When will indyref2 happen?

[Guest Bob Mahelp]

1 hour ago, Ivo den Bieman said:

Come off it, the SNP have absolutely no intention of holding a referendum anytime soon. Having been in power in some form since 2007 they've got their feet nicely under the table of devolved government and why would they rock that boat when they are not under (too much) pressure to deliver?

Alba moon howlers and the noisy anti-vaxx lot may seem significant on twitter but they are not, really. If it is true that people really have left the SNP today over restrictions on football then I'd question the level of their original commitment that made them join the party.

The SNP are neatly in the back pocket of corporate lobbyists and Capital will be happy for them to stay exactly where they are as a competent administrator of late neoliberalism. No progress will be made until Covid is better managed which unfortunately looks a way off.

I've long said on here that under any normal set of circumstances, the SNP need a spell in opposition. No government anywhere worldwide, can stay in power for 14+ years without becoming stale. 

They need to re-invent themselves to a certain extent. A change of focus away from certain issues and a renewed focus on the bigger picture. 

Sadly, the SNP has went from the relatively liberal, progressive party it was 15 years ago, to become a party obsessed with government control and the kind of loony left-wing infighting that helped destroy Labour. 

As strongly as I believe that Nicola Sturgeon is the UK's most competent politician, the fact remains that in order to move forward a change of leadership at the top is badly needed. 

The reality is though that there is no opposition to the SNP in Scotland, so it's unlikely they'll lose power any time in the next decade. It wouldn't surprise me though if they slipped back to being a minority government again as they were in 2007, and having to find concensus with other parties to get policy through. 

It may not be a bad thing. 

 

 

[HoBNob]

1 hour ago, Dunfermline Don said:

Remember that one of the best ways to get rid of the SNP is to have independence.
I would fully expect them to splinter into two or three different parties after Independence.

Probably correct. 

 

However, if you go with the thinking that for another referendum to be called then we need a majority snp government then today has undoubtedly hurt it, check just the amount of people on this forum who have cancelled there membership, on a personal level I'm not voting for them anymore. Very much straw that broke the camels back but I'm absolutely sick of them, have absolutely no confidence or faith that Sturgeon will get us any closer to holding a referendum, and the constant shitting on football fans has got old. 

[Theyellowbox]

2 hours ago, betting competition said:

Today decisions has hurt the independence movement. I know quite a few that have quit the SNP today.

Alternatively, if this wave of the virus does (and I really hope it doesnt) turn out to be bad and deaths mount up, the actions taken today, particularly when taken in contrast to Westminster will look like proper leadership. Couple it with the financial paralysis from Sunek and the inability for Scotland to raise borrowing itself it could be used as a very real example of the need for independence.

Even if it turns out not to be as bad as feared, it is a sign of a leader making decisions when required and not kicking the can down the road.

Agree with what others have said. There is a wider independence movement than just the SNP. Sturgeon rightly gets criticised for many things, but I think it would take a very partisan person not to recognised that she has provided clear leadership during this pandemic, even if people may not fully agree with the decisions. 

[Granny Danger]

7 minutes ago, Theyellowbox said:

Alternatively, if this wave of the virus does (and I really hope it doesnt) turn out to be bad and deaths mount up, the actions taken today, particularly when taken in contrast to Westminster will look like proper leadership. Couple it with the financial paralysis from Sunek and the inability for Scotland to raise borrowing itself it could be used as a very real example of the need for independence.

Even if it turns out not to be as bad as feared, it is a sign of a leader making decisions when required and not kicking the can down the road.

Agree with what others have said. There is a wider independence movement than just the SNP. Sturgeon rightly gets criticised for many things, but I think it would take a very partisan person not to recognised that she has provided clear leadership during this pandemic, even if people may not fully agree with the decisions. 

When judging a politician it’s right and proper to look at competence in decision making, it’s also right and proper to look at motivation and credibility.

I don’t think Sturgeon and the SNP government in Holyrood has got it all right but I think they’ve got most of it right in an unparalleled situation and without the options that full political and financial autonomy brings.  What’s more I think her motivation is genuine.

Some of the claims I’ve read on other threads about ‘she’s out to get football fans’ or ‘she doesn’t want folk to enjoy themselves’ is beyond belief.  Sadly it’s not just coming from the moon howlers, there are some previously sound posters who appear to have lost the plot.

