To think that the new SNP leader just pledged to ignore the will of the majority of Scottish people?

[RudeBarbandCustard]

Forgive me if I'm being naive - I may well be.

But Nicola Sturgeon pledging to continue to fight for Scottish independence is essentially a pledge to fight against the majority of the Scottish people's democratically expressed wishes?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-30011423

I mean, it couldn't be clearer. The majority of Scottish people voted No. So she's essentially saying "Hey, majority of Scotland - I'm going to ignore what you voted for in a democratic process, and fight for the opposite!".

It smacks of arrogance, and a complete disregard for what people voted for!

I may be missing something though, but it's intriguing and bugging me so I'd be interested to hear what others think.

Because the status quo wasn't an option on the ballot paper, it was yes for independence or no for more powers

I'm pretty sure that's not true.

It wouldn't have been a brand new country!

Was that directed at me?

The SNP have no motivation to run Scotland the best they can, they have every motivation to run it as badly as possible and blame the lack of independence and that is what is wrong.

No one expects them to stop wanting Independence, no one expects them to stop thinking it would be for the best.

However, actively making decisions that do not benefit the people of Scotland, to (falsely) prove a point is disgraceful.

I said pre ref that we should have had a second paper. Yes/No on paper 1, various devo options including status quo and devo max on paper 2. Then we'd have a much better idea of opinion. Sadly nobody lets me run these things

"I'm pretty sure that's not true."

How isn't that true?

A vote for no was not a vote for nothing to change politically...it was supposed to be, but they changed that during the campaign and so by the time people were voting there was no option for...actually I'm happy with the amount of devolution there is now.

You are telling me people might be happy in their box. That's what I'm struggling with. Did people really just pop out to vote no and scuttle away again, or are there no voters out there as outraged with the state of our nation as yes voters (who have been more vocal in that outrage) and what are they doing about it?

Bringing rule closer to home was the answer to me. The first step in making changes. The majority didn't agree. Fine. But now what?

No it was me that said that.

I think I'm being naive again, but wouldnt it have been a brand new country in some senses?.

Left to govern itself for the first time, negotiate it's currency, its membership of the EU....

For the sake of clarity, the question on the ballot paper was "Should Scotland be an Independent Country" - yes or no.

Sorry, that was in response to Sirs question

Sir no, it was in reply to rudes comment about them (I'm assuming that means snp) not inspiring much confidence in running a new country.

Scotland is already a country. SNP are already running it.

PrimalLass I do a bit of work on the N5 and Higher material (not for the SQA) and it looks the same to me as it ever did.

It certainly doesn't to me. We didn't have NABs when I did Highers, and we had only 1 prelim, not 2. Having to sit and pass 5 exams in order to get to the actual exam, never mind the practice exams for each, much of which requires very short answers not formulated into proper sentences marked against an equally short and limited answer sheet, is hardly conducive to gaining a wide subject knowledge. Scotland does labour quite far down comparative league tables on educational attainment in both Maths and Science and Literature and the Arts, so this would seem to bear it out.

Perhaps you are right in that it has always been slightly mediocre; I don't remember it being quite so much of a race to the bottom when I was at school but there was certainly a discernable ethos amongst those in charge of delivery of knowing your place and not aiming too high.

tabulah

For the sake of clarity, the question on the ballot paper was "Should Scotland be an Independent Country" - yes or no

Thank you flippin - that's what I meant.

Because the status quo wasn't an option on the ballot paper, it was yes for independence or no for more powers

No, the ballot paper did not state 'yes for independence, no for more powers'. Although I agree with OOAOML there should have been more options.

The electorate were told without a shadow of a doubt to vote no for more powers.

It wasn't on the ballot paper.

The status quo absolutely was on the ballot paper - it's there in black and white. The promises the No campaign made in the campaign were dodgy, agreed, but they are most certainly not on the ballot paper.

And we were told that after voting had begun.

The content seems at the same level - that's what I meant. Sorry to be unclear. I don't know anything about the exam calendar - I'm a content editor.

Scotland is already a country. SNP are already running it.

OK, a brand new independent country as stated on the ballot paper.

Ah, got it now Rude

Rita - it really doesn't matter why people voted No. There were over 2 million people who voted that way - you can't possibly expect to understand why each person voted the way they did as there are simply far too many variables. Neither the Yes nor the No side were/are a homogenous mass. All that you really need to understand is that the SNP failed to persuade sufficient numbers of voters, despite having years/decades to do so, that Scotland would be better as an independent country.

Rather than looking to the 2 million No voters for an explanation, look to the one party that is responsible.

I'm aware of what the options on the ballot paper were...what I'm pointing out is that no couldn't possibly be a vote for the status quo as by the time people were voting a vote for no was a vote for extra powers.

If you actually wanted to vote for the status quo of staying with the powers and devolution that were already in place - there was no longer an option for that.

The electorate were told without a shadow of a doubt to vote no for more powers.

They must have missed me out!!

And we were told that after voting had begun

So presumably some people voted before those promises were made.

What are you on about? The status quo was no an option.

Independent Scotland. Yes or No.

Voting no did not mean everything would remain the same.

Voting No meant that we would remain part of Britain. That was a key consideration for many.

The 'Yes' voters simply wont listen to the fact that 'The Vow' changed very very few minds. It was a ridiculous thing to do (I think it was well intentioned, just badly thought out) because the NO vote would have won anyway and The Vow has just given the Yes voters something else to complain about, they wont accept that a significant majority voted NO and instead of looking into why the Yes campaign was a massive fail, they just want to blame the No voters for being 'too stupid' and the politicians for the Vow.

The Yes campaign was a massive fail simply because it had no legs. The ony reason it did as well as it did was because it fired so many people up, Yes & 'change' is sexy, No & 'remaining the same' is not. The vote and the campaigns should not have been allowed to use the terms Yes and No to lead.

It was also, massively - massively, stupid to enable this to go to poll only requiring one vote over 50% to change the way a country is governed. It's scary that it happened.

It was also, massively - massively, stupid to enable this to go to poll only requiring one vote over 50% to change the way a country is governed

Completely agree.