Tories taking one for the Union again, Labour lead up to 8%
Saturday's poll may offer some assurance. Labour now stands at 37%, a point up from two weeks ago. The Conservatives are on 29% while the Liberal Democrats attract just 7% of the electorate.
Nigel Farage's Ukip stand at 19% – up three points on the last Opinium/Observer poll a fortnight ago.
Despite Labour's lead, their leader still trails behind David Cameron in the approval ratings.
Nearly two in five voters (37%) approve of the prime minister. One in four (25%) approve of Miliband. Just 17% approve of the Liberal Democrat leader, Nick Clegg.
@Alanbrooke "Scotland can be vetoed in perpetuity by others, but if we want to guarantee it we vote it ourselves. " I thought you wanted out of the EU?
And that's the ace we should play. What matters to us isn't the issue. In effective negotiations, you hold your oppo hostage on the issues that matter most to them.
We're in the EU [and not happy about it], what do we care if Scotland is or isn't? Nowt. But it matters to them a great deal.
as is assuming goodwill on their part. the issue is to hold the negotiating card until we want to play it. I see no reason to give it away up front.
The negotiations need to happen, and be concluded as soon as feasible. Delaying the divorce after a Yes vote - and particularly a strong yes vote - will do neither side any good and just increase rancour.
Scottish EU membership is small-fry to us. We have much bigger concerns that need to be addressed during the divorce.
It looks likely that Salmond and the SNP sold the Scottish electorate a pup on automatic EU membership. Vetoing it when that course of action hold little for us would allow them to transfer the blame onto us.
Instead, we can say: "They lied, but we're helping you." Even if that help is absolutely minimal in the non-action of not vetoing.
The EU is just a small part of the game we need to play.
oh I'm all for a fast divorce March 2015 before the GE seems feasible.
but EU membership is more than small fry it's small to us maybe, but big to them.
The threat was to veto the treaty they were talking about. He wasn't bluffing - he carried it through, they just worked out how to do what they needed without a treaty.
the bluff issue is actually simpler than that, they CAN work round him because they know he's not going to do anything about it.
I thought we were talking about vetos? He can threaten to leave if he wants. There's a limit to how much people will allow themselves to be pushed around, though. If Spain threatened to leave unless it got X, Y and Z, most people here would be saying "Don't let the door hit you on the arse on the way out". That's how most of the EU would respond to the British doing the same thing.
I don't know why you're assuming it's a zero-sum game. Juncker, Tusk and Merkel seem reasonably receptive to the idea of a renegotiated settlement.
Everybody wants "reform", but everybody's reform means something different. There are a bunch of issues where half the EU wants X and the other half wants Y, so if you say, "We demand X", the other people on the X side will say, "We agree!", but they were never the problem in the first place. The problem is the side that wants Y, and they're not going to agree to it just because you're threatening to leave unless you get it.
When Cameron tried to play the exit threat card over Juncker it actually made it harder for people to agree with him, because people don't like being pushed around by other countries. Like I say, people here would respond in exactly the same way if any other EU country tried to threaten them like that.
That said, there are some things that most EU member states are trying to do anyway like labour market reform that Cameron could conceivably try to take the credit for, and a few minor things where they probably don't care much either way and the UK is only involved because Labour liked them on the merits, like whether the UK is part of the working time directive.
The threat was to veto the treaty they were talking about. He wasn't bluffing - he carried it through, they just worked out how to do what they needed without a treaty.
the bluff issue is actually simpler than that, they CAN work round him because they know he's not going to do anything about it.
I thought we were talking about vetos? He can threaten to leave if he wants. There's a limit to how much people will allow themselves to be pushed around, though. If Spain threatened to leave unless it got X, Y and Z, most people here would be saying "Don't let the door hit you on the arse on the way out". That's how most of the EU would respond to the British doing the same thing.
I don't know why you're assuming it's a zero-sum game. Juncker, Tusk and Merkel seem reasonably receptive to the idea of a renegotiated settlement.
