Jump to content

Next permanent Scotland manager


Richey Edwards

.  

253 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Ivo den Bieman said:

Forbes is far too right wing and in the pocket of Charlotte Street corporate lobbyists. I'm also not comfortbale with a religious-obscurantist weirdo being first minister.

Not sure Humza is hugely competent either and his image tarnished by a pisspoor spell as Health Secretary.

A better candidate is needed- both of these meh at best.

Like who, though?

Forbes likely ticks the boxes in terms of presentation and she's no doubt fairly articulate and intelligent. For me she'd need to quickly move to say how she isolates her private religious views from her public duties. 

Yousaf, has a record that will need defending - at Justice and Health. He's done the rounds on most of the major devolved portfolios so should be able to appreciate the detail in each. For me, he's not a careful enough politician and goes in two footed too often.

Regan is nothing more than a spoiler, chucking populist rhetoric for the base in an attempt to drag the party right on the GRR. 

Suspect all of the above, and those who already ruled themselves out are fairly plugged into the "Charlotte St. Lobbyist" type government.  That's basically a feature, not a bug of the way the Civil Service is structured, as much as anything else.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With Yousaf, I always think about his petted lip reaction to that video of him falling over.

Most people probably aren't that familiar with his ministerial record, but if he's that thin-skinned and easily rattled as FM he won't last long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Highland Capital said:

What are people's thoughts on Ben MacPherson?  I remember when he got elected there was talk of him being a real leader-of-the-future type but I haven't heard his name mentioned at all.  

Don't know him but he hasn't ruled himself out or announced his support for anyone else. Might have a too gradualist strategy for seeking independence for some of the membership.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, CarrbridgeSaintee said:

I'd say so mate.

You'd have the vote split between both anti-GRR candidates, clearing the way for Yousaf to ride his scooter all the way to victory.

That's assuming it's just one vote though.  Maybe they'd do it in rounds?

Maybe someone closer to the SNP could confirm?

I'd imagine if more than two stand it will be a preference vote (ie. You rank the candidates 1,2,3,4. If your number one is knocked out your vote is transferred to your second choice and so on). Otherwise the winner would be elected with less than 50% of the vote which could damage their credibility wrt. mandate from the membership. 

Edited by Trogdor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, renton said:

Will Forbes be too right wing, economically for the membership? Definitely think Yousaf will be able to run to the left of her there.

It barely matters if she's economically left or right wing in practice when Scot Gov don't have any control over the main fiscal levers. I also don't recall widespread criticism of her being too right wing economically during her tenure as finance secretary, just the growth commission stuff which seemed pretty isolated. So I don't think it will be a major factor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think Yousaf is smart enough or polished enough to succeed as FM. Concern over Forbes' personal views have to be balanced against the fact that there aren't the votes in the party or in Parliament to enact any crazy policies like limiting abortions or closing the shops on Sundays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said:

Empire building was, of course, much more a Scots thing than an English one, pound for pound, although it's rarely talked about - which makes sense.  I think 'middle England would say, "some bits were good, other bits were bad and, in the light of the 21st C, we shouldn't have been there." Which is about my own position.

As for self-determination?  The UN context is, "subjection of peoples to alien subjugation, domination and exploitation".  This is pretty-much echoed by the Supreme Court in December when they said:

"International law favours the territorial integrity of States. Outside the context of self-determination, normally limited to situations of colonial type or those involving foreign occupation, it does not confer any ‘right to secede’."

That's why I see SD as a hackneyed old trope that has no bearing on Britain as an independent, democratic and self-determined state.

😂

Surely no one is taking this pathetic drivel seriously. Good lord. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 16/02/2023 at 21:53, superbigal said:

Got on the lovely Kate at 2.15 for a max bet (restricted) at 11/2.  Decent value as now about 2/1

Saying that Hills were thick as fook.  Douglas Ross and various other tories were all about 25s

Screenshot_20230216_215126_Chrome.jpg

Oh this is looking very tidy now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, CarrbridgeSaintee said:

I'd say so mate.

You'd have the vote split between both anti-GRR candidates, clearing the way for Yousaf to ride his scooter all the way to victory.

That's assuming it's just one vote though.  Maybe they'd do it in rounds?

Maybe someone closer to the SNP could confirm?

Just checked, it's the same rules as the Council elections, so numbered preference and just the one round.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Stephen Malkmus said:

It barely matters if she's economically left or right wing in practice when Scot Gov don't have any control over the main fiscal levers. I also don't recall widespread criticism of her being too right wing economically during her tenure as finance secretary, just the growth commission stuff which seemed pretty isolated. So I don't think it will be a major factor.

I suppose as Finance Secretary she followed the lead given her by Sturgeon, out on her own is a different matter, and whilecI absolutely agree on the matter of the fiscal and financial levers, in terms of the spending available to her, the priorities she set will matter, both in practical terms but also for positioning: Labour haven't been able to run to the left of the SNP economically, and have been squeezed into a box simply marked "union" that they are competing for votes with the Tories.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 17/02/2023 at 17:49, DeeTillEhDeh said:

For a politician Cherry is very thin skinned.

Whilst not condoning Wishart (he is an arse) I'm also struggling to see the misogyny in his post.

Cherry has an ego the size of Everest.

That sounds like a bad combination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forbes's church wanted her to vote No to independence in 2014, so presumably she doesn't take everything they say onboard.

https://www.fpchurch.org.uk/2014/07/scottish-independence-referendum-synod-resolution/

P.S. I get confused between the various Free Presbyterian churches, it's possible this is not hers..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, renton said:

I suppose as Finance Secretary she followed the lead given her by Sturgeon, out on her own is a different matter, and whilecI absolutely agree on the matter of the fiscal and financial levers, in terms of the spending available to her, the priorities she set will matter, both in practical terms but also for positioning: Labour haven't been able to run to the left of the SNP economically, and have been squeezed into a box simply marked "union" that they are competing for votes with the Tories.

 

Uncertainty over forward travel for the SNP over independence and other issues with a new leader that most voters wouldn't recognise if they passed them in the street is inviting their vote to be squeezed in 2024. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, welshbairn said:

Forbes's church wanted her to vote No to independence in 2014, so presumably she doesn't take everything they say onboard.

https://www.fpchurch.org.uk/2014/07/scottish-independence-referendum-synod-resolution/

P.S. I get confused between the various Free Presbyterian churches, it's possible this is not hers..

Which one/s are the splitters? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

Forbes's church wanted her to vote No to independence in 2014, so presumably she doesn't take everything they say onboard.

https://www.fpchurch.org.uk/2014/07/scottish-independence-referendum-synod-resolution/

P.S. I get confused between the various Free Presbyterian churches, it's possible this is not hers..

It's not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...