Referendum on Scottish Independence

How would you vote in the referendum?

  • In Scotland: Yes

    Votes: 8 4.5%
  • In Scotland: No

    Votes: 3 1.7%
  • In Scotland: Undecided / won't vote / spoilt vote

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Rest of UK: Yes

    Votes: 3 1.7%
  • Rest of UK: No

    Votes: 21 11.9%
  • Rest of UK: Undecided / won't vote / spoilt vote

    Votes: 3 1.7%
  • Rest of World: Yes

    Votes: 61 34.5%
  • Rest of World: No

    Votes: 52 29.4%
  • Rest of World: Undecided / won't vote / spoilt vote

    Votes: 26 14.7%

  • Total voters
    177
  • Poll closed .
Well...

(1) Delivering on his promises: risk a backbench revolt and the loss of whatever authority he still has in his party.

(2) Forgetting his promises: risk losing all his Scottish MPs.

Difficult decision!
Forgetting his promises would also destroy any and all trust in Westminister across Scotland, not something you want to do in a region that wasn't far off secession. And with the speech Cameron just gave, which announced that the Scotland voted for a stronger Scottish parliament it probably wouldn't be difficult to argue for a redo if they failed to keep that promise.

Anyway, it looks like the point is moot, as if he's intending to break all the promises he just made (to every nation in the UK!) then he just committed political suicide.
 
I think he committed political suicide by making the promise in the first place. Which is sad because it was absolutely the right thing to do. Such is politics I suppose...
 
So, the BBC reports that Scotland has voted against becoming an independent country by a projected 55% to 45%, or 1,914,187 Yes votes to 1,539,920 no votes. Only Dundee City, Glasgow, North Lanarkshire, and West Dunbartonshire had a majority for independence. They don't have the data from Highland yet, but there aren't enough voters there to change the final outcome.

http://www.bbc.com/news/events/scotland-decides/results
 
I'm mostly relieved, but also have a slight sense of disappointment. Whatever had happened in the wake of a 'yes' vote, it would have been interesting to watch. What we need now is for the promises made to Scotland to be kept in full, and, hopefully, to lead the way towards greater devolution of powers in the rest of the UK.

Which has nothing in particular to do with the subject at hand.

This has been a curiosity of mine for a while...why do people make the wild assumption that somehow this whole voting process goes off as designed? It seems like it would be well worth the minor effort to just rig the blazes out of the whole thing.

The major parties in any election (in this case the two campaigns) are very much aware of that possibility, and so have people around to keep a close eye on proceedings.
 
I think he committed political suicide by making the promise in the first place. Which is sad because it was absolutely the right thing to do. Such is politics I suppose...
This is quite possibly true, but if he is seen to make good on his promises, and presides over some effective reforms following this I think he could come out in an even stronger position than he was before.
Winston Hughes said:
The major parties in any election (in this case the two campaigns) are very much aware of that possibility, and so have people around to keep a close eye on proceedings.
Ha very true, it was "breaking news" when they found just 10 or so fraudulent votes.
 
So it appears that the campaign for Scottish independence has failed. Will this cast a shadow on other movements similar to this one?
 
So I wake up and the first thing I do is pick my tablet to come over here and turn on the TV to watch the news.

I think Cameron can't do speeches, he was just repeating 'United Kingdom' and 'together' all the time. In any case, No won a clear victory, although if Westminster doesnt deliver on devolution, another referendum or something alike is foreseeable before people would expect it.
 
I don't think I'd call it a failure - they got a referendum and have been promised more powers.

It could only spur on other independence movements.

Randomly I was talking to a man in Saudi Arabia yesterday and he was very interested.
I don't think he knew the difference between Ireland and the UK but he was very interested in it.

although if Westminster doesnt deliver on devolution, another referendum or something alike is foreseeable before people would expect it.
The established steps if you are promised home rule within the UK and then don't get it is an unpopular uprising, followed by a ham fisted response and then a successful guerilla war and then a short civil war, cutting pensions to balance the budget and never being forgiven for it, an initial period of hopefulness followed by handing things over to the church to decide.
 
But Scotland is closer to England than Ireland. I mean, the Irish had a separate island. There's however no escape from British that want to hold unto their "empire".
 
Forgetting his promises would also destroy any and all trust in Westminister across Scotland, not something you want to do in a region that wasn't far off secession. And with the speech Cameron just gave, which announced that the Scotland voted for a stronger Scottish parliament it probably wouldn't be difficult to argue for a redo if they failed to keep that promise.

I'm not convinced. This is the man who promised he wouldn't fiddle with the NHS.

Cameron's focus over the next eight months will be the general election campaign, in which English voters will be infinitely more important to him than Scottish ones. And I don't think those voters will be quite as happy about the prospect of more powers and more money going to the Scottish parliament when an English one still doesn't even exist.
 
Man, this referendum really acted like a giant lead pan hitting all your politicians and making them acting weird and confused.
 
It is well known that there are more pandas in Scotland than Scottish tory MPs.
 
Well that's my point. Cameron has nothing to gain, now, by following up on his vague promises to Scotland, and nothing to lose if he doesn't. Whereas he has far more to lose if he angers his English MPs and voters.
 
The trick is, though, that he must appear to be keeping his word (or else lose credibility with the English electorate who haven't fallen fast asleep) while not actually doing anything.

I suspect he can easily enough do this.
 
I haven't been following this at all (sort of like football), but what surprises me most is that 1.6 million Scotsmen actually voted in favour of independence. Anywho, apparently a clear majority of Scotsmen has let the downsides outweigh the upsides.

Interesting to see also that 'rest of world' would apparently love to see an independent Scotland. Perhaps they can make one somewhere. ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom