Is It Too Soon For Indyref2?

[ToraToraTora]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-47679065
they only voted 4 years ago.

[douglas9401]

Yes, it is. It won't stop the alleged clamour though.

[-Talbot-]

Having just watched Scotland against San Marino, I'm edging towards ...let them go.

[pixie374]

Was it only four years ago? It seems reasonable if there is a big change such as Brexit. I think we should all get a vote on it though.

[Zacs-Master]

Did you not see Ms Crankie on Andrew Marr, Tora? Certainty according to her.

[-Talbot-]

Referendum results should last at a minimum of 15 years without being revisited.

[douglas9401]

I doubt Tora has much time for the pinko, lefty fake news factory that is the BBC. :-)

[mushroom25]

they can hold a referendum any time they like. but it needs to be backed by act of UK parliament to have any validity. will the SNP get that? answers on a postcard.....

[Old_Geezer]

Only a couple of decades.

[pixie374]

Talbot has a point, actually. Maybe there should be a minimum time in between to allow everything to be resolved, settled and see what the outcome is.

[Zacs-Master]

Dooogie, then his thread started off rather badly, didn’t it!

[douglas9401]

Tora may have been hacked.

[agchristie]

Another example of 'if you don't get your own way the first time try and try again'.

[Zacs-Master]

Haaaaaa. Nice one, Douglas.

[KARL]

In 2014 Scottish voters were urged (by Westminster lobbyists) to reject independence because, amongst other things, an independent Scotland would end up outside the EU. Those statements in that referendum were equally unfounded as the famous ones in the referendum for the UK leaving the EU in 2016. Just about everyone knows that they were wrong and also that still these statements will have persuaded voters in their choice in both referenda. People on here are insisting that, once the voting is done, the die is cast for the longest time possible and that retesting voters opinion is heresy, "undemocratic" and worse. Presumably there is discomfort over the possibility of a reverse wafer thin majority - if the same wafer thin majority again came out on top, surely that would not offend the winners would it ? Would democracy be compromised by following the will of a different majority if it came to light ? What if a majority is more sizeable one way or the other ? Democracy has weaknesses and less than 100% turnout is one, thin majority is another, and there are others (not least a poorly informed, perhaps misinformed, electorate).

[-Talbot-]

KARL
In 2014 Scottish voters were urged (by Westminster lobbyists) to reject independence because, amongst other things, an independent Scotland would end up outside the EU. Those statements in that referendum were equally unfounded as the famous ones in the referendum for the UK leaving the EU in 2016.



What?

[KARL]

Talbot - which part ?

[-Talbot-]

First bit.

[THECORBYLOON]

Legislation allows a minimum of seven years between referendums on the border between Ulster and the ROI.

[KARL]

Yes, one of the arguments put forward at the time both (especially) in the media and "on the stump" when Westminster missionaries rushed by the trainload "up north" was the risk, nay certainty, that independent Scotland would inevitably end up outside the EU and could at best try to apply for membership, the often stated (and often simply being implied) doubt that Scotland would be accepted was loaded onto the "trolley" of woes that betide independent Scotland.

Maybe you are too young to remember this, surely it is not poor memory ? In any case, anyone caring to trawl through archive material from about May to mid September of 2014 will find plenty of examples. This is one of the first things foreigners bring up in conversation when Scotland's position comes up - and then they roll about laughing at the British.......

[gulliver1]

Will we be leaving the E/U ON FRIDAY .?????????