Is an SNP + Green majority nailed on? And did the Greens have a clear commitment to a referendum in their manifesto?
AN INDEPENDENCE REFERENDUM SHOULD BE HELD DURING THE NEXT PARLIAMENTARY SESSION The legislation covering all aspects of the referendum, including the question and the timing, should be decided by a simple majority of the Scottish Parliament. The Scottish Greens will campaign and vote for a referendum within the next Parliamentary term and under the terms of the Referendums Act (2020). We believe that the UK Government’s refusal to respect a pro-independence majority in the Scottish Parliament would not be politically sustainable and could be subject to legal challenge.
The parliament is similar in make up to the last.
Indy vote didn’t happen then. So what’s changed? The only thing I can see is pressure on Sturgeon to press on regardless...
All the enabling legislation was passed in the last parliament.
Is an SNP + Green majority nailed on? And did the Greens have a clear commitment to a referendum in their manifesto?
AN INDEPENDENCE REFERENDUM SHOULD BE HELD DURING THE NEXT PARLIAMENTARY SESSION The legislation covering all aspects of the referendum, including the question and the timing, should be decided by a simple majority of the Scottish Parliament. The Scottish Greens will campaign and vote for a referendum within the next Parliamentary term and under the terms of the Referendums Act (2020). We believe that the UK Government’s refusal to respect a pro-independence majority in the Scottish Parliament would not be politically sustainable and could be subject to legal challenge.
The parliament is similar in make up to the last.
Indy vote didn’t happen then. So what’s changed? The only thing I can see is pressure on Sturgeon to press on regardless...
This coronavirus thing. Also this Brexit thing.
Not sure about coronavirus as an excuse. Tentatively I can see how you can argue brexit - but can’t see how a vote happens unless it’s a wildcat one
Is an SNP + Green majority nailed on? And did the Greens have a clear commitment to a referendum in their manifesto?
AN INDEPENDENCE REFERENDUM SHOULD BE HELD DURING THE NEXT PARLIAMENTARY SESSION The legislation covering all aspects of the referendum, including the question and the timing, should be decided by a simple majority of the Scottish Parliament. The Scottish Greens will campaign and vote for a referendum within the next Parliamentary term and under the terms of the Referendums Act (2020). We believe that the UK Government’s refusal to respect a pro-independence majority in the Scottish Parliament would not be politically sustainable and could be subject to legal challenge.
The parliament is similar in make up to the last.
Indy vote didn’t happen then. So what’s changed? The only thing I can see is pressure on Sturgeon to press on regardless...
This coronavirus thing. Also this Brexit thing.
Not sure about coronavirus as an excuse. Tentatively I can see how you can argue brexit - but can’t see how a vote happens unless it’s a wildcat one
What's the general turnout picture around the country? Anecdotal evidence in London of pretty high turnout - theory being that everybody working at home made voting a lot easier, and an excuse to get out of the house.
It seems to me surely as it stands the SNP have achieved a majority? Barring any losses?
They had 63, with 65 needed for a majority.
East Lothian is a gain. There are no SNP list MSPs there, so its a 'pure' gain. Takes them to 64, just 1 short.
Ayr and Edinburgh Central are gains too. They would need to lose two of the three List MSPs to not have a majority. Someone (David?) said earlier he thought they'd lose one if they won two constituencies.
That's the correct hot take on these elections, right?
I suspect if the politicians decided that the voters liked lockdowns so much that we should do it for another 12 months, the results next May might be somewhat different.
Is an SNP + Green majority nailed on? And did the Greens have a clear commitment to a referendum in their manifesto?
AN INDEPENDENCE REFERENDUM SHOULD BE HELD DURING THE NEXT PARLIAMENTARY SESSION The legislation covering all aspects of the referendum, including the question and the timing, should be decided by a simple majority of the Scottish Parliament. The Scottish Greens will campaign and vote for a referendum within the next Parliamentary term and under the terms of the Referendums Act (2020). We believe that the UK Government’s refusal to respect a pro-independence majority in the Scottish Parliament would not be politically sustainable and could be subject to legal challenge.
The parliament is similar in make up to the last.
Indy vote didn’t happen then. So what’s changed? The only thing I can see is pressure on Sturgeon to press on regardless...
All the enabling legislation was passed in the last parliament.
A good performance - against national trend - might give him a strong base to launch a Kier ouster.
He's not in parliament. May as well bet on David Miliband.
At least Burnham is in the UK.
Doesn't Miliband's role with the International Rescue Mission mean he can be deployed at a moment's notice?
Well, of course. Thunderbirds and all that.
Wouldn't Lady Penelope be a more appealing choice IF you wish to select the next Labour Leader from the Thunderbird roster? Would tick off the woman box?
OR if you do NOT wish to go posh, how's about Parker? Working class bloke, if not exactly in the model of Keir (Hardy that is).
It seems to me surely as it stands the SNP have achieved a majority? Barring any losses?
They had 63, with 65 needed for a majority.
East Lothian is a gain. There are no SNP list MSPs there, so its a 'pure' gain. Takes them to 64, just 1 short.
Ayr and Edinburgh Central are gains too. They would need to lose two of the three List MSPs to not have a majority. Someone (David?) said earlier he thought they'd lose one if they won two constituencies.
Is an SNP + Green majority nailed on? And did the Greens have a clear commitment to a referendum in their manifesto?
AN INDEPENDENCE REFERENDUM SHOULD BE HELD DURING THE NEXT PARLIAMENTARY SESSION The legislation covering all aspects of the referendum, including the question and the timing, should be decided by a simple majority of the Scottish Parliament. The Scottish Greens will campaign and vote for a referendum within the next Parliamentary term and under the terms of the Referendums Act (2020). We believe that the UK Government’s refusal to respect a pro-independence majority in the Scottish Parliament would not be politically sustainable and could be subject to legal challenge.
The parliament is similar in make up to the last.
Indy vote didn’t happen then. So what’s changed? The only thing I can see is pressure on Sturgeon to press on regardless...
All the enabling legislation was passed in the last parliament.
Let's temporarily turn the question around the other way - what's a realistic number of list seats for the SNP here based on what we know so far? We must be looking at what, less than 4, if we think they are falling short of a majority?
It seems to me surely as it stands the SNP have achieved a majority? Barring any losses?
They had 63, with 65 needed for a majority.
East Lothian is a gain. There are no SNP list MSPs there, so its a 'pure' gain. Takes them to 64, just 1 short.
Ayr and Edinburgh Central are gains too. They would need to lose two of the three List MSPs to not have a majority. Someone (David?) said earlier he thought they'd lose one if they won two constituencies.
East Lothian is in South of Scotland and not, as you might expect, Lothian
Everyone still seems to assume we'll have tonnes of money to spend and no economic issues will come up, I really hope I am wrong on this but I can't see it being entirely smooth
That's the correct hot take on these elections, right?
I suspect if the politicians decided that the voters liked lockdowns so much that we should do it for another 12 months, the results next May might be somewhat different.
I know, but I was thinking of people like Alison Pearson and Toby Young who were so sure that Boris Johnson/Sturgeon/Drakeford would pay a heavy price at these elections for the lockdowns they put us through.
It seems to me surely as it stands the SNP have achieved a majority? Barring any losses?
They had 63, with 65 needed for a majority.
East Lothian is a gain. There are no SNP list MSPs there, so its a 'pure' gain. Takes them to 64, just 1 short.
Ayr and Edinburgh Central are gains too. They would need to lose two of the three List MSPs to not have a majority. Someone (David?) said earlier he thought they'd lose one if they won two constituencies.
Yep, that's right. But you have to go region by region. There were no list seats in the Edinburgh etc region so the Edin Central seat is a pure gain. The two gains in South of Scotland etc may be partly or wholly offset on the list, though. And so on.
That's the correct hot take on these elections, right?
I suspect if the politicians decided that the voters liked lockdowns so much that we should do it for another 12 months, the results next May might be somewhat different.
I know, but I was thinking of people like Alison Pearson and Toby Young who were so sure that Boris Johnson/Sturgeon/Drakeford would pay a heavy price at these elections for the lockdowns they put us through.
If we were still in lockdown with no end in sight (ie no vaccines) then they probably would.
A good performance - against national trend - might give him a strong base to launch a Kier ouster.
He's not in parliament. May as well bet on David Miliband.
At least Burnham is in the UK.
Doesn't Miliband's role with the International Rescue Mission mean he can be deployed at a moment's notice?
Well, of course. Thunderbirds and all that.
Wouldn't Lady Penelope be a more appealing choice IF you wish to select the next Labour Leader from the Thunderbird roster? Would tick off the woman box?
OR if you do NOT wish to go posh, how's about Parker? Working class bloke, if not exactly in the model of Keir (Hardy that is).
It seems to me surely as it stands the SNP have achieved a majority? Barring any losses?
They had 63, with 65 needed for a majority.
East Lothian is a gain. There are no SNP list MSPs there, so its a 'pure' gain. Takes them to 64, just 1 short.
Ayr and Edinburgh Central are gains too. They would need to lose two of the three List MSPs to not have a majority. Someone (David?) said earlier he thought they'd lose one if they won two constituencies.
Is an SNP + Green majority nailed on? And did the Greens have a clear commitment to a referendum in their manifesto?
AN INDEPENDENCE REFERENDUM SHOULD BE HELD DURING THE NEXT PARLIAMENTARY SESSION The legislation covering all aspects of the referendum, including the question and the timing, should be decided by a simple majority of the Scottish Parliament. The Scottish Greens will campaign and vote for a referendum within the next Parliamentary term and under the terms of the Referendums Act (2020). We believe that the UK Government’s refusal to respect a pro-independence majority in the Scottish Parliament would not be politically sustainable and could be subject to legal challenge.
The parliament is similar in make up to the last.
Indy vote didn’t happen then. So what’s changed? The only thing I can see is pressure on Sturgeon to press on regardless...
All the enabling legislation was passed in the last parliament.
You know who also passed an enabling act?
Westminster, for Brexit, for instance.
It was a joke, I know someone who worked in government, one of their golden rules was never ever put word 'enabling' anywhere near the word 'legislation.'
That's the correct hot take on these elections, right?
I suspect if the politicians decided that the voters liked lockdowns so much that we should do it for another 12 months, the results next May might be somewhat different.
I know, but I was thinking of people like Alison Pearson and Toby Young who were so sure that Boris Johnson/Sturgeon/Drakeford would pay a heavy price at these elections for the lockdowns they put us through.
Ultimately it's all about the vaccines. Lockdowns are pointless without them
Yeah, so popular he shipped an 80 seat majority to Johnson.
Looks like Starmer would put that into triple figures.
Starmer has had a shocker, but I doubt that. He has certainly lost the former mining seats in Northern England and the North, West and East Midlands but looking less bad in Southern England and Wales.
Along with strong commitment to joining the EU - which means no pound.....
My thought is that the question of the border with England is even more problematic than the currency question.
"Berwick was Scottish once - and Scottish Berwick shall be again!"
Berwick changed hands 13 times, and no matter independence, it will not be Scottish but just a very prosperous part of Northumberland if the Scots leave
Looking at the North Britain results am I right in thinking Alba is going to end up with zero seats?
They are even trailing Galloway's mob.
#ScotchExpert
It's almost as if Scots don't believe the old lecherous.
I have to admit when one pollster had his ratings lower than Boris Johnson in Scotland I asked had they checked the numbers and it wasn't a typo/methodology/formula screw up.
They said they were way ahead of me, and it had been quadruple checked.
When other pollsters started showing a similar thing I knew Alba were in for a painful night.
Leader ratings don't lie.
In theory that shouldn't have sunk him, though. 15% of people reported a positive opinion of him, which in a PR system should have given him a decent chance of seats. Not really sure why it all fell apart.
One wonders how much his SNP1 ALBA2 message has helped Nicola.
Starmer in trouble, but there's no one to take over
Salmond's political career is over, end of
Sturgeon survives, but with no serious claim for Sindyref2
The Lib Dems did something but I forget already
Plaid Cymru, sad
For all the drama it turns out quite ho-hum. Perhaps the biggest consequence will be a short-medium-term challenge to Sturgeon's position. She now has no route to indy and she apparently can't do it through elections. So what next?
It seems to me surely as it stands the SNP have achieved a majority? Barring any losses?
They had 63, with 65 needed for a majority.
East Lothian is a gain. There are no SNP list MSPs there, so its a 'pure' gain. Takes them to 64, just 1 short.
Ayr and Edinburgh Central are gains too. They would need to lose two of the three List MSPs to not have a majority. Someone (David?) said earlier he thought they'd lose one if they won two constituencies.
