Sunday, November 24, 2024

Why is it that every time the SNP pointlessly chuck away a precious parliamentary seat, they get patted on the back as if they've just done something really sensible and mature?

When it emerged that Stephen Flynn wanted to challenge a sitting SNP MSP for a place in Holyrood, but also wanted to retain his Westminster seat until the next general election if he was successful, I made the point that the one thing the SNP needed to avoid at all costs was a needless Westminster by-election in Aberdeen South.  In other words, there had to be one of two outcomes: either a) Flynn had to be persuaded to abandon his plan to switch to Holyrood and instead rededicate himself to his important role as leader of the fourth largest group in the Commons (by far the most preferable option), or b) his critics had to accept his temporary dual mandate through gritted teeth.

The SNP making strategic mis-steps has become such an established pattern in recent years that it's no great surprise to me that after only a few short days they've managed to end up with precisely the worst-case scenario I warned against.  They've persuaded Flynn to abandon his plan to have a dual mandate, but not to abandon his plan to switch to Holyrood.  That makes a by-election almost inevitable - unless of course Flynn fails in his bid for Holyrood selection.  But that seems highly unlikely, because we all know what this is really about - the leadership faction want Flynn in Holyrood so he can be the next leader.  I was asked last night how long I thought John Swinney would stay on as leader, and I said "at least two more years, because the ruling faction want him to hang on until they can replace him with Stephen Flynn, preventing Kate Forbes from becoming First Minister is the one thing they care about above all else".  And the person I was speaking to gave me a look of total bafflement and said "WHY?"  I had to think about that for a moment, but eventually I said "well, because she's an evangelical Christian, and because she has certain private views about abortion...", and then I sort of tailed off and thought to myself "yeah, this doesn't really make any sense, does it?"  The SNP have got to stop tearing their own house down for factional reasons.

What does surprise me, although it probably shouldn't, is that having needlessly got themselves into this by-election mess, the SNP are receiving a big pat on the back from certain sections of the independence movement.  "Stephen Flynn got this one wrong, but the important thing is he's accepted that and put things right."  Well, no, actually, he's now got things even more wrong than before.  Far, far more wrong.  It reminds me of when prominent independence supporters both inside and outside the SNP were enthusiastically urging people in Rutherglen to sign the recall petition against Margaret Ferrier.  "Here's a helpful map showing you where you can sign, and don't forget to wrap up warm, now!"  Those sterling "efforts" led to a landmark by-election gain for Labour, which in turn generated momentum that led to the SNP's defeat at the general election.

Make no mistake - if the SNP stupidly bring about a by-election in Aberdeen South, they're likely to lose it and see their representation in the Commons cut from nine seats to eight.  It's not a natural SNP constituency.  Flynn only held it in July because the unionist vote was split down the middle, but in a by-election context it's likely that unionist voters would coalesce more behind one party, possibly the Tories.  Heaven only knows what momentum that might generate and what the long-term consequences might be.

205 comments:

  1. As a SNP member I think we should be asked for our views on dual mandates and the rest. An unnecessary diversion.
    I wish “Independence” for our country. All decisions surrounding this should not lose this mantra.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What are you going to do about it, then? The last 10 years of living history haven't cast the SNP membership in a kind light. You're treated like mushrooms—kept in the dark and fed shite—and just keep on taking it.

      Delete
  2. The reason the leadership faction despise Kate is that she’s not loyal to Nicola’s continuing guidance. (Not to mention her and the hubby’s needs to remain out of pokey.) In power politics: fidelity is everything. That’s how we got Humza the patently Useless, Swinney the janitor, and how Flynn is indeed guaranteed. F*** the seat, goes the reasoning, keeping an iron grip on the party for this faction is all that matters.

    I mean, just think of the horrors if Team Nicola ever lost control. Scotland might even wind up leaving the UK!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The party’s criminally fiddled finances are a direct threat to Mr. and Ms. Sturgeon’s continued liberty, let alone their legacy. That’s how vital it is to keep the leadership in trusted, complicit hands. Make no mistake: they will fight like their lives depend on it.

      Delete
    2. Starmer about to wage war on benefits but not the Royal benefits. Charlieboy getting his main residence Bucky house done up at a cost of £369 million. Small beer compared to the billions spent on the Palace of Westminster.

      Delete
    3. IFS you need to realise your benefits lifestyle has to be paid for by someone who works? It’s not unreasonable to ask you to work if you can.

      Delete
    4. Benefit fraud is pursued heavily by both Labour and Tories. Always has been. Yet billions in benefits are unclaimed because of lack of information and being shamed to claim by the anti benefits propaganda streamed out by politicians and the media. Meanwhile tax fraud continues almost unchecked because politicians don't want to upset their donors. And what limited pursuit there is is hampered by lack of staff and resources.

      Delete
    5. Anon at 12.56pm - you need to realise you are a prick. You don't know me so you have no idea of my lifestyle. My point was juxtaposing the war on benefits with the easy access to money for Royalty and politicians in Westminster. But you anon being a total prick take a stupid shot at me.

      Delete
    6. We know you are unemployed/unemployable you have said so before.

      Delete
    7. Anon troll at 3.02pm - liar. Beats me how these trolls have any self respect.

      Delete
    8. Not a lie if you've previously boasted about it.

      Delete
    9. Anon troll at 3.57pm. going for a new record of consecutive lies.

      Delete
    10. There should be no shame in claiming benefits which you are rightfully due.

      Delete
    11. Anon troll at 5.35pm. do you work for the DWP? There is plenty of shame in blatant lying but pricks like you don't do shame. What's up - troll - run out of SNP carrots to munch on.

      Delete
    12. Why on earth do you think Flynn is loyal to Sturgeon? Blackford and Thewliss were Sturgeon’s choices for WM leader - Flynn beat them both. The Bute House Agreement was Sturgeon’s deal, Flynn got it punted.
      And it’s the Sturgeon clique screaming loudest against Flynn standing for Holyrood.

      The absolute hypocrisy of people saying SNP MSPs are useless grifters with no principles then crying when one of the aforementioned useless grifter gets challenged for her seat. Boo-hoo poor anonymous Audrey, If she’s any good she’ll win the selection. Otherwise that’s democracy

      Stephen Flynn should be at HR at least he is stepping up and it will be a generational change which is badly needed.

      Delete
    13. I used to wonder how IFS had the time to post/troll so frequently. Hadn’t realised he was unemployed. Nothing wrong with that in itself. The abuse of benefits is minuscule as part of the overall benefits budget. It is also dwarfed by tax evasion and tax avoidance.

      Delete
    14. Exactly, as much as I've had disagreements with IFS. I wouldn't have a go at someone because they were unemployed or had a disability or something like that.

      Delete
    15. Anon at 7.12pm and Scottish Skier at 7.51pm - pathetic people with pathetic lies. Is that all you can do with your time. No wonder you are happy for Sturgeon to smear Salmond. Low lifes.

      Skier you have not had disagreements with me you just post lies and propaganda.

      Delete
    16. So you are not unemployed? Just say that and the position is clarified.

      Delete
    17. Steven Flynn doesn't know the word independence.

      Delete
    18. IFS. Have you been asked to post your C V? If not, why would you ask it of someone else? Simple question. Are you unemployed? I am employed. Easy question, easy answer. In your own time. A M or P M. Makes no odds.

      Delete
    19. For God's sake, James! Get a hold of the site. It has now descended into a pathetic rant against IFS for his employment status, real or imagined. What has that to do with politics or independence. Who wants to read this childish drivel?

      Delete
    20. Anon at 1.02pm - so you don't want publish your cv - what are you hiding anon? While you are at it - what religion are you? Do you like porridge for breakfast? Just answer these questions and your position is clarified until I think up some more questions. It's about time anons like you answered questions. Put your carrots🥕down and answer.

      Delete
    21. Anon at 3.27pm - sadly it's trolls just trying to ruin the site. Mainly from WGD. They are seriously pissed off with me because I have been proved right about Sturgeon and her gang and their teeny weeny egos cannae handle it.

      Delete
    22. Correction at 2.03pm - must stop rushing posts - the job keeps getting in the way😀

      Delete
    23. IFS, 🤣🤣🤣. But seriously, James needs to stamp down on this sort of puerile nonsense as it does the site no favours.

      Delete
    24. Anon troll at 1.02pm you have not answered any of my questions. You are a bad troll - 2 hours on the naughty step. Do you have your SNP carrots with your porridge in the morning? I have heard the SNP carrots are absolutely delicious with anything.

      Delete
    25. Why are so many people have a go at IFS for being unemployed? It's not a illegal to not have a job.

      Delete
  3. What I found somewhat amusing: The SNP made similar moves to ensure that Angus Robertson could make the switch from Westminster to Holyrood in 2021 & removing Joanna Cherry from being a threat to his future leadership bid. But he managed to balls that up and didn't stand when the time came.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Poor Shug. The security services didn't get as much game from him as his wife. Goes to show the necessity of casting a wide net.

      Delete
    2. Joanna Cherry, the yoons favourite nationalist.

      Delete
    3. Angus Robertson was being set up to be the future leader, what happened?

      Delete
    4. This:

      https://www.holyrood.com/news/view,angus-robertson-faces-conference-backlash-over-israel-meeting

      His London handlers played him a bit too hard.

      Delete
    5. Anon@5:16, His wife happened 🤔🤭😉

      Delete
  4. The SNP really don't come out of this well. If they allow dual mandates now then it would become abundantly clear that they introduced a new rule last time to vindictively stop Joanna Cherry from standing for Holyrood.

    One rule for some and a different rule for others. All the while insulting members who have never been given a say on how they would like to select candidates for elections.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The SNP under Sturgeon's gang have always applied double standards. Patrick Grady - they tried to cover up his sexual assault because he was in the gang. What other organisation would give their recently resigned leader a bunch of flowers after being arrested and questioned for eight hours over possible embezzlement of funds from the same organisation. In contrast Michelle Thomson, not in the gang, suspended for two years by Sturgeon based on nothing.
      I guess this is some of the dirty stuff that David Francis is quite relaxed about. Did you chuck in some money for the flowers David?

      Delete
  5. Why are you all so concerned about the SNP when Alba was specifically set up to destroy it? why aren't you all happy ? there seems no pleasing you Alba punters

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dr Jim at 3.15pm - Alba was set up to achieve Scottish independence because the SNP had been taken over by the British state. People like you supporting agents of the British state in the SNP are responsible for the SNP's woes.

      Delete
    2. And Alba has failed completely, likewise IPS. These wee diddy parties are kidding themselves on.

      Delete
    3. Anon at 5.09pm - not big on accuracy are you. IPS🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

      Delete
    4. A diddy party, however they arrange their name, who got 57 votes in an East Lothian by election 😂

      Delete
    5. I like the look of Sovereignty. I'll vote for them at HR26 if I have the opportunity.

      Delete
    6. Anon at 5 20pm says " a diddy party " as distinct from a plain diddy like anon. At least the diddy party is not run by Britnats like the SNP. Who is up next to get their FM pension from Sturgeon's gang? Clearly Flynn fancies a bit of the cake. What about Sturgeon's other pal SAS? - Captain woke. Surely Shirley willnae miss out on the FM pension.

      Delete
    7. John McBarry, you and about two others will vote for them !

      Delete
    8. If Alba was set up to achieve independence by Alex Salmond why didn't he spend his time doing that instead of trying to retake the party he ran away from after 2014?
      Nicola Sturgeon was doing too well and Salmond was chosen for the job by the Brits again

      Delete
    9. Dr Jim says at 12.02am - " Nicola Sturgeon was doing too well ...." so well that she ran away claiming she was tired and the next thing Sturgeon and her husband are being investigated for embezzlement.

      Incredibly WGD numpties like Dr Jim kept saying that international organisations would be queuing up to offer Sturgeon top jobs. Nearly two years later how many job offers has she had - 1. A job on an election night TV panel, 2. Writing her " I don't recall " memoirs which is still to appear and 3. An appearance at some comedy show. If you are an independence supporter there is nothing funny about Sturgeon's betrayal of all who voted in many elections for Indyref2.

      Jimbo is getting annoyed that her book willnae be in his Xmas stocking on Xmas morning.

      Delete
    10. How do you know what offers she has had?

      Delete
    11. I don't - do you anon at 12.57pm. So you think she may have had an offer of a high flying job from the UN, for example, and turned it down? Perhaps the polis have told her not to leave the country and all these wonderful job offers are sitting waiting for the polis to declare her free of investigation over embezzling the organisation she once led.

      Whether or not she is cleared of any embezzlement the fact remains she was charged with delivering Indyref2 and failed. More than that she actually took action to make it illegal to deliver the gold standard referendum she declared in many elections she would deliver. A failure or a fraud. Disnae matter nobody will touch her with a barge poll - well maybe if there is a position going in North Korea.

      Maybe you are just another nicophant unhappy you won't be getting her book for Xmas. There is always next year.

      Delete
    12. And you asked IFS the question. You really are as hypocritical as you seem.

      Delete
    13. Anon at 4.15pm - there is always a Silver Lining. When Sturgeon brings her book out next year you will be able to get it for a £1 next Xmas in the fiction section.

      Delete
  6. Ot - I see in the Sunday National the Head of Labour In Inverclyde Council apparently lives in a house in Kilbarchan now owned by a “ labour” Lord and who just happens to have been appointed to oversee a new funding group in the same area without any interview. I am annoyed that I was passed over. I suppose I should donate to the Labour Party first. No mention in the bbc web page although Ally McCoist has an incurable condition affecting his hand it seems.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Some issues re the property sale and re sale with free rented property? Further investigations needed.

      Delete
  7. Bloomin eck ... everybody's angry the day!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They terrify me. They're nuts!

      Delete
  8. If reform had not run in Scotland the SNP would have been reduced to 4 MP's.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Reform will keep running in Scotland. The nutjob right is on a roll, worldwide.

      Delete
    2. And Stu Campbell is lovin' it.

      Delete
    3. Reform is an English party, it has no relevance in Scotland apart from right wing loonies (in that sense you can see why Campbell would support it).

      Delete
    4. ALBA didn’t work so he moves on.

      Delete
  9. genuinely impressed with independence for scotland's indefatigability

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If they were on Downtown Abbey they wouldn't be sitting down to dinner with a marquis. No way, Hosay.

      Delete
    2. It’s easier when you don’t work.

      Delete
    3. 3.00pm. You lazy bastard get out there and work. Rachel Reeves needs your taxes.

      Delete
  10. I think if Flynn had stuck to his clueless demand for 4 job part-time representation the SNP wouldn't lose the 1 seat in a by-election - but they'd lose a lot more, and at Holyrood in 2024. They'd have been wiped.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Meanwhile, with Scotland having beaten Australia 27-13, there's no change in world rankings, but they're nearer Argentina.

    1 South Africa 92.78
    2 Ireland 90.78
    3 New Zealand 90.36 (+0.27)
    4 France 88.51 (+0.43)
    5 Argentina 84.97 (-0.43)
    6 Scotland 83.34 (+0.65)
    7 England 82.31
    8 Australia 81.52 (-0.65)
    9 Fiji 80.07
    10 Italy 78.64 (-0.27)
    11 Wales 74.01
    12 Georgia 73.85

    ReplyDelete
  12. See nothing wrong with dual mandates.

    If you're voted in by the people that's all the matters.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unless your name is Joanna Cherry or Douglas Ross then dual mandates are abhorrent and should be consigned to history.

      Delete
  13. From someone close to the constituency concerned, however popular Stephen apoears to becwuthin the SNP there is no guarantee that he will get the nomination to fight this seat.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But if he doesn't, they would still find a way. Another constituency, or the list, or both.

      Delete
  14. Replies
    1. Yes, they. The leadership faction who want Flynn at Holyrood. Do try to keep up.

      Delete
  15. The WGD numpty Scottish Skier thinks a petition will mean a new UK election.

    The numpty Skier posts this:-

    " 10% of the registered electorate is needed to trigger a recall in a constituency, so 4.82m signatures on this would be the equivalent. No reason why that should not trigger a new UK GE. "

    No reason says the numpty 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣. This is the type of dross that Skier posts on WGD when he is not posting his drivel as Declan on SGP.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And what would that fanciful ruse win us? Oh yeah, another shade of British colonial government that says Scotland can get tae fuck.

      The only business we have in Westminster is slamming the door on our way out.

      Delete
    2. Skier spends a lot of time telling everyone who'll listen that a WM GE is an irrelevance to Scots but now he wants another one!?
      I guess the party he regularly claims to help fund losing 39 MPs still hurts.

      Delete
    3. What do they seriously hope to achieve with another General Election?

      Is the aim to bring the Tories back to power or have Reform in Government?

      Delete
    4. For clarity the petition will not bring about another election. It needs sufficient Labour MPs to vote for it and they ain't about to give up their seat on the gravy train anytime soon.

      I agree with the posts at 2.07am and 5.01am.

      Delete
    5. Anon at 5.01. What party do you support?

      Delete
  16. And your drivel isn’t any better.

    ReplyDelete
  17. The SNP should not be in the business of reducing their tactical scope.

    I realise a defacto referendum is not currently on the cards but those rubbishing it as an idea, and dual mandates fall into that category.. trying to tell me the FM wouldn't stand forward in this case?

    Stewart Mcdonald etc's quoted rubbishing the idea during a time where it may have been fruitless , may tie the hands of a future FM who may want to fruitfully use it as a tactic.

    We simply should not be blocking tactical scope. We are not supposed to be a run of the mill political party..think some have forgot that (or been worn down by 20 years of devolved govt..as important as the day to day also is).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He's essentially advocating to keep us in permanent limbo as it will never be in any futures UK Governments interests to ever allow another referendum under any circumstances and due to the daft Supreme Court action there's nothing we can do to force them into it.

      Delete
    2. You do not appear to understand the point of the Court of Session action or the legal implications of the judgement. The decision itself was never in any doubt.

      Delete
    3. It achieved nothing, if for nothing else the SNP should have just pressed ahead with a referendum and forced the UK Government to challenge it in court.

      The optics alone of the UK Government going to court to deny Scotland's democracy would have greatly assisted the cause. Instead the SNP willingly went to the court themselves to confirm that it's the UK Government who have the control over future referendums.

      Delete
    4. Hi I'm the original poster at 11.39.

      Do you mean me? I understand the legal ruling. I'm suggesting if there is any skin left in independence ever rearing it's head again its almost certainly going to require a defacto expression at the ballot box to apply democratic rather than legal pressure.

      For any person in the SNP to dismiss this for all future SNP leaders, rather than the current situation, is very poor indeed.

      Delete
    5. Anon at 1.01. No. I was referring to Anon at 12.04. Sorry for any confusion. I am I agreement with you.

      Delete
    6. Get a grip you anons - try and identify yourself properly/consistently and address who you are referring to at the start of your post.

      E.g. anon at 12.48pm - what Court of Session ( an Edinburgh court) judgement are you referring to? Do you not mean the court in London called the UK Supreme Court?

      Delete
    7. am sure if a defacto vote of Ukrainians wanting EU membership was called without the Eastern Ukraine taking part, it would all fine and well to Mcdonald MP for Kiev.

      Delete
    8. Funnily enough it’s only idiot you that was confused by a typo. AM PM ring any bells thicko? Cue ah but from Inactive for Scotland.

      Delete
    9. Who is ISF? Is he different from Independence for Scotland? Is he really Yestoindyref2? We have a right to know? Who can tell us? And who is K C? Or Dr Jim! So many questions. So few answers.

      Delete
    10. The silence is deafening. Come on Inactive For Scotland. Spill the beans. How many of you are there?

      Delete
  18. Mc Donald is a devolutionist. He always talks down routes to independence. That's the problem with the SNP too many happy being Wishart style mouth pieces.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He may be an independence supporter but it's wrong headed to bad mouth potential tactics to further pressure on London to agree a new vote. A defacto referendum at an election is a valid way for Scottish people to demonstrate their feelings on it, it's legal and although it doesn't have a binding result, is a legitimate tactic in pressuring an actual referendum to be accepted.

      Saying thing now which can be quoted back to you in 10 years time has already caused a headache.

      Really daft to give the opposition ready quotes. Poor stuff.

      Delete
    2. Even if you accepted the notion Scotland needs to be polling 60% in favour before a vote is pushed for..

      You need to know how you're going to action the "pushing"!

      A defacto vote would have to be part of the war gaming.

      Delete
    3. 60%? No. Simple majority. No argument. Only unionists advocate 60 %.

      Delete
    4. Yeah it's ridiculous can just see them thinking "We've moved the goalposts and these dafties have fallen for it!

      "Will we give them a referendum if they reach 60%?"

      "lol nope, but it's funny that they think we would"

      Delete
    5. 50% +1 is enough. England ignores 62% Scots vote in its no Brexit vote but accepts is English 52%

      Delete
    6. I don't accept the notion...

      I said "even if you did".

      Delete
    7. there should be an annual referendum and if there is not a super majority of 60% of voters, then we revert to the original nations, Scotland and England.

      - like an annual marriage

      Delete
  19. Good to see WGD advocating the confrontational approach that I and some others have been pushing for for several years. Regrettably, SNP do not have the balls for it. And no other party has meaningful enough support to help in a campaign of confrontation. So depressing considering the momentum the Indy movement had even five years ago. If there is no confrontation, there will be no progress towards Independence.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Nice to see Nicola Sturgeon out and about saying that she thought the Yes side had very low chance of success in 2014 and that it was rational that Scots voted to remain as part of the union.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Here we go, Nicola, Nicola ! All her fault. Blame the folk who didn’t vote, those that believed the unionists that Scotland would be thrown out of the EU and the rest.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nicola herself is saying she thought the Yes side wouldn't win...

      When the leaders of the campaign at the time don't believe in our chances of success that's not a good sign.

      Delete
    2. Realistic. Move on.

      Delete
    3. She knew YES wouldn't win because Salmond made sure it wouldn't
      Do you think she stopped talking to him just because he was a sex pest alone?
      Look at the footage every time he came near her to try his usual big sloppy kiss, she physically ducked her face out of the way
      That relationship was over long before Salmond's fake British controlled referendum

      Delete
    4. Defo a yoon troll just wanting a reaction.

      Delete
    5. Dr Jim at 7.56pm - your posts are now so ridiculous Jimbo your brain must be about to explode. Your SNP said on its website the 2014 referendum was run by Sturgeon. So is that why it was in your words a " fake British controlled referendum" ?

      Jimbo with your propensity to violence towards women Sturgeon would be running away from you if she saw you coming near her.

      Delete
  22. Here's something interesting. That GE petition which personally I can't be bothered signing because what's the point, Labour, Tory, the animals looked from one pig at the trough of human despond to another and went "snort".

    https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

    England looks like maybe 4.8% on average apart from London at less than 2%. And Scotland is less than 3%. London and Scotland often seem to be similar - who gives a stuff who's in power at Westminster?

    ReplyDelete
  23. Labour in power means Scotland's prison guards put on their red uniforms.

    Tories in power means Scotland's prison guards put on blue uniforms.

    Reform in power means Scotland's prison guards put on snappy turquoise and white uniforms but expect more violent beatings.

    Scotland is England's colony. The gold standard referendum was a Westminster con aided and abetted by people like Sturgeon/Blackford/Wishart and Kavanagh.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I like you're messages they're funny and they make me laugh

      Delete
    2. Sometimes I giggle but feel a bit guilty. Shouldn’t really laugh at the poor soul. He needs help.

      Delete
    3. 9.12 If anyone needs help it’s you. You fill up this blog with your inane trolling.

      Delete
    4. Awww. Sticking up for your wee pal. Did you met at the job centre? Do you not understand that anon isn’t one person? It appears not.

      Delete
    5. 12.32. You are one seriously ill person. We do not need your hate filled posts on SGP. See a psychiatrist and get a job.

      Delete
    6. Anon@12:32, It really cuts you up to see that some of us, including the site host, aren't in the least bothered by IFS doesn't it? You sound like a very sad, lonely person. Go out in the fresh air and try to find someone to talk to in the real world.😁

      Delete
  24. What age are you really? Sturgeon/Blackford/Wishart and Kavanagh! It is you and folk like you that prevent any progress as we move to 2025.
    C’mon- how do we get independence by next week with you leading!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anon at 5.45pm - what is it with you people. What age are you numpty? Just how do I prevent any progress to independence? Go on - now is your opportunity to be more than a troll. Put forward a reasoned post.

      Delete
    2. Anon at 5.45pm - you don't even have the capability to put your post in the correct location. Numpty.

      Delete
    3. Do you eat a lot of grapefruit?

      Delete
    4. Through the letterbox you mean?

      Delete
    5. I asked the numpty troll to put forward a reasoned post and the above is the best he can do. Speaks for itself.

      Delete
    6. Selby. What is your favourite One Direction hit?

      Delete
    7. "The Lounge of Love"

      Delete
    8. Do you not put your post through the letterbox?

      Delete
  25. Aye numptyheid. Divert away. You have no plan.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He has no plan,
      he has no brain,
      he’s thick as mince,
      an online pain.

      Delete
    2. 6.47pm Do you have a plan anon?

      9.15pm Do you have a plan anon?

      Delete
    3. Anon at 6.41pm - I never said I had a plan. Why do you think I should have a plan what gave you that idea? The combined brains of the SNP who are paid to have a plan do not have one but you expect me to do their job for them.
      I suggest you address your question to John REDACTOR MAN Swinney, First Minister for cover ups.

      Delete
    4. Anon at 9.58. Why should I have a plan? Do you have difficulty reading and understanding posts? It appears so.

      Delete
  26. Ifsv We knowsyou have no plan. You are a disruptor, devoid of ideas yet constantly tell others how they fail. Help them out ! Give them your wisdom! lol ps, I suppose that’s how your party will never be in power anywhere.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Semi literate anon at 11.35pm - you know I have no plan because I told you that. I also told you that it is not my job to have a plan for independence and that you should ask John REDACTOR MAN Swinney First Minister for cover ups as that is supposed to be his job. Just what did you not understand about that. Or have you serious short term memory problems as well as being semi literate. I also do not have any political party - told you that before.

      Delete
    2. Brit Nat numpty?

      Delete
    3. Bath, Lib Dem’s?

      Delete
    4. IFS at 8.57 confirming beyond any doubt that he is nothing more than a sad wee troll, with no interest in promoting Independence. His must be a sad lonely life of unemployment.

      Delete
    5. 12.23. All you confirm is that you are the troll on SGP with a strange obsession about ifs. Get a job you lazy bastard.

      Delete
  27. Just been having a wee look at independence polling on Wikipedia, and tbh wish I hadnae.
    There’s been 33 indy polls so far in 2024, and I was desperately disappointed to discover 26 of they polls put No ahead.
    What a dinae understand is we keep getting telt indy is the settled will. I jist dinae understand it at a.
    Looks tae me like somebody’s tellin porkies.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anon at 9.56. You are coming across as an utter wanker. Grow up. Jings crivens?

      Delete
    2. @12:20pm,
      You come across as a bigger w****r.

      Delete
    3. Anon at 12.31. Whoooosh. Help ma boab. Silly billy boy.

      Delete
  28. Aye you -wi yir pretendy accent

    ReplyDelete
  29. To actually address the topic of James’s post—redundant of me, I know—the answer to why is “the woke left.” Not to be confused with actually being left of centre on substantive economic policy, of course. No, just the kind that preens and tweets and loses elections for all of us.

    Punters have seen right through it. Sound the alarm!

    ReplyDelete
  30. Left isn’t woke. Please don’t conflate the two. Woke is stand-alone, and is a part of the moronic culture war that the greens plus some prominent SNP politicians dragged us into. And at what cost?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Absolutely. But do you know anyone who calls themselves woke and right of centre? It’s just not part of the brand.

      Delete
    2. Woke is weaponised exclusively against us. Not a problem for the right.

      Delete
    3. Woke is a right wing perjorative cliché, which is, primarily, for the benefit of those who consider similar clichés, such as 'politically-correct' or 'virtue signalling' contain too many letters.

      Delete
    4. The term 'woke' was redefined by Donald Trump's political sales team from meaning socially & politically aware (as in awoken) to meaning bug-eyed monsters (as in you have awoken to bug-eyed monsters under the bed). They did a good job: You, and everyone else bought the rewriting of language by American right-wingers from Fox News.

      Delete
  31. There is way too much trolling on SGP. There is one anon troll in particular who does nothing but troll ifs. Whatever his motivation he messes up SGP below the line as we have to wade through reams of personal abuse. Is this anon the unionist KC?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes but surely you can see that IFS is often pretty abusive as well?

      Delete
    2. I can see it, but I can’t blame him. The moron-grade stick he gets from Dr. Jimanon is just begging to be called out. It would take a saint.

      Delete
    3. The site has descended into an IFS-bashing free for all these days. It's hardly worth reading the comments any more they are so juvenile. Reminiscent of a playground bully.

      Delete
    4. IFS - stop posting supporting yourself. Its embarrassing. Anyone going on a blog has to expect a response. Particularly if they post that x, y, z, dr jimamon and skyer are all numpties without fear or favour. Now despite all his posts complaining about the SNP he cannot provide 1 idea as to how to get Independence.

      Delete
    5. Is the troll who trolls ifs the same unionist troll KC who has commented in the past as a fake independence supporter on SGP. Possibly, after all he is a sneaky unionist shit.

      Delete
    6. Anon@2:52, Stop posting in support of yourself!?? Have you looked in a mirror lately?

      Delete
    7. Might help if we could disable Anonymous commenting and force everyone to select a name (and yeah I get the irony).

      Delete
    8. Time for an analysis of the current situation re my troll.

      1. My troll at 2.52pm says about me:- " he cannot provide 1 idea as to how to get independence". My troll has said this quite a few times and I have posted the reply on a number of occasions that I have been promoting a de facto referendum at Holyrood since 2020. Anyone reading SGP since then will know that is true as will our host James Kelly. I have told my troll this counts as an idea for independence on a numbernof occasions. So quite simply my troll has a short term memory problem or is just a plain liar. So troll are you a liar or have memory problems like " I can't recall" Sturgeon? I think he is a liar just like Sturgeon.

