Actually more people in Scotland voted for Brexit than voted for the SNP at the last election
The SNP have 47 out of 59 MPs, that's kinda dominant (barely shy of 80%). Scotland voted 62% remain, highest within the UK. The real questions are A) will there be a 2nd referendum & B) if there is will it carry. The May election outcome should be a decent indicator as to whether the Salmond inquiry is a 9 day wonder or something more longlasting. Re-joining the EU is a no brainer if the independence vote is won, Ireland is the poster boy in that respect. That's the interesting story in the UK, the Saxe Coburgs are just for giggles, Wales still fairly 'within the camp' notwithstanding recent Drakeford comments - you'd need to see ballot box outcomes before any serious interest there.
Good that the Tories have some ethnic diversity, bad that it includes Priti Patel
Brexit voting options: Remain or Leave
UK election voting options in Scotland :
SNP
Labour
Conservative
Liberal Democrats
Green Party
Brexit Party
UKIP
Others
SNP won 45% of the vote, 1.2m votes
Brexit (in a two horse race) 38% of the vote, 1m votes.
Your regular reminder that UK elections and referenda are national not regional votes.
But they're all about the democracy innit. I swear to jaysus if I was Scottish I'd be past asking for permission.Your regular reminder that a decision on a referendum is entirely the perogative of the UK prime minister.
Don't hold your breath.
I guess there are "facts" - words were said or not. However, what was heard/interpreted can be different.I hate the term "your truth" as in "Thank you for speaking your truth".
Truth is not a relative term; something is either true or it isn't.
Yep, "Your perspective" is now "Your truth".I guess there are "facts" - words were said or not. However, what was heard/interpreted can be different.
"I gave him a few pointers, constructive stuff."
"He absolutely tore strips off me."
Maybe neither are lying, that just have different interpretations of what went down. One has the benefit of knowing their true intent (assuming they are being honest), the other doesn't. Maybe there's context that should objectively clarify intent. But when someone says "I felt....", there's a fair chance they did feel that way, even if you think that's the most hypersensitive/irrational way to assess the situation. You have to remember that many/most people go into 'rabbit in the headlights' mode when presented with a difficult situation, emotion takes over (even if only temporarily), it's amygdala 'fight or flight' stuff.
So it's not always as cut and dried as you'd think it should be.
There's nowt as queer as folk.
Agreed, but in the absence of objective evidence, something measurable be that physical, numerical etc etc, then what else is there?Yep, "Your perspective" is now "Your truth".
Sure, but the phrase frames the subjective as the objective. There's just too much of that going on just about everywhere.Agreed, but in the absence of objective evidence, something measurable be that physical, numerical etc etc, then what else is there?
Where such evidence does exist then it is absolutely right to say - "thank you for your perspective, but these facts ...x, y & z, prove to the contrary, so they are the facts of the matter and that's what we're dealing with from now on...." (i.e. we're not wasting time rehashing your erroneous claims)
Do Harry and Meghan have a right to want security for their kids? lIke, do others on the same level get it? Like Princess Anne's kids etc?
I had to look him up. I didn't know who he was.Prince Edward has two children - I had to look up their names ( Louise and James ) because they've been brought up out of the public eye.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?