Alex Salmond: A second Scottish referendum is inevitible

[Macro]

If you had actually read the thread you would know that I have already explained multiple times why the next referendum will be completely democratic no matter how soon it happens.

As in "we'll keep democratically asking the same question until you fools give us the correct answer ffs"?

 

[lovelyhead]

I have read this thread

You obviously haven't. I think any rational person would agree with my view that the people are sovereign and if they want another referendum then that is what they should have. It isn't up to Cameron to decide on behalf of the people of Scotland if or when they have another referendum.

I think he meant if there was another referendum now the result would still be a no vote, which the polling numbers you posted still seem to suggest (even if it is narrow).

You haven't read what was written.

They said "I don't think the SNP will get as high a share of the vote if they tried again in a referendum so they would be stupid to try at this moment."

The poll I posted showed that the YES vote has stayed the same or might have risen slightly.

As in "we'll keep democratically asking the same question until you fools give us the correct answer ffs"?

If you read the thread you would know what I have actually said is basically, only if the people want it.

Reading comprehension, knowledge of democracy and indeed knowledge of Scottish affairs is supremely lacking in this thread. Must try harder.

 

[lovelyhead]

How will you decide if people want it? Why not a referendum to decide if there should be an independence referendum? It sounds silly on the face of it, but shirley it's better than assuming people want a referendum based on them voting for the SNP (which is stupid) and having a potentially destabilising, divisive, economically damaging campaign which people don't actually want...

I have already previously stated this in the thread, but if the SNP have a manifesto promise for another referendum and you don't want another referendum, don't vote SNP. It is incredibly simple.

 

[lovelyhead]

It just seems retarded to assume that a vote for a party is a vote for a specific policy, when there isn't an alternative party which is like the SNP but is pro-union, and the SNP platform has a massive range of policies of which independence would only be one. It wouldn't be so bad if it didn't have huge consequences, but a referendum campaign which isn't actually wanted would be, like I said, destabilising, divisive, and economically damaging.

No, what would be "retarded" though would be someone who doesn't want another referendum, voting for the only party in Scotland who promises to hold one if they win the election.

If another referendum is such a red line issue to people then the solution to avoiding one is really simple.

 

[xs2man]

What, don't vote? Hats off to the SNP for decimating the opposition. There is no real choice in Scotland anymore for the majority of non-SNP voters. Labour are in pieces, Lib Dems have been annihilated, and, although I do vote Tory personally, there is a huge stigma attached to a Scottish Tory vote.

So realistically, if you oppose another referendum, who do you vote for? There isn't anyone, because the only other way is to vote tactically if you want to stop the SNP, and many just aren't prepared to vote for a party they don't want to vote for, just to stop a single policy from a party they might actually be inclined to vote for otherwise (mores the pity).

The problem is now that the SNP have around 50% of the Scottish vote. And whilst I don't really feel that is enough of a mandate for another referrendum, on account of the recent one results reflecting the will of the majority, and the SNP share of votes not being suitably higher than in, say, the last MSP election.

Next year will be telling though. If the SNP should get, say, 60%+ of the vote in the MSP elections, assuming another high turnout in elections, then I think there could be an argument for another referendum, assuming it is in their manifesto. As this is a sizeable increase in voting share. But if it remains at 50%, or thereabouts, or increases share only with a decrease in turnout (compared to the indy vote, or the last General Election), then the mandate simply isn't there, as it is a similar result to the previous elections, and therefore shows no major swing towards a want for independence post ref.

The SNP have been good at mobilising it's supporters, but it may well be the case that the No voters turned out for this important referendum, to get the result they wished, but are otherwise disinterested in Scottish elections. So if opposition parties get a similar number of votes as the last Scottish elections, but the SNP see their surge, as I expect they will, then that doesn't really show an increased appetite for independence, just a more efficient mobilisation of separatists, compared to mobilisation of unionists.

 

[[TW]Fox]

No, what would be "retarded" though would be someone who doesn't want another referendum, voting for the only party in Scotland who promises to hold one if they win the election.

What if they agree with every other policy they have except independence, though?

Are they not allowed to vote because people like you will then claim they support independence if they do? How democratic

Newsflash: Almost nobody will 100% support every single pledge in a manifesto released by the party they vote for.

A vote for the SNP is a vote for the SNP, not a vote for Scottish independence. The vote for that was last year. Sorry you didn't get your own way. Thats democracy for you. What is all the more galling about this is if YES had one the referendum do you think there would have been any chance of the No brigade holding another one to try and stop it? Of course not! Voting Yes was a one-way street, voting no seems like it will continually lead to countless referendums until eventually enough of the No voters are sufficiently sick to death of it all to give up.

 

[lovelyhead]

What, don't vote? Hats off to the SNP for decimating the opposition. There is no real choice in Scotland anymore for the majority of non-SNP voters. Labour are in pieces, Lib Dems have been annihilated, and, although I do vote Tory personally, there is a huge stigma attached to a Scottish Tory vote.

So realistically, if you oppose another referendum, who do you vote for? There isn't anyone, because the only other way is to vote tactically if you want to stop the SNP, and many just aren't prepared to vote for a party they don't want to vote for, just to stop a single policy from a party they might actually be inclined to vote for otherwise (mores the pity).

The problem is now that the SNP have around 50% of the Scottish vote. And whilst I don't really feel that is enough of a mandate for another referrendum, on account of the recent one results reflecting the will of the majority, and the SNP share of votes not being suitably higher than in, say, the last MSP election.

Next year will be telling though. If the SNP should get, say, 60%+ of the vote in the MSP elections, assuming another high turnout in elections, then I think there could be an argument for another referendum, assuming it is in their manifesto. As this is a sizeable increase in voting share. But if it remains at 50%, or thereabouts, or increases share only with a decrease in turnout (compared to the indy vote, or the last General Election), then the mandate simply isn't there, as it is a similar result to the previous elections, and therefore shows no major swing towards a want for independence post ref.

To gain 60% of the vote during a Scottish election is nearly impossible due to the voting system.

In the last Scottish election the SNP won 45% of the constituency votes and went on to hold the referendum. This was the biggest share of the vote any party has ever had during a Scottish election.

The whole Scottish voting system is set up in such a way that it is very difficult for any one party to hold a majority. It was designed this way deliberately in order to make it easier for unionist party's to have the overall majority when it comes to votes. Power devolved is power retained.

All the SNP need to do to justify having another referendum (and it is no small task), assuming they have a manifesto promise for a referendum, is to gain a majority in the Scottish parliament.

Setting arbitrary percentages for the SNP to achieve is pretty ridiculous due to the voting system.

What if they agree with every other policy they have except independence, though?

Are they not allowed to vote because people like you will then claim they support independence if they do? How democratic

Newsflash: Almost nobody will 100% support every single pledge in a manifesto released by the party they vote for.

A vote for the SNP is a vote for the SNP, not a vote for Scottish independence. The vote for that was last year. Sorry you didn't get your own way. Thats democracy for you. What is all the more galling about this is if YES had one the referendum do you think there would have been any chance of the No brigade holding another one to try and stop it? Of course not! Voting Yes was a one-way street, voting no seems like it will continually lead to countless referendums until eventually enough of the No voters are sufficiently sick to death of it all to give up.

I'll be honest I didn't even read to the end of your post. Your first three paragraphs are just ridiculous.

It is just a stupid argument to make. If they are proposing holding another referendum and this is something you just do not want no matter if you agree with every other policy, then do not vote for them.

A referendum is serious business. There are other parties available to vote for even as a protest vote. If people opposed to another referendum felt so strongly against it, they could organize and tactically vote for Labour (north britain branch) to stop it happening.

I really can't understand how people can seriously argue about this?

Simply put, if you vote SNP when they have a manifesto commitment for a referendum you are voting for that referendum. If you vote for them under those circumstances and you really don't want a referendum then you are a complete and utter moron.

It is like going into a bakery where all they sell is out of date moldy cakes apart from the one cake that is the most amazing tasty cake ever created that is fresh out of the oven. The only problem is it contains peanuts which you are allergic to. The baker makes it extremely clear that the cake contains peanuts by having the BBC and all the other MSM clearly broadcast the fact. You are aware that it contains peanuts but proceed to eat it anyway. You go into anaphylactic shock. If you then go on to blame the baker you are a complete idiot.

 

[[TW]Fox]

So you 100% support every manifesto page of every party you ever vote for?

 

[lovelyhead]

So you 100% support every manifesto page of every party you ever vote for?

If you still don't get it by now there is no hope for you.

 

[xs2man]

To gain 60% of the vote during a Scottish election is nearly impossible due to the voting system.

