|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Mon 1 Mar 08:29
Latest survey shows more people in favour of remaining in the UK. A direct impact of the NS/AS case or something else?
Post Edited (Fri 05 Mar 20:17)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Mon 1 Mar 09:12
Some people seem very fickle over such a fundamental issue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Mon 1 Mar 09:43
I guess it depends on
1. the size of the sample
2. the wording of the question
3. who/where you ask.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sadindiefreak
Date: Mon 1 Mar 10:00
Quote:
jake89, Mon 1 Mar 08:29
Latest survey shows more people in favour of remaining in the UK. A direct impact of the NS/AS case or something else?
It's a poll by Survation who's methodology seems to favour the union.
Last Survation poll Yes lead by just 1% that has switched this time. Since sample sizes of around 1000 have an accuracy of +/- 3% not much can be read into it.
Not going to lie though it does worry me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Mon 1 Mar 12:05
All polls have the be taken with a pinch of salt, but interesting that this is the first in a long while showing a desire to remain.
Also seeing a lot of suggestions that Sturgeon needs to go. Whilst I think the SNP are incompetent, none of the other parties strike me as doing anything better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Mon 1 Mar 12:18
Strangely enough another poll shows the snp on course for a majority in the May elections.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Mon 1 Mar 12:24
"Strangely enough another poll shows the snp on course for a majority in the May elections."
Might have a little to do with a lack of suitable alternative?
Scottish Labour?
Scottish Tories?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: shrek par
Date: Mon 1 Mar 13:37
I'm sure most folk are seeing the SNP as a vehicle to gain independence now. The party will fracture after it happens, and we may see a return to individual rather than party line politics. Each area has its own challenges. This needs an individual approach in addition to group steering. Would be good to get away from the one size fits all approach. Fife has different needs from Edinburgh or the Highlands, Dunfermline does to Glenrothes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Mon 1 Mar 13:37
I think it was as many as 1 in 4 vote SNP but are also No voters.
Some Yes voters also vote Lib Dem and Labour.
The strongest correlation between votes collection and the party's indi position is with the Tories where I think it was over 90% vote No as well as Conservative. I don't think you can always equate a vote for the SNP as a Yes vote.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: shrek par
Date: Mon 1 Mar 13:42
Once the Scottish elections are done, the die will be cast one way or the other. Personally, if they can't make hay from the current situation they'd be as well waiting 20yrs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Jbob
Date: Mon 1 Mar 14:05
Choice is
Deal with our own shecht or
Get bo jo do it.
Bobs of the world unite
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Mon 1 Mar 14:21
I vote snp and green primarily because they are Indy supporters
If we’d gained Indy then I’d vote for whatever party best represents my vision, values and desires for the next Parliament
I could imagine voting for an actual Scottish Labour Party
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: shrek par
Date: Mon 1 Mar 17:27
Means to an end for me too. Would be nice to have someone from here representing here, that's interested in moving us forward rather than being on message with the current party trend.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Mon 1 Mar 20:02
The young Scottish vote along with EU nationals contribution will be significant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Mon 1 Mar 23:28
I`m sure I read that the swing back to a majority pro union was from under 25s.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: P
Date: Tue 2 Mar 18:32
I would imagine a few folk think pursuing independence during an unprecedented pandemic is a bad idea
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Thu 4 Mar 13:02
Back up to 53% Yes and a 7 point lead.
I would imagine folk who realise that the U.K. gov contributed to the seriousness of the pandemic due to their inaction and superior than though attitude and of course their ineptitude this past year. Their cronyism and blatant corruption shovelling millions in to the back pockets of their friends.....this and a whole lot more are making people think it is a jolly good idea to leave this one sided unequal “union”...for good.
And another 7000 joined SNP yesterday.
Post Edited (Thu 04 Mar 15:22)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Fri 5 Mar 10:53
Saw this post in the National regarding Mark Drakefords comment about the U.K. being “Over”.
The last two sentences sum it up perfectly for me......
The whole lot needs tearing down and all nations need to stand on their own two feet. Until that day comes the devolved govts will be diminished slowly but surely to puppet parliaments where we get to do anything we like, as long as the tories in London agree, which of course is having no power at all.
