politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Ipsos-Mori becomes the latest pollster to show the indyref

Come on Oldies, win this one for No. Hope for No, No hope!

The campaign in microcosm...

@jimwaterson: When @sirajdatoo went to report on pro-indy event http://t.co/lWMQnu6QsT the BBC were turned away and told "just fuck off, not welcome here"

My prediction: the same as the spreadsheet, unsurprisingly.

Yes 46.51%, Turnout 83.35%.

It's been mentioned before, and you (TSE) mention it above - the GOTV operations potentially makeing the difference. It occurs to me though that that might not make a difference - a good GOTV operation works best in a low turnout election as what you are seeking to achieve is differential turnout. (If only 30% turnout, then if you can get 45% of your voters to turnout then that gives you 1.5 times the votes that you 'should' have and so a likely win). In an election with such high turnout, by definition surely differential turnout will make much less difference? Obviously when it is as close as it is predicted to be then clearly every little counts, but are there really people on either side who would otherwise 'forget' to vote and have to be reminded? Maybe I am missing something, but I am not sure what.

Scott_P said:

The campaign in microcosm...

@jimwaterson: When @sirajdatoo went to report on pro-indy event http://t.co/lWMQnu6QsT the BBC were turned away and told "just fuck off, not welcome here"

So everyone has to let journalists interview them in a very sensitive position (just look at those films - I couldn't bear to finish them)? When you have no idea how they would present them? Would you want a BBC chap at the doctor's when your trousers were down and your prostate was being examined? Which I'd prefer far more to that stuff.

Richard_Nabavi Posts: 2,824
3:38PM
Perhaps the same 750 people are responding to all the pollsters!
Flag Quote · Off Topic


The fellow from Survation hinted he thought that might not be far from the truth on the Daily Politics

AllyM said:

CarlottaVance said:

Gordon Brown:

youtube.com/watch?v=J39bBV7CBJk&feature=youtu.be

It was really some speech.

If Brown had found that in 2010 he might still be PM - I hope he stands as an MSP and forces them all to raise their game.....

I'm surprised Yes has shortened this afternoon.

All the polls over the last 24 hours say the same thing.

Four polls 48/52, one poll 49/51.

OK, it's not comfortable but it seems pretty unlikely they are ALL wrong enough that Yes could really be ahead.

Plus, on balance, it seems more likely that people switch to No at the last minute in the polling booth.

In my opinion the odds should be Yes 6, No 1.2.

I saw this and was amazed:

"Shetland could opt to leave an independent Scotland, Carmichael says
Oil-rich Shetland could opt to leave Scotland if it votes for independence, Alistair Carmichael, the Scottish secretary says. He’s been speaking to my colleague Esther Addley, and she’s filed this.

In an interview with the Guardian, Carmichael said if the islands were to vote strongly “no” but the Scottish national vote was a narrow yes, then a “conversation about Shetland’s position and the options that might be open to it” would begin.

The Lib Dem MP, who represents Orkney and Shetland in Westminster and has been secretary of state or Scotland in the coalition government since last October, said those options might include the islands modelling themselves on the Isle of Man, which is a self-governing Crown dependency, or on the Faroe Islands, which are an autonomous country within the Danish realm.

Asked if he was suggesting that Alex Salmond should not necessarily take for granted that oilfields off Shetland will belong to Scotland in the event of a yes vote, he said: “That would be one of the things that we would want to discuss. I wouldn’t like to predict at this stage where the discussions would go.”

This has been speculated about in the media & indeed on this site. But this is a semi-official comment from a government minister. I fear it may backfire very badly.

Just put another £50 on No, in a moment of madness, perhaps.

MikeL said:

I'm surprised Yes has shortened this afternoon.

All the polls over the last 24 hours say the same thing.

Four polls 48/52, one poll 49/51.

OK, it's not comfortable but it seems pretty unlikely they are ALL wrong enough that Yes could really be ahead.

Plus, on balance, it seems more likely that people switch to No at the last minute in the polling booth.

In my opinion the odds should be Yes 6, No 1.2.

I think yourself and @southamobserver should have a bet and save the betfair commission or bookie overround!

jam2809 said:

I saw this and was amazed:

"Shetland could opt to leave an independent Scotland, Carmichael says
Oil-rich Shetland could opt to leave Scotland if it votes for independence, Alistair Carmichael, the Scottish secretary says. He’s been speaking to my colleague Esther Addley, and she’s filed this.

In an interview with the Guardian, Carmichael said if the islands were to vote strongly “no” but the Scottish national vote was a narrow yes, then a “conversation about Shetland’s position and the options that might be open to it” would begin.

The Lib Dem MP, who represents Orkney and Shetland in Westminster and has been secretary of state or Scotland in the coalition government since last October, said those options might include the islands modelling themselves on the Isle of Man, which is a self-governing Crown dependency, or on the Faroe Islands, which are an autonomous country within the Danish realm.

Asked if he was suggesting that Alex Salmond should not necessarily take for granted that oilfields off Shetland will belong to Scotland in the event of a yes vote, he said: “That would be one of the things that we would want to discuss. I wouldn’t like to predict at this stage where the discussions would go.”

This has been speculated about in the media & indeed on this site. But this is a semi-official comment from a government minister. I fear it may backfire very badly.

This is talked about quite frequently. Shetland is that far North to boot, it often feels little connection to the mainland.

Carmichael, is not "bluffing".

Ps; "bluffing" added to the list.

AllyM said:

CarlottaVance said:

AllyM said:

CarlottaVance said:

Gordon Brown:

youtube.com/watch?v=J39bBV7CBJk&feature=youtu.be

It was really some speech.

If Brown had found that in 2010 he might still be PM - I hope he stands as an MSP and forces them all to raise their game.....

I concur. I'm not a Labour voter but, Gordon at Holyrood, in whatever Scotland, is the sort of person who can really shake it up.

He is a lying has been fake.

FPT

AndyJS said:

Anorak said:

49/51 and still trading at 5.

Suggests gamblers are utterly stupid, or that they know full well how the DKs are going to break.

If virtually every poll puts No ahead, maybe that indicates No is going to win, however narrowly.

True - the margin of error in a poll-of-polls will be a lot smaller, but not that small. Plus, given the methodological similarities across all the polls, there could easily be a common fault (1992 and all that).

Given the above, the price is still out of kilter (geddit) with the polls. In my opinion.

elephant_man said:

A question for PB which is probably stupid - if there is a YES vote, do the Scottish MPs in Westminster no longer "count" at the GE2015?

Many people might not wish them to, but my understanding is they would. Until formal independence is declared in 2016, the people of Scotland are deserving of representation at Westminster.

SeanT said:

AllyM said:

jam2809 said:

I saw this and was amazed:

"Shetland could opt to leave an independent Scotland, Carmichael says
Oil-rich Shetland could opt to leave Scotland if it votes for independence, Alistair Carmichael, the Scottish secretary says. He’s been speaking to my colleague Esther Addley, and she’s filed this.

In an interview with the Guardian, Carmichael said if the islands were to vote strongly “no” but the Scottish national vote was a narrow yes, then a “conversation about Shetland’s position and the options that might be open to it” would begin.

The Lib Dem MP, who represents Orkney and Shetland in Westminster and has been secretary of state or Scotland in the coalition government since last October, said those options might include the islands modelling themselves on the Isle of Man, which is a self-governing Crown dependency, or on the Faroe Islands, which are an autonomous country within the Danish realm.

Asked if he was suggesting that Alex Salmond should not necessarily take for granted that oilfields off Shetland will belong to Scotland in the event of a yes vote, he said: “That would be one of the things that we would want to discuss. I wouldn’t like to predict at this stage where the discussions would go.”

This has been speculated about in the media & indeed on this site. But this is a semi-official comment from a government minister. I fear it may backfire very badly.

This is talked about quite frequently. Shetland is that far North to boot, it often feels little connection to the mainland.

Carmichael, is not "bluffing".

Ps; "bluffing" added to the list.

Watch that video I linked. It makes a very convincing case that Scotland will be completely fucked by independence, thanks to the currency problems, inherited debt, deficits, etc

Why would the oil rich Shetland islands want to be shackled to this madness?

Will do mate.

kle4 said:

elephant_man said:

A question for PB which is probably stupid - if there is a YES vote, do the Scottish MPs in Westminster no longer "count" at the GE2015?

Many people might not wish them to, but my understanding is they would. Until formal independence is declared in 2016, the people of Scotland are deserving of representation at Westminster.

Thanks for the answer - so MPs would canvas for a one-year term an MP from 2015-16? It seems pointless - may as well carry over votes from 2010 for 1-year?

kle4 said:

elephant_man said:

A question for PB which is probably stupid - if there is a YES vote, do the Scottish MPs in Westminster no longer "count" at the GE2015?

Many people might not wish them to, but my understanding is they would. Until formal independence is declared in 2016, the people of Scotland are deserving of representation at Westminster.

So you think the RUK would countenance Scots being on both sides during any negotiations?

Unlikely IMO.

Still can't fathom how UKlite could be taken seriously if Scots withdraw from the British Army - 80% of the SAS are Scots - simply because they are hard ba**ards (torture toleration, general suicidal/bravery etc).

If the Scots win, Cameron should resign as it is because he is so out of touch - more interested in a lol text message from a newspaper editor than people's lives...

AllyM said:

SeanT said:

AllyM said:

jam2809 said:

I saw this and was amazed:

"Shetland could opt to leave an independent Scotland, Carmichael says
Oil-rich Shetland could opt to leave Scotland if it votes for independence, Alistair Carmichael, the Scottish secretary says. He’s been speaking to my colleague Esther Addley, and she’s filed this.

In an interview with the Guardian, Carmichael said if the islands were to vote strongly “no” but the Scottish national vote was a narrow yes, then a “conversation about Shetland’s position and the options that might be open to it” would begin.

The Lib Dem MP, who represents Orkney and Shetland in Westminster and has been secretary of state or Scotland in the coalition government since last October, said those options might include the islands modelling themselves on the Isle of Man, which is a self-governing Crown dependency, or on the Faroe Islands, which are an autonomous country within the Danish realm.

Asked if he was suggesting that Alex Salmond should not necessarily take for granted that oilfields off Shetland will belong to Scotland in the event of a yes vote, he said: “That would be one of the things that we would want to discuss. I wouldn’t like to predict at this stage where the discussions would go.”

This has been speculated about in the media & indeed on this site. But this is a semi-official comment from a government minister. I fear it may backfire very badly.

This is talked about quite frequently. Shetland is that far North to boot, it often feels little connection to the mainland.

Carmichael, is not "bluffing".

Ps; "bluffing" added to the list.

Watch that video I linked. It makes a very convincing case that Scotland will be completely fucked by independence, thanks to the currency problems, inherited debt, deficits, etc

Why would the oil rich Shetland islands want to be shackled to this madness?

Will do mate.

I agree. But I am just amazed that a minister just said that. Idle speculation on this site or elsewhere is one thing, this is quite another. I am sure it was planned & this may well prove to be a major misjudgment. Interesting to see the YES % in the Shetland's tomorrow...

Put this on previous thread and then noticed a new one had just started.

If there is a "Yes" win I'll offer a bet to anyone who wants to take it - despite the "Yes" propaganda that if they win there will be no more Tory governments ever in Scotland, and the even dafter suggestion from some quarters that there will be no more Labour governments in RUK, I will bet £50 that

1) within 20 years there will be a new government in Scotland which includes, possibly as part of a coalition, ministers who are recognisably centre-right (e.g. either members of whatever Scottish Conservative Party or it's successor organisation is called, or of some new party with a platform which is pro business, pro small government, and pro low taxes and light regulation,) and


2) unfortunately within the same timeframe there will also be a government in RUK which includes Labour ministers.

Odds negotiable - I'll start by suggesting evens but I think the probability of those two things both happening within 20 years given a "Yes" is higher than 50:50 so will consider a reasonable proposal for odds reflecting this.

If the person taking the bet with me is from Scotland I'm willing to consider a bet denominated in Euros, as if there is a "Yes" vote you won't be using the pound in 20 years' time.

Party support changes - within my lifetime there was a Conservative PM in the UK who had majority support in Scotland and there have been Labour governments with a majority of the vote in England. It is entirely possible, especially in the different environment which will exist after Friday whichever way the vote goes, that support might change round again.

SeanT said:

AllyM said:

jam2809 said:

I saw this and was amazed:

"Shetland could opt to leave an independent Scotland, Carmichael says
Oil-rich Shetland could opt to leave Scotland if it votes for independence, Alistair Carmichael, the Scottish secretary says. He’s been speaking to my colleague Esther Addley, and she’s filed this.

In an interview with the Guardian, Carmichael said if the islands were to vote strongly “no” but the Scottish national vote was a narrow yes, then a “conversation about Shetland’s position and the options that might be open to it” would begin.

The Lib Dem MP, who represents Orkney and Shetland in Westminster and has been secretary of state or Scotland in the coalition government since last October, said those options might include the islands modelling themselves on the Isle of Man, which is a self-governing Crown dependency, or on the Faroe Islands, which are an autonomous country within the Danish realm.

Asked if he was suggesting that Alex Salmond should not necessarily take for granted that oilfields off Shetland will belong to Scotland in the event of a yes vote, he said: “That would be one of the things that we would want to discuss. I wouldn’t like to predict at this stage where the discussions would go.”

This has been speculated about in the media & indeed on this site. But this is a semi-official comment from a government minister. I fear it may backfire very badly.

This is talked about quite frequently. Shetland is that far North to boot, it often feels little connection to the mainland.

Carmichael, is not "bluffing".

Ps; "bluffing" added to the list.

Watch that video I linked. It makes a very convincing case that Scotland will be completely fucked by independence, thanks to the currency problems, inherited debt, deficits, etc

Why would the oil rich Shetland islands want to be shackled to this madness?

Because they get a few miles of water if they are not and so would be unshackled and skint , eating grass in a few months.

Carnyx said:

jam2809 said:

I saw this and was amazed:

"Shetland could opt to leave an independent Scotland, Carmichael says
Oil-rich Shetland could opt to leave Scotland if it votes for independence, Alistair Carmichael, the Scottish secretary says. He’s been speaking to my colleague Esther Addley, and she’s filed this.

In an interview with the Guardian, Carmichael said if the islands were to vote strongly “no” but the Scottish national vote was a narrow yes, then a “conversation about Shetland’s position and the options that might be open to it” would begin.

The Lib Dem MP, who represents Orkney and Shetland in Westminster and has been secretary of state or Scotland in the coalition government since last October, said those options might include the islands modelling themselves on the Isle of Man, which is a self-governing Crown dependency, or on the Faroe Islands, which are an autonomous country within the Danish realm.

Asked if he was suggesting that Alex Salmond should not necessarily take for granted that oilfields off Shetland will belong to Scotland in the event of a yes vote, he said: “That would be one of the things that we would want to discuss. I wouldn’t like to predict at this stage where the discussions would go.”

This has been speculated about in the media & indeed on this site. But this is a semi-official comment from a government minister. I fear it may backfire very badly.

I wonder if he worries at all. He seems to have been semi-detaching himself from the coalition since his teatime at Jurassic Park public debate at Nicola Sturgeon. First he was talking about retiring at the next election and then joining the Yes side if they'd have him after a Yes (I forget if he was seeking to be on the indy negotiating team). Plus he's one of the very few LDs in a reasonably secure seat (given the VI polling for even Danny Alexander's seat). Could be be trying to find himself a different bolthole in the event of a Yes? It's not as if he has much to lose by upsetting Messrs Cameron and Clegg in that event.

He has already said he will resign office immediately after a YES vote and join the Scottish negotiation team.

Martin said:

AllyM said:

This is talked about quite frequently. Shetland is that far North to boot, it often feels little connection to the mainland.

Carmichael, is not "bluffing".

Ps; "bluffing" added to the list.

It's not just the oil that's in Shetland. Fishing is even more important...have a read of this:

http://www.shetnews.co.uk/letters/9231-a-fighting-chance

It's very, very unlikely that the SNP will be able to negotiate an opt out from the standard EU fisheries policy. This would be a disaster for Shetland's economy. So after a yes vote, Shetland has 3 options:

1. Stay with Scotland. Lose the Fishing industry to the EU.
2. Go independent from EU/UK. Uncertain how much fishing territory or oil territory they'd keep.
3. Vote to stay with the UK. This would keep the UK's opt-out for fishing for them, and as a bonus, the UK would have lots of claim to lots of the oil off Shetland. Goodbye 'geographic share of the oil', and Scotland's economy. I'm sure Shetland would be rewarded with a mother-of-all Barnett-type agreement.

I know which way I'd vote if I was Shetland...

Fishing would be 1% of the economy if they had economic rights to the oil.

Anorak said:

elephant_man said:

kle4 said:

elephant_man said:

A question for PB which is probably stupid - if there is a YES vote, do the Scottish MPs in Westminster no longer "count" at the GE2015?

Many people might not wish them to, but my understanding is they would. Until formal independence is declared in 2016, the people of Scotland are deserving of representation at Westminster.

Thanks for the answer - so MPs would canvas for a one-year term an MP from 2015-16? It seems pointless - may as well carry over votes from 2010 for 1-year?

Nobody knows. There has been talk of emergency legislation to extend this parliament, or legislation to exclude Scottish MPs from Westminster, or a 'gentlemans agreement' whereby they would not vote on England-only matters.

What I don't get is who agreed that Scotland would become independent in 2016 in the event of a yes event. I would be saying you are out of the door in May 2015

malcolmg said:

AllyM said:

SeanT said:

AllyM said:

jam2809 said:

I saw this and was amazed:

"Shetland could opt to leave an independent Scotland, Carmichael says
Oil-rich Shetland could opt to leave Scotland if it votes for independence, Alistair Carmichael, the Scottish secretary says. He’s been speaking to my colleague Esther Addley, and she’s filed this.

In an interview with the Guardian, Carmichael said if the islands were to vote strongly “no” but the Scottish national vote was a narrow yes, then a “conversation about Shetland’s position and the options that might be open to it” would begin.

The Lib Dem MP, who represents Orkney and Shetland in Westminster and has been secretary of state or Scotland in the coalition government since last October, said those options might include the islands modelling themselves on the Isle of Man, which is a self-governing Crown dependency, or on the Faroe Islands, which are an autonomous country within the Danish realm.

Asked if he was suggesting that Alex Salmond should not necessarily take for granted that oilfields off Shetland will belong to Scotland in the event of a yes vote, he said: “That would be one of the things that we would want to discuss. I wouldn’t like to predict at this stage where the discussions would go.”

This has been speculated about in the media & indeed on this site. But this is a semi-official comment from a government minister. I fear it may backfire very badly.

This is talked about quite frequently. Shetland is that far North to boot, it often feels little connection to the mainland.

Carmichael, is not "bluffing".

Ps; "bluffing" added to the list.

Watch that video I linked. It makes a very convincing case that Scotland will be completely fucked by independence, thanks to the currency problems, inherited debt, deficits, etc

Why would the oil rich Shetland islands want to be shackled to this madness?

Will do mate.

Be better watching paint dry

Or watching turnips grow?

Garethofthevale said:

Anorak said:

elephant_man said:

kle4 said:

elephant_man said:

A question for PB which is probably stupid - if there is a YES vote, do the Scottish MPs in Westminster no longer "count" at the GE2015?

Many people might not wish them to, but my understanding is they would. Until formal independence is declared in 2016, the people of Scotland are deserving of representation at Westminster.

Thanks for the answer - so MPs would canvas for a one-year term an MP from 2015-16? It seems pointless - may as well carry over votes from 2010 for 1-year?

Nobody knows. There has been talk of emergency legislation to extend this parliament, or legislation to exclude Scottish MPs from Westminster, or a 'gentlemans agreement' whereby they would not vote on England-only matters.

What I don't get is who agreed that Scotland would become independent in 2016 in the event of a yes event. I would be saying you are out of the door in May 2015

Somethings just take time to sort out, whatever you might want. They could be declared independent within a week but it would be the mother of all clusterf*cks to sort out - for both rUK and iScotland.

The markets on which we all depend for our wealth and security would very much like to see an orderly transition.

TheWatcher said:

malcolmg said:

SeanT said:

AllyM said:

jam2809 said:

I saw this and was amazed:

"Shetland could opt to leave an independent Scotland, Carmichael says
Oil-rich Shetland could opt to leave Scotland if it votes for independence, Alistair Carmichael, the Scottish secretary says. He’s been speaking to my colleague Esther Addley, and she’s filed this.

In an interview with the Guardian, Carmichael said if the islands were to vote strongly “no” but the Scottish national vote was a narrow yes, then a “conversation about Shetland’s position and the options that might be open to it” would begin.

The Lib Dem MP, who represents Orkney and Shetland in Westminster and has been secretary of state or Scotland in the coalition government since last October, said those options might include the islands modelling themselves on the Isle of Man, which is a self-governing Crown dependency, or on the Faroe Islands, which are an autonomous country within the Danish realm.

Asked if he was suggesting that Alex Salmond should not necessarily take for granted that oilfields off Shetland will belong to Scotland in the event of a yes vote, he said: “That would be one of the things that we would want to discuss. I wouldn’t like to predict at this stage where the discussions would go.”

This has been speculated about in the media & indeed on this site. But this is a semi-official comment from a government minister. I fear it may backfire very badly.

This is talked about quite frequently. Shetland is that far North to boot, it often feels little connection to the mainland.

Carmichael, is not "bluffing".

Ps; "bluffing" added to the list.

Watch that video I linked. It makes a very convincing case that Scotland will be completely fucked by independence, thanks to the currency problems, inherited debt, deficits, etc

Why would the oil rich Shetland islands want to be shackled to this madness?

Because they get a few miles of water if they are not and so would be unshackled and skint , eating grass in a few months.

Arf. Ah, the old 12 mile rule applies to everyone but Scotland. (And Independence too).

How much oil is there 12 miles from Shetland?

I find him an insufferable sort, not least because economists are wrong all the time but present themselves as certain when they are, admittedly, out on the spot, and he's a particularly bad example, but I did like Paul Krugman's comment the other day:

It would be one thing to make the sober case that independence is worth it despite the economic costs and risks; but the SNP has been claiming that there are no costs and risks, which is just wrong.

The broader Yes campaign and supporters have made more comments along the lines of knowing there could be issues but it being worth it, which is a very respectable position to hold, but it has been frustrating how many in No err too far on the pessimistic side while still accepting Scotland ultimately would do ok, and how many in Yes dismiss any hint of risk as just plain wrong and presenting the opponents as question whether Scotland could be independent, rather than if it should.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/

AllyM said:

Martin said:

AllyM said:

This is talked about quite frequently. Shetland is that far North to boot, it often feels little connection to the mainland.

Carmichael, is not "bluffing".

Ps; "bluffing" added to the list.

It's not just the oil that's in Shetland. Fishing is even more important...have a read of this:

http://www.shetnews.co.uk/letters/9231-a-fighting-chance

It's very, very unlikely that the SNP will be able to negotiate an opt out from the standard EU fisheries policy. This would be a disaster for Shetland's economy. So after a yes vote, Shetland has 3 options:

1. Stay with Scotland. Lose the Fishing industry to the EU.
2. Go independent from EU/UK. Uncertain how much fishing territory or oil territory they'd keep.
3. Vote to stay with the UK. This would keep the UK's opt-out for fishing for them, and as a bonus, the UK would have lots of claim to lots of the oil off Shetland. Goodbye 'geographic share of the oil', and Scotland's economy. I'm sure Shetland would be rewarded with a mother-of-all Barnett-type agreement.

I know which way I'd vote if I was Shetland...

Funnily, I was talking about the importance of fishing to Shetland with someone the other day.

I can't recall why it was relevant but, I felt the need to bring it up nonetheless.

The Shetland Islanders must be protected from danger like the Falkland Islanders.

kle4 said:

elephant_man said:

A question for PB which is probably stupid - if there is a YES vote, do the Scottish MPs in Westminster no longer "count" at the GE2015?

Many people might not wish them to, but my understanding is they would. Until formal independence is declared in 2016, the people of Scotland are deserving of representation at Westminster.

And I suppose they'll carry on voting on English matters until 2016 as well.

I'm always a little sceptical of economists saying either that all will be well in the best of all possible worlds - which was pretty much what a majority of them were saying pre-2007 - or, conversely, that there will be plagues of locusts and the end of civilization as we know it, which seems to be what they're saying re Scotland.

There will be difficulties of course. But - for reasons which I'm quite willing to expand on if anyone's interested - I do think that if Scotland votes yes, it will be in rUK's interest to have some sort of currency union and to be gracious and generous in its negotiations with Scotland. It is never a good idea to have such a close neighbour in dire straits. It would affect us - possibly badly - were we to do so.

So I think the gloom and doom is both overdone and self-defeating. Britain's USP is stability and a certain sang-froid in the face of problems. So it should treat any decision by Scotland to become independent with civility, graciousness and in a spirit of co-operation rather than with hysterical "we're all doomed / you're all doomed" panic and vengefulness.

Anorak said:

Martin said:

AllyM said:

This is talked about quite frequently. Shetland is that far North to boot, it often feels little connection to the mainland.

Carmichael, is not "bluffing".

Ps; "bluffing" added to the list.

It's not just the oil that's in Shetland. Fishing is even more important...have a read of this:

http://www.shetnews.co.uk/letters/9231-a-fighting-chance

It's very, very unlikely that the SNP will be able to negotiate an opt out from the standard EU fisheries policy. This would be a disaster for Shetland's economy. So after a yes vote, Shetland has 3 options:

1. Stay with Scotland. Lose the Fishing industry to the EU.
2. Go independent from EU/UK. Uncertain how much fishing territory or oil territory they'd keep.
3. Vote to stay with the UK. This would keep the UK's opt-out for fishing for them, and as a bonus, the UK would have lots of claim to lots of the oil off Shetland. Goodbye 'geographic share of the oil', and Scotland's economy. I'm sure Shetland would be rewarded with a mother-of-all Barnett-type agreement.

I know which way I'd vote if I was Shetland...

Fishing would be 1% of the economy if they had economic rights to the oil.

The Scottish Government would give Shetland the grandmother, the uncles, cousins and mad Aunt Hattie of a deal to avoid Shetland slipping out of its grasp. Unlike Scotland in its negotiations with the previously insulted Westminster, Shetland will have massive bargaining power and would be sitting very pretty indeed.

Mr. 67, I'm also considering whether to stay up.

It'd knacker me for the Singapore practice, though.

malcolmg said:

AllyM said:

CarlottaVance said:

AllyM said:

CarlottaVance said:

Gordon Brown:

youtube.com/watch?v=J39bBV7CBJk&feature=youtu.be

It was really some speech.

If Brown had found that in 2010 he might still be PM - I hope he stands as an MSP and forces them all to raise their game.....

I concur. I'm not a Labour voter but, Gordon at Holyrood, in whatever Scotland, is the sort of person who can really shake it up.

He is a lying has been fake.

As opposed to a lying current fake like Salmond?

If the Scots win, the CEO of Wetherspoon's saying beer would get cheaper was the swing factor - that was more powerful than any Sun headline

Martin said:

Anorak said:

Fishing would be 1% of the economy if they had economic rights to the oil.

Very true. When this is brought up with Nationalists, they consult their knowledge of international law and say that Shetland would only get an 'enclave' of the oil, 10 miles out or something from their land. As with all Nationalist arguments, I take it with a very large pinch of salt.

Assuming the Nationalists are correct, however, their argument wouldn't stand if Shetland remained part of the rUK. Then, I believe, the drawing of lines around who gets what becomes much more open to debate. I'm sure it would end up in court. But I'm also confident the rUK would get rather a lot more oil than Scotland would want.

You have that the wrong way round. A fully independent Shetland gets it's equitable share of equidistant EEZ - giving it a massive wedge of the oil and fishing rights. A Shetland as part of the UK would be an island enclave and only get it's 12 mile territorial waters.

This is the same body of law that's being used to guarantee the Falklands isles so the rUK would be in choppy waters if it wanted to rock the boat.

elephant_man said:

Still can't fathom how UKlite could be taken seriously if Scots withdraw from the British Army - 80% of the SAS are Scots

..

No they're not.

Also the Scottish are unable to man their existing infantry commitments and have to fill the gaps with Fijians. They can't get enough recruits due to the poor standards of health and fitness of the young.

Re staying up for the vote - My plan was to stay up until the early-ish hours, but I've been a bit scared of doing that since going to bed at the "I'm calling it, it's President Kerry" moment in 2004.

The only polling that has been done on Orkeny/Shetland intentions post independence had the choice between staying with an independent Scotland or forming a fully independent country of their own. Sticking with Scotland was 80%+.

"Chief Counting Officer Mary Pitcaithly admitted she would be "slightly nervous" on the big day.
"I just want everybody to have a really good experience on polling day," she said. "No impediments to voting, everything goes smoothly when they turn up to vote. And then we get an accurate result that everybody can trust.""

http://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-scotland-29233956

Chatting with one of my production staff who mentioned that his mom was off to see John Reid tonight and that the hall was going to be packed out with over 100 voters. One of the benefits that the No campaign has is the number of heavy hitters it can call on. This is North Lanarkshire one of the key battlegrounds.

Another of my staff was chatting and his view was that no-one is standing up and shouting about voting No but they just know it needs to be done. There is a perception that the Yes campaign have hijacked Scottish nationalism for their own personal agenda.

Off to collect my son and drag him to the polls. His 3 other flat mates who are all Scottish born students are not voting. I am not sure we can take the high postal vote turnout as an indication of the same for in person. Maybe Nick is right with the - 15% estimate.

elephant_man said:

Interesting that Cameron has now dropped to 4/1 to go before year-end with Lads

Yet 16/1 as next to leave the Cabinet with PaddyPower

Cameron - weak, weak, weak

Both bad bets, surely? If this is predicated on a yes vote, then at 4/1 it would be better simply to back yes, and at 16/1 he'd surely be beaten to resignation by ministers like Charmichael or Alexander who do not have to nominate a successor.

SeanT said:

Alistair said:

The only polling that has been done on Orkeny/Shetland intentions post independence had the choice between staying with an independent Scotland or forming a fully independent country of their own. Sticking with Scotland was 80%+.

Were they offered the option of joining the FUK?

http://www.newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-politics/7203-northern-isles-are-scottish-say-islanders

Alistair seems to be accurate. But what would be the point of rejoining the UK? The enclave issue would occur, and they'd end up paying lots of taxes to London.

Even the Spectator likes Gordon Brown's speech:

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/09/watch-gordon-browns-passionate-speech-in-defence-of-the-union/

I think a GE2015 that is swung one way by Labour Scottish MPs would be a tricky one - I would expect Clegg to side with the party with the largest majority in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. After all, the Scottish MPs would be stepping down in 2016 anyway...

Weirdly I expect that Salmond would be quite an autocrat were he to realize his dream of becoming President of Scotland - something akin to Putin....

I am sure that if the NO campaign offered some free Buckfast for voting NO, that they would easily win.

SeanT said:

hucks67 said:

Am I alone in thinking of staying up to watch the results come in, even though I have no real stake in whether Scotland is independence or not ?

I live 400 miles away from Scotland and have no real connection with it. If it goes independent, it is not really going to affect me, unless the stock market and other financial markets go into meltdown.

But the stupid thing is that I do care about it. It is a 307 year old union and I think if separation happens, it might not be a good thing for the UK's reputation.

Yes, it affects you. It really really does.

It will be BAD for us economically, it will probably be really BAD for Scotland, and it could be a potential CATASTROPHE for all.

My guess is somewhere between really bad and catastrophe, in the medium term.

Simon Jenkins was recently interviewed on independence and he said he was not sure what the fuss was about. He seemed to think that Scotland could go independent without any real affect on Scotland or the rUK.

I'll be up for the results. Last day in work tomorrow then off to Australia for 6 months, from next Tuesday. Really hoping its a No, starting to feel very anxious about the result, so I can imagine its about a billion times worse for those in Scotland, what ever side you're on. Hope Scotland can come together after the result. But equally if its a yes, I hope the rest of the UK can unite around a negotiating stance that is in our interests. We would also have to start rebuilding a country to a certain extent.