Discussion in 'Politics' started by The Walking Dickhead, Mar 13, 2017.
Haha..Ger in der la..Luv a bira aggis lad! Pura loada bura on me spuds doe!
May is a liar.
She stifles all democratic process and that is all the reason Scotland needs to declare independence from Westminster.
They probably don't like it that David Nutt put alcohol, their drug of choice, in a category worse than cannabis, psychedelics or MDMA.
They don't care about science, or about facts. They care about what the Daily Mail says.
It could be years before Scotland get their vote for independence, and yes, May will stand in their way as much as possible!
I watched the interview, it was appalling!
So much for 'the will of the people'. She has no mandate whatsoever where Scotland is concerned.
She can't stop us holding a referendum.
Sadly I think part of it is down to the same reason Cameron did his best to pervert the will of the Scotland, they don't want to go down in history as being the PM in office when it happens.
Sturgeon also wants to play it at the right time, and the main reason she hasn't called a referendum sooner is because she knows it would be the end of her tenure in office if Scotland voted No again. The SNP want to keep as much control over Scotland as they can, and they know as soon as Scotland goes independent support for them will fall.
Here comes Gordon the moron (again)
What is he proposing?
Ah who cares...
Sir Mervyn King, former head of the Bank of England seems to think that Scotland could make independence work.
So - the Scottish Parliament has voted for indyref 2.
Looks like May could end up presiding over the end of Britain as a unified political entity assuming she keeps the job long enough. Just be little England left all alone. (OK - Wales too)
Be time for project fear 2 soon I expect.
It was always in the bag as far as the vote in the Scottish parliament goes since the Scottish greens vowed to vote with the SNP which put the vote in the majority.
Looks like Scarecrow is actually going to "politely decline" the request, and I hope that the Scottish Government go ahead with it anyway.
Better still, I hope this leads to months of squabbling between the SNP and the tories to which end Nicola Sturgeon just says fuck it and declares independence unilaterally. Scotland can do that if it wants, the only reason the SNP aren't calling this is out of respect for the majority will of the people, and because it would be less likely to create a war on the streets if they go through democratic channels.
There's a guy who is campaigning for some form of electronic voting to be used, don't know whether that would make it easier or harder for the result to be doctored like it was in 2014.
Probably, when Thatcher said that, she considered the likelihood of the SNP ever getting a majority in Scotland as nil. Times have changed.
My guess is that this whole issue is going to lead to a lot of problems for the tories, especially combined with Brexit. I think they'll stop at nothing to try to keep Scotland part of the UK.
'UDI' may be a possibility further down the road. If people want independence, they'll get it eventually. If Scotland holds it's own vote even without approval of Westminster, and the vote is for independence, it would be un-stoppable.
I'm undecided about electronic voting. We'd have to see how it was going to work.
I think if there was both electronic voting and a paper ballot that would eliminate most ways for corruption to be used to sway the result, however how exactly that could be efficiently implemented?
If each ballot paper was put through a machine that recorded the vote electronically as it was being submitted then that would eliminate any way for either count to be fixed without it being noticed, I think. It would make it a lot harder anyway.
I don't think relying on computers alone to count the votes in such large numbers is wise anyway.
I'm sure Thatcher never envisaged the SNP having a majority, but she also never envisaged herself become the prime minister, plus she was as mad a bag of cats.
Some people think that the reality of the political landscape before the first indy ref was that Scotland was never in any way formally commited to being Westminster's second in command, and that the real purpose behind the first indy ref was to "democractically" get Scotland to sign away it's sovereignty to Westminster forever.
Probably when the first vote went the way Cameron wanted, they thought they'd got rid of the whole issue. If not forever, for a long time anyway. They didn't expect the Brexit vote, or that Scotland would vote one way, England and Wales the other. That's what's put it back on the table now. The SNP have a strong case. So I think I agree with you there.
The tories are clinging on for dear life. They only scraped through the past couple of elections and the know they have barely a mandate in England, let along the rest of the UK.
Brexit went in their favour as they are no longer restricted by the EU in imposing ever more draconian laws and measures, of the Trump variety.
Westminster has always been America's lap dog, since the end of WW2 anyway.
Scarecrow wants to delay indyref2 until after Brexit because once the UK goes fully out of the EU then the witch can do whatever she pleases. Scotland must get out before this happens. We need someone like Tommy Sheridan in Holyrood to be more proactive and just do it. Fuck Westminster.
It's all gone a bit Pete Tong, and as usual we can't make any progress because of politicians, deluded by their own self worth and not wanting to leave office having failed. Too many stupid people.
Ruth Davidson and David Mundell, I mean what are they fighting for? The tories haven't been popular in Scotland since the 1950's.
Davidson & Mundell. It's a like a brand of dog biscuits for the rich.
I vote yes because as a huge fan of the movie Braveheart, that's all William Wallace ever wanted.
And fuck the English.
That's what the orange bastards call us, the Braveheart contingency.
Because Scotland needs to go independent because of a fictional bastardisation of old Scottish history between the Scots and English.
Nothing to do with Rangers or Celtic or anything like that. It would be wholly incorrect for either side to bring football sectarianism into the debate.
A double poll between Rangers and Celtic fans would be interesting?
It's just, someone I know started going on about how all the young ones want independence because of Braveheart. But he's a hun. He's a Rangers supporter. I don't give a fuck about football, but maybe he wants Scotland to stay in the union because Rangers are better than Celtic.
Why should he care anyway he hasn't lived here since the 1960's, and he loves Trump. We've had our political disagreements over the years...
The result of that recent by election doesn't give me much hope that the tories are only just clinging on. I think if they had a snap election now, they would increase their majority in England.
British politicians love to harp on abut the so-called 'special relationship' with the USA. Post Brexit, England (Scotland will IMO go independent eventually) may as well become the 51st state. If not in name, then in effect. It could well become a kind of mix of an open prison and a tax haven for dodgy investment.Not far from that now. The tories would love it if the British Isles were off the coast of America rather than Europe.
Separate names with a comma.