CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!

White Paper (THE #indyref thread)

(2915 posts)
  • Started 10 years ago by Morningsider
  • Latest reply from chdot
  • This topic is closed

1…767778…98

  1. gibbo
    Member

    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.

    That's typical political stuff: "I have all these supporters, but they don't want to admit they're supporters" = "I want to claim these people support me, even though I have no evidence they do".

    Posted 9 years ago #

  2. chdot
    Admin

    "I'm being more contemptuous of the argument that someone acting legally is a legitimate target for an assault using the excuse of provocation."

    That's not the main point here.

    Whether throwing an egg is 'traditional British protest' or unacceptable violence, is not really part of the claims of it all being 'an organised campaign to silence the No message'!

    I wasn't at any of the events and have only watched some clips (not just the ones selected by JM), but the people getting most angry with him seem to be 'ordinary people' who are reacting to him personally - or at least him as an MP.

    I look forward to photos pointing out people who were at more than one JM event. (Though no doubt the 'Yes campaign' is too clever for that...)

    I also look forward to the arrest of the person who threw the egg - there is plenty of photographic evidence - to find out who sent him.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  3. crowriver
    Member

    @Insto, "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."

    You're doing a great job of trying to put words in my mouth there. You used the term "asking for it", not me.

    You're the one that implied an equivalence between throwing an egg and rape, not me.

    If we are going to get onto a debate about violence, and what is legal or not, then what about the illegal violence visited upon the population of Iraq by Jim Murphy's party? Are you prepared to condemn that, or is it just egg throwing that upsets you?

    I watched the video of Jim Murphy's talk in Kirkcaldy. It's on the BBC news web site. The gathering appears to have equal numbers of Yes and No supporters attending, judging by the comments and banter hurled back and forth between the two groups. The egg thrower throws three eggs. The first two miss, and hit some Yes campaigners in front of Mr Murphy. The MP ducks for the second one, and taunts his aggravator "You missed!" The lone individual, dressed in black with no Yes placard or badge then cracks a third egg at close range on Mr Murphy's back. He then walks swiftly away. Mr Murphy, visibly angered, then bellows "I will not be silenced by Nationalist mobs!"

    Frankly that's a bit of a conceptual leap: from a lone egg thrower to a "Nationalist mob". Clearly Mr Murphy, as an ex-government whip and former minister, knows how to take opportunities and turn an act of defiance around to emphasise his own victimhood and demonise the opposition. His media cheerleaders have gleefully piled in to support him, across all available platforms.

    It's all a bit of a storm in an egg cup. Those banging on about "violence" and "intimidation" really need to open their eyes.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  4. chdot
    Admin

    I was wrong -

    "
    A couple of Yes supporters appeared at the back of the “crowd” and unfurled a banner about Alistair Darling. Jim recognised the pair, as they’d been following him throughout his Aberdeenshire part of the tour.

    "

    Oh, well it IS an organised conspiracy then.

    "

    For the entire hour the two men stood in the same spot, and probably wouldn’t have been a bother had Jim not pointed them out and tried to take the piss out of them immediately.

    "

    The rest makes interesting reading, though of course the tale teller is not impartial.

    http://www.raymcrobbie.com/2014/08/27/return-of-the-britnats

    Posted 9 years ago #

  5. Instography
    Member

    Sure, I don't have any trouble condemning all kinds of violence. If there's any others you'd like me to explicitly condemn, let me know but you can take it as read that if someone is behaving legally then my view would be that it's generally not acceptable to use force to prevent them doing that. Within that generality, I'll make exceptions for some kinds of force. I think it's OK to forcibly disrupt fascist marches and meetings. But even in those cases I like the force to be organised by a broader, established movement rather than by a small band of activists.

    Jim Murphy (and Jim Sillars and anyone else involved in referendum campaigning on either side) are perfectly entitled to use any and all legal means to advance their cause and neither they nor people who stop to listen to them should be prevented from doing that. I don't have any difficulty condemning anyone involved in verbally or physically trying to break up those activities. You seem to have a problem with that.

    And I wasn't asking anyone to condemn anything. I just don't think we should be making excuses. Assaulting someone is not an "act of defiance".

    Posted 9 years ago #

  6. crowriver
    Member

    "not acceptable to use force to prevent them doing that."

    Throwing three eggs does not consitute "use of force" as far as I can see.

    I find it bizarre that such a huge fuss has been made over this incident. The campaign up to now has been incredibly good natured for the most part. There has been no political violence in this campaign, it's demeaning to victims of real political violence around the world to try and portray petty wee incidents in this way.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  7. Instography
    Member

    So, what does constitute "use of force"? I mean, what would people need to throw before it became "use of force"? Water balloons, vegetables? Those would still be within the "fine tradition" of electoral banter, surely. Small stones? The sort you might use on your driveway. Something larger?

    If a large group turns up and just through continuous shouting, chanting and telling English people to f*** of home makes it impossible for the event to continue, does that constitute "use of force" or does something need to be thrown?

    In one of my student employments I used to stand in front of people just using my presence, no words or actions required, to encourage them to turn around and go away. Just implying a willingness to use violence is enough, in my experience, to constitute "use of force". Even in Glasgow.

    So, let's be clear, organising a group of people, including burly guys, to turn up at a street event with the sole purpose of preventing the event going ahead is "use of force" even before a single egg was thrown. You may find that acceptable. Part of the "fine tradition" of showing politicians the respect they deserve. I don't.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  8. gembo
    Member

    Petty wee incidents indeed. But this is one of the reasons why I am voting no as I do not want groups of petty wee idiots turning up at democratic events in an organised way with the sole purpose of preventing them,

    Nothing like Gaza but more like how I imagine Mussolini might have got started in the 1920s?

    Shame instead of condemning this faction Alex salmond mentioned an isolated road rage incident. A one off opportunistic incident compared with an organised group of thugs?

    The yes side have had some very crafty tactics that have shown some ring skills. However, this gang of flying pockets is not doing them any favours

    Posted 9 years ago #

  9. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    Has the Phantom Egg Thrower of Kirkcaldy Town been identified yet?

    If not, bit early to be pontificating on his political alliegences?

    Posted 9 years ago #

  10. chdot
    Admin

    "However, this gang of flying pockets is not doing them any favours"

    Are you referring to this -

    "
    Jim recognised the pair, as they’d been following him throughout his Aberdeenshire part of the tour.

    "

    Or do you have other evidence or following the JM/Labour Party line (which may be based on Kirkaldy)?

    Latest instalment -

    "

    FEARS of "absolute carnage" outside polling stations on Referendum Day amid a growing atmosphere of intimidation have been raised by the No camp.

    "

    http://www.heraldscotland.com/mobile/politics/referendum-news/warning-of-polling-station-clashes-as-tensions-rise.25192695

    Posted 9 years ago #

  11. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    GemNo and AyeWRATS settled the referendum once and for all medieval style today by tilting on the Union Canal lists. A cycle joust for the soul of the nation.

    I wore the blue colours of lady Alba, he the red of lady Britannia.

    The outcome? A high-speed high five and a draw. Anyone know if it's a coin toss if there's a dead heat on the 18th?

    Posted 9 years ago #

  12. crowriver
    Member

    "organising a group of people, including burly guys, to turn up at a street event with the sole purpose of preventing the event going ahead"

    "like how I imagine Mussolini might have got started in the 1920s"

    "an organised group of thugs"

    Well the hyperbolic propaganda continues to be swallowed hook, line and sinker by people who arguably should know better.

    Have any of you attended Jim Murphy MP's tour events? I know I haven't. Have you watched the footage of events in Motherwell, Dundee, Kirkcaldy? I have. Shouty people from both sides in the referendum debate at all three.

    If those throwing around accusations of "organised" protests, intentions to stop events, etc. have any evidence, then show it. As for allusions to Fascist Italy in the 1920s, well frankly that is ludicrous. Get a grip.

    Long may the tradition of throwing eggs at lying, warmongering politicians continue. I have no problem with that at all.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  13. crowriver
    Member

    "Nothing like Gaza"

    Nothing like Northern Ireland either.

    BTW, Jim Murphy MP is a former chair of Labour Friends of Israel.

    A keen supporter of WMDs too, except of course the fictional ones in Iraq.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  14. Instography
    Member

    "However as long as no-one is injured I think this traditional pelting helps to remind politicians they are not above the common folk."

    Luckily no one was injured

    Eggs, with or without flour, chairs, politicians, kids. Maybe it was aimed at reminding Jim Sillars of something. I don't think any of this is acceptable.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  15. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    Anyone care to hazard a guess at the proportion of referendum interactions that lead to unpleasantness?

    I've put in quite a few hours without anything more unpleasant than the foaming-mouthed gentleman who called the police to object to our canvassing him.

    I'd guess that the figure is around one in ten thousand, if not less.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  16. crowriver
    Member

    The only remotely 'unpleasant' thing that has happened to me is someone deleting my comments, then unfriending me on Farcebook for disagreeing with their point of view. Oh yeah and one old fella refused a Green Yes leaflet last week, but then fair enough, he had a "no junk mail" notice on the door.

    Maybe I'll not go campaigning in Kirkcaldy mind you. Always a rough old town, seems things are getting a bit too heated there.

    Oh, and throwing a chair from a balcony is not the same as throwing an egg. A bit like bumping into a pedestrian while driving a car at 30mph is not the same as bumping into a pedestrian while walking on the pavement.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  17. crowriver
    Member

    In other news:

    Polls say Scotland will spurn independence, but are they right?

    "Pollsters say they carefully weight their polls to try to take account of numerous variables. But this time the quantity and nature of those variables are more complex.

    The minimum voting age for British national elections is 18. For the referendum, it has been lowered to 16. For pollsters, the voting intentions of teenagers are uncharted territory.

    Then there is turnout. At Scotland's last major election, a 2011 parliamentary vote, it was 50 percent. This time, some pollsters and politicians say it could be as high as 80 percent.

    The pro-independence campaign says that could benefit its cause. "A missing million" of mostly poorer Scots who do not usually vote but will this time, it says, are not necessarily reflected in polls.

    Experts are skeptical of the 1 million figure, but agree that some people who do not usually vote will do so this time."

    Featuring a quote from someone we may know...

    Posted 9 years ago #

  18. wingpig
    Member

    @IWRATS Real-world or internetrical? 2,295 posts on this thread, but I don't know if you'd count each occurrence of unpleasantness (defined as, in case of the unwarranted application of quote-tongs, as the occurrence of something which is 'not pleasant') as a discrete unpleasantness or group it at person/unpleasantness level?

    Posted 9 years ago #

  19. SRD
    Moderator

    "The pro-independence campaign says that could benefit its cause. "A missing million" of mostly poorer Scots who do not usually vote but will this time, it says, are not necessarily reflected in polls."

    I don't understand why their voting or not would make them any less represented in the polls.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  20. crowriver
    Member

    "I don't understand why their voting or not would make them any less represented in the polls."

    Because polls are weighted by previous voting, either in Holyrood or in Westminster, to try and make samples representative of political preferences. So, if you haven't voted before, or not in a long while.....then you are not represented. Neither by your elected representative nor by the opinion polls.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  21. Morningsider
    Member

    IWRATS - What happens in case of a tied result? There are no formal procedures in place for this or any other result. The result of the referendum is simply announced. It is then up to the two Governments to decide how to proceed.

    The White Paper seems pretty clear though, stating "We propose that, if more than 50 per cent of the people who vote in the referendum vote Yes, Scotland should become an independent country in March 2016."

    Thinking about this, the wording of the referendum question "Should Scotland be an independent country?" would require a positive answer for independence to go ahead. A tie wouldn't be enough and the Scottish Government seems to have accepted this.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  22. chdot
    Admin

    "What happens in case of a tied result?"

    Several recounts, followed by all sorts of challenges!

    Posted 9 years ago #

  23. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    @wingpig

    Real-world or internetrical?

    Oh, real world. I never got hurt yet by anything on a telescreen, though I guess if the video of me dancing naked in Glen Dessary ever gets out my blushes will light up the web.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  24. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    @chdot

    Several recounts, followed by all sorts of challenges!

    Ah, no. No recount is envisaged in any circumstance.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  25. chdot
    Admin

    "No recount is envisaged in any circumstance."

    Really?!!

    In that case -

    all sorts of (legal) challenges and then some recounts!

    Posted 9 years ago #

  26. Morningsider
    Member

    The votes are being counted on a local authority wide basis. There can be recounts at a local authority level, but only prior to the official announcement of the local authority result. There cannot be a national recount.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  27. chdot
    Admin

    "

    Scottish independence campaigners have been attacked by a mob outside Tynecastle.

    It is understood that at least three people were injured in the attack on Saturday afternoon.

    Campaigners say that punches were thrown and their leaflet table was kicked over by an angry mob intent on driving them away.

    The claims come days after Labour MP Jim Murphy suspended his Scotland-wide tour, citing “co-ordinated abuse” from “Yes” voters.

    "

    http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/yes-campaigners-attacked-by-mob-outside-tynecastle-1-3527125

    Posted 9 years ago #

  28. chdot
    Admin

    "There can be recounts at a local authority level"

    Who can ask for one and on what grounds?

    Posted 9 years ago #

  29. slowcoach
    Member

    re those who normally don't vote being more likely to vote "yes", not according to Survation they aren't (If I've understood YouGov's explanation properly):
    "Just over half told Survation they had voted in those (Euro?)elections. When asked how they would vote in September’s referendum, they divided: Yes 245, No 244. Non-voters in the 2011 election, plus the handful who couldn’t remember, divided Yes 118, No 179. Add those together and we get Survation’s overall result: Yes 363 (46%), No 423 (54%). ...

    Now, if we reweight the figures for those who say they voted in the euro-elections, so that they reflect the actual result, then the voters divide Yes 214, No 290. Add these to Survation’s non-voters, then the overall figures are: Yes 332, No 469. In percentage terms, that’s Yes, 41%, No 59% – close to YouGov’s latest poll and identical to our recent (in July) average."
    http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/07/01/why-do-polls-scotland-vary-so-much/

    So maybe getting more people so fed up with the referendum that they don't take part would help the nationalists?

    Posted 9 years ago #

  30. SRD
    Moderator

    @crowriver, I understand about polls being weighted in elections, but given that none of us have voted recently in a referendum, I don't understand how it would work out in a way that left out those who don't normally vote.

    Posted 9 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

1…767778…98

Topic Closed

This topic has been closed to new replies.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin