When will indyref2 happen?

[williemillersmoustache]

13 minutes ago, DMCs said:

Rumbled by who? Certainly not by you anyway as you're as thick as pig shit let's be honest

The dynamic viscosity of pig shit can vary from 0.5 to 7.0 N·s/m2 (newtons per square meter) so I'm going to choose to take that as a compliment. 

Edited March 27, 2022 by williemillersmoustache

[Albus Bulbasaur]

Some people are really sensitive when it comes to seeing opinions they disagree with. I don't know if they're trolling or not because there's no way these people act like this in real life. Definite anger issues.

[DMCs]

6 hours ago, Albus Bulbasaur said:

Some people are really sensitive when it comes to seeing opinions they disagree with. I don't know if they're trolling or not because there's no way these people act like this in real life. Definite anger issues.

Ultimately it comes down to deep rooted psychological issues. Your hardened Scottish nationalist has a vicious envy of the English that is hard for them to forget emotionally. It's an inferiority complex at it's base.

Edited March 27, 2022 by DMCs

[williemillersmoustache]

Are the brand guidelines for unionist memes written by some kind of avant garde genius that challenges and disrupts the established practices of consistency and clarity in visual messaging or is the random font size and use of capitalisation some kind of hidden code in of itself?? 

[Rodhull]

Thank God Stormzy alias #17 and the dumbest of all the raging yoons on the site are here to give us lessons in trolling and deep rooted psychological issues. The lack of self awareness is staggering.

Edited March 27, 2022 by Rodhull

[Goomba]

Unless Lichtensteins Monster or any other Nat tackles my points then I’m afraid I’ll be chalking that one up as a win.

[Goomba]

4 hours ago, williemillersmoustache said:

I'm sure the content is as irrelevant to Goomba as it is to the rest of us and the debate on independence. This is just more unionist kerb stone art and the next overly long, rambling, incoherent riposte will be in blue. 

Rumbled. 

His content is very relevant to me, which is why I take great pleasure in countering every single point.

Hopefully he accepts my offer of a wager.

[carpetmonster]

33 minutes ago, Rodhull said:

Thank God Stormzy alias #17 

Is he getting banned or just flouncing off of his own accord? 

[Rodhull]

1 minute ago, carpetmonster said:

Is he getting banned or just flouncing off of his own accord? 

I guess he'll be around for a while before eventually letting his bigoted nature slip out fully and get emptied again before returning a few weeks later to lecture us all anew.

[carpetmonster]

1 minute ago, Rodhull said:

I guess he'll be around for a while before eventually letting his bigoted nature slip out fully and get emptied again before returning a few weeks later to lecture us all anew.

He’ll need to do a better job of grasping the nettle then, given he’s being roundly ignored at present. 

[Benjamin_Nevis]

7 minutes ago, carpetmonster said:

Is he getting banned or just flouncing off of his own accord? 

The usual modus operandi is to pretend to be interested in genuine debate, then lose it a bit, finally culminating in a multi-thread spamming session and a fully-merited ban. Realises he can't stay away, because he literally has nothing else in his life, and returns with another alias. Rinse/Repeat. 

As i said before, for all his greeting about pro-Indy posters, I'm struggling to think of a single one who's been pathetic enough to have to slither back under repeated aliases after a ban. 

[doulikefish]

Stromzy definitely has "mummy" issues 

[Rodhull]

44 minutes ago, carpetmonster said:

He’ll need to do a better job of grasping the nettle then, given he’s being roundly ignored at present. 

Aye, he is relentless though.  He's bound to catch someone either new, unknowing or on a bad day eventually.

[carpetmonster]

5 minutes ago, Rodhull said:

Aye, he is relentless though.  He's bound to catch someone either new, unknowing or on a bad day eventually.

I wonder if that’s more or less bleak than just saying sod it and going to RangersMedia, but then realizing that these are your people. 

[lichtgilphead]

1) Goomba's original post said ""It's been obvious from the start that no 2nd referendum will take place for the following reasons: - Scots don't want one" 

Since then, he has claimed that this statement refers to Sturgeon's timetable for Indyref 2. It's impossible to work that out from the original statement, which is just plain wrong.