Only on their terms though. If we pushed for say limits to free movement of labour then all bets would be off. The UK's demands will not be allowed to get in the way of the EU's aspirations.
This was the theory Cameron followed, but it's been tested and empirically disproved. He vetoed, they worked around him.
Right, you don't think the fact that he said he didn't want to leave the EU gave away that he was bluffing ?
The threat was to veto the treaty they were talking about. He wasn't bluffing - he carried it through, they just worked out how to do what they needed without a treaty.
the bluff issue is actually simpler than that, they CAN work round him because they know he's not going to do anything about it.
My pedantry gene is in full flow today, so please excuse me if I butt in. Two points:
1) Cameron's veto. He vetoed the EU fiscal union thingy treaty, which he was perfectly entitled to do. He then tried to stop a subset of the EU countries from setting up their own treaty and he tried to stop them using the institutions of the EU to run that subset treaty. Unfortunately for him, the principle of enhanced cooperation introduced in the Nice(?) treaty prevented him from doing so. Since neither he nor his legal advisors were up to speed on the EU they did not know this and got arsesmacked as a result. Unusually, I am quite sympathetic to Cameron on this point: he can't be expected to know everything and his legal should have pointed it out and didn't. So Cameron successfully vetoed a full-EU treaty, but could not prevent a partial subset-EU treaty.
2) Scottish accession to the EU. To join the EU requires a full-EU treaty and all 28 have to say yes. Spain can veto perpetually if it wants, and so can any of the others.
@Alanbrooke "Scotland can be vetoed in perpetuity by others, but if we want to guarantee it we vote it ourselves. " I thought you wanted out of the EU?
You lump people in boxes too easily I'm in the sympathetic but want to see the arguments camp. Though if it's anything like the Indyref I might as well make them up myself.
"@DamianSurvation 4m ***POLL ALERT*** Stand by your beds. We have a NEW release coming shortly. Survation TELEPHONE poll on Scottish Independence.....#indyref"
These polls are all making the national news. Come on pollsters get your name on the news. The bigger the she shift (particularly to YES) the louder the noise....Even Jack's McARSE could cause a few ripples
The idea that Spain will wave through Scotland's membership of the EU before the Catalonian issue is resolved is laughable, as is the idea that an independent Scotland could enforce any kind of fishing ban on Spanish/EU boats.
Here's a weird potential scenario: Yes wins Cameron resigns Osborne becomes PM within days [prolonged contest is out of the question, so it'd probably be him or perhaps Hague] He's tough on the Scots England likes that, and decides to vote for him Osborne wins the next election
He'll've seen what happened with David Davis stepping aside for Michael Howard and won't want to throw away his chance, if he can help it.
A Yes would make it very difficult for Osborne to become PM if there were financial turmoil as it might be seen as putting ambition ahead of ministerial duty. Hammond, May or Hague would be ahead of him as likely successors. In any case, Davis didn't become leader because he wasn't up to it, not because he stood aside. He'd probably have lost in 2003 had he stood, and even if he'd gained the leadership, he'd have lost the general election. Osborne probably isn't up to the requirements of party leadership either, foremost among which is winning elections.
"The idea that Spain will wave through Scotland's membership of the EU before the Catalonian issue is resolved is laughable"
I heard this morning that Scotland would have to reapply for membership to the EU which would require them to accept the rules including VAT on food which the UK has an exemption from. Surely if true wouldn't the rest of the UK also have to reapply having lost a large part of their entity?
Is not the very fact of Scotland's secession likely to be enough to make many EU leaders (certainly in the institutions) hostile to the very idea of Scotland joining the EU? For many achieving a situation like Scotland has in the UK is their ultimate goal (albeit on a significantly larger scale) for all countries within the EU. And yet they (Scotland) will have just given that away. So they might see Scotland as seeking to enter for all the wrong reasons. And liable to be troublemakers and an obstacle to their goal.
OR various persons in the EU will make it very easy for Scotland to join, just to annoy the English...
To be honest i don't really see why Scotland joining the EU should annoy the English in the slightest. Probably the one member of the EU who wouldn't have an interest in vetoeing them and wouldn't be particularly concerned about them maintaining opt outs from Schengen/Euro etc etc
are you naive ? About the worst thing rUK could do is let a Salmond govt in to the EU, they'd veto rUK on everything just because the could. they're better outside the tent where we can piss on them.
And if they did that, it would be just another sign that the EU did not work, and hence persuade more of us that we should leave the EU.
Besides, it assumes that Scotland would want to p*ss the rest of the UK off. That may not be the case, depending on how things go. There is still a possibility that we might be friends after any split, despite how some of our Scottish contingent act.
A Scottish Douze Points would be nailed on. Eurovision is an excellent measure of the relative sizes of ethnic minorities within the competing countries.
Britain voted for Poland in the last Eurovision (large Polish expatriate community), but this was simply overruled in favour of a bearded transvestite.
Is not the very fact of Scotland's secession likely to be enough to make many EU leaders (certainly in the institutions) hostile to the very idea of Scotland joining the EU? For many achieving a situation like Scotland has in the UK is their ultimate goal (albeit on a significantly larger scale) for all countries within the EU. And yet they (Scotland) will have just given that away. So they might see Scotland as seeking to enter for all the wrong reasons. And liable to be troublemakers and an obstacle to their goal.
OR various persons in the EU will make it very easy for Scotland to join, just to annoy the English...
To be honest i don't really see why Scotland joining the EU should annoy the English in the slightest. Probably the one member of the EU who wouldn't have an interest in vetoeing them and wouldn't be particularly concerned about them maintaining opt outs from Schengen/Euro etc etc
are you naive ? About the worst thing rUK could do is let a Salmond govt in to the EU, they'd veto rUK on everything just because the could. they're better outside the tent where we can piss on them.
And if they did that, it would be just another sign that the EU did not work, and hence persuade more of us that we should leave the EU.
Besides, it assumes that Scotland would want to p*ss the rest of the UK off. That may not be the case, depending on how things go. There is still a possibility that we might be friends after any split, despite how some of our Scottish contingent act.
A Scottish Douze Points would be nailed on. Eurovision is an excellent measure of the relative sizes of ethnic minorities within the competing countries.
8% margin. Undecideds seeing through the SNP lies that everyone but them is bluffing?
Alternatively maybe the lead's been about 6% for ages, and everybody's been freaking out over one rogue YouGov. But let's see what the other two polls say...
8% margin. Undecideds seeing through the SNP lies that everyone but them is bluffing?
Probably watched Salmond's 'Great Dictator' routine, and Sillars threatening people and businesses, and thought sod that, I'm not living in a Scotland where that's the norm in future.
"The idea that Spain will wave through Scotland's membership of the EU before the Catalonian issue is resolved is laughable"
I heard this morning that Scotland would have to reapply for membership to the EU which would require them to accept the rules including VAT on food which the UK has an exemption from. Surely if true wouldn't the rest of the UK also have to reapply having lost a large part of their entity?
Not a chance; would be a gift to Farage et al and I'm sure Germany would not want any more turmoil . Also at the end of the day it's only 8%. rUK would easily remain part of the big 4 still about the population size ( if not a bit bigger) than Italy and within 10% of France.
Are people realising that the current Tories can't govern the UK ? The Tories have not won an election since 1992 and have been lucky that the Lib Dems were willing to let them implement most of their policies. The Lib Dems could have made it much more difficult for the Tories by blocking some policies. The bedroom tax which the Lib Dems voted for, is now opposed by them. Some of the discontent in Scotland relates to Tory policies they disagree with.
Th problem that the Tories have is that they have not persuaded a majority that their way of dealing with the countries problems is the best way forward. Margaret Thatcher would have been much more agressive in getting her message out. But Cameron can't do this, as he has portrayed himself as a touchy feely liberal Tory. Many Tory backbenchers given the opportunity would remove Cameron and choose another leader.
8% margin. Undecideds seeing through the SNP lies that everyone but them is bluffing?
Alternatively maybe the lead's been about 6% for ages, and everybody's been freaking out over one rogue YouGov. But let's see what the other two polls say...
you'd expect Panel base to be more favourable to Yes, I suppose we have to watch what Rupert's tweeting.
"If by "it" you mean "vetoing iScotland's membership of the EU" then I agree. I would prefer rUK not do that, but I acknowledge rUK can do that."
Why should it be assumed that the rest of the UK should retain their membership when the country is clearly different from what it was when it was accepted for membership?
"If by "it" you mean "vetoing iScotland's membership of the EU" then I agree. I would prefer rUK not do that, but I acknowledge rUK can do that."
Why should it be assumed that the rest of the UK should retain their membership when the country is clearly different from what it was when it was accepted for membership?
BOO Roger, I never expected you to be one of them.
"If by "it" you mean "vetoing iScotland's membership of the EU" then I agree. I would prefer rUK not do that, but I acknowledge rUK can do that."
Why should it be assumed that the rest of the UK should retain their membership when the country is clearly different from what it was when it was accepted for membership?
Do you really think that the rest of the EU would say to Britain, a net contributor to the EU, with all the issues of UKIP: sod off and apply to join us again?
Do you realise what the majority in this country would reply?
He makes it quite clear its a telephone rather than an online poll in this tweet. Twitter Damian Lyons Lowe @DamianSurvation · 31m ***POLL ALERT*** Stand by your beds. We have a NEW release coming shortly. Survation TELEPHONE poll on Scottish Independence.....#indyref
"If by "it" you mean "vetoing iScotland's membership of the EU" then I agree. I would prefer rUK not do that, but I acknowledge rUK can do that."
Why should it be assumed that the rest of the UK should retain their membership when the country is clearly different from what it was when it was accepted for membership?
Do you really think that the rest of the EU would say to Britain, a net contributor to the EU, with all the issues of UKIP: sod off and apply to join us again?
Do you realise what the majority in this country would reply?
Are people realising that the current Tories can't govern the UK ? The Tories have not won an election since 1992 and have been lucky that the Lib Dems were willing to let them implement most of their policies. The Lib Dems could have made it much more difficult for the Tories by blocking some policies. The bedroom tax which the Lib Dems voted for, is now opposed by them. Some of the discontent in Scotland relates to Tory policies they disagree with.
Th problem that the Tories have is that they have not persuaded a majority that their way of dealing with the countries problems is the best way forward. Margaret Thatcher would have been much more agressive in getting her message out. But Cameron can't do this, as he has portrayed himself as a touchy feely liberal Tory. Many Tory backbenchers given the opportunity would remove Cameron and choose another leader.
Talking of getting carried away by one poll - only yesterday Ipsos-Mori had the Tories ahead. Let the dust settle after Sindy ref and the conferences before we get close to any real idea about the GE
"If by "it" you mean "vetoing iScotland's membership of the EU" then I agree. I would prefer rUK not do that, but I acknowledge rUK can do that."
Why should it be assumed that the rest of the UK should retain their membership when the country is clearly different from what it was when it was accepted for membership?
Before my time, but what happened to France when Algeria broke away?
Within my time, Denmark remained part of the EU when Greenland broke away.
Different case, but Germany remained part of the EU when it expanded.
Jim Murphy, besides being blessed with a lovely Scottish accent, did an excellent civilised job on "Any Questions", defending the "no" vote. Clearly, by his vigorous roving defence around Scotland he has honed his arguments. He managed to fill in most of the opportunities for rebuttal that Darling missed, or couldn't get in sideways past a barracking Salmond, and he did it calmly and with good nature. Impressive civility.
" "Jim Sillars is a great campaigner who has put aside his personal grief over the loss of his wife Margo MacDonald to put his heart and soul into galvanising the Yes vote. He is fighting a fine campaign all over Scotland - but the day after a Yes vote will be a day of celebration for the people, not reckoning for big companies drawn into the No campaign by Downing Street.
Jim was simply trying to express the anger felt by so many people about the revelations that some supermarket statements were orchestrated by the Prime Minister himself.
