Should Scotland be an independent country?

http://news.stv.tv/west-central/292974-hundreds-of-bags-donated-to-pop-up-foodbank-in-george-square/

If Devo Max isn't delivered as explicitly promised, and the SNP get re-elected with the intention of calling another referendum, this is democracy, regardless of whether people in the London like it or not. Because of the broken promises, and the scale of the Yes grassroots movement, Yes are likely to win it. You're badly missing your own point.

Yes. If that happens. If the majority of your fellow countrymen (and women) change their minds. I don't think they'd be likely to win it though, I think the silent majority would vote no, again. Personally.

We called the other half's Mum last night, a fervent Yes voter who was 'heartbroken' (her own word) by the No result. But she has thought about it a lot and conceded that the referendum was the No side's to lose and the Yes side's to win, and although it was a stellar campaign by the Yes side (45% was an amazing achievement) she has realised that they spent too much time preaching to the converted and that the strident, almost evangelical tone of the Yes campaign probably put some people off, and that they didn't spend enough time worrying about those who hadn't expressed any preference.

She put this beautifully. She said when they were out canvassing they spent too much time looking at all the windows with Yes in, and merrily noting how few windows had No in. But all along they should have been looking at the empty windows.

The fundamental point you keep avoiding, either deliberately or not, is that the Yes side didn't convince enough people to make the leap, and most people opted for the status quo. This is why there was a No vote. It's very hard to have a reasoned debate with someone who won't concede a single point, accept that they are in a minority or even consider that there might have been failings on the Yes side, so I'm giving up now.

I do genuinely hope that you can have that conversation with the No's because it's a conversation Scotland badly needs to have.

The irony here is that you're choosing to ignore the qualified comments I've made by actually citing sources and articles etc, and all you can retort with is 'I think' and 'my mum in law'.

I've stated repeatedly my reasons, and posted information that corresponds such as the Scotsman article on potential re-referendum outcome; you don't think they are relevant, or disagree, fine, but don't try and dismiss me as being totally blinkered or that I'm not accepting there were failings on the Yes side.

As someone who knows many people who have canvassed and campaigned for months by going door to door all over Glasgow seeking No voters and trying to bring them over to Yes, forgive me for not accepting your Mother in Law's words as gospel, however beautiful or appropriately subjective they are to your needs. Individual people like your Mother in Law may have allowed themselves the luxury of expecting a landslide but the people I know were focused solely on the poll results and were not optimistic even in the final week after one poll showed a Yes lead.

It's very hard to have a reasoned debate with someone who won't concede a single point,

Fucking hell. It's amazing how you can accuse me of refusing to be objective when you can apply this to conversations on here but not the referendum itself. It pretty accurately summarises the whole referendum process with the inevitably entrenched stances between both political parties. You can't have a debate if one side refuses to even discuss issues, that when the vote narrowed, even the Civil Service at Whitehall was breaking rank to say that the failure to make any kind of contingency plans for Scotland being independent or to even discuss currency union was absolute madness and brought about more financial instability than the referendum itself, not to mention suffocating the democratic process over and above using the BBC as a state mouthpiece.

Obviously you think that the only thing that matters is the final result, and not the process that was involved to attain it.

Giving the same privileges to same sex unions as to heterosexual ones is typical leftist tokenism

Maybe people in queer relationships just want to be treated like the rest of the population, did you ever think of that? And maybe the rest of society should afford them equality, regardless of their sexual orientation. Why is this just a 'leftist' thing?

Some gay / lesbian couples arent interested in getting married because they dont want to conform to the heteronormative, patriarchal society they find themselves oppressed by; others just want the chance to do whatever everyone else has the chance to. Why is this 'tokenism'?

Of course. Salmond was, is, and forever will be acting solely for the interest of Salmond, not the Scottish people. He lost the opportunity to become the Great Leader, so now he doesn't want to do anything but turn up and take the money. His bonus for being first minister of about £80k on top of his MSP's salary clearly isn't enough, since unencumbered by high office he can easily take many times that from lobbyists, speaking engagements and company directorships.

Your cynicism is depressing. Salmond swam in the opposite direction to the right wing policies of the Lib-Con coalition. He stayed committed to promises made in the SNP manifesto, imagine that! He actually did what he said he was going to do. If he was acting solely for the interest of himself he would have stayed on. He was probably physically and mentally exhausted after putting so much energy into the campaign. Your incorrect verdict on him was shown up on the streets of every Scottish town and city that Salmond went to - he was met by smiling people, taking photos with him, hugging him, shaking his hand, wishing him well. Any politician acting in self-interest, regardless of their affiliation, will always run into trouble if they stick their head out in public. Would David Cameron (or even Ed Miliband) be able to do that in any street in England? I doubt it.

