Who will you be voting for in the General Election?

[GlesgaeHibby]

SNP for me.

[SHODAN]

SNP for me.

Likewise.

[Sylar]

There should be an option for 'Spoil/Won't Vote'.

I'll be spoiling my ballot paper.

[Hibbyradge]

You should run this poll fresh every week as people's intentions may change.

Having said that, it's unusual for people to switch after they've made a public commitment.

[Steve20]

Labour

[Glory Lurker]

Snp

[HibeeLR]

Can't vote on phone but SNP

[ronaldo7]

SNP for me.

[Hibrandenburg]

No one! I'm a democratic vagrant and can't vote.

[cabbageandribs1875]

no-brainer, SNP

[Judas Iscariot]

Can't vote on phone but SNP

[KdyHby]

Snp

[Phil D. Rolls]

I'm waiting to see who Standard Life and the Weir Group tell me to vote for.

[CB_NO3]

I'm waiting to see who Standard Life and the Weir Group tell me to vote for.
What about B&Q? Told everyone to vote no during the referendum to safeguard jobs. Then yesterday they announce they are closing 60 stores.

[EH6 Hibby]

What about B&Q? Told everyone to vote no during the referendum to safeguard jobs. Then yesterday they announce they are closing 60 stores.

RBS seem to be getting off quite lightly too for their behaviour during the referendum considering the amount of people that have been laid off despite the No vote.

[Bookkeeper]

Could only be SNP :agree:

[Phil D. Rolls]

What about B&Q? Told everyone to vote no during the referendum to safeguard jobs. Then yesterday they announce they are closing 60 stores.

I am starting to run out of places to shop. Thank goodness Lidl were pro Devo.

[easty]

SNP for me.

[CB_NO3]

I am starting to run out of places to shop. Thank goodness Lidl were pro Devo.
Can always trust the Germans.

[lyonhibs]

If I could vote,and as this is a GE, it would be SNP. Breaking the habit of a lifetime but all the others are so unpalatable.

[Haymaker]

As my local constituency is a tory heartland (a a considerable margin) I will probably spoil my vote. In past elections it is usually only Tory and a token lib dem.

Edit: just had a wee check and I have a green and independent candidate this year. Probably green then.

[patch1875]

Probably going to vote SNP to keep labour out.

Happy with the conservatives to do another term sorting out Labour's **** ups

[degenerated]

SNP for me

[Hiber-nation]

SNP for me

And me. First time since 2001 I don't even need to think about it too much, it's the only choice.

[Speedy]

RBS seem to be getting off quite lightly too for their behaviour during the referendum considering the amount of people that have been laid off despite the No vote.

They didn't really say or do anything of note.

They said they may have to change their registered head office but wouldn't alter their operational plans (which were always going to reduce after growing so much and now shrinking).

[Speedy]

Don't know if I'll bother voting.

Probably SNP if I do.

[Future17]

They didn't really say or do anything of note.

They said they may have to change their registered head office but wouldn't alter their operational plans (which were always going to reduce after growing so much and now shrinking).

That doesn't really tell the full story does it? They said they believed that independence would be bad for the economy and for their own business. They also stated they were making contingency plans to move their head office out of Scotland and took almost 5 months to clarify that this did not mean moving operations or jobs.

You can argue either side of whether a company like RBS should have got involved in the referendum debate to the extent they did, but I don't think you can rewrite history to try and pretend they didn't know exactly what they were trying to do by making the statements they did, when they did.

[EH6 Hibby]

That doesn't really tell the full story does it? They said they believed that independence would be bad for the economy and for their own business. They also stated they were making contingency plans to move their head office out of Scotland and took almost 5 months to clarify that this did not mean moving operations or jobs.

You can argue either side of whether a company like RBS should have got involved in the referendum debate to the extent they did, but I don't think you can rewrite history to try and pretend they didn't know exactly what they were trying to do by making the statements they did, when they did.

Not to mention internal communications to staff which as good as said vote no or your job will be at risk. Only to then lay staff off anyway within months of the vote.

[CB_NO3]

Not to mention internal communications to staff which as good as said vote no or your job will be at risk. Only to then lay staff off anyway within months of the vote.

They also ran at 3.5 billion pound loss. All this by having to get bailed out by the taxpayer. These torie voters should learn to keep their mouth shut. Get your own house in order before telling other people what to do.

[Colr]

My seat's Liberal but a Labour target. I don't want this manifestation of the Labour party in government and I think we need stability at the moment so I'll vote for the incumbent.

[PiemanP]

Voting Conservative (London seat). We need stability at this stage of the recovery and Cameron's lot deserve another term based on the past 5 years. We certainly don't need a Labour government.

[snooky]

Not to mention internal communications to staff which as good as said vote no or your job will be at risk. Only to then lay staff off anyway within months of the vote.

Similar threats of closures by others if 'Yes' won, e.g. Tesco, B&Q.
'No' won and so .....

Move along, nothing to see here.

[Del Boy]

SNP for sure

[Speedy]

That doesn't really tell the full story does it? They said they believed that independence would be bad for the economy and for their own business. They also stated they were making contingency plans to move their head office out of Scotland and took almost 5 months to clarify that this did not mean moving operations or jobs.

You can argue either side of whether a company like RBS should have got involved in the referendum debate to the extent they did, but I don't think you can rewrite history to try and pretend they didn't know exactly what they were trying to do by making the statements they did, when they did.

Maybe I wasn't paying attention but I can't remember them saying anything surprising or contentious. It's to be expected that a UK wide financial institution wouldn't be keen on the country being split up.

[Stranraer]

Snp.

[Betty Boop]

Labour.

[The Harp Awakes]

Voted Labour without exception for 20 years but they are now the last party I'd vote for. The way they conducted themselves as individuals and as a party during the referendum campaign was a disgrace.

SNP without hesitation for me.

[cabbageandribs1875]

ok c'mon, who voted UKIP own up :greengrin

[BroxburnHibee]

Snp.

[The_Exile]

Voted Labour without exception for 20 years but they are now the last party I'd vote for. The way they conducted themselves as individuals and as a party during the referendum campaign was a disgrace.

SNP without hesitation for me.

That's how the vast majority of my close family are seeing it, they'd have basically voted for a chimp with a red rosette on but they don't recognise the labour party anymore. SNP all round now.

[Canon Hannan]

SNP for hope, peace, supporting the poor and our Country back one day!

[judas]

Voted Labour without exception for 20 years but they are now the last party I'd vote for. The way they conducted themselves as individuals and as a party during the referendum campaign was a disgrace.

SNP without hesitation for me.

As above.

[weecounty hibby]

SNP. Have governed Scotland superbly in the last few years. Strong leader, strong social policies, great to see the establishment squirm. Labour/Tories/Libdems all desperate to see Scotland stay in UK but now all squeeling that us uppity Jocks might have at last a big say as to how its run. A positive progressive party

[HiBremian]

I've still got a vote for GEs in Engerland. Am I the first one here to say I'll be voting Green? And in Nick Clegg's constituency too.

Have to say though, I'm much more impressed by Patrick Harvie than Natalie Bennett. Hoping a lot of folks here give their second vote to the Greens next year in the Holyrood elections.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

I've still got a vote for GEs in Engerland. Am I the first one here to say I'll be voting Green? And in Nick Clegg's constituency too.

Have to say though, I'm much more impressed by Patrick Harvie than Natalie Bennett. Hoping a lot of folks here give their second vote to the Greens next year in the Holyrood elections.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

:thumbsup::agree:

[snooky]

ok c'mon, who voted UKIP own up :greengrin

Maybe they thought it was the "U.K. Is P!sh" party? :dunno:

[Hibbyradge]

My wife is from England. She voted no in the referendum.

She's voting SNP next month.

[Stranraer]

Milliband's interview with The Observer today is odd - he seems to suggest that he is left wing yet wants to appeal to "moderate" Conservatives :confused: I don't think he knows what he is. And to think he called himself a Socialist during the leadership campaign.

[snooky]

Pants on fire. :fibber:
http://wingsoverscotland.com/listening-very-carefully/

[ronaldo7]

Pants on fire. :fibber:
http://wingsoverscotland.com/listening-very-carefully/

Kezia really is a turnip. Yesterday's discussions with Brewer were a full blown rant about the SNP. She only mentioned them about 19 times so maybe she's learning that if you put a positive case to the electorate they might vote for you...Then again.

[DaveF]

Kezia really is a turnip. Yesterday's discussions with Brewer were a full blown rant about the SNP. She only mentioned them about 19 times so maybe she's learning that if you put a positive case to the electorate they might vote for you...Then again.

I only ever seem to hear her rant over the SNP. She seems to hate them more than she cares for her own party. She comes across as a spiteful, bitter person which be fine for the dyed in the wool Labour supporters but would do nothing for any undecided's out there.

[hibs0666]

Watched Sturgeon launch her manifesto, and it was interesting that the biggest cheer of the day was not for any detailed policy but was when she re-iterated her support for secession.

Milliband would IMHO be nuts to do any sort of deal with her.

[snooky]

Watched Sturgeon launch her manifesto, and it was interesting that the biggest cheer of the day was not for any detailed policy but was when she re-iterated her support for secession.

Milliband would IMHO be nuts to do any sort of deal with her.
Miliband might need all the support he can get if he wants to form a government.

[marinello59]

Watched Sturgeon launch her manifesto, and it was interesting that the biggest cheer of the day was not for any detailed policy but was when she re-iterated her support for secession.

Milliband would IMHO be nuts to do any sort of deal with her.

I thought the way she reached out to the whole UK was pitched perfectly. Nicola Sturgeon is not letting opinion polls and focus groups lead the way, she is leading the way. It's good old fashioned conviction politics. It helps her come across as what I think she is, an entirely honest politician.
Milliband would be mad not to do a deal with her.

[hibs0666]

Miliband might need all the support he can get if he wants to form a government.

In that case he needs to progress without the SNP as the underpinning principles of the parties are too far apart to create a sustainable partnership.

The SNP have previous for bringing down Labour governments and Sturgeon would do the same again - quite reasonably so given her mandate - if she thought it would be in the best interest of achieving independence. Milliband should not afford her that opportunity.

[Moulin Yarns]

In that case he needs to progress without the SNP as the underpinning principles of the parties are too far apart to create a sustainable partnership.

The SNP have previous for bringing down Labour governments and Sturgeon would do the same again - quite reasonably so given her mandate - if she thought it would be in the best interest of achieving independence. Milliband should not afford her that opportunity.

The SNP will not and cannot bring down the Labour Government or any government. The Fixed Term Parliament Act 2011 makes that impossible.


Meanwhile in latest opinion

http://www.scotsman.com/news/uk/snp-will-get-42-seats-predicts-nate-silver-poll-1-3747404

[Future17]

The SNP will not and cannot bring down the Labour Government or any government. The Fixed Term Parliament Act 2011 makes that impossible.


Meanwhile in latest opinion

http://www.scotsman.com/news/uk/snp-will-get-42-seats-predicts-nate-silver-poll-1-3747404

I'm not sure what you mean by the bit in bold, but the Fixed Term Parliaments Act does not guarantee a fixed term parliament.

It's all obviously hypothetical at this stage but if for example the SNP withdrew support for a minority Labour government, the House of Commons could pass a vote of no confidence and fresh elections would have to be called.

[Bristolhibby]

It's getting on my thruppneys the SNP bashing down here.

Please Scotland stay part of the UK. But only if you elect Labour or Lib MPs, God forbid you send some MPs who want to "destroy the UK" (insert any other Armageddon like description).

This is parliamentary elections. Command a majority or come to some working solution. Then form a Government.

Quite simple really.

Next in the hit list is the FPTP system and the House of Lords for me.

Heard today that if Danny Alexander loses his seat, they will make him a Lord! WTF!?!

Democracy, don't you just love it?

J

[hibs0666]

The SNP will not and cannot bring down the Labour Government or any government. The Fixed Term Parliament Act 2011 makes that impossible.


The bill does not stop the SNP supporting a no confidence vote against a Labour government during the parliament, and the SNP has previous for doing exactly that. Sturgeon is quite happy to state that she wants a coalition with Labour. Unsurprisingly she is less forthcoming on the conditions under which she would withdraw from a coalition. For example, if Labour votes for a Trident replacement at the main gate decision in 2016, and seeing that it is a red line for the SNP, would that cause the SNP to vote against a Labour government?

