# Scots indy results thread



## DotCommunist (Sep 17, 2014)

tomorrows the day. Thought I'd start this in advance to detail the results/discuss it in realtime while glued to the telebox all night.

otherwise its spreading the convo over 4 (5?) existing threads.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 17, 2014)

Have a good thread.  I'll be having a small house party to watch the results.

But here's to your health.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 17, 2014)

I applaud your thread but deplore your choice of forum


----------



## ska invita (Sep 17, 2014)

Feeling excited and emotional down here in London - I cant imagine what it must feel like in Scotland


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Sep 17, 2014)

weepiper said:


> I applaud your thread but deplore your choice of forum


Yes, it might have to be moved.


----------



## LiamO (Sep 18, 2014)

weepiper said:


> I applaud your thread but deplore your choice of forum



Well, hopefully, you can open the first one in  World Politics about 6am on Friday!


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 18, 2014)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Yes, it might have to be moved.




do as thou wilt shall be the whole of the modlaw


----------



## 8ball (Sep 18, 2014)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Yes, it might have to be moved.



Careful, now.


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 18, 2014)

Are there going to be declarations as the night goes on tomorrow?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Sep 18, 2014)

It's "UK-relevant" certainly.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 18, 2014)

lizzieloo said:


> Are there going to be declarations as the night goes on tomorrow?


Yes, starting about 1-2am


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 18, 2014)

danny la rouge said:


> Have a good thread.  I'll be having a small house party to watch the results.
> 
> But here's to your health.




my brother is down tomorrow to stop over for band practise. He comes here, picks up his music gear then goes corby for band practise. When he gets back I normally cook him a meal and put on a dave-friendly film (must be an action thriller). I just told him on the phone that there will be no film tomorrow because I'm watching scots indy. 'Will there still be cheeseburger and chips?'

yes david. There will still be cheeseburger and chips.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 18, 2014)

danny la rouge said:


> Have a good thread.  I'll be having a small house party to watch the results.
> 
> But here's to your health.




I note that in line with the fabled scots parsimony you have proffered but a single.

It'll be doubles come the Yes vote. All round.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 18, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> my brother is down tomorrow to stop over for band practise. He comes here, picks up his music gear then goes corby for band practise. When he gets back I normally cook him a meal and put on a dave-friendly film (must be an action thriller). I just told him on the phone that there will be no film tomorrow because I'm watching scots indy. 'Will there still be cheeseburger and chips?'
> 
> yes david. There will still be cheeseburger and chips.


Not if _they _get _their _way. There will be no cheeseburger and chips for a very long time indeed. Never mind the short term.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 18, 2014)

its ironic that this is the first and only time I've ever seen a Labour leader come out in full support of a union


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 18, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> its ironic that this is the first and only time I've ever seen a Labour leader come out in full support of a union


They are always in full support of unions and their essential role in delivering public services. Just not strikes.


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 18, 2014)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Yes, it might have to be moved.


Yep, all the threads about Scotland will have to be moved to world politics.


----------



## discokermit (Sep 18, 2014)

danny la rouge said:


> Have a good thread.  I'll be having a small house party to watch the results.
> 
> But here's to your health.


i had a party for the '92 general election. worst party ever and i include any thrown by michael barrymore in that. i hope yours is much better.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 18, 2014)

We'll still be able to say that england has the best snooker players in the known world. Bit niche though.


----------



## discokermit (Sep 18, 2014)

i'm singing auld lang syne with tears streaming down my face.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 18, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> We'll still be able to say that england has the best snooker players in the known world. Bit niche though.


That's china mate.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 18, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> That's china mate.




niether ding nor fu have smashed it yet!


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Sep 18, 2014)

We won't have the best tennis players though. Andy Murray's just said he's voting yes, twitter is going bonkers lol


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 18, 2014)

He hasn't got a vote the lying freak!


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 18, 2014)

we must lay waste to his mound


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 18, 2014)

traitors mound


----------



## fen_boy (Sep 18, 2014)




----------



## J Ed (Sep 18, 2014)

Will the exit polls even be that useful if the vote is as close as it looks like it will be?


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Sep 18, 2014)

Any predictions on turnout?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 18, 2014)

> *David Cameron To Scottish People: ‘I’ll Kill Myself If You Leave’*



http://www.theonion.com/articles/da...s=10202939880086444&fb_action_types=og.shares


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 18, 2014)

Brixton Hatter said:


> We won't have the best tennis players though. Andy Murray's just said he's voting yes, twitter is going bonkers lol



Nothing funny about nasty shit like this, though.


----------



## JTG (Sep 18, 2014)

frogwoman said:


> Yep, all the threads about Scotland will have to be moved to world politics.


In the spirit of brother/sisterhood in these isles, I propose the forum is renamed "Britain and Ireland politics" and we keep Scottish politics where they are 

Good luck today Scotland, however it goes


----------



## JTG (Sep 18, 2014)

danny la rouge said:


> Nothing funny about nasty shit like this, though.



Now that, right there, is the nasty sort of nationalism. Pro-Union liberal hand wringers take note


----------



## Voley (Sep 18, 2014)

Good luck, Scotland. I'll be trying to stay awake tonight until the result comes in and hoping for a 'Yes'.


----------



## JTG (Sep 18, 2014)

Voley said:


> Good luck, Scotland. I'll be trying to stay awake tonight until the result comes in and hoping for a 'Yes'.


Better off having a nap and getting up for first results at 2am. Glasgow and Edinburgh expected around 5 and Aberdeen last at 6am. Long night!

Reports of queues already


----------



## The Boy (Sep 18, 2014)

danny la rouge said:


> Have a good thread.  I'll be having a small house party to watch the results.
> 
> But here's to your health.


English whisky?


----------



## Voley (Sep 18, 2014)

JTG said:


> Better off having a nap and getting up for first results at 2am. Glasgow and Edinburgh expected around 5 and Aberdeen last at 6am. Long night!
> 
> Reports of queues already


Ah. That sounds more like a plan tbh. I might get up early instead in that case. I wonder how accurate exit polls might be this time round with it being so close. With the General election you usually have reasonably good idea how things might pan out.


----------



## JTG (Sep 18, 2014)

No exit polls tonight!
Weather looks good so Highland and Islands counts should go ahead promptly


----------



## Voley (Sep 18, 2014)

JTG said:


> No exit polls tonight!


My God! Can't they do anything right up there?! The country's gone to the dogs already!


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 18, 2014)

I'm kind of excited.

good luck Scotland, however it goes


----------



## ska invita (Sep 18, 2014)

J Ed said:


> Will the exit polls even be that useful if the vote is as close as it looks like it will be?


i think i heard it said that there isnt any attempt to do a proper exit poll
and basically all speculation until the count is in will be just that, as theres no precedent on which to read the tea leaves from
thats going to be so much waffle on the tv coverage


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 18, 2014)

Voley said:


> My God! Can't they do anything right up there?! The country's gone to the dogs already!


don't worry, Gordon brown will save the day


----------



## Voley (Sep 18, 2014)

frogwoman said:


> don't worry, Gordon brown will save the day


I fear for this new type of so-called 'democracy' they've got with its high turnouts and people genuinely interested in politics and stuff. Don't they know that you're meant to govern by winning a handful of votes and doing a deal with a pack of charlatans even worse than yourself? It's the end of freedom, I tell you. The absolute end.


----------



## J Ed (Sep 18, 2014)

frogwoman said:


> don't worry, Gordon brown will save the day



Lots of Labour people furiously wanking themselves off at that speech


----------



## JTG (Sep 18, 2014)

Who do we reckon will have the better GOTV operation? My money's on Yes with their legions of volunteers and minibuses


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Sep 18, 2014)

Why are there no exit polls?


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 18, 2014)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Why are there no exit polls?




that dun't sound right, on another thread our weepiper  said she'd been given some paperwork for the exit polling?


----------



## JTG (Sep 18, 2014)

Jamie Murray has come out for Yes in solidarity with his brother


----------



## Sue (Sep 18, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> that dun't sound right, on another thread our weepiper  said she'd been given some paperwork for the exit polling?



Iirc, that was for exit polling being done by the yes campaign, not by a polling organisation. So presumably it won't necessarily be made public. (Also might be so they can keep track of definite yes voters for knocking up.)


----------



## JTG (Sep 18, 2014)

Sue said:


> Iirc, that was for exit polling being done by the yes campaign, not by a polling organisation. So presumably it won't necessarily be made public. (Also might be so they can keep track of definite yes voters for knocking up.)


Yeah, it's a GOTV thing I think


----------



## flypanam (Sep 18, 2014)

I'm booking a holiday. Arriving in Scotland on Independence Eve. C'mon Yes!


----------



## newbie (Sep 18, 2014)

JTG said:


> Better off having a nap and getting up for first results at 2am. Glasgow and Edinburgh expected around 5 and Aberdeen last at 6am. Long night!
> 
> Reports of queues already


what on earth is the matter with them?  They should import some counters from Sunderland, they'd have it all in neat piles by midnight.


----------



## JTG (Sep 18, 2014)

newbie said:


> what on earth is the matter with them?  They should import some counters from Sunderland, they'd have it all in neat piles by midnight.



Suspect Glasgow's turnout will be higher than Sunderland's usual GE showing!
No recounts allowed either so they'll be taking their time


----------



## newbie (Sep 18, 2014)

really?  no recounts.  How is that supposed to be a good idea?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 18, 2014)

newbie said:


> really?  no recounts.  How is that supposed to be a good idea?


They're only allowed recounts if suspicious of process being corrupted or undermined - not for closeness of vote. I.e agents can't just demand one.


----------



## JTG (Sep 18, 2014)

As it's just two options and constituencies are irrelevant, I guess it's just down to challenges on numbers in piles etc.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 18, 2014)

normally a requested recount is for 'have i really lost my fucking deposit' or 'shennanigans' but there is no deposit here.


----------



## newbie (Sep 18, 2014)

gosh.  That startling little fact has passed me by completely- there must be hard fought politics behind a decision like that, who, when, why?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 18, 2014)

Here's the stuff (pdf) from the Chief Counting Officer Designate for the Scottish Independence Referendum

Recounts

8.19  A related issue would be that of a recount. While a close result – especially in a
national referendum – would not in itself be a cause for a recount, in order to
satisfy observers of the accuracy of a close count a CO might agree to a recount.
Recounts would only be undertaken at a local level and only on the basis of
concerns about process, not the closeness of a result. Any recount would add to
the duration of a count.

8.20  The CCO might also require a CO to undertake a recount to resolve a discrepancy
in totals if checking did not allow figures to be reconciled.

Who this benefits or who pushed for it - i just don't know. I can't think of nay plausible advantage to either side off the top of my head as regards the result on the night. I can think of a few potential ways it can be used by the losing side _afterwards _though.


----------



## newbie (Sep 18, 2014)

thanks for that.  I'm with your last para, and I guess if there are any very close results tonight the talking heads will provide some background.


----------



## JTG (Sep 18, 2014)

My previously 'no' housemate has just come out for 'yes' in the kitchen, giving a clear victory to Indy in the Eastville Scots poll


----------



## AverageJoe (Sep 18, 2014)

Paddy Power latest odds - No - 1/5 on, Yes - 7/2

Thats not as close as its being made out to be at all


----------



## cantsin (Sep 18, 2014)

weepiper said:


> Yes, starting about 1-2am



cld be wrong, but isnt it just one big yes/no, ie : no individual constituency-type results ? which would mean just one result declaration at 5am ish ?


----------



## cantsin (Sep 18, 2014)

AverageJoe said:


> Paddy Power latest odds - No - 1/5 on, Yes - 7/2
> 
> Thats not as close as its being made out to be at all



been roughly like that on Betfair throughout, and that lot never seem to get it wrong ( wisdom of the crowd etc ) - but this is a unique scenario, and not even the vultures on there can predict the impact of completely unprecedented levels of turnout on either side .


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 18, 2014)

cantsin said:


> cld be wrong, but isnt it just one big yes/no, ie : no individual constituency-type results ? which would mean just one result declaration at 5am ish ?


Yes and no, they're totting up - as they go - so there's a running total as diff areas declare their local results. Which, of course, people want to cross-check with areas known for strong support for one position or the other to see if that turned into actual votes.


----------



## ddraig (Sep 18, 2014)

times again, scroll down
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/e718e2b8-3e59-11e4-a620-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3Df7sJ9Wc


----------



## JTG (Sep 18, 2014)

Bookies odds mean fuck all btw


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 18, 2014)

holy shit, I reckon they might just do it.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 18, 2014)

The running totals won't mean much though as there's no data from past elections to compare them to. I suppose they'll blather on about how the results differ from the opinion polls in one place or another but they might as well just talk about something else entirely until there's a final result.


----------



## cantsin (Sep 18, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Yes and no, they're totting up - as they go - so there's a running total as diff areas declare their local results. Which, of course, people want to cross-check with areas known for strong support for one position or the other to see if that turned into actual votes.



ah ok, ta


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Sep 18, 2014)

AverageJoe said:


> Paddy Power latest odds - No - 1/5 on, Yes - 7/2
> 
> Thats not as close as its being made out to be at all



The gambler in me has just put a tenner on that at 7/2


----------



## JTG (Sep 18, 2014)

SpookyFrank said:


> The running totals won't mean much though as there's no data from past elections to compare them to. I suppose they'll blather on about how the results differ from the opinion polls in one place or another but they might as well just talk about something else entirely until there's a final result.


Esp with the three biggest cities being last to declare - around 25% of the population


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 18, 2014)

SpookyFrank said:


> The running totals won't mean much though as there's no data from past elections to compare them to. I suppose they'll blather on about how the results differ from the opinion polls in one place or another but they might as well just talk about something else entirely until there's a final result.



You compare them to what local polling said, your own campaigns canvassing, historical traditions of the place and so on. If the polls suggest overwhelming support for position a) then it turns out that it's 50/50 then you make a note of it. If a similar area with similar expectations goes the same way, you might think a patter in developing and so on. of course local results tell us something - you just have to do some work with them.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 18, 2014)

Things tend to be a bit anti-climactic in British politics, and based almost entirely on that I'm calling the election result as a no.


----------



## JTG (Sep 18, 2014)

I expect Glasgow to plump for Yes fwiw


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 18, 2014)

I heard someone say on Radio 4 last night polls are useless when it is so close.
Voters get to the booth and still ponder and even panic and change their mind.
I wish all in Scotland the very best.


----------



## AverageJoe (Sep 18, 2014)

Wow. Betfair have *already* paid out on a "No" vote.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politi...pendence-betfair-pay-out-on-no-vote-1-3543402


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 18, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> You compare them to what local polling said, your own campaigns canvassing, historical traditions of the place and so on. If the polls suggest overwhelming support for position a) then it turns out that it's 50/50 then you make a note of it. If a similar area with similar expectations goes the same way, you might think a patter in developing and so on. of course local results tell us something - you just have to do some work with them.



You could just wait though. The result will be the same.

I remember how annoyed I was that I stayed up all night to watch the 2010 GE results so I'd know what happened straight away and yet in the cruel sunlight of the next morning I still didn't know shit, and nor did anyone else. They were all just sat around in offices deciding amongst themselves who the government was. I could have got a good night's kip and found out exactly the same thing.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 18, 2014)

AverageJoe said:


> Wow. Betfair have *already* paid out on a "No" vote.
> 
> http://www.scotsman.com/news/politi...pendence-betfair-pay-out-on-no-vote-1-3543402



How is that a good idea?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 18, 2014)

SpookyFrank said:


> You could just wait though. The result will be the same.


You could not bother watching or listening to the cricket - just wait till it's finished then check the result.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 18, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> You could not bother watching or listening to the cricket - just wait till it's finished then check the result.



Yeah but cricket is _important _


----------



## Nylock (Sep 18, 2014)

danny la rouge said:


> Nothing funny about nasty shit like this, though.



this response to that post did make me laugh out loud though:


E2A: Best of luck Scotland! (or as we'd say in wales: Pob lwc yr Alban!)


----------



## peterkro (Sep 18, 2014)

AverageJoe said:


> Wow. Betfair have *already* paid out on a "No" vote.
> 
> http://www.scotsman.com/news/politi...pendence-betfair-pay-out-on-no-vote-1-3543402


Doesn't mean much these people are just accountants taking a skim off all money bet.I imagine they are trying to make a political point to encourage a no vote.
You could also bet everything on the fact they have laid off enough to cover their losses in case of a Yes vote.


----------



## el-ahrairah (Sep 18, 2014)

SpookyFrank said:


> How is that a good idea?


 
well, it might make a few DKs vote No because they want to be on the winning side.


----------



## JTG (Sep 18, 2014)

Bookies are businesses with business reasons for doing what they do. They aint all seeing oracles


----------



## belboid (Sep 18, 2014)

SpookyFrank said:


> How is that a good idea?


it's a bit of very cheap advertising as all the papes cover the story


----------



## likesfish (Sep 18, 2014)

Harry s thats just nasty shit and needs to be called on it
   Much as wasting plod time on facebook and twitter their ought to be a slap button where idiots get a slap and before you start I definitly desrve a few


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 18, 2014)

el-ahrairah said:


> well, it might make a few DKs vote No because they want to be on the winning side.



 I can't imagine having such easily influenced opinions!


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 18, 2014)

belboid said:


> it's a bit of very cheap advertising as all the papes cover the story


...and let's face it, most of that money paid out is going to go right back in.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 18, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> You compare them to what local polling said, your own campaigns canvassing, historical traditions of the place and so on. If the polls suggest overwhelming support for position a) then it turns out that it's 50/50 then you make a note of it. If a similar area with similar expectations goes the same way, you might think a patter in developing and so on. of course local results tell us something - you just have to do some work with them.


This sort of work.



> Undaunted, I considered a variety of different plausible statistical models for the distribution of Yes and No votes across councils. For each model I looked to see which councils would be most likely to have a tie between Yes and No in the event that there is a tie for Scotland as a whole.
> 
> On this basis the councils most likely to be indicative of the overall result are East Lothian, Fife, Midlothian, Renfrewshire, South Ayrshire and West Lothian. If these councils all have a majority for Yes then the overall result is likely to be Yes.


----------



## Tankus (Sep 18, 2014)

God..... imagine if there was less that 10 votes that swung it ....


----------



## el-ahrairah (Sep 18, 2014)

frogwoman said:


> I can't imagine having such easily influenced opinions!


 
i'm not convinced that people do really.  but if one thing can be said to categorise the bettertogether campaign, it's disdain and contempt for the voters - the assumption that the average Scot is thick as pig-shit and unable to cope with any more complex ideas than "vote for the winner".  seems to have mostly backfired i reckon.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 18, 2014)

So: 


Muirhouse is one of Edinburgh's most deprived areas.


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 18, 2014)

http://blogs.channel4.com/paul-maso...ndence-referendum-yes-no-social-movement/2379


----------



## JTG (Sep 18, 2014)

From the Graun live blog:



> Evelyn Stenhouse and Tom Dumphie, on opposite sides of the argument, shared a Twix outside the Mill of Mains polling place. They reckoned the yes voters came up the hill from the housing scheme, the no voters from the private houses on the hill


----------



## ddraig (Sep 18, 2014)

frogwoman said:


> http://blogs.channel4.com/paul-maso...ndence-referendum-yes-no-social-movement/2379





> On George Square last night I had a taste of the anger, enthusiasm and at times hostility of the yes grassroots.
> 
> If it’s rough, and profane, it’s because that’s what street politics are like when ideologies collide. That’s what it was like when class defined British politics and if it makes a few technocrats upset, get used to it.
> 
> ...


not abuse, real anger


----------



## weepiper (Sep 18, 2014)

Queueing up to vote in Glasgow this morning







I voted at 8.30 am and 109 votes had already been cast at my polling station in south Edinburgh (and there were four polling stations in the room). There were two film crews there too.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 18, 2014)

frogwoman said:


> holy shit, I reckon they might just do it.


im with you froggy but what prompted you to say that?


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 18, 2014)

ska invita said:


> im with you froggy but what prompted you to say that?


Looking at how many people from such a diversity of backgrounds are voting yes I think.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 18, 2014)

> *2.43pm: *Reports the turnout so far is close to 80 per cent with suggestions one polling station in Muirhouse apparently exceeding its 2010 turnout by 9.30 this morning.



http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/scottish-independence-live-updates-1-3545331


----------



## weepiper (Sep 18, 2014)




----------



## 8ball (Sep 18, 2014)

I'm not convinced size of turnout plays well for the likelihood of a Yes.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 18, 2014)

8ball said:


> I'm not convinced size of turnout plays well for the likelihood of a Yes.


why not


----------



## 8ball (Sep 18, 2014)

ska invita said:


> why not



Yes voters generally seem more passionate and engaged - the types that are going to vote anyway.
'Can't be arsed' types seem more likely to vote no to me, and when turnout is high it's the most apathetic that turn up last.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 18, 2014)




----------



## weepiper (Sep 18, 2014)




----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 18, 2014)

The turnout is more than impressive!


----------



## The Boy (Sep 18, 2014)

twitter suggests postal votes point to a comfortable no


----------



## ska invita (Sep 18, 2014)

The Boy said:


> twitter suggests postal votes point to a comfortable no


what percentage of the overall vote do postal votes make up, anyone?


----------



## The Boy (Sep 18, 2014)

no idea.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 18, 2014)

ska invita said:


> what percentage of the overall vote do postal votes make up, anyone?



789,024 out of 4,285,323

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-29238890

So 18.4%


----------



## weepiper (Sep 18, 2014)

ska invita said:


> what percentage of the overall vote do postal votes make up, anyone?


16%ish

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/scotland-independence-referendum/


----------



## ferrelhadley (Sep 18, 2014)

The Boy said:


> twitter suggests postal votes point to a comfortable no


They dont get counted till the polls close.

Edited and they are popular with the over 65, the strongest No demographic.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 18, 2014)

CNN with some fine work:


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 18, 2014)

'No child left behind' didn't really work then


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 18, 2014)

Tankus said:


> God..... imagine if there was less that 10 votes that swung it ....



I'm hoping for a tie, and then a sudden death bar fight to settle the matter.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 18, 2014)

Friockheim in Angus apparently had a 100% turnout.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 18, 2014)

90% postal vote turnout in Edinburgh.


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 18, 2014)

SpookyFrank said:


> I'm hoping for a tie, and then a sudden *death bar fight *to settle the matter.




Between Salmond and Cameron? With both losing?


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 18, 2014)

I'm trying to watch the results program quietly because my husband has gone to bed, every now and then they drop in a VT, The last one was a piper, had to jump for the remote. 

That's gonna happen a fair bit innit.


----------



## Das Uberdog (Sep 18, 2014)

friend of mine who's been campaigning for Yes seems to think there's been a lot of 'No' based fraud on the postal ballots in Glasgow... lots of Yessers never receiving their ballots apparently. says the atmosphere is very tense, and he expects people out on the streets tomorrow regardless of the result


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

Turnout in Branchton, Greenock, 95%.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 19, 2014)

Are you or have you ever been a member of Team Scotland?

GET ON WITH IT!!! 
(bbc tv coverage)


----------



## ferrelhadley (Sep 19, 2014)

> Steven Hope @SH_IpsosMORI
> Follow
> Talk of North Lanarkshire result by 1245. Will be key result. I have estimated it as a slim Yes win with 52% of the vote. #indyref


https://twitter.com/SH_IpsosMORI?or...-vote&tw_i=512735992432705536&tw_p=tweetembed


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 19, 2014)

What is #indyref? 

Reliable source or not?


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

William of Walworth said:


> What is #indyref?
> 
> Reliable source or not?



It's the twitter hashtag we've been using for the referendum for about a year.


----------



## muscovyduck (Sep 19, 2014)

What does everyone think of the ITV/STV coverage? Way better than I expected


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> It's the twitter hashtag we've been using for the referendum for about a year.



I knew that really, hence my  'question' that you quoted .... 

But I don't think polling predictions, ie speculation, from that source, or from the No equivalent, neither of 'em without any real info yet, are that likely to be especially reliable for now?


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

William of Walworth said:


> I knew that really, hence my  'question' that you quoted ....
> 
> But I don't think polling predictions, ie speculation, from that source, or from the No equivalent, neither of 'em without any real info yet, are that likely to be especially reliable for now?


He's the managing director of Ipsos MORI's Edinburgh office.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 19, 2014)

Das Uberdog said:


> friend of mine who's been campaigning for Yes seems to think there's been a lot of 'No' based fraud on the postal ballots in Glasgow... lots of Yessers never receiving their ballots apparently. says the atmosphere is very tense, and he expects people out on the streets tomorrow regardless of the result


Interesting.  Normally, when that happens it's either alleged about a particular minority or even a particular landlord.  Is this another of those random stories or is there some detail about who might be doing it?  Suppose what I'm thinking is, apart from a few of your own personal contacts, _how would you know who to deprive of a vote_?  Postie not delivering to those with Yes posters type thing?


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

Northfield in Aberdeen which normally returns about 20-25% apparently at around 80% turnout.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Sep 19, 2014)

first result due around 1am apparently (BBC)


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 19, 2014)

Das Uberdog -- that looked like an anecdote of quite questionable reliability (to be kind!), given that it looks based on entirely second-hand 'person down pub' (or twitter type equivalent) source-ery.


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 19, 2014)

Turnouts, Orkney: 84%, Clackmannanshire: 89%


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Sep 19, 2014)

muscovyduck said:


> What does everyone think of the ITV/STV coverage? Way better than I expected


we were watching ITV and all we can remember is Danny Rodent Alexander's wobbly chin. It wasn't very visually interesting so we went back to BBC. Can't really follow the conversation cos my mates have drunk 6 bottles of wine


----------



## ferrelhadley (Sep 19, 2014)

> James Cook ✔ @BBCJamesCook
> Follow
> Yes camp "much happier now than half an hour ago". Senior source says Glasgow "looking good for us". #indyref #Scotland


Mon the weegies.


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 19, 2014)

Fuck wish I could stay up to watch the entire thing.


----------



## ferrelhadley (Sep 19, 2014)

lizzieloo said:


> Turnouts, Orkney: 84%, Clackmannanshire: 89%
> 
> which normally returns about 20-25% apparently at around 80% turnout.


Clackmannanshire is more YES than an 18 year old on his first eccy


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)




----------



## youngian (Sep 19, 2014)

On Scotland Decides on BBC1 a strident charismatic voice for English nationalism emerges: John Redwood. Jesus H Christ Scotland what the fuck have you done!


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 19, 2014)

Is this flouting the predictions of yes areas having a lower turnout then? I'm guessing Craigmillar isn't a no area


----------



## free spirit (Sep 19, 2014)

> Declaration times by council area
> 
> Comhairle nan Eilean Siar - 02:00 (There were concerns this may be delayed as fog was causing problems at Stornoway airport earlier)
> North Lanarkshire - 02:00
> ...


expected results times from the BBC


----------



## Metal Malcolm (Sep 19, 2014)

I'm on STV, as it's somewhat less dull. Can someone let me know if the BBC picks up?


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

lizzieloo said:


> Is this flouting the predictions of yes areas having a lower turnout then? I'm guessing Craigmillar isn't a no area


Craigmillar is where the people were marching to behind a flaming piper on the photos thread.


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 19, 2014)

Folk finding it tedious on the telly, you probably have the choice between BBC England coverage and BBC Scotland coverage


----------



## ferrelhadley (Sep 19, 2014)

free spirit said:


> expected results times from the BBC


Eilean Siar had fog  so unlikely until 5ish. Everything else you can put half an hour to a full hour later. Perhaps even two for the big ones like Glasgow. 

Folk turned up for this en masse.


----------



## belboid (Sep 19, 2014)

14,907 votes being counted in Orkney


----------



## 8ball (Sep 19, 2014)

Turnout my arse.

I'd sooner they put on re-runs of _Father Ted_ and sounded a massive klaxon whenever an actual result comes in.
Has there been a single one yet?


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 19, 2014)

8ball said:


> Turnout my arse.
> 
> I'd sooner they put on re-runs of _Father Ted_ and sounded a massive klaxon whenever an actual result comes in.
> Has there been a single one yet?



There probably won't be one till about half 2


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> He's the managing director of Ipsos MORI's Edinburgh office.




Apologies weepiper .

I can see now** (  ) that what we were on about earlier up was  #indyref quoting him, not indyref's own claim.

I'm away to bed now, **mostly for that reason , but I still predict a narrow No.

Let's see which of us gets the more surprised by 7 am.

I do appreciate -- here in Wales!  -- that's all this is that vastly more important for Scotland-residents/voters/you than for various random/Urban outsiders, so if I've been an annoying arse I apologise.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 19, 2014)

lizzieloo said:


> There probably won't be one till about half 2



The Beeb said a bit ago that they were expecting some 'shortly after midnight' - half 2 doesn't fall under that in my book.


----------



## Lo Siento. (Sep 19, 2014)

Settling in, full of wine, hoping the UK ends tonight.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Sep 19, 2014)

Quick straw poll - does anyone really expect a yes?

It's gonna be very close. 

Look at Alex Salmond's face though - he doesn't think he's won.


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 19, 2014)

8ball said:


> The Beeb said a bit ago that they were expecting some 'shortly after midnight' - half 2 doesn't fall under that in my book.



Posted on last page but here it is again

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-29264278


----------



## Wilf (Sep 19, 2014)

God, why did you send this plague of Nick Robinsons?


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 19, 2014)

Renfrewshire: 87% turnout


----------



## 8ball (Sep 19, 2014)

lizzieloo said:


> Posted on last page but here it is again
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-29264278



Cheers - News24 are lying bastards


----------



## tony heath (Sep 19, 2014)

Are there two Nick Robinsons?


----------



## Wilf (Sep 19, 2014)

I'm now hating peter Hennessy.


----------



## leanderman (Sep 19, 2014)

Brixton Hatter said:


> Quick straw poll - does anyone really expect a yes?
> 
> It's gonna be very close.
> 
> Look at Alex Salmond's face though - he doesn't think he's won.



NO


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

William of Walworth said:


> Apologies weepiper .
> 
> I can see now** (  ) that what we were on about earlier up was  #indyref quoting him, not indyref's own claim.


You're not on twitter, are you William?


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 19, 2014)

How did you guess that? 

Goodnight


----------



## 1%er (Sep 19, 2014)

Turn out is amazing, interesting to hear Alex Salmond is not now going to the count he was expected to attend, that's interesting.


----------



## muscovyduck (Sep 19, 2014)

STV reporting that story that police are investigating possible electoral fraud in the Glasgow area.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Sep 19, 2014)

Wilf said:


> I'm now hating peter Hennessy.



I have always quite liked Peter Hennessey. I have been flicking through his book about Whitehall recently. It has just occurred to me that a lot of it is going to be historical now.


----------



## Lo Siento. (Sep 19, 2014)

All sounding very no.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Sep 19, 2014)

muscovyduck said:


> STV reporting that story that police are investigating possible electoral fraud in the Glasgow area.


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 19, 2014)

muscovyduck said:


> STV reporting that story that police are investigating possible electoral fraud in the Glasgow area.



Might as well go to bed then, the police have the ballots

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/...ions-of-electoral-fraud-in-glasgow.1411083982


----------



## muscovyduck (Sep 19, 2014)

Bloke on the tele reckons it won't delay the count but they're not too sure what it is atm


----------



## binka (Sep 19, 2014)

all these people on itv i've never seen before in my life. can't stand all those same old smug faces on bbc


----------



## 1%er (Sep 19, 2014)

muscovyduck said:


> STV reporting that story that police are investigating possible electoral fraud in the Glasgow area.


"The incidents have apparently been caused by people allegedly giving a false name when they go to vote on 10 ballot papers in various polling stations around the city."


----------



## weltweit (Sep 19, 2014)

1%er said:


> Turn out is amazing, interesting to hear Alex Salmond is not now going to the count he was expected to attend, that's interesting.


Why?


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 19, 2014)

1%er said:


> Turn out is amazing, interesting to hear Alex Salmond is not now going to the count he was expected to attend, that's interesting.


Link?


----------



## 1%er (Sep 19, 2014)

frogwoman said:


> Link?


BBC world news


----------



## Dillinger4 (Sep 19, 2014)

frogwoman said:


> Link?



It was on the BBC about ten minutes ago. I think it was a press release to journalists rather than a public statement.


----------



## shifting gears (Sep 19, 2014)

frogwoman said:


> Link?



Was mentioned on bbc coverage about 10 mins ago


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 19, 2014)

Dillinger4 said:


> It was on the BBC about ten minutes ago. I think it was a press release to journalists rather than a public statement.


I'm going to bed, I hope I wake up to an independent Scotland


----------



## muscovyduck (Sep 19, 2014)

1%er said:


> "The incidents have apparently been caused by people allegedly giving a false name when they go to vote on 10 ballot papers in various polling stations around the city."


So do we reckon this Is being played up because nothing else has happened yet?


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 19, 2014)

He's not going to his constituency but his constituency doesn't mean much here

Edit: That came out wrong but I'm sure you get what I mean


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 19, 2014)

muscovyduck said:


> So do we reckon this Is being played up because nothing else has happened yet?



It's not been mentioned on the BCC (England)


----------



## Dillinger4 (Sep 19, 2014)

muscovyduck said:


> So do we reckon this Is being played up because nothing else has happened yet?



There is often a little bit of this in elections. If it turned out to be widespread it would be a different story.


----------



## muscovyduck (Sep 19, 2014)

lizzieloo said:


> It's not been metioned on the BCC (England)


Mentioned two or three times on ITV/STV but they appear to have forgotten about it for the moment


----------



## 1%er (Sep 19, 2014)

lizzieloo said:


> It's not been mentioned on the BCC (England)


BBC world news is the same as BBc one I believe as it says BBC one in the top left corner


----------



## Dillinger4 (Sep 19, 2014)

lizzieloo said:


> He's not going to his constituency but his constituency doesn't mean much here



But he is going to Edinburgh where the result will be announced. So he planning on being present for that.


----------



## discokermit (Sep 19, 2014)

did that woman on the telly just cough and gob live on air?


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 19, 2014)

1%er said:


> BBC world news is the same as BBc one I believe as it says BBC one in the top left corner



BBC Scotland is different though


----------



## Das Uberdog (Sep 19, 2014)

William of Walworth said:


> Das Uberdog -- that looked like an anecdote of quite questionable reliability (to be kind!), given that it looks based on entirely second-hand 'person down pub' (or twitter type equivalent) source-ery.



aye, i tried to couch the statement in loose terms to emphasise this was one canvasser's opinion from doing the rounds in Glasgow. that said, he's not usually one for overstatement.

Wilf, he seemed to think it was something to do with the Labour Party and i think it was based on areas with traditionally low turnout (or perhaps newly registered folk) who were expected to vote Yes.

just repeating the goss as i get it! i'm actually headed up to Glasgow tomorrow to breathe in some of the fumes for myself.


----------



## 1%er (Sep 19, 2014)

lizzieloo said:


> BBC Scotland is different though


But in your post you said BBC England



lizzieloo said:


> It's not been mentioned on the BCC (England)


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 19, 2014)

1%er said:


> But
> 
> in your post you said BBC England



Yes, as opposed to BBC Scotland

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_One#Regional_variations


----------



## The Boy (Sep 19, 2014)

Calling it now for no.  Ten point margin.


----------



## JTG (Sep 19, 2014)

Das Uberdog said:


> aye, i tried to couch the statement in loose terms to emphasise this was one canvasser's opinion from doing the rounds in Glasgow. that said, he's not usually one for overstatement.
> 
> Wilf, he seemed to think it was something to do with the Labour Party and i think it was based on areas with traditionally low turnout (or perhaps newly registered folk) who were expected to vote Yes.
> 
> just repeating the goss as i get it! i'm actually headed up to Glasgow tomorrow to breathe in some of the fumes for myself.


I'm quite sure something like that would have been attempted given that Labour are corrupt as fuck and need to be destroyed


----------



## muscovyduck (Sep 19, 2014)

Watching the media and not paying attention to Twitter, definite no vibe.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 19, 2014)

.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Sep 19, 2014)

nobody knows anything yet


----------



## 1%er (Sep 19, 2014)

lizzieloo said:


> BBC Scotland is different though


That's interesting as BBC Scotland online appears the same, I'm watching BBC world online as I'm not in Europe


----------



## muscovyduck (Sep 19, 2014)

First results supposedly imminent


----------



## Wilf (Sep 19, 2014)

Going to bed, there's not going to be any drama here.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Sep 19, 2014)

Off to bed shortly - have fun all. 

Baby hatter will wake me up about 5am - looking forward to a new dawn, whatever the result…


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 19, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Going to bed, there's not going to be any drama here.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Sep 19, 2014)

tempted to go to bed. but I am going to stick it out I think. at least until a few results come in.


----------



## 5t3IIa (Sep 19, 2014)

A result!! Clackmananshire...


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 19, 2014)

5t3IIa said:


> A result!! Clackmananshire...



What is it?


----------



## Dillinger4 (Sep 19, 2014)

lizzieloo said:


> What is it?



about to be declared


----------



## weltweit (Sep 19, 2014)

lizzieloo said:


> What is it?


A place in Scotland


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 19, 2014)

Dillinger4 said:


> about to be declared



That's what I thought but I figured 5t3IIa knew something I didn't


----------



## muscovyduck (Sep 19, 2014)

Orkney had a recount, Highlands have opened their first box
(Edited because I read something wrong)


----------



## 5t3IIa (Sep 19, 2014)

Soz. Huw got me excited. Fuck this shut, I'm going to bed.


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 19, 2014)

muscovyduck said:


> Orkney had a recount, Highlands have opened their first box, turnout in Dundee was in the 90s% but somewhere else (didn't catch it) was 54%



78%


----------



## Ole (Sep 19, 2014)

Sticking it out. Looking negative this.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 19, 2014)

5t3IIa said:


> Soz. Huw got me excited. Fuck this shut, I'm going to bed.


Ya fecker! I nearly had me jim jams on and you called me back.


----------



## tony heath (Sep 19, 2014)

no wonder the Swiss have a name for being dull, roll on the election


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

Fire alarm at the count in Dundee


----------



## muscovyduck (Sep 19, 2014)

lizzieloo said:


> 78%


Just went to edit it before I saw your post. Misread the figures.


----------



## weltweit (Sep 19, 2014)

I want to go to bed, I am tired, my eyes are droopy but I want to see a result at least one!


----------



## Dillinger4 (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> Fire alarm at the count in Dundee


----------



## belboid (Sep 19, 2014)

Low turnout in Dundee - one of Yes's strongest regions


----------



## pogofish (Sep 19, 2014)

Clackmannan - No.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Sep 19, 2014)

No wins Clackmananshire 54%


----------



## belboid (Sep 19, 2014)

Yes - 16350
No - 19036
24 rejected


----------



## The Boy (Sep 19, 2014)

game over


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 19, 2014)

pogofish said:


> Clackmannan - No.



Does that tell you anything? I'm down here so have no idea


----------



## belboid (Sep 19, 2014)

54% v 46% - a 12% margin according to Huw


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

lizzieloo said:


> Does that tell you anything? I'm down here so have no idea


It's not great tbh, we might have expected to take Clacks.


----------



## belboid (Sep 19, 2014)

lizzieloo said:


> Does that tell you anything? I'm down here so have no idea


it was an edge and edge one, apparently, and mirrors the polls exaclty


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> It's not great tbh, we might have expected to take Clacks.



I'm not gonna "like" it but thanks


----------



## Ole (Sep 19, 2014)

Oof.


----------



## muscovyduck (Sep 19, 2014)

Prediction (because I couldn't find the other thread): if yes wins it'll be through the results that come through later in the bigger areas


----------



## weltweit (Sep 19, 2014)

8% margin not 12


----------



## Wilf (Sep 19, 2014)

Bit early to be drawing dire and depressing conclusions, but the way it's going we'll be seeing twatty Tory MPs talking about a 'decisive victory' tomorrow.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

Interesting graphic here which suggests it's not an unexpected result though


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 19, 2014)

Where from?
Oh sorry, missed your link


----------



## Ole (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> Interesting graphic here which suggests it's not an unexpected result though



Right, I'll be ignoring the BBC then.


----------



## belboid (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> Interesting graphic here which suggests it's not an unexpected result though


it only shows a 3% majority, as opposed to the actual 8.  Pretty decisive in effect


----------



## The Pale King (Sep 19, 2014)

Spot on Muscovy - this is a few thousand folk, who knows what local factors are at play. 

I am keeping the faith...


----------



## JTG (Sep 19, 2014)

Ole said:


> Right, I'll be ignoring the BBC then.


An increasingly good plan these days


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 19, 2014)

They're using the 2014 European election results as an indication of how people would vote in the referendum, it'll have no significance, I bet the turnout was tiny for that


----------



## Dooby (Sep 19, 2014)

Come on now people, stay with us.
oh they talk such shite on this programme, I want to take over and teLL you WHY wee Billy fae Greggs voted as he did


----------



## Tankus (Sep 19, 2014)

Heh ..thought peeps had gone to bed ...I was on the wrong thread ,....BBC coverage rather jaded ,nodding me off too


----------



## 19sixtysix (Sep 19, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Bit early to be drawing dire and depressing conclusions, but the way it's going we'll be seeing twatty Tory MPs talking about a 'decisive victory' tomorrow.



I am sat here feeling livid that as a scot exiled to work for a UK organisation which does not employ my skills in Scotland I get no say in my nation. 600000 of us down here are in same boat many due the shite policies that have destroyed industry back home. I got secondary school just as thatcher came to power and destroyed industry after industry then new labour all making the rich richer than ever before. It's folks from "best" schools that in charge on my company. Took me till about 40 to realise I never stood a chance. If there a no vote this is not the end. Looks like a couple of million will have voted to end this country. That's a start. When a lot of Nos see the result of more failed promises from westminster we might get another shot.


----------



## Ole (Sep 19, 2014)

West Lothian to be NO apparently. 

This is one of the councils most likely to be indicative of the overall result according to this.

http://electionsetc.com/2014/09/18/...sult-in-the-scottish-independence-referendum/


----------



## peterkro (Sep 19, 2014)

Fuck it I'm going to bed.
All the beers gone and I've finished an entire cheesecake by myself.
I'll check the result in the morning,I fear this time the Scottish breakaway has failed.
It's not the disappointment it's the fucking hope I can't stand.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

Glasgow turnout 75%. East Renfrewshire 90.4%


----------



## belboid (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> Interesting graphic here which suggests it's not an unexpected result though


looking at that (the page, rather than the graph) in more detail.. it seems to predict a No win of 55-45, with a margin of error whereby Yes _could _still win by 50.4 - 49.6. 

It's still on!


----------



## Ole (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> Glasgow turnout 75%. East Renfrewshire 90.4%



What's that mean pipes?


----------



## JTG (Sep 19, 2014)

Ole said:


> What's that mean pipes?


A lot of people voted


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

Ole said:


> What's that mean pipes?


Glasgow is expected to return a Yes. East Renfrewshire probably a big No though.


----------



## The Boy (Sep 19, 2014)

JTG said:


> A lot of people voted


bigger turnout in strong no areas though.


----------



## pogofish (Sep 19, 2014)

lizzieloo said:


> Does that tell you anything? I'm down here so have no idea




Not  great deal - its Scotland's equivalent of Rutland.


----------



## Ole (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> Glasgow is expected to return a Yes. East Renfrewshire probably a big No though.


I meant what were you surprised about? Is 75% a high turnout for Glasgow? 

Surely Glasgow has to be a big fuck off YES. Saw a few polls yesterday saying fucking Rangers fans were majority indy.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

Ole said:


> I meant what were you surprised about? Is 75% a high turnout for Glasgow?
> 
> Surely Glasgow has to be a big fuck off YES. Saw a few polls yesterday saying fucking Rangers fans were majority indy.


It's very high compared to general election turnouts which are more like 50-55% usually.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 19, 2014)

19sixtysix said:


> I am sat here feeling livid that as a scot exiled to work for a UK organisation which does not employ my skills in Scotland I get no say in my nation. 600000 of us down here are in same boat many due the shite policies that have destroyed industry back home. I got secondary school just as thatcher came to power and destroyed industry after industry then new labour all making the rich richer than ever before. It's folks from "best" schools that in charge on my company. Took me till about 40 to realise I never stood a chance. If there a no vote this is not the end. Looks like a couple of million will have voted to end this country. That's a start. When a lot of Nos see the result of more failed promises from westminster we might get another shot.


id expect most expat scots living in england would vote No too, but that aside I agree that as the Devo Vow turns sour there might be a chance to keep the pressure on into the future...leading to what I don't know.


----------



## pogofish (Sep 19, 2014)

Orkney - solid No.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

pogofish said:


> Orkney - solid No.


always going to be.


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 19, 2014)

No great surprise though


----------



## leanderman (Sep 19, 2014)

lizzieloo said:


> No great surprise though



yes. 2:1 not unexpected


----------



## free spirit (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> It's very high compared to general election turnouts which are more like 50-55% usually.


still looks likely not to have been good enough unfortunately, as the no voting areas have also upped their turnout by about the same amount.

Depends what the make up of the none voters was in those cities though I suppose.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

free spirit said:


> still looks likely not to have been good enough unfortunately, as the no voting areas have also upped their turnout by about the same amount.
> 
> Depends what the make up of the none voters was in those cities though I suppose.


yeah I'm worried tbh. And also surprised that 25% of Glaswegians apparently haven't voted.


----------



## free spirit (Sep 19, 2014)

A comment earlier about people partying in the square when they should have been out knocking up the vote might turn out to have been a good assessment.

The no areas seem to have got their act together on that score better than the big yes areas.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> always going to be. (orkney)


why is that by the way, any idea? Id imagine people in the rural ends of the country having a particularly strong Scottish identity - thats more how it works in England. I know identity isnt everything but.... whats the thinking in places like Orkney?


----------



## JTG (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> yeah I'm worried tbh. And also surprised that 25% of Glaswegians apparently haven't voted.


Greater population mobility in a big city = less up to date register?


----------



## JTG (Sep 19, 2014)

ska invita said:


> why is that by the way, any idea? Id imagine people in the rural ends of the country having a particularly strong Scottish identity - thats more how it works in England. I know identity isnt everything but.... whats the thinking in places like Orkney?


Orkney is less 'Scottish' and more Orcadian


----------



## free spirit (Sep 19, 2014)

JTG said:


> Greater population mobility in a big city = less up to date register?


are these percentages, percentages of population over 16, or percentages of registered voters actually voting?


----------



## belboid (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> yeah I'm worried tbh. And also surprised that 25% of Glaswegians apparently haven't voted.


it is really surprising, considering the YEs vote has always seemed the far more determined and buoyant, and likely to vote.

My immediate guess would be a fair few people who wanted to scare the crap out of the government (and labour), but couldnt quite bring themselves to push the button


----------



## belboid (Sep 19, 2014)

ska invita said:


> why is that by the way, any idea? Id imagine people in the rural ends of the country having a particularly strong Scottish identity - thats more how it works in England. I know identity isnt everything but.... whats the thinking in places like Orkney?


I dont think the Cornish would agree with you.  Nor any of the islanders. Orkneys are just so bloody far from anywhere...


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 19, 2014)

I've been wondering whether a lot of people will have wibbled as they cast their vote


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

East Lothian and Inverclyde (probably Nos) and Eilean Siar (could go either way) and Perth and Kinross, Moray and North Lanarkshire (probable Yesses) expected soon.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 19, 2014)

belboid said:


> I dont think the Cornish would agree with you.  Nor any of the islanders. Orkneys are just so bloody far from anywhere...


yeah i didnt express it quite right (bit tired) , but cornwall has a strong seperatist/independent identity - they all feel dislocated from Westminster Id expect


----------



## belboid (Sep 19, 2014)

lizzieloo said:


> I've been wondering whether a lot of people will have wibbled as they cast their vote


Wibbled, wobbled, and probably even wubbled. No webblers tho


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 19, 2014)

lizzieloo said:


> I've been wondering whether a lot of people will have wibbled as they cast their vote


Yeah I always felt that this might be a factor


----------



## belboid (Sep 19, 2014)

ska invita said:


> yeah i didnt express it quite right (bit tired) , but cornwall has a strong independent identity - they all feel dislocated from Westminster Id expect


indeed, disconnected frm anywhere.  totally different, the state is so far removed, both literally and figuratively. Which is why such places are fascinating


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 19, 2014)

You'd have to be a fair way removed from what's going on to vote for UKIP in large numbers when your county is propped up by large amounts of EU development funding.

I do love cornwall and cornish folk though. I was there last week, it's lovely.

e2a: Cornwall has also led the way in developing wind power and solar panels seem to be very popular down there as well. But then cornwall probably gets more sun _and_ more wind than anywhere else in the country...


----------



## toggle (Sep 19, 2014)

ska invita said:


> yeah i didnt express it quite right (bit tired) , but cornwall has a strong seperatist/independent identity - they all feel dislocated from Westminster Id expect



but as far as i am aware, although the scillies are administratively party of cornwall, they don't consider themselves cornish. 

a big partt of down here is that no one local is listened to, an expert is someone from up country.


----------



## Dooby (Sep 19, 2014)

Let's get off the whole Cornwall thing which is confusing. Massive amount of factors affecting vote in Scotland right now


----------



## toggle (Sep 19, 2014)

SpookyFrank said:


> You'd have to be a fair way removed from what's going on to vote for UKIP in large numbers when your county is propped up by large amounts of EU development funding.
> 
> I do love cornwall and cornish folk though. I was there last week, it's lovely.



don't, i'll end up with a sore head from the facepalming


----------



## belboid (Sep 19, 2014)

Highest ever turnout in a Scottish election, apparently


----------



## The Boy (Sep 19, 2014)

talk that the noes have it in north Lanarkshire


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

The Boy said:


> talk that the noes have it in north Lanarkshire


And Edinburgh. I'm not feeling hopeful now. I'm not sure Glasgow can swing it enough on that turnout


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 19, 2014)

belboid said:


> Highest ever turnout in a Scottish election, apparently


In absolute or relative terms?


----------



## The Boy (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> And Edinburgh. I'm not feeling hopeful now. I'm not sure Glasgow can swing it enough on that turnout


Edinburgh was always going no, though.  talk of 60-40 which i would have expected but no good the way other places are going.e


----------



## belboid (Sep 19, 2014)

redsquirrel said:


> In absolute or relative terms?


percentagewise.  which very probably means in absolute terms to, given population growth, but i couldnt be sure on that


----------



## JTG (Sep 19, 2014)

belboid said:


> percentagewise.  which very probably means in absolute terms to, given population growth, but i couldnt be sure on that


Largest ever Scottish electorate


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 19, 2014)

belboid said:


> percentagewise.  which very probably means in absolute terms to, given population growth, but i couldnt be sure on that


Cheers and sorry to be a pain but what exactly do they mean by a Scottish election? A Scottish only election or any election within Scotland?


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 19, 2014)

its owen!


----------



## pogofish (Sep 19, 2014)

Shetland - Hell No!


----------



## belboid (Sep 19, 2014)

predicted to be the No'est of all the regions


----------



## Tankus (Sep 19, 2014)

Its a pity one in four from Glasgow couldn't make the effort even for this .......


----------



## JTG (Sep 19, 2014)

Not looking great in Aberdeenshire either


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 19, 2014)

JTG said:


> Not looking great in Aberdeenshire either



The turnout?


----------



## wiskey (Sep 19, 2014)

The number of spoiled/rejected papers seem to be very low from what I've heard. I'm surprised that a quarter of Glasgow didn't vote though.


----------



## pogofish (Sep 19, 2014)

lizzieloo said:


> The turnout?



No, the turnout is good but its likely to be no too.


----------



## pogofish (Sep 19, 2014)

Western Isles - No


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

pogofish said:


> Western Isles - No


I think we're fucked.


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 19, 2014)

.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

lizzieloo said:


> Fairly close though


But should have been a Yes.


----------



## pogofish (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> I think we're fucked.



Too early to say yet IMO.


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> But should have been a Yes.



Yeah, realised that after I posted.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Sep 19, 2014)

Very satisfactory, so far.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

pogofish said:


> Too early to say yet IMO.


acht I daren't hope. I know they're only wee areas and we've some much more likely Yes results to come much later but I was hoping for one by now.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

WTF is going on in Dundee. Count evacuated _for the second time _due to a fire alarm


----------



## Tankus (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> I think we're fucked.



Not really .....Salmond originally was punting for devo Max , superficially he can claim something from that ......'from last weeks Westminster panic ....


Plus ...I think he's boosted Ukips chances ....by re engaging people back into politics even in the south ...2015 is going to be an interesting election

He may not have got the change he wanted in Scotland , but he may have inadvertantly provided a catalyst for change of the status quo in Westminster's sty ?

Its been worthwhile


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 19, 2014)

Isn't Dundee the most likely Yes?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> acht I daren't hope. I know they're only wee areas and we've some much more likely Yes results to come much later but I was hoping for one by now.



West Lothian is indicating a 6% majority to NO.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 19, 2014)

lizzieloo said:


> The turnout?



East Renfrewshire: 66,021 votes (turnout 90.4%) 
East Ayrshire: 84,252 votes (turnout 84.5%) 
Stirling: 62,225 votes (turnout 90.1%) 
South Ayrshire: 81,715 votes (turnout 86.1%) 
East Lothian: 71,798 votes (turnout 87.6%) 
Falkirk: 108,626 votes (turnout 88.7%) 
Dumfries and Galloway: 106,755 votes (turnout 87.5%) 
Aberdeen: 143,664 votes (turnout 81.7%) 
Glasgow: 364,664 votes (turnout 75%) 
Perth and Kinross: 104,285 votes (turnout 86.9%).


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

lizzieloo said:


> Isn't Dundee the most likely Yes?


Yes.


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

Having worked in the Hebs (for short periods) I'm really surprised that they sneaked through a No count!  There's a massive nationalist sentiment there, shown by the Gaelic naming and announcement for example.  AFAIK they can't break the count down to individual islands.  It would have been interesting to see if there is a difference between South Uist, Benbecula, and the rest


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

Could we be looking at something more radical?  Hearing some of the comments could we be looking along the lines of Switzerland, a national government setting high level direction and regional blocks for more detailed rule?


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

Mind you, the results so far could be completely overturned by any one of the big urban areas.


----------



## editor (Sep 19, 2014)

pogofish said:


> Western Isles - No


I'm genuinely surprised at that, but then my opinion is always been that this vote is too early. Give it ten years (and proper debates about the fine details) and I'd be surprised if Scotland isn't totally behind independence - unless the UK govt totally changes its tune (which is unlikely).


----------



## pogofish (Sep 19, 2014)

Yup - much as I'm hoping for it now, I've long held the opinion tha we do need a couple more terms of Tory-like government to really make things certain.  

When it comes to electing MPs, the Western Isles have always been at least as much about the personality involved, not just the party.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 19, 2014)

why is it bare ukip chat


----------



## The Boy (Sep 19, 2014)

even north lanarkshire looking like a no atm


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 19, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> why is it bare ukip chat



He was just stunning wasn't he


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> why is it bare ukip chat


It's not on BBC1 Scotland, we've got peers coming out of our ears but no David Coburn thank fuck.


----------



## Tankus (Sep 19, 2014)

Sky bod quips ...someone was smoking a fag in the bogs in Dundee ...


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 19, 2014)

some yank waffling


----------



## editor (Sep 19, 2014)

How come the most outlaying areas are the first to declare their results?

I know there's less people, but I would have thought there'd be more people for doing the counting in the urban areas.

And for reference, here's the BBC results site: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/events/scotland-decides/results



Amazing turnout, thus far.


----------



## JimW (Sep 19, 2014)

Doesn't come much closer than that


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 19, 2014)

they're way smaller editor


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

Inverclyde a No. Tantalisingly close though. 86 votes in it.
Yes 27243 No 27329


----------



## editor (Sep 19, 2014)

Five no's now.


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 19, 2014)

I'm off, wishing you all well


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

Invercylde a bare vote for no.  Earlier the BEEB were saying it was expected to be a stronger no vote.


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

See they're talking about the sectarian split in the votes, that's what I was wondering about with the Hebs.


----------



## JimW (Sep 19, 2014)

Does that inverclyde vote bode well for the bigger councils?


----------



## The Boy (Sep 19, 2014)

probably not.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 19, 2014)

Nick Robinson and andrew niel. Truly ambassador.


----------



## JimW (Sep 19, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> Nick Robinson and andrew niel. Truly ambassador.


Gove too now, cunt central to reward you for staying up


----------



## The Boy (Sep 19, 2014)

west  Dunbartonshire yes


----------



## Ibn Khaldoun (Sep 19, 2014)

Dodged Andrew Neil/Beeb . . . ITV saying Glasgow expecting only small Yes majority which would be a huge blow to the indy vote.


----------



## Tankus (Sep 19, 2014)

Groves  nose has gone a bit drinkers red hasn't it ?


----------



## pogofish (Sep 19, 2014)

Dundee - Yes


----------



## Anonymous1 (Sep 19, 2014)

Belter Dundee, turning now i hope.


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

Dundee is a yes.


----------



## pogofish (Sep 19, 2014)

Renfrewshire - No


----------



## JimW (Sep 19, 2014)

Big yes in Dundee


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

Deleted - balls comment!


----------



## quimcunx (Sep 19, 2014)

Yay Dundee!


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

Mon the Arabs!!


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

Christ! It's close at the moment 49.1 to 50.9!


----------



## JimW (Sep 19, 2014)

Brought national totals close again


----------



## Anonymous1 (Sep 19, 2014)

Six and a half thousand in it, it's slow torture atm but we're alive and kicking so far.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 19, 2014)

YES in Dundee

"Yes" 57% "No" 43%


----------



## The Boy (Sep 19, 2014)

Dundee not wide enough margin.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 19, 2014)

The Boy said:


> Dundee not wide enough margin.


Yeah if that's the most YES (as has been predicted) then things not looking good


----------



## JTG (Sep 19, 2014)

Ibn Khaldoun said:


> Dodged Andrew Neil/Beeb . . . ITV saying Glasgow expecting only small Yes majority which would be a huge blow to the indy vote.


yeah, needs to be big to counter expected No in Edinburgh and Aberdeen


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

West Dunbartonshire a Yes!

Yes - 33,720; No - 28,776.


----------



## toggle (Sep 19, 2014)

redsquirrel said:


> Yeah if that's the most YES (as has been predicted) then things not looking good



it's only very slightly behind the percentages that were given by whassisface at east anglia.


----------



## Anonymous1 (Sep 19, 2014)

More than decent result.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

That's a surprise. Maybe this isn't over yet


----------



## toggle (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> West Dunbartonshire a Yes!
> 
> Yes - 33,720; No - 28,776.



much better than the predictions i believe....


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

Whichever way it goes I think there is going to be a greater interest in politics and elections in future.  I'm going to take a bet that the turnout for the next General Election will be elevated.

Jesus - 49.8 Yes/50.2 No!  But this has had two of the results expected to be strongly Yes


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

Midlothian a No but not by anywhere near as much as I might have expected

yes 26370 no 33972


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

Thought Mid-Lothian was expected to be more Yes due to the level of deprivation in the area?


----------



## JimW (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> Midlothian a No but not by anywhere near as much as I might have expected
> 
> yes 26370 no 33972


Talking heads on BBC reckon it was a bellwether.


----------



## Tankus (Sep 19, 2014)

Sky have better graphics methinks......


----------



## JTG (Sep 19, 2014)

West of Scotland strong-ish for Yes


----------



## Anonymous1 (Sep 19, 2014)

East lothian is a sickener.


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

Go East Lothian!


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

Anonymous1 said:


> East lothian is a sickener.


Yep. Shower of twats. My home county


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

Not unexpected in Sterling.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 19, 2014)

toggle said:


> it's only very slightly behind the percentages that were given by whassisface at east anglia.


Which predicts an overall win for NO. So if YES was on course to win it's likely they'd have done better than they did.


----------



## The Boy (Sep 19, 2014)

Stirling is a sore one.


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> Yep. Shower of twats. My home county


Sorry, I'm from Hawick, still waiting for the Borders, that will be a No from them though.


----------



## JTG (Sep 19, 2014)

Following on here and nowhere else - more numbers please?


----------



## Anonymous1 (Sep 19, 2014)

Feckin' Falkirk ya bas!


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

Falkirk no

yes 50489 no 58030


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 19, 2014)

JTG said:


> Following on here and nowhere else - more numbers please?


*EAST LOTHIAN RESULT*
Posted at 04:19
"No" wins by 44,283 to 27,467.
That is 62% "Yes" to 38% "No".
Total votes were 71,798 - a turnout of 87.6%.

*STIRLING RESULT*
Posted at 04:19
"No" wins by 37,153 to 25,010.
That is 60% for "No" and 40% for "Yes".
Total votes cast was 62,225. Turnout 90.1%.

*FALKIRK RESULT*
Posted at 04:22
"No" wins by 58,030 votes to 50,489.
That is 53% for "No" and 47% for "Yes".
The total number of votes was 108,626 - a turnout of 88.7%.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

MikeMcc said:


> Sorry, I'm from Hawick, still waiting for the Borders, that will be a No from them though.


Borders will be a thumping No.


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

Now at 47 Yes  / 53 No, not doing my nerves any favours at the moment.  The lead is still only 45.5k and could still be whittled down.  My personal opinion is that the no vote will swing it, but only damned just.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

We need a really big Yes from Glasgow. We might still get it.


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

Aye, they're solidly Liberal, but with a strong Tory bias.  With the tourist industry in the area, it's in their interest for a No vote, hence the silliness earlier this week with the 'passport control' on the Carter Bar


----------



## JTG (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> We need a really big Yes from Glasgow. We might still get it.


Yeah, Glasgow's the clincher now


----------



## MrSki (Sep 19, 2014)

His face says all you need to know.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

Angus No
Yes 35044 No 45192


----------



## newbie (Sep 19, 2014)

the radio4 coverage is falling to bits... " sorry for the silence, I was listening to my headphones.."


----------



## Sasaferrato (Sep 19, 2014)

Well done Aberdeen!


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

Aberdeen No
Yes 59390 No 84093


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

Dumfries and Galloway No (always was going to be a big No)

Yes 36614 No 70039


----------



## MrSki (Sep 19, 2014)

newbie said:


> the radio4 coverage is falling to bits... " sorry for the silence, I was listening to my headphones.."


Try radio 5 live.


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 19, 2014)

MrSki said:


> Try radio 5 live.



They're the same atm, can't sleep so listening in bed


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

Aye, no shocks there, very close to the Border with plenty of trade to Carlisle.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

East Renfrewshire a No


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

East Renfrewshire a big No, no shocks.  Reasonably middle class estates


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

East Dunbartonshire a No

yes 30624 no 48214


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 19, 2014)

Looking like the polls might have been pretty accurate, NO by 7-8%


----------



## The Boy (Sep 19, 2014)

is this going to be going towards a 20% margin?


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

Holy shit! Big No vote in Aberdeen - SNP representation but affected by the 'foreign vote' due to the oil industry.


----------



## JTG (Sep 19, 2014)

MikeMcc said:


> East Renfrewshire a big No, no shocks.  Reasonably middle class estates


Always touted as a Tory target at GEs


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

The Boy said:


> is this going to be going towards a 20% margin?


I doubt it unless there are unexpected swings in the bigger cities,  Probably nearer 10%


----------



## pogofish (Sep 19, 2014)

I'm crashing-out soon.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Sep 19, 2014)

redsquirrel said:


> Looking like the polls might have been pretty accurate, NO by 7-8%



Until they seem to have suspended betting earlier, the bookies consistently had NO to win.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Sep 19, 2014)

pogofish said:


> I'm crashing-out soon.



Me too.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 19, 2014)

*EAST RENFREWSHIRE RESULT*
"No" wins by 41,690 to 24,287.
That is 67% for "No" and 33% for "Yes".
Total votes 66,021. Turnout 90.4%.


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

Still Fife, Edinburgh, and Glasgow to go though.  I think Fife and Edinburgh will counter Glasgow.  Still only counted a 1/4 of the votes so far though!


----------



## JTG (Sep 19, 2014)

Ayrshire and Lanarkshire still waiting too


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

Glasgow may be soon...


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

JTG said:


> Ayrshire and Lanarkshire still waiting too


North Lanarkshire is looking like a yes


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

North Lanarkshire Yes 
yes 115783 no 110922


----------



## Anonymous1 (Sep 19, 2014)

YESSSS! NL, my area.


----------



## JTG (Sep 19, 2014)

Motherwell/Hamilton innit?


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

West Lothian No

 yes 53342 no 65684


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

Perth and Kinloss - Big No! No surprises  - big tourist industry and also a big forces area too


----------



## Anonymous1 (Sep 19, 2014)

South Lanarkshire go no.


----------



## steeplejack (Sep 19, 2014)

pretty devastated to be honest.

a painful disappointment. Yes have basically been taken to the cleaners.


----------



## Anonymous1 (Sep 19, 2014)

JTG said:


> Motherwell/Hamilton innit?


 Aye.


----------



## toggle (Sep 19, 2014)

shit.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

The Lanarkshire results are particularly bad for Labour btw. That's 'monkey with a red rosette' territory historically.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 19, 2014)

South Lanarkshire for NO

*SOUTH LANARKSHIRE RESULT*
"No" wins by 121,800 votes to 100,990.
That's 55% for "No" and 45% for "Yes".
Total votes 222,790. Turnout 85.3%.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

Glasgow Yes

yes 194779 no 169347

not enough.


----------



## Tankus (Sep 19, 2014)

Why would so many people recently register ...then not vote ?

Higher turnouts are no


----------



## JimW (Sep 19, 2014)

25,000 plus lead for yes in Glasgow not enough it looks like


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

steeplejack said:


> pretty devastated to be honest.
> 
> a painful disappointment. Yes have basically been taken to the cleaners.


Aye looks like a 55/45 split to me


----------



## Anonymous1 (Sep 19, 2014)

75% turnout in Glasgow, fuck me sideways.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 19, 2014)

steeplejack said:


> pretty devastated to be honest.
> 
> a painful disappointment. Yes have basically been taken to the cleaners.


Well considering when the Referendum was announced NO was leading by ~20% I think halving that (which looks pretty likely) shows the YES campaign really managed to engage people.

The important thing now for RIC is to use that momentum to push for pro-wc politics.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> Glasgow Yes
> 
> yes 194779 no 169347
> 
> not enough.


Yeah, sadly that's not going to be good enough.


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

Big Yes there, but nowhere near enough to overwhelm the momentum for the No vote, still 200k ahead.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

Borders  67% No 33% Yes
YES - 27,906 NO - 55,553


----------



## JTG (Sep 19, 2014)

Fwiw my heart goes out to weepiper, steeplejack, geminisnake and everyone else who's disappointed. My lovely housemate will be upset too


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

North Ayrshire

Yes 47072 No 49,016


----------



## JTG (Sep 19, 2014)

redsquirrel said:


> Well considering when the Referendum was announced NO was leading by ~20% I think halving that (which looks pretty likely) shows the YES campaign really managed to engage people.


Indeed, we've always been told it was only 35% tops for indy. You scared the shit out of them


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 19, 2014)

*WEST LOTHIAN RESULT*
"No" wins by 65,682 to 53,342.
That's 55% for "Yes" and 45% for "No".
Total votes 119,024. Turnout 86.1%.

*NORTH AYRSHIRE*
"No" wins by 49,016 to 47,072.
That is 51% for "No" and 49% for "Yes".
Total votes 96,173. Turnout 84.4%


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> Borders  67% No 33% Yes
> YES - 27,906 NO - 55,553


No shocks there, think all my family there were voting no


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

Listen to these cunts cheering to keep inequality.


----------



## joustmaster (Sep 19, 2014)

Is the job fucked then?
Can I go to bed'?


----------



## JTG (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> Listen to these cunts cheering to keep inequality.


Bracing myself for the conga line of SE England Tory backbenchers calling for less money for anyone other than them


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 19, 2014)

*SOUTH AYRSHIRE RESULT*
"No" wins by 47,247 to 34,402.
That's 58% for "No" to 42% for "Yes".
Total votes 81,716. Turnout 86%.


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

JTG said:


> Fwiw my heart goes out to weepiper, steeplejack, geminisnake and everyone else who's disappointed. My lovely housemate will be upset too


I'm sorry that they will be upset, but personally I'm glad.  I really believe a No vote would have been disastrous. The voting mandate, and the strength of feeling, must mean that our whole approach to governance must change.  It can't stay as it was.


----------



## Anonymous1 (Sep 19, 2014)

MikeMcc said:


> I'm sorry that they will be upset, but personally I'm glad.  I really believe a No vote would have been disastrous. The voting mandate, and the strength of feeling, must mean that our whole approach to governance must change.  It can't stay as it was.



We can discuss it when we're queueing for health insurance as the NHS gets stripped in the name of austerity.
How's that for disastrous?


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

05:14 BBC calling a no result


----------



## JTG (Sep 19, 2014)

West of Scotland votes show how many people have stopped listening to Labour in Glasgow, N Ayrshire, N Lanarkshire, Inverclyde, Dunbartonshire etc


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

Anonymous1 said:


> We can discuss it when we're queueing for health insurance as the NHS gets stripped in the name of austerity.
> How's that for disastrous?


And you think the SNP could really deliver what they have been promising?  What happens if they can't keep the currency, the Scots Pound goes pear-shaped, and corporations desert Montreal-style?  I really don't think the consequences have been fully thought through, that doesn't necessarily make the alternatives attractive.


----------



## weltweit (Sep 19, 2014)

MikeMcc said:


> 05:14 BBC calling a no result


I've just woken up, how can the BBC call it now with so many votes yet to come in?


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

Because Edinburgh and Fife should carry it.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 19, 2014)

Because they can extrapolate from the data they do have and make a prediction


----------



## JTG (Sep 19, 2014)

MikeMcc said:


> Because Edinburgh and Fife should carry it.


Yup, Yes needed more votes from the West in particular


----------



## quimcunx (Sep 19, 2014)

I don't understand what happened to Angus.


----------



## JTG (Sep 19, 2014)

55/45 projected split


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 19, 2014)

For the 'Yes' supporters: don't despair if you lose. The first sovereignty referendum was held in Quebec in 1980. The No side won.

All that meant was.... another referendum: this time in 1995, and this time, the No side won by a much narrower margin.

In 1980, No got 59% of the vote; in 1995, No got 50.58%

No doubt there will be another one, and this time, who knows?


----------



## JTG (Sep 19, 2014)

quimcunx said:


> I don't understand what happened to Angus.


Or Falkirk, Western Isles, Glasgow...

Got the last minute fear


----------



## quimcunx (Sep 19, 2014)

JTG said:


> 55/45 projected split



I waivered between this and 56/44 on the predictions thread. plumped for the second. 

I'm last left standing in my flat now. *drums fingers*  Maybe it's time for bed.


----------



## JTG (Sep 19, 2014)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> For the 'Yes' supporters: don't despair if you lose. The first sovereignty referendum was held in Quebec in 1980. The No side won.
> 
> All that meant was.... another referendum: this time in 1995, and this time, the No side won by a much narrower margin.
> 
> ...


Oh, it's coming alright


----------



## quimcunx (Sep 19, 2014)

JTG said:


> Or Falkirk, Western Isles, Glasgow...
> 
> Got the last minute fear



I'm not from any of those places though!


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> For the 'Yes' supporters: don't despair if you lose. The first sovereignty referendum was held in Quebec in 1980. The No side won.
> 
> All that meant was.... another referendum: this time in 1995, and this time, the No side won by a much narrower margin.
> 
> ...



I haven't got 30 years.


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> For the 'Yes' supporters: don't despair if you lose. The first sovereignty referendum was held in Quebec in 1980. The No side won.
> 
> All that meant was.... another referendum: this time in 1995, and this time, the No side won by a much narrower margin.
> 
> ...


All well and good until the Montreal Effect comes into effect


----------



## Batboy (Sep 19, 2014)

MikeMcc said:


> And you think the SNP could really deliver what they have been promising?  What happens if they can't keep the currency, the Scots Pound goes pear-shaped, and corporations desert Montreal-style?  I really don't think the consequences have been fully thought through, that doesn't necessarily make the alternatives attractive.



I don't think Salmond or the SNP have really put much thought into in any of this, they simply allowed their hearts to rule their heads without presenting much of an incisive mandate or realistic polices for an Independent Scotland. Salmond got found out largely by a silent majority. There will be a bitter aftertaste from this referendum. Scotland is at times a very divided country. Some 30 years ago I lived in Dundee for around a year. Dundee voted with a largish majority of yes voters, I don't think I would find the same element of hospitality today in Dundee that I did 30 years ago.


----------



## Celyn (Sep 19, 2014)

JTG said:


> Or Falkirk, Western Isles, Glasgow...
> 
> Got the last minute fear


Glasgow did vote "Yes".  So, I suppose it might cause a wee bit of concern to the Labour Party in Glasgow, which generally thinks it will always win by a sort of divine right.  So that's sort of good, but the referendum as a whole is "no".


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

Celyn said:


> Glasgow did vote "Yes".  So, I suppose it might cause a wee bit of concern to the Labour Party in Glasgow, which generally thinks it will always win by a sort of divine right.  So that's sort of good, but the referendum as a whole is "no".


The leader of the Scottish Labour Party's own constituency voted for independence by 26807 Yes to 22956 No. Labour are a busted flush in Glasgow.


----------



## JTG (Sep 19, 2014)

But not by nearly enough and on a lower than expected turn out


----------



## newbie (Sep 19, 2014)

r4 has gone to prayer for the day.  time to stop listening.


----------



## albionism (Sep 19, 2014)




----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> I haven't got 30 years.


Don't worry about it.   Clearly Scotland will not (in our life-times) be an independent country, but this referendum will have massive implications for Scotland and the English regions.  Bringing in regional English struggle may (in the long run) empower Scots regional  political power.

I can easily see a UK with a restricted National Government with regional boards looking after large areas (Islands, Highlands, Lowlands, Southern Scotland, Lancs / Yorks, Northern and Southern Wales, West and East Midlands, East Anglia, London and The South).  the status quo is not an option for anyone in the UK.


----------



## JTG (Sep 19, 2014)

Time for work! Love to all in Scotland. Bye


----------



## Tankus (Sep 19, 2014)

Only 14 months between Ireland's EU referendums when the first result didn't give the right one for the elites

This ones not going to be once in a lifetime is it ..?...my bets 5 to 8 years


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Sep 19, 2014)

MikeMcc said:


> And you think the SNP could really deliver what they have been promising?  What happens if they can't keep the currency, the Scots Pound goes pear-shaped, and corporations desert Montreal-style?  I really don't think the consequences have been fully thought through, that doesn't necessarily make the alternatives attractive.


This is what I think too. I've already posted that I think No is the best outcome, even if that outcome isn't great.

The airy (and sometimes deeply arrogant) assumptions made by the SNP were hugely risky, and if an independent Scotland went tits up economically and England had to bail them out, that would come at a very heavy price, just like what has happened in the Euro zone where smaller countries like Greece have been ordered to carry out swingeing cuts. 

It seems that the SNP were rushing into a referendum without taking the necessary time to plan things thoroughly. For example, negotiations over currency. Maybe in another ten years or so they might have a better case to out to the electorate.  

But it has been a good day for democracy given the amazing engagement and turnout, and I hope that this continues. All credit to both sides for this achievement.   And hopefully we'll all see some some proper constitutional change for the better, but I'm not holding my breath for that sadly.


----------



## Anonymous1 (Sep 19, 2014)

MikeMcc said:


> And you think the SNP could really deliver what they have been promising?  What happens if they can't keep the currency, the Scots Pound goes pear-shaped, and corporations desert Montreal-style?  I really don't think the consequences have been fully thought through, that doesn't necessarily make the alternatives attractive.



I think they would've protected the the NHS, free prescriptions and elderly care as a priority, if that's what you mean. How long they lasted after a first term would be another question though.
I would personally prefer a new Scotland adapted a new currency, as independent countries tend to. And yes i know that would be risky but not every country to go Independent has resources of Scotland. 
Scotland is not Montreal. 


Nevermind, watch out for the slash and burn. That's not a _what if?_


----------



## quimcunx (Sep 19, 2014)

Batboy said:


> I don't think Salmond or the SNP have really put much thought into in any of this, they simply allowed their hearts to rule their heads without presenting much of an incisive mandate or realistic polices for an Independent Scotland. Salmond got found out largely by a silent majority. There will be a bitter aftertaste from this referendum. Scotland is at times a very divided country. Some 30 years ago I lived in Dundee for around a year. Dundee voted with a largish majority of yes voters, I don't think I would find the same element of hospitality today in Dundee that I did 30 years ago.



It's a shame you feel that way.  The other day I spoke to my dad, Dundonian, SNP member since 1956 and yes voter, and he said 'Nothing can split us up. We are still friends, still neighbours.  I'll still buy British, take holidays in England.'  Your fears don't relate to anything the other yes voters in Dundee I know have expressed.


----------



## JTG (Sep 19, 2014)

MikeMcc said:


> Don't worry about it.   Clearly Scotland will not (in our life-times) be an independent country, but this referendum will have massive implications for Scotland and the English regions.  Bringing in regional English struggle may (in the long run) empower Scots regional  political power.
> 
> I can easily see a UK with a restricted National Government with regional boards looking after large areas (Islands, Highlands, Lowlands, Southern Scotland, Lancs / Yorks, Northern and Southern Wales, West and East Midlands, East Anglia, London and The South).  the status quo is not an option for anyone in the UK.


You can draw a line through 'The South' or I aint interested


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

Batboy said:


> I don't think Salmond or the SNP have really put much thought into in any of this, they simply allowed their hearts to rule their heads without presenting much of an incisive mandate or realistic polices for an Independent Scotland. Salmond got found out largely by a silent majority. There will be a bitter aftertaste from this referendum. Scotland is at times a very divided country. Some 30 years ago I lived in Dundee for around a year. Dundee voted with a largish majority of yes voters, I don't think I would find the same element of hospitality today in Dundee that I did 30 years ago.


Aye, though when I was up there, there was no significant antagonism. If you went into certain bars there was a feeling you got shut-out.  The Hebs 'could' be worse, the folks there were a lot more direct.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 19, 2014)

JTG said:


> 55/45 projected split


stating the obvious but it means it came down to 5% of the electorate - not a lot in it, even if split bigger than Yes voters may have hoped


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

JTG said:


> You can draw a line through 'The South' or I aint interested


For many Londoners that would be on a line through Stevenage!


----------



## Combustible (Sep 19, 2014)

Celyn said:


> Glasgow did vote "Yes".  So, I suppose it might cause a wee bit of concern to the Labour Party in Glasgow, which generally thinks it will always win by a sort of divine right.  So that's sort of good, but the referendum as a whole is "no".


But for those who voted yes to get rid of the Tories, it might make a lot of sense to continue voting labour in general elections. People already vote snp in one and labour in the other.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> The leader of the Scottish Labour Party's own constituency voted for independence by 26807 Yes to 22956 No. Labour are a busted flush in Glasgow.


I've seen a number of people say this but why do you think that these people won't vote Labour in the next GE? Plenty of people already vote differently for Westminster, Holyrood and local elections. There was a swing to Labour in 2010, I can see some people drifting away from Labour, certainly at a SP/LE level, but on a large scale for Westminster, I just don't see it. They are still the Anti-Tory option for many, probably most, people.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 19, 2014)

Big no for Edinburgh

*Edinburgh - No 61.1%, 38.9%*
Edinburgh has voted no.
No: 194, 638 (61.1%)
Yes: 123,927 (38.9%)


----------



## Anonymous1 (Sep 19, 2014)

Sickened, we blew it. Imagine rejecting independence to control and run your own affairs, i truly despair.

Night then.


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

Fife may carry it...


----------



## ska invita (Sep 19, 2014)

MikeMcc said:


> All well and good until the Montreal Effect comes into effect


whats that then


----------



## gabi (Sep 19, 2014)

Surely the end of the road, finally, for Alex Salmond?


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 19, 2014)

Why when he's closed the gap to about 10% and has run the unionist parties ragged.


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

It's a NO


----------



## gabi (Sep 19, 2014)

redsquirrel said:


> Why when he's closed the gap to about 10% and has run the unionist parties ragged.



It was an unwinnable election. The result pretty much mirrors every single poll leading up to the big day. He's cost the country a fucking fortune, all to stoke his ego. Maybe in ten years yes. But he was never gonna win this.


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

gabi said:


> Surely the end of the road, finally, for Alex Salmond?


I doubt it.  He was astute and a damned good politician.  I don't agree with him, but he has left us looking at the situation and thinking 'what the hell do we do now?'


----------



## Sasaferrato (Sep 19, 2014)

FOI request going in re cost of this. I suspect that it would offset the £400m of health spending cuts, scheduled to be announced _after_ the referendum.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

It honestly feels like someone has died.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Sep 19, 2014)

MikeMcc said:


> I doubt it.  He was astute and a damned good politician.  I don't agree with him, but he has left us looking at the situation and thinking 'what the hell do we do now?'



Bookies giving 2/1 that he's gone in 48 hours.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> It honestly feels like someone has died.



No, it feels that the Scots have not bought Salmond's bullshit.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> I haven't got 30 years.



Maybe not; but Scotland does.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 19, 2014)

gabi said:


> It was an unwinnable election. The result pretty much mirrors every single poll leading up to the big day. He's cost the country a fucking fortune, all to stoke his ego. Maybe in ten years yes. But he was never gonna win this.


God you're an idiot, 45% of the populace supported independence, on a turnout that is the highest in the UK and you call that just stroking someones ego. Even fucking pricks like Cameron, Clegg and Miliband have have to concede that the YES campaign forced them onto the back foot.


----------



## Tankus (Sep 19, 2014)

Salmond standing behind a "one Scotland " bannered podium ,  after doing his utmost to divide it ....

Doesn't do irony well perhaps....


----------



## Celyn (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> The leader of the Scottish Labour Party's own constituency voted for independence by 26807 Yes to 22956 No. Labour are a busted flush in Glasgow.



I hope she is suitably "astonished!.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Sep 19, 2014)

NO : 1,877,252
YES :1,512,688


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 19, 2014)

Wee Eck was doing so well with his speech until he mentioned meeting an ex-squaddie .  Given how he actively sort to disenfranchised Scots squaddies deployed in England, Germany and other countries the little shit can fuck right off.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 19, 2014)

in that speech just now alex salmond spelled out whats next, namely forcing the Vow to take place to Browns timetable, every slip on that will be rightly exploited as a betrayal of the democratic process...im sorry its not a Yes, and feel bad for everyone gutted by the result, but still cheered that these islands are going to move another step closer to a more meaningful democracy....will get there in the end

time to turn the media off before cameron pops up on it


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 19, 2014)

Oh god. My mission today is NOT to hear or read any speech or gloating/patronising from the tories. 

/feels sick at the thought.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Sep 19, 2014)

Och aye the NO. Looks like they listened to Bonnie Prince Billy.


----------



## DownwardDog (Sep 19, 2014)

gabi said:


> It was an unwinnable election. .



Was it unwinnable? If he'd had a defensible and feasible plan for the post independence currency arrangements and a feasible roadmap for EU membership instead of just "It'll be ok because reasons." then he could have got it over the line.


----------



## Tankus (Sep 19, 2014)

Rutita1 said:


> Oh god. My mission today is NOT to hear or read any speech or gloating/patronising from the tories.
> 
> /feels sick at the thought.



It's not going to last long couple of tweets perhaps  .....then they are going to go at it like ferrets over what's been given without consultation......also the Welsh assembly will be (rightly) unimpressed at the differential in the distribution of powers


----------



## jakethesnake (Sep 19, 2014)

I'm really disappointed. I thought it could happen there for a while and that a yes vote would force Cameron to resign


----------



## PursuedByBears (Sep 19, 2014)

Shame but not a massive surprise.  Now wait for the backlash from England on Devo max and the Barnett formula. Condolences to those who were hoping for a yes.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 19, 2014)

DownwardDog said:


> Was it unwinnable? If he'd had a defensible and feasible plan for the post independence currency arrangements and a feasible roadmap for EU membership instead of just "It'll be ok because reasons." then he could have got it over the line.


Ive no idea if this is true, but i wonder if the starting point arrangements of the UK made it harder to make the smooth transition case (or are all successions equally problematic?). If a desire for federalism sweeps the nation in the coming months it may create a smoother transition to the same end goal of devolution of power, better avoiding any of those big unknowns that worried some.

Personally i would've preferred the short sharp shock of a Yes win, but I'm not sure the genie can be put back in the bottle now...funnily enough 24hrs ago I doubted a No vote would result in much more than a rapid and forced return to the status quo, but now i think the thin end of the wedge has been hammered into the system and theres no going back and the momentum for self-government will snowball across the UK. 



Rutita1 said:


> Oh god. My mission today is NOT to hear or read any speech or gloating/patronising from the tories.
> 
> /feels sick at the thought.


ha yeah i agree. That said Camerons truly panicked and distraught face has been one of the highlights of the campaign up till now, and I reckon there'll be plenty more squirming to take some pleasure in between now and the GE.


----------



## quimcunx (Sep 19, 2014)

So is Dundee independent now?


----------



## Quartz (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> Listen to these cunts cheering to keep inequality.



It's that attitude that helped you lose. They made their own decisions for their own reasons.



Sasaferrato said:


> FOI request going in re cost of this. I suspect that it would offset the £400m of health spending cuts, scheduled to be announced _after_ the referendum.



Salmond's cuts, right? The ones he forgot to mention in the debate with Darling when he asked us to vote Yes to protect the NHS?


----------



## Quartz (Sep 19, 2014)

Tankus said:


> Only 14 months between Ireland's EU referendums when the first result didn't give the right one for the elites
> 
> This ones not going to be once in a lifetime is it ..?...my bets 5 to 8 years



Yes. It will happen the next time the SNP hold the balance of power in Westminster.


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 19, 2014)

Condolences to the yes campaign supporters but be proud of the fact that this campaign has brought more people to the debate on why politics has become so stale in this group of countries. 
Hopefully the kick start to change.
But I sadly remain pessimistic.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 19, 2014)

> Sasaferrato said: ↑
> FOI request going in re cost of this. I suspect that it would offset the £400m of health spending cuts, scheduled to be announced after the referendum.


 
re the cost, its wrong to be paralised by spending to potentially create deep and meaningful changes to the system, the end logic of that argument is sitting in a closed room eating bread and water. A Yes win would've completely changed the financial make up of the country. Worth remembering that the SNP had it in their manifesto to have this referendum and had a mandate to follow through on that promise from the electorate - within a proportionally representative parliament at that.



Quartz said:


> Yes. It will happen the next time the SNP hold the balance of power in Westminster.


any failure to follow through on the Vow will also give real justification to a rerun


----------



## ChrisD (Sep 19, 2014)

David Cameron speech now..."we hear you"

"A new and fair settlement"

He doesn't know the meaning of these words.


----------



## ChrisD (Sep 19, 2014)

Anyone seen a map of the regional results?


----------



## quimcunx (Sep 19, 2014)

I stopped listening quite quickly but the beginning sounded more like  loser's speech trying to sound gracious.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 19, 2014)

ChrisD said:


> Anyone seen a map of the regional results?


only one for absolute wins with each voting region coloured in for its final result which doesnt really reflect the fact that the Yes vote is spread across the whole country, not just in pockets...the lowest Yes vote in any region was a third of the electorate


----------



## JTG (Sep 19, 2014)

MikeMcc said:


> For many Londoners that would be on a line through Stevenage!


 Sod Stevenage, the West Country aint sharing a region with the south east!


----------



## J Ed (Sep 19, 2014)

Fuck.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 19, 2014)

I was awoken at 3am by a massive thunder/lightening storm. I was hoping it was a good omen.


----------



## yardbird (Sep 19, 2014)

I'm a bit surprised.


----------



## friedaweed (Sep 19, 2014)

84% Turnout.  If only the rest of the UK would get that political


----------



## J Ed (Sep 19, 2014)

On the bright side this probably means that the Catalans are more likely to be 'allowed' a referendum, which they will almost certainly vote yes in.


----------



## JTG (Sep 19, 2014)

friedaweed said:


> 84% Turnout.  If only the rest of the UK would get that political


Meaningful choice might just do that


----------



## ska invita (Sep 19, 2014)

friedaweed said:


> 84% Turnout.  If only the rest of the UK would get that political


they are


----------



## ska invita (Sep 19, 2014)

J Ed said:


> On the bright side this probably means that the Catalans are more likely to be 'allowed' a referendum, which they will almost certainly vote yes in.


why so allowed? Who allows it and why does this vote encourage it to happen? Im asking as i know nothing about it


----------



## Red Cat (Sep 19, 2014)

Bummer


----------



## Riklet (Sep 19, 2014)

A grey, normal day then here in London. Pretty Disappointing! 

Only 75% turnout in Glasgow. Seems surprisingly low. I reckon a lot of folks couldnt make up their minds, or Yes voters bottled it.


----------



## JTG (Sep 19, 2014)

goldenecitrone said:


> Och aye the NO. Looks like they listened to Bonnie Prince Billy.



 He backed Indy


----------



## J Ed (Sep 19, 2014)

ska invita said:


> why so allowed? Who allows it and why does this vote encourage it to happen? Im asking as i know nothing about it



Basically the Catalan government, and a majority of the Catalan people (millions took part in a pro-independence march recently, including Barca luminaries), have been asking for a referendum on independence for a couple of years now. The Spanish government's tactic has been to just say no on the basis that it would be unconstitutional, as I suspect Cameron would have if he thought yes stood a chance of winning.

I would have thought, though I don't know, that this loss by 10% means that they are more likely to relent at some point than the precedent of Cameron allowing a referendum and a subsequent yes vote.


----------



## SikhWarrioR (Sep 19, 2014)

JTG said:


> Meaningful choice might just do that



Like a meaningful socialist left of center party committed to its principles {ie renationalisation of Railways,Gas,Electrcity,Water etc decent pay/employment rights,education,health care,social or low cost to buy housing,no dodgy trade deals,illegal wars,trident,a  serious crack down on out of control corporations and bankers and their tax evasion/dodging,a decent comitment to the envrionment  and renewables etc etc etc} unlike what we get from any of the Red/Blue/Yellow/Purple rainbow conservatives we currently have


----------



## ska invita (Sep 19, 2014)

Riklet said:


> Only 75% turnout in Glasgow. Seems surprisingly low. I reckon a lot of folks couldnt make up their minds, or Yes voters bottled it.


by my calculation if another 10% of Glaswegians came out and ALL voted Yes it woudlve added around 50,000 votes to the Yes tally...if another 20% came out and all voted Yes it wouldve added 100,000.....and the deficit for a win at the current count is around 400,000


----------



## Chz (Sep 19, 2014)

Westminster allowing the referendum is more about external politics than internal. Remember that the government is constantly criticised for holding onto the Falklands or Gibraltar and their response has always been that if those places democratically decide to leave, yhen they can. Refusing the Scots would be a huge diplomatic black eye and likely piss off all the Overseas Territories, even if it is the case that they don't want to leave.


----------



## AverageJoe (Sep 19, 2014)

JTG said:


> Bookies odds mean fuck all btw



Just saying


----------



## JTG (Sep 19, 2014)

AverageJoe said:


> Just saying


I'm still right. They're not political analysis, they're set by business decisions to balance the book.


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 19, 2014)

Just woken up to get this 'No by 10%' surprise. Margin of No is  a lot bigger than I was expecting or predicting -- I thought the result would be much closer. I never really thought Yes would get it though.

I'm sure Yes people in Scotland are devastated this morning. How many are truly surprised/shocked though I wonder? (by the result at all I mean, more than by the margin of it).


----------



## starfish (Sep 19, 2014)

Lets just hope Cameron et al keep their promises about more devolved powers.


----------



## likesfish (Sep 19, 2014)




----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 19, 2014)

Just had a quick look at the regional results breakdown on the BBC

Perhaps I shouldn't have been, but I was a bit surprised by Glasgow -- was lower turnout a factor in surpressing the No level there? Or would it have been Yes in Glasgow whatever, even if the turnout had been as high as anywhere else?

Some of those other No margins are massive -- 60% + for No in some places


----------



## Voley (Sep 19, 2014)

Hard luck, Scotland. I hope you get a good deal out of the further devolution negotiations.


----------



## JTG (Sep 19, 2014)

William of Walworth said:


> Just had a quick look at the regional results breakdown on the BBC
> 
> Perhaps I shouldn't have been, but I was a bit surprised by Glasgow -- was lower turnout a factor in surpressing the No level there? Or would it have been Yes in Glasgow whatever, even if the turnout had been as high as anywhere else?
> 
> Some of those other No margins are massive -- 60% + for No in some places


Glasgow was always going to be a big Yes


----------



## chilango (Sep 19, 2014)

ah fuck .

Oh well.


----------



## PursuedByBears (Sep 19, 2014)

From the Guardian live blog, following Cameron's speech:


> Here’s Patrick Wintour’s report on David Cameron’s speech.
> 
> David Cameron committed himself to a devolution revolution across Great Britain, including votes on English issues by English MPs at Westminster, as he hailed the Scottish people’s decision to remain inside the United Kingdom in the referendum.
> 
> ...



So already questioning the Barnett formula and the West Lothian question.

Can open.  Worms everywhere.


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Sep 19, 2014)

I'm a bit sad.  But also pleased that they scared the shit out of those wankers in Westminster.
Also, now whenever we hear cries of "voter apathy" we'll know it's bollocks.


Anyway, the conspiracy theories are now in circulation:


----------



## cantsin (Sep 19, 2014)

JTG said:


> I'm still right. They're not political analysis, they're set by business decisions to balance the book.



Betfair is punter to punter betting not set by bookies - it got to 1/14 on : NO by midnight / prior to first result - i went to bed.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 19, 2014)

BBC live feed said:
			
		

> UKIP leader Nigel Farage has just posted letters from Westminster to all 59 Scottish MPs asking them not to vote on English issues...
> 
> Mr Farage tweets: We need a full, proper national debate about the democratic future of England #indyref





PursuedByBears said:


> Can open.  Worms everywhere.


Certainly looks like it at the moment. Do wonder if they'll somehow manage to sweep the worms under the carpet, and other mixed metaphors.


----------



## quiquaquo (Sep 19, 2014)

Turkeys voting for Christmas albeit after a disgraceful media fear campaign.

Sad really, listening to that triumphant gloating scumbag Nicky Campbell on the radio right now.


----------



## flypanam (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> I haven't got 30 years.



That's tough but tiocfaidh ár lá .


----------



## The39thStep (Sep 19, 2014)

friedaweed said:


> 84% Turnout.  If only the rest of the UK would get that political


The cheadlehighstreet independence referendum in 2002 had a 102% turn out


----------



## Favelado (Sep 19, 2014)

J Ed said:


> On the bright side this probably means that the Catalans are more likely to be 'allowed' a referendum, which they will almost certainly vote yes in.



The mood I get at the moment is that Madrid government are going to do anything they can to stop that. They'll pull any stunt necessary to stop it.


----------



## poului (Sep 19, 2014)

Ugh. And Millipede speaks.


----------



## DownwardDog (Sep 19, 2014)

Favelado said:


> The mood I get at the moment is that Madrid government are going to do anything they can to stop that. They'll pull any stunt necessary to stop it.



Cameron will return the favour by saying he will veto Catalan EU membership.


----------



## krink (Sep 19, 2014)

must admit, as an englishman in northern england, very familiar with being ignored and punished by the government, i'm gutted by the result. looking for positives...

Well, despite the press, the tv, the tories, labour and all the rest of the no campaign, nearly half the voters STILL voted yes. That's a result that is not too shabby in terms of the size of the forces against them. Please please please build on this, Scottish comrades.

The no campaign was also a good way to identify and put a spotlight on the likes of Labour, Galloway and the other so-called left politicos. They have shown themselves to be all in it together with the Tories and UKIPs, standing shoulder to shoulder and laughing and back-slapping as the no victory was announced. Although I was gutted to see some so-called socialists and even the odd anarchist crowing about the no victory, I am heartened by how many Scots, who were once his biggest supporters, have now sussed out that Galloway is a cunt. And Labour are finished in Scotland, I reckon.

I'm sick as fuck No won though, fucking bastards.


----------



## quiquaquo (Sep 19, 2014)

William of Walworth said:


> Just had a quick look at the regional results breakdown on the BBC
> 
> Perhaps I shouldn't have been, but I was a bit surprised by Glasgow -- was lower turnout a factor in surpressing the No level there? Or would it have been Yes in Glasgow whatever, even if the turnout had been as high as anywhere else?
> 
> Some of those other No margins are massive -- 60% + for No in some places



Pretty much like in England and Wales, cities vote left, provinces vote right. Of course Edinburgh was the exception but that was to be expected.

Very sad.


----------



## The39thStep (Sep 19, 2014)

quiquaquo said:


> Pretty much like in England and Wales, cities vote left, provinces vote right. Of course Edinburgh was the exception but that was to be expected.
> 
> Very sad.



Should we build more cities in the provinces?


----------



## Theisticle (Sep 19, 2014)




----------



## newbie (Sep 19, 2014)

> Farage also pressed Scottish MPs to make an immediate commitment not to vote any further in English only issues, as he called for a constitutional convention to discuss the whole future political settlement in the UK. He said “The fact that three party leaders made commitments on behalf of millions of UK voters means nothing. Why should I stand by a panicky commitment to Scotland made by the Prime Minister?”



He's populist and astute and has staked an immediate claim to another English votewinner which differentiates him from the Tories, but unlike Europe, doesn't yet appear to bore most people senseless.


----------



## Idris2002 (Sep 19, 2014)

Another map of the voting:


----------



## The39thStep (Sep 19, 2014)

In what way would the NHS be affected by independence. I thought they already had control over the funding?


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 19, 2014)

Just been speaking to someone up in Scotland who voted no and said that he was tempted to vote yes but he didn't trust what Salmond was saying about the idea it would all have been fine after independence and for him to keep his promises.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 19, 2014)

The39thStep said:


> In what way would the NHS be affected by independence. I thought they already had control over the funding?


They have control over what to do with the block grant westminster chooses to give them for it. Incidentally, Salmond chose to under-spend this over the last period. I wonder what political motivation he could have had to do such a thing?


----------



## 8ball (Sep 19, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> They have control over what to do with the block grant westminster chooses to give them for it. Incidentally, Salmond chose to under-spend this over the last period. I wonder what political motivation he could have had to do such a thing?


 
Figuring out some belt-tightening measures in preparation for delivering on the promise of tax cuts to big business, possibly?

That's a total guess, I'm not sure what you're getting at...


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 19, 2014)

8ball said:


> Figuring out some belt-tightening measures in preparation for delivering on the promise of tax cuts to big business, possibly?
> 
> That's a total guess, I'm not sure what you're getting at...


Making it appear to be squuezed prior to the election is what i was getting at - _look, spending on *** has fallen by **this amount*** over the last year, vote YES o stop this happening _etc - and the NHS did come out (in the Ashcroft poll anyway) as the main motivator for YES voters.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 19, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Making it appear to be squuezed prior to the election is what i was getting at - _look, spending on *** has fallen by **this amount*** over the last year, vote YES o stop this happening _etc - and the NHS did come out (in the Ashcroft poll anyway) as the main motivator for YES voters.


 
Ah, ok.  Seems like someone would pick holes in such a transparent ploy pretty quickly.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 19, 2014)

8ball said:


> Ah, ok.  Seems like someone would pick holes in such a transparent ploy pretty quickly.


Yep, and i suspect they did - but that's now how political propaganda works. Get the idea out there, make it the common sense of the debate and you're off to a good start. Unless it does get seriously and embarrassingly trashed  - which didn't seem to happen here.


----------



## Theisticle (Sep 19, 2014)

The second biggest issue on the Ashcroft poll was the NHS, but that's already devolved. But I guess Salmond's scaremongering on that issue was effective.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> Listen to these cunts cheering to keep inequality.



Not that we're oversimplifying or anything.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 19, 2014)

ska invita said:


> stating the obvious but it means it came down to 5% of the electorate - not a lot in it, even if split bigger than Yes voters may have hoped



Well, 10%. Subtract 45 from 55 and what are you left with?


----------



## hot air baboon (Sep 19, 2014)

...striking lack of read-across from an SNP vote to a Yes vote....


----------



## ska invita (Sep 19, 2014)

SpookyFrank said:


> Well, 10%. Subtract 45 from 55 and what are you left with?


its a 5% swing -if 5% of the Nos voted Yes it wouldve been 50/50
its that 5% of the population wot won it


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 19, 2014)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> Anyway, the conspiracy theories are now in circulation:




Well, he's American so I guess he'd know all about rigged elections.


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 19, 2014)

JTG said:


> Glasgow was always going to be a big Yes




All along do you say? I thought it was more of a late swing, and heavier late campaigning from the Yes side once the published polls had _already_ started to get closer.

Inaccurately closer, as it turns out, but that's another matter.


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 19, 2014)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> Anyway, the conspiracy theories are now in circulation:



What about that one circulating quite widely in Yes circles before the referendum, that there was a huge newly discovered oilfield whose existence 'they' were concealing from Scotland? 

I trust that Yes supporters here on Urban were smart enough to be sceptical about that?


----------



## leanderman (Sep 19, 2014)

hot air baboon said:


> ...striking lack of read-across from an SNP vote to a Yes vote....



14pc of SNP supporters went NO! Odd


----------



## ska invita (Sep 19, 2014)

William of Walworth said:


> What about that one circulating quite widely in Yes circles before the referendum, that there was a huge newly discovered oilfield whose existence 'they' were concealing from Scotland?
> 
> I trust that Yes supporters here on Urban were smart enough to be sceptical about that?


the potential one in the clyde blocked my heseltine sounded real enough though


----------



## ska invita (Sep 19, 2014)

leanderman said:


> 14pc of SNP supporters went NO! Odd


" Richer Scotland stuck with the union — so no did very well in a lot of traditional SNP areas.  "
i guess its not impossible to vote SNP for their domestic policies and be against independence...14% arent a lot of people statistically...plus people may have genuinely been swung by th arguments/threats etc


----------



## dennisr (Sep 19, 2014)

hot air baboon said:


> ...striking lack of read-across from an SNP vote to a Yes vote....



More striking is the solid labour areas voting Yes. Most of the rest is empty of people.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 19, 2014)

ska invita said:


> " Richer Scotland stuck with the union — so no did very well in a lot of traditional SNP areas.  "
> i guess its not impossible to vote SNP for their domestic policies and be against independence...14% arent a lot of people statistically...plus people may have genuinely been swung by th arguments/threats etc


Look up the history of the term tartan tories.

What happened here is that many people were blinded by the SNPs 2011 performance when a coalition of city/labourish voters and the trad more rural conservative voters voted SNP together - they took this to be writ in stone forever. This referendum saw a breakdown of that coalition with the latter voting NO and the former YES. This could spell big changes for both labour and the SNP or things could just go back to dual voting with the former voting labour in GE and SNP in national elections.


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 19, 2014)

dennisr said:


> More striking is the solid labour areas voting Yes**. Most of the rest is empty of people.




**Not all of them by any means. Lots of other trad Labour areas going No. In Dundee, a Yes area, the SNP have always been strong. I think Glasgow probably makes your point best though, albeit on the lowest turnout of anywhere ("only" 75%  ).


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

William of Walworth said:


> **Not all of them by any means. Lots of other trad Labour areas going No. In Dundee, a Yes area, the SNP have always been strong. I think Glasgow probably makes your point best though, albeit on the lowest turnout of anywhere ("only" 75%  ).


75% is a colossal turnout for Glasgow. Glasgow's mostly poor. It doesn't normally turn out to vote at all because they know there's fuck all point.


----------



## hot air baboon (Sep 19, 2014)

William of Walworth said:


> **Not all of them by any means. Lots of other trad Labour areas going No.


 
....saw a young ship yard worker admitting to being a no voter....difficult to reassure some of those fellas that the UK navy contracts weren't going to go south...


----------



## articul8 (Sep 19, 2014)

I bet I'm not the only one feeling tired and depressed today - can only image what the 45% are feeling


----------



## The39thStep (Sep 19, 2014)

Tory backbenchers now saying Scotland is finished business and the real priority is defeating Farage


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> 75% is a colossal turnout for Glasgow. Glasgow's mostly poor. It doesn't normally turn out to vote at all because they know there's fuck all point.




I know, not disagreing, in fact I did put 'only' 75% in inverted commas.

butchersapron  linked to this in the other thread, but Ben Page has some useful insights into voting levels, turnout, differential turnout, opinion poll flaws, etc.


----------



## Theisticle (Sep 19, 2014)

More conspiracy theories.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/alanwhite/t...-calling-for-a-revote-of-the-scottish#37ic8zr


----------



## Lo Siento. (Sep 19, 2014)

The39thStep said:


> Tory backbenchers now saying Scotland is finished business and the real priority is defeating Farage



I think this is what will ultimately happen. If Cameron hadn't wet himself and already promised devo max because of one rogue poll we wouldn't even be talking about it.


----------



## Theisticle (Sep 19, 2014)

The Tories are already planning for life after Cameron. Indyref proved how useless he is.


----------



## nuffsaid (Sep 19, 2014)

Never mind the result I never knew there were so few Scots. The population is tiny compared to the landmass. They want to worry more about extinction - I recommend a captive breeding programme, just to be sure.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 19, 2014)

Theisticle said:


> The Tories are already planning for life after Cameron. Indyref proved how useless he is.


not arguing but he did manage to navigate the obligation to have the referendum, avoid devo max and get a no vote


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 19, 2014)

ska invita said:


> not arguing but he did manage to navigate the obligation to have the referendum, avoid devo max and get a no vote


I think he rather ensured devo max. If you think he's coming out of this smelling of roses,well,  have you sobered up from last night yet?


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

A graph showing turnout


----------



## ska invita (Sep 19, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> I think he rather ensured devo max.


time will tell on that... really hard to know what will happen next. Its far from certain. I havent looked closely at The Vow, but there seemed to be a lot of voices at the time saying it was, if anything, devo lite.

In fact Ive had a quick google but I haven't been able to find a clear summary of the Vow + Browns Timetable...may be the subject for a different thread, but if someone has a link to hand Id appreciate it


----------



## ska invita (Sep 19, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> . If you think he's coming out of this smelling of roses,well,  have you sobered up from last night yet?


as i said, im not arguing about camerons status post vote, just adding the nuance that it could have gone worse for him



ska invita said:


> *not arguing but* he did manage to navigate the obligation to have the referendum, avoid devo max and get a no vote


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 19, 2014)

ska invita said:


> as i said, im not arguing about camerons status post vote, just adding the nuance that it could have gone worse for him


It could, but that fact alone, that his ineptitude led his army to the brink of total destruction, is not going to be forgotten or be rewarded.

saving an army out of nowhere = remembered, applauded
leading that army to where it needed saving = remembered, but for rather different reason.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

The middle class fucked us over.


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 19, 2014)

Has anyone seen any figures showing the percentage of votes cast by 16 & 17 year olds?


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 19, 2014)

Double post, no hang on!


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 19, 2014)

Triple post, ridiculous techno use!


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

Sprocket. said:


> Has anyone seen any figures showing the percentage of votes cast by 16 & 17 year olds?








small sample size though so may not be all that representative


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 19, 2014)

Sprocket. said:


> Has anyone seen any figures showing the percentage of votes cast by 16 & 17 year olds?


All we have right now are general figures-i,e area, turnout etc and general figures for the make up of those areas - and however we then interpret those figures. And a post-election poll by Ashcroft of 14 people.


----------



## Theisticle (Sep 19, 2014)

Ignoring Ashcroft regarding age, 14 sized sample for 16-17 years is a joke.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

Theisticle said:


> Ignoring Ashcroft regarding age, 14 sized sample for 16-17 years is a joke.


is that how small it was? Ok, probably bollocks then


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 19, 2014)

Theisticle said:


> Ignoring Ashcroft regarding age, 14 sized sample for 16-17 years is a joke.


It was only that age group that had such a small sample size mind.


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 19, 2014)

Thanks weepiper and BA.
I have heard a couple of reports that the franchise may be extended in the GE.

Also weepiper,


weepiper said:


> The middle class fucked us over.



Isn't this always the case.


----------



## Chz (Sep 19, 2014)

Damn them for actually wielding the power of their franchise. 

I think the one great thing about this referendum is the turnout. 85% is fantastic in this day and age.


----------



## Theisticle (Sep 19, 2014)

Theisticle said:


> Ignoring Ashcroft regarding age, 14 sized sample for 16-17 years is a joke.



Heavily weighted towards older folk. Less than 100 18-24 year olds.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 19, 2014)

Theisticle said:


> Heavily weighted towards older folk. Less than 100 18-24 year olds.


Yep,  because of proportional size of electorate they represent.


----------



## Quartz (Sep 19, 2014)

Theisticle said:


> Heavily weighted towards older folk. Less than 100 18-24 year olds.



Is that a proportionally correct number?


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

Salmond's resigned


----------



## quimcunx (Sep 19, 2014)

Where's that reported?  I can't see anything.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> Salmond's resigned


In the expectation of  glorious swell/bore to lift him back upstream?


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

quimcunx said:


> Where's that reported?  I can't see anything.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-29277527


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 19, 2014)

quimcunx said:


> Where's that reported?  I can't see anything.


loads places.


----------



## Looby (Sep 19, 2014)

There's a live news conference on BBC now.


----------



## quimcunx (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-29277527



Thank you.


----------



## jusali (Sep 19, 2014)

quimcunx said:


> Where's that reported?  I can't see anything.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-29277527


----------



## cesare (Sep 19, 2014)

And on the live reporting: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/events/scotland-decides/live


----------



## jusali (Sep 19, 2014)

doh!


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 19, 2014)

The scottish Clegg goes again.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> The scottish Clegg goes again.


eh?


----------



## marty21 (Sep 19, 2014)

quimcunx said:


> Where's that reported?  I can't see anything.


 breaking news on BBC News atm -


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Sep 19, 2014)

Wait? The Westminster elite have back-pedalled from their vows?  WHODATHUNKIT?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> eh?


I'm comparing him to Nick Clegg and his two-faced neo-liberal role. The again bit was to do with the last time he played this hand in order get members to beg him to come back,thus strengthening his hand and cutting off potential challengers without a formal challenge or long drawn out internal fight.


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> Salmond's resigned



His disappointment will be a heavy burden on him at the moment.
He should be proud of the fact he raised a party that was only seen as a one agenda party into a force that has shaken the very foundations of Westminster.
I always have time for those who cause a ruckus.
Those who quaked at the polling booth and erred for the known instead of a chance to see what could have been possible, good or bad, will lay in their beds tonight and wonder if they have let slip a new beginning.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> I'm comparing him to Nick Clegg and his two-faced neo-liberal role.


Then please don't.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 19, 2014)

Guardian reporting this from Salmond's news conference:


> But he says that David Cameron, in a phone conversation today, has refused to commit to a second reading in Westminster of a bill for more powers for Scotland by 27 March 2015 – a promise he says was made by Gordon Brown during the campaign.


Suspect this will now shift to _manifesto commitments_ to extra powers, rather than immediate commitments. I haven't scrutnised the wording of what Brown has said on all this, butit suggests either he or Cameron is a liar.


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 19, 2014)

Cameron should resign too. Arse!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 19, 2014)

Sprocket. said:


> Those who quaked at the polling booth and erred for the known instead of a chance to see what could have been possible, good or bad, will lay in their beds tonight and wonder if they have let slip a new beginning.


Fuck me, that's patronising.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 19, 2014)

weepiper said:


> Then please don't.


I think i will ta. His party and he personally are neo-liberals. They pose as being social-democratic or left. They're not. They are the people who would bring neo-liberalism under the guise of social justice.


----------



## Theisticle (Sep 19, 2014)

LMAO, what a baby: Salmond bans Mail, Telegraph & Express from resignation presser - Guardian also not present - live blog


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 19, 2014)

Theisticle said:


> LMAO, what a baby: Salmond bans Mail, Telegraph & Express from resignation presser - Guardian also not present - live blog


The guardian were only allowed a journo the SNP decided was ok to them.


----------



## marty21 (Sep 19, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> I'm comparing him to Nick Clegg and his two-faced neo-liberal role. The again bit was to do with the last time he played this hand in order get members to beg him to come back,thus strengthening his hand and cutting off potential challengers without a formal challenge or long drawn out internal fight.


 he was way younger then, he's 61 now? can't see him riding to the rescue another time


----------



## marty21 (Sep 19, 2014)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> Wait? The Westminster elite have back-pedalled from their vows?  WHODATHUNKIT?


 clegg in breaking pledge shocker!


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 19, 2014)

marty21 said:


> he was way younger then, he's 61 now? can't see him riding to the rescue another time


Only 59 - a  new GE in less than a year. All this stuff centred on him (at least from the party and electoral formal side) . Nah, i can't see a walk away.


----------



## Theisticle (Sep 19, 2014)




----------



## Wilf (Sep 19, 2014)

Sprocket. said:


> Cameron should resign too. Arse!


It's turned out just about as well as it could for Cameron - significant victoy margin, big enough to avoid calls for a run off in the next decade.  His political difficulty is matching the vague commitments he gave on devo with the blusterings of his back benchers, but he'll probably manage that by leaving it till the manifesto.  If he can do that he'll also avoid all the excited chatter about 'no going back' for the UK constitution, English parliaments etc.  In reality, it's probably miliband who will have to do the real juggling after May 2015, particularly if he's reliant on the SNP at Westminster.


----------



## marty21 (Sep 19, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Only 59 - a  new GE in less than a year. All this stuff centred on him (at least from the party and electoral formal side) . Nah, i can't see a walk away.


Had it been a yes vote, the SNP would have been weakened as a party at the first Scottish Election as their main pulling power would have disappeared - so votes may have gone back to Scottish Labour, so his time at the top would have been limited anyway - I can see why he resigned - didn't get the glittering prize


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 19, 2014)

marty21 said:


> Had it been a yes vote, the SNP would have been weakened as a party at the first Scottish Election as their main pulling power would have disappeared - so votes may have gone back to Scottish Labour, so his time at the top would have been limited anyway - I can see why he resigned - didn't get the glittering prize


The day after, with negotiations for further devolution to deal with? 

Not very _statesmanlike_.


----------



## Quartz (Sep 19, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The day after, with negotiations for further devolution to deal with?
> 
> Not very _statesmanlike_.



But honourable.


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 19, 2014)

Quote of the day just now on R5.
Boris Johnson; '' How many wheels are there on a tandem? yes three that's right'' '


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 19, 2014)

marty21 said:


> Had it been a yes vote, the SNP would have been weakened as a party at the first Scottish Election as their main pulling power would have disappeared - so votes may have gone back to Scottish Labour, so his time at the top would have been limited anyway - I can see why he resigned - didn't get the glittering prize


I think they would have got an independence electoral bonus. The tories have also melted into that party, but they have gone native. Lots of people saying (and i don't agree) that the NO vote spells big trouble for labour. So this ex-tory/ex-labour coaliton might strengthen the SNP.


----------



## Tankus (Sep 19, 2014)

Blimey....what a roller coaster .......I feel quite optimistic over what salmond has initiated ....Its no longer all about the Scot's

Looking at the Glasgow result  possibly the SNP vote will be strengthened at the expense of ex heritary labour voters

Maybe Brown might seize an opportunity and separate Scottish labour from the English manbag metrosexual centro London labour set and spray himself in woad..... Solves the west lothian and he's back to being the big man in a small house , going it alone 

Maybe call it Old school labour


----------



## marty21 (Sep 19, 2014)

Cameron is very damaged by this, couldn't convince on his own, had to get Labour involved and drag Brown out of retirement


----------



## Coolfonz (Sep 19, 2014)

Fuck all will happen. Already all the conditions are being rolled out. It will be a year of chipping away at the "promises", compromises, u-turns, misunderstandings and an enquiry. Bingo. Mugged off.


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 19, 2014)

marty21 said:


> Cameron is very damaged by this, couldn't convince on his own, had to get Labour involved and drag Brown out of retirement



Or as Boris put it, ' they had to get Gordon Brown out of the deep freeze to make up for the invertebrate Milliband'!


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 19, 2014)

DP


----------



## newbie (Sep 19, 2014)

Coolfonz said:


> Fuck all will happen. Already all the conditions are being rolled out. It will be a year of chipping away at the "promises", compromises, u-turns, misunderstandings and an enquiry. Bingo. Mugged off.


I don't think so.  We're less than 9 months off an election, and there's now a head of steam building as all sorts of people spot the possibility for constitutional realignment.  Cameron has promised change since the result, all the party leaders promised something before it.

We'll see but it looks to me like 9 months of constitutional arguments.  What will come of that will depend on balance of forces, of course.


----------



## treelover (Sep 19, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Guardian reporting this from Salmond's news conference:
> 
> Suspect this will now shift to _manifesto commitments_ to extra powers, rather than immediate commitments. I haven't scrutnised the wording of what Brown has said on all this, butit suggests either he or Cameron is a liar.



Unbelievable, I suspect civil disobedience will raise its head if they renege.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 19, 2014)

Sprocket. said:


> His disappointment will be a heavy burden on him at the moment.
> He should be proud of the fact he raised a party that was only seen as a one agenda party into a force that has shaken the very foundations of Westminster.
> I always have time for those who cause a ruckus.
> Those who quaked at the polling booth and erred for the known instead of a chance to see what could have been possible, good or bad, will lay in their beds tonight and wonder if they have let slip a new beginning.


Fuck him the neoliberal prick, the idea that he isn't part of the establishment is ludicrous.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 19, 2014)

I am always suspect of any party that has "Nationalist" in its title. 

He sounds like a fish anyhow.


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 19, 2014)

redsquirrel said:


> Fuck him the neoliberal prick, the idea that he isn't part of the establishment is ludicrous.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 19, 2014)

newbie said:


> I don't think so.  We're less than 9 months off an election, and there's now a head of steam building as all sorts of people spot the possibility for constitutional realignment.  Cameron has promised change since the result, all the party leaders promised something before it.
> 
> We'll see but it looks to me like 9 months of constitutional arguments.  What will come of that will depend on balance of forces, of course.


I'm sure _something_ will come out of this constitutionally, but it's hard to say what till the dust settles. However now the vote has been won Cameron has no great incentive to please Scottish voters, particularly as he has only 1 MP in Scotland (and not many MSPs to lose in 2016).  It's a mess really, Miliband might end up being the one putting all this into practice, but has his ultimate battle with the SNP to factor in.  Cameron ain't got fuck all in Scotland but has to worry about his backbenchers and, most of all, what Farage will do with any promises he makes.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 19, 2014)

Quartz said:


> But honourable.


Nothing honourable about stepping down now. He can step down if he wants, but the next year is really important for the SNP. Potentially it is the period in which the powers of a Scottish parliament are set for the next generation. 

Or not - they might get nothing substantial. But either way, he won't be there fighting for it. It's almost as if he doesn't give a shit really, he's just in it for himself...


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 19, 2014)

Sprocket. said:


> Those who quaked at the polling booth and erred for the known instead of a chance to see what could have been possible, good or bad, *will lay in their beds tonight* and wonder if they have let slip a new beginning.



Drunk, or just relieved? 

I doubt the late No voting  ex-switherers will be that bothered right now, tbh.


----------



## Quartz (Sep 19, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Cameron ain't got fuck all in Scotland



That's not actually quite correct. While the Tories only won one seat in 2010, their share of the vote at 16.7% was only 2.2% behind that of the second-placed Lib Dems and 3.2% behind the third-placed SNP. Their lack of MPs is an artefact of the FPTP system we have. As with the Tories in the 1980s, Labour benefitted a lot from the opposition splitting the vote. If you look at the electoral results, the Tories came second or a close third in a lot of places.


----------



## Quartz (Sep 19, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Nothing honourable about stepping down now.



Of course it is. As the leader, he's taking full responsibility, as is fit and proper.

He's also clearing the way for his replacement before the General Election next year, of course.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 19, 2014)

Quartz said:


> Of course it is. As the leader, he's taking full responsibility, as is fit and proper.
> 
> He's also clearing the way for his replacement before the General Election next year, of course.


Balls. He's abdicating before the really hard stuff, and distancing himself from any failure to deliver more meaningful devolution. Negotiate the new deal, then stand down. That would be an honourable thing to do.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 19, 2014)

Quartz said:


> That's not actually quite correct. While the Tories only won one seat in 2010, their share of the vote at 16.7% was only 2.2% behind that of the second-placed Lib Dems and 3.2% behind the third-placed SNP. Their lack of MPs is an artefact of the FPTP system we have. As with the Tories in the 1980s, Labour benefitted a lot from the opposition splitting the vote. If you look at the electoral results, the Tories came second or a close third in a lot of places.


Yeah, I know that, but I was responding to a post about what Cameron will or won't do between now and May 2015.  Whilst he now has to offer something - and some sort of vaguely something/nothing for the rest of the UK - his short term thinking will be more concerned with there being only 1 Tory Mp in Scotland (and not much chance of increasing that).


----------



## Quartz (Sep 19, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Yeah, I know that, but I was responding to a post about what Cameron will or won't do between now and May 2015.



Cameron's a cunt. He's already passed the buck to Hague. Who's conveniently leaving and so won't actually do anything.


----------



## newbie (Sep 20, 2014)

Wilf said:


> I'm sure _something_ will come out of this constitutionally, but it's hard to say what till the dust settles. However now the vote has been won Cameron has no great incentive to please Scottish voters, particularly as he has only 1 MP in Scotland (and not many MSPs to lose in 2016).  It's a mess really, Miliband might end up being the one putting all this into practice, but has his ultimate battle with the SNP to factor in.  Cameron ain't got fuck all in Scotland but has to worry about his backbenchers and, most of all, what Farage will do with any promises he makes.


Scottish voters are collateral- Cameron wants to finess Labour.  He's proposing Scottish MPs shouldn't vote on English matters: so if the predictions are correct and after next May there's a Lab majority of 30, propped up by 40 ScotLab MPs, then a Labour government has a majority on UK-wide issues but is in the minority on England only matters.

Cameron has much to gain.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 20, 2014)

Anyway, I'm at least glad we can stop using Yes and No as nouns.


----------



## starfish (Sep 20, 2014)

Im glad of the result. Im neither a Unionist or a Monarchist but my head always said keep things as they are but make change from within. It will cause a seismic shake up in the way people view politics now, maybe. Maybe im just rambling. It would have too much hassle to split everything up. I am just rambling.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Sep 20, 2014)

starfish said:


> I am just rambling.



As long as you're not naked, then that shouldn't be a problem caller.


----------



## starfish (Sep 20, 2014)

goldenecitrone said:


> As long as you're not naked, then that shouldn't be a problem caller.


Well not yet i amnt but the night is still young.


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 20, 2014)

Sasaferrato said:


> Bookies giving 2/1 that he's gone in 48 hours.


Doubt it unless the party boots him


ska invita said:


> whats that then


http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/bc147fac-1003-11e4-80b1-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3DoDxCTxC

Here you go


----------



## starfish (Sep 20, 2014)

20 odd years ago i was a fervent Nationalist & would have done anything to see my country gain independence but my opinion, like my feelings towards the England football team, have softened over the years. I just didnt see what benefit would have been gained from independence. I salute all those who spoke articulately & heartfelt about it danny la rouge weepiper especially, forgive me if i have missed anyone out My feelings & opinion may well have been different if i still lived in Scotland.


----------



## Nylock (Sep 20, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Balls. He's abdicating before the really hard stuff, and distancing himself from any failure to deliver more meaningful devolution. Negotiate the new deal, then stand down. That would be an honourable thing to do.


From the tone of this post it seems that you think Salmond is the only member of the SNP capable of leading the negotiations, which is a bit of a slap in the face to the many other SNP members who could make a decent fist of it. Who's to say that he won't form part of the negotiating team anyway, just not with the additional responsibilities of first minister? I'd imagine that the proposals put forward from the Westminster side will be laced with all sorts of tricks and traps. It would be easier to focus on the details of the negotiations without the obligations of the first minister job potentially getting in the way.

Then again, maybe he has just chucked his dolly out the pram and they're all now fucked in the upcoming negotiations...


----------



## leanderman (Sep 20, 2014)

Nylock said:


> From the tone of this post it seems that you think Salmond is the only member of the SNP capable of leading the negotiations, which is a bit of a slap in the face to the many other SNP members who could make a decent fist of it. Who's to say that he won't form part of the negotiating team anyway, just not with the additional responsibilities of first minister? I'd imagine that the proposals put forward from the Westminster side will be laced with all sorts of tricks and traps. It would be easier to focus on the details of the negotiations without the obligations of the first minister job potentially getting in the way.
> 
> Then again, maybe he has just chucked his dolly out the pram and they're all now fucked in the upcoming negotiations...



He's kind of unlucky in that an outlier poll put YES ahead and others mis-stated YES's support by an extra 3-4 percentage points. 

This meant the result was more seen as a disappointment. 

And may have helped him feel he had to quit.


----------



## Nylock (Sep 20, 2014)

Thanks for explaining that to me captain obvious! The city can once again sleep tonight knowing that you are on the case to demystify such complexities to the rest of us!


----------



## leanderman (Sep 20, 2014)

It's also not impossible that it was the decision of his wife who, at 76 to his 59, might have said something like: 'Enough of the politics for now - we are not going to live for ever.'


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 20, 2014)

starfish said:


> 20 odd years ago i was a fervent Nationalist & would have done anything to see my country gain independence but my opinion, like my feelings towards the England football team, have softened over the years. I just didnt see what benefit would have been gained from independence. I salute all those who spoke articulately & heartfelt about it danny la rouge weepiper especially, forgive me if i have missed anyone out My feelings & opinion may well have been different if i still lived in Scotland.


Great post. More of this.


----------



## cantsin (Sep 20, 2014)

starfish said:


> 20 odd years ago i was a fervent Nationalist & would have done anything to see my country gain independence but my opinion, like my feelings towards the England football team, have softened over the years. I just didnt see what benefit would have been gained from independence. I salute all those who spoke articulately & heartfelt about it danny la rouge weepiper especially, forgive me if i have missed anyone out My feelings & opinion may well have been different if i still lived in Scotland.



heard a Scottish No voter on radio yday saying, in very non triumphalist tone, that he felt good about contributing to the stopping of an inbuilt Tory majority in England for the next 40 years....

Was good to be reminded of the fundamentally decent intentions of so many No's....

But then he's probably just helped ensure Scotland will swap between the Tories and near identical New Lab for the forseeable future.


----------



## Chz (Sep 20, 2014)

Quartz said:


> Of course it is. As the leader, he's taking full responsibility, as is fit and proper.
> 
> He's also clearing the way for his replacement before the General Election next year, of course.


He also swore that he wouldn't step down if he lost the referendum. So he shows himself to be just as much of a lying cunt as the rest of them when things don't go his way. (Though I think he's always come off as being from the nastier side of politics)


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 20, 2014)

Nylock said:


> From the tone of this post it seems that you think Salmond is the only member of the SNP capable of leading the negotiations, which is a bit of a slap in the face to the many other SNP members who could make a decent fist of it. Who's to say that he won't form part of the negotiating team anyway, just not with the additional responsibilities of first minister? I'd imagine that the proposals put forward from the Westminster side will be laced with all sorts of tricks and traps. It would be easier to focus on the details of the negotiations without the obligations of the first minister job potentially getting in the way.
> 
> Then again, maybe he has just chucked his dolly out the pram and they're all now fucked in the upcoming negotiations...


I have no opinion either way about his competence or importance to his party. I was merely commenting on the honourability of resigning at such a moment.


----------



## Quartz (Sep 20, 2014)

Chz said:


> He also swore that he wouldn't step down if he lost the referendum.



I had forgotten that.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 20, 2014)

Quartz said:


> I had forgotten that.


I don't blame him. He must be knackered from two years of campaigning. He has done all he can & there won't be another referendum in his political career.


----------



## newbie (Sep 20, 2014)

Chz said:


> He also swore that he wouldn't step down if he lost the referendum. So he shows himself to be just as much of a lying cunt as the rest of them when things don't go his way. (Though I think he's always come off as being from the nastier side of politics)


I'm sure you've never changed your mind about your own intentions. Or is it only politicians you expect to be hostage to everything they ever said sometime in the past, despite changed circumstances?

And, of course, you don't know if the great and the good in the SNP handed him a loaded revolver.


----------



## tony heath (Sep 20, 2014)

Salmond can devote his retirement to fighting British nationalism


----------



## malatesta32 (Sep 20, 2014)

anyone got any info on SDL/EDL eejits rucknig in glasgow?


----------



## gabi (Sep 20, 2014)

So sturgeon is tipped to take over? Fucking hell. What an upgrade.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 20, 2014)

What a great thread.  Lots of insightful comments.  Any opinions on Andy Murray?


----------



## gabi (Sep 20, 2014)

A living legend. Bravely calling on his troops to vote to separate from England, from his leafy mansion in... England...


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 20, 2014)

... and there we have it...  well done gabi.


----------



## Belushi (Sep 20, 2014)

There's nothing wrong with that. I might be supportive of Welsh independence even though I live in London.


----------



## gabi (Sep 20, 2014)

I do actually reckon if they polled the English, Salmond might actually get his wish and Scotland would be adrift. That's the great irony of this whole shitstorm.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 20, 2014)

Nope, you're wrong gabi.  Of course, the British are above nationalism though, no irony intended.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Sep 20, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> What a great thread.  Lots of insightful comments.  Any opinions on Andy Murray?


----------



## marty21 (Sep 20, 2014)

I have an answer to the West Loathian question, we can have an English Parliament simply by making the other home nations independent .

HTH


----------



## Sasaferrato (Sep 20, 2014)

gabi said:


> So sturgeon is tipped to take over? Fucking hell. What an upgrade.



Someone who is despised even more, outside the SNP tent, than Salmond.

Excellent choice, having 'seen off' the 'Little Scotlanders', the next job is to 'see off' the SNP at the 2016 elections.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 20, 2014)

And then 'we' win?  Who is we?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Sep 20, 2014)

gabi said:


> A living legend. Bravely calling on his troops to vote to separate from England, from his leafy mansion in... England...



Not forgetting the chief hypocrite of the 'Yes' campaign, Connery, tax dodger resident in Monaco.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 20, 2014)

Wow, you are really angry aren't you?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Sep 20, 2014)

marty21 said:


> I have an answer to the West Loathian question, we can have an English Parliament simply by making the other home nations independent .
> 
> HTH



Only 1 'a' in Lothian. Good place to live is West Lothian, the council pretty much swaps between Labour/SNP at each election, so they do do their best for the electorate, in the hope of re-election.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Sep 20, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> Wow, you are really angry aren't you?



Me? Angry doesn't quite describe it.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 20, 2014)

I guess under the UK, West Lothian will flourish now Sasaferrato


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 20, 2014)

Sasaferrato said:


> Me? Angry doesn't quite describe it.



True... deranged... a bit more closer to home.


----------



## treelover (Sep 20, 2014)

Sasaferrato said:


> Someone who is despised even more, outside the SNP tent, than Salmond.
> 
> Excellent choice, having 'seen off' the 'Little Scotlanders', the next job is to 'see off' the SNP at the 2016 elections.



So, you will be happy if Scottish Labour win then?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Sep 20, 2014)

treelover said:


> So, you will be happy if Scottish Labour win then?



Tell me, which party do you think would have been in power after the first election 'post independence' ? Labour voters would have seized on their chance to elect a government. Don't forget, their are more natural Labour voters than SNP voters. 

I was against 'compulsory voting', but having seen the genuine engagement in this campaign, and also the colossal turnout, I've shifted my view. Perhaps if people had to vote, they would engage more with the political process. Who knows, Scotland might return a 'Real Conservative' government.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Sep 20, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> True... deranged... a bit more closer to home.



And you are a stupid twat...


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 20, 2014)

Sasaferrato said:


> I was against 'compulsory voting', but having seen the genuine engagement in this campaign, and also the colossal turnout, I've shifted my view. Perhaps if people had to vote, they would engage more with the political process. Who knows, Scotland might return a 'Real Conservative' government.



I really doubt the people being dragged to the polling booth would be voting conservative mate.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Sep 20, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> I guess under the UK, West Lothian will flourish now Sasaferrato



It will make no difference. Had the lunatics succeeded in taking over the asylum, much would have changed, none of it for the better.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Sep 20, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> I really doubt the people being dragged to the polling booth would be voting conservative mate.



There was a time when Scotland returned a Conservative majority in Westminster MPs. Of course, given the quality of your previous 'dialogue', I didn't expect you to know that.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Sep 20, 2014)

Shower time.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 20, 2014)

Sasaferrato said:


> It will make no difference. Had the lunatics succeeded in taking over the asylum, much would have changed, none of it for the better.



Says the man from West Lothian voting for Cameron, Duncan Smith, Gove, and Osbourne.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 20, 2014)

Sasaferrato said:


> There was a time when Scotland returned a Conservative majority in Westminster MPs. Of course, given the quality of your previous 'dialogue', I didn't expect you to know that.



Harking back to the great days of the Unionist Party?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Sep 20, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> Says the man from West Lothian voting for Cameron, Duncan Smith, Gove, and Osbourne.



One again, you display your ignorance. I will not vote for any of the above.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 20, 2014)

I think I am getting the impression of the types of people you vote for.


----------



## Quartz (Sep 20, 2014)

They're rerunning the vote coverage on the BBC Parliament channel.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Sep 20, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> Harking back to the great days of the Unionist Party?



Times past are often cited as being considerably better than times present. In truth, times past were no better in many ways than present times. Because of incremental improvement, often won at great cost to the protagonists, society is considerably more equitable that it was 50 years ago, and infinitely more equitable than 100 years ago.

I opposed Scottish independence on a number of grounds, not least the unanswered questions on EU membership and currency. In the month before the referendum, £14Bn flowed out of Edinburgh to London, that money may now return, or not. Intrinsically, whether it returns or not is immaterial, we as we are still a single 'nation'.

SNP deceit can be characterised very nicely by the £400m of health spending cutbacks, which were to be announced after the referendum. Salmond, having seen the 'President Eck' nameplate disappear from his door, has reneged on his promise not to stand down in the event of a 'No' vote.

There have been very disparate opinions of the oil reserves, but even given the 'best estimate', there is a certain irony on the party which prides itself on its 'greenness' basing its financial forecasts (such as they were) on the ongoing consumption of fossil fuel.

I had to smile at Gordon Brown this morning, with his 'promise' that further devolved powers will be delivered. He is in no position to deliver anything, and Milliband and Cameron are already arguing as to what these devolved powers might be. Neither of them is actually able to guarantee anything, as neither has back bench consensus.

A country of 65m people is stronger on both the European and world stages than a country of 6m people. An independent Scotland would have as much influence as Albania, but probably with a weaker currency.

Scotland benefits from a higher per capita income from central government than the other nations within the UK, I am very surprised that those other nations are not more vociferous with regard to this.

Oh well, it is over. Those who wished to destroy the Union have lost. It'll be a while before they stop whining I suppose, but they'll get over it, just as I would have had to do had it gone the other way. The vote was lost by 10%, which is a large majority. Had this been a parliamentary election, 10% is 60 MPs, which would not, by any standards, be regarded as close. 

One thing which has emerged is the difference between the 'Yes' and 'No' demographic. The 'poorer' areas voted 'Yes', presumably in he belief that this would deliver higher welfare spending; one may argue that the more prosperous areas voted 'No' because they would have had to pay for it. 

I look forward to the next referendum. Ballot question: 'Should we have a Scottish parliament.'


----------



## Sasaferrato (Sep 20, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> I think I am getting the impression of the types of people you vote for.



You have no clue whatsoever. (My last vote was for a Labour councillor.)


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 20, 2014)

.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 20, 2014)

Sasaferrato said:


> Times past are often cited as being considerably better than times present. In truth, times past were no better in many ways than present times. Because of incremental improvement, often won at great cost to the protagonists, society is considerably more equitable that it was 50 years ago, and infinitely more equitable than 100 years ago.
> 
> I opposed Scottish independence on a number of grounds, not least the unanswered questions on EU membership and currency. In the month before the referendum, £14Bn flowed out of Edinburgh to London, that money may now return, or not. Intrinsically, whether it returns or not is immaterial, we as we are still a single 'nation'.
> 
> ...



Well thanks for all of that.

Rehashed scare stories about the EU and currency.

Rehashed bullshit about health spending cuttbacks.

Our oil is a liability.  If the Treasury forecasts are wrong, I am sure you will be outraged and reflect on the referendum.

Disnae like Albania.

Scrounging poor people want independence.

Wants to scrap the Scottish Parliament.

So, you a member of UKIP or just vote for them?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Sep 20, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> Well thanks for all of that.
> 
> Rehashed scare stories about the EU and currency.
> 
> ...



You really are a fucking idiot, aren't you? The health spending cut is real, not a rumour.  As to the rest, you have put up no cogent argument whatsoever.

Edited to add: I see that you have been on the boards for five minutes, which explains the fact that despite knowing nothing at all about me, you feel able to tell me what I believe.


----------



## where to (Sep 20, 2014)

Sasaferrato said:


> Not forgetting the chief hypocrite of the 'Yes' campaign, Connery, tax dodger resident in Monaco.



he was kept away from the campaign for that very reason. 



cantsin said:


> heard a Scottish No voter on radio yday saying, in very non triumphalist tone, that he felt good about contributing to the stopping of an inbuilt Tory majority in England for the next 40 years....
> 
> Was good to be reminded of the fundamentally decent intentions of so many No's....
> 
> But then he's probably just helped ensure Scotland will swap between the Tories and near identical New Lab for the forseeable future.



wonder how he's feeling now. these guys got majorly blackmailed/ guilted into voting No by Labour and it will be interesting to see how they respond to the realisation they've been used.


----------



## where to (Sep 20, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Look up the history of the term tartan tories.
> 
> What happened here is that many people were blinded by the SNPs 2011 performance when a coalition of city/labourish voters and the trad more rural conservative voters voted SNP together - they took this to be writ in stone forever. This referendum saw a breakdown of that coalition with the latter voting NO and the former YES. This could spell big changes for both labour and the SNP or things could just go back to dual voting with the former voting labour in GE and SNP in national elections.



aye, in a nutshell. 

35-40% Labour voted Yes on Thursday - despite Labour throwing everything they had at them. I don't think many will be going back soon.

separately, 4000 have joined the SNP since yesterday.  1200 have joined the Scottish Greens.  Many have joined the SSP apparently too.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 20, 2014)

where to said:


> aye, in a nutshell.
> 
> 35-40% Labour voted Yes on Thursday - despite Labour throwing everything they had at them. I don't think many will be going back soon.
> 
> separately, 4000 have joined the SNP since yesterday.  1200 have joined the Scottish Greens.  Many have joined the SSP apparently too.


Those figures, if true, are astonishing. I say 'if true' not because I'm doubting you, but I might be doubting the greens and snp.

Edit: I've just seen a reference to the ssp getting 800+ applications, so the above figures wouldn't be out of line with that.  I suspect these all inquiries that might be _about membership in some shape or form_, not actual sign ups. Still, even that is impressive.


----------



## where to (Sep 20, 2014)

Two personal friends have joined parties in the last 36 hours. a month ago neither were campaigners, one wasn't at all.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 20, 2014)

Again, I'm sure this is something short of standing orders signed and sent to the bank, but still very high figures. Scaled up to England, the snp figure would be 40000 joining in a day.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 20, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Again, I'm sure this is something short of standing orders signed and sent to the bank, but still very high figures. Scaled up to England, the snp figure would be 40000 joining in a day.


People are angry. Most people who voted Yes weren't nationalists.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 20, 2014)

where to said:


> 35-40% Labour voted Yes on Thursday - despite Labour throwing everything they had at them. I don't think many will be going back soon..



Sorry, I don't get this argument. People who voted Labour in previous elections are somehow going to vote 'no' because 'their party' told them to? People don't vote like that. People vote in a more independent manner than that. They might vote labour but also have thought 'yes' on the balance of what they thought was right, not what the SNP thought was right or some other cunt in the 'yes' campaign thought was right. And they might still hope for a labour future, believe in a labour movement. 

There is no contradiction here.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 20, 2014)

where to said:


> he was kept away from the campaign for that very reason.
> 
> 
> 
> wonder how he's feeling now. these guys got majorly blackmailed/ guilted into voting No by Labour and it will be interesting to see how they respond to the realisation they've been used.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 20, 2014)

How did you sort those tweets?


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 20, 2014)

weepiper said:


> View attachment 61330



You'd think there would be something to be learned from trying to use a random sampling of social media posts to prove something. Seems like actual ballots more truly reflect the electorate.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 20, 2014)

Nah, all the dupes who voted 'no' are regretting it already. Fools that they were.


----------



## where to (Sep 20, 2014)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> You'd think there would be something to be learned from trying to use a random sampling of social media posts to prove something. Seems like actual ballots more truly reflect the electorate.



woooosh.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 20, 2014)

where to said:


> woooosh.


Wooosh what? 

It's not actually random sampling, though, is it?


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 20, 2014)

where to said:


> woooosh.



Sorry, what? You'll have to explain.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 20, 2014)

where to said:


> woooosh.


What are you talking about HoodedClaw's point was a perfectly reasonable one, particularly the higher internet presence of YES IMO was part of the reason why some YES supporters thought that the polls were wrong and that they would win.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 20, 2014)

weepiper has posted a content-free sample of tweets. She needs to say how she came about that sample for it to mean anything. Otherwise it is an absurd waste of everyone's time.


----------



## where to (Sep 20, 2014)

redsquirrel said:


> What are you talking about HoodedClaw's point was a perfectly reasonable one, particularly the higher internet presence of YES IMO was part of the reason why some YES supporters thought that the polls were wrong and that they would win.



Some people are apparently already having regrets, as I had wondered about. That was Weepipers point. There was no suggestion of anything more than that.


----------



## where to (Sep 20, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> weepiper has posted a content-free sample of tweets. She needs to say how she came about that sample for it to mean anything. Otherwise it is an absurd waste of everyone's time.



Do you realise how ridiculous you sound?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 20, 2014)

where to said:


> Do you realise how ridiculous you sound?


This kind of lazy shit should be jumped on. IMO.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 20, 2014)

where to said:


> Some people are apparently already having regrets, as I had wondered about. That was Weepipers point. There was no suggestion of anything more than that.


Nah, there was no point at all.' Some people, who I've sorted, are saying this.'

I could sort a group saying the opposite. 

So what.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 20, 2014)

where to said:


> Some people are apparently already having regrets, as I had wondered about. That was Weepipers point. There was no suggestion of anything more than that.


Rubbish there's the suggestion that this is a significant number of people, not merely just some people. And trying to us FB to gauge numbers is a bad way of doing that.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Sep 20, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Nah, there was no point at all.' Some people, who I've sorted, are saying this.'
> 
> I could sort a group saying the opposite.
> 
> So what.


I agree. And when you're dealing with the millions of total votes, it means nothing if twenty people say they regret voting the way they did, apart from representing those twenty people.

And five of them don't even say which way they actually voted - they could be regretting voting Yes for all we know!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 20, 2014)

*hashtag* "post here if you regret voting no"


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 20, 2014)

It's bizarre that anyone would use a small random sample of twitter to try and support a point of view. It's not like there's been a big vote with a big turnout recently that kind of put the kibosh on that sort of analysis. "Every window I see has a Yes poster in it!"


----------



## weepiper (Sep 21, 2014)

It's a picture off twitter someone has 'sorted' by presumably searching twitter for 'regret no' or similar search terms and it represents nothing other than some people on twitter saying they regret their vote. Jesus.


----------



## where to (Sep 21, 2014)

Fucking hell.

Nobody is trying to rewrite the result here. I'm just suggesting Labour may lose some supporters over this, and weepiper has shown some people already have regrets.

Not sure who you people are but the way you're jumping on this is fucking weird.  I may have missed the context to this?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 21, 2014)

weepiper said:


> It's a picture off twitter someone has 'sorted' by presumably searching twitter for 'regret no' or similar search terms and it represents nothing other than some people on twitter saying they regret their vote. Jesus.


Right. So it's entirely meaningless.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 21, 2014)

Paddy Englishman, Paddy Irishman, Paddy Englishman...


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 21, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Sorry, I don't get this argument. People who voted Labour in previous elections are somehow going to vote 'no' because 'their party' told them to? People don't vote like that. People vote in a more independent manner than that. They might vote labour but also have thought 'yes' on the balance of what they thought was right, not what the SNP thought was right or some other cunt in the 'yes' campaign thought was right. And they might still hope for a labour future, believe in a labour movement.
> 
> There is no contradiction here.



The labour movement?  Which movement is that?  I thought movements had, you know, people out in the streets, some kind of trajectory.


----------



## where to (Sep 21, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Right. So it's entirely meaningless.



You're really not adding anything to the discussion with this you know.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 21, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> The labour movement?  Which movement is that?  I thought movements had, you know, people out in the streets, some kind of trajectory.


you know, trade unions and that.

There are people who still believe in the link between the labour party and the trade unions, and will vote labour over the snp on that  basis.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 21, 2014)

where to said:


> You're really not adding anything to the discussion with this you know.


No, it's weepiper who's adding nothing with her selection of tweets.


----------



## where to (Sep 21, 2014)

where to said:


> Two personal friends have joined parties in the last 36 hours. a month ago neither were campaigners, one wasn't at all.



Now 3.  Apologies in advance though - shite sample size. Ban anecdotes.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 21, 2014)

gabi said:


> So sturgeon is tipped to take over? Fucking hell. What an upgrade.



The important thing is that Scotland remains in the capable hands of someone named after a fish.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 21, 2014)

The Labour Party, even before this, were on something of a downward trajectory (even in England).  It remains to be seen if that will continue.  They do get a lot of coverage at General Elections, the SNP don't.

I agree it is too early to tell how things are going with the Scottish electorate, but Labour is becoming an anachronism and a cunt magnet.  Trade Unionism is not what it used to be, and the good ones are not even affiliated with Labour any more.

Whether making total tits of themselves in this referendum will help them in any way, I doubt.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 21, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> you know, trade unions and that.
> 
> There are people who still believe in the link between the labour party and the trade unions.


yeah, some of them are the people who've torn up their USDAW memberships because they sent out a letter advising their members to vote no. I know of two personally.


----------



## coley (Sep 21, 2014)

Sasaferrato said:


> Scotland benefits from a higher per capita income from central government than the other nations within the UK, I am very surprised that those other nations are not more vociferous with regard to this.



Think we might be hearing a lot more on this given Cameron's waffle on how " we have heard the Scots speak, now we have to listen to England and the rest of the UK"
A fairer distribution of the Barnett formula  might be on the way


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 21, 2014)

where to said:


> Now 3.  Apologies in advance though - shite sample size. Ban anecdotes.


No but when your anecdotal evidence has lead you to wrongly predict something it might be time to for some re-evaluation


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 21, 2014)

It has been widely reported that there has been a surge in SNP, Green and SSP membership.  I don't find that hard to believe.  A lot of people were out campaigning, and really do think independence is the only way to change our current system.  English people should join as well


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 21, 2014)

weepiper said:


> yeah, some of them are the people who've torn up their USDAW memberships because they sent out a letter advising their members to vote no. I know of two personally.


Yep. I lost my belief in labour as representing the labour movement years ago. It's a sad moment.


----------



## where to (Sep 21, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No, it's weepiper who's adding nothing with her selection of tweets.



I found it interesting and will be looking out for more of the same.

Any source is useful in building understanding if you assess its meaning and give it appropriate weight.


----------



## where to (Sep 21, 2014)

redsquirrel said:


> No but when your anecdotal evidence has lead you to wrongly predict something it might be time to for some re-evaluation



My predictions on the referendum result were spot on and based in many respects on anecdotal evidence.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 21, 2014)

Sasaferrato said:


> Scotland benefits from a higher per capita income from central government than the other nations within the UK, I am very surprised that those other nations are not more vociferous with regard to this.



Some people are actually OK with the redistribution of wealth.

 If you want something to be angry about, look at how coalition cuts to local authority funding have been vastly greater in areas that don't vote tory. That's not redistribution, it's not 'austerity', it's just outright theft.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 21, 2014)

where to said:


> My predictions on the referendum result were spot on and based in many respects on anecdotal evidence.


Fine but there were U75 YES supporters that did predict YES wins


----------



## DownwardDog (Sep 21, 2014)

Sasaferrato said:


> I was against 'compulsory voting', but having seen the genuine engagement in this campaign, and also the colossal turnout, I've shifted my view. Perhaps if people had to vote, they would engage more with the political process. Who knows, Scotland might return a 'Real Conservative' government.



We have compulsory voting in Australia; it doesn't lead to an engaged electorate or rarefied political debate in the style of Aeschines vs. Demosthenes. All it means is that the parties don't have to get their core votes out and therefore never have to offer them any ideological red meat. Thus elections are fought on matters of process and competence with near identical policies from all parties.


----------



## Quartz (Sep 21, 2014)

SpookyFrank said:


> If you want something to be angry about, look at how coalition cuts to local authority funding have been vastly greater in areas that don't vote tory. That's not redistribution, it's not 'austerity', it's just outright theft.



I disagree: it's politicians buying votes as usual. Just like the aircraft carriers being built on the Clyde. Labour constituencies, of course.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 21, 2014)

I suppose one upside is that you get a good indication of disaffection from the spoiled votes.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 21, 2014)

and also the privelege of saying, "I was forced to draw a cock on a ballot paper this morning"


----------



## coley (Sep 21, 2014)

SpookyFrank said:


> The important thing is that Scotland remains in the capable hands of someone named after a fish.


When was I elected? Funny sort of democracy, oh Scotland? Naw, got paint I need to see drying


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 21, 2014)

coley said:


> When was I elected? Funny sort of democracy, oh Scotland? Naw, got paint I need to see drying



Is this a pun?


----------



## coley (Sep 21, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> Is this a pun?


Aye, just bored


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 21, 2014)

8ball said:


> I suppose one upside is that you get a good indication of disaffection from the spoiled votes.


You don't, well at least in Oz you don't. The Australian electorate is every bit as disaffected as the British but that doesn't really translate into spoiled ballots.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 21, 2014)

I was struck by the tiny no of spoilt ballots. Around 3,000, irrc. A tiny number.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 21, 2014)

redsquirrel said:


> You don't, well at least in Oz you don't. The Australian electorate is every bit as disaffected as the British but that doesn't really translate into spoiled ballots.



I thought you got a hell of a lot more spoiled ballots there compared to here.


----------



## where to (Sep 21, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I was struck by the tiny no of spoilt ballots. Around 3,000, irrc. A tiny number.



Totally agree. And only around 700 did the 'both boxes' option, which was a fairly logical option for several desperately undecided people I knew alone.  In the end they voted Yes.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Sep 21, 2014)

Quartz said:


> I disagree: it's politicians buying votes as usual. Just like the aircraft carriers being built on the Clyde. Labour constituencies, of course.


It's tricky to build aircraft carriers in the leafy shires, with no access to major rivers. They would if they could work out a way round this constraint though.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Sep 21, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> *hashtag* "post here if you regret voting no"


It's impossible to see that in the picture, at least on my phone, so apologies if I missed that.


----------



## Quartz (Sep 21, 2014)

farmerbarleymow said:


> It's tricky to build aircraft carriers in the leafy shires, with no access to major rivers.



But there are shipyards on the south coast.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Sep 21, 2014)

Quartz said:


> But there are shipyards on the south coast.


It was a joke.


----------



## where to (Sep 21, 2014)

redsquirrel said:


> Fine but there were U75 YES supporters that did predict YES wins



Hang them mate. Hang them twice.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 21, 2014)

where to said:


> Hang them mate. Hang them twice.


Oh fuck off, if we can't discuss or mention some of the tactical mistakes made by the YES campaign how are we ever going to learn from those mistakes.  Or you could just go an stick your head in the sand and blame it all on the Daily Mail brainwashing old ladies.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 21, 2014)

8ball said:


> I thought you got a hell of a lot more spoiled ballots there compared to here.


The number of 'informal' ballots is probably higher (but still pretty low ~5%) but that could equally be down to the fact that the ballot papers are more complex.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 21, 2014)

redsquirrel said:


> Oh fuck off, if we can't discuss or mention some of the tactical mistakes made by the YES campaign how are we ever going to learn from those mistakes.  Or you could just go an stick your head in the sand and blame it all on the Daily Mail brainwashing old ladies.



... or YOU can accept that convincing the Scottish population to vote for independence won't happen in two years, and that to achieve 45% of the vote considering the massive institutional prejudice (the press being the most obvious) the campaign overrall was an achievement.  Scots are only now grasping these issues, and how we want to be governed, our politics will be formed over time.  I think there is more positives that we, as a country, can take from this campaign.  It was people power like I have never seen.  The state hates us, and will be unwilling to change anything.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 21, 2014)

ah, 'we as a country'. Not a nationalist argument. Not at all.

Not we as a class. But we as a country. A vertical division of the people, not a horizontal one. Bosses and workers united.


----------



## Quartz (Sep 21, 2014)

farmerbarleymow said:


> It was a joke.



Sorry. It's late and I'm tired. And presently off to bed.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 21, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> ah, 'we as a country'. Not a nationalist argument. Not at all.
> 
> Not we as a class. But we as a country. A vertical division of the people, not a horizontal one. Bosses and workers united.



I consider myself Scottish and campaign here.  I have comrades all over the place and campaign in other countries.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 21, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> I consider myself Scottish, and campaign here.  I have comrades all over the place, and campaign in other countries.


In that case, what is this 'we, as a country'? Who does it include? why is it useful?

There have been movements of national liberation across the world over the last 60 years. This is not one of those. And clothing yourself in the language of those movements is insulting.


----------



## where to (Sep 21, 2014)

redsquirrel said:


> Oh fuck off, if we can't discuss or mention some of the tactical mistakes made by the YES campaign how are we ever going to learn from those mistakes.  Or you could just go an stick your head in the sand and blame it all on the Daily Mail brainwashing old ladies.



The positivity and belief within the campaign was no mistake. It was its greatest strength.

And this hasn't been a discussion of tactical mistakes, but whether weepiper should (be allowed?) to use twitter as a source.  As I said before, i may have missed some context. I've not been on the boards for a while.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 21, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> In that case, what is this 'we, as a country'? Who does it include? why is it useful?



What?  Scotland has a political culture that I feel part of, so it includes anyone part of that culture.  I don't know what you are insinuating.  I feel solidarity with all sorts of groups across the world in similar and not so similar political environments.  Not sure that has much use.  I would like to think that people like you, in England, could take positives from this campaign too.  You know, work together to help bring radical change to our shared political environment. I am sure that would have some use.  I just feel nothing but hostility.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 21, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> ah, 'we as a country'. Not a nationalist argument. Not at all.
> 
> Not we as a class. But we as a country. A vertical division of the people, not a horizontal one. Bosses and workers united.


tbf lbj it was a national campaign not a local class one in that it involved convincing bosses as much as workers - thats realpolitik to win independence - the class struggle here wasnt within the country but between scotland and the english establishment. once independence is won the focus of class struggle reframes to within the new border


----------



## 8ball (Sep 21, 2014)

ska invita said:


> tbf lbj it was a national campaign not a local class one in that it involved convincing bosses as much as workers - thats realpolitik to win independence - the class struggle here wasnt within the country but between scotland and the english establishment. once independence is won the focus of class struggle reframes to within the new border



Actually once won the struggle would have been to turn the independence movement into something truly progressive.  There was no class struggle on the SNP agenda.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 21, 2014)

8ball said:


> Actually once won the struggle would have been to turn the independence movement into something truly progressive.  There was no class struggle on the SNP agenda.


yeah thats what i meant but said badly


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Sep 21, 2014)

where to said:


> <snip>
> 
> And this hasn't been a discussion of tactical mistakes, but whether weepiper should (be allowed?) to use twitter as a source.  As I said before, i may have missed some context. I've not been on the boards for a while.


It's not a question of what sources anyone is 'allowed' to use, but rather how reliable those sources are. Anyone can cite whichever source they like, but that source will rightly be questioned if it  appears lacking. 

Twitter is, at best, unreliable, as people can post whatever they like, truthful or otherwise, and there is little way of verifying whether they are who they say they are. Lots of people regret which way they voted in an election for various reasons, but that doesn't really tell us anything beyond that they regretted it. Likewise, there will inevitably be people who voted Yes that regretted doing so.


----------



## newbie (Sep 21, 2014)

weepiper said:


> yeah, some of them are the people who've torn up their USDAW memberships because they sent out a letter advising their members to vote no. I know of two personally.



why? a unions job is to promote solidarity amongst all its members.  Have these people really bitten the poisoned apple of cross class nationalism to the extent they no longer need/want/feel solidarity with English workers?  Where will their workplace representation come from, some sort of Scottish only union?  

We've been assured, over and over, that what was under discussion was some sort of 'civic nationalism', different quantitatively, qualitatively, emotionally and practically from the well worn nationalism that I thought virtually everyone on the left rejected completely.  Is one of the outcomes of this that unhappy yes voters are now thinking in terms of Us and Them, Insiders and Outsiders based on some overarching sense of national identity?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Sep 21, 2014)

8ball said:


> I suppose one upside is that you get a good indication of disaffection from the spoiled votes.


There were very few. IRRC, no count topped 100 spoilt papers.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 21, 2014)

newbie said:


> why? a unions job is to promote solidarity amongst all its members.  Have these people really bitten the poisoned apple of cross class nationalism to the extent they no longer need/want/feel solidarity with English workers?  Where will their workplace representation come from, some sort of Scottish only union?
> 
> We've been assured, over and over, that what was under discussion was some sort of 'civic nationalism', different quantitatively, qualitatively, emotionally and practically from the well worn nationalism that I thought virtually everyone on the left rejected completely.  Is one of the outcomes of this that unhappy yes voters are now thinking in terms of Us and Them, Insiders and Outsiders based on some overarching sense of national identity?



What a load of bollocks.  She disane like one union, and you are accusing her of 'well worn nationalism' that "everyone on the left rejected completely".

Maybe USDAW's members no longer feel that it is a vehicle that can provide a platform for working-class unity if they are affiliated to a political party that doesn't support strikes, and will campaign with them even if it is against the interests off their members.

It is amazing that apart from maybe two or three posters, we are getting a load of drivel about how bloody pious our British left is (which seems to consist of Owen Jones and a bunch of 80 year old men).  We then get the ol' "you're a nationalist" insults after being under seige from state power for months.  I certainly believe two different narratives are forming in this country, and the British one is far more sinister.  A very right-wing nationalist movement that thinks of itself as 'above nationalism'.


----------



## newbie (Sep 21, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> What a load of bollocks.  She disane like one union, and you are accusing her of 'well worn nationalism' that "everyone on the left rejected completely".


down tiger, I'm not shooting any messengers but I see no problem in seeking clarification.


> Maybe USDAW's members no longer feel that it is a vehicle that can provide a platform for working-class unity if they are affiliated to a political party that doesn't support strikes, and will campaign with them even if it is against the interests off their members.



and that changed overnight with the result?  Are you in a position to decide what's in the interests of all USDAW members, or is their NEC?



> It is amazing that apart from maybe two or three posters, we are getting a load of drivel about how bloody pious our British left is (which seems to consist of Owen Jones and a bunch of 80 year old men).  We then get the ol' "you're a nationalist" insults after being under seige from state power for months.  I certainly believe two different narratives are forming in this country, and the British one is far more sinister.  A very right-wing nationalist movement that thinks of itself as 'above nationalism'.


I get you're disappointed, and on a comedown, but do you really think lashing out at all and sundry is big or clever?  There's nothing remotely 'nationalist' in what I said, just the opposite, or right wing, so what's the point in painting it like that?


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 21, 2014)

newbie said:


> down tiger, I'm not shooting any messengers but I see no problem in seeking clarification.
> 
> I get you're disappointed, and on a comedown, but do you really think lashing out at all and sundry is big or clever?  There's nothing remotely 'nationalist' in what I said, just the opposite, or right wing, so what's the point in painting it like that?



Are you a member/voter of the Labour Party?  You're not from Scotland, you are replaying tired, old Labour arguments that have been made for years.  It was deeply hypocritical when they made them, and you repeating them is a little more pathetic.  I would describe what you're doing as condescending, and - at the very least - it is pretty clear you have not really followed Scottish politics, but feel the need to make crass, ill-informed judgements.  No comedown mate.

Some people think USDAW's conduct in the referendum campaign was wrong.  I would not join them, they probably do fuck all anyway.  So what?


----------



## newbie (Sep 21, 2014)

tbh I couldn't care less whether you think I'm tired old Labour, nor whether you think my posts are worthless because I'm English.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 21, 2014)

Never said that.  Plenty of people from England follow Scottish politics.  

You might want us to be filthy nationalists for whatever reason, it is just not true.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 21, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> It is amazing that apart from maybe two or three posters, we are getting a load of drivel about how bloody pious our British left is (which seems to consist of Owen Jones and a bunch of 80 year old men).  We then get the ol' "you're a nationalist" insults after being under seige from state power for months.  I certainly believe two different narratives are forming in this country, and the British one is far more sinister.  A very right-wing nationalist movement that thinks of itself as 'above nationalism'.



I don't know about the 'British' narrative's nationalism, but here you are close to characterising Scottish nationalism as a movement of national liberation, akin to those of the British empire's ex-colonies.

You also seem to think that people who are truly of the left must have voted 'yes', that a 'no' vote could only mean being reactionary and r/w, that good people only voted 'no' by mistake or because they were duped. 

I don't think that narrative works.


----------



## newbie (Sep 21, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> Never said that.  Plenty of people from England follow Scottish politics.
> 
> You might want us to be filthy nationalists for whatever reason, it is just not true.



why on earth have you chosen to direct that tweet at me?


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 21, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't know about the 'British' narrative's nationalism, but here you are close to characterising Scottish nationalism as a movement of national liberation, akin to those of the British empire's ex-colonies.
> 
> You also seem to think that people who are truly of the left must have voted 'yes', that a 'no' vote could only mean being reactionary and r/w, that good people only voted 'no' by mistake or because they were duped.
> 
> I don't think that narrative works.



I would say the first part is probably true, would not have done a few weeks ago.  I would say that Scotland's independence movement is something of a national liberation and similar to any former colony of the UK.  Mainly after seeing the way in which the establishment (particularly the broadcast/print media) and the rest of the country looks at Scottish people and our politics. Currently, I would say that people on the left should support that.


----------



## treelover (Sep 21, 2014)

where to said:


> Now 3.  Apologies in advance though - shite sample size. Ban anecdotes.



But what would posters like me do then?


----------



## treelover (Sep 21, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> It has been widely reported that there has been a surge in SNP, Green and SSP membership.  I don't find that hard to believe.  A lot of people were out campaigning, and really do think independence is the only way to change our current system.  English people should join as well



I'm absolutely certain this will happen, for a while anyway, after such a mass movement/surge of ideas, etc: during the Iraq War, inspired by the protests, I rememeber lots of young people (and older people returning back to politics)  discussing which 'left wing party' they would join, thinking about inequality, etc, sadly it didn't last, it never seems to here.


----------



## treelover (Sep 21, 2014)

DownwardDog said:


> We have compulsory voting in Australia; it doesn't lead to an engaged electorate or rarefied political debate in the style of Aeschines vs. Demosthenes. All it means is that the parties don't have to get their core votes out and therefore never have to offer them any ideological red meat. Thus elections are fought on matters of process and competence with near identical policies from all parties.




Australia has had some of the most right wing and ideological Gov'ts of all 'western' democracies, Howard for one, Now Abbot...

especially on benefits and immigration


----------



## treelover (Sep 21, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> Never said that.  Plenty of people from England follow Scottish politics.
> 
> You might want us to be filthy nationalists for whatever reason, it is just not true.



Hopefully he will be getting a visit soon, that's not acceptable, even online.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 21, 2014)

Sasaferrato said:


> I was against 'compulsory voting', but having seen the genuine engagement in this campaign, and also the colossal turnout, I've shifted my view. Perhaps if people had to vote, they would engage more with the political process. Who knows, Scotland might return a 'Real Conservative' government.



It doesn't matter if compulsory voting would 100% guarantee that everything would be sunshine and gravy from now until the end of time, that wouldn't change the fact that it would overstep the bounds of what a democratic state should be allowed to do. It would also be unenforceable, just like the legal requirements we already have to register to vote and fill in census forms.

I can only assume by 'real conservative' you mean a return the old fashioned 'borstals and bigotry' tory ethos of a couple of generations ago.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 21, 2014)

treelover said:


> Australia has had some of the most right wing and ideological Gov'ts of all 'western' democracies, Howard for one, Now Abbot...
> 
> especially on benefits and immigration



If I was compelled to vote in an election which pitted Tony Abbot against Saddam Hussein I fear I would have to opt for the latter. This is what compulsory voting woud create, an artificial democractic mandate for the slightly-lesser of two evils. The best we can hope for in the UK with the current status quo is that turnouts drop low enough to discredit the whole system.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Sep 21, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> I would say the first part is probably true, would not have done a few weeks ago.  I would say that Scotland's independence movement is something of a national liberation and similar to any former colony of the UK.  Mainly after seeing the way in which the establishment (particularly the broadcast/print media) and the rest of the country looks at Scottish people and our politics. Currently, I would say that people on the left should support that.


That comes across as quite an anti-English sentiment to be honest, and makes you look a bit paranoid and silly. Equating former colonies that the UK took over, often by force, with Scotland being part of the Union is just daft.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Sep 21, 2014)

treelover said:


> Hopefully he will be getting a visit soon, that's not acceptable, even online.


Totally agree - that's well out of order.


----------



## treelover (Sep 21, 2014)

> Equating former colonies that the UK took over, often by force, with Scotland being part of the Union is just daft.




In the past maybe, but Culloden, the Clearances, etc, say otherwise.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 21, 2014)

treelover said:


> In the past maybe, but Culloden, the Clearances, etc, say otherwise.


What were the clearances?


----------



## treelover (Sep 21, 2014)

http://www.highlandclearances.co.uk/

though why you ask?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 21, 2014)

treelover said:


> http://www.highlandclearances.co.uk/
> 
> though why you ask?


I suggest that you take a closer look at that resource and then come back and explain  why the clearances were an english imposition on scotland and characteristic of classic colonies of empire - as per your post above.  Just so we know that you're not just glibly parroting nationalist myths.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 21, 2014)

farmerbarleymow said:


> That comes across as quite an anti-English sentiment to be honest, and makes you look a bit paranoid and silly. Equating former colonies that the UK took over, often by force, with Scotland being part of the Union is just daft.



Not my intention.  However, I would not necessarily associated English people with colonialism, and they were often victims of exploitation.  I would say that there were elements of coercion in the referendum campaign.  True, there was not red coats in the street, but, then, again not all of Britain's conquests were through the barrel of a gun.  I guess I consider Scotland in a similar situation to a place like Bermuda, although they do have more autonomy.  I consider that a colony, and largely kept in 'the family of nations' through elements of coercion, and policies that are not always in the interests of the Bermudan people.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 21, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> I suggest that you take a closer look at that resource and then come back and explain  why the clearances were an english imposition on scotland and characteristic of classic colonies of empire - as per your post above.  Just so we know that you're not just glibly parroting nationalist myths.



I agree that it was not directly a result of British tyranny, but was largely the result of imposing 'British' law (or lowland Scots law) in Scotland.  True, it was the Scottish ruling classes that were more than happy to implement the law, but I think it is simplistic and wrong to say the British government had their hands clean here.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 21, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> I agree that it was not directly a result of British tyranny, but was largely the result of imposing British law in Scotland.  True, it was the Scottish ruling classes that were more than happy to implement the law, but I think it is simplistic and wrong to say the British government had their hands clean here.


Who would ever suggest such a daft scenario though? Clearly it was a cross-nation pursuit of naked class interest. Such as happened with the english enclosures and the expulsion of millions from the land/agriculture in England. Who were the colonists there?


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 21, 2014)

You would be surprised how many people suggest such a scenario.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Sep 21, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> Not my intention.  However, I would not necessarily associated English people with colonialism, and they were often victims of exploitation.  I would say that there were elements of coercion in the referendum campaign.  True, there was not red coats in the street, but, then, again not all of Britain's conquests were through the barrel of a gun.  I guess I consider Scotland in a similar situation to a place like Bermuda, although they do have more autonomy.  I consider that a colony, and largely kept in 'the family of nations' through elements of coercion, and policies that are not always in the interests of the Bermudan people.


Fair enough, but you mentioned coercion here, so where did that come from and who did the coercing?

I ask because I'm genuinely curious as to why you take the position you do, and obviously don't agree that England is to blame for everything (although it's certainly not a paragon of virtue either). 

I can't agree that Scotland's similar to Bermuda - it's not a tax haven and it certainly isn't hot and sunny!


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 21, 2014)

Btw salmond seems to now be saying that the UK leaving the EU would be grounds for another referendum - so come on YES voters, get behind Cameron and the tories and support their 2015 election campaign in order to get that 2017 referendum.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Sep 21, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Btw salmond seems to now be saying that the UK leaving the EU would be grounds for another referendum - so come on YES voters, get behind Cameron and the tories and support their 2015 election campaign in order to get that 2017 referendum.


Somehow I can't see a sudden swing to the tories in Scotland!


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 21, 2014)

farmerbarleymow said:


> Somehow I can't see a sudden swing to the tories in Scotland!


Nationalism makes for strange bedfellows - this chap might be angry enough to do something daft:



> Willie Cameron, a yes voting businessman who owns the area's Cobbs hotel and cafe chain, agrees. "We are one of the most politically aware countries in the world. People have become very savvy and politics will never be the same."





> "The Scots and the English are two completely different beings, two completely different psyches. The English are Anglo Saxons. The Scots are Celts. In my view they are as different as Arabs and Jews."


----------



## JTG (Sep 21, 2014)

Genetically speaking, the English have more in common with a crab than with a Scotchman


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 21, 2014)

farmerbarleymow said:


> Fair enough, but you mentioned coercion here, so where did that come from and who did the coercing?
> 
> I ask because I'm genuinely curious as to why you take the position you do, and obviously don't agree that England is to blame for everything (although it's certainly not a paragon of virtue either).
> 
> I can't agree that Scotland's similar to Bermuda - it's not a tax haven and it certainly isn't hot and sunny!



I think there is an english establishment, that is not the same as English 'people', when you do not really vote for them.  I think that this establishment is to blame for most social policy failures in the UK, and really beneath this surface of tolerance rhetoric, Britain can't really cope with genuine diversity of opinion and culture.  Scots are, to them, white, christian and english-speaking so to many it is very difficult to grasp the idea that they are 'really' a minority.

butchersapron - the other side of the coin, is the Telegraph, and others dismissing, the notion of Scots and denigrating Scottish people.  Martin Amis talking about Celtic hard-men and drunks.  The whole 'Scots are sexists' stuff.  There is undoubtedly a reaction to that.  Scots are a minority in the UK, and so many do feel under threat.  I don't defend the whole Celtic pride stuff, but I think it has to be seen in perspective.  A lot of people are genuinely scared they are going to be repressed and that Scottish culture will not be allowed to develop.


----------



## treelover (Sep 21, 2014)

Going by some of the tabloids, the Scots may be about to enter their pantheon of hate figures, well at least the ones in Glasgow or who are poor and voted yes.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 21, 2014)

treelover said:


> Going by some of the tabloids, the Scots may be about to enter their pantheon of hate figures, well at least the ones in Glasgow or who are poor and voted yes.


link?


----------



## treelover (Sep 21, 2014)

> "You've got to think with your head," agrees Ferguson. *Things will change now anyway with devo max, he argues. Scotland will control its own destiny*. "So why would you want to break up Britain, one of the greatest countries in the world?"



some no voters are clearly going to get a shock, when Westminster shafts them as it will


----------



## treelover (Sep 21, 2014)

ska invita said:


> link?




Just the tone about how much public money they are getting, etc, it could harden, though there are sources just can't find them at moment.


----------



## tony heath (Sep 21, 2014)

Salmond wants Scottish people to live in a world where they don't fight Tory rule from London and therefore encourages support of the Tories and Monarchy. We've seen it all before.


----------



## what (Sep 21, 2014)

Does this tell us anything


----------



## Quartz (Sep 21, 2014)

what said:


> Does this tell us anything



Yes: Scotland wants to stay in the Union.


----------



## newbie (Sep 21, 2014)

treelover said:


> Hopefully he will be getting a visit soon, that's not acceptable, even online.


no it's not, and I have no idea why DairyQueen thought it necessary or reasonable to bring it into this thread in response to a post of mine. Should I take it as a threat, or is it simply intended as a really nasty insult?  Either way, it's an appalling way to conduct a debate.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 21, 2014)

newbie said:


> no it's not, and I have no idea why DairyQueen thought it necessary or reasonable to bring it into this thread in response to a post of mine. Should I take it as a threat, or is it simply intended as a really nasty insult?  Either way, it's an appalling way to conduct a debate.



You are whining about nationalism.  At least in Scotland, it is obvious who the real old school nationalists have been in this debate.


----------



## newbie (Sep 21, 2014)

what?  

why did you post that remarkably nasty tweet at me?


----------



## paolo (Sep 21, 2014)

JTG said:


> Genetically speaking, the English have more in common with a crab than with a Scotchman



Makes me half crab then 

Assuming you meant Scots. If not, I'm 100% crab, except certain evenings.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 21, 2014)

newbie said:


> what?
> 
> why did you post that remarkably nasty tweet at me?



You were accusing people of nationalism.  I think you really need to see who the real nationalists have been.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Sep 21, 2014)

treelover said:


> some no voters are clearly going to get a shock, when Westminster shafts them as it will



You seem to be under the impression that all Scots are in favour of more powers for the Scottish parliament. This is far from the case.


----------



## quimcunx (Sep 21, 2014)

what said:


> Does this tell us anything




Not much.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Sep 21, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> You are whining about nationalism.  At least in Scotland, it is obvious who the real old school nationalists have been in this debate.



The 'Little Scotlanders' you mean?


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Sep 21, 2014)

Sasaferrato said:


> You seem to be under the impression that all Scots are in favour of more powers for the Scottish parliament. This is far from the case.



He said some you thick cunt


----------



## what (Sep 21, 2014)

quimcunx said:


> Not much.
> View attachment 61365


Intresting image . Is it possible to provide link to where it comes from


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 21, 2014)

Sasaferrato said:


> The 'Little Scotlanders' you mean?



Something tells me you blame the Poles.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Sep 21, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> Something tells me you blame the Poles.


for what?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 21, 2014)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> for what?


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Sep 21, 2014)

we all blame them for that, that goes without saying


----------



## quimcunx (Sep 21, 2014)

what said:


> *Intresting image *. Is it possible to provide link to where it comes from


Not really.    I downloaded from what someone posted on another forum.  Maybe they did it themselves. I've no link, sorry.


----------



## paolo (Sep 21, 2014)

Geographic maps are bit useless, I think. You have to mentally overlay population density.

The Graun did an adjusted one about a week ago. Looked hideous, but was functional


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 21, 2014)

paolo said:


> Geographic maps are bit useless, I think.


sadly maps traditionally geographic


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Sep 21, 2014)

paolo said:


> Geographic maps are bit useless,



Post of the year


----------



## what (Sep 21, 2014)

paolo said:


> Geographic maps are bit useless, I think. You have to mentally overlay population density.
> 
> The Graun did an adjusted one about a week ago. Looked hideous, but was functional


I think the map I posted probably shows population density without intending to. i.e the bigger the area the smaller the population density


----------



## what (Sep 21, 2014)

quimcunx said:


> Not really.    I downloaded from what someone posted on another forum.  Maybe they did it themselves. I've no link, sorry.


I think it might be as you say someone making it up


----------



## quimcunx (Sep 21, 2014)

what said:


> I think it might be as you say someone making it up



Making what up?  Splitting up each region into yeses and nos?  Were the votes in each region not split into yeses and nos?  Is that made up? Have we been duped?


----------



## what (Sep 21, 2014)

quimcunx said:


> Making what up?  Splitting up each region into yeses and nos?  Were the votes in each region not split into yeses and nos?  Is that made up? Have we been duped?


You've lost me


----------



## quimcunx (Sep 21, 2014)

what said:


> You've lost me



you asked if your image tells us anything.  Well, no, it doesn't tell us anything very much at all. It shows what regions voted yes and which no. We already knew that.  It shows which %. We already knew that two.  What it does do, as information in image form, is give the impression that only a tiny number of people voted yes, which is inaccurate. The image I posted gives a more accurate visual representation of the yes/no split. 

I'm sure you know this already.


----------



## what (Sep 21, 2014)

quimcunx said:


> you asked if your image tells us anything.  Well, no, it doesn't tell us anything very much at all. It shows what regions voted yes and which no. We already knew that.  It shows which %. We already knew that two.  What it does do, as information in image form, is give the impression that only a tiny number of people voted yes, which is inaccurate. The image I posted gives a more accurate visual representation of the yes/no split.
> 
> I'm sure you know this already.


Yeah I know that but does it say anymore.
Why bar a couple of places are yes more likely in centres of high population.
Why are the furthest North and South very strong No's. 
etc


----------



## quimcunx (Sep 21, 2014)

what said:


> Yeah I know that but does it say anymore.
> Why bar a couple of places are yes more likely in centres of high population.
> Why are the furthest North and South very strong No's.
> etc



You were the one that said it was interesting. I said it wasn't. It was just a contrast to your one which tells us very little.


----------



## what (Sep 21, 2014)

quimcunx said:


> You were the one that said it was interesting. I said it wasn't. It was just a contrast to your one which tells us very little.


ok


----------



## paolo (Sep 21, 2014)




----------



## paolo (Sep 21, 2014)

Fugly, but the geographical map doesn't *really* paint the picture does it?


----------



## ferrelhadley (Sep 21, 2014)

what said:


> Does this tell us anything


East coasters are bawbags..... 

However on a more serious note this may say something.






Source


----------



## what (Sep 21, 2014)

In reply to Paolos map

Thats painful on the eye. Might be more representative that the one I posted if I could read a pattern. Maybe there is no pattern?


----------



## weepiper (Sep 21, 2014)

ferrelhadley said:


> East coasters are bawbags.....
> 
> However on a more serious note this may say something.
> 
> ...


This one's instructive too.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 21, 2014)

paolo -
God, that is hideous.  Guardian spending money wisely I see.


----------



## paolo (Sep 21, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> paolo -
> God, that is hideous.  Guardian spending money wisely I see.



Aesthetically horrid. Not sure you (or I, or anyone with any sense) would prefer the geographic version though. What does that say?


----------



## JimW (Sep 21, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> sadly maps traditionally geographic


Surely they were firstly and traditionally cosmographic, and of course later could have been geological or any number of other things.

/pedant wars


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 21, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> paolo -
> God, that is hideous.  Guardian spending money wisely I see.




I doubt it cost all that much. The rectangles version is an assault to the eyes though, agreed. You can learn most from the bars-formatted list of regional votes, I'd say. And the geographical one also tells you at least something. Even if unwelcome!


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 21, 2014)

Seymour analysis


> The Unionist side won, decisively, on a big turnout.
> 
> However, it did not win because it prevailed in the 'battle of ideas', such as it was.  The utter cluelessness of the Unionists was apparent from day one.  It was evident in the futile insistence of Scottish Labourites that "we are as Scottish as anyone else", as if anyone had ever queried it or - frankly - given much of a shit.  It was evident in the little brainstorm Ed Miliband experienced toward the end of the campaign, whereupon he invited the English to wave the saltire, thus proving to the Scots that they are far better off in the company of UKIP-voting Clacton than living under the regime of that man off the television.  And is still clear today when Scottish Labourites such as Douglas Alexander murmur with faux innocence about how dangerous it is that politicians - the Westminster elite, let us call them - are obviously held in such contempt.  They have no ideas, and no idea.
> 
> ...


----------



## ferrelhadley (Sep 21, 2014)

weepiper said:


> This one's instructive too.


  'sake. Given how many funerals I have been to for folk in their 50s and 60s I suppose its no surprise.


----------



## paolo (Sep 21, 2014)

"The Unionist side won, decisively" - wrong in the first sentence. dot you're better than this


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 21, 2014)

paolo said:


> "The Unionist side won, decisively" - wrong in the first sentence. dot you're better than this




its not my analysis! its from Lenins Tomb


----------



## ferrelhadley (Sep 21, 2014)

The SNP are claiming 10 000 new members over the weekend. As I know a couple of folk who have joined up it may even be true. That would put them around 35 000. The greens are also (allegedly) claiming more than 1000.


----------



## Tankus (Sep 21, 2014)

ska invita said:


> tbf lbj it was a national campaign not a local class one in that it involved convincing bosses as much as workers - thats realpolitik to win independence - the class struggle here wasnt within the country but between scotland and the english establishment. once independence is won the focus of class struggle reframes to within the new border



dunno ..... but I thought that the argument was totally between Scots  ...... perhaps urban central and rural highlands and islands


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Sep 21, 2014)

paolo said:


> "The Unionist side won, decisively" - wrong in the first sentence. dot you're better than this



It's true a 10% margin on a massive turnout it's a big win for the unionists. And it's essential to understand that to know why it will be pretty difficult for any type of left progressive change


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 21, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> its not my analysis! its from Lenins Tomb




Don't think Seymour's dissection of why the No vote was as higher-than-predicted as it was, cuts enough ice for me. Some pretty good and interesting points/insights in there, but he's leaving out far too many seriously relevant reasons for it, IMO.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 21, 2014)

Tankus said:


> dunno ..... but I thought that the argument was totally between Scots  ...... perhaps urban central and rural highlands and islands


It's not easy to cut it that way either. Edinburgh voted 61-39 No-Yes for example. And although Eilean Siar as a whole voted No, Skye voted Yes.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 21, 2014)

weepiper said:


> It's not easy to cut it that way either. Edinburgh voted 61-39 No-Yes for example. And although Eilean Siar as a whole voted No, *Skye voted Yes.*


Where's that info from weepiper? Have they got any other more detailed breakdowns by area?


----------



## weepiper (Sep 21, 2014)

redsquirrel said:


> Where's that info from weepiper? Have they got any other more detailed breakdowns by area?


From ballot box sampling carried out by the local Yes campaigners. I've read (from a Herald journalist on twitter) that every constituency in Glasgow returned a Yes majority. Unfortunately not every council count collated the figures this way, the information doesn't seem to be available for Edinburgh for example (although I would bet good money that Cramond, Barnton and the Grange voted No and Muirhouse, Niddrie and Leith voted Yes)

Edited because I got my fucking Yesses and Nos the wrong way round FFS


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 21, 2014)

weepiper said:


> From ballot box sampling carried out by the local Yes campaigners.



Do you know anything about how that was done?

(Not disputing any of their conclusions, just interested in their data gathering methods).


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 21, 2014)

weepiper said:


> From ballot box sampling carried out by the local Yes campaigners. I've read (from a Herald journalist on twitter) that every constituency in Glasgow returned a Yes majority. Unfortunately not every council count collated the figures this way, the information doesn't seem to be available for Edinburgh for example (although I would bet good money that Cramond, Barnton and the Grange voted Yes and Muirhouse, Niddrie and Leith voted No)


Ta


----------



## Batboy (Sep 22, 2014)

quimcunx said:


> It's a shame you feel that way.  The other day I spoke to my dad, Dundonian, SNP member since 1956 and yes voter, and he said 'Nothing can split us up. We are still friends, still neighbours.  I'll still buy British, take holidays in England.'  Your fears don't relate to anything the other yes voters in Dundee I know have expressed.



I really hope it is still that way, I was only 18 when I lived there and a group of guys a couple of years older than me took me under their wing and looked after me, I've never forgotten that. They saw me off at the Station when I had to return to London and got me smashed, I slept the whole journey. 

One of the other things I remember was when we went out to clubs and I'd be dancing on my own and they looked at me as if I was nuts, they then pointed out to me I might get into trouble with people thinking I was gay as I should really be dancing with a girl and not on my own, they soon changed their views when I caught the eye from some pretty girl they were all drooling over, suddenly they were all throwing moves on the dance floor, it was hilarious... 1978 fuck me life was very different then...


----------



## gabi (Sep 22, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> paolo -
> God, that is hideous.  Guardian spending money wisely I see.



Seriously? you've just backed a doomed Salmond ego campaign that cost the tax payer fucking millions, and you're giving the Guardian grief about wasting money?


----------



## Frankie Jack (Sep 22, 2014)

gabi said:


> Seriously? you've just backed a doomed Salmond ego campaign that cost the tax payer fucking millions, and you're giving the Guardian grief about wasting money?


Thank you for your complete lack of understanding about the thoughts and feelings of 1.6 million Scottish people.


----------



## gabi (Sep 22, 2014)

And thank you for yours about the feelings of 2 million scots.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 22, 2014)

gabi said:


> Seriously? you've just backed a doomed Salmond ego campaign that cost the tax payer fucking millions, and you're giving the Guardian grief about wasting money?




a legitimate refferendum question democratically voted for and carried out under the rules such as they are. We should just scrap all elections, all notions of plebscite entirely. Cos gabi thinks its a waste of money.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 22, 2014)

Mind you its vastly amusing to see someone with a fingernails grasp on reality giving it his informed opinion on a polity he can't even be arsed to live in. Always great to hear the expat whiner give his skynews voice


----------



## gabi (Sep 22, 2014)

I don't pay tax in the UK anymore. If I did I'd be furious. A complete and utter waste of everybody's time and money.

Did you ever think the Scottish people wanted to be independent? Seriously?


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 22, 2014)

near half the voting population voted yes, it was quite close. So it reall depends on which 'the scottish people' you are talking about doesn't it? Unless you're so dumb you think that a 60-40 result really amounts to a unified and emphatic voice.


----------



## co-op (Sep 22, 2014)

gabi said:


> I don't pay tax in the UK anymore. If I did I'd be furious. A complete and utter waste of everybody's time and money.
> 
> Did you ever think the Scottish people wanted to be independent? Seriously?



Of all the wastes of taxpayers money, this is the one that would make you furious?


----------



## weepiper (Sep 22, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> near half the voting population voted yes, it was quite close. So it reall depends on which 'the scottish people' you are talking about doesn't it? Unless you're so dumb you think that a 60-40 result really amounts to a unified and emphatic voice.


55-45.


----------



## Tankus (Sep 22, 2014)

Of those who could be bothered to vote .....

1 in 4 in Glasgow ....for example.... couldn't be arsed....!

Around 34% actively wanted yes .... Taking into consideration the non arsed and the even less arsed  3% ........not even  bothered to register .....

That arse does look fairly big in this !

As for the cost...surely worth every penny... south of the border for the unmitigated political panic caused to all parties in Westminster ...and the coming democratic  fallout even though its a no ...


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 22, 2014)

gabi said:


> Seriously? you've just backed a doomed Salmond ego campaign that cost the tax payer fucking millions, and you're giving the Guardian grief about wasting money?



Don't worry gabi, we will stop discussing Scotland's future soon enough and get back to what's important.  Spending billions on military equipment, other vanity projects, kickbacks to the Eton crew, and London's infrastructure.  We can then get back to what is really important in all of this, complaining about having to 'subsidise' rural Romanian peasants through the European Union, or just complaining about Romanians.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 22, 2014)

Tankus said:


> Of those who could be bothered to vote .....
> 
> 1 in 4 in Glasgow ....for example.... couldn't be arsed....!
> 
> ...



What an idiotic comment.  Only 46% voted no.  Now the silent majority will work together for the UK? Not even a majority wants to stay in the United Kingdom.  Subtract the "old, rich probably a bit racist" vote, and you are probably looking at some rather embarrassingly low number of votes.


----------



## Tankus (Sep 22, 2014)

Why idiotic ? .. What is the actual percentage that voted YES... out of the Scottish total electorate then .?


----------



## weepiper (Sep 22, 2014)

For comparison, the Lib Dems have around 44,000 members across the entire UK.

edit, and at this rate the SNP's going to overtake them soon


----------



## weepiper (Sep 22, 2014)

Tankus said:


> Why idiotic ? .. What is the actual percentage that voted YES... out of the Scottish total electorate then .?


37.77%. No got 46.74%


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 22, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> Not even a majority wants to stay in the United Kingdom.


Come now. You cannot say this. Nearly half the entire electorate voted no. That's a pretty chunky section that expressed a preference. And a majority of those who voted - in a massive turnout - voted no. You seem to be in denial a bit about this, blaming the old, the misinformed, and now the racist.


----------



## Tankus (Sep 22, 2014)

Plus the not registered ....so its about a third of the electorate that actively shows a YES preference ...
Should it be 2/3 s to make such a massive change ?
Otherwise there's bound to be substantial issues in the aftermath......when all the unanswered blustered   issues ...get answered by reality .?


----------



## weepiper (Sep 22, 2014)

Tankus said:


> Plus the not registered ....so its about a third of the electorate that actively shows a preference ...
> Should it be 2/3 s to make such a massive change ?


What you think it 'should be' is irrelevant. The terms of the referendum were that a simple majority of those who turned out would be the result.


----------



## treelover (Sep 22, 2014)

ferrelhadley said:


> 'sake. Given how many funerals I have been to for folk in their 50s and 60s I suppose its no surprise.




like given for comment, not the situation, which is appalling


----------



## Quartz (Sep 22, 2014)

Tankus said:


> Plus the not registered ....so its about a third of the electorate that actively shows a YES preference ...



If you don't care enough to vote, you have no cause to complain about the result. If you did care enough to vote and your side lost, then part of the democratic process is respecting the will of the majority.


----------



## treelover (Sep 22, 2014)

> And the third flag? In this historic space, the heartland of the “Red Clyde” where the British government in 1919 sent tanks to attack a 90,000-strong workers’ demo, I didn’t see a single red flag. That, as far as this movement is concerned, has gone. No, the third flag was the estelada – the red and yellow banner of Catalan separatism. Wherever it appeared toted by actual Catalans, they were mobbed – so by the end, there were plenty being carried by shirtless Glaswegians. The symbolism, again, was clear – small nations of feisty people, fed up with remote elites, should stick together and disrupt the global order.
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/21/what-now-scotland-young-yes-generation



Interesting comments from Paul Mason on events in Glasgow before the Indyref.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 22, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Come now. You cannot say this. Nearly half the entire electorate voted no. That's a pretty chunky section that expressed a preference. And a majority of those who voted - in a massive turnout - voted no. You seem to be in denial a bit about this, blaming the old, the misinformed, and now the racist.



Of course its stupid to say that.  Why not have a go at the guy spouting this 37% bollocks, that's what it was in response to.  Or is that fine?


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 22, 2014)

Tankus said:


> Plus the not registered ....so its about a third of the electorate that actively shows a YES preference ...
> Should it be 2/3 s to make such a massive change ?
> Otherwise there's bound to be substantial issues in the aftermath......when all the unanswered blustered   issues ...get answered by reality .?



So it is fine to press ahead with neoliberal carnage sitting on roughly 27% of the full electoral roll?

Unanswered bluster?  Unanswered bluster does not make any sense.  You have read 'bluster' and 'Salmond does not answer questions' in the press and merged them together.  It does not work.

You really think there are no risks of staying in the UK?  Do you really believe that?


----------



## Tankus (Sep 22, 2014)

In tree lovers links comments 


> The pensioners in Scotland are taking a bit of a hammering for "selling the youth down the river", portrayed at feeble minded old nincompoops who when threatened with losing their pensions voted no en masse. Nothing at all to do with them being old enough and wise enough to be able know a snake oil salesman when they see one.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 22, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> So it is fine to press ahead with neoliberal carnage sitting on roughly 27% of the full electoral roll


What exactly do you think the SNP was proposing to do?


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 22, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What exactly do you think the SNP was proposing to do?



Declare independence.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 22, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> Declare independence.


What does that have to do with the planned neoliberal carnage?


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 22, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What does that have to do with the planned neoliberal carnage?



I never said it had anything to do with neoliberal carnage.  I don't see the connection (other than that being one motivating factor in declaring independence).  Maybe you can look into this parallel universe crystal ball and explain it to me.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 22, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> I never said it had anything to do with neoliberal carnage.  I don't see the connection (other than that being one motivating factor in declaring independence).  Maybe you can look into this parallel universe crystal ball and explain it to me.


You are suggesting that independence is a way to stop the neoliberal carnage. How? How would that have worked? Do you seriously doubt that the SNP would have got in to form the first government? What would they have done?


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 22, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You are suggesting that independence is a way to stop the neoliberal carnage. How? How would that have worked? Do you seriously doubt that the SNP would have got in to form the first government? What would they have done?



Considering it would have been on the back of working-class votes, I really doubt that their first objectives would be to punish those that got them independence.  I have no idea why old Labour activists, or anyone else whose career does not depend it, wish to propagate such a fantasy.


----------



## cesare (Sep 22, 2014)

Quartz said:


> If you don't care enough to vote, you have no cause to complain about the result. If you did care enough to vote and your side lost, then part of the democratic process is respecting the will of the majority.


I don't agree. Lack of voting doesn't necessarily indicate that people don't care - they might be saying "neither of the above".


----------



## MrSki (Sep 22, 2014)

cesare said:


> I don't agree. Lack of voting doesn't necessarily indicate that people don't care - they might be saying "neither of the above".


Agreed in an election but this argument does not really hold water in a two choice referendum.


----------



## Quartz (Sep 22, 2014)

cesare said:


> I don't agree. Lack of voting doesn't necessarily indicate that people don't care - they might be saying "neither of the above".



MrSki beat me to it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 22, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> Considering it would have been on the back of working-class votes, I really doubt that their first objectives would be to punish those that got them independence.  I have no idea why old Labour activists, or anyone else whose career does not depend it, wish to propagate such a fantasy.


It would have been on the backs of votes from across a spectrum of class. But being elected mainly by working-class voters didn't stop Blair and New Labour from shafting them. I heard similar noises from Salmond and the SNP to those of Blair's Labour pre-1997. _Elect us and we'll be business-friendly. The rich have nothing to fear from us, but we'll run capitalism in a fairer way. _Maybe. And maybe not. 

His last conference speech contains some good rhetoric but little of substance, beyond that they're against a few things even many tories are against - private monopolies, for instance. The best he could say about raising the minimum wage was that he would 'work with the private sector' to raise it. He also couldn't bring himself to back striking workers. He was a populist leader above all else.


----------



## cesare (Sep 22, 2014)

MrSki said:


> Agreed in an election but this argument does not really hold water in a two choice referendum.


Yes it does. You can't get rid of people's right to abstain just because you only present them with two choices.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 22, 2014)

cesare said:


> Yes it does. You can't get rid of people's right to abstain just because you only present them with two choices.


Surely if they wish to abstain in a referendum then it does indicate that they don't care?


----------



## cesare (Sep 22, 2014)

MrSki said:


> Surely if they wish to abstain in a referendum then it does indicate that they don't care?


No. They might not like either of the choices and actively want something different to both.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 22, 2014)

cesare said:


> No. They might not like either of the choices and actively want something different to both.


"Should Scotland be an independent country" Yes or No? Are you suggesting that some voters wanted a union with France?


----------



## cesare (Sep 22, 2014)

MrSki said:


> "Should Scotland be an independent country" Yes or No? Are you suggesting that some voters wanted a union with France?


Wtf has France got to do with it?


----------



## MrSki (Sep 22, 2014)

cesare said:


> Wtf has France got to do with it?


If they didn't agree with a Yes/No answer then 


cesare said:


> They might not like either of the choices and actively want something different to both.


They must have wanted something else, hence a union with France. What else do you mean by actively different to wanting or not wanting to be independent?


----------



## cesare (Sep 22, 2014)

MrSki said:


> If they didn't agree with a Yes/No answer then
> 
> They must have wanted something else, hence a union with France. What else do you mean by actively different to wanting or not wanting to be independent?


Something else might be something as simple as "not yet". In any event, they're as worth polling as the people that said they would vote (but might not have done). So the France suggestion was an effort at sarcasm then?


----------



## MrSki (Sep 22, 2014)

cesare said:


> Something else might be something as simple as "not yet". In any event, they're as worth polling as the people that said they would vote (but might not have done). So the France suggestion was an effort at sarcasm then?


France & Scotland have strong historical links. Surely "not yet" equates to a no? I was struggling for  another possible option that is not "don't care"


----------



## cesare (Sep 22, 2014)

MrSki said:


> France & Scotland have strong historical links. Surely "not yet" equates to a no? I was struggling for  another possible option that is not "don't care"


Well danny la rouge has previously mentioned the purist anarchism position and that's just one of the positions that might result in abstaining whilst still caring.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 22, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It would have been on the backs of votes from across a spectrum of class. But being elected mainly by working-class voters didn't stop Blair and New Labour from shafting them. I heard similar noises from Salmond and the SNP to those of Blair's Labour pre-1997. _Elect us and we'll be business-friendly. The rich have nothing to fear from us, but we'll run capitalism in a fairer way. _Maybe. And maybe not.
> 
> His last conference speech contains some good rhetoric but little of substance, beyond that they're against a few things even many tories are against - private monopolies, for instance. The best he could say about raising the minimum wage was that he would 'work with the private sector' to raise it. He also couldn't bring himself to back striking workers. He was a populist leader above all else.



As many people in Scotland have argued, we can have these debates once we have a political culture.  Yes Scotland were campaigning for Scotland to have its own politics.  Labour is campaigning to turn Scotland into a massive docile Labour Party ballot stuffer.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 23, 2014)

cesare said:


> Well danny la rouge has previously mentioned the purist anarchism position and that's just one of the positions that might result in abstaining whilst still caring.



From other thread.


danny la rouge said:


> This anarchist voted Yes.


----------



## cesare (Sep 23, 2014)

MrSki said:


> From other thread.


And he's previously explained why he didn't adopt the purist position.


----------



## fractionMan (Sep 23, 2014)

Are you seriously saying that someone who says "it's more complicated than yes or no" doesn't care about the issue?


----------



## poului (Sep 23, 2014)

The conspiracy theories continue. 

"We believe that it is only a matter of time before the fullness of the truth comes out. There can be no doubt that the count was a fraud."

http://thebutterflyrebellion.org/2014/09/23/the-sabotage-of-scotlands-democracy/

Is there any merit in this?


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 23, 2014)

no


----------



## poului (Sep 23, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> no



"Ireland, it can be argued, is yet another tainted source. Not France."

Um....


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 23, 2014)

poului said:


> The conspiracy theories continue.
> 
> "We believe that it is only a matter of time before the fullness of the truth comes out. There can be no doubt that the count was a fraud."
> 
> ...


I very, very, very much doubt it.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 23, 2014)

Didn't you read them, they said: "There can be no doubt that the count was a fraud." Right - _no doubt_.


----------



## poului (Sep 23, 2014)

Some loon linked me to this on social media. 

"We know all our evidence is anecdotal but..."


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 23, 2014)

Knowingly the Westminster administration sought tainted witnesses to witness its crime; almost the perfect crime. Earlier this evening a senior civil servant in the Irish Department of Foreign Affairs in Dublin made it known to us that this decision was known in advance in Dublin, and that preparation for a Yes vote had been cancelled. According to this source, from whom we have requested documentary evidence, it had been made clear to his department that “Westminster will not, _under any circumstances_, let go of Scotland.” Open diplomatic opinion in Ireland, a young state with hard experience of an independence struggle with Westminster, is that clandestine moves were made to safeguard Scottish resources for London.

Umm...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 23, 2014)

They invited Russian observers and committed the crime in front of the Russian observers because Russian observers are not going to be believed. The perfect crime. 

Except that it doesn't work like that. The country in question doesn't get to choose who observes what.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 23, 2014)

it was inevitable that which ever side won there would be bonkers like this. I'm sure saner heads are looking at why they lost and where to go from here etc.


I bet Alex Jones had his piece pre written and just left the winning sides names blank to be filled in on results day


----------



## poului (Sep 23, 2014)

It's seriously fucking radio, isn't it?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 23, 2014)

RT's gone into top gear on this. 



> The Kremlin propaganda channel RT, meanwhile, speculated that the result might have been rigged and expressed surprise at the "North Korean" levels of turnout.
> 
> Afshin Rattansi, the presenter of RT's Going Underground show, said there were "international considerations", such as the UK's nuclear deterrent, which had affected the outcome. He said: "With the vote as close as this, with the mainstream media on one side, with a massive amount of people from Westminster running up to beg Scotland the other way, and certain recounts in certain bits of the poll, which way did the vote go, really?"
> 
> He added: "It is normally the sort of turnout you would expect in North Korea. Usually media here would go 'we don't believe it. How can it be nearly 90%?'"



graun


----------



## poului (Sep 23, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> RT's gone into top gear on this.



So if it's a low turnout, it's suspect and if it's a high turnout, it's suspect. Ffs.


----------



## toggle (Sep 23, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> Seymour analysis
> 
> 
> 
> ...



this rings completely true with a lot of the stuff i've seen. the refusal of some to accept that their support for the status quo, for maintaining the british nation intact is in fact, a nationalist position. whether they choose to recognise this or not. I see this every time anyone suggests they identify as Cornish, not English. the righteous anger and sense of betrayal - how dare part of our country claim not to be part of our country. a little time to think and this is often rethought into a more considered position - and argued through international socialism, or neo-liberalist economics, but the initial reactions are generally the same.


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 23, 2014)

http://t.co/Ze1ZvQ5jIS breakdown of voting intentions


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 23, 2014)

frogwoman said:


> http://t.co/Ze1ZvQ5jIS breakdown of voting intentions


They've been got at.

/RT


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 23, 2014)

frogwoman said:


> http://t.co/Ze1ZvQ5jIS breakdown of voting intentions


I guess we need to be a little cautious as the number of 'did not respond's is quite high, but that broadly supports the Ashcroft poll. Narrow vote 'no' among youngest voters, then peak 'yes' around 30 years old, drifting off to narrow 'no' again around age 35-40, and decisive no among older voters.

Richer voters - decisive no; poorer voters narrow yes.

Born in Scotland, even split; born outside Scotland decisive no.

Adding that to other stuff showing Labour supporters voting 2:1 no, it's an interesting dynamic - it strikes me there that 'yes' couldn't achieve decisive majorities among the groups most likely to vote 'yes'. There was a tendency for more left-wing, working class voters to vote 'yes', but only a very weak one - plenty voted 'no'. There are strong constituencies for 'no', but not really any strong constituencies for 'yes'.


If I were a 'yes' supporter, I'd be quite concerned by that. It shows they were off by a fair distance. They ended in a dead heat among those born in Scotland, but lost the argument decisively among those born outside Scotland.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 24, 2014)

Born in rUK/outside Scotland need to be split out there.  Not as simple as non-Scots voting no.  I know the Scots-born Asian community was supportive of yes, a long side a great many minorities.  Again, it is likely more to do with a combination of other factors than English say no.  Age, wealth might be more important.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 24, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> Born in rUK/outside Scotland need to be split out there.  Not as simple as non-Scots voting no.  I know the Scots-born Asian community was supportive of yes, a long side a great many minorities.


Yep. And actually a lot of English people living in Scotland were voting Yes.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 24, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> Born in rUK/outside Scotland need to be split out there.  Not as simple as non-Scots voting no.  I know the Scots-born Asian community was supportive of yes, a long side a great many minorities.  Again, it is likely more to do with a combination of other factors than English say no.  Age, wealth might be more important.


The figures don't support that. 

Born outside the UK were marginally less strongly 'no' than born in UK but outside Scotland. But by those figures, it's still a 38-24 split for no of those who responded that they had voted and were born outside the UK.

How their Scottish-born children voted, I don't know. Just judging by those figures, if they are young, urban and not rich, then they will be in line with others of that demographic if they are tending to yes, but not overwhelmingly so. It would be interesting to see whether or not they were in line. 

I can't see good figures online. Just one rather small study from before the vote and a lot of wishful thinking from both sides before the vote, both claiming a majority. 

I certainly can't find anything persuasive to show that Scots-born Asians were a majority 'yes'. One of the problems with a lot of stuff from before the vote, as far as I can see, is that those intending to vote 'yes', to vote for change, were more likely to call up radio shows, etc, than those intending a quiet 'no'. There was a hell of a lot of confusing noise.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 24, 2014)

Mainly going by media reports leading into the campaign.  They will be predominately Scottish though.  The figures you provided show a significant difference between those born in rUK (25% yes) and those born outside the UK (41% yes).


----------



## MrSki (Sep 24, 2014)




----------



## butchersapron (Sep 24, 2014)

How will that hit him and his party?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 24, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> Mainly going by media reports leading into the campaign.


Yeah, I found that radio poll. I also found a small study of young Asain voters giving a majority 'no'. Totally unreliable noise, I'm afraid, both of them.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 24, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> How will that hit him and his party?


Probably not a lot. Maybe it will encourage others to think more about their politics?


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 24, 2014)

It will help him. No?  Getting attacked from the left in Scotland and right in England?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 24, 2014)

MrSki said:


> Probably not a lot. Maybe it will encourage others to think more about their politics?


Like voting lib-dem in 2010?


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Sep 24, 2014)

Cameron is laughing his head off that the Libscum are being overtaking by the Nats


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 24, 2014)

Lib Dems did get into government on the back of some promises.  People probably did think about their vote, just expected much, much more from the Lib Dems.  Are they not going to free the weed if they get another chance?


----------



## Cpatain Rbubish (Sep 24, 2014)

I reckon Alec's made a mistake in resigning. Any half decent Eton uneducated (but well connected) advisor would have have told him that the supremely deft political move would be to transform the SNP into a UK national party. I reckon he could of torn chunks out of the established parties in the rest of the UK


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 24, 2014)

Cpatain Rbubish said:


> I reckon Alec's made a mistake in resigning. Any half decent Eton uneducated (but well connected) advisor would have have told him that the supremely deft political move would be to transform the SNP into a UK national party. I reckon he could torn chunks out of the established parties in the rest of the UK



I always thought some spoiler in the north of England might get a few deposits back


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 24, 2014)

Fantasy lib-dem world.


----------



## Cpatain Rbubish (Sep 24, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Fantasy lib-dem world.



Was that...



DairyQueen said:


> Lib Dems did get into government on the back of some promises.  People probably did think about their vote, just expected much, much more from the Lib Dems.  Are they not going to free the weed if they get another chance?



About this?


----------



## kebabking (Sep 24, 2014)

he's also laughing his head off because every additional SNP MP is another MP who won't be voting against the Tories, or for Labour, on English/Welsh/NI affairs...

he's got one MP in Scotland, Labour has 40. the rise of the SNP makes his life easier and Millipeeds harder - Cameron has nothing to lose and everthing to gain by the SNP gaining more seats, Labour however has lots to lose and nothing to gain.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 24, 2014)

Cpatain Rbubish said:


> Was that...
> 
> 
> 
> About this?


Was this and this.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 24, 2014)

kebabking said:


> he's also laughing his head off because every additional SNP MP is another MP who won't be voting against the Tories, or for Labour, on English/Welsh/NI affairs...
> 
> he's got one MP in Scotland, Labour has 40. the rise of the SNP makes his life easier and Millipeeds harder - Cameron has nothing to lose and everthing to gain by the SNP gaining more seats, Labour however has lots to lose and nothing to gain.


What additional MPs? Where?


----------



## Cpatain Rbubish (Sep 24, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Was this and this.



Quite right 

Well, was it?

E2A: You'll ave to excuse me dicktion as...

A. I'm lazy
B. Some people on'ere think I even smelt me usedupname wrong FFS!


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 24, 2014)

Cpatain Rbubish said:


> Quite right
> 
> Well, was it?


Yes it was.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 24, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> What additional MPs? Where?



The latest WM voting intention in Scotland had SNP(+15)-Labour(+1) neck and neck.  On a uniform swing (7% to SNP), they could get ten or so of their targets.  Big could, and maybe optimistic.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 24, 2014)

kebabking said:


> he's also laughing his head off because every additional SNP MP is another MP who won't be voting against the Tories, or for Labour, on English/Welsh/NI affairs...
> 
> he's got one MP in Scotland, Labour has 40. the rise of the SNP makes his life easier and Millipeeds harder - Cameron has nothing to lose and everthing to gain by the SNP gaining more seats, Labour however has lots to lose and nothing to gain.



It depends how close the Parliament is, if it is a coalition again and SNP votes count, I don't think Cameron would like that one bit.  Think war.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 24, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> The latest WM voting intention in Scotland had SNP(+15)-Labour(+1) neck and neck.  On a uniform swing (7% to SNP), they could get ten or so of their targets.  Big could, and maybe optimistic.


Have you a link?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 24, 2014)

kebabking said:


> he's also laughing his head off because every additional SNP MP is another MP who won't be voting against the Tories, or for Labour, on English/Welsh/NI affairs...
> 
> he's got one MP in Scotland, Labour has 40. the rise of the SNP makes his life easier and Millipeeds harder - Cameron has nothing to lose and everthing to gain by the SNP gaining more seats, Labour however has lots to lose and nothing to gain.


Dunno if that's true. I think it's hard to predict who benefits here. I can see lots of potential headaches for Cameron if he's seen to be weakening the union. The fact that the 'West Lothian question' is now a phrase known about by more than just political anoraks like many of us on here is a big headache - I'm sure all sides in Westminster would prefer to just not talk about it and not do anything about it.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 24, 2014)

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politi...n-2016-election-says-survation-poll-1-3548137

It is a big if, SNP support might drop, and it depends how the campaign goes.  It was done for the Express.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 24, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> http://www.scotsman.com/news/politi...n-2016-election-says-survation-poll-1-3548137
> 
> It is a big if, SNP support might drop, and it depends how the campaign goes.  It was done for the Express.


Where is this 15% rise?


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 24, 2014)

They got 20% in 2010.  That survey has 35%.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Sep 24, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Dunno if that's true. I think it's hard to predict who benefits here. I can see lots of potential headaches for Cameron if he's seen to be weakening the union. The fact that the 'West Lothian question' is now a phrase known about by more than just political anoraks like many of us on here is a big headache - I'm sure all sides in Westminster would prefer to just not talk about it and not do anything about it.


Why on earth would the Tories want the west Lothian questi n to go away?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 24, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> They got 20% in 2010.  That survey has 35%.


So the 15% rise is not from thursday as you suggested. What was it last time before thursday?


----------



## toggle (Sep 24, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Dunno if that's true. I think it's hard to predict who benefits here. I can see lots of potential headaches for Cameron if he's seen to be weakening the union. The fact that the 'West Lothian question' is now a phrase known about by more than just political anoraks like many of us on here is a big headache - I'm sure all sides in Westminster would prefer to just not talk about it and not do anything about it.





Spanky Longhorn said:


> Why on earth would the Tories want the west Lothian questi n to go away?



i wouoldn't have thought they would. because whining about the english being short changed by devolution is a vote winner for them. it's in their interests to whine loudly and do nothing.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Sep 24, 2014)

toggle said:


> i wouoldn't have thought they would. because whining about the english being short changed by devolution is a vote winner for them. it's in their interests to whine loudly and do nothing.


Exactly


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 24, 2014)

It's vote winner for UKIP not the tories. For the tories it's a time wasting  headache they can do without.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 24, 2014)

toggle said:


> i wouoldn't have thought they would. because whining about the english being short changed by devolution is a vote winner for them. it's in their interests to whine loudly and do nothing.


It's a question that's been out there ever since devolution, and they've generally kept relatively quiet about it until now, when they are forced to address it. And it is a question that has no solution that the Tories would contemplate. It may exercise the minds of English voters now, but it's hard to see how the Tories or anyone else for that matter will come up with good answers.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 24, 2014)

toggle said:


> i wouoldn't have thought they would. because whining about the english being short changed by devolution is a vote winner for them. it's in their interests to whine loudly and do nothing.


_The english_

Look - this nationalism is everywhere now. It's cool!


----------



## toggle (Sep 24, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> _The english_
> 
> Look - this nationalism is everywhere now. It's cool!



everywhere now?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 24, 2014)

toggle said:


> everywhere now?


Well, it's certainly more acceptable now - maybe your nationalism is more exclusive. But it doesn't really matter how well popular "the english" is for it to be pointed as as vile idiocy. "the english" ffs.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 24, 2014)

the english
the english
the english
the blacks
the english
the pirates
the slaves
the english
the irish
the miners
the stovemakers
the morons


----------



## Quartz (Sep 24, 2014)

Cpatain Rbubish said:


> I reckon Alec's made a mistake in resigning. Any half decent Eton uneducated (but well connected) advisor would have have told him that the supremely deft political move would be to transform the SNP into a UK national party.



You mean merge with UKIP?


----------



## Cpatain Rbubish (Sep 25, 2014)

Quartz said:


> You mean merge with UKIP?



Not what I had in mind 

I was simply musing that if they dropped their reason d'être (Scottish independence) and became a UK party I could see them attracting a lot of votes across all nations. A lot of their policies would be very popular IMO, no idea if they could deliver on them but that would hardly be a paradigm shift in UK politics would it


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 25, 2014)

Cpatain Rbubish said:


> Not what I had in mind
> 
> I was simply musing that if they dropped their reason d'être (Scottish independence) and became a UK party I could see them attracting a lot of votes across all nations. A lot of their policies would be very popular IMO, no idea if they could deliver on them but that would hardly be a paradigm shift in UK politics would it


The neo-liberal ones being rejected across the north? You don't know anything about the SNP or its policies do you?


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 25, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Well, it's certainly more acceptable now - maybe your nationalism is more exclusive. But it doesn't really matter how well popular "the english" is for it to be pointed as as vile idiocy. "the english" ffs.



I can see your problem.  I think it is less of an issue in Scotland, since there is only a small number of people here (I would have liked to have seen even further devolution post-independence).  The idea of nations, or communities (defined by spatial proximity), are integral to the cohesiveness of successful progressive movements, even the CNT (or the EU in its post-war peace/consensus building).

The concept of a nation is fluid, I grant you, but surely any successful progressive movement would have to start with some sort of understanding that decentralisation of power would have to occur on the basis of regional identity as opposed to social class, which will be sparsely spread.

The problem is that in England, with such a large number of people there is no way to devolve power.  The concept of England as some homogeneous blob is ludicrous I grant you.  The fact the North East rejected a parliament was disastrous, okay it was a neoliberal fudge to make it look like Wales and Scotland were not special cases and we were really all proud Brits.  However, it was a chance to weaken the power of the central government.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 25, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> The problem is that in England, with such a large number of people there is no way to devolve power.


This is complete rubbish. Power was devolved quite a bit more than it is now pre-Thatcher. This idea that you cannot have larger states with distinctly devolved power really is nonsense. Look around the world at other places.

The USA is a good example of a large country in which substantial power is devolved to the individual states. Germany, too. There is no reason whatever why a large country needs to have highly centralised power. Why would you think that there was?


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 25, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> This is complete rubbish. Power was devolved quite a bit more than it is now pre-Thatcher. This idea that you cannot have larger states with distinctly devolved power really is nonsense. Look around the world at other places.



I don't see how you can have large state like Britain, America or England and then bemoan the concept of nationalism.  That's the whole point.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 25, 2014)

I knew it was englands fault. Too big to give comparative models any constitution flow. The very idea that there is a constitutional way out of the mess is shocking. I couldn't care less about a constitution and neither did you - but now, it's your flame and fight. Fight for it. Time wasters.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 25, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> I knew it was englands fault. Too big to give comparative models any constitution flow. The very idea that there is a constitutional way out of the mess is shocking. I couldn't care less about a constitution and neither did you - but now, it's your flame and fight. Fight for it. Time wasters.



Not at all, I am saying you're fucked, and I'm going down with you.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 25, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> I don't see how you can have large state like Britain, America or England and then bemoan the concept of nationalism.  That's the whole point.


Eh? 

From my point of view, make states as large as we can. Let's have one world state - in which powers are highly devolved. This isn't about nationalism as I'm not attached to one particular size of state. A properly democratic united states of Europe? Why not? Many of the world's problems now need to be dealt with at an international level - if we could bring democratic accountability in some way to that level, it would be rather advantageous. 

I'm not advocating the EU, btw, which is profoundly undemocratic.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 25, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> I don't see how you can have large state like Britain, America or England and then bemoan the concept of nationalism.  That's the whole point.


None of your replies make any sense. They are just things that you type. They are not connected to what we're ever talking about.

I think you may be the 2nd ever person i put on ignore.

edit: plus you're a horrible racist with no understanding of why you are a horrible racist


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 25, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Eh?
> 
> From my point of view, make states as large as we can. Let's have one world state - in which powers are highly devolved. This isn't about nationalism as I'm not attached to one particular size of state. A properly democratic united states of Europe? Why not? Many of the world's problems now need to be dealt with at an international level - if we could bring democratic accountability in some way to that level, it would be rather advantageous.
> 
> I'm not advocating the EU, btw, which is profoundly undemocratic.



But the USA relies heavily on nationalism to keep its states together.  In fact, the intensity of its nationalism is probably the only thing that keeps individual states together.  The EU relies on the strength of its economy while desperately trying to formulate some common identity between groups of people.  The one thing about the EU that worked was that it was co-operative and voluntary, that is just not the case any more.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 25, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> edit: plus you're a horrible racist with no understanding of why you are a horrible racist



Why do you say that?  This is just nonsense.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 25, 2014)

Examine each  piece of this drivel above. The US states want to break apart. Greece is hanging in on there due to it booming economy. You couldn't maker it up.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 25, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Examine each  piece of this drivel above. The US states want to break apart. Greece is hanging in on there due to it booming economy. You couldn't maker it up.



What you have said is nonsense.  None of it even implies racism.  Greece has been shafted by the EU, it is not its booming economy but threat of complete collapse that has kept it in the EU.  American nationalism?  Are you kidding me?  The whole concept of state versus federal interests.  How is that racist?  It is just nonsense.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 25, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> Why do you say that?  This is just nonsense.


Post after post since thursday- disagree with you = english, being english =posh, being english= not to be trusted. 

You are where nationalism leads and i hope any  left wingers thinking they can play with the fire of nationalism learn they can't.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 25, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> What you have said is nonsense.  None of it even implies racism.  Greece has been shafted by the EU, it is not its booming economy but threat of complete collapse that has kept it in the EU.  American nationalism?  Are you kidding me?  The whole concept of state versus federal interests.  How is that racist?  It is just nonsense.


Look, just drivel. American nationalism? Where has s/he come up with that from? The same place that the states want to leave. 

Took some time, but clocked  as fantasy world.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 25, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Post after post since thursday- disagree with you = english, being english =posh, being english= not to be trusted.
> 
> You are where nationalism leads and i hope any  left wingers thinking they can play with the fire of nationalism learn they can't.



That is complete garbage. At no point have I suggested that English people are posh or not to be trusted.  You're fabricating bullshit.

If you want to understand Scottish demographics, then read about it.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 25, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Look, just drivel. American nationalism? Where has s/he come up with that from? The same place that the states want to leave.
> 
> Took some time, but clocked  as fantasy world.



What a load of nonsense.  American Patriotism? You are seriously going to draw a distinction between patriotism and nationalism?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinheads_and_Patriots
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_patriotism

Of course there is some popular support for secession.



> A Reuters/Ipsos poll sought to see if Thursday’s Scottish independence referendum ‒ which failed ‒ inspired Americans to dream of secession from the United States. According to the results, 23.9 percent of those surveyed either strongly supported or tended to support the idea of their state breaking away from the union.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 25, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> That is complete garbage. At no point have I suggested that English people are posh or not to be trusted.  You're fabricating bullshit.
> 
> If you want to understand Scottish demographics, then read about it.


You did worse, you suggested that just by being english newbie supported a horrible twitter attack on andy murray and further, that this was characteristic of 'the english'.

the english

You are a disgrace.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 25, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> What a load of fucking horseshit.  American Patriotism? You are seriously going to draw a distinction between patriotism and nationalism?
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinheads_and_Patriots
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_patriotism


I rest my case -_nothing to do with what we're talking about.Here's some odd links about stuff i brought up myself.
_
Disgrace. i hope you've been home at least since thursday.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 25, 2014)

How is that nothing do to with it?   Of course O'Reilly and the American establishment are nationalists as we are defining it.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 25, 2014)

Hiding in plain view.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 25, 2014)

Utter nonsense.  I am not hiding from anything.  The idea that you can dress up nationalism as patriotism is a trick played by unionists throughout this campaign.  It is nothing new.



butchersapron said:


> You did worse, you suggested that just by being english newbie supported a horrible twitter attack on andy murray and further, that this was characteristic of 'the english'.
> 
> the english
> 
> You are a disgrace.



I never suggested anything like that.  newbie went around accusing people of nationalism, when the press has run a horrific British nationalist agenda.  At no point did I ever suggest it was characteristic of 'the english'.  This is just a total fabricated nonsense.  Show me once where I described anything as characteristic of the english.

The fact of the matter is that you are desperate to find examples of Scottish nationalism when the real horrors of the last several weeks have been British nationalism.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 25, 2014)

Yeah, the media fabricated it - you were under attack. You principle free arsehole.

How you people who votd YES and want to do something about it going to deal with people like this?


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 25, 2014)

What?  Nonsense, you are comparing two completely different things.  An odd idiot with a massive campaign promulgating British propaganda.  That is nothing to do with me.  Of course, one of the reasons some people voted YES was to stop this kind of nonsense.

Show me once were I described something as characteristic of the english.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 25, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> What?  Nonsense, you are comparing two completely different things.  An odd idiot with a massive campaign promulgating British propaganda.  That is nothing to do with me.  Of course, one of the reasons some people voted YES was to stop this kind of nonsense.
> 
> Show me once were I described something as characteristic of the english.


I think the king one was the one you posted at newbie   the anti-murray thing. NO WORDS NEEDED RIGHT. No need to actually describe your racism - on your part at least.

I wrote you off then - as a simple racist. Tonight i learn that you're a loon as well. So there was some madness behind your method.

I've had enough now. Stop _following_ me. It's your problem now pro-indy people.


----------



## DairyQueen (Sep 25, 2014)

You can't just say you were wrong?  You can't find any evidence, but you _know_.  You'll explain what things really mean.  Go with the gut, throw in some insults.


----------



## J Ed (Sep 25, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> the english
> the english
> the english
> the blacks
> ...



Is this a Billy Bragg song?


----------



## newbie (Sep 25, 2014)

DairyQueen said:


> newbie went around accusing people of nationalism,


I did no such thing. I asked whether resigning from a UK-wide union was evidence of the sort of nationalism we've been assured was absent from the Scottish campaign. No-one has even attempted a rational answer but you came back with "_You're not from Scotland_" and a vile old tweet that no decent person would ever use as ammunition but which you'd stored up for use against anyone English critical of nationalism. _This is how the English behave, you're all the same, all British nationalists._

_



			Britain can't really cope with genuine diversity of opinion and culture. Scots are, to them, white, christian and english-speaking so to many it is very difficult to grasp the idea that they are 'really' a minority
		
Click to expand...

_
Like I said, you're obviously on a comedown and lashing out at all and sundry. I don't know whether you're a racist or simply making ill advised posts, but either way you'd do well to read up about the grieving process and then step away from the internet for a bit


----------



## kebabking (Sep 25, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> ...I'm sure all sides in Westminster would prefer to just not talk about it and not do anything about it.



while i think thats undoubtedly true, i'm of the belief that if _forced_ to grapple with the issue Cameron has better options than Milliband, and his 'second best' result - that of effectively English devolution - looks a lot rosier than Labours. if Cameron gets rid of the WLQ he has one less MP and those who oppose him have 58 less MP's, if Milliband sorts it out he might form a UK government, but unless he gets a landslide in 2015 he'd get almost nothing through on English only matters - Health, Education, Planning etc.. the phrase 'a lame duck shooting itself in the foot' doesn't even come close.

Cameron could easily spin English devolution (effectively the English Grand Committee idea) as_ strengthening_ the union - by providing a solution to the WLQ he ensures that _England_ stays in the union, and that his electorate (English voters) stop caring what the Scottish Government or Welsh Assembly do or provide.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 25, 2014)

kebabking said:


> if Cameron gets rid of the WLQ he has one less MP and those who oppose him have 58 less MP's


On devolved matters.  On reserved matters he'll still have 58 MPs from other parties opposing him (on those issues on which they oppose him).


----------



## Wilf (Sep 25, 2014)

J Ed said:


> Is this a Billy Bragg song?


 If you add a few 'oh, ahahas' it could be off the next Morrissey album.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 25, 2014)

And by God he'd be right.


----------



## Quartz (Sep 25, 2014)

danny la rouge said:


> On devolved matters.  On reserved matters he'll still have 58 MPs from other parties opposing him (on those issues on which they oppose him).



Cameron will have to get his skates on if anything is to happen before the next election. And he'll deservedly get booted then. More likely it will be Miliband that makes changes.

OTOH could he use Scots reform to reintroduce the Boundary Commission changes which the Lib Dems blocked? Getting those through would disadvantage Labour.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 25, 2014)

just call it gerrymandering, thats what it is


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 25, 2014)

They're gone. There is no time or support.


----------



## articul8 (Sep 25, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> They're gone. There is no time or support.


they could come back post 2015


----------



## Cpatain Rbubish (Sep 25, 2014)

I think the whole fucking UK should seek devolution from Westminster IMHO.


----------



## Quartz (Sep 25, 2014)

Well, one of the sillier complaints of the independence campaign was that Westminster was over 400 miles away, so perhaps moving Parliament to Liverpool might be an idea.


----------



## Cpatain Rbubish (Sep 25, 2014)

A while back on this thread, someone mentioned the devolved powers of the individual states in the united states.

OK, so how fucked up is this...


Some of the Silicon Valley super rich are trying to make that area a devolved mini state to facilitate them not having to share the burden of the tax deficit of California. Fuck the rest the we're all-right jack in extremis!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 26, 2014)

Cpatain Rbubish said:


> A while back on this thread, someone mentioned the devolved powers of the individual states in the united states.
> 
> OK, so how fucked up is this...
> 
> ...


That was me. I was not advocating a US-style system, merely pointing out the possibility of devolution within a wider polity. You might want to look at the post I was replying to to understand why I gave that example.


----------



## Cpatain Rbubish (Sep 26, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That was me. I was not advocating a US-style system, merely pointing out the possibility of devolution within a wider polity. You might want to look at the post I was replying to to understand why I gave that example.



It wasn't a direct response to your post, just a little fucked up nugget of info I thought I'd share. Sorry for any confusion.


----------



## toggle (Sep 26, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That was me. I was not advocating a US-style system, merely pointing out the possibility of devolution within a wider polity. You might want to look at the post I was replying to to understand why I gave that example.



the problem with arrangements that devolve power is that the central authority then tends to find ways to undermine local power structures and reserve power to itself. usually completely forgetting and hence recreating the problems that led to devolved power in the first place. 

the most blindingly obvious example is that we are now looking at the need for devolution of the constituent nations and possibly english regional devolution. a major part of this being a response to successive governments hobbling county councils and the power structures at that level. 

as an aside, these were created by the tory government that was formed as a result of the failure of the first attempt to legislate home rule for ireland. significantly, to try to undermine calls for irish home rule. by allowing greater local control and it was hoped, to remove the worst excesses of bad government in ireland. the house of commons voted for irish home rule 3 years later. it took about 20 more years to get that past the lords and another 7 years to actually achieve dominion status for Ireland. i think any measures forwarded now are similarly, delaying the inevitable.


----------



## newbie (Sep 26, 2014)

what outcome can possibly be seen, from here and now, as inevitable?


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 26, 2014)

Death and taxes.


----------



## where to (Sep 26, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> They're gone. There is no time or support.



Looked straight from Lynton Crosby's playbook to me. I expect it to rumble on.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Sep 28, 2014)




----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 28, 2014)

toggle said:


> the problem with arrangements that devolve power is that the central authority then tends to find ways to undermine local power structures and reserve power to itself. usually completely forgetting and hence recreating the problems that led to devolved power in the first place.
> 
> the most blindingly obvious example is that we are now looking at the need for devolution of the constituent nations and possibly english regional devolution. a major part of this being a response to successive governments hobbling county councils and the power structures at that level.
> 
> as an aside, these were created by the tory government that was formed as a result of the failure of the first attempt to legislate home rule for ireland. significantly, to try to undermine calls for irish home rule. by allowing greater local control and it was hoped, to remove the worst excesses of bad government in ireland. the house of commons voted for irish home rule 3 years later. it took about 20 more years to get that past the lords and another 7 years to actually achieve dominion status for Ireland. i think any measures forwarded now are similarly, delaying the inevitable.


I agree completely with the first two paragraphs. And it will ever be thus - the level of the nation state is the level at which armies are controlled - they have the monopoly on ultimate violence, and that central power will always be in a strong position to gather power to itself. That's a tension between centre and periphery that has existed for as long as nation states have existed. We will always need to find ways to battle against it. 

I'm not sure how far parallels with Ireland can go. One big difference I can think of is that Ireland had been subdued by the English/British for centuries and land was owned substantially by absentee landlords. The Irish had good reason to consider themselves as having been colonised by the British by force. That's a very different dynamic from the one that brought about union between Scotland and England.


----------



## treelover (Sep 28, 2014)

Dillinger4 said:


>



That's a very good poster


----------



## treelover (Sep 28, 2014)

> There's something to the "five stages of grief" observation. I feel it, and I see it in many of my friends. Our dream of having a country of our own, a country where we could prevent fracking, and new nuclear power stations, and preserve the NHS as a public body, and remove WMDs from our soil, and tackle child poverty and urban deprivation, and give our elderly better pensions, and not destroy lives in the Middle East, that has been shattered.
> By the Labour party, acting as the loyal lieutenants of the Conservative party.
> The Edinburgh agreement was trashed. Cameron refused to debate with Salmond, but hawked himself around foreign governments and celebrities and banks and big business, desperate to recruit as many talking heads as possible to threaten Scotland with destruction or schmooze it to bits, depending. The BBC was happy to amplify any scare story, or positive snippet for the No campaign, but refused to give any publicity to good news for Yes, even going so far as to refuse to report people complaining they'd been misquoted.
> For months, I felt like a victim of domestic abuse. I was being metaphorically battered by what was coming over the airwaves. In the last two weeks it was like being on the wrong end of a seal clubbing. And still the opinion polls crept upwards for Yes. I remarked that if Scotland did vote Yes in the face of the barrage of terror, it would be an act of extraordinary bravery. I think that was about the time we were being told queues would be forming at the banks as people rushed to withdraw all their money, if a Yes was announced on the 19th.
> ...



http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...scotland-dying-does-anyone-care?commentpage=1

A really good post on CIf in response to a good piece by Kevin McKenna(who appears to be a socialist despite being Editor in Chief of the Scottish Daily Mail)


----------



## Sue (Sep 28, 2014)

I like this bit:

'The most troubling question that may be asked about Murphy’s tour is this one: you’ve been a Labour MP for 15 years, Jim, so why didn’t you ever get up off your arse during that time to conduct a tour of 100 towns to highlight urban deprivation and social inequality? You waited far too long to show you cared about anything beyond your career and, when you finally did, you chose the wrong subject to get all passionate about: the British state.'


----------



## treelover (Sep 28, 2014)

Murphy was instrumental in introducing Employment Support Allowance and abolishing Incapacity Benefit

oh, and as NUS president facilitated the NUS bending over to accept student loans.


----------



## treelover (Sep 28, 2014)

> Can the no voters please enlighten on the following: What extra powers is Scotland to receive, just an idea please? When will it happen? Why are Camerons mps trying to do away with the Barnett formula? Why did bbc report yesterday that Scotland will have oil for decades yet two weeks before said it was running out? Why did I receive a no campaign leaflet telling me food prices would rise and state pensions weren't protected? Why has media not reported on the possible fraud case thats going to judicial review? Why is Scotland no longer on the news atall. Where did Gordon Brown go? Why is labour cutting child support etc etc feeling silly yet?



posted on the 45 FB site


----------



## gosub (Sep 28, 2014)

treelover said:


> http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...scotland-dying-does-anyone-care?commentpage=1
> 
> A really good post on CIf in response to a good piece by Kevin McKenna(who appears to be a socialist despite being Editor in Chief of the Scottish Daily Mail)


"Ed Miliband will require all of his 41 Scottish Labour MPs to be returned if he is to have any hope of winning an overall majority at Westminster next year. Yet how many of them would survive a backlash from among the 1.6 million who voted yes and who have effectively renounced the Labour faith?"


I would say most Labour seats could survive a hollowing out,  SNP will pick up most Lib Dem votes this time around. Its 2020 Labour has to worry about.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_Kingdom_general_election_results_in_Scotland


----------



## Cpatain Rbubish (Sep 28, 2014)

Quartz said:


> Well, one of the sillier complaints of the independence campaign was that Westminster was over 400 miles away, so perhaps moving Parliament to Liverpool might be an idea.



Whilst the joke upfront sounds like it's a geographical one one it wasn't meant as such. True it's funny to me that Scotland expressed it's desire not to be ruled from Westminster (not the Indy win but only a 10-15% swing needed) at the same time as a considerable number of UK MPs/parties are trying to gain power back from Brussels. 

Perhaps I find it funnier because I don't care that much. The number of all MPs that I consider to be true to their political beliefs (on all sides) is sadly diminishing. Now it's just about populist, blow with the wind bollocks on all sides. In my lifetime I've witnessed the electorate voting in disgusting right wing parliaments and seen the labour movement usurped by cunts who wouldn't know a days work, or the working classes lot if it bit them. One day I hope it does but somehow I doubt it. Our democracy is becoming the joke of choice as it has been in living memory in the US. SO MUCH MUCH TO CHOOSE BUT FUCK ALL CHOICE. When everyone fights for the centre ground in the UK we are all the the political poorer. 

Choice becomes a case not of conviction politics, but that of voting for the least worst cunts. I never thought I'd say this but I doubt I'll vote again ever, they are (nearly all) all self serving cunts and it would make me sick t cast a ballot for any of them. Sad days indeed.


----------



## Quartz (Sep 28, 2014)

Cpatain Rbubish said:


> The number of all MPs that I consider to be true to their political beliefs (on all sides) is sadly diminishing.



QFT.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 28, 2014)

treelover said:


> http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...scotland-dying-does-anyone-care?commentpage=1
> 
> A really good post on CIf in response to a good piece by Kevin McKenna(who appears to be a socialist despite being Editor in Chief of the Scottish Daily Mail)


That's a terrible shit post, it's more of the a vote for NO = a vote for Austerity/Tories crap, as well as more elderly "sheeple" bashing. His/her "dream" was a ridiculous fantasy, even if YES had won neo-liberalism was still going to be the name of the game, governments were still going to use an austerity agenda to drive their attacks on the working-class.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 28, 2014)

redsquirrel said:


> That's a terrible shit post, it's more of the a vote for NO = a vote for Austerity/Tories crap, as well as more elderly "sheeple" bashing. His/her "dream" was a ridiculous fantasy, even if YES had won neo-liberalism was still going to be the name of the game, governments were still going to use an austerity agenda to drive their attacks on the working-class.


All this stuff is shit. NO = everything bad. YES = everything good that could have been. Including oil money being shared among fewer people. This 'it's Scottish oil' stuff sticks most in my craw. It's narrow-minded nationalism at its worst.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2014)

> 0m ago16:11
> 
> *Christopher Chope*, a Conservative, says the “vow” offered to Scotland by David Cameron and other party leaders was never approved by parliament.



Light's blue touch paper and retires.....


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 14, 2014)

colour me astonished


----------



## Tankus (Dec 7, 2014)

Milibands going to have changes imposed on him ........not make them ...

Salmonds smirk in his confirmation of a run into Aberdeen just confirms Milibands increasing inconsequence in directing  labours future.


----------

