Scottish Referendum / Independence - Vol 5

Scottish Referendum / Independence - Vol 5

TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED
Author
Discussion

Moonhawk

10,730 posts

218 months

Wednesday 30th July 2014
quotequote all
Troubleatmill said:
As you are sat on the fence - try it out and read some. Report back with all your questions.
I do find it odd that somebody who claims to be sat on the fence hasn't, at the very least, looked at the campaign websites for both sides. scratchchin

Not reading the information in detail is one thing........to not even know it exists however confused

Welshbeef

49,633 posts

197 months

Wednesday 30th July 2014
quotequote all
Edinburger said:
How many people do you think read that?
How many people read the SNP White Paper? Better together didn't have the euro lottery millionaires hand outs and moving of money from other budget areas to the SNP bunce pot for this vote.



Also have you read it ? If not now you have been highlighted as to where it is will you read it to answer the questions you have still not had a proper answer?


If you have read the a White Paper SNP but refuse to read the Pro Union it brings into question your position about being undecided and needing more info to help you decide.


Wombat3

11,962 posts

205 months

Wednesday 30th July 2014
quotequote all
Edinburger said:
McWigglebum4th said:
nellyleelephant said:
What more do you think the No camp could have done?
The No campaign are somewhat hampered by the YES campaign run around in circles screaming FREEDDDOOOMMMMmmmmmmm!!!!!! and refuse to engage in any debate
Sigh.

Why then, has the FM repeatedley asked the PM for a public debate?
Because he wants to play "the big man" & he wants to play the man not the ball. Jesus, how stupid do you (does he) think people are?

London424

12,826 posts

174 months

Edinburger

10,403 posts

167 months

Wednesday 30th July 2014
quotequote all
Welshbeef said:
Edinburger said:
How many people do you think read that?
How many people read the SNP White Paper? Better together didn't have the euro lottery millionaires hand outs and moving of money from other budget areas to the SNP bunce pot for this vote.



Also have you read it ? If not now you have been highlighted as to where it is will you read it to answer the questions you have still not had a proper answer?


If you have read the a White Paper SNP but refuse to read the Pro Union it brings into question your position about being undecided and needing more info to help you decide.
Doesn't matter - I regularly see Yes campaigners in in most towns and cities across Scotland, either chapping doors or holding a stall in a street /shopping centre, or holding open events to discuss independence. People who are passionate about independence openly talking with the Scottish people. I also receive mailings, newletters, etc., from the Yes crowd.

What do I see from No? The square root of sod all. Apart from press releases telling us why the Yes side are wrong and pictures of Darling portrayed as someone we should trust.


Edinburger

10,403 posts

167 months

Wednesday 30th July 2014
quotequote all
Wombat3 said:
Edinburger said:
McWigglebum4th said:
nellyleelephant said:
What more do you think the No camp could have done?
The No campaign are somewhat hampered by the YES campaign run around in circles screaming FREEDDDOOOMMMMmmmmmmm!!!!!! and refuse to engage in any debate
Sigh.

Why then, has the FM repeatedley asked the PM for a public debate?
Because he wants to play "the big man" & he wants to play the man not the ball. Jesus, how stupid do you (does he) think people are?
Perhaps. It dissapoints me that the PM won't debate. What signal does it give to the people of Scotland?

Edinburger

10,403 posts

167 months

Wednesday 30th July 2014
quotequote all
Moonhawk said:
Troubleatmill said:
As you are sat on the fence - try it out and read some. Report back with all your questions.
I do find it odd that somebody who claims to be sat on the fence hasn't, at the very least, looked at the campaign websites for both sides. scratchchin

Not reading the information in detail is one thing........to not even know it exists however confused
I have looked at them actually.

But have a few million other Scottish voters? I suspect not.

They need to push and not pull marketing to the general public.

Edinburger

10,403 posts

167 months

Wednesday 30th July 2014
quotequote all

Troubleatmill said:
Edinburger said:
Moonhawk said:
Edinburger said:
Err... define things as they are? Highlight the benefits of the union?
What - like this?

http://bettertogether.net/pages/resources
Yes - but let's see that publicised.
It is a big assumption here... but run with it.

Someone wants to know why we are better together.

