When will indyref2 happen?

[welshbairn]

14 minutes ago, Detournement said:

I think the DUP strategy makes sense.

They know that massive psychological and economic obstacles exist to Irish unification so they aren't worried about that at the moment. What they are worried about is giving away ground constitutionally.

They're being offered single market access to both the EU and UK markets, huge advantage over the rest of the UK, and are turning it down. This in a place who voted Remain in a big way. I'd imagine their vote will take a big tumble if they don't surrender. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-46220456

[Granny Danger]

41 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

They're being offered single market access to both the EU and UK markets, huge advantage over the rest of the UK, and are turning it down. This in a place who voted Remain in a big way. I'd imagine their vote will take a big tumble if they don't surrender. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-46220456

Their vote will only tumble when their base puts issues such as the economy and jobs ahead of their ancestry.  I wouldn’t hold my breath tbh.

 

[Diamonds are Forever]

In the lead up to the 2014 referendum one of the biggest reasons I kept hearing for voting 'No' was about the 'uncertainty' of independence. That it was a perceived risk that people, particularly the comfortable, wealthy, older middle classes just weren't willing to take. I'm not sure whether this was geniune selfishness, or just they were more emotionally connected to the idea of the Union and trying to find reason to justify it. However the benefit of all this chaos just now is that that argument is null and void, there is uncertainty either way, the only difference is that with independence we'd have more of a say, instead sitting up here watching mayhem unfold down in London and not being able to do anything about.

The majority of people vote based on emotion and connection, and then use logic and reason to justify it. Given that the UK is looking more backward than ever, this creates a real opportunity for Scotland to set out a clear vision for itself that people will buy into enough to vote for it. I think we need to wait until it is clearer what is happening with Brexit until we can do this though. Not least because the longer this plays out the more the whole system is going to implode.

[welshbairn]

Just now, Granny Danger said:

Their vote will only tumble when their base puts issues such as the economy and jobs ahead of their ancestry.  I wouldn’t hold my breath tbh.

 

Not sure what the Ulster Unionist Party stance is, or even if they still exist. Good chance for them to recover their vote share though.

[Colkitto]

My prediction of indyref2 being called before Xmas looking good.

 

[Antlion]

3 hours ago, RedRob72 said:

I’ve said a number of times that Westminster cannot continue to ignore the voice of Scotland particularly with regards to the EU, also that it would be hard to disagree with those who would support independence in a second Ref on the back of this mess. I’ll still say the SNP don’t do themselves any favours at WM though.
I’ve no problem in owning the responsibility of the result in which I participated (through voting Tory in 2016 as you suggest) at all. The decision on offering the EU Ref had been made long before then btw. I wanted to remain in the UK and within the EU. I don’t see what’s hypocritical about that. I and many others voted exactly the same way in the Ref, the GE and the EU Ref.
The notion that Republicans in Northern Ireland and Nationalists in Scotland are separatists hell bent on breaking up the U.K. is entirely consistent. It isn’t meant as an insult its just a fact. Again, I could have never have envisioned that we would leave the EU, but I’ll live with it though.

What’s hypocritical is backing a separatist and divisive party and a separatist and divisive referendum whilst condemning divisiveness and separation. I doubt anyone believes you “don’t mean it as an insult”; you do. And you backed exactly what you use as an insult, and all because all that mattered to you in 2016 was keeping Scotland’s sovereignty out of Scotland’s hands.

[Chapelhall chap]

In the lead up to the 2014 referendum one of the biggest reasons I kept hearing for voting 'No' was about the 'uncertainty' of independence. That it was a perceived risk that people, particularly the comfortable, wealthy, older middle classes just weren't willing to take. I'm not sure whether this was geniune selfishness, or just they were more emotionally connected to the idea of the Union and trying to find reason to justify it. However the benefit of all this chaos just now is that that argument is null and void, there is uncertainty either way, the only difference is that with independence we'd have more of a say, instead sitting up here watching mayhem unfold down in London and not being able to do anything about.
The majority of people vote based on emotion and connection, and then use logic and reason to justify it. Given that the UK is looking more backward than ever, this creates a real opportunity for Scotland to set out a clear vision for itself that people will buy into enough to vote for it. I think we need to wait until it is clearer what is happening with Brexit until we can do this though. Not least because the longer this plays out the more the whole system is going to implode.

I largely agree but I fear the clarity will not be there soon and the time to declare the mandate is nigh. (NOW)

[RedRob72]

What’s hypocritical is backing a separatist and divisive party and a separatist and divisive referendum whilst condemning divisiveness and separation. I doubt anyone believes you “don’t mean it as an insult”; you do. And you backed exactly what you use as an insult, and all because all that mattered to you in 2016 was keeping Scotland’s sovereignty out of Scotland’s hands.

Cameron promised an EU vote as far back as 2013 which was presented as a bill to parliament in 2015. You presumably suggest therefore, that everyone who voted for the Labour Party in the 2005 GE also supported the invasion of Iraq two years earlier.
I’ve never once said that I supported or had any desire for a Referendum to leave the EU. Your accusation seems to be that anyone who voted Tory in 2016 endorsed the break up of the EU. That’s not only untrue but plainly disingenuous.

[AUFC90]

I'm starting to think that a hard brexit or no deal will make winning indy ref 2 all the harder. There will be a hard border, that much is clear and i doubt many nos will change their mind on the back of that.

[HeartsOfficialMoaner]

9 minutes ago, AUFC90 said:

I'm starting to think that a hard brexit or no deal will make winning indy ref 2 all the harder. There will be a hard border, that much is clear and i doubt many nos will change their mind on the back of that.

 

What would their concerns be? 

[AUFC90]

 
What would their concerns be? 

A hard border with England will be up there. Plus the line i can see a mile away...."look how much of a mess Brexit is, indy will be a lot more complicated ".

[JamieThomas]

3 hours ago, HeartsOfficialMoaner said:

 

What would their concerns be? 

They'd just make up some garbage like they always do. At England's rate of regression they'll be banning inside toilets and bathing more than once a month soon, and these daft ****s would vote no because "Scotland can't afford bog roll"

[Antlion]

9 hours ago, RedRob72 said:

Cameron promised an EU vote as far back as 2013 which was presented as a bill to parliament in 2015. You presumably suggest therefore, that everyone who voted for the Labour Party in the 2005 GE also supported the invasion of Iraq two years earlier.
I’ve never once said that I supported or had any desire for a Referendum to leave the EU. Your accusation seems to be that anyone who voted Tory in 2016 endorsed the break up of the EU. That’s not only untrue but plainly disingenuous.

You voted for a party which had held a referendum (which let’s not forget you think are divisive) in its manifesto, and which promised to negotiate separation from the EU according to the hard red lines laid out by its leader. Why? Because they appealed to your love of Scotland remaining a wee region of the UK. You put division and separatism ahead of your (claimed) partiality to remain in the UK and EU. Forever more your claims to dislike separatism and division will fall flat. You opted to back it. If you voted Tory in either of the last two general elections you backed separatism and division. As far as I know, it was the last GE you chose them in - if you did so when Cameron was in charge too, you further backed a referendum (you know, those things you decry as “divisive”?).

[Antlion]

8 hours ago, AUFC90 said:

9 hours ago, HeartsOfficialMoaner said:

 
What would their concerns be? 

A hard border with England will be up there. Plus the line i can see a mile away...."look how much of a mess Brexit is, indy will be a lot more complicated ".

They will definitely try this - ignoring the fact that Brexit didn’t need to be anywhere near as difficult as Theresa May’s red lines (which I understand she was told to pursue by her advisers) made it. She laid down impossible and contradictory demands.

[ayrmad]

I think the shambles that is Brexit has kiboshed independence for quite a while. 

[BawWatchin]

8 minutes ago, ayrmad said:

I think the shambles that is Brexit has kiboshed independence for quite a while. 

Yep, because the more miserable the UK gets, the further away from independence it takes Scotland. Clearly.

[ayrmad]

53 minutes ago, BawWatchin said:

Yep, because the more miserable the UK gets, the further away from independence it takes Scotland. Clearly.

No, the easier it is to say "it's going to be worse after independence", too easy for the unionists to convince the thick and cowardly among us, and we do have more than our share of both.

[RedRob72]

You voted for a party which had held a referendum (which let’s not forget you think are divisive) in its manifesto, and which promised to negotiate separation from the EU according to the hard red lines laid out by its leader. Why? Because they appealed to your love of Scotland remaining a wee region of the UK. You put division and separatism ahead of your (claimed) partiality to remain in the UK and EU. Forever more your claims to dislike separatism and division will fall flat. You opted to back it. If you voted Tory in either of the last two general elections you backed separatism and division. As far as I know, it was the last GE you chose them in - if you did so when Cameron was in charge too, you further backed a referendum (you know, those things you decry as “divisive”?).

I voted Con in the last GE and LD previously to that in 2015. Both candidates supported remaining in the Union and the EU. If you seriously believe that’s a separatist, divisive choice and one that offers unconditional support to leaving Europe, then I cannot change that.

[Jacksgranda]

15 hours ago, welshbairn said:

Not sure what the Ulster Unionist Party stance is, or even if they still exist. Good chance for them to recover their vote share though.

They still exist. What policy would you like? They will have one to suit you. Not a chance they'll recover their vote.

[AUFC90]

Yep, because the more miserable the UK gets, the further away from independence it takes Scotland. Clearly.

Correct. Shitebags don't wont anymore misery.