Scottish Independence Poll

[Guest MattP]

Good perspective there. I think those who think this campaign on both sides has been dirty really do need to take a close look at American political campaigning for what the term really means.

 

I don't think he Yanks have anything on what we can produce when you look at Tower Hamlets and certain areas of Birmingham when it comes to 'dirty politics'.

[ADK]

When do we know the result?

[Guest MattP]

When do we know the result?

 

I'd imagine somewhere around 5-6am depending on how close it is.

[Smudge]

When do we know the result?

According to BBC news tomorrow morning

[Strokes]

YES

[Sir Fynwy]

The "influence" point is arguable, but the Tories haven't won the largest number of seats in Scotland since 1955.

By next year, there will have been Tory UK governments for 36 of the last 60 years (1955-64, 1970-74, 1979-97, 2010-15).

36/60 is a lot more than 10%...

I'll admit I over egged that a bit but 11 times out of 18 is still in their favour.

[leicsmac]

I don't think he Yanks have anything on what we can produce when you look at Tower Hamlets and certain areas of Birmingham when it comes to 'dirty politics'.

 

Really? You've never seen a good old-fashioned American political smear attempt?

[Guest MattP]

Really? You've never seen a good old-fashioned American political smear attempt?

 

Well Watergate is obviously the first thing that comes to mind when I think of US political treachery but I followed the last US presidential campaign and I don't remember too much in terms of smear. I remember Obama using some ridiclous hyperbole regarding Russia in the debates (which has now made him look silly) but that's about it.

 

Are the US smears really any worse than ours? I'd struggle to believe any US party could have been the victim of a smear campaign to the extent that UKIP were earlier this year or the SNP were last week? Both have came under a substantial organised effort from the Westminster elite and mainstream media to completely lie and utter misrepresent them and their policies in order to mislead people in their viewpoint on them.

 

Thousands were protesting outside the BBC HQ last night.

[Alf Bentley]

I'll admit I over egged that a bit but 11 times out of 18 is still in their favour.

 

 

11 players out of 18 from the match squad can be on the pitch...

[Jon the Hat]

Is telling the truth about Alex Salmond a smear campaign now?  Jesus.

 

No idea on currency or central bank

No idea on the EU

£500m NHS spending cuts planned

 

If that isnt enough to make one think twice about trusting the bloke i dont know what is.

[Guest MattP]

Is telling the truth about Alex Salmond a smear campaign now?  Jesus.

 

No idea on currency or central bank

No idea on the EU

£500m NHS spending cuts planned

 

If that isnt enough to make one think twice about trusting the bloke i dont know what is.

 

Of course not, Salmond has got the treatment he has deserved.

 

There has clearly been a smear campaign against the wider SNP though when you see the veiled accusations in the press regarding racism etc that has been going on for a while.

[leicsmac]

Well Watergate is obviously the first thing that comes to mind when I think of US political treachery but I followed the last US presidential campaign and I don't remember too much in terms of smear. I remember Obama using some ridiclous hyperbole regarding Russia in the debates (which has now made him look silly) but that's about it.

 

Are the US smears really any worse than ours? I'd struggle to believe any US party could have been the victim of a smear campaign to the extent that UKIP were earlier this year or the SNP were last week? Both have came under a substantial organised effort from the Westminster elite and mainstream media to completely lie and utter misrepresent them and their policies in order to mislead people in their viewpoint on them.

 

Thousands were protesting outside the BBC HQ last night.

 

It's the individuals that get smeared in the US rather than the parties, from what I understand. Because the US political process is so subject to money, there's a lot of it spent on attempts to discredit the other guy in any way possible. Take the campaign ads, for instance - at least with our PP broadcasts there's a proportional distribution for every party and they're only about 5 minutes long. The US ones are practically wall-to-wall and seem to do nothing but attack the other competing parties. Also third parties get smacked about too - for Nigel Farage read Ron Paul, for instance - not necessarily in terms of policy but in terms of the way the politcal establishment likes to go after him.

 

Honestly, the media and PR management in the US puts the greater part of what we can do with dirty tricks totally in the shade.

[Jon the Hat]

Anyway, the final polls suggest Yes 47%, No 53%, which I think is probably generous to the Yes vote.  They arent going anywhere.  Next up, telling our party leaders to **** off if they think we are letting them keep their promise to keep subsidising the Scots forever.  Free prescriptions and no tuition fees can **** right off.

[leicsmac]

Do the Scots actually get more government money per head allocated than everyone south of the border? Or do they just spend it on different things?

[WhatsHisName]

''Scottish independence: Final poll puts No campaign ahead by six percentage points'http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/scottish-independence/scottish-independence-final-poll-puts-no-campaign-ahead-by-six-percentage-points-9741019.html

We will win the vote to prevent independece by over 6%

[Guest MattP]

Anyway, the final polls suggest Yes 47%, No 53%, which I think is probably generous to the Yes vote.  They arent going anywhere.  Next up, telling our party leaders to **** off if they think we are letting them keep their promise to keep subsidising the Scots forever.  Free prescriptions and no tuition fees can **** right off.

