Scottish Independence Vote

[poormadpeter]

Well, the result was as predicted. The England BBC coverage last night interviewed a number of voters in the studio, and some of those that voted no said they did so because they weren't convinced on issues such as currency etc. Which is exactly what I was arguing all the way through this thread.

There were also, of course, people saying that the yes campaign lost because the no campaigners "brought out the big guns" in the final two weeks. It makes good headlines, of course, but it doesn't stack up. Out of the whole two years of campaigning, just a couple of polls (out of hundreds) put the "yes" campaign in front. They were never on course to win, whether the "big guns" came out or not. In fact, the worse thing that could have happened for them was the poll from two weeks ago that put them ahead. It meant that those "no" voters who might not otherwise have bothered to vote were woken up from their complacency. The "yes" voters went online saying they could win it, the media jumped on it too, and the "no" campaign got its backside into gear as well. That one skewy poll that so many thought was a sign that the yes campaign could win, actually put the nail in the coffin of the yes campaign.

[memphisto]

Well, the result was as predicted. The England BBC coverage last night interviewed a number of voters in the studio, and some of those that voted no said they did so because they weren't convinced on issues such as currency etc. Which is exactly what I was arguing all the way through this thread.

There were also, of course, people saying that the yes campaign lost because the no campaigners "brought out the big guns" in the final two weeks. It makes good headlines, of course, but it doesn't stack up. Out of the whole two years of campaigning, just a couple of polls (out of hundreds) put the "yes" campaign in front. They were never on course to win, whether the "big guns" came out or not. In fact, the worse thing that could have happened for them was the poll from two weeks ago that put them ahead. It meant that those "no" voters who might not otherwise have bothered to vote were woken up from their complacency. The "yes" voters went online saying they could win it, the media jumped on it too, and the "no" campaign got its backside into gear as well. That one skewy poll that so many thought was a sign that the yes campaign could win, actually put the nail in the coffin of the yes campaign.

You know what lost it, the constant scaremongering from the no campaign, and the specific thing that lost it, the pension scare. Almost every age group voted for independence except for the over 55s and more specifically the over 65s.

As for the BBC, never have I saw so much propaganda over such a short space in time on one TV channel, utter disgrace.
Things like this were commonplace day in day out
..

I hope you are proud to live in such an unfair, undemocratic country, because lets face it, now that the referendum is finished, they can go back to ejecting foreigners from the country, removing workers rights, privatising the NHS and making the poor work for nothing and pretending that the UK is actually important in world affairs with their nuclear weapons that they dont even hold the trigger for. And maybe in 2 years time these 55% that voted No will see what they voted for.

[The Pirate]

What a load of tripe. The 'Yes' party lost because right up til the last minute they couldn't answer some fundamental questions about what would happen if they won. They had a couple of years to sort it all out, and by Wednesday night they were still talking about things that "should happen" and saying phrases along the lines of "If we win, I can so no reason why this would not..." etc. Who the hell in their right mind is going to vote 'Yes' under those circumstances? Let's face it, Alex Salmond blew it. He thought he was going to get votes based on his own standing, and when it came down to it the Scottish people proved that they aren't that daft.

[poormadpeter]

What a load of tripe. The 'Yes' party lost because right up til the last minute they couldn't answer some fundamental questions about what would happen if they won. They had a couple of years to sort it all out, and by Wednesday night they were still talking about things that "should happen" and saying phrases along the lines of "If we win, I can so no reason why this would not..." etc. Who the hell in their right mind is going to vote 'Yes' under those circumstances? Let's face it, Alex Salmond blew it. He thought he was going to get votes based on his own standing, and when it came down to it the Scottish people proved that they aren't that daft.

You nailed it.

Blame will always be deflected to other things. I find it quite funny that Salmond was moaning about the No campaign having Cameron going to Scotland through panic to turn voters - and yet has maintained throughout the campaign that Cameron was the most hated man in the country. Can't have it both ways. Salmond did blow it - in the current economic climate, it could and should have been a landslide.

[Matthew]

What a load of tripe. The 'Yes' party lost because right up til the last minute they couldn't answer some fundamental questions about what would happen if they won. They had a couple of years to sort it all out, and by Wednesday night they were still talking about things that "should happen" and saying phrases along the lines of "If we win, I can so no reason why this would not..." etc. Who the hell in their right mind is going to vote 'Yes' under those circumstances? Let's face it, Alex Salmond blew it. He thought he was going to get votes based on his own standing, and when it came down to it the Scottish people proved that they aren't that daft.

Precisely, the proper homework was note done, nor setup of a robust plan of action to facilitate such a major change. Frankly, it is worrying so many people voted Yes under such circumstances.

Things like this cannot be hung on a "seat of the pants" approach to management and leadership.

Thank goodness the majority vote was the right and most logical choice.

[memphisto]

What a load of tripe. The 'Yes' party lost because right up til the last minute they couldn't answer some fundamental questions about what would happen if they won. They had a couple of years to sort it all out, and by Wednesday night they were still talking about things that "should happen" and saying phrases along the lines of "If we win, I can so no reason why this would not..." etc. Who the hell in their right mind is going to vote 'Yes' under those circumstances? Let's face it, Alex Salmond blew it. He thought he was going to get votes based on his own standing, and when it came down to it the Scottish people proved that they aren't that daft.

Lets get this straight, every age range of people voted for independence up to 55 years old apart from a small percentage of 18-24 year olds. Older people who generally rely on traditional media and the BBC voted 73% in favour of No. You do the homework.

And what now, so much for the timetable that they all agreed on 4 days ago, now its been put back 6 months...and now a bunch of union jack waving fascists singing sectarian songs and giving nazi salutes being held back by police are in George Square. That is what your country is now. Thats what it promotes. Bet you that isnt on your news down south eh.

[memphisto]

What a load of tripe. The 'Yes' party lost because right up til the last minute they couldn't answer some fundamental questions about what would happen if they won. They had a couple of years to sort it all out, and by Wednesday night they were still talking about things that "should happen" and saying phrases along the lines of "If we win, I can so no reason why this would not..." etc. Who the hell in their right mind is going to vote 'Yes' under those circumstances? Let's face it, Alex Salmond blew it. He thought he was going to get votes based on his own standing, and when it came down to it the Scottish people proved that they aren't that daft.

Precisely, the proper homework was note done, nor setup of a robust plan of action to facilitate such a major change. Frankly, it is worrying so many people voted Yes under such circumstances.

Things like this cannot be hung on a "seat of the pants" approach to management and leadership.

Thank goodness the majority vote was the right and most logical choice.

Ive been following this campaign for 2 years, plenty of reasoning has went into all the arguments, but the media refused to show them time and time again. Now sure what media you receive in New Zealand but im betting you havent really seen much of what goes on here.

[poormadpeter]

What a load of tripe. The 'Yes' party lost because right up til the last minute they couldn't answer some fundamental questions about what would happen if they won. They had a couple of years to sort it all out, and by Wednesday night they were still talking about things that "should happen" and saying phrases along the lines of "If we win, I can so no reason why this would not..." etc. Who the hell in their right mind is going to vote 'Yes' under those circumstances? Let's face it, Alex Salmond blew it. He thought he was going to get votes based on his own standing, and when it came down to it the Scottish people proved that they aren't that daft.

Lets get this straight, every age range of people voted for independence up to 55 years old apart from a small percentage of 18-24 year olds. Older people who generally rely on traditional media and the BBC voted 73% in favour of No. You do the homework.

And what now, so much for the timetable that they all agreed on 4 days ago, now its been put back 6 months...and now a bunch of union jack waving fascists singing sectarian songs and giving nazi salutes being held back by police are in George Square. That is what your country is now. Thats what it promotes. Bet you that isnt on your news down south eh.

The timetable hasn't been put back six months - it's still to be delivered by the time of the next election as originally announced by Gordon Brown a few days back, with the draft paper being presented on, or prior to, January 25th 2015. The only thing that won't happen is for it to be passed through parliament before the next election. But that was never the plan anyway. It would be a physical impossibility for a law to be passed that quickly.

What's more, considering the vote was completely anonymous, I have no idea how you think you know who voted for what. You're relying on a poll taken last night that covered just 2000 people - and then you have to assume that those people told the pollsters the truth.

But let's assume the poll is correct. You seem to believe it after all.

And, indeed, let's get a few things about that straight. The poll states that 16-24 year olds did not have a "small percentage" voting for "no." but 49% voting "no." That's not a small percentage.

And let's look at the aging population. They account for 16.8% of Scotland's population. That means, of those that voted yesterday, just over 600,000 were over 65 (not 55 as you state). If 73% of them voted "no" (as the poll states) that accounts for 440,920 no votes. Which means that 163,297 voted "yes" in that age bracket. So, let's completely obliterate both those numbers from the final numbers of votes. That means the results would have been:

No: 1,560,998
Yes: 1,454,692

And this is the problem. You're moaning about propaganda and skewed figures. But what you're giving us is exactly that. Completely ignoring the over 65 vote and wiping them out of the equation, it becomes quite clear that the "yes" vote would STILL have lost. I've given you the figures, based on the poll that YOU quote. So, it's complete bull that every age range under 65 voted for independence, isn't it? If they had, then the "YES" vote would not be 106,000 LESS than the NO vote in the figures I have given above.

So, let's start being honest about the so-called skewed media coverage and propaganda, especially when you're actually taking part in those sorts of antics yourself.

And yes, the George Square issue is being reported live on BBC News - and even on the One Show.

[daylon]

Almost HALF of Scotland and it's biggest city voted for Independence. That is a significant portion of the population. It is clear a lot of people changed their vote on the day, I know quite a few who did this. Biased media coverage played a huge part on the result, there is absolutely no doubt about that. Any negative story on independence was reported hugely, yet opposing arguments and expert opinions were not heard. I've never seen anything like it. And the vast majority of scare stories were orchestrated by the PM. Without the intimidation and threats, Scotland would have voted Yes.

Whats being seen in George Square are not "unionists" they are "loyalists". They are Rangers FC supporters, who probably have the most bigoted and racist supporters in any part of the UK. Of course not all RFC supporters(and I know many) are like the crowd in George Square, but they are all about protestantism, the Queen, the Union etc , And they have massive support in Scotland. The vast majority of them were No voters. For no other reason than, "thats what they're supposed to do".

% of Yes vote

16-17 - 71%
18-24 - 48%
25-34 - 59%
35- 44 53%
45-54 - 52%
55-64 - 43%
65+ - 27%

Bottom 2 have won it for No.

I am convinced Scotland will be independent within the next 10 years.

[norrie]

The irony of "better together" will be lost on these idiots

[poormadpeter]

Almost HALF of Scotland and it's biggest city voted for Independence. That is a significant portion of the population. It is clear a lot of people changed their vote on the day, I know quite a few who did this. Biased media coverage played a huge part on the result, there is absolutely no doubt about that. Any negative story on independence was reported hugely, yet opposing arguments and expert opinions were not heard. I've never seen anything like it. And the vast majority of scare stories were orchestrated by the PM. Without the intimidation and threats, Scotland would have voted Yes.

Whats being seen in George Square are not "unionists" they are "loyalists". They are Rangers FC supporters, who probably have the most bigoted and racist supporters in any part of the UK. Of course not all RFC supporters(and I know many) are like the crowd in George Square, but they are all about protestantism, the Queen, the Union etc , And they have massive support in Scotland. The vast majority of them were No voters. For no other reason than, "thats what they're supposed to do".

% of Yes vote

16-17 - 71%
18-24 - 48%
25-34 - 59%
35- 44 53%
45-54 - 52%
55-64 - 43%
65+ - 27%

Bottom 2 have won it for No.

I am convinced Scotland will be independent within the next 10 years.

You can't say that biased media coverage caused people to change their vote on the day. It's lunacy. With the exception of one poll, the YES campaign was never shown as winning. How can you lose it through media bias in the last week if you were never going to win it in the first place? Blame the media all you like - but the blame is on Salmond for the exact reasons that Pirate stated so succinctly earlier today. He knows he is to blame, and that's exactly why he resigned.

And I have already given you the figures that would have resulted if no-one over 65 had even voted. You still would have lost - by 106,000 votes. Conveniently ignored in your comments, I notice.

[daylon]

Almost HALF of Scotland and it's biggest city voted for Independence. That is a significant portion of the population. It is clear a lot of people changed their vote on the day, I know quite a few who did this. Biased media coverage played a huge part on the result, there is absolutely no doubt about that. Any negative story on independence was reported hugely, yet opposing arguments and expert opinions were not heard. I've never seen anything like it. And the vast majority of scare stories were orchestrated by the PM. Without the intimidation and threats, Scotland would have voted Yes.

Whats being seen in George Square are not "unionists" they are "loyalists". They are Rangers FC supporters, who probably have the most bigoted and racist supporters in any part of the UK. Of course not all RFC supporters(and I know many) are like the crowd in George Square, but they are all about protestantism, the Queen, the Union etc , And they have massive support in Scotland. The vast majority of them were No voters. For no other reason than, "thats what they're supposed to do".

% of Yes vote

16-17 - 71%
18-24 - 48%
25-34 - 59%
35- 44 53%
45-54 - 52%
55-64 - 43%
65+ - 27%

Bottom 2 have won it for No.

I am convinced Scotland will be independent within the next 10 years.

You can't say that biased media coverage caused people to change their vote on the day. It's lunacy. With the exception of one poll, the YES campaign was never shown as winning. How can you lose it through media bias in the last week if you were never going to win it in the first place? Blame the media all you like - but the blame is on Salmond for the exact reasons that Pirate stated so succinctly earlier today. He knows he is to blame, and that's exactly why he resigned.

And I have already given you the figures that would have resulted if no-one over 65 had even voted. You still would have lost - by 106,000 votes. Conveniently ignored in your comments, I notice.

Wrong. And there were a few that were very close.

What about the figures for 55 and over?

[poormadpeter]

Almost HALF of Scotland and it's biggest city voted for Independence. That is a significant portion of the population. It is clear a lot of people changed their vote on the day, I know quite a few who did this. Biased media coverage played a huge part on the result, there is absolutely no doubt about that. Any negative story on independence was reported hugely, yet opposing arguments and expert opinions were not heard. I've never seen anything like it. And the vast majority of scare stories were orchestrated by the PM. Without the intimidation and threats, Scotland would have voted Yes.

Whats being seen in George Square are not "unionists" they are "loyalists". They are Rangers FC supporters, who probably have the most bigoted and racist supporters in any part of the UK. Of course not all RFC supporters(and I know many) are like the crowd in George Square, but they are all about protestantism, the Queen, the Union etc , And they have massive support in Scotland. The vast majority of them were No voters. For no other reason than, "thats what they're supposed to do".

% of Yes vote

16-17 - 71%
18-24 - 48%
25-34 - 59%
35- 44 53%
45-54 - 52%
55-64 - 43%
65+ - 27%

Bottom 2 have won it for No.

I am convinced Scotland will be independent within the next 10 years.

You can't say that biased media coverage caused people to change their vote on the day. It's lunacy. With the exception of one poll, the YES campaign was never shown as winning. How can you lose it through media bias in the last week if you were never going to win it in the first place? Blame the media all you like - but the blame is on Salmond for the exact reasons that Pirate stated so succinctly earlier today. He knows he is to blame, and that's exactly why he resigned.

And I have already given you the figures that would have resulted if no-one over 65 had even voted. You still would have lost - by 106,000 votes. Conveniently ignored in your comments, I notice.

Wrong. And there were a few that were very close.

What about the figures for 55 and over?

I don't care about the votes of the 55 and over. You can't just excise votes for people who don't happen to feel the way you do. I have stated in my earlier post how the figures would have added up if no-one over 65 had voted at all (in other words, the age group that were most anti-independence):

[the over 65s] account for 16.8% of Scotland's population. That means, of those that voted yesterday, just over 600,000 were over 65 (not 55 as you state). If 73% of them voted "no" (as the poll states) that accounts for 440,920 no votes. Which means that 163,297 voted "yes" in that age bracket. So, let's completely obliterate both those numbers from the final numbers of votes. That means the results would have been:

No: 1,560,998
Yes: 1,454,692

So, unless you are saying that I can't do simple mathematics, I was not "wrong" as you said, but completely correct in my comment and calculations. I'll await your retraction.

These are the facts:

You lost.

With the exception of one poll from two weeks ago, you were never on target to win - even before campaign starting and the media would have had any effect at all.

You can sit there bemoaning how one or two age groups let the side down or you can act like adults and understand that more people in Scotland wanted to stay within the UK than leave it. In other words, you can get on with life or continue to throw your toys out of the pram.

It was a fair, honest vote and you were in the minority. Get over it, and stop trying to blame it on something or someone. You simply lost the vote.

[Mike S]

Honestly it's hard to know where to start with all the nonsense flying around here by disgruntled former 'Yes' supporters but one thing should be made clear. The 'Yes' campaign was never likely to win. All polls bar one (since dismissed as a rogue poll) indicated that the 'No' vote were ahead and yet from the posturing and spin from those running the 'Yes' campaign you would have thought it was the other way around. Unrealistic expectations were raised and dashed on a falsehood.

A clear guide was provided by the City, where shares have not rallied to any great extent today since the expectation of a 'No' result had already been priced in, as well as the bookmakers who also had the 'No' vote down as favourite. The clues were all there, so those feeling disappointment have only themselves to blame for expectations based on nothing more than wishful thinking.

Well done Shane for your contributions to this thread - you had it right from the start....and yet some still can't see it. Amazing and sad.

[daylon]

Almost HALF of Scotland and it's biggest city voted for Independence. That is a significant portion of the population. It is clear a lot of people changed their vote on the day, I know quite a few who did this. Biased media coverage played a huge part on the result, there is absolutely no doubt about that. Any negative story on independence was reported hugely, yet opposing arguments and expert opinions were not heard. I've never seen anything like it. And the vast majority of scare stories were orchestrated by the PM. Without the intimidation and threats, Scotland would have voted Yes.

Whats being seen in George Square are not "unionists" they are "loyalists". They are Rangers FC supporters, who probably have the most bigoted and racist supporters in any part of the UK. Of course not all RFC supporters(and I know many) are like the crowd in George Square, but they are all about protestantism, the Queen, the Union etc , And they have massive support in Scotland. The vast majority of them were No voters. For no other reason than, "thats what they're supposed to do".

% of Yes vote

16-17 - 71%
18-24 - 48%
25-34 - 59%
35- 44 53%
45-54 - 52%
55-64 - 43%
65+ - 27%

Bottom 2 have won it for No.

I am convinced Scotland will be independent within the next 10 years.

You can't say that biased media coverage caused people to change their vote on the day. It's lunacy. With the exception of one poll, the YES campaign was never shown as winning. How can you lose it through media bias in the last week if you were never going to win it in the first place? Blame the media all you like - but the blame is on Salmond for the exact reasons that Pirate stated so succinctly earlier today. He knows he is to blame, and that's exactly why he resigned.

And I have already given you the figures that would have resulted if no-one over 65 had even voted. You still would have lost - by 106,000 votes. Conveniently ignored in your comments, I notice.

Wrong. And there were a few that were very close.

What about the figures for 55 and over?

I don't care about the votes of the 55 and over. You can't just excise votes for people who don't happen to feel the way you do. I have stated in my earlier post how the figures would have added up if no-one over 65 had voted at all (in other words, the age group that were most anti-independence):

[the over 65s] account for 16.8% of Scotland's population. That means, of those that voted yesterday, just over 600,000 were over 65 (not 55 as you state). If 73% of them voted "no" (as the poll states) that accounts for 440,920 no votes. Which means that 163,297 voted "yes" in that age bracket. So, let's completely obliterate both those numbers from the final numbers of votes. That means the results would have been:

No: 1,560,998
Yes: 1,454,692

So, unless you are saying that I can't do simple mathematics, I was not "wrong" as you said, but completely correct in my comment and calculations. I'll await your retraction.

These are the facts:

You lost.

With the exception of one poll from two weeks ago, you were never on target to win - even before campaign starting and the media would have had any effect at all.

You can sit there bemoaning how one or two age groups let the side down or you can act like adults and understand that more people in Scotland wanted to stay within the UK than leave it. In other words, you can get on with life or continue to throw your toys out of the pram.

It was a fair, honest vote and you were in the minority. Get over it, and stop trying to blame it on something or someone. You simply lost the vote.

Honestly, do you actually read other peoples posts before replying?

I'll spell it out for you in terms hopefully you understand.

You wrote: "With the exception of one poll, the YES campaign was never shown as winning". - I wrote: "Wrong" - which you are. Clue -> research again with regards to opinion poll figures, they're out there! Is this part clear?

I wrote an opinion in my post as to where the Yes vote was lost- thats all - I wrote -"the bottom 2 have won it for No" - which included the age group 55-64 - and which showed a high No vote. Hence the question to you about 55 and overs. Have you got that part now?

Then you start prattling on about 65 and overs and something about mathematics??? .... Basically nonsense.

And as for this little beauty that you wrote "You can sit there bemoaning how one or two age groups let the side down or you can act like adults" -
You're the one with his little calculator out, feverishly punching numbers, showing figures to support your guff to another poster, not me.

Read the post a little more carefully next time before jumping in .

I'll await your retraction.

[daylon]

Honestly it's hard to know where to start with all the nonsense flying around here by disgruntled former 'Yes' supporters but one thing should be made clear. The 'Yes' campaign was never likely to win. All polls bar one (since dismissed as a rogue poll) indicated that the 'No' vote were ahead and yet from the posturing and spin from those running the 'Yes' campaign you would have thought it was the other way around. Unrealistic expectations were raised and dashed on a falsehood.

A clear guide was provided by the City, where shares have not rallied to any great extent today since the expectation of a 'No' result had already been priced in, as well as the bookmakers who also had the 'No' vote down as favourite. The clues were all there, so those feeling disappointment have only themselves to blame for expectations based on nothing more than wishful thinking.

Well done Shane for your contributions to this thread - you had it right from the start....and yet some still can't see it. Amazing and sad.

Sounds like it's been a big relief to you and others outside Scotland, that we've stayed within the UK. Why is that?

And you're wrong on so many points.

Were you in Scotland to see the "posturing" of the Yes team? It's a term even the most fervent No campaigner have used, but you'll know better, you always do!!!

Maybe you and pmp can get your heads together and check on those previous opinion polls that you like to use to enhance your points.

Ps- that "one" poll has not been dismissed by experts as "rogue".

[londonflash]

Well I think PMP has made his points well.

Let's be honest - the likelihood was always that the "no" group would triumph. It's already been pointed out about a hundred times on this thread, but it doesn't seem to have got through, that for all his proclamations Salmond didn't do enough to convince most voters that their lot would be better if Scotland achieved independence. There were too many unanswered questions. For many, a yes vote was a leap of faith too far, a risk they were unwilling to take given the uncertainty of what a yes actually meant.

Now it's time for devo-max (not just for Scotland, but for Wales and Northern Ireland too) and an English parliament.

[poormadpeter]

Almost HALF of Scotland and it's biggest city voted for Independence. That is a significant portion of the population. It is clear a lot of people changed their vote on the day, I know quite a few who did this. Biased media coverage played a huge part on the result, there is absolutely no doubt about that. Any negative story on independence was reported hugely, yet opposing arguments and expert opinions were not heard. I've never seen anything like it. And the vast majority of scare stories were orchestrated by the PM. Without the intimidation and threats, Scotland would have voted Yes.

Whats being seen in George Square are not "unionists" they are "loyalists". They are Rangers FC supporters, who probably have the most bigoted and racist supporters in any part of the UK. Of course not all RFC supporters(and I know many) are like the crowd in George Square, but they are all about protestantism, the Queen, the Union etc , And they have massive support in Scotland. The vast majority of them were No voters. For no other reason than, "thats what they're supposed to do".

% of Yes vote

16-17 - 71%
18-24 - 48%
25-34 - 59%
35- 44 53%
45-54 - 52%
55-64 - 43%
65+ - 27%

Bottom 2 have won it for No.

I am convinced Scotland will be independent within the next 10 years.

You can't say that biased media coverage caused people to change their vote on the day. It's lunacy. With the exception of one poll, the YES campaign was never shown as winning. How can you lose it through media bias in the last week if you were never going to win it in the first place? Blame the media all you like - but the blame is on Salmond for the exact reasons that Pirate stated so succinctly earlier today. He knows he is to blame, and that's exactly why he resigned.

And I have already given you the figures that would have resulted if no-one over 65 had even voted. You still would have lost - by 106,000 votes. Conveniently ignored in your comments, I notice.

Wrong. And there were a few that were very close.

What about the figures for 55 and over?

I don't care about the votes of the 55 and over. You can't just excise votes for people who don't happen to feel the way you do. I have stated in my earlier post how the figures would have added up if no-one over 65 had voted at all (in other words, the age group that were most anti-independence):

[the over 65s] account for 16.8% of Scotland's population. That means, of those that voted yesterday, just over 600,000 were over 65 (not 55 as you state). If 73% of them voted "no" (as the poll states) that accounts for 440,920 no votes. Which means that 163,297 voted "yes" in that age bracket. So, let's completely obliterate both those numbers from the final numbers of votes. That means the results would have been:

No: 1,560,998
Yes: 1,454,692

So, unless you are saying that I can't do simple mathematics, I was not "wrong" as you said, but completely correct in my comment and calculations. I'll await your retraction.

These are the facts:

You lost.

With the exception of one poll from two weeks ago, you were never on target to win - even before campaign starting and the media would have had any effect at all.

You can sit there bemoaning how one or two age groups let the side down or you can act like adults and understand that more people in Scotland wanted to stay within the UK than leave it. In other words, you can get on with life or continue to throw your toys out of the pram.

It was a fair, honest vote and you were in the minority. Get over it, and stop trying to blame it on something or someone. You simply lost the vote.

Honestly, do you actually read other peoples posts before replying?

I'll spell it out for you in terms hopefully you understand.

You wrote: "With the exception of one poll, the YES campaign was never shown as winning". - I wrote: "Wrong" - which you are. Clue -> research again with regards to opinion poll figures, they're out there! Is this part clear?

I wrote an opinion in my post as to where the Yes vote was lost- thats all - I wrote -"the bottom 2 have won it for No" - which included the age group 55-64 - and which showed a high No vote. Hence the question to you about 55 and overs. Have you got that part now?

Then you start prattling on about 65 and overs and something about mathematics??? .... Basically nonsense.

And as for this little beauty that you wrote "You can sit there bemoaning how one or two age groups let the side down or you can act like adults" -
You're the one with his little calculator out, feverishly punching numbers, showing figures to support your guff to another poster, not me.

Read the post a little more carefully next time before jumping in .

I'll await your retraction.

Ah yes, there were two polls. Over two years of campaigning. Wow. You sure were the favourites after all.

The calculations were made to show that what was being said was completely incorrect. And what I have stated is completely true - that the over 65s did not lose you the referendum, it would have been lost anyway even if it was only open to people from 16-64.

[daylon]

Well I think PMP has made his points well.

Let's be honest - the likelihood was always that the "no" group would triumph. It's already been pointed out about a hundred times on this thread, but it doesn't seem to have got through, that for all his proclamations Salmond didn't do enough to convince most voters that their lot would be better if Scotland achieved independence. There were too many unanswered questions. For many, a yes vote was a leap of faith too far, a risk they were unwilling to take given the uncertainty of what a yes actually meant.

Now it's time for devo-max (not just for Scotland, but for Wales and Northern Ireland too) and an English parliament.

This post shows just how ignorant you are to the vote. Devo-Max is NOT being offered to Scotland- nowhere near it. If it had, I would have voted NO.
The final result would have been 75% No, if it had. Even Nigel Farage has stated DMax should have been offered. It is the only way to kill independence. The Labour and Tory proposals are at best 20% of DMAX..... Devo Max is FULL fiscal powers.

[daylon]

Almost HALF of Scotland and it's biggest city voted for Independence. That is a significant portion of the population. It is clear a lot of people changed their vote on the day, I know quite a few who did this. Biased media coverage played a huge part on the result, there is absolutely no doubt about that. Any negative story on independence was reported hugely, yet opposing arguments and expert opinions were not heard. I've never seen anything like it. And the vast majority of scare stories were orchestrated by the PM. Without the intimidation and threats, Scotland would have voted Yes.

Whats being seen in George Square are not "unionists" they are "loyalists". They are Rangers FC supporters, who probably have the most bigoted and racist supporters in any part of the UK. Of course not all RFC supporters(and I know many) are like the crowd in George Square, but they are all about protestantism, the Queen, the Union etc , And they have massive support in Scotland. The vast majority of them were No voters. For no other reason than, "thats what they're supposed to do".

% of Yes vote

16-17 - 71%
18-24 - 48%
25-34 - 59%
35- 44 53%
45-54 - 52%
55-64 - 43%
65+ - 27%

Bottom 2 have won it for No.

I am convinced Scotland will be independent within the next 10 years.

You can't say that biased media coverage caused people to change their vote on the day. It's lunacy. With the exception of one poll, the YES campaign was never shown as winning. How can you lose it through media bias in the last week if you were never going to win it in the first place? Blame the media all you like - but the blame is on Salmond for the exact reasons that Pirate stated so succinctly earlier today. He knows he is to blame, and that's exactly why he resigned.

And I have already given you the figures that would have resulted if no-one over 65 had even voted. You still would have lost - by 106,000 votes. Conveniently ignored in your comments, I notice.

Wrong. And there were a few that were very close.

What about the figures for 55 and over?

I don't care about the votes of the 55 and over. You can't just excise votes for people who don't happen to feel the way you do. I have stated in my earlier post how the figures would have added up if no-one over 65 had voted at all (in other words, the age group that were most anti-independence):

[the over 65s] account for 16.8% of Scotland's population. That means, of those that voted yesterday, just over 600,000 were over 65 (not 55 as you state). If 73% of them voted "no" (as the poll states) that accounts for 440,920 no votes. Which means that 163,297 voted "yes" in that age bracket. So, let's completely obliterate both those numbers from the final numbers of votes. That means the results would have been:

No: 1,560,998
Yes: 1,454,692

So, unless you are saying that I can't do simple mathematics, I was not "wrong" as you said, but completely correct in my comment and calculations. I'll await your retraction.

These are the facts:

You lost.

With the exception of one poll from two weeks ago, you were never on target to win - even before campaign starting and the media would have had any effect at all.

You can sit there bemoaning how one or two age groups let the side down or you can act like adults and understand that more people in Scotland wanted to stay within the UK than leave it. In other words, you can get on with life or continue to throw your toys out of the pram.

It was a fair, honest vote and you were in the minority. Get over it, and stop trying to blame it on something or someone. You simply lost the vote.

Honestly, do you actually read other peoples posts before replying?

I'll spell it out for you in terms hopefully you understand.

You wrote: "With the exception of one poll, the YES campaign was never shown as winning". - I wrote: "Wrong" - which you are. Clue -> research again with regards to opinion poll figures, they're out there! Is this part clear?

I wrote an opinion in my post as to where the Yes vote was lost- thats all - I wrote -"the bottom 2 have won it for No" - which included the age group 55-64 - and which showed a high No vote. Hence the question to you about 55 and overs. Have you got that part now?

Then you start prattling on about 65 and overs and something about mathematics??? .... Basically nonsense.

And as for this little beauty that you wrote "You can sit there bemoaning how one or two age groups let the side down or you can act like adults" -
You're the one with his little calculator out, feverishly punching numbers, showing figures to support your guff to another poster, not me.

Read the post a little more carefully next time before jumping in .

I'll await your retraction.

Ah yes, there were two polls. Over two years of campaigning. Wow. You sure were the favourites after all.

The calculations were made to show that what was being said was completely incorrect. And what I have stated is completely true - that the over 65s did not lose you the referendum, it would have been lost anyway even if it was only open to people from 16-64.

Why are you still waffling on about over 65's? I never mentioned over 65's.

What is true though is, that the age group 16-54 voted resoundingly YES. It was the 55's and over that won it for the No camp....my original point.

And you're wrong again on the polls, I'll narrow it down for you, they were carried out within the last 12 DAYS of the vote.

Never mind, Scotland will be independent within 10 years unless DMAX is offered.

Anyway, I'm off to the beautiful Scottish Highlands for a few days with my family.

[londonflash]

Well I think PMP has made his points well.

Let's be honest - the likelihood was always that the "no" group would triumph. It's already been pointed out about a hundred times on this thread, but it doesn't seem to have got through, that for all his proclamations Salmond didn't do enough to convince most voters that their lot would be better if Scotland achieved independence. There were too many unanswered questions. For many, a yes vote was a leap of faith too far, a risk they were unwilling to take given the uncertainty of what a yes actually meant.

Now it's time for devo-max (not just for Scotland, but for Wales and Northern Ireland too) and an English parliament.

This post shows just how ignorant you are to the vote. Devo-Max is NOT being offered to Scotland- nowhere near it. If it had, I would have voted NO.
The final result would have been 75% No, if it had. Even Nigel Farage has stated DMax should have been offered. It is the only way to kill independence. The Labour and Tory proposals are at best 20% of DMAX..... Devo Max is FULL fiscal powers.

I suggest you re-read what I wrote old chap. I am fully aware that devo-max has not been offered, I was stating my opinion that it should be for all parts of the UK.

[memphisto]

What a load of tripe. The 'Yes' party lost because right up til the last minute they couldn't answer some fundamental questions about what would happen if they won. They had a couple of years to sort it all out, and by Wednesday night they were still talking about things that "should happen" and saying phrases along the lines of "If we win, I can so no reason why this would not..." etc. Who the hell in their right mind is going to vote 'Yes' under those circumstances? Let's face it, Alex Salmond blew it. He thought he was going to get votes based on his own standing, and when it came down to it the Scottish people proved that they aren't that daft.

Lets get this straight, every age range of people voted for independence up to 55 years old apart from a small percentage of 18-24 year olds. Older people who generally rely on traditional media and the BBC voted 73% in favour of No. You do the homework.

And what now, so much for the timetable that they all agreed on 4 days ago, now its been put back 6 months...and now a bunch of union jack waving fascists singing sectarian songs and giving nazi salutes being held back by police are in George Square. That is what your country is now. Thats what it promotes. Bet you that isnt on your news down south eh.

The timetable hasn't been put back six months - it's still to be delivered by the time of the next election as originally announced by Gordon Brown a few days back, with the draft paper being presented on, or prior to, January 25th 2015. The only thing that won't happen is for it to be passed through parliament before the next election. But that was never the plan anyway. It would be a physical impossibility for a law to be passed that quickly.

What's more, considering the vote was completely anonymous, I have no idea how you think you know who voted for what. You're relying on a poll taken last night that covered just 2000 people - and then you have to assume that those people told the pollsters the truth.

But let's assume the poll is correct. You seem to believe it after all.

And, indeed, let's get a few things about that straight. The poll states that 16-24 year olds did not have a "small percentage" voting for "no." but 49% voting "no." That's not a small percentage.

And let's look at the aging population. They account for 16.8% of Scotland's population. That means, of those that voted yesterday, just over 600,000 were over 65 (not 55 as you state). If 73% of them voted "no" (as the poll states) that accounts for 440,920 no votes. Which means that 163,297 voted "yes" in that age bracket. So, let's completely obliterate both those numbers from the final numbers of votes. That means the results would have been:

No: 1,560,998
Yes: 1,454,692

And this is the problem. You're moaning about propaganda and skewed figures. But what you're giving us is exactly that. Completely ignoring the over 65 vote and wiping them out of the equation, it becomes quite clear that the "yes" vote would STILL have lost. I've given you the figures, based on the poll that YOU quote. So, it's complete bull that every age range under 65 voted for independence, isn't it? If they had, then the "YES" vote would not be 106,000 LESS than the NO vote in the figures I have given above.

So, let's start being honest about the so-called skewed media coverage and propaganda, especially when you're actually taking part in those sorts of antics yourself.

And yes, the George Square issue is being reported live on BBC News - and even on the One Show.

This is how little you know. Gordon Brown is a back bench MP who has rarely attends parliament and goes on his little trips making millions of pounds in speeches. He has NO power, he is ONE MP. Brown said 5 whole days ago.
‘We have agreed a timetable for that stronger Scottish Parliament – a timetable to bring in the new powers that will go ahead if there is a No vote. A White Paper by November, put into draft legislation by January.'”
This was the timetable

Step 1 has already been missed

Miliband wants to slow that process down
http://news.sky.com/story/1339172/miliband-more-important-things-than-devo-max

As for the poll, 2000 people is a larger sample that most pollsters use to predict election percentages, it has a standard deviation within a couple of percent. Its a valid poll.

For someone who does reviews you would think that you could actually read a sentence. I did say 55 and not 65 because those people would be approaching retirement and that group voted No. Btw Scotlands population over 65 is around 892,000 according to census, not 600,000, 55-65 is 668,000, that makes 1.56 million. So your figures are way off.

Without the over 65 vote it would have 54.3% for Yes, this value was calculated by someone else but I concur with its value. Its not the the first time I have been lectured in mathematics from those that dont know I have a honours degree in Financial Statistics.

So the figures are not skewed. I dont do that. Thats one of the reasons why I am a programmer now and not one of these statisticians because I couldnt stand people manipulating the results to suit themselves. I didnt agree with that, change the parameters, change the method, change the confidence interval, use a different statistic, I heard them all, they all do it to convince people that its right. Thats why I only trust figures when I see them myself. I know what is being manipulated because I know how it works. You were the one with the wrong figures.

Maybe it was on 24 hour live but really, how many people watch that. I heard it wasnt on the 6pm or 10pm news, thats what most people watch. What did you see? Nazi salutes? Burning saltires? The video containing homophobic comments in the face of gay MP Austin Sheridan? hmmm, what was on that news then?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQIN7UAfLBo

6,000 people have joined the SNP, the SSP and the Greens in 2 days. This wont die down, there is a movement rising out of this, and it demands change.

[memphisto]

Almost HALF of Scotland and it's biggest city voted for Independence. That is a significant portion of the population. It is clear a lot of people changed their vote on the day, I know quite a few who did this. Biased media coverage played a huge part on the result, there is absolutely no doubt about that. Any negative story on independence was reported hugely, yet opposing arguments and expert opinions were not heard. I've never seen anything like it. And the vast majority of scare stories were orchestrated by the PM. Without the intimidation and threats, Scotland would have voted Yes.

Whats being seen in George Square are not "unionists" they are "loyalists". They are Rangers FC supporters, who probably have the most bigoted and racist supporters in any part of the UK. Of course not all RFC supporters(and I know many) are like the crowd in George Square, but they are all about protestantism, the Queen, the Union etc , And they have massive support in Scotland. The vast majority of them were No voters. For no other reason than, "thats what they're supposed to do".

% of Yes vote

16-17 - 71%
18-24 - 48%
25-34 - 59%
35- 44 53%
45-54 - 52%
55-64 - 43%
65+ - 27%

Bottom 2 have won it for No.

I am convinced Scotland will be independent within the next 10 years.

You can't say that biased media coverage caused people to change their vote on the day. It's lunacy. With the exception of one poll, the YES campaign was never shown as winning. How can you lose it through media bias in the last week if you were never going to win it in the first place? Blame the media all you like - but the blame is on Salmond for the exact reasons that Pirate stated so succinctly earlier today. He knows he is to blame, and that's exactly why he resigned.

And I have already given you the figures that would have resulted if no-one over 65 had even voted. You still would have lost - by 106,000 votes. Conveniently ignored in your comments, I notice.

Wrong. And there were a few that were very close.

What about the figures for 55 and over?

I don't care about the votes of the 55 and over. You can't just excise votes for people who don't happen to feel the way you do. I have stated in my earlier post how the figures would have added up if no-one over 65 had voted at all (in other words, the age group that were most anti-independence):

[the over 65s] account for 16.8% of Scotland's population. That means, of those that voted yesterday, just over 600,000 were over 65 (not 55 as you state). If 73% of them voted "no" (as the poll states) that accounts for 440,920 no votes. Which means that 163,297 voted "yes" in that age bracket. So, let's completely obliterate both those numbers from the final numbers of votes. That means the results would have been:

No: 1,560,998
Yes: 1,454,692

So, unless you are saying that I can't do simple mathematics, I was not "wrong" as you said, but completely correct in my comment and calculations. I'll await your retraction.

These are the facts:

You lost.

With the exception of one poll from two weeks ago, you were never on target to win - even before campaign starting and the media would have had any effect at all.

You can sit there bemoaning how one or two age groups let the side down or you can act like adults and understand that more people in Scotland wanted to stay within the UK than leave it. In other words, you can get on with life or continue to throw your toys out of the pram.

It was a fair, honest vote and you were in the minority. Get over it, and stop trying to blame it on something or someone. You simply lost the vote.

Honestly, do you actually read other peoples posts before replying?

I'll spell it out for you in terms hopefully you understand.

You wrote: "With the exception of one poll, the YES campaign was never shown as winning". - I wrote: "Wrong" - which you are. Clue -> research again with regards to opinion poll figures, they're out there! Is this part clear?

I wrote an opinion in my post as to where the Yes vote was lost- thats all - I wrote -"the bottom 2 have won it for No" - which included the age group 55-64 - and which showed a high No vote. Hence the question to you about 55 and overs. Have you got that part now?

Then you start prattling on about 65 and overs and something about mathematics??? .... Basically nonsense.

And as for this little beauty that you wrote "You can sit there bemoaning how one or two age groups let the side down or you can act like adults" -
You're the one with his little calculator out, feverishly punching numbers, showing figures to support your guff to another poster, not me.

Read the post a little more carefully next time before jumping in .

I'll await your retraction.

Ah yes, there were two polls. Over two years of campaigning. Wow. You sure were the favourites after all.

The calculations were made to show that what was being said was completely incorrect. And what I have stated is completely true - that the over 65s did not lose you the referendum, it would have been lost anyway even if it was only open to people from 16-64.

Considering the polls started at around 28% and ended up 45% is testament to the work that was put into it.

And as stated, your figures were incorrect

[poormadpeter]

What a load of tripe. The 'Yes' party lost because right up til the last minute they couldn't answer some fundamental questions about what would happen if they won. They had a couple of years to sort it all out, and by Wednesday night they were still talking about things that "should happen" and saying phrases along the lines of "If we win, I can so no reason why this would not..." etc. Who the hell in their right mind is going to vote 'Yes' under those circumstances? Let's face it, Alex Salmond blew it. He thought he was going to get votes based on his own standing, and when it came down to it the Scottish people proved that they aren't that daft.

Lets get this straight, every age range of people voted for independence up to 55 years old apart from a small percentage of 18-24 year olds. Older people who generally rely on traditional media and the BBC voted 73% in favour of No. You do the homework.

And what now, so much for the timetable that they all agreed on 4 days ago, now its been put back 6 months...and now a bunch of union jack waving fascists singing sectarian songs and giving nazi salutes being held back by police are in George Square. That is what your country is now. Thats what it promotes. Bet you that isnt on your news down south eh.

The timetable hasn't been put back six months - it's still to be delivered by the time of the next election as originally announced by Gordon Brown a few days back, with the draft paper being presented on, or prior to, January 25th 2015. The only thing that won't happen is for it to be passed through parliament before the next election. But that was never the plan anyway. It would be a physical impossibility for a law to be passed that quickly.

What's more, considering the vote was completely anonymous, I have no idea how you think you know who voted for what. You're relying on a poll taken last night that covered just 2000 people - and then you have to assume that those people told the pollsters the truth.

But let's assume the poll is correct. You seem to believe it after all.

And, indeed, let's get a few things about that straight. The poll states that 16-24 year olds did not have a "small percentage" voting for "no." but 49% voting "no." That's not a small percentage.

And let's look at the aging population. They account for 16.8% of Scotland's population. That means, of those that voted yesterday, just over 600,000 were over 65 (not 55 as you state). If 73% of them voted "no" (as the poll states) that accounts for 440,920 no votes. Which means that 163,297 voted "yes" in that age bracket. So, let's completely obliterate both those numbers from the final numbers of votes. That means the results would have been:

No: 1,560,998
Yes: 1,454,692

And this is the problem. You're moaning about propaganda and skewed figures. But what you're giving us is exactly that. Completely ignoring the over 65 vote and wiping them out of the equation, it becomes quite clear that the "yes" vote would STILL have lost. I've given you the figures, based on the poll that YOU quote. So, it's complete bull that every age range under 65 voted for independence, isn't it? If they had, then the "YES" vote would not be 106,000 LESS than the NO vote in the figures I have given above.

So, let's start being honest about the so-called skewed media coverage and propaganda, especially when you're actually taking part in those sorts of antics yourself.

And yes, the George Square issue is being reported live on BBC News - and even on the One Show.

This is how little you know. Gordon Brown is a back bench MP who has rarely attends parliament and goes on his little trips making millions of pounds in speeches. He has NO power, he is ONE MP. Brown said 5 whole days ago.
‘We have agreed a timetable for that stronger Scottish Parliament – a timetable to bring in the new powers that will go ahead if there is a No vote. A White Paper by November, put into draft legislation by January.'”
This was the timetable

Step 1 has already been missed

Miliband wants to slow that process down
http://news.sky.com/story/1339172/miliband-more-important-things-than-devo-max

As for the poll, 2000 people is a larger sample that most pollsters use to predict election percentages, it has a standard deviation within a couple of percent. Its a valid poll.

For someone who does reviews you would think that you could actually read a sentence. I did say 55 and not 65 because those people would be approaching retirement and that group voted No. Btw Scotlands population over 65 is around 892,000 according to census, not 600,000, 55-65 is 668,000, that makes 1.56 million. So your figures are way off.

Without the over 65 vote it would have 54.3% for Yes, this value was calculated by someone else but I concur with its value. Its not the the first time I have been lectured in mathematics from those that dont know I have a honours degree in Financial Statistics.

So the figures are not skewed. I dont do that. Thats one of the reasons why I am a programmer now and not one of these statisticians because I couldnt stand people manipulating the results to suit themselves. I didnt agree with that, change the parameters, change the method, change the confidence interval, use a different statistic, I heard them all, they all do it to convince people that its right. Thats why I only trust figures when I see them myself. I know what is being manipulated because I know how it works. You were the one with the wrong figures.

Meanwhile, the poll that you quote says that 16.8% of the Scottish population is over 65. 16.8% of all votes comes to 608,172.
Maybe it was on 24 hour live but really, how many people watch that. I heard it wasnt on the 6pm or 10pm news, thats what most people watch. What did you see? Nazi salutes? Burning saltires? The video containing homophobic comments in the face of gay MP Austin Sheridan? hmmm, what was on that news then?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQIN7UAfLBo

6,000 people have joined the SNP, the SSP and the Greens in 2 days. This wont die down, there is a movement rising out of this, and it demands change.

I don't give a damn who was at George Square in Glasgow. The fact of the matter is that it was 200 people who went there to cause trouble. they had no interest in politics, just to be a pain up the backside - wanting an excuse to be ar*seholes. In the end, it was under control relatively quickly. It was live on BBC1 at 7pm last night on the One Show. In the great scheme of things with regards to yesterday's news of the referendum and Salmond standing down, it wasn't worthy of the BBC national news bulletins. To broadcast it on there would have given drunken louts more publicity than they deserved. If you really think they were there because of the referendum, then you are remarkably naïve.

Meanwhile, the poll that you quote says that 16.8% of the Scottish population is over 65. 16.8% of all votes comes to 608,172.

You said the timetable was put back six months. Missing step 1 by a day is not 6 months (as you stated). And what one party leader WANTS may be very different to what actually takes place. It's also odd how you quote the British media when it suits, and yet say they are not be believed when it doesn't.

Just let it rest.

[memphisto]

Just to clarify the math. If the No vote for over 65s was removed it would have been a majority for Yes, it was not including removing the entire Yes vote of that age group as well. This is the statistic I was referencing. I believe your conversation with Daylon was referring to the removal of the entire age group from the calculations.

As for the 200 people going to cause trouble , it was far more than that. And it went from 6pm until well into the early hours of the morning. It was organised by Britain First, a registered campaigner in the Referendum, and unsurprisingly also a good number of extremist Rangers fans. Not naive by any means. And a number of other riots have had a lot of prime time exposure, thats the supposed job of the BBC, to report the news.

As for why I mentioned 6 months, Labours plans unveiled here and the quote below
https://archive.today/h7NqI
"This would be followed in autumn 2015 with a constitutional convention to determine the UK-wide implications of devolution and to bring these recommendations together."

Now if im not mistaken, autumn 2015 comes a little after May does it not and thats just when they will be debating it. Thats 6 months and more.

Also to clarify that I did not say all age groups below 55 voted for a majority, I said almost all age groups.