Jump to content

The Big Scottish Independence Debate


Recommended Posts

73% of over 65's voted no

 

 

71% of 16 - 17 year old's voted yes

 

 

 

 

 

Time for the waiting game... :tumbleweed:

I assume these figures are from the survey reported in the Mirror.  I think it is highly unlikely that the survey is representative in that it interviewed just over 2047 people of all age groups and therefore if the numbers interviewed of all ages was proportional to the numbers on the electoral register then it might be that as few as 60 were interviewed.  However, the fact that the figure is so much in the NO direction suggests that whilst there may be a pretty large margin of error, the true picture is likely to be a greater level of support for NO than YES.

 

This is interesting because all the information coming out beforehand was that this age group was showing a distinct difference in view point from older teenagers and young adults and were actually strongly in the NO camp.  Research by Edinburgh University in 2013 with proper sample sizes suggested 72% intended to vote "NO" and when repeated in June this year, whilst the gap had narrowed, it was still 64% NO and 36% YES.  This research seemed to confirm evidence from the various mock polls which schools up and down the country had held and which consistently showed the youngsters coming down on the side of the arguments against independence. 

 

If this latest post election poll is correct, then I imagine researchers will want to look very carefully as to the reasons why so many people in that age group changed their minds in the latter parts of the campaign.  It is really very interesing and I suspect we will hear more about it in due course.

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

My voting form arrived on the doorstep this morning. After, months and months (and years for some, and 'centuries' for others!) of debate, it's now become very, very real! There will be an actual vot

I have to be honest I have not looked at this post for six months maybe, just got so peeed off with the lies coming from both sides.   Oddquine by the way is a real person, of the more senior genera

Well. of course it does and they have never made any secret of the fact.which is why the Scottish Parliament voting system was deliberately set up by Westminster to ensure there would never be majorit

Posted Images

8. Voters over a certain age have been digesting all the information required to make what they consider to be an informed decision from media putlets firmly in favour of one of the two options.

None of whom broadcast the real dangers to pensioners benefits while staying in the Union, such as one day having to pay 20k per year for care as they do already in England or highlighting that the UK pension fund is secured by a credit rating rather than a valuable natural resource.

Sure, staunch and proud the old yins have been, with no fucks given for the people currently funding them who want a better deal.

 

On the two days before the referendum, a Tory Highland List MSP stood at the Better Together stall on the High Street and told pensioners that their pensions wouldn't be paid and their bus passes would stop on independence...no uncertainty...stated as fact......just as companies employing Poles and other EU nationals were telling them that if there was a YES vote, they would be deported.....so I am not surprised that so many voted NO in our area and North.    And that is why the campaign for independence isn't over....we are not going anywhere but onwards......the fact that the debate was slanted and our voice was not heard means all bets are off as to when the next attempt will be. 

 

I think it is more telling of attitude that the areas in Scotland with the most poverty voted more YES and the areas with the least poverty voted more NO.

 

A YES worker locally was passing the time of day with a NO campaigner neighbour, and remarked that he was shattered, what with meetings, canvassing, leafleting etc right up to the day before the vote......and the NO campaigner said  he didn't have to do that much......the media did it all for them.

 

And from Eric Joyce's website  http://ericjoyce.co.uk/2014/09/a-lie-wont-fly/

 

I, and others in the No camp with me, believe Scots are best within the union. I am glad that Scots voted No. But if we were lied to and the government of the day reneges on ‘the vow’, the vote was a fraud and the UK is corrupted beyond repair. 

 

And going by the media today, it looks more and more likely that this is 1979 all over again.......lie to get the result you want...and then forget you promised anything. 

  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

And from Eric Joyce's website  http://ericjoyce.co.uk/2014/09/a-lie-wont-fly/

 

I, and others in the No camp with me, believe Scots are best within the union. I am glad that Scots voted No. But if we were lied to and the government of the day reneges on ‘the vow’, the vote was a fraud and the UK is corrupted beyond repair.

 

And going by the media today, it looks more and more likely that this is 1979 all over again.......lie to get the result you want...and then forget you promised anything. 

 

I have always thought that the UK Government is corrupted beyond repair and that will not change.  What I think is sad is the 2 million Scottish voters that don't se it or don't want to!

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Foul ball! Doofers Dad.

She just realizes that she can't stay away from the website. :cheer01:

 

Got a YES vote from bughtmaster!   I'd do anything for a YES vote! :rotflmao:  

 

Tbh, I hadn't intended to come back...a) because I thought the thread was pretty well finished anyway, given the vote was past and b) because I was well through a bottle of red and indescribably depressed when I wrote the flounce (my spelling and grammar were decent though, weren't they ?) and c) nearly two years of banging my head off a brick wall composed of DD, yngwie and starchief was getting wearing.

  .

However, on reflection, given that I have had myself deleted from the database on leaving other forums to stop me going back, but hadn't here, I rather think that culduthel just caught me at a bad time....and I did just what Westminster does.when making laws.....produced a knee jerk spur of the moment reaction :blush: . . Decided I'm just going to put culduthel on ignore, and then he can be as stupid about me as he likes. :smile:

 

Sorry DD, yngwie and starchief and the others I irritate.....but it isn't likely I'll be posting much............unless Westminster plays silly buggers over the "VOW". .

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The Referendum -  the gift that keeps on giving!  Now Scottish football supporters have promised to stop singing the dirge The Flower Of Scotland at upcoming Scottish matches. 

We can only pray that it is ditched as our unofficial anthem from all occasions  very soon.  What a gift that will be.

Not a chance it will take more than a referendum to stop us singing that :music02:

 

 

Only allowed to sing it if you are wearing a YES badge, an "I'm one of the 45%" badge.or a "Don't Blame Me, I voted YES t-shirt!  :lol:  Anyone else is a weed not a flower (joke.......honest!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

73% of over 65's voted no

71% of 16 - 17 year old's voted yes

Time for the waiting game... :tumbleweed:

This definitely proves the adage - As you grow older you grow wiser.

Lots of young people at University become instant Marxists. By the time they have left Uni and worked for a couple of years they realize what a load of old unworkable cr*p that is and become more moderate or liberal or conservative.

As a 16 - 17 year old I would have voted Yes as well - as would have many of the older folk who voted No on Thursday.

You will find as you grow older your views and opinions will change. That is one of the beauties of life.

In 15 - 20 years time or so these 31-37 year olds will more than deserve the opportunity to determine the outcome of a referendum on Independence. And best of luck to them.

I think it has to do with that the fact the over 65's are more likley to favour the union as it had a function back when they were growing up.

alot of age group voted yes not only the teenagers!

Your time will come eventually. By that time though, you may be a crusty old conservative voting for the Union. :crazy::amazed::lol::cheer01: I would rip out my internal organs through my butthole with a rusty hook and follow that with a lemon juice enima before that ever happens...

 

 

 

What you describe is very, very similar to a Colonoscopy without the anesthetic.  So you are right, by the time you are 65 you will definitely have had one of those and thus fulfilled your prediction from above.  :holyshit:  :yuk:

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I think it is more telling of attitude that the areas in Scotland with the most poverty voted more YES and the areas with the least poverty voted more NO.

 

 

 

 

That is what I have been saying.  The reason they voted "YES" is that the SNP hijacked the referendum and did some shameless electioneering by promoting a range of un-affordable policies which they said they would introduce if Scotland was independent and which would be directed to the poorest in our society.  These folk are mainly in labour heartlands where support for independence has always been low.  They didn't vote YES because they believed in the arguments for independence, they voted YES because they were promised short term benefits if Scotland became independent.

 

These measures would have required the SNP Government to borrow billions of pounds even allowing for the wildly optimistic forcasts of oil revenues.  This in turn is why they were so desparate to have a currency union so that the Bank of England could bail them out when their bribery bankrupted the nation.

 

It is also illuminating how strong the NO vote was in Grampian - Salmond's stamping ground, SNP heartland and the country's oil capital.  They knew you can't build a nation's economy on what is left in the North Sea and they knew we need the broader base of the UK economy to keep Scotland prosperous.

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Today I am going to vote for the Nationalists !  

 

 

But in the New Zealand elections - and hopefully John Key and his team will return.

 

Is that the New Zealand, the country with a population of less than five million who decided they no longer wanted to be governed from Westminster, who became independent, continued to use the pound sterling for many years after, have a policy of no nuclear weapons on their soil but don't seem to be at greater threat to their security   and who have largely prospered ever since ? Or is there a different New Zealand you speak of ?

 

 

Yes Kingsmills you are right - it is the very New Zealand, that Scotland as part of the British Parliament/Government, granted independence through various laws, statutes and declarations from about 1830 through to 1947. Thanks for that Scotland.  Especially the one that turned us along with Australia into a Dominion of the Crown.  And the one that kept the Crown as head of State through to this day, via the Governor General. A process of steady devolution that worked very well. We are all happy with the situation especially as the Nationalists won the election last night.

 

We are also the New Zealand that was settled mostly by Scots who worked with and intermingled with the Maori so that today three quarters of Kiwis have Scottish blood running through their veins -  most Maoris you meet will very proudly tell you about their Scottish Ancestry.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Foul ball! Doofers Dad.

She just realizes that she can't stay away from the website. :cheer01:

 

Got a YES vote from bughtmaster!   I'd do anything for a YES vote! :rotflmao:  

 

Tbh, I hadn't intended to come back...a) because I thought the thread was pretty well finished anyway, given the vote was past and b) because I was well through a bottle of red and indescribably depressed when I wrote the flounce (my spelling and grammar were decent though, weren't they ?) and c) nearly two years of banging my head off a brick wall composed of DD, yngwie and starchief was getting wearing.

  .

However, on reflection, given that I have had myself deleted from the database on leaving other forums to stop me going back, but hadn't here, I rather think that culduthel just caught me at a bad time....and I did just what Westminster does.when making laws.....produced a knee jerk spur of the moment reaction :blush: . . Decided I'm just going to put culduthel on ignore, and then he can be as stupid about me as he likes. :smile:

 

Sorry DD, yngwie and starchief and the others I irritate.....but it isn't likely I'll be posting much............unless Westminster plays silly buggers over the "VOW". .

 

 

 

Office Central re-instates Oddquine as many forum users still seem to believe in the construct.  But they do away with Salmond as nobody believes in him anymore.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been talking to people and posting on forums so much over the past few months, that  I don't even know if I said it on here, or somewhere else, that, if we voted NO, Westminster would make it so we will never be able to have another referendum, or at least not another purely Scottish referendum.  I know I have said..and again I'm not sure where...maybe on a forum, or even to the many Catalonians who visited the shop over the summer, that, if we vote NO, we will become another Catalonia, with England's ownership of Scotland enshrined in law, as is Spain's ownership of Catalonia. 

 

And it appears that I wasn't far wrong in my cynicism.....http://wingsoverscotland.com/number-1-in-a-long-series/

 

Jack Straw, seeing as the NO vote won, wants to make it so we are shackled to Westminster much as Catalonia is shackled to Spain and he wants to change the constitution to make the Union indissoluble. And under Westminster rules, constitutional change is solely their prerogative and does not require Scotland, or we Scots, to agree to it, the constitution being a reserved competence. 

 

I find myself producing hollow laughter at the below the headline remark, "The United Kingdom may be unbalanced. But, hey, it works". And I'm sure it does for those who have the money to load the balance in their favour, and even for newspaper proprietors, but it doesn't work for the majority of the country outside the more salubrious areas of London and the home counties.

 

Unfortunately the NO vote has given them the right to allow the majority of my rather selfish age group, because they still have 15 or 20 years to live,  to choose the long term future for our 16 + year olds, who would prefer to have the opportunity, in an independent Scotland, to stay here and work, but will, as so many hundreds of thousands have in the past, be forced to leave to find work, rather than exist on the zero hours contracts and minimum wage jobs which pass for employment in the UK today. .

 

I have always said that NO voters are not voting for the status quo, however much they try to kid themselves to justify their vote to themselves, but are voting to reduce our country to a region of Greater England.which an indissoluble Union will make them. 

 

As an aside, for those who think it is all over, the SNP have had 5000 new members in 2 days, the Greens have had 2000 and the SSP have nearly 1000...and a lot more like me, haven't made up their minds if we are going to be party members or just use our votes where they will do the most good.

Edited by Oddquine
  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

And it appears that I wasn't far wrong in my cynicism.....http://wingsoverscotland.com/number-1-in-a-long-series/

 

 

Oddquine... why do you persist with quoting that delusional windbag The Reverend Whinge Over Skintland as if his pronouncements were some kind of Scottish answer to The Thoughts Of Chairman Mao?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just wonder if everyone would have voted they way they did if there were no lies, no deceit, no scaremongering, no exaggeration, just pure honesty and openness about what would be.

 

It will be interesting to see what occurs during the next set of elections. I think Labour and Lid Dem will be harmed by this association with the Torries, and the Greens and SNP will rise. Just hope the racist UK Indy party dont get a look in. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure why the Yes campaign tried to remain so positive, theres legitimate dangers to staying tied to a country whose national debt is 90% of GDP and has a massive trade and spending deficit, maybe a bit of fear mongering might not have been a bad move?  The sad truth is our country is being funded by foreign debt and is overly reliant on financial services in London, when they make a **** of it the rest of the country has to suffer, the Westminister parties have no control themselves over money supply, nevermind Scotland having a say at all.
 
The SNP lost their core support because they targetted Labour voters throughout the campaign and took their own base for granted, despite the demographics in those areas being totally different.  The constant talk of currency union was a massive own goal, I honestly think they would've won over more middle class voters with promises of a new currency, with controls put in place to favour savers and investers.

 

State pensions are secured at the UK level by a credit rating, nothing more, there is no 'pension pot' as darling called it.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not been here for a while cos the sun sea and sand of Mexico was too good to resist.

 

Everyone can discuss and find different reasons why a person would vote one way over another and I believe there were many who would have swung the result the other way but in the last three or four days of the run up were persuaded to support the political party they supported. Being in Mexico I was able to see a different aspect to the reporting of the debate. I now believe that the final factor that swayed some voters and made others stay at home was the speech and plea from Gordon Brown. I believe that, with an Independent Scotland, the Labour Party in rUK would have become a third or fourth choice party of government and that this fact swayed many labour supporters to reject an Independent Scotland.

 

People are not stupid. They've all had two years of debate and counter debate and plenty of time, as I have, to find out the relevent information to make judgement by but, just as it tears the heartstrings of lifelong SNP supporters to not achieve our goal, it tears at the heartstrings of the lifelong labour faithful to vote in a way that would seriously wound the party that they fought alongside through many years of industrial change and unrest.

 

Sadly I predict the outcome of this referendum is going to end in  tears and heartbreak for many people for many years to come. Those tears will come with the results of next years general election.

 

I am not bitter in defeat and I will not slander those who made the choice on 18th September. I live in a democracy where all are entitled to choose there own way without threat of reprisal or a gun at their head. The choice has now been made and we all must live with whatever the consequences.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would agree with most of the sentitment there Alex, however I would question the legitimacy of the democratic process when an entire generation of the electorate are relying on a medium with heavy self interest in one outcome, for their information.

Edited by clacher_holiday2
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

In Canada the T V coverage was extensive and excellent. One commentator  was at pains to tell us that there are 300,000 families in Canada descended from Scots migrants and that several of our politicians  were Scots.

 

The Green Party?  Our one Green party M.P. in Parliament in Ottawa is Elizabeth May who came, seemingly, from nowhere to win her seat after two tries as I recall.

She is from a Western Canada constituency and was on the T V yesterday from New York where that large rally for environmental controls was being held. She is a very eloquent and smart lady but, like everywhere else, when voters don't think that her party is too credible at this juncture and  probably won't get many seats, they tend to shy away from voting for the party.

Stephen Harper , our illustrious P.M. has seated her right at the back of the seats away in a corner farthest from the front of the chamber. Strange how Thomas Mulcair, the National Democratic Party leader, is seated on the front benches directly opposite to Harper. Ms May could make mince meat of Harper if she got riled up and maybe he can only cope with one eloquent and persistent opposition leader at a time. :happy:

 

International currency Exchanges: I have nervously been keeping an eye on the exchange rates for the pound  re Canadian dollars and note with surprise that there is , if anything, an increase in the amount of dollars that we would receive in the event of cashing a pound cheque. Which means that the markets are sitting tight and not reacting strongly to the outcome of this referendum vote. Good!

 

Alex MacLeod --interested to se you enjoy a vacation in Mexico. I would never set foot in the place ever again after a situation that developed with me when I was on holiday there several years ago. In Mexicao we anglos or North Ameriucans are euphemistaclly referred to as Gringos and are seen as marks --for rooking blind .The average Mexican in the street is fine but the monied class is conscienceless. Never invest in that country is my advice to anyone  who is considering it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is very important that the politicans do deliver upon the promise of additional powers for Scotland, but the interesting thing about this "vow" that has vexed the Yessers is that it almost certainly didn't make any difference to the referendum outcome.

 

The "No" folk were already voting no and Yes folk all said it was just a trick and a lie. There was no major shift in the polls after it was announced, just a couple of points max compared to an eventual 11 point margin, and even then there were other issues being raised those days which would have contributed to that. The reality is that from start to finish the polls were understating the No support, the silent majority who just don't take part in surveys etc.

 

No doubt the vow would have persuaded some undecideds, but the margin of victory was pretty large in the end, with No getting 24% more votes than Yes. If Celtic (or ICT!) get 24% more points than the team in 2nd place, you couldn't put it down to one particularly good player, or to one dodgy offside call or to a red card decision, there would have to be numerous factors at play.

 

Looking at it another way, to make up the gap of almost 400,000 votes, you would have needed another 15 Glasgows or 28 Dundees - and I can't decide which would be worse!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree. Until the vow, there was clear and rapid momentum from No to Yes with the gap narrowing from 20 points to, in one case a Yes lead.

 

The No supporters can argue many things but they can't seriously argue that these 'promises' didn't make a difference to the result.

  • Agree 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

This saga really gets more and more like post-WW1 Germany as time goes by. What we are now seeing is the classic Nationalist "We wuz robbed" and "stabbed in the back" routines which invariably surface when they are defeated. I even hear that there is some rally in Inverness on Saturday to demand a re-run of the vote... presumably because - 24 hours after White Man's Forked Tongue appeared to accept the outcome - he was already shouting that they had been " cheated".

Interestingly enough when the rest of the Scottish political establishment were attending a service of reconciliation on Sunday and John Swinney (albeit sporting "Yes" cufflinks) was publicly shaking hands with Douglas Alexander, Salmond and Sturgeon somehow contrived not to be there. Salmond was apparently too busy stoking up more discontent and division in interviews with the media.

Yngwie is completely right. "No" was consistently ahead in the polls throughout and I reckon that even the isolated poll on September 7th of 51-49 Yes was just Peter Kellner of YouGov pulling Salmond's todger for him in the full knowledge that the Nats would then get all excited about now "certainly" pullng it off. Meanwhile this also galvanised NO out of the complacency of their leadership and into a bit of realistic action. But I really do not believe for one minute that the promise of enhanced devolution changed the minds of 400,000 voters in the course of a few days.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I think it is more telling of attitude that the areas in Scotland with the most poverty voted more YES and the areas with the least poverty voted more NO.

 

 

 

 

That is what I have been saying.  The reason they voted "YES" is that the SNP hijacked the referendum and did some shameless electioneering by promoting a range of un-affordable policies which they said they would introduce if Scotland was independent and which would be directed to the poorest in our society.  These folk are mainly in labour heartlands where support for independence has always been low.  They didn't vote YES because they believed in the arguments for independence, they voted YES because they were promised short term benefits if Scotland became independent.

 

These measures would have required the SNP Government to borrow billions of pounds even allowing for the wildly optimistic forcasts of oil revenues.  This in turn is why they were so desparate to have a currency union so that the Bank of England could bail them out when their bribery bankrupted the nation.

 

It is also illuminating how strong the NO vote was in Grampian - Salmond's stamping ground, SNP heartland and the country's oil capital.  They knew you can't build a nation's economy on what is left in the North Sea and they knew we need the broader base of the UK economy to keep Scotland prosperous.

 

Pure and utter shyte

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

No doubt pollsters and researchers will be looking into the reasons why people voted as they did and, if they changed their minds, why.  But until I see some convincing evidence to the contrary I simply can't buy into the argument that the pledge nonsense changed peoples minds.  After all, it doesn't make sense.

 

Voters fell into 3 main camps. 

1) Those wanting independence.

2) Those not wanting independence but wanting a greater degree of devolution than currently on offer.

3) Those not wanting independence and not wanting further devolution.

 

Clearly the pledge is not going to change the minds of those in the 1st and 3rd categories.  The pledge is only going to influence those in the 2nd group thinking of voting YES.  But why on earth would you vote for independence if you don't want it!  If you want to remain in the Union but want more powers devolved the only way you can get that is to stay in the union and therefore you vote NO.  Once staying in the union is confirmed, then there will be an opportunity to debate the merits of further devolved powers.  

 

If anything, it might have persuaded some to vote YES on the basis that it showed the leaders of the three main UK parties to be complete numpties and folk might have thought that if that was the quality of political leadership in the UK we might be better off being independent after all.  The intervention may have swayed some but certainly not many.  It shouldn't have swayed any and it shouldn't have been made.

 

I am sure there will be a number of factors contributing to the late move back to NO but I am convinced the main one is simply the common phenomenon of people drawing back from major change when it comes to the bit.  It is the "better the devil you know" mentality.

 

Interestingly, whilst UK political leaders panicked, the bookies held firm.  Even though there were a couple of polls favouring YES they consistently had a NO outcome as a clear favourite.  That provides further evidence that the pledge probably made little difference.

Edited by DoofersDad
Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree. Until the vow, there was clear and rapid momentum from No to Yes with the gap narrowing from 20 points to, in one case a Yes lead.

 

The No supporters can argue many things but they can't seriously argue that these 'promises' didn't make a difference to the result.

I'm a bit of a stats geek but it didn't quite work like that.  There was a narrow squeeze but not very much when you take YouGov out of it.  Now, in UK elections, YouGov has been excellent but poor in Scotland (ICM are far better).  The massive narrowing was greatly exaggerated by a change in methodology when YG realised they were hugely underestimating the amount of SNP voters they were picking up.

 

As for broken promises...I suspect many will be upset over what is eventually reached but No would still have won, just more narrowly.  What if it would have been Yes?  Would the currency union have appeared?  Would Junckers have admitted his statements of an application being necessary was a ruse?  No to both.  Neither side would have got exactly what they want but the Scottish people made their decision.  Saying they were too stupid to realise the issues is patronising stuff.  There were bigger broken promises there to be found.

 

What would have been interesting is if Yes had laid it out on the line.  What were the plans for the currency if no union?  How would Scotland cope being outside the EU?  Is the Euro something that is a no go, no matter what inducements the EU offer?  As you can see on this very forum, I was leaning towards Yes until the White Paper.  Maybe they needed to go for the blind optimism approach to get the Labour vote in Glasgow's estates but it certainly turned me right off.  As I've said a number of times, there was a case for independence but Yes didn't make it.

 

But can't we move on?  Enough with insults about wanting to be Greater England and throwing toys out of prams.  I would hope that we all want Scotland to succeed, independent or British.  If your hope is that Scotland fails so you can wave your little flag about, it's not patriotism that's driving you but selfishness.  If you are simply expecting Scotland to not succeed...well, let's put that aside for the moment and work together.  I guarantee you, I would have been waving the Scottish flag if independence had come, maybe even voting Labour to get the best deal from Westminster after the break up (and that's saying something after the Blair/Brown years!).  We're all in this together, like it or not, so let's try to make it work.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. : Terms of Use : Guidelines : Privacy Policy