H_B Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 and Scotland was seen abroad as a separate country, partly due to him. Was it? When? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 Neil Findlay had announced he's running for the leadership Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 Was it? When? Maybe that time he went on a jolly to China and left his trousers at Joan McAlpines? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmothecat Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 Basically everyone on my Facebook who is a member of the Labour Party is supporting Findlay. Personally before this week I think I had heard his name twice before. He's an even bigger nonentity than Lamont was, yet somehow already seems to be forming a decent support base. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 Basically everyone on my Facebook who is a member of the Labour Party is supporting Findlay. Personally before this week I think I had heard his name twice before. He's an even bigger nonentity than Lamont was, yet somehow already seems to be forming a decent support base. Clear sign that the labour party are brimming with talented politicians and have clear direction IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colkitto Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 Findlay, another ex teacher just like Lamont .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmothecat Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 Clear sign that the labour party are brimming with talented politicians and have clear direction IMO. Scottish Labour are a complete mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagfox Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunning1874 Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 Basically everyone on my Facebook who is a member of the Labour Party is supporting Findlay. Personally before this week I think I had heard his name twice before. He's an even bigger nonentity than Lamont was, yet somehow already seems to be forming a decent support base. Probably because people agree with him on the need to move to the left of the SNP despite the fact he's a charisma vacuum. Unlike yourself, there's no doubt that most ordinary Scottish Labour members do want to go left. The problem of course is that regardless of policy, if your leader is a total non-entity you're going to struggle and more than likely become even more of an irrelevance. If you go with Murphy and move to the right as the SNP move to the left with Sturgeon, you're fucked on policy If you go with Findlay and move to the left, you increase your appeal on policy but have a non-entity of a leader who'll be fucked in debate by Sturgeon If you go with Boyack it's a continuation of Alexander/Gray/Lamont, you remain a directionless shambles and get fucked on everything Can someone explain a potential scenario that doesn't involve Labour being fucked? Unless Sturgeon turns out to be a Swinney-esque disaster area, things look bleak for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagfox Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 Nope, labour are pretty fucked in Scotland. A good number of no voters were vote Labour at all cost simpletons. They will continue to do so. I don't see them appealing to any other demographic tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim McLean's Ghost Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 Probably because people agree with him on the need to move to the left of the SNP despite the fact he's a charisma vacuum. Unlike yourself, there's no doubt that most ordinary Scottish Labour members do want to go left. The problem of course is that regardless of policy, if your leader is a total non-entity you're going to struggle and more than likely become even more of an irrelevance. If you go with Murphy and move to the right as the SNP move to the left with Sturgeon, you're fucked on policy If you go with Findlay and move to the left, you increase your appeal on policy but have a non-entity of a leader who'll be fucked in debate by Sturgeon If you go with Boyack it's a continuation of Alexander/Gray/Lamont, you remain a directionless shambles and get fucked on everything Can someone explain a potential scenario that doesn't involve Labour being fucked? Unless Sturgeon turns out to be a Swinney-esque disaster area, things look bleak for them. Labour squeak a workable majority in 2015 and spend the next 12 months making positive policy decisions at UK level and hope Sturgeon implodes leading to a Labour plurality in Edinburgh. The Lib Dems or Greens probably won't have enough MSPs to form a coalition and there would be no formal pact with the SNP or Tories. Murphy or whoever governs a minority govt effectively and everyone gets back to supporting Labour for the next election. What is happening to the Scottish Election schedule? Holyrood is supposed to have 4 year term parliaments but postponed a year due to the fixed term Westminister parliament, are both still scheduled to have elections in 2020? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adamski Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 What is happening to the Scottish Election schedule? Holyrood is supposed to have 4 year term parliaments but postponed a year due to the fixed term Westminister parliament, are both still scheduled to have elections in 2020? I'm confused about this too. The next Holyrood election was postponed until 2016 because the Westminster election was due in 2015 as far as I understand it. But that would cause a clash again in 2020 (Scottish in 2021?) and 2025. Does the fixed term election in Westminster push Scottish parliamentary elections back to being every five years from now on by default? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Psychosis Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 Can someone explain a potential scenario that doesn't involve Labour being fucked? Unless Sturgeon turns out to be a Swinney-esque disaster area, things look bleak for them. In Scotland the only one I can see is the one where the SNP/Greens are unable to keep all their new members happy and end up splitting into a million smaller groups in something of a People's Front Of Judea style. Don't think it'll be happening any time soon though. In England they may just about scrape along if the Tories and UKIP cut each other's throats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC92 Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 Probably because people agree with him on the need to move to the left of the SNP despite the fact he's a charisma vacuum. Unlike yourself, there's no doubt that most ordinary Scottish Labour members do want to go left. The problem of course is that regardless of policy, if your leader is a total non-entity you're going to struggle and more than likely become even more of an irrelevance. If you go with Murphy and move to the right as the SNP move to the left with Sturgeon, you're fucked on policy If you go with Findlay and move to the left, you increase your appeal on policy but have a non-entity of a leader who'll be fucked in debate by Sturgeon If you go with Boyack it's a continuation of Alexander/Gray/Lamont, you remain a directionless shambles and get fucked on everything Can someone explain a potential scenario that doesn't involve Labour being fucked? Unless Sturgeon turns out to be a Swinney-esque disaster area, things look bleak for them. I'm not so sure with Murphy. I think there are a lot more conservatives (small 'c') in Scotland than people think, but they don't vote for the Tories because they're a toxic brand. Salmond was able to appeal to these people over nonentities like Iain Gray but Murphy vs. Sturgeon might be less straightforward. I think Sturgeon could help the SNP gain more ground in Glasgow and the west but they could lose ground in middle Scotland, Edinburgh, Aberdeen etc. if Murphy's in charge. I'd still fancy the SNP to win the election but I'd be surprised if they kept their majority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 I'm not so sure with Murphy. I think there are a lot more conservatives (small 'c') in Scotland than people think, but they don't vote for the Tories because they're a toxic brand. Salmond was able to appeal to these people over nonentities like Iain Gray but Murphy vs. Sturgeon might be less straightforward. I think Sturgeon could help the SNP gain more ground in Glasgow and the west but they could lose ground in middle Scotland, Edinburgh, Aberdeen etc. if Murphy's in charge. I'd still fancy the SNP to win the election but I'd be surprised if they kept their majority. Most of the SNP Westminster seats are old Tory shire seats. None of these areas voted for independence and most of them rejected it pretty big style too. The Tories were certainly toxic prior to the referendum but its not so much the case now. Davidson had a decent referendum and made a contribution. The Tories have risen a bit in the polls and they generally do better in the actual vote than they do from opinion polling. It was quite funny seeing them actually in a marginal lead over Labour in a recent poll or two after the referendum. It wont last, but Labour are probably getting the "toxic" treatment more these days and the centre ground is right there for the taking if Sturgeon decides to go for the urban Labour vote. Middle Scotland will turn away if she decides to punish success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renton Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 Most of the SNP Westminster seats are old Tory shire seats. None of these areas voted for independence and most of them rejected it pretty big style too. The Tories were certainly toxic prior to the referendum but its not so much the case now. Davidson had a decent referendum and made a contribution. The Tories have risen a bit in the polls and they generally do better in the actual vote than they do from opinion polling. It was quite funny seeing them actually in a marginal lead over Labour in a recent poll or two after the referendum. It wont last, but Labour are probably getting the "toxic" treatment more these days and the centre ground is right there for the taking if Sturgeon decides to go for the urban Labour vote. Middle Scotland will turn away if she decides to punish success. define 'punishing success' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 If Murphy DOES take this job as leader. I'd expect him to be a far more formidable opponent than anything the SNP have faced from Labour at Holyrood in its entire existence. He may well be a c**t, duck, p***k fanny or whatever, but he is a bit of an attack dog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 define 'punishing success' Taxing them too much. Pretty obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renton Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 Taxing them too much. Pretty obvious. How much is too much? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 How much is too much? You find out when the pips begin to squeak I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.