If part of MacKay's point is simply that pro-independence parties should not be standing against each other in a first-past-the-post election, and that every pro-independence party will bear a share of the responsibility if the vote is split, that's music to my ears and is exactly what I've been saying all along. And it really is particularly odd that the SNP and Greens, who are forever waxing lyrical about how much they get on and about the extreme importance of the Bute House Agreement, seem hellbent on knocking lumps out of each other at the general election like never before.
Yes, of course coalitions can just be businesslike affairs, born out of necessity, that have no particular relevance in elections for other tiers of government. But this is a coalition of choice, not of necessity. The SNP could govern perfectly well without the Greens, which means it's reasonable to infer that the two parties must really like each other. In that case, why not do the sensible thing and form an electoral pact for the general election, even just as a one-off to get the independence movement through the current crisis? The SNP could throw their weight behind the Greens in, say, two constituencies where the SNP have very little chance (Ian Murray's and Christine Jardine's spring to mind) and the Greens could give the SNP a free run elsewhere. The only downside would be the challenge of getting the media to report the combined popular vote for the two parties, but winning seats really is the name of the game in this election.
And the flipside of the coin is that if the two parties don't like each other enough for an electoral pact, and don't see enough common cause, why would they persevere with a coalition of choice at Holyrood?
Of course this is Neil MacKay we're talking about here, so emphasis is very much on the half-right. He's still reassuringly wrong about plenty, not least the usual guff about an independence referendum being very distant if Labour are going to win a thumping majority. Most of us got the memo quite a while ago that independence will only be won when we stop kidding ourselves that the route to it is a referendum that will never be granted under any circumstances whatsoever.
MacKay also blasts Kate Forbes for supposedly being wrong in claiming that a "ban" is being imposed on wood-burning stoves, but then curiously contradicts himself by saying "only new-build properties applied for after April 2024 are prohibited from installing wood-burning stoves". Yeah, that sounds a bit ban-like, Neil. The clue is in the word "prohibited".
He says, probably correctly, that a big general election defeat would lead to the SNP replacing Yousaf, but then nonsensically claims that this will "compound" their "inevitable" defeat at the 2026 Holyrood election. That's just his prejuduce against Forbes' social conservatism speaking. No, replacing an unpopular leader with a more popular one will not make the situation worse. It will make the situation better. Even under Yousaf, the polling evidence suggests the SNP still have a real chance of emerging as the largest single party in 2026, so under a Forbes leadership, defeat most certainly would not be inevitable.
* * *
If, like me, you're a member of the Alba Party, you'll have received the weekly email today, which lauds the party's performance in the Inverness South local by-election, said to have been a "60 per cent" increase on the party's showing in the ward in 2022. It's also said that a similar increase in the Holyrood election would see Alba win seats in the north.
Now, I'm all for positive thinking, but it's important to remain grounded in some sort of reality. Alba's share of the vote in the by-election increased from 1.8% to 3.2%. They're unlikely to win any seats on 3% of the vote. I presume what they're talking about is some sort of exponential growth path, which assumes they are now on 3% across the north, and that they might come close to doubling that in the next two years, which might win them two list seats in the north (thus justifying the plural). But exponential growth paths are rare in politics, and to put it mildly, it's a bit of a stretch to suggest that a 3% vote share in a local by-election is proof that you're on one.
As I always say, I think it's absolutely possible that Alba can win list seats in 2026, but the most important part of the battle is recognising just how hard it's going to be and that we haven't made enough progress yet. Patting ourselves on the back and falsely telling ourselves that we're already well on our way is pretty much the worst thing we can possibly do.
* * *
It looks like the Blogger platform has introduced an irritating new feature which means that if a comments thread is exceptionally long, the most recent comments will only appear if you press a "Load More" link at the bottom of the page, which is quite difficult to spot on a first glance. This shouldn't be a major problem, because so far it's only seemed to happen when a thread has well over 200 comments. But if you do post a comment on a very long thread and it doesn't show up, it'll probably be there if you press "Load More".
* * *
If you can, please help Scot Goes Pop continue with a full-fat service throughout this crucial election year. The 2024 fundraiser has received three very generous donations recently, and a million thanks to everyone who has contributed so far. But we're still a long way from the target figure. Donations by card can be made via the fundraiser page HERE, but if you have a Paypal account, the preferable way to donate is by direct Paypal payment, because that way the funds are usually transferred instantly and fees can be eliminated completely depending on which option you select from the menu. My Paypal email address is: jkellysta@yahoo.co.uk
It would be ironic if the Glasgow Herald, for decades the masthead for home rule, finally became more up for Independence than the SNP.
