I said long before the vote that polls would all exaggerate the No vote by at least several points. Sorry, but the disparity between the polls and the vote is not the slightest bit surprising.
In matters like these people are more willing to SAY “let’s change everything” than they are to actually change everything.
And those dirty Arab b*stards have never let us forget it!
Note to the easily offended: Arab in this instance does not mean Arab people.
Sorry, that’s transparent bullshit. Of the polls I linked one of the six, from 2012 after the Edinburgh Agreement, showed 58%. The others are 53, 54, 55, 53 and 50%. Since the only poll that counts, the actual referendum, came in at 55% “no” I think it’s fair to say the results match up with polling from two years ago.
You are innumerate.
The year after the Edinburgh Agreement YES ranged from 25-37% with one severely outlying 44% and NO ranged from 44-59%. After the second debate until the cancellation of PMQs the range was 38-45% YES and 39-50% NO. The final result after the last week panic was 45/55%.
I would say unlike elections in which parties and candidates are elected, in this case where the literal future of the country is being decided, many will at the last moment vote “No”, because of cold feet. This is one factor why the gap was 10 points. I do also think the media sometimes is wrong in saying it is a dead heat, but when it actually came to vote, some Scots got cold feet.
On a side note, this part of the BBC article on the world’s reaction on Scottish Vote Results, cracks me up:
Demands for a referendum persist in Kashmir, but the chances of it happening are remote
India’s foreign minister didn’t know Scotland was considering divorce, until an aide whispered in her ear. A more pressing concern for some Indians was what it meant for the price of Scotch.
Sure, just keep barfing up numbers off the top of your head. Really shows how numerate you are.
Carnalk and Pjen, both of you back off on the personal remarks.
[ /Moderating ]
Those ranges are sourced from the Wikipedia page you provided as a cite.
My claim from above with annotations:
The year after the Edinburgh Agreement YES ranged from 25-37% (A) with one severely outlying 44% and NO ranged from 44-59%(B). After the second debate until the cancellation of PMQs the range was 38-45% YES (C) and 39-50% NO (D). The final result after the last week panic was 45/55%.
These are the figures copied directly from the cite
Source for A and B
27% 41% 33% 14%
6–9 Dec YouGov/The Times 1,074 36% 55% 10% 19%
29 Nov–5 Dec Ipsos MORI/STV News 1,006 34% 57% 10% 23%
26 Nov Release of Scotland’s Future
20–27 Nov TNS BMRB 1,004 26% 42% 32% 16%
12–20 Nov Panelbase/Sunday Times 1,006 38% 47% 15% 9%
23–30 Oct TNS BMRB 1,010 25% 43% 32% 18%
17–24 Oct Panelbase/Wings Over Scotland 1,008 37% 45% 17% 8%
25 Sep–2 Oct TNS BMRB 1,004 25% 44% 31% 19%
13–16 Sep YouGov/The Times 1,139 32% 52% 13% 20%
9–15 Sep Ipsos MORI/STV News 1,000 31% 59% 9% 28%
10–13 Sep ICM/Scotland on Sunday 1,002 32% 49% 19% 17%
30 Aug–5 Sep Panelbase/Sunday Times 1,002 37% 47% 16% 10%
23–28 Aug Panelbase/Scottish National Party 1,043 44% 43% 13% 1%
21–27 Aug TNS BMRB 1,017 25% 47% 28% 22%
19–22 Aug YouGov/Devo Plus 1,171 29% 59% 10% 30%
16 Aug Angus Reid/Daily Express 549 34% 47% 19% 13%
17–24 July Panelbase/Sunday Times 1,001 37% 46% 17% 9%
10–16 May Panelbase/Sunday Times 1,004 36% 44% 20% 8%
29 Apr–5 May Ipsos MORI/The Times 1,001 28% 57% 15% 29%
20 Mar–2 Apr TNS BMRB 1,002 30% 51% 19% 21%
18–22 Mar Panelbase/Sunday Times 885 36% 46% 18% 10%
20–28 Feb TNS BMRB/Scottish CND 1,001 33% 52% 15% 19%
4–9 Feb Ipsos MORI/The Times 1,003 32% 52% 16% 20%
30 Jan–1 Feb Angus Reid 1,003 32% 47% 20% 15%
11–21 Jan Panelbase/Sunday Times 1,004 34% 47% 19% 13%
3–9 Jan TNS BMRB 1,012 28% 48% 24% 20%
3–4 Jan Angus Reid 573 32% 50% 16% 18%
2012[edit]
22–24 Oct YouGov/DC Thomson 1,004 29% 55% 14% 26%
9–19 Oct Panelbase/Sunday Times 972 37% 45% 17% 8%
Source for C and D
15–16 Sep Ipsos MORI/STV 1,373 47% 49% 5% 2%
12–16 Sep ICM/The Scotsman 1,175 41% 45% 14% 4%
12–16 Sep Survation/Daily Mail 1,000 44% 48% 8% 4%
12–15 Sep Opinium/Telegraph 1,156 43% 47% 8% 4%
10–12 Sep Survation/Better Together 1,044 42% 49% 9% 7%
9–12 Sep Panelbase/Sunday Times 1,014 46% 47% 7% 1%
We may be headed for a referendum after all.
Salmond has said in interview today that if the Vow is reneged upon, UDI is a possibility. He also points out that the UK trying to disengage from Europe to the detriment of Scotland would also be reason to separate. Additionally Sillars is on record as suggesting that should there be a nationalist majority in the Scottish parliament in 2016, that too could leas to further separation moves.
Scots aren’t stupid enough to start a civil war, even if Salmond is.
No, what he points out is that Alex Salmond believes that is a reason to separate. All indications are that Scots have no interest in holding referendums over and over or anyone pushing a UDI. And well they should not; the former is idiocy, and the latter is treason.
Alex Salmond is a separatist. Scottish independence is his political raison d’etre, and so to him, everything is a reason to separate. Domestic policy, foreign policy, everything Westminster does, Salmond will spin as “Scotland should leave.” There is absolutely nothing Westminster can give Scotland as part of the United Kingdom that will satisfy Salmond, ever. Devo max isn’t enough. Devo Super DoublePlusMax wouldn’t be enough. Only full independence will do. The fact that the separatists just held a referendum and lost simply means he needs to find a new provocation, excuse, or reason to demand separation again and keep the fires stoked until another referendum can be justified.
It was always inevitable Alex Salmond would find a way to eventually reject the result of the referendum. Doesn’t matter what the facts are; he plan, all along, was to initially accept it and then begin to dismiss it. If he were to accept that Scottish voters have truly decided to remain part of the UK, he has no career.
So in other words, they are going for the Quebec model: If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again until the electorate is sick enough to vote for succession and in the meantime short circuit any actual policy debate during elections.
The spell checker over corrected neverendum in my original post.
I did predict during the campaign that a substantial YES vote would probably lead to another bite at the cherry within the decade.
Mr. Salmond’s post-referendum wit and wisdom is more accurately on display in this video 
That’s about as cool as posting a clip from Monty Python’s Upper Class Twit of the Year when criticising Cameron, Gromit when criticising Miliband or a film of Hitler when criticising Merkel.
What is your opinion on this?
Would you be okay if the SNP declared independence solely on the basis of winning an election? I believe that this is the most dangerous scenario because if you turn every election into a referendum on sovereignty and reduces the accountability of politicians as the Yes/No parties become policy echo chambers and no one from the outside is able to give them feedback to the effect that their policies are bad.
Also, who gets to decide if not enough has been done and another referendum is warranted? The same politicians who have made sovereignty their career?
What do you think that the minimum time between referendums should be?
I am not keen on a neverendum but it is very difficult to deny that the demographics suggest that a YES vote is at least possible as the older generation dies off. It is difficult to argue that should there be a future majority for separation that it should be resisted by the rUK or by others. There are quite a few commentaries today suggesting that a future separation is likely no matter what happens now.
Oh come on, the guy is clearly coming apart at the seams (“UDI” next, are you kidding me?) Looks like the Scots dodged a bullet by avoiding him as their leader. I wonder if the Monster Raving Loony Party has a Scottish office though.
I would say that it would be difficult to oppose a majority nationalist government elected with a manifesto call for a referendum winning that vote and then presenting the result as a fait accompli. The UK is hardly going to send in the tanks to quell democracy.