Another Drive4show 'Anything goes' thread

[JAS]

First topic message reminder :

Right now I would rather we still had Wellbeck and little pea and that Falcao had never arrived.  Not too impressed by the signing of Di Maria either.

"We"?? I'm surprised you associate yourself to an organisation that has squandered over £135 this summer, whilst there are homeless people on the streets and starving children in the world!! They could have spent £135m on those things and left the squad alone, finishing top half would still be ok wouldn't it? Especially if so many peoples lives were improved by redirecting transfer monies to charity.

[McLaren]

Does anyone now how long after they are originally broadcast the bbc MOTD programmes go onto iplayer?

[MustPuttBetter]

I can never find MOTD on the iplayer - i don't think it ever goes onto it

[super_realist]

I thought you always went Mac, hence the "we"

[McLaren]

Super

Don't worry, I watched the man utd match. But there are other games to catch up on.

Mustputt

MOTD and MOTD both say coming soon if you go to them on iplayer, I wonder if they need to wait for a sky monday night highlights show to put them up?

[MustPuttBetter]

Or possibly have to wait until all the week's fixtures are done? Hull V West Ham tonight

[McLaren]

Is anyone on here voting yes?

[super_realist]

I certainly haven't heard anyone declaring that Mac. Probably too busy out tearing down No signs

[incontinentia]

So have the Scots been scared enough to ensure a No vote?

[McLaren]

So have the Scots been scared enough to ensure a No vote?

I was always going to vote "no" as nationalism as a concept makes no sense and defies all my socialist leanings. So I have not been scared into a no vote but I can assure you I am currently bricking it. I do not meet enough people who grasp how close to plunging ourselves into oblivion we are.

[SmithersJones]

That's the thing, isn't it? Those who understand the realities of independence wouldn't dream of voting yes, but it's the nature of society that most people are thick.

[super_realist]

The sneaky, underhand and cynical Yes campaign has tapped in to the typical ignoramus in Scotland and their anti-englishness.

[McLaren]

I am also starting to tire with the idea that is currently flying around that the bbc and other media are biased. Does fatty Salmond no realise that most media have reported a parochial cynical nationalist movement as a viable alternative to living in one of the strongest economies in the world. Yes, there is a bias, but not the one Salmond believes there is.

[super_realist]

I am also starting to tire with the idea that is currently flying around that the bbc and other media are biased.  Does fatty Salmond no realise that most media have reported a parochial cynical nationalist movement as a viable alternative to living in one of the strongest economies in the world.  Yes, there is a bias, but not the one Salmond believes there is.

Salmond obviously never watches North Tonight (or is it the STV news now?) or BBC News Scotland, they seem very pro Yes to me.

[MustPuttBetter]

That's the thing, isn't it? Those who understand the realities of independence wouldn't dream of voting yes, but it's the nature of society that most people are thick.

Careful SJ, Lorus won't like this

[kwinigolfer]

Is it not ironic that the last three PM's have either been Scots or of immediate Scottish ancestry?

The old adage that "the enemy is us" has never been more apt.

Imagine most in Westminster and the City can't wait to pull the plug - which is why I'll be campaigning for Isle Of Wight independence.

[Roller_Coaster]

Something I'm not sure on.

Yes = Scotland Independent forever. No going back. No re-unification. Scottish people no longer have the power to make that choice. The end.

While No = stays in the Union until next time a vote is called, then next time, then next time. Salmond/successor(s) will call for every few years (which I think they have the right to) until they get the vote they want anyway. So effectively No will ultimately be Yes in the future at some point.

Is that right?

[super_realist]

Not sure how often they are permitted to hold a referendum.

[McLaren]

Hopefully no one will be as stupid as Davie was in letting them hold one again. He should have sacrificed the small conservative vote in scotland and denied fat alec his referendum.

[Roller_Coaster]

Well, given the fact that if sweaty salmond wants another one in 4 years (by merely citing that feeling has shifted sufficiently and funding a poll to show this), any future refusal by the UK government to sanction one would be sold as an act of suppression and would be the best marketing tool the SNP ever had (in the same way a refusal to hold one would have this time).

I just get the feeling that it's a cul de sac that the UK is being backed into now, it's just a matter of time.

But I have no idea on the actual ins and outs of it all or whether (say) the SNP have included in the referendum agreement with the UK government to a pre-defined time period before the question can be asked again if a no vote ensues.

I also wonder whether the populace of the UK might swing towards a kick them out campaign even if there's a no vote...

[super_realist]

I'm sure I remember hearing that such referendums can only be held on a generational basis, not on someones whim.

I wouldn't say it was inevitable. The "Yes" campaign hang onto oil like it was the best possible argument, this diminishes rapidly over time, and Scotland looks less likely to be able to use it as a bargaining chip to con voters with.

[navyblueshorts]

Can't wait for it to be done with. What's certain is the three cretins leaders with their latest promises have made a HUGE number of people hopping mad, me included. How very dare they make offers, like they've just done, to these bl**dy whining Scottish nationalists without so much as a "By your leave..." to the rUK populace??
The only good thing might be the "Give them enough rope..." adage - let's see how well you do when you have to raise money as well as spend it like water you ingrates   .
If Cameron et al think the political status quo viz. Westminster and the constituent countries of the UK after this, particularly in England, is going to remain the same, they have another think coming.

Do you know who I'm going to blame for everything, regardless of the outcome? S_R, that's who! You had the chance to chuck him down some stairs and you didn't take it! It's all your fault man!

[super_realist]

Can't wait for it to be done with. What's certain is the three cretins leaders with their latest promises have made a HUGE number of people hopping mad, me included. How very dare they make offers, like they've just done, to these bl**dy whining Scottish nationalists without so much as a "By your leave..." to the rUK populace??
The only good thing might be the "Give them enough rope..." adage - let's see how well you do when you have to raise money as well as spend it like water you ingrates   .
If Cameron et al think the political status quo viz. Westminster and the constituent countries of the UK after this, particularly in England, is going to remain the same, they have another think coming.

Do you know who I'm going to blame for everything, regardless of the outcome? S_R, that's who! You had the chance to chuck him down some stairs and you didn't take it! It's all your fault man!

Had several chances to bump off Lego hair too.

[MustPuttBetter]

Something I'm not sure on.

Yes = Scotland Independent forever. No going back. No re-unification. Scottish people no longer have the power to make that choice. The end.

While No = stays in the Union until next time a vote is called, then next time, then next time. Salmond/successor(s) will call for every few years (which I think they have the right to) until they get the vote they want anyway. So effectively No will ultimately be Yes in the future at some point.

Is that right?

Similarly ive been wondering if it's a Yes, does that mean Scotland goes independant for definite from whenever they can get it sorted. Or are they just asking opinions?

[kwinigolfer]

I imagine that if the YES vote wins, then the Scots can call for a new referendum among Scots about re-integrating when they see the financial windfall that benefits Westminster and bankrupts Scotland.

Such a referendum would be nothing to do with Westminster, but it would possibly lead to a NI, W & E referendum on whether to re-integrate!

Hopefully the by-product of all this would be that MP's representing constituencies outside the South-east would demand a redistribution of their new wealth to the benefit of NI, W, Cornwall, the North, the Midlands, you name it; anything but leafy suburban London.

[gaelgowfer]

The only way to prevent future referendums is to not vote for the SNP.  Salmond believes that 'a generation' is every twenty years.

Over the last few days the 'No' campaign has taken the eye off the ball by failing to ram home Salmond's comprehensive failure to address any of the fundamental economic questions put to him.

Super-realist ... any idea as to whether or not there is any truth that votes are being purloined from non-eligible under-16 year olds?

[kwinigolfer]

Surely any new Scottish Government would be able to do anything it so desired, so long as it was Scots only?
My school-teacher daughter had her 13/14-y-olds debating the pros and cons of Vermont secession yesterday . . . . . . . the things these little beezers think of!

[gaelgowfer]

kwini, Scotland's current list of devolved powers ...

Health
Education
Housing
Sport and Arts
Agriculture, Forestry & Fishing
Emergency Services
Planning
Social Work
Heritage
some Transport
Tourism

Scotland's never had it so good.

Gordon Brown's just delivered, I think, the best speech of his entire career.  Let's hope it's enough to pull back from the brink.

[super_realist]

Gael, I'm not sure I understand your question. If a "voter" is under 16 and ineligible, then there isn't a vote to purloin is there?

[raycastleunited]

I've said it before - partition is the answer. Let all the yes voters go and live in one half of Scotland, and the rest of us can watch the newly independent nation deteriorate into a 3rd world country. I can imagine eventually Salmond would have to build a wall to keep his citizens in, there would be envious glances over to the prosperous UK Scotland.

[gaelgowfer]

Gael, I'm not sure I understand your question. If a "voter" is under 16 and ineligible, then there isn't a vote to purloin is there?

THE “integrity” of the electoral register in Scotland has been called into question ahead of this month’s historic referendum vote after it emerged yesterday that children as young as three have been registered to vote and received polling cards.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-independence-vote-rigging-fears-1-3533762

[super_realist]

AH right, see what you mean.

[navyblueshorts]

The only way to prevent future referendums is to not vote for the SNP.  Salmond believes that 'a generation' is every twenty years.

Over the last few days the 'No' campaign has taken the eye off the ball by failing to ram home Salmond's comprehensive failure to address any of the fundamental economic questions put to him.

Super-realist ... any idea as to whether or not there is any truth that votes are being purloined from non-eligible under-16 year olds?

I don't think it's just SNP anymore Gael. I think some of the shift to 'yes' the other week was Scottish Labour, for example, thinking "What if???" about some Socialist Utopia north of the border. Hopefully, they'll quietly disappear if there's a 'no'.
Hopefully, any UK Government would be a lot more reticent in granting a referendum in anything like the near future if it's a 'no'.

[gaelgowfer]

AH right, see what you mean.

Don't know what kind of writing instrument will be available tomorrow but, just in case it's a pencil, I'm taking a pen!

[gaelgowfer]

The only way to prevent future referendums is to not vote for the SNP.  Salmond believes that 'a generation' is every twenty years.

Over the last few days the 'No' campaign has taken the eye off the ball by failing to ram home Salmond's comprehensive failure to address any of the fundamental economic questions put to him.

Super-realist ... any idea as to whether or not there is any truth that votes are being purloined from non-eligible under-16 year olds?

I don't think it's just SNP anymore Gael. I think some of the shift to 'yes' the other week was Scottish Labour, for example, thinking "What if???" about some Socialist Utopia north of the border. Hopefully, they'll quietly disappear if there's a 'no'.
Hopefully, any UK Government would be a lot more reticent in granting a referendum in anything like the near future if it's a 'no'.

Well aware that it's not only SNP supporters who will be voting 'Yes' Navy.  However, after Gordon Brown's stirring speech this morning, I hope that some Labour supporters will switch back to 'No'.

[kwinigolfer]

This sounds like just the opportunity for gael, Plunky, Lady Putt etc, etc.

"The R&A" will first consider women who have made a "significant contribution" to golf if the club votes Thursday's to admit women members.

Not sure that all current male members will have made such a contribution, but let's hope the R&A reintroduce themselves to the 20th Century - reaching the 21st will come when Dawson departs presumably.

[McLaren]

Whatever you think of Brown, this is one impressive speech which in time may be one of the most important of our generation.

Spoiler:

[gaelgowfer]

kwini ... " ... the plan is to fast-track 15 women members, the likelihood being that they’d be non-active." (taken from The Scotsman).

Not sure what to make of this particularly in regard to the "non-active" reference.  Full m'ship includes playing rights.  Don't know if anyone remembers (s_r will) Herbert Kohler, saviour of what was in yesteryear The Grand Hotel (the big red building behind the 18th hole on the Old Course) and owner of the Old Course Hotel.  It was widely expected he would be given m'ship of the R&A.  Unfortunately, he was too old to meet m'ship criteria.  Can't be certain of this but I think they got round this awkward impasse by effectively creating a non playing section or "non-active".  

Certainly, the names which are currently being touted are no spring chickens!  Having said that, I would imagine that Carole Semple Thompson is still playing.

Carole Semple Thompson (65)
Belle Robertson (77)
Judy Bell (77)
Angela Bonallack (? - !!!)  Hubby, Michael, is 79 though.

It's extremely difficult to gain m'ship of this club so, once the 15 "non-active" members are admitted, what then?  It's 15 active female members they need if m'ship is to even begin to be meaningful.  The whole thing smacks of tokenism.

[kwinigolfer]

It is most distressing to note that pgatour.com's article on the upcoming R&A vote on women members features a photo of Condoleeza Rice, well-known war criminal whose acts and complicities while in office were probably more instrumental than anything else in the sharp decline of golf, at least in terms of participation and industry results, in the USA.
Surely the antithesis of what Dawson is saying (but most likely what he craves)?

[gaelgowfer]

Still mulling over what the R&A means by "non-active" m'ship.  Perhaps it just means they can't take part in competitions (still thinking about the Kohler connection here).

Still, I sure hope they go for a younger group of women who still play and compete in the game otherwise there really is no point to this exercise.

kwini ... ultimately, doesn't the buck stop with the President?  I also think it's a bit of a stretch to blame her for any decline in the American golf industry.  In my view, that ... was completely self-inflicted.

