Scots indy results thread

[Sasaferrato]

I think I am getting the impression of the types of people you vote for.

You have no clue whatsoever. (My last vote was for a Labour councillor.)

 

[DairyQueen]

.

 

[DairyQueen]

Times past are often cited as being considerably better than times present. In truth, times past were no better in many ways than present times. Because of incremental improvement, often won at great cost to the protagonists, society is considerably more equitable that it was 50 years ago, and infinitely more equitable than 100 years ago.

I opposed Scottish independence on a number of grounds, not least the unanswered questions on EU membership and currency. In the month before the referendum, £14Bn flowed out of Edinburgh to London, that money may now return, or not. Intrinsically, whether it returns or not is immaterial, we as we are still a single 'nation'.

SNP deceit can be characterised very nicely by the £400m of health spending cutbacks, which were to be announced after the referendum. Salmond, having seen the 'President Eck' nameplate disappear from his door, has reneged on his promise not to stand down in the event of a 'No' vote.

There have been very disparate opinions of the oil reserves, but even given the 'best estimate', there is a certain irony on the party which prides itself on its 'greenness' basing its financial forecasts (such as they were) on the ongoing consumption of fossil fuel.

I had to smile at Gordon Brown this morning, with his 'promise' that further devolved powers will be delivered. He is in no position to deliver anything, and Milliband and Cameron are already arguing as to what these devolved powers might be. Neither of them is actually able to guarantee anything, as neither has back bench consensus.

A country of 65m people is stronger on both the European and world stages than a country of 6m people. An independent Scotland would have as much influence as Albania, but probably with a weaker currency.

Scotland benefits from a higher per capita income from central government than the other nations within the UK, I am very surprised that those other nations are not more vociferous with regard to this.

Oh well, it is over. Those who wished to destroy the Union have lost. It'll be a while before they stop whining I suppose, but they'll get over it, just as I would have had to do had it gone the other way. The vote was lost by 10%, which is a large majority. Had this been a parliamentary election, 10% is 60 MPs, which would not, by any standards, be regarded as close.

One thing which has emerged is the difference between the 'Yes' and 'No' demographic. The 'poorer' areas voted 'Yes', presumably in he belief that this would deliver higher welfare spending; one may argue that the more prosperous areas voted 'No' because they would have had to pay for it.

I look forward to the next referendum. Ballot question: 'Should we have a Scottish parliament.'

Well thanks for all of that.

Rehashed scare stories about the EU and currency.

Rehashed bullshit about health spending cuttbacks.

Our oil is a liability. If the Treasury forecasts are wrong, I am sure you will be outraged and reflect on the referendum.

Disnae like Albania.

Scrounging poor people want independence.

Wants to scrap the Scottish Parliament.

So, you a member of UKIP or just vote for them?

 

[Sasaferrato]

Well thanks for all of that.

Rehashed scare stories about the EU and currency.

Rehashed bullshit about health spending cuttbacks.

Our oil is a liability. If the Treasury forecasts are wrong, I am sure you will be outraged and reflect on the referendum.

Disnae like Albania.

Scrounging poor people want independence.

Wants to scrap the Scottish Parliament.

So, you a member of UKIP or just vote for them?

You really are a fucking idiot, aren't you? The health spending cut is real, not a rumour. As to the rest, you have put up no cogent argument whatsoever.

Edited to add: I see that you have been on the boards for five minutes, which explains the fact that despite knowing nothing at all about me, you feel able to tell me what I believe.

 

[where to]

Not forgetting the chief hypocrite of the 'Yes' campaign, Connery, tax dodger resident in Monaco.

he was kept away from the campaign for that very reason.

heard a Scottish No voter on radio yday saying, in very non triumphalist tone, that he felt good about contributing to the stopping of an inbuilt Tory majority in England for the next 40 years....

Was good to be reminded of the fundamentally decent intentions of so many No's....

But then he's probably just helped ensure Scotland will swap between the Tories and near identical New Lab for the forseeable future.

wonder how he's feeling now. these guys got majorly blackmailed/ guilted into voting No by Labour and it will be interesting to see how they respond to the realisation they've been used.

 

[where to]

Look up the history of the term tartan tories.

What happened here is that many people were blinded by the SNPs 2011 performance when a coalition of city/labourish voters and the trad more rural conservative voters voted SNP together - they took this to be writ in stone forever. This referendum saw a breakdown of that coalition with the latter voting NO and the former YES. This could spell big changes for both labour and the SNP or things could just go back to dual voting with the former voting labour in GE and SNP in national elections.

aye, in a nutshell.

35-40% Labour voted Yes on Thursday - despite Labour throwing everything they had at them. I don't think many will be going back soon.

separately, 4000 have joined the SNP since yesterday. 1200 have joined the Scottish Greens. Many have joined the SSP apparently too.

 

[Wilf]

aye, in a nutshell.

35-40% Labour voted Yes on Thursday - despite Labour throwing everything they had at them. I don't think many will be going back soon.

separately, 4000 have joined the SNP since yesterday. 1200 have joined the Scottish Greens. Many have joined the SSP apparently too.

Those figures, if true, are astonishing. I say 'if true' not because I'm doubting you, but I might be doubting the greens and snp.

Edit: I've just seen a reference to the ssp getting 800+ applications, so the above figures wouldn't be out of line with that. I suspect these all inquiries that might be about membership in some shape or form, not actual sign ups. Still, even that is impressive.

 

[where to]

Two personal friends have joined parties in the last 36 hours. a month ago neither were campaigners, one wasn't at all.

 

[Wilf]

Again, I'm sure this is something short of standing orders signed and sent to the bank, but still very high figures. Scaled up to England, the snp figure would be 40000 joining in a day.

 

[weepiper]

Again, I'm sure this is something short of standing orders signed and sent to the bank, but still very high figures. Scaled up to England, the snp figure would be 40000 joining in a day.

People are angry. Most people who voted Yes weren't nationalists.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

35-40% Labour voted Yes on Thursday - despite Labour throwing everything they had at them. I don't think many will be going back soon..

Sorry, I don't get this argument. People who voted Labour in previous elections are somehow going to vote 'no' because 'their party' told them to? People don't vote like that. People vote in a more independent manner than that. They might vote labour but also have thought 'yes' on the balance of what they thought was right, not what the SNP thought was right or some other cunt in the 'yes' campaign thought was right. And they might still hope for a labour future, believe in a labour movement.

There is no contradiction here.

 

[weepiper]

he was kept away from the campaign for that very reason.



wonder how he's feeling now. these guys got majorly blackmailed/ guilted into voting No by Labour and it will be interesting to see how they respond to the realisation they've been used.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

How did you sort those tweets?

 

[TheHoodedClaw]

View attachment 61330

You'd think there would be something to be learned from trying to use a random sampling of social media posts to prove something. Seems like actual ballots more truly reflect the electorate.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Nah, all the dupes who voted 'no' are regretting it already. Fools that they were.

 

[where to]

You'd think there would be something to be learned from trying to use a random sampling of social media posts to prove something. Seems like actual ballots more truly reflect the electorate.

woooosh.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

woooosh.

Wooosh what?

It's not actually random sampling, though, is it?

 

[TheHoodedClaw]

woooosh.

Sorry, what? You'll have to explain.

 

[redsquirrel]

woooosh.

What are you talking about HoodedClaw's point was a perfectly reasonable one, particularly the higher internet presence of YES IMO was part of the reason why some YES supporters thought that the polls were wrong and that they would win.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

weepiper has posted a content-free sample of tweets. She needs to say how she came about that sample for it to mean anything. Otherwise it is an absurd waste of everyone's time.

 

[where to]

What are you talking about HoodedClaw's point was a perfectly reasonable one, particularly the higher internet presence of YES IMO was part of the reason why some YES supporters thought that the polls were wrong and that they would win.

Some people are apparently already having regrets, as I had wondered about. That was Weepipers point. There was no suggestion of anything more than that.

 

[where to]

weepiper has posted a content-free sample of tweets. She needs to say how she came about that sample for it to mean anything. Otherwise it is an absurd waste of everyone's time.

Do you realise how ridiculous you sound?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Do you realise how ridiculous you sound?

This kind of lazy shit should be jumped on. IMO.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Some people are apparently already having regrets, as I had wondered about. That was Weepipers point. There was no suggestion of anything more than that.

Nah, there was no point at all.' Some people, who I've sorted, are saying this.'

I could sort a group saying the opposite.

So what.

 

[redsquirrel]

Some people are apparently already having regrets, as I had wondered about. That was Weepipers point. There was no suggestion of anything more than that.

Rubbish there's the suggestion that this is a significant number of people, not merely just some people. And trying to us FB to gauge numbers is a bad way of doing that.

 

[farmerbarleymow]

Nah, there was no point at all.' Some people, who I've sorted, are saying this.'

I could sort a group saying the opposite.

So what.

I agree. And when you're dealing with the millions of total votes, it means nothing if twenty people say they regret voting the way they did, apart from representing those twenty people.

And five of them don't even say which way they actually voted - they could be regretting voting Yes for all we know!

 

[littlebabyjesus]

*hashtag* "post here if you regret voting no"

 

[TheHoodedClaw]

It's bizarre that anyone would use a small random sample of twitter to try and support a point of view. It's not like there's been a big vote with a big turnout recently that kind of put the kibosh on that sort of analysis. "Every window I see has a Yes poster in it!"

 

[weepiper]

It's a picture off twitter someone has 'sorted' by presumably searching twitter for 'regret no' or similar search terms and it represents nothing other than some people on twitter saying they regret their vote. Jesus.

 

[where to]

Fucking hell.

Nobody is trying to rewrite the result here. I'm just suggesting Labour may lose some supporters over this, and weepiper has shown some people already have regrets.

Not sure who you people are but the way you're jumping on this is fucking weird. I may have missed the context to this?