Printable View
The No campaign said that?Quote:
Originally Posted by <3Morrissey
In any case, which bit do you have a problem with?
To be honest, I don't pay any attention to much that either side says other than through the threads on here. I am enjoying the repeated attempts to question my intelligence/thinking ability though.
I don't really have a problem and it's none of my business really I just wondered. When the UK gov. said Scotland would have to renegotiate 14,000 treaties for example...?Quote:
Originally Posted by Beefster
Never heard that before. When did they say that?Quote:
Originally Posted by <3Morrissey
http://theweebluebook.com/principles-and-politics.phpQuote:
Originally Posted by danhibees1875
http://theweebluebook.com/assets/images/tory-govts.png
http://theweebluebook.com/assets/images/uk-govts.png
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beefster
Thanks boys! :Thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
Feb. last yearQuote:
Originally Posted by Beefster
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...eaty-toll.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by danhibees1875
I make that 70% of the time (give or take a few months) over the last 20 years. Not far off Beefsters figures really.
I'd make it about 65% when looking at the last 20 years. :agree:Quote:
Originally Posted by E/Port_Hibee
Yeh about that figure, I've not looked at the exact dates. Not a bad percentage really is it? :)Quote:
Originally Posted by danhibees1875
I just based it off the full years (13/20) so may be a bit off. It's not a great percentage either though, is it?Quote:
Originally Posted by E/Port_Hibee
Question 2: How frequently would Scotland get the party it voted for if it was independent? 70%?Quote:
Originally Posted by E/Port_Hibee
Oh I don't know, I think its a pretty good percentage (75, 70 or 65%) People vote for the Green party and Lib Dems and never get their way do they? (Not including the 'coalition', because the its just the Tories in reality isn't it?).Quote:
Originally Posted by danhibees1875
A a democrat, this is the overarching reason for voting Yes. It may make things difficult down here for me, but I believe it will force England (& Wales) to wake up to what it has become and galvanise the opposition.
It may IMO split the Tories as they individual MPs believe they can become big fish in right wing parties like UKIP.
Big changes are a comin' and it all hinges on the vote on the 18th.
J
But that is assuming all of Scotland wants the same, which it obviously doesn't. There are always going to be winners and losers, no one gets exactly what they want all the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by snooky
You ol' weasel you :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by E/Port_Hibee
The country of Scotland democratically would get the government it votes for.
Nice try though :wink:
I see where you're coming from but for me that's a similar argument to that of many people in the north of England not voting Tory either. It's not about an independent individual, household or city. It's about Scotland as a collective nation.Quote:
Originally Posted by E/Port_Hibee
I suppose the back and forthing of the debate is because it's a subjective matter and boils down to whether you'd rather see Scotland as a country or part of a country.
Jesus wept. Look at the ****** picture! Picking 20 years is just hacking off the wee bit at the end that suits your argument. Post-war it's 30/68 = 44%, ie. woeful.Quote:
Originally Posted by E/Port_Hibee
I'm not sure that Jesus would weep over this like? :confused: But anyway, I was commenting on a post that was looking at the last 20 years. I don't know what the maths is for the last 300 years, but where do we draw the line? Plus 44% (if that I'd an accurate figure) is not that far off 50% is it, not exactly woeful is it?Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
Jim Murphy's outstanding performance in Dundee is sure to go viral :faf:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcOjBeyAaWQ
A democratic country should get the government it votes for 100% of time, anything less is woeful.Quote:
Originally Posted by E/Port_Hibee
House of Lords, need I say more.Quote:
Originally Posted by CapitalGreen
Donate enough money to a party become a Lord. No campaigning, no election, no democracy.
The House of Lords is an affront to democracy. Scotland has a chance to grasp democracy and keep it.
First Past The Post sucks too while I'm at it.
J
Hands up who voted for a coalition? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by CapitalGreen
No one ever gets their own way all the time.
Or alternatively:Quote:
Originally Posted by Bristolhibby
Be born, become a Lord.
You're struggling with this again aren't you.Quote:
Originally Posted by E/Port_Hibee
It's about collective wants, not individual wants.
Thankfully no more, but there's enough of them still there.Quote:
Originally Posted by CapitalGreen
Also WTF are the Bishops in the House of Lords all about? Who do those ****ers represent? Not me!
