If part of the US, the UK would be 2nd poorest state

Oh a lot of good comes out of the North, as I tried to show in my last post

And David Haines was born in Yorkshire and grew up in Scotland.

I just pray that Scotland vote Yes. Sure they can be bloody minded (lol) but I sure would rather deal with them than London. I would hope there's a swing of attention for my part of the Country from the south to the north.



Members of the Eton Bullingdon Club. David Cameron (top 2nd along) and Boris Johnson (sitting 3rd along). Both are high up in power at the moment. Both looking rather smart but what was the Bullingdon Club I hear you ask?

Bullingdon Club - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Move over Boris, it's... Bullingdon Club 2013 | Mail Online

"The club often books private dining rooms under an assumed name, as most restaurateurs are wary of the Club's reputation for causing considerable drunken damage during the course of dinner."

Effectively a load of toffs wrecking a restaurant and getting away with it and our Prime Minister was party to that. This happens now, not in 1130 or even 1610, but 2010.

So why do the Scots want out of this? And why do many others in part of the UK look on in envy wishing they could do the same.

 

(1) I didn't create the article titles I posted. Ask the British reporters why they chose those headlines. The important point is this: The NHS is not some healthcare paradise where no one ever gets neglected/ignored/mistreated.

(2) The new name would be the United Kingdom of England and northern Ireland.

 

Polls in England are 3:1 in favor of union.

 

From who though?

London wants the Union, some of the regions don't. Average that out and you get 2/3's in favour. That's still 1 person in 3 who doesn't and in some areas it's much higher. London likes the Union as it gains the benefit at the expense of the regions including Scotland. I've given examples of why in previous posts.

You won't see much in the UK papers or news sites about this though due to editorial bias. That isn't tin hat country either. In Scotland it's running near enough 50/50 for Yes/No, yet only ONE newspaper in Scotland is in favour of Yes. How does that work then? Half the population wants something yet only a minority of newspapers support that, the rest towing the Government line.

97 per cent of Scotland's Sunday newspaper market backs 'no' vote on referendum or stays neutral | Press Gazette
Scottish referendum: majority of Sunday newspapers back no vote | Politics | The Guardian

 

The least supportive region for union is about 1:1, the most over 3:1. No region in England favors split-up. This is what I read from UK newspapers that report the poll results.

 

The least supportive region for union is about 1:1, the most over 3:1. No region in England favors split-up. This is what I read from UK newspapers that report the poll results.[/QUOTE]
And if all bar one newspapers in Scotland are against splitting, what do you think the proportion is south of the border?

Does that prove anything? No. But if only 5% of papers in Scotland support Yes compared to 48% of the population, then it's unlikely there will be any better reporting south of the border.

It's just scare stories and doom and gloom. One wonders what the reporting was like here when you guys chucked all that tea into Boston harbour. Did that mean your independence was any less valid?

 

^^ You are confounding the editorial bias of the UK media outlets with their reporting of poll results.
I am amused that you accept the Scotland polls as they are reported in the media but take for granted poll conspiracy south of the border.

It is irony that you keep throwing US independence into your posts. Smoldering American public resentment at English policy was manipulated by a small group of very rich Boston businesspeople and smugglers who stood to lose a lot of money, to support the attack on the English goods as if it was a demand for representation.

 

Well we find out on Friday and I'm happy to wait til then.

 

Time for a lottery!
I say 'No' wins 53:47

 

I watched that last night - John Oliver is *very* good! Reminds me of the early days of British satire, when David Frost was first on TV.

 

They chose to stay at 55%.

Scottish independence referendum - BBC News

But that means that 45% of the people are unhappy and that certainly needs to be addressed. Also, the three UK party leaders offered all kinds of things to the Scots just days before the vote. They didn't have their party authority to do so, so will they be able to carry this out or will they change their minds? I'm betting on a small token gesture and then they'll hope the Scots will forget.

Whatever happened it was a wake up call, hopefully one that will be answered.

 

45% of the Scots won't forget the promises ..... but will it make a difference??

Unfortunately, the Scots don't have much of a say as they'd like and that'll have to change somehow. It's a pity that they didn't get it as 45% is ALOT of people not happy with the current situation

 

most people vote based on media propaganda, no one knows what the future would hold for a separate scotland. or for a united one for that matter.

 

I think many of the scare stories worked. Trouble is, now they've voted to stay the UK Government is going to do exactly what it wants - regardless.

This face of Cameron says it all;



David Cameron hails Scottish independence referendum results | Daily Mail Online

That isn't the face of relief. That's the face of someone who's got away with something, or pulled the wool over someones eyes. The Scots had their chance and I fear they blew it