Scotland Debate

[Deleted member 15344]

Beckham come out as a NO.

Keep them coming Cameron, wheeling out fuds like that,who don't have a note anyway, is playing a blinder for YES.

I am sure that Knighthood will be duly delivered.

Yes I can see all those No voters changing their mind purely on the basis of what Beckham has said

He won't make a single difference to either side

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Being peed off with Westminster is no different to most who live outside London...

Maybe so - just so happens that Scotland (as part of the UK but also a nation in it's own right) is in the fortunate position of being able to do something about it - so maybe the rest of the UK outside of London should get their act together.

Also on your statement

the collective benefits of the future

Well I am sure the voters of Scotland would be delighted to hear of the detail of the future benefits being part of the UK will provide. But they better get to it because time is running out.

 

[CheltenhamHacker]

No! If that's not being 'negative'!

All sides put their policies for (positive) change forward and voters make a selection.

There may be arguments along the lines of 'that won't work because....' etc. And Opposition will always say Government isn't working properly......

But, overall, the negatives are kept under control because Positive feelings tend to produce more votes.

And, yet again, you were selective about what you read/absorbed! The word 'extremely' was key!

I think you're misunderstanding what LP meant. Or maybe I am. But one of us is.

I took LP to be referring to that nearly all modern political campaigns being "negative politics". It used to be as you describe, but in the last 20 years it seems almost 100% to be "negative".

That's just what I took him to mean though.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

I think you're misunderstanding what LP meant. Or maybe I am. But one of us is.

I took LP to be referring to that nearly all modern political campaigns being "negative politics". It used to be as you describe, but in the last 20 years it seems almost 100% to be "negative".

That's just what I took him to mean though.

Exactly what I meant :thup:

 

[CMAC]

Beckham come out as a NO.

Keep them coming Cameron, wheeling out fuds like that,who don't have a note anyway, is playing a blinder for YES.

I am sure that Knighthood will be duly delivered.

He was joined by two more Olympic legends, Sir Steve Redgrave and Baroness Grey-Thompson, who released the following joint statement to the Scottish Daily Mail: “It is clear, in competing side by side, that we are so much greater than the sum of our parts.”


shame you have to resort to name calling but I suppose thats the YES way

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Yes I can see all those No voters changing their mind purely on the basis of what Beckham has said

He won't make a single difference to either side

They wouldn't roll him out as a BT supporter if they didn't think some undecided folks would vote NO on the back of it. I'd rather hope some undecideds won't vote YES because of him supporting BT.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

I think you're misunderstanding what LP meant. Or maybe I am. But one of us is.

I took LP to be referring to that nearly all modern political campaigns being "negative politics". It used to be as you describe, but in the last 20 years it seems almost 100% to be "negative".

So it's nice to have YES trying to put forward a positive vision in the face of all the things that could possibly go wrong. Yes the vision is flawed and has many challenges - but at least it's POSITIVE.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

So it's nice to have YES trying to put forward a positive vision in the face of all the things that could possibly go wrong. Yes the vision is flawed and has many challenges - but at least it's POSITIVE.

It's that positive it's built of fantasy and fairy dust it appears with holes the size of the Cheddar Gorge

Yes may put forward a lovely fluffy vision of the future but their methods are extremely negative in the attacks they make on people.

 

[FairwayDodger]

So it's nice to have YES trying to put forward a positive vision in the face of all the things that could possibly go wrong. Yes the vision is flawed and has many challenges - but at least it's POSITIVE.

This is a myth. The yes campaign are using both positive and negative arguments. Nothing wrong with that but the spin that it's their "positive" message vs "scaremongering" is annoying and hypocritical.

 

[CheltenhamHacker]

So it's nice to have YES trying to put forward a positive vision in the face of all the things that could possibly go wrong. Yes the vision is flawed and has many challenges - but at least it's POSITIVE.

Telling everyone the NHS will collapse within minutes of NO vote, and that they will have to pay thousands of pounds for a GP visit (I may be exagerating for effect), doesn't count as Negative?

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

This is a myth. The yes campaign are using both positive and negative arguments. Nothing wrong with that but the spin that it's their "positive" message vs "scaremongering" is annoying and hypocritical.

But at least there is something positive about self-determination. It is inevitable that part of making the case for self-determination is to highlight the faults and failings of the alternative and to try and show where such failings can be improved upon. BT quite validly do exactly the same but have IMO failed to make enough of the POSITIVES about remaining in the UK - and there are many. But I do not hear them amidst all the loud warnings and risks coming from BT.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Telling everyone the NHS will collapse within minutes of NO vote, and that they will have to pay thousands of pounds for a GP visit (I may be exagerating for effect), doesn't count as Negative?

Likewise I have heard on a number of occasions how the Scotland benefits from the shared resources etc available to NHS Scotland from across the UK. But I though that NHS Scotland was autonomous other than as determined by funding through Barnett. So what is this stuff about shared UK resources? Maybe there are but I'm not aware of them or how it works.

 

[FairwayDodger]

But at least there is something positive about self-determination. It is inevitable that part of making the case for self-determination is to highlight the faults and failings of the alternative and to try and show where such failings can be improved upon. BT quite validly do exactly the same but have IMO failed to make enough of the POSITIVES about remaining in the UK - and there are many. But I do not hear them amidst all the loud warnings and risks coming from BT.

Agreed, although I think they (BT) are belatedly improving in this aspect.

 

[Hobbit]

But at least there is something positive about self-determination. It is inevitable that part of making the case for self-determination is to highlight the faults and failings of the alternative and to try and show where such failings can be improved upon. BT quite validly do exactly the same but have IMO failed to make enough of the POSITIVES about remaining in the UK - and there are many. But I do not hear them amidst all the loud warnings and risks coming from BT.

But why is saying "no" about self determination seen as a negative. Surely its about choice, and of choosing what an individual sees as RIGHT. Just because someone says "no" to independence, doesn't mean they're being negative about the future of Scotland as they see it. Why would they vote for a negative outcome?

 

[Dodger]

Yes I can see all those No voters changing their mind purely on the basis of what Beckham has said

He won't make a single difference to either side

If you think that one of Englandshire's finest casting his support for NO won't make even the slightest bit of difference then you really are not in touch.

The more that these types continue to trot out their support the more power YES will continue to get.

 

[CMAC]

If you think that one of Englandshire's finest casting his support for NO won't make even the slightest bit of difference then you really are not in touch.

The more that these types continue to trot out their support the more power YES will continue to get.

are you moving back to Scotland to reap what you sow if its (highly unlikely) a YES?

you dont have to answer as thats personal, just curious

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

But why is saying "no" about self determination seen as a negative. Surely its about choice, and of choosing what an individual sees as RIGHT. Just because someone says "no" to independence, doesn't mean they're being negative about the future of Scotland as they see it. Why would they vote for a negative outcome?

Because they don;t need to be quite so negative about it - they could have really positively promoted the benefits. Part of the problem was that the benefit for so long was simply the status quo - and for every major plus BT could cite about the status quo, YES would put forward a status quo negative and supplement that with a positive improvement.

And Westminster stood aside saying that they would not get involved as this was Scotland's debate and Scotland's alone - bizarrely missing the fact that much of Scotland was not at all happy with the status quo - no matter how much positive spin could be put on it - it just wasn't cutting it. Now BT have 'additional powers' and that is so much easier to sell than a tainted and unwanted status quo

 

[Dodger]

are you moving back to Scotland to reap what you sow if its (highly unlikely) a YES?

you dont have to answer as thats personal, just curious

Happy to answer......The only time I have lived in Scotland was through my later education but the high likelihood is that I will move there for work in the near future. I also currently own property in our fine country, and yes, I am more than ready thank you.:thup:

 

[Deleted member 15344]

If you think that one of Englandshire's finest casting his support for NO won't make even the slightest bit of difference then you really are not in touch.

The more that these types continue to trot out their support the more power YES will continue to get.

Englandshire ? Where is that ?

More power ? Utter nonsense - if people change votes based on celebs then I expect they are that flakey they will prob change tomorrow again when the wind blows to the south.

Any other straws you fancy clutching

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Because they don;t need to be quite so negative about it - they could have really positively promoted the benefits. Part of the problem was that the benefit for so long was simply the status quo - and for every major plus BT could cite about the status quo, YES would put forward a status quo negative and supplement that with a positive improvement.

And Westminster stood aside saying that they would not get involved as this was Scotland's debate and Scotland's alone - bizarrely missing the fact that much of Scotland was not at all happy with the status quo - no matter how much positive spin could be put on it - it just wasn't cutting it. Now BT have 'additional powers' and that is so much easier to sell than a tainted and unwanted status quo

Really ?! Must have missed all these positives or is it the fairy dust again

Most of the time a negative has been mentioned the response has been "scaremongering" or "we will are it work" or "we don't need a plan b we will make plan a work"

Surely if it's an unwanted status quo then no one will vote No ?