East Lothian is in South of Scotland and not, as you might expect, Lothian
Sorry I mixed it up there. Edinburgh Central is a gain in the Lothian region.
So same principle, just reverse the names Edinburgh Central and East Lothian.
It seems to me surely as it stands the SNP have achieved a majority? Barring any losses?
They had 63, with 65 needed for a majority.
East Lothian is a gain. There are no SNP list MSPs there, so its a 'pure' gain. Takes them to 64, just 1 short.
Ayr and Edinburgh Central are gains too. They would need to lose two of the three List MSPs to not have a majority. Someone (David?) said earlier he thought they'd lose one if they won two constituencies.
Is an SNP + Green majority nailed on? And did the Greens have a clear commitment to a referendum in their manifesto?
AN INDEPENDENCE REFERENDUM SHOULD BE HELD DURING THE NEXT PARLIAMENTARY SESSION The legislation covering all aspects of the referendum, including the question and the timing, should be decided by a simple majority of the Scottish Parliament. The Scottish Greens will campaign and vote for a referendum within the next Parliamentary term and under the terms of the Referendums Act (2020). We believe that the UK Government’s refusal to respect a pro-independence majority in the Scottish Parliament would not be politically sustainable and could be subject to legal challenge.
The parliament is similar in make up to the last.
Indy vote didn’t happen then. So what’s changed? The only thing I can see is pressure on Sturgeon to press on regardless...
All the enabling legislation was passed in the last parliament.
You know who also passed an enabling act?
Westminster, for Brexit, for instance.
It was a joke, I know someone who worked in government, one of their golden rules was never ever put word 'enabling' anywhere near the word 'legislation.'
Was that because of the 1933 precewdent, or is there something I am missing?
It seems to me surely as it stands the SNP have achieved a majority? Barring any losses?
They had 63, with 65 needed for a majority.
East Lothian is a gain. There are no SNP list MSPs there, so its a 'pure' gain. Takes them to 64, just 1 short.
Ayr and Edinburgh Central are gains too. They would need to lose two of the three List MSPs to not have a majority. Someone (David?) said earlier he thought they'd lose one if they won two constituencies.
Is an SNP + Green majority nailed on? And did the Greens have a clear commitment to a referendum in their manifesto?
AN INDEPENDENCE REFERENDUM SHOULD BE HELD DURING THE NEXT PARLIAMENTARY SESSION The legislation covering all aspects of the referendum, including the question and the timing, should be decided by a simple majority of the Scottish Parliament. The Scottish Greens will campaign and vote for a referendum within the next Parliamentary term and under the terms of the Referendums Act (2020). We believe that the UK Government’s refusal to respect a pro-independence majority in the Scottish Parliament would not be politically sustainable and could be subject to legal challenge.
The parliament is similar in make up to the last.
Indy vote didn’t happen then. So what’s changed? The only thing I can see is pressure on Sturgeon to press on regardless...
All the enabling legislation was passed in the last parliament.
You know who also passed an enabling act?
Westminster, for Brexit, for instance.
It was a joke, I know someone who worked in government, one of their golden rules was never ever put word 'enabling' anywhere near the word 'legislation.'
Was that because of the 1933 precewdent, or is there something I am missing?
Everyone still seems to assume we'll have tonnes of money to spend and no economic issues will come up, I really hope I am wrong on this but I can't see it being entirely smooth
The classic way to manage the electoral cycle is to put the pain in years 1 and 2, so you can loosen off in year 3 and win in year 4. Thatcher and Blair were masters at that. Partly for self-inflicted reasons (Brexit) and mostly for reasons beyond his control (Covid), Johnson doesn't have that option. If it's left to Johnson, I imagine he'll keep on spending.. But Sunak's projections imply not much tightening as we come out of lockdown (fair enough) and then a pretty sharp slamming on of the brakes. It might not be visible, but I suspect it will be tangible. Just in time for the next election.
Along with strong commitment to joining the EU - which means no pound.....
My thought is that the question of the border with England is even more problematic than the currency question.
Assuming, being simple about it, that losing Scotland would be a resignation matter for a PM, and that Nicola knows perfectly well that she is expected by many supporters to go all out for Ref2 at some point in the definite future and also knows she would probably but not certainly lose it, a compromise might quietly commend itself to both parties.
