The Referendum Thread

[saintnextlifetime]

I'm not an economist, just trying to understand. To sum up, Germany has been bailing out the entire Eurozone for the past 2 or 3 years? I can't believe the markets would buy that and not make themselves a fortune by some kind of run on the currency, it's the nature of the beast.

Staying with Sterling temporarily until the decision is made about the currency (whatever that future currency may be) is the eminently sensible and proven route to follow.

Britain has done a fair bit of bailing out as well. Our money went to rescue Greece and even more so in the case of the imminent collapse of Eire a couple of years ago. .

I still say that the Norwegian model is preferable to me . As far as leaving the EU is concerned , l don't think a member can leave , short of actually going to war , which is why Cameron has postponed the vote on EU membership and will probably continue to do so but in the short term it stops the English Tory party losing out to the UKIP vote ..

The whole Europe senario is an insideous thing over the last 40 years going from the EEC (which the country as a whole did vote on) to the EC and now the EU where some people (Ted Heath admitted he knew it was the plan) in this country contrived to hoodwink the public for personal gain. No one voted for the EU , politicians excluded . They recently got the Cypriot government's agreement to dip the bank accounts of everyone on the island . I'm trying not to be cynical but was that a test case. .

[Bart Simpson]

And in much the same way as...

... it's no one's interest every few years to waste so much energy, time and money to hold ineffectual referenda, simply in order to satisfy the whingings of a few Nationalists who blame everyone but themselves for their own inadequacies?

And every time those referenda show that most Scots are out of alignment with those who aspire to a so called separation.

You are quite right, oaksoft - once again it has come too soon. Once again it will be not in anyone's interest.

Such a waste.

Democracy in action indeed.

I completely disagree that it is not in anyone's interest. I think it is completely within everyone's interest to examine their point of view closely. For those who are politically inclined (an ever decreasing breed of person) the topic may take very little thought however to engage the ever increasing percentage of those disengaged by politics this referendum is of paramount importance.

Whilst this is a subject I am passionate about as I've said in my original post in this topic, I'm intrigued and respectful of those with alternative perspectives. Whilst I disagree with your point of view again I respect your right to voice it. To state the democratic process resulting from will of the Scottish electorate isn't in their interest though is slightly misrepresenting the facts.

Oaksoft was merely in that statement agreeing that it takes time for people to realise that the way things have been don't necessarily need to stay that way. For some though it takes small steps. Small steps that have taken a marginal party over the course of 30-40years from a protest vote to a governing majority government.

I agree that this vote may represent too much of a change for the majority, however there is a real appetite for increased autonomy that will only continue to grow as the populous realises that self determination is not to be feared nor that it represents separatism.

As has been pointed out, if there is a Tory majority government next term in Westminster there will likely be a referendum concerning the UK's EU membership. Should a less (in my opinion, I accept) euro-skeptic Scotland or for that matter Wales or NI lose their EU membership on the will of those voters who live in England?

In a strange way feel I have to reiterate that this is in no way an anti-English or xenophobic point. Simply a pro-Europe point.

I don't believe in separatist politics simply in self determination with a view to empowering a population to take responsibility for their own destiny.

[Stuart Dickson]

Britain has done a fair bit of bailing out as well. Our money went to rescue Greece and even more so in the case of the imminent collapse of Eire a couple of years ago. .

I still say that the Norwegian model is preferable to me . As far as leaving the EU is concerned , l don't think a member can leave , short of actually going to war , which is why Cameron has postponed the vote on EU membership and will probably continue to do so but in the short term it stops the English Tory party losing out to the UKIP vote ..

The whole Europe senario is an insideous thing over the last 40 years going from the EEC (which the country as a whole did vote on) to the EC and now the EU where some people (Ted Heath admitted he knew it was the plan) in this country contrived to hoodwink the public for personal gain. No one voted for the EU , politicians excluded . They recently got the Cypriot government's agreement to dip the bank accounts of everyone on the island . I'm trying not to be cynical but was that a test case. .

True - we did our share of bailing out. it works well for the UK. By borrowing money against our rather good credit rating at low interest rates, we were then able to pass that on to the Irish in return at a greater rate of interest with the UK profiting from the differential between the two.

[salmonbuddie]

 

True - we did our share of bailing out. it works well for the UK. By borrowing money against our rather good credit rating at low interest rates, we were then able to pass that on to the Irish in return at a greater rate of interest with the UK profiting from the differential between the two. 

