Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

skintmacflint

zagubov wrote: »

I personally feel there should be a period of stability now before revisiting the issue.
.;)

As do a couple of million Scottish residents. Seems Sir Tom Hunter a highly successful businessman shared a table with the Sturgeon at a recent CBI dinner. During his speech he asked her to focus on the powers Scotland has as a nation, not moan about the powers we don't.

Said the world and business is moving very fast. If our government is worrying about powers we don't have, it isn't worrying about using the ones we have to our best advantage.

But as SNP operate simply as an effective opposition party of Westminster grievance , I'm not convinced tbh , they are actually capable of doing just that.

Not forgetting Salmond who has been incessantly ranting about his second chance Neverendum since last Sept, along with some of his new crew of Borg MPs. Arrogantly forgetting the 55% who voted No and had no going back or second chance, if the outcome had been Yes.

And his followers continue to hang on his every utterance, admiring his alleged great intellect, and wit. Totally oblivious to the glaring fact he holds them in contempt as mere sheepie voting fodder numbers.

Enterprise_1701C

Sturgeon is desperate to stay in the EU.

She also thinks Cameron is doing wrong by the refugees, in spite of the fact we are spending a fortune in trying to support them close to their homeland.

Solution, send all the refugees that Cameron has agreed to accept to Scotland, then let hem have inedependance, everyone is happy then

wotsthat

Shakethedisease wrote: »

We all accept that the referendum was free and fair. But there is no denying that there were 'oddities' with it. The most glaring being no exit poll on the stroke of 10. For one of the biggest questions that's faced the UK in 300 years.. Weird, and why not ?

That the closest evidence to a rigged poll is the lack of an exit poll is suggestive of no evidence whatsoever. I reckon Eletan's secret evidence that can't be shared because it doesn't exist is more persuasive.

One of the biggest questions facing the UK in 300 years? Hilarious.

wotsthat

zagubov wrote: »

All this talk about "holding the SNP to account" is secondary to the people holding Westminster to account. And the last election seemed to show that voters in Scotland are keen to put Westminster very much under the microscope.;)

Do you mean Westminster or the UK government?

I don't see them being held to account and they're making hay whilst the sun shines.

Labour have been navel gazing since the election, the Lib Dems are out of the picture, UKIP didn't get in the picture and the SNP assess everything based on whether it moves Scotland closer to independence.

Thrugelmir

skintmacflint wrote: »

Said the world and business is moving very fast. If our government is worrying about powers we don't have, it isn't worrying about using the ones we have to our best advantage.

And that's the inherent danger. They've enormous power over Scottish affairs. Yet seem reluctant to be bold and decisive. With a blame game directed at Westminster which appears little more than a stalling tactic to buy time.

Rinoa

Shakethedisease wrote: »

We all accept that the referendum was free and fair. But there is no denying that there were 'oddities' with it. The most glaring being no exit poll on the stroke of 10. For one of the biggest questions that's faced the UK in 300 years.. Weird, and why not ?

/

Exit polls work by comparing constituency voting on election day with the result of those same constituencies in previous elections. After doing the maths you have a fair idea of how the country as a whole will vote.

In the referendum there was no comparable result to compare with so any exit poll would have little chance of being accurate. In the next inevitable referendum it will be possible to compare individual constituency votes with how they voted last year and calculate the result with some confidence.

Generali

Rinoa wrote: »

Exit polls work by comparing constituency voting on election day with the result of those same constituencies in previous elections. After doing the maths you have a fair idea of how the country as a whole will vote.

In the referendum there was no comparable result to compare with so any exit poll would have little chance of being accurate. In the next inevitable referendum it will be possible to compare individual constituency votes with how they voted last year and calculate the result with some confidence.

If you ever meet statisticians then they are generally quite passionate about what they do and won't just make up some rubbish for a client just because they want it (private polling aside which Lord Ashcroft calls 'comfort polling').

A lack of an exit poll because of a lack of a formalised methodology fits with the type.

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

We all accept that the referendum was free and fair. But there is no denying that there were 'oddities' with it. The most glaring being no exit poll on the stroke of 10. For one of the biggest questions that's faced the UK in 300 years.. Weird, and why not ?

Postal voting also really, really needs looking at again.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/feb/23/labour-postal-voting-glasgow-north-east

There are lots of reports of how postal voting is 'wide open to fraud' about as well. Ruth Davidson blurting out about how 'her people' had been 'sampling the postal votes' as they were opened, for weeks in advance around the country. Wasn't perhaps the best way of indicating a straight down the line playing field either. Imagine having access to that sort of information before a single vote has been counted.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-29489288

The 2014 referendum is over now. And 'rigged' probably isn't the word for it. However, if the NO/Leave side start gaining a bit of traction in the EU ref ? I personally wouldn't be surprised if those 'postal votes' start showing a 'record turnout' a few weeks out from the vote. And that's a bad thing to be thinking.

Things need tightened up so there are not even the slightest doubts in future over election results. Glenrothes is universally seen as a 'rigged and dodgy vote' in Scotland. Ruth Davidson openly admitting that there was counting going on of supposedly sealed/secret ballot papers didn't help either. There is no room for dodgy vote results from 'wide open to fraud' methods of voting these days.

Let's face it, when you've got the RUSSIAN'S of all people complaining about procedure.. there's got to be a few problems there. As the title of the article on Time.com states..they should know..

http://time.com/3414430/russia-scotland-independence-referendum/

just love the russsian connection


I've many times drawn the parallel between Putin democratic Russia and the SNP wish for a one party state.

Thrugelmir

Rinoa wrote: »

Exit polls work by comparing constituency voting on election day with the result of those same constituencies in previous elections. After doing the maths you have a fair idea of how the country as a whole will vote.

Throw in a local issue such as the years of argument over the Newbury by pass and historic data has no meaning. The Tories stance on the issue cost them a safe seat. By Pass was built. The vote changes. How much of the SNP's vote is simply the one issue of independence. Politics aren't actually of interest to the vast majority of people. .

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

Joining the deluded bandwagon I see STD. So to paraphrase, 'the referendum was a little bit rigged'. Twaddle. Just making stuff up to fill the gap between your dreams and reality.

Making what stuff up ? That postal voting is open to fraud ? Or that postal vote counting before the date is seemingly widespread and acceptable practice ?

I wasn't just talking about the referendum. I was talking about all elections/referendums. They must be beyond doubt.