We are safe. Thanks to everyone on PB for support and updates. Some people trying to get on beach. Think I will give it a miss
Brilliant John. Best to you and your family. Not sure how old your daughter is but make sure she realises this is not the way things are overseas. I would hate to think that such an unfortunate event would colour her view of what is still wonderful world.
Felix Labourlist polls are rubbish. They had Corbyn ahead in their last poll for leader, yet yougov and ORB have Burnham ahead. Labourlist polls do not even scientifically weigh their samples to reflect Labour Party Members as conservativehome do for Tory members, they simply record the preferences of Labourlist users
Mind you even if you do take it with a huge pinch of salt the fact Stella Creasey is close behind is not too far for her and in any case no floating voter votes for the Deputy Leader, see John Prescott
kle4 Bear in mind though that the BQ won most seats in Quebec at every Canadian General Election from 1993 to 2011, so the SNP should not be too concerned just yet! Of course in that time Quebec also had a second referendum which largely settled the independence question, even if the No margin was barely more than 1%
Mr. HYUFD, but that precedent suggests Labour should be.
Not just because it'd make it hard for them to regain Scottish seats, but so long as that's the case the fear of an SNP-Lab coalition will play in England.
Mr. HYUFD, but that precedent suggests Labour should be.
Not just because it'd make it hard for them to regain Scottish seats, but so long as that's the case the fear of an SNP-Lab coalition will play in England.
The dilemma facing Scottish Tories for Holyrood 2016 is, do they vote tactically for SLAB and potentially help start a SLAB revival or do they leave SLAB to their own devices?
BJB As the poll itself says 'As always, this is the result of a self-selective survey rather than a weighted poll of supporters.' So it is not a scientific poll of Labour members, only Labourlist members. Take with a large pinch of salt, though even so it does suggest Creasey could win on preferences, Watson would be Prescott2 with a few more brains
Now that bigjohnowls is safe, we should give Don Brind's piece the attention that it deserves.
It's definitely the case that oppositions are at the mercy of events and usually governments lose elections rather than oppositions win them. But a canny opposition can maximise its chances of success and look to sow dissent in the ranks of the government. It will not do that by squabbling with other opposition parties and Labour's best approach to the SNP is by and large to treat them as a sideshow to the serious business of forming a progressive coalition of voters. The Conservatives look easier targets than the SNP and Labour don't need that many seat wins in 2020 in order to lead a minority government or progressive coalition. The most important thing is that they should hold their nerve. So far they haven't.
Don't agree with Don Brind that Labour must recover in Scotland to win power at Westminster. That is only true of an overall Labour majority. Beyond that the key figure is the number of Tory MPs - of which I suspect 310 or so will be needed to retain office in 2020.
MD The fact the BQ lost 10 seats at the 1997 election and a further 6 seats at the 2000 election while the Liberals were able to form a majority government on both occasions without the BQ's support should offer some encouragement to Labour though
Mr. HYUFD, but that precedent suggests Labour should be.
Not just because it'd make it hard for them to regain Scottish seats, but so long as that's the case the fear of an SNP-Lab coalition will play in England.
The dilemma facing Scottish Tories for Holyrood 2016 is, do they vote tactically for SLAB and potentially help start a SLAB revival or do they leave SLAB to their own devices?
Leave them to their devices: they've earned their fate.
The Scottish Tories' long-term goal should be to return to being the largest party. That's perhaps not as far off as may appear at the moment; the path is visible, if tough. Put simply, when the SNP's shine comes off - and all governments lose it sooner or later - then it's likely that it's the right-leaning voters who'll peel off first. Combined with the collapse in the Lib Dem vote, that offers an opportunity not seen in decades. It may also require the Scottish Tories to go their own way from the UK party to avoid cross-contamination of what is too easily portrayed as an English party, given the split in MPs returned over the last 20 years.
Even if that's too much to ask, aiming for second would be a very good first step. What is clear is that helping Labour challenge the SNP can only (1) cement the left in power, and (2) secure the Tories second-division politics in Scotland at best.
calum General Election 2015 was about more powers for Scotland and whether Ed Miliband or David Cameron would be PM, Holyrood Election 2016 will be about giving the SNP a mandate for indyref 2, on that basis Scottish Tories will be more likely to tactically vote Labour on the constituency level in the Central Belt
calum General Election 2015 was about more powers for Scotland and whether Ed Miliband or David Cameron would be PM, Holyrood Election 2016 will be about giving the SNP a mandate for indyref 2, on that basis Scottish Tories will be more likely to tactically vote Labour on the constituency level in the Central Belt
It would be the first time the UK ever saw systemic Tory tactical voting for another party.
Don't agree with Don Brind that Labour must recover in Scotland to win power at Westminster. That is only true of an overall Labour majority. Beyond that the key figure is the number of Tory MPs - of which I suspect 310 or so will be needed to retain office in 2020.
I disagree with the simplistic assumption that Labour can count on the SNP's MPs to be their puppets. That may have been true this time (though not definitely) when the SNP were seeking to displace Labour. That is not necessarily true in five years time.
The NI Parties by and large can side with either side, seeking to get whatever is the best deal with NI. That could become the future of the SNP too. Pledging not to work with the Tories was necessary last month because they needed to overcome Labour's incumbency, with SLAB dead and buried that's no longer necessarily the case. In five years time the SNP could theoretically work with whichever party offers what they view as the best deal for Scotland.
calum General Election 2015 was about more powers for Scotland and whether Ed Miliband or David Cameron would be PM, Holyrood Election 2016 will be about giving the SNP a mandate for indyref 2, on that basis Scottish Tories will be more likely to tactically vote Labour on the constituency level in the Central Belt
It would be the first time the UK ever saw systemic Tory tactical voting for another party.
We saw some Tory tactical voting this time for Lib Dems because they were coalition allies. It probably saved Nick Clegg himself. We all saw though how far the limits of that went too.
Tories wouldn't even save their partners by voting tactically for them. They most definitely will not vote tactically for Labour, that is simply not happening.
davidherdson At Westminster that may be the right strategy where the aim of Tories is to elect a Tory Government, however when they got less than 15% even in 2015 and Labour nearer 25% it remains a tall order. The Tories also tend to be confined to the Borders in terms of prospects for actually winning FPTP seats.
At Holyrood though the aim of many Tories will be to stop the SNP getting another absolute majority above all and to avoid indyref2 in the near future so tactical voting is more likely there. In Quebec, for example, while the BQ won most seats for 18 years from 1993-2011 at the Canadian general election, in the Quebec provincial elections the fortunes of the nationalists were more mixed, while the Quebec nationalists won the 1994 and 1998 elections, the Liberals won the 2003 elections (ironically led by Jean Charest who used to lead the Progressive Conservatives as unionists largely united to stop the nationalists). In 2007 a centre right AD party came second to the Liberals though in 2008 the nationalists overtook them to reclaim second place and won back the provincial government in 2012 before the Liberals returned to power again in 2014
EPG/PT They did in Edinburgh South at the general election. Tories also tactically voted LD in the 2011 Oldham by-election as well as for Clegg as PT states. At Westminster it may not happen in any large numbers, at Holyrood it will certainly occur, and indeed the Tories should be encouraging Labour voters to back them in the Borders and the LDs Labour voters to back them in the Highlands to stop the SNP, in return for their voters voting Labour in the Central Belt where they are the main alternative to the SNP
Evening. Very sad to hear about the attacks, happy to hear that a fellow poster is safe.
Iron law 1 of UK politics: The cleavage is, and has always been, the Tories versus all-comers. Anyone who tried to migrate from the latter group to the former has been eviscerated, most recently the hapless Lib Dems. This split breaks down when nationalism takes over from politics as usual, as in Ireland and Scotland. That's why there will not be tactical Conservative voting for Scottish Labour - because there never has been tactical Conservative voting, apart from, as has been noted below, unsystemically in a handful of seats (why Greg Mulholland in particular, say?). It is also why it would be foolish for Labour to expend effort on the SNP. Go for the vulnerable majority government on 37 per cent, rather than the party that will probably support you anyway. Like the Tories v Lib Dems, if you're doing really well, you can always go for them during the campaign if you want to stretch for a majority, but no-one's believing in that for Labour this time (rightly or wrongly?).
Now that bigjohnowls is safe, we should give Don Brind's piece the attention that it deserves.
It's definitely the case that oppositions are at the mercy of events and usually governments lose elections rather than oppositions win them. But a canny opposition can maximise its chances of success and look to sow dissent in the ranks of the government. It will not do that by squabbling with other opposition parties and Labour's best approach to the SNP is by and large to treat them as a sideshow to the serious business of forming a progressive coalition of voters. The Conservatives look easier targets than the SNP and Labour don't need that many seat wins in 2020 in order to lead a minority government or progressive coalition. The most important thing is that they should hold their nerve. So far they haven't.
Yes, I agree with that. Tbh, I think as different as the opponents may seem, the way back for Labour in Scotland is similar to the way back against the Tories in England: get a good and likeable leader, look like they're organised and on top of stuff, and get a coherent message and reason for why a Labour government is needed.
Unpopular opinion but I do still think Labour need not be screwed completely in Scotland in the long run: it was only a year ago that they almost tied with the SNP in the European elections.
EPG Wrong because in Scotland it is now the SNP versus all comers, Holyrood elections are now almost entirely about the future of the union and Scottish Tories are unionists above all else
If Labour wins back 10-20 seats from the SNP at Westminster that also makes their chances of a majority easier and if they have a clear poll lead across the UK as a whole there is no reason that would be impossible
EPG So what, all the Yes voters are voting SNP anyway now, it does not have to be a direct appeal, simply a few targeted leaflets saying 'Only Labour can beat the SNP here' etc and the Tories could do the same in the Borders, the LDs in the Highlands
davidherdson At Westminster that may be the right strategy where the aim of Tories is to elect a Tory Government, however when they got less than 15% even in 2015 and Labour nearer 25% it remains a tall order. The Tories also tend to be confined to the Borders in terms of prospects for actually winning FPTP seats.
At Holyrood though the aim of many Tories will be to stop the SNP getting another absolute majority above all and to avoid indyref2 in the near future so tactical voting is more likely there. In Quebec, for example, while the BQ won most seats for 18 years from 1993-2011 at the Canadian general election, in the Quebec provincial elections the fortunes of the nationalists were more mixed, while the Quebec nationalists won the 1994 and 1998 elections, the Liberals won the 2003 elections (ironically led by Jean Charest who used to lead the Progressive Conservatives as unionists largely united to stop the nationalists). In 2007 a centre right AD party came second to the Liberals though in 2008 the nationalists overtook them to reclaim second place and won back the provincial government in 2012 before the Liberals returned to power again in 2014
Linking back to this morning's thread, the thing you can count on is there are very few shy Scottish Tories, they are to a man (+lady) Tory and proud. I think they will want to see SLAB slaughtered in May 2016, this will be in part due to them taking revenge for 1997 and as David H pointed out the weaker SLAB gets, the better chance of a Tory revival.
Calum Nope, Scottish Tories hate the SNP above all else and unlike Westminster, where there was a serious risk of Ed Miliband PM, at Holyrood the question is almost entirely will Sturgeon get an absolute majority to push through indyref 2 or will she fall just short. I believe Scottish Tories will do anything to achieve the latter, they put Queen and Country above all else, even if it means some in the Central Belt holding their nose and voting Labour on the constituency vote (they can still vote Tory on the List)
Ken Livingstone's comments in the video were in some ways more interesting, not least because he combined the 'we weren't left-wing enough' strand of thinking with Labour's perennial problem - 'our sums didn't add up'. Many of the voices taking part in the current leadership debate seem to regard the two positions as mutually exclusive and deride Liz Kendall as a Tory because she says Labour needs to balance the books. Ken advocates, dare I say it, a third way.
Remember even in 2015 the combined Tory+Lab+LD voteshare was 47% in Scotland, add in UKIP and it was almost 49%, the SNP won 50%
I admire your tenacity on sticking to your grand Unionist alliance rising up to defeat the SNP in 2016. The problem is to achieve this somebody must be able to herd a cat, a donkey, a mouse and a live kipper into the voting booth and somehow agree to vote for the same person. I'll let everybody make up their about which animal represents which party.
