[Closed] Osbourne says no to currency union.

12 August is far more important, surely?

Salmond agreed to a debate with Darling.

Yup.

The date was set, Salmond pulled out.

Nope. Salmond offered to debate Cameron on the 16th or Darling at a later date. Salmond didn't pull out of anything.

No it isn't. July 16 is a week before the Commonwealth Games. That's not the reason - try to think of another one.

Still right in the middle of the media build-up, not the best time to do it.

Although you, me, and everyone else, knows the real reason - because Salmond wants to play silly games. And he wants to call the shots, bully, and dictate - another reason why people should vote No in September.

Ah, another try at comparing Salmond to a dictator - it's been ages since we had one of those 😉

I'm not a SNP supporter. I'd probably never vote for Salmond again. Voting No because you don't like Salmond is one of the more stupid reasons for voting No.

No one would position votes or debates around symbolic moments, dates or events Ben, would they!?! C 😉

Nope. Salmond offered to debate Cameron on the 16th or Darling at a later date. Salmond didn't pull out of anything.

The date was set by STV, the hosts of the debate.

You seem to only be able to understand the words that you want to.

When it comes to losing the argument, your refusal to answer simple questions trumps my tendancy to be abusive, hands down.

I'm not even sure why you continue to post on this thread Ben.
There is nothing to debate with you, because you have already stated that you have closed your mind to debate.
It was you afterall, that said they would still vote YES even if it was detrimental to Scotland.
🙄

Of course Salmond wants to have the debate at the best time for him - he's probably the best political operator in the UK, of course he's manipulating it.

But that still doesn't alter the fact that Darling said "any place, any time" then pulled out. That was a bad move.

Better Together's aim is to avoid having any debates, which they'd lose, while trying to make it look as if the lack of debates isn't their fault.

Worth putting this in context

A couple of years ago, OFCOM found STV to be in breach of the broadcasting code over sponsorship, because they had been altering content and scheduling of programmes at the behest of the Scottish Government...

There is nothing to debate with you, because you have already stated that you have closed your mind to debate.

😀

I'd love to hear some intelligent debate around voting No, but that's not happening on this thread. I've heard some really good speakers for the No side, the author Ken Macleod has some really good things to say. He hasn't convinced me yet, but made me think. This thread is just light entertainment.

It was you afterall, that said they would still vote YES even if it was detrimental to Scotland.

When did I say that? I'm sure I had caveats like if it was detrimental in the short term or something.

But that still doesn't alter the fact that Darling said "any place, any time" then pulled out. That was a bad move.

[b]AT WHAT DATE AND LOCATION WAS THE DEBATE THAT DARLING PULLED OUT OF?

YES I AM SHOUTING. IF I WAS IN THE SAME ROOM AS YOU IMAGINE I WAS DOING IT RIGHT IN YOUR FACE.[/b]

🙂

Still right in the middle of the media build-up, not the best time to do it.

😆

On the previous page you said : [i]"The breakup of the UK is probably the biggest thing to happen politically in the last 100 years at least". [/i]

But now you are claiming that Scots will be too distracted the by Commonwealth Games, which will be held a week later, to be bothered watching their First Minister debate the issue !

So according to you Scots attach even less importance to Scottish independence than Cameron.

bencooper - Member

Of course Salmond wants to have the debate at the best time for him - he's probably the best political operator in the UK

I think I just physically felt the effects of Ben's swoon for dear leader all the way down here in sunny Cambridgeshire. 😆

I'm off to chase some skirt, see y'all later.

Still right in the middle of the media build-up, not the best time to do it.

Still, I suppose they could debate it on a wet Thursday in a village hall in Easter Ross...

sbob - Member
I'm off to chase some skirt, see y'all later.

Isn't it referred to as a kilt?

Nope, I'm not a big fan of him - he's far too keen on big business for my liking.

However liking is not the same as admiring. He took a fringe party, got it into power in Scotland (in a system designed to prevent that) and is now a bawhair away from getting independence.

Salmond agreed to a debate with Darling.
The date was set, Salmond pulled out.

Our position is that an invitation has gone to Alistair Darling and Alex Salmond to debate on 16th July and until we've heard back from all parties we don't want to speculate on how or when or anything.

The first minister has replied with a note that they've sent to David Cameron and they're waiting to hear back from Downing Street before coming back to STV. Our position is that the 16th July is the date we've proposed to both sides and it has been [proposed] to Alistair Darling and Alex Salmond.

Of course Salmond wants to have the debate at the best time for him

They are politicians they make decisions for political reasons, some of these decisions stink.

Salmond wants to play silly games. And he wants to call the shots, bully, and dictate - another reason why people should vote No in September.

Salmond wants to play silly games. And he wants to call the shots, bully, and dictate - another reason why people should vote No in September.

Awesome

What would be really awesome would be if the nats could think of one credible reason why the debate between Salmond and Darling shouldn't be on July 16.

But of course you can't.

Ben after giving the issue much thought comes up with the excuse that it will be in the middle of the Commonwealth Games, even though it won't be.

And you come up with the excuse that Salmond wants the debate nearer polling day, conveniently ignoring the fact that Salmond has said that he would very happy to have the debate on July 16 with Cameron.

So since we've run out of excuses the conclusion must be that Salmond is playing games, even Ben concedes that Salmond is "manipulating".

Simple question: who pulled out of the debate?

All the articles I've read say "Better Together walk out" or variations on that.

It's funny seeing people argue the opposite, though.

Another simple question : what's wrong with July 16 ?

Funny how you can't answer that one.

Again you're confusing me with someone who works in the Yes campaign 😉

What's wrong with the 16th is that Salmond never offered to debate Darling on the 16th.

Edit: Salmond has accepted STV's suggestion of a debate on the 5th of August. So will Darling ("any place, any time") accept that?

But of course you can't

To be clear almost all my comments have been yes no shit that is what politicians do [ Ben gets enough shit without me joining in but he is no where near impartial if that helps] Personally I can see little difference between CMD refusal and AS wanting to debate nearer the election date [ is that a reason yet?*] Perhaps you could explain why only one deserves your venom and name calling- the principle behind this view?
Its interesting how both sides only want to talk of the other when their side** is doing basically the same thing

* the article i linked to explained but yes think it will more likely sway the floating voters - why ask a questions if you dont read the answers and links?

But that date is far from convenient for Salmond: as this blog reported last month, he and his strategists want to stage the debates far closer to polling day – ideally just before about one million of Scotland's 4m voters start to receive their postal votes on 25 August, at a point when the final campaign is in full swing

Go too early – in July, and the debate will be competing for an audience already depleted by the school holidays with the 2014 Glasgow games, the First World War commemorations in early August and the final stages of the world cup.

Go too late, you miss influencing those crucial postal votes – these are the committed electors who are far more likely to take part but conversely to have made up their minds; you may be talking to an increasingly weary and committed electorate and you also have too little time to fix any disasters from the debate.

And for the yes campaign, still lagging behind in the polls, timing is critical: Salmond may be a divisive character for many voters, but he is rightly famous for his sharp debating skills and his ease on a stage. He is an asset which his team needs to play very cleverly indeed.

** I apologise for claiming CMD is your side but you get my point.

Ben gets enough shit without me joining in but he is no where near impartial if that helps

Yup, and I don't claim to be, I'm not the BBC 🙂

If you listen to some that does not stop you working for the BBC 😉

Is it ernie name calling day rather than ernie making insightful comments?

I stopped reading after that. I had already ignored your comment in your previous post : "This debate is so partisan its ridiculous, and from you Ernie , I expect better".

You always end up attacking someone on a personal level. You accuse others of resorting to personal insults and yet throughout this thread you yourself have resorted to personal insults, you just can't help yourself.

I generally ignore your posts and thought that it was probably a mistake to give a lengthy response to your comment, I was right.

I generally ignore your posts and thought that it was probably a mistake to give a lengthy response to your comment, I was right.

Wisdom comes to us all in time, Ernie!! 😉

There's a word for it...........

There is a report post button for both you and THM if you think I am overstepping the mark with my “personal comments” which mean disagreeing with you and challenging you when you are fast and lose with facts. I have heard nothing from moderators and only those reluctant to reply/defend themselves have complained on the forum so far.
Easier to attack me than explain why AS is different from CMD or for THM to defend the claim that AS has only done all this to "get power" innit.

FWIW the original comment was a compliment [ it not well written ] in that you are one of the most insightful commentators on STW and that comment/analysis was not what I would expect from you. It was not meant as an insult in general just on that one post

Why do we need a televised debate about independence between two individuals? I understand the need for debates between political party leaders in the run up to an election because it gives the electorate a chance to judge their debating styles, gauge their personalities, and to decide who they want to run the country. With the case of Scottish Independence though people are not voting for Alec Salmond or the SNP so a one on one debate does not make as much sense. Maybe a panel of members from both sides would be more appropriate?
I can't help but feel that this television debate is distracting from the fact that a lot of questions about independence have yet to be answered.

I agree - but that kind of debate is too intellectual for TV probably. The BBC's debate at the Hydro with 12,000 schoolkids is equally daft.

http://news.stv.tv/scotland/280474-orange-lodge-officially-registers-as-supporter-of-referendum-no-vote/

Well there's a surprise...

Well there's a surprise...

What's a surprise ?

That the Orange Lodge is unionist ?

That, according to your link : [i]It is understood the cross-party pro-Union organisation "firmly rejected" a written request by the Grand Orange Lodge of Scotland asking to join their campaign.[/i]?

Or that you have been forced to scrape the bottom of the barrel as you abandon all attempts to provide a carefully thought out and compelling argument in favour of Scottish 'independence' ?

To be honest I don't find any of those three things surprising.

We've gone though the debate thing right at the start of the thread. It's too easy for AS to manipulate a debate into a Scotland v England argument if it's the PM.

Or that you have been forced to scrape the bottom of the barrel as you abandon all attempts to provide a carefully thought out and compelling argument in favour of Scottish 'independence' ?

I didn't know that's what you wanted. I can give you lots of good reasons if you're actually interested.

It's too easy for AS to manipulate a debate into a Scotland v England argument if it's the PM.

Double Post

I didn't know that's what you wanted. I can give you lots of good reasons if you're actually interested.

I am very interested, although a link to an article which clearly states all the tangible advantages of independence would probably be easier.

And by tangible I mean just that, not for example the suggestion that Scots will be ruled by a different bunch of politicians. I'd like to hear about real stuff which will provide real benefits to real people, and which can only be achieved through independence, and which will outweigh any likely negatives.

At the end of the day CMD has always said that he would not debate the issue with AS, so he is being consistent. The articles are a bit hazy, but I suspect that all parties are right and are spinning it their way. STV issued the invite to darling and AS, As thought it was going to CMD and sent it to him, Darling said yes, Salmond said only CMD, Darling said 'sod off' then, etc!

CMD does (and will continue to) snipe from the sidelines - in same manner that AS tries to create and Scotland v England arguement. Neither are right. If CMD turns up to get involved he will lose far more than he will gain - and his advisor's will keep him a long way from that. He does have an opinion, and as the leader of the UK (not England - there is no English Leader) I would expect him to have one. And not surprisingly it is for the union. AS (as expected) is trying to explore all avenues to swing the don't knows and convert the No's. Nothing wrong there.

C'mon Ernie, be fair - Ben has got a day job. AS has had a lifetime to do what you asking and has failed so far. Harsh to expect Ben to pick up the pieces even given his valient efforts on this thread.

There is no answer as we know. AS still wants rUK to set Econ policy for him around which he will tax less and spend more. Too much 80/-????

AS couldn't give a toss - he just wants more power!!! 😉 Otherwise he would have already put a credible set of answers to the basic questions that we and others have posed. It's embarrassing, really.......

I'd like to hear about real stuff which will provide real benefits to real people, and which can only be achieved through independence, and which will outweigh any likely negatives

Okay, a quick one because I have a four-year-old lying on my arm:

If we don't have to contribute to the twin white elephants of Trident and HS2, we'll have billions more to spend on schools, hospitals and other things that will help real people.

Ben that is two things you mentioned

Your worse than AS at this truth telling 😛

sadmadalan dont be bringing a rational and balanced opinion to this thread.

I agree with all you said but really you need to become massively partisan , stick to it for 170 pages and then say the other side have failed.

I dont think failing to convince the most entrenched voters [ no or yes for balance]is a failure the real issue is which side convince the undecided.The vote will let us know that one. Nothing would convince you or ben to change your views.

So Ben, how much smaller will the total defence budget be? Ball park so that we can gauge how much extra billions will be available?

If you can tell him/us exactly what tridents replacement will be, the cost and soctlands share we will be able to answer. You do know what this figure is ?
Its not his fault UK cannot give this figure so no one can say what the saving will be. Why are you asking? Does this lack of certainty over the exact amount negate his point that it will be a saving?
This is why you ignore me as you have no reply.

Despite this lack of knowledge the point is still true that it will be a saving.

If we don't have to contribute to the twin white elephants of Trident and HS2, we'll have billions more to spend on schools, hospitals and other things that will help real people.

Do you know how much it is going to cost to run Scotland as an independent country? It could end up swallowing any savings made on Trident and HS2. The fact that you don't even have solid figures for setting up all of the institutions needed to run an independent country does not really help. I find it very worrying that this late into the debate a yes vote is still a leap of faith due to the number of unanswered questions.

Ben, ignore the trolling. AS has given (at least an indicated) answer to that......so how much lower will defence spending be? I guess quite a lot given the spending wish list?

Well bearing in mind the proposal for a HS3 yesterday across the North of England,we can safely assume it will be a few hundred million more.

You can't run a country based on guesses THM.

Ben, ignore the trolling.

AS has given (at least an indicated) answer to that

I know that. Equally you can't run it if you don't understand what a currency is!! But people seem happy to swallow that!!

But the defence answer is there......