ReplyDeleteYes.
DeleteHi James. Thanks for highlighting this article in the Herald and your honest-as-ever analysis of the Alba party.
ReplyDeleteI’m not convinced a Greens / SNP pact is a good idea, though.
The SNP is (very) far from perfect, but at least there are very few Indy supporters don’t have a visceral hatred of it. It’s still a broad enough church of a party to attract support across the range of socially liberal / conservative voters, and centrist to socialist ones on that scale too.
Whereas the Greens elicit extremely strong reactions both positive and negative amongst Indy supporters.
I can think of plenty of Indy supporters I know who would rather vote Labour than Green in the case of forced choice. They despise the Greens more than they want independence.
So, I’m not sure any such pact would be practicable.
But it would favour the SNP in the above scenario, as the bigger party would harvest up Green votes across the country and in most seats, leaving the Greens disappointed in the couple of seats where the they are meant to be the United Nat beneficiaries.
If that came out to pass the probably bye bye Bute House agreement once the WM GE results have been digested by Lorna and pals.
Southside Ian
A green pact means SNP implicitly endorse Greens. A v. bad idea for SNP.
DeleteExactly.
DeleteSouthside Ian
The highland result was based on a turnout of 26.3%.. 1st preference votes for ALBA was 107.
ReplyDeleteExtrapolate this to a number of MSP’s in a number of years is fanciful. More chance of withering on the vine.Maybe Herald readers like yiref2 have given up on the GE already to spend their regular essenpee bad stories on even more fanciful thoughts. SNP remains the main and safest bet for Scotland. ALBA’s ambition is what exactly?
with a turnout of 26.3% and a total valid votes of 3,305, that's a "population" (electorate) of 12,566. Which gives a margin of error of just 1%.
DeleteWhat is more to the point though is that Scotland NE in 2021 Alba had 2.3% - highest of all 8 regions. The overall was 1.7%.
Delete"But exponential growth paths are rare in politics"
ReplyDeleteBut not impossible.
SNP 1966 - 5.0%
SNP 1970 - 11.4%
SNP 1974 - 21.9% (Feb)
SNP 1974 - 30.4% (Oct)
I remember projecting that the SNP could get 30 seats in 1979, or more. Then of course the Devo ref happened, 51.6% YES but with turnover less than the required 40% and everything fell apart for 18 years.
"turnover" meaning of course turnout x YES vote. Cough.
DeleteAs I've said before, I'm tending to delete comments that misrepresent my own position. The deleted anonymous comment claimed that "my calculation" is incorrect, but the blogpost makes perfectly clear that the claim of a 60 per cent increase is not my calculation - it's what's in the weekly email.
ReplyDeleteIf the Alba 1st pref. went from1.8 => 3.2 that's an increase of 78%. They are talking about a total of ~100 votes though, with many of them being fanatics in a vote with a very low turnout with the Alba vote unlikely to increase in line with an inceased turnout (and whoever wrote the email doesn't look like they can count).
DeleteI think the 60 per cent claim was based on the raw number of votes, and thus may not have been inaccurate (although raw number of votes is always an odd metric to use).
DeleteSorry I'm posting too much. But if the by-election increased from 1.8% to 3.2%, the region list could have increased from 2.3% to 4.1%. If it got to 6% by 2026 then Alba could get 1 seat as Labour got the 7th seat in 2021 with 5.7% of the list vote (Cons the 6th with 6.12%, Greens 5th with 6.3%).
ReplyDeleteAlba couldn't get 2 though as with that 1 seat their effective vote for any further AMS (Additional Member System) ones halves - to 3% if they get 6%.
Yes indeed I'm afraid I do have a spreadsheet for that.
Inverness is highlands the 2021 result there was 1.6%
DeleteThanks yes, I mixed it up there. That above (one seat) goes for NE Scotland, 2.3% to 4.1% to 6%.
DeleteFor the Highlands and Islands it could go from 1.6% to 2.8% to say 4.3%, and no list seat. Highlands 7th was SNP at 5.77%, 6th Con at 6.35% and Green 5th at 7.4%. Oh for an edit.
It's all maths anyway; and therefore hypothetical of course.
Yesindyref2 mixes a lot of things up like IFS does as well
DeleteAnon at 11.05am - just exactly what do I mix up. I'm pretty good at spotting WGD numpty pricks.
DeleteAs many of us spot Britnats and independence underminers
DeleteIan Funcan Smith seems to have uncorked early.
DeleteAnonymous at 12.09pm - I said just exactly what do I mix up? Your reply - nothing. That makes you a WGD numpty prick on here to troll.
DeleteVote for Independence is what I want. Seems you want the opposite apart from your ability to spell "numpty". This is very impressive. After several years one would have hoped you would grow up and tell us all how you intend to get us independence and the time scale likely to be involved?
DeleteWhy don't YOU tell us how you intend to get your vote for independence and the time scale involved, you know instead of asking others the same thing.
DeleteAnon at 3:14, Ifs seems to like calling others numpties, though I’ve noticed recently he’s increasingly using the term “half wit”.
DeleteAnonymous WGD NUMPTY PRICK(s) - It wisnae me that promised to deliver a referendum if you give me money and vote for me. I can spell prick as well and that is what you anon at 3.14 most surely are. I have posted on SGP since 2020 for years that the SNP should use a Holyrood de facto referendum. Pity you weren't paying attention.
DeleteStill nothing backing up your assertion that I mix things up.
You anon are a lying WGD numpty prick.
Ifs, oh calm down!
DeleteMaybe you’re just having a bad day.
IFS, these posts are all coming from the one source. Just ignore him.
DeleteAs much as I’d like to see a Green with a half chance of winning here, in Jardine’s safe seat, I can’t see “Yes unity” coming true here any more than the ever-hyped “left unity” ever does in England.
ReplyDeletePolitical parties are inherently self interested beasts. Standing aside for their political allies seems preternaturally difficult for them. Maybe it’s the constituency-level workings of the beast “why should we be forced to sit this one out on our patch?” or maybe it’s a top-down decision “why should we show any weakness in compromises before the election?” but whatever it is: it’s petty and self-destructive.
Then they ask us voters to make exactly these compromises for ourselves. “Don’t split the vote.” Then don’t split the ballot!
Exactly. Don't expect anything positive to happen regarding Yes Unity since it likely won't.
DeleteSo, we are back to the SNP again. The leadership of which need to wake up and smell the coffee.
Oh, the debate regarding these Alba percentages, haven't you all got better things to do? Alba aren't going anywhere except backwards. False dawns are cheap and (briefly) cheerful, if that 3.2% vote haul in some Sneckie by election makes Alba folk happy then I guess that I am happy for them. Significance = zero, as should be obvious. As James said, "They're unlikely to win any seats on 3% of the vote".
Southside Ian.
SNP 2.4% of the vote in Scotland - 1964 GE.
DeleteIf the SNP continue not to cut the mustard, I sincerely hope it doesn't take ALBA say 50 years to get us another Indy Ref. Barring a cryogenic chamber I'll be propping up daisies or ash in the wind by then. Or landfill or propping a motorway bridge, sorry, horse and carriage penny black bridge over the totally deserted Harvie inactive bicycle mudtrack.
Anon: I am not deleting your comments because I am "wrong", I am deleting your comments because you are incapable of reading and keep attributing to me things I didn't say. Stop misrepresenting me and I'll stop deleting your comments.
ReplyDeleteALBA is a great idea if only to allow Scottish independence supporters a broader choice of personalities and policies to vote for but it can only ever succeed if enough people move their vote from SNP to ALBA and if that did happen would it move Scottish independence closer ? i do not think so.Only a joint effort or pact as some call it will move Scottish independence closer the broader choice aforementioned in a Scotland where SNP and ALBA work as partners for independence might move some disenchanted Labour tory or lib dem voters to ALBA but at present as things stand ALBA is nothing more than a whisper of a protest vote .Shame really that independence parties cannot work together for us the people.Terence Callachan Dundee
ReplyDeleteIt is indeed a sad fact that independence parties can’t work together, quite the opposite in fact, they work against each other. The pro Indy vote gets split, and this will potentially hand seats to unionist parties, probably Labour at the upcoming GE.
DeleteI don’t have a solution to this, but sooner or later people are going to have to get behind one pro Indy party. I totally understand a lot of people are disillusioned with the SNP at the moment, but at the end of the day people are going to have to get behind them.
The only other outcome can be Alba replacing the SNP as the dominant pro Indy party, though that seems extremely unlikely.
I got the impression some Alba are disillusioned with Alba over internal voting issues and some folk being allowed in. 2 parties at once.
DeleteJeff, the solution was and is for the party in government to honour its pledges and hold a referendum instead of annoying and counter productive policies. Perhaps you should be asking yourself why the the SNP spent the last 7 years promising a referendum and not delivering. Perhaps you should be asking yourself will the SNP ever deliver a referendum? Perhaps you should be asking yourself is the SNP a party of independence or a party of devolution. I did and I know the conclusion I came to.
DeleteFor independence to happen first base is a majority vote for independence. The Britnats know this and they are happy for people to vote SNP as they know the SNP will not deliver a vote. The SNP will just moan about a democratic deficit and then get back to imposing on the people of Scotland crap policies. If you are happy with that future keep voting for the SNP and remain stuck in a colony. If you want independence do something different.
IFS, I agree with you about the SNP, however surely you can see where I’m coming from.
DeleteMaybe long term, the SNP getting humiliated at the GE will be best, and spur them into significant change. Abstaining or voting for another pro Indy party will certainly help if that is your aim, but it obviously splits the Indy vote thereby benefiting the unionist parties.
In the short to medium term this outcome can only damage the independence cause, but if you’re happy to look long term maybe the strategy could work.
I know you’re not a big fan of Neil Mackay, but I’m sure, like James, you agree with at least some of what he says.
The above post was Jeff McLean.
DeleteJeff, James knows I do not agree with everything he says. I am not a political party person who will just accept any nonsense, and to be fair to James he does disagree with Alba at times but ultimately you have to toe the party line.
DeleteSalmond offered the olive branch of unity to the SNP many many times but it was spurned. MacKay is starting from the premise that the SNP support independence. I disagree. The SNP are the party who have been in power with the ability to hold the referendum they promised. They chose not to despite fraudulently gathering votes and money on the back of such promises. MacKay wrote that article during Salmond's trial. Like Sturgeon's gang and the Britnat media he wanted Salmond out of the way. He is no independence supporter.
In 1707 the parliamentarians of Scotland betrayed their country. The current lot have done the same. In 1707 mobs wanted to lynch the parliamentarians, today we should at least not vote for them. A vote for the SNP is a vote to remain under the control of England - a de facto colony.
IFS, all well and good but you don’t address the point I make.
DeleteJeff - it would have been helpful in your post at 1.14pm (if you want me to address the point) if you said what this point is.
DeleteIFS, well basically my point was the damage that’s going to be done to the independence cause, short to medium term, if the SNP get humiliated at the GE. Though I did acknowledge the strategy of abstaining and voting for other parties, which would obviously do damage to the SNP, might work out best long term, though I’m sceptical.
Delete2:34 was Jeff McLean.
DeleteWell Jeff, I thought I had answered this in previous posts but apart from that surely the fact that I clearly stated in the post at 12.45pm that the SNP are currently a devolutionalist party must mean I don't think it will do any harm to Scottish independence. It can't do any more harm than voting for a party under the control of Britnats.
DeleteIndependence for Scotland, the biggest problem you have is not the SNP or Sturgeon’s gang as you put it, it’s the fact the majority of the country don’t want independence. This is something you need to accept, you’re in a minority man. Time to get a grip and accept this fact.
DeleteI agree with Jeff
DeleteDerek.
KC at 9.09am - if we are in a minority then why not prove it and have a referendum. The Britnats in Westminster are running scared they will lose their golden goose of a colony called Scotland that's why. I always love it when I see a Britnat House Jock posting " Independence for Scotland" - thanks.
DeleteIFS, absolute BS.
DeleteKC prove that independence is in a minority if you cannae then you are just another House Jock posting bullshit.
DeleteIFS, do you never look at polls?
DeleteThe vast majority show a consistent majority in favour of remaining in the union!
ReplyDeleteAfter some investigation, the root cause of this week’s inevitable instalment of Holyrood burach (the ban on wood burning stoves) lies with the Greens, or more specifically, Patrick Harvie (nae surprises there).
The ban on wood burning stoves (WBS) appears to be a “write over” from changes to UK Building Regulations.
This ban was discussed by the Local Government, Planning & Housing Committee on 12th Sept. 2023. In the Committee minutes, “biofuels” refers to WBS.
The Committee Convenor is Green MSP Ariane Burgess (Highlands & Islands). Burgess is a rookie MSP (class of 2021), I can only wonder at the “horse trading” that led to Burgess becoming a Convenor. Nonetheless, Burgess appears to be trying to do a decent job.
Most of the Committees’ time is taken up with interminable discussions on Heat Pumps.
The relevant section on WBS is around page 25 (of 38) of the minutes.
Convenor Burgess proactively raises the apparent ban and argues that there will be a disproportionate impact on rural communities, requesting an assessment for “some kind of exemption”.
At this point Patrick Harvie (Minister for Zero Carbon Buildings … ) interjects issuing irrelevant platitudes and claiming that an exemption is unnecessary due to … something to do with Heat Pumps and Heat Networks.
This entirely misses the key word in Burgess’ introduction; “rural”.
There are no Heat Networks in rural Scotland (nor will there ever be) and Heat Pumps require an electric supply that in an environment dependent on a fragile, above ground transmission lines which are subject to frequent interruption from storms.
