Scottish Referendum / Independence - Vol 6
Discussion
Justayellowbadge said:
xjsdriver said:
I have to disagree with you there.....it's 45% and climbing every day....... many are now regretting their no vote. Should anyone in Westminster renege on their "vow", don't imagine it will be taken lightly North of the border....
By Christ, if you had the faintest shred of self awareness you would cringe yourself into an orthopaedic ward.2011 scottish election SNP got 44% of votes and the greens got 4% so 48% of the vote
AstonZagato said:
(a) To choose the date of the referendum.
(b) To choose the question.
(c) To add in 16/17 year olds.
(d) Had plenty of money.
(e) Had a 2 year capaign to prepare for it.
(f) Were up against Alistair Darling.
(g) Have disaffection with the ruling political classes at a multi-generational low
(h) Be at a point where the aging demographics are yet to hit Scottish public finances
(i) Have oil revenues at a level that does not make the long-term decline obvious
(j) Have the Commonwealth Games in Scotland for some rousing patriotism
(k) Have the 700th anniversary of Bannockburn (for those who find it difficult to forget a grudge).
2014 independence got 45% of the votes with the green party and the SNP supporting it(b) To choose the question.
(c) To add in 16/17 year olds.
(d) Had plenty of money.
(e) Had a 2 year capaign to prepare for it.
(f) Were up against Alistair Darling.
(g) Have disaffection with the ruling political classes at a multi-generational low
(h) Be at a point where the aging demographics are yet to hit Scottish public finances
(i) Have oil revenues at a level that does not make the long-term decline obvious
(j) Have the Commonwealth Games in Scotland for some rousing patriotism
(k) Have the 700th anniversary of Bannockburn (for those who find it difficult to forget a grudge).
BigsimonY said:
So im not so sure the Better Together had it warped up without the PM promising more powers
The poll results would suggest otherwise.The margin for the No win may have been smaller had the promises not been made (although the promises appear to have had little effect on the polls) - but I don't think anyone but the nats themselves believed a Yes win was actually on the cards.
Only two out of 19 polls published in the final month show Yes ahead - and in both cases, the Yes result was boosted massively by the weighting applied (changing one from a No win to a Yes win - and the other from a marginal Yes win ~1.4% to a Yes win of over 6.5%).
One thing we can take from this campaign - is that the pollsters weighting calculations need to be looked at. The underlying raw unweighted data seems to have been a far better indicator of the final outcome.
BigsimonY said:
i started this campaign as a no supporter, then wavered to a yes, then to a undecided. It was Mr brown(promises on more powers) and that bel**nd Jim Sillars that convinced me to vote No. So im not so sure the Better Together had it warped up without the PM promising more powers
I started off hoping for a No vote, but seeing the amount of seething hate many Scots seemed to hold against the English, changed my mind and hoped for a Yes. However, now the Scots have voted to stay, I feel it's incumbent on all citizens of the UK to try and make it work. Quite clearly it will be difficult for Westminster to devolve more powers to Scotland without addressing the West Lothian issue. Fairness should be for all parts of the union.The Fluff's and XJS's will always b
h at not getting their own way and I think they get-off on posting provocative comments on this thread. They are behaving like spoilt teenagers and should try acting like adults and start accepting that their view of Scotland has been rejected.fluffnik said:
I think an indisputable popular mandate for independence will be demonstrated at 2016's Holyrood elections
An indisputable popular - and democratic - mandate to remain in the United Kingdom was demonstrated by the Scottish people on 18th September 2014.Why are you now unable to accept the the (hallowed) "considered will of the Scottish people" (you know, the guff you got from a random blogger with an agenda, who couldn't understand the constitutional issues he'd been reading about)?
Borghetto said:
The Fluff's and XJS's will always bh at not getting their own way and I think they get-off on posting provocative comments on this thread. They are behaving like spoilt teenagers and should try acting like adults and start accepting that their view of Scotland has been rejected.
I don't know. XJS comes across as a gloating, stirring troll ("as you were, fella"), but I get the impression Fluff's stance is thought-out, reasoned, and principled. It may be anti-establishment, destabilising, unpopular and (as I'm sure he's aware) irritating as hell hearing the same lines over and over again sans ending, but he's consistent, polite, personally inoffensive and the fact he doesn't resort to swearing or responses of that ilk (to me) shows his viewpoint is more considered than a lot of the independence proponents. h at not getting their own way and I think they get-off on posting provocative comments on this thread. They are behaving like spoilt teenagers and should try acting like adults and start accepting that their view of Scotland has been rejected.But yeah, it's bloody frustrating. And he's still wrong. IMO.
The Nats have big questions to consider if they are ever going to get anywhere:
Do they lie more or less in order to win more votes?
Do they think that swearing that they would have currency union with the UK even when it was clear that they wouldn't - did that win them more or less votes?
Was it a vote winner or loser lying about the future of shipbuilding in Scotland?
Did their inabilities to address the problems the finance sector would have cost them more or less votes?
The list is endless, so the question is:
Might it not be better for the Nats to tell the truth and not try and win on the deliberate telling of lies? Maybe, just maybe, if they have more respect for the people of Scotland than they do they might get somewhere in the future.
Do they lie more or less in order to win more votes?
Do they think that swearing that they would have currency union with the UK even when it was clear that they wouldn't - did that win them more or less votes?
Was it a vote winner or loser lying about the future of shipbuilding in Scotland?
Did their inabilities to address the problems the finance sector would have cost them more or less votes?
The list is endless, so the question is:
Might it not be better for the Nats to tell the truth and not try and win on the deliberate telling of lies? Maybe, just maybe, if they have more respect for the people of Scotland than they do they might get somewhere in the future.
OpulentBob said:
Borghetto said:
The Fluff's and XJS's will always bh at not getting their own way and I think they get-off on posting provocative comments on this thread. They are behaving like spoilt teenagers and should try acting like adults and start accepting that their view of Scotland has been rejected.
I don't know. XJS comes across as a gloating, stirring troll ("as you were, fella"), but I get the impression Fluff's stance is thought-out, reasoned, and principled. It may be anti-establishment, destabilising, unpopular and (as I'm sure he's aware) irritating as hell hearing the same lines over and over again sans ending, but he's consistent, polite, personally inoffensive and the fact he doesn't resort to swearing or responses of that ilk (to me) shows his viewpoint is more considered than a lot of the independence proponents. h at not getting their own way and I think they get-off on posting provocative comments on this thread. They are behaving like spoilt teenagers and should try acting like adults and start accepting that their view of Scotland has been rejected.But yeah, it's bloody frustrating. And he's still wrong. IMO.
....does not mean that he or she cannot be called a complete
for doing so! (IMO of course 
)I am sure Hitler appeared to be very reasonable to those with the same perspective on life and, anecdotally, he could apparently be charming,
He was still a
though.sherbertdip said:
Taking a step back from all the words being spouted here by fluffy and xjsdrivel etc their sphere of influence appeares to be:
Half a dozen people here on PH!
Their proud membership of other groups eg the "i've got an IQ of 45" is basically preaching to the converted.
Don't forget fluffys contributions to the telegraph comments section too Half a dozen people here on PH!
Their proud membership of other groups eg the "i've got an IQ of 45" is basically preaching to the converted.
I think the 2016 election will be very interesting. Back in 2011 the electorate were fed up with the Lib Dems and Labour, and saw the SNP (whether rightly or wrongly) as a credible government even though they did not believe in their core policy of Independence. Their choice was made easier because the SNP explicitily said in the run up that the election was not about Independence. That obviously changed when they got their majority in Holyrood, and the rest is history. I really don't see the electorate making the same error in 2016, as a vote for the SNP in 2016 will undoubtedly mean a vote for independence and years of uncertainty (again!)
Edited by tim0409 on Wednesday 24th September 13:43
HenryJM said:
The problem is that half of Scotland doesn't bother voting for Holyrood so you have a government that is elected by a small fraction of the population setting the rules.
It would seem likely they may have woken up to that particular problem now. It will be quite clear to the 2M No voters that they risk having their country taken away from them if they can't be bothered to get out & vote.The SNP hierarchy do not believe that 'no' voters even exist in Scotland. To Salmond and co they are not 'no' voters but just 'deferred yes' voters. Which is why they want a referendum as often as possible until they get the answer they want.
"The sovereign will of the people of Scotland" only matters when things go their way.
"The sovereign will of the people of Scotland" only matters when things go their way.
Wombat3 said:
HenryJM said:
The problem is that half of Scotland doesn't bother voting for Holyrood so you have a government that is elected by a small fraction of the population setting the rules.
It would seem likely they may have woken up to that particular problem now. It will be quite clear to the 2M No voters that they risk having their country taken away from them if they can't be bothered to get out & vote.Funk said:
Wombat3 said:
HenryJM said:
The problem is that half of Scotland doesn't bother voting for Holyrood so you have a government that is elected by a small fraction of the population setting the rules.
It would seem likely they may have woken up to that particular problem now. It will be quite clear to the 2M No voters that they risk having their country taken away from them if they can't be bothered to get out & vote.ks to go away for good.The vote will essentially become anyone but the SNP for a lot of no voters imo.
bp1 said:
Funk said:
Wombat3 said:
HenryJM said:
The problem is that half of Scotland doesn't bother voting for Holyrood so you have a government that is elected by a small fraction of the population setting the rules.
It would seem likely they may have woken up to that particular problem now. It will be quite clear to the 2M No voters that they risk having their country taken away from them if they can't be bothered to get out & vote.ks to go away for good.The vote will essentially become anyone but the SNP for a lot of no voters imo.
Further south it might indeed be a good thing if some of the Kippers took note of the risible tripe that's being espoused in Manchester this week & considered that one (IMO of course).
Wombat3 said:
I'd be inclined to think this will not be an uncommon course of action. Sometimes the best outcome you can get is preventing the worst option.
Further south it might indeed be a good thing if some of the Kippers took note of the risible tripe that's being espoused in Manchester this week & considered that one (IMO of course).
I don't think millibrain could do as much damage no matter how hard he tried to the UK as Salmond wanted to inflict on scotlandFurther south it might indeed be a good thing if some of the Kippers took note of the risible tripe that's being espoused in Manchester this week & considered that one (IMO of course).
But i will be voting conservative in 2016 purely to try and get rid of the SNP idiot MSP we have locally
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff