Gordon EF Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 The research quoted in the Herald also reported that only 10% of those who participated said that a 2nd Ref was an immediate priority! Perhaps less encouraging I'm not sure if you can tell I'm being facetious. These polls are utterly meaningless. I support independence, I support another referendum and I'll vote Yes in it. Do i want it to be held in the next 5 years? Probably not. Is it an immediate priority? No. Independence will come when all the codgers shuffle off, don't you worry about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1320Lichtie Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 I don't want ankther referendum for at least 15 year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob the tank Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 I don't want ankther referendum for at least 15 year. I want to die in a free Scotland, fifteen years is too long Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wirez Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 2021 is the year I would go for. I reckon the Tories will win the 2020 GE based on English votes at a canter. So that will be 15 years at least we will be stuck with them. Added to the fact that Cameron said he is stepping down to be replaced by current bookies favorite Osborne, means an even more reptilian overlord will be in charge. If Scotland votes No under those circumstances we may as well write ourselves off forever as a northern region of greater Englandshire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wee Willie Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 I'm not sure if you can tell I'm being facetious. These polls are utterly meaningless. I support independence, I support another referendum and I'll vote Yes in it. Do i want it to be held in the next 5 years? Probably not. Is it an immediate priority? No. Independence will come when all the codgers shuffle off, don't you worry about it. If ye mean 'auld codger' then that's me beat. I want to die in a free Scotland, fifteen years is too long Jeez, I'll be a really auld codger if I've tae wait that long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaz Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 Although the split along socio-economic lines is not as simple as is being suggested by some, one of my main criticisms of the Yes movement was that time and time again No representatives were allowed to get away with the suggestion that there was a guarantee of greater security/a better standard of living for the middle classes. Why were they not shouting from the rooftops about the pension raids on 50 something year old women like my mother? Where were the broad shoulders of the Union when the middle classes were losing jobs during the economic downturn? In terms of standards of living, to give one example wouldn't it be great for fathers in this country to have longer paternity leave similar to other countries? If old folk and foreigners are going to vote the same way the next time, then the Yes movement needs to do more to comprehensively win other groups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongTimeLurker Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 A lot of it is down to Alex Salmond. He always has seen going after the council scheme vote in preference to middle class voters as the way to go and that goes right back to the 1980s when the SNP was relying on a Tory tactical vote to hold Dundee East and a wee Free vote to hold the Western Isles. He maybe overdid it, but it is difficult to argue against him too strongly when his strategy ultimately led the SNP to a position that looked very unlikely 30 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob the tank Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 If ye mean 'auld codger' then that's me beat. Jeez, I'll be a really auld codger if I've tae wait that long. And me auld yin... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScotSquid Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 I want to die in a free Scotland, fifteen years is too long If we could guarantee the gap would not be too great between these events, this is one of the better arguments for an early new vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob the tank Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 If we could guarantee the gap would not be too great between these events, this is one of the better arguments for an early new vote. Comedy gold squid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparky88 Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 You can look at it even in very basic terrms: Scots born-Scots residents (Yes/No) 53/47 rUK born-Scots residents (Yes/No) 20/80 Those are two groups who are definitely not looking at the issue from the same view point. Matters of finance tend to be universal, and certainly wouldn't have any strong correlations down demographics of nationality by birth. So if financial arguments were the one dominant factor in the referendum you'd expect a similar breakdown across both groups. There is very clearly another set of criteria infuencing that divergence between groups and it's almost certainly identity based. Its almost certainly identity based if you want to provide comfort to yourself about yes getting a hiding. 20 per cent of the population are UK non Scots residents. I'd suspect that sector of the population may have been less likely to vote anyway. Non UK Scots residents make up less than 4 per cent according to the census. Hardly huge numbers. Lots of probablys in your generalisation of old people getting misty eyed about fighting in the war as well. Some of your assumptions are off too, in my opinion. Home ownership now skews older than 30-39, again according to the census IIRC. I think older people may have been more likely to vote yes as well, but that's probably because they are more likely to own their own home rather than just because they are old which is basically what you're saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Rational Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 And you know what opinions are like.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fide Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Its almost certainly identity based if you want to provide comfort to yourself about yes getting a hiding. 20 per cent of the population are UK non Scots residents. I'd suspect that sector of the population may have been less likely to vote anyway. Non UK Scots residents make up less than 4 per cent according to the census. Hardly huge numbers. It doesn't need to be huge numbers. A swing of 200,000 would have seen Yes win the day. Along with scaring and lying to pensioners, this is how UKOK won the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renton Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Its almost certainly identity based if you want to provide comfort to yourself about yes getting a hiding. 20 per cent of the population are UK non Scots residents. I'd suspect that sector of the population may have been less likely to vote anyway. Non UK Scots residents make up less than 4 per cent according to the census. Hardly huge numbers. Lots of probablys in your generalisation of old people getting misty eyed about fighting in the war as well. Some of your assumptions are off too, in my opinion. Home ownership now skews older than 30-39, again according to the census IIRC. I think older people may have been more likely to vote yes as well, but that's probably because they are more likely to own their own home rather than just because they are old which is basically what you're saying. I don't recall seeing any evidence that the rUK Scots residents were less likely to vote, and the data I provide is based on those who definitely did. My point stands, there is no way that matters of household finance should correlate by what nation you were born in, ergo there is a definite divergence in criteria for voting in those groups that isn't related to household income, or fiscal concerns about deficits or pensions. I think it's identity based, I think there are two strands to it: One, that Scots born-Scots residents were simply more open to the idea of independence, and willing to give the idea an airing and two, rUK born-Scots residents were far more wedded to the concept of the UK (it's so they don't feel like expatriates living in a foreign country, they just moved to a different part of the same country). However, that's just one example from those demographics - point being if those two groups were not voting strictly along financial lines, is it valid to then state that other groups were? I doubt it. The term 'generalisation' is often thrown around to disaprage an argument. However, there are no specifics applicable to large groups here - generalisations offer a context to why people vote the way they do - the specifics will vary from individual to individual. However, you once again grossly over simplify my argument - it's not getting misty eyed about the war, it's a reflection of the fact that growing up immediately post war means you grew up with a very different political outlook. One where you could find Scotland referred to as 'North Britain' on the map, one prior to Winning's 67 byelection victory. One Nation Conservatism from macMillan, the swinging 60s with Union Jacks emblazoned everywhere. Powerful organised Labour that really did hold Glasgow and Liverpool as equals. In truth, the divide is not so much about proximity to the war - though I'd suggest that does play a role in the gradiation of No voting through age groups, but the stark divide is like pre and post '79. That marks the divergence of Scottish politics with UK politics, the upheaveals of the industrial clearances and lately the Scottish parliament which served as a manifested form of the partial decoupling of Scotland from the UK. There is also at work larger global trends in succeeding generations spurred by technical advancement which can be defined as 'Things change quick, more quickly' each generation is more iconoclastic than the last, less wedded to notions of 'that's how things have always worked' - primarily because they can't afford those attitudes. Finally, I took from the UK census that the average age of the householder was about 36. If you have any other data from Scotland that suggests otherwise, I'm happy to go back and incorporate that into my thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedRob72 Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 It doesn't need to be huge numbers. A swing of 200,000 would have seen Yes win the day. Along with scaring and lying to pensioners, this is how UKOK won the day. Just continue to believe that Fidey and you'll get the same result next time round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon EF Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Just continue to believe that Fidey and you'll get the same result next time round. The only way that'll happen is if they find a cure for old age in the next few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fide Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Just continue to believe that Fidey and you'll get the same result next time round. Perhaps we need to be more like the Tories with the Brexit referendum and only allow Scottish-born people the vote. It's only fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doulikefish Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 Scottish widows would leave,oh wait they are Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Rational Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 Aye? What's all this about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.