Jump to content
Cold?
Local
Radar
Snow?

Scottish Politics 2011-2017


Recommended Posts

Posted
  • Location: Highland Scotland
  • Location: Highland Scotland

    The label "Project Fear" is used to pass off GENUINE fears as just lies and manipulation.

    The term "project fear" was used internally by Better Together to describe their strategy and it's frankly been the most accurate and perceptive thing to come out of Better Together through the entire campaign.

    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: Gilesgate Moor, Durham City
  • Location: Gilesgate Moor, Durham City

    The term "project fear" was used internally by Better Together to describe their strategy and it's frankly been the most accurate and perceptive thing to come out of Better Together through the entire campaign.

     

     

     

    ::sigh::

     

    OK: "Project Fear" as it is now used by yessers.

     

    Though I'm sure if you look hard enough you can find a few more hairs to split to avoid addressing the substantive point.

    Edited by lorenzo
    Removing reference to deleted post.
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: falkirk, scotland, 16.505m, 54.151ft above sea level
  • Weather Preferences: dry sunny average summers and really cold snowy winters
  • Location: falkirk, scotland, 16.505m, 54.151ft above sea level
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE

    I agree that both sides are guilty of manipulating things. It's politics of course and why should people expect some morality to break out, it's all about winning for both sides.

     

    If a lie works both sides will have no qualms in doing that. There is a tendency for supporters on both sides to just believe what reinforces their view. I've seen plenty of hot air from both Yes and No and certainly don't buy this Luke Skywalker versus Darth Vader, good against evil portrayal !

     

    People are looking for reasons to validate their decision as to which way to vote, fundamentally you either throw caution to the wind and say go for it or you shrug your shoulders and think I really don't care that much, independence for me isn't that important, I'm more worried about risk and uncertainty.

     

    If people were just honest about it they'd just say I don't give a frig about the economics, my heart says Yes and I can't easiliy quantify why but they're forced to tick a box in a poll to validate their decision

     

    Equally the No supporter just might not really care that much about independence, they might just be more risk averse and worried about the future.

     

    Both decisions are equally valid, either side trying to portray the other as less valid or demeaning their intention to vote a certain way is both insulting and shows a complete lack of empathy and understanding.

     

    As an onlooker I totally understand why people would want to vote Yes or No.

     

    I would be disappointed if Scotland didn't vote Yes but it wouldn't surprise me because "fear of change" is a pretty strong emotion, I've been there myself and I'm sure we all have at times.

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Carryduff, County Down 420ft ASL
  • Location: Carryduff, County Down 420ft ASL

    Ah! So you mean you understood, but you disagree. 

     

    Might have been easier just to say that.

     

    ::sigh::

     

    OK: "Project Fear" as it is now used by yessers.

     

    Though I'm sure if you look hard enough you can find a few more hairs to split to avoid addressing the substantive point.

    I notice you use the term yessers. This is a derogatory term of the No campaign which has its roots in North American slavery, making out that Yes voters are being scared into voting yes. Shameful.

    Listen carefully to these lyrics and maybe you will understand..

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Inbhir Nis / Inverness - 636 ft asl
  • Weather Preferences: Freezing fog, frost, snow, sunshine.
  • Location: Inbhir Nis / Inverness - 636 ft asl

    Erm....because they are.

    Yeh, good point actually.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Inbhir Nis / Inverness - 636 ft asl
  • Weather Preferences: Freezing fog, frost, snow, sunshine.
  • Location: Inbhir Nis / Inverness - 636 ft asl

    You don't understand the words "exactly the same"?  :fool:

     

    To paraphrase in simpler words:

     

    "The fact is, both sides engage in the same mixture of a) manipulation/scaremongering/twisting of things; and b) truth/speaking straight".

    Bit of a happy coincidence that both sides of the campaign, encompassing tens of thousands of people, just so happen to tell the same amount of truth, measure for measure.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Calgary, Canada (1230m asl)
  • Weather Preferences: Wind driven falling snow
  • Location: Calgary, Canada (1230m asl)

    How clear can i make it from this evening - some Scots prefer to stay as part of UK for their own v good reasons.

    "Yes" voters - dont chastise them for deciding so. Their view is as valid as yours. I think it's called democracy.

     

    As I said earlier, each to their own.

     

    It's interesting that you use the phrase "for their own v good reasons", the overwhelming feeling I get is that No voters are doing it for their own very personal reasons, their argument is usually along the lines of "I'm going to lose..." "I'm worried about my finances...". Whereas Yes voters quite often argue "We can be better..." "Our future will be brighter". I think someone touched on this earlier in the thread when talking about a BT meeting, or did I read it on Facebook?

     

    The No campaign seems to be a collection of individuals, whereas the Yes side are far more about the movement than the individual.

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Carryduff, County Down 420ft ASL
  • Location: Carryduff, County Down 420ft ASL

    Nail on head Catch My Drift. The No campaign is about the needs of the individual, the Yes campaign is about the needs of us all.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE

    Nail on head Catch My Drift. The No campaign is about the needs of the individual, the Yes campaign is about the needs of us all.

    I disagree, this is judging others because we can't understand why they feel a certain way. What if a No supporter believes No is better for Scotland, is that individual?

     

    Are we to believe given recent polling that theres been an outbreak of altruism and self-sacrifice effecting nearly half the Scottish population?

     

    There are many facets to the Scottish referendum which are much more interesting than where the debate seems to have ended up.Which has been too economically driven IMO.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Gilesgate Moor, Durham City
  • Location: Gilesgate Moor, Durham City

    I agree that both sides are guilty of manipulating things. It's politics of course and why should people expect some morality to break out, it's all about winning for both sides.

     

    If a lie works both sides will have no qualms in doing that. There is a tendency for supporters on both sides to just believe what reinforces their view. I've seen plenty of hot air from both Yes and No and certainly don't buy this Luke Skywalker versus Darth Vader, good against evil portrayal !

     

    People are looking for reasons to validate their decision as to which way to vote, fundamentally you either throw caution to the wind and say go for it or you shrug your shoulders and think I really don't care that much, independence for me isn't that important, I'm more worried about risk and uncertainty.

     

    If people were just honest about it they'd just say I don't give a frig about the economics, my heart says Yes and I can't easiliy quantify why but they're forced to tick a box in a poll to validate their decision

     

    Equally the No supporter just might not really care that much about independence, they might just be more risk averse and worried about the future.

     

    Both decisions are equally valid, either side trying to portray the other as less valid or demeaning their intention to vote a certain way is both insulting and shows a complete lack of empathy and understanding.

     

    As an onlooker I totally understand why people would want to vote Yes or No.

     

    I would be disappointed if Scotland didn't vote Yes but it wouldn't surprise me because "fear of change" is a pretty strong emotion, I've been there myself and I'm sure we all have at times.

    Great post, Nick.

    Bit of a happy coincidence that both sides of the campaign, encompassing tens of thousands of people, just so happen to tell the same amount of truth, measure for measure.

     

    There you go... yet more hair splitting to ignore the substantive point. It's like saying to a seven-year-old "Give me 2 seconds"... and getting the reply when you turn up "see, you weren't 2 seconds".

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Inbhir Nis / Inverness - 636 ft asl
  • Weather Preferences: Freezing fog, frost, snow, sunshine.
  • Location: Inbhir Nis / Inverness - 636 ft asl

    Great post, Nick.

     

    There you go... yet more hair splitting to ignore the substantive point. It's like saying to a seven-year-old "Give me 2 seconds"... and getting the reply when you turn up "see, you weren't 2 seconds".

    You should follow his example.

    • Like 2
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Gilesgate Moor, Durham City
  • Location: Gilesgate Moor, Durham City

    I notice you use the term yessers. This is a derogatory term of the No campaign which has its roots in North American slavery, making out that Yes voters are being scared into voting yes. Shameful.

    Listen carefully to these lyrics and maybe you will understand..

    Read the term in other places, thought it was just a good shorthand. Wasn't meaning to imply anything about being scared into voting. 

    Now... the substantive point? So far that's 3 of you who have found every means possible to miss the point and change the issue.

    You should follow his example.

    Whose? Someone who splits hairs in order to avoid addressing a point? Why would I want to do that?

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Inbhir Nis / Inverness - 636 ft asl
  • Weather Preferences: Freezing fog, frost, snow, sunshine.
  • Location: Inbhir Nis / Inverness - 636 ft asl

    Now... the substantive point? So far that's 3 of you who have found every means possible to miss the point and change the issue.

    Your point that both employ facts and fear equally?

    I think that's an absurd claim. How did you quantify the respective figures? Which criteria did you employ to compartmentalise each unit of fear? Dollars of terror, utils of joy?

    One is very likely more at fault than the other. Let the debate commence as to which.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Calgary, Canada (1230m asl)
  • Weather Preferences: Wind driven falling snow
  • Location: Calgary, Canada (1230m asl)

    I disagree, this is judging others because we can't understand why they feel a certain way. What if a No supporter believes No is better for Scotland, is that individual?

     

    Are we to believe given recent polling that theres been an outbreak of altruism and self-sacrifice effecting nearly half the Scottish population?

     

    There are many facets to the Scottish referendum which are much more interesting than where the debate seems to have ended up.Which has been too economically driven IMO.

     

    It's rare to hear a No supporter argue along the lines of "I'm voting No because Scotland is amazing" or "We're doing very well in Scotland". All I'm hearing is "I...." and "me...." from No supporters. They seem to want a No vote without any other outcome, "let's vote NO then that's that, back to normal life". There's only a NO vote, no other dream.

     

    There's a togetherness about Yes voters, it's hard to explain to someone who's not directly a part of it. Maybe that's my imagination? Anyone else feeling it?

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Calgary, Canada (1230m asl)
  • Weather Preferences: Wind driven falling snow
  • Location: Calgary, Canada (1230m asl)

    Perhaps we could also concentrate on debating Scottish politics as per the thread title, rather than ripping into each other, although I'm now being a hypocrite :diablo:

    Edited by lorenzo
    Removing references to deleted post.
    • Like 7
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Inbhir Nis / Inverness - 636 ft asl
  • Weather Preferences: Freezing fog, frost, snow, sunshine.
  • Location: Inbhir Nis / Inverness - 636 ft asl

    Right, to make this crystal: Nick Sussex has managed to participate in this threads for months without any hint of ill-feeling breaking out. I do not agree with the ridiculous assertion that both sides are somehow magically equal in the desemination of fear, based on legitimate critical reasoning, can you refute that without the use of ad hominem reasoning?

    Edited by lorenzo
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: @scotlandwx
  • Weather Preferences: Crystal Clear High Pressure & Blue Skies
  • Location: @scotlandwx

    Just deleted a bunch of bickering posts and edited down a couple of posts to get rid of references to other deleted posts.

     

    Looks readable again.

     

    Be nice to each other, and stay on topic, versus picking apart each others posting styles / skills at English language interpretation / level of intellect etc !

     

    Let's continue...

    • Like 3
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

     I do not agree with the ridiculous assertion that both sides are somehow magically equal in the desemination of fear

     

    Polling data would support that. The Yes campaign and those involved in it are out in front by a country mile in terms of trust etc, with the No campaign winning on negativity in a big way. I mean even No supporters have criticised No for negativity / ridiculous scare stories.

     

    This from No friendly MORI sums things up well:

     

    scottish-public-opinion-monitor-effectiv

     

    scottish-public-opinion-monitor-effectiv

     

    scottish-public-opinion-monitor-effectiv

     

    Certainly, it is not in doubt that Yes have presented the more attractive case in a more effective manner, gaining significantly more trust. It's just a question of whether that will translate into votes.

     

    ---

     

    Here's a list of No campaign stories:

     

    - YOU’LL PROBABLY DIE OF CANCER
     
    - SCOTLAND WILL BE BOMBED BY ENGLAND
     
    - YOUR CHILDREN WILL BE KIDNAPPED
     
    - THE ECONOMY WILL BE DESTROYED
     
    - THE EDINBURGH ZOO PANDAS WILL BE CONFISCATED
     
    - WE’LL ALL BE MURDERED BY TERRORISTS…
     
    - …AND EVEN IF YOU ONLY GET INJURED YOU’LL BLEED TO DEATH
     
    - WOMEN ALL OVER THE WORLD WILL BE RAPED
     
    - YOU WON’T BE ALLOWED TO LISTEN TO BRITISH MUSIC…
     
    - …AND YOU WON’T FEEL AS CONNECTED TO TENNIS AT WIMBLEDON
     
    - WE’LL HAVE TO DRIVE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ROAD
     
    - YOU’LL NEVER WIN THE LOTTERY
     
    - ENGLAND WILL BUILD A NEW HADRIAN’S WALL
     
    - YOU’LL NEED A PASSPORT TO GO TO GARELOCHHEAD
     
    - ORKNEY AND SHETLAND WILL FORM A BREAKAWAY COUNTRY
     
    - NOBODY WILL KNOW SCOTLAND’S INTERNATIONAL DIALLING CODE…
     
    - …AND YOU WON’T BE ABLE TO AFFORD PHONE CALLS ANYWAY
     
    - YOU WON’T GET ANY HOLIDAYS EVER
     
    - WE MIGHT HAVE TO GET A WEIRD-LOOKING NEW QUEEN
     
    - WE’LL BE BARRED FROM JOINING THE EU…
     
    - …BUT WE’LL HAVE TO PAY THE EU A FORTUNE, AS WE’LL BE TOO RICH
     
    - YOU WON’T BE ABLE TO WATCH ‘STRICTLY COME DANCING’…
     
    - …OR ‘DOCTOR WHO’
     
    - WE’LL GET NUKED AND NOBODY WILL CARE
     
    - YOUR PENSION WILL BE SLASHED
     
    - YOUR FRIENDS AND RELATIVES WILL BECOME FOREIGN
     
    - WE WON’T HAVE THE HORSERACE BETTING LEVY APPEAL TRIBUNAL
     
    - THE WHOLE OF WESTERN CIVILISATION AND DEMOCRACY WILL FALL TO THE FORCES OF DARKNESS IN A GLOBE-SPANNING CATACLYSM
     
    Links to stories:
     
    Edited by scottish skier
    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Gilesgate Moor, Durham City
  • Location: Gilesgate Moor, Durham City

    Right, to make this crystal: Nick Sussex has managed to participate in this threads for months without any hint of ill-feeling breaking out. I do not agree with the ridiculous assertion that both sides are somehow magically equal in the desemination of fear, based on legitimate critical reasoning, can you refute that without the use of ad hominem reasoning?

     

    They're politicians. Salmond does it with more arrogance, joviality, and charm. But all political sides engage in this sort of "selling". The "520 workers only with Trident" line being one example of a skewed and less than straight presentation. Both sides take reports that favour their position and fail to offer an objective analysis that takes in all sides. The fact is there are many uncertainties about how things would turn out. Yet both sides present a remarkably assured front about what WILL happen.

     

    People who support YES seem to get rather tetchy at the idea that their side engages in the same sort of political posturing and presentation as every other politician. Not sure why.

    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 interesting thing about YesScotland is that it isn't run by politicians, but rather is grassroots and grew from the ground up.

     

    It was initiated by some politicians and non-politicians, but was designed to take on a life of it's own; something it successfully did.

     

    In contrast No is very much top-down politician controlled with very little grassroots, so much so it needs to bus people up from England and pay them to hand out leaflets. It has heavily relied on MSM support / compliance for its message, rather than the town-hall meeting style of Yes.

     

    This is probably a large factor in the differing perceptions of respective campaigns. People are wary of politicians (and both sides have varying levels of bluster etc) but much less so of real people with their wee Yes stall at the Sunday market etc.

     

    The development of pro-indy websites is a classic example.. Wings over Scotland, Bella Caledonia, National Collective, Newsnet Scotland; these grew themselves to gain huge readerships rivalling mainstream titles completely independently of politicians.

    Edited by scottish skier
    • Like 2
    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Any polls out today, as it seems weird that so close to the referendum that polling data is non existent...is this normal?  Surely, the public need to know what the mood of the voters is taking the country. I am genuinely worried about democracy here and no conspiracy theories intended.   

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Gilesgate Moor, Durham City
  • Location: Gilesgate Moor, Durham City

    The interesting thing about YesScotland is that it isn't run by politicians, but rather is grassroots and grew from the ground up.

     

    It was initiated by some politicians and non-politicians, but was designed to take on a life of it's own; something it successfully did.

     

    In contrast No is very much top-down politician controlled with very little grassroots, so much so it needs to bus people up from England and pay them to hand out leaflets. It has heavily relied on MSM support / compliance for its message, rather than the town-hall meeting style of Yes.

     

    This is probably a large factor in the differing perceptions of respective campaigns. People are wary of politicians (and both sides have varying levels of bluster etc) but much less so of real people with their wee Yes stall at the Sunday market etc.

     

    The development of pro-indy websites is a classic example.. Wings over Scotland, Bella Caledonia, National Collective, Newsnet Scotland; these grew themselves to gain huge readerships rivalling mainstream titles completely independently of politicians.

     

    All true... but they often take their lead from the SNP and the analysis offered by them. None of the groups you mention present things in an objective light. Directly or indirectly they still present a partisan view of topics related to independence, as is natural. To pretend that one side is immune from this and only interested in presenting the "objective truth" is not very credible.

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

     To pretend that one side is immune from this and only interested in presenting the "objective truth" is not very credible.

     

    Who said that?

     

    I'd also suggest you'd find supporters and members of other poticial parties which support indy (Greens, Labour for Indy, SSP, Libs for Indy, solidarity etc) would disagree with you on them taking the SNPs lead.

     

    Margo (RIP) and Jim are classic examples.

    Edited by scottish skier
    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Irlam
  • Location: Irlam

    What if....

    ...the margin between yes and no is less than 10% say 53% no and 47% yes?

    Will that end the independence debate? I don't think it will, it is not decisive, I can see another referendum in a decade or so time if the SNP are in power despite talk that this is a one off.

    Peculiar things referenda because if it were 53% Yes, that would kill off the debate, the Yes people will say they have got their majority mandate and go ahead with independence but the other way around with 53% No, the Yes will still argue their cause and will want another referendum a few years down the line after they have "educated" the populace.

    ......the margin is just a couple of % points between the two? A huge decision to be made with a bare majority.

    .....the vote is No, should Scottish MPs be still allowed to vote on issues that don't affect them, the West Lothian Question? That has got to be resolved for me, we saw this10 years ago with tuition fees when the government of the day won because their Scottish members voted for it even though it didn't affect their constituents.

    the vote is Yes, surely you can't have a general election in 2015? You would have Scottish MPs who will then disappear in 2016. You have to have another election in 2016.

    Talk about Scotland having a government enforced on them has been offset somewhat by devolution. However, there is a democratic deficit, Scotland and Northern Ireland have their parliaments, Wales their assembly. Where's England's? England hasn't got an assembly nor it's own parliament.

    Labour and Tory have got a lot to answer for allowing this constitutional mess to happen. The Tories for letting their representation wither on the vine, they had 50% of the Scottish 60 years ago! Labour claiming that devolution would lance the independence boil in 1997. It did no such thing, they have taken the Scottish Labour vote for granted.

    Edited by Weather-history
    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest
    This topic is now closed to further replies.
    ×
    ×
    • Create New...