Where did the Yes campaign go wrong?

[Scary Bear]

This is the point though. Its double standards which defined the Yes campaign on here.

'The MSM have poisoned the minds of voters with biased lies... thank goodness we have social media, WoS etc to give us the truth '.

Do you see the problem here?

I don't read those blogs/websites, so I am not aware just how biased they are. Anything that combats the stuff churned out by MSM is a bonus. They seem to take government press releases and just publish them without checking them out. In an ideal world the media would be more objective.

[MuckleMoo]

If I can offer a word of advice or two here - while telling yourself that people disagreed with you because they were craven, whimpering big jessies is probably comforting, it's not exactly endearing.

Portraying a Yes vote as an act of outstanding political courage and a No as basically cowardice may make you feel better, but it really doesn't look good if the story you're telling each other is that the majority of the country were driven by cringing terror and obsequiousness*. The rest of us can see you doing it and will remember, the next time there's a big poll on the issue.

This all looks a lot like refusal to face facts and retreating into more convenient myths. I've seen a thousand theories for why Yes lost from its supporters, and not one single person considering whether it might just be that two million people found the Yes arguments unconvincing.

In fact, I've seen loads of people swallowing that We wuz robbed stuff about vote-rigging, and none saying - people considered our argument and decided that we were wrong. Which speaks volumes, I think.

(I don't expect this to go down very well, but it's worth saying nonetheless).

*Or, if you're determined to stick with the "You are all traitorous big jessies" line, it might help if there was also some contemplation of the idea that much of the Yes vote was driven by slack-jawed, brainless Braveheart bullshit too, which it definitely was for many people.

Agree completely.

In the cold light of day I think there were just to many unanswered questions that required a leap of faith. Unfortunately, these questions were of a kind that could never, unequivocally, be answered until independence was secured.

It was a leap of faith I was prepared to make, I can fully understand why others would not.

The referendum is gone, over, and we lost. Now is the time to reflect on those issues that caused uncertainty and attempt to come up with arguements that will convince the electorate if/when a further referendum is achieved.

[flyingrodent]

Agree completely.

In the cold light of day I think there were just to many unanswered questions that required a leap of faith. Unfortunately, these questions were of a kind that could never, unequivocally, be answered until independence was secured.

It was a leap of faith I was prepared to make, I can fully understand why others would not.

The referendum is gone, over, and we lost. Now is the time to reflect on those issues that caused uncertainty and attempt to come up with arguements that will convince the electorate if/when a further referendum is achieved.

That was the theme of the whole thing, really - a matter of faith, in the real sense of the word.

[H_B]

In your urgency to dominate every thread in this forum you're obviously missing some of the detail.

As previously stated, we have a variety of mediums in this country to report news. If they had been allowed to report and comment as unbiased sources then the need for an alternative press would be just a sideshow. The only reason Wings of Scotland etc were allowed to flourish is because even the most blinkered in our country were realising that the MSM were completely untrustworthy.

You can twist it all you want but the Scottish public at large now understand that the BBC, Daily Record and every other media outlet in the UK ( and beyond) are corruptable and unreliable for impartial opinion. You can't stop that now.

So .. that will be no criticism then? Thought not.

You and other Yes voters were quite happy to see people move to Yes based on biased garbage Yes propaganda they bought hook line and sinker.

Indeed it was celebrated.

That's fine.. I've no issues with that.

Buhhhht... then the same people (like you) wish to cry crocodile tears about No voters being swayed by the Daily Record and not needing 'the facts' ( not actual facts... just spun Yes propaganda natch).

Comedy stuff. That you revel in such double standards says a lot about you.

[H_B]

I don't read those blogs/websites, so I am not aware just how biased they are. Anything that combats the stuff churned out by MSM is a bonus. They seem to take government press releases and just publish them without checking them out. In an ideal world the media would be more objective.

Is it a bonus? That's like saying the Celtic website Kerrydale Street is great because it contradicts Follow Follow.

What would be a bonus is if sane rational sources of information existed.

