What's behind the SNP lead in the polls?

[itzdrk]

Because some people are daft for stickers, badges and balloons

[kevthedee]

Well I dunno. Not many folk will openly admit to being the victim of a confidence trickster.

The Vow; as sold by arch-unionist fud Broon, would have have certainly struck a chord with some folk.

Especially with the semi-daft auld gullible yins (team Hay)

3.4% said it was a factor in how they voted more people(5.2%) said they did not trust salmond as a reason interesting figures

[WaffenThinMint]

I am at home in bed with a fever and a sore throat.

Aw diddums.

If you're well enough to be still typing on your laptop/tablet/My Little Pony Smartphone, you're well enough to be posting on Twitter instead or somewhere else that might - just might - get you a few extra votes: not pissing around on a football forum at 1.20 in the morning because it's an easier audience to peddle your politico-shitgibbonry to than a bunch of rabid Cybernats, Cybertories or Cybervermin who are more likely to tear you a new one.

Your local branch have spunked £500 over you plus the cost of leaflets & you owe it to them to do everything you can to justify that outlay. Get a Lemsip & man up.

[FuzzyAffro]

No part of the definition requires full and/or exclusive control.

Yeah so even under your pedantic ranting we have at best partial home-rule. Which we don't anyway given Brown was offering Home Rule recently before he changed his mind and before he realised he can't offer anything anyway.

But just for shits and giggles then champ, lets see a definition of devo-max then explain to us how we have that too. I'll give you a clue, just like home-rule, we don't, not even close. Though we were promised it as part of the vow by unionist politicians, media and members of the current cabinet.

Instead we get income tax partially devolved, air passenger duty and road signs. Even a trumpet like you can't claim that's devo-max, but for ease would you like me to post a definition of it to leave you high and dry before you even attempt to con us all?

[Ad Lib]

The "black hole" that would suddenly appear out of nowhere with FFA is already there in the form of debt. That additional 8 billion pounds of borrowing each year needs to be paid back sooner or later, so it's already a black hole in Scotlands finances.

Unionists really are a special lot if they don't understand this.

But it's a black hole spread over a tax base of 70 million people instead of 5, meaning it's interest rate is lower.

[Ad Lib]

Yeah so even under your pedantic ranting we have at best partial home-rule. Which we don't anyway given Brown was offering Home Rule recently before he changed his mind and before he realised he can't offer anything anyway.

But just for shits and giggles then champ, lets see a definition of devo-max then explain to us how we have that too. I'll give you a clue, just like home-rule, we don't, not even close. Though we were promised it as part of the vow by unionist politicians, media and members of the current cabinet.

Instead we get income tax partially devolved, air passenger duty and road signs. Even a trumpet like you can't claim that's devo-max, but for ease would you like me to post a definition of it to leave you high and dry before you even attempt to con us all?

You weren't promised Devo-max.

Devo max is the devolution of all domestic matters and taxation except for those governed by EU law (VAT and excises), with defence, foreign affairs and monetary policy being reserved.

The Vow promised something that explicitly could not be Devo Max. It spoke of continued pooling of resources in relation to welfare. It wasn't just not promised, they explicitly promised not to offer it.

[NotThePars]

Aw diddums.

If you're well enough to be still typing on your laptop/tablet/My Little Pony Smartphone, you're well enough to be posting on Twitter instead or somewhere else that might - just might - get you a few extra votes: not pissing around on a football forum at 1.20 in the morning because it's an easier audience to peddle your politico-shitgibbonry to than a bunch of rabid Cybernats, Cybertories or Cybervermin who are more likely to tear you a new one.

Your local branch have spunked £500 over you plus the cost of leaflets & you owe it to them to do everything you can to justify that outlay. Get a Lemsip & man up.

lol never change

[Mr Heliums]

The Vow promised something that explicitly could not be Devo Max. It spoke of continued pooling of resources in relation to welfare. It wasn't just not promised, they explicitly promised not to offer it.

I don't think the Vow promised anything. It was just designed to be read as if it did.

[mjw]

I don't think the Vow promised anything. It was just designed to be read as if it did.

It was written by the editor of the Record,it probably wasn't even spelt right.

[FuzzyAffro]

You weren't promised Devo-max.

Devo max is the devolution of all domestic matters and taxation except for those governed by EU law (VAT and excises), with defence, foreign affairs and monetary policy being reserved.

The Vow promised something that explicitly could not be Devo Max. It spoke of continued pooling of resources in relation to welfare. It wasn't just not promised, they explicitly promised not to offer it.

You're moving the goalposts in an attempt to be right but are making a couple of fatal mistakes.

First, you're forgetting what lies you've already told thus contradicting yourself. Second you are falling into the typically immature trap for you of thinking you can't ever be wrong about anything.

That's a big problem you have, your intellectual arrogance, its actually part of growing up accepting you don't know everything and admitting when you're wrong. You should genuinely try it some time its cathartic.

