"With the benefits and privileges of being in government the SNP controlled the legislative timetable. They spent large amounts public money, through publications and other means, on preparing the ground for the referendum. Some would even say that this part of the process involved a not-so-covert politicisation of parts of the Scottish civil service in the nationalist cause.
With the backing of multi-millionaires and billionaires the SNP had the money to outspend every other party combined, with cash left over to recruit and aid many splinter groups in support of their cause, giving the impression of broad political support for the break-up of the UK where none had existed before.
With an unpopular Tory Government in Westminster they had the perfect scapegoat to blame for every ill. They controlled the question on the ballot paper and they controlled the timetable and the timing of the vote. They chose a long campaign and a date to benefit from the feel-good factor from the Commonwealth Games and to coincide with the publicly-funded celebration of the anniversary of the battle at Bannockburn. They benefited from having the slickest election team and most expensive software to target voters and promise them whatever it took to persuade them to vote Yes.
There has never been, nor ever will be again, such a perfect confluence of factors in favour of the SNP gaining its dream result. Even so, they failed to get a majority. The inescapable fact is that, despite almost every factor being weighted in favour of the Yes campaign, the Scottish people turned out in vast numbers to reject independence."
The damning conclusion that just about wraps it up.
Ninfan your link also shows that people were more likely to find yes supporters acting reasonably at polling stations
All this talk of media bias, and yet none on the fact that the vote was purposely tilted in the favour of a Yes vote, by the fact that only current residents of Scotland could vote.
So people who aren't Scottish by any definition but happen to currently be living there (they could be from anywhere in the EU) were allowed to vote, but people who were born in Scotland but now happen to live and work in other parts of the UK were not allowed to vote.
The reason for this (this is purely my theory), is that the SNP know that the majority of those Scottish people who now happen to be living and working in other parts of the UK would probably want to vote No due to the fact being part of the Union works for them (or something like that).
Tbh the referendum is over. Is there any will to discuss this without point scoring?
I dunno - you're the one trying to make points about the older people voting the wrong way because they're scared. Or am I just supposed to let you get on with posting any old rubbish - BTW your 54% suggestion doesn't stand up for under 55s using the Ashcroft figures either - I make it 51% Yes assuming equal numbers voting for each year of age.
according to the final poll
Interesting, and significantly different to the [url= http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/20/scottish-independence-lord-ashcroft-poll ]Lord Ashcroft poll[/url] (which had a rather higher proportion of over 65s voting yes). I wonder why the difference, or is it just that all these polls are unreliable?
Dream on THM 😆
I will, and on that note, good night. Sleep well!
So much anti Scottish sentiment in here saddens me. Used to really enjoy here but given that my presence is so evidently loathed, I can only think that I should leave.
So much anti Scottish sentiment in here
Really? Some anti-SNP sentiment, but that's hardly the same thing.
Just as us non-Scottish people didn't want Scotland to leave, we don't want the Scottish to leave. (ninja edit) I also love Scotland and the Scottish
Where's the anti-Scottish sentiment? I love Scotland.
There may be some truth in some of the stuff Yes supporters are saying but stating it as if it's fact is ridiculous. So are some of the patronising at best and nasty at worst generalisations about No voters and their motivations.
If anyone can produce any evidence for any of their assertions I'm all ears.
Really? Some anti-SNP sentiment,
This. It's the divisiveness that I find offensive and I don't think that SNP government has left Scotland in a better place. That editorial sums it up so well.
I can only think that I should leave
[img] 
[/img]
I’ve just finished speaking to my wifes niece, she’s 13 years old, born in in Sheffield, Irish mother, Scottish father living in the highlands. She made the heinous mistake of posting on Facebook that she was glad that ‘No’ won, and has suffered a landslide of abuse from the ‘45’ lot. She seems to be genuinely terrified, she knows full well what division can cause (some of her other uncles are Sinn Fein supporters) . I urge anyone who is banging on about this 45% militant shite to reject it, and stop it now. We are all fully aware of what happened in Ireland and I don’t think anyone wants that again.
It depends on your perspective. Lots of no voters will obviously say everything was in the yes camps favour. Which it wasn't as it was 30% or lower for yes at times. Although near the end the momentum was with the yes voters.
No one had the bigger backing or budget than the no campaign. The only time I have seen nearly all parties get together on one agenda! With multi national corporate companies scaring people and endorsing the no vote. Not to mention nearly all media outlets!! So don't tell me everything was with the yes vote.
People say it wasn't financially driven, tell me a government agenda that isn't that involves the control of another country!!
Next people will be saying it was the yes voters that were the ones doing Nazi salutes, waving union flags and burning the ST Andrews flag while rioting in Glasgow. Which I seen with my own eyes and was sickened with there behaviour.
As to the BBC, no I wont be viewing there channels. Yes I will watch live TV on other channels but I wont be giving the BBC a penny for it. Why should I? Don't tell me its because they lobbied some MP's and lords to get a law passed to con people. That would be absurd not to mention morally unconstitutional.
Sherry. This is clearly not the place for us. There is **** all desire for change here. Dunno about you but I'm done arguing. I learned a lot over the last while mind. But now, well it's time to regroup and move forward locally. First battle, The general election, let's rout labour and the unionist parties(the self interest parties).
I'd prefer your voices remained here tbh
Just because others disagree is no reason to quit expressing your opinion. Otherwise we end up repeating the failure of social media, which only really worked for one side.
Sherry. This is clearly not the place for us. There is **** all desire for change here.
Well so much for your commitment to Scotland - the Scottish people disagree with you and you want to bugger off !
There is **** all desire for change here.
Everyone's arguing for change.
Sherry. This is clearly not the place for us. There is **** all desire for change here.
Plenty of desire for change thanks - just not exactly the change you were hoping for. No need to throw your toys out of the pram.
Molly, the Scots Nats are upset that further devolutionary powers are linked to those proposed for the other UK nations. To me this smacks of a sense that Scotland is somehow special, and that devo powers for Scotland should be apart from the argument for increasing the rights of the constituent parts of the UK.
The people of Scotland have spoken and they want to remain a part of us, so its only right that the discussions now involve all of us.
If the Scots separatists are too bitter to get involved in those discussions they should move aside and make space for those will, its not all about Scotland now. Scotland has a unique position at the moment, she can be the leader and instrument for change, but only if the Nats decide to engage with the rest of us rather than sulking in the corner.
Suppose that will be seen as anti Scottish now, its not meant that way. We (rUK) need Scotland's input.
that the vote was purposely tilted in the favour of a Yes vote, by the fact that only current residents of Scotland could vote.
So people who aren't Scottish by any definition but happen to currently be living there (they could be from anywhere in the EU) were allowed to vote, but people who were born in Scotland but now happen to live and work in other parts of the UK were not allowed to vote.
This is the weirdest allegation of gerrymandering I've ever heard - that the vote was biased because people who don't live there weren't allowed to vote.
the SNP know that the majority of those Scottish people who now happen to be living and working in other parts of the UK would probably want to vote No
Or they could just as easily have been Yessers because they wouldn't have borne any of the risk or cost if it went wrong.
I agree with your statement muddy. This can be an interesting period ahead. We need the so called 45 on board to help progress the debate throughout the UK.
People I am sure will come round. We will be the 100 again, but we are still in the immediate aftermath and I can understand how gutted some are right now. I know how I would feel if the result went the other way.
Molly, the Scots Nats are upset that further devolutionary powers are linked to those proposed for the other UK nations. To me this smacks of a sense that Scotland is somehow special, and that devo powers for Scotland should be apart from the argument for increasing the rights of the constituent parts of the UK.
Scottish (and Welsh/NI) MPs in Westminster must have exactly the same voting rights as English MPs, which isn't necessarily what some Tories are suggesting, otherwise it would mean no Scottish (or Welsh/NI) politician could become Prime Minister or cabinet member.
England must have devolved power with separate politicians. Just like any other country within the Union. Preferably regional devolved power imo.
Fwiw, I'm all for an English parliament in say Manchester.
The best thing here would be a time out and some reflection. We have even more knee jerk politics. AS spouting more BS this overnight, Brown promising things he has no authority to promise, and CMD and EM playing games without proper debate and reference to those they serve.
What more evidence do we need to show that we want fewer not more politicians? Centralise and rationalise core departments (foreign, defence, Justice) and devolved local decision making with an aim to reduce the role of Government. The worst scenario would be four versions of Holyrood and a Westminster. Nothing would get done other than the creation of lots of non-jobs.
The best thing here would be a time out and some reflection. We have even more knee jerk politics. AS spouting more BS this overnight, Brown promising things he has no authority to promise, and CMD and EM playing games without proper debate and reference to those they serve.
Yep - from what I heard about the various pronouncements overnight it seems like our leaders don't quite get the message they've just been given by their electorate - Westminster AND Salmond. It's like they just can't help themselves... straight into playing tit for tat games, making pledges they can't guarantee, setting traps for each other etc.
It's not a good sign - UK's not in a great place right now economically and I can't imagine the electorate (Scotland AND rUK) being too impressed if Westminster fails to deliver on the pledges they made last week. Not sure how that will pan out - protests, riots, refusal to vote? Time will tell I guess.
On media bias - refusing to watch BBC because you don't agree with their view just disempowers you. Best hint I was given to protect yourself from media bias is take two papers (broadsheet, not tabloid) - one which shares your political views and one from the other side. It's a right eye opener when you compare and contrast them - not just the slant on the stories, but the prominence they give them and even the stories they include/don't include... you realise even the broadsheets can't really be trusted to inform you...
England must have devolved power with separate politicians. Just like any other country within the Union. Preferably regional devolved power imo.
The problem is that means an extra layer of politicians, hence more politicians which nobody wants, and there wasn't much appetite for regional government when the people were last asked. I suspect part of the answer to that might be a significantly scaled down Westminster - after all if most of the day to day powers are devolved then they surely don't need so many of them in the same format. The follow on from which is a complete remodelling of the UK political system (federalism anybody?) - which is I'm sure what many people would like, the question is will the turkeys vote for Christmas?
Despite the legacy of excess debt, the UK economy is fairing surprisingly well at the moment. But as for the message, apart from 1.6m Scots, who exactly has been asking for an unbalanced approach to democracy across the UK? Mainly knee-jerk nonsense so far.
One of the benefits of the economic system that is so often derided is the access to so many different views via the internet that it provides. I agree with reading different papers - I try to dip into at least four on the way to work every day. The FT probably allows a greater range of views across its columnists and contributors IMO which leads to many fun debates on their website. The Monday morning Euro-fest fed by Wolfgang the euro sceptic is always a giggle.
The economy will recover creating a tough task for labour, Europe will haunt the Tories and the lib Dems will be forgotten. Oh no, that means the media being taken over by another gobby politician spouting BS up until 2015. Aaaargggh, enough.....
But as for the message, apart from 1.6m Scots, who exactly has been asking for an unbalanced approach to democracy across the UK?
Just a hunch, I have no actual evidence for this but it seemed to me that a chunk of the rUK seemed to think that devo max was a fair enough deal to give to the Scots (after all we all sympathise with their dislike of Westminster)...
And so if Westminster failed to deliver on their promises, we'd have sympathy with those Scots who'd voted No on the strength of those promises... and you'd end up with the Yessers, the No's who voted on the strength of the promises and a chunk of rUK all throwing rotten tomatoes at Westminster for being a bunch of shysters! United in their dislike of Westminster.
So ironically, the result of the referendum would be a more united UK 🙂
apart from 1.6m Scots, who exactly has been asking for an unbalanced approach to democracy across the UK?
Most people haven't been asked.
Possibly, we shall see, but as I said earlier best to have a brief time out and period of reflection. Policy made on the hoof is generally bad policy.
The irony of AS bleating about unkept promises etc is brilliant. The sooner he drifts on to marketing his book the better. A filler for the fiction section at Xmas.
Exactly aracer, so why all the promises. Bloody politicians.
@Tifted Ernie is quoting from a readers letter in The Herald not an editorial.
apart from 1.6m Scots, who exactly has been asking for an unbalanced approach to democracy across the UK?
@ THM Thats quite a stretch even by your standards, yes voters were the "seperatists" remember. For what its worth I think Scottish mps should not vote on matters that have been devolved to Scotland.England needs a parliament for England alone
@Muddydwarf Its not that there is anything "special" about Scotland.The thing that is irritating is that the 3 amigos made their vow,which they are now reneging on. Browns timetable is already being ignored. It is also not just Yes voters who are irritated, some of those who voted no on the strength of the "vow" are too. Perhaps more irritated than us Yes voters who saw it coming. (edit
Exactly aracer, so why all the promises. Bloody politicians.
I see stuff like this at work. People making all kinds of promises to their bosses which they have absolutely no chance of being able to keep.
It's like they've operated for so long in a world of smoke and mirrors, game-playing and dishonesty that they actually don't realise that it's bleeding obvious to everyone else that they're lying and they're setting a trap for themselves - total self-deception.
It was a desperate step when the penny finally dropped that the electorate really have had enough of their self-obsession and complete lack of respect for their job description - to provide leadership and good governance and I'm really not sure they quite know how to cope with it...
I think I may have eaten some of what Binners has been eating 🙂
I can't imagine the electorate (Scotland AND rUK) being too impressed if Westminster fails to deliver on the pledges they made last week. Not sure how that will pan out - protests, riots, refusal to vote?
Would any rUKers GAS if there was a failure to deliver anything to Scotland?
On the contrary, the polls suggest that many non Scots were fed up with the lack of balance in many of AS's BS. He thought he could twist everything in his favour and any attempt for rUK to resist was dismissed (wrongly) as bullying. Unions require maturity which was clearly beyond him.
Don't forget that a central threat during the campaign was to technically default on debt outstanding.
Quite correct that CMD should tie these changes together. Arrogant of one country to think this should only apply to them. As always, the mirror doesn't lie.
Blatant self interest oozes from each pronouncement over the past 24 hours. Time, gentlemen, please.
New thread same old THM bs
1 ignore the point raised about yes voters wanting to leave the Uk.
2 Personal attack on Alex Salmond because he
thought he could twist everything in his favour
3
I agree ,pity he did'nt put that in his "vow" It's deceitful really. Cameron wouldnt have tried to "twist everything in his favour" by catching Miliband out on the West Lothian question would he?Quite correct that CMD should tie these changes together.
Just remember Gordi, this is not a McFly song, it's not just "all about you" despite what AS liked to pretend.
Yes voters wanting to leave. True. They were the minority. Get over it FFS, you are already getting more that most. Be grateful not spoilt. More Scots wanted the union.
Personalising things after a campaign of personalised attacks - the STW irony meter ticking on overtime now
Did you notice, I wasnt praising CMD or EM? But if they stand up for wider interests good for them. Listening to the one-sided diatribe from yS gets on your ****s
the Scots Nats are upset that further devolutionary powers are linked to those proposed for the other UK nations. To me this smacks of a sense that Scotland is somehow special, and that devo powers for Scotland should be apart from the argument for increasing the rights of the constituent parts of the UK.
I think they care that he has allready broken his word and this did not form part of his pledge. The fact that you agree with this [ and I personally think it has merits but they do not have to happen concurrently IMHO ]
This is what the nats said would happen, it is what happened last time as well and it is happening
It also plays into the narrative that westminster politicians lies and BS wer eused to sell a settlement they knew they could not deliver and they had no intention of delivering either.
Ie the very things AS was demonised for.
In essence , and i think it has some merits, CMD has moved the goal posts after the vote. Muddy he should be judged just as you would judge AS had he done this, poorly
I see no reason why the two need to be done concurrently tbh and giving the extra to the scots allows time to solve the west lothian issue which is far more complicated and requires far more thought
They don't HAVE to be done concurrently but its politically unwise to do that for CMD as he will incur the wrath of middle England. He won't lose votes (as Scotland doesn't vote tory) by tieing devolution together but he will if he is seen to be giving Scotland something without giving it to the rest.
Cynical? Of course, he's a politician. However I do think that rushed legislation will have unintended consequences so it needs a cool, calm approach in order to avoid this. Its 3 days after the referendum for gods sake, even if the vote had been YES then even AS was looking at 18 months of negotiations before final independence. I understand the hurt and the desire/need to see the hand of the enemy at every turn but come on, lets get some perspective. Its time for the Nats to join in, if they continue in this vein they will be sidelined and that's dangerous - unless the plan is to deliberately stand aside & do a Provo - "we do not recognise the legitimacy of this court".
Tempers are too high right now IMO, we need a time of standing still and gathering our thoughts before taking the new path that lies before us all. Lets not allow this current temporary division to become permanent.
What muddydwarf said.
I also would have sworn that Salmond said something about respecting the result? Clearly my mistake.
Cynical? Of course, he's a politician
I dont disagree but the problem is, if it delays scottish issues, it is deceitful and he never mentioned this before the vote...ie what folk dsaid about AS who now seem happy to praise CMD for doign the same thing.
I do think that rushed legislation will have unintended consequences so it needs a cool, calm approach in order to avoid this. Its 3 days after the referendum for gods sake
He should have thought have that before he signed a pledge to persuade the voters to stay with the union and before he extended it , after the vote, to include the other regions.
Imagine if after the election AS did this - we should react the same with westminster.
Tempers are too high right now IMO, we need a time of standing still and gathering our thoughts before taking the new path that lies before us all
You have a point and a very good one.However I cannot see how a dwlay will calm hotheads or bring calm to the regions/issue. It will look like two finger, delays , backtracking etc and cause anger and resentment IMHO. If the reason is "england" issue it will be even more so - whether you or I agree with this reaction. It also plays right into the nats hand as well.
As i said delivering on the pledge to scotland is fairly simple - here have these extra power - there you go job done as we promised. Now lest sort the inequalities out. Working out how to make england equal is problematic and . IMHO requires a parliament other than westminster - it will hardly be seen as fair if westminster is the UK and the english parliament as well.
You are correct folk need to calm down and it requires time unfortunately the three westminster partes set the timeline in a pledge and only delivering on it on time will bring calm.
I also would have sworn that Salmond said something about respecting the result? Clearly my mistake
Do you remember a pledge and a timeline that made no mention of tying it in with other countries? Has this been met?
Essentially folk here are turning a blind eye to "their side" having lied and still, god know how, using it as method to criticise AS for having not stuck to his word 😯
I am sure he will respect the judgement but in order to do that it has to be delivered.
Amazing that so many know what Lord Smith of Kelvin is going to say/do already!
A quick lesson for AS, sometimes it pays to think about things first, that way you don't get caught with your pants down.
Despite all the headwinds behind you, most Scots rejected your BS. You have had your time. Now STFU and retire gracefully to your book. It will be riveting. How about the "Magic Roundabout", to reflect the spinning and nursery stories? Or "Which way is the wind blowing" for the opportunism and flip flopping over policy.
The problem is that means an extra layer of politicians, hence more politicians which nobody wants, and there wasn't much appetite for regional government when the people were last asked.
It's not an "extra layer" of politicians, the politicians who previously took centralized decisions are simply replaced by ones from the devolved legislatures. For example there isn't an "extra layer" of politicians which is responsible for the NHS in Scotland, just the one in the Scottish Parliament.
And I would dispute that 'nobody wants more politicians'. The peoples of Scotland, Wales, and NI, appear to be very happy indeed with the extra politicians that the end of direct rule has brought them.
There is every indication that there is growing support in England for an English Parliament, and no evidence that calls by senior politicians for devolved powers for England are out of step with public opinion, which presumably is why they are making them. Things have moved on in the last 10 years.
[url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/active/11107428/Give-English-regions-the-same-powers-as-Scotland-says-Local-Government-Association.html ]Devolution genie is out of the bottle[/url]