I don't see why lies slanted to favour Yes are great.. and lies slanted to favour No are bad.

Surely the unbiased neutral facts are the only good thing. Allow voters to interpret them as they choose?

[Confidemus]

What I find most refreshing is that H_B isn't overbearing or Patrick Bateman-esque in his approach at all.

[flyingrodent]

BTW, if people are a bit depressed, I made a political map of Scotland to explain the country for foreigners on IndyRef night - might cheer a couple of you up a bit.

https://twitter.com/flying_rodent/status/512763761262751747/photo/1

[sparky88]

The newspapers chose to back no because thats what most of the people wanted - a no vote.

[LongTimeLurker]

Even Alan Cochrane of the Daily Telegraph is writing this:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11108132/The-Scottish-Independence-roller-coaster-ends...-for-now.html

...Then two weeks ago, the worst of all happened. A You Gov poll for the Sunday Times showed them in the lead and all hell appeared to break loose. The value of the pound nose-dived, billions were wiped off the value of major British firms and Osborne announced that a timetable for extra Holyrood powers would be announced immediately.

This, plus the emergency drafting in – or more likely he drafted himself in – of Gordon Brown more than did the trick. In a series of barnstorming speeches, filled with Old Time Religion from the former prime minister, now fully rehabilitated with the man who threw him out of Downing Street, appeared to work especially in the Labour heartlands.

The No side took the lead in the polls again, albeit a narrow one, and as Referendum Day approached there was everything to play for.

As it turned out the combination of Brown’s reassurance to the army of traditional Labour voters, the solemn promise of the leaders of the three main political parties to grant new powers to Holyrood – even if they still haven’t agreed them all amongst themselves – plus the determination of Tory voters to make their votes count in defence of the Union won the day.

A huge turnout across the entire country saw Scotland retain its place as part of the United Kingdom. However, the victory was not as large as it could have been and there will be many today saying that it was nowhere as good as it should have been.

The questions will begin today – what went wrong in the Unionist camp and how can Scotland recover from this bruising contest?

The fight to prevent the break-up of Britain has been won. Or is it only the end of Round One?

The Yes side did enough to get Tory cabinet ministers to declare stuff like this:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11110441/English-votes-only-for-English-laws.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11111435/Justice-Secretary-Grayling-tells-Scots-MPs-Get-off-my-lawn.html

“Even with a big majority, there were times when backbench rebellions meant their plans for England were pushed through Parliament against the wishes of English MPs, and only Scottish votes secured a majority,” he says.

“This time things have to be different. If the Scottish Parliament – and probably the other devolved assemblies – are to be given new powers, then England has to be a priority as well. It is something the Tory party is united on. We cannot have a situation where more and more decisions about Scotland are being taken in Scotland, and yet Scottish MPs come to Westminster and vote on English only issues.”

If/when Scottish MPs are only voting on a narrow range of issues at Westminster, the political and cultural landscape will be very different from the one that delivered a 55:45 for the No side. If the referendum outcome had been something like 63:37 and there had been no late surge to the Yes side after the debates none of this would be happening. Alistair Darling's inept performance may yet prove to be a pivotal turning point in Scottish history.

[Jacksgranda]

Agree completely.

In the cold light of day I think there were just to many unanswered questions that required a leap of faith. Unfortunately, these questions were of a kind that could never, unequivocally, be answered until independence was secured.

It was a leap of faith I was prepared to make, I can fully understand why others would not.

The referendum is gone, over, and we lost. Now is the time to reflect on those issues that caused uncertainty and attempt to come up with arguements that will convince the electorate if/when a further referendum is achieved.

Not much point in posting sensible stuff like that...

[HibeeJibee]

If I can offer a word of advice or two here - while telling yourself that people disagreed with you because they were craven, whimpering big jessies is probably comforting, it's not exactly endearing.

Portraying a Yes vote as an act of outstanding political courage and a No as basically cowardice may make you feel better, but it really doesn't look good if the story you're telling each other is that the majority of the country were driven by cringing terror and obsequiousness*. The rest of us can see you doing it and will remember, the next time there's a big poll on the issue.

I was thinking that myself... Claiming that 'No' voters are cowards, idiots, sheep, or unScottish, will do nothing to endear those saying it to those they're saying it to.

EDIT: Also some still saying "Currency Plan A" should've been a seperate Scottish currency. That would've been madness from 'Yes' and harmed not boosted their prospects.

[H_B]

I was thinking that myself... Claiming that 'No' voters are cowards, idiots or unScottish will do nothing to endear those saying it to those they're saying it to.

They don't care. It's much more satisfying for them to dish out random abuse to those who don't agree than actually try and treat them with respect, understand where they are coming from and basically be a decent human.

[QPSAFalkirkFirm]

Agree completely.

In the cold light of day I think there were just to many unanswered questions that required a leap of faith. Unfortunately, these questions were of a kind that could never, unequivocally, be answered until independence was secured

A very fair observation and I'm sure the biggest issue for many NO voters. So many people wanted certainty when, as you say, the definitive answers could never be given until full independence was a living thing. Unfortunately, virtually all of these people believed, and I'm specifically talking about the Ayes but Naws here, when voting NO that they were retaining the status quo. Even in the short time since the vote it's evident that that isn't going to be the case so they haven't got what they thought they were voting for.

I don't personally believe there will be any future referendum. Not for constitutional reasons, I just can't see any future UK government running the risk. But even if there was, that leap of faith will always be an issue.

The underlying question remains though. If Scotland was such an unattractive offer to the UK why was the Massive Machine mobilised to keep us?

[DeeTillEhDeh]

This is the point though. Its double standards which defined the Yes campaign on here.

'The MSM have poisoned the minds of voters with biased lies... thank goodness we have social media, WoS etc to give us the truth '.

Do you see the problem here?

Some of the stuff (from both sides) on social media was laughable.

The reliance by some on it being their sole source of "information" is frightening. It has made people lazy in finding out for themselves about the issues - instead there is the sheep-like following with little questioning of the crap posted.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

I was thinking that myself... Claiming that 'No' voters are cowards, idiots, sheep, or unScottish, will do nothing to endear those saying it to those they're saying it to.

EDIT: Also some still saying "Currency Plan A" should've been a seperate Scottish currency. That would've been madness from 'Yes' and harmed not boosted their prospects.

I understand why Yes may have avoided having an iCurrency as option A - fear that No would have went for a Groatland line of attack.

My own view is that it could have been sold if established as the route to go when the White Paper was published. Leaving it as late as they did with the ludicrous sterlingisation plan B was never going to work.

[HibeeJibee]

Each-to-their-own, but (IMO) there's no way saying there'd be a Scots Mark or whatever would have helped - rather than hindered - their efforts.

[The big chair]

Is it a bonus? That's like saying the Celtic website Kerrydale Street is great because it contradicts Follow Follow.

What would be a bonus is if sane rational sources of information existed.

I don't see why lies slanted to favour Yes are great.. and lies slanted to favour No are bad.

Surely the unbiased neutral facts are the only good thing. Allow voters to interpret them as they choose?

Quite a few of your arguments appear to refer to Celtic, very strange behaviour in a political discussion imo. Or maybe it reveals why you're so staunch in your defence of the Union.

[H_B]

Quite a few of your arguments appear to refer to Celtic, very strange behaviour in a political discussion imo. Or maybe it reveals why you're so staunch in your defence of the Union.

Oh dear.

[The big chair]

Perhaps you could explain the relevance of your posts about Celtic in a discussion about independence then?

[H_B]

Perhaps you could explain the relevance of your posts about Celtic in a discussion about independence then?

It's incredibly relevant.

Yes supporters display so many of the tribal failings of Old Firm fans. Particularly Celtic fans, given the tendency to see conspiracies everywhere, and believe the media are out to get them along with the establishment of course.

There is also of course the Old Firm tendency displayed of completely refusing to see the faults in "their" side and engage in whataboutery and faux outrage.

That you need this explained to you is no real surprise given you are a little dim.