Originally Posted by scottishcelts

Oxymoron.

Originally Posted by amomentofstillness

As much as I believe that independence is the best way for things in Scotland (and the rest of the UK) to improve, I could accept that the majority of Scotland disagree. However my issue with 55% voting NO is how the Better together campaign, the media and Westminster conducted themselves and how they all combined to win the NO vote. The entire British establishment was against independence and I don't think it's because they wanted the best for the people of Scotland.

It wasn't an emphatic answer either, all it needed was a swing of 192k for YES to win. It's amazing that 1.6 million voted for Scotland to leave the union, a massive amount. The majority of under 50's voted YES. This won't go away if and when Westminster fail to deliver a better country.

Scaring people into voting NO and promising more powers 9 days before the vote (and after postal votes have been submitted) isn't the same as people voting NO because they genuinely believe in Scotland being better off within the union.

Not sure the SNP's stance on the royal family will chance, regardless of what party members privately believe.

Originally Posted by OzTennis

With respect, the No vote was miles ahead in the polls from when the referendum was first mooted in 2012 until the polls 4 weeks before the vote started showing the gap narrowing and one poll out of the hundreds done showed a narrow yes lead.

I don't think you can put the defeat down merely to the offers made by the 3 Westminster parties a week or so before the poll. There's always been a majority will against independence/for being part of the union. The area where we live returned a 2/3 No; 1/3 Yes - it was only in the Glasgow area and Dundee where Yes marginally was ahead.

Originally Posted by amomentofstillness

The gap narrowed slowly from the beginning. We probably will never know how much influence the promise of more powers had on some voters, however Westminster must have been worried enough to make 'the vow'. The rumor being that private polling from both sides should a slender YES lead 10 days before the vote, possibly explains why Westminster decided to promise more powers despite A not wanting to and B the resulting headache to try and deliver them.

Independence is now a mainstream alternative to the status quo and won't go away unless Westminster makes some serious changes.

Originally Posted by OzTennis

I realise it won't go away and I still think you are overplaying the role the greater devolution offer had in the decision. My gut feeling is that whatever increased powers are delivered under the timetable over the next year will keep the No side well in the majority.

Originally Posted by amomentofstillness

I Don't think I'm overplaying it. Nor to I think a swing of 192k voters is a sizeable majority.
The fact 45% or 1.6 million voted to end the union is a damning opinion on how Westminster governs Scotland. This number was despite Westminster having almost the entire media and big business supporting a no vote. The referendum happened for a reason. And the way better together ran their campaign and how Westminster have behaved since, I don't think they understand why it did happen or why so many voted YES.

Interesting times ahead.

Originally Posted by OzTennis

I can see we will have to beg to differ. 55.3% is quite emphatic in a democratic vote - the people have spoken as they say and because 44.7% voted to break away doesn't give a mandate to break away - not in a democracy anyway. All it does is give the SNP hope for another crack at a referendum at some point in the future; the sizeable minority voting Yes has also moved the pro-union parties to give more devolved power in a hurry - too much of a hurry say constitutional experts in that the timetable mapped out by Cameron is overly ambitious.

If you are going to say a lot of people who voted No only did so because of 'sweeteners' I'd say a lot of people voted Yes purely with their heart and emotions - without knowing and understanding the implications for currency, the financial system, the health service, people's pensions, having to rejoin the EU ....... It was a clever move giving the vote to 16 year olds who were sure to mainly vote like good Bravehearts. I think I saw that Yes would have been around or below 42% if the vote was by the 18 and overs.

Originally Posted by amomentofstillness

The no victory was in no way emphatic IMO so yes let's agree to disagree on that point.

Ah Braveheart. Doesn't take long for someone to mention it.

After watching the teenagers debate before the vote I'm curious as to why you think 16 - 18 year olds were more likely to vote based on Scottish nationalism than anyone else?

Allowing 16 year olds the chance to vote was a major success and one I hope the UK government follow for the general election. I wish I cared so much about politics at that age. Mind you I get the feeling that Westminster doesn't enjoy a high level of engagement in politics . . .

Originally Posted by Gibbo

I just wish it had been only Scots who had voted. That would have settled the question one way or the other. Everyone is saying that the Scots said no when no one knows how many Scots voted yes or no. The difference between the two camps is small and all that the referendum has done is create division in the country. Westminster is going to continue to ignore Scotland and the north of England and wonder why there is so much discontent within the Union. To quote something I read," The Union was accomplished by lies, bribery and deceit and it's being held together by the same."

Originally Posted by OzTennis

One survey had the 16 and 17 year olds 71% Yes and 29% No. That compares to 44 to 46 Yes and 54 to 56 No for 18 and overs.

Scottish referendum: How first vote went for 16/17-year-olds - BBC Newsbeat

I'm not saying they aren't entitled to vote or it wasn't a success or whatever - I merely said they were more likely to vote Yes and that's why Salmond was keen to give them the vote on this issue. If SNP research showed that the youngsters were more likely to vote No do you really think they would have been given the vote on this one?

Originally Posted by scot47

"Lord Brown" ? He does not yet have a peerage, although be sure that one is in the pipeline.

How did he manage to sucker them into believing "The Vow" ?

Originally Posted by amomentofstillness

Why were they more likely to vote yes?

Off the top of my head 18 - 24 vote no, just. While 25 - 50 when broken down further vote yes. Bit surprised by that.

No doubt the over 50 vote won it for the NO side. No coincidence that they are generally less likely to get their news from social media