From the Church of England website.
"There is no 'Bishops' Party' and as non-aligned members, their activities in the Upper House are not whipped.
Like other members of the Lords, they do not represent a parliamentary constituency, although their work is often closely informed by their diocesan role.
They sit as individual Lords Spiritual, and as such they have much in common with the independent Crossbenchers and those who are not party-affiliated.
Their presence in the Lords is an extension of their general vocation as bishops to preach God's word and to lead people in prayer. Bishops provide an important independent voice and spiritual insight to the work of the Upper House and, while they make no claims to direct representation, they seek to be a voice for all people of faith, not just Christians."
I'm sorry chums, GTF!
J
You seem to be becoming increasingly hysterical in the past few days, JMS. Not like you at all (and I'm not trying to wind you up).Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
You do know who votes in the UK general election, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by CapitalGreen
Incidentally, the majority of Scots didn't want an SNP majority in 2011. Woeful.
Much like the UK gets the government it votes for, and no doubt deserves?Quote:
Originally Posted by snooky
That's the thing with democracy, it's all fair until we get something we don't want, then it's not!
As Charles the 1st said, "Democracy is the power of equal votes for unequal minds",,,,sounds like something Johann Lamont would mumble :wink:
Think the heckling is a shame here. People are allowed to give their opinion and this Jim Murphy chap should be allowed a bit more respect i thinkQuote:
Originally Posted by <3Morrissey
Seperate question:
Why did the UK reject voting reforms a few years back?
Re the voting reforms. IMO it was to keep the status quo. And PR wasn't in the table. It would have lead to lore consensus politics (what we need IMO), that scared the big two who both need their moments (5 years) in the limelight.Quote:
Originally Posted by sauzee_4
J
I'm not sure about hysterical, irritable maybe? You've been a tad tetchy at times too if we're going to get pass remarkable. ;-)Quote:
Originally Posted by Beefster
Survation poll coming out.
Y 47 (+4)
N 53 (-4)
Equals but not better than Survation's previous high for Y.
So did the 'collective' vote for a coalition then? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by CapitalGreen
Do we vote as a collective, or is it an individual choice?
Point me in the direction of somebody complaining they don't get their individual choice all of the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by E/Port_Hibee
Exactly my point. I'm glad we agree. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by CapitalGreen
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...an-rights.html
Possible delay on the vote until it's decided if expats should be allowed to vote according to this. (Just found it on Facebook, so apologies if it's wrong/ out of date).
That's just wrong. I left Scotland 10 years ago and see no valid reason why I should have the right to vote in the referendum.Quote:
Originally Posted by danhibees1875
However I don't have the right to vote here and that really p***es me off !
.
No you don't.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bristolhibby
IMO, getting shot of that den of unelected poseurs is worth a 'yes' vote in itself.
Maybe but I can completely understand why people don't respect a man with a voting record like his.Quote:
Originally Posted by sauzee_4
Also, I voted for AV but I don't know why it was rejected, maybe because FPTP is easier to understand. :wink:
Quote:
Originally Posted by danhibees1875
29th April mate.
I'm a Hibs supporter in his 40's with a wife, kid, dog, mortgage, job and lawn that grows faster that triffids. 'A tad tetchy' is my default state.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
Hah, got all that, but 2 kids, and teenagers at that. :na na:Quote:
Originally Posted by Beefster
:agree:Quote:
Originally Posted by <3Morrissey
He has always been a slimy Labour careerist. He was a couple of years ahead of me at Uni, edging his way up the greasy pole via the NUS, where he eventually became president. Imagine my surprise when he totally sold out his membership by supporting Nu-Lab's introduction of student fees. :rolleyes:
That can't be right, I know of 2 German nationals who are in Scotland for more than 6 months, are resident here at the time of the referendum and as European Citizens both are allowed to vote.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peevemor
I think we're at cross purposes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Golden Fleece
I think it's right that people currently living in Scotland have the right to vote (if they fulfill certain criteria).
I also think it's right that expats like myself do not have the right to vote.
However, I think it's wrong that I don't have the right to vote in France (eg. Presidential elections) even though I've lived, worked and paid taxes here for 10 years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beefster
:faf:
Can you vote in municipal elections? I presume you get to vote in EU elections.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peevemor
I guess it must be a quirk of French democracy when it comes to presidential elections. Sadly I don't see it being a major issue to the majority of French.
