Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » “An independence referendum is like a normal election on st

SystemSystem Posts: 11,688
edited August 2014 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » “An independence referendum is like a normal election on steroids”

I’ve just got back from three days in Edinburgh where I was totally immersed in the momentous decision that the Scottish people are due to make in the referendum on September 18th. I was a panellist at the Festival of Politics which was held in the superb Scottish Parliament Building just across the road from Holyrood Palace – the Queen’s official residence.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • Options
    Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    First again!
  • Options
    DanBarkrDanBarkr Posts: 17
    Is there any streams/videos of this event you spoke at? Thanks.
  • Options
    JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    I have just finished watching the series of "I, Claudius". I remember watching it (or most of it, or some of it) when it was repeated in the early 1980s (I would have been too young for it when it was first shown in 1976). Interestingly, the only specific bit I remember from seeing it before was the final death scene at the end of the final episode, when Claudius was speaking with the Sybil.

    I noticed that
    Nero (age 17) was played by Christopher Biggins (age 27)
    Britannicus (13) was played by Graham Seed (26)
    Caligula (17 to 29) was played by John Hurt (36)
    and at one stage Augustus (age 75) and Claudius (age 23) were in the same scene, played by Brian Blessed and Derek Jacobi (aged 38 and 37 respectively).
    I suspect that these anachronistic ages were done deliberately for stylistic, artistic reasons, as if it were a low-budget amateur stage play in a theatre, rather than from the lack of available actors. Similarly the sole use of studio scenes with no long-range wide-angle shots or location filming.

    Brian Blessed kept his eyes open, with camera on his face in close-up, and with no edit cuts, for 1 minute 48 seconds after Augustus had died.

    Third!
  • Options
    fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,279
    FPT this morning. MarqueeMark "Is there any suggestion that Nicola Sturgeon would have played the campaign differently but has been over-ridden by Salmond? Unless she has a different take on say currency Plan B, then she should take as much responsibility for a NO vote as Salmond."

    That is both a very astute question and observation about Nicola Sturgeon from Mark. And the answer to this is No she wouldn't have run the campaign any differently than Alex Salmond has done, and Yes she should take as much responsibility for a No vote as Salmond. Nicola Sturgeon has been joined at the hip to Alex Salmond in recent years as Deputy Leader of the SNP, and she has also been in charge of the SNP's referendum campaign since Salmond appointed her to this Cabinet role in 2012. The fact that the SNP don't have coherent or credible Plan B is surely down to her failures in the effective role of SNP Government manager? It was also notable that she left her role as Minister in charge of the Scottish NHS just as some of the shine was coming off that department as well.

    And while Sturgeon never had Salmond's media presence, she also never really had to deal with a less than impressed or critical audience until quite recently up here in Scotland. Having seen the shine come of the Sturgeon band wagon with the Independence Referendum now having central focus in Scottish politics over the last couple of years has been quite interesting. She really does come across as yet another 'cold' and quite clinical SNP politician, much like Salmond in many ways. Add this to the fact that Alex Salmond and the Yes Campaign have a serious problem convincing Scottish women voters, and you have to ask why she has not been able to recognise or neutralise this problem as such a central SNP Cabinet figure during the Independence campaign.

    Our polling cards arrived yesterday. Four years ago none of my three lads were old enough to vote at the last GE, but now they are all eligible to vote on 18th September in the Independence Referendum.

  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,760
    JohnLoony said:

    I have just finished watching the series of "I, Claudius". I

    It was a huge breakthrough in its day - until then representations of classical periods had been played as if they were Shakespeare - very serious (iirc "bonking" was used more than once) tho as Livia, Sian Phillips stole the show (albeit the character was a travesty of the historical one).

  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,760
    fitalass said:

    Our polling cards arrived yesterday. Four years ago none of my three lads were old enough to vote at the last GE, but now they are all eligible to vote on 18th September in the Independence Referendum.

    Polling Cards or Postal ballots? If there are a lot of postal ballots the YESNP's much vaunted GOTV operation may be blunted.

    Chortle.....as someone used to say.....

  • Options
    JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790

    JohnLoony said:

    I have just finished watching the series of "I, Claudius". I

    It was a huge breakthrough in its day - until then representations of classical periods had been played as if they were Shakespeare - very serious (iirc "bonking" was used more than once) tho as Livia, Sian Phillips stole the show (albeit the character was a travesty of the historical one).
    I guess that there is inevitably a lot of dramatic licence in translating historical reality into Graves's book and then into Jack Pulman's script, purely because of the lack of detailed reliable contemporary historical sources about what the people were really like, or what exactly happened in the details of each death / murder. How can we filter the historical record and deduce what is fact, and what is propaganda or has a slant or a hidden agenda? Just by reading a few pages about it on Wikipedia, it seem that for some events there are only perhaps one or two sources which can be extrapolated into a drama.

    In the DVD set there is a 1965 documentary about the 1937 film version (which was abandoned after one month of filming), starring Charles Laughton as Claudius and Flora Robson as Livia. It says that Laughton struggled for ages to "find" the right character to play, and eventually got his inspiration from Edward VIII's abdication speech.

  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,972
    Welcome back, Mike!
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,760
    JohnLoony said:

    JohnLoony said:

    I have just finished watching the series of "I, Claudius". I

    It was a huge breakthrough in its day - until then representations of classical periods had been played as if they were Shakespeare - very serious (iirc "bonking" was used more than once) tho as Livia, Sian Phillips stole the show (albeit the character was a travesty of the historical one).
    How can we filter the historical record and deduce what is fact, and what is propaganda or has a slant or a hidden agenda?
    In his introduction Graves says his Livia is a complete invention and the real Livia was by all accounts a respectable, efficient and hard working Roman matron, who with her husband ran the empire well. As Gore Vidal once observed passing the site of their office - when one sees how much was done from such a small space, then sees the bureaucracy of the modern state "one grows contemplative". She was also no fool, putting the longevity and happiness of their marriage down to her turning a blind eye to her husband's frequent infidelities and in particular to his latest fancy.....
  • Options
    JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790


    In his introduction Graves says his Livia is a complete invention and the real Livia was by all accounts a respectable, efficient and hard working Roman matron, who with her husband ran the empire well.

    Oh! Ha ha ha. Anyway. Dramatic licence, and all that stuff.

  • Options
    fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,279
    Polling cards. But its still going to be No. :) I was even told this weekend that I had no right to call myself a patriotic Scot as a No voter. And while the big Yes boards have remained untouched around my patch, the No boards that went up were all vandalised, who ever did this really didn't help their own cause as a result.

    fitalass said:

    Our polling cards arrived yesterday. Four years ago none of my three lads were old enough to vote at the last GE, but now they are all eligible to vote on 18th September in the Independence Referendum.

    Polling Cards or Postal ballots? If there are a lot of postal ballots the YESNP's much vaunted GOTV operation may be blunted.

    Chortle.....as someone used to say.....

  • Options
    asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 1,276
    Not a great deal of liquidity in the market but you can presently get around 4s for the Labour Party in next months NZ election.

    The ruling National party was thought to be cruising towards re election but over the weekend it has been engulfed in a hacking / dirty tricks scandel that is spinning badly out of control by the hour.

    Polls have started to turn, as ever do your own research but I think there is massive value at current prices.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,972

    Not a great deal of liquidity in the market but you can presently get around 4s for the Labour Party in next months NZ election.

    The ruling National party was thought to be cruising towards re election but over the weekend it has been engulfed in a hacking / dirty tricks scandel that is spinning badly out of control by the hour.

    Polls have started to turn, as ever do your own research but I think there is massive value at current prices.

    Weren't the National party at above 50% in the polls recently? Could it really change so much that Labour would win?
  • Options
    asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 1,276
    RobD said:

    Not a great deal of liquidity in the market but you can presently get around 4s for the Labour Party in next months NZ election.

    The ruling National party was thought to be cruising towards re election but over the weekend it has been engulfed in a hacking / dirty tricks scandel that is spinning badly out of control by the hour.

    Polls have started to turn, as ever do your own research but I think there is massive value at current prices.

    Weren't the National party at above 50% in the polls recently? Could it really change so much that Labour would win?
    In an MMP situation they need 47+% of the vote to win, they are almost without supporting parties.

    Poll last week only had them a couple of points ahead of the left win bloc, prior to hacking scandal. The media coverage has turned badly against them in past 24 hours
  • Options
    surbiton said:

    FPT for our separatist sceptics::

    Scottish Women:

    Alex Salmond's presence as leader of Yes makes me more/less likely to vote for independence:
    More : 24
    Less: 51

    Ho ho. Who is that pale blue wiggly line way, way down at the bottom of this chart?

    http://www.ipsos-mori.com/contactus/offices/scotland/indyref2014/polling/leaderimage.aspx

    PODWAS
    Why has Sturgeon taken such a fall lately ? I thought she was the darling [ note: small letters ] of Scotland
    Err... if you take a close look at the chart you will see that every single leader took a dip between Dec 13 and Feb 14, so unclear why you single out Sturgeon.

    http://www.ipsos-mori.com/contactus/offices/scotland/indyref2014/polling/leaderimage.aspx
  • Options
    Best prices - Scottish independence referendum 18 September

    Yes 11/2 (William Hill)
    No 1/6 (Betdaq)

    Matched total to date at Betfair: £1.63 million
  • Options
    A really interesting article showing that the actual YES vote in referendums nearly always underperforms the latest polling:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11040226/Independence-referendum-Heres-why-Scotland-will-vote-No-probably.html
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,972
    Patrick said:

    A really interesting article showing that the actual YES vote in referendums nearly always underperforms the latest polling:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11040226/Independence-referendum-Heres-why-Scotland-will-vote-No-probably.html

    One of those polls was 50% off!!!
  • Options
    Yes has the Big Mo. Time to put my money where my mouth is. Momentous times.
  • Options
    RobD said:

    Patrick said:

    A really interesting article showing that the actual YES vote in referendums nearly always underperforms the latest polling:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11040226/Independence-referendum-Heres-why-Scotland-will-vote-No-probably.html

    One of those polls was 50% off!!!
    ...which on current 57/43 would move to an actual result of NO 107%/YES -7%! I don't think the actual result will be quite that extreme however. ;-)
  • Options
    Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    edited August 2014
    Patrick said:

    A really interesting article showing that the actual YES vote in referendums nearly always underperforms the latest polling:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11040226/Independence-referendum-Heres-why-Scotland-will-vote-No-probably.html

    Liberal Democrat Voters for Independence:

    - "... the 1997 referendum in Scotland that lead to the creation of the Scottish Parliament.
    It resulted in a massive YES vote (74.3%) to be exact. What is not often said is that polling throughout the campaign never put the YES vote that high. In fact in the weeks before the vote polls were showing support to be around the 55% mark.

    What happened was a triumph of hope over fear. When people were in the voting booth, away from the press and TV media they lost their inhibitions and voted for a positive future.

    The same will happen again."
  • Options
    Innocent_AbroadInnocent_Abroad Posts: 3,294
    edited August 2014
    Let's suppose that Scotland votes "yes".

    Let's then suppose a Party is set up in the English border counties on the platform of joining Scotland. (The border was pretty fluid a thousand years ago, after all.) Let's further suppose that this Party wins, say, the Cumbria County Council election, and, at the GE after next, all the Parliamentary seats in that county.

    Should it then be allowed to join Scotland? What if there are two referenda on the matter, in which Cumbria votes "yes" and Scotland votes "no"?

    ***

    Or, alternatively, what if Scotland votes "no" by a smaller margin than the number of Sassenachs resident in Scotland?
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,937
    edited August 2014

    Patrick said:

    A really interesting article showing that the actual YES vote in referendums nearly always underperforms the latest polling:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11040226/Independence-referendum-Heres-why-Scotland-will-vote-No-probably.html

    Liberal Democrat Voters for Independence:

    - "... the 1997 referendum in Scotland that lead to the creation of the Scottish Parliament.
    It resulted in a massive YES vote (74.3%) to be exact. What is not often said is that polling throughout the campaign never put the YES vote that high. In fact in the weeks before the vote polls were showing support to be around the 55% mark.

    What happened was a triumph of hope over fear. When people were in the voting booth, away from the press and TV media they lost their inhibitions and voted for a positive future.

    The same will happen again."


    Perhaps more a case of those opposed knowing they were going to lose so not bothering?

    That said, I have been leaning Yes for a while on the basis of the total conviction of independence supporters that they are going to win. Whatever others on here say I just don't believe that such a level of self-delusion is possible. The polls are measuring something unique in the history of the UK, so I don't think it's that unreasonable to postulate they may have been failing to do it accurately. And now they are clearly beginning to move to Yes, just as the Yes side predicted. I will be making my first political bet today for a while and taking advantage of odds that are bound to tighten significantly over the coming weeks.

    Although I'd like No to win, there's a growing part of me that is also fascinated to see how it all plays out with a vote to end the UK. It really will be a momentous time, rivalled only in the last 100 years by the end of WW2.

  • Options

    Let's suppose that Scotland votes "yes".

    Let's then suppose a Party is set up in the English border counties on the platform of joining Scotland. (The border was pretty fluid a thousand years ago, after all.) Let's further suppose that this Party wins, say, the Cumbria County Council election, and, at the GE after next, all the Parliamentary seats in that county.

    Should it then be allowed to join Scotland? What if there are two referenda on the matter, in which Cumbria votes "yes" and Scotland votes "no"?

    ***

    Or, alternatively, what if Scotland votes "no" by a smaller margin than the number of Sassenachs resident in Scotland?

    Cumbria is part of England. Therefore, it's up to the English what happens to it. The same also applies to the Scots and the Shetlands and Orkneys (or Borders, for that matter).

  • Options

    Patrick said:

    A really interesting article showing that the actual YES vote in referendums nearly always underperforms the latest polling:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11040226/Independence-referendum-Heres-why-Scotland-will-vote-No-probably.html

    Liberal Democrat Voters for Independence:

    - "... the 1997 referendum in Scotland that lead to the creation of the Scottish Parliament.
    It resulted in a massive YES vote (74.3%) to be exact. What is not often said is that polling throughout the campaign never put the YES vote that high. In fact in the weeks before the vote polls were showing support to be around the 55% mark.

    What happened was a triumph of hope over fear. When people were in the voting booth, away from the press and TV media they lost their inhibitions and voted for a positive future.

    The same will happen again."


    Perhaps more a case of those opposed knowing they were going to lose so not bothering?

    That said, I have been leaning Yes for a while on the basis of the total conviction of independence supporters that they are going to win. Whatever others on here say I just don't believe that such a level of self-delusion is possible. The polls are measuring something unique in the history of the UK, so I don't think it's that unreasonable to postulate they may have been failing to do it accurately. And now they are clearly beginning to move to Yes, just as the Yes side predicted. I will be making my first political bet today for a while and taking advantage of odds that are bound to tighten significantly over the coming weeks.

    Although I'd like No to win, there's a growing part of me that is also fascinated to see how it all plays out with a vote to end the UK. It really will be a momentous time, rivalled only in the last 100 years by the end of WW2.

    Out of interest: are you a supporter of Trident renewal?

    The Scottish vote is going to have big effects on English public policy, not least regarding nuclear weapons. I have seen many Yes-supportive comments from English people largely on the basis that a Yes result makes it far less likely that England will continue to throw vast sums of taxpayers' cash down the drain labelled "Trident".
  • Options
    Innocent_AbroadInnocent_Abroad Posts: 3,294
    edited August 2014

    Let's suppose that Scotland votes "yes".

    Let's then suppose a Party is set up in the English border counties on the platform of joining Scotland. (The border was pretty fluid a thousand years ago, after all.) Let's further suppose that this Party wins, say, the Cumbria County Council election, and, at the GE after next, all the Parliamentary seats in that county.

    Should it then be allowed to join Scotland? What if there are two referenda on the matter, in which Cumbria votes "yes" and Scotland votes "no"?

    ***

    Or, alternatively, what if Scotland votes "no" by a smaller margin than the number of Sassenachs resident in Scotland?

    Cumbria is part of England. Therefore, it's up to the English what happens to it. The same also applies to the Scots and the Shetlands and Orkneys (or Borders, for that matter).

    And by that logic Scotland is part of the UK and it is up to the UK what happens to it. I suppose you might say that a sovereign Parliament can do what it likes, but that doesn't take us much further...

    Hopefully we won't have our very own West Bank...

  • Options
    @Stuart_Dickson - the UK would be much better off accepting its place in the world as an advanced, but medium-sized, country with a high soft power potential. Trident looks a big waste of wedge to me and with Scotland gone why not use the opportunity for a fundamental reassessment? It won't happen though.
  • Options

    Let's suppose that Scotland votes "yes".

    Let's then suppose a Party is set up in the English border counties on the platform of joining Scotland. (The border was pretty fluid a thousand years ago, after all.) Let's further suppose that this Party wins, say, the Cumbria County Council election, and, at the GE after next, all the Parliamentary seats in that county.

    Should it then be allowed to join Scotland? What if there are two referenda on the matter, in which Cumbria votes "yes" and Scotland votes "no"?

    ***

    Or, alternatively, what if Scotland votes "no" by a smaller margin than the number of Sassenachs resident in Scotland?

    Cumbria is part of England. Therefore, it's up to the English what happens to it. The same also applies to the Scots and the Shetlands and Orkneys (or Borders, for that matter).

    And by that logic Scotland is part of the UK and it is up to the UK what happens to it. I suppose you might say that a sovereign Parliament can do what it likes, but that doesn't take us much further...

    Hopefully we won't have our very own West Bank...

    It is. For the referendum to be legal the UK government had to authorise it. I guess if the UK Parliament authorised Cumbrian accession to an independent Scotland that would happen to. The point is that in the first instance it's not up to the Cumbrians.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,010
    Patrick said:

    A really interesting article showing that the actual YES vote in referendums nearly always underperforms the latest polling:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11040226/Independence-referendum-Heres-why-Scotland-will-vote-No-probably.html

    Get ready for those pies Patrick
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,988
    Good morning, everyone.

    I, Claudius is excellent. I agree entirely that Livia stole the show, though there were fantastic performances throughout.

    Bloody weird seeing Patrick Stewart with hair and Brian Blessed without a beard.

    Welcome back, Mr. Smithson.
  • Options
    malcolmg said:

    Patrick said:

    A really interesting article showing that the actual YES vote in referendums nearly always underperforms the latest polling:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11040226/Independence-referendum-Heres-why-Scotland-will-vote-No-probably.html

    Get ready for those pies Patrick
    I thought I was obliged to eat a plate of haggis, neeps and tatties with a pint of Bellhaven if it's YES. The humble pie with a pint of scrumpy is for you when it is a resounding NO. :-)
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,215
    I've been saying for months that I would not be surprised to see Scotland vote Yes.

    Interesting times ahead if that happens.
  • Options

    Let's suppose that Scotland votes "yes".

    Let's then suppose a Party is set up in the English border counties on the platform of joining Scotland. (The border was pretty fluid a thousand years ago, after all.) Let's further suppose that this Party wins, say, the Cumbria County Council election, and, at the GE after next, all the Parliamentary seats in that county.

    Should it then be allowed to join Scotland? What if there are two referenda on the matter, in which Cumbria votes "yes" and Scotland votes "no"?

    ***

    Or, alternatively, what if Scotland votes "no" by a smaller margin than the number of Sassenachs resident in Scotland?

    Cumbria is part of England. Therefore, it's up to the English what happens to it. The same also applies to the Scots and the Shetlands and Orkneys (or Borders, for that matter).

    And by that logic Scotland is part of the UK and it is up to the UK what happens to it. I suppose you might say that a sovereign Parliament can do what it likes, but that doesn't take us much further...

    Hopefully we won't have our very own West Bank...

    It is. For the referendum to be legal the UK government had to authorise it. I guess if the UK Parliament authorised Cumbrian accession to an independent Scotland that would happen to. The point is that in the first instance it's not up to the Cumbrians.
    The Cumbrians could certainly vote for a secessionist Party, just as the Scots (or some of them) have been doing for decades...

  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Whatever others on here say I just don't believe that such a level of self-delusion is possible.

    You believed Romney was going to win, right? Based on the utter conviction of the Republican poll-"adjusters"?
  • Options
    Charles said:

    Whatever others on here say I just don't believe that such a level of self-delusion is possible.

    You believed Romney was going to win, right? Based on the utter conviction of the Republican poll-"adjusters"?
    Remember this;

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=C5Pa9YvAqLs
  • Options

    Let's suppose that Scotland votes "yes".

    Let's then suppose a Party is set up in the English border counties on the platform of joining Scotland. (The border was pretty fluid a thousand years ago, after all.) Let's further suppose that this Party wins, say, the Cumbria County Council election, and, at the GE after next, all the Parliamentary seats in that county.

    Should it then be allowed to join Scotland? What if there are two referenda on the matter, in which Cumbria votes "yes" and Scotland votes "no"?

    ***

    Or, alternatively, what if Scotland votes "no" by a smaller margin than the number of Sassenachs resident in Scotland?

    Cumbria is part of England. Therefore, it's up to the English what happens to it. The same also applies to the Scots and the Shetlands and Orkneys (or Borders, for that matter).

    And by that logic Scotland is part of the UK and it is up to the UK what happens to it. I suppose you might say that a sovereign Parliament can do what it likes, but that doesn't take us much further...

    Hopefully we won't have our very own West Bank...

    Not true. Scotland is a partner country in the Union. Cumbria is an integral part of England. As is, more controversially, Cornwall.

    The Scottish people are sovereign. The people of Cumbria and Cornwall are not: they are subject to the English parliament.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,311
    Ok I will admit to being seriously worried by this. Still a month to go and the mood in Scotland is clearly febrile.

    I never understood JackW's confidence of 60:40. I think he ended up 60.5:39.5. He may still be proved right but this always seemed closer to me.

    It is dangerous to rely on anecdotes but my perception from various conversations and public events recently is that Yes has run the most appalling and incompetent campaign imaginable. And, for many, that does not matter at all. They readily recognise that there will be problems, that Salmond and Sturgeon do not have any credible answers to a whole host of questions but they feel Scottish and want Scotland to be an independent country.

    I feel the opposite way. It would not matter a damn to me if I was going to be a few thousand better off in an independent Scotland. I would still vote no in a heart beat. The UK is my country and I am desperate for it to remain so.

    The campaign has throughout been bogged down in trivia and incompetence but Scots are now coming to terms with that question. Are they Scots or British? It is a biggie and I am really not sure which way they will jump.

    For me this is going to be the key to the next debate. Attacking the incompetence that is Salmond is almost pointless. Darling must sell the UK, our shared values, our role in the world, the opportunities that we have together. My advice to him would be to almost ignore Salmond and speak to the camera.
  • Options
    Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    edited August 2014

    @Stuart_Dickson - the UK would be much better off accepting its place in the world as an advanced, but medium-sized, country with a high soft power potential. Trident looks a big waste of wedge to me and with Scotland gone why not use the opportunity for a fundamental reassessment? It won't happen though.

    The residents of Plymouth will be absolutely delighted when the bulldozers move in to relocate the 200 nuclear warheads currently stored in the concrete bunkers at Coulport. Not.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,988
    Mr. L, the question is not Scottish or British. It's Scottish within the United Kingdom, and Scottish without.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @journodave: Majority of Scots think Alex Salmond should resign if there's a big No vote, @TimesRedBox reports via YouGov #indyref http://t.co/XpooN60kl8
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,125
    Stuart, I have long been for not renewing Trident, but beefing up our Special Forces. We are currently seeing the futility of nuclear weapons in the mountains of northern Iraq. What better serves to protect the Yazidis - our having 200 nuclear warheads - or 200 SAS ready to deploy?
  • Options
    DavidL said:

    Ok I will admit to being seriously worried by this. Still a month to go and the mood in Scotland is clearly febrile.

    I never understood JackW's confidence of 60:40. I think he ended up 60.5:39.5. He may still be proved right but this always seemed closer to me.

    It is dangerous to rely on anecdotes but my perception from various conversations and public events recently is that Yes has run the most appalling and incompetent campaign imaginable. And, for many, that does not matter at all. They readily recognise that there will be problems, that Salmond and Sturgeon do not have any credible answers to a whole host of questions but they feel Scottish and want Scotland to be an independent country.

    I feel the opposite way. It would not matter a damn to me if I was going to be a few thousand better off in an independent Scotland. I would still vote no in a heart beat. The UK is my country and I am desperate for it to remain so.

    The campaign has throughout been bogged down in trivia and incompetence but Scots are now coming to terms with that question. Are they Scots or British? It is a biggie and I am really not sure which way they will jump.

    For me this is going to be the key to the next debate. Attacking the incompetence that is Salmond is almost pointless. Darling must sell the UK, our shared values, our role in the world, the opportunities that we have together. My advice to him would be to almost ignore Salmond and speak to the camera.

    You mean like this?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=482J16Lkims

    Cheery chap isn't he?
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,466
    I'd love us to get rid of trident. Sadly I don't see it happening, especially not with the recent scaremongering over Russia.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,311

    Mr. L, the question is not Scottish or British. It's Scottish within the United Kingdom, and Scottish without.

    The no campaign try to characterise it that way. I am not sure they have succeeded. Those who think of themselves as Scottish first put little weight on being British. I am proud to be a Scot but I always think of myself as British.

  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,311

    DavidL said:

    Ok I will admit to being seriously worried by this. Still a month to go and the mood in Scotland is clearly febrile.

    I never understood JackW's confidence of 60:40. I think he ended up 60.5:39.5. He may still be proved right but this always seemed closer to me.

    It is dangerous to rely on anecdotes but my perception from various conversations and public events recently is that Yes has run the most appalling and incompetent campaign imaginable. And, for many, that does not matter at all. They readily recognise that there will be problems, that Salmond and Sturgeon do not have any credible answers to a whole host of questions but they feel Scottish and want Scotland to be an independent country.

    I feel the opposite way. It would not matter a damn to me if I was going to be a few thousand better off in an independent Scotland. I would still vote no in a heart beat. The UK is my country and I am desperate for it to remain so.

    The campaign has throughout been bogged down in trivia and incompetence but Scots are now coming to terms with that question. Are they Scots or British? It is a biggie and I am really not sure which way they will jump.

    For me this is going to be the key to the next debate. Attacking the incompetence that is Salmond is almost pointless. Darling must sell the UK, our shared values, our role in the world, the opportunities that we have together. My advice to him would be to almost ignore Salmond and speak to the camera.

    You mean like this?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=482J16Lkims

    Cheery chap isn't he?
    We were all young once Stuart.

