Friday, February 16, 2024

Astroturfing for Humza: he's supposed to have been "finding his feet" and "growing in sureness-of-touch" for longer than you might realise

When I switched pre-moderation off in the comments section of this blog a few weeks ago, my biggest concern about the decision was that it would allow comments from two very persistent trolls to become visible for the first time.  It may seem bizarre, but even though I wasn't publishing their comments and they therefore only had an audience of one (me), they weren't deterred and just carried on submitting comments regardless - and in the case of one of them, he continued doing so multiple times every day.

If you've been reading the comments section regularly, you'll probably have spotted the two individuals I'm talking about very easily.  One is a unionist troll who is naive enough to think he can drain the morale of independence supporters by constantly repeating lines like "time to forget this independence nonsense, it isn't happening".  He's almost certainly an Englishman who has spent very little time in Scotland, because his only reference point for this country appears to be "Nessie", which he mentions in around 20-30% of his comments.

But the second troll could not be more different.  He/she is a diehard SNP leadership loyalist whose sole mission appears to be to convince us that Humza Yousaf is "improving".  You'll have seen the stock lines that he/she has trotted out in recent weeks - Humza is "growing into the role", he is gaining "sureness of touch", and "we can all agree" on this.  Robin McAlpine mentioned in an article a few days ago that Yousaf's people are currently briefing that their man is "growing into his role" - and the use of those exact same words is a pretty obvious giveaway that our resident troll is astroturfing for Team Humza, perhaps on their direct instructions.

What you probably don't realise, though, is that it hasn't just been the last few weeks.  Before I switched pre-moderation off, exactly the same person had been regularly submitting comments with either the same or very similar stock lines, all the way back to last spring when Yousaf was narrowly elected leader.  I very rarely let those comments through, but I still have a record of them via email.  Here is a very small selection - 

30th April 2023: "It can. Humza has grown in sureness of touch."

26th May 2023: "Humza definitely finding his feet now. Excellent FMQs yesterday!"

24th June 2023: "Humza handled that heckler with stature and sureness-of-touch."

25th June 2023: "Humza was applauded to the rooftop yesterday and was excellent on Sky news this morning. He is growing in stature, standing and in sureness-of-touch."

17th October 2023: "Good speech by Humza - growing in stature and in sureness-of-touch"

17th October 2023: "Thought his speech was brilliant. He is growing in stature and sureness of touch."

18th October 2023: "Too negative on Humza. He made a great speech at conference and has steadied the ship."

So if this is an organised astroturfing operation by Team Humza, it was devised in the very earliest days of his leadership and has been ongoing ever since.  Question: if he was "finding his feet" in May last year, surely he would have well and truly found them by now?  If he was "growing in stature" in June last year, surely he would have attained his full height by now?

67 comments:

  1. Poor Humza , he's been dealt a poor hand . I voted far Kate but I was for giving him a far shot...but let's face it , he just doesnae have it. Time for the metaphorical knife in the back.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The time to take down a failing leader is the day after a bad election result. It'll come.

      If he's still First Minister come the next Holyrood election, well, British dreams have come true.

      Delete
    2. No, the time to take down an unpopular leader is *before* a crushing election defeat when there is still time to avert that outcome. Not much point doing it the day after.

      Delete
    3. I see your point. But there are a couple of things at play here:

      1. Westminster seats essentially don't matter. If the election isn't an explicit de facto referendum, then Scotland's just a minor sideshow in England's parliament.
      2. It's not just Humza Yousaf who's doing badly. He's the front man for a whole faction of the SNP, fundamentally shaped by and loyal to Nicola Sturgeon. They're sure as hell going to fight to replace him with another diddy of their own.

      If a Holyrood election was on the calendar this year, I'd be as anxious as you that he should be urgently replaced.

      If the SNP's ruling body and internal positions of power weren't dominated by a corrosive, cynical, do-nothing faction, I'd also agree it's time to throw him off.

      But the situation we are in suggests to me that the party NEEDS the shock of a bad Westminster result. The party membership which elected Humza must face the fact that they need something, someone, profoundly different. Get back on track or perish.

      Delete
    4. "Westminster seats essentially don't matter"

      Oh they do. They absolutely do. If the SNP lose their majority at Westminster, the UK Government will start arguing that no mandate for independence counts without a majority of Scottish MPs. They'll say "if we didn't budge on a referendum when there were 56 pro-independence MPs, we're hardly going to be impressed by anything that happens when there are only 17, or 12, or 2."

      Delete
    5. They could use that argument with 40 seats, too. Hell, they'd spout whatever nonsense puts the goalposts beyond the ball, wherever it is. To think otherwise is to play into the game of "just keep asking for a section 30 and they can't refuse, they won't refuse, it's unthinkable…"

      Humza's never going to push for independence. That's not his faction's game. The SNP is a jobs machine for them and their families. As long as they're running it, London's not even our primary roadblock.

      Delete
    6. "They could use that argument with 40 seats, too."

      No, not really. They could try but it would be several orders of magnitude less effective and convincing. And ultimately if you have a majority of seats, you have the nuclear option of effectively "withdrawing Scotland from the UK Parliament", which brings with it considerable potential leverage.

      Delete
    7. I must admit it's hard for me to imagine the SNP in its current state withdrawing its parliamentary group from Westminster. They got a lot of attention, briefly, when they all walked that one time before. But a real withdrawal, in pursuit of the explicit goal of independence? That takes passion. Passion they absolutely haven't got.

      Now, if Westminster tried draining their pension pots, I could see it. But for Scotland? This lot?

      Delete
    8. This lot will do what the leader tells them. Everything hinges on the correct leader being in place. (And for clarity, I can't see Kate Forbes being sufficiently radical either, but I do think she might be the best realistic option available for the foreseeable future.)

      Delete
    9. It's a difficult one to know when an ineffective leader should stand down, if you actually want them replaced with something radically different. I well remember after Clinton lost to Trump in 2016 thinking Sanders would be a shoe-in for the 2020 nomination. And for a stretch of time in late 2019, early 2020, it seemed that he was. Biden was DOA in the first few primary states. His placing in Iowa and New Hampshire were particularly shambolic. Then of course, the call went around from his old friend Obama to Rally Round the Vegetable.

      To my mind, Sturgeon occupies a similar spot in the SNP's establishment that Obama does. She may be a little more tainted than him, but she still exerts considerable influence - even bordering on messianic in some circles - which is not really merited anymore and yet still persists.

      I'm just not sure replacing her chosen successor before an election drubbing would have the effect people want. Who's to say they won't nobble the opposition the way they did last year, and the way Obama did in 2020? We could find ourselves going through the volatility of a whole leadership election only to emerge with an equally weak leader. Or we could even replace an ineffective leader with an effective leader, find that its too late to avert electoral failure, and find the effective new leader unfairly saddled with that defeat.

      I think the most likely time to effect a change in direction is in the immediate aftermath of a drubbing, while the SNP are in a state of shock and licking their wounds. It allows the clearest symbolic break from the past. Of course, that necessitates a drubbing, which would be disastrous in its own right for the independence cause.

      But I don't think it's as easy a call as simply assuming Humza will be replaced by someone who's not just yet another continuity candidate.

      I remember the common wisdom (not shared by you James, incidentally) was that if Sturgeon were ousted a more effective leader was certain to take up the mantle. Yet look where we are now.

      Delete
    10. James: who do you hope to become leader of the SNP one day?

      I look at all of them, in both parliaments, and only Kate stands out. I quite agree with you that she doesn't strike me as a firebrand, but I can see her rallying around independence if we the people make our message clear in an election. Our support is for independence, not the SNP's continued comfort at Westminster. No indy: no point in them. When that message is delivered, it's time for a major rethink and a realignment in the party. That's when I hope for her to emerge.

      The alternative is another decade or many more of wasted years, just as Nicola wanted.

      Delete
    11. Re: Biden’s selection in 2020. Ever heard of Jim Clyburn? He was absolutely pivotal in saving Biden’s campaign and propelling him to nomination and his slim win over Trump. It was conservative democrat black voters in South Carolina what won it.

      Delete
    12. Re. Anon 8:37 - you are spot on about Clyburn.

      The bigger discussion here is about the SNP’s next leader. I’m ardent that should be Forbes. It’s not about being a firebrand, which she absolutely isn’t, instead it’s about earning again that reputation for good governance, competence and sanity that we had until Saint Nicola frittered most of it all away, followed by the even more horrendous HY.

      Only when that respect is earned afresh will swing voters even be willing to listen to arguments about Indy.

      Delete
  2. The only positive thing I can say about Yousaf is he doesn't seem to be happy about Palestinians being massacred in their thousands unlike the Tory and Labour mob.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He’d make a fine foreign minister in an independent Scotland, probably best at home in the Labour Party as I hope it will be finally named. ;-)

      Delete
    2. IfS: that is a most important positive thing about Humza!

      Delete
    3. Anon at 1.36pm - yes but not as important as delivering Scottish independence and that is something he disnae care about.

      Delete
  3. There's a lassie in Westminster who knows all about his sureness of touch.

    ReplyDelete
  4. " So the only rational conclusion it's possible to draw is that the man's simply an idiot. And at some point that's a fact that even the diehard gullible dopes still supporting the SNP are going to have to face up to." Says your 'pal' Campbell.

    Aye the continuity clown just disnae cut it. Vote for a strong SNP voice in Westminster that just gets either ignored or even worse laughed at. The food must be really good in the Westminster restaurants to be happy being a pointless SNP MP. Oh wait I forgot the real reason - it's the money they get from Westminster for themselves and the SNP. A party of independence being financially supported by Westminster.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bingo. Suckle at Westminster's teet and grow awfy comfy.

      Actions speak louder than words, as always.

      Delete
  5. There was a poll mentioned in the guardian or BBC this morning about attitudes to the monarchy in young people. It said they polled in England, Scotland and Wales. However, there was no mention of differences in the respective countries.

    Have you seen any raw numbers with this polling? I'm just wondering what the attitude was in Scotland versus the rest of the UK.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Time to get behind Yousaf and the SNP.

    Let’s get independence done.

    ReplyDelete
  7. If Alba embraced abstentionism it would put pressure on the SNP to do the same. It would also attract donations to Alba's coffers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!”
      —Upton Sinclair

      Maybe once they’ve no seats of their own to defend, they’ll take up that idea.

      Delete
  8. Has Alba anything to say about independence or do they just exist to be like the Lib Dems, a party of moaning misery with nothing to offer except bitterness

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It’s difficult to see Alba ever being anything other than a fringe party.
      Not sure you can even compare them to the Lib Dems, at least they always win a few seats.

      Delete
  9. Most Scottish people ive spoken to dont really care about H Y they dont rate him as highly as A S or N S but dont dislike him either , to be honest i dont mind him at all i dont think he has done anything bad , its the slow crawl of the SNP that people are disgruntled about , me too , when a new leader for Scottish Independence arrives as they surely will , we will know , we will hear the words spoken of the theft of our land our freedom our jobs resources and the life chances of our children , we will see the light shone on the english masquerading in their all in it together britishness a falsified mask behind which lies their desire to rob everyone everywhere for england , i will perk up and be ready for the fight like you , in the meantime H Y steers the ship but its one heading for Scottish Independence

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good comment. Agree 100%.

      Delete
    2. Anon say:- "..... I don't think he has done anything bad.....". I give you his Hate Crime Bill. Anyone that comes up with that should not be in charge of any political party never mind FM.

      "Steer a ship" - I wouldn't have him in charge of a rowing boat in your local pond.

