PanzerGeneral wrote:...Re-the currency union, I personally would not have liked for it to happen, but with regards to strong arm tactics and blackmail-that is exactly what happened to ensure a no vote was successful.
There may have been some alarmist stories and utter garbage like Border guards, but the problem was that the SNP just did not provide enough solid answers to the questions that people were going to ask.
The currency was a no-brainer, and Salmond clearly did not think it through. Going from dumping Sterling, to insisting on a union that he would have had to fight for was never going to convince the undecided.
The SNP have had years to prepare for this, and the fact that they didn't plan for, and anticipate a rough road and instead relied on anti-Tory feeling and blind optimism tells you quite a lot about how things would have panned out.
The BT campaign has taken a lot of flack for it's tactics, but it was a reflection of the real fears and anxieties of the Scottish people. If the SNP were truly serious, they should have invested time in getting credible answers to those questions.
The fact of the matter is, the Yes campaign spent too much time having a "carnival" and being relentlessly positive, and they thought that would be enough. They didn't listen to, or respond well to the real anxieties of the people they needed to persuade. Instead they banged on about them just being scared. Damn right they were scared, why wouldn't they be? Even without the so called "Project Fear", the SNP had very few solid answers to the questions they had.
The SNP are the ones who you should be blaming, if you feel aggrieved. It was upto them to persuade people that what they wanted was desirable, achievable, and realistic.
However, come the next referendum I think things will be very different. Without real political change, this whole country is going to be in serious trouble.
I never disliked Mr Salmond, in fact I respect him, and admire his passion and his vision. I was interested in his idea that an independent Scotland could be a financial counterweight to London, and it definitely could. I know which end of the country I would prefer to be in. I think further devolution is just a waste of time, it can be rescinded at any time Westminster wishes. What the country needs is federalisation. Like Germany and the US, a strong union of nations/ regions, with inviolable rights and independent decision making powers, enshrined in a constitution. We would all be independent, but still be able to retain the advantages of a strong union.