European Elections

[Victorian]

The next general election was already assured to be a huge shake up of Westminster but that has been increased quite a bit by the gains of the Brexit Party.     Farage has already made strong suggestions that they will sell themselves on a ticket of being completely anti-establishment / virtually revolutionary.     The reservoir of dislike for the political establishment is very high and it's a credible breeding ground for Farage's type of vague policy base bombast.      The longer the Brexit stalement goes on,    the stronger they'll get and the more party infrastructure they'll build.

Edited May 27, 2019 by Victorian

[Cade]

Scottish Tories know their London-based party is 100% toxic so they've been reduced to not mentioning the mayhem in Westminster and have become a single issue party in Scotland. Independence Never.

The Greens are the same as they are in England.

Same with LibDems.

Nobody knows what Scottish Labour stand for, least of all Scottish Labour themselves. Can't remember the last time I heard them say anything about policy.

This leaves the SNP as the only functional party up here.

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

5 hours ago, Toggie88 said:

 

Nothing but soundbites and a complete misunderstanding of how the EU works, dearie me. 

 

Correct.

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

2 hours ago, dtgj said:

 

Your 'equivalent' is nothing like how it works though. On a UK scale the equivalent would be the democratically elected parliaments in each UK country (you'd have to set up one for England) appointing representatives to get together and decide on topics that need to be addressed at a whole UK level. Those proposals would then be discussed by a democratically elected Westminster parliament. 

 

The European equivalent of your UK scenario would be if we had a democratically elected European parliament that appointed government at a country level. This is not what happens, as adequately explained in the infographic posted by Boris. 

Again, correct.

[Victorian]

1 minute ago, Lord BJ said:

As others have said strange results last night. All I can take from it is we are divided. 

 

I think if a GE is to happen tories and labour will need to pick a side. The tories will go hard on leaving and try and get brexit done before a general election. They don’t they will probably see devastation like they’ve seen before. My concern is they know that and will try and get a exit at any cost. 

 

Labour, I suggest, need to get off this strategy that they can’t explain. Which i suggest probably means going for remain and second vote. To differentiate themselves from the tories. Otherwise they will probably see devastation that they’ve never seen before.

 

Fun times.

 

 

 

The Tories are being squeezed on the right but also on the left.     They could position as a Brexit at all costs party but that isn't the broadest appeal strategy.    It might represent damage limitation.

 

Labour have a big problem.    The signs are that trying to be broad appeal wont win a general election.    Jumping down on the remain side of the fence seems certain to lose support.      Their best chance is to sell their domestic programme on at least as big a billing as Brexit.

[The Mighty Thor]

14 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

Labour, I suggest, need to get off this strategy that they can’t explain. Which i suggest probably means going for remain and second vote. To differentiate themselves from the tories. Otherwise they will probably see devastation that they’ve never seen before.

 

Fun times.

 

 

 

7 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

Labour have a big problem.    The signs are that trying to be broad appeal wont win a general election.    Jumping down on the remain side of the fence seems certain to lose support.      Their best chance is to sell their domestic programme on at least as big a billing as Brexit.

Labour are finished. 

They've been manoeuvred into a position they can't recover from by a membership and NEC that are so far out of touch with reality.

The folly of 'returning to their roots' with a guy like Corbyn is coming home to roost. 

Times have moved on and they've decided to go back to the 70s in leadership and ideology. 

As for the branch office......

[Victorian]

4 minutes ago, The Mighty Thor said:

 

Labour are finished. 

They've been manoeuvred into a position they can't recover from by a membership and NEC that are so far out of touch with reality.

The folly of 'returning to their roots' with a guy like Corbyn is coming home to roost. 

Times have moved on and they've decided to go back to the 70s in leadership and ideology. 

As for the branch office......

 

The problem is that the NEC / PLP dynamic is often incompatible with a party manifesto / front bench policy making structure.    There is a latent contradiction in the messages being issued as to what the policies are and whi determined them.     The leadership is not faultless but backbenchers going off message from the NEC is equally damaging.

[The Mighty Thor]

2 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

The problem is that the NEC / PLP dynamic is often incompatible with a party manifesto / front bench policy making structure.    There is a latent contradiction in the messages being issued as to what the policies are and whi determined them.     The leadership is not faultless but backbenchers going off message from the NEC is equally damaging.

Vic it's easy to go off message when no one knows what the message is meant to be. 

Take today when Corbyn comes out in response to the mother of all bleachings with support now for a second referendum. 

No one knows what Labour stand for least of all labour. 

[Victorian]

1 minute ago, The Mighty Thor said:

Vic it's easy to go off message when no one knows what the message is meant to be. 

Take today when Corbyn comes out in response to the mother of all bleachings with support now for a second referendum. 

No one knows what Labour stand for least of all labour. 

 

But it's certainly no worse a confused message than the Tories.     The Tories have just as many opposing views across the the factions of the party.    The cabinet has been involved in a titanic power struggle throughout.     May has attempted to live hand to mouth by trying to appease one side of the party or the other as events have unfolded,    often having to U-turn almost immediately.     

 

The Labour policy has remained much,  much more consistent thoughout.     They just haven't been able to demonstrate it.      

[The Mighty Thor]

3 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

But it's certainly no worse a confused message than the Tories.     The Tories have just as many opposing views across the the factions of the party.    The cabinet has been involved in a titanic power struggle throughout.     May has attempted to live hand to mouth by trying to appease one side of the party or the other as events have unfolded,    often having to U-turn almost immediately.     

 

The Labour policy has remained much,  much more consistent thoughout.     They just haven't been able to demonstrate it.      

No argument there but they'll lurch right and when push comes to shove, ie when being removed from power looms, unite under that hard Brexit banner and be a far more right wing Tory party, ironically leaving a vacuum in the middle where the Labour party should be, except they won't be there because they're chasing the 1970s they never had. 

It must be shit living in England where your political choices are right, righter, left and whatever you need us to be to get a seat at the big table. No wonder theres fertile ground for the halfwits. 

[Victorian]

Just now, The Mighty Thor said:

No argument there but they'll lurch right and when push comes to shove, ie when being removed from power looms, unite under that hard Brexit banner and be a far more right wing Tory party, ironically leaving a vacuum in the middle where the Labour party should be, except they won't be there because they're chasing the 1970s they never had. 

It must be shit living in England where your political choices are right, righter, left and whatever you need us to be to get a seat at the big table. No wonder theres fertile ground for the halfwits. 

 

More than ever,    voters scrutinise their own MP's voting record and stated positions on policies.     It wont be easy for either party to collectively reposition as a party of leave / hard Brexit / remain / confirmatory vote,  etc.     All these individual MPs are exposed to their own voting records and what they have said on Brexit.     It is absolutely impossible to even begin to forecast how the next election will pan out.      The large gains of the Brexit Party and the Lib Dems have complicated it even more.     

 

The Tories may well want Brexit finalised well in advance of facing an election but the wrath of voters will last for a generation.

[The Mighty Thor]

1 minute ago, Victorian said:

 

More than ever,    voters scrutinise their own MP's voting record and stated positions on policies.     It wont be easy for either party to collectively reposition as a party of leave / hard Brexit / remain / confirmatory vote,  etc.     All these individual MPs are exposed to their own voting records and what they have said on Brexit.     It is absolutely impossible to even begin to forecast how the next election will pan out.      The large gains of the Brexit Party and the Lib Dems have complicated it even more.     

 

The Tories may well want Brexit finalised well in advance of facing an election but the wrath of voters will last for a generation.

I said it this morning. We are living in a time of rapid political change. 

I don't think any of us can predict what will happen in the next 10 or 20 years particularly as Scotland and England are moving apart at a terrific pace socially, culturally and politically.

It will be a foolish WM government that does not acknowledge or attempt to address that. 

Put Johnson in no.10 on a right wing agenda and the UK will implode. 

[Victorian]

4 minutes ago, The Mighty Thor said:

I said it this morning. We are living in a time of rapid political change. 

I don't think any of us can predict what will happen in the next 10 or 20 years particularly as Scotland and England are moving apart at a terrific pace socially, culturally and politically.