Namely: Yes to Ref2 once there is an agreed deal to vote on ('we have learned from Brexit not to leave these things till afterwards') with both sides ensuring that this doesn't finalise on their watch - which frankly won't be difficult. It is impossible to imagine terms of leaving which, if made clear in advance, would be acceptable to both sides as a basis for Ref2.
It seems to me surely as it stands the SNP have achieved a majority? Barring any losses?
They had 63, with 65 needed for a majority.
East Lothian is a gain. There are no SNP list MSPs there, so its a 'pure' gain. Takes them to 64, just 1 short.
Ayr and Edinburgh Central are gains too. They would need to lose two of the three List MSPs to not have a majority. Someone (David?) said earlier he thought they'd lose one if they won two constituencies.
John Curtis seems pretty sure they won't win a majority, although I don't understand his working.
If Labour leftwingers try to defenestrate Starmer this year, they need 40 MPs to call for a leadership election.
One shadow cabinet member insisted Starmer was “untouchable” given the lack of alternative big-hitters in the parliamentary Labour party. “There is no one else,” he said. “You can’t give up on him.”
Yeah, so popular he shipped an 80 seat majority to Johnson.
Looks like Starmer would put that into triple figures.
Starmer has had a shocker, but I doubt that. He has certainly lost the former mining seats in Northern England and the North, West and East Midlands but looking less bad in Southern England and Wales.
I suspect if we had an election tomorrow, Labour would grab the low hanging fruit from the Tories. Get the majority down to 40-50. Probably not much more than that.
Along with strong commitment to joining the EU - which means no pound.....
My thought is that the question of the border with England is even more problematic than the currency question.
"Berwick was Scottish once - and Scottish Berwick shall be again!"
Berwick changed hands 13 times, and no matter independence, it will not be Scottish but just a very prosperous part of Northumberland if the Scots leave
Methinks Scots infiltrators are already slipping across the Tweed & chalking "14" up on the walls . . .
That's the correct hot take on these elections, right?
I suspect if the politicians decided that the voters liked lockdowns so much that we should do it for another 12 months, the results next May might be somewhat different.
I know, but I was thinking of people like Alison Pearson and Toby Young who were so sure that Boris Johnson/Sturgeon/Drakeford would pay a heavy price at these elections for the lockdowns they put us through.
Everyone still seems to assume we'll have tonnes of money to spend and no economic issues will come up, I really hope I am wrong on this but I can't see it being entirely smooth
The classic way to manage the electoral cycle is to put the pain in years 1 and 2, so you can loosen off in year 3 and win in year 4. Thatcher and Blair were masters at that. Partly for self-inflicted reasons (Brexit) and mostly for reasons beyond his control (Covid), Johnson doesn't have that option. If it's left to Johnson, I imagine he'll keep on spending.. But Sunak's projections imply not much tightening as we come out of lockdown (fair enough) and then a pretty sharp slamming on of the brakes. It might not be visible, but I suspect it will be tangible. Just in time for the next election.
Another reason for an election as early as next year.
If there was a GE tomorrow, Labour would probably pick up 10 or fewer seats and the Tories would have a healthy majority. Which is why I am sceptical of Johnson going early, can't see why he'd bother
If there was a GE tomorrow, Labour would probably pick up 10 or fewer seats and the Tories would have a healthy majority. Which is why I am sceptical of Johnson going early, can't see why he'd bother
There's no need to go now, given the size of the majority. Maybe in late 2023 rather than late 2024 though.
Everyone still seems to assume we'll have tonnes of money to spend and no economic issues will come up, I really hope I am wrong on this but I can't see it being entirely smooth
The classic way to manage the electoral cycle is to put the pain in years 1 and 2, so you can loosen off in year 3 and win in year 4. Thatcher and Blair were masters at that. Partly for self-inflicted reasons (Brexit) and mostly for reasons beyond his control (Covid), Johnson doesn't have that option. If it's left to Johnson, I imagine he'll keep on spending.. But Sunak's projections imply not much tightening as we come out of lockdown (fair enough) and then a pretty sharp slamming on of the brakes. It might not be visible, but I suspect it will be tangible. Just in time for the next election.
Another reason for an election as early as next year.
On the whole, electorates do not like early elections, except when forced. See May in 2017.
Along with strong commitment to joining the EU - which means no pound.....
My thought is that the question of the border with England is even more problematic than the currency question.
"Berwick was Scottish once - and Scottish Berwick shall be again!"
Berwick changed hands 13 times, and no matter independence, it will not be Scottish but just a very prosperous part of Northumberland if the Scots leave
Methinks Scots infiltrators are already slipping across the Tweed & chalking "14" up on the walls . . .
Unionists arguing that vote share matters and seats won don't matter sound like Corbynistas trying to justify why losing an election is winning one.
Nah.
“There’s an overwhelming majority for independence - we hold x seats”
“But over half the population voted for unionist parties”
"Half the population voted for non-Brexit Parties, so we should still be in the EU".
It is who gets elected that matters.
Who gets elected only matters if they have the power to do what they want to do. Bums on seats isn't about moral right to do things, it is about actual power to do things. The Scottish Parliament doesn't have the actual power to implement an Indy Referendum - so the Government at Westminster can set what ever criteria it wants. The only judgement is whether the route they choose might have a negative political consequence.
Hats off to whoever on here tipped Binface to get more than 20,000 votes at a nudge over 4/1. With the more Binface friendly areas left to count he's at a solid 1%/12,100 votes.
Been a very decent election from a betting perspective if that alone comes in.
No way would that be the outcome if there was an election tomorrow
Yes, I'm not sure how they come up with Lab+23 on GE2019 with results like Hartlepool.
Hartlepool was a combination of (mostly) a delayed dropping of a shoe from 2019 and (partly) worse than it should have been. Same for some of the other results from Leave-y areas.
The other story is that the "Conservative because nobody else will keep Jezza out" vote has unwound significantly, which doesn't help the governing party.
It seems to me surely as it stands the SNP have achieved a majority? Barring any losses?
They had 63, with 65 needed for a majority.
East Lothian is a gain. There are no SNP list MSPs there, so its a 'pure' gain. Takes them to 64, just 1 short.
Ayr and Edinburgh Central are gains too. They would need to lose two of the three List MSPs to not have a majority. Someone (David?) said earlier he thought they'd lose one if they won two constituencies.
It seems to me surely as it stands the SNP have achieved a majority? Barring any losses?
They had 63, with 65 needed for a majority.
East Lothian is a gain. There are no SNP list MSPs there, so its a 'pure' gain. Takes them to 64, just 1 short.
Ayr and Edinburgh Central are gains too. They would need to lose two of the three List MSPs to not have a majority. Someone (David?) said earlier he thought they'd lose one if they won two constituencies.
East Lothian is in South of Scotland and not, as you might expect, Lothian
Sorry I mixed it up there. Edinburgh Central is a gain in the Lothian region.
So same principle, just reverse the names Edinburgh Central and East Lothian.
I haven't run the numbers to be sure but I'm fairly certain the Ayr and East Lothian pickups will be precisely cancelled out by the loss of two seats on the South of Scotland list.
If there was a GE tomorrow, Labour would probably pick up 10 or fewer seats and the Tories would have a healthy majority. Which is why I am sceptical of Johnson going early, can't see why he'd bother
There's no need to go now, given the size of the majority. Maybe in late 2023 rather than late 2024 though.
Generally best not to leave it till full term (I think this is still June 2024?) so yes summer or late 2023 could be on.
Unless of course Starmer is 15% clear in the polls!
Hats off to whoever on here tipped Binface to get more than 20,000 votes at a nudge over 4/1. With the more Binface friendly areas left to count he's at a solid 1%/12,100 votes.
Been a very decent election from a betting perspective if that alone comes in.
Is Binface the most successful "Loony" candidate ever?
That's the correct hot take on these elections, right?
I suspect if the politicians decided that the voters liked lockdowns so much that we should do it for another 12 months, the results next May might be somewhat different.
I know, but I was thinking of people like Alison Pearson and Toby Young who were so sure that Boris Johnson/Sturgeon/Drakeford would pay a heavy price at these elections for the lockdowns they put us through.
Ultimately it's all about the vaccines. Lockdowns are pointless without them
I agree. I opposed the first one because that just pushed deaths to the winter and ruined the economy into the bargain. I reluctantly accepted January's though because vaccinations were available by then.
Unionists arguing that vote share matters and seats won don't matter sound like Corbynistas trying to justify why losing an election is winning one.
