UK General Election

[Giz]

Whether or not you realise it, the way you frame your questions is very revealing of your basic standpoint, thinking, prejudices and agenda. Of course replies are going to acknowledge that.

Aye, the nerve to ask a question without dressing it up in tartan...


Wee, sleekit, cow'rin, tim'rous beastie,
O, what a panic's in thy breastie!
Thou need na start awa sae hasty,
Wi' bickering brattle!
I wad be laith to rin an' question thee,
Wi' moving goalposties!

I'm truly sorry May's dominion,
Has broken Scotland’s social union,
An' justifies that ill opinion,
Which makes thee startle
At me, thy poor, UK companion,
An' fellow-mortal!

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Aye, the nerve to ask a question without dressing it up in tartan...


Wee, sleekit, cow'rin, tim'rous beastie,
O, what a panic's in thy breastie!
Thou need na start awa sae hasty,
Wi' bickering brattle!
I wad be laith to rin an' question thee,
Wi' moving goalposties!

I'm truly sorry May's dominion,
Has broken Scotland’s social union,
An' justifies that ill opinion,
Which makes thee startle
At me, thy poor, UK companion,
An' fellow-mortal!

Aye observing details like the right to self determination is just dressing things up in tartan. Meanwhile bigots draped in the butchers apron are dragging the country off a cliff edge based in Daily Mail tales and xenophobia.

 

[MikeG]

Aye, the nerve to ask a question without dressing it up in tartan.........

I'd love to know how I could possibly have asked the same question another way without offending anyone. I took Rolfe's point, added a point about the conservative manifesto, and politely asked for their opinion on what the upshot would be from a Scots perspective. Immediately the personal comments start. Frankly, it's beyond parody. I clearly have a nerve being a reprehensible middle of the road Englishman, and how dare I ask a polite question.

 

[Rolfe]

That may be the point. You see yourself as a "middle-of-the-road Englishman" but the debate in Scotland is so far beyond the compass of middle-of-the-road Englishmen at this stage that any question which may possibly appear to you as neutral comes over as extremely union-biassed.

If you're getting all your information from the English press and broadcast media you are inevitably taking on board a one-sided agenda. Consequently, questions you frame from this perspective are going to appear extremely agenda-driven to anyone who is following the debate on a daily basis in Scotland.

The idea that if Theresa May wins a general election victory on the back of a landslide of English votes while losing badly to the SNP in Scotland itself, that could in any way be considered as a mandate to block the expressed will of the Scottish parliament, is simply not one that would be contemplated in Scotland. It's back to "Sit down, Scotland. No you can't. Be quiet. Get back in your box, your betters have spoken." We're not having that any more and I'm perennially astonished that anyone thinks we even might.

 

[Strawberry]

None of the Scots here have answered the point I raised some days ago. I'm genuinely interested in your thoughts.

Assume exactly the scenario that Rolfe has just outlined: an increase in the Conservative vote in Scotland, and a decrease in the SNP vote and seats. The numbers aren't important for the sake of this question. If...........if............the Tories have it in their GE manifesto that they won't be allowing an Indyref 2 in this next parliament if re-elected, and they then get the stonking great majority that everyone predicts, what then?

Sturgeon will demand and whine, and May will say no, it's the democratic will of the electorate. What are the SNP's options then?

You would be headed for a similar situation to that which existed in Ireland after the 1918 election. It would be an incredibly stupid thing for Theresa May to put into an election manifesto, but if you really are representative of middle of the road English people maybe its the kind of stupidity that would go down well with the English electorate at the moment.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

You would be headed for a similar situation to that which existed in Ireland after the 1918 election. It would be an incredibly stupid thing for Theresa May to put into an election manifesto, but if you really are representative of middle of the road English people maybe its the kind of stupidity that would go down well with the English electorate at the moment.

And just prove once more why Scotland needs to be independent from a country that has nothing but disdain for Scots.

 

[McHrozni]

I'd be dancing in the street if they figured out fusion power generation in my lifetime.

So would I, but that wasn't the point I was making. It was that while it is possible for Scotland to go full retard and throw in their lots with Tories and diamond-hard Brexit, this possibility is so unlikely it is pointless to discuss it.

McHrozni

 

[MikeG]

That may be the point. You see yourself as a "middle-of-the-road Englishman" but the debate in Scotland is so far beyond the compass of middle-of-the-road Englishmen at this stage that any question which may possibly appear to you as neutral comes over as extremely union-biassed.

Are you really saying that an Englishman isn't allowed to ask about anything Scottish?

If you're getting all your information from the English press and broadcast media you are inevitably taking on board a one-sided agenda. Consequently, questions you frame from this perspective are going to appear extremely agenda-driven to anyone who is following the debate on a daily basis in Scotland.