Marked difference: Nick Clegg promised, "a pledge" if I remember rightly, that university fees would not increase. When in office, he rowed back on that pledge quickly. He lost a referendum that he had campaigned on for years. Did he resign? Did he fuck. No honour.

We called the other half's Mum last night, a fervent Yes voter who was 'heartbroken' (her own word) by the No result. But she has thought about it a lot and conceded that the referendum was the No side's to lose and the Yes side's to win, and although it was a stellar campaign by the Yes side (45% was an amazing achievement) she has realised that they spent too much time preaching to the converted and that the strident, almost evangelical tone of the Yes campaign probably put some people off, and that they didn't spend enough time worrying about those who hadn't expressed any preference.

I can agree with this. I wasn't convinced to vote yes by the main campaign, but the more reasonable fringes (they were probably the majority of the actual voters, but not the vocal ones) that acknowledged the downsides and risks but presented reasoned arguments that they were outweighed by the benefits and removal of the risks of staying in the UK.

Also, can everyone stop with wilfully misreading each other and being stroppy? This thread has been generally quite interesting but the last page or two... not so much.

Quite right too, let's have a vote every week until the people see sense and deliver the result you want.

Sounds like the Irish vote on the Lisbon treaty.

And the Nice treaty.

Surely everyone would be in favour of that.

using the BBC as a state mouthpiece

The BBC is certainly guilty of having an entrenched set of opinions and values which they regard as 'neutral' in a rather self-congratulatory way, but when your rants include accusations that it is some kind of government propaganda office, you lose what little credibility you have left.

Maybe people in queer relationships just want to be treated like the rest of the population, did you ever think of that?

Unless you're older than you look, I thought of that before you were even born, I was on gay pride marches before it was cool. So, I'm all for equal treatment under the law. My point, which I think you may have missed, is that the government has no business in anybody's marriage.

Your incorrect verdict on him was shown up on the streets of every Scottish town and city that Salmond went to - he was met by smiling people, taking photos with him, hugging him, shaking his hand, wishing him well.

That doesn't, of itself, make my verdict incorrect. If we have learned anything from politics over the past few centuries, it is that popularity is no guide to a person's character.

David Cameron...Ed Miliband...Nick Clegg

I'm more than happy to concede that all three are even greater scumbags than Salmond, but again, that's not exactly a ringing endorsement.

dafuq

Dundee still rawks whats the fuckin trouble heeyer?

you lose what little credibility you have left.

Top lulz coming from someone who's got the intellectual traction of a greased up Jade Goody at a waterpark.

Jade Goody

RIP

David Ian Salmond RIP

Look..Has anyone commented on the fact that he is a salmon and likely to be superceded by a sturgeon?
Is there no ameer Scots feesh we could hae?

Vote Michael John Trout ffs

wow this thread. Some top moments:

Srampagnolo more like

Just shut up. For everybody's benefit, shut up. Please just shut up.

intellecual rigour

intellectual rigour

intellectual rigour

greased up Jade Goody at a waterpark.

bump?

I'd say yes. I was yes before but only just. Now a firm yes.

Fuck the low wage, low tax future the UK is heading for.

+1

+2. Save yourselves while you still can.

asking for the right to call a referendum and actually calling it are 2 different things.........
this is the final card in the game Sturgeon can play against May,

but the issue now is all the old Ghosts will start to appear from the original one

• what currency
  
• funding scotland without massive tax hikes
  
• splitting of national services
  but with the addition of :-
  
• passport control borders
  
• hard border for goods and supplies
  
• tax levies on export of scottish goods to the UK whether or not scotland is a full EU member or not....leading me onto....
  
• full EU membership only (as this is what the EU has stated - no fringe deals for anyone !) which means scotland has to give up a lot of monetary control and gets its budget deficit under control with EU laws, and free movement of people ...... which raises the question - with all of these so-called "NHS tourists" not going to the UK after Brexit, where is the only other country they can go to with free services. in the EU.
  
  

be interesting to see how all these Q's will get answered - i suspect they wont be and it will end up being like Ref1, all sound bites and nonsense....