Alex Salmond: A second Scottish referendum is inevitible

[lovelyhead]

I used to be a member of the Automobile Association. So again, are you a paid up member of the SNP?

Are you a paid up member of the Lib Dems?

 

[ubersonic]

But it is the English (in nearly every general election for the last 100 years) who choose who is in power in Westminster.

It was Scotland that decided the last one...

No it's not.

Yes it is.

We had this discussion a few pages back.

Can you link to that? I don't recall discussing that with you :S

 

[lovelyhead]

It was Scotland that decided the last one...

Really. I thought it was a majority of the English voting for the Tories.

 

[KillBoY_UK]

This was demonstrated at the last general election. It wouldn't have made any difference if Labour won every seat in Scotland.

The SNP didn't field any candidates outside of Scotland so where would have been the chance to rest of the UK to vote for the same as Scotland. Quite a few would people in the rest of UK would have voted for Nicola sturgeon if given the chance.

If the SNP really cared for fair and progressive politics for Scotland and the UK (there words not mine) They wouldn't call them self the Scottish Nationalist party and would pitch candidates elsewhere.

As a side note, it fine for people to want Scottish independence but if you have to use a economic argument they its then not relay about independence its about being better off. Dont get me wrong wanting things to be better economically is fine too but using independence as a argument is abit of a fallacy imo.

Something tells me you will disagree and count me as a anti Scottish unionist English dog who wants to repress the Scottish people.

 

[ubersonic]

Really. I thought it was a majority of the English voting for the Tories.

Nope, it was the majority of Scotland voting for the SNP that swung it, basically Sturgeon told everyone that if they voted SNP instead of Labour then they would still get Labour in Westminster but also extra deals for Scotland that she would squeeze out of Miliband for her support. This cost Labour 40 seats in Scotland and dozens more in England/Wales while at the same time gaining the Tories seats in England (because nobody wanted an SNP puppet Miliband as PM).

And the result was a majority Tory government which has set about hurting the UK (including Scotland). Plus the SNP got some MP's in London, who haven't really done anything yet, apart from act childish, cause a ruckus oh and hypocritically interfere in votes that only affect England (because causing trouble for the UK/England plays towards their goals of independence).

 

[KillBoY_UK]

If we won with 55% of the vote and the NO side wanted another referendum, I would have no issue with them having one so long as they managed to get a pro union party elected into holyrood with a manifesto promise to hold another referendum.

I am all for democracy you see.

The problem with that instance it after interdependence even if there was a new vote to want back in the UK it wouldn't be up to Scotland ultimately to let them in, it would up the the UK Westminster parliament.

 

[lovelyhead]

The SNP didn't field any candidates outside of Scotland so where would have been the chance to rest of the UK to vote for the same as Scotland. Quite a few would people in the rest of UK would have voted for Nicola sturgeon if given the chance.

If the SNP really cared for fair and progressive politics for Scotland and the UK (there words not mine) They wouldn't call them self the Scottish Nationalist party and would pitch candidates elsewhere.

Why would they do that? They want to be separate from the UK. Why would they lend credence to the UK by fielding candidates outside of Scotland?

 

[BuffetSlayer]

But since the referendum the momentum has been with the YES side. YES and NO are now basically level in the polls. If the oil price thing was really important to people then you would expect to see the polls going in the opposite direction.

They are. Slowly, but definitely the support for independence has peaked and is now sloping off and has been since earlier this year.

The price of oil is just not something the average Joe really thinks about. In fact the most likely time someone is going to think about the price of oil, is when they are filling up their car and a low oil price is probably seen as a positive in that regard.

So you are advocating independence even if it is gained through voter ignorance, no matter what the damage to Scotland is? Personally, I think you should give voters more credit, though. Whether or not you think oil prices are a concern for the average Joe does not mean general fiscal policy is not. An economic plan has to be plausible, credible and deliverable and I think as more information comes to light there will be steady decline for the yes campaign as they realise the fiscal policy of Salmond (and the SNP) was full of holes. Holes do not put food on the table or keep people in jobs and that is what the average Joe is concerned about. That is not to say a credible manifesto could not be made, but herein lies the problem - you need voters to believe in it and have the faith to make the jump into the unknown. Who knows, perhaps a Tory government for 5 years may just be the catalyst for people to make that jump. But perhaps not. Don't forget that further Devolution may also reduce yes voters.

The unionists like to point to the oil price and make a big deal out of it, but for the average person it is a non issue.

How do you know that? It seems like it was a big enough issue to hand victory to the no campaign. It played an important role in Salmond's fiscal vision, so how do you propose that hole in funding will be filled? Or are you suggesting it is not needed? If it is not needed why did Salmond make it such a key part of his Campaign?

During the next referendum, I bet if you could convince the majority of people that they would be no better off but also no worse off, you would get a YES majority.

I agree, but it does not make it true though does it? Any more than it would have made Salmond's promises true if Scotland had voted yes last year.

Convincing people something is true and delivering those promises are two very different things and the political fraternity have a long history of being great at the former and terrible at the latter. The Scottish people are not stupid and whilst I think idealistically many would like to see independence, the cost to them and their future is too great to bear on if and maybe.

 

[lovelyhead]

Nope, it was the majority of Scotland voting for the SNP that swung it, basically Sturgeon told everyone that if they voted SNP instead of Labour then they would still get Labour in Westminster but also extra deals for Scotland that she would squeeze out of Miliband for her support. This cost Labour 40 seats in Scotland and dozens more in England/Wales while at the same time gaining the Tories seats in England (because nobody wanted an SNP puppet Miliband as PM).

And the result was a majority Tory government which has set about hurting the UK (including Scotland). Plus the SNP got some MP's in London, who haven't really done anything yet, apart from act childish, cause a ruckus oh and hypocritically interfere in votes that only affect England (because causing trouble for the UK/England plays towards their goals of independence).

That is a pretty hilarious opinion you hold! Any evidence to back it up?

 

[KillBoY_UK]

Why would they do that? They want to be separate from the UK. Why would they lend credence to the UK by fielding candidates outside of Scotland?

They said they want fair and progressive politics for the rest of the UK or was that a lie? Also you have not answer the question on how the rest of the UK could have voted what Scotland wanted, in this case a majority SNP government.

You and the SNP can't have it both ways in that argument.

 

[Elixir]

No you are simply wrong about that.

Perhaps you might want to read about poll weighting:

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/faq-weighting

This accounts for weighting by demographic. I'm not saying a particular demographic is more likely to respond, I'm saying that Yes voters are more likely to respond than No voters. It's impossible to weight for this given it's exactly what is being polled.

 

[lovelyhead]

They are. Slowly, but definitely the support for independence has peaked and is now sloping off and has been since earlier this year.

Peaked earlier this year eh? Not according to the polls.

SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 1, 2014

http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/20...ndence-by.html

Should Scotland be an independent country?

Yes 52% (+7)
No 48% (-7)

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 2014

http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/20...-goes-pop.html

Imagine that Scotland voted to stay in the EU, but was outvoted by the rest of the UK choosing to leave. In those circumstances, would a second Scottish independence referendum be justified, so that Scotland wasn’t forced out of the EU against its will?

Yes, it would be justified : 45%
No, we should accept the UK-wide result : 41%

SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 2014

http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/20...lls-apart.html

Total who want another independence referendum : 60%
Total who don't want another independence referendum : 28%

Total who want another independence referendum within ten years : 48%
Total who don't want another independence referendum within ten years : 40%

FRIDAY, DECEMBER 12, 2014

http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/20...ehind-snp.html

Should Scotland be an independent country?

Yes 48%
No 45%

TUESDAY, DECEMBER 23, 2014

http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/20...es-50-for.html

Imagine there were another referendum on Scottish independence held today. How would you vote if the question were ‘Should Scotland be an independent country?'

Yes 50% (+3)
No 50% (-3)

MONDAY, FEBRUARY 2, 2015

http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/20...ad-in-jaw.html

Should Scotland be an independent country?

Yes 49% (+1)
No 44% (-1)

With Don't Knows removed, that works out as...

Yes 52% (n/c)
No 48% (n/c)

FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 2015

http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/20...erons-its.html

Want another independence referendum within the next ten years?

Yes 59%
No 41%

Want another independence referendum at some point?

Yes 80%
No 20%

THURSDAY, MARCH 19, 2015

http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/20...er-second.html

Should Scotland be an independent country?

Yes 50.9% (+3.2)
No 49.1% (-3.2)

SATURDAY, MAY 2, 2015

http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/20...ading-its.html

If there was another referendum on Scottish independence tomorrow and in the referendum voters will again be asked, "Should Scotland be an independent country?", do you think you would vote 'yes' or 'no'? (Don't Knows excluded)

Yes 49.4%
No 50.6%

If there was to be another referendum on Scottish independence when, if at all, do you think this referendum should take place?

Should be another referendum at some point : 80.4%
Should NOT be another referendum at some point : 19.6%

Another referendum should take place within ten years : 58.6%
Another referendum should NOT take place within ten years : 41.4%


SUNDAY, MAY 10, 2015

http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/20...crease-in.html

Respondents in Scotland only :

Support independence: 52%
Oppose independence: 43%

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 2, 2015

http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/20...-suggests.html

Should Scotland be an independent country?

Yes 53%
No 44%

An economic plan has to be plausible, credible and deliverable and I think as more information comes to light there will be steady decline for the yes campaign as they realise the fiscal policy of Salmond (and the SNP) was full of holes.

What more is there to come out to change peoples minds?

That is not to say a credible manifesto could not be made, but herein lies the problem - you need voters to believe in it and have the faith to make the jump into the unknown. Who knows, perhaps a Tory government for 5 years may just be the catalyst for people to make that jump. But perhaps not. Don't forget that further Devolution may also reduce yes voters.

The further devolution proposed by the Smith Commission is not going to make people think "Scotland is the most powerful devolved country in the world" as promised by Cameron.

How do you know that? It seems like it was a big enough issue to hand victory to the no campaign. It played an important role in Salmond's fiscal vision, so how do you propose that hole in funding will be filled? Or are you suggesting it is not needed? If it is not needed why did Salmond make it such a key part of his Campaign?

How do you know it was a big part of what convinced people to vote NO. Why wouldn't Salmond crow about how having oil is a huge advantage for Scotland?

I would say that the NO sides fear campaign over pensions was a much bigger vote winner for NO than any worries over oil. The vast majority of over 60's voted NO and I wouldn't be surprised if it was because of the pension threats.

 

[lovelyhead]

The problem with that instance it after interdependence even if there was a new vote to want back in the UK it wouldn't be up to Scotland ultimately to let them in, it would up the the UK Westminster parliament.

I am sure the UK would love us to rejoin seeing as we are "better together"!

They said they want fair and progressive politics for the rest of the UK or was that a lie? Also you have not answer the question on how the rest of the UK could have voted what Scotland wanted, in this case a majority SNP government.

You and the SNP can't have it both ways in that argument.

Whilst they are a part of the UK they want whats best for the people of the UK. That is quite different to fielding candidates outside Scotland and lending credence to the UK.

This accounts for weighting by demographic. I'm not saying a particular demographic is more likely to respond, I'm saying that Yes voters are more likely to respond than No voters. It's impossible to weight for this given it's exactly what is being polled.

You obviously didn't read it then. The vast majority of that article is about political weighting.

 

[grumpysculler]

As I have said numerous times in this thread the only people who haven't accepted the NO result are nutters who think the vote was tampered with somehow.

So you think that you accept the settled will of the Scottish people by campaigning for another referendum in the hope of getting another answer? What is decisive about having a series of votes on the same issue?

As I'm sure you are aware, votes are cast for parties based on the whole manifesto and not single issues. So even if the SNP do get another majority in Holyrood with a manifesto pledge, it is not indicative of a majority desire by the Scottish electorate. Not to mention that another referendum is outwith Holyrood's competence.

 

[Elixir]

You obviously didn't read it then. The vast majority of that article is about political weighting.

Indeed, it summaries how potentially flawed political weighting is even when using a much more established topic such as general election voting behaviour. Can you find me some information on how your accurate independence polls are weighted based on past independence referendum voting behaviour?

Also none of your links above work, you should save the code behind your copy and paste propaganda posts rather than the posted version.

 

[KillBoY_UK]

Whilst they are a part of the UK they want whats best for the people of the UK. That is quite different to fielding candidates outside Scotland and lending credence to the UK.

Turning it on its head you would be fine if say there was a fictional English Nationalist Party, who only candidates in England, you be happy with what you just said ? I guess not as your not even happy with the party's who have candidates in whole of the UK "oppressing Scotland".

 

[ubersonic]

Whilst they are a part of the UK they want whats best for the people of the UK.

Nonsense, if that were true they wouldn't be trying to use their new positions in Westminster to cause trouble and work against the UK.

 

[Five.Stars]

Yes, momentum towards the next referendum that most people want within 10 years. If it were the case that the referendum result was 70% NO and 30% YES then the matter would probably be dead and buried. 45% YES and 55% NO most certainly has not laid the matter to rest.

You can argue the opposite if you like but roughly half of Scotland would disagree.

37% is NOT roughly half of Scotland ya clown.

 

[ubersonic]

37% is NOT roughly half of Scotland ya clown.

It is when the vile tyrannical Westminster parliament don't get to dictate what percentages mean in Scotland!

 

[lovelyhead]

So you think that you accept the settled will of the Scottish people by campaigning for another referendum in the hope of getting another answer? What is decisive about having a series of votes on the same issue?

I would probably agree with you if the vote had went 70% NO. I would probably accept that there won't be another referendum for a long time as it would be clear that only a small minority wanted independence.

55% NO is not a decisive victory though. Especially when you look at the demographics of how people voted. If you removed the over 60's you would be looking at a much closer result. Maybe even a Yes win.

On top of that, since last year the polls have narrowed further suggesting that a lot of people have changed their mind in favour of YES.

The issue of independence will never be done and dusted in the eyes of Independence supporters until the NO side win a referendum with about 70% of the vote. I think at that point we would concede that the issue has been put to bed for a lifetime.

We will continue pushing for another referendum until either that day of defeat or until we gain independence.

As I'm sure you are aware, votes are cast for parties based on the whole manifesto and not single issues. So even if the SNP do get another majority in Holyrood with a manifesto pledge, it is not indicative of a majority desire by the Scottish electorate. Not to mention that another referendum is outwith Holyrood's competence.

I made my views clear on that matter near the start of this thread so can't really be bothered hashing that out again.

Indeed, it summaries how potentially flawed political weighting is even when using a much more established topic such as general election voting behaviour. Can you find me some information on how your accurate independence polls are weighted based on past independence referendum voting behaviour?

Also none of your links above work, you should save the code behind your copy and paste propaganda posts rather than the posted version.

Yes and then it goes on to explain how the different polling companies try to gain the most accurate results possible.

I am sure you can go to each of the polling companies websites to find out how the weight their results.

The links did work when I originally posted them. The results can all be found on the ScotGoesPop website.

Turning it on its head you would be fine if say there was a fictional English Nationalist Party, who only candidates in England, you be happy with what you just said ? I guess not as your not even happy with the party's who have candidates in whole of the UK "oppressing Scotland".

Yes of course I would. Why would I have an issue with an England only party. If they managed to win a majority at Westminster it would further the cause for Scottish independence and probably wouldn't be any different than having the Tories in power!

Nonsense, if that were true they wouldn't be trying to use their new positions in Westminster to cause trouble and work against the UK.

OK examples please.