Yet Ireland is still better off than the UK as I demonstrated earlier in this thread.

[zurich_allan]

Britain has done a fair bit of bailing out as well. Our money went to rescue Greece and even more so in the case of the imminent collapse of Eire a couple of years ago. .

I still say that the Norwegian model is preferable to me . As far as leaving the EU is concerned , l don't think a member can leave , short of actually going to war , which is why Cameron has postponed the vote on EU membership and will probably continue to do so but in the short term it stops the English Tory party losing out to the UKIP vote ..

The whole Europe senario is an insideous thing over the last 40 years going from the EEC (which the country as a whole did vote on) to the EC and now the EU where some people (Ted Heath admitted he knew it was the plan) in this country contrived to hoodwink the public for personal gain. No one voted for the EU , politicians excluded . They recently got the Cypriot government's agreement to dip the bank accounts of everyone on the island . I'm trying not to be cynical but was that a test case. .

A Member State can indeed leave the EU. This has always been possible, although there wasn't a formal mechanism for doing it until 2009. The formal provision for a Member to leave the Union is contained within the Treaty of Lisbon, and essentially calls for a separation agreement to be drawn up and agreed by both the deceding Member and the EU Parliament. Due to existing commitments (trade & political), leaving cannot be an instant thing, it would likely take a year or more to actually draft and have rubber stamped the separation agreement, and would likely be a further two years before the separation actually happened.

[Stuart Dickson]

Yet Ireland is still better off than the UK as I demonstrated earlier in this thread.

Better off? That's interesting. UK unemployment sits currently at around 7.8%, in Ireland the figure is 14.6%. The UK public debt sits at 87% of GDP, in Ireland that figure is 118% of GDP, and in the UK our budget runs at an annual deficit of around 7.7% of GDP, in Ireland the figure is a deficit of 8.5%. Still don't let the facts get in the way of some natsi propaganda.

Source

Edited November 6, 2013 by Stuart Dickson

[salmonbuddie]

And, from the same source, Irish GDP growth is 0.8%, UK's is -0.1%, Irish GDP is $41,700, UK's is $36,700 and, incredibly, given how much better off we are according to you, Ireland has 5.5% of it's population below the poverty line whilst the UK has 14%.

Still, don't let facts get in the way of a good discussion when you can dumb it down with the good old "natsi" smear. Sid would be so proud.....

[Stuart Dickson]

And, from the same source, Irish GDP growth is 0.8%, UK's is -0.1%, Irish GDP is $41,700, UK's is $36,700 and, incredibly, given how much better off we are according to you, Ireland has 5.5% of it's population below the poverty line whilst the UK has 14%.

Still, don't let facts get in the way of a good discussion when you can dumb it down with the good old "natsi" smear. Sid would be so proud.....

Growth figures are utterly misleading. The UK economy remained relatively steady, while the Irish economy plummeted like a stone. Of course when you hit rock bottom any growth you get is bound to be at a higher rate. Just look at the annual migration figures. The UK is still the place most Irish people emigrate to - you can't say the same in reverse, ever. Never mind Sid - Joseph Goebbels would be proud of your attempts

Edited November 6, 2013 by Stuart Dickson

[salmonbuddie]

Only to you, when the figures you source don't fit your argument.

They show Ireland going from -ve to +ve growth whilst the UK goes from +ve to -ve in the same period.

And the you get out the old, reliable smear to attempt to disguise the fact that your argument is completely unfounded. Only this time it isn't "natsi" you use, you've gone straight for Nazi. You really are a disgusting individual at times.

Eta - using smilies doesn't make it any more acceptable.

Edited November 6, 2013 by salmonbuddie

[oaksoft]

Better off? That's interesting. UK unemployment sits currently at around 7.8%, in Ireland the figure is 14.6%. The UK public debt sits at 87% of GDP, in Ireland that figure is 118% of GDP, and in the UK our budget runs at an annual deficit of around 7.7% of GDP, in Ireland the figure is a deficit of 8.5%. Still don't let the facts get in the way of some natsi propaganda.

Source

You can't even be trusted with sourced statistics FFS.

Selective quoting in the hope that the few people who don't have you on ignore are idiots - deary me.

[oaksoft]

And there it is again - when on the ropes the Natsis always accuse those who won't vote their way of cowardice. We've seen similar campaign all through history Yet in history the opposite is always true. It's those who stand up to the bully in the face or their goading, who show true courage.

Oh FFS you genuinely see yourself as another Martin Luther King?

Did you have a dream you want to tell us about?

Another forum moonbeam.

Edited November 6, 2013 by oaksoft

[Seaside Nipper]

Democracy in action indeed.

I completely disagree that it is not in anyone's interest. I think it is completely within everyone's interest to examine their point of view closely. For those who are politically inclined (an ever decreasing breed of person) the topic may take very little thought however to engage the ever increasing percentage of those disengaged by politics this referendum is of paramount importance.

Whilst this is a subject I am passionate about as I've said in my original post in this topic, I'm intrigued and respectful of those with alternative perspectives. Whilst I disagree with your point of view again I respect your right to voice it. To state the democratic process resulting from will of the Scottish electorate isn't in their interest though is slightly misrepresenting the facts.

Oaksoft was merely in that statement agreeing that it takes time for people to realise that the way things have been don't necessarily need to stay that way. For some though it takes small steps. Small steps that have taken a marginal party over the course of 30-40years from a protest vote to a governing majority government.

I agree that this vote may represent too much of a change for the majority, however there is a real appetite for increased autonomy that will only continue to grow as the populous realises that self determination is not to be feared nor that it represents separatism.

As has been pointed out, if there is a Tory majority government next term in Westminster there will likely be a referendum concerning the UK's EU membership. Should a less (in my opinion, I accept) euro-skeptic Scotland or for that matter Wales or NI lose their EU membership on the will of those voters who live in England?

In a strange way feel I have to reiterate that this is in no way an anti-English or xenophobic point. Simply a pro-Europe point.

I don't believe in separatist politics simply in self determination with a view to empowering a population to take responsibility for their own destiny.

Hmm, slightly confused.com here.

That reads a bit to me like Devo Max (were it an option) could be the best considered outcome for a significant number of Scotland's voters. In fact did Alec Salmond not want that as an option on a ballot paper ? More autonomy versus full on separation..............dunno it's a kind of it's my cake and I'm eating it irrespective kind of choice in many ways.

[Bart Simpson]

Hmm, slightly confused.com here.

That reads a bit to me like Devo Max (were it an option) could be the best considered outcome for a significant number of Scotland's voters. In fact did Alec Salmond not want that as an option on a ballot paper ? More autonomy versus full on separation..............dunno it's a kind of it's my cake and I'm eating it irrespective kind of choice in many ways.

I want full independence.

However my interpretation of opinion polls and conversations with people in general is that the actual outcome that the majority of people in Scotland currently want is Devo Max. Ironically the number one preferred option it isn't on the ballot paper.

Again this is a sensible approach wanting an eased transition into further devolution and autonomy pre-full self determination. The key issue post a probable no vote is how the BT parties placate this issue. Sadly as they don't have to argue this point at present their plans are unknown, but as the Scottish population wants more autonomy a renewed vision of Scottish policies and politics will need to be forthcoming or an awful lot of unsure voters will move to the Yes camp in years to come. Furthermore the SNP will remain a significant political force in Holyrood and the independence question will remain indefinitely in the background until they are confident of a win.

Once again whilst others may see this as a waste of time, money and effort, I would argue that the whole process is within everyone's interests. It makes all the major London based parties take heed of Scottish issues and regardless of the result engages Scots in their own future whilst hopefully ensuring continued progress towards further autonomy.

[Stuart Dickson]

I see the Scottish Electoral Commission have warned the police and the Scottish Government that they now expect that there will be violence during the referendum vote counts and violence on the streets when nationalists realise independence is in the bin again for at least another 30 years. These Natsis really are a despicable bunch

[Lex]

I'm not an economist, just trying to understand. To sum up, Germany has been bailing out the entire Eurozone for the past 2 or 3 years? I can't believe the markets would buy that and not make themselves a fortune by some kind of run on the currency, it's the nature of the beast.

Staying with Sterling temporarily until the decision is made about the currency (whatever that future currency may be) is the eminently sensible and proven route to follow.

The markets know that ze Germans won't let the Euro fail, and they know that they have the means of stopping it failing. What you're essentially left with is German austerity policies being imposed directly on the citizens of Greece, and indirectly on the citizens of other Eurozone states. Mitterand, the French president who essentially came up with the idea of a single currency did it to prevent the German economy dominating Europe. It's had the opposite effect.

Sterling is absolutely the right route for an independent Scotland, it's the least bad of the available three and will be the only viable option for at least a generation. That means a generation of surrendering representation on crucial fiscal matters such as interest rates and levels of quantitive easing.

We would have greater control over our own affairs though.

Broad sweeping statements unfortunately only serve to antagonise it would appear. I personally believe that the majority of Scots aren't yet really for self determination in the fullest sense of independence. Part of this will be down to fear of the unknown, part not wanting to rock the boat and for others a whole myriad of other reasons. However, whilst not old enough to comment comprehensively on the 1st devolution referendum, recent history would suggest that regardless of your own views collectively we are starting to demonstrate a want to make our own decisions and the need for more local decision making powers. The difference in the increase in vote for devolution over the 20-30 years between two votes demonstrates this, as does the fact that a previously marginal party are now in majority government in Holyrood.

I think currency issues are a valid point, but the difficulty comes with the British Government potentially quite rightly saying "it is our ball and you're not playing with it" however what is there to stop Scotland maintaining its own currency an therefore currency union with the rest of the UK whilst exercising our own political will?

I'm sure the legal ramifications are fascinating to those with any interest in them, however we already have our own legal, school, university and health systems to name a few, so why not have complete autonomy?

As above I'm not sure enough of the population is convinced yet, but I think it is coming and in another generation's time there may well indeed be a very different result.

I think you answer your own question there. In Scotland we essentially have the best of both worlds. We, as a people, are among the most represented people on the planet. We all have an MP, an MEP, a MSP and a councillor for every other housing scheme.

We have our own legal, school, university and health systems, while retaining representation on English and Welsh domestic policy. We have Scottish MP's in Westminster voting on English education and law policies which have absolutely no impact on the Scottish people. If i was English i'd want independence from Scotland, we are ridiculously over represented in Westminster aswell as having our own parliament, something the English people don't

You say we already have almost total control over our domestic matters, and you ask why not have complete autonomy. I think that question should be flipped on its head. We already have all this control, why have complete autonomy? We will lose all our representation in Westminster, we will lose our representation at the top tables of UN and NATO. What will we gain? The only major policy matter we don't have direct control over in the devolved parliament is foreign affairs. Is this what we are willing to give up all the positives that come out of being in the union for?

Of course a relatively tiny country like ours will only be able to afford an armed forces similar in size to Ireland. This will mean the full or partial closures of places like Faslane and Lossiemouth and will result in hundreds if not thousands of Scottish armed forces employees losing their jobs as we will not be able to afford them. If you ever visit towns around these bases you'll see just how dependent these towns economies are on military personnel.

It seems like we have alot to lose by voting yes, and not alot to gain. Therefore it doesn't surprise me that all relevant polls have a no vote cruising to a comprehensive victory. Regarding the date of the referendum, as i said earlier it has came too soon for Salmond, but he's been a victim of his own parties success. He wanted it in the early 2020's because he knows he can't win before then. However his party won a majority - something which he could never have foreseen - and he's been forced to have it now.

After no wins next year, the next referendum won't be before 2030 in my opinion. I can't imagine the Scottish people having the stomach for this long drawn out and boring campaign again before then.

[stlucifer]

I see the Scottish Electoral Commission have warned the police and the Scottish Government that they now expect that there will be violence during the referendum vote counts and violence on the streets when nationalists realise independence is in the bin again for at least another 30 years. These Natsis really are a despicable bunch

SD.

You really appear to be the small minded, deluded pipefitter some on here claim.

The SEC have no idea what will transpire IF the country vote no to independence. It would be ridiculous for the police to pay the slightest attention to their predictions unless they felt they were psychic.

You love to pick up on statements which have no basis in truth.

And to believe that stating the above and using nonsensical jargonism in a veiled attempt to satanise a movement whose sole purpose is to realise the political wishes and historical beliefs of the majority of Scottish people is, in my opinion, as despicable as it gets.

[Stuart Dickson]

SD.

You really appear to be the small minded, deluded pipefitter some on here claim.

The SEC have no idea what will transpire IF the country vote no to independence. It would be ridiculous for the police to pay the slightest attention to their predictions unless they felt they were psychic.

You love to pick up on statements which have no basis in truth.

And to believe that stating the above and using nonsensical jargonism in a veiled attempt to satanise a movement whose sole purpose is to realise the political wishes and historical beliefs of the majority of Scottish people is, in my opinion, as despicable as it gets.

Hmmm, wasn't National Socialisms sole purpose to realise the political wishes and historical beliefs of Aryans?

Hitler blamed the Jews for all Germany's ills. The natsis blame the English. When the natsi's talk about the EU it reads not of independence but more of a desperation to be ruled completely by anyone, absolutely anyone, other than the English.

An Independent Scotland would never have the capability that Germany had to cause global devastation but it does have the capability to be a truly horrible place to live.

[Edinbuddie]

Hmmm, wasn't National Socialisms sole purpose to realise the political wishes and historical beliefs of Aryans?

Hitler blamed the Jews for all Germany's ills. The natsis blame the English. When the natsi's talk about the EU it reads not of independence but more of a desperation to be ruled completely by anyone, absolutely anyone, other than the English.

An Independent Scotland would never have the capability that Germany had to cause global devastation but it does have the capability to be a truly horrible place to live.

Says the guy living in Wishaw

[stlucifer]

Hmmm, wasn't National Socialisms sole purpose to realise the political wishes and historical beliefs of Aryans?

Hitler blamed the Jews for all Germany's ills. The natsis blame the English. When the natsi's talk about the EU it reads not of independence but more of a desperation to be ruled completely by anyone, absolutely anyone, other than the English.

An Independent Scotland would never have the capability that Germany had to cause global devastation but it does have the capability to be a truly horrible place to live.

And there in lies the "real" SD agenda.

No positive reason for the status quo so go for the lowest and most despicable attack on those who have won the argument.

As I said.

Small minded and vindictive little person.

[oaksoft]

Sterling is absolutely the right route for an independent Scotland, it's the least bad of the available three and will be the only viable option for at least a generation. That means a generation of surrendering representation on crucial fiscal matters such as interest rates and levels of quantitive easing.

In your poorly educated opinion of course.

[oaksoft]

It seems like we have alot to lose by voting yes, and not alot to gain.

And again the question is posed - this is exactly the same situation when most of us leave home and start living on our own. The risks are huge, most of us struggle and chances are it will take a short while before things settle down but that doesn't stop most of us taking the plunge anyway.

Why?

Because freedom and personal responsibility bring huge gains.

[bluto]

And again the question is posed - this is exactly the same situation when most of us leave home and start living on our own. The risks are huge, most of us struggle and chances are it will take a short while before things settle down but that doesn't stop most of us taking the plunge anyway.

Why?

Because freedom and personal responsibility bring huge gains.

I thought it simplistic when you first used it, but now your poor analogy has stretched beyond breaking point.

When you leave home it's with the blessing (usually) of your parents. They want you to get on in life and they want you out from under their feet.

More importantly, they will be there to assist, sustain and subsidise you through the inevitable tough times. And they'll take you back home, if the baw goes on the slates...

Freedom and personal responsibility are NOT guaranteed to bring huge gains.

So it's far from being "exactly the same situation" as breaking up an economic and political union. It's rather more complicated than your trite, paint-by-numbers description.

[Bart Simpson]

The markets know that ze Germans won't let the Euro fail, and they know that they have the means of stopping it failing. What you're essentially left with is German austerity policies being imposed directly on the citizens of Greece, and indirectly on the citizens of other Eurozone states. Mitterand, the French president who essentially came up with the idea of a single currency did it to prevent the German economy dominating Europe. It's had the opposite effect.

Sterling is absolutely the right route for an independent Scotland, it's the least bad of the available three and will be the only viable option for at least a generation. That means a generation of surrendering representation on crucial fiscal matters such as interest rates and levels of quantitive easing.

I think you answer your own question there. In Scotland we essentially have the best of both worlds. We, as a people, are among the most represented people on the planet. We all have an MP, an MEP, a MSP and a councillor for every other housing scheme.

We have our own legal, school, university and health systems, while retaining representation on English and Welsh domestic policy. We have Scottish MP's in Westminster voting on English education and law policies which have absolutely no impact on the Scottish people. If i was English i'd want independence from Scotland, we are ridiculously over represented in Westminster aswell as having our own parliament, something the English people don't

You say we already have almost total control over our domestic matters, and you ask why not have complete autonomy. I think that question should be flipped on its head. We already have all this control, why have complete autonomy? We will lose all our representation in Westminster, we will lose our representation at the top tables of UN and NATO. What will we gain? The only major policy matter we don't have direct control over in the devolved parliament is foreign affairs. Is this what we are willing to give up all the positives that come out of being in the union for?

Of course a relatively tiny country like ours will only be able to afford an armed forces similar in size to Ireland. This will mean the full or partial closures of places like Faslane and Lossiemouth and will result in hundreds if not thousands of Scottish armed forces employees losing their jobs as we will not be able to afford them. If you ever visit towns around these bases you'll see just how dependent these towns economies are on military personnel.

It seems like we have alot to lose by voting yes, and not alot to gain. Therefore it doesn't surprise me that all relevant polls have a no vote cruising to a comprehensive victory. Regarding the date of the referendum, as i said earlier it has came too soon for Salmond, but he's been a victim of his own parties success. He wanted it in the early 2020's because he knows he can't win before then. However his party won a majority - something which he could never have foreseen - and he's been forced to have it now.

After no wins next year, the next referendum won't be before 2030 in my opinion. I can't imagine the Scottish people having the stomach for this long drawn out and boring campaign again before then.

If we retain our currency in that of Sterling why should we lose representation regarding quantitative easing etc? If we retain the currency we should continue to have a proportional representation in decision making?

Over representation in politics perhaps, but I suppose the debate then comes down to which respective tear you find redundant.

Voting on issues that affect other parts of the UK by Scottish MPs that have no impact on Scotland should stop, I agree. However, there then becomes an issue about appropriate representation for Scotland, Wales and NI on non-devolved issues that you describe. So reducing the number of Scottish, Welsh or NI MPs perhaps is not the way to go but there should be a bar on voting on issues that have no relevance to respective nations.

I said we have control of a number of issues highlighting the fact that we have the necessary abilities for self governance already, but made no reference to their proportion in general.

Putting my cards firmly on the table I think your next point is something that is not negotiable. I am a Scot and for me, albeit I completely respect and understand those of differing opinions as it ultimately comes down to a personal opinion of identity, self determination over international policy is of paramount importance. Without debating the individual aspects of the UK's recent foreign policy, this aspect is key to how the rest of the world perceives your country and it's people. I want Scotland, potentially idealistically, to set an example of a forward thinking all inclusive modern society acutely aware of its position in the world taking responsibility for its own actions. This may be of little or no importance to others but when interacting with people from around the world first impressions count, and a nation's foreign policy has a major impact on that. Having the ability to influence that nationally is therefore important to me and whilst I don't disagree that the transition period will bring significant change it is worth it on the above point alone.

What influence does Scotland have at the top table of the UN or NATO in the context of a predominately Labour/SNP voting public being represented by a ConDem government?

As to the economic impact for individual communities, yes there will undoubtedly be change but there will then be a local influence on finance which when you factor out massive spending in other areas irrelevant to the majority of Scotland could more than likely provide the offset. Ultimately though it is up to the Yes Campaign to delineate this and reassure individual communities that a Yes vote doesn't mean the death of their community. Unless these answers are provided in these areas then it will be No as you say.

Therefore there is a lot to gain in my opinion but I don't disagree that this will take time and potentially it won't suit everyone. That's the point of this being a democratic process though.

[Guest TPAFKATS]

I wonder if there will be big "rally's" à la Reichsparteitag?

Posted like a true Separatist. Whenever the "Yes Campaigners" struggle with a statement they resort to "bully boy" tactics with a bit of personal abuse thrown in for good measure.

FFS!

[Seaside Nipper]

Hmm, so now the anti Scottish sound bites start............

The Sea Lord sees Scotland as a Foreign country, the Portsmouth shipbuilders see the aherm Scotch workers as quite happy. No doubt the London Evening Standard will have disdain and horror at the Northern savages hacking out canoes for their Navy as frankly not acceptable.

Oh and lets not forget all those BAE Scottish directors , nuff said mate

Well it didn't take too long

Oh ffsake..................are we maybe really just as well to vote for the thing through to dis associate ourselves once and for all from those arrogant Southern types.