However, we must rise above these underhand Tory tactics, and be confident of the new spirit in Scotland. The people are showing no signs whatsoever of being cowed. They are in no mood to be bullied by big Westminster Government putting pressure on big business to intimidate the people of Scotland. Indeed, just the opposite is happening.
We should also remember two things.
One is that many businesses have refused to be pressurised by Downing Street. For every supermarket drawn into it, there is a Tesco who are properly neutral. For every negativity from Bob Dudley of BP there is the positivity of Tim Martin of Wetherspoons.
Second, there are now almost 3,000 members of Business for Scotland led by some of the greatest job creators in the country. People like Jim McColl don’t just talk about Scotland’s prospects. They transform the position of workers at Ferguson’s to save shipbuilding on the lower Clyde."
But Sillars is still giving interviews. He has just finished one on News 24. I’ll post quotes from it later."
Will businesses fall for this spin hook, line and sinker? Sillars has landed Salmond in serious trouble, and Salmond has been too slow witted to unpick the damage. How does he expect to mend fences whatever the outcome next Thursday?
I have been saying that Jim Murphy is one of the most astute and media savvy politicians in the Labour party since he was appointed Secretary of State for Scotland in the last Government on here.
Jim Murphy, besides being blessed with a lovely Scottish accent, did an excellent civilised job on "Any Questions", defending the "no" vote. Clearly, by his vigorous roving defence around Scotland he has honed his arguments. He managed to fill in most of the opportunities for rebuttal that Darling missed, or couldn't get in sideways past a barracking Salmond, and he did it calmly and with good nature. Impressive civility.
I have been saying that Jim Murphy is one of the most astute and media savvy politicians in the Labour party since he was appointed Secretary of State for Scotland in the last Government on here.
Jim Murphy, besides being blessed with a lovely Scottish accent, did an excellent civilised job on "Any Questions", defending the "no" vote. Clearly, by his vigorous roving defence around Scotland he has honed his arguments. He managed to fill in most of the opportunities for rebuttal that Darling missed, or couldn't get in sideways past a barracking Salmond, and he did it calmly and with good nature. Impressive civility.
I'm now a fan. If no wins he will have made a significant contribution.
Is not the very fact of Scotland's secession likely to be enough to make many EU leaders (certainly in the institutions) hostile to the very idea of Scotland joining the EU? For many achieving a situation like Scotland has in the UK is their ultimate goal (albeit on a significantly larger scale) for all countries within the EU. And yet they (Scotland) will have just given that away. So they might see Scotland as seeking to enter for all the wrong reasons. And liable to be troublemakers and an obstacle to their goal.
OR various persons in the EU will make it very easy for Scotland to join, just to annoy the English...
To be honest i don't really see why Scotland joining the EU should annoy the English in the slightest. Probably the one member of the EU who wouldn't have an interest in vetoeing them and wouldn't be particularly concerned about them maintaining opt outs from Schengen/Euro etc etc
are you naive ? About the worst thing rUK could do is let a Salmond govt in to the EU, they'd veto rUK on everything just because the could. they're better outside the tent where we can piss on them.
And if they did that, it would be just another sign that the EU did not work, and hence persuade more of us that we should leave the EU.
Besides, it assumes that Scotland would want to p*ss the rest of the UK off. That may not be the case, depending on how things go. There is still a possibility that we might be friends after any split, despite how some of our Scottish contingent act.
A Scottish Douze Points would be nailed on. Eurovision is an excellent measure of the relative sizes of ethnic minorities within the competing countries.
Britain voted for Poland in the last Eurovision (large Polish expatriate community), but this was simply overruled in favour of a bearded transvestite.
Democracy? Wazzat?
It wasn't just Poles voting for those lovely Polish laundry workers!
Good try David but I don't think it works: On an ACCA basis, off the top of my head, I rate your three pre-conditions as follows:
Yes referendum vote ............................... 4/1 Narrow Labour win in popular vote ......... 2/1 Differential Impact re: polling shifts ........ 5/1
A treble based on the above produces combined winning odds of 89/1, some way longer than the bookie's offering of 66/1. The great unknown here in terms of assessing the likely odds is the third element, where I have had a guess at 5/1. I don't think most would argue greatly with the odds I have attributed to the other two elements. For the 66/1 price to be justified on this basis, the odds against the third part of the accumulator would need to reduce from 5/1 to 7/2, considerably too short in my opinion. Conversely if one were to lengthen the odds by the same one and a half points from 5/1 to 13/2, the combined odds stretch out to 111/1.
You rate a Scottish Yes much lower than I do. I think it's about a 6/4 prospect. I wish I had the money to place on what for me seems ludicrously long odds but right now, I don't. If it is 6/4, then that makes the overall price 44/1.
" "Jim Sillars is a great campaigner who has put aside his personal grief over the loss of his wife Margo MacDonald to put his heart and soul into galvanising the Yes vote. He is fighting a fine campaign all over Scotland - but the day after a Yes vote will be a day of celebration for the people, not reckoning for big companies drawn into the No campaign by Downing Street.
Jim was simply trying to express the anger felt by so many people about the revelations that some supermarket statements were orchestrated by the Prime Minister himself.
However, we must rise above these underhand Tory tactics, and be confident of the new spirit in Scotland. The people are showing no signs whatsoever of being cowed. They are in no mood to be bullied by big Westminster Government putting pressure on big business to intimidate the people of Scotland. Indeed, just the opposite is happening.
We should also remember two things.
One is that many businesses have refused to be pressurised by Downing Street. For every supermarket drawn into it, there is a Tesco who are properly neutral. For every negativity from Bob Dudley of BP there is the positivity of Tim Martin of Wetherspoons.
Second, there are now almost 3,000 members of Business for Scotland led by some of the greatest job creators in the country. People like Jim McColl don’t just talk about Scotland’s prospects. They transform the position of workers at Ferguson’s to save shipbuilding on the lower Clyde."
But Sillars is still giving interviews. He has just finished one on News 24. I’ll post quotes from it later."
Will businesses fall for this spin hook, line and sinker? Sillars has landed Salmond in serious trouble, and Salmond has been too slow witted to unpick the damage. How does he expect to mend fences whatever the outcome next Thursday?
Great speech but complete bs. The majority of Scotland's key business leaders are firmly in the No camp. Business for Scotland contains mostly a group of nobodies or has-beens. Jim McColl is a tax exile who cannot vote and Tim Martin runs a bunch of crappy pubs supplying cheap drinks to the NEDs of Scotland.
Comments
Tories taking one for the Union again, Labour lead up to 8%
Saturday's poll may offer some assurance. Labour now stands at 37%, a point up from two weeks ago. The Conservatives are on 29% while the Liberal Democrats attract just 7% of the electorate.
Nigel Farage's Ukip stand at 19% – up three points on the last Opinium/Observer poll a fortnight ago.
Despite Labour's lead, their leader still trails behind David Cameron in the approval ratings.
Nearly two in five voters (37%) approve of the prime minister. One in four (25%) approve of Miliband. Just 17% approve of the Liberal Democrat leader, Nick Clegg.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/13/labour-stretches-lead-tories-eight-point-opinium-observer-poll?CMP=twt_gu
Andrew Picken @andrewpicken1 7 mins
This, apparently, is Rupert Murdoch in Aberdeen today RT @HKforYES Rupert Murdoch has landed in Aberdeen! #indyref http://tinyurl.com/q2xoqrh
"Scotland can be vetoed in perpetuity by others, but if we want to guarantee it we vote it ourselves. "
I thought you wanted out of the EU?
And that's the ace we should play. What matters to us isn't the issue. In effective negotiations, you hold your oppo hostage on the issues that matter most to them.
We're in the EU [and not happy about it], what do we care if Scotland is or isn't? Nowt. But it matters to them a great deal.
When Cameron tried to play the exit threat card over Juncker it actually made it harder for people to agree with him, because people don't like being pushed around by other countries. Like I say, people here would respond in exactly the same way if any other EU country tried to threaten them like that.
That said, there are some things that most EU member states are trying to do anyway like labour market reform that Cameron could conceivably try to take the credit for, and a few minor things where they probably don't care much either way and the UK is only involved because Labour liked them on the merits, like whether the UK is part of the working time directive.
Lab 37 (+1) Con 29 (-1) LD 7 (nc) UKIP 19 (+3)
"@DamianSurvation 4m
***POLL ALERT*** Stand by your beds. We have a NEW release coming shortly. Survation TELEPHONE poll on Scottish Independence.....#indyref"
These polls are all making the national news. Come on pollsters get your name on the news. The bigger the she shift (particularly to YES) the louder the noise....Even Jack's McARSE could cause a few ripples
You're doomed, Salmond, doomed I tell ya.
http://www.sportinglife.com/football/news/article/165/9466022/premier-league-match-by-match-betting-preview-and-tips-for-saturdays-games-including-arsenal-v-manchester-city
I wonder what the guy predicts for Thursday!!
"The idea that Spain will wave through Scotland's membership of the EU before the Catalonian issue is resolved is laughable"
I heard this morning that Scotland would have to reapply for membership to the EU which would require them to accept the rules including VAT on food which the UK has an exemption from. Surely if true wouldn't the rest of the UK also have to reapply having lost a large part of their entity?
Democracy? Wazzat?
Provides pretty strong evidence that the "true" No position is at least 52.
Plus that if there is any movement it is in direction of No.
Hard to see Yes turning around that magnitude of deficit given where the momentum currently is.
No has the MO.
Th problem that the Tories have is that they have not persuaded a majority that their way of dealing with the countries problems is the best way forward. Margaret Thatcher would have been much more agressive in getting her message out. But Cameron can't do this, as he has portrayed himself as a touchy feely liberal Tory. Many Tory backbenchers given the opportunity would remove Cameron and choose another leader.
Why should it be assumed that the rest of the UK should retain their membership when the country is clearly different from what it was when it was accepted for membership?
Phwoarr!
bollocks didn't do any of these this weekend!
Do you really think that the rest of the EU would say to Britain, a net contributor to the EU, with all the issues of UKIP: sod off and apply to join us again?
Do you realise what the majority in this country would reply?
Twitter
Damian Lyons Lowe @DamianSurvation · 31m
***POLL ALERT*** Stand by your beds. We have a NEW release coming shortly. Survation TELEPHONE poll on Scottish Independence.....#indyref
Within my time, Denmark remained part of the EU when Greenland broke away.
Different case, but Germany remained part of the EU when it expanded.
Seriously !
" "Jim Sillars is a great campaigner who has put aside his personal grief over the loss of his wife Margo MacDonald to put his heart and soul into galvanising the Yes vote. He is fighting a fine campaign all over Scotland - but the day after a Yes vote will be a day of celebration for the people, not reckoning for big companies drawn into the No campaign by Downing Street.
Jim was simply trying to express the anger felt by so many people about the revelations that some supermarket statements were orchestrated by the Prime Minister himself.
However, we must rise above these underhand Tory tactics, and be confident of the new spirit in Scotland. The people are showing no signs whatsoever of being cowed. They are in no mood to be bullied by big Westminster Government putting pressure on big business to intimidate the people of Scotland. Indeed, just the opposite is happening.
We should also remember two things.
One is that many businesses have refused to be pressurised by Downing Street. For every supermarket drawn into it, there is a Tesco who are properly neutral. For every negativity from Bob Dudley of BP there is the positivity of Tim Martin of Wetherspoons.
Second, there are now almost 3,000 members of Business for Scotland led by some of the greatest job creators in the country. People like Jim McColl don’t just talk about Scotland’s prospects. They transform the position of workers at Ferguson’s to save shipbuilding on the lower Clyde."
But Sillars is still giving interviews. He has just finished one on News 24. I’ll post quotes from it later."
Will businesses fall for this spin hook, line and sinker? Sillars has landed Salmond in serious trouble, and Salmond has been too slow witted to unpick the damage. How does he expect to mend fences whatever the outcome next Thursday?