As you know, I'm very conflicted about the current intra-Yes warfare. Having seen people try to put him in jail, I cannot blame Alex Salmond in any way for prioritising truth and justice over every other consideration. I also agree that the current leadership are wrong to reject a Plan B for securing an independence mandate, and that something will have to give. However, actively trying to bring down Nicola Sturgeon in order to change the strategy does not strike me as being a great plan. If a vacancy did occur, I'm sure I'd support any bid for the leadership by Joanna Cherry, but she wouldn't be the frontrunner by any means, and we could easily end up with another leader just as committed to the current strategy (or non-strategy as some would see it). We'd also have thrown away our greatest asset in the process.
After my recent dispute with Stuart Campbell, a young friend of mine sent me some thoughts. She's from England originally, and was studying in Edinburgh at the time of the 2014 independence referendum. With a week to go she was still firmly planning to vote No - until she went to a rally and heard Nicola Sturgeon speak. With her permission I'm publishing a lightly edited version of what she wrote - and it's an interesting insight into the potential downsides of changing leader at such a crucial moment.
He doesn't understand his own demographic and relies on a cult following rather than what would help unionist supporters choose independence. He doesn't understand the type of people who might be drawn to his blog, and essentially talks to himself.
I used to be a staunch No voter. I only changed my mind about independence about a week before the vote. I was the typical English union supporter all round and his blog would've been offensive to me as someone sitting on the fence. A lot of No voters are young girls who like me, idolise Nicola Sturgeon. She is literally one of my idols and he shakes trust in her as a figurehead. At the moment people's opinions of her don't matter. The fact is most people love her and she gets girls like me interested in politics for the first time. Older people too. I don't think he understands he isn't addressing No voters, he's addressing his own cult following.
I've worked it out FINALLY.
My only real reasons for being drawn to Yes were:
1. Sturgeon
2. The community feel
That's what hooked me in and started me reading. Stuart shakes trust in someone very famous and good at her job, right at the last minute before an independence vote. He values his ego above independence and nothing more.
But I was the typical No voter. I was quite hardcore against independence before watching Nicola Sturgeon. Oh yes, I was completely against independence. I changed at the last minute. I found her engaging and inspiring. She drew me in. I was really against independence. A lot of people are like me, young and think she is amazing. His opinion of her isn't the priority. The priority is reinforcing trust in her. When people think of independence they think of Sturgeon by association. Stuart is using a big following irresponsibly.
I felt Scottish people hated English people and it was a shortsighted decision. If it wasn't for Sturgeon I would've voted No. She really got me interested in politics for the first time in my life.
Yeah. It's nothing to do with the general public or independence. Most of my English friends find Sturgeon fascinating. Stuart doesn't seem to understand the audience he is speaking to.
But I'm a prime example. Stuart's blog would've been very confusing for me. The swearing and the way he is arrogant and sounds superior. People who come to Yes are very afraid of it because it's so different and feels a bit, mad. Sturgeon is who people look to. I don't think he understands a typical No voter at all.
It's like trying a gym for the first time and the instructor is shouting and complaining at you, trying the equipment. You'd never go back."
The fact remains, Sturgeon has proven to have lied ... how can the genie now be put back in the bottle??
ReplyDeleteEr, proof. Show me.
DeleteNo she has not been proven to have lied
DeleteYou got your information second hand
It's shocking how little people know about what's going on with the 'Salmond' committee.
DeleteA few of us - all independence-supporting SNP activists - have watched every evidence session, read the subsequent 'official record and as many of the 1500+ pages of evidence as time allowed, plus all the letters/replies, legal papers and submissions (one of us is a lawyer), and we're in no doubt that there was, and is, a conspiracy meant to stop Salmond returning to politics.
When the first attempt failed (JR), 'Plan B' was rolled out. Evans sent her (yes - hers - as she kept telling the committee last Tuesday) report to the Crown Office, who involved the police.
