Independence - how would you vote?

[wirez]

f**k it. In my opinion anyone who is stubbornly going to vote NO regardless is one of the following -

- Gullible people who read the mainstream press and swallow everything they say - (thepundit)

- Labour lackeys who are still dazzled by the red rosette and the false promises it contains...cos their da was a miner - (snottybarry)

- Angry xenophobic types who are BRITISH till they die - (deegas)

- Right wing loonies with nothing better to do - (Reynard)

If you disagree please give us your reasons why you are voting no*

*deegas is excluded from this request as he is the most tiresome of fuds

[thepundit]

f**k it. In my opinion anyone who is stubbornly going to vote NO regardless is one of the following -

- Gullible people who read the mainstream press and swallow everything they say - (thepundit)

I don't believe everything I read in the papers Wirez. In fact, I prefer getting my info from Twitter where its not had the chance to be spun to the left or right.

What do you think I've read in the mainstream media which, with me being gullible and all that, I've believed without question?

[barrysnotter]

f**k it. In my opinion anyone who is stubbornly going to vote NO regardless is one of the following -

- Gullible people who read the mainstream press and swallow everything they say - (thepundit)

- Labour lackeys who are still dazzled by the red rosette and the false promises it contains...cos their da was a miner - (snottybarry)

- Angry xenophobic types who are BRITISH till they die - (deegas)

- Right wing loonies with nothing better to do - (Reynard)

If you disagree please give us your reasons why you are voting no*

*deegas is excluded from this request as he is the most tiresome of fuds

And you, my friend, are a typical separatist.

[LinkinFighter]

Sevco fan voting no? Shocker.

[xbl]

f**k it. In my opinion anyone who is stubbornly going to vote NO regardless is one of the following -

- Gullible people who read the mainstream press and swallow everything they say - (thepundit)

- Labour lackeys who are still dazzled by the red rosette and the false promises it contains...cos their da was a miner - (snottybarry)

- Angry xenophobic types who are BRITISH till they die - (deegas)

- Right wing loonies with nothing better to do - (Reynard)

If you disagree please give us your reasons why you are voting no*

*deegas is excluded from this request as he is the most tiresome of fuds

Its much simpler than that. They're scared. Thats all there is to it, fear.

[Davi3j]

Could well be. If its to be a Yes victory the Separatists still have a lot of convincing to do. So far they've struggled to provide facts which is probably because they don't have the answers.

ok then, what questions are you wanting answers to?

[wingsoverperthshire]

What do you think I've read in the mainstream media which, with me being gullible and all that, I've believed without question?

*raises hand*

Rememeber when you told us all Grangemouth wouldn't have survived if Scotland was independent (a soundbite from a lid-dem clown, late to the party and desperate to make impression) which you repeated. I believe you were gullible in swallowing his.

Are we reaching the point where you give a full retraction?

[Jamaldo]

I think it's clear, no matter how many credible facts and convincing arguments you bombard them with, certain unionists just aren't having it. They absolutely refuse to be convinced. thepundit is one of these people, so my message to people like Enrico is just not to bother with him, as he isn't changing his mind. He knows that there's no credible reason for voting No but for whatever reason he's doing it.

[DeeGas]

f**k it. In my opinion anyone who is stubbornly going to vote NO regardless is one of the following -

- Gullible people who read the mainstream press and swallow everything they say - (thepundit)

- Labour lackeys who are still dazzled by the red rosette and the false promises it contains...cos their da was a miner - (snottybarry)

- Angry xenophobic types who are BRITISH till they die - (deegas)

- Right wing loonies with nothing better to do - (Reynard)

If you disagree please give us your reasons why you are voting no*

*deegas is excluded from this request as he is the most tiresome of fuds

That's ridiculous,if you saw where I live,an area with a huge percentage of immigrant people you might take that back.

The only thing that really worries me is the right wing side of Islam and I reckon there are approximately 30000000 other English people who feel the same.

But that's another story.