1/ GOOGLE BETTER TOGETHER. The first hit takes you to bettertogether.net/
2/ Clicking that link - and a very big button on the screen says "GET THE FACTS ON WHY WE ARE BETTER TOGETHER"
3/ Clicking that link..... and everything you want to know about The economy, the pound, jobs, NHS, the case for the UK, Devolution, pensions, defence, welfare, shopping, mortgages, energy bills, EU, oil and gas and universities are all there for the reader.


Can it be made any simpler?



As you are sat on the fence - try it out and read some. Report back with all your questions.
Aye, very good. See my last post re. push/pull.

Mr GrimNasty

8,172 posts

169 months

Wednesday 30th July 2014
quotequote all
Edinburger said:
Doesn't matter - I regularly see Yes campaigners in in most towns and cities across Scotland, either chapping doors or holding a stall in a street /shopping centre, or holding open events to discuss independence. People who are passionate about independence openly talking with the Scottish people. I also receive mailings, newletters, etc., from the Yes crowd.

What do I see from No? The square root of sod all. Apart from press releases telling us why the Yes side are wrong and pictures of Darling portrayed as someone we should trust.

And you would trust Salmond? You'd have to be delusional.

Edinburger

10,403 posts

167 months

Wednesday 30th July 2014
quotequote all
Moonhawk said:
Edinburger said:
How many people do you think read that?
Doesn't matter how many 'people' read it - the question that was put to you was whether you had.

If you haven't - then how can you possibly criticise the no campaign for not 'defining things as they are' or 'highlighting the benefits of the union'?

If anything - "fence sitters" such as yourself are the very people who such information is targeted as. Arden't unionists or nationalists will have already made their mind up.

It's odd that you would not want to actively seek out such information.
My last few posts answer most of your points.

I find it odd that BT don't want to talk to me and my neighbours about why I should vote No.

Edinburger

10,403 posts

167 months

Wednesday 30th July 2014
quotequote all
Mr GrimNasty said:
Edinburger said:
Doesn't matter - I regularly see Yes campaigners in in most towns and cities across Scotland, either chapping doors or holding a stall in a street /shopping centre, or holding open events to discuss independence. People who are passionate about independence openly talking with the Scottish people. I also receive mailings, newletters, etc., from the Yes crowd.

What do I see from No? The square root of sod all. Apart from press releases telling us why the Yes side are wrong and pictures of Darling portrayed as someone we should trust.

And you would trust Salmond? You'd have to be delusional.
That's subjective but he's been a good PM for Scotland and is well regarded in the popularity polls.

Edinburger

10,403 posts

167 months

Wednesday 30th July 2014
quotequote all
donutsina911 said:
Edinburger said:
For starters, tcould have articulated the benefits of the union because I'd suggest that over 95% of voters are not aware of most of those.
You're either being deliberately troll like or have your head up your arse.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...

This was widely publicised, although I suspect you chose to ignore it. The benefits could not have been more clearly 'articulated.'

From the summary pages:

This paper sets out the programme’s key conclusions, showing that Scotland is better off as
part of the UK, now and in the future:

• The best of both worlds. With a strong Scottish Parliament, Scotland can make its
own decisions in devolved areas, while sharing risks and resources with the other
parts of the UK. More than 200 UK public institutions serve people in Scotland,
underpinned by shared principles and values. If Scotland votes for independence this
will come to an end. Scotland will leave the UK and become a new, separate state.

• The advantages of the pound. As part of the UK, Scotland has one of the oldest
and most stable currencies in the world, supported by the UK’s strong political union.
It would not be possible to recreate today’s arrangements if that political union did
not exist. That is why all three of the largest political parties in the UK have ruled out
sharing the pound or the Bank of England in a formal currency union.

• Lower taxes, higher public spending. A great weight of evidence says that
Scotland’s finances are stronger as part of the UK. Independent experts agree that the
UK offers people in Scotland lower taxes and higher public spending than would be
possible in an independent Scotland. HM Treasury estimates that this is worth £1,400
per person per year for each person in Scotland. The government of an independent
Scotland would exercise additional responsibilities, but it would also have to choose
whether to raise taxes, or cut public services, or both.

• Stronger finances as part of the UK: staying in the larger UK economy helps to
ensure stable funding for public services in Scotland. Scotland’s deficit (shortfall
between what it spends and what it raises in tax each year) is higher than the UK as
a whole. In 2016/17, the proposed year of independence, experts like the Institute for
Fiscal Studies estimate the Scottish deficit will be more than 5 per cent of its economy
– more than twice the deficit expected for the whole of the UK in the same year.

