Scottish IndepenDENce YES or NO?

[dyna-ti]

Ach well
The majority decided fear was more palatable than progress but there you go.

I do see another round of public services being cut in the fast growing economy. At least it will pay for the next couple of rounds of banking bonuses and parliamentary expenses

 

[ajm]

I do see another round of public services being cut in the fast growing economy

As we found out this week, they were planned (by the Scottish government) anyway, they just weren't going to say so before the referendum for some reason ;-)

 

[highlandsflyer]

In simplistic terms OUR poll was split 44.4 YES 55.6 NO
Versus the REAL result which split.... 44.7 YES 55.3 NO

Amazing. Could have saved a lot of time! Perhaps the whole UK voting on the matter would have yielded the same result!

As for the SNHS 'cuts', two minutes of research would answer that question.

Over and over again we saw these tactics from the NO campaign.

 

[technodup]

Re: Re:

For those who think this confirms Scotland was happy with the status quo, don't be daft!

Within the terms of the question posed that is precisely the outcome.

There was no devo-max option. We don't know how many voted no because they always intended to and how many were swayed by the 'extra powers'. We do know that No got 22% more votes than Yes. And yet we're now being told we voted for change. Eh, no we didn't.

Westminster MPs won't wear it, we'll get a fudge as per, Salmond will beat his drum and that'll be that. Anyone thinking we'll get any substantive change I fear will be disappointed.

I love the idea that we're about the only country on earth to reject independence. If we can manage to do it without any bloodshed all the better. And I'm looking forward to the chance of kyboshing the separatist nonsense again in retirement.

 

[technodup]

And he's gone.

 

[highlandsflyer]

Re: Re:

For those who think this confirms Scotland was happy with the status quo, don't be daft!

Within the terms of the question posed that is precisely the outcome.

There was no devo-max option. We don't know how many voted no because they always intended to and how many were swayed by the 'extra powers'.

We do know that No got 22% more votes than Yes. And yet we're now being told we voted for change. Eh, no we didn't.

As long as extra powers were on the table in some form it is a solid assumption such a close vote involved a number of NO votes gained by such offers. Thus no assumption could be made it was a vote for the status quo. Seems your party leader accepts that reasoning.

22%???? Surely now it is over we can let the NO campaign style of arithmetic go?

 

[Raging_Bulls]

Re:

Did you guys happen to watch CNN last night? Here's a partial result they showed ...

:facepalm:

 

[dyna-ti]

:facepalm:

 

[FluffyChicken]

I can't believe they want to give you all those *powers* where in reality you're still only the population of Yorkshire and we get screwed just as much.
Shouldn't we get similar abilities to screw ourselves ?

 

[technodup]

Re: Re:

Thus no assumption could be made it was a vote for the status quo. Seems your party leader accepts that reasoning.

He'll say whatever he thinks people want. It'll be different next week.

22%???? Surely now it is over we can let the NO campaign style of arithmetic go?

No got 22% more votes than Yes. That is a fact missed by many, especially on the Yes side. Given the polls it wasn't really close at all.

All I need is Rangers finding an legitimate investor and this is a perfect day.