[Falling Down]

Salmond has resigned.

It was inevitable but I  didn't think it would come that quick but in many ways that's admirable.  He's spent much of his adult life campaigning for an independent Scotland. He must be terribly disappointed, drained and reflective. 

He should've said "Double dare ya" to Cameron in his resignation, after all, he's got to go too.

[Pantontino]

He did leave this for Cameron:

"I spoke to the prime minister today and, although he reiterated his intention to proceed as he has outlined, he would not commit to a second reading vote by 27th March on a Scotland bill. That was a clear promise laid out by Gordon Brown during the campaign. The prime minister says such a vote would be meaningless. I suspect he cannot guarantee the support of his party."

[Falling Down]

Rocksteady, that was a good bit of writing, especially the party politics paragraph.  Across Europe we're seeing enormous frustration and anger with mainstream politics and the political system.  Initially manifesting as apathy and resentment then turning to protest vote and the rise of "insurgent" parties like UKIP, Beppe Grillo's movement in Italy, The Sweden Democrats and dare I say it, le Front National in France... The SNP has a much longer history but a lot of the Yes vote was mobilised by anger and frustration with Westminster.

There's a real anti-politics mood across the entire population who feel that the parties are acting in their own interests... Next years general election is going to be very interesting.

[Falling Down]

He did leave this for Cameron:

I suspect he cannot guarantee the support of his party."

He's dead right.  The man's dead in the water.

[tim palmer]

He did leave this for Cameron:

"I spoke to the prime minister today and, although he reiterated his intention to proceed as he has outlined, he would not commit to a second reading vote by 27th March on a Scotland bill. That was a clear promise laid out by Gordon Brown during the campaign. The prime minister says such a vote would be meaningless. I suspect he cannot guarantee the support of his party."

I am assuming this refers to the seconding reading of the "devomax" bill?

[a dense loner]

I don't really see how the GE is going to be very interesting. We have a choice of 2 maybe 3 parties that are going to get in. Nothing very much will change apart from people's rhetoric as usual. So what if people don't trust politicians? You've still got to vote one or the other in

[Jaspersharpe]

So FD the big question is, will Boris be zip lined into a safe seat and then the leadership before the next election?

Cameron v Miliband is the battle of who could care less as far as a lot people are concerned, and one which Miliband could win by default.

Johnson v Miliband would be very different.

[Pantontino]

I don't really see how the GE is going to be very interesting. We have a choice of 2 maybe 3 parties that are going to get in. Nothing very much will change apart from people's rhetoric as usual. So what if people don't trust politicians? You've still got to vote one or the other in

FD is right, the GE is wide open. Old voting patterns are eroding fast, disillusion with westminster is rife and coalition govt is almost a certainty. Therefore the smaller parties, despite the first past the post stopper, have a chance of getting into power shares.

[Pantontino]

So FD the big question is, will Boris be zip lined into a safe seat and then the leadership before the next election?

Cameron v Miliband is the battle of who could care less as far as a lot people are concerned, and one which Miliband could win by default.

Johnson v Miliband would be very different.

This is probably true, but would they be that ruthless? Cameron must be bricking it.

[abarro81]

Rocksteady - surely the problem with that approach is that often some kf the most important things which a government will do is not in preestablished policies but responding to unforseen events -wars, banking crises, etc. If you vote for someone who has similar core beliefs to you then you're hoping that they'll respond to those scenarios in a way you would approve of...

[lagerstarfish]

time for me to make my move to become Dictator of All South Yorkshire and Emperor of Abyssinia

I knew you were destined for this when you marched up and down the terrace range at Bolsover Castle with your helmet on and chest out saying "The M1 at this distance sounds like the roar of an adoring crowd. I shall address them"
I for one pledge my life to you Duce

I have had an extra eleven and a half years of belting out rousing speeches to moving cars and trucks since then.

I'm getting some uniforms made up by Hugo Boss over the weekend

[Sloper]

Its starting to look as though the consequences of the No might be almost as interesting and important as those that would have come from a Yes.

Absolutely, what wil be interesting as the Labour shadow justice spokesman on TWAO was already rowing back from the commitments made at the end of the campaign, perhaps they're finally waking up to the likely answer to the West Lothain question will have massive consequences for Labour.

[Sloper]

I'm deeply disappointed that the fear enslaught from the establishment won the day, but... on the positive side, the turn out was incredible and the sense of political engagement remarkable.

But what happens next?

Will those last minute promises made by the No campaign be kicked into the long grass - Hague was already back peddling on radio 4 this morning and a Tory rebellion is waiting in the wings.

I didn't hear that i/v but as for a Tory rebellion, I rather think the opposite is on the cards with the party unifying to pass legislation that will mean that on purely English matters Scottish members will have no vote.

