Scottish independence and devolution superthread

[TheMaganator]

It's interesting how vociferous some sections of NO voters are these days about the SNP.  It's almost as if they realise that the referendum may well have been a Pyrrhic victory.

I have always loathed them. 

 

Apart from their grubby politics which I have covered at length on here - I don't like how their supporters never criticise them. They do not hold them to account.

 

If I was a SNP supporter I would be livid at the state of the White Paper, amongst other things. But  they are not. And they wont be. Because they will never publicaly criticise their party. Which means we have a majority government that is not held to account. Its rank rotten. I know you are not a SNP man so this must concern you?

 

They can literally do what they like and not be held to account for it. Why? Because their end goal is independence and their supporters, some would call them zealots, care only about gaining independence - and nothing else matters to them.  

[Guest Trapper John]

I have always loathed them. 

 

Apart from their grubby politics which I have covered at length on here - I don't like how their supporters never criticise them. They do not hold them to account.

 

If I was a SNP supporter I would be livid at the state of the White Paper, amongst other things. But  they are not. And they wont be. Because they will never publicaly criticise their party. Which means we have a majority government that is not held to account. Its rank rotten. I know you are not a SNP man so this must concern you?

 

They can literally do what they like and not be held to account for it. Why? Because their end goal is independence and their supporters, some would call them zealots, care only about gaining independence - and nothing else matters to them.  

 

 

Superb riposte, Mag.

 

Yer no bad for a Tory.

 

[jack D and coke]

It's interesting how vociferous some sections of NO voters are these days about the SNP. It's almost as if they realise that the referendum may well have been a Pyrrhic victory.

Exactly. They're the only ones who won't stop banging on about it.

 

I said at the time I didn't believe, whatever way it went, that it would be any reason for anyone to gloat or rub anyone's nose in it for a number or reasons but some No voters are appearing to be getting more bitter despite actually getting the result they wanted.

 

Bizarre.

[2NaFish]

I have always loathed them. 

 

Apart from their grubby politics which I have covered at length on here - I don't like how their supporters never criticise them. They do not hold them to account.

 

If I was a SNP supporter I would be livid at the state of the White Paper, amongst other things. But  they are not. And they wont be. Because they will never publicaly criticise their party. Which means we have a majority government that is not held to account. Its rank rotten. I know you are not a SNP man so this must concern you?

 

They can literally do what they like and not be held to account for it. Why? Because their end goal is independence and their supporters, some would call them zealots, care only about gaining independence - and nothing else matters to them.  

 

Be careful when hunting monsters

[pablo]

Exactly. They're the only ones who won't stop banging on about it.

 

I said at the time I didn't believe, whatever way it went, that it would be any reason for anyone to gloat or rub anyone's nose in it for a number or reasons but some No voters are appearing to be getting more bitter despite actually getting the result they wanted.

 

Bizarre.

The only people banging on about anything are the same half dozen or so posters from the big independence thread. From the losing side mostly. In the real world the majority of Scots have moved on and are delighted with the part they played in saving our country.

[jack D and coke]

The only people banging on about anything are the same half dozen or so posters from the big independence thread. From the losing side mostly. In the real world the majority of Scots have moved on and are delighted with the part they played in saving our country.

Really? Imo it's the "winners" who are constantly bringing it up[emoji1]

 

I myself have moved on and don't mention it to anyone really unless they bring it up first and in my opinion it's No voters again.

 

Give it a rest ffs[emoji1]

[leginten]

I have always loathed them.

 

Apart from their grubby politics which I have covered at length on here - I don't like how their supporters never criticise them. They do not hold them to account.

 

If I was a SNP supporter I would be livid at the state of the White Paper, amongst other things. But they are not. And they wont be. Because they will never publicaly criticise their party. Which means we have a majority government that is not held to account. Its rank rotten. I know you are not a SNP man so this must concern you?

 

They can literally do what they like and not be held to account for it. Why? Because their end goal is independence and their supporters, some would call them zealots, care only about gaining independence - and nothing else matters to them.

 

When it comes to "grubby", you should really be paying more attention to your new-found friends in the Labour party - the party that gave us Jim Devine, Anne Moffat, Eric Joyce, Mick Martin and the entire Glasgow mafia, to mention but a few. The very epitome of graft and corruption for decades now in all areas of Scottish politics, but as long as they voted No with you, that's fine.

 

The last part of your post just doesn't make sense. They can literally do what they like and not be held to account for it? Were you complaining about this when the Tories were in power at Westminster for an eternity from 1979 onwards and did a lot of things many people in the UK found abhorrent? We have these things called elections - if sufficient numbers of people are as upset about the SNP as you are, they will be voted out at the next Holyrood election.

Edited December 22, 2014 by leginten

[Guest Trapper John]

Really? Imo it's the "winners" who are constantly bringing it up[emoji1]

 

I myself have moved on and don't mention it to anyone really unless they bring it up first and in my opinion it's No voters again.

 

Give it a rest ffs[emoji1]

 

Apres moi le deluge.

 

Here come all the 'good' losers.

 

It all started with the beloved child and his mini-me not turning up for the reconciliation service. A pointer to the future.

[jack D and coke]

Apres moi le deluge.

 

Here come all the 'good' losers.

 

It all started with the beloved child and his mini-me not turning up for the reconciliation service. A pointer to the future.

Sorry man I'm not with you?

 

Why don't you prattle on about the oil price again or that you've saved us all or Jim "big hitter" Murphy at least I know what your going on about[emoji1]

[TheMaganator]

When it comes to "grubby", you should really be paying more attention to your new-found friends in the Labour party - the party that gave us Jim Devine, Anne Moffat, Eric Joyce, Mick Martin and the entire Glasgow mafia, to mention but a few. The very epitome of graft and corruption for decades now in all areas of Scottish politics, but as long as they voted No with you, that's fine.

 

The last part of your post just doesn't make sense. They can literally do what they like and not be held to account for it? Were you complaining about this when the Tories were in power at Westminster for an eternity from 1979 onwards and did a lot of things many people in the UK found abhorrent? We have these things called elections - if sufficient numbers of people are as upset about the SNP as you are, they will be voted out at the next Holyrood election.

It makes perfect sense.

 

When you have supporters of a party who will vote for them regardless of their performance because of what they stand for (ie independence) they are not being held to account. When you couple that with the fact that their supporters do not criticise them that makes the situation even worse.

[Guest Trapper John]

It makes perfect sense.

 

When you have supporters of a party who will vote for them regardless of their performance because of what they stand for (ie independence) they are not being held to account. When you couple that with the fact that their supporters do not criticise them that makes the situation even worse.

 

The biggest trick the SNP ever pulled was convincing enough people they are a political party with credible policies.

 

They've done well on that score if virtually on nothing else.

[TheMaganator]

The biggest trick the SNP ever pulled was convincing enough people they are a political party with credible policies.

 

They've done well on that score if virtually on nothing else.

Their policy is to say what they think people will want to hear in order for them to vote Yes.

[jambos are go!]

We wouldn't be independent yet so it wouldn't have cost us anything.

 

Why not discuss the oil price in say 2 years?

 

If your like most No voters and not prepared to admit we would've been minted in the 30 years previous when we were being lied to by WM governments then why bang about something that wouldn't have happened yet either?

Happy to discuss  the oil price in 2 years and point out how much our economy depends on it whether its low, medium or high. The cost of ?1000 is per annum BTW and their is no way their will be a referendum any time soon till it settles back above the hundred dollar mark. And remind the electorate how sharing risks within the UK was proven to be no fallacy when the price of oil fell disastrously. And during the 30 years you talk about Scotland enjoyed ongoing and rising prosperity for the most part.

 

If a mansion tax is introduced 90% of the new revenue will be raised in London and the South east and Scotland and the rest of the UK will benefit  at little cost to them and I'll be pointing that out as well.

[Cade]

Aye the poor wee gullible Scottish voting public has been badly hoodwinked by the SNP.

 

So much so that they voted them in as a minority government in 2007.

Then they did so badly and lied so much that they got returned in a landslide win in 2011.

They then got so completely destroyed in the referendum that they had a huge surge in memberships and are now the 3rd largest party in the entire UK.

People are so upset with the SNP that they are currently polling 24 points ahead of Jimbo Murphy's ScotLab.

[TheMaganator]

Aye the poor wee gullible Scottish voting public has been badly hoodwinked by the SNP.

 

So much so that they voted them in as a minority government in 2007.

Then they did so badly and lied so much that they got returned in a landslide win in 2011.

They then got so completely destroyed in the referendum that they had a huge surge in memberships and are now the 3rd largest party in the entire UK.

People are so upset with the SNP that they are currently polling 24 points ahead of Jimbo Murphy's ScotLab.

 

Thanks for helping me make my point

[flecktimus]

Aye the poor wee gullible Scottish voting public has been badly hoodwinked by the SNP.

 

So much so that they voted them in as a minority government in 2007.

Then they did so badly and lied so much that they got returned in a landslide win in 2011.

They then got so completely destroyed in the referendum that they had a huge surge in memberships and are now the 3rd largest party in the entire UK.

People are so upset with the SNP that they are currently polling 24 points ahead of Jimbo Murphy's ScotLab.

 

 

The truth hurts

[Guest Trapper John]

The truth hurts

The truth and the SNP?? Don't make me:

 

   

[jambos are go!]

Not worried so much about the SNP are ahead in the polls now that Independence has been clearly rejected and SNP votes not as disastrous as before. Folk can vote SNP without fearing for the Union as much.. And be grateful we dodged a bullet in the shape of the oil price collapse.

[Guest Trapper John]

Not worried so much about the SNP are ahead in the polls now that Independence has been clearly rejected and SNP votes not as disastrous as before. Folk can vote SNP without fearing for the Union as much.. And be grateful we dodged a bullet in the shape of the oil price collapse.

 

Note the Survation poll today that states SNP are up to 48%...

 

The Poll was conducted online...

 

http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/December-Scotland-Daily-Record-Scottish-Voting-Intention-ONE.pdf

 

It must be right then. Surely?

Edited December 22, 2014 by Trapper John

[Ulysses]

Fulmination is a poor substitute for reasoned debate. You'd have to hope that the views being expressed on this thread represent the margins rather than the mainstream of the pro and anti independence viewpoints. It's all gotten a bit "ya boo hiss", to be honest.

[Mr Brightside]

We wouldn't be independent yet so it wouldn't have cost us anything.

 

Why not discuss the oil price in say 2 years?

 

If your like most No voters and not prepared to admit we would've been minted in the 30 years previous when we were being lied to by WM governments then why bang about something that wouldn't have happened yet either?

The current low oil price would have had a detrimental effect on negotiations for splitting the UKs financial assests and burdens. A higher oil price would have given Scotland a stronger negotiating position.

It would also impact on any borrowoing that was required.

[Guest Trapper John]

Fulmination is a poor substitute for reasoned debate. You'd have to hope that the views being expressed on this thread represent the margins rather than the mainstream of the pro and anti independence viewpoints. It's all gotten a bit "ya boo hiss", to be honest.

Ully,

 

It's almost impossible to argue reasonably with any form of nationalism. They want all or nothing. Invariably, there is no middle ground acceptable to them. And they will lie, disseminate and cheat their way to attain their goals while making any deal no matter how reprehensible.

 

That's the nature of the debate.

 

But at least in Scotland  we're not blowing people up over it.

[deesidejambo]

The current low oil price would have had a detrimental effect on negotiations for splitting the UKs financial assests and burdens. A higher oil price would have given Scotland a stronger negotiating position.

It would also impact on any borrowoing that was required.

Good point.    Its simple.  The main economic argument for Yes was based on oil revenues .   That has been blown to pieces.  Not only the price, but also the production volumes in their forecasts were nonsense.

 

But they will of course ignore that!

[2NaFish]

Ully,

 

It's almost impossible to argue reasonably with any form of nationalism. They want all or nothing. Invariably, there is no middle ground acceptable to them. And they will lie, disseminate and cheat their way to attain their goals while making any deal no matter how reprehensible.

 

That's the nature of the debate.

 

But at least in Scotland  we're not blowing people up over it.

 

 

Here's Uly's point -----> .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Here's you ----> . It's not a baggio of missing the point, it's van vossen levels.

 

 

 

I don't doubt that that his assertions can be thrown at me as much as anyone, but your response is baffling. Although it does prove what he's saying, even if it is a touch didactic

[steve444]

You cant beat the UK gravy train.

 

One thing I will give the SNP MPs credit for is not voting on matters that involve England.

[Ulysses]

 

 

Ully,

 

It's almost impossible to argue reasonably with any form of nationalism.

For a start, that's a poor excuse for not trying.

 

Secondly, if you go into a discussion looking for reasoned debate you might find it. But if you go in looking for an unreasonable argument you'll almost certainly get one.

 

Thirdly, if I thought that only one side of the debate was responsible for substituting fulmination for discourse I'd have said so.

 

Right now, if I was pro-independence I'd be positively delighted at many of the "No" posts on this thread, and if I was anti-independence I'd be well pleased with a lot of the "Yes" posts.

 

It's a pretty poor discussion, all in all.

[Marooned In Oz]

Ully,

 

It's almost impossible to argue reasonably with any form of nationalism. They want all or nothing. Invariably, there is no middle ground acceptable to them. And they will lie, disseminate and cheat their way to attain their goals while making any deal no matter how reprehensible.

 

That's the nature of the debate.

 

But at least in Scotland  we're not blowing people up over it.

 

 

This is probably the biggest pile of nonsense I've ever read on here.

 

I'm Australian and I wanted independence more than anyone else I know.  Nationalism doesn't come into it for me and the majority of Yes supporters.  Making a fairer country and being responsible for our own decisions was the main reason for all the people I know that voted yes.  Pigeon holing people who support the SNP and voted yes as narrow nationalists is just going to turn more people off your weak as piss argument. 

Keep it up.

You've missed the point that much about independence that you sound like a Labour party MP.  

[Gorgiewave]

 

Is this Ulysses? One feels upbraided.

[leginten]

It makes perfect sense.

 

When you have supporters of a party who will vote for them regardless of their performance because of what they stand for (ie independence) they are not being held to account. When you couple that with the fact that their supporters do not criticise them that makes the situation even worse.

Your point could be used to describe nearly half a century of Labour monoculture in Scotland. Voted for regardless of performance.

 

But when it comes to "holding to account", that's traditionally the job of the parliamentary opposition. Unfortunately for Scotland as a whole, that has recently been provided by the likes of Iain Gray and Johann Lamont. Maybe Murphy will do a better job. I'm not holding my breath.

[Guest Trapper John]

For a start, that's a poor excuse for not trying.

 

Secondly, if you go into a discussion looking for reasoned debate you might find it. But if you go in looking for an unreasonable argument you'll almost certainly get one.

 

Thirdly, if I thought that only one side of the debate was responsible for substituting fulmination for discourse I'd have said so.

 

Right now, if I was pro-independence I'd be positively delighted at many of the "No" posts on this thread, and if I was anti-independence I'd be well pleased with a lot of the "Yes" posts.

 

It's a pretty poor discussion, all in all.

 

 

The SNP lost the referendum. They then signed up for Smith in which they were given more than they could have hoped for originally. Remember, Salmond wanted Devo-Max on the ballot paper. They then publicly denigrate the commission, crying foul as a political tactic, nothing else. 

 

How can you approach any such position with 'reasonable debate?' The 'Unionist' side has attempted to agree a middle ground of giving Scotland far more autonomy to run its affairs. It has delivered but it still is not enough for the other side who want all or nothing. That is the crux of the matter: One side has shown willingness to compromise, the other does not and never will. No one will ever be able to prove how much the 'Vow' affected the outcome. What is undeniable is the result of the referendum.

 

In case it escaped the notice of some, Scotland voted overwhelmingly to remain in the Union. That is a fact and it cannot be changed at least for the forseeable future. But the SNP have reneged on their promise that it would be a 'Once in a generation, once in lifetime' event. Instead of getting on with running the country, they are still obsessing over another referendum. 

 

They cannot, or as is more likely, are unwilling to differentiate that a lead in the Westminster/Holyrood polls and the desire for independence are two very different things.

 

As for your final points, I guess you can conclude that we may have reached an impasse in the debate as neither side will ever convince the other. But what cannot be changed is the result: Scotland remains part of the United Kingdom.

