Scottish Referendum / Independence - Vol 7
Discussion
Edinburger said:
Troubleatmill said:
Any comment to make on Alex Bell's admission that the SNP case for independence didn't add up?
No, I haven't paid much attention to that yet. Alex Bell - 2013
Alex Bell - 2014
There are those who say Alex Salmond's intention was never about independence, but about absolute power for him and his successors.
Bell has called it spot on, and you 'burger are officially the village idiot.
Edited by r11co on Saturday 21st November 22:16
While the results were 45% and 55%. That was from the votes cast, if you took in the number of people who didn't vote that number fell to 38%.
As i've previously said. I worked the election, i was a polling clerk at an Airdrie branch, this was North Lanarkshire and one of four of the 32 areas to return a yes vote. 51% to 49% so a close run thing.
My table had 816 names, of which i had 76.6% turn out, so lower than the average of 84%.
Interestingly, i worked the general election, again as a polling clerk. I got the same Airdrie branch as the indy vote, with the same 816 names. The turn out for that was 51%.
That's quite a few people who didn't turn up again to vote.
A lot of the people who i saw with yes badges and fliers etc, were not the sort who had a steady 9-5 job. Or who had held a 9-5 job for a while. Or who had felt the blessing of running water and soap for a while either...
Just my experience.
It's rather telling that the head people of the yes campaign, are now pointing out the glaring facts that plenty of us had been calling out for months and years.
The idea was bulls
t. The figures never stacked up, regardless of how much hope and dreams you sprinkled on them.
The public services are cracking, the NHS is in melt down, police is following, education is falling.
Also, on the subject of religion.
My village has both Church and Chapel. When both schools were due to be knocked down and merged on a joint campus building. The Priest spoke in his sermons about rejecting the idea to his congregation. Thankfully, the campus went ahead but it's a painful reminder that bridging the barriers is needed in ALL areas. Attitudes like that don't help anyone and continues to drive wedges in the West of Scotland.
As i've previously said. I worked the election, i was a polling clerk at an Airdrie branch, this was North Lanarkshire and one of four of the 32 areas to return a yes vote. 51% to 49% so a close run thing.
My table had 816 names, of which i had 76.6% turn out, so lower than the average of 84%.
Interestingly, i worked the general election, again as a polling clerk. I got the same Airdrie branch as the indy vote, with the same 816 names. The turn out for that was 51%.
That's quite a few people who didn't turn up again to vote.
A lot of the people who i saw with yes badges and fliers etc, were not the sort who had a steady 9-5 job. Or who had held a 9-5 job for a while. Or who had felt the blessing of running water and soap for a while either...
Just my experience.
It's rather telling that the head people of the yes campaign, are now pointing out the glaring facts that plenty of us had been calling out for months and years.
The idea was bulls
t. The figures never stacked up, regardless of how much hope and dreams you sprinkled on them.The public services are cracking, the NHS is in melt down, police is following, education is falling.
Also, on the subject of religion.
My village has both Church and Chapel. When both schools were due to be knocked down and merged on a joint campus building. The Priest spoke in his sermons about rejecting the idea to his congregation. Thankfully, the campus went ahead but it's a painful reminder that bridging the barriers is needed in ALL areas. Attitudes like that don't help anyone and continues to drive wedges in the West of Scotland.
A.J.M said:
While the results were 45% and 55%. That was from the votes cast, if you took in the number of people who didn't vote that number fell to 38%.
As i've previously said. I worked the election, i was a polling clerk at an Airdrie branch, this was North Lanarkshire and one of four of the 32 areas to return a yes vote. 51% to 49% so a close run thing.
My table had 816 names, of which i had 76.6% turn out, so lower than the average of 84%.
Interestingly, i worked the general election, again as a polling clerk. I got the same Airdrie branch as the indy vote, with the same 816 names. The turn out for that was 51%.
That's quite a few people who didn't turn up again to vote.
A lot of the people who i saw with yes badges and fliers etc, were not the sort who had a steady 9-5 job. Or who had held a 9-5 job for a while. Or who had felt the blessing of running water and soap for a while either...
Just my experience.
It's rather telling that the head people of the yes campaign, are now pointing out the glaring facts that plenty of us had been calling out for months and years.
The idea was bullst. The figures never stacked up, regardless of how much hope and dreams you sprinkled on them.
The public services are cracking, the NHS is in melt down, police is following, education is falling.
Also, on the subject of religion.
My village has both Church and Chapel. When both schools were due to be knocked down and merged on a joint campus building. The Priest spoke in his sermons about rejecting the idea to his congregation. Thankfully, the campus went ahead but it's a painful reminder that bridging the barriers is needed in ALL areas. Attitudes like that don't help anyone and continues to drive wedges in the West of Scotland.
Interesting, the priest tried to stop the improvement of a new joint school presumably in the fear that it would dilute his infuence on the kids (and hence his churches future revenue stream). As i've previously said. I worked the election, i was a polling clerk at an Airdrie branch, this was North Lanarkshire and one of four of the 32 areas to return a yes vote. 51% to 49% so a close run thing.
My table had 816 names, of which i had 76.6% turn out, so lower than the average of 84%.
Interestingly, i worked the general election, again as a polling clerk. I got the same Airdrie branch as the indy vote, with the same 816 names. The turn out for that was 51%.
That's quite a few people who didn't turn up again to vote.
A lot of the people who i saw with yes badges and fliers etc, were not the sort who had a steady 9-5 job. Or who had held a 9-5 job for a while. Or who had felt the blessing of running water and soap for a while either...
Just my experience.
It's rather telling that the head people of the yes campaign, are now pointing out the glaring facts that plenty of us had been calling out for months and years.
The idea was bulls
t. The figures never stacked up, regardless of how much hope and dreams you sprinkled on them.The public services are cracking, the NHS is in melt down, police is following, education is falling.
Also, on the subject of religion.
My village has both Church and Chapel. When both schools were due to be knocked down and merged on a joint campus building. The Priest spoke in his sermons about rejecting the idea to his congregation. Thankfully, the campus went ahead but it's a painful reminder that bridging the barriers is needed in ALL areas. Attitudes like that don't help anyone and continues to drive wedges in the West of Scotland.
I wonder how popular a policy to bin all faith schools actually would be. There must be a fair majority that would prefer they are binned across the board. I guess the issue is parties chasing minorities in key constituencies, and the wedge of conservative "tea with the vicar" voters. That latter group must be an aging demographic.
It seems important the UK really embraces secularism as an important tenant, especially as the CofE disappears with an aging support base.
DocJock said:
No: 55.30Yes: 44.70
This wasn't a first past the post election, it required a majority outcome, the Yes campaign received just less than 45% of the vote, no more, no less, and using any other figures is just disingenuous tbh.
r11co said:
Edinburger said:
Troubleatmill said:
Any comment to make on Alex Bell's admission that the SNP case for independence didn't add up?
No, I haven't paid much attention to that yet. Alex Bell - 2013
Alex Bell - 2014
There are those who say Alex Salmond's intention was never about independence, but about absolute power for him and his successors.
Bell has called it spot on, and you 'burger are officially the village idiot.
Edited by r11co on Saturday 21st November 22:16
Like all of us, Alex Bell is entitled to his views and like all of us his views are entitles to change over time.
I sped read the article and most if not all of the points made were discussed in earlier volumes, perhaps before you joined us.
And unlike many here (it would appear), I have moved on with life after the referendum. I objectively considered and voted accordingly once my decision had been made. There will not be another referendum for a few decades in my view. So I'm not going to get excited when someone changes their mind about something.
Axionknight said:
No: 55.30
Yes: 44.70
This wasn't a first past the post election, it required a majority outcome, the Yes campaign received just less than 45% of the vote, no more, no less, and using any other figures is just disingenuous tbh.
38% of the electorate voted yes, that is the only right and true figure.Yes: 44.70
This wasn't a first past the post election, it required a majority outcome, the Yes campaign received just less than 45% of the vote, no more, no less, and using any other figures is just disingenuous tbh.
Edited by NoNeed on Sunday 22 November 15:49
Edinburger said:
Just as a matter of interest r11co, why would you expect me to spend time reading this?
Like all of us, Alex Bell is entitled to his views and like all of us his views are entitles to change over time.
I sped read the article and most if not all of the points made were discussed in earlier volumes, perhaps before you joined us.
And unlike many here (it would appear), I have moved on with life after the referendum. I objectively considered and voted accordingly once my decision had been made. There will not be another referendum for a few decades in my view. So I'm not going to get excited when someone changes their mind about something.
It should be of interest as it strikes at the heart of the credibility of the SNP in everything they do.Like all of us, Alex Bell is entitled to his views and like all of us his views are entitles to change over time.
I sped read the article and most if not all of the points made were discussed in earlier volumes, perhaps before you joined us.
And unlike many here (it would appear), I have moved on with life after the referendum. I objectively considered and voted accordingly once my decision had been made. There will not be another referendum for a few decades in my view. So I'm not going to get excited when someone changes their mind about something.
Your vigorous defence of your beloved SNP on here suggests you have not moved on at all - or perhaps are in denial as to how the SNP still shape everything they do on an independence/grievance basis.
Either way, surely any avid SNP supporter would draw breath at one of ALex's closest aids saying it was all nonsense? Unless they were so closely involved they know it for the scam that it is, and want to ignore it, and call squirrel.
Hmmmm.
Edinburger said:
Just as a matter of interest r11co, why would you expect me to spend time reading this?
For the same reason Alex Bell expected you to read the White Paper.If you choose to comment while uninformed then your comment is worthless 'burger.
The SNP are now just power players creating an authoritarian government.
NoNeed said:
Axionknight said:
No: 55.30
Yes: 44.70
This wasn't a first past the post election, it required a majority outcome, the Yes campaign received just less than 45% of the vote, no more, no less, and using any other figures is just disingenuous tbh.
38% of the electorate voted yes, that is the only right and true figure.Yes: 44.70
This wasn't a first past the post election, it required a majority outcome, the Yes campaign received just less than 45% of the vote, no more, no less, and using any other figures is just disingenuous tbh.
Edited by NoNeed on Sunday 22 November 15:49
Only sad sacks who think they have some sort of point to prove. I guess in that case the No side recieved less that half the vote share, can't really call that a majority in such an election can we? Shall we go through it all again?
Edited by Axionknight on Sunday 22 November 20:20
Axionknight said:
NoNeed said:
Axionknight said:
No: 55.30
Yes: 44.70
This wasn't a first past the post election, it required a majority outcome, the Yes campaign received just less than 45% of the vote, no more, no less, and using any other figures is just disingenuous tbh.
38% of the electorate voted yes, that is the only right and true figure.Yes: 44.70
This wasn't a first past the post election, it required a majority outcome, the Yes campaign received just less than 45% of the vote, no more, no less, and using any other figures is just disingenuous tbh.
Edited by NoNeed on Sunday 22 November 15:49
Only sad sacks who think they have some sort of point to prove.
Axionknight said:
But how many people look at the results of an election and count those that didn't vote either way?
Only sad sacks who think they have some sort of point to prove. I guess in that case the No side received less that half the vote share, can't really call that a majority in such an election can we? Shall we go through it all again?
Actually pre-neverendum it was all we had from yes voters and the SNP to show how the Westminster parliament was not representative, I am only using the same measures they used.Only sad sacks who think they have some sort of point to prove. I guess in that case the No side received less that half the vote share, can't really call that a majority in such an election can we? Shall we go through it all again?
Edited by Axionknight on Sunday 22 November 20:20
Go back and read the first few volumes and you will see that it is how many that didn't vote was the SNP's supporters favorite measure. and as stated above an abstention is a vote for the status quo.
I actually got sick of how many of the Scottish electorate voted in which particular Westminster government as only 20% of the Scottish electorate voting tory was all that mattered.
so why can't we use the same measure?
Edited by NoNeed on Sunday 22 November 23:31
NoNeed said:
Axionknight said:
But how many people look at the results of an election and count those that didn't vote either way?
Only sad sacks who think they have some sort of point to prove. I guess in that case the No side received less that half the vote share, can't really call that a majority in such an election can we? Shall we go through it all again?
Actually pre-neverendum it was all we had from yes voters and the SNP to show how the Westminster parliament was not representative, I am only using the same measures they used.Only sad sacks who think they have some sort of point to prove. I guess in that case the No side received less that half the vote share, can't really call that a majority in such an election can we? Shall we go through it all again?
Edited by Axionknight on Sunday 22 November 20:20
Go back and read the first few volumes and you will see that it is how many that didn't vote was the SNP's supporters favorite measure. and as stated above an abstention is a vote for the status quo.
I actually got sick of how many of the Scottish electorate voted in which particular Westminster government as only 20% of the Scottish electorate voting tory was all that mattered.
so why can't we use the same measure?
Edited by NoNeed on Sunday 22 November 23:31
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff