The Northern Isles will probably vote No to independence. Maybe they could simply remain as part of the UK whilst the rest of Scotland goes it alone. :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Glory Lurker
Printable View
The Northern Isles will probably vote No to independence. Maybe they could simply remain as part of the UK whilst the rest of Scotland goes it alone. :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Glory Lurker
I don't get this big "foreign" thing. It does seem to be a pre-occupation with the no campaign, and a bizzare one at that given that a lot of the talking heads for your side are Labour people who are supposed to be inclusive folk. What's wrong with foreigners? All we'd be doing would be doing things our way as a political unit. I genuinely do not see any social barriers.Quote:
Originally Posted by yeezus
Quote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
First, not sure what you're basing your prediction on. Second, you could apply that argument to any constituency, town, street, house or bedroom that voted one way or the other. Third, you are talking about partition:eek:. Fourth, I am taking all this too seriously! :greengrin Fifth, I'm off to have a beer.
Thanks for the joust!
The same applies to any particular area of five million or so within the UK. It's a UK election and the UK gets what it votes for.Quote:
Originally Posted by Glory Lurker
What happens in an independent Scotland when Shetland votes for a Lib Dem MSP and never get a Lib Dem government? Presumably, they should vote for independence from Scotland so that they can get what they vote for?
Incidentally, East Lothian gets exactly what it votes for in the UK General Election - a Labour MP.
Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath voted for a Labour MP and ended up with one of the most part time representatives there's been - even recently denying to an audience that he's a politician before someone reminded him he's a member of parliament.
He's on full time expenses though.
PS: not having a go at Labour with that, just can't stand Gordon Brown.
I expected Brown to have a bigger part in the pro-union campaign to be honest, not herd much since his speech in Edinburgh.Quote:
Originally Posted by steakbake
I'm sure he'll contribute in some way, but I reckon Brown is a lot more toxic than some folk in the Scottish political firmament are willing to agree that he is.Quote:
Originally Posted by yeezus
Brown's like political arsenic. He's better well away from the campaign.Quote:
Originally Posted by yeezus
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beefster
Scotland cannot be compared to any other particular area of five million people. Scotland is a constituent part of the UK, a political unit. It entered as a functioning state and can leave as one. Among lots of other reasons, I think it should leave to ensure that - as a political unit - it gets the government it actually elects.
I'm a bit lost with your Shetland example (although I know why you've chosen it - happy to get in to that barney if you want :greengrin:cb). Their Lib Dem MSP has featured in half of the Holyrood governments so far. Until the coalition at Westminster, their Lib Dem/ LibSDP/ Liberal MP has been no closer to power than possibly standing beside the PM in a lobby toilet (although presumably not Mrs T).
My prediction would be based on the fact that both Orkney and Shetland gave a massive No in the 1979 referendum. I don't think their views will have changed all that much. I am fairly sure that consider themselves more Shetlander / Orcadian than Scots. Maybe somebody from up there could let us know the score on that one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Glory Lurker
Wasn't there an opt out for the Northern Isles in the 1978 Scotland act allowing them to continue being governed from Westminster in the event of a devolved Parliament? (I might have imagined that. :greengrin)
I thought he wasn't so unpopular with Scots...?Quote:
Originally Posted by Beefster
Are you joking? The man is a national embarrassment. Unless you ask him and his cronies who think he saved the world.Quote:
Originally Posted by yeezus
Why would Brown be popular? He was one of the most dismal Chancellors we had and probably the worst prime minister.
The Chinese on the other hand, love him as the guy who sold the UK gold reserves for a knock down price.
He also described himself recently as a former politician in China. Something I'm sure his constituents probably aren't to chuffed about.Quote:
Originally Posted by steakbake
So whats the story?Billions extra or leaded weight round our neck?Who should be listen to?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...il-review.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...tay-in-UK.html
Ask the Norwegians. The mill stone of oil wealth has condemned them to the highest standard of living in the world.Quote:
Originally Posted by southfieldhibby
Any initial thoughts on the White Paper then?