Independence is the only way for Scotland and Wales. Why NI wants to be ruled by London rather than rejoin their own people on their own island is beyond me. If Scotland does not vote for independence in the next referendum I will seriously consider applying for Irish citizenship because I don`t think I could take the international embarrassment of being Scottish because the majority of Scottish people want to be ruled by England. If those NO voters think the English would vote the same way, they are sadly and seriously mistaken. The English are too proud of being English to vote to be governed by another country. That is why I respect them more than Scottish No voters. Voting No to your own countries independence is probably the most pathetic act any man or woman of any nationality could perform in their lives. To prefer to be subservient and happy to take what you get and be thankful for it just goes against the rules of nature itself.
What an opportunity we missed in 2014.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Fri 5 Mar 11:44
Quote:
desparado, Fri 5 Mar 10:53
Why NI wants to be ruled by London rather than rejoin their own people on their own island is beyond me.
Because most consider themselves British rather than Irish. Why doesn't the Lothians and half the Borders rejoin the kingdom of Northumbria?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: 1985Par
Date: Fri 5 Mar 11:50
"That is why I respect them more than Scottish No voters. Voting No to your own countries independence is probably the most pathetic act any man or woman of any nationality could perform in their lives.
They`re the lines that " sums it up perfectly to me" too.
Utter contempt for those with a different opinion to yourselves since the day you lost the referendum. Nothing but contempt and an arrogant " my opinion is better than yours " attitude.
Branding 54% of scots "pathetic"!. That is pathetic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Fri 5 Mar 15:22
"Branding 54% of scots "pathetic"!. That is pathetic."
54% of those who voted... Not all of whom were `Scots`
Not all are deemed `pathetic`
Some EU citizens voted to stay in the EU
Some genuinely believe in the Union.
Some have calculated that they are doing ok under the `status quo`, and don`t want to rock their boat, to hell with everyone else.
Some were bullied/scared
Some were lied to and/or misled
And a significant portion were ignorant blue-nosed bigots who will vote one way regardless of ANY facts/discussions/arguments presented, simply due to the their team`s perceived place in the `establishment`.
Oh yes, and a good chunk of the remainder would fall into the category of having committed "the most pathetic act any man or woman of any nationality could perform".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: McCaig`s Tower
Date: Fri 5 Mar 16:13
How the question is phrased is very important, as is the context in which it is phrased.
Reputable polling companies should be able to sample and weight properly.
However, the fact that people are so uncertain must surely call into question the wisdom of deciding major questions in this way. It cannot be considered "the settled will".
Regarding the Election (assuming it goes ahead as scheduled), it is entirely legitimate to decide that the SNP has the best program for Holyrood and to vote accordingly.
Of course, many people may believe it has the best program for matters outside of Holyrood’s competence and vote for them – I don’t share either view, you may be surprised to learn. (And I’m not particularly thrilled to be branded as having carried out the “most pathetic act any man or woman could perform in their lives”, albeit in "the National" by someone who can’t spell). What of those who voted to remain in the EU?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Fri 5 Mar 16:57
"What of those who voted to remain in the EU?"
Emmm...
Some EU citizens voted to stay in the EU
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: McCaig`s Tower
Date: Fri 5 Mar 17:39
I wasn`t commenting on your point Lux, rather about the post in the National, which I haven`t seen, but which (I think) was quoted above. (Of course, we were all EU citizens in those days).
My point was that many voted for the UK to remain in the EU (and hence cede national sovereignty). Was that pathetic too?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: red-star-par
Date: Fri 5 Mar 18:41
Quote:
1985Par, Fri 5 Mar 11:50
"That is why I respect them more than Scottish No voters. Voting No to your own countries independence is probably the most pathetic act any man or woman of any nationality could perform in their lives.
They`re the lines that " sums it up perfectly to me" too.
Utter contempt for those with a different opinion to yourselves since the day you lost the referendum. Nothing but contempt and an arrogant " my opinion is better than yours " attitude.
Branding 54% of scots "pathetic"!. That is pathetic.
I don't think that anyone that voted no can actually call themselves Scots. They are brits to me. It's fair enough if people voted 'No' but don't vote against Scottish self determination and call yourself a Scot, because you are not
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: 1985Par
Date: Fri 5 Mar 19:06
You have arrogantly, sanctimoniously and self-righteously put me in my place.
This is exactly what we voted against in 2014.
"Pathetic" and "not a Scot".
Jesus wept
Post Edited (Fri 05 Mar 19:13)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Fri 5 Mar 19:19
Divide and Conquer ..... the auld trick still seems to be working :(
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: aaaaaaaaaargh
Date: Sat 6 Mar 07:46
I am in favour of independence, but I think the bar should be set higher than 50% for major issues like this. There needs to be a clear difference between those voting for change and those voting for the status quo, otherwise it will just be a huge mess for decades.
The Brexit vote is a prime example of that. Leave won by just under 4%. If everyone voted again today (with everyone voting exactly the same way as they did in 2016) then leave would probably win by less than 1%. By next year remain would win.
Brexit is basically making a lot of dead people happy. I`m not sure that is the best way to decide the future of a country.
I know that Scottish independence is different in that more young people are in favour of change, but if this is the case then we should just wait a few years until there is an overwhelming majority in favour of independence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Andrew283
Date: Sat 6 Mar 09:11
Strongly disagree. Changing the rules now would be a complete joke frankly. Also, waiting a few years/decades is just going to p*** off my age bracket even more and make it even harder to rejoin the EU as we will be dragged along into England's little Brexit fantasy
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: BigJPar
Date: Sat 6 Mar 10:18
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Sat 6 Mar 11:30
Scotland and Westminster now have completely different agendas and priorities which makes separation inevitable unless one of them makes a sharp political turn, which doesn't seem likely.
We want such different things, or rather we hope to achieve similar ends using vastly different methods, that the union has become a real burden.
The enemy travels by private jet, not by dinghy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Sat 6 Mar 13:53
Who gets to set the bar and what would be their motivation...
Let’s be honest, I’d you set the bar higher than half then you’re skewing the result in favour of the Union.
You can’t have a situation where the majority vote for something but the minority position wins - simply undemocratic
Also, if we’re going down that road off introducing a mandatory watermark then You could just as easily argue it could be turned on its head? IF after 300 years, the union can’t command 60%in favour of it, then that signals it’s not working and we need to try something else!
Post Edited (Sat 06 Mar 13:55)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Sat 6 Mar 15:44
“And another 7000 joined the SNP yesterday”
They must be the same 7000 who have flooded Twitter with identical “I’ve known Nicola since she was sixteen” twaddle? Some birthday party she must have had!
As for pathetic, the Yes vote was a pathetic 37% of the electorate. This was despite Salmond getting a free hand in setting the question, giving school kids a vote, and extending the vote to non citizens.
But none so pathetic as the Connery, Cummings, Cox etc Bravehearts and any other expats who didn’t have a vote, banged on about Indy, yet wouldn’t dream of living here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Andrew283
Date: Sat 6 Mar 15:56
You sound absolutely seething there mate. Notice you went all quiet on the other thread after all your baseless accusations were found to be worthless. Keep trying though
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Sat 6 Mar 16:01
I`ve never understood the argument for setting the bar at, say, 50% of the electorate having to vote for change to validate a ballot. If people aren`t sufficiently interested to exercise their vote why should it would be allocated to one side over another?
As well as Scots exiles supporting `Yes`, there were plenty people who didn`t live in Scotland and who weren`t even Scots telling us to vote `No`. Were they not entitled to have an opinion either?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: aaaaaaaaaargh
Date: Sun 7 Mar 08:16
Ok, maybe we shouldn`t play with the 50% threshold.
How about age-based weighted voting instead. Your vote is multiplied by the number of decades that you are likely to be around. 6 for under 30s down to 1 for over 80s. This would only be for major constitutional votes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Sun 7 Mar 09:06
How about IQ weighted?
Post Edited (Sun 07 Mar 10:07)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: phutupfeet
Date: Sun 7 Mar 10:26
Quote:
aaaaaaaaaargh, Sun 7 Mar 08:16
Ok, maybe we shouldn`t play with the 50% threshold.
How about age-based weighted voting instead. Your vote is multiplied by the number of decades that you are likely to be around. 6 for under 30s down to 1 for over 80s. This would only be for major constitutional votes.
So a 16-24 year old with very limited life experience, who can't decide if they are male, female or a toaster vote carrys' more importance than someone who has matured, got more experience and potentially more to lose with a change? That really is the most ridiculous thing I've heard.
If you want to put more weight on votes then maybe give that to those who have jobs/careers, homes, family commitments at stake.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Sun 7 Mar 10:43
Let's be fair here. Every generation has its % of idiots. On Friday I was on a walk and went past two women who both admitted their kids had had COVID symptoms but they sent them in anyway as they didn't want the hassle of getting them tested. Both in their early 40s.
I then go to get shopping and have this old cow get right up in my face to get in at some tins.
Then see a load of teenagers headed up the woods for (presumably) a drinking session.
There are idiots everywhere and, unfortunately, they're allowed to vote.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Sun 7 Mar 11:15
“If you want to put more weight on votes then maybe give that to those who have jobs/careers, homes, family commitments at stake.”
Not sure I’m interpreting your comment correctly but I find it quite sad. If Scotland becomes independent is not going to mean we all lose our job, career and home... or at least they’re no more at risk than staying with Brexit fuelled Westminster.
I’d argue that an independent country, who’s government and policies are focused on their population (and not for example the south east of England), their natural resources and their place in the world would provide a as better foundation for perhaps more people to obtain jobs, careers and homes
Post Edited (Sun 07 Mar 11:15)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Sun 7 Mar 12:21
It took a long time to achieve `one person, one vote`. Why would anyone think any departure from that would be progress?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Sun 7 Mar 12:22
So current policies pushed by the Scottish Government suit those across Scotland, or only those in the central belt?
Just as an example, how much money has been spent reducing journey times between Edinburgh and Glasgow, and then how much has been spent on the Fife Circle? It's thanks to the Greens that we're hopefully going to see routes to Levenmouth and the Dunfermline-Alloa line reopen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Andrew283
Date: Sun 7 Mar 12:31
Quote:
phutupfeet, Sun 7 Mar 10:26
Quote:
aaaaaaaaaargh, Sun 7 Mar 08:16
Ok, maybe we shouldn`t play with the 50% threshold.
How about age-based weighted voting instead. Your vote is multiplied by the number of decades that you are likely to be around. 6 for under 30s down to 1 for over 80s. This would only be for major constitutional votes.
So a 16-24 year old with very limited life experience, who can't decide if they are male, female or a toaster vote carrys' more importance than someone who has matured, got more experience and potentially more to lose with a change? That really is the most ridiculous thing I've heard.
If you want to put more weight on votes then maybe give that to those who have jobs/careers, homes, family commitments at stake.
Christ you took that bait. Pumping out kids doesn't make you a better person either. Frankly I'd rather be surrounded by a hundred youthful idiots who get their news from multiple sources and haven't than the same number of boomers who shovel the BBC and newspapers down their throats
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Sun 7 Mar 12:41
Well there’s a few answers to that question,
At its simplest level you could argue that much of Scotland current spend is in the central belt-primarily because much of Scotland population and wealth generation is condensed in the central belt... this is no different to the uk, where most of its population and wealth producers are in the south east of England, so much of its focus is there. Nothing wrong with that per se but you have to recognise that for the great majority of Scottish people, the central belt is a lot closer to home, eg an though I don’t live there, I work there, so I do benefit from businesses being attracted there, infrastructure projects like the new bridge to help me get there etc
A slightly longer answer is that if the Scottish Parliament was looking to attract investment/businesses or distribute spending round the country, it would be to places outside the central belt but still within Scotland. Right now when the uk does that, it’s to a much larger area with much larger conurbations that would likely get first dibs
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Sun 7 Mar 14:33
So when does the Scottish Government currently encourage economic development outside the central belt?
Fife is Scotland's third largest local authority area by population. Thousands leave Fife each day (or did) to travel elsewhere to work. How is that sustainable?
Fife has one SG body with its base here (Scottish Water). That's one out of 30+.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Sun 7 Mar 17:21
I don’t think I said it did?
I think what I said was that attracting businesses, even to the central belt, is a lot neater and commutable (when required) than them being in the south east of England
What I also said was that if Scotland was independent, then it would be within their gift to give incentives to have these businesses locate to places like fife, as opposed to fife competing against places like Birmingham, Middlesbrough, Cardiff that will all be bigger conurbations than Dunfermline. Kirkcaldy, Glenrothes
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sadindiefreak
Date: Sun 7 Mar 23:13
Quote:
Parboiled, Sun 7 Mar 09:06
How about IQ weighted?
You sure you want to give up your vote? 🤪
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: moviescot
Date: Sun 7 Mar 23:34
Quote:
jake89, Sun 7 Mar 14:33
So when does the Scottish Government currently encourage economic development outside the central belt?
Fife is Scotland's third largest local authority area by population. Thousands leave Fife each day (or did) to travel elsewhere to work. How is that sustainable?
Fife has one SG body with its base here (Scottish Water). That's one out of 30+.
The SG managed to get the Aberdeen Western peripheral route completed. This was blocked at every turn but was eventually done. This has reduced journey times between Aberdeen and the ports of Peterhead and Fraserburgh. And clearly it is now easier for these ports to get their goods South without spending up to an hour going through Aberdeen.
Congestion in Aberdeen had dropped dramatically as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
