Who is bogging off after the YES vote?
Discussion
pcvdriver said:
Their election result shows that the majority of those that could be bothered to vote wanted a referendum.
Do the math.The SNP were voted in on 31% of the vote.
That's not a majority.
It's not even close.
In fact it's worse. The turnout was only gnat's whisker over 50%.
So that means *only 16%* were bothered enough to want it.
ViperPict said:
"I really don't want to be flippant about this but investment trusts have survived through world wars and depressions and so I am sure they will thrive after September no matter what the results."Their perspective isn't everyone's; and they aren't saying they aren't going to leave as they think it'll be OK - they are saying they aren't too bothered as they can adjust through most situations, even wars and depression...
andy_s said:
ViperPict said:
"I really don't want to be flippant about this but investment trusts have survived through world wars and depressions and so I am sure they will thrive after September no matter what the results."Their perspective isn't everyone's; and they aren't saying they aren't going to leave as they think it'll be OK - they are saying they aren't too bothered as they can adjust through most situations, even wars and depression...
Dryce said:
Do the math.
The SNP were voted in on 31% of the vote.
That's not a majority.
It's not even close.
In fact it's worse. The turnout was only gnat's whisker over 50%.
So that means *only 16%* were bothered enough to want it.
Not sure on your ''math", IIRC the SNP won around 45% of the votes, from about a 50% turnout.The SNP were voted in on 31% of the vote.
That's not a majority.
It's not even close.
In fact it's worse. The turnout was only gnat's whisker over 50%.
So that means *only 16%* were bothered enough to want it.
Still, nowhere near the factually inaccurate claims of a majority from pcvdriver though
simoid said:
Dryce said:
Do the math.
The SNP were voted in on 31% of the vote.
That's not a majority.
It's not even close.
In fact it's worse. The turnout was only gnat's whisker over 50%.
So that means *only 16%* were bothered enough to want it.
Not sure on your ''math", IIRC the SNP won around 45% of the votes, from about a 50% turnout.The SNP were voted in on 31% of the vote.
That's not a majority.
It's not even close.
In fact it's worse. The turnout was only gnat's whisker over 50%.
So that means *only 16%* were bothered enough to want it.
Still, nowhere near the factually inaccurate claims of a majority from pcvdriver though
xjsdriver said:
Maybe I should have termed it better.... The majority (as in the majority, as used in our FPP voting system, which returns a candidate to parliament) of those people chose on election night to return the SNP government to power and ergo wanted a referendum, as this was top of the agenda on the SNP's election manifesto.
You sure it wasnt a single page way down on page 28 of the 2011 manifesto? xjsdriver said:
Maybe I should have termed it better.... The majority (as in the majority, as used in our FPP voting system, which returns a candidate to parliament) of those people chose on election night to return the SNP government to power and ergo wanted a referendum, as this was top of the agenda on the SNP's election manifesto.
I'd put money on it they weren't.. Some would have voted for the SNP for this reason of course, but most probably were attracted by some of the policies proposed, just as any political vote is made up from people with different wants or needs, the vote says more about their social policies. That's what got them their majority, not the independance card (even though its quite clear)..Ironically, the SNP would do more good for Scotland and the people that lived here if they actually dropped their incesant demand for independance (or their form of independance) and focused their energies on regular matter rather than constitutional change..
gofasterrosssco said:
...if they actually dropped their incessant demand for independence (or their form of independence) and focused their energies on regular matter rather than constitutional change....
..at which they are patently under-prepared for and not very good at. Mind you, it'd be easier if there were any tangible benefits to shout about...simoid said:
Not sure on your ''math", IIRC the SNP won around 45% of the votes, from about a 50% turnout.
Brain fade on my part. You're right 45% of the vote.Still not an overwhelming majority - and it means only 22.5% of the electorate were bothered to vote for change given the turnout.
And in UK national elections they poll even less in Scotland.
xjsdriver said:
Maybe I should have termed it better.... The majority (as in the majority, as used in our FPP voting system, which returns a candidate to parliament) of those people chose on election night to return the SNP government to power and ergo wanted a referendum, as this was top of the agenda on the SNP's election manifesto.
Do you know what a majority is? It's when more people vote for something than don't.55% of the voters chose someone other than the SNP.
That's not a majority of votes for the SNP - although they did get a majority of seats.
Also - just because someone voted SNP doesn't mean they wanted every single one of their policies, and conversely, voting Labour doesn't mean you didn't want a referendum.
This is really basic logic here, I'm struggling to believe you're not just being flippant
The electorate need to see this (not least since we paid for it!):
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west...
Calvib said:
The electorate need to see this (not least since we paid for it!):
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west...
Why do we need to see it?http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west...
simoid said:
Calvib said:
The electorate need to see this (not least since we paid for it!):
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west...
Why do we need to see it?http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west...
barryrs said:
Calvib said:
I would turn that back to you
There's a surprise 
Do you think that this is a good move by Westminster?
The question of 'why need to see it asinine?' - publically funded poll on a very relevant issue in Scoland right now.
Do you think they would have published if the outcome had been very supportive of the no campaign?
It does not send a good signal at all!
Calvib said:
Why not address the (albeit awkward) issue?
Do you think that this is a good move by Westminster?
The question of 'why need to see it asinine?' - publically funded poll on a very relevant issue in Scoland right now.
Do you think they would have published if the outcome had been very supportive of the no campaign?
It does not send a good signal at all!
But of course; it should be the job of pro unionists to answer all questions.Do you think that this is a good move by Westminster?
The question of 'why need to see it asinine?' - publically funded poll on a very relevant issue in Scoland right now.
Do you think they would have published if the outcome had been very supportive of the no campaign?
It does not send a good signal at all!
Perhaps the data will be used closer to the referendum date to support the BT campaign?
Of course if opinion poll results are the most important factor in the independence debate for you then i suspect your mind is very much made up.
Gassing Station | Scotland | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff