[Closed] SNP. You LOST, get over it

[quote=bearGrease ]

the alternative offer was for MORE devolution

The only people I know who are chuntering for extra powers are those who lost. All the No voters I know, don't want them. Which side was in the majority?

The majority voted no, but it was their own side that created the confusion over the extra powers. I have heard some rumblings on the subject of betrayal from folks that voted No and who have said the offer of new powers was a factor in their decision.

Hard core No voters will always vote No (well, maybe not always because UK politics could easily impact that for some of them - especially the traditional Labour vote which hasn't always been pro-Union) and hard core Yes voters will always vote Yes. There is a fair chunk in-between (and the polling indicated this as well), many of whom were attracted to the idea of independence but were scared at the prospect and seemed to want to give the UK parties one last chance.

As I understand it yes if tax take dropped because of reduced income tax then yes choices would have to be made on cutting schools, hospitals, roads etc. Obviously some tax still would go to Westminster to pay for UK wide things like border control, defence, the Research Councils etc.

[quote=dragon ] Obviously some tax still would go to Westminster to pay for UK wide things like border control, defence, the Research Councils etc.
70-80% of tax take still goes to Westminster. Seriously, these are pretty minor tweaks to the existing arrangements.

If Labour lost enought Scottish seats that they'd need SNP votes in the UK parliament then it's very hard to see the price for that being anything other than an agreement to support the holding of another referendum.

It'll be a Tory majority regardless so Labour wont win/get in. I'd also like to see UKIP shut the **** up. They have two pissing seats. Big deal. 750 total and they have two. Wish they'd shut up. Idiots.

Really? Have you forgotten the question on the ballot paper already? The alternative offer was to remain in the union, which is what two million people voted for.

It was the No campaign that changed what that meant to "stay in the UK, but with more powers" and certainly some people thought that's what they were voting for when the put their mark in the No box.

It certainly would have been better if they devoMax option was on the ballot paper - especially as it wasn't offered until after some people had already voted by post. At the moment it's possible to know what percentage wanted independence, but it's not possible to say how many voter for No on the basis that they thought devoMax was the best available option, and how many were an outright No under any circumstances. I'd hazard a guess that the majority of the No vote was the latter, but I wouldn't hazard a guess at what percentage. I don't think the offer made the difference between winning and losing for the No camp though - they'd have won anyway. In fact if the No vote didn't send their big-guns up to Scotand to campaign they'd probably have won with a much healthier margin. Given the vast majority of the press outlets were supporting the Union then there wasn't really any need for the UK politicians to get involved.

It'll be a Tory majority regardless so Labour wont win/get in. I'd also like to see UKIP shut the **** up. They have two pissing seats. Big deal. 750 total and they have two. Wish they'd shut up. Idiots

I'd be surprised if there is an outright Tory majority at the next general election. It seems one of the least likely outcomes to me. So if the Tories are to retain control it'll need to be with the support of someone else - and that could be UKIP if they win more seats at the general election. Whether they do win more seats (or even retain what they've currently got) is definitely open to question though - the Tories will be arguing that a vote for UKIP is effectively a vote for a Labour government, just as Labour will be saying that a vote for SNP is a vote for a Tory government.

It'll be a Tory majority regardless so Labour wont win/get in. I'd also like to see UKIP shut the **** up. They have two pissing seats. Big deal. 750 total and they have two. Wish they'd shut up. Idiots.

While they are indeed idiots, it would appear that 19% of the country are presently stupid enough to consider voting for them. And all the polling says that nobody is going to get a majority at the general election. Theres potentially going to be some serious horse-trading going on to establish a working majority. And whether we like it or not UKIP and the SNP are going to be right in the mix

The nightmare scenario is a Tory/UKIP coalition. Imagine Nige holding sway in the role of kingmaker 😯

Cheers!

[img] [/img]

The nightmare scenario is a Tory/UKIP coalition.

Not if you're the SNP. They must be praying for that.

Looks like the Smith report contains potential legislation aimed at stopping there being another referendum: "To provide an adequate check on Scottish Parliament legislation changing the franchise, the electoral system or the number of constituency and regional members
for the Scottish Parliament, UK legislation will require such legislation to be passed by a two-thirds majority of the Scottish Parliament."

Theres potentially going to be some serious horse-trading going on

Going by the polls for the next Holyrood elections, that won't be a problem.

It'll be a Tory majority regardless so Labour wont win/get in. I'd also like to see UKIP shut the **** up. They have two pissing seats. Big deal. 750 total and they have two. Wish they'd shut up. Idiots.

Did those Tory Bar stewards increase the number of MP's by a hundred and not give any to Scotland? Typical!
Interesting that historically there has been a major change in Scottish politics every two decades. I think you can take that as the cycle that as much as some of you wish would end;it won't.Unless we get a Tory/UKIP love in. If that was to happen,then shall we cut the period of time to a decade?
One final point, the Smith report isn't law,not until the next Government passes it,so I am afraid that trying to hold Westminster to the offer isn't sour grapes,your lot offered it...And not in a spirit of reconciliation either. I wonder why we didn't hear about it until days before the ref.

Politician of the Year??

Ian Duncan Smith?

jambalaya - Member
Current wishfull/dellusional thinking is another referendum before 2020.

teamhurtmore - Member
Now let's see if there are politicians capable of exercising this new responsibility well.

How about an Tory / SNP coalition 😆

TBH I see a Tory majority at the next election.

So Westminster attempting to rewrite the Scottish Parliament's rules in order to prevent it acting unilaterally? I can imagine how that would go down north of the border!

I forsee another referrundum before 2020. The Indy issue is far from over and next time I believe - hope - the Nats will win.

it would appear that 19% of the country are presently stupid enough to consider voting for them

There is a worrying undercurrent of racism/ xenophobia/ bigotry that I'm seeing more and more. While UKIP are often considered to be an "English" problem (a lot of pro-Yes stuff used the fear of UKIP as a campaign tool) my attention was drawn to a Facebook page that was setup this week protesting against plans to convert a disused waterboard building into temporary accomodation for asylum seekers. Some of the comments from local residents were eye watering. Here's a few unedited examples

That's what all the yes voters voted for this is the SNP s doing we should be looking after our own people FIRST

Am fkn right pissed of with this shit get them to **** out our country there's a nuff people that don't belong here n this country aww ready that are rapping our woman trying to kip nap our weans

Stick it up yer arse ****in more ae these ****s in this country than us scots send thum ****in back !! Sick ae this god dam country wee get treated like shit and they get the good stuff rats man

**** offf !!! Refugees ?? Seriously ? Theyll get chased out what about us ?? HAVE WE NO GOT A SAY NAW ? THE PEOPLE THAT STAY IN POSSO NO GOT A SAY ? **** THAT THEY DONT NEED IT THEYR GETTING ENOUGH AFF THE SOCIAL SEND THEM HAME NO WONDER THERS POVERTY HERE AND PEOPLE HOMELESS AND STARVING HAVING TO USE FOOD BANKS .. SET UP A HOMELESS UNIT INSTEAD OR SOMETHING FOR THE WAYNES DONT GIVE IT TO ****S HERE TO SPONGE AFF THE BREW AND CLAIM FOR THEYR FAMILYS BACK IN WER EVER THEYR FROM

THATS A JOKE ITS REALLY IS !!!!

WEEV GPT ENOUGH TP DEAL WOTH WITH THE AMOUNT A JUNKIES WE DONT NEED RANDOM REFUGEE WAYN SNACHERS TO WORRY ABOUT ASWELL

😳

Like you I have no idea why they would have to respect the wishes of the people

Because they aren't prepared to engage in another debate around it so soon, which is an entirely legitamate viewpoint given the massive division and cost it incurred last time round. And if only one side is prepared to take part its hardly a fair fight is it?

Hypothetically - whats to stop the Scottish Government running a referendum every 2 years until they finally get a small majority, then walking away from the UK forever? As someone has already pointed out, the UK wouldn't subsequently be able to run referendum every 2 years after independence to opt back in, waiting until the population again changed their minds.

And perhaps I should remind you that the 'wishes of the people' was that Scotland shouldn't be independent. Sounds to me that the wishes of the people currently come a distant second to the ambitions of the SNP party.

my attention was drawn to a Facebook page that was setup this week protesting against plans to convert a disused waterboard building into temporary accomodation for asylum seekers

Yeah, but that's Possil*. The pub next to the Water Board site has finally been demolished but there were several murders there.

*And it's Facebook.

[quote=tpbiker ]Sounds to me that the wishes of the people currently come a distant second to the ambitions of the SNP party.
You do realise that the SNP only get into power if [i]the people [/i]vote for them? [i]If[/i] it was a manifesto commitment to have another referendum on independence, then it would be [i]the people[/i] that wanted it.

You do realise that the SNP only get into power if "the people" vote for them? If it was a manifesto commitment to have another referendum on independence, then it would be the people that wanted it.

Indeed. I don't think even the SNP will push for another referendum unless something has changed and they have some kind of mandate for it (it'd be pointless anyway as they'd just lose again). At the moment they definitely don't, but there will be a lot of political changes coming over the next few years and that could well deliver them a mandate for another referendum.

Hypothetically - whats to stop the Scottish Government running a referendum every 2 years until they finally get a small majority, then walking away from the UK forever?

As someone has already pointed out, the UK wouldn't subsequently be able to run referendum every 2 years after independence to opt back in,

Sounds to me that the wishes of the people currently come a distant second to the ambitions of the SNP party.

For clarity I should add that I do not think they can have a referendum in the next 10 years[ and quite possibly 20 years] unless their is a substantial change in the Union such as leaving the EU. The people have spoken.

Yeah, but that's Possil

They still vote

Like you I have no idea why they would have to respect the wishes of the people

70-80% of tax take still goes to Westminster. Seriously, these are pretty minor tweaks to the existing arrangements.

Too many pigeons, here's a few cats to throw in...

The SNP is only part of the independence movement in Scotland, and while the SNP may be regarded as being in the forefront, they do not control the independence movement.

There is a separate legal system in Scotland. The Treaty of Union didn't absorb Scotland's parliament into England's but created a new body and the respective legal rights were retained. In Scotland sovereignty resides in the people, not the parliament. Hence the attitude amongst many here that it is not whether we are "allowed" to have a referendum, but whether we should exercise our sovereignty and simply declare independence. A suitable trigger being maybe when there is a majority of MPs from Scotland supporting independence, or a large majority in the Scottish parliament. That could be next May.

And as for "get over it", when Labour or Conservative lose an election, do you expect the voters for the losing party to convert to the other political opinion? Similarly independence isn't going away.

This is why it is important why if Westminster wants to put the independence issue to bed they should honour "The Vow". Devolution is what a substantial part of the Scottish people would prefer/accept, but if it is denied, they will see the only option is independence.

[quote=jambalaya ]

70-80% of tax take still goes to Westminster. Seriously, these are pretty minor tweaks to the existing arrangements.

But JY there are 60m people in the UK, you have to respect everyone's wishes. 5 blokes down the pub might want to declare Independence for their favourite boozer

It would be very difficult for rUK to ignore the wishes of Scotland and force them to stay against their wishes. If your wife wants to leave then she leaves what you want or millions of others is neither here nor there as you cannot force her or scotland to remain.
I am not sure why this is hard to grasp and it will only ever be done in highly exceptional circumstances
Imagine if the EU said no you cannot leave we all have to vote on it. its ****ing ludicrous and has been done to death

The staggering arrogance of some people never ceases to amaze. "The Scots voted no" in one breath, "whinging Scots" in the next. "We" in one breath, "you" in the next.

The result was no, but at least 45% of people in this country want it to be independent. The third city in the uk doesn't want to be in it.The "there, you've had you're little vote now back in your box and we'll hear no more about it" attitude is ignorant in the extreme. If you can't understand that you don't just give up on independence then you've no appreciation of the strength of feeling. The Tories won the last election (sort of), why are we having another one, can't those labour lot just accept the result with good grace? Why did we have a devo vote in 97 when we'd already had one in 79?

There's been a surge in support for the SNP, and the other Yes parties and movements since the result. Exactly who the hell does anyone think they are to tell us we what we should support?

Actually, maybe it's insecurity rather than arrogance. "Leave? Don't you love me any more?"

Funny how that argument only seems to work one way?

Why did so many SNP voters vote NO?

Why did so many SNP voters vote NO?

How many?

Indeed lets see the stats/evidence to support that claim please

20%

And don't forget the irony of one large metropolitan area (nearly) determining the outcome for the rest.....hmmmm

[img] [/img]

teamhurtmore - Member
Funny how that argument only seems to work one way?

Why did so many SNP voters vote NO?

That stretches credibility to the utmost to put it politely.

Did they find that figure in a huge pile of steaming bovine exhaust?

Scots have expressed their opinion of the SNP and its policies by joining the party in record numbers. Membership has gone up from 25,000 before the referendum to almost 100,000 in just a few weeks.

(And before I'm accused of being a SNP fan, I'll repeat I am not a member and have no intention of joining.)

Edit: for comparison's sake, the total membership of the Conservative Party throughout the UK is estimated at 135,000. Membership of the LibDem Party UK wide is estimated at 43,500. Both members of the Labour Party refused to comment on membership numbers. 🙂

^^^ I meant to say Scottish Labour.

Why confuse post-event trends with the event itself. The maths is straightforward and confirmed in the stats at the time. One in five SNP voters, voted NO. The canny 20%. Don't forget which side stretched credibility beyond breaking point - helps to explain the result.

Since then lots of people have switched to UKIP too. Apart from the similarities in both leaders lying through their teeth, so what? Different things altogether

Tried deodorant rene?

^^^ I meant to say [s]Scottish[/s] UK Labour branch office.

FTFY

EDIT: THM you really need to provide proof to your claims - you could provide proof and be all smug- Evidence is the best "argument"
Forgive the use of facts here
Original post

as he will probably tell us to google here is what I found
20 % comes from the torygraph

As well as the electoral map, polling by Lord Ashcroft, the Tory peer, also sheds light on the Yes camp’s disappointment.
According to the poll of 2,000 voters, one in five people who backed the SNP in the 2010 general election rejected independence this week. Even 14 per cent of SNP voters at the last Scottish Parliament election in 2011 voted No.

He expresses it like this though

Meanwhile one in seven SNP voters opted to remain in the UK. Those who voted SNP in the last general election comprised just over half (53%) of the total Yes vote.

Dangerously on topic it also found

Finally, for how long do Scottish voters think the question of independence will remain settled? A majority of those who voted No said they thought the issue was now resolved for at least a generation (28%) or forever (25%). Yes voters disagree: more than six in ten said they thought the matter was settled for no more than ten years, including nearly half (45%) who thought the question would remain closed for no more than five years.

[quote=unknown ]at least 45% of people in this country want it to be independent.

Has there been some other vote I've missed? Because in the most obvious recent one the number was nowhere near that high.

at least 45% of people [b]who expressed a preference [/b]

45% of those who voted , as you well know, pedant 😛

Then again they would have won had it not been for the older voters 😉

[quote=scotroutes ]at least 45% of people who expressed a preference

er, no, not quite that either 😉

Then again they would have won had it not been for the older voters

Along with the English voters. The number of English people who live in Scotland and were eligible to vote wasn't far off the difference between the Yes and No votes.

so there we have it is the english and the old who are to blame...no arguing with science now is there 😉

[quote=epicsteve ]

Then again they would have won had it not been for the older voters

No, please! This is supposed to be a happy occasion! Let's not bicker and argue about who [s]killed[/s]voted for who !

😀

typical of the english oppressor FFFFFFFRRRRRREEEEEEEDDDDDDDDDOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMM

Junky seen earlier;
[img] [/img]

Aye - but you're surely not suggesting they all voted no?

97.3% of those that voted did.

I get why the pain is so harsh. Facts, truth and logic aside, yS had everything aligned for an easy win. And yet the most astute politician in the uk (no, really) misses the open goal.

If it were not for the fact that the result is a win, win for everyone, I would be a bit pissed too I was a yS suporter. Still if you cannae carry your own side, what hope is there for you?

Now you have the best solution possible, STFU, count your blessings (not least we are rid of wee eck for now) and get on with it.

Doesnt surprise me that SNP membership is rocketing. The yes vote was always far more vocal than the no, and from what I can see many simply refuse to give up on the independence dream and are desperate to continue the momentum

The silent majority that is the No vote probably don't really give a shit anymore, they got what they wanted and have moved on

On the topic of more powers to Scotland within the union, I'm pretty convinced that if Devo Max had been an option on the paper the Yes Vote would have been far smaller than what it was (as would the no vote obviously), so I'd be staggered if any future Referendum didn't include this option, which would pretty much put an end to the subject.

Junky seen earlier;

THM diplomacy and counsellings loss is our gain

Personally, I have not had time to digest the Smith report, however I have been disappointed on the tone from the final weeks of the referendum until now by all sides.

A panicked pledge was made late on that has left most Westminster politicians running about chasing their arses as well as many yes voters hoping it all goes pear shaped.

Debate on constitutional reform I feel should have been discussed sooner and been more inclusive of the whole UK, although perhaps the referendum was what was required to bring it to discussion. Now we have the 'pledge' separate from rUK devolution, which is as it should be, however I can understand but don't like to see either a simmering resentment in England/Wales/NI or a willful hope for failure in Scotland.

I know the last thread got heated, however a more reasoned tone should prevail now, but does not seem to be happening.

Wise words and insightful but nuanced debate seems unlikely on here.

The independence referendum was democracy at it's best, comments about unilaterally declaring independence do no one any favours. People need to respect the vote so that the whole of the UK can move on. The UK needs a shake up from the top to the bottom. The north-south divide does not start at the Scottish border it starts at the Watford gap. Devolution to the regions is a must!

epicsteve - Member
Aye - but you're surely not suggesting they all voted no?
97.3% of those that voted did.

POSTED 40 MINUTES AGO # REPORT-POST

Link

Link

I made it up - just like some of the other stats quoted here.

SNP is pushing for independence in all but name. The scarecrow leader was saying in parliament 'I want'. What about the majority voters who voted no? Again Salmon saying 'we lost but we can still declare independence' post vote. Do they believe in democracy or arrogantly believe no's only voted no if they all got completr control?

The leader of the SNP is not representing people who either voted yes or no, she is representing the voters who voted the SNP into power in Scotland. How hard is that to understand?.

2011 wasnt it? Pretty hard for one of us. Shes pushing for the max from where I see it. Calm yerself laddie. Lets wait for their next election to see the turnout.

Shes pushing for the max from where I see it. Calm yerself laddie. Lets wait for their next election to see the turnout.

It'll be interesting. Normally votes turn back to Labour in the general election, as it's as much about an anti-Tory vote as anything else. The polls are indicating that might not happen this time but we'll have to wait and see. Labour is in even more of a mess in Scotland that it is in the rest of the UK.

Hora has more chance of a sensible post than labour have of regaining power in Scotland.

Hora has more chance of a sensible post than labour have of regaining power in Scotland.

True, but they might still get the majority of the seats in Scotland in the general election.

epicsteve - Member
"Hora has more chance of a sensible post than labour have of regaining power in Scotland."
True, but they might still get the majority of the seats in Scotland in the general election.

At which point the independence movement may start putting pressure on the SNP majority Scottish parliament to declare independence.

Take a look at Iceland for an example. The people en masse sacked the parliament and re-established their govt. That could happen in Scotland.

That's if Westminster dodges and weaves over the issue of "more powers" as we expect them to.

The big master stroke Cameron could do now is to ensure that Devo Max happens, and in a stroke he cripples Labour for a generation, and puts independence on the back burner until the UK exits the EU.

epicsteve - Member

True, but they might still get the majority of the seats in Scotland in the general election.

They might... But the last polling I saw has the SNP taking 40 seats, labour 16, the tories outnumbering the pandas by 1 and the lib dems getting completely wiped out. So it'd be a heck of a comeback

the tories outnumbering the pandas by 1

The pandas have a much greater chance of increasing their Scottish population than the Tories so not a fair comparison.
Mon the pandas!

The third city in the uk doesn't want to be in it.

The north-south divide does not start at the Scottish border it starts at the Watford gap.

+1

The nation state is a thing of the past. The Yes campaign should grasp that fact and stop trying to force Scotland back into the 20th century.

Glasgow being the third city of the UK is not based on population alone. There is no official second city of the UK, pre WW1 this was largely accepted as being Glasgow (2nd city of the empire) which was overtaken by Birmingham around WW1, hence pushing Glasgow into third place. This status is based on mixture of population, influence, economic and cultural contribution amongst others.

Manchester has a fair shout, but Leeds? My arse!

bearGrease - Member
"The north-south divide does not start at the Scottish border it starts at the Watford gap."
+1

The nation state is a thing of the past. The Yes campaign should grasp that fact and stop trying to force Scotland back into the 20th century.

If we're talking about old-fashioned stuff, a parliamentary system with a superior unelected upper house and a monarch at the top, is far more a thing of the past, and definitely not democratic.

The independence movement is more about democracy than nationalism. It is very much an amorphous people's movement and not a monolithic thing that can be directed.

If we accept that the problem starts at the Watford gap, it raises the question of what are you doing about it in your part of the country?

From our perspective, it looks like you are swinging to an even more right wing version of what we are trying to get away from, so there doesn't seem much prospect of a common cause.

I get why the pain is so harsh. Facts, truth and logic aside, yS had everything aligned for an easy win. And yet the most astute politician in the uk (no, really) misses the open goal.

I looked at the level of pro-independence support at the beginning of the campaign, the level at the end of the campaign, and the concessions made by Westminster. I concluded that the Yes campaign was extremely effective.

As an outsider I was very surpirsed how easily the Yes voters were swayed by a few rapidly rushed promises from Westminster.
Suggests to me it wasn't really a very committed vote if it was so cheaply bought?

hora - Member

2011 wasnt it? Pretty hard for one of us. Shes pushing for the max from where I see it. Calm yerself laddie. Lets wait for their next election to see the turnout.

Posted 12 hours ago #

Must be hard for you all,your Government managed to win the battle,but at what cost?

At an extremely high cost indeed. Do you think the majority of English voters give 2 shits about devolution? Na, it's the scots who asked for this and it's us who are now divided into two groups as a result.
What concerns me now is the lack of uncertainty in Scotland's future-it can only lead to a lack of investment which in turn affects every single one of us living in Scotland.

hilldodger - Member
As an outsider I was very surpirsed how easily the Yes voters were swayed by a few rapidly rushed promises from Westminster.
Suggests to me it wasn't really a very committed vote if it was so cheaply bought?

No, it just shows that there was far more support for devolution than outright independence.

Which is why the govt didn't allow devolution as a choice in the referendum. Then in a last minute panic, they offered it, and people who believed them voted No in the expectation that the promise would be delivered.

That's why it is important that the govt delivers proper devolution, because the next time round no-one will believe them.

eat_more_cheese - Member
...What concerns me now is the lack of uncertainty in Scotland's future-it can only lead to a lack of investment which in turn affects every single one of us living in Scotland.

Yes, it's a worry. This whole get out of Europe movement is extremely unsettling for business and is bound to affect investment.

The best tactic is to invest in Scotland now, because when England leaves the EU, Scottish independence will occur, and you will then still be able to trade with the EU.

As an outsider I was very surpirsed how easily the Yes voters were swayed by a few rapidly rushed promises from Westminster.
Suggests to me it wasn't really a very committed vote if it was so cheaply bought?

Well to be a Yes voter you would have to had actually voted Yes so how exactly were Yes voters easily swayed?