 

This is something they all will have to answer for on Friday, this was a Yes/No poll, not a late minute Yes/Devo Max poll which Westminster tried to turn it into.

 

I don't think Cameron realises just how pissed off a lot of people are over this. It's almost like he is goading his own voters to go to UKIP sometimes.

[Guest MattP]

Do the Scots actually get more government money per head allocated than everyone south of the border? Or do they just spend it on different things?

 

Yes.

 

And possibly, they appear to be diverting money from the NHS to education so they can still hawk about free University places.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p026stmc

[Mark_w]

Cameron has openly stated he cares more about his country than his party.

 

That's not really evidence of anything, saying the opposite or nothing at all wouldn't have done him much good would it?

[Guest MattP]

That's not really evidence of anything, saying the opposite or nothing at all wouldn't have done him much good would it?

 

He didn't have to say it though in the context of the speech he gave, I imagine a lot of his members weren't particularly happy with him stating such things in an effort to bend over to the Jocks.

[linemakers]

What ever happens snp on win win. They either get independence for Scotland or greater tax breaks and more cash per head for free Uni's, free prescriptions, free eye tests and more

[leicsmac]

Yes.

 

And possibly, they appear to be diverting money from the NHS to education so they can still hawk about free University places.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p026stmc

 

I wonder why? Is it a long standing arrangement? Must be if nothing has been done about it before now.

 

Speaking as an academic I'd really be in favour of free (or at least heavily subsidised) university education for certain courses that would be condusive to the growth of the country (*cough*STEM*cough*), but that's me. Free prescriptions should be something you have to qualify for, though, IMO.

 

He didn't have to say it though in the context of the speech he gave, I imagine a lot of his members weren't particularly happy with him stating such things in an effort to bend over to the Jocks.

 

As was said earlier though, the smart ones amongst his members know what a Yes vote would mean, but also know that he can't be seen to think that way.

 

Is there much of a split in the conservative community regarding this, do you think?

[Guest MattP]

No split at all, every Tory I've spoken to wants them to stay.

 

Been in since the 70's was a temporary arrangement back then to shift a Labour gov. through and it never seems to have been reviewed for some strange reason, the Scots now seem to see it as entitlement to get it (unsurprising I suppose when over half the population is on some sort of welfare) and we just seem to pay it. Why the Conservatives didn't do something about it in the 90's I have no idea.

 

I have no problem with University being free is the country can afford it, Scotland clearly can't and how the English people haven't caused uproar that they have to pay for it whilst at the same time being taxed so Scottish students can do it for free is quite staggering. If they were anyone but students they would probably do.

[LanguedocFox]

I wonder why? Is it a long standing arrangement? Must be if nothing has been done about it before now.

 

Speaking as an academic I'd really be in favour of free (or at least heavily subsidised) university education for certain courses that would be condusive to the growth of the country (*cough*STEM*cough*), but that's me. Free prescriptions should be something you have to qualify for, though, IMO.

 

 

As was said earlier though, the smart ones amongst his members know what a Yes vote would mean, but also know that he can't be seen to think that way.

 

Is there much of a split in the conservative community regarding this, do you think?

 

 

It was something introduced in the late 1970s. It was only meant to last a few years, and the guy who introduced it has just said he thought it was a huge mistake. There's an article about it here

[fuchsntf]

After the "Winter of discontent" anyone could have called for a vote of no confidence and got it.

The country was out of control and held to ransom by the Unions. To which Callaghan, after returning from a trip to the Caribbean, responded "Crisis? What crisis?

By some Unions, many skilled trade, unions didnt strike, and were against Scargill, and the harbour unions.Somehow forgot

in the melle of confusion, often conveniently.Since, the labour party has been its own worst enemy, not one I would ever have

voted for.Blair took it far to the right.they too let the midlands, the north and Scotland down.

Its just a bloody shame ( for the Scots) that the yes vote politics, including their Whitepaper, have not shown a honest defined platform for the interim period, or near future definite necessities.You would think its a coverate move from the Conservatives,

to blow any indepence out of the water.

The vows our leaders made, if NO, will not find clear air.So the Scots are bu#gered if they do and bu#gered if they dont.

[leicsmac]

No split at all, every Tory I've spoken to wants them to stay.

 

Been in since the 70's was a temporary arrangement back then to shift a Labour gov. through and it never seems to have been reviewed for some strange reason, the Scots now seem to see it as entitlement to get it (unsurprising I suppose when over half the population is on some sort of welfare) and we just seem to pay it. Why the Conservatives didn't do something about it in the 90's I have no idea.

 

I have no problem with University being free is the country can afford it, Scotland clearly can't and how the English people haven't caused uproar that they have to pay for it whilst at the same time being taxed so Scottish students can do it for free is quite staggering. If they were anyone but students they would probably do.

 

Interesting info that.