Fortunately they are not representative of the wider electorate as recent polls have shown very clearly.

At the end of the day the SNP is nothing more than a mechanism and in my opinion the only credible one to achieve an objective that is far more important than any transitory politician whoever they are and whatever my opinions of them are.

 

[Theyellowbox]

20 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

When judging a politician it’s right and proper to look at competence in decision making, it’s also right and proper to look at motivation and credibility.

I don’t think Sturgeon and the SNP government in Holyrood has got it all right but I think they’ve got most of it right in an unparalleled situation and without the options that full political and financial autonomy brings.  What’s more I think her motivation is genuine.

Some of the claims I’ve read on other threads about ‘she’s out to get football fans’ or ‘she doesn’t want folk to enjoy themselves’ is beyond belief.  Sadly it’s not just coming from the moon howlers, there are some previously sound posters who appear to have lost the plot.

Fortunately they are not representative of the wider electorate as recent polls have shown very clearly.

At the end of the day the SNP is nothing more than a mechanism and in my opinion the only credible one to achieve an objective that is far more important than any transitory politician whoever they are and whatever my opinions of them are.

 

Spot on. While like everyone else I am disappointed that football will be hit, I don't buy the view that she or anyone in the government is in any way out to get football fans, nor that the actions taken are for anything other than to navigate a health crisis. There are flashes of political moments, such as Westminster funding, but that is to be expected.

By comparison, can any of us genuinely say that all the actions taken by BJ are purely in the public interests? I'll be honest and say, I believe in the main he he has looked to do the right thing, but in amongst it, there is self serving smaller actions. 

Edited December 21, 2021 by Theyellowbox

[Ayrshire Analytica]

16 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

When judging a politician it’s right and proper to look at competence in decision making, it’s also right and proper to look at motivation and credibility.

I don’t think Sturgeon and the SNP government in Holyrood has got it all right but I think they’ve got most of it right in an unparalleled situation and without the options that full political and financial autonomy brings.  What’s more I think her motivation is genuine.

Some of the claims I’ve read on other threads about ‘she’s out to get football fans’ or ‘she doesn’t want folk to enjoy themselves’ is beyond belief.  Sadly it’s not just coming from the moon howlers, there are some previously sound posters who appear to have lost the plot.

Fortunately they are not representative of the wider electorate as recent polls have shown very clearly.

At the end of the day the SNP is nothing more than a mechanism and in my opinion the only credible one to achieve an objective that is far more important than any transitory politician whoever they are and whatever my opinions of them are.

 

I get the feeling that this paragraph could have been written at any time over the past seven years, yet all there's been is, successive, squandered mandates.

My question would be, is there any timescale for you when the non-committal of the party leadership to the primary goal of the party, finally, becomes untenable?

[NotThePars]

I think the SNP support and are striving for independence I just think they haven't fully comprehended that the nature of politics has changed in the UK and I don't think they have the stomach or understanding of how they get independence.

[Zern]

2 hours ago, BFTD said:

I'd have thought you'd still have a Tory party tied to Westminster who'd be campaigning to rejoin the glorious union. If you thought 'SNP Bad' was funny, 'Westminister would never let this happen' would bring the house down.

f**k knows what Labour would do. Total paralysis as they struggled to work out why they exist, probably.

Our very own version of the DUP.

Pining for the Union. 

As for what Labour and the Lib Dems do? f**k knows. Sir Kier Starmer and Sir Ed Davey are establishment to the core. Their parties offer only token dissension and i sincerely doubt they would have any real place in a post-independent political landscape when their is ample opportunity for an alternative to gain power under the MMP system.

Nicola and the SNP as arch-unionists does tickle me though. Saying they have no interest in independence.

Did you not read your Conservative leaflets?

[O'Kelly Isley III]

18 minutes ago, Ayrshire Analytica said:

I get the feeling that this paragraph could have been written at any time over the past seven years, yet all there's been is, successive, squandered mandates.

My question would be, is there any timescale for you when the non-committal of the party leadership to the primary goal of the party, finally, becomes untenable?

I think timescales are in cold storage until such time as societies, UK and beyond, achieve an accommodation with Covid sufficient for the 'normal' political rules of engagement to return.  However, I don't doubt that events of the Covid period will inform voters' opinions at that point, as will Brexit.

[Guest Bob Mahelp]

2 hours ago, Grant228 said:

Probably correct. 

