Scottish independence referendum thread

[Rossfan]

Anybody have any idea or suggestions what will happen when the English outvote the rest to leave the EU?

[Milltown Row2]

Quote from: AZOffaly on Today at 02:37:48 PM

    If there was a vote in Northern Ireland only, where the proposal was to unite with the Republic of Ireland, would a high turnout be seen as good for the Yes campaign?

No. I'd think it would mean the opposite in that case, as there are probably more people who don't habitually use their franchise who would be on the No side in that one. That's my speculation anyway.

leave Milltown out of it, Scotland is different.
[/quote]

Now now, the vote here would be a lot worse than the 55/45 Scottish vote. If it came to a vote here I'd have no problems voting yes. But the amount of people who'd change their minds when they arrive at the booth would be telling.

I'd say a large percentage of the no voters (in Scotland) would be people on benefits, how else would they survive in Scotland without their handouts

[AZOffaly]

Lads, I'm struggling to understand the anger and disappointment felt on our side of the Irish Sea. I understand, maybe, the potential ramifications for the wee 6 if the UK started to break up, but I don't think Scotland's situation would determine anything either way on that front. (Although I'm sure the P&F bands with their Orange flags and bowler hats are delighted with the result).

I think the criticism of Scotland, and the Scots of being 'cowardly' or 'spineless' is over the top. I also think this notion that we should never hear again any talk about William Wallace, Flower of Scotland etc etc is way over the top.

The way I see it is you essentially had 3 camps.

1 - The Scots Nationalists. (Not to be confused with the SNP). These people have a very Scottish sense of identity, and are hugely proud of that identity and the whole Scottish culture, including those items above. They would have voted YES yesterday, even if they were unsure of the future, as they would face it with hope, determination and pride in a new independent Scotland.

2 - The Scots-British. These would be analogous to our own Unionist brethern. They feel themselves as British as anyone in Middlesex, Essex or Surrey. Granted a lot of them would support Scotland in sporting events against England, but only in the same way a brother would want to beat another brother. These identify as British, and always would. I believe this cohort would have voted NO, regardless of any promises of a prosperous future as a commonwealth, but independent, nation.

3 - The Waverers. This is where the game was won and lost. On the assumption that the camps in 1&2 were fairly evenly matched, or even weighted more towards the #1s, this is the bunch that the campaign was really aimed at. Proud of being Scots, but having nothing against the remainder of the UK, and quite comfortable having a bulwark of a big brother to prop them up if the need arises. This bunch would have had to be swayed that independence was good for them and their children, sustainable, and prosperous. This is what has failed.


So I don't think you can call the 45% of the Scottish Population, 1.6 million voters, spineless or not real Scots. At the end of the day, they did everything they could do, and I'm sure that accounts for practically everyone in #1 above.

Likewise, I don't think you can call the group #2 any of those things, as they would be unashamedly British in any case, and voting NO had more to do with their identity than being scared to go alone. They see no reason on earth why they would forsake their identity. Again, parallels with our own Unionists. You might say you don't want this bunch supporting Scotland in any sporting event, or proclaiming their culture, but that's their point. This Scottishness is part of their Britishness.

So, if we are going to slate anyone, and I don't think we should, we should be slating that percentage (unknown) who fall into group 3. The group that isn't emotionally invested in Nationhood to a sufficient extent to risk a period of financial instability or the removal of a huge buffer in the form of the UK. Cowardice is one charge that can be thrown at them, but maybe that's not accurate either. Maybe it's the case that the advantages weren't well sold to them.

[deiseach]

It's not nonsense because it's the way the No voters felt... I've spoken to quite a few Scots over the past week and all were in favour of Independence in theory but ultimately the Yes campaign did not convince them of the things you have pointed out above so they voted for the status quo.

People don't like to change too often and for many it was a case of better the devil you know than the devil you don't!

What was it about the theory of independence that they liked?

[Rossfan]

The way I see it is you essentially had 3 camps.

1 - The Scots Nationalists. (Not to be confused with the SNP). These people have a very Scottish sense of identity, and are hugely proud of that identity and the whole Scottish culture, including those items above. They would have voted YES yesterday, even if they were unsure of the future, as they would face it with hope, determination and pride in a new independent Scotland.

2 - The Scots-British. These would be analogous to our own Unionist brethern. They feel themselves as British as anyone in Middlesex, Essex or Surrey. Granted a lot of them would support Scotland in sporting events against England, but only in the same way a brother would want to beat another brother. These identify as British, and always would. I believe this cohort would have voted NO, regardless of any promises of a prosperous future as a commonwealth, but independent, nation.

3 - The Waverers. This is where the game was won and lost. On the assumption that the camps in 1&2 were fairly evenly matched, or even weighted more towards the #1s, this is the bunch that the campaign was really aimed at. Proud of being Scots, but having nothing against the remainder of the UK, and quite comfortable having a bulwark of a big brother to prop them up if the need arises. This bunch would have had to be swayed that independence was good for them and their children, sustainable, and prosperous. This is what has failed.

1- 45%
2 and 3 - 25% + 30%.??

If/when we have a referendum in the 6 Cos are talking
30% yes to UI ( no matter what)
40%(at least) No ( no matter what)
and the other 30% decide the outcome on Economic/fear of the unknown grounds?

[AZOffaly]

The way I see it is you essentially had 3 camps.

1 - The Scots Nationalists. (Not to be confused with the SNP). These people have a very Scottish sense of identity, and are hugely proud of that identity and the whole Scottish culture, including those items above. They would have voted YES yesterday, even if they were unsure of the future, as they would face it with hope, determination and pride in a new independent Scotland.

2 - The Scots-British. These would be analogous to our own Unionist brethern. They feel themselves as British as anyone in Middlesex, Essex or Surrey. Granted a lot of them would support Scotland in sporting events against England, but only in the same way a brother would want to beat another brother. These identify as British, and always would. I believe this cohort would have voted NO, regardless of any promises of a prosperous future as a commonwealth, but independent, nation.

3 - The Waverers. This is where the game was won and lost. On the assumption that the camps in 1&2 were fairly evenly matched, or even weighted more towards the #1s, this is the bunch that the campaign was really aimed at. Proud of being Scots, but having nothing against the remainder of the UK, and quite comfortable having a bulwark of a big brother to prop them up if the need arises. This bunch would have had to be swayed that independence was good for them and their children, sustainable, and prosperous. This is what has failed.

1- 45%
2 and 3 - 25% + 30%.??

If/when we have a referendum in the 6 Cos are talking
30% yes to UI ( no matter what)
40%(at least) No ( no matter what)
and the other 30% decide the outcome on Economic/fear of the unknown grounds?

I'd imagine it would be along those lines, although it may be 35% versus 40% with 25% swing votes.

[bennydorano]

Circular how?

Because it seems to be me that you are saying that because people have a decision to make, they can't be said to have chickened out. That could be applied to any choice. Golfer has 20-foot downhill putt to force a playoff in the Masters but opts to come up short to ensure he doesn't end up finishing third? Hey, don't say he chickened out, he had a decision to make! A lot of Scots will talk the talk about hating the English and wrapping themselves in the saltire and wearing kilts at weddings and sing laments about the cruel Sassenachs when filled with Glenfiddich. But when they went into the polling booth, they were suddenly overwhelmed with concern over not having a lender of last resort in the event of a run on banks. For me, that's you-know-what.

If that's your opinion, fine. It strikes me as disrespectful to the choices people have made. Maybe there's just more pro-union supporters than supporters of Independence as evidenced by yesterday's vote?

[haranguerer]

Talk of the Yes campaign's vision of the future being full of uncertainties is a nonsense - it's the future we're talking about, stupid, of course there are going to be uncertainties. What about highlighting similar uncertainties in the No blueprint? I'm thinking of the fact that Scotland could find itself being dragged out of Europe in the very near future by UKIP, the Tory right wing and all their fellow travellers. How's that for uncertainty. The currency union and use of the pound was not an uncertainty. As Salmond pointed out, Scotland is the 2nd biggest market for the rest of the UK after the US. There is simply no way that, post referendum, the British govt would put tariff barriers or exchange rate worries in the way of its own businesses. Enlightened self interest would have prevailed. Likewise, Europe could not be seen to offer a carrot to Scotland before the referendum, as this would have been viewed as encouraging the breakup of the UK. Once the vote had been won, though, Scotland would have been ushered in as quickly as possible. It's a stable, wealthy country - why wouldn't Europe want it on board?

This is true

[Milltown Row2]

The way I see it is you essentially had 3 camps.

1 - The Scots Nationalists. (Not to be confused with the SNP). These people have a very Scottish sense of identity, and are hugely proud of that identity and the whole Scottish culture, including those items above. They would have voted YES yesterday, even if they were unsure of the future, as they would face it with hope, determination and pride in a new independent Scotland.

2 - The Scots-British. These would be analogous to our own Unionist brethern. They feel themselves as British as anyone in Middlesex, Essex or Surrey. Granted a lot of them would support Scotland in sporting events against England, but only in the same way a brother would want to beat another brother. These identify as British, and always would. I believe this cohort would have voted NO, regardless of any promises of a prosperous future as a commonwealth, but independent, nation.

3 - The Waverers. This is where the game was won and lost. On the assumption that the camps in 1&2 were fairly evenly matched, or even weighted more towards the #1s, this is the bunch that the campaign was really aimed at. Proud of being Scots, but having nothing against the remainder of the UK, and quite comfortable having a bulwark of a big brother to prop them up if the need arises. This bunch would have had to be swayed that independence was good for them and their children, sustainable, and prosperous. This is what has failed.

1- 45%
2 and 3 - 25% + 30%.??

If/when we have a referendum in the 6 Cos are talking
30% yes to UI ( no matter what)
40%(at least) No ( no matter what)
and the other 30% decide the outcome on Economic/fear of the unknown grounds?

I'd say there would only be around 20% undecided

[deiseach]

If that's your opinion, fine. It strikes me as disrespectful to the choices people have made. Maybe there's just more pro-union supporters than supporters of Independence as evidenced by yesterday's vote?

Sure, and I can respect someone who genuinely feels British and Scottish and doesn't wish the r(ump)UK to become a foreign country. I mentioned Alex Massie in a previous comment who has made a tremendous case for the emotional attachment of the Union. What I can't respect, and I have no doubt the number of people who fall into this category run into tens, maybe hundreds, of thousands, is the Braveheart-loving bullshitters who know the dates of Bannockburn and Culloden and think the former PM is called Tony Bliar, but when they went into the polling booth suddenly worried that their giro might bounce. I'm exaggerating the grotesque nature of these people - but not by much. And it was they who swung the vote.

[bennydorano]

Maybe they all did vote Yes, but were simply outvoted?

Get out of that one Rommel

[AQMP]

The way I see it is you essentially had 3 camps.

1 - The Scots Nationalists. (Not to be confused with the SNP). These people have a very Scottish sense of identity, and are hugely proud of that identity and the whole Scottish culture, including those items above. They would have voted YES yesterday, even if they were unsure of the future, as they would face it with hope, determination and pride in a new independent Scotland.

2 - The Scots-British. These would be analogous to our own Unionist brethern. They feel themselves as British as anyone in Middlesex, Essex or Surrey. Granted a lot of them would support Scotland in sporting events against England, but only in the same way a brother would want to beat another brother. These identify as British, and always would. I believe this cohort would have voted NO, regardless of any promises of a prosperous future as a commonwealth, but independent, nation.

3 - The Waverers. This is where the game was won and lost. On the assumption that the camps in 1&2 were fairly evenly matched, or even weighted more towards the #1s, this is the bunch that the campaign was really aimed at. Proud of being Scots, but having nothing against the remainder of the UK, and quite comfortable having a bulwark of a big brother to prop them up if the need arises. This bunch would have had to be swayed that independence was good for them and their children, sustainable, and prosperous. This is what has failed.

1- 45%
2 and 3 - 25% + 30%.??

If/when we have a referendum in the 6 Cos are talking
30% yes to UI ( no matter what)
40%(at least) No ( no matter what)
and the other 30% decide the outcome on Economic/fear of the unknown grounds?

I'd imagine it would be along those lines, although it may be 35% versus 40% with 25% swing votes.

I think you're both over estimating the automatic Yes to a UI.  I'd see it as:

20% (on a good day) "Yes" no matter what - 10% Hate The English/Prods Bigots and 10% with an emotional attachment to a UI (like myself)

25% "No" no matter what (cos they're nasty, vicious bigots)

20% "No" because we're financially better off in the UK (even it it were shown in black and white that this wasn't the case) and it's really a fig leaf to disguise the fact that deep down they're nasty, vicious bigots too.

10% "No" - NI is a great wee country, why can't we all just get along, it's a minority spoiling it for everyone else?? - Alliance Party and Rory McIlroys

25% - The "Northern Irish" mostly Taigs but who gives a f**k what they think as we're already at 55% "NO!!"

[deiseach]

Maybe they all did vote Yes, but were simply outvoted?

Get out of that one Rommel

No, I'm certain that not ALL of the type I'm describing voted Yes. If they did, then the No campaign really did waste their time by appealing to them.

[Syferus]

The dance was nice while it lasted. A shift in the niteclub stalls was all it amounted to in the end.

It would have been an interesting case study to compare how an independent Celtic nation would be formed in the early 21st century as opposed to the early 20th century. Beyond riling up unionists it mattered little with regards the situation in the north.

[seafoid]

Anybody have any idea or suggestions what will happen when the English outvote the rest to leave the EU?

All the "better together" arguments can be applied to the Tory/UKIP notion that leaving the EU will be better than my little pony.