A pro-independence blog by James Kelly - voted one of Scotland's top 10 political websites.
Just a quick note to let you know that I have a new article at the International Business Times, about the battle to define the meaning of the referendum result, and how Nicola Sturgeon has already won it. You can read the article HERE.
I agree with a lot of what you said in the first part of the article James, particularly over who won the battle over interpreting the referendum result. However, I disagree with your support for another independence referendum so soon after the first one. I know we have discussed this at some length on your blog, so there is no real point in discussing it much further; we are just going to have to agree to disagree on this one.What I would say is that I believe that Nicola Sturgeon is genuinely against holding another referendum in the next 5 years. She appears to be much more cautious than Salmond. I have to add here that while I greatly admire Alex Salmond, and the work he did in the SNP, and the wider independence movement, to get us so close to a Yes vote, I just do not find his analysis of why we lost satisfactory at all. I simply do not believe that the vow made that much of a difference. Salmond apparently thinks it did. I think it merely made enough people more comfortable to vote No, but I suspect it was the MSM's coverage of the banks/ big business/pensions/currency claims and warnings that really secured the No vote. Scotland is at heart a (small) conservative nation, and I do not think enough voters from the middle classes and elderly sections of the electorate were persuaded to make the jump to independence at the first opportunity. There needs to be proper thought put into how to present our economic arguments better next time. There is only going to be one more chance at independence.
I've heard this claim that we only get one more chance, and I'm baffled as to where it comes from. Quebec disproves it - a third referendum is probably inevitable there, unless the PQ cease to be a serious contender for office, which at the moment looks unlikely.A second referendum defeat would obviously be a serious setback, but I see no reason why it would kill the issue indefinitely, unless the Yes vote was sharply down on 2014.
I don't think there is a right or wrong argument as they both have merit. I think that the SNP will do private polling to test the waters before they propose the next referendum whilst continuing to plan for it.
James, that simply isn't correct re: Quebec.PQ entered the 2014 Quebec election as a minority government and explicitly campaigned for a mandate to hold a referendum. They were heavily defeated by the Quebec Liberals. The Bloc (federal party, equivalent of SNP in WM elections) was completely wiped out in the last Canadian election and there is absolutely no sign of a recovery in the election due next month.
Most of what you're saying is true, but none of it even comes close to contradicting what I said, so I'm slightly baffled as to what your point is! The demise of the Bloc is a sideshow - they didn't even exist when the first referendum was held in 1980. The PQ's defeat last year was a defeat in a single election, at a specific point in time. There is no sign whatever of them ceasing to be a credible alternative party of government (and indeed they were in power until that election).
James I agree. We have momentum let's use it. We can't allow the media to dictate terms. If we started today at 49%. I reckon support could be built in 6 months to easily win.My real caveat this time, is that we need a shorter campaign and can't allow the Electoral Commission to run the show.
Sounds fascist to me.
The problem, folks is that we don't just have to win next time, we have to win convincingly. Sure we may just about be able to scrape 51% at the moment, but IMO this would lead to mayhem. The loyalists would certainly not take this lying down. The events in George Square on 19th September 2014 would look like a picnic compared to the effects of a 51% YES vote. Sorry folks, because of the nasty Brit Nat element in Scotland, and the dark forces ranged against us, we have to win big. A convincing 55-60% YES win would force those creatures back into their holes. Less than that could be trouble. Last year NO won 55% and it's been a bloody headache for them ever since. Six months of consistent opinion polls more than 53%YES and that's the time to go for it IMO.I don't go by the "strike while the iron's hot" argument in this occasion v- the iron is still warming up - why pour cold water on it?
A convincing 55%+ Yes vote isn't going to happen in a lifetime, Not when you get 800,000 postal votes thrown into the mix. November 13 is also equally distrusting of the Brit Electoral Commission as I am.I have said it more than once and that is the SNP plus the other Indy Parties should use Holyrood 2016 as a platform for UDI. To put it mildly that is to blackmail the British State politically on the following basis "Deliver Devo to the Max within one year or we go UDI". What is the bet that the Brit Establishment wont. I for one and I am not alone in this do not trust any Referendum process. I certainly don't trust the process that we will be subjected to over the EU Referendum.
We don't need a "convincing" victory, whatever that means. We need 50% + 1, and we should be extremely grateful if and when we get it. That's tough enough a hurdle to get over.
Sorry James, much as I admire your work, I don't agree. 50% +1 or even 51% would never be accepted. It would lead to chaos. Democracy may be supposed to work like that but it rarely does. On that basis, if No won 55% last year, maybe we should have all packed up and gone home? I sense you may disagree because perhaps you don't think a convincing win is possible? It is, but not today, not tomorrow. Soon.
You don't need to rely on "senses". I made absolutely, explicitly clear in the article that I believe 60% Yes is virtually impossible, and anyone waiting "until" that happens is essentially (albeit unwittingly) arguing for the indefinite continuation of the union.I have no idea what you mean about "we should all have packed up and gone home" on the basis of a 55% No vote. 50% + 1 for either side does not abolish democracy. 55% for either side does not abolish democracy. 80% for either side does not abolish democracy. I am not seeking the abolition of democracy, and I don't understand why anyone would.
'Creatures', sounds fascist to me.
Aye, they are fascists right enough.
1. Police Scotland were ostensibly formed to save money. There is another reason why a single unitary police force ultimately controlled by Holyrood is a good idea. 2. We have a nakedly Tory government. Corbyn may well prosper. The SNP are currently wildly popular, this situation will not pertain forever. 3. Do you want to argue for independence in the face of a Corbyn Labour govt with scary stories of what the Tories might do in the future? It has to be soon or the moment of maximum advantage may well be lost. I want us to take our opportunities not rely on what happens in Westminster. Corbyn may well prosper, may well not be deposed, may propose a properly federal Britain. A scandal or crisis could cast the SNP in a bad light. People arguing for a long wait assume things will be ever thus.
I did the postal vote as I cannot stand the Nat si idiots and their snide comments at the polling station.And what about George Square on Saturday with the fanatics out in force promoting the Comrade!! and the SNP pretending to distance themselves from the event. Well where did all the SNP yellow ballons and flags come from? I did have a laugh when a load of saltire bearers got of at Croy! Wrong flag maybe. Looks like the Nat sis have claimed the flag for themselves like the BNP did the Union flag. Interesting times!
Is this you at the front Glasgow WC?
Times are certainly more interesting than GWC's posts. More obsessed with Nazis than a cable history channel...
Naw far too young.
Well it looks like Dave is on his way out after Pigate. I predicted Gideon would be next in line. I think this will speed up the process. God help us!
The problem with last year's vote is that they cheated. I would accept a 55% vote if it was obtained fairly.1. The MO Truth was utterly biased.2. There are still suspicious unanswered questions . Like the lack of exit polls yet No knew the result at close of poll, Unheard of turnouts of up to 97% on some postal ballots I recall. If the postal votes had not been counted Yes would have won. Like the anecdotes of the turnout of centenarians. Like the ignoring of Purdah agreements. There is a long list.I know in my heart we were cheated. if - and I am not unreasonable - I thought that was a fair and reasoned vote which they won fairly and honestly I would accept it. But it was not. We do need a long run of polls showing 53% or more before we go again. But we need a Yes organisation that plays as dirty as those bastards did.
Even if you exclude the postal votes, we would still have lost (albeit by a narrower margin).
What were the numbers? I have laboured all year under the impression the postal vote tipped the result.
The good thing about the postal vote is us oldies do not hiv tae struggle up a hill to a school or pay for a taxi. We can fuck the Nat sis in comfort in our homes and you get freepost.
No, it didn't. Another point to bear in mind is that the postal vote was expected to be more No than the vote on the day, for various well-rehearsed reasons. It wasn't actually any more No, relatively speaking, than can be explained by these very reasons (elderly voters, voters in big houses out in the country, farmers and so on).While it's certain there was some individual jiggery-pokery, by people registering at addresses in Scotland where they weren't actually resident, there can't possibly have been enough of these people to make a significant difference. And some of them probably did it to vote Yes!And it's possible some residents in care homes had their ballots helpfully dealt with by a councillor or even a member of staff, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if these were for No. But again there just aren't enough dementia patients to make a significant difference.There's no suspicion whatsoever that the postal vote was systematically tampered with by the authorities, and actually no real way it could have been even if they'd wanted to risk doing it.
Looking forward to polls on Cameron's performance when it comes to mounting dead farmyard animals :-)On a serious note... Could this be a move to replace Cameron with Osborne?Osborne is even more hated in Scotland than Cameron, so that would be a good thing.
Why would he be hated have you conducted a poll? Yawn! Hate seems be a Nat si mentality. Britain is thriving and has done so since Harold Wilson.
George says the opposite. He keeps saying Britain is bankrupt / up to its eyeballs in debt and needs massive austerity just to survive.
It could be lack of work, lack of tax paying and benefit scroungers eating into the purse. So what do the Nat sis propose! Is it socialism or borrowing from the capitalist institutes. You are at a loss I would suggest. Do you have a third way inspite of no currency! On a postcard please.
SS -My suspicion has always been that Cameron would use an opportunity to resign and let Gideon in. I can forsee Boris as his number 2 (Quite literally).Worrying times in the interim , ultimately will hasten independence. Cameron is a floppy eejit. Gideon is very dangerous cold and calculating. He will vandalise Scotland as he knows it is going!
I think Gideon would be happy to get rid of Scotland at the earliest opportunity, and Boris has already made noises about real federalism. Yep, things are looking up!
Anon regards the lack of indi exit polls. We were advised some half baked baloney at the time. That no party wanted to pay for an exit poll. I find that a very strange reason indeed! Again the Yes side and SNP should have been smarter with that aspect.
Does anyone seriously think that piggate is actual grounds for resignation? It's funny as hell and it damages Cameron because it makes him a figure of fun. It's not good for the gravitas if people keep bursting out laughing when they see you then saying "nevermind". But he hasn't done anything illegal, or even arguably immoral.Once upon a very long time ago now I was a vet student. I probably know every bestiality joke known to science. My classmates never got up to anything quite as startling as that, though I do recall a group of lads getting a bit of a telling-off for using a length of intestines as a skipping rope. Cameron's (alleged) exploit was extreme, but it was a long time ago.Resignation? Really? (I hope he stays on and people just giggle at him.)
Agreed. Even if the story is 100% true, it will probably be seen as a kind of urban myth, alongside ones like Richard Gere stuffing gerbils up his rectum for sexual kicks or that Rod Stewart had his stomach pumped after if was filled with... er, let's not go there. Something for people to titter about, but no serious consequences.
Marc Almond, surely.
Personally I want HAMeron to remain in-post.Really looking forward to PMQs on Wednesday.MUST be an opportunity for SNP or Labour to get some references to "porkies" in there.The snigger-level will be extreme, when Dave-boy attempts his first answer.With an (alleged) pig-shagger as PM and an (alleged) coke-head as Chancellor - you really could not wish for the Tories to be shown in a less favourable light.Bring on the kiddie-fiddling Enquiries results and you have the perfect Westminster Storm.What a shower of incompetent, inbred cretins that lot really are.
Inbred David indeed. And kiddie fiddling in Scotland by the respectable ! Clergy is not the fault of the Tories. You must get a grip dear boy. Try politics and policy.
I think it is not enough in isolation for resignation. However if he is looking for a way out, then is this the opportunity?
Decision may not be his?
I might actually watch the PMQs on Wednesday for a change. I wont behaving ham in my piece though. I hope for plenty of questions about the Bwitish Pig Industry. Perhaps one or two about Animal Farm and George Orwell.
Alas, there is no PMQs for a few weeks - we're into conference season now. (Only the Lib Dems at the moment, but the parliamentary schedule doesn't seem to have caught up with their demise.)
Was this a Gideon set up! Isnt Ashcroft one of his pals?
You should not let Ashcroft allow this to deviate from politics and current issues. He is a Lord and has loadsamoney and can do what he wants. The destruction of the Lords should be a priority for all democrats.
Glasgow working class you are a clown get lost TROLL.
He's not even a consistent troll. All over the place as usual. I wish he would go back to serving fries.
Labour continue to increase their number of peers, as do all the other Unionist Parties.No sign of wishing to reform/destroy the HoL.Only SNP refuse to nominate, on principle.All Unionist Parties have their snouts well and truly in the ermine-clad trough.Hypocrites, the lot of them.Say one thing about that place.....and then do exactly the opposite.
Did not know SNP had principles. They claim they hate Tories and austerity but do not tax the rich and better off Scots to alleviate. You lot are Nat sis and Tartan Tories. It becomes clearer every day and you will be exposed. The truth usually wins inspite of yer shite.
LOL!Corbyn backtracking on Trident already and most Labour MPs ready to vote with the Tories on bombing Syria.Red Tory Trash.All that is missing is the pig.
I reckon Syria has been bombed enough and it is time the people returned home with UN support. Does the Scot Nat sis not recognise the Syrian division? We are a Nation in a Union with our neighbour. But you Nat sis want to divide our people. Shame on you.
Well, that's very decent of you - Syria has been bombed enough?And......only a sad, deluded Unionist would even try to compare the peaceful, democratic Referendum here, with the mess that is Assad's back yard.Utterly pathetic.
This comment has been removed by the author.