Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

The polling data I linked to the other day showed that as things stand, the SNP are unlikely to be holding the balance of power. The reason? The SNP are taking seats directly from Labour and Labour isn't picking up enough votes in the rest of the country to be able to form a Government with just the support of the SNP.

If the SNP were taking large numbers of seats from other parties, they would be able to support a Labour Government. Trouble is, they're not as the Tories have insignificant numbers of seats in Scotland.

To form a majority Government on the current showing, Labour would need to form other alliances, not just with the SNP. Any fantasies of being able to pin your Nationalist ideals onto the Labour donkey are likely to remain fantasies.

You're dreaming Gen. Have you not looked at any of the various seat projections at all ? ANY deal looks likely to have to involve the SNP. Only they've already explicitly ruled out dealing with the Tories.

The Conservatives are so scared of the SNP holding the balance of power these billboards are going up ( England only ). Why do you think that is ?



I think you might be the one fantasising. Either that or you aren't following things closely enough. Based on current polls, Labour and Tory seat numbers are neck and neck, but not enough for a majority for either of them. With the SNP looking like the third largest party. Where do you think that leaves things in terms of someone holding the balance of power ?

Things may change. But at the moment....

Shakethedisease

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Here are the latest projections....

All four are now projecting the Conservatives to have the most seats and therefore to form the next government.

Elections Etc – Hung Parliament, CON 286(+7), LAB 278(-5), LD 22(-1), SNP 40(nc), UKIP 3(nc)

Election Forecast – Hung Parliament, CON 286(+1), LAB 280(+4), LD 24(-3), SNP 38(-1), UKIP 1(nc)

May 2015 – Hung Parliament, CON 276(+6), LAB 271(nc), LD 23(-3), SNP 55(-1), UKIP 3(-1)

Guardian – Hung Parliament, CON 275(nc), LAB 271(nc), LD 26(-1), SNP 52(+1), UKIP 4(nc)
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/

They can't form a government without a majority in the HOC ! Or a deal with another party to provide it. Trying to pass bills and budgets with 275 seats when Labour and the SNP have 323 between them won't work.. ( using the last stat there as example).

Shakethedisease

Here.. read this. Sorry to burst your bubble.

If the UK general election were held today, the Conservatives would get the most seats but David Cameron would struggle to form a government against a coalition led by Ed Miliband, a new Guardian analysis can reveal.

The projection, based on all current polling, suggests the Tories would win 276 seats and Labour 271, both well short of the 326 needed to secure an outright majority. The result would leave both leaders fighting to form a viable government.


Adding up all the Tories’ realistic sources of support would take Cameron to 315 seats, 11 below the required bar.

Labour, meanwhile, has been stubbornly stuck for some time now on just above 270 seats and today’s figure of 271 leaves Miliband needing 55 seats to form a majority.
The gap between the two main parties is mostly explained by the surge in support for the Scottish National party (SNP) that followed last year’s independence referendum. Anyone doubting the strength of Nicola Sturgeon’s party should consider this: about one in 50 adults in Scotland are now SNP members.

Based on current figures, the SNP would win about 50 seats. Due to the fact that five years ago Labour won 41 of Scotland’s 59 seats, the majority of SNP gains would be at the expense of Miliband’s party.
As things stand, it is difficult to imagine any conversation about forming a stable government that could not include the SNP. So it is significant that the party has clearly stated it will not make any deal with the Conservatives, but is open to talking to Labour.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/feb/27/election-2015-tories-largest-party-but-cameron-may-not-have-the-numbers-to-stay-pm

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Shakethedisease wrote: »

They can't form a government without a majority in the HOC ! Or a deal with another party to provide it. Trying to pass bills and budgets with 275 seats when Labour and the SNP have 323 between them won't work.. ( using the last stat there as example).

The SNP managed it for years in Scotland... With Tory support.:)

Shakethedisease

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

The SNP managed it for years in Scotland... With Tory support.:)

In a PR system, on an issue by issue basis. There was no deal, pact or confidence and supply agreement. Tories voted for what they agreed with, and didn't for what they didn't agree with.

But at the end of the day. You are talking nonsense about the party with the most seats forming a stable government. If the SNP IS the third largest party. Then the Conservatives have a problem. And don't they know it.

Also, if Clegg goes after the election. Cable has already said he'd be open to dealing with the SNP no problem at all. Farron is iffy.. but well, a Lib Dem after all.

zagubov

Generali wrote: »

The polling data I linked to the other day showed that as things stand, the SNP are unlikely to be holding the balance of power. The reason? The SNP are taking seats directly from Labour and Labour isn't picking up enough votes in the rest of the country to be able to form a Government with just the support of the SNP.

If the SNP were taking large numbers of seats from other parties, they would be able to support a Labour Government. Trouble is, they're not as the Tories have insignificant numbers of seats in Scotland.

To form a majority Government on the current showing, Labour would need to form other alliances, not just with the SNP. Any fantasies of being able to pin your Nationalist ideals onto the Labour donkey are likely to remain fantasies.

They'll need to enter into a coalition I reckon, and the SNP are too smart to do that. They'd probably be quite happy for the Tories to get in (although they'll never admit it). They'll bring in enough austerity to make the SG paint them as the villains of the arrangement.

Or they'll trigger some kind of constitutional crisis via an EU referendum.

The SNP will want to wait till they're sure they'll win a referendum so they won't do anything about repeating the indyref during the next parliamentary term, if not longer.

The Lib Dems (what's left of them) might be biddable for a coalition. The SNP would be on a much less formal support role.

I don't believe the SNP will get 30-50+ seats; but I could believe 20-30. On the other hand, it'll take a long time for the unionist parties to rebound north of the border.

I'd prefer it if there was stability now; constitutional change needs to be reduced to nuancing the devolution settlement until there is clear call for anything major, and that doesn't look as though it's on the horizon..

Generali

zagubov wrote: »

I don't believe the SNP will get 30-50+ seats; but I could believe 20-30. On the other hand, it'll take a long time for the unionist parties to rebound north of the border.

They will if they get the votes predicted. Whether they get the votes or not is another question entirely.

The problem when a party has a big change in support as the SNP seems to is that it throws out the methodology of the polling companies. I would estimate that the SNP could quite easily get 10 percentage points more or fewer votes than predicted just because of the way that the polling companies try to control the sample to reduce sampling error.

The polling companies try to make sure that they have a representative sample of voters by asking people how they voted at the last election and then lining up the poll so they get the same proportion of people that voted for each party at the last election in their sample. The problem the pollsters face is that people are very bad at remembering who they voted for (seriously!) and are hugely likely to be swayed by their current voting intention. That could mean that SNP voters are being hugely under- or over-represented in the polling sample. Or that the sample is really good.

As people have said before, there's only one poll that matters in the end. However what is clear is that Labour have to start doing a lot better in England if they are going to have a hope of forming a coalition with the SNP. If we take it as read that the SNP would prop up a Labour Government in one way or another, if the SNP takes a seat off Labour then they're not adding to the sum of seats required to form a Government, they're just shuffling them around.

If Labour can't get their act together in England and the SNP won't work with the Tories, there'll be no SNP in the next UK Government. That's just maths.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

They can't form a government without a majority in the HOC ! Or a deal with another party to provide it. Trying to pass bills and budgets with 275 seats when Labour and the SNP have 323 between them won't work.. ( using the last stat there as example).

Don't forget that while a majority is handy, it isn't a pre-requisite for forming a Government. To keep a Government going all you need to be able to do is maintain supply, pass a budget and avoid a no confidence defeat. It may be that enough Tories would support a Labour minority Government or Labour a Tory minority Government to make a minority Government a possibility for a while, say a year or even just a few months. If there's a minority Government in place it would be pretty simple for the 2 major parties (UK-wide not Scotland only, Scotland clearly has a third main party) to engineer an Election-triggering vote in the HoC.

The UK was Governed by a National Government from 1931 - 1945 perfectly well.

elantan

Shake is it true the SNP have breached the 100k members mark ?

wotsthat

Shakethedisease wrote: »

They can't form a government without a majority in the HOC ! Or a deal with another party to provide it. Trying to pass bills and budgets with 275 seats when Labour and the SNP have 323 between them won't work.. ( using the last stat there as example).

Why not?

I can't see why either Labour or the Tories would form a coalition with a minor party if the price is 5 years of the Union being chipped away and a focus on Scotland beyond their representation in parliament.

In the example above we'd have a Tory PM and an agreement with Labour. You underestimate the ability of politicians to do the 'right thing' when required.

Tromking

I can't help but think that the nats on here might be in for a shock if they think they can send a SNP wrecking ball to Westminster and not expect a reaction from the old parties.
I always thought it was canny of the Scots (the ones who don't want independence anyway) to vote Labour in UK elections then SNP for Holyrood. Going 'full on' SNP just ups the ante to the extent that will mean the rest of the UK will just hate Scotland and the Scottish.
A case of by all means take our money, but don't ruin our country's much vaunted stability.