Independence - how would you vote?

[xbl]

I've been through this numerous times already. At the highest level, the current plan for independence is a complete and utter clusterfcuk (where it exists at all). Not withstanding any other factors, there simply isn't a credible and sustainable plan for moving forward as an independent nation. Maybe that will change with a wholesome white paper, but I seriously doubt it. Until then, little else needs said.

Yep. And when questioned, you mentioned that the details of Europe and currency were all wrong. However, you were actually unable to actually identify anything specific you had a problem with. Actually, that marked one of your disappearances from the thread. The reason we've been through it numerous times is that when it comes to actual detail, you hide.

As far as I can see, your problem with Europe is that...no, in fact, I can't see what your problem with Europe is.

[Colkitto]

One bright note from Scotland Tonight was the consensus that polls don't really matter this far out from the referendum vote.

HB & Reynard have based their entire arguments on them with their "Nats can't win" referendum rhetoric

[The Old Northerner]

I've been through this numerous times already. At the highest level, the current plan for independence is a complete and utter clusterfcuk (where it exists at all). Not withstanding any other factors, there simply isn't a credible and sustainable plan for moving forward as an independent nation. Maybe that will change with a wholesome white paper, but I seriously doubt it. Until then, little else needs said.

I'm not over-sure there's a credible and sustainable plan for the Union.

[xbl]

You seem to have me mixed up with Colkitto.

I think Curtice is a clown. But he is very well thought of by the nats.. colkitto for example breathlessly linked his views on the Angus Reid poll.

But not this one...

Curtice? Really? Are you not getting him mixed up with almost anyone else? He is a known joke and uber-Unionist, and one of the pleasing things of the 2011 election was seeing him trying not to sob as his precious Unionists were humped. You seem curiously reticent to post up his blog there boy. Not like you at all. And I've read the blog, I can see why you won't unless prompted heavily. So go on, post it up boy.

[H_B]

 

It's not interesting at all. It's a dubious poll in which ultra-Unionist Professor Curtice said " it is very much on the small side and not too much reliance should be placed on it."

 

Jeeze, it's as if Prof Curtice never lived...

Just as a reminder..

.

[xbl]

One bright note from Scotland Tonight was the consensus that polls don't really matter this far out from the referendum vote.

HB & Reynard have based their entire arguments on them with their "Nats can't win" referendum rhetoric

YOU'RE GOING TO LOSE, LOOK AT THE POLLS

YOU'RE GOING TO LOSE, LOOK AT THE POLLS

YOU'RE GOING TO LOSE, LOOK AT THE POLLS

YOU'RE GOING TO LOSE, LOOK AT THE POLLS

YOU'RE GOING TO LOSE, LOOK AT THE POLLS

oh. pollingdatadoesn'tmatteranyway

YOU'RE GOING TO LOSE, LOOK AT THE POLLS

YOU'RE GOING TO LOSE, LOOK AT THE POLLS

YOU'RE GOING TO LOSE, LOOK AT THE POLLS

etc.

[H_B]

Whats his conclusion on the SNP commissioned poll?

[Colkitto]

Unionists getting a little nervous over the White Paper going by Alex Johnson & Jabba Baillie's performances tonight on Newsnicht

[xbl]

Whats his conclusion on the SNP commissioned poll?

Why won't you link it up boy? I've read it. You claim you've read it. Post it up boy. Why so shy?

[barrysnotter]

It really got to you that I agreed with you, didn't it? You were getting ready for some big series of angry posts, and yet, I accepted your point, leaving all that pent up rage.

But you didn't really agree with me. You denied that the reporting of today's poll was "evasive" despite omitting the leading context in which the question was asked. You labelled yesterday's poll "evasive" for precisely the same reason. You even attempted to justify today's reporting. You certainly weren't "intellectually honest".

And whilst we're on that post, I didn't notice this grossly disgusting and inappropriate comment at the time.

I know you wouldn't know intellectual honesty if it raped your children,

Totally out of order. You really are a cretin.

[xbl]

But you didn't really agree with me. You denied that the reporting of today's poll was "evasive" despite omitting the leading context in which the question was asked. You labelled yesterday's poll "evasive" for precisely the same reason. You even attempted to justify today's reporting. You certainly weren't "intellectually honest".

And whilst we're on that post, I didn't notice this grossly disgusting and inappropriate comment at the time.

Totally out of order. You really are a cretin.

Awww, is the delicate little flower taking umbrage? You're happy enough to give it out, got a problem taking it back?

And as I said very clearly, I agreed that the question was leading because of the previous questions. No argument there.

However, it never even occurred to me, or anyone else on here, to question the order of the question, so when I read the article, it never occurred to me that something was missing, therefore I never thought it was evasive. After all, no other article normally discusses that. On the other hand the SOS article omitted the actual question, which IS unusual. So it read very evasively to me in a way that today's reporting didn't. I don't think this is unreasonable. The SOS never reported the order of questions either, but I wouldn't have called that omission evasive either, not in a way that I would have picked up on.

But I agreed with you with no issue, as I am intellectually honest, in a way that you Unionists are not managing to be.

[H_B]

Here you go..

'So in truth its not a poll about which we should get too excited.

There is a good reason to believe that the particularly favourable result for the Yes side is a consequence of the way in which the poll was conducted'

[xbl]

Here you go..

'So in truth its not a poll about which we should get too excited.

There is a good reason to believe that the particularly favourable result for the Yes side is a consequence of the way in which the poll was conducted'

Oh dear, oh dear. No link, no proper use of quote tags, and no full context. Now if I was a neutral reading that post, I would wonder why you can't do it properly, when you normally find it so easy to do.

[Colkitto]

Just as a reminder..

.

A reminder of what? That I quoted Curtice? Is that what you're meaning?

[~~~]

I've been through this numerous times already. At the highest level, the current plan for independence is a complete and utter clusterfcuk (where it exists at all). Not withstanding any other factors, there simply isn't a credible and sustainable plan for moving forward as an independent nation. Maybe that will change with a wholesome white paper, but I seriously doubt it. Until then, little else needs said.

So what plan do you think would work for independence?

[H_B]

 

 

A reminder of what?   That I quoted Curtice? Is that what you're meaning?

You quoted curtice on the AR poll.

To illustrate his dismissal of it.

Why didnt you quote his dismissal of the SNP poll?

[Colkitto]

You quoted curtice on the AR poll.

To illustrate his dismissal of it.

Why didnt you quote his dismissal of the SNP poll?

Because I disagreed with his comments on the SNP poll and agreed with his comments on the AR poll.

[H_B]

 

 

Because I disagreed with his comments on the SNP poll and agreed with his comments on the AR poll.

:lol:

[xbl]

Because I disagreed with his comments on the SNP poll and agreed with his comments on the AR poll.

No, you see, this is why Barry and HB got so angry tonight. The Unionist way is that if you agree with something that one person said, then you agree with everything that person said. They also believe that if you hold an opinion, then you must stick to it regardless of the facts.

It puts their shameful last two days into context.

[xbl]

:lol:

See, observe!