Salmond vs Darling: Round 2 (25th Aug)

[Ross.]

The only reason that AS beating AD is being welcomed with such vigour is due to the utter shock that he didn't manage to do it first time around.

To be fair, and I said this on here somewhere, the final debate is the important one amongst folk who are interested. Part of me things it may have been tactical for Salmond to be bang average(At best) in the first show so that it had more of an impact when he performed relatively well in the next one.

[H_B]

Part of me things it may have been tactical for Salmond to be bang average(At best) in the first show so that it had more of an impact when he performed relatively well in the next one.

[Ross.]

You can laugh, but from what I have read in the media and various forii it seems to have been the outcome.

Whether it was by design or not is the only bit I am uncertain about.

[ayrmad]

Aye, I seen enough, it was terrible!!

No, the only terrible part was the cross examination part, 8 minutes each of talking over each other unlike Salmond letting Darling away with it the last time.

The rest of the time was spent watching Salmond, the audience and the host all expose the NO camp for what it really is, not a lot was the resounding answer.

[Confidemus]

No, the only terrible part was the cross examination part, 8 minutes each of talking over each other unlike Salmond letting Darling away with it the last time.

This is very true. The only difference this time was that Salmond refused to be talked over. Darling was every bit as shouty and finger jabby on his own last time.

My Gran always told me pointing your finger at someone is rude.

[H_B]

You can laugh, but from what I have read in the media and various forii it seems to have been the outcome.

Whether it was by design or not is the only bit I am uncertain about.

Yes, because wiping the floor with Darling twice would have been dreadful news for the Yes campaign.

Come on - this is just utter garbage. Salmond was awful in the first debate, and lost. That's the way it goes - he was overhyped, got it completely wrong and got beat.

What next - his shit jokes about aliens and driving on the wrong side of the road were cunning ploys?

[sons superhero]

Who would defend our honour if we weren't in NATO?

Not you, white feather.

[Ross.]

Yes, because wiping the floor with Darling twice would have been dreadful news for the Yes campaign.

Come on - this is just utter garbage. Salmond was awful in the first debate, and lost. That's the way it goes - he was overhyped, got it completely wrong and got beat.

What next - his shit jokes about aliens and driving on the wrong side of the road were cunning ploys?

I'm more thinking about the aspects of his personality that are seen as a turn off to large swathes of the voting public. He is seen as arrogant, pompous and a bit of a bully. Rogering Darling twice in quick succession could easily have had people see it as showing the worst aspects of him. Instead he dominated the last debate, the one which will have the biggest impact, and it's seen as a massive comeback instead of him picking on the helpless.

[Tonsilitis]

See if this is true, how has Scotland managed to be the economic success it is?

Scotland has been milked for years and any success we have is despite Westminster rather than because of it.

[H_B]

Scotland has been milked for years and any success we have is despite Westminster rather than because of it.

Sigh. Yes, of course it is.

[orlandoblue]

That's where our opinions differ. 1 in 5 kids in poverty, foodbanks, austerity, 4th most unequal country in the developed world and the biggest rich/ poor divide in Europe would seem to suggest otherwise.

As the audience member put it last night, if we're Better Together, why aren't we already?

And all these things will magically disappear in an independent country?

[orlandoblue]

Not that it's any of your business, but I have contributed to local foodbanks on many, many occasions.

An awful lot of No voters with the word "blue" in their usernames. Funny that.

What's that got to do with it? I have blue in my username cause I'm a rangers fan.

The correlation with this and how I will vote is lost on me. You were doing fine until you resorted to 12 year old debating as is too often prevalent on here these days.

[yoda]

And all these things will magically disappear in an independent country?

No. They can, however, be addressed in an independent country.

[Ross.]

And all these things will magically disappear in an independent country?

There is absolutely no reason or excuse for a country with the natural resources of Scotland(And indeed the UK) to have to have food banks in the first place. There has been massive mismanagement of the UK economy and there needs to be massive change to start fixing things. A yes vote is the only realistic way to have any kind of meaningful influence on things.

[1320Lichtie]

And all these things will magically disappear in an independent country?

It gives us a chance to try and change them!!! This will never be tackled under Westminster, I'd tell you to get your head out of the sand and actually provide a decent argument for the Union but given that you are a Sevco fan it'll remain firmly planted. You'd defend the Union at any cost no matter what happened, the Union doesn't work for Scotland, people clinging to it down to the feckin football team they support is embarrassing.

[orlandoblue]

There is absolutely no reason or excuse for a country with the natural resources of Scotland(And indeed the UK) to have to have food banks in the first place. There has been massive mismanagement of the UK economy and there needs to be massive change to start fixing things. A yes vote is the only realistic way to have any kind of meaningful influence on things.

I respect that view but it's probably where we differ. I think we can progress just as well as part of the UK.

[strichener]

There is absolutely no reason or excuse for a country with the natural resources of Scotland(And indeed the UK) to have to have food banks in the first place. There has been massive mismanagement of the UK economy and there needs to be massive change to start fixing things. A yes vote is the only realistic way to have any kind of meaningful influence on things.

Not according to BT - you don't have a normal society until you have foodbanks.

[forever_blue]

It gives us a chance to try and change them!!! This will never be tackled under Westminster, I'd tell you to get your head out of the sand and actually provide a decent argument for the Union but given that you are a Sevco fan it'll remain firmly planted. You'd defend the Union at any cost no matter what happened, the Union doesn't work for Scotland, people clinging to it down to the feckin football team they support is embarrassing.

sorry but the guy has made no statements that his choice is anything to do with rangers being his team. your constant dragging up of rangers to the debate is embarrassing in all honesty. there is a thread called the bralt where you can discuss all things rangers till yer blue in the face if you like, pardon the pun.

[orlandoblue]

It gives us a chance to try and change them!!! This will never be tackled under Westminster, I'd tell you to get your head out of the sand and actually provide a decent argument for the Union but given that you are a Sevco fan it'll remain firmly planted. You'd defend the Union at any cost no matter what happened, the Union doesn't work for Scotland, people clinging to it down to the feckin football team they support is embarrassing.

That's ridiculous. You don't know me at all and if you did you'd realise that such a suggestion is ludicrous. We don't agree on the debate but that doesn't mean my reasons for doing so are based on football as you suggest. Like me saying the polls on here are so biased towards yes due to the chip on the shoulder the tartan army have about England.

[Ross.]

I respect that view but it's probably where we differ. I think we can progress just as well as part of the UK.

I don't see the will to change in the UK as a whole. Realistically, only the tories or Labour will win a majority position in parliament and neither have shown any appetite to do anything that will make a meaningful contribution towards fixing the social problems that are faced by many in the UK. Food banks are just one symptom.