Scotland votes no to independence

[SeaVisionBurma]

An inflammatory post has been removed

[7by7]

Doesn't The Speaker's powers include him telling certain members to leave the chamber? Surely that is all that is required for English only matters.

Wouldn't stop them from voting.

[I Like Thai]

[daveAustin]

Now we need Australia to have a referendum and cut the cord from mother England.

If I remember rightly you lot had one a few years ago and voted the status quo. You see, it's all about wanting to be in the club. Though what this result has anything to do with an Aussie who doesn't even live there is of zero importance. I do, however, agree about cutting cords. An independent England with no UK, no EU and no Commonwealth and its boorish hangers-on to be constantly badmouthed by would be something worth repatriating for. Edited September 19, 2014 by daveAustin

[bkk_mike]

I see that some from the Yes side are already getting their excuses in; BBC bias, scaremongering etc.

BBC bias? A few out of context pictures and comments doesn't prove such.

Scaremongering? If the Yes campaign had actually addressed the undesirable results of independence instead of merely using this word every time the No campaign raised those undesirable results; maybe the result would have been different!

Salmond and the Yes campaign have had the good grace to accept the will of the majority of the Scottish people; time some posters here did as well.

I think you'll find that complaints about BBC bias have been going on for at least a couple of years. I defy anyone to watch Nick Robinson's editing for the BBC news last week and tell me they don't think it was somewhat biased... you see how it was broadcast, and the original question and answer here, and yes you have to go to a foreign news organisation to see it.

http://rt.com/uk/187344-bbc-scottish-independence-bias/

That's the event that caused the biggest of the mass rallies against bias at the BBC Scotland headquarters. Nick Robinson was even named when bias was talked about in the televised debates. There are a lot of people who are disgusted with the BBC in Scotland, with a large number threatening to stop paying their licence fees, and that's been reported since BEFORE the vote. Again, you'll probably have to look at non-UK news sources to see any mention of it.

Edited September 20, 2014 by bkk_mike

[Franky Bear]

What a bunch of Jellyfish. Scotland should have a referendum to change their name from: Scotland to Spineless/KissAssLand.

Quite, I'm embarrassed to be a Scot today - what a bunch of narrow-minded dumpties.

Why can't you lot accept people, educated people have voted with their heads and not their hearts. To vote in something like this with your heart is very dangerous.

Maybe you should look at how bad the Yes campaign was with the "don't worry, it'll be alright" **wink-wink**

[bkk_mike]

45% or more dont want to live in UK !!

This is a great victory for england ??

It is a great victory for democracy, for what most would argue to be a free and fair referendum. Don't start lashing out at all and sundry because the vote didn't go your way.

It's a great victory for Gordon Brown, coming to the rescue of the No campaign by getting the leaders of the 3 main parties in Westminster to agree to give some form of additional devolution, when the devo max option would always have won if it had been allowed to be on the ballot..

But even with extra devolution promises, those under 65 voted Yes (not by much - but without the pensioner vote, Scotland would be independent). This is a vote where the 3 to 1 vote for No by pensioners gave No the win. I hope they can look their children and grandchildren in the eye.

[jpinx]

45% or more dont want to live in UK !!

This is a great victory for england ??

It is a great victory for democracy, for what most would argue to be a free and fair referendum. Don't start lashing out at all and sundry because the vote didn't go your way.

It's a great victory for Gordon Brown, coming to the rescue of the No campaign by getting the leaders of the 3 main parties in Westminster to agree to give some form of additional devolution, when the devo max option would always have won if it had been allowed to be on the ballot..

But even with extra devolution promises, those under 65 voted Yes (not by much - but without the pensioner vote, Scotland would be independent). This is a vote where the 3 to 1 vote for No by pensioners gave No the win. I hope they can look their children and grandchildren in the eye.

Very interesting if true

What's the source of your information ?

[Asiantravel]

Scottish poll rigged – Aangirfan

In Glasgow, “Police are investigating ten cases of electoral fraud.”

Voters turned up at polling stations to find that people had already voted using their names.

http://beforeitsnews.com/eu/2014/09/scottish-poll-rigged-aangirfan-2569306.html

There is a rising tide among the YES camp that view the Scottish vote was rigged. There are videos and photographs emerging calling the votes rigged. There is special focus on Dundee where photos are circulating on Twitter and Facebook demonstrating the rigging of the election.

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/09/19/scottish-rigged-vote-is-anything-real-any-more-the-crisis-in-democracy/

Edited September 20, 2014 by Asiantravel

[jpinx]

Scottish poll rigged – Aangirfan

In Glasgow, “Police are investigating ten cases of electoral fraud.”

Voters turned up at polling stations to find that people had already voted using their names.

http://beforeitsnews.com/eu/2014/09/scottish-poll-rigged-aangirfan-2569306.html

There is a rising tide among the YES camp that view the Scottish vote was rigged. There are videos and photographs emerging calling the votes rigged. There is special focus on Dundee where photos are circulating on Twitter and Facebook demonstrating the rigging of the election.

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/09/19/scottish-rigged-vote-is-anything-real-any-more-the-crisis-in-democracy/

Losers always call "foul" -- but it's good to know that there were people watching closely. The numbers would have been unlikely to make any overall difference.

[inutil]

My family are pushing this idea a bit. I think the problem is that for many yes supporters they were really living in a bit of an echo chamber on social media and the like. Because it was such a successful grassroots campaign they didnt really interact with their opposition. And the opposition didnt interact because not only was the entire British political machine behind them to make their points, so was the print and tv media.

I think in part this is why the no campaign could in fact claim intimidation and suggest they were being silenced and heckled due to the sheer voice of the grassroots nature of the yes campaign and its clear support on social media, but i also think that because they didnt have to engage, they decided not to bother and made their minds up quietly. The yes campaign got ever noisier and the no campaign ever quieter (in the public) which of course led to his echo chamber effect as mentioned, and the feeling that the results went against everything the yes campaign anticipated based upon their own individual observations the length and breadth of the country.

I dont think the yes campaigners were particularly intimidating, its just that as the grassroots campaign too hold, the no campaign went quieter and relied on the power of the media and the political machinery of westminster to make their case on the six o clock news and editorials/front pages instead. As less of the no campaign actually participated in the conversation, the natural affect was that less people would TRY to participate in it. It reached its crescendo in the flag waving outside the BBC and thus, strategically it did have an effect, It forced the yes campaign to mobilise against the mainstream media and thus looked a bit like a mob rather than a glorious movement for change. Unfairly. But there you go. Such missteps happen

[Keesters]

If Scotland is given more power to decide its own fate then shouldn't Wales and Northern Ireland be given the same? And come to think of it why not an English assembly/parliament in Manchester or Birmingham leaving Westminster as a federal government only. Isn't what's good for the goose also supposed to be good for the gander

[Chicog]

45% or more dont want to live in UK !!

This is a great victory for england ??

It is a great victory for democracy, for what most would argue to be a free and fair referendum. Don't start lashing out at all and sundry because the vote didn't go your way.

It's a great victory for Gordon Brown, coming to the rescue of the No campaign by getting the leaders of the 3 main parties in Westminster to agree to give some form of additional devolution, when the devo max option would always have won if it had been allowed to be on the ballot..

But even with extra devolution promises, those under 65 voted Yes (not by much - but without the pensioner vote, Scotland would be independent). This is a vote where the 3 to 1 vote for No by pensioners gave No the win. I hope they can look their children and grandchildren in the eye.

I hope when their children and grandchildren grow up, they realise how they were duped by a fat megalomaniac.

[Matej]

Scottish referendum was the excellent example of a well-functioning democracy, but also it showed as how easily can people give in to demagogy

[7by7]

I see that some from the Yes side are already getting their excuses in; BBC bias, scaremongering etc.

BBC bias? A few out of context pictures and comments doesn't prove such.

Scaremongering? If the Yes campaign had actually addressed the undesirable results of independence instead of merely using this word every time the No campaign raised those undesirable results; maybe the result would have been different!

Salmond and the Yes campaign have had the good grace to accept the will of the majority of the Scottish people; time some posters here did as well.

I think you'll find that complaints about BBC bias have been going on for at least a couple of years. I defy anyone to watch Nick Robinson's editing for the BBC news last week and tell me they don't think it was somewhat biased... you see how it was broadcast, and the original question and answer here, and yes you have to go to a foreign news organisation to see it.

http://rt.com/uk/187344-bbc-scottish-independence-bias/

That's the event that caused the biggest of the mass rallies against bias at the BBC Scotland headquarters. Nick Robinson was even named when bias was talked about in the televised debates. There are a lot of people who are disgusted with the BBC in Scotland, with a large number threatening to stop paying their licence fees, and that's been reported since BEFORE the vote. Again, you'll probably have to look at non-UK news sources to see any mention of it.

Like I said, the No campaign were getting their excuses in early, very early!

I did not see the TV report mentioned; but the exchange, including Salmond's pathetic 'Brass Plate' reply and unfounded accusations of Treasury 'leaks' to the BBC , was reported fully on the BBC website and BBC radio and the BBC 24 news TV channel.

[7by7]

<snip>

when the devo max option would always have won if it had been allowed to be on the ballot..

Whose 'fault' is it that it wasn't?

The Scottish Parliament, i.e. Salmond and the SNP, decided on the question!

But even with extra devolution promises, those under 65 voted Yes (not by much - but without the pensioner vote, Scotland would be independent). This is a vote where the 3 to 1 vote for No by pensioners gave No the win. I hope they can look their children and grandchildren in the eye.

How do you know?

Was it not a secret ballot?

Don't say that post ballot surveys prove it; that would only be true if every voter was asked and every one asked answered.

[alanrchase]

Apparently no one is allowed to call a polotician a liar. You get kicked out of the house for that.

Would like to find some serious reporting on various statements by the yes and no supporters.

Are all the secret north sea oil reserves going to come to light?

[nontabury]

45% or more dont want to live in UK !!

This is a great victory for england ??

It is a great victory for democracy, for what most would argue to be a free and fair referendum. Don't start lashing out at all and sundry because the vote didn't go your way.

It's a great victory for Gordon Brown, coming to the rescue of the No campaign by getting the leaders of the 3 main parties in Westminster to agree to give some form of additional devolution, when the devo max option would always have won if it had been allowed to be on the ballot..

But even with extra devolution promises, those under 65 voted Yes (not by much - but without the pensioner vote, Scotland would be independent). This is a vote where the 3 to 1 vote for No by pensioners gave No the win. I hope they can look their children and grandchildren in the eye.

Why not, they voted using their experience of life. The 16-18 age group according to one survey voted "YES" why was this,do you think. It could't have anything to do with their inexperience of life, or their susceptibility to accept Braveheart and the vague promises of the Nationalist.

[inutil]

Come on, you can make these stupid arguments for any age group.

Perhaps then pensioners should be barred from voting because theres a decent chance theyll be dead before the changes on offer from the relevant parties have time to actually affect them. It makes them selfish, myopic and narrow and forces the rest of us us into kow-towing to their stupid brand of selfish conservatism because old people are clearly too stupid and doddery to deal with change or do the decent thing and DIE!!! Wait, that reminds me. Their brains arent working anyway. Who gave these people a vote? Madness. There should be an upper age limit. Lets make it pensioner age to be fair. Id reduce it to 60 as well, but my mum might shout at me what with her retirement age already going up.

Edited September 20, 2014 by inutil

[7by7]

45% Yes, 55% No.

But 14% of those eligible to vote didn't.

I think it's reasonable to conclude that those who didn't vote didn't really care; apart from a small percentage who were prevented from voting by illness or similar.

I think it's also reasonable to conclude that Yes supporters made sure they voted if at all possible.

