I didn't come up with it, the folks over at Tory Hoose did.
Couldn't think of a better way of putting it, so simply decided to nick it.
What is equally amusing is the way the Cybernattosphere is trying to spin this as some sort of win for them. Hilarious.
Beginners Eck-onomics Part 1.
2 hours ago
11 comments:
Gotcha?
How tasteful.
My God Smee, you really think this is a good move for the Tories in Scotland?
Every time Call One Dave opens his mouth about Scotland, he gains votes for the SNP, even if you can't see it in yer wee Tory enclave...
They do make me laugh its like a reflex action....
Well more like the Nationalists rationalizing into their blinkered world view.
You can feel the angst welling up in Conan
An early, circa 2014, referendum date announcement? Will the coalition government last that long? Which "unionist" party will break ranks? What myths will you employ to enhance the "no" vote? An invasion of a foreign country perhaps? It worked for Thatcher!
Incidentally, a belated Happy New Year!
Gotcha?
2014 - autumn mentioned was in the Sunday Times on the New Years Day edition and rereported in the Herald the following day.
Check those papers.
Gotcha indeed--------
Tonight the Child Poverty Action Group Scotland announced that child poverty in Scotland is on the increase... and all we can talk about is the abstract nonsense of an "independence" referendum....
what a waste of political energy and all of our time....
I think that anyone who believes that Salmond would not have named a date without being shoved by Cameron is seriously delusional.
And I also think that most comment on this has missed one of the main points - Lallands Peat Worrier being an obvious exception.
The "legal problems" for a Holyrood referendum do not stem from Westminster; they come from the Scottish public.
All it would take would be one Concerned Citizen, in conjunction with an Eminent (Glasgow?) Lawyer - who might well be one and the same - to say "I believe this is ultra vires and illegal" in court, and the whole thing would be snarled up for years.
I have said it before - confronted with some sort of convoluted multi-question referendum run by some Nat-accountable commission with the vote extended to 16-year olds who can barely tie their own shoelaces - I would definitely be prepared to be such a Concerned Citizen.
To be honest the 16 and 17 year olds getting the vote on the referendum would be a side issue. It is for another day if the franchise should be extended to 16 year olds and therefore should be dropped from the SNP's proposals as it complicates matters. And the Electoral Commission should be involved - I think that is nearly conceded.
However as you may or may not know, 16 and 17 year olds can vote on the Isle of Man, Jersey and Guernsey. So some of our fellow Brits who apparently cannot tie their shoelaces are already voting - such as at the Manx general election back in September.
If you did know this then my interpretation maybe that you think the average 16 year old in Scotland is much more stupid than the their Manx or Channel Island equivalent--------
But then I did mention a month or so ago that the the Scottish Tories tend to be hypocrites when it comes to the Crown Dependencies.
If you block the referendum by legal means then as suggested by Torquil Crichton, Salmond will use it to his advantage in the 2016 election and use his outrage about being blocked by the Supreme Court as a "who governs Scotland" and drag the thing on until the end of the decade. Probably helped by a Tory majority government in Westminster coming to power in 2015 and scaring the heck out of much of the Scottish electorate.
You stike me as "No, no" man in 1997, whether you were here or in exile. Am I right?
"maybe that you think the average 16 year old in Scotland is much more stupid"
As I now teach said 16 year-olds, I can say from first-hand experience that the vast bulk of them are not qualified to vote for anything.
I suspect Fraggle Rock and the Channel Islands have rather odd age distributions - lots of retirees, few teenagers. Hardly examples.
"If you block the referendum by legal means then as suggested by Torquil Crichton, Salmond will use it to his advantage in the 2016 election"
No he won't. If some Concerned Citizen were to take it to court, the UK Government would say "See? Told you so" and hold a proper, legal and decisive referendum.
Case closed for a generation.
BTW in 1997 I was actually "Yes, No".
I could see a case for recreating a democratic summit for Scots Law which would have the time to focus on specifically Scottish issues and problems- but the idea of giving yet another bunch of pollies the power to tax me never appealed.
Then why did HM UK government give Brenda the go ahead to sign the Order in Council passing the suffrage to these people?
Considering your past predictions, I do will not be going down the betting shop with your predictions on legal action.
For fun, remember that Lithuania held a illegal referendum on independence and then boycotted the legal referendum on the continuance on the existance of the USSR. Spose Gorby had every right to shoot the sepratists who took over the Vilnius TV tower------
And of course the Tory sponsership of Carson's UVF. But that is for another day----
So now we have unionism caving in on the timing, next it will be consideration of the second question and 16yo voting. It's hilarious, your such a shower of blow hards.
Post a Comment