Salmond Vs. Darling - The Debate

[Blaven]

It became VERY clear to me last night that it is the unionists who are SHOUTING the loudest.

Why are they shouting?

[the jambo-rocker]

From the bits and pieces I saw from it and especially on my twitter feed, it was fucking tragic. No wonder people are so disillusioned when practically everything uttered from either politician was recycled soundbites galore.

Armando Ianucci's tweet last night.

"I'm disappointed by the lack of ambition.Scotland's voting on the next 100 years; both men just talked about the next 2 or 3. #ScotDecides"

[thisal]

Its not bullying for sovereign states to say what they will do for their own people.

Its arrogance to tell other sovereign states what they must do to make your life a bit easier.

That's why this is so dreadful for the SNP.

That's the problem both sides are telling the other what they can do and neither a being honest.

[Blaven]

From the bits and pieces I saw from it and especially on my twitter feed, it was fucking tragic. No wonder people are so disillusioned when practically everything uttered from either politician was recycled soundbites galore.

Armando Ianucci's tweet last night.

"I'm disappointed by the lack of ambition.Scotland's voting on the next 100 years; both men just talked about the next 2 or 3. #ScotDecides"

This is the problem that the YES side have. They have their focus on how to obtain the best hand going into any negotiations. Darling wants to stop it getting that far, yet he at the same time is f*cking up that best hand in the process.

When we vote YES, any deal we get won't be as good as it could have been, all thanks to our friends in Labour.

Don't forget that. LABOUR are the new Hammer of the Scots.

[The Master]

Incidentally, I think I see where you're going wrong. You're not counting the Yes voters that thought Darling won or the No voters that thought Salmond won tonight

They will still count for the yes & no sides at the final reckoning.

That's not the point, though.

The original claim made was that Salmond "won" 76% of "don't knows" post-debate. I was then pointing out that the only reason that happened is because he "kept" more DKs than Darling.

[Spain]

From the bits and pieces I saw from it and especially on my twitter feed, it was fucking tragic. No wonder people are so disillusioned when practically everything uttered from either politician was recycled soundbites galore.

Armando Ianucci's tweet last night.

"I'm disappointed by the lack of ambition.Scotland's voting on the next 100 years; both men just talked about the next 2 or 3. #ScotDecides"

The debate last night mostly only acted as an anchor to get people talking about it again en masse at the same time. The public debate has certainly been ignited by it and everyone in my office is talking about it, but the actual performance of the debate itself did little other than that to sway people IMO. I would say it's the surrounding public debate, like on social media and forums like this or at workplaces, that will have more success winning people over.

The way I see it:

• Yes Voters aren't going to change back to No Voters.
• Undecided Voters are probably looking to vote yes, but need the assurances or better information to do so.
• No Voters are a mix of staunch No Voters, or ones that don't intend to vote yes but the same information as the undecided's above could sway them.

Darling was never going to comprehensively win this. So to have not suffered a heavy defeat is as good as a victory for him. His 'victory' is comparable to Salmond missing a penalty against him.

[jmothecat]

Debate went about as I expected. Not a great deal of information, similar arguments repeated and nothing that will convince undecideds. Had expected a draw going in, but think Darling shaded it. I am pretty biased though as not only am I a no voter, I've always quite liked him and think he is one of few things good about the Better Together campaign.

Lots for the cheerleaders, little for the undecideds, good enough for the no side. At best it's a slight boost to us, at worst it's a nationalist opportunity parried.

[George Parr]

Darling came out of that looking stronger unfortunately, which was amazing given Salmond had him on the ropes after the opening statements.

Later, Salmond was weak on currency and Darling's almost manic badgering on this point was pretty effective.

Contrastingly Salmond was even remotely strong enough when it came to examination of BT.

The audience element was more evenly spilt but Darling just seemed far more confident and upbeat by the end even despite his unrelenting negativity whilst Salmond came across just a bit weary and forlorn.

A definite opportunity missed for Alex Salmond and Yes. He'll be kicking himself for not having a real go at Darling and the Fear.

[CALDERON]

Salmond was awful. Absolutely awful, he missed a massive chance there.

