If by the new government you mean the riff raff which will emerge after the leadership election, then they do not have a mandate for anything which is not contained in their 2015 election manifesto - we are not in Chile or Argentina here where right wing coups are the order of the day.
Two years on from that and the situation hasn't really changed - in the opinion, of course, of an ever-increasing majority of Scots. At least you didn't quote the IFS - the Tory-created Institute for Fiscal Studies - who recently issued a doom & gloom laden report on Scotland's current and future debt levels. A report that, strangely, ended with a small-print acknowledgement that, as suggested in Michael Gray's article above, Independence would see Scotland's debt drastically slashed. And I'm certainly glad that you didn't quote GERS... Re your contention that Scotland is 'propped up by the UK' - one simple sentence can cast doubt on that. England wants the UK to leave the EU because staying in is costing the country money - yet we are to believe that England wants Scotland to stay in the UK when exactly the same situation applies.
I look forward to re-visiting our differing predictions, I'm certain your whinging will come to nothing.
It's not a case of whinging but rather facing up to political realities. Remain has a very strong majority in parliament. Admittedly we do not know how many potential waverers there are on both sides but we have to assume that Britain will be living with this 'majority' for some years to come, and whowever we get as PM. is not going to change this. The Commons may rally around their leaders instructions and vote for Brexit, through some mistaken interpretation of democracy, or simply through fear. But, once the negotiations have started then every single aspect of it, accepting or rejecting of EU. laws etc. would have to be voted on by those same people. The situation is as ludicrous as if you were to have an election tomorrow and then say 'our manifesto must be carried through by the other party'. It just can't work and I am surprised that you cannot see how impractical this is. You can have a Brexiter as PM. and he may have a mandate for activating Brexit but he/she does not have a mandate for governing this country in every other sphere of government. Any other democracy, anywhere in the World, would be calling a new election in such a situation as this.
There will not be an election as there is no need. The government has a fresh mandate from last year's election. In practice why would any government with a working majority take any risk although with the Labour Party in utter chaos the last thing the left require is an election. Nearly all the MPs voted for the referendum except the SNP, they will respect the outcome of that referendum as they should. MP's have more decency than you give them credit for. The only organisation that would have the cheek to not respect the result is the EU, they have plenty of history of ignoring the proletariat.
Farage resigns again as leader of UKIP. Will he mean it this time? Still wants his salary from the EU though for another two yearss.
They may be forced into respecting the outcome of the referendum but they are not bound to the means by which it should be achieved, and that is the point I was trying to make. They are also not prevented from asking for a second referendum citing 'changed circumstances' as a valid pretext - exactly what those 'changed circumstances' could be is open to interpretation at the moment. Britain is in political turmoil at the moment and that is no time to be making snap decisions which could still affect Britain (England) in 20 years time.
This guy will go down in history as the man that took the UK out of the EU. He will be remembered long after all the other present politicians are well forgotten. A massive achievement seeing he was not even an MP. Most if not all political careers end in failure, his ends in glorious success.
He may well go down in history in the same catagory as Oswald Moseley - the only difference being that the latter wore his black shirt openly.
He was the leader of the most popular party in the European elections, he is very popular in the UK. His achievement is massive. He will still work in the EU parliament making sure the UK government does not slide on the demands of the Brexit side.
Yet on the Third and final reading the vote was 316 to 53. That was the final vote in the Commons and as there are 650 MPs it means that less than half our democratically elected MPs - and not even all of the 330 Conservative MPs supported the referendum. That is not a ringing endorsement. The more you look the less the referendum result looks "decisive".
That is a massive majority on those bothered to vote, you cannot add the abstainers to the other side.
I agree. However this is not a general election where people who abstain essentially are saying they accept other people's choices. Here all parties abstained (except the SNP) to register the fact that whilst they were not prepared to deny a referendum (not a clever political option) they did not support it. All I am trying to do is to show that your world where there is only black and white is less complicated than the real world where there are many shades in between. I do believe sadly that we will exit the EU - but we will do so with a very divided nation. I personally voted for Remain on purely economic reasons and fully expect the country to be worse off by having left. If ordinary people find they have additional years of austerity, lower incomes, higher unemployment and higher inflation I think many people will get angry at having been lied to and conned by rich newpaper proprietors and others who have been able to make fortunes on currency and share dealings as a result of the vote. But - who am I to forecast such things - perhaps we will sail into a brave new future of economic prosperity unfettered by the chains of the EU. After all life in 70's Britain was so much rosier before the EU wrecked it all - I adored 3 day working weeks, power cuts and getting a pay rise every other month to cope with high inflation.
He was the leader of a party which offered members of the English defence league the chance to stand as candidates - and which has a strong parallel to the BNP - in so far that many Ukip members were once BNP members. A party which produced posters and material which could only be classed as inflammatory and which scapegoated minority groups and which played up to popular prejudices. In other countries they would be able to 'place' such a movement quite clearly - but, of course, in England we do not use words like Fascist (this word is somehow only used about Europeans). But, all the ingredients are there - the scapegoating of one group after another - the unions, the leftists, the immigrants, the EU., the Scots etc. who will be the next scapegoat ? And always the appeal is to those at the bottom of the pile - those that were placed there not by the EU. but by the growing gulf between rich and poor, a gulf which is bigger in terms of the distribution of wealth than any other western country. So, if the cap fits wear it !
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/aberdeenshire/964527/david-cameron-moving-aberdeen/ Dear Lord no... Although it would be somewhat amusing for him to be denied a visa by the Scottish Home Office...
Many millions of people in Southern Europe would agree that the EU has wrecked their lives, especially the 50% of young without the prospect of a job. The UK democracy works by counting the number of votes cast not by considering the various reasons for abstaining, which are always many. I'm sure we can discuss the outcome in 5 years if we are all still alive.
Before they joined the EU. Spain, Portugal and Greece were all under military dictatorships and the Italians were emigrating en masse to Switzerland, the USA and everywhere else they could get into. Those countries problems initially arose from a Worldwide financial crisis which had nothing to do with the EU.
