Mastermind Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 It would be a bit of a misnomer to make this an East v West thing. The whole fucking region voted No really. Even West Dunbartonshire and North Lanarkshire only gave us a 10k dent between them. Glasgow and Dundee can hold their head up relatively high, especially given the number of tradishunnul Labour men and/or Rangers fans in the former. Everyone else is living amongst fuds. ^^^rattled^^^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamaldo Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 Mastermind has to be the most hate-filled poster on the site. That signature must be worrying to normal folk. A classic "vote No cause I hate Salmond" person. Get back to posting on how cracking the action in the Barclays Premier League was today mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mastermind Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 Mastermind has to be the most hate-filled poster on the site. That signature must be worrying to normal folk. A classic "vote No cause I hate Salmond" person. Get back to posting on how cracking the action in the Barclays Premier League was today mate. Voted no for a number of reasons . Seeing Salmond being destroyed after months of arrogance and dismissing any flagging up of the many holes in Yes' arguments as 'scaremongering' was a very satisfying bonus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
git-intae-thum Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 Voted no for a number of reasons . Seeing Salmond being destroyed after months of arrogance and dismissing any flagging up of the many holes in Yes' arguments as 'scaremongering' was a very satisfying bonus. Yeh. Must be so satisfying Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 Voted no for a number of reasons . Seeing Salmond being destroyed after months of arrogance and dismissing any flagging up of the many holes in Yes' arguments as 'scaremongering' was a very satisfying bonus. Salmond comes across as arrogant because he is head and shoulders above every other political leader in Scotland (and probably Britain) - and HE KNOWS IT. I think its a very Scottish trait - gallus-ness. Your sheer determination for a No vote means your either a Tory, a raging Britnat, or a non-thinking Labour moron. The first two are fine, perfectly entitled to your position, the third makes you a moron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat(The most tip top) Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 Im not sure. Not that i saw certainly but i don't read every story on the BBC. I think people have legitimate gripes with the BBC if they feel so. We pay for it. I've never understood the demands that privately owned newspapers be neutral. What a ridiculous demand. It's more about the duplicity of passing off active campaigning as objective reporting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GalaKev Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 We could have enshrined it in the constitution that we would only get involved in conflicts sanctioned by the UN. Yes, it could have got enshrined in constitution. If that happened I would have voted No, without thinking about anything else. Don't get me wrong I am not talking about Iraq etc, in this. But just say someone stakes a claim on some Scottish Territory shall we say The Shetlands and takes control, the UN says, we should get around the table. No, as a country we have a right to use military force to enforce our elected government and peoples will. That would be the same to Scotland as it would to the UK as well. Think it can't happen, The Falklands was the prime example in immediate history. The UN said we should get around the table, so in Constitution, we would have no redress. The government at the time needs to make a decision whether or not to take action. Or are you asking for an opt out clause as it effects Scotland directly. However, when does it cross the line, what effects Scotland or not? The definition of what the UN asks, is not as clear cut as it sounds. The UN is only as good as when people play by the rules, a few major nations leaves, where does that leave the UN constitution element. However I think we are going off track, the OP asked where it went wrong. I as a No voter responded without knocking anyone why I thought it went wrong, why they could not change me. You can argue all you want, but at the end of the day you did not convince me or the other 11% you needed. By saying this could or should happen has not changed the will of the majority and is now cast in stone. The same arguments are not going to change anything now. I was only answering why I thought it failed. To which i had studied both sides of the argument to come to my decision. The daft bit is I voted SNP at the last Scottish elections as I thought they may be on a good thing. I gave them a chance to convince me and they failed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tryfield Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 I can think of 3 reasons. Crowd funding, expense claiming, lying b*****ds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mastermind Posted September 22, 2014 Share Posted September 22, 2014 Salmond comes across as arrogant because he is head and shoulders above every other political leader in Scotland (and probably Britain) - and HE KNOWS IT. I think its a very Scottish trait - gallus-ness. Your sheer determination for a No vote means your either a Tory, a raging Britnat, or a non-thinking Labour moron. The first two are fine, perfectly entitled to your position, the third makes you a moron. He can't be that great as he drew 1-1 in debates with Alistair Darling, who is pretty horrific at live debates. He also failed to convince the electorate on many issues (most notably currency), and was therefore smashed aside by the elite Westminster politicians such as Cameron, Brown, Miliband etc and forced to immediately announce his retirement due to his failure. Salmond was the Scottish Parliaments best politician, but that alone shows we're probably not fit to govern ourselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeartsOfficialMoaner Posted September 22, 2014 Share Posted September 22, 2014 He can't be that great as he drew 1-1 in debates with Alistair Darling, who is pretty horrific at live debates. He also failed to convince the electorate on many issues (most notably currency), and was therefore smashed aside by the elite Westminster politicians such as Cameron, Brown, Miliband etc and forced to immediately announce his retirement due to his failure. Salmond was the Scottish Parliaments best politician, but that alone shows we're probably not fit to govern ourselves. We are lacking quality politicians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted September 22, 2014 Share Posted September 22, 2014 A new addition to 'too wee, too poor'.... 'too rubbish'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peasy23 Posted September 22, 2014 Share Posted September 22, 2014 We are lacking quality politicians. Definitely. The worst part for Milliband is that Cameron seemed more comfortable talking to people in so called Labour heartlands than he did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.