SodjesSixteenIncher Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 If things genuinely improve in the UK, I won't want change. I promise you I'll be happy with it. That's not going to happen though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowmore Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 Spectacularly missing the point. The Yes campaign was almost too socialist for its own good. The wealthy in Scotland absolutely voted No. You can't be this stupid chief? Surely? So oil was not one of the major levers in salmond and cos rationale Did you know Scotland was the 14th richest country in the world prior to the Salmond campaign? Please, give it a rest mate. The nature of the yes campaign is documented for history to judge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
placidcasual Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 I have a question... Why do you call yourself ' The 45 '? You were thousands of votes short of 45%. 44.whatever it was% isn't as snappy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bookies Love Me Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 You know that the nukes are in Scotland because Scotland is closer to Russia, if you go over the North Pole? They're a relic of the Cold War, one of humanity's most embarrassingly stupid episodes, but they're not here because the Tories hate us (although many of them do). They're here because it's lots quicker to nuke Russia from Scotland than it is to nuke it from Kent. Are you serious? Or on the wind up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 So oil was not one of the major levers in salmond and cos rationale Did you know Scotland was the 14th richest country in the world prior to the Salmond campaign? Please, give it a rest mate. The nature of the yes campaign is documented for history to judge. Yes it is. Fortunately, anyone who has any powers of deduction can work out that it was a generally left wing campaign based on building a fairer society. The biggest problem the Yes campaign always faced was that of proving that Scotland COULD make it on its own - and that we weren't too wee, too poor. The 14th richest stat was aimed at proving that case. It was pretty successful in that regard - and folk's fears were pretty much about the interim transition period rather than long-term sustainability. I'm spending too much time responding to your incredibly weak points - so I'm off to watch the football now. And can I make the point that you read Andrew Marr's Modern History of Britain to find out what the Tories spent the oil wealth on? (spoiler: the big bang of the 1980s that allowed Thatcher to completely deregulate the markets and set them free - neoliberalism - and making the already rich, positively uber-rich) Do you prefer that oil wealth is spent on lining the pockets of bankers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capybara Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 I am looking forward to see wee Lamonts sour puss aftet the next Scottish election Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted September 21, 2014 Author Share Posted September 21, 2014 Yes it is. Fortunately, anyone who has any powers of deduction can work out that it was a generally left wing campaign based on building a fairer society. Was it? Is that why Brian Souter supported Independence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowmore Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 Yes it is. Fortunately, anyone who has any powers of deduction can work out that it was a generally left wing campaign based on building a fairer society. The biggest problem the Yes campaign always faced was that of proving that Scotland COULD make it on its own - and that we weren't too wee, too poor. The 14th richest stat was aimed at proving that case. It was pretty successful in that regard - and folk's fears were pretty much about the interim transition period rather than long-term sustainability. I'm spending too much time responding to your incredibly weak points - so I'm off to watch the football now. And can I make the point that you read Andrew Marr's Modern History of Britain to find out what the Tories spent the oil wealth on? (spoiler: the big bang of the 1980s that allowed Thatcher to completely deregulate the markets and set them free - neoliberalism - and making the already rich, positively uber-rich) Do you prefer that oil wealth is spent on lining the pockets of bankers? Keep skirting around the edges of the room, kid. One day you'll turn around and see there's a big elephant stood behind you. As I say, man city all over, yuk! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lex Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 What was the actual percentage? The media rounded it up to 45%. 55.3% NO 44.7% YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confidemus Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 Was it? Is that why Brian Souter supported Independence? Yes. No. HTH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMDP Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 at HB on this thread. I used to the think he was a brightish guy who enjoyed a wind up. Clearly he is just a mental sociopath though whose goal is to try and be RIGHT about stuff on the internet. I particularly like his shtick about only posting when working, really strong material that. Arguing the semantics of poverty and making sweeping generalizations about people who find themselves that way. At least they can apply for a hardship grant. That will make everything OK. Keep fighting the good fight, son. FWIW, in answer to his mental opening question, I would say that it is a fairly narrow definition to paint the UK that way in ten years time. Instead of worrying about ludicrous hypotheticals, I would probably just say that most Yes voters will just watch with vested interest the progress of these promised new powers within the context of how the country progresses over the next few years and shape their opinion around that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HardyBamboo Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 Yes. No. HTH. Congratulations H-B, you are in trolling nirvana today & tonight & you are fkn good at it, it is a shame that you didn't keep to the premise of your original post though. You are working a right long shift at work today, problems? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Rider Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 H B is picking shite out his arse and smearing it across every topic on this forum. The most pleasing aspect for me is that his side won yet he's stamping his stilettos trying to get the Yes heroes to buy in to the Team UK schtick when we all know that WM won't deliver. What a dumpling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MariusZaliukas Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 I'm sure Salmond was thinking about all those poverty stricken families when he was paying £250 for a paid or trousers. Or when he was on all expenses paid trips to the Ryder Cup, staying in 4/5 star hotel suites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Rider Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 I'm sure Salmond was thinking about all those poverty stricken families when he was paying £250 for a paid or trousers. Or when he was on all expenses paid trips to the Ryder Cup, staying in 4/5 star hotel suites.Or when he donated his Westminster salary to charity.4/5 star! Ha ha, what a chump. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banterous Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 Or when he donated his Westminster salary to charity. 4/5 star! Ha ha, what a chump. You talking about a new currency? One more time mate - You lost! Get over it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerwickMad Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 I'll happily have the nukes here, in England. About as close to Russia over the North Pole and loads of much needed jobs for Northumberland! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted September 21, 2014 Author Share Posted September 21, 2014 Congratulations H-B, you are in trolling nirvana today & tonight & you are fkn good at it, it is a shame that you didn't keep to the premise of your original post though. You are working a right long shift at work today, problems? I don't work 'a shift'. Im not assembling hoovers in a factory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
git-intae-thum Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 I'm sure Salmond was thinking about all those poverty stricken families when he was paying £250 for a paid or trousers. Or when he was on all expenses paid trips to the Ryder Cup, staying in 4/5 star hotel suites. Its coz eez fat. Granny shagger. Eh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 I'm sure Salmond was thinking about all those poverty stricken families when he was paying £250 for a paid or trousers. Or when he was on all expenses paid trips to the Ryder Cup, staying in 4/5 star hotel suites. This is primary 1 politics stuff this. Poor effort wee man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.