How did and would you vote in a second Scottish referendum?

[anotherchance]

The pro yes people should tone down their arguments and stop dismissing no voters as idiots. It's making undecided people side with no because most of the yes events seem ranty and full of belters with painted faces and being aggressive.
I'm voting yes again but please understand that the militant sanctimonious approach comes across as obnoxious and puts people right off.

This is where I’m at also.

Already social media is awash with self righteous pish as described above.

No lessons seem to have been learned from the last two referendums which have gone against my wishes, partly due to folk on my side acting like arseholes.

[Inanimate Carbon Rod]

Voted yes last time, becoming a parent has solidified my point of view on indy since then.

[wastecoatwilly]

On 25/04/2019 at 22:16, The_Kincardine said:

Sharing sovereignty with England in 1603, the Williamite Revolution and the 1707 Act of Union all ensured that Scotland '"took its place on the world stage" over 400 years ago.

 It would've been interesting to see the people voting back then.
400 years later maybe it's safe to have two within 10 years of each other.

[Kuro]

Scotland has had its place on the world stage a thousand years, it disappeared as we were subsumed with the act of union.  We will reestablish it shortly.

[renton]

On 25/04/2019 at 22:16, The_Kincardine said:

Sharing sovereignty with England in 1603, the Williamite Revolution and the 1707 Act of Union all ensured that Scotland '"took its place on the world stage" over 400 years ago.

Not quite. It certainly allowed individual Scots of means to take their place on the world stage and in the corridors of power - particularly those suitably indoctrinated into anglo power structures. Scotland as a collective culture, as a people were not so well served. English culture, English politics and English aims came first. Scotland was subsumed into that.

Edited April 26, 2019 by renton

[sjc]

9 hours ago, yoda said:

 What? 

This is the worst of a lot of bad currency takes in this sub-forum.

Did you not read the sentence that followed? I was alluding that using the dollar would make sense due to its ties to the price of oil and that the bulk of Scotland's economy would be just this, thus making QE less of an issue if required.

Given that a number of Countries around the World are now dumping the dollar as a reserve currency it's probably not a good idea.

A feasible currency still needs to be decided upon.

[BawWatchin]

5 hours ago, welshbairn said:

Loads of English born have lived here for longer than 16 years, all it would accomplish is alienating those who are coming round to the idea. And it would be illegal so it's not going to happen.

Why would it be "illegal"?

Why is it one rule for the UK Government and a different rule for ours? Why should we give them a vote when they don't give the same courtesy to EU nationals? They may even attempt to block EU nationals from voting in a 2nd Scottish Independence Referendum.

[Baxter Parp]

10 hours ago, welshbairn said:

Not sure what you're after.

Evidence of terror.

[Kuro]

10 minutes ago, BawWatchin said:

Why would it be "illegal"?

Why is it one rule for the UK Government and a different rule for ours? Why should we give them a vote when they don't give the same courtesy to EU nationals? They may even attempt to block EU nationals from voting in a 2nd Scottish Independence Referendum.

They definitely will try to do that.  And they insisted they got to vote last time, though the Scottish govt wasn't opposed to it, neither was I for that matter.  Though I do think its sensible and fair for there to be some residency requirement, 5, 10 or 15 years.  That's fairly standard practice in most countries. 

[yoda]

25 minutes ago, sjc said:

Did you not read the sentence that followed? I was alluding that using the dollar would make sense due to its ties to the price of oil and that the bulk of Scotland's economy would be just this, thus making QE less of an issue if required.

Given that a number of Countries around the World are now dumping the dollar as a reserve currency it's probably not a good idea.

A feasible currency still needs to be decided upon.

It wouldn't make sense at all, IMO. I think you're overstating the "dumping" of the dollar too; I'm sure it'll happen at some point but not for some time.

The feasible currency option is a new, independent currency.  That should be the "party line" that people get behind - the Euro, a Sterling Currency Union, or Sterlingisation need kicked into touch. There was a FT article in 2014 that discussed various currency options with some economists (both academic and "corporate") and almost all of them cited a new currency as the best (or least worst) option.

[BawWatchin]

18 minutes ago, Kuro said:

They definitely will try to do that.  And they insisted they got to vote last time, though the Scottish govt wasn't opposed to it, neither was I for that matter.  Though I do think its sensible and fair for there to be some residency requirement, 5, 10 or 15 years.  That's fairly standard practice in most countries. 

Yes, but it should apply equally to everybody outwith Scotland who hasn't been here long enough.

[DAFC.]

Latest YouGov poll shows Yes on 49% and No on 51% (it was a phone poll)

Would like to know how many of those were aged between 16-25. Very little, I would imagine.

[Kuro]

1 hour ago, BawWatchin said:

Yes, but it should apply equally to everybody outwith Scotland who hasn't been here long enough.

Nobody out with Scotland should be allowed to vote.  I'm not sure what you mean apart from that.

[sjc]

1 hour ago, yoda said:

It wouldn't make sense at all, IMO. I think you're overstating the "dumping" of the dollar too; I'm sure it'll happen at some point but not for some time.

The feasible currency option is a new, independent currency.  That should be the "party line" that people get behind - the Euro, a Sterling Currency Union, or Sterlingisation need kicked into touch. There was a FT article in 2014 that discussed various currency options with some economists (both academic and "corporate") and almost all of them cited a new currency as the best (or least worst) option.

I totally agree that a feasible currency would be our own. 

Using someone else's currency would be crazy imo, but if we were, having one tied to the bulk of our economy would be better was the point I was making.

I think the US economy is heading south sooner than you think btw.

[Broomhill Ultra]

I was Yes and would be next time. My wife too. I have two children who will be old enough this time around and are both Yes. My Nawbag Dad has died in the meantime and my Mum only voted what he did so I don’t think has bothered since.
A healthy swing.

[John Lambies Doos]

I was Yes and would be next time. My wife too. I have two children who will be old enough this time around and are both Yes. My Nawbag Dad has died in the meantime and my Mum only voted what he did so I don’t think has bothered since.
A healthy swing.

I'm sorry to hear about your father, but there's certainly a few more in board there

[Kuro]

31 minutes ago, MixuFixit said:

You have to wonder how many families around the country reflect this demographic shift.

There's been a huge shift towards yes, I don't believe polls they're part of the propaganda campaign.  I into doubt whatsoever a referendum any time soon returns a yes.vote, possibly quite comfortably.  That's why the UK government won't allow one. 

You have to also temper this shift though with the fact 45 thousand English people move to.Scotland every year, and they were 80-85% no last time (practicing pure identity politics, it's a statistical impossibility otherwise).  This is one of the reasons a.residency rule is required,as that's absurd and unfair.

[welshbairn]

13 minutes ago, Kuro said:

There's been a huge shift towards yes, I don't believe polls they're part of the propaganda campaign.  I into doubt whatsoever a referendum any time soon returns a yes.vote, possibly quite comfortably.  That's why the UK government won't allow one. 

You have to also temper this shift though with the fact 45 thousand English people move to.Scotland every year, and they were 80-85% no last time (practicing pure identity politics, it's a statistical impossibility otherwise).  This is one of the reasons a.residency rule is required,as that's absurd and unfair.

This anti English thing is pointless and counter productive. Any UK citizen has the right to vote where they live, and that's not going to change. We have to bring them around, not alienate them even more with futile gesture politics laced with bitterness.

Edited April 27, 2019 by welshbairn

[Kuro]

10 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

This anti English thing is pointless and counter productive. Any UK citizen has the right to vote where they live, and that's not going to change. We have to bring them around, not alienate them even more with futile gesture politics laced with bitterness.

Its not anti English, it would apply to anybody who has just moved to Scotland and not lived here for the required period.  And I'm afraid you can try all you want, the vast majority of them will vote for us to continue to be governed by England because that's where they're from. No consideration for the arguments, and don't even care what's best for Scotland.  It's not me being unreasonable here.  I'm just speaking facts, sometimes the facts are a bit uncomfortable for some.

[wastecoatwilly]

The YES movement is bigger than the SNP I keep thinking we need about 8 to 10% from the right to push it over the line.
It's not a question of politics it's a question of believing in our country.
Simple things like our national team making a major tournament would install belief.
Places like Aberdeen and auld reekie need to get their heed out their arse.