|
|
Post by happyjack on Apr 15, 2023 11:07:42 GMT
You might find these figures surprising (I presume that you mean “funny” in the surprising sense of the word here and not the jocular?) but I don’t. As I have explained on here before, many Scots who do not support Scottish Independence are not unionists. You, and other Indy-leaning forum members have thus far demonstrated an inability or an unwillingness to grasp that simple concept for some reason, but the figures that you highlight in your post above strongly suggest that there is merit in what I have been saying. This survey was taken at a time when "support for independence -V- opposed to independence" was probably circa 30%/70%. By the logic you laid out recently in another thread, that meant that 70% of us were unionists. However, nobody who believes in the unionist ideology would ever fail to identify as being British, yet only 8% of us identified as feeling “ British Only” and a further 18% felt enough of of a connection to the union to feel “Scottish and British”. Even if all of the 18% who felt ”Scottish and British” bought into unionism (which will definitely not have been the case) that still leaves a massive chasm between the high numbers who didn’t support Scottish Independence and the much lower numbers who felt at least some sense of being British (a pre-requisite to being a unionist, of course). Therefore there was a massive number of Scots who did not support Independence but who were not unionists. The percentages might be a bit different nowadays but otherwise the same scenario still applies today. Hopefully you will be able to get your head around this and see the Scottish electorate for what it truly is rather than continue to buy into the Indy Fanatic propaganda - but I somehow doubt that. Yes, I agree that not all who express doubts are Unionists but you are, through and through. That only 8% felt it necessary to tick the "British only" box is rather telling compared to the 62% who said they were "Scottish Only". I have no doubt that the former %age, in the main, comprised English immigrants and Rangers supporters. I'm not sure where you fit in, perhaps both! Well, you have changed your tune if you are now conceding that not all of those who oppose Independence are unionists. That’s a good start! I agree that the respective percentages are “rather telling”, and what this tells us is that a large number ( probably the majority) of No voters are not unionists. They just see the harm that independence will bring and don’t want any of that. You obviously have real trouble retaining information. I see it with many things that you post where you simply can’t remember what came before. Anyway, I recently explained that I am a Scot, born in Scotland, to Scottish parents and grandparents and that I live in, and have always lived in, Scotland. As for football teams, are you seriously reducing things to this level? Football is not really my sport. I have always shied away from it partly because of the attitudes and associations that you display above. |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Apr 15, 2023 11:08:38 GMT
Morayloon, somewhere in your DNA is a little bit of England, a little bit of Italy, a little bit of Africa, a little bit of Jew, maybe even a bit of South American Gaucho.
We British are mongrels and whether you like it or not, you are one of us.
|
|
|
|
Post by morayloon on Apr 15, 2023 11:17:20 GMT
So you think that seeking a second referendum on a constitutional issue is denying Scottish democracy - or do you only think that when it suits you? You could argue it both ways I suppose but, given that a small %age want to see direct rule being imposed whereas 45-50% of Scots want to see the back of the UK, an Independence Referendum is more of a necessity. The graph in this link shows the level of support there is for No Scottish Parliament. At the last time of asking it was 8%. Compare that with the injustices done to Scotland, chief amongst them being the Brexit fiasco. 62% voted No but, as per usual, the Scots view was ignored in the race to accept a maginal UK Leave victory. Independence is required ... urgently. Yes you can and your sophistry does not wash. I meant that the anti devolutionists have a right to put their argument but, my own view is that 74.3% of the electorate voted for devolution in 1997 added to the fact that only about 8% want a return to direct rule shows that such a referendum would be pointless and a waste of money. The 2014 referendum had a much closer result and, if the polls are anything close to the actual voting figures, at the moment there is at least a 3-9% increase in support for Independence.. A lot has happened since 2014 e.g. dragging us out of the EU against our will. A 2nd referendum is a necessity. Given that 15-20% was added to YES over the 2013/14 campaign there is everything to play for and that is why the UK government is denying Scottish democracy. |
|
|
|
Post by morayloon on Apr 15, 2023 11:19:45 GMT
Oh. Morayloon understands it full well. The main reason for the 'overspend' is the pure guesswork in attributing costs relating to reserved matters. You will doubtless keep telling yourself that but, once again, you demonstrate that you simply do not understand any of this stuff to anywhere near the basic level necessary to engage in discussion. I understand it a lot more than you do as your ridiculous attempts at trying to to dis what I say shows. |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Apr 15, 2023 11:23:38 GMT
More drivel from the SNAT propaganda sewer.
Meanwhile Scotland voted to stay British.
There are Scots in England, and if every Scot in England voted leave, whilst every English person in Scotland voted remain, your argument is null and void about Scotland being taken out of the EU against its will.
We're British.
The British voted to leave the EU.
Get over it.
You ignore the million Brexit votes from Scotland which made independence from the EU possible.
You ignore the taxes the UK gives Scotland above the amount of money Scotland provides in tax receipts.
You're in a cult.
Leave the cult.
|
|
|
|
Post by happyjack on Apr 15, 2023 11:37:31 GMT
Morayloon,
You clearly don’t understand but think that you do, so you continue to embarrass yourself when you should just stop digging instead.
So, I am not disrespecting what you say. Rather, you are disrespecting yourself by saying what you say, by continuing to double down on it when it is obviously wrong, and by allowing others to see how poor your grasp of such matters is.
You have asked and speculated about my background a few times on here and I have never reciprocated. However, I will do so now and speculate that you have never worked in business or finance ( certainly not at a senior decision-making level), nor have you ever received much of an education in business and finance either (certainly not at an advanced level, anyway). If you have, and you can still show the poor understanding that you demonstrate on here, then I will be astounded.
|
|
|
|
Post by morayloon on Apr 15, 2023 11:41:01 GMT
Yes, I agree that not all who express doubts are Unionists but you are, through and through. That only 8% felt it necessary to tick the "British only" box is rather telling compared to the 62% who said they were "Scottish Only". I have no doubt that the former %age, in the main, comprised English immigrants and Rangers supporters. I'm not sure where you fit in, perhaps both! Well, you have changed your tune if you are now conceding that not all of those who oppose Independence are unionists. That’s a good start! I agree that the respective percentages are “rather telling”, and what this tells us is that a large number ( probably the majority) of No voters are not unionists. They just see the harm that independence will bring and don’t want any of that. You obviously have real trouble retaining information. I see it with many things that you post where you simply can’t remember what came before. Anyway, I recently explained that I am a Scot, born in Scotland, to Scottish parents and grandparents and that I live in, and have always lived in, Scotland. As for football teams, are you seriously reducing things to this level? Football is not really my sport. I have always shied away from it partly because of the attitudes and associations that you display above. If you are not pro Independence then you are, by definition, a Unionist. However there are degrees of Unionism from those who are in the persuadable category down to those who are totally against. Your every utterance shows you are in the latter category despite your rather ridiculous protestations. to the contrary. No, I do not agree, it is said that about 20-30% are persuadable ... unlike you. Remember, when the facts were laid out to the electorate and the Better together lies were exposed, 20% came over to YES. We don't need as many to change to YES this time. You, however are a lost cause but don't try and pass your intractable view on to the multitude of voters who are non committal. Oh, I remember your claims but, as I have said many times, I don't believe your pleas to be accepted as being the voice of the reasonable Scot. You are the voice of the 20-30% who are against Independence at all cost. Are you really telling me that, given your assertion that you are Scottish, you are unaware of what Glasgow Rangers represent? |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Apr 15, 2023 11:46:48 GMT
You're not pro independence you're pro EU and anti English.
If you were pro independence you'd want independence from EU policies, like the CAP, the CFP, Freedom of Movement, the Euro, and the unelected Commission who make the EU's policies.
You're in a cult.
A cult which is institutionally racist.
|
|
|
|
Post by morayloon on Apr 15, 2023 11:51:34 GMT
Morayloon, You clearly don’t understand but think that you do, so you continue to embarrass yourself when you should just stop digging instead. So, I am not disrespecting what you say. Rather, you are disrespecting yourself by saying what you say, by continuing to double down on it when it is obviously wrong, and by allowing others to see how poor your grasp of such matters is. You have asked and speculated about my background a few times on here and I have never reciprocated. However, I will do so now and speculate that you have never worked in business or finance ( certainly not at a senior decision-making level), nor have you ever received much of an education in business and finance either (certainly not at an advanced level, anyway). If you have, and you can still show the poor understanding that you demonstrate on here, then I will be astounded. Not at all. You by your every post on the subject display your ignorance of the Barnett issue. For instance, arguing that Scot Gov does not Balance its Books when, in reality, it is their legal duty to do just that. I remember YC, on the old forum, trying to explain all of this to you. You did not accept what he said so it is not surprising that you are showing a similar lack of comprehension now. Am I supposed to be impressed by your suggested background as if only those from business or finance backgrounds have a right to pontificate on the subject. Rather pompous I would say but then pomposity is your m.o. |
|
|
|
Post by happyjack on Apr 15, 2023 11:52:51 GMT
You could argue it both ways I suppose but, given that a small %age want to see direct rule being imposed whereas 45-50% of Scots want to see the back of the UK, an Independence Referendum is more of a necessity. The graph in this link shows the level of support there is for No Scottish Parliament. At the last time of asking it was 8%. Compare that with the injustices done to Scotland, chief amongst them being the Brexit fiasco. 62% voted No but, as per usual, the Scots view was ignored in the race to accept a maginal UK Leave victory. Independence is required ... urgently. Yes you can and your sophistry does not wash. I meant that the anti devolutionists have a right to put their argument but, my own view is that 74.3% of the electorate voted for devolution in 1997 added to the fact that only about 8% want a return to direct rule shows that such a referendum would be pointless and a waste of money. The 2014 referendum had a much closer result and, if the polls are anything close to the actual voting figures, at the moment there is at least a 3-9% increase in support for Independence.. A lot has happened since 2014 e.g. dragging us out of the EU against our will. A 2nd referendum is a necessity. Given that 15-20% was added to YES over the 2013/14 campaign there is everything to play for and that is why the UK government is denying Scottish democracy. There is zero sophistry coming from me. You said, in a succinct manner, to someone who was promoting the idea of a 2nd referendum on a major constitutional matter, “ So you think that denying Scottish Democracy is the way to go?”. I simply pointed out, and do so again, that you clearly have double standards. Maybe you should reflect upon that rather than try to wiggle out of what you said. And as for a 2nd referendum, haven’t you got it into your head yet that there is no prospect of another indyref, never mind of independence, for several decades at least. |
|
|
|
Post by happyjack on Apr 15, 2023 12:12:22 GMT
Morayloon, You clearly don’t understand but think that you do, so you continue to embarrass yourself when you should just stop digging instead. So, I am not disrespecting what you say. Rather, you are disrespecting yourself by saying what you say, by continuing to double down on it when it is obviously wrong, and by allowing others to see how poor your grasp of such matters is. You have asked and speculated about my background a few times on here and I have never reciprocated. However, I will do so now and speculate that you have never worked in business or finance ( certainly not at a senior decision-making level), nor have you ever received much of an education in business and finance either (certainly not at an advanced level, anyway). If you have, and you can still show the poor understanding that you demonstrate on here, then I will be astounded. Not at all. You by your every post on the subject display your ignorance of the Barnett issue. For instance, arguing that Scot Gov does not Balance its Books when, in reality, it is their legal duty to do just that. I remember YC, on the old forum, trying to explain all of this to you. You did not accept what he said so it is not surprising that you are showing a similar lack of comprehension now. Am I supposed to be impressed by your suggested background as if only those from business or finance backgrounds have a right to pontificate on the subject. Rather pompous I would say but then pomposity is your m.o. Where have I ever denied that ScotGov balances the books? I have said quite the opposite several times in this thread, the most recent being in a post to you from an hour of so ago. You are simply incapable of reading and understanding as far as I can see. And, for that matter, what has ScotGov balancing the books got to do with the Barnett Formula? First you think that ScotGov’s books are part of GERS and now you think that they are part of the Barnett Formula. You are all over the place and completely lacking in understanding on any of this stuff. And your memory of what was said on the old forum is shocking too (which isn’t a surprise because you clearly can’t remember things that have been posted on this forum much more recently). Nobody ever had to explain that ScotGov balances the books, or how the Barnett Formula works, because I worked all of this out for myself. You seriously have issues separating reality from fantasy. That happens to be my background but, no, you are not supposed to be impressed by it and of course anyone can pontificate on anything they like. However, when I say that you clearly have no basic understanding in this field and that it shows in all of the factually wrong things that you say and flawed reasoning that you employ, then it does mean that I am reasonably well placed to recognise this. |
|
|
|
Post by happyjack on Apr 15, 2023 12:37:53 GMT
Well, you have changed your tune if you are now conceding that not all of those who oppose Independence are unionists. That’s a good start! I agree that the respective percentages are “rather telling”, and what this tells us is that a large number ( probably the majority) of No voters are not unionists. They just see the harm that independence will bring and don’t want any of that. You obviously have real trouble retaining information. I see it with many things that you post where you simply can’t remember what came before. Anyway, I recently explained that I am a Scot, born in Scotland, to Scottish parents and grandparents and that I live in, and have always lived in, Scotland. As for football teams, are you seriously reducing things to this level? Football is not really my sport. I have always shied away from it partly because of the attitudes and associations that you display above. If you are not pro Independence then you are, by definition, a Unionist. However there are degrees of Unionism from those who are in the persuadable category down to those who are totally against. Your every utterance shows you are in the latter category despite your rather ridiculous protestations. to the contrary. No, I do not agree, it is said that about 20-30% are persuadable ... unlike you. Remember, when the facts were laid out to the electorate and the Better together lies were exposed, 20% came over to YES. We don't need as many to change to YES this time. You, however are a lost cause but don't try and pass your intractable view on to the multitude of voters who are non committal. Oh, I remember your claims but, as I have said many times, I don't believe your pleas to be accepted as being the voice of the reasonable Scot. You are the voice of the 20-30% who are against Independence at all cost. Are you really telling me that, given your assertion that you are Scottish, you are unaware of what Glasgow Rangers represent? Failing to be pro-independence is not, by definition, being a unionist. Subscribing to the unionist ideology is what defines a unionist. I am not against independence at any cost. Indeed, if it can just be demonstrated to me that independence will bring mid to long term financial benefit and well-being to me and my fellow Scots, and that we will not suffer long and deep financial hardship in the interim, then I will get right behind the Indy cause. I have asked you and your fellow Indy supporters many times on here to demonstrate this and not one of you can even make a start. My conclusion is that that is because you are incapable of doing so but I await the evidence nonetheless. Err, no, I am obviously not telling you that. When you suggested that I might be a Rangers supporter and I replied that I have shied away from football “partly because of the attitudes and associations that you display above”, what did you think that I meant? |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Apr 22, 2023 12:30:46 GMT
If you are not pro Independence then you are, by definition, a Unionist. However there are degrees of Unionism from those who are in the persuadable category down to those who are totally against. Your every utterance shows you are in the latter category despite your rather ridiculous protestations. to the contrary. No, I do not agree, it is said that about 20-30% are persuadable ... unlike you. Remember, when the facts were laid out to the electorate and the Better together lies were exposed, 20% came over to YES. We don't need as many to change to YES this time. You, however are a lost cause but don't try and pass your intractable view on to the multitude of voters who are non committal. Oh, I remember your claims but, as I have said many times, I don't believe your pleas to be accepted as being the voice of the reasonable Scot. You are the voice of the 20-30% who are against Independence at all cost. Are you really telling me that, given your assertion that you are Scottish, you are unaware of what Glasgow Rangers represent? Failing to be pro-independence is not, by definition, being a unionist. Subscribing to the unionist ideology is what defines a unionist. I am not against independence at any cost. Indeed, if it can just be demonstrated to me that independence will bring mid to long term financial benefit and well-being to me and my fellow Scots, and that we will not suffer long and deep financial hardship in the interim, then I will get right behind the Indy cause. I have asked you and your fellow Indy supporters many times on here to demonstrate this and not one of you can even make a start. My conclusion is that that is because you are incapable of doing so but I await the evidence nonetheless. Err, no, I am obviously not telling you that. When you suggested that I might be a Rangers supporter and I replied that I have shied away from football “partly because of the attitudes and associations that you display above”, what did you think that I meant? Do you not get bored with the "concerned , politically unattached scottish citizen " shtick who just happens to vehemently hate the snp and scottish independence happy?
You are fooling no one but yourself .
|
|
|
|
Post by happyjack on Apr 22, 2023 16:43:59 GMT
So, if you can’t refute the message then demonise the messenger, Thomas. Is that all that you have left to respond with? It is a cheap and discredited approach but one sadly employed to good effect all too often by zealots of all hues - and one that you have been increasingly falling back on in exchanges with me as you desperately try to defend the indefensible.
Talking of which, there are a number of examples of you making unsubstantiated claims about me elsewhere on this site where you have failed to provide evidence to back up your claims despite me challenging you to do so. That doesn’t surprise me because there is no evidence to support your false claims. I am sure that you realise this but simply lack the personal integrity to acknowledge it. I mean, why should you let anything as trivial as the truth get in the way of cheap point scoring?
|
|
|
|
Post by om15 on Apr 22, 2023 18:05:01 GMT
I'm afraid shamelessly stolen from arrse, for those that might have missed it,  |
|
