Electoral Commission Reject Biased SNP Referendum Question

[Thinking Aloud]

So, tell us again where you stand on the issue.

That is entirely different from the situation where Scots will go to the polling booth having discussed this very specific referendum question and the issues for 3 years, ever since SNP won the election in 2011, and most people having been exposed to the arguments for decades.

Exposed, yes. But actually thought about it, in detail, or even understand the half of it? I know you and I pay attention, but does everyone? I hope that will be the case by the time the vote comes around, because answering yes "because it sounds nice" isn't really a sensible way of deciding on nationhood.

That's why the wording is interesting.

* Should Scotland be an independent nation? "Yeah. Why not? Sounds good." *waves flag and cheers
* Should Scotland stay united with the rest of the UK? "Hang on - what will actually happen if we vote, 'no'? I'd better look into it a bit more."

I think Mistermack's wording is more thought-provoking, possibly because it requires a negative response - a rejection of the current circumstance - to get the same outcome, and that's what I thought was interesting. It's quite possible that the outcome will be exactly the same, but the wording, if I was faced with it, would cause me to think a little more deeply about the issues than the currently approved one, which more or less instills an emotional response from me.

[ronmcd]

Sounds like the gnats are rehearsing their losing speech.

"It's all Cameron's fault. He wouldn't allow us to include devo-max."
You're going to hear this a lot more, as the day get's nearer.

Funny from a party that's campaigning for INDEPENDENCE.

Not so long now. And the polls are still shit for the yes campaign.

Um ... I know personal attacks are not allowed, but seriously, one might wonder if you had some sort of memory-affecting turn over Xmas mistermack. I'm worried about you.

I've explained before, but I'll do so again ever so slowly just for you: the SNP didn't WANT a devo max question, but were in public at least open to having it on the referendum IF someone else could define it and propose it. No one did.

And why on earth would the SNP really want a devo max question? It would ALWAYS win between statusquo/devomax/indy. To win independence, the YES campaign needed a straight yes/no question, pushing substantial numbers of those who would otherwise vote for devomax into independence. Luckily for them, thats what they got.


But hey, let me know when you next forget/make stuff up, and I'll re-inform you.

[mistermack]

Given the Scottish Government is accepting all recommendations from the Electoral Commission I would hope that the UK Government is prepared to do the same.[/b]”

Exactly why they shouldn't do it.
Wrangling over the terms in public before the vote? Smarmy Alex would love that.

The electoral commission has done enough to help the Scot gnats. I can't see Cameron joining in. Unless he WANTS to lose the vote.

[ronmcd]

So, tell us again where you stand on the issue.

Independence, no argument . I'd have voted for devo max, or more explicitly full fiscal autonomy. But that will never - ever - happen. And I become more and more sick to the stomach with the antics of the Scottish parties, in particular Scottish Labour. The only way for Scottish Labour to save itself is independence.

[ronmcd]

So, tell us again where you stand on the issue.

That is entirely different from the situation where Scots will go to the polling booth having discussed this very specific referendum question and the issues for 3 years, ever since SNP won the election in 2011, and most people having been exposed to the arguments for decades.

Exposed, yes. But actually thought about it, in detail, or even understand the half of it? I know you and I pay attention, but does everyone? I hope that will be the case by the time the vote comes around, because answering yes "because it sounds nice" isn't really a sensible way of deciding on nationhood.

That's why the wording is interesting.

* Should Scotland be an independent nation? "Yeah. Why not? Sounds good." *waves flag and cheers
* Should Scotland stay united with the rest of the UK? "Hang on - what will actually happen if we vote, 'no'? I'd better look into it a bit more."

I think Mistermack's wording is more thought-provoking, possibly because it requires a negative response - a rejection of the current circumstance - to get the same outcome, and that's what I thought was interesting. It's quite possible that the outcome will be exactly the same, but the wording, if I was faced with it, would cause me to think a little more deeply about the issues than the currently approved one, which more or less instills an emotional response from me.

Sure, but again doesnt that apply really to being polled on the issue, someone at the door or on the phone? Surely the same level of deep thinking will go on between now and referendum day as the issues are discussed, ie what WILL scotland be like after a yes or no vote. It cant be true that the only time that people will think deeply about the issues will be when they look at a question in front of them on the day of the referendum. No matter the formulation of the question.