  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,010
    Patrick said:

    malcolmg said:

    Patrick said:

    A really interesting article showing that the actual YES vote in referendums nearly always underperforms the latest polling:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11040226/Independence-referendum-Heres-why-Scotland-will-vote-No-probably.html

    Get ready for those pies Patrick
    I thought I was obliged to eat a plate of haggis, neeps and tatties with a pint of Bellhaven if it's YES. The humble pie with a pint of scrumpy is for you when it is a resounding NO. :-)
    Yes but it has to be in a very large very humble pie case to count.....
  • Options
    dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    Will the beleaguered professional footballers of Berwick Rangers be the first English club to play in a foreign country?
    More to the point, forget Cumbria, will Berwick Upon Tweed apply to secede from England and join the new independent nation of Scotland?
    Let's hope so, it will ease the case for the Wuffingas Kingdom of East Anglia to finally be rid of the yoke of the Wessex idiots and breathe free once more. #fortifythegreatouse
  • Options
    DavidL said:

    Mr. L, the question is not Scottish or British. It's Scottish within the United Kingdom, and Scottish without.

    The no campaign try to characterise it that way. I am not sure they have succeeded. Those who think of themselves as Scottish first put little weight on being British. I am proud to be a Scot but I always think of myself as British.
    The Norwegians did not cease to be Scandinavians when they voted Yes to independence in their 1905 referendum (Yes: 99.95%, No: 0.05%, Turnout: 85.4%).

    The Scots will not cease to be British if they vote Yes on 18 September. Great Britain is an island and no vote on Earth can ever change that. Only extremely long-term geological changes could alter that.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,988
    Mr. Dickson, geographically, that's correct. Politically, it isn't.

    Not sure going to Ireland and telling them they're all British would make one universally popular.

    A month to go until a fateful day indeed. I hope the result's clear-cut. The worst thing would be a squabble over a tiny margin of victory for one side.
  • Options
    DaemonBarberDaemonBarber Posts: 1,626
    Mike, Glad you had fun in Auld Reekie, August is probably the best month to come as a tourist, and the best to avoid as a resident ;-)

    The referendum is certainly top of most people's minds atm. I was at a toddler's birthday party on Saturday and it was pretty much the only non-child centred conversation topic. On a completely non-scientific sample of people-wot-I-spoke-to basis, then Yes is ever so slightly ahead, but there are certainly lots of haverers out there.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,008
    Lers be optimistic about Iraq. The Americans and the Russians arm the Kurds, and the former use enough drones on IS forces to ensure the Kurds smash IS and drive the remnants back into Syria.

    We now have a well armed and experienced Kurdish army wanting a Kurdistan, which presently one would expect to be carved out of Iraq, Turkey, Iran and to some extent Syria.

    Who are going to be the good guys then?
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,010
    DavidL said:

    Ok I will admit to being seriously worried by this. Still a month to go and the mood in Scotland is clearly febrile.

    I never understood JackW's confidence of 60:40. I think he ended up 60.5:39.5. He may still be proved right but this always seemed closer to me.

    It is dangerous to rely on anecdotes but my perception from various conversations and public events recently is that Yes has run the most appalling and incompetent campaign imaginable. And, for many, that does not matter at all. They readily recognise that there will be problems, that Salmond and Sturgeon do not have any credible answers to a whole host of questions but they feel Scottish and want Scotland to be an independent country.

    I feel the opposite way. It would not matter a damn to me if I was going to be a few thousand better off in an independent Scotland. I would still vote no in a heart beat. The UK is my country and I am desperate for it to remain so.

    The campaign has throughout been bogged down in trivia and incompetence but Scots are now coming to terms with that question. Are they Scots or British? It is a biggie and I am really not sure which way they will jump.

    For me this is going to be the key to the next debate. Attacking the incompetence that is Salmond is almost pointless. Darling must sell the UK, our shared values, our role in the world, the opportunities that we have together. My advice to him would be to almost ignore Salmond and speak to the camera.

    David that was down to him being barking , someone with very very similar views and just as barking was spouting the same in Herald yesterday. Spooky coincidence.
  • Options
    Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    edited August 2014
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Ok I will admit to being seriously worried by this. Still a month to go and the mood in Scotland is clearly febrile.

    I never understood JackW's confidence of 60:40. I think he ended up 60.5:39.5. He may still be proved right but this always seemed closer to me.

    It is dangerous to rely on anecdotes but my perception from various conversations and public events recently is that Yes has run the most appalling and incompetent campaign imaginable. And, for many, that does not matter at all. They readily recognise that there will be problems, that Salmond and Sturgeon do not have any credible answers to a whole host of questions but they feel Scottish and want Scotland to be an independent country.

    I feel the opposite way. It would not matter a damn to me if I was going to be a few thousand better off in an independent Scotland. I would still vote no in a heart beat. The UK is my country and I am desperate for it to remain so.

    The campaign has throughout been bogged down in trivia and incompetence but Scots are now coming to terms with that question. Are they Scots or British? It is a biggie and I am really not sure which way they will jump.

    For me this is going to be the key to the next debate. Attacking the incompetence that is Salmond is almost pointless. Darling must sell the UK, our shared values, our role in the world, the opportunities that we have together. My advice to him would be to almost ignore Salmond and speak to the camera.

    You mean like this?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=482J16Lkims

    Cheery chap isn't he?
    We were all young once Stuart.

    Most young people do not go on national TV to accuse their political opponents of inciting rape.

    His behaviour is indicative of Darling's Project Fear mindset. George Galloway knew him as a young man: "Darling was to the left of Mao Zedong."

    http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/if-the-recession-hits-will-alistair-be-our-darling-970975
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,008
    edited August 2014

    Will the beleaguered professional footballers of Berwick Rangers be the first English club to play in a foreign country?
    More to the point, forget Cumbria, will Berwick Upon Tweed apply to secede from England and join the new independent nation of Scotland?
    Let's hope so, it will ease the case for the Wuffingas Kingdom of East Anglia to finally be rid of the yoke of the Wessex idiots and breathe free once more. #fortifythegreatouse

    I’ll vote for that! Especially if Wuffingas rule extends as far S as Chelmsford.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,010

    DavidL said:

    Mr. L, the question is not Scottish or British. It's Scottish within the United Kingdom, and Scottish without.

    The no campaign try to characterise it that way. I am not sure they have succeeded. Those who think of themselves as Scottish first put little weight on being British. I am proud to be a Scot but I always think of myself as British.
    The Norwegians did not cease to be Scandinavians when they voted Yes to independence in their 1905 referendum (Yes: 99.95%, No: 0.05%, Turnout: 85.4%).

    The Scots will not cease to be British if they vote Yes on 18 September. Great Britain is an island and no vote on Earth can ever change that. Only extremely long-term geological changes could alter that.
    Stuart , they are confused as to what Britain actually is , in their jingoistic fervour they get even more confused and conflate it with something else.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,988
    Mr. G, different situation, as there is no country called the United Kingdom of Scandinavia. If there were, the term would have political as well as geographical significance.
  • Options
    Rexel56Rexel56 Posts: 807
    DavidL said:

    Ok I will admit to being seriously worried by this. Still a month to go and the mood in Scotland is clearly febrile.

    I never understood JackW's confidence of 60:40. I think he ended up 60.5:39.5. He may still be proved right but this always seemed closer to me.

    It is dangerous to rely on anecdotes but my perception from various conversations and public events recently is that Yes has run the most appalling and incompetent campaign imaginable. And, for many, that does not matter at all. They readily recognise that there will be problems, that Salmond and Sturgeon do not have any credible answers to a whole host of questions but they feel Scottish and want Scotland to be an independent country.

    I feel the opposite way. It would not matter a damn to me if I was going to be a few thousand better off in an independent Scotland. I would still vote no in a heart beat. The UK is my country and I am desperate for it to remain so.

    The campaign has throughout been bogged down in trivia and incompetence but Scots are now coming to terms with that question. Are they Scots or British? It is a biggie and I am really not sure which way they will jump.

    For me this is going to be the key to the next debate. Attacking the incompetence that is Salmond is almost pointless. Darling must sell the UK, our shared values, our role in the world, the opportunities that we have together. My advice to him would be to almost ignore Salmond and speak to the camera.

    As said before, to win Yes must prevail on three fronts:

    - a powerful vision for an independent nation
    - dissatisfaction with the status quo
    - it can be done without undue risk

    BT has hammered away at the third and the currency spoiler was masterful. If Salmond can repair the damage and set out a simple roadmap to being independent he could turn the tide. This will include some backtracking but needs must:

    "we will ask for a permanent currency union and make the case, if we cannot agree then we shall ask for a period of time to introduce an independent currency... If that delays the date of independence a couple of years, so be it. We shall seek membership of the European Economic Area and should it be right for Scotland's economy, we may seek membership of the EU and Euro in the long term. The priority in the medium term will be secure the benefits of being an independent nation with an independent currency.... If some Banks relocate their headquarters to London, so be it... We will make it attractive for them to keep their operations in Scotland and even encourage other UK banks to relocate jobs to the Scottish Enterprise Zone..."
  • Options

    Mike, Glad you had fun in Auld Reekie, August is probably the best month to come as a tourist, and the best to avoid as a resident ;-)

    The referendum is certainly top of most people's minds atm. I was at a toddler's birthday party on Saturday and it was pretty much the only non-child centred conversation topic. On a completely non-scientific sample of people-wot-I-spoke-to basis, then Yes is ever so slightly ahead, but there are certainly lots of haverers out there.

    Did you mean "waverers" (although "haverers" might be more accurate!) ;)

    I was brought up in Edinburgh and my parents always made sure that the family were out of the city during August. Most Edinburgh friends have similar experiences.

    The disadvantage of fleeing the capital in August is that my tender skin was bitten to hell by Ardnamurchan midgies and clegs.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,937
    edited August 2014
    Charles said:

    Whatever others on here say I just don't believe that such a level of self-delusion is possible.

    You believed Romney was going to win, right? Based on the utter conviction of the Republican poll-"adjusters"?

    No, that was based on my own interactions with a lot of very disillusioned Obama supporters. I extrapolated and got it wrong. Thus, I am not infallible. I don't know a single person with a vote on 18th September and I would strongly advise taking my word as gospel. I am merely sharing my thoughts. And I have a growing sense that Yes will win. It will be momentous. Politically and historically bigger than anything any of us have been through before.

  • Options
    DavidL said:

    Mr. L, the question is not Scottish or British. It's Scottish within the United Kingdom, and Scottish without.

    The no campaign try to characterise it that way. I am not sure they have succeeded. Those who think of themselves as Scottish first put little weight on being British. I am proud to be a Scot but I always think of myself as British.

    I think of myself as English first, but still put weight on being British too. But I sense that in general terms Britishness everywhere in the UK is in decline. Common bonds remain and much more unites us than separates us, but this is the era of focusing on differences, sadly.

  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,264
    One thing that puzzles me about the referendum: why hold on Thursday? Surely turn-out will be even higher if at a weekend. There is no tradition as to which day to hold such things.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,760
    edited August 2014

    I'd love us to get rid of trident. Sadly I don't see it happening, especially not with the recent scaremongering over Russia.

    Or with yesterday's polling which showed keeping Trident orders of magnitude more popular than either scraping it, or doing a deal with Scotland.....
  • Options

    Mr. G, different situation, as there is no country called the United Kingdom of Scandinavia. If there were, the term would have political as well as geographical significance.

    There is no country called the United Kingdom of Great Britain either. The state is called the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and is self-evidently a political construction and not a geographical country. If in doubt, just spend some time in the Irish border country: the UK border is a political one, not a geographical one.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,044

    Lers be optimistic about Iraq. The Americans and the Russians arm the Kurds, and the former use enough drones on IS forces to ensure the Kurds smash IS and drive the remnants back into Syria.

    We now have a well armed and experienced Kurdish army wanting a Kurdistan, which presently one would expect to be carved out of Iraq, Turkey, Iran and to some extent Syria.

    Who are going to be the good guys then?

    That's a massive worry that people miss in their understandable desire to stop the IS. Tens of thousands have died in the conflict caused by the Kurdish terrorist group the PKK in the last thirty years. They make the PIRA seem like fluffy bunnies.

    The only reason the PKK came to a deal with the Turkish government is that they wanted their fighters and expertise within the Kurdish areas of Turkey and Syria.

    Sadly, it may be necessary to arm the Kurds. But if and when we do so, we have to be aware that it may cause the conflict to spread and cause significant regional problems later.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkey–PKK_conflict
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    KW Posting For JackW

    The new 2015 general election ARSE projection and JackW Dozen will be posted here on Pb at 9am tomorrow.

  • Options
    DaemonBarberDaemonBarber Posts: 1,626

    Mike, Glad you had fun in Auld Reekie, August is probably the best month to come as a tourist, and the best to avoid as a resident ;-)

    The referendum is certainly top of most people's minds atm. I was at a toddler's birthday party on Saturday and it was pretty much the only non-child centred conversation topic. On a completely non-scientific sample of people-wot-I-spoke-to basis, then Yes is ever so slightly ahead, but there are certainly lots of haverers out there.

    Did you mean "waverers" (although "haverers" might be more accurate!) ;)

    I was brought up in Edinburgh and my parents always made sure that the family were out of the city during August. Most Edinburgh friends have similar experiences.

    The disadvantage of fleeing the capital in August is that my tender skin was bitten to hell by Ardnamurchan midgies and clegs.
    No I mean haver as in vacillating or indecisive... But yeah there are lots of waverers too.

    The midgies have been hellish this year!
  • Options
    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    Ok I will admit to being seriously worried by this. Still a month to go and the mood in Scotland is clearly febrile.

    I never understood JackW's confidence of 60:40. I think he ended up 60.5:39.5. He may still be proved right but this always seemed closer to me.

    It is dangerous to rely on anecdotes but my perception from various conversations and public events recently is that Yes has run the most appalling and incompetent campaign imaginable. And, for many, that does not matter at all. They readily recognise that there will be problems, that Salmond and Sturgeon do not have any credible answers to a whole host of questions but they feel Scottish and want Scotland to be an independent country.

    I feel the opposite way. It would not matter a damn to me if I was going to be a few thousand better off in an independent Scotland. I would still vote no in a heart beat. The UK is my country and I am desperate for it to remain so.

    The campaign has throughout been bogged down in trivia and incompetence but Scots are now coming to terms with that question. Are they Scots or British? It is a biggie and I am really not sure which way they will jump.

    For me this is going to be the key to the next debate. Attacking the incompetence that is Salmond is almost pointless. Darling must sell the UK, our shared values, our role in the world, the opportunities that we have together. My advice to him would be to almost ignore Salmond and speak to the camera.

    David that was down to him being barking , someone with very very similar views and just as barking was spouting the same in Herald yesterday. Spooky coincidence.
    Jack's ARSE is not to be sniffed at, it has remarkable form.
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,047
    Scottish or British - Why not both?

    I still think No will get 55%+ but it will hardly be a ringing endorsement of the Union if 45% of people in Scotland want it over with. There is a question of what a knock on effect it will have on England. My guess is once the English realise that nearly half the Scottish population feel no commitment to them, their own interest in the Union (already flagging) will wane further. English nationalism will rise somewhat, although I'm still doubtful of its true potential. How will ethnic minorities feel about that? The Welsh won't be going anywhere in the short run for lots of reasons but a serious English nationalism might change a few minds. And how long would the English want to keep subsidising the alien culture of Northern Ireland?

    Big questions for Unionists on both the left and right as to how they have managed to screw this up so badly.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,988
    Mr. Observer, it's unsurprising, with the rise of pointless and ill-considered devolution, and the multi-cultural approach that all cultures are equal. And we've seen morris dancers unable to continue centuries old traditions due to red tape bullshit.

    Not a particularly party political point. Like lots of bad things in recent times, it was started by Labour and continued by the Coalition.

    Oh, and Clegg announcing the Cornish minority bullshit was a mind-bendingly stupid move. How many years before appeals for a Cornish Parliament? In a pathetic attempt to get a tiny bit of popularity he's sown a seed which could (decades down the line) help tear apart England.
  • Options

    DavidL said:

    Mr. L, the question is not Scottish or British. It's Scottish within the United Kingdom, and Scottish without.

    The no campaign try to characterise it that way. I am not sure they have succeeded. Those who think of themselves as Scottish first put little weight on being British. I am proud to be a Scot but I always think of myself as British.

    I think of myself as English first, but still put weight on being British too. But I sense that in general terms Britishness everywhere in the UK is in decline. Common bonds remain and much more unites us than separates us, but this is the era of focusing on differences, sadly.

    'British identity is waning in England'
    - The twin festivals of patriotism of last summer - the London Olympics and the Diamond Jubilee - failed to provide a boost for feelings of "Britishness" among the English, according to new research.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/10093611/British-identity-is-waning-in-England.html

    Gotta love those "non-political" Olympics! :)
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,988
    Mr. Dickson, someone describes themselves as British. Do you think they're from the UK, or Ireland? [Even allowing for weight of numbers, the answer would be the former].
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,311

    Mike, Glad you had fun in Auld Reekie, August is probably the best month to come as a tourist, and the best to avoid as a resident ;-)

    The referendum is certainly top of most people's minds atm. I was at a toddler's birthday party on Saturday and it was pretty much the only non-child centred conversation topic. On a completely non-scientific sample of people-wot-I-spoke-to basis, then Yes is ever so slightly ahead, but there are certainly lots of haverers out there.

    Did you mean "waverers" (although "haverers" might be more accurate!) ;)

    I was brought up in Edinburgh and my parents always made sure that the family were out of the city during August. Most Edinburgh friends have similar experiences.

    The disadvantage of fleeing the capital in August is that my tender skin was bitten to hell by Ardnamurchan midgies and clegs.

    Working in Edinburgh in August is indeed horrible, especially on the Royal Mile where I am based. I have suggested on a few occasions that we need a faculty machete to carve our way down to the consultation rooms.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,311

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    Ok I will admit to being seriously worried by this. Still a month to go and the mood in Scotland is clearly febrile.

    I never understood JackW's confidence of 60:40. I think he ended up 60.5:39.5. He may still be proved right but this always seemed closer to me.

    It is dangerous to rely on anecdotes but my perception from various conversations and public events recently is that Yes has run the most appalling and incompetent campaign imaginable. And, for many, that does not matter at all. They readily recognise that there will be problems, that Salmond and Sturgeon do not have any credible answers to a whole host of questions but they feel Scottish and want Scotland to be an independent country.

    I feel the opposite way. It would not matter a damn to me if I was going to be a few thousand better off in an independent Scotland. I would still vote no in a heart beat. The UK is my country and I am desperate for it to remain so.

    The campaign has throughout been bogged down in trivia and incompetence but Scots are now coming to terms with that question. Are they Scots or British? It is a biggie and I am really not sure which way they will jump.

    For me this is going to be the key to the next debate. Attacking the incompetence that is Salmond is almost pointless. Darling must sell the UK, our shared values, our role in the world, the opportunities that we have together. My advice to him would be to almost ignore Salmond and speak to the camera.

    David that was down to him being barking , someone with very very similar views and just as barking was spouting the same in Herald yesterday. Spooky coincidence.
    Jack's ARSE is not to be sniffed at, it has remarkable form.
    How did it do in the last Scottish referendum?

    Here be dragons. We are off the map.

  • Options

    Mr. Observer, it's unsurprising, with the rise of pointless and ill-considered devolution, and the multi-cultural approach that all cultures are equal. And we've seen morris dancers unable to continue centuries old traditions due to red tape bullshit.

    Not a particularly party political point. Like lots of bad things in recent times, it was started by Labour and continued by the Coalition.

    Oh, and Clegg announcing the Cornish minority bullshit was a mind-bendingly stupid move. How many years before appeals for a Cornish Parliament? In a pathetic attempt to get a tiny bit of popularity he's sown a seed which could (decades down the line) help tear apart England.

    - "pointless and ill-considered devolution"

    Err, you do understand why Smith, Steel, Bruce, Campbell, Cook, Brown, Dewar and Co had to implement devolution, don't you?

    Far from being "pointless", it was absolutely essential. It was the only way to protect their own Lib-Lab jobs and power base.

    You are on stronger territory when you say "ill-considered".
  • Options
    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    Ok I will admit to being seriously worried by this. Still a month to go and the mood in Scotland is clearly febrile.

    I never understood JackW's confidence of 60:40. I think he ended up 60.5:39.5. He may still be proved right but this always seemed closer to me.

    It is dangerous to rely on anecdotes but my perception from various conversations and public events recently is that Yes has run the most appalling and incompetent campaign imaginable. And, for many, that does not matter at all. They readily recognise that there will be problems, that Salmond and Sturgeon do not have any credible answers to a whole host of questions but they feel Scottish and want Scotland to be an independent country.

    I feel the opposite way. It would not matter a damn to me if I was going to be a few thousand better off in an independent Scotland. I would still vote no in a heart beat. The UK is my country and I am desperate for it to remain so.

    The campaign has throughout been bogged down in trivia and incompetence but Scots are now coming to terms with that question. Are they Scots or British? It is a biggie and I am really not sure which way they will jump.

    For me this is going to be the key to the next debate. Attacking the incompetence that is Salmond is almost pointless. Darling must sell the UK, our shared values, our role in the world, the opportunities that we have together. My advice to him would be to almost ignore Salmond and speak to the camera.

    David that was down to him being barking , someone with very very similar views and just as barking was spouting the same in Herald yesterday. Spooky coincidence.
    Jack's ARSE is not to be sniffed at, it has remarkable form.
    How did it do in the last Scottish referendum?

    Here be dragons. We are off the map.

    They have got the cotton wool firmly stuffed in their lugs David. "La, la, la, la, la... we cannae hear ye."
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,988
    Mr. Dickson, I realise it was an effort by the short-term delinquents of Labour to perpetuate a fiefdom forever and ever amen, but it was clearly pointless as it's not only failed to deliver that, it's done the exact opposite and may separate forever Scotland from the UK.
  • Options
    FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012

    Patrick said:

    A really interesting article showing that the actual YES vote in referendums nearly always underperforms the latest polling:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11040226/Independence-referendum-Heres-why-Scotland-will-vote-No-probably.html

    Liberal Democrat Voters for Independence:

    - "... the 1997 referendum in Scotland that lead to the creation of the Scottish Parliament.
    It resulted in a massive YES vote (74.3%) to be exact. What is not often said is that polling throughout the campaign never put the YES vote that high. In fact in the weeks before the vote polls were showing support to be around the 55% mark.

    What happened was a triumph of hope over fear. When people were in the voting booth, away from the press and TV media they lost their inhibitions and voted for a positive future.

    The same will happen again."


    Perhaps more a case of those opposed knowing they were going to lose so not bothering?

    That said, I have been leaning Yes for a while on the basis of the total conviction of independence supporters that they are going to win. Whatever others on here say I just don't believe that such a level of self-delusion is possible. The polls are measuring something unique in the history of the UK, so I don't think it's that unreasonable to postulate they may have been failing to do it accurately. And now they are clearly beginning to move to Yes, just as the Yes side predicted. I will be making my first political bet today for a while and taking advantage of odds that are bound to tighten significantly over the coming weeks.

    Although I'd like No to win, there's a growing part of me that is also fascinated to see how it all plays out with a vote to end the UK. It really will be a momentous time, rivalled only in the last 100 years by the end of WW2.

    Out of interest: are you a supporter of Trident renewal?

    The Scottish vote is going to have big effects on English public policy, not least regarding nuclear weapons. I have seen many Yes-supportive comments from English people largely on the basis that a Yes result makes it far less likely that England will continue to throw vast sums of taxpayers' cash down the drain labelled "Trident".
    Then your Yes supportive people are delusional. Trident would stay and all its expense would benefit the jobs and economy of England. English shipbuilding would prosper.

    Yes supportive people in Scotland are underestimating the money they would have to spend on defence, not to mention where they would get their soldiers sailors and airmen from.
  • Options
    DaemonBarberDaemonBarber Posts: 1,626
    DavidL said:

    Mike, Glad you had fun in Auld Reekie, August is probably the best month to come as a tourist, and the best to avoid as a resident ;-)

    The referendum is certainly top of most people's minds atm. I was at a toddler's birthday party on Saturday and it was pretty much the only non-child centred conversation topic. On a completely non-scientific sample of people-wot-I-spoke-to basis, then Yes is ever so slightly ahead, but there are certainly lots of haverers out there.

    Did you mean "waverers" (although "haverers" might be more accurate!) ;)

    I was brought up in Edinburgh and my parents always made sure that the family were out of the city during August. Most Edinburgh friends have similar experiences.

    The disadvantage of fleeing the capital in August is that my tender skin was bitten to hell by Ardnamurchan midgies and clegs.

    Working in Edinburgh in August is indeed horrible, especially on the Royal Mile where I am based. I have suggested on a few occasions that we need a faculty machete to carve our way down to the consultation rooms.
    Urgh, It's bad enough having to drive through the city but I shudder at the prospect of having to work on the Royal Mile! How many fliers get thrust at you? How many jugglers do you want to kill have to dodge?
  • Options

    Mr. Dickson, someone describes themselves as British. Do you think they're from the UK, or Ireland? [Even allowing for weight of numbers, the answer would be the former].

    Oh dear. The straw man gets hauled out for the umpteenth time.
  • Options
    DaemonBarberDaemonBarber Posts: 1,626
    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    Ok I will admit to being seriously worried by this. Still a month to go and the mood in Scotland is clearly febrile.

    I never understood JackW's confidence of 60:40. I think he ended up 60.5:39.5. He may still be proved right but this always seemed closer to me.

    It is dangerous to rely on anecdotes but my perception from various conversations and public events recently is that Yes has run the most appalling and incompetent campaign imaginable. And, for many, that does not matter at all. They readily recognise that there will be problems, that Salmond and Sturgeon do not have any credible answers to a whole host of questions but they feel Scottish and want Scotland to be an independent country.

    I feel the opposite way. It would not matter a damn to me if I was going to be a few thousand better off in an independent Scotland. I would still vote no in a heart beat. The UK is my country and I am desperate for it to remain so.

    The campaign has throughout been bogged down in trivia and incompetence but Scots are now coming to terms with that question. Are they Scots or British? It is a biggie and I am really not sure which way they will jump.

    For me this is going to be the key to the next debate. Attacking the incompetence that is Salmond is almost pointless. Darling must sell the UK, our shared values, our role in the world, the opportunities that we have together. My advice to him would be to almost ignore Salmond and speak to the camera.

    David that was down to him being barking , someone with very very similar views and just as barking was spouting the same in Herald yesterday. Spooky coincidence.
    Jack's ARSE is not to be sniffed at, it has remarkable form.
    How did it do in the last Scottish referendum?

    Here be dragons. We are off the map.

    Speaking of which, How To Train Your Dragon 2 is great, but a little too much for younger children (as I discovered yesterday)
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,010

    Mr. G, different situation, as there is no country called the United Kingdom of Scandinavia. If there were, the term would have political as well as geographical significance.

    MD , Exactly , there will be no impact on Great Britain at all , it remains the same geographical place it has been for ever. The only change is the dissolution of the 1707 union. So only political union is gone , we can choose to keep or not keep all other relationships. Only unionists are whinging and making a big deal of it and threatening us with them taking their ball away. No a nice way to go about things , especially when it is done by lying toads like Cameron, Osborne , Clegg , Alexander , Balls , Milliband etc.
  • Options
    OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143

    DavidL said:

    Mr. L, the question is not Scottish or British. It's Scottish within the United Kingdom, and Scottish without.

    The no campaign try to characterise it that way. I am not sure they have succeeded. Those who think of themselves as Scottish first put little weight on being British. I am proud to be a Scot but I always think of myself as British.
    The Norwegians did not cease to be Scandinavians when they voted Yes to independence in their 1905 referendum (Yes: 99.95%, No: 0.05%, Turnout: 85.4%).

    The Scots will not cease to be British if they vote Yes on 18 September. Great Britain is an island and no vote on Earth can ever change that. Only extremely long-term geological changes could alter that.
    Surprised to see you make a slip like that.

    Britain is an island, but Great Britain is a political construct created by James VI/I in an attempt to unite the two Kingdoms of Scotland and England.
  • Options

    Mr. Observer, it's unsurprising, with the rise of pointless and ill-considered devolution, and the multi-cultural approach that all cultures are equal. And we've seen morris dancers unable to continue centuries old traditions due to red tape bullshit.

    Not a particularly party political point. Like lots of bad things in recent times, it was started by Labour and continued by the Coalition.

    Oh, and Clegg announcing the Cornish minority bullshit was a mind-bendingly stupid move. How many years before appeals for a Cornish Parliament? In a pathetic attempt to get a tiny bit of popularity he's sown a seed which could (decades down the line) help tear apart England.

    The idea that everything would be hunky-dory without devolution is one of the more absurd notions that you hear. There was a reason that the Scots felt the need for more say in the way they were governed and it was not because of nasty Labour agitation.

    If you ask me the single biggest contributor to where we are now is FPTP. Neither the Scots nor the English have delivered a majority of Tory or Labour votes for decades. Salmond is right to say Scotland does not get what it votes for, but neither does England or Wales or Northern Ireland.

  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,010
    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    Ok I will admit to being seriously worried by this. Still a month to go and the mood in Scotland is clearly febrile.

    I never understood JackW's confidence of 60:40. I think he ended up 60.5:39.5. He may still be proved right but this always seemed closer to me.

    It is dangerous to rely on anecdotes but my perception from various conversations and public events recently is that Yes has run the most appalling and incompetent campaign imaginable. And, for many, that does not matter at all. They readily recognise that there will be problems, that Salmond and Sturgeon do not have any credible answers to a whole host of questions but they feel Scottish and want Scotland to be an independent country.

    I feel the opposite way. It would not matter a damn to me if I was going to be a few thousand better off in an independent Scotland. I would still vote no in a heart beat. The UK is my country and I am desperate for it to remain so.

    The campaign has throughout been bogged down in trivia and incompetence but Scots are now coming to terms with that question. Are they Scots or British? It is a biggie and I am really not sure which way they will jump.

    For me this is going to be the key to the next debate. Attacking the incompetence that is Salmond is almost pointless. Darling must sell the UK, our shared values, our role in the world, the opportunities that we have together. My advice to him would be to almost ignore Salmond and speak to the camera.

    David that was down to him being barking , someone with very very similar views and just as barking was spouting the same in Herald yesterday. Spooky coincidence.
    Jack's ARSE is not to be sniffed at, it has remarkable form.
    How did it do in the last Scottish referendum?

    Here be dragons. We are off the map.

    Personally David he talks out his ARSE, a fake of the first order.
  • Options

    Patrick said:

    A really interesting article showing that the actual YES vote in referendums nearly always underperforms the latest polling:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11040226/Independence-referendum-Heres-why-Scotland-will-vote-No-probably.html

    Liberal Democrat Voters for Independence:

    - "... the 1997 referendum in Scotland that lead to the creation of the Scottish Parliament.
    It resulted in a massive YES vote (74.3%) to be exact. What is not often said is that polling throughout the campaign never put the YES vote that high. In fact in the weeks before the vote polls were showing support to be around the 55% mark.

    What happened was a triumph of hope over fear. When people were in the voting booth, away from the press and TV media they lost their inhibitions and voted for a positive future.

    The same will happen again."


    Perhaps more a case of those opposed knowing they were going to lose so not bothering?

    That said, I have been leaning Yes for a while on the basis of the total conviction of independence supporters that they are going to win. Whatever others on here say I just don't believe that such a level of self-delusion is possible. The polls are measuring something unique in the history of the UK, so I don't think it's that unreasonable to postulate they may have been failing to do it accurately. And now they are clearly beginning to move to Yes, just as the Yes side predicted. I will be making my first political bet today for a while and taking advantage of odds that are bound to tighten significantly over the coming weeks.

    Although I'd like No to win, there's a growing part of me that is also fascinated to see how it all plays out with a vote to end the UK. It really will be a momentous time, rivalled only in the last 100 years by the end of WW2.

    Out of interest: are you a supporter of Trident renewal?

    The Scottish vote is going to have big effects on English public policy, not least regarding nuclear weapons. I have seen many Yes-supportive comments from English people largely on the basis that a Yes result makes it far less likely that England will continue to throw vast sums of taxpayers' cash down the drain labelled "Trident".
    Then your Yes supportive people are delusional. Trident would stay and all its expense would benefit the jobs and economy of England. English shipbuilding would prosper.

    Yes supportive people in Scotland are underestimating the money they would have to spend on defence, not to mention where they would get their soldiers sailors and airmen from.
    Ground Control to Major Tom
    Your circuit's dead,
    there's something wrong
    Can you hear me, Major Tom?
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,988
    Mr. G, not sure what you mean by this:
    "So only political union is gone , we can choose to keep or not keep all other relationships. Only unionists are whinging and making a big deal of it and threatening us with them taking their ball away."

    The clearest reference would, I think, be currency union. But that's clearly something most of those south of the border don't want.
  • Options
    JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400
    DavidL said:


    I feel the opposite way. It would not matter a damn to me if I was going to be a few thousand better off in an independent Scotland. I would still vote no in a heart beat. The UK is my country and I am desperate for it to remain so.


    Fully agree with you and I'm now regretting not registering for a postal vote at my parents.

    I do think some of this yes polling momentum is simply swing back from the good No polling that appeared after the first debate.

    Regarding your description of the appeal of the Yes campaign I think that alot of it is similar to a mid life crisis with a number of Scots being bored and just wanting to try something new. People have got used to voting without it resulting in any real change so the danger is Yes wins narrowly and then alot of voters suffer buyers remorse when the bill arrives.

    Still worth remembering No is still in the lead.
  • Options
    EasterrossEasterross Posts: 1,915
    Morning all and thankfully only a month until THE vote! The Scottish business community is largely on hold as we wait to learn the result. I'm looking forward to the debate in Inverness on Wednesday in front of a business leaders only audience.

    I detect a real move to YES. On Thursday at the Glenmorangie Highland Gathering in Tain, our Rotary stand was next to the Better Together one. It was busy all day. Every overseas/English visitor who stopped to chat to me at our Rotary stand asked me about the referendum and how I thought the vote would go.

    As a Scot, I hope it is an 80+% turnout and either NO by at least 10% or YES by at least 1 vote. If it is a narrow NO, we will simply be back doing it all again within 5 years. That would be seriously bad for the Scottish economy.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,311

    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    Ok I will admit to being seriously worried by this. Still a month to go and the mood in Scotland is clearly febrile.

    I never understood JackW's confidence of 60:40. I think he ended up 60.5:39.5. He may still be proved right but this always seemed closer to me.

    It is dangerous to rely on anecdotes but my perception from various conversations and public events recently is that Yes has run the most appalling and incompetent campaign imaginable. And, for many, that does not matter at all. They readily recognise that there will be problems, that Salmond and Sturgeon do not have any credible answers to a whole host of questions but they feel Scottish and want Scotland to be an independent country.

    I feel the opposite way. It would not matter a damn to me if I was going to be a few thousand better off in an independent Scotland. I would still vote no in a heart beat. The UK is my country and I am desperate for it to remain so.

    The campaign has throughout been bogged down in trivia and incompetence but Scots are now coming to terms with that question. Are they Scots or British? It is a biggie and I am really not sure which way they will jump.

    For me this is going to be the key to the next debate. Attacking the incompetence that is Salmond is almost pointless. Darling must sell the UK, our shared values, our role in the world, the opportunities that we have together. My advice to him would be to almost ignore Salmond and speak to the camera.

    David that was down to him being barking , someone with very very similar views and just as barking was spouting the same in Herald yesterday. Spooky coincidence.
    Jack's ARSE is not to be sniffed at, it has remarkable form.
    How did it do in the last Scottish referendum?

    Here be dragons. We are off the map.

    Speaking of which, How To Train Your Dragon 2 is great, but a little too much for younger children (as I discovered yesterday)
    I really liked the first one but my son got taken to the second by his sister. He said it was good but not as good.