Is it something that could be taken up through the EU as to me it seems like discrimination based on Nationality.
J
That's what I meant, surely if you are resident then you should get the vote where you live and work. It begs the question why foreign nationals temporarily resident can vote here, but you, as a foreign national but permanently resident cant vote where you are. Bonkers!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Peevemor
I can vote in municipal elections over here and have even been given the vote in General elections. The last two general elections I was given the wrong ballot paper after the election supervisor just glanced at my name and photo on my passport whilst cross-checking it with my election letter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bristolhibby
:greengrin
I can vote in the municipal (only since 2011) and European elections. A "full" vote was a major issue in the run up to the last presidential elections. Hollande said he was up for it, then changed his mind at the last minute. Sarkozy during a televised debate said no, because there would be too many muslims (I nearly fell off my chaise-longue)!Quote:
Originally Posted by Bristolhibby
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-oWrSVz0ZLQ...00/cartoon.jpg
I must admit I was quite a bit of the way through the original before I realised it wasn't a spoof.
I am watching and following this
https://www.futurelearn.com/courses/indyref
Not that the Scotland International team is high on my list of priorities for an Independent Scotland, but the article at the attached link is interesting nonetheless. http://en.ria.ru/analysis/20140828/1...rnational.html
That makes the vomit rise in my throat, but it's important to remember that those shown in that video are, I hope, in the minority. It would probably be very easy to make a video montage of intense, anti-English sentiment being expressed by residents of Scotland in all walks of life.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiberlin
I has the "pleasure" of speaking to someone today who wanted the Electoral Commission to resign its role in the referendum because its bus shelter adverts which publicise the voting guide were "too Scottish" which meant they favoured a "Yes" vote. The person asked why the adverts depicted a tourist version of Scotland instead of a quaint, English village which would "make people vote no".
This person was not the first I've encountered who fits the stereotype of an anti-Scottish "No" voter. It seems impossible for them to understand that "No" voters are capable of loving Scotland (in all its beauty) just as much as "Yes" voters, despite the fact they claim to be on the "No" side. Don't get me wrong, I've also experienced this extreme paranoia from those on the "Yes" side, but all it does is exacerbate the elements of "debate" which ordinarily turn so many people away from politics.
I think part of the reason that "Yes" seems to be behind in the polls is that our culture all too often reinforces the negative connotations of where we currently are as a nation and it is very difficult to go against the tide to sell people on where we could be as an independent nation.
Not very happy tonight, got a text from a mate saying well done on voting yes, I texts back asking WTF, he said my FaceBook profile said I was going to vote yes. This was news to me, turns out some innocuous link I clicked (funny vid) ended up adding a post to my profile stating I was going to an event on the 18th and voting YES. I'd seen this on other people's timeline and just assumed they were. Turns out it's just spam or some very clever cyber Nats. Not very happy as it gives the illusion that everyone on FB is voting yes,,,,
Think yourself lucky, I supposedly disposed of my socks in a very undignified manner.Quote:
Originally Posted by speedy_gonzales
Quote:
Originally Posted by speedy_gonzales
You are joking here, right? :confused:
I promise you I'm not, like I said, I got a text from a friend. Checked out my FB profile and right enough it said I was going to an event (on the 18th, voting YES etc). I've genuinely no idea how it got there, I thought I must have clicked something but on hindsight I wasn't even near a PC or on my phone when the post was made. I then had a look on my news feed and noticed a few other friends had the exact same post. When I messaged them about it, it turns out some were aware of it but others weren't.Quote:
Originally Posted by Glory Lurker
Not exactly sure how it's happening, my profile has settings on it that prevent others tagging me at check-ins or in pics, would love to think it's something innocent but I still feel it's an underhanded way to behave through this referendum.
Okay, i'll take your word for it. I find it a bit of a stretch though to think there's someone with the ability to hack Facebook and all they use it for is getting folk to say they're voting Yes. I'd at least get Maggie Gyllenhaal's page to have a post saying how much she fancies me! :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by speedy_gonzales
The Better Together stand is doing a roaring trade in Pitlochry, 5 staff and NO interest by the public. :agree:
I'm thinking of giving them a visit later, just to get some answers, you understand. :wink:
I intend trying this approach
Imagine Scotland was already independent and we were about to have a referendum on whether to join a union with the rest of the UK.
