New Scottish Labour Leader

[Fide]

There's ALWAYS room for improvement in public services.

Would you agree with me, Robert, that it's a good thing that the Scottish NHS is the best performing NHS in Britain. Isn't that cause for celebration? The NHS from YOUR country, performing better than anywhere else?

[Granny Danger]

Everyone Knows you could be.

Doing it is another thing entirely.

Yeah, I reckon there will be a fair few SNP members voting Green on the list next year and keeping quiet about it.

[LongTimeLurker]

Completely disagree.

If you'd offered the No side a greater than 55.4% score before anything happened they'd have chomped your arm off to the elbow.

No way. That's revisionism. Some of the polls were even suggesting under 30% support for Yes at the time the negotiations were happening, depending on how the question was phrased. There was no huge appetite for independence amongst the Scottish electorate and the SNP won in 2011 mainly for party political reasons. Westminster thought it had Salmond trapped, because he had painted himself into a corner with his manifesto pledge, which he probably never expected to be able to implement. Anyone looking at it rationally can see that today's 65+ generation, will have to depart the scene before conditions could ever be ripe for a Yes. Beyond that the Yes side did extremely well given the uncertainty over what currency would be used and whether EU membership would be retained in the aftermath. A lopsided No victory should have been easy to achieve, but somewhere along the line a significant portion of the electorate looked closely at the Westminster power structure in comparison with the Holyrood way of doing things and did not like what they saw and were willing to give radical change a whirl despite the risks.

[~~~]

Considering the position they started from, only winning 55% of the vote would have to be considered a failure by the no campaign.

It leaves the door open for a future Indy ref

[H_B]

Your polling claim is revisionary nonsense indeed. Support for independence minus don't knows has traditionally been around a third.

In a referendum where its Yes or No the very lowest Yes could have expected was around 38-40%.

Given the economic climate..a Tory dominated government... An SNP holyrood majority for the first time ever... The huge spending advantage of Yes... The ability to frame the question and claim the positive angle of Yes .

The end margin was an absolute disaster for Yes. Its no surprise the bookmakers were offering very very generous odds on Yes getting under 45%. It seemed before the night itself that anything under 47% was unthinkable.

You are correct though that Yes made unforgivable errors. Lying about EU membership and being forced into an embarrassing climbdown. The currency debacle.

They were of course helped by the atrocious BT campaign . I genuinely fail to see how that could have gone worse to he honest.

And yet No triumphed by a huge margin virtually no one predicted the scale of in the late hours of the day.

The door was and is always open for another referendum. As it should be.

Its an issue that will rumble on. In 20 years time who knows whatvtgw population will decide?

All we know for the moment is that a huge turnout saw a comprehensive No win. In future.. Who can say. If Yes learns the lessons of their failings and the people change our views its perfectly possible a future referendum in a relatively short ten to twenty years in the future could go the other way.

[Thumper]

Man who confidently predicted a 30-point win for No suddenly announces that there was a decimal point in there all along and that it's just that the stupid proles didn't notice it. Fooling nobody.

[H_B]

Man who confidently predicted a 30-point win for No suddenly announces that there was a decimal point in there all along and that it's just that the stupid proles didn't notice it. Fooling nobody.

I'm guessing this is just yet another of the ludicrous claims you are going to litter the forum with minus well.. Evidence.

[H_B]

Just to emphasise the poll point and why this is hideous revisionism..

A poll in 2011 had Yes with a lead over No. Where did it all go wrong from there Lurker?

[strichener]

Who ever the new Labour leader is and the new Labour leader in Scotland, as the 2nd biggest party they need to get right back to dealing with the task at hand in Scotland, issues that seem somehow to be slipping under the radar as far as the SNP are concerned. A&E waiting times in our Hospitals and falling literacy rates for our school children for example.

If you are worried about A & E waiting times then move to England.

Oops, just checked and in March NHS Scotland treated 92.2% within 4 hours whilst in NHS England it was 89.7%

Even by the latest figures (taking into account the shambles at SGUH) Scotland recorded 92.6% and England 91.9%

[welshbairn]

No objective observer thought there would be a Yes vote, including the bookies. Around 45% would have been expected from the polling:

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/scottish-independence-referendum

[Fide]

Unionists, as usual, having a fucking nightmare on here.

Pleasing.

[H_B]

No objective observer thought there would be a Yes vote, including the bookies. Around 45% would have been expected from the polling:

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/scottish-independence-referendum

Yeah?

Care to remind me what the bookies odds were on Yes failing to reach 45% on the day of polling?

Many thanks.

You are of course correct that only utter loonballs thought Yes would actually win though. Mostly confined to Ayrshire and Dundee thankfully and safely kept away from civilisation.

[Fotbawmad]

Your polling claim is revisionary nonsense indeed. Support for independence minus don't knows has traditionally been around a third.

In a referendum where its Yes or No the very lowest Yes could have expected was around 38-40%.

Given the economic climate..a Tory dominated government... An SNP holyrood majority for the first time ever... The huge spending advantage of Yes... The ability to frame the question and claim the positive angle of Yes .

The end margin was an absolute disaster for Yes. Its no surprise the bookmakers were offering very very generous odds on Yes getting under 45%. It seemed before the night itself that anything under 47% was unthinkable.

You are correct though that Yes made unforgivable errors. Lying about EU membership and being forced into an embarrassing climbdown. The currency debacle.

They were of course helped by the atrocious BT campaign . I genuinely fail to see how that could have gone worse to he honest.

And yet No triumphed by a huge margin virtually no one predicted the scale of in the late hours of the day.

The door was and is always open for another referendum. As it should be.

Its an issue that will rumble on. In 20 years time who knows whatvtgw population will decide?

All we know for the moment is that a huge turnout saw a comprehensive No win. In future.. Who can say. If Yes learns the lessons of their failings and the people change our views its perfectly possible a future referendum in a relatively short ten to twenty years in the future could go the other way.

I'm sure if I was to look into your posting history I would find claims of the No vote getting 65-70% of the vote. You bring up the Yes side outspending the No campaign. However, in truth the No campaign far outspent the Yes and even used vast sums of public money to achieve this *cough*BBC*cough*. As all bar one media outlet (with the one outlet not supporting the Yes till late in the campaign) were in favour of the No. The Yes campaign did make mistakes, but they were nowhere near on the scale of BT. However, I don't think even a near perfectly run Yes campaign could have won the vote. Given all the obstacles that needed to be overcome at the start. After all. Usain Bolt might be fast, but he's not going to beat me if I get a 50m head start.

At the end of the day 55:45 is essentially a defeat for the No campaign. Given they were likely expecting a 2/3 majority. Especially when you consider most of the vote is consolidated in the older demographics. It's inevitable we're going to get another independence referendum within the next 10-15 years, and I find it hard to envision the Unionist side winning that one. As for the EU and currency debate. It was the BT side that lied about and muddied the waters on that issue, and there is plenty of quotes from EU sources and constitutional experts that leave these two issues in no doubt.

[H_B]

I'm sure if I was to look into your posting history I would find claims of the "No" vote getting 65-70% of the vote. You bring up the "Yes" side outspending the "No" campaign. However, in truth the "No" campaign far outspent the "Yes" and even used vast public money to achieve this *cough*BBC*cough*. As all bar one media outlet (with the one outlet not supporting the Yes till late in the campaign) were in favour of the "No". Yes, campaign did make mistakes, but they were nowhere near on the scale of BT. However, I don't think even a near perfectly run "Yes" campaign could have won the vote. Given all the obstacles that needed to be overcome at the start. Usain Bolt might be fast, but he's not going to beat me if I get a 50m head start.

At the end of the day 55:45 is essentially a defeat for the "No" campaign. Given they were likely expecting a 2/3 majority. Especially when you consider most of the vote is consolidated in the older demographics. It's inevitable we're going to get another independence referendum within the next 10-15 years, and I find it hard to envision the Unionist side winning that one. As for the EU and currency debate. It was the BT side that lied about and muddied the waters on that issue, and there is plenty of quotes from EU sources and constitutional experts that leave these two issues in no doubt.

You would find no such evidence. This is why the Thumper clown has had to scuttle away having embarrassed himself by making just such a ludicrous claim.

Feel free to join him in a fail Joint Venture.

[H_B]

The rest of your post is just comic.

Where to start with this really?

Kudos though for a breathtaking attempt to rewrite history around the clusterfuck the SNP and the Yes campaign made of the EU membership situation.

Nicola Sturgeon lying to the public previously about the effects of secession. Alex Salmond lying about legal advice. Their own white paper admitting they'd lied previously. It was one of the most glaring examples of the weakness in Yes and their stupidity and deceitfulness.

Its one of the many things they need to sort out before ever trying this again.

Oh and a 55% win for No was essentially a defeat? Aye.. Guid yin.

Anyway this is all becoming distant past. The referendum was won by No and comprehensively so. That battle is long over.

Its the future that's important now.

[Benjamin_Nevis]

You would find no such evidence. This is why the Thumper clown has had to scuttle away having embarrassed himself by making just such a ludicrous claim.

Feel free to join him in a fail Joint Venture.

You really miss Supras huh?

Oh, nearly forgot:

[Fide]

I'm sure if I was to look into your posting history I would find claims of the No vote getting 65-70% of the vote. You bring up the Yes side outspending the No campaign. However, in truth the No campaign far outspent the Yes and even used vast sums of public money to achieve this *cough*BBC*cough*. As all bar one media outlet (with the one outlet not supporting the Yes till late in the campaign) were in favour of the No. The Yes campaign did make mistakes, but they were nowhere near on the scale of BT. However, I don't think even a near perfectly run Yes campaign could have won the vote. Given all the obstacles that needed to be overcome at the start. After all. Usain Bolt might be fast, but he's not going to beat me if I get a 50m head start.

At the end of the day 55:45 is essentially a defeat for the No campaign. Given they were likely expecting a 2/3 majority. Especially when you consider most of the vote is consolidated in the older demographics. It's inevitable we're going to get another independence referendum within the next 10-15 years, and I find it hard to envision the Unionist side winning that one. As for the EU and currency debate. It was the BT side that lied about and muddied the waters on that issue, and there is plenty of quotes from EU sources and constitutional experts that leave these two issues in no doubt.

You will see that H_B has replied to your post. It is shite. You are correct. He is entirely wrong. Don't give him the satisfaction of a reply/

[renton]

You will see that H_B has replied to your post. It is shite. You are correct. He is entirely wrong. Don't give him the satisfaction of a reply/

Bare in mind that the No campaign outspent the Yes campaign, had 300 years of institutional inertia, and an almost universally friendly print and broadcast media, as well as a 25-30 point lead at the start of the campaign. Remember also that even darling was quoted on the necessity of keeping it under 40/60 in order to bury the issue for a 'generation' as well. The simple fact is that you can not call it a comprehensive victory, even with a ten point margin.

The reason for that is the sheer amount of ground No gave up even for that. Looking at the demographics of the vote, the only groups who came out for a No were those with either a vested interest in 'Britishness' through being 'other UK born scots' or the Gray vote who came with far different conceptions of what the British state is all about. Granted the Yes vote didn't do as wll as it needed to in the demographics it was competitive in, but it still came out ahead in those (just by not enough of a margin to offset the huge No votes from the other demographics mentioned above)

Ahead in 16-40 year olds, tied up to the 49-50 age bracket. That puts a huge ticking time bomb under the present bulwark of the No vote, as that last generation with a rosy memory of the British state fades away, granted those who voted Yes six months ago may not 5 years from now, but they are in the Yes camp for them to lose and the No case was not terribly persuasive considering all they did for two years was lose ground (nothing but a spoiling campaign). Add to that the current TNS polling showing the levels of support for the SNP in the younger demographics (and factoring in of course the fact that there is not a direct correlation between support for the SNP and support for Indy) and there is a large challenge there for any future No campaign.

That's amplified by the British state's conduct at the referendum and in the succeeding months. The Scottish people can now judge the promises and vows made at the time against the British state's delivery. It's likely that such appeals by the British state to people's trust will not work again in the future.

Finally, any referendum in 5-10 years from now will be conducted against a weakened Unionist campaigning machine, I don't think Labour can get back to their 2010 levels of support in that time, the Lib dems are utterly finished as well.

So, comprehensive? A comprehensive victory would have fulfilled darling's aim of getting the Yes vote below 40%, would have strengthened the union in the eyes of the Scottish people and buried the SNP for a generation or more.

What they got was a 10 point lead based largely on a fragile section of the demographic, with the Yes vote ahead in youth and most working age demographics, caught in a vice of needing to devolve more powers than they want with a majority of Scots polling as wanting even more powers devolved than that - while the winners of the referendum have been, massively damaged as a political campaigning mechanism in Scotland.

That feels less like a comprehensive victory and more of a pyrrhic one.

[Ira Gaines]

People that reply to H_B seriously might actually be worse than the tosspot himself.

[H_B]

People that reply to H_B seriously might actually be worse than the tosspot himself.

Do you ever contribute anything to this forum ? Other than tone trolling?

I accept you may be of more value on wrestling threads . Being over 14 I have no interest in those.

Just out of interest, when are you going to grow out of that?