I wonder how many votes both would lose if it came out as a formal alliance before the election? Witth the SNP, BXP and Mr Gallowa's lot salivating for any lost votes.
I think the only realstic option conceivably is an Aberdeen style after-election alliance - but (a) that assumes that the Greens and LDs and Trots (if any) would play ball, if needed, and (b) what happens at the next election thereafter?
The other option would be a Tory minority administration, and that assumes they have more MSPs than the SNP or at least can stop the SNP from being installed. Which latter would require Labour cooperation, or Green'LD/Trot - the klatter inherently unlikely.
As you say, bye bye SLAB given most of its pols are pro-EU and anti-Trident.
Of course, the Tories are happy for other parties to sacrifice themselves for the Union in Scotland, as 2014 showed very clearly.
There is more chance of me being the next Pope than the Tories leading Holyrood , with or without the pygmies to support them.
A majority, no, but would even a minority administration be workable without Labour setting it up and consistently voting with the Tories? Else it'd be like the Edinburgh trams week in week out with government defeats regularly.
Scottish Labour voters are starting to vote tactically for the Tories to beat the SNP as last week's local by election in Clackmannanshire showed, if Labour are going to regain Glasgow and central belt seats from the SNP they in turn will need Tory tactical votes
Do you happen to know whether the leaving councillor got the first place in the original slate at the previous election, or whether s/he was lower down (in which case we are not comparing like with like)? It's a crucial piece of data for any Scottish local gmt election which cannot be meaningfully discussed until this is established.
Do my eyes deceive me or does that imply that the Unionist vote is down 3.8% pts and the Indy vote up 3.8% pts? Pleasingly symmetrical.
Irrelevant as most Holyrood seats are constituencies elected under FPTP not preferential voting, so as long as the lead Unionist party's vote is up it does not matter if the combined Unionist total is down in terms of beating the SNP (though obviously the other Unionist parties would also gain seats on the PR list).
So that is why Labour voters last time voting Tory as their first preference this time in that by election could be so crucial if it becomes a trend for Holyrood 2021
I though the polling showed that Labour voters break more for the SNP than the Tories as second choice.
Scottish Labour voters are starting to vote tactically for the Tories to beat the SNP as last week's local by election in Clackmannanshire showed, if Labour are going to regain Glasgow and central belt seats from the SNP they in turn will need Tory tactical votes
Do you happen to know whether the leaving councillor got the first place in the original slate at the previous election, or whether s/he was lower down (in which case we are not comparing like with like)? It's a crucial piece of data for any Scottish local gmt election which cannot be meaningfully discussed until this is established.
Do my eyes deceive me or does that imply that the Unionist vote is down 3.8% pts and the Indy vote up 3.8% pts? Pleasingly symmetrical.
Irrelevant as most Holyrood seats are constituencies elected under FPTP not preferential voting, so as long as the lead Unionist party's vote is up it does not matter if the combined Unionist total is down in terms of beating the SNP (though obviously the other Unionist parties would also gain seats on the PR list).
So that is why Labour voters last time voting Tory as their first preference this time in that by election could be so crucial if it becomes a trend for Holyrood 2021
Speaking personally, I find an SKS led Labour Party a lot more attractive for the purposes of tactical voting than a Corbyn one would ever have been. It won't matter in May because then I am in Angus which is a straight SNP/Tory fight but for the next Westminster election where I am in Dundee West I will be giving it serious consideration, provided the polls indicate that Labour is in with some sort of a shout.
Hmm, interesting. Yet Mr Leonard? And the danger that Labour might itself eat into the Tory vote elsewhere and overtake them, certainly at Holyrood? I can;'t judge that last offhand, but if you are an anti-Brexit Unionist ...
Leonard is only a problem for Holyrood and he will be gone after May when Labour have yet another shocker and conclude, once again, that the problem is the leader rather than the failure to have anything useful to say.
I do think that we will see more Tories willing to vote tactically for Labour under SKS. Whether that will be enough in some of those fairly close Glasgow seats remains to be seen. There is a risk that they will lose more elsewhere than they gain.
Scottish Labour voters are starting to vote tactically for the Tories to beat the SNP as last week's local by election in Clackmannanshire showed, if Labour are going to regain Glasgow and central belt seats from the SNP they in turn will need Tory tactical votes
Do you happen to know whether the leaving councillor got the first place in the original slate at the previous election, or whether s/he was lower down (in which case we are not comparing like with like)? It's a crucial piece of data for any Scottish local gmt election which cannot be meaningfully discussed until this is established.
Do my eyes deceive me or does that imply that the Unionist vote is down 3.8% pts and the Indy vote up 3.8% pts? Pleasingly symmetrical.
Irrelevant as most Holyrood seats are constituencies elected under FPTP not preferential voting, so as long as the lead Unionist party's vote is up it does not matter if the combined Unionist total is down in terms of beating the SNP (though obviously the other Unionist parties would also gain seats on the PR list).
So that is why Labour voters last time voting Tory as their first preference this time in that by election could be so crucial if it becomes a trend for Holyrood 2021
I though the polling showed that Labour voters break more for the SNP than the Tories as second choice.
I'm also puzzled - HYUFD was all over Tories voting for Labour as being crucial for Unionist triumph. Now he's saying Labour voting for Tories is crucial. In a voting system specifically designed to make tactical voting both very difficult and unnecessary.
In my time Dundee West has gone from one of the safest Labour seats in Scotland (where the donkey and rosette theory was tried, tested and succeeded repeatedly) to a seat where they are not in sight. To be frank if Labour were back in contention there SKS would be heading to Downing Street with a comfortable majority.
Interesting thread. It had me wondering how many plans Remainers had trying to overturn the EU Referendum result?
I count six:
- Plan A: pretend it never happened - apparently seriously canvassed at the time - Plan B: campaign for a second referendum - Plan C: try and defeat it in Parliament - Plan D : try to get the Labour Party to back Remain in the 2017 election then hope they win - Plan E: lawfare in the Courts, filing lawsuits with about as much hope as Trump had - Plan F: vote LibDem in the 2019 election.
Maybe others can think of some more, but those were the ones that sprang to my mind.
Anyone who goes into coalition with the Tories should look at what happened to the LD's. And back off hard.
I think SLab can look even closer to home at what happens when you work with the Tories.
Indeed. 2014. Any Tory rule at Holyrood will be like the Pyramid at Tenochtitlan - lubricated with the blood and extracted heart of the Scottish Labour Party of Hardie and Cunninghame Graham.
Interesting thread. It had me wondering how many plans Remainers had trying to overturn the EU Referendum result?
I count six:
- Plan A: pretend it never happened - apparently seriously canvassed at the time - Plan B: campaign for a second referendum - Plan C: try and defeat it in Parliament - Plan D : try to get the Labour Party to back Remain in the 2017 election then hope they win - Plan E: lawfare in the Courts, filing lawsuits with about as much hope as Trump had - Plan F: vote LibDem in the 2019 election.
Maybe others can think of some more, but those were the ones that sprang to my mind.
An interesting post. Perhaps some who so happily condemn Trump's shenanigans might want to reflect on it.
Anyway, George Galloway has been sticking it to the man through the medium of wallpaper stripping and colour charts. No word if the Lenin of laminate is now a political prisoner.
I'm going to need a very long long shower after saying this, but I think George Galloway has a point.
I'm not sure the Scotland Act gives Holyrood the competence on who many enter Scotland, it violates a few international treaties I think as well as it restricts travel inside the Common Travel Area and FoM for EU citizens.
On the latter point, I've always said Nats and Brexiteers are two cheeks of the same arse, this again proves it.
Now off for a very long shower.
I Must have missed the 75% support for Brexit in Scotland.
I believe it peaked in the polls at around that in 1975, when Scotland was dragged against its will into the EC by England.
Seriously, though, are you just making it up, or do you have hard data for that? It's as interesting as the schiltron tactics at Bannockburn, if as relevant today - but it is intiguing.
It is genuine data, it was in a LSE politics department pamphlet from I think 2016/17, it was something to do with fishing that was a driver for those who were Eurosceptics in Scotland.
I'll dig it out for you when I find it.
No hurry - just interesting to see how views have changed. I was at school then - remember the politics and current affairs master talking about the matter!
I wonder how many votes both would lose if it came out as a formal alliance before the election? Witth the SNP, BXP and Mr Gallowa's lot salivating for any lost votes.
I think the only realstic option conceivably is an Aberdeen style after-election alliance - but (a) that assumes that the Greens and LDs and Trots (if any) would play ball, if needed, and (b) what happens at the next election thereafter?
The other option would be a Tory minority administration, and that assumes they have more MSPs than the SNP or at least can stop the SNP from being installed. Which latter would require Labour cooperation, or Green'LD/Trot - the klatter inherently unlikely.
As you say, bye bye SLAB given most of its pols are pro-EU and anti-Trident.
Of course, the Tories are happy for other parties to sacrifice themselves for the Union in Scotland, as 2014 showed very clearly.
There is more chance of me being the next Pope than the Tories leading Holyrood , with or without the pygmies to support them.
A majority, no, but would even a minority administration be workable without Labour setting it up and consistently voting with the Tories? Else it'd be like the Edinburgh trams week in week out with government defeats regularly.
In my time Dundee West has gone from one of the safest Labour seats in Scotland (where the donkey and rosette theory was tried, tested and succeeded repeatedly) to a seat where they are not in sight. To be frank if Labour were back in contention there SKS would be heading to Downing Street with a comfortable majority.
Same with Ayrshire apart from South, they used to win by colossal margins and now are also rans. They are dead until they see sense , become a Scottish party and support independence, they could easily recover if that happened, especially as SNP are going all WOKE and losing the plot. Otherwise people will hold their noses and vote SNP. Tories are seen as sockpuppets of London and they have no hope as long as they remain that way and probably not even if they actually became a Scottish party.
Scottish Labour voters are starting to vote tactically for the Tories to beat the SNP as last week's local by election in Clackmannanshire showed, if Labour are going to regain Glasgow and central belt seats from the SNP they in turn will need Tory tactical votes
Do you happen to know whether the leaving councillor got the first place in the original slate at the previous election, or whether s/he was lower down (in which case we are not comparing like with like)? It's a crucial piece of data for any Scottish local gmt election which cannot be meaningfully discussed until this is established.
Do my eyes deceive me or does that imply that the Unionist vote is down 3.8% pts and the Indy vote up 3.8% pts? Pleasingly symmetrical.
Irrelevant as most Holyrood seats are constituencies elected under FPTP not preferential voting, so as long as the lead Unionist party's vote is up it does not matter if the combined Unionist total is down in terms of beating the SNP (though obviously the other Unionist parties would also gain seats on the PR list).
So that is why Labour voters last time voting Tory as their first preference this time in that by election could be so crucial if it becomes a trend for Holyrood 2021
I though the polling showed that Labour voters break more for the SNP than the Tories as second choice.
They do indeed but fiction Trumps facts for the unionists.
Interesting thread. It had me wondering how many plans Remainers had trying to overturn the EU Referendum result?
I count six:
- Plan A: pretend it never happened - apparently seriously canvassed at the time - Plan B: campaign for a second referendum - Plan C: try and defeat it in Parliament - Plan D : try to get the Labour Party to back Remain in the 2017 election then hope they win - Plan E: lawfare in the Courts, filing lawsuits with about as much hope as Trump had - Plan F: vote LibDem in the 2019 election.
Maybe others can think of some more, but those were the ones that sprang to my mind.
An interesting post. Perhaps some who so happily condemn Trump's shenanigans might want to reflect on it.
I can't remember any mainstream pro-Remain politicians (as opposed to some random FBPE type on Twitter) advocating annulling the referendum without a second vote. Other efforts were made in parliament to force a soft Brexit, which still respected the 2016 vote. Advocating a second referendum would be like Trump standing again in 2024, which would be fine. I think the analogy is rather poor.
Time for Labour to get Jess Phillips into Starmer's shadow cabinet. Just heard her on 'Any Questions' and she's likable and feisty.
Not something you could say about 90% of the Shadow Cabinet
My tip for next Lab leader 50/1
Personally I think she is a donkey, her ill judged comments on Scotland showed she has no clue about UK and just another parochial English Labour dummy..
Interesting thread. It had me wondering how many plans Remainers had trying to overturn the EU Referendum result?
I count six:
- Plan A: pretend it never happened - apparently seriously canvassed at the time - Plan B: campaign for a second referendum - Plan C: try and defeat it in Parliament - Plan D : try to get the Labour Party to back Remain in the 2017 election then hope they win - Plan E: lawfare in the Courts, filing lawsuits with about as much hope as Trump had - Plan F: vote LibDem in the 2019 election.
Maybe others can think of some more, but those were the ones that sprang to my mind.
An interesting post. Perhaps some who so happily condemn Trump's shenanigans might want to reflect on it.
Unlike Trump several of the lawsuits were successful, including requiring a parliamentary vote before A50, ruling the prorogation illegal etc, and bringing about the 2017 and 2019 GE entirely democratic processes.
Interesting thread. It had me wondering how many plans Remainers had trying to overturn the EU Referendum result?
I count six:
- Plan A: pretend it never happened - apparently seriously canvassed at the time - Plan B: campaign for a second referendum - Plan C: try and defeat it in Parliament - Plan D : try to get the Labour Party to back Remain in the 2017 election then hope they win - Plan E: lawfare in the Courts, filing lawsuits with about as much hope as Trump had - Plan F: vote LibDem in the 2019 election.
Maybe others can think of some more, but those were the ones that sprang to my mind.
An interesting post. Perhaps some who so happily condemn Trump's shenanigans might want to reflect on it.
I mean, there's quite a big difference between trying to pressure officials to not certify election results and...vote for a different outcome at a later election.
Time for Labour to get Jess Phillips into Starmer's shadow cabinet. Just heard her on 'Any Questions' and she's likable and feisty.
Not something you could say about 90% of the Shadow Cabinet
My tip for next Lab leader 50/1
Personally I think she is a donkey, her ill judged comments on Scotland showed she has no clue about UK and just another parochial English Labour dummy..
is that bonnie prince charlie on your avatar malc?
In my time Dundee West has gone from one of the safest Labour seats in Scotland (where the donkey and rosette theory was tried, tested and succeeded repeatedly) to a seat where they are not in sight. To be frank if Labour were back in contention there SKS would be heading to Downing Street with a comfortable majority.
Same with Ayrshire apart from South, they used to win by colossal margins and now are also rans. They are dead until they see sense , become a Scottish party and support independence, they could easily recover if that happened, especially as SNP are going all WOKE and losing the plot. Otherwise people will hold their noses and vote SNP. Tories are seen as sockpuppets of London and they have no hope as long as they remain that way and probably not even if they actually became a Scottish party.
I think a wise position for SLab would be to support a new referendum on the basis that Brexit has essentially made the 2014 No campaign a lie ex post. They could then say that the decision is up to the Scottish people, allow party members to campaign on both sides and promise to respect the result either way. Die hard unionists will vote Tory, die hard Nats will vote SNP. Labour should position itself in the pragmatic centre ground. Last thing they should do is front the No campaign again. The English party should support another referendum too, argue for a need to draw a line under the issue.
Interesting thread. It had me wondering how many plans Remainers had trying to overturn the EU Referendum result?
I count six:
- Plan A: pretend it never happened - apparently seriously canvassed at the time - Plan B: campaign for a second referendum - Plan C: try and defeat it in Parliament - Plan D : try to get the Labour Party to back Remain in the 2017 election then hope they win - Plan E: lawfare in the Courts, filing lawsuits with about as much hope as Trump had - Plan F: vote LibDem in the 2019 election.
Maybe others can think of some more, but those were the ones that sprang to my mind.
Plan F was definitely the most pathetic. Imagine doing something as sad as voting for Swinson. Good on Scotland for flushing that turd.
Interesting thread. It had me wondering how many plans Remainers had trying to overturn the EU Referendum result?
I count six:
- Plan A: pretend it never happened - apparently seriously canvassed at the time - Plan B: campaign for a second referendum - Plan C: try and defeat it in Parliament - Plan D : try to get the Labour Party to back Remain in the 2017 election then hope they win - Plan E: lawfare in the Courts, filing lawsuits with about as much hope as Trump had - Plan F: vote LibDem in the 2019 election.
Maybe others can think of some more, but those were the ones that sprang to my mind.
An interesting post. Perhaps some who so happily condemn Trump's shenanigans might want to reflect on it.
I mean, there's quite a big difference between trying to pressure officials to not certify election results and...vote for a different outcome at a later election.
Gina Miller did everything she could in the courts to stop Brexit.
Interesting thread. It had me wondering how many plans Remainers had trying to overturn the EU Referendum result?
I count six:
- Plan A: pretend it never happened - apparently seriously canvassed at the time - Plan B: campaign for a second referendum - Plan C: try and defeat it in Parliament - Plan D : try to get the Labour Party to back Remain in the 2017 election then hope they win - Plan E: lawfare in the Courts, filing lawsuits with about as much hope as Trump had - Plan F: vote LibDem in the 2019 election.
Maybe others can think of some more, but those were the ones that sprang to my mind.
An interesting post. Perhaps some who so happily condemn Trump's shenanigans might want to reflect on it.
I can't remember any mainstream pro-Remain politicians (as opposed to some random FBPE type on Twitter) advocating annulling the referendum without a second vote. Other efforts were made in parliament to force a soft Brexit, which still respected the 2016 vote. Advocating a second referendum would be like Trump standing again in 2024, which would be fine. I think the analogy is rather poor.
It isn't quite the same thing as Trump standing again, because Biden will get to be President for 4 years.
The plan for the second referendum was for it to take place before the results of the first were enacted.
The efforts to force a soft Brexit were hopeless (indicative vote, anyone?) partly because there was this daft idea that it could be stopped entirely.
"From Davey himself, nothing distinctively liberal has emerged in relation to the battle against Covid. There is no hint of worry about intrusion into civil liberties and no demand from ministers to explicitly rule out compulsion when the vaccines are rolled out."
BBC are leading with 'Boris Johnson denies he wants to undermine Scottish devolution'. I misread it at first glance as "evolution" - that'd be real conservatism!
If you think Betfair are keeping markets open as long as they can get away with for the extra commission (Next President market alone could reach £900M staked), might be worth considering buying some Flutter Entertainment PLC shares?
In my time Dundee West has gone from one of the safest Labour seats in Scotland (where the donkey and rosette theory was tried, tested and succeeded repeatedly) to a seat where they are not in sight. To be frank if Labour were back in contention there SKS would be heading to Downing Street with a comfortable majority.
Same with Ayrshire apart from South, they used to win by colossal margins and now are also rans. They are dead until they see sense , become a Scottish party and support independence, they could easily recover if that happened, especially as SNP are going all WOKE and losing the plot. Otherwise people will hold their noses and vote SNP. Tories are seen as sockpuppets of London and they have no hope as long as they remain that way and probably not even if they actually became a Scottish party.
I think a wise position for SLab would be to support a new referendum on the basis that Brexit has essentially made the 2014 No campaign a lie ex post. They could then say that the decision is up to the Scottish people, allow party members to campaign on both sides and promise to respect the result either way. Die hard unionists will vote Tory, die hard Nats will vote SNP. Labour should position itself in the pragmatic centre ground. Last thing they should do is front the No campaign again. The English party should support another referendum too, argue for a need to draw a line under the issue.
That would open up Labour to charges from the Tories of aiding and abetting treason (yes, I know, but given the wording used here by PB Tories, perfectly likely). Cue pics of SKS in Ms Sturgeon's jacket pocket, mobey case, etc. in the next Westminster election.
But on the other hand - the argument that SKS would knock back EVEL (as voiced on PB today) will have long been nullifed by the Tories themselves. Consider their wish to use English votes to impose laws EVEN WITHIN THE DEVOLVED REALMS in Scotland (and Wales and NI). As in the current Internal Market Bill passing through Parliament. English Votes for Scottish Laws, like the good old days of the satraps in their palace on Calton Hill.
Interesting thread. It had me wondering how many plans Remainers had trying to overturn the EU Referendum result?
I count six:
- Plan A: pretend it never happened - apparently seriously canvassed at the time - Plan B: campaign for a second referendum - Plan C: try and defeat it in Parliament - Plan D : try to get the Labour Party to back Remain in the 2017 election then hope they win - Plan E: lawfare in the Courts, filing lawsuits with about as much hope as Trump had - Plan F: vote LibDem in the 2019 election.
Maybe others can think of some more, but those were the ones that sprang to my mind.
An interesting post. Perhaps some who so happily condemn Trump's shenanigans might want to reflect on it.
I can't remember any mainstream pro-Remain politicians (as opposed to some random FBPE type on Twitter) advocating annulling the referendum without a second vote. Other efforts were made in parliament to force a soft Brexit, which still respected the 2016 vote. Advocating a second referendum would be like Trump standing again in 2024, which would be fine. I think the analogy is rather poor.
It isn't quite the same thing as Trump standing again, because Biden will get to be President for 4 years.
The plan for the second referendum was for it to take place before the results of the first were enacted.
The efforts to force a soft Brexit were hopeless (indicative vote, anyone?) partly because there was this daft idea that it could be stopped entirely.
Why would a second referendum be any less valid than the first? I didn't advocate one incidentally, but am just interested as to why one plebiscite gets preference simply because it took place at an earlier point in time.
Interesting thread. It had me wondering how many plans Remainers had trying to overturn the EU Referendum result?
I count six:
- Plan A: pretend it never happened - apparently seriously canvassed at the time - Plan B: campaign for a second referendum - Plan C: try and defeat it in Parliament - Plan D : try to get the Labour Party to back Remain in the 2017 election then hope they win - Plan E: lawfare in the Courts, filing lawsuits with about as much hope as Trump had - Plan F: vote LibDem in the 2019 election.
Maybe others can think of some more, but those were the ones that sprang to my mind.
An interesting post. Perhaps some who so happily condemn Trump's shenanigans might want to reflect on it.
I can't remember any mainstream pro-Remain politicians (as opposed to some random FBPE type on Twitter) advocating annulling the referendum without a second vote. Other efforts were made in parliament to force a soft Brexit, which still respected the 2016 vote. Advocating a second referendum would be like Trump standing again in 2024, which would be fine. I think the analogy is rather poor.
It isn't quite the same thing as Trump standing again, because Biden will get to be President for 4 years.
The plan for the second referendum was for it to take place before the results of the first were enacted.
The efforts to force a soft Brexit were hopeless (indicative vote, anyone?) partly because there was this daft idea that it could be stopped entirely.
Not a daft idea at all. Very sensible just badly executed.
A question for the certifying doctor, not anyone else. Lying about cause of death is quite serious, so there does need to be some evidence of Covid-19. If not content, then speak to the coroner.
Time for Labour to get Jess Phillips into Starmer's shadow cabinet. Just heard her on 'Any Questions' and she's likable and feisty.
Not something you could say about 90% of the Shadow Cabinet
My tip for next Lab leader 50/1
Personally I think she is a donkey, her ill judged comments on Scotland showed she has no clue about UK and just another parochial English Labour dummy..
is that bonnie prince charlie on your avatar malc?
In my time Dundee West has gone from one of the safest Labour seats in Scotland (where the donkey and rosette theory was tried, tested and succeeded repeatedly) to a seat where they are not in sight. To be frank if Labour were back in contention there SKS would be heading to Downing Street with a comfortable majority.
Same with Ayrshire apart from South, they used to win by colossal margins and now are also rans. They are dead until they see sense , become a Scottish party and support independence, they could easily recover if that happened, especially as SNP are going all WOKE and losing the plot. Otherwise people will hold their noses and vote SNP. Tories are seen as sockpuppets of London and they have no hope as long as they remain that way and probably not even if they actually became a Scottish party.
I think a wise position for SLab would be to support a new referendum on the basis that Brexit has essentially made the 2014 No campaign a lie ex post. They could then say that the decision is up to the Scottish people, allow party members to campaign on both sides and promise to respect the result either way. Die hard unionists will vote Tory, die hard Nats will vote SNP. Labour should position itself in the pragmatic centre ground. Last thing they should do is front the No campaign again. The English party should support another referendum too, argue for a need to draw a line under the issue.
Looks like they would rather kill the regional party than be sensible.
For as long as he has the confidence of a sufficient number of his party to give him control of the Commons cabinet Ministers serve at the pleasure of the PM and in what he deems to be the national interest. It seems obvious to me that the Home Office senior civil service have been a source of frustration for a long time. I suspect that Patel was asked in terms to shake things up a bit and to try to change the culture there by Boris. That is what she is trying to do.
From Boris's perspective in challenging, even shouting at, senior officials, Patel was doing what she had been asked to do. He doesn't see much wrong with it. Hence his reluctance to accept that this amounted to bullying and a breach of the Ministerial code. That decision, along with many others, is something to be weighed by the MPs who give him his majority. If they are ok with that, that is the end of the matter.
The Ministerial code is not law. It is guidance and the report of the person appointed to investigate issues under it is an opinion, not a binding decision on the PM of the day. Boris can be criticised for his decision, the hypocrisy of his foreword is exposed, but the only views that ultimately matter are those of the 364 other MPs that form his majority. And so far they seem to be with him.
In my time Dundee West has gone from one of the safest Labour seats in Scotland (where the donkey and rosette theory was tried, tested and succeeded repeatedly) to a seat where they are not in sight. To be frank if Labour were back in contention there SKS would be heading to Downing Street with a comfortable majority.
Same with Ayrshire apart from South, they used to win by colossal margins and now are also rans. They are dead until they see sense , become a Scottish party and support independence, they could easily recover if that happened, especially as SNP are going all WOKE and losing the plot. Otherwise people will hold their noses and vote SNP. Tories are seen as sockpuppets of London and they have no hope as long as they remain that way and probably not even if they actually became a Scottish party.
I think a wise position for SLab would be to support a new referendum on the basis that Brexit has essentially made the 2014 No campaign a lie ex post. They could then say that the decision is up to the Scottish people, allow party members to campaign on both sides and promise to respect the result either way. Die hard unionists will vote Tory, die hard Nats will vote SNP. Labour should position itself in the pragmatic centre ground. Last thing they should do is front the No campaign again. The English party should support another referendum too, argue for a need to draw a line under the issue.
Looks like they would rather kill the regional party than be sensible.
Interesting thread. It had me wondering how many plans Remainers had trying to overturn the EU Referendum result?
I count six:
- Plan A: pretend it never happened - apparently seriously canvassed at the time - Plan B: campaign for a second referendum - Plan C: try and defeat it in Parliament - Plan D : try to get the Labour Party to back Remain in the 2017 election then hope they win - Plan E: lawfare in the Courts, filing lawsuits with about as much hope as Trump had - Plan F: vote LibDem in the 2019 election.
Maybe others can think of some more, but those were the ones that sprang to my mind.
An interesting post. Perhaps some who so happily condemn Trump's shenanigans might want to reflect on it.
I can't remember any mainstream pro-Remain politicians (as opposed to some random FBPE type on Twitter) advocating annulling the referendum without a second vote. Other efforts were made in parliament to force a soft Brexit, which still respected the 2016 vote. Advocating a second referendum would be like Trump standing again in 2024, which would be fine. I think the analogy is rather poor.
It isn't quite the same thing as Trump standing again, because Biden will get to be President for 4 years.
The plan for the second referendum was for it to take place before the results of the first were enacted.
The efforts to force a soft Brexit were hopeless (indicative vote, anyone?) partly because there was this daft idea that it could be stopped entirely.
No, efforts at soft Brexit failed because Tories blocked it in parliament, go and look at the votes. I assume a 2nd referendum is OK now we have left? Brexit already seems quite unpopular, it seems only right that people have a chance to register their opposition to it now they've had a chance to see what a clusterfuck it's turning out to be.
If you think Betfair are keeping markets open as long as they can get away with for the extra commission (Next President market alone could reach £900M staked), might be worth considering buying some Flutter Entertainment PLC shares?
I have them. They are one of my better performers.
What is truly astonishing, from a UK perspective, is that Trump has received 73.8m votes, far more than any candidate in history other than Joe Biden. Trump has very few supporters on this board, @MrEd is the only one that instantly comes to mind although @HYUFD dabbled, mainly, in fairness, pointing out that his chances were better than we thought. It shows the incredible gulf between American politics and mindset and ours.
Millions of Americans clearly believe that Biden is some sort of a socialist. Other than being thick I really struggle to see any evidence for that at all in a very long career. Their definition of socialism would clearly include most of the current Tory party.
I think that it is very difficult for us to predict what these millions might do. We simply do not understand their terms of reference.
Re: HYUFD It's impossible to truly know someone's mind, but the tenor of his posts made me think he would have voted Trump. Of course, he repeatedly claimed that he would vote for Biden if he had a vote, but, in short, I didn't believe him.
HYUFD is just a super-loyal Tory who goes wherever that journey takes him. He was a passionate Cameroon Remainer who became an equally passionate Johnson Leaver. He realized a Biden win would leave his new beau up shit creek so he became an obsessive Trumpster.
Think Stretford Ender
HYUFD`s recall of political factoids from history is extraordinary. I`ve been shot down before for saying that he largely just posts facts and some posters should lay off the rudeness towards him. He`s cherry-picking - of course - but still facts. Its`s up to us to raise our games to challenge him with equal precision.
His policital radar is worthy of attention. Most of us were predicting large Biden win, some landslide even. HYUFD vacillated between narrow Biden, then narrow Trump then narrow Biden again. He drew our attentions to, for example, Arizona, Florida and Wisconsin repeatedly where Trump, he said, may defy the odds. He`s worth listening too even when you don`t agree.
He`ll be back, good as ever. He`s one of the few (maybe six or seven) posters who I regard as top tier PB.com posters. I`m minor league in comparison.
HYUFD is excellent at cherry picking polls and examples from history that make elections look promising for the right-leaning candidate. That makes him look like a sage in an era where most elections have been won by right-leaning candidates. I doubt he’d have been as successful at projecting elections in, say, the 1990s
It is a myth to say I only forecast rightwing victories, for example last year I said Trudeau would win in Canada which was no certainty and he did
What is truly astonishing, from a UK perspective, is that Trump has received 73.8m votes, far more than any candidate in history other than Joe Biden. Trump has very few supporters on this board, @MrEd is the only one that instantly comes to mind although @HYUFD dabbled, mainly, in fairness, pointing out that his chances were better than we thought. It shows the incredible gulf between American politics and mindset and ours.
Millions of Americans clearly believe that Biden is some sort of a socialist. Other than being thick I really struggle to see any evidence for that at all in a very long career. Their definition of socialism would clearly include most of the current Tory party.
I think that it is very difficult for us to predict what these millions might do. We simply do not understand their terms of reference.
Re: HYUFD It's impossible to truly know someone's mind, but the tenor of his posts made me think he would have voted Trump. Of course, he repeatedly claimed that he would vote for Biden if he had a vote, but, in short, I didn't believe him.
HYUFD is just a super-loyal Tory who goes wherever that journey takes him. He was a passionate Cameroon Remainer who became an equally passionate Johnson Leaver. He realized a Biden win would leave his new beau up shit creek so he became an obsessive Trumpster.
Think Stretford Ender
HYUFD`s recall of political factoids from history is extraordinary. I`ve been shot down before for saying that he largely just posts facts and some posters should lay off the rudeness towards him. He`s cherry-picking - of course - but still facts. Its`s up to us to raise our games to challenge him with equal precision.
His policital radar is worthy of attention. Most of us were predicting large Biden win, some landslide even. HYUFD vacillated between narrow Biden, then narrow Trump then narrow Biden again. He drew our attentions to, for example, Arizona, Florida and Wisconsin repeatedly where Trump, he said, may defy the odds. He`s worth listening too even when you don`t agree.
He`ll be back, good as ever. He`s one of the few (maybe six or seven) posters who I regard as top tier PB.com posters. I`m minor league in comparison.
HYUFD is excellent at cherry picking polls and examples from history that make elections look promising for the right-leaning candidate. That makes him look like a sage in an era where most elections have been won by right-leaning candidates. I doubt he’d have been as successful at projecting elections in, say, the 1990s
It is a myth to say I only forecast rightwing victories, for example last year I said Trudeau would win in Canada which was no certainty and he did
Although Trudeau has some, umm, unfortunate views on race...
I wonder how many votes both would lose if it came out as a formal alliance before the election? Witth the SNP, BXP and Mr Gallowa's lot salivating for any lost votes.
I think the only realstic option conceivably is an Aberdeen style after-election alliance - but (a) that assumes that the Greens and LDs and Trots (if any) would play ball, if needed, and (b) what happens at the next election thereafter?
The other option would be a Tory minority administration, and that assumes they have more MSPs than the SNP or at least can stop the SNP from being installed. Which latter would require Labour cooperation, or Green'LD/Trot - the klatter inherently unlikely.
As you say, bye bye SLAB given most of its pols are pro-EU and anti-Trident.
Of course, the Tories are happy for other parties to sacrifice themselves for the Union in Scotland, as 2014 showed very clearly.
There is more chance of me being the next Pope than the Tories leading Holyrood , with or without the pygmies to support them.
A majority, no, but would even a minority administration be workable without Labour setting it up and consistently voting with the Tories? Else it'd be like the Edinburgh trams week in week out with government defeats regularly.
The aim is not a Tory or Labour government at Holyrood, the aim is to get a Unionist majority to stop indyre2, that is all, as long as that happens a neutered Sturgeon can stay First Minister indefinitely as far as I am concerned and just focus on Scottish domestic policy (though Salmond might have a few other ideas)
Scottish Labour voters are starting to vote tactically for the Tories to beat the SNP as last week's local by election in Clackmannanshire showed, if Labour are going to regain Glasgow and central belt seats from the SNP they in turn will need Tory tactical votes
Do you happen to know whether the leaving councillor got the first place in the original slate at the previous election, or whether s/he was lower down (in which case we are not comparing like with like)? It's a crucial piece of data for any Scottish local gmt election which cannot be meaningfully discussed until this is established.
Do my eyes deceive me or does that imply that the Unionist vote is down 3.8% pts and the Indy vote up 3.8% pts? Pleasingly symmetrical.
Irrelevant as most Holyrood seats are constituencies elected under FPTP not preferential voting, so as long as the lead Unionist party's vote is up it does not matter if the combined Unionist total is down in terms of beating the SNP (though obviously the other Unionist parties would also gain seats on the PR list).
So that is why Labour voters last time voting Tory as their first preference this time in that by election could be so crucial if it becomes a trend for Holyrood 2021
I though the polling showed that Labour voters break more for the SNP than the Tories as second choice.
Second choice is irrelevant as Holyrood is FPTP and list not preferential voting and last week 12% of the Scottish Labour vote switched to make the Tories their first choice to beat the SNP, that Unionist tactical voting will be crucial to getting that Unionist majority next year
I have a Zoom quiz in a couple of hours and no questions for my round as yet. Any charitable PBers who wish to lob me any interesting questions, they would (as ever) be most welcome. I'm going to do pot luck, so they don't have to be on a theme.
I wonder how many votes both would lose if it came out as a formal alliance before the election? Witth the SNP, BXP and Mr Gallowa's lot salivating for any lost votes.
I think the only realstic option conceivably is an Aberdeen style after-election alliance - but (a) that assumes that the Greens and LDs and Trots (if any) would play ball, if needed, and (b) what happens at the next election thereafter?
The other option would be a Tory minority administration, and that assumes they have more MSPs than the SNP or at least can stop the SNP from being installed. Which latter would require Labour cooperation, or Green'LD/Trot - the klatter inherently unlikely.
As you say, bye bye SLAB given most of its pols are pro-EU and anti-Trident.
Of course, the Tories are happy for other parties to sacrifice themselves for the Union in Scotland, as 2014 showed very clearly.
There is more chance of me being the next Pope than the Tories leading Holyrood , with or without the pygmies to support them.
A majority, no, but would even a minority administration be workable without Labour setting it up and consistently voting with the Tories? Else it'd be like the Edinburgh trams week in week out with government defeats regularly.
The aim is not a Tory or Labour government at Holyrood, the aim is to get a Unionist majority to stop indyre2, that is all, as long as that happens a neutered Sturgeon can stay First Minister indefinitely as far as I am concerned and just focus on Scottish domestic policy (though Salmond might have a few other ideas)
It would be very much an SNP 2007-11 scenario if any party other than the SNP were the largest party. Everyone would put them in power and pretend they weren’t talking to them.
But in any case, the SNP will still be in government after the next Holyrood election. It might be different if there were one clear challenger, but there isn’t.
What is truly astonishing, from a UK perspective, is that Trump has received 73.8m votes, far more than any candidate in history other than Joe Biden. Trump has very few supporters on this board, @MrEd is the only one that instantly comes to mind although @HYUFD dabbled, mainly, in fairness, pointing out that his chances were better than we thought. It shows the incredible gulf between American politics and mindset and ours.
Millions of Americans clearly believe that Biden is some sort of a socialist. Other than being thick I really struggle to see any evidence for that at all in a very long career. Their definition of socialism would clearly include most of the current Tory party.
I think that it is very difficult for us to predict what these millions might do. We simply do not understand their terms of reference.
Re: HYUFD It's impossible to truly know someone's mind, but the tenor of his posts made me think he would have voted Trump. Of course, he repeatedly claimed that he would vote for Biden if he had a vote, but, in short, I didn't believe him.
HYUFD is just a super-loyal Tory who goes wherever that journey takes him. He was a passionate Cameroon Remainer who became an equally passionate Johnson Leaver. He realized a Biden win would leave his new beau up shit creek so he became an obsessive Trumpster.
Think Stretford Ender
HYUFD`s recall of political factoids from history is extraordinary. I`ve been shot down before for saying that he largely just posts facts and some posters should lay off the rudeness towards him. He`s cherry-picking - of course - but still facts. Its`s up to us to raise our games to challenge him with equal precision.
His policital radar is worthy of attention. Most of us were predicting large Biden win, some landslide even. HYUFD vacillated between narrow Biden, then narrow Trump then narrow Biden again. He drew our attentions to, for example, Arizona, Florida and Wisconsin repeatedly where Trump, he said, may defy the odds. He`s worth listening too even when you don`t agree.
He`ll be back, good as ever. He`s one of the few (maybe six or seven) posters who I regard as top tier PB.com posters. I`m minor league in comparison.
HYUFD is excellent at cherry picking polls and examples from history that make elections look promising for the right-leaning candidate. That makes him look like a sage in an era where most elections have been won by right-leaning candidates. I doubt he’d have been as successful at projecting elections in, say, the 1990s
It is a myth to say I only forecast rightwing victories, for example last year I said Trudeau would win in Canada which was no certainty and he did
In tyhat case, why do you always assume that undecideds always vote for the right wingers?
Anyone who goes into coalition with the Tories should look at what happened to the LD's. And back off hard.
Labour needs Tory tactical votes, it is as simple as that, there is 1 Scottish Labour MP only elected due to Tory tactical votes and without Tory tactical votes in the central belt Labour will not win back seats from the SNP.
Most Labour target seats in Scotland have the SNP as their main rivals, most LD seats in 2015 had the Tories as their main rivals, that was the difference
I have a Zoom quiz in a couple of hours and no questions for my round as yet. Any charitable PBers who wish to lob me any interesting questions, they would (as ever) be most welcome. I'm going to do pot luck, so they don't have to be on a theme.
Which current Australian Test player averages over 70 with the bat and under 20 with the ball?
Scottish Labour voters are starting to vote tactically for the Tories to beat the SNP as last week's local by election in Clackmannanshire showed, if Labour are going to regain Glasgow and central belt seats from the SNP they in turn will need Tory tactical votes
Do you happen to know whether the leaving councillor got the first place in the original slate at the previous election, or whether s/he was lower down (in which case we are not comparing like with like)? It's a crucial piece of data for any Scottish local gmt election which cannot be meaningfully discussed until this is established.
Do my eyes deceive me or does that imply that the Unionist vote is down 3.8% pts and the Indy vote up 3.8% pts? Pleasingly symmetrical.
Irrelevant as most Holyrood seats are constituencies elected under FPTP not preferential voting, so as long as the lead Unionist party's vote is up it does not matter if the combined Unionist total is down in terms of beating the SNP (though obviously the other Unionist parties would also gain seats on the PR list).
So that is why Labour voters last time voting Tory as their first preference this time in that by election could be so crucial if it becomes a trend for Holyrood 2021
I though the polling showed that Labour voters break more for the SNP than the Tories as second choice.
I'm also puzzled - HYUFD was all over Tories voting for Labour as being crucial for Unionist triumph. Now he's saying Labour voting for Tories is crucial. In a voting system specifically designed to make tactical voting both very difficult and unnecessary.
Of course it is, in the central belt Tories voting for Labour is crucial to beat the SNP, in the Borders, Aberdeenshire and much of the Highlands Labour voting for the Tories or LDs is crucial to beat the SNP.
Most Holyrood seats are FPTP and for them tactical voting is pivotal
Scottish Labour voters are starting to vote tactically for the Tories to beat the SNP as last week's local by election in Clackmannanshire showed, if Labour are going to regain Glasgow and central belt seats from the SNP they in turn will need Tory tactical votes
Do you happen to know whether the leaving councillor got the first place in the original slate at the previous election, or whether s/he was lower down (in which case we are not comparing like with like)? It's a crucial piece of data for any Scottish local gmt election which cannot be meaningfully discussed until this is established.
Do my eyes deceive me or does that imply that the Unionist vote is down 3.8% pts and the Indy vote up 3.8% pts? Pleasingly symmetrical.
Irrelevant as most Holyrood seats are constituencies elected under FPTP not preferential voting, so as long as the lead Unionist party's vote is up it does not matter if the combined Unionist total is down in terms of beating the SNP (though obviously the other Unionist parties would also gain seats on the PR list).
So that is why Labour voters last time voting Tory as their first preference this time in that by election could be so crucial if it becomes a trend for Holyrood 2021
I though the polling showed that Labour voters break more for the SNP than the Tories as second choice.
Second choice is irrelevant as Holyrood is FPTP and list not preferential voting and last week 12% of the Scottish Labour vote switched to make the Tories their first choice to beat the SNP, that Unionist tactical voting will be crucial to getting that Unionist majority next year
But you are now using evcidence from local government voting to buttress your hopes in a completely different voting system. In the local government system there is no tactical voting by definition. You vote for your lot first and then give the secoind vote to wo might be acceptable.
In my time Dundee West has gone from one of the safest Labour seats in Scotland (where the donkey and rosette theory was tried, tested and succeeded repeatedly) to a seat where they are not in sight. To be frank if Labour were back in contention there SKS would be heading to Downing Street with a comfortable majority.
Same with Ayrshire apart from South, they used to win by colossal margins and now are also rans. They are dead until they see sense , become a Scottish party and support independence, they could easily recover if that happened, especially as SNP are going all WOKE and losing the plot. Otherwise people will hold their noses and vote SNP. Tories are seen as sockpuppets of London and they have no hope as long as they remain that way and probably not even if they actually became a Scottish party.
Nationalists are already voting SNP, they will not go back to Labour, if Labour abandoned the Union it would lose all its remaining voters who are Unionists to the Tories and LDs, finally killing off Scottish Labour, so SLab backing independence would be political suicide
I have a Zoom quiz in a couple of hours and no questions for my round as yet. Any charitable PBers who wish to lob me any interesting questions, they would (as ever) be most welcome. I'm going to do pot luck, so they don't have to be on a theme.
Which current Australian Test player averages over 70 with the bat and under 20 with the ball?
Answer - Ellyse Perry.
Q: Which member of the House of Lords, past or present, had the highest test batting average?
Scottish Labour voters are starting to vote tactically for the Tories to beat the SNP as last week's local by election in Clackmannanshire showed, if Labour are going to regain Glasgow and central belt seats from the SNP they in turn will need Tory tactical votes
Do you happen to know whether the leaving councillor got the first place in the original slate at the previous election, or whether s/he was lower down (in which case we are not comparing like with like)? It's a crucial piece of data for any Scottish local gmt election which cannot be meaningfully discussed until this is established.
Do my eyes deceive me or does that imply that the Unionist vote is down 3.8% pts and the Indy vote up 3.8% pts? Pleasingly symmetrical.
Irrelevant as most Holyrood seats are constituencies elected under FPTP not preferential voting, so as long as the lead Unionist party's vote is up it does not matter if the combined Unionist total is down in terms of beating the SNP (though obviously the other Unionist parties would also gain seats on the PR list).
So that is why Labour voters last time voting Tory as their first preference this time in that by election could be so crucial if it becomes a trend for Holyrood 2021
I though the polling showed that Labour voters break more for the SNP than the Tories as second choice.
I'm also puzzled - HYUFD was all over Tories voting for Labour as being crucial for Unionist triumph. Now he's saying Labour voting for Tories is crucial. In a voting system specifically designed to make tactical voting both very difficult and unnecessary.
Of course it is, in the central belt Tories voting for Labour is crucial to beat the SNP, in the Borders, Aberdeenshire and much of the Highlands Labour voting for the Tories or LDs is crucial to beat the SNP.
Most Holyrood seats are FPTP and for them tactical voting is pivotal
You are back not one day and already stretching the meaning of words in English language. Most Holyrood seats are not FPTP - in fact the constituencies comprise rather less than three-fifths, ie. a bare majority. And the list votes counteract success in the constituency seats.
In my time Dundee West has gone from one of the safest Labour seats in Scotland (where the donkey and rosette theory was tried, tested and succeeded repeatedly) to a seat where they are not in sight. To be frank if Labour were back in contention there SKS would be heading to Downing Street with a comfortable majority.
Same with Ayrshire apart from South, they used to win by colossal margins and now are also rans. They are dead until they see sense , become a Scottish party and support independence, they could easily recover if that happened, especially as SNP are going all WOKE and losing the plot. Otherwise people will hold their noses and vote SNP. Tories are seen as sockpuppets of London and they have no hope as long as they remain that way and probably not even if they actually became a Scottish party.
I think a wise position for SLab would be to support a new referendum on the basis that Brexit has essentially made the 2014 No campaign a lie ex post. They could then say that the decision is up to the Scottish people, allow party members to campaign on both sides and promise to respect the result either way. Die hard unionists will vote Tory, die hard Nats will vote SNP. Labour should position itself in the pragmatic centre ground. Last thing they should do is front the No campaign again. The English party should support another referendum too, argue for a need to draw a line under the issue.
They can argue what they want, we have a Tory majority of 80 and so until 2024 at least Westminster will not grant indyref2
I have a Zoom quiz in a couple of hours and no questions for my round as yet. Any charitable PBers who wish to lob me any interesting questions, they would (as ever) be most welcome. I'm going to do pot luck, so they don't have to be on a theme.
Which current Australian Test player averages over 70 with the bat and under 20 with the ball?
Answer - Ellyse Perry.
I love it, but I am afraid there's absolutely no chance of anyone answering that (or indeed of myself getting it were I to be asked). Fantastic bit of trivia though!
In my time Dundee West has gone from one of the safest Labour seats in Scotland (where the donkey and rosette theory was tried, tested and succeeded repeatedly) to a seat where they are not in sight. To be frank if Labour were back in contention there SKS would be heading to Downing Street with a comfortable majority.
Same with Ayrshire apart from South, they used to win by colossal margins and now are also rans. They are dead until they see sense , become a Scottish party and support independence, they could easily recover if that happened, especially as SNP are going all WOKE and losing the plot. Otherwise people will hold their noses and vote SNP. Tories are seen as sockpuppets of London and they have no hope as long as they remain that way and probably not even if they actually became a Scottish party.
I think a wise position for SLab would be to support a new referendum on the basis that Brexit has essentially made the 2014 No campaign a lie ex post. They could then say that the decision is up to the Scottish people, allow party members to campaign on both sides and promise to respect the result either way. Die hard unionists will vote Tory, die hard Nats will vote SNP. Labour should position itself in the pragmatic centre ground. Last thing they should do is front the No campaign again. The English party should support another referendum too, argue for a need to draw a line under the issue.
That would open up Labour to charges from the Tories of aiding and abetting treason (yes, I know, but given the wording used here by PB Tories, perfectly likely). Cue pics of SKS in Ms Sturgeon's jacket pocket, mobey case, etc. in the next Westminster election.
But on the other hand - the argument that SKS would knock back EVEL (as voiced on PB today) will have long been nullifed by the Tories themselves. Consider their wish to use English votes to impose laws EVEN WITHIN THE DEVOLVED REALMS in Scotland (and Wales and NI). As in the current Internal Market Bill passing through Parliament. English Votes for Scottish Laws, like the good old days of the satraps in their palace on Calton Hill.
The Internal Market Bill is to preserve the Union (though hopefully rendered redundant by an EU trade deal) it is not English only MPs voting on Scottish domestic policy where the Scottish Parliament decides policy, if there was a hung parliament in 2024 and the Tories had won a majority of English seats but Starmer was PM thanks to support from SNP MPs which is possible on current polls and scrapped EVEL so English domestic policy was decided by Scottish MPs with no English Parliament that would be a totally different matter
I have a Zoom quiz in a couple of hours and no questions for my round as yet. Any charitable PBers who wish to lob me any interesting questions, they would (as ever) be most welcome. I'm going to do pot luck, so they don't have to be on a theme.
Which current Australian Test player averages over 70 with the bat and under 20 with the ball?
Answer - Ellyse Perry.
I love it, but I am afraid there's absolutely no chance of anyone answering that (or indeed of myself getting it were I to be asked). Fantastic bit of trivia though!
Alright, how about ‘which player captained his country in the most tests?’
Answer Graeme Smith (108, not including that silly Rest of World one).
A question for the certifying doctor, not anyone else. Lying about cause of death is quite serious, so there does need to be some evidence of Covid-19. If not content, then speak to the coroner.
Oh, no, no, no. It’s a conspiracy. There’s no covid. Everything’s normal. It’s false positives, the decline in cases is herd immunity, people die with covid and not of covid, everything’s normal, false positives, lockdowns don’t work, cases declined without it, hospitals don’t have any covid, it’s false positives, people only catch covid in hospital, everything’s normal, they’re all lying, all of them in all the countries. Oh, and masks don’t work.
The lockdownsceptics cultists have got to the point of being fucking pathetic.
I wonder how many votes both would lose if it came out as a formal alliance before the election? Witth the SNP, BXP and Mr Gallowa's lot salivating for any lost votes.
I think the only realstic option conceivably is an Aberdeen style after-election alliance - but (a) that assumes that the Greens and LDs and Trots (if any) would play ball, if needed, and (b) what happens at the next election thereafter?
The other option would be a Tory minority administration, and that assumes they have more MSPs than the SNP or at least can stop the SNP from being installed. Which latter would require Labour cooperation, or Green'LD/Trot - the klatter inherently unlikely.
As you say, bye bye SLAB given most of its pols are pro-EU and anti-Trident.
Of course, the Tories are happy for other parties to sacrifice themselves for the Union in Scotland, as 2014 showed very clearly.
There is more chance of me being the next Pope than the Tories leading Holyrood , with or without the pygmies to support them.
A majority, no, but would even a minority administration be workable without Labour setting it up and consistently voting with the Tories? Else it'd be like the Edinburgh trams week in week out with government defeats regularly.
The aim is not a Tory or Labour government at Holyrood, the aim is to get a Unionist majority to stop indyre2, that is all, as long as that happens a neutered Sturgeon can stay First Minister indefinitely as far as I am concerned and just focus on Scottish domestic policy (though Salmond might have a few other ideas)
Why do they need a Unionist majority to stop indyref2, when as we know indyref2 can't happen because Johnson will block it under all circumstances?
In my time Dundee West has gone from one of the safest Labour seats in Scotland (where the donkey and rosette theory was tried, tested and succeeded repeatedly) to a seat where they are not in sight. To be frank if Labour were back in contention there SKS would be heading to Downing Street with a comfortable majority.
Same with Ayrshire apart from South, they used to win by colossal margins and now are also rans. They are dead until they see sense , become a Scottish party and support independence, they could easily recover if that happened, especially as SNP are going all WOKE and losing the plot. Otherwise people will hold their noses and vote SNP. Tories are seen as sockpuppets of London and they have no hope as long as they remain that way and probably not even if they actually became a Scottish party.
Nationalists are already voting SNP, they will not go back to Labour, if Labour abandoned the Union it would lose all its remaining voters who are Unionists to the Tories and LDs, finally killing off Scottish Labour, so SLab backing independence would be political suicide
And, again, again, again, conveniently forgetting the Scottish Greens.
I see you are eeeeever so carefully muddling "voter for a pro-independence party at Holyrood" with "voter for the SNP" by sleekitly using the word "Nationalist" (which is in any case inaccurate as it describes rightwingers such as Tories, BXP, rather better).
Scottish Labour voters are starting to vote tactically for the Tories to beat the SNP as last week's local by election in Clackmannanshire showed, if Labour are going to regain Glasgow and central belt seats from the SNP they in turn will need Tory tactical votes
Do you happen to know whether the leaving councillor got the first place in the original slate at the previous election, or whether s/he was lower down (in which case we are not comparing like with like)? It's a crucial piece of data for any Scottish local gmt election which cannot be meaningfully discussed until this is established.
Do my eyes deceive me or does that imply that the Unionist vote is down 3.8% pts and the Indy vote up 3.8% pts? Pleasingly symmetrical.
Irrelevant as most Holyrood seats are constituencies elected under FPTP not preferential voting, so as long as the lead Unionist party's vote is up it does not matter if the combined Unionist total is down in terms of beating the SNP (though obviously the other Unionist parties would also gain seats on the PR list).
So that is why Labour voters last time voting Tory as their first preference this time in that by election could be so crucial if it becomes a trend for Holyrood 2021
I though the polling showed that Labour voters break more for the SNP than the Tories as second choice.
Second choice is irrelevant as Holyrood is FPTP and list not preferential voting and last week 12% of the Scottish Labour vote switched to make the Tories their first choice to beat the SNP, that Unionist tactical voting will be crucial to getting that Unionist majority next year
Yes, but a higher number of SLAB tactical votes will go to the SNP. Dislike of the Tories clearly outweighs Unionism for many of them, according to polling.
In my time Dundee West has gone from one of the safest Labour seats in Scotland (where the donkey and rosette theory was tried, tested and succeeded repeatedly) to a seat where they are not in sight. To be frank if Labour were back in contention there SKS would be heading to Downing Street with a comfortable majority.
Same with Ayrshire apart from South, they used to win by colossal margins and now are also rans. They are dead until they see sense , become a Scottish party and support independence, they could easily recover if that happened, especially as SNP are going all WOKE and losing the plot. Otherwise people will hold their noses and vote SNP. Tories are seen as sockpuppets of London and they have no hope as long as they remain that way and probably not even if they actually became a Scottish party.
I think a wise position for SLab would be to support a new referendum on the basis that Brexit has essentially made the 2014 No campaign a lie ex post. They could then say that the decision is up to the Scottish people, allow party members to campaign on both sides and promise to respect the result either way. Die hard unionists will vote Tory, die hard Nats will vote SNP. Labour should position itself in the pragmatic centre ground. Last thing they should do is front the No campaign again. The English party should support another referendum too, argue for a need to draw a line under the issue.
That would open up Labour to charges from the Tories of aiding and abetting treason (yes, I know, but given the wording used here by PB Tories, perfectly likely). Cue pics of SKS in Ms Sturgeon's jacket pocket, mobey case, etc. in the next Westminster election.
But on the other hand - the argument that SKS would knock back EVEL (as voiced on PB today) will have long been nullifed by the Tories themselves. Consider their wish to use English votes to impose laws EVEN WITHIN THE DEVOLVED REALMS in Scotland (and Wales and NI). As in the current Internal Market Bill passing through Parliament. English Votes for Scottish Laws, like the good old days of the satraps in their palace on Calton Hill.
The Internal Market Bill is to preserve the Union (though hopefully rendered redundant by an EU trade deal) it is not English only MPs voting on Scottish domestic policy where the Scottish Parliament decides policy, if there was a hung parliament in 2024 and the Tories had won a majority of English seats but Starmer was PM thanks to support from SNP MPs which is possible on current polls and scrapped EVEL so English domestic policy was decided by Scottish MPs with no English Parliament that would be a totally different matter
So9 why does the IMB contain provisions to enable the Toriues to change Scottish laws within the devolved realms?
What is truly astonishing, from a UK perspective, is that Trump has received 73.8m votes, far more than any candidate in history other than Joe Biden. Trump has very few supporters on this board, @MrEd is the only one that instantly comes to mind although @HYUFD dabbled, mainly, in fairness, pointing out that his chances were better than we thought. It shows the incredible gulf between American politics and mindset and ours.
Millions of Americans clearly believe that Biden is some sort of a socialist. Other than being thick I really struggle to see any evidence for that at all in a very long career. Their definition of socialism would clearly include most of the current Tory party.
I think that it is very difficult for us to predict what these millions might do. We simply do not understand their terms of reference.
Re: HYUFD It's impossible to truly know someone's mind, but the tenor of his posts made me think he would have voted Trump. Of course, he repeatedly claimed that he would vote for Biden if he had a vote, but, in short, I didn't believe him.
HYUFD is just a super-loyal Tory who goes wherever that journey takes him. He was a passionate Cameroon Remainer who became an equally passionate Johnson Leaver. He realized a Biden win would leave his new beau up shit creek so he became an obsessive Trumpster.
Think Stretford Ender
HYUFD`s recall of political factoids from history is extraordinary. I`ve been shot down before for saying that he largely just posts facts and some posters should lay off the rudeness towards him. He`s cherry-picking - of course - but still facts. Its`s up to us to raise our games to challenge him with equal precision.
His policital radar is worthy of attention. Most of us were predicting large Biden win, some landslide even. HYUFD vacillated between narrow Biden, then narrow Trump then narrow Biden again. He drew our attentions to, for example, Arizona, Florida and Wisconsin repeatedly where Trump, he said, may defy the odds. He`s worth listening too even when you don`t agree.
He`ll be back, good as ever. He`s one of the few (maybe six or seven) posters who I regard as top tier PB.com posters. I`m minor league in comparison.
HYUFD is excellent at cherry picking polls and examples from history that make elections look promising for the right-leaning candidate. That makes him look like a sage in an era where most elections have been won by right-leaning candidates. I doubt he’d have been as successful at projecting elections in, say, the 1990s
It is a myth to say I only forecast rightwing victories, for example last year I said Trudeau would win in Canada which was no certainty and he did
In tyhat case, why do you always assume that undecideds always vote for the right wingers?
They normally do, indeed Trump has got 47% of the popular vote when most polls were showing him on 43 to 45% and the 50% Biden has got is just what the polls predicted
I wonder how many votes both would lose if it came out as a formal alliance before the election? Witth the SNP, BXP and Mr Gallowa's lot salivating for any lost votes.
I think the only realstic option conceivably is an Aberdeen style after-election alliance - but (a) that assumes that the Greens and LDs and Trots (if any) would play ball, if needed, and (b) what happens at the next election thereafter?
The other option would be a Tory minority administration, and that assumes they have more MSPs than the SNP or at least can stop the SNP from being installed. Which latter would require Labour cooperation, or Green'LD/Trot - the klatter inherently unlikely.
As you say, bye bye SLAB given most of its pols are pro-EU and anti-Trident.
Of course, the Tories are happy for other parties to sacrifice themselves for the Union in Scotland, as 2014 showed very clearly.
There is more chance of me being the next Pope than the Tories leading Holyrood , with or without the pygmies to support them.
A majority, no, but would even a minority administration be workable without Labour setting it up and consistently voting with the Tories? Else it'd be like the Edinburgh trams week in week out with government defeats regularly.
The aim is not a Tory or Labour government at Holyrood, the aim is to get a Unionist majority to stop indyre2, that is all, as long as that happens a neutered Sturgeon can stay First Minister indefinitely as far as I am concerned and just focus on Scottish domestic policy (though Salmond might have a few other ideas)
Why do they need a Unionist majority to stop indyref2, when as we know indyref2 can't happen because Johnson will block it under all circumstances?
Because not all Tories are stupid and pigheaded enough to ignore a democratic mandate, and moreover know that Johnson has the consistency and determination of a very runny piece of jelly?
Scottish Labour voters are starting to vote tactically for the Tories to beat the SNP as last week's local by election in Clackmannanshire showed, if Labour are going to regain Glasgow and central belt seats from the SNP they in turn will need Tory tactical votes
Do you happen to know whether the leaving councillor got the first place in the original slate at the previous election, or whether s/he was lower down (in which case we are not comparing like with like)? It's a crucial piece of data for any Scottish local gmt election which cannot be meaningfully discussed until this is established.
Do my eyes deceive me or does that imply that the Unionist vote is down 3.8% pts and the Indy vote up 3.8% pts? Pleasingly symmetrical.
Irrelevant as most Holyrood seats are constituencies elected under FPTP not preferential voting, so as long as the lead Unionist party's vote is up it does not matter if the combined Unionist total is down in terms of beating the SNP (though obviously the other Unionist parties would also gain seats on the PR list).
So that is why Labour voters last time voting Tory as their first preference this time in that by election could be so crucial if it becomes a trend for Holyrood 2021
I though the polling showed that Labour voters break more for the SNP than the Tories as second choice.
Second choice is irrelevant as Holyrood is FPTP and list not preferential voting and last week 12% of the Scottish Labour vote switched to make the Tories their first choice to beat the SNP, that Unionist tactical voting will be crucial to getting that Unionist majority next year
But you are now using evcidence from local government voting to buttress your hopes in a completely different voting system. In the local government system there is no tactical voting by definition. You vote for your lot first and then give the secoind vote to wo might be acceptable.
There was clear tactical voting from those who put Labour first last time switching to put the Tories first this time and first preferences is all that matters under FPTP
Scottish Labour voters are starting to vote tactically for the Tories to beat the SNP as last week's local by election in Clackmannanshire showed, if Labour are going to regain Glasgow and central belt seats from the SNP they in turn will need Tory tactical votes
Do you happen to know whether the leaving councillor got the first place in the original slate at the previous election, or whether s/he was lower down (in which case we are not comparing like with like)? It's a crucial piece of data for any Scottish local gmt election which cannot be meaningfully discussed until this is established.
Do my eyes deceive me or does that imply that the Unionist vote is down 3.8% pts and the Indy vote up 3.8% pts? Pleasingly symmetrical.
Irrelevant as most Holyrood seats are constituencies elected under FPTP not preferential voting, so as long as the lead Unionist party's vote is up it does not matter if the combined Unionist total is down in terms of beating the SNP (though obviously the other Unionist parties would also gain seats on the PR list).
So that is why Labour voters last time voting Tory as their first preference this time in that by election could be so crucial if it becomes a trend for Holyrood 2021
I though the polling showed that Labour voters break more for the SNP than the Tories as second choice.
I'm also puzzled - HYUFD was all over Tories voting for Labour as being crucial for Unionist triumph. Now he's saying Labour voting for Tories is crucial. In a voting system specifically designed to make tactical voting both very difficult and unnecessary.
Of course it is, in the central belt Tories voting for Labour is crucial to beat the SNP, in the Borders, Aberdeenshire and much of the Highlands Labour voting for the Tories or LDs is crucial to beat the SNP.
Most Holyrood seats are FPTP and for them tactical voting is pivotal
You are back not one day and already stretching the meaning of words in English language. Most Holyrood seats are not FPTP - in fact the constituencies comprise rather less than three-fifths, ie. a bare majority. And the list votes counteract success in the constituency seats.
Excuse me, since when did 3/5 not constitute a majority? The SNP and Green current majority and combined seat total of 69 mainly comes from the 59 constituency seats the SNP won in 2016 under FPTP.
Interesting thread. It had me wondering how many plans Remainers had trying to overturn the EU Referendum result?
I count six:
- Plan A: pretend it never happened - apparently seriously canvassed at the time - Plan B: campaign for a second referendum - Plan C: try and defeat it in Parliament - Plan D : try to get the Labour Party to back Remain in the 2017 election then hope they win - Plan E: lawfare in the Courts, filing lawsuits with about as much hope as Trump had - Plan F: vote LibDem in the 2019 election.
Maybe others can think of some more, but those were the ones that sprang to my mind.
An interesting post. Perhaps some who so happily condemn Trump's shenanigans might want to reflect on it.
I can't remember any mainstream pro-Remain politicians (as opposed to some random FBPE type on Twitter) advocating annulling the referendum without a second vote. Other efforts were made in parliament to force a soft Brexit, which still respected the 2016 vote. Advocating a second referendum would be like Trump standing again in 2024, which would be fine. I think the analogy is rather poor.
It isn't quite the same thing as Trump standing again, because Biden will get to be President for 4 years.
The plan for the second referendum was for it to take place before the results of the first were enacted.
The efforts to force a soft Brexit were hopeless (indicative vote, anyone?) partly because there was this daft idea that it could be stopped entirely.
Why would a second referendum be any less valid than the first? I didn't advocate one incidentally, but am just interested as to why one plebiscite gets preference simply because it took place at an earlier point in time.
Constitutionally a second referendum wouldn't have been any less valid if one had been agreed by parliament.
Putting the same question again and again until you get the 'right' answer and refusing to implement the 'wrong' answer isn't a good look though. Otherwise, why bother asking?
All I'm pointing out though is that it wouldn't have been quite the same as Trump 'standing again', because unless something really bad happens, those who voted for Biden will get to see him as President.
I wonder how many votes both would lose if it came out as a formal alliance before the election? Witth the SNP, BXP and Mr Gallowa's lot salivating for any lost votes.
I think the only realstic option conceivably is an Aberdeen style after-election alliance - but (a) that assumes that the Greens and LDs and Trots (if any) would play ball, if needed, and (b) what happens at the next election thereafter?
The other option would be a Tory minority administration, and that assumes they have more MSPs than the SNP or at least can stop the SNP from being installed. Which latter would require Labour cooperation, or Green'LD/Trot - the klatter inherently unlikely.
As you say, bye bye SLAB given most of its pols are pro-EU and anti-Trident.
Of course, the Tories are happy for other parties to sacrifice themselves for the Union in Scotland, as 2014 showed very clearly.
There is more chance of me being the next Pope than the Tories leading Holyrood , with or without the pygmies to support them.
A majority, no, but would even a minority administration be workable without Labour setting it up and consistently voting with the Tories? Else it'd be like the Edinburgh trams week in week out with government defeats regularly.
The aim is not a Tory or Labour government at Holyrood, the aim is to get a Unionist majority to stop indyre2, that is all, as long as that happens a neutered Sturgeon can stay First Minister indefinitely as far as I am concerned and just focus on Scottish domestic policy (though Salmond might have a few other ideas)
Why do they need a Unionist majority to stop indyref2, when as we know indyref2 can't happen because Johnson will block it under all circumstances?
As it is easier to defeat it democratically at the ballot box in Holyrood, though of course indyref2 will not be granted by the Tories at Westminster anyway even if the SNP win a majority next year
In my time Dundee West has gone from one of the safest Labour seats in Scotland (where the donkey and rosette theory was tried, tested and succeeded repeatedly) to a seat where they are not in sight. To be frank if Labour were back in contention there SKS would be heading to Downing Street with a comfortable majority.
Same with Ayrshire apart from South, they used to win by colossal margins and now are also rans. They are dead until they see sense , become a Scottish party and support independence, they could easily recover if that happened, especially as SNP are going all WOKE and losing the plot. Otherwise people will hold their noses and vote SNP. Tories are seen as sockpuppets of London and they have no hope as long as they remain that way and probably not even if they actually became a Scottish party.
Nationalists are already voting SNP, they will not go back to Labour, if Labour abandoned the Union it would lose all its remaining voters who are Unionists to the Tories and LDs, finally killing off Scottish Labour, so SLab backing independence would be political suicide
And, again, again, again, conveniently forgetting the Scottish Greens.
I see you are eeeeever so carefully muddling "voter for a pro-independence party at Holyrood" with "voter for the SNP" by sleekitly using the word "Nationalist" (which is in any case inaccurate as it describes rightwingers such as Tories, BXP, rather better).
Only 2 parties in the UK have the word 'National' in their name, the Scottish National Party and the British National Party, the SNP are the Scottish Nationalist Party
Scottish Labour voters are starting to vote tactically for the Tories to beat the SNP as last week's local by election in Clackmannanshire showed, if Labour are going to regain Glasgow and central belt seats from the SNP they in turn will need Tory tactical votes
Do you happen to know whether the leaving councillor got the first place in the original slate at the previous election, or whether s/he was lower down (in which case we are not comparing like with like)? It's a crucial piece of data for any Scottish local gmt election which cannot be meaningfully discussed until this is established.
Do my eyes deceive me or does that imply that the Unionist vote is down 3.8% pts and the Indy vote up 3.8% pts? Pleasingly symmetrical.
Irrelevant as most Holyrood seats are constituencies elected under FPTP not preferential voting, so as long as the lead Unionist party's vote is up it does not matter if the combined Unionist total is down in terms of beating the SNP (though obviously the other Unionist parties would also gain seats on the PR list).
So that is why Labour voters last time voting Tory as their first preference this time in that by election could be so crucial if it becomes a trend for Holyrood 2021
I though the polling showed that Labour voters break more for the SNP than the Tories as second choice.
Second choice is irrelevant as Holyrood is FPTP and list not preferential voting and last week 12% of the Scottish Labour vote switched to make the Tories their first choice to beat the SNP, that Unionist tactical voting will be crucial to getting that Unionist majority next year
Yes, but a higher number of SLAB tactical votes will go to the SNP. Dislike of the Tories clearly outweighs Unionism for many of them, according to polling.
Except they won't last Thursday the Labour first preference vote was down 12% and the Tories up 10%, there was clearly Labour to Tory tactical voting to beat the SNP
I have a Zoom quiz in a couple of hours and no questions for my round as yet. Any charitable PBers who wish to lob me any interesting questions, they would (as ever) be most welcome. I'm going to do pot luck, so they don't have to be on a theme.
What happened in London on the 10th of September 1752?
Scottish Labour voters are starting to vote tactically for the Tories to beat the SNP as last week's local by election in Clackmannanshire showed, if Labour are going to regain Glasgow and central belt seats from the SNP they in turn will need Tory tactical votes
Do you happen to know whether the leaving councillor got the first place in the original slate at the previous election, or whether s/he was lower down (in which case we are not comparing like with like)? It's a crucial piece of data for any Scottish local gmt election which cannot be meaningfully discussed until this is established.
Do my eyes deceive me or does that imply that the Unionist vote is down 3.8% pts and the Indy vote up 3.8% pts? Pleasingly symmetrical.
Irrelevant as most Holyrood seats are constituencies elected under FPTP not preferential voting, so as long as the lead Unionist party's vote is up it does not matter if the combined Unionist total is down in terms of beating the SNP (though obviously the other Unionist parties would also gain seats on the PR list).
So that is why Labour voters last time voting Tory as their first preference this time in that by election could be so crucial if it becomes a trend for Holyrood 2021
I though the polling showed that Labour voters break more for the SNP than the Tories as second choice.
Second choice is irrelevant as Holyrood is FPTP and list not preferential voting and last week 12% of the Scottish Labour vote switched to make the Tories their first choice to beat the SNP, that Unionist tactical voting will be crucial to getting that Unionist majority next year
Yes, but a higher number of SLAB tactical votes will go to the SNP. Dislike of the Tories clearly outweighs Unionism for many of them, according to polling.
Except they won't last Thursday the Labour first preference vote was down 12% and the Tories up 10%, there was clearly Labour to Tory tactical voting to beat the SNP
In a voting system which makes tactical voting completely unnecessary in the first place.
Scottish Labour voters are starting to vote tactically for the Tories to beat the SNP as last week's local by election in Clackmannanshire showed, if Labour are going to regain Glasgow and central belt seats from the SNP they in turn will need Tory tactical votes
Do you happen to know whether the leaving councillor got the first place in the original slate at the previous election, or whether s/he was lower down (in which case we are not comparing like with like)? It's a crucial piece of data for any Scottish local gmt election which cannot be meaningfully discussed until this is established.
Do my eyes deceive me or does that imply that the Unionist vote is down 3.8% pts and the Indy vote up 3.8% pts? Pleasingly symmetrical.
Irrelevant as most Holyrood seats are constituencies elected under FPTP not preferential voting, so as long as the lead Unionist party's vote is up it does not matter if the combined Unionist total is down in terms of beating the SNP (though obviously the other Unionist parties would also gain seats on the PR list).
So that is why Labour voters last time voting Tory as their first preference this time in that by election could be so crucial if it becomes a trend for Holyrood 2021
I though the polling showed that Labour voters break more for the SNP than the Tories as second choice.
Second choice is irrelevant as Holyrood is FPTP and list not preferential voting and last week 12% of the Scottish Labour vote switched to make the Tories their first choice to beat the SNP, that Unionist tactical voting will be crucial to getting that Unionist majority next year
Yes, but a higher number of SLAB tactical votes will go to the SNP. Dislike of the Tories clearly outweighs Unionism for many of them, according to polling.
Except they won't last Thursday the Labour first preference vote was down 12% and the Tories up 10%, there was clearly Labour to Tory tactical voting to beat the SNP
In a voting system which makes tactical voting completely unnecessary in the first place.
The Tories won the seat on the first round as a result of that tactical voting
I have a Zoom quiz in a couple of hours and no questions for my round as yet. Any charitable PBers who wish to lob me any interesting questions, they would (as ever) be most welcome. I'm going to do pot luck, so they don't have to be on a theme.
What happened in London on the 10th of September 1752?
I have a Zoom quiz in a couple of hours and no questions for my round as yet. Any charitable PBers who wish to lob me any interesting questions, they would (as ever) be most welcome. I'm going to do pot luck, so they don't have to be on a theme.
What happened in London on the 10th of September 1752?
Without googling, something to do with cricket?
Ha, I just googled and I know the answer... even more boring that cricket! good one.
I have a Zoom quiz in a couple of hours and no questions for my round as yet. Any charitable PBers who wish to lob me any interesting questions, they would (as ever) be most welcome. I'm going to do pot luck, so they don't have to be on a theme.
What happened in London on the 10th of September 1752?
Without googling, something to do with cricket?
Riots because of a change from the Julian to the Gregorian calendar (or the other way round - I can never remember which is which).
It meant the date jumped from the 10th to the 22nd September 1752, and people thought they were being cheated of 11 days.
I have a Zoom quiz in a couple of hours and no questions for my round as yet. Any charitable PBers who wish to lob me any interesting questions, they would (as ever) be most welcome. I'm going to do pot luck, so they don't have to be on a theme.
What happened in London on the 10th of September 1752?
Without googling, something to do with cricket?
Riots because of a change from the Julian to the Gregorian calendar (or the other way round - I can never remember which is which).
It meant the date jumped from the 10th to the 22nd September 1752, and people thought they were being cheated of 11 days.
2nd to 14th: the 10th of September 1752 had as much happening at the 30th of February did this year.
I have a Zoom quiz in a couple of hours and no questions for my round as yet. Any charitable PBers who wish to lob me any interesting questions, they would (as ever) be most welcome. I'm going to do pot luck, so they don't have to be on a theme.
What happened in London on the 10th of September 1752?
Without googling, something to do with cricket?
Riots because of a change from the Julian to the Gregorian calendar (or the other way round - I can never remember which is which).
It meant the date jumped from the 10th to the 22nd September 1752, and people thought they were being cheated of 11 days.
I thought the riots were because those 11 days included two weekends? So the peasants finished work on Friday night and then went back to work the next day which was Wednesday morning. Could be an urban myth though so DYOR.
I have a Zoom quiz in a couple of hours and no questions for my round as yet. Any charitable PBers who wish to lob me any interesting questions, they would (as ever) be most welcome. I'm going to do pot luck, so they don't have to be on a theme.
What happened in London on the 10th of September 1752?
Without googling, something to do with cricket?
Riots because of a change from the Julian to the Gregorian calendar (or the other way round - I can never remember which is which).
It meant the date jumped from the 10th to the 22nd September 1752, and people thought they were being cheated of 11 days.
2nd to 14th: the 10th of September 1752 had as much happening at the 30th of February did this year.
Yup, so the answer is "even less action than a test match". Nice one, will reuse.
I have a Zoom quiz in a couple of hours and no questions for my round as yet. Any charitable PBers who wish to lob me any interesting questions, they would (as ever) be most welcome. I'm going to do pot luck, so they don't have to be on a theme.
What happened in London on the 10th of September 1752?
Without googling, something to do with cricket?
Riots because of a change from the Julian to the Gregorian calendar (or the other way round - I can never remember which is which).
It meant the date jumped from the 10th to the 22nd September 1752, and people thought they were being cheated of 11 days.
I thought the riots were because those 11 days included two weekends? So the peasants finished work on Friday night and then went back to work the next day which was Wednesday morning. Could be an urban myth though so DYOR.
The days of the week didn't change, but the rioters were probably miffed that they were paid by the day and charged rent by the month.
I have a Zoom quiz in a couple of hours and no questions for my round as yet. Any charitable PBers who wish to lob me any interesting questions, they would (as ever) be most welcome. I'm going to do pot luck, so they don't have to be on a theme.
What happened in London on the 10th of September 1752?
Comments
And back off hard.
I do think that we will see more Tories willing to vote tactically for Labour under SKS. Whether that will be enough in some of those fairly close Glasgow seats remains to be seen. There is a risk that they will lose more elsewhere than they gain.
I count six:
- Plan A: pretend it never happened - apparently seriously canvassed at the time
- Plan B: campaign for a second referendum
- Plan C: try and defeat it in Parliament
- Plan D : try to get the Labour Party to back Remain in the 2017 election then hope they win
- Plan E: lawfare in the Courts, filing lawsuits with about as much hope as Trump had
- Plan F: vote LibDem in the 2019 election.
Maybe others can think of some more, but those were the ones that sprang to my mind.
They are dead until they see sense , become a Scottish party and support independence, they could easily recover if that happened, especially as SNP are going all WOKE and losing the plot. Otherwise people will hold their noses and vote SNP. Tories are seen as sockpuppets of London and they have no hope as long as they remain that way and probably not even if they actually became a Scottish party.
The plan for the second referendum was for it to take place before the results of the first were enacted.
The efforts to force a soft Brexit were hopeless (indicative vote, anyone?) partly because there was this daft idea that it could be stopped entirely.
"From Davey himself, nothing distinctively liberal has emerged in relation to the battle against Covid. There is no hint of worry about intrusion into civil liberties and no demand from ministers to explicitly rule out compulsion when the vaccines are rolled out."
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-are-ed-davey-s-lib-dems-keeping-such-a-low-profile-
Interesting piece. He thinks there is a plot to do a deal with Starmer.
But on the other hand - the argument that SKS would knock back EVEL (as voiced on PB today) will have long been nullifed by the Tories themselves. Consider their wish to use English votes to impose laws EVEN WITHIN THE DEVOLVED REALMS in Scotland (and Wales and NI). As in the current Internal Market Bill passing through Parliament. English Votes for Scottish Laws, like the good old days of the satraps in their palace on Calton Hill.
https://twitter.com/esproull/status/1330183901667610633
Welsh numbers up again vs same day last week. Sends himself to Tory Home.
I assume a 2nd referendum is OK now we have left? Brexit already seems quite unpopular, it seems only right that people have a chance to register their opposition to it now they've had a chance to see what a clusterfuck it's turning out to be.
Stonewall penalty by the looks given and VAR tells Oliver to look at it and he overturns his decision.
https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1329576355068080130?s=20
But in any case, the SNP will still be in government after the next Holyrood election. It might be different if there were one clear challenger, but there isn’t.
Most Labour target seats in Scotland have the SNP as their main rivals, most LD seats in 2015 had the Tories as their main rivals, that was the difference
Answer - Ellyse Perry.
Most Holyrood seats are FPTP and for them tactical voting is pivotal
A: Baroness Heyhoe-Flint
Answer Graeme Smith (108, not including that silly Rest of World one).
The lockdownsceptics cultists have got to the point of being fucking pathetic.
Meanwhile, in the cold harsh world of reality:
https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/heartbreak-despair-covid-heroism-inside-19314519
You're back then.
I see you are eeeeever so carefully muddling "voter for a pro-independence party at Holyrood" with "voter for the SNP" by sleekitly using the word "Nationalist" (which is in any case inaccurate as it describes rightwingers such as Tories, BXP, rather better).
NEW THREAD
Putting the same question again and again until you get the 'right' answer and refusing to implement the 'wrong' answer isn't a good look though. Otherwise, why bother asking?
All I'm pointing out though is that it wouldn't have been quite the same as Trump 'standing again', because unless something really bad happens, those who voted for Biden will get to see him as President.
There are three American State Capitals with populations under 20,000, and one with a population over 1,000,000.
Can you name either the states, or the capitals themselves?
Lowest:
Vermont (Montpellier), Maine (Augusta), South Dakota (Pierre)
Highest:
Arizona (Phoenix)
It meant the date jumped from the 10th to the 22nd September 1752, and people thought they were being cheated of 11 days.