|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Fri 23 Apr 07:10
The last two independence polls have shown that the tide appears to have turned once again and that support for independence has dipped well below the 50% mark.
As I feared Alba possibly could have helped in securing a referendum but at the cost of ensuring that any referendum would be a losing one for the yes side.
I think that for some the type of independent Scotland that the snp has been campaigning for isn`t perhaps the type of society we would have post independence and they maybe now believe that the status quo would be best for them.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: red-star-par
Date: Fri 23 Apr 09:22
There are also rumours that the Tories might offer a snap referendum. From their point of view it might be a good idea, it's pretty tight at the moment and I think a No vote might just shade it. In my opinion I think it would be better to wait for about 3 years at least. Give to tories enough rope to hang themselves and then get a decisive victory
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Fri 23 Apr 14:17
https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-betrayer/
Sturgeon as the leader of the SNP has been the leader of the Independence Movement .
She has to take full responsibility for the movements success or failure during her tenancy.
You cannot blame the Alba party for the dip in the polls ,they're failing to make any impact.
CONSTITUENCY VOTE SNP
LIST VOTE ALBA
Post Edited (Fri 23 Apr 14:58)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Fri 23 Apr 15:45
I agree the success or failure should be hers but then why, when a consistent run of poll had support at over 50% did Alba spring into life? And now one month later that majority has dwindled away. Nope that`s on Salmond. He lost one referendum and has now likely torpedoed a chance of a second one unless Sturgeon and the snp can pull the cause out of the fire in the next three weeks.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Fri 23 Apr 16:16
Stop it TOWK, your just teasing now.
There has in the last year, three different independence parties set up to challenge the SNP, Why would that be if all was rosey in the garden.
You cannot even blame the Alba party because they've failed to make an impact.
Looking like a Green Government with the help of the SNP.
Good call on your part.
https://yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2021/04/20/a-few-short-months-ago/
CONSTITUENCY VOTE SNP
LIST VOTE ALBA
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Fri 23 Apr 16:48
None of the other party's have Salmond's profile or as many ex members of the SNP in their parties. I didn't even know other Indy parties had been created if I'm honest their impact has been so low.
Salmond's profile has anything from staunch supporters and people that dislike him immensely and people whose view is in between. The people that support or lean towards Salmond are almost certainly going to vote for Independence so they would have voted for one of the pro Indy parties anyway.
For those that dislike Salmond you need their desire for an independent Scotland to overcome their dislike of Salmond. There will be a core of anti Salmind voters that will still vote for an Indy party and they more than likely won't vote ALBA but if undecided or swing yes/no voters put personality at the forefront of the decision making process and decide that Salmonds involvement in Independence is enough to put them off then we have a risk they don't vote for any of the Indy supporting parties.
Salmond is such a divisive figure that there is more downside to upside in his involvement for the simple fact a lot of folk don't like him and those that do were already more than likely yes voters anyway.
One of the good things is that some polling indicates the Greens are picking up list votes to it might be the message is getting through but people are swerving ALBA in the process.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Fri 23 Apr 17:07
Don't think the Greens/SNP alliance is the road to independence. Maybe I'm wrong but there's a big issue around the bend that is going to come back and haunt both parties.
Folk are switching onto the policy's that the 2 are pursuing.
Neither party has an appetite for independence.
CONSTITUENCY VOTE SNP
LIST VOTE ALBA
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Fri 23 Apr 18:25
Tenruh,
The Green vote has always struck me as a very soft vote, so if Alba cannot gain from them on the List system it tells me that commitment to an Independent Scotland is not there amongst the electorate.
I don’t see any of this is due to personal popularity, it’s more the case that Nicola Sturgeon represents the wider Scottish electorate. She wants Independence but would rather unite with the Greens and accept defeat of that objective rather than take on a full blooded constitutional fight against Westminster alongside hard line nationalists.
This may not be what you, I, or Wings Over Scotland want but it seems to be the majority position at present.
sammer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Fri 23 Apr 18:42
It won't be down to personal popularity to anyone that posts on this forum as folk obviously care, research and debate the issues but the minute you look on Facebook or Twitter it absolutely does come down to personalities for some people and in some cases where people are genuinely torn who they think they can trust most is going to be important.
Sturgeon doesn't want to be involved in with ALBA as ALBA want to force another referendum and chance it as to whether we win. Sturgeon would rather see a solid basis for going for it which we appeared to have until recently which is why she committed to another referendum in the SNP manifesto in the next Parliament term. She's not going to ask for one if she thinks we're going to lose and if we lose another one it'll be a long time before we get a third go. The problem is that some staunch yes voters do really believe in a neverendum approach.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Fri 23 Apr 19:05
People that vote for the left leaning Scottish Greens would never in a million years vote Alba and I dare say the feeling is mutual. Neither side would want Scotland to be independent if it meant that the society of such a Scotland would go in the direction that the other side envisage.
The snp was the vehicle that was trying to bring these different viewpoints together, let them put their differences and prejudices to one side and get independence done first. You don`t make peace with your friends you make peace with your enemies. Alas it was not to be.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Fri 23 Apr 19:07
Agree with your analysis completely lpf.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Fri 23 Apr 19:50
Quote:
The One Who Knocks, Fri 23 Apr 19:05
People that vote for the left leaning Scottish Greens would never in a million years vote Alba and I dare say the feeling is mutual. Neither side would want Scotland to be independent if it meant that the society of such a Scotland would go in the direction that the other side envisage.
The snp was the vehicle that was trying to bring these different viewpoints together, let them put their differences and prejudices to one side and get independence done first. You don`t make peace with your friends you make peace with your enemies. Alas it was not to be.
The SNP leader won't engage with ALBA,
No one to blame but herself she is the leader of the independence Movement and she's fractured it.
Until then independence is off the agenda
Don't expect a referendum over the course of the next parliament.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Fri 23 Apr 20:22
Unless the SNP and the Greens get enough seats then of course there won`t be an independence referendum. I suspect they might well get a majority though it won`t be the `super majority` that Salmond kept banging on about. All that Salmond achieved there was to move the goalposts so that anything other than a thumping majority in parliament for independence is a defeat for those wanting a referendum. I suppose that was the point of it though.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Fri 23 Apr 20:37
I don’t think Salmond moved the goalposts; more like he widened the goals to make scoring for Independence easier. In theory at least.
sammer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Fri 23 Apr 20:55
I'm intrigued to understand why you think Salmond is making independence easier?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Fri 23 Apr 21:04
By making Independence easier I was reflecting Alex Salmond`s aim to increase the number of MSPs in favour of independence through the List vote. The arithmetic he used seems sound enough to me. His logic is that the more MSPs voted in on an independence manifesto, the stronger the case for a second referendum.
Reality may prove different. Perhaps the Scottish electorate does not really want a second referendum, which offers no guarantee of victory as has been pointed out earlier. Anyone voting Green instead of Alba would come into the category of an independence sympathiser but not an actual supporter.
sammer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Fri 23 Apr 21:22
There are independence supporters that dislike Salmond and even more neutral supporters that dislike him. The option to vote for other pro Indy parties has already been there and they could have voted Green.
Pro Indy parties already held a majority after the last election so why the need for ALBA? They could have mounted a campaign for the Greens using the exact same mathematical logic. They chose not to and there's a reason for that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Fri 23 Apr 22:25
There’s a difference between the Greens being supportive of Independence and the ALBA party who are totally committed to the concept. The raison d’etre of the Greens is not Independence; in fact it might strike many as odd that a movement devoted to protecting the planet has much truck with nationalist policies whatever the country.
Even a politician as clumsy as Johnson could buy off Green support for Independence with little difficulty: a carbon tax here, some crofting legislation there. A vote for the Green Party is not a vote for Independence.
sammer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Fri 23 Apr 22:30
Independence has always been a key pillar of the Greens policy. The Greens everywhere are big supporters of local Government even within a nation. The fact they have more to them than one policy is a strange criticism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Fri 23 Apr 23:09
It’s no criticism to have a wide range of policies and I can’t deny that the Greens are a broad church. In Germany, where they have the strongest roots, the Greens used to be something of a retirement home for Baader-Meinhof activists and there was talk of a red/green coalition to confront capitalism. Last I heard they were snuggling up to a right wing group in the name of pragmatic politics. Their situation in Scotland is further behind obviously.
On the single issue of Scottish Independence, a List vote for ALBA would be a stronger statement for that cause than a vote for the Greens.
sammer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Sat 24 Apr 06:55
https://mobile.twitter.com/seallrifeorag/status/1384524972945821696
Posted previously, thanks Sammer that sums it up perfectly.
The independence movement is a wide gathering of people with the one goal , why then would the leader of the movement refuse to engage with another independence party . Fear I suspect
The same leader who since being elected has appeared at only one march for independence in Scotland .
She's been got at , as has her chosen replacement .
Regarding the way forward, the Greens will support the SNP when they go for a bill to hold another Referendum like the SNP they'll then hide behind the tories refusal of the s30 then relax in the talking shop for the next parliament knowing that they've done the minimum needed.
The ALBA party was pushing for a Supermajority knowing that that gave them other options to explore other than waiting for the s30
https://www.albaparty.org/delivering_independence
Post Edited (Sat 24 Apr 07:49)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Sat 24 Apr 08:21
I can understand voters being cautious about voting ALBA given some recent statements by Alex Salmond. He wasn’t far off pouring petrol into milk bottles to make some Molotov cocktails in preparation for the upcoming battle. In contrast, Nicola Sturgeon is clearly very aware of what took place in Catalonia and is determined to make sure any future referendum is solidly based on legal ground that would command international respect.
But whatever their differences, the strongest statement for Scottish Independence would surely be an SNP + ALBA vote. Anything else would suggest the electorate are prepared to settle for something less, presumably a DevoMax option that would be the Tory government’s final fall back position. If that’s what the Scottish electorate desire then all well and good, but they can’t vote Green then complain a few years down the line that Westminster cheated them out of Independence.
sammer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Sat 24 Apr 11:39
The flyer in that Twitter link looks like it was cobbled together by a 5 year old. It doesn't use the official Green branding and I've not seen any of the Green candidates or supporters on Twitter sharing it.
The only people I have seen share it are ALBA supporters trying to use it as an excuse to vote Green. I highly doubt that any party or supporter of a party would use the phrase "impose our agenda" when trying to promote their party. It's the sort of language used by opponents of a party.
It was either badly knocked together by a supporter of the Green party that has not been officially endorsed or used by any of the Greens or it was badly knocked up by an ALBA supporter trying to sway votes in their direction. Either way it's had no support from the Greens although I suspect behind the scenes all of the parties would want two votes in all of the constituencies and areas they have candidates running.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Sat 24 Apr 11:40
To the next point about why the SNP won't engage with ALBA, fear is certainly one option but its got to be one of the lowest. Sturgeon has little to fear from Salmond as demonstrated in the polling:
https://cdn.survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/03150817/Survation-DC-Thomson-Scotland-Tracker-Survey-Data-Tables.xlsx
When you look at the respective leaders polling Sturgeon has a 50% positive opinion whereas Salmond has a 71% negative rating with only a 10% positive rating. The response to Harvie is 16% positive and 28% negative with 56% of people what appears to be "meh".
The main reason for not working with AlBA and I'm sure you noticed it was that there was a fairly public fall out between the two leaders recently and they appear to utterly despise each other.
Factor in Salmond has already blown an attempt at independence by pulling the trigger when we were way too far off in the polls to make up the ground which already says he has poor judgement regarding the timing of when referendums should take place and couple that with the fact that more women than men are pro Indy at the moment and Salmond is politically toxic in that demographic and you can see why the SNP won't tarnish their own brand (despite what you may think of their brand already more people would dislike them) by working with them. The party is filled with SNP rejects.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Sat 24 Apr 11:40
On the point about her only attending one rally I have to be blunt and say I couldn't care less. She's running a country and is managing the biggest independence drive of all.
The SNP already have a super majority for Independence at Holyrood with the Greens and they simply don't need someone that's already failed and is widely disliked and in some cases despised being involved. ALBA were claiming to want to deliver something that was already there if you voted for them. Its a pretty disingenuous claim when you look at it. Vote for us as only we can deliver something you already have or could easily be enhanced without any input from anyone at ALBA. So if you don't need ALBA for a super majority why do they exist and why are they making such claims? Its clear they have their own agenda that is different from the other Independence parties.
Salmond simply no longer brings any benefit to the Independence cause. Yes he still has his supporters and yes they are vocal but it doesn't carry any weight with the majority of people in Scotland any more. If he did have any clout the polls would be showing a significant spike in support for ALBA and they don't appear to at this point in time.
ALBA is more about Salmond's vision of the timing of Independence rather than actually securing Independence itself. He's that arrogant, and he has always been arrogant, that he would let his own personal drive over shadow the fact that a referendum in the immediate future would be taken from a position where support for Independence in the polls is a very fine margin and as TOWK has pointed out may not exist any more.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Sat 24 Apr 11:41
Timing is crucial and Salmond has already failed in this respect. He carried the Independence vote a long way but it was under Sturgeon's leadership that it became a majority and I don't think it's a coincidence that support for Independence among women has increased when we have someone who has not only demonstrated they're a capable leader (at least relative to what we've had in Scotland before and in rUK) and will be more relatable to many than Salmond ever was.
The claim that the Greens aren't fully committed to Independence is a strange one. This is from the main party:
https://www.greenparty.org.uk/local-government-programme.html
The Greens have, for as long as I can remember at least, always supported devolved power to regions whether that be more power to the regions in England or Independence for Scotland and Wales. They're fundamentally against power being too centralised and if you go back over their position in any of Scotland, Wales or the UK you can clearly see its the case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Sat 24 Apr 11:42
Apologies to everyone that actually ended up being way longer than I ever intended it to be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Sat 24 Apr 12:05
Agreed lpf - the Greens are ideologically in favour of devolved power the world over.
Small countries` governments work better for their people.
The enemy travels by private jet, not by dinghy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Sat 24 Apr 13:09
I cannot see the case for Nicola Sturgeon being a vote winner for Scottish Independence. When she took over the leadership of the SNP in September 2014 she inherited, by dint of the referendum vote, just shy of 45% support for the cause. That 45% was a much higher figure than anticipated otherwise Cameron would never have agreed to a referendum in the first place.
Now, after nearly seven years of Nicola Sturgeon as leader of the SNP, the latest poll (Sevanta/Scotsman) puts support for Independence at…..45%. Not much sign of progress that I can see. It’s true that support was recently as high as 53% (Hanbury poll) but Sturgeon has also seen poll ratings as low as 36% (Survation/Daily Record, 2017.) Given that two major political events have strengthened her hand- Brexit and the appointment to PM of the highly unpopular (in Scotland at least) Boris Johnson- this is not an indication of good leadership.
If Nicola Sturgeon is indeed winning more women over to the cause of Scottish Independence then she must presumably be losing male voters at the same rate since the average support remains around 45%.
sammer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Sat 24 Apr 13:52
There's a decent graph tracking the polls I this FT article:
https://www.ft.com/content/48c70d0a-2d11-4117-8185-933d9f6bdbaa
It's important to understand the reason for the current slump and I've not seen much in the way of analysis that explains it. Was it down to Sturgeon losing some credibility in the case against Salmond where both of their popularity took a hit or is the fact that Salmond is back on the scene as TOWK suggested. Is it something else?
One thing that is absolutely clear from all polling is that Sturgeon is significantly more popular than Salmond. People think less of Salmond than the rest of the leaders by far. If Sturgeon is unlikely to be a vote winner then she's at least not likely to cost the case any votes. Salmond on the other hand..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: McCaig`s Tower
Date: Sat 24 Apr 19:42
Regarding polls – sorry, I couldn’t get access to that FT article, lpf, but I would imagine there are several factors.
The principal one IMO is that we are now in an election campaign, so the opposition parties are able to get their point across on the doorsteps and in the media, and those polled may be giving the matter a little thought.
I’m not sure what Salmond is up to, but I suspect his plan has back-fired. (It reminds me a little of the financial crisis when it was suggested that banks could clean up their balance sheets by ring-fencing all the toxic assets in a separate company and managing appropriately). Somehow the SNP has managed to detoxify their party to a certain extent, but at the cost of raising questions of judgement and competence.
Thirdly, you have Sturgeon revealing that the financial figures underpinning her Growth’s Commission blue-print are “out of date” from which it could be inferred that the figures can’t be made to add up.
And perhaps doubts are growing over her commitment to actually having a referendum any time soon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Sun 25 Apr 12:32
Twitter link doesn't work for me. Are people suggesting the Greens aren't supporting independence?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Andrew283
Date: Sun 25 Apr 12:42
Wish sleezy Salmond would just bolt back to obscurity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Sun 25 Apr 16:22
Quote:
jake89, Sun 25 Apr 12:32
Twitter link doesn't work for me. Are people suggesting the Greens aren't supporting independence?
It was a campaign flyer suggesting independence lower down their priorities. Here's a clip from today discussing their manifesto including at around 2.30 their interpretation of the Yogyakarta Principles
https://tinyurl.com/ywsns2z5
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Sun 25 Apr 17:29
That's an absolute schooling and a highly impressive performance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Sun 25 Apr 18:00
Even the SNP don't have independence as their top priority. Recovery is first.
What I don't understand is why the unionist parties are so against a referendum. Yes, a bit of a distraction but surely better to get it out the way than to have it constantly in the background?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Sun 25 Apr 20:20
Jake89 they are so against a referendum because they simply cannot afford to lose Alba irrespective of what you read.... our wee Country is the heart of the Union and without us they will struggle .... They have treated us with disrespect, contempt, and used us as cannon fodder, but deep down we are bigger and better than them and they know it ....
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Sun 25 Apr 20:25
Well aware of that. So why don't Westminster stop the fibs and do what's right for all in the UK rather than just London and the South? I would be furious if I lived in the likes of Tyneside.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Sun 25 Apr 20:40
Because jake89 Westminster is led by the Fibber King :-))
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Sun 25 Apr 22:23
And lo and behold the latest poll has SNP on course to win a majority and Greens to go from 6-11 seats.
What an opportunity we missed in 2014.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Sun 25 Apr 23:32
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19257574.election-2021-snp-on-course-five-seat-majority-labour-second/
Salmond's negative view now up to 74%. He's also less popular in Scotland than BoJo.