Anyway - forgetting what lies you've already told - you are saying we weren't promised devo-max so it doesn't apply. You say this as it wasn't mentioned in the text of the vow you refer to.

However, neither was Home Rule which you have made a strenuous, though futile, attempt to convince us we now have as a result of Smith (A very immature and pedantic attempt too btw given your laughable claims about taxes only being partially dissolved meeting the definition of Home Rule).

In truth the 'vow' you speak of and are using as your standard doesn't exist. Nobody knows who wrote it, nobody admits writing it, the signatures were printed nobody signed it. It means nothing and is authorless.

What doesn't mean nothing is the verbal promises we were repeatedly made by unionist politicians and the media repeatedly. They all pointedly used the terms 'devo-max', 'Home Rule' and 'Full Federalism', none of which we now have. Therefore the vow has not been delivered. Any objective person couldn't possibly disagree.

We were told Home Rule did we get Home Rule? Despite your pathetic mewlings no we did not. We were told devo-max did we get devo-max? No we did not. Your attempt to rule out Devo-Max as the text of a non-existent vow written and signed by nobody is really because you can't pretend we've got it as you did with Home Rule. We were told Full Federalism are we getting Full Federalism? I'll let you answer that one.

You have a lot of growing up to do, and I take comfort from the fact you represent such a joke of a party you won't be anyone's representative any time soon, as you're not nearly ready for that intellectually.

[deadasdillinger]

For me, one of the biggest reasons is the difference in tone.

In the last two Scottish elections, Labour spent so much time on the attack, bemoaning the SNP and the Tories and disagreeing with the SnP's vision. It was all negative. The SNP won their landslide with a clear, positive message.

Negativity and mud slinging will work for so long, but ultimately people are optimistic and want something with a bit of hope and positivity to vote for.

Despite their tactic failing miserably in the last two elections in Scotland, and almost failing in the referendum, Labour are sticking with their tactic of moan moan moan moan while the SNP are laying out a positive vision for Scotland that is optimistic about what the country can do.

Jim Murphy is like a rabid dug slabbering at the mouth, raging at the very thought of anything Nicola and co say or do. Who is he going to convince to vote?!

[Gaz]

Negativity and mud slinging will work for so long, but ultimately people are optimistic and want something with a bit of hope and positivity to vote for.

This too.

There are only so many times you can tell people "you won't be able to do this, you won't be able to do that" before they say "f**k you, I'm going to try it anyway".

[F_T_Y]

I think it is yes voters jumping ship, also younger generation more involved in politics now due to the referendum.As others have said sturgeon a more popular leader, Salmond was very powerful but he was really smug and you could see why people didn't like him.

Be interesting if a 2nd referendum is in the manifesto for the SNP next year. I think it would be a bad move, seems to me that people don't want all out independence but are quite happy for the SNP to represent them. Also going against the majority of the population who voted no could kill the popularity of the snp stone dead.

I think in 10-15 years we will be looking at a very different uk anyway with the English having there own parliament.

[FuzzyAffro]

I think it is yes voters jumping ship, also younger generation more involved in politics now due to the referendum.As others have said sturgeon a more popular leader, Salmond was very powerful but he was really smug and you could see why people didn't like him.

Be interesting if a 2nd referendum is in the manifesto for the SNP next year. I think it would be a bad move, seems to me that people don't want all out independence but are quite happy for the SNP to represent them. Also going against the majority of the population who voted no could kill the popularity of the snp stone dead.

I think in 10-15 years we will be looking at a very different uk anyway with the English having there own parliament.

Don't agree at all. I think the one thing we learned from the referendum is most people do want independence. Despite being told the sky would fall in 45% still voted for it. Easily enough to have won it didn't vote for it not because they didn't want it but because they believed one or more of the scare stories.

I think if people could believe there really wasn't much risk and things would basically be the same but we'd be independent it would win by an absolute landslide.

[pandarilla]

Don't agree at all. I think the one thing we learned from the referendum is most people do want independence. Despite being told the sky would fall in 45% still voted for it. Easily enough to have won it didn't vote for it not because they didn't want it but because they believed one or more of the scare stories.

I think if people could believe there really wasn't much risk and things would basically be the same but we'd be independent it would win by an absolute landslide.

Read your second sentence again and think about that for a wee minute.

[FuzzyAffro]

Yes, I had actually thought about it before I typed it believe it or not.

[Loondave1]

It's such a lazy idea that it was lost because of scare stories. Just a security blanket really to hug after the tears of disappointment. It reads like im trolling but I'm really not.

[pandarilla]

Most people in Scotland want independence, based on last year's referendum?

Come on fuzzy. That's totally irrational - and plays into the stereotype that the media want to paint of independence supporters.

[F_T_Y]

There is change coming, the english will not stand for scottish mp's having any say on english laws and rightly so.

English votes for english laws has already been mentioned.Which is a great idea.All four countries should have there own parliament and control there own affairs and make their own laws.

Last thing we need is another referendum.

[FuzzyAffro]

No its not its perfectly logical and undeniably true given the referendum. Think about it.