[pedro]

It is most distressing to note that pgatour.com's article on the upcoming R&A vote on women members features a photo of Condoleeza Rice, well-known war criminal whose acts and complicities while in office were probably more instrumental than anything else in the sharp decline of golf, at least in terms of participation and industry results, in the USA.
Surely the antithesis of what Dawson is saying (but most likely what he craves)?

And Carthage must be destroyed.


(She probably eats little children as well.)

[Plunky]

Presumably they put Condoleeza Rice in the article because she's one of the token females at Augusta.

[kwinigolfer]

gael,
Was just referring to her role in the economic collapse . . . . . . . she was in the cabinet after all.

[kwinigolfer]

Poor by Team England in Europe; squeak by a bunch of Bulgars and get duffed up by three sets of Germans.
Not good enough.

[Diggers]

Apparently predicting an 80% turnout tomorrow. Sure that's high for a ballot but how can 1 in 5 not vote, who can not think it directly effects them? Bizarre.

[SetupDeterminesTheMotion]

2 big votes is Scotland today.

Independence & Women allowed to join the R&A.

Yes to both methinks.

The UK govt thought it was a simple NO, and put the question as Yes or No.
Ruled out the Max Devo option. Now the opinion polls swing to YES, and the 3 stoogies (Cameron, Milliband & Clegg) will allow Scotland to have a MAX Devo. Too little too late.

TO all my English friends, you've got to ask the question:
If Scotland is such a burdeon on the UK economy, why oh why is the UK Govt trying so hard to keep us together ?

[pedro]

Now this is something that hasn't been considered:

In case of a 'Yes', wouldn't rUK be more likely to get 'douze points' at the Eurovision song contest?

[super_realist]

2 big voes is Scotland today.

Independence & Women allowed to join the R&A.

Yes to both methinks.

The UK govt thought it was a simple NO, and put the question as Yes or No.
Ruled out the Max Devo option. Now the opinion polls swing to YES, and the 3 stoogies (Cameron, Milliband & Clegg) will allow Scotland to have a MAX Devo. Too little too late.

TO all my English friends, you've got to ask the question:
If Scotland is such a burdeon on the UK economy, why oh why is the UK Govt trying so hard to keep us together ?

THe opinion polls haven't swung to Yes at all. There have been TWO polls out of hundreds in which the Yes vote is fractionally in front. Every single other one has the No vote in front.

We shall see tomorrow.

[Sand]

I haven't seen one poll that shows the Yes in front?? I just ignore these polls as they ask a max of 1000 people, yet there is going to be around 4 million votes plus?? How realistic is taking a sample of 1000. I haven't been asked once by these polls and don't know anyone who has either...

[SetupDeterminesTheMotion]

I got called by pollsters yesterday, & told them to go forth & multiply.

My vote will be made at the polling station.

[navyblueshorts]

2 big voes is Scotland today.

Independence & Women allowed to join the R&A.

Yes to both methinks.

The UK govt thought it was a simple NO, and put the question as Yes or No.
Ruled out the Max Devo option. Now the opinion polls swing to YES, and the 3 stoogies (Cameron, Milliband & Clegg) will allow Scotland to have a MAX Devo. Too little too late.

TO all my English friends, you've got to ask the question:
If Scotland is such a burdeon on the UK economy, why oh why is the UK Govt trying so hard to keep us together ?

What was offered in the last couple of weeks wasn't the same as the wanted DevoMAX.

As for why Scotland might just be wanted in a continuing Union, which serious politician/analyst has ever said Scotland was a burden? You're just buying into the Nationalist nonsense. What has been suggested, by many, is that certainly in the short to medium term, going indy will hit Scotland in loads of ways. The SNP disagree - we may well find out shortly.

I still hope for a 'no' but I'm no longer that bothered if it's a 'yes', even though I think this is the height of stupidity and a pretty good example of cutting off your nose to spite your face. If it's a 'no', I would hope that ultimately, Scotland has its own tax raising powers etc etc. Be nice to see them have to raise money rather than simply spending it while bitching at the same time. Give 'em enough rope and all that.

Has it ever occurred to the dreamers, Bravehearts and blatantly self-interested that maybe, just maybe, Scotland is wanted because we actually are better together? Why fragment a nation (which could be argued is the very definition of a successful union) that isn't at war with itself or discriminating against a sub-section of its populace? This is a stupid, pointless and essentially xenophobic referendum. Whatever the result, there'll be quite a lot of bad blood swilling around for a while and all because of one man's self-interest and hubris.

[Sponsored content]