 

However, if you go with the thinking that for another referendum to be called then we need a majority snp government then today has undoubtedly hurt it, check just the amount of people on this forum who have cancelled there membership, on a personal level I'm not voting for them anymore. Very much straw that broke the camels back but I'm absolutely sick of them, have absolutely no confidence or faith that Sturgeon will get us any closer to holding a referendum, and the constant shitting on football fans has got old. 

As much as I didn't want any further restrictions today, I don't think you can judge a few angry posts on a football forum as representative of what the majority of people in Scotland think. 

Her inherent conservatism (small c, obviously) and excellent communication skills are very popular with large swathes of the Scottish population. 

I didn't want these restrictions, but why anyone actually expects her to be a Bolsonaro-type gambler and throw caution to the wind is beyond me. 

I'll pretty much guarantee you that her popularity with the Scottish electorate will be untouched by today's announcement. 

 

[Ayrshire Analytica]

13 minutes ago, O'Kelly Isley III said:

I think timescales are in cold storage until such time as societies, UK and beyond, achieve an accommodation with Covid sufficient for the 'normal' political rules of engagement to return.  However, I don't doubt that events of the Covid period will inform voters' opinions at that point, as will Brexit.

That's a fair point.

For me, however, the impasse that the independence movement currently faces, began before Covid.  

When the UK voted for Brexit, it should have been the governing party of Scotland's cue to withdraw, permanently, from the institutions of the British state.  This, is an inevitable step that we must take as a nation, sooner rather than later.  It would require boldness and courage, they had neither.

A section of the party is completely enamoured with British rule and English parliamentary convention, because it makes them rich.  They have been absorbed by Westminster.  The next step is an SNP member of the, unelected, second chamber in London.

[DrewDon]

It feels about right that her standing will probably be broadly unharmed by today. I don't like what she has announced - and, to be honest, I am pretty pissed off with her about it - but caution and timidity being significant components of Sturgeon's political DNA is hardly a new thing. 

[HoBNob]

17 minutes ago, Bob Mahelp said:

 

I'll pretty much guarantee you that her popularity with the Scottish electorate will be untouched by today's announcement. 

 

How big a number does it need to be for her popularity to be touched? All my football supporting pals who voted snp are done with her, you had multiple cancellations just on this one corner of the Internet... 

 

It's certainly not unoutched, you just have those extremely loyal to Sturgeon hoping it's not that bad. 

[Scampi on toast]

1 hour ago, Ayrshire Analytica said:

I get the feeling that this paragraph could have been written at any time over the past seven years, yet all there's been is, successive, squandered mandates.

My question would be, is there any timescale for you when the non-committal of the party leadership to the primary goal of the party, finally, becomes untenable?

Since you ask my line in the sand was the last day of 2021.  

I've lost my religion with her.

[Baxter Parp]

1 hour ago, Ayrshire Analytica said:

I get the feeling that this paragraph could have been written at any time over the past seven years, yet all there's been is, successive, squandered mandates.

That's not all there's been, there was that pandemic thingy that killed 6,000 Scots too.

[Granny Danger]

30 minutes ago, Grant228 said:

How big a number does it need to be for her popularity to be touched? All my football supporting pals who voted snp are done with her, you had multiple cancellations just on this one corner of the Internet... 

 

It's certainly not unoutched, you just have those extremely loyal to Sturgeon hoping it's not that bad. 

People have been critical of Sturgeon for months over ‘restrictions’.  Yet the most recent poll (less than three weeks old) showed that the SNP would win every one of the 59 seats at Westminster.

 

[HoBNob]

3 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

People have been critical of Sturgeon for months over ‘restrictions’.  Yet the most recent poll (less than three weeks old) showed that the SNP would win every one of the 59 seats at Westminster.

 

Meh, we'll see what the next one says. 

[Granny Danger]

1 minute ago, Grant228 said:

Meh, we'll see what the next one says. 

Yeah you’re right.  They probably won’t get any more than the 59.

[HoBNob]

3 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

Yeah you’re right.  They probably won’t get any more than the 59.

Makes f**k all difference anyway doesn't it? No matter how many seats they get in Westminster, no matter how many they get in Holyrood, we're not getting independence under Sturgeon. 

 

[ICTJohnboy]

FFS, How many aliases has Stormzy created tonight?