Dirty Tricks in the Scottish Campaign

[Dave2002]

All over Scotland the words "Yes" and "No" are springing up. There is a splendidly large orange "Yes" on the northern side of Kessock Bridge.

Presumably mostly the signs are legitimate, and have been put up on land belonging to owners with a particular viewpoint. This is their right.

There are some problem spots though. Dingwall, in the Highlands, has a long road where many of the lamp posts have a "Yes" affixed. Some of the posts also have "No", though these are typically smaller.

Surely this should be incorrect? I do not think either the Local Authority or the highways authorities should approve of this. If this were a regular election such advertising would be considered fly posting, and agents would be rushing around trying to get the signs removed in order to protect their candidates from penalties.

This may be happening in other parts of Scotland, but the approach to Dingwall is very obvious. There should be no signs, either "Yes" or "No" attached to public buildings or publicly owned street fueniture.

[Flosshilde]

It's perfectly normal practice in an election, even in England. Landowners (& householders) can put up what they like (more or less) & although election posters are covered by laws against flyposting they are so ubiquitous that I don't think anybody bothers to do anything about it.

Actually I'm surprised that you've seen many 'No' posters - I've seen one in an Edinburgh window & a few in some fields, but nothing else. If the referendum was won on the number of posters, 'Yes' would win by about 95%.

[Dave2002]

I don't think you read the last three paragraphs properly. Putting signs up on public land, public street furniture, or on public buildings is incorrect.

There are some problem spots though. Dingwall, in the Highlands, has a long road where many of the lamp posts have a "Yes" affixed. Some of the posts also have "No", though these are typically smaller.

Surely this should be incorrect? I do not think either the Local Authority or the highways authorities should approve of this. If this were a regular election such advertising would be considered fly posting, and agents would be rushing around trying to get the signs removed in order to protect their candidates from penalties.

This may be happening in other parts of Scotland, but the approach to Dingwall is very obvious. There should be no signs, either "Yes" or "No" attached to public buildings or publicly owned street fueniture.

Putting signs up on private property or land is, as you say, perfectly legitimate.

[MrGongGong]

I don't think you read the last three paragraphs properly. Putting signs up on public land, public street furniture, or on public buildings is incorrect.

Blimey
Do you really think that we need MORE rules

In the grand scheme of things it's hardly worth bothering about

[Dave2002]

Blimey
Do you really think that we need MORE rules

In the grand scheme of things it's hardly worth bothering about

The rules for elections are there already. I can't be absolutely sure that they also apply to referenda.

I most certainly do think that the issues relating to Scotland are worth bothering about, whichever way things go

[ahinton]

What I'd like to know is how close the referendum result has to be in order to determine that there must be a re-run - not to mention whether there'd be a limit to the number of re-runs in the event of too close a result...

[Dave2002]

What I'd like to know is how close the referendum result has to be in order to determine that there must be a re-run - not to mention whether there'd be a limit to the number of re-runs in the event of too close a result...

The impression I have is that one extra vote for "Yes" would cause Scotland to be released from the UK "for ever", while even several thousands extra in favour of "No" will invoke indefinitely repeated cries of "Let's have another go".

[Flosshilde]

The rules for elections are there already. I can't be absolutely sure that they also apply to referenda.

As I said. You clearly didn't read my first paragraph -

It's perfectly normal practice in an election, even in England. Landowners (& householders) can put up what they like (more or less) & although election posters are covered by laws against flyposting they are so ubiquitous that I don't think anybody bothers to do anything about it.

[MrGongGong]

The rules for elections are there already. I can't be absolutely sure that they also apply to referenda.

I most certainly do think that the issues relating to Scotland are worth bothering about, whichever way things go

I think the ISSUES are worth bothering about
but who sticks what posters where is not really an issue IMV

[P. G. Tipps]

The impression I have is that one extra vote for "Yes" would cause Scotland to be released from the UK "for ever", while even several thousands extra in favour of "No" will invoke indefinitely repeated cries of "Let's have another go".

There is a lot of truth in that.

If it is a 'No' and the polls are right about the likely percentage numbers the strange notion that the result will be 'final' and there will be no calls for further referenda in the future is fanciful, imv.

In my opinion the best result (and which polls in the recent past were pointing to) would be a 60/40 result for 'No'. That would be decisive enough to end the Nationalist/Unionist argument at least for the foreseeable future, and also ensure further devolution to Scotland as a compromise settlement, and in order to satisfy what a big majority of Scots actually want anyway!

Sadly, that looks more and more like a pipe-dream now.

[Dave2002]

As I said. You clearly didn't read my first paragraph -

I don't think so.

Although I can't comment on the situation round Edinburgh, I would agree that one would expect a Yes outcome based purely on the preponderance of signs around the country. Perhaps 80/20 - Yes/No based on signs. That does not mean that will be the outcome. I have no idea whether the signs influence people either way, but in what might, according to various polls, be a close call event, I think they will have an impact, even if simply to inject what would otherwise be considered as "noise" into what may turn out to be an important result for many of us.

[MrGongGong]

It's OK matey
apparently a woman is going to have a baby
which will make everyone in Scotland vote NO

[Dave2002]

It's OK matey
apparently a woman is going to have a baby
which will make everyone in Scotland vote NO

Ha ha ha!

[teamsaint]

george says YES......

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/09/yes-vote-in-scotland-most-dangerous-thing-of-all-hope

[Serial_Apologist]

george says YES......

http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...ng-of-all-hope

It's a great article in many ways, as usual with George Monbiot, but what it does not do is take account of the political relationship of forces inside Scotland being one in which it is the Scots Nats, namely the Tartan Tories, who hold the ideological hegemony on this issue, not, as he has to admit, the Scottish Labour Party. A Yes voter is asking for a pig in a poke.