• We'd like to take this opportunity to wish you a Happy Holidays and a very Merry Christmas from all at Golf Monthly. Thank you for sharing your 2025 with us!

Scotland Debate

One of my fears is that Scotland win Independence and then Labour win the next Scottish election.

I doubt if the present Scottish Labour crowd would manage to run a cold bath.

Also a likely scenario if there's a No vote and SNP implode with the ritual infighting that would no doubt follow such a result.

As long as King Eck doesn't explode, that could be messy ;)
 
I wish this vote was bloody yesterday!

This whole debate (in general, not necessarily this thread but I suppose some of the following applies here) is based around spin, mistrust, half truths, deception, downright lies, made up nonsense and (in my personal opinion) barely concealed racism*.

The sooner it is finished the better. I'm sick Fed up of politicians and their lickspittles telling me 'the people of Scotland want/don't want whatever'. Who the ...... are they to say what anyone wants? They haven't got a bleedin clue what the average person wants/needs/thinks, not one bloody clue! Millions spent on the most blatantly obvious propaganda that could have been put to much better use and that's not counting the Civil servants man hours that could have been better utilised. An absolute joke imo.

I refuse to believe either side is 100% correct 100% of the time, yet not once have I heard them agree on any single point. If this is the standard of our 'leaders' then I would suggest it's a revolution we need, not a vote!

Rant over!

* based on plentiful conversations I've had, or had the misfortune to have overhead.
 
Also a likely scenario if there's a No vote and SNP implode with the ritual infighting that would no doubt follow such a result.

As long as King Eck doesn't explode, that could be messy ;)

if you knew (maybe you do) anyone in the snr SNP party you would realise how ludicrous that statement is.
 
I wish this vote was bloody yesterday!

This whole debate (in general, not necessarily this thread but I suppose some of the following applies here) is based around spin, mistrust, half truths, deception, downright lies, made up nonsense and (in my personal opinion) barely concealed racism*.

The sooner it is finished the better. I'm sick Fed up of politicians and their lickspittles telling me 'the people of Scotland want/don't want whatever'. Who the ...... are they to say what anyone wants? They haven't got a bleedin clue what the average person wants/needs/thinks, not one bloody clue! Millions spent on the most blatantly obvious propaganda that could have been put to much better use and that's not counting the Civil servants man hours that could have been better utilised. An absolute joke imo.

I refuse to believe either side is 100% correct 100% of the time, yet not once have I heard them agree on any single point. If this is the standard of our 'leaders' then I would suggest it's a revolution we need, not a vote!

Rant over!

* based on plentiful conversations I've had, or had the misfortune to have overhead.



I just wish the vote was to be a question of whether the Scots would be happier deciding their own future/fate rather than "will we be financially better or worse off" as the over riding factor. Any financial better or worse off is likely to change over the coming years and decades, it will never amount to a huge difference either way. Surely the vote shouldn't be solely based on that point alone, if it was a Union purely based on economics, why do we not get a vote in the other Union countries as to whether we want to be in or out, and whether we wish to support, or be supported, by the other member countries?
 
...and then there is this sort of nonsense (from today's Herald)

In other developments yesterday, Lord West, former First Sea Lord and Labour security minister said independence posed "the greatest grand strategic threat to the security and defence of our islands".

He added: "There is no doubt whatsoever that if Scotland separated it would diminish our ability to defend these islands."

couldnt agree more with Lord West. You know you can agree or disagree with the sentiment of a headline statement without having the 'N'th degree of detail. He certainly will be speaking from a position of knowledge we are not privvy to for obvious reasons.
 
...and then there is this sort of nonsense (from today's Herald)

In other developments yesterday, Lord West, former First Sea Lord and Labour security minister said independence posed "the greatest grand strategic threat to the security and defence of our islands".

He added: "There is no doubt whatsoever that if Scotland separated it would diminish our ability to defend these islands."

Without seeing the detail, I'd say those comments stand to reason...
 
Not sure about positivity.
In my mind positivity would have been allowing DevoMax on the ballot paper in the first place.
Now we have a panic move because the Darling boy has made a series of momentous mess ups and it looks like the Nats just may have a chance of winning.

What nonsense. A third option on the referendum would only have served to place a big question mark over the result.
 
Just as a statement providing information - what Lord West says is tosh as it gives me absolutely no information on why what he says would be the case. Give me an explanation and I might well agree with him.
Logical really,if you have no control over the policies or military who are on your border they become are vulnerable point within in your defences. As there is no guarantee that an iscot will be either in EU or NATO it could mean we (RUK) would be vulnerable along our border.
 
Not sure how?
Say 70% of Scots voted for DevoMax what would the question be?


Or, another way of looking at it is this; say 33% vote for devo, 33% vote no and 34% vote yes. That way the yes vote wins despite the vast majority not wanting it. It was one question to keep it simple and to avoid this scenario. A blind man on a galloping horse could see that!

Devo max can be argued for/against and agreed between the respective governments, no need for a referendum on that particular question.
 
Or, another way of looking at it is this; say 33% vote for devo, 33% vote no and 34% vote yes. That way the yes vote wins despite the vast majority not wanting it. It was one question to keep it simple and to avoid this scenario. A blind man on a galloping horse could see that!

Devo max can be argued for/against and agreed between the respective governments, no need for a referendum on that particular question.

You beat me to it, you are a wise man ;)
 
Incredible bias from Sky News tonight, do they think the Scots are stupid? Why won't they report the online polls from two of Scotland's biggest newspapers today putting the Yes vote at 91%
 
Incredible bias from Sky News tonight, do they think the Scots are stupid? Why won't they report the online polls from two of Scotland's biggest newspapers today putting the Yes vote at 91%

Na, you're going to have to be more specific. I've guessed three potential newspapers you might be referring to and can't find this on any of their sites? Got a link?

Regardless, 91%, if you believe that you are stupid. Not a very scientific survey, I'd hazard!
 
Top