[djn]

Sounds feasible, it'd scare Salmond big time

[djn]

Ron Burgundy, on Mar 27 2008, 21:17, said:

He might even hang himself....good times.

It'd make your "Salmond Watch" thread a bit dull though...

[Mak QOSFC]

He got booed at the Scotland game last night.

[xbl]

Ron Burgundy, on Mar 27 2008, 21:12, said:

It is surely within the remit of the Uk westminster government to arrange a referendum asking a straight yes or no if the people of Scotland wish independence.

Sorry, Im confused. I thought you were against a referendum being held and the SNP were in favour?

[BishyTON]

This would be a great idea, as once the inevitable no vote triumphed in the referendum, the issue of independence would be quashed and both Salmond and the SNP would be left looking very silly indeed.

[xbl]

BishyTON, on Mar 27 2008, 22:11, said:

This would be a great idea, as once the inevitable no vote triumphed in the referendum, the issue of independence would be quashed and both Salmond and the SNP would be left looking very silly indeed.

Again though, thats what they were arguing for! The SNP said they wanted to hold a referendum to give people their say, and all the other parties were against giving people a choice. So effectively, the other parties would be going against what they fought the election on and conceding to the SNPs policy.

Im all for it!

[Dunning1874]

The thing I don't understand - Alexander, Goldie and Stephen say that no one wants independence, but say there should be no referendum. If they're so sure, why not just have the referendum and be proved right? Chicken shits.

[Akritoi]

If Salmond gets independence, it'd f**k me over career wise unless I got offered better wages and a promotion. f**k the SNP until then!

[Akritoi]

Salmond is a w**ker, Ron mate, end of. I serve with English, Welsh and Irish in the Navy and we view it as a bloody good adventure plus we have to be there, especially now.

[orlandoblue]

If there is to be a vote on independence it must contain two boxes. one for yes one for no either one to be marked with a X. He can't possibly go for a STV after the shambles at the last election.


Why does he smirk so much ?

[lichtgilphead]

Ron Burgundy, on Mar 27 2008, 23:22, said:

his system for a referendum is ridiculous. how can you give sliding scale preference to a simple yes or no question. trying to blur it with other matters is just fucking silly..

OK, Ron. I assume that the simple "yes" option is independence.

Can you explain the simple "no" option to me? Does it mean sticking with the current halfway house or does it involve going back to total Westminster rule?

Whichever of these two "Not independence" options you choose, you will effectively disenfranchise a sizeable section of the electorate.

Or are you seriously suggesting that every "lets stick with Holyrood as it is" supporter will automatically choose "Lets go back to Westminster" as a 2nd option (and vice versa), therefore their votes should be counted together?

[Akritoi]

lichtgilphead, on Mar 27 2008, 23:46, said:

OK, Ron. I assume that the simple "yes" option is independence.

Can you explain the simple "no" option to me? Does it mean sticking with the current halfway house or does it involve going back to total Westminster rule?

Whichever of these two "Not independence" options you choose, you will effectively disenfranchise a sizeable section of the electorate.

Or are you seriously suggesting that every "lets stick with Holyrood as it is" supporter will automatically choose "Lets go back to Westminster" as a 2nd option (and vice versa), therefore their votes should be counted together?

Hello Mr Salmond *Waves to Alex*

[Michael W]

Ron Burgundy, on Mar 27 2008, 23:32, said:

this might interest you ...

http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/12700. ..-not.3906443.jp

Reading the comments, that article seems to have upset a few people

[lichtgilphead]

Ron Burgundy, on Mar 27 2008, 23:50, said:

lets just decide the most important issue facing this country in 300 years once and for all again for the third time.

Please remind me exactly where the previous referenda had a box marked "independence" on the ballot paper?

As far as I'm aware, the independence option has not been put to Scottish voters for over 300 years.

[xbl]

Ron Burgundy, on Mar 27 2008, 23:50, said:

lets just decide the most important issue facing this country in 300 years once and for all again for the third time.

we can argue the toss about the rest once the big stuff is out of the way.

So what are the options to be then?

Yes - Independence

No - Back to Westminster

Or perhaps

Yes - Independence

No - Maintain status quo

Either way, the question is more complex than a simple yes no matter.

[lichtgilphead]

Ron Burgundy, on Mar 28 2008, 00:05, said:

I never said they did or that there was even a ballot paper.

Is that applicable to the joining of the kingdom of strathclyde to the english parliament as well, should the good folk of strathclyde be given a specific stv vote on opting out of an independent scotland as a choice on the paper.

Where do we end this constant delusion the archaic system of demarking sovreign territory with a vague line when dealing with folk we have had more than cordial relations with, save football and rugby, for centuries.

You agree that its slightly more complicated than "a simple yes or no question" then?

Glad to see we're getting somewhere.