[Guest Trapper John]

This is probably the biggest pile of nonsense I've ever read on here.

 

I'm Australian and I wanted independence more than anyone else I know.  Nationalism doesn't come into it for me and the majority of Yes supporters.  Making a fairer country and being responsible for our own decisions was the main reason for all the people I know that voted yes.  Pigeon holing people who support the SNP and voted yes as narrow nationalists is just going to turn more people off your weak as piss argument. 

Keep it up.

You've missed the point that much about independence that you sound like a Labour party MP.  

 

Talk about 'pigeon-holing.'

 

Your desire for independence is your own business. My desire for remaining in the UK is my business. But the problem with the independence side is the unwillingess to accept the reasons  why we wish to stay as we are in the United Kingdom. And you are quick to play the 'fairer country' card as if we don't care or want the same for OUR country too.

 

Keep it up.

Edited December 22, 2014 by Trapper John

[Psychedelicropcircle]

Superb riposte, Mag.

 

Yer no bad for a Tory.

 

 

 

Still hand in glove I see.

[Guest Trapper John]

Still hand in glove I see.

 

Just following the old nationalist principle that my enemy's enemy is my friend. 

 

Or people coming together in a common cause?

 

Not that the Nats know much about people working together.

Edited December 22, 2014 by Trapper John

[3fingersreid]

We wouldn't be independent yet so it wouldn't have cost us anything.

 

Why not discuss the oil price in say 2 years?

 

If your like most No voters and not prepared to admit we would've been minted in the 30 years previous when we were being lied to by WM governments then why bang about something that wouldn't have happened yet either?

I'm a NO voter and would be happy to admit we would've been "

minted" as you say but it's 30 years too late ,unfortunately , but given that Mr salmond kept on highlighting the importance of the oil to the countries wealth and future it's something that does cause debate as I'm sure you'll agree.

What would be nice is if the SNP actually came out and showed a maturity and admit they lost the recent election tho

[JamboX2]

Aye the poor wee gullible Scottish voting public has been badly hoodwinked by the SNP.

 

So much so that they voted them in as a minority government in 2007.

Then they did so badly and lied so much that they got returned in a landslide win in 2011.

They then got so completely destroyed in the referendum that they had a huge surge in memberships and are now the 3rd largest party in the entire UK.

People are so upset with the SNP that they are currently polling 24 points ahead of Jimbo Murphy's ScotLab.

 

Tbh the SNP have been utterly disappointing in government. Major reforms promised at both elections have yet to materialise and the central government has fatally hobbled local government.

 

They've made Scotland believe in itself more. And, yup, bravo on turning their biggest ever political defeat into a pyrrhic victory. But lets be honest they've spoke big and done little.

 

Also, Scotland never voted for a minority government. A majority of people in 2007 voted against the SNP. It was parliamentary arithmetic and bypassing due process of British politics to allow the incumbent government to try form a government which gave them office.

Edited December 22, 2014 by JamboX2

[Psychedelicropcircle]

Just following the old nationalist principle that my enemy's enemy is my friend.

 

Or people coming together in a common cause?

 

Not that the Nats know much about people working together.

Apparently Jimbo is now following the SNP into becoming Scotland's most patriotic party.

[Sarah O]

In the real world the majority of Scots have moved on and are delighted with the part they played in saving our country.

[JAYEL]

Still hand in glove I see.

 

Better together

[Ulysses]

 

 

How can you approach any such position with 'reasonable debate?'

I'd recommend being reasonable.

 

 

Scotland remains part of the United Kingdom.

Viewed from another point of view, that's a narrow nationalist view to espouse. Some people in Scotland wish that position to change; they are entitled to that view.

[Guest Trapper John]

I'd recommend being reasonable.

 

 

 

Viewed from another point of view, that's a narrow nationalist view to espouse. Some people in Scotland wish that position to change; they are entitled to that view.

 

 

Kindly deliver your recommendation to Nicola Sturgeon, C/o Holyrood, Edinburgh.

 

The second is merely a statement of fact, regardless of anyone's views, for or against.

Edited December 22, 2014 by Trapper John

[jambos are go!]

