Chris

The thing is, I think that's a very short-term analysis of what would happen following a referendum 'no' vote. Yes, in the short term, it would rob the SNP of the ability to claim there are more people in favour of 'independence' than their vote would indicate, but in the longer term it would simply serve to set a precedent, that you can hold a referendum on the issue, even in the absence of any obvious popular support for that issue. It's a recipe for perpetual calls for a referendum, probably once every 10-15 years or so. That serves to totally undermine the stability of the UK as an international partner, location for potential investment and a whole lot of other stuff. Who wants the spectre of permanent constitutional uncertainty hanging around like a bad smell?

Of course, the SNP knows this. They know they can't win a referendum today. It doesn't matter to them if they don't win one today. What they want is to establish the precedent that a referendum on Scotland's place in the Union can even be held. Once they have secured that precedent, the genie is well and truly out of the bottle.