When will indyref2 happen?

[ICTJohnboy]

4 minutes ago, Salt n Vinegar said:

Do you think there are any candidates with a degree of competence in the current batch of Tory MPs who would command respect and support from the MPs and wider Tory and Tory voting base? I'm struggling to come up with a short list of even 1.

 

That's a good question, but I'm sorry to say I can't think of a single, solitary one either!

[williemillersmoustache]

2 minutes ago, ICTJohnboy said:

 

That's a good question, but I'm sorry to say I can't think of a single, solitary one either!

Jeremy Hunt would fall into the category of "not quite so mental" but I don't think this clutch of Tory MPs would have him. Truss is the banter candidate, would be more acceptable to the headbangers and would have a +ve effect for indy imo

[Lurkst]

11 hours ago, speckled tangerine said:

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/politics/arid-40754472.html

I see Sinn Fein continue to be miles ahead in opinion polling in Ireland and who'd have thought that even ten years ago? 

I absolutely agree that Scottish independence needs a catalyst and that catalyst is the ever closer integration of the north with the south as a direct result highlighted by the preferential deal NI has following brexit. Trade has increased by large amounts between the two whilst trade between NI and the mainland has fallen off a cliff. If Sinn Fein lead the next Irish Government then surely they'll be chasing a border poll and if the demand is there, then the GFA says it happens.

The polls could show a huge majority for independence here but number ten says no to a referendum. The white house will make sure it happens in Ireland.

That's the only way we'll get our chance in my opinion, with NI going first although that could be happening relatively quickly- within ten years.

Pie & Bovril will still be here though.

The Unionist argument would then be "the unification of Ireland shows us why Great Britain must stay united."

 

[Theyellowbox]

30 minutes ago, williemillersmoustache said:

Jeremy Hunt would fall into the category of "not quite so mental" but I don't think this clutch of Tory MPs would have him. Truss is the banter candidate, would be more acceptable to the headbangers and would have a +ve effect for indy imo

Oddly, the tories seem to love Truss. She would be better than BoJo, but not by much and where he is calculated stupid, she is just plain stupid.

This would play really well for independence. 

[BigDoddyKane]

18 hours ago, speckled tangerine said:

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/politics/arid-40754472.html

I see Sinn Fein continue to be miles ahead in opinion polling in Ireland and who'd have thought that even ten years ago? 

I absolutely agree that Scottish independence needs a catalyst and that catalyst is the ever closer integration of the north with the south as a direct result highlighted by the preferential deal NI has following brexit. Trade has increased by large amounts between the two whilst trade between NI and the mainland has fallen off a cliff. If Sinn Fein lead the next Irish Government then surely they'll be chasing a border poll and if the demand is there, then the GFA says it happens.

The polls could show a huge majority for independence here but number ten says no to a referendum. The white house will make sure it happens in Ireland.

That's the only way we'll get our chance in my opinion, with NI going first although that could be happening relatively quickly- within ten years.

Pie & Bovril will still be here though.

 

 

10 years without a referendum would be a complete failure by the SNP

[ICTJohnboy]

7 minutes ago, BigDoddyKane said:

10 years without a referendum would be a complete failure by the SNP

 

An Indyref2, lost within 3 years, would be an even bigger failure.

[BigDoddyKane]

37 minutes ago, ICTJohnboy said:

 

An Indyref2, lost within 3 years, would be an even bigger failure.

Yes they both would be bad thats why I would expect the SNP to do better , its not good at its job if either happens

Edited December 5, 2021 by BigDoddyKane

[Scott Steiner]

8 hours ago, Lurkst said:

The Unionist argument would then be "the unification of Ireland shows us why Great Britain must stay united."

 

That would be a logical take.

It makes far more sense than 'independence for Ireland'

[ICTJohnboy]

49 minutes ago, Scott Steiner said:

That would be a logical take.

It makes far more sense than 'independence for Ireland'

 

Ireland is independent.

[Guest Bob Mahelp]

10 hours ago, williemillersmoustache said:

Jeremy Hunt would fall into the category of "not quite so mental" but I don't think this clutch of Tory MPs would have him. Truss is the banter candidate, would be more acceptable to the headbangers and would have a +ve effect for indy imo

Regardless of whoever takes over from Johnson, the Tory party....due to Brexit and the pressure from Farage....has swung irrevocably to the right. 

There's no prospective leader out there who would dare lead the Tories back to the 'middle ground'. They're absolutely committed to attacking migrants, human rights, the EU, and all the rest. 

That's where we are. And Scotland rejects that, regardless of who leads this callous band of evil fuckers. 

 

[Scott Steiner]

43 minutes ago, Bob Mahelp said:

Regardless of whoever takes over from Johnson, the Tory party....due to Brexit and the pressure from Farage....has swung irrevocably to the right. 

There's no prospective leader out there who would dare lead the Tories back to the 'middle ground'. They're absolutely committed to attacking migrants, human rights, the EU, and all the rest. 

That's where we are. And Scotland rejects that, regardless of who leads this callous band of evil fuckers. 

 

In what way do they attack migrants?  Sounds like more hysterical nonsense.

[Guest Bob Mahelp]

12 hours ago, Scott Steiner said:

In what way do they attack migrants?  Sounds like more hysterical nonsense.

I'm not sure if you're ripping the pish, or if you're using semantics to imply that you interpret my statement as Tories actually physically attacking random migrants. 

You'll have to let me know. 

[Scott Steiner]

1 minute ago, Bob Mahelp said:

I'm not sure if you're ripping the pish, or if you're using semantics to imply that you interpret my statement as Tories actually physically attacking random migrants. 

You'll have to let me know. 

Happy to do so.

I'm not ripping the pish, nor am I using semantics, nor am I implying anything physical or non-physical, random or otherwise.

It's common for echo-chamber dwelling lefties to use hyperbolic, twisted and downright illogical language to paint things worse than they are.. I see it all the time.

Like I asked in a previous post, in what way do the Tories attack migrants?

[Abdul_Latif]

17 hours ago, ICTJohnboy said:

 

An Indyref2, lost within 3 years, would be an even bigger failure.

But we keep getting told by the nosier Indy supporters that Yes will breeze it this time.

Are you suggesting that may not be entirely true?

[Guest Bob Mahelp]

1 hour ago, Scott Steiner said:

Happy to do so.

I'm not ripping the pish, nor am I using semantics, nor am I implying anything physical or non-physical, random or otherwise.

It's common for echo-chamber dwelling lefties to use hyperbolic, twisted and downright illogical language to paint things worse than they are.. I see it all the time.

Like I asked in a previous post, in what way do the Tories attack migrants?

Thanks for clearing up what you meant. I've never seen myself as an echo-chamber dwelling lefty, but at least that's given me a new perspective on a Monday morning 

I hate to answer your question with another question, but are you actually trying to deny the fact that the Tories use immigration as a handy populist tool to keep their supporters irate, or the fact that the Tories and their media supporters have long used the idea of the immigrant 'bogey man' as a vote winner ? 

Brexit has many facets, many of them well hidden by Tories to disguise the fact that they see de-regulation as a personal money spinner, but the facet that stuck/sticks most in people's minds is that of 'uncontrolled immigration'. 

I can't believe I'm having to type this. But are you trying to say that the Tories don't 'attack immigrants/immigration' ? (I could possibly have worded it better, I'll give you that).

 

 

[Scott Steiner]

16 minutes ago, Bob Mahelp said:

Thanks for clearing up what you meant. I've never seen myself as an echo-chamber dwelling lefty, but at least that's given me a new perspective on a Monday morning 

I hate to answer your question with another question, but are you actually trying to deny the fact that the Tories use immigration as a handy populist tool to keep their supporters irate, or the fact that the Tories and their media supporters have long used the idea of the immigrant 'bogey man' as a vote winner ? 

Brexit has many facets, many of them well hidden by Tories to disguise the fact that they see de-regulation as a personal money spinner, but the facet that stuck/sticks most in people's minds is that of 'uncontrolled immigration'. 

I can't believe I'm having to type this. But are you trying to say that the Tories don't 'attack immigrants/immigration' ? (I could possibly have worded it better, I'll give you that).

 

 

Most echo-chamber dwellers tend not to see themselves that way,  hence the strength of their convictions.  Happy to accept that you're not one though.  I just see it all the time, this tendency of the left to use loaded language to paint others in a bad light and win arguments.

'The Tories want to curb immigration' becomes 'The Tories attack immigrants' - these statements are a million miles apart.

Attacking immigration isn't sinister in my book, but this is a far cry from attacking immigrants.  Also, why must everything be reduced to an attack?  Are we not allowed any sort of nuanced opinion on immigration without it being characterised as attacking?

I don't think the Tories use immigration as a handy populist tool to keep their supporters irate at all.  I think they talk tough on immigration without real action as they know it'll appeal to voters though.  However, this isn't populism.

No I don't think the Tories use the idea of an immigration bogey man as a vote winner.  If you can provide examples of this taking place which I agree with then I could change my mind though.

Indeed, uncontrolled immigration does stick in people's minds, because it's awful.  Free movement within the EU was incredibly damaging in so many ways.

Edited December 6, 2021 by Scott Steiner

[Dawson Park Boy]

It’s all very well for Bob to take a ‘high and mighty’ position on immigration living in a country,Scotland, which has a relatively small number of immigrants.

I think he would have a different opinion if he was living in Dover or some of those south coast coastal towns watching people come ashore without any of the documentation which we native UK residents need. I bet he’d be a little ‘pissed off’. The majority are not refugees but economic migrants.

Immigration is a good thing but it needs to be controlled in order to keep social cohesion.
Most conservatives just want secure borders and a fair system.

[dirty dingus]

31 minutes ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

It’s all very well for Bob to take a ‘high and mighty’ position on immigration living in a country,Scotland, which has a relatively small number of immigrants.

I think he would have a different opinion if he was living in Dover or some of those south coast coastal towns watching people come ashore without any of the documentation which we native UK residents need. I bet he’d be a little ‘pissed off’. The majority are not refugees but economic migrants.

Immigration is a good thing but it needs to be controlled in order to keep social cohesion.
Most conservatives just want secure borders and a fair system.

 

 

Scotland has more immigrants than England.

Cant find figures for England alone but it's roughly 14% 

In the census 83.3% of Scotland's population was born in Scotland.2 Aug 2021

So 16.7% of Scottish residents are immigrants. 

It's just not the wee brown ones that you don't like.

[Guest Bob Mahelp]

2 hours ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

It’s all very well for Bob to take a ‘high and mighty’ position on immigration living in a country,Scotland, which has a relatively small number of immigrants.

I think he would have a different opinion if he was living in Dover or some of those south coast coastal towns watching people come ashore without any of the documentation which we native UK residents need. I bet he’d be a little ‘pissed off’. The majority are not refugees but economic migrants.

Immigration is a good thing but it needs to be controlled in order to keep social cohesion.
Most conservatives just want secure borders and a fair system.

You seem to believe that I want uncontrolled immigration (I know you suggested as such in another thread). 

I never said any such thing. What I said is that I want refugees/immigrants/economic migrants to be humanised by the right wing media and right wing political parties, not demonised. 

All of these people have names, families, often children, they had jobs. They have stories. They have reasons why they risk their lives to try and get to the UK (or other countries).....often the reason is that the UK was implicit in destroying the social and governmental fabric of their country of origin. 

Let me point you as example to this disgusting piece of work...a deliberate and poisonous attempt to demonise refugees....which was endorsed fully by our current PM and many in his party. Maybe you can explain to us how that fits in with your views of caring, cuddly Conservatives who are all in favour of controlled immigration.

 

 

[Scott Steiner]

29 minutes ago, Bob Mahelp said:

You seem to believe that I want uncontrolled immigration (I know you suggested as such in another thread). 

I never said any such thing. What I said is that I want refugees/immigrants/economic migrants to be humanised by the right wing media and right wing political parties, not demonised. 

All of these people have names, families, often children, they had jobs. They have stories. They have reasons why they risk their lives to try and get to the UK (or other countries).....often the reason is that the UK was implicit in destroying the social and governmental fabric of their country of origin. 

Let me point you as example to this disgusting piece of work...a deliberate and poisonous attempt to demonise refugees....which was endorsed fully by our current PM and many in his party. Maybe you can explain to us how that fits in with your views of caring, cuddly Conservatives who are all in favour of controlled immigration.

 

 

 

How is the above picture an example of refugees being demonised or dehumanised though?

My personal take is that you're correct in saying that refugees/immigrants etc are indeed all individuals, with names, families, children, their own identity etc.  They are human beings of equal worth to you or I.

That doesn't mean any opposition to unlimited amounts coming over is sinister or dehumanises/demonises the individuals themselves though.