To be clear, of course bookies set their initial odds based on an estimate of the actual likelihood of whatever the occurrence is. Typically, in an event with two possible outcomes, they will simply estimate the “fair” odds of it occurring and then set their odds either side of that so they have a margin. The point being made upthread was that the odds in question were those after many weeks or months of bets had been placed, so they were bound to be skewed depending on how many bets on each had in fact been placed. Therefore they had little value (or at least, couldn’t necessarily be relied upon) as a predictive tool on the likely outcome of the election.
Yeah, the issue can certainly come up again. And the English government made a lot of promises and concessions to get that “No” vote. My prediction is, the English will Welsh on their promises, and Scotland will vote “Yes” on becoming an independent country in a subsequent election.
What English government? You do know that Westminster has been devolving more and more power to the Scottish Parliament for 20 years, right?
Stupid/ignorant question: How often can these votes be brought up? For that matter, same question in regards to Quebec.
As often as the Scottish and UK Parliaments authorize them. There was no constitutional precedent so a treaty of sorts was required.
Yes, but if they have only a meaningless remnant of power, they certainly seemed VERY reluctant to hand over what little was left, didn’t they?
55% will be breaking out their celebration haggis.
45% will be breaking out their ‘this sucks’ haggis.
haggis for all.
The Scotland situation is remarkably similar in a lot of ways to Quebec. It doesn’t have the same issues and language barrier, obviously, but the way the process works is eerily the same.
In the case of Quebec, it’s worth noting separatists have held power in Quebec’s legislature for roughly half of the last 40 years but have, of course, only held two referenda, and not since 1995. The reason is simple; they have rarely had a chance to win and there’s no point holding a referendum you are sure to lose. The PArti Quebecois spends a lot of their election campaigns saying they WON’T hold a referendum; when a prominent member of the party said the ywould in the last election, they collapsed and lost the election. To just keep holding the vote over and over would not help the cause, it would harm it; the voters would become so sick of the issue they’d stop electing politicians who raised it.
Alex Salmond is something of a snake oil salesman but he got people to take this issue seriously, and debate it seriously, and treat it as an issue worthy of consideration. But what happens if he tried to hold another vote next year? And the year after? Everyone will start thinking he’s a clown. He’d be out of office in no time.
Who said they had “a meaningless amount of power”? If anything, Scotland has too much power (given its dual representation). The point is that Westminster has been keeping its promises to the Scottish people.
Taken from an article on Yahoo (emphasis mine).
The Scottish electorate’s rejection of independence was greeted with delight by Prime Minister David Cameron, who said that the victory margin of around** 55%-45%** had settled the issue “for a generation… perhaps for a lifetime”.
Exactly what I predicted up thread, see post # 10.
Yeppers, you need help on setting odds for political issues feel free to give me a call.
Breaking news is that he’s standing down.
For what it is worth, I think it was the right decision. It is a very emotional decision to break away, but I believe in the long run(the next century, for example), it will prove to be the wiser move to stay in the UK.
The Onion on a major crisis averted by the Scottish vote to preserve the UK: Ugly Custody Battle Over Ian McKellen Narrowly Avoided
And HM has risen to the occasion: http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/queen-accepts-scotlands-apology
I think perhaps Borowitz does not know enough about the situation to understand that Liz was fully expected, by all concerned, to continue as queen of any independent Scotland. The whole thing made very little difference to the Royal Family and their status either way.
Eventually every country gets their 15 minutes of fame, and this was certainly Scotland’s. I bet tourism increases in the short term as people around the world actually look up Scotland and think “hey, that might be a cool place to visit!”
Alexander Salmond is on my Death Pool list this year. I did a themed list of people who were born on New Year’s Eve, like myself. Not only was Salmond born 12/31, he was born 12/31/54, just like me and twickster the mod.
Very strange reasoning.