Poll: The GD Referendum – Scottish Independence

[Mynight]

Curiosity killed the cat.

 

[arc@css]

Yay.

 

[therealpieman]

I kinda want them to get independence just from a curiosity standpoint. I am intrigued by what might follow.

Same here, it seems such a huge task to take on that how it actually works in practise is interesting to me.

 

[anything I don't mind]

I want them to Win and then i want them to socialise all their industries and increase the minimum wage and all the rest of the crazy stuff the lefts up there want to do. Then i can sit back and watch it all fail and use it as an example of another failed socialists state.

 

[div0]

As much as I think that Scotland should remain part of the UK... I do not think we can afford it.
If the NO vote wins then Salmond will hold Westminster to the pledges that have been made and a boat load more, Scotland will want to spend, spend, spend and want the south to pay the bills.... We just cannot afford it.
If they go independent the UK will be better off financially

I really don't like to see this side of the argument either. The whole discussion is causing division, even if the vote is to remain together.

There is no doubt in my mind that the south east of England in particular generate a large amount of money for the UK as a whole, which potentially benefits everyone including the north of England, Scotland and Wales. But then there has historically be a huge amount of investment made in that area too, in terms of transport links and infrastructure. If such investment were to have been made elsewhere, then things would probably be different now.

For me the topic of independence is not about who gives and who takes. I recognise that a strong economic hub such as London is a huge benefit to the whole UK. But equally I believe that everyone (UK, London, Scotland, everywhere) would be worse off if we chose to accept this level of division.

 

[Tunney]

It's not about Scots, it's about the people of Scotland. In other words those living there. That's the only way you can accurately reflect the will of the people, when you start involving those who have left, at which point do you stop?

An independent Scotland has a profound impact on Scottish people currently living in other parts of the UK. It affects their identity and their livelihoods.

In my opinion, all British citizens who were born in Scotland or spent a significant part of the childhood in Scotland should get to vote on such an important and irreversible matter.

 

[FoxEye]

Does anyone think there's even a slight chance of Yes winning tho? What's the betting most of the undecided block end up voting No?

 

[McPhee]

A no vote is a vote to keep the status quo. Why do you think Cameron didn't want a devo-max option on the ballot?

The parties have been rushing around Scotland making lots of promises but we are already seeing English backbench MPs saying they will not support the changes. Milliband is even promising Lords reform! Labour has promised this for the last 3+ elections and never did it, and they scuppered Lib Dem plans for reform in this parlilament! They don't believe in the changes they are promising, and once everything has died down after a no vote, nothing significant will have changed.

(I'm English btw so not a nationalist Scot!)

A 'No' vote was intended to be a vote for the status quo. However, 'No' was supposed to win by a county mile, giving a clear mandate for the status quo to be maintained. 'Devo Max' wasn't an option because Westminster believed a 'Yes' result was close to impossible - in a clear Yes/No vote, Westminster believed it couldn't lose.

Had Westminster known the vote would be this close, some form of enhanced devolution would have been on the table as a third option. Over the past few weeks, there has been a clear attempt by Westminster to tie further devolution to a 'No' vote. They now know the Scottish populace wants change (frankly, I think the majority of the UK population wants change), and that they want it enough to at least consider splitting up the union.

If a 'No' vote is returned and the Scottish people continue to demand change, it will have to be delivered. Westminster can't afford to be accused of lying or misleading the Scottish electorate in the run up to the referendum. If Westminster is allowed to worm out of the promises made, Scotland only has itself to blame.

 

[anything I don't mind]

Does anyone think there's even a slight chance of Yes winning tho? What's the betting most of the undecided block end up voting No?

There is no chance of them winning because even if they did win the people in charge of the voting would simply lie about the result.There are too many powerful people and organisations that want a no vote for the vote to actually be yes. The mistake people make is that they think the election will not be fraudulent. All democratic elections are fraudulent. If voting changed anything it will be outlawed.

 

[leaskovski]

Enjoyed reading the serious debate in SC... but behold... GD debating politics...

Let the alpha'ing and poh'ing begin!

My eVote is bigger than yours!

 

[omnomnom]

There is no chance of them winning because even if they did win the people in charge of the voting would simply lie about the result.There are too many powerful people and organisations that want a no vote for the vote to actually be yes. The mistake people make is that they think the election will not be fraudulent. All democratic elections are fraudulent. If voting changed anything it will be outlawed.

Hi there, I hear there's some tin foil for sale in the MM. Go take a look.

 

[AJK]

There is no chance of them winning because even if they did win the people in charge of the voting would simply lie about the result.There are too many powerful people and organisations that want a no vote for the vote to actually be yes. The mistake people make is that they think the election will not be fraudulent. All democratic elections are fraudulent. If voting changed anything it will be outlawed.

This topic is brilliant, first we had a debate about Roman cities, now the conspiracy theories are coming out! Barmy.

 

[Jono8]

I hope they vote Yes as it will be a huge shake-up for the UK Political System that is very much needed, we are all sick to death of the same old, same old from Westminster no matter which Party gets in. ool:

This point of view winds me up the most. It is such a dimwitted notion (The same notion that Russell Brand had in that awful interview he had with Jeremy Paxman).

Change =/= Better . "shaking things up" in Westminster, does not, for a moment mean anything will get better. What if it gets worse?

Just voting no, for the sake of change, when you have no idea whether what comes after will be any better is a stupid viewpoint to take.

Again, going back to Brand's idiotic diatribe about politics, he came up with no viable alternative, no thoughts on how it would be better, but instead just said what we currently have is no good so everyone should form a revolution : / or not vote. But did stupid people fawn all over him for it? You bet they did

 

[anything I don't mind]

Even if they win they won't realy win anything. They will lose both ways. :|

 

[Wizzfizz]

There is no chance of them winning because even if they did win the people in charge of the voting would simply lie about the result.There are too many powerful people and organisations that want a no vote for the vote to actually be yes. The mistake people make is that they think the election will not be fraudulent. All democratic elections are fraudulent. If voting changed anything it will be outlawed.

lol

 

[ancientmariner]

Yes all the way for Scotland. I fully applaud them for bringing this to the referendum stage and hope they will be victorious. The current political and financial system is a disgrace, and to take the power from the rich public school boys can be the first step to designing a new, better system. One which might lead to better awareness of the greedy senselessly wasteful system we currently have in place

 

[McPhee]

I really don't like to see this side of the argument either. The whole discussion is causing division, even if the vote is to remain together.

There is no doubt in my mind that the south east of England in particular generate a large amount of money for the UK as a whole, which potentially benefits everyone including the north of England, Scotland and Wales. But then there has historically be a huge amount of investment made in that area too, in terms of transport links and infrastructure. If such investment were to have been made elsewhere, then things would probably be different now.

For me the topic of independence is not about who gives and who takes. I recognise that a strong economic hub such as London is a huge benefit to the whole UK. But equally I believe that everyone (UK, London, Scotland, everywhere) would be worse off if we chose to accept this level of division.

Indeed. I actually find it quite sad that people keep bringing this up, especially given Scotland pretty much balances its own books. It's particularly funny when the person bringing up the subject lives in the South West, Wales or the North of England...

 

[Sankari]

Speaking as a British person, I'd be sad to see Scotland go because I believe England needs her. But we cannot claim to be a true democracy while we continue to deny her freedom, so on that basis I vote 'Yes.'

 

[Castiel]

This topic is brilliant, first we had a debate about Roman cities, now the conspiracy theories are coming out! Barmy.

It's the Romans who are trying to overtake Scotland through political subterfuge, they will then rename Edinburgh as Cannae and Alex Salmond will become Emperor Augustus Salmonidae.

 

[AJK]

It's the Romans who are trying to overtake Scotland through political subterfuge, they will then rename Edinburgh as Cannae and Alex Salmond will become Emperor Augustus Salmonidae.

Awesome! Which option do I vote for to make this happen?

Oh wait, I'm not Scottish - no vote for me