Miliband is also rowing back from the pledges made int he election, the result could be a massive swing from Labour to SNP.

There's no appetite for a rebellion in the Conservative party as doing so now woulds live UKIP a boost that could actually see them win a seat.

[Sloper]

Salmond has resigned.

It was inevitable but I  didn't think it would come that quick but in many ways that's admirable.  He's spent much of his adult life campaigning for an independent Scotland. He must be terribly disappointed, drained and reflective. 

He should've said "Double dare ya" to Cameron in his resignation, after all, he's got to go too.

While I regard Cameron as weak and ineffective, I can't see that he's got to go, if we goes it's a snap election and from a Tory perspective another 6 months of solid growth, inflation under control and unemployment falling is what's needed not a bitter election campaign which takes the spot light of Miliband and Balls.

[Oldmanmatt]

This is Arse.

Large buckets of Arse.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/alanwhite/police-called-to-george-square-in-glasgow-following-confront#2jaaay3

[Fultonius]

This is Arse.

Large buckets of Arse.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/alanwhite/police-called-to-george-square-in-glasgow-following-confront#2jaaay3

When people start singing rule Britannia in Glasgow it's no longer about politics. At moments like this a small minority of Scotland embarrasses me.

[rodma]

Accht. These folk passionately believe in something fultonius, we can only hope they don't breed too successfully and will slowly dwindle away. No-one really attributes those people to Glasgow let alone Scotland let alone humanity.

Maybe that's too harsh.

[SA Chris]

fucking stupid to do something like that, inviting trouble

[Jaspersharpe]

Accht. These folk passionately believe in something fultonius, we can only hope they don't breed too successfully and will slowly dwindle away. No-one really attributes those people to Glasgow let alone Scotland let alone humanity.

Maybe that's too harsh.

True. It's just the same pricks who use Rangers/Celtic as an excuse to be cunts. Not surprising, just sad.

[Pantontino]

Why? Are the scots somehow better than the rest of us?

Never said they were, just that they wouldn't be saddled with the neoliberal policies of a govt beholden to the ultra rich 1% in London.

Isn't this a bit of a short term view? The union is 300 years old after all, and scottish voting habits have changed massively over that time, and not always in one direction. After all, 100 years ago the parties themselves were essentially all different.

Far better to fix this with more political engagement, than tearing up the union. For example, I'm a bit sad there wasn't 80% turnout in the AV referendum, which could have addressed many of the same issues.

I have read theories that the neoliberal train will crash soon - in history you can see similar patterns where the ultra rich 1% get richer and richer until eventually the house of cards collapses (as happened around the first world war, then the stock market crash in 1929) but how much that was inevitable and how much was external factors is hard to say. It could be that the train doesn't crash and that the rich keep on getting richer and that only the onset of serious climate change will be the tipping point. With no certain answers I don't blame the yes voters in Scotland for wanting to get off the train.

(And yes of course AV would have been a very positive change for British politics - but guess what, the establishment and its media friends made sure that didn't happen, just like they did in the indyref.)

[Pantontino]

Some background reading on the West Lothian question:

http://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/sep/19/west-lothian-question-english-votes-laws

And an interview with Tam Dalyell:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YO8ZEJ5Kh0&feature=youtu.be

[Johnny Brown]

I'm not sure what makes you think the neoliberal train is solely in Westminster. Scotland has the most concentrated pattern of landownership with some crafters effectively in feudalism. Despite this the SNP's appetite for land reform seems limited.

[Pantontino]

I'm not sure what makes you think the neoliberal train is solely in Westminster. Scotland has the most concentrated pattern of landownership with some crafters effectively in feudalism. Despite this the SNP's appetite for land reform seems limited.

I'm well aware of the land ownership situation in Scotland; if you recall I did post a link to that infamous Tatler article a few pages back:

http://www.tatler.com/news/articles/september-2014/the-future-of-scotland

Those big landowners seem pretty fearful of independence - they know that sooner or later the focus would have shifted on to them. The SNP may not have made much noise about this so far but Sturgeon (the new leader in waiting) is more left wing than Salmond and even if she didn't push in that direction then I reckon within an election or two the SNP would probably have been sidelined by somebody who would.

[Johnny Brown]

You'd like to think so, yeah. But given that a move in that direction was not being offered it's not surprising folk didn't vote for it. As it is you had Salmond with his unparalleled track record for bending Scotland's natural heritage over to be bummed by the rich.

[petejh]

Vast tracts of the whole of the UK's natural heritage was 'bent over and bummed by the rich' hundreds of years ago and the legacy endures. Take the aristocracy. (Please... for one night only...).