Scotland Debate

[Foxholer]

Negotiation will be cross party/no party and already Carmichael has indicated he'd be involved, as will Darling/Brown/Davidson and any other politician who's been involved in the debate.

This seems to be a classic historic Scottish weakness. Win the major battle, then waste the opportunity fighting amongst themselves! Hopefully the fishy pair can actually lead them rather than be usurped by the has-beens!

 

[CheltenhamHacker]

For Scotland, none of them have an electoral mandate for iScotland!

On a side, lighter note, everytime someone writes iScotland, it makes me think that they will be sponsored by Apple. I hope it doesn't mean Apple will force a load of bagpipe songs onto my iPhone, like they did with U2!

 

[Dodger]

How convenient........

Another orchestrated move in using a regular donor's company in the lead 'battle'?

Surely not?:smirk:

http://citywire.co.uk/money/pound-lifts-off-lows-as-betfair-pays-out-on-scottish-no/a772804

 

[CheltenhamHacker]

how convenient........

Another orchestrated move in using a regular donor's company in the lead 'battle'?

Surely not?:smirk:

http://citywire.co.uk/money/pound-lifts-off-lows-as-betfair-pays-out-on-scottish-no/a772804

it's a conspiracy!!!!!

 

[Deleted member 15344]

it's a conspiracy!!!!!

The oil price meanwhile looks on course to register its biggest quarterly loss since in more than two years. Brent crude is trading at $97.7 per barrel, and is down around 13% over the quarter, as weaker than expected economic data from the US and China took its toll.

That must be a bit of pain to read

 

[CheltenhamHacker]

The oil price meanwhile looks on course to register its biggest quarterly loss since in more than two years. Brent crude is trading at $97.7 per barrel, and is down around 13% over the quarter, as weaker than expected economic data from the US and China took its toll.

That must be a bit of pain to read

That must be a conspiracy as well.

The whole oil industry is against iScotland.

 

[DCB]

I wouldn't worry, after a No is returned on Friday it'll all be water under the bridge

 

[Deleted member 15344]

That must be a conspiracy as well.

The whole oil industry is against iScotland.

Long list of people against iScotland it appears

 

[CMAC]

How convenient........

Another orchestrated move in using a regular donor's company in the lead 'battle'?

Surely not?:smirk:

http://citywire.co.uk/money/pound-lifts-off-lows-as-betfair-pays-out-on-scottish-no/a772804

correct, it's not- they are stating their finite figs- another attack on presentation over content tedious!

 

[CMAC]

On a side, lighter note, everytime someone writes iScotland, it makes me think that they will be sponsored by Apple. I hope it doesn't mean Apple will force a load of bagpipe songs onto my iPhone, like they did with U2!

U2 forced a lot of bagpipe songs on you?


I also think iPhone when I see iScot etc

someone posted above saying Rest of UK as R o fuk.......could be quite apt come Friday

 

[CMAC]

The Herald is the latest Paper to support a NO VOTE :whoo:

http://www.heraldscotland.com/comme...ure-that-meets-the-aspirations-of-sc.25295912


a snippet and a view I agree with.....

But the supporters of independence do not hold the monopoly on caring passionately about Scotland and wanting change to help bring about a more just, equal and prosperous society.

The question is whether that vision is best pursued as part of the UK or outside it. We keenly understand the appeal of independence. Who would not want to believe that, by putting a cross on a ballot paper, Scotland could be set on a sure path to becoming a country where poverty, inequality and unpopular governments are vanquished?

But, amid all the excitement and hope generated by the prospect of wholesale change, it is important to recognise that aspiration, assertion and belief in the benefits of independence are not enough.

 

[Old Skier]

Somebody tell him please:lol:

I'd rather you did as

 

[IanG]

For Scotland, none of them have an electoral mandate for iScotland!

No one has an electoral mandate for iScotland until it exists and hold an election.

IMHO - the divorce settlement will be agreed by those in positions of power within the existing structures. They may well take advice/input from all and sundry and try to broker a consensus view. Ultimately though the SNP would be entitled to feel they have the authority and mandate to lead as they led the winning YES campaign.

 

[NWJocko]

The Herald is the latest Paper to support a NO VOTE :whoo:

http://www.heraldscotland.com/comme...ure-that-meets-the-aspirations-of-sc.25295912


a snippet and a view I agree with.....

But the supporters of independence do not hold the monopoly on caring passionately about Scotland and wanting change to help bring about a more just, equal and prosperous society.

The question is whether that vision is best pursued as part of the UK or outside it. We keenly understand the appeal of independence. Who would not want to believe that, by putting a cross on a ballot paper, Scotland could be set on a sure path to becoming a country where poverty, inequality and unpopular governments are vanquished?

But, amid all the excitement and hope generated by the prospect of wholesale change, it is important to recognise that aspiration, assertion and belief in the benefits of independence are not enough.

The bit in bold is important and a good point.

One of the most disappointing things about the debate for me is the attitude of some Yes voters towards anyone from the No side of the fence who is brave enough to stick their head above the parapet.

Some of the abuse they get from Yes voters is ridiculous and completely uncalled for. Their attitude seems to be that you can't be a patriotic scot and vote No!

I've seen friendships end over the attitude of some of my Yes friends to No which is just sad. I worry about the reaction from the Yes group if the vote is No.....

 

[Old Skier]

Interesting time at Trafalgar Sq yesterday evening. Most people I spoke to are genuinely upsetwith the Party Leaders, and not for reacting to late but in agreeing to thereferendum in the first place. The feeling was that on a matter that was goingto have implications for the whole of the UK, the whole of the UK should havehad the opportunity to vote. But hey ho,as my grammar and spelling coach on hear keeps sprouting off about democracy Iwonder why it can only be on the Yes voter’s terms.
Like the well know song goes “When the going gets tough,the tough get going”. Its seems like itsgoing to have to change to “When the going gets tough, lets jump ship”.

 

[Adi2Dassler]

Interesting time at Trafalgar Sq yesterday evening. Most people I spoke to are genuinely upsetwith the Party Leaders, and not for reacting to late but in agreeing to thereferendum in the first place. The feeling was that on a matter that was goingto have implications for the whole of the UK, the whole of the UK should havehad the opportunity to vote. But hey ho,as my grammar and spelling coach on hear keeps sprouting off about democracy Iwonder why it can only be on the Yes voter’s terms.
Like the well know song goes “When the going gets tough,the tough get going”. Its seems like itsgoing to have to change to “When the going gets tough, lets jump ship”.

Happy to help. :thup:

 

[Old Skier]

Happy to help. :thup:

You may have missed one.

 

[FairwayDodger]

No it won't be!The white paper isn't giving Salmond or anyone else the right to negotiate with westminster based on that.The white paper is the blueprint for the 1st SNP election manifesto, one I'll be rejecting at the ballot box.

Ok, let's go with this. I realise the white paper is the snp's vision but my understanding, which may well be wrong, is that it will form the basis of the negotiations between Friday and the 2016 "go live".

So if that's not the case, does that mean we're having an election between a yes vote and the start of negotiations so that the negotiating team have a proper mandate?

Honest question.

 

[drdel]

Happy to help. :thup:

Then you should do it right... e.g .."upset that"; "..too late.."; " ...a referendum..."; ".. was to..." going is surplus word; "..Uk should have..." had is surplus word;"...It seems...".


I wonder if Apple will decide to get involve the lawyers on the use of "i"Scotland ?

 

[Old Skier]

Ok, let's go with this. I realise the white paper is the snp's vision but my understanding, which may well be wrong, is that it will form the basis of the negotiations between Friday and the 2016 "go live".

So if that's not the case, does that mean we're having an election between a yes vote and the start of negotiations so that the negotiating team have a proper mandate?

Honest question.

As long as an iscot pays.