Scottish Independence:

Total posts: [1,744]
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
8 9 10 11 12 ... 70
151 GameChainsaw12th Oct 2012 11:53:17 AM from sunshine and rainbows!
The Shadows Devour You.
True enough. I don't have anything in principle against 16 year olds voting, I just seem to remember doing a lot of growing up between 16 and 18.
152 DeviantBraeburn12th Oct 2012 06:08:01 PM from Dysfunctional California
Wandering Jew
Honestly, if we let 16 year olds vote, this country would be reduced to ashes by the end of the decade.

edited 16th Oct '12 4:24:50 PM by DeviantBraeburn

Everything is Possible.

But some things are more Probable than others.
JEBAGEDDON 2016

scratching at .8, just hopin'
That's because we can't be bothered to educate our 16 year olds. Have you seen how much damage our 76 year olds do?
154 Inhopelessguy13th Oct 2012 12:11:01 PM from Birmingham Ctl, UK , Relationship Status: One Is The Loneliest Number
So digital! ^▽^
Someone create a separate thread. :p
The self is the one thing you can't really see clearly.
155 TheBatPencil15th Oct 2012 07:03:45 AM from Glasgow, Scotland , Relationship Status: I'm just a hunk-a, hunk-a burnin' love
Game on, then.

The agreement itself.

edited 15th Oct '12 7:48:43 AM by TheBatPencil

And let us pray that come it may (As come it will for a' that)
156 pagad15th Oct 2012 12:53:53 PM from perfidious Albion , Relationship Status: Having tea with Cthulhu
Sneering Imperialist
I have to wonder what the fuck Cameron is playing at. He's given Salmond every possible advantage.
Typhoid and swans - it all comes from the same place.
157 Inhopelessguy15th Oct 2012 01:10:24 PM from Birmingham Ctl, UK , Relationship Status: One Is The Loneliest Number
So digital! ^▽^
Indeed. There must be a catch. Somewhere.
The self is the one thing you can't really see clearly.
158 Silasw15th Oct 2012 01:23:10 PM from The UNITED Kingdom , Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
Isnít the fact that it's a strait Yes or No, his win? Since if there was a devo max option lots of people who are not after full independence might go for that. Now those people are probably going to vote no.
"And the Bunny nails it!" ~ Gabrael

"If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we." ~ Cyran
159 Chalkos15th Oct 2012 02:50:44 PM from The Internets
Sidequest Proliferator
It depends. Salmond is betting more of those people will vote Yes than No. Cameron is making the opposing bet.
160 CaissasDeathAngel15th Oct 2012 03:08:19 PM from Dumfries, SW Scotland , Relationship Status: Pining for the fjords
House Lewis: Sanity is Relative
Yep, it's not an easy question to answer.

Personally, I think it plays into Salmond's favour. I think many SNP-voting Scots would prefer devo-max over independance, and that that option would pull in a lot of other voters who specifically do not vote SNP because of this issue. By gunning for the devo-max option, Salmond appeases those voters and can legitimately claim he tried and failed, but ultimately gets the outcome he wants.

For what it's worth, I'd be on the fence about devo-max if it were on the ballot paper, but will definitely vote independance now that it's not, so I'm one of those people I just described (I'm also an SNP voter anyway)
My name is Addy. Please call me that instead of my username.
161 TheBatPencil15th Oct 2012 07:22:50 PM from Glasgow, Scotland , Relationship Status: I'm just a hunk-a, hunk-a burnin' love
Of course, had Cameron made an issue out of anything then he's made himself the Westminster Tory who is trying to deliver a diktat to Scotland. In Scotland only Maggie Thatcher, the bad guy from Braveheart and Geoff Hurst are less popular than that guy.

It's not a battle they can win. Their best shot is in campaigning, but anything Cameron does to get himself involved is just going to turn people away and over to the "Yes" camp, but with a general election in 2015 (that we all know he's going to lose in Scotland) he has to get involved at some point.

He can't let Labour and the Lib Dems do the job for him when he's actively running against them. Even if he could, those parties are as unpopular as his own right now (and even more incompetent) and have no chance of beating Salmond.

It's very much the perfect storm for Salmond. Unpopular Tory government talking unpopular fiscal policies in a time of economic trouble and no real Labour or Lib Dem opposition in sight. He couldn't have scripted this.

edited 15th Oct '12 7:23:24 PM by TheBatPencil

And let us pray that come it may (As come it will for a' that)
162 pagad16th Oct 2012 01:16:03 AM from perfidious Albion , Relationship Status: Having tea with Cthulhu
Sneering Imperialist
What I don't understand is why Cameron didn't plump for devo-max himself. Keeping Scotland in the Union whilst assuaging nationalist sentiment in an electorate that largely hates his party would be a win-win, surely.
Typhoid and swans - it all comes from the same place.
163 DeviantBraeburn16th Oct 2012 01:37:12 AM from Dysfunctional California
Wandering Jew
Is it possible that David Cameron secretly wants Scotland to succeed, so that The Conservative Party will have power in Britain?
Everything is Possible.

But some things are more Probable than others.
JEBAGEDDON 2016

164 TamH7016th Oct 2012 01:54:55 AM from 合計虐殺 , Relationship Status: Having tea with Cthulhu
War ALWAYS changes. Man does not.
The Conservatives? Having ANY power after the next election? Possible. Then again, so are huge formations of flying pigs in Israeli Airforce colours doing circuits of Tel Aviv's Ben Gurion Airport.

CMD may have the issue of the Tory scum gaining power again at the election after the next one on his mind but I doubt very much that he is actually believing it will be possible.
165 GameChainsaw16th Oct 2012 03:04:40 AM from sunshine and rainbows!
The Shadows Devour You.
Actually I'm pretty sure it's impossible for the flying pigs incident to happen, as pigs can't fly. While it is at least physically possible for Cameron to win an election; in fact, there's precedent.
166 3of416th Oct 2012 03:56:34 AM from Five Seconds in the Future. , Relationship Status: I'd need a PowerPoint presentation
Emperor Stronk! Remove Chaos!
Impossible for pigs to fly? Do we know what some mad Israeli genetist is working on in his lab? Flying kamikaze pigs? *does not make the obvious joke*

LMage: NO ONE ASKED FOR YOUR WITCHCRAFT THREE
167 TamH7016th Oct 2012 04:31:41 AM from 合計虐殺 , Relationship Status: Having tea with Cthulhu
War ALWAYS changes. Man does not.
[up][up]Which precedent? CMD did not win the last election. He was handed power by that lickspittle prick Clegg. (Whose name is a slang word in many dialects for "an irritating little mosquito", btw)
168 Greenmantle16th Oct 2012 04:33:42 AM from Greater Wessex, Britannia , Relationship Status: Hiding
On The Road Again
[up]

John Major? Margaret Thatcher, perhaps?

By the way, would you have held another General Election, or gone for a "Rainbow Coalition" of Labour and Nationalist Parties?

edited 16th Oct '12 4:35:30 AM by Greenmantle

"Britannia Rules the Waves (if only)"
169 TamH7016th Oct 2012 04:51:10 AM from 合計虐殺 , Relationship Status: Having tea with Cthulhu
War ALWAYS changes. Man does not.
New election in six months from the date of the failed one. Simples.
170 Greenmantle16th Oct 2012 05:00:27 AM from Greater Wessex, Britannia , Relationship Status: Hiding
On The Road Again
^

Six Months? Six Weeks or less!
"Britannia Rules the Waves (if only)"
171 TheBatPencil16th Oct 2012 09:25:20 AM from Glasgow, Scotland , Relationship Status: I'm just a hunk-a, hunk-a burnin' love
172 pagad16th Oct 2012 09:41:11 AM from perfidious Albion , Relationship Status: Having tea with Cthulhu
Sneering Imperialist
Federated UK? Ooh, I like that idea.

edited 16th Oct '12 9:41:27 AM by pagad

Typhoid and swans - it all comes from the same place.
173 terlwyth16th Oct 2012 09:48:41 AM from Kalifornien , Relationship Status: Who needs love when you have waffles?
174 GameChainsaw16th Oct 2012 10:11:15 AM from sunshine and rainbows!
The Shadows Devour You.
That has nothing to do with America being a federation, and everything to do with it having two elected houses, and then a president on top of that who can veto things. That's like... three different levels of gridlock. In Britain the house of commons is all that is required to pass a law... and the Scottish house of commons doesn't even have the house of lords.

Needless to say legislation can get passed with a lot less fuss here.

Also we suffer from gerrymandering too. Constituency boundaries regularly get shifted in support of the ruling party.

The 2000 election was something else entirely though.

edited 16th Oct '12 10:12:52 AM by GameChainsaw

175 terlwyth16th Oct 2012 10:56:24 AM from Kalifornien , Relationship Status: Who needs love when you have waffles?
Nichts zu sehen hier
None of that would happen if the party in power picked the President,and in many states it's the state parties in power that draw the districts in weird forms to put the opposition at a disadvantage.

A Unitary government doesn't have such problems,...except the coalition kind that is,but even then
Geh weg

Total posts: 1,744
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
8 9 10 11 12 ... 70