Metropol

WillPS wrote:

robschneider wrote:And I don't want that happening either, it makes a mockery of the idea in both cases. Majority rules, end of.

However, if Cameron does get in I hope he sticks to his word and doesn't find an excuse not to hold a referendum.

Well, there has been a referendum on our membership of the EU (then called the 'common market') previously, and the result was a lot more decisive.

But yeah, I take your point - and actually I don't think holding another referendum so soon after the last will be taken particularly well.

There are plenty in Scotland who would support the SNP but vote No.

I suppose one agreement that might be palatable is a re-run towards the end of the next term, say, 2019 but there's three options - Yes, No and Devo Max. I would imagine though that Devo Max will effectively happen anyway if the SNP partake in any coalition.

robschneider wrote:

WillPS wrote:

robschneider wrote:And I don't want that happening either, it makes a mockery of the idea in both cases. Majority rules, end of.

However, if Cameron does get in I hope he sticks to his word and doesn't find an excuse not to hold a referendum.

Well, there has been a referendum on our membership of the EU (then called the 'common market') previously, and the result was a lot more decisive.

But yeah, I take your point - and actually I don't think holding another referendum so soon after the last will be taken particularly well.

There are plenty in Scotland who would support the SNP but vote No.

I suppose one agreement that might be palatable is a re-run towards the end of the next term, say, 2019 but there's three options - Yes, No and Devo Max. I would imagine though that Devo Max will effectively happen anyway if the SNP partake in any coalition.

Devo Max has already been promised.

WillPS wrote:Devo Max has already been promised.

Our idea of "Promised" and politician's ideas of "Promised" differ somewhat...!

Can someone explain why the BBC are doing a 30min programme with Nate Silver the guy who does http://fivethirtyeight.com/ His site when it comes to UK election is a pile of crap. His blog has partys get % of the vote YET said parties are not even standing. Opinion polls do not match up with this guy nor does the Bookies..

What laziness of correct details.

barcode wrote:Can someone explain why the BBC are doing a 30min programme with Nate Silver the guy who does http://fivethirtyeight.com/ His site when it comes to UK election is a pile of crap. His blog has partys get % of the vote YET said parties are not even standing. Opinion polls do not match up with this guy nor does the Bookies..

Could you please give specific examples?

Alexia wrote:

barcode wrote:Can someone explain why the BBC are doing a 30min programme with Nate Silver the guy who does http://fivethirtyeight.com/ His site when it comes to UK election is a pile of crap. His blog has partys get % of the vote YET said parties are not even standing. Opinion polls do not match up with this guy nor does the Bookies..

Could you please give specific examples?

Yes but you wont see them now since I and a number of other people complained to the site. It had UKIP standing in a number of Scottish seats with votes YET there did not have them standing.

WillPS wrote:Devo Max has already been promised.

The Smith Commission doesn't come close to so called "devo max" or "home rule".

robschneider wrote:And I don't want that happening either, it makes a mockery of the idea in both cases. Majority rules, end of.

"End of"? Majority rules until when? Until sunset? Until the end of the parliament? Until your death?

Any political vote - from who governs to whether we join a common market or adopt a currency are barometers of opinion at any given point in time. Circumstances change, opinions change. Some argue against a further Scottish referendum by saying, "oh but the SNP promised it would be once in a lifetime" - you're going even further and saying you get ONE chance to ask a question.

That's bullshit.

Its not for anyone to say the people can't be given a choice in the future - whether that's 5 or 10 years away. If there's a will for it and a party make it part of their manifesto, then a mandate can be created by returning that party to power.

That, Mr Scheider, is where the "end of" comes in. Get over it.

If the SNP didn't want the decision to be once in a generation, they shouldn't have said it would be.

bilky asko wrote:If the SNP didn't want the decision to be once in a generation, they shouldn't have said it would be.

I do agree it was a poor choice of thing to say and its made a rod for their own back media-wise; but that doesn't alter the fact that its not in one man's gift to make such a determination.