Tartan Dave Posted February 21, 2023 Share Posted February 21, 2023 I’d struggle to vote for a party lead by any of the current 3 in the leadership contest. I voted for the first time in 2014 and have only ever voted for SNP/Yes/remain. I wouldn’t vote for Labour, Lib Dem, Tory, Alba and I’d struggle to vote for Greens as, Patrick Harvie aside, they haven’t impressed me much with their wee bit of power. I suspect a lot will be in a similar boat if no one competent enters the race 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trogdor Posted February 21, 2023 Share Posted February 21, 2023 Forbes is a goner. She is losing support by the second. Claire Haughey has just withdrawn her support. I doubt Forbes will make it onto the ballot tbh. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted February 21, 2023 Share Posted February 21, 2023 Ash Regan still in hiding this morning with the other two both on the radio at least. With her USP of being anti GRR blown out of the water by Forbes she might be bowing out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScotiaNostra Posted February 21, 2023 Share Posted February 21, 2023 I think Forbes blunder helps Regan, I presume Regan voted for same sex marriage. Its probably not enough to win but enough to show just how unpopular Yousaf is as a candidate 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted February 21, 2023 Share Posted February 21, 2023 10 hours ago, HTG said: No, her bid is in tatters because of her beliefs - not her honesty. We should expect honesty (I know) as a matter of course. The only way that those views would have been fully disclosed is by honesty. The response to this is exactly why politicians are in general disingenuous about their real views: because when the public cry for 'honesty', they mean no such thing. Quote The question is more why she thought entering the race was a good idea in the first place given that it's as clear as the nose on her face that she'd be at odds with the will of parliament on specific social issues. The will of parliament sets views on hundreds if not thousands of issues at any given time. The idea that a candidate for leadership must be bound to every single one of those decisions (or a cherry-picked handful of Very Important Ones because Reasons) is nonsense. It's actually much better than a candidate sets out their views transparently and lets their voting constituency make an informed choice. 9 hours ago, renton said: Really, as much as her religious bigotry should get her stopped in the race, so should the stupidity and/or naivety of her positioning today. Like, don't be a bigot - but if you must be at least pretend you aren't. That's the compact we make in Western Democracies. Politicians pretend to think whatever way we want them to, and we promise not to berate them too much for their utter lack of integrity. If you can't clear that bar, then you shouldn't be running for political office. That'll be why politicians are beneath bankers in levels of public approval in Western democracies, because this approach is working out so well. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunning1874 Posted February 21, 2023 Share Posted February 21, 2023 Gillian Martin another to withdraw support. When you only had 10 MSP endorsements to date, losing 3 of them in 12 hours does not suggest you'll be hanging around the campaign long. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin_Nevis Posted February 21, 2023 Share Posted February 21, 2023 Between this and the complete and utter shambles that SSS is proving to be, I'm not sure I can be fucked with voting for the SNP for the foreseeable future. This contest is going to be a monumental binfire. Kate Forbes must have set some sort of record for torching a political career. She should be nowhere near the front benches ever again. The least worst choice now appears to be Humza, which is as depressing as f**k. No wonder Sturgeon resigned. She must have been fucking knackered trying to hold that lot together. Whichever absolute no-mark gets the gig is going to oversee a considerable dip in support, imo. I think we can safely forget about an Indy vote in the next few years, possibly even my lifetime, leaving us a choice in government of a Tory Party marginally to the left of the Third Reich and a Labour Party which would have been indistinguishable from David Cameron's lot. What a time to be alive. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted February 21, 2023 Share Posted February 21, 2023 33 minutes ago, effeffsee_the2nd said: maybe it's deliberate? there are thousands in the SNP membership who keep demanding that we hold another indy ref as soon as possible, one that we would almost certainly lose if it we're to go ahead. having a shite leader to increase apathy and get all those blowhard members to chuck their membership gives the wider independence movement time to build for having a proper go at winning the next one, which would have to be some time after 2030. You need polls to consistently show 60% + in favour of support to be even thinking about having another vote. we don't have anywhere near that While I don't disagree entirely that there's a certain impatience with the timing, that is the most bankrupt feature of Sturgeonism. You will never get a string of 60% Yes polls on an issue that fundamentally splits the country. The risk cannot be removed from calling a second referendum by setting such a fantasy condition - you're just never actually holding one by sticking to that line. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted February 21, 2023 Share Posted February 21, 2023 10 hours ago, Dunning1874 said: The trap the Tories have laid here is not in trying to force the SNP to take the legal route to oppose a Section 35 over an issue they can fight the culture war on. It's picking a culture war issue which they know has already divided the SNP, for precisely the reason that those divisions might lead to the Scottish Government deciding not to make a legal challenge even though they would inevitably win. While the point that power devolved = power retained remains a pertinent argument in favour of independence, it becomes very hard to credibly make that argument if you've rolled over without a fight and accepted even the insufficient powers bestowed under that devolution settlement being trampled. Not making a legal challenge is the gateway to Holyrood becoming ungovernable, as anything which actually passes can then be slapped down with an S35, which is going to do more to tank the SNP's popularity than anything else could. Even an ongoing civil war over social issues, which failing to mount a legal challenge wouldn't actually end anyway,: you'd simply be switching the positions of leadership v backbenchers. This is utter nonsense, not least given the context of a Tory government at Westminster that is marginally less popular than Jimmy Saville. A nationalist political party benefits from having the democratic will of its constituent nation openly subverted by its Union partner. In a direct choice, it absolutely benefits far more from simply highlighting that reality time and time again than pursuing a tedious and drawn-out legal case, that will only add further oxygen to a long-toxic single issue that has already torched one of its leaders. That you and the Greens don't like this reality does not actually change it. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamamafegan Posted February 21, 2023 Share Posted February 21, 2023 I mean, it shouldn’t be a surprise to anybody that Kate Forbes has fucked it. The only surprise is that it’s happened so quickly. She was already a well known churchy type who holds Trump supporter-like views on things like gay marriage and abortions. Clearly not fit to run the party. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted February 21, 2023 Share Posted February 21, 2023 Kate says that although she would have voted against the repeal of the Scottish Witchcraft Act of 1563 she has no intention of reintroducing it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
well fan for life Posted February 21, 2023 Share Posted February 21, 2023 Kate Forbes torching her front bench political career speed run. World record pace. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paxo Posted February 21, 2023 Share Posted February 21, 2023 Disaster for Forbes. Imagine getting drawn into that hypothetical equal marriage question, naivety off the scale. All she had to do was not give a straight answer, waffle about some minor technicality of the bill, and then use the opportunity to confirm that she would use her position as first minister to further the aims and policies of the SNP ahead of her own personal views. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GiGi Posted February 21, 2023 Share Posted February 21, 2023 It really is a stupid own goal from Forbes. Had she kept her most egregiously god-bothering beliefs to herself I think she would have been the next FM comfortably. Fucking dire choice from the available candidates. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itzdrk Posted February 21, 2023 Share Posted February 21, 2023 8 minutes ago, Paxo said: Disaster for Forbes. Imagine getting drawn into that hypothetical equal marriage question, naivety off the scale. All she had to do was not give a straight answer, waffle about some minor technicality of the bill, and then use the opportunity to confirm that she would use her position as first minister to further the aims and policies of the SNP ahead of her own personal views. Better she makes it clear than the rest of the nation find out later on to their shock. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scary Bear Posted February 21, 2023 Share Posted February 21, 2023 Humza Yousless it is then. A man who can’t even ride a scooter. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donathan Posted February 21, 2023 Share Posted February 21, 2023 11 hours ago, Dunning1874 said: The trap the Tories have laid here is not in trying to force the SNP to take the legal route to oppose a Section 35 over an issue they can fight the culture war on. It's picking a culture war issue which they know has already divided the SNP, for precisely the reason that those divisions might lead to the Scottish Government deciding not to make a legal challenge even though they would inevitably win. While the point that power devolved = power retained remains a pertinent argument in favour of independence, it becomes very hard to credibly make that argument if you've rolled over without a fight and accepted even the insufficient powers bestowed under that devolution settlement being trampled. Not making a legal challenge is the gateway to Holyrood becoming ungovernable, as anything which actually passes can then be slapped down with an S35, which is going to do more to tank the SNP's popularity than anything else could. Even an ongoing civil war over social issues, which failing to mount a legal challenge wouldn't actually end anyway,: you'd simply be switching the positions of leadership v backbenchers. Anyone proposing not to make a legal challenge as part of a leadership campaign is ending any chance of winning on the spot, because it's an impossible position for the leader of the SNP to take. I’m no lawyer but I’m interested in finding out where this idea comes from that the SG would inevitability win a legal challenge over the gender bill? Recent evidence seems to show that court battles between the SG and the UKG tend to go in Westminster’s favour. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUcal Posted February 21, 2023 Share Posted February 21, 2023 Disappointed to see the amount of folk elsewhere claiming she is being attacked for her religion. If she was not particularly religious and was just saying she doesn't approve of gay marriage etc, then folk probably wouldn't be giving her the time of day in a leadership contest (and rightly so, imo). However, because it's part of her faith it's beyond criticism? Nah. None of the candidates fill me with much optimism. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted February 21, 2023 Share Posted February 21, 2023 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Donathan said: I’m no lawyer but I’m interested in finding out where this idea comes from that the SG would inevitability win a legal challenge over the gender bill? Recent evidence seems to show that court battles between the SG and the UKG tend to go in Westminster’s favour. The statement of reasons they gave to justify blocking it was laughably flimsy, the legal test is reasonableness which was totally lacking. I think they could win this one, and it's definitely worth testing the principle that Westminster can't overrule devolved legislation willy-nilly. Even if they lose it will show that devolution is a farce and the only solution is independence. Edited February 21, 2023 by welshbairn 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D Angelo Barksdale Posted February 21, 2023 Share Posted February 21, 2023 Wonder what silly nicknames the Unionists will come up with, much to live up/down to after wee Nippy and wee Jimmy Krankie. Shouty Kate has torched her campaign. Humza Youseless is right there I suppose and I'd be surprised if some variation of Bumza Poosef didn't appear. Ash Regan is more difficult. Perhaps Ronald if she moves to the right. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.