When will indyref2 happen?

[Stellaboz]

Imagine still wanting to be part of a completely skewed "union" where your opinion and vote count for so little, when your vote could potentially count for so much more. 

If the unionists turned round and demanded reform and an equal voice for Scotland then I'd at least understand. They don't though. 

[Baxter Parp]

UK welfare cuts blamed for Scots life expectancy gap

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18858477.uk-welfare-cuts-blamed-scots-life-expectancy-gap/

Benefits of the union.

[Thistle_do_nicely]

from that conservative woman pish:

Now here you are berating the Scottish secretary Alister Jack who echoed you and your predecessor’s pronouncement that the 2014 Scottish Independence Referendum result was for once in a generation only. After all, your party signed the Edinburgh Agreement to abide by the outcome and now you are slamming President Trump for ‘raging against democracy’. Pot and kettle spring to mind. 

who was it on here that posted that screenie of the Edinburgh Agreement and a CTRL + F for the word "generation" hitting zero results? first thing that sprang to mind.

[Anonapersona]

3 hours ago, Glen Sannox said:

A pretty poor analogy. As for them being morally abhorrent, plenty would disagree. They may well be expensive, but they have kept us safe and that is a price worth paying.

All those countries without nukes have never actually needed them though. So in what way have nukes kept us safe?

[strichener]

21 minutes ago, Andrew Driver said:

'.  

The 'Once in a generation' line was a backwards looking projection.   Factually the 2014 referendum was 'once in a generation' (1997-2014).    

Rubbish.  It was used in the white paper specifically in response to the question of whether there would be another vote.

Quote

If Scotland votes No, will there be another referendum on independence at a later date?
The Edinburgh Agreement states that a referendum must be held by the end of 2014. There is no arrangement in place for another referendum on independence. 
It is the view of the current Scottish Government that a referendum is a once-in-a-generation opportunity. This means that only a majority vote for Yes in 2014 would give certainty 
that Scotland will be independent.

 

[strichener]

4 minutes ago, Andrew Driver said:

What an awful response. 

Sorry, did this burst your bubble?  Your statement was shite, end of.

Edited November 10, 2020 by strichener

[welshbairn]

14 minutes ago, strichener said:

Rubbish.  It was used in the white paper specifically in response to the question of whether there would be another vote.

 

I see that as just saying don't waste your vote, there might not be another chance. If there was something in a treaty like the Edinburgh Agreement saying that both parties agree there would not be another referendum for 25 years, even if circumstances materially changed, that would be worth quoting.

Edited November 10, 2020 by welshbairn

[strichener]

1 minute ago, welshbairn said:

I see that as just saying don't waste your vote, there might not be another chance. If there was something in a treaty like the Edinburgh Agreement saying that both parties agree there would not be another referendum for 25 years even if circumstances materially changed, that would be worth quoting.

Exactly.  There not being another chance is not a backwardnlooking projection.

[Baxter Parp]

15 minutes ago, strichener said:

Rubbish.  It was used in the white paper specifically in response to the question of whether there would be another vote

That's a view not a vow.

[strichener]

4 minutes ago, Andrew Driver said:

I was just disappointed almost very disappointed. 

Always best IMO if your reply relates to the subject matter.  

Ok, so provide the context where once in a generation was used as a backward looking projection.  You made the claim, I merely provided context to show you were wrong.

[strichener]

Just now, Baxter Parp said:

That's a view not a vow.

Cool, so everything in the white paper can be ignored?  Don't answer that it is rhetorical.

[Baxter Parp]

Just now, strichener said:

Cool, so everything in the white paper can be ignored?  Don't answer that it is fucking stupid.

FTFY.

[strichener]

Just now, Baxter Parp said:

FTFY.

Ah, we can cherry pick.  Got it.

[welshbairn]

6 minutes ago, strichener said:

Exactly.  There not being another chance is not a backwardnlooking projection.

Given that there hadn't been a chance for the previous generation it can be interpreted either way or both. But as it isn't a legal commitment or promise I don't know why you think it's relevant. It's just a comment that it's an opportunity that shouldn't be missed as there might not be another.

Edited November 10, 2020 by welshbairn

[Baxter Parp]

Just now, strichener said:

Ah, we can cherry pick.  Got it.

The White Paper was a plan, not a view. Got to love the way you're willing to twist yourself into pretzel shapes to argue your bullshit.

[strichener]

2 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

Given that there hadn't been a chance for the previous generation it can be interpreted either way or both. But as it isn't a legal commitment or promise I don't know why you think it's relevant. It's just a comment that it's an opportunity that shouldn't be missed as there might not be another.

That's twice you have replied to me and both times you have referred to their not being another.  Forward looking, it makes absolutely no sense in the context of asking if there will be a future vote to use the term once in a generation to refer historically.  Anyone that thinks this is the case is a fruit loop.  

[git-intae-thum]

Just now, welshbairn said:

Given that there hadn't been a chance for the previous generation it can be interpreted either way or both. But as it isn't a legal commitment or promise I don't know why you think it's relevant.

That's the key point....it was not a legal commitment......

 

1 minute ago, strichener said:

That's twice you have replied to me and both times you have referred to their not being another.  Forward looking, it makes absolutely no sense in the context of asking if there will be a future vote to use the term once in a generation to refer historically.  Anyone that thinks this is the case is a fruit loop.  

the other point worth considering is the emphasis on it being the view of the "current administration" 

That may well have been a deliberate addition at the time, in anticipation of exactly these circumstances. It is pretty well accepted protocol in any democracy that no  government has the right to tie the hands of its successors on such matters. This case is no different.

The whole unionist position is based on nonsense. It's using a play on words to deny democracy.

[DA Baracus]

2 hours ago, Baxter Parp said:

UK welfare cuts blamed for Scots life expectancy gap

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18858477.uk-welfare-cuts-blamed-scots-life-expectancy-gap/

Benefits of the union.

Aye, but there's a couple of SNP politicians folk don't like so better not vote for independence. Much rather have awful shite like this instead.

29 minutes ago, strichener said:

Rubbish.  It was used in the white paper specifically in response to the question of whether there would be another vote.

 

In your quote was this line:

It is the view of the current Scottish Government that a referendum is a once-in-a-generation opportunity

Since we're playing semantics, it is no longer that same Scottish Government. Ergo, it can be binned as the nonsense it is and idiots can stop desperately trying to attach any sort of relevancy to it since it has precisely none.

[strichener]

8 minutes ago, Baxter Parp said:

The White Paper was a plan, not a view. Got to love the way you're willing to twist yourself into pretzel shapes to argue your bullshit.

And yet you previously posted 

Quote

The White Paper sets out the SNP's vision of an independent Scotland, not the Lib Dems or Labour and so on. The SNP can't speak for any other party, obviously.

Can something be a vision without being a view?  I don't think it is me that is performing mental gymnastics over this.

[strichener]

2 minutes ago, DA Baracus said:

Aye, but there's a couple of SNP politicians folk don't like so better not vote for independence. Much rather have awful shite like this instead.

In your quote was this line:

It is the view of the current Scottish Government that a referendum is a once-in-a-generation opportunity

Since we're playing semantics, it is no longer that same Scottish Government. Ergo, it can be binned as the nonsense it is and idiots can stop desperately trying to attach any sort of relevancy to it since it has precisely none.

I completely agree with you.  However let's not deny the context or meaning of the various statement using the phrase.  Nicola herself used it as I have previously quoted.  

I don't have a problem in arguing for another referendum in the next parliament.  I don't have to deny history to do so.