Do you think the JOCKS will vote YES ?

[London Irish]

[QUOTEoííít=Don Quixote;6560125]Yes the Prime Minister should, certainly, but why the leader of the opposition? He's not in government.

Because Labour have a large following in Scotland the onus was on them to be at the forefront of the no vote at which they have failed miserably.[/QUOTE]

Might be because the majority of Labour rank and file want independence? They recognise it could be the single most progressive thing to happen to all the UK since the creation of the NHS in 1945.

 

[Jim D]

Yes the Prime Minister should, certainly, but why the leader of the opposition? He's not in government.

Why should Cameron resign? If it's a 'Yes' then he will have manufactured a situation where his party will be in power forever. What's more, there will be no evidence of his fingerprints or DNA at the scene of the crime - it will all be down to Labour making a complete mess of it.

 

[Fitzcarraldo]

Surely this whole thing is a nightmare for Cameron. This could easily be the event that will be most remembered from his time as Prime Minister, yet it is seemingly completely out his control. He can't go up to Scotland to campaign, he is the embodiment of what most Scots hate about the Union. Enough to make No voters vote Yes. All he can do is sit back and wait. If the Scots vote yes, you can try and finger the Better Together campaign, but who is ultimately in charge?

 

[bn1&bn3 Albion]

 

[Jim D]

Might be because the majority of Labour rank and file want independence? They recognise it could be the single most progressive thing to happen to all the UK since the creation of the NHS in 1945.

So if the SNP and Labour both want independence who wants to stay in the UK and why aren't the polls showing it as heavily in favour? There aren't many left to vote against.

 

[Pavilionaire]

Things are now so close that the break-up of the United Kingdom and its 63 million inhabitants will depend, in all likelihood, on which way Scotland's 98,000 registered 16-17 year olds vote. They make up about 2.5% of the voters, and if they vote 80/20 YES that will be enough to create a 1.5% gap nationally.

David Cameron will be fighting for his political life over the next 9 days. The New Stateman had an interesting article yesterday about the referendum deal struck between Salmond and Cameron.

Back in 2012 he agreed to Salmond's requests to have 16-17 year olds voting, he agreed to their request for a 2014 vote - as opposed to 2013 - and, crucially, he agreed to the question being framed "Should Scotland be an independent country"? This wording has allowed Salmond to lead the "Yes" campaign and to project the nationalists as the positive force in the campaign (while also avoiding any reference to the UK). Had Cameron played hardball and forced Salmond to accept a wording such as "Should Scotland remain part of the United Kingdom?" it could have been Alistair Darling leading the "Yes" campaign.

If you break these factors down, having the vote last year might have added 5-6% onto the NO score because the economy was that much worse and we wouldn't have had the Commonwealth Games / Bannockburn anniversary bollocks. I think 16-17 year olds will add 1-1.5% to the YES vote, and I think the way the question itself is worded probably adds 3-4% to the YES campaign.

The bottom line is that Cameron's weak negotiating has probably given the YES campaign an additional 10% support it should never have had. Without this they'd have been dead in the water.

 

[The Maharajah of Sydney]

Here's an interesting perspective. It relates to Quebec's referendum to secede from Canada back in 1995.
What stands out is that over 80% of the of the Undecided Voters ended up sticking with the status quo.
It also shows the effect the Vote had on the Canadian currency and capital markets.


Scotland referendum: 5 things markets can learn from the Quebec referendum

http://www.forexlive.com/blog/2014/...markets-can-learn-from-the-quebec-referendum/

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Things are now so close that the break-up of the United Kingdom and its 63 million inhabitants will depend, in all likelihood, on which way Scotland's 98,000 registered 16-17 year olds vote. They make up about 2.5% of the voters, and if they vote 80/20 YES that will be enough to create a 1.5% gap nationally.

Kids in that age group in Scotland are firmly in the 'Anyone But England' camp. Kids growing up in Scotland are brought up that way, always have been. Hence Andy Murray's younger years comments. It's instinctive reaction by that age. If that's the age group that is going to swing the vote, then it'll be a 'Yes' vote.

 

[London Irish]

So if the SNP and Labour both want independence who wants to stay in the UK and why aren't the polls showing it as heavily in favour? There aren't many left to vote against.

Because the Labour hierachy are unionists, always have been. Look who the last saviour of the union being wheeled out is - Gordon Brown!

The fact is Labour supporters have had enough of being ruled by Old Etonians.

If we'd had a more equal Britain over the last few years, the union might have survived unscathed but this is an easy way out for the Scots to have a fairer country, and they'd be mad not to take it.

 

[Simster]

The fact is Labour supporters have had enough of being ruled by Old Etonians.

So am I, but that's democracy isn't it?

And I don't think they'd be mad to take it at all - there are plenty of benefits they stand to lose by quitting the union. I do think the Quebec model is probably one that works best - a nation within a nation and all that.

 

[London Irish]

Here's an interesting perspective. It relates to Quebec's referendum to secede from Canada back in 1995.
What stands out is that over 80% of the of the Undecided Voters ended up sticking with the status quo.
It also shows the effect the Vote had on the Canadian currency and capital markets.


Scotland referendum: 5 things markets can learn from the Quebec referendum

http://www.forexlive.com/blog/2014/...markets-can-learn-from-the-quebec-referendum/

I've just read at least 3 banks saying only short-term consequences for stocks.

Markets seem more fixated on the launch of some bloody phone

 

[beorhthelm]

Because the Labour hierachy are unionists, always have been. Look who the last saviour of the union being wheeled out is - Gordon Brown!

think you missed the point: given the voting patterns in Scotland, there must be an awful lot of Labour supporters in the No camp. In the Scottish parliament elections, SNP polled ~45 and Labour polled ~30%. Assuming SNP are all/vast majority in favour of No, why isnt the No campaign polling in the region of 70%+?

 

[London Irish]

So am I, but that's democracy isn't it?

As is an independence vote?

They think they'll have a better democracy with leaders far closer to them - certainly the gutting of local democracy in this country means I agree with them

 

[User removed 4]

Because the Labour hierachy are unionists, always have been. Look who the last saviour of the union being wheeled out is - Gordon Brown!

The fact is Labour supporters have had enough of being ruled by Old Etonians.

If we'd had a more equal Britain over the last few years, the union might have survived unscathed but this is an easy way out for the Scots to have a fairer country, and they'd be mad not to take it.

Yes they'd much rather be ruled by someone educated at fettes, the Scottish equivalent , as Tony Blair was, or privately educated Ed balls, chuka umunna , or tessa jowell or tristram hunt or St Paul's educated Harriet Harman.........

 

[London Irish]

Yes they'd much rather be ruled by someone educated at fettes, the Scottish equivalent , as Tony Blair was, or privately educated Ed balls, chuka umunna , or tessa jowell or tristram hunt or St Paul's educated Harriet Harman.........

Ha ha - shall I send you a Labour party membership form and together we'll get rid of them, comrade Bushy?

 

[Simster]

As is an independence vote?

They think they'll have a better democracy with leaders far closer to them - certainly the gutting of local democracy in this country means I agree with them

Yes, the more devolved the power, the better the democracy - I'd agree with you there. But at what cost? That's what the vote is about, which is why your assertion that they'd be mad not to vote yes purely on that one issue, is ridiculously over-simplistic.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Yes they'd much rather be ruled by someone educated at fettes, the Scottish equivalent , as Tony Blair was, or privately educated Ed balls, chuka umunna , or tessa jowell or tristram hunt or St Paul's educated Harriet Harman.........

This is the actual breakdown of the background of MPs elected in 2010. http://www.smith-institute.org.uk/file/Who-Governs-Britain.pdf

20 MPs went to Eton; 19 Conservative and 1 Lib Dem.

34% of all MPs went to private fee paying schools. Of that 34% total, 54% were Conservatives, 41% Lib Dems, 12% Labour.

 

[London Irish]

This is the actual breakdown of the background of MPs elected in 2010. http://www.smith-institute.org.uk/file/Who-Governs-Britain.pdf

20 MPs went to Eton; 19 Conservative and 1 Lib Dem.

34% of all MPs went to private fee paying schools. Of that 34% total, 54% were Conservatives, 41% Lib Dems, 12% Labour.

And when Farage wins that by-election, 100% of those anti-establishment rascals UKIP will be public school

 

[London Irish]

Yes, the more devolved the power, the better the democracy - I'd agree with you there. But at what cost? That's what the vote is about, which is why your assertion that they'd be mad not to vote yes purely on that one issue, is ridiculously over-simplistic.

Not if you think political values are key - most Scottish voters want a centre left democracy, not the neo-liberal right-leaning governments New Labour and Tories keep giving them. This is the Scots' golden chance to change that - it is a clear choice to make in their own self-interests.

Now do I think all will be rosy in the garden come the new Scottish democracy? The fact that Rupert Murdoch has been on the phone constantly to Alex Salmond over the last two weeks means there's a good chance there will be some disillusionment, for sure - but at the moment a "Yes" is the authentic vote for "Hope", however real or not real that Hope might be.

 

[Blackadder]

Came across this today.

With all bets off in the run-up to the referendum, New-Keynesian Paul Krugman has added his opinion to the mix.

Krugman wrote in his column for the New York Times:

I have a message for the Scots: Be afraid, be very afraid. The risks of going it alone are huge. You may think that Scotland can become another Canada, but it’s all too likely that it would end up becoming Spain without the sunshine.

Krugman goes on to claim that Scotland, despite perhaps seeing itself as Canada - a small economy trading predominantly with a larger neighbour - is more like Spain.

Canada, Krugman says, has its own currency and that "makes a big difference".