Alex Salmond: A second Scottish referendum is inevitible

[lovelyhead]

Damning indictment of the failure of the SNP's independence campaign there then.

Nah not at all. The unionists have total dominance over traditional media outlets. The YES campaign utilised the internet and social media in a far superior manner then the NO side and still do. Hence the reason the younger you are the more likely you are to vote YES.

 

[The_Abyss]

Nah not at all. The unionists have total dominance over traditional media outlets. The YES campaign utilised the internet and social media in a far superior manner then the NO side and still do. Hence the reason the younger you are the more likely you are to vote YES.

Hence why you're so willing to marginalise pensioners and polarise the debate. The population is ageing, but the independence movement wants to ignore this to get into power.

One would really hope that an independence movement would be founded on unity and a common purpose and belief rather than discrimination and kicking the demographic challenge can further down the road for the next generation to deal with.

 

[Woden]

Nah not at all. The unionists have total dominance over traditional media outlets. The YES campaign utilised the internet and social media in a far superior manner then the NO side and still do. Hence the reason the younger you are the more likely you are to vote YES.

So the SNP ignored the older generation on purpose? And never intended to win this referendum but gain ground for some hypothetical future vote.

 

[Mark3h]

The main issue with the SNP's approach to independance is that its very much "independance at any cost".

Not "independance for the good of the scottish people", which many seem blind to.

How many companies are in Scotland, purely for the cheap rent but economic ties to London.
You gain independance, how many will stay? An unstable and uncertain economy that won't be the GBP anymore? Cue offices moving to the north of England, very very quickly.

 

[grumpysculler]

Nah. I would just prefer it if they weren't lied to about their pensions!

I'd prefer it if we weren't led to about the effect of independence on our eu membership, our currency, our public finances, etc.

The main stream media gave the Yes campaign a very easy ride.

You seem to want to take us back to an era where some groups are considered inferior. There's a word for that...

 

[BuffetSlayer]

Nah not at all. The unionists have total dominance over traditional media outlets. The YES campaign utilised the internet and social media in a far superior manner then the NO side and still do. Hence the reason the younger you are the more likely you are to vote YES.

Or perhaps younger people spend too much time believing the drivel they read on the internet, have no life experience and are easily led and influenced is the reason the largest portion of yes votes comes from them.

In comparison, older people are generally more experienced in life so know what politicians are like and have a greater understanding of consequences on the country they live in, have more rounded opinions and are not as easily fooled by people like Alex Salmond and you.

Just saying.

I notice you have still not responded to earlier points I have made

 

[grumpysculler]

I wonder why it's only the correlation with age that lovelyhead points out? The Yes vote was correlated with low educational acheivement and low socioeconomic status.

I think it is generally accepted that as we age we become more conservative and risk averse. That isn't a bad thing and attacking universal suffrage the way some Yes campaigners have done is abhorrent. It has no place in a civilised society.

 

[platypus]

I bet it'd have gone away had YES won 51/49...

The headlines sort of write themselves really don't they in a 49% no vote? As if the nationalists would just sit back and happily allow people discuss a reunification referendum. They'd be all over the "facist" Westminster for trying to go against the "will of the people".

It's funny how it's only the will of the people when it suits the nationalist agenda.

Or perhaps younger people spend too much time believing the drivel they read on the internet, have no life experience and are easily led and influenced is the reason the largest portion of yes votes comes from them.

In comparison, older people are generally more experienced in life so know what politicians are like and have a greater understanding of consequences on the country they live in, have more rounded opinions and are not as easily fooled by people like Alex Salmond and you.

Exactly the reason the voting age was lowered to 16. Salmond thought he could get away with whipping up nationalist fervour amongst younger people as they are more easily led.

 

[BuffetSlayer]

The headlines sort of write themselves really don't they in a 49% no vote? As if the nationalists would just sit back and happily allow people discuss a reunification referendum. They'd be all over the "facist" Westminster for trying to go against the "will of the people".

It's funny how it's only the will of the people when it suits the nationalist agenda.

I pointed out the exact same irony a few pages back and lovelyhead has still refused to comment on it (and other issues with the SNP).

Pretty sure it is because he knows he has no answers that will not make him look silly and highlight his own double standards

 

[lovelyhead]

So the SNP ignored the older generation on purpose?

Of course not. I thought what I was writing was an easy concept to understand.

The YES campaign tried to reach older voters but their only method of doing so was via TV, Radio and newspapers.

All three of those avenues are controlled by the unionists.

And never intended to win this referendum but gain ground for some hypothetical future vote.

Wat?

 

[Schlong&Stable]

Or, is responding to the will of the people.

If a clear majority of Scots genuinely want out, I can't see a good argument for forcing them to stay in.

On the other hand, a referendum every fortnight is clearly a non-starter.

There has to be a balance, and the SNP won't call for a second one until they're pretty confident of winning it, because if they call for it, get it and lose it again, the hurdle to getting a third one will be very high.

The problem with the "clear majority" argument is that peoples views wax and wane depending on current affairs. It may be that my fellow Scots are a little more secession minded today than they will be next year, and much more than they would be in a decade. We can't have referendums every time people get frustrated with Westminster.

There was obviously some secessionist sentiments brewing since 1997, so a referendum was a good idea. The question was asked and the matter settled. A strong British government should use that mandate to refuse another referendum for a generation at least. If the sentiment is still strong in thirty five or so years, then there can be another referendum.