• North Sea oil and gas: revenues from North Sea oil and gas are subject to sudden
change and will ultimately decline. Since 2010, the independent Office for Budget
Responsibility has revised down these revenues by £21 billion. But instead of needing
to cut spending in response, the Scottish Government has benefited from an
additional £2.2 billion, provided by the UK Government.

• Ageing population: pensioners make up nearly 20 per cent of Scotland’s population,
placing pressures on age-related spending and affecting levels of economic growth
and tax revenues. Over the next 20 years, an independent Scotland’s extra spending
on pensioners would rise to around £1.4 billion higher per year.

• The UK Dividend: taken together, HM Treasury estimates that the benefit of stronger
finances as part of the UK saves each person in Scotland the equivalent of at least
£1,400 per year, meaning lower taxes and better public services. Independence would
mean leaving the UK’s stronger public finances and managing challenges separately,
with potential higher taxes and cuts to public services as a result. Summary 7

• Borderless trade: many thousands of Scottish jobs are connected to trade with
England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Scottish businesses trade more with the rest
of the UK than with the rest of the world combined. Putting an international border
between Scotland and the UK would slow growth just as the economy is beginning to
take off.

• A world class financial sector: Scotland’s financial sector is large, with assets
totalling more than twelve times the size of an independent Scotland’s economy.
This would make Scotland more vulnerable to financial shocks without the security
and support of the UK’s larger economy, strong institutions or credible reputation in
financial markets.

• Lower cost of borrowing: the UK’s reputation contributes to its lower cost of
borrowing. HM Treasury estimates that as part of the UK, mortgage interest costs are
up to £1,700 lower on the first year of repayments alone for a 75 per cent loan-to-value
mortgage on the average Scottish house.

• Energy bills: the energy market in Great Britain is ten times larger than Scotland’s
alone, so costs are spread across 30 million households and businesses. Staying in
the UK would keep future energy bills for Scottish households up to £189 a year lower.

• Overseas reach: the UK’s extensive overseas network promotes Scottish businesses
and products all over the world, and protects Scottish people when they travel.

• EU membership: an independent Scotland would need to apply to join the EU. The
rules under which it might join are not a matter for Scotland to decide, or negotiate
with the UK. All 28 Member States would need to agree the terms of Scotland’s
membership in what would be a complex, lengthy process and Scotland could not
expect to retain the same terms of membership as the UK.

• Favourable terms: Scotland benefits from the UK’s terms of EU membership:
keeping the UK pound; maintaining a separate free travel area; and retaining a rebate
that saves more than £3 billion a year on payments to the EU. The UK Government
estimates that as part of the UK, over the next seven years, Scotland saves at least
£750 per household on the costs of EU membership.

• Defence and security: defence is one of the largest employers in Scotland,
supporting around 12,600 highly-skilled industry jobs. Scotland is an integral part of
the UK’s defence and security arrangements – defending shared airspace, patrolling
the surrounding seas and helping to protect everyone in the UK against threats.

Care to debate any of these? Or would you prefer to post wky links and discuss flags and sitting on the fence?
Push/pull my friend. You think the average voter knows that?!

Moonhawk

10,730 posts

218 months

Wednesday 30th July 2014
quotequote all
Edinburger said:
I have looked at them actually.

But have a few million other Scottish voters? I suspect not.

They need to push and not pull marketing to the general public.
Actually - I think the campaign is at the right level from what I have seen.

What's the point in blowing millions of pounds more to try and convince people to effectively maintain the status quo. The information is there - if you choose not to look, that is your prerogative.

The fact that the yes campaign with their socialist ideals seem to have no qualms spending many millions in achieving their nationalistic goals - all seems rather vulgar.

Wombat3

11,962 posts

205 months

Wednesday 30th July 2014
quotequote all
Edinburger said:
Wombat3 said:
Edinburger said:
McWigglebum4th said:
nellyleelephant said:
What more do you think the No camp could have done?
The No campaign are somewhat hampered by the YES campaign run around in circles screaming FREEDDDOOOMMMMmmmmmmm!!!!!! and refuse to engage in any debate
Sigh.

Why then, has the FM repeatedley asked the PM for a public debate?
Because he wants to play "the big man" & he wants to play the man not the ball. Jesus, how stupid do you (does he) think people are?
Perhaps. It dissapoints me that the PM won't debate. What signal does it give to the people of Scotland?
What the actual fk are you on??? We've been told repeatedly that everyone else should keep their noses out & that this is a decision for the people of Scotland and you suddenly want a debate about it to take place with an Englishman??

I repeat, how fking stupid do you think people are? Its quite transparently obvious that it would not be a serious debate, it would be a bloody circus.

Really serious questions have been raised about many issues from defence to currency to EU membership etc and instead of dealing with these (which is what the Nationalists should be doing), you and the rest of the Nationalists are just burying your heads in the sand & looking for some kind of "braveheart moment" to carry the day.

If it wasn't such a serious matter it would be funny. But it is a serious matter with serious consequences for millions of people & the skirting /ignoring of these issues by you and your ilk is beyond reprehensible.

You KNOW the thing is a fking joke that won't work, but clearly you just don't have the balls to actually face the facts.




Edinburger

10,403 posts

167 months

Wednesday 30th July 2014
quotequote all
Moonhawk said:
Edinburger said:
I have looked at them actually.

But have a few million other Scottish voters? I suspect not.

They need to push and not pull marketing to the general public.
Actually - I think the campaign is at the right level from what I have seen.

What's the point in blowing millions of pounds more to try and convince people to effectively maintain the status quo. The information is there - if you choose not to look, that is your prerogative.

The fact that the yes campaign with their socialist ideals seem to have no qualms spending many millions in achieving their nationalistic goals - all seems rather vulgar.
That's a fair enough POV.

Edinburger

10,403 posts

167 months

Wednesday 30th July 2014
quotequote all
Wombat3 said:
Edinburger said:
Wombat3 said:
Edinburger said:
McWigglebum4th said:
nellyleelephant said:
What more do you think the No camp could have done?
The No campaign are somewhat hampered by the YES campaign run around in circles screaming FREEDDDOOOMMMMmmmmmmm!!!!!! and refuse to engage in any debate
Sigh.

Why then, has the FM repeatedley asked the PM for a public debate?
Because he wants to play "the big man" & he wants to play the man not the ball. Jesus, how stupid do you (does he) think people are?
Perhaps. It dissapoints me that the PM won't debate. What signal does it give to the people of Scotland?
What the actual fk are you on??? We've been told repeatedly that everyone else should keep their noses out & that this is a decision for the people of Scotland and you suddenly want a debate about it to take place with an Englishman??

I repeat, how fking stupid do you think people are? Its quite transparently obvious that it would not be a serious debate, it would be a bloody circus.

Really serious questions have been raised about many issues from defence to currency to EU membership etc and instead of dealing with these (which is what the Nationalists should be doing), you and the rest of the Nationalists are just burying your heads in the sand & looking for some kind of "braveheart moment" to carry the day.

If it wasn't such a serious matter it would be funny. But it is a serious matter with serious consequences for millions of people & the skirting /ignoring of these issues by you and your ilk is beyond reprehensible.

You KNOW the thing is a fking joke that won't work, but clearly you just don't have the balls to actually face the facts.
Yeah well, let's agree to disagree on that one smile

toppstuff

13,698 posts

246 months

Wednesday 30th July 2014
quotequote all
Edinburger said:
donutsina911 said:
Edinburger said:
For starters, tcould have articulated the benefits of the union because I'd suggest that over 95% of voters are not aware of most of those.
You're either being deliberately troll like or have your head up your arse.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...

This was widely publicised, although I suspect you chose to ignore it. The benefits could not have been more clearly 'articulated.'

From the summary pages:

This paper sets out the programme’s key conclusions, showing that Scotland is better off as
part of the UK, now and in the future:

• The best of both worlds. With a strong Scottish Parliament, Scotland can make its
own decisions in devolved areas, while sharing risks and resources with the other
parts of the UK. More than 200 UK public institutions serve people in Scotland,
underpinned by shared principles and values. If Scotland votes for independence this
will come to an end. Scotland will leave the UK and become a new, separate state.

• The advantages of the pound. As part of the UK, Scotland has one of the oldest
and most stable currencies in the world, supported by the UK’s strong political union.
It would not be possible to recreate today’s arrangements if that political union did
not exist. That is why all three of the largest political parties in the UK have ruled out
sharing the pound or the Bank of England in a formal currency union.

• Lower taxes, higher public spending. A great weight of evidence says that
Scotland’s finances are stronger as part of the UK. Independent experts agree that the
UK offers people in Scotland lower taxes and higher public spending than would be
possible in an independent Scotland. HM Treasury estimates that this is worth £1,400
per person per year for each person in Scotland. The government of an independent
Scotland would exercise additional responsibilities, but it would also have to choose
whether to raise taxes, or cut public services, or both.

