Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
which way are you hoping the referendum will go, and why?
such high quality considering the number of Gaelic speakers totals the population of somewhere like Weston-Super-Mare.
Farpaisean Chon-Chaorach 4EVA.
So want a collie dog.
Just will be a bit different innit, doesn't matter either way frankly, we're all gonna die so why not try something new out?
see Marge, this guy gets it!
is that good or bad?
No confidence in anyone who's going to realistically be elected though so what's the difference
Scotland would historically only change about two elections in Westminster history, and it will probably continue on as a minority government anyway so it doesn't really make that much of a difference
If they vote yes then the est lothian Q needs ot come onto the table for the interim period during the negotiations. there will be a secessoin hadover period where we can't expect the best of both worlds.
If they vote no, we may end up with DevoMax, which means the WL questoin is still highly relevant. It's double standards and it's been the main logical lacuna I've found throughout the whole campaign.
Just delay any legislation that fell into this category? Just refuse to pass it until independence, and then the Commons could reconsider it without the Scottish MPs?
This kind of entrenchment will be part of the negotiations. If a Yes vote is delivered then all that is legally promised is that the parties will negotiate for Scotland to leave the union. Westminster could make it so difficult as to be impossible while still following the legal promise. It's up to them whether it's worthwhile it politically to do so. It's not likely but not impossible. It's one of the most flawed electoral process I've seen, presumably because nobody thought yes would ever be a threat, so why waste resources in times of austerity employing lawyers to do this complex thinking. It will all come out in the wash either way, the biggest lie is that yes = independence as a matter of course. Westminster are not bound by the white paper ao they can and will resist lots of it. Trident and independent assessment as to oil revenue plans are years worth of negotiation. Can't believe people are getting upset about currency when that's a comparative red herring.
I was meaning more as a way round the West Lothian thing. Assuming independence agreed, and then Labour has a majority in UK Parliament thanks to Scots MPs. Lords just block anything that goes through with Scots MP support, until actual independence. At which point Labour doesn't have a majority, so Cameron gets to try to form a government, I guess? I don't know. Weird scenario.
Some really interesting comments about the process as well, thanks. I did wonder if that was the case (that Westminster was just committed to negotiate, rather than to give independence automatically). And looking at it from a distance it does seem like a strange process - still uncertain about what a yes vote will actually mean in a lot of ways (like the electoral reform thing a couple of years ago. Hardly any discussion or consideration of the implications. Whereas when we did the same thing in New Zealand, there were serious public arguments and debates and campaigns for and against, and the implications were really clearly spelled out).
fine if they want to go
it'll be more interesting if they go
it'll be funnier if they chicken out
whatever the result I just pray they celebrate it like a 1950s goal and just shake hands and run back to the centre circle to get on with things. They'll probably do some extended Sturridge thing though the stupid shitflicks.
for voting Yes thogh anmd a lot of shockingly thick people being duped by them., I think it wil go down in history as the ballot paper I have most wanted to spoil ever. Both sides slimy and disingenuous and useless. I can get an Irish passport, I might get one of those.
not bothered though, will enjoy the positives of either result.
Seeing Cameron getting a shooing for basically losing part of the country would be sweeeeeeeeeet as though.
His lips are going to quiver and everything
Don't have to see them on the weather
No need to hear their football results
Disadvantages of them going:
Map will look weird on the weather if they chop it off
because you're definitely inundated with Scottish results as it is
I'd accept the Rangers and Celtic results, everything else can fuck off though.
they're Glasgow's wee team
and fritter my inheritance on my nemesis. Not even kidding. I had to have dinner with the board on saturday and lunch today. I want to die.
go work for Thistle already
and guess which one is proving to be cheaper (or least likely to give a pence in the £ return as opposed to all equity underwater) :/
bar what's happening on the pitch, and that in itself is pretty hard work
That'd be fun
I had a meeting with him over lunch and I think d've managed to persuade him that he's be better off throwing a suitcase full of ton notes into the clyde than sticking cash into that particular 'investment'.
Was if it ever had Forfar 4 - 5 East Fife but that's never going to happen
during an international break, when every game in the UK was postponed because of snow, with the exception of one Scottish game. So they can be useful, in exceptional circumstances.
was a belter of a game. sometimes it's lovely to watch barely professional lever football. although i forgot my glasses and from where I was standing in the cowshed, you could be mistaken for thinking it was a game that was a cross between wrestling and shinty.
