Jump to content
Cold?
Local
Radar
Snow?

Scottish Politics 2011-2017


Recommended Posts

Posted
  • Location: Carryduff, County Down 420ft ASL
  • Location: Carryduff, County Down 420ft ASL

    In all of this discussion about campaigning et al, there seems to be a fundamental lack of acknowledgement that the main reason that the majority of people didn't vote for Independence is because they didn't want to and just perhaps they want to be remain part of the Union. It seems that even a week after the vote there is still a hardcore of Yes campaigners who still have not got their head around this and accept it.this

     

    Because it is naive to think it was a straight vote between Independence and the Union (Status Quo). It was only the offer of Devo max/Federalism in the last few days that swung it. In reality therefore, the vote was Inpendence against Devo Max.

     

    The Unionists must now deliver or be destroyed in Scotland.

    • Like 5
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Spotted a post you think may be an issue? Please help the team by reporting it.
    • Replies 30.9k
    • Created
    • Last Reply

    Top Posters In This Topic

    • Scottish-Irish Skier

      8874

    • mountain shadow

      1528

    • skifreak

      1435

    • frogesque

      1306

    Top Posters In This Topic

    Popular Posts

    And that ignorant, offensive, rant sums up exactly why the YES campaign failed  

    Good god. What a load of boarish spiteful bile from bad losers has been posted during the night. I actually dread to think how Scotland would be run if this is representative of how the yes vote behav

    I'm disappointed in the lack of grace shown by some across the net in accepting this No vote. A complete lack of any empathy and understanding as to why fellow Scots didn't vote Yes.   I personally

    Posted Images

    Posted
  • Location: Hayward’s Heath - home, Brighton/East Grinstead - work.
  • Weather Preferences: Snow and storms
  • Location: Hayward’s Heath - home, Brighton/East Grinstead - work.

    So what are you suggesting, that the Yes side should just melt away in disappointment never to be heard from again? Is that what Labour did after they lost the last Westminster GE, or indeed what the Tories did when Blair & Brown were PM? No, all political parties/movements have their ups and downs but if they are true in their beliefs then they continue to campaign for them. God help us if the Suffragettes had given up, or the US Civil Rights movement, or the anti-apartheid movement in South Africa, or Ghandi in India etc. Those who want to see Independence lost, and lost fairly, but that doesn't mean the desire has gone away.

    No.

     

    How about SNP concentrating on the issues that didn't attract the NO voters- such as the currency, jobs, defence and pensions. Perhaps if AS hadn't postured on defaulting on Scotland's share of the national debt and had shown a more accomadating attitude to those he was breaking away from, then the vote may have been different. Focussing on the demographics of the vote rather than the underlying issues does the SNP no favours. The same can be said of the labour vote in Scotland.

    • Like 2
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Highland Scotland
  • Location: Highland Scotland

    AS's comment that No voters are deferred Yes voters is a classic example of this.

    As it happens a couple of people I know down in the Falkirk area have said Alex Salmond's comments on 'deferred yes' sums them up well. They voted no for a variety of reasons last Thursday, but to cut a long story short they thought it was too big a step at this stage and more devolution would be an intermediate step for them voting YES in the future and they certainly believe there will be a next time.

    Clearly there is a fair chunk of No voters who are strongly unionist, they believe in the concept of the United Kingdom, they nat ID as British first (or British only), but there is also a significant proportion (perhaps even a majority) of no voters who wish to see much more powers for Holyrood. Combined with the Yes vote that would be a large majority.

    I see Labour are now trying to run with Willie Rennie's mis-use of John Smith's "Settled will" quote. This lie from Labour must be challenged at every turn, the settled will implies dominant and largely unwavering support for something, this has arguably been the case for a Scottish Parliament that incrementally increases it's powers to bring more of the governance of Scotland home to Scotland. Staying in the UK was the considered will of Scotland last Thursday, it's not credible to argue it's the settled will when the margin of lead for that option was reduced from over 25% to 10%!

    Edited by skifreak
    • Like 4
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Hayward’s Heath - home, Brighton/East Grinstead - work.
  • Weather Preferences: Snow and storms
  • Location: Hayward’s Heath - home, Brighton/East Grinstead - work.

    Because it is naive to think it was a straight vote between Independence and the Union (Status Quo). It was only the offer of Devo max/Federalism in the last few days that swung it. In reality therefore, the vote was Inpendence against Devo Max.

     

    The Unionists must now deliver or be destroyed in Scotland.

    To use word like destroyed ......

     

    Why?

     

    How would you feel if the the Union reversed this and said that now the No vote has succeeded the Scottish Nationalists must be destroyed in Scotland. Nationalism like this is none other than extremism in my book. And totally unneccessary.

    • Like 2
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Tullynessle/Inverurie
  • Weather Preferences: Cold and snowy or warm and dry
  • Location: Tullynessle/Inverurie

    I have no idea how this post responds to the post to which it putatively replied.

     

    I probably misinterpreted the post I was replying to.

     

    No.

     

    How about SNP concentrating on the issues that didn't attract the NO voters- such as the currency, jobs, defence and pensions. Perhaps if AS hadn't postured on defaulting on Scotland's share of the national debt and had shown a more accomadating attitude to those he was breaking away from, then the vote may have been different. Focussing on the demographics of the vote rather than the underlying issues does the SNP no favours. The same can be said of the labour vote in Scotland.

     

    I agree, I don't think the Yes campaign focused on the right areas at times, maybe because they were on the back foot trying to address the attacks from BT, supported overwhelmingly by the MSM. Pensions security is one area I feel was particularly badly handled, especially when it was clear that the older voters were leaning heavily to No. Lessons have to be learned, preferably before the Westminster General Election.

    Edited by Ravelin
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Highland Scotland
  • Location: Highland Scotland

    How would you feel if the the Union reversed this and said that now the No vote has succeeded the Scottish Nationalists must be destroyed in Scotland. Nationalism like this is none other than extremism in my book. And totally unneccessary.

    That has been the situation in Scottish Politics for decades, Labour's hatred of the SNP is all encompassing - Labour in Scotland still hasn't accepted that it lost the 2007 Scottish Election, which contributed to it's collapse in 2011. It's why Labour adopts the 'Bain Principle' at Westminster:

    There is a long standing Parliamentary Labour Party convention that we do not support SNP motions

    Labour will even vote against their own policies and beliefs to vote down an SNP motion. This has already seen Labour vote in favour of the 'bedroom tax' when they voted down an SNP motion seeking to amend the relevant finance bill!

    • Like 5
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Carryduff, County Down 420ft ASL
  • Location: Carryduff, County Down 420ft ASL

    To use word like destroyed ......

     

    Why?

    Because they would be destroyed, finished. Look at the Lib Dems, for getting into bed with the Tories they will may be lucky to get 10 MP's at the next General Election, that is not far off destruction to me.

     

    The Unionist parties in Scotland, well to be fair, the Labour and Lib Dems would face a similar fate if they back track on their promise of Devo Max.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Back in Edmonton Alberta(via Chelmsford, Exeter & Calgary)
  • Location: Back in Edmonton Alberta(via Chelmsford, Exeter & Calgary)

    Because it is naive to think it was a straight vote between Independence and the Union (Status Quo). It was only the offer of Devo max/Federalism in the last few days that swung it. In reality therefore, the vote was Inpendence against Devo Max.

     

    The Unionists must now deliver or be destroyed in Scotland.

    My understanding is that a lot of voters who voted Yes would also have voted for Devo Max had the option been on the ballot paper and not just those who voted No.

    • Like 3
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Coatbridge, North Lanarkshire (this lockdown) Freuchie, Fife (normally)
  • Weather Preferences: cold and snowy in winter, a good mix of weather the rest of the time
  • Location: Coatbridge, North Lanarkshire (this lockdown) Freuchie, Fife (normally)

    The Ashcroft exit poll showed that only 25% of No voters cited a belief in the union as their primary reason for voting No. Roughly 50% said it was because of currency, pension scares etc. (I acknowledge a fair few of those were genuinely unionists too but a few were definitely 'I'd like independence but ASDA says my shopping will go up/Osborne won't let us keep the pound/Labour says I'll lose my pension etc.) and another 25%, the crucial late swingback to No (Labour's private polls had us on 53% before 'the Vow), were those who believed we'd get more powers. What the late offer did was to assure those who were leaning towards independence but hadn't fully committed to have a fall back option. In some respects the SNP majority in 2011 came too early - I don't think there was a genuine expectation that we'd be able to hold a referendum until 2016 at the earliest and we believed that we'd be able to continue to chip away at Westminster from a position of strength as a minority administration to extract more devolution - the gradualist wing of the SNP became the SNP and that strategy of not upsetting the apple cart too much was responsible for the 'indy-light' offering of the white paper offering compared to the 'full independence' of Sillars. Essentially, the perceived (although we did warn people that it wasn't anything like as substantive as it appeared) promise of 'devo-max' along with funding guarantees meant that 'gradualists' felt able to vote No on the basis that it would advance self-governance to a level which was not, in practical terms, so much less than independence, without having to deal with the 'risks' of a Yes vote.

    Of course, given the sudden addition of EVEL into the equation by the PM without Labour's consent and the setting up on a commission on an absurdly tight timescale which is trying to merge three different offerings along with whatever our input is (presumably Full Fiscal Autonomy), and also the demands for similar devolution from NI and Wales, the constitutional uncertainty remains pretty high, and if the outcome is towards the 'Labour' end of the scale i.e. very little substantive extra powers, then many of the 'more powers' No voters will feel as though they've been duped, given that there is majority support in Scotland for devolution of everything except defence. I genuinely know quite a few No voters who are regretting their decision and would like another referendum ASAP. It won't happen, of course, as too many people would be angered at having the debate again, but we should certainly look to both advance the cause of gaining as much devolution as possible, which is in fact as much devolution as a majority of people across Scotland want and expect, while keeping the referendum option open in case WM does screw up. 

    The soonest I could see another referendum occuring is in 2017, and it would ONLY be under the following circumstances:
    1) the extra powers deal, whenever it is forged, is viewed by a majority of Scots as insufficient (if the SNP do end up holding the balance of power at Westminster this is strangely less likely to occur, as this would likely lead to something approaching full devo max given that England now seems to be pulling at the other side of that constitutional thread)

    2) the tories get a majority, or at least another coalition with the Lib Dems, in 2015

    3) there is an EU referendum called for 2017

    4) The SNP win the 2016 SP election on a mandate of another referendum if and only if the result of the EU referendum in Scotland diverges with that of the UK

    5) The UK votes out and Scotland votes to stay in

    6) polls show a decent Yes majority

    At that point, the referendum campaign would be swift, maybe only a few months, and I'd expect a Yes vote of around 60-65%. Other than that, it does look as though we should return to pursuing a resolutely gradualist line until such time as there is a genuine mass demand for another referendum.

     

     A minor point at this stage too, but the more powers 'timetable' and the Vow were published in the 'Purdah period', which rather suggests that these postal returns up to that point (which they were clearly sampling and using for their own strategy in a legally dubious manner) were not so grand, but also calls into question the legality of these proposals - they weren't offered to those who postal voted early.

    • Like 3
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Coatbridge, North Lanarkshire (this lockdown) Freuchie, Fife (normally)
  • Weather Preferences: cold and snowy in winter, a good mix of weather the rest of the time
  • Location: Coatbridge, North Lanarkshire (this lockdown) Freuchie, Fife (normally)

    My understanding is that a lot of voters who voted Yes would also have voted for Devo Max had the option been on the ballot paper and not just those who voted No.

    Not that many - most polls by the end of the campaign showed support for independence in a three way choice was over 40%, with devo max around 30-35% and the status quo decisively third on 20-25%. 

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Tullynessle/Inverurie
  • Weather Preferences: Cold and snowy or warm and dry
  • Location: Tullynessle/Inverurie
    2) the tories get a majority, or at least another coalition with the Lib Dems, in 2015

     

    I just though of another scenario. Probably an unlikely one but hilarious if it happened...

     

    After the May 2015 GE Labour are the biggest party but short of a majority. The SNP have their number of MPs boosted by taking a few of the LibDem and Labour seats in Scotland. Now imagine Labour having to go to the SNP to look for support to form a government. Also imagine the reaction UK wide if the government that is formed is a Labour & SNP coalition.

    • Like 3
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Pershore
  • Location: Pershore

    A few posts removed this pm - can we keep it polite please, and if people want to have a personal chat which has little/nothing to do with the topic then please feel free to use the pm system.

    • Like 2
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Kingdom of Fife: 56.2º N, 3.2º W
  • Location: Kingdom of Fife: 56.2º N, 3.2º W

    There wont be another referendum vote for at least 12 to 15 years imo.

    Quite possibly - but then again, Westminster HAS to deliver meaningful new powers to Holyrood AND the finance to fund it. It's no use saying we will allow you to control XYZ without the cash.

     

    For instance, just suppose for sake of argument that X is on the table and Westminster keep the taxes raised from Scotland as at present (that is, the finance is not returned). Scotland then has a castrated power with no hope of carrying out the extra work.

     

    I simply do not trust Westminster. Cameron's Vow was Cameron's - he could be deposed (stabbed in the front) by the grey men of the Conservatives tomorrow and his so called binding promise would be void. This is why Scots MUST keep the pressure on for a further ref if things go to hell in a handbasket.

    Edited by frogesque
    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Tullynessle/Inverurie
  • Weather Preferences: Cold and snowy or warm and dry
  • Location: Tullynessle/Inverurie

    All this talk about oil and gas revenues? - The EU is committed to reducing dependence on fossil fuels by 80% by 2050 - Many parts of the world are going all out to develop sustainable forms of energy and I suspect that over the next few years this will grow exponentially so that although there is still likely to be some need for oil and gas there is not likely to be the same demand for it - that being the case what is going to happen to the price? - Most likely it will fall and where will this leave Scotland?  

     

    Almost half of the power generated in Scotland now comes from renewable sources, according to official figures.

     

    The Department of Energy and Climate Change said renewables achieved 46.4% of gross electricity consumption in 2013 - up from 39.9% in 2012.

     

    It also found the amount of power generated from renewable sources in Scotland in the first half of this year was 30% up on a year ago.

     

    The period saw wind output rise by 20%, while hydro generation climbed by 50%.

     

    Renewable heat generation accounted for 3% of Scotland's non-electrical heat demand - up from 2.7% in 2011.

     

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-29360934

     

     

    This is of course before we start to produce from tidal or wave energy, which should be fairly soon.

     

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-29230800

    Edited by Ravelin
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Highland Scotland
  • Location: Highland Scotland

    Oil and gas are of vital importance as feedstocks to the petrochemical industry and arguably even if there wasn't concern about AGW as it is a finite resource there will as it diminishes become an increasing argument that it's too valuable to burn. A finite resource of such importance is likely to have one long term trajectory in price.

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Tullynessle/Inverurie
  • Weather Preferences: Cold and snowy or warm and dry
  • Location: Tullynessle/Inverurie

    Oil and gas are of vital importance as feedstocks to the petrochemical industry and arguably even if there wasn't concern about AGW as it is a finite resource there will as it diminishes become an increasing argument that it's too valuable to burn. A finite resource of such importance is likely to have one long term trajectory in price.

    I remember reading something years ago that predicted that future generations would curse us for burning something as precious as oil.

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    Banksy's take.

     

    10614151_804468289574990_623697966014993

     

     

    UoE Prof. James Mitchell's (author of 'The Scottish Question') initial thoughts:

    http://www.scottishconstitutionalfutures.org/OpinionandAnalysis/ViewBlogPost/tabid/1767/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/4300/James-Mitchell-Why-Was-That-the-Outcome.aspx

     

    ...In the final analysis, while there was a significant increase in support for independence, the union retained the support of a majority in a lengthy campaign.  Scottish democracy was rejuvenated.  John Smith, late leader of the Labour Party, is often credited with telling the Scottish Labour conference in March 1994 that devolution was the settled will of the Scottish people.  In the referendum on devolution three years later, three quarters of Scots voted for a devolved Parliament and 64% agreed it should have tax-varying powers.  Twenty years on and Scots have voted in favour of the union by 55-45%.  The independence referendum suggests that there is no settled will.  Attitudes change and the dynamic of that change have tended to be perceptions of UK Governments.  The union has been reprieved but the Scottish Question remains unresolved.

     

     

    Independence support currently the highest it has ever been versus devo max.

     

    Devo max (with no indy offered) also at new record highs; something that was overlooked in the heat of the campaign.

     

    http://whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/what-should-happen-next-if-scotland-votes-no#line

     

    Most recent poll has 74(+15)% for devo max vs 18(-10)% status quo (on 2013). This is Scottish natID vs British natID (SSAS forced choice Scot / Brit / Other).

     

    So, Scotland closer to independence than it has ever been with the ~70 year drift out of the union continuing.

     

    We might wonder whether last Thursday was a dead cat bounce for the union.

     

    More devolution of course would just make Scotland more independent. Pensions!!!! wouldn't scare people if the Scottish government paid them. You canny afford it wouldn't either if Scotland was FFA. 

     

    Really, 2 options are presented; massively more devolution which could end the union in the long term New Zealand style. They're not even sure when it was they became independent.

     

    Or the will of 74% of the population is resisted with promises broken and the 45% grows to majority.

     

    ----

     

    I'll also add to comments about 'Yes people apparently should just shut up' since Yes didn't win. Scary - is this the Brave New World of post iref Britain? People who support indy are not longer allowed to voice that, not allowed to campaign etc?

     

    I read comments today about the SNP "threatening'" another iref. Interesting concept; a free democratic vote on an important and topical matter is now threatening... Democracy is considered dangerous?

     

    Why should unionists fear another iref at some point in the future? Surely if people still want the union they'll just vote No. It might be an idea to hold regular irefs. If the union is stable and popular, this would help to solidify it...

     

    Much was made of the damage to the economy the iref debate would have. Seems it made effectively no impact at all really. No more so than e.g. a UKGE anyway.

     

    --

     

    Oh and out of date now, but...

     

    https://twitter.com/PeterMurrell

     

    BREAKING: @theSNP membership soars 39,031 in 7 days! Last Thurs 5pm, 25,642. Today 5pm, 64,673. Be part of it, join: https://my.snp.org/join 

     

     

     

     

    They just keep coming. 

     

     

    Sur

    Edited by scottish skier
    • Like 3
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: North of Falkirk
  • Weather Preferences: North Atlantic cyclogenesis
  • Location: North of Falkirk

    45% YES, 55% NO. Just how many of that NO have since joined the SNP after Westminster offered jam the next morning and we're still waiting. Meanwhile, Labour and Tories not best of friends again. Sickening. 

     

    Better Together? Don't make me spew my milky porridge.

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    In all of this discussion about campaigning et al, there seems to be a fundamental lack of acknowledgement that the main reason that the majority of people didn't vote for Independence is because they didn't want to and just perhaps they want to be remain part of the Union.

     

    You are both right and wrong if polls are to be believed.

     

    74% now want all but indy (my previous post) with just 18% for continued Westminster rule in current form.

     

    45% voted to leave the UK entirely, including 2 of Scotland's largest cities.

     

    What you have is Scotland wants independence, but it's reluctant to break up Britain in the process. If Britain lets Scotland be independent within the UK, then the union will likely survive a good while yet.

     

    If Britain resists this, the 45% may well become the >50%.

    Edited by scottish skier
    • Like 3
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Hayward’s Heath - home, Brighton/East Grinstead - work.
  • Weather Preferences: Snow and storms
  • Location: Hayward’s Heath - home, Brighton/East Grinstead - work.

    You are both right and wrong if polls are to be believed.

     

    74% now want all but indy (my previous post) with just 18% for continued Westminster rule in current form.

     

    45% voted to leave the UK entirely, including 2 of Scotland's largest cities.

     

    What you have is Scotland wants independence, but it's reluctant to break up Britain in the process. If Britain lets Scotland be independent within the UK, then the union will likely survive a good while yet.

     

    If Britain resists this, the 45% may well become the >50%.

    Well, we all want our cake and to eat it. I would love to earn money without working!

    • Like 3
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    Well, we all want our cake and to eat it. I would love to earn money without working!

     

    I'm not sure what this means.

     

    You postulated that people voted No because they wanted to remain part of the union.

     

    I took that as meaning you thought Scots liked the idea of being in the UK and working together.

     

    Was I wrong in my interpretation of your post?

     

    The above post seems to suggest you have disdain for people in Scotland? Scots are subsidy junkies and want their cake while eating it?

     

    You appreciate that 74% want Scotland to fund itself entirely right? That's what devo max is.

     

    Apologies if I've read you wrong.

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Hayward’s Heath - home, Brighton/East Grinstead - work.
  • Weather Preferences: Snow and storms
  • Location: Hayward’s Heath - home, Brighton/East Grinstead - work.

    I'm not sure what this means.

     

    You postulated that people voted No because they wanted to remain part of the union.

     

    I took that as meaning you thought Scots liked the idea of being in the UK and working together.

     

    Was I wrong in my interpretation of your post?

     

    The above post seems to suggest you have disdain for people in Scotland? Scots are subsidy junkies and want their cake while eating it?

     

    You appreciate that 74% want Scotland to fund itself entirely right? That's what devo max is.

     

    Apologies if I've read you wrong.

    Previously, I have stipulated that there are a number of Scots that wanted to remain part of the Union - no matter what. That is similar to those that want Independence no matter what. It has been the failure of a some on here to recognise this that I have had a problem with. How that translates to me having disdain for the people in Scotland I do not know. Conversely, perhaps you feel that if one disagrees with the Scottish Independence that translates as disdain for Scotland, whereas I think that it just means that I don't suppport an Independent Scotland but still can love the country and people!

     

    The comment regarding he cake and eating it is suggestive that there is a lot in the Independence white paper and devo max where the Scots want the best of both worlds and I stand by this. And to illustrate this with an example I will use keeping the pound as Scotland's currency despite wanting to be Independent from the UK.

     

    And apologies if I have read you wrong also.

    • Like 5
    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Almost half of the power generated in Scotland now comes from renewable sources, according to official figures.

     

    The Department of Energy and Climate Change said renewables achieved 46.4% of gross electricity consumption in 2013 - up from 39.9% in 2012.

     

    It also found the amount of power generated from renewable sources in Scotland in the first half of this year was 30% up on a year ago.

     

    The period saw wind output rise by 20%, while hydro generation climbed by 50%.

     

    Renewable heat generation accounted for 3% of Scotland's non-electrical heat demand - up from 2.7% in 2011.

     

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-29360934

     

     

    This is of course before we start to produce from tidal or wave energy, which should be fairly soon.

     

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-29230800

    I appreciate that Scotland does produce a lot of renewable energy but that is not the point I was trying to make - the point I was trying to make is that it was my impression that Scotland was hoping to export oil and gas to support its economy - it the usage of oil and gas is reduced and indeed if the prices fall as well this is not going to produce as much as what appears to have been hoped.

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

     Scots want the best of both worlds and I stand by this. 

     

    © Bettertogether

     

    Although I'm confused a tad about how independence supporters want the same?

     

    (I'd like to keep the £Scots which I've had refused a few times down south BTW)

     

    -------

     

    Anyway, moving swiftly on...

     

    I'm tending to:

     

    Brown for DFM, nominated by NS

     

    Hosie for DL of the SNP and prominent in Westminster

     

    Good compromise?

    Edited by scottish skier
    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest
    This topic is now closed to further replies.
    • Week Ahead: Bimbling lows keeping the weather unsettled, showery and cool

      Low pressure is going to keep doing its thing during the upcoming week, rolling in from the Atlantic, then hanging around to bring days of sunshine and showers with occasional longer spells of rain. Read the full update here

      Netweather forecasts
      Netweather forecasts
      Latest weather updates from Netweather

      UK Storm and Severe Convective Forecast

      UK Severe Convective & Storm Forecast - Issued 2021-05-16 06:49:50 Valid: 16/05/2021 0600 - 17/05/2021 0600 THUNDERSTORM WATCH - SUN 16TH MAY 2021 Click here for the full forecast

      Nick F
      Nick F
      Latest weather updates from Netweather

      UK Storm and Severe Convective Forecast

      UK Severe Convective & Storm Forecast - Issued 2021-05-15 09:37:16 Valid: 15/05/2021 0600 - 16/05/2021 0600 THUNDERSTORM WATCH - SAT 15TH MAY 2021 Click here for the full forecast

      Nick F
      Nick F
      Latest weather updates from Netweather
    • Recently Browsing   0 members

      No registered users viewing this page.

    ×
    ×
    • Create New...