2) The GFA specifies conditions under which one discrete part of the UK can choose to leave the UK. As Yoons claim that we are a union of equals, why do they appear to be happy with different rules applying to another discrete part of the union?

I would agree that the condition in the GFA is that it should appear likely that a majority would vote in favour of the United Ireland in a referendum. The method to determine this condition is not set out. The Institute For Government (a UK organisation) state that this condition could be determined by "a consistent majority in opinion polls, a Catholic majority in a census, a nationalist majority in the Northern Ireland Assembly, or a vote by a majority in the Assembly" (my emphasis)

The bit in bold is exactly the condition I specified in my previous post.

3) Goomba's orginal contention was that "There’s been no sustainable evidence of support for the breakup of the country"

I countered by saying that "Both sides appear to be at around 50% +/- 5% in the majority of polls" (since the start of the pandemic). That's sustainable evidence that support for the Scottish Indepedence is around 50%, give or take a few percent either way. 

Contrary to Goomba's claim, I never said that this was a basis for holding IndyRef 2. The mandate for that exists because of the Green/SNP majority in our proportionally elected government at Holyrood.

Also contrary to Goomba's claims, "No" have not mostly been in front. There have been a further 3 polls since my original post, when Yes led by 35 to 30. The current score (since 1st March 2020) is Yes 36, No 32 and 8 ties.

Goomba also said that the 35 leads for yes were during a short period of time and were mainly done by Yes supporters. I demonstrated that the 35 polls were over 18 months and that polls were commissioned by organisations such as the Daily Express & DC Thomson. At no point did I suggest that Yes had won 35 polls in a row, so I fail to see any relevance in Goomba's "There were several No leads during that period.  Hard lines." response. Indeed, I specifically pointed out that No had led o 30 occasions!

4) Stormzy Goomba says that the Ipsos MORI poll of 9th February 2022 "had dodgy, loaded, leading questions prior to the penultimate 'Do you want Scotland to be an Independent Country?"'. That's a barefaced lie.

Here's the link to the survey results. It is easily seen that the first question is "Q1. If a referendum were held in Scotland on its constitutional future, would you personally prefer Scotland tovote for or against leaving the UK and becoming an independent country?"

Is Goomba privy to information to suggest otherwise, or is he just talking out of his arse?

He also describes the poll of 29 November 2021 is a outlier. This poll was carried out by Ipsos MORI/STV and should therefore be compared against other polls carried out by the same organisation for the same client.

It looks like the Ipsos MORI/STV panel are quite Yes friendly, as the 6 results over the last couple of years always show Yes in the lead, apart from one poll that shows a tie. The 5 leads held by Yes are 9%, (Tie,) 4%, 4%, 10% and 13%. Accordingly, the average Yes lead over the period is 6.67% with a standard deviation of 4.38. 9% is clearly not an outlier of that population.

5) Goomba asks me to provide evidence that his position does not align with the UN's position on self-determination. The UN's position is set out in Article 1 (2)

This establishes that one of the main purposes of the United Nations, and thus the Security Council, is to "develop friendly international relations based on respect for the “principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples”. The case studies in this section cover instances where the Security Council has discussed situations with a bearing on the principle of self-determination and the right of peoples to decide their own government, which may relate to the questions of independence, autonomy, referenda, elections, and the legitimacy of governments."

Link

Scotland has defined borders, and a devolved parliament that represents the populace. Accordingly, should the populace elect a government on a manifesto promise to hold a referendum, the UN supports the right of that populace to hold a referendum. Denying such a right (by giving Westminster the decision whether to hod such a referendum) does not align with the UN's position. The Westminster parliament is not solely elected by the Scottish populace.

6) Goomba says "A Tory mandate is indeed a mandate to resist another referendum.  Deciding referenda is not a devolved issue, so the devolved assembly results matter not a jot.  Very sneaky of you to go by the list vote and not the constituency vote too"

The Tory majority is in the UK, not Scotland. See point 5 above. 

Conducting referenda is not reserved, so it is devolved. The constitution is reserved, so the Scottish Parliament cannot change it. However, this does not prevent them from holding an advisory referendum. I've already explained all this. If Goomba wishes to refute this, he should provide evidence, not unsupported statements.

