When will indyref2 happen?

[oneteaminglasgow]

4 minutes ago, BILmac1967 said:

We don't have votes all the time, general elections are every four years.

Referenda should be spaced much further apart than that.

We can't just leave and rejoin the UK every four years, that would just be ridiculous and impractical. And rejoin under which circumstances?

Not unless it's only the Indy vote that counts, the fact that remain won is just what- Scotch mist?

We’ve had 3 general elections in the 7 years since the independence vote, which by my calculations isn’t every 4 years.

And why, specifically, should referenda be ‘spaced much further apart than that’? All referenda, or just ones on Scottish independence?

[BILmac1967]

3 minutes ago, madwullie said:

You must be a better reader than me because I can't see any of that in what I wrote. 

Then be specific, how far apart should each referendum be, until you get the win you demand?

If economic conditions of the future might suit, how soon do the reamainers get another?

But in your mind there will never be another, you only see your own point and no-one elses.

Also current economic conditions might not be the same 25 years from now, that's why referenda should be a generation apart.

[gaz5]

We don't have votes all the time, general elections are every four years.
Referenda should be spaced much further apart than that.
We can't just leave and rejoin the UK every four years, that would just be ridiculous and impractical. And rejoin under which circumstances?
Not unless it's only the Indy vote that counts, the fact that remain won is just what- Scotch mist?

I know we like to do things differently in Scotland, but given no country/territory in the history of the world has ever gained independence from the UK then decided to go back to being subservient, I'm guessing that "leave and rejoin the UK every 4 years" wouldn't be much of an issue.

But then, Unionists know this. Once they lose (and they will, eventually) they lose forever. That's why they make a big deal about referendums.

Timescales/Generations/Anything Else is just a smokescreen. No idea why they feel the need do that dance. "We don't want one because it's not in our best interests to have one" is a perfectly reasonable stance in itself.

[BILmac1967]

4 minutes ago, oneteaminglasgow said:

We’ve had 3 general elections in the 7 years since the independence vote, which by my calculations isn’t every 4 years.

And why, specifically, should referenda be ‘spaced much further apart than that’? All referenda, or just ones on Scottish independence?

Specifically, because referenda on independence would be much more affecting and difficult to reverse under changed economic conditions, if not impossible.

In your mind independence would be a final vote, I dont then see why us remainers shouldn't have return referenda as it suits us. you would need to agree to that in principle, it's what you want for yourselves.

You just don't accept that you lost.

[HalfCutNinja]

The crux of it is if your position is 'democracy must be stopped cause my side will lose' you're definitely on the wrong side of history and need to have a damn good look at yourself. 

London will never let Scotland go willingly, as our resources are far too important to them. They will never grant another referendum under any circumstances as they know they would lose. They don't care how we vote or what we want, as we are a de-facto colony.

So another way is required. After May when another indy majority is returned a consultative referendum should be held, then the results will probably have to be debated in court. There's no other way.

[Anonapersona]

Just now, BILmac1967 said:

Specifically, because referenda on independence would be much more affecting and difficult to reverse under changed economic conditions, if not impossible.

In your mind independence would be a final vote, I dont then see why us remainers shouldn't have return referenda as it suits us. you would need to agree to that in principle, it's what you want for yourselves.

You just don't accept that you lost.

Jesus Christ. If remainers want to start a Rejoin-The-UK-Party then go ahead. Don't whine as if gangs of indy supports are somehow stopping you.

[tirso]

14 minutes ago, BILmac1967 said:

Then be specific, how far apart should each referendum be, until you get the win you demand?

If economic conditions of the future might suit, how soon do the reamainers get another?

But in your mind there will never be another, you only see your own point and no-one elses.

Also current economic conditions might not be the same 25 years from now, that's why referenda should be a generation apart.

see with it being ridiculous and impractical every other election, youre absolutely right..  the Scottish people aren't stupid.  They wouldn't vote for a vote every 5 minutes.  If the SNP did that, they would be slaughtered at election.  The Scottish people want a vote when they want a vote.  Nothing more, nothing less.

[Ira Gaines]

[GordonS]

I think it would be a good tactic for the SNP to say that they would hold an independence referendum in 2024. That's 10 years since the last one, and 10 years in which we've been dragged out of the EU against our will and had three increasingly ugly Conservative governments. It would also be safely distant from Covid-19. I appreciate the people who would have the biggest problem with that would be the indyzoomers, but it would be a good plan overall. Support for independence still isn't anywhere near high enough and a second lost referendum would be curtains for decades. 

[Antlion]

25 minutes ago, BILmac1967 said:

Then be specific, how far apart should each referendum be, until you get the win you demand?

If economic conditions of the future might suit, how soon do the reamainers get another?

But in your mind there will never be another, you only see your own point and no-one elses.

Also current economic conditions might not be the same 25 years from now, that's why referenda should be a generation apart.

I for one would love to see an anti-Independence party form in an independent Scotland. It could call itself “The Little Englanders”. Or the “Monster Craven Loony Party”. Or the “Start London Rule” Party. “The Scottish Regional Party” (SRP)? The “Anti Scottish Sovereignty - Hand Over the Levers to England” ( or ASS-HOLE Party) would also work. I’d say they could network with those parties across the world that want to eliminate their national status and become regions of a larger country, but I don’t know that they exist - so you might have to blaze a trail of national self loathing. 

Edited March 29, 2021 by Antlion

[GordonS]

47 minutes ago, BILmac1967 said:

Manifesto pledges are like bubble-gum dabities from the 1970's - free with every mouthful and wear off quickly.

There's nothing official about election manifestoes, the lot of them just lie like eff.

If you look back through election manifestos you'll see that's not true. There are always some things that don't get done or get dropped, and some parties have been less sincere than others at different times. But on the whole they're surprisingly well respected in government.

[BILmac1967]

3 minutes ago, HalfCutNinja said:

The crux of it is if your position is 'democracy must be stopped cause my side will lose' you're definitely on the wrong side of history and need to have a damn good look at yourself. 

London will never let Scotland go willingly,

Quote

"as our resources are too important to them". They are not our resources, ours and who's army, we actually don't have one.

as our resources are far too important to them. They will never grant another referendum under any circumstances as they know they would lose. They don't care how we vote or what we want, as we are a de-facto colony.

So another way is required. After May when another indy majority is returned a consultative referendum should be held, then the results will probably have to be debated in court. There's no other way.

The crux of your point is that only your version of democracy counts, the fact we have won is just ignored. Democracy apparently stops when indy win, not the other way around And didn't the Catalans also hold a consultative referendum, that went well.

[GordonS]

Just now, BILmac1967 said:

The crux of your point is that only your version of democracy counts, the fact we have won is just ignored. Democracy apparently stops when indy win, not the other way around And didn't the Catalans also hold a consultative referendum, that went well.

Woah, are you advocating the violent suppression of civilians expressing their political will? Falangist police officers cracking pensioners' heads? Please tell me you're not that bad.

[HalfCutNinja]

1 minute ago, BILmac1967 said:

The crux of your point is that only your version of democracy counts, the fact we have won is just ignored. Democracy apparently stops when indy win, not the other way around And didn't the Catalans also hold a consultative referendum, that went well.

Nobody suggested democracy stops when we win. After independence if you want to start a party that wants to rejoin the UK and vote for it you'd be free to do so. The only people saying democracy stops when we win are unionists, as they know they'd lose the next one.

Spain's constitution is very different from the UK's, so they're not comparable situations.

[SANTAN]

4 minutes ago, Antlion said:

I for one would love to see an anti-Independence party form in an independent Scotland. It could call itself “The Little Englanders”. Or the “Monster Craven Loony Party”. Or the “Start London Rule” Party. “The Scottish Regional Party” (SRP)? The “Anti Scottish Sovereignty - Hand Over the Levers to England” ( or ASS-HOLE Party) would also work. I’d say they could network with those parties across the world that want to eliminate their national status and become regions of a larger country, but I don’t know that they exist - so you might have to blaze a trail of national self loathing. 

The effort you put in to be laughably unfunny is actually impressive, stick to the dotting buddy. 

[BILmac1967]

3 minutes ago, GordonS said:

I think it would be a good tactic for the SNP to say that they would hold an independence referendum in 2024. That's 10 years since the last one, and 10 years in which we've been dragged out of the EU against our will and had three increasingly ugly Conservative governments. It would also be safely distant from Covid-19. I appreciate the people who would have the biggest problem with that would be the indyzoomers, but it would be a good plan overall. Support for independence still isn't anywhere near high enough and a second lost referendum would be curtains for decades. 

"Dragged out of the EU against thir will" Utter nonsense, we voted as the UK, not as indy Scotland.

They want to cut ourselves off from England, our biggest trading partner by far.

[SouthLanarkshireWhite]

39 minutes ago, gaz5 said:

I know we like to do things differently in Scotland, but given no country/territory in the history of the world has ever gained independence from the UK then decided to go back to being subservient, I'm guessing that "leave and rejoin the UK every 4 years" wouldn't be much of an issue.

But then, Unionists know this. Once they lose (and they will, eventually) they lose forever. That's why they make a big deal about referendums.

Timescales/Generations/Anything Else is just a smokescreen. No idea why they feel the need do that dance. "We don't want one because it's not in our best interests to have one" is a perfectly reasonable stance in itself.
 

If the UK or any part of it re-joined the EU would they be deciding to return to being subservient?

[D Angelo Barksdale]

52 minutes ago, Richey Edwards said:

Would Scottish election votes count as one or two?

We'd need to have a vote on it.

[GordonS]

21 minutes ago, BILmac1967 said:

"Dragged out of the EU against thir will" Utter nonsense, we voted as the UK, not as indy Scotland.

They want to cut ourselves off from England, our biggest trading partner by far.

You do understand that those who campaigned for and voted for Brexit overwhelmingly wanted it to reduce trade between the UK and the EU, and to reduce freedom of movement, while those who campaigned for and voted for Scottish independence wanted it to have no impact on trade or free movement at all?

Independence supporters don't want to "cut ourselves off" from anyone, you're thinking of Leavers.

[madwullie]

1 hour ago, BILmac1967 said:

Then be specific, how far apart should each referendum be, until you get the win you demand?

If economic conditions of the future might suit, how soon do the reamainers get another?

But in your mind there will never be another, you only see your own point and no-one elses.

Also current economic conditions might not be the same 25 years from now, that's why referenda should be a generation apart.

Very impressed at how much mileage you're getting out of my 9 word post. Actual analysis of my psyche and everything. Astonishing. You must be really good at this. Hopefully I don't find myself locking horns with you on twitter or suchlike