Could the Pro-union side convince us that getting together would be better when we were told what would happen to Scotland after such a union? Some bullet points from the campaign…
-Your main Parliament will move 600 miles away, and your MPs will be in a tiny minority & will therefore have limited ability to effect policy on your behalf
-Scotland will get a government it didn’t vote for.
-All of your oil and gas revenues will be handed over to the treasury in London.
-Even though not 1 inch of track will touch Scottish soil your taxpayers will contribute £4.2bn to the HS2 project.
-Your taxpayers will also subsidise the crossrail project to the tune of £4.2bn
-The biggest nuclear weapons facility in Western Europe will be built on the river Clyde, just 30 miles from your largest city.
-Even though you only have 8.2% of the UK’s population you will contribute 9.9% of the UK’s total tax take yet will only receive 9.3% of that tax take back to spend in Scotland (you will lose £4.4bn per year to the UK treasury)
-You will devolve all of the economic levers you have used to shape your economy directly to London and will now only have control of 7% of your economy
-Even though 79% of Scottish MP's voted against it we will privitise your publicly owned mail service
-Even though 91% of Scottish MPs voted against the bedroom tax in your parliament, we will impose it.
-Even though 82% of Scottish MP's believed that a VAT increase would be detrimental to your economy, we will impose a VAT increase.
-You will join a country whose health and education services are rapidly being privatised.
-Now and again you’ll get dragged into an illegal foreign war.
-An austerity budget will be imposed from London cutting jobs and threatening vital public services even though 81% of your MP's voted against the cuts.
-The financial regulation system will be so weak and so lax that your whole economy will be brought to the brink of collapse.
-The most weak and vulnerable in society, instead of getting the protection and support they deserve will be interrogated and humiliated in an effort to get them off the meagre levels of support to which they are entitled.
Ask yourself, would you vote for such a package?
Would you vote for that Better Together campaign?
This poll should really read 231 for yes and 87 for no as I changed my mind a while back :greengrin
I see posts in this style from both sides.Quote:
Originally Posted by Golden Fleece
What they have in common is that they are so clearly biased that they lose credibility.
Just out of interest, have any former do not knows or anybody changed sides, based on the discussion on this thread?
They're also generally copied and pasted from somewhere else and not even the poster's words.Quote:
Originally Posted by deano88
Sort of... I was don't know / no'ish leaning. I dropped the no'ish bit quite quickly I guess, then have steadily shifted to a firmer and firmer yes. :agree:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Grieves
Heaven forbid.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beefster
Just watched Salmond give Jim Murphy a verbal kicking on Sky News. Love him or hate him he's a smooth operator.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beefster
COPY AND PASTE ALERT
I am posting this from a self-declared 'undecided' billionaire businessman. I have posted some of his observations in the past as I think they help people get some unbiased perspective compared to News websites. If that is such a bad thing then I really worry about the future.
Last night I spent the evening in my old home town of New Cumnock at a ‘tattiefest’ – a music and tattie combo; they are still pretty inventive there!
The town, and ultimately my dad Campbell’s grocery store there, was decimated by the pit closures when the notion of a job for life finally ended as the nationalised pits, steel and shipbuilding industries collapsed.
So as the music skirled and the tatties were consumed inevitably the conversation turned to the Referendum and I think this is an important and positive aspect of this Referendum people are engaged, I also think that the debates that happen between friends and family are proving more productive than the claim and counter claim we get from our politicians more later. Unsurprisingly the discussion wasn’t led by Trident, Euro, EU membership or the currency, it was about how a yes or no vote could affect the daily lives there and rightly so.
If we go would the pension be safe, how many more jobs would be created, could there be new investment in New Cumnock and the surrounding areas and would we need a passport to get to the Yorkshire Dales? Will we still be able to afford free prescriptions, education and elderly care? And what if we stay with the UK what changes then; we’ve had three different offers of more powers but which one, or combination do we get and when?
All these points are absolutely bang on and require an answer, an answer I’m saddened to say I expect from neither camp. Business people like me are absolutely concerned with the currency issue as it will have a distinct and material impact on both rUK and Scotland, most people just want to know will I be better off, have more opportunity for my family in or out of the Union? It’s a good question.
Fundamentally sadly that brings us back to the currency question.
What saddens me most about this referendum is the willingness of both sides for brinkmanship, to play with normal people’s lives, the one’s who can’t up sticks if they don’t like the yes or no answer we offer on the 18th of September.
On the one hand we have Alex Salmond and John Swinney declaring that if we don’t negotiate a currency union we are not paying our share of the UK’s debts. There are two crucial points to note in that assertion.
The first is this, if we do agree to a currency union our public finances will in absolute terms be governed by the UK, or more precisely the Bank of England. Is that what Yes voters are signing up for because I am struggling hard to see how with such constraints Alex’s White Paper vision can be delivered on that basis – perhaps he could explain?
Secondly say we take the brinkmanship to the end point, fail to get a currency union and default on our debts. I think we all know when walking into a bank for a loan having just failed to pay off a massive debt elsewhere what the bank manager might say – countries are no different. To be extreme will the headline be ‘Scotland signs deal with Wonga for long-term capital requirements?’
Be assured if we go down that route the cost of capital will inflate markedly and thus we the taxpayer need either to generate more taxes, through building more successful businesses, or cut back on the very services Alex wants to protect.
So there are two positions set out by Alex both of which have very material consequences to the questions posed by the people of New Cumnock I talked to…
The people we democratically elected in the Labour, Conservative and Lib Dem parties have united in saying no to a currency union in the hope of exposing the perils of Plan B.
But here’s the big question that exposes their duplicity in all of this – if they can unite to say no to currency union why is it they can’t unite to say yes to an agreed package of devolved powers: what is it we get if we tick no on the 18th of September. Answers please before the 18th Mr. Cameron, Clegg and Milliband.
On the one hand Alex wants us signing up for a walk in the fog with cliffs nearby, while Alistair and the unionists want us blindfolded knowing only what lies behind us and not in front of us.
Most undecided people I speak to say this – if it’s more of the same that’s not that appealing, the trouble is I don’t know what we will get if I vote no and I’m unclear if independence will make me better or worse off.
Curiously, to the point of playing with people’s lives, when Alex Salmond sat down with David Cameron to define the question we would be asked on the 18th of September, Alex asked for a second question – in essence do you want more devolution for Scotland? Cameron refused and to my mind cast the dice that now has brinkmanship on every side.
This is just for a laugh, folks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KphfN-Bk7M
:greengrin
Hey, there's a great big world out there.:greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Beefster
Probably I've banged on way too much on this thread already, but here's a hysterical post I wrote all in my own words to a no leaning friend, originally from England, hence the last para. Feedback welcome,even if it's just STFU. ;-)Quote:
Originally Posted by Beefster
This is my case for Yes with as much objectivity as I can muster.
In my view, the debate is happening in three strands:
1. Money - obviously important but essentially ends up a pointless argument.
2. Structure - this should be the main focus but usually gets drowned out by 1
3. Identity - the elephant in the room.
On 1, I think the fiscal position of Scotland in the UK is roughly neutral. More money goes in, more money comes out. More goes in because of oil but even ex-oil we are comfortably the 3rd best performing region of the UK behind only London and the SE. More comes out because of Barnett. This is completely accidental. Barnett was devised to allocate funds by population share but still uses multipliers derived in the 70s. Since then, Scotland’s population has been fairly flat, England’s has increased markedly.
Either way, we have a big adjustment to make. Either we become independent and face oil running out or we stay in the union and have to face the end of Barnett. It makes no logical sense to maintain it and in fact is detrimental to Wales and the English regions so there is inevitable pressure building to replace it. The only thing keeping that pressure on hold is a pragmatic desire to win the referendum (google Cameron’s comments on Barnett pre and post 2011, big difference). I think the same pragmatism will see it reduced gradually rather than suddenly withdrawn, just as the oil money will gradually taper rather than abruptly end. This assumes things continuing on a similar economic trajectory either way. Of course, I think we can do better under a more tailored structure but I don’t think things will change a lot in the short term, divergence will grow over time. The scare stories on one side and happy, sunlit uplands on the other are equally illusory. We had all the same stuff before the 97 referendum. The reality is I think things have got a wee bit better since then, or actually maybe just a wee bit different to England, in a way that has suited society here, but change is slow.