So, was Sturgeon simply a gullible bit-player who trusted the wrong people ?
Is that why only two names appear on page 1 of the case papers - Alex Salmond - Plaintiff, and Leslie Evans - 'Respondent'?
The above Court of Session Petition/Q&A should be read by anyone with an interest.
How many folk......
1. Know about the search warrant that had to be used to get information from the 'Government' - and even then more evidence appeared later that the warrant missed ?
2. Have been following Hamilton's investigation, and that the identity of who 'leaked' the story appears to be one of FM's 23 office staff ?
3. That Evans, who made virtually all the crucial decisions, was told to give up in October by the Scot Gov legal team - and she refused ?
4. That the two very senior QC's weren't given all the evidence, and that was one of many reasons they announced that if Evans didn't concede, they'd quit ?
5. That Evans still disagrees with the Court of Session findings, and said as much last Tuesday.
6. That that ''tainted with bias'' is only one of a number of reasons the ScotGov case was doomed ?
I could go on. And on ....because the evidence we keep seeing or hearing people asking for is there in lorry-loads, and what those people are really saying is ''we haven't looked, so it isn't there ''.
But I repeat - Sturgeon is a probably a bit-player compared to others, and sadly that seems to be the norm.
Her 13 Spads, a couple of dozen senior civil servants, and a few favoured (and ScotGov-funded) lobby groups now dictate government policy.
Did the FM have no idea what was actually going on, as the evidence seems to confirm ?
Did she actually believe what she was told by the people she's surrounded herself with ?
If you read nothing else, read Salmond's two submissions - one to the committee, the other to Hamilton, because evidence confirming/corroborating what's in those two damning documents has either already been heard, or it will be when Evans is forced into handing over the rest of the evidence.
And of course Salmond is trying very hard to provide ALL the evidence he has, but to do that the contempt of court threat has to be lifted.
However, as Evans&Co have also withheld/hidden evidence from the courts and other legal bodies, she has few friends at the COPFS
Finally - we all hoped Evans&Co would capitulate last year, and the truth - all of it - could have lead to resignations and possibly criminal charges/prosecutions.
Sturgeon might have just about avoided the worst of it - but as I keep saying - she believed, trusted, and backed the wrong people.
It could have all been over last October, and rebuilding would be complete by now.
But with Evans&Co digging their heels in and refusing to hand over crucial evidence, we could see the total meltdown of both the Scottish Government and the SNP a few weeks before the May election.
Some will claim that was the plan all along, and as Evans admits she speaks to Peter Housden every week, and on Tuesday stated that he'd told her to 'get a move on' (we still can't decide with what !), that idea will get support.
A comment from Douglas:
ReplyDelete"I am very worried about the actions of the SNP leadership and Scottish Government.
It is not a political calculation, it is right and wrong.
Reading the evidence that has come out so far, it is clear that something is far wrong.
I wish it wasn't so but there is a major problem.
If we ignore this, it will cause more and more damage.
It must be addressed without fear, favour or obstruction -not political calculation"
Pinning a political movement to an individual will always end badly.
ReplyDeleteI think that's quite a weak reply, quite honestly. If personalities didn't matter, the SNP would have won the 2003 election. The reality is that without the "Alex Salmond for First Minister" drive in 2007 and 2011, there would never have been an SNP government or an independence referendum.
DeleteWe've been unbelievably blessed to have two phenomenal leaders in succession, and we lose sight of the importance of that at our peril.
Yes " at our peril" and it sometimes looks like we will do the "Scottish thing" and shoot ourselves in our many feet. I try and think of a way out and so far still in the cul de sac, with no where to go.
DeleteAre you all Yoons?
ReplyDeleteI don't mean to sound patronising, but that's quite an immature view. To decide on something based on a personality rather than any argument or critical thinking is not really the kind of thinking anyone should want to encourage. It's a cult of personality and they never end well. For what it's worth, it was Alex Salmond who pulled me into supporting indy, back around 2012. Given the massive rise in pro independence support over the past 10-20 years, we've all been pulled in by something. I'm beyond angry Alex has been put through what he has, something which now looks like a stitch up of massive proportions involving government, police, civil servants etc. No one - whatever you think of them - should ever be put through that. NS has to answer for that. I really, really hope she has an answer, an out, some way to convince us it wasn't her behind it, she was just caught up in it. Honestly, I want that more than anything. But she needs to address it now and tell us what that is. Maybe even resign with some dignity and let the SNP and movement move on before May.
ReplyDeleteSo your reply to a young, female, English No-to-Yes switcher is to call her reasons "immature". For the love of God, what is happening to us? Do we actually want votes anymore? "If you can't vote Yes for a reason we approve of, we don't want you, quite frankly."
DeleteIf the reason is purely a personality and nothing else, yes, it's immature. I'm surprised, given what we're seeing in the US right now, you would disagree with that. There are so, so many very good reasons to support independence for Scotland. Perhaps look at making sure people know what those are.
DeleteAre you seriously trying to compare Nicola Sturgeon's popularity with the Trumpian cult? I'm not surprised you didn't spell it out, because such a comparison is a) nuts, and b) well, immature, for want of a better word.
DeleteAnd seriously, telling people they're voting Yes for the wrong reasons is destructive. It's daft. We should be welcoming switchers with open arms.
No I'm comparing people who support anything only because of one personality with people who support anything only because of one personality.
DeleteHello, I'd said that Sturgeon was what got me interested in politics for the first time, what got me reading and what DREW me to the yes side.
DeleteI never once said Sturgeon as a person was why I voted yes for Scottish Independence. I voted yes after being drawn in and beginning reading properly. She got me interested and I wanted to know more.
Unless you'd like a list of reasons why I voted yes, but I'd rather not do that.
Thanks.
Dear God Fergie. What precious self indulgent crap you write as the country faces the final battle against an enemy vastly more vicious and dangerous than anything you are accusing Sturgeon of.
DeleteFergie - "I want that more than anything" - well prepare to be disappointed.
DeleteThe choice is turn a blind eye to the truth or not. It's a moral choice. The Britnats had the same moral choice with Tony Blair and his illegal war. They chose to continue to vote for Blair.
You are being very patronising and I know as a Scottish voting female of at the time of my change to SNP at 59, I know exactly where she is coming from. I was Labour all my voting years and a unionist and I can't stomach Indy but it was Nicola as deputy leader and the rest of the ScotGov doing the summer tour in 2011 that I changed my mind about SNP and Indy, Salmond wasnt there in my home town when I sneaked in to see the 'enemy'. It was Nicola that pulled me nearer and nearer to Independence and I joined Labour for Independence till 2014 when Salmond stood down and I joined SNP. I sure as hell would not have joined for Salmond like many many of us ex Labour and if you think we ex Labour will just turn a blind eye to Campbell and Salmond ousting Nicola and thinking we'll stick around in SNP to be a member of a dirty tricks new leader and likeminded politicians who are not the kin d of people I would stick around in a party for, I did that with decades long brainwashing by Labour and dirty tricks, backstabbing that sickened so many of us. Thesae Campbell/Salmond/Cherry supporters, be careful what you wish for because SNP support will massively diminish and we will probably join the reds in the Yes movement or Greens and where will you be when SNP votes bomb. After all, SNP membership was only about 25/27k and after 2014 so many folk joined, mainly from Labour and by 2018 it was at around 118k. If Nicola is pushed out, most of us have nothing to hang around in SNP for and we'll help get a majority with the leftwing leaning Yessers.
DeleteI am so sickened by what I see the enemies of Yes who are following the Trump of Bath, he has so much hate for Nicola that he doesn't care if we lose Indy, after all he is sitting in luxury of all the wealth he made which he didn't have to reveal where all the hundreds of thousands of crowdfunding was spent on and he'll be hoping for continued crowdfunding once we lose Indy AGAIN! One guy said 'Nicola lied' yet we haven't heard Nicolas side at the Committee and also, we have seen what Johnson, Trump, Putin, Netanyahu and many more corrupt and evil despots have done yet how pathetic is this 'Nicola lied so lets boot her out at the most important turning point of Scotland's life. Something stinks within Campbell and Salmond's cult and it certainly isn't Indy they want, they want to punish Nicola for her not agreeing with Campbell about him starting a new Indy party, hell hath no fury like Campbell scorned and Salmond, the sleazebag who admitted he came on to some women inappropriately even if he was found innocent. Hell mend these cult members who will be blamed when THEY lose us Indy while Campbell and Salmond will laugh their heads off that they managed like Trump to manipulate their cult to do their bidding and get rid of Nicola.
Are you sure you understood what this person wrote? She didn't write that she became indy supporter because of NS or that she'd vote yes because of NS. She wrote that she was drawn to the yes side because of NS and that she got her reading and thinking. I wish we had at least ten people who were as good at communicating the message as NS. Because yes - we need to have as many union supporters as possible to start thinking why iScotland's good for them and other people. And - yes NS's really good at that. And yes - Campbell's so crap at that that there are quite a few people now who think that he might actually be playing for the other side.
ReplyDeleteI thought he was on the unionist site, I gave up reading about what he had to say years ago. Nothing he wrote was any good for independence it was a bit of a jumble really, and like may others he was out to destroy somebody and say he won. You win by your own efforts not by pulling opponent down.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteNo matter how Stu's attempts to topple the SNP leadership pan out, it's perfectly valid to say (as this friend does) that she was drawn to listening to what the SNP wants, on the strength of Nicola Sturgeon's personality. I'm sure that applies to quite a lot of potential SNP voters.
ReplyDeleteWHat worries me (based on twitter and mutliple facebook groups) is that there *is* a cult of Nicola. I think she has done wonders especially in the last year as we have all wrestled with Covid; but surely people will vote for independence because they're persuaded it's right. Not 'because Nicola'.
'Cult' is a strong word. Cults are closed social groups that exert high degrees of mind control over members by not allowing them to access other sources of infomation (and by other means). If people regard Nicola Sturgeon as an effective and inspiring leader, that does not make them a cult. I don't think it is accurate or helpful to be talking about cults in a democratic society where there is access to many alternative sources of information and no one is forced to think in a particular way. Nicola Sturgeon is a successful leader in the same way as Angela Merkel and Jacinda Arden.
Delete'Cult' is the term unionists use to describe the SNP / support for Scottish indy.
DeleteA poster on WGD thinks Sturgeon is a female Moses. There was me thinking she was a politician who has failed to deliver independence.
DeleteAnd the cult of Campbell and Salmond or do you see them as supporters and the people who support their leader because at the age of now 65 I have seen and lived under so many SHIT leaders of all parties, it is no wonder that we support her and probably protect her from the vile lies, death threats and abuse by so called Scots who are a disgrace to Scotland for the comments she has received, especially from misogynistic men? Till these people turned against Nicola because their love of Campbell and Salmond had been what they seen as slighted, I thought they were fighting for Scottish Indy but it seems they are fighting for the revenge of their beloved leaders yet you criticise those of us who are thankful that finally Nicola is a person we trust in, if that is what you see as a cult then what the hell do you think the supporters before 2014 for Salmond were?
DeleteThis! This a million times.
ReplyDeleteIt sometimes feels like a part of the Yes movement has decided that winning over more No voters isn't necessary anymore. We're way past 50%, 18 polls in a row, etc.. They want to split the list vote to maximise the current Yes vote, because they don't believe more is needed.
For the last five years, Nicola Sturgeon has been focused on winning over No voters and she hasn't stopped. Because they believe she's aiming for an unachievable target, they believe she'll never get there - and have interpreted this as intentional.
She's doing her best to not scare the non-Yes voters. It's not just a figure above 50% that we need, we need at least two million Yes votes in the bag. Preferably two and a half million.
Strange. I read this primarily as a criticism of Stuart Campbell's methods. Whereas, your commenters seem to have taken it as a ringing endorsement of Nicola Sturgeon.
ReplyDeleteIt's clearly positive about the first minister, but the purpose of the piece, at least the way I read it, is to explain how Stuart Campbell wastes his talents.
Folks, this is an astute and articulate young person with a passion for Scottish poltics. It would be great if we actually listen to her.
Nicola is the SNPs top asset, along with the shift to Yes.
ReplyDeleteShe's popular with lots of older people too, a demographic both SNP and YES have found difficult to win over.
Only a tiny minority want her to stand down, mainly because they've deluded themselves into believing that she's not committed to Independence.
Keeping our nerve going into the 2021 Election is vital to winning a YES majority.
The old British divide and rule will suit London just fine.
Anti-Sturgeon blogs and useful idiots in the Indy movement need to button it and put their energies into the positive case for independence.
I think there could be traction in looking in depth into Peter Murrell's background.
ReplyDeleteIt's time he stepped aside. Party CEO since 1999? Entered his role having worked in the constituency office of the former leader and only SNP MP of the time of any profile?
Hmm...if he isn't an MI5 plant then they aren't doing their job.
SNP polling for another majority and Yes on 55% suggests he's a double agent.
DeleteIt's been a while since I have been round the doors but whether people want to accept it or not the young woman in James post is very typical .Granted I'm in Nicola's constituencey that maybe a factor but since she took over as leader round the doors it's very clear that Nicola is very popular with young woman .She is brilliant she is magic are very common description you hear .
ReplyDeleteI don't know how the public are viewing things ,I don't think Twitter Facebook give a true reflection of public opinion.
My hunch is that these young woman will believe that Nicola has been removed by sleazy older men .They will take the view rightly or wrongly that Nicola has lost her job owing to the behaviour of a man .It may haunt us for years
I'll put my house on it if we lose Nicola the backlash from young women will deny us a majority and therefore no Indyref2 .
I know this post will be unpopular but please get out the Yes/SNP social media bubble and listen to the voters .I know difficult in these times but we are really shooting ourselves in the foot if we ditch Nicola now
You are right. Twitter and Facebook are not the "real world" for politics. Most readers on this site will be political junkies. The vast majority are not and only take a passing interest in politics. When things start to impact on them, then they will take notice. Brexit is starting to impact on them. One example. Those now wanting to have a second home in Spain will find it difficult. The ending of the freedom of movement will be a vote loser for the No side in the next independence referendum.
DeleteAs others have said, the author is contrasting the ability of people to communicate the message and inspire others with it. She isn't voting Yes 'cos sturgeon', but because Sturgeon got through to her with the message. Sturgeon is good at convincing e.g. English folks that all the 'it's anti-English' shit is just that, and is in a position to do that.
ReplyDeleteI remember when an Irish-German couple we know asked me (established politics geek) to tell them about indy because they had all sorts of questions that they felt they were not able to get clear answers on. They were worried about 'oot the EU' etc. I just sat down and told them why I supported indy and tried my best to honestly answer their questions. Some weeks later they thanked me a lot, told me they had really appreciated the time I had taken, how well I had articulated things, and after thinking about it, they were both voting yes.
I was their sturgeon and many people have one of these. Might be their dad, mum, sister, a friend a colleague.... a politician. They are not voting yes because of me, but because of the message and I was just the right messenger for them.
I used to say to people 'Whether you like Salmond/Sturgeon/Campbell or not, they have a good way of communicating the reasons for independence to people'.
I still say the same about Sturgeon, but Salmond's busy with other stuff as far as I can see and Campbell just writes about willies in the ladies / how he hates Sturgeon.
When I check out the Rev Stu's blog these days I sometimes wonder if he's in touch with the reality on the ground here in Scotland.
