How Would You Vote in IndyRef2?

[Boris]

11 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

Is that not the one before. 

 

2016 election.

 

2011 below

 

 

Both maps from By DrRandomFactor, derivative of Barryob, CC BY-SA 4.0,  https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=48275087

Edited September 24, 2018 by Boris

[ri Alban]

1 minute ago, Boris said:

 

2016 election.

 

2011 below

 

The Reg seats threw me, I don't remember them receiving any. Then I remember 2011 was the anomaly majority. 

[Thunderstruck]

47 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

So based on the last Holyrood elections...

 

 

Scotland kind of gets what it votes for...

 

You are confusing election results with centre of population. Irrespective of the hue of a government, it will bias decisions towards the interests of the majority of the population - that is a political necessity and survival instinct. The SE of the U.K. has power not because of how it votes but because of sheer weight of numbers. 

 

The majority of Scotland’s population is in Glasgow, its conurbation and adjacent towns. When Paisley’s population exceeds that of the Borders, it is difficult to favour the Borders at the expense of Paisley. 

 

Curiously, the Tories are the ones taking steps to address that issue within England. The chances of that happening up here are currently zero and the chances of devolution within an independent Scotland are - well, nobody knows because, wait for it, nobody has a clue what might happen if that were ever to happen; particularly not those who shout loudest for independence. 

 

 

[ri Alban]

7 minutes ago, Thunderstruck said:

 

You are confusing election results with centre of population. Irrespective of the hue of a government, it will bias decisions towards the interests of the majority of the population - that is a political necessity and survival instinct. The SE of the U.K. has power not because of how it votes but because of sheer weight of numbers. 

 

The majority of Scotland’s population is in Glasgow, its conurbation and adjacent towns. When Paisley’s population exceeds that of the Borders, it is difficult to favour the Borders at the expense of Paisley. 

 

Curiously, the Tories are the ones taking steps to address that issue within England. The chances of that happening up here are currently zero and the chances of devolution within an independent Scotland are - well, nobody knows because, wait for it, nobody has a clue what might happen if that were ever to happen; particularly not those who shout loudest for independence. 

 

 

I'm sure we can decide it when it comes or is that SNP mob gonnae rule forever. 

I do agree we need to repopulate the Highlands and borders. 

Edited September 24, 2018 by ri Alban

[Pans Jambo]

2 hours ago, Thunderstruck said:

 

Any independent Scotland gets what Greater Glasgow wants. How is that good or even better for the Lothians, Fife, the North East, The Highlands, the Islands or the Borders. 

As posted previously. Greater Glasgow is actually a part of the sovereign nation that is Scotland. Nottingham is not!

[Thunderstruck]

29 minutes ago, Pans Jambo said:

As posted previously. Greater Glasgow is actually a part of the sovereign nation that is Scotland. Nottingham is not!

 

Point missed - as per usual and probably deliberately. 

[ri Alban]

7 minutes ago, Thunderstruck said:

 

Point missed - as per usual and probably deliberately. 

You're just being twisted. There's a big difference between your point and his. The SNP isn't the UK government is it. 

1.6 m of the 4.6m eligible to vote isn't really Glasgow dominant is it, especially under PR. 

 

We'd be independent too. 

Edited September 24, 2018 by ri Alban

[JamboX2]

7 hours ago, ri Alban said:

Libdems would have sucked boaby. 

 

Again... wouldn't have mattered had they not won those 13 seats.

[ri Alban]

29 minutes ago, JamboX2 said:

 

Again... wouldn't have mattered had they not won those 13 seats.

It does matter. They lost their majority end of. Pity Labour couldn't put together a coalition. 

[JamboX2]

27 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

It does matter. They lost their majority end of. Pity Labour couldn't put together a coalition. 

 

Again. The numbers weren't there.

[ri Alban]

23 minutes ago, JamboX2 said:

 

Again. The numbers weren't there.

Enough to outvote Tories. 

[ASSASSIN]

Voted YES the first time and intend on voting YES again when it happens

 

 

[Thunderstruck]

1 hour ago, ri Alban said:

You're just being twisted. There's a big difference between your point and his. The SNP isn't the UK government is it. 

1.6 m of the 4.6m eligible to vote isn't really Glasgow dominant is it, especially under PR. 

 

We'd be independent too. 

 

Is there any difference?

 

It doesn’t matter how you cut it, there will be a dominant area which will be treated more favourably or be perceived to be so treated. It’s human nature. 

 

Is having a Glasgow-centric Scotland going to produce better outcomes across Scotland than Nottingham (why Nottingham?) or London? It’s just another of the long and growing list of unknowns which may or may not be “alright in the night”.

 

 

[Space Mackerel]

1 hour ago, ASSASSIN said:

Voted YES the first time and intend on voting YES again when it happens

 

 

 

Great to hear.

 

As Tommy Sheppard said..."Nothing will change after Independence apart from the fact we CAN change everything"

[Irufushi]

6 minutes ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

Great to hear.

 

As Tommy Sheppard said..."Nothing will change after Independence apart from the fact we CAN change everything"

 

Truly inspirational words . 

[Space Mackerel]

1 hour ago, Thunderstruck said:

 

Is there any difference?

 

It doesn’t matter how you cut it, there will be a dominant area which will be treated more favourably or be perceived to be so treated. It’s human nature. 

 

Is having a Glasgow-centric Scotland going to produce better outcomes across Scotland than Nottingham (why Nottingham?) or London? It’s just another of the long and growing list of unknowns which may or may not be “alright in the night”.

 

 

 

It's all BLACK in your wee world, isn't it? As long as you can wave a UJ then everything is OK. Bizarre thought process. 

[Space Mackerel]

The state of them down South ?

 

 

[H2]

On 21/09/2018 at 15:16, Pans Jambo said:

Believe it or not Glasgow IS in Scotland whereas Hemel Hempstead is not.

 

Heard your pishy argument many times before. Usually its "lets make the Orkney Islands Independent" etc.

 

Scotland mate, Scotland!

 

You are saying that England voted Tory but because Scotland voted Labour, a Labour government was returned at Westminster. OK, when? 

Without hunting through the internet and getting info off the top of my head I don't know however when the likes of WIlson and Callaghan were in power there were many labour seats in Soctland, even perhap Blair (though he was a a Tory in disguise).

 

Britain ..., Britain. We are all British.

 

Why should I have to live with your idea of independence, like the majority of Scotland want to be British, as well as Scottish. Why should we have to put up with what the people of Glasgow and Dundee want, they were the only areas to vote for it. That is exactly the same arguemt you make.

 

It is unfortunate you have to use such demenaing adjectives to support your case against an discussion, but hey, that's your choice!

 

An independant Scotland would be like being run by the SFA.

[Space Mackerel]

12 minutes ago, H2 said:

Without hunting through the internet and getting info off the top of my head I don't know however when the likes of WIlson and Callaghan were in power there were many labour seats in Soctland, even perhap Blair (though he was a a Tory in disguise).

 

Britain ..., Britain. We are all British.

 

Why should I have to live with your idea of independence, like the majority of Scotland want to be British, as well as Scottish. Why should we have to put up with what the people of Glasgow and Dundee want, they were the only areas to vote for it. That is exactly the same arguemt you make.

 

It is unfortunate you have to use such demenaing adjectives to support your case against an discussion, but hey, that's your choice!

 

An independant Scotland would be like being run by the SFA.

 

We don’t have a FPTP system in Scotland, Thunderstruck has already made your last point a few posts ago and it’s been debunked. 

[Pans Jambo]

4 hours ago, Thunderstruck said:

 

Is there any difference?

 

It doesn’t matter how you cut it, there will be a dominant area which will be treated more favourably or be perceived to be so treated. It’s human nature. 

 

Is having a Glasgow-centric Scotland going to produce better outcomes across Scotland than Nottingham (why Nottingham?) or London? It’s just another of the long and growing list of unknowns which may or may not be “alright in the night”.

 

 

Itll be Scots voting on who governs Scots. 

 

Get it???

[JamboX2]

13 minutes ago, Pans Jambo said:

Itll be Scots voting on who governs Scots. 

 

Get it???

 

But Scots are all different. That's his point.

 

You may be a Scot but policies designed to benefit the central belt might not be good for say Aberdeen or Caithness. 

 

The argument made is an extension of the independence/brexit argument. Some decisions are taken in political entities which don't benefit all it's people. How does the Aberdeen Bypass benefit Kelso and should they pay for that? In effect, why does being a Scot stop or mitigate those feelings? Why does being British do it with brexit? 

 

Imo, it makes no difference. And it happens now.

 

What both Brexit and Independence share is the elevation of the idea that being either British or Scottish means that decisions taken by Brits or Scots are inherently better for all of those people with that nationality. Regardless of what they are. Which, imo, won't last long after either eventuality before traditional regional and class differences return to define politics.

[Pans Jambo]

1 minute ago, JamboX2 said:

 

But Scots are all different. That's his point.

 

You may be a Scot but policies designed to benefit the central belt might not be good for say Aberdeen or Caithness. 

 

The argument made is an extension of the independence/brexit argument. Some decisions are taken in political entities which don't benefit all it's people. How does the Aberdeen Bypass benefit Kelso and should they pay for that? In effect, why does being a Scot stop or mitigate those feelings? Why does being British do it with brexit? 

 

Imo, it makes no difference. And it happens now.

 

What both Brexit and Independence share is the elevation of the idea that being either British or Scottish means that decisions taken by Brits or Scots are inherently better for all of those people with that nationality. Regardless of what they are. Which, imo, won't last long after either eventuality before traditional regional and class differences return to define politics.

Scots are all different. Especially different to folk who live in Watford. 

If Glasgow votes en-masse for the Lib-dems (for example) in an Indy Scotland so what? It’ll be a Lib-dem party of Scots, based in Scotland NOT a branch office of a Westminster owned & controlled party with no care except what goes on in the SE of Engerland. 

[Thunderstruck]

22 minutes ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

We don’t have a FPTP system in Scotland, Thunderstruck has already made your last point a few posts ago and it’s been debunked. 

 

Do try and pay better attention. I made no mention of elected members; I was referring to weight of population and how politics will inevitably drift towards policies that favour that larger percentage of the population - irrespective of how it voted.  

 

That aside, you seem poorly informed on the nature of the Scottish Parliamentary Election Voting System. 

 

73 of the 129 seats (57%) in the Scottish Parliament are decided on what basis? 

 

Yes, you’ve guessed it, FPTP. 

 

It is entirely possible that a majority government could be elected on the basis of 65 of the FPTP seats and those seats would represent a minority of those who voted.

 

In 2016, the SNP obtained 59 (86%) of the constituency seats with 46% of the constituency vote (26% of the electorate) and is propped up by the Greens who won zero constituency seats with 0.6% of the constituency votes. 

 

The largest percentage of the constituency vote (Con/Lab/Lib) had 52.4% of constituency vote but only 14 seats. 

 

It is a mongrel system leaning heavily on FPTP and is not PR. It is confusing and the Additional Member (Regional Seat) voting method is poorly understood by many Voters (and more than a few MSPs). The Regional Vote fails to compensate for the inherent lack of equity in the FPTP element. 

 

Local Government is the only voting system we have that uses PR via Single Transferable Vote and multi-member Wards. It is much more representative of voting patterns. 

[JamboX2]

7 hours ago, Pans Jambo said:

Scots are all different. Especially different to folk who live in Watford. 

If Glasgow votes en-masse for the Lib-dems (for example) in an Indy Scotland so what? It’ll be a Lib-dem party of Scots, based in Scotland NOT a branch office of a Westminster owned & controlled party with no care except what goes on in the SE of Engerland. 

 

Yup I get your argument. You've made this a few times.

 

What makes a Scot better at governing than folk from Watford?

 

That's your underlying point. That Scots will govern. But the current Lib Dems in Scotland are Scots. As are all the parties in Scotland's parliament. 

 

How would you seek to address the issue of Glasgow/West Coast slanted policies in the event of independence?

 

That's the question being asked of you. Not what the nationality of decision makers would be. Atm your argument seems to be - because they're Scottish they'll make more enlightened policies that'll benefit all Scots regardless of where they live. That's not happening now with devolution in Scotland.

Edited September 25, 2018 by JamboX2

[Unknown user]

21 minutes ago, JamboX2 said:

 

Yup I get your argument. You've made this a few times.

 

What makes a Scot better at governing than folk from Watford?

 

That's your underlying point. That Scots will govern. But the current Lib Dems in Scotland are Scots. As are all the parties in Scotland's parliament. 

 

How would you seek to address the issue of Glasgow/West Coast slanted policies in the event of independence?

 

That's the question being asked of you. Not what the nationality of decision makers would be. Atm your argument seems to be - because they're Scottish they'll make more enlightened policies that'll benefit all Scots regardless of where they live. That's not happening now with devolution in Scotland.

 

It's not that they're Scottish and therefore more enlightened, it's that they're local and give a ****, rather than us being an appendix.

 

A uk government will do what they think is best for the uk, and sometimes that might even be good for Scotland. But it's dominated by, and geared towards the south east of England, and that's a fact. 

 

A Scottish government would be interested in Scotland, you could even say obsessed. Westminster? Pffff!

[Space Mackerel]

Thunderstruck and Jambo x 2 using Project Fear on everyone but folk from Glasgow now. Desperate, desperate stuff. 

 

You really can’t make this all up now!

[Boris]

1 hour ago, JamboX2 said:

 

Yup I get your argument. You've made this a few times.

 

What makes a Scot better at governing than folk from Watford?

 

That's your underlying point. That Scots will govern. But the current Lib Dems in Scotland are Scots. As are all the parties in Scotland's parliament. 

 

How would you seek to address the issue of Glasgow/West Coast slanted policies in the event of independence?

 

That's the question being asked of you. Not what the nationality of decision makers would be. Atm your argument seems to be - because they're Scottish they'll make more enlightened policies that'll benefit all Scots regardless of where they live. That's not happening now with devolution in Scotland.

 

Are these Glasgow centric policies evident now?  Why would they be so after independence?

[Space Mackerel]

30 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

Are these Glasgow centric policies evident now?  Why would they be so after independence?

 

They’ll be on Google now, formulating an answer with 100 links to articles about Renfrewshire getting new wheelie bins ahead of East Lothian. 

[Unknown user]

The biggest fly in the unionist movement's ointment is Westminster.

 

Nearly all arguments put forward can be negated by comparing a government interested in Scotland to that corrupt, incompetent nest of sleazy, self interested multi millionaires that's only vaguely aware we exist and doesn't particularly care about our problems. 

 

That's a pretty tough image problem to get past, and if the independence movement is smart, they'll start making it more about getting away from Westminster to a government that gives a semblance of a ****, no matter who gets voted in. 

[JamboX2]

49 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

Are these Glasgow centric policies evident now?  Why would they be so after independence?

 

The argument made was policies atm benefit SE England. That's in part due to the population weight. That weight in Scotland is skewed to the Greater Glasgow area in Scotland. An area which gets more funding per head than most in Scotland. It's a hypothetical but a realistic one based on the argument currently made against the Union.

[Ron Burgundy]

19 minutes ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

They’ll be on Google now, formulating an answer with 100 links to articles about Renfrewshire getting new wheelie bins ahead of East Lothian. 

To be fair Thunderstruck has just wiped the floor with you regarding FPTP in Scotland.

 

Stick to posting pics of beef wellington on Facebook. You're good at that.

[JamboX2]

2 minutes ago, Smithee said:

The biggest fly in the unionist movement's ointment is Westminster.

 

Nearly all arguments put forward can be negated by comparing a government interested in Scotland to that corrupt, incompetent nest of sleazy, self interested multi millionaires that's only vaguely aware we exist and doesn't particularly care about our problems. 

 

That's a pretty tough image problem to get past, and if the independence movement is smart, they'll start making it more about getting away from Westminster to a government that gives a semblance of a ****, no matter who gets voted in. 

 

Perhaps I'm increasingly cynical on politics but I think you'll find that where power lies corruption and money follow. MSPs are hardly immune from lobbying and influence in how they make decisions. The idea is laughable to think it won't follow if Scotland got independence nor that power is a corrupting influence.

 

That isn't to say WM needs to have a look itself. But this is becoming a morality contest.

[JamboX2]

1 hour ago, Smithee said:

 

It's not that they're Scottish and therefore more enlightened, it's that they're local and give a ****, rather than us being an appendix.

 

MPs are local reps and give a ****. Local councils want more financial power to improve local services. Holyrood's governing party is opposed to that. How is that in favour of giving a hoot about local areas?

 

1 hour ago, Smithee said:

 

A uk government will do what they think is best for the uk, and sometimes that might even be good for Scotland. But it's dominated by, and geared towards the south east of England, and that's a fact. 

 

And a Scottish government won't do likewise for the major population centres over others? 

 

1 hour ago, Smithee said:

 

A Scottish government would be interested in Scotland, you could even say obsessed. Westminster? Pffff!

 

It's not about "Scotland" but the people thereof they should be interested in. What may make Scotland as a nation wealthier doesn't necessarily translate to better for the Scottish people. 

[Boris]

6 minutes ago, JamboX2 said:

 

The argument made was policies atm benefit SE England. That's in part due to the population weight. That weight in Scotland is skewed to the Greater Glasgow area in Scotland. An area which gets more funding per head than most in Scotland. It's a hypothetical but a realistic one based on the argument currently made against the Union.

 

Perhaps, but wouldn't this then be seen via Holyrood's legislation, given we have the Scottish Parliament.

 

If Holyrood doesn't in its current form, why would Holyrood of an independent Scotland suddenly change?

[Unknown user]

5 minutes ago, JamboX2 said:

 

Perhaps I'm increasingly cynical on politics but I think you'll find that where power lies corruption and money follow. MSPs are hardly immune from lobbying and influence in how they make decisions. The idea is laughable to think it won't follow if Scotland got independence nor that power is a corrupting influence.

 

That isn't to say WM needs to have a look itself. But this is becoming a morality contest.

 

Corruption and lobbying aren't the only aspects of my post of course, I also pointed out that Westminster's a government that doesn't give a **** about Scotland.

 

But let's be honest, all of that can be debated. What can't really be debated is what many many people's perception of Westminster is, and that would be a powerful argument if taken advantage of. 

[JamboX2]

32 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

Perhaps, but wouldn't this then be seen via Holyrood's legislation, given we have the Scottish Parliament.

 

If Holyrood doesn't in its current form, why would Holyrood of an independent Scotland suddenly change?

 

Not necessarily. Funding on infrastructure and local government would however as LG provide most services in Scotland. Funding is already skewed toward Glasgow over other areas of Scotland which also face similar issues.

[JamboX2]

30 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

Corruption and lobbying aren't the only aspects of my post of course, I also pointed out that Westminster's a government that doesn't give a **** about Scotland.

 

But let's be honest, all of that can be debated. What can't really be debated is what many many people's perception of Westminster is, and that would be a powerful argument if taken advantage of. 

 

That drum has been banged for a long time. And so far it's not born much fruit.

[The Treasurer]

Why do people insist on calling it "Indy Ref 2"

We've already had two independence votes, the first one actually resulted in a majority vote in favour, but of course the UK government moved the goalposts, saying it had to be a majority of those eligible to vote rather than the votes actually cast

[Unknown user]

17 minutes ago, JamboX2 said:

 

That drum has been banged for a long time. And so far it's not born much fruit.

 

Not in terms of the independence vote, the snp in particular allowed the debate to be about their vision of a post independence Scotland which was blurry and fragmented, instead of pointing out that the exact future couldn't be predicted, that cross party bodies would be set up to decide the details over a notice period of, say, five years, and that if anything's to be attacked it's the status quo of sleaze and incompetence that cares not a jot about us

[Boris]

1 hour ago, The Treasurer said:

Why do people insist on calling it "Indy Ref 2"

We've already had two independence votes, the first one actually resulted in a majority vote in favour, but of course the UK government moved the goalposts, saying it had to be a majority of those eligible to vote rather than the votes actually cast

 

That was for devolution in the 1970's wasn't it?

[John Findlay]

15 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

That was for devolution in the 1970's wasn't it?

Correct. First vote for devolution was 1979. Where a Labour government brought in a last minute amendment that 40% of the eligible voters had to vote for devolution. It was 37% in the end but was still a majority for.

 

[Boab]

1 hour ago, The Treasurer said:

Why do people insist on calling it "Indy Ref 2"

We've already had two independence votes, the first one actually resulted in a majority vote in favour, but of course the UK government moved the goalposts, saying it had to be a majority of those eligible to vote rather than the votes actually cast

 I'd call that 1-1 !

Next goal's the winner !

Literally !

[Thunderstruck]

1 hour ago, The Treasurer said:

Why do people insist on calling it "Indy Ref 2"

We've already had two independence votes, the first one actually resulted in a majority vote in favour, but of course the UK government moved the goalposts, saying it had to be a majority of those eligible to vote rather than the votes actually cast

 

Are you referring to the 1979 Referendum?

 

If so, it had nothing to do with independence, just devolution. Not too different from the more recent referendum on devolution. 

 

1979 was a referendum on the implementation of the Scotland Act 1977. If it had reached the requirement in terms of support, the result would have been the formation of a Scottish Assembly. 

 

In terms of the the number of votes required, a “supermajority” is far from unusual in referendums. In 1979, 63% of the turnout would have meant that the Act would have passed into law. 60 to 65% or even two thirds is viewed as reasonable for a supermajority for major constitutional change. 

 

We might be in quieter times if the U.K. insisted on a minimum of two thirds of the vote to initiate change. 

[Highlander]

Yes	No	Undecided
Konrad Von Carstein	Carl Weathers*	Geoff the Mince*
Thommo414	Gorgiewave	AlphonseCapone*
Cade	Brighton Jambo	Stokesy**
Moogsy***	Jambo-Jimbo*	The Frenchman Returns*
GrumpyJambo	Irufushi	Horatio Caine**
The Brow	Ricardo Shillyshally	Sooperstar*
IndianaJones	PortobelloJambo1	Jack D and Coke
Cruyff Turn	Dawnrazor***	Doctor Jambo**
Roxy Hearts	ArgyJambo	Tian447**
Herbert	Lemongrab*	Gambo
Smithee***	Superjack
ToqueJambo	Stevie
Sarah O	Jambo_Gaz
Der Kaiser	Benny
RedJambo**	JonnoTheJambo
All Roads Lead to Gorgie	12XU
Ibiza Jambo	Dannie Boy
Helzibob**	JamboX2*
Ray Gin	Frankblack*
Lord BJ**	ManAliveIts105
Pans Jambo	Dougal
Boris	JimKongUno*
Been Here Before	richiehmfc
NormTheBarman	Poseidon*
Praha06	Hasselhoff
Scottish_chicP	Thunderstruck
OmiyaHearts	Pablo
Marvin***	SkacelSid
Space Mackerel	EastsideJambo
Jamhammer	JackLadd
Coconut Doug	Shooter McGavin*
Hunky Dory	Jambos_1874
Bez
PsychocAndy
Boof
Pcw1874
Jake
GeoMac
Skinny Milinkovic
Ri Alban
Mysterion
Hmfc_liam06**
Assassin

 

* Previously voted Yes / ** Previously voted No / *** Previously did not or could not vote

 

 

Slow day at the office!

 

This should placate those who wanted a poll but, to put our conversation in some context, this is where things stand. Please take into account, some people do not live in Scotland and a few could not vote last time around due to age or place of residence. Some have not stated which way they would vote, did not state their intention explicitly or appeared to be using sarcasm (and have not been included), some were clearly leaning one way or the other (and have been included) but, if anyone wants to explicitly state their preference or correct me for having misinterpreted their position, I’d be happy to add or amend their position. Apologies if I have done so, I have simply been using the content offered in this thread.

 

I have highlighted those who have clearly stated a change in their position as originally stated in my opening post.

 

Edited September 25, 2018 by Highlander

[Dawnrazor]

14 minutes ago, Highlander said:

Yes	No	Undecided
Konrad Von Carstein	Carl Weathers*	Geoff the Mince*
Thommo414	Gorgiewave	AlphonseCapone*
Cade	Brighton Jambo	Stokesy**
Moogsy***	Jambo-Jimbo*	The Frenchman Returns*
GrumpyJambo	Irufushi	Horatio Caine**
The Brow	Ricardo Shillyshally	Sooperstar*
IndianaJones	PortobelloJambo1	Jack D and Coke
Cruyff Turn	Dawnrazor***	Doctor Jambo**
Roxy Hearts	ArgyJambo	Tian447**
Herbert	Lemongrab*	Gambo
Smithee***	Superjack
ToqueJambo	Stevie
Sarah O	Jambo_Gaz
Der Kaiser	Benny
RedJambo**	JonnoTheJambo
All Roads Lead to Gorgie	12XU
Ibiza Jambo	Dannie Boy
Helzibob**	JamboX2*
Ray Gin	Frankblack*
Lord BJ**	ManAliveIts105
Pans Jambo	Dougal
Boris	JimKongUno*
Been Here Before	richiehmfc
NormTheBarman	Poseidon*
Praha06	Hasselhoff
Scottish_chicP	Thunderstruck
OmiyaHearts	Pablo
Marvin***	SkacelSid
Space Mackerel	EastsideJambo
Jamhammer	JackLadd
Coconut Doug	Shooter McGavin*
Hunky Dory	Jambos_1874
Bez
PsychocAndy
Boof
Pcw1874
Jake
GeoMac
Skinny Milinkovic
Ri Alban
Mysterion
Hmfc_liam06**
Assassin

 

* Previously voted Yes / ** Previously voted No / *** Previously did not or could not vote

 

 

Slow day at the office!

 

This should placate those who wanted a poll but, to put our conversation in some context, this is where things stand. Please take into account, some people do not live in Scotland and a few could not vote last time around due to age or place of residence. Some have not stated which way they would vote, did not state their intention explicitly or appeared to be using sarcasm (and have not been included), some were clearly leaning one way or the other (and have been included) but, if anyone wants to explicitly state their preference or correct me for having misinterpreted their position, I’d be happy to add or amend their position. Apologies if I have done so, I have simply been using the content offered in this thread.

 

I have highlighted those who have clearly stated a change in their position as originally stated in my opening post.

 

That's looks like the results of a poll ??

[Highlander]

1 minute ago, Dawnrazor said:

That's looks like the results of a poll ??

 

After my afternoon nap and dose of CBeebies, I was a different person. 

[Dawnrazor]

1 minute ago, Highlander said:

 

After my afternoon nap and dose of CBeebies, I was a different person. 

??

[redjambo]

27 minutes ago, Highlander said:

Yes	No	Undecided
Konrad Von Carstein	Carl Weathers*	Geoff the Mince*
Thommo414	Gorgiewave	AlphonseCapone*
Cade	Brighton Jambo	Stokesy**
Moogsy***	Jambo-Jimbo*	The Frenchman Returns*
GrumpyJambo	Irufushi	Horatio Caine**
The Brow	Ricardo Shillyshally	Sooperstar*
IndianaJones	PortobelloJambo1	Jack D and Coke
Cruyff Turn	Dawnrazor***	Doctor Jambo**
Roxy Hearts	ArgyJambo	Tian447**
Herbert	Lemongrab*	Gambo
Smithee***	Superjack
ToqueJambo	Stevie
Sarah O	Jambo_Gaz
Der Kaiser	Benny
RedJambo**	JonnoTheJambo
All Roads Lead to Gorgie	12XU
Ibiza Jambo	Dannie Boy
Helzibob**	JamboX2*
Ray Gin	Frankblack*
Lord BJ**	ManAliveIts105
Pans Jambo	Dougal
Boris	JimKongUno*
Been Here Before	richiehmfc
NormTheBarman	Poseidon*
Praha06	Hasselhoff
Scottish_chicP	Thunderstruck
OmiyaHearts	Pablo
Marvin***	SkacelSid
Space Mackerel	EastsideJambo
Jamhammer	JackLadd
Coconut Doug	Shooter McGavin*
Hunky Dory	Jambos_1874
Bez
PsychocAndy
Boof
Pcw1874
Jake
GeoMac
Skinny Milinkovic
Ri Alban
Mysterion
Hmfc_liam06**
Assassin

 

* Previously voted Yes / ** Previously voted No / *** Previously did not or could not vote

 

 

Slow day at the office!

 

This should placate those who wanted a poll but, to put our conversation in some context, this is where things stand. Please take into account, some people do not live in Scotland and a few could not vote last time around due to age or place of residence. Some have not stated which way they would vote, did not state their intention explicitly or appeared to be using sarcasm (and have not been included), some were clearly leaning one way or the other (and have been included) but, if anyone wants to explicitly state their preference or correct me for having misinterpreted their position, I’d be happy to add or amend their position. Apologies if I have done so, I have simply been using the content offered in this thread.

 

I have highlighted those who have clearly stated a change in their position as originally stated in my opening post.

 

 

I'm still undecided (although Space Mackerel might be pushing me back to a No. ;)).

[Highlander]

Sincere apologies Red! I am sure there are others.

 

I will amend it in due course. 

[redjambo]

12 minutes ago, Highlander said:

Sincere apologies Red! I am sure there are others.

 

I will amend it in due course. 

 

I'm so offended! ;)

 

No worries, I did say that I was leaning towards Yes next time, so it was an understandable mistake. There's a lot going to happen between now and a potential next referendum so I can't call how I will vote quite now.