H_B Posted September 19, 2014 Share Posted September 19, 2014 This It would have been easier to handle if it had been a Brazil v Germany type defeat. This was more Switzerland v Argentina, an extra time shitfest that possibly raised more questions than it answered. What would you have classed as a tanking? 80/20? Look at Quebec. which was a Rizla paper. This couldn't really have been more comprehensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paranoid android Posted September 19, 2014 Share Posted September 19, 2014 People seem to forget it's a coalition in Westminster. I haven't forgotten that - there is very little between Labour and Conservative since Blair - the Liberals? Nice in theory - toothless in practice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paranoid android Posted September 19, 2014 Share Posted September 19, 2014 It's actually just a geographical entity made up of people people. I used to think of Scotland as a distinct people - not any more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted September 19, 2014 Share Posted September 19, 2014 I used to think of Scotland as a distinct people - not any more. Distinct from what? We are a bunch of people who share a wee bit of land. Being Scottish isn't important to many people. It's just a label. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hillonearth Posted September 19, 2014 Share Posted September 19, 2014 What would you have classed as a tanking? 80/20? Not a few percentage points over half anyway. Every game of football you go to must be a tanking for someone then - "Aye, we tanked them 2-1" Unfortunately I always in my heart of hearts suspected the Westminster machine would be able to put together a coalition of the timid and scared sufficient to carry the day, and that's been the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paranoid android Posted September 19, 2014 Share Posted September 19, 2014 Distinct from what? We are a bunch of people who share a wee bit of land. Being Scottish isn't important to many people. It's just a label. Scottish people have never voted Conservative in any significant numbers. Until now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongTimeLurker Posted September 19, 2014 Share Posted September 19, 2014 What would you have classed as a tanking? 80/20? Look at Quebec. which was a Rizla paper. This couldn't really have been more comprehensive. It could have been as lopsided as 70:30 if the No side had managed to get all of the three-option poll devo-max responders on their side. If they hadn't waited until the last week to start talking in terms of meaningful extra powers the Yes side would have been road kill. Instead, there's going to be the lingering impression that it might have been a Yes in the absence of the "Vow" and if the extra powers that flow out of that turn out to be non-existent or a damp squib it sets the stage for a rematch that could (but probably won't) come quicker than another generation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted September 19, 2014 Share Posted September 19, 2014 Scottish people have never voted Conservative in any significant numbers. Until now. That's not true actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Psychosis Posted September 19, 2014 Share Posted September 19, 2014 Scottish people have never voted Conservative in any significant numbers. Until now. Not sure if serious... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dorlomin Posted September 19, 2014 Share Posted September 19, 2014 Distinct from what? We are a bunch of people who share a wee bit of land. Being Scottish isn't important to many people. It's just a label. ragman troll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongTimeLurker Posted September 19, 2014 Share Posted September 19, 2014 Not sure if serious... Technically it was the Unionists in the 50s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flogelsleftpeg Posted September 19, 2014 Share Posted September 19, 2014 Perhaps if salmond had spent some of the two years coming up with actual answers to the important questions, rather than play to the crowd and outright lie then yes would have won. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo Jagsfan Posted September 19, 2014 Share Posted September 19, 2014 Glasgow and Dundee had the lowest turnouts and voted YES. Why did a large turnout end up with a NO? Maybe the high turnout brought out more oldies who were worried that an Independent Scotland could not afford to pay the pensions and also the underclass who thought it could not afford to pay the giros? Its the economy, stupid! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarePeople Posted September 19, 2014 Share Posted September 19, 2014 It was the high turnout of new voters returning a comprehensive NO landslide that surprised me. Im still in shock at the rejection accross the board, like others Ive woken up with an identity crisis and a loss of faith in 55% of people everywhere. Nevermind pish about political parties or party leaders, we had the chance to reject corporations run on the labour of minimum wage workers, self regulating banks that keep profits but socialise losses, state media that covered up peadophilia and told lies for years, we couldve rejected NATO ffs. How many millions/billions around the world have suffered at the hands of the people who sided with the No campaign? Yet come polling day, Scotland turned out in droves to protect the crumbs the establishment dribbles down to them, Im glad Im leaving tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo Jagsfan Posted September 19, 2014 Share Posted September 19, 2014 We are bought and sold for English gold - such a parcel of rogues in a nation. It's the economy, stupid! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Psychosis Posted September 19, 2014 Share Posted September 19, 2014 Technically it was the Unionists in the 50s. ...and the 22 Scottish seats that Thatcher got for the Tories in 1979, and the 21 she got in 1983? It was only in the 90s that the Conservative vote in Scotland died, and even with their "small" support they still get more than 15% of the popular vote up here. Hardly insignificant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newbornbairn Posted September 19, 2014 Share Posted September 19, 2014 I think that Poll that put Yes ahead last week played a part. Up until then there was a complacency amongst No voters. That Poll woke a lot of people up and ensured the No Vote turned out on the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted September 19, 2014 Share Posted September 19, 2014 I think that Poll that put Yes ahead last week played a part. Up until then there was a complacency amongst No voters. That Poll woke a lot of people up and ensured the No Vote turned out on the day. Yep. With hindsight talking that really was a wake up call for people. Probably brough another couple of hundred thousand No voters out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lemmy Posted September 19, 2014 Share Posted September 19, 2014 This is clearly the case IMO. Glasgow, West Dunbartonshire, Dundee and God's Country are all well known as economic shitholes. In the main, poor places voted yes, rich places voted no. What about Bridgeton or Brigtoon it is posh and voted No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madwullie Posted September 19, 2014 Share Posted September 19, 2014 U wot m8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.