What was bizarre about the Tory non-campaign is that in the previous 2 years whenever they wanted to get Jezza into a really tough spot they did it with ease. So many times he ended up having a mini-meltdown under the pressure of some scrutiny, resulting in running away from the cameras or snarling at them.
During the GE, they did nothing until the last 2 days when the terrorist sympathizer stuff came out, but he it was too late to change the narrative and / or have him a tough spot during a debate*.
* Yet another incredibly bizarre decision that Team May said no matter what, no debates.
She is crap, but still manages to beat Corbyn most weeks at PMQs.
--------
I really want to know what Textor / Messina thought was the state of play. Did they see the tightening or were they like ICM and thought May was fine?
Or maybe they aren't as good as they think they are? I'll take Occam's Razor on that one. It isn't the first time they've got it wrong. Although they have also got it right, too,
I don't think that is correct.
Crosby has certainly had hits and misses in terms of campaigns around the world. However with Jim Messina, he didn't work for example for the Goldsmith campaign or Brexit.
Another reason why Theresa May might not be in as much trouble as some assumed is that nearly all Tory MPs got many thousands more votes than they did in 2015, and a heavy proportion increased their majorities, which means they'll be feeling pretty happy with her on a personal level, even though the party lost 13 net seats overall.
I saw something today that said under the craziness of FPTP, May was only a few 100 votes (in the right place) of a clear majority and Jezza only a few 1000.
Not sure about Jezza being a few thousand from a majority, more likely from most seats.
Another reason why Theresa May might not be in as much trouble as some assumed is that nearly all Tory MPs got many thousands more votes than they did in 2015, and a heavy proportion increased their majorities, which means they'll be feeling pretty happy with her on a personal level, even though the party lost 13 net seats overall.
I saw something today that said under the craziness of FPTP, May was only a few 100 votes (in the right place) of a clear majority and Jezza only a few 1000.
Not sure about Jezza being a few thousand from a majority, more likely from most seats.
I think you are right. I was only scanning the articles earlier. It could also be that the article was presuming that SNP would then go into coalition and thus he would be PM.
Another reason why Theresa May might not be in as much trouble as some assumed is that nearly all Tory MPs got many thousands more votes than they did in 2015, and a heavy proportion increased their majorities, which means they'll be feeling pretty happy with her on a personal level, even though the party lost 13 net seats overall.
I'm not sure that is the case - many Tory MPs with Labour would have seen their majority fall, precipitously so in London, like Justine Greening. Places like Milton keynes and Broxtowe saw the majority plummet as well.
That's right, but most Tory seats are pretty safe and those MPs got higher votes than ever before in the majority of cases I think.
The Tories got exactly the same share of the vote in Britain as they did in 1983, 43.5%. But in 1983 they only got more than 60% of the vote in 40 constituencies. I think it was well over 100 this time.
Another reason why Theresa May might not be in as much trouble as some assumed is that nearly all Tory MPs got many thousands more votes than they did in 2015, and a heavy proportion increased their majorities, which means they'll be feeling pretty happy with her on a personal level, even though the party lost 13 net seats overall.
I'm not sure that is the case - many Tory MPs with Labour would have seen their majority fall, precipitously so in London, like Justine Greening. Places like Milton keynes and Broxtowe saw the majority plummet as well.
That's right, but most Tory seats are pretty safe and those MPs got higher votes than ever before in the majority of cases I think.
That is precisely the Tory problem. Piling up votes where not needed.
Another reason why Theresa May might not be in as much trouble as some assumed is that nearly all Tory MPs got many thousands more votes than they did in 2015, and a heavy proportion increased their majorities, which means they'll be feeling pretty happy with her on a personal level, even though the party lost 13 net seats overall.
I'm not sure that is the case - many Tory MPs with Labour would have seen their majority fall, precipitously so in London, like Justine Greening. Places like Milton keynes and Broxtowe saw the majority plummet as well.
That's right, but most Tory seats are pretty safe and those MPs got higher votes than ever before in the majority of cases I think.
That is precisely the Tory problem. Piling up votes where not needed.
Both parties did it about equally, from glancing at the results. I've never seen so many candidates getting over 60% of the vote, whether they were Tory or Labour.