I find it quite odd when Scots try to teach the English about immigration because let's face it,England has much experience,some good and some not so good,but England does have ago,our record is not bad,check it.

As Barry posted,you are a separatist,an anti English separatist.

[Ad Lib]

So you concede that the white paper may well produce a 2% bump, and that clegg (a worse politician) managed to produce a spike in the polls. So why the needless pish?

*sigh*

The TV debates had no perceptible effect on Clegg's party's polling in the actual election of 2010. There is no good reason for believing that a TV debate between Alex Salmond and whoever is against him will be any dramatically different.

I said that the White Paper, like EVERY OTHER NEWS STORY connected to the independence debate, could lead to a temporary swing of 2% in either direction quite plausibly, depending on who wins the propaganda war around it. It is not going to hail a seismic shift in public opinion. It's about who spins it best that wins out of it. And even then a 2% swing is within the margin of error of most polls such as to be imperceptibly small.

With regards to Salmond. I've absolutely no figures to hand as continuing this debate is of little interest to me. What I can remember is neutral audiences being won over to Salmond. This has happened in England many times (QT, and suchlike). I've little doubt that Salmond v Iain Gray helped focus the minds of voters.

Not relevant. Salmond isn't facing Iain Gray on the question of an election to a legislature.

I've never seen Salmond being anything other than 'streets ahead', in political battle. I see no reason for this to be any different. Given that Sturgeon and the excellent Hosie have 'won' the three debates thus far, are you honestly suggesting that Alistair Darling can get a score draw with salmond. Particularly given his record on Fiscal micawberism and war?

No. I'm saying that even when Salmond wins any such TV debate that it will not significantly change the polls. That's a different proposition.

Yes. Let's be fair Most recent YouGov poll I'm aware of has figures of Yes 32% No 52% Wouldn't vote 2% Don't Know 13% So, let's strip out the 13% don't knows and allocate them as you suggest

Yes = 32/87 = 36.7%

No = 52/87 = 59.7%

Wouldn't vote 2/87 = 2.3%

So, even on your predicted 97.7% turnout (unlikely, I feel), No doesn't even make 60%, never mind 65% Where did I say that that poll was correct?

I wasn't talking about YouGov's most recent poll. You said that none of the polls have suggested that 60-65% is likely to happen. YouGov polls have conducted polls that would place a No vote above 60%. Indeed as far as I can see, the previous YouGov polls would place it between 65 and 67%.

[wingsoverperthshire]

The only thing that really worries me is the right wing side of Islam and I reckon there are approximately 30000000 other English people who feel the same.

But that's another story.

and there are about 15-20 SDL bangers that care one jot about this.

Take your racism and lack of tolerance for 'foreigners' and leave us be.

Scotland is different.

[thepundit]

thepundit is one of these people, so my message to people like Enrico is just not to bother with him

I think thats excellent advice to give Enrico.... because I've been ignoring him for a very long time now.

[wingsoverperthshire]

*sigh*

The TV debates had no perceptible effect on Clegg's party's polling in the actual election of 2010. There is no good reason for believing that a TV debate between Alex Salmond and whoever is against him will be any dramatically different.

I said that the White Paper, like EVERY OTHER NEWS STORY connected to the independence debate, could lead to a temporary swing of 2% in either direction quite plausibly, depending on who wins the propaganda war around it. It is not going to hail a seismic shift in public opinion. It's about who spins it best that wins out of it. And even then a 2% swing is within the margin of error of most polls such as to be imperceptibly small.

Not relevant. Salmond isn't facing Iain Gray on the question of an election to a legislature.

No. I'm saying that even when Salmond wins any such TV debate that it will not significantly change the polls. That's a different proposition.

Leaving aside the irony you of all people post *sigh*.

Salmond gaining popularity by virtue of debate is entirely relevant to what happens in 2014. How you can suggest that debate doesn't matter when Clegg can outscore the other better together parties http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/election-2010/7605260/General-Election-2010-Lib-Dems-take-lead-in-new-poll.html (only being let down by the awful FTPT system) is anyones guess. Debates are game changers, you only need to look at the micro-poll gathered in Abertay university to appreciate this.

There will be debates. There will be changes in the polls, and evidence suggests it will be towards the Yes camp.

I've no idea why you don't like this, or won't accept this? Are you blinkered by a deep-rooted hatred of king eck ?

[wingsoverperthshire]

I think thats excellent advice to give Enrico.... because I've been ignoring him for a very long time now.

I believe I asked you a question. Are you retracting your statement about Grangemouth? A simple yes/no will suffice.

[wirez]

And you, my friend, are a typical separatist.

Oooh that really cuts me so it does

No rational argument to back up your flawed ideology

A unionist drone...bzzzzzzz

[thepundit]

I believe I asked you a question. Are you retracting your statement about Grangemouth?

A simple yes/no will suffice.

No.

Well done to the UK Gov for saving Grangemouth. Credit to Salmond for scrambling £9m together, though. I'm sure it really scraped the surface so hat off to him for that.

[WFAANW]

And you, my friend, are a typical separatist.

ho ho that's DeeGas patter, you're a DeeGas.

[~~~]

I think thats excellent advice to give Enrico.... because I've been ignoring him for a very long time now.

So, benefits for Scotland? Anytime now

[WFAANW]

So, benefits for Scotland? Anytime now

I think when he said ignoring he meant avoiding.

[Ad Lib]

Leaving aside the irony you of all people post *sigh*.

Salmond gaining popularity by virtue of debate is entirely relevant to what happens in 2014. How you can suggest that debate doesn't matter when Clegg can outscore the other better together parties http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/election-2010/7605260/General-Election-2010-Lib-Dems-take-lead-in-new-poll.html (only being let down by the awful FTPT system) is anyones guess. Debates are game changers, you only need to look at the micro-poll gathered in Abertay university to appreciate this.

There will be debates. There will be changes in the polls, and evidence suggests it will be towards the Yes camp.

I've no idea why you don't like this, or won't accept this? Are you blinkered by a deep-rooted hatred of king eck ?

*sigh*

You're completely ignoring the specifics of my request. Show me evidence that Salmond will or is likely to cause a statistically significant positive swing in favour of the Yes campaign, rather than to a political party. Referendums are completely different from elections, so please note, no evidence from elections will be admissible unless you can demonstrate, with further evidence, why a referendum won't be statistically or contextually different.

The thing about Cleggmania is it died on its arse within a fortnight of that debate. TV debates provide no perceptible effect on voting intention in any circumstances in the UK. The point is, unless you can both prove that a) the Salmond effect is relevant to the referendum and b) that any debate would take place like 48 hours before polling day, there is no reason to believe that a TV face-off with Darling will do anything significant to the polls. The only reason Clegg's polls shifted so sharply was a) a lack of exposure prior to that relative to the other parties and b) the gimmickry of being the none of the above candidate. AND EVEN THEN the whole hysteria whipped up by the TV debate died within days.

The point is, you have no way of knowing that a) the overwhelming majority of the electorate will even watch the Salmond debate (the viewing figures of Sturgeon's stand-off with Moore were probably barely into 5 figures I'd guess) and even then, the kind of people who will watch a debate are going to be, largely, those who have already made up their mind. The Abertay Hosie event at best shows that among an engaged, young audience in Dundee, when faced with the debating prowess of George fucking Robertson, will gravitate strongly towards the alternative. It is not a piece of evidence that supports the view that a) the public will engage with a TV debate b) that they'll watch it and c) that those who do watch it won't have already made their minds up and d) that among those whose opinions it does change it will be anything like as volatile as the views of people in a General Election.

The polls are within the margin of error virtually wherever you look of not having moved in a year. Across polling companies whether they predict a 4% or a 15% swing is needed. Of course the polls will move closer to the time, but there is approximately ZERO good reason to a) assume that only a 4% swing is needed from now AND b) that any tail-end swing will be enough. All you have is mood music. Not evidence.