Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Generali wrote: »

chaos.

Speaking of which....

This polling data is extremely interesting.

http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/uaoy4ef6ez/Channel4_Scotland_Results_150409_Website.pdf

If it's anywhere near correct, the SNP could have a big problem on their hands from tactical voting.

Generali

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Speaking of which....

This polling data is extremely interesting.

http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/uaoy4ef6ez/Channel4_Scotland_Results_150409_Website.pdf

If it's anywhere near correct, the SNP could have a big problem on their hands from tactical voting.

Fascinating. Thanks HAMISH.

From what I can see from that, Scottish people:

1. Want more money spending in Scotland
2. Want that money to come from somewhere other than Scotland
3. Hate the SNP other than those that want to vote SNP.

Funny that the rise of the SNP might deliver more Scottish seats to the Tories and even, as a result, deliver another Tory Government to the UK.

Of course all outcomes are favourable to the SNP according to SNP accolites.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Generali wrote: »

From what I can see from that, Scottish people.

Yep....

To me however, two of the most interesting questions were...

Following the referendum Scottish society and politics has become dangerously divided

- Total Agree- 53
- Total Disagree - 38

and....

Regardless of what you would like to see and what you think they'll actually deliver, what do you think the Conservatives, Labour and Liberal Democrats MEANT by their promise of increased powers?

- Devo Max - 17
- Smith Commission output - 37
- Only minor devolution and extra powers - 30
- Something else/Not sure - 17

The first pretty much demolishes the perspective of the nationalists that this is a new positive age of political engagement in Scotland (in fact the opposite is true, a majority think society is now dangerously divided).

And that absolutely reflects what I see and hear from ordinary people in the real world, Scotland is becoming increasingly polarised, and the majority who voted no and expected that 'once in a generation' meant exactly that are increasingly getting frustrated at the SNP acolytes refusal to accept the verdict.

Also quite clearly, the majority understood full well that 'The Vow' did not mean full autonomy, but instead only limited further devolution.

kabayiri

This is no brave new world of politics, with Scottish people 'engaging' on every street corner.

Hamish illustrates a £14bn income gap which would have to be closed to support FFA.

Even if the figure is disputed it will still leave a seriously large gap.

Why can't the politicians in favour of FFA be honest with their electorate, and give them choices :

- steep cuts
- negotiate some other form of subsidy from UKr (perhaps front loading of oil income)
- set out a realistic plan over a number of years to close the gap (maybe a combination of growth and reduction in state spend)

The last option could actually put Scotland on a better footing all round, but I don't think it sits well with spendy Left-of-centre parties.

ruggedtoast

I wonder what Sturgeon has up her sleeve. She is canny!

Generali

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

The first pretty much demolishes the perspective of the nationalists that this is a new positive age of political engagement in Scotland (in fact the opposite is true, a majority think society is now dangerously divided).

To be fair, I expect that Serbia, Croatia and Bosnia were extremely engaged, politically speaking. The outcome of that engagement was probably sub-optimal overall both politically and socially but it did result in an end to their political union.

I can see why Lord Pantsdown thinks as he does. These sorts of divisions can end very badly.

Tromking

.string. wrote: »

The SNP has quite deliberately set about stirring up division, that sort of thing can go sour, very sour.

Indeed, the country that proof tested multi party politics in the UK will quickly abandon that when Unionists in Scotland realise that to stop rampant nationalism they're going to have to chose a single party to oppose the SNP. I can't see tactical voting against the SNP lasting much past this General Election.
I'm also not convinced that Scotland isn't on the cusp of Ulster style sectarian politics either. As if to confirm my fears just seen a tweet from a SNP supporter bemoaning the Orange Order sympathies of a Labour candidate in the central belt......scary!!!!

Shakethedisease

skintmacflint wrote: »

Nice attempt Shake , while back at SNP headquarters you think you're playing the long game, your hyped up newly converted Nat supporters aren't. That's the problem with relying on grass root support, you can't control it. They want things done now and aren't prepared to wait. She's made a lot of big promises what with her new welfare system and all. Lol.

Despite Murphy immediately ruling it out , and WOS spin, her fans still believe as the magnificent leader of the new SNP power brokers in Westminster she can and will deliver FFA. Regardless of the financial black hole it exposes Scotland to. As for being Teflon coated re Westminster she has been very clearly she alone is in control of SNP Westminster.

Delivering FFA for Scotland was the reason she people gave for voting a large contingent of SNP MPs to to Westminster. You can't spin it both ways, much as you'd like to try. The Rev's article is a desperate attempt to calm them down, back pedal for Sturgeons loose mouth.

Murphy said no, because Labour have nothing to lose with fully deluded Nat supporters, up here just now, . Mainly thanks to WOS daily demonising of anything Labour or Westminster. They're the new 'gospel' for converted Nats.

All Sturgeon's loose mouth, has achieved is to severely anger around 2 .3 million No voters including myself, and sow the first seeds of doubt and disharmony within a large section of her own supporters. When she attempts to spin the blame for not achieving it, as you kindly confirmed she definitely will, she will be fully exposed for what she and SNP stand for. Hot air.

Labour is not the only party who are going to have fun with this. Hope the smaller independent parties are taking notes.

Sturgeon a Statesman , my eyebrow.

Then you must think SNP voters are all stupid then. Only Labour and or Tories can implement FFA. It's not the SNP's gift to give, that's not to say it's not worth fighting for however. Any further powers are. But unless SNP returns 323 MP's in May, it's an impossibility. Sturgeon herself said ' as soon as the other parties want to give it, we'd vote for it'.

Whatever you say about her as a statesman.. she'd played this campaign extremely well. She must be, since all left in Labour's armoury in Scotland is pathetic tactical voting, and another ref rerun ( complete with pension scares ) over FFA... which most of us know, isn't in the SNP's power to make happen anyway. Gordon Brown will be popping up, and the banks will be threatening to leave any day now.

Your post wasn't even a nice try imo, if you don't mind me saying so. You have no idea nor speak for any newly converted SNP supporters, let alone huge swathes of them. Nor do I. But at least I don't pretend to. I'd say most were pretty well clued up politically though after the referendum. And are more likely to vote too this election, most especially, all those younger voters traditionally who normally don't bother..

And yes, I'd say the SNP is playing the long game.

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

Fascinating. Thanks HAMISH.

From what I can see from that, Scottish people:

1. Want more money spending in Scotland
2. Want that money to come from somewhere other than Scotland
3. Hate the SNP other than those that want to vote SNP.

Funny that the rise of the SNP might deliver more Scottish seats to the Tories and even, as a result, deliver another Tory Government to the UK.

Of course all outcomes are favourable to the SNP according to SNP accolites.

John Curtice says tactical voting, if it happens, will 'save' at most 4 seats.

However, the mood amongst Labour voters is very different. If they thought they were living in a constituency in which the Conservatives were challenging the SNP they are almost as likely to say that they would switch to the SNP (30%) than they are to the Conservatives (31%). The two parties might have been on the same side in the referendum, but many a Labour voter evidently still has considerable antipathy for the Conservatives. The picture is much the same when Labour voters are faced with the prospect of a Liberal Democrat/SNP battle; while 34% say they would switch to the Liberal Democrats, 27% say they would back the SNP...

...And if it does not happen the tally of seats the SNP might fail to win would be no more than four, two of them picked up by Labour and one each by the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats. Tactical voting may help deny the SNP a few seats, but in truth it seems incapable of recreating on May 7 the unionist coalition that succeeded in defeating independence last September.

http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2015/04/could-tactical-voting-scupper-the-snp/

Nae luck there then.

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

If the SNP was to insist on FFA as a condition of their support they could probably force it through if they held the balance of power. TBH they probably could regardless as, if the polls are right, they are about to do something close to a clean sweep of Scottish seats.

I'd be rather inclined to offer it to them or maybe a snap referendum on it. It would destroy the SNP once the people of Scotland saw what had been done. The only problem really is that the terrible damage it would do to the health and education of a generation of Scots would make it immoral to force through.

Labour ruled it out yesterday, as well as another indy referendum. Labour will be campaigning strongly against FFA in Scotland for the next few weeks.. ( is all they have left )... so they won't be offering it in the next five years if in power, even with the SNP (vote by vote basis ). Will of course, kill Labour off for a good while in Scotland though, and if in a minority govt, life may be difficult for them depending on the arithmetic. The next year of Labour's offering's being crucial to 2016 Scottish elections.. wonder if the SNP have thought of that...

As I've said. If it's to be FFA it'll be the Tories that offer it to get rid.