      2. So what ideas have my troll ever put forward for independence - none. In fact what are my troll's views on anything - who knows - he never posts any opinions on anything other than trolling me. So is he an independence supporter or the Britnat House Jock KC?

      I did think he was an SNP carrot muncher. Possibly an SNP staffer about to lose his job and that explains his current fixation on jobs and going to the job centre. Perhaps he sees himself at his local job centre in the near future and blames me. Not very rational but most trolls do not do rational. Rational thinking would blame the people who are ruining the SNP not someone commenting on it on an independence blog. But as I say trolls do not do rational thinking.

      Alternatively, could he be the Britnat House Jock KC who has form for impersonating independence supporters. KC could be annoyed at me for calling him a House Jock. More likely, Britnats like him hate the idea of a de facto referendum and as he knows I have been promoting that strongly since 2020. My troll claims he isnae happy about me " complaining about the SNP." In my opinion if you are happy with the SNP under the current leadership you are either a Britnat or a numpty. Sturgeon could have called a de facto referendum for 2021 Holyrood after Johnston refused another of her requests for her fake gold standard referendum but she made fools of all the numpties who believed she would deliver Indyref2 on 19/10/23.
      On balance I would say my troll is a Britnat. He posts nothing supporting independence or criticising Westminster. He is House Jock KC running scared of a de facto referendum. The first step to independence - a majority yes vote. You won't get a yes vote if you don't call the referendum.

      Delete
    9. Wrong once again IFS, not KC who’s been trolling you.

      Delete
    10. Well you would say that KC at 6.11pm - wouldn't you House Jock.

      Delete
    11. I’m of the opinion that KC gets blamed for posts that aren’t his, on a regular basis on here. IFS in particular is guilty of this, and James himself has done it on occasion.
      The posts on this thread that some are attributing to KC clearly aren’t him, in my opinion. They’re not his style at all.
      IFS in particular has made quite an error of judgement here.

      Delete
    12. 7.30pm - is that right KC😂😂😂😂. You are a lot more flexible and devious than you make out.

      Delete
  32. I see you had to think why the leadership might want to avoid a Forbes leadership. If at face value that religious motive were correct, I'd be even more alarmed by the SNP than I've increasingly been over years now. What does 'factionalism' amount to? Forbes seems to be more or less aligned on major policy with the leadership; the answer doesn’t lie there. So returning to the religious motive, and more particularly Forbes’ personal convictions, it would be easy to fall back for an explanation on her moral values, which are not going to be in great demand at the head of that organisation right now.

    Whatever is going on at the top of the SNP, if you consider how tainted by a raft of scandals and weird decisions the leadership is, any candidate standing against their anointed successor is worth supporting. Yet, Forbes? She's bought in to SEZs and Freeports, ignoring the flagrant trampling of Scots’ sovereignty. This is a matter of our sovereign territory and constitutionally there should be a clear popular mandate to agree to leasing vast chunks of our territory away. As if Scots Sovereignty hasn't taken a hard enough beating from the SNP's cack-handed, indeed sinisterly stage-managed approach to the Supreme Court, the British state of course emboldened by their perceived success. The problem that needs repeating is that *our* constitution is dead and binned while an English constitution is imposed on us.

    No leader of an independence party who does not fully understand our escape from the clutches of this stifling and colonising union lies in exposing the rotten and fraudulent constitutional "arrangement" inflicted on us by England is going to lead us to international statehood. That leader is neither Flynn nor Forbes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nicola hates Kate personally, that much is clear, and defines all else.

      Maybe it’s because she’s confident, Well spoken, obviously intelligent, and would make Nicola look very very small indeed if she did take us to Indy. Kate can’t be relied on to fail. That’s got to hurt an ego like hers.

      Delete
    2. Alan, very good post. It's worth remembering that John REDACTOR MAN Swinney FM for cover ups stated that Forbes was not a fit person to be leader due to her religious views during the leadership election. A year later he appoints her as his deputy FM. Presumably she didn't have to leave her church to get the position. A bit of 'keep your enemies close to you' there by Swinney.
      Personally, I don't think Swinney is a fit person to be FM.

      Delete
  33. Complete drivel with viciousness attached. Met both. My view is that they are both intelligent and personable individuals. Still I met Alex S also several times too. Very personable too.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He seems nice.

      Delete
    2. Alex S was not considered a nice man.

      Delete
    3. Alex S was not good considered a nice man by Britnats.

      There you go fixed that for you anon at 10.47pm.

      Delete
  34. Hilarious comment from Cole-Hamilton. He won't support the SNP budget if there is anything in it promoting Scottish independence. Swinney supporting independence😂😂😂. He is more interested in going on pride marches. Never seen him at any independence march.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So, I'm a glove puppet am I? So, sue me!

      Delete
    2. Anon atb7.56pm - no idea what or who you are but your post is gibberish.

      Delete
  35. Comments critical of John Swinney are wrong.

    He has attended multiple independence events.

    He put private wishes to one side in order to serve the party.

    He has done well and is his own man. Widely respected on the ground.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He is said to be a nice man.

      Delete
    2. Hi Ken at 7.13pm.- when and where did Swinney attend an independence march?

      Delete
    3. https://www.snp.org/events/for-a-future-made-in-scotland-marking-10-years-since-the-2014-scottish-independence-referendum/

      Delete
    4. Obsequious StovepipeNovember 27, 2024 at 4:58 AM

      I would be very happy to have John Swinney as my neighbour. He seems to be a man of his word. If I lent him my orbital sander but I needed it back by the weekend I'm quite sure he would return it by then.

      Delete
    5. Don't go lending him money for indyref2 though!!!

      Delete
    6. Stovepipe at 4.58am - " He seems to be a man of his word. " is that right - you seem to have forgotten the promised Indyref2 - 19/10/23. Surprising it just slipped your mind.

      Delete
  36. I think some of the posters who complain about the 2014 failure, Swinney or Surgeon ad-infinitum just cannot move on to consider the future. The majority of the people in Scotland I imagine are more worried about heating their home, getting through Christmas and the rest. There is a disconnect between how we can be better being Independent and the present mess which some see as somehow tolerable.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Anyone heard Nicola Sturgeon's podcast with George Osborne and Ed Balls? She is excellent on it so far--she is more than able to hold her own very well--I'm listening to it now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good podcast showing how Nicola Sturgeon was instrumental in Edinburgh Agreement.

      Delete
    2. Anon at 10.48am but Dr Jim says it was all Salmond's doing and it was all part of his master plan to help the British and sabotage the referendum. So basically Sturgeon is confirming Jimbo is raving mad - must be devastating for a nicophant like Jimbo.

      Of course Sturgeon was instrumental in the EA. She worked with Moore on it and they both co - signed it after Salmond and Cameron. Hardly news to anyone but raving looneys like Dr Jim.

      Delete
  38. You have to laugh at the big dug and his most recent article advocating a confrontational approach to independence. He helps waste at least 7 years by advocating Sturgeon's phoney gold standard referendum approach and now he wants something different. He manages to do this without uttering one word of criticism of Sturgeon or the SNP. Hey he cannae break his own golden rule of his own blog. The trouble for him is that even his doggers btl have had enough and they lay in to the SNP over their inaction on independence breaking his golden rule over and over again. You know the SNP are in deep trouble when the doggers are rebelling. WGD numpty deelsdug says she has had enough and has resigned from the SNP.

    All of this of course disnae stop Dr Jim posting a contradictory comment and Skier posing at best a misrepresentation and a worst a lie.

    Dr Jim says this about the UK Supreme Court :- " .... instructs its own Supreme Court which was set up after the act of union to overrule any challenge to the status quo, that particular court should have no bearing on Scotland whatsoever"
    I agree with Jimbo that the court should have no bearing on Scotland whatsoever but the point Jimbo fails to mention is why did Sturgeon then go this court to get it declared unlawful for Scotland to hold Indyref2. His nicophant brain clearly cannae compute this so he ignores the conflict in his reasoning.

    Skier says this about the SNP accounts:- " SNP accounts were independently audited and signed off every year without fail."

    What Skier fails to mention is the year their regular auditors resigned and the new auditors recorded major qualifications regarding the accounts which painted a very poor picture of record keeping for donations. A perfect example of SNP propagandist Skier hiding the truth.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. SNP sleeper agents will begin planting landmines and assassinating government officials and establishment figures using a strategy of tension

      Delete
    2. The blue hair gives them away though.

      Delete
    3. Dr Jim at 12.40am - even when he jokes Jimbo advocates violence - well I hope he is joking.

      Delete
  39. Most folk don’t care. Old news by those holding old prejudices. Still if you don’t have a plan for independence I suppose distorted history is all you have. Gave a donation to the Sally Army. I won’t call the police.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. " Gave a donation to the Sally Army" aye right you are anon at 12.19am. What is your plan for independence anon?

      Delete
    2. So your plan for independence is to do nothing anon at 12.19am.

      Delete
    3. Not what I said IFS. The time isn’t right after the disastrous GE, that’s all.
      What’s your plan? Do share!

      Delete
    4. 'Now is not the time'@9:50! Since when did Theresa May start posting on SGP 🤔

      Delete
    5. Ifs at 939- replying to wrong anon. My plan already stated. Holyrood -make it it a pro independence vote with over 50% as a mandate since Westminster refuses referendum. Over to you—oh , you don’t have a plan. Ok, sign up to mine.

      Delete
    6. 11.21am " Replying to wrong anon " - is it my fault you people cannae identify yourself correctly but you expect your comments to be taken seriously.
      " Ok sign up to mine " - you joker. I have been promoting that since 2020 on SGP but it ain't a plan it's a starting point/idea. You don't even know the difference between that and a proper plan.

      Delete
  40. Kezia's preparing the way:

    https://i0.wp.com/wingsoverscotland.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/kdcoalition.jpg?w=1000&ssl=1

    Labour + SNP coalition in Holyrood 2026 is absolutely possible. The more MSPs Farage bags, the more likely still.

    ReplyDelete
  41. @12:14,
    Excellent post, well said.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. KC at 12.14 and 12.58 being a House Jock you would say that.

      Delete