Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Shakethedisease

Tromking wrote: »

You as usual extrapolate way too much. People don't not vote Labour in referendums or SNP for that matter. They vote for independence or the continuance of the Union, or last time round they voted more specifically for the financial stability of the Union over quite the opposite that independence provides. Until that particular conundrum is solved by your beloved SNP then you and they are whistling in the wind. You do get that Scots could vote for the SNP ad infinitum and still never feel the need to vote for independence don't you?

In the Scottish Referendum. Labour I'm afraid very much made it a Labour v's the SNP referendum. Focused almost entirely on Alex Salmond. That's actually why they're snookered now. They hoped it would kill off the SNP and they'd return Holyrood to 'normal' ( ie Labour in charge ). They were only worried about Labour.

If there's a future referendum, they'd do well to focus on the union instead next time. The below was the mindset of one of the leading lights of the Labour referendum campaign, and then Jim Murphy's election campaign in May. It's hard to see how anyone can get quite so much, quite so wrong in one article. Forecasting the aftermath of a No vote. ( article too long to quote in full ). There's nothing much about the union there. It's all about Labour 'winning' and the demise of the SNP.

So, accepting that separatism is rejected in the referendum, what is the post-September political trajectory? Importantly, the wheel turns. The SNP has bossed the political agenda for seven years, driving all the other parties. Suddenly the boot would be on the other foot...

...The Tories will lose the 2015 general election, but – at least in Scotland – they may win seats, doubling, tripling or even quadrupling the size of their parliamentary group. And for those who think Labour have maxed out the number of Scottish seats they hold there will be the surprise gain of Caithness and Sutherland. A long-term Labour seat returning to the fold. Plus the outside chance that increasingly urban Inverness will drop the king of cuts – Danny Alexander – and go Labour again.

To this powerful dynamic must be added the actions of the Scottish Conservatives and Scottish Labour. This is their once in a generation chance too: the chance to return to politics as normal.

This, then, is what makes the general election of 2016 truly interesting. Resurgent Labour and Tory parties with very different views of the kind of Scotland that should be built in the 21st century. An SNP trying to manage genuine internal tension. A Labour government still in its honeymoon. One that has abolished the bedroom tax and slain the dragon of Tory government.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/john-mcternan-what-next-for-scots-after-no-vote-1-3331737

Everyone knows any future referendum will be more likely to result in a Yes vote than the last one. Labour No voters are rethinking and coming to their own conclusions over a Westminster where Labour aren't likely to be in power anytime soon. That's for future debate however. But it's been hilarious reading the last few days Labour 'noteables' coming out for 'Home Rule' going against almost everything Scottish Labour has said or did over the last 6 years. And weird, confused articles in the Herald about 'SNPBad'. Desperate times for Scottish Labour.

Tromking

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Everyone knows any future referendum will be more likely to result in a Yes vote than the last one. Labour No voters are rethinking and coming to their own conclusions over a Westminster where Labour aren't likely to be in power anytime soon. That's for future debate however. But it's been hilarious reading the last few days Labour 'noteables' coming out for 'Home Rule' going against almost everything Scottish Labour has said or did over the last 6 years. And weird, confused articles in the Herald about 'SNPBad'. Desperate times for Scottish Labour.

The almost wholesale abandonment of Scottish Labour doesn't necessarily mean independence is inevitable, although I get that it's more likely. The case for independence rests simply on Nationalists persuading enough Scots to take a punt on a journey into the unknown. If, as they say Scots are politically different to to the rest of UK, a good start would be for the SNP to make use of Holyroods new ability to differentiate Scotland form the rUK, but they seem scared to do so. Any old faux progressive can spend an over generous block grant, proper ones make political choices and stand or fail on their ability to persuade tax payers to pay for it. I don't sense as you do, a more radical SNP itching to take Scotland forward, I just see a bunch of very successful chancers desperate to hold on to the English subsidy.

kabayiri

What happens to the Scottish economy between now and another possible referendum in say early in the next parliamentary term?

That could be 5 years of flat/sluggish growth, particularly if oil revenues remain depressed.

Should the Tory party push increasing spend in Scotland, or accept that there are other parts of the UK which show more promise.

A good example is fracking. People in the NW and other regions of the UK will embrace fracking when they see the jobs that follow.

Generali

Leanne1812 wrote: »

I don't agree that 55% of the electorate are unionists. They may have voted No but I'm sure they're not all die-hard unionists. Will some of them vote SNP? I'm certain they will. Not necessarily because they agree wholeheartedly with the SNP but because the alternatives are not worthy.

But by the same logic, not all of the 45% are die hard separatists which just leaves you where you started!

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Leanne1812 wrote: »

I don't agree that 55% of the electorate are unionists. They may have voted No but I'm sure they're not all die-hard unionists. Will some of them vote SNP? I'm certain they will. Not necessarily because they agree wholeheartedly with the SNP but because the alternatives are not worthy. .

Not to mention Nicola has gone out of her way to appeal for No voters to vote SNP, and that such a vote would absolutely not be a trigger for a new referendum.

Leanne1812

Generali wrote: »

But by the same logic, not all of the 45% are die hard separatists which just leaves you where you started!

We're talking of a parliamentary election not a referendum. I think it would be unusual for most of the 45% who voted Yes to vote for a party they may feel let down or disappointed by. Who do you imagine they would vote for?

Leanne1812

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Not to mention Nicola has gone out of her way to appeal for No voters to vote SNP, and that such a vote would absolutely not be a trigger for a new referendum.

Yes she has and I agree.

Will you consider putting your 'X' in the 'right' box?

CLAPTON

Leanne1812 wrote: »

Yes she has and I agree.

Will you consider putting your 'X' in the 'right' box?

no change : just the usual dishonesty

the situation stands as
-nice big vote May 16 : single party state in the far northern region

-if the polls show a 'healthy ' majority for independence, then a demand for a new referendum all within 6 months

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Leanne1812 wrote: »

Yes she has and I agree.

Will you consider putting your 'X' in the 'right' box?

I'd never vote for the SNP unless they formally renounced their goal of an independent Scotland.

But many people who voted No will vote for the SNP just as many SNP supporters in previous elections voted No in the referendum.

Leanne1812

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

I'd never vote for the SNP unless they formally renounced their goal of an independent Scotland.

But many people who voted No will vote for the SNP just as many SNP supporters in previous elections voted No in the referendum.

I find this quite interesting. I think what it's saying is you may agree with the SNP and their policies but because of one policy you fundamentally disagree with you wouldn't vote for them. They're actually not all that bad Hamish eh.....