I'm hoping not to get caught in the same trap I fell into in 2011 and 2016 when I spent the last few weeks before polling day doing little else but countering disinformation about the voting system. To save time, and as they say on Blue Peter, here's something I made earlier. Two videos, in fact. The first is a film I made with Phantom Power in 2016 which explains the Holyrood voting system in detail, sets out the theory that it can be 'hacked' by voting strategically on the list, and then explains why that theory is largely bogus. The second is a livestream debate I had on the subject with Tommy Sheridan, also in 2016. A number of people were kind enough to say at the time that I had either won the debate or that it was a score draw, which is quite something when you consider what a formidable debater Tommy is - although, to be fair, he may have been going easy on a fellow Yes supporter, and I think his main problem was that his basic argument wasn't particularly convincing. Even the finest debater can only do so much with such thin material.I did make exactly those points in 2016 and I was proved right. I said we couldn't possibly know, as you were specifically claiming, that the SNP would win at least 65 constituency seats. They didn't - they won 59, and because they didn't have enough list votes, no majority.
— James Kelly (@JamesKelly) March 16, 2021
To anticipate the objection that is always raised at this point, no I have not contradicted myself by saying I would get behind an Alex Salmond-led list party, if one were to be formed. The point is that I wouldn't be doing that to 'game the system' - I would simply be voting for my first choice party on the more important list vote, which is exactly the way the system is supposed to be used. That said, Alex Salmond is the one person who might actually be capable of successfully gaming the system. Why? Because, as stated in the videos, for a tactical push on the list to work, you'd effectively need a mind control ray - you'd need implausibly large numbers of people doing exactly what you want them to do by voting for the SNP on the constituency ballot and then switching to a Party X on the list. Alex Salmond would be able to produce that effect due to the trust and loyalty gained from his twenty years at the helm of the SNP - he'd be able to convince a substantial minority of SNP voters that 'SNP constituency, Salmond party list' is a natural extension of their usual partisan choice.
Helpful vids James; the more folk understand the system the better.
ReplyDeleteAlways worth remembering this very accurate story. Pity such good writing went down the pan.
https://wingsoverscotland.com/ams-for-lazy-people/
...It’s not this site’s business to tell anyone how to vote. What these numbers strongly suggest, though, is that tactical voting – of any sort and for anyone’s benefit – in an AMS election is a mug’s game. You should vote for the party or parties that you most want to see form the government, rather than trying to second-guess the system. Because if you try, chances are it’ll make a chump out of you.
And something to infuriate the erm 'true indy supporters' on here:
https://www.thenational.scot/news/19163110.scottish-election-snp-apply-get-indyref2-ballot-paper/
Scottish election: SNP apply to get indyref2 on the ballot paper
THE SNP have applied to get indyref2 on the ballot paper at the upcoming Scottish Parliament election.
According to The Herald, the party has requested permission to use the phrase in two instances – “Vote SNP for indyref2” and “Both votes SNP for indyref2”.
I commend your optimism James. I absolutely, 109% agree with your stance on the issue - that every voter should vote on the list for the party they want to form a government. That is self-evident and your logic is irrefutable.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I am far more pessimistic than you on a couple of points......
Firstly, the usual suspects will totally ignore your impeccable logic and will continue to beat the same broken drum that they beat in 2016, with the added kink of how evil and power-mad the SNP leadership has become.
Secondly, with regard to the possibility of the unionists gaining 65 seats and then "making life difficult" for a minority SNP government, I think that is wildly optimistic. This isn't 2007 anymore, where the unionists "did the honourable, democratic thing" and allowed Salmond to form a minority government. If they get 65 seats, they'll form a grand coalition faster than you can say "Indy is dead", with DRoss as FM, Anus as deputy FM and wee Willie as minister for road signs.
Scottish politics has become much more divided along the line of independence/unionism since 2007, and we piss about with "tactical" voting at our peril.
The chances of a unionist grand coalition are pretty slim, because Labour could never be seen to install a Tory First Minister. If Labour were the second largest party, a confidence and supply deal with the Tories might be possible, but if the Tories remain in second place, there'll be no deal at all.
DeleteIs Aberdeen City Council not an advert for what is possible when it comes to "Scottish Labour" and playing hand-maiden to the Tories?
DeleteNot really, because the councillors were suspended. That shows Labour understand that there's a line they can't be *seen* to cross, however much they might want to.
DeleteJames, I bow to your superior psephological knowledge, but with reservations. I DO think that Scottish politics is a completely different animal from general UK politics, in that the dividing line of left/right is becoming less important, and is being replaced by the Indy/union divider.
DeleteI don't believe that Anus would pass up the chance of being a minister, and the stigma of being in bed with Tories wasn't sufficient to stop the labour rogues on Aberdeen council.
A memory that will go to my grave with me, was the sight of TV pictures of Labour politicians hugging Tory politicians on that terrible night in Sept 2014. I'd been voting SNP for several years before that, because of Blairism, but that was the night I finally gave up hope of Labour ever creating a UK social democracy and joined the SNP.
My driver for everything I do has been the prospect of Davidson, Carlaw, and now DRoss, sitting in the FM seat........
James, again, you're probably right about Labour, but "probably" is the operative word. It is also important to recognise that Labour suspended these members nearly four years ago, but they haven't yet been expelled, so Labour's "repugnance" at their behaviour is tempered by political reality.
DeleteWhen Charlie Kennedy was Lib Dem leader, the idea that the Lib Dems would ever have gone into coalition with the Tories would have been laughed at. Is anyone suggesting that Anus Sarwar is more moral than Nick Clegg?
"Crossing lines" is easy if you are a political scoundrel, and Sarwar is definitely a political scoundrel.
When Charlie Kennedy was Lib Dem leader, the idea that the Lib Dems would ever have gone into coalition with the Tories would have been laughed at. Is anyone suggesting that Anus Sarwar is more moral than Nick Clegg?
DeleteThe argument is about self-preservation, not morality. Not sure I buy it, though: I could just about see Scottish Labour taking a gamble that their vestigial support is more anti-SNP than anti-Tory (much of it coming from actual Tories voting tactically), and so there wouldn't be much to lose from a grand coalition.
Useful post/videos, James. Needs to be read/seen again by as many folk as possible.
ReplyDeleteFWIW I'll be both votes SNP. With a very large clothes peg on ma neb.
I think the ‘Wings Party’ idea was kite flying, possibly in the hope that someone better suited took this on (unless Stuart is completely delusional about his ability).
ReplyDeletePeople should vote for the candidate they want to represent them, Stuart adding a caveat about being able to form a government is unhelpful as it automatically excludes start up parties (perhaps his intention at the time). The corollary of this is that people shouldn’t vote for parties that they don’t want, this sounds obvious but a lot of people want Independence but not the SNP.
SNP 1&2 is designed to optimise SNP MSP numbers and frankly to squeeze out any alternatives before they are established even as seedlings. Perfectly rational for SNP but we are seeing the weakness of only having one Independence Party (Greens barely count) and no safety net of a credible Devolutionist Party in opposition. This leads to fatal complacency.
Some won’t be voting SNP for reasons of conscience or because they no longer believe that the SNP S30 obsession represents a credible route to Independence.
It might not make a good campaign slogan but ‘vote AFI/ISP/Independent Independista, it’s better than spoiling your ballot’ is where an unknown number of people are at the moment.
A single Independence alternative with a recognised leader would be very welcome.
Douglas, I disagree. I have little doubt that Campbell was deadly serious about forming a Wings party, but was only deterred by the disappointing figures that his "poll" yielded. In spite of asking the most leading questions ever in a poll, the numbers he got were obviously a big disappointment to him.
DeleteYour proviso is correct .... Stuart Campbell IS completely delusional about his ability.
In May, we WILL be voting for a party that CAN form a government. We are too close to the finish line to be conducting electoral experiments with untried parties.
I want independence, but I don't want the SNP. I will almost certainly be "party shopping" after independence, but I recognise that "holding my nose" and voting SNP is a necessity, if my dream of a social democracy is to come true. We CAN and WILL have a social democracy after independence, and the inevitability of the SNP forming governments at that time is by no means a certainty.
I think that folk who believe that the SNP aren't committed to independence are like Trump supporters. They will believe anything, while ignoring the evidence. That's not to say that Sturgeon will act decisively to run a referendum. But if she doesn't, THEN we have evidence that she is what these people say she is, and THEN we can do something about sorting THAT out. "Sorting it out" now, weeks before the most important election of my lifetime would be madness.
We are 50 days away from the election. We don't have time to "welcome a single Independence alternative".......
Held my nose too many times
DeleteEvery election has had a promise of Independence never being closer
Now there’s added toxicity
The only reason I consider voting for our constituency MSP is despite them being SNP (would be more comfortable if they were an Independent). Absolutely no chance of me voting for the chancer pushed to the top of the list. I’ve read their output & they’ve made it abundantly clear how low on their list of priorities Independence is.
Douglas, i have absolutely no idea what you mean by " every election has had a promise of independence never being closer"?
DeleteAre you seriously suggesting that we are no closer to independence now, than we were in previous elections?
Since 2007, when (arguably) the SNP took a massive step closer to independence, the independence movement has never been "close to the finish line", because an absolutely NECESSARY part of being "close to the finish line" is having a majority of those voting, being in favour of independence.
The closest we have been to that was in 2015, when just under 50% voted for the SNP, on a manifesto promise that " a vote for the SNP at this election is not a vote for independence". I thought at the time that this was a mistake, but I'm coming round to the idea that the SNP strategists knew what they were doing, because this year, for the very FIRST time, the Scottish people MIGHT vote a majority for parties promising a referendum on independence.
If that happens, and Sturgeon DOES call a referendum for later this year or early next year, it won't matter a shite who has been voted into Holyrood on the list vote, or how obnoxious you find them to be, because we will the truly be "close to the finish line". Once the glue of seeking independence is gone, and Scotland is independent, the SNP will cease to be a single, unified party. You just can't have Mhairi Black and Fergus Ewing in the same party, if that party isn't unified by independence-seeking.
It seems to me that you can't see the forest for the trees....
Well argued Alex. People have to think well ahead into the future. Independence isn't just for "next Tuesday", it's for the foreseeable future, for our children, grandchildren and their children. And for the foreseeable future the only way we are going to get it is by voting SN1 &2 (Imho). If we fail to get an Indy majority (SNP pref) then it's clear what's going to happen. Just as Thatcher was clear that she was going to destroy the unions and UK industry in favour of financialisation and all the rest, it's clear that Liesalot Johnson is going to destroy devolution and reduce the Scottish Parliament to little more than a Community Council.
DeleteThe first referendum started from a far lower support base & we almost succeeded
DeleteFate (& British Nationalism) handed us an other opportunity several years ago but we’ve not used it. Mandate (root: Mandatory: something that must be done, not optional) after mandate lie unused.
Being close to the goal is no use if you are fanning about with controversial policies rather than completing the task. Some of the unethical antics are beyond what I can stomach. Independence won’t be won by ‘they’ll vote for us anyway, what choice do they have’ -holding Independence to ransom.
SNP would get more support if it stopped alienating people (women in my family gone from member to someone who would actively campaign against SNP), ditched peripheral issues & concentrated on Independence.
I’ve encouraged members to stay & try to recover the SNP for it’s prime reason but at every turn there is self destruction going on. Internal democracy & constitution are subverted for a different agenda.
Sick of it
Women are notably bigger fans of the SNP than men. Taking e.g. the latest Survation, it was 40% SNP for men and 56% for women.
DeleteGRA is also a bit more likely to make women support independence based on recent polling, although for most it makes no difference.
I think there's been a bit of a mansplaining issue around this issue TBH, particularly by middle aged Englishmen to Scots women.
Cameron got 36.9% of the vote in 2015 and it was accepted he had a mandate for the EU referendum because his party won a majority of MPs.
DeleteScotland, however, according to the SNP and the above posters MUST get >50% or there is no mandate for a referendum.
That is the CRINGE.
The SNP had a mandate for a referendum and the Scottish Parliament voted twice for a referendum. Did a referendum happen - NO. Did SNP members rebel - NO.
Hi IfS, if what you are saying is right, and Scots really wanted indy in the last few years but the SNP didn't deliver, they'll be punished in May.
DeleteIf you are totally wrong, the SNP will do similar to or better than 2016.
Smearer Skier (liar since 2014) - you are posting pish again Smearer and you know it.
DeleteSkier, you're right of course. It's very difficult to judge the mood of the whole of Scotland, and we can only judge from the conversations we have with those around us. However, I get the impression that there HAS been a sea change in the attitudes of ordinary folk, who are appalled at the antics of Doris and his pals.
DeleteIf you were to pay any heed to the trolls who talk shite on this site and elsewhere, you would be led to believe that ordinary folk are upset about the trans issue and other internal SNP stuff, but in my experience, that stuff isn't causing even a flicker on the needle. The Salmond affair was a bit of a stodgier, but hopefully, (fingers crossed), the SNP have weathered that storm.
Folk are pissed off about Brexit, they are pissed off with Doris, they are pissed off with Covid, but are impressed with Sturgeon. I think (I hope) that the polls are underestimating the movement towards independence that is going on, and that the SNP will get a majority, with (possibly) up to 10 Green seats.
If that happens, and Sturgeon moves decisively on holding a referendum, will the trolls and Wings sheep wind their necks in? Of course they won't! I've given up trying to understand the motives of folk like TFS and his ilk. It's a waste of time trying to wheedle out of them what would make them happy, because you never get a straight answer. Supposed long term SNP supporters who spend their time slagging off the SNP?? Hmmmm!!?? As the comedienne used to say on the sketch programme ..... "I smell shite"......
Alex the shite you smell is the stuff you are posting.
DeleteSo Alex you are ignoring the fit up of your hero Alex Salmond. That means you are condoning the attempt to send him to jail.
Just how many years did you vote for Britnat parties Alex? So you now support independence but you condone Sturgeons gang trying to send Salmond your hero to jail. You don't have a track record of getting things right do you Alex.
Here is the straight answer you say is never forthcoming:
I want a leadership of the SNP that 1. Doesn't abuse its power to try to send innocent people to jail and 2. Actually wants independence
There you are Alex that will make me happy. So once again you are talking shite. No need to wheedle anything out of me just ask.
I just watched the debate video again. Tommy kept saying that "All the polls show that the SNP WILL win a majority in the constituencies". His certainty is being repeated yet again by the "wee party" enthusiasts, despite the fact that the polls were wildly wrong. The SNP DIDN'T win 73 seats as was alluded by Tommy. They didn't get anywhere near 65 seats in 2016, they won only 59.
ReplyDeleteJames is correct in his description of the list vote being given to other than your preferred party as being a "gamble" rather than "tactical". My nightmare is waking up on the morning after the election, to realise that the "wee party" campaign has worked, but that the polls were wrong about the constituencies, and DRoss is sitting smugly in the FM seat.
I'm an SNP foot-soldier who works himself into the ground at election time chapping doors, leafletting and poster-sticking. I don't go to branch meetings because they are packed with people I never see at election time, but have plenty to say for themselves about how people like me are getting it wrong. Primadonnas and conspiracy theorists, plus armchair experts who have convinced themselves that voting for another party on the list will, somehow or other, "keep Sturgeon in check". They simply don't understand that just one one second vote on the list could lose a seat for the SNP and let a Tory in. Both votes for the SNP!!!
ReplyDeleteMalkie, Agree 100%.
DeleteToo many SNP folk go to meetings etc but expect the footsodgers to leaflet, canvass.
It wis aye like that tho! The SNP have an ally this time. We're expected to win whereas it used to be a struggle to convince folk that we could.
The madness of IFS and AFI standing against each other is actually unbelievable.
Most of their candidates say they'd bolster the YES numbers in the Scottish Parliament but nearly all seem to have an ANTI-SNP chip on the shoulder.
Can we even trust them?
I admire some of the Green MSPs
but I'm thinking it has to be SNP1&2.
So, UK arming itself with more nukes whilst breaking international law as a new hobby.
ReplyDeleteI can see EU-US sanctions on the UK soon over breaches to the United Nations GFA.
SET ENGLAND FREE, VOTE 1 AND 2 S.N.P.
ReplyDeleteA second vote for the SNP removes one from another party, this could be needed.
I could be wrong about this but I dont see Salmond jumping. If he was going to then I think he would have done it already. Besides the feminazis right the now want every male in the UK to be set a curfew or locked up. That would make campaigning impossible. The feminazis seem to think they have special rights to break Covid 19 rules though.
ReplyDeleteAs "feminist" male I find some of your language offensive. You seem to part of the man problem - many men seem to have difficulty respecting women and treating them as equals.
DeleteMaybe a curfew on the little children who run around calling people 'woke, TERFS, transfans, transphobes, feminazis' etc has some merit TBH.
DeleteBed by 7 pm?
The snowflake Yoons have left alone again I see.
DeleteIt's even worse than that; they haven't learned the FPTP lessons of 2015-2017. The 3 incumbent unionist MPs turned into safe seats simply due to the media exposure they were then given. The "Ian Murray effect", which surely applies to MSPs too.
ReplyDeleteAs a result, the SNP almost certainly won't be able to swing Shetland, Orkney, North East Fife, Edinburgh Western or Dumbarton. That brings us down to 68 viable constituencies.
Eastwood is a three-way marginal. Even if Carlaw loses, there's a chance Labour picks it up instead.
Renfrewshire North and West may present a nasty shock(Derek Mackay is the outgoing MSP).
The Greens are standing in Edinburgh Central(and a few others).
65.
Alex stepped away and just left us to it. 100,000 stepped up and went on with Nicola Sturgeon, joined by another 10,000 just a week ago.
ReplyDeleteThere would be no manifesto he could put forward, that didn't say, 'I'm in opposition to the SNP'.
Indy Ref is going on the ballot paper, what, with any merit, would he offer against his own party?
Again, I am severely tempted to delete that comment, because you're just propagandising. Most of those 100,000 joined while Alex Salmond was still leader. They were not "joined by another 10,000" recently because a large number of them have subsequently left. And Alex Salmond did not "step away and leave us to it". He took responsibility for the outcome of the referendum, but he stood as an SNP candidate in the two subsequent general elections.
DeleteBrian Powell , it seems to have escaped your notice that an indyref was in the SNP 2016 Holyrood manifesto and the SNP 2017 UK GE manifesto.
DeleteAs James said you do need to pay more attention.
I don't think we should attribute membership numbers to any leader. While these undoubtedly will have inspired some to join, membership fluctuations are normally driven by national political circumstances, parties seen to be offering solutions to current key problems, and the perceived ability of said parties to achieve that.
DeleteThe surge in SNP membership post-iref was driven by those inspired by Yes not wanting to give up hope. But then a new iref just a couple of years after the first was never realistically going to happen, particularly as brexit was not clear cut in terms of Yes/No in Scotland, so support for Yes retreated and so did membership somewhat apparently. But now iref2 looks real and the bandwagon will start picking up passengers again. The hope ahead of 2014 is returning, no matter how much those against indy are trying to destroy it with the whole 'The SNP don't want indy, given up, go home, forget it, Scottish democracy is a failure' shit.
Personally, I've never voted SNP and didn't join due to Salmond or Sturgeon. This is why I'm utterly impervious to attacks on them; it matters jack shit to me.
'I've never voted SNP because of / didn't join due to...'
DeleteKinda obviously.
Smearer Skier (liar since 2014) - so you have never voted SNP and didn't join it. - and it matters jack shit to you. Some admission there Smearer.
DeleteAre you lying again Smearer. Or is one of your multiple personalities telling the truth for a change.
I've been a member since pre-2014 but didn't join or vote for them due to Salmond or Sturgeon.
DeleteYou by contrast admit you didn't join the SNP as that would involve supporting Salmond. Even now you won't join to help Salmond's supporters.
Smearer Skier (liar since 2014) - so you were lying or are you now saying you didn't vote for them. Not only are you a really really bad reader you ain't that good at writing either. Best stick to rock bashing.
DeleteIt's only in totalitarian states and Communist countries that insist people join the governing political party. Seems like you are a bit of a fascist Smearer as well as a liar, smearer and hypocrite. Oh well I'm sure you must have at least one redeeming quality. It's just not been apparent yet.
Do a video in 2021.
ReplyDeleteI've done umpteen videos in 2021. Do pay attention.
DeleteI've never been convinced that you can game the system, and always voted SNP 1&2.
ReplyDeleteI can't in all conscience do that anymore.
What's your thoughts on voting ISP or AFI in a region like Lothian where the SNP haven't won a list seat since 2007?
I think you have to vote Green in Lothian to have a chance of achieving something positive for independence ( and perhaps the planet) if you don’t want to vote snp 1&2.
DeleteBrian Powell, if "stepping away and leaving us to it" involves carrying on as an MSP for two years after resigning as FM, getting elected to Westminster in 2015, serving loyally as Foreign Affairs spokesman until he lost his seat in 2017, then yes, he "stepped away and just left us to it"......
ReplyDeleteAlex Salmond is my all-time political hero, and will probably always will be. However, I sincerely hope he doesn't join any of the "wee parties". I'm almost certain that he won't, but if he did stand as an independent candidate in the regional ballot in NE Scotland, then he would almost certainly win a seat. He would definitely get my vote......
ReplyDeleteAlex - as Salmond is your all time hero it would be reasonable to assume you read his submissions to the Inquiry and all his correspondence.
DeleteDo do you believe what your hero said?
TFS, I have decided not to waste my time arguing with trolls. I detest the way you debate, and have no wish to get into a conversation with you. Have a nice life......
DeleteAlex - you detest the way I tell the truth. Sturgeon and her gang tried to send Salmond your hero to jail.
DeleteAlex if there is one thing I cannot stand is people like you, who used to vote for a Britnat party, telling me, a lifelong SNP voter and independence supporter, that I am a troll or a unionist.
DeleteI wonder if Nicola Sturgeon is going to lose in Govan?
ReplyDeleteShe's not standing in Govan.
DeleteThe mouse must have sneaked in to Dr Who's Tardis and travelled back to a time when Britnat Labour in Scotland won elections.
DeleteD'oh !
DeleteMarvin, using the 2016 result in Lothian as a guide, you would need to be joined by 17,274 others, voting as a bloc for EITHER the ISP OR AFI to win a list seat.
ReplyDeleteOf course, this would reduce the number of Green seats from 2 to 1, because they won the last seat available in 2016. To take a seat from the unionists (Tories) you'd need to ensure that you were joined by 18,742 AND arrange for the Greens to garner 2,935 votes more than they did in 2016.
It is disappointing that we still need to have this discussion. There is no prospect of any of these new parties getting 6% of the list vote. I will go further. The total cumulative vote of these new parties will not reach 6%. If people are voting for these parties as a form of protest that is their right but, they need to own the consequences. I have been voting for Independence for over 40 years. We are at a crucial point here. A sound SNP majority in this election will be followed by a referendum. A referendum we can win. The time to register discontent with SNP is in the first elections held in an Independent Scotland. Both votes SNP.
ReplyDeleteMarvin, if you wanted to win 2 unionist seats in Lothian (using 2016 figures) then you would need 22,665 folk to vote AFI, 22,665 folk to vote ISP, and arrange for the Greens to get an extra 10,779 votes.
ReplyDelete3 unionist seats would require 49,984 folk to vote AFI, 24,992 folk to vote ISP, and an extra 15,441 folk to vote Green. Any more than that, and you've run out of SNP voters....
OK so maybe not possible to get a list seat, I dunno really how many votes are likely.
DeleteBut still I feel it's worth doing in the hope that others do the same and the SNP see a drastic enough fall in list votes to get the message that they have a problem with lots of people in the independence movement.
Marvin, since I started reading Scot Goes Pop!, I've had a look back through every Holyrood election. Apart from the Main parties, the results for the "best of the rest" have been .... 1999 - 2% Scottish Socialist (1 seat). 2003 - 6.7% Scottish Socialist (6 seats). 2007 - 1.9% Scottish Senior Citizens (0 seats). 2011 - 1.7% Scottish Senior Citizens (0 seats), 2016 - 2.0% UKIP (0 seats), 0.6% Solidarity (0 seats).
DeleteLast time, the best known candidate from the "best of the rest" was Tommy Sheridan. Tommy will probably be running on the AFS ticket in Glasgow, and Craig Murray in Lothian, again for AFS, but neither is likely to get anywhere near the votes required for a seat. If Alex Salmond stands as an independent in NE Scotland, he will almost certainly win a seat, but I really can't see any other candidate getting a seat.
Voting outside the SNP and the Greens will almost certainly be a wasted vote, in my opinion.
I agree it will probably be a wasted vote....but I can't, in all good conscience, give the SNP 1&2, and my second votes for the SNP have been wasted anyway since 2007.
DeleteThe fact is the way the SNP are being run, they don't deserve either of my votes, but I see no alternative for my 1st vote, purely for independence. And the Greens are no better on other issues.
I know I am not alone in feeling this way, so maybe history isn't a good guide this time...upsets happen.
I live in Glasgow Southside and for the life of my cannot find out who is on the list vote for my region. Where can I find this information? I want to know if the SNP candidate is awful or not.
ReplyDeleteRoza Salih is number 1 (due to the reserved places scheme) and Nicola Sturgeon is number 2.
DeleteI'd have thought if the SNP was a Dear Leader Sturgeon-Murrell privately owned cult, she'd be top of the Glasgow list. Just in case...
DeleteWhile a dumb policy for other reasons, it does highlight how the SNP isn't what some would love you to believe.
Credit to Sarwar for agreeing to take second spot. I can't say I've time for the man, and I suppose the maths say's he's safe enough in second. But still.
Unless you can be sure indy voters fully understand the list system and who best to vote for in their region then it has to be SNP 1&2. You can't expect voters to fully understand tactical voting etc
ReplyDeleteIf yer team was 99% guaranteed to win the league by 6 points would you take it? If it was suggested they could win by much more say 20 points but it was a gamble and it could backfire...what would you take? Great videos and debate. I am a hold nose SNP 1 and 2 because in this election it is critical that a pro indy parliament is delivered. Those 5 SNP list seats will I think be needed. There is also the simplicity of the message to the voting public and particularly the 5% softening to indy vote. Most family and friends glaze over when I try to explain the system. The MSM will not care about list seats but will be counting total votes to see what an independence vote would deliver.
ReplyDeleteMouse I assume you mean Nicola losing Glasgow Southside .There is absolutely no chance Nicola could literally murder a baby on the campaign trail and she would still win .
ReplyDeleteI know the constituencey like the back of my hand I must have either stuck a leaflet through or chapped every door in the constituencey over the last 25 years .
The constituencey has the largest Asian community in Scotland and Sarwar may make some inroads there .On the other side the constituencey contains some of the most pro Independence parts of Scotland .At the referendum the ballot boxes from St Francis in the Gorbals were showing 70% Yes and the boxes from Strathbungo and parts of Shawlands were not far behind .There is also a small but very solid Tory vote in Maxwell Park which gets boosted by a nasty Orange vote from the Kinning Park .
The MSM will try to talk up a contest but you can put your house on Nicola getting 60% of the vote again
Thanks James. I've converted "The Decision" to MP4 and published to my large SNP/Indy Page on Facebook (I added your script to the strapline)
ReplyDeleteLaura Dunlop QC has trashed the procedure against former Ministers that Sturgeon and Evans both claimed was fine.
ReplyDeleteCan you give me a link to where you opposed the procedure when it was first published in February 2018?
DeleteIf you can't, you must have supported it or didn't care.
Can you give me a link to when it was first published in 2018?
DeleteI usually split my vote SNP/Green which worked well in Edinburgh - electing two Green MSPs on the list
ReplyDeleteI could be swayed to both votes SNP depending on what the polls look like closer to the election
Either way I'd be happy with either party winning the seats
Forby the trumpeting and drum roll from Sarah Smith, after due consideration (about 8 hours) I've decided this "revelation" is just CAULD KAIL HET AGAIN.
ReplyDeleteCriminal leaks to an English brexit Tory (who's friends with Salmond I understand, so facepalm for the latter) who then openly breaks Scots law on English telly using English law to protect himself doesn't look good.
ReplyDeleteOnly those with mal intent read snippets of stuff which suits what they want you to hear. And were these not the messages that Lady Dorian and Salmond's team agreed were not worthy of submission to the court as evidence?
Also, what was the goal of the #meetoo movement again? I think it was to encourage victims of sexual assault / harassment to come forward?
Are we seriously now reversing that?
I can't see the latest unionist 'revelations' doing anything but boosting the SNP / Sturgeon. I mean jesus David 'hard brexit' Davis; might as well have had Farage read stuff out.
Makes me even more sure we are heading for Surgeon and ministers being cleared by the independent Hamilton and opposition / unionist committee.
To add.
DeleteLol, f'n new it.
Wings has gone full circle. A damascene conversion.
We are now to believe English right-wing pro-brexit Tories breaking Scots law under the protection of England reading choice excerpts designed to attack Scotland ahead of an election the Tories desperately need to do well in to save the union from stuff criminally obtained (if real) in breach of Scots law.
Forget whit our ane folk say. Believe English right-wing bloggers and brexit tories breaking Scots law using English law to protect them.
Next Wings will be telling us English Tories can overrule Scots law on the iref. Wait and see.
This is why wings didn't oppose brexit I understand. Hence the lack of anti-brexit stories on his site.
And Smearer Skier says he isn't obsessed with Campbell 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
DeleteThe Salmond fit up.
ReplyDeleteIndependence supporters have a choice.
1. Confront the truth = morally and politically the correct choice.
2. Ignore the truth = condone the attempted fit up of Salmond by the SNP/Scotgov.
3. Try to cover up the truth = collude with the actions of the perpetrators. That is people like Smearer Skier and John Swinney.
I will accept the results of the unionist-opposition controlled Scottish PR parliament committee and international Irish observer James Hamilton's findings.
DeleteI won't be taking lessons from hard right English Tory brexiters using English law to protect them while they criminally breach Scots law to attack Scotland.
If I wanted to see unaccountable corrupt criminal politicians above the law, I can watch Wing's pal David Davis again.
Smearer Skier (liar since 2014) - colluding with the actions of perpetrators of wrong doings.
DeleteAlso throwing in a lie for good measure ( pretty standard for Smearer to be fair) - "...unionist opposition controlled Scottish PR parliament Committee ...." liars like Smearer will lie - that's what they do.
The parliament committee is dominated by Unionist / opposition MSPs. This is a statement of fact. SNP MSPs are a minority.
DeleteThe Murrell effect comes into play. Smearer misspoke. He reinvents what he posted.
DeleteThe Convenor is Fabiani -appointed by the SNP.
4 SNP MSPs
4 Britnat party MSPs
1 independent Andy Wightman ex Scottish Greens
This is NOT a " Unionist- opposition controlled Committee" as stated by Smearer in his original post.
Liars when caught lying try to reinvent what they said. There are 4 Unionist MSPs out of the total of 9 on the Committee and the Convenor is SNP. 4 out of 9 is not a Unionist majority never mind being "dominated" as Smearer says by unionists.
I said 'unionist-opposition'. That means a mix of unionist and other opposition MSP.
DeleteAny Wightman is standing against the SNP in May you numpty. So are the Greens. It would be in the interests of both that the SNP are damaged so people swap to them.
The idea that Whightman would cover for the SNP so they get a huge list vote and he loses his seat is just plain stupid.
Smearer Skier (liar since 2014) - the Convenor is an SNP MSP appointed by Sturgeon - so you are the numpty who like Murrell like to reinvent the meaning of his words - something liars do a lot. And you and Murrell are both proven liars.
DeleteIt won't be long before Wings has Farage as a guest author.
ReplyDeleteThat's who's directly after David Davis in the hard brexit line-up.
Just remember folks. 'Scottish Holyrood democracy has failed. There's no way forward for Scotland now'. Listen to Davis on this.
Most telling thing for me is that no body is dening that what Davis said was untrue. Te best that can be rolled out is :
ReplyDeleteSpokesperson for
@NicolaSturgeon
: “At that time, she (chief of staff) was not aware that there was any connection to the former First Minister. “
Quote Tweet
Nick Eardley
@nickeardleybbc
· 15h
David Davis claims in Commons to have messages from civil servants suggesting Nicola Sturgeon chief of staff interfered in complaints process in early Feb 2018 (several weeks before FM says she was first told). He says emails show civil servants believe interference “v bad”.
So basically yes I did try interfering but it wasn't interfering with the Salmond case so that's ok then. When admitting that doing something wrong is your best line of defence then you know the crap is well and truly hitting the fan.
Then this morning we have :
Dep FM John Swinney asked about David Davis’s comments in the Commons. He says Nicola Sturgeon ”Stands by” evidence given to the committee investigating Scot Gov’s handling of Harassment complaints.
Anybody who follows politics knows that Stands By is up there with 'fas full confidence' in being the phrase used when they have nothing positive to say.
Of course the fact that Davis was making an adjunment debate and the subject that it would of been on would of been well known for a few days before so other things make more sense. Pete Wishart's ignore the bloggers they are really really bad, blog post and the Nationals indyref2 bill is on its way headline were obviously attempts at getting some positive messaging out before the speach.
I've never believed that Salmond wanted to return to front line politics, but its been obvious that he wanted his pound of flesh from those that he believed wronged him. Evans was certainly one of those, but last night was a timely warning that was not going to be enough. Peter Murell will certainly have to go and probably a couple of others. We already know that that he thinks that Nicola Sturgeon has lied / broken the ministerial code on a number of occasions , but he is of course clever enough to not publicly say what he should happen is she is found to of broken them.
The SNP leadership have basically given a choice, either Murrell and a couple of others and the whole saga goes away with them being able to spin Evans and the main culprit or spend the election campaign wondering when the next bombshell is going to come from. Yesterday it was a MP using parlimentary privilege to get around and restrictions. Next time it might be all the messages appear in non UK publication for all the world to see, or maybe some WikiLeaks type organisation might just dump the whole lot onto the 'net.
Finally for those who don't want to visit WoS can I suggest that you look at either Craig Murray or Grouse Beater. They have been saying exactly the same as Wings over the course of this affair. The only reason you see them being mentioned as much on social media /blogs etc is that they can't simply be dismissed as being 'English'.
Davis is an anti-Scottish criminal rehashing old shit. Don't trust criminals.
DeleteUnless Davis publishes the illegal messages so we can all read them in context alongside all the other messages, we have to dismiss the information as not allowing us to form fair conclusions. Nobody selecting we bits of info to fit a story should be trusted, especially anti-Scottish foreign entities breaking the law to do so for political purposes.
How does Murray or grouse beater know better than the committee or courts? How does anyone? Murray's met Salmond like twice or something. He's never interviewed all the witnesses and consulted all the evidence. He knows as much as me. He just has a blog; that doesn't make him know more.
Davis is right, he said, the messages 'don't provide evidence for a conspiracy'. The merely show that victims were 'encouraged to come forward' in light of the me too movement which as all about encouraging potential victims of past abuse to come forward. Except he seems to have forgotten that encouraging victims to come forward is a good thing.
The committee have read the messages. I understand this is the 'evidence' Lady Dorian dismissed as not relevant to the case and Salmond's team agreed, not appealing against the decision. Apparently Murdo Fraser et al. will be doing the same soon too if reports are correct, and we will even get to read the full conversations too in time.
And the most recent developments convince me of this even more.
There is absolutely no reason for this latest desperate brexit Tory rehash unless the committee is going to pretty much completely dismiss the conspiracy theory and Hamilton is going to largely clear Sturgeon.
Otherwise, unionists would just be gleefully and patiently awaiting the findings of these while the SNP start a contest for a new leader in earnest.
Folks already know what the committees / Hamilton are going to conclude. It's not a suprise; pretty much all parties are on the committee slowly agreeing the final joint conclusions together. I think we can too pretty safely now.
What disappoints me is Salmond is friends with David Davis. Now setting politics aside outside of work to be friends is fine. But this looks really, really bad for Salmond, what with his lawyers waving this stuff around recently unhappy that the committee didn't see the 'grand conspiracy' davis says the messages don't provide evidence for.
I really, really hope Salmond's team were not the leak source.
I also hope police Scotland look into the leak and whether Davis has broken the law with contempt of court. I can't see how this relates to his parliamentary duties. It looks like contempt of court for political point scoring and not in the public interest.
I'd like to see Dorian jail him if guilty.
You can almost taste the desperation in Smearers words. What a vile cover up person Smearer is. Corruption is ok because it is his party leadership that are responsible. That is the moral vacuum of people like Smearer.
DeleteIs this the best we can hope for - SNP corruption is not as bad as Tory corruption. That is not what I want for an independent Scotland.
These is of course court orders banning identification or jigsaw identification of the accusers (quiet correctly). I personally can't see anything that was said yesterday that does this, maybe some could highlight the bits that do?
ReplyDeleteAs I said earlier I'm seeing a lot of playing the 'man rather than the ball' (ie ignore what was said because Davis is a Tory) no comment statements but none actually denying that the emails /electronic messages don't exist. In face over the last few months have gone from there were no messages, to there were messages but they were nothing todo with Salmond just general chit chat, to there are messages and people did overstep the boundaries but they were done for the right reasons so everything is ok.
As I said the full branch of messages emails etc is going to see the light of day. The only decision the SNP has to make is do they want to be in contol of the narrative. This means that Peter Murrell and a few others will have to fall on their sword, but the damage to the party will probably be quite limited.
Or do they want to wake up on day and find them dumped on the internet Panama Papers style in which case Murrell etc will still go, but the collateral damage to the party will be much higher.
Adam - You could add to the Independence bloggers you quoted above Barrhead boy, Jeggit (Random Public journal), Iain Lawson (Yours for Scotland) and Gordon Dangerfield.
DeleteAdam if Sturgeon and her gang truly cared about independence they would never have gone down this road in the first place as there was a reasonable risk that they would be found out. As Davis said in his speech quoting Sue Ruddick - she was concerned her role in this matter would be revealed. These are the words of someone knowing what they were doing was wrong. As I have posted previously - why has Ruddick not been asked to submit her evidence and appear before the Committee.
Secondly, if Sturgeon cared about independence she would have gone quietly as it started to unravel. That of course was the hope of people like WGD. Minimise the impact of their wrong doing on the SNP and independence. What did Sturgeon and her gang do instead they doubled down and lied and lied and changed their stories as they got caught out lying. They care about their own personal positions of power and nothing about Scottish independence.
Barrhead Boy - another voice from England.
DeleteAlec - another one not so bright.
DeleteBarrhead is where in England? He actually now lives in Catalonia.
I have no insider knowledge about what happened to Alex Salmond, and I have no desire to see either "side" win, because no matter who "wins", they will be standing on the winner's podium, standing alongside their fellow victors, the Tories and the rest of the "Better Together" crowd.
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me that poor Alex Salmond must have an itchy arse, with the number of people who seem to be sticking their hands up his arse, and saying " What Alex would like to say".
Alex Salmond is my all-time political hero, and I'm desperate to live in a social democracy, which can only happen if Scotland becomes independent.
The vultures gnawing at the bones of this fiasco consist of jackals and hyenas, who don't seem to realise that some of their fellow jackals and hyenas tearing at this carcase are wearing butcher's aprons.
It seems to me that we are faced with three choices....
1. Choose Salmond's side and get tore in, and to hell with the consequences for Indy.
2. Choose Sturgeon's side and get tore in, and to hell with the consequences for Indy.
3. Realise the damage that this is doing to the cause of independence, and keep your fat gob shut. There are enough jackals at this carcase.....
Folk who are choosing option 1 or option 2 are jackals, who'd rather taste a bit of rotting flesh, than worry about the consequences.
A pox on their houses.....
Alex - you are not very bright are you.
DeleteIrony. Lol
DeleteI've often wondered what motivates trolls to do what they do, and every time I circle round to the conclusion that they are (generally speaking), wee nyaffs who got bullied at school.
ReplyDeleteOf course, there are bound to be SOME hard men amongst them, but I suspect that they would sit quietly in a corner in the pub, terrified that if they said anything, they'd get a "Glesgae Kiss" for their impudence.
I hastily refute any suggestion that I fancy myself as a hard man ...... physical prowess has never been my forte, but I just find it amusing to think of the likes of TFS opening his gob in some of the bars I've frequented in my life.......
Alex - you are not very bright are you. I am 6' 1 and never got bullied at school or anywhere so bang goes another of your theories - well hardly a theory I suppose.
DeleteAll you people that cannae face the truth you just resort to personal insults -pathetic.
Alex you have turned your back on your hero Alex Salmond - shame on you.
Alex - I suggest you go back to frequenting your pubs when they reopen and stick to amusing yourself in whatever way you want.
The voting system in Scotland was set up to prevent 1 party winning a majority, and to encourage coalition government, coalition has to be the best way forward, and IMHO Indy supporters should embrace this.
ReplyDeleteAfter checking the polls for whatever region your in just before the election, then choosing the best placed party to take seats from the Unionists, and for a coalition government to take Scotland forward.