Now, I defy the self-styled 'realists' in the SNP's ranks to think this through logically and come to a different conclusion from the one I have reached. It may well be that emphasising that an independent Scotland will be a member of NATO is reassuring enough for people concerned about national security that it gets the SNP some extra votes. It may even be that, hypothetically, ditching the SNP's commitment to nuclear disarmament would win even more votes, because some voters wrongly believe that the theory of nuclear deterrence is a sound one. But if the SNP are going to remain somewhere in the middle and be pro-NATO but anti-Trident, it stretches credibility somewhat to suggest that voters who are broadly satisfied with that compromise position are going to be put off because the proposal is to remove Trident within two years rather than five or ten. How many voters does anyone think even have a view on what constitutes a realistic timetable for Trident removal, or have enough information before them to reach such a view?
No, I would submit to you that McDonald plainly cannot be motivated by the SNP's electability, but he's pretending that he is in order to serve another agenda - and that can only be his own pro-nuclear agenda. On some level, I suspect he yearns to put himself forward to the voters as First Minister one day on a promise to build "a strong Scotland within a strong United Kingdom with the nuclear deterrent as the cornerstone of our security", and failing that he just wants to get as close as possible.
If anyone doubts that McDonald would be happy enough if the independence issue just vanished, how else can you explain this from him: "I want to see us grow up, I want to see us get serious. I want to see us have a debate where there are no sacred cows, nothing is off the table." Now, what could he POSSIBLY HAVE IN MIND THERE, given that the SNP are a pro-independence party and saying that there are no sacred cows at all, and that nothing at all is off the table, can only mean that independence should be treated as an expendable policy like any other? And if he didn't mean to be taken that way, surely he would have said "there are no sacred cows apart from independence itself, and nothing is off the table apart from our unshakeable commitment to independence"?
Another key part of "growing up" on Planet McDonald apparently involves fretting terribly about unionist voters not regarding a de facto referendum as "legitimate" - which basically amounts to a concern that the minority won't like what the majority have voted for and won't think they should get it. I mean, so what? Would it have been grown up for Keir Starmer to stop trying to win a majority of seats because many non-Labour voters refused to regard his win as legitimate without proportional representation? Maybe it would have been, actually, but that's certainly not the way the centrist power politics that McDonald worships at the altar of has ever worked.
I'll tell you what really isn't grown up, serious or credible politics, and that's taking McDonald's advice by presenting yourselves to the public as a pro-independence party which has no intention of actually trying to deliver independence until such time as the UK government randomly decides to voluntarily allow a vote on it, which they will have no conceivable incentive to ever do. A voter sophisticated enough to think Trident removal is impossible within two years is certainly going to have no difficulty in seeing straight through McDonald's faux independence prospectus.
I wish more people would realise that you don't start papering the living room walls until they've been built.
ReplyDeleteLet's get independence first, then be perfect second.
McDonald isn't for independence. I don't think he ever has been. He's another devolutionist and I think the SNP is riddled with them
ReplyDeleteI celebrated his defeat on election night. The man’s a viper, with no place whatsoever in the independence movement or its party. He’d be happier in Anas Sarwar’s Hug a Trident Labour, and it’ll surprise no one when he goes there in a hissy someday.
DeleteI’m SNP and there is no way I wish nuclear weapons on our land. Not negotiable.
DeleteWhen it comes to setting up the negotiating team for Independence, could I nominate Stewart McDonald as a member for EWNI please? Thanks!
ReplyDeleteHaving once been in the same SNP branch as Stewart, my impression is that he is a bear of very little brain. I'm pretty sure most of his speeches are ghost-written.
ReplyDeleteThis does not seem right to me. He seems quite intelligent.
DeleteI questioned him when the branch were discussing NATO and his answers were, frankly, incoherent, lacked information, and amounted pretty much to "it would be a good idea". I got the impression he had been told the Angus Robertson bandwagon was a good career move. And so it turned out. Maybe not quite so stupid when it came to self-interest.
DeleteEvery time I read a Stewart McDonald column in the Scotsman my blood pressure rises. On reading yesterday's column, I was incandescent, but not really that surprised!
ReplyDeleteHe's also a warmongering, NATO loving, eejit!
Once upon a time, I lived in Cathcart. This was in the days of Teddy Taylor, and I'd rather him than Stewart McDonald.
You read the “Scotsman” Brit paper?
DeleteHow else would I know what Stewart McDonald has been saying?
DeleteThree columnists, including the so-called economist John McLaren, have just penned their final articles, so I don't think it's going to last much longer - I'll have to look elsewhere for the lies from Jackie Baillie etc.
Stewart was clear that he supports Swinney.
ReplyDeleteHe says that two years is just not a technically feasible timetable and therefore not credible or serious for any party to propose it.
DeleteHe’s right about Indy having a problem. It’s him and other Careerists like him who do not have Indy as a priority. If he is put in a listing come 2026 my list vote will not be SNP.
ReplyDeleteHe is perhaps able to attract wider range of voters extending reach?
DeleteYou mean like people who oppose independence? A bit hard to do that without "narrowing reach" among core voters. And if he was really such a vote-gathering machine, he probably would have been re-elected last week.
DeleteJames: Some are on the fence, however.
DeleteI thought he gave a decent account of himself on the Bernard Ponsonby podcast. He was able to hold his position under detailed questioning and showed no signs of any lack of intellectual capability.
ReplyDeleteJust yesterday afternoon, as the Waverley steamed past the mouth of Loch Long on the way back to Glasgow, an announcement pointed out a Vanguard class submarine coming out of the loch from Coulport.
ReplyDeleteThere was a mild ripple of interest on deck but the only comment that I actually heard was "Oooh - isn't it long". A little wave of a sort of flat despair ran through me.
Macdonald ignored every attempt over years by local activists to raise the profile of the campaign against Trident. He is no loss at all in my view.
James, I have issues with Stewart's takes. He was arguing for a return to the culture of open debate and disagreement; in order to reach better collective decisions. Ironically, I suspect that culture was shut down by "serious" politics manager types who came into SNP ; encouraged by Poor Leaders who feared voters hearing mixed messages.
ReplyDeleteI've always felt that while SNP should indicate general positions for Scotland to take following Independence, that any detailed debates whether on most specifics: Anthems; Nuke Disposal or Tax / Spend balance & priorities are totally irrelevant and highly wasteful of enery until an Independence Date is achieved. There are some grey areas, such as Currency; Central Bank which need a credible position, so they can't be hijacked again as Dead Cat distractions to feed #ProjectFear 2. On all of those aspects SNP Leadership has failed since 2015 .
A 'policy free' presentation of independence has always seemed like a formula for self defeat to me. Many people are not independence purists but support independence because they believe that it will improve their lives. There has to be some policy content to the independence package. It can certainly be debated what should be in and what shouldn't and it should not claim to be a complete package for government - but not a blank cheque vacuum either.
DeleteBrexit won because it was policy free.
DeleteBrexit won because the English won't be bullied. Unlike us.
DeleteAgree there needs to be a reasonable outline vision of what post Independence brings; but its not unreasonable to do what every Opposition party does until an Election Date is set: Claim the detail will depend on the exact circumstances at the time. The more detail presented, the more it opens the door for #Unionst claims of 'but that will never work because of X;Y.. Z' So better vote NO !
DeleteEg. An incoming Independent ScotGov might chose to balance a longer Nuke Removal against ever increasing Lease fees and/or beneficial Asset detailed split terms
Listened to him on the Ponsonby and Massie show and got the impression that his preferred strategy for achieving independence is to just stick with the United Kingdom indefinitely.
ReplyDeleteI got the impression he favours independence but prefers a different route based on an open debate with the SNP and on competent government.
DeleteIn that case you got a false impression, Anon.
DeleteHe said he wanted more open policy debate and greater emphasis on competent government.
DeleteAnon at 11.27
DeleteHow visionary...
What do the snp members of the branches think? Maybe we can be asked.
ReplyDeleteHear
DeleteHear
Vacuous AI generated essays to the Scotsman with zero substance what change he is actually putting forward will not take the SNP or independence forward.
ReplyDeleteAt least have the gumption to put forward a vision instead of simply demanding one.
Abhainn
Ah yes the "five years instead of two years for Nucleur removal issue" was all he heard on the doorsteps I'm sure.
ReplyDeleteSNPs/independent Scotland's commitment to NATO was the issue that got you unelected, Stewart. Aye right.
I think he was using this issue to illustrate a wider point.
DeletePeople vote snp for competent govt, independence and against the tories.
DeleteThey don't vote for them for niche issues or stuff about nato.
There's some folk that think the SNP needs to be ' starmerised' . Get rid of any contentious policy , contentious that is to the Britnat media .
ReplyDeleteThis needs to be resisted and more power needs to go to SNP members- they at least won't want to go for Indy next century!
One reason Stewart lost was he (among others) stripped the SNP of its selling point and became a bland, fake version of Labour who'd been in 'power' too long. A Labour version which couldn't be in power in London.
ReplyDeleteSo folk went with the real one.
If you want power for powers sake just hang around long enough. Seems to work. Labour didn't ditch its unionism and here we are.
Stewart thought he had a good wee job for life as long as independence support hovered at 40percent.
ReplyDeleteThey forgot, post brexit, they were there to seek independence and campaign vividly for that.
Never forget when polling had independence support above 50% for 12 polls in a row, there was one MP steadfastly trying to put the blockers on....
Of course the Glasgow South ballot was all to do with Ukraine/nato/trident.
ReplyDeleteIt's all this guy every talks about.
I'm all for helping them out but dear me.
The SNP are square in the orthodoxy more or less already here. It's only him that ever seems to bring it up.
He is a thoughtful man and caring and seems to be well thought of in his local constituency, but sadly the swing to Labour was too much. He will be back next time.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure McDonald is a nice guy . He's is just no the sort of person we need in the SNP just noo. We actually need candidates that want an independent Scotland.
ReplyDeleteHe is pro independence.
DeleteHe is atheist, LGBTQ+, and favoured Sturgeons Gender Bill. He campaigns for extensions of queer rights.
DeleteDon’t care. The issue is how active was he in pushing for Indy and the answer is hardly at all. If it’s not his priority, and if he can’t understand that his hopes and aims can only be secured through Indy, then he’s in the wrong party.
Delete"He is atheist, LGBTQ+, and favoured Sturgeons Gender Bill. He campaigns for extensions of queer rights."
DeleteNot sure what two out of three of those has to do with anything?
The conflation of trans rights with gay history is non analogous. You don't need to cut off body parts or tell people they are in the "wrong" body for a start. A regressive, despicable thing which is nothing to do whatsoever with being same sex attracted.
Also, the idea someone is gay and atheist should be of no consequence to anyone. Get a grip.
I'm more concerned with the fact he's chums with the UK security services when the biggest threat to UK territorial integrity should he the SNP.
DeleteMaist folk are atheists , at least in my experience . As far the alphabet folk, maist folk dinnae care - as lang as it's nae pushed doon their thrapples.
DeleteStewart McDonald deserves credit for these progressive attributes and views and people should not be dismissing them.
DeleteBeing gay is not progressive or an attribute.
DeleteIt's just a reality.
Get a grip.
3:01 "The idea that someone is atheist should be of no consequence to anyone". Yet Kate Forbes religious beliefs are a major failing for many - double standards?
Delete5.34
DeleteYoure replying to me and not for me it wasn't.
Incomprehensible.
DeleteHow can a short sentence of ten words end up in drivel like that?
DeleteJames, you say that Trident can be removed within two years. Would be helpful for everyone if you can give chapter and verse on how that would be accomplished. You could maybe start with what the USA Trident stakeholders and other interested parties who this would affect points are in relation to relocation options, their cited pros and cons, costs, logistics and current status of what UK Gov's global agreements with foreign states are. Many thanks James.
ReplyDeleteWhy on earth does this dance on a pin matter?
DeleteChange it to 5 years or 50 for all the votes it's winning and losing.
This is not a wedge issue in the slightest.
Very few people consider the SNP an outlier in western defence orthodoxy. Why make a bigger deal of something which isn't a thing?
Of all the things the SNP should not be focusing on, it's this.
DeleteOf course Trident is an imporrant issue but there is no pressing desire to make it a dividing issue.
"James, you say that Trident can be removed within two years."
DeleteIf you think I said that, let's see the quote. Good luck!
Stewart was arguing that the two-year time frame is unreasonable.
DeleteStewart has experts on his side in this.
Delete4.13 and 4.15
DeleteGenuinely... so what?
So it's 5 years. And?
A minor change, hardly a "sacred cow".
"Stewart has experts on his side in this."
DeleteIs one of them Janette Krankie?
Possibly Falmouth for the Coulport equivalent, though I picked out a better and cheaper site long ago which is [redacted]
DeleteI think all SNP politicians - candidates, those holding elected office and all party officials should be required to sign a declaration. This would declare that they support independence for Scotland asap. Maybe it could apply to all party members ?
ReplyDeleteLOL.
Delete4.01 is a Britnat
DeleteAye , that a coo we dinnae want slayed.
DeleteSNP politicians support party policy and independence is party. Therefore Stewart supports independence.
DeleteObviously his support is somewhat ambiguous . A requirement to sign a specific declaration for Indy would be stronger than merely supporting general party policy in which candidates could have more nuanced positions .
Delete.
At least all the Alba supporters have accepted their gang of thieves moment in the stolen sun is over, now get rid of Salmond and you might put together a political party based on more than hating the SNP
DeleteI'd stop obsessing about Alba and worry about the SNP if I were you. If you won't learn from last week, you can expect another kicking in 26.
Delete^Independence is SNP party policy.
ReplyDeleteAye but when? 2050 , 2150?
DeleteMany of us SNP members have lost confidence in the commitment of certain individuals in the party , especially the likes of McDonald . Hence if he was required to sign a specific declaration he wouldn't be able to spout shite like the above and stay in the party.
DeleteIf they are part of the SNP, you'd like to think they are independence supporters.
DeleteI know we may disagree on tactics but they will support the aim.
Of course, snp may also have a few infiltrators.. would be remiss of the UK not to have some.
To add, an infiltrator is hardly going to refuse to sign such a document.
DeleteDE FACTO REFERENDUM NOW
ReplyDeleteWha's gonnae disagree wi that? Naw me.
Delete6.25
DeleteThat very much depends on the circumstances. Turnout, result and narrative around it.
It wouldn't right now.
It could be in future.
It will never work if people supposedly on our own side (sic) knock it as a tool before it has a chance to build into something more amenable than the current position.
The only reason I can think of to raise this trident "molehill" of whether it's 2, 5 or 10 years is to keep Stewart McDonald relevant in some way.
ReplyDeleteHas anyone found the current position on this specific policy area
1. a stumbling block in any way to independence
2. A swing voter hot topic?
If no, it seems to me, to be simply a way to remain relevant as one of the few topics McDonald has some knowledge about.
Watching and supporting England at the mo fa the Glesgae area.. Will the National have to eat the humble pie or sook the head aw yon hate monster?
ReplyDeleteHow many years will England pretend they haven't insulted the entire world with their bitter prejudice and hatred of all people not them?
DeleteDoes the same not apply to the SNP and the Sturgien Cabal?
DeleteWho says "fa the Glesgae area"? Do you mean "fae"?
DeleteIt wis the National whit dun it!
DeleteAnon at 8.30. Billy ten bellies sitting in the loudon dribbling on his beer stained vest, no doubt with a wee tear in his eye after standing to proudly sing his national anthem, and salute the king that quite literally laughs at and despises him. Each to his own.
DeleteMcDonald and others like him should be rejected wholesale by the sea of yes voters. Perhaps he still has a place in the SNP but he's not for independence - maybe they aren't either. We got an early sign of how Strong for Scotland our contingent was down there when they were told to stop clapping the first week and they complied. The rest of the house must have been crapping themselves at the sight of these militant revolutionaries.
ReplyDeleteWhoever is the FM in the circumstances of Scottish independence decides that Trident must go in whatever timescale, if England fails to do so then Faslane will come under occupation by the SDF or whatever Scotland decides to name the Scottish military
ReplyDeleteEngland will move it
Don’t be a silly billy! Have you not noticed the world has changed?
DeleteAnonymous at 9:39 PM
DeleteIf the rUK don't move it, they won't be able to move it.
Have you not noticed the map?
Anon at 9.39 seems to think England actually controls the nuclear deterrent based in Scotland. Now that is silly, or more accurately it’s ignorant and stupid. Educate yourself.
DeleteAh well football insna coming home tonight. But Branchform is, an investigation into Humza re donations to Gaza, the polis investigations we can’t talk about into the SNP, a pile of ordinary Scots parents totally pissed off at the SNP trying to teach their kids about anal sex and the SNP pandering to the deviant greens. Gupta, Grangemouth, ferries the SNP fail list goes on and on!
ReplyDeleteGet the SNP out and start afresh with Indy.
And a partridge in a pear tree.
DeleteAye- yir team got beat- blame brexit. Viva espana!
Delete"Ah well football insna coming home tonight."
DeleteThose were the operative words of your comment, I feel. The rest was just the hurt speaking. We do understand.
If football was coming home it wouldn’t involve England. Learn your history.
DeleteWhat a fantastic night, england lost the match!
ReplyDeletehttps://x.com/conmansteggo/status/1812616821666725995
ReplyDeleteSNP had their faults....but they did fight for Scotland in Westminster...that's sadly a thing of the past with parity on the way.
ReplyDeleteAt least the result last night gives Nats a wee something to be happy about in these grim times for them.
ReplyDeleteNats haha?,,happiest people I know were union supporters!
DeleteIt runs deep!
9.22 . When you use the term " nats" , you need to specify which type - Britnat or Scotnat .
DeleteIsn’t a britnat really an English right winger but kids on they want a union of equal nations.
DeleteDid Starmer not go to the match?
ReplyDeleteNo. Princes William and George were representing UK.
DeleteYou must be mistaken. They only represent Engerland
DeleteSlightly O T but I see the Labour unionist guardianistas are currently denying that Nandy said what she said about it being time Indy supports were subjected to violent suppression. Apparently she meant something else but they can’t tell us what it was. Hasn’t taken long has it? And no one calling out gun happy Trump for his hypocrisy. 600 million guns among 300 million people. And blood bath atrocities every week, fuelled by the rhetoric of Trump and his mates. But they are shocked someone would think about shooting with one of them.
ReplyDeleteNarrative now being developed that the Indy Referendum is part of a toxic divisive series of events resulting in the assassination attempt on Trump. We knew we were in for an onslaught of anti Indy disinformation but this takes it to a different level. It is of course just a variation, albeit extreme, on the damaging narrative some of us tried to warn the give them a bloody nose brigade about. And for the really stupid ones, and yes I am referring to him and his pals, bloody nose is used in the context of the anti snp debate, nothing else.
ReplyDeleteMany many people who support independence stayed at home.
ReplyDeleteIf SNP were to place more focus on Independence then the 15% of people who support independence but didn't vote SNP would vote SNP.
This is not a unionist forum. Your lot should go off to a unionist forum and leave our lot alone..
ReplyDelete