likely have been even lower at the point of the Act's conception.

The threshold and subjectivity are actually quite similar

Well evidently not, otherwise NI would be having Border Polls any time it looks likely 26% of the inhabitants would vote for a united Ireland.

The SNP’s “once in a generation” comment was clearly meant to describe a rare, historic opportunity, in fact Salmond himself used the word “rare” to describe it

Indeed, so there is no basis whatsoever to continue to use that statement as an excuse to deny Referenda in perpetuity, which is effectively the current situation given the refusal to even contemplate what might constitute a political generation.

And it’s a bit rich to dismiss the 2014 White Paper as ancient history while treating throwaway lines from Thatcher or random comments from decades ago as some sacred “yardstick.”

No.

Margaret Thatcher was PM at the time, Alexander is the current SoS for Scotland, Ruth Davidson was the Scottish Leader of the party of Westminster Governance throughout her entire time in that role. Neither of the latter pairs' comments were "decades" ago, and these are not people whose statements on Constitutional matters can simply be dismissed as "throwaway" comments given their political status, and especially not when these comments are as close to anything any prominent Unionist politician has come to spelling out the democratic route to Scotland leaving a "voluntary" Union of its own accord. Again, absent of anything further, the only conclusion can be that the UK is in no way, shape, or form a "voluntary" union in any recognised meaning of that term.

And once again, the White Paper was simply a political prospectus that ceased to have any relevance whatsoever in the aftermath of the No vote, so no, the two are not comparable.

👏👏

I find it humorous because your arguments are so patently ridiculous.

you clearly don’t remember why the 2014 referendum happened. It happened because the SNP won a clear majority. Something that has not been repeated since. Nothing to do with polling which renders your comment on NI even more ridiculous. 🤭

And again the straw man about there never being a referendum again. The SNP called for another referendum immediately after the first which dilutes any further calls for another. All anyone is said is that there needs to be a clear mandate for another referendum. Not because the SNP and no voters are throwing a tantrum at the result. Nothing voting or polling since the first referendum has given a clear mandate. That may change at this election but we’ll have to wait and see.

Again all those politicians are yesterdays men and woman and those were throwaway comments. Not any kind of promise or mandate. It’s very clear anyway that the only reason the SNP get a majority in Westminster is down to the FPTP voting system they do not get anywhere near even 50% of the votes.

you clearly don’t remember why the 2014 referendum happened. It happened because the SNP won a clear majority

Really? There is absolutely nothing on statute that mandates this. If only there was, because then we'd have a clear and unambiguous yardstick, which at least NI has in some form even though it still contains a degree of subjectivity.

Nothing to do with polling which renders your comment on NI even more ridiculous

Err.. it was you that suggested the driver behind the 2014 referendum was a government thinking they were in a position to win Independence. At no point did I suggest the referendum came about as a result of indi polling. That was to demonstrate that your assertion is nonsense, given that no government is going to be confident of winning any issue that is polling at 26% in favour.

In any case, the Scottish Government did not call the Referendum, the Westminster government offered terms under which the SG would be permitted to do this, Cameron mistakenly believing that "No" was a formality and it would kill the issue stone dead, just as he did with his Brexit gamble and subsequent miscalculation.

we had a voluntary referendum in 2014 precisely because it appeared likely to the government at the time that a majority might vote for independence

You are clearly referring to the SG here, which ably demonstrates that you are flailing around and talking utter nonsense.

The SNP called for another referendum immediately after the first which dilutes any further calls for another

No they did not. This is yet more rubbish.

The SG in 2016 and 2017 repeatedly requested concessions from Theresa May's government given that every single ward in Scotland had rejected Brexit. A fundamental "better together" campaign promise was that if Scotland voted "no", this would ensure Scotland's continued membership of the EU. Two years on from the referendum, there is a clear and unambiguous failure to deliver on what was promised as a result of a "no" vote, this is followed by a total and utter rebuffing of all attempts to negotiate a more temperate Brexit for Scotland which reflected Scotland's vote. Not only this, but the SG were told at the time that the concessions they were seeking simply weren't possible, yet much the same conditions later came into effect in Northern Ireland, proving that May's recalcitrance was also without foundation.

The SNP did not call for another referendum "immediately after the first", they called for one years later in the aftermath of an enormous failure of the UK State to make good on the promises made in return for a "no" vote, and even then, only after being subjected to a needlessly harsh "hard" Brexit which self-evidently did not have to be the case.

So just how ridiculous do things have to be before there is a "clear mandate for another referendum"?

Not because the SNP and no voters are throwing a tantrum at the result

More nonsense.

The "no" result was generally accepted with good grace. The SG went into the Smith Commission in good faith, only to find that the BT representatives then set about diluting and undermining practically every single commitment made in the campaign and in Gordon Brown's ludicrous "vow". The SG has since abided by the outcome of the 2014 Referendum, meanwhile, practically every promise or assurance made by BT has either turned out to be nonsense, a straightforward lie, or hasn't materialised in anything remotely close to the format that was suggested.

Again all those politicians are yesterdays men and woman

Douglas Alexander is the current, in-situ Secretary of State for Scotland 🙄

It’s very clear anyway that the only reason the SNP get a majority in Westminster is down to the FPTP voting system they do not get anywhere near even 50% of the votes

And what of it?

Is this somehow less legitimate than any other outcome arising from FPTP, for example, when Scotland ends up being governed by a party with a literal handful of representatives North of the border, or literally one solitary representative as was the case between 2010 and 2017?

BTW, are you still absolutely adamant the SNP are going to be "swept away" on May 7th? Reason I ask, is I can still vividly remember the absolute state you got yourself into a little over a year back on here when I pointed out that despite your vehemence, the actual polling was suggesting nothing of the sort.

It’s not FPTP.

You really don’t know that the UK elections for Westminster are FPTP? 😂😂😂

Missed the Westminster in your rant. When did they have a majority in Westminster?

I am Scottish and i am mighty proud of Faslane. Don't talk for the whole of Scotland when you really can't.

Oh I’m flattered that you remember me. 😂 clearly I got to you back then. I have no idea who you are. You are clearly the one getting yourself into a bit of a state here though. You seem quite angry. 🤭 The polling at the time did show the SNP being swept away. Thanks to the fuckwit Starmer that will not happen.

yes the 2014 referendum happened because the SNP won a majority. Not my problem if you can’t remember. 🤷🏻‍♀️ Not many countries have the conditions under which part of it can separate written down. NI is an unusual case.

You are clearly referring to the SG here, which ably demonstrates that you are flailing around and talking utter nonsense.
nope I’m clearly referring to the UK gov. You’re the one flailing.

At no point did I suggest the referendum came about as a result of indi polling. Yes you did. At no point did I mention polling.

The "no" result was generally accepted with good grace. 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂💀💀💀💀💀💀💀💀💀💀💀Thanks for the laugh. Salmond threw his toys out of the pram. They refused to attend the service of reconciliation. Less than a year later there was talk of another referendum.

And what of it? It shows that your “yardstick” of Westminster seats does not reflect any potential independence vote.

In 2015 they won the majority of the Scottish seats at Westminster.

So not a majority.