HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Shock new poll says Scots...

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 05:25 PM

Shock new poll says Scots set to vote yes to independence

Source: Guardian

The people of Scotland are to be offered a historic opportunity to devise a federal future for their country before next year's general election, it emerged on Saturday night, as a shock new poll gave the campaign for independence a narrow lead for the first time.
...
The plan, in the event of a no vote, is that people from all parts of Scottish society – rather than just politicians – would be invited to take part in a Scottish conference or convention that would decide on further large-scale transfers of power from London to Holyrood.

A poll by YouGov for the Sunday Times sent shockwaves through the political establishment north and south of the border as it showed the yes camp had 51% to 49% for no, excluding the don't knows. Better Together leader Alistair Darling said: "These polls can and must now serve as a wake-up call to anyone who thought the referendum was a foregone conclusion."
...
With momentum now strongly behind Alex Salmond's push for full-blown independence, the no campaign is desperately searching for ways to seize back the initiative in the last 11 days of campaigning. A win for the yes campaign would represent a stunning turnaround, and unleash the biggest constitutional crisis in the union's 300-year history.

Read more: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/06/scots-radical-new-deal-save-the-union



For comparison, earlier poll results here: http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/scottish-independence-referendum , plus previous YouGov poll with No leading by 6 points

152 replies, 21024 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 152 replies Author Time Post
Reply Shock new poll says Scots set to vote yes to independence (Original post)
muriel_volestrangler Sep 2014 OP
Helen Borg Sep 2014 #1
Dyedinthewoolliberal Sep 2014 #4
whatthehey Sep 2014 #129
La Lioness Priyanka Sep 2014 #5
DFW Sep 2014 #8
roguevalley Sep 2014 #11
Helen Borg Sep 2014 #29
roguevalley Sep 2014 #30
Spider Jerusalem Sep 2014 #31
roguevalley Sep 2014 #50
Helen Borg Sep 2014 #57
sendero Sep 2014 #79
Helen Borg Sep 2014 #81
txwhitedove Sep 2014 #91
Ken Burch Sep 2014 #119
Helen Borg Sep 2014 #121
Ken Burch Sep 2014 #123
BillZBubb Sep 2014 #151
Dyedinthewoolliberal Sep 2014 #131
roguevalley Sep 2014 #96
Helen Borg Sep 2014 #97
riderinthestorm Sep 2014 #112
Ken Burch Sep 2014 #62
muriel_volestrangler Sep 2014 #66
Ken Burch Sep 2014 #68
Spider Jerusalem Sep 2014 #73
tabasco Sep 2014 #108
Spider Jerusalem Sep 2014 #110
Ken Burch Sep 2014 #118
muriel_volestrangler Sep 2014 #120
Ken Burch Sep 2014 #122
CBGLuthier Sep 2014 #126
muriel_volestrangler Sep 2014 #127
Helen Borg Sep 2014 #23
Ken Burch Sep 2014 #69
former9thward Sep 2014 #35
DFW Sep 2014 #67
Helen Borg Sep 2014 #95
DFW Sep 2014 #106
happyslug Sep 2014 #115
former9thward Sep 2014 #116
NV Whino Sep 2014 #9
ballyhoo Sep 2014 #27
Helen Borg Sep 2014 #58
jamzrockz Sep 2014 #83
Helen Borg Sep 2014 #84
IrishAyes Sep 2014 #105
Ken Burch Sep 2014 #124
IrishAyes Sep 2014 #136
Ken Burch Sep 2014 #140
IrishAyes Sep 2014 #144
Ken Burch Sep 2014 #36
dflprincess Sep 2014 #44
Helen Borg Sep 2014 #59
Ken Burch Sep 2014 #61
Helen Borg Sep 2014 #111
riderinthestorm Sep 2014 #114
FarrenH Sep 2014 #74
Ken Burch Sep 2014 #63
jtuck004 Sep 2014 #64
valerief Sep 2014 #94
Kablooie Sep 2014 #102
Warpy Sep 2014 #109
Zorra Sep 2014 #113
Keefer Sep 2014 #2
muriel_volestrangler Sep 2014 #14
Helen Borg Sep 2014 #24
Spider Jerusalem Sep 2014 #32
Ken Burch Sep 2014 #45
Helen Borg Sep 2014 #56
Spider Jerusalem Sep 2014 #76
PatrynXX Sep 2014 #3
La Lioness Priyanka Sep 2014 #6
DFW Sep 2014 #10
dawn frenzy adams Sep 2014 #17
Ken Burch Sep 2014 #46
whathehell Sep 2014 #82
Kalidurga Sep 2014 #7
roguevalley Sep 2014 #12
Kalidurga Sep 2014 #13
muriel_volestrangler Sep 2014 #16
Ken Burch Sep 2014 #47
bananas Sep 2014 #48
Spider Jerusalem Sep 2014 #15
FarrenH Sep 2014 #75
Spider Jerusalem Sep 2014 #77
FarrenH Sep 2014 #87
Spider Jerusalem Sep 2014 #89
FarrenH Sep 2014 #92
elleng Sep 2014 #18
muriel_volestrangler Sep 2014 #19
elleng Sep 2014 #20
iandhr Sep 2014 #21
muriel_volestrangler Sep 2014 #22
Ken Burch Sep 2014 #37
muriel_volestrangler Sep 2014 #70
sendero Sep 2014 #80
Prophet 451 Sep 2014 #86
sendero Sep 2014 #88
muriel_volestrangler Sep 2014 #90
cosmicone Sep 2014 #25
muriel_volestrangler Sep 2014 #71
cosmicone Sep 2014 #93
mac56 Sep 2014 #26
Ken Burch Sep 2014 #38
hrmjustin Sep 2014 #28
another_liberal Sep 2014 #33
Blue_Tires Sep 2014 #142
another_liberal Sep 2014 #143
enid602 Sep 2014 #34
Ken Burch Sep 2014 #39
Nye Bevan Sep 2014 #40
shaayecanaan Sep 2014 #43
Turborama Sep 2014 #52
shaayecanaan Sep 2014 #55
Adenoid_Hynkel Sep 2014 #41
shaayecanaan Sep 2014 #42
Turborama Sep 2014 #49
jtuck004 Sep 2014 #65
MADem Sep 2014 #51
muriel_volestrangler Sep 2014 #72
MADem Sep 2014 #98
muriel_volestrangler Sep 2014 #99
MADem Sep 2014 #100
muriel_volestrangler Sep 2014 #101
MADem Sep 2014 #104
grasswire Sep 2014 #53
U4ikLefty Sep 2014 #54
BluegrassDem Sep 2014 #60
LeftishBrit Sep 2014 #78
Prophet 451 Sep 2014 #85
Kablooie Sep 2014 #103
Spider Jerusalem Sep 2014 #117
flamingdem Sep 2014 #107
pampango Sep 2014 #125
3rdwaydem Sep 2014 #128
La Lioness Priyanka Sep 2014 #130
3rdwaydem Sep 2014 #132
Bosonic Sep 2014 #133
Nihil Sep 2014 #134
geek tragedy Sep 2014 #135
CTyankee Sep 2014 #139
muriel_volestrangler Sep 2014 #137
DavidDvorkin Sep 2014 #138
muriel_volestrangler Sep 2014 #141
Baclava Sep 2014 #145
muriel_volestrangler Sep 2014 #146
Baclava Sep 2014 #147
muriel_volestrangler Sep 2014 #148
Baclava Sep 2014 #149
Adrahil Sep 2014 #150
BillZBubb Sep 2014 #152

Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 05:32 PM

1. These geniuses we'll learn fast enough what it means to be "independent"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Helen Borg (Reply #1)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 05:48 PM

4. Hmmmmmmmm

what is meant by that? They (the Yes people) seem to have thought this out pretty thoroughly and have a firm grasp on what it means. I spent a dew days in Scotland in June and my informal survey shows it will pass.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dyedinthewoolliberal (Reply #4)

Mon Sep 8, 2014, 10:18 AM

129. well look a t tax revenue from Scotland compared to expenditure in it.

They will need to shift those numbers a bit or face a debt spiral when they lose UK subsidies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Helen Borg (Reply #1)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 05:49 PM

5. why? most countries are independent and the scots are wealthy

 

i am not sure what all the fear mongering is about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #5)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 06:05 PM

8. If they vote yes, they'll need every pound of it.

Setting up a completely new federal bureaucracy is an expensive undertaking. I don't doubt for a second they can do it, but I think there'll be quite a bit of serious second thoughts and "I told you so" afterward. But there'd probably be that from the losing side, no matter which way it goes. It's significant that the polling is going within 2% on either side of 50%. The Scots seem rather split down the middle, which is kind of a shaky start to something as serious as splitting off from the UK.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DFW (Reply #8)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 06:07 PM

11. My highland relatives would be ecstatic at this. They were victims of the clearances

I am for it. North Sea oil will be a boon for them. GO, SCOTLAND! Freedom is just bullshit if you can't form your own destiny.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roguevalley (Reply #11)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 07:56 PM

29. Clearences?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Helen Borg (Reply #29)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 08:03 PM

30. highland clearances were when the rich asses threw everyone into the snow to take there farms for

Sheep. It destroyed people and culture. They threw out entire areas and the people died. There is a lot behind this that people need to know. My family had 15 kids

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roguevalley (Reply #11)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 08:04 PM

31. The clearances were centuries ago, and North Sea oil revenues are forecast to decline 38% by 2017

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #31)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 11:37 PM

50. perhaps but the past is prologue. human desire to be free is universal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roguevalley (Reply #50)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 03:30 AM

57. Free from what??

Last edited Sun Sep 7, 2014, 06:49 AM - Edit history (1)

The ultimate desire to be free is to get out of society and live in a cave with your family, or by yourself. Why don't they dissolve Scotland completely and let everyone live truly free?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Helen Borg (Reply #57)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 08:35 AM

79. Free from.

... High Street's corruption and the English government's (coalition of the willing?) stupidity?

I hope Scotland goes it alone I think they can do better on their own.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sendero (Reply #79)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 08:41 AM

81. If they have Starbucks and shopping malls...

Then they are doomed like everybody else... It's not England that is the problem, is global neoliberalism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Helen Borg (Reply #81)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 10:13 AM

91. Good Morning, little miss sunshine!


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Helen Borg (Reply #81)

Mon Sep 8, 2014, 07:23 AM

119. Which the Scots can't fight against if they stay in the UK. n/t.

 

It's about the chance to create a "liberated zone".

The whole world needs to join together to beat neoliberalism, but making people stay in permanentlt right-wing entities(like the UK, and at times like the US) is making those people give up any chance of creating a real alternative at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #119)

Mon Sep 8, 2014, 08:18 AM

121. Perhaps... However, my bet is...

That the 50% of the population that want Scotland not to split are also the people with high-paying jobs that are driving the economy, the kind of people who actually WANT Starbucks near where they live.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Helen Borg (Reply #121)

Mon Sep 8, 2014, 08:41 AM

123. Probably, in some cases.

 

But that doesn't exactly refute the point I was making.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Helen Borg (Reply #121)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 04:01 PM

151. Oh, you mean the makers not the takers, Miss Romney?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Helen Borg (Reply #81)

Mon Sep 8, 2014, 10:55 AM

131. Please define

'global neoliberalism'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Helen Borg (Reply #57)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 01:24 PM

96. really? we wanted free from england with less historica impetus. does that apply to us too?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roguevalley (Reply #96)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 01:34 PM

97. That was a long distance relationship. It was bound to end.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roguevalley (Reply #50)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 05:47 PM

112. British brutality towards the Irish hasn't faded from our memory

 

Some things like the Scottish clearing and the Irish Famine are etched indelibly into the collective memory and the passing years/decades/centuries even doesn't mean it isn't still resonant today.

Fact is the Scottish clearing like the Irish Famine irrevocably changed our cultures. That's not easily forgiven or forgotten.

The Irish managed to detach from England less than a century ago when many said it couldn't be done. And that Ireland would fail economically.

I wish Scotland every success with their vote.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #31)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 03:56 AM

62. The Clearances were in the 1880's...130 years is not "centuries ago".

 

The clearances are why Scotland is underpopulated to this day(just as the "Black 47"-the Famine-is the reason Ireland is underpopulated to this day).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #62)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 05:24 AM

66. 1880s was very much the tail-end of the Clearances - mainly early 19th century

In the late 18th century well into the 19th century, Highland estates moved from arable and mixed farming, which supported a large tenant population, to the more profitable sheep-farming. Surplus tenants were ‘cleared’ off the estates from about 1780; and the Clearances were ongoing nearly 70 years later at the time of the potato famine in 1846.

Not all clearances were brutal, but some were. Nor were they confined to the Highlands. But the Highland experience was the most traumatic. The Highland Clearances devastated Gaelic culture and clan society, driving people from the land their families had called home for centuries.

Planned towns sprang up and took some of the cleared populations: places like Dufftown, Fochabers, Grantown-on-Spey, Hopeman, Inveraray, Kingussie, Kyleakin, Plockton, Tomintoul and Ullapool, but the vast majority of Highlanders were forced to emigrate to the cities or overseas.

The first mass emigration was in 1792; known as the ‘Year of the Sheep’, when most of the cleared clansmen went to Canada and the Carolinas. Scots left their native soil to live out their lives in America, Canada, New Zealand and Australia.

http://www.educationscotland.gov.uk/scotlandshistory/jacobitesenlightenmentclearances/clearances/


A couple of centuries ago is accurate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #66)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 05:28 AM

68. OK-but "centuries ago" implies it was during the Wars of the Roses(or the reign of "Longshanks").

 

There are people alive now who had great-grandparents who lived during the Clearances. It's still part of a living recent past, in the minds of a lot of people, I'd guess.

And it's an example of where "market values" end up leading, when carried to close to the logical extreme. The wealthy landowners decided it wasn't profitable for them to allow rural Scots to keep living in their own homeland. Things like that don't get forgotten.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #68)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 07:59 AM

73. No, "centuries ago" implies "more than one" (and I meant "late 1700's-early 1800's).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #73)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 04:20 PM

108. LOL

 

"Centuries" = minimum 200 years. Try again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tabasco (Reply #108)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 04:51 PM

110. Someone can't math, apparently

how long ago is the late 1700's-early 1800's?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #110)

Mon Sep 8, 2014, 07:22 AM

118. Near enough to be in living historical memory.

 

It's comparable to how the Irish relate to the "Black '47".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #118)

Mon Sep 8, 2014, 08:18 AM

120. 'Living'? No-one has a living memory from the 19th century now

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oldest_people

Oldest living person form March 1898 - she won't have a memory before 1900.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #120)

Mon Sep 8, 2014, 08:39 AM

122. living in the sense of being fresh in the consciousness.

 

And the Clearances say as much about class as about nationalism, given that it was often wealthy Scots forcing their countrywomen-and-men into exile in the name of the same fixation with short-term gain that(in the U.S., anyway)leads to things like mass layoffs on Christmas Eve.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #120)

Mon Sep 8, 2014, 09:38 AM

126. 1900 was the last year of the 19th century, not the first year of the 20th century

So your arbitrary attempt to prove yourself correct has failed on a basic fact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CBGLuthier (Reply #126)

Mon Sep 8, 2014, 09:46 AM

127. A 'basic fact' that has long been disputed

My 'attempt' wasn't 'arbitrary', however; it was a specific point about the claim made by that post.

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/within-living-memory

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DFW (Reply #8)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 07:22 PM

23. ObviousLy... For matters of this importance...

50% shoud not be the threshold. Perhaps 60%, at least.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Helen Borg (Reply #23)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 05:38 AM

69. All sides there agreed that 50% +1 vote would be enough.

 

That is also currently considered the acceptable margin of victory for a referendum of Quebec voters on sovereignty.

The problem with "super-majorities"such as 60%)is that they end up giving a privileged minority a veto over change backed by a clear majority. In cases where such change doesn't involve repressing anybody or depriving anyone of their basic rights, this becomes deeply anti-democratic. And it creates real questions as to the legitimacy of the outcome.

How could there be any democratic validity, for example, to a result in which Scotland or Quebec stayed part of their respective political entities(the UK and Canada, in these cases)when a clear majority had said they wished to be independent of them? And how would this play out(as could happen in both situations)in which a UK or Canadian election were held and the party winning a majority of seats in Parliament won that majority on the votes of the areas which, before that, had given majority support to referenda declairing that they wished no longer to be part of the entities in which voters then cast ballots in general elections involving the entire entity?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DFW (Reply #8)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 09:07 PM

35. We split off from the UK with less than 50% support.

We made it. So can Scotland and more power to them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #35)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 05:28 AM

67. 18th century rural America a month's boat ride from England was slightly different.

By the time the Bunker Hill happened, over 50% of the colonial population was unaware of it.

Of course they'll "make it." That's not in question. Whether or not they'll be better off is the question they need to ask, and the answer is less obvious. If it were obvious, they wouldn't be split so evenly down the middle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DFW (Reply #67)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 12:27 PM

95. Well said...

I wonder if the split is along income lines. No idea.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Helen Borg (Reply #95)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 04:05 PM

106. That would be a great subject to poll on

I have to plead ignorance on that. I know Catalunya well, but that is a completely different set of circumstances.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DFW (Reply #67)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 08:19 PM

115. where did you get that data from?

 

pp books have read indicate otherwise. Now pulp paper was only invented in 1801. Pulp paper did not come into widespread use till the 1820 but had replace linen paper for newspapers by the 1850s What we call newspaper is a result of that switch. Prior to that switch most people received news by going to church. Churches is how governments told people what was going on thus why you had state churches and the main reason who had fights over religion prior to the mid 1850s AND what is your religion is no longer important, it has been replaced by where you get your news from.

Anyway in the 1770s people went to church not only to heat religious dogma but what was going on in the world. Your church provided that news either from the pulpit or after mass when you talked to other members of your congregation. One historian called the American Revolution a Presbyterian revolution the that church supported it more than any other group. Religion was not a factor in the Revolution but who you supported reflected your religion. Quakers and members of the Church of England supported the crown.

Thus most Americans (excluding native Americans and slaves) supported the revolution they were few "neutrals" or people who did not care. British estimates were 90% of New Englanders; 2/3 of the middle Colonies and the South was split 50-50.

American gave higher numbers and at the start of the revolution controlled not only every colonial government but also the militia of every colony. Thus Support for the war was high even in the South. Clear majority wanted the war and latter Independence. You had sizable opposition but little neutrals. The churches provided the news and states tended to support churches that Supported the state. Thus people did get the news and showed up for militia duty when called into service (complaining of their service and trying to minimize the days in active service several New York militia left before the battle of Saratoga but only after they had served their 90 days and it was time for them to go home).

That shows support for the war but limits to the cost. Remember militia service was UNPAID. And sooner or later they had get back home to get the crop in. The British knew this and tried to work around those same restrictions.

Just Comments the while they did not have modern forms of communications the did not know what was going on in the world. They had ways to get the news and express they support up for the war ie show up for militia drill and show up for militia duty when called up. The people did that showing they support for the war.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DFW (Reply #67)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 08:28 PM

116. Those things are never obvious.

Historians agree that about 1/3 supported the revolution, 1/3 opposed it and 1/3 had no great feelings about it. So it clearly was not obvious. That should never stop self-determination.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Helen Borg (Reply #1)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 06:07 PM

9. I think they'll do just fine

And I expect it to pass.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Helen Borg (Reply #1)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 07:45 PM

27. They deserve to be independent from England. They will have problems but nothing

 

like the ties that bind with Mother England. Let them taste freedom like we in the US had for many years before the rich took it away.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ballyhoo (Reply #27)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 03:31 AM

58. England will save a lot of money too...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Helen Borg (Reply #58)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 08:45 AM

83. Then whats the problem?

 

Its seems like its going to be a win win for everybody.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jamzrockz (Reply #83)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 08:48 AM

84. England is not the problem...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Helen Borg (Reply #84)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 03:59 PM

105. England IS the problem, first and foremost!

One of the worst imperialists until the recent past, and still at it anywhere they get a shot, from all appearances.

I'd strongly advise against your visiting Dublin and declaring Deare Olde England 'not the problem' in front of people who suffered over 800 years of invasion and slavery at the hands of the world's FORMER master of the seas. What they did to the Irish - who never invaded anyone btw - rivals what the US did to its imported labor.

One other thing they'd better prepare themselves for next: Wales will break off too at long last. The REPUBLIC of Ireland has long had supporters there; it's where my own most recent ancestors fled one jump ahead of John Bull after Dev (in concert with England) had our national saint Michael Collins assassinated. What's that, you say? You thought the national saint was named Patrick? He's just #2.

'England not the problem', my royal Irish arse!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IrishAyes (Reply #105)

Mon Sep 8, 2014, 08:43 AM

124. Southeast English Thatcherism is the precise problem.

 

Not sure how soon Wales will make the break...support for THEIR nationalist party, Plaid Cymru, has been stagnant for years now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #124)

Mon Sep 8, 2014, 12:32 PM

136. Sometimes the pot that simmers longest boils over suddenly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IrishAyes (Reply #136)

Fri Sep 12, 2014, 03:39 PM

140. True.

 

(Oh...unrelated note, and I say this as a fellow member of the ILWU...Harry Bridges was great, but he didn't actually coin the phrase "An Injury To One...Is An Injury To ALL!"-though Harry did use the phrase and live it. It was actually originated by the Industrial Workers of the World-the IWW, or "The Wobblies".)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #140)

Fri Sep 12, 2014, 07:45 PM

144. That's definitely where Harry picked up the term, as I believe he was involved with them earlier.

BTW, as an older lady I never got to join the ILWU myself but had relatives involved, including one who was Harry's West Coast business manager. Had a steel plate in his head from the Great Strike, etc. I was raised to believe and still do that anyone who crosses a picket line anywhere commits a mortal sin.

