Latest Polls and Latest Odds

[scottsdad]

8 hours ago, BFTD said:

Oaksoft's right, in that the Labour Party also used to be anti-immigrant, because their primary concern was the welfare of the working class. The world changes over time. Being a homophobic racist was also the default a hundred years ago, so anyone who wasn't deserves credit more than anyone needs to be picked out for it. I'd rather you went down the blood-and-thunder American born-again route however, as there's a lot more scope for comedy there and will let you get back to your favourite subjects.

Jedi, the problem (as you appeared to be admitting yourself recently) is that this Labour Party is promising nothing, and change that nothing on a weekly basis. Absolutely nobody thought New Labour didn't have policies, even if most of them involved kicking the ball down the road for future governments to deal with. This nonsense is as deluded as the people who thought Blair was going to be the reincarnation of Harold Wilson.

Not convinced he is old Oaky.

Oaksoft could engage, make jokes. He also had a bit of empathy and understanding. He posted loads and loads on every subject under the sun. He called me "fucking arrogant".

Of course, for balance, he was a bit cranially detached. On many subjects, not least gender and energy prices. 

[Highlandmagar]

12 hours ago, Jedi2 said:

I can recall back in 1997, that we heard 'folk are only voting Labour because the Tories have been a mess for years/the Tories will be back in, next election/ New Labour are just the Tories in disguise/ all they will do is manage decline for the next 4 years'

Same govt went on to give us record levels of funding for public services, the Minimum Wage, Devolution in Scotland, a Peace Settlement in Northern Ireland, Sure Start Centres, Human Rights Act, 3 million more people in work, crime rates halved, Educational Maintenance Allowance, low inflation, debt write off for 100% of the poorest countries in the world.

Same refrains then as now..

'They are just Red Tories'

'They don't have any policies/won't do what they promise anyway'.

Time will tell..

Time will tell. Did a Blair government welcome with open arms extreme right wing loonballs? Was Blair as unpopular as Starmer is? Did Blair/ Brown cartwheel in just about every policy decision? No they didn't. Starmer's party sit right at the position of actraditional right wing Tory Party, whilst they have gone to the extreme right.

[Jedi2]

It just goes to show the tribal nature of politics...SNP equate to 'Independence', doent matter if they have the 'Growth Commission' view of Independence (as some in high positions still do), Independence is 'all' that matters..their record in govt-also becomes irrelevant.

It's no different to the 50 odd years of Scotland 'voting Labour' by instinct, didn't matter who the characters or the policies were..the votes just stacked up.

It is of course possible to 'support' a political party, and still be critical of them and recognise their flaws..ie is Starmer about to lead the UK into some new 'golden era'..no, I don't think so. Should he have accepted Elphicke..no.Do they need to flesh out more policies and be more 'principled'? Absolutely. But ultimately will they be better than the Tories over time? I think they will, and they aren't 'just' a right wing party.

Unless the SNP can also do some soul searching and admit mistakes along the way,(as well as admitting that Kate Forbes and those around her are very much on the right wing of politics ecomically and socially) Independence with them is not 'inevitable'...it still takes a lot of work 

Edited May 11 by Jedi2

[lichtgilphead]

"Vote for Labour. I can't promise anything but it might make things less shite. Boats are bad"

That's me convinced. 

[Dan Steele]

On 11/05/2024 at 00:19, Jedi2 said:

am looking forward to the SNP's 'honest' upcoming GE pitch...'make us Independent this time, you will be worse off and have a desert of public services for 10 years, (cause that George Osbourne was a wet Liberal) but it will be sunshine and flowers after that'

That's just a silly made-up wee rant. If you want to see how the Scottish political landscape will look under Labour, have a wee look at this from one of the branch office voices being primed by Sir Keith just last week (from Labour list). Imagine being part of a Party that is now actively saying this.

'Dugdale argued that the widening gap between government spending and revenue north of the border means that “something’s going to have to give” with respect to current Holyrood policies like free prescriptions, free personal care, free tuition fees and new child payments.'

 

[JS_FFC]

21 minutes ago, Dan Steele said:

That's just a silly made-up wee rant. If you want to see how the Scottish political landscape will look under Labour, have a wee look at this from one of the branch office voices being primed by Sir Keith just last week (from Labour list). Imagine being part of a Party that is now actively saying this.

'Dugdale argued that the widening gap between government spending and revenue north of the border means that “something’s going to have to give” with respect to current Holyrood policies like free prescriptions, free personal care, free tuition fees and new child payments.'

 

It can’t be free prescriptions. Something like 90% of prescription items are given out free of charge in England and Wales, because those on low incomes or people with underlying medical conditions that mean they are regularly receiving prescriptions are exempt from paying. The cost of the means testing itself outweighs the benefit of charging for the remaining 10% of items.

 

Out of the above you could probably replace free tuition with a graduate tax rate (effectively how it works in the rest of the UK), but then it would take several years to realise the benefit of it because you still need to fund the up front costs of degrees and the first cohort won’t be paying the elevated tax rates until they graduate in five years or so. 

[DeeTillEhDeh]

14 hours ago, scottsdad said:

Not convinced he is old Oaky.

Oaksoft could engage, make jokes. He also had a bit of empathy and understanding. He posted loads and loads on every subject under the sun. He called me "fucking arrogant".

Of course, for balance, he was a bit cranially detached. On many subjects, not least gender and energy prices. 

He isn't.

I do have a suspicion of who he is though when you put the other snippets together.

Edited May 12 by DeeTillEhDeh

[Moonglum25]

15 hours ago, SandyCromarty said:

I vote SNP at every election, as does my family, as we regard the party as the vehicle to Independence.

Unionists and the media continually attack and snipe at the SNP Government like those wee schoolboy bullies we all knew.

What they fail to understand is that all of their sniping means fuckin zip to us and all other Independent minded folks as our votes will always go to the party for Independence and one day we will get there make no mistake.

Great stuff.  Voting for a party of failures, the party of false promises, a party of liars and cheats, a party that put independence before the state of hospitals,  local services,  schools etc, food banks. In many cases no different to any other party but you think this is the way forward?

[Salvo Montalbano]

11 hours ago, Jedi2 said:

It just goes to show the tribal nature of politics...SNP equate to 'Independence', doent matter if they have the 'Growth Commission' view of Independence (as some in high positions still do), Independence is 'all' that matters..their record in govt-also becomes irrelevant.

Well in a sense, sure. Because we don't necessarily need to know how good, bad or indifferent an SNP administration is because once Independent, parties can stand on their own records and manifestos and let the people decide who they want leading Scotland. I'll be voting SNP in this and any subsequent Holyrood election not because they are  brilliant in Government but because I can't see Labour or the Conservatives doing much better if better at all. And of course they don't believe in democracy or allowing Scotland to decide their own future. And in the Tories case, because they are evil bustards.  But if we were to become independent, I can very easily see myself voting for a Labour type party (as long as it was a Smith/Blair/Brown Labour or a Corbyn Labour, perhaps not if it was a Starmer Labour - but then they'd have their own record at Westminster to stand on by that point). 

[SandyCromarty]

2 hours ago, Moonglum25 said:

Great stuff.  Voting for a party of failures, the party of false promises, a party of liars and cheats, a party that put independence before the state of hospitals,  local services,  schools etc, food banks. In many cases no different to any other party but you think this is the way forward?

You said it, the party for Independence is all that matters, and it will come eventually when we'll be rid of all the whining little unionists.

[SandyCromarty]

1 hour ago, Salvo Montalbano said:

Well in a sense, sure. Because we don't necessarily need to know how good, bad or indifferent an SNP administration is because once Independent, parties can stand on their own records and manifestos and let the people decide who they want leading Scotland. I'll be voting SNP in this and any subsequent Holyrood election not because they are  brilliant in Government but because I can't see Labour or the Conservatives doing much better if better at all. And of course they don't believe in democracy or allowing Scotland to decide their own future. And in the Tories case, because they are evil bustards.  But if we were to become independent, I can very easily see myself voting for a Labour type party (as long as it was a Smith/Blair/Brown Labour or a Corbyn Labour, perhaps not if it was a Starmer Labour - but then they'd have their own record at Westminster to stand on by that point). 

There are only two wholly Scottish based parties, the SNP and the Greens, all the rest are based in London and make no mistake they will put england first as that is where the majority of their voters are with Scotland an also ran, they will promise anything for your Scottish vote and then forget you.

Scottish Independence is the answer, back in Europe and standing on our own and not dependent on crumbs from Westminster.

[CarrbridgeSaintee]

1 hour ago, SandyCromarty said:

Scottish Independence is the answer…

[Crùbag]

13 hours ago, Jedi2 said:

It just goes to show the tribal nature of politics...SNP equate to 'Independence', doent matter if they have the 'Growth Commission' view of Independence (as some in high positions still do), Independence is 'all' that matters..their record in govt-also becomes irrelevant.

It's no different to the 50 odd years of Scotland 'voting Labour' by instinct, didn't matter who the characters or the policies were..the votes just stacked up.

It is of course possible to 'support' a political party, and still be critical of them and recognise their flaws..ie is Starmer about to lead the UK into some new 'golden era'..no, I don't think so. Should he have accepted Elphicke..no.Do they need to flesh out more policies and be more 'principled'? Absolutely. But ultimately will they be better than the Tories over time? I think they will, and they aren't 'just' a right wing party.

Unless the SNP can also do some soul searching and admit mistakes along the way,(as well as admitting that Kate Forbes and those around her are very much on the right wing of politics ecomically and socially) Independence with them is not 'inevitable'...it still takes a lot of work 

Except there is the question of principles.

If Labour still stood for socialism - nationalising industries and abolishing the House of Lords for example - they there would be a point voting for it.

Until the SNP actually give up on independence they the two parties aren't similar in that way.

Independence is what matters, to me at least. I wouldn't vote for a party lead by Forbes though. As it stands, she's had to compromise and has made the kind of bread and butter statements she should have years ago.

[Big Bobo]

52 minutes ago, CarrbridgeSaintee said:

People like Sandy are an absolute godsend for Unionists imo. 

He does make me smile reading his posts.

[Jedi2]

6 hours ago, Salvo Montalbano said:

 Because we don't necessarily need to know how good, bad or indifferent an SNP administration is 

Erm..they have been an administration for the past 17 years, in a period when, aside from broadcasting, foreign policy, and defence, pretty much everything else has been Devolved..they of course have power over taxation as well.

Would think that might be a long enough period to assess how the SNP do in govt.

[Salvo Montalbano]

43 minutes ago, Jedi2 said:

Erm..they have been an administration for the past 17 years, in a period when, aside from broadcasting, foreign policy, and defence, pretty much everything else has been Devolved..they of course have power over taxation as well.

Would think that might be a long enough period to assess how the SNP do in govt.

I take it you missed the point? Not sure if that was deliberate or not but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. 

The current SNP Government is of no relevance to any post Independence administration - if the SNP as a party were still to exist in the current form post Independence and stand on their record so far then they'll be judged on that (and would likely lose), if they splinter into different factions as has been theorised then it becomes moot. As I said upthread, I'd most likely vote Labour in an independent Scotland unless they were a right of centre Starmerist party or they proposed rejoining the rUK in their manifesto. 

[lichtgilphead]

50 minutes ago, Jedi2 said:

Erm..they have been an administration for the past 17 years, in a period when, aside from broadcasting, foreign policy, and defence, pretty much everything else has been Devolved..they of course have power over taxation as well.

Would think that might be a long enough period to assess how the SNP do in govt.

Oh, if we're using competence in devolved government as a benchmark, Labour have been an administration in Wales for the past 25 years, in a period when, aside from broadcasting, foreign affairs and defence, pretty much everything else has been devolved. They of course have power over taxation as well.

Would think that might be a long enough period to assess how Labour do in government.

As far as I'm aware, the Scottish Government outperforms the Welsh Government in most areas.

Hardly a ringing endorsement of Labour, is it.

[ICTChris]

me, watching the poll thread descend into arguments about politics 

You can’t argue about polling in here! This is the polls thread!

[Highlandmagar]

18 minutes ago, lichtgilphead said:

Oh, if we're using competence in devolved government as a benchmark, Labour have been an administration in Wales for the past 25 years, in a period when, aside from broadcasting, foreign affairs and defence, pretty much everything else has been devolved. They of course have power over taxation as well.

Would think that might be a long enough period to assess how Labour do in government.

As far as I'm aware, the Scottish Government outperforms the Welsh Government in most areas.

Hardly a ringing endorsement of Labour, is it.

Ah. But the Welsh Labour Party haven't been Tory enough for Jedi 2

[SandyCromarty]

5 hours ago, Crùbag said:

Except there is the question of principles.

If Labour still stood for socialism - nationalising industries and abolishing the House of Lords for example - they there would be a point voting for it.

Until the SNP actually give up on independence they the two parties aren't similar in that way.

Independence is what matters, to me at least. I wouldn't vote for a party lead by Forbes though. As it stands, she's had to compromise and has made the kind of bread and butter statements she should have years ago.

I was led to understand that the deal struck between Kate Forbes and John Swinney was that Forbes would be given a good cabinet position so I was surprised when she was declared as Deputy Leader which immediately angered the Greens meaning Swinneys minority government will not be able to call upon them so that leaves Arsehole Cole Hamiltons Liberals ???

As for Forbes there is support for her including in my own family and her, to me, outlandish policies seems to be in line with the older generation.

I did hear that if there had been  leader election between Forbes and Swinney and Forbes winning there would have been senior resignations.