Another reason why Theresa May might not be in as much trouble as some assumed is that nearly all Tory MPs got many thousands more votes than they did in 2015, and a heavy proportion increased their majorities, which means they'll be feeling pretty happy with her on a personal level, even though the party lost 13 net seats overall.
I'm not sure that is the case - many Tory MPs with Labour would have seen their majority fall, precipitously so in London, like Justine Greening. Places like Milton keynes and Broxtowe saw the majority plummet as well.
That's right, but most Tory seats are pretty safe and those MPs got higher votes than ever before in the majority of cases I think.
That is precisely the Tory problem. Piling up votes where not needed.
That was actually both of the parties problems.
Although it's very out of fashion right now, I think the basic electoral logic still holds - A competent labour centrist would have won '17 election with a landslide.
Of course it's all theoretical. If lab stuck to the centre post '15, the referendum either wouldn't have been called, or would have played out differently - we wouldn't have bluntly brexited, May wouldn't have been leader - and wouldn't have called an election she thought she couldn't lose with a barely credible UKIP manifesto.
It's the blues reaction to corbyn which has got the country into this almighty mess and temporarily reshaped electoral politics.
The vacuum in the centre can't hold for long though.
Another reason why Theresa May might not be in as much trouble as some assumed is that nearly all Tory MPs got many thousands more votes than they did in 2015, and a heavy proportion increased their majorities, which means they'll be feeling pretty happy with her on a personal level, even though the party lost 13 net seats overall.
I'm not sure that is the case - many Tory MPs with Labour would have seen their majority fall, precipitously so in London, like Justine Greening. Places like Milton keynes and Broxtowe saw the majority plummet as well.
That's right, but most Tory seats are pretty safe and those MPs got higher votes than ever before in the majority of cases I think.
That is precisely the Tory problem. Piling up votes where not needed.
Both parties did it about equally, from glancing at the results. I've never seen so many candidates getting over 60% of the vote, whether they were Tory or Labour.
Never seen so many candidates get over 40% and lose either.
Another reason why Theresa May might not be in as much trouble as some assumed is that nearly all Tory MPs got many thousands more votes than they did in 2015, and a heavy proportion increased their majorities, which means they'll be feeling pretty happy with her on a personal level, even though the party lost 13 net seats overall.
I'm not sure that is the case - many Tory MPs with Labour would have seen their majority fall, precipitously so in London, like Justine Greening. Places like Milton keynes and Broxtowe saw the majority plummet as well.
That's right, but most Tory seats are pretty safe and those MPs got higher votes than ever before in the majority of cases I think.
That is precisely the Tory problem. Piling up votes where not needed.
Both parties did it about equally, from glancing at the results. I've never seen so many candidates getting over 60% of the vote, whether they were Tory or Labour.
Never seen so many candidates get over 40% and lose either.
In 2015, Wirral West had the highest losing Tory vote share at 44.2% In 2017 24 Tory candidates got more than 44.2% and still lost
Since I live IN Aberdeen and have many relatives who work in the offshore industry I suspect I might know something about the North East of Scotland - where do you live Mr Tyndall or do you take a common male line that a little knowledge just gives you the right to spout your opinions more aggressively.
In fact the SNP performed well in Aberdeen City - winning the local elections throughout handsomely and holding Aberdeen North easily. The claim that the SNP has done nothing for the industry is a silly Tory propaganda line that owes nothing to reality given that the taxation levers are all held by the Treasury and the Scottish Government have been extremely active in their responsibilities of R&D support, training, college places, export grants etc. The local papers have been full of Callum McCaig's call for exploration credits which would have been a sensible taxation/employment measure for the industry if the Treasury who have received £300 billion of revenue over the years could have been persuaded to give anything back.
Finally in the North East the SNP hold all but one of the Scottish Parliamentary seats and are first or second in all of the Westminster seats - hardly evidence of the SNP being hated.
So now then Dick give me a few facts rather than your boorish assumptions.
A very close correlation between Labour strongholds and low home ownership.
Yeah. That the Midlands doesn't show up light blue is psephologically interesting.
I suspect a house price crash would be the thing that would reeeeealy screw the tories.
You can guarantee there will be a house price crash under Corbyn, of course the rest of the economy would crash too
Yes, because for PB Tories, Corbyn has consistently undershot expectations. I am no fan, but you really need to start at least respecting him as a opponent.
I can respect his campaigning skills, that does not change the fact a Corbyn premiership would be a disaster
If you are 100% confident then fine. It is 2 short months since most were equally confident his campaign would be a disaster. I am not a fan, but waiting for Corbyn to implode is getting a little like Godot.
Twitter Alex Deane @ajcdeane 13h13 hours ago 2005: Tories lost 3rd election in row. Howard gained 33 seats. Resigned. 2017: Labour loses 3rd election in row. Corbyn gained 30 seats.
What was bizarre about the Tory non-campaign is that in the previous 2 years whenever they wanted to get Jezza into a really tough spot they did it with ease. So many times he ended up having a mini-meltdown under the pressure of some scrutiny, resulting in running away from the cameras or snarling at them.
During the GE, they did nothing until the last 2 days when the terrorist sympathizer stuff came out, but he it was too late to change the narrative and / or have him a tough spot during a debate*.
* Yet another incredibly bizarre decision that Team May said no matter what, no debates.
She is crap, but still manages to beat Corbyn most weeks at PMQs.
--------
I really want to know what Textor / Messina thought was the state of play. Did they see the tightening or were they like ICM and thought May was fine?
To be fair to Messina, HYUFD reported on a speech he gave to the volunteers manning the phones at CCHQ 24 hours before the GE. IIRC, Messina highlighted the fact that he had never come across so many 'don't knows' before in a GE campaign. Apologies if I have misremembered HYUFD, but I think that was the gist of it. That info combined with David Herdson's last canvass report once TSE's verified it had been David who posted it really got me thinking about the idea that we were looking at some kind of result in the 1992 ball park where the vote really polarised between Labour and the Conservatives outside Scotland.
Regular poster Alastair deserves a shout out because he predicted that they would be writing papers for years about the tactical voting churn in this GE, he was right.
You can guarantee there will be a house price crash under Corbyn...
God, I wish. Unfortunately, it's the exact opposite: we had a house price miniboom in the mid 70's and a full-on house price bubble between 1997 and 2008. Labour governments are associated with high inflation, and house prices *rise* in such circs, not fall. Remember "demand" is not just a function of the number of people, it's also a function of the amount of money in the system: more money, bigger prices (mutatis mutandis)
Apologies if I've missed pertinent questions but the points I can answer are that it's not DEFINITELY the best result the DUP can ever get. If they get a run at FST next time as the unity Unionist it is faintly possible they could win there (though I suspect the only realistic person who can win as a Unionist is still Tom) and they are likely to take North Down. If this Parliament passes its first birthday I expect Sylvia to read the writing on the wall and step down unbeaten. But, struggling as I am to see any real SDLP revival I think Sinn Fein would be heavy favourites in South Belfast and North Belfast is also dicey.
Which is why I think this is as good as it gets for the DUP and they certainly won't risk an election they can avoid.
People in GB might look at the numbers and think one seat here or there no particularly big deal. But every seat is a big deal when there are only 18 in total and everyone is constantly checking the numbers to see if and when the Nationalists have the majority. Losing Belfast North and South to Sinn Fein while picking up North Down from Sylvia would be a net loss of just one but would be viewed as a total catastrophe.
The other question I saw is what do SF MPs do. Not a lot. They pick up loads of expenses to run offices but their travel claims tend to show they don't go over very often and then just to have coffee in Portcullis House and attend fundraisers.
We were tidying up cases today and wondered how many people we were working for had voted SF and wouldn't get the same full service.
Anyone with a spreadsheet know if anyone else got Tom's vote and lost?
Another reason why Theresa May might not be in as much trouble as some assumed is that nearly all Tory MPs got many thousands more votes than they did in 2015, and a heavy proportion increased their majorities, which means they'll be feeling pretty happy with her on a personal level, even though the party lost 13 net seats overall.
I'm not sure that is the case - many Tory MPs with Labour would have seen their majority fall, precipitously so in London, like Justine Greening. Places like Milton keynes and Broxtowe saw the majority plummet as well.
That's right, but most Tory seats are pretty safe and those MPs got higher votes than ever before in the majority of cases I think.
The Tories got exactly the same share of the vote in Britain as they did in 1983, 43.5%. But in 1983 they only got more than 60% of the vote in 40 constituencies. I think it was well over 100 this time.
A big shout out to Easteross when it came to my Scottish constituency betting, he told me to back a 1983 style result up here.
Another reason why Theresa May might not be in as much trouble as some assumed is that nearly all Tory MPs got many thousands more votes than they did in 2015, and a heavy proportion increased their majorities, which means they'll be feeling pretty happy with her on a personal level, even though the party lost 13 net seats overall.
I'm not sure that is the case - many Tory MPs with Labour would have seen their majority fall, precipitously so in London, like Justine Greening. Places like Milton keynes and Broxtowe saw the majority plummet as well.
That's right, but most Tory seats are pretty safe and those MPs got higher votes than ever before in the majority of cases I think.
That is precisely the Tory problem. Piling up votes where not needed.
I can think of twelve seats where the Conservatives overturned massive majorities and still piled up the votes where it mattered...
So there we have it. We were never all in this together, were we?
A final kickback for their client vote before they get kicked out.
Generation f*cked get a final f*cking.
The austerity project was a restructuring of the economy, funneling wealth from the young and the poor to the old and the wealthy, with inheritance tax breaks so the wealthy can pass it on to their own kids.
From non-property owners to property owners.
No deficit got eliminated. No debt paid off.
The financial crisis became an excuse to transfer wealth between generations - and from the have-nots to the haves.
My reasons to not vote labour have all disappeared.
I may well campaign for them at the next election.
Another reason why Theresa May might not be in as much trouble as some assumed is that nearly all Tory MPs got many thousands more votes than they did in 2015, and a heavy proportion increased their majorities, which means they'll be feeling pretty happy with her on a personal level, even though the party lost 13 net seats overall.
I'm not sure that is the case - many Tory MPs with Labour would have seen their majority fall, precipitously so in London, like Justine Greening. Places like Milton keynes and Broxtowe saw the majority plummet as well.
That's right, but most Tory seats are pretty safe and those MPs got higher votes than ever before in the majority of cases I think.
That is precisely the Tory problem. Piling up votes where not needed.
Labour piled on 3,517,149 more votes than needed in the 262 seats they won, or 13,424 wasted votes per seat.
The Tories piled on 3,962,969 more votes than needed in the 317 seats they won, or 12,501 wasted votes per seat.
Since I live IN Aberdeen and have many relatives who work in the offshore industry I suspect I might know something about the North East of Scotland - where do you live Mr Tyndall or do you take a common male line that a little knowledge just gives you the right to spout your opinions more aggressively.
In fact the SNP performed well in Aberdeen City - winning the local elections throughout handsomely and holding Aberdeen North easily. The claim that the SNP has done nothing for the industry is a silly Tory propaganda line that owes nothing to reality given that the taxation levers are all held by the Treasury and the Scottish Government have been extremely active in their responsibilities of R&D support, training, college places, export grants etc. The local papers have been full of Callum McCaig's call for exploration credits which would have been a sensible taxation/employment measure for the industry if the Treasury who have received £300 billion of revenue over the years could have been persuaded to give anything back.
Finally in the North East the SNP hold all but one of the Scottish Parliamentary seats and are first or second in all of the Westminster seats - hardly evidence of the SNP being hated.
So now then Dick give me a few facts rather than your boorish assumptions.
Oh, the SNP rebutt bot has moved. The SNP don't hold power in Aberdeen or Aberdeenshire Council, and as of last Thursday they don't even hold any Westminster seats other than North Aberdeen in the North East of Scotland.
The reason the SNP don't control Aberdeen Council is because their group in Aberdeen council is regarded as toxic to the other parties up here. The increasingly small local Libdem group even lost a councillor who jumped ship to the Indy team rather than contenance her party even talking to the SNP group. If Kezia Dugdale has any sense or ever wants to win a seat back in this region, she will apologise and reinstate her former Labour councillors on Aberdeen Council asap. They unlike her understand their local voters and put them before their party.
Now you live in Aberdeen, and with many of your relatives working in the 'offshore' industry, it's a very brave claim to suggest the SNP have done anything useful for the Oil&Gas industry or North East economy in recent years. IIRC, Richard Tyndall works in the Oil&Gas industry and does pop up to Aberdeen as a result of this. And one more observation since I have lived in Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire for going on three decades, and therefore might know something about the North East of Scotland. The SNP really should not have taken this heartland region for granted, or the fact that the Press & Journal and the Courier employ some great local journalists who often put their more well known colleagues in bigger Scottish newspapers to shame by robustly doing their job and holding the SNP Government to account.
Another reason why Theresa May might not be in as much trouble as some assumed is that nearly all Tory MPs got many thousands more votes than they did in 2015, and a heavy proportion increased their majorities, which means they'll be feeling pretty happy with her on a personal level, even though the party lost 13 net seats overall.
I'm not sure that is the case - many Tory MPs with Labour would have seen their majority fall, precipitously so in London, like Justine Greening. Places like Milton keynes and Broxtowe saw the majority plummet as well.
That's right, but most Tory seats are pretty safe and those MPs got higher votes than ever before in the majority of cases I think.
That is precisely the Tory problem. Piling up votes where not needed.
Labour piled on 3,517,149 more votes than needed in the 262 seats they won, or 13,424 wasted votes per seat.
The Tories piled on 3,962,969 more votes than needed in the 317 seats they won, or 12,501 wasted votes per seat.
So there we have it. We were never all in this together, were we?
A final kickback for their client vote before they get kicked out.
Generation f*cked get a final f*cking.
The austerity project was a restructuring of the economy, funneling wealth from the young and the poor to the old and the wealthy, with inheritance tax breaks so the wealthy can pass it on to their own kids.
From non-property owners to property owners.
No deficit got eliminated. No debt paid off.
The financial crisis became an excuse to transfer wealth between generations - and from the have-nots to the haves.
My reasons to not vote labour have all disappeared.
I may well campaign for them at the next election.
What are you on about? You do realise that a lot of older voters suffered because of how low interest rates inpacted on their savings over the last decade, and that many pensioners who worked hard and saved over their working life to provide for their old age via a basic private pension now pay income tax on that income? And as for the deficit, its a hell of lot lower than it was back when the Labour party left Office because the Conservatives didn't want the younger generation to be paying it off for decades through higher taxation! If you want to have a rant, just go look at the Labour manifestos over the last decade that would have seen the younger generation in hoc up to their necks for decades before they even bought a loaf of bread.
Barry Gardiner should be wheeled out as much as often by Labour to do interviews, because he is a brilliant arguer, knows his stuff and definetly one of the more likeable Labour MP's. Can they not give him a bigger brief than Trade?
If May wants to win those voters back, she'd be better off avoiding a further toxification of the Conservative Party brand by running a minority government
Here's the rub though - much as I deeply agree with you and TSE about the long-term danger to the Conservative "brand" with key voting demographics if they get involved with the DUP, it's hard to give an active, realistic recommendation as to what they should do instead. May has landed herself and her party in a terrible Catch-22 situation.
Not coming out and saying that they were their natural allies and friends and partners in a Downing Street speech when other options hadn't been explored might have been an idea.
Agreed. I mean, just because you're caught between a rock and a hard place, nobody's suggesting you have to immediately start smashing your head against the rock just for good measure. (It was bizarre political theatrics - like Lucian Fletcher I half-wondered if she had got the UUP and DUP mixed up, but that's so unlikely it must be that someone senior had decided the fawning made good politics.)
I honestly wouldn't put it past her not to know. Private soundings of LD's and SNP could have happened. A holding statement? We will talk to all interested Parties in this time of National importance? That would have meant acknowledging the scale of her fuck up. She has been either badly advised or is incompetent. My money is on both.
I think the SNP and LDs would have been absolute non-starters.
Getting the LDs to abstain on the QS would not have been a non starter and would have been sufficient.
Comments
Crosby has certainly had hits and misses in terms of campaigns around the world. However with Jim Messina, he didn't work for example for the Goldsmith campaign or Brexit.
The Tories got exactly the same share of the vote in Britain as they did in 1983, 43.5%. But in 1983 they only got more than 60% of the vote in 40 constituencies. I think it was well over 100 this time.
Although it's very out of fashion right now, I think the basic electoral logic still holds - A competent labour centrist would have won '17 election with a landslide.
Of course it's all theoretical. If lab stuck to the centre post '15, the referendum either wouldn't have been called, or would have played out differently - we wouldn't have bluntly brexited, May wouldn't have been leader - and wouldn't have called an election she thought she couldn't lose with a barely credible UKIP manifesto.
It's the blues reaction to corbyn which has got the country into this almighty mess and temporarily reshaped electoral politics.
The vacuum in the centre can't hold for long though.
In 2015, Wirral West had the highest losing Tory vote share at 44.2%
In 2017 24 Tory candidates got more than 44.2% and still lost
Since I live IN Aberdeen and have many relatives who work in the offshore industry I suspect I might know something about the North East of Scotland - where do you live Mr Tyndall or do you take a common male line that a little knowledge just gives you the right to spout your opinions more aggressively.
In fact the SNP performed well in Aberdeen City - winning the local elections throughout handsomely and holding Aberdeen North easily. The claim that the SNP has done nothing for the industry is a silly Tory propaganda line that owes nothing to reality given that the taxation levers are all held by the Treasury and the Scottish Government have been extremely active in their responsibilities of R&D support, training, college places, export grants etc. The local papers have been full of Callum McCaig's call for exploration credits which would have been a sensible taxation/employment measure for the industry if the Treasury who have received £300 billion of revenue over the years could have been persuaded to give anything back.
Finally in the North East the SNP hold all but one of the Scottish Parliamentary seats and are first or second in all of the Westminster seats - hardly evidence of the SNP being hated.
So now then Dick give me a few facts rather than your boorish assumptions.
Alex Deane @ajcdeane 13h13 hours ago
2005: Tories lost 3rd election in row. Howard gained 33 seats. Resigned.
2017: Labour loses 3rd election in row. Corbyn gained 30 seats.
Regular poster Alastair deserves a shout out because he predicted that they would be writing papers for years about the tactical voting churn in this GE, he was right.
Which is why I think this is as good as it gets for the DUP and they certainly won't risk an election they can avoid.
People in GB might look at the numbers and think one seat here or there no particularly big deal. But every seat is a big deal when there are only 18 in total and everyone is constantly checking the numbers to see if and when the Nationalists have the majority. Losing Belfast North and South to Sinn Fein while picking up North Down from Sylvia would be a net loss of just one but would be viewed as a total catastrophe.
The other question I saw is what do SF MPs do. Not a lot. They pick up loads of expenses to run offices but their travel claims tend to show they don't go over very often and then just to have coffee in Portcullis House and attend fundraisers.
We were tidying up cases today and wondered how many people we were working for had voted SF and wouldn't get the same full service.
Anyone with a spreadsheet know if anyone else got Tom's vote and lost?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-40255847
The end of austerity: for conservative voters.
So there we have it. We were never all in this together, were we?
A final kickback for their client vote before they get kicked out.
Generation f*cked get a final f*cking.
The austerity project was a restructuring of the economy, funneling wealth from the young and the poor to the old and the wealthy, with inheritance tax breaks so the wealthy can pass it on to their own kids.
From non-property owners to property owners.
No deficit got eliminated. No debt paid off.
The financial crisis became an excuse to transfer wealth between generations - and from the have-nots to the haves.
My reasons to not vote labour have all disappeared.
I may well campaign for them at the next election.
Labour piled on 3,517,149 more votes than needed in the 262 seats they won, or 13,424 wasted votes per seat.
The Tories piled on 3,962,969 more votes than needed in the 317 seats they won, or 12,501 wasted votes per seat.
The reason the SNP don't control Aberdeen Council is because their group in Aberdeen council is regarded as toxic to the other parties up here. The increasingly small local Libdem group even lost a councillor who jumped ship to the Indy team rather than contenance her party even talking to the SNP group. If Kezia Dugdale has any sense or ever wants to win a seat back in this region, she will apologise and reinstate her former Labour councillors on Aberdeen Council asap. They unlike her understand their local voters and put them before their party.
Now you live in Aberdeen, and with many of your relatives working in the 'offshore' industry, it's a very brave claim to suggest the SNP have done anything useful for the Oil&Gas industry or North East economy in recent years. IIRC, Richard Tyndall works in the Oil&Gas industry and does pop up to Aberdeen as a result of this. And one more observation since I have lived in Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire for going on three decades, and therefore might know something about the North East of Scotland. The SNP really should not have taken this heartland region for granted, or the fact that the Press & Journal and the Courier employ some great local journalists who often put their more well known colleagues in bigger Scottish newspapers to shame by robustly doing their job and holding the SNP Government to account.
http://i.imgur.com/EiPnQaZ.png
95% of Con seats have a majority of < 23,931 votes, 85% for Labour
99% of Con seats have a majority of < 25,763 votes, 87%(!) for Labour