So, if my maths is correct, only 38% of Scottish voters wanted an independent Scotland enough to go and vote for it.

[inutil]

Your maths is self serving and based on circumstances and assumptions you are pulling out of your arse. With respect.

Edited September 20, 2014 by inutil

[phuketjock]

PhuketJock

Please explain why the Barnett formula is neccessary if The Scottish parliament gets tax raising powers. Its no good trying the Salmond trick of blaming everything on nasty English tories , even the majority of Scots have now seen through that.

Barnett is hugely unfair to certain less prosperous parts of the UK , notably Wales and the North East of England.

Further devolution means Scotland taking financial responsibility , good luck expecting that from Salmond.

No where in my post did I support or criticise the merits of the Barnett formula I merely

pointed out that the Tory,Labour, and Liberal Democrat leaders in West minister Vowed

on the front page of a popular Scottish tabloid prior to the referendum vote that Scotland

would still be eligible for payment under the existing Barnett formula and also promised

further tax/revenue raising powers to the Scottish government if there was a NO vote.

Now there is already murmers of denying that promise by the very person, I discovered

on the news last night, that has been put in charge of the negotiations with the Scottish

government on the new devolution powers for that government William Hague.

I fear the cowardly NO voters have very little idea of the depth of their betrayal of the nation

of Scotland, but I am quite positive it will not be very long before even they realise the grave

misjustice they have done their counrty.

A sad sad day for them and Scotland..................................

[alanrchase]

Am I right in understanding there can't be another vote for 30 years?

[nontabury]

Scottish poll rigged – Aangirfan

In Glasgow, “Police are investigating ten cases of electoral fraud.”

Voters turned up at polling stations to find that people had already voted using their names.

http://beforeitsnews.com/eu/2014/09/scottish-poll-rigged-aangirfan-2569306.html

There is a rising tide among the YES camp that view the Scottish vote was rigged. There are videos and photographs emerging calling the votes rigged. There is special focus on Dundee where photos are circulating on Twitter and Facebook demonstrating the rigging of the election.

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/09/19/scottish-rigged-vote-is-anything-real-any-more-the-crisis-in-democracy/

I think you can call these articles plain rubbish, the Nationalist have accepted this result, unfortunately you will always get a few nut cases who will never accept any result that goes against them. If any side was to question the Dundee result it would surely be the "NO" side, for the simple reason that Dundee presented the National with their best result.

[alanrchase]

PhuketJock

Please explain why the Barnett formula is neccessary if The Scottish parliament gets tax raising powers. Its no good trying the Salmond trick of blaming everything on nasty English tories , even the majority of Scots have now seen through that.

Barnett is hugely unfair to certain less prosperous parts of the UK , notably Wales and the North East of England.

Further devolution means Scotland taking financial responsibility , good luck expecting that from Salmond.

No where in my post did I support or criticise the merits of the Barnett formula I merely

pointed out that the Tory,Labour, and Liberal Democrat leaders in West minister Vowed

on the front page of a popular Scottish tabloid prior to the referendum vote that Scotland

would still be eligible for payment under the existing Barnett formula and also promised

further tax/revenue raising powers to the Scottish government if there was a NO vote.

Now there is already murmers of denying that promise by the very person, I discovered

on the news last night, that has been put in charge of the negotiations with the Scottish

government on the new devolution powers for that government William Hague.

I fear the cowardly NO voters have very little idea of the depth of their betrayal of the nation

of Scotland, but I am quite positive it will not be very long before even they realise the grave

misjustice they have done their counrty.

A sad sad day for them and Scotland..................................

Don't like to assume but seems you may be Scottish? How did you vote? Yes, No?

[laolover88]

I have no reason to like or dislike Herr Salmonella. But you have to have some sympathy for a guy who tried to lead his people to the promised land, only for the Haggises and Lassies to turn round, raise their skirts and kilts and wind on him. I never realised the dork Cameron was a dish. No knowing what ladies think! I am sure I am missing something; well maybe a lot of things.

[transam]

PhuketJock

Please explain why the Barnett formula is neccessary if The Scottish parliament gets tax raising powers. Its no good trying the Salmond trick of blaming everything on nasty English tories , even the majority of Scots have now seen through that.

Barnett is hugely unfair to certain less prosperous parts of the UK , notably Wales and the North East of England.

Further devolution means Scotland taking financial responsibility , good luck expecting that from Salmond.

No where in my post did I support or criticise the merits of the Barnett formula I merely

pointed out that the Tory,Labour, and Liberal Democrat leaders in West minister Vowed

on the front page of a popular Scottish tabloid prior to the referendum vote that Scotland

would still be eligible for payment under the existing Barnett formula and also promised

further tax/revenue raising powers to the Scottish government if there was a NO vote.

Now there is already murmers of denying that promise by the very person, I discovered

on the news last night, that has been put in charge of the negotiations with the Scottish

government on the new devolution powers for that government William Hague.

I fear the cowardly NO voters have very little idea of the depth of their betrayal of the nation

of Scotland, but I am quite positive it will not be very long before even they realise the grave

misjustice they have done their counrty.

A sad sad day for them and Scotland..................................

Scots Cowards, 55% are cowards, adding on the folk who didn't bother voting cos they don't care, we then have about 65% of Scots in YOUR opinion are cowards.

This must be the most ridiculous thing I have read in a looooooooong time chum.

[alanrchase]

I have no reason to like or dislike Herr Salmonella. But you have to have some sympathy for a guy who tried to lead his people to the promised land, only for the Haggises and Lassies to turn round, raise their skirts and kilts and wind on him. I never realised the dork Cameron was a dish. No knowing what ladies think! I am sure I am missing something; well maybe a lot of things.

Assuming He was leading them to the promised land.

[jpinx]

<snip>

when the devo max option would always have won if it had been allowed to be on the ballot..

Whose 'fault' is it that it wasn't?

The Scottish Parliament, i.e. Salmond and the SNP, decided on the question!

But even with extra devolution promises, those under 65 voted Yes (not by much - but without the pensioner vote, Scotland would be independent). This is a vote where the 3 to 1 vote for No by pensioners gave No the win. I hope they can look their children and grandchildren in the eye.

How do you know?

Was it not a secret ballot?

Don't say that post ballot surveys prove it; that would only be true if every voter was asked and every one asked answered.

Apparently it was Cameron who refused to allow devomax, and the Scottish parliament were allowed to choose the question. Bit of a Hobson's choice

But it's all academic now. England needs to sort out it's parliament while they have the chance or all those scottish MP's will be voting for things in Sussex etc

[inutil]

Am I right in understanding there can't be another vote for 30 years?

You are not im afraid. Its at the whim of three things:

1. A manifesto pledge.

2. A mandate to deliver on that manifesto.

3. A British government in Parliament that agrees on such a thing.

There could be another mandate in as little as 2 years. There could be one if the UK EU referendum actually compels Scotland into leaving the EU in 2017. There could be one at the next Scottish parliament elections thereafter.

There even could be one if someone said "lets have a referendum!" and printed up a bunch of ballot papers (though without the actual chance of being endorsed by the UK government to make it a legally binding verdict, it would lack any participation and be a massive waste of time, money and effort).

Basically you follow those three rules at the top and we could have another one within 2 years (but Scotland would REAAAAAAALLLLLLYYYY have to want it to offset the sheer annoyance of dealing with this all again and grinding the country to a halt - people would be mad IN SCOTLAND if a second referendum comes without any good reason other than to try and get the vote the independence movement want). More than likely only if there was real cross party support against a yes vote to leave the EU would perhaps trigger another referendum. Failing that it will be argued that two years is far too short a time politically to insist on devo max pledges being fully honored and delivered. Maybe in about ten years though, the records can be checked again before the emotion on broken promises is enirely forgotten, but not so early that people think "this &lt;deleted&gt; again!?!??!"