Salmond wanted two questions on the ballot paper. 'Should Scotland have more power aka Devo Max' and 'Should Scotland tell England to take their hands the fuck off our oil and piss off'

 

All three Unionist parties weren't particularly happy about that and the ConDem government refused point blank to allow it forcing just the full indie.

 

Devo Max would have sailed through on a good 65-75% Yes, full Indie would have got about 25% Yes. The issue would be over for a long time (unless the UK voted to leave the EU and Scotland voted to stay, but that's a whole different set of hypotheticals) as nobody would see the point in the divorce when Scotland had full fiscal freedom.

 

It's the single stupidest thing the NO campaign has done, no mean feat given that every move they've made has been stupid.

Every?

Every?

Do you have any particular good move in mind? I can't think of one atm.

Newsnight reporting David Cameron is going to get involved in the independence campaign. Eek.

 

Also, the Newsnight correspondent agrees that it feels like the "Yes" campaign is starting to build up momentum.

- Putting Darling in charge as opposed to having it as a Salmond vs Cameron slug-out (and please, no citations of 'anonymous senior Tory figures' criticism)

- Making a big play of the Swinney memo - which seems about as game, set and match as you can get. Why would anybody want to choose to pay more for the same service?

- Well, pretty much every torpedoing of the presumptive crap Salmond comes out with over...well, take your pick from any of keeping the pound/EU/transfer arrangements/whatever. Actually, that's not so much a Better Together triumph as the triumph of anybody with even the most basic sense that if Scotland turns around to the UK and tells it to fuck off, it's slightly wishful thinking that the UK would gladly sign a promise to underwrite Scotland in perpetuity.

 

Really, the only people you'll find trying to pretend the No campaign has been a total disaster are those already sympathetic to independence and those in the media desperately trying to turn it into a horse race (nothing sells papers less than the news agenda being utterly dominated by a referendum that everyone knows the result of already. it's in their interest to try and create a 'Yes is on the up and could win!' narrative) when there isn't anything out there showing a big narrowing, short of the occasional rogue poll once or twice a month showing something ridiculous like a 14 point margin - which is utterly absurd as a sign that 'the momentum is with independence!!!!' (honestly, when the best you're managing after your effective manifesto launch is 14 points behind, that's probably not a sign of confidence in your chances come November), especially when the rogues are never borne out by any of the other polls that come about after.

 

I'd gladly admit it if there was a sense of a big Yes surge, but it really isn't coming through from much of the evidence so far. After playing their best card, Yes are now reaping the rewards of 3-4 point gains. Anything other than a gain from that would be a disaster - it's not really much of a sign of optimism that that's all it's getting.

Oh FOR GOD'S SAKE DAVE I THOUGHT WE HAD THIS CLEAR

 

I'm waiting on the receipts. He's shown a perfect understanding over the last two years (hell, even as recently as a couple of weeks ago in PMQs when he managed an amusingly self-deprecating response to a Labour MP begging him to stay out) that this absolutely isn't his place to get involved, so I'm a little dubious on that.

OK so appointing Alistair Darling to lead the No campaign was a smart move. However, the rest of the campaign has been almost entirely negative. They have failed to give positive reasons for maintaining the union. They have made all sorts of assertions without producing much in the way of evidence to support them.

Oh FOR GOD'S SAKE DAVE I THOUGHT WE HAD THIS CLEAR

 

I'm waiting on the receipts. He's shown a perfect understanding over the last two years (hell, even as recently as a couple of weeks ago in PMQs when he managed an amusingly self-deprecating response to a Labour MP begging him to stay out) that this absolutely isn't his place to get involved, so I'm a little dubious on that.

Are you seriously suggesting that a Cameron pledge to stay out should be taken seriously? He said he would stay out of the AV campaign and look what happened there. That plastic faced idiot's word is about as reliable as a Sun headline.

Oh FOR GOD'S SAKE DAVE I THOUGHT WE HAD THIS CLEAR

 

I'm waiting on the receipts. He's shown a perfect understanding over the last two years (hell, even as recently as a couple of weeks ago in PMQs when he managed an amusingly self-deprecating response to a Labour MP begging him to stay out) that this absolutely isn't his place to get involved, so I'm a little dubious on that.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/sco...id-Cameron.html

 

Even if the polls aren't pointing to a "Yes" win yet (though there's definitely atleast a small trend towards "Yes" in all of them), the real movement is what Silas has said, which is previously rock-solid "No" voters are starting to consider voting for independence, especially Labour voters -- not because of the SNP's manifesto launch, but because they're sick of the Tories and don't want to risk wasting what might be their only opportunity to get rid of them. There's been a few reports in recent weeks where "No" people have been saying off the record things like that.

Edited February 6, 201411 yr by Danny

They have made all sorts of assertions without producing much in the way of evidence to support them.

How delightfully meta! *.*

 

The Yes campaign shouting 'Project Fear!' every time Better Together ask exactly how their pie-in-the-sky dreams is a bit weak. It's not really an adult response to just reply 'you're being negative!' to somebody actually posing questions on how something as big as declaring independence will work - and the claim that there haven't been any positive reasons given is just untrue.

Are you seriously suggesting that a Cameron pledge to stay out should be taken seriously? He said he would stay out of the AV campaign and look what happened there. That plastic faced idiot's word is about as reliable as a Sun headline.

The difference being that he knew his intervention would give a boost to the No campaign in the AV referendum. Every time he's made a public statement on the Scottish referendum has given the sign that he's more than aware that his intervention would almost certainly have a negative effect on the No campaign in the Scottish referendum.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/sco...id-Cameron.html

 

Even if the polls aren't pointing to a "Yes" win yet (though there's definitely atleast a small trend towards "Yes" in all of them), the real movement is what Silas has said, which is previously rock-solid "No" voters are starting to consider voting for independence, especially Labour voters -- not because of the SNP's manifesto launch, but because they're sick of the Tories and don't want to risk wasting what might be their only opportunity to get rid of them. There's been a few reports in recent weeks where "No" people have been saying off the record things like that.

Oh, that's not quite as bad as I thought. I thought by intervention they meant he was actually going to start going up to Scotland and getting involved in the campaign - now that WOULD be a disaster. It'd be pretty unreasonable to expect the Prime Minister to not comment on the matter though - and by the looks of things, he's not really going with an especially objectionable argument in that speech. If he was doing the whole 'Scotland won't cope on it's own!'/'We won't let you keep the pound!' thing in the speech, then obviously that'd inspire a big reaction and push a few undecideds/No voters to go Yes to stick two fingers up at him, but a speech on how the rest of the UK wants Scotland to stay in isn't really the kind of thing that Salmond et al could really use to say 'arrogant Tory toff thinks he knows better than Scotland etcetc'.

Oh, that's not quite as bad as I thought. I thought by intervention they meant he was actually going to start going up to Scotland and getting involved in the campaign - now that WOULD be a disaster..

 

Newsnight said he was making the speech in Scotland (in the Western Isles, I think they said), but admittedly that article doesn't say that.

I'm just trying to think where on EARTH he'd do a speech in the Western Isles! :D I suppose there's probably a spare Presbyterian community hall going somewhere.

I'm just trying to think where on EARTH he'd do a speech in the Western Isles! :D I suppose there's probably a spare Presbyterian community hall going somewhere.

stornoway?

- Putting Darling in charge as opposed to having it as a Salmond vs Cameron slug-out (and please, no citations of 'anonymous senior Tory figures' criticism)

- Making a big play of the Swinney memo - which seems about as game, set and match as you can get. Why would anybody want to choose to pay more for the same service?

- Well, pretty much every torpedoing of the presumptive crap Salmond comes out with over...well, take your pick from any of keeping the pound/EU/transfer arrangements/whatever. Actually, that's not so much a Better Together triumph as the triumph of anybody with even the most basic sense that if Scotland turns around to the UK and tells it to fuck off, it's slightly wishful thinking that the UK would gladly sign a promise to underwrite Scotland in perpetuity.

 

Really, the only people you'll find trying to pretend the No campaign has been a total disaster are those already sympathetic to independence and those in the media desperately trying to turn it into a horse race (nothing sells papers less than the news agenda being utterly dominated by a referendum that everyone knows the result of already. it's in their interest to try and create a 'Yes is on the up and could win!' narrative) when there isn't anything out there showing a big narrowing, short of the occasional rogue poll once or twice a month showing something ridiculous like a 14 point margin - which is utterly absurd as a sign that 'the momentum is with independence!!!!' (honestly, when the best you're managing after your effective manifesto launch is 14 points behind, that's probably not a sign of confidence in your chances come November), especially when the rogues are never borne out by any of the other polls that come about after.

 

I'd gladly admit it if there was a sense of a big Yes surge, but it really isn't coming through from much of the evidence so far. After playing their best card, Yes are now reaping the rewards of 3-4 point gains. Anything other than a gain from that would be a disaster - it's not really much of a sign of optimism that that's all it's getting.

- Darling hasn't really done anything of note and nobody takes anything he says that seriously.

- Nobody remembers that memo this side of the border AT ALL. Which is where it actually counts. Even then it's nothing but scaremongering about a report that looks at the worst case scenario. The memo says more about the SNP being aware of the risks and being prepared to fight them. The UK Treasury committed to underwriting all Scotland's inherited debt so that removes interest worries on existing debt.

- Yeah....no. It's relentlessly negative and they just shoot down every single thing the SNP say. It's dull and lost it's impact months ago. The fact that they still harp on without offering any alternates is starting to be counter-productive.

 

This is where actually living in Scotland has an advantage. Pulling a complete Craig here, but even firm No's laugh at the Better Together Campaign. In fact every No I know have paid no attention to Darling and are just unconvinced by Salmond.

 

The media is covering it quite religiously because it's the most important question to have been asked in a lifetime. The conversation is happening day in, day out across the country in workplaces and homes. My office has groups from all three camps and it makes for a lively debate.

 

Polls only tell part of the story and we all know that. Momentum is measured by more than just a random phone survey of 1,000 people.

Newsnight said he was making the speech in Scotland (in the Western Isles, I think they said), but admittedly that article doesn't say that.

I was under the impression that Camoron would be in Aberdeen soon with some of his chums to rim the oil and gas lot. Luckily that happens to coincide with a visit to the North East/Aberdeenshire by Salmond and Co.

 

That renewed calls for a debate.

 

Public support up here is more in favour of a Camoron vs Salmond debate than anything involving Darling. Primarily because the SNP have as much impact on UK policy right now as Labour do (i.e. sweet fa as they aren't in government). There is no point in someone without a shred of power making a case for Scotland to stay in the UK (oh wait, they haven't actually done that yet) when they currently have 0 influence on what will happen policy wise in the UK. They accuse Salmond of talking about pipe dreams but not a single whisper has come out of Better Together about the future of Scotland post-No vote. No doubt because they know admitting to more cuts to public spending would gift Salmond the win.

Don't really see why Cameron would go to the Western Isles. They are very pro-renewables and hideously anti-tory. (like everywhere funnily enough)

Hmm, I must have misheard what Newsnight said. Apparently he's making the speech at the Olympic Park in London.

In fairness, chances are that there'll be a Labour-led Westminster government by the time that Scotland would be going independent anyway so it's perfectly relevant for them to be leading the No campaign.