With regard to the constituency/ list vote, I went for the list as Goomba specifically said that FPTP is unfair (SNP won the constituency by 62 to 11). This list vote is proportional & rewards all parties equally. Indepedence supporting parties won a majority of this proportional vote.

7) Goomba says that the Scottiish Parliament is now permanent. The doctrine of Parliamentary Soverignty says it is not. Westminster could abolish Holyrood at the stroke of a pen. This is absolutely basic stuff.

8 ) In 2014, no-one seriously thought that England & Wales would be stupid enough to vote to leave the EU. The assumption that Scotland would be thrown out of the EU on a Yes vote depends on who would be considered by the EU to be the continuing state. Nothing was guaranteed at the time, and the EU specifically said that they would only answer the question if it was asked by the member state (the UK). Strangely, the UK didn't ask the question (perhaps because they wouldn't have liked the answer?)

If you recall, EU citizens resident in Scotland were overwhelmingly "No", because of the Yoon propaganda about the EU. Their view will have changed.

9) Goomba asks what powers have been taken back from Holyrood to Westminster? All devolved powers under EU law have been removed from Edinburgh, Cardiff & Belfast. It's set out in the Internal Market Act. Off the top of my head, these include food labelling & standards. animal feed labelling and standards, and a mechanism to allow Westminster to fund local authorities directly, rather than through Holyrood. Westminster is worried that we might ban chlorinated chicken!

10) Goomba said "The Tories always run on the promise of not holding" a 2nd referendum. When asked for specifics, he said that they had run on that promise twice - in 2019 & 2017. Twice is ot the same as always, and the referendum policy in 2017 was "Now is not the time", rather that a specific commitment to not hold one. Effectively, the current UK government are the only UK government ever elected on that manifesto promise. They won 6 out of 59 seats on that manifesto.

11) Goomba said "Sturgeon is stringing her voters along.  There will be no referendum arranged in 2023 - mark my words.  Fancy a wager?"

I hope that Sturgeon is not "stringing her voters along", but I'm not confident enough to put money on it. I will, however, be resigning my membership of the SNP if they fail to keep their manifesto commitment to hold a referendum "when the covid crisis has passed". All other things being equal, I expect that referendum to be arranged by the end of 2023

 

[The_Kincardine]

And breathe @lichtgilphead

There won't be an IndyRef in 2023.

[lichtgilphead]

3 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said:

And breathe @lichtgilphead

There won't be an IndyRef in 2023.

I said that I expected the next indyref to be arranged by the end of 2023, not that it would be held in 2023. I'll be happy with that amount of progress.

There's a subtle difference.

And yes, that was a long rant, but Goomba's scattergun approach left me with little choice. Perhaps you could post a picture of some Tartan Gonks so I can resume my usual pithy & witty replies? 

[The_Kincardine]

1 minute ago, lichtgilphead said:

Perhaps you could post a picture of some Tartan Gonks so I can resume my usual pithy & witty replies? 

'Resume' is doing a lot of heavy lifting in that sentence...

[Goomba]

19 hours ago, lichtgilphead said:

1) Goomba's original post said ""It's been obvious from the start that no 2nd referendum will take place for the following reasons: - Scots don't want one" 

Since then, he has claimed that this statement refers to Sturgeon's timetable for Indyref 2. It's impossible to work that out from the original statement, which is just plain wrong.

Of course it refers to her timetable.  I clarified my original statement which is normal in discourse.

2) The GFA specifies conditions under which one discrete part of the UK can choose to leave the UK. As Yoons claim that we are a union of equals, why do they appear to be happy with different rules applying to another discrete part of the union?

Us all working out different agreements depending on our situation isn't inconsistent with a Union of Equals.  The GFA was driven by the need to stop the IRA bombing campaign for example, with all sorts of other stuff thrown in.  Thankfully Sturgeon's not thrown any bombs yet.

I would agree that the condition in the GFA is that it should appear likely that a majority would vote in favour of the United Ireland in a referendum. The method to determine this condition is not set out. The Institute For Government (a UK organisation) state that this condition could be determined by "a consistent majority in opinion polls, a Catholic majority in a census, a nationalist majority in the Northern Ireland Assembly, or a vote by a majority in the Assembly" (my emphasis)

The bit in bold is exactly the condition I specified in my previous post.

