Another new Brexit thread

[Metal Biker]

Great Britain isnt the country. it is a purely geographic term.

Did you miss the part where I said "UK is the name of the Union?" GB became UK.

 

[Metal Biker]

Yes, it did happen until Brexit happened.

No, it didn't. SNP, especially Salmond and Sturgeon, were bleating about how "this ain't over..."

 

[Coatigan]

I wasn't because I voted No in the referendum. If we have a soft Brexit deal, I'll vote No again. If we hard Brexit, or No deal I'll probably vote Yes. Not because of some Braveheart freedom campaign which I haven't seen. Because I want as close an integration and FOM with the EU as possible, imo Scotland needs it, which is why I voted No first time because that was at risk at that time.

I know so so so many like you. Which is why i keep saying, nobody can claim it an unlikely outcome. Some are not even that much on the fence, they've gone from a hard no to an outrigh yes. Many of them English. One i know has gone from a No campaigner to an SNP member!

All because of the brexit turmoil, the lack of trust, and the feeling of a lack of shared values. The economic case seems irrelevant to many, as it was the last time.

I still don't believe there is enough myself. Mostly down to pure political fatigue and folk (myself included) being fed up of it all.
There seems to be a gradual, but insufficient shift, but come brexit that could well ramp up. And sentiment will play a much bigger part this time.

That is before you factor in the generational changes, new young voters etc. At the end of the day, once you strip away the determined extremes on both sides, it is the moderates that will swing it, and from what i can see, that is where the change i am seeing is happening.

 

[Coatigan]

Please. Not another day when a vacuum of news on a deal means the thread descends into proxy wars over Scottish independence.

Surely it is better than a whole day of 'yass, we made the EU bottle it and bow to us with our threat of a no-deal vs no you didn't you blinkered numpties' ?

 

[Saddleworth2]

With respect - and I am not seeking an argument - I can understand all that irritation with Brexit - although I of course do not agree - that is not really addressing what we have just discussed.

So try facts

I have just listed some for @Coatigan - try applying them to Scotland/UK and you see where by logic comes from.

You will also see that I suggest that it will increase frustration and a sense of injustice - even though (I believe) it will return an increase NO vote

Mate, you just ignore stuff you don’t like. You asked me 5 reasons why I voted to remain. I gave you one and then you tell me it’s not what we are talking about? Bizarre behaviour.

You try and start another argument about Scotland that we had a month and a half ago. I understand your logic but your conclusions are based on your own opinions. That is perfectly valid but my view of the Scotland situation is far less ‘certain’ than yours. Bloody hell, you even dismissed the impact of a Johnson win at the next GE on Scotland if I remember correctly. We agreed to disagree. Do you really want to go through the whole thing again? For what purpose? Showboating?

 

[Coatigan]

No, it didn't. SNP, especially Salmond and Sturgeon, were bleating about how "this ain't over..."

True. Think you/we can thank David Cameron for that.

 

[blueparrot]

No, it didn't. SNP, especially Salmond and Sturgeon, were bleating about how "this ain't over..."

That's because you aren't separating the rhetoric from the politics. There is the message for party members and there is the pragmatic politics. Unlike Corbyn, May and Johnson, Sturgeon realised members and voters are two very different things, to stay in government a leader needs both. So while a second ref would never be off the table as it would undermine her with members, pragmatism meant sticking to domestic policy for the foreseeable future was the only option as voters had no appetite to be asked the same question. a No Deal or hard Brexit changes the question, if and only if there is evidence of a mood swing after Brexit, then she may well go for it.
There is a reason the SNP have remained strong despite there not being an independence majority and it's down to being probably the UK s most pragmatic party and currently the nearest to a centrist third way party, happy to steal policy from left or right as it suits. Many including 3 out of 4 of my immediate family vote for them domestically but voted no to independence.

 

[Coatigan]

That's because you aren't separating the rhetoric from the politics. There is the message for party members and there is the pragmatic politics. Unlike Corbyn, May and Johnson, Sturgeon realised members and voters are two very different things, to stay in government a leader needs both. So while a second ref would never be off the table as it would undermine her with members, pragmatism meant sticking to domestic policy for the foreseeable future was the only option as voters had no appetite to be asked the same question. a No Deal or hard Brexit changes the question, if and only if there is evidence of a mood swing after Brexit, then she may well go for it.
There is a reason the SNP have remained strong despite there not being an independence majority and it's down to being probably the UK s most pragmatic party and currently the nearest to a centrist third way party, happy to steal policy from left or right as it suits. Many including 3 out of 4 of my immediate family vote for them domestically but voted no to independence.

It is posts like this that make reading this forum, petty squabbles included, worthwhile. Thank you.

 

[Metal Biker]

True. Think you/we can thank David Cameron for that.

No, because they were doing it in 2015, a full year before the EU referendum was even contemplated.

Brexit has just been useful for them. In truth they were waiting for anything. I was expecting a Scotland defeat to England in the Rugby....

 

[Metal Biker]

That's because you aren't separating the rhetoric from the politics. There is the message for party members and there is the pragmatic politics. Unlike Corbyn, May and Johnson, Sturgeon realised members and voters are two very different things, to stay in government a leader needs both. So while a second ref would never be off the table as it would undermine her with members, pragmatism meant sticking to domestic policy for the foreseeable future was the only option as voters had no appetite to be asked the same question. a No Deal or hard Brexit changes the question, if and only if there is evidence of a mood swing after Brexit, then she may well go for it.
There is a reason the SNP have remained strong despite there not being an independence majority and it's down to being probably the UK s most pragmatic party and currently the nearest to a centrist third way party, happy to steal policy from left or right as it suits. Many including 3 out of 4 of my immediate family vote for them domestically but voted no to independence.

Thanks for that, I needed the laugh after yesterday.

 

[Mike D]

I did say that I was not counting them....

I am just celebrating Tusk rowing back and the EU having moved - so there is now the potential for a deal to be made

Johnson has thrown the DUP under the bus otherwise they wouldn't be even talking

 

[blueparrot]

Johnson has thrown the DUP under the bus otherwise they wouldn't be even talking

I expect any deal he agrees with Ireland and the EU will almost certainly lose him DUP and some ERG votes.

 

[hgblue]

Johnson has thrown the DUP under the bus otherwise they wouldn't be even talking

From the details I’ve heard both sides have compromised and NI are to be offered the cake and eat it option. The DUP would be mad to reject this.

 

[joe123]

From the details I’ve heard both sides have compromised and NI are to be offered the cake and eat it option. The DUP would be mad to reject this.

interesting. do you know what we've theoretically secured from the EU that will help it land here? what i've read so far seems like we're giving up NI (which I actually think is potentially great for them), just wondering if we've got anything to show from it that will swing it in parliament. other than everyone being sick and tired of it and just wanting to move on.

 

[Coatigan]

No, because they were doing it in 2015, a full year before the EU referendum was even contemplated.

Brexit has just been useful for them. In truth they were waiting for anything. I was expecting a Scotland defeat to England in the Rugby....

I meant for his actions/words from the day after the referendum.

I don't disagree btw, and although i take the snp seriously, and dare i say i even value some of they offer Scotland, i don't agree with everything they do or say either.

I think it is pretty clear though you see my point all along, about brexit only strengthening that direction though. And Scotland separating being a potential likelyhood as a result. Whether you see that as a price worth paying, or a blessing, or whatever.

 

[Metal Biker]

I meant for his actions/words from the day after the referendum.

I don't disagree btw, and although i take the snp seriously, and dare i say it even value some of they offer Scotland, i don't agree with everything they do or say either.

I think it is pretty clear though you see my point all along, about brexit only strengthening that direction though. And Scotland separating being a potential likelyhood as a result. Whether you see that as a price worth paying, or a blessing, or whatever.

Yeah of course, brexit has fuelled the nationalists, on both sides of the debate, but my view is that, for the SNP, they were looking for any excuse to reignite their cause for independence.

My initial cause to comment was on the idea that "England rules Parliament", when England doesn't have a Parliament of it's own, and it's MP's represent their constituencies, and also the belief that "if Scotland has a referendum, it can leave". It can't, not without the consent of its other, equal members of the Union. Only NI has that automatic right to leave if they chose to do so in a referendum that could neither be blocked or opposed by the UK Government and Parliament.

It's another example of typical anglophobic scot nat ramblings claiming England controls what the UK does, which hypocritically, is the exact same argument those who support brexit say about the UK's position in the EU Parliament; with the UK being Scotland and the EU being Westminster; many of us feel our voices aren't being heard. Yet they reject UK independence claims under that premise, but oppose the UK union and support Scottish independence by the same example.

 

[hgblue]

interesting. do you know what we've theoretically secured from the EU that will help it land here? what i've read so far seems like we're giving up NI (which I actually think is potentially great for them), just wondering if we've got anything to show from it that will swing it in parliament. other than everyone being sick and tired of it and just wanting to move on.

We’ve not given up NI, they stay part of the UK and remain part of the UK customs union. The compromise is that any customs checks will take place at the GB/NI border to protect the EU single market and remove the need for any customs checks on the island of Ireland. Seems perfectly reasonable to me.

 

[hgblue]

Yeah of course, brexit has fuelled the nationalists, on both sides of the debate, but my view is that, for the SNP, they were looking for any excuse to reignite their cause for independence.

My initial cause to comment was on the idea that "England rules Parliament", when England doesn't have a Parliament of it's own, and it's MP's represent their constituencies, and also the belief that "if Scotland has a referendum, it can leave". It can't, not without the consent of its other, equal members of the Union. Only NI has that automatic right to leave if they chose to do so in a referendum that could neither be blocked or opposed by the UK Government and Parliament.

It's another example of typical anglophobic scot nat ramblings claiming England controls what the UK does, which hypocritically, is the exact same argument those who support brexit say about the UK's position in the EU Parliament; with the UK being Scotland and the EU being Westminster; many of us feel our voices aren't being heard. Yet they reject UK independence claims under that premise, but oppose the UK union and support Scottish independence by the same example.

It’s perfectly simple, if the Scottish people want to leave the union they should do it, it’s not a prison. As a general rule the British Parliament should allow a referendum if the Scottish Parliament has a majority in favour of one.

 

[Metal Biker]

It’s perfectly simple, if the Scottish people want to leave the union they should do it, it’s not a prison. As a general rule the British Parliament should allow a referendum if the Scottish Parliament has a majority in favour of one.

Oh don't worry, i'm not saying that they should be blocked. Merely pointing out that reality that it requires the acceptance of all members of the Union for a member to leave, not that a member can leave willy-nilly, as was beign suggested. People can argue the chances of the other members attempting to block it or say no, but that's not the point i'm raising.

 

[Ban-jani]

It’s perfectly simple, if the Scottish people want to leave the union they should do it, it’s not a prison. As a general rule the British Parliament should allow a referendum if the Scottish Parliament has a majority in favour of one.

They’ve already lost, they should get over it.