Its chilling to think that the crash in oil prices could cost a normal sized family in an Independent Scotland ?5000 per annum. That's a ?100 per week. Yet within the larger UK our Shared resources mean that there is no substantial storm to weather and economic growth is ongoing. Proof positive of a major plank of the NO campaign.

 

And lets not forget that some serious commentators  are saying that the North Sea Oil Industry could disappear completely if the oil price goes down much further. I don't believe that but putting our financial future into one basket is madness IMO.

[Marooned In Oz]

Talk about 'pigeon-holing.'

 

Your desire for independence is your own business. My desire for remaining in the UK is my business. But the problem with the independence side is the unwillingess to accept the reasons  why we wish to stay as we are in the United Kingdom. And you are quick to play the 'fairer country' card as if we don't care or want the same for OUR country too.

 

Keep it up.

 

My problem isn't your desire to remain part of the UK.  If people can articulate their reasons then fair play, I won't have an issue with that.  I wasn't playing a fairer country card, I was saying why I wanted independence which didn't involve dressing up in a kilt and hating the English, just like  me mentioning I am Australian is to show it isn't all about jingoistic flag waving.  

 

I looked at both sides of the argument and felt that was the best decision.

 

What I have an issue with is you suggesting that people who vote for the SNP are shortbread eating braveheart watching nationalists, which is a view espoused by a lot of unionist politicians and people who are either trolling, or are idiots.

 

It's a boring view that's out of touch with the reality of the situation.  This isn't the 70's and the party has changed beyond all recognition.  

Edited December 22, 2014 by Marooned In Oz

[Guest Trapper John]

My problem isn't your desire to remain part of the UK.  If people can articulate their reasons then fair play, I won't have an issue with that.  I wasn't playing a fairer country card, I was saying why I wanted independence which didn't involve dressing up in a kilt and hating the English, just like  me mentioning I am Australian is to show it isn't all about jingoistic flag waving.  

 

I looked at both sides of the argument and felt that was the best decision.

 

What I have an issue with is you suggesting that people who vote for the SNP are shortbread eating braveheart watching nationalists, which is a view espoused by a lot of unionist politicians and people who are either trolling, or are idiots.

 

It's a boring view that's out of touch with the reality of the situation.  This isn't the 70's and the party has changed beyond all recognition.  

 

Fair points.

As long as you accept that just because I and 2 million others want to remain in the UK, it doesn't mean we're all Union Jack waving, God Save the Queen Singing Bittereinders.

 

And as for the Party, I remember when they used to go around blowing up Post Office letter boxes. They've come a long way indeed. They're far more dangerous now.

[JAYEL]

My problem isn't your desire to remain part of the UK.  If people can articulate their reasons then fair play, I won't have an issue with that.  I wasn't playing a fairer country card, I was saying why I wanted independence which didn't involve dressing up in a kilt and hating the English, just like  me mentioning I am Australian is to show it isn't all about jingoistic flag waving.  

 

I looked at both sides of the argument and felt that was the best decision.

 

What I have an issue with is you suggesting that people who vote for the SNP are shortbread eating braveheart watching nationalists, which is a view espoused by a lot of unionist politicians and people who are either trolling, or are idiots.

 

It's a boring view that's out of touch with the reality of the situation.  This isn't the 70's and the party has changed beyond all recognition.  

 

 

They dont like it that the SNP are more to the left than Labour.

 

Where are all the North Sea oil profits ?

 

Where is the oil fund ?

[TheMaganator]

They dont like it that the SNP are more to the left than Labour.

 

Where are all the North Sea oil profits ?

 

Where is the oil fund ?

More left than labour?!

 

Was it not a Tory leader who said the next best thing to a Tory budget was a SNP one?

[JAYEL]

More left than labour?!

 

Was it not a Tory leader who said the next best thing to a Tory budget was a SNP one?

 

No need to shift to the right to pick up middle england votes

 

 

Who in Scotland care what the tories say

[TheMaganator]

No need to shift to the right to pick up middle england votes

 

 

Who in Scotland care what the tories say

Check out the voting numbers for the Tories & SNP at the last Westminster elections. 410k versus 480k

 

I'm not sure I understand your first point

[Ulysses]

Kindly deliver your recommendation to Nicola Sturgeon, C/o Holyrood, Edinburgh.

 

The second is merely a statement of fact, regardless of anyone's views, for or against.

 

You can't blame the other side for your unreasonableness; the other side can't blame you for their unreasonableness either.  That's fair, IMO - blaming the other side for one's unreasonable behaviour is the hallmark of the fanatic.

 

My point is that if both sides put in earplugs and yell at each other the debate isn't going to be either intelligent or productive, and whether either side likes it or not you do have to share the same physical and political space while also having diametrically opposed views.  In that context, your political debates could do with a degree of intelligence and productivity.  On this thread, many people are practising the internet forum equivalent of earplugs and yelling; it's not so much an exchange of political views as a set of diatribes in parallel.  That's in sharp contrast to the quality of debate that generally prevailed on this forum during the referendum campaign, and if represents the general standard of debate in Scotland around these issues then that probably doesn't bode well into the future.

[Spencer]

The SNP lost the referendum. They then signed up for Smith in which they were given more than they could have hoped for originally. Remember, Salmond wanted Devo-Max on the ballot paper. They then publicly denigrate the commission, crying foul as a political tactic, nothing else. 

 

How can you approach any such position with 'reasonable debate?' The 'Unionist' side has attempted to agree a middle ground of giving Scotland far more autonomy to run its affairs. It has delivered but it still is not enough for the other side who want all or nothing. That is the crux of the matter: One side has shown willingness to compromise, the other does not and never will. No one will ever be able to prove how much the 'Vow' affected the outcome. What is undeniable is the result of the referendum.

 

In case it escaped the notice of some, Scotland voted overwhelmingly to remain in the Union. That is a fact and it cannot be changed at least for the forseeable future. But the SNP have reneged on their promise that it would be a 'Once in a generation, once in lifetime' event. Instead of getting on with running the country, they are still obsessing over another referendum. 

 

They cannot, or as is more likely, are unwilling to differentiate that a lead in the Westminster/Holyrood polls and the desire for independence are two very different things.

 

As for your final points, I guess you can conclude that we may have reached an impasse in the debate as neither side will ever convince the other. But what cannot be changed is the result: Scotland remains part of the United Kingdom.

Agree entirely.

 

Salmond was all about accepting the sovereign will of the Scottish people, unless of course that outcome didn't suit the fanatical crusade. In which case the outcome isn't respected and we have Salmond and Sturgeon both outwardly suggesting the possibility, indeed probability, of another referendum inside the next 5 years.

 

I'm afraid to say this only serves to illustrate a complete disregard for democracy. Should there be another referendum idc I think wee Eck might find the terms a little less in their favour should such a situation transpire - which I don't think should happen.

 

The nation decided. It's time to move on. SNP need to be accountable for their actions and they might be better served looking at much needed revenue generating mechanisms that they've conveniently reneged upon for populist reasons.

[JamboX2]

They dont like it that the SNP are more to the left than Labour.

 

On some issues in justice, the economy and taxation and social mobility they are to the right of Labour. They are also more statist than Scottish Labour.

 

Where are all the North Sea oil profits ?

 

Where is the oil fund ?

This is the biggest myth of the debate. There is no historical indication that had Scotland been independent we'd have made the policy change Norway did.

 

There is no way we can know if Scotland would've nationalised exploration and production and the sea bed. The overriding aim of all Scottish politicians and business was to get it out as fast as possible which meant selling rights to private companies.

 

As for the profits? They're with the shareholders of private business. And considering the SNP argue for lowering the tax burden on oil companies and do so if Scotland became independent then it is likely that more profit would fly off to shareholders.

 

Their oil fund pledge is also fanciful. Norway spends the interest of the fund not the capital. The Scottish government's spending plans required spending the money now like the UK government chose to not to take the financial knock Norway did for a decade where they cut spending to help build the fund.

 

It was and is a flawed argument. Another wrong placed and developed one by the SNP. Face it, its too late. The industry is vital but it's sadly too late to emulate Norway. Had we got yes I'd have used most of the money raised pa to spend on education and housing and infrastructure. Things we've neglected over 30 years of oil.