Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Salmond-Darling encounter: Watch the full debate here
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Salmond-Darling encounter: Watch the full debate here
Given how difficult it was for those outside Scotland to watch last night here are three YouTube videos of the entire event. Part 2 is perhaps the sharpest.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Did you roast the Salmond?
Congrats - they have a great astrophysics faculty there (my wife always regrets that she chose history of art over nuclear physics - don't ask!).
The International Relations team is great - the others I got to know best were Robert Birgeneau and Richard Lyons who are both great people
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/05/us-scotland-independence-idUSKBN0G422920140805?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&utm_source=twitter
Isn't Salmond supposed to be a master debater?
QTWTAIN, but anyway
He can't say he wasn't warned enough, it just fell on deaf ears.
At times he looked like a fish out of water - opening his mouth gasping for air and saying nothing meaningful - at others like a morris dancer (sorry MD) dancing about a stage with a pricked and slowly deflating bladder.
Surely he cannot recover at the projected second BBC debate - unless he rapidly changes his stance on some policies.
What is left to be covered in the second debate that was not discussed last night?
Possibly as a Tory, but on previous patterns, not the last as a "loose cannon".
What Salmond said about the oil money was a gift that Darling failed to spot. The only way Scotland gets close to being able to balance its books is by including North Sea receipts in current spending; yet Salmond was talking about a fund like the Norwegian one, which would tie the oil money up. What he also failed to point out was the amount of tax and the extremely high prices that Norwegian's pay. Is that Salmond's vision for Scots who, let us remember, do not have earning levels close to those enjoyed in Norway? Salmond is absolutely right that the UK should have had an oil fund, but that flush was busted many years ago. It's too late now - and you cannot spend the same money twice.
That said, it's hard to believe that Salmond can be as bad again as he was last night. He does have time to recover. I still expect a narrow Yes win.
There seems to be a trend developing here - just when it seems as if they are making real progress - as indeed they need to and soon to justify the expectant crossover fans - they get hit by a poll such as this and lose considerable impetus as a result.
Not good for the Blues.
44% - Full Scottish breakfast
56% - Loch Fyne Kippers
A fine pair it is ....
The second debate on the BBC is not finalised yet and I would be surprised if it happened. For no it really can't come better than this and I suspect Salmond would prefer to go back to speak to the converted and use his bully pulpit as FM where the playing field is rather more tipped in his favour.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/11010871/Lowering-expectations-is-key-to-happiness.html
Even in the SNP itself, Salmond is not universally loved and adored but is tolerated because he is the nearest that Scotland has got to Independence in 300 odd years (not counting 1715 and 1745 when even if the Stuart's had won, Scotland would still have been under London).
The SNP are made up of many disparate groups and individuals who have one thought, that it will all be different when they are in control. Salmond knows this, which is why he probably preferred any referendum vote to take place after the next Holyrood election. Unfortunately for him, he got a majority and his hand was forced.
Make no mistake, if there is a Yes vote, Salmond knows that he has the fight of his life to retain political life if not relevance to remain in control. If the vote is No, then there are plenty of knives ready and waiting in the desks behind him in the Holyrood debating chamber.
There are too many people who accidentally became MSP's, acquiesced to keep stum and follow Salmond's line no matter what, and wasted 4 years of their lives. Interesting times!
For LDers of a nervous disposition today's 2010 LD split is more normal (if it is ever normal) at:
Cons:15
LAB: 32
LD:31
UKIP: 10
Green: 10
The Cons have a nasty attack of UKIPitis today and the relevant blue pills have been given.
I don't believe this would happen for a moment. UK business would be up in arms about anything that made doing business more expensive across fUK. This is essentially an empty threat on the part of better together. In the event of a 'yes' there will be a humiliating u-turn from Osborne, Cameron and co.
Personally, I hope for a 'no' vote, but I am left in no doubt that Salmond has won the campaign.
Ali Darling = Scipio Africanus
Or for the fitba fans
Alex Salmond = Scotland
Ali Darling = Peru
I didn't dream that Salmond talked alien attacks did I?
Think how popular that policy would be.
Yes Scotland is asking for a divorce but still expecting steak and [moderated] every week from the ex wife.
It exposes his bluster and lack of strategic planning, and most of all it exposes him as a man unwilling to be honest with the Scottish Electorate concerning the most important vote of their lives.
In that great political cliche: Would you buy a used car off this man?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-13713798
I will be voting No as will all my family and almost everyone at our work for one simple reason. Salmond's plans threaten our income and the money in our pockets. A long time ago it became clear that Salmond did not really have a plan for people like us so we stopped listening.
It may well be that the campaign rather than heating up is about to fizzle out. Why does Darling need another debate? No-one is gone to call him feart now (scared) and nothing to gain from it.
I have constantly been predicting a 60-65% No vote and nothing has changed my view. The SNP are out of game changers and the only thing left is for Cameron or the Scottish Labour party to make a massive mistake. I suggest they check their microphones constantly.
Interesting that the poll after the debate last night had YES up and Don't Knows 2:1 movement to YES. Labour party supporters are not happy being lapdogs for the Tories. Your view coloured by your comfortable , I am all right Jack position may well be mistaken.
Darling's other good line was to refer to the current devolved status in the UK as "the best of both" which is a good positive slogan for BT.
PS - Salmond's comments on the pound are absurd. The pound scots [sic] was suppressed centuries ago (by that stage, having started off in equal value to the pound sterling it was worth approximately one shilling after mismanagement and adulteration). The pound sterling in its early evolutions was the currency of the medieval Angevin empire and its successor state in England. (It grew, of course, out of a pound of gold - but that's another story.) In a sense, the pound is the symbol of English rule over Scotland - not something Scotland has 'built up' or is 'theirs'. And there is absolutely no chance of any English politician agreeing a CU - feelings against Scotland after the way the Yes campaign has described England would preclude it.
1) The SNP lady who asked Darling if he had an address in Scotland and was surprised that Darling didn't vote for the SNP
2) Gaelic girl
The fear & negative campaigning will work, alot of people Salmond is trying to convince have only ever voted Scottish Labour, one of the most negative political outfits out there.
Surely it would have been better to argue all along for true independence?
Mr. Monksfield, there are huge economic and political reasons for England, Wales and Northern Ireland to be against a currency union.
Makes non-Scottish taxpayers liable to protect Scottish financial institutions if they fail due to the Bank of England being lender of last resort.
Helps protect Scottish financial sector, without which many/most of it would drift south and provide the UK (ex-Scotland) with more jobs and tax income.
Has been ruled out categorically by all major parties, and a u-turn would lead to a ballot box massacre.
There's also the problems for the Scots:
FREEEEDDDOOOOOM! And the first thing we'll do is hand over our interest rates to a foreign country.
Currency union would demand fiscal restraints. Or, England (as Salmond likes to refer to us so much) telling the Scots what to tax and how much they're allowed to borrow. That's more dependence than independence.
And of course my politics are quite separate from my medical skills!
Fool (n) anyone who doesn't agree with Malcolm G.
As for "Gaelic Girl" - did I miss something?
http://www.worldtrademarkreview.com/daily/detail.aspx?g=177fb7b4-24c5-441a-a9b8-664f77ce8be8
A woman has been refused a new UK passport because she infringes a trademark in using her Skywalker middle name - which she got via deed poll in 2008 - in her signature.
When is comes to currency union, NO means NO.
But Salmond was not good last night. Wasn't the car-crash that many are saying, he only really lost one part of the debate. But it was the manner in which he lost it. His answer to the plan B question was ok as a one-off answer, but as soon as he said the exact same thing when pressed, Darling smelt weakness and pressed and pressed. Nothing turns people off politics faster than a politician being evasive. Darling suffered the same problem with the "do you agree with Cameron" question, but it wasn't the killer blow it could have been due to the roasting he had just had.
My overriding feeling after the debate was one of a missed opportunity. There was a chance to show a real positive future for Scotland but instead it descended to politics as normal.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/john-curtice-debate-that-neglected-the-undecided-1-3500253
Only a fool would think that he has not considered every possible option on currency.
I suspect however TSE was more taken by her looks - she was a dove amongst crows imho.
What happens next? (SNP implosion?) And what are the implications for any similar BOO referendum? I can see the case for staying in winning that one too...
Instead he just looked evasive and flapping.
What they always fail to mention is that this convenient cosmetic arrangement is under the licence and rigorous control of the Bank of England.
'a TV debate will change nothing.' Well, agreed, this one will change nothing. But since it needed to, that should worry you.
'He obviously does not share your expert opinion on the pound'. Which tells me he hasn't done his research properly. How that makes his position tenable is not clear to me. (Although, let's be fair, few politicians do on such matters. Ronald Reagan's remarkable admission over Iran-Contra, 'A few weeks ago, I informed you I did not trade arms for hostages. My heart and my best intentions still tell me this is true, but the facts and the evidence tell me it is not,' could be an epitaph for political slogans.)
'[He] is sure that the unionists will fold when reality is required.' Supposing he finds that the reality is that Alistair Darling was telling the truth? What then? That seems a legitimate question to me and one that Salmond has consistently refused to answer, much to my disappointment as I used to greatly admire him.
I am not English (the clue's in the username!) but I live in England and not by any means a right-wing, dyed-in-the-wool blue spot either. I assure you, the Scottish nationalists are making themselves very unpopular. No major party would be able to go into next year's election after a yes vote without promising to play it tough with Scotland over divorce negotiations. They would be lucky to come third if they didn't. While I agree business, especially in the north of England, wouldn't be happy, there are times when even businesses have to bow to popular will.
Honest. As a speaker of several minority/ancient languages I'm in favour of support for those languages.
Incidentally, if Yes does win and Osborne did u-turn on currency union, I would not vote Conservative at the next election, even if that meant Balls getting back in.
Mr. StClare, are you sure? It's hard to imagine Mr. Eagles being so shallow.
Fnarr.
I have to say, although I'm no economist I'm sceptical about the latter route. What currency would it be, how established, would it be able to borrow money on international markets, would it be strong enough to stand behind RBS (bearing in mind it's still a wreck - and let's not forget, that happened on Alistair Darling's watch)? Those are the further ramifications and if they are being considered I'm very surprised there's been no leak of them. Also - would it be just the debt? Wouldn't all UK capital assets, e.g. warships and military installations, be forfeited under those circumstances (a share of which Salmond has stated he needs for Scotland)?
It's clearly being considered in Whitehall, because we get semi-regular and not always popular updates on it. But nothing so far from Edinburgh apart from the white paper, which isn't a feasible option and doesn't seem to be mentioned much by now.
Noticed that Salmond was pretty much blaming England for voting the Tories in, as a reason for Scotland to become independnent. If most people in the UK want to maintain the union, there is an obvious solution.
http://crosbywaterloo.wordpress.com/2014/08/05/new-mp-for-bootle-constituency
Peter Dowd, Paul Edwards, Kevin Hickson, Matthew Doyle, Stephen Tudhope, Alex Flynn, Dave Landrum, Jacqueline Robinson.
Final deadline is August 8th.
Peter Dowd stars as early frontrunner given he's leader of Sefton Council
And on that point, he's lost the referendum - or more accurately, he's lost the chance to win the referendum. The result was in the balance. If Darling has won the debate yesterday, what prompt can there be now to shift Noes to Yesses, or to split undecideds decisively in favour of Yes? The Debate was Yes's last best chance. They might still turn something up but it's increasingly difficult to see what or how.
Despite all his faults, the Badger is the best bet for the Labour party at GE 2015. If he could be persuaded to take over from Ed Balls, I could see myself reverting back to Labour from LD. But that supposes he'd agree to work under the jumped-up tea-boy.
So could I ever vote for Labour under EdM? There are some plusses:-
(1) Yes, he's weird. But it may make him give give up PR photo-shoots and the ludicrous heart-to hearts he attempts.
(2) He has no principles whatsoever and will always go for whatever gains electoral advantage. That means he'll look after old gits like me even when it's not in the national interest; he knows we vote in numbers.
(3) In his softy-Walter guise, he will be ordered around by the big boys in the government, like that nasty bully, Darling. So he'll hopefully give up on green nonsense or receive a Chinese burn from the aforementioned Badger.
OK, there are a few assumptions but last night could be a triumph for the Labour party if played correctly.
He should have been able to deflect the currency question better, he only had to quote the 5 options available and stick to option 1.
Public in England may have thought otherwise.
By the way, people are being a bit dismissive about the quality of the debate, but it was still miles better than the 10-second soundbites that we're used to as our political diet on TV. Both speakers were civil and focused largely on serious issues. Wish we had more debates...
Misbah - Ul - Hak currently scoring at the rate of 2.63 per 100 balls. Making Sir Geoffrey look like Botham
Fascinating.
I've not been through the data tables yet but
the sample who participated after the debate, views did not move – 53% said they intended to vote No beforehand, and the same figures emerged afterwards. So Darling won on the night, but voters remain steadfast in the way they plan to vote.
Cannot believe i just missed it making a coffee just seen the next 4 dot balls though.
If Misbah stays there could be on to a winner by Friday
So to business ....
The scale of the defeat for YES is difficult to over-estimate. It considerably outweighs the margin of Darling's ICM win.
YES has since the autumn been ticking off defining events that would swing the campaign their way. Each has come and gone with little change to the overall pattern of a heavy loss for YES.
Last night we saw YES fluff their last best chance. The great debater Salmond was bested by Darling and skewered on the currency issue.
Who'd have thought but it's Salmond who desperately needs a re-match whilst Darling may bask in his new found status as the most passionate pair of eye brows in Scotland.
The tactic of throwing random quotes from random people at Darling was frankly bizarre. Surely the SNP would have had practices before the debate. How on earth did they ever think that that was going to work? The repeated reference to a document which not even 1 in a 1000 Scots have seen which supposedly had "the answers" was equally so. Darling's challenge to actually name plan B should have had a planned and credible response. It didn't and it turned into the key point of the night.
Salmond's best line was the argument that if Scotland is independent we will always get the government we vote for. This is essentially why Cameron was right not to debate him. As a debater Cameron would run rings around Salmond but that question is a killer. He was of course dishonest about it. He claimed that a majority of Scots voted for himself. That is not true even amongst those that voted.
Darling = Robert the Bruce
Eck = Scotland WC 1990
Darling = Costa Rica 1990 (dribbled a long telegraphed toe poke past a previously rated Aberdonian)
Anyway, I'm off. Have a good morning everyone.