In the last Scottish election the SNP won 45% of the constituency votes and went on to hold the referendum. This was the biggest share of the vote any party has ever had during a Scottish election.

The whole Scottish voting system is set up in such a way that it is very difficult for any one party to hold a majority. It was designed this way deliberately in order to make it easier for unionist party's to have the overall majority when it comes to votes. Power devolved is power retained.

All the SNP need to do to justify having another referendum (and it is no small task), assuming they have a manifesto promise for a referendum, is to gain a majority in the Scottish parliament.

Setting arbitrary percentages for the SNP to achieve is pretty ridiculous due to the voting system.

I wasn't talking about votes in separate elements of the election. Or how that equates to seats or any of that. I'm talking about their share of TOTAL votes. You do know how numbers work?

In 2011 there were 3,980,206 votes in total. Of this, the SNP took 1,779,336 votes, so around 44.7% of all the votes cast in the election. Which really means there were 2,200,870 votes that WEREN'T for the SNP or their policies.

Now I think it is fair to assume that the SNP has been successful in their mobilisation of support, but this didn't result in a victory for them. My fear is that their support will be more resilient than the support for the No side. By that, I mean that there will be more No voters who felt they have done their part in the "once in a generation" vote for independence, and will go back to normal duties, which in many cases may well be to not vote. As compared to the more impassioned Yes supporters, who will blindly back the SNP's march for independence at any cost. Such as yourself. Have you ever voted before? I know many Yes voters, who for decades didn't vote, but now will vote everytime for the SNP.

My point is that if the opposition votes to the SNP remain around the 2.2 million mark at the next GE, and the SNP vote increases substantially, that would OBVIOUSLY cause an increase in voting share for the SNP, but this does not necessarily mean there is any more appetite for independence than there was previously. Just that the No vote may well have just returned to normal business, as it believes should be the case. While the Yes campaign has energised it's supporters.

I am all for more people becoming politically active mind you. I am firmly of the belief that previous generations have gone through much hardship, and in some cases, death, so that we are free to vote. And I always found it unbelievable that so many refused to grasp this freedom.

But the mobilisation of certain parts of the electorate, does not equal any more appetite for independence than was displayed only 12 months previously.

If you still don't get it by now there is no hope for you.

I feel the same about you.

 

[lovelyhead]

In 2011 there were 3,980,206 votes in total. Of this, the SNP took 1,779,336 votes, so around 44.7% of all the votes cast in the election. Which really means there were 2,200,870 votes that WEREN'T for the SNP or their policies.

That's just the way the system works. The fact is that the SNP managed to get a majority against all the odds. It is near impossible for any party to do much better.

Now I think it is fair to assume that the SNP has been successful in their mobilisation of support, but this didn't result in a victory for them. My fear is that their support will be more resilient than the support for the No side. By that, I mean that there will be more No voters who felt they have done their part in the "once in a generation" vote for independence, and will go back to normal duties, which in many cases may well be to not vote. As compared to the more impassioned Yes supporters, who will blindly back the SNP's march for independence at any cost. Such as yourself. Have you ever voted before? I know many Yes voters, who for decades didn't vote, but now will vote everytime for the SNP.

The YES side will always have a strong core support which I believe will grow stronger as the older, typically NO voters, die off and younger people who are more likely to vote YES become eligible to vote.. If the NO side are defeated via voter apathy then they only have themselves to blame. They obviously wouldn't have cared enough about the union to take action.

My point is that if the opposition votes to the SNP remain around the 2.2 million mark at the next GE, and the SNP vote increases substantially, that would OBVIOUSLY cause an increase in voting share for the SNP, but this does not necessarily mean there is any more appetite for independence than there was previously. Just that the No vote may well have just returned to normal business, as it believes should be the case. While the Yes campaign has energised it's supporters.

Again if the NO side lose due to voter apathy, tough luck.

 

[xs2man]

That's just the way the system works. The fact is that the SNP managed to get a majority against all the odds. It is near impossible for any party to do much better.

Indeed. They have done well. But the point I made, to which this was a response, was a pure numbers exercise. It's not the way "the system" works, but how math works.

The YES side will always have a strong core support which I believe will grow stronger as the older, typically NO voters, die off and younger people who are more likely to vote YES become eligible to vote.. If the NO side are defeated via voter apathy then they only have themselves to blame. They obviously wouldn't have cared enough about the union to take action.

You still aren't getting it though. I don't think the No side would lose through voter apathy. I think the SNP will succeed through this, but I still believe the No side will still come out for any such referendum. But basically what you are saying is that you are counting on Schoolies to win your independence? Presumably because they are too stupid to understand basic economics / political bluster?

Again if the NO side lose due to voter apathy, tough luck.

My point is that increased SNP support does not equal increased independence support, and it's rather ingenuous to believe otherwise frankly.

There is obviously no reasoning with someone who neither understands, nor wishes to understand, reason.

 

[alx]

You haven't read what was written.

They said "I don't think the SNP will get as high a share of the vote if they tried again in a referendum so they would be stupid to try at this moment."

The poll I posted showed that the YES vote has stayed the same or might have risen slightly.

Fair enough, but the yes vote is still less than 50% and from that poll it has only changed slightly (assuming it's actually a fair representation, we all know polls are not perfect).

Obviously if there was a significant swing it would put pressure on for another referendum as you say, but it would have to be quite significant I imagine.

 

[alx]

I'll be honest I didn't even read to the end of your post. Your first three paragraphs are just ridiculous.

It is just a stupid argument to make. If they are proposing holding another referendum and this is something you just do not want no matter if you agree with every other policy, then do not vote for them.

A referendum is serious business. There are other parties available to vote for even as a protest vote. If people opposed to another referendum felt so strongly against it, they could organize and tactically vote for Labour (north britain branch) to stop it happening.

I really can't understand how people can seriously argue about this?

Simply put, if you vote SNP when they have a manifesto commitment for a referendum you are voting for that referendum. If you vote for them under those circumstances and you really don't want a referendum then you are a complete and utter moron.

It is like going into a bakery where all they sell is out of date moldy cakes apart from the one cake that is the most amazing tasty cake ever created that is fresh out of the oven. The only problem is it contains peanuts which you are allergic to. The baker makes it extremely clear that the cake contains peanuts by having the BBC and all the other MSM clearly broadcast the fact. You are aware that it contains peanuts but proceed to eat it anyway. You go into anaphylactic shock. If you then go on to blame the baker you are a complete idiot.

I think you underestimate human stupidity. People will vote SNP because they feel it is there best choice, but don't want independence. You can argue it's stupid,they don't understand politics, they should vote for another party or not vote at all etc (which is probably all true) but it will happen unfortunately whether you like it or not. Therefore to assume everyone who votes for the SNP wants independence is a bit short sighted, but obviously it helps the SNP if they assume this is true.

 

[do_ron_ron]

Is it not reasonable that parliament has ~80% English MPs, given that the population of England is over 80% of the population of the UK?

I am not saying anything about the status quo simply stating a fact.

 

[do_ron_ron]

How is that any different to the people of Aberdeen complaining that they are 'ruled over' by Edinburgh?

Edinburgh is a hell of a lot nearer than the deep south of the UK.

He was born there and is of Scottish heritage but if you insist Gordon Brown also ruled the nation and spent his entire political career as MP for Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath, which last time I checked was... Scottish.

I was making the point about Bliar may have been born in Scotland but was like a lot of people who leave the country of their birth and become more patriotic than natives of their new country. Bliar spent only a short time in Scotland, as a child he was in Australia and Durham.

 

[do_ron_ron]

But they're happy enough to be ruled over by Brussels and the EU instead?

The power that Brussels have is exaggerated by the right wing press for their own agenda.

 

[Macro]

I have already previously stated this in the thread, but if the SNP have a manifesto promise for another referendum and you don't want another referendum, don't vote SNP. It is incredibly simple.

A promise for another referendum would be just a single issue in the manifesto, many Scots would like to vote for the SNP based on a myriad of other issues and manifesto pledges (including a strong Scottish government within the Union)which benefit them and have nothing to do with referendum on independence to which they have already democratically expressed their view recently. Political manipulation at it's finest there and speaks amply of the disregard the Nationalists have for the Scottish people.

Three facts remain you are avoiding with your witty(?) snipes, reliance on wings over Scotland and vague assertions it's democracy in action (Biohazzrd, is that you back? It is isn't it )

• The YES campaign alliance backed by SNP leadership positioned a "once in a generation, or lifetime" referendum on independence.
• The majority of Scots voted against Independence.
• The majority of Scots did not vote for the SNP.

Please stop trying to pretend you're speaking on behalf of the Scottish people, they've spoken and clearly at that.
By any measure you're done here - give it up.

 

[lovelyhead]

You still aren't getting it though. I don't think the No side would lose through voter apathy. I think the SNP will succeed through this, but I still believe the No side will still come out for any such referendum.

I have read this a few times but it doesn't make sense and contradicts itself.

But basically what you are saying is that you are counting on Schoolies to win your independence? Presumably because they are too stupid to understand basic economics / political bluster?

This argument is so weak. I could equally say that the NO side relies on past it, stuck in their ways coffin dodgers to win.

My point is that increased SNP support does not equal increased independence support, and it's rather ingenuous to believe otherwise frankly.

Nice straw man argument.

There is obviously no reasoning with someone who neither understands, nor wishes to understand, reason.

I know how you feel!

Fair enough, but the yes vote is still less than 50% and from that poll it has only changed slightly (assuming it's actually a fair representation, we all know polls are not perfect).

Obviously if there was a significant swing it would put pressure on for another referendum as you say, but it would have to be quite significant I imagine.

Well the SNP are only going to go for another referendum if they believe they have a chance of winning. I would say a 50/50 chance is pretty good odds and we are very close to that.

I think you underestimate human stupidity. People will vote SNP because they feel it is there best choice, but don't want independence. You can argue it's stupid,they don't understand politics, they should vote for another party or not vote at all etc (which is probably all true)

I am glad you finally agree with me!

Therefore to assume everyone who votes for the SNP wants independence is a bit short sighted

Good job I don't think that then.

You claim that people shouldn't vote SNP if there's a specific policy they disagree with (which I think is stupid when the platform is so wide, but hey-ho). But if that's the case, doesn't it work the other way round? So if people actually want independence, and the SNP was the only party offering it, wouldn't people organise voting for them and they'd get an overall majority* quite easily if there was a majority in favour of independence?

*As a proportion of total votes... I'm not talking seats.

I am sure many people already do vote for the SNP who may not agree with all of their other policies but see voting for them as a means to an end. I would say the same thing about those people too though. If there is a policy that you just can not abide by, if it is a line you simply can not cross, no matter how much you want independence, then you would be an idiot for voting for them and then complaining about that policy when they were elected.

A promise for another referendum would be just a single issue in the manifesto, many Scots would like to vote for the SNP based on a myriad of other issues and manifesto pledges (including a strong Scottish government within the Union)which benefit them and have nothing to do with referendum on independence to which they have already democratically expressed their view recently. Political manipulation at it's finest there and speaks amply of the disregard the Nationalists have for the Scottish people.

See my last post.

Three facts remain you are avoiding with your witty(?) snipes, reliance on wings over Scotland and vague assertions it's democracy in action (Biohazzrd, is that you back? It is isn't it )

I don't think I have relied on Wings for any info so far in this thread. Not that there is anything wrong with using info from Wings as there is a lot of truth on that site that you will never hear anywhere else. If you choose not to believe it that is up to you.

• The YES campaign alliance backed by SNP leadership positioned a "once in a generation, or lifetime" referendum on independence.
• The majority of Scots voted against Independence.
• The majority of Scots did not vote for the SNP.

Well for your first point, who are the SNP to decide if the people want another referendum or not? Just because they said once in a generation, which I believe Alex Salmond said was just his opinion, doesn't stop the people from demanding one any time they like.

I agree with your 2nd point. Last year, before all the promises were broken, a majority of Scots voted NO.

As for your third point 50% of Scottish voters did vote for the SNP which is probably the strongest mandate any political party in the UK has had for as long as anyone can remember. Never quite good enough for you unionists though. (and before you say it, again, no this does not mean they have a mandate to hold a referendum )

Please stop trying to pretend you're speaking on behalf of the Scottish people, they've spoken and clearly at that.
By any measure you're done here - give it up.

Another nice straw man.

 

[alx]

Well the SNP are only going to go for another referendum if they believe they have a chance of winning. I would say a 50/50 chance is pretty good odds and we are very close to that.

You say close to that, but how many polls is that bass on? Extensive polling would need to be undertaken before it would be believed it was a realistic number, and even then it would probably need to be 55+% yes as when it comes to the actual vote there always tends to be a shift to no.

Will be interesting to see how it varies over the next few years.