So the runners and riders are...

[GreenGray]

So Forbes' faith may condemn a load of us to burn in hell.

Regan's policies may condemn us to burn to a crisp from global warming.

Or Yousaf's complete ineptitude will make our cheeks burn with embarrassment.

Are these genuinely the only three options? **** me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

So Forbes' faith may condemn a load of us to burn in hell.

Regan's policies may condemn us to burn to a crisp from global warming.

Or Yousaf's complete ineptitude will make our cheeks burn with embarrassment.

Given that hell doesn’t exist I’ll take my chances.[emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[archie]

It looked to me like Forbes launch video was very slick and well crafted. Apropos yesterday's discussion on tone of campaigns it was relentlessly upbeat, optimistic and even had 'hope' spelt out in it. All to vaguely soaring music. It even used her relative youth to get a dig in, calling for a fresh faced leaders. Very smart.

[James310]

This doesn't look particularly good for her.

"Kate Forbes would not have voted for Holyrood's equal marriage bill "as a matter of conscience", she tells @TheScotsman

Another resignation matter if she was a Minister.

[CropleyWasGod]

This doesn't look particularly good for her.

"Kate Forbes would not have voted for Holyrood's equal marriage bill "as a matter of conscience", she tells @TheScotsman

and the rest.....

"But I would have respected and defended the democratic choice that was made.

"It is a legal right now and I am a servant of democracy, I am not a dictator.”

[James310]

and the rest.....

"But I would have respected and defended the democratic choice that was made.

"It is a legal right now and I am a servant of democracy, I am not a dictator.”

The point being though she would have voted against it. That would be another resignation matter if she was a Minister. That's two issues now she would have had to resign on.

She is definitely going to appeal to those on the right of the SNP. There is probably way more of them than they would like to admit.

[BroxburnHibee]

I often find the animosity at times towards Labour bewildering.

Ok, I get that "rather be governed by Tories at Westminster than a left wing government from Holyrood" is a slightly mad outlook but I often see part of the Labour Party as being the most likely to be tempted away, even if emotions have run high and entrenched positions adopted post 2014.

Salmond, for all his faults, was probably cuter when it came to how to talk with those of a different persuasion.

I'm traditionally a Labour voter but have never given them my vote since siding with the Tories in 14.

They are doing absolutely nothing to win me back.

[CropleyWasGod]

The point being though she would have voted against it. That would be another resignation matter if she was a Minister. That's two issues now she would have had to resign on.

She is definitely going to appeal to those on the right of the SNP. There is probably way more of them than they would like to admit.

The point is that you can't just take one quote out of the interview. If people are to make a judgement on her, they need to know the full context.

[James310]

The point is that you can't just take one quote out of the interview. If people are to make a judgement on her, they need to know the full context.

The point I was making was covered in what I posted. She would have had to resign and it's yet another issue that would have led to resignation.

[archie]

I'm traditionally a Labour voter but have never given them my vote since siding with the Tories in 14.

They are doing absolutely nothing to win me back.
They didn't side with the Tories. The supported the Better Together campaign. This was a one off cross party campaign.

[davhibby]

and the rest.....

"But I would have respected and defended the democratic choice that was made.

"It is a legal right now and I am a servant of democracy, I am not a dictator.”

The reality is that for a lot of younger voters that bit won’t matter. Any of the 3 current candidates will see the SNP vote drop off to varying degrees for different reasons. Amazingly in one day Forbes has managed to make Humza seem like a good choice.

[Stairway 2 7]

The reality is that for a lot of younger voters that bit won’t matter. Any of the 3 current candidates will see the SNP vote drop off to varying degrees for different reasons. Amazingly in one day Forbes has managed to make Humza seem like a good choice.

The youth vote is shockingly small that all sensible politicians go for the older age groups

[grunt]

The point being though she would have voted against it. That would be another resignation matter if she was a Minister.
Why would she have had to resign?

[Pretty Boy]

Why would she have had to resign?

She wouldn't have had to.

A government minister voting against government policy is traditionally cause to resign though. If you don't resign then you are almost certainly getting sacked.

It's hypothetical of course because it didn't happen.

[James310]

Why would she have had to resign?

You can't vote against the Government if you are in the Government, well you can but it's basically a de facto resignation. A Minister is expected to resign if you don't support government votes that are whipped, if you don't resign you get sacked. See quote below from Nicola Sturgeon when Ash Regan resigned.

"However, in circumstances in which a minister is unable to support the government, it is the case that the only options available are resignation ahead of the vote or dismissal thereafter. I therefore accept your resignation."

[James310]

She wouldn't have had to.

A government minister voting against government policy is traditionally cause to resign though.

It's hypothetical of course because it didn't happen.

If she hadn't she would have been sacked.

[grunt]

A government minister voting against government policy is traditionally cause to resign though. If you don't resign then you are almost certainly getting sacked.


You can't vote against the Government if you are in the Government, well you can but it's basically a de facto resignation.
Wouldn't a vote on something as sensitive as single sex marriage have been a free vote?

[Ozyhibby]

Wouldn't a vote on something as sensitive as single sex marriage have been a free vote?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26041921.amp

It was.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grunt]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26041921.amp

It was.So, would she have had to resign?

[James310]

So, would she have had to resign?

Not if a free vote I think. Although if a Government Minister I am not entirely sure.

[Paul1642]

Not if a free vote I think. Although if a Government Minister I am not entirely sure.

I can’t say i have a problem with ministers of any party voting against the government if they believe a policy is wrong. That’s why we vote for individuals and not just the party.

[grunt]

Not if a free vote I think. Although if a Government Minister I am not entirely sure.


The point being though she would have voted against it. That would be another resignation matter if she was a Minister.
So she wouldn't have had to resign?

[Mibbes Aye]

Wouldn't a vote on something as sensitive as single sex marriage have been a free vote?

Generallly, if it is a Government bill (Scotland or UK) then collective rerponsibility applies - ministers can argue the point in private but are expected to show a united front.

It doesn't happen always though - the UK government's stated position was Remain for the EU referendum but ministers were allowed to voice support for either side. But it is rare. I can't remember a Scottish example though I'm sure there must have been at least one.

[Ozyhibby]

Generallly, if it is a Government bill (Scotland or UK) then collective rerponsibility applies - ministers can argue the point in private but are expected to show a united front.

It doesn't happen always though - the UK government's stated position was Remain for the EU referendum but ministers were allowed to voice support for either side. But it is rare. I can't remember a Scottish example though I'm sure there must have been at least one.

There are a few SNP MSP’s on that list who voted against but no idea if any were ministers at the time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grunt]

Generallly, if it is a Government bill (Scotland or UK) then collective rerponsibility applies - ministers can argue the point in private but are expected to show a united front.
It seems we don't really know definitively one way or the other.

I find it hard to believe that collective responsibility would have applied to a vote of this nature, one where personal and indeed (as here) religious views have a bearing on how someone might vote.

[Ozyhibby]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230220/6dcff7295728981701464c9a771ac365.jpg
16-13 in the endorsement race. Regan languishing behind with just Joanna Cherry.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kato]

The point is that you can't just take one quote out of the interview. If people are to make a judgement on her, they need to know the full context.James loves context. I mean, hates.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

So, would she have had to resign?

Looking at the list, Yousaf didn’t vote for it either.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CropleyWasGod]

Looking at the list, Yousaf didn’t vote for it either.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He was absent.

[Crunchie]

Ms Forbes, a member of the Free Church of Scotland, was asked whether a man should be able to marry another man.

She says: "Equal marriage is a legal right and therefore I would defend that legal commitment.

"Incidentally though I would hope that others can defend the rights of other minorities, including religious minorities that might take a different view."

She said there was a distinction to be made between personal morality and practice - and a person's political responsibilities as a lawmaker.

Quote Message: In terms of the morality of the issue I am a practising Christian and I practice the teachings of most mainstream religions - whether that is Islam, Judaism or Christianity - that marriage is between a man and a woman. But that's what I practice. As a servant of democracy in a country where there is law I would defend to the hilt your right and anybody else's right to live and to love without harassment or fear."
I agree with that and I'm not religous.

[Crunchie]

Talking of manifestos, Forbes stood on the SNP manifesto that included gender reform changes but it seems she was against it all along.
You weren't allowed to speak out against it though. She saw what happened to those that did.

[James310]

James loves context. I mean, hates.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

Another fan speaks 😂

[Kato]

Another fan speaks [emoji23]You're hysterical.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[One Day Soon]

I'm traditionally a Labour voter but have never given them my vote since siding with the Tories in 14.

They are doing absolutely nothing to win me back.

Who have you voted for since then?

[Mibbes Aye]

There are a few SNP MSP’s on that list who voted against but no idea if any were ministers at the time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


It seems we don't really know definitively one way or the other.

I find it hard to believe that collective responsibility would have applied to a vote of this nature, one where personal and indeed (as here) religious views have a bearing on how someone might vote.

Collective responsibility is meant to apply when it is a government bill. It's not codified as such but as Sturgeon's response to Regan indicated, it is a convention.

The same-sex marriage legislation which was what I responded to, was introduced as a Government bill, by Alex Neil.

The government of the day, SNP or otherwise, could publicly declare it is a genuine free vote, with ministers allowed to hold different views. Cameron did it with the EU referendum. I'm fairly confident it was done in the past at Westminster, when backbenchers introduced bills on abortion rights, and termed a 'conscience' vote.

[Moulin Yarns]

So she wouldn't have had to resign?

It's all hypothetical because she wasn't an MSP at the time of the vote.

[James310]

Forbes campaign has ended the day it began hasn't it.

https://twitter.com/AlexofBrown/status/1627748904363036674?t=0uI9Peq3KFdbjKhVlLsuXA&s=19

"Senior member of Kate Forbes campaign says "she has ****ed it" after the finance secretary said she would have voted against gay marriage

In my informed opinion, as a political journalist, your own team saying you've ****ed it on the day you launch your campaign isn't ideal is it"

[One Day Soon]

Forbes campaign has ended the day it began hasn't it.

https://twitter.com/AlexofBrown/status/1627748904363036674?t=0uI9Peq3KFdbjKhVlLsuXA&s=19

"Senior member of Kate Forbes campaign says "she has ****ed it" after the finance secretary said she would have voted against gay marriage

In my informed opinion, as a political journalist, your own team saying you've ****ed it on the day you launch your campaign isn't ideal is it"


It's incredible, just astonishing. I thought she was the serious and most competent one. And there are weeks of this to go. Unless Yousaf starts to run away with numbers quickly this could get quite messy.

[Santa Cruz]

Collective responsibility is meant to apply when it is a government bill. It's not codified as such but as Sturgeon's response to Regan indicated, it is a convention.

The same-sex marriage legislation which was what I responded to, was introduced as a Government bill, by Alex Neil.

The government of the day, SNP or otherwise, could publicly declare it is a genuine free vote, with ministers allowed to hold different views. Cameron did it with the EU referendum. I'm fairly confident it was done in the past at Westminster, when backbenchers introduced bills on abortion rights, and termed a 'conscience' vote.

There was. List of all free votes in HoC going back to 1979. List on the spreadsheet in the link.

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn04793/

[He's here!]

It's incredible, just astonishing. I thought she was the serious and most competent one. And there are weeks of this to go. Unless Yousaf starts to run away with numbers quickly this could get quite messy.

'Members of her campaign team had their heads in their hands after she said that,' according to the reporter on News at Ten just now.

Certainly not a wise admission on the very first day of her campaign. I actually find it hard to see how she moves on from this.

TBH, having heard her speak I can't see her as First Minister irrespective of her beliefs.

[neil7908]

Forbes campaign has ended the day it began hasn't it.

https://twitter.com/AlexofBrown/status/1627748904363036674?t=0uI9Peq3KFdbjKhVlLsuXA&s=19

"Senior member of Kate Forbes campaign says "she has ****ed it" after the finance secretary said she would have voted against gay marriage

In my informed opinion, as a political journalist, your own team saying you've ****ed it on the day you launch your campaign isn't ideal is it"

Yup, I think she's done.

And this is why religion and politics don't mix. I posted some concerns about her on this thread and was keen to hear more from her but if you are religious and want to run the country you have to govern in the interests of all, not what your scripture tells you. If you can do that then no problem. But Tim Farron faced the same issue and he couldn't reconcile these competing interests.

[Mibbes Aye]

There was. List of all free votes in HoC going back to 1979. List on the spreadsheet in the link.

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn04793/

Thanks for posting this, it's a good summary.

So, the death penalty and abortion and reproduction-related matters and equalisation of law for homsexuals. It's probably a sign of ptogress (maybe not for some folk), that a lot of these votes don't need to happen or would be simply countenanced nowadays.

Quite a few about parliament itself, Lords reform etc and quite a few on hunting, I had forgotten about that. It was very controversail at the time, regular protests and marches by the pro-hunt lobby in central London against Blair.

[Ozyhibby]

Thanks for posting this, it's a good summary.

So, the death penalty and abortion and reproduction-related matters and equalisation of law for homsexuals. It's probably a sign of ptogress (maybe not for some folk), that a lot of these votes don't need to happen or would be simply countenanced nowadays.

Quite a few about parliament itself, Lords reform etc and quite a few on hunting, I had forgotten about that. It was very controversail at the time, regular protests and marches by the pro-hunt lobby in central London against Blair.

I think even the GRR was a free vote for the Tories? Are they not very common for social issues?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

Interesting start from Forbes. I wouldn’t have advised handling it like she did. To say the least.
I don’t think it’s fatal but she will have to start showing a more conciliatory tone on these issues. Yousaf has had a good day. He was strong in interviews given today.
Not sure when Regan is going to start.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

Surely to good they can get someone from Westminster to stand

[Mibbes Aye]

I think even the GRR was a free vote for the Tories? Are they not very common for social issues?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Depends how you define 'very common' and 'social issues'!

i think the key point was that about ministers and how they vote on a government bill. Generally they don't go against the governmentand it is accepted that if they do, without agreement, they walk or are sacked.

I can't remember a government bill at Holyrood that wasn't bound by collective responsibility. And there's been relatively few at Westminster in the last forty-five years, most of them quite a while back when abortion and the death penalty were fiercely-contested issues.

Anyway, most government domestic policy is 'social issues' at the end of the day.

[neil7908]

Interesting start from Forbes. I wouldn’t have advised handling it like she did. To say the least.
I don’t think it’s fatal but she will have to start showing a more conciliatory tone on these issues. Yousaf has had a good day. He was strong in interviews given today.
Not sure when Regan is going to start.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I really hope its fatal for her. Its remind me a wee bit of all those Supreme Court justices Trump appointed who, when asked, said Rowe vs Wade was "settled". And guess what happened next...

Now I don't think she would in reality look to remove existing rights but would she champion new ones? Like protection zones around abortion clinics?

I also can't understand how she can say she will govern for all but then say that her vote is a matter of conscience - which means voting based on her personal beliefs. How many issues will her conscience (religion) guide her on?

I'll be honest, none of the candidates fill me with much hope right now but I hope after today she's nowhere near the job.

[One Day Soon]

She’s lost Lochhead, on day one of her campaign. **** me but that’s clown car territory. Withdrawal before the week is out?

[James310]

She’s lost Lochhead, on day one of her campaign. **** me but that’s clown car territory. Withdrawal before the week is out?

It wouldn't surprise me if she withdraws tomorrow. It will just dominate everything else she says from now on. Might as well give it to Humza now.

I can't quite believe Humza is going to be First Minister.

Someone should get a lettuce.

[Stairway 2 7]

Get NS back in

Alexander Brown
@AlexofBrown
·
Humza Yousaf the clear favourite to replace Nicola Sturgeon among both SNP supporters and opposition parties, who can't quite believe their luck

[Paul1642]

Get NS back in

Alexander Brown
@AlexofBrown
·
Humza Yousaf the clear favourite to replace Nicola Sturgeon among both SNP supporters and opposition parties, who can't quite believe their luck

Supporters of the opposition need to be careful what they wish for. Yousaf being FM might give them a better a better change at the next election but he’s going to be running this county for several years and it’s in everyone’s interest to have someone competent.

I was never calling for Sturgeon to go but at the same time I wasn’t disappointed and was looking forward to a fresh perspective on things. It hasn’t taken long for that feeling to disappear.

[Stairway 2 7]

Supporters of the opposition need to be careful what they wish for. Yousaf being FM might give them a better a better change at the next election but he’s going to be running this county for several years and it’s in everyone’s interest to have someone competent.

I was never calling for Sturgeon to go but at the same time I wasn’t disappointed and was looking forward to a fresh perspective on things. It hasn’t taken long for that feeling to disappear.

Same I thought Sturgeon probably had to go eventually before a referendum. Now feel despondent looking at the choices going forward

[ElginHibbie]

I did have a thought that whoever followed NS was gonna have a hard time of it and so the smarter potential candidates might hold back knowing it be available again soon enough... I am now really hoping that's the case otherwise we are in for a rough time

Humza Yousaf vs Douglas Ross FMQ be good bedtime listening I guess at least

[Sergio sledge]

She’s lost Lochhead, on day one of her campaign. **** me but that’s clown car territory. Withdrawal before the week is out?

This was always going to be her biggest issue and was always going to be a sticking point with a lot of people. It is not like it was unknown though, so it's a surprise to see someone removing their endorsement because of it. She's always been pretty open about her beliefs, Lochhead must have known and its just being a typical slimy politician.

Also struggle to believe her campaign won't have known that she would answer a question like that openly and honestly.

If, and it's a big if, she can get past this with her campaign still in tact then she's got over her biggest hurdle on day 1, and should be able to turn focus onto other matters where she is stronger than the other candidates IMHO.

[Stairway 2 7]

I did have a thought that whoever followed NS was gonna have a hard time of it and so the smarter potential candidates might hold back knowing it be available again soon enough... I am now really hoping that's the case otherwise we are in for a rough time

Humza Yousaf vs Douglas Ross FMQ be good bedtime listening I guess at least

No fan of Sarwar but he'll wipe the floor with them

[ElginHibbie]

No fan of Sarwar but he'll wipe the floor with them

He'd need an election to be called soon to really take advantage of situation, which should happen and could happen if SNP and Greens fall out.. might not be worse thing for SNP either though as they might need short term pain for long term gain

[Ozyhibby]

No fan of Sarwar but he'll wipe the floor with them

Really? Sarwar always strikes me as a poor performer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SteveHFC]

Hopefully we have a 4th person announcing their bid become first minister.

[Stairway 2 7]

Really? Sarwar always strikes me as a poor performer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He is. Not sure why Robertson or Flynn didn't go for it, both better than the others. Perhaps someone previously on here was right that it's a poisoned chalice being after NS

[J-C]

Listened to Humza being interviewed last night on STV and he came across very well, very clued up. He has good experience and might be a different leader to Sturgeon who I think was maybe too full on the FM and possibly it all came down to being about her instead of the party and campaign.

[marinello59]

He is. Not sure why Robertson or Flynn didn't go for it, both better than the others. Perhaps someone previously on here was right that it's a poisoned chalice being after NS

Maybe Robertson was encouraged to stand aside for the Murrell’s preferred candidate. I love a wee political conspiracy theory. :greengrin
Flynn can’t stand as he needs to be in Holyrood to become FM. It does look like the serious lack of real talent amongst the SNP at Holyrood has been exposed for all to see.

[He's here!]

Interesting start from Forbes. I wouldn’t have advised handling it like she did. To say the least.
I don’t think it’s fatal but she will have to start showing a more conciliatory tone on these issues. Yousaf has had a good day. He was strong in interviews given today.
Not sure when Regan is going to start.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64713630

Inevitably awful front pages this morning for Forbes, most notably from the National who I'm guessing must be backing 'Sturgeon continuity' candidate Yousef?

[degenerated]

He is. Not sure why Robertson or Flynn didn't go for it, both better than the others. Perhaps someone previously on here was right that it's a poisoned chalice being after NSI wouldn't be at all surprised if Angus Robertson changed his mind.

[grunt]

It's quite clear that anyone who would have voted against the same sex marriage bill in 2014 is unsuitable to be a party leader in Scotland.
Also, let there be constant headlines and online criticism of anyone who proclaims such views.

#BunchOfHypocrites

https://archive.is/lhQit

[He's here!]

Yup, I think she's done.

And this is why religion and politics don't mix. I posted some concerns about her on this thread and was keen to hear more from her but if you are religious and want to run the country you have to govern in the interests of all, not what your scripture tells you. If you can do that then no problem. But Tim Farron faced the same issue and he couldn't reconcile these competing interests.

Tim Farron. Had forgotten about him. It's a good comparison.

[James310]

It's quite clear that anyone who would have voted against the same sex marriage bill in 2014 is unsuitable to be a party leader in Scotland.
Also, let there be constant headlines and online criticism of anyone who proclaims such views.

#BunchOfHypocrites

https://archive.is/lhQit

Thanks for drawing attention to the fact the next potential leader of the SNP has way more in common with Douglas Ross than we originally thought.

How do you feel about Humza becoming leader and the next FM? Do you think he can do what Nicola Sturgeon failed to do and take support for Indy to the next level?

[Ozyhibby]

Listened to Humza being interviewed last night on STV and he came across very well, very clued up. He has good experience and might be a different leader to Sturgeon who I think was maybe too full on the FM and possibly it all came down to being about her instead of the party and campaign.

Yes thought he did very well in all his media yesterday.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[marinello59]

I wouldn't be at all surprised if Angus Robertson changed his mind.

I’m sure SNP supporters everywhere are fervently wishing for that to happen. :greengrin

[James310]

Yes thought he did very well in all his media yesterday.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Scotland deserves better than Humza.

[Ozyhibby]

I’m sure SNP supporters everywhere are fervently wishing for that to happen. :greengrin

I’m not. If he’s not 100% ready then it’s not for him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Crunchie]

Hopefully we have a 4th person announcing their bid become first minister.
Keith Brown second fav with some bookies.

[Santa Cruz]

Keith Brown second fav with some bookies.

Ben Macpherson wouldn't surprise me.

[J-C]

Scotland deserves better than Humza.

Like Sarwar or DRoss :faf::faf::faf:

[marinello59]

Get NS back in

Alexander Brown
@AlexofBrown
·
Humza Yousaf the clear favourite to replace Nicola Sturgeon among both SNP supporters and opposition parties, who can't quite believe their luck

Forbes hasn’t really said anything that different from Yousaf when it comes to how her faith would influence her decision making process yet it’s not an issue for him. Blackford was being talked up as a potential candidate as well yet his membership of the Free Church is largely ignored.
Apart from her refreshing honesty why is Forbes being treated differently?

[degenerated]

I’m sure SNP supporters everywhere are fervently wishing for that to happen. :greengrinSome no doubt, plenty others not so I would imagine.

[Kato]

Forbes hasn’t really said anything that different from Yousaf when it comes to how her faith would influence her decision making process yet it’s not an issue for him. Blackford was being talked up as a potential candidate as well yet his membership of the Free Church is largely ignored.
Apart from her refreshing honesty why is Forbes being treated differently?Person, woman, man, camera, TV.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Colr]

She has a right to a personal opinion about voting for or against gay marriage but if you are a leader you need to PROMOTE what the country wants not what you are you narrow clique want.

Unsuitable.

[James310]

Nail in the coffin?

"Kate Forbes saying on GMS that opposition to gay marriage is a mainstream view in Scotland. It isn’t. Fewer than 1 in 6 of us think what she thinks in successive opinion polls."

But...she has these views as a Government Minister and nobody seemed to care.

[Ozyhibby]

Forbes hasn’t really said anything that different from Yousaf when it comes to how her faith would influence her decision making process yet it’s not an issue for him. Blackford was being talked up as a potential candidate as well yet his membership of the Free Church is largely ignored.
Apart from her refreshing honesty why is Forbes being treated differently?

She was a lot better on radio Scotland this morning.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

Would have been nice to have had someone with real life experience from working an actual job. Forbes only done 2 years as an accountant whilst Yousef went from private school to uni to politics

[Steven79]

Nail in the coffin?

"Kate Forbes saying on GMS that opposition to gay marriage is a mainstream view in Scotland. It isn’t. Fewer than 1 in 6 of us think what she thinks in successive opinion polls."

But...she has these views as a Government Minister and nobody seemed to care.One thing to be a MSP or a Government minister but as a FM she would be unsuitable as she cleary lets religion influence her politics.

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

[Steven79]

She has a right to a personal opinion about voting for or against gay marriage but if you are a leader you need to PROMOTE what the country wants not what you are you narrow clique want.

Unsuitable.Yep and I've said that from the start to family and friends.

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

[Santa Cruz]

Nail in the coffin?

"Kate Forbes saying on GMS that opposition to gay marriage is a mainstream view in Scotland. It isn’t. Fewer than 1 in 6 of us think what she thinks in successive opinion polls."

But...she has these views as a Government Minister and nobody seemed to care.

Think the SNP really are a broadchurch when it comes to differing views, united on one issue only. I didn't know much about KF and am surprised at how conservative her views are, but if this is her religious beliefs she is entitled to them. As another poster pointed out she knew these q's were coming and the important thing is she was honest about her views. I don't see her making any policy decisions based on her personal beliefs, they wouldn't get voted through for a start and her approval ratings would plummet. If she is going to focus on economic recovery and has the experience from her current role, she is the obvious best candidate imo.

[James310]

Think the SNP really are a broadchurch when it comes to differing views, united on one issue only. I didn't know much about KF and am surprised at how conservative her views are, but if this is her religious beliefs she is entitled to them. As another poster pointed out she knew these q's were coming and the important thing is she was honest about her views. I don't see her making any policy decisions based on her personal beliefs, they wouldn't get voted through for a start and her approval ratings would plummet. If she is going to focus on economic recovery and has the experience from her current role, she is the obvious best candidate imo.

Your first sentence is spot on, I can't remember a time when we were exposed to the reality that the SNP is indeed full of those on the left, those on the right and those somewhere in between because they have always had a shared single aim and that has covered up these differences.

[Sergio sledge]

Two more MSP's have removed their endorsements from Kate Forbes.

Find it really hard to believe that her beliefs have somehow taken them by surprise to be honest. They knew what she stood for and are just reading the public reaction and going with it rather than standing by their convictions that she would be best for the job despite her views.

This seems to be a pretty balanced comparison of the two candidates who have given interviews so far and a fair reflection of what Forbes has said.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-64713755

""As a servant of democracy in a country where this is law, I would defend to the hilt your right, and anybody else's right, to live and to love without harassment or fear," she said."

At least she's being open and honest on her views, which is a trait seldom seen in politicians.

The leadership election will decide if the SNP can look past her personal views and look at her policies and decide if that is best for their party.

[Stairway 2 7]

Gender laws will be the topic if Yousaf takes over, definitely a poisoned chalice. How can you support self ID but then call someone a liar

@C4Ciaranc
Humza Yousaf is quoted as saying in relation to the Isla Bryson fiasco [Bryson was] “a deceitful, deceptive individual [who is] simply pretending to be trans for the sake of making their life easier”. So is he saying self ID can be open to challenge? Or error-prone?

“Mr Yousaf who, perhaps inadvertently, highlighted a problem with existing gender law, which he supports.

"Isla Bryson, by law, has the right to self-identify, that's the law even before the gender recognition reform even was discussed in parliament," he said

[marinello59]

One thing to be a MSP or a Government minister but as a FM she would be unsuitable as she cleary lets religion influence her politics.

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

Do you feel the same about Yousaf? They have said broadly similar things about their faith.

[Crunchie]

Two more MSP's have removed their endorsements from Kate Forbes.

Find it really hard to believe that her beliefs have somehow taken them by surprise to be honest. They knew what she stood for and are just reading the public reaction and going with it rather than standing by their convictions that she would be best for the job despite her views.

This seems to be a pretty balanced comparison of the two candidates who have given interviews so far and a fair reflection of what Forbes has said.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-64713755

""As a servant of democracy in a country where this is law, I would defend to the hilt your right, and anybody else's right, to live and to love without harassment or fear," she said."

At least she's being open and honest on her views, which is a trait seldom seen in politicians.

The leadership election will decide if the SNP can look past her personal views and look at her policies and decide if that is best for their party.
:top marks

[James310]

Two more MSP's have removed their endorsements from Kate Forbes.

Find it really hard to believe that her beliefs have somehow taken them by surprise to be honest. They knew what she stood for and are just reading the public reaction and going with it rather than standing by their convictions that she would be best for the job despite her views.

This seems to be a pretty balanced comparison of the two candidates who have given interviews so far and a fair reflection of what Forbes has said.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-64713755

""As a servant of democracy in a country where this is law, I would defend to the hilt your right, and anybody else's right, to live and to love without harassment or fear," she said."

At least she's being open and honest on her views, which is a trait seldom seen in politicians.

The leadership election will decide if the SNP can look past her personal views and look at her policies and decide if that is best for their party.

It does seem odd they back her and then change their minds, maybe they knew her views but just thought she would not say them out loud. Shows a bit of naivety on their part though for backing someone without understanding their views.

[Steven79]

Do you feel the same about Yousaf? They have said broadly similar things about their faith.Pretty much.

I could never vote for a leader that let's their religion influence their policies.

Would be as well voting for a Tory...

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

[grunt]

Apart from her refreshing honesty why is Forbes being treated differently?Perhaps we should ask those who post in here who are attacking her so much.

But I would suggest 2 possible reasons:

1. She's a woman, and it's fashionable to abuse women politicians these days
2. She's a strong candidate, so opposition parties see this as a stick to beat her with.

What's disappointing is the number of SNP colleagues who are joining in.

Politics stinks in 2023, and Scottish politics smells no better at the moment.

[Santa Cruz]

It does seem odd they back her and then change their minds, maybe they knew her views but just thought she would not say them out loud. Shows a bit of naivety on their part though for backing someone without understanding their views.

I doubt they're naive. Might be worth watching who removes their endorsement. Then If Humza becomes FM who he awards a ministerial role, or if they already have one, if they get a move to a higher profile position.

[grunt]

I could never vote for a leader that let's their religion influence their policies.
I must say I think this is a strange thing to say. We are all the product of our upbringing, and some will be religious and some won't. Are we really saying that in Scotland in future it will be mandatory to be non-religious? Doesn't seem very progressive to me.

[archie]

Perhaps we should ask those who post in here who are attacking her so much.

But I would suggest 2 possible reasons:

1. She's a woman, and it's fashionable to abuse women politicians these days
2. She's a strong candidate, so opposition parties see this as a stick to beat her with.

What's disappointing is the number of SNP colleagues who are joining in.

Politics stinks in 2023, and Scottish politics smells no better at the moment.

The thing is, it's not the opposition attacking her. I suspect the opposition are quite happy to sit back and watch this unfold. I do think it exposes her lack of experience as a politician. The old guard of the SNP grew up in real rough and tumble politics. People like FM learned in the school of hard knocks when SNP activism was not the career route it is now. Kate Forbes rise has not seen her troubled by this side of politics until now. Humza is saying similar things, but in a much smarter way.

[Ozyhibby]

Perhaps we should ask those who post in here who are attacking her so much.

But I would suggest 2 possible reasons:

1. She's a woman, and it's fashionable to abuse women politicians these days
2. She's a strong candidate, so opposition parties see this as a stick to beat her with.

What's disappointing is the number of SNP colleagues who are joining in.

Politics stinks in 2023, and Scottish politics smells no better at the moment.

The focus on social issues is poisoning the well just now. So far we haven’t heard a peep from either candidate on the economy, jobs, independence, NHS, education etc etc.
I honestly don’t care how either voted on GRR or Gay marriage. I’m personally supportive of both but they are so far down my list of priorities.
Forbes has put herself in a difficult situation but if she develops a laser like focus on the other issues she can still win. I suppose if she gets all this out the way the first few days then that’s a good thing for her.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grunt]

I doubt they're naive. Might be worth watching who removes their endorsement. Then If Humza becomes FM who he awards a ministerial role, or if they already have one, if they get a move to a higher profile position.I hope you're wrong, but if not, then it would be really sad to see SNP politicians acting in the same way as the mercenary Tory MPs who changed their allegiance to their leader depending on which way the wind was blowing.

[Ozyhibby]

The thing is, it's not the opposition attacking her. I suspect the opposition are quite happy to sit back and watch this unfold. I do think it exposes her lack of experience as a politician. The old guard of the SNP grew up in real rough and tumble politics. People like FM learned in the school of hard knocks when SNP activism was not the career route it is now. Kate Forbes rise has not seen her troubled by this side of politics until now. Humza is saying similar things, but in a much smarter way.

I think she has shown some naivety but maybe some straight talking is also to be welcomed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grunt]

The thing is, it's not the opposition attacking her. I suspect the opposition are quite happy to sit back and watch this unfold.
I haven't analysed in detail who is saying what, but when I talked about those attacking her, I was including all those who amplify the attacks on her. By which I mean all the London based media, who are building this into an apocalyptic view of her as some kind of 16th Century witch burning heretic.

And they're doing that to attack the SNP, as well as Kate Forbes. "Look what a mess the SNP are!"

[Santa Cruz]

The focus on social issues is poisoning the well just now. So far we haven’t heard a peep from either candidate on the economy, jobs, independence, NHS, education etc etc.
I honestly don’t care how either voted on GRR or Gay marriage. I’m personally supportive of both but they are so far down my list of priorities.
Forbes has put herself in a difficult situation but if she develops a laser like focus on the other issues she can still win. I suppose if she gets all this out the way the first few days then that’s a good thing for her.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I heard KF talk about the economy and NHS in an interview yesterday, it was brief but she done well. She touched on the cost of living and the more sensible option of compromising with the UK Gov over GRR as opposed to wasting our money in a court battle they won't win.

[Hiber-nation]

Perhaps we should ask those who post in here who are attacking her so much.

But I would suggest 2 possible reasons:

1. She's a woman, and it's fashionable to abuse women politicians these days
2. She's a strong candidate, so opposition parties see this as a stick to beat her with.

What's disappointing is the number of SNP colleagues who are joining in.

Politics stinks in 2023, and Scottish politics smells no better at the moment.

Let's face it, any person who stands for SNP leadership will be slaughtered in the press.

But did these SNP MSPs really think she was going to say she'd changed her mind and was for gay marriage? It's just bizarre. I'm not comfortable with her stance at all but if it's a choice between her and Yousef then there's no choice, he'd be a disaster. His press interviews yesterday were awful, he was nervous and had no enthusiasm at all.

[marinello59]

I must say I think this is a strange thing to say. We are all the product of our upbringing, and some will be religious and some won't. Are we really saying that in Scotland in future it will be mandatory to be non-religious? Doesn't seem very progressive to me.

:agree:

[Stairway 2 7]

The focus on social issues is poisoning the well just now. So far we haven’t heard a peep from either candidate on the economy, jobs, independence, NHS, education etc etc.
I honestly don’t care how either voted on GRR or Gay marriage. I’m personally supportive of both but they are so far down my list of priorities.
Forbes has put herself in a difficult situation but if she develops a laser like focus on the other issues she can still win. I suppose if she gets all this out the way the first few days then that’s a good thing for her.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree, the majority of questions should be on domestic policy and independence. But as grunt says the media is loving stoking the devision. Every headline all week has been about religion, then yesterday they got the quote they were after. She won't get it now perhaps correctly i don't know, but I certainly think that's what the opposition wanted

[archie]

I agree, the majority of questions should be on domestic policy and independence. But as grunt says the media is loving stoking the devision. Every headline all week has been about religion, then yesterday they got the quote they were after. She won't get it now perhaps correctly i don't know, but I certainly think that's what the opposition wantedShe walked into it. Humza dealt with it really well. But all this talk of the media - who do you think is doing the briefing?

[archie]

Perhaps we should ask those who post in here who are attacking her so much.

But I would suggest 2 possible reasons:

1. She's a woman, and it's fashionable to abuse women politicians these days
2. She's a strong candidate, so opposition parties see this as a stick to beat her with.

What's disappointing is the number of SNP colleagues who are joining in.

Politics stinks in 2023, and Scottish politics smells no better at the moment.

On another point, do you really think asking these questions of Kate Forbes is 'abuse'?

[Ozyhibby]

She walked into it. Humza dealt with it really well. But all this talk of the media - who do you think is doing the briefing?

I agree. No point blaming the media. She knew the questions were coming and could have dealt with them better without changing her answers. Still it’s out there now and she needs to stick to her guns and move the debate to more important issues.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

On another point, do you really think asking these questions of Kate Forbes is 'abuse'?

When you don't ask them to males and on repeat then yes. Sunak abstained on the 2 votes for same sex rights for NI, and also abstained on buffer zones for abortion clinics , Greater access to abortion clinics and to roll out pill by post.

I didn't know he abstained on everything until today until I read it. The reason I didn't read it is because no one asked him and then put it in every paper

[archie]

I must say I think this is a strange thing to say. We are all the product of our upbringing, and some will be religious and some won't. Are we really saying that in Scotland in future it will be mandatory to be non-religious? Doesn't seem very progressive to me.

I agree. We're lucky it's Scotland and not the US where Humza's faith would be weaponised.

[Santa Cruz]

I agree. No point blaming the media. She knew the questions were coming and could have dealt with them better without changing her answers. Still it’s out there now and she needs to stick to her guns and move the debate to more important issues.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agree on the important issues. Maybe announce she's selling all vacant social housing stock for 50p, or even something more credible like free dental treatment for all :greengrin

[archie]

When you don't ask them to males and on repeat then yes. Sunak abstained on the 2 votes for same sex rights for NI, and also abstained on buffer zones for abortion clinics , Greater access to abortion clinics and to roll out pill by post.

I didn't know he abstained on everything until today until I read it. The reason I didn't read it is because no one asked him and then put it in every paper
I don't think it's abuse - I think they are legitimate questions poorly handled.Tim Farron got it big style - what do you think was different? And why do you think Humza isn't getting it?

[archie]

Agree on the important issues. Maybe announce she's selling all vacant social housing stock for 50p, or even something more credible like free dental treatment for all :greengrin

Have I missed something? I don't see the joke.

[Santa Cruz]

Have I missed something? I don't see the joke.

We are 2 years into their 5 year term, the manifesto pledge of rolling out free dental treatment for all adults hasn't budged from the 18-20 something age group. It's never mentioned, I have my doubts it will ever happen.

Imo the Labour pledge won't happen either, they will possibly manage to sell of some vacant stock in Labour Council's, but it will come up against resistance from other LA's as undeliverable due to lack of adequate funding. Think this para is for another thread. :aok:

[archie]

We are 2 years into their 5 year term, the manifesto pledge of rolling out free dental treatment for all adults hasn't budged from the 18-20 something age group. It's never mentioned, I have my doubts it will ever happen.

Imo the Labour pledge won't happen either, they will possibly manage to sell of some vacant stock in Labour Council's, but it will come up against resistance from other LA's as undeliverable due to lack of adequate funding. Think this para is for another thread. :aok:

Right - it's the SNP pledge on dental care you were having a pop at! TBH I am sceptical about the homes policy (which on the surface looks like the old homesteads policy). But as you say, for another thread.

[grunt]

On another point, do you really think asking these questions of Kate Forbes is 'abuse'?


When you don't ask them to males and on repeat then yes. Sunak abstained on the 2 votes for same sex rights for NI, and also abstained on buffer zones for abortion clinics ...


I don't think it's abuse - I think they are legitimate questions poorly handled.Tim Farron got it big style - what do you think was different? And why do you think Humza isn't getting it?

I'm posting here between doing other things, so sometimes my replies will be shorter than might be useful for them to be properly understood.

I'm conflating - in the interest in briefer posts - two things: pressing KF about her religious views, and the subsequent pile on that occurs on social media. So do I think the questioning is abusive? Well yes and no. It's valid to ask but not to focus on this one thing while ignoring other potentially more important issues. I also think that as S27 said, Humza isn't being pressed in the same way, and (as I said earlier) KF is getting it because she's a woman and because she's seen as a formidable opponent. Following the posts by English commentators (including the likes of Nick Eardley who frankly should know better) about her religious views, there follows a pile on which IS abusive. I've seen posts saying she's a bigot, and telling her to disappear, and worse. So if it isn't abuse (and I'm undecided on that) it certainly leads to abuse. And those posting the questions are well aware of that.

[Santa Cruz]

Right - it's the SNP pledge on dental care you were having a pop at! TBH I am sceptical about the homes policy (which on the surface looks like the old homesteads policy). But as you say, for another thread.

Yeah. Sorry, I'm not good/too lazy to insert the appropriate emoji, I was more taking the mick.

[archie]

I'm posting here between doing other things, so sometimes my replies will be shorter than might be useful for them to be properly understood.

I'm conflating - in the interest in briefer posts - two things: pressing KF about her religious views, and the subsequent pile on that occurs on social media. So do I think the questioning is abusive? Well yes and no. It's valid to ask but not to focus on this one thing while ignoring other potentially more important issues. I also think that as S27 said, Humza isn't being pressed in the same way, and (as I said earlier) KF is getting it because she's a woman and because she's seen as a formidable opponent. Following the posts by English commentators (including the likes of Nick Eardley who frankly should know better) about her religious views, there follows a pile on which IS abusive. I've seen posts saying she's a bigot, and telling her to disappear, and worse. So if it isn't abuse (and I'm undecided on that) it certainly leads to abuse. And those posting the questions are well aware of that.

It's tricky because it's often internal rivals doing the briefing, knowing what the impact will be.

[Sergio sledge]

I agree. No point blaming the media. She knew the questions were coming and could have dealt with them better without changing her answers. Still it’s out there now and she needs to stick to her guns and move the debate to more important issues.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Absolutely right, she needs to quickly move the narrative on to issues that many people will see as far more important in the immediate future than debating a hypothetical vote on legislation which is already law and there's absolutely no chance could be rolled back.

If she's to stand any chance the debate needs moved on.

At the risk of sounding like Terry butcher... Maybe it's better for her to get it all out in the open this early in the debate so that she can survive and move things on and it won't be something which could sink the campaign at a late stage.

[Brightside]

Does Humza just win this by default? Don;t think it will help independence at all, but tbh I think we have missed the boat on that completley.

[archie]

Does Humza just win this by default? Don;t think it will help independence at all, but tbh I think we have missed the boat on that completley.I suspect quite a lot of the monstering of Kate Forbes is to ensure that very thing.

[heretoday]

Humza, Forbes, Regan.

What else have you got?

[He's here!]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64715944

Key backers withdraw support for Forbes.

Guessing she might end up having to withdraw from the race.

[One Day Soon]

Perhaps we should ask those who post in here who are attacking her so much.

But I would suggest 2 possible reasons:

1. She's a woman, and it's fashionable to abuse women politicians these days
2. She's a strong candidate, so opposition parties see this as a stick to beat her with.

What's disappointing is the number of SNP colleagues who are joining in.

Politics stinks in 2023, and Scottish politics smells no better at the moment.


She's largely beating herself up with that stick. Why not simply not answer the question or give a different answer? Oh wait...

[archie]

Absolutely right, she needs to quickly move the narrative on to issues that many people will see as far more important in the immediate future than debating a hypothetical vote on legislation which is already law and there's absolutely no chance could be rolled back.

If she's to stand any chance the debate needs moved on.

At the risk of sounding like Terry butcher... Maybe it's better for her to get it all out in the open this early in the debate so that she can survive and move things on and it won't be something which could sink the campaign at a late stage.
If I was advising her I would:
- get clarification statements out very quickly
- push the narrative that she is being targetted as a woman and a Christian (potentially risky and could be seen as negative)
- make some key announcements on the economy to move the debate on
- use channels to speak to members directly
- stop inept briefings like Humza didn't vote on same sex marriage as he was ready for it and brushed it off
- push brand Kate: approachable, mother, highlander
- don't hide her background - use the time in India and in work to push an understanding and broad experience narrative and contrast with Humza's narrow path.

[One Day Soon]

I haven't analysed in detail who is saying what, but when I talked about those attacking her, I was including all those who amplify the attacks on her. By which I mean all the London based media, who are building this into an apocalyptic view of her as some kind of 16th Century witch burning heretic.

And they're doing that to attack the SNP, as well as Kate Forbes. "Look what a mess the SNP are!"


Is Humza part of the London based media? As far as I can recall he said yesterday something like he wouldn't use his religion as an excuse in relation to voting? A not very subtle attack on the position Forbes was taking.

[AgentDaleCooper]

The difference between Forbes and Yousef's beliefs is that Islam contains multitudes, while the Free Church doesn't, or certainly not to the same extent. It's a fundamentalist, reactionary breakaway sect of Christianity based on a literal reading of the bible, hence her antiquated social views.

As has been noted, Tim Farron was quite rightly pulled over the coals over these sorts of issues, and he wasn't going for the top job in the country, so it's entirely appropriate that Forbes is vigorously questioned.

She's only 32 - she's got plenty of time to reflect.

[James310]

Humza, Forbes, Regan.

What else have you got?

Could have been Derek MacKay, is that worse or better.

It is amazing no natural successor was being lined up which I still think points to us not getting the whole truth about why Sturgeon left so abruptly as she did.

[Ozyhibby]

If I was advising her I would:
- get clarification statements out very quickly
- push the narrative that she is being targetted as a woman and a Christian (potentially risky and could be seen as negative)
- make some key announcements on the economy to move the debate on
- use channels to speak to members directly
- stop inept briefings like Humza didn't vote on same sex marriage as he was ready for it and brushed it off
- push brand Kate: approachable, mother, highlander
- don't hide her background - use the time in India and in work to push an understanding and broad experience narrative and contrast with Humza's narrow path.

I agree with all except point 2. Never play the victim. Point 3 very important. If you want to move the conversation on then you have to give people something else to talk about.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[One Day Soon]

Humza, Forbes, Regan.

What else have you got?

Might have a second hand and heavily shop-soiled Salmond somewhere in the stockroom sir, would you be interested in that?

[James310]

And people need to stop blaming the English media for everything, one thing that really annoys me is the lack of responsibility for anything.

We are hopefully going to hear what these people's plans are for the NHS, Education and the economy and they must believe they can change it for the positive with the powers they have otherwise they wouldn't be saying they could. They won't be saying the NHS is basically standing still or getting worse because of England, well I hope they don't. Time for a fresh approach.

[James310]

Might have a second hand and heavily shop-soiled Salmond somewhere in the stockroom sir, would you be interested in that?

Oooh suits you sir!

[neil7908]

I'm posting here between doing other things, so sometimes my replies will be shorter than might be useful for them to be properly understood.

I'm conflating - in the interest in briefer posts - two things: pressing KF about her religious views, and the subsequent pile on that occurs on social media. So do I think the questioning is abusive? Well yes and no. It's valid to ask but not to focus on this one thing while ignoring other potentially more important issues. I also think that as S27 said, Humza isn't being pressed in the same way, and (as I said earlier) KF is getting it because she's a woman and because she's seen as a formidable opponent. Following the posts by English commentators (including the likes of Nick Eardley who frankly should know better) about her religious views, there follows a pile on which IS abusive. I've seen posts saying she's a bigot, and telling her to disappear, and worse. So if it isn't abuse (and I'm undecided on that) it certainly leads to abuse. And those posting the questions are well aware of that.

Just FYI on Nick Eardly, he was brought up and went to school in Edinburgh (St Tams). He is definitely not English, though appreciate he does cover a lot of Westminster stuff.

[One Day Soon]

If I was advising her I would:
- get clarification statements out very quickly
- push the narrative that she is being targetted as a woman and a Christian (potentially risky and could be seen as negative)
- make some key announcements on the economy to move the debate on
- use channels to speak to members directly
- stop inept briefings like Humza didn't vote on same sex marriage as he was ready for it and brushed it off
- push brand Kate: approachable, mother, highlander
- don't hide her background - use the time in India and in work to push an understanding and broad experience narrative and contrast with Humza's narrow path.


I would advise her to withdraw - quickly.

There's no way she's winning it now and if she somehow managed to do so she's never leaving this stuff behind her. The longer this damaging exposure goes on the more likely it is that she is either demoted to a much lower post in a new cabinet or perhaps not even put in it at all.

[Zambernardi1875]

Kate Forbes quickly realising, in politics honesty is the worst policy

[One Day Soon]

Kate Forbes quickly realising, in politics honesty is the worst policy


Is honesty the worst policy or is holding views massively out of step with what the country and your party thinks the worst policy? A bit of both I guess.

The view expressed to me by some of those who have worked closely with her is that she isn't as clever as she thinks she is but also that, much more damaging than that, she is very inexperienced and under exposed up to this point. Remember she has only been an MSP for six years.

[neil7908]

I must say I think this is a strange thing to say. We are all the product of our upbringing, and some will be religious and some won't. Are we really saying that in Scotland in future it will be mandatory to be non-religious? Doesn't seem very progressive to me.

This has been said before but worth repeating. I have no issue with someone holding private beliefs on any religion. But as soon as they enter politics, they must be put aside. Others can of course disagree but religion is different from other principles as if you are a true believer it's non-negotiable.

Some of Forbes responses get to the heart of the issue. She's said she won't let her religion impact her job but wouldn't have voted for gay marriage as it goes against her religious beliefs. That's a massive contradiction.

Keep religion entirely out of politics. Worship how you like but it should have no impact on how you govern. If you can't do that then personally I see no role for you. Again though, plenty will disagree and then ultimately democracy will decide.

[archie]

I agree with all except point 2. Never play the victim. Point 3 very important. If you want to move the conversation on then you have to give people something else to talk about.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkI know what you mean about point 2, but she is in such peril desperate measures are needed. I might also advise that she pushes against Humza as the no change candidate.

[Zambernardi1875]

Is honesty the worst policy or is holding views massively out of step with what the country and your party thinks the worst policy? A bit of both I guess.

The view expressed to me by some of those who have worked closely with her is that she isn't as clever as she thinks she is but also that, much more damaging than that, she is very inexperienced and under exposed up to this point. Remember she has only been an MSP for six years.

As someone already said, Sunak and Humza both didn’t vote and the media haven’t given it a second thought.

[SHODAN]

Yousaf is religious but has repeatedly reaffirmed his support for LGBTQ+ rights. For all the issues I have with him, that has been consistent.

Forbes could be as atheist as they come, anyone who would vote against gay marriage wouldn't get my vote; anyone who says this is about religion is promoting more bad faith bull**** but you can't expect much else from a journalist class who openly states their intention to destabilise Holyrood.

Apparently it's become more important to protect people with intolerant views, rather than those they are being intolerant of.

[Ozyhibby]

Yousaf is religious but has repeatedly reaffirmed his support for LGBTQ+ rights. For all the issues I have with him, that has been consistent.

Forbes could be as atheist as they come, anyone who would vote against gay marriage wouldn't get my vote; anyone who says this is about religion is promoting more bad faith bull**** but you can't expect much else from a journalist class who openly states their intention to destabilise Holyrood.

Apparently it's become more important to protect people with intolerant views, rather than those they are being intolerant of.

I agree, it’s not about religion, it’s about the choices she makes. And there is no point complaining about that as the choices politicians make is how we decide who we vote for. Every politician has things about which you will not agree but are willing to over look. She rapidly needs to start showing that she has something in her locker that makes it easier to over look this. If she doesn’t then she will not last long and won’t deserve to be FM.
Hasn’t helped her that Yousaf is running a decent campaign so far.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SHODAN]

I agree, it’s not about religion, it’s about the choices she makes. And there is no point complaining about that as the choices politicians make is how we decide who we vote for. Every politician has things about which you will not agree but are willing to over look. She rapidly needs to start showing that she has something in her locker that makes it easier to over look this. If she doesn’t then she will not last long and won’t deserve to be FM.
Hasn’t helped her that Yousaf is running a decent campaign so far.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

To be honest I think this has done irreparable damage to the SNP already, for the next decade at least. They're certainly no longer a guaranteed vote for me any more, I'm not comfortable with independence if this is who's going to be leading it.

[Pretty Boy]

The likelihood of failure for Forbes campaign is ultimately a victory for democracy and how it is supposed to work.

No one has barred her from standing because of her beliefs. She has stood, she has answered questions honestly, people haven't liked the answers and it looks likely that will be fatal to her campaign.

The world is changing and people who are religious can change with it or find themselves increasingly out of step and isolated in their views. Forbes views on same sex marriage are regressive and if she is unable or unwilling to put those aside for wider societal good then that's always going to have limited appeal.

[One Day Soon]

As someone already said, Sunak and Humza both didn’t vote and the media haven’t given it a second thought.


Sunak isn't a candidate in this contest.

Humza is but had a pretext for not voting at the time I think (though some believe that was pretty confected) and as I understand it he hasn't gone on the record on day one to say that he would have voted against same sex marriage if he could have.

I have no doubt that she has been given hard time because of a combination of a) she is (or at least was) a serious contender b) is a member of the Free Kirk which is not exactly mainstream and is known for having pretty hard line views as an institution and of course c) she is a woman. d) would be that unlike some others she seems to have made a point of emphasising her personal views rather than sheltering those and playing a straight bat on the political stance she would take.

[grunt]

Why not simply not answer the question or give a different answer? Oh wait...:greengrin Because of course that's what Tory politicians would do. One of the more bizarre posts on this topic.

[grunt]

Just FYI on Nick Eardly, he was brought up and went to school in Edinburgh (St Tams). He is definitely not English, though appreciate he does cover a lot of Westminster stuff.
Which is why I said he should know better.

[SHODAN]

The likelihood of failure for Forbes campaign is ultimately a victory for democracy and how it is supposed to work.

No one has barred her from standing because of her beliefs. She has stood, she has answered questions honestly, people haven't liked the answers and it looks likely that will be fatal to her campaign.

The world is changing and people who are religious can change with it or find themselves increasingly out of step and isolated in their views. Forbes views on same sex marriage are regressive and if she is unable or unwilling to put those aside for wider societal good then that's always going to have limited appeal.

Nah mate, it's more important that people are allowed to say whatever they want. And that they're not questioned about it. And that electors aren't allowed to take these things that they say into account when choosing whether or not to elect them as leader of a country.

Free speech or something.

[grunt]

I have no issue with someone holding private beliefs on any religion. But as soon as they enter politics, they must be put aside.I completely and utterly disagree. And I'm not religious.


She's said she won't let her religion impact her job but wouldn't have voted for gay marriage as it goes against her religious beliefs. That's a massive contradiction.No it isn't. On the matter at hand, MSPs were given free vote, allowing them to vote with their conscience.


Keep religion entirely out of politics. Worship how you like but it should have no impact on how you govern. If you can't do that then personally I see no role for you. Again though, plenty will disagree and then ultimately democracy will decide.It seems that some of the non-believers are more zealous than the true believers.

[grunt]

Forbes could be as atheist as they come, anyone who would vote against gay marriage wouldn't get my vote; anyone who says this is about religion is promoting more bad faith bull**** but you can't expect much else from a journalist class who openly states their intention to destabilise Holyrood.One person's views on gay marriage are more important to you than the future governance of the country? Ok.


Apparently it's become more important to protect people with intolerant views, rather than those they are being intolerant of.I've lost track of who is being more intolerant here.


To be honest I think this has done irreparable damage to the SNP already, for the next decade at least. They're certainly no longer a guaranteed vote for me any more, I'm not comfortable with independence if this is who's going to be leading it.Independence eh? Wasn't that important apparently.

[archie]

I completely and utterly disagree. And I'm not religious.

No it isn't. On the matter at hand, MSPs were given free vote, allowing them to vote with their conscience.

It seems that some of the non-believers are more zealous than the true believers.I find this discussion is taking a strange turn, mainly because I'm agreeing with Grunt! All politicians have values, whether religious or not. Is it only those who have religious values who are disbarred from this? Cards on the table, I'm an atheist, but I do respect people who have faith. Why can’t we do this? If we take this to it's logical conclusion would we disbar Catholics from having a ministerial position because of the church's view on Catholic schools? To my mind that would be absurd. The idea that non-religious MSPs don't bring their values to bear is fanciful. This gets us into interesting territory about who then controls the prevailing orthodoxy and to what purpose.

[One Day Soon]

:greengrin Because of course that's what Tory politicians would do. One of the more bizarre posts on this topic.


Kind of missing the point there entirely. She CAN'T give a different answer. This is a what Kate Forbes thinks and believes problem, not an everyone else problem.

[Smartie]

Sunak isn't a candidate in this contest.

Humza is but had a pretext for not voting at the time I think (though some believe that was pretty confected) and as I understand it he hasn't gone on the record on day one to say that he would have voted against same sex marriage if he could have.

I have no doubt that she has been given hard time because of a combination of a) she is (or at least was) a serious contender b) is a member of the Free Kirk which is not exactly mainstream and is known for having pretty hard line views as an institution and of course c) she is a woman. d) would be that unlike some others she seems to have made a point of emphasising her personal views rather than sheltering those and playing a straight bat on the political stance she would take.

I reckon there is room to expand a/ into the most serious threat to the union of the candidates available, as she appears to be the most competent, by some distance.

The free Kirk stuff could probably be kicked into dust fairly quickly if it proved not to be a threat to her ability to do her job therefore any opponent needs to go really big with this early in order to sink her before she's begun.

[ElginHibbie]

"Freedom of practice of faith groups should be "defended" in any ban on gay or trans conversion therapy, Kate Forbes has said. FM candidate also said the “rights of other minorities” such as those of faith should be defended in the bill"

When it's mostly faith groups pushing conversion therapy this is a worrying statement.

Everything else so far seems to just be focused on her faith, but this would impact a bill they said they want to introduce this year

[One Day Soon]

WTAF? She has apparently now said her faith says it is "wrong" for children to be born outside of marriage?

If this is accurate reporting someone needs to intervene to protect her from herself.

[One Day Soon]

I reckon there is room to expand a/ into the most serious threat to the union of the candidates available, as she appears to be the most competent, by some distance.

The free Kirk stuff could probably be kicked into dust fairly quickly if it proved not to be a threat to her ability to do her job therefore any opponent needs to go really big with this early in order to sink her before she's begun.


She's sinking herself and she is demonstrating that she is in no way either ready for this or the most competent, which is really spectacularly saying something given that Yousaf is in the race.

[TrumpIsAPeado]

WTAF? She has apparently now said her faith says it is "wrong" for children to be born outside of marriage?

If this is accurate reporting someone needs to intervene to protect her from herself.

Going by the standard of British Media reporting when it comes to the SNP. What are the odds of it actually being accurate?

[J-C]

Is Humza part of the London based media? As far as I can recall he said yesterday something like he wouldn't use his religion as an excuse in relation to voting? A not very subtle attack on the position Forbes was taking.

The question was asked last night from John Mackay re Kate Forbes.

[One Day Soon]

Going by the standard of British Media reporting when it comes to the SNP. What are the odds of it actually being accurate?


Sky News interview. She's making Ash Regan into a serious contender the way this going.

[One Day Soon]

The question was asked last night from John Mackay re Kate Forbes.

It's brutal way to answer it and he knew exactly what he was doing to Forbes when he did so.

[marinello59]

Going by the standard of British Media reporting when it comes to the SNP. What are the odds of it actually being accurate?

You can’t blame the media here. The electorate are all SNP members in this one, what is being exposed are the internal party divisions and prejudices. It’s remarkable how long party discipline has held but when the top job comes up that goes out the window. Any spin being put on Forbes views is coming from her opponents within her own party to undermine her.
Much like the divisive Tory party leadership contests it’s good fun to watch from the sidelines. :greengrin

[Mon Dieu4]

"Freedom of practice of faith groups should be "defended" in any ban on gay or trans conversion therapy, Kate Forbes has said. FM candidate also said the “rights of other minorities” such as those of faith should be defended in the bill"

When it's mostly faith groups pushing conversion therapy this is a worrying statement.

Everything else so far seems to just be focused on her faith, but this would impact a bill they said they want to introduce this year

Depends on what's meant by "conversion therapy" it's become a loaded term, some people think conversion therapy is sitting a kid down who says they are Trans and trying to talk it through with them to make sure they aren't confused/depressed/possibly gay and coming to terms with it etc, all of which I think is perfectly reasonable when talking to minors rather than just saying aye alright you are the opposite sex now and potentially going through life altering treatment

[archie]

"Freedom of practice of faith groups should be "defended" in any ban on gay or trans conversion therapy, Kate Forbes has said. FM candidate also said the “rights of other minorities” such as those of faith should be defended in the bill"

When it's mostly faith groups pushing conversion therapy this is a worrying statement.

Everything else so far seems to just be focused on her faith, but this would impact a bill they said they want to introduce this year
But this is where the prevailing orthodoxy is just as bad as any religious doctrine. Conversion therapy is bad. End of. But there's no serious definition of what it is and it's guaranteed that the legislation will create an awful mess.

[Pretty Boy]

WTAF? She has apparently now said her faith says it is "wrong" for children to be born outside of marriage?

If this is accurate reporting someone needs to intervene to protect her from herself.

I think the issue now is that Forbes is showing that on some issues she is perhaps a bit of a zealot.

I have a faith. I also had 2 children outside of marriage and when I did get married it was to someone nominally Protestant (shock, horror) but in actuality an atheist. It was never an issue for my Parish Priest, in fact the area around bearing children in marriage became a bit of a running joke when we met him for our marriage preparation. There was a Baptism at Mass on Sunday, the godparents were a same sex couple. 50 years ago they both would have had to be Catholic, now only one has to be Catholic and nominally it has to be one male and female but some Priests will permit other arrangements now. As I said previously the world is changing and for the vast majority of religious lay people children being born outside of marriage isn't a huge priority on their list of concerns. If Forbes finds herself out of step then that issue lies squarely with her.

Joe Biden was repeatedly asked about his view on abortion in the Presidential campaign. He was firm in his stance that he was pro choice. In theory that conflicts with his faith, in reality of the 176 Bishops in he US only one has said Biden would not be permitted to receive the Eucharist or other sacraments in his diocese. There's wiggle room there on a whole range of issues for those who want it.

[J-C]

It's brutal way to answer it and he knew exactly what he was doing to Forbes when he did so.

How is it brutal, all he said was his faith and politics are two seperate things and one will never interfere with the other, as it should be. If Forbes allows her faith to control here politics, then maybe politics isn't for her.

[TrumpIsAPeado]

You can’t blame the media here. The electorate are all SNP members in this one, what is being exposed are the internal party divisions and prejudices. It’s remarkable how long party discipline has held but when the top job comes up that goes out the window. Any spin being put on Forbes views is coming from her opponents within her own party to undermine her.
Much like the divisive Tory party leadership contests it’s good fun to watch from the sidelines. :greengrin

Can't disagree with any of that. The knives are well and truly out, which is unfortunately the case when it comes to any party leadership bid.

I just ask myself how realistic it is that she would come out with such comments when actively trying to become party leader. Doesn't seem realistic at all, which takes me to the conclusion of typical media spin and comments being taken out of context.

[archie]

I think the issue now is that Forbes is showing that on some issues she is perhaps a bit of a zealot.

I have a faith. I also had 2 children outside of marriage and when I did get married it was to someone nominally Protestant (shock, horror) but in actuality an atheist. It was never an issue for my Parish Priest, in fact the area around bearing children in marriage became a bit of a running joke when we met him for our marriage preparation. There was a Baptism at Mass on Sunday, the godparents were a same sex couple. 50 years ago they both would have had to be Catholic, now only one has to be Catholic and nominally it has to be one male and female but some Priests will permit other arrangements now. As I said previously the world is changing and for the vast majority of religious lay people children being born outside of marriage isn't a huge priority on their list of concerns. If Forbes finds herself out of step then that issue lies squarely with her.

TBF to Kate Forbes there's a lot more nuance to it https://news.sky.com/story/kate-forbes-says-her-faith-means-children-outside-of-marriage-is-wrong-12816429

[Ozyhibby]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230221/9c9e7d9fe81b967c5868dfdff6318442.jpg
Forbes going backwards now rapidly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[heretoday]

FFS. It's the economy. That's what's important.
What are the candidates going to do about it?
We're all worried about pensions, jobs, businesses, health etc.
Gay marriage and gender are not important issues.

[One Day Soon]

How is it brutal, all he said was his faith and politics are two seperate things and one will never interfere with the other, as it should be. If Forbes allows her faith to control here politics, then maybe politics isn't for her.


It was brutal because he could have answered in a number of different ways that didn't stick the stiletto in but he chose to do so anyway. Hard to blame him, it is a leadership contest after all. And I agree that the issue here is largely a problem of her own making. But his answer was quite deliberate and knowing, let's not pretend otherwise.

[TrumpIsAPeado]

FFS. It's the economy. That's what's important.
What are the candidates going to do about it?
We're all worried about pensions, jobs, businesses, health etc.
Gay marriage and gender are not important issues.

What are the candidates going to do about reserved matters? My guess would be nothing at all.

[grunt]

Kind of missing the point there entirely. She CAN'T give a different answer. This is a what Kate Forbes thinks and believes problem, not an everyone else problem.My point: do you want your politicians to be honest, or not?

[Kato]

Funny old book Leviticus. By funny I mean old, wonky, Hebrew tribal mythology which not one member of the Wee Frees actually stick to unless they are preparing their animals to be sacrificed at the (no longer extant) Temple properly, eating food which Yahweh deems pure, executing homosexuals, executing adulterers, avoiding having tattoos and only wearing one fibre of cloth - all of which the new testament said was to be ignored anyway.

Not very Jesusy at all.

"Hail The New Puritan, righteous maelstrom, cook one."

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk


Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[The Harp Awakes]

Still 3 days for nominations to be confirmed. Could someone please encourage Angus to do a u turn, preferably Nicola.

[TrumpIsAPeado]

My point: do you want your politicians to be honest, or not?

She can be honest while committing to governing in the interests of the country, even if it means putting her own personal views to the side at times.

Of course, the media will only ever report on the first part, which is why so many politicians ultimately resort to lying in the first place.

[SHODAN]

My point: do you want your politicians to be honest, or not?

I'd rather they weren't anti gay marriage, anti abortion and anti children outside wedlock (genuinely can't believe I had to say that one), like the overwhelming majority of people in this country, but that's just me I guess.

[One Day Soon]

My point: do you want your politicians to be honest, or not?


When Sturgeon was latterly asked the question related to the person sent to Cornton Vale to be among women her reply to the question over what gender they were was to say they were a rapist and refuse to name the gender. That wasn't honest, it didn't answer the question and Sturgeon isn't a Tory.

My point was that Forbes clearly isn't capable of answering the question deftly and also isn't capable of giving a different answer because her views are so entrenched. As I said, this is a Kate Forbes problem, not an everyone else problem.

TBQH I don't particularly give a **** how they answer but I think perhaps they ought to, given the office they seek to inhabit. It's a catastrophic disaster for the SNP but this, as they say, isn't my circus and these aren't my monkeys.

[archie]

I'd rather they weren't anti gay marriage, anti abortion and anti children outside wedlock (genuinely can't believe I had to say that one), like the overwhelming majority of people in this country, but that's just me I guess.
But what if you Don't want that for you, but are OK with that for others?

[James310]

If Humza gets the gig will we have the first privately educated First Minister?

£13K a year for secondary school.

[McD]

But what if you Don't want that for you, but are OK with that for others?


then that clarity should probably have been provided by KF, and equally saying she’d have voted against it then you’re really saying you’re not ok with it for others either

[One Day Soon]

If Humza gets the gig will we have the first privately educated First Minister?

£13K a year for secondary school.


Kate Forbes is your only hope on that score. It's not clear where Regan was educated but she sent her kids to private school I think.

[Santa Cruz]

If Humza gets the gig will we have the first privately educated First Minister?

£13K a year for secondary school.

What does this mean? I've no problem with where anyone is educated. The only thing I would like to see public schools doing is justifying their charitable status or losing the right to have it.

[Stairway 2 7]

What does this mean? I've no problem with where anyone is educated. The only thing I would like to see public schools doing is justifying their charitable status or losing the right to have it.

Tories get mocked for private education too. I'm more fussy with the lack of ever having a job, how can you relate to the
hoi polloi

[He's here!]

WTAF? She has apparently now said her faith says it is "wrong" for children to be born outside of marriage?

If this is accurate reporting someone needs to intervene to protect her from herself.

Yes, she said that in her Sky News interview earlier. Not going to improve her chances by throwing that in after yesterday's comments.

I wonder how many children are born outwith marriage these days compared to within marriage.

[Pretty Boy]

Yes, she said that in her Sky News interview earlier. Not going to improve her chances by throwing that in after yesterday's comments.

I wonder how many children are born outwith marriage these days compared to within marriage.

In 2021 it was 51% in England and Wales, I can't find figures exclusively for Scotland but I can't imagine it will be drastically different.

[James310]

https://twitter.com/andrewlearmonth/status/1628025219280523265?t=wpZneEvyq3Ct5KUKeFAzRQ&s=19

The co-convenor of Out for Independence, the SNP's LGBTQ+ wing, has submitted a formal complaint to the party's National Secretary after Kate Forbes said that "a trans woman is a biological male who identifies as a woman."

The SNP's definition of transphobia explicitly includes the example of "deliberately misgendering someone or using phrases or language to suggest their gender identity is not valid, for example referring to a trans woman as a 'biological male.'

She will need to leave the party at this rate.

[Berwickhibby]

Popcorn time as this is hilarious 🤣🤣:faf:

[ElginHibbie]

https://news.sky.com/video/a-rapist-cannot-be-a-woman-says-snp-leadership-hopeful-12816423

Ignoring everything else riding a motorbike being wildest thing ever done up there with Theresa May running through a field

[Brightside]

https://twitter.com/andrewlearmonth/status/1628025219280523265?t=wpZneEvyq3Ct5KUKeFAzRQ&s=19

The co-convenor of Out for Independence, the SNP's LGBTQ+ wing, has submitted a formal complaint to the party's National Secretary after Kate Forbes said that "a trans woman is a biological male who identifies as a woman."

The SNP's definition of transphobia explicitly includes the example of "deliberately misgendering someone or using phrases or language to suggest their gender identity is not valid, for example referring to a trans woman as a 'biological male.'

She will need to leave the party at this rate.

The party are chucking everything away over this issue. Something that interests about 3% of voters.

[James310]

It's remarkable that someone like Kate Forbes could sit in a government meeting next to someone like Patrick Harvie and they both be on the same side. It shows you how much the likes of Salmond and Sturgeon kept the factions together so they never spilled out into the public, but all that's ending now.

I can't wait for the TV debates.

[Curried]

Seems to be a lot of people on this thread all-het-up with a young woman’s religion.....chill-out and LALL:

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=presence+of+the+lord+hyde+park+hd&biw=1366&bih=629&tbm=vid&ei=W8n0Y-2kE6uG4-EP9eOtmAo&ved=0ahUKEwitvtar3qb9AhUrwzgGHfVxC6MQ4dUDCA0&uact=5&oq=presence+of+the+lord+hyde+park+hd&gs_lcp=Cg1nd3Mtd2l6LXZpZGVvEAMyBQghEKABMgUIIRCgATI FCCEQoAE6CQgAEBYQHhDxBDoLCCEQFhAeEPEEEB1QhQNYohBg3 xJoAHAAeACAAfABiAGRBpIBBTAuMy4xmAEAoAEBwAEB&sclient=gws-wiz-video#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:383805a3,vid:HIcESt9eYRk

[neil7908]

It's remarkable that someone like Kate Forbes could sit in a government meeting next to someone like Patrick Harvie and they both be on the same side. It shows you how much the likes of Salmond and Sturgeon kept the factions together so they never spilled out into the public, but all that's ending now.

I can't wait for the TV debates.

Good point. Whatever you have to say about Sturgeon, good or bad, it's clear at this point how crucial she was for the party. I don't like the idea of a leader 'grooming' a successor as it reeks of old boys network and doesn't allow for fresh ideas and debate but on the flip side, it does feel like there is a vaccum of tried and tested leaders at a senior level of Scot Gov.

[One Day Soon]

It's remarkable that someone like Kate Forbes could sit in a government meeting next to someone like Patrick Harvie and they both be on the same side. It shows you how much the likes of Salmond and Sturgeon kept the factions together so they never spilled out into the public, but all that's ending now.

I can't wait for the TV debates.


They're not seriously doing TV debates are they? Talk about governments losing elections rather than oppositions winning them.

[neil7908]

I completely and utterly disagree. And I'm not religious.

No it isn't. On the matter at hand, MSPs were given free vote, allowing them to vote with their conscience.

It seems that some of the non-believers are more zealous than the true believers.

Hahaha, so it's zealous to say religion shouldn't be part of politics?? Care to explain further.

Pretty Boy has said it better than I have but no one stopped her running. She has put herself forward and discussed her views on important matters. Whatever the reason I, and many others in Scotland, don't like what we hear. That is our right as voters.

[Stairway 2 7]

Tv debates all but confirmed with brodacasters. Gay marriage and trans issues should only get a limited time, but I'd doubt it

[James310]

They're not seriously doing TV debates are they? Talk about governments losing elections rather than oppositions winning them.

They should but I bet they won't, too scared now. It's the leader of the SNP but also First Minister that is being appointed, we should all get a chance to see just how bad they are.

[James310]

Tv debates all but confirmed with brodacasters. Gay marriage and trans issues should only get a limited time, but I'd doubt it

Is it pay per view?

[Ozyhibby]

Tv debates all but confirmed with brodacasters. Gay marriage and trans issues should only get a limited time, but I'd doubt it

I’m beginning to think Forbes and Regan won’t make it that far. Yousaf could be FM within a week.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[He's here!]

https://twitter.com/andrewlearmonth/status/1628025219280523265?t=wpZneEvyq3Ct5KUKeFAzRQ&s=19

The co-convenor of Out for Independence, the SNP's LGBTQ+ wing, has submitted a formal complaint to the party's National Secretary after Kate Forbes said that "a trans woman is a biological male who identifies as a woman."

The SNP's definition of transphobia explicitly includes the example of "deliberately misgendering someone or using phrases or language to suggest their gender identity is not valid, for example referring to a trans woman as a 'biological male.'

She will need to leave the party at this rate.

Jeez, you can see why Sturgeon got so hopelessly tied in knots over this when you read those SNP regulations.

As you say, Forbes has not only pressed the self destruct button on her campaign, she might end up suspended.

[James310]

Jeez, you can see why Sturgeon got so hopelessly tied in knots over this when you read those SNP regulations.

As you say, Forbes has not only pressed the self destruct button on her campaign, she might end up suspended.

At least she could answer if Isla Bryson was a man or woman. Plenty in the SNP still can't.

[Brightside]

I’m beginning to think Forbes and Regan won’t make it that far. Yousaf could be FM within a week.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Has Regan said anything to screw up her chances? Or just not enough support?

[Ozyhibby]

Has Regan said anything to screw up her chances? Or just not enough support?

She hasn’t even launched her campaign yet which makes me think she is struggling to get enough backing to get things going. So far it appears it is just her and Joanna Cherry.
I now think Forbes will be gone by the weekend.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[He's here!]

Has Regan said anything to screw up her chances? Or just not enough support?

She's yet to launch her campaign as far as I'm aware.

[marinello59]

I’m beginning to think Forbes and Regan won’t make it that far. Yousaf could be FM within a week.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What a frightening thought.

[TrumpIsAPeado]

I now think Forbes will be gone by the weekend.

I wonder if Roberson is already regretting taking his name out of the hat.

[Stairway 2 7]

At least she could answer if Isla Bryson was a man or woman. Plenty in the SNP still can't.

Humza says Bryson is a man that's pretending to be a woman, which pretty much goes against self ID. GRA conversation will continue if he's in power

[The Harp Awakes]

I wonder if Roberson is already regretting taking his name out of the hat.

If I was an SNP minister (other than KF or HY) I'd doing everything to make Angus do a U turn.

[James310]

Humza says Bryson is a man that's pretending to be a woman, which pretty much goes against self ID. GRA conversation will continue if he's in power

He better watch out as if he said that he is as guilty as Kate Forbes of breaking the SNPs code of conduct and is being transphobic.

[He's here!]

Is honesty the worst policy or is holding views massively out of step with what the country and your party thinks the worst policy? A bit of both I guess.

The view expressed to me by some of those who have worked closely with her is that she isn't as clever as she thinks she is but also that, much more damaging than that, she is very inexperienced and under exposed up to this point. Remember she has only been an MSP for six years.

I've thought from the start she's actually too inexperienced. She got parachuted in to present the budget after the Mackay scandal but has had little opportunity due to Covid and maternity leave to display her prowess.

As Lord Hague has pointed out today she wouldn't win a Tory leadership contest let alone an SNP one by expressing the views she has. Pretty sure Cameron said legalising gay marriage was his proudest achievement as PM.

[James310]

I've thought from the start she's actually too inexperienced. She got parachuted in to present the budget after the Mackay scandal but has had little opportunity due to Covid and maternity leave to display her prowess.

As Lord Hague has pointed out today she wouldn't win a Tory leadership contest let alone an SNP one by expressing the views she has. Pretty sure Cameron said legalising gay marriage was his proudest achievement as PM.

Maybe she can take over from Douglas Ross when Labour win the upcoming Scottish Election.....

[SteveHFC]

What a frightening thought.

If that's the best the SNP can do then it's frightening.

Still hope we have someone else wanting to be in charge.

[Stairway 2 7]

He better watch out as if he said that he is as guilty as Kate Forbes of breaking the SNPs code of conduct and is being transphobic.

[Bryson was] “a deceitful, deceptive individual [who is] simply pretending to be trans for the sake of making their life easier”

[TrumpIsAPeado]

If that's the best the SNP can do then it's frightening.

Still hope we have someone else wanting to be in charge.

Makes you wonder if they've just given up or were never really interested to begin with.

[James310]

[Bryson was] “a deceitful, deceptive individual [who is] simply pretending to be trans for the sake of making their life easier”

That sounds like he is questioning the validity of someone's gender, a clear breach of the SNPs own code of conduct. Bet he doesn't get reported by the youth wing though.

[Kato]

Popcorn time as this is hilarious [emoji1787][emoji1787]:faf:I'm not surprised BH. When the stumbling block is 700BC book full of ancient twaddle the lols are inevitable.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[SteveHFC]

Makes you wonder if they've just given up or were never really interested to begin with.

Willing to make a prediction for which I’m happy to be proved wrong. I would be surprised if the SNP are still in charge after the next election.

[Brightside]

Willing to make a prediction for which I’m happy to be proved wrong. I would be surprised if the SNP are still in charge after the next election.

I agree. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if it turned into a minor party like the greens over the next 10 years. Which is a real shame.

[Pretty Boy]

I've thought from the start she's actually too inexperienced. She got parachuted in to present the budget after the Mackay scandal but has had little opportunity due to Covid and maternity leave to display her prowess.

As Lord Hague has pointed out today she wouldn't win a Tory leadership contest let alone an SNP one by expressing the views she has. Pretty sure Cameron said legalising gay marriage was his proudest achievement as PM.

I remember Cameron's speech at the time, largely aimed at quieting dissent in the ranks, in which he said he was legalising same sex marriage not 'in spite of being a conservative' but rather 'because he was a conservative'. Truth be told I didn't really understand what he meant, then or now, but it was abundantly clear he was very proud of getting it done, as he should be.

[Pretty Boy]

Willing to make a prediction for which I’m happy to be proved wrong. I would be surprised if the SNP are still in charge after the next election.

Tough to predict with any certainty.

There are plenty people, including a few on here, who will happily admit that independence is their only concern when voting, In that regard the SNP remain the only party who can, theoretically at least, come close to delivering that.

I think they will lose seats, it's impressive as an incumbent government that they haven't already lost more down the years, but I'm not sure a total collapse in the vote is likely as long as independence remains tantalisingly close. It's not a job I'd fancy taking on right enough, from where they have been the last few years the only way is down really.

[Hiber-nation]

I keep starting a post on this thread and keep changing my mind halfway through as it's just too depressing.

All I can say is Humza Yousef First Minister is a disaster waiting to happen. Yes he's pretty able, got good ideas and plenty support but all the public will see is his media presence which is absolutely lamentable. Going by yesterday's interviews you had to question whether he really wanted it such was his total lack of enthusiasm.

Think that'll be my last post on the subject till the result is confirmed :(

[Berwickhibby]

I’m beginning to think Forbes and Regan won’t make it that far. Yousaf could be FM within a week.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

:faf::faf: Yousaf…he made an erse of transport, erse of justice and don’t start at the mess he currently making of Health….let’s now make him FM 🤣🤣🤣🤣

[Crunchie]

I would advise her to withdraw - quickly.

There's no way she's winning it now and if she somehow managed to do so she's never leaving this stuff behind her. The longer this damaging exposure goes on the more likely it is that she is either demoted to a much lower post in a new cabinet or perhaps not even put in it at all.
It's a sad indictment in today's politically correct politics that you cannot say what your beliefs are without offending anyone. She states she wouldn't attempt to revoke gay marriage rights, I don't see the problem with her comments and I don't think wider society will either.

[Ozyhibby]

:faf::faf: Yousaf…he made an erse of transport, erse of justice and don’t start at the mess he currently making of Health….let’s now make him FM [emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787]

Runs the best health service in the UK.[emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

Runs the best health service in the UK.[emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do you think he personally does or our nhs which is better funded than down south. I mainly know him from covid when it was clear he didn't understand many very basic things. Including when the statistics watchdog pulled him for misunderstanding facts
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-57446887.amp

[One Day Soon]

Willing to make a prediction for which I’m happy to be proved wrong. I would be surprised if the SNP are still in charge after the next election.


Horrendously bad for the SNP though this is, I suspect we are barely even at base camp and that it is going to get vastly worse.

[James310]

Runs the best health service in the UK.[emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am not sure that's the case, the figures can be presented to basically tell whatever story you want.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/sturgeon-rebuked-for-misleading-a-e-comparison-pwqgwt7vd

If I said a few weeks ago Humza would be a shoo in for FM you would have laughed and said no chance.

[He's here!]

I’m beginning to think Forbes and Regan won’t make it that far. Yousaf could be FM within a week.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You might be right. Sounds like Forbes is being privately urged to step aside. Stephen Flynn has joined her detractors:

https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/snp-leadership-race-what-stance-has-the-snp-westminster-group-taken-on-kate-forbes-and-her-same-sex-marriage-stance-4035937

[SHODAN]

Honestly the best case scenario is if someone comes in (Robertson? Black?) at the last minute to imprint some competent leadership on the party before nominations close. Failing that, Yousef gets in and is somehow good/is removed quickly and replaced with aforementioned competent leader before things get bad.

This is the biggest thread to independence since 2014 IMO and with a sterilised, barely-left-of-centre Labour about to take charge it's not looking good for the future of this country.

[TrumpIsAPeado]

Honestly the best case scenario is if someone comes in (Robertson? Black?) at the last minute to imprint some competent leadership on the party before nominations close. Failing that, Yousef gets in and is somehow good/is removed quickly and replaced with aforementioned competent leader before things get bad.

This is the biggest thread to independence since 2014 IMO and with a sterilised, barely-left-of-centre Labour about to take charge it's not looking good for the future of this country.

I'd say 2014 was the biggest threat to the union, not independence. So much so that another referendum will never be "allowed" to take place. I also think 'barely left of centre' is being far too kind to them. 'Barely left of centre' gets you deselected as a Labour Party candidate these days.

[Skol]

Forbes really has destroyed her own chances. Reagan appears to have no chance either.

There is still time for another candidate to appear, or for sturgeon to change her mind.

So many on have defended everything that came from sturgeon. Despite yousaf running the best nhs according to Ozy, it’s hard to see people getting as behind yousaf.

[Ozyhibby]

Forbes really has destroyed her own chances. Reagan appears to have no chance either.

There is still time for another candidate to appear, or for sturgeon to change her mind.

So many on have defended everything that came from sturgeon. Despite yousaf running the best nhs according to Ozy, it’s hard to see people getting as behind yousaf.

People will get behind him if he performs well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

It's not very dignified

@mireille_pouget
"Mr Yousaf himself requested a meeting with the Pakistan Consul General in Glasgow on the day of the vote, thereby creating a clash

https://archive.ph/kcakn

[Skol]

People will get behind him if he performs well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Big if though.

[Since90+2]

As much as it pains me to say it, but with the GRC bill and Sturgeon stepping down, I'd imagine the likelihood of independence is as far as it's been for many a year.

I'd honestly not be surprised to see a Labour lead coalition with the Lib Dems at the outcome of the next Holyrood election.

[Stairway 2 7]

People will get behind him if he performs well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think so. Politicians generally take over leadership with a neutral or a bit under approval rating then steadily drop till they are chucked. His approval rating is starting terribly, its more akin to Truss taking over with a large negative. He's a dead parrot

[TrumpIsAPeado]

People will get behind him if he performs well.

He has no hope of performing well. I don't think it would make a blind bit of difference who the next First Minister of Scotland is. They're walking directly into an impossible situation.

[marinello59]

I don't think so. Politicians generally take over leadership with a neutral or a bit under approval rating then steadily drop till they are chucked. His approval rating is starting terribly, its more akin to Truss taking over with a large negative. He's a dead parrot

I think it’s over 20 years since the SNP have actually had a leadership contest. Maybe they’ve taken the way the Tories did things as a template. :greengrin

[Skol]

He has no hope of performing well. I don't think it would make a blind bit of difference who the next First Minister of Scotland is. They're walking directly into an impossible situation.

It is possible Robertson and others share this view and they are assuming there will be another opportunity either after the next Westminster or holyrood elections

[TrumpIsAPeado]

It is possible Robertson and others share this view and they are assuming there will be another opportunity either after the next Westminster or holyrood elections

You could be right. Looking at the list of atrocious candidates, it looks like they're being set up to be the fall person.

[Santa Cruz]

There's an MP called Kirsty Blackman on the list for no endorsements, along with NS and Keith Brown. Is there a reason she won't or couldn't endorse any candidates?

[One Day Soon]

It is possible Robertson and others share this view and they are assuming there will be another opportunity either after the next Westminster or holyrood elections

Not to be First Minister there won’t. Sturgeon won’t be back and whether/what kind of SNP remains is highly questionable.

[James310]

As much as it pains me to say it, but with the GRC bill and Sturgeon stepping down, I'd imagine the likelihood of independence is as far as it's been for many a year.

I'd honestly not be surprised to see a Labour lead coalition with the Lib Dems at the outcome of the next Holyrood election.

It has been further away than ever before for a while now, the answers to the big questions have never been answered. No credible plan has been put forward and it has been kicking the can down the road and carrot and stick for a while now, some of us could see it but for some it was almost like they would not believe it.

I saw a poker analogy that seems apt, Sturgeon kept raising the stakes and eventually went all in and Westminster called her bluff and she folded (or something like that)

When Humza is appointed FM I will be putting a bet on Anas Sarwar for the next FM. It I had said Anas Sarwar as the next FM 10 days ago it would be laughed at, but it's a very serious possibility now.

[Skol]

Not to be First Minister there won’t. Sturgeon won’t be back and whether/what kind of SNP remains is highly questionable.

Took me a while to compute what you were saying there. You are right though, it does feel like this is potentially a time for a change to happen. Let’s hope it’s a change for the better

[James310]

Took me a while to compute what you were saying there. You are right though, it does feel like this is potentially a time for a change to happen. Let’s hope it’s a change for the better

Imagine if all the effort and time spend taking about Independence was spent talking about the NHS and Education and the economy etc. I don't expect them to abandon Independence, that would be silly, but be realistic enough to admit it's off the table for next 7 or 8 years. If we have a Scottish Election this year the next session of Parliament should be all about using the powers the Parliament has and possibly more from devolution, not spending time dreaming of the powers it doesn't have.

[Skol]

Imagine if all the effort and time spend taking about Independence was spent talking about the NHS and Education and the economy etc. I don't expect them to abandon Independence, that would be silly, but be realistic enough to admit it's off the table for next 7 or 8 years. If we have a Scottish Election this year the next session of Parliament should be all about using the powers the Parliament has and possibly more from devolution, not spending time dreaming of the powers it doesn't have.

You are bound to get a few bites taking that view :greengrin

I agree though, the best way to build a consensus for independence is to show what you can do with what you have. Then you start to show more details on the case for independence.

[James310]

You are bound to get a few bites taking that view :greengrin

I agree though, the best way to build a consensus for independence is to show what you can do with what you have. Then you start to show more details on the case for independence.

It's an opinion I know most on here will disagree with...but as you say maybe some competent government will make people think hang on if they can make a success of X,Y and Z maybe they can be trusted with Independence.

More of the same won't work, I can give the SNP strategists that advice for free.

[TrumpIsAPeado]

It's an opinion I know most on here will disagree with...but as you say maybe some competent government will make people think hang on if they can make a success of X,Y and Z maybe they can be trusted with Independence.

More of the same won't work, I can give the SNP strategists that advice for free.

The Scottish Government could be perfectly competent and everything would still ultimately turn to crap. Scotland can't be the successful outlier in a political and economic union that is falling apart.

[Ozyhibby]

There's an MP called Kirsty Blackman on the list for no endorsements, along with NS and Keith Brown. Is there a reason she won't or couldn't endorse any candidates?

No, she just decided she wouldn’t.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Santa Cruz]

No, she just decided she wouldn’t.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks. Is that a normal thing, will there be more like that who just don't participate?

[Skol]

Thanks. Is that a normal thing, will there be more like that who just don't participate?

Some will support a candidate in the hope of getting a job as a reward. Was it Hancock who slated boris and then when he was out of the running supported boris to ensure he got a job. Or maybe shapps

Others might sit on the fence in case they back the wrong horse.

Some might just not favour any candidate.

Oh and sturgeon also not endorsing anyone which feels the right things to do.

[Santa Cruz]

Some will support a candidate in the hope of getting a job as a reward. Was it Hancock who slated boris and then when he was out of the running supported boris to ensure he got a job. Or maybe shapps

Others might sit on the fence in case they back the wrong horse.

Some might just not favour any candidate.

Oh and sturgeon also not endorsing anyone which feels the right things to do.

I could understand a Leader and Deputy not wanting to endorse candidates to avoid accusations of influencing others decisions. Just thought the MP would state her reasons or there was maybe an obvious reason I was unaware of.

[James310]

The Scottish Government could be perfectly competent and everything would still ultimately turn to crap. Scotland can't be the successful outlier in a political and economic union that is falling apart.

So what's your suggestion to advance the case of Independence?

Constantly attacking the media or Westminster isn't working.

[greenlex]

Imagine if all the effort and time spend taking about Independence was spent talking about the NHS and Education and the economy etc. I don't expect them to abandon Independence, that would be silly, but be realistic enough to admit it's off the table for next 7 or 8 years. If we have a Scottish Election this year the next session of Parliament should be all about using the powers the Parliament has and possibly more from devolution, not spending time dreaming of the powers it doesn't have.
As long as there is discord and chaos in Westminster it will always be in the table and forefront in Scottish politics. We are of course capable of addressing both that and day to day running of the country. The Scottish election results will reveal a lot about how we are all feeling. I must say with the SNP a shoe in once again the dearth of real talent coming forward to lead it leaves me thoroughly depressed to be honest. Politics in the UK as a whole is a basket case.

[TrumpIsAPeado]

So what's your suggestion to advance the case of Independence?

Advancing the case will accomplish nothing anyway. Courts in England with judges put into position by nobody in Scotland have made sure of that.