politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Darling versus Salmond – the 2nd leg: Live discussion with
Options
Comments
-
Has he reverted to the line that Scotland would lose responsibility for the whole of their debt, rather than just their share supposedly held by the Bank of England? (which is nonsense of course, but too technical to explain - the debt held by the Bank of England is from Quantitative Easing and is effectively "temporary money printing" - if it is ever paid back/called in then it will be 'destroyed' thereby shrinking the balance sheet). It therefore doesn't really have a monetary value in the real world and can't be transferred to a third party as an 'asset'.0
-
Salmond wins the debate in the room on currency but has he given the kind of clarity that will reassure waverers as they vote? Probably not.0
-
Has anyone ever seen Malcolm and Alex in the same room?Gadfly said:We will welch threat.
Where's Malcom?0 -
Salmond is being incredibly disingenuous with his answers.0
-
Because he's positioned himself as someone with answers regardless of the outcome, and because he demanded a Plan B from Salmond not because he was leader of the No campaign but as a matter of personal integrity last time. He has to therefore reciprocate.RobD said:
Sorry, he is arguing for the status quo, so why does he need a plan B?Quincel said:
Darling repeatedly hammered Salmond with "What if you're wrong?" last time and plays the "I'm a loyal Scot who wants the best for it regardless of outcome" card the whole time. He made a rod for his own back there and does need a Plan B given it.RobD said:The moderator was wrong there. Alastair doesn't require a plan B, because the Union exists as it is.
0 -
Salmond comes over as too clever by half0
-
Bloody hell! ;-)Flightpath said:
Has anyone ever seen Malcolm and Alex in the same room?Gadfly said:We will welch threat.
Where's Malcom?
0 -
Salmond is not even trying to argue with reality.
I just don't think you can pull the wool over enough eyes this way.0 -
Snakeoil saleman !MikeSmithson said:Salmond comes over as too clever by half
0 -
Only in Britain would we see a clever politician as a bad thing ;-)MikeSmithson said:Salmond comes over as too clever by half
0 -
Darling cheerleading for the Tories again.0
-
Darling acknowledging NHS spending is going up under the coalition, that could be useful for them in 2015!0
-
Darling doing the NHS issue well0
-
Oh, I see a plan B in case of independence. I think his answer that they are all second best is reasonable enough. Given that he isn't campaigning for Yes.Quincel said:
Because he's positioned himself as someone with answers regardless of the outcome, and because he demanded a Plan B from Salmond not because he was leader of the No campaign but as a matter of personal integrity last time. He has to therefore reciprocate.RobD said:
Sorry, he is arguing for the status quo, so why does he need a plan B?Quincel said:
Darling repeatedly hammered Salmond with "What if you're wrong?" last time and plays the "I'm a loyal Scot who wants the best for it regardless of outcome" card the whole time. He made a rod for his own back there and does need a Plan B given it.RobD said:The moderator was wrong there. Alastair doesn't require a plan B, because the Union exists as it is.
0 -
What kind of 'question' is this?!0
-
Oh look an SNP plant in the debate.0
-
Glad that I am not the only one who has noticed.MikeSmithson said:Salmond comes over as too clever by half
0 -
Darling just got monstered by the audience.0
-
He only needs to pull it over enough Ayes...IOS said:Salmond is not even trying to argue with reality.
I just don't think you can pull the wool over enough eyes this way.
0 -
Given that Labour voters are the swing voters here - I don't think YES supporters attacking Labour is the best way to get to 50.1%0
-
There's a reason stories of such conmen tricks get passed along for so long. They worked.hucks67 said:
0 -
But not about UKIP MEPS growing rich on the EU gravy train?hucks67 said:
I thought at one time you were a strong supporter of the Tories or came across to me that way.Socrates said:@hucks67
I've come to the view that the Tories are busted as a brand. The sensible long term strategy for the Right is for UKIP and the Tories to merge, and thus straddle the working class-middle class divide. Unfortunately the Tories have been stupidly short-sighted in trying to smear their potential allies.
The problem with the Tories is that many of the current MP's don't represent most of the people around the country. They are seen as out of touch rich folk, who want a career in politics to further their business interests. You could argue the same about some Labour MP's.
This ''don't represent most of the people around the country'' stuff is just bunkum on all sides.0 -
Are the Scottish public more left wing than the current Labour party ?0
-
Hugh
"Honestly, to see what I mean pop to Scotland. It feels like a country that's about to vote Yes, overwhelmingly"
Depends where you are. I didn't get that sense from the people I was with in Edinburgh and Aberdeen. They happened to be mainly NO but I didn't get a sense of a great march towards YES.0 -
Alastair Darling is a modern day Great for what he's done for us after the bankers wrecked our economy, and he should have a Day or Airport named after him or something.
But he's losing this debate.
Edit: though given the state of the Yes / No polls, he might well win the immediate "win/lose" poll. People always favour their man.0 -
Glasgow is.hucks67 said:Are the Scottish public more left wing than the current Labour party ?
0 -
No he doesn't. Salmond is the one trying to sell the dream.Quincel said:
Because he's positioned himself as someone with answers regardless of the outcome, and because he demanded a Plan B from Salmond not because he was leader of the No campaign but as a matter of personal integrity last time. He has to therefore reciprocate.RobD said:
Sorry, he is arguing for the status quo, so why does he need a plan B?Quincel said:
Darling repeatedly hammered Salmond with "What if you're wrong?" last time and plays the "I'm a loyal Scot who wants the best for it regardless of outcome" card the whole time. He made a rod for his own back there and does need a Plan B given it.RobD said:The moderator was wrong there. Alastair doesn't require a plan B, because the Union exists as it is.
0 -
Was that deliberate, bracketing Darling with the Post Office sell-off? Clever if so...0
-
Partly. I think it more a problem with the Tories in that they don't seem to represent their own activists, who seem to tack harder to the right than them, which leads to more problems.Flightpath said:
But not about UKIP MEPS growing rich on the EU gravy train?hucks67 said:
I thought at one time you were a strong supporter of the Tories or came across to me that way.Socrates said:@hucks67
I've come to the view that the Tories are busted as a brand. The sensible long term strategy for the Right is for UKIP and the Tories to merge, and thus straddle the working class-middle class divide. Unfortunately the Tories have been stupidly short-sighted in trying to smear their potential allies.
The problem with the Tories is that many of the current MP's don't represent most of the people around the country. They are seen as out of touch rich folk, who want a career in politics to further their business interests. You could argue the same about some Labour MP's.
This ''don't represent most of the people around the country'' stuff is just bunkum on all sides.
0 -
Being clever isn't a problem. Being *too* clever can be, or at least, being what it infers is: fond of excessive complexity and theorising, both of which have a tendency of coming a cropper on contact with the real world.DaemonBarber said:
Only in Britain would we see a clever politician as a bad thing ;-)MikeSmithson said:Salmond comes over as too clever by half
0 -
Salmond can't keep talking over Darling. Will not win over a neutral.0
-
I would not buy a second hand country from Salmond. Disingenuous to a fault on currency.
If you vote yes up there then entirely fair enough, but may God help you. If people cannot see what a gigantic whopper this currency union spin is from Salmond I would truly despair were I Scottish.0 -
More rubbish. Who created devolution? Labour. When did Salmond and the independence movement thrive? Under labour. But oh dear me - independence is all the Tories fault.hucks67 said:I do blame the Tories for Scots wanting independence. It has got worse over the years. Whereas John Major may have been able to debate with Salmond, there was no chance Cameron could have done so.
0 -
Liverpool defence parting like the red sea again. Good to see the lessons of last season learned.0
-
Then he shouldn't have implied that Salmond needed a Plan B to show he wasn't intellectually dishonest, arrogant and incapable of imagining he might be wrong. If you do that, don't be surprised when people ask you what your plan is if you're wrong.Edin_Rokz said:
No he doesn't. Salmond is the one trying to sell the dream.Quincel said:
Because he's positioned himself as someone with answers regardless of the outcome, and because he demanded a Plan B from Salmond not because he was leader of the No campaign but as a matter of personal integrity last time. He has to therefore reciprocate.RobD said:
Sorry, he is arguing for the status quo, so why does he need a plan B?Quincel said:
Darling repeatedly hammered Salmond with "What if you're wrong?" last time and plays the "I'm a loyal Scot who wants the best for it regardless of outcome" card the whole time. He made a rod for his own back there and does need a Plan B given it.RobD said:The moderator was wrong there. Alastair doesn't require a plan B, because the Union exists as it is.
0 -
I don't even understand this last question. "If we are better together, why aren't we better together already?"
?
I seem to be running a bit behind, is that really what he said?0 -
It was a sensible question I thought. If you think about it, if Scotland votes NO, they might be a bit disappointed with a Labour government, because Ed Miliband probably won't be as red as he is painted.Hugh said:
lolhucks67 said:Are the Scottish public more left wing than the current Labour party ?
0 -
[Sunil utters a cough that sounds suspiciously like "Poll Tax".]Flightpath said:
More rubbish. Who created devolution? Labour. When did Salmond and the independence movement thrive? Under labour. But oh dear me - independence is all the Tories fault.hucks67 said:I do blame the Tories for Scots wanting independence. It has got worse over the years. Whereas John Major may have been able to debate with Salmond, there was no chance Cameron could have done so.
0 -
You should go to the doctors... polltaxitis is a common side effect of Tebbit chip implantation. :')Sunil_Prasannan said:
[Sunil utters a cough that sounds suspiciously like "Poll Tax".]Flightpath said:
More rubbish. Who created devolution? Labour. When did Salmond and the independence movement thrive? Under labour. But oh dear me - independence is all the Tories fault.hucks67 said:I do blame the Tories for Scots wanting independence. It has got worse over the years. Whereas John Major may have been able to debate with Salmond, there was no chance Cameron could have done so.
0 -
It's the same as asking a government why they haven't already done the stuff in their manifesto, right? If Darling says the UK can achieve loads together, why haven't they already achieved it. It's a silly question every time because the reason is basically "Because politics is never perfect", but whatever.kle4 said:I don't even understand this last question. "If we are better together, why aren't we better together already?"
?0 -
That is a fair point, but Tories have been in favour of devolution for awhile now.Flightpath said:
More rubbish. Who created devolution? Labour. When did Salmond and the independence movement thrive? Under labour. But oh dear me - independence is all the Tories fault.hucks67 said:I do blame the Tories for Scots wanting independence. It has got worse over the years. Whereas John Major may have been able to debate with Salmond, there was no chance Cameron could have done so.
0 -
@JamesM
"....spending is going up under the coalition, that could be useful for them in 2015! "
Not really, I doubt they will argue that it has been "cut". An argument like that becomes a war of statistics that people ignore. "Spending decisions are wrong", is simpler and has more traction.0 -
Darling allowing himself to be painted as the Westminster stooge here0
-
Sounds serious - have you seen a doctor about it?Sunil_Prasannan said:
[Sunil utters a cough that sounds suspiciously like "Poll Tax".]Flightpath said:
More rubbish. Who created devolution? Labour. When did Salmond and the independence movement thrive? Under labour. But oh dear me - independence is all the Tories fault.hucks67 said:I do blame the Tories for Scots wanting independence. It has got worse over the years. Whereas John Major may have been able to debate with Salmond, there was no chance Cameron could have done so.
0 -
Salmond playing the game very well. He only needs to hold the line to 18th September. He does not need to do anything but say what is necessary to win the vote.0
-
But Salmond is intellectually dishonest, arrogant and incapable of imagining he might be wrong.Quincel said:
Then he shouldn't have implied that Salmond needed a Plan B to show he wasn't intellectually dishonest, arrogant and incapable of imagining he might be wrong. If you do that, don't be surprised when people ask you what your plan is if you're wrong.Edin_Rokz said:
No he doesn't. Salmond is the one trying to sell the dream.Quincel said:
Because he's positioned himself as someone with answers regardless of the outcome, and because he demanded a Plan B from Salmond not because he was leader of the No campaign but as a matter of personal integrity last time. He has to therefore reciprocate.RobD said:
Sorry, he is arguing for the status quo, so why does he need a plan B?Quincel said:
Darling repeatedly hammered Salmond with "What if you're wrong?" last time and plays the "I'm a loyal Scot who wants the best for it regardless of outcome" card the whole time. He made a rod for his own back there and does need a Plan B given it.RobD said:The moderator was wrong there. Alastair doesn't require a plan B, because the Union exists as it is.
0 -
Vote NO, save Ed!RobD said:
You should go to the doctors... polltaxitis is a common side effect of Tebbit chip implantation. :')Sunil_Prasannan said:
[Sunil utters a cough that sounds suspiciously like "Poll Tax".]Flightpath said:
More rubbish. Who created devolution? Labour. When did Salmond and the independence movement thrive? Under labour. But oh dear me - independence is all the Tories fault.hucks67 said:I do blame the Tories for Scots wanting independence. It has got worse over the years. Whereas John Major may have been able to debate with Salmond, there was no chance Cameron could have done so.
Vote YES, maximise the chances of Tory survival!0 -
Salmond is blaming IDS.0
-
Salmond smooth and reasonable, and having the best soundbites (the 'ah!' at the 'revelation' of Darling saying of course Scotland could use the point, will play very well despite not being a change in position), crowd with him more as well it seems. The expected narrative was he could not do as badly as last time and would probably win, and even if that expectation is impacting my and others' interpretations, he's making it pretty easy.
Even if what he is saying is disingenuous or wrong, that hardly matters if it works.0 -
You're suggesting he doesn't need a Plan B because politics is fair? I don't mean he needs one as a logical argument, I mean he needs one politically. At least for this debate. Long-term it doesn't really matter.Edin_Rokz said:
But Salmond is intellectually dishonest, arrogant and incapable of imagining he might be wrong.Quincel said:
Then he shouldn't have implied that Salmond needed a Plan B to show he wasn't intellectually dishonest, arrogant and incapable of imagining he might be wrong. If you do that, don't be surprised when people ask you what your plan is if you're wrong.Edin_Rokz said:
No he doesn't. Salmond is the one trying to sell the dream.Quincel said:
Because he's positioned himself as someone with answers regardless of the outcome, and because he demanded a Plan B from Salmond not because he was leader of the No campaign but as a matter of personal integrity last time. He has to therefore reciprocate.RobD said:
Sorry, he is arguing for the status quo, so why does he need a plan B?Quincel said:
Darling repeatedly hammered Salmond with "What if you're wrong?" last time and plays the "I'm a loyal Scot who wants the best for it regardless of outcome" card the whole time. He made a rod for his own back there and does need a Plan B given it.RobD said:The moderator was wrong there. Alastair doesn't require a plan B, because the Union exists as it is.
0 -
Today's pensions are not unaffordable. What is (apparently) unaffordable is the pensions of tomorrow, due to the ageing population. That is why the Government are increasing the retirement age. Since Scotland are ageing faster than the rest of the UK it therefore follows that the future pensions are more unaffordable for them than the rest. That they currently die younger and are currently less expensive is irrelevant, because 'currently' is what we can afford. Which is why the SNP posturing on this is nonsense - the common approach to the future problem in the Union benefits them.0
-
Oh dear. Wee Feck's last point was a 'you're a Tory' rant.
Ooops0 -
Alex Salmond trying to turn into a Scots version of de Kirchner with threats of default?0
-
Painting darling as a westminster stooge is a bad tactic. Salmond needs working class Labour supporters.0
-
You do NOT start cross examination with an open question which gives your opponent control of the stage. That is really amateurish frankly.0
-
Zzzzzz Darling sounding like a stuck record. To be fair to Salmond, he's answered the currency question much better than last time.0
-
Maybe Darling should just go for broke and say 'Look, Labour are going to win in 2015, you don't have to worry about a Tory government'. I know Scottish Labour are hardly united on this issue and the prospect of a government of Labour not appealing to many, but the fact of a current Tory government seems to colour every argument on both sides, either emboldening Yes to bring up matters which are not relevant, or No to tie itself in knots trying to explain away agreement with the hated Tories on anything.0
-
Big mistake for Darling to go back to the currency question, he lost that one badly just minutes ago and he loses it again.0
-
I think SNP plans to use the Euro, if they don't get the pound currency union. But there may be a transitional period of Scotland using the pound independently.0
-
Salmond seems to be deliberately laughing off anything Darling says more than last time. Portray anything he says as ridiculous and/or Tory, both of which will anger Darling and make him get flustered? Good tactics it seems.0
-
Why did the No campaign call itself "Better together" rather than "Stronger together" btw?0
-
Tory MPs in Scotland 1987 = 10MarkHopkins said:
Sounds serious - have you seen a doctor about it?Sunil_Prasannan said:
[Sunil utters a cough that sounds suspiciously like "Poll Tax".]Flightpath said:
More rubbish. Who created devolution? Labour. When did Salmond and the independence movement thrive? Under labour. But oh dear me - independence is all the Tories fault.hucks67 said:I do blame the Tories for Scots wanting independence. It has got worse over the years. Whereas John Major may have been able to debate with Salmond, there was no chance Cameron could have done so.
Tory MPs in Scotland 1992 = 11
Tory MPs in Scotland 1997 = 0!!!0 -
The difference is that Salmond needs a Plan B because his Plan A rests on the decision of people over whom he has no control; Darling's Plan A follows directly from the referendum result. The equivalent would be to ask Salmond what he'd do if he loses the referendum, not if he's blocked on a currency union.Quincel said:
Then he shouldn't have implied that Salmond needed a Plan B to show he wasn't intellectually dishonest, arrogant and incapable of imagining he might be wrong. If you do that, don't be surprised when people ask you what your plan is if you're wrong.Edin_Rokz said:
No he doesn't. Salmond is the one trying to sell the dream.Quincel said:
Because he's positioned himself as someone with answers regardless of the outcome, and because he demanded a Plan B from Salmond not because he was leader of the No campaign but as a matter of personal integrity last time. He has to therefore reciprocate.RobD said:
Sorry, he is arguing for the status quo, so why does he need a plan B?Quincel said:
Darling repeatedly hammered Salmond with "What if you're wrong?" last time and plays the "I'm a loyal Scot who wants the best for it regardless of outcome" card the whole time. He made a rod for his own back there and does need a Plan B given it.RobD said:The moderator was wrong there. Alastair doesn't require a plan B, because the Union exists as it is.
0 -
Salmond missed an open goal there: Darling boasted that with incentives production can go up0
-
Agreed. Could have gone either way, but seems to be going for them.kle4 said:Salmond seems to be deliberately laughing off anything Darling says more than last time. Portray anything he says as ridiculous and/or Tory, both of which will anger Darling and make him get flustered? Good tactics it seems.
0 -
Losing faith inthe Chair. Shouty shouty shouty0
-
Getting way too shouty now0
-
Don't see why Salmond is arguing over the oil. Scotland will only get 8% of it....
0 -
Everyone told Darling to hammer Salmond on the currency issue following his success last time. I guess he can hardly be blamed for having prepared his entire routine around it0
-
Salmond is in trouble here. His tactic of trying to shout over Alistair is looking bad.0
-
Salmond does not answer very many questions.0
-
Darling has found a new line of attack on oil revenues.
This debate is reversing the arguments.
Currency is now Salmond's biggest success, oil is Darling's.0 -
Salmond using coalition failures as a reason for Scotland to have independence.0
-
Darling won that on oil revenues.0
-
This is turning out to be a terrible night - Liverpool getting absolutely hammered, Salmond as expected returning to form. First day back at work after a week off tomorrow and all, with a lot of messes to get back to. This week is not starting off well.0
-
It's hard to hear who is saying what. I like this format but the chairing could be better.0
-
At least TSE can look forward to improving the Pool goal difference on Sunday.... maybe.0
-
Pit ra heed onnim "Badger"!
Oops, got carried away there0 -
Alex Salmond Polls show most Scots want welfare cuts0
-
So based on the debate so far do we think we're actually going to get rid of Scotland once and for all?0
-
Salmond need to not take on Labour. He will lose.0
-
If I am undecided I just hear two blokes shouting at each other.0
-
Salmond's cross-examination is much better than Darling's. New(er) material, more clarity.0
-
This is nothing more than a shore up the vote from a losing side.
Salmond doesn't want swing voters.0 -
Oh no he didn'tTykejohnno said:Darling won that on oil revenues.
Too much pantomime shouty shouty. No winner0 -
BTW I've been watching Airplane on Film4 since 8.30
0 -
Salmond and his supporters will claim that they won this debate. They will be wrong.0
-
This debate has completely reversed the main arguments of YES and NO.
The SNP is attacking Labour for New Labour policies and currency, Labour is attacking the SNP as closet tories on social policy and oil revenues.0 -
Of course, he's no fool.hucks67 said:Salmond using coalition failures as a reason for Scotland to have independence.
I am however a little annoyed at the extent of applause at the line that essentially says that because Darling agrees with the Tories and LDs about Scottish independence, he is sharing a platform with them, that he must somehow either favour or not object to everything those other parties believe in. It's absurd, but the majority of the crowd seem to love it, and many people seem to believe it.
0 -
Yes the debate in not being properly chaired.SouthamObserver said:If I am undecided I just hear two blokes shouting at each other.
0 -
wish the chair would step in and stop them talking/shouting over each other - poor so far.0
-
Long term/short term, it doesn't matter, because Salmond is going to lose.Quincel said:
You're suggesting he doesn't need a Plan B because politics is fair? I don't mean he needs one as a logical argument, I mean he needs one politically. At least for this debate. Long-term it doesn't really matter.Edin_Rokz said:
But Salmond is intellectually dishonest, arrogant and incapable of imagining he might be wrong.Quincel said:
Then he shouldn't have implied that Salmond needed a Plan B to show he wasn't intellectually dishonest, arrogant and incapable of imagining he might be wrong. If you do that, don't be surprised when people ask you what your plan is if you're wrong.Edin_Rokz said:
No he doesn't. Salmond is the one trying to sell the dream.Quincel said:
Because he's positioned himself as someone with answers regardless of the outcome, and because he demanded a Plan B from Salmond not because he was leader of the No campaign but as a matter of personal integrity last time. He has to therefore reciprocate.RobD said:
Sorry, he is arguing for the status quo, so why does he need a plan B?Quincel said:
Darling repeatedly hammered Salmond with "What if you're wrong?" last time and plays the "I'm a loyal Scot who wants the best for it regardless of outcome" card the whole time. He made a rod for his own back there and does need a Plan B given it.RobD said:The moderator was wrong there. Alastair doesn't require a plan B, because the Union exists as it is.
Please note, I am not saying the Yes campaign or even the SNP is going to lose. What ever happens, will he ever be allowed to run Scotland after? Do you, as an obvious YESNP'er (or just a YES'er) think that Salmond can be trusted to be honest and truthful?0 -
Southam
And the status quo is a better together win. Salmond has his tactics wrong.0
This discussion has been closed.