Harvie whitters something about “direct emissions” (of CO2) from WBS as if this is relevant. Well, the required product (heat) is more efficiently delivered (in terms of CO2 emissions) by locally sourced, renewable biofuel than by electricity generated remotely in fossil fuel (or biomass) power stations with the associated losses to generation and transmission. Failed humanities student Harvie is entirely out of his depth.
From the minutes, it seems no one has the stomach to argue with the insufferably puritanical and sanctimonious Harvie.
I can only speculate on the power dynamics at play where Burgess (beneficiary of her immediate predecessor’s (Andy Wightman) expulsion from the Party) is reluctant to challenge her thin skinned and vindictive “boss” who has engineered a cast iron sinecure for himself in 20 years of dubious “service”.
As the Committee failed to raise concerns to initiate a Parliamentary debate, the UK Building Regs. were “written over” without further consideration and months later we are treated to an entirely unnecessary drama.
There appears to be a degree of friction within the Greens. Both Wightman and Burgess would fall under the category of “environmental activists”. Harvie, Chapman, Greer & Slater are identity politics fixated and Central Beltcentric. To the extent that these “Central Belters” concern themselves in environmental matters, they reveal themselves as technically illiterate zealots.
V. O’B
Thank you V. O’B for all this info and analysis.
DeleteIt’s a pity it’s needed in the first place. The Greens belong in opposition, at which point we can all breathe a sigh of relief and promptly ignore them, hopefully for ever.
This would also provide space for the SNP to regenerate, presuming that they are not beyond redemption.
Southside ian
Indeed, that's a very good description of the Greens, a rump of environmentalists dominated by a horde of transgender fanatics. And why do all the latter group look like they've just arrived from another planet?🤔
DeleteIt seems some still feel they can insult, be rude and all the rest. Can you confirm how you know they have arrived from another planet? Asking for a scientist with an interest in fashion. Lol
DeleteI’m comfortable insulting and being rude about that Party on the basis of their politics. No to ad hominem attacks, please, including regarding their looks, fashion, etc.
DeleteSouthside Ian
There's an article in the National BY Kate Forbes - https://archive.is/9s24F
DeleteYou can see comments below the line that make it obvious those who defend the SNP regardless don't read or understand the likes of this from her:
"Everybody else can stick a stove on – but you can’t because you applied for your building warrant after April 1."
Fergus Ewing was suspended for supporting what everyone else knows - Slater is incompetent. I wonder if the SNP will suspend Forbes for telling the truth - perhaps in a vain attempt to hold on to support which by then could be in the high or even low, twenties? The Greens are laughing it up at the SNP.
"You’ll be able to spot the new builds in a power cut easily – they’ll all be huddled around a big bonfire in the garden trying to stay warm."
DeleteIt's a cracker! Absolute mindless Central Belt city legislation. Patrick Harvie should be made to deliver a heat pump on his push bike from Glasgow to Cannich. Good luck with that.
Indyref2 - I think because Forbes is a former Finance Minister and also a former leadership contender within the SNP it is only right that the leadership is cutting her some slack.
DeleteParties can't just throw their weight behind another party anymore, not after the Elections Act 2022 made electoral pacts very difficult. It doesn't prevent an informal pact where Party A agrees not to contest seats XYZ so that Parties B/C can, but it does blow a hole in anything resembling a formal pact where joint campaiging has to be accounted for.
ReplyDeletePrecisely. Nod and a wink. Plausible deniability to any suggestion of an electoral pact, eg “we’ve limited £ resources, hence we need to target to have the most impact” (very often true).
DeleteFor any informal pact, the actual voters have to be amenable. Which is why I don’t see it as viable for Greens and SNP, since - in general - the former could be relied upon to vote SNP, but not reliably the other way around.
Southside Ian
Surely the Greens can do better than heat-pumps Harvie and circular Slater in government? They are proven incompetents, and everything they touch turns to shit (deposit return, GRA, heat pumps, stoves, marine protection, etc - not a bad list of fuck-ups for 2 1/2 years).
ReplyDeleteAs to comments above re wood stove. I absolutely agree with more controls on them . We are importing wood from Swedan / Finland etc which is nonsense. Kiln drying is bonkers. Wood stoves are sensible oot in the sticks but not in towns or even villages because the smoke is toxic. Particulates abound in wood smoke and it's carcinogenic. Try staying here in Moray with lots of white settlers either side. When they move in they want , in no particular order, a wood stove , a massive 4x4 and a dog . We cannae sit oot at nicht maist o the time even on summer wioot breathing their fumes!
