Wars of Scottish Independence!

[Kimmy]

http://oi59.tinypic.com/2a0jpxf.jpg

Think of slaughter and War. Think of a time where flags were flown and the men they belonged to savaged all by the wish of a country where we could find our own. Horse drawn carts of corpses and dreams, the ideas of a simple vote of 'yes' or 'no' such a bizarre way to remedy the constant fight for both survival and an independence that'd mark the Scot's as their own people.
Then again, think of unification. Imagine our country and people, where for as long as we've known, stood side by side with no division between who we are but simply who we stand for.
In the 1300's, in the reign of King Edward II, people were forced to chose their sides. The possibilities of having lands on both England and Scotland were abolished. It wasn't a vote of 'yes' or 'no', but a count of how many people were willing to stand and fight, and how many to die for their country.

http://oi61.tinypic.com/2mzjhb8.jpg

Here in the eye of the buzz, I've become curious on the reasons why and not people are voting. Why are the yes voters so keen to detach themselves from our neighbours, and why are the no voters so willing to give up a fight that's lasted for hundreds of years?
I'm also curious on the English's views on the current situation.

Even still, I ventured further than the United Kingdom itself to ask an Australian as a distant onlooker on his views of the foreseeable independence:

Remy says, “It's a good chance because you're like, independent and stuff. It's a chance to get a new, stronger, real identity. India became Independent, look how far it's come! Australia is almost there, ties to Britain really have no purpose anymore.”


I asked an Englishman of his thoughts of losing Scotland's bonds. Joe, a HabboxLive DJ replied:

Joe says, “I'd say I think it's completely right that the Scottish should have the opportunity to be self determinent and chose whether they wish their country to go it alone or to remain in the union. But, I think that the negative parts of independence have been largely ignored by the Scottish media and that therefore, the people who are elible to vote are not being given a true and accurate representation of the consequences of an Independent Scotland.”

I then asked how he feels, as an English bloke, about losing Scotland:

“I think it's very sad that travelling there on holiday would be difficult, but I've always had a deep affinity with Scotland so I think that independence would provide Scotland with a nationalistic spirit.”

On far more negative levels, I'd like to conclude that one Englishman referred to it as:
“Good riddance.” - Perhaps reflection of a strong anti-Scottish perspective!

So, I hit closer to home with my next questions asked to a close friend of mine, who is more or less the most Scottish lass' I know. Emma told me:

“I think we should do it. When have West minister ever took Scotland seriously apart from when we're making them money? If we don't get independence they'll really bleed us dry, they'll take us for everything. Things might not change immediately, but in a few years time we'll be much better off.” When I asked her if she knew of any no voters she replied, “Naw, man. Everybody I knew is voting aye!”

On a search for any No voters, I discovered a few quotes of
“Vote no and save the union,” and Alistair Darling seems to be in no doubt with an optimistic “We will win.”
Watch your back, Mr. Darling! The Scots are nipping very closely at your heels!


And so I wonder, whether or not you're Scottish, English, Austrlian or Indian, what are your views on independence and why? Do you think the Scots will find their freedom?
From War to Voting, it'll be interesting by all means to sit back and observe the outcome, especially when you're as nonchalent as I am!
Looking forwards to updating you all on Friday when the results are revealed!

[-:Undertaker:-]

A good article and an interesting read, although I will comment on two parts.

A +rep for your efforts.


India became Independent, look how far it's come!

Hahahahahahahahahahaha *gasps for air*


Do you think the Scots will find their freedom?

Scotland is free within the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, ironically though if Scotland does come independent it will immediately join the European Union, lose the few opt-outs that Britain has at the moment, and will be governed from Brussels.

The real issue of national independence is at the European level, not the British level.

[Kimmy]

A good article and an interesting read, although I will comment on two parts.

A +rep for your efforts.



Hahahahahahahahahahaha *gasps for air*



Scotland is free within the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, ironically though if Scotland does come independent it will immediately join the European Union, lose the few opt-outs that Britain has at the moment, and will be governed from Brussels.

The real issue of national independence is at the European level, not the British level.

In all fairness, it was the Australian with the India comment, not myself. I find the general concept of independance interesting. It'll be amusing to see where it takes us.

[-:Undertaker:-]

In all fairness, it was the Australian with the India comment, not myself. I find the general concept of independance interesting. It'll be amusing to see where it takes us.

No I know, that's why I didn't quote it as you and coloured the writing in blue. :)

[Kimmy]

No I know, that's why I didn't quote it as you and coloured the writing in blue. :)

The dude was born in India, ofc he'd be patriotic.

[Collegno]

The dude was born in India, ofc he'd be patriotic.

Patriotism is no excuse for idiocy.

[Kimmy]

Now, now Joe. :D

Patriotism is no excuse for idiocy.

[Lewis]

Definitely for independence.

Also, what does that person mean that the media aren't saying the truth behind what could go wrong with independence? That's all they ever do, alongside a million lies to go with it :P. I can't think of one newspaper, news site, the overall media etc that isn't against independence!

[-:Undertaker:-]

The dude was born in India, ofc he'd be patriotic.

I'm as patriotic as they come, but I still think and admit my country been run by idiots and gone backwards over the last half a century. :P

[Kimmy]

Usually is run by idiots. :rolleyes:

I'm as patriotic as they come, but I still think and admit my country been run by idiots and gone backwards over the last half a century. :P

- - - Updated - - -


Definitely for independence.

Also, what does that person mean that the media aren't saying the truth behind what could go wrong with independence? That's all they ever do, alongside a million lies to go with it :P. I can't think of one newspaper, news site, the overall media etc that isn't against independence!

I think they mean more so with the Scottish media who're most definitely rooting for the independence. In many places they've cut out vital details and shed far more light on the complimentary side of things than the derogatory, influencing people to vote yes than to vote no.

[scottish]

Yes will lose the vote.

[Kimmy]

What d'you mean?

Yes will lose the vote.

[scottish]

I mean what I said, No will win with the majority and Scotland will remain part of the UK.

[buttons]

and then I'll leave byeeeeeee

[GommeInc]

I think Scotland should deserve independence but not under Salmond.

He looks like either a bad guy in James Bond who is killed off in the opening sequence for being a bumbling moron or a bad guy who works undercover at MI6, helps Bond obtain secrets while being nice to M (by Dame Judi, not the new one) and then slowly after each mission bad things happen to the secret service and he is seen secretly getting onto a plane at London City Airport flying off to Moscow, where he is killed in the air by Bond who sneaks on the plane for revenge.

That's how I see him now, so this whole independence referendum is now ruined because it looks like some Bond film :P

[buttons]

i actually really him but i see him probably once a year and he's always been really friendly, checking out our local shops, schools, colleges, events etc. living up and away from the cities means mps never bother with us (which they still haven't during this referendum) so it's nice to have someone so near us. obviously mps always come across as evil in the media but iv personally spoke to him and he's been cool whilst people i know irl have said the likes of ed milliband are rude and look down on u lol

[Kardan]

Oh, I'm glad I'm not the only one that dislikes Salmond. I mean, from my point of view, all I see is someone trying to get into power, and the easiest way for him is to get the country independent. Salmond has thrown a lot of statements around such as "Cameron, Clegg and Miliband are all trying to keep their jobs", and fair enough, but I just see Salmond trying to get a promotion :P

[Kimmy]

I mean what I said, No will win with the majority and Scotland will remain part of the UK.

Nobody knows that for certain, yet. Shall be interesting. >:)

- - - Updated - - -


I think Scotland should deserve independence but not under Salmond.:P


I'd love for Scotland to have their own monarchy. Bring the Stewarts into rightful power, and all that jazz.
As for James Bond... 007 is way too sophisticated for poor Salmond.

- - - Updated - - -


Oh, I'm glad I'm not the only one that dislikes Salmond. I mean, from my point of view, all I see is someone trying to get into power, and the easiest way for him is to get the country independent. Salmond has thrown a lot of statements around such as "Cameron, Clegg and Miliband are all trying to keep their jobs", and fair enough, but I just see Salmond trying to get a promotion :P

It's all about power from their perspective, which is sad really.

[buttons]

Oh, I'm glad I'm not the only one that dislikes Salmond. I mean, from my point of view, all I see is someone trying to get into power, and the easiest way for him is to get the country independent. Salmond has thrown a lot of statements around such as "Cameron, Clegg and Miliband are all trying to keep their jobs", and fair enough, but I just see Salmond trying to get a promotion :P
how much people in Britain will u hear say 'I love the pm/politicians' lol it's like the accepted thing for people to hate politicians no matter what they do and believe they're corrupt

[Kardan]

how much people in Britain will u hear say 'I love the pm/politicians' lol it's like the accepted thing for people to hate politicians no matter what they do and believe they're corrupt

Unless they're UKIP - everybody loves UKIP ;) :P

[scottish]

because all politicians are liars and will do anything to make you vote for them regardless of how many lies they tell you.

[GommeInc]

because all politicians are liars and will do anything to make you vote for them regardless of how many lies they tell you.
Amazingly well put :P The problem with politicians these days are that they are career politicians, so they rely on being voted in to live unlike many minority (or least heard of) politicians who do it on the side of another job. They tend to be the more down to earth, too as they do not have to worry so much.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Salmond is popular and likable in character like Farage because he doesn't come across as a cardboard cut out and he's at least entered politics on a principle that he's never really ditched. Those factors, including having an actual job outside of politics, are very rare nowadays especially in the three established political parties, all of whom are identical in policy, what they say and what they do. I'm probably the strongest Unionist on here yet I rather like and respect Salmond even if I disagree with him completely. I can't say same for the three clone leaders of the cartel parties.

At least when Salmond, Farage, Galloway, Benn, Paisley, Powell, Skinner and others speak/spoke: they actually say something of substance.

[AgnesIO]

Patriotism is no excuse for idiocy.

India has a lot of problems, but it has seen astronomical development.

[-:Undertaker:-]

India has a lot of problems, but it has seen astronomical development.

Only since the 1990s when it dropped socialism and turned to the free market, prior to that India had actually gone backwards like much of Africa has since the end of Empire. That said, although India has been doing better: it could still do a lot better like China has done.

[Mark]

The latest thing coming from yes voters is that make sure to bring a pen to put the x in the box because no voters are rubbing them out... Can't wait until the whole debate is over and we remain a valued part of the United Kingdom.

[A4R0N]

because all politicians are liars and will do anything to make you vote for them regardless of how many lies they tell you.

except from future king of the north patrick harvie

[Collegno]

India has a lot of problems, but it has seen astronomical development.

Increased Caste and religious violence, increased poverty levels, rampant crime, a partition along religious lines that created Bangladesh...remind me how exactly India has improved, other than the fact that there are now a couple of millionaires to complement the billion starving people?

[Kardan]

Increased Caste and religious violence, increased poverty levels, rampant crime, a partition along religious lines that created Bangladesh...remind me how exactly India has improved, other than the fact that there are now a couple of millionaires to complement the billion starving people?

You do realise that there aren't even a billion starving people in the entire world, let alone India?

[Collegno]

You do realise that there aren't even a billion starving people in the entire world, let alone India?

I concede that I typed without thinking. Let me say that I assume that those in a country living below the poverty line are, for all intents and purposes, starving or close-to.

India's population is 1.21 billion, their percentage of people living in poverty is 68%. 822,800,000. Not quite a billion, I'll concede.

China's population is 1.355 billion. Their percentage of people living in poverty is 27%. 365,850,000.


You were right in your correction of my figure for India; wrong in your correction of my global figure. I didn't even get -started- on Africa xD

[scottish]

805 million people in the world 'do not have enough food to lead a healthy active life' (approx 1/9 people)

2/3 of those are in Asia.

Africa has the highest percentage of population starving (1 in 4 people)

3.1 million children die per year, 45% of those are due to poor nutrition

[Kardan]

Quite simply, poverty =/= starving.

[Collegno]

Quite simply, poverty =/= starving.

In a very technical sense, yes, but you might be accused of being pedantic. Whether or not they are medically starving, I imagine that when living on >$2 a day you are not particularly far from this state at any given time, assuming that your government is essentially indifferent to your plight.

[Kardan]

In a very technical sense, yes, but you might be accused of being pedantic. Whether or not they are medically starving, I imagine that when living on >$2 a day you are not particularly far from this state at any given time, assuming that your government is essentially indifferent to your plight.

It's not being pedantic, they're different terms.

Poverty is essentially the lack of money. Estimates are that over 3 billion people are considered to be in poverty, that's less than $2.50 a day.
Starving is the lack of food. Only 842 million people are considered to be starving.

It is possible to be in poverty and still eat.
Likewise, it's easy to be starving and not be in poverty. Maybe looking at it that way makes it more clear what the difference is.

[Collegno]

Even if we were to eschew starving, wold you really like to make the claim that there are less people now starving in India than before they gained their independence?

[Collegno]

Even if we were to eschew starving, wold you really like to make the claim that there are less people now starving in India than before they gained their independence?


Edit: That made no sense. Re-phrase: Even if we eschew the statistic of one billion starving people, as it was largely irrelevant to the broader point I was making, do you think that India is better or worse, in a utilitarian sense?

[buttons]

this is the timetable of when the results of each councils ballot is announced

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BxW-Wl0IIAAPRtl.jpg

Not sure what the yes rating is? My council is at 3am (7 rating) and my city at 6am (4 rating) ahhhh I wanna watch it all, if it'll be on tv?
@A4R0N (http://www.habboxforum.com/member.php?u=79492); @-:Undertaker:- (http://www.habboxforum.com/member.php?u=24233);

also pub licenses being issued to allow them to stay open til later

[GommeInc]

Not sure what the yes rating is? My council is at 3am (7 rating) and my city at 6am (4 rating) ahhhh I wanna watch it all, if it'll be on tv?
@A4R0N (http://www.habboxforum.com/member.php?u=79492); @-:Undertaker:- (http://www.habboxforum.com/member.php?u=24233);
Good question, it doesn't really correlate to how the results are expected to go :S Perhaps given the size of Glasgow, Edinburgh etc there won't be an overwhelming Yes/No, while in small councils like Clackmannanshire they're so anti-British/English they're likely to be an absolute yes?

It should be on TV :) The BBC were advertising a programme starting sometime around 10-11pm which might go on until the morning. If not, BBC Parliament or BBC News.

[-:Undertaker:-]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bxo9iuvCAAQfg7D.png

[scottish]

this is going to be interesting

[buttons]

so i assume they'll be doing a eurovision thing where they get the results from each council and add it up all throughout, so we will see which way it's headed half way through. I'll keep an updated thread probably as I'll be staying up

[-:Undertaker:-]

so i assume they'll be doing a eurovision thing where they get the results from each council and add it up all throughout, so we will see which way it's headed half way through. I'll keep an updated thread probably as I'll be staying up

We can often tell with the first few results which way it is going to go, or we can project the result, ie if a certain area surprises us with a strong YES vote, then the one after and so on. It's like in the Local Elections 2014, Ukip did very well in Sunderland and Doncaster so it indicated a good night and it was. Then again, go back to the 1992 General Election and it took everybody by surprise as the night went on. :P



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QyvifYlqihA

A lot was learnt by broadcasters and pollsters from that night though resulting in huge methodology changes, as Major won easily with 336 seats.

[buttons]

is that when they thought labour were gonna win narrowly but conservative went on to win by a bit?

nvm saw ur vid!! it's gna be exciting regardless, it's crazy cause early polls were saying Aberdeen n aberdeenshire are most likely to vote no and now it's 7 and 4 yes rating

Nvm again
'ps. I’ve subsequently got hold of a copy of the report concerned. To quote the methodology for determining the “Yes” rating, it’s


“derived from support for the Scottish National Party in the 2012 local elections. We… show a range from 0 (the lowest local vote [share] for SNP in 2012, excluding Orkney and Shetland where the vote was negligible) to 10 (highest local vote share for SNP).”

Ah well that makes sense, north east was all snp

[-:Undertaker:-]

is that when they thought labour were gonna win narrowly but conservative went on to win by a bit?

nvm saw ur vid!! it's gna be exciting regardless, it's crazy cause early polls were saying Aberdeen n aberdeenshire are most likely to vote no and now it's 7 and 4 yes rating

Indeed. It was explained by the 'shy Tory' vote in which people wouldn't admit to the pollsters that they'd voted Conservative so they polled lower in both the polling and the exit polls. A lot are predicting a 'shy No' vote with the referendum tomorrow. We'll have to wait and see.

The Director of ICM, Martin Boon, is fearful of a 'Waterloo' for polling companies tomorrow (http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/icm-director-boon-admits-a-polling-waterloo-is-possible.25336542). Referendums are always risky in polling.

[buttons]

yeah they're saying yes is over represented because no voters are saying yes in polls just to make others happy which weirdly enough was the opposite for me. said I was undecided and would probably be voting no even tho I was a yes just cause of the backlash Id seen other yes voters get. No's are not that silent on twitter lol. Apparently some people don't even have their postal vote through their doors yet :S

[Mark]

Three polls out today put No at 52%, I reckon it'll be close but No will prevail. Going to my local council's vote count :P

[A4R0N]

this is the timetable of when the results of each councils ballot is announced

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BxW-Wl0IIAAPRtl.jpg

Not sure what the yes rating is? My council is at 3am (7 rating) and my city at 6am (4 rating) ahhhh I wanna watch it all, if it'll be on tv?
@A4R0N (http://www.habboxforum.com/member.php?u=79492); @-:Undertaker:- (http://www.habboxforum.com/member.php?u=24233);

also pub licenses being issued to allow them to stay open til later


IM SO EXCITED

[AgnesIO]

I concede that I typed without thinking. Let me say that I assume that those in a country living below the poverty line are, for all intents and purposes, starving or close-to.

India's population is 1.21 billion, their percentage of people living in poverty is 68%. 822,800,000. Not quite a billion, I'll concede.

China's population is 1.355 billion. Their percentage of people living in poverty is 27%. 365,850,000.


You were right in your correction of my figure for India; wrong in your correction of my global figure. I didn't even get -started- on Africa xD

Your figures depend hugely on which estimates you believe (although I do believe that the poverty level is higher than most estimates predict).

Have you also heard of the rising middle class in India? It's huge, and it is growing at an incredible rate.


Increased Caste and religious violence, increased poverty levels, rampant crime, a partition along religious lines that created Bangladesh...remind me how exactly India has improved, other than the fact that there are now a couple of millionaires to complement the billion starving people?

Yeah, there is caste and religious violence. There is also this in most of the countries in South East Asia, that are home to Buddhists, Muslims and Christians.

Between 1953 and 2006 the murder rate has increased by 7%, and the kidnapping rate has also vastly increased (although still minimal). BUT the burglary rate has fallen by 80%, along with various other statistics. Those figures are then all completely irrelevant when you look at the HUGE differences from state to state.

You are also aware Bangladesh was previously Pakistan, not India, right?

Lastly, the majority of estimates suggest poverty levels have fallen, not risen.

- - - Updated - - -


Only since the 1990s when it dropped socialism and turned to the free market, prior to that India had actually gone backwards like much of Africa has since the end of Empire. That said, although India has been doing better: it could still do a lot better like China has done.

Oh of course - it could do a lot better. There are loads of things that India could improve itself on (scrap the ridiculous movie star = politician phenomenon for a start!!) - but for the other user to suggest it is all going backwards is quite simply arrogant and uneducated.

[Kimmy]

The replies to this are brilliant!
Can't wait to update a new one when the vote is out. ;D

[Kardan]

Edit: That made no sense. Re-phrase: Even if we eschew the statistic of one billion starving people, as it was largely irrelevant to the broader point I was making, do you think that India is better or worse, in a utilitarian sense?

I don't really have an opinion on that. My point was simply Poverty =/= Starving. They can't be used interchangeably.

As for the referendum, it's getting exciting now. I want 'No' to win, but I must admit, the curiosity is there for a 'Yes' vote, just because I do wonder if Scotland would be better off in 10 years time, and if they're not, what would the reaction be from the people that voted for independence.

[buttons]

tbh it's Cameron's fault we're divided, wasn't it him who said to just go for or against independence (cause he believed it'd be a no) whereas salmond wanted devo max as an option on the ballot. I would have picked devo max over independence but now it's just a huuuuuuuge divide and staying together vs the extreme

[Kardan]

tbh it's Cameron's fault we're divided, wasn't it him who said to just go for or against independence (cause he believed it'd be a no) whereas salmond wanted devo max as an option on the ballot. I would have picked devo max over independence but now it's just a huuuuuuuge divide and staying together vs the extreme

So you're saying nobody in Scotland wanted independence 5 years ago? I mean, I don't like Cameron either, but surely there was still some issues before he came into power :P

I also think this whole situation is just crapping on the rest of the UK. If Scotland vote 'No', they'll (try to anyway) get more powers, and fair enough if they do. But that just screws up Wales and Northern Ireland, and they've been plodding along not making a fuss. Also this whole thing is making England look quite bad, when in reality most parts of England feel just as independent from London/Westminster as Scotland does.

I mean, I'm not even Scottish and this referendum has nothing to do with me, but it's really bothering me now - it's literally all that is on the news. I'm glad you scots will be even more happier come Friday, no matter the outcome.

[buttons]

I'm saying it's Cameron's fault because he's only allowing us 2 options on the referendum, yes vs no instead of the yes, no, devo max that salmond wanted

[Kardan]

Ah, I see - my bad.

[The Don]

Can't wait for the no vote to win and for this to all settle down.

[Michael]

I liked Gordon Brown's speech for the no campaign, never really been a fan of him but this is very strong.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-T6lpcsJI4c

[-:Undertaker:-]

tbh it's Cameron's fault we're divided, wasn't it him who said to just go for or against independence (cause he believed it'd be a no) whereas salmond wanted devo max as an option on the ballot. I would have picked devo max over independence but now it's just a huuuuuuuge divide and staying together vs the extreme

Quite frankly the promise of yet more powers to Scotland is becoming unacceptable to even a Unionist like myself. There's two things we can be sure of tomorrow no matter what the result: the referendum has buggered up the British constitution and English nationalism is on the rise - which i've long said is the biggest threat to the Union longer term. The notion that Scotland can be given more powers whilst Scottish MPs continue to vote on English-only legislation as well as the Barnett formula continuing is becoming unacceptable even to me.

It's high time the rest of Britain, especially England, had a veto on whether we want our constitution to change even more so to please 5m out of 70m people. Cameron was 100% right to make it an in/out question, but he's 100% wrong to offer the Holyrood mickey mouse parliament anymore powers.


If Scotland vote 'No', they'll (try to anyway) get more powers, and fair enough if they do. But that just screws up Wales and Northern Ireland, and they've been plodding along not making a fuss. Also this whole thing is making England look quite bad, when in reality most parts of England feel just as independent from London/Westminster as Scotland does.

If you are happy to give Scotland more powers, would you like to tell me how you would address the English question of 50 or so Labour MPs from Scotland voting on English-only matters? Surely you would even admit this, with more powers to Holyrood, cannot continue?

And if not, what is the answer? Because this is the huge constitutional question.

[Southe,]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xap1/v/t1.0-9/10628526_748790038515358_5024467371722775216_n.jpg ?oh=820c014695024c0113672b7ca0cafdd6&oe=548D6A5D&__gda__=1422598529_2726eeb05af0e17f09b70426069cbb2 2

Lovely.

[Inseriousity.]

ah 2am, that sucks, cba waiting up. i tend to just see the first few results then wait for the next day but doesn't look like that's going to happen. I suppose theyve got to factor in the huge turnout.
how do they count anyway, do they just have a pile then put it into yes or no piles cos that'd be quicker compared to counting 6-7 candidates.

[dbgtz]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xap1/v/t1.0-9/10628526_748790038515358_5024467371722775216_n.jpg ?oh=820c014695024c0113672b7ca0cafdd6&oe=548D6A5D&__gda__=1422598529_2726eeb05af0e17f09b70426069cbb2 2

Lovely.

assuming that's not a troll, responses like that would have happened regardless of which way he voted. I'm not defending them by any means, people like that are just ********s, just don't pretend like the yes campaign is full of love hearts and cotton candy.

[-:Undertaker:-]

ah 2am, that sucks, cba waiting up. i tend to just see the first few results then wait for the next day but doesn't look like that's going to happen. I suppose theyve got to factor in the huge turnout.
how do they count anyway, do they just have a pile then put it into yes or no piles cos that'd be quicker compared to counting 6-7 candidates.

I think so.

Even worse though, if it is close it could end up going to a recount. Apparently the returning officer has said that a recount will not happen, but if it is very very close then he'll have no choice but to order a recount. It probably is best going to best - or on a night out as I may. :P

[j0rd]

aww how cute is this
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/scottish-independence-dear-scotland-quick-7788343

[Kardan]

I think so.

Even worse though, if it is close it could end up going to a recount. Apparently the returning officer has said that a recount will not happen, but if it is very very close then he'll have no choice but to order a recount. It probably is best going to best - or on a night out as I may. :P

I've read that a recount cannot be done if the vote is close - that is no reason to do a recount. You only do them if they think there's been an error, and either way, the recounts would happen at a regional level rather than a national level if they do happen.

[scottish]

if the votes like 20 off though they'd assume there's an errors (losing side) to get a recount i'd imagine lol

[Kardan]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xap1/v/t1.0-9/10628526_748790038515358_5024467371722775216_n.jpg ?oh=820c014695024c0113672b7ca0cafdd6&oe=548D6A5D&__gda__=1422598529_2726eeb05af0e17f09b70426069cbb2 2

Lovely.

People are getting far too heated about it. Must be horrible if you agree with one side of the debate, but you live in an area that mainly supports the other side of the debate.