Scotland Vote No In Referendum – Selfish, Scared People, Well Done!

originally posted by: bigyin
a reply to: stumason


You misunderstand how the vote was counted. All the votes from all over Scotland were counted together. The side with the greatest number won. It wasn't based on areas / constituencies / regions

No, you are wrong, each local authority (32 in total) count the votes from each area within that authority and then they declare the result for that authority. There are often numerous polling stations for each authority and once the vote is closed, the ballot boxes are sealed in the polling station and taken to a central point within the authority and counted together, then when the count is complete, they declare the result. That is why the different regions declared at different times. For example, Ayrshire is split into North Ayrshire, East Ayrshire and South Ayrshire and they all count votes and declare separately the list of Scottish regions is as follows


Aberdeen City

Aberdeenshire

Angus

Argyll & Bute

Comhairle nan Eilean Siar

Clackmannanshire

Dumfries and Galloway

Dundee

East Ayrshire

East Dunbartonshire

Edinburgh

East Lothian

East Renfrewshire

Falkirk

Fife

Glasgow

Highland

Inverclyde

Midlothian

Moray

North Ayrshire

North Lanarkshire

Orkney

Perth & Kinross

Renfrewshire

Scottish Borders

Shetland Islands

South Ayrshire

South Lanarkshire

Stirling

West Dunbartonshire

West Lothian

Can't believe that people don't know this...

Here is a link with a graphic showing the percentages for each region

Regional Referendum Results

...I shall miss the 'Braveheart' clips posted by US citizens who cling on to their Scottish ancestry, now that the majority of people in Scotland made the choice to stay in union with Northern ireland, Wales, and England lol
I'm not surprised this thread is still going as it is a classic whinge topic, totally love the entertainment

a reply to: destination now


You are so wrong. I'm surprised people can be so wrong.

Here is the official referendum result page

Whilst each region did count their own votes, the totals from each was sent to the central count in Edinburgh where they were all added together.

Final result:

Yes 1,617,989 44.65
No 2,001,926 55.25
Rejected Papers 3,429
Total 3,623,344

a reply to: stumason


Ok let me ask you how much money oil has made for the UK government over the last 30 years, since you seem to think it's barely anything.

a reply to: stumason

I refer you to my previous post.

The regional counting took place but the totals were passed to Edinburgh Count and added together.

The regional breakdown is only of passing interest but was not the way the vote was decided.

If there was one bin full of papers there may have been others not found, or perhaps papers were disposed of in other ways. The point is there should not be any papers leaking from the system.

originally posted by: bigyin
a reply to: destination now


You are so wrong. I'm surprised people can be so wrong.

Here is the official referendum result page

Whilst each region did count their own votes, the totals from each was sent to the central count in Edinburgh where they were all added together.

Final result:

Yes 1,617,989 44.65
No 2,001,926 55.25
Rejected Papers 3,429
Total 3,623,344

Obviously all of the final regional results were added up for a final total, but you were claiming that all the votes were counted together centrally, which they were not. And the regional results did make a difference, there were 4 majority Yes areas, the other 28 were majority No and each region declared their own result, so the regions were all autonomous. That is why the final result was predicted before all the results were declared because there was no way the Yes vote was going to be a majority by that point with the number of possible votes left, even if everyone had voted yes, which they didn't

I noticed some posts here that accuse Buckingham Palace and MI5 fixing the Referendum.

I agree it's a possibility. Why do I say that? Well before the Referendum vote process started it was said that the Queen was a bit concerned as to what the voters were saying about Scotland's independence! The YES votes were ahead of the No votes. In various sites and newspapers it was noticed:

The prospect of an independent Scotland has provoked a “great deal of concern” inside Buckingham Palace, according to sources close to the Queen. They are facing a constitutional crisis and there is now a realistic prospect of Scotland becoming a republic.

One option would be for the Queen to appoint a Governor-General in Scotland to govern on her behalf, with a similar arrangement working in Australia.

One final point worth noting is that the Queen is head of the Church of Scotland. That title is also under threat if the Scots vote Yes on September 18.

Scotland Independence The 10 Key Questions

But would this concern warrant a 'Fix' by Buxkingham Palace and MI5? Yes it would.

Especially with the Oil. Cameron and Osbornes quips about North Sea Oil running dry are unfounded and false. With the ever expanding technology popping up all the time new fields of vast reserves are being found all the time. Just before the Referendum it was announced that a reservoir found just West of the Shetland Isles contained a vast amount of Oil and Gas worth at least a Trillion pounds. But for some reason the BBC and the rest of the Mainstream Media in the UK failed to mention it. I wonder why?

60% INCREASE IN ESTIMATES OF UNTAPPED OIL AND GAS IN SCOTLAND

Scotland has much more oil and gas than previously thought, but the London government continues to neglect Scotland.

The London government's tax regime punishes Scotland's oil industry.

London and Buckingham Palace are keeping these figures secret. What else are they keeping secret?

Secret plan to deprive independent Scotland of North Sea oil fields

Scotland's Stolen SeaIn 1999 Tony Blair secretly made 6,000 MILES of SCOTLAND'S SEA - ENGLISH
by moving Scotland's marine boundaries from Berwick-up-on-Tweed to Carnoustie.

The shocking thing about this secret order is that it was not openly discussed in the Commons, passed by the house of Lords and then passed by a very select Labour and Liberal committee in the Scottish Office.
One wonders if, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the First of Scotland, knew how undemocratic this order was before she signed it ??

Duh of she knew. The Royal and Political Elite are always ripping off Scotland's wealth.

Documents detailing secret government plans in the 1970s to prevent Scotland laying claim to North Sea oil have been seen by The Times. They show the extraordinary lengths to which civil servants were prepared to go to head off devolution, which was seen then as inevitably leading to independence. Scotland gives LONDON all of its oil and gas revenues, in 2008 these were worth a massive.

£380 a second, £22,831 a minute, £32.8 million a day, £1 billion a month, £12+ billion a year

Scotland's North Sea Oil

So you still think Buckingham Palace was willing to let all that go? The Queen was deeply concerned that Scotland would take their Oil back.

a reply to: Tedgoat

I wouldn't have been Scotlands oil in the end but the Shetland isles.
They would have had a referendum and either gone alone or rejoin the UK.

a reply to: Tedgoat

Also which is a big concern for greedy queenie is the fact that if you take out the scottish tax payers from the groups that contribute to queenie's housekeeping bills (+ the extra 47 million cousin cam gave her on top of her annual money), she would not be so wealthy without scotland to also contribute towards her other bills tghe state pays - most of which she should - security and don't forget fracking rights, she would have a much smaller purse to enjoy - wouldn't she as the English NI and Wales would contribute considerably less without scotland. It was pure greed and the worry of loosing her scottish castles and land.

The scots lost more than their freedom from Britain's foreign meddling and grabbing their resources. Nevermind, they could go for another referendum soon. Purring queens don't do it for many people.

a reply to: Tedgoat

Also which is a big concern for greedy queenie is the fact that if you take out the scottish tax payers from the groups that contribute to queenie's housekeeping bills (+ the extra 47 million cousin cam gave her on top of her annual money), she would not be so wealthy without scotland to also contribute towards her other bills tghe state pays - most of which she should - security and don't forget fracking rights, she would have a much smaller purse to enjoy - wouldn't she as the English NI and Wales would contribute considerably less without scotland. It was pure greed and the worry of loosing her scottish castles and land.

The scots lost more than their freedom from Britain's foreign meddling and grabbing their resources. Nevermind, they could go for another referendum soon. Purring queens don't do it for many people.

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: Tedgoat

I wouldn't have been Scotlands oil in the end but the Shetland isles.
They would have had a referendum and either gone alone or rejoin the UK.

Really...lol you need to look at a Map...Seriously. And if you believe that the Shatlands can go it alone would you be in favour of them holding a referendum now.??
I would rather The shatlands went it alone now than see Westminster get one more penny from North Sea oil and Gas,

Maybe Aberdeen can hold a referendum and go it alone, then Grangemouth...Yeah,? No?...Highly unlikely eh.

a reply to: Soloprotocol

Yes about a quarter of the oil would have been in the Shetlands waters.
Anyhow none of this matters because the vote was a No.
The Islanders already said If it was a yes they would think about breaking away from mainland Scotland.
But again it was a no vote so it is all in the past now and the people of Scotland ed to look forward and work together with the rest of us.

a reply to: Shiloh7

The queen brings in money, she doesn't cost much and If we got rid of them a president would cost more.
Like them or don't but the majority does...

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: Soloprotocol

Yes about a quarter of the oil would have been in the Shetlands waters.
Anyhow none of this matters because the vote was a No.

It seemed to matter a lot before a vote was cast...Why does it not matter now. ?

Just for your information, No/Zero Oil is or has ever been extracted from Shetlands Waters 12 mile limit.

a reply to: Soloprotocol

Doesn't matter because the majority voted no.
It is the UK's oil not just Scotland's.
Accept the democratic process and accept you are still a part of the UK.
Move on and lets all get the conservatives out.

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: Shiloh7

The queen brings in money, she doesn't cost much and If we got rid of them a president would cost more.
Like them or don't but the majority does...

And how does she "bring in money"..Dont say tourism the chances of a Tourist actually seeing the queen are pretty much Zero.

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: Soloprotocol


Move on and lets all get the conservatives out.

Want to place a bet with me now the Tories will win the next election and the election after that. England will vote them in as they always have done

a reply to: Soloprotocol

The german presidency costs about the same as the Queen but you don't see many people lining the streets trying to catch a glimpse of her do you?.
They do bring in millions you can not deny it.
Just a little research would prove this to you.

a reply to: boymonkey74

We can't get the Conservatives out, it is the English that vote them in...and even if Labour return to power, who wants them?

We will have another go at independence when Holyrood is filled with SNP MP's.

The English people sold themselves out by not supporting our independence call. They also revealed their true colours towards the Scottish people.

The positives are that we now know what to expect and will be better prepared.