Two of my favorite pictures of Harry are of him as a young man shipping out for the States. He's barefoot on a wooden deck and in one picture has the wheel. You KNOW that was a lonnnng time ago!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Helen Borg (Reply #1)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 09:29 PM

36. It will mean finally having the chance to be free of Thatcherism.

 

Staying in the UK means accepting living under Thatcherism forever, because the Labour Party will never break with Blairism(Thatcherism Lite).

Why on Earth SHOULD the Scots give up on their dreams and their humane, democratic, progressive values?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #36)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 10:59 PM

44. That's pretty much what the article in the Minneapolis Star Tribune said today

The Strib's website won't pull up the article but the print edition said: (www.startribune.com)

[div class = "excerpt"]
Proponents of separation say it's a more modern tale. Scotland is a country booming with oil reserves, ready to conduct its own affairs. There's growing frustration among many in the left-of-center country who say the U.K.'s government began moving to the right with the election of Margaret Thatcher and hasn't looked back.

"It's not about teary-eyed Scots yearning for ancient soil, it's about hoping to live in a civilized, caring society and we've given up all hope we can do that with Westminster," said Keith Atichison a retired civil servant. "Our two nations have moved apart."


I feel the Scot's pain. If only there was a way we could escape Reaganism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #36)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 03:33 AM

59. Dunno, Scotland does not seem better

Than England to me. And to the 50% of people there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Helen Borg (Reply #59)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 03:52 AM

61. Scotland hasn't had the chance to BE better yet, being essentially powerless.

 

You can't deny though, that the fight against Thatcheris is pretty much hopelessly lost in the UK as a whole.

What it comes down to is this:

Why SHOULD Scotland have to stay in a federation, a vestige of an extinct Empire in fact, in which it will be impossible for progressive, democratic, inclusive values to EVER prevail?

Why should they live, forever, at the mercy of unstoppable Thatcherites in the South of England?

As an American of Scottish ancestry, this sounds like a call to national masochism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #61)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 05:01 PM

111. This is where I disagree with you...

Thatcherism is just an example of neoliberalism, now gone global. It's everywhere, it has become the environment in which every nation lives. There is no escape by isolationism. It has to run its course, people globally getting fed up with it and resisting, and then we'll be able to move to the next phase (unless we destroy the globe in this phase).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Helen Borg (Reply #111)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 05:56 PM

114. That's just simply not true. The Scandinavian countries for example aren't neoliberal

 

Besides why does Scotland have to stay tied to England while waiting for it to "run its course"?

That's whacked. Especially if they have the chance to chart their own course and choose differently.

This Irish woman wouldn't dare presume to tell the Scots to just buck up and hang tight with England cause, cause, cause ... well things MIGHT get better (and let's just forget all that past nastiness shall we, hmmm?)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #36)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 08:10 AM

74. Yup, this isn't really about burning historical grudges

English conservatism is a drag on what is now clearly a more enlightened Scottish political culture and I think most of the Yes voters recognize that. It won't be an acrimonious divorce if it goes that way and the two countries will obviously retain close ties after the split. But it will be a sad day for the English left.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Helen Borg (Reply #1)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 04:43 AM

63. What is your interest in this?

 

I can't tell if you are Scottish or English(rather doubt that you're either)but why would you be so hostile-sounding to people were fighting for something that doesn't affect(as far as I can tell)either you or anything you care about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Helen Borg (Reply #1)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 04:50 AM

64. I bet more than one plantation owner said that in 1865. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Helen Borg (Reply #1)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 10:58 AM

94. Rich will get richer and poor will get poorer. Just like in the U.S. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Helen Borg (Reply #1)


Response to Helen Borg (Reply #1)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 04:50 PM

109. Rumblings started when revenue from the North Sea oilfields

started to pour in and went to London, not even bothering to let the Scots smell the money on its way through.

They've decided more than once in their history that it's better to tough it out alone than to be tied to a bully who does not share.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Helen Borg (Reply #1)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 05:51 PM

113. The folks in Eire, The Free Republic of Ireland can tell them all about how truly awesome it is.

December 6, 1921 ~ Irish Free State Declared

A movement for Irish home rule gained momentum in the late 19th century, and in 1916 Irish nationalists launched the Easter Rising against British rule in Dublin. The rebellion was crushed, but widespread agitation for independence continued. In 1919, the Irish Republican Army (IRA) launched a widespread and effective guerrilla campaign against British forces. In 1921, a cease-fire was declared, and in January 1922 a faction of Irish nationalists signed a peace treaty with Britain, calling for the partition of Ireland, with the south becoming autonomous and the six northern counties of the island remaining in the United Kingdom.

Civil war broke out even before the declaration of the Irish Free State on December 6, 1922, and ended with the victory of the Irish Free State over the Irish Republican forces in 1923. A constitution adopted by the Irish people in 1937 declared Ireland to be "a sovereign, independent, democratic state," and the Irish Free State was renamed Eire. Eire remained neutral during World War II, and in 1949 the Republic of Ireland Act severed the last remaining link with the Commonwealth.

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/irish-free-state-declared


To the Free Republic of Scotland. Slainte!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 05:35 PM

2. I really don't see a problem here.

If people are tired of the way things are, why shouldn't they be allowed to determine their own future?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Keefer (Reply #2)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 06:16 PM

14. The question most up in the air is the currency they'd use, and who'd control it

The Financial Times asked a panel of leading economists to consider four currency options available to an independent Scotland: currency union with the UK; the continued use of the pound sterling but without the backing of the Bank of England; forming a new currency; and joining the euro. The following ratings - marked out of 10 - are based on what our panel members believe are the best options for Scotland, rather than what is most likely to happen.
...
http://www.cnbc.com/id/101975637

To complicate matters, an outgoing EU official says that 'sterlingisation' - using the pound, but without the Bank of England backing Scottish banks (in the way Panama or Ecuador use the dollar) would not be allowed under EU rules - and the Yes campaign definitely want to be in the EU:

Former EU economics chief Olli Rehn said it would "simply not be possible" to combine a policy of sterlingisation with EU membership.

Mr Rehn gave his opinion in response to a letter from Chief Secretary to the Treasury Danny Alexander.

But First Minister Alex Salmond said Mr Rehn's claim was wrong.

The three main Westminster parties have repeatedly ruled out the Scottish government's preferred option of a formal currency union with the rest of the UK, a move that has been dismissed by nationalists as political posturing before the referendum.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-29043878

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Keefer (Reply #2)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 07:23 PM

24. They'd be off the EU, I'm afraid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Helen Borg (Reply #24)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 08:14 PM

32. An independent Scotland wouldn't be able to join the EU for at least five years

in which time they'd be shut out of the common market.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Helen Borg (Reply #24)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 11:02 PM

45. It's also possible that the EU could declare that the admission as part of the UK

 

continues as an independent country...it's not as though the EU would deprive themselves of the vibrant Scottish economy just to appease a vindictive David Cameron(one of the least popular government leaders in all of Europe).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #45)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 03:26 AM

56. New country, back to the queue, I'm afraid

Nobody knows if Scotland by itself won't become the new Greece. Need 5 years to figure that out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #45)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 08:22 AM

76. No, it's not possible.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11054187/Spain-and-Belgium-would-veto-an-independent-Scotlands-EU-membership.html

It'd require the unanimous consent of all existing EU members, and that's never going to happen. (An independent Scotland joining the EU would still require the unanimous consent of EU members and five years' wait.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 05:47 PM

3. Just disappointed JK Rowling

gave so much money to the NO side who created a book series about inclusion just disappointed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 05:55 PM

6. i am more shocked by how polite this whole thing has been. at its worst, it was still better than

 

any of our presidential elections

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #6)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 06:07 PM

10. The Kochs don't live in Scotland n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DFW (Reply #10)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 06:23 PM

17. Amen!


Any they don't have groups where politicians can use racism to stifle progress.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dawn frenzy adams (Reply #17)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 11:03 PM

46. We're just lucky Donald Trump hasn't used his part-Scottish ancestry

 

as a justification to shoot his mouth and hairpiece off about this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #6)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 08:41 AM

82. Uh, not so much..

I happened to be in Europe a few years ago at a table where two Englishmen, one young, and one old in my group were discussing the Scottish Independence movement in
what can only be called the most patronizing of terms.

I was somewhat taken back by the level condescension they leveled at the Scots -- I say 'somewhat' because as an American of Irish descent, I'm not exactly unfamiliar with Brit condescension.

The whole conversation seemed to revolve around how the Scots were "acting like children"
how they were all "on the dole", and how, if they left the UK, they'd only have to leave Scotland to find work, etc.

It was interesting, needless to say.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 06:05 PM

7. FREE SCOTLAND

I hope they vote for independence, even though I don't have a dog in this hunt. I would say that any US States that want to follow suit should do so as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kalidurga (Reply #7)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 06:10 PM

12. Go, Scotland. But the states? Scotland didn't choose to be part of the UK and this

is their chance to decide if they want to stay. All of the American states chose freely to join. Just because some of their dumber ass hats want to go stag doesn't mean its a good thing. Most of them would be destitute alone and having alien countries in the middle of our unity would be crazy. But that's just my opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roguevalley (Reply #12)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 06:14 PM

13. I have no doubt it would be a big mess if individual states decided to leave the union.

But, I probably wouldn't lose sleep over it either. Think about Europe there are a lot of very small countries there, it seems to work out okay for them. I don't care if Texas becomes it's own country and they find they can't handle it economically. I feel sorry for the Texans that are innocent and are stuck there, but I have no compassion for the ones who thought it was a great idea. Besides most this state thing was decided a long time before any of us was born so it wasn't like we decided if our state should be part of the United States.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roguevalley (Reply #12)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 06:22 PM

16. They did choose to be part of the UK, in theory at least

Though many historians think many of the Scottish politicians were bribed to smooth the process. But Scotland was in dire financial straits after the failure of their Panamanian colony, and union got them out of that hole.

http://www.educationscotland.gov.uk/scotlandshistory/unioncrownsparliaments/dariencolony/index.asp
http://www.educationscotland.gov.uk/scotlandshistory/unioncrownsparliaments/unionofparliaments/index.asp

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #16)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 11:09 PM

47. Why? Because it was in the interest of the Scots upper classes to do so.

 

Robert Burns later characterized them all brilliantly in this song:

Fareweel to a' our Scottish fame,
Fareweel our ancient glory;
Fareweel ev'n to the Scottish name,
Sae fam'd in martial story.
Now Sark rins over Solway sands,
An' Tweed rins to the ocean,
To mark where England's province stands-
Such a parcel of rogues in a nation!

What force or guile could not subdue,
Thro' many warlike ages,
Is wrought now by a coward few,
For hireling traitor's wages.
The English steel we could disdain,
Secure in valour's station;
But English gold has been our bane -
Such a parcel of rogues in a nation!

O would, ere I had seen the day
That Treason thus could sell us,
My auld grey head had lien in clay,
Wi' Bruce and loyal Wallace!
But pith and power, till my last hour,
I'll mak this declaration;
We're bought and sold for English gold-
Such a parcel of rogues in a nation!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kalidurga (Reply #7)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 11:15 PM

48. Made in Scotland: Album celebrates nation's music ahead of independence referendum

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/scottish-independence/made-in-scotland-album-celebrates-nations-music-ahead-of-independence-referendum-9690277.html

Made in Scotland: Album celebrates nation's music ahead of independence referendum

Three-disc set features 59 tracks from artists ranging from contemporary artists like Calvin Harris, to Sixties’ folk star Donovan and cult bands including The Cocteau Twins

Adam Sherwin
Tuesday 26 August 2014

Some of Scotland’s most successful artists will feature on a unique “Best of” album released to coincide with the independence referendum.

Made in Scotland features 59 tracks from artists ranging from Calvin Harris, Emeli Sandé and Paulo Nutini to Sixties’ folk star Donovan and cult bands including The Cocteau Twins and The Jesus & Mary Chain.

Compiled by Sony Music and released next Monday, MiS has been put together to mark “a year that Scotland has dominated the news and wowed the world with the Commonwealth Games”.

However, the three-disc album, described as a “celebration of some of the best contemporary and heritage Scottish artists across all genres”, is likely to boost the Yes campaign ahead of the national independence vote.

Songs that could be adapted as Yes victory anthems include Fairground Attraction’s “Perfect”, “Feels Like Heaven” by Fiction Factory and “I Could Be Happy” by Altered Images.


http://freshindependence.com/made-in-scotland-featuring-paolo-nutini/

Made In Scotland featuring Paolo Nutini
25 August 2014

In a year that Scotland has dominated the news and wowed the world with the Commonwealth Games, Sony Music Entertainment will release Made In Scotland a fifty-nine track compilation album.

It features some of Scotland’s most famous artists and performers from the last five decades. Made In Scotland is released on 1 September 2014.

Over 3CDs Made In Scotland is a celebration of some of the best contemporary and heritage Scottish artists across all genres. Some of the incredible talent gracing the album include BRITS Critics’ Choice Winner Emeli Sande, Grammy Award winner Calvin Harris, multiplatinum selling and critically acclaimed Paolo Nutini, Biffy Clyro, Primal Screen, Texas, Twin Atlantic, Wet Wet Wet, Stealers Wheels and many more.

Made In Scotland is available for pre order HERE http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00METAYEC?ie=UTF8&tag=sonymusiccommercial-21&linkCode=as2&camp=1634&creative=6738&creativeASIN=B00METAYEC


Nutini’s song, ‘These Streets’ was chosen for Made In Scotland. The song dates back to his first Album: ‘These Streets’ released in 2006. Dedicated to wandering the streets on London missing his girl and hometown of Paisley, Scotland.

(embedded youtube video)





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 06:17 PM

15. the Scots will quickly find that most of Salmond's arguments were hollow, if "yes" wins

for one, the Scots won't be able to keep the pound, for another, they won't be fast-tracked for EU membership.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #15)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 08:16 AM

75. They may well keep the pound

at least for the short haul. Using another country's currency is a common arrangement around the world. A number of countries use the American dollar today. The currency issue along with several others is just a bogeyman employed by union-boosters to sway the vote. Its likely a host of bilateral arrangements to ensure continued stability for both countries will follow a "yes" vote. They're not going to completely uncouple the two economies overnight.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FarrenH (Reply #75)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 08:23 AM

77. It's not something they can do if they want to join the EU.

In his response to Mr Alexander, Mr Rehn said an independent Scotland would have to apply to join the EU under the Treaty on European Union.