It does however look like the message on the 2nd vote is getting through to the electorate just not for ALBA with the Greens predicted to almost double their seats and.the SNP picking up a majority without their help.
It's quite ironic that ALBAs supporters that have been targeting the Greens to try and diminish their list vote may inadvertently have helped convince SNP supporters to give their 2nd vote to the Greens.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Sun 25 Apr 23:34
Sorry MCT the FT seems to do a funny think where if you click through from Google you can read the article but if you link to it it's behind a paywall. I'll try and find the free link.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Mon 26 Apr 00:06
Quote:
jake89, Sun 25 Apr 12:32
Twitter link doesn't work for me. Are people suggesting the Greens aren't supporting independence?
They've unblocked their Tweets so the link works again. I was trying to find some of the shares so I could share it with you but its almost impossible when you go through the Green party members Twitter accounts..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Mon 26 Apr 10:57
Quote:
londonparsfan, Sun 25 Apr 23:50
Tab Q2 summary has 79% saying they wouldn't vote for ALBA which is the highest negative score of any party.
What a bizarre and stupid question to ask.
“Would you or would you not consider voting for the following parties?”
You omit to mention that
77% wouldn’t vote Tory
71% wouldn’t vote SNP
74% wouldn’t vote Reform
56% wouldn’t vote Labour
61% wouldn’t vote Lib Dem’s
60% wouldn’t vote Greens
51% would not consider ‘other’
Even more stupid to try to extract any relevance from it.
Going by the above, if it actually had any credance, whoever ‘other’ is, seems to be winning with Labour second...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Mon 26 Apr 11:15
It's not really. People have parties that they absolutely won't vote for.
Most socialists won't vote for the Conservatives.
People that belive in light touch regulation for heavy industry aren't likely to vote Green.
You can extrapolate from the answers that more people will not consider voting for ALBA than any other party. Edited to add: which was the main point I was making.
Post Edited (Mon 26 Apr 11:16)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Mon 26 Apr 11:35
The main point is that they are 2% less regarded than the Tories?
Or 6% less than SNP?
No, you give a completely out of context ‘79% won’t vote for Alba’.
Which sounded pretty damning, and was the reason I checked the link.
So, any unionist won’t vote for them?
- shock horror, given that their only reason for existence is to push for Indy ref.
There’s 45-55% right there, depending on which poll you believe.
Labour/Tory/LD won’t vote for a harder lined SNP?
Green supporters won’t move their 2nd vote? (which is about the only way they will get seat)
What should be noted is that 21% WOULD consider voting for a party that is what, a month old?
As previously mentioned, if they were to get 20% of the vote, they would get in the region of 25-30 seats
Even 10% would get 10 seats.
Alba are not trying to win the election - just to take enough list seats off Labour and Tories to enable an SNP/Alba absolute majority in any Independrnce debate/vote/motion at Scottish Parliament level.
Seem to be on track...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: aaaaaaaaaargh
Date: Mon 26 Apr 11:36
The question is much more interesting for polling experts than it is for the general public. They can use it to better estimate the variability around the predictions for each party.
I`m not sure it will help them too much, though. It just shows that a lot of people would still consider voting for other parties.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Mon 26 Apr 12:01
No it was more a comparison with the Greens seeing as how they are the other main pro Indy party.
So far ALBA have put out a cheesy video calling for unity and have then gone off sticking the boot into the parties that already had a majority for Independence in Scotland. They are led by someone who is the most disliked leader in Scotland and whose party have polarised more people against them than any other party. What exactly do they think they're achieving?
They're polling has them at 3% on the list vote. The Greens are on 10% ironically quite potentially an increase in support from the ALBA message to split your votes intended to give ALBA votes.
By far the best thing to do if independence is the key to your vote is check your region and where the SNP need 2 votes give them two votes or split between the SNP and Green.
ALBA are going to get pumped. Interesting to see which political party Tasmina ends up at though - is there anyone she's not been involved with?
Post Edited (Mon 26 Apr 12:02)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Mon 26 Apr 12:22
Quote:
Tenruh, Mon 26 Apr 11:46
https://wingsoverscotland.com/traitors-gate/
Interesting article this morning.
The seethe is palpable. It's quite funny watching him throw his toys out the pram as the majority of Scotland don't appear to agree with him even on the Yes side.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Mon 26 Apr 12:31
The majority of Scotland don't even know who the Alba party is.
Let's keep it our wee secret....
CONSTITUENCY VOTE SNP
LIST VOTE ALBA
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Mon 26 Apr 21:46
Quote:
londonparsfan, Mon 26 Apr 12:01
No it was more a comparison with the Greens seeing as how they are the other main pro Indy party.
So far ALBA have put out a cheesy video calling for unity and have then gone off sticking the boot into the parties that already had a majority for Independence in Scotland. They are led by someone who is the most disliked leader in Scotland and whose party have polarised more people against them than any other party. What exactly do they think they're achieving?
They're polling has them at 3% on the list vote. The Greens are on 10% ironically quite potentially an increase in support from the ALBA message to split your votes intended to give ALBA votes.
By far the best thing to do if independence is the key to your vote is check your region and where the SNP need 2 votes give them two votes or split between the SNP and Green.
ALBA are going to get pumped. Interesting to see which political party Tasmina ends up at though - is there anyone she's not been involved with?
Poll result from ScotGoesPop – Alba on 6% – projected to take 8 seats. Yeah.
10 days to go, lets get that and more.
Squeaky bum time for the pseudo Indy parties
https://scotgoespop.blogspot.com/2021/04/video-exclusive-new-scot-goes-pop.html
Post Edited (Mon 26 Apr 21:59)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Tue 27 Apr 19:03
Scottish Leaders` Debate will be included in Channel 4 News just started at 7 pm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Tue 27 Apr 19:58
Quite a feisty debate. Krishnan Guru-Murthy is a good questioner and controller I`d say.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Wed 28 Apr 17:26
It was but wasn't in the collection of polls list above so I popped it up too.
If I was trying to hide anything I wouldn't include the link 😉
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Wed 28 Apr 23:51
Latest opinion poll shows support for independence fallen even further now. Sitting at 42%. The game may well be up now regardless of what happens next week.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Thu 29 Apr 07:19
Doesn't matter one hoot what the poll shows we're not voting for independence next week.
All the negative polls have been conducted by the Scotsman and the Post, along with the Ashcroft one. All Union bias.
Looks like the Ashcroft one has definitely been loaded with appropriate questions for a certain negative answer.
Only 43% of Greens support Independence ?
Only 2 in 100 would vote ALBA ?
We'll know next week....
CONSTITUENCY VOTE SNP
LIST VOTE ALBA
Post Edited (Thu 29 Apr 07:21)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Thu 29 Apr 09:14
Find it hard to believe that support for independence has fallen from 58% to 42% in a few short weeks, with all this Tory sleaze and scandal going on.
Let’s get the vote done next week , then things will settle down and when the time is right and another independence referendum campaign starts I am utterly convinced that the polls ( providing the question is not loaded of course ) will soon be back above 50%…
What an opportunity we missed in 2014.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: AdamAntsParsStripe
Date: Thu 29 Apr 13:21
Quote:
The One Who Knocks, Wed 28 Apr 23:51
Latest opinion poll shows support for independence fallen even further now. Sitting at 42%. The game may well be up now regardless of what happens next week.
I’d say that’s skewed. Given NS has been at pains to say there won’t be a referendum until the pandemic is over, when the question asked is ‘If a referendum is held tomorrow how would you vote?’ , you’re not going to get a realistic result.
Zwei Pints Bier und ein Päckchen Chips bitte
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Wed 5 May 18:24
Daft question from an auld man guys ... but can we use both votes for SNP ? and is there any advantage voting that way as opposed to SNP ... Alba ?
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Andrew283
Date: Wed 5 May 18:46
Think it depends on the %vote the SNP gets in the area (Fife). The higher numbers they get in the 1st they lower the value they get in the list. I'm personally going for SNP and Greens in the list. Get Alba into the sea
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Wed 5 May 19:15
Yep I recently have voted snp/snp for last few elections ...but if Alba had done anything it’s woken me up too the waste the list vote is if your constituents vote wins.
So SNP for constituency and Green on the list for me
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: donj
Date: Wed 5 May 19:20
I`m SNP / Alba.I think we need a real politician back.And any comments about his reputation try actually reading the real reports about the case before spewing the normal abuse about how terrible he is as strangely a judge and jury disagreed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Andrew283
Date: Wed 5 May 19:33
Nothing even about Salmond for me, that party has been swarmed with transphobes, bigots, generally the scummy side of the push for indy. Not a chance I'll vote for that party
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Wed 5 May 20:29
I`ll probably just stick with snp 1 and 2. Think with North East Fife maybe going Lib Dem there may be room on the list for the snp. If you are a conservative who fancies independence or even if you just want to severely wound the independence movement then vote Alba.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Wed 5 May 20:32
CONSTITUENCY VOTE SNP
LIST VOTE ALBA
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Wed 5 May 22:29
Quote:
donj, Wed 5 May 19:20
I`m SNP / Alba.I think we need a real politician back.And any comments about his reputation try actually reading the real reports about the case before spewing the normal abuse about how terrible he is as strangely a judge and jury disagreed.
Sorry Donj but the civil service were warning women about working alone with him at night when he was in power. He might not have done anything criminal but that's hardly a good sign.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Wed 5 May 22:50
Quote:
londonparsfan, Wed 05 May 22:29
Sorry Donj but the civil service were warning women about working alone with him at night when he was in power.
What a load of pihs. Did he turn into a vampire at night?
IF there were such warnings, surely it would be ‘alone at any time’.
Why only when he was ‘in power’?
Does his ALLEGED BUT FOUND NOT GUILTY activities only happen under these conditions?
Mutually exclusive?
At night when in power = danger?
Evening/daytime/morning when in power = safe?
At night when not in power = safe?
Awa’ and boil yer heid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: AdamAntsParsStripe
Date: Thu 6 May 00:24
Eve of the Election and been keeping an eye on polls etc.
Clearly SNP are on course for a big victory again but we don’t know if they’ll need back up from Greens to push the Indy majority or do it themselves. Either way there is going to be an independence majority of that there is no doubt.
I’m sticking with Alba on the list vote as even if they come short , in Fife it won’t take away any meaningful votes from SNP who won’t get a list seat here anyway.
Greens are ok on most things but I find their anti women stance deplorable.
Zwei Pints Bier und ein Päckchen Chips bitte
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Thu 6 May 00:47
Quote:
Luxembourg Par, Wed 5 May 22:50
Quote:
londonparsfan, Wed 05 May 22:29
Sorry Donj but the civil service were warning women about working alone with him at night when he was in power.
What a load of pihs. Did he turn into a vampire at night?
IF there were such warnings, surely it would be ‘alone at any time’.
Why only when he was ‘in power’?
Does his ALLEGED BUT FOUND NOT GUILTY activities only happen under these conditions?
Mutually exclusive?
At night when in power = danger?
Evening/daytime/morning when in power = safe?
At night when not in power = safe?
Awa’ and boil yer heid.
Err it was Donj that suggested we looked at the actual reporting from the court and that was exactly what was presented in evidence to the court so its not a case of if the warning was given, it was.
Women were told not to work unaccompanied by Salmond at night and this wasn't refuted by Salmonds team. Sorry if that's not what Salmond fan boys want to hear. As I said, he might not have been found guilty of any criminal conduct but the fact on organisation had to warn women not to work unaccompanied with him at night isn't normal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Thu 6 May 07:29
Can someone explain to me how the Greens are anti women?
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 6 May 07:56
Down to suggestions on voting around a change to replace sex with gender. It's seen as progressive in terms of some people being non-binary but there are also substantial concerns, mainly among women, about people born as men identifying a women.
I'd argue that there is no "right" side to the argument and attempting to have an open discussion on it is limited by fear of offending and having your career ruined by a minority of extremists. Graham Linehan (Father Ted, IT Crowd, Motherland writer) has been black-listed due to his views. Similar was attempted with JK Rowling when she made a remark about women who have periods. Whilst things they have both said may be considered offensive, how can a debate be had if there is constant figure pointing and shocked faces?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Thu 6 May 08:49
I agree Jake it is a complex issue but just saying "they are anti women" hardly brings anything to the debate (I know thats is not what you are saying). Also though if that makes them anti women wouldn`t it also make them anti men? Some are born as women but identify as men.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 6 May 08:52
That's the part I'm never comfortable with. It's always inferred that all men are predators. So a trans woman will want to molest a child if they share facilities but a trans man wouldn't. I'm sure the figures suggest there are more sketchy people born as men than born as women but it's an uncomfortable suggestion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: BigJPar
Date: Thu 6 May 09:15
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: QPR_Par
Date: Thu 6 May 09:40
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Thu 6 May 00:47
Women were told not to work unaccompanied by Salmond at night and this wasn`t refuted by Salmonds team. Sorry if that`s not what Salmond fan boys want to hear. As I said, he might not have been found guilty of any criminal conduct but the fact on organisation had to warn women not to work unaccompanied with him at night isn`t normal.
LPF, I enjoy reading your posts, very informative and frequently with links to back up your observations. However, you have stated on more than one occasion in this thread that women were warned away from being alone with Salmond but I don`t think that`s the case. I`ll post a link to Craig Murray`s blog but this is the relevant text denying the policy:
"The nearest thing the crown had to an eye witness was Mr Donald Cameron, head of the private office of Leslie Evans, Permanent Secretary to the Scottish Government. Mr Cameron testified on Friday that he had witnessed Alex Salmond attempt to brush the hair from the cheek of a civil servant in a lift (which is not one of the charges). Mr Cameron also agreed under questioning that there was not, to his knowledge, any policy against female civil servants working alongside Mr Salmond in Bute House, which claim had been the major trial media headline on Friday morning."
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/03/13-events-no-witnesses-the-prosecution-concludes-the-case-against-alex-salmond/
(edited to add link)
Post Edited (Thu 06 May 09:45)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Thu 6 May 09:58
Quote:
QPR_Par, Thu 6 May 09:40
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Thu 6 May 00:47
Women were told not to work unaccompanied by Salmond at night and this wasn`t refuted by Salmonds team. Sorry if that`s not what Salmond fan boys want to hear. As I said, he might not have been found guilty of any criminal conduct but the fact on organisation had to warn women not to work unaccompanied with him at night isn`t normal.
LPF, I enjoy reading your posts, very informative and frequently with links to back up your observations. However, you have stated on more than one occasion in this thread that women were warned away from being alone with Salmond but I don`t think that`s the case. I`ll post a link to Craig Murray`s blog but this is the relevant text denying the policy:
"The nearest thing the crown had to an eye witness was Mr Donald Cameron, head of the private office of Leslie Evans, Permanent Secretary to the Scottish Government. Mr Cameron testified on Friday that he had witnessed Alex Salmond attempt to brush the hair from the cheek of a civil servant in a lift (which is not one of the charges). Mr Cameron also agreed under questioning that there was not, to his knowledge, any policy against female civil servants working alongside Mr Salmond in Bute House, which claim had been the major trial media headline on Friday morning."
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/03/13-events-no-witnesses-the-prosecution-concludes-the-case-against-alex-salmond/
(edited to add link)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Thu 6 May 10:16
Thanks QPR and appreciate the kind words. Salmond has been acquitted of all charges so I'm not suggesting he has done anything illegal. FWIW I also think the way some of this has been handled by both the SG and the police/prosecution has been extremely strange and depending on how you interpret some things you could see why some people would say it almost looked like a conspiracy to get him at times.
In the link you provided it confirms there was no eye witness to any assault and that the Permanent Secretary to the SG was unaware of any policy to limit lone female working with AS. Both of these statements can be true and it can still be the case that the following is true:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/mar/12/alleged-assault-led-to-ban-on-alex-salmond-working-alone-with-women
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-51908343.amp
There you have two separate testimonies in court under oath that they tried to avoid women working alone with AS at Bute House and in the second link they went to the extent of changing rotas to ensure women weren't left to work alone with him.
Irrespective of the final outcome of whether he acted illegally and whether there may have been a witch hunt to get him, unless they have both lied under oath, that's quite some policy to implement even if it was undocumented.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: McCaig`s Tower
Date: Thu 6 May 14:45
I’ve never met Alex Salmond but I don’t care for him. I didn’t follow the trial so can’t comment on that.
I would say however that it is interesting how unpopular he and his party are (relative to other parties). This sort of question must be important in terms of the potential for tactical voting, and in how transfers are ordered in local elections under STV. I think Tories are much more likely to vote Labour to keep the SNP out, than Labour supporters are to vote Tory.
It is also interesting to see some people, who tend to view everything in black and white, try to come to terms with the fact their former ally is now their enemy.
Regarding improper behaviour, it must be clear that there are risks in having a man in a position of power (it’s almost always a man) left alone with a woman.
Obviously these risks are heightened at night:
• It is outwith normal working hours, so normal working norms may be suspended.
• There are fewer people around, so fewer witnesses, fewer people to interrupt unexpectedly, fewer people to hear cries for help, figurative or literal
• Night time is already a potential danger for single women, who may not have an obvious mode of transport to get home
If there were concerns about Salmond’s behaviour it would seem that they were put to one side. Sadly, that is often how people get away with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: QPR_Par
Date: Thu 6 May 16:37
LPF, thanks for your reply and the links. I think that "never written down" comment is a huge part of the problem but I imagine trying to make that official policy when the First Minister is in the firing line can`t be an easy task.
I can`t disagree with anything else you have said and expressed it far more succinctly than I could. This whole Salmond / Sturgeon saga needs to be brought to an end and there are days when I think the best way to end this is for them to both to step away from politics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Thu 6 May 18:55
You're very welcome and I agree with you and MCT. It would be almost impossible for the staff to document properly a decision that said they didn't want female staff working alone with AS especially when it appears they were all pro SNP and Yes as they knew the damage it could do if it got out and between that and not having a proper process to deal with claims of misconduct against an FM it does appear as though not much other action was taken until much later on.
I try and equate things like that to what if it was a Tory minister that had done it and I wouldn't want them involved in leading a political party so I now feel the same about AS even though I don't entirely dismiss the view that some were out to get him on top of the information that came to light in the trial.
The polling showed both NS and AS were negatively impacted by the fiasco so it will be interesting to see how today's voting goes compared to the opinion polls. I wouldn't be desperate to keep NS as leader of the SNP but a bit like changing a football manager I don't think the SNP is brimming with people that would do a better job.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Fri 7 May 14:37
LPF - Genuinely think that is gonna be an issue for the SNP going forward. Who will be the successor? For me the obvious candidates would be Robertson, Blackford Cherry and Smyth but it looks as if it will only be Robertson sitting in Holyrood, assuming he wins Edinburgh Central of course.
Cherry would have been my first choice as she has a strong legal career behind her but she seems to have been well and truly smeared with all this transphobia nonsense. I do think there is traction behind what she said about being conspired against to prevent her standing in Edinburgh. Thing that genuinely does my box in is when the extremely loud activists can`t seem to fathom that legislation is inherently complex and needs to be carefully worded and thoroughly examined to ensure there are no loop holes. In the case of the trans issue its extremely complicated because gender is both biological on one hand and psychological on the other. Anyone who says anything against them and doesn`t accept their few that the issues isn`t black and white though is simply "bigoted".
I like to think that the majority of people in Scotland take the "live and let live" approach and say people should be able to live their lives as they see fit and, as a Lesbian, I`d highly doubt that Cherry wouldn`t take the same view.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Fri 7 May 15:17
No I don't think there is any real risk of NS not being the leader it was more of a response to QPRs post.
I'd forgotten about Robertson actually with him being off the front line for a bit I think he's pretty talented.
Cherry is clearly a very sharp lady but a lot of what I'd read about her seems to indicate she can be divisive as well and not just on the trans issues so although she's definitely bright enough to do it she might be lacking some of the other traits needed from a leader.
Over all I think Blackford does a decent enough job but there are times where I cringe at some of the stuff he comes out with and I think if he was front and center all the time there would be more chances to drop a clanger. I don't think he's as quite as good as Robertson on that front.
Smith seemed decent at the European Parliament but to be honest a lot of what I have seen of him were Facebook clips so I don't know enough about the rest of his career to have a proper view on him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: McCaig`s Tower
Date: Fri 7 May 16:37
Actually, I thought NS would have quit during the last parliament,
I thought she was teeing up a change of career - perhaps some gig at the EU, or maybe visiting Professor of Modern Politics at some overseas University, somewhere in New Zealand say (and become besties with Jacinda).
But events happened (as Asquith might have said).
First there was the EU Ref (we`ll skip over the half-hearted campaign...) which breathed new life into the Indy cause. She could ride that wave for a bit longer.
Second, there was the absence of an obvious successor (one downside of maintaning an iron grip on the party). Deek Mackay might have been being groomed, to coin a phrase, but had to give up politics; Salmond was going to trial, "Safe Hands" Swinney was turning into a klutz, Joanna Cherry seems unpopular with large sections of the party, Kate Forbes was a bit inexperienced, and Angus Roberston couldn`t be brought into play for some reason.
Third, there was a pandemic - you couldn`t quit in the middle of that.
However, on the assumption that Robertson gets in in Edinburgh Central, I would expect a coronation within 2 years. Mind you, I`ve been wrong before...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Fri 7 May 17:59
I wouldn`t discount Kate Forbes eventually taking over from Sturgeon.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: red-star-par
Date: Fri 7 May 22:10
I think a few of the previous posters would love it if Nicola quit, but I'm pretty sure she has got the passion to see the country through this Pandemic, as she has being doing so well so far, and deliver independence
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Fri 7 May 22:20
Huw Edwards is Welsh Labour through and through 😂
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Sat 8 May 08:44
TOWK, Kate Forbes has admirable qualities, but the rock in in her life is an utterly sincere and deeply held religious one at odds with the Woke brigade.
Taken together with an aversion to telling porkies, and changing principles to suit which way the wind blows, she is totally unsuited to be in politics at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Sat 8 May 08:51
I can't see her religious beliefs mattering much when placed beside a Tory party who aren't far off being the Scottish Family Party with some of their own MPs and MSPs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Sat 8 May 12:26
She`s a Member of the Free Church of Scotland. I have little time for any of the Abrahamic mythologies, but the Free Church of Scotland are most definitely far from the worst!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DA-go Par Adonis
Date: Sat 8 May 18:10
Alba have helped the pro-independence majority. It's highlighted that voting SNP 2nd vote is a waste in most places.
It's just that it's far easier to put the cross beside 'green' rather than Salmond's party. It's just unfortunate that more didn't quite catch on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I love it when we go sell Kevin Nisbet,
He's gonna pay for everyone this season.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Sat 8 May 18:20
Yeah I'd agree with that point and I'd said the same based on the increased polling for the Greens.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sat 8 May 20:27
A nice healthy pro independence majority in the Parliament with the electorate utterly rejecting Alba and their mirror image party led by George Galloway.
It`s a pity there isn`t going to be a general election for a while so the electorate could also jettison MacAskill and Hanvey.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Sat 8 May 20:47
The people have spoken but still the parties against independence aren`t listening. They`ve all won apparently and people don`t want an independence referendum! Less than 48 hours since the polls closed but nothing has changed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Sun 9 May 10:06
1.7% for ALBA. Looking forward to a swatch at the good Reverend's considered opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Sun 9 May 10:17
Looks like he started earlier than I thought he would:
[Url]https://wingsoverscotland.com/dawn-of-the-imbeciles/#more-130040
Always nice to see someone sticking the boot into someone with mental health issues. Classy guy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DA-go Par Adonis
Date: Sun 9 May 14:05
Anyone up to speed enough to work out how many green MSPs could have been elected if all SNP voters gave their 2nd vote to them?
I'm not sure of the methodology if a party polled 1% in the FPTP vote and then 48% in the list vote.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I love it when we go sell Kevin Nisbet,
He's gonna pay for everyone this season.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sun 9 May 14:39
If every snp list vote had went to the Greens then they`d would have 35 msp`s, an increase of 27.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Sun 9 May 15:17
Do you know what Labour and the Conservatives would have been left with respectively by any chance mate?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: McCaig`s Tower
Date: Sun 9 May 16:07
Have you a source for that TOWK?
I had a quick look and got Greens 34 (+26), Con 13 (-13) Lab 9 (-11) SNP 0 (-2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Sun 9 May 16:16
Cheers MCT.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sun 9 May 16:27
I don`t have reliable sour e I could vouch for as such just a post someone had made on reddit. They did seem to have done a bit of research and presented it in a non partisan way.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: McCaig`s Tower
Date: Sun 9 May 18:05
I note that there was a "Independent Green Voice" candidate on the Glasgow list who polled a couple of thousand votes. Had those gone to the SGP then they might have had an extra seat at the Tories` expense.
I think this may be the work of Alistair McConnochie who is a man of dubious previous political affiliations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Sun 9 May 19:18
Quote:
McCaig`s Tower, Sun 9 May 18:05
I note that there was a "Independent Green Voice" candidate on the Glasgow list who polled a couple of thousand votes. Had those gone to the SGP then they might have had an extra seat at the Tories` expense.
I think this may be the work of Alistair McConnochie who is a man of dubious previous political affiliations.
I saw someone on twitter complaining about the naming of the party, seems some first time voters saw "green " and selected them. They are anything but a green party, seemingly!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Sun 9 May 19:43
I'd never heard of him but a quick Google shows he was booted out of UKIP. Another nice guy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Sun 9 May 20:26
Bring back the monster raving loony party :)
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sadindiefreak
Date: Sun 9 May 22:40
Quote:
londonparsfan, Sun 9 May 19:43
I'd never heard of him but a quick Google shows he was booted out of UKIP. Another nice guy.
He was booted out of UKIP for being too racist.
That's some achievement for him.
Seems holocaust denial is a step too far even for UKIP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: McCaig`s Tower
Date: Mon 10 May 21:18
Meanwhile, in the Chessington South By-election for Kingston Council, the Monster Raving Loony Party managed to split their vote by fielding 13 candidates for the one seat.
edit - link may be too long
try this
edit - no, it`s the hash problem again.
(Lack of preview also an issue)
Post Edited (Mon 10 May 21:24)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Mon 10 May 21:19
Quote:
McCaig`s Tower, Mon 10 May 21:18
Meanwhile, in the Chessington South By-election for Kingston Council, the Monster Raving Loony Party managed to split their vote by fielding 13 candidates for the one seat.
spot the loony
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: helensburghpar
Date: Tue 11 May 08:54
Alistair Mcconnachie runs the A force for good website. He`s a Holocaust denier and organises the tiny counter protests at the indy marches. Usually wears a union jack waistcoat.
If you want to read bigotry and posts by assorted knuckle draggers check out the website. One post saying the SNP only received a high amount of votes due to immigrants voting for them. A high number of posts seem to end with no surrender, wonder what team they support?
Post Edited (Tue 11 May 09:25)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Tue 11 May 13:46
I see Craig Murray who wrote a blog during Salmond`s trial from which the complainers could be identified, in breach of a court order, has been sentenced to 8 months in jail although he has 3 weeks to appeal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sadindiefreak
Date: Tue 11 May 17:14
Quote:
wee eck, Tue 11 May 13:46
I see Craig Murray who wrote a blog during Salmond`s trial from which the complainers could be identified, in breach of a court order, has been sentenced to 8 months in jail although he has 3 weeks to appeal.
I don't think it's worthy of a prison sentence.
I was able to identify one of them from his blog though, so it is pretty serious to breach a court order.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Tue 11 May 18:06
The judges comments give some indication of how serious she considered the offence -
Lady Dorrian said: "It appears from the posts and articles that he was in fact relishing the task he set himself, which was essentially to allow the identities of complainers to be discerned - which he thought was in the public interest - in a way which did not attract sanction."
She added: "These actions create a real risk that complainers may be reluctant to come forward in future cases, particularly where the case may be high profile or likely to attract significant publicity.
"The actions strike at the heart of the fair administration of justice.
"Notwithstanding the previous character of the respondent and his health issues, we do not think we can dispose of this case other than by way of a sentence of imprisonment."
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Tue 11 May 18:08
Anonymity and justice do not make good bedfellows. From memory it was initially children who were afforded anonymity during court proceedings and this was then extended to women in cases of sexual assault. Now it seems to apply to any servant of the state who has taken civilian life in the course of his duties, be it as a police marksman or a soldier.
The concept of ‘jigsaw identification’ is an elastic term which can mean as much or as little as demanded by the state. Craig Murray had an axe to grind in his coverage of the Salmond trial but his real crime was to comment on the successful defence offered by Alex Salmond. The verdict came as a surprise to the state, who had lined up an anti-Salmond TV special in anticipation of a guilty verdict. Failing to get Salmond jailed, and it could have been up to eight years, they have had to settle for Murray and eight months.
I fear Murray is wasting his money lodging an appeal. The money could be better spent bribing warders and inmates at Saughton to give him an easy time on arrival. His high profile reporting on the Assange case has made him more serious enemies than reside at Holyrood; as a self proclaimed enemy of the rogue state he has become a political prisoner, but not one that Amnesty will be putting on the its website anytime soon.
sammer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: donj
Date: Tue 11 May 18:13
Strange that he was worthy of being convicted of jigsaw identification but an anonymous perjurer who tried to get a man put in jail does not even get investigated.Maybe the police couldn`t find out who she was due to her protected anonymity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Tue 11 May 18:38
Didn`t Yaxley-Lennon get time in the pokey for contempt of court as well?
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Tue 11 May 19:15
He did and was sentenced to 9 months at the re-trial and served 9 weeks.
Although I think people breaching the privacy restrictions in court cases like AS's should face prison, Craig Murray's sentence seems quite big relative to his considering the previous convictions for Yaxley.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Tue 11 May 19:32
Yaxley-Lennon`s contempt was in a different league from anything alleged against Murray.
The Attorney General was granted permission to bring proceedings on the basis of:
1. Publishing information that was subject to a restriction prohibiting any reporting of the trial until a later, related trial had concluded
2. Publishing a video encouraging his followers to harass the defendants, creating a substantial risk that their rights would be seriously impeded
3. Illegally photographing and intimidating defendants as they entered court
YL was being funded by right wing elements within the USA and I think he later sought asylum in that country.
sammer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Thu 13 May 14:32
Hopefully it will be reduced a bit on appeal as it does seem out of proportion relative to others.
|
|
|
|
|
|