      Delete
  10. Last comment was Terence Callachan

    ReplyDelete
  11. I agree. So many on here talking of voting Alba, abstaining or spoiling ballot papers. I understand some people are disillusioned with the SNP at the moment, but it’s madness and could do considerable damage to the independence cause.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt there because there's no personal abuse in that comment, although given the pattern of the three comments I've just deleted, I do wonder if you might be the same person.

      Delete
    2. I’m not, but I was agreeing with him on the need for people to get behind the SNP.

      Delete
  12. Some of the comments about Humza Yousaf do not really do justice to his leadership of the SNP, which has been marked by vision, resilience, and inclusivity. His ability to articulate a clear direction for the party while fostering unity among members has been commendable. Yousaf's unwavering commitment to advocating for Scotland's interests, coupled with his dedication to social justice, has inspired confidence and support within the party and among the Scottish electorate. Under his guidance, the SNP has remained a driving force in Scottish politics, championing progressive policies and advancing the cause of Scottish independence with determination and integrity.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is what you're saying that he's growing in stature and sureness-of-touch?

      Delete
    2. "unity among members"

      You must be joking. How many parliamentarians have left the party on his watch? I make it at least three: Angus MacNeil, Ash Regan and Lisa Cameron?

      Delete
    3. Aye, Humza "inspires" so much "support" and "confidence" among the Scottish electorate that his current approval rating is minus 17.

      Delete
    4. Hey, anon 10:14, this post is all about *you*. Read from the top for a change. ;-)

      Delete
  13. James, there do seem to be a lot of posts from people supporting Yousaf who sound like they are posting from pre - prepared scripts. If they are astroturfing then they ain't very good at it. As genuine as a £9 note.

    Whether people agree with or hate my posts they are my genuine thoughts not some British state paid operative or paid SNP operative.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. IfS: While warranted scepticism persists towards many engaging in online discourse, my position on Humza Yousaf's growing leadership strength mirrors a genuine evaluation, which resonates with the sentiments of numerous ordinary people in Scotland

      Delete
    2. Anon your post resonates of bullshit and that is my genuine evaluation

      Delete
  14. It is possible the astroturfers are batting for the other side. As in this for an example of laying it on far too thick:

    "Sunak is just an honest working chap like us, trying to earn a crust".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Did somebody actually say that?

      Delete
    2. He pays (half-rate) taxes like the rest of us plebs (and unlike his $Missus). Leave him alone!

      Delete
    3. I think a lot of them are just trolls posting for the lols rather than genuine propagandists. The anon comment at 11:03 above, for example, sounds like a parody of apparatchik-speak rather than something actually intended to convince anybody.

      Delete
  15. We've always known that Humza speaks fairly well, in a sales manager presenting the quarterly figures sort of way. Professional enough but not terribly engaging.
    His biggest achievement as leader has been overseeing the SNP's managed decline.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually, he's doing the job Nicola hand-picked him for: making her look good by comparison.

      Delete
    2. I don’t that that’s actually true, but it is very funny :-)

      Delete
  16. A lot of people are understandably disillusioned with the SNP, however we need to get behind Yousaf and the party. If we don’t we’re heading for disaster at the GE, which could cause much damage to the independence cause and take years to recover from.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello Terence Callachan from Dundee here , H Y is not inspirational i get that , but he has bot done anything bad , someone earlier said he has - The hate crime bill ! i think its daft to say that bill is "bad" i get it that some people might not like it for various reasons but its a bill with good intentions , it eliminated the old Blasphemy law which i think in this day and age is good , hate crime can have a wide interpretation which might cause it some difficulty but we all know of hate crime we have witnessed at some time n our lives and should not be against making it illegal , how its interpreted remains to be seen , lets wait and see.

      Delete
    2. Terence, good to see you posting again. I thought you might have kicked the bucket. Pretty sure you were convinced Sturgeon, Blackford et al were definitely going to deliver a referendum and independence. Now that was what I would definitely say was daft.
      "Let's wait and see" you now say re the horrendous Hate Crime Bill. Aye that would be the one that the polis cannae work out how ( for years now ) to apply this law. It's a bad law if the polis cannae work out what the hell to do with it.

      You also say he has not done anything bad. He is a member of Sturgeon's gang that is bad.

      Delete
    3. IfS: It's important to consider whether Humza Yousaf has actually done anything wrong as the leader of the SNP. Judging him solely because Nicola Sturgeon supported him doesn't make sense. We should assess Yousaf's leadership based on his own actions, not just who endorsed him. Blaming him simply because of his connections is oversimplifying things. Instead, let's look at what he's actually done and have a meaningful discussion about it. In terms of the SNP's hate crime bill, this was introduced to promote inclusivity, foster understanding, and champion diversity in Scottish society, which are very worthwhile goals consistent with the values of the party and they line up with the values of the Scottish people as a whole.

      Delete
    4. Anon ( Murray) - at 10.34am - you say we should assess Yousaf's leadership based on his own actions - I do. He has ditched any action on independence - no de facto referendum. Happy now Murray. Past or present actions - Yousaf is useless.

      In terms of the Hate Crime objectives you present the bill fails because it has done nothing. It is authoritarian nonsense.

      Delete
    5. IfS: It's understandable that you seek seek to assess Humza Yousaf's leadership based on his actions. However, Humza's tenure is still unfolding, and drawing conclusions prematurely may overlook the complex nature of the art of political leadership, particularly given the turbulent situation he inherited from Nicola Sturgeon. Rather than rushing to judgment, let us allow Humza the necessary time to demonstrate the full extent of his leadership capabilities.

      Delete
    6. Anon (Murray) at 12.15pm - " rushing to judgement " - hardly, he has been in government for a decade or so. What is this " necessary time " - he has had long enough. He is a devolutionalist who betrays the history and raison d'etre of the SNP.

      Delete
    7. IfS: Humza Yousaf's tenure in government, while a decade long, should not be hastily judged, as he was not the leader for most of those years. As leader has not put a foot wrong very often and he has improved greatly in terms of his standing. Labelling Yousaf as a "devolutionalist" disregards the need for Yousaf to offer a pragmatic pathway to independence that considers the complexities of governance and public sentiment. Moreover, accusing Yousaf of betraying the SNP's history and raison d'etre oversimplifies the party's evolution. The SNP's primary objective has always been independence, but the means to achieve it can evolve over time in response to changing circumstances and strategic considerations. In summary, Humza Yousaf is getting better and better at being FM and deserves credit for building up a united party after a difficult period, getting it ready for the upcoming election.

      Delete
    8. Anon at 6:17, excellent post, totally agree. It’s high time people got behind Yousaf and the SNP.

      Delete
    9. Anon at 6:24PM - I can’t get behind Yousaf as the unionists have taken all the available spots.

      Delete
  17. The question is about when do you give a new leader the chance. After or on the lead up to a drubbing?

    For the sake of argument let's say Forbes takes the leadership next month and leads into the Election. SNP are going to have a bad election regardless. Best to give it to her unblemished.

    Ps I don't rate Forbes as highly as many do but for the sake of argument,

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, that doesn't make sense unless you think she would have no effect at all on the number of seats the SNP would win. The number one priority for both the SNP and Forbes is to save seats at the general election, otherwise the inheritance might be barely worth having.

      Delete
    2. It's often better for a new party leader to take over after an electoral event. First,
      because the election provides real rather than speculative evidence on the success or otherwise of the leader. Second, the new leader, if the election was disappointing, can be seen as a fresh start, unencumbered by the failures of the previous leadership. This allows the party to distance itself from past mistakes and present a renewed vision to voters, potentially reinvigorating support and trust in the party's direction. Additionally, a new leader can implement necessary changes and reforms without being hindered by internal resistance or loyalty to the previous leadership. Finally, internal relations within a party are best maintained if leadership changes are seen to be taking place at a natural rather than a confected juncture as there will have been a more widespread consensus on the need for a change of leader.

      Delete