Jump to content
John Lambies Doos

Scottish Parliamentary Elections May 2021

Recommended Posts

Wonder if labour are now bitterly regretting setting up devolution?  If they hadn't gave us it there's no way we could have forced the uk government to give us it , not even by returning a clean sweep of SNP MP's at a general election ( we had between 5-10 pre 2014) Nobody in politics just does things because it's right thing to do, Labour were always going to lose a general election sooner or later , they were only in power for a total of 22 years throughout the 20th centaury . i'm assuming they thought devolution would allow them to keep power and influence in Scotland and wales when they were out at WM. surely when they sat and planned this out they must have at least consider the possibility of a nationalist takeover in the parliament? obviously not it seems

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, effeffsee_the2nd said:

Wonder if labour are now bitterly regretting setting up devolution? ...

Does a bear defecate in the woods. Using devolution with a d'Hondt system to put the genie of nationalism back in the bottle worked about as well for Labour as posle Tita, Tito (after Tito, Tito) worked for the Yugoslav League of Communists. Suspect what the other parties also very much regret is giving the SNP a crack at it as a minority government in 2007. Hand the irrational nat nuts enough rope and they will hang themselves was no doubt the mentality but instead by being more competent than Labour (not exactly difficult) the SNP and by extension further constitutional change lost a lot of the fear factor that had previously been involved for a sizable chunk of the electorate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Does a bear defecate in the woods. Using devolution with a d'Hondt system to put the genie of nationalism back in the bottle worked about as well for Labour as posle Tita, Tito (after Tito, Tito) worked for the Yugoslav League of Communists. Suspect what the other parties also very much regret is giving the SNP a crack at it as a minority government in 2007. Hand the irrational nat nuts enough rope and they will hang themselves was no doubt the mentality but instead by being more competent than Labour (not exactly difficult) the SNP and by extension further constitutional change lost a lot of the fear factor that had previously been involved for a sizable chunk of the electorate.



What was the alternative to an SNP minority in 2007? A 3-way coalition led by Labour would have had the numbers to govern, but remember this was when the Tories were still highly toxic in Scotland (only in the last 5 years has it become in any way socially acceptable to vote for them) and this would have given the SNP a great campaigning message for the next election. Red Tories, blue Tories and orange Tories sort of thing.

The only other thing they could have done was to VONC the SNP and forced a second election, but I suspect even that would have just resulted in a similar makeup of parliament and maybe an even stronger SNP lead.

One thing I’ve never really understood was the LAB to SNP swing in the polls in the year leading up to the 2011 election. In the spring of 2010 it looked likely that the SNP would just be a one term government and less than a year later, they won an outright majority and flipped a lot of constituencies that had been voting Labour for decades.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, LongTimeLurker said:

Does a bear defecate in the woods. Using devolution with a d'Hondt system to put the genie of nationalism back in the bottle worked about as well for Labour as posle Tita, Tito (after Tito, Tito) worked for the Yugoslav League of Communists. Suspect what the other parties also very much regret is giving the SNP a crack at it as a minority government in 2007. Hand the irrational nat nuts enough rope and they will hang themselves was no doubt the mentality but instead by being more competent than Labour (not exactly difficult) the SNP and by extension further constitutional change lost a lot of the fear factor that had previously been involved for a sizable chunk of the electorate.

I know but thing is it's not like the genie was ever getting out unless they let it, even if we had returned a clean sweep of snp mp's at a general election, there would be nothing they could do to force the uk government to grant devolution, unless there was a hung parliament which in 97 & 01 was never on the cards. They could have easily chosen to ignore us and it would have made f**k all difference .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Any evidence to back up your laughable claim? 
I'd imagine you are in the minority on your side but fair enough. 



Ah Stormzy, yet again howling at the moon. When the first referendum was called, Yes voters were very much in the minority but throughout the campaign support rose to 45%. This time support starts at around 50% and I suspect will rise during the campaign. The yoons are absolutely terrified of a 2nd referendum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Latest yoon tack among those I know is that any indyref must have a minimum turnout, and a threshold higher than 50% for yes. This is in the premise of "making sure its the will of the people"

Its the Trade Unions Act under a different guise

Absolutely scrambling, but yiu just know that view is going to make it into the mainstream

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, CambieBud said:

 

 


Ah Stormzy, yet again howling at the moon. When the first referendum was called, Yes voters were very much in the minority but throughout the campaign support rose to 45%. This time support starts at around 50% and I suspect will rise during the campaign. The yoons are absolutely terrified of a 2nd referendum

 

 

Okay, perhaps try and address what I've said rather than just telling me your random thoughts on random subjects. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Donathan said:

What was the alternative to an SNP minority in 2007? ...

A Labour-LibDem coalition government could have continued as a minority if it could survive votes of no confidence but the Tories decided they preferred to have the SNP in there instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A Labour-LibDem coalition government could have continued as a minority if it could survive votes of no confidence but the Tories decided they preferred to have the SNP in there instead.

Didn’t the Lib Dems say they’d only talk to the party who had the most seats?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, CambieBud said:

 

 


Ah Stormzy, yet again howling at the moon. When the first referendum was called, Yes voters were very much in the minority but throughout the campaign support rose to 45%. This time support starts at around 50% and I suspect will rise during the campaign. The yoons are absolutely terrified of a 2nd referendum

 

 

The SNP unity with the Greens is attractive to the younger voters who see the branch party's as belonging to the past, so there will be strong support for Independence coming from that section of our community. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Donathan said:


Didn’t the Lib Dems say they’d only talk to the party who had the most seats?

...it's been a while so would need to do some googling to refresh my memory on all the gory details. Bottom line is that the mainstream Unionist trio probably wish in retrospect that they had imposed an ongoing cordon sanitaire on the SNP in a mainstream German parties with the AfD sort of way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bairnardo said:

Latest yoon tack among those I know is that any indyref must have a minimum turnout, and a threshold higher than 50% for yes. This is in the premise of "making sure its the will of the people"

Its the Trade Unions Act under a different guise emoji1787.png

Absolutely scrambling, but yiu just know that view is going to make it into the mainstream

The Unionists must be taking turns... the last time Westminster introduced a minimum standard for electoral democracy, a Labour MP proposed the 40% rule for the first Devolution referendum under the 1978 Scotland Act. As a result of that the dead were counted as "no" voters. 

Anyone still  trust these Westminster types? Really? If you do, will you be expecting them to introduce anything remotely similar for their own procedures? 🤣

As the saying goes "fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me."

Edited by Salt n Vinegar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, effeffsee_the2nd said:

I know but thing is it's not like the genie was ever getting out unless they let it, even if we had returned a clean sweep of snp mp's at a general election, there would be nothing they could do to force the uk government to grant devolution, unless there was a hung parliament which in 97 & 01 was never on the cards. They could have easily chosen to ignore us and it would have made f**k all difference .

Up until the not too distant past, before the establishment of Holyrood, Westminsters position was that if the majority of Scots Mp's elected had been SNP, this would have been a mandate to start independence negotiations.

That was in the days when there was not a hope in hell of it happening of course.......and when UK gov still kept up a pretence of being democrats.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Donathan said:


Didn’t the Lib Dems say they’d only talk to the party who had the most seats?

They did this post-GE 2010, if I recall correctly. Twats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Up until the not too distant past, before the establishment of Holyrood, Westminsters position was that if the majority of Scots Mp's elected had been SNP, this would have been a mandate to start independence negotiations.
That was in the days when there was not a hope in hell of it happening of course.......and when UK gov still kept up a pretence of being democrats.
 

I pretty much the last bit, they would be quite happy saying that knowing there was little chance of it ever happening.
I think labour went for devolution thinking they could keep power in Scotland and wales in years when they done more poorly in England, they took a calculated risk that separatist parties wouldn’t gain an ascendency over them .
In wales it has worked well for them as they have power despite getting pumped elsewhere.
In Scotland not so much but perhaps not the end of the world as it’s one thing to hold an indyref but it’s quite another to win it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The EU was growing increasingly vocal and dissatisfied with 'Democtratic deficit' in certain EU regions in the mid-90's. Had the 97 Labour government not brought about the Devo bill then, I think it's inevitable it would have happened in the next parliament anyway, regardless of which party was in power.

Labour went for Devo out of pure self-interest, in the hope that it would consolidate their hegemony in Scots politics forevermore. This is why it's especially pleasing, and amusing, that it has effectively destroyed them as a going concern north of the border.

Edited by Boo Khaki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, git-intae-thum said:

Up until the not too distant past, before the establishment of Holyrood, Westminsters position was that if the majority of Scots Mp's elected had been SNP, this would have been a mandate to start independence negotiations.

That was in the days when there was not a hope in hell of it happening of course.......and when UK gov still kept up a pretence of being democrats.

 

A view expressed publicly by Margaret Thatcher, and again much more recently by  none other than Ruth Davidson, hence why her adherence to 'no to a 2nd ref' is such hypocritical bollocks.

Edited by Boo Khaki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, LongTimeLurker said:

...it's been a while so would need to do some googling to refresh my memory on all the gory details. Bottom line is that the mainstream Unionist trio probably wish in retrospect that they had imposed an ongoing cordon sanitaire on the SNP in a mainstream German parties with the AfD sort of way.

Can think of a much closer and recent example than the AfD...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Donathan said:

One thing I’ve never really understood was the LAB to SNP swing in the polls in the year leading up to the 2011 election. In the spring of 2010 it looked likely that the SNP would just be a one term government and less than a year later, they won an outright majority and flipped a lot of constituencies that had been voting Labour for decades.

What happened was the campaign actually started, and the ex-Labour voters, who "came back" to the party for the 2010 election (as well as the ex-Lib Dem voters who were now inclined towards them because of the coalition) realised that they had absolutely nothing to say, and were led by a laughably mediocre charisma-vacuum in Iain Gray. Labour wrongly assumed those votes would go to them with zero effort on their part, while the SNP ran on Salmond's (high) popularity and their (also popular) record in government, and hoovered them up.

Iain Gray running away and hiding from Sean Clerkin in a Subway in Glasgow was a highlight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...