• Stronger finances as part of the UK: staying in the larger UK economy helps to
ensure stable funding for public services in Scotland. Scotland’s deficit (shortfall
between what it spends and what it raises in tax each year) is higher than the UK as
a whole. In 2016/17, the proposed year of independence, experts like the Institute for
Fiscal Studies estimate the Scottish deficit will be more than 5 per cent of its economy
– more than twice the deficit expected for the whole of the UK in the same year.

• North Sea oil and gas: revenues from North Sea oil and gas are subject to sudden
change and will ultimately decline. Since 2010, the independent Office for Budget
Responsibility has revised down these revenues by £21 billion. But instead of needing
to cut spending in response, the Scottish Government has benefited from an
additional £2.2 billion, provided by the UK Government.

• Ageing population: pensioners make up nearly 20 per cent of Scotland’s population,
placing pressures on age-related spending and affecting levels of economic growth
and tax revenues. Over the next 20 years, an independent Scotland’s extra spending
on pensioners would rise to around £1.4 billion higher per year.

• The UK Dividend: taken together, HM Treasury estimates that the benefit of stronger
finances as part of the UK saves each person in Scotland the equivalent of at least
£1,400 per year, meaning lower taxes and better public services. Independence would
mean leaving the UK’s stronger public finances and managing challenges separately,
with potential higher taxes and cuts to public services as a result. Summary 7

• Borderless trade: many thousands of Scottish jobs are connected to trade with
England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Scottish businesses trade more with the rest
of the UK than with the rest of the world combined. Putting an international border
between Scotland and the UK would slow growth just as the economy is beginning to
take off.

• A world class financial sector: Scotland’s financial sector is large, with assets
totalling more than twelve times the size of an independent Scotland’s economy.
This would make Scotland more vulnerable to financial shocks without the security
and support of the UK’s larger economy, strong institutions or credible reputation in
financial markets.

• Lower cost of borrowing: the UK’s reputation contributes to its lower cost of
borrowing. HM Treasury estimates that as part of the UK, mortgage interest costs are
up to £1,700 lower on the first year of repayments alone for a 75 per cent loan-to-value
mortgage on the average Scottish house.

• Energy bills: the energy market in Great Britain is ten times larger than Scotland’s
alone, so costs are spread across 30 million households and businesses. Staying in
the UK would keep future energy bills for Scottish households up to £189 a year lower.

• Overseas reach: the UK’s extensive overseas network promotes Scottish businesses
and products all over the world, and protects Scottish people when they travel.

• EU membership: an independent Scotland would need to apply to join the EU. The
rules under which it might join are not a matter for Scotland to decide, or negotiate
with the UK. All 28 Member States would need to agree the terms of Scotland’s
membership in what would be a complex, lengthy process and Scotland could not
expect to retain the same terms of membership as the UK.

• Favourable terms: Scotland benefits from the UK’s terms of EU membership:
keeping the UK pound; maintaining a separate free travel area; and retaining a rebate
that saves more than £3 billion a year on payments to the EU. The UK Government
estimates that as part of the UK, over the next seven years, Scotland saves at least
£750 per household on the costs of EU membership.

• Defence and security: defence is one of the largest employers in Scotland,
supporting around 12,600 highly-skilled industry jobs. Scotland is an integral part of
the UK’s defence and security arrangements – defending shared airspace, patrolling
the surrounding seas and helping to protect everyone in the UK against threats.

Care to debate any of these? Or would you prefer to post wky links and discuss flags and sitting on the fence?
Push/pull my friend. You think the average voter knows that?!
You are talking about "the campaign" so as to avoid talking about the actual issues themselves.

You do this a lot.

When all is said and done, the quality of people's lives will be determined by the issues themselves, not the manner in which they are debated ( or, in your case, ignored).

Man up. Grow a pair. Stop obfuscating. Respond to the issues themselves.

Tell me what YOU will say when interest rates are higher in Scotland than the rUK. Tell me what YOU will say to the ship workers losing their jobs. Tell me what YOU will say when there is a run on Scottish banks. Tell me what YOU will say to your countrymen when things become more expensive to buy in Scotland than they do in the UK.

OR, tell me precisely why these things will not happen.

Simply suggesting I am scaremongering is not good enough. Refute these points with cold, reasoned statements.

Go on then..

smile

Wombat3

11,962 posts

205 months

Wednesday 30th July 2014
quotequote all
Edinburger said:
Wombat3 said:
Edinburger said:
Wombat3 said:
Edinburger said:
McWigglebum4th said:
nellyleelephant said:
What more do you think the No camp could have done?
The No campaign are somewhat hampered by the YES campaign run around in circles screaming FREEDDDOOOMMMMmmmmmmm!!!!!! and refuse to engage in any debate
Sigh.

Why then, has the FM repeatedley asked the PM for a public debate?
Because he wants to play "the big man" & he wants to play the man not the ball. Jesus, how stupid do you (does he) think people are?
Perhaps. It dissapoints me that the PM won't debate. What signal does it give to the people of Scotland?
What the actual fk are you on??? We've been told repeatedly that everyone else should keep their noses out & that this is a decision for the people of Scotland and you suddenly want a debate about it to take place with an Englishman??

I repeat, how fking stupid do you think people are? Its quite transparently obvious that it would not be a serious debate, it would be a bloody circus.

Really serious questions have been raised about many issues from defence to currency to EU membership etc and instead of dealing with these (which is what the Nationalists should be doing), you and the rest of the Nationalists are just burying your heads in the sand & looking for some kind of "braveheart moment" to carry the day.

If it wasn't such a serious matter it would be funny. But it is a serious matter with serious consequences for millions of people & the skirting /ignoring of these issues by you and your ilk is beyond reprehensible.

You KNOW the thing is a fking joke that won't work, but clearly you just don't have the balls to actually face the facts.
Yeah well, let's agree to disagree on that one smile
No, lets not.

Lets have you actually tell us what you think is going to be so great about an independent Scotland & how its all going to work - you know, currency, EU etc etc etc ?

You are the one whinging about a lack of information - so try supplying some that supports your position.

And before you try the "I'm undecided" bullst yet again, the idea that anyone with two brain cells to rub together can still be sitting on the fence on this is risible. There is a massive amount of information available about the key issues and not one shred of anything serious from the idiot nationalists to counter any of it.

Tell us do.

Welshbeef

49,633 posts

197 months

Wednesday 30th July 2014
quotequote all
Edinburger said:
Doesn't matter - I regularly see Yes campaigners in in most towns and cities across Scotland, either chapping doors or holding a stall in a street /shopping centre, or holding open events to discuss independence. People who are passionate about independence openly talking with the Scottish people. I also receive mailings, newletters, etc., from the Yes crowd.

What do I see from No? The square root of sod all. Apart from press releases telling us why the Yes side are wrong and pictures of Darling portrayed as someone we should trust.

So to clarify you have outstanding questions have clearly not read the Pro No version of White paper and it seems that you are not intending to?

Can you confirm that is correct.

One point that I find interesting is that generally Pro Yes supporters state what you have above and Pro No state similar from the No camp. Maybe its pure chance that you have not seen Pro No out and its pure chance that a No supporter has seen Pro No campaigners.

Still its interesting as a fence sitter the evidence is given to you in press releases and a full document - you did claim to have read the white paper to get the full info yet refuse to do the same for Pro No paper - interesting.

Troubleatmill

10,210 posts

158 months

Wednesday 30th July 2014
quotequote all
Edinburger said:
Aye, very good. See my last post re. push/pull.
Do you think it is needed?

Salmond/ Sturgeon tell lies to Scottish Parliament. Forced to apologise. Reported all over the news. TV, radio, papers. The works

Salmond says - Scottish Shipbuilding will continue to build UK warships.
UK MOD says- No warships contracts outside of UK. ( and has held back on giving contracts already )
Union foreman wants to talk to Salmond on - Explain how rUK are going to give us the work. Reported all over the news etc etc

Rinse and repeat for everything that Salmond/ Sturgeon/ Swinney say.
Defence, currency, EU - whatever.

SNP say "something that doesn't stand scrutiny"
Someone else. rUK, EU Presidents, EU Vice Presidents, World Leaders, Union Reps, Corporates, Supermarkets etc etc say "SNP are wrong"
News media reports it. Even STV.

Hardly a week goes by without the SNP saying something and it is proven wrong.

You don't need a door to door army to convey that message.

The SNP need a door bothering army because their numbers, stories etc - just don't stand scrutiny,
TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED