The Kate Forbes thread

[eez-eh]

1 hour ago, D Angelo Barksdale said:

I see the Forbster (still going with this) voted for the buffer zone bill.

Only one MSP voted against. Take a guess who it was.

[scottsdad]

9 minutes ago, eez-eh said:

Only one MSP voted against. Take a guess who it was.

I will give you actual cash if it was Humza Yousaf

[BFTD]

John Mason likes to harass women outside medical clinics. Pass it on.

Love this picture. What a bunch of creepy fucking weirdos.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

24 minutes ago, eez-eh said:

Only one MSP voted against. Take a guess who it was.

John Mason?

[Dunning1874]

On 29/04/2024 at 23:18, Jedi2 said:

But once Kate starts pursuing a low tax, light touch regulation programme, promoting oil and gas, downplaying Environmentalism and Equality, potentially trimming public service budgets...why wouldn't the Tories get on board with that?

She would win the next Holyrood election...hoovering up 'soft' Tory votes, suggesting that Independence is a 'longer process' of needing to persuade enough people with competent/strong govt, and, in addition to the soft Tory vote, retaining most of the SNP's existing share as it will be a 'who else is there to vote for' response 

They wouldn't get on board with it because this isn't the 2007-11 parliament, we're in a totally different place. The Tories were happy to work with the SNP on budgets and other legislation then because no one believed there was any prospect of any party ever winning or even getting close to a majority in Holyrood, therefore independence was easily dismissed as a non-issue with only about 30% support among the electorate and seemingly no chance of a pro-independence parliamentary majority. Being a good faith opposition who could extract concessions from a minority government in that context made perfect sense.

The last 13 years have changed the situation entirely and the whole Tory strategy in the years since has been obstruction, blanket opposition, never working with the SNP. They are the Great Satan who must be destroyed, and bad faith opposition has worked as an electoral tactic since 2014 in allowing the Tories to portray themselves as the great defenders of the Union in a situation where the constitution became the most important factor for a huge number of voters, an Ulsterisation the Tories actively strived for and wanted to deepen.

They're already going to slip back to being the third party come the next Holyrood election through a combination of unpopularity from their own legacy of government at Westminster and likely being squeezed out on the list as Labour compete with the SNP in constituencies again, while 10 years on from the referendum voters on both sides of the debate also start to doubt independence remains a live electoral issue which will be impacted by their vote. They're not going to make it even worse for themselves by constructively working with the SNP and handing what remains of the uberstaunch pro-Union vote away to Labour as well, even if the SNP had a reanimated independence supporting Thatcher as leader throwing out a load of other policies they agree with.

[eez-eh]

20 minutes ago, scottsdad said:

I will give you actual cash if it was Humza Yousaf

Unfortunately for my wallet, no.

5 minutes ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

John Mason?

Bingo!

[Dunning1874]

As for Forbes hoovering up Tory voters come the next election, regardless of how the relationship with Tory MSPs was to go in the meantime, this very much depends who the members of public making Forbes more popular than Swinney are.

It's easy to look at polling showing Forbes as more popular than Swinney overall with the public but less popular among SNP members then conclude that the SNP membership are being too insular and need to look at how to reconnect with the wider public. However if a significant proportion of the poll respondents who've said they prefer Forbes to Swinney are in fact died in the wool Tories, people who've still voted Labour in every election for the last 13 years despite everything or some other variant of hardcore unionist, then they're still people who would rather commit seppuku than vote SNP regardless of who the leader is. They may hate Forbes less than they hate Swinney because they don't associate her as closely with Sturgeon or the Greens and therefore prefer her to be FM, but it doesn't mean they'd vote for her.

Maybe a veer to the right will attract some soft Tories who aren't in that diehard category, but this seems an unlikely route to stemming the tide for the SNP when it could risk driving other voters away. They don’t need to pick up people who've been voting Tory for the last 17 years, they need to get their 2019 & 2021 voters who are drifting to Labour back.

While it's very early days after Yousaf's resignation and we don't even know who's standing yet so any polls need to be taken with an even bigger truckload of salt than usual, the polling breakdown of 2021 SNP voters does suggest Swinney is more popular with them. If that's the case, Forbes and a substantial move to the right of where they were in 2021 is more likely to push those voters further away than reverse the slump.

The idea that those voters are planning to abandon the SNP for Labour come the next two elections because they aren't right wing enough and have been captured by loony left Greens doesn't seem a more plausible explanation than general fatigue with a party who've been in government 17 years, have developed an air of bumbling incompetence through self-inflicted crises such as Matheson's iPad or Yousaf 4D chessing himself out of office, and most significantly are the subject of an ongoing criminal investigation into corruption which has seen their ex-Chief Executive charged, who happens to be married to the former First Minister who has also been arrested in connection with the same investigation.

[strichener]

7 hours ago, Jedi2 said:

So, if both stand and Forbes wins..the Greens won't vote for her when it comes to Holyrood meaning she couldn't be FM.

Meanwhile if Swinney wins but does so by giving her a top Cabinet job (possibly deputy), the Greens again presumably can't vote it through at Holyrood.

So..is it not the case now that the Greens will only support a Swinney Coronation (which doesn't include Forbes in a top job)?

It's incredible that these cranks will continue to wield so much power and effectively get to decide who the FM is.

If they can't get a Candidate passed by Holyrood vote they have 28 days to put another one forward which the Greens can vote for.

That's what happens when a bunch of morons give them their vote for independence reasons only.  It's SNP supporters that have given them this power.

Edited May 1 by strichener

[strichener]

6 hours ago, Alan Twelve said:

Aye, there's only eight times as many Tory, Labour and Lib MSPs as there are Greens. The Greens hold all the power for sure.

That's an idiotic take.

[Jedi2]

11 hours ago, Dunning1874 said:

As for Forbes hoovering up Tory voters come the next election, regardless of how the relationship with Tory MSPs was to go in the meantime, this very much depends who the members of public making Forbes more popular than Swinney are.

It's easy to look at polling showing Forbes as more popular than Swinney overall with the public but less popular among SNP members then conclude that the SNP membership are being too insular and need to look at how to reconnect with the wider public. However if a significant proportion of the poll respondents who've said they prefer Forbes to Swinney are in fact died in the wool Tories, people who've still voted Labour in every election for the last 13 years despite everything or some other variant of hardcore unionist, then they're still people who would rather commit seppuku than vote SNP regardless of who the leader is. They may hate Forbes less than they hate Swinney because they don't associate her as closely with Sturgeon or the Greens and therefore prefer her to be FM, but it doesn't mean they'd vote for her.

Maybe a veer to the right will attract some soft Tories who aren't in that diehard category, but this seems an unlikely route to stemming the tide for the SNP when it could risk driving other voters away. They don’t need to pick up people who've been voting Tory for the last 17 years, they need to get their 2019 & 2021 voters who are drifting to Labour back.

While it's very early days after Yousaf's resignation and we don't even know who's standing yet so any polls need to be taken with an even bigger truckload of salt than usual, the polling breakdown of 2021 SNP voters does suggest Swinney is more popular with them. If that's the case, Forbes and a substantial move to the right of where they were in 2021 is more likely to push those voters further away than reverse the slump.

The idea that those voters are planning to abandon the SNP for Labour come the next two elections because they aren't right wing enough and have been captured by loony left Greens doesn't seem a more plausible explanation than general fatigue with a party who've been in government 17 years, have developed an air of bumbling incompetence through self-inflicted crises such as Matheson's iPad or Yousaf 4D chessing himself out of office, and most significantly are the subject of an ongoing criminal investigation into corruption which has seen their ex-Chief Executive charged, who happens to be married to the former First Minister who has also been arrested in connection with the same investigation.

Excellent post and bang on the money

[Alan Twelve]

11 hours ago, strichener said:

That's an idiotic take.

Nah, idiotic is all the other parties whining about the Greens' power while at the same time refusing to work constructively with the government.

[tirso]

12 hours ago, Dunning1874 said:

The idea that those voters are planning to abandon the SNP for Labour come the next two elections because they aren't right wing enough and have been captured by loony left Greens doesn't seem a more plausible explanation than general fatigue with a party who've been in government 17 years, have developed an air of bumbling incompetence through self-inflicted crises such as Matheson's iPad or Yousaf 4D chessing himself out of office, and most significantly are the subject of an ongoing criminal investigation into corruption which has seen their ex-Chief Executive charged, who happens to be married to the former First Minister who has also been arrested in connection with the same investigation.

Totally agree.  I do think there is a feeling the SNP have become heck of a gimmicky too though.  And the trans stuff has been a factor in that.  People I'd never have as reactionary have written in my whatsapp group about ensuring the greens are nowhere near power.  combination of things.

 

Salmond, Sturgeon, Dewar, Davidson, even McConnell to an extent had wide respect if not appeal.  I think Swinney probably just edges it on that front for me out of the two current options but neither are in the same league as the previous list.

[DrewDon]

13 hours ago, BFTD said:

John Mason likes to harass women outside medical clinics. Pass it on.

Love this picture. What a bunch of creepy fucking weirdos.

I'm afraid the patter on the signs on the fence is much more offensive than what the protestors themselves are holding up. 

[ICTChris]

It seems like there's a big push for Forbes to join with Swinney and prevent a contest, possibily by returing as finance secretary and/or deputy First Minister.  it must be atractive to do that as it would give her a significant brief, allow her to have influence in government etc.

However, if she does agree to it, i don't think she will ever be First Minister.  Essentially she will now be tied to the successes or failures of the Swinney government and, however people want to spin it, Swinney is the continuinty-continuity candidate.  Say she  falls in with Swinney and things continue getting wore for the SNP - they lose seats in the UK General Election, there are more scandals, poll figures stay low.  She's tarred with that failure so if it happens and the Swinney goes she won't be the clean break she is now (you can debate whether she is a clean break now of course).

If she falls in with Swinney and he turns things around and there is electoral success, well why would he leave?  Also, what is likely to happen is others in the SNP will become the new shining stars of the future, leaving Forbes as yesterday's woman.

If Forbes wants to be First Minister she has to run now, against Swinney.

This is looking at things purely from the perspective of how to win.  Forbes may have significant policy differences to Swinney, she might want to approach constitutional questions in a different way, she might think she has a better chance of winning SNP majorities and even independence than John Swinney.  I just think from a purely tactical sense she can't stand aside now if she wants to be leader.

 

ETA - Sounds like she will be stepping aside.

Edited May 2 by ICTChris

[tirso]

31 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

It seems like there's a big push for Forbes to join with Swinney and prevent a contest, possibily by returing as finance secretary and/or deputy First Minister.  it must be atractive to do that as it would give her a significant brief, allow her to have influence in government etc.

However, if she does agree to it, i don't think she will ever be First Minister.  Essentially she will now be tied to the successes or failures of the Swinney government and, however people want to spin it, Swinney is the continuinty-continuity candidate.  Say she  falls in with Swinney and things continue getting wore for the SNP - they lose seats in the UK General Election, there are more scandals, poll figures stay low.  She's tarred with that failure so if it happens and the Swinney goes she won't be the clean break she is now (you can debate whether she is a clean break now of course).

If she falls in with Swinney and he turns things around and there is electoral success, well why would he leave?  Also, what is likely to happen is others in the SNP will become the new shining stars of the future, leaving Forbes as yesterday's woman.

If Forbes wants to be First Minister she has to run now, against Swinney.

This is looking at things purely from the perspective of how to win.  Forbes may have significant policy differences to Swinney, she might want to approach constitutional questions in a different way, she might think she has a better chance of winning SNP majorities and even independence than John Swinney.  I just think from a purely tactical sense she can't stand aside now if she wants to be leader.

 

ETA - Sounds like she will be stepping aside.

Alternative idea is she runs now and fails.  She won't run a third time.

I see no reason she'll be tarred if she's part of the cabinet.  She's already been part of the cabinet.  As was Yousaf, Swinney and Sturgeon.  In ten years she'll be 44.  That is still young and vibrant for a politician.  The age Nicola Sturgeon became FM.

 

Hard to predict the future.  Ultimately I'd hope Swinney can turn things around, you never know.  If a new shining star comes that would be great.  I hope it happens.

[oneteaminglasgow]

I think that ultimately Forbes is aware that the SNP minority government at present are relying on the greens to be able to function fully. Given that the greens have made it perfectly clear that they won’t work with her, that leaves her the choice of being a part of a Swinney government that can function, or leader of one that can’t.

I think she’s probably playing the long game and hoping that, in future, they’ll be a situation where the SNP don’t rely on the greens, and she can launch a bid there. 

[Binos]

1 hour ago, oneteaminglasgow said:

I think that ultimately Forbes is aware that the SNP minority government at present are relying on the greens to be able to function fully. Given that the greens have made it perfectly clear that they won’t work with her, that leaves her the choice of being a part of a Swinney government that can function, or leader of one that can’t.

I think she’s probably playing the long game and hoping that, in future, they’ll be a situation where the SNP don’t rely on the greens, and she can launch a bid there. 

There won't be 

The Scottish parliament was ill devised and may as well be first past the post 

[Jedi2]

So Harvie and Sturgeon pulling all the strings...Harvie gets his wish to not have Forbes, and Sturgeon gets 'her' man in, with Swinney.

And now, Swinney can do another deal with the Greens in order to get legislation passed,(and the Greens can get the SNP to keep plugging away at their 'Equality' agenda).The continuity,continuity candidate.

Exactly the same pattern as the Tories in this parliamentary term...they handed the election of next leader to the members who botched it with Truss, same as the SNP with Yousaf. Next time around they cut the members out (too risky) and put Sunak in, unopposed. Now the SNP cut their members out (in case they plumped for Forbes) and have a Swinney Coronation.

Edited May 2 by Jedi2

[welshbairn]

4 minutes ago, Jedi2 said:

So Harvie and Sturgeon pulling all the strings...Harvie gets his wish to not have Forbes, and Sturgeon gets 'her' man in, with Swinney.

And now, Swinney can do another deal with the Greens in order to get legislation passed,(and the Greens can get the SNP to keep plugging away at their 'Equality' agenda).The continuity,continuity candidate.

Exactly the same pattern as the Tories in this parliamentary term...they handed the election of next leader to the members who botched it with Truss, same as the SNP with Yousaf. Next time around they cut the members out (too risky) and put Sunak in, unopposed. Now the SNP cut their members out (in case they plumped for Forbes) and have a Swinney Coronation.

Livid that your dream Forbes led SNP/Tory coalition won't come about before the Westminster election?

[Jedi2]

No, no really. More sad about the state of Scottish politics, when the Greens can be kicked out of the Cabinet only to effectively return a week later so that they can continue their agenda. And also of the continuing influence of Sturgeon...such is the hatred for Salmond that she can torpedo a deal with Alba and work to get the Greens back in.