Whatever snap polls say and ignoring the spinners for either side, neither Salmond nor Darling delivered a knockout blow. Both had success but both had a critical failure. What was good was the emotion which both men brought to the debate; sometimes they found it hard to control themselves. Salmond waffled over the currency. Everybody knows that you cannot have a currency without a government in charge and that a shared currency demands a shared sovereignty in which the largest economy will be sovereign over the joint economies. This is a limited form of independence which falls far short of the Salmond promise. To the extent that they understand the complexities of the issue, Scots can see this and those who do not fully understand the complexities worry about it. If Salmond loses the referendum and Scotland votes No, it will be on this issue that the dream will turn to nothing.
The problem with the No campaign and its leader, Alistair Darling, is that in pointing up all the reasons why Scotland is better off in the Union, it is necessary to be negative about the prospects for Scotland outside it and that means giving the impression of running Scotland down. The message should be that Scotland will be good whatever it does, but it will do it best in the future, as it has in the past, within the Union, in which it punches well above its weight. If you look at the history of Scotland its Golden Age has been inside the Union. That message had failed to get across; Darling had the opportunity to proclaim it with fervour last night and he repeatedly shunned the opportunity to do so. If No loses on voting day, it will be because of this failure.
In the end Yes voters have to have faith in Salmond, but No voters do not have to have faith in Darling. That makes the contest even more interesting. There are some commentators, as well as social media chatter, suggesting Salmond fell short last night. If they are right Yes has lost.