ReplyDeleteThe YES Movement are getting ready for a massive push in May to win an overall mandate for a new Indyref.
Wings seems more interested in taking down the first minister and effectively scuppering the momentum.
Stuart Campbell has an obsession with the Salmond case, and his followers in many cases seem to have lost the plot.
His blog was once a force for good in promoting independence.
Today it mostly makes me squirm.
Ramstam - what is an " OVERALL MANDATE" ? and how does it differ from previous unused mandates and how do you know this? Is the manifesto available to you as an SNP member. What exactly does it say?
Delete"When I check out the Rev Stu's blog these days I sometimes wonder if he's in touch with the reality on the ground here in Scotland."
DeleteHe's in his favoured (over Scotland) Bath, southern England, so no, he's no idea what the reality on the ground is hundreds of miles away in a different country.
I'm an independence man IFS.
DeleteOf course I meant a YES party - SNP/Green plus any other MSP that's pro-indy mandate.
Previous "mandates" can be argued against.
2015 was too soon after the first Indyref although with just shy of 50% the SNP were in a strong position to demand and get more for Scotland IMO.
A previous "mandate" on 37% (2017) was nae mandate at all.
Last December 2019 @ 45% was a recovery for the big one 2021.
As for the SNP manifesto - it'll be what it has to be.
A strong unambiguous commitment to act on the people's instructions. A failure to act on the mandate will result in a change of leadership in the SNP.
Of that I'm certain.
Ramstam - Cameron in 2015 got 36.9% vote share and he took that as a mandate for his EU referendum. Britnats will always argue against any mandate for independence but never against a Westminster mandate.
DeleteThe previous SNP mandates were valid it is only defeatist cringing to argue otherwise.
Succinctly and well put.
DeleteSkier says - tried my best to honestly answer their questions"
ReplyDeleteYou see skier people who just tell the truth do not have to try their best - only liars like you have to try not to lie. That whole post is probably a lie. You come across as a narcissist. Others may think what a pompous arse.
" I was their Sturgeon" 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 she lies as well.
It's interesting that you idolize Sturgeon and see her as so very important, hence mocking me for making the comparison.
DeleteMy messenger ('Sturgeon' for some), if I have one, would probably be my grandad; an old Scottish unionist who thatcher turned to independence supporter. He was solidly Scottish but a unionist and not British, but the Tories bashed it out of him.
What we can be sure of IfS, is that you've likely never convinced anyone to vote for indy. I've never see a post from you that would inspire anyone to vote Yes. It's always attack, mock, moan, name call etc.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/let-their-words-do-the-talking/201103/the-seven-stage-hate-model-the-psychopathology-hate
DeleteStage 4: The Hate Group Taunts the Target
Hate, by its nature, changes incrementally. Time cools the fire of hate, thus forcing the hater to look inward. To avoid introspection, haters use ever-increasing degrees of rhetoric and violence to maintain high levels of agitation. Taunts and offensive gestures serve this purpose"
You are now a psychologist are you.
DeleteRock basher, lawyer and psychologist but had to leave Scotland because you were super qualified. Perhaps people don't like employing liars.
Think this post highlights a very important issue facing Yes as a campaigning movement at the moment.
ReplyDeleteWhat it raises for me, is the question of how, and who, the Yes campaign should be targeting its main fire on (now and any future full blown indy campaign).. The article seems to be advancing the idea that the focus should be concentrated on converting the No vote, just as it was during IndyRef1. This was an essential strategy in 2014 when Yes was fighting from 26% of the vote, so, an aggressive focus on specifically converting 'No' voters was essential. However, essential as it was at the time, it did mean that the Yes campaign was, by its own focus, completely led by the NO campaigns agenda.
This is an inherently weak strategic position for any campaign to have to fight from. Like charging up a hill. That is where things like personalities of leaders and 'key conversational issues' become very important to getting a foot in the door to try to get the No voting person thinking about things in a new way - just as this young woman describes herself doing once she was willing to listen to the Yes message through Nicola's presentation.
In a way, the Yes movement had to use these personalities and 'key issues' as a way to persuade 'normal' folk that Independence was a legitimate possible future for Scotland and therefore should be considered carefully before deciding Yes or No.
This is encapsulated by the theory of 'banal of Unionism' which is foundational to British nationalist psychology and so also central to the Better Together campaign strategy. Relying on their Union being so normalised by the population that it would always remain unquestioned. The young woman of this post, and many of the gradualist Nicola Sturgeon camp seem to still believe that this is the major hurdle that Yes needs to overcome in 2021.
I am not so sure this is any longer the case, when Indy is now polling in the high 50's and the population is completely at ease with Indy as a possible future (that still obviously needs to be discussed before a final decision is made).
For me, the Yes movement (and supporting political parties) need to make the strategic move away from our previously enforced but weak position of following the No campaign's agenda by overtly chasing perceived 'soft No' mindsets (ie, charging uphill). Instead, the focus should be completely on reinforcing the many, many positive reasons for an Indy Scotland that majority Yes voters already believe to be true (charging our army downhill).
This forces the No campaign to deal with our campaign agenda and puts them in our old, inherently weak position of chasing uphill.
The difference between us in 2014 and them in 2021 being that all they have to chase with now is negativity, and telling a majority of the population that they are idiots voting for a failed state will not go well for them.
I agree with Jason, the No side trying to sell the Union (they will try with scares) case will be more difficult that 2014.
DeleteJames, your poll is in the field, I got invited but not taken as they had enough from my age group/demographic.
Sorry to me that is straight out the Steve Bannon Trump school of politics .Divide the nation motivate your base get it out to vote .The results of such a strategy can be seen in the States at this very moment .
DeletePost Independence I don't want to live in a Scotland which will still be divided along those that voted Yes and No .
The best way to do that is win over people by persuasion even if you don't win every one over the soft Nos will feel less threatened by a Yes victory
Concentrating soley on the Yes base will lead to a partisan campaign exacerbate divisions and I want no part of that
I want us to win not by 54 or 55% but by by 60% and at least 40% in every local authority area .That will give us the best chance to unite the nation and build s new Scotland after Indy .I am getting worried at some of the stuff emanating from the pop up parties .A leading member who produces videos supporting Trump and this core vote strategy .
"James, your poll is in the field, I got invited but not taken as they had enough from my age group/demographic."
DeleteThat'll be a different poll - the fieldwork for mine is already complete.
This also leads to the other important change from 2014, and that is the 'settled will' argument. Indyref1 was fought with Yes hemmed in by being constantly portrayed as a totally minority outlook (radical even).
ReplyDeleteIn terms of human nature, Better Together was targeting the non politically aware voter with very basic behavioural psychology. Their message was simple and nothing to do with the kind of detailed arguments over specific issues that we were engaging on (or even the leadership personalities issue that this blog post focusses on). Their message was - 'Vote Yes and leave the safety of the group'.
With Yes now accepted and understood by the Scots population to be in the high 50s, that situation can now be reversed. So, if Yes focuses our Campaign on the positive majority population views of an Indy Scotland, then Indy can begin to benefit from the 'non political' undecided voters naturally falling into support of the majority view, just as Better Together benefitted from the same effect in 2014.
This however cannot be done while Yes is being perceived to 'be chasing votes from the majority'. The thinking No voting minority will be won over by the positive majority arguments of Yes anyway - if they are willing to seriously consider change.
James, I think your article cirreclty poses the dilemma many independence supporters have confronted and many many more will have to do in the near future.
ReplyDeleteThe police have a term called " noble cause corruption" when police think a police officer has tried to fit up a criminal for the better good of society. The question is do the police turn a blind eye to this or not. If they do are they not corrupt as well and breaking the law they are supposed to uphold.
Is the cause of independence noble enough and of such overriding importance that any type of wrongdoing can be overlooked? Each independence supporter will have to make their choice.
Except until such time as someone is found guilty of something, nobody has done anything wrong.
DeleteIf there is a guilty verdict, the person found guilty will be punished.
You are the sort of person who was telling everyone salmond was guilty before his trial verdict. You are just doing that to sturgeon, swinney etc. Classic right wing 'guilty without trial' stuff.
You clearly have no interest in inspiring people to vote for indy.
Smearer Skier telling lies again. I contributed to Salmonds crowdfunder to help him defend himself against the unlawful, unfair and tainted by apparent bias procedure that Sturgeon commissioned at a Cabinet meeting and duly signed off. I never said he was guilty of anything.
DeleteYou of course are guilty of continually lying and smearing Salmond.
I contributed to Salmond's fundraiser too.
DeleteHowever, by telling us that Sturgeon is guilty when she has not been convicted of anything, you are no different to those that said Salmond was guilty. It is hard right wing 'britant' to act like that.
Sturgeon is as innocent as Salmond until such time as either are found guilty of something.
Unlike you, I believe in a Scotland of justice where people are innocent until found guilty.
Is convicting people or serious crimes without trial really a price worth paying for independence? Your vision of a Scotland where people are guilty without trial is a dark place reminiscent of the colonial British empire. You need to take a step back here and decide whether you believe in a just Scotland, or one where right wing lynch mobs convict without trial on English blogs.
Act with honor and respect due process; if Sturgeon is guilty of something she will be found so in due course. She will have her comeuppance, just as you will if you don't act with honor.
Are you threatening me again Smearer Skier? Paper tiger.
DeleteSturgeon presided over a Scottish gov whose process was found to be unlawful. unfair and tainted by apparent bias . Forgotten have you skier? That judgement has been in for two years now. All that has hapoened since is that everyone around Sturgeon has lied and lied - pretty much like you do on this site.
Exactly what Scottish Skier just said. When the parliament puts forth a decision, I will accept it. Until then, I will not take part in a witch hung.
DeleteJR Tomlin - the Court of Session put forward a decision two years ago. Sturgeon as FM and her cabinet presided over an unlawful, unfair and tainted by apparent bias process. The Cabinet authorised the approval of the witch hunt of Salmond and Sturgeon signed off the process.
DeleteThat is the highest Civil Court in Scotland.
Genuine question, but is salmond still actively campaigning for indy or is he just doing his show etc these days?
ReplyDeleteIt's just he doesn't seem to be doing much on the Yes front and eg his twitter certainly isn't busy arguing for indy.
A pity as he was good at engaging folks.
I still can't figure out why 'Cubby' aka 'Independence for Scotland' posts on here.
ReplyDeleteIs it to further independence for Scotland, or is he simply a Sturgeon hater for some reason, or is he scared of women in general?
Impotence maybe?
Truth justice and common decency Juteman - something clearly alien to you.
DeleteJustice requires innocence until proven guilty, which is something you don't believe in.
DeleteTruth, justice and common decency something alien to you as well Smearer Skier.
DeleteIgnore the guy Skier. He's just another Sturgeon obsessive, "screw Indy", Malcontent troll. "Leave it, he's not worth it" kind of thing.
DeleteBetter Together getting ready? A Facebook advert paid for by a LD in England.
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/jye_d/status/1350463554693046273
Yougov UK 4.7k survey, Scottish sample:
ReplyDeletehttps://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2021/01/15/3d0fb/1?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=daily_questions&utm_campaign=question_1
The EU transition period ended on Dec 31st 2020. Since then, do you think Brexit has gone well or badly?
13% Well
16% Neither
61% Badly
=-48% net
If the two investigations into the actions of Nicola Sturgeon go against her, she will look like she runs the government of Belarus.
ReplyDeleteStu and his cultist followers do real damage to the independence cause, sadly.
ReplyDelete