Options

Why did "Yes" lose?

2456789

Comments

  • Options
    Jol44Jol44 Posts: 21,048
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I'd say probably fear of the unknown, and a huge number of people financially enslaved to the current status quo.
  • Options
    Cloudy2Cloudy2 Posts: 6,865
    Forum Member
    For me the yes campaign didn't tell me what they were going to do. The biggest sound bites were there are more pandas in Scotland than Tory MPs and vote yes to never have another Tory government. That didn't wash with me I wanted to know what the currency would be, did I need a new passport, how much would that be. Could we travel to other countries with ease or would we need a visa. When would our embassies be up and running. As the SNP have been in charge of the NHS for years why are they not sorting out the £350 million short fall that has nothing to do with Westminster. What happens to road tax, where do we pay it. What would happen to the BBC. These were the questions I wanted answers to and the yes campaign didn't answer them to my satisfaction. So I voted no.
  • Options
    EurostarEurostar Posts: 78,519
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    jim_lyons wrote: »
    So I guess there will be no more "Scotland the brave" from now on?

    I actually had a bit of hope that the Scots had enough fire inside them to do something radical and exciting...Essentially I think they were scared stiff of going it alone.

    How can the rest of the UK respect Scotland at all, now? Oh, and good luck to the three main parties getting a settlement through that includes more powers for the Scots and the retention of the Barnett formula - if the political classes think we'll let them drive that through unscathed, then I guess they have yet again learnt nothing from this process.

    Looking in from the outside, I must admit I'm slightly surprised any European region would emphatically reject the chance to be an independent nation state. Even a small region like Montenegro with a population of only 600k which was inextricably linked to it's bigger neighbour Serbia, and shares the same language and culture, eventually decided to break the tie and go it alone, for better or for worse.
  • Options
    Gary_LandyFanGary_LandyFan Posts: 3,824
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Cloudy2 wrote: »
    For me the yes campaign didn't tell me what they were going to do. The biggest sound bites were there are more pandas in Scotland than Tory MPs and vote yes to never have another Tory government. That didn't wash with me I wanted to know what the currency would be, did I need a new passport, how much would that be. Could we travel to other countries with ease or would we need a visa. When would our embassies be up and running. As the SNP have been in charge of the NHS for years why are they not sorting out the £350 million short fall that has nothing to do with Westminster. What happens to road tax, where do we pay it. What would happen to the BBC. These were the questions I wanted answers to and the yes campaign didn't answer them to my satisfaction. So I voted no.
    Can answer a coupe of the for you.
    Road Tax - To the Scottish Version of the DVLA
    BBC - You would stop receive BBC, unless a commercial deal was struck although this would probably have made them pay channels in Scotland.
  • Options
    DotheboyshallDotheboyshall Posts: 40,583
    Forum Member
    Salmond preached to the converted. He did very little to draw the undecided let alone the No voter to his side
  • Options
    erin_perin_p Posts: 25,091
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    because sense prevailed
  • Options
    OvalteenieOvalteenie Posts: 24,169
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Because the UK parties changed the No option to No with devo-max which was always going to be the preferred middle option for most.

    They now have to deliver on The Vow.
  • Options
    DaewosDaewos Posts: 8,345
    Forum Member
    Ovalteenie wrote: »
    Because the UK parties changed the No option to No with devo-max which was always going to be the preferred middle option for most.

    They now have to deliver on The Vow.

    And considering some of the rhetoric from our English brethren that may not be as easy as possibly could be hoped. We will know by March next year so it could be more interesting times ahead :p
  • Options
    erin_perin_p Posts: 25,091
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Ovalteenie wrote: »
    Because the UK parties changed the No option to No with devo-max which was always going to be the preferred middle option for most.

    They now have to deliver on The Vow.

    My ballot paper asked YES OR NO...simple as that.
  • Options
    OvalteenieOvalteenie Posts: 24,169
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    erin_p wrote: »
    My ballot paper asked YES OR NO...simple as that.

    The 3 main UK parties elaborated on what No meant... as they made clear in The Vow. That means continuation of the Barnett formula and more powers for the Scottish parliament, and a fast-track timetable to be delivered by next year. :)
  • Options
    DotheboyshallDotheboyshall Posts: 40,583
    Forum Member
    Ovalteenie wrote: »
    Because the UK parties changed the No option to No with devo-max which was always going to be the preferred middle option for most.

    They now have to deliver on The Vow.

    The Nat's were in the lead in one or two polls at most. Even without the panic of the Westminster Elite it would have been virtually impossible for the Nat's to win
  • Options
    weirlandia4evaweirlandia4eva Posts: 1,484
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Ovalteenie wrote: »
    The 3 main UK parties elaborated on what No meant... as they made clear in The Vow. That means continuation of the Barnett formula and more powers for the Scottish parliament, and a fast-track timetable to be delivered by next year. :)
    and of course politicians always keep their promises, don't they ;-)
  • Options
    DaewosDaewos Posts: 8,345
    Forum Member
    The Nat's were in the lead in one or two polls at most. Even without the panic of the Westminster Elite it would have been virtually impossible for the Nat's to win

    I would have been very surprised if the result would have been much different even if the extra powers had not been on the table. It does mean however that they need to come up with the goods so should be an interesting few months ahead
  • Options
    OvalteenieOvalteenie Posts: 24,169
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    and of course politicians always keep their promises, don't they ;-)

    It was a solemn Vow, signed by all 3 leaders. Their sincerity and personal integrity are at stake. :)

    It would be the biggest breach of trust ever if they renege, which will have serious consequences for all 3 parties in Scotland.
  • Options
    DaewosDaewos Posts: 8,345
    Forum Member
    Ovalteenie wrote: »
    It was a solemn Vow, signed by all 3 leaders. Their sincerity and personal integrity are at stake. :)

    You do remember that we are talking about politicians? :D
  • Options
    MajlisMajlis Posts: 31,362
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Ovalteenie wrote: »
    It was a solemn Vow, signed by all 3 leaders. Their sincerity and personal integrity are at stake. :)

    ROFL :D:D

    Funnily enough when I look at those 3 clowns sincerity and integrity are not what immediately spring to mind..

    I have to say that if you take what those herberts say at face value I can see why you were so easily led astray by Mr Salmond.
  • Options
    tangsmantangsman Posts: 3,661
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Grey vote, people not prepared to risk financial future, YES campaign's unsound plan on a number of issues and a dislike of Mr. Salmond.
  • Options
    twingletwingle Posts: 19,322
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Too many Scots chickened out. They obviously like England looking after them. ;-)

    Yes I am proud to say I chickened out of having a Salmond cock and Sturgeon hen running the country!
  • Options
    James2001James2001 Posts: 73,771
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Surely Scotland have been brave- by voting against the bullying, intimidation and lies of the Yes campaign!
  • Options
    gulliverfoylegulliverfoyle Posts: 6,318
    Forum Member
    because even a stupid person can work out that there is no socialist magic money tree and basing your economy on a declining income stream is not a good idea

    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ed/UK_Oil_Production.png
  • Options
    MeepersMeepers Posts: 5,502
    Forum Member
    Because the public aren't all gullible mugs taken in by b*******
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 297
    Forum Member
    vosne wrote: »
    Cause Sturgeon and Salmond are arseholes.

    Always thought there was something fishy about those two...
  • Options
    twingletwingle Posts: 19,322
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Ovalteenie wrote: »
    It was a solemn Vow, signed by all 3 leaders. Their sincerity and personal integrity are at stake. :)

    It would be the biggest breach of trust ever if they renege, which will have serious consequences for all 3 parties in Scotland.

    I think very few voters voted no because of the last minute olive branch from Westminster. Most had made their minds up before then and are fully aware that it is very doubtful they will come to pass.

    As for comparing us to montenegro and calling us running scared. The ties we have to the union are much deeper than anything they have had. In my eyes it isn't being chicken to try new things but logical to carry on as part of a nation who has clout in the world
  • Options
    twingletwingle Posts: 19,322
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Always thought there was something fishy about those two...

    I didn't get the fish connection until this morning !!:D
  • Options
    EurostarEurostar Posts: 78,519
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    twingle wrote: »
    I think very few voters voted no because of the last minute olive branch from Westminster. Most had made their minds up before then and are fully aware that it is very doubtful they will come to pass.

    As for comparing us to montenegro and calling us running scared. The ties we have to the union are much deeper than anything they have had. In my eyes it isn't being chicken to try new things but logical to carry on as part of a nation who has clout in the world

    Certainly, but countries like Montenegro and the numerous other newly independent European states were part of much bigger empires for many hundreds of years. I suppose the one key difference about Scotland is that it was not a colony of the UK in the way Ireland was, and in fact was a colonial power itself at one point.
Sign In or Register to comment.