As I say, you keep running into it.

Hey, that's not my definition, its that of the Oxford dictionary;

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/impinge

She won't, the Greens seem to be on board (and, considering the talks she's been having with them, alongside Plaid Cymru, its likely that would have been tackled before independence was even mentioned). People forget the Greens are also pro-independence, there's an independence friendly majority in Holyrood.

She's got a pro independence majority in the parliament with the Greens.

Ah, thank you. As the decision is not within her remit anyway, does she have to get it through Holyrood at all?

Interesting that the Greens support isolationism.

Is isolationism the new separation?

The SGP supports Scottish independence, and is anything but an isolationist policy.

The SNP want Scotland to be members of NATO though and therefore we'll have to meet the necessary spend. Not necessarily on Trident, but still defense and not healthcare.

Whatever suits you, chap.

Is only about 40% of the Scottish electorate voting for the UK to remain the EU "clear and sustained evidence" that independence has become the preferred choice of the Scottish people?

Oh bringer of negative thoughts.

Have you read posts 982 and 986 on the page before, as you tried to make this point before? Going by Theresa May's views, for instance, Nicola Sturgeon is speaking for, and I quote, "people (who) gave their answer with emphatic clarity".

So, I'd suggest that the answer is, yes, yes it is.

Its what free elections and democracy are, you don't just take into account those who didn't vote. It doesn't work like that. Just ignoring the fact of the matter, and hoping it goes away, doesn't mean it will. We're not living under some wonderful, imaginary electoral system which exists in anywhere else but your mind.

Agreed, but you are skirting around the point.

If enough Scots wanted us out of Nato and a political party adopted this policy and enough people voted for them, we'd be out. Substitute any and all other aspects of life for NATO and you have the basis of a democracy.

For devolved matters, to an extent this is true. For everything else, we have no ability to change or influence. Would you accept this suggests we are subject to a democratic deficit in Scotland?

Was not the referendum the ultimate in free election and democracy?

Or is it only free election and democracy when you agree with the result?

(Sigh) Can somebody confirm how many times this needs to be explained? Help me somebody. I hate to think ill of somebody who obviously appreciates the KLF, so let me explain.

Scotland voted to remain in the UK in 2014, fine. However, that UK was part of EU.
Scotland voted to remain in the EU in 2016, the UK didn't.
So, what to do.
The SNP are looking to get the best deal for Scotland, and protect the interests of the people of Scotland. They're the Scottish government, that's their job, that's what they were voted in for.
If they don't get what they believe that is, then another independence vote has to be a possibility, to see what the Scottish people want to do. Be part of the UK, or be part of the EU outside of the UK.
If a way is found that Scotland can retain EU priviliges within the UK, there won't be any need for any further referendum.

Its simple.

BIB - We've had this debate though... how many times was democratic deficit said during the last referendum and in itself, it isn't sufficient to make the majority vote YES. The economic case still needs to be made, because more control, but lower public spending doesn't look attractive.

For example, we have a 9.5% deficit and Sturgeon just on stage getting clapped for spending promises... clapped for promises made on the back of currently receiving a fiscal transfer.

I agree.

The debate should continue however, it has not been had. A democratic deficit is not a normal state of existence (in those countries which would be conventionally regarded as democracies anyhow).

So she is calling for a vote on something that she has no idea on how it is going to work out?

Not at all, she has announced a referendum bill to be discussed in Holyrood. Nothing more at the moment.

That's not factually correct. It's a logical fallacy, so I'm afraid it's an invalid argument. I would kindly request that you don't repeat it, or start asking "why not?" Thank you.

OK, would "the people of Scotland overwhelmingly voted to stay in the EU" be better?

No we voted for the UK to stay in the EU.

That's not factually correct either.

not really

"the people of Scotland voted overwhelmingly for the UK to stay in the EU" would be factually correct

Regional voting didn't matter anyway.

All you can say is "The majority of people who cast their votes in Scotland voted for the UK to remain in the EU."

Since I am not a pedant, and politicians use exactly the same terminology, I will continue to use that. I suggest, if you don't like it, tough. Ninman from The Internet, and his wrath, holds no fears for me.

Nobody's being selfish. It's a hypothesis based obythw current SNP stance over the EU referendum and indeed past movements on Orkney and Shetland.

I have no problem with an SNP Government in Edinburgh or indeed a Tory Government in London, it's what the respective electorates voted for.