Where's Red Celt when you want a laugh!?

[John_fi_Skye]

Ron

[Rum]

I predict 55 - 60% no..but I'm not always right either.

You do realise don't you that if YES wins the rest of the UK is doomed to Conservative rule for decades to come!

As John said, it can't really be the responsibility of Scottish voters to prevent a Tory government for England (&Wales &NI). But it's also very rare that it has ever made a difference what Scotland votes. When Labour have been in government they have done so by winning in England. It won't make much difference in numbers.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27129813

Analysis shows that most general election results would have been the same, albeit with changed majorities. In recent times, Margaret Thatcher's Conservatives would have enjoyed a massive 174-seat majority in 1983, bigger even than the 144-seat majority they achieved. In 1992, Tory John Major would have had a 71-seat majority, as opposed to the 21-seat majority which occurred. And, without Scotland, Tony Blair's Labour majority would have been cut from 179 to 137 seats in 1997, from 167 to 127 seats in 2001, and from 66 to 43 seats in 2005.

2010 would have been a Tory majority, but rarely other results would have been any different.

What will I think make a difference, and this is the Billy Brag argument and one of the reasons he supports Scottish Independence, is a left of centre Scotland showing that there is an alternative to austerity and the red/blue/yellow tory consensus.

This is not strictly true in overall terms. There are several recent elections that Labour could have won without the Scottish vote, but their majority would have been reduced substantially. And in the event of a 'close call' the odds would be stacked against them. I do however agree that this is not a good reason to vote 'No'. There are many better ones, the most notable being that whole is far greater than the sum of the parts.

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-s ... jority-win

[John_fi_Skye]

"....whole is far greater than the sum of the parts."

Platitudes aren't necessarily true. In this case, this one isn't.

[Rum]

Well that is a matter of opinion. It wasn't intended to be a platitude I assure you. I firmly believe it to be the case.

[John_fi_Skye]

Well that is a matter of opinion. It wasn't intended to be a platitude I assure you. I firmly believe it to be the case.

It is indeed a matter of opinion. I spent years voting Labour because I held a similar opinion, but my opinion has shifted, and for the last decade I've voted SNP at every opportunity - not because I'm the sort of nationalist that some No people think all the Yes people are, but because experience has led me to believe that only through independence will I acquire the opportunity to avoid being ruled by people like Cameron, Clegg and Miliband. And I see nothing in the No campaign that gives me reason to worry about the Scottish economy after a Yes vote.

However, as I've said, I'm not remotely convinced that that's what the vote will be. But, as I've also said, I'll stay hopeful.

[John_fi_Skye]

The Whole gets led by people like Cameron, Clegg and Miliband. This particular Part may be able to escape that fate.

[ronmcd]

I predict 55 - 60% no..but I'm not always right either.

You do realise don't you that if YES wins the rest of the UK is doomed to Conservative rule for decades to come!

As John said, it can't really be the responsibility of Scottish voters to prevent a Tory government for England (&Wales &NI). But it's also very rare that it has ever made a difference what Scotland votes. When Labour have been in government they have done so by winning in England. It won't make much difference in numbers.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27129813

Analysis shows that most general election results would have been the same, albeit with changed majorities. In recent times, Margaret Thatcher's Conservatives would have enjoyed a massive 174-seat majority in 1983, bigger even than the 144-seat majority they achieved. In 1992, Tory John Major would have had a 71-seat majority, as opposed to the 21-seat majority which occurred. And, without Scotland, Tony Blair's Labour majority would have been cut from 179 to 137 seats in 1997, from 167 to 127 seats in 2001, and from 66 to 43 seats in 2005.

2010 would have been a Tory majority, but rarely other results would have been any different.

What will I think make a difference, and this is the Billy Brag argument and one of the reasons he supports Scottish Independence, is a left of centre Scotland showing that there is an alternative to austerity and the red/blue/yellow tory consensus.

This is not strictly true in overall terms. There are several recent elections that Labour could have won without the Scottish vote, but their majority would have been reduced substantially. And in the event of a 'close call' the odds would be stacked against them. I do however agree that this is not a good reason to vote 'No'. There are many better ones, the most notable being that whole is far greater than the sum of the parts.

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-s ... jority-win

What's not strictly true? You are just repeating what the bbc article - and the newstatesman article - said: most GE results would have been the same, just with different majorities. (edit) That was the point, the idea that the Tories would rule if Scotland left is wrong, when Labour win it's England that votes for them.

(edit of the edit ) Unfortunately Blair's Labour wasn't my Labour.

[ronmcd]

The Whole gets led by people like Cameron, Clegg and Miliband. This particular Part may be able to escape that fate.

To quote the utterly discredited and disgusting shell of a man that now is George Galloway, they are three cheeks of the same arse. Let's choose our own ... arse.

[John_fi_Skye]

The Whole gets led by people like Cameron, Clegg and Miliband. This particular Part may be able to escape that fate.

To quote the utterly discredited and disgusting shell of a man that now is George Galloway, they are three cheeks of the same arse. Let's choose our own ... arse.

100% agreement from here.

[Svartalf]

The Whole gets led by people like Cameron, Clegg and Miliband. This particular Part may be able to escape that fate.

Because you believe salmond or any home grown politico is truly likely to be better?

I'm all for independence, mind ye, but let's not delude ourselves and believe that a tartan patterned politico is cut from a different cloth than those you revile.

[Rum]

The SNP have done a good job as a government. That doesn't mean Salmond isn't a slimeball though.

[ronmcd]

100% agreement from here.

I was looking for another smilie for drunken agreement, and thought this guy wasn't far off

[ronmcd]

The Whole gets led by people like Cameron, Clegg and Miliband. This particular Part may be able to escape that fate.

Because you believe salmond or any home grown politico is truly likely to be better?

I'm all for independence, mind ye, but let's not delude ourselves and believe that a tartan patterned politico is cut from a different cloth than those you revile.

The SNP have done a good job as a government. That doesn't mean Salmond isn't a slimeball though.

Agree with both points. Scottish politicians won't be better, and the fact SNP have done a good job doesn't mean any individual isn't an arse.

But the answer to both is the same. We will get the government we vote for, and it will be more representative of Scotland all of the time, rather than by coincidence when England votes the same way. We certainly won't get the situation where we elect 1 Tory and they form the government that decides the very issues that cause us not to elect them.

[John_fi_Skye]

Svartalf - in my life, I have admired two politicians - Nelson Mandela and Vaclav Havel. That's all. Leaving those two to one side, I dislike some politicians more than I dislike others. I dislike most of the SNP politicians a bit less than I dislike most Westminster politicians.

Rum - I'd say the SNP have done a passable job, rather than a good job. And although I'm not a Salmond fan, I also don't think he's a slimeball.

Ron - now that I've got the whisky out, I'm hoping I'll look just like that smiley within the next hour or two. And your last paragraph is another I agree 100% with.

[mistermack]

This point about the whole being better etc is proved to be a fact by Scotland's insistence on remaining in the EU.
Scotland gives up huge sovereignty to the EU, just like everybody else does. And they love it.
Huge decisions affecting Scotland are made in Brussels, 500 miles away. And Salmond can't get enough of it.
It's complete hypocrisy to keep claiming that local decisions are necessarily best, while doing the opposite, and planning the opposite at every turn.

Why don't the nationalists just admit it. They want to split, because they don't like the English, it's the natural racism that we all inherit to some degree, half from the egg and half from the sperm.

Luckily, not all Scots feel the same.