Scottish Election 2021

[Moulin Yarns]

It's clearly a great result for the pro-independence parties in terms of seats won but in terms of planning for a referendum it's extremely close in terms of the number of votes cast, pretty much 50-50 between pro-independence and pro-union parties.

As I said earlier, with only around 50% of the electorate voting for pro-independence parties the pro-independence side really has their work cut out if they plan on holding a referendum any time soon, which I do think there's an argument for.

Ignoring the fact that supporters of other persuasion also support independence, and some snp supporters don't, then that's a bit of a long shot.



Expect unionists in Scotland, plus UK govt, to trumpet the following stat:

constituency votes for SNP + Green: 1,274,977
for Tories + Labour + LDs: 1,326,149

Very, very close (and let's see what list vote shows) but anti-referendum parties have won more support than pro.


BUT



Independence supporters can respond with the following, now the list vote has reported back:

SNP + Green + Alba: 1,359,611
Tories + Labour + LDs + Alliance for Unity: 1,283,401



😁

[Sir David Gray]

Ignoring the fact that supporters of other persuasion also support independence, and some snp supporters don't, then that's a bit of a long shot.



Expect unionists in Scotland, plus UK govt, to trumpet the following stat:

constituency votes for SNP + Green: 1,274,977
for Tories + Labour + LDs: 1,326,149

Very, very close (and let's see what list vote shows) but anti-referendum parties have won more support than pro.


BUT



Independence supporters can respond with the following, now the list vote has reported back:

SNP + Green + Alba: 1,359,611
Tories + Labour + LDs + Alliance for Unity: 1,283,401



😁

Like I said it's almost neck and neck and considering another referendum would almost certainly be the final one for a very long time (barring another major event occurring on the scale of Brexit) the pro-independence side has some work to do despite the clear majority they have in Holyrood.

[wookie70]

Like I said it's almost neck and neck and considering another referendum would almost certainly be the final one for a very long time (barring another major event occurring on the scale of Brexit) the pro-independence side has some work to do despite the clear majority they have in Holyrood.

Assuming a chunk of those Labour voters don't support a Yes vote. There may be some SNP and Green who would vote no too but I know a few Labour Yes voters and no SNP or Green No voters. I agree though that it is a judgement call whether to go for a referendum because this may be the last we see in a good while. It won't go away though, Indy just need to wait till the opponents die and that won't be that far away to get a solid majority

[Sir David Gray]

Assuming a chunk of those Labour voters don't support a Yes vote. There may be some SNP and Green who would vote no too but I know a few Labour Yes voters and no SNP or Green No voters. I agree though that it is a judgement call whether to go for a referendum because this may be the last we see in a good while. It won't go away though, Indy just need to wait till the opponents die and that won't be that far away to get a solid majority

Personally if I was Johnson I'd call the SNP's bluff and go in with an offer to hold it asap even before it's requested. I'd be fairly confident that a No vote would still win, albeit with probably a slightly reduced number from 2014.

Refusing a request is not the way to deal with this.

[Radium]

It's clearly a great result for the pro-independence parties in terms of seats won but in terms of planning for a referendum it's extremely close in terms of the number of votes cast, pretty much 50-50 between pro-independence and pro-union parties.

As I said earlier, with only around 50% of the electorate voting for pro-independence parties the pro-independence side really has their work cut out if they plan on holding a referendum any time soon, which I do think there's an argument for.

Constitutionally the parliament has a 72-57 split for parties that put forward a mandate for an independence referendum during the election which needs to be acknowledged and respected. If we start using % of the electorate voting, no party in Scotland has ever had a mandate for its policies and you have to go back to 1935 for a UK government that would have a mandate.

I probably agree with you that we don’t need a referendum any time soon, but for me that would mean it happening towards the end of this parliament.

Health recovery from pandemic is the priority, alongside getting the economy moving again.

Westminster are already challenging the constitutional settlement by taking the UNCRC legislation to the Supreme Court so that outcome will be interesting.

Labour want to set out a new constitutional settlement but are only just thinking about it. Will be interesting to see what comes out and if devomax is resurrected.

The next 18 months will probably involve the legislation being passed and I actually expect Westminster to pass legislation making it illegal at the end of it all.

I also expect that areas such as drugs policy will start to show that we should have more control of our own destiny and demonstrate how different our mindset is from England.

I expect Westminster to throw money at Conservative areas and it will be interesting to see how that plays in England where the scrounging Scots might be best got rid of for some.

All of which could increase or decrease support for a referendum that may not be possible. I &still think that the mandate is there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mayo hibee]

Personally if I was Johnson I'd call the SNP's bluff and go in with an offer to hold it asap even before it's requested. I'd be fairly confident that a No vote would still win, albeit with probably a slightly reduced number from 2014.

Refusing a request is not the way to deal with this.

I'm not sure this would work either from their point of view. You're right in that the No vote would still be favourites but a closer result than last time would just turn up the pressure even more rather than resolve anything.

If the remain vote had squeezed through in the Brexit referendum if wouldn't have finished the issue, it would have just encouraged the leave campaign to rebuild and go again, having gotten so close the previous time. Similarly with Scotland, barring a yes vote or a resounding no vote - both unlikely in the short term I think, the issue will just run and run.

[Sir David Gray]

Constitutionally the parliament has a 72-57 split for parties that put forward a mandate for an independence referendum during the election which needs to be acknowledged and respected. If we start using % of the electorate voting, no party in Scotland has ever had a mandate for its policies and you have to go back to 1935 for a UK government that would have a mandate.

I probably agree with you that we don’t need a referendum any time soon, but for me that would mean it happening towards the end of this parliament.

Health recovery from pandemic is the priority, alongside getting the economy moving again.

Westminster are already challenging the constitutional settlement by taking the UNCRC legislation to the Supreme Court so that outcome will be interesting.

Labour want to set out a new constitutional settlement but are only just thinking about it. Will be interesting to see what comes out and if devomax is resurrected.

The next 18 months will probably involve the legislation being passed and I actually expect Westminster to pass legislation making it illegal at the end of it all.

I also expect that areas such as drugs policy will start to show that we should have more control of our own destiny and demonstrate how different our mindset is from England.

I expect Westminster to throw money at Conservative areas and it will be interesting to see how that plays in England where the scrounging Scots might be best got rid of for some.

All of which could increase or decrease support for a referendum that may not be possible. I &still think that the mandate is there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not saying that they don't have a mandate, I'm saying that they will, by virtue of pro-independence parties holding a majority number of seats.

When a vote inevitably gets passed in Holyrood to hold another referendum then, despite being opposed to independence myself, I think it should be held due to the landscape having changed significantly enough since 2016.

What I was getting at is I do think the percentage of votes cast is important when looking towards the prospect of winning a referendum. In that scenario winning seats is irrelevant it's all about getting just over 50% of the votes cast.

If the Yes side is "only" getting around 50% of the votes cast after we have had Brexit and a very unpopular Prime Minister has been elected in Westminster then it will be a brave decision to call for a referendum. If this one is lost then there won't be another one for a very long time, no matter what kind of percentage of MSPs are pro-independence in future parliaments, unless some other significant event was to take place on a similar scale to the EU vote.

[The Harp Awakes]

While being pleased by the overall election result, I am disgusted by the so called Labour voters tactically voting for the tories.

The Labour Party are totally finished in Scotland as well as England now. Kier Hardie will be turning in his grave to see so many Labour voters in Scotland signing a cross for the nasty party in these elections. They are voting to keep right wing tories having power over the less well off people they are supposed to represent in Scotland. Hell mend them. The Labour Party are going to disappear into oblivion and they deserve everything that is coming to them.

[Steven79]

While being pleased by the overall election result, I am disgusted by the so called Labour voters tactically voting for the tories.

The Labour Party are totally finished in Scotland as well as England now. Kier Hardie will be turning in his grave to see so many Labour voters in Scotland signing a cross for the nasty party in these elections. They are voting to keep right wing tories having power over the less well off people they are supposed to represent in Scotland. Hell mend them. The Labour Party are going to disappear into oblivion and they deserve everything that is coming to them.I truly can't understand a mindset of a socialistic Labour voter switching to Tory so Scotland can stay chained to a right wing Boris Johnson led Tory government.

This "union at all costs" mentality is a sickness as it blinds people to common sense as it truly defies logic.

Do these people truly think they are going to get a socalist government more with an increasingly right wing England calling the shots or an Independent Scotland?

You really can not help stupid!

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

[The Harp Awakes]

I truly can't understand a mindset of a socialistic Labour voter switching to Tory so Scotland can stay chained to a right wing Boris Johnson led Tory government.

This "union at all costs" mentality is a sickness as it blinds people to common sense as it truly defies logic.

Do these people truly think they are going to get a socalist government more with an increasingly right wing England calling the shots or an Independent Scotland?

You really can not help stupid!

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

It completely defies logic. I come from an extended family that was passionately Labour until the Blair years. Since then the party has completely lost its soul and have forgotten where they came from. So sad. Nobody knows what they stand for these days. Red tories for sure.

[cabbageandribs1875]

https://scontent.fman1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/184051424_325724395579237_3163649432307989174_n.jp g?_nc_cat=101&ccb=1-3&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=9Wg-IcTX4xYAX9GMhol&_nc_ht=scontent.fman1-2.fna&oh=d22b42f8a34bdfa45ebbd1aacaa712c2&oe=60BCC6B9

[cabbageandribs1875]

Alba standing in council elections next year

[Jones28]

Assuming a chunk of those Labour voters don't support a Yes vote. There may be some SNP and Green who would vote no too but I know a few Labour Yes voters and no SNP or Green No voters. I agree though that it is a judgement call whether to go for a referendum because this may be the last we see in a good while. It won't go away though, Indy just need to wait till the opponents die and that won't be that far away to get a solid majority

Surely pro-independence Labour voters should be biting the bullet in the way that so many of there unionist Labour colleagues did and tactically vote for the SNP?

[Crunchie]

While being pleased by the overall election result, I am disgusted by the so called Labour voters tactically voting for the tories.

The Labour Party are totally finished in Scotland as well as England now. Kier Hardie will be turning in his grave to see so many Labour voters in Scotland signing a cross for the nasty party in these elections. They are voting to keep right wing tories having power over the less well off people they are supposed to represent in Scotland. Hell mend them. The Labour Party are going to disappear into oblivion and they deserve everything that is coming to them.
There's probably still a fair few Labour people disgusted with the snp for bringing down the Labour govt in 1979 giving us Maggie and 18 years of conservative govt. Now that's what i call tactical voting.

[Jack]

There's probably still a fair few Labour people disgusted with the snp for bringing down the Labour govt in 1979 giving us Maggie and 18 years of conservative govt. Now that's what i call tactical voting.

A Labour myth.

Anyway. I see that Boris Prince of Thieves has sent a rather conciliatory letter of congratulations to NS and the Welsh and will be phoning her today.

A 3 way meeting is going to be arranged to discuss a way forward.

[bawheid]

I was going to buy a newspaper today to read up on the election and the various possible machinations. Not bought a hard copy paper in years. Would rather not read a unionist rag but the National was pretty crap the last time I bought it. Would usually have been either the SoS or the Sunday Times. Any recommendations for good Scottish political analysis?

[lapsedhibee]

I was going to buy a newspaper today to read up on the election and the various possible machinations. Not bought a hard copy paper in years. Would rather not read a unionist rag but the National was pretty crap the last time I bought it. Would usually have been either the SoS or the Sunday Times. Any recommendations for good Scottish political analysis?

Ciaran Jenkins on Ch4 News is the only journalist I'll be paying any attention to.

[DaveF]

There's probably still a fair few Labour people disgusted with the snp for bringing down the Labour govt in 1979 giving us Maggie and 18 years of conservative govt. Now that's what i call tactical voting.

Yet despite that you still joined the SNP and voted yes in 2014. And now you are a Tory 😂

[GlesgaeHibby]

I'm not saying that they don't have a mandate, I'm saying that they will, by virtue of pro-independence parties holding a majority number of seats.

When a vote inevitably gets passed in Holyrood to hold another referendum then, despite being opposed to independence myself, I think it should be held due to the landscape having changed significantly enough since 2016.

What I was getting at is I do think the percentage of votes cast is important when looking towards the prospect of winning a referendum. In that scenario winning seats is irrelevant it's all about getting just over 50% of the votes cast.

If the Yes side is "only" getting around 50% of the votes cast after we have had Brexit and a very unpopular Prime Minister has been elected in Westminster then it will be a brave decision to call for a referendum. If this one is lost then there won't be another one for a very long time, no matter what kind of percentage of MSPs are pro-independence in future parliaments, unless some other significant event was to take place on a similar scale to the EU vote.

Alternatively, starting from 50% for yes this time is a fantastic position to be in before a campaign.

The campaign took yes from around 30% to 45% in 2014.

[Hibbyradge]

Surely pro-independence Labour voters should be biting the bullet in the way that so many of there unionist Labour colleagues did and tactically vote for the SNP?

Is it only Labour voters that have "colleagues"?

Do they all know each other and work together?

[Hibbyradge]

A Labour myth.

Anyway. I see that Boris Prince of Thieves has sent a rather conciliatory letter of congratulations to NS and the Welsh and will be phoning her today.

A 3 way meeting is going to be arranged to discuss a way forward.

In what way is it a myth. :confused:

I remember being furious with the SNP at the time and I cancelled my membership.

[Sir David Gray]

Alternatively, starting from 50% for yes this time is a fantastic position to be in before a campaign.

The campaign took yes from around 30% to 45% in 2014.

Did some polls just a few weeks ago not have Yes at quite a few percentage points above 50%?

[GlesgaeHibby]

Did some polls just a few weeks ago not have Yes at quite a few percentage points above 50%?

Aye, recent polls have all been around the 50% mark.

[Crunchie]

Yet despite that you still joined the SNP and voted yes in 2014. And now you are a Tory 😂
I'm not bitter and I don't hold grudges, whereas as some people will follow a certain party blindly like sheep over a cliff top, I prefer to step back and vote for what is best for me and mine.
There might come a time where I rejoin the snp and vote again for independence, but now is certainly not the time and in all honesty I can't see it for another 20 years at least.

[Betty Boop]

I truly can't understand a mindset of a socialistic Labour voter switching to Tory so Scotland can stay chained to a right wing Boris Johnson led Tory government.

This "union at all costs" mentality is a sickness as it blinds people to common sense as it truly defies logic.

Do these people truly think they are going to get a socalist government more with an increasingly right wing England calling the shots or an Independent Scotland?

You really can not help stupid!

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
Aye describing voters who favour the Union as stupid is really sensible. What about Independence at all costs is that a sickness ?

[Jack]

In what way is it a myth. :confused:

I remember being furious with the SNP at the time and I cancelled my membership.

Labour paint it these days as though it was all the fault of the SNP whereas the whole story paints quite a different picture where the SNP had quite a minor part in the Labour Partys increasingly bad decisions in the run up to that vote. Well apart from being mislead by Labour.

https://www.thenational.scot/news/17531857.busting-myth-snp-brought-us-margaret-thatcher-1979/

[Crunchie]

Labour paint it these days as though it was all the fault of the SNP whereas the whole story paints quite a different picture where the SNP had quite a minor part in the Labour Partys increasingly bad decisions in the run up to that vote. Well apart from being mislead by Labour.

https://www.thenational.scot/news/17531857.busting-myth-snp-brought-us-margaret-thatcher-1979/
There wouldn't have been a vote of no confidence if the snp had sided with Labour. The snp were still smarting with the conditions put on the 79 referendum by Labour and so sided with the conservatives.

[lucky]

The result gives the SNP a chance to create a Scotland for all. They continue to have control over the Scottish budget and will make a few concessions to the Greens. Once the pandemic is over and we are moving forward back to some normality then a referendum should be held. It would gain more support, if the SNP state it will happen 3 years time and won’t happen again for at least another 10 years after but reserve the right to continue to campaign on the matter. A constitutional referendum 10 years apart is generational. Scotland must decide its own future

[Hibrandenburg]

Gove on Marr. "The people of Scotland voted for Nicola Sturgeon because they wanted her to work together with the Tories fighting the pandemic and not for independence".

What ****ing drugs is this tube on?

[Moulin Yarns]

Is it only Labour voters that have "colleagues"?

Do they all know each other and work together?

I thought it was comrades 😉

[weecounty hibby]

Gove on Marr. "The people of Scotland voted for Nicola Sturgeon because they wanted her to work together with the Tories fighting the pandemic and not for independence".

What ****ing drugs is this tube on?
Cocaine I believe is his drug of choice

[weecounty hibby]

The result gives the SNP a chance to create a Scotland for all. They continue to have control over the Scottish budget and will make a few concessions to the Greens. Once the pandemic is over and we are moving forward back to some normality then a referendum should be held. It would gain more support, if the SNP state it will happen 3 years time and won’t happen again for at least another 10 years after but reserve the right to continue to campaign on the matter. A constitutional referendum 10 years apart is generational. Scotland must decide its own future

Very sensible post

[weecounty hibby]

There wouldn't have been a vote of no confidence if the snp had sided with Labour. The snp were still smarting with the conditions put on the 79 referendum by Labour and so sided with the conservatives.
Labour had been mismanaging the UK so badly at that point that they would have lost any election regardless of when it came along. From memory, as I can't be arsed checking, there was an election due anyway. There is huge revision about that time from Labour.

[Moulin Yarns]

There wouldn't have been a vote of no confidence if the snp had sided with Labour. The snp were still smarting with the conditions put on the 79 referendum by Labour and so sided with the conservatives.

I see that Maggie was the one that called for the vote of no confidence.

How is that the responsibility of the SNP.

[Crunchie]

Labour had been mismanaging the UK so badly at that point that they would have lost any election regardless of when it came along. From memory, as I can't be arsed checking, there was an election due anyway. There is huge revision about that time from Labour.
Bottom line is the snp sided with the conservatives in a vote of no confidence in the labour govt. Point being the high and mighty snp stance on tactical voting is a bit hypocritical.

[Moulin Yarns]

Bottom line is the snp sided with the conservatives in a vote of no confidence in the labour govt. Point being the high and mighty snp stance on tactical voting is a bit hypocritical.

How is voting in a vote of no confidence, and not having confidence in the government, tactical voting.

Correct me if I'm wrong, the SNP had it's own motion of no confidence prepared, but it was for callaghan as pm not the Labour government, which is what Maggie's motion was.

[makaveli1875]

Michael Gove spitting obvious lies on the sunday show . Who's idea was it to let him on telly this morning

[Steven79]

Aye describing voters who favour the Union as stupid is really sensible. What about Independence at all costs is that a sickness ?It's like Turkey's voting for Christmas.

I know what side history will side with.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

[Steven79]

Michael Gove spitting obvious lies on the sunday show . Who's idea was it to let him on telly this morningNicola Sturgeon? [emoji23]

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

[Northernhibee]

Gove on Marr. "The people of Scotland voted for Nicola Sturgeon because they wanted her to work together with the Tories fighting the pandemic and not for independence".

What ****ing drugs is this tube on?

I’m sure that Scotland will appreciate being told what it wants and thinks from him.

[Sir David Gray]

Aye, recent polls have all been around the 50% mark.

Yep I know that's why I just think the trajectory isn't great for independence and despite the pro-independence majority in Holyrood right now with only around 50% of the voters voting for pro-independence parties it will be a brave decision to call a referendum.

[degenerated]

Gove on Marr. "The people of Scotland voted for Nicola Sturgeon because they wanted her to work together with the Tories fighting the pandemic and not for independence".

What ****ing drugs is this tube on?Cocaine, as I understand it

Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk

[Peevemor]

Yep I know that's why I just think the trajectory isn't great for independence and despite the pro-independence majority in Holyrood right now with only around 50% of the voters voting for pro-independence parties it will be a brave decision to call a referendum.If they don't the independence movement will fragment and the opportunity will be lost, possibly forever.

[Bostonhibby]

I’m sure that Scotland will appreciate being told what it wants and thinks from him.I really wish he'd just focus fully on his transition away from being Scottish.

He's spent so long on the rather weird accent and I'd feel much happier as a Scot knowing he had morphed into whatever it is he aspires to be.

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Hibbyradge]

Labour had been mismanaging the UK so badly at that point that they would have lost any election regardless of when it came along. From memory, as I can't be arsed checking, there was an election due anyway. There is huge revision about that time from Labour.

There's been no revision. You are right that Labour were unpopular but they still had 6 months to try to turn it around.

The SNP backed a motion of no confidence in the government as punishment for their part in scuppering the Scotland Act referendum.

That spiteful act gave us Margaret Thatcher.

Unless you're suggesting that the SNP preferred the Tories to Labour. :dunno:

[Hibbyradge]

I know what side history will side with.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

I have no idea what that means! :hilarious

[DaveF]

The result gives the SNP a chance to create a Scotland for all. They continue to have control over the Scottish budget and will make a few concessions to the Greens. Once the pandemic is over and we are moving forward back to some normality then a referendum should be held. It would gain more support, if the SNP state it will happen 3 years time and won’t happen again for at least another 10 years after but reserve the right to continue to campaign on the matter. A constitutional referendum 10 years apart is generational. Scotland must decide its own future

Could not agree more with that.

[Kato]

There's been no revision. You are right that Labour were unpopular but they still had 6 months to try to turn it around.

The SNP backed a motion of no confidence in the government as punishment for their part in scuppering the Scotland Act referendum.

That spiteful act gave us Margaret Thatcher.

Unless you're suggesting that the SNP preferred the Tories to Labour. :dunno:

That Labour Govt weren't turning anything around, whether we got Thatcher in 1979 or 1980, we were getting Thatcher.

[Jones28]

Is it only Labour voters that have "colleagues"?

Do they all know each other and work together?

Ooooh just a wee figure of speech seems to have touched a nerve.

[Hibbyradge]

That Labour Govt weren't turning anything around, whether we got Thatcher in 1979 or 1980, we were getting Thatcher.

Maybe, maybe not.

Folk are keen to criticise Labour for siding with the Tories when it suits them politically. They should accept that the SNP did exactly the same and undoubtedly would do so again in the right circumstances.

Most politicians would do so if it suited their agenda. Even the blessed Jeremy has voted with the Tories against his own party.

[Hibbyradge]

Ooooh just a wee figure of speech seems to have touched a nerve.

My nerves remain virginal.

I'm just amused that some folk think that voters are somehow sneakily organising themselves against the SNP when the truth is they just don't want independence or they don't like the leader.

I'm very disappointed that the SNP "only" won 64 seats, and that it's somehow being portrayed as a failure, but I think the chances of a Yes vote when Indy 2 eventually arrives are greater than ever.

However there's loads of work to do to achieve that and belittling people who we need to get onside isn't going to help.

[weecounty hibby]

There's been no revision. You are right that Labour were unpopular but they still had 6 months to try to turn it around.

The SNP backed a motion of no confidence in the government as punishment for their part in scuppering the Scotland Act referendum.

That spiteful act gave us Margaret Thatcher.

Unless you're suggesting that the SNP preferred the Tories to Labour. :dunno:
No what I'm saying is that Labour were so unpopular that they would have lost the election anyway. In fact it took them 18 years and a huge leap to the right to be elected again. Thatcher was hugely popular with voters in England. Labour would never have turned it round in 6 months, at least two of those would have been campaigning trying to persuade folk that honestly we won't be as **** as we were in the last few years!! Never going to happen. So I don't believe that the SNP gave us Thatcher and neither did Callaghan.
And do you think it was spiteful of Labour to go back on their word over the referendum bill?

[Kato]

Maybe, maybe not.

Folk are keen to criticise Labour for siding with the Tories when it suits them politically. They should accept that the SNP did exactly the same and undoubtedly would do so again in the right circumstances.

Most politicians would do so if it suited their agenda. Even the blessed Jeremy has voted with the Tories against his own party.

Politicians are slippery and slimy when it suits them I agree. Even though I vote I've no great love for any Party because 1. They don't deserve it 2. They lie 3. They will always let you down and 4. They aren't very truthful.

Saying that the SNP action surrounding Thatcher's (inevitable) election win was 42 years ago, Labour's collusion with the Tories happened this weekend. That whataboutery needs putting into context.

[SHODAN]

Gove on Marr. "The people of Scotland voted for Nicola Sturgeon because they wanted her to work together with the Tories fighting the pandemic and not for independence".

What ****ing drugs is this tube on?

Surely they'd have just bypassed the middle man and voted for the Tories then.

[degenerated]

There's been no revision. You are right that Labour were unpopular but they still had 6 months to try to turn it around.

The SNP backed a motion of no confidence in the government as punishment for their part in scuppering the Scotland Act referendum.

That spiteful act gave us Margaret Thatcher.

Unless you're suggesting that the SNP preferred the Tories to Labour. :dunno:Aye, all the SNP's fault. Nowt to do with Labours terrible performance in government at that time.

Is it just the SNP you blame it on or are the liberals equally guilty?



Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk

[SHODAN]

Maybe, maybe not.

Folk are keen to criticise Labour for siding with the Tories when it suits them politically. They should accept that the SNP did exactly the same and undoubtedly would do so again in the right circumstances.

Most politicians would do so if it suited their agenda. Even the blessed Jeremy has voted with the Tories against his own party.

The modern-day SNP are defined by their opposition to the Tories. That wasn't the case in 1979; fair enough. 1979 was long before I was born let alone politically aware, and if they joined forces with them now they'd lose the votes of me and most of their supporters. They know that fine well and that's why it won't happen now.

Labour are in a position in Scotland where, whether they like it or not, constitutional politics dominate the political landscape. The position they hold now i.e. sustaining the union is now diametrically at odds with their traditional left-wing, working-class voting base, not least because sustaining a union requires collusion with the Conservatives. They can either decide to dispense with this and go pro-independence (or at least not oppose it), or in 2026 the Greens will overtake them as the third party.

I look at Scottish Labour and I see a bunch of middle-class establishment professionals who think that the late 90s/early 2000s were the best years ever and if the idiot masses all started acting like that again everything would be fine, irrespective of the political or economic upheaval that has taken place since.

Try telling that to me whose earnings and qualifications far outstrips my parents when they were my age, yet they had to almost completely fund my deposit for a property that is 3+ times the value of what it was in the mid-90s when they bought theirs. AND I'm one of the lucky ones.

Politics changes and Labour and their supporters don't seem to get that.

[CloudSquall]

Reading about the SNP supposedly putting Thatcher into power in 1979 is like listening to Albert's "during the war" speeches in Only Fools and Horses.

[SaulGoodman]

Would like to thank the posters that provided updates during the election results, time to bow out this thread now as it seems to have reverted back to mud slinging.

[Moulin Yarns]

Would like to thank the posters that provided updates during the election results, time to bow out this thread now as it seems to have reverted back to mud slinging.

👍

[Pretty Boy]

As I said on the Labour thread it's a ludicrous situation that Labour find themselves losing voters to both the SNP and Conservative. Whether as a result of cirucmstances or by design.

The unofficial unionist alliance with the Tories is something that is at the root of a lot of their issues. The image of Labour activists hugging and high fiving Tories during the last referendum will live long in the memory for me and I'm about as soft a yes voter as you will get.

The SNP have somehow stolen the mantle as the progressive, left wing party despite actual evidence of them being worthy of such a tag being thin on the ground. There are more than a few policies that are commendable in the way they tackle the symptoms of poverty and inequality but little in the way of radical policies aimed at tackle the root causes. A lot of big promises from the formative days of the SNP govt have been quietly dropped or amended over the years. When I see people getting excited about Kate Forbes as a future FM then I can only hope the lefties using the SNP as a means to an end are keeping quiet in the background.

Labour missed the boat when it came to presenting a 3rd way. A decade ago devo max was the obvious solution to a growing discontent but no one grasped the opportunity to present it as such. The debate is now so polarised that taking a non stance and wishing it away is not an option.

Time for Labour to accept another referendum is happening, support it and remain muted in their position as a unionist party and build themselves into a position to pick up the pieces whatever the result. If it's no again then get devo max on the table and be passionate about it. If it's yes then get prepared to be a genuinely democratic socialist alternative for Scotland. God knows we need one.

[Jones28]

My nerves remain virginal.

I'm just amused that some folk think that voters are somehow sneakily organising themselves against the SNP when the truth is they just don't want independence or they don't like the leader.

I'm very disappointed that the SNP "only" won 64 seats, and that it's somehow being portrayed as a failure, but I think the chances of a Yes vote when Indy 2 eventually arrives are greater than ever.

However there's loads of work to do to achieve that and belittling people who we need to get onside isn't going to help.

I didn’t mean to insinuate something underhand by what I said, I was genuinely curious. My question may well be answered by the East Lothian result.

[Moulin Yarns]

A final analysis of the votes. I've got all the votes cast, firstly constituency votes, then list votes, follwed by total votes cast for each party, then that figure divided by 2.

The top figure is the total yes parties less the total No parties, not including the obscure parties but including the 'personality' parties Alba and All for Unity.




Constit
List
total
Total/2


Yes/no assumed
-38462
76210
37748
18874



SNP
1291204
1094374
2385578
1192789


LD
-187746
-137152
-324898
-162449


Con
-592518
-637131
-1229649
-614825


Lab
-584392
-485819
-1070211
-535106


green
34990
220324
255314
127657









alba

44913
44913
44913


all for unity

-23299
-23299
-23299









Scottish Family
2734
16085
18819
9410


Independent
5673
6122
11795
5898


Freedom
1154
6271
7425
3713


Reform

5793
5793
5793


UKIP
699
3848
4547
2274


others
5573
31604
37177
18589

[Since90+2]

I'm a Yes voter but if there was a indy referendum tomorrow my gut says No would win.

Whether or not that changes in the next couple of years or not is the question. Boris is a gambler and I honestly wouldn't be surprised if he agreed to a referendum on the basis it must take place within x amount of time.

Nicola Sturgeon is a huge reason for the SNPs popularity and a defeat in the referendum would mean her resignation, Boris will know that and might think it's a chance to kill 2 birds with 1 stone.

[Hibs90]

I'm a Yes voter but if there was a indy referendum tomorrow my gut says No would win.

Whether or not that changes in the next couple of years or not is the question. Boris is a gambler and I honestly wouldn't be surprised if he agreed to a referendum on the basis it must take place within x amount of time.

Think SNP know this, hence why they've been saying 'at a time we decide'

[GlesgaeHibby]

Yep I know that's why I just think the trajectory isn't great for independence and despite the pro-independence majority in Holyrood right now with only around 50% of the voters voting for pro-independence parties it will be a brave decision to call a referendum.

I disagree, around 50% as a starting point is far better than where we started from in 2014. I think the SNP need to move on this quickly given the circumstances are perfect for building support at the moment. Tories winning down south in labour heartlands and likely to be in power until at least 2029, food exports being hammered by brexit, Tories using a pandemic to funnel money to their mates.

I think when things settle in a few years after covid and brexit people will be less willing to vote for such a significant change and more upheaval and uncertainty.

I appreciate getting this right is difficult and the approach the SNP have taken with indyref2 after recovery is aimed at targeting soft No's. That may be the best way. I'd rather they went with a strategy of independence for recovery and a positive campaign about doing things differently and having a government Scotland elects in charge of all the levers of power, to get the recovery right, rather than Boris.

[Hibernia&Alba]

A final analysis of the votes. I've got all the votes cast, firstly constituency votes, then list votes, follwed by total votes cast for each party, then that figure divided by 2.

The top figure is the total yes parties less the total No parties, not including the obscure parties but including the 'personality' parties Alba and All for Unity.




Constit
List
total
Total/2


Yes/no assumed
-38462
76210
37748
29681


SNP
1291204
1094374
2385578
1192789


LD
-187746
-137152
-324898
-162449


Con
-592518
-637131
-1229649
-614825


Lab
-584392
-485819
-1070211
-535106


green
34990
220324
255314
127657









alba

44913
44913
44913


all for unity

-23299
-23299
-23299









Scottish Family
2734
16085
18819
9410


Independent
5673
6122
11795
5898


Freedom
1154
6271
7425
3713


Reform

5793
5793
5793


UKIP
699
3848
4547
2274


others
5573
31604
37177
18589




Good work, sir. Just look how tight the assumed Yes/No vote is: around thirty thousand votes in it.

[Moulin Yarns]

Good work, sir. Just look how tight the assumed Yes/No vote is: around thirty thousand votes in it.

Actually tighter, just under 19,000 (I had the wrong formula :rolleyes:)

[Pretty Boy]

I'm a Yes voter but if there was a indy referendum tomorrow my gut says No would win.

Whether or not that changes in the next couple of years or not is the question. Boris is a gambler and I honestly wouldn't be surprised if he agreed to a referendum on the basis it must take place within x amount of time.

I think there are is a lot less scope for movement this time.

There was huge, and deserved, swing towards yes last time. They put forward a positive campaign. A lot of it was largely irrelevant to the question being asked and much of the white paper read like a manifesto but that doesn't really matter, it captured people's imaginations.

This time around people are far more entrenched in their views. We have had a decade of the constitutional question dominating our politics and increasingly people's vote in every election is dictated by their stance on that issue. That's not some startling revelation, people are quite open about 'lending' their vote to the SNP or tactically voting for the best placed unionist.

I'm not sure there is a 10 or 20% swing to be had this time. I think both sides are fighting for a small core of 'don't knows' and very soft voters on the other side. I'd suggest 40%+ are locked in on either side. It also concerns me that that leads to a situation in which the result is close enough either way that it still doesn't resolve the division and the years after are spent fighting for another referendum, a confirmatory referendum, a referendum to rejoin etc etc. That will happen anyway to some extent but if it's 51-49 or similar it will be all the more bitter.

[Since90+2]

I think there are is a lot less scope for movement this time.

There was huge, and deserved, swing towards yes last time. They put forward a positive campaign. A lot of it was largely irrelevant to the question being asked and much of the white paper read like a manifesto but that doesn't really matter, it captured people's imaginations.

This time around people are far more entrenched in their views. We have had a decade of the constitutional question dominating our politics and increasingly people's vote in every election is dictated by their stance on that issue. That's not some startling revelation, people are quite open about 'lending' their vote to the SNP or tactically voting for the best placed unionist.

I'm not sure there is a 10 or 20% swing to be had this time. I think both sides are fighting for a small core of 'don't knows' and very soft voters on the other side. I'd suggest 40%+ are locked in on either side. It also concerns me that that leads to a situation in which the result is close enough either way that it still doesn't resolve the division and the years after are spent fighting for another referendum, a confirmatory referendum, a referendum to rejoin etc etc. That will happen anyway to some extent but if it's 51-49 or similar it will be all the more bitter.

Agreed. I think the result will be closer this time and a 51/49 split or something very close to that is likely.

If Yes were to lose by that much you can absolutely guarantee that people would continue to campaign for independence. It would go on for years.

The only way this is resolved is if there is a overwhelming victory for either side and that looks highly unlikely. I really don't see how this resolves.

Perhaps a federal UK system is something that could get close to keeping all parties happy. As a yes voter I'd personally be happy with that but I'm not sure how popular that would be.

[Sir David Gray]

I disagree, around 50% as a starting point is far better than where we started from in 2014. I think the SNP need to move on this quickly given the circumstances are perfect for building support at the moment. Tories winning down south in labour heartlands and likely to be in power until at least 2029, food exports being hammered by brexit, Tories using a pandemic to funnel money to their mates.

I think when things settle in a few years after covid and brexit people will be less willing to vote for such a significant change and more upheaval and uncertainty.

I appreciate getting this right is difficult and the approach the SNP have taken with indyref2 after recovery is aimed at targeting soft No's. That may be the best way. I'd rather they went with a strategy of independence for recovery and a positive campaign about doing things differently and having a government Scotland elects in charge of all the levers of power, to get the recovery right, rather than Boris.

I think that given the fallout from Brexit and the rhetoric from the SNP about being "dragged out of the EU against our will" etc and the election of an unpopular figure (as far as Scotland's concerned at least) in Westminster I think the pro-independence side would have hoped for a larger share of the vote than just 50% in the first Scottish elections after both events.

Despite what the SNP would like to have us believe I'm just not sure that there's quite the appetite for independence amongst voters. If they can't get more than 50% now then I'm not sure what will happen to change that in the future.

[Moulin Yarns]

I think that given the fallout from Brexit and the rhetoric from the SNP about being "dragged out of the EU against our will" etc and the election of an unpopular figure (as far as Scotland's concerned at least) in Westminster I think the pro-independence side would have hoped for a larger share of the vote than just 50% in the first Scottish elections after both events.

Despite what the SNP would like to have us believe I'm just not sure that there's quite the appetite for independence amongst voters. If they can't get more than 50% now then I'm not sure what will happen to change that in the future.

Based on my calculations of the votes cast, those who clearly voted for an Independence party is at 50.7%*. Not great for the yes movement as far as it goes, but that is without the campaign even started yet.


* See my chart above for how I reached that. Lots of ifs and buts in how I arrived at it. :wink:

[WeeRussell]

I think that given the fallout from Brexit and the rhetoric from the SNP about being "dragged out of the EU against our will" etc and the election of an unpopular figure (as far as Scotland's concerned at least) in Westminster I think the pro-independence side would have hoped for a larger share of the vote than just 50% in the first Scottish elections after both events.

Despite what the SNP would like to have us believe I'm just not sure that there's quite the appetite for independence amongst voters. If they can't get more than 50% now then I'm not sure what will happen to change that in the future.

“The rhetoric”? Were we not dragged out of the EU against our will?

I think they’ll be quite satisfied with the result and wouldn’t have expected much more. An overall majority for pro-independence parties.

I’m not sure the appetite for another referendum is as low as the ever-changing spin of the unionists on the bbc would have us believe. The unionist leaders are scared of something - why else would they continue to make themselves look (even more) ridiculous with their constant changing of stories and refusal to answer straight forward questions?

If a YES vote is so obviously what the people of Scotland don’t want, a referendum would put this all to bed for a very long time.

[Skol]

“The rhetoric”? Were we not dragged out of the EU against our will?

I think they’ll be quite satisfied with the result and wouldn’t have expected much more. An overall majority for pro-independence parties.

I’m not sure the appetite for another referendum is as low as the ever-changing spin of the unionists on the bbc would have us believe. The unionist leaders are scared of something - why else would they continue to make themselves look (even more) ridiculous with their constant changing of stories and refusal to answer straight forward questions?

If a YES vote is so obviously what the people of Scotland don’t want, a referendum would put this all to bed for a very long time.

You could argue 45% voted for the snp to take us out of Europe willingly !!

[Since90+2]

You could argue 45% voted for the snp to take us out of Europe willingly !!

Im not sure I understand what you mean by that?

[Moulin Yarns]

Im not sure I understand what you mean by that?

Ach, they are trying to suggest that Scotland would not be in the EU if it isn't a part of the UK :rolleyes:

Unfurtunately the same can't be said of Scotland being part of the EU while being part of the UK. :wink:

[Santa Cruz]

Im not sure I understand what you mean by that?

In 2014 the UK were still EU members. Scotland had no guarantee of membership if it had been a Yes vote, by all accounts potentially quite a long wait as there was uncertainties over whether we met the criteria to join. Spain also could have vetoed. These questions need firm answers before any other Ref, or that could be quite a ropey transitional period.

[WeeRussell]

You could argue 45% voted for the snp to take us out of Europe willingly !!

No I couldn’t.

[WeeRussell]

In 2014 the UK were still EU members. Scotland had no guarantee of membership if it had been a Yes vote, by all accounts potentially quite a long wait as there was uncertainties over whether we met the criteria to join. Spain also could have vetoed. These questions need firm answers before any other Ref, or that could be quite a ropey transitional period.

You’re right - the only “guarantee” for continued EU membership was to vote NO in 2014.

[Santa Cruz]

You’re right - the only “guarantee” for continued EU membership was to vote NO in 2014.

:confused:

[Since90+2]

:confused:

That was what the no campaign told us in 2014. If you want to remain a EU citizen you should vote no to guarantee that.

We all know how that turned out.

[Colr]

You’re right - the only “guarantee” for continued EU membership was to vote NO in 2014.

Would be interesting if Gove or Johnson or any of the Tory Brexit sturmabteilung had said this.

[Santa Cruz]

That was what the no campaign told us in 2014. If you want to remain a EU citizen you should vote no to guarantee that.

We all know how that turned out.

Aah ok, cheers for explaining. Problem with that though is more people either weren't fussed so didn't vote, or voted leave, than actually voted remain. So, we don' actually know what if any influence that would have on an Indy Ref result.

[cabbageandribs1875]

You’re right - the only “guarantee” for continued EU membership was to vote NO in 2014.


pensioners were also told by liar Brown they would lose their pensions.......... which of course turned out to be a lie, but the seed was planted

[cabbageandribs1875]

https://scontent.fman1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/184102323_1682923991895246_6920012169617917507_n.j pg?_nc_cat=105&ccb=1-3&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=91ZFMXFMinkAX_Cc8Vz&_nc_oc=AQksM0c0a28B_CHcJHy6iNFblg5KKI8BkVY_fLgmrV7 Zek5HkMCg58gPDN7IUJQkURw&_nc_ht=scontent.fman1-2.fna&oh=64194f58adfa6ae8afc9c12379d63230&oe=60BEF9E0

[Since90+2]

Aah ok, cheers for explaining. Problem with that though is more people either weren't fussed so didn't vote, or voted leave, than actually voted remain. So, we don' actually know what if any influence that would have on an Indy Ref result.

I imagine it impacted the thinking of some voters. EU citizens living in Scotland from other European countries likely voted no for that reason.

[WeeRussell]

Aah ok, cheers for explaining. Problem with that though is more people either weren't fussed so didn't vote, or voted leave, than actually voted remain. So, we don' actually know what if any influence that would have on an Indy Ref result.

The principle of scaremongering with an event that you then enable yourself is enough really, but there are certainly a fair number of voters that now say they would vote YES (and would have voted YES) as a preference to leaving the EU. That’s for sure.

[Santa Cruz]

The principle of scaremongering with an event that you then enable yourself is enough really, but there are certainly a fair number of voters that now say they would vote YES (and would have voted YES) as a preference to leaving the EU. That’s for sure.

I'm not clear how I'm enabling scaremongering by stating a fact about voting leave/not voting as opposed to voting remain figure's?

[Moulin Yarns]

I imagine it impacted the thinking of some voters. EU citizens living in Scotland from other European countries likely voted no for that reason.

This could be a crucial part of independence campaign. Free movement of people which has been removed by the UK. The lies from the better together campaign should be very useful as well.

[lapsedhibee]

I'm not clear how I'm enabling scaremongering by stating a fact about voting leave/not voting as opposed to voting remain figure's?
Think WR's talking about the Better Together Tory people, not you.

[pacoluna]

Like I said it's almost neck and neck and considering another referendum would almost certainly be the final one for a very long time (barring another major event occurring on the scale of Brexit) the pro-independence side has some work to do despite the clear majority they have in Holyrood.

In that case Brexit must be cancelled - or do people just conflate referendums and election results when it suits them. It's absolutely nonsence.

[Santa Cruz]

Think he's talking about the Better Together Tory people, not you.

The post said "you then enable yourself". I misunderstood due to the wording of the post. Kind of like how you help me out from time to time when I pick up post's incorrectly. :aok:

[WeeRussell]

The post said "you then enable yourself". I misunderstood due to the wording of the post. Kind of like how you help me out from time to time when I pick up post's incorrectly. :aok:

Yes, for clarity - I don’t think you enabled Brexit 👍

[Moulin Yarns]

Yes, for clarity - I don’t think you enabled Brexit 👍

Whit? I was sure it was all her fault!!


Only joking Santa 😉

[Santa Cruz]

Yes, for clarity - I don’t think you enabled Brexit 👍

:aok:

[Steven79]

In that case Brexit must be cancelled - or do people just conflate referendums and election results when it suits them. It's absolutely nonsence.Scotland is only allowed democracy when our Westminster masters allow us...

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

[Santa Cruz]

Whit? I was sure it was all her fault!!


Only joking Santa 😉

I know you're joshing. I will be honest though, I voted Leave, I just didn't take part in influencing anyone else's vote. I made my own mind up.

[Since90+2]

I know you're joshing. I will be honest though, I voted Leave, I just didn't take part in influencing anyone else's vote. I made my own mind up.

If you don't mind me asking, do you regret that at all? And if you could vote again would it be different?

[Kato]

I know you're joshing. I will be honest though, I voted Leave, I just didn't take part in influencing anyone else's vote. I made my own mind up.On what criteria was your mind made up?

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

[Santa Cruz]

If you don't mind me asking, do you regret that at all? And if you could vote again would it be different?

No, I don't mind you asking. I wouldn't change my vote. I didn't think we would get everything we wanted from the deal, I suppose the only part I fully didn't understand the ramifications of, was the implications for N.Ireland, so more info on that would have been useful, equally I should have taken it on board to pay more attention to the issue.

[Moulin Yarns]

I know you're joshing. I will be honest though, I voted Leave, I just didn't take part in influencing anyone else's vote. I made my own mind up.

I see a few people asking why. While I would be interested I think that you should keep it to yourself for the sanity of the thread, and probably the Admins. 😁


Too late 👍

[Santa Cruz]

On what criteria was your mind made up?

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

The failure of successive Govs to build the infrastructure to cope with the growing population. It impacted education, health and housing. I'm not keen on two member states having far more influence than the many more smaller countries.

[Santa Cruz]

I see a few people asking why. While I would be interested I think that you should keep it to yourself for the sanity of the thread, and probably the Admins. 😁


Too late 👍

I'm happy to be honest and up front. I respect other people's views and realise they may differ to mine. I won't keep answering if you think it will upset the thread/admins.

[Moulin Yarns]

The failure of successive Govs to build the infrastructure to cope with the growing population. It impacted education, health and housing. I'm not keen on two member states having far more influence than the many more smaller countries.

OK, I have to ask, how has 2 member states (of the EU) had more influence on the smaller states? And which 2 do you think they are?

Why has that stopped governments in the UK and Scotland build the infrastructure you mentioned?

[Santa Cruz]

OK, I have to ask, how has 2 member states (of the EU) had more influence on the smaller states? And which 2 do you think they are?

Why has that stopped governments in the UK and Scotland build the infrastructure you mentioned?

The member states are Germany and France, they seem to have greater influence probably due to the size of their economies. They haven't stopped any part of the UK develop the infrastructure, that was a failure of successive Government's here.

[Since90+2]

The member states are Germany and France, they seem to have greater influence probably due to the size of their economies. They haven't stopped any part of the UK develop the infrastructure, that was a failure of successive Government's here.

What evidence is there that France have had more influence than the UK?

[Moulin Yarns]

The member states are Germany and France, they seem to have greater influence probably due to the size of their economies. They haven't stopped any part of the UK develop the infrastructure, that was a failure of successive Government's here.

The second answer therefore had no influence on how you voted in EU referendum them. So why did you bother mentioning them.


Don't get me wrong, you can do whatever you want, but sometimes I wonder what goes through people's minds when they make important decisions. (and that is not meant to be a dig at you, please believe me.)

[Santa Cruz]

What evidence is there that France have had more influence than the UK?

I've no evidence, it's just with anything EU related, you'd get a statement from Merkel or Macron, I never heard a voice from Greece, Spain, Poland etc. It wasn't my main reason, it was a combination including the set up of moving parliament base's from Strasburg to Brussel's, I never understood how that cost was justified.

[Santa Cruz]

The second answer therefore had no influence on how you voted in EU referendum them. So why did you bother mentioning them.


Don't get me wrong, you can do whatever you want, but sometimes I wonder what goes through people's minds when they make important decisions. (and that is not meant to be a dig at you, please believe me.)

No, they're not related. It was a combination of reasons, not a single issue.

[The Modfather]

I’d like to see a 2nd referendum fought on a positive basis, why we would be better off independent and the possibilities or why we’re better in the union. That’s unlikely to be the case and I fully expect Yes to have learned from Project Fear and have their own version this time. I think better together can probably effectively scrutinise what an independent Scotland would look like but are going to really struggle to put forward the case for what is going to change, and for the better, in a post Brexit union.

[Hibrandenburg]

Surely they'd have just bypassed the middle man and voted for the Tories then.

That's exactly what my German wife said whilst watching the interview.

[Moulin Yarns]

No, they're not related. It was a combination of reasons, not a single issue.

OK. So unrelated to the EU referendum, but governments are not responsible for house building. Local authorities allocate land for different uses, some of which is housing.

Local authorities are able to build a small number of houses for rent, but the majority of non private rented properties are housing associations.

Affordable housing is usually built in association with private housing for sale as part of larger developments by the likes of Barratt or cala and there's a lot of financial implications for the developers in building housing before having buyers.


I've probably gone off on a tangent, but governments, whether the UK or Scottish, do not have a direct path to building houses.

[Sir David Gray]

“The rhetoric”? Were we not dragged out of the EU against our will?

I think they’ll be quite satisfied with the result and wouldn’t have expected much more. An overall majority for pro-independence parties.

I’m not sure the appetite for another referendum is as low as the ever-changing spin of the unionists on the bbc would have us believe. The unionist leaders are scared of something - why else would they continue to make themselves look (even more) ridiculous with their constant changing of stories and refusal to answer straight forward questions?

If a YES vote is so obviously what the people of Scotland don’t want, a referendum would put this all to bed for a very long time.

Yes, the rhetoric. It was a UK wide vote and the UK voted to leave. Yes the majority of Scotland voted to remain but if the decision to leave was such a big issue in the minds of Scottish voters and such a game changer that the SNP seem to think it is then I'd have expected more than 50% of voters to have voted for pro-independence parties.

Like I've said already I do think another referendum is justified given the majority of SNP/Green MSPs in Holyrood but I'm really not convinced that independence is on the minds of the majority of voters at the moment.

[Hibrandenburg]

You could argue 45% voted for the snp to take us out of Europe willingly !!

You'd be laughed at, but I guess you could argue that point.

[Santa Cruz]

OK. So unrelated to the EU referendum, but governments are not responsible for house building. Local authorities allocate land for different uses, some of which is housing.

Local authorities are able to build a small number of houses for rent, but the majority of non private rented properties are housing associations.

Affordable housing is usually built in association with private housing for sale as part of larger developments by the likes of Barratt or cala and there's a lot of financial implications for the developers in building housing before having buyers.


I've probably gone off on a tangent, but governments, whether the UK or Scottish, do not have a direct path to building houses.

Local Government can't do anything to develop housing or education capacity without increased funding from Central Gov. I'm going to leave it there now as this is the wrong thread, I'll be getting telt the now. :aok:

[greenlex]

Yes, the rhetoric. It was a UK wide vote and the UK voted to leave. Yes the majority of Scotland voted to remain but if the decision to leave was such a big issue in the minds of Scottish voters and such a game changer that the SNP seem to think it is then I'd have expected more than 50% of voters to have voted for pro-independence parties.

Like I've said already I do think another referendum is justified given the majority of SNP/Green MSPs in Holyrood but I'm really not convinced that independence is on the minds of the majority of voters at the moment.
There’s plenty pro independence supporters that don’t wish to rejoin the EU. Referendum on independence has to. Be held. If it’s yes a referendum on rejoining the EU should then also be held.

[cabbageandribs1875]

https://scontent.fman1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/183710830_1683082008546111_8586148341895682172_n.j pg?_nc_cat=110&ccb=1-3&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=HnXoU7Xx5JUAX8R4how&_nc_ht=scontent.fman1-1.fna&oh=1e500e4c688b00c03e84042056571684&oe=60BD0BC2


https://scontent.fman1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/183957110_3048009972099863_8184171455347863704_n.j pg?_nc_cat=108&ccb=1-3&_nc_sid=dbeb18&_nc_ohc=MISYhCA5jn0AX-a78Du&_nc_ht=scontent.fman1-1.fna&oh=c25c84797be7ebf0624b4d5337fc0ee3&oe=60BD2582



what's going on here then :confused:

[weecounty hibby]

https://scontent.fman1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/183710830_1683082008546111_8586148341895682172_n.j pg?_nc_cat=110&ccb=1-3&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=HnXoU7Xx5JUAX8R4how&_nc_ht=scontent.fman1-1.fna&oh=1e500e4c688b00c03e84042056571684&oe=60BD0BC2


https://scontent.fman1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/183957110_3048009972099863_8184171455347863704_n.j pg?_nc_cat=108&ccb=1-3&_nc_sid=dbeb18&_nc_ohc=MISYhCA5jn0AX-a78Du&_nc_ht=scontent.fman1-1.fna&oh=c25c84797be7ebf0624b4d5337fc0ee3&oe=60BD2582



what's going on here then :confused:

I think it's that there were loads of folk who voted for "independent Green Voice" on the ballot who thought they were voting for the Greens. Probably a poor choice of name that the electoral commission allowed. They actually got a couple of thousands in one seat that looks like it deprived the actual greens of a seat

[cabbageandribs1875]

I think it's that there were loads of folk who voted for "independent Green Voice" on the ballot who thought they were voting for the Greens. Probably a poor choice of name that the electoral commission allowed. They actually got a couple of thousands in one seat that looks like it deprived the actual greens of a seat


sadly i don't think they will be able to do anything about Manky Jaickets attempt at deception in Glasgow, no idea what's going on with the Aberdeenshire West one though, was his filthy party standing there as well ?

i noticed the Greens were also angry(quite rightly) at Sky news showing a chart with the Fib-Dems 4 above the Greens 8, making it look like the 8 seats were made up of others and the Fence-Sitters came in 4th

[ronaldo7]

The modern-day SNP are defined by their opposition to the Tories. That wasn't the case in 1979; fair enough. 1979 was long before I was born let alone politically aware, and if they joined forces with them now they'd lose the votes of me and most of their supporters. They know that fine well and that's why it won't happen now.

Labour are in a position in Scotland where, whether they like it or not, constitutional politics dominate the political landscape. The position they hold now i.e. sustaining the union is now diametrically at odds with their traditional left-wing, working-class voting base, not least because sustaining a union requires collusion with the Conservatives. They can either decide to dispense with this and go pro-independence (or at least not oppose it), or in 2026 the Greens will overtake them as the third party.

I look at Scottish Labour and I see a bunch of middle-class establishment professionals who think that the late 90s/early 2000s were the best years ever and if the idiot masses all started acting like that again everything would be fine, irrespective of the political or economic upheaval that has taken place since.

Try telling that to me whose earnings and qualifications far outstrips my parents when they were my age, yet they had to almost completely fund my deposit for a property that is 3+ times the value of what it was in the mid-90s when they bought theirs. AND I'm one of the lucky ones.

Politics changes and Labour and their supporters don't seem to get that.

Take a look at this. A piece done by the common weal. It tells you a bit more about what the Labour Gov were up to at the time. Dark, smoke filled rooms abound. He was offering deals all over the place, but told the SNP to bolt.

A couple of snippets.

One Labour Lord, who describes himself as just “a low level foot soldier in 1979”, told CommonSpace he agrees that “the SNP cannot be wholly blamed for Thatcher”.

“People love to re-write history,” he added.

"Callaghan did seek and win the support of the three Plaid Cymru (Welsh nationalist) MPs by offering them support for slate quarries, an important factor in two out of three of the Plaid Cymru MPs’ constituencies.

Labour whips also attempted to convince Callaghan to agree to a pipe line to Northern Ireland to secure the votes of Ulster unionists, and there were also discussions about increasing the number of constituencies in Northern Ireland that would boost the number of Ulster unionist MPs.

Callaghan apparently refused these deals too, but two Ulster Unionist MPs did vote with the government because they got a new deal from Hattersley on Northern Ireland’s prices policy.

The flirtation with the Ulster unionist MPs was part of the reason that two moderate Irish republican MPs voted against the government, which was the deciding votes in defeating Callaghan."

https://sourcenews.scot/march-1979-what-really-happened-when-the-snp-brought-down-a-minority-labour-government/

[weecounty hibby]

sadly i don't think they will be able to do anything about Manky Jaickets attempt at deception in Glasgow, no idea what's going on with the Aberdeenshire West one though, was his filthy party standing there as well ?

Yeah, not sure about that one. Could be the usual that there has been an error and someone didn't get to vote that should have. Happens all the time and I think this hear it also happend in Leith. Would be surprised if it's anything major

[WeeRussell]

The failure of successive Govs to build the infrastructure to cope with the growing population. It impacted education, health and housing. I'm not keen on two member states having far more influence than the many more smaller countries.

I don’t understand the first sentence, SC. You voted to leave the EU because you were sick of successive UK government failures?

Sounds more like a reason you would give for voting YES, as opposed to LEAVE, but I’ve maybe missed something.

[WeeRussell]

There’s plenty pro independence supporters that don’t wish to rejoin the EU. Referendum on independence has to. Be held. If it’s yes a referendum on rejoining the EU should then also be held.

I’d have absolutely no argument against any of that. Sounds fair enough, although I don’t think there’s any doubt that an independent Scotland would vote to join the EU (in the above scenario).

[Santa Cruz]

I don’t understand the first sentence, SC. You voted to leave the EU because you were sick of successive UK government failures?

Sounds more like a reason you would give for voting YES, as opposed to LEAVE, but I’ve maybe missed something.

I felt the infrastructure was not there to accommodate the growing population. It was clear our Gov's were not going to invest in this. It wasn't sustainable without further impacts on health, education and housing. I favour controlled immigration as they failed to deal with it.

[weecounty hibby]

I felt the infrastructure was not there to accommodate the growing population. It was clear our Gov's were not going to invest in this. It wasn't sustainable without further impacts on health, education and housing. I favour controlled immigration as they failed to deal with it.

You do realise that more people come into the UK every year from outside of the EU than from inside of it? Or is it really just immigration as a whole you don't like. Or perhaps just being able to pick and choose which foreigners are the right type?

[Hibbyradge]

No what I'm saying is that Labour were so unpopular that they would have lost the election anyway. In fact it took them 18 years and a huge leap to the right to be elected again. Thatcher was hugely popular with voters in England. Labour would never have turned it round in 6 months, at least two of those would have been campaigning trying to persuade folk that honestly we won't be as **** as we were in the last few years!! Never going to happen. So I don't believe that the SNP gave us Thatcher and neither did Callaghan.
And do you think it was spiteful of Labour to go back on their word over the referendum bill?

No-one knows what would have happened if the term had run till October, because the SNP sided with the Tories and we got Thatcher as a result.

Labour going back on their word wasn't spiteful, it was dishonest and I was angry with them for it.

[Hibbyradge]

Aye, all the SNP's fault. Nowt to do with Labours terrible performance in government at that time.

Is it just the SNP you blame it on or are the liberals equally guilty?



Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk

I blame everyone who deserves blame. I don't read any liberals being sanctimonious on here. When I do, I'll remind them of their part in the Tories'successes too.

[Hibbyradge]

Reading about the SNP supposedly putting Thatcher into power in 1979 is like listening to Albert's "during the war" speeches in Only Fools and Horses.

Enjoyable, eh? :wink:

[Hibbyradge]

https://scontent.fman1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/184102323_1682923991895246_6920012169617917507_n.j pg?_nc_cat=105&ccb=1-3&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=91ZFMXFMinkAX_Cc8Vz&_nc_oc=AQksM0c0a28B_CHcJHy6iNFblg5KKI8BkVY_fLgmrV7 Zek5HkMCg58gPDN7IUJQkURw&_nc_ht=scontent.fman1-2.fna&oh=64194f58adfa6ae8afc9c12379d63230&oe=60BEF9E0

Is that true?

[Hibrandenburg]

Is that true?

I'm taking that with a big pinch of salt. Shocking if true and would leave the BBC open for legal action.

[Kato]

Is that true?

The show is on the iPlayer, it featured the "landslide" headline.

[Hibbyradge]

I'm taking that with a big pinch of salt. Shocking if true and would leave the BBC open for legal action.

:agree: I smell sheite.

[Pretty Boy]

Is that true?

My initial reaction was it must be nonsense but the 2nd picture is definitely on the BBC and the 1st is on the Heralds Twitter account in the tweet announcing the front page.

I think the most likely explanation is the BBC would have been sent an earlier version of the front page last night and an editorial decision has been taken late on by the Herald to change it.

Poor that it hasn't been amended and downright bizarre if it is anything more sinister.

[SideBurns]

Is that true?

Andrew Marr showed the 'landslide' headline on his show this morning. The BBC wouldn't change a headline - the paper itself would go Radio Rental!!

[cabbageandribs1875]

My initial reaction was it must be nonsense but the 2nd picture is definitely on the BBC and the 1st is on the Heralds Twitter account in the tweet announcing the front page.

I think the most likely explanation is the BBC would have been sent an earlier version of the front page last night and an editorial decision has been taken late on by the Herald to change it.

Poor that it hasn't been amended and downright bizarre if it is anything more sinister.


i'd go with that explanation as well

[Kato]

Andrew Marr showed the 'landslide' headline on his show this morning. The BBC wouldn't change a headline - the paper itself would go Radio Rental!!

I would've agreed with that and having looked at the iPlayer programmes rather than the web news section I thought the above was rubbish.

However on the Scottish section of the Paper Review the headline has been changed.

George Orwell would feel saddened but vindicated.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-57046318

https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/82AD/production/_118435433_heraldonsunday.jpg

[Kato]

I think the most likely explanation is the BBC would have been sent an earlier version of the front page last night and an editorial decision has been taken late on by the Herald to change it.



You would think but that font doesn't look authentic.

[cabbageandribs1875]

No what I'm saying is that Labour were so unpopular that they would have lost the election anyway. In fact it took them 18 years and a huge leap to the right to be elected again. Thatcher was hugely popular with voters in England. Labour would never have turned it round in 6 months, at least two of those would have been campaigning trying to persuade folk that honestly we won't be as **** as we were in the last few years!! Never going to happen. So I don't believe that the SNP gave us Thatcher and neither did Callaghan.
And do you think it was spiteful of Labour to go back on their word over the referendum bill?



you're right, Tories absolutely would have been in 6 months later :agree: better explanation of events here March 1979: What really happened when the SNP brought down a minority Labour government – Source (sourcenews.scot) (https://sourcenews.scot/march-1979-what-really-happened-when-the-snp-brought-down-a-minority-labour-government/)


In December 1978, Thatcher had lost a no confidence vote against Callaghan’s government by 10 votes, with the SNP’s support crucial in propping up the government.


this is always forgotten though, Labour sh*t on the SNP big style by moving the goalposts, iirc even Callaghan himself didn't blame the SNP in his memoirs, i could be wrong of course :cb

[Skol]

You would think but that font doesn't look authentic.

Surely you don’t actually believe the bbc would change a headline when it could be so easily shown.

[Kato]

Surely you don’t actually believe the bbc would change a headline when it could be so easily shown.

I remember the BBC doing worse.

Do I believe someone has changed this one? No, but I'm in between and not too hung up about it either way.

[Hibbyradge]

you're right, Tories absolutely would have been in 6 months later :agree: better explanation of events here March 1979: What really happened when the SNP brought down a minority Labour government – Source (sourcenews.scot) (https://sourcenews.scot/march-1979-what-really-happened-when-the-snp-brought-down-a-minority-labour-government/)


In December 1978, Thatcher had lost a no confidence vote against Callaghan’s government by 10 votes, with the SNP’s support crucial in propping up the government.


this is always forgotten though, Labour sh*t on the SNP big style by moving the goalposts, iirc even Callaghan himself didn't blame the SNP in his memoirs, i could be wrong of course :cb



Labour did go back on their word.

The SNP reacted by siding with the Tories to bring the Labour government down. We got Thatcher instead.

Why that's even disputed is beyond me.

[Rocky]

I don’t understand the first sentence, SC. You voted to leave the EU because you were sick of successive UK government failures?

Sounds more like a reason you would give for voting YES, as opposed to LEAVE, but I’ve maybe missed something.

It'll be code for immigration. It always is

[bawheid]

I'm not keen on two member states having far more influence than the many more smaller countries.

Yes, it would be awful to be in a union where there’s an unequal distribution of power between larger and smaller countries.

[pacoluna]

https://www.thenational.scot/news/19289277.scotland-deserves-observer-status-nordic-council-finnish-mp-tells-snp/

[Just Alf]

You do realise that more people come into the UK every year from outside of the EU than from inside of it? Or is it really just immigration as a whole you don't like. Or perhaps just being able to pick and choose which foreigners are the right type?

A wee bit unfair? that last bit's definitely not what SC said.

[DaveF]

Yes, it would be awful to be in a union where there’s an unequal distribution of power between larger and smaller countries.

😁

[CapitalGreen]

I would've agreed with that and having looked at the iPlayer programmes rather than the web news section I thought the above was rubbish.

However on the Scottish section of the Paper Review the headline has been changed.

George Orwell would feel saddened but vindicated.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-57046318

https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/82AD/production/_118435433_heraldonsunday.jpg

https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1391146799373631489?s=21

Deputy Editor of The Herald responding in the comments to this twitter post. Seems the paper changed the headline at the last minute before it went to print as the “split decision” pun was too ambiguous.

Strange the BBC didn’t update their articles though with the updated front cover.

[StevieC]

Labour did go back on their word.

The SNP reacted by siding with the Tories to bring the Labour government down. We got Thatcher instead.

Why that's even disputed is beyond me.

I suspect it’s the “siding with” aspect?
Labour shat on the SNP from a great height, and as a result lost the (previously provided) support of the SNP. The SNP didn’t change their stance because they wanted to see a Tory government, they changed their stance because Labour lied to them and broke a promise.

[weecounty hibby]

A wee bit unfair? that last bit's definitely not what SC said.

Controlled immigration is definitely picking and choosing the type of people you want in the country. Scotland needs immigration and not just surgeons and scientists.

[Kato]

https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1391146799373631489?s=21

Deputy Editor of The Herald responding in the comments to this twitter post. Seems the paper changed the headline at the last minute before it went to print as the “split decision” pun was too ambiguous.

Strange the BBC didn’t update their articles though with the updated front cover.

So Pretty Boy called it.

Editorial on that BBC page still a disgrace.

[Hibbyradge]

I suspect it’s the “siding with” aspect?
Labour shat on the SNP from a great height, and as a result lost the (previously provided) support of the SNP. The SNP didn’t change their stance because they wanted to see a Tory government, they changed their stance because Labour lied to them and broke a promise.

Labour gets slagged off on here when they with the Tories against the SNP. They never want a Tory government either.

[Santa Cruz]

You do realise that more people come into the UK every year from outside of the EU than from inside of it? Or is it really just immigration as a whole you don't like. Or perhaps just being able to pick and choose which foreigners are the right type?

I've no problem engaging honestly with posters. Don't paint me as a certain type of person. Thanks.

You'll get no further responses from me, so post away.

[weecounty hibby]

I've no problem engaging honestly with posters. Don't paint me as a certain type of person. Thanks.

You'll get no further responses from me, so post away.
No worries. No need to be so touchy about it. I genuinely wondered why you thought leaving the EU would solve immigration issues when most immigrantscome from outside the EU. Also the whole bit about controlled immigration seems to me to be very easy to manipulate in favour of certain types of people. Fair enough if you don't want to engage anymore but I wasn't painting you as anything.

[WeeRussell]

I felt the infrastructure was not there to accommodate the growing population. It was clear our Gov's were not going to invest in this. It wasn't sustainable without further impacts on health, education and housing. I favour controlled immigration as they failed to deal with it.

So are you essentially saying you’re not against free movement of people and EU immigrants per se (and yes I hate myself for using that phrase!) but you see stopping people coming into the country as the alternative, having given up on our country being run properly?

If I’ve got that right - Does/did it bother you at all that the party responsible for leading, negotiating and lying to the public to achieve your desired result are the same one that has provided the inept government ignoring the original issues you speak of for a number of successive years? Genuine question, appreciating of course that tories are by no means the only pro-brexit party.

[Future17]

You do realise that more people come into the UK every year from outside of the EU than from inside of it? Or is it really just immigration as a whole you don't like. Or perhaps just being able to pick and choose which foreigners are the right type?

I think your post is unnecessarily harsh. I don't always agree with what SC posts, but he always does it respectfully. I don't think there's any justification for what you've suggested or what it implies.

[Moulin Yarns]

https://images.app.goo.gl/sYUKPgvua9fSFbpY8

Population growth projection by NRS

We need immigration or our aging population and reduced birth rates means that there will not be anybody left to work.

[HiBremian]

https://images.app.goo.gl/sYUKPgvua9fSFbpY8

Population growth projection by NRS

We need immigration or our aging population and reduced birth rates means that there will not be anybody left to work.

That big drop in birthrate from the 1960s onward reminds me of my own life history. Moved south to uni in 1971, fully intending to return but never finding a job in Scotland. It suggests to me that internal uk migration was the bigger problem, with working age people moving to the south east from elsewhere over almost 3 decades. If anything, it’s an argument for control over migration within the UK. More so today given the different needs between Scotland (more young migrants needed) and England (apparently less migration is needed for all the reasons given about infrastructure etc).


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Santa Cruz]

So are you essentially saying you’re not against free movement of people and EU immigrants per se (and yes I hate myself for using that phrase!) but you see stopping people coming into the country as the alternative, having given up on our country being run properly?

If I’ve got that right - Does/did it bother you at all that the party responsible for leading, negotiating and lying to the public to achieve your desired result are the same one that has provided the inept government ignoring the original issues you speak of for a number of successive years? Genuine question, appreciating of course that tories are by no means the only pro-brexit party.

I wasn't against EU immigrants coming to the country, I totally get and admire people who are brave enough to leave their family and home nation behind in search of a better life. I never suggested controlling numbers by picking people based on occupation. I think it got to a point where we didn't have the public services to sustain the numbers. Had they built more schools as opposed to extensions taking away playground space, we could have reduced class sizes and people wouldn't have been in a position of sending one of their kids to one school and the sibling to another all because the schools are oversubscribed. Same goes for the health service, recruit more staff, less waiting times to deal with more patients. Build more houses etc to meet the demand. If I've came across as touchy, aye I felt insulated at the insinuation from the other poster. I've welcomed EU colleague's/family's of my daughter's friends and witnessed and called out the unacceptable hostility aimed at them by ignorant Scottish citizens.

It was a Labour Gov I think that agreed to the policy of freedom of movement so they should have developed the infrastructure to meet the demands. If you have a referendum on anything, the result has to be respected, or it makes a mockery of democracy. As for Tory lies, not many will be surprised at that. I wouldn't defend them, but they're not the only party guilty of doing that.

[WeeRussell]

I wasn't against EU immigrants coming to the country, I totally get and admire people who are brave enough to leave their family and home nation behind in search of a better life. I never suggested controlling numbers by picking people based on occupation. I think it got to a point where we didn't have the public services to sustain the numbers. Had they built more schools as opposed to extensions taking away playground space, we could have reduced class sizes and people wouldn't have been in a position of sending one of their kids to one school and the sibling to another all because the schools are oversubscribed. Same goes for the health service, recruit more staff, less waiting times to deal with more patients. Build more houses etc to meet the demand. If I've came across as touchy, aye I felt insulated at the insinuation from the other poster. I've welcomed EU colleague's/family's of my daughter's friends and witnessed and called out the unacceptable hostility aimed at them by ignorant Scottish citizens.

It was a Labour Gov I think that agreed to the policy of freedom of movement so they should have developed the infrastructure to meet the demands. If you have a referendum on anything, the result has to be respected, or it makes a mockery of democracy. As for Tory lies, not many will be surprised at that. I wouldn't defend them, but they're not the only party guilty of doing that.

Cheers for the response 👍, while I still struggle to comprehend your reasoning for voting to leave the EU, it’s nice that you continue to conduct yourself in a decent and honest manner, especially given you’re essentially ‘fighting’ your corner yourself.

[Moulin Yarns]

To anyone who thinks that the D'hondt system for electing a parliament is not sensible, the question must be asked, why is it used in more than 50 countries?

[degenerated]

To anyone who thinks that the D'hondt system for electing a parliament is not sensible, the question must be asked, why is it used in more than 50 countries?The problem isn't the system it's the absolute nonsense from a certain section that failing to win a majority equals losing the election and not being able to implement mandates they don't agree with that is the real problem.

Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

The problem isn't the system it's the absolute nonsense from a certain section that failing to win a majority equals losing the election and not being able to implement mandates they don't agree with that is the real problem.

Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk

The point of the D'hondt system is no single party should get a majority and the parliament is based on consensus. Unfortunately there appears to be 3 parties that refuse to work with the largest party.

[Santa Cruz]

To anyone who thinks that the D'hondt system for electing a parliament is not sensible, the question must be asked, why is it used in more than 50 countries?

Do you know if it is the system that dictates how many MSP's must be elected from one Party in order to gain recognition as a main Party, or is that a ScotParl rule?

FWIW I wouldn't say it's not sensible, as previously discussed it's not that easy to understand (won't go down that road again).

[Ozyhibby]

The D’Hondt system appears to have produced a parliament that accurately reflects what Scotland voted for. It gets a thumbs up from me.[emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

Do you know if it is the system that dictates how many MSP's must be elected from one Party in order to gain recognition as a main Party, or is that a ScotParl rule?

FWIW I wouldn't say it's not sensible, as previously discussed it's not that easy to understand (won't go down that road again).

I'm not sure if I understand the question.

The results has left the Liberal Democrats with 'only' 4 MSPs, this means that they lose some privileges such as the right to ask a question at fmqs and a seat on the parliamentary committee. I think that is down to SP rules.


Hope that makes sense and answers your question.

[Santa Cruz]

I'm not sure if I understand the question.

The results has left the Liberal Democrats with 'only' 4 MSPs, this means that they lose some privileges such as the right to ask a question at fmqs and a seat on the parliamentary committee. I think that is down to SP rules.


Hope that makes sense and answers your question.

Yes, thanks. Perfect sense.

So, if I was a LibDem voter I think I'd be questioning the system. Willie Rennie and A.C.H each received more constituent votes than both the FM & DFM (the most senior elected officials), yet the system allowed Green candidates with less than half their voting numbers enough seats to have those privileges that have been removed from them. I can see how a LibDem voter may not view the system as sensible, but like I say I think it's fine, not perfect, but no voting system is going to please everyone.

[Moulin Yarns]

Yes, thanks. Perfect sense.

So, if I was a LibDem voter I think I'd be questioning the system. Willie Rennie and A.C.H each received more constituent votes than both the FM & DFM (the most senior elected officials), yet the system allowed Green candidates with less than half their voting numbers enough seats to have those privileges that have been removed from them. I can see how a LibDem voter may not view the system as sensible, but like I say I think it's fine, not perfect, but no voting system is going to please everyone.

Except, the Liberal Democrats are the most vociferous party in favour of proportional representation so that would be hypothetical. The system represents the parties, as close as possible, to the numbers of votes cast in total.

Go back to yesterday lunchtime and see the table I posted analysing the results.

[Moulin Yarns]

A final analysis of the votes. I've got all the votes cast, firstly constituency votes, then list votes, follwed by total votes cast for each party, then that figure divided by 2.

The top figure is the total yes parties less the total No parties, not including the obscure parties but including the 'personality' parties Alba and All for Unity.




Constit
List
total
Total/2


Yes/no assumed
-38462
76210
37748
18874



SNP
1291204
1094374
2385578
1192789


LD
-187746
-137152
-324898
-162449


Con
-592518
-637131
-1229649
-614825


Lab
-584392
-485819
-1070211
-535106


green
34990
220324
255314
127657









alba

44913
44913
44913


all for unity

-23299
-23299
-23299









Scottish Family
2734
16085
18819
9410


Independent
5673
6122
11795
5898


Freedom
1154
6271
7425
3713


Reform

5793
5793
5793


UKIP
699
3848
4547
2274


others
5573
31604
37177
18589



To save Santa Cruz the bother 😉

[Sir David Gray]

The method's definitely better than first past the post. Based on how the constituency vote went, if that had been used to elect every MSP then we would currently have around 110 SNP MSPs - shudder the thought. :greengrin

[JeMeSouviens]

To anyone who thinks that the D'hondt system for electing a parliament is not sensible, the question must be asked, why is it used in more than 50 countries?

Pedantic point but I'll make it anyway. :greengrin

The system used to elect the Scottish Parliament is called Additional Member (AMS).

The D'Hondt method properly only refers to the distribution of seats within each region, ie. dividing the vote by seats already won+1. You can use the D'Hondt method within other systems.

[Moulin Yarns]

Pedantic point but I'll make it anyway. :greengrin

The system used to elect the Scottish Parliament is called Additional Member (AMS).

The D'Hondt method properly only refers to the distribution of seats within each region, ie. dividing the vote by seats already won+1. You can use the D'Hondt method within other systems.

Don't you hate a pedant 😉

[JeMeSouviens]

Don't you hate a pedant 😉

I know - annoying as! :rolleyes::greengrin

[danhibees1875]

To save Santa Cruz the bother 😉

I think the problem some are raising is looking at the LD and green votes: 128k votes on your table for greens got them 8 seats, against 162k votes for LD got them 4.

From what I've seen, the more No leaning commentators are unsurprisingly focusing more specifically on simply the total of constituency votes (rather than adding in the lists and dividing by 2) - this shows LD on over 5 times as many votes with half the seats.

I can see the point, but I agree that the overall result is still fairly proportional.

A quick calculation looks like Labour and LD would have faired slightly better (plus 6 and 5 seats respectively) with a totally PR system. Greens, conservatives, and SNP would have lost out on 6,3 and 2 seats respectively.
But I don't really see the relevance of it as we don't have a complete PR system, so it's all as hypothetical as what would have happened under FPTP/any other system.

[Moulin Yarns]

A final analysis of the votes. I've got all the votes cast, firstly constituency votes, then list votes, follwed by total votes cast for each party, then that figure divided by 2.

The top figure is the total yes parties less the total No parties, not including the obscure parties but including the 'personality' parties Alba and All for Unity.




Constit
List
total
Total/2


Yes/no assumed
-38462
76210
37748
18874


SNP
1291204
1094374
2385578
1192789


LD
-187746
-137152
-324898
-162449


Con
-592518
-637131
-1229649
-614825


Lab
-584392
-485819
-1070211
-535106


green
34990
220324
255314
127657









alba

44913
44913
44913


all for unity

-23299
-23299
-23299









Scottish Family
2734
16085
18819
9410


Independent
5673
6122
11795
5898


Freedom
1154
6271
7425
3713


Reform

5793
5793
5793


UKIP
699
3848
4547
2274


others
5573
31604
37177
18589




A final bit

For the constituencies Votes required for each seat won

SNP 20,826
Con 118,504
Lab 292,196
LD 46,937

For the list seats

SNP 547,187
Con 24,505
Lab 24,291
LD N/A
Green 27,541

All seats (half the votes cast)

SNP 18,637
Con 19,833
Lab 24,323
LD 40,612
Green 15,957

Take from that what you want. Greens got more seats with least votes, LD got least seats for votes cast.

[Santa Cruz]

Except, the Liberal Democrats are the most vociferous party in favour of proportional representation so that would be hypothetical. The system represents the parties, as close as possible, to the numbers of votes cast in total.

Go back to yesterday lunchtime and see the table I posted analysing the results.

Fair do's if that's the Party's line. Not sure a Lib dem voter would agree. I only know one so will ask them at some point out of curiosity.

[Moulin Yarns]

The method's definitely better than first past the post. Based on how the constituency vote went, if that had been used to elect every MSP then we would currently have around 110 SNP MSPs - shudder the thought. :greengrin

We need electoral reform FPTP is a must :greengrin

[JeMeSouviens]

Yes, thanks. Perfect sense.

So, if I was a LibDem voter I think I'd be questioning the system. Willie Rennie and A.C.H each received more constituent votes than both the FM & DFM (the most senior elected officials), yet the system allowed Green candidates with less than half their voting numbers enough seats to have those privileges that have been removed from them. I can see how a LibDem voter may not view the system as sensible, but like I say I think it's fine, not perfect, but no voting system is going to please everyone.

The Libs have a few pockets of concentrated support and vast swathes of nothing. The Greens have a bit more support but spread more thinly.

The whole point of any PR system is to smooth out the anomalies created by concentrations of support in certain areas.

[JeMeSouviens]

The advantages of the Scottish parliament system is that it's fairly proportional but it retains local representation, each constituency has a local MSP to speak just for them.

Disadvantages are that few understand how it works or why it works that way, and it's open to be gamed by people who want to exploit that.

It's now being gamed and it's creaking under the weight. I think we'd probably better with one of 2 alternatives:

1. Treat Scotland as one giant constituency. You only get one vote, the parties each produce lists of candidates. Netherlands does this.

2. Carve Scotland into large constituences and use STV as per the council elections. You get one vote but can rank candidates in order of preference and optionally allow your vote to transfer to other parties if your most preferred choices fail to get elected. Ireland does this.


Neither of these systems can be gamed. (1) is more proportional and very simple but has no local link between electors and their MSP. (2) is more complex and not as proportional but has some amount of locality.

[Moulin Yarns]

I think the problem some are raising is looking at the LD and green votes: 128k votes on your table for greens got them 8 seats, against 162k votes for LD got them 4.

From what I've seen, the more No leaning commentators are unsurprisingly focusing more specifically on simply the total of constituency votes (rather than adding in the lists and dividing by 2) - this shows LD on over 5 times as many votes with half the seats.

I can see the point, but I agree that the overall result is still fairly proportional.

A quick calculation looks like Labour and LD would have faired slightly better (plus 6 and 5 seats respectively) with a totally PR system. Greens, conservatives, and SNP would have lost out on 6,3 and 2 seats respectively.
But I don't really see the relevance of it as we don't have a complete PR system, so it's all as hypothetical as what would have happened under FPTP/any other system.

A full PR based on all votes as cast

SNP 58
Con 30
Lab 26
LD 8
Green 7

The difficulty with the figures is the low Green Constituency vote skews the figures, but I've done the best guess.

[Moulin Yarns]

The advantages of the Scottish parliament system is that it's fairly proportional but it retains local representation, each constituency has a local MSP to speak just for them.

Disadvantages are that few understand how it works or why it works that way, and it's open to be gamed by people who want to exploit that.

It's now being gamed and it's creaking under the weight. I think we'd probably better with one of 2 alternatives:

1. Treat Scotland as one giant constituency. You only get one vote, the parties each produce lists of candidates. Netherlands does this.

2. Carve Scotland into large constituences and use STV as per the council elections. You get one vote but can rank candidates in order of preference and optionally allow your vote to transfer to other parties if your most preferred choices fail to get elected. Ireland does this.


Neither of these systems can be gamed. (1) is more proportional and very simple but has no local link between electors and their MSP. (2) is more complex and not as proportional but has some amount of locality.

Agree with this, I believe Wales are looking at reform

[Santa Cruz]

The Libs have a few pockets of concentrated support and vast swathes of nothing. The Greens have a bit more support but spread more thinly.

The whole point of any PR system is to smooth out the anomalies created by concentrations of support in certain areas.

I understand that. Purely playing devils advocate from a Lib Dem voter's perspective about how fair/sensible they would view the system.

[JeMeSouviens]

I understand that. Purely playing devils advocate from a Lib Dem voter's perspective about how fair/sensible they would view the system.

After the austerity coalition, even the Devil renounced the Libs. :wink:

[Ozyhibby]

Changing the system now would be seen as trying to hold back the SNP. It’s not going to happen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Santa Cruz]

After the austerity coalition, even the Devil renounced the Libs. :wink:

Remind me, was that when Clegg abandoned his pledge to his hefty student voters?

[Mon Dieu4]

Changing the system now would be seen as trying to hold back the SNP. It’s not going to happen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm sure they mentioned on part of the analysis over the results shows that the Scottish parliament actually has the powers to change our voting system

[JeMeSouviens]

Remind me, was that when Clegg abandoned his pledge to his hefty student voters?

Yes. :agree:

They made a big theatrical show about signing a pledge on fees and then didn't even make it one of their red lines in the coalition talks. Clegg now does PR for facebook, trying to paper over the dodgy stuff they're doing with everyone's data. A real "liberal" :rolleyes:

[JeMeSouviens]

I'm sure they mentioned on part of the analysis over the results shows that the Scottish parliament actually has the powers to change our voting system

It certainly can change the franchise and has done so to include 16/17 y.o.s and refugees etc.

[Mon Dieu4]

It certainly can change the franchise and has done so to include 16/17 y.o.s and refugees etc.

Good point, I had forgot about that!

[Ozyhibby]

I'm sure they mentioned on part of the analysis over the results shows that the Scottish parliament actually has the powers to change our voting system

Time for FPTP then. [emoji6][emoji106][emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Skol]

Time for FPTP then. [emoji6][emoji106][emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The issue with that is that they would need the Greens support to get that through and given they would lose all their seats in FPTP thats not going to happen.

[Skol]

The problem isn't the system it's the absolute nonsense from a certain section that failing to win a majority equals losing the election and not being able to implement mandates they don't agree with that is the real problem.

Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk

You conflate two things here.

Absolutely no doubt in the mandate to govern and no restriction to implement, however some aspects are not within the control of Holyrood to change. No one has spoken about losing the election.

For me, there is now the mandate to ask for a 2nd referendum and we need to wait until that question is asked and see what the answer is. Until the question is asked its kind of pointless to have all this posturing. Its clear the UK are not going to answer the question before being asked, and why should they. Its also clear that the SNP are not going to ask the question any time soon.

I really think we put that aside, get on with recovery and then when the SNP decide it is time we deal with the issue then

[Steven79]

We simply do not need the amount of MSP's that we have at present.

The AMS should be reduced massively as it just brings serial losers like Murdo back.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

[weecounty hibby]

As frustrating as tye system can be at times I think it actually works quite well. It does what it's designed to do more often than not. I would hope that parties do work together as well where possible. Monica Lennons period poverty bill shows it can be done

[Skol]

As frustrating as tye system can be at times I think it actually works quite well. It does what it's designed to do more often than not. I would hope that parties do work together as well where possible. Monica Lennons period poverty bill shows it can be done

I agree. Yes the system does have flaws, but so does FPTP. This does mean that we get a spread of representation that is closer to the votes actually cast.

[degenerated]

You conflate two things here.

Absolutely no doubt in the mandate to govern and no restriction to implement, however some aspects are not within the control of Holyrood to change. No one has spoken about losing the election.

For me, there is now the mandate to ask for a 2nd referendum and we need to wait until that question is asked and see what the answer is. Until the question is asked its kind of pointless to have all this posturing. Its clear the UK are not going to answer the question before being asked, and why should they. Its also clear that the SNP are not going to ask the question any time soon.

I really think we put that aside, get on with recovery and then when the SNP decide it is time we deal with the issue thenI'm not conflating anything, I like the electoral system and I dislike the way that the results are presented by certain sections. What's conflated about that?

Douglas Ross is running around telling anyone who cares to listen that he stopped the SNP getting a majority therefore there is no mandate for a policy he disagrees with.



Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk

[Skol]

I'm not conflating anything, I like the electoral system and I dislike the way that the results are presented by certain sections. What's conflated about that?

Douglas Ross is running around telling anyone who cares to listen that he stopped the SNP getting a majority therefore there is no mandate for a policy he disagrees with.



Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk

Ross is correct that he prevented a majority. Well contributed to it rather than a single handed heroic effort. That doesnt mean there is no mandate however and he is avoiding reality on that front.

It is now down to the SNP to govern and implement their manifesto, working with other parties as required.

[Moulin Yarns]

Ross is correct that he prevented a majority. Well contributed to it rather than a single handed heroic effort. That doesnt mean there is no mandate however and he is avoiding reality on that front.

It is now down to the SNP to govern and implement their manifesto, working with other parties as required.

The problem with last sentence is that 3 of the other parties refuse to work with party in government.

[Radium]

I'm not saying that they don't have a mandate, I'm saying that they will, by virtue of pro-independence parties holding a majority number of seats.

When a vote inevitably gets passed in Holyrood to hold another referendum then, despite being opposed to independence myself, I think it should be held due to the landscape having changed significantly enough since 2016.

What I was getting at is I do think the percentage of votes cast is important when looking towards the prospect of winning a referendum. In that scenario winning seats is irrelevant it's all about getting just over 50% of the votes cast.

If the Yes side is "only" getting around 50% of the votes cast after we have had Brexit and a very unpopular Prime Minister has been elected in Westminster then it will be a brave decision to call for a referendum. If this one is lost then there won't be another one for a very long time, no matter what kind of percentage of MSPs are pro-independence in future parliaments, unless some other significant event was to take place on a similar scale to the EU vote.

Sorry for picking up the reply late and acknowledge the points you were making


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[danhibees1875]

A full PR based on all votes as cast

SNP 58
Con 30
Lab 26
LD 8
Green 7

The difficulty with the figures is the low Green Constituency vote skews the figures, but I've done the best guess.

I'd just used constituency votes to get a quick/simple answer. Greens don't stand in all of them do they? If so, your way probably works better.

Although within the confines of just looking at Green v LD it favours the greens more so as they got more tactical votes (I assume). A strictly PR system would just have been one vote each.

[lapsedhibee]

For me, there is now the mandate to ask for a 2nd referendum and we need to wait until that question is asked and see what the answer is. Until the question is asked its kind of pointless to have all this posturing. Its clear the UK are not going to answer the question before being asked, and why should they.

Johnson did answer the question without being asked.

[Moulin Yarns]

I'd just used constituency votes to get a quick/simple answer. Greens don't stand in all of them do they? If so, your way probably works better.

Although within the confines of just looking at Green v LD it favours the greens more so as they got more tactical votes (I assume). A strictly PR system would just have been one vote each.

I took the total vote (constituency and list, divided by two) to try and level out the lack of green constituency votes.

LDEM benefited from tactical vote in Edinburgh West and North East Fife.

[cabbageandribs1875]

Alba seein yi :greengrin wee bitty humour

Elizabeth Caproni (@elizabethcaproni) TikTok | Watch Elizabeth Caproni's Newest TikTok Videos (https://www.tiktok.com/@elizabethcaproni/video/6960226465631849734?lang=en&is_copy_url=1&is_from_webapp=v1)

[Skol]

The problem with last sentence is that 3 of the other parties refuse to work with party in government.

SNP only need to work with the greens though so nothing stopping them

[Skol]

Johnson did answer the question without being asked.

I dont think he did. There may have been a suggestion that now is not the time. That suggestion is coming from both sides. There has been no rejection that I have seen

[lapsedhibee]

I dont think he did. There may have been a suggestion that now is not the time. That suggestion is coming from both sides. There has been no rejection that I have seen

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9302089/Boris-Johnson-rules-second-independence-referendum-Scotland.html

[Jack]

I haven't looked into the detail of previous elections but I'd be surprised if the Libdems haven't benefited from the system in the past and I'd suggest other parties have been similarly affected one way or the other.

If you look at the votes cast the overall picture is about as reasonable as its likely to get.

Swings and roundabouts.

[Skol]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9302089/Boris-Johnson-rules-second-independence-referendum-Scotland.html

That is not a source I would usually trust for my information !

[lapsedhibee]

That is not a source I would usually trust for my information !

Johnson's been ruling out a referendum for months. He's only changed his tune in the last couple of days because someone's eventually told him that him continually ruling it out makes it more, not less, likely to happen.

[Skol]

Johnson's been ruling out a referendum for months. He's only changed his tune in the last couple of days because someone's eventually told him that him continually ruling it out makes it more, not less, likely to happen.

But he has changed his tune and that is a key step.

[Bostonhibby]

But he has changed his tune and that is a key step.It's not unheard of for Bozo to do the odd u turn.[emoji6]

It's just normally within a week of his lips moving. This one's exceptional because he maintained his position for so long. Maybe he forgot that was his position

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[JeMeSouviens]

But he has changed his tune and that is a key step.

According to people who normally have a good ear inside the inner Tory den of evil, eg. James Forsyth of the Spectator, who's married to Carrie's pal Allegra, the new Tory strategy is to say they won't block a referendum while doing all they can to block a referendum.

Sounds pretty plausible from what we know of them.

[Skol]

According to people who normally have a good ear inside the inner Tory den of evil, eg. James Forsyth of the Spectator, who's married to Carrie's pal Allegra, the new Tory strategy is to say they won't block a referendum while doing all they can to block a referendum.

Sounds pretty plausible from what we know of them.

I think there has been a realisation that they cannot say no and if they or or are even believed to be intending to say no ,this just drives more people to the yes camp.

There will now be a change in strategy which will aim to get to a position where they are not asked the question and therefore dont have to say no. This will start by trying to demonstrate the benefits of the union and working together as 'Team UK'.

[lapsedhibee]

This will start by trying to demonstrate the benefits of the union.

This will start by lying to demonstrate the benefits of the union.

[Moulin Yarns]

SNP only need to work with the greens though so nothing stopping them

Yes, but why will the other three parties not work with the governing party if there is something that they agree with. There is precidence of them voting against a motion in the parliament and then proposing virtually the same thing shortly later. Why not work with the original proposal?

[Ozyhibby]

Lots of articles floating about today on how well Ross and Sarwar done in the election. Mental world we live in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hibrandenburg]

But he has changed his tune and that is a key step.

Not through choice, he had to, his no democracy for Scotland stand was unsustainable.

[Moulin Yarns]

Lots of articles floating about today on how well Ross and Sarwar done in the election. Mental world we live in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Better than expected 😂

Now there's a three word slogan 😉

[lapsedhibee]

Lots of articles floating about today on how well Ross and Sarwar done in the election. Mental world we live in.


First Ross-Sturgeon head-to-head at Holyrood should be fun. Unless Murray has some hidden talents/skills/intelligence, it'll be like tormenting a dumb lino.

[Skol]

Not through choice, he had to, his no democracy for Scotland stand was unsustainable.

Surely thats a positive though ?

Although I can see that for the SNP a different approach might be a worry and see some of the yes vote think again.

[cabbageandribs1875]

Did dark money and dirty tactics swing the Scottish election? | openDemocracy (https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/dark-money-investigations/did-dark-money-and-dirty-tactics-swing-scottish-election/?fbclid=IwAR1GAfFSoh7X5pW0cdFdISz37-0evHZUcahO3gwT52dF7gQ-G5paZhJrVfc)

Peter Geoghegan on Twitter: "Did dark money and dirty tactics swing Scottish election? So I looked at tactical voting ads in #SP21 and found some pretty worrying things Tens of thousands spent by anonymous campaigns. Turning Point buying ads. Rules flouted My @openDemocracy latest https://t.co/nTQJssMgsM" / Twitter (https://twitter.com/PeterKGeoghegan/status/1391793265343700994?s=19&fbclid=IwAR1GAfFSoh7X5pW0cdFdISz37-0evHZUcahO3gwT52dF7gQ-G5paZhJrVfc)

Did dark money and dirty tactics swing the Scottish election?

[lapsedhibee]

Did dark money and dirty tactics swing the Scottish election? | openDemocracy (https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/dark-money-investigations/did-dark-money-and-dirty-tactics-swing-scottish-election/?fbclid=IwAR1GAfFSoh7X5pW0cdFdISz37-0evHZUcahO3gwT52dF7gQ-G5paZhJrVfc)

Peter Geoghegan on Twitter: "Did dark money and dirty tactics swing Scottish election? So I looked at tactical voting ads in #SP21 and found some pretty worrying things Tens of thousands spent by anonymous campaigns. Turning Point buying ads. Rules flouted My @openDemocracy latest https://t.co/nTQJssMgsM" / Twitter (https://twitter.com/PeterKGeoghegan/status/1391793265343700994?s=19&fbclid=IwAR1GAfFSoh7X5pW0cdFdISz37-0evHZUcahO3gwT52dF7gQ-G5paZhJrVfc)

Did dark money and dirty tactics swing the Scottish election?

Interesting stuff, but strange use of 'swing', which is usually applied to winners. 'Poison' might be better.

[Jones28]

Did dark money and dirty tactics swing the Scottish election? | openDemocracy (https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/dark-money-investigations/did-dark-money-and-dirty-tactics-swing-scottish-election/?fbclid=IwAR1GAfFSoh7X5pW0cdFdISz37-0evHZUcahO3gwT52dF7gQ-G5paZhJrVfc)

Peter Geoghegan on Twitter: "Did dark money and dirty tactics swing Scottish election? So I looked at tactical voting ads in #SP21 and found some pretty worrying things Tens of thousands spent by anonymous campaigns. Turning Point buying ads. Rules flouted My @openDemocracy latest https://t.co/nTQJssMgsM" / Twitter (https://twitter.com/PeterKGeoghegan/status/1391793265343700994?s=19&fbclid=IwAR1GAfFSoh7X5pW0cdFdISz37-0evHZUcahO3gwT52dF7gQ-G5paZhJrVfc)

Did dark money and dirty tactics swing the Scottish election?

**** like this makes me think we will never win an independence referendum.

[bigwheel]

**** like this makes me think we will never win an independence referendum.

I think that is a fair genuine concern you have there


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[JimBHibees]

Did dark money and dirty tactics swing the Scottish election? | openDemocracy (https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/dark-money-investigations/did-dark-money-and-dirty-tactics-swing-scottish-election/?fbclid=IwAR1GAfFSoh7X5pW0cdFdISz37-0evHZUcahO3gwT52dF7gQ-G5paZhJrVfc)

Peter Geoghegan on Twitter: "Did dark money and dirty tactics swing Scottish election? So I looked at tactical voting ads in #SP21 and found some pretty worrying things Tens of thousands spent by anonymous campaigns. Turning Point buying ads. Rules flouted My @openDemocracy latest https://t.co/nTQJssMgsM" / Twitter (https://twitter.com/PeterKGeoghegan/status/1391793265343700994?s=19&fbclid=IwAR1GAfFSoh7X5pW0cdFdISz37-0evHZUcahO3gwT52dF7gQ-G5paZhJrVfc)

Did dark money and dirty tactics swing the Scottish election?

Seems very shady. I see Brian Monteith mentioned. Absolutely no way on this earth that the fraud party posing as Greens should have been allowed to change their logo a few weeks before the vote. As the article said their votes denied Greens getting two more and also saved the Tories seat which would have changed the narrative. Just shows how dodgy ads are on facebook etc. As with everything social media should be regulated but isnt

[wookie70]

Yes, but why will the other three parties not work with the governing party if there is something that they agree with. There is precidence of them voting against a motion in the parliament and then proposing virtually the same thing shortly later. Why not work with the original proposal?

Johnson stole a few of Corbyn's ideas. Hope he steals them all as his usually result in killing poor people

[CloudSquall]

I don't have knowledge in the area but aren't there some sort of checks in place to stop what "Independent Green Voice" did?

It's clear as day what they were trying to acheive with the combination of the name, logo and slogan.

[lapsedhibee]

I don't have knowledge in the area but aren't there some sort of checks in place to stop what "Independent Green Voice" did?

It's clear as day what they were trying to acheive with the combination of the name, logo and slogan.

Certainly remember someone not being allowed to stand as a 'Literal Democrat' once.

[Moulin Yarns]

I don't have knowledge in the area but aren't there some sort of checks in place to stop what "Independent Green Voice" did?

It's clear as day what they were trying to acheive with the combination of the name, logo and slogan.

https://theferret.scot/electoral-commission-green-party-far-right/


Looks like the Electoral Commission ok'd the name and logo. But by all accounts the Scottish greens were denied 2 list seats as a result.

[Steven79]

https://theferret.scot/electoral-commission-green-party-far-right/


Looks like the Electoral Commission ok'd the name and logo. But by all accounts the Scottish greens were denied 2 list seats as a result.Scottish democracy doesn't matter to them...

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

[Hibrandenburg]

I think that is a fair genuine concern you have there


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Anyone who thinks it's a conspiracy theory that the British state will implement all resources including overt and covert to stop the break up of the UK is in denial.

[Steven79]

Anyone who thinks it's a conspiracy theory that the British state will implement all resources including overt and covert to stop the break up of the UK is in denial.Pretty much!

They will do whatever it takes including threats to partition Scotland.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

[JimBHibees]

I don't have knowledge in the area but aren't there some sort of checks in place to stop what "Independent Green Voice" did?

It's clear as day what they were trying to acheive with the combination of the name, logo and slogan.

A wee bit surprised the Greens didn't highlight this prior to the election or maybe they did and it was never reported.

[JimBHibees]

Anyone who thinks it's a conspiracy theory that the British state will implement all resources including overt and covert to stop the break up of the UK is in denial.

Agree whatever it takes. The Marr interview with Sturgeon on Sunday was interesting him highlighting three or four bits of legislation to highlight how difficult it would be to get independence. Strange line of questioning

[cabbageandribs1875]

good riddance ya bam :bye::bye: take barryheidboy and crossgate centre with yi


Wings Over Scotland's Stuart Campbell announces he is quitting blogging | The National (https://www.thenational.scot/news/19298358.wings-scotlands-stuart-campbell-announces-quitting-blogging/?fbclid=IwAR3rGjwmgjyqH84Ym6FxcDvjKi5WAA1lVOsb-XqMITo9VDBW1ba-zbrw1K8)

CONTROVERSIAL Scottish independence (https://www.thenational.scot/news/scottish-independence/) blogger Stuart Campbell, who runs the Wings Over Scotland website, has announced that he will be quitting.
In a 2500-word blog post published today, Campbell said that in the “event of another indyref Yes would need to start with a clean slate of new faces”.

[Hibbyradge]

good riddance ya bam :bye::bye:


Wings Over Scotland's Stuart Campbell announces he is quitting blogging | The National (https://www.thenational.scot/news/19298358.wings-scotlands-stuart-campbell-announces-quitting-blogging/?fbclid=IwAR3rGjwmgjyqH84Ym6FxcDvjKi5WAA1lVOsb-XqMITo9VDBW1ba-zbrw1K8)

CONTROVERSIAL Scottish independence (https://www.thenational.scot/news/scottish-independence/) blogger Stuart Campbell, who runs the Wings Over Scotland website, has announced that he will be quitting.
In a 2500-word blog post published today, Campbell said that in the “event of another indyref Yes would need to start with a clean slate of new faces”.

Finally, something with which I agree with you! :greengrin

[cabbageandribs1875]

Finally, something with which I agree with you! :greengrin


just don't make a Habit of it :na na:

[weecounty hibby]

There is no way he'll leave it at that. There will be another begging blog along shortly to raise some money for his favourite cause. Himself! Interesting that his description of Scotland, from Bath, is nothing like the Scotland I know. The worst bloggers I've seen are the ones who don't actually live here.

[Hibbyradge]

just don't make a Habit of it :na na:

Knowing you, it's unlikely!

[cabbageandribs1875]

There is no way he'll leave it at that. There will be another begging blog along shortly to raise some money for his favourite cause. Himself! Interesting that his description of Scotland, from Bath, is nothing like the Scotland I know. The worst bloggers I've seen are the ones who don't actually live here.


barrheadboy lives in spain

[cabbageandribs1875]

Knowing you, it's unlikely!

ok

[degenerated]

Duplicate post

[degenerated]

barrheadboy lives in spainThere's another one called Jeggit from Dublin who is a complete throbber.



Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk

[CloudSquall]

There's another one called Jeggit from Dublin who is a complete throbber.



Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk


Wasn't he the one that said that it was panic stations at SNP HQ in the lead up to the elections because "internal polling" was showing that Alba was on course to take 40% of SNP list votes?


Can't wait for more on point analysis from him :greengrin



Can pretty much guarantee Campbell will be back on in a couple of weeks, most like in some anti-trans rant.

[cabbageandribs1875]

new Presiding Officer Green MSP Alison Johnstone



Yes - 97
No - 28
Abstentions - 2
Spoiled - 1

how on earth can a politician spoil a ballot paper, suspect it was one of the nasties





oh and well said Patrick Harvie urging the end of Monarchy, truly progressive in the 21st century :agree:


#Johnstone

[cabbageandribs1875]

There's another one called Jeggit from Dublin who is a complete throbber.



Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk


i'll need to do some research on that one :)

[GlesgaeHibby]

new Presiding Officer Green MSP Alison Johnson



Yes - 97
No - 28
Abstentions - 2
Spoiled - 1

how on earth can a politician spoil a ballot paper, suspect it was one of the nasties





oh and well said Patrick Harvie urging the end of Monarchy, truly progressive in the 21st century :agree:

Adds up to 31. Total coincidence that it's the same as the number of tory MSPs.

[Ozyhibby]

Did the tories really not put anyone forward for the job of presiding officer and at the same time votes against the only candidate?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cabbageandribs1875]

Adds up to 31. Total coincidence that it's the same as the number of tory MSPs.


no need for detective work here :) except to guess who the child was that spoiled the ballot sheet, "scottish" tories serve absolutely no purpose whatsoever in Holyrood

[Moulin Yarns]

new Presiding Officer Green MSP Alison Johnson



Yes - 97
No - 28
Abstentions - 2
Spoiled - 1

how on earth can a politician spoil a ballot paper, suspect it was one of the nasties





oh and well said Patrick Harvie urging the end of Monarchy, truly progressive in the 21st century :agree:

Think about it, 28 +2+1=????

[Moulin Yarns]

Did the tories really not put anyone forward for the job of presiding officer and at the same time votes against the only candidate?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Because of the arithmetic no party was willing to put a candidate up.

I think AJ will be a good presiding officer.

[degenerated]

i'll need to do some research on that one :)Here's another of the helmet brigade, Ted Crilly at All Under one banner. Difficult to ignore but well worth the effort.

https://twitter.com/NeilMackay_/status/1392972316003512321?s=19

Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk