It's not about the SNP - official!
"
Margaret Curran MP (@Margaret_Curran)
30/08/2014 13:26
Out in Baillieston morning found a few snp voters voting no #labourno
http://pic.twitter.com/eG67Zq9BfZ
"
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!
White Paper (THE #indyref thread)
(2915 posts)- Started 10 years ago by Morningsider
- Latest reply from chdot
- This topic is
closed
-
Posted 9 years ago #
-
gemNo here reporting back from the streets of Ratho. Lot more bought houses than I realised in Ratho
They are nearly all No
The people in the council or former council houses maybe more fifty fifty
Pour souls they will have the SNP round next week once they find out we have been out to Ratho
Posted 9 years ago # -
Found this intriguing quote in RT article about independence polls:
'Ben Page, chief executive of Ipsos MORI, a leading UK research company, told RT that much of the Scottish push for independence is based on issues of identity.
“It matters more to them to be Scottish than being English,” he said.
Although he raised concerns whether the current constitution of four separate countries together as the United Kingdom still works, he said Scotland’s economy would be “stronger if it stays in the union.” '
So much for impartial opinion pollsters!
http://rt.com/uk/183608-scotland-independence-poll-increase/
Posted 9 years ago # -
That Ben page geezer, who is giving him his info?
Insto?
Anyway I think there is a minority within the minority who are voting Yes who regardless of any debate you could have with them are voting Yes because they want to be Scottish and to assert this Scottishness by voting Yes. Within this minority within the minority there is another minority who are xenophobic about the English. However, I would judge that on the No side there is a similar element of very Protestant people. They sort of balance each other out.
Posted 9 years ago # -
I decided to run a magical opinion poll with a sample of one while waiting at the bus stop. The framework was that the next car sticker I saw would decide the outcome of the referendum. Instography will quite rightly have me arrested by the Sampling Securitate, but I don't care.
Black Mercedes. Very swanky. A4 YES poster in the back window.
So that's it. We'll vote Yes. Stand down the door knockers, cyber-trolls and egg-throwers.
Posted 9 years ago # -
"
David Cameron and Alistair Darling have both cited groups afraid to enter the indyref debate for fear of retribution from the Scottish Government.
The Prime Minister today admits he is "nervous" as campaigning enters its final few weeks, telling the Scottish Daily Mail: "I'm emotional and nervous because it matters so much."
But he also alluded to a "silent majority" of people who were afraid to speak out, citing academics in particular."Recently I was talking to university vice chancellors who are very much part of the silent majority. They don't want to speak out ... because they worry about retribution from the Scottish government," the PM said.
"
Posted 9 years ago # -
crowriver - individual opinion pollsters don't have to be impartial. A problem only arises when their personal opinions influence their work. I haven't seen anyone criticise Ipsos mori referendum related polls for bias.
Given the enthusiasm that both yes and no camps have greeted messages of support from well known business figures, and you say that Ben Page is a Chief Executive, I don't see why one more offering an opinion is a problem.
Posted 9 years ago # -
I think Ben's info comes mainly from decades of the Scottish Social Attitudes Survey. The relationship between identity and support for independence is well established. Anyway, he's a big boy - he's allowed to have opinions.
Ipsos MORI is the pollster not Ben.
Posted 9 years ago # -
@IWRATS that sounds like a very dangerous poster. A4 In Back window of Mercedes? May have a blindspot created by such a large poster. But no flags, hardly worth driving around without the flags. If you get up a bit earlier on towpath you will spot my flag sticking out my pannier on Monday morning.
Posted 9 years ago # -
"
Senior Labour sources have rounded on Douglas Alexander, blaming the Shadow Foreign Secretary for the No campaign's recent woes - and in particular an advert designed to appeal to women which led to accusations of patronising sexism.
"
Posted 9 years ago # -
Which is odd, don't you think? Douglas always strikes as a man who knows the minds of women.
Posted 9 years ago # -
"
STV has announced the line-up for a live referendum debate on Tuesday night.
Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon, Patrick Harvie MSP, co-convenor of the Scottish Greens, and actress Elaine C Smith will speak in favour of independence. Mr Alexander, Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson and Labour's Scottish education spokeswoman Kezia Dugdale will represent the No camp.
The two-hour broadcast will be broadcast live with a 350-strong audience at The Assembly Rooms in Edinburgh, starting at 8pm.
"
I wonder if the new cycle infrastructure will be 'open'.
Posted 9 years ago # -
"Douglas always strikes as a man who knows the minds of women"
Just because he's got a sister??
Posted 9 years ago # -
You all know how I usually feel about Kevin McKenna...
Posted 9 years ago # -
"You all know how I usually feel about Kevin McKenna"
No.
I need of a bicycle?
Posted 9 years ago # -
I was assuming the sarcasm would be obvious.
Posted 9 years ago # -
Maybe Kevin's worrying for his main job with the Mail.
Posted 9 years ago # -
IWRATS - by co-incidence I also did a survey based on car stickers today. After seeing a 'yes' I decided to count how many cars would pass before the next one with a ref sticker: I got to 15 (and then it was a 'uk:ok'). My conclusion is that while there are more 'yes' stickers than 'no' stickers, the vast majority haven't stickers. Same for house windows: those who are postering are more likely to post yes, but they are still a small proportion, so can't be relied on as representative.
Posted 9 years ago # -
More importantly, from a sampling perspective, IWRATS' method is biased if Yes cars have a probability of being next that is 15 times higher than No cars.
Since it's a binary choice, the only reasonable way to choose is to use a binary selection method - coin toss, odd or even throw of a dice, short straw. Random choices are under-rated, especially where there's no obvious decision. For instance, when I have to decide which of Alex Salmond or David Cameron I'd least like to see happy on 19 September, it might come down to the toss of a coin. If I don't like the outcome I can always push it to the best of three.
Posted 9 years ago # -
"I was assuming the sarcasm would be obvious"
Too late at night to second guess the intanut.
Posted 9 years ago # -
"
UKIP leader Nigel Farage is to visit Scotland 24 hours before a massive Orange Order march "to save the Union", sparking fears of further public disorder."
Last day of the silly season (today)?
Posted 9 years ago # -
"
Lamont: our ad isn't sexist...I've met women exactly like 'patronising BT lady'
"
Posted 9 years ago # -
Regarding the McKenna article. Replace "Scottish independence" with virtually any other contentious issue (say, for example, motorway building or welfare reform) and you'll find "warmth and honesty" sorely lacking in the debate too. So I don't really see what his complaint is. When passions run high on a topic and there are sharp divides of opinion, it's hardly surprising the debate gets a little heated. As for the appeal for "honesty", it reminds me of the constant calls for "facts" or "certainty" in this debate: there cannot be any facts or certainty about the future, only projections, assumptions, proposals, suppositions, probabilities, and desires. Even so-called "facts" about the past are the subject of numerous different interpretations (we call it history for a reason).
Posted 9 years ago # -
UKIP leader Nigel Farage is to visit Scotland 24 hours before a massive Orange Order march "to save the Union", sparking fears of further public disorder.
If someone throws an egg at Farage, will the press be conducting another witch hunt? Will they be demonising opponents of Farage and calling it "organised abuse"?
What "further public disorder"? I'm not aware of rioting, looting or mass brawls going on during the campaign. Oh, do they mean a few voters shouting back at a shouty politician bellowing down a PA system?
Posted 9 years ago # -
I'm quite surprised at the number of people trotting out the "asking for it" line. Anyone would think he'd gone out in a short skirt and got drunk.
Posted 9 years ago # -
"do they mean a few voters shouting back at a shouty politician bellowing down a PA system?"
Probably.
Jim Murphy is protesting too much.
He should be pleased he did so many gigs with hardly anyone bothering to turn up.
Presumably he is telling people where he is going next.
Recently some people have been putting his next event on Twitter and saying 'come along and bring a Yes banner'.
Hardly needs the official sanction or secret hand of the "Yes campaign".
The clips I've watched of some of the 'noisier' occasions hardly show a standard rent-a-mob. Some were more concerned with Jim Murphy and the Iraq war than independence.
JM clearly thinks he should be allowed to turn up, deliver his message and receive polite applause.
Posted 9 years ago # -
Other interpretations are available
"
It isn't merely a protest or demonstration that's being waged against Mr Murphy, it is a deliberate and orchestrated attempt to shut him up, to silence his opposition to separatism. And there is no doubt that it is orchestrated by the Yes campaign, mostly through social media sites.
"
Posted 9 years ago # -
@Insto, I'm assuming that was sarcasm, because I can scarcely believe anyone could seriously compare Jim Murphy MP having some eggs cracked on his back with the plight of a (hypothetical) rape victim. Because if it really was a serious comparison it would be worthy of contempt.
Egg throwing is an old trick, part of a fine tradition in these isles of showing politicians the respect they deserve. Sometimes flour is added. Various ministers and elected representatives over the years have had tomatoes, red paint, treacle etc. thrown at them. It's possible of course to argue this behaviour is violent, unacceptable, etc. However as long as no-one is injured I think this traditional pelting helps to remind politicians they are not above the common folk.
Posted 9 years ago # -
Odd how we didn't hear about this on BBC news, or have numerous media outlets howling in outrage about "attempts to silence Nationalists":
"Margo MacDonald and Jim Sillars the target of vile attack in Fife"
Meanwhile, in London, nothing to do with Scottish indepence apparently:
"George Galloway taken to hospital after street attack"
I'm sure we can look forward to thundering editorials in all the papers about the attempts to silence those who speak out against Israel.
Posted 9 years ago # -
I'm being more contemptuous of the argument that someone acting legally is a legitimate target for an assault using the excuse of provocation. Of course pelting someone with an egg, even if you've made it into a nice batter beforehand is not the same as a sexual assault but in both cases when the 'asking for it' line is wheeled out, it puts the blame on the 'victim' and excuses the aggressor. You are saying that it's OK to assault your opponents.
I'm sure there's a 'fine tradition' of all sorts of violence. Hitting with an egg is at the very low end of the continuum but somewhere along it is the slap on the face for a bit of banter, the punch for knocking over someone's pint, the motorist 'provoked' by the cyclist riding in the middle of the lane and pushing them into the kerb. Once you start down the road of excusing one assault on the basis of someone 'asking for it' I can't see where you logically draw the line. Drawing blood? What are the acceptable limits of assaults of provocation?
It's pretty clear to me that when it comes to violence, the attacker does not get to decide at which point they've been sufficiently provoked and it makes no difference to me whether it's part of a jolly old political tradition of behaving violently to those you disagree with. There is no trade off of acts of violence - one doesn't cancel out the other. Indeed, if you're willing to say that one was 'asking for it' I can't see why you wouldn't accept that all were asking for it.
Posted 9 years ago #
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.
posts
