Next permanent Scotland manager

[renton]

16 minutes ago, Scary Bear said:

You tend to find that if you constantly fall out with people who, like it or not, you need to keep a good relationship with, then you struggle to get things done.

Not sure a decent bonhomie between Sturgeon and the Tories would have made the latter any less reticent about a referendum they'd have a decent chance of losing and therefore fucking their own careers.

[itzdrk]

13 hours ago, Trogdor said:

I tend to use WhatScotlandThinks which shows all polls rather than cherry picking. Unless I was looking at Westminster voting intention, the yellow line was decisively down and the red one decisively up.

Edit - Also below from BallotBoxScot, which was my general sense that the SNP vote share is down circa 5%...

Party polling in the middle of a leadership contest is pointless IMO.  You'll see how they are really getting on two to three months after whichever of the three idiots wins. 

[Wee-Bey]

This would make Forbes favourite assuming the majority of Regan's 2nd votes go to her.

[DrewDon]

2 minutes ago, Marlo Stanfield said:

This would make Forbes favourite assuming the majority of Regan's 2nd votes go to her.

Surely this doesn't actually have much value as an indication if it is a poll of SNP voters rather than SNP members? 

[welshbairn]

There was a guy on the radio this morning saying he thought a majority of activist members would be backing Humza but nobody had a clue how couch members like myself will vote. 

[Wee-Bey]

6 minutes ago, DrewDon said:

Surely this doesn't actually have much value as an indication if it is a poll of SNP voters rather than SNP members? 

Yeah I guess so, I got suckered by the headline.

Humza is out to 1/4 now too.

[Scary Bear]

13 minutes ago, renton said:

Not sure a decent bonhomie between Sturgeon and the Tories would have made the latter any less reticent about a referendum they'd have a decent chance of losing and therefore fucking their own careers.

True, I think it’s highly unlikely that any Westminster government, especially a Tory one, will agree to another Indy Ref any time soon.

At the time of the Edinburgh Agreement and ever since the Tories have said that the referendum was a once in a generation opportunity. Eight years is not a generation, so I can see why the Tories or any Westminster government, will keep saying no. 

The SNP (Yes movement) will either need to come up with another plan or keep treading water until at least 2034, possibly longer. However, it would maybe help if Holyrood could get back to having a working relationship with the Westminster government of the day.

 

[ICTChris]

17 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

There was a guy on the radio this morning saying he thought a majority of activist members would be backing Humza but nobody had a clue how couch members like myself will vote. 

What's the split of active members to passive ones?  Must be heavily skewed in favour of the passive.

[welshbairn]

11 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

What's the split of active members to passive ones?  Must be heavily skewed in favour of the passive.

I'd have thought so. The passive ones probably reflect SNP voters as a whole so about 50/50, with activists tipping the result to Humza. That's probably what the bookies are thinking but if it's close Forbes could still win on Regan's second preferences.

Edited March 24, 2023 by welshbairn

[Leith Green]

44 minutes ago, Marlo Stanfield said:

This would make Forbes favourite assuming the majority of Regan's 2nd votes go to her.

Disappointed at The National tbqhwy, surely a Scottish paper knows that the correct word in these circumstances is "bawhair"....................

[Rugster]

12 minutes ago, Leith Green said:

Disappointed at The National tbqhwy, surely a Scottish paper knows that the correct word in these circumstances is "bawhair"....................

A midge's bawhair, to be precise!

[renton]

38 minutes ago, Scary Bear said:

True, I think it’s highly unlikely that any Westminster government, especially a Tory one, will agree to another Indy Ref any time soon.

At the time of the Edinburgh Agreement and ever since the Tories have said that the referendum was a once in a generation opportunity. Eight years is not a generation, so I can see why the Tories or any Westminster government, will keep saying no. 

The SNP (Yes movement) will either need to come up with another plan or keep treading water until at least 2034, possibly longer. However, it would maybe help if Holyrood could get back to having a working relationship with the Westminster government of the day.

 

I think it's fanciful that they'd eventually turn around and say "fair play it's been long enough, on you go"

A generation is such a nebulous concept as to be worthless, not to mention that it has no legal standing.

Basically, I agree in so much as until the SNP can create some leverage, no UK prime minister is likely to be as hubristic as Cameron was in 2012. He thought he could kill off every deep division in UK politics with a few big referendum wins and run the table for a decade.

I disagree that the Tories have a decent moral reason for saying no. The c***s are just running scared.

As for the last paragraph. UK politics isn't founded on co-operative agreement (even the coalition government was basically the Tories absorbing then destroyingvthe Lib Dems) and any notion of a working relationship is founded squarely on Holyrood doing what it's told as apparent in Gordon Brown's last foray into constitutional reform. So why should the SNP or any Scottish Government worth the name be content with that?

[Blue Brazil Forever]

20 minutes ago, Leith Green said:

Disappointed at The National tbqhwy, surely a Scottish paper knows that the correct word in these circumstances is "bawhair"....................

Surely after all the recent goings on, the word "bawhair" should now be replaced by, for example,  "pubehair"

[Double Jack D]

3 minutes ago, renton said:

I think it's fanciful that they'd eventually turn around and say "fair play it's been long enough, on you go"

A generation is such a nebulous concept as to be worthless, not to mention that it has no legal standing.

Basically, I agree in so much as until the SNP can create some leverage, no UK prime minister is likely to be as hubristic as Cameron was in 2012. He thought he could kill off every deep division in UK politics with a few big referendum wins and run the table for a decade.

I disagree that the Tories have a decent moral reason for saying no. The c***s are just running scared.

As for the last paragraph. UK politics isn't founded on co-operative agreement (even the coalition government was basically the Tories absorbing then destroyingvthe Lib Dems) and any notion of a working relationship is founded squarely on Holyrood doing what it's told as apparent in Gordon Brown's last foray into constitutional reform. So why should the SNP or any Scottish Government worth the name be content with that?

Both Labour and the Tories are standing on a manifesto of no second indyref. Generation passed or not, running scared or not, whoever is elected the next UK government will have a UK mandate not to have an indyref which is a UK reserved matter.

[Trogdor]

1 hour ago, welshbairn said:

There was a guy on the radio this morning saying he thought a majority of activist members would be backing Humza but nobody had a clue how couch members like myself will vote. 

[welshbairn]

If the SNP ever have the leverage to force the Tories or Labour to do anything, it should be to devolve the right to call an independence referendum at a time of Holyrood's choosing, not a one off Section 30 agreement. And we shouldn't hold one until the result is likely to be considerably more than 50+0.1 in favour, at least 55% and preferably more than 60%. It would be nearly impossible to make Independence work with near total non cooperation from half the population, it has to be a resounding and conclusive Yes vote imo.

[ICTChris]

12 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

I'd have thought so. The passive ones probably reflect SNP voters as a whole so about 50/50, with activists tipping the result to Humza. That's probably what the bookies are thinking but if it's close Forbes could still win on Regan's second preferences.

Are the bookies particularly reliable for an election like this?  The last one was 20 years ago and was really completely different.

[welshbairn]

Just now, ICTChris said:

Are the bookies particularly reliable for an election like this?  The last one was 20 years ago and was really completely different.

I don't really get their odds on this, there was a guy from Ladbrokes on GMS this morning saying that the odds generally reflect the money being bet on different candidates to balance their book, rather than a prediction. But he then said that roughly equal amounts had been bet on Forbes and Yousaf, so I don't know what they're thinking.

[Leith Green]

42 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

If the SNP ever have the leverage to force the Tories or Labour to do anything, it should be to devolve the right to call an independence referendum at a time of Holyrood's choosing, not a one off Section 30 agreement. And we shouldn't hold one until the result is likely to be considerably more than 50+0.1 in favour, at least 55% and preferably more than 60%. It would be nearly impossible to make Independence work with near total non cooperation from half the population, it has to be a resounding and conclusive Yes vote imo.

Brexit is operating (if not working well) with at least half the population totally frustrated at the situation.............

[renton]

7 minutes ago, Leith Green said:

Brexit is operating (if not working well) with at least half the population totally frustrated at the situation.............

Basically because that half are disenfranchised by an opposition bricking it from articulating their viewpoint. Probably because they are shit scared their lead is soft as shit and expect to still have to pander to the right leaning 'swing vote'

PR can't come soon enough.