He calls it "Billytimdruggiebuckiebookieland"
We work in Coatbrige so... not much better.
My wee pal robbie crawford (on loan from gers) pumped the winning goal past you central belt weirdos. hehe x
what are you waiting for?
also on Soccer Saturday or whatever... clogging up vidiprinters, those things at the side, whatever. It's a curse.
Every time I hear Roddy Forsyth reporting from Tynecastle I die a little inside.
Just gonna assume it's always raining up there.
can't we get rid of nation states?
"yeh they should definitely go for it, think of what they could achieve if they put their minds to it" to "actually it's a bit daft in the 21st century to be creating more divisions between groups of people when we should really trying to work together maaaan". I'm pretty much exactly in the middle now, it will be interesting if they vote yes but I'll be a bit glad if it's a no vote.
It'll be nice to see how it goes, if it's genuinely amazing I'll probably move up there. Just want the right wing to have as little joy as possible tbh and if that means gradually isolating them all the way into the South East of England then so be it.
They'll vote No anyway so not that bothered.
It's really not going to happen.
the bookies are just balancing the larger amount of money put on No by increasing the odds of Yes.
and get down before they shut the borders.
I think I'll just go straight ahead and marry a Chilean.
saw this at the weekend for the first time in years:
if its a no vote.
Also i don't think independence will be great for Scotland but i've been assured that everything would be brilliant and i needn't worry so i guess that's sorted. So just the misery thing, really.
Desk aregeants on secondmnet have been pulled back to their lcoal offices for beat duty.
In case there's a yes vote. According to senior person i went to school with at PS and who was pissed and indiscreet at a party at the weekend.
I'm getting everything the wrong way round today.
Because the economic case hasn't been sufficiently made, in my opinion, and it seems too risky a venture for too little reason (I don't think that the Scots are culturally, politically and socially distinct enough from the rest of the UK to `need` independence* and that this point is always overstated in the debate). I think that Scottish independence weakens both countries from an `International Standing` point of view also, and the rest of the UK will be weaker as a result (including the bit I live in). So, a combination of worry that Scots are taking too big a risk for too little purpose and a smattering of undeniable self-interest.
* - Fully aware it's not really my place to make this point.
And you've got a referendum by which to officially make a decision based on it. What I think doesn't matter.
Just fuck off already.
#DiS exit poll
than I have in england. And I'm competely undecided as to where i want to settle. I keep getting job offers offshore that are tempting. I feel like I don't much deserve a vote in the future of the country tbqh, feel like a bit of a fraud if I have one eye on the next boat out when it goes tits up.
I object to English folk living in Scotland being allowed to vote and Scottish people living in England not. Perfectly plausible for a load of TheWza's to sway the vote in independence's favour and for then to fuck off back home if their little experiment in building a better democracy works out catastrophically. Something unfair about that.
Just how it works. Like I could vote for whoever in a London Mayoral election and then fuck off whence I came, or I could move to Wales and vote there. This referendum isn't about national identity, despite what the media says- it's about how a country is governed. It would make absolutely no sense for people who wouldn't have to live under the new system of government to get a vote. I don't think that there's any reason to assume that the majority of 'Scottish' (whatever that means- I presume you mean people born in Scotland) people living in England will ever want to move back to Scotland anyway. They gave up their chance to have a say on Scottish affairs when they chose to move away from Scotland.
like, have a permanent address and pay council tax etc. There aren't a load of English socialists staying in Scottish Travelodges for a couple of weeks just to try and swing the vote.
I'm fucking gutted I can't vote but completely understand why
and oddly in Edinburgh on the day of the vote. Of course I would like to have my say but I fully agree with the fairness of how the vote eligibility is decided.
My home is Glasgow. And it has been for a decade. I have a civic, personal, and economic stake in Dennistoun, Glasgow, and Scotland.
Where else would "back home" be for me? Where I was previous to Glasgow? i.e. Birmingham, where I'd lived for a sum total of six years (with a years break between two student stints)? Manchester, where I worked for a year on placement? Sheffield, where I lived for a year whilst working. Leicester, where I was born, but left at the age of two and haven't lived in since? Lincoln, where my parents live, but where I've never lived? Or maybe you think my home is one of the Lincolnshire villages I used to live in during my school years.
Do I need to have spent half my life (and therefore be 50) in Scotland before I qualify for a referendum vote? Or maybe half my adult life will do? In which case, I've been "home" (rather than just holidaying?) for between one and three years. Phew.
What's unfair is having shitty opinions like this "home" thing see the light of day.
I'm not angry with you, GeOff. Just very very disappointed. You're one of the last people I'd expect to hear this kind of guff from. Have a word with yourself.
Let me be absolutely clear about this [Blair hands]: I'm not laying a claim to 'being Scottish' (whatever that means). Far from it. Either way, that particular issue is an irrelevance. And to acknowledge that is to begin to understand what this whole thing is about, rather than to worry about what nationality someone is.
'a load of TheWzas' a bit tongue in cheek.
I consider you a lot more scottish than many of my friends who were born here and lived all their lives here as socially and politically disengaged mere cirizens by chance. You have embraced your 'new' home of ten years and I think that's relaly admirable.
I can see Geoff's point to the etxent that it menas that 'residence' for the purposes of being elibible to vote did seem quite forgiving. You could be based in London but taken a secondment up to standard Life in edinburgh and get a vote. The meaning of 'permanent residence' is very fluid.
I don't see how else it could ahve been defined though.
...I wasn't intending to be offensive here. Or to make an analysis of your background (of which I know very little), or to say that you have less of a claim to call Scotland 'home' than others. But obviously I lost control of that inference when I used your name so... I apologise for that, and for any offence taken.
I was using you as shorthand for English folk living in Scotland who (whether they call it home or not) have more of a safety net of passing between borders if things don't work out. It's a fucking huge deal and the flippancy of responses received from it sum up a problem I have with the whole debate. Comparing a London mayoral election to this referendum?!?!?! Sweet fucking Lord...
But yeah there is an inherent unfairness in certain folk with Scottish birth certificates and Scottish families and all that not being allowed a vote. There is. If that's the only practical way of slicing it then, I'll accept it though. No system ever is 100% fair.
Anyway mate - good luck today. Whatever the result, your guys have won. If it's a No, Yes has still won the debate and changed the political ground. It's a fantastic achievement so, whatever happens tomorrow morning you can rock back content in a job well done, and a job that you have helped ensure is ongoing.
Apologies again for any offence caused.
's cool. I /think/ I get what you're saying about the 'safety net' but I'm not sure if I can buy into it. Cos I think it relies upon a presumed set of circumstances being in place. And I can see how certain folk would be irked. But, yeah, that's golf maaan. Anyway, I'm only on a quick break from final day activities and it's time to get back to the final push. Laters, G-face. x
hahahhaa, who the fuck allows cretins mike me to vote?!? I've spent as much of my adult life in england as i have in scotland, is what I meant.
The majority of the `Don't Knows` will be `No`.
No campaign have led in most of the polls and historically at least, the majority of Don't Knows will go towards the status quo. Think No will win 55-45 or so.
That said, maybe the undecideds will wake up on Thursday morning and just think, fuck it, why not?
You should totally do it though guys.
Best of luck x x x
The feeling after that referendum on the electoral system was crushing. People voted to leave things as they were.
That's it, game over. See you again never.
52/48 or 51/49.
with the exception of some crazy odds I got on some football bets at the weekend, I egnerally trustv the bookies. whenever I want to know what's going to happen, I have a look at the bookies and the patern of their odds. I'm sure their odds will have changed a bit since the shock poll at the weekend, but I'm pretty sure they're stil repdicting No. I can't get onto betting sets at work unless I have my IPad with me, which I don't. HELP, can anybody see what the odds are?
This is why we shouldn't have allowed any Scots in here.
You need to speak to these people in terms that they will understand.
Showering itself in a fine misty rain of blue and white that eventually errodes the country to a wasteland. At Scotland's funeral David Cameron will play mainly A1 and S Club 7 songs on a twenty quid sound system.
#DiS exit poll
It's Scotland's call. If anything it's a pretty damning indictment of the failures of policy of Westminster towards Scotland over the last 40 years that has now led to a situation where nearly half of them want out. We're still going to have a certain kinship, shared history, shared identity with the Scots - they're just going to manage their own affairs as an independent state (if they choose to do that on Thursday).
Shame its mostly vitriol
NO - 4.4 (7/2)
YES - 1.28 (2/7)
"You never see a thin bookie" as my old man once said to me.
but their entire industry is propped up/propelled by them being unexpectedly wrong on occasion. Could this be one of those instances?
There could be a 1992 style moment where the pollsters get it completely wrong and Yes romp home.
In the 1992 GE the Tories were predicted to narrowly lose the popular vote to Labour and ended up winning by a 7.5% popular vote margin with the highest number of votes for any political party at a UK general election.
Taking into account the 'shy-Tory' effect wasn't done then. It's very unusual for pollsters to get it wrong these days.
For general elections. Relying strongly on precedent. But this is fairly unprecedented. Two+ treat long campaign, 97% registration, rumours of an insanely high level of postal voting, etc.
If I iirc, the polling companies didn't cover themselves in glory with the AV referendum, and this is next level compared to that.
http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk is a good companion blog to UK Polling Report.
all voting on a binary choice, separate from party-affiliation, actually make it a lot easier to model and predict.
Everyone betting on No for over a year has pushed the price down.
Betting odds reflect two things: the chances of something happening, and the amount of money that's likely to be laid on it.
Bit worried about the potential for it to result in permanent Tory rule, and a further lurch to the right from the Labour party to try and counter that, but on the other hand, if it came to pass, the establishment of a genuine and successful social democratic country is pretty much the only way that I can see the rest of the UK ever being allowed to see an alternative to the economically neo-liberal but authoritorian clusterfuck that seems inevitable whoever wins the General Election.
It's just a shame for Scotland (and the cause of socialism) that it's taken a horrifically nasty Westminster government to tip the independence scales to the point where it might be a reality, and it's a shame that it's not happened before Westminster bled the oil revenues dry for the benefit of tax cuts to the wealthy. Scotland could have followed Norway's path, investing in the country and virtually eradicating poverty. Instead, most of the revenues shored up the Thatcher government and its policies.
Far too many Scottish people in that thread as well.
it's a complete vote of no-confidence in Westminster and the Westminster system (even a 'No' vote would now come caveated with the fact that it is essentially a Yes vote for DevoMax).
I just have the horrible feeling that Westminster won't see it as this.
A No vote but coming as close to a genuine Yes as possible which has but the shits up Westminster to an unforeseen extent. They'll get more autonomy but with the seeming security of being within the UK. This to me sounds like the best compromise at this juncture. Think one thing's been evident - this referendum has brought up a load of discussion of issues that neither the SNP nor Westminster had thought about. The debate will be better in the long run as a result and DevoMax (if that's what happens) could be a neat step in a long-term transition into Scottish independence. Think at the moment it's too risky for 'em but who knows in 10 years time...
Despite the three leaders 'vowing' to push ahead with DevoMax, there's strong opposition to it within the Conservative party and its donors.
If it does go ahead it'll be done as a way of unpicking the Barnett formula and forcing the SNP to cover the difference with income tax rises.
But there's no guarantee at this juncture he'll be contesting the next election.
Not sure if your second point will happen. And anyway (notwithstanding the assumption that the SNP will be the governing party in an independent Scotland) they've pledged to borrow over increase income tax haven't they?
Already outlined here (page 4)http://budgetresponsibility.org.uk/wordpress/docs/Forecasting-Scottish-taxes.pdf
But also you'll see increasing pressure from the media and Tory MPs to completely renegotiate/end the formula, in parallel with tackling the West Lothian question. I think the three party leaders, in a desperate attempt to appease the voters in Scotland have completely underestimated just how hamstrung they'll be once the media, UKIP and headbanger MPs realise that they can push the angry English nationalist until it becomes public opinion. In the weeks following a (probable) No vote you'll see the anti-Scottish rhetoric completely dominate - so much for the lovebombing.
The SNP won't be able to borrow enough to cover the whole reduction in the block grant, so income taxes will have to rise - it's designed to make the SNP look fiscally irresponsible in the short term, completely forgetting the fact that they're not going to be in power permanently.
...with time for that plan to be torn up. But fair enough.
One thing's for sure I'm not going to enjoy any of the post referendum media rhetoric. Ed Miliband absolutely NEEDS to play this correctly though re: his election chances next year. Can't really afford to be losing seats to a rejuvenated SNP and he's done as shit a job as Cameron has regarding being complacent on the threat of Scottish independence...
Labour needs Scotland to remain in the UK for it to remain a strong party in General Elections (not just in terms of MPs, but in terms of support, funding, expertise and solidarity). Losing Scotland doesn't have the potential to break the Conservatives.
His hideous complacency may yet come back to kick him square in the arse. Cameron's already guaranteed to get a shinning.
and then invade England.
"Betfair said this morning that gambling patterns indicate a 79pc likelihood of a "No" vote. Despite the odds on "Yes" shortening last week, they have lengthened significantly in the last few days. Financial markets have appeared to mirror betting patterns in recent days, with both suggesting that the chances of a "Yes" vote are far slimmer than polls suggest."
I don't understand how the bookmakers and the financial markets can be ahead of the polls? Surely they're getting their information from the polls?
The bookies are influenced by the polls, but they're going to be influenced by them in aggregate, not individual polls which may display an outlier. The couple of polls that have put Yes in front have been seized on by the media who naturally have a role in pushing the idea that the race is "neck and neck". The race may be close even if we look at poll averages, but at this stage if the No campaign on a poll of polls has a 3-4% lead, then that is significant.
If 8 polls were to give the lead for No between 3 and 5% and 2 polls gave a Yes lead between 4 and 6%, I'd be on the face of it (ignoring the complexities of each poll's individual methodology) more inclined to give a greater weighting towards No in terms of their overall chances of winning.
Also as previously stated the bookies are going to be influenced by the amount of money being staked on the outcome, so if there's been some big bets on No then that's going to sway their odds.
"Neck and neck" when it suited media narratives to portray it as such (and also suited activists for both parties). If you looked at how the advanced models such as Five Thirty Eight performed they performed very well because they weighted each poll on date, sample size, strength of methodology e.t.c. and weren't hamstrung by a need to big up the supposed closeness of the race.
Thanks for that.
Portraying it both as a tight contest but also that the No campaign are clearly going to win due to them being the only rational choice and hidden majorities and a vote for yes is a vote for Salmond etc etc.
I don't think Scottish independence would necessarily lead the country to the Left forever, but that's certainly what's being portrayed. The media presents the Yes vote almost as a fringe movement, a scary leap for senseless change (presumably because they hate anything that's not absolute market driven nonsense). That's just my experience of it but I think it undermines how tight the race is presented.
UKPollingReport has tended to be very good on this topic. The latest polls from pretty much every company appear to show Yes 2-4 points behind. They all weight differently, ask the question slightly differently and sample in various ways, but as with the way they tend to converge just before general elections these days, they seem to have converged on that very narrow lead for No for this one.
Panelbase (online) 49%
ICM (phone) 49%
TNS (face to face) 49%
YouGov (online) 48%
ICM (online) 48%
Opinium (online) 48%
Survation (online) 48%
Survation (phone) 46%
There's a couple of reasons they might all be wrong though;
1) Turnout. The higher the turnout, the more likely it is that people who aren't otherwise engaged in politics (voting in other elections) will be voting. If they when compared to demographically similar people they break substantially for Yes or No then that will swing the actual result away from anything the pollsters can model. I'd expect that factor (if it exists) to be more in favour of the Yes campaign
2) The aforementioned "shy Tory" effect. Could effect the polls in two ways - "shy nos" feeling a little ashamed of their opinion given the positive Yes/negative No campaigns and "enthusiastic Yes" voters who are more willing to do so for similar reasons. Unlikely to be much of an issue for online polls and since there's not an obvious difference between those and face-to-face/phone interviews, I doubt it's rearing it's head too much.
I'd guess that most 'Don't know' voters are probably going to swing towards No, and that's what the betting firms are basing things on.
hope they go for it, shake things up a bit, whats the worst that can happen, even if they end up a bit worse off they'll probably have a fairer and therefore better society. really just want to hear big caves cry voice
cause, go Scotland.
cause, DON'T GO SCOTLAND.
Would definitely be willing to swing for a yes outcome if it means I can emigrate and get free tuition fees. Eh? Safety wink necessary? ;) JUST IN CASE
because the continuation of the scottish govt's policy to pay the tuition fees of scottish and other non-UK EU students is only tenable when they are allowed to exclude English students (currently acceptable under EU law). But if Scotland does indeed join the EU as an independent country, then it's gonna have to apply for an exemption so that it can continue to not pay English students' fees whilst paying everyone else's. It may get this exemption but it may not. If it doesn't, then 'free' tuition isnt gonna be affordable for anyone. former ecj judge doesn't think they'd get the exemption: http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/news/scottish-government-fees-stance-incompatible-with-eu-law/2015435.article
free tuition fees are such an important policy for Scotland that you can't imagining them abandoning it unless they really had no other option. Obviously they could force foreign students to pay large administration fees etc, but it wouldn't cover the loss in fees from English students.
I've heard people say that there will some kind of legal loophole which would allow them to re-introduce fees, whilst allowing Scottish students to remain exempt, but not explicitly just because they live in Scotland- ie. the fee exemption might be to do with having Scottish qualifications or transitioning from Scottish schools etc. No idea if there's any truth in that, though.
"free tuition fees are such an important policy for Scotland"
rather than "widening access and participation is such an important policy for Scotland". personally i think "free tuition" isn't an end in itself; it's only useful when it's arranged in a way that actually improves access for people from low participation backgrounds. right now, i think it probably helps a bit but it's still paying the fees of thousands and thousands of rich people. it benefits the rich most.
i think if scotland goes independent, the fairest option would be to means test all students (across the whole of the EU) so that the children of wealthy parents have to contribute and people from low income backgrounds pay nothing. a graduate tax would probably be too expensive to implement because so many EU students will become domiciled elsewhere after graduating and the EU doesn't currently have the powers to chase them for it.
even when it doesn't improve the overall service or access to the service for the most disadvantaged.
Interesting how the Yes side has managed to get away with portraying free uni, prescriptions, care etc as policies primarily for the disadvantaged. Tends to be forgotten that they're just as beneficial for the middle classes, arguably more so.
and there are plenty of arguments against means-testing too. Both have their huge problems.
Not saying means testing is better - there's lots of good arguments for universal benefits. Just an interesting thing about the rhetoric of the debates.
because it so disproportionately benefits middle class, wealthy people, the majority of whom go to university. only a small minority of the poorest school leavers (8.6%) are going to uni. it's even worse for the elite and ancient universities. st andrews has 13 students in the entire university from the poorest quintile. if you're at one of the most prestigious universities (glasgow, edinburgh, aberdeen and st andrews), you're 16 times more likely to be from the richest 5th than the poorest 5th of the population. scotland also has the worst retention rates in the whole of the uk - the the 20% most deprived background, the drop-out rate is 12% lower than average.
won't change any of that though, at all.
there's going to be a massive shortfall in HE spending in an independent scotland and someone's going to have to pay for it. i'm saying i think the burden should fall on the rich rather than being spread out universally as a partial fee waiver for all. to sustain the level of research and teaching and increase bursaries for students from wp backgrounds (which is proven to help retention), we need more money. if it's not coming from general taxation or corporations or w/e, then it should come from rich people paying fees.
cause obviously they would all come here. I'd love if it all came from oil and gas companies or a massive hike in income tax for the rich... but then i'd love to live in a castle filled with guinea pigs.
which is postgrad
Foreign (non-EU) students have always paid way over the odds to study in Scotland haven't they?
Eh?? I don't get this, why would they pay out before the result is in? I don't think I 'get' betting.
and their overall payout to people will be less.
Also liquidity- more cash circulating for punters to reinvest in 'Fred. and you may as well bet big now really. I'm not telling anyone how I'm betting (or voting for that matter.)
doesn't concern us. STOP HAVING AN OPINION EVEYONE!!!
a) All-Conquering EU SUPER STATE
b) world descends into city states
not sure whether yes or not is more likely with that, probably yes
In a condescending 'you don't understand what you're voting for' kind of way.
I say, good on the impassioned for giving a fuck.
Also amusing to hear from people who take so much joy out of seeing people's hopes dashed.
and the "sneering" to mostly be bants, but each to their own
Love a properly deranged 'in this thread' denouncement.
if they vote yes will labour ever have a chance of winning another election?
the north of england.
sorry for being biased
my girlfriend who grew up in Newcastle (but is from Scotland) does exactly the same
people here assume everyone other region is tory-friendly because they might have voted for them previously
Even a lot of Scotland voted for Thatcher the first time around
The north east is the only place in the country that rivals Liverpool on it's victim obsession.
we haven't ever
you're not even as northern as yorkshire
hahaha poor not-very-northern sods
plus fptp means that there's probably more tories around you than you think ;)
they live in the posh bits
they're all aloof
they vote for the tories
and they're directly responsible for people like my mam losing her job
the people who would vote tory but are working class so don't vote for lib dems or ukip
thanks, i've lived here all my life so i know this stuff
Though I kinda hope the result is no.
saw myself on the news last night too :D
Really irks me.
cuz the thinly veiled's mum always buys me a nice Speyside malt for birthdays/Christmas' and is inexplicably threatening to boycott all Scottish goods if they go. She's a bit mental.
I wish them the best either way though. Great bunch o' lads.
Never thought of that, could be top fun.
I probably hope they go just to see if a fresh break from established Westminister politics can be a positive thing and it will encourage devolution in other areas.
It's going to be astronomically painful for Scotland in the short term though and I presume they'll be stitched up in any negotiation with government.
whisky, shortbread, porridge oats or scotch eggs?
if not then I'm probably ok.
I'd rather they stuck around but this is the real crux of the issue.
there's a barr factory in walkergate
and a few more around the country
be a shame if they closed them down
also, with my massive indifference, I am unaware of the potential impact on our government in terms of loss of labour votes/constituencies? Is there any?
I'd look into it but I just....you know.
has been that losing scotland would have absolutely no effect on what the government in westminster would look like. Loads of people have been like 'oh well when everyone in rUK realises how amazing scotland will be as a social democratic country, they'll shift to the left'. Don't think that's true even if scotland really does become a social democratic country. All it'll do is mean labour will have to shift to the right to win more of the current marginal seats (where the majority will likely have no interest in social democracy anyway). Like, if you suddenly lose a bunch of safe-ish seats, you'd be very negligent if you didn't compensate for that.
that this vote is happening in the first place. They are no longer fit for purpose.
what does 'negligence' mean in that context? what does 'no longer fit for purpose' mean? How would scottish labour or the SNP differ in an independent scotland?
and be governing a nation of people who voted them in, as opposed to voting completely against whatever Westminister delivers them
and 'a nation of people' didn't vote them in if over 50% of eligible voters didnt vote in the ruling party (as has happened with every election in the uk that i know of since clement atlee i think?). I've not voted the snp in if i vote labour. Such is liberal democracy.
wrt you point below 'don't really see why a pro-independence voter would care about what happens to Westminster' i would really hope people arent that self-centred, especially when the whole point for a lot of people is that they want scotland to be a fairer, more just society. Would then be strange to not care if rUK becomes a less fair, less just society as a direct result of independence.
and start governing themselves. Of course it's self-centred, it's a fucking independence vote!
If it was YES and the first "Scottish General Election" happened and the party you voted for lost at least it was voted by the nation of people you live in as opposed to the almost blanket rejection of what we have now
I wondered if there might have been something I hadn't considered/I wasn't aware of that would balance out what I had perceived, from an admittedly limited amount of information, as a potential huge loss for the Labour party and potential gain for the Tories.
if irn bru got expensive/dried up entirely I'd go nuts
would care about what happens to Westminster
has just done an absolute belter of a speech. Can't find a video of it but I'm intrigued. Always have liked Gordon at his fired up best.
Unfortunately, we don't live in one, and I reckon Scotland's going to have a far harder time of independence than the SNP suggests. Too much of the "Yes" campaign has been based around unlikely best-case scenarios (especially around oil revenues) and the occasional bit of outright fantasy, and I think the desire to see Scotland fail amongst the British right-wing and European countries with their own separatist regions will sadly put paid to any idea of a socialist utopia north of the border. I'd like to be proved wrong though.
Then I see DC in earnest self-deprecation mode or Eddie Fucking Izzard outside buckhingham palace or the latest bit of BBC FUDdery and I think "fuck it, really hope they get it"
PISSED ME RIGHT OFF. Full of Tory bellends too, which I don't get, because everyone keeps saying that if the Yes campaign wins it will usher in 1,000 years of Tory government.
the methods and make up of the people and the media advocating the status quo have been major factors in tipping my opinion away from them.
the Tory's are kicking off about this proposed deal that more of "their taxes" would go towards keeping Scotland "happy"
It's just cuz it makes them look a bit shit if they can't keep the union together though
I liked the bit where he talked to the taxi driver who was like:
'basically there seems to be no way of knowing who's telling the truth, would be great if there was some arbiter in the middle when they're both shouting over each other and disagreeing who steps in and say "HERE ARE THE ACTUAL FACTS", otherwise it's just all bullshit'
That's basically how I feel about 95% of politics in general.
which then got deleted
as he wasn't pushing any specific agenda, just asking people their opinions.
Pretty ironic if this is true considering the currently anger at the BBC 'bias'.
BBC are barely hiding their contempt for the Yes campaign tbh
if you so badly want you're own country i don't see why you'd still want to use our websites. sean's got enough to do already without creating a whole new website for you all, and obviously you won't be welcome here any more, so where you going to go, huh Scottish disers?
can't believe the No campaign haven't pursued this line already.
but why are/were Miliband and Cameron and Clegg all here pleading with us to vote no?
Like, what are their honest reasons? I'm pretty certain that none of them are really concerned about our welfare or our shopping bills or whatever else they were pretending to care about, so what is it?
The best thing about all of this is feeling that my vote tomorrow actually matters for the first time in my life - the worst is the sense that there's going to be a rough few years regardless of the outcome (plus losing pretty much any remaining faith I had in the Labour party up here).
Cameron: Doesn't want to have to face the queen after losing 10% of her subjects.
Miliband: Doesn't want to lose a portion of the country that's currently electorally advantageous.
Clegg: Doesn't want to feel left out.
Labour and the LibDems have a lot of support in Scotland. MPs, members, funding, expertise, etc etc. Losing Scotland would disproportionally affect them.
Some Conservatives still have a 'one-nation' kind of view. Not many of them are left in the parliamentary party, but there are quite a few amongst the voters. Others see an independent Scotland becoming more closely tied to the EU, and there are a lot of eurosceptics in the Conservative party.
All of the big three Westminster parties want to see the current system continue because it's served them so well. In the case of the Labour party and Conservatives it's delivered them a duopoly on power, without really having to be accountable to the wider public. You'll see that just about all the small, progressive parties who can't get a seat at the table, or who are stymied by the Westminster system are in favour of independence.
All three of them also don't want to lose the (now declining) revenues from oil and gas. Without being able to fall back on it as a means of shoring up the public finances, the shaky foundations of the past thirty five years' economic policies would begin to crack.
And, you know, some of them think it will be in the best interests of the people of Scotland and the people of the rest of the UK too. A lot of that is based upon what they think is in the best business interests of the companies with concerns in the UK, but if you believe that business is the answer to everything then the two are the same thing.
I'm seriously expecting a turnout of 30% or something.
Good to see the voice of the working class back and calling for complete pandering to the market.
unless stella creasy becomes leader of the labour party at some point i guess
Dennis Skinner seems alright.
The attributes that draws people to positions of power are often the very same attributes that make them so bloody awful at it.
DiS mods not included obviously. :)
don't agree with everything he did but i think he's very admirable either way.
Free market essentialism, arrogant pious 'it's for your own good' policy making, evasive, vague, control freakery/paranoia, complete alienation from anyone not in the political elite. It's not even his fault, I'm sure he's fine as a person but government does that to people.
Gordon Brown 2019
and bring it into work tomorrow. I have a recipe for making it in the microwave that I'm keen to try out (and Oh how we laughed on the way to the Emergency Burns Clinic).
fix of the famous Scots poet ... so you drive over there and ....
there's only one way to make a small fortune from owning a football club – and that’s to start off with a large fortune
(Wonder if the rescue centre will have any Scottish Folds).
if it's a YES I'm getting a SCOTTY DOG like at the commy games opening!!!11111
Maru is a Scottish fold and makes me want one so much, but only if it likes boxes as much as Maru likes boxes.
border terrier for no
westie for yes
this campaign has been a triumph for people shouting people down. I reckon that it's fairly anti democratic to turn up where someone is trying to put their side forward hurl abuse and threats until they are intimidated into fucking off. If that's what politics is like up there then the scots can fuck right off. If that's what it's like down here, then we should fuck right off. Basically, everyone just needs to fuck off. FUCK THE FUCK OFF NOW