I'm not in any camp per se but there are a lot of good things contained within the document. However, as a Scottish academic, this is still a major stumbling block:
That's a £3bn uncertainty right there which directly impacts every single academic currently working at a Scottish University.Quote:
Negotiating with the Westminster government a fair funding formula for the Scottish government to contribute to the funding of university research councils
The Westminster government don't need to accommodate any such requests and I was really hoping the SNP would have outlined a plan B should negotiations not yield an answer or a productive outcome.
As I said, there are a lot of positives outlined in the case but this, for me personally, is the deal-breaker.
Extremely light on detail, EU membership, £, no tax increases, passport if youve live 10 years in Scotland, pensions safeguarded all to be taken as happening because Alex Salmond says so. I doubt today's SNP manifesto will sway many people to vote yes
There you go... it's things like this that are the reason why I'm only "leaning" towards a Yes at the moment.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Story So Far...
I've been banging on about Trident, London Crossrail, even the BBC previously ... all things that we put money into and get less value back, you're post shows that there are a lot of swings and roundabouts involved in all this :confused:
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucky
The biggie for me is the £ question.
on one hand are we really saying that the Rest of UK business really want one of their most important "export" markets to move onto another currency with all the additional cost and complexity that would entail?
on the the other hand how can we say we will use the £ "full stop" "end of" "fact" etc?? (and i know the argument that Scotland owns 8-9% of the B of E but that's not enough of an argument)
If we vote "no", will Scotland's position in the Union be stronger, or weaker? It's like Tam Dayell said, you can't go half way down the road to independence.
I might not be directing my ire towards the correct group of people, but this is a bugbear I have with the SNP/Scottish Executive,,,,the lack of a plan B for each and every point it has made in the white paper.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Story So Far...
Perhaps a little OTT for me to expect such things, but there is a rather important referendum on the horizon, we rarely get 'absolutes' from politicians but lately it's 'we will do this' and 'we will get that',,,but what if the promises made re EU, currency etc are beyond the powers of an independent Scotland? Where would an elected Scotland be if the £ was not an option, are we better/worse or the same?
Whilst I'm on my soap box, even the abolition of trident from the Clyde has softened from 'it will go' to something like 'it will go as soon as as safely and responsibly achieved',,,,not quite a flip-flop, certainly a flip!
What makes you think we pay for London cross rail? Does a city of 3 million more residents than the whole of Scotland not generate enough economic output to pay for such things?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Alf R
As for the BBC...sure BBC Scotland does not receive all of the license fee raised in Scotland but the last time I checked I had access to most of BBC's national output whenever I wanted So not sure what your argument is here.
And as for Trident. Well you either believe in nuclear deterrents or you don't but at least you can't complain about any economic benefit from maintaining the base of being felt in Scotland!
Judging by the time of posts, we've got some very fast readers in the .net fraternity! Must be just be that us simple "yes" people can't read as well as our unionist betters:wink:
If I could pick on certain points that I think I know the answer to:-
"Plan B"s. Who ever goes in to a negotiation saying what their plan B is?
Currency - it will be the pound (yes, full stop). Anyone can use whatever currency they like. The important thing is the currency union. Despite all the huffing and puffing, Westminster is not saying no to this, and would be mad to do so. It would run the risk of sterling ceasing to be an oil currency, plus dismember the very common market they are supposedly so keen to preserve. It wouldn't be "pre-negotiating" to say "we will not allow a currency union", it would be clarity. If it is the case that this is a non-starter, why aren't they saying it?
EU Membership - a given. Scotland is already EU territory, with over 5 million EU citizens. Assuming that we do need to get our own new membership, we are uniquely well-placed. We hold most of the EU's oil reserves, a massive share of its fisheries, and a large proportion of its renewables potential. The EU commission will not push Schengen on us as it would cause barriers within what is presently a free-trading area.
Trident - see ya. It's a negotiating tool, though. I can wait a couple years or so post-independence for it to go. At a slight tangent, SiMar talks about economic benefits of Trident. When the cost of the scheme is worked out against the purported economic benefits, does this genuinely work out in our favour? I don't know, my problem with Trident is in principle, but it would be interesting to know if this assertion really had a basis.
Cross rail - the finances of this are split. Very roughly, "london" tax payers are paying around 50%, railtrack (or similar, on phone so can't look it up are 20-25% and Westminster Central government are picking up the rest, from memory "our" share of that is around £44-45 millionQuote:
Originally Posted by SiMar
BBC's last accounts stated they take in just shy of £199 million in licence fees from Scotland and spend just over £180 million in our programming. There's probably more complexity to it if we factor in what the bbc spends to other tv companies to then air here?
On Trident, I used to be for but now I think it's time expired, if we must spend all the money then I'd rather it was on ships, soldiers etc that are more useful day to day (Philippines etc)... I was told (not read it myself so won't hang my hat on the argument!) the Scottish tax payer contributes £3 billion(really???) towards it.... Whatever the truth I can't imagine we benefit by the amount paid in. (Open to discussion on that tho :-) )
Whilst I hear what you're saying, there's far too much at stake to otherwise expect an entire work sector to vote without a semblance of plan B. The loss of that money destroys the Further Education sector in Scotland and 'we'll see what we can do' is not a valid security position.Quote:
Originally Posted by Glory Lurker
I'm still reading it and as I said, there's a lot of good stuff for the case of independence but a lot of it is also very woolly and vague.
I said on the other thread (PM) that I was undecided. I wish the UK Parliament would go over the benefits of staying in the Union rather than just being negative all the time. At least the Yes camp are coming out with some propaganda.
take a look at the recently published white paper re-Scottish independence then. Salmond's writing, is good. the vote "yes" is not about voting for him, btw. It is all about voting for the kind of society we deserve in this small country.modern Scottish parties will be formed/come back to the fore, and have social values, fairness at the helm, not who can get a quick buck at the demise of others round them. there will be no bedroom tax, that is for sure , whichever new party took the lead. vote with your heart, and be proud to vote with your head too. it's time to rid this country of the notion that we are part of the world powers that the UK once was.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beefster
Am I right in thinking that the Queen will still remain Head of State after Independence?
What's that all about? :confused:
I suppose if people want to have a referendum on becoming a republic, it can wait till after we've decided on the independence question?Quote:
Originally Posted by heretoday
Most countries in the commonwealth have gone down that route - independence, then deciding whether to remain in the commonwealth. Australia still frequently debate it and I think Jamaica recently has seen a rise in republican sentiment.
:agree:. If there is a yes vote, no way will westminster block a currency union - they need us.Quote:
Originally Posted by Glory Lurker
Quite a hard thing for them to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by PatHead
:agree: The arguments against seem to be limited to:Quote:
Originally Posted by PatHead
- Its better for everyone to stay as the united kingdom.
Ok then tell us why its better for everyone? or more specifically tell us scots why we are better off staying in the UK because thats what we are basing our decision on or is it that the united kingdom is better for England/Wales & NI and we are supposed to sacrifice our independence and ability to self-govern to benefit everyone else apart from us.
- We wont get membership of the EU.
Why not? Yes, the SNP have been vague on the process and ability to gain EU membership post-independence but the better together campaign has presented nothing other than the assertion of pro-union politicians that it wont happen. Where is the evidence or reasoning behind this stance?
- We wont get to keep the pound.
Ok, get the prime minister to come out and confirm that there will be no possibility of a currency union should scotland become independent. Given that good ol' Dave is pro-union he'd be more than happy to dispel this myth that a common currency would be used or indeed in the best interests of both sides post-independence.
Ironically after many months of complaints from the better together side about the lack of information or clarity on how independence would work the publishing of this white paper has shown up exactly how little they are actually putting into justifying thier stance of no independence beyond sniping at everything said by the SNP
An independent Scotland would be considered a new country and therefore have to re-apply for membership of the European Union, that doesn't mean we "wouldn't get membership" at all - it just means that there would be long negotiations. That being said, the rules are laid down in the Lisbon Treaty and it will come down to law, not talks.Quote:
Originally Posted by MyJo
Great, that'll make us even more like Norway.Quote:
Originally Posted by StranraerHibee
For those that are as yet undecided.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xm5EBDa42ck
I keep hearing that folk shouldn't make up their mind on the basis of hating Salmond but then keep seeing links to stuff like this. What next? 'Jeremy Kyle does independence'?Quote:
Originally Posted by Peevemor
You keep seeing? Really!! All two links. It was hard to tell the difference between that video and the Rangers one. All were obnoxious, ignorant and uninformed.......Quote:
Originally Posted by Beefster
My criticism of the SNP's white paper is that it has too much detailed planning. It will turn the referendum into a vote for or against the SNP's policy platform. This allows the unionist parties to focus on criticising details and pointing out possible snags in implementation of these policies, without being expected to put forward any constructive alternative vision.
That's not what the whole thing's about. The referendum isn't about whether you approve of the SNP's policies or even about what sort of society you'd like to see in Scotland in the future. It's about who should be making the decisions about the type of Scotland we want in the coming decades.
In the union Scots are a decreasing minority. Power lies with the south of England, in particular the City of London, and if they want something the opinions of Scots will be overridden. There will be difficulties in independence, but we have to decide whether to confront and work through these or continue as a peripheral and largely disregarded province of an outstandingly centralised state.
Just posted this on the white paper thread so thought I'd do the same here
I've sat back and read this thread for a few days now, taking in what people are saying and what not. I was very much a man that stood for the no vote before I had a look at what it all actually meant. I have simple views that are easy to follow and for me they are the sole reason that I will vote yes. I have trust In our political parties- can't believe I just said that- to sort out the intricacies that follow of we go independent.
For all those undecided here are my reasons for voting yes.
In 14 of the last 18 elections the Scottish vote has counted for nothing. That is my first reason. I'm thinking why would I want to continue this? Is this a fair system to be part of?
Then I learn that we send £500B roughly per year to Westminster. Fair doos. Then it comes back up £450B, I start to think wait the now? That's not quite right.
Anyway I continue to plod along, and learn that on average and to take the last year on record 2011/12 we paid 10700 in tax per head whereas others in the uk 9000. Now I'm really wondering what on earth is going on here.
Then I find out Scotland has run on average net fiscal profit of 0.2% since 1980. Not a lot huh? No. But I hear that the uk has run itself at a 3% deficit. And now I'm really thinking why am I paying for these people to continue to waste money on things I don't even think we should be involved in. Now I want independence
I also had a yes campaigner at my door last night who I had a great discussion with. To refer to my first reason, it came to my attention in one of the leaflets he have me, with regards to the cuts the government are making 11 out of 57 Scottish mps votes in favour of them. Fair enough, so I assume we didn't take part in te cuts?
Wrong: 324 out 592 in Westminster votes yes for them. And guess what we're now undergoing cuts.
I have lots more reasons if anyone wants to know let me know. Anyway these are my fundamental reasons. Good to hear your points of view on them
Oh and I must add I am a sociology student and in a lecture I was subject to some figures, about eight weeks ago, and this is when I changed my mind. They were all about inequality and poverty btw.
According to the IFS, if an independent Scotland were to balance the books over the next 50 odd years, public spending cuts or tax rises are inevitable.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seanduff
Whilst I appreciate your point I feel you are completely missing my point, In fact I know you are missing my pointQuote:
Originally Posted by StranraerHibee
Voting no as the propsals put forward aren't affordable at all and would bankrupt the country. Nearly every question asked on important issues has remained unanswered and Salmond still adds pie in the sky ideas to his wish list for an independent Scotland.
Salmond is a very dangerous and deluded man.
Fair enough, my apologies, I was trying to address your point on cuts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seanduff
I take it you've read the white paper in its entirety to come to that conclusion?Quote:
Originally Posted by Northernhibee
The Beano would quite frankly be a more worthwhile read than that load of propaganda - the fact is that we can't pay for all these things Salmond is promising.Quote:
Originally Posted by green glory
No problem man, as I said I was trying to highlight the fact our vote counts for almost nothingQuote:
Originally Posted by StranraerHibee
The IFS has predicted that Scotland will face a "fiscal gap" of 1.9% of the national income in comparison to 0.8% for the rest of the UK. With an ageing population and declining North Sea oil and gas revenues (to account for 2.2% of national income by 2017/18 according to the OBR) I agree with you - how can we afford everything that he has promised!?Quote:
Originally Posted by Northernhibee
Happy Independence Day Albania
I mentioned it on the other thread, but the same IFS report also saidQuote:
Originally Posted by StranraerHibee
"...the current system of income taxes and welfare benefits creates serious disincentives to work for many with relatively low potential earning power. The benefit system in particular is far too complex (though the proposed universal credit will help to some extent)...Scottish independence would provide an opportunity to make sensible changes to the tax system in Scotland that successive UK governments have failed to make...the creation of a new state is surely the best opportunity that is ever likely to present itself for radical and rational tax reform, starting from first principles, which has the potential to unlock really significant economic benefits".
..... looks like as usual our politicians cherry pick the bits that fit their argument even if taken as a whole the report actually says something different![
The IFS themselves admit their projections in this report are 'inherently uncertain and could evolve differently if Scotland were independent rather than part of the UK; in addition they could be substantially affected by the policies chosen by the government of an independent Scotland'.Quote:
Originally Posted by StranraerHibee
The whole point of independence is to equip Scotland with the competitive powers required to make the most of our vast natural resources and human talent and to follow a better path than the current Westminster system which, incidentally, the IFS report - and its projections - are based on.
I'd say our position is pretty strong as things stand. We have a parliament.Quote:
Originally Posted by Filled Rolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by heretoday
Maybe be be incorrect, is she not queen Elizabeth I of Scotland and II of England?
with minimal ability to take macroeconomic decisions.Quote:
Originally Posted by heretoday
That's correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by tcm1875
It is correct. But it's immaterial.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibby rae
There is no way anyone can stop us using the £. Various pegged currencies exist or have existed outside of currency unions. The Irish punt was pegged to sterling from the 30s to the late 70s.Quote:
Originally Posted by speedy_gonzales
The Bank of England has already agreed to start basic negotiations with the Scottish Government with regards to currency union.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
Couldn't agree more. I'm firmly republican.Quote:
Originally Posted by TariqE
Great to see a big pro indy presence around ER on Saturday. Four different groups by my reckoning.
Hibs Yes, Jags Yes, Edinburgh North and Leith Yes and Radical Independence.
Nice bit of co-operation between rival supporters.
Worrying from an anti-independence perspective (http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/8520) YES is up 3 points from September and still makes me think the referendum is going to be tough to call.
Yes 34Quote:
Originally Posted by StranraerHibee
No 57
And you suggest that is worrying from an anti independence perspective?
Considering the coverage the white paper received I would be worried if I was running the yes campaign and that's the size of the polling bump afterwards.
Similar to what was posted earlier in the thread about the report on oil but here it is on video. Have a gander guys. http://youtu.be/Jg-nK_lhtfc
New YouGov poll for the Times has the following results:
YES 33%, NO 52%.
I really can't get my head around why most Scottish folk wouldn't want us to be an independent country.
I see talk about us not being capable of making "big decisions". Well perhaps if we weren't in a union where we allowed people from another country to make all the "big decisions" for us, we would learn to make our own "big decisions". No? :confused:
But people from another country don't make all the big decisions for us. We have a fully elected Scottish Parliament and 50 odd MP's from Scotland representing us at Westminster. Also, I'm not sure that many on the pro-union side say we aren't capable...Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibercelona
I havent heard anybody from the pro-union side saying we aren't capable of making our own decisions. Not one.Quote:
Originally Posted by StranraerHibee
If People who like Celery Yes join in I might be impressed.Quote:
Originally Posted by green glory
Fair enough, I guess I'm not either. I get the impression that the Yes side are portraying Scotland as a "victim". I find it quite irritating.Quote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
Marinello 59 - I've heard plenty of folk who say they'll vote no say that the quality of Scottish politicians aren't up to the job of running the country, and being trusted to make decisions, along with various other incredible manifestations of the Scottish cringe.
Stranraer - Yes is not saying we're victims. It's saying we're not achieving our potential. It's saying that it's up to us whether we want to do something about that.
Who? David Cameron has said that Scotland is more than capable of governing itself. The argument is would we be any better off. The Scottish cringe seems to be something ultra Nats claim exists. I don't know any Scots of any political persuasion who suffer from any sort of 'cringe' . It's a myth.Quote:
Originally Posted by Glory Lurker
Quote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
I've heard plenty of folk who say they'll vote no say we're not capable of it. It's a central plank of what no-supporting Tory voters say. Too wee, too poor, too stupid is a mantra of plenty Scottish voters. I'm not an ultra Nat. There is a Scottish cringe.
I don't know where you're reading that but it's not on here AFAIK.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibercelona
It seems to be becoming common in this debate for folk to argue against points that haven't actually been made.
A central plank? I haven't heard anybody say we are too stupid etc. Could you name a single politician who has taken that line?Quote:
Originally Posted by Glory Lurker
What is the Scottish cringe and how does it manifest itself? Cringing doesn't sound like anything the majority of Scots would do. Most of us are pretty proud to be Scots so anybody making a deragatory claim against a large number of us should surely be challenged.
This 'Scottish cringe' seems to me to be a continuation/extension of the "Those who don't support independence are lesser Scots" line.Quote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
You'll note I've not said it's a politician saying it. I'm talking about voters, and I have heard it plenty. Saying we're not good enough is a cringe - what else is it?Quote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
When did I say it was something the majority did? I made reference to it being something common among Tory supporters, notably not a majority of Scottish people.
Do you ask them if they are Tory supporters before or after they tell you that Scotland is collectively stupid?Quote:
Originally Posted by Glory Lurker
No. It's a fair way to describe folk who go right to the other end of the argument and rubbish our potential.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beefster
As for the "lesser Scots" line, did you not just have a go at Hibercelona for picking fights over points that haven't been made? :na na:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beefster
The folk I have heard say that we can't do it are Tories.
So you have heard plenty of people saying it and they are mainly identifiable as being Tory supporters. You are making this up now aren't you? :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Glory Lurker
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-25337494
Scotland's council tax will remain frozen for the seventh year running, John Swinney has confirmed.
sooooooperb :saltireflag
You're confusing them with Celtic fans :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by StranraerHibee
Not people as in politicians. More so the fans. And obviously not a big amount. I know three who I constantly argue with about it say we couldn't run our own country. Lunacy if you ask me. And sheer ignorance. Obviously you can't apply that to everyone thoughQuote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
No politician on the pro union side is going to say that outright, but the fact remains that a fair number of voters will vote No because they don't think Scotland, as a small Independent State, is capable of running it's own affairs (i.e. - taking big decisions).Quote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
Why do a fair number of voters take this view, might it have something to do with constant scaremongering we get from the pro union side and MSM (i.e. - EU wouldn't want an Independent Scotland, NATO wouldn't want an Independent Scotland, we'd be totally anonymous as part of the UN, ecomony would be 'basket case', without oil revenues, blah, blah, blah)? It's embarrassing. Will it work? Lets wait and see.
Why the need to talk down Scots as running scared? I still don't know any Scot who doesn't think we are capable of doing anything we set our minds too. Don't most of us think we invented the modern world? There are plenty of Scots who think that we are better off as part of a larger country. That is a totally different thing and a perfectly valid viewpoint to hold. . Trying to suggest that Scots lack confidence in their own abilities is quite simply insulting and a bizarre viewpoint for anybody who wants us to be a proud Independent nation to take.Quote:
Originally Posted by allmodcons
[QUOTE=marinello59;3834723]Why the need to talk down Scots as running scared? I still don't know any Scot who doesn't think we are capable of doing anything we set our minds too. Don't most of us think we invented the modern world? There are plenty of Scots who think that we are better off as part of a larger country. That is a totally different thing and a perfectly valid viewpoint to hold. . Trying to suggest that Scots lack confidence in their own abilities is quite simply insulting and a bizarre viewpoint for anybody who wants us to be a proud Independent nation to take.[/QUOTE]
I'm not doubting some Scots are confident but, on the otherhand, firmly believe a fair number take what they read and hear as gospel. I've spoken to a number of individuals who are voting No because they 'don't think Scotland could manage on it's own'. You might think this is insulting, I just think it's embarrassing.
I wish they'd raise the council tax and fix the bloody potholes in the roads.Quote:
Originally Posted by cabbageandribs1875
Wish they'd put a mileage tax on those who wear the roads down, then those who don't drive don't have to pay for repairs for those who do. :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Hibbyradge
So a fair number are unable to think for themselves as well?Quote:
Originally Posted by allmodcons
Around about half the population of Scotland look likely to vote No. What percentage of them do you think are either unable to think for themselves or think we are simply not capable of running our own affairs?
And what percentage of those voting Yes do you think are unable to think for themselves?
And maybe you could you define the Scottish Cringe because until somebody does so I will go on thinking its a myth. If it does exist it surely affects us all no matter which way we intend voting next year.
Are you seriously suggesting that a fair number of voters (on both sides) are not heavily influenced by what the read and hear in/on MSM?Quote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
Can I ask which MSM publication openly supports the Yes campaign and how many openly back the No side?
I think a 'fair' proportion will vote 'No' because they think we are not capable of running our own affairs. Can you prove otherwise?
I never brought up the Scottish Cringe. IMO it is a myth too, however, I firmly believe the MSM plays a big part in determining how people perceive things, need I say more than Daily Mail readers.
No.:greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by allmodcons
I think you may believe too much in the power of the media to influence how people will vote. The media doesn't lead opinion, it follows it. (The Sun is a perfect example, it takes a punt on which side will win any particular election and backs it.) My opinion is that the Scottish electorate in the main is far too politically aware to allow themselves to be conned by newspaper editors.
No, you didn't bring up the Scottish cringe, that was another poster. At least we can agree that it doesn't exist. :thumbsup:
For me I agree with everything the boy is saying. I have a multi group text set up about Indy now two of the three I talk to reply quite often. If I was to show you the texts you'd be quite surprised at how much they are letting the media influence them.Quote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
I swear to you they rubbished the white paper based on no, or virtually no- meaning about two pages- worth of reading.
Now all the things they say to me whenever I look at a no side of things it's like reading their texts back. I wished they would make their OWN opinion up about things. They seem to ignore that each time I bring it up. I beg of them to look into it themselves and make their own opinion up. They simply don't.
So to take an example. The day after the white paper came out I received a text explaining that 'all the papers and news stations I've read/heard have said it is this that and the next thing' I was and am astounded that people can argue so strongly based on opinions of the media. For me the media know where their bread is buttered and they'll stick to it. As he said earlier can you tell us what paper or other source of media supports the yes campaign? Or at least looks at it fairly? I can answer that.
They also tell me how we can't run our own country, mentioning things like the parliament and the trams.
Finally I assure you I don't think that this is the mass reason for no but I think it is naive for you to dismiss it.
Is it any more naïve than dismissing the Scottish electorate as unthinking on the strength of a few texts ? If a large number of those voting No are only doing so because they are unthinkingly accepting everything they read in the media then there must be a equal number on the Yes side unthinkingly voting that way because the accept everything they are told by others. There is plenty of decent writing on both sides of the debate if you open your eyes and read the commentary sections of newspapers. Some people only see what they want to see. Maybe it's time to stop making excuses in advance.....''.The media did for us''...........and concentrating more on winning over the don't knows.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seanduff
I think the Scottish electorate is much more sophisticated than you are willing to give then credit for and it's quite disheartening that there are a few on here who really have no respect for their fellow Scots. I hope it isn't just because they are voting differently from themselves. No matter which way this goes we all have to live with the decision and with each other afterwards.
I don't know if I said 'now I know this is only a few people but it stresses that it does exist' but it if I never then I should have. And if I did then you have completely blown what I was saying out of proportion. I'm not dismissing the whole Scottish electorate under the category I speak of, merely expressing that what the boy above has said DOES existQuote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
Quote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
There is not a single MSM outlet backing a Yes vote. I agree you'll find some decent pro Yes pieces in the likes of the Herald but, that apart, you'll have to move away from MSM to find any media support for a Yes vote. I can name a whole host of pro No newspapers (Daily Record, Daily Mail, P&J, Daily Express, Times, Telegraph, Scotsman) but can't think of any that back the Yes campaign.
With regard to the having 'no respect for my fellow Scots' why would I want to respect anybody who intends to vote No because they believe their own countrymen incapable of running their own affairs?
I would suggest that the number of No voters who actually believe that nonsense is pretty insignificant. I assume that you do have respect for the vast majority of No voters who will be doing so because, after weighing up all the arguments, they believe we are better off as part of the UK.Quote:
allmodcons]There is not a single MSM outlet backing a Yes vote. I agree you'll find some decent pro Yes pieces in the likes of the Herald but, that apart, you'll have to move away from MSM to find any media support for a Yes vote. I can name a whole host of pro No newspapers (Daily Record, Daily Mail, P&J, Daily Express, Times, Telegraph, Scotsman) but can't think of any that back the Yes campaign.
With regard to the having 'no respect for my fellow Scots' why would I want to respect anybody who intends to vote No because they believe their own countrymen incapable of running their own affairs?
You are being disrespectful to the electorate if you think many of us are dumb enough to vote the way a Newspaper editorial tells us to. The debate around the publication of the White Paper was fairly balanced. Support for Independence has actually increased since then hasn't it? Looks like the Scottish electorate is more than capable of making its own mind up. Your bleating about the media would suggest that you think otherwise.
When we collectively decided to give the Tories a kicking we didn't need a newspaper telling us to vote tactically. Result? Westminster Tory MP's were wiped out.
A majority SNP Government at Holyrood was impossible according to the press. Well we didn't listen to that either did we? As I said before the press don't lead, they follow. If opinion polls started to show a major surge in support for a Yes vote then you can bet your bottom dollar that some will shift sides.
You make some good points here M59. Not sure where I sit on the 'respect' issue, I have some good mates who will most likely vote No. Them I respect, but those in the No camp who seek to convince others that Scotland is some kind of economic basket case or those on the right (the rule Britannia brigade) I despise.Quote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
I qualified my earlier post by saying 'will it work, lets wait and see' and live in hope that, as you rightly point out in the case of the 2011 election, the electorate will (once again) see through the daily anti Independence/anti SNP diatribe of MSM.
This is simply a once in a lifetime chance. Why wouldn't we want independence?
We are better off WITHOUT them. :thumbsup:
By "them" I take it you mean England, Wales and Northern Ireland. I disagree anyway, we have a strong devolved Parliament but also great Labour representation at Westminster :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by hibeeleicester