Also, on a different note: The argument that the older generation are holding back the younger is laughable. As the current youth get older, they too will move towards Unionism. 'Revolution' is a young persons game, because they've so little to lose. People with homes, money and a lifetime of experience better understand the risks and therefore tend to eschew highly risky propositions.

 

[lovelyhead]

The problem with the "clear majority" argument is that peoples views wax and wane depending on current affairs. It may be that my fellow Scots are a little more secession minded today than they will be next year, and much more than they would be in a decade. We can't have referendums every time people get frustrated with Westminster.

Or it may be that my fellow Scots are a little less secession minded today than they will be next year, and much less than they would be in a decade! Works both ways see.

If the sentiment is still strong in thirty five or so years, then there can be another referendum.

How very kind of you to allow us to hold another one!

Also, on a different note: The argument that the older generation are holding back the younger is laughable. As the current youth get older, they too will move towards Unionism. 'Revolution' is a young persons game, because they've so little to lose. People with homes, money and a lifetime of experience better understand the risks and therefore tend to eschew highly risky propositions.

That is pure opinion and doesn't even hold up to even a little scrutiny. People between the ages of 25 - 54 were slightly in favor of Independence. These people had more at stake than pensioners. They were also better informed. It was the pension lies what did it.

 

[Schlong&Stable]

Or it may be that my fellow Scots are a little less secession minded today than they will be next year, and much less than they would be in a decade! Works both ways see.

We had a referendum which required people to think about the long term. They chose to remain in the Union. There is no benefit in second guessing that decision in the short to medium term.

That is pure opinion and doesn't even hold up to even a little scrutiny. People between the ages of 25 - 54 were slightly in favor of Independence. These people had more at stake than pensioners. They were also better informed. It was the pension lies what did it.

Are you denying that people become more conservative and more inclined towards the status quo as they get older?

The people who are in the 25-54 bracket will become more Unionist as they get older. Or at the very least, they will become more risk adverse and thus tacit Unionists.

Anyway, only 18% of the population is currently over 65 and the referendum was a defeat for the nats. By 2035, that number is estimated to be nearer to 25%. So if we both agree the pensioners tend to be more Unionist, well.. time is ticking for any potential secession.

Anyway, another referendum would be a chuckle at the moment. With even Russia giving up on oil revenues (they estimate longterm oil prices of $50 bbl) in favour of manufacturing and farming, I struggle to see how Sturgeon will make the economic argument.

 

[lovelyhead]

We had a referendum which required people to think about the long term. They chose to remain in the Union. There is no benefit in second guessing that decision in the short to medium term.

Indeed! Thanks for helping to make my point.

The majority of people who are actually going to be around for the long term chose to vote for independence. The old yins were worried about the short term issue of whether or not their pensions were going to be stopped (which they weren't).

 

[Schlong&Stable]

Indeed! Thanks for helping to make my point.

The majority of people who are actually going to be around for the long term chose to vote for independence. The old yins were worried about the short term issue of whether or not their pensions were going to be stopped (which they weren't).

Wriggle, wriggle, squirm, squirm.

The over 65's don't make up a large enough percentage of the population to have carried the referendum on their own. They would only represent about 20% of those who were able to vote.

Clearly a large proportion of the under 65's also favoured remaining in the Union. A percentage which will grow with every passing year as people become older and wiser. But by all means, let us return to this in 225-35 years when all the current generation of OAP's is gone.

 

[platypus]

I find it pretty hilarious that he's basing a huge amount of his argument on this fallacy that people of pension age only voted No because of pension scaremongering.

As if 1.47million+ (as of the 2011 census, but not by vote numbers) people were unable to make a decision based on anything else.

 

[lovelyhead]

Wriggle, wriggle, squirm, squirm.

The over 65's don't make up a large enough percentage of the population to have carried the referendum on their own. They would only represent about 20% of those who were able to vote.

Clearly a large proportion of the under 65's also favoured remaining in the Union. A percentage which will grow with every passing year as people become older and wiser. But by all means, let us return to this in 225-35 years when all the current generation of OAP's is gone.

I am not saying they did carry the vote on their own. However 20% is a very large proportion if a vast majority of them vote one way. People between the ages of 25 - 54 voted YES with a slight majority. The old yins pushed the NO's over the line fueled by short term thinking.

I find it pretty hilarious that he's basing a huge amount of his argument on this fallacy that people of pension age only voted No because of pension scaremongering.

As if 1.47million+ (as of the 2011 census, but not by vote numbers) people were unable to make a decision based on anything else.

It was one of the main reasons. But there was also the fact that the majority of the old yins were getting their information from unionist sources.

 

[[TW]Fox]

It was one of the main reasons.

How can you possibly know that?

The 16 year olds are well educated because of the internet point is hilarious as well - just because you can find lots of information online doesn't necessarily mean you are able to process it rationally and come to a rational viewpoint. For more information see the MH17 thread, lots of information there, lots of barking mad contradictory opinions formed as a result.

The ability to rationalise and understand information is something which grows with age. It's something very few of us can do at 16 but most of us can probably hope to be able to do at say 55.

 

[Schlong&Stable]

It was one of the main reasons. But there was also the fact that the majority of the old yins were getting their information from unionist sources.

No one knows what the actual demographics for each vote was, never mind their reasoning.

 

[grumpysculler]

The old yins pushed the NO's over the line fueled by short term thinking.

Provide a source for that or shut up about it.

It is also perfectly reasonable that, having spent 40+ years voting in elections they saw through the veneer put forward by the politicians and realised that the union is better for us all.

The young whippersnappers, not having such life experience of politics, were more taken in by the empty promises.