ReplyDeleteI am gey ambiguous aboot the Greens but they're nae aa bad!
As far as I understand, you can build a new house with a stove or fireplace as 'emergency heating'. Edinburgh has been a smoke-free zone sine the Dark Ages so n.a., but it sounds like a complete waste of time, like their pointless and now forgotten smoke-detecter drivel produced by the current finance minister (today, if NHS staff are going to work in your home regularly, the NHS ignores the government stuff, and has their own, far laxer fire-detecter stipulations). Like the hate crime etc. bill, the Scottish government seem to spend a lot of energy making-up pointless badly written stuff that serves no purpose at all apart from maybe making them look a bit progressive for a morning. That may be a reflection of the politicians involved. I will not be helping to vote them back at Holyrood.
DeleteThey're distinct, different parties so why on earth wouldn't they compete for votes in a democracy?
ReplyDeleteIf there was a defacto vote a la Sturgeon things mignt be different but that's not the show in town.
I don't think denying people an opportunity to vote green in a climate emergency is a good idea. And I won't even be voting green.
So much chit chat.
ReplyDeleteIt’s obvious what needs doing:
1. Forbes replaces Yousaf
2. Nae Greens anywhere near government
3. Sensible, pro-economic growth and pro-jobs policies that help Scotland “rise again”, not least out from of grinding poverty
4. No more virtue signalling politics from our SNP government, just delivery focussed real world policies that are then actually implemented.
5. Bring back Fergus Ewing and put him in charge of Energy policy again
6. Unite behind the SNP and make FPTP work for us again
Southside Ian
Fergus Ewing is for the Coul links golf course. Like we need another golf course built on SSSI. Mind fit happened in Aberdeenshire?
DeleteWell said Ian. Now that's an SNP worth voting for.
DeleteExcellent proposal by Ian.
DeleteDerek.
7. This General Election a de facto referendum and follow through to Independence.
DeleteAnd I'm in.
Something else that needs to get done is for Alba and the revived SNP to recruit somebody famous in secret. Off the top of my head the likes of Stacey Solomon but not necessarily her. Holly Willoughby or Jamie Oliver. Somebody very popular in England. That person could then make pro Alba or SNP statements on TV and radio without people knowing they have been recruited. It worked in the past. It could be a game changer.
DeleteAnd thank you, Derek, too.
DeleteSouthside Ian
Thank you Felix.
ReplyDeleteSouthside Ian
I despise the English people, and I envy the Irish for having been able to free themselves from foreign control
ReplyDeleteDesperate stuff, seek help!
DeleteAnon at 6:47, do you seriously think posting a comment like that does anything whatsoever for the independence cause???
DeleteIt's obviously not an independence supporter lol
DeleteAnyone seen Stewart M15donald's AI generated gibberish in the rags? I think we've found our AI troll.
ReplyDeleteIt's clear, concise and will surely deliver. Heaven forbid an independence party puts forward the complicated idea we should just be like Ireland, Denmark or Austria.
I urge everyone to get their thesauruses out and give this prose a read.
Hear hear.
Abhainn
Anon at 6:47, sad and pathetic, bow your head in shame.
DeleteCome on, you spooks can surely do better than that!
DeleteMind, I’d have thought you could do better than McDonald…
Check out the sheer panic of those when Nicola attempted the defacto vote and fifth columnists appealing immediately for "grown up" politics.
DeleteCover blown but nobody cared. A few war holidays to Ukraine is a heck of a drug.
Abhainn
Abhain - in what parallel planet earth did " Nicola attempted the de facto vote" ?
DeleteIndependence for Scotland,
DeleteThe press conference in January and the subsequent few weeks succeeding it. Note the reaction to her decision by some at the time...
Ps I know much has happened since but she did announce this intention.
Abhainn
Abhainn - she did announce it then took every step to avoid it happening. She had only spent the preceding years rubbishing the people who proposed it and the idea itself. It was just another false promise. She also announced a referendum on 19/10/2023.
DeleteAll true but doesn't change the point I was making re the article and the article that wrote it.
DeleteAbhainn
Stewart Hosie SNP GE Campaign manager in the National:
ReplyDelete"And our message to the people of Scotland is one of optimism and hope – vote SNP to make Scotland Tory-free, vote SNP for a strong voice at Westminster standing up for Scotland and vote SNP to ensure that decisions are made in Scotland, for Scotland."
They still don't get it. We don't want Scotland to be Tory-free, we want to be Westminster-free; we don't want a strong voice at Westminster we want OUT of Westminster. The only way to ensure decisions are made in Scotland for Scotland, is INDEPENCENCE.
So was Independence mentioned in this pathetic excuse for an article by Stewart Hosie? Yes, just the once:
" I promised to remain active in the SNP and the cause of independence for Scotland."
Broken promise if that article is anything to go by.
Mair greetin from non snp members. In 7days in the Sunday National. “.., However, for as long as Scotland remain tied to broken Brexit Britain, we will remain hamstrung by Westminster incompetence, …….challenging the cosy Westminster consensus that the Tories and Labour are both signed up to.” Bottom of the page “.. vote SNP to ensure that decisions are made in Scotland form Scotland”.
DeleteIt's not the SNP members you have to convince, it's the SNP voters.
DeleteVote SNP to ensure that decisions are taken in Westminster restaurants.
Deletesaddo brit nats . I take it ALBA . Labour Tories even ex FM's eat too in restaurants ?
Delete2:08 Barely literate drivel. What are you trying to say?
DeleteMr angry. Read posts 12:36pm and work it out for your self.
DeleteIt's not reading that's the problem, it's your writing. Little or no punctuation, no proper use of capitals (saddo, Mr angry?), and bizarre spelling (yourself not your self). Sort yourself out!😁
DeleteStuart Hosie is a very experienced politician and will have chosen his words carefully. They are fine with me.
DeleteDerek
Derek - Hosie was having a great time shagging a journalist in London when he was supposed to be settling up in London. Aye very experienced in sin city.
DeleteIFS:
DeleteI could cut Hosie and other SNP politicians some slack.
Derek
Well jolly good for you Derek.
DeleteInteresting analysis.
ReplyDeleteBut oh how different it could all have been. Different if the SNP had used its Westminster super rmajorities, different of it had not encouraged over a million Hollyrood second votes to be wasted delivering two regional MSPs when a nationalist SNP / Alba super majority could have been delivered, and different had the SNP engaged in pursuing independence,
Exactly. What a waste the last decade has been pursuing so-called 'progressive' nonsense while independence was left to wither on the vine. If an ordinary voter like Ian (above) can see the problem and the solution, why not those overpaid balloons in Westminster and Holyrood?
DeleteOwen - I have to say I didn't expect much from the politicians in the SNP but it's all these SNP till I die supporters/members who refuse to look at the evidence that has surprised me. I watched and listened to all the SNP leadership hustings and the vast majority of the SNP members voted for the two candidates who showed no interest in independence.
DeleteThe members of the cult are too deep into the mythology of the Blessed Nicola to admit she might have been a false prophet. The party has completely lost its way as far as independence is concerned and now only pays it lip service when there's an election in the offing. We need to get rid of all the grifters if we're ever to get back on track.
DeleteOwen at 4.18pm - you are correct. I posted years ago on SGP that if the SNP/ WGD numpties do not wake up to what Sturgeon's gang are doing to the SNP they will all die with Scotland still not independent. I vastly underestimated how entrenched they were in their position that Sturgeon could do no wrong and supporting her and the SNP were what was important to them rather than independence. Multiple false promises on independence by the SNP later they are stil to wake up. Now not sure if they ever will. Yesindyref2 at least seems to be a bit more awake now. What a complete waste the last 10 years have been but the SNP members are still in denial.
DeleteSNP/WGD numpties have been banging on about voting Alba splits the vote for some time now. They have also been completing ignoring the Greens - somehow in the numpty mind people voting for the Greens disnae split the vote but Alba does. The only logical reason for this is that Nicola told them the Greens splitting the vote is fine. Talk about party numpty drones. Alba are contesting only 12 seats but the Greens 32 seats yet Alba has been the problem acording to the drones.
ReplyDeleteWill the drones now change their tune now Yousaf has said voting Greens will split the vote. Who knows, but I for one am totally sick of all this party shit. I want a de facto referendum not this crap. I want independence. Party drones can do one.
We can expect both votes SNP again in 2026 and no de facto referendum. Sick sick of what the SNP have become under Sturgeon's Britnat gang.
Sturgeon no longer in charge. Misogyny still exists it seems. Move forward. Alba will never being in power nor have influence. I sense your concerns.
DeleteGood point. It is now more than a year that Humza has been leading. He is actually making a decent go of it.
DeleteJames in Lanark
The SNP/ WGD numpties are right though, Alba has no interest in Scottish independence, they're led by a man bent on his own self interest of wrecking the SNP and probably getting himself into the House of Lords where he thinks he deserves to be
DeleteSalmond is a narcissistic and vindictive man
If it was only Sturgeon that was against him why does the rest of the party want nothing to do with him either?
Anon at 2.10pm - well done. I see your spelling has improved. " Sturgeon no longer in charge" - aye right. Yousaf is Sturgeon's boy being operated like a glove puppet.
DeleteAnon at 2.19pm - are we independent no. Is there a referendum on the horizon no. If you think this is ok then James you must be a Britnat.
Finally, DrJim at 3.05pm - you pepper your posts on WGD with violent remarks like some sort of hardman but you are too cowardly to post here other than as anon. The only person wanting in the House of Lords is Blowhard Blackford who said he wanted the SNP policy changed. So Jimbo have you carried out a survey of all SNP members about Salmond - no. So Jimbo you are not just a coward but a liar as well.
IIS -really have you left 2nd year at school yet? lol. Hard man. Grow up. Let’s try again. What is your plan to get Independence and the time line. Asked a few times before but await a cognitive response.
DeleteHave you ever been to school? When are you going to learn to put three letters in the right order? IFS!!! Have asked a few times but have yet to receive a cognitive response.
DeleteAnon at 3.56pm - see when you ask someone to do something you want and ask in that manner I bet they normally tell you to f**k off. So I won't be the exception - so f***k off.
DeleteAnyone who's incapable of working out the abbreviation for Independence for Scotland isn't worth your time anyway. The guy's a cretin.
DeleteI think Mr Kelly might reconsider pre-approval of comments because clearly here it's full of unionist trolls, so what's the point?
ReplyDeletePeople negating that Scotland is a colony, when the most important political decision, leaving the European Union, was done against the vote of the Scottish people
Yes a lot of is more personal abuse than political discussion. Most of it directed at one specific poster in an attempt to bully him off the site.
DeleteAye Scotland's no a colony. Folk across the country put oot the union flag to celebrate in 1707. . Of course a' body got a vote ,The commissioners didna take bribes of gold and land in England . Scots fought along side English willingly- so we cannae be a colony- there wasnae Indian colonial regiments were there?
DeleteAn all got a vote ( eventually ) in the English , sorry BRITISH parliament which nae others got....oops except Ireland...
Oh aye .. and we or our forefathers decided that Scots and Gaidhlig were not good vehicles of communication and immediately switched to the far superior English. We still have to keep trying hard to speak proper and excuse those nasty Scottishisms ..as fir those heathen Erse speakers, are they actually human?
DeleteAnon at 2:49, you had your referendum in 2014 and lost.
DeleteGive up on the nonsense of independence and move on.
You’re clearly in a minority.
ot - why did the uk shoot down Iranian drones fired at Israel but ignored missiles fired at citizens of charitable organisations and Palestinians by the same Israel military. Seems lives of the british state citizens are expendable along with Palestinians and other nations.
ReplyDeleteOT - I see Michael Shanks is as useful and refreshing as an overflowing and permanently blocked cludgie.
ReplyDeleteWGD/SNP numpties have been banging on about how Labour have been taken over by right wingers.
ReplyDeleteYet the very same numpties cannae see that the SNP have been taken over by devolutionalists.
The idea that the SNP could have been taken over by Britnats to stop independence just disnae seem to have entered their numpty brains despite talking about how entryism has happened to Labour. They seem to think the SNP have a force field which rejects Britnats. Spoiler - they don't.
IFS, independence is an SNP policy so you are wrong.
DeleteCharles
Charles - independence being an SNP policy does not fill me with any confidence. Independence was the sole reason for the SNP now it is a policy like the Scottish Energy company that was ditched after 6 years of doing nothing about it. The SNP promised a referendum for 7 years and now it is a vague policy. Thin gruel.
DeleteIFS
DeleteSNP conference voted in favour of using the next UK election as a means for the people of Scotland to express their support for independence by voting for the SNP.
Charles
IFS?
DeleteFFS!
Hahahahahaha
Charles - so what - that is totally meaningless.
DeleteThe time to start talking about independence is when there’s a majority in favour of it!
ReplyDeleteKC - well we will never know if there is a majority unless there is a referendum will we. So tell your English masters in Westminster to tell Yousaf he can have a referendum. It's called the human right to self determination. Colonies are not acceptable to any decent person.
DeleteIFS, if you cast your mind back, the SNP said themselves the 2014 referendum was “once in a generation “. Ten years isn’t a generation.
DeletePlus of course, support for independence is no higher now than back in 2014, and that’s despite Brexit and years of the Tories!
I think it’s pretty obvious peak support for independence has passed.
I suggest you stop living in denial and accept it’s over.
It's the People o Scotland that has the right to decide when we have independence and this cannot be limited by off- the- cuff statements by SNP or any politician.
DeleteGreen Green, The people of Scotland gave a resounding NO to independence in 2014.
DeleteYou need to accept it’s over.