Quote:
Originally Posted by Husker
The polling continually showed it would be a victory for 'no' and a post referendum study showed Brown's intervention made little or no difference. After the result though a nationalist myth built up that Brown came out, told a lot of lies and the 'Yes' side lost because of this. This allowed them to continue with a narrative that they should've won and it was only the fact that those simple, easily led No voters had been lied to that cost them victory. Far easier to go down that route than face up to the shortfalls of their campaign/ cause and any necessary introspection that may be required.
Thanks for fleshing that out properly.
I should point out I said Brown was "widely credited" with swinging the referendum. That is different from actually doing it. He was in fact widely credited in many newspapers, even tory ones, as cursory googling shows.
Additionally when you say "litte or no difference" you need to clarify that. If he changed the view of 2-3% of the electorate that's a small effect in absolute terms but it makes the difference between yes and no. I could not find any such study, do you have a link?
I agree with your analysis of the SNP's spin but nonetheless, it it difficult to see where Labour can gain votes with its unionism. At the end of the day Labour is not a unionist party: its focus is on worker rights. I doubt it would help the unionist cause much either: it would create the impression of a westminster London elite keeping plucky scots down.