When will indyref2 happen?

[Guest Jedi]

Unfortunately (or fortunately) whichever way you look at it, the pattern of politics in Scotland since the 1950s has been to effectively have a one party state.

From the late 50s through to 2011 that was Labour-pretty much for 50 years. During that period the SNP were small electorally in terms of vote share and seats.(at Westminster traditionally returning 3 or 4 seats)

Now that has been completely reversed since really 2011 and the first SNP landslide in a Scottish election. With their having been in power now for 15 years, it difficult to see that changing for a long, long time. Reason being that there is an in-built 40-45% of the vote which is guaranteed to go to the SNP because of Independence..that share automatically gains by far the most seats. You could argue that maybe the opposition is just rubbish (and in Scotland, they haven't been good since 2011), but because of the pattern of Scottish politics, when you look at Labour dominance for 50 years, and now the SNP, 15 years already and many more to go (the next Scottish election being a formality for them)...Labour will never really recover in Scotland because they were part of the No campaign in 2014.

Its actually ironic that Westminster does change governments in less time periods than Scotland. Yes, the Tories have clearly won the most elections but if you look at

1979-97 Tories for 18 years

97-2010 Labour for 13

2010-22 Tories for 12 (and now likely to change again)

The 'turnover' is quite different to Scottish politics.

So, with that (continuing 40-45% of voters) which I can't see changing post-Indy for a very long stretch, it will most certainly be the SNP who dominate an Independent Scotland for a good while.

Edited October 21, 2022 by Jedi

[Clown Job]

3 minutes ago, Jedi said:

have a one party state.

Behave yourself 

[Aufc]

2 hours ago, Stellaboz said:

Imagine still advocating being part of a country where a disgraced PM is being touted to return a few weeks later. A man who cheated on his cancer ridden wife and was found to lie to parliament. 

Also a man who is on record saying cash spent in England is better than in Scotland. 

 

But I'll go eat my cereal.

I agree the tories are a shambles/disgrace etc. However, there is a very high chance they will get voted out in the next GE. A no vote is not a vote for tory, much the same as a yes vote is not a vote for SNP. 

2 hours ago, TheScarf said:

But ma penshun!

But Putin will bomb us!

The numbers don't add up! We'd be in debt!

This is just embarrassing. People are trying (and actually been quite good and interesting) to have a proper conversation and this is the level of chat you are at. Cant even offer up anything except blind optimism. I will reiterate that i would love to vote yes but the financial side needs to be a lot clearer. 

[Guest Jedi]

So the complete dominance electorally of Scottish politics by a single party firstly from the late 50s-2011, and then from 2011 till now isn't effectively a 'one party state'?

Of course it doesn't fit the 'definition' by way of there being other parties which actually stand, but in these time periods, as now, there was/is no prospect of any other than one party holdng power. Independence doesn't automatically change that. Where are the 40-45% of SNP going to go post-Indy?...the Greens? Labour?

Edited October 21, 2022 by Jedi

[Antlion]

11 minutes ago, Jedi said:

So the complete dominance electorally of Scottish politics by a single party firstly from the late 50s-2011, and then from 2011 till now isn't effectively a 'one party state'?

Of course it doesn't fit the 'definition' by way of there being other parties which actually stand, but in these time periods, as now, there was/is no prospect of any other than one party holdng power. Independence doesn't automatically change that. Where are the 40-45% of SNP going to go post-Indy?...the Greens? Labour?

It doesn’t fit the definition by way of Scotland not being a “state” either, so swing and a miss on both counts there.

[Brother Blades]

5 minutes ago, Jedi said:

So the complete dominance electorally of Scottish politics by a single party firstly from the late 50s-2011, and then from 2011 till now isn't effectively a 'one party state'?

Of course it doesn't fit the 'definition' by way of there being other parties which actually stand, but in these time periods, as now, there was/is no prospect of any other than one party holdng power. Independence doesn't automatically change that.

Maybe if Labour weren’t such a bunch of lick spittle, yoon, gammon chasing arseholes, the “one party state” may change? Anyway, they are about to win every single seat in our largest city! 

[Antlion]

20 minutes ago, Jedi said:

Unfortunately (or fortunately) whichever way you look at it, the pattern of politics in Scotland since the 1950s has been to effectively have a one party state.

From the late 50s through to 2011 that was Labour-pretty much for 50 years. During that period the SNP were small electorally in terms of vote share and seats.(at Westminster traditionally returning 3 or 4 seats)

Now that has been completely reversed since really 2011 and the first SNP landslide in a Scottish election. With their having been in power now for 15 years, it difficult to see that changing for a long, long time. Reason being that there is an in-built 40-45% of the vote which is guaranteed to go to the SNP because of Independence..that share automatically gains by far the most seats. You could argue that maybe the opposition is just rubbish (and in Scotland, they haven't been good since 2011), but because of the pattern of Scottish politics, when you look at Labour dominance for 50 years, and now the SNP, 15 years already and many more to go (the next Scottish election being a formality for them)...Labour will never really recover in Scotland because they were part of the No campaign in 2014.

Its actually ironic that Westminster does change governments in less time periods than Scotland. Yes, the Tories have clearly won the most elections but if you look at

1979-97 Tories for 18 years

97-2010 Labour for 13

2010-22 Tories for 12 (and now likely to change again)

The 'turnover' is quite different to Scottish politics.

So, with that (continuing 40-45% of voters) which I can't see changing post-Indy for a very long stretch, it will most certainly be the SNP who dominate an Independent Scotland for a good while.

It takes quite some brass to state that Scottish democracy is the one really in poor health at a time when the UK Government, despite imploding, is refusing to even countenance giving the public a choice. Shameless too.

[Caledonian1]

22 minutes ago, Jedi said:

Unfortunately (or fortunately) whichever way you look at it, the pattern of politics in Scotland since the 1950s has been to effectively have a one party state.

From the late 50s through to 2011 that was Labour-pretty much for 50 years. During that period the SNP were small electorally in terms of vote share and seats.(at Westminster traditionally returning 3 or 4 seats)

Now that has been completely reversed since really 2011 and the first SNP landslide in a Scottish election. With their having been in power now for 15 years, it difficult to see that changing for a long, long time. Reason being that there is an in-built 40-45% of the vote which is guaranteed to go to the SNP because of Independence..that share automatically gains by far the most seats. You could argue that maybe the opposition is just rubbish (and in Scotland, they haven't been good since 2011), but because of the pattern of Scottish politics, when you look at Labour dominance for 50 years, and now the SNP, 15 years already and many more to go (the next Scottish election being a formality for them)...Labour will never really recover in Scotland because they were part of the No campaign in 2014.

Its actually ironic that Westminster does change governments in less time periods than Scotland. Yes, the Tories have clearly won the most elections but if you look at

1979-97 Tories for 18 years

97-2010 Labour for 13

2010-22 Tories for 12 (and now likely to change again)

The 'turnover' is quite different to Scottish politics.

So, with that (continuing 40-45% of voters) which I can't see changing post-Indy for a very long stretch, it will most certainly be the SNP who dominate an Independent Scotland for a good while.

You are aware that we have PR in Scotland?

[Granny Danger]

1 minute ago, Caledonian1 said:

You are aware?

No he’s not.

[Guest Jedi]

It is not a question of 'democracy' in Scotland, as 'free' elections clearly happen, where a range of parties are able to stand. Obviously the point is the pattern of electoral behaviour in Scotland...where it seems to be the preference of voters to stick with one party which dominates the scene.

'one party state' is a phrase which is used to denote a political situation where one party dominates the vote. It is not a 'comment' on whether it is a nation/a state/a region whatever, as you well know.

Hardly 'shameless' to offer discussion on voting patterns in Scotland, and compare these to another situation ie Westminster. That has got absolutely nothing to do with whether there should or should not be a GE called at the moment (there should), but nice try.

Will be interesting to see what the Glasgow results are ('if' there is a GE in the next few months)....maybe they will win most seats there, maybe they won't.

 

 

[Guest Jedi]

5 minutes ago, Caledonian1 said:

You are aware that we have PR in Scotland?

And PR has resulted in an SNP landslide in 2011, and dominance of the vote at Holyrood in both 2016 and 21......but again, as long as we have PR no one party can dominate the parliament on a 40%+ share. Nice dig @Granny Danger

[Guest Jedi]

So again, post-Independence, where are the 40-45% of SNP going to place their tick? (of course 'nobody can predict that etc etc), but why would they change to another party not one which stood shoulder to shoulder with the Tories, not the Tories themselves., and the Liberals are an irrelevance, so where 'might' they go to? Why 'desert' the party which just delivered Independence?

[TheScarf]

30 minutes ago, Aufc said:

I agree the tories are a shambles/disgrace etc. However, there is a very high chance they will get voted out in the next GE. A no vote is not a vote for tory, much the same as a yes vote is not a vote for SNP. 

This is just embarrassing. People are trying (and actually been quite good and interesting) to have a proper conversation and this is the level of chat you are at. Cant even offer up anything except blind optimism. I will reiterate that i would love to vote yes but the financial side needs to be a lot clearer. 

That what it’s boiling down to, brother.

[Antlion]

3 minutes ago, Jedi said:

So again, post-Independence, where are the 40-45% of SNP going to place their tick? (of course 'nobody can predict that etc etc), but why would they change to another party not one which stood shoulder to shoulder with the Tories, not the Tories themselves., and the Liberals are an irrelevance, so where 'might' they go to? Why 'desert' the party which just delivered Independence?

Wherever the people choose. For me it would be an independent Labour Party (provided they get rid of the scumbags) or more likely Green: a republican party would be my first choice.

Unless you’re seriously suggesting, at this moment in time, that the UK (which has no mechanism even to oust a collapsing government) is the bastion of democratic choice in comparison to Scotland.

[williemillersmoustache]

No a multiparty system that elects a parliament through proportional representation is not a one party state. 

 

Carry on. 

[Antlion]

11 minutes ago, Jedi said:

 

'one party state' is a phrase which is used to denote a political situation where one party dominates the vote. It is not a 'comment' on whether it is a nation/a state/a region whatever, as you well know.

 

No it isn’t. Not knowing what it means (in apparently either the sense of “one party” or “state”) doesn’t change its meaning.

[Joey Jo Jo Junior Shabadoo]

I always thought 'one party state' was dog whistle nonsense to make the punters think of the Soviet Union or China. Funnily enough, almost exclusively used by the Conservatives to describe Labour in Scotland back in the good old days.

The thought that a party that doesn't even have a majority in parliament is displaying characteristics of one is a bit silly.

Edited October 21, 2022 by Joey Jo Jo Junior Shabadoo

[Antlion]

2 minutes ago, Joey Jo Jo Junior Shabadoo said:

I always though 'one party state' was dog whistle nonsense to make the punters think of the Soviet Union or China. Funnily enough, almost exclusively used by the Conservatives to describe Labour in Scotland back in the good old days.

The thought that a party that doesn't even have a majority in parliament is displaying characteristics of one is a bit silly.

You thought right. But I’m amazed it’s still being tried this of all weeks in the tinpot UK’s history. Utterly brazen.

[Stellaboz]

46 minutes ago, Aufc said:

I agree the tories are a shambles/disgrace etc. However, there is a very high chance they will get voted out in the next GE. A no vote is not a vote for tory, much the same as a yes vote is not a vote for SNP. 

 

It just goes back to the valid point that Scotland could determine what way it wants to vote if it goes alone. 

[williemillersmoustache]

13 minutes ago, Antlion said:

No it isn’t. Not knowing what it means (in apparently either the sense of “one party” or “state”) doesn’t change its meaning.

Can anyone give me an example of a one party state. Anyone? Anyone?