Jump to content

Scottish Politics 2011-2017


Recommended Posts

Aye, positive for the Yes campaign.

 

Record high Yes from TNS repeated and the slightly higher no in the last one does look like being a random sampling variation.

 

To add...

 

Certain to vote ex DK

Yes 45% (+4)

No 55% (-4)

 

No starting to run out of 'friendly' pollsters.

 

One thing I'll add is that historically (all polls going back through devolution), DK correlates with Yes strongly. Zero correlation between No and DK.

 

That means, at least in polls, when DK actually shift it is invariably to Yes. Makes sense as if you are saying 'DK', you have already in principle rejected the union status quo.

 

The very high DK in TNS - which is likely associated with a shy Yes due to the knock your door / face to face approach as discussed - says there's all to play for.

 

As is we now have 4/6 saying 'Yes will at least give No a good run for its money'. 1/6 Yougov remains No friendly with it's unrepresentative sampling and questionable methods. Remaining 1/6 MORI lies in the middle; showed a swing to Yes with 50/50 for men finally but not reported in a while.

 

----

 

That Bella article is top notch.

 

Vote No and you've no right to complain about Westminster. None. 

Edited by scottish skier
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 30.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • scottish 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

Utterly inane Labour survey for you to complete:

 

http://action.labour.org.uk/index.php/scotland-survey

 

e.g.

 

Posted Image

 

Whit?

 

The last Q is this:

 

The thought of Alex Salmond winning in the referendum makes me feel…
 
like dancing as if it’s 1999 again.
 
with my answer.
 
Have fun!
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure if it's just my age (early 20s) or the fact that we're from the Highlands or male, but of my group of friends from school (17 or so of us), 13 of us are yes, 2 are undecided and 2 are no (a few have recently moved from no to yes). I've been hearing that Better Together are having a tough time in Inverness gathering support, especially from the young.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All the celebrity stuff, from both sides, is pointless noise as far as I'm concerned. No way am I going to make a decision of such importance because someone who's managed to get thier face on TV or can kick a ball tells me to.

Exactly what I was thinking!   I would prefer to hear compilations from both sides where I can compare the opinions of an assortment of Scottish people.

Interesting that at the moment I am in Kent and have a few friends down here. Been out most evenings socialising and not once has anyone asked me what I think or how I intend to vote. The subject has never even been raised. I don't think the majority of ordinary people across the border could care less quite frankly because they don't appear to be losing any sleep over it. 

Edited by Blitzen
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure if it's just my age (early 20s) or the fact that we're from the Highlands or male, but of my group of friends from school (17 or so of us), 13 of us are yes, 2 are undecided and 2 are no (a few have recently moved from no to yes). I've been hearing that Better Together are having a tough time in Inverness gathering support, especially from the young.

Well rab , i have family from ayr to Kirriemuir and they are all either yes or dont know. similarly at work and social circles. There seems to be a similar pattern being discussed either online or by people you speak to so the question is where is this majority  no vote? Maybe its us who are completely out of touch and we will see on the day.

 

To my knowledge there is just one no voter on this forum and the rest are either yes or havent said so far. Surely the  majority no vote would be making an impression online , and as the member of many forums its not the case. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly what I was thinking!   I would prefer to hear compilations from both sides where I can compare the opinions of an assortment of Scottish people.Interesting that at the moment I am in Kent and have a few friends down here. Been out most evenings socialising and not once has anyone asked me what I think or how I intend to vote. The subject has never even been raised. I don't think the majority of ordinary people across the border could care less quite frankly because tlhey don't appear to be losing any sleep over it.

You are probably right.The Anglo Scots up here mainly MPs on the gravy train are desperately trying to keep their jobs.That's why their arguments are often so personal an often I logical.Some have even stated that they don't want independence even if Scotland would be better off.This is about themselves not Scotland they see Salmond as a threat to their employment
Link to post
Share on other sites

Another E.U story  , this time positive for the yes side

 

http://newsnetscotland.com/index.php/referendum/9481-brussels-signals-backing-for-indy-scotland-over-continued-eu-membership

 

 
SUNDAY, 20 JULY 2014 00:17
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image
 

Posted Image  By a Newsnet reporter 
 
A newly independent Scotland would be 'unlikely' to be excluded from the European Union, sources in Brussels have told a Sunday newspaper.
 
According to Scotland on Sunday, a Yes vote in September's independence referendum would see Scotland treated as a 'special case' as negotiations began to officially recognise the new state as a member of the EU in its own right.

The newspaper reports that New European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker is "sympathetic" to an independent Scotland continuing as a member of the European Union. 

As a part of the UK, Scotland has been part of the EU for forty years and already meets the "core EU requirements" for member states.  Sources have reportedly told the newspaper that Scotland would be treated as a "special and separate case", circumventing many of the the normal rules of application.

The newspaper quotes a high-ranking EU official saying that Junker "would not want Scotland to be kept out". The source said: "He'd be sympathetic as someone who is from a smaller country as he’ll understand the obstacles that can be put in the way of less powerful member states."

The news will come as a significant blow to the anti-independence campaign.  Unionists have consistently claimed that a newly independent Scotland would find itself out of the EU and forced to re-apply for entry

 

Here the story in the newspaper that originally reported it

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/independence-juncker-sympathetic-to-scotland-bid-1-3482266

 

Interesting ,i wonder how much this is a dig at cameron. Barroso says no , juncker says yes. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm welsh/norwegian living in england. i want a scottish independence. you are such a rich beautiful country with a ton of luck. daffydd x

Thankyou for your sentiments cotswoldsnow. Very much appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that snp is letting Hamas militants into Scotland I have changed my vote to no. This is my personal opinion.

???I wasn't aware that the SNP was currently in charge of UK immigration policy. Link to a source story would be useful.
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

???I wasn't aware that the SNP was currently in charge of UK immigration policy. Link to a source story would be useful.

Well at least we know your politics now.One less right wing pro Israeli bigot won't do us any harm.The point stands however.Immigration is reserved to Westminster!Perhaps the red mist came down when you saw the pro Palestine march in Glasgow.Maybe if you stand back and see what Israel and the west is doing you would have a different perspective.Not sure that there were Hama's terrorist at a legal demo.Maybe you just think everyone who is against the US/Britain and Israel is a terrorist?I am disgusted with Obama and London at present allowing Israel to do as it pleases and breaking the human rights laws allover the place! Edited by November13
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am disgusted with Obama and London at present allowing Israel to do as it pleases and breaking the human rights laws allover the place!

Well said! This is one of the main reasons I think people should be very aware that voting 'NO' puts us all in a very precarious position! Oh the irony....'Better Together' is helping to force us apart!

That was a huge demo in London yesterday (which the BBC didn't cover)  and the only thing I can agree with George Galloway on is to stop paying my TV licence!

How anyone can contemplate staying part of this disgusting political set up is beyond me!

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://news.stv.tv/scotland/282157-scottish-hospitals-ready-to-treat-injured-gaza-violence-civilians/

 

Scotland's hospitals stand ready to treat civilians affected by violence in Gaza, the Scottish Government has said.
 
External Affairs Minister Humza Yousaf has written to British foreign secretary William Hague to express his concern at the violence on both sides of the conflict.
 
The Scottish Government has called for an immediate end to hostilities, including a cessation of both rocket attacks and air strikes to de-escalate the situation.

 

 
 
As has been noted by others, the Scottish Government can't help injured civilians unless the UK government lets them as the latter controls immigration.
 
I'm not aware of any restrictions on visas for Israeli militants / military travelling to the UK; as I understand it, they are free to travel to the UK without any visa.
 
Of course people in Israel are not in need of external hospital treatment as hardly anyone has been injured and Israel has top medical facilities unlike the Gaza Palestinian ghetto.
 
Sadly, as is so common the case, there is no military solution here. Rockets from Gaza are as unhelpful as the disproportionate response from Israel. And as usual, it's civilians that suffer the most. 
 
Anyway, the only bearing this has on the referendum is highlighting how Scotland can't choose its own stance in such matters.
 
Being part of the UK after all has allowed militants to come to Scotland and attempt to Bomb it (Glasgow Airport) as a response to Britain bombing civilians in the middle east.
 
Until the Glasgow attempted bombing, as far as I'm aware, Scotland has never suffered a terrorist attack. The IRA for example never bombed Scotland as it understood Scotland's position as not in control of British foreign policy. Islamic militants I'd imagine are less aware of this / more likely to see Scotland a legitimate British target. Independence would of course change that and whether Scotland was seen as an aggressor would be based on its own foreign policy.
 
---
 
As an aside, the irony is that if people have strong views on immigration (which the Gaza thing is not about at all, although it seems to have been linked too), they should vote Yes. At the moment, Scotland has no control over immigration. Anyone that votes for the union is voting for zero control of immigration to Scotland. Likewise no say on whether it is part of the EU or not. This is why e.g. UKIPs stance in Scotland makes no sense at all; 'Vote No for uncontrolled immigration and to have other countries decide whether you are in the EU or not'. Perplexing to say the least.
Edited by scottish skier
Link to post
Share on other sites

Meanwhile, another good reason to vote Yes.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-28390734

 

Scottish independence: Sir Harry Burns says Yes vote could be 'positive' for health.

 

A former chief medical officer has said Scottish independence could be "very positive" for the country's health.

 

Sir Harry Burns told BBC Scotland that people's health could be improved if they felt more in control of their lives.

He also said he feared for the way the health service was going in England.

...Speaking to the Crossfire programme on BBC Radio Scotland, Sir Harry said: "The question is, would people in an independent country feel more in control of their lives?

"If they did, then that would be very positive for their health. If people felt that they were able to engage more with local government, with central government and make choices more easily for themselves then that would improve their health."

He said the question of how independence would make people feel more in control would "depend very much on the political decisions that are made".

 

 

Governance can directly affect mental health levels, e.g.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2263690.stm

 

More suicides under Conservative rule
 
Australian scientists found the suicide rate in the country increased significantly when a Conservative government was in power.
 
And an analysis of figures in the UK seems to suggest a similar trend.

 

 

 

Of course in a 'dog eat dog' world, higher suicide rates would be expected as inequality increases and social mobility (the ability to move up the ladder and escape poverty) is reduced.

 

Britain now has one of the lowest levels of social mobility in the western world. You can work very hard, but your chances of 'getting on' in life as a result are much lower than in more moderate, socio-democratic countries, e.g.

 

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/perceived-social-mobility-do-we-think-that-money-buys-success/

 

Posted Image

Edited by scottish skier
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 
 
As has been noted by others, the Scottish Government can't help injured civilians unless the UK government lets them as the latter controls immigration.
 
I'm not aware of any restrictions on visas for Israeli militants / military travelling to the UK; as I understand it, they are free to travel to the UK without any visa.
 
Of course people in Israel are not in need of external hospital treatment as hardly anyone has been injured and Israel has top medical facilities unlike the Gaza Palestinian ghetto.
 
Sadly, as is so common the case, there is no military solution here. Rockets from Gaza are as unhelpful as the disproportionate response from Israel. And as usual, it's civilians that suffer the most. 
 
Anyway, the only bearing this has on the referendum is highlighting how Scotland can't choose its own stance in such matters.
 
Being part of the UK after all has allowed militants to come to Scotland and attempt to Bomb it (Glasgow Airport) as a response to Britain bombing civilians in the middle east.
 
Until the Glasgow attempted bombing, as far as I'm aware, Scotland has never suffered a terrorist attack. The IRA for example never bombed Scotland as it understood Scotland's position as not in control of British foreign policy. Islamic militants I'd imagine are less aware of this / more likely to see Scotland a legitimate British target. Independence would of course change that and whether Scotland was seen as an aggressor would be based on its own foreign policy.
 
---
 
As an aside, the irony is that if people have strong views on immigration (which the Gaza thing is not about at all, although it seems to have been linked too), they should vote Yes. At the moment, Scotland has no control over immigration. Anyone that votes for the union is voting for zero control of immigration to Scotland. Likewise no say on whether it is part of the EU or not. This is why e.g. UKIPs stance in Scotland makes no sense at all; 'Vote No for uncontrolled immigration and to have other countries decide whether you are in the EU or not'. Perplexing to say the least.

 

Fair point SS.  I feel a bit of an idiot this morning. Should not go near the internet at stupid oclock in morning when intoxicicated.  I should also apologise to YES Moray Coast as told them I was having nothing more to do with them.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair point SS.  I feel a bit of an idiot this morning. Should not go near the internet at stupid oclock in morning when intoxicicated.  I should also apologise to YES Moray Coast as told them I was having nothing more to do with them.

 

We all know that headlines often tell the exact opposite of the story when it comes to Scotland and the SNP.

 

However, in the tense situation we are in, even I have come across articles and been initially caught thinking 'Eh, what are they doing!' with respect e.g. to the SNP, then of course checking it out and finding I'm being lied to once more by the MSM.

 

Of course in terms of any policy for an iScotland, be that on foreign affairs, immigration or whatever, people will get to vote for the government they want with the policies they wish in an iScotland and that's the key.

 

A vote for independence is not a vote for any political party, but a vote for your vote in elections to count towards how Scotland is governed.

 

At the moment, >60% of votes in UKGE's in Scotland are just binned without being counted, meaning Scotland's population has just 4% representation in Westminster.

 

http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/wasted-votes/

 

 In contrast, the Holyrood PR-type system is ~95% representation on average, with only tiny vote shares for the myriad of minnow parties not resulting in an MSP.

 

However, even for smaller parties, local support can get you in. Margo got just 6.7% of the regional list in the Lothian yet was elected as an MSP. Nationwide her % would be tiny.

Edited by scottish skier
Link to post
Share on other sites

Colsuth surely you are not shallow enough or fickle enough to change your opinion about your own nation based on a media spun headline.There is also a very basic and worrying gap in your knowledge about Scotland and Israel.Why did you change your mind so quickly given that Israel is breaking international law and Palestine happens to be in the right.Are you now agreeing that Israel is wrong or just admitting you didn't know immigration was reserved to Westminster? Very very worrying that some of my country men are so thin skinned.Also why would you not want Scotland to be independent based on the possible decision on one subject of one party.The basic reason for independence is to elect a Scottish government of the choosing of the people.Its not a vote for a particular policy or party.The country can only be shaped after independence.Using your logic because I disagree with the SNP on the monarchy would mean I voted no.We should not personalise this and instead look at what we are being asked to do in September and that is to free our nation from London.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I should note that a quick look online shows various ridiculous stories over the years about how the SNP are funding / supporting Hamas.

 

Yes, of course they are. They also require the sacrifice of the first born. It's how they get elected. Their support for terrorist organisations was a key manifesto pledge and it was them that masterminded the invasion of Iraq.

 

What happenend to Colsuth after a few beers is what the British state wants - poeople who support independence getting doubts and fighting amongst themselves.

 

Such is the nature of the British state. It rules by division. Catholic vs protestant. Public sector vs private sector. Middle class vs poor. Working poor vs poor struggling to find work. Working poor vs disabled. Natives vs immigrants. 

 

Associate the words 'muslim' and 'terrorist' as much as possible. Associate 'polish' with 'taking British jobs'. Associate 'illegal' with 'immigrant', 'benefits claimants' with 'fraudulent', 'benefits' with 'cushy lifestyle'... etc, all aided and abetted by the right-wing press.

 

Divide and rule.

 

The British parties hate democracy as it gives a voice to people who don't have money. They hate the SNP (and other pro-indy parties) as the SNP can't be bought and are giving people a democratic voice / attempting to unify them.

Edited by scottish skier
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Colsuth surely you are not shallow enough or fickle enough to change your opinion about your own nation based on a media spun headline.There is also a very basic and worrying gap in your knowledge about Scotland and Israel.Why did you change your mind so quickly given that Israel is breaking international law and Palestine happens to be in the right.Are you now agreeing that Israel is wrong or just admitting you didn't know immigration was reserved to Westminster? Very very worrying that some of my country men are so thin skinned.Also why would you not want Scotland to be independent based on the possible decision on one subject of one party.The basic reason for independence is to elect a Scottish government of the choosing of the people.Its not a vote for a particular policy or party.The country can only be shaped after independence.Using your logic because I disagree with the SNP on the monarchy would mean I voted no.We should not personalise this and instead look at what we are being asked to do in September and that is to free our nation from London.

I am not pro Israel or anti Palestinian.  I dont believe I'm fickle or thin skinned.  ( although shouldn't believe any pub talk)

An article yesterday on Palestinian refugees was spun round to say that an iScotland would have an open door policy allowing hundreds of thousands of refugees in.  I don't believe Scotland could cope with this.

Ps I'm still voting YES

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's OK you are entitled to change your mind its not my vote.However if Palestine refugees came to Scotland I would be delighted not frightened.Surely the first job of any independent nation is to make the world know that its a welcoming country.Refugees coming here is not the worry.Its Westminster taking us into another middle east war we should be worried about.Remember that my ancestors were economic refugees from Eire and that was when it was still under British Rule in the 1890s!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Now more pertinent to the discussion..
 
Comres UK poll:
 
"Wisdom of crowds"
 
Ed Miliband is likely to be prime minister after the next election
 
July 2014 (from May 2013)
Agree
21(-10)%
Disagree
44(+7)%
Don’t know
32(+3)%
 
There's been a solid rise in 'disagree' and fall in 'agree' over the past year.
 
Scotland (fair sized susbet with VI a little unfavourable the SNP based on current running averages):
 
20% Agree
42% Disagree
 
This agrees with ongoing yougov patterns for satisfaction. Scotland's opinion of party leader performance in this morning's Yougov (and this is for a poll which heavily down weights SNP respondents and boosts Labour / Tory / Lib due to 2010 weighting).
 
Dave
32% doing well
64% badly

Ed
21% doing well
72% badly
 
All the evidence would suggest Scots don't rate Ed and don't see Labour winning the next GE. The leader of the Labour party rated lower than the Tory leader is quite extraordinary for Scotland since Thatcher.
 
Of course polls show the prospect of a Tory win giving Yes a likely comfortable majority, although I've said before I think this is more a case of 'adding a justification to a sensitive question allows people to be more honest without needing to offer their own justifications' phenomenon.
 
More from Comres (Scotland respondents):
 
Q6. Do you agree or disagree with the following statements?
[Westminster] Politicians have probably covered up child sex abuse by other senior politicians in the past
 
77% Agree
6% disagree
 
I have confidence that the inquiry appointed by the Prime Minister will reveal and make public the truth about allegations of child sex abuse by politicians in the past
27% agree
45% disagree
 
Nuff said.
Edited by scottish skier
Link to post
Share on other sites

Leaving aside the BBC Scotland's News front page misleading headline that might leave people thinking 'Currency Union a dead parrot' was a statement of fact or at least a pronouncement from someone significant, here we have a cross (unionist) party committee of Scottish MPs collectively acting against Scotland's interest.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-28399968

The Scottish Affairs Committee is being boycotted by the SNP, and is currently comprised of pro-UK politicians from the three main Westminster parties.

I might be wrong, but is that not a complete misrepresentation? Is the SNP boycotting it - I thought it was simply the committee nominated a Unionist replacement when the SNP member resigned after being threatened with 'a doing'! So bullying a member off a parliamentary committee with threats of violence now counts as a boycott by the victim!
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...