Nah.
“There’s an overwhelming majority for independence - we hold x seats”
“But over half the population voted for unionist parties”
There may or may not be an overwhelming mandate, but a parliamentary mandate is something else, and its that which our system usually says is key.
Indeed, it is only specific referenda where voting numbers overall count, and those are rare and precisely demarcated well in advance.
Everything else (e.g. the decision to have referenda, vide Brexit) is by counting parliamentary seats. To argue for anything else is profoundly subversive of UK democracy as it is formulated.
Unionists arguing that vote share matters and seats won don't matter sound like Corbynistas trying to justify why losing an election is winning one.
Nah.
“There’s an overwhelming majority for independence - we hold x seats”
“But over half the population voted for unionist parties”
There may or may not be an overwhelming mandate, but a parliamentary mandate is something else, and its that which our system usually says is key.
As above, a mandate gives a victorious party a mandate to do that which they have the power to do. The power to conduct a legal independence referendum does no lie with the Scottish Parliament. Any more than Sadiq Khan winning gives him the legal power to carry out his manifesto policies on rent controls etc.
Starmer in trouble, but there's no one to take over
Salmond's political career is over, end of
Sturgeon survives, but with no serious claim for Sindyref2
The Lib Dems did something but I forget already
Plaid Cymru, sad
For all the drama it turns out quite ho-hum. Perhaps the biggest consequence will be a short-medium-term challenge to Sturgeon's position. She now has no route to indy and she apparently can't do it through elections. So what next?
So not having seen the news for 12 hours, what's the single most surprising result?
Leanne Wood.
Disagree. Has been on the cards for ages.
I heard she had walked out of the count in a strop
She was very upset. Had to write her defeated candidate speech on her mobile.
Back number of years ago Ireland experimented with using voting machines for one general election. So instead of the count taking place the day after the vote, in typical slow fashion, the results were announced the night of the poll.
At one count, the process of informing the candidates who had won and who hadn't was was mishandled. So that one incumbent TD apparently learned that she was out right as the result was announced, on live TV. And broke into tears.
The Irish reaction was quite different than the British reaction here on PB. Instead of gloating over her downfall, the general reaction - by friend and foe alike - was outrage.
In fact, this incident was one reason why the Irish scrapped using machines for tabulation, which is actually a better, more accurate and certainly faster way to do it.
Everyone still seems to assume we'll have tonnes of money to spend and no economic issues will come up, I really hope I am wrong on this but I can't see it being entirely smooth
The classic way to manage the electoral cycle is to put the pain in years 1 and 2, so you can loosen off in year 3 and win in year 4. Thatcher and Blair were masters at that. Partly for self-inflicted reasons (Brexit) and mostly for reasons beyond his control (Covid), Johnson doesn't have that option. If it's left to Johnson, I imagine he'll keep on spending.. But Sunak's projections imply not much tightening as we come out of lockdown (fair enough) and then a pretty sharp slamming on of the brakes. It might not be visible, but I suspect it will be tangible. Just in time for the next election.
Another reason for an election as early as next year.
On the whole, electorates do not like early elections, except when forced. See May in 2017.
I suspect it will be 2024. Given the FTPA is supposed to be ending up on the scrap heap (horaaay!!) but that it will be relatively novel for a PM to have the power to call an election again (for the first time in 14 years) I think that there would be a lot of scrutiny around an early call which could be unwelcome. Before 2010 we didn’t know any different but I do imagine certain sections of the media fixating on it next time. Which means it’s probably safest to keep going for what the Parliament would have run for with the FTPA in place. Gives longer for the Covid memories to hopefully fade too.
Along with strong commitment to joining the EU - which means no pound.....
My thought is that the question of the border with England is even more problematic than the currency question.
"Berwick was Scottish once - and Scottish Berwick shall be again!"
Berwick changed hands 13 times, and no matter independence, it will not be Scottish but just a very prosperous part of Northumberland if the Scots leave
Methinks Scots infiltrators are already slipping across the Tweed & chalking "14" up on the walls . . .
In the 1950s when I was a schoolboy living in Berwick, Wendy Wood used to regularly chalk 'Scotland' across the centre of the Border Bridge
And by the way Scotland’s border is seven miles up the Tweed so for those seven miles both banks are in England
Comments
Tories on 327 according to their seat projection.
Also this Mr Johnson thing, to put it mildly.
They had 63, with 65 needed for a majority.
East Lothian is a gain. There are no SNP list MSPs there, so its a 'pure' gain. Takes them to 64, just 1 short.
Ayr and Edinburgh Central are gains too. They would need to lose two of the three List MSPs to not have a majority. Someone (David?) said earlier he thought they'd lose one if they won two constituencies.
and
Yes. https://greens.scot/our-future/independence-and-scotland-s-future
"AN INDEPENDENCE REFERENDUM SHOULD BE HELD DURING THE NEXT PARLIAMENTARY SESSION"
So as Cocky Cockney rightly says, they aren't in favour of holding an independence referendum.
AND "Redebate the Debatable Lands!"
Boris sails on, but the economy looms
Starmer in trouble, but there's no one to take over
Salmond's political career is over, end of
Sturgeon survives, but with no serious claim for Sindyref2
The Lib Dems did something but I forget already
Plaid Cymru, sad
For all the drama it turns out quite ho-hum. Perhaps the biggest consequence will be a short-medium-term challenge to Sturgeon's position. She now has no route to indy and she apparently can't do it through elections. So what next?
So same principle, just reverse the names Edinburgh Central and East Lothian.
Meanwhile I have a Tory Council with a majority of 1 decided by drawing lots in two tied wards.
“There’s an overwhelming majority for independence - we hold x seats”
“But over half the population voted for unionist parties”
Not for the results, which are bad - but as the BBC projections show - not calamitous.
But for his interview. He’s not a man, he’s some kind of droid with a broken chip.
https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1390686617199906820?s=20
Namely: Yes to Ref2 once there is an agreed deal to vote on ('we have learned from Brexit not to leave these things till afterwards') with both sides ensuring that this doesn't finalise on their watch - which frankly won't be difficult. It is impossible to imagine terms of leaving which, if made clear in advance, would be acceptable to both sides as a basis for Ref2.
One shadow cabinet member insisted Starmer was “untouchable” given the lack of alternative big-hitters in the parliamentary Labour party. “There is no one else,” he said. “You can’t give up on him.”
https://www.ft.com/content/c6caf2cb-584e-486c-98ac-9023a108b220
Starmer is going nowhere, the SCG do not have the MPs
Con 17.7 (+0.1)
Plaid 16.1 (-15.8)
Neil McEvoy 9.5%
Novara Media
@novaramedia
·
22m
"Keir Starmer is a fundamentally useless vacuous politician, surrounded by useless advisors."
@aaronbastani
on why Labour's Hartlepool defeat was, at least in part, self-inflicted.
https://twitter.com/novaramedia/status/1390763245179387909
It is who gets elected that matters.
..
It absolutely was an endorsement of lockdowns.
And the Tories were applauded for them.
As were they on here.
(Written to you while still in lockdown.)
@BorisJohnson
blew up Labour #TomorrowsPapersToday
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1390765653074882566
Labour in Wales have done well.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/c37d28xdn99t/scottish-parliament-election-2021
Been a very decent election from a betting perspective if that alone comes in.
Well, the regions too...but I read they have been moved to tomorrow
The other story is that the "Conservative because nobody else will keep Jezza out" vote has unwound significantly, which doesn't help the governing party.
Unless of course Starmer is 15% clear in the polls!
Obviously definitions are problematic.
Khan 487,104
Bailey 462,837
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/c27kz1m3j9mt/london-elections-2021
This page doesn't give second preferences atm.
Discuss.
Everything else (e.g. the decision to have referenda, vide Brexit) is by counting parliamentary seats. To argue for anything else is profoundly subversive of UK democracy as it is formulated.
Boris sails on, the economy booms.
At one count, the process of informing the candidates who had won and who hadn't was was mishandled. So that one incumbent TD apparently learned that she was out right as the result was announced, on live TV. And broke into tears.
The Irish reaction was quite different than the British reaction here on PB. Instead of gloating over her downfall, the general reaction - by friend and foe alike - was outrage.
In fact, this incident was one reason why the Irish scrapped using machines for tabulation, which is actually a better, more accurate and certainly faster way to do it.
And by the way Scotland’s border is seven miles up the Tweed so for those seven miles both banks are in England