He said: "One core part of the economic conditions under the Treaty is that any candidate country must be committed to the Economic and Monetary Union, which implies the will and expected capacity to meet the convergence criteria of euro membership in due course, as well as the existence of a competent monetary authority in the form of an independent central bank.

"As to the question whether sterlingisation were compatible with EU membership, the answer is that this would simply not be possible, since that would obviously imply a situation where the candidate country concerned would not have a monetary authority of its own, and thus no necessary instruments of the EMU."

In reference to the Scottish government's threat to walk away from its share of UK national debt if denied a currency union, Mr Rehn added: "The EU Treaty requires that all member states and candidate countries respect their commitments in public finances, including the deficit and debt targets."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-29043878

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #77)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 09:19 AM

87. Interesting

Although the suggestion is that keeping the pound will be a temporary arrangement among several to ensure that Scotland doesn't have to create whole institutions overnight to replace those that are now integrated features of union. And there are considerable incentives for the UK to go along with those arrangements.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FarrenH (Reply #87)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 09:38 AM

89. Except...

the Treasury, the Bank of England, the leaders of all the major parties, and the EU Commission have all said "no, you can't really do that".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #89)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 10:31 AM

92. Well, yes

but lumping them together disguises the fact that they're saying different things.

The EU commission has said "you can't join the EU while you're using the pound", not "you can never join the EU if you use the pound now".

While UK parties are really using the Pound issue as a stick to beat potential Yes voters into submission. But this assumes that Scotland doesn't have equally big sticks. Before and after the vote are two different situations. The list of things that gives Scotland leverage is long, but by way of an example, Sir James Mirrlees has suggested that Scotland could walk away from it's share of the UK's national debt if the English dig their heels in over the pound. Westminster wants Scotland to stay in the union because Scotland has lots that Westminster wants and that means Scotland has far more leverage than No-advocates will admit.

Assuming a Yes vote, after the vote is in and the dust has settled the real horse-trading will begin, but I don't think we can assume too many certainties when the declarations that inform those certainties are themselves attempts to influence the outcome.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 06:27 PM

18. County to Send Anti-Federal Message by Horseback!

ELKO, Nev. — A rural Nevada county will send a message the old-fashioned way to Washington about what it calls federal overreach on public lands: by horseback.

Elko County Commissioner Grant Gerber said riders will begin the 2,800-mile ride at Point Reyes, California, around Sept. 26 and reach the U.S. Capitol about 20 days later.

Multiple riders covering 5 miles each at a time will carry the commissioners' resolution touching on various issues including livestock grazing, water rights and wild horses.

The theme of the Cowboy Express ride is "regulation without representation is tyranny," he said, and commissioners hope its outcome will be an increase in local voices on public land decisions.

"It's extremely serious, but we're trying to make it fun as we go," Gerber told the Elko Daily Free Press (http://bit.ly/Wr5ypi ).

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2014/09/06/us/ap-us-range-showdown-protest.html?&hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&version=WireFeed&module=pocket-region®ion=pocket-region&WT.nav=pocket-region&_r=0

-------------------------

kind of. XPosting at LBN.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #18)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 06:28 PM

19. Wrong thread?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #19)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 06:30 PM

20. No, not wrong thread.

Related message, even tho some

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 06:42 PM

21. Wouldn't this mean permanent Torry rule in the UK?

I also thought of an interesting hypothetical. What if independance passes and the SNP looses to Labour in the next Scottish parlimentry elections?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to iandhr (Reply #21)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 06:50 PM

22. It would certainly increase the chances of Tory governments

which is a principle reason why I, as an Englishman, don't want the Scottish to leave.

The fun would start with the next UK election, in May 2015. While the independence negotiations were going on (the SNP reckons they'll take 18 months - that's a minimum), we could elect a Labour majority government - but only a majority with its Scottish MPs (or Labour is the biggest party, but without an absolute majority). If the Tories are the largest party in the rest of the UK, who should be leading the negotiations for 'RUK'? What role, if any, should any SNP MPs, leading their nation out of the country, have in the UK government?

If an independent Scotland did elect a Scottish Labour government soon, I doubt they'd try to reunite. Too much disruption.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #22)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 09:33 PM

37. The answer would be for Labour to finally do the sane thing and support proportional representation.

 

It's the first-past-the-post electoral system that gives the Tories their unfair advantage in UK elections.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #37)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 05:47 AM

70. First past the post benefits Labour more at the moment

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2010

Con: 36.1% of popular vote, 47.2% of seats, 34,865 votes/seat
Labour: 29.0% of vote, 39.7% of seats, 33,358 votes/seat

And that's when the Tories were in front - normally that gives an advantage to the leading party in first-past-the-post. In 2005, Labour needed 26,908 votes/seat, and the Tories 44,383.

What PR would do is benefit the Lib Dems, UKIP, and smaller parties like the Greens. Labour would have to accept it would have to run coalition governments with them (Lib Dems and Greens, anyway), rather than rule on its own (and with more chance of getting representation, more people would likely vote for the smaller parties, as well, rather than voting for the 'least worst' choice of possible MPs as at the moment).

Whether the Tories and UKIP could get a majority of votes in England and Wales, I don't know. They did in the 2014 European elections, but UKIP gets a lot of extra support then from people who hate Europe and bother to vote, while others are more apathetic about EU elections.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #22)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 08:39 AM

80. If the English want Tory rule...

... let them have it and let them suffer the consequences.

Of all the ideas being bandied about here as to why Scotland should stay, this is by for the most ridiculous. Let England AND Scotland be in control of their own destinies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sendero (Reply #80)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 09:11 AM

86. We don't want to suffer the consequences

Well, I don't anyway. I'm disabled and a prime target for Tory "reforms" of the welfare syustem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Prophet 451 (Reply #86)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 09:26 AM

88. So a whole country ..

.... should compromise their self-determination?

Seriously, I know only a little of English politics and of that I will admit. But I truly believe that the "conservative revolutions" as ushered in by Reagan and Thatcher have just about had their day. I hope I'm not engaging in wishful thinking, but over here anyway, the signs people are getting weary of Republicans are everywhere.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sendero (Reply #88)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 09:39 AM

90. At the moment, a party to the right of the Tories - UKIP - is getting very popular

Their core message is "get the UK out of the EU", but this is based on an anti-immigrant outlook above all (one rule of the EU is that citizens can go and live, and work and get benefits, in any member country without any visa or anything, and UKIP hates that). They also tend to embrace other attitudes like US Tea Partiers too - climate change denial (the ridiculous Lord Monckton was their spokesman on it for a bit), they used to favour a flat income tax (but have worked out that's a vote loser overall, so are now dropping that), and so on.

But at the moment, the Tories are looking like they may move a bit further right to head off UKIP, and Labour leads, for the whole UK, only by a small amount. There are still too many right wingers in the UK.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 07:27 PM

25. It will never happen

 

Immigrants form 15% of the voters and they want to maintain their prestigious British passports and want to be called citizens of the UK. They overwhelmingly oppose independence for Scotland and ... Quebec as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cosmicone (Reply #25)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 05:54 AM

71. Only if you define 'immigrant' as 'not born in Scotland'

Ninety-three per cent of the people in Scotland stated they were born within the UK, a decrease of three percentage points since 2001. Eighty-three per cent of the population were born in Scotland, nine per cent in England, 0.7 per cent in Northern Ireland and 0.3 per cent in Wales.

http://www.scotlandscensus.gov.uk/news/census-2011-release-2a

And if you mean ethnicity:
Four per cent of people in Scotland were from minority ethnic groups - an increase of two percentage points since 2001.

If Scotland stays in the EU (and that is a major goal of the nationalists - they'll negotiate on just about everything else to get that), that's enough 'prestige' for most.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #71)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 10:39 AM

93. Thanks for the statistics

 

We shall see what happens. I personally favor Scottish independence. Just for Sean Connery's sake!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 07:32 PM

26. I haven't been following it as closely as I should.

Are there concessions Westminster could offer that would tip the vote toward "no" and continued union? Or is it too late for that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mac56 (Reply #26)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 09:36 PM

38. Problem is, any concessions Westminster could offer would mean diluting Thatcherism.

 

And NONE of the major parties at Westminster-Conservative, "Liberal Democrat" or "Labour" are ever going to do that.

All three have shown, by their deeds, that they would objectively prefer to have Scotland leave than to re-open the economic and political debate in the UK. All three have too many wealthy backers who are adamant that no alternative to Thatcherism-Blairism will be tolerated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 07:50 PM

28. I hope they stay but best wishes to them.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 08:20 PM

33. It's a good thing Scotland is crappy tank country . . .

 

Otherwise the UK and NATO would be all over them as soon as they declare independence. I think that's SOP nowadays.

Am I right?



(yes, sarcasm)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #33)

Fri Sep 12, 2014, 05:57 PM

142. I'm just shocked you haven't accused the Yes movement

of being some CIA-engineered plot to de-stabilize the UK...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue_Tires (Reply #142)

Fri Sep 12, 2014, 06:44 PM

143. Really?

 

Why would you imagine I would do that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 08:26 PM

34. queen

You want to see the queen? She's out touring the empire. Should be back any moment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to enid602 (Reply #34)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 09:37 PM

39. As someone once put it, "Her Majesty's a pretty nice girl, but she doesn't have a lot to say." n/t.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 09:49 PM

40. Would the blue be removed from the Union Jack if this goes through? (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #40)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 10:58 PM

43. Yes

The alternative flag model being pitched still contains the cross of St Patrick, but there is no way that the public will swallow that. They will almost certainly revert to the English flag.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shaayecanaan (Reply #43)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 01:16 AM

52. That's the St George's cross plus the Saint Patrick's Saltire.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_George%27s_Cross

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Patrick%27s_Saltire

I can't see Wales and Northern Ireland going for just the George's Cross.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Turborama (Reply #52)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 02:03 AM

55. Yes, as I just pointed out in my post

St Patrick's cross/saltire are synonymous, as is the case with St Andrew's cross (the St Andrew's cross spider is always called as such and never the St Andrew's saltire spider).

The Welsh care nothing for St Patrick, neither do the Northern Irish protestants. The Northern Irish Catholics might care, but they were never great fans of the Union Jack anyway. And the English would rather wash their hands of northern Ireland truth be told.

It will be interesting to see what will become of the Ulster Presbyterians, they were always more Scottish than English anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 10:44 PM

41. It's shite being Scottish!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 10:55 PM

42. Still very unlikely it will go through...

This is the only poll out of dozens that have the yes campaign ahead.

Yes voters are also predominantly working class, meaning that if turnover is less than 100% any lead that they might otherwise have will be quickly eroded.

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/politics/2012/07/scottish-yes-campaign%E2%80%99s-class-problem

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 11:29 PM

49. Yes Scotland Scottish weather forecaster loses it live on air

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Turborama (Reply #49)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 04:54 AM

65. That is very good. Tthank you.n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 12:07 AM

51. Excluding the "don't knows?" I wonder how many of those there are?

I don't think any of them have this locked down just yet!

UPDATE: There is also a new Panelbase poll out tonight, conducted for the Yes Scotland campaign. Throughout most of the campaign YouGov have tended to show some of the largest leads for NO, Panelbase have tended to show some of the smallest leads for NO. Given the movement towards YES in YouGov’s recent polls many people reasonably expected that Panelbase would be the ones to show YES ahead, in fact they still show a small lead for NO. Topline figures with changes from the last Panelbase poll in mid-August are YES 44%(+2), NO 48%(+2), Don’t know 8%(-4). Without don’t knows it’s YES 48%(nc), NO 52%(nc). In contrast to the collapsing NO position in YouGov, Panelbase are showing no real change – strange. We should have TNS and Survation polls in the coming week (and should be due an ICM at some point), so we’ll see what trends others pick up.


http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #72)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 02:02 PM

98. And isn't their polling internet based?

I think they may have missed a few pensioners, which is why that other poll isn't agreeing with them. Time will reveal all, of course!



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #98)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 02:05 PM

99. Panelbase is internet-based too (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #99)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 02:31 PM

100. It is hard to know how solid any of this reporting is.

Scotland has quite a few pensioners, I wonder if their voices are being heard in these accounts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #100)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 02:47 PM

101. Well, the 60+ age group responded at above-avarage levels in the YouGov survey

http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/09/07/full-results-scottish-independence-2nd-5th-septemb/

Unweighted sample: 309 participants
Weighted sample: 291

(36% Yes, 59% No, FWIW)

so, it looks like they are being heard.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #101)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 03:01 PM

104. We'll know soon enough--I'm very interested to hear the outcome. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 01:31 AM

53. Isn't the Bush family involved with the Bank of Scotland?

Time for some digging.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 02:01 AM

54. If It's Not Scottish, It's Crap!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 03:44 AM

60. YouGov is a joke pollster. They've been horrible in every American election

 

Not sure why we'd give them any credence with this poll.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 08:35 AM

78. A subsequent poll (Panelbase) suggests a narrow majority for No

52:48.

It's close and volatile.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 09:09 AM

85. I think it would be a mistake

While North Sea oil provides a lot of cash, the cost of setting up an an etirely new government is not something to be sneezed at, let alone teh cost of issuing and backing a new currency. Also, I'd like to see some legal opinions on whether a split is even legal under the Acts of Union.

That said, I'll understand if teh Scots vote for independence. Scotland is a left-on-centre nation and Westminster is just drifting further to teh right. Hey, I wonder if they'll accept an immigrant from England?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 02:54 PM

103. I'll bet Sean Connery is excited.


He's been pushing for Scottish independence forever.

Even though he was England's James I 007 he was always Scottish underneath.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kablooie (Reply #103)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 10:36 PM

117. He cares so much about Scotland that he lives in the Bahamas.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Sun Sep 7, 2014, 04:13 PM

107. Cornwall is feeling its oats as well

They probably can't go it alone though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Mon Sep 8, 2014, 09:31 AM

125. UK Tory government blinks: New powers for Scotland if voters say No to independence.

Speaking on the BBC's Andrew Marr show, Conservative (Chancellor George) Osborne said: "You will see in the next few days a plan of action to give more powers to Scotland; more tax powers, more spending powers, more powers over the welfare state. "That will be put into effect the moment there is a 'No' vote in the referendum."

The pledge came on the day a YouGov poll suggested the Yes Scotland campaign for independence had taken a narrow lead.

Scotland's first minister said: "Are we expected to believe, after hundreds of thousands have already voted, that there's a radical new deal?

"This is a panicky measure made because the 'Yes' side is winning on the ground. They're trying to bribe us, but it won't work as they have no credibility left."

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-29099431

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Mon Sep 8, 2014, 09:48 AM

128. Maybe it's time we give Red States the option to vote on their independence

 

Yes, let them vote for independence and we can wash our hands of them! Those of us in the new Blue United States can finally move forward with a truly progressive agenda and it would insure no further US adventurism abroad as the new Red States of America would lack the resources needed to engage in force projection.

At the end of the day Red States, without Blue States are poor states.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 3rdwaydem (Reply #128)

Mon Sep 8, 2014, 10:54 AM

130. In this case it's more like the blue states

 

Voting to separate. Scots are left of center

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #130)

Mon Sep 8, 2014, 11:19 AM

132. In any event, we should wash our hands of them

 

Yes, let them try their right wing ideology out of massive tax cuts, quasi-theocracy and deregulation. Let's see where that get them. Of course progressives stuck in those backward states would be able to flee to the new Blue United States of America and likewise, those Red Meat malcontents in Blue states, like mine, could join their buddies in the Red States.

In the end there would be no more wars for oil or profit. The new Blue States of America would not consider such militaristic adventurism and the Red States would be too poor to dare try it.

If the UK can allow Scotland the vote to secede, then maybe it's time to rid ourselves of the finally rid ourselves from the obstructionism and reactionary policies of the Wing Nut States. In the end, it would be the ultimate expression of democracy while allowing us the loose the millstone of Rightism which is dragging this country down.

The funny thing is that the Wing Nuts in the Red States would be stupid enough to agree to it!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Mon Sep 8, 2014, 11:24 AM

133. Dave's pretty upset

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Mon Sep 8, 2014, 11:45 AM

134. The only people who would benefit from the split are those who are already wealthy.

 

They'll take carpet-bagging to a new level whilst the poor deluded voters get shat on again & again.

Currency change: Remember the ERM debacle that made obscenely rich speculators even richer?

Costs: Having to basically duplicate the entire machinery of state is going to cost a fortune.

Loss of subsidies from the UK (and, probably, from the EU) will unfairly impact rural Scots.

Tax increases across the remaining public to get funds to try to juggle the books for the above.

Employment will be a real roller-coaster as some things will go away (e.g., MOD bases/suppliers)
but others will have to spring up from nothing (e.g., the above bureaucracy). And as the new state
will need stuff done *now*, all the "independent" Scots will be swamped by job-hunting immigrants
(hah! including the English!) with the support & encouragement of their own brand-new government.


Scotland has many enviable progressive aspects - very enviable when seen from the depths
of Tory England - but those very things will be the first casualties of the reality train bearing the
name "Independence".

I can't see it ending well for the average Scot but who can tell?



For myself, I fear the resulting slide to the Right in England: The two main parties have already
moved significantly to the right in the last few decades and that was despite the largely calming
influence of the (non-Blairite) Scottish Labour MPs. Once that has gone - and it will have to
go as no-one will want Scottish MPs after they split off - then the road will inevitably turn even
further in the direction of capitalism, greed, nationalism & the whole "Me First" lifestyle.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Mon Sep 8, 2014, 12:28 PM

135. See Krugman's take.

 

Long-story short, political independence while not controlling your own currency is bad news. See Spain, Greece, Portugal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #135)

Mon Sep 8, 2014, 07:40 PM

139. I know he's right!How can Scotland do this without a currency controlled by your government?

It's ridiculous. Look at what happened to the euro...

I don't think issuing their own "pound" will do any good. Who would want it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Mon Sep 8, 2014, 06:29 PM

137. New poll: another statistical tie

A dramatic surge in support for Scottish independence has been confirmed by a further poll which shows that next week's referendum is on a knife edge, with only a 1% gap between yes and no.

The poll by TNS has found that support for independence has jumped by six points in the last month, putting the yes vote at 38% and the no vote at 39%, wiping out a 12-point lead for the pro-UK campaign led by former chancellor Alistair Darling.

The switch in support will delight the yes campaign but deeply alarm their opponents, coming after a YouGov poll found the pro-independence vote had a narrow one-point lead for the first time.
...
TNS had originally planned to release its findings overnight on Tuesday, but brought that forward after worried City analysts and market traders called them about their poll, for the first time, following YouGov's findings.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/09/scottish-independence-tns-poll-1-per-cent-gap-yes-no

I believe this is a phone poll (but am not certain about that - the TNS site is not responding well, presumably with loads of people hitting it)

(Correction: it's a face-to-face poll: http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/8961 )

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #137)

Mon Sep 8, 2014, 07:04 PM

138. The TNS poll has a huge undecided percentage

Which is strikingly different from the YouGov result.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Fri Sep 12, 2014, 05:24 PM

141. Latest (phone) poll from ICM: Yes 49%, No 51%

The 307-year-old union between Scotland and England hangs by a thread as a fresh Guardian/ICM poll put the yes vote in next week's referendum just two percentage points behind those supporting no.

Despite an intense week of campaigning by pro-union politicians and repeated warnings from business, the poll out on Friday found support for the no campaign on 51% and with yes on 49%, once don't knows were excluded.

The Guardian/ICM poll is based on telephone interviews conducted between Tuesday and Thursday, the first such survey ICM has conducted during the campaign. Previous polls suggesting that the race for Scotland was too close to call have been based on internet-based surveys.

The headline figures exclude the 17% of voters in Scotland who ICM found were still undecided a mere week before polling day, a substantial proportion that gives the pro-UK campaign hope that it could arrest September's surge in support for independence.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/12/scottish-referendum-icm-poll-too-close-to-call-union


Other recent polls: YouGov (internet): Yes 48%, No 52% ; Survation (internet): Yes 47%, No 53%

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 09:51 AM

145. Go Scotland! I blow my nose on you English pig dogs!

My Scottish blood is boiling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Baclava (Reply #145)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 10:34 AM

146. Well, that's a pleasant way to introduce yourself

Did you know John Lennon was English? And two thirds of Monty Python? Or were you just calling the Englishman who started this thread a 'pig dog'?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #146)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 11:21 AM

147. ...another of the Queen's lackeys? - "Scotland forever!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Baclava (Reply #147)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 11:27 AM

148. Mel Gibson?

He's not even a manky Scots git.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #148)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 11:38 AM

149. William Wallace



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Baclava (Reply #149)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 02:52 PM

150. William Wallace eh? Most people really know nothing about him.

 

Wallace had a LOT more in common with the English aristocracy than he did with the Scottish peasantry. His name was WILLIAM, a Norman name at the time, and his primary language would have been French. He MAY have known Scots Gaelic, but likely d\id not speak it regularly. He would have dressed the same as the English noblity, and and he CERTAINLY never wore a kilt.

In same vein, Robert the Bruce was fighting not for "Freedom," but the right to oppress the Scottish peasantry directly, instead of having to share a piece with the English crown.

Let's not get too romantic here.

For sure Scotland has been been mistreated by England over the years. But England and Scotland are very, VERY integrated at this point, and I expect that the IDEA of independence will turn out to be much more attractive than the reality. Frankly North Sea oil revenues have been falling for a long time now, and they will never be what they once were. Scotland will be a poor country, with most of its intellectual talent heading south.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Sat Sep 13, 2014, 04:17 PM

152. The betting odds strongly indicate the "NO" side will prevail.

The best poll is usually where people are placing their bets. Right now, the no side is overwhelmingly favored.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread