Mr Rational Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 A lot was thrown at Donside and the important thing was to get him over the finishing line which was accomplished. By elections always have a lower turn out, it's mid term and the government always takes a bit of a kicking. It's a safe seat, so I reckon the result is about right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 Please see my recent post in the other political thread. No. Just tell us when Labour held that seat, who their MSP was etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 Dunno, I never followed the by election and I have no idea what issues were campaigned on which is why I said "may be concerning". For all I know the SNP didn't bother getting off their arses at all and relied on their core vote. But as an outsider looking in, that's a spectacular collapse in SNP votes. Not for the middle of a parliament with a new candidate who doesn't have anything like the same personal popularity of the old incumbent it's not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 Not for the middle of a parliament with a new candidate who doesn't have anything like the same personal popularity of the old incumbent it's not. Were "non party affiliated" YES Scotland campaigners involved in fighting for the SNP up there? I heard they were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 Is Texas a state? Is the USA a country ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 But as a desperate outsider looking in, that's a spectacular collapse in SNP votes. Fixed that for you. To recap for the non-CDU fluffers: SNP gains an unprecedented share of the vote in 2011, faces a by-election precisely half-way through its given term: wins at a canter. The only thing spectacularly collapsing at the moment is BitterTogether's arse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newbornbairn Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 Fixed that for you. To recap for the non-CDU fluffers: SNP gains an unprecedented share of the vote in 2011, faces a by-election precisely half-way through its given term: wins at a canter. The only thing spectacularly collapsing at the moment is BitterTogether's arse. pleasing.jpg pleasing.jpg Whit? There's nothing desperate about it. I'm asking why the SNP lost a third of their vote. Others have attempted to give reasons, you post irrelevant pictures. Sums you up really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 There's nothing desperate about it. False. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swampy Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 Is the USA a country ? Yep! Is Abkhazia a state? Isn't it weird how these things are so clear-cut, except when they're not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 Yep! Is Abkhazia a state? Isn't it weird how these things are so clear-cut, except when they're not? Indeed. Country is a particularly impossible entity to define. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 That worked out well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kejan Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 Have Labour said this is ''the road back to power'' yet ? SNP hold the seat after 6 years in government, Independence receiving pounding after WARNING and WARNING from the Hootsman, BBC, The Sun, Herald and so on. Labour playing up this as a mini-referendum with that leaflet above. And they still don't win! :lol: :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oht Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 If voting for unionist parties were an opportunity to say "no", 55% of the voters took it. [insert gif] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swampy Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 If voting for unionist parties were an opportunity to say "no", 55% of the voters took it. [insert gif] True enough. I'd take a 45-55 split at this stage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 True enough. I'd take a 45-55 split at this stage. Fortunately, you're still floundering away on just over a quarter of the vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 If voting for unionist parties were an opportunity to say "no", 55% of the voters took it. [insert gif] If that were the instruction placed on the poster, then your clutching at straws might have been a valid point. It wasn't so... it's not. Scottish Labour specifically instructed voters to vote for its candidate in order to "say no to separation". They didn't. Instead Mr 'No to separation' easily lost in a plurality to the party of 'separation'. Again. Making things even better, it's crystal clear that the BitterTogether campaign's sole weapon continues to be, err, replacing the word 'independence' with separation. That's some cutting edge stuff! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 If that were the instruction placed on the poster, then your clutching at straws might have been a valid point. It wasn't so... it's not. Scottish Labour specifically instructed voters to vote for its candidate in order to "say no to separation". They didn't. Instead Mr 'No to separation' easily lost in a plurality to the party of 'separation'. Again. Making things even better, it's crystal clear that the BitterTogether campaign's sole weapon continues to be, err, replacing the word 'independence' with separation. That's some cutting edge stuff! ...the utter shambles of the separatists campaign so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xbl Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 Watching HB and Reynard at work today, one is reminded of Anas Sarwar on tv last night... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 ...the utter shambles of the separatists campaign so far. That being the case, it's understandable why the SNP saw a crushing rebuke of their popularity at last night's by-... oh wait. By all means keep the wishing upon a star predictions coming though - just like we had on the thread prior to the unprecedented SNP majority in 2011. Just like when you claimed Mitt Romney was certain to be U.S. President also. In other words, a complete busted flush of a poster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oht Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 If that were the instruction placed on the poster, then your clutching at straws might have been a valid point. It wasn't so... it's not. Scottish Labour specifically instructed voters to vote for its candidate in order to "say no to separation". They didn't specifically instruct anything. Read it again. Swampy's response >>>>>>>> Your response Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.