  • Options

    DavidL said:

    Mr. L, the question is not Scottish or British. It's Scottish within the United Kingdom, and Scottish without.

    The no campaign try to characterise it that way. I am not sure they have succeeded. Those who think of themselves as Scottish first put little weight on being British. I am proud to be a Scot but I always think of myself as British.
    The Norwegians did not cease to be Scandinavians when they voted Yes to independence in their 1905 referendum (Yes: 99.95%, No: 0.05%, Turnout: 85.4%).

    The Scots will not cease to be British if they vote Yes on 18 September. Great Britain is an island and no vote on Earth can ever change that. Only extremely long-term geological changes could alter that.
    Surprised to see you make a slip like that.

    Britain is an island, but Great Britain is a political construct created by James VI/I in an attempt to unite the two Kingdoms of Scotland and England.
    In Wikipedia terminology the above is referred to as "original research". In the popular tung it is referred to as "pish".

    - "Great Britain, also known as Britain, is an island in the North Atlantic off the north-west coast of continental Europe."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Britain

    Have fun trying to edit that particular page to impose your own novel definition! :)
  • Options
    DaemonBarberDaemonBarber Posts: 1,626
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    Ok I will admit to being seriously worried by this. Still a month to go and the mood in Scotland is clearly febrile.

    I never understood JackW's confidence of 60:40. I think he ended up 60.5:39.5. He may still be proved right but this always seemed closer to me.

    It is dangerous to rely on anecdotes but my perception from various conversations and public events recently is that Yes has run the most appalling and incompetent campaign imaginable. And, for many, that does not matter at all. They readily recognise that there will be problems, that Salmond and Sturgeon do not have any credible answers to a whole host of questions but they feel Scottish and want Scotland to be an independent country.

    I feel the opposite way. It would not matter a damn to me if I was going to be a few thousand better off in an independent Scotland. I would still vote no in a heart beat. The UK is my country and I am desperate for it to remain so.

    The campaign has throughout been bogged down in trivia and incompetence but Scots are now coming to terms with that question. Are they Scots or British? It is a biggie and I am really not sure which way they will jump.

    For me this is going to be the key to the next debate. Attacking the incompetence that is Salmond is almost pointless. Darling must sell the UK, our shared values, our role in the world, the opportunities that we have together. My advice to him would be to almost ignore Salmond and speak to the camera.

    David that was down to him being barking , someone with very very similar views and just as barking was spouting the same in Herald yesterday. Spooky coincidence.
    Jack's ARSE is not to be sniffed at, it has remarkable form.
    How did it do in the last Scottish referendum?

    Here be dragons. We are off the map.

    Speaking of which, How To Train Your Dragon 2 is great, but a little too much for younger children (as I discovered yesterday)
    I really liked the first one but my son got taken to the second by his sister. He said it was good but not as good.

    For me it is a better film, but less child friendly. It's much darker, much more violent and involves the death of a major character...
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,010
    DavidL said:

    Mike, Glad you had fun in Auld Reekie, August is probably the best month to come as a tourist, and the best to avoid as a resident ;-)

    The referendum is certainly top of most people's minds atm. I was at a toddler's birthday party on Saturday and it was pretty much the only non-child centred conversation topic. On a completely non-scientific sample of people-wot-I-spoke-to basis, then Yes is ever so slightly ahead, but there are certainly lots of haverers out there.

    Did you mean "waverers" (although "haverers" might be more accurate!) ;)

    I was brought up in Edinburgh and my parents always made sure that the family were out of the city during August. Most Edinburgh friends have similar experiences.

    The disadvantage of fleeing the capital in August is that my tender skin was bitten to hell by Ardnamurchan midgies and clegs.

    Working in Edinburgh in August is indeed horrible, especially on the Royal Mile where I am based. I have suggested on a few occasions that we need a faculty machete to carve our way down to the consultation rooms.
    Edinburgh is always nice to visit , I will be there tomorrow and look forward to a good pint.Unfortunately I have some business to deal with first.
  • Options
    YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    Southam Observer, "Whatever others on here say I just don't believe that such a level of self-delusion is possible. "

    A good counter-example is Karl Rove's on Fox on election night 2012, who simply refused to believe the projection of Obama's victory.

    He could not believe it, just could not believe it, he thought the Republicans were going to win.

    There's abundant evidence of high delusion at the top of the Romney camp. They simply didn't believe the state projections when swing states were called for Obama.

    Very, very high levels of self-delusion are possible in politics.

  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,047
    Morris Dancer - Britain has effectively turned into a London Empire in which politicians have attempted to buy off Celtic discontent with a kind of home rule. Not really a long term solution. Why would Scots want to be part of a London Empire? Where would we be without devolution? 13 years of New Labour and the coalition would have been a fertile breeding ground for a nationalist uprising in Scotland.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,010

    Mr. Observer, it's unsurprising, with the rise of pointless and ill-considered devolution, and the multi-cultural approach that all cultures are equal. And we've seen morris dancers unable to continue centuries old traditions due to red tape bullshit.

    Not a particularly party political point. Like lots of bad things in recent times, it was started by Labour and continued by the Coalition.

    Oh, and Clegg announcing the Cornish minority bullshit was a mind-bendingly stupid move. How many years before appeals for a Cornish Parliament? In a pathetic attempt to get a tiny bit of popularity he's sown a seed which could (decades down the line) help tear apart England.

    The idea that everything would be hunky-dory without devolution is one of the more absurd notions that you hear. There was a reason that the Scots felt the need for more say in the way they were governed and it was not because of nasty Labour agitation.

    If you ask me the single biggest contributor to where we are now is FPTP. Neither the Scots nor the English have delivered a majority of Tory or Labour votes for decades. Salmond is right to say Scotland does not get what it votes for, but neither does England or Wales or Northern Ireland.

    SO, you forgot Thatcher
  • Options
    malcolmg said:

    Mr. G, different situation, as there is no country called the United Kingdom of Scandinavia. If there were, the term would have political as well as geographical significance.

    MD , Exactly , there will be no impact on Great Britain at all , it remains the same geographical place it has been for ever. The only change is the dissolution of the 1707 union. So only political union is gone , we can choose to keep or not keep all other relationships. Only unionists are whinging and making a big deal of it and threatening us with them taking their ball away. No a nice way to go about things , especially when it is done by lying toads like Cameron, Osborne , Clegg , Alexander , Balls , Milliband etc.
    Do you know, Malcolm, that I didn't know that they were all lying toads.

    We are so lucky to have you on this board. Anyone who thinks differently to you about anything at all should be taken out and shot. Obviously.

  • Options

    Scottish or British - Why not both?

    I still think No will get 55%+ but it will hardly be a ringing endorsement of the Union if 45% of people in Scotland want it over with. There is a question of what a knock on effect it will have on England. My guess is once the English realise that nearly half the Scottish population feel no commitment to them, their own interest in the Union (already flagging) will wane further. English nationalism will rise somewhat, although I'm still doubtful of its true potential. How will ethnic minorities feel about that? The Welsh won't be going anywhere in the short run for lots of reasons but a serious English nationalism might change a few minds. And how long would the English want to keep subsidising the alien culture of Northern Ireland?

    Big questions for Unionists on both the left and right as to how they have managed to screw this up so badly.

    Narrow self-interest has dictated how our constitutional settlement has developed over the decades. Too much confrontation and too much centralisation have done for the UK. It's a shame, but we are where we are. The right will reap early rewards in England from the break-up, but they don't have any long-term solutions. Low wages, economic insecurity and growing inequality are not going to carry the day indefinitely. I suspect that over the medium term we will see a much greater devolution of powers within England accompanied by voting reform, as all parties except the Tories gravitate towards it.

  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,988
    Mr. Booth, I think that's a slight exaggeration, but the use of the term 'provinces' to describe non-London areas of Britain is not to my liking.

    And do we not have a (peaceful and political) nationalist uprising now?

    Mr. Dickson, can't say on that particular example but Wikipedia isn't always right. The nonsense about Alexander being a Greek king stands out as a particularly enormous error.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,758
    malcolmg said:

    Mr. G, different situation, as there is no country called the United Kingdom of Scandinavia. If there were, the term would have political as well as geographical significance.

    MD , Exactly , there will be no impact on Great Britain at all , it remains the same geographical place it has been for ever. The only change is the dissolution of the 1707 union. So only political union is gone , we can choose to keep or not keep all other relationships. Only unionists are whinging and making a big deal of it and threatening us with them taking their ball away. No a nice way to go about things , especially when it is done by lying toads like Cameron, Osborne , Clegg , Alexander , Balls , Milliband etc.
    malc

    stop being a turnip

    when a relationship changes it changes in many ways. When you leave the house no-one owes you anything and the Irish who these days have much better relations with the english than the scots will eat your dinner.

    All this nonsense that it will be the same is just Salmond fibbing to the gullible.
  • Options
    El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 3,870

    The clearest reference would, I think, be currency union. But that's clearly something most of those south of the border don't want.

    Out of interest, is there any polling data on that - i.e. asking the English/Welsh whether they'd support currency union with an independent Scotland?
This discussion has been closed.