Indy Ref

by **Notch** Wed 17 Sep 2014, 10:09 pm

First topic message reminder :

George Carlin wrote: v
Let me start this off, then. I have printed and read all literature which either side has published on this debate over the past 2 years (including the main policy papers from the SNP and from Better Together/UK Treasury and the Wee Blue Book).

If I had the chance, I would think hard about it, but ultimately I think that I would vote 'no'.

It seems to me, with my pea brain, that:

1. As a professional economist, Alex Salmond has had his entire political and professional life to make a waterproof financial case for an independent Scotland. Provided that there isn't something I've missed, I cannot see that he has done so. How can we still be fishing for answers to very fundemental questions so close to the actual voting date? Surely if it was the case that Scotland had a solid long term financial future, there would be a far greater volume of published consensus? If the financial case for independence cannot be clearly and verifiably made (without optimistic financial projects which strain credulity), then this is where this debate begins and ends for me. What do we tell our kids otherwise?

2. I entirely understand and appreciate that stepping into the unknown cannot in itself be a reason to say 'no'. You cannot have opportunity without risk. However, is anyone else disappointed with the quality of verifiable information that has been made available to us throughout this entire debate? Whilst I don't expect all answers to all questions, surely it is better to err on the side of caution until such time as policy can be firmly established.

If this was a trial, the verdict would be 'not proven'.

What I don't believe is if Scotland votes no, the chance to do so again would be lost forever. I think that we may see another vote on this topic within a generation (20 years) if a 'no' vote does not have a clear majority amongst Scottish people. I would be happy with that.

Discuss. For the love of feck, please be nice.

by **RDW** Fri 19 Sep 2014, 12:55 pm

fa0019 wrote:
Notch wrote:Whats most interesting to me is this graphic;

https://twitter.com/HereInScotland/status/512915502076014592/photo/1

14% of SNP voters from 2011 voted NO. 5% of Tory voters from 2011 voted YES.

Fascinating to imagine their journey.

Amazing stats there....really shows Salmond's 16-17 year old stat to be what exactly it stood for.... nothing to do with democracy at all.

16-17 years

71% yes. 12% points more than the next best age group.

Says it all.

Given voting is anonymous, where are these stats coming from? More opinion polls? We've just seen how accurate they are!

To be fair, the mock referendums high schools have been putting on (which were almost unanimously No votes) are probably as good a poll as you could get for 16-18 year oids.

by fa0019 Fri 19 Sep 2014, 1:00 pm

SecretFly wrote:
beshocked wrote:National front lingo?

Perhaps you could stop with the Irish jingoistic rubbish?

There is a difference between having a right to an opinion and agreeing with it.

If you started abusing your employer do you think they would be happy about that?

Murray lives in Surrey, he has an English girlfriend, he gets a lot of British support - he has a lot to thank the Union for - do I think he's a bit ungrateful? Yes I do - just like Sean Connery who made his career from James Bond.

I am not going to Murray's house in Surrey to throw rotten eggs or hurl abuse at him but I am entitled to call his decision foolish. It's my opinion - saying that means I am part of the National front is insulting.

Saying someone is stupid for disagreeing with you is insulting. You understand that? That's not disagreeing with them - that's calling their views stupid. So far so good? - you decide to throw offensive remarks around, then be prepared to collect some.
Never said you were a member of the National front - did say you often - often - use language steeped in intolerance of an opposing view - not a disagreement with that view, a spitefulness that assumes people almost shouldn't have the view. I stand by that continuing observation of you.

Now Murray and Connery - ungrateful to what and who?
Who can they be ungrateful to if that's what they were and obviously now still are - British?
It's you who say they were British and part of a Union.
So who do they have to be grateful to that they've achieved success in the careers? You? The Westminster government? The rest of the UK that didn't include Scotland? Just who are they being ungrateful to? They don't owe apologies to you or anyone else for getting by in life as UK citizens - that's what they were - it wasn't gifted to them by you. It was them - they are and were the UK. If they want their part to leave the UK that's their business and their right to express it.
But they don't owe you anything for having that thought...certainly not guilt.

Fly

You are right, everyone deserves their open say without backlash.

But like I also said (in agreement with Beshocked)

1) I would question his timing (lets be honest had he said it 1 month ago it would not have had as much impact as it did).
2) I would also question his loyalty to the GB davis cup team and his stance saying.. "well there will probably be a no vote, there is no Scottish Davis Cup team so I will keep on playing for GB".... doesn't exactly inspire confidence.

However I also acknowledge that Murray gets very little out of davis cup, its not like we're good enough to actually win the thing, it isn't paid, he personally always plays 3 matches to the point of exhaustion and its often not great from a scheduling point of view.

I'm sure his agent Simon Fuller has read the riot act to him ... "All the publicity you could have got from Wimbledon 2013 ruined" I imagine.

by wrfc1980 Fri 19 Sep 2014, 1:00 pm

I don't understand why some Irish posters were so pro independence. To be quite frank if you live in the republic the vote had NOTHING to do with you. What many if you fail to realise is that many Scots consider themselves British just as they do Scottish. They ENJOY been part of the united kingdom. A kingdom that has led the world in many facets and continues to be a big player on the international stage.

by fa0019 Fri 19 Sep 2014, 1:01 pm

RDW_Scotland wrote:
fa0019 wrote:
Notch wrote:Whats most interesting to me is this graphic;

https://twitter.com/HereInScotland/status/512915502076014592/photo/1

14% of SNP voters from 2011 voted NO. 5% of Tory voters from 2011 voted YES.

Fascinating to imagine their journey.

Amazing stats there....really shows Salmond's 16-17 year old stat to be what exactly it stood for.... nothing to do with democracy at all.

16-17 years

71% yes. 12% points more than the next best age group.

Says it all.

Given voting is anonymous, where are these stats coming from? More opinion polls? We've just seen how accurate they are!

To be fair, the mock referendums high schools have been putting on (which were almost unanimously No votes) are probably as good a poll as you could get for 16-18 year oids.

Lord Ashcrofts polls have been know to be reasonably accurate. Quite professional (yes it is a poll mind but one from a reputable source).

by fa0019 Fri 19 Sep 2014, 1:02 pm

wrfc1980 wrote:I don't understand why some Irish posters were so pro independence. To be quite frank if you live in the republic the vote had NOTHING to do with you. What many if you fail to realise is that many Scots consider themselves British just as they do Scottish. They ENJOY been part of the united kingdom. A kingdom that has led the world in many facets and continues to be a big player on the international stage.

Probably why most Afrikaners don't have the greatest amount of love for the British either. Don't have to be a rocket scientist to work that one out.

by **Biltong** Fri 19 Sep 2014, 1:02 pm

Is anyone concerned that the vote was not overwhelmingly Yes?

Do you think this referendum will be repeated in future?

by **Biltong** Fri 19 Sep 2014, 1:05 pm

wrfc1980 wrote:I don't understand why some Irish posters were so pro independence. To be quite frank if you live in the republic the vote had NOTHING to do with you. What many if you fail to realise is that many Scots consider themselves British just as they do Scottish. They ENJOY been part of the united kingdom. A kingdom that has led the world in many facets and continues to be a big player on the international stage.

I was rather hoping it would be yes just because I was curious about what would happen and the implications of independence for Scotland

by fa0019 Fri 19 Sep 2014, 1:06 pm

Biltong wrote:Is anyone concerned that the vote was not overwhelmingly Yes?

Do you think this referendum will be repeated in future?

BB

Both sides said once in a generation so probably next in 20 years... but by then the Oil will be near gone so the benefits from that would be largely reduced and Scotland would be seen as less able to live amongst their means.... making independence less viable.

Na, I think had the opposition government been in (which they were for 13 years up to 2010) it would have been close to a 30/70 no vote. Lots of reasons why Yes did well i.e. we were in a recession for so long and many people were angry with current governments policies which made those on the breadline even closer to the line so to speak or even behind it.

by **RDW** Fri 19 Sep 2014, 1:07 pm

Biltong wrote:Is anyone concerned that the vote was not overwhelmingly Yes?

Do you think this referendum will be repeated in future?

God I hope note. Your own beliefs aside, it has definitely damaged Scotland socially and economically.

I can see it being a reasonable assumption that another one might happen in my lifetime, but hopefully not in the next 20 years. I suspect it will all depend on how these negotitations with Westminster go.

Also worth noting that Scotland's oil is due to run out from 2035 - the economic case will become even more difficult to prove.

by fa0019 Fri 19 Sep 2014, 1:07 pm

Biltong wrote:
wrfc1980 wrote:I don't understand why some Irish posters were so pro independence. To be quite frank if you live in the republic the vote had NOTHING to do with you. What many if you fail to realise is that many Scots consider themselves British just as they do Scottish. They ENJOY been part of the united kingdom. A kingdom that has led the world in many facets and continues to be a big player on the international stage.
I was rather hoping it would be yes just because I was curious about what would happen and the implications of independence for Scotland

BB

Do you like watching people jump off cliffs onto jagged rocks by chance??? Wink

by doctor_grey Fri 19 Sep 2014, 1:08 pm

I am very glad the vote for Scotland's independence was voted down and the unity of our nation has been preserved. In a world where the underpinnings of stability, power, finance, influence are being rattled, it has always been clear to me that this is a time for unity not disunity. The raising economic power of nations not allied with us politically, culturally, economically, nor as vested in our country as our current major partners is a major concern. The only way to preserve the ability to influence the future to protect the standard of living for all our people is to stand together, not rip ourselves apart.

The desire to diminish all for older historical or vague emotional notions, for me, I politely describe as misguided. Westminster does make it easy for people to dislike government from London. And clearly so. But the bigger picture must be considered: A vote against Scotland's independence is neither a vote for Cameron nor against Salmond. And absolutely not a vote for reactionary groups. It is a vote for the bigger picture.

Now this is over, we can get back to the Rugby, no?

by fa0019 Fri 19 Sep 2014, 1:11 pm

doctor_grey wrote:I am very glad the vote for Scotland's independence was voted down and the unity of our nation has been preserved. In a world where the underpinnings of stability, power, finance, influence are being rattled, it has always been clear to me that this is a time for unity not disunity. The raising economic power of nations not allied with us politically, culturally, economically, nor as vested in our country as our current major partners is a major concern. The only way to preserve the ability to influence the future to protect the standard of living for all our people is to stand together, not rip ourselves apart.

The desire to diminish all for older historical or vague emotional notions, for me, I politely describe as misguided. Westminster does make it easy for people to dislike government from London. And clearly so. But the bigger picture must be considered: A vote against Scotland's independence is neither a vote for Cameron nor against Salmond. And absolutely not a vote for reactionary groups. It is a vote for the bigger picture.

Now this is over, we can get back to the Rugby, no?

Hear hear

Lets stay away from any topic which might cause international ridicule to the Scottish people. Sad

by **Biltong** Fri 19 Sep 2014, 1:12 pm

fa0019 wrote:
Biltong wrote:
wrfc1980 wrote:I don't understand why some Irish posters were so pro independence. To be quite frank if you live in the republic the vote had NOTHING to do with you. What many if you fail to realise is that many Scots consider themselves British just as they do Scottish. They ENJOY been part of the united kingdom. A kingdom that has led the world in many facets and continues to be a big player on the international stage.
I was rather hoping it would be yes just because I was curious about what would happen and the implications of independence for Scotland

BB

Do you like watching people jump off cliffs onto jagged rocks by chance???

No mate, it is just a very interesting socio political scenario fro a outsiders point of view.

If you think about how many aspects will be affected economy, military, politics, jobs etc etc etc.

by fa0019 Fri 19 Sep 2014, 1:15 pm

Biltong wrote:
fa0019 wrote:
Biltong wrote:
wrfc1980 wrote:I don't understand why some Irish posters were so pro independence. To be quite frank if you live in the republic the vote had NOTHING to do with you. What many if you fail to realise is that many Scots consider themselves British just as they do Scottish. They ENJOY been part of the united kingdom. A kingdom that has led the world in many facets and continues to be a big player on the international stage.
I was rather hoping it would be yes just because I was curious about what would happen and the implications of independence for Scotland

BB

Do you like watching people jump off cliffs onto jagged rocks by chance???

No mate, it is just a very interesting socio political scenario fro a outsiders point of view.

If you think about how many aspects will be affected economy, military, politics, jobs etc etc etc.

I agree, it certainly would have been interesting change on a global viewpoint... the UN security council, EU, GB's place in the world the lot. From a Brit it would have been like seeing you team relegated though. You have to watch but can't bare to at the same time.

by **Notch** Fri 19 Sep 2014, 1:16 pm

fa0019 wrote:
Notch wrote:Whats most interesting to me is this graphic;

https://twitter.com/HereInScotland/status/512915502076014592/photo/1

14% of SNP voters from 2011 voted NO. 5% of Tory voters from 2011 voted YES.

Fascinating to imagine their journey.

Amazing stats there....really shows Salmond's 16-17 year old stat to be what exactly it stood for.... nothing to do with democracy at all.

16-17 years

71% yes. 12% points more than the next best age group.

Says it all.

That just means they are as useful to YES as old people to the NO vote. I'm not gonna side with Innocence over Experience or vice versa. We need both.

by **Notch** Fri 19 Sep 2014, 1:21 pm

wrfc1980 wrote:I don't understand why some Irish posters were so pro independence. To be quite frank if you live in the republic the vote had NOTHING to do with you. What many if you fail to realise is that many Scots consider themselves British just as they do Scottish. They ENJOY been part of the united kingdom. A kingdom that has led the world in many facets and continues to be a big player on the international stage.

Aye, some of them do. If it helps I lived in Scotland for nine years, have family in Scotland, have many of my closest friends in Scotland. All my teenage years were spent in Scotland- those are formative years growing up. I was educated in Scottish schools, received medical treatment in Scottish hospitals, my first kiss was with a Scottish lass etc.

Now I'm not Scottish. But Scotland is such a big part of my life whether I feel like wearing my British hat or my Irish hat on any given day. I'm not gonna apologise for having an opinion kiss

And in many ways we're all that interconnected. The amount of migration between Scotland and Ireland was massive across history. We shared a common culture, a common language, before Britain was a thing. Scotland and Ireland are as culturally linked at the hip as much as anyone else in our family of nations. No border can tear that asunder.

by tigertattie Fri 19 Sep 2014, 1:23 pm

fa0019 wrote:
tigertattie wrote:just my opinion

Individuals whose stock has increased:
Gordon Brown (should be the next Scottish labour leader and first minister)
Kesia Dugdale (should be the Scottish Labour Depudy to then go on and succeed old man Brown)
Ruth Davidson (Will keep other MSPs on their toes but she won't come to much more being a Scottish Tory)
Patrick Harvey (Actually provided positive and balanced reasons for a yes vote, will likely increase the green vote next Holyrood election)

Individuals whose stock has gone down:
Alex Salmond (His shouty politics have been shown to lack substance)
Nicola Sturgeon (She's at a corss road here. She either continues to be wee eck's attack dog or she comes out from his shadow)
Tommy Sheridan (plank, nuff said)
George Galloway (Shouldn't go on national tele and mumble incoherent nonsnese)

I saw Douglas Alexander's stock rise IMO... think he could be the next leader of the national labour party by next election. Milliband is useless, I think the Scottish people had less time for him than Cameron (which really says something).

I agree on Brown completely... I see a return, to a people who he loves truly and most importantly he doesn't have a inferiority complex about (was never comfortable being Scottish and UK PM IMO... unlike Blair).

Jim Murphy did terribly well too, real dignified and I think he deserves a front line job in the shadow cabinet given his calm and dedicated performances.

do you mean the one next May? Surely thats too soon????

by fa0019 Fri 19 Sep 2014, 1:27 pm

Notch wrote:
fa0019 wrote:
Notch wrote:Whats most interesting to me is this graphic;

https://twitter.com/HereInScotland/status/512915502076014592/photo/1

14% of SNP voters from 2011 voted NO. 5% of Tory voters from 2011 voted YES.

Fascinating to imagine their journey.

Amazing stats there....really shows Salmond's 16-17 year old stat to be what exactly it stood for.... nothing to do with democracy at all.

16-17 years

71% yes. 12% points more than the next best age group.

Says it all.

That just means they are as useful to YES as old people to the NO vote. I'm not gonna side with Innocence over Experience or vice versa. We need both.

You don't find it particularly odd that the next age group (18-24) voted 23% points less for Yes???

Why is that.... if you assume they are of similar rational mind and able to properly decide what is right?

Are they more patriotic???

Lets be honest I think its a maturity thing, when you at that age your heart rules over your head more... which is why we don't let them vote in general elections (which isn't permanent I should add, we don't let them drink, we don't let them drive... hell we don't even let them smoke a cigarette.

by Sin é Fri 19 Sep 2014, 1:30 pm

funnyExiledScot wrote:
Sin é wrote:
funnyExiledScot wrote:

That's just wrong. You clearly do not live in Scotland.

Loved the poem though.

You clearly have no experience of what a divisive campaign is. All the Irish journalists covering the referendum are all saying how wonderful the whole thing is. Some saying it was one of the great experiences of democracy in action.

Daire O'Brien, responding to comments on twitter about divisiveness etc. in the debate, said that when it happened in Ireland, his granny had to hide in the ditch from the British.

You think its all over now, but England has to keep its promises. What will be devisive will be the question over the membership of the EU and of course it will be English voters that decide that one, not Scottish.

Just because our referendum doesn't reach the extremely high standards of divisiveness and violence set by the Irish (and British) in the Irish struggle for independence, does not mean that it wasn't divisive. Believe me, this referendum has created serious divisions in communities in Scotland and we need to move on from that.

As for the EU referendum which is proposed currently by the Coalition Government, I fully hope that the UK votes to stay in the EU, but nevertheless what is being promised is a referendum, and the action taken will be the action decided upon by the UK. Each person in Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland will have a vote, and we will decide the outcome together as a union (which Scotland has just firmly declared its intention to remain part of). Saying that "English" voters decide the outcome misunderstands democracy. You've been listening to the separatist spin machine for too long!

It also isn't "England" that has to keep its promises, it is the major parties of the United Kingdom that must do that. Those parties include MPs based in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland as well.

Just remember you are dealing with the same (Westminister) mindset as we Irish were. You do realise that the responsibilities are with the 'victors' of this referendum (i.e., you) to overcome any 'divisiveness'. Some of the victors here could do with being 'magnanimous in victory' and the rest 'being gracious in defeat'.

In a refrendum on staying in the EU, the majority will decide - and England is where the majority live.

Just for the record, my head wanted Scotland to remain in the Union (as an independent scotland would have been bad for Ireland economically in that we would have another competitor very similar to us).

My heart said they should have gone for Independence, but its up to you Scots to decide what you want.

by fa0019 Fri 19 Sep 2014, 1:31 pm

tigertattie wrote:
fa0019 wrote:
tigertattie wrote:just my opinion

Individuals whose stock has increased:
Gordon Brown (should be the next Scottish labour leader and first minister)
Kesia Dugdale (should be the Scottish Labour Depudy to then go on and succeed old man Brown)
Ruth Davidson (Will keep other MSPs on their toes but she won't come to much more being a Scottish Tory)
Patrick Harvey (Actually provided positive and balanced reasons for a yes vote, will likely increase the green vote next Holyrood election)

Individuals whose stock has gone down:
Alex Salmond (His shouty politics have been shown to lack substance)
Nicola Sturgeon (She's at a corss road here. She either continues to be wee eck's attack dog or she comes out from his shadow)
Tommy Sheridan (plank, nuff said)
George Galloway (Shouldn't go on national tele and mumble incoherent nonsnese)

I saw Douglas Alexander's stock rise IMO... think he could be the next leader of the national labour party by next election. Milliband is useless, I think the Scottish people had less time for him than Cameron (which really says something).

I agree on Brown completely... I see a return, to a people who he loves truly and most importantly he doesn't have a inferiority complex about (was never comfortable being Scottish and UK PM IMO... unlike Blair).

Jim Murphy did terribly well too, real dignified and I think he deserves a front line job in the shadow cabinet given his calm and dedicated performances.

do you mean the one next May? Surely thats too soon????

For Alexander... I think Milliband will pay with his job if he loses which is probable even though polls say neck and neck... people don't like to say they will vote tory, just like people who said they wouldn't say no this time around.... yet they still do. Then I think its an open market. Probably best for his brother to come back but he's no longer an MP and has left the country so he couldn't parachute in post election until someone resigns/leaves/dies.

There is the UK Barack Obama (chukka but he seems very aloof and gets ridiculed a lot). Alexander was apparently Tony Blairs choice in 2010.

by SecretFly Fri 19 Sep 2014, 1:31 pm

wrfc1980 wrote:I don't understand why some Irish posters were so pro independence. To be quite frank if you live in the republic the vote had NOTHING to do with you. What many if you fail to realise is that many Scots consider themselves British just as they do Scottish. They ENJOY been part of the united kingdom. A kingdom that has led the world in many facets and continues to be a big player on the international stage.

Just as it has nothing to do with the other world commentators - EU heads, two Ameican Presidents (one the serving one) the Australian Prime Minister etc.
Of course it has NOTHING to do with me - anymore than the next guy who has a vested interest in very near neighbours and one of the very biggest trading relationships with that very near neighbour that would and still will have big implications for my country - (that's both sides of the coin incidently in trading interest terms, we're pretty damn big for UK trading interests too)
So, yeah - the Irish should have been banned from 606V2 for the duration of the campaign as having very least vested interest in the debate in the whole damn world. Wink

Sorry for the intrusion - myself and Barack are writing our apologetic letters as I speak. I'm telling him to address his to Salmond. And I'm going to address mine to beshocked Wink

by Sin é Fri 19 Sep 2014, 1:36 pm

fa0019 wrote:
Notch wrote:Whats most interesting to me is this graphic;

https://twitter.com/HereInScotland/status/512915502076014592/photo/1

14% of SNP voters from 2011 voted NO. 5% of Tory voters from 2011 voted YES.

Fascinating to imagine their journey.

Amazing stats there....really shows Salmond's 16-17 year old stat to be what exactly it stood for.... nothing to do with democracy at all.

16-17 years

71% yes. 12% points more than the next best age group.

Says it all.

And most the pensioners who voted to keep the Union could be dead in 10 years. It seems very logical to me that 16-17 year olds should have a say as they will be around hopefully for the next 50/60 years.

by Scrumpy Fri 19 Sep 2014, 1:37 pm

Well done Scotland thumbsup

and thank you for staying part of the Union, now my kids can enjoy free higher education if they choose to go up North.

I'm so proud to be British, what other Country in the world would allow a part of it (Oil rich at that!) and its people to break away?

As for the future I hope we as Brits can continue to work together, enjoy Free speech (debatable as to whether it exists on 606 these days!) thumbsdown

and Democracy.

What a GREAT place Great Britain is to live.

Indy Ref - Page 6 Union.jack_.flag_

by Scrumpy Fri 19 Sep 2014, 1:40 pm

Sin é wrote:
fa0019 wrote:
Notch wrote:Whats most interesting to me is this graphic;

https://twitter.com/HereInScotland/status/512915502076014592/photo/1

14% of SNP voters from 2011 voted NO. 5% of Tory voters from 2011 voted YES.

Fascinating to imagine their journey.

Amazing stats there....really shows Salmond's 16-17 year old stat to be what exactly it stood for.... nothing to do with democracy at all.

16-17 years

71% yes. 12% points more than the next best age group.

Says it all.

And most the pensioners who voted to keep the Union could be dead in 10 years. It seems very logical to me that 16-17 year olds should have a say as they will be around hopefully for the next 50/60 years.

The problem is 16/17 year olds can be easily swayed by Parents, teachers and Sport/Pop Stars.

by fa0019 Fri 19 Sep 2014, 1:46 pm

Sin é wrote:
fa0019 wrote:
Notch wrote:Whats most interesting to me is this graphic;

https://twitter.com/HereInScotland/status/512915502076014592/photo/1

14% of SNP voters from 2011 voted NO. 5% of Tory voters from 2011 voted YES.

Fascinating to imagine their journey.

Amazing stats there....really shows Salmond's 16-17 year old stat to be what exactly it stood for.... nothing to do with democracy at all.

16-17 years

71% yes. 12% points more than the next best age group.

Says it all.

And most the pensioners who voted to keep the Union could be dead in 10 years. It seems very logical to me that 16-17 year olds should have a say as they will be around hopefully for the next 50/60 years.

The thing about the old is that yes they vote en masse and in this case for the union... but they generally vote with their heads. "You can't teach your grandmother to suck eggs"

Experience, an experience of all avenues, scenarios gives them a good perspective in life. They have been around the block, some are still alive to have given everything, saw their nation on its knees in WWII and know what really matters in live, "not... hell, this bedroom tax is so unfair teenage angst moan at the world".

Kids, are what they are. We don't trust them to be on the roads or use the most basic drugs and socially acceptable drugs (Tobacco and Alcohol) or even vote in any other non permanent political elections.. so why oh why would we give them the right to vote in a no turnaround one off decision. They are not allowed to live on their own, get married... why not.... simply because they are not seen again as mature to maintain themselves or make formative decisions.

14 year olds are just as smart, pretty much as developed brain function wise? Why not them.... because common sense tells us neither have reached an appropriate level of maturity on a mass scale for them to make such an important individual decision.

It was politically based only.... why because Salmond knew the sample. He knew it could help him and it did by at least 1% maybe more. Those small margins may have been all that mattered had other things gone his way. Cameron should have known better.

by broadlandboy Fri 19 Sep 2014, 1:50 pm

Could the UK be an example for Europe? Cooperation rather than dictation, more powers at a localised level.

by fa0019 Fri 19 Sep 2014, 1:51 pm

broadlandboy wrote:Could the UK be an example for Europe? Cooperation rather than dictation, more powers at a localised level.

Aren't we the exception to the norm already?

by Sin é Fri 19 Sep 2014, 1:51 pm

fa0019 wrote:
You have to take it with a pinch of salt though. The SNP was still 400,000 votes adrift of the No vote.

Also they had a few things on their side

a) Had the Tories been out of power you could take at least 10% points off their side (in last 30 years they have been in power for 17, opposition for 13).

If the Tories been out of power, there would not have been a Referendum.

b) We have just come out a recession where people suffered... as everyone has generally suffered.
So, everything is going to get better now

c) The SNP got into power mainly because of the Labour party running themselves into the ground eventually after 13 years of power as all parties do.
Labour made themselves irrelevant in Scotland.

d) They kept things off such as the retained monarchy... we all know on a Yes vote that would have gone within 20 years similar to Ireland.

And if that is the will of the people, what is your problem with that?

e) They managed to keep full blown denial of the wave of opposition for their voodoo economic plans which was enough for many people.
Its going to be interesting when England decides to pull out of the EU how Scotland will fare?

f) Darling did prove whilst an honest man, a good man and a patriot.... he was never a tough as nails campaigner like we needed. Had Brown been at the forefront I doubt the SNP would have got any momentum from the debates (and given he was near absent from the media thereafter with Brown in his place the campaign saw this too).
Who cares at this stage?

g) major issues like the bedroom tax showed it was genuine protest...for what is a sensible idea.... live in a 3 bed council subsidised house with your partner only, then sure you should change if there is a family of 5 making do with a 2 bed council house. If you want subsidises need should be paramount to any award. Its not like they reduced the number of council houses with the so called tax.. they just tried to re-allocate them more fairly. What is wrong about that??? if that isn't social-democratic I don't know what is.
I can imagine some people not liking being uprooted from where they have lived all their lives and elderly people for instance, possibly transfered away from all their support systems.

h) Don't underestimate the 16-17yr old vote. We don't allow them to drive but vote? It was a ploy to improve their voter pool, it was their demand not the governments and I can't believe they agreed to it frankly and why, because they are seen as more likely to vote yes. It wasn't for anything other than that.

They are the ones who are going to have to live in the UK for the next 50 years+. They are allowed study, pass exams and decide on their future at that age. Most are very responsible about that.

I honestly think the vote is more 30/70 had we had a labour government in, a recession wasn't an instant memory and the SNP ran a truthful campaign... and hell I reckon a 30/70 against vote has been in place as long as I remember.
Then you are deluded.

by quinsforever Fri 19 Sep 2014, 1:52 pm

good quoted attributed to churchill re age and its impact on voting...

"If you're not a liberal when you're 20, you have no heart. If
you're not a conservative when you're 40, you have no head."

the 16/17 yr olds who allegedly voted 71% YES, as they get older, and acquire responsibilities, will not vote the same way.

by Sin é Fri 19 Sep 2014, 1:55 pm

Scrumpy wrote:
Sin é wrote:
fa0019 wrote:
Notch wrote:Whats most interesting to me is this graphic;

https://twitter.com/HereInScotland/status/512915502076014592/photo/1

14% of SNP voters from 2011 voted NO. 5% of Tory voters from 2011 voted YES.

Fascinating to imagine their journey.

Amazing stats there....really shows Salmond's 16-17 year old stat to be what exactly it stood for.... nothing to do with democracy at all.

16-17 years

71% yes. 12% points more than the next best age group.

Says it all.

And most the pensioners who voted to keep the Union could be dead in 10 years. It seems very logical to me that 16-17 year olds should have a say as they will be around hopefully for the next 50/60 years.

The problem is 16/17 year olds can be easily swayed by Parents, teachers and Sport/Pop Stars.

16/17 year olds decide on their future careers at that age - i.e., how they are going to live their lives. More than likely with the influence of their parents, teachers etc (which didn't seem to influence them in this Referendum though)!

by Scrumpy Fri 19 Sep 2014, 2:00 pm

Not all.

The age limit should always be 18 for the right to vote, that is when they are classed as adults and you need a cut off at some point, why change it?

by quinsforever Fri 19 Sep 2014, 2:03 pm

well they wont get to vote in the UK general election.

would have been interesting in the event of a YES whether the Scots voting age would have been dropped to 16

by fa0019 Fri 19 Sep 2014, 2:08 pm

Sin é wrote:
fa0019 wrote:
You have to take it with a pinch of salt though. The SNP was still 400,000 votes adrift of the No vote.

Also they had a few things on their side

a) Had the Tories been out of power you could take at least 10% points off their side (in last 30 years they have been in power for 17, opposition for 13).

If the Tories been out of power, there would not have been a Referendum.

b) We have just come out a recession where people suffered... as everyone has generally suffered.
So, everything is going to get better now

c) The SNP got into power mainly because of the Labour party running themselves into the ground eventually after 13 years of power as all parties do.
Labour made themselves irrelevant in Scotland.

d) They kept things off such as the retained monarchy... we all know on a Yes vote that would have gone within 20 years similar to Ireland.

And if that is the will of the people, what is your problem with that?

e) They managed to keep full blown denial of the wave of opposition for their voodoo economic plans which was enough for many people.
Its going to be interesting when England decides to pull out of the EU how Scotland will fare?

f) Darling did prove whilst an honest man, a good man and a patriot.... he was never a tough as nails campaigner like we needed. Had Brown been at the forefront I doubt the SNP would have got any momentum from the debates (and given he was near absent from the media thereafter with Brown in his place the campaign saw this too).
Who cares at this stage?

g) major issues like the bedroom tax showed it was genuine protest...for what is a sensible idea.... live in a 3 bed council subsidised house with your partner only, then sure you should change if there is a family of 5 making do with a 2 bed council house. If you want subsidises need should be paramount to any award. Its not like they reduced the number of council houses with the so called tax.. they just tried to re-allocate them more fairly. What is wrong about that??? if that isn't social-democratic I don't know what is.
I can imagine some people not liking being uprooted from where they have lived all their lives and elderly people for instance, possibly transfered away from all their support systems.

h) Don't underestimate the 16-17yr old vote. We don't allow them to drive but vote? It was a ploy to improve their voter pool, it was their demand not the governments and I can't believe they agreed to it frankly and why, because they are seen as more likely to vote yes. It wasn't for anything other than that.

They are the ones who are going to have to live in the UK for the next 50 years+. They are allowed study, pass exams and decide on their future at that age. Most are very responsible about that.

I honestly think the vote is more 30/70 had we had a labour government in, a recession wasn't an instant memory and the SNP ran a truthful campaign... and hell I reckon a 30/70 against vote has been in place as long as I remember.
Then you are deluded.

Sine

a) Firstly mate I may be deluded but I think I know my people reasonably well (or at least I try to think I do).

This referendum was almost because the Tories were in power alone. They saw it as a chance of weakness... even if the Tories were some magicians that made it rain chocolate the people of Scotland would have hated them. Had there been no need for cut backs, no things such as bedroom taxes then again people would have been less upset. It made a big diff and you can tell that given that the SNP dedicated so much time to reminding people of who was in power and the decisions had recently made.

b) The monarchy thing.... sure it was your democratic right especially since the pro monarchy people of Ireland pre independence was a) concentrated in the North and b) the anglo Irish population was significantly reduced post independence in the South. No problem with any of it. But it was a textbook example of how it could be achieved.

But make no mistake... don't be a fool and no see the reasons for it. The SNP have always wanted a republic. Yet they adopted the pro queen stance for one reason... to make themselves seem more in touch with the everyday person... and then over time once they have separated Scotland from rUK for long enough say 20 years then boom, a referendum takes place and all of a sudden the monarchy is seen as less viable... especially as we now have a group of voters who have very little memory of the UK and of a UK monarchy.

c)I doubt the UK will leave the EU. People are not as stupid as they sometimes seem. UKIP is like the SNP, its a protest vote largely at least to get it to dangerous levels of a majority perspective of a nation.

d) In terms of the bedroom tax

We have a housing problem in the UK. Its a fact. We have too many people wanting to live in specific places i.e. cities on low/no incomes who need social housing. They have children, often these people have the most children. Once their children grow old they are living in a big house which they don't need anymore. Its state subsidised remember... we are in part paying for them to live in half a house when new families are being forced to living in B&Bs because there isn't enough large houses in these places to go around. The bedroom tax may seem difficult on those who have lived in a particular street for so long but we are a community no... we provide to those in need... not to those who were once in need but are ok now. That is the very essence of social housing and provision.

e) Finally, can you explain to me why there was a 23 % point difference between 16-17 yr olds and 18-24 yr olds? Are they simply more patriotic. If your argument is that they will be paying taxes for years to come then hell.... why not give the vote to anyone who can write an x on a ticket???? Come on

by Scrumpy Fri 19 Sep 2014, 2:11 pm

quinsforever wrote:well they wont get to vote in the UK general election.

would have been interesting in the event of a YES whether the Scots voting age would have been dropped to 16

The ones I saw on the news were giggling and holding a cuddly toy!

by fa0019 Fri 19 Sep 2014, 2:11 pm

quinsforever wrote:well they wont get to vote in the UK general election.

would have been interesting in the event of a YES whether the Scots voting age would have been dropped to 16

Or if Salmond drops it for the Scottish parliamentary elections either. He better do or it will be pot calling kettle black.

by **RDW** Fri 19 Sep 2014, 2:16 pm

Woman for independence leader is on BBC Scotland radio saying that Lord Ashcroft's poll shows the 'vast majority' of under 55s voted Yes, and that it was the old people that caused such a No vote.

He polled 2000 people...Not exactly definitive.

by fa0019 Fri 19 Sep 2014, 2:21 pm

RDW_Scotland wrote:Woman for independence leader is on BBC Scotland radio saying that Lord Ashcroft's poll shows the 'vast majority' of under 55s voted Yes, and that it was the old people that caused such a No vote.

He polled 2000 people...Not exactly definitive.

The old... we just have to wait until those WWII surviving/fighters traitors die ideology right. Loco Those people have done more/seen more change and upheaval than the current youth will probably ever go through.

by GLove39 Fri 19 Sep 2014, 2:36 pm

RDW_Scotland wrote:Woman for independence leader is on BBC Scotland radio saying that Lord Ashcroft's poll shows the 'vast majority' of under 55s voted Yes, and that it was the old people that caused such a No vote.

He polled 2000 people...Not exactly definitive.

Indeed. Doesn't say much when your sample size is less then an Edinburgh crowd!

by Scrumpy Fri 19 Sep 2014, 2:41 pm

So when is Salmond going to step down as leader of the SNP?

by **Notch** Fri 19 Sep 2014, 2:42 pm

fa0019 wrote:
RDW_Scotland wrote:Woman for independence leader is on BBC Scotland radio saying that Lord Ashcroft's poll shows the 'vast majority' of under 55s voted Yes, and that it was the old people that caused such a No vote.

He polled 2000 people...Not exactly definitive.

The old... we just have to wait until those WWII surviving/fighters traitors die ideology right. Loco Those people have done more/seen more change and upheaval than the current youth will probably ever go through.

Every generation has its own upheaval.

by beshocked Fri 19 Sep 2014, 2:46 pm

SecretFly wrote:
beshocked wrote:National front lingo?

Perhaps you could stop with the Irish jingoistic rubbish?

There is a difference between having a right to an opinion and agreeing with it.

If you started abusing your employer do you think they would be happy about that?

Murray lives in Surrey, he has an English girlfriend, he gets a lot of British support - he has a lot to thank the Union for - do I think he's a bit ungrateful? Yes I do - just like Sean Connery who made his career from James Bond.

I am not going to Murray's house in Surrey to throw rotten eggs or hurl abuse at him but I am entitled to call his decision foolish. It's my opinion - saying that means I am part of the National front is insulting.

Saying someone is stupid for disagreeing with you is insulting. You understand that? That's not disagreeing with them - that's calling their views stupid. So far so good? - you decide to throw offensive remarks around, then be prepared to collect some.
Never said you were a member of the National front - did say you often - often - use language steeped in intolerance of an opposing view - not a disagreement with that view, a spitefulness that assumes people almost shouldn't have the view. I stand by that continuing observation of you.

Now Murray and Connery - ungrateful to what and who?
Who can they be ungrateful to if that's what they were and obviously now still are - British?
It's you who say they were British and part of a Union.
So who do they have to be grateful to that they've achieved success in the careers? You? The Westminster government? The rest of the UK that didn't include Scotland? Just who are they being ungrateful to? They don't owe apologies to you or anyone else for getting by in life as UK citizens - that's what they were - it wasn't gifted to them by you. It was them - they are and were the UK. If they want their part to leave the UK that's their business and their right to express it.
But they don't owe you anything for having that thought...certainly not guilt.

I am entitled to my opinion - I do think that Murray's declaration of his voting was a foolish decision for the reasons I have already said.

Offensive remarks? You're the one comparing me to the National front. You're the one with the obviously divisive stance - trying to break up the union with your deluded views.

Ungrateful to those who have supported them in their careers - would Sean Connery be as famous if he wasn't James Bond?

They have to be grateful to those who have given them the opportunities to succeed in the UK

Not saying they owe me any apologies - just don't expect any support. They can want their part to leave the UK but it's a bit hypocritical to compete for Britain in a sign of unity yet want to break away.

Neither Sean Connery or Andy Murray live in Scotland. Why don't they want to move there? Oh right - Andy Murray would rather live in Surrey instead with his English girlfriend whilst criticising the Union....

Think how ludicrous it is of you to defend two multi millionaires who have very much benefitted from being part of the UK.

by **Notch** Fri 19 Sep 2014, 2:47 pm

Beshocked if you're entitled to your opinion then so is Andy Murray and Sean Connery and SecretFly. Get it? It doesn't matter!

by fa0019 Fri 19 Sep 2014, 2:47 pm

Notch wrote:
fa0019 wrote:
RDW_Scotland wrote:Woman for independence leader is on BBC Scotland radio saying that Lord Ashcroft's poll shows the 'vast majority' of under 55s voted Yes, and that it was the old people that caused such a No vote.

He polled 2000 people...Not exactly definitive.

The old... we just have to wait until those WWII surviving/fighters traitors die ideology right. Loco Those people have done more/seen more change and upheaval than the current youth will probably ever go through.

Every generation has its own upheaval.

At the moment the most dramatic in mine was when the super Nintendo sold out nationwide on release.... heartbroken!

Jokes aside of course they have... but we have precious little to worry about compared. Lets feel good about progress and the world we live in today compared to 50+ years ago.

by **Notch** Fri 19 Sep 2014, 2:49 pm

fa0019 wrote:
Notch wrote:
fa0019 wrote:
RDW_Scotland wrote:Woman for independence leader is on BBC Scotland radio saying that Lord Ashcroft's poll shows the 'vast majority' of under 55s voted Yes, and that it was the old people that caused such a No vote.

He polled 2000 people...Not exactly definitive.

The old... we just have to wait until those WWII surviving/fighters traitors die ideology right. Loco Those people have done more/seen more change and upheaval than the current youth will probably ever go through.

Every generation has its own upheaval.

At the moment the most dramatic in mine was when the super Nintendo sold out nationwide on release.... heartbroken!

Jokes aside of course they have... but we have precious little to worry about compared. Lets feel good about progress and the world we live in today compared to 50+ years ago.

by fa0019 Fri 19 Sep 2014, 2:51 pm

Notch wrote:Beshocked if you're entitled to your opinion then so is Andy Murray and Sean Connery and SecretFly. Get it? It doesn't matter!

Sean Connery did it the hard way. He was a independence voter when there was no such thing in public. He never even called out, never even asked to be part of the campaign. We should all be proud about the way he handled himself.

Murray... lets be honest the timing wasn't great. Had he done so earlier then I would have been fine with it too. His timing made it out to be planned... a little too Machiavellian to tell the truth. Probably innocent, just naïve.

by doctor_grey Fri 19 Sep 2014, 2:52 pm

RDW_Scotland wrote:Woman for independence leader is on BBC Scotland radio saying that Lord Ashcroft's poll shows the 'vast majority' of under 55s voted Yes, and that it was the old people that caused such a No vote.

He polled 2000 people...Not exactly definitive.

Jeez, I know I haven't lived in the UK for the last two years, but when did we give the vote to women?

by **RDW** Fri 19 Sep 2014, 2:54 pm

Well guys I'm going to leave you to it - completely spent, both physically and emotionally!

These threads have been a shining beacon of intelligent debate, informed arguments and respect of other people's opinions (in general) - so well done all.

I'm off to muse about how much Edinburgh will be pumped by the ospreys...

by ME-109 Fri 19 Sep 2014, 2:56 pm

Out of curiosity...given the Scots have decided not to be an independent nation...does that mean the rugby (and Soccer) teams will become part of a British team or something? Seems logical.

by fa0019 Fri 19 Sep 2014, 3:02 pm

ME-109 wrote:Out of curiosity...given the Scots have decided not to be an independent nation...does that mean the rugby (and Soccer) teams will become part of a British team or something? Seems logical.

Maybe it will make players more patriotic i.e. less likely to do a I'm 1/4 Irish McGeady and play for your lot over his own country.

by GLove39 Fri 19 Sep 2014, 3:07 pm

doctor_grey wrote:
RDW_Scotland wrote:Woman for independence leader is on BBC Scotland radio saying that Lord Ashcroft's poll shows the 'vast majority' of under 55s voted Yes, and that it was the old people that caused such a No vote.

He polled 2000 people...Not exactly definitive.
Jeez, I know I haven't lived in the UK for the last two years, but when did we give the vote to women?

Slippery slope, soon we'll be letting them into golf clubhouses!

by Sponsored content