#BothVotesSNP

[Wee Willie]

If tribal loyalty is the limit of your politics then so be it. It'd be nonsense for the Greens to unconditionally vote for an SNP FM at first asking: they campaigned for Yes, not for the fucking SNP.

ffs why can't 7 Greens endorse the leader of the SNP as First Minister?

Logic and common courtesy would say that Nicola Sturgeon should be FM.

You could argue that the Greens have sided with Slab & the Tories by abstaining.

Why should my second vote go to them?

Perhaps the next time I won't use the second vote.

 

Ermmm

That's the point.

 

Sorry, I misunderstood. Yes, if you are tribal SNP then you're free to continue wasting your second vote. Encouraged to, really, because it's another tenth of a vote that the yoons need to claw back. The point is that the majority of SNP supporters at this time aren't tribal SNP, do support left-wing politics, and due to the way certain parts of the country look now in the constituencies it should be much easier next time for the Greens and whatever becomes of RISE to illustrate why they should get people's second vote.

See my reply a wee bit further up.

The Greens are supposed to be on the same side of the fence as the SNP.

(If you say they're no then why should I give them my vote).

What would it take for the full compliment of Greens in Holyrood to endorse the obvious FM.

[Wee Willie]

As I say the legality of such a ruse is doubtful and if it is legal it bloody well shouldn't be but I wasn't actually suggesting it as a serious course of action. Possibly I should have used a smiley.

The less jocular point is that this whole thread is based on some SNP types being angry that the greens aren't the NSP and are doing their own thing.

Of course there remains the possibility of a genuine, as opposed to strategically created, splinter faction from the SNP emerging and deploying that strategy but I can't see that happening any time soon

 

I've no objection to the Greens doing their own thing but why didn't they endorse the leader of the SNP in Parliament?

The SNP are by far the biggest party.

It's surely common courtesy to accept their leader as the FM.

In my book they've sided with the Unionists so f**k 'em.

[Mr Bairn]

Wee willie having an absolute meltdown

[Wee Willie]

Wee willie having an absolute meltdown

Where's the meltdown?

I'm just saying it as it is.

ps. my Willie has a capital W.

[Mr Bairn]

Where's the meltdown?

I'm just saying it as it is.

ps. my Willie has a capital W.

The greens haven't sided with anyone. They'd have gone with nicola if she indicated that she wanted to form a coalition with them or a supply and demand deal then they'd have voted for her, but she wasn't giving them any concessions so why should they? If there was any doubt who would have won the FM vote or if the unionists were all going to vote for Willie Rennie then the Greens would have been giving some kind of sweetener to vote for Nicola, but their votes weren't needed so they rightfully abstained.

[Wee Willie]

The greens haven't sided with anyone. They'd have gone with nicola if she indicated that she wanted to form a coalition with them or a supply and demand deal then they'd have voted for her, but she wasn't giving them any concessions so why should they? If there was any doubt who would have won the FM vote or if the unionists were all going to vote for Willie Rennie then the Greens would have been giving some kind of sweetener to vote for Nicola, but their votes weren't needed so they rightfully abstained.

Fair do's but my point is it's the start of a new parliament and they're only voting on who should be FM.

Do ye no think that a party which has 7 MSP's should endorse the leader of the party with the largest number of MSPs.

There was no (real) competition for the position of FM.

Three parties voted (?) to abstain and they were Tories, Slab & Greens.

In my book that's called siding with the opposition.

[John Lambies Doos]

In fairness Willie; the greens were not offered a coalition, sturgeon was a shoe in for FM, I'm not really bothered with them abstaining. Be very interesting how they vote going forward; and that's what should be scrutinised more.

[Fide]

Where's the meltdown?

I'm just saying it as it is.

ps. my Willie has a capital W.

 

Don't bother entertaining wee Scrappy Doo, Willie.

 

He lives under a bridge.  A bridge that goats trip-trap over.

[Wee Willie]

In fairness Willie; the greens were not offered a coalition, sturgeon was a shoe in for FM, I'm not really bothered with them abstaining. Be very interesting how they vote going forward; and that's what should be scrutinised more.

And I agree with ye (up tae a point).

 

Me:

Fair do's but my point is it's the start of a new parliament and they're only voting on who should be FM.

Do ye no think that a party which has 7 MSP's should endorse the leader of the party with the largest number of MSPs.

 

Dae ye agree wi' me?

I'm trying no tae make a big deal out of this but the Greens had eff-all to lose by showing a wee bit of common sense and endorsing Nicola.

Why do they need a wee backhander tae vote for her?

She was the only logical candidate and with them & Tories & Lab abstaining then the Greens sided with the opposition so f**k 'em again.

[Wee Willie]

Don't bother entertaining wee Scrappy Doo, Willie.

 

He lives under a bridge.  A bridge that goats trip-trap over.

Fair dos but he did give a reasonable reasoned reply.

[Londonwell]

If tribal loyalty is the limit of your politics then so be it. It'd be nonsense for the Greens to unconditionally vote for an SNP FM at first asking: they campaigned for Yes, not for the fucking SNP.

Tbf in the election the Greens, particularly John Finnie, led a campaign asking SNP supporters for hauners for a 2nd vote. So they are quite happy to be aligned with the SNP when it suits their interest's. I personally have no problem with that btw, I'd do the same in their situation.

 

I probably agree though, Nicola had no interest in a coalition with them, so why should they vote her in as FM? Either way it makes not a jot of difference as their votes in this instance weren't important.   

[Wee Willie]

Tbf in the election the Greens, particularly John Finnie, led a campaign asking SNP supporters for hauners for a 2nd vote. So they are quite happy to be aligned with the SNP when it suits their interest's. I personally have no problem with that btw, I'd do the same in their situation.

 

I probably agree though, Nicola had no interest in a coalition with them, so why should they vote her in as FM? Either way it makes not a jot of difference as their votes in this instance weren't important.   

I agree with everything you said but it looks tae me it's toys oot the pram stuff from the Greens.

 

so why should they vote her in as FM

Why should they no?

There are only 7 of them and surely it would be common sense to vote for Nicola as she was the only logical FM.

Tart it up however ye want but they did side with the Unionists by abstaining.

And they still want my SNP vote at elections - nae chance.

[Scary Bear]

Where's the meltdown?

I'm just saying it as it is.

ps. my Willie has a capital W.

Did the tattoo hurt or is it done in Biro?

[Wee Willie]

Did the tattoo hurt or is it done in Biro?

Hammer and sickle chisel - I'm tuff

[Thumper]

Tbf in the election the Greens, particularly John Finnie, led a campaign asking SNP supporters for hauners for a 2nd vote. So they are quite happy to be aligned with the SNP when it suits their interest's. I personally have no problem with that btw, I'd do the same in their situation.

 

They didn't just say "we know you support the SNP, but gie us a wee vote, eh". They set out a case for pre-independence, left-wing voters whose constituency choice was the SNP to use their second vote to put additional pre-independence, left-wing candidates into Parliament. On this occasion not very many voters were convinced of the maths, but it's quite easy now for the Greens to point to large parts of the map and say "either the SNP get 150,000 votes for one extra seat, or we get 30,000". No seat calculators needed.

 

As for this Willie character, what in the brass f**k is this line of argument about. They got the most seats, so it's just polite to vote for them? What if it hadn't have been the SNP who got the most seats? What if it had been the Tories? Baffling to figure out how someone could lack the intellect to follow this argument to any sort of conclusion.

[strichener]

They didn't just say "we know you support the SNP, but gie us a wee vote, eh". They set out a case for pre-independence, left-wing voters whose constituency choice was the SNP to use their second vote to put additional pre-independence, left-wing candidates into Parliament. On this occasion not very many voters were convinced of the maths, but it's quite easy now for the Greens to point to large parts of the map and say "either the SNP get 150,000 votes for one extra seat, or we get 30,000". No seat calculators needed.

 

As for this Willie character, what in the brass f**k is this line of argument about. They got the most seats, so it's just polite to vote for them? What if it hadn't have been the SNP who got the most seats? What if it had been the Tories? Baffling to figure out how someone could lack the intellect to follow this argument to any sort of conclusion.

Eh?  That is exactly what they did as this article shows:

 

http://www.scotsman.com/news/scottish-greens-target-2nd-votes-of-snp-supporters-1-4021681

 

We think we can do better than that this time, given that strategic opportunity of being able to approach people who have a regional vote that they know won’t be of much value to the SNP, but they want a political party that will speak to some of the issues they care about

[Londonwell]

They didn't just say "we know you support the SNP, but gie us a wee vote, eh". They set out a case for pre-independence, left-wing voters whose constituency choice was the SNP to use their second vote to put additional pre-independence, left-wing candidates into Parliament. On this occasion not very many voters were convinced of the maths, but it's quite easy now for the Greens to point to large parts of the map and say "either the SNP get 150,000 votes for one extra seat, or we get 30,000". No seat calculators needed.

 

As for this Willie character, what in the brass f**k is this line of argument about. They got the most seats, so it's just polite to vote for them? What if it hadn't have been the SNP who got the most seats? What if it had been the Tories? Baffling to figure out how someone could lack the intellect to follow this argument to any sort of conclusion.

If you don't think that's what they did in certain area's I would take some time to research John Finnie's election campaign material as a 1st point of call if I was you.

 

Edit: Or even better just read the article that Strichener has posted. Job's a good-un!

 

Willie- Thumper whilst sounding particularly angry is kinda right I would say mate, they have and rightly so, their own priorities. They should absolutely be under no obligation to vote for Nicola and i'm not sure how not voting her in means they're siding with the unionist's? They were fully aware it was a forgone conclusion. Moving forward It will be interesting to see how future votes play out that aren't so clear cut though.

[Wee Willie]

...

As for this Willie character, what in the brass f**k is this line of argument about. They got the most seats, so it's just polite to vote for them? What if it hadn't have been the SNP who got the most seats? What if it had been the Tories? Baffling to figure out how someone could lack the intellect to follow this argument to any sort of conclusion.

They got the most seats, so it's just polite to vote for them?

It's no voting for the SNP it's voting for a FM.

Of course it's polite and courteous tae vote for Nicola.

She is the leader of the party with the most seats.

What would it cost the Greens to do that?

 

What if it had been the Tories

Like it or no I would have said the same.

Whatever party has the largest number of MSPs (provided it's no a close call) their leader should be endorsed by a party with 7 MSPs.

That way they are accepting the reality of the situation.

 

Baffling to figure out how someone could lack the intellect to follow this argument to any sort of conclusion.

I'd blame your teacher

 

...

Willie- Thumper whilst sounding particularly angry is kinda right I would say mate, they have and rightly so their own priorities. They should absolutely be under no obligation to vote for Nicola and i'm not sure how not voting her in means they're siding with the unionist's? They were fully aware it was a forgone conclusion. Moving forward It will be interesting to see how future votes play out that aren't so clear cut though.

I understand that but surely voting for a FM is only a procedure (in this case a foregone conclusion).

It's nothing to do with policies or issues or priorities.

The Greens could quite easily have said we will vote for Nicola as FM because she is clearly the only one that merits the job.

Do you agree with that?

 

I'm not sure how not voting her in means they're siding with the unionist's

The SNP and Ad Libs lot voted and the other two unionist parties + the Greens abstained.

In my book that means they agree with the unionists.

[Mr Bairn]

Willie having an absolute nightmare

[Wee Willie]

Willie having an absolute nightmare

But you're jist a bairn