JIm SIllars : Indy ref failure analysis

[rob murray]

SOme interesting facts to be revealed in Jim Sillars new book which examines the referendum, currency issue was all over the sundays yesterday, ie according to Sillars it was the decision not to outline a plan b ie what an indy scotland would use as currency and the failure of Alec Salmond to recognise the need for a clear plan b on this which existed and was supported by the majority involved in the yes campaign. Salmond thought that announcing this PLan B so late in the day would show splits in the yes campaign, so he called it wrong. SIllars is quite correct in his analysis, uncertainty over currency was perhaps the single issue which de railed the yes campaign that and a lack of clarity over EU where again a plan b existed. Sillars is claiming that another indy ref cannot be taken seriously until an honest examination of the last failure is undertaken, that the yes campaign learns from mistakes and presents plan b's on key strateguc issues to the electorate. In other words he wants us to be given the facts, solutions and options rather than Salmons approach...."believe me it will be alright on the night ". AT last some grown up thinking, a book I look forward to and will certainly get and read with an open mind.

[Shabbychic]

Yes, for once I agree with you. Sound like a very interesting book. Here is more of what it is about. Appears to be much more to it than just plan B.

Strange how all the unionist media (usual suspects) concentrate on only one part of the book? Still think there is no media bias?

[rob murray]

Yes, for once I agree with you. Sound like a very interesting book. Here is more of what it is about. Appears to be much more to it than just plan B.

Strange how all the unionist media (usual suspects) concentrate on only one part of the book? Still think there is no media bias?

I found an early post you made, an analysis of the vote, very highlighting, you said yourself that failure to address some key issues created uncertainty, I agreed with you, when it all comes down to it Salmond took the wrong strategic decisions ie not announcing plan b's on currency and EU but sticking to his script, which lets face it was ropey and relied to much on the believe me or believe these project fear merchants.....now thats wrong ie polarising the debate into 2 camps without addressing the big questions ( or avoiding them / posturing etc ) ..... Salmond gambled and lost, wiser heads counselled addressing the big issues, issues which were of concern to people and the need for announcing plan b's. The media, is biased and always will be, but Salmond left himself wide open by his tactics and mannerism ( all bluster he is a marmite politician ! ) I hope Sillars book will make people think ie both yes / no voters, as he is not ducking the big issues and what plan b's are in place, mores the pity SIllars wasnt fronting the campaign as his more measured approach plus plan b outlines may have calmed people down and yes may well have won. Yes people need to take Sillars analysis on the chin and learn why they lost, which means an admission that they got things wrong, which obviously they did....No voters may well be swayed if the SNP as a party adopted plan b's and articulated them, moving from what is a polarised position into a more honest and open one. As Dale Carnegie's famous book goes : How to win friends and influence people.

Im approaching this situation / SIllars book with an open mind.

[Shabbychic]

I will totally read this book with an open mind, and accept any failings found, and I'm sure there are plenty. I have no problem with that. Where I do have a problem however, is the fact that all the mainstream media are focusing on is ONE issue....plan B, when there is so much more to the story. Surely you must see this?

This is always the way and why I get so angry at times when you and others rush to post all the anti-SNP media rubbish. They never show both sides, or other sides to the argument. No matter what the story is, the writer always picks out a negative point and runs with it, and ignores other aspects of the story, just as has been done with Jim's book. I have also found that any positive stories, that can't be twisted, are just ignored.

Look at this politics section for example. Anyone new will take one look and see it is overrun with SNP haters. It is as if no other political issues are going on in the UK. Almost every thread is about SNP doing this and SNP doing that......actually I laugh quite a lot at the antics and titles, and find I can't take much of it seriously.

All I ask is for the haters on here to look at the whole picture, and not just the unionist media's slant on it. They might even be surprised!

[theone]

Maybe the separatists main failure was not realising that the majority of Scots did not want to leave the UK.

I'd be really interested to know how many people actually changed their minds through the whole campaign.

[davth]

The referendum was not a failure.
It was a glorious waste of our money and time, but definitely not a failure

[Shabbychic]

Maybe the separatists main failure was not realising that the majority of Scots did not want to leave the UK.

I'd be really interested to know how many people actually changed their minds through the whole campaign.

Knowing full well that those who voted for independence object to being called "separatists" why do you persist on using that term? Where on this list is separatist mentioned? We want Independence just like all the other countries mentioned. You, I believe are deliberately attempting to provoke. I am fed up listening to how nasty the nationalists are........you and your buddies should start by looking in the mirror.

If you are so interested in the referendum, why don't you read Jim's book, instead of spouting your sanctimonious drivel!

[rob murray]

I will totally read this book with an open mind, and accept any failings found, and I'm sure there are plenty. I have no problem with that. Where I do have a problem however, is the fact that all the mainstream media are focusing on is ONE issue....plan B, when there is so much more to the story. Surely you must see this?

This is always the way and why I get so angry at times when you and others rush to post all the anti-SNP media rubbish. They never show both sides, or other sides to the argument. No matter what the story is, the writer always picks out a negative point and runs with it, and ignores other aspects of the story, just as has been done with Jim's book. I have also found that any positive stories, that can't be twisted, are just ignored.

Look at this politics section for example. Anyone new will take one look and see it is overrun with SNP haters. It is as if no other political issues are going on in the UK. Almost every thread is about SNP doing this and SNP doing that......actually I laugh quite a lot at the antics and titles, and find I can't take much of it seriously.

All I ask is for the haters on here to look at the whole picture, and not just the unionist media's slant on it. They might even be surprised!

Yes I do but that the whole point Salmond blustered his way through the campaign and didnt offer alternatives ie what if we couldnt use the pound, the EU what would happen in the period prior to becomming accepted ( this take a lot more time than he inferred ) there were and are alternative routes to progress he choose not to do so as politicaly he thought he had the momentum and didnt want to introduce oplan b alternatives as it could be spun out as splits n the campaign. The SNP are in government and people are entitled to question "their" government and ms sturgeon has now held her hands up on several serious issues which need addressed, thats from her mouth and not the media which I agree can be severely biased. But pro yes sites like wings over scotland are equally as biased. Just because you criticise the government doent make you an SNP hater, similarly just becuase you are a no voter shouldnt tarnish you, ie I see Sillars book as a vital attempt at reconciliation and introducing a long needed adult grown up perspective into this debate. Of courses I have long known that there is no love lost between Salmond and Sillars so fully expect some die hard yessers to dismiss SIllars perspectives, interestingly Partick Harvie of the Greens is in favour and generally agrees with SIllars, ie why did the yes campaign lose....theres more to it than simply media bias / the vow etc.....could it be that Salmond gambled and played it all out wrongly, currency and EU .......there were and are creditible alternatives ?

[cptdodger]

Knowing full well that those who voted for independence object to being called "separatists" why do you persist on using that term? Where on this list is separatist mentioned? We want Independence just like all the other countries mentioned. You, I believe are deliberately attempting to provoke. I am fed up listening to how nasty the nationalists are........you and your buddies should start by looking in the mirror.

If you are so interested in the referendum, why don't you read Jim's book, instead of spouting your sanctimonious drivel!

Are you not doing exactly the same, calling us Nationalists ?

I went a bit wrong there, I'm not a Nationalist at all, see below !!

[rob murray]

Are you not doing exactly the same, calling us Nationalists ?

Its the term "unionist" that gets me.....people who use this know fully well fine what is being inferred, lets leave it at that. Independance does mean seperation, an independant scotland sepereted from the UK has to mean seperation, and I dont see "seperation" / "seperationists" as an insulting word.

[Shabbychic]

I am not arguing with you on these points. All I ask is for everyone to have an open mind and stop name calling and dredging up nonsense articles.....or worse, believing it all without question, because it's what they want to hear.

I believe most "unionists" call themselves that.

[cptdodger]

Its the term "unionist" that gets me.....people who use this know fully well fine what is being inferred, lets leave it at that. Independance does mean seperation, an independant scotland sepereted from the UK has to mean seperation, and I dont see "seperation" / "seperationists" as an insulting word.

Just call me British then, I'm happy with that !!

[rob murray]

I am not arguing with you on these points. All I ask is for everyone to have an open mind and stop name calling and dredging up nonsense articles.....or worse, believing it all without question, because it's what they want to hear.

Totally agree with you, lets be adult about the situation, surely SIllars book and revelations will calm things down and we can get serious debate going....but everyone has the right to criticise a governments performance especially when they dont deliver, to once again make a point sturgeons recent admissions on SNP goverment failings......a good starter for 10 now we watch what is being done to sort things.

[rob murray]

Just call me British then, I'm happy with that !!

SO am, I I am like all Scots, British until the situation changes then if scotland is indepedant I will be a scot not a Brit.

[Shabbychic]

Are you not doing exactly the same, calling us Nationalists ?

I used the term Nationalist as that or Nats is usually how we are referred to.

[cptdodger]

I used the term Nationalist as that or Nats is usually how we are referred to.

To be fair I never refer to anybody as anything, that is Nationalist or whatever the people that voted Yes are commonly referred to. I am just somebody that voted no in the referendum.

[davth]

I use a word that rhymes with Nats to describe the Separatists.

[cptdodger]

And this is the reason I never refer to anybody by either Nationalist or whatever, I get confused with all the terms !! I believe I would be whatever you call somebody that doesn't want Independence !

[BetterTogether]

I'm not sure if any of you have been watching the Alistair Carmichael Trial today but it makes for a rather unedifying debacle when one could also use the same premise to launch an equally spurious legal action on Alex Salmond and his assertion that he had sought advice on membership to enter the EU, then proceeded to waste nearly £20,000 trying to suppress the fact no such advice had been undertaken by using taxpayers money.

I think Shabbychic should go and use social media a bit more and find some of the rather choice language used to describe No voters quite commonly used is the term Britnat although that is probably one of the least offensive.

It's also worth noting by those who voted for the SNP that whilst they can rejoice at having 56 out of 59 seats it also makes it rather difficult to question any other party in Scotland Political system when they effectively run the whole show.

Until such time as other parties win a suitable amount of seats or another party wins at Holyrood any criticism has to be laid quite squarely at the door of the SNP the constant arguing over constitional issue at the expense of the day to day running of this country may well keep some duly occupied but for the rest of us who didn't vote for them it provides a situation where SNP voters can no longer claim their voice isn't being heard but they it also holds them to account for their choices in political party.

There is no shortage of information about the failures of the SNP but I've yet to meet one person who will roundly accept those failings put their hands up and admit that the SNP are making mistakes and not doing an overly impressive job considering they've had 8 years in power.

[theone]

Knowing full well that those who voted for independence object to being called "separatists" why do you persist on using that term? Where on this list is separatist mentioned? We want Independence just like all the other countries mentioned. You, I believe are deliberately attempting to provoke. I am fed up listening to how nasty the nationalists are........you and your buddies should start by looking in the mirror.

If you are so interested in the referendum, why don't you read Jim's book, instead of spouting your sanctimonious drivel!

If you don't like the term separatist, stop trying to separate the UK. No provocation intended, that is what independence seekers are.

You can be as sick as you like about hearing how nasty nationalists are. But that isn't coming from me. Re-read my post and think again.

I am/was very interested in the referendum. I may well read the book but Jim's opinion is just another amongst hundreds.

He may well think plan 'b' was the snp failure. Or currency. Or anything else. Many nationalists claim it was 'the pledge'.

As per my previous post, I don't think was any of these. I think the vast majority of people decided long ago which way they were voting and not enough changed their minds for a yes vote.

If you think that's 'sanctimonious drivel' then so be it, but I would suggest it is yourself who is 'nasty' and needs to 'look in the mirror'.