Bay 12 Games Forum

Well that's the second TV debate down in the Scottish Independence Referendum campaign. The first one, between Alistair Darling (figurehead of the Unionists) and Alex Salmond (leader of the Scottish Government) was won by Darling according to an ICM/Guardian poll, showing that 56% of a sample of 500 people thought he won compared with the 44% that thought Salmond won. On the basis of that poll the BBC reported quickly that Darling had narrowly won, while the biased press (by that I mean all Scottish newspapers bar one) heralded it as "Darling draws first blood" and stuff like that. You may recall how terrible I felt after that and I quickly conceded the referendum to the Unionists.

This latest debate was summed up by the BBC as one with "no clear winner", although "the supporters of Salmond will be the happier ones tonight". Commentary on national news described it as "rough" and "heated" and other nonsense, trying to portray it as one of those "more heat than light" debates they are so fond of complaining about. The Scotsman newspaper's editor claimed it was a "close draw".

The thing is, BBC, you terrible people, there was another poll after this debate just like the last one, by the same pollster. It showed that Alex Salmond won by 71% vs Darling's 29%. He had over 40% of the vote over Darling. Despite having sworn not to I actually caught the end of it when I was making a cup of tea. Salmond was on top form and effectively demolished Darling. In my eyes he was statesmanlike. Darling looked rattled, nervous and he was actually apologetic in his closing statement when he said "and yes, I know I did talk about currency again but etc" - he certainly did. He knew that currency was a winner in the first debate but he parroted the old lines and jibes all over again and made a fool of himself. He was a self parody.

As an aside, the sample of 500 people were also asked their voting intentions. 51% would vote No, 49% would vote Yes. I'm not going to crow about that, despite it being pretty damned good, because I know the sample is very small.

I think that regardless of how the referendum goes from here on out, tonight (and the newspaper headlines tomorrow and the days after) will be the best example of how the BBC and the majority of the Scottish press organisations are biased in favour of Unionism and the British State. If some blasted hack writing for the Scotsman or something tomorrow claims that Salmond "edged a victory" I will scream.

Quote from: MonkeyHead on August 24, 2014, 02:33:22 pm

I remember reading somewhere that in the USA, the training and support given to officers runs at about 50% in terms of cost and time when compared to other forces - I think the comparison was with the UK. That is ridiculous when you consider some of the challenges faced in law enforcement in the US (what with prevalent guns and on occasion serious class A drug issues).

You've got that backwards. 

Drug issues are definitely more than 'occasional'.  They're widespread and very, very serious.  I've lived in urban areas, suburban areas and rural areas and every single one had serious drug problems. The only difference is what kind of drugs - meth is rural, for example.   Legal gun ownership doesn't really correlate with crime, but drug problems correlate with illegal gun ownership, gangs and lots and lots of violence.  Americans are generally much more worried about people with drugs (especially the gangs with drugs, who will also have illegal weaponry) than people following the law and getting a gun license to go hunting.

The USA has regretted invading Vietnam so hard that 30 years later they invade Iraq.

They regret this, but it doesn't stop the invasions from happening.