So either way, big challenges to live within our means, but of a fairly similar scale. We will have to either drive up tax revenue or have less to spend, whatever we decide in September. At least under independence we get to decide the balance of taxation vs spending for ourselves and get rid of any government that does something we end up not liking. If the situation was clear cut either way, it would be an easy win for that side and the referendum would’ve been a foregone conclusion months ago. Which is a shame, because there’s so much fog surrounding 1 that it takes up almost all the debate and I think what we should really be talking about is 2 …
The chance to have real accountable democracy in Scotland: a government that makes changes to attempt to improve the economy and reaps the rewards of an increased tax take or takes the punishment and is booted out. We’d also get a full parliament of the best politicians we produce. At the moment the standard is woeful as all the best Unionists head for Westminster where real power lies. We’re left with the SNP by default and a 3rd rate opposition. And they’d be focused full time on our problems and tailored solutions to them. With the best will in the word, a government in London can’t apply itself properly to solving Scottish issues, it has too much else to deal with. And because we’d be entering into a new venture, everything is up for grabs: do we want to continue the monarchy or be a republic? Have a military big enough to participate abroad or just a minimum defence? The sort of things that could never be changed in the UK can all be on the table post-independence in the years ahead, if we want.
Lastly 3, the subject which actually is a huge driver of the debate but nobody wants to talk about! Whether to be British or Scottish. “Yes" don’t want to be accused of being Nazis, “No" won’t bring it up because it’s a weak point, there just isn’t enough Britishness about to guarantee them a win. Fundamentally, if people feel Scottish and view Scotland as a country, it’s the natural order of things that we should run it ourselves. That’s how it works the world over.
It took me a long time to work out why the UK establishment wants to keep the union so much (subsidy junkies etc!) but that's about identity too. If you haven't seen it, watch Andrew Neil's documentary on the effects of independence on the remaining UK. It makes it all crystal clear. It's about staying a nuclear power, staying on the UN security council, maintaining the current position in table of G8 GDPs, not "losing" Scotland, keeping face.
You’ve lived here most of your adult life and are as much part of Scottish society as anyone. You are actually in the lucky position of being able to have a Scottish identity if you want without having to be saddled with the bloody football team! If you aren’t the best person to make the decisions about things that will shape your life, who is?
... And a reply to a reply,on national identity ...
The fact that we can and do have multiple identities is obvious. However, looking at it from the other way round, I think it's also obvious that you can't sustain a successful state, at least not a democratic one, if the people don't buy into the idea of it. By which I mean the overwhelming number of the people have to feel they belong to the country and the country belongs to them. Look at the US, it has all sorts of identities going on within it of all sorts of racial and non-racial, ethnic, religious, policitical affiliations but they all accept their American-ness. The Swiss have distinct language blocs and a history involving violent sectarian conflict, but today they all feel Swiss. Ireland, on the other hand, has never reconciled the Unionists to living in Ireland or the nationalists of the north to living in Britain. They will always be living with inherent instability unless they can find a way for one or other of those populations to buy into a state they can all be content with.
When I go to England, I don't feel culturally dissimilar or unwelcome, but I don't feel it belongs to me, as I do visiting any part of Scotland. If Scotland is to have a long term future in the the UK, then the UK has to find a way to make Scots feel that it, rather than Scotland, should be their country. They don't have to lose their Scottish identity, people from Yorkshire and Cornwall are proud of those identities after all, but they do have to feel an allegiance to Britain over and above. It's not impossible, the second world war and its aftermath definitely fostered a common identity and is probably the high watermark of Britishness-including-Scotland since the Union. But that generation is disappearing and I don't see anything likely to happen that would have the same sort of effect today. I've seen numerous articles dismissing the state of the Tory party in Scotland as no different to the north of England. I think that's a fundamental misunderstanding. I think the larger part of the Scottish people actually felt they weren't just a party they disagreed with, they were a government without legitimacy north of the border. The only way to keep Scotland in the Union was to loosen the binding by devolving power but that's only been a short term fix. Here we are again, with the only way to keep Scotland in the Union being to loosen the binding still further. And even if that succeeds, we'll be back here again in another 10 years or so.
