ORIGINAL: warspite1
I'm not sure when will know the result or even when we'll get a real idea of what is going on, but I suspect I'll stay up for it if there is any sort of program. Its too momentous - I probably won't sleep anyway....
according to the lady with a lovely Highland accent (who is in charge of administering the vote) on the Today programme, she reckons it'll be known by 07.00 (UK time). It was so funny when she bridled at John Humphrey's suggestion that there could be any hiccups (as she patiently explained plans to use boats, small planes, helicopters and god knows what to bring the votes in from the more remote areas).
The problem is that Dundee, Edinburgh and Glasgow will declare last (in that order), all things being equal. Given that Glasgow has roughly 20% of the population it will mean nothing is sure to right to the end. An opinion poll in our local evening paper (admittedly a few weeks back) indicated the city would vote yes by about 45-39 (the rest declaring as unknown), if so and given that Edinburgh will vote No, its not going to be clear till the end (unless everyone is utterly wrong about the rough 50/50 split).
ORIGINAL: PipFromSlitherine
The fact the (potentially) a single person could decide whether half of Scotland are stripped of the citizenship they want to keep doesn't sit well with me either. I think that the key 'realism' that the Yes are losing sight of is that once there is a Yes vote all the leverage is gone. I don't believe that enough Yes understand the anger that the rest of Britain has that a tiny % get to break up our nation. There are far better ways of fixing broken politics than taking your ball and going home (something of a childish metaphor, but it seems most apt). Want a fairer society? Use the taxing powers that already exists (and the broader ones already set to come online in 2016) to build it. Show the rest of the UK a better way - it's not like there aren't a lot of people who feel the same way.
Cheers
Pip
I realise this is no comfort to those who agree with you, but this really is David Cameron's fault.
Yes, the SNP manifesto had a commitment to a referendum. But remember our electoral system is designed to ensure no party has a majority (votes on the second 'list' system are weighted inversely to success on the first past the post vote), so while they expected to be the largest party, they didn't expect a clear majority.
The current SNP leadership are gradualists. They had a strategy of establishing the SNP as the natural party of the Scottish Parliament over 2-3 terms, then raise the issue of independence. Some suspect that left to himself, for Salmond and a few others, more devolution would have been fine. It was Cameron who had the brain wave of forcing a vote (to, in his fantasy, kill off independence before the SNP built the consensus they wanted). It was also Cameron (the same cunning plan) who ensured no 'devo-max' was on the ballot paper. In effect, left to themselves the SNP would have grumbled about independence but not pushed the issue.
I don't wish the Union to cease as I agree that our collective presence is better.