[mistermack]

I've explained before, but I'll do so again ever so slowly just for you: the SNP didn't WANT a devo max question, but were in public at least open to having it on the referendum IF someone else could define it and propose it. No one did.

Big fat lies. Is your name Alex, at all?

[ronmcd]

Given the Scottish Government is accepting all recommendations from the Electoral Commission I would hope that the UK Government is prepared to do the same.[/b]”

Exactly why they shouldn't do it.
Wrangling over the terms in public before the vote? Smarmy Alex would love that.

The electoral commission has done enough to help the Scot gnats. I can't see Cameron joining in. Unless he WANTS to lose the vote.

Yup. So the abject hypocrisy of the Better Together campaign is exposed. Demanding for the last few months that Scottish govt accept whatever the Electoral commission say, in advance, publicly, while being smeared continuously as trying to "fix" the referendum.

Fucking pathetic.

[ronmcd]

I've explained before, but I'll do so again ever so slowly just for you: the SNP didn't WANT a devo max question, but were in public at least open to having it on the referendum IF someone else could define it and propose it. No one did.

Big fat lies. Is your name Alex, at all?

Nope. It's mister, like you.

What are you claiming is a lie? That I said it before, or that the SNP didnt want devo max on the ref paper?

[mistermack]

I've explained before, but I'll do so again ever so slowly just for you: the SNP didn't WANT a devo max question, but were in public at least open to having it on the referendum IF someone else could define it and propose it. No one did.

Big fat lies. Is your name Alex, at all?

Nope. It's mister, like you.

What are you claiming is a lie? That I said it before, or that the SNP didnt want devo max on the ref paper?

Oh, you are piling on the shit. Have you been working out?
I suppose it was Cameron who wanted a devo max option.

[Thinking Aloud]

Sure, but again doesnt that apply really to being polled on the issue, someone at the door or on the phone? Surely the same level of deep thinking will go on between now and referendum day as the issues are discussed, ie what WILL scotland be like after a yes or no vote. It cant be true that the only time that people will think deeply about the issues will be when they look at a question in front of them on the day of the referendum. No matter the formulation of the question.

Yes, I hope so. I guess I just don't trust the general public to think deeply about anything in advance!

[ronmcd]

Spin. Took you a while to get here, Ron, but then you have to do PR on a lot of sites.

Do I? How many sites do I post on?

It's odd that it's never me that starts these topics, if you were right you'd think I'd be the one starting them, not ... um ... correcting the 'mistakes' of others.

[Clinton Huxley]

Spin. Took you a while to get here, Ron, but then you have to do PR on a lot of sites.

Do I? How many sites do I post on?

It's odd that it's never me that starts these topics, if you were right you'd think I'd be the one starting them, not ... um ... correcting the 'mistakes' of others.

More than two.

[ronmcd]

Sure, but again doesnt that apply really to being polled on the issue, someone at the door or on the phone? Surely the same level of deep thinking will go on between now and referendum day as the issues are discussed, ie what WILL scotland be like after a yes or no vote. It cant be true that the only time that people will think deeply about the issues will be when they look at a question in front of them on the day of the referendum. No matter the formulation of the question.

Yes, I hope so. I guess I just don't trust the general public to think deeply about anything in advance!

True, true. Similarly, I do worry the facts which should be made known to everyone - on all sides of the argument - will be obscured by the mud-slinging. Of course, for one side at the moment, that's a deliberate tactic, smear the First Minister and they think people wont vote for independence. They are wrong in the sense that people I'm sure will understand it isnt about him, but the real issues might get buried.

And Clinton Huxley wonders why I post ... we may just have answered him

[ronmcd]

Spin. Took you a while to get here, Ron, but then you have to do PR on a lot of sites.

Do I? How many sites do I post on?

It's odd that it's never me that starts these topics, if you were right you'd think I'd be the one starting them, not ... um ... correcting the 'mistakes' of others.

More than two.

I DO post on more than two sites, that's amazing. My nefarious plans are exposed!

[Clinton Huxley]

Spin. Took you a while to get here, Ron, but then you have to do PR on a lot of sites.

Do I? How many sites do I post on?

It's odd that it's never me that starts these topics, if you were right you'd think I'd be the one starting them, not ... um ... correcting the 'mistakes' of others.

More than two.

I DO post on more than two sites, that's amazing. My nefarious plans are exposed!

I am impressed, mind, really, at the speed with which you turn up to any Scotch Separatist related thread and for....pretty much nothing else. You've got an excellent alert system going.