Bud Bundy Posted December 14, 2014 Report Share Posted December 14, 2014 They didn't get Murphy from Holyrood. Is That the 24 Hour Cowboy - Aw, Day Murphy ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuddieinEK Posted December 14, 2014 Report Share Posted December 14, 2014 Had a though... What if there IS another referendum. .. .. ... and the question is "should Scotland remain part of the UK"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted December 14, 2014 Report Share Posted December 14, 2014 Had a though... What if there IS another referendum. .. .. ... and the question is "should Scotland remain part of the UK"? Why would anyone attempting to gain independence word the question in that way? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuddieinEK Posted December 14, 2014 Report Share Posted December 14, 2014 Why would anyone attempting to gain independence word the question in that way? The question isn't set by those attempting to gain independence, it is agreed between both parties. Having the affirmative response was an advantage as it set it up as a positive campaign. Just find it amusing that people are still campaigning Yes when there is no longer a question to be answered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted December 14, 2014 Report Share Posted December 14, 2014 The question isn't set by those attempting to gain independence, it is agreed between both parties. Having the affirmative response was an advantage as it set it up as a positive campaign. Just find it amusing that people are still campaigning Yes when there is no longer a question to be answered. Its a matter of time, Brian. By the end of the decade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuddieinEK Posted December 14, 2014 Report Share Posted December 14, 2014 Its a matter of time, Brian. By the end of the decade. I don't doubt for a minute it will happen Drew. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuddieinEK Posted December 14, 2014 Report Share Posted December 14, 2014 Its a matter of time, Brian. By the end of the decade. I just think that Yes was an old campaign that failed. If folks passionately believe in independence for Scotland fsir enough... but surely it should be a pro-independence or SNP campaign as Yes is irrelevant now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted December 14, 2014 Report Share Posted December 14, 2014 You are the thick one. Interest rates in the UK won't rise Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted December 14, 2014 Report Share Posted December 14, 2014 (edited) I just think that Yes was an old campaign that failed. If folks passionately believe in independence for Scotland fsir enough... but surely it should be a pro-independence or SNP campaign as Yes is irrelevant now. 1.6 million people voted YES, Brian. It won't go away, and why should it? It is a simple, hopeful symbol of what a significant proportion of Scots believe could and should be the future direction of our nation. It is far from irrelevant, and with a general election next year that could see the Westminster based established parties moving ever further right to compensate for the UKIP effect, I'd suggest it becomes more relevant with each passing day. Incidentally, why suggest it should be an SNP campaign? YES Scotland was a broad coalition of pro-independence parties and organisations. The #creepyjims of this world would like us all to believe that it was and remains about the SNP but that's fatuous. The YES 'movement' is a clear pro-independence campaign. Its that simple. The genie is out the bottle now, and it ain't going back in. Edited December 14, 2014 by Drew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuddieinEK Posted December 14, 2014 Report Share Posted December 14, 2014 1.6 million people voted YES, Brian. It won't go away, and why should it? It is a simple, hopeful symbol of what a significant proportion of Scots believe could and should be the future direction of our nation. It is far from irrelevant, and with a general election next year that could see the Westminster based established parties moving ever further right to compensate for the UKIP effect, I'd suggest it becomes more relevant with each passing day. Incidentally, why suggest it should be an SNP campaign? YES Scotland was a broad coalition of pro-independence parties and organisations. The #creepyjims of this world would like us all to belive that it was and remains about the SNP but that's fatuous. The YES 'movement' is a clear pro-independence campaign. Its that simple. The genie is out the bottle now, and it ain't going back in. Which brings me back to my original tongue in cheek question... What if the next referendum question is "Should Scotland remain in the UK?" You will have spent a decade campaigning for the other side! Makes me chuckle... I forgot the lack of humour on the Yes side tho... sorry I mentioned it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted December 14, 2014 Report Share Posted December 14, 2014 Makes me chuckle... I forgot the lack of humour on the Yes side tho... sorry I mentioned it. No lack of humour here, bud. I just didn't find it particularly funny. Each to their own. I bet you like Miranda, too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beyond our ken Posted December 14, 2014 Report Share Posted December 14, 2014 Which brings me back to my original tongue in cheek question... What if the next referendum question is "Should Scotland remain in the UK?" You will have spent a decade campaigning for the other side! Makes me chuckle... I forgot the lack of humour on the Yes side tho... sorry I mentioned it. this would carry some weight if it were actually funny-outside of the schoolyard that is Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beyond our ken Posted December 15, 2014 Report Share Posted December 15, 2014 UK interest rates CANNOT rise now before the end of 2015 but preferrably not before Q2 2016 Britain has now spunked away 2.2 billion in PPI refunds and the consumer led blip is over. we are back to stagnancy or even borderline recession in the next 2 years meanwhile, wee gid announces a UK oil & Gas fund for parts of England that have yet to produce very much of anything related to hydrocarbons in a cack-handed attempt to convince the north that he cares way to go, Gideon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted December 16, 2014 Report Share Posted December 16, 2014 (edited) Which brings me back to my original tongue in cheek question... What if the next referendum question is "Should Scotland remain in the UK?" You will have spent a decade campaigning for the other side! Makes me chuckle... I forgot the lack of humour on the Yes side tho... sorry I mentioned it. When people don't laugh at your joke it doesn't mean they have no sense of humour. There is another alternative. TBH you've started to come across as a smug, arrogant prick recently. Especially on this thread. Edited December 16, 2014 by oaksoft Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted December 16, 2014 Report Share Posted December 16, 2014 (edited) Why can't they? Do you mean that it's impossible for them to rise or that they can't rise without having a severe detrimental effect on the economy? You do understand that for the vast majority of people in the UK low interest rates are preferred don't you? I'm just checking because you appear to have all the grasp of economics as a myopic former SNP party leader Edited December 16, 2014 by Stuart Dickson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted December 16, 2014 Report Share Posted December 16, 2014 (edited) Read the f**king posts ya dafty. Spell them out if you have to, so that you can understand them. I was asking what he meant by "cannot", nothing else. Nowhere did I put my opinion on anything or even implied anything. You really are a thick c**t. (Why do I find myself repeating that all the time?) It's called Displaced Aggression. You get really annoyed when someone shows you up as a thick c**t but you are too stupid to take them on so instead you choose to pass on that anger and aggression to someone seen as less popular in the group. You do so, not because you perceive me to be more stupid, or weaker than you, but simply because you hope that the pack will form behind you boosting your low self esteem derived from the fact that you are so often shown up to be a thick c**t. It's alright. I won't change for the therapy. But I will continue to look on your posts with apathetic pity. Edited December 16, 2014 by Stuart Dickson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salmonbuddie Posted December 16, 2014 Report Share Posted December 16, 2014 It's called Displaced Aggression. You get really annoyed when someone shows you up as a thick c**t but you are too stupid to take them on so instead you choose to pass on that anger and aggression to someone seen as less popular in the group. You do so, not because you perceive me to be more stupid, or weaker than you, but simply because you hope that the pack will form behind you boosting your low self esteem derived from the fact that you are so often shown up to be a thick c**t. It's alright. I won't change for the therapy. But I will continue to look on your posts with apathetic pity. If you'd used "charge" and not "change" in your last para, you may just have got away with it. Your failure means you've really just left yourself wide open....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuddieinEK Posted December 16, 2014 Report Share Posted December 16, 2014 TBH you've started to come across as a smug, arrogant prick recently. Especially on this thread. Got the best teacher out Oaky darling! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bud the Baker Posted December 16, 2014 Report Share Posted December 16, 2014 I see that the "pig in the poke" that we won when we voted No is becoming clearer with the announcement of the "English MP's only for English issues" proposals from one section of the "Better Together" alliance. Hopefully these will hasten the inevitable breakup of the UK! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintnextlifetime Posted December 16, 2014 Report Share Posted December 16, 2014 I see that the "pig in the poke" that we won when we voted No is becoming clearer with the announcement of the "English MP's only for English issues" proposals from one section of the "Better Together" alliance. Hopefully these will hasten the inevitable breakup of the UK! Indeed. . One would think someone put the frighteners into them. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FTOF Posted December 16, 2014 Report Share Posted December 16, 2014 (edited) So only 33% voted "Yes". So there are even more selfish cowards in Scotland than I thought. Edited December 16, 2014 by FTOF Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted December 17, 2014 Report Share Posted December 17, 2014 It's OK, neither side in the referendum were voted for by 50% of the electorate, never mind 50% of the population. Those that mention this "33%" that the Yes campaign got never seem to mention that little fact. Never mind, roll on the next one. Exactly. By those stats, barely 40% voted No. Including non-voters is utterly meaningless. I said numerous times during the vote that less than 60% would be a disaster for the winning side and so it is proving. No didn't get close to 60%. They were as far away from 60% as Yes were from a dead heat. Nope this is not going away. Bluto, Reynard and BuddieinEK can wring their hands all they like and they can pretend to be in fits of laughter over our "delusion" all they like but the No campaign failure to hit a decisive 60% will be the end of the union. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stlucifer Posted December 17, 2014 Report Share Posted December 17, 2014 Exactly. By those stats, barely 40% voted No. Including non-voters is utterly meaningless. I said numerous times during the vote that less than 60% would be a disaster for the winning side and so it is proving. No didn't get close to 60%. They were as far away from 60% as Yes were from a dead heat. Nope this is not going away. Bluto, Reynard and BuddieinEK can wring their hands all they like and they can pretend to be in fits of laughter over our "delusion" all they like but the No campaign failure to hit a decisive 60% will be the end of the union. Cameron cowing to "middle England" with his English votes for English matters will be more likey to destroy the union, free Scotland. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted December 17, 2014 Report Share Posted December 17, 2014 Got the best teacher out Oaky darling! Yes that may be true but in all my posting on here over the years I've always been spiky. You haven't. For years you've been a pretty reasonable voice on virtually everything. On this topic however you're behaving like a twat for some reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted December 17, 2014 Report Share Posted December 17, 2014 (edited) I'm actually all for English votes for English matters - they should, however, have an English parliament to do this. If we have to stay in the union it should be as federal /devolved a solution as possible. You could end up with the SNP in power in Scotland, the Tories in England, Plaid Cymru in Wales, a bunch of nutters (of some persuasion) in N.I. and Labour as the UK government with just power over defence, foreign policy and not much else. Now that would be interesting. Yes I agree with this too. We're either a union of equals or we're not a functioning union at all. An English devolved parliament is the only way forwards with the union responsible only for shared things like defence with each member of the union allowed an equal voice in that complete with opt outs where necessary e.g. Iraq and Trident. It's the imbalance within the group of nations which is the problem and it won't go away. Why they can't see this is where it's all going is beyond me TBH. Edited December 17, 2014 by oaksoft Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.