Also, seeing as she wants to hold the balance of power in a UK parliament, when is she going to spell out her policies for the other UK regions? What is her UK defence policy? UK economic policy? UK foreign affairs? UK industry regulation?

I do not expect answers. It is a grave situation that we are nearing and Milliband must tell her to do one for the sake of the nation.

[hibs0666]

John McDermott nails it in the FT...

One of the smartest moves Alex Salmond ever made was to swiftly pass on the leadership of the Scottish National party to Nicola Sturgeon after the independence referendum. She personifies the generational shift in the party’s support base from an eclectic group of often conservative nationalists to Scots who would historically be expected to vote Labour. According to opinion polls, she has successfully overseen the transfer of Yes votes in the referendum to likely SNP votes on May 7. At the launch of the SNP manifesto on Monday, Ms Sturgeon’s speech was peppered with cheers from the party’s besotted activists. She appears alone on the manifesto cover.

Inside, the word “independence” appears only once. Instead, the manifesto is full of miscellaneous pledges to spend more money than Labour. If the SNP were to play a role in the next Westminster government, what its manifesto suggests is not that the party would mount a sudden push towards independence, or even “full financial responsibility”, but that it is geared for opportunism and grinding negotiations. This is because for the SNP, independence is a process, not an event.

Ironically, what the manifesto represents is an attempt by the SNP to do what the No campaign did in the independence referendum: successfully appeal to Scots’ self-interest. This is a brazen and contradictory appeal, but it is also a rational one. And the problem the other parties in Scotland have is that it makes sense – up to a point. For many Scots, voting SNP in this election is the obvious thing for them to do.

In making this appeal, the SNP is trying to take advantage of two gaps in the political universe – one in space and the other in time. The first is between the Labour party’s UK-wide policies and their approach to Scotland. The SNP is able to out-promise the Labour party in Scotland because, crudely, it knows that there is only so far to the left that Ed Miliband is willing to go without fearing for English votes.

The second gap is between Scotland’s public finances of today and those of an unknown tomorrow. In its manifesto, the SNP reaffirmed its 2011 commitment to full fiscal autonomy, albeit under a different name: “full financial responsibility”. But in her speech, Ms Sturgeon deliberately played down the imminence of any such arrangement, talking about how negotiations take “several years” (though independence was supposed to have been concluded by the Spring of 2016) and that autonomy would require a “phased transition”.

Ms Sturgeon is of course right that it is very unlikely that any huge transfer of economic powers would take place in the space of a few months. However, if the price of North Sea oil had risen to $150 a barrel rather than falling to $60, then the SNP leader wouldn’t have been such a gradualist. Since full financial responsibility now would mean sweeping austerity beyond any planned by the Conservatives, it is not in the SNP’s interest to emphasise this policy. In fact, it’ll play it down.

This is why the approach of the SNP at Westminster would likely to be more obstructive than destructive, at least in the run up to the 2016 Scottish elections. As I wrote after the Smith Commission concluded, the SNP will push for a sort of “Smith plus” deal, with various new powers on welfare, the minimum wage, and so on. It will test to the limits the notion of “no detriment” in the Smith agreement fine print.

So, rather than “bursting with ideas and ambition”, as Ms Sturgeon put it, the SNP manifesto shows its short-termist and opportunist approach to policy. After asking Scots to imagine the future during the referendum it is now encouraging them to not think too far ahead, lest they realise how full fiscal autonomy would make them worse off. This is cynical but effective politics. Mr Salmond would be proud.

[Peevemor]

John McDermott nails it in the FT...

....

So, rather than “bursting with ideas and ambition”, as Ms Sturgeon put it, the SNP manifesto shows its short-termist and opportunist approach to policy. After asking Scots to imagine the future during the referendum it is now encouraging them to not think too far ahead, lest they realise how full fiscal autonomy would make them worse off. This is cynical but effective politics. Mr Salmond would be proud.

Personally I think that last bit is just the usual guff we've learned to expect from the London media. For once the Scottish electorate could see their votes making a genuine difference to Scotland at Westminster and the London run parties are cracking their pants.

[snooky]

In that case he needs to progress without the SNP as the underpinning principles of the parties are too far apart to create a sustainable partnership.

The SNP have previous for bringing down Labour governments and Sturgeon would do the same again - quite reasonably so given her mandate - if she thought it would be in the best interest of achieving independence. Milliband should not afford her that opportunity.

IMO, it's Labour who have lost the "principles" of their Party.
The SNP have stepped in and filled the obvious void, hence the big swing.

Self-inflicted wound, M'lud

[snooky]

It's getting on my thruppneys the SNP bashing down here.

Please Scotland stay part of the UK. But only if you elect Labour or Lib MPs, God forbid you send some MPs who want to "destroy the UK" (insert any other Armageddon like description).

This is parliamentary elections. Command a majority or come to some working solution. Then form a Government.

Quite simple really.

Next in the hit list is the FPTP system and the House of Lords for me.

Heard today that if Danny Alexander loses his seat, they will make him a Lord! WTF!?!

Democracy, don't you just love it?

J

:agree: 'Lord of the Ring', I suspect.

[hibs0666]

IMO, it's Labour who have lost the "principles" of their Party.
The SNP have stepped in and filled the obvious void, hence the big swing.

Self-inflicted wound, M'lud

A fundamental principle of the Labour party is it belief in the union.

Having experienced the SNP over a number of decades now, its only enduring principle is secession.

Miliband would therefore be unwise to enter into any arrangement with the SNP as there is no commonality on the direction of travel.

[VivaHiberña]

A fundamental principle of the Labour party is it belief in the union.

Having experienced the SNP over a number of decades now, its only enduring principle is secession.

Miliband would therefore be unwise to enter into any arrangement with the SNP as there is no commonality on the direction of travel.

Are you seriously saying that Labour should let the Tories form a government rather than work with the SNP, despite the many areas of overlap in their respective manifestos?

Google "the Bain principle," (https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=the+%22bain+principle%22) pathetic really.
_______________________________________________

Realistically, there's not going to be a referendum on independence in the next 15 years, I don't know why Sturgeon doesn't just say that. Any sooner and Yes would just lose again while the SNP would pee off a lot people while simultaneously losing any credibility as a party of government and just look completely obsessed with independence.

[Hibernia&Alba]

Probably nobody. I think voting is important - those who died for the right to vote - so will turn up to spoil my paper with 'none of above'. I don't see a democratic socialist voice.

[hibs0666]

Are you seriously saying that Labour should let Tories form a government rather than work with the SNP, despite the many areas of overlap in their respective manifestos?

Google "the Bain principle," (https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=the+%22bain+principle%22) pathetic really.
_______________________________________________

Realistically, there's not going to be a referendum on independence in the next 15 years, I don't know why Sturgeon doesn't just say that. Any sooner and Yes would just lose again while the SNP would pee off a lot people while simultaneously losing any credibility as a party of government and just look completely obsessed with independence.

The SNP sees cancellation of Trident as a red line issue. How can either party reasonably compromise on that issue?

How can Labour enter into any sort of pact with a party that has no national policies?

How can a party that seeks to end Westminster rule be afforded power in that parliament?

[VivaHiberña]

The SNP sees cancellation of Trident as a red line issue. How can either party reasonably compromise on that issue?

How can Labour enter into any sort of pact with a party that has no national policies?

How can a party that seeks to end Westminster rule be afforded power in that parliament?

Trident would not be mentioned in any deal, the vote will pass next year regardless because Labour and the Tories will vote together on it (this isn't a criticism of either party, just a statement of fact). "Red line" in this instance can be read to mean the SNP will vote against it regardless of any other deal.

They have plenty of national policies, these include:


Infrastructure spending, eg building HS2 from London and Edinburgh/Glasgow
Increasing health spending*
Reducing/removing tuition fees in England*
Raising the minimum wage
Introducing a proportional voting system
Abolishing the House of Lords
Reversing the Health and Social Care Bill ("bedroom tax")
Bringing the Carer's Allowance into line with Jobseeker's
Abolition of zero-hours contracts

All of which are in the manifesto, both the short (http://www.snp.org/sites/default/files/page/file/04_16d_snp_election_manifesto_290x280x.pdf) and longer (http://www.snp.org/sites/default/files/page/file/04_17d_snp_main_manifesto_245x188.pdf) versions.


The SNP can be afforded power at Westminster because (a) if Labour want to take office they might not have much choice and (b) if elected to Westminster they have every right to influence proceedings. This isn't without precedent, although the Irish Parliamentary Party admittedly has slightly different aims.

Are you seriously saying that Labour should let the Tories form a government rather than work with the SNP, despite the many areas of overlap in their respective manifestos?

[JeMeSouviens]

The SNP sees cancellation of Trident as a red line issue. How can either party reasonably compromise on that issue?


Long grass. An inquiry is the traditional method. Trident replacement has already been delayed once.



How can Labour enter into any sort of pact with a party that has no national policies?


Oh dear, you lot are supposed to say Scotland *is* a nation. Remember the "family of nations " and all that? Did you miss the memo?



How can a party that seeks to end Westminster rule be afforded power in that parliament?

All the SNP will have is one vote for each constituency it wins ... or do our votes not get to count the same unless they're for unionist parties?

[hibs0666]

Long grass. An inquiry is the traditional method. Trident replacement has already been delayed once.

Trident replacement cannot be delayed again as there are much broader implications that relate to international nuclear non-proliferation agreements. 2016 is a drop dead on that one I'm afraid.


Oh dear, you lot are supposed to say Scotland *is* a nation. Remember the "family of nations " and all that? Did you miss the memo?

Yup, missed the memo in the same way as the SNP is missing a national transport policy for example.


All the SNP will have is one vote for each constituency it wins ... or do our votes not get to count the same unless they're for unionist parties?

Each seat won by the SNP affords its constituents representation by the SNP at Westminster. However I cannot countenance the SNP sharing the levers of power in a parliament that it seeks to undermine, and I hope that Miliband can find a way to achieve the necessary mandate that leaves the SNP on the sideline.

[hibs0666]

Trident would not be mentioned in any deal, the vote will pass next year regardless because Labour and the Tories will vote together on it (this isn't a criticism of either party, just a statement of fact). "Red line" in this instance can be read to mean the SNP will vote against it regardless of any other deal.

How could the SNP can stand behind a queen's speech that would commit the UK government to replacing Trident? If the SNP could not stand behind a queen's speech delivered By Miliband, how could it possibly be considered a viable long-term coalition partner for Labour?



They have plenty of national policies, these include:


Infrastructure spending, eg building HS2 from London and Edinburgh/Glasgow
Increasing health spending*
Reducing/removing tuition fees in England*
Raising the minimum wage
Introducing a proportional voting system
Abolishing the House of Lords
Reversing the Health and Social Care Bill ("bedroom tax")
Bringing the Carer's Allowance into line with Jobseeker's
Abolition of zero-hours contracts

All of which are in the manifesto, both the short (http://www.snp.org/sites/default/files/page/file/04_16d_snp_election_manifesto_290x280x.pdf) and longer (http://www.snp.org/sites/default/files/page/file/04_17d_snp_main_manifesto_245x188.pdf) versions.

We both know that your list barely scratches the surface of policy issues facing the UK government. What is the SNP policy on English legal reform? What will the SNP offer Welsh sheep farmersWill the SNP support nationalist aspirations in Northern Ireland?


The SNP can be afforded power at Westminster because (a) if Labour want to take office they might not have much choice and (b) if elected to Westminster they have every right to influence proceedings. This isn't without precedent, although the Irish Parliamentary Party admittedly has slightly different aims.

Are you seriously saying that Labour should let the Tories form a government rather than work with the SNP, despite the many areas of overlap in their respective manifestos?

I am seriously saying that people should vote Labour if the want a Labour government, and I cannot see how a viable and stable UK government that involves that SNP can be formed.

[Peevemor]

I am seriously saying that people should vote Labour if the want a Labour government, and I cannot see how a viable and stable UK government that involves that SNP can be formed.

But it's looking like the Scottish electorate doesn't.

[hibs0666]

But it's looking like the Scottish electorate doesn't.

That's fine, and if it results in a Tory government then so be it.

[Peevemor]

That's fine, and if it results in a Tory government then so be it.

And if it results in a Labour minority governent, propped up by the SNP (whilst fighting tooth and nail for wishes of the majority of Scottish voters), then so be it, whether you can "countenance" it or not.

[EH6 Hibby]

That's fine, and if it results in a Tory government then so be it.

If England vote Tory, we get a Tory government.

If England vote Labour, we get a Labour government.

What Scotland votes makes no difference overall so anyone who wants to vote SNP should do so as it at least it means some MP's will be looking after Scotland's interests.

[7 Hills]

That's fine, and if it results in a Tory government then so be it.

Scotland voted predominantly Labour in the 1992 General Election and got a Tory Government.

[weecounty hibby]

I am seriously saying that people should vote Labour if the want a Labour government, and I cannot see how a viable and stable UK government that involves that SNP can be formed.[/QUOTE]

The problem for you and the rest of the labour party is that it looks like Scotland isn't fussed about voting for labour. This COUNTRY voted labour continuously and got Tory governments from 79 until Tony Blair's version of the Tories got into power. It was this right wing labour party that got us into a financial crisis as well as an unnecessary and illegal war.
Now as you and the rest of the unionists were so desperate to keep us you will have to deal with the fact that as a NATION we have grown stronger since the referendum. This means that, like it or not, if we return a large number of SNP, or communist, or green, or monster raving loonie party MPs then they are democratically elected to a parliament that you wanted to see Scotland remain part of and have a big say in how that parliament is run.

[snooky]

And if it results in a Labour minority governent, propped up by the SNP (whilst fighting tooth and nail for wishes of the majority of Scottish voters), then so be it, whether you can "countenance" it or not.

I'm sure I read that only once (I think since the war?) has the Scottish vote affected a GE outcome.
That being the case, the argument that voting SNP will secure a win for either Labour or Conservative doesn't hold much water, surely?

[bawheid]

I'm sure I read that only once (I think since the war?) has the Scottish vote affected a GE outcome.
That being the case, the argument that voting SNP will secure a win for either Labour or Conservative doesn't hold much water, surely?

It's desperate, scaremongering nonsense from both of them. The Daily Mail branding Sturgeon the most dangerous woman in the world! I mean, WTF?!!

Only seems to be hardening the resolve of the Scottish electorate though. Can't wait to see Murphy lose his seat - 2015's very own "Portillo moment"...

[Stranraer]

How could the SNP can stand behind a queen's speech that would commit the UK government to replacing Trident? If the SNP could not stand behind a queen's speech delivered By Miliband, how could it possibly be considered a viable long-term coalition partner for Labour?




We both know that your list barely scratches the surface of policy issues facing the UK government. What is the SNP policy on English legal reform? What will the SNP offer Welsh sheep farmersWill the SNP support nationalist aspirations in Northern Ireland?



I am seriously saying that people should vote Labour if the want a Labour government, and I cannot see how a viable and stable UK government that involves that SNP can be formed.

I don't see how that is at all relevant. The DUP are like an Irish version of UKIP, Sinn Fein are opposing Austerity but will ultimately wait for any possible future PM / secretary of state to call for a border poll on Unification - that is more likely to happen under Labour regardless of whether or not the SNP are involved. The SNP might however support the devolution of more powers to Stormont.

[JeMeSouviens]

Trident replacement cannot be delayed again as there are much broader implications that relate to international nuclear non-proliferation agreements. 2016 is a drop dead on that one I'm afraid.


http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/apr/09/tory-labour-renew-trident-threat-reality-nuclear-election



Yup, missed the memo in the same way as the SNP is missing a national transport policy for example.


Sorry, policy for which nation? The SNP has a transport policy for Scotland, does it need one for some other member of the family?



Each seat won by the SNP affords its constituents representation by the SNP at Westminster. However I cannot countenance the SNP sharing the levers of power in a parliament that it seeks to undermine, and I hope that Miliband can find a way to achieve the necessary mandate that leaves the SNP on the sideline.

The SNP won't be sharing levers of power: a coalition has been ruled out by both sides. They'd have had to be barking to get involved in one anyway. Strategically, nothing much at Westminster matters to the SNP outside of how much extra powers they can wring out of Devo+. They should be able to get Smith-and-a-bit in exchange for leaving a Lab minority in something approaching peace. If they achieve that and essentially behave as noisy backbenchers that always speak up for a partisan Scottish interest then it's mission accomplished and on to Holyrood 2016.

[snooky]

It's desperate, scaremongering nonsense from both of them. The Daily Mail branding Sturgeon the most dangerous woman in the world! I mean, WTF?!!

Only seems to be hardening the resolve of the Scottish electorate though. Can't wait to see Murphy lose his seat - 2015's very own "Portillo moment"...

And "Lord" Alexander too!

[JeMeSouviens]

That's fine, and if it results in a Tory government then so be it.

The only way it results in a Tory government is if Lab refuse to join the SNP in voting them down. They wouldn't, would they?

[Peevemor]

The SNP must have decided to withdraw their candidates.

http://www.bbc.com/news/politics/poll-tracker

Good old impartial BBC. :thumbsup:

[JeMeSouviens]

The SNP must have decided to withdraw their candidates.

http://www.bbc.com/news/politics/poll-tracker

Good old impartial BBC. :thumbsup:

Never fear, good old Prof Curtice is keeping an eye on the Scottish numbers:

http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Slide18.jpg

[Future17]

The only way it results in a Tory government is if Lab refuse to join the SNP in voting them down. They wouldn't, would they?

Do you think the SNP would vote down a minority Tory government? I can't really see how that helps their cause at all.

[Hibernia&Alba]

Never fear, good old Prof Curtice is keeping an eye on the Scottish numbers:

http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Slide18.jpg


What's the latest figures on seat distribution?

[JeMeSouviens]

Do you think the SNP would vote down a minority Tory government? I can't really see how that helps their cause at all.

Yes, the SNP has explicitly committed itself to voting against any Tory Queen's speech. Strategically, it keeps the new voters that defected from Lab/Lib in 2011 and look like staying for this election as well onside. It cements their longer term aim of supplanting Labour in Scotland as the main centre-left force. The SNP have got good at playing the long game.

[JeMeSouviens]

What's the latest figures on seat distribution?

SNP forecasted in range 47-55.

[stoneyburn hibs]

SNP forecasted in range 47-55.

Even if it's 40 seats, it would be excellent.

[JeMeSouviens]

Even if it's 40 seats, it would be excellent.

Too right. :agree:

[southfieldhibby]

We need stability at this stage of the recovery and Cameron's lot deserve another term based on the past 5 years.

Not too sure if this is the best sarcastic post ever or not?

[Kavinho]

Wow. 80% to date declared snp in this poll.

Interesting

[bawheid]

Wow. 80% to date declared snp in this poll.

Interesting

The referendum poll on here confirmed that Hibs.net is predominantly nationalist. :greengrin:

[PiemanP]

Not too sure if this is the best sarcastic post ever or not?

No, and millions of voters agree with me.

I tend to keep my political views to myself when it comes to .net, as you can see from the poll I'm not going to have many supporters, nor win many people over. That said, I believe my original comment couldn't be closer to the truth; our economy and country has come a long way since 2010 and I think it's vital we keep at this current strategy and it will bare fruit in the long-term. If not then all that's likely to happen is we'll get the Tories in again in 5 or 10 years time to yet again clean up someone else's mess.

[Geo_1875]

No, and millions of voters agree with me.

I tend to keep my political views to myself when it comes to .net, as you can see from the poll I'm not going to have many supporters, nor win many people over. That said, I believe my original comment couldn't be closer to the truth; our economy and country has come a long way since 2010 and I think it's vital we keep at this current strategy and it will bare fruit in the long-term. If not then all that's likely to happen is we'll get the Tories in again in 5 or 10 years time to yet again clean up someone else's mess.

Tory policies may well "bare fruit" but that fruit will not be available to the ordinary man. Capitalism doesn't work like that.

[PiemanP]

Tory policies may well "bare fruit" but that fruit will not be available to the ordinary man. Capitalism doesn't work like that.

I believe the benefits will be there for all those willing to work hard for it. Don't get me wrong, the Tories are far from perfect but for me they are the best party to govern the UK at the current time.

A Labour government propped up by the SNP genuinly does worry me and it has the potential to really divide the UK if it starts to go wrong. My opinions of course, again I realise yourself and most on here won't agree.

[ACLeith]

I believe the benefits will be there for all those willing to work hard for it. Don't get me wrong, the Tories are far from perfect but for me they are the best party to govern the UK at the current time.

A Labour government propped up by the SNP genuinly does worry me and it has the potential to really divide the UK if it starts to go wrong. My opinions of course, again I realise yourself and most on here won't agree.

The implication in what you say is that if you don't have a job then you are not worth considering. There are many reasons why people are unemployed, being a work-shy parasite on society is a tiny minority.

The largest increase in those that have to attend foodbanks is those who are in employment, but still can't provide the basics for their families. Tory policies are not going to help them, though Jim Murphy says he will eradicate the need for foodbanks if only we keep him in the lifestyle he has become used to - aye right!

[snooky]

Tory policies may well "bare fruit" but that fruit will not be available to the ordinary man. Capitalism doesn't work like that.

Agreed & that's the tragedy.

Capitalist Socialism (or vice-versa) is what this country needs. :cb

Something "Progressive" :wink:

[Onceinawhile]

Want to vote green, but can't as there's no candidate in my constituency.

As the only other party backing the scrapping of trident, I'll instead be giving the SNP my vote.

[southfieldhibby]

I think it's vital we keep at this current strategy and it will bare fruit in the long-term.

What, the doubling of national debt when they said precisely the opposite? The rise of zero hour contracts and food banks or the continued acceptance for massive bonuses to be paid to the very folk who created the financial mess initially?Or maybe you mean the continued privatisation of state owned assets at well below market rates to their chums like the post office?

Aye, good one.

[RyeSloan]

What, the doubling of national debt when they said precisely the opposite? The rise of zero hour contracts and food banks or the continued acceptance for massive bonuses to be paid to the very folk who created the financial mess initially?Or maybe you mean the continued privatisation of state owned assets at well below market rates to their chums like the post office? Aye, good one.

Post office IPO share price was 330p, current share price 440p with a low of 400p. As IPO's go that's hardly 'well below' market rates and as the IPO also included a very large retail element the noise around this is not really deserved. Everyone also conveniently forgets that the government took on the pensions liabilities (approx £5bn) and the requirement to underwrite those pensions forever more. Essentially the only 'chums' that gained a no risk win on that was all the Royal Mail employees and pensioners within their pension scheme. So effectively my tax money has been promised to retirees in a scheme that was too generous and underfunded, now that is something to get upset about not the market performance of the share price after the government has divested itself of a letter and parcel company.

[Beefster]

The referendum poll on here confirmed that Hibs.net is predominantly nationalist. :greengrin:

It confirmed that nationalists like to let everyone know that they're nationalists!

[Moulin Yarns]

It confirmed that nationalists like to let everyone know that they're nationalists!

I wish it to be known I am not a nationalist :agree:

See, I'm not as green as I'm cabbage looking :wink:

[Smartie]

I am not a nationalist but I will certainly be voting SNP.

[Fergus52]

Wanted to vote for the greens, but I've reluctantly decided to vote with my head rather than my heart and will be voting for the SNP.

A vote for the greens would be wasted in this election, particularly when I'm keen for my current Labour MP to be ousted

[Golden Bear]

As was proved in the various Hibs net referendum polls, the posters are not exactly representative of the population as a whole and I'm confident that this will continue to be the case with this particular poll.


:offski:

[Pretty Boy]

As was proved in the various Hibs net referendum polls, the posters are not exactly representative of the population as a whole and I'm confident that this will continue to be the case with this particular poll.


:offski:

Tbh I think the polls on here are very representative of a small section of the population. Pre referendum if you went on almost any football fans forum in Scotland, the exceptions were Rangers and Celtic for the predictable reasons, the polls showed huge majority support for yes. That was the case for the bigger teams like us, Hearts and Aberdeen through to the Brechins and Arbroaths of the world. Polls about voting intentions in this election seem to be following a similar pattern.

That can't be a mere coincidence.

[RyeSloan]

Tbh I think the polls on here are very representative of a small section of the population. Pre referendum if you went on almost any football fans forum in Scotland, the exceptions were Rangers and Celtic for the predictable reasons, the polls showed huge majority support for yes. That was the case for the bigger teams like us, Hearts and Aberdeen through to the Brechins and Arbroaths of the world. Polls about voting intentions in this election seem to be following a similar pattern. That can't be a mere coincidence.

It's not...what I think we are seeing though is basically the transfer of the Yes vote to exclusively the SNP. Previously I reckon a lot of people who voted Yes would not necessarily voted for the SNP (esp in a Westminster election) but as we know the referendum was rather polarising and as such Yes voters are now quite happy to abandon previous political affiliations and vote SNP this time around. It helps of course that we had a Tory led coalition so there is no incumbent benefit for Labour.

You have to hand it to the SNP strategists, they have played a long game very very well (although Labour seemed determined to assist where possible at every turn). Even the SNP manifesto is nicely balanced in not being overly radical but nicely outside of reality enough to portray the SNP as a party that can cut less and spend more than anyone. Add in the rather peculiar fascination of their opposition to attack the SNP as a party rather than their policies (see recent IFS less than flattering review rather typically swatted away by the SNP gladly suggesting that more borrowing was actually the best idea) and it's no wonder the polls are as they are.

[GlesgaeHibby]

Wow. 80% to date declared snp in this poll.

Interesting

Similar results on pie and bovril forum, 79% SNP with around 400 votes cast.

[stoneyburn hibs]

It's not...what I think we are seeing though is basically the transfer of the Yes vote to exclusively the SNP. Previously I reckon a lot of people who voted Yes would not necessarily voted for the SNP (esp in a Westminster election) but as we know the referendum was rather polarising and as such Yes voters are now quite happy to abandon previous political affiliations and vote SNP this time around. It helps of course that we had a Tory led coalition so there is no incumbent benefit for Labour.

You have to hand it to the SNP strategists, they have played a long game very very well (although Labour seemed determined to assist where possible at every turn). Even the SNP manifesto is nicely balanced in not being overly radical but nicely outside of reality enough to portray the SNP as a party that can cut less and spend more than anyone. Add in the rather peculiar fascination of their opposition to attack the SNP as a party rather than their policies (see recent IFS less than flattering review rather typically swatted away by the SNP gladly suggesting that more borrowing was actually the best idea) and it's no wonder the polls are as they are.

Respect your views SiMar,but your so wrong. The vast majority of Yes voters would have always voted SNP, in any Election.

[Pretty Boy]

Respect your views SiMar,but your so wrong. The vast majority of Yes voters would have always voted SNP, in any Election.

The SNPs previous results at Westminster (between 17 and 20% of the popular vote since 2001), at Holyrood (between 20 and 40% of the vote since 2003) and for Europe (between 19 and 29% since 1999) suggest that the Yes vote came from outwith just the core SNP voters. Be that those who usually didn't vote or from other parties is up for debate.

[RyeSloan]

Respect your views SiMar,but your so wrong. The vast majority of Yes voters would have always voted SNP, in any Election.

Maybe, it was after all just my own musings based on not very much ;-)

However that said my musings were simply trying to work out where the surge for the SNP has come from. I honestly don't see their polices as substantially different to warrant such a dramatic upturn in fortunes so I assumed the reason must lie elsewhere, that led me to think that the '45' will have felt rather disenfranchised after the Indy Ref when it came to the main parties who campaigned for a No and have therefore switched in large numbers to voting in the general election for the SNP. Every chance as you say that thought process is dead wrong, I've live a long enough to have been dead wrong on a few occasions :-)

[The Harp Awakes]

Maybe, it was after all just my own musings based on not very much ;-)

However that said my musings were simply trying to work out where the surge for the SNP has come from. I honestly don't see their polices as substantially different to warrant such a dramatic upturn in fortunes so I assumed the reason must lie elsewhere, that led me to think that the '45' will have felt rather disenfranchised after the Indy Ref when it came to the main parties who campaigned for a No and have therefore switched in large numbers to voting in the general election for the SNP. Every chance as you say that thought process is dead wrong, I've live a long enough to have been dead wrong on a few occasions :-)

I think the other thing to factor in when trying to explain the SNP surge, is that I believe there are a lot of people who voted 'no' at the referendum who still disliked the Unionist parties campaign tactics. In particular, the Labour Party,who unashamedly stood alongside the Tories and big business in attempting to scare people into voting no. Many folk want to see these parties get a bloody nose at this election.

[marinello59]

I think the other thing to factor in when trying to explain the SNP surge, is that I believe there are a lot of people who voted 'no' at the referendum who still disliked the Unionist parties campaign tactics. In particular, the Labour Party,who unashamedly stood alongside the Tories and big business in attempting to scare people into voting no. Many folk want to see these parties get a bloody nose at this election.

I think this whole Labour standing with the Tories outrage is mainly felt by those who are SNP supporting Yes voters. Nicola Sturgeon is speaking the language that many Labour voters wished their leaders were using. That's what it comes down to for a lot of us, all this talk of other parties being simply dismissed as Unionist leaves me cold. The referundum was last year.

[Hibrandenburg]

I think this whole Labour standing with the Tories outrage is mainly felt by those who are SNP supporting Yes voters. Nicola Sturgeon is speaking the language that many Labour voters wished their leaders were using. That's what it comes down to for a lot of us, all this talk of other parties being simply dismissed as Unionist leaves me cold. The referundum was last year.


That's about the long and short of it. :agree:

[grunt]

They have plenty of national policies, these include:


Infrastructure spending, eg building HS2 from London and Edinburgh/Glasgow
Increasing health spending*
Reducing/removing tuition fees in England*
Raising the minimum wage
Introducing a proportional voting system
Abolishing the House of Lords
Reversing the Health and Social Care Bill ("bedroom tax")
Bringing the Carer's Allowance into line with Jobseeker's
Abolition of zero-hours contracts

All of which are in the manifesto, both the short (http://www.snp.org/sites/default/files/page/file/04_16d_snp_election_manifesto_290x280x.pdf) and longer (http://www.snp.org/sites/default/files/page/file/04_17d_snp_main_manifesto_245x188.pdf) versions.

Does the SNP manifesto say how they are going to finance all this increased expenditure?

[ronaldo7]

Does the SNP manifesto say how they are going to finance all this increased expenditure?

14758:aok:

[grunt]

14758:aok:Thanks, yes I saw that.

It seems to be a bit vague about where the money is going to come from to pay for all this.
Actually I'd go further than that - it doesn't indicate at all where the money is going to come from.
Other than from a "stronger economy".

It reads like another version of the independence white paper - lots of promises, little content, no explanations.

[EH6 Hibby]

Thanks, yes I saw that.

It seems to be a bit vague about where the money is going to come from to pay for all this.
Actually I'd go further than that - it doesn't indicate at all where the money is going to come from.
Other than from a "stronger economy".

It reads like another version of the independence white paper - lots of promises, little content, no explanations.

Less austerity cuts.

[grunt]

Less austerity cuts.More borrowing then?

[ronaldo7]

Thanks, yes I saw that.

It seems to be a bit vague about where the money is going to come from to pay for all this.
Actually I'd go further than that - it doesn't indicate at all where the money is going to come from.
Other than from a "stronger economy".

It reads like another version of the independence white paper - lots of promises, little content, no explanations.

Modest, responsible increases in public spending of approx. 0.5% in real terms. Debt and deficit still falling as a percentage of GDP.

This would free up £140b to invest in infrastructure, innovation, and growing the economy.

That's what she told me anyway.

We could always trust George Osborne to try and hit at least one of his targets for the next 5 years though:greengrin

[EH6 Hibby]

More borrowing then?


No. Cutting the deficit over a longer time.

[grunt]

Modest, responsible increases in public spending of approx. 0.5% in real terms. Debt and deficit still falling as a percentage of GDP.

This would free up £140b to invest in infrastructure, innovation, and growing the economy.


Thanks. Let's hope it works.

[grunt]

No. Cutting the deficit over a longer time.

Well having debt for longer looks like more debt to me but I see what you mean. Let's hope that it works.

[Kato]

Thanks, yes I saw that.

It seems to be a bit vague about where the money is going to come from to pay for all this.
Actually I'd go further than that - it doesn't indicate at all where the money is going to come from.
Other than from a "stronger economy".

It reads like another version of the independence white paper - lots of promises, little content, no explanations.


Can you tell which political party has a fiscal management strategy in it's manifesto which is water-tight with all the sums adding up so that everything mentioned has been accounted for and every promise can be met?

[RyeSloan]

No. Cutting the deficit over a longer time.

Which is of course more borrowing for longer.

The SNP to their credit are not shying away from the fact that they would borrow more, they are extolling that as a virtue by classing it as 'investment'...not a line I buy for one second but there you go.

[snooky]

Thanks, yes I saw that.

It seems to be a bit vague about where the money is going to come from to pay for all this.
Actually I'd go further than that - it doesn't indicate at all where the money is going to come from.
Other than from a "stronger economy".

It reads like another version of the independence white paper - lots of promises, little content, no explanations.

Unlike all the other parties' manifestos that explain everything.

[JimBHibees]

Anyone see Jim Murphy on reporting scotland absolutely appalling.

[JeMeSouviens]

Anyone see Jim Murphy on reporting scotland absolutely appalling.

He's improving then!

[JimBHibees]

He's improving then!

Arrogant and clueless not a great combination for a politician.

[snooky]

Arrogant and clueless not a great combination for a politician.

So JMS is right enough, Murphy is improving.

[Tyler Durden]

So JMS is right enough, Murphy is improving.

The fascination SNP voters have with Jim Murphy is getting slightly bizarre. Most Labour voters in a GE won't give much thought to the leader of Scottish Labour

[Peevemor]

The fascination SNP voters have with Jim Murphy is getting slightly bizarre. Most Labour voters in a GE won't give much thought to the leader of Scottish Labour


He sets himself up nicely as a hate figure.

[marinello59]

He sets himself up nicely as a hate figure.

It wouldn't matter who the leader was, those who believe SNP good, everybody else evil will hate them.
He has performed dreadfully during this campaign though.

[lyonhibs]

SNP for me. If and when Labour start acting like Labour again I'll go back to voting for them as they are my and my family's "natural " party.

[JeMeSouviens]

The fascination SNP voters have with Jim Murphy is getting slightly bizarre. Most Labour voters in a GE won't give much thought to the leader of Scottish Labour

Personally I've hated Slimebucket since I saw him leading protests against the abolition of student grants only to then use his position as NUS president to sell out his membership (amid allegations of dirty tricks*) in exchange for the chance to run as one of the youngest NuLab candidates in 97.


* http://www.parliament.uk/edm/1995-96/991

[Geo_1875]

The fascination SNP voters have with Jim Murphy is getting slightly bizarre. Most Labour voters in a GE won't give much thought to the leader of Scottish Labour

Most Labour voters in a GE don't have a clue who the leader of the Scottish Labour party is.

Most Scots do know who he is and many don't rate him.

[Hibrandenburg]

The fascination SNP voters have with Jim Murphy is getting slightly bizarre. Most Labour voters in a GE won't give much thought to the leader of Scottish Labour

Maybe because a lot of those SNP voters used to vote Labour and are wondering WTF has happened to the party of the working man? :dunno:

[snooky]

Maybe because a lot of those SNP voters used to vote Labour and are wondering WTF has happened to the party of the working man? :dunno:

And I'm sure a lot of UK voters asked themselves the same question at the last election .... and voted Liberal.

[Mon Dieu4]

It wouldn't matter who the leader was, those who believe SNP good, everybody else evil will hate them.
He has performed dreadfully during this campaign though.

I just find him a condescending twat, Ruth Davidson on the other hand seems like a decent person and a really good politician, I just don't agree with her parties views

[HiBremian]

I just find him a condescending twat, Ruth Davidson on the other hand seems like a decent person and a really good politician, I just don't agree with her parties views

Agree on both counts. Not only a condescending twat but one that oozes insincerity. Pretty sure I'd enjoy a pint with RD, but JM looks the type that lets everyone else buy a round and buggers off when it's his turn.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[RyeSloan]

Agree on both counts. Not only a condescending twat but one that oozes insincerity. Pretty sure I'd enjoy a pint with RD, but JM looks the type that lets everyone else buy a round and buggers off when it's his turn. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Probably the best description of murphy that I have read! :-)

[JeMeSouviens]

Agree on both counts. Not only a condescending twat but one that oozes insincerity. Pretty sure I'd enjoy a pint with RD, but JM looks the type that lets everyone else buy a round and buggers off when it's his turn.


He's teetotal. Mind you, I bet he doesn't buy his own irn-bru either.

[HiBremian]

He's teetotal. Mind you, I bet he doesn't buy his own irn-bru either.

Of course I was thinking pints of irn-bru ;-)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk