Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » What’s striking about the Maria Miller polling is that CON

124

Comments

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,974
    TFS The goal was to get Al Qaeda out of Afghanistan, which was achieved, and it is now for Afghans to decide their own fate, it will not be perfect, and has a turbulent history, but the big turnout yesterday will give the new president a big mandate
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    HYUFD said:

    MickPork Only because of Clegg, the Labour total was its lowest since 1983

    Clegg won less seats than Kennedy.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,974
    JackW Maybe, but Quebec is still in Canada and has had no referendum for 19 years, despite that tight 51-49 vote in 1995
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,302
    edited April 2014
    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    AndyJS said:

    Has anyone so far expressed the view that maybe one factor causing YES to rise in Scotland is the growing popularity of UKIP in the rest of the UK? Maybe Scotland's more left-wing voters don't like what they're seeing.

    Undoubtedly. One of the key points about indy is the way in which the Scots keep voting for anyone but a Tory and end up under Tories (or their Blairite impersonations). So anything that contributes to the perception that England is being overrun by, metaphorically, what many a Scots voter sees as the political equivalent of an ueber-Tory zombie apocalypse is going to help get a Yes, as a first approximation, so UKIP is very good for Yes.


    (No need to explain to me how this divergence has happened - this has been discussed many times on PB and is undoubtedly in part due to the rather different experiences of immigration and emigration. I'm only concerned here with the existence of the divergence and the loikely response to a rise in UKIP.)



    the rise in the acceptability of anti-foreigner discourse in English and therefore Westminster politics.

    what sanctimonious nonsense. Scotland hasn't had mass immigration in the way England has, and still despite it all England remains one of the most tolerant places on earth.
    Sorry if it upset you. I was trying to be factual and neutral but it is certainly what I have been told and what I have heard from my friend and the impression I get from reading in the paper. Perhaps my terminology would have been better "anti-immigrant" discourse. But others can judge better than me which is more accurate. I did also note the different experiences (at least in recent years).
    No apology needed I just disagree with you. I'm Irish and I find the English the most annoyingly laidback people I've come across. perhaps if Scotland had 10% of it's population come in in the last decade and rapid change in towns and cities we'd have a better view of how tolerant Scots are. The issue maybe you should ask is how did things get so far advanced that it's only now people are discussing it ?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,974
    ANDY JS Well UKIP was up to 8% in Scotland in the Euro poll yesterday, so Scotland is not immune to the Kippers either
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    This is quite a delicious take on Maria Miller:

    #Wonga running a #MariaMiller special pic.twitter.com/Z6dQELBVVl

    — Wake Up UK (@Shellspeare) April 6, 2014
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,197

    Mick_Pork said:

    I think I will take John Curtice word on the PanelBase poll rather than the furious spinning of the stalled separatists:

    Once the Don’t Knows (14%, down one point) are excluded the Yes vote stands at 47%, the same as in Panelbase’s previous poll for newsnet. The poll thus cannot be cited as evidence that there is now a nationalist bandwagon moving continuously and relentlessly towards the 50% mark. We should certainly remember that all of the polls Panelbase conducted last year already put the Yes tally at 44% or 45%. The two to three point increase in Yes support since then is simply in line with the trend that has already been evident in more or less all the polls for some two or three months.

    Osbrowne's inept posturing for nothing.
    You mean the intervention that drove rUK opinion on a currency union from "evenly split" to "2:1 against"?

    Clearly, "A Victory for Eck"!

    Titters.....

    You mean this one:
    Currency furore over mystery of missing memos

    No paper trail means Treasury's position engineered, say SNP
    Sunday 6 April 2014

    THE Treasury was last night at the centre of a growing row over political bias, after admitting it had no record of when its most senior civil servant first advised the Chancellor against a currency union with an independent Scotland.
    Memo from Sir Nicholas was seized on by the Unionist lobby
    The inability of permanent secretary Sir Nicholas Macpherson to give a precise date is fuelling claims that Westminster's bombshell rejection of a currency union was cooked up to help the No campaign in the referendum.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,302
    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    MalcolmG David Bowie, Billy Connolly are No backers, Brian Cox is for YES. Both have celebrity backers

    Dear Dear , you get worse. Bowie got himself some free publicity , Connolly has clearly stated he will not state his views and as he does not live in Scotland has no vote. Cox is YES but again has no vote . All are irrelevant and nobody gives a toss what any of them think, we are interested in what the people who live in Scotland think.
    So you don't give a toss about Dickson or that weird fake cleric at WoS ? Very snubbing of you.
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    MalcolmG David Bowie, Billy Connolly are No backers, Brian Cox is for YES. Both have celebrity backers

    Dear Dear , you get worse. Bowie got himself some free publicity , Connolly has clearly stated he will not state his views and as he does not live in Scotland has no vote. Cox is YES but again has no vote . All are irrelevant and nobody gives a toss what any of them think, we are interested in what the people who live in Scotland think.
    So you don't give a toss about Dickson or that weird fake cleric at WoS ? Very snubbing of you.
    Mr Campbell at WoS is doing a grand job, he may not have a vote but it looks like he is certainly influencing the decision. Nice to see the lying unionist medias stories being shown up for what they are.
    If Stuart lives in Sweden then he has no vote so that is tough.
    I am sure there are many Scots throughout the world interested in the referendum result.
    On Ms DiCanio's logic, we should ignore most of the "Scottish" media, including the BBC, as they are owned/controlled south of the border, and we should also ignore Messrs Cameron, Osborne, Hammond, Cable, Clegg, Miliband, etc. etc.
    I think you'll find he's only playing your own logic back to you.
    My own logic? Where?

    I'd read anything with interest from anywhere if it is well informed, germane and has something useful to contribute.

    "you" in the collective sense of Nats saying anyone outside Scotland is simply "interfering". So southern media shouldn't "interfere" in the Indyref with the obvious exceptions of those based in the West Country.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,751

    HYUFD said:

    MalcolmG David Bowie, Billy Connolly are No backers, Brian Cox is for YES. Both have celebrity backers

    Connolly has declined to express an opinion.
    so have lots of Scots - the tennis Murrays for example. Sort of shows what a shit campaign it has been.
    Seems fine to me: lots of gettogethers, humour, activism, getting out and talking to folk, though no doubt you'd decry that as student politics. Seems to be working though.

    As a matter of interest, what do you think BT should be doing to lower the shit quotient (apart from appealing to blood and clan over WWI)?

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,197

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    MalcolmG David Bowie, Billy Connolly are No backers, Brian Cox is for YES. Both have celebrity backers

    Dear Dear , you get worse. Bowie got himself some free publicity , Connolly has clearly stated he will not state his views and as he does not live in Scotland has no vote. Cox is YES but again has no vote . All are irrelevant and nobody gives a toss what any of them think, we are interested in what the people who live in Scotland think.
    But what about Cumming who desperately wants to vote - bought a flat to qualify - but sadly can't? (As some of us pointed out at the time....) And after you assured us all that he would be able to vote too.....

    That is the unionist bias that we are going to defeat though. If he has a house in Scotland he should be able to vote.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    malcolmg said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    I think I will take John Curtice word on the PanelBase poll rather than the furious spinning of the stalled separatists:

    Once the Don’t Knows (14%, down one point) are excluded the Yes vote stands at 47%, the same as in Panelbase’s previous poll for newsnet. The poll thus cannot be cited as evidence that there is now a nationalist bandwagon moving continuously and relentlessly towards the 50% mark. We should certainly remember that all of the polls Panelbase conducted last year already put the Yes tally at 44% or 45%. The two to three point increase in Yes support since then is simply in line with the trend that has already been evident in more or less all the polls for some two or three months.

    Osbrowne's inept posturing for nothing.
    You mean the intervention that drove rUK opinion on a currency union from "evenly split" to "2:1 against"?

    Clearly, "A Victory for Eck"!

    Titters.....

    You mean this one:
    Currency furore over mystery of missing memos

    No paper trail means Treasury's position engineered, say SNP
    Sunday 6 April 2014

    THE Treasury was last night at the centre of a growing row over political bias, after admitting it had no record of when its most senior civil servant first advised the Chancellor against a currency union with an independent Scotland.
    Memo from Sir Nicholas was seized on by the Unionist lobby
    The inability of permanent secretary Sir Nicholas Macpherson to give a precise date is fuelling claims that Westminster's bombshell rejection of a currency union was cooked up to help the No campaign in the referendum.
    Where does that article explain what currency will be used after independence? Surely that is of greater import than a "missing memo"?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,751
    edited April 2014
    Oh dear, it appears some PB defamers have escaped into the wider world.

    Panelbase ‏@Panelbase 2 hrs
    @Danyal1233 Our polls are not "rigged". Suggest you retract inaccurate and defamatory comments.

    Panelbase ‏@Panelbase 2 hrs
    @flashgrim Not true and highly misleading. Suggest you think carefully before posting inaccurate comments and defaming our company.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,302
    malcolmg said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    I think I will take John Curtice word on the PanelBase poll rather than the furious spinning of the stalled separatists:

    Once the Don’t Knows (14%, down one point) are excluded the Yes vote stands at 47%, the same as in Panelbase’s previous poll for newsnet. The poll thus cannot be cited as evidence that there is now a nationalist bandwagon moving continuously and relentlessly towards the 50% mark. We should certainly remember that all of the polls Panelbase conducted last year already put the Yes tally at 44% or 45%. The two to three point increase in Yes support since then is simply in line with the trend that has already been evident in more or less all the polls for some two or three months.

    Osbrowne's inept posturing for nothing.
    You mean the intervention that drove rUK opinion on a currency union from "evenly split" to "2:1 against"?

    Clearly, "A Victory for Eck"!

    Titters.....

    You mean this one:
    Currency furore over mystery of missing memos

    No paper trail means Treasury's position engineered, say SNP
    Sunday 6 April 2014

    THE Treasury was last night at the centre of a growing row over political bias, after admitting it had no record of when its most senior civil servant first advised the Chancellor against a currency union with an independent Scotland.
    Memo from Sir Nicholas was seized on by the Unionist lobby
    The inability of permanent secretary Sir Nicholas Macpherson to give a precise date is fuelling claims that Westminster's bombshell rejection of a currency union was cooked up to help the No campaign in the referendum.

    getting a bit obsessive malc. Are you claiming the guy now isn't advising not to have a currency union, because I think you'll find that's not the case.

    In any case why don't you guys gets some balls and say you'll just have your own.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,654
    As I have said repeatedly the independence referendum is going to be close.

    The campaign and the supposed debate has been absolutely shambolic to date. Salmond's white paper was a complete joke, based on a whole range of false assumptions about the currency, lender of last resort, EU membership, tax revenues from the North sea etc etc. This supposed political wizard has repeatedly looked like a chump.

    But as Malcolm and others point out this matters less than it should because the movement for independence is wider than the SNP and is not reliant on Salmond. The point is really much more fundamental: whatever the answers are to these questions (and the SNP themselves clearly do not have a clue) should these decisions be made by Scots for Scots or as part of a larger Union? That is the real question.

    It is a question the Better Together campaign is not answering. They are getting bogged down in the details of catching out Salmond's fantasies without addressing the real question. Why are we better together?

    I think it is because as part of a larger economic unit and market we have huge advantages that give our people far more opportunities than they will have in an independent Scotland. The United Kingdom is one of the most successful Unions in history but the vote is about the future not the past. Better Together really need to put forward compelling arguments as to why Scots will be better off and happier over the next 20-30 years. So far they have completely failed to address this and it is a major flaw.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,598

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    MalcolmG David Bowie, Billy Connolly are No backers, Brian Cox is for YES. Both have celebrity backers

    Dear Dear , you get worse. Bowie got himself some free publicity , Connolly has clearly stated he will not state his views and as he does not live in Scotland has no vote. Cox is YES but again has no vote . All are irrelevant and nobody gives a toss what any of them think, we are interested in what the people who live in Scotland think.
    So you don't give a toss about Dickson or that weird fake cleric at WoS ? Very snubbing of you.
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    MalcolmG David Bowie, Billy Connolly are No backers, Brian Cox is for YES. Both have celebrity backers

    Dear Dear , you get worse. Bowie got himself some free publicity , Connolly has clearly stated he will not state his views and as he does not live in Scotland has no vote. Cox is YES but again has no vote . All are irrelevant and nobody gives a toss what any of them think, we are interested in what the people who live in Scotland think.
    So you don't give a toss about Dickson or that weird fake cleric at WoS ? Very snubbing of you.
    Mr Campbell at WoS is doing a grand job, he may not have a vote but it looks like he is certainly influencing the decision. Nice to see the lying unionist medias stories being shown up for what they are.
    If Stuart lives in Sweden then he has no vote so that is tough.
    I am sure there are many Scots throughout the world interested in the referendum result.
    On Ms DiCanio's logic, we should ignore most of the "Scottish" media, including the BBC, as they are owned/controlled south of the border, and we should also ignore Messrs Cameron, Osborne, Hammond, Cable, Clegg, Miliband, etc. etc.
    I think you'll find he's only playing your own logic back to you.
    My own logic? Where?

    I'd read anything with interest from anywhere if it is well informed, germane and has something useful to contribute.

    "you" in the collective sense of Nats saying anyone outside Scotland is simply "interfering". So southern media shouldn't "interfere" in the Indyref with the obvious exceptions of those based in the West Country.
    I was noting that Ms DCanio's logic, that a Scot ought (by implication) to be downgraded because he lives in the Westcountry, had wider implications. Of course this would be silly. But I'd be a lot happier with a better balanced media.

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    malcolmg said:

    I think I will take John Curtice word on the PanelBase poll rather than the furious spinning of the stalled separatists:

    Once the Don’t Knows (14%, down one point) are excluded the Yes vote stands at 47%, the same as in Panelbase’s previous poll for newsnet. The poll thus cannot be cited as evidence that there is now a nationalist bandwagon moving continuously and relentlessly towards the 50% mark. We should certainly remember that all of the polls Panelbase conducted last year already put the Yes tally at 44% or 45%. The two to three point increase in Yes support since then is simply in line with the trend that has already been evident in more or less all the polls for some two or three months.

    http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2014/04/panelbase-wings-poll-shows-narrow-but-unchanged-no-lead/

    Did you read your cut and paste, "the two to three point increase in YES support since then is simply in line with the trend that has already been evident in more or less all the polls for some two or three months".

    It states exactly what I have said today , the trend is to YES even that great unionist Curtice is promoting it.
    It's not my fault you can't tell the difference between a "shift" (which is what has happened) and a "trend" - which Curtice points out isn't supported by this poll.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758


    No apology needed I just disagree with you. I'm Irish and I find the English the most annoyingly laidback people I've come across.

    They have given us into the hands of the new unhappy lords,
    Lords without anger and honour, who dare not carry their swords.
    They fight by shuffling papers; they have bright dead alien eyes;
    They look at our labour and laughter as a tired man looks at flies.
    And the load of their loveless pity is worse than the ancient wrongs,
    Their doors are shut in the evenings; and they know no songs.

    We hear men speaking for us of new laws strong and sweet,
    Yet is there no man speaketh as we speak in the street.
    It may be we shall rise the last as Frenchmen rose the first,
    Our wrath come after Russia's wrath and our wrath be the worst.
    It may be we are meant to mark with our riot and our rest
    God's scorn for all men governing. It may be beer is best.
    But we are the people of England; and we have not spoken yet.
    Smile at us, pay us, pass us. But do not quite forget.


    http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~martinh/poems/SECRET
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,974
    MickPork So what, Clegg stopped Cameron getting a majority, and the Labour vote fell 7% from 2005 to 2010
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,302

    HYUFD said:

    MalcolmG David Bowie, Billy Connolly are No backers, Brian Cox is for YES. Both have celebrity backers

    Connolly has declined to express an opinion.
    so have lots of Scots - the tennis Murrays for example. Sort of shows what a shit campaign it has been.
    Seems fine to me: lots of gettogethers, humour, activism, getting out and talking to folk, though no doubt you'd decry that as student politics. Seems to be working though.

    As a matter of interest, what do you think BT should be doing to lower the shit quotient (apart from appealing to blood and clan over WWI)?

    I'd say they need to switch to being more upbeat for the last 6 months and sell the benefits of staying in the UK. The nats have lost all the head arguments, it's time to park some tanks on eck's lawn and appeal to the heart, he's had it too easy.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited April 2014
    HYUFD said:

    ANDY JS Well UKIP was up to 8% in Scotland in the Euro poll yesterday, so Scotland is not immune to the Kippers either

    It would be almost earth-shattering if UKIP get more than 10% of the vote in the Scottish Euro election. If they did so, it would almost certainly mean beating both the Tories and LDs.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    @Ninoinoz wrote :

    "Incidentally, isn't it great to see the gay community rush to Miller's aid in her hour of need in gratitude for introducing gay "marriage"? Most touching."

    ..............................................................

    What a fatuous comment.

    Maria Miller didn't introduce gay marriage. It became law as a result of free votes in Parliament and supported by a substantial majority of the public.

    Neither is the gay community a single block who should support or reject Maria Miller. They are millions of individuals who like straight folk determine their views according to all the normal process of free thought.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,974
    TFS On the celebrity count, Yes probably narrowly do win true
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,197

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    MalcolmG David Bowie, Billy Connolly are No backers, Brian Cox is for YES. Both have celebrity backers

    So you don't give a toss about Dickson or that weird fake cleric at WoS ? Very snubbing of you.
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    MalcolmG David Bowie, Billy Connolly are No backers, Brian Cox is for YES. Both have celebrity backers

    Dear Dear , you get worse. Bowie got himself some free publicity , Connolly has clearly stated he will not state his views and as he does not live in Scotland has no vote. Cox is YES but again has no vote . All are irrelevant and nobody gives a toss what any of them think, we are interested in what the people who live in Scotland think.
    So you don't give a toss about Dickson or that weird fake cleric at WoS ? Very snubbing of you.
    Mr Campbell at WoS is doing a grand job, he may not have a vote but it looks like he is certainly influencing the decision. Nice to see the lying unionist medias stories being shown up for what they are.
    If Stuart lives in Sweden then he has no vote so that is tough.
    I am sure there are many Scots throughout the world interested in the referendum result.
    On Ms DiCanio's logic, we should ignore most of the "Scottish" media, including the BBC, as they are owned/controlled south of the border, and we should also ignore Messrs Cameron, Osborne, Hammond, Cable, Clegg, Miliband, etc. etc.
    I think you'll find he's only playing your own logic back to you.
    My own logic? Where?

    I'd read anything with interest from anywhere if it is well informed, germane and has something useful to contribute.

    "you" in the collective sense of Nats saying anyone outside Scotland is simply "interfering". So southern media shouldn't "interfere" in the Indyref with the obvious exceptions of those based in the West Country.
    Alan, surprised that you are in the same camp as the media disparaging one guy's blog just because he is running rings round them and proving to be popular by actually telling it as it really is instead of the usual Tory/labour fantasy press releases.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    MalcolmG David Bowie, Billy Connolly are No backers, Brian Cox is for YES. Both have celebrity backers

    Dear Dear , you get worse. Bowie got himself some free publicity , Connolly has clearly stated he will not state his views and as he does not live in Scotland has no vote. Cox is YES but again has no vote . All are irrelevant and nobody gives a toss what any of them think, we are interested in what the people who live in Scotland think.
    But what about Cumming who desperately wants to vote - bought a flat to qualify - but sadly can't? (As some of us pointed out at the time....) And after you assured us all that he would be able to vote too.....

    That is the unionist bias that we are going to defeat though. If he has a house in Scotland he should be able to vote.
    Votes for non-resident property owners......is that official SNP policy?

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,197

    malcolmg said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    I think I will take John Curtice word on the PanelBase poll rather than the furious spinning of the stalled separatists:

    Once the Don’t Knows (14%, down one point) are excluded the Yes vote stands at 47%, the same as in Panelbase’s previous poll for newsnet. The poll thus cannot be cited as evidence that there is now a nationalist bandwagon moving continuously and relentlessly towards the 50% mark. We should certainly remember that all of the polls Panelbase conducted last year already put the Yes tally at 44% or 45%. The two to three point increase in Yes support since then is simply in line with the trend that has already been evident in more or less all the polls for some two or three months.

    Osbrowne's inept posturing for nothing.
    You mean the intervention that drove rUK opinion on a currency union from "evenly split" to "2:1 against"?

    Clearly, "A Victory for Eck"!

    Titters.....

    You mean this one:
    Currency furore over mystery of missing memos

    No paper trail means Treasury's position engineered, say SNP
    Sunday 6 April 2014

    THE Treasury was last night at the centre of a growing row over political bias, after admitting it had no record of when its most senior civil servant first advised the Chancellor against a currency union with an independent Scotland.
    Memo from Sir Nicholas was seized on by the Unionist lobby
    The inability of permanent secretary Sir Nicholas Macpherson to give a precise date is fuelling claims that Westminster's bombshell rejection of a currency union was cooked up to help the No campaign in the referendum.
    Where does that article explain what currency will be used after independence? Surely that is of greater import than a "missing memo"?
    As has been clearly stated , we will continue to use the pound. Bit worrying that you cannot take that in.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,974
    edited April 2014
    MickPork Abdullah Abdullah is a very tough strong character, and has fought the Russians and the Taleban before even 9/11, he is the best choice for president, but Ghani would be OK too
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Around 200 voters took part in the St Helens South & Whiston Labour selection. The candidates were Marie Rimmer, Catherine McDonald and June Hitchin:

    http://www.sthelensstar.co.uk/news/11129815.Rimmer_secures_Labour_candidacy/?ref=var_0
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,302
    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    MalcolmG David Bowie, Billy Connolly are No backers, Brian Cox is for YES. Both have celebrity backers

    Dear Dear , you get worse. Bowie got himself some free publicity , Connolly has clearly stated he will not state his views and as he does not live in Scotland has no vote. Cox is YES but again has no vote . All are irrelevant and nobody gives a toss what any of them think, we are interested in what the people who live in Scotland think.
    So you don't give a toss about Dickson or that weird fake cleric at WoS ? Very snubbing of you.
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    MalcolmG David Bowie, Billy Connolly are No backers, Brian Cox is for YES. Both have celebrity backers

    Dear Dear , you get worse. Bowie got himself some free publicity , Connolly has clearly toss what any of them think, we are interested in what the people who live in Scotland think.
    So you don't give a toss about Dickson or that weird fake cleric at WoS ? Very snubbing of you.
    has no vote so that is tough.
    I am sure there are many Scots throughout the world interested in the referendum result.
    On Ms DiCanio's logic, we should ignore most of the "Scottish" media, including the BBC, as they are owned/controlled south of the border, and we should also ignore Messrs Cameron, Osborne, Hammond, Cable, Clegg, Miliband, etc. etc.
    I think you'll find he's only playing your own logic back to you.
    My own logic? Where?

    I'd read anything with interest from anywhere if it is well informed, germane and has something useful to contribute.

    "you" in the collective sense of Nats saying anyone outside Scotland is simply "interfering". So southern media shouldn't "interfere" in the Indyref with the obvious exceptions of those based in the West Country.
    I was noting that Ms DCanio's logic, that a Scot ought (by implication) to be downgraded because he lives in the Westcountry, had wider implications. Of course this would be silly. But I'd be a lot happier with a better balanced media.

    A difficult one Carnryx, as a more recent poster you don't have quite the "history" on the Indyref as some of our PB nats. We had a period of "nobody should interfere in Scotland" which ended abruptly when Eck realised he needed a plummy- voiced PM to boost his campaign and wasn't going to get one.

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,598

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    AndyJS said:

    Has anyone so far expressed the view that maybe one factor causing YES to rise in Scotland is the growing popularity of UKIP in the rest of the UK? Maybe Scotland's more left-wing voters don't like what they're seeing.

    Undoubtedly. One of the key points about indy is the way in which the Scots keep voting for anyone but a Tory and end up under Tories (or their Blairite impersonations). So anything that contributes to the perception that England is being overrun by, metaphorically, what many a Scots voter sees as the political equivalent of an ueber-Tory zombie apocalypse is going to help get a Yes, as a first approximation, so UKIP is very good for Yes.


    (No need to explain to me how this divergence has happened - this has been discussed many times on PB and is undoubtedly in part due to the rather different experiences of immigration and emigration. I'm only concerned here with the existence of the divergence and the loikely response to a rise in UKIP.)



    the rise in the acceptability of anti-foreigner discourse in English and therefore Westminster politics.

    what sanctimonious nonsense. Scotland hasn't had mass immigration in the way England has, and still despite it all England remains one of the most tolerant places on earth.
    Sorry if it upset you. I was trying to be factual and neutral but it is certainly what I have been told and what I have heard from my friend and the impression I get from reading in the paper. Perhaps my terminology would have been better "anti-immigrant" discourse. But others can judge better than me which is more accurate. I did also note the different experiences (at least in recent years).
    No apology needed I just disagree with you. I'm Irish and I find the English the most annoyingly laidback people I've come across. perhaps if Scotland had 10% of it's population come in in the last decade and rapid change in towns and cities we'd have a better view of how tolerant Scots are. The issue maybe you should ask is how did things get so far advanced that it's only now people are discussing it ?
    Thanks. That would be - I think - mainly southern politics and not one for me to say, apart from listening what others here have had to say ad libitum, and no doubt will in the future.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,974
    Malcolm G I would agree on that, the likes of Sean Connery should not determine Scotland's future from a Bahamas beach or Manhattan apartment, if Scotland does get independence they would be Scottish citizens by birth
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,197
    edited April 2014

    malcolmg said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    I think I will take John Curtice word on the PanelBase poll rather than the furious spinning of the stalled separatists:

    Once the Don’t Knows (14%, down one point) are excluded the Yes vote stands at 47%, the same as in Panelbase’s previous poll for newsnet. The poll thus cannot be cited as evidence that there is now a nationalist bandwagon moving continuously and relentlessly towards the 50% mark. We should certainly remember that all of the polls Panelbase conducted last year already put the Yes tally at 44% or 45%. The two to three point increase in Yes support since then is simply in line with the trend that has already been evident in more or less all the polls for some two or three months.

    Osbrowne's inept posturing for nothing.
    You mean the intervention that drove rUK opinion on a currency union from "evenly split" to "2:1 against"?

    Clearly, "A Victory for Eck"!

    Titters.....

    You mean this one:
    Currency furore over mystery of missing memos

    No paper trail means Treasury's position engineered, say SNP
    Sunday 6 April 2014

    THE Treasury was last night at the centre of a growing row over political bias, after admitting it had no record of when its most senior civil servant first advised the Chancellor against a currency union with an independent Scotland.
    Memo from Sir Nicholas was seized on by the Unionist lobby
    The inability of permanent secretary Sir Nicholas Macpherson to give a precise date is fuelling claims that Westminster's bombshell rejection of a currency union was cooked up to help the No campaign in the referendum.

    getting a bit obsessive malc. Are you claiming the guy now isn't advising not to have a currency union, because I think you'll find that's not the case.

    In any case why don't you guys gets some balls and say you'll just have your own.
    Alan, It is obvious it was cooked up by darling / Gideon etc. They thought it was a great idea and ordered their lackey to say it was a bad idea. It was very stupid. Personally I do not believe there will be any interest in a currency union , we will continue using the pound initially.

    There will be plenty time after the vote to start negotiating.

  • EasterrossEasterross Posts: 1,915
    Saw a comment, I think from Malcolm about Alan Cumming. He cant vote because his Scottish property is not declared his main residence, that being somewhere in America.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    HYUFD said:

    JackW Maybe, but Quebec is still in Canada and has had no referendum for 19 years, despite that tight 51-49 vote in 1995

    Sorry HYUFD but I'm unsure of your point in relation to my comment.

    Perhaps you might expand ?

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,302
    malcolmg said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    MalcolmG David Bowie, Billy Connolly are No backers, Brian Cox is for YES. Both have celebrity backers

    So you don't give a toss about Dickson or that weird fake cleric at WoS ? Very snubbing of you.
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    MalcolmG David Bowie, Billy Connolly are No backers, Brian Cox is for YES. Both have celebrity backers

    Dear Dear , you get worse. Bowie got himself some free publicity , Connolly has clearly stated he will not state his views and as he does not live in Scotland has no vote. Cox is YES but again has no vote . All are irrelevant and nobody gives a toss what any of them think, we are interested in what the people who live in Scotland think.
    So you don't give a toss about Dickson or that weird fake cleric at WoS ? Very snubbing of you.
    Mr Campbell at WoS is doing a grand job, he may not have a vote but it looks like he is certainly influencing the decision. Nice to see the lying unionist medias stories being shown up for what they are.
    If Stuart lives in Sweden then he has no vote so that is tough.
    I am sure there are many Scots throughout the world interested in the referendum result.
    On Ms DiCanio's logic, we should ignore most of the "Scottish" media, including the BBC, as they are owned/controlled south of the border, and we should also ignore Messrs Cameron, Osborne, Hammond, Cable, Clegg, Miliband, etc. etc.
    I think you'll find he's only playing your own logic back to you.
    My own logic? Where?

    I'd read anything with interest from anywhere if it is well informed, germane and has something useful to contribute.

    "you" in the collective sense of Nats saying anyone outside Scotland is simply "interfering". So southern media shouldn't "interfere" in the Indyref with the obvious exceptions of those based in the West Country.
    Alan, surprised that you are in the same camp as the media disparaging one guy's blog just because he is running rings round them and proving to be popular by actually telling it as it really is instead of the usual Tory/labour fantasy press releases.
    malc the guy can post as much as he wants as far as I'm concerned, but if Nats are going to draw arbitrary lines around who can and can't express an opinion then they could at least be consistent and apply them to themselves.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,974
    Twisted Fire Stopper The Taleban had killed Ahmed Massood days before 9/11 and Bin Laden plotted 9/11 from Afghan soil, Bin Laden is now dead and Afghans have turned out in large numbers to elect a new government and president, it will not be perfect, but is in a better place than before intervention
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    I think I will take John Curtice word on the PanelBase poll rather than the furious spinning of the stalled separatists:

    Once the Don’t Knows (14%, down one point) are excluded the Yes vote stands at 47%, the same as in Panelbase’s previous poll for newsnet. The poll thus cannot be cited as evidence that there is now a nationalist bandwagon moving continuously and relentlessly towards the 50% mark. We should certainly remember that all of the polls Panelbase conducted last year already put the Yes tally at 44% or 45%. The two to three point increase in Yes support since then is simply in line with the trend that has already been evident in more or less all the polls for some two or three months.

    Osbrowne's inept posturing for nothing.
    You mean the intervention that drove rUK opinion on a currency union from "evenly split" to "2:1 against"?

    Clearly, "A Victory for Eck"!

    Titters.....

    You mean this one:
    Currency furore over mystery of missing memos

    No paper trail means Treasury's position engineered, say SNP
    Sunday 6 April 2014

    THE Treasury was last night at the centre of a growing row over political bias, after admitting it had no record of when its most senior civil servant first advised the Chancellor against a currency union with an independent Scotland.
    Memo from Sir Nicholas was seized on by the Unionist lobby
    The inability of permanent secretary Sir Nicholas Macpherson to give a precise date is fuelling claims that Westminster's bombshell rejection of a currency union was cooked up to help the No campaign in the referendum.
    Where does that article explain what currency will be used after independence? Surely that is of greater import than a "missing memo"?
    As has been clearly stated , we will continue to use the pound. Bit worrying that you cannot take that in.
    So the Darien Panama option then......

  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,751
    DavidL said:

    I think it is because as part of a larger economic unit and market we have huge advantages that give our people far more opportunities than they will have in an independent Scotland. The United Kingdom is one of the most successful Unions in history but the vote is about the future not the past. Better Together really need to put forward compelling arguments as to why Scots will be better off and happier over the next 20-30 years. So far they have completely failed to address this and it is a major flaw.

    Up to a point, but the recent past also comes into it. What would you say are the Union's great achievements that have occurred in the lifetime of anyone under 50? It's that dearth that's killing any vision for the future.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    JackW said:

    HYUFD said:

    JackW Maybe, but Quebec is still in Canada and has had no referendum for 19 years, despite that tight 51-49 vote in 1995

    Sorry HYUFD but I'm unsure of your point in relation to my comment.

    Perhaps you might expand ?

    The first thing the pro-Independence camp in Quebec said after the result was announced in 1995 was "we won". In other words the ethnic French voted for independence and it was only because of immigrants that No was able to win.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,197
    DavidL said:

    As I have said repeatedly the independence referendum is going to be close.

    The campaign and the supposed debate has been absolutely shambolic to date. Salmond's white paper was a complete joke, based on a whole range of false assumptions about the currency, lender of last resort, EU membership, tax revenues from the North sea etc etc. This supposed political wizard has repeatedly looked like a chump.

    But as Malcolm and others point out this matters less than it should because the movement for independence is wider than the SNP and is not reliant on Salmond. The point is really much more fundamental: whatever the answers are to these questions (and the SNP themselves clearly do not have a clue) should these decisions be made by Scots for Scots or as part of a larger Union? That is the real question.

    It is a question the Better Together campaign is not answering. They are getting bogged down in the details of catching out Salmond's fantasies without addressing the real question. Why are we better together?

    I think it is because as part of a larger economic unit and market we have huge advantages that give our people far more opportunities than they will have in an independent Scotland. The United Kingdom is one of the most successful Unions in history but the vote is about the future not the past. Better Together really need to put forward compelling arguments as to why Scots will be better off and happier over the next 20-30 years. So far they have completely failed to address this and it is a major flaw.

    David, correct, NO are fixated on Salmond whilst there are many many thousands now holding meetings and canvassing every day of the week. They are dinosaurs and led by Darling who is a donkey. They are in deep trouble and do not have time now to build an organisation, e-mails are not going to cut it.
  • HYUFD said:

    Twisted Fire Stopper The Taleban had killed Ahmed Massood days before 9/11 and Bin Laden plotted 9/11 from Afghan soil, Bin Laden is now dead and Afghans have turned out in large numbers to elect a new government and president, it will not be perfect, but is in a better place than before intervention

    We'll have to wait and see about that.

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,302
    edited April 2014
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    I think I will take John Curtice word on the PanelBase poll rather than the furious spinning of the stalled separatists:

    Once the Don’t Knows (14%, down one point) are excluded the Yes vote stands at 47%, at has already been evident in more or less all the polls for some two or three months.

    Osbrowne's inept posturing for nothing.
    You mean the intervention that drove rUK opinion on a currency union from "evenly split" to "2:1 against"?

    Clearly, "A Victory for Eck"!

    Titters.....

    You mean this one:
    Currency furore over mystery of missing memos

    No paper trail means Treasury's position engineered, say SNP
    Sunday 6 April 2014

    THE Treasury was last night at the centre of a growing row over political bias, after admitting it had no record of when its most senior civil servant first advised the Chancellor against a currency union with an independent Scotland.
    Memo from Sir Nicholas was seized on by the Unionist lobby
    The inability of permanent secretary Sir Nicholas Macpherson to give a precise date is fuelling claims that Westminster's bombshell rejection of a currency union was cooked up to help the No campaign in the referendum.

    getting a bit obsessive malc. Are you claiming the guy now isn't advising not to have a currency union, because I think you'll find that's not the case.

    In any case why don't you guys gets some balls and say you'll just have your own.
    Alan, It is obvious it was cooked up by darling / Gideon etc. They thought it was a great idea and ordered their lackey to say it was a bad idea. It was very stupid. Personally I do not believe there will be any interest in a currency union , we will continue using the pound initially.

    There will be plenty time after the vote to start negotiating.

    What's there to discuss ? opinion down here thinks currency union is a bad idea.

    Even worse those bastards in the City of London will see avoiding currency union as a great opportunity to gut Edinburgh and eliminate one more competitor.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,974
    AndyJS Indeed, and they were doing just that in yesterday's poll
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,197
    HYUFD said:

    Malcolm G I would agree on that, the likes of Sean Connery should not determine Scotland's future from a Bahamas beach or Manhattan apartment, if Scotland does get independence they would be Scottish citizens by birth

    Yes and lets call it a draw at that
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,974
    JackW The very tight 1995 referendum might have given Quebec independence momentum, but it has gone backwards and the BQ (Quebec's SNP) vote has fallen
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,197

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    I think I will take John Curtice word on the PanelBase poll rather than the furious spinning of the stalled separatists:

    Once the Don’t Knows (14%, down one point) are excluded the Yes vote stands at 47%, the same as in Panelbase’s previous poll for newsnet. The poll thus cannot be cited as evidence that there is now a nationalist bandwagon moving continuously and relentlessly towards the 50% mark. We should certainly remember that all of the polls Panelbase conducted last year already put the Yes tally at 44% or 45%. The two to three point increase in Yes support since then is simply in line with the trend that has already been evident in more or less all the polls for some two or three months.

    Osbrowne's inept posturing for nothing.
    You mean the intervention that drove rUK opinion on a currency union from "evenly split" to "2:1 against"?

    Clearly, "A Victory for Eck"!

    Titters.....

    You mean this one:
    Currency furore over mystery of missing memos

    No paper trail means Treasury's position engineered, say SNP
    Sunday 6 April 2014

    THE Treasury was last night at the centre of a growing row over political bias, after admitting it had no record of when its most senior civil servant first advised the Chancellor against a currency union with an independent Scotland.
    Memo from Sir Nicholas was seized on by the Unionist lobby
    The inability of permanent secretary Sir Nicholas Macpherson to give a precise date is fuelling claims that Westminster's bombshell rejection of a currency union was cooked up to help the No campaign in the referendum.
    Where does that article explain what currency will be used after independence? Surely that is of greater import than a "missing memo"?
    As has been clearly stated , we will continue to use the pound. Bit worrying that you cannot take that in.
    So the Darien Panama option then......

    Not much wrong with Panama, it is down to people like you that the English are loved throughout the world. A small bunch of elite sneering no marks giving a whole country a bad name.
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    AndyJS said:

    HYUFD said:

    ANDY JS Well UKIP was up to 8% in Scotland in the Euro poll yesterday, so Scotland is not immune to the Kippers either

    It would be almost earth-shattering if UKIP get more than 10% of the vote in the Scottish Euro election. If they did so, it would almost certainly mean beating both the Tories and LDs.
    You mean beating LDs and Greens, surely?

    Basically, UKIP have to come fourth, with the first party on less than 3x their vote in order to win a seat...
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    After 33 selections for seats vacated by retiring MPs, the number of female candidates is standing at +12.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,974
    AndyJS Indeed, would be ironic if English and other immigrants gave NO their victory margin, but Scottish YES backers living abroad could not vote
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    AndyJS said:

    JackW said:

    HYUFD said:

    JackW Maybe, but Quebec is still in Canada and has had no referendum for 19 years, despite that tight 51-49 vote in 1995

    Sorry HYUFD but I'm unsure of your point in relation to my comment.

    Perhaps you might expand ?

    The first thing the pro-Independence camp in Quebec said after the result was announced in 1995 was "we won". In other words the ethnic French voted for independence and it was only because of immigrants that No was able to win.
    Noted .... although a YES strategy founded on Gaelic speakers has a few million flaws in it !!

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,302
    SeanT said:

    Re indyref, it should be remembered that NO and BT still have an ace to play.

    If the polls narrow very seriously - or YES takes the lead - then I reckon the three Westminster parties will come up with some dramatic offer of Devomax.

    Which is what Cameron should've done in the first place, the halfwit that he is.

    Must say I don't think offering Devomax would do much more than add to Salmond's weapons. He'd simply bank it and say once more right up your breech dear friend. Best to clear the air with Y\N and then reshuffle the pack. with the Y\N question answered Salmond has lost his main pressure point.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,197

    malcolmg said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    MalcolmG David Bowie, Billy Connolly are No backers, Brian Cox is for YES. Both have celebrity backers

    So you don't give a toss about Dickson or that weird fake cleric at WoS ? Very snubbing of you.
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    MalcolmG David Bowie, Billy Connolly are No backers, Brian Cox is for YES. Both have celebrity backers

    Dear Dear , you get worse. Bowie got himself some free publicity , Connolly has clearly stated he will not state his views and as he does not live in Scotland has no vote. Cox is YES but again has no vote . All are irrelevant and nobody gives a toss what any of them think, we are interested in what the people who live in Scotland think.
    So you don't give a toss about Dickson or that weird fake cleric at WoS ? Very snubbing of you.

    I think you'll find he's only playing your own logic back to you.
    My own logic? Where?

    I'd read anything with interest from anywhere if it is well informed, germane and has something useful to contribute.

    "you" in the collective sense of Nats saying anyone outside Scotland is simply "interfering". So southern media shouldn't "interfere" in the Indyref with the obvious exceptions of those based in the West Country.
    Alan, surprised that you are in the same camp as the media disparaging one guy's blog just because he is running rings round them and proving to be popular by actually telling it as it really is instead of the usual Tory/labour fantasy press releases.
    malc the guy can post as much as he wants as far as I'm concerned, but if Nats are going to draw arbitrary lines around who can and can't express an opinion then they could at least be consistent and apply them to themselves.
    Alan, I have not seen anything re people not being entitled to have an opinion. The only ones that count are the votes at the end of the day. Most of the shrieking comes from the unionist side I am afraid, they only like their opinions to be expressed. Obviously it is an emotive subject but on the whole has been very well mannered up to now.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,197
    Alan, I have not seen anything re people not being entitled to have an opinion. The only ones that count are the votes at the end of the day. Most of the shrieking comes from the unionist side I am afraid, they only like their opinions to be expressed. Obviously it is an emotive subject but on the whole has been very well mannered up to now.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,197

    Saw a comment, I think from Malcolm about Alan Cumming. He cant vote because his Scottish property is not declared his main residence, that being somewhere in America.

    Still a bit of a dubious decision Easterross. Pretty sure if he leaned the other way it would not have been an issue.
  • MillsyMillsy Posts: 900
    On that Survation poll, changes in VI since it was last done by Survation in December 2013

    UKIP +5
    Conservative +1
    Liberal Democrat -2
    Labour -3
    Others -3
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,974
    TFS Indeed, but their are grounds for optimism, but ultimately Afghans must now decide their own destiny
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,974
    Malcolm G Agreed, anyway off to watch Omad Djalili to raise money for Hereford Bulls
  • HYUFD said:

    TFS Indeed, but their are grounds for optimism, but ultimately Afghans must now decide their own destiny

    What destiny is that? The one we've tried to force on them? You make it sound like they're heading for the sunny uplands. Are you expecting them to suddenly decide to try Western style democracy?
    You're going to be disappointed.

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,598
    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    Re indyref, it should be remembered that NO and BT still have an ace to play.

    If the polls narrow very seriously - or YES takes the lead - then I reckon the three Westminster parties will come up with some dramatic offer of Devomax.

    Which is what Cameron should've done in the first place, the halfwit that he is.

    Must say I don't think offering Devomax would do much more than add to Salmond's weapons. He'd simply bank it and say once more right up your breech dear friend. Best to clear the air with Y\N and then reshuffle the pack. with the Y\N question answered Salmond has lost his main pressure point.
    A clear offer of Devomax - which, as all polls show, is what most Scots want, rather than the risk of independence - would be very seductive.

    And if YES get a lead in the polls (which is the scenario I am hypothesising) then the Westminster parties, esp the LDs and Labour, will be desperate. So I reckon they'd make the offer to the Scots.

    Despite the incredible complacency and denial shown on here by lefties (we'd be fine without Scotland blah blah) I am sure there are smarter people in Labour HQ who know what a disaster YES would be for their party, so they must be gaming some ways of winning the referendum if the polls turn really bad.
    Althoigh I tend to agree with the chap who thinks Mr Miliband et al don't care a monkey's for dear old Keir Hardie and would be glad to be shot of such ghosts at the feast as the Scots MPs, you have putt your finger on Mr Cameron's - probable - miscalculation.

    However ... how far would the Scots trust the pols to deliver, given the Westminster conventions of no government binding its successor and a UKGE in 2015? Sir Alec Douglas-Home's promise of "something better" in 1979 casts a long shadow - especially in the light of whom we then got as a Prime Minister. And all devolved power is repealable in London given the doctrine of crown sovereignty.

    The other factor is how much the relationship with London, and the London politicians' credibility also, have been damaged by the conduct of the campaign by the No side and the Unionist parties. I can see that many yes-minded Scots would just take a late devomax promise as evidence that they were lying all along, and vote yes with even more force. Whether more would change from DK/No to Yes than Yes to No I don't know.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,302
    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    Re indyref, it should be remembered that NO and BT still have an ace to play.

    If the polls narrow very seriously - or YES takes the lead - then I reckon the three Westminster parties will come up with some dramatic offer of Devomax.

    Which is what Cameron should've done in the first place, the halfwit that he is.

    Must say I don't think offering Devomax would do much more than add to Salmond's weapons. He'd simply bank it and say once more right up your breech dear friend. Best to clear the air with Y\N and then reshuffle the pack. with the Y\N question answered Salmond has lost his main pressure point.
    A clear offer of Devomax - which, as all polls show, is what most Scots want, rather than the risk of independence - would be very seductive.

    And if YES get a lead in the polls (which is the scenario I am hypothesising) then the Westminster parties, esp the LDs and Labour, will be desperate. So I reckon they'd make the offer to the Scots.

    Despite the incredible complacency and denial shown on here by lefties (we'd be fine without Scotland blah blah) I am sure there are smarter people in Labour HQ who know what a disaster YES would be for their party, so they must be gaming some ways of winning the referendum if the polls turn really bad.
    I'm actually for DevoMax, it's one of the things which debating with the nats I've changed my mind on.The Uk's overcentralised and we need to get decision making away from the Gaylord Poncyboots factions that run the major parties and back in to regions.

    However I think how devo max is offered is as important as offering it. If it's presented as a grudging bribe to avoid Indy Salmond will simply say one more shove and we're free. If it's offered voluntarily as a UK wide revamp of the consitiution then it's in with a chance of sticking and killing off the Indy debate for generation.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,654

    DavidL said:

    I think it is because as part of a larger economic unit and market we have huge advantages that give our people far more opportunities than they will have in an independent Scotland. The United Kingdom is one of the most successful Unions in history but the vote is about the future not the past. Better Together really need to put forward compelling arguments as to why Scots will be better off and happier over the next 20-30 years. So far they have completely failed to address this and it is a major flaw.

    Up to a point, but the recent past also comes into it. What would you say are the Union's great achievements that have occurred in the lifetime of anyone under 50? It's that dearth that's killing any vision for the future.
    In the last 50 years Britain has remained one of the most stable, reasonable and fair minded places in the world to live. We have developed a society I think we can genuinely be proud of, where women, gays, racial minorities and other "outsiders" are treated with more respect than almost anywhere else on earth.

    Economically, we have recovered from the total exhaustion that we suffered after WW2 and have built astonishingly succesful new service industries that allow us to fund our social safety nets. There is much to do and more might have been done with the monies from the North sea but our standard of living is unimaginable to those of 50 years ago.

    We stood up for the Falklands and played a very succesful part in Gulf War 1.

    We put on the best Olympics ever.

    The forecasts are that within about 20 years the UK will be the largest single economy in the EU, overtaking Germany. And Scotland really should be a part of it.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,974
    edited April 2014
    TwistedFireStopper A clear majority of Afghans voted yesterday, it will never be western style democracy and it will never be a nation of peace and harmony, but it will be a damn sight better than the situation in 2001 when the Taleban ruled most of it, women were enslaved, and children denied an education, and Bin Laden was plotting 9/11 from Afghan borders. Both Abdullah Abudullah and Ghani, the leading presidential candidates, are tough, experienced, shrewd men, but as I say, Afghans will now determine their own future, anyway got to go
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I think it is because as part of a larger economic unit and market we have huge advantages that give our people far more opportunities than they will have in an independent Scotland. The United Kingdom is one of the most successful Unions in history but the vote is about the future not the past. Better Together really need to put forward compelling arguments as to why Scots will be better off and happier over the next 20-30 years. So far they have completely failed to address this and it is a major flaw.

    Up to a point, but the recent past also comes into it. What would you say are the Union's great achievements that have occurred in the lifetime of anyone under 50? It's that dearth that's killing any vision for the future.
    In the last 50 years Britain has remained one of the most stable, reasonable and fair minded places in the world to live. We have developed a society I think we can genuinely be proud of, where women, gays, racial minorities and other "outsiders" are treated with more respect than almost anywhere else on earth.

    Economically, we have recovered from the total exhaustion that we suffered after WW2 and have built astonishingly succesful new service industries that allow us to fund our social safety nets. There is much to do and more might have been done with the monies from the North sea but our standard of living is unimaginable to those of 50 years ago.

    We stood up for the Falklands and played a very succesful part in Gulf War 1.

    We put on the best Olympics ever.

    The forecasts are that within about 20 years the UK will be the largest single economy in the EU, overtaking Germany. And Scotland really should be a part of it.

    Quite right. And some on the left genuinely think Britain is a terrible place for women, gay people and ethnic minorities to live.
  • HYUFD said:

    TwistedFireStopper A clear majority of Afghans voted yesterday, it will never be western style democracy and it will never be a nation of peace and harmony, but it will be a damn sight better than the situation in 2001 when the Taleban ruled most of it, women were enslaved, and children denied an education, and Bin Laden was plotting 9/11 from Afghan borders. Both Abdullah Abudullah and Ghani, the leading presidential candidates, are tough, experienced, shrewd men, but as I say, Afghans will now determine their own, anyway got to go

    Nah, the guys with AK47s will be the ones who decide the future.

  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    edited April 2014
    DavidL said:


    In the last 50 years Britain has remained one of the most stable, reasonable and fair minded places in the world to live. We have developed a society I think we can genuinely be proud of, where women, gays, racial minorities and other "outsiders" are treated with more respect than almost anywhere else on earth.

    Economically, we have recovered from the total exhaustion that we suffered after WW2 and have built astonishingly succesful new service industries that allow us to fund our social safety nets. There is much to do and more might have been done with the monies from the North sea but our standard of living is unimaginable to those of 50 years ago.

    We stood up for the Falklands and played a very succesful part in Gulf War 1.

    We put on the best Olympics ever.

    The forecasts are that within about 20 years the UK will be the largest single economy in the EU, overtaking Germany. And Scotland really should be a part of it.

    And inequality in life expectancy, health and income is back to where it was in 1918...
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited April 2014
    HYUFD said:

    MickPork So what, Clegg stopped Cameron getting a majority, and the Labour vote fell 7% from 2005 to 2010

    So pretending all the party leaders but the one actually leading the conservatives were somehow to blame for Cammie's failure to win a majority is laughable. If Brown was "trounced" by Cammie then Cammie having to run begging to Clegg to save him doesn't exactly square with that, does it? Brown was beaten but there was no tory landslide so he was hardly "trounced". The notion that there was backlash against labour in scotland because of 2010 is just plain wrong as all the polling showed before the 2011 campaign began to heat up. Labour were leading in the polling months out and they were leading by a substantial amount.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,068
    AndyJS said:

    It'll be interesting to see if UKIP can beat the LDs in London in the Euro elections.

    Very likely they will. I'd expect UKIP to get 18-20% in London in the Euros.

    Survation have UKIP on 10% for the London Borough elections, and the Lib Dems on 9%. But, much depends on how many candidates UKIP will field.

  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    HYUFD said:

    MickPork Abdullah Abdullah is a very tough strong character, and has fought the Russians and the Taleban before even 9/11, he is the best choice for president, but Ghani would be OK too

    I also remember the early NeoCon spin that Karzai was a 'strongman' able to bring the Afghans together. Same for Jalal Talabani and Iraq. How did that work out? Remarkably smoothly I presume?
  • NinoinozNinoinoz Posts: 1,312
    JackW said:

    Maria Miller didn't introduce gay marriage. It became law as a result of free votes in Parliament and supported by a substantial majority of the public.

    Yes, I must have imagined her introducing the bill and the DCMS issued the highly misleading consultation document.

    And if it was supported by a substantial majority of the public, why no referendum? I think you know the answer.
    JackW said:

    Neither is the gay community a single block who should support or reject Maria Miller. They are millions of individuals who like straight folk determine their views according to all the normal process of free thought.

    Well, shows what an idiot Cameron (and Miller) is trying to court a non-existent voting block.

    But interesting to see the switch between gays having not chosen their lifestyle to having free will, as convenience requires.

    Incidentally, the whole piece by OGH is predicated on block voting. Her own block hates her, not exactly the most successful strategy in politics, is it?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,690
    I think pretty much all of the leading Afghan candidates are anti EU, so this is an important read across for UK elections next year
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Sean_F said:

    AndyJS said:

    It'll be interesting to see if UKIP can beat the LDs in London in the Euro elections.

    Very likely they will. I'd expect UKIP to get 18-20% in London in the Euros.

    Survation have UKIP on 10% for the London Borough elections, and the Lib Dems on 9%. But, much depends on how many candidates UKIP will field.

    Is there ever betting on boroughs in the locals?
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    rcs1000 said:

    I think pretty much all of the leading Afghan candidates are anti EU

    A Cast Iron Pledge from Cammie on an Afghan referendum can't be far away then, can it?

    ;)

  • NinoinozNinoinoz Posts: 1,312
    Incidentally, on writing my reply to JackW, I was reminded of why Maria Miller is such a despicable character.

    When the Jimmy Savile scandal exploded into the open, the Conservative Party conference was imminent.

    So, what does the DCMS minister (Maria Miller) decide to address the conference about? Gay marriage.

    So, gay marriage tops endemic child abuse in the nation's lead broadcaster? Only in Cameron's warped cabinet.
  • Sean_F said:

    AndyJS said:

    It'll be interesting to see if UKIP can beat the LDs in London in the Euro elections.

    Very likely they will. I'd expect UKIP to get 18-20% in London in the Euros.
    What! London has the biggest % of the LD membership and 7 MPs. No MEPs would be a shocker.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    "The Tory revolt over Europe took a dramatic turn last night after senior Conservative David Davis called on the Government to open talks with Brussels on quitting the EU.

    Former Tory chairman Mr Davis tore into David Cameron, accusing him of making a mess of his pledge to win back powers from the EU.

    ‘Scaremongers’ who said Britain would collapse if it decided to go it alone were talking nonsense, said Mr Davis. Quitting the EU would be like a ‘revolution’ and would boost UK jobs, wages, world power, arts and prestige, he added."

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2597945/Get-ready-quit-EU-Davis-tells-Tories-tears-Cameron-predicts-UKIP-triumph-Euro-elections.html
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited April 2014
    SeanT said:

    A lot of movement on the indyref betting, btw

    32Red have a YES vote at 9/4, the shortest odds yet.

    32RED are not a significant bookie...

    BUT

    Betfair is now 4.3-4.5 YES, and with £250k traded, most of it in the last month Id say, that is significant.. was 5.5 in March
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    "MH370: Pings 'Must Be From A Plane Black Box'

    The two signals detected by the Chinese search team in the Indian Ocean had the same frequency as aircraft black boxes."


    http://news.sky.com/story/1237898/mh370-pings-must-be-from-a-plane-black-box
  • TSE - I assume you are betting on Sunderland for tomorrow night 11/2 is v v appealing even as a Spurs fan....we're on the beach.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    AndyJS said:

    "The Tory revolt over Europe took a dramatic turn last night after senior Conservative David Davis called on the Government to open talks with Brussels on quitting the EU.

    Former Tory chairman Mr Davis tore into David Cameron, accusing him of making a mess of his pledge to win back powers from the EU.

    ‘Scaremongers’ who said Britain would collapse if it decided to go it alone were talking nonsense, said Mr Davis. Quitting the EU would be like a ‘revolution’ and would boost UK jobs, wages, world power, arts and prestige, he added."

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2597945/Get-ready-quit-EU-Davis-tells-Tories-tears-Cameron-predicts-UKIP-triumph-Euro-elections.html

    That'll be Clegg's 'master strategy' bearing fruit no doubt. Puzzling that some tories might not be too happy to see Farage grinning as calamity Clegg tanked with Cammie nowhere to be seen. Almost as if they might still be worried about the kippers for some bizarre reason.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,598
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I think it is because as part of a larger economic unit and market we have huge advantages that give our people far more opportunities than they will have in an independent Scotland. The United Kingdom is one of the most successful Unions in history but the vote is about the future not the past. Better Together really need to put forward compelling arguments as to why Scots will be better off and happier over the next 20-30 years. So far they have completely failed to address this and it is a major flaw.

    Up to a point, but the recent past also comes into it. What would you say are the Union's great achievements that have occurred in the lifetime of anyone under 50? It's that dearth that's killing any vision for the future.
    In the last 50 years Britain has remained one of the most stable, reasonable and fair minded places in the world to live. We have developed a society I think we can genuinely be proud of, where women, gays, racial minorities and other "outsiders" are treated with more respect than almost anywhere else on earth.

    Economically, we have recovered from the total exhaustion that we suffered after WW2 and have built astonishingly succesful new service industries that allow us to fund our social safety nets. There is much to do and more might have been done with the monies from the North sea but our standard of living is unimaginable to those of 50 years ago.

    We stood up for the Falklands and played a very succesful part in Gulf War 1.

    We put on the best Olympics ever.

    The forecasts are that within about 20 years the UK will be the largest single economy in the EU, overtaking Germany. And Scotland really should be a part of it.

    Thank you for taking the trouble. Which is more than a lot of folk do when asked.

    But this does not, to my mind, answer the logical issue at the heart of indy. This is not a referendum for the UK as a whole but for the Scots. And the key question is: would the Scots be better off in the UK, in the future, than they can do for themselves as an independent country?
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    So is the attack on MM in part revenge for gay marriage?

    I thought that the Saville scandal was one needing investigation by police and BBC, not one for the party conferences.

    Gay marriage now seems to have become accepted very quickly by a majority of the country. Cameron was right on this one. Indeed even UKIP seems to realise that repeal is not on.
    Ninoinoz said:

    Incidentally, on writing my reply to JackW, I was reminded of why Maria Miller is such a despicable character.

    When the Jimmy Savile scandal exploded into the open, the Conservative Party conference was imminent.

    So, what does the DCMS minister (Maria Miller) decide to address the conference about? Gay marriage.

    So, gay marriage tops endemic child abuse in the nation's lead broadcaster? Only in Cameron's warped cabinet.

  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    AndyJS said:

    "The Tory revolt over Europe took a dramatic turn last night after senior Conservative David Davis called on the Government to open talks with Brussels on quitting the EU.

    Former Tory chairman Mr Davis tore into David Cameron, accusing him of making a mess of his pledge to win back powers from the EU.

    ‘Scaremongers’ who said Britain would collapse if it decided to go it alone were talking nonsense, said Mr Davis. Quitting the EU would be like a ‘revolution’ and would boost UK jobs, wages, world power, arts and prestige, he added."

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2597945/Get-ready-quit-EU-Davis-tells-Tories-tears-Cameron-predicts-UKIP-triumph-Euro-elections.html

    Leadership challenge in June?

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,302
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I think it is because as part of a larger economic unit and market we have huge advantages that give our people far more opportunities than they will have in an independent Scotland. The United Kingdom is one of the most successful Unions in history but the vote is about the future not the past. Better Together really need to put forward compelling arguments as to why Scots will be better off and happier over the next 20-30 years. So far they have completely failed to address this and it is a major flaw.

    Up to a point, but the recent past also comes into it. What would you say are the Union's great achievements that have occurred in the lifetime of anyone under 50? It's that dearth that's killing any vision for the future.
    In the last 50 years Britain has remained one of the most stable, reasonable and fair minded places in the world to live. We have developed a society I think we can genuinely be proud of, where women, gays, racial minorities and other "outsiders" are treated with more respect than almost anywhere else on earth.

    Economically, we have recovered from the total exhaustion that we suffered after WW2 and have built astonishingly succesful new service industries that allow us to fund our social safety nets. There is much to do and more might have been done with the monies from the North sea but our standard of living is unimaginable to those of 50 years ago.

    We stood up for the Falklands and played a very succesful part in Gulf War 1.

    We put on the best Olympics ever.

    The forecasts are that within about 20 years the UK will be the largest single economy in the EU, overtaking Germany. And Scotland really should be a part of it.

    And we're family. We're the people who can walk in and out of each other's houses as friends and neighbours. We live in each others countries and move around. We marry and settle and raise kids across these islands. We laugh and like to share a joke. We're passionate about who we are but still able to appreciate each other and listen to a different point of view.

    We're the people who'll pull out the stops for each other when times are tough and who'll pick you up over a cup of tea. We are sometimes slow to act but when we do we do with purpose. We side with the underdog, we believe all should have a chance in life, we support each other without smothering the individual.

    We're optimists, an older nation with young hearts. We look out in to the world but still love the comforts of home. We are a mongrel nation sharing each other's DNA and ideas and customs. We're the people who do pubs, and if you call it a ceilidh or a knees-up you can all join in. We're comfortable with who we are but not so complacent as to accept it and with 300 years under our beltts we're confident enough to say the best is yet to come.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,690
    SeanT said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I think pretty much all of the leading Afghan candidates are anti EU, so this is an important read across for UK elections next year

    Still reckon NO will win the indy referendum by 60/40 at least? Or was it 70/30?
    I'll take bets on 6:4 or better, and I reckon the absolute will be closer to 2:1
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    edited April 2014
    DavidL said:

    ..........
    The forecasts are that within about 20 years the UK will be the largest single economy in the EU, overtaking Germany. And Scotland really should be a part of it.

    and within 20 years Scotland will have voted to rejoin the UK after the nordic islands of Shetland etc forced a new soverign wealth fund via a threat of independence.....

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/9794316/Alex-Salmond-warning-over-Shetland-oil-after-independence.html
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530



    And we're family. We're the people who can walk in and out of each other's houses as friends and neighbours. We live in each others countries and move around. We marry and settle and raise kids across these islands. We laugh and like to share a joke. We're passionate about who we are but still able to appreciate each other and listen to a different point of view.

    We're the people who'll pull out the stops for each other when times are tough and who'll pick you up over a cup of tea. We are sometimes slow to act but when we do we do with purpose. We side with the underdog, we believe all should have a chance in life, we support each other without smothering the individual.

    We're optimists, an older nation with young hearts. We look out in to the world but still love the comforts of home. We are a mongrel nation sharing each other's DNA and ideas and customs. We're the people who do pubs, and if you call it a ceilidh or a knees-up you can all join in. We're comfortable with who we are but not so complacent as to accept it and with 300 years under our beltts we're confident enough to say the best is yet to come.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T72TopWbXJg

    :)

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,302
    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    Re indyref, it should be remembered that NO and BT still have an ace to play.

    If the polls narrow very seriously - or YES takes the lead - then I reckon the three Westminster parties will come up with some dramatic offer of Devomax.

    Which is what Cameron should've done in the first place, the halfwit that he is.

    Must say I don't think offering Devomax would do much more than add to Salmond's weapons. He'd simply bank it and say once more right up your breech dear friend. Best to clear the air with Y\N and then reshuffle the pack. with the Y\N question answered Salmond has lost his main pressure point.
    A clear .
    I'm actually for DevoMax, it's one of the things which debating with the nats I've changed my t's in with a chance of sticking and killing off the Indy debate for generation.
    The one thing stopping Devomax is the Left's hypocrisy vis-a-vis the WLQuestion. Labour (and the LDs) know that real Devomax would surely lead to the end of Scots MPs at Westminster, or at least an end to Scots MPs voting on English laws. So Labour would be crippled. This is why Labour have refused to come up with real suggestions for Devomax,

    However if the alternative is losing Scotland altogether - "a nightmare for Labour" as that Labour SPAD said - then that will presumably concentrate leftwing minds and they will find some solution.

    Alternatively the Left will march blindly over the cliff, as some here suggest, as they will be "fine without Scotland". Ach. Who knows.

    Assuming Indy loses the staus quo can't hold. As you correctly say the WLQ must be answered and the lefty hypocrisy will have to go with it.

    Likewise there may just be enough scottish labourites who will see the relentless sledging of english tories as some kind on Bond villains, is them simply doing the nats work for them and ultimately will lead to Labour's own destruction.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,197
    SeanT said:

    Re indyref, it should be remembered that NO and BT still have an ace to play.

    If the polls narrow very seriously - or YES takes the lead - then I reckon the three Westminster parties will come up with some dramatic offer of Devomax.

    Which is what Cameron should've done in the first place, the halfwit that he is.

    Too late and the 3 unionist parties will never agree to it. Unless written in blood everybody knows they would cheat us again. They had their chance at that and Salmond tricked them into taking it away.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,302
    Carnyx said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I think it is because as part of a larger economic unit and market we have huge advantages that give our people far more opportunities than they will have in an independent Scotland. The United Kingdom is one of the most successful Unions in history but the vote is about the future not the past. Better Together really need to put forward compelling arguments as to why Scots will be better off and happier over the next 20-30 years. So far they have completely failed to address this and it is a major flaw.

    Up to a point, but the recent past also comes into it. What would you say are the Union's great achievements that have occurred in the lifetime of anyone under 50? It's that dearth that's killing any vision for the future.
    In the last 50 years Britain has remained one of the most stable, reasonable and fair minded places in the world to live. We have developed a society I think we can genuinely be proud of, where women, gays, racial minorities and other "outsiders" are treated with more respect than almost anywhere else on earth.

    Economically, we have recovered from the total exhaustion that we suffered after WW2 and have built astonishingly succesful new service industries that allow us to fund our social safety nets. There is much to do and more might have been done with the monies from the North sea but our standard of living is unimaginable to those of 50 years ago.

    We stood up for the Falklands and played a very succesful part in Gulf War 1.

    We put on the best Olympics ever.

    The forecasts are that within about 20 years the UK will be the largest single economy in the EU, overtaking Germany. And Scotland really should be a part of it.

    Thank you for taking the trouble. Which is more than a lot of folk do when asked.

    But this does not, to my mind, answer the logical issue at the heart of indy. This is not a referendum for the UK as a whole but for the Scots. And the key question is: would the Scots be better off in the UK, in the future, than they can do for themselves as an independent country?
    can you point me to an economic argument the nats have carried in the last 2 years ?
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530

    As you correctly say the WLQ must be answered and the lefty hypocrisy will have to go with it.

    Which two lefty hypocrites pledged to tackle the WLQ in the coalition agreement?
    The McKay Commission has been and gone and yet still no substantive response to it.

    Funny that. ;)
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,302
    Mick_Pork said:

    As you correctly say the WLQ must be answered and the lefty hypocrisy will have to go with it.

    Which two lefty hypocrites pledged to tackle the WLQ in the coalition agreement?
    The McKay Commission has been and gone and yet still no substantive response to it.

    Funny that. ;)
    Not much will move until after the Indyref. Why should it ?
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,302
    malcolmg said:



    SeanT said:

    Re indyref, it should be remembered that NO and BT still have an ace to play.

    If the polls narrow very seriously - or YES takes the lead - then I reckon the three Westminster parties will come up with some dramatic offer of Devomax.

    Which is what Cameron should've done in the first place, the halfwit that he is.

    Too late and the 3 unionist parties will never agree to it. Unless written in blood everybody knows they would cheat us again. They had their chance at that and Salmond tricked them into taking it away.
    That will be the same three cheating bastards who are going to play a straight bat on currency union with you ?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,197
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I think it is because as part of a larger economic unit and market we have huge advantages that give our people far more opportunities than they will have in an independent Scotland. The United Kingdom is one of the most successful Unions in history but the vote is about the future not the past. Better Together really need to put forward compelling arguments as to why Scots will be better off and happier over the next 20-30 years. So far they have completely failed to address this and it is a major flaw.

    Up to a point, but the recent past also comes into it. What would you say are the Union's great achievements that have occurred in the lifetime of anyone under 50? It's that dearth that's killing any vision for the future.
    In the last 50 years Britain has remained one of the most stable, reasonable and fair minded places in the world to live. We have developed a society I think we can genuinely be proud of, where women, gays, racial minorities and other "outsiders" are treated with more respect than almost anywhere else on earth.

    Economically, we have recovered from the total exhaustion that we suffered after WW2 and have built astonishingly succesful new service industries that allow us to fund our social safety nets. There is much to do and more might have been done with the monies from the North sea but our standard of living is unimaginable to those of 50 years ago.

    We stood up for the Falklands and played a very succesful part in Gulf War 1.

    We put on the best Olympics ever.

    The forecasts are that within about 20 years the UK will be the largest single economy in the EU, overtaking Germany. And Scotland really should be a part of it.

    David, Unfortunately you have forgotten the illegal wars , the inequality , 4th worst in developed world, child poverty , low wage , etc , etc. We have gone the way of the US , great country if you are lucky and have money.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530

    Mick_Pork said:

    As you correctly say the WLQ must be answered and the lefty hypocrisy will have to go with it.

    Which two lefty hypocrites pledged to tackle the WLQ in the coalition agreement?
    The McKay Commission has been and gone and yet still no substantive response to it.

    Funny that. ;)
    Not much will move until after the Indyref. Why should it ?
    Well for one unless you prefer to have labour do f** all about it then I would have thought the tories might be more keen on seeing something done about it while they still definitely had the chance. There's been plenty of opportunity since McKay reported but there will be precious little chance of doing anything substantive in the teeth of the 2015 election campaign after september and when legislation will drop off to almost nothing. For another it ain't just about scotland as McKay made abundantly clear. It's about devolution everywhere.
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737

    Sean_F said:

    AndyJS said:

    It'll be interesting to see if UKIP can beat the LDs in London in the Euro elections.

    Very likely they will. I'd expect UKIP to get 18-20% in London in the Euros.
    What! London has the biggest % of the LD membership and 7 MPs. No MEPs would be a shocker.
    London would be one of their better chances because of its large district magnitude (8).

    Therefore, if the sum of the integer-multiples of the LD vote from the parties which beat them is less than 8 the LDs will win a seat.

    I would estimate that if the LDs hold on in London, they should win at least 4 MEPs nationally...
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,302
    Mick_Pork said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    As you correctly say the WLQ must be answered and the lefty hypocrisy will have to go with it.

    Which two lefty hypocrites pledged to tackle the WLQ in the coalition agreement?
    The McKay Commission has been and gone and yet still no substantive response to it.

    Funny that. ;)
    Not much will move until after the Indyref. Why should it ?
    Well for one unless you prefer to have labour do f** all about it then I would have thought the tories might be more keen on seeing something done about it while they still definitely had the chance. There's been plenty of opportunity since McKay reported but there will be precious little chance of doing anything substantive in the teeth of the 2015 election campaign after september and when legislation will drop off to almost nothing. For another it ain't just about scotland as McKay made abundantly clear. It's about devolution everywhere.
    As it happens I think the blues have been idiots on aspects of constitutional reform. However the Indyref has a vote to get out of the way first before the nature of reforms can be brought forward; Indy and Devo Max are mutually exclusive. Whatever Cameron says will be derided as too little and too grudging by Salmond prior to a vote so he should let the Indy vote happen and then take stock.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,654
    Carnyx said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Up to a point, but the recent past also comes into it. What would you say are the Union's great achievements that have occurred in the lifetime of anyone under 50? It's that dearth that's killing any vision for the future.
    In the last 50 years Britain has remained one of the most stable, reasonable and fair minded places in the world to live. We have developed a society I think we can genuinely be proud of, where women, gays, racial minorities and other "outsiders" are treated with more respect than almost anywhere else on earth.

    Economically, we have recovered from the total exhaustion that we suffered after WW2 and have built astonishingly succesful new service industries that allow us to fund our social safety nets. There is much to do and more might have been done with the monies from the North sea but our standard of living is unimaginable to those of 50 years ago.

    We stood up for the Falklands and played a very succesful part in Gulf War 1.

    We put on the best Olympics ever.

    The forecasts are that within about 20 years the UK will be the largest single economy in the EU, overtaking Germany. And Scotland really should be a part of it.

    Thank you for taking the trouble. Which is more than a lot of folk do when asked.

    But this does not, to my mind, answer the logical issue at the heart of indy. This is not a referendum for the UK as a whole but for the Scots. And the key question is: would the Scots be better off in the UK, in the future, than they can do for themselves as an independent country?
    Yes, I agree. And the answer is that over the last 300 years Scots have had vastly more opportunities to make their mark in the world, to build their businesses, to seek their fortune in those southern parts and benefit from working in a larger unit than we would have done as an independent country. I have no doubt this will not change if we stay together.

    As Alan has somewhat lyrically said (reminded me vaguely of that scene in Love Actually tbh) we are a part of a successful family. Like all families things change over time and new arrangements need to be found but we are still family, intermarried and with vastly more in common than anything that divides us.

    This is what Better Together need to focus on. Not Salmond's latest absurdity or his expenses or the inadequacies of the Scottish Government's policies. This is a battle of dreams and I dream of remaining British, something I am inordinately proud to be.

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,197

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I think it is because as part of a address this and it is a major flaw.

    Up to a point, but the recent past also comes into it. What would you say are the Union's great achievements that have occurred in the lifetime of anyone under 50? It's that dearth that's killing any vision for the future.


    Economically, we have recovered from the total exhaustion that we suffered after WW2 and have built astonishingly succesful new service industries that allow us to fund our social safety nets. There is much to do and more might have been done with the monies from the North sea but our standard of living is unimaginable to those of 50 years ago.

    We stood up for the Falklands and played a very succesful part in Gulf War 1.

    We put on the best Olympics ever.

    The forecasts are that within about 20 years the UK will be the largest single economy in the EU, overtaking Germany. And Scotland really should be a part of it.

    And we're family. We're the people who can walk in and out of each other's houses as friends and neighbours. We live in each others countries and move around. We marry and settle and raise kids across these islands. We laugh and like to share a joke. We're passionate about who we are but still able to appreciate each other and listen to a different point of view.

    We're the people who'll pull out the stops for each other when times are tough and who'll pick you up over a cup of tea. We are sometimes slow to act but when we do we do with purpose. We side with the underdog, we believe all should have a chance in life, we support each other without smothering the individual.

    We're optimists, an older nation with young hearts. We look out in to the world but still love the comforts of home. We are a mongrel nation sharing each other's DNA and ideas and customs. We're the people who do pubs, and if you call it a ceilidh or a knees-up you can all join in. We're comfortable with who we are but not so complacent as to accept it and with 300 years under our beltts we're confident enough to say the best is yet to come.
    Alan, do you seriously think any of that would change with independence
    rcs1000 said:

    SeanT said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I think pretty much all of the leading Afghan candidates are anti EU, so this is an important read across for UK elections next year

    Still reckon NO will win the indy referendum by 60/40 at least? Or was it 70/30?
    I'll take bets on 6:4 or better, and I reckon the absolute will be closer to 2:1
    So you are saying it will be 2:1 NO, if so I will be happy to take you up on that.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,302
    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I think it is because as part of a address this and it is a major flaw.

    Up to a point, but the recent past also comes into it. What would you say are the Union's great achievements that have occurred in the lifetime of anyone under 50? It's that dearth that's killing any vision for the future.


    Economically, we have recovered from the total exhaustion that we suffered after WW2 and have built astonishingly succesful new service industries that allow us to fund our social safety nets. There is much to do and more might have been done with the monies from the North sea but our standard of living is unimaginable to those of 50 years ago.

    We stood up for the Falklands and played a very succesful part in Gulf War 1.

    We put on the best Olympics ever.

    The forecasts are that within about 20 years the UK will be the largest single economy in the EU, overtaking Germany. And Scotland really should be a part of it.

    And we're family. We're the people who can walk in and out of each other's houses as friends and neighbours. We live in each others countries and move around. We marry and settle and raise kids across these islands. We laugh and like to share a joke. We're passionate about who we are but still able to appreciate each other and listen to a different point of view.

    We're the people who'll pull out the stops for each other when times are tough and who'll pick you up over a cup of tea. We are sometimes slow to act but when we do we do with purpose. We side with the underdog, we believe all should have a chance in life, we support each other without smothering the individual.

    We're optimists, an older nation with young hearts. We look out in to the world but still love the comforts of home. We are a mongrel nation sharing each other's DNA and ideas and customs. We're the people who do pubs, and if you call it a ceilidh or a knees-up you can all join in. We're comfortable with who we are but not so complacent as to accept it and with 300 years under our beltts we're confident enough to say the best is yet to come.
    Alan, do you seriously think any of that would change with independence
    rcs1000 said:

    SeanT said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I think pretty much all of the leading Afghan candidates are anti EU, so this is an important read across for UK elections next year

    Still reckon NO will win the indy referendum by 60/40 at least? Or was it 70/30?
    I'll take bets on 6:4 or better, and I reckon the absolute will be closer to 2:1
    So you are saying it will be 2:1 NO, if so I will be happy to take you up on that.
    Most definitely.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,598

    Carnyx said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I think it is because as part of a larger economic unit and market we have huge advantages that give our people far more opportunities than they will have in an independent Scotland. The United Kingdom is one of the most successful Unions in history but the vote is about the future not the past. Better Together really need to put forward compelling arguments as to why Scots will be better off and happier over the next 20-30 years. So far they have completely failed to address this and it is a major flaw.

    Up to a point, but the recent past also comes into it. What would you say are the Union's great achievements that have occurred in the lifetime of anyone under 50? It's that dearth that's killing any vision for the future.
    In the last 50 years Britain has remained one of the most stable, reasonable and fair minded places in the world to live. We have developed a society I think we can genuinely be proud of, where women, gays, racial minorities and other "outsiders" are treated with more respect than almost anywhere else on earth.

    Economically, we have recovered from the total exhaustion that we suffered after WW2 and have built astonishingly succesful new service industries that allow us to fund our social safety nets. There is much to do and more might have been done with the monies from the North sea but our standard of living is unimaginable to those of 50 years ago.

    We stood up for the Falklands and played a very succesful part in Gulf War 1.

    We put on the best Olympics ever.

    The forecasts are that within about 20 years the UK will be the largest single economy in the EU, overtaking Germany. And Scotland really should be a part of it.

    Thank you for taking the trouble. Which is more than a lot of folk do when asked.

    But this does not, to my mind, answer the logical issue at the heart of indy. This is not a referendum for the UK as a whole but for the Scots. And the key question is: would the Scots be better off in the UK, in the future, than they can do for themselves as an independent country?
    can you point me to an economic argument the nats have carried in the last 2 years ?
    When I said 'better off' I should have said - not just economically, but also democratically, ideologically and culturally.

    Hardly fair, as there is so little they can do in the current dispensation, but Swinney has done well running the country.

    Here's one perhaps counterintuitive example: student tuition fees. Look at the way that is becoming a disaster down south.

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,197

    Carnyx said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I think it is because as part of a larger economic unit and market we have huge advantages that give our people far more opportunities than they will have in an independent Scotland. The United Kingdom is one of the most successful Unions in history but the vote is about the future not the past. Better Together really need to put forward compelling arguments as to why Scots will be better off and happier over the next 20-30 years. So far they have completely failed to address this and it is a major flaw.

    Up to a point, but the recent past also comes into it. What would you say are the Union's great achievements that have occurred in the lifetime of anyone under 50? It's that dearth that's killing any vision for the future.
    In the last 50 years Britain has remained one of the most stable, reasonable and fair minded places in the world to live. We have developed a society I think we can genuinely be proud of, where women, gays, racial minorities and other "outsiders" are treated with more respect than almost anywhere else on earth.

    Economically, we have recovered from the total exhaustion that we suffered after WW2 and have built astonishingly succesful new service industries that allow us to fund our social safety nets. There is much to do and more might have been done with the monies from the North sea but our standard of living is unimaginable to those of 50 years ago.

    We stood up for the Falklands and played a very succesful part in Gulf War 1.

    We put on the best Olympics ever.

    The forecasts are that within about 20 years the UK will be the largest single economy in the EU, overtaking Germany. And Scotland really should be a part of it.

    Thank you for taking the trouble. Which is more than a lot of folk do when asked.

    But this does not, to my mind, answer the logical issue at the heart of indy. This is not a referendum for the UK as a whole but for the Scots. And the key question is: would the Scots be better off in the UK, in the future, than they can do for themselves as an independent country?
    can you point me to an economic argument the nats have carried in the last 2 years ?
    Alan, can you point to a real one the unionists have carried, and I don't mean all the bullshit they usually come out with re £5000 black holes and oil is a burden etc.
This discussion has been closed.