Spurf you will have heard of the term '' silent majority '' as that In many ways is most accurate when describing the No voters as in the main, No voters can't express their passion in the same way as yes voters and instead refrain from the OTT, forced passion that we see from yes supporters which are nothing more than people being lead through false hope and unrealistic dreams. Anyone who is Scottish can join in, wear a silly badge and wave a flag but being loud and brash isn't to be mistaken for speaking for the majority. The silent majority are the ones your campaign can't touch and the voters you have ignored and that's why you mistakenly believe your campaign is winning. Yes campaign is the loudest campaign. It's the most fired up and brash campaign. But winning? No, winning is being part of the UK.
Can you tell me what a typical yes supporter is? And how can you tell one just by looking at him/her?
I think you're jumping into this thread and taking parts literally as that's why Spurf for example will ignore such comments as he knows it's banter, much like I ignore part of his comments which are banter.
This silent majority that through their inaction or fear may well win this for the establishment I would not argue that Boss we have not won yet that is for sure. They have after all been in power for a thousand years. The only way we can overturn this huge power that Westminster is, is to make a noise and show the people we are not afraid, show the people the truth and hope to break through years and years of conditioning. The power of the internet is helping like never before, it is no coincidence that our weakest area of support is amongst old people. These are the people less likely to use social media and more likely to rely on TV for their information. Very difficult to move them but as time goes by this will not be the case and then the days of domination by elites all over the world will become more and more difficult just as long as the internet survives as an open source of information.
So you, like the typical Better Together voter, are willing to embellish and overexagerrate just for comedic/sarcastic (some may say Point scoring) effect? How are we supposed to know which parts of your argument are serious and which are not? You do realise that you are simply undermining your whole argument by making sweeping generalisations about the Yes camp, and that some people on here may actually believe you? If we are going to engage in wummery just let me know so I too can post some mistruths and shrug them off as whimsy when confronted.
Spurf Obviously the 'establishment' of the UK would fight to keep Scotland within the UK, just as the 'establishment' in Scotland are fighting for independence. It would be irrational for it to be any other way. It is also wrong for anybody to claim that it does not matter to those who do not have a vote in this referendum. It will affect all the people in the UK and also all the UK expats. I paid into the UK economy for 40+ years before leaving for Spain. My savings and pensions are both affected by government decisions in the UK so obviously I will be interested what happens and am entitled to an opinion. I think both sides have used selective facts, lies by omission and prevarication to put forward their respective cases making it very difficult for the non-committed to arrive at a conclusion unless they have the will and the time to check out all the claims and counter-claims. I personally believe that it will be better for all citizens of the UK if the no vote wins and also in the probable future UK wide referendum on EU membership that we do not leave the EU.
Good news, Better Together, you are on the same side as George Galloway, The Orange Lodge, UKIP and BNP amongst others.
Ex Pats all over the world, lots of whom are Scots by birth don't have a vote, even Scots in the rUK don't have a vote. If you gave everyone a vote who has even the slightest interest - money wise = in Scottish Independence, how many people would that include? Where do you stop, do you give New York or Tokyo stockbrokers a vote too? It is entirely illogical to give anyone outside of Scotland a say on the matter because the people MOST affected are the ones who live here.
If I was concerned about people believing a view I post then I wouldn't post that view, at all. Much like if I went onto another forum and starting posting, chances are my views would get taken literally. The generalisations are being made from both sides, such as No voters voting in fear or being part of the establishment, two accusations made at me by Spurf which I brush off as they firstly are wrong but secondly just taken as him having a sly dig at one of his opinions of No voters. It's up to you as a poster to decide what is serious (or not) and respond as such but if I was here to wum I could have played along with your questioning, yet this debate on the whole, isn't about anyone posting wind up views.
You believe that both sides have lied by omission and there you are in Spain with no possible chance of knowing what it is really like in Scotland unless you have followed on the net very closely. Give me something I have omitted or lied about, ONE thing. paultheplug what do you know about the Establishment in Scotland? That is WESTMINSTER the same because Scotland is still in the UK. I assume you are talking about the SNP, well I have to tell you that they bear NO resemblance to Westminster I have met and chatted to 6 Scottish ministers of state in the last couple years. This is not a political elite that you cannot get near that arrives with guards on their carefully orchestrated visits. Your beliefs are just that beliefs, in this situation we need people to understand the facts otherwise this UK of yours of which you are so fond of that you left to live in Spain, will carry on and on just as before.
Yes, it's so 'weird' that we're concerned for the future of our nationality, our institutions, our families, our finances. So 'weird' that we'd do everything possible to protect these things. Being interested and speaking up is the only thing we can do.
I don't think he meant everyone who has commented to be fair, I personally agree with some of what you said previously, as I do with some other comments in favour of the Union. I think he meant the posters who simply continue to paint as bleak a picture as possible for some strange reason.
We're also concerned for the future of Scotland by the way, because, independence will be a disaster.
A lot of what you might consider to be scaremongering on the "no" side has not come from politicians in England, but from outsiders, such as Deutsche Bank. They are the latest to warn against independence stating that it would be "an historic mistake" akin to the ones made by the U.S Federal Reserve leading to The Great Depression. With no obvious drum to beat, why should Deutsche Bank's views be disregarded as irrelevant? They aren't pulling any punches; they're saying it would be an economic and financial disaster for Scotland.
Salmond will have us all believe that all big businesses (even foreign ones like Deutsche) are in the pocket of the British government Does he not realise that if anything it's the other way around, the government will always seek to appease businesses, there is nothing is in it for businesses to appease the government.
They are not outsiders though, they are based in London. David Folkerts-Landau who made te statement has lived and worked there for years, he is not neutral would be my view.