Calum Nope, Scottish Tories hate the SNP above all else and unlike Westminster, where there was a serious risk of Ed Miliband PM, at Holyrood the question is almost entirely will Sturgeon get an absolute majority to push through indyref 2 or will she fall just short. I believe Scottish Tories will do anything to achieve the latter, they put Queen and Country above all else, even if it means some in the Central Belt holding their nose and voting Labour on the constituency vote (they can still vote Tory on the List)
Just because you say it doesn't make it true. Scottish Tories have had a lifetime of hating Labour and of being hated by Labour. That doesn't disappear overnight.
WG Burnham has also said Labour need to balance the books, though through taxes as well as as spending cuts Cooper and Corbyn have not (albeit Corbyn says it can all be done through higher taxes)
Calum The beauty of Holyrood is you have 2 votes, so you can hold your nose and vote for the party in your constituency best placed to beat the SNP on the first vote and then for your real preferred party on the second List vote. I agree the SNP will almost certainly be largest party, but there is no guarantee they will win another outright majority (don't forget the SNP only have a majority of 1 at the moment). Once the Smith Commission Plans giving more powers to Scotland are passed into law by next May, forcing the SNP to do more to defend its record, and Labour has no leaders at Westminster and Holyrood things may also look a little different
Remember even in 2015 the combined Tory+Lab+LD voteshare was 47% in Scotland, add in UKIP and it was almost 49%, the SNP won 50%
I admire your tenacity on sticking to your grand Unionist alliance rising up to defeat the SNP in 2016. The problem is to achieve this somebody must be able to herd a cat, a donkey, a mouse and a live kipper into the voting booth and somehow agree to vote for the same person. I'll let everybody make up their about which animal represents which party.
Anyway the SNP are now polling 60%.
Tories are the cat, everyone's been trying to skin them. Labour are the donkey with the red rosette. Timid Lib Dems are the mouse. Kipper kind of obvious.
Calum The beauty of Holyrood is you have 2 votes, so you can hold your nose and vote for the party in your constituency best placed to beat the SNP on the first vote and then for your real preferred party on the second List vote. I agree the SNP will almost certainly be largest party, but there is no guarantee they will win another outright majority (don't forget the SNP only have a majority of 1 at the moment). Once the Smith Commission Plans giving more powers to Scotland are passed into law by next May, forcing the SNP to do more to defend its record, and Labour has no leaders at Westminster and Holyrood things may also look a little different
If the Tories were willing to vote tactically they'd have been voting anything but Labour already to stop their arch-nemesis. They haven't. Labour and the Tories are not friends and it will take something dramatic that hasn't happened yet to change that.
PT But Scottish Tories hate the SNP even more and Scottish Labour are now a shadow of the force they once were, it is the SNP who are the threat in Scotland now
PT The something dramatic is the threat of indyref2 if the SNP get another majority at Holyrood which will concentrate Scottish Tory minds. Some Tories have voted tactically anyway on occasion in the likes of Edinburgh S in 2015 and in the Oldham by-election in 2011 and in 2015 for Clegg
Calum Nope, Scottish Tories hate the SNP above all else and unlike Westminster, where there was a serious risk of Ed Miliband PM, at Holyrood the question is almost entirely will Sturgeon get an absolute majority to push through indyref 2 or will she fall just short. I believe Scottish Tories will do anything to achieve the latter, they put Queen and Country above all else, even if it means some in the Central Belt holding their nose and voting Labour on the constituency vote (they can still vote Tory on the List)
I think you need to spend sometime in Scotland and talk to the various parties. A small band of Cyberunionists try and keep the tactical voting candle alive, if you visit their web sites they number a few thousand and most of them seem to be off their rockers and spend all day worshiping a lady called Historywoman on twitter and slagging off WOS. Their message is not a very compelling one and will not attract much support from where I sit in Stirling.
davidherdson At Westminster that may be the right strategy where the aim of Tories is to elect a Tory Government, however when they got less than 15% even in 2015 and Labour nearer 25% it remains a tall order. The Tories also tend to be confined to the Borders in terms of prospects for actually winning FPTP seats.
At Holyrood though the aim of many Tories will be to stop the SNP getting another absolute majority above all and to avoid indyref2 in the near future so tactical voting is more likely there. In Quebec, for example, while the BQ won most seats for 18 years from 1993-2011 at the Canadian general election, in the Quebec provincial elections the fortunes of the nationalists were more mixed, while the Quebec nationalists won the 1994 and 1998 elections, the Liberals won the 2003 elections (ironically led by Jean Charest who used to lead the Progressive Conservatives as unionists largely united to stop the nationalists). In 2007 a centre right AD party came second to the Liberals though in 2008 the nationalists overtook them to reclaim second place and won back the provincial government in 2012 before the Liberals returned to power again in 2014
If I had a vote for Holyrood, I might just vote Labour against SNP in a constituency if (1) there was an extremely marked difference in quality in candidate in the top two and (2) the Tories were miles back. The AMS system means the list vote is usually the important one anyway. However I wouldn't do it on ideological grounds. If the SNP win an outright majority and claim a mandate for IndyRef2 then that's a discussion to be had. Holyrood doesn't have the power to authorise it by itself and after claiming 2014 was a once-in-a-generation / -lifetime event, there'd be some persuading to do simply to have another vote. But assuming that was the clear will of the people, then so be it. Better to take it on again if that is what's demanded than to hide behind the fetid carcass of Scottish Labour.
calum Holyrood is a completely different prospect to Westminster, there you are not deciding whether Labour or the Tories form the Government but whether or not the SNP get a majority or not and have a mandate to potentially push through indyref2 and threaten the Union all over again. I have also been to Scotland twice this year already
DH In the Central Belt Labour are clearly the only alternative to the SNP. It is not 'hiding behind the carcass of Scottish Labour' anyway but voting for whichever party at the constituency level is best placed to beat the SNP, in the Borders that would be the Tories actually, not Scottish Labour, in the Highlands the LDs. As long as you vote for another unionist party on the List that means the SNP is likely to lose the list seat too. There is no overwhelming majority in Scotland voting for the SNP, they actually won exactly half the votes in 2015, but if unionists do not start voting tactically at Holyrood the SNP will claim a far greater mandate for independence than they deserve!
Don't agree with Don Brind that Labour must recover in Scotland to win power at Westminster. That is only true of an overall Labour majority. Beyond that the key figure is the number of Tory MPs - of which I suspect 310 or so will be needed to retain office in 2020.
I disagree with the simplistic assumption that Labour can count on the SNP's MPs to be their puppets. That may have been true this time (though not definitely) when the SNP were seeking to displace Labour. That is not necessarily true in five years time.
The NI Parties by and large can side with either side, seeking to get whatever is the best deal with NI. That could become the future of the SNP too. Pledging not to work with the Tories was necessary last month because they needed to overcome Labour's incumbency, with SLAB dead and buried that's no longer necessarily the case. In five years time the SNP could theoretically work with whichever party offers what they view as the best deal for Scotland.
Supporting the Tories will remain toxic in Scotland - and the SNP know it. Nothing would be more certain to restore Labour's fotunes there.
Remember even in 2015 the combined Tory+Lab+LD voteshare was 47% in Scotland, add in UKIP and it was almost 49%, the SNP won 50%
I admire your tenacity on sticking to your grand Unionist alliance rising up to defeat the SNP in 2016. The problem is to achieve this somebody must be able to herd a cat, a donkey, a mouse and a live kipper into the voting booth and somehow agree to vote for the same person. I'll let everybody make up their about which animal represents which party.
Anyway the SNP are now polling 60%.
Tories are the cat, everyone's been trying to skin them. Labour are the donkey with the red rosette. Timid Lib Dems are the mouse. Kipper kind of obvious.
4 out of 4 or is it 4 out of 3, that's my crap Scottish education kicking in. I think the Unicorn will win comfortably. If I were UKIP I would be sending Mr Coburn to the Artic Circle with no phone access for the duration of the campaign or at least turn off his very entertaining Twitter account.
I think Cameron will refuse to assent to a second Referendum on the very reasonable basis that 'the people have already spoken'. I don't see another vote on Independence much this side of 2030.
Question for the Lib Dems. I think Farron has shown better judgement about which policies you should adopt to survive, i.e. not being Nick Clegg, but he comes across weak on broadcast media and there must be some reason why so many senior figures disfavour him. Any insights on Lamb's qualifications in these last two topics?
I think Cameron will refuse to assent to a second Referendum on the very reasonable basis that 'the people have already spoken'. I don't see another vote on Independence much this side of 2030.
Which would give the SNP even more of an axe to grind, if Westminster were seen to be "denying the will of the Scottish people".
Justin124 If the SNP get a big majority next year it would be difficult to refuse, especially if there is an Out vote in 2016 and Scotland votes In, depriving the SNP of their majority would make the decision far easier
Justin124 If the SNP get a big majority next year it would be difficult to refuse, especially if there is an Out vote in 2016 and Scotland votes In, depriving the SNP of their majority would make the decision far easier
But yes, this is going to be an interesting dimension in next year's Holyrood election. If the SNP do put another referendum in the manifesto, they risk pissing off some of the softer SNP supporters who like Nicola Sturgeon, think the SNP government are good and competent, and like the idea of them standing up for Scotland against Westminster, but who don't want endless referendums.
On the other hand, if they DON'T put a referendum in the manifesto, they risk depressing the enthusiasm of some of their activists and maybe pushing some of their voters away to the Greens or whatever party Tommy Sheridan is running these days.
If today hasn't been ghastly and bloody enough, two kids have been stabbed in the street less than a mile from where I live. I feel a sense of despair. But I'm so glad BJO and his family are safe.
Danny565 Indeed, until we see what is in the SNP's manifesto next year take Holyrood polls with a slight pinch of salt, remember too by next year legislation will have passed giving Scotland more powers
If today hasn't been ghastly and bloody enough, two kids have been stabbed in the street less than a mile from where I live. I feel a sense of despair. But I'm so glad BJO and his family are safe.
I echo those sentiments re BJO.
That said, Sousse must have cleaned its act up. I went there in about '78 and the word **** hole just about summed the place up. We hired a car and took a drive towards the desert, and no one would sell us anything to drink.. nice people . I got ill on day 1 and could only manage boiled eggs and watermelon after that. I lost TWO STONE in a fortnight. I doubt/know I will never return there.
Question for the Lib Dems. I think Farron has shown better judgement about which policies you should adopt to survive, i.e. not being Nick Clegg, but he comes across weak on broadcast media and there must be some reason why so many senior figures disfavour him. Any insights on Lamb's qualifications in these last two topics?
I don't know if you ask from a "friendly" or hostile perspective but as a member of the LD electorate, I'll offer what thoughts I can.
Your view on Tim Farron is your view - it's easy to say someone whose politics you don't support and whose Party you wish to denigrate comes over as "weak" if they say things you don't agree with. I often think Cameron is poor but I'm not a Conservative and don't support a lot of what he says.
The Farron I've seen is a tub-thumper and that's fine for friendly audiences but he will need to up his game when facing hosile questionning and I'm sure he can do that. He will, I believe, say some distinctive things which will be derided by some if not many on here but he's not trying to preach to the unconvertible - he's trying to get back those of a naturally liberal view who deserted the party in may, whether they voted Conservative, Labour, Green or whatever.
There are a few number of senior people who back Tim and it's a bit loose to say senior figures "disfavour him" in all honesty. He does have some big guns on his side though I concede more probably back Norman.
Norman is a careful studious and authoritative speaker especially on his pet area of mental health. He's a much less passionate speaker than Tim but builds a strong argument. In a set-piece interview, he might be the better option but that's not what the Party needs to do and where it needs to do it and Norman isn't, for me, the leader to get us noticed again.
I do think he will poll well and I hope he will have a key place in Tim's team possily in the area of policy development but the days of "shadowing" every MP or department are over - it's going to require a different approach.
Justin124 If the SNP get a big majority next year it would be difficult to refuse, especially if there is an Out vote in 2016 and Scotland votes In, depriving the SNP of their majority would make the decision far easier
I disagree here. Whilst I am not one to support Cameron, on this issue he could reasonably decline another Referendum on the basis that Scotland spoke with a clear voice in September 2014 on a turnout of 85%. The decision was said by Salmond at the time to be one for a generation. Holyrood elections have typically seen turnout of circa 50% and given that people do not vote in such elections on the basis of a single issue it would be unreasonable that they should override or negate last year's decision.
PT The something dramatic is the threat of indyref2 if the SNP get another majority at Holyrood which will concentrate Scottish Tory minds. Some Tories have voted tactically anyway on occasion in the likes of Edinburgh S in 2015 and in the Oldham by-election in 2011 and in 2015 for Clegg
Tories categorically did not vote tactically in Edinburgh South. Their vote held up within 700 votes of last time, not significantly different from the rest of the seats nearby, nearby Edinburgh West saw their vote drop 10%. They voted tactically against Labour in aid of their partner Clegg - why you think that's evidence of backing Labour is beyond me.
DH In the Central Belt Labour are clearly the only alternative to the SNP. It is not 'hiding behind the carcass of Scottish Labour' anyway but voting for whichever party at the constituency level is best placed to beat the SNP, in the Borders that would be the Tories actually, not Scottish Labour, in the Highlands the LDs. As long as you vote for another unionist party on the List that means the SNP is likely to lose the list seat too. There is no overwhelming majority in Scotland voting for the SNP, they actually won exactly half the votes in 2015, but if unionists do not start voting tactically at Holyrood the SNP will claim a far greater mandate for independence than they deserve!
Given the quality of many Scottish Labour MPs (never mind MSPs), I would find it almost impossible to vote for that side, and hang the consequences.
There is actually a very large risk in unionist vote swapping, which is that it divides the country on nationalist/unionist lines and smothers out all others. The SNP can only gain from that as other parties would lose their identity if they simply become stop-the-nationalists. Look what has already happened to Labour (and look who the beneficiaries were).
I think Cameron will refuse to assent to a second Referendum on the very reasonable basis that 'the people have already spoken'. I don't see another vote on Independence much this side of 2030.
I'm on the side that sees another one very soon as inevitable. Yes, the people did speak on a high turnout, and it might well be reasonable that that would be for a generation, but if a party can win an election promising to run another one, that's reasonable too, if aggravating from a unionist perspective. The only question then becomes if Cameron assents to it, or whether the SNP would bluff a unilateral declaration or not, or do a poll which, while not legal, presses the matter yet further.
Sure, none of that might change the legalities or settle the matter, but either way it's a shambles.
I think Cameron will refuse to assent to a second Referendum on the very reasonable basis that 'the people have already spoken'. I don't see another vote on Independence much this side of 2030.
Which would give the SNP even more of an axe to grind, if Westminster were seen to be "denying the will of the Scottish people".
Scotland has had its referendum. Voting SNP now in any election is no mandate for another referendum. Voting in an election in Scotland is about giving a mandate for the government in Scotland to govern - within the devolution settlement and if needs be to agree further devolution.
Justin124 If the SNP get a big majority next year it would be difficult to refuse, especially if there is an Out vote in 2016 and Scotland votes In, depriving the SNP of their majority would make the decision far easier
You are suggesting then that Scotland would vote to join the Schengen area
Justin124 If the SNP get a big majority next year it would be difficult to refuse, especially if there is an Out vote in 2016 and Scotland votes In, depriving the SNP of their majority would make the decision far easier
But yes, this is going to be an interesting dimension in next year's Holyrood election. If the SNP do put another referendum in the manifesto, they risk pissing off some of the softer SNP supporters who like Nicola Sturgeon, think the SNP government are good and competent, and like the idea of them standing up for Scotland against Westminster, but who don't want endless referendums.
On the other hand, if they DON'T put a referendum in the manifesto, they risk depressing the enthusiasm of some of their activists and maybe pushing some of their voters away to the Greens or whatever party Tommy Sheridan is running these days.
I think Sturgeon will deal with this by stating there will only be another Indyref if there's a material event like rUK voting to leave the EU and Scotland voting to stay in.
I think the main problem the MSM and the mainstream parties need to be doing is reigning in the Cyberunionist who are carpet bombing social media with the likes of the tweet below. I am sure the SNP will be building up dossiers of this stuff and then calling on them to take action. I fear the Daily Mail have fallen into Nicola's bear trap. This sort of tweet is only driving the SNP surge ever higher, as the MSM go all 3 monkeys on this.
Justin124 If the SNP get a big majority next year it would be difficult to refuse, especially if there is an Out vote in 2016 and Scotland votes In, depriving the SNP of their majority would make the decision far easier
I disagree here. Whilst I am not one to support Cameron, on this issue he could reasonably decline another Referendum on the basis that Scotland spoke with a clear voice in September 2014 on a turnout of 85%. The decision was said by Salmond at the time to be one for a generation. Holyrood elections have typically seen turnout of circa 50% and given that people do not vote in such elections on the basis of a single issue it would be unreasonable that they should override or negate last year's decision.
Absolutely. The SNP need a casus belli to be able to say that events have changed since 2014 in order to justify a second referendum. It took 15 years between the two Quebec referendums and required the falling apart of the accord in 1990 to give the justification to ultimately trigger the second one. 2016 is too soon to have just cause.
Justin124 If the SNP get a big majority next year it would be difficult to refuse, especially if there is an Out vote in 2016 and Scotland votes In, depriving the SNP of their majority would make the decision far easier
But yes, this is going to be an interesting dimension in next year's Holyrood election. If the SNP do put another referendum in the manifesto, they risk pissing off some of the softer SNP supporters who like Nicola Sturgeon, think the SNP government are good and competent, and like the idea of them standing up for Scotland against Westminster, but who don't want endless referendums.
On the other hand, if they DON'T put a referendum in the manifesto, they risk depressing the enthusiasm of some of their activists and maybe pushing some of their voters away to the Greens or whatever party Tommy Sheridan is running these days.
I think Sturgeon will deal with this by stating there will only be another Indyref if there's a material event like rUK voting to leave the EU and Scotland voting to stay in.
I think the main problem the MSM and the mainstream parties need to be doing is reigning in the Cyberunionist who are carpet bombing social media with the likes of the tweet below. I am sure the SNP will be building up dossiers of this stuff and then calling on them to take action. I fear the Daily Mail have fallen into Nicola's bear trap. This sort of tweet is only driving the SNP surge ever higher, as the MSM go all 3 monkeys on this.
Question for the Lib Dems. I think Farron has shown better judgement about which policies you should adopt to survive, i.e. not being Nick Clegg, but he comes across weak on broadcast media and there must be some reason why so many senior figures disfavour him. Any insights on Lamb's qualifications in these last two topics?
I don't know if you ask from a "friendly" or hostile perspective but as a member of the LD electorate, I'll offer what thoughts I can.
Your view on Tim Farron is your view - it's easy to say someone whose politics you don't support and whose Party you wish to denigrate comes over as "weak" if they say things you don't agree with. I often think Cameron is poor but I'm not a Conservative and don't support a lot of what he says.
The Farron I've seen is a tub-thumper and that's fine for friendly audiences but he will need to up his game when facing hosile questionning and I'm sure he can do that. He will, I believe, say some distinctive things which will be derided by some if not many on here but he's not trying to preach to the unconvertible - he's trying to get back those of a naturally liberal view who deserted the party in may, whether they voted Conservative, Labour, Green or whatever.
There are a few number of senior people who back Tim and it's a bit loose to say senior figures "disfavour him" in all honesty. He does have some big guns on his side though I concede more probably back Norman.
Norman is a careful studious and authoritative speaker especially on his pet area of mental health. He's a much less passionate speaker than Tim but builds a strong argument. In a set-piece interview, he might be the better option but that's not what the Party needs to do and where it needs to do it and Norman isn't, for me, the leader to get us noticed again.
I do think he will poll well and I hope he will have a key place in Tim's team possily in the area of policy development but the days of "shadowing" every MP or department are over - it's going to require a different approach.
Friendly but the contrary presumption is forgivable on PB.com. I just don't know much about either candidate and I think Farron would be better overall, but having seen him once or twice, I was not very inspired. Actually, I didn't think his interview was Andrew Neil was the disaster that PB thought it was.
We are safe. Thanks to everyone on PB for support and updates. Some people trying to get on beach. Think I will give it a miss
That's just really is very good news BJO. Just catching up on the threads and all your posts and you did precisely the right thing. Well done I am glad you and family are all safe but saddened others perhaps are not.
On the other hand.....How many more feckin times does this have to happen though before our so called leaders say enough is enough?
From the looks PB.com can also get a well done for the information and tips by all.....
DH In the Central Belt Labour are clearly the only alternative to the SNP. It is not 'hiding behind the carcass of Scottish Labour' anyway but voting for whichever party at the constituency level is best placed to beat the SNP, in the Borders that would be the Tories actually, not Scottish Labour, in the Highlands the LDs. As long as you vote for another unionist party on the List that means the SNP is likely to lose the list seat too. There is no overwhelming majority in Scotland voting for the SNP, they actually won exactly half the votes in 2015, but if unionists do not start voting tactically at Holyrood the SNP will claim a far greater mandate for independence than they deserve!
Given the quality of many Scottish Labour MPs (never mind MSPs), I would find it almost impossible to vote for that side, and hang the consequences.
There is actually a very large risk in unionist vote swapping, which is that it divides the country on nationalist/unionist lines and smothers out all others. The SNP can only gain from that as other parties would lose their identity if they simply become stop-the-nationalists. Look what has already happened to Labour (and look who the beneficiaries were).
I think the Scottish Tories will be hoping that SLAB get reduced to a 15% core vote level, which could then give them more hope in 2020.
If I were a SNP strategist, I would be giving serious consideration to rebranding the party before 2020, with the obvious new name being the Scottish Democratic Party, which would punch this sort of bubble:
Justin124 If the SNP get a big majority next year it would be difficult to refuse, especially if there is an Out vote in 2016 and Scotland votes In, depriving the SNP of their majority would make the decision far easier
Absolutely not! If the UK votes Out but Scotland votes In then that would be the perfect justification I just wrote about for a new referendum. There is zero chance that Scotland will leave the EU having voted In without a second referendum regardless of whether the SNP holds a majority or not. Any government would have to allow it as England pulling Scotland out against its will would guarantee an overwhelming majority next time for the SNP and an overwhelming Yes vote for Independence.
DH In the Central Belt Labour are clearly the only alternative to the SNP. It is not 'hiding behind the carcass of Scottish Labour' anyway but voting for whichever party at the constituency level is best placed to beat the SNP, in the Borders that would be the Tories actually, not Scottish Labour, in the Highlands the LDs. As long as you vote for another unionist party on the List that means the SNP is likely to lose the list seat too. There is no overwhelming majority in Scotland voting for the SNP, they actually won exactly half the votes in 2015, but if unionists do not start voting tactically at Holyrood the SNP will claim a far greater mandate for independence than they deserve!
Given the quality of many Scottish Labour MPs (never mind MSPs), I would find it almost impossible to vote for that side, and hang the consequences.
There is actually a very large risk in unionist vote swapping, which is that it divides the country on nationalist/unionist lines and smothers out all others. The SNP can only gain from that as other parties would lose their identity if they simply become stop-the-nationalists. Look what has already happened to Labour (and look who the beneficiaries were).
I think the Scottish Tories will be hoping that SLAB get reduced to a 15% core vote level, which could then give them more hope in 2020.
If I were a SNP strategist, I would be giving serious consideration to rebranding the party before 2020, with the obvious new name being the Scottish Democratic Party, which would punch this sort of bubble:
I do think he will poll well and I hope he will have a key place in Tim's team possily in the area of policy development but the days of "shadowing" every MP or department are over - it's going to require a different approach.
Surely with only 8 MPs (and Clegg likely to take no major role to avoid overshadowing his successor) then any of the other 6 MPs besides the leader who want a major role will get one. Its not like there's a lot of alternatives.
If I were a SNP strategist, I would be giving serious consideration to rebranding the party before 2020, with the obvious new name being the Scottish Democratic Party, which would punch this sort of bubble:
Justin124 If the SNP get a big majority next year it would be difficult to refuse, especially if there is an Out vote in 2016 and Scotland votes In, depriving the SNP of their majority would make the decision far easier
But yes, this is going to be an interesting dimension in next year's Holyrood election. If the SNP do put another referendum in the manifesto, they risk pissing off some of the softer SNP supporters who like Nicola Sturgeon, think the SNP government are good and competent, and like the idea of them standing up for Scotland against Westminster, but who don't want endless referendums.
On the other hand, if they DON'T put a referendum in the manifesto, they risk depressing the enthusiasm of some of their activists and maybe pushing some of their voters away to the Greens or whatever party Tommy Sheridan is running these days.
I think Sturgeon will deal with this by stating there will only be another Indyref if there's a material event like rUK voting to leave the EU and Scotland voting to stay in.
I think the main problem the MSM and the mainstream parties need to be doing is reigning in the Cyberunionist who are carpet bombing social media with the likes of the tweet below. I am sure the SNP will be building up dossiers of this stuff and then calling on them to take action. I fear the Daily Mail have fallen into Nicola's bear trap. This sort of tweet is only driving the SNP surge ever higher, as the MSM go all 3 monkeys on this.
