Cybernats spit the dummy out ...
I seem to have annoyed some cybernats inside and outside the SNP with the Twitter version of my post earlier today pointing out that "selling out" appears to be SNP-speak for "respecting the result of a referendum."
I have carefully avoided accusing any of the individuals concerned of lying even when I think I can prove they were wrong, because it is entirely possible that they believe what they write. This is not a courtesy that all the nationalists who responded to me observed in return.
More than one person attacked my post on the grounds that the statement, prior to the Scottish Independence Referendum, that it was a "once in a generation opportunity" for Independence was merely the "personal opinion" of one individual e.g. Alex Salmond.
Sharing this YouTube video which most reasonable people would consider pretty strong evidence that this was more than just Alex Salmond's view ...
... cut no ice with the Cybernats who accused me of making things up.
Even pointing out that an official Scottish government document, "Scotland's Future," published during the run-up to the Referendum, which is available on the internet at
http://www.gov.scot/resource/0043/00439021.pdf
states in black and white on page 556 that
"It is the view of the current Scottish government that a referendum is a once-in-a-generation opportunity"
did not produce any retraction or apology by the people who had accused me of making things up.
The closest any of them got to admitting that actually I was neither lying or misinformed was
"Have Tories in Cumbria not got a life?"
Yes, thank you!
That wasn't the only response from a nationalist which made personal remarks about me rather than engaging with the issue, and far from being the nastiest either.
The other thing I said which upset the Cybernats is that under the terms of Nicola Sturgeon's previous triple lock statement she is not in a position to call another referendum. Here is my argument:
Opinion polls have not had a good track record over the past eighteen months, but I don't see what else you could use to objectively assess whether public opinion has changed.
Here are the results of all 11 opinion polls in Scotland asking how people would vote in a second Scottish independence referendum since the Brexit vote.
There was a blip lasting less than a week in the immediate aftermath of the June 23rd vote, but since July 25th every one of the eight opinion polls taken has shown a lead for the opponents of independence, most recently of 11 percentage points. That does NOT prove that a second Independence referendum would produce another "No" vote, but it does mean that Nicola Sturgeon would be on very shaky ground indeed in arguing that public opinion has changed.
I'm not going to push the point about whether the 2016 Scottish parliament election SNP manifesto promised another referendum - the nationalist side argue that because Brexit represents a major change in circumstances the manifesto does provide such a mandate - but the second part of Nicola Sturgeon's "triple lock" was that people had to vote for a manifesto with that promise.
The SNP did not achieve a majority of votes or seats in the 2016 Scottish parliament election - in fact they had previously had a majority in the Scottish parliament and lost it. Their share of the constituency vote was up slightly at 46.5% but their share of the regional vote went down by 2.3 percentage points to 41.7% resulting in a net loss of six seats.
Fortunately for me, I have a thick skin. Sadly, this is pretty much a requirement in politics these days, something which results in many people who might be assets to their country and communities refusing to serve.
So the Cybernats can call me whatever insulting names they like on twitter or elsewhere, as they did today and doubtless will again, it will not stop me from thinking that their obsession with calling another independence referendum rather than trying to sort out Scotland's problems is bad for Scotland.
And the evidence suggests that a lot of Scots, in fact probably a majority of them, agree with that opinion.
I have carefully avoided accusing any of the individuals concerned of lying even when I think I can prove they were wrong, because it is entirely possible that they believe what they write. This is not a courtesy that all the nationalists who responded to me observed in return.
More than one person attacked my post on the grounds that the statement, prior to the Scottish Independence Referendum, that it was a "once in a generation opportunity" for Independence was merely the "personal opinion" of one individual e.g. Alex Salmond.
Sharing this YouTube video which most reasonable people would consider pretty strong evidence that this was more than just Alex Salmond's view ...
... cut no ice with the Cybernats who accused me of making things up.
Even pointing out that an official Scottish government document, "Scotland's Future," published during the run-up to the Referendum, which is available on the internet at
http://www.gov.scot/resource/0043/00439021.pdf
states in black and white on page 556 that
"It is the view of the current Scottish government that a referendum is a once-in-a-generation opportunity"
did not produce any retraction or apology by the people who had accused me of making things up.
The closest any of them got to admitting that actually I was neither lying or misinformed was
"Have Tories in Cumbria not got a life?"
Yes, thank you!
That wasn't the only response from a nationalist which made personal remarks about me rather than engaging with the issue, and far from being the nastiest either.
The other thing I said which upset the Cybernats is that under the terms of Nicola Sturgeon's previous triple lock statement she is not in a position to call another referendum. Here is my argument:
Opinion polls have not had a good track record over the past eighteen months, but I don't see what else you could use to objectively assess whether public opinion has changed.
Here are the results of all 11 opinion polls in Scotland asking how people would vote in a second Scottish independence referendum since the Brexit vote.
There was a blip lasting less than a week in the immediate aftermath of the June 23rd vote, but since July 25th every one of the eight opinion polls taken has shown a lead for the opponents of independence, most recently of 11 percentage points. That does NOT prove that a second Independence referendum would produce another "No" vote, but it does mean that Nicola Sturgeon would be on very shaky ground indeed in arguing that public opinion has changed.
I'm not going to push the point about whether the 2016 Scottish parliament election SNP manifesto promised another referendum - the nationalist side argue that because Brexit represents a major change in circumstances the manifesto does provide such a mandate - but the second part of Nicola Sturgeon's "triple lock" was that people had to vote for a manifesto with that promise.
The SNP did not achieve a majority of votes or seats in the 2016 Scottish parliament election - in fact they had previously had a majority in the Scottish parliament and lost it. Their share of the constituency vote was up slightly at 46.5% but their share of the regional vote went down by 2.3 percentage points to 41.7% resulting in a net loss of six seats.
Fortunately for me, I have a thick skin. Sadly, this is pretty much a requirement in politics these days, something which results in many people who might be assets to their country and communities refusing to serve.
So the Cybernats can call me whatever insulting names they like on twitter or elsewhere, as they did today and doubtless will again, it will not stop me from thinking that their obsession with calling another independence referendum rather than trying to sort out Scotland's problems is bad for Scotland.
And the evidence suggests that a lot of Scots, in fact probably a majority of them, agree with that opinion.
Comments
its kind of how it works, trouble is these days and usually from the left, they dont want to do that. Why take the trouble of debate when you can reach a desision and just instantly call anyone who disagrees with it Racist/Fashist/Communinst (oddly)/Sexist (only applied if you are disagreeing with a female)/isolationist/some other word * delete as appropriate.
that is just it, people have lost the power of debate, they dont seem to do it. I am all for "letting the other person have their 10 minutes to state their position, then them leaving me with my 10 mins, then after that we can have 10 mins each to knock the hell out of each others ideas, then we can have questions, then we can reach a workable arangement.
its like how debate works.
the left these days dont like that idea, its more "this is how it is and if you disagree you are hitler, so you are getting no platform here"