The Tory leadership is wrong on Scottish tactical voting – politicalbetting.com
The Tory leadership is wrong on Scottish tactical voting – politicalbetting.com
The leader of the Scottish Conservatives Douglas Ross has been wrapped on the knuckles by the party’s London bosses for suggesting that voters north of the border should tactically vote Labour in certain seats in order to keep the SNP out.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
As OGH suggests the voters in Scotland may well do it regardless, to the net benefit (they hope) of Scon, Slab and even Sld.
https://twitter.com/keir_starmer/status/1644958328945274881
How can anyone watch this and not conclude Keir Starmer isn't as dishonest as he is devoid of principle?
To argue otherwise, you have to become a liar yourself, which is why - as the expression goes - 'a fish rots from the head down'.
https://twitter.com/owenjones84/status/1645152275311075328
If the vast majority of Scottish seats are once again won by the SNP, there's still a realistic possibility that, faced with a refusal by Starmer to give ground on constitutional issues, the SNP will make things difficult by combining with a Conservative opposition in parliament to defeat a Lab-Lib coalition at will, making it difficult to sustain a Labour-led government for any period and making likely an early general election later in 2025 or 2026, at which the Conservatives would get a second bite at the cherry.
So it seems to me that the Conservatives' prospects are better served by the SNP holding on to seats in the face of a Labour challenge, rather than Labour winning those seats with or without Conservative tactical votes.
It makes no odds to idiots like this whether there is a Labour government or not, their cosseted lives will remain largely the same.
It makes no odds to idiots like this whether there is a Labour government or not, their cosseted lives will remain largely the same.
Owen Jones is simply a left wing Dan Hodges. He sold out years ago to following whatever maintains him in “clicks”.
The SNP champions the anti-Tory cause north of the border whilst praying that their enemy will get elected south of it. Tory HQ knows this, and to an extent the relationship is symbiotic since having the SNP dominant in Scotland makes their trump card of frightening the English with the risk of nationalist leverage potent in the first place. If we got back to Labour dominance in Scotland with the SNP marginalised (and the Nats are certainly giving it their best shot….) then the Tory hand would be missing its Ace.
That said, the attack ad on Sunak was dumb politics and a Labour error, and credit to those on the left who are calling it for what it is.
https://twitter.com/ulrichspeck/status/1645094073219391488
An unintended consequence was PB Tories endlessly going on about the irritating posters they were specifically blocking using the widget, which was an odd kind of ignoring.
Macron responded by helping to throw a wedge into #transatlanticrelations, into the EU, & possibly NATO. Not bad for 6 hours of Xi's valuable time. Macron's #CarnivalofVanity continues.
https://twitter.com/theresaafallon/status/1645146499771146240
Trans people have always existed. Trans people will have been using the toilets of their new gender for as long as there have been gendered toilets.
It is also patently unpoliceable, and the effects of it on women who do not exhibit 'womanly' traits - or who do not fir the bigoted views of bigots on what a woman should look like - might be severe.
It was inevitable that the conservatives would counter labour's posters with a nasty battle looming
Labour have opened a can of worms
For ever since the huge rise of the SNP following the 2014 IndyRef there has been a strong pattern of Labour, Lib Dem and Tory voters getting behind the candidate in their constituency most likely to stop the SNP.
My guess is that this practice, which arguably has helped the Tories win more Scottish seats overall, will continue whatever the London bosses might say.'
Mike, you hit the nail on the head! And more importantly Douglas Ross is going to do what he did back in the 2021 Holyrood electiion campaign, he is going to ignore the same journalists/commentators criticism of his campaign which then saw him retain the gains that Ruth Davidson achieved back in the 2016 Holyood election despite a Boris Johnson premiership in Downing Street that cost the SConservatives half their MPs in the 2019 GE.
Its a win win for Douglas Ross if the Westminster Conservatives criticise him for this, he defines and declares his independence from Westminster like a London Mayor candidate would. And already wise SLabour commentators are pointing out that he is deliberately trying to undermine the SLabour party who would not risk being seen to be in cahoots with the SConservatives in a joint tactical voting campaign because they are desperately trying to woo back the left leaning SLabour voters that went to the SNP. But that is all window dressing for Douglas Ross if the real message reaches those SLabour/SLibdem voters in the Highlands, North East, West Coast and the Borders and other SConservative/SNP marginal seats they gained and then lost between the 2017/2019 GEs.
A gentle reminder from the previous thread, back in the 1992 GE where the Conservatives bucked the polling trend and the Exit poll, their only Conservative gain on the night was the Scottish seat Aberdeen South...
https://unherd.com/2023/04/how-thatcherism-outgrew-its-mistress/
I think that the experience of the past, is that the tories will prove themselves to be more ruthless and effective at this business, labour may come to regret this change in direction.
As a former labour stragist put it you have to be certain your poster is believable and credible and this is not and the message just gets lost
He went on to say he would not have published it
Starmer and labour have put themselves alongside Braverman with these ill conceived posters
But bad as that was, and stupid as it was, at least that wasn’t trying to smear his opponent directly.
And whilst your comment might not be bigoted, it is the politics of fantasyland. I struggle to form a view on the endless (important) debates about the rights of women vs the rights of trans people. It’s a complex issue.
But the one crystal clear conclusion for me is that rights are never paramount. They are always the starting point for a messy compromise at an institutional or societal level. To deny this and to use the language of rights being paramount is immature politics.
There's a great deal to be said about your comment, but let's take just one point: who polices it? If a woman thinks that another person in the toilet is male, what does she do? Does she call the police? Does she confront the person directly? And what happens when (as happens) they get it wrong? Should women who do not fit the stereotypical views of womanhood - say, butch women - be treated to abuse when they go to the toilet? Or are they not 'women' in your eyes?
And I'd argue that the rights of *no* group should be 'paramount'. Rights are often a balance between competing groups, as rights for one group often impinge (in minor or major ways) on other groups. And we certainly should not have the case where there is a tyranny of the majority: where the 'rights' of a larger group are seen as more critical than those of a minor group, simply because there are more of them. You may note that's been tried in the past; rarely to good consequence.
The party is doubling down on its controversial strategy of claiming the prime minister is responsible for prosecution and sentencing and will expand its remit to economic and health policies.
Further adverts by Labour this week, seen by The Times, will claim that Sunak thinks it is “acceptable” for council tax to rise above £2,000 and that he “thinks it’s right” that people are having to pay higher housing costs and mortgage rates.
The party believes it will be hard for Sunak to hit back because he will have to place the blame for economic chaos on Liz Truss, his predecessor. However, the strategy is seen as risky as it could backfire by exposing Labour’s lack of tax-and-spending policies.
Labour is also planning even more “controversial and disruptive” adverts this month that will return to the issue of crime, accusing Sunak of “effectively decriminalising rape”. They will be launched for “maximum impact” days before local elections on May 4.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/labour-attack-ads-to-blame-sunak-for-crashing-economy-9sths6wz2
The recent letter from the EHRC sets out the advantages of clarifying “sex” = “biological sex” but also points out that this carries potential disadvantages for people who identify as other than their biological sex.
The mess the census has made by using “inclusive” language that has evidently confused non-native English speakers illustrates the dangers of believing that “inclusion” should only cover gender identity. Either that or Newham is indeed the “trans capital” of the U.K. and one in 67 Muslims are trans…
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-does-the-census-say-there-are-more-trans-people-in-newham-than-brighton/
How many “cervix havers” are going to die because they didn’t realise that meant, them, “women” so should come forward for a smear test?
Stonewall’s influence has been destructive and harmful.
Hope they like choosing the mud fight with the pigs, because the pigs are definitely going to enjoy it.
For maximum lolz I may share the comments from that day of the PBers who cheered that smear but seem outraged by these ads.
My interpretation of what Labour are doing now is that they are using the local elections to test messages and approaches ahead on the 24/25 general election. They are testing their range and seeing what cuts through and what doesn’t. And specifically what winds up their opponents and what reaches those hard to reach red wall voters.
There will be counter posters as politics descends into the gutter and Starmer/labour surrender the moral high ground
Similarly, never wise to engage arch-smearers in a smear campaign. It will likely end badly.
Even in the best case scenario it feeds the ‘they’re all the same’ narrative which Labour really need to break free from.
Trying to portray Sunak as a friend of paedophiles is revolting and straight out of the Alastair Campbell playbook
The smarter thing for the Tories to have done was to ignore it, It’s generally not the wisest thing to to to cede the agenda to the opposition.
Or Braverman's comments on grooming gangs last week?
New post: Here's the thing with "trans issues" in the UK
Most voters have an opinion, but the vast majority will readily admit to not paying it much attention. As a 𝘃𝗼𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗺𝗼𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝘀𝘀𝘂𝗲, it's next-to-nonexistent. 🧵
sotn.newstatesman.com
Do voters care about trans rights?
https://twitter.com/BNHWalker/status/1643274157688274946?cxt=HHwWhIC22frIis4tAAAA
Tory attack dog: “We should make a poster attacking Labour before the May
elections, just like we always do.”
Sunak: “Goodness no, we can’t do that!!
Labour are so morally unimpeachable. I simply can’t countenance it!! ”
Both look at Starmer’s Twitter feed.
Sunak: “Sigh. I’m so disappointed in the state of British politics. Oh alright then. Unleash the hounds. Do your worst!”
This is Labour at war with itself over these gutter posters and you are just trying to deflect from this controversy
It is just sad more than anything else. I honestly thought Starmer was trying to rise above all this. It is particularly sad that he, a KC and former DPP, can peddle such a misleading narrative on the courts and sentencing.
It would be good to look in to the evidence of how other progressive parties have come to power around the world over the last decade, I am not convinced it is with these type of personal attacks.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11955043/SIR-KEIR-STARMER-Rishi-Sunak-Tories-let-criminals-away-it.html
This will backfire spectacularly, judging by the comments underneath the piece.
Haven't you read the guardian and listened to the media condemning the nature of them
I support Sunak as I see him as a decent and competent PM and will defend him accordingly
Essentially you keep banging on loudly on how Labour have changed.
Attacks might be tempting but they don't always work. I recall disagreeing with pro-EU types here who were giggling confidently about Cameron's 'little England' comments, as if attaching an insult to the majority of the electorate with the name of Farage would make it work.
Starmer's over-egged the cake. His poll lead is so big the effect will likely be minimal, but this is a mistep nonetheless.
Angus MacNeil said that the detention of Murrell, Nicola Sturgeon’s husband and the former SNP chief executive, meant there were “clearly questions to answer” about the six-week leadership campaign which led to the narrow victory of Yousaf, the “continuity candidate”, over Kate Forbes.
It is alleged that Murrell, who quit his post last month after 20 years, personally intervened to shorten the duration of the contest after his wife’s resignation in mid-February as first minister and party leader.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/call-to-rerun-snp-leader-vote-after-peter-murrell-s-arrest-pnqfpdvhq
I find it hard to get excited about these posters. Its just politics and those who were deluded enough to believe that Labour are morally superior are the same people and mindset that have lost the last 4 elections. Starmer is playing to win, as he should.
I think the problem here goes back to the personal attacks on Sunak.
Having watched the Tory party do this many times, one truism is that each level of response and counter-response will get less attention. So whilst we have Starmer’s article linked here, no one has linked the accompanying op-ed by the paper. I bet far fewer will read it.
In turn, far fewer will read the Twitter responses to the Labour ads than the ads themselves. And so they might achieve their aim. Like Southam, I wish it weren’t so, but I can’t decide if I blame Labour for recognising and responding to the reality of media campaigning.
That's what I think the strategy is, anyway.