Jump to content
Cold?
Local
Radar
Snow?

Scottish Politics 2011-2017


Recommended Posts

Posted
  • Location: Leeds/Bradford border, 185 metres above sea level, around 600 feet
  • Location: Leeds/Bradford border, 185 metres above sea level, around 600 feet

    That's a ridiculously short sighted position. The existence of the rail service would decrease congestion on the roads and open up opportunities for travel and work that weren't previously there. This in turn contributes the overall economy, creates jobs, and people visit these places who wouldn't normally have done so. 

     

    Your right, for every £ spent on that loss making rural station it may generate 3 jobs elsewhere however my point is that using that money in another location or another piece of infrastructure may generate 10 jobs. Additionally a lot of rural villages don't experience heavy congestion and roadworks are substantially cheaper than rail.

     

    It is not the governments job to subside your choice to live in the Glens.

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Spotted a post you think may be an issue? Please help the team by reporting it.
    • Replies 30.9k
    • Created
    • Last Reply

    Top Posters In This Topic

    • Scottish-Irish Skier

      8874

    • mountain shadow

      1528

    • skifreak

      1435

    • frogesque

      1306

    Top Posters In This Topic

    Popular Posts

    And that ignorant, offensive, rant sums up exactly why the YES campaign failed  

    Good god. What a load of boarish spiteful bile from bad losers has been posted during the night. I actually dread to think how Scotland would be run if this is representative of how the yes vote behav

    I'm disappointed in the lack of grace shown by some across the net in accepting this No vote. A complete lack of any empathy and understanding as to why fellow Scots didn't vote Yes.   I personally

    Posted Images

    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    It is not the governments job to subside your choice to live in the Glens.

     

     

    It is the job of the government to do what those who elected it asked them to do to the best of their ability. That may include projects such as the Borders Railway near me, which is projected to make a loss, at least in the beginning. So it is the government's job to subsidise 'some people's choice to live in the glens' if the electorate has put them in charge after they made that commitment.

     

    I know that's novel in Britain nowadays - i.e. a party puts forward a manifesto then implements that if elected - but people in Scotland are getting used to it and quite like it.

     

    Part of the reason I didn't vote Tory or Labour at the last election was neither had manifestos, or at least anything you could describe as a concrete set of commitments. Both largely waffle.

     

    I was almost tempted by the Libs as they actually did have a proper manifesto and it contained a good few policies I thought sensible, although I'm glad I wasn't fooled.

    Edited by scottish skier
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Highland Scotland
  • Location: Highland Scotland

    It is not the governments job to subside your choice to live in the Glens.

    are you arguing that people should be driven from their homelands and family (a new round of clearances), to already overpopulated parts of the UK where the under invested infrastructure is creaking at the seems - yes really sensible. If no-one lived in rural areas, what do you propose those in the cities would eat?Supporting a railway line in your example above is probably a lot more efficient use of public funds, than the financial cost of not doing so, when the resultant social problems could cost us for decades as an on going burden, as we've already witnessed from Thatcher's time.
    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    Sunday herald looks interesting tomorrow.

     

    Workers exposed to radiation at Faslane nuclear base by @robedwards53 in tomorrow's paper

     

    Oh s**t. We know Trident is inherently unsafe. I wonder what has happened and what has in the past been covered up.

     

    Our splash tomorrow: Salmond's secret plan to save Grangemouth ... front page to follow soon

     

    Interesting to see what the front page looks like.

     

    --------------

     

    EDIT

     

    Also, first results of Wings over Scotland second crowd-funded poll due ~8:00 am the morn. Going to be very enlightening based on the hints so far.

     

    Unique readers hit over 400,000  this month for 2013, which is equivalent to ~15% of the regularly voting electorate. Of course it's hard to know exactly, but numbers are massive for a crowd-funded blog.

     

    -------------

     

    EDIT

     

    Herald front page

     

    Posted Image

     

    I assume the Sunday Herald are keeping going with the increasingly balanced approach as it's paying back for them.

    Edited by scottish skier
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Maddiston , Falkirk, Scotland 390ft above sea level
  • Location: Maddiston , Falkirk, Scotland 390ft above sea level

    The result of Ineos basically holding the workers over a baral of a gun.Is not good for anyone.It means that workers rights and unions are toothless and its now an employers right to do what the hell they like.Of course because we live in Tory post Thatcher broken Britain.Some people are crazy enough to believe that leaving corporate dictators to decide on workers rights and conditions to be acceptable.This is how the free market operates and its not a good model to aspire to.In the sector I work in if you don't like something there is no union ,no employee committee and no right to withdraw Labour.This has been a disaster for the social responsibility of employers as their ethics were mediated by workers bodies input and agreement.There is no agreements between workers and CEO,s before policies are implemented in the private sector.I was relocated at work and given a flat token increase to cover travel which didn't even cover half of it.So whether I was travelling 200 miles or 10 miles more it was the same amount.Would a union or employees committee have approved that one? But alas that is the power employers have nowadays and its making employees life's at work impossible sometimes. The unions were put in place to stop exploitation by employers and we must never forget that.

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Leeds/Bradford border, 185 metres above sea level, around 600 feet
  • Location: Leeds/Bradford border, 185 metres above sea level, around 600 feet

    are you arguing that people should be driven from their homelands and family (a new round of clearances), to already overpopulated parts of the UK where the under invested infrastructure is creaking at the seems - yes really sensible. If no-one lived in rural areas, what do you propose those in the cities would eat?Supporting a railway line in your example above is probably a lot more efficient use of public funds, than the financial cost of not doing so, when the resultant social problems could cost us for decades as an on going burden, as we've already witnessed from Thatcher's time.

     

    I never said they should be driven away, it's not the role of the state to directly force somebody to move, it's their choice if they move somewhere with better transport links. I'm not suggesting that nobody farms or lives in rural areas, again i'm simply suggesting that they can manage fine with a railway station as many rural villages in Yorkshire do (and i presume Scotland). Costing tens of thousands their jobs is a little different to the much smaller effect that closing a railway line will have and even by your own logical inference that money could probably be better spent on "under invested infrastructure that is creaking at the seems". 

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Stoke Gifford, Bristol
  • Location: Stoke Gifford, Bristol

    Grangemouth.

    Highly paid workforce.

    Plant losing money.

    Change your pension scheme to a still-generous scheme compared to many.

    Do u still want a job being paid well above UK average or not?

    No brainer really.

    Once again the union that i'm a fully paid-up member of screws up.

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    Panelbase poll results for Wings over Scotland coming out now.

     

    Interestingly, Wings has made the Sunday Herald, which should mean it makes the BBC, STV and other papers because if one talks about the 'latest poll', others follow. Great advertising.

     

    http://archive.is/9dsM4

     

    Standard Indy Q

    Yes = 35%

    No = 43%

    Thinking about it/DK = 20%

    (without tables I'm assuming this is full base as it doesn't add up to 100 so 2% must be would not vote. Seems it is from WoS).

     

    Excluding undecideds it's 45 Y / 55 N. 

     

    That's the lowest No panelbase have got since early 2012 before No started to climb, peaking in late 2012. Agrees with TNS recent 44 N.

     

    Yes in line with continuing slow rise.

     

    So, from my running averages, gap is now ~10 points conservatively, down from ~21 late 2012. Yes has gained ~5 points with No losing ~6. 

     

    Trend towards parity by the end of 2013 / early 2014 continues and that's without the white paper / joint UK government statement.

     

    Starting to get interesting.

     

    ---------

     

    Still not up on WoS, so from what the herald has chosen with it's own spin:

     

    49% think the economy is the most important factor in independence. Hardly a surprise that. Interesting that it's not a clear majority though. Is for undecideds at 61%.

     

    Don't have the tables, but going from the Herald data ~21% think the UK's 'status and influence' is important (assuming Yes voters haven't ranked this one as important - why would they!).

     

    -------

     

    EDIT.

     

    First one up on WoS.

     

    Should be coming out every couple of hours.

     

    http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-gnats-chuff/

     

    Oh, what's really interesting is panelbase got another company to run the poll by their own panel and combined the two. So in effect the poll is an average of two entirely different polls combined.

     

    By party:

    SNP 69-17 (14 DK) +52
    Labour 19-56 (25 DK) -37
    Lib Dem 17-55 (29 DK) -38
    Conservative 1-96 (3 DK) -95

     

    So a lot of undecideds for Labour and the Libs. Only just over half their voters are backing No for now. Fair support for Yes amongst them too.

     

    By gender:

    Men: 46-42 (12 DK) +4
    Women: 29-49 (22 DK) -20

     

    As noted, 'project fear' by the no campaign is aimed at scaring/bullying the female electorate in voting No. It's not washing with men.

     

    YES/NO VOTE BY AGE

    18-24: 28-68 (4 DK) -40*
    25-34: 42-37 (22 DK) +5
    35-44: 34-45 (20 DK) -11
    45-54: 42-42 (17 DK) 0
    55-64: 36-45 (19 DK) -9
    65+: 32-53 (15 DK) -21

    (*The size of the 18-24 sample was far smaller than the other groups, and therefore highly susceptible to error)

     

    The 18-24 group has been the subject of much debate. It's the most volatile so should be treated with care. Also one of the least likely groups to vote.

    For most groups, N does not have a majority.

     

     

    YES/NO VOTE BY RESIDENCE TYPE

     
    Homeowners: 31-51 (18 DK) -20
    Private renters: 42-39 (20 DK) +3*
    Social renters: 56-28 (16 DK) +28

     

    (*The private-renters group was also a small sample size.)

     

    Unsurprising. The ones most worried are the ones who have the most to lose in theory.

    Edited by scottish skier
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Maddiston , Falkirk, Scotland 390ft above sea level
  • Location: Maddiston , Falkirk, Scotland 390ft above sea level

    The poll suggests the youngsters have been Britafied. They are the easiest group to influence though.So you can't read too much into this.The fake Britannia of the,Olympics and Andy Murray becoming  an accepted Brit are two things that spring to mind.However once they get past the gimmicks and veneer and understand the Britannia they have endorsed.They will quickly understand the true difference between broken diminishing Tory Britain and the socially democratic Scotland we aspire to.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    My current Y/N poll data. Full base, i.e. not adjusted for turnout as I feel that's too much of an unknown at this stage. Higher turnouts favour Yes (Yes's more likely to vote) generally so this is conservative for Yes. Error bars are standard +/- 3% precision (not accuracy). Different symbols represent different pollsters. Prior to 2011, the only regular pollster was TNS; dashed line links these but no trend fitting as only one poll so nothing for comparison/averaging.

     

    Includes all polls which are consistent with each other and have not had methodology / base called into question.

     

    Thus outdated landline telephone MORI is excluded (only agrees with all the other polls if you attempt to correct the disparity in Moreno identity based on SSAS and census data) and Yougov (recently conceded they were wrong to weight to UKGE data and stopped doing this, rendering their previous massive outlier polls as only fit for the bin - we'll see what they get from now on with the new weighting system once they've done a few - the first one with the new method is in much better agreement with trends).

     

    Solid lines are simple 2nd order poly fits; one for the 2011 to early 2012 period, the second from early 2012 to now. These represent the main peaks and troughs we've seen since the 2011 election, i.e. first Yes goes ahead, then No takes the lead, now reversing again.

     

    You can see in late 2011 when the Yes went ahead of the No it was partly from No but mainly from the DKs; when the DKs shift, they shift to Yes (highest Yes correlates with lowest DK).

     

    No loses mainly direct to Yes (strongest correlation), which is something that should scare the crap out of No for obvious reasons; many No's said Yes before so are clearly open to Yes / like the idea of indy. The main loss from No since their late 2012 peak has been back to Yes with just a little to DK.

     

    Clearly, for the entire period shown (and beyond back to 1997), there has never been majority support for No.

     

    I predict, by year end/early 2014 we should be back to the parity commonly seen at ~4/10 for 4/10 against way back to the beginning of devolution and seen here in 2008-2009.

     

    ----------------

     

    EDIT.

     

    Hearing reports the Wings poll is being discussed on GMS on BBC Radio Scotland.

     

    Excellent.

    post-9421-0-85729400-1382865242_thumb.pn

    Edited by scottish skier
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-mind-of-the-nation-part-1/

     

     

    More selected results:

     

    THE UK HAVING NUCLEAR WEAPONS

    In favour: 32
    Against: 46
    Don’t know: 21

     

     

    Keeping the monarchy

     

    In favour: 50
    Against: 32
    Don’t know: 17

     

    THE BEDROOM TAX

    In favour: 16
    Against: 75
    Don’t know: 9

     

    MEMBERSHIP OF THE EU

    In favour: 41
    Against: 38
    Don’t know: 21

     

    Tighter than usual. Clearly a place for this debate under independence. Likewise a place for an out of EU (e.g. like  Norway or Switzerland) party. Just not UKIP it would seem who are the kings of lost deposits.

     

     

    NATIONALISING THE RAILWAYS

    In favour: 47
    Against: 28
    Don’t know: 25

     

    OBTAINING NATURAL GAS BY ‘FRACKING’

    In favour: 26
    Against: 34
    Don’t know: 40

     

    "Tune in soon for the concluding section, after which we’ll get down to the fun stuff where we laugh at Alistair Darling and such."

     

    -------------

     

    Meanwhile, it seems the biggest nuclear threat to Scotland is hosting trident.

     

    http://archive.is/GvH1E

     

    Workers exposed to radiation at Faslane

     

    Two nuclear submarine bases in Scotland and England have suffered 11 significant safety incidents in the last five years, including human exposure to radiation, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) has revealed.
     
    Radioactive waste has been spilled, workers exposed to radiation, power supplies lost, safety valves wrongly operated and a bag of waste mistakenly dropped overboard. Six of the incidents happened at the Faslane naval base on the Clyde, and five at Devonport in Plymouth.
    Edited by scottish skier
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    More selected results relating to Scottish Government policies:

     

    MEMBERSHIP OF NATO (SNP policy now after party conference vote on stance change)

     

    In favour: 61Against: 11Don’t know: 28

     

    THE COUNCIL TAX FREEZE  (SNP policy)

     

    In favour: 82Against: 9Don’t know: 9

     

    PRIVATISING THE ROYAL MAIL (SNP policy to re-nationalise)

    In favour: 15Against: 66Don’t know: 19

     

    BUILDING NEW NUCLEAR POWER STATIONS (SNP not planning news ones, but may keep existing open for longer if needed)

    In favour: 39Against: 34Don’t know: 28

     

    A WRITTEN CONSTITUTION (pro-indy party policy)

    In favour: 57Against: 7Don’t know: 40

     

    MINIMUM PRICING FOR ALCOHOL

    In favour: 39Against: 47Don’t know: 14

    Narrow against here. I actually oppose it but support it at the same because without control of alcohol taxes, there's little the government can do to reduce the sale of paint stripper cheap booze. The problem is that minimum pricing doesn't create more tax cash for the Scottish government (which could be directed at helping those with alcohol problems) which is where my opposition comes from.

     

    ANTI-SECTARIANISM FOOTBALL LAWS (SNP policy)

    In favour: 73Against: 13Don’t know: 14

     

    Interesting the last one. That is the only policy to pass through Holyrood without the majority support of 2 or more parties since its inception (that I know of). Labour and the Tories were against it because they have always encouraged sectarianism in an attempt to keep the population of Scotland divided. Catholics voted Labour, Protestants Scottish Unionist / Tory.

     

    Good call SNP. Scotland hates bigots.

    Edited by scottish skier
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    More.

     

    http://wingsoverscotland.com/still-looking/

     

     

    “From what you’ve seen and heard of the independence debate so far, and regardless of whether you agree with their views or not, do you feel that the following people and organisations have been acting with the best interests of the people of Scotland at heart?â€

     

    Alex Salmond +15
    Nicola Sturgeon +12
    Alistair Darling -11 
    Willie Rennie -13
    Patrick Harvie -14
    Anas Sarwar -18
    Ruth Davidson -18
    Johann Lamont -19
    Michael Moore -20
    David Cameron -42

     

    "Alistair Darling’s relatively high rating was almost exclusively down to Conservative voters, who thought their recent conference guest had Scotland’s interests at heart by a whopping margin of +62. Labour supporters, on the other hand, rated the “Better Together†chairman at a genuinely startling -3....

     

    ..Michael Moore scored +18 from Conservative voters for his actions as Secretary of State for Scotland, but just +13 from his own fellow Lib Dems."...

     

    ...And this one’s going to sting – among Labour supporters who expressed an opinion, the net rating for Johann Lamont in terms of whether she was acting in what she felt were the best interests of the people of Scotland was -12. Tory and Lib Dem voters were both far kinder to her than her own people, at +13 and +10.

     

    So Alastair and Johann are Tory darlings huh..

     

    ------------

     

    Same question as above, but for newspapers:

     

    The Scotsman -6
    The Sunday Herald -9
    The Herald -9
    Scotland on Sunday -9
    Daily Record -11
    Sunday Post -11
    Sunday Mail -13
    Scottish Sun -14
    The Times -18
    Scottish Daily Mail -18
    Scottish Daily Express -21

     

    Lots of DK's of course for each paper from those that don't read it. Amazing that not one got a positive rating; all seen to be acting against Scotland's interests.

     

    The English (Times) and most rabidly Tory (SDM, SDE) papers taking the worst of the flack.

     

    ----

     

    If there were to be a live televised debate about independence and Alex Salmond was the person making the case for an independent Scotland, who do you feel would be the most appropriate person to make the case for the UK?

     

    David Cameron: 37

    Alistair Darling (chairman of “Better Togetherâ€): 25

    Alistair Carmichael (Secretary of State for Scotland): 9

    Someone else: 10

    Don’t know: 19

     

    Aye but DC's too chicken.

     

    -------------

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    Right, so let's put the Braveheart thing to bed (well actually, independence supporters put it to bed just after they watched the film back in 1995, it's unionists that use the term):

     

    Which of these will be the MAIN factors in deciding how you vote in the independence referendum? (Tick up to two.)

     

    The future of the economy: 50

    The prospects for my children/grandchildren: 43

    Ensuring Scotland always gets the government it votes for: 31

    Maintaining the UK’s international standing/influence: 25

    My own prospects: 19

    Emotional reasons (national pride etc): 8

     

    -----

     

    The Scottish Government’s annual budget (like those of Wales and Northern Ireland) is determined by a block grant from Westminster calculated according to the ‘Barnett formula’, which is unpopular with many English voters and MPs.

     

    Labour, the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats have all recently said that they want to abolish this system and replace it with a ‘needs-based’ alternative, which would give Scotland a smaller share of UK spending than it receives at present.

     

    If you knew that the Barnett formula was going to be abolished after 2015, how would it affect your vote in the independence referendum?

     

    Much more likely to vote Yes: 18

    Slightly more likely to vote Yes: 9

    No difference – I’ll vote Yes anyway: 21

    NET = 48%

     

    No difference – I’ll vote No anyway: 33

    Slightly more likely to vote No: 2

    Much more likely to vote No: 3

    NET = 37%

     

    Don’t know: 15%

     

    Interesting. = potential 56% Yes excluding undecideds.

     

     

     

    David Cameron has pledged that the UK will hold an in/out referendum on membership of the European Union in 2017. If you believed the UK was going to leave the EU in the next few years, how would that affect your vote in the SCOTTISH INDEPENDENCE referendum?

     

    Much more likely to vote Yes: 14

    Slightly more likely to vote Yes: 6

    NET = 20%

     

    No difference: 53

     

    Slightly more likely to vote No: 3

    Much more likely to vote No: 7

    NET = 10%

     

    Don’t know: 16

     

    So again the prospect of being yanked out of the EU lends itself to a Yes vote. That’s the thing, while the earlier EU question had support for staying in only a little higher than out, it’s the prospect of the UK deciding the EU question for Scotland that people don’t like the idea of it would seem.

    Edited by scottish skier
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    And finally, some very, very interesting results.

     

    USE OF MEDIA OUTLETS IN CONNECTION WITH INDEPENDENCE

    (Regularly or occasionally)

    Official campaign websites (Yes Scotland, Better Together): 26
    Free-to-access commercial media sites (Daily Record, Scotsman, BBC etc):47
    Pay-to-access commercial media sites (The Sun, Herald, Times etc): 9
    Other websites and blogs: 37
    Twitter: 21
    Facebook: 39

     

     

    Other websites and blogs on 37%. Facebook on 39%.

     

    Social media is massively dominated by pro-independence voices. So those figures can only be good news for Yes supporters.

     

    http://wingsoverscotland.com/welcome-to-the-future/

     

    Posted Image

     

    ------

     

    the official campaigns have now been running for roughly 15 months.Regardless of whether your voting intention has actually changed or not,how would you describe your feelings now compared to 15 months ago?

    Much more in favour of independence: 18
    Slightly more in favour of independence: 12

    NET = 30%


    Unchanged: 55


    Slightly more against independence: 6
    Much more against independence: 9

    NET = 15%

     

     

    Yep, the media keep telling us nothing has changed since the campaigns began. Things have changed though. It's like what I showed in the Y/N graph. Oh yes you can pick out some of the higher No polls and some which have highly questionable bases/methodology to try and pretend all is looking solid for the union, but if you take all the ones where there's nothing obviously questionable and plot them together, they all show the same trend. The trend is a swing towards Yes.

     

    ---------

     

    Then there's this:

     

    What is your opinion regarding the following statement?

    “The Scottish people would make a success of an independent Scotland.â€

    Agree: 55
    Disagree: 30
    Don’t know: 15

     

    Unionists are so 'get up and go'. That 30% will roughly be your pro-status quoers.

     

    Don't be depressed by the laziness/lack of ambition of Scots right-wingers (who are the ones with the least get up and go / most against indy), as look at this:

     

    YES VOTERS
    Agree 96 Disagree 3 Don’t know 1

    NO VOTERS
    Agree 17 Disagree 62 Don’t know 21

    UNDECIDED VOTERS
    Agree 68 Disagree 3 Don’t know 29

     

    68% of undecideds believe that Scottish people could make an independent Scotland a success.

     

    As I said earlier, polls show that when the undecideds swing, it's to Yes....

     

    To quote WoS:

     

    "Look at those numbers again. And again, and then a couple more times, because the story they tell is a spectacular and uplifting one for anyone in the Yes camp.

     

    People who vote No are doing so because, overwhelmingly, they think Scotland simply doesn’t have what it takes to be independent. The people who haven’t made their mind up yet, by an absolutely crushing margin, think it does. It’s clear which way they’re leaning, if only they can have their questions answered.

     

    Among the undecideds, 36% are more in favour of independence than they were a year ago, compared to just 10% who’re more against. 42% of them would like Scotland to be an independent country if everything else was equal, compared to just 20% who’d rather remain in the UK.

     

    They care more than either Yes or No voters about the economy and the future of their children. They don’t give a monkey’s about the UK’s international status and influence. (It’s their second-lowest factor, above only â€œEmotional reasonsâ€.)

     

    These are the people on whom the referendum will swing, and they really, really want to swing towards independence. The Yes camp has 11 months to make their dreams come true. Those 11 months start here."

    Edited by scottish skier
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Keele, North Staffs
  • Location: Near Keele, North Staffs

    The 'NO' campaign needs to become more focused and organised. There is a danger of Scotland sleepwalking into this on the back of Salmond's popularity.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    The 'NO' campaign needs to become more focused and organised. There is a danger of Scotland sleepwalking into this on the back of Salmond's popularity.

     

     

    That's slightly at odd with the facts Ian.

     

    I'll put aside the implication that you believe the Scottish electorate are stupid (by implying they are 'sleepwalking' into the biggest decision they'll have to ever vote on possibly).

     

    No is ahead and has been for coming on 2 years now (Yes went ahead briefly in the euphoria following the SNP win before the reality of the big step that independence is set in), albeit the gap is closing.

     

    It can't close due to 'sleepwalking', only by people deciding it's time to look into the matter and making their mind up in an informed way.

     

    Having a Scottish Government is popular. It's not about Mr Salmond. By saying that you sound like the Daily Mail. Which would be odd for a left winger.

    Edited by scottish skier
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Keele, North Staffs
  • Location: Near Keele, North Staffs

    SS, my interest is purely to keep Scotland in the Union for the purpose of trying to keep the Tories out of power in Westminster. Without, the Scottish anti-tory vote then we would have a permanent Tory government.

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    SS, my interest is purely to keep Scotland in the Union for the purpose of trying to keep the Tories out of power in Westminster. Without, the Scottish anti-tory vote then we would have a permanent Tory government.

     

     

    In your imagination that's the case Ian. We've been over this before, with me showing this same graph.

     

    2 years and 28 days since 1945 I'll grant you.

     

    It's your own countrymen you need to work on persuading to vote for the centre to left. They're the ones who pick who's in charge the vast majority of the time, not Scotland with it's piddly 59/650 MPs.

     

    Posted Image

    Edited by scottish skier
    • Like 3
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Maddiston , Falkirk, Scotland 390ft above sea level
  • Location: Maddiston , Falkirk, Scotland 390ft above sea level

    That old chestnut ..Scotland exists to save England from itself! Scotland has no influence on the government of your nation. Utter nonsense..Not even worth commenting on. We will have a chance to decide our future next year and finally ellect the government we choose not what England has chosen for us for the last 50 years. Get a grip and read a book about democracy and self determination you might learn something!

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    Interesting breakdown of the undecided's on WoS.

     

    http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-in-betweeners/

     

    SOCIO-ECONOMIC GRADE

    A: <1
    B: 9
    C1: 32
    C2: 30
    D: 23
    E: 14

    ————————————–

    The rich and the poor have pretty much made up their minds. The vast bulk of people still thinking about it are those in the middle and lower-middle classes.

     

     

    VIEW ON NUCLEAR WEAPONS

    In favour: 19
    Against: 48
    Don’t know: 34

     

    VIEWS ON THE MONARCHY

    In favour: 40
    Against: 33
    Don’t know: 27

     

    VIEWS ON NATO MEMBERSHIP

    In favour: 39
    Against: 13
    Don’t know: 48

     

    VIEWS ON FRACKING

    In favour: 13
    Against: 39
    Don’t know: 48

     

    VIEWS ON NUCLEAR POWER

    In favour: 20
    Against: 32
    Don’t know: 48

     

    PREFERRED NATIONALITY

    Scottish (independent): 42
    British: 20
    Don’t know: 38

     

    ON THE ABOLITION OF THE BARNETT FORMULA
    (General populace figures)

    More likely to vote Yes: 45 (27)
    More likely to vote No: (5)

    No change: (54)

    Don’t know: 40 (15)

     

    REACTION TO THE CAMPAIGN SO FAR
    (Full sample)

    Much more Yes: (18)
    Slightly more Yes: 32 (12)

    NET = 36%


    No change: 54 (55)


    Slightly more No: (6)
    Much more No: (9)

    NET = 10%

     

    ———————————

    ON LEADER APPROVAL
    (Full sample)

    Alex Salmond +36 (+15)
    Nicola Sturgeon +34 (+12)

     

    CONFIDENCE IN THE SCOTTISH PEOPLE

    Would make a success of independence: 68
    Would not make a success of independence: 3
    Don’t know: 29

     

    "Undecided voters believe in Scotland. They’re greener, more left-wing, more republican and less militaristic than the Scottish electorate as a whole. They’re mostly Labour and SNP voters – almost evenly split, but they trust Alex Salmond vastly more than Alistair Darling and Johann Lamont.

    They’re ready and willing to be won over, if the Yes camp is up to the job."

     

    See WoS for more discussion.

    Edited by scottish skier
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Keele, North Staffs
  • Location: Near Keele, North Staffs

    Every vote will matter in 2015 to stop Cameron winning, whether it is Right wingers voting UKIP or Scots voting SNP. I don't want that chunk of seats, which would return maybe 1 Tory at the max, lost in the final reckoning.

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Highland Scotland
  • Location: Highland Scotland

    Every vote will matter in 2015 to stop Cameron winning, whether it is Right wingers voting UKIP or Scots voting SNP. I don't want that chunk of seats, which would return maybe 1 Tory at the max, lost in the final reckoning.

    England (like Scotland)gets the government England votes for. I want Scotland to get the government it votes for, whether or not it's a government I agree with - it's a fundamental democratic principle.
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: New York City
  • Location: New York City

    Ian Brown, on 28 Oct 2013 - 14:45, said:Every vote will matter in 2015 to stop Cameron winning, whether it is Right wingers voting UKIP or Scots voting SNP. I don't want that chunk of seats, which would return maybe 1 Tory at the max, lost in the final reckoning.

    Out of curiosity how would you feel if Labour were prevented getting a majority by the Scottish voting SNP instead of Labour?
    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    Out of curiosity how would you feel if Labour were prevented getting a majority by the Scottish voting SNP instead of Labour?

     

    Keeping in mind of course that Labour hate the SNP more than the Tories so they'd not form a coalition with the SNP (this is common practice in Scotland, i.e. Labour-Tory coalitions at council level to keep out the centrist/left leaning SNP). Rather, the SNP would need to deal with the Tories to try and achieve what they had been elected to do by the Scottish people... (as per post Holyrood 2007 where the similarly yellow flag waving liberals refused a coalition with the SNP and alongside Labour regularly voted against SNP bills and budgets meaning the SNP needed to work with the Tories quite commonly to get stuff done).

    Edited by scottish skier
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest
    This topic is now closed to further replies.
    • Recently Browsing   0 members

      No registered users viewing this page.

    ×
    ×
    • Create New...