Indeed, as the MSM were pretty much universally behind Murphy and SLAB the irony of this sort of stuff would be great, sadly these guys seem to be serious. Another example below - even funnier this guy is also a BOO:
Question for the Lib Dems. I think Farron has shown better judgement about which policies you should adopt to survive, i.e. not being Nick Clegg, but he comes across weak on broadcast media and there must be some reason why so many senior figures disfavour him. Any insights on Lamb's qualifications in these last two topics?
There are a few number of senior people who back Tim and it's a bit loose to say senior figures "disfavour him" in all honesty. He does have some big guns on his side though I concede more probably back Norman.
Up to a point, EPG and Stodge....... There are lists available of who is backing which (on Mark Pack´s blog) and in terms of big hitters (former Parliamentarians), they are running fairly level. Most Lib Dems I know would be happy with either - as I would - but this week we are going to have to decide between them. We are very fortunate.
Thanks @Callum I've been looking for someone new to follow on Twitter - but 1 r/t & 1 favourite on those tweets ought to not to be a threat to those sensitive souls of the SNP.
Friendly but the contrary presumption is forgivable on PB.com. I just don't know much about either candidate and I think Farron would be better overall, but having seen him once or twice, I was not very inspired. Actually, I didn't think his interview was Andrew Neil was the disaster that PB thought it was.
I went to the London Hustings last week and franklt Tim Farron was much better than Norman Lamb though, rather like PClipp, I would be happy with either as leader.
The Andrew Neil interview wasn't too bad at all - to be honest, all Neil kept going on was about how Farron voted in some Division in 2006 as if that wa sof paramount importance to how he would be as leader.
It was the equivalent of asking Cameron now if he supported the ID card policy in 2004 or asking Tony Blair if he endorsed the 1983 Labour Manifesto.
The concept that the world might have moved on and people, even politicians, are entitled to change their views just doesn't seem to exist for some and that's curious.
If today hasn't been ghastly and bloody enough, two kids have been stabbed in the street less than a mile from where I live. I feel a sense of despair. But I'm so glad BJO and his family are safe.
A thoroughly depressing day but agree, so pleased BJO and his family safe and well. Get back here as soon as possible mate so we can start sparring again.
If I were a SNP strategist, I would be giving serious consideration to rebranding the party before 2020, with the obvious new name being the Scottish Democratic Party, which would punch this sort of bubble:
SDP? No that acronym doesn't work.
Scottish National Socialists is an apt description. SNS?
Friendly but the contrary presumption is forgivable on PB.com. I just don't know much about either candidate and I think Farron would be better overall, but having seen him once or twice, I was not very inspired. Actually, I didn't think his interview was Andrew Neil was the disaster that PB thought it was.
...
The concept that the world might have moved on and people, even politicians, are entitled to change their views just doesn't seem to exist for some and that's curious.
I agree. Views change and the acceptance of reality should be recognised. I think they should give reasons and not be seen as opportunists, but your point is well made.
According to some on twitter Greece is calling a referendum on July 5th
Calling as in announcing or actually holding the vote? Seems a weird delay to announce it then, but far too soon to hold it than which surely would have had no debate time.
Well, it'll be a miracle if you get to July 9th without some reference to the Punic Wars or the Greek city-states or some other classical conflict.
I don't quite see what this is going to achieve - as far as I know, every poll has shown the Greeks strongly in favour of the Euro but as we've seen ourselves opinion can move sharply under the right circumstances.
What would be the point of a Greek referendum on retaining the Euro? That they want it was, I had thought, firmly established, it was just a question of whether they could bring themselves to do what was necessary to retain it.
Well, it'll be a miracle if you get to July 9th without some reference to the Punic Wars or the Greek city-states or some other classical conflict.
I don't quite see what this is going to achieve - as far as I know, every poll has shown the Greeks strongly in favour of the Euro but as we've seen ourselves opinion can move sharply under the right circumstances.
You're getting the headline Stuck in the middle with EU
What would be the point of a Greek referendum on retaining the Euro? That they want it was, I had thought, firmly established, it was just a question of whether they could bring themselves to do what was necessary to retain it.
If a deal is made to retain it that goes against the election pledges then it can be a choice of keep austerity and the euro, or end the bailouts and leave.
Comments
Glad to have you safe. Slightly surreal thread as a result.
I like 'Cameron Calamity', I'm a sucker for alliteration.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FZIpN7B1lU
Most tense thread since the General Election.
Mind you even if you do take it with a huge pinch of salt the fact Stella Creasey is close behind is not too far for her and in any case no floating voter votes for the Deputy Leader, see John Prescott
Not just because it'd make it hard for them to regain Scottish seats, but so long as that's the case the fear of an SNP-Lab coalition will play in England.
Mrs Balls + Pigface Watson = second Tory majority.
All over now thankfully. WiFi a problem as I can imagine please let everyone know and thank them for their support and updates
It's definitely the case that oppositions are at the mercy of events and usually governments lose elections rather than oppositions win them. But a canny opposition can maximise its chances of success and look to sow dissent in the ranks of the government. It will not do that by squabbling with other opposition parties and Labour's best approach to the SNP is by and large to treat them as a sideshow to the serious business of forming a progressive coalition of voters. The Conservatives look easier targets than the SNP and Labour don't need that many seat wins in 2020 in order to lead a minority government or progressive coalition. The most important thing is that they should hold their nerve. So far they haven't.
The Scottish Tories' long-term goal should be to return to being the largest party. That's perhaps not as far off as may appear at the moment; the path is visible, if tough. Put simply, when the SNP's shine comes off - and all governments lose it sooner or later - then it's likely that it's the right-leaning voters who'll peel off first. Combined with the collapse in the Lib Dem vote, that offers an opportunity not seen in decades. It may also require the Scottish Tories to go their own way from the UK party to avoid cross-contamination of what is too easily portrayed as an English party, given the split in MPs returned over the last 20 years.
Even if that's too much to ask, aiming for second would be a very good first step. What is clear is that helping Labour challenge the SNP can only (1) cement the left in power, and (2) secure the Tories second-division politics in Scotland at best.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jun/26/david-cameron-eu-campaign-risky-impact-uk-exit
Yesterday we had the SNP joining forces with the Daily Mail to deal with extreme Cybernats.
Back in April we had the LibDems leaking to the Daily Telegraph.
UKIP and Labour leaking like sieves to any journalist who comes with in 10 yards of one of their spin doctors.
The NI Parties by and large can side with either side, seeking to get whatever is the best deal with NI. That could become the future of the SNP too. Pledging not to work with the Tories was necessary last month because they needed to overcome Labour's incumbency, with SLAB dead and buried that's no longer necessarily the case. In five years time the SNP could theoretically work with whichever party offers what they view as the best deal for Scotland.
Tories wouldn't even save their partners by voting tactically for them. They most definitely will not vote tactically for Labour, that is simply not happening.
At Holyrood though the aim of many Tories will be to stop the SNP getting another absolute majority above all and to avoid indyref2 in the near future so tactical voting is more likely there. In Quebec, for example, while the BQ won most seats for 18 years from 1993-2011 at the Canadian general election, in the Quebec provincial elections the fortunes of the nationalists were more mixed, while the Quebec nationalists won the 1994 and 1998 elections, the Liberals won the 2003 elections (ironically led by Jean Charest who used to lead the Progressive Conservatives as unionists largely united to stop the nationalists). In 2007 a centre right AD party came second to the Liberals though in 2008 the nationalists overtook them to reclaim second place and won back the provincial government in 2012 before the Liberals returned to power again in 2014
Iron law 1 of UK politics: The cleavage is, and has always been, the Tories versus all-comers. Anyone who tried to migrate from the latter group to the former has been eviscerated, most recently the hapless Lib Dems. This split breaks down when nationalism takes over from politics as usual, as in Ireland and Scotland. That's why there will not be tactical Conservative voting for Scottish Labour - because there never has been tactical Conservative voting, apart from, as has been noted below, unsystemically in a handful of seats (why Greg Mulholland in particular, say?). It is also why it would be foolish for Labour to expend effort on the SNP. Go for the vulnerable majority government on 37 per cent, rather than the party that will probably support you anyway. Like the Tories v Lib Dems, if you're doing really well, you can always go for them during the campaign if you want to stretch for a majority, but no-one's believing in that for Labour this time (rightly or wrongly?).
Unpopular opinion but I do still think Labour need not be screwed completely in Scotland in the long run: it was only a year ago that they almost tied with the SNP in the European elections.
If Labour wins back 10-20 seats from the SNP at Westminster that also makes their chances of a majority easier and if they have a clear poll lead across the UK as a whole there is no reason that would be impossible
Anyway the SNP are now polling 60%.
Labour are the donkey with the red rosette.
Timid Lib Dems are the mouse.
Kipper kind of obvious.
On the other hand, if they DON'T put a referendum in the manifesto, they risk depressing the enthusiasm of some of their activists and maybe pushing some of their voters away to the Greens or whatever party Tommy Sheridan is running these days.
That said, Sousse must have cleaned its act up. I went there in about '78 and the word **** hole just about summed the place up. We hired a car and took a drive towards the desert, and no one would sell us anything to drink.. nice people . I got ill on day 1 and could only manage boiled eggs and watermelon after that. I lost TWO STONE in a fortnight.
I doubt/know I will never return there.
Your view on Tim Farron is your view - it's easy to say someone whose politics you don't support and whose Party you wish to denigrate comes over as "weak" if they say things you don't agree with. I often think Cameron is poor but I'm not a Conservative and don't support a lot of what he says.
The Farron I've seen is a tub-thumper and that's fine for friendly audiences but he will need to up his game when facing hosile questionning and I'm sure he can do that. He will, I believe, say some distinctive things which will be derided by some if not many on here but he's not trying to preach to the unconvertible - he's trying to get back those of a naturally liberal view who deserted the party in may, whether they voted Conservative, Labour, Green or whatever.
There are a few number of senior people who back Tim and it's a bit loose to say senior figures "disfavour him" in all honesty. He does have some big guns on his side though I concede more probably back Norman.
Norman is a careful studious and authoritative speaker especially on his pet area of mental health. He's a much less passionate speaker than Tim but builds a strong argument. In a set-piece interview, he might be the better option but that's not what the Party needs to do and where it needs to do it and Norman isn't, for me, the leader to get us noticed again.
I do think he will poll well and I hope he will have a key place in Tim's team possily in the area of policy development but the days of "shadowing" every MP or department are over - it's going to require a different approach.
There is actually a very large risk in unionist vote swapping, which is that it divides the country on nationalist/unionist lines and smothers out all others. The SNP can only gain from that as other parties would lose their identity if they simply become stop-the-nationalists. Look what has already happened to Labour (and look who the beneficiaries were).
Sure, none of that might change the legalities or settle the matter, but either way it's a shambles.
I think the main problem the MSM and the mainstream parties need to be doing is reigning in the Cyberunionist who are carpet bombing social media with the likes of the tweet below. I am sure the SNP will be building up dossiers of this stuff and then calling on them to take action. I fear the Daily Mail have fallen into Nicola's bear trap. This sort of tweet is only driving the SNP surge ever higher, as the MSM go all 3 monkeys on this.
https://twitter.com/MagicEyeRevo/status/609059119606190080
On the other hand.....How many more feckin times does this have to happen though before our so called leaders say enough is enough?
From the looks PB.com can also get a well done for the information and tips by all.....
If I were a SNP strategist, I would be giving serious consideration to rebranding the party before 2020, with the obvious new name being the Scottish Democratic Party, which would punch this sort of bubble:
https://twitter.com/MagicEyeRevo/status/609059119606190080
https://twitter.com/MagicEyeRevo/status/610891675645313025
The Andrew Neil interview wasn't too bad at all - to be honest, all Neil kept going on was about how Farron voted in some Division in 2006 as if that wa sof paramount importance to how he would be as leader.
It was the equivalent of asking Cameron now if he supported the ID card policy in 2004 or asking Tony Blair if he endorsed the 1983 Labour Manifesto.
The concept that the world might have moved on and people, even politicians, are entitled to change their views just doesn't seem to exist for some and that's curious.
"Are you Nigel in disguise"
I don't quite see what this is going to achieve - as far as I know, every poll has shown the Greeks strongly in favour of the Euro but as we've seen ourselves opinion can move sharply under the right circumstances.
How about "Drachma, he's making Ayes at me" or is that too clever ?