As an undecided voter, Darling certainly did a better job tonight. No doubts about that.

[Mr Bairn]

The debate last night mostly only acted as an anchor to get people talking about it again en masse at the same time. The public debate has certainly been ignited by it and everyone in my office is talking about it, but the actual performance of the debate itself did little other than that to sway people IMO. I would say it's the surrounding public debate, like on social media and forums like this or at workplaces, that will have more success winning people over.

The way I see it:

• Yes Voters aren't going to change back to No Voters.
• Undecided Voters are probably looking to vote yes, but need the assurances or better information to do so.
• No Voters are a mix of staunch No Voters, or ones that don't intend to vote yes but the same information as the undecided's above could sway them.

Darling was never going to comprehensively win this. So to have not suffered a heavy defeat is as good as a victory for him. His 'victory' is comparable to Salmond missing a penalty against him.

I agree with this. The one positive yes can take from this is that it can reignite the debate on social media, in homes, around the water cooler at work etc

I think that Darling shaded it but getting people talking about it will help yes, imo.

I say Darling shaded it, maybe that's all relative. I expected Salmond to win by TKO and Darling won on a split decision.

[~~~]

That's the problem both sides are telling the other what they can do and neither a being honest.

Darling only told us what we can't do

[Ross.]

Didn't watch the debate(Spent the night watching Lille v Grasshoppers instead) but from social media the view I got is that yes voters are still voting yes though are a little disappointed with Salmonds performance, no voters are still voting no and are still going ad hominem with "Salmond is bad", and undecided's are still undecided and think both men are cocks.

No change then.

[Baxter Parp]

Edinburgh Evening News Poll shows yes increase after debate.

http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/scottish-independence-en-readers-split-on-debate-1-3500421

[Bookies Love Me]

Didn't watch the debate(Spent the night watching Lille v Grasshoppers instead) but from social media the view I got is that yes voters are still voting yes though are a little disappointed with Salmonds performance, no voters are still voting no and are still going ad hominem with "Salmond is bad", and undecided's are still undecided and think both men are cocks.

No change then.

Well done Sir.

That's the best summing up of the whole affair.

[Blaven]

Are there any unionists on here who can't bring themselves to say that " Scotland could be a successful independent country "?

Why did Darling choke on that?

If Cameron ( who's English ) can say it, why can't Darling ( who's Scottish ) say it?

[Tio Pepe]

Are there any unionists on here who can't bring themselves to say that " Scotland could be a successful independent country "?

Why did Darling choke on that?

If Cameron ( who's English ) can say it, why can't Darling ( who's Scottish ) say it?

I saw a clip of that bit and didn't understand it. Cumnock could be a successful country, anywhere could. Darling's answer should have been along the lines of "it could be but I believe the people of Scotland will enjoy greater success, short, medium and long term, as part of the UK".

[banana]

Are there any unionists on here who can't bring themselves to say that " Scotland could be a successful independent country "?

Why did Darling choke on that?

If Cameron ( who's English ) can say it, why can't Darling ( who's Scottish ) say it?

Rattled in the heat of debate, I'd imagine. He'll be soundbite prepared next time he's asked.

[Shuggie_Murray7]

Todays papers are incredible...if it weren't so pathetic it'd be hilarious.

[Mr Bairn]

Edinburgh Evening News Poll shows yes increase after debate.

http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/scottish-independence-en-readers-split-on-debate-1-3500421

What a load of pish

So Darling won the debate apparently, more than 2/3rds of the undecideds made up their minds ( ) and yes had a 12 point lead before hand ( )

I smell cybernats. That's obviously a poll where anyone can vote as many times as they please and not a properly vetted and weighted poll

[H_B]

I saw a clip of that bit and didn't understand it. Cumnock could be a successful country, anywhere could. Darling's answer should have been along the lines of "it could be but I believe the people of Scotland will enjoy greater success, short, medium and long term, as part of the UK".

I don't get this either. The obvious answer is "Of course it could - but we are already a highly successful nation within a highly successful country in the UK. I believe Scotland's position in the Union contributes to its success and independence won't improve things, and might just make them more challenging".

It's not some great admission.