My question involved no information gathered from any news organisation anywhere. It was a straightforward hypothetical........"if X and Y happen, what would be your response in Scotland?" The X of that question came from you. There was no agenda. No bias. No unionist blah blah blah. Get a grip on reality. Your response shows that it was not me with the extremely biased one-eyed view of events.

The idea that if Theresa May wins a general election victory on the back of a landslide of English votes while losing badly to the SNP in Scotland itself, that could in any way be considered as a mandate to block the expressed will of the Scottish parliament, is simply not one that would be contemplated in Scotland.

I'll take that as an answer to the original question. Thank you. It wouldn't have killed you to have written this in the first place, instead of resorting to all the personal guff.

It's back to "Sit down, Scotland. No you can't. Be quiet. Get back in your box, your betters have spoken." We're not having that any more and I'm perennially astonished that anyone thinks we even might.

Feeling better? How about taking this sort of rant to the appropriate thread.

 

[MikeG]

....... It would be an incredibly stupid thing for Theresa May to put into an election manifesto, but if you really are representative of middle of the road English people maybe its the kind of stupidity that would go down well with the English electorate at the moment.

Why would you think this would go down well with me?

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

So would I, but that wasn't the point I was making. It was that while it is possible for Scotland to go full retard and throw in their lots with Tories and diamond-hard Brexit, this possibility is so unlikely it is pointless to discuss it.

McHrozni

Yeah but that wasn't actually what Mike was proposing. It was that Scotland continue us to vote SNP perhaps in smaller numbers and TM is elected as UK PM with 'crush the rebellious scots' in her manifesto.

It was the usual Little Englander assumption that their will trumps everything else everywhere regardless.

 

[McHrozni]

Yeah but that wasn't actually what Mike was proposing. It was that Scotland continue us to vote SNP perhaps in smaller numbers and TM is elected as UK PM with 'crush the rebellious scots' in her manifesto.

It was the usual Little Englander assumption that their will trumps everything else everywhere regardless.

There are only two scenarios, with two results each.

Either Scotland gets a second indyref2 in due course or not. If it does it can either vote for independence or not, if it doesn't get one the Scotts can either accept that or not.

The results of three of those four scenarios are self-evident (though the execution of the events is not), the only scenario with uncertainty is when Scotland doesn't get indyref2 and a majority of Scotts don't accept that. This is inconsistent with Scotland voting Tory in the first place.

McHrozni

 

[3point14]

If you're getting all your information from the English press and broadcast media you are inevitably taking on board a one-sided agenda. Consequently, questions you frame from this perspective are going to appear extremely agenda-driven to anyone who is following the debate on a daily basis in Scotland.

This is brilliant. 'I dismiss your question on the basis that I assume you are poorly informed.'

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

There are only two scenarios, with two results each.

Either Scotland gets a second indyref2 in due course or not. If it does it can either vote for independence or not, if it doesn't get one the Scotts can either accept that or not.

The results of three of those four scenarios are self-evident (though the execution of the events is not), the only scenario with uncertainty is when Scotland doesn't get indyref2 and a majority of Scotts don't accept that. This is inconsistent with Scotland voting Tory in the first place.

McHrozni

Well of course it's not really as simple as that because you are not talking about 'Scots' overall but percentages of Scots and has been shown people will try to use movements in those percentages to make a case beyond what they actually say when it suits them.

So far we have the situation that the Scottish Government has voted for an indyref2. This request has been sent to Westminster. I have seen it reported that TM has declined this but I personally haven't seen that confirmed in anything official. I may have missed it though. The Scottish Government have it within their powers to go ahead with the referendum anyway if they choose to but Westminster would not be bound by the result.

Nothing that happens in the GE changes any of the above.

Separate to any of that you have a GE coming up in which the SNP can only really lose ground because they are starting from a place of pretty much complete dominance. On the back of that it is highly likely that a proportion of those opposed to another referendum will back the Tories at the GE.

So a highly likely outcome is that the SNP will lose some seats and the Tories might gain a handful in Scotland. Of course in the UK as a whole it is very likely that the Tories will romp to victory. That being the case TM can write just about anything in her manifesto that she likes. So yes she could include something about refusing efforts to push for Scottish Independence. She could include deporting Belgians, making everyone wear silly hats on Tuesdays or banning bicycles from town centres and still win.

The problem, that the Unionists and Little Englanders, ignore. Is that winning a UK election is not, never has been and never will be, a mandate to do whatever you like to Scotland when the people of Scotland don't support it. Continuing to be in denial about that or insisting the opposite under the guise of JAQing off fools no one.

As for the outcome of the election and the indyref. The question remains more or less the same regardless of the GE result.

Scottish government wants one. Tories don't.
Tories think they can ignore Scottish people.
UK constitution allows Tories to ignore Scottish people.
Up until the point where the Scottish Government grows a pair and pursues the UDI option. Then the UK constitution matters not a jot.

ETA: The differences in the systems for the GE and Scottish Parliaments also throws up some interesting differences.

The SNP have a much larger share of the popular vote in Scotland than the Tories do in Westminster and yet the SNP don't have a majority in the Scottish Parliament for example.

The Tories had 15% of the vote in the last GE in Scotland and about 22% in the Scottish election. So they could get 25-35% this time round realistically. And apparently that would mean they 'won' even if the SNP get 40%

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

This is brilliant. 'I dismiss your question on the basis that I assume you are poorly informed.'

Actually the question was answered despite it being poorly informed. CraigB responded quite clearly. And that was met with a few snipes at the SNP and an insistence that the UK is all that matters.

The question demonstrated that he was poorly informed. And the subsequent interactions demonstrated that it wasn't asked in good faith.

 

[3point14]

Actually the question was answered despite it being poorly informed. CraigB responded quite clearly. And that was met with a few snipes at the SNP and an insistence that the UK is all that matters.

The question demonstrated that he was poorly informed. And the subsequent interactions demonstrated that it wasn't asked in good faith.

I really shouldn't have mentioned it. Discussing Scottish issues while not being Scottish seems to get certain Scots hackles up so I really don't bother.

I'll withdraw the comment.

 

[McHrozni]

Well of course it's not really as simple as that because you are not talking about 'Scots' overall but percentages of Scots and has been shown people will try to use movements in those percentages to make a case beyond what they actually say when it suits them.

You're overthinking it. Either a majority of Scots will accept the lordship of Theresa May, allowing her to do as she pleases, or they will not and will rebel, preferably at the ballot box - if not in 2017 then in 2022 or even beyond.

What you describe is what will happen in the meantime. Yes, that will be messy, but in the end there are only four possible results. Westminster can either abide the request for the referendum or it doesn't. If it does either a clear majority of Scots grows out of independence and bend the knee to Westminster or else Scotland votes for independence. If Westminster refuses and keeps refusing the referendum Scots have two options, the first one is the same as in the previous option and the second one is to demand indyref2 ever more loudly until such time as Westminster grants their wish.

The messiest scenario by far is the one where Westminster keeps denying the referendum whereas Scots grow ever more resistive, all others are quite clear-cut.

McHrozni

 

[Tolls]

Mike's point isn't about telling the Scots to shut up.
It's about the practicalities.

The mandate he refers to is the UK government mandate, which is dominated by the 10 ton behemoth to your south. If the Tories have a "no-IndyRef2" in their manifesto then what can the SNP do about it if the Tories then end up with a hefty majority?

I do think it would be a bloody stupid idea of May, but who knows? Dumber things have been done...

ETA: Apologies to Mike if I've misinterpreted his point.

 

[MikeG]

No, that's about it, Tolls. May has said no for the duration of the Brexit negotiations. I was simply curious as to how the Scots might react if she organised herself a mandate to say no for a full parliament. It was clearly impudent and unreasonable (and poorly informed, of course) of me to even consider such a proposition.

 

[Tolls]

I suppose I can see her doing it if she's unconcerned about possible electoral repercussions north of the border, and to be honest I doubt she's exactly relying on a Tory resurgence in Scotland for her victory in the south. She may feel it's better to ensure that Scotland remains in the Union, thus preventing any chance of her being the PM that broke up the Union. Presupposing that any such referendum was too close to call.

I doubt she'll want to make Dave's mistake of calling a referendum she was not guaranteed to win.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

You're overthinking it. Either a majority of Scots will accept the lordship of Theresa May, allowing her to do as she pleases, or they will not and will rebel, preferably at the ballot box - if not in 2017 then in 2022 or even beyond.

What you describe is what will happen in the meantime. Yes, that will be messy, but in the end there are only four possible results. Westminster can either abide the request for the referendum or it doesn't. If it does either a clear majority of Scots grows out of independence and bend the knee to Westminster or else Scotland votes for independence. If Westminster refuses and keeps refusing the referendum Scots have two options, the first one is the same as in the previous option and the second one is to demand indyref2 ever more loudly until such time as Westminster grants their wish.

The messiest scenario by far is the one where Westminster keeps denying the referendum whereas Scots grow ever more resistive, all others are quite clear-cut.

McHrozni

I'm not quite sure what your first paragraph means. They already have done this in 2015. It makes not a chuff of difference. There is one Tory MP in Scotland out of 59 and his majority is measured in hundreds.

But there are a percentage of Scots who value the union greatly and will vote Tory to preserve it. As is their right.

So what result at the GE would be meaningful to change the current standoff? Really depends on your initial position and how you want to spin it.