All ifs and buts, unlike your original claim.

3) Goomba's orginal contention was that "There’s been no sustainable evidence of support for the breakup of the country"

I countered by saying that "Both sides appear to be at around 50% +/- 5% in the majority of polls" (since the start of the pandemic). That's sustainable evidence that support for the Scottish Indepedence is around 50%, give or take a few percent either way. 

It's not.  It's evidence of fluctuation.

Contrary to Goomba's claim, I never said that this was a basis for holding IndyRef 2. The mandate for that exists because of the Green/SNP majority in our proportionally elected government at Holyrood.

There is no mandate, other than the one Boris has based on the Tories manifesto promise.  Holyrood can't decide referenda.

Also contrary to Goomba's claims, "No" have not mostly been in front. There have been a further 3 polls since my original post, when Yes led by 35 to 30. The current score (since 1st March 2020) is Yes 36, No 32 and 8 ties.

It all just depends what the timescale is surely?

Goomba also said that the 35 leads for yes were during a short period of time and were mainly done by Yes supporters. I demonstrated that the 35 polls were over 18 months and that polls were commissioned by organisations such as the Daily Express & DC Thomson. At no point did I suggest that Yes had won 35 polls in a row, so I fail to see any relevance in Goomba's "There were several No leads during that period.  Hard lines." response. Indeed, I specifically pointed out that No had led o 30 occasions!

I humbly concede on this point.  Having looked through the posts, it looks like I messed up completely 

4) Stormzy Goomba says that the Ipsos MORI poll of 9th February 2022 "had dodgy, loaded, leading questions prior to the penultimate 'Do you want Scotland to be an Independent Country?"'. That's a barefaced lie.  How dare you! 

Here's the link to the survey results. It is easily seen that the first question is "Q1. If a referendum were held in Scotland on its constitutional future, would you personally prefer Scotland tovote for or against leaving the UK and becoming an independent country?"

Is Goomba privy to information to suggest otherwise, or is he just talking out of his arse?

There were definitely dodgy, loaded, lead up questions in there.  Mark my words.

He also describes the poll of 29 November 2021 is a outlier. This poll was carried out by Ipsos MORI/STV and should therefore be compared against other polls carried out by the same organisation for the same client.

It's an outlier because it goes completely against the grain/trend of the other polls held at a similar time.

It looks like the Ipsos MORI/STV panel are quite Yes friendly, as the 6 results over the last couple of years always show Yes in the lead, apart from one poll that shows a tie. The 5 leads held by Yes are 9%, (Tie,) 4%, 4%, 10% and 13%. Accordingly, the average Yes lead over the period is 6.67% with a standard deviation of 4.38. 9% is clearly not an outlier of that population.

It was a huge outlier as all the surrounding polls were, just like Scots in 2014, emphatically saying NO THANKS.

5) Goomba asks me to provide evidence that his position does not align with the UN's position on self-determination. The UN's position is set out in Article 1 (2)

This establishes that one of the main purposes of the United Nations, and thus the Security Council, is to "develop friendly international relations based on respect for the “principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples”. The case studies in this section cover instances where the Security Council has discussed situations with a bearing on the principle of self-determination and the right of peoples to decide their own government, which may relate to the questions of independence, autonomy, referenda, elections, and the legitimacy of governments."

Link

Scotland has defined borders, and a devolved parliament that represents the populace. Accordingly, should the populace elect a government on a manifesto promise to hold a referendum, the UN supports the right of that populace to hold a referendum. Denying such a right (by giving Westminster the decision whether to hod such a referendum) does not align with the UN's position. The Westminster parliament is not solely elected by the Scottish populace.

Aye, but the people of Scotland aren't clamouring to break away.

6) Goomba says "A Tory mandate is indeed a mandate to resist another referendum.  Deciding referenda is not a devolved issue, so the devolved assembly results matter not a jot.  Very sneaky of you to go by the list vote and not the constituency vote too"

The Tory majority is in the UK, not Scotland. See point 5 above. 

Doesn't matter.  It's not a devolved issue so Parliament decides, not the devolved assembly or the UK.  The UN's stance could only be invoked if it was obvious that a clear majority of Scots were clamouring for Independence for a sustained amount of time.

Conducting referenda is not reserved, so it is devolved. The constitution is reserved, so the Scottish Parliament cannot change it. However, this does not prevent them from holding an advisory referendum. I've already explained all this. If Goomba wishes to refute this, he should provide evidence, not unsupported statements.

Deciding whether a referendum takes place lies with Parliament, not the devolved assembly.  An advisory referendum would be utterly pointless without Parliament's consent.  You'd have a Catalonia situation, with the Nats all jumping about Freedom George Square as if they'd won the lottery, when in reality it means nothing.

With regard to the constituency/ list vote, I went for the list as Goomba specifically said that FPTP is unfair (SNP won the constituency by 62 to 11). This list vote is proportional & rewards all parties equally. Indepedence supporting parties won a majority of this proportional vote.

I do think FPTP is unfair, but you'll get a more accurate picture on the constitutional mindset of the populace via the constituency results.  People tend to vote for wildcards and novelty parties on the list.

7) Goomba says that the Scottiish Parliament is now permanent. The doctrine of Parliamentary Soverignty says it is not. Westminster could abolish Holyrood at the stroke of a pen. This is absolutely basic stuff.

I think you're wrong on that one (I hope you're not), but if you have evidence that stands up to scrutiny then I'll happily eat humble pie.

8 ) In 2014, no-one seriously thought that England & Wales would be stupid enough to vote to leave the EU. The assumption that Scotland would be thrown out of the EU on a Yes vote depends on who would be considered by the EU to be the continuing state. Nothing was guaranteed at the time, and the EU specifically said that they would only answer the question if it was asked by the member state (the UK). Strangely, the UK didn't ask the question (perhaps because they wouldn't have liked the answer?)

Guaranteed or not, the No Campaign's claim was not that we'd be staying in the EU forever if we remain in the UK.  This is yet another Nationalist myth.  It can be added to the ever growing list alongside the vow being a lie and that NHS Scotland was in danger of being privatised.

If you recall, EU citizens resident in Scotland were overwhelmingly "No", because of the Yoon propaganda about the EU. Their view will have changed.

Well the opinion polling certainly doesn't reflect much change, plus loads of them will have moved back home anyway surely?

9) Goomba asks what powers have been taken back from Holyrood to Westminster? All devolved powers under EU law have been removed from Edinburgh, Cardiff & Belfast. It's set out in the Internal Market Act. Off the top of my head, these include food labelling & standards. animal feed labelling and standards, and a mechanism to allow Westminster to fund local authorities directly, rather than through Holyrood. Westminster is worried that we might ban chlorinated chicken!

I believe these were EU powers given to Parliament rather and were not devolved assembly powers in the first place.

10) Goomba said "The Tories always run on the promise of not holding" a 2nd referendum. When asked for specifics, he said that they had run on that promise twice - in 2019 & 2017. Twice is ot the same as always, and the referendum policy in 2017 was "Now is not the time", rather that a specific commitment to not hold one. Effectively, the current UK government are the only UK government ever elected on that manifesto promise. They won 6 out of 59 seats on that manifesto.

I think saying 'always' is fair in this case.  We use it in such a way all the way.  i.e. if your neighbour parks the car too far from the pavement the last two times, you could say 'he always parks terribly.'  Just the way we speak.

11) Goomba said "Sturgeon is stringing her voters along.  There will be no referendum arranged in 2023 - mark my words.  Fancy a wager?"

I hope that Sturgeon is not "stringing her voters along", but I'm not confident enough to put money on it. I will, however, be resigning my membership of the SNP if they fail to keep their manifesto commitment to hold a referendum "when the covid crisis has passed". All other things being equal, I expect that referendum to be arranged by the end of 2023

I respect that to be honest.  Let me know if you change your mind on the wager.

 

[git-intae-thum]

Remember that commodity we were told until recently was all but gone 

www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/simon-clarke-uk-north-sea-oil-production-b2043060.html%3famp

They think you are stupid.

In 2014 they were 55% right.