The SDLP

[imtommygunn]

Yeah tbh neither nationalist party, in my view, is anywhere near capable of delivering it. Still a pipe dream. It is less of a pipe dream because of brexit and the dup - not the actions of sf or the sdlp.

[Fear Bun Na Sceilpe]

Yeah tbh neither nationalist party, in my view, is anywhere near capable of delivering it. Still a pipe dream. It is less of a pipe dream because of brexit and the dup - not the actions of sf or the sdlp.

100%

[dublin7]

A point to note here, throwing a missile at police is criminal. Breaking Covid regs is like getting a speeding ticket. Perspective please.

A point to note here, Covid is a highly contagious and potentially fatal virus. Large gatherings should not be organized to for health reasons.

Large gatherings are a breeding ground for Covid and have led to major outbreaks. Put that into perspective

Agreed. Equally as true for the funeral for the funeral of a Republican as for a Garda.

Indeed. It's disappointing and a little sad that SF supporters use the funeral of a garda as a comparison for a politicaly organised funeral for a convicted criminal. While both funerals broke Covid regulations to any normal person the circumstances are much different

Clearly SF supporters see nothing wrong with what they did and the Unionists/loyalists are using this as an excuse for what's gone on the last few days.

I don't think this week has done anything to bring a united Ireland closer. I wouldn't be surprised if it led to another collapse of the Assembly. SF and the DUP dislike each other and disagree on most things. This only going to cause further division and conflict between the parties

[6th sam]

A point to note here, throwing a missile at police is criminal. Breaking Covid regs is like getting a speeding ticket. Perspective please.

A point to note here, Covid is a highly contagious and potentially fatal virus. Large gatherings should not be organized to for health reasons.

Large gatherings are a breeding ground for Covid and have led to major outbreaks. Put that into perspective

Agreed. Equally as true for the funeral for the funeral of a Republican as for a Garda.

Indeed. It's disappointing and a little sad that SF supporters use the funeral of a garda as a comparison for a politicaly organised funeral for a convicted criminal. While both funerals broke Covid regulations to any normal person the circumstances are much different

Clearly SF supporters see nothing wrong with what they did and the Unionists/loyalists are using this as an excuse for what's gone on the last few days.

I don't think this week has done anything to bring a united Ireland closer. I wouldn't be surprised if it led to another collapse of the Assembly. SF and the DUP dislike each other and disagree on most things. This only going to cause further division and conflict between the parties

Tbf I don't know of any SF supporter who "sees nothing wrong with what they did".

I know many "moderates" who think that the Storey funeral is being used by DUP and others as a distraction from the fact that they have seriously "dropped the ball" over Brexit and Covid. History has shown that when unionism is under pressure , the default position is to unite under "anti-Irishness". I only hope that the pattern over Drumcree and Flegs is repeated, and that the campaign fizzles out. Regardless of constitutional issues people have to realise that there are much bigger challenges ahead in terms of recovery from Covid and brexit.

[Snapchap]

It's disappointing and a little sad that SF supporters use the funeral of a garda as a comparison for a politicaly organised funeral for a convicted criminal. While both funerals broke Covid regulations to any normal person the circumstances are much different

Yes because covid famously didn't allow itself to spread among mourners at garda funerals.

Such absolute and utter nonsense. "The circumstances are very different"?? What does that actually mean? That covid only spreads at some funerals but not others, purely depending on "the circumstances" of who is in the coffin? That some politicians cant be criticised for covid breaches? What is it? Take the rank hypocrisy out of your "different circumstances" line and there remains no reasonable, understandable rationale behind it whatsoever.

Clearly SF supporters see nothing wrong with what they did

I'm on record as having repeatedly criticised SF over the funeral. I did so as recently as the last post I placed on this thread. Just because that is an inconvenient fact for you, doesn't mean you get to ignore it.

I don't think this week has done anything to bring a united Ireland closer. I wouldn't be surprised if it led to another collapse of the Assembly. SF and the DUP dislike each other and disagree on most things. This only going to cause further division and conflict between the parties

Demographics, brexit and likely scottish independence will bring a United Ireland closer. This week will make no difference whatsoever. And if you actually think this week will lead to an assembly collapse, then you really don't understand whats going on in the north at all. Who would collapse it now? SF, who have nothing to gain from doing so (and a lot to lose), or the DUP who fear an election more than anything else on earth right now, to the extent that they tried to focus their attacks primarily on the police and chief constable last week rather than on SF?

[Rossfan]

Serious question...
What percentage of the Unionist/Protestant population are "angry" over the Protocol?
What percentage are out rioting, attacking Police, trying to attack Nationalists etc?

[general_lee]

Serious question...
What percentage of the Unionist/Protestant population are "angry" over the Protocol?
What percentage are out rioting, attacking Police, trying to attack Nationalists etc?

I'd say a high percentage are angry over the Protocol, but a a very low percentage could actually articulate the reasons why.

The percentage out rioting, attacking police etc are minuscule and while they may try and turn up the heat so to speak, this will be futile.

[Armagh18]

Serious question...
What percentage of the Unionist/Protestant population are "angry" over the Protocol?
What percentage are out rioting, attacking Police, trying to attack Nationalists etc?

I'd say a high percentage are angry over the Protocol, but a a very low percentage could actually articulate the reasons why.

The percentage out rioting, attacking police etc are minuscule and while they may try and turn up the heat so to speak, this will be futile.

are they not protesting because the police wouldn't arrest Bobby Storey or something?

[general_lee]

Oh yeah I forgot that one 

[imtommygunn]

Some of those statements by lcc or uprg or whichever one it was more or less said it was the protocol.

If I were a unionist I would be very pissed off about the ni protocol and more how it came about due to the dup.

It's a very very low percentage rioting. It is mainly youths.

[6th sam]

Serious question...
What percentage of the Unionist/Protestant population are "angry" over the Protocol?
What percentage are out rioting, attacking Police, trying to attack Nationalists etc?

Very very low percentage Ross, most unionists are reasonable . The problem for us is that they value the union and therefore many ( understandably ) back the main unionist party as the best way of maintaining the union. The real hardliners tend to be older fundamentalist types , and an easily led section of the "Protestant" working class. Most unionists favour the union for socio-economic reasons, and if there are sound socioeconomic reasons for a UI they could be persuaded. It would suit the British and Irish governments to create favourable socioeconomic for a UI. Let's be honest no Englishman with a brain wouldn't be delighted to offload Ni, to the extent that they'd be happy for GB to part finance it. A trouble free north with an economic link to England would make sense even to partitionists in ROI. For me the biggest step along the path is to sideline the DUP by giving unionists a middle ground alternative in the Alliance ( some unionists already copping on to this) . SF need to realise ( and I think they are already starting this) that if they genuinely want to become the largest party in the North they are going to have to soften further, show more remorse . Finucane epitomised this best in North belfast

[michaelg]

Serious question...
What percentage of the Unionist/Protestant population are "angry" over the Protocol?
What percentage are out rioting, attacking Police, trying to attack Nationalists etc?

Very very low percentage Ross, most unionists are reasonable . The problem for us is that they value the union and therefore many ( understandably ) back the main unionist party as the best way of maintaining the union. The real hardliners tend to be older fundamentalist types , and an easily led section of the "Protestant" working class. Most unionists favour the union for socio-economic reasons, and if there are sound socioeconomic reasons for a UI they could be persuaded. It would suit the British and Irish governments to create favourable socioeconomic for a UI. Let's be honest no Englishman with a brain wouldn't be delighted to offload Ni, to the extent that they'd be happy for GB to part finance it. A trouble free north with an economic link to England would make sense even to partitionists in ROI. For me the biggest step along the path is to sideline the DUP by giving unionists a middle ground alternative in the Alliance ( some unionists already copping on to this) . SF need to realise ( and I think they are already starting this) that if they genuinely want to become the largest party in the North they are going to have to soften further, show more remorse . Finucane epitomised this best in North belfast

A very reasonable post.  Whilst socio-economic reasons are undoutedly a major reason why unionists favour the union, it's not the be all and end all.  A sense of comfort with the status quo and fear of the unkown are the main reasons why unionsists would be reluctant to ever vote for a UI.  Coupled with the oft mentioned 'siege mentality' and a sense of giving in to SF/IRA after their 30 year terrorist campaign, it's unlikely that small 'u' unionists who vote Alliance will ever vote for a UI, as many on this board seem to think that they will.

[6th sam]

Serious question...
What percentage of the Unionist/Protestant population are "angry" over the Protocol?
What percentage are out rioting, attacking Police, trying to attack Nationalists etc?

Very very low percentage Ross, most unionists are reasonable . The problem for us is that they value the union and therefore many ( understandably ) back the main unionist party as the best way of maintaining the union. The real hardliners tend to be older fundamentalist types , and an easily led section of the "Protestant" working class. Most unionists favour the union for socio-economic reasons, and if there are sound socioeconomic reasons for a UI they could be persuaded. It would suit the British and Irish governments to create favourable socioeconomic for a UI. Let's be honest no Englishman with a brain wouldn't be delighted to offload Ni, to the extent that they'd be happy for GB to part finance it. A trouble free north with an economic link to England would make sense even to partitionists in ROI. For me the biggest step along the path is to sideline the DUP by giving unionists a middle ground alternative in the Alliance ( some unionists already copping on to this) . SF need to realise ( and I think they are already starting this) that if they genuinely want to become the largest party in the North they are going to have to soften further, show more remorse . Finucane epitomised this best in North belfast

A very reasonable post.  Whilst socio-economic reasons are undoutedly a major reason why unionists favour the union, it's not the be all and end all.  A sense of comfort with the status quo and fear of the unkown are the main reasons why unionsists would be reluctant to ever vote for a UI.  Coupled with the oft mentioned 'siege mentality' and a sense of giving in to SF/IRA after their 30 year terrorist campaign, it's unlikely that small 'u' unionists who vote Alliance will ever vote for a UI, as many on this board seem to think that they will.

Agree that the " comfort of the status quo " is a factor, unbelievably, as the status quo has been a disaster by most parameters: large percentage of the population having no affinity to the state, economic regression, large public sector, segregation , sectarianism, racism . The status quo is not a viable option and those unionists who are hanging onto the status quo are doing themselves no favours. If NI didn't work with a large unionist majority , it ain't go to work with a unionist minority. An all island solution with Britishness enshrined in the constitution is the most likely scenario. NI possibly might have worked if respect was shown to the minority but unfortunately for unionists that opportunity has been lost .

[michaelg]

Serious question...
What percentage of the Unionist/Protestant population are "angry" over the Protocol?
What percentage are out rioting, attacking Police, trying to attack Nationalists etc?

Very very low percentage Ross, most unionists are reasonable . The problem for us is that they value the union and therefore many ( understandably ) back the main unionist party as the best way of maintaining the union. The real hardliners tend to be older fundamentalist types , and an easily led section of the "Protestant" working class. Most unionists favour the union for socio-economic reasons, and if there are sound socioeconomic reasons for a UI they could be persuaded. It would suit the British and Irish governments to create favourable socioeconomic for a UI. Let's be honest no Englishman with a brain wouldn't be delighted to offload Ni, to the extent that they'd be happy for GB to part finance it. A trouble free north with an economic link to England would make sense even to partitionists in ROI. For me the biggest step along the path is to sideline the DUP by giving unionists a middle ground alternative in the Alliance ( some unionists already copping on to this) . SF need to realise ( and I think they are already starting this) that if they genuinely want to become the largest party in the North they are going to have to soften further, show more remorse . Finucane epitomised this best in North belfast

A very reasonable post.  Whilst socio-economic reasons are undoutedly a major reason why unionists favour the union, it's not the be all and end all.  A sense of comfort with the status quo and fear of the unkown are the main reasons why unionsists would be reluctant to ever vote for a UI.  Coupled with the oft mentioned 'siege mentality' and a sense of giving in to SF/IRA after their 30 year terrorist campaign, it's unlikely that small 'u' unionists who vote Alliance will ever vote for a UI, as many on this board seem to think that they will.

Agree that the " comfort of the status quo " is a factor, unbelievably, as the status quo has been a disaster by most parameters: large percentage of the population having no affinity to the state, economic regression, large public sector, segregation , sectarianism, racism . The status quo is not a viable option and those unionists who are hanging onto the status quo are doing themselves no favours. If NI didn't work with a large unionist majority , it ain't go to work with a unionist minority. An all island solution with Britishness enshrined in the constitution is the most likely scenario. NI possibly might have worked if respect was shown to the minority but unfortunately for unionists that opportunity has been lost .

Again, you don't seem to get the fundamental point / essence of unionism.  The main parameter by which it has been a success, is that NI has remained as part of the United Kingdom, with the benefits that that brings.  As for your final sentence, as things stand there is likely still a significant number from the nationalist community who would vote to remain in the UK, so there is no guarantee of a UI happening in the immediate future.

[seafoid]

Serious question...
What percentage of the Unionist/Protestant population are "angry" over the Protocol?
What percentage are out rioting, attacking Police, trying to attack Nationalists etc?

Very very low percentage Ross, most unionists are reasonable . The problem for us is that they value the union and therefore many ( understandably ) back the main unionist party as the best way of maintaining the union. The real hardliners tend to be older fundamentalist types , and an easily led section of the "Protestant" working class. Most unionists favour the union for socio-economic reasons, and if there are sound socioeconomic reasons for a UI they could be persuaded. It would suit the British and Irish governments to create favourable socioeconomic for a UI. Let's be honest no Englishman with a brain wouldn't be delighted to offload Ni, to the extent that they'd be happy for GB to part finance it. A trouble free north with an economic link to England would make sense even to partitionists in ROI. For me the biggest step along the path is to sideline the DUP by giving unionists a middle ground alternative in the Alliance ( some unionists already copping on to this) . SF need to realise ( and I think they are already starting this) that if they genuinely want to become the largest party in the North they are going to have to soften further, show more remorse . Finucane epitomised this best in North belfast

A very reasonable post.  Whilst socio-economic reasons are undoutedly a major reason why unionists favour the union, it's not the be all and end all.  A sense of comfort with the status quo and fear of the unkown are the main reasons why unionsists would be reluctant to ever vote for a UI.  Coupled with the oft mentioned 'siege mentality' and a sense of giving in to SF/IRA after their 30 year terrorist campaign, it's unlikely that small 'u' unionists who vote Alliance will ever vote for a UI, as many on this board seem to think that they will.

The status quo is breaking down. The UK may be too.
Any UI will have to be imagined in a citizens assembly and planned over a long time.
Unionism hasn't always been the default political choice of northern protestants.