So, given a Yes vote, won't the situation just be reversed, with a large minority of British identifiers unhappy with their lot? I don't think so, for 3 reasons. A very large part of the No vote also has a Scottish identity: there are a lot of people who would support independence in an ideal world but have some personal situation that makes them perceive it as a risk. They will be on board once the decision is made. We're good at absorbing foreigners: Scotland has been built on waves of immigration and if you look at the census returns, Scottishness pervades all the arrivals bar those who have recently moved from inside the UK, ie. the people who didn't perceive themselves to be moving country. Lastly, we've already had an acid test, the setting up of the Scottish Parliament. It has been overwhelmingly accepted as our national parliament and even those who opposed its creation have got on with the business of making it work. I also think it's been a success and there is no better measure of that than the reduction in anti-English whingeing and the blaming of England for all our problems. It still exists but compared to 20 years ago, it's a shadow of its former self.
After all the deliberation, this is my postal vote;
Attachment 13366
This should see a few more don't knows move to YES!
http://m.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-sc...itics-29003017
Footnote for Beefster: Warning!! Cut n Paste
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibbyradge
:thumbsup:
Attachment 13368
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...itics-29003017
It just gets better, not together. :greengrin
Just read a good piece my Irvine Welsh in the Sunday Herald - talking about how people are concerned with the risks but when they are looking at the ballot paper will say **** it and vote Yes! I hope he's right.
:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Golden Fleece
Haven't you failed to mention here that this is because you are a German national? Surely "Peevemor" cannot vote in France in a GE because he is a foreign national and not a "Froggie"!Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiberlin
I can vote in the municipals here, but not the GE ... still not a German after all these years - mind you, if Scotland votes yes, then I'm asking for the forms :greengrin
The correct answer. :thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibbyradge
Britain on highest level terrorism alert. I take it the Irish border is fully manned and all cars are bring checked. Otherwise, what exactly is border control?
"we are happy to join him make sure he stays safe" UKIP must have more money for bodyguards than the Labour party.Quote:
Originally Posted by Golden Fleece
Yeah I'd say it has more to do with British nationals fighting in Syria and Iraq.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Servant
Bring it on, I can't wait to see how the rest of them can distance themselves from him, whilst agreeing with what he says.Quote:
Originally Posted by Golden Fleece
Better Together claimed that there would be a border between Scotland and the Uk. If the Irish border remains open at a time like this, it's hard to believe there will be border controls if we vote yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by <3Morrissey
:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Golden Fleece
The Irish border serves no purpose and I look forward to the day that it doesn't exist but that's another debate. The Better Together campaign's claim on a border is ridiculous but then I'm getting used to their garbage leaflets that don't actually explain why Scotland is better off in the union. I guess that's why they are springing around with "No Thanks" badges now. There's less explaining to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Servant
Neither am I, think I must have slipped under their radar somehow. Does that make me a sleeper?Quote:
Originally Posted by PeeJay
The pentland hills have Aye's.
Attachment 13369
Absolutely magic.
The Hill-end of the Union. ;-)Quote:
Originally Posted by ronaldo7
Ah just seeing the words "end of the Union" made my day. Latest Survation poll has Yes at 47 and No at 53.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
Berlin and Wowi ... anything's possible here - well, not the airport obviously :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Hiberlin
Attachment 13389
The No campaign's latest poster is yet another insult, who comes up with this garbage?
M&C Saatchi, sanctioned by Douglas Alexander (Campaign Manager).Quote:
Originally Posted by <3Morrissey
The same lot that used 'Are you thinking what we're thinking' and 'Labour isn't working...'. The masters of fear trying to be positive and this is the result...
As I see it, BT know they've gone too negative but their eggs are all in that basket with the expertise they've bought in.
Momentum is with an aspirational campaign. BT isn't about aspiration: it's about keeping things exactly as they are.
Looking forward to seeing a few polls this week. It's going to be very close.
Yougov (the sun):
Y 47 (+4)
N 53 (-4)
Last Yougov also showed +4 swing to Y. N lead cut from 22 to 6 in under a month!
Excellent news, lets hope it continues!Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
Momentum firmly with yes. Undecided's going to yes at a rate of 2:1. Looks like a yes win is becoming ever more likely.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...itics-29010574
:faf:
I love my family, I'm saying no thanks.
BT have replaced the union flag with the saltire.
Keep em coming Alastair .