ChatterBank0 min ago
A Second Referendum On Scottish Independence!
http://
Seriously?
How can there be any justification?
Seriously?
How can there be any justification?
Answers
1 to 19 of 19
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by sp1814. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
this has been raised before, though with increasing ill temper
http://
My own guess is that the SNP won't force the issue but will wait for public disquiet over broken vows and over rule by alien parties in Westminster. This may not happen; if it doesn't a second referendum may be years away. The party doesn't need to rush it.
http://
My own guess is that the SNP won't force the issue but will wait for public disquiet over broken vows and over rule by alien parties in Westminster. This may not happen; if it doesn't a second referendum may be years away. The party doesn't need to rush it.
David Mundell’s opening quote from the link material reads, “Is it the SNP policy to have a second referendum or not?” Later, he is quoted as saying, “The question, of course, is not the inevitability…”
If it is (quote) ‘inevitable’ that there will be a later referendum, what can he possibly mean by asking whether it is “SNP policy to have a second referendum”? Does he not understand what ‘inevitable’ means?
OF COURSE there will be a further referendum - or even referenda - on the matter, given that independence is the central core of SNP policy. Would any rational person seriously question whether UKIP will give up on the UK's abandoning the EU as a core policy in future or that Tories will really start financially hammering casino bankers and venture capitalists?
The only valid query at the moment is whether the SNP will have that policy as a plank in their manifesto for the 2016 general election in Scotland or not. It's up to them, not Mundell or his masters, for whom Mundell is but the tiniest of toeholds in Scotland.
If it is (quote) ‘inevitable’ that there will be a later referendum, what can he possibly mean by asking whether it is “SNP policy to have a second referendum”? Does he not understand what ‘inevitable’ means?
OF COURSE there will be a further referendum - or even referenda - on the matter, given that independence is the central core of SNP policy. Would any rational person seriously question whether UKIP will give up on the UK's abandoning the EU as a core policy in future or that Tories will really start financially hammering casino bankers and venture capitalists?
The only valid query at the moment is whether the SNP will have that policy as a plank in their manifesto for the 2016 general election in Scotland or not. It's up to them, not Mundell or his masters, for whom Mundell is but the tiniest of toeholds in Scotland.
I don't see why it wouldn't be justified.
If it'd been 10% for independence, I'd say a second one would be an obvious waste of time and money, but when the result was as close as it was, it's reasonable to assume the question needs to be asked again at some point.
I hope the scots pick up all the costs for all these referenda by they way, it being purely their concern and everything.
If it'd been 10% for independence, I'd say a second one would be an obvious waste of time and money, but when the result was as close as it was, it's reasonable to assume the question needs to be asked again at some point.
I hope the scots pick up all the costs for all these referenda by they way, it being purely their concern and everything.
> How can there be any justification?
It's simple. If people vote for the wrong answer, you make them keep voting until they get the right answer, and then you never let them vote on it again. A bit like the Irish and the Lisbon Treaty ...
http://
It's simple. If people vote for the wrong answer, you make them keep voting until they get the right answer, and then you never let them vote on it again. A bit like the Irish and the Lisbon Treaty ...
http://
The link material offered above makes it clear that the Irish voted 'Yes' the second time because of the economic downturn and the guarantees that were provided on sovereignty, taxation and neutrality as well as military and family matters which had simply not been there on the earlier occasion.
Consequently, it was not the case that the same offer was simply presented again and would have gone on being presented ad infinitum until a 'Yes' vote triumphed.
Consequently, it was not the case that the same offer was simply presented again and would have gone on being presented ad infinitum until a 'Yes' vote triumphed.
The Scot Gnats will just keep on going with this until they get the result they want. Some democracy !! The next referendum must be held throughout the entire UK as it affects the entire UK. It will be an overwhelming yes yes yes next time. If Scotland doesn't want the rest of the UK , then the rest of the UK sure as H**l doesn't want Scotland . Get rid !.... and I'm a Scot.... and VERY anti Gnat. Independence will be a big mistake for all of the UK but it will cause irreparable damage and oblivion for Scotland. It is forever and no backsies when it goes toes up.... which it will. Very sad day for my beloved Scotland.
> If it'd been 10% for independence, I'd say a second one would be an obvious waste of time and money, but when the result was as close as it was, it's reasonable to assume the question needs to be asked again at some point.
Except that if the vote had been 50.1% for independence then the question would have been resolved once and for all, presumably! Definitely if it had been 55:45 for independence ...
> Could it be something to do with the SNP taking 56 out of the 59 Westminster seats? Looks like a major change of mind in Scotland to me.
That could have been achieved with 45% of the vote. It was actually achieved with 50% - not exactly a major change, especially as support for the SNP is not necessarily an indication of the support for independence. You definitely should not take 56/59 (95%) as an indication that the SNP got 95% of the vote, as that is not the case at all.
Except that if the vote had been 50.1% for independence then the question would have been resolved once and for all, presumably! Definitely if it had been 55:45 for independence ...
> Could it be something to do with the SNP taking 56 out of the 59 Westminster seats? Looks like a major change of mind in Scotland to me.
That could have been achieved with 45% of the vote. It was actually achieved with 50% - not exactly a major change, especially as support for the SNP is not necessarily an indication of the support for independence. You definitely should not take 56/59 (95%) as an indication that the SNP got 95% of the vote, as that is not the case at all.
The referendum was in September. Remarkably, this was announced on 24th October…
http://
…and this, the following day
http://
A change of circumstances, as Nicola Sturgeon suggests, sufficient as justification?
Also, if they are convinced they will be flush with cash, after independance, perhaps they won't mind a clause whereby they agree to reimbursing the cumulative costs of referenda to UK PLC, as a condition of exit?
http://
…and this, the following day
http://
A change of circumstances, as Nicola Sturgeon suggests, sufficient as justification?
Also, if they are convinced they will be flush with cash, after independance, perhaps they won't mind a clause whereby they agree to reimbursing the cumulative costs of referenda to UK PLC, as a condition of exit?
The SNP dont care about Scotland they only care about vanity and pride I call them the Scottish Nasty Party and I know many others that call them something else with N !! I am scottish and I am ashamed to be Scottish because of Nicola Sturgeon and Alex Salmond they are ruining this country. It is only the intelligent and educated people that voted no in the referendum. The 45% were I suspect working class uneducated taken in by this Braveheart mentaility and they were desperate for something to fight for. They are ruining this country by causing division in friendships and families.
1 to 19 of 19
