Supreme Court ruling on Scot ref - Scottish govt does NOT have right to hold another referendum

"Cult", "hate filled", "vile", "obsessed", "she's nuts"... "protest vote".

What a weird thread. Teacider and Jedi do you two think that there's no valid position for a person to be in favour of Scottish independence? It's not that out there is it? Loads of countries have decided they wanted to be independent of British rule over the last century or two.

Jedi you especially seem to be saying that the leader of the Scottish National Party is being out of order supporting the idea of a Scottish nation...
 
Last edited:
sure checkout Health care , Transport, Housing, Green issues immigration they actually seem to want to help and welcome asylum seekers SNP not sure what the issue is with her is do people feel threatened by her ?

None of those things are going well in Scotland right now?

Scotland's NHS is on it's **** as much as England's, they're in a massive housing crisis, they're also undergoing mass strike actions in transport.

What's great about it?

None of those things are great in the rest of the UK either right now, but I'm not claiming that.
 
This 100% it’s not about a referendum vote it’s about independence by hook or by crook

Of course. :ROFLMAO: she's the leader of a political party that exists to secure Scottish independence. What are you expecting? How weird would it be if she one day turned round and started saying actually I think we should stay in the UK?

It'd be like having a Labour leader who votes against corporation tax rises, supports undercover police in trade unions, sacks ministers for joining trade union picket lines... 😇😜
 
Last edited:
So if we voted remain this wouldn’t be happening come on

Brexit was a complete red herring sh wsnts independence end of

I'm sure the hardliners would still want independence if Brexit hadn't happened, but Brexit and the way it was handled added a lot of momentum to the cause. If the UK was in the EU today the SNP would not have so much traction.
 
If SNP put candidates up for election in England I'd vote for them. Banned rent rises. Absolute F***ing legends.

Of course there shouldn't be another referendum. We just had one a few years ago. You can't just keep having referendums over and over again until you get the result you want. Defeats the whole object. Disrespects those who voted the other way. It's subverting democracy. It's like what trump's doing though without the lunatic rhetoric and violence.
 
If SNP put candidates up for election in England I'd vote for them. Banned rent rises. Absolute F***ing legends.

Of course there shouldn't be another referendum. We just had one a few years ago. You can't just keep having referendums over and over again until you get the result you want. Defeats the whole object. Disrespects those who voted the other way. It's subverting democracy. It's like what trump's doing though without the lunatic rhetoric and violence.

It was 8 years ago now. And its not like one could be organised in the next 5 weeks so even if one was called now it'd be 9 years since by the time it actually happened. How long is appropriate?
 
I don't understand how Scottish independence arguments make sense to someone that thinks Brexit was a bad idea. All of the arguments against Brexit, which the Scots were so opposed to, are the exact same as the arguments against Scottish Independence.

The case for Scotland being independent can only be because they don't want to be ruled by the English. It's a power-grab by Sturgeon and co.
 
The problem with these ratchet referendums ( they only go one way and cannot be reversed in the future ) is that they regard a split vote as consent if it is marginally above 50%. As the Brexit vote was.
All the indications are that roughly 50% of Scots want independence. This should not be enough to commit the whole of a country to a split in the Union with rest of UK.
If we have any such referendums in future the bar should be set to something like 65%, which would mean that there wold have to be overwhelming support for the irreversible change.
 
It was 8 years ago now. And its not like one could be organised in the next 5 weeks so even if one was called now it'd be 9 years since by the time it actually happened. How long is appropriate?
Longer than 8 or 9 years certainly. Really they should have agreed on this before the first referendum. Imagine having a general election and then just having a new one every week until you got the result you wanted. Though given the finality of a yes result, it's perhaps not the best example. Imagine putting a man on trial every week until you get the death penalty.

Its very important in a democracy to respect the result even if you do not agree with it.
 
Longer than 8 or 9 years certainly. Really they should have agreed on this before the first referendum. Imagine having a general election and then just having a new one every week until you got the result you wanted. Though given the finality of a yes result, it's perhaps not the best example. Imagine putting a man on trial every week until you get the death penalty.

Its very important in a democracy to respect the result even if you do not agree with it.

I don't think any analogy where you're changing 8 or 9 years to "every week" is particularly useful...
 
I don't think any analogy where you're changing 8 or 9 years to "every week" is particularly useful...
I think it pretty much is equivalent to every week when you take into account how final and momentous the decision would be.

Tell me this. If the Brexit vote had been for remain, would you be happy to have another one every few years until we left?
 
I think it pretty much is equivalent to every week when you take into account how final and momentous the decision would be.

Tell me this. If the Brexit vote had been for remain, would you be happy to have another one every few years until we left?

Every few years? Every week? 9 years later?

These are very different things.

Yes I think 9 years is pretty reasonable tbh. And as others have pointed out, the brexit vote is a pretty big change within those 9 years.

To take your person on trial analogy, would it be reasonable to have a retrial 9 years later, if a major new piece of evidence suddenly emerged? Of course it would.
 
9 years is a very small amount of time. Scotland could leave and rejoin the UK 7 or 8 times in a lifetime under your timescale. That to me seems pretty daft.

Brexit isn't that big. Was there a referendum for Scotland to leave the UK when we joined?

If the Brexit vote had been for remain, would you be happy to have another one every few years until we left?
 
If the Brexit vote had been for remain, would you be happy to have another one every few years until we left?

As I've said, I disagree with the way you're playing with timescales.

But as a general answer - yeah sure. If it was comparable. I.e. governments kept being elected, with big thumping majorities, with EU referendums in their manifestos. Why would anyone arbitrarily set a time limit on how often something like a referendum can happen, irrespective of whatever else is happening in the world?

I asked a few messages ago how long you think Scotland should have to wait before they're allowed another vote. What are you saying? Not 9 years isn't much of an answer. 20 years? 100 years? 1000 years?
 
"Cult", "hate filled", "vile", "obsessed", "she's nuts"... "protest vote".

What a weird thread. Teacider and Jedi do you two think that there's no valid position for a person to be in favour of Scottish independence? It's not that out there is it? Loads of countries have decided they wanted to be independent of British rule over the last century or two.

Jedi you especially seem to be saying that the leader of the Scottish National Party is being out of order supporting the idea of a Scottish nation...
Jedi is utterly obsessed with her. Anytime she comes up he gets like this 😂
 
From Sturgeon's press conference, it sounds like she'll resign if the SNP and Scottish Greens don't get 50%+ of the vote in Scotland at the next general election.

They got a combined 46% at the last general election, up from 37.1% in 2017, but it wasn't being marketed as a de facto referendum.

There will be current SNP voters who don't support independence, and there will also be Lib Dem, Labour and Tory voters that do.
 
Sounds like it

She tried to claim they were a repressed colony like Quebec.

Verdict is in

Scottish parliament does NOT have power to hold referendum
Quebec has had two democratic referendums to separate from Canada , both returned no .

You sure they didn’t mean Kosovo ? F***ing ridiculous they’re comparing themselves anyway to them
 
No other party in Scotland has such an overwhelming mandate.
Declare UDI - go ahead without a referendum and start devolution from Westminster.
(y)

Chew on that Richi
 
Back
Top