It will be a foolish WM government that does not acknowledge or attempt to address that. 

Put Johnson in no.10 on a right wing agenda and the UK will implode. 

 

I agree.     As I was saying earlier,    there's as large an appetite as ever for the comfortable political establishment to be torn down.     I think Farage could well be in the right place at the right time here.     Talking about delivering wholesale revolution to politics.    As a party they may well eventually present a domestic manifesto but they'll still be represented by the fruitier elements of society.       God help us if these people achieve a position of power.      Hazardous times.

[Harry Potter]

1 hour ago, Victorian said:

The results in Scotland are curious to say the least.    The SNP made gains on a no-Brexit ticket.    The Brexit Party achieved a significant vote share despite Nigel Farage being a long standing opponent of Scottish Independence and generally being pretty toxic in Scotland.      Of the big two parties,    Labour were given a much bigger clobbering than the Tories,    despite Labour being a much bigger possibility of a second referendum or softer Brexit deal.     The Tories hypnotised a section of their followers on a bizarre anti-independence ticket.

 

All over the place.

Edinburgh with the biggest turn-out in scotland, class. the result was obvious,  

[Victorian]

Just now, Lord BJ said:

 

I wasnt so so much suggesting they become brexit at any cost as a policy. More that the tories might make it happen at any cost before a GE. This way in theory they have the brexit issue. 

 

 

Likewise I think labour have no chance of selling a domestic programme without addressing the brexit thing. 

 

Unless brexit is done before the next GE, which seems unlikely, I suspect the next GE will end up being fought around brexit. A bit of tragedy as these sort of binary referendum choice have dominated Scottish and UK politics for too long.

 

 

 

Like I said,   both parties might hope their troubles are over in the event of delivering Brexit in whatever form,   but it seems fanciful that the electorate are going to forgive and forget so easily.

[Darren]

7 hours ago, dtgj said:

 

Your 'equivalent' is nothing like how it works though. On a UK scale the equivalent would be the democratically elected parliaments in each UK country (you'd have to set up one for England) appointing representatives to get together and decide on topics that need to be addressed at a whole UK level. Those proposals would then be discussed by a democratically elected Westminster parliament. 

 

The European equivalent of your UK scenario would be if we had a democratically elected European parliament that appointed government at a country level. This is not what happens, as adequately explained in the infographic posted by Boris. 

 

An excellent response.

[Sraman]

Is this type of antiestablishmentarianism for folks who like to think we are an establishment club?

 

I wonder if they see the Brexit party as a sort of FOUK without the annoyance of piddly little details like everything?

 

I suppose you have to admire them for their honesty though. The first political party that I can remember, who have released a written manifesto outlining exactly what they are going to do for the money we pay them.

 

Ach well, they've given the tree a shake. We'll just have to wait and see what affect it has, good bad or indifferent. Roll on 2020.

[JamboX2]

12 hours ago, Cade said:

Scottish Tories know their London-based party is 100% toxic so they've been reduced to not mentioning the mayhem in Westminster and have become a single issue party in Scotland. Independence Never.

The Greens are the same as they are in England.

Same with LibDems.

Nobody knows what Scottish Labour stand for, least of all Scottish Labour themselves. Can't remember the last time I heard them say anything about policy.

This leaves the SNP as the only functional party up here.

 

The EU elections to me raised two major issues but not for the Tories (their vote held up better than elsewhere in the UK!). The questions are for Labour and the Greens:

 

1. Greens - the only Green Party in Europe to not see a significant increase in their vote share. Why is that? What is it that Patrick Harvie is not doing which is causing them to be stagnant at a time when Green politics are on the up? Even in England the Greens had a hige boost in support. 

 

The Scottish Greens need to start flexing their muscle. Labour are clearly struggling and yet they show no signs of doing anything. LibDems gaining that extra seat in Scotland is damning to the Greens given they are smaller in Holyrood than the Greens.

 

It might just be time for Harvie and the Scottish Greens to start distinguishing themselves from the SNP and showing some clear "Green" water between them on domestic policy, EU politics and on issues around independence. I say this because their website does have very different policies from the SNP posted as their current political position. Why then are these radical, green ideas not landing? Patrick Harvie has some big questions over his leadership strategy to answer. 

 

2. Scottish Labour - The Leonard experiment is officially a failure. The slight increase in vote share won by Dugdale in 2017 has been lost along with Britain's most experienced MEP. Leonard and the CfS have failed on their core message and are only going backwards; even on the significant party autonomy the party achieved in 2014 it looks as though Leonard is going backwards:

 

- refers to himself as the leader in Scotland not leader of the Scottish Labour Party

- used campaign slogans and lines designed for England and Wales where Farage and not Sturgeon was the key opponent

- adopted a low key approach to the constitutional position when raised.

 

Policy wise at home there are good positions being adopted:

 

- £5 a week child benefit top up

- increasing the top rate of income tax 

- increased investment in education

- opposed to scrapping APD

- nationalising Scot Rail 

- changing Scottish Government procurement laws to demand living wage for all public sector contracts.

 

There is a prospectus but it's barely spole about because Leonard is a toom tabbard, the forgotten man. He is a very intelligent man and someone who has a part to play, leader isn't the thing he should be doing. He and CfS are taking Scottish Labour backwards. He should step down and someone like Sarwar, Marra, Sweeney, Murray or Bailley should stand. The party has a lot of ex-MPs and MSPs who should be considered as well for leadership or running for seats, David Martin being one.

 

The saving grace for Scottish Labour at present is the lack of increase in support for the Greens.

 

That was my big take in Scotland: Green and Labour have big questions over their leadership and party strategy. 

Edited May 28, 2019 by JamboX2

[Toggie88]

16 hours ago, frankblack said:

 

Not the same thing.

 

It is the equivalent to scrapping elections for the Welsh and Scottish Parliaments and have Westminster send whoever the felt like to run these institutions.  I assume you wouldn't have a problem with it?

 

It is not the same at all! Literally the opposite. 

 

The system of electing the Commission sees power come from the bottom, while your made up scenario sees power come from the top. 

 

A better analogy is that if the UK Parliament was appointed by elected members of the Scottish Parliament, Welsh and North Irish assemblies and an English parliament... That would be comparable. 

 

Also, the irony of Eurosceptic complaints about democratic accountability when we have the House of Lords... which is entirely undemocratic, unaccountable and they are made peers for life. In comparison, the Commission is held to account, can be voted out and has clear terms. 

 

 

 

[Cade]

Anybody living in a nation which has first-past-the-post voting, an unelected 2nd house and a hereditary Head of State has some bloody cheek to call anybody else "undemocratic"

[coconut doug]

3 hours ago, JamboX2 said:

 

The EU elections to me raised two major issues but not for the Tories (their vote held up better than elsewhere in the UK!). The questions are for Labour and the Greens:

 

1. Greens - the only Green Party in Europe to not see a significant increase in their vote share. Why is that? What is it that Patrick Harvie is not doing which is causing them to be stagnant at a time when Green politics are on the up? Even in England the Greens had a hige boost in support. 

 

The Scottish Greens need to start flexing their muscle. Labour are clearly struggling and yet they show no signs of doing anything. LibDems gaining that extra seat in Scotland is damning to the Greens given they are smaller in Holyrood than the Greens.

 

It might just be time for Harvie and the Scottish Greens to start distinguishing themselves from the SNP and showing some clear "Green" water between them on domestic policy, EU politics and on issues around independence. I say this because their website does have very different policies from the SNP posted as their current political position. Why then are these radical, green ideas not landing? Patrick Harvie has some big questions over his leadership strategy to answer. 

 

2. Scottish Labour - The Leonard experiment is officially a failure. The slight increase in vote share won by Dugdale in 2017 has been lost along with Britain's most experienced MEP. Leonard and the CfS have failed on their core message and are only going backwards; even on the significant party autonomy the party achieved in 2014 it looks as though Leonard is going backwards:

 

- refers to himself as the leader in Scotland not leader of the Scottish Labour Party

- used campaign slogans and lines designed for England and Wales where Farage and not Sturgeon was the key opponent

- adopted a low key approach to the constitutional position when raised.

 

Policy wise at home there are good positions being adopted:

 

- £5 a week child benefit top up

- increasing the top rate of income tax 

- increased investment in education

- opposed to scrapping APD

- nationalising Scot Rail 

- changing Scottish Government procurement laws to demand living wage for all public sector contracts.

 

There is a prospectus but it's barely spole about because Leonard is a toom tabbard, the forgotten man. He is a very intelligent man and someone who has a part to play, leader isn't the thing he should be doing. He and CfS are taking Scottish Labour backwards. He should step down and someone like Sarwar, Marra, Sweeney, Murray or Bailley should stand. The party has a lot of ex-MPs and MSPs who should be considered as well for leadership or running for seats, David Martin being one.

 

The saving grace for Scottish Labour at present is the lack of increase in support for the Greens.

 

That was my big take in Scotland: Green and Labour have big questions over their leadership and party strategy. 

 

The Green vote went up marginally as Greens stayed loyal. They did not attract remain support though because there were alternatives who could win the seat (SNP and Libdems) A vote for the Greens was widely understood to have little chance of creating a Green MEP. Thats what happened +1 for SNP and Libdems,  -2 for Labour.

 

The Labour vote did not stay loyal and replacing Leonard will not help. They are now an anachronism.

 

[frankblack]

3 hours ago, Toggie88 said:

 

It is not the same at all! Literally the opposite. 

 

The system of electing the Commission sees power come from the bottom, while your made up scenario sees power come from the top. 

 

A better analogy is that if the UK Parliament was appointed by elected members of the Scottish Parliament, Welsh and North Irish assemblies and an English parliament... That would be comparable. 

 

I accept the analogy wasn't the best - I was finishing off something and about to get my dinner and watch some TV for the night.

 

Quote

Also, the irony of Eurosceptic complaints about democratic accountability when we have the House of Lords... which is entirely undemocratic, unaccountable and they are made peers for life. In comparison, the Commission is held to account, can be voted out and has clear terms. 

 

 

 

 

I don't disagree about the Lords.

[Sraman]

The Greens in Scotland didn't see a rise in their vote as there were plenty other options. The Greens in England saw a rise as the other parties offering an alternative were not all that appealing when you think about it.

 

Oxbridge has finally devoured Labour. They have managed to turn the peasants full circle and have provided the pumpkin coach with it's team of mice horses to take them all to the ball.

 

Who survives and in what capacity, we'll just have to wait and see.

[Watt-Zeefuik]

6 hours ago, JamboX2 said:

 

The EU elections to me raised two major issues but not for the Tories (their vote held up better than elsewhere in the UK!). The questions are for Labour and the Greens:

 

1. Greens - the only Green Party in Europe to not see a significant increase in their vote share. Why is that? What is it that Patrick Harvie is not doing which is causing them to be stagnant at a time when Green politics are on the up? Even in England the Greens had a hige boost in support. 

 

The Scottish Greens need to start flexing their muscle. Labour are clearly struggling and yet they show no signs of doing anything. LibDems gaining that extra seat in Scotland is damning to the Greens given they are smaller in Holyrood than the Greens.

 

It might just be time for Harvie and the Scottish Greens to start distinguishing themselves from the SNP and showing some clear "Green" water between them on domestic policy, EU politics and on issues around independence. I say this because their website does have very different policies from the SNP posted as their current political position. Why then are these radical, green ideas not landing? Patrick Harvie has some big questions over his leadership strategy to answer. 

 

2. Scottish Labour - The Leonard experiment is officially a failure. The slight increase in vote share won by Dugdale in 2017 has been lost along with Britain's most experienced MEP. Leonard and the CfS have failed on their core message and are only going backwards; even on the significant party autonomy the party achieved in 2014 it looks as though Leonard is going backwards:

 

- refers to himself as the leader in Scotland not leader of the Scottish Labour Party

- used campaign slogans and lines designed for England and Wales where Farage and not Sturgeon was the key opponent

- adopted a low key approach to the constitutional position when raised.

 

Policy wise at home there are good positions being adopted:

 

- £5 a week child benefit top up

- increasing the top rate of income tax 

- increased investment in education

- opposed to scrapping APD

- nationalising Scot Rail 

- changing Scottish Government procurement laws to demand living wage for all public sector contracts.

 

There is a prospectus but it's barely spole about because Leonard is a toom tabbard, the forgotten man. He is a very intelligent man and someone who has a part to play, leader isn't the thing he should be doing. He and CfS are taking Scottish Labour backwards. He should step down and someone like Sarwar, Marra, Sweeney, Murray or Bailley should stand. The party has a lot of ex-MPs and MSPs who should be considered as well for leadership or running for seats, David Martin being one.

 

The saving grace for Scottish Labour at present is the lack of increase in support for the Greens.

 

That was my big take in Scotland: Green and Labour have big questions over their leadership and party strategy. 

 

Watching from afar I have to agree with coconut doug -- most EU countries don't have the equivalent of the SNP, which already occupies something of the space that the Greens elsewhere have moved into. And I happen to have a fairly high opinion of the Greens, and think their points on restoring local control and opposing the SNP's centralization in Edinburgh are pretty good ones.

 

But at the EU level, there wasn't a huge amount to distinguish between the two. Most other EU countries either don't have an EFA group member that's as well established and powerful as the SNP, or if they are (like the folks in Flanders) they're more on the right wing side of things.

 

I find it encouraging that the Greens increased their vote share even in the face of the SNP surge.

[JamboX2]

2 hours ago, coconut doug said:

 

The Green vote went up marginally as Greens stayed loyal. They did not attract remain support though because there were alternatives who could win the seat (SNP and Libdems) A vote for the Greens was widely understood to have little chance of creating a Green MEP. Thats what happened +1 for SNP and Libdems,  -2 for Labour.

 

The Labour vote did not stay loyal and replacing Leonard will not help. They are now an anachronism.

 

 

Was it not an increase below a % point? Like 0.2% increase.

 

I think for both the Greens and Labour it ultimately comes down to the constitutional question in Scotland. When that goes I'd expect the plates to shift away from the SNP back their way. Afterall 2003, 6 Greens and 6 SSP MSPs were returned. 

 

I don't think they're an anachronism as there needs to be some form of party which represents the centre left to the SNPs big tent of right to left nationalism. But I think this debacle stems predominantly from Leonard and his failings to run a strong campaign in Scotland. Both he and Corbyn have come to the end of the road imo.

Edited May 28, 2019 by JamboX2

[JamboX2]

8 minutes ago, Ugly American said:

 

Watching from afar I have to agree with coconut doug -- most EU countries don't have the equivalent of the SNP, which already occupies something of the space that the Greens elsewhere have moved into. And I happen to have a fairly high opinion of the Greens, and think their points on restoring local control and opposing the SNP's centralization in Edinburgh are pretty good ones.

 

But at the EU level, there wasn't a huge amount to distinguish between the two. Most other EU countries either don't have an EFA group member that's as well established and powerful as the SNP, or if they are (like the folks in Flanders) they're more on the right wing side of things.

 

I find it encouraging that the Greens increased their vote share even in the face of the SNP surge.

 

It's not a positive increase or step forward for a party which advocates an altogether more radical approach to economics, climate, housing and EU issues from the SNP.

 

To me this suggests a weak campaign.

[ri Alban]

7 hours ago, JamboX2 said:

 

The EU elections to me raised two major issues but not for the Tories (their vote held up better than elsewhere in the UK!). The questions are for Labour and the Greens:

 

1. Greens - the only Green Party in Europe to not see a significant increase in their vote share. Why is that? What is it that Patrick Harvie is not doing which is causing them to be stagnant at a time when Green politics are on the up? Even in England the Greens had a hige boost in support. 

 

The Scottish Greens need to start flexing their muscle. Labour are clearly struggling and yet they show no signs of doing anything. LibDems gaining that extra seat in Scotland is damning to the Greens given they are smaller in Holyrood than the Greens.

 

It might just be time for Harvie and the Scottish Greens to start distinguishing themselves from the SNP and showing some clear "Green" water between them on domestic policy, EU politics and on issues around independence. I say this because their website does have very different policies from the SNP posted as their current political position. Why then are these radical, green ideas not landing? Patrick Harvie has some big questions over his leadership strategy to answer. 

 

2. Scottish Labour - The Leonard experiment is officially a failure. The slight increase in vote share won by Dugdale in 2017 has been lost along with Britain's most experienced MEP. Leonard and the CfS have failed on their core message and are only going backwards; even on the significant party autonomy the party achieved in 2014 it looks as though Leonard is going backwards:

 

- refers to himself as the leader in Scotland not leader of the Scottish Labour Party

- used campaign slogans and lines designed for England and Wales where Farage and not Sturgeon was the key opponent

- adopted a low key approach to the constitutional position when raised.

 

Policy wise at home there are good positions being adopted:

 

- £5 a week child benefit top up

- increasing the top rate of income tax 

- increased investment in education

- opposed to scrapping APD

- nationalising Scot Rail 

- changing Scottish Government procurement laws to demand living wage for all public sector contracts.

 

There is a prospectus but it's barely spole about because Leonard is a toom tabbard, the forgotten man. He is a very intelligent man and someone who has a part to play, leader isn't the thing he should be doing. He and CfS are taking Scottish Labour backwards. He should step down and someone like Sarwar, Marra, Sweeney, Murray or Bailley should stand. The party has a lot of ex-MPs and MSPs who should be considered as well for leadership or running for seats, David Martin being one.

 

The saving grace for Scottish Labour at present is the lack of increase in support for the Greens.

 

That was my big take in Scotland: Green and Labour have big questions over their leadership and party strategy. 

It was either, SNP, LDs or the BNP. Independence in Europe, Both unions or no deal. The Tories, ukip and labour were pumped. The Greens have the same vote as last time. 

For you to have a go at the Greens who have the same % as the last EU elections, but praise the Tories who lost 7% to the Brexit party is shameful. 

Edited May 28, 2019 by ri Alban

[JamboX2]

24 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

It was either, SNP, LDs or the BNP. Independence in Europe, Both unions or no deal. The Tories, ukip and labour were pumped. The Greens have the same vote as last time. 

For you to have a go at the Greens who have the same % as the last EU elections, but praise the Tories who lost 7% to the Brexit party is shameful. 

 

I never praised anyone. I said in comparison to everywhere else in the UK the Tory vote held up well in Scotland and still above the Greens.

 

Imo that is remarkable. Given the recent history of Tory support in Scotland I'd have expected a total collapse and 0 MEPs. 

 

As you note, no improvement in the Green share of the vote. Given the Green vote rose across Europe I would suggest there are some deep questions as to why Patrick Harvie and Maggie Chapman have failed to get the vote out.

[maroonlegions]

So all those far right  Brexit  Tories  desperate to leave , even on a no deal , will have to try harder.

 

John Bercow warns Tory leadership hardliners that MPs can still block no-deal

 

INDEPENDENT.CO.UK

 

 

Edited May 28, 2019 by maroonlegions

[jake]

Brexit rocking the place.

 

Labour party like rabbit in headlights

Making policy up on the hoof almost.

 

Tories not got a clue 

 

Lib dems ...please

 

Scotland

SNP on top 

 

But it has to be said Brexit got more votes than I expected.

With Farage as front man.

Not the minority that's painted by the First Minister.

[coconut doug]

3 hours ago, JamboX2 said:

 

I never praised anyone. I said in comparison to everywhere else in the UK the Tory vote held up well in Scotland and still above the Greens.

 

Imo that is remarkable. Given the recent history of Tory support in Scotland I'd have expected a total collapse and 0 MEPs. 

 

As you note, no improvement in the Green share of the vote. Given the Green vote rose across Europe I would suggest there are some deep questions as to why Patrick Harvie and Maggie Chapman have failed to get the vote out.

I can't imagine why you would expect a collapse in the Tory vote. Where can they go? IMO the ones that want a hard or no deal Brexit voted for the Brexit party. The others who would have voted Labour in other times couldn't do so for a number of reasons and so they were left with no option but to support their usual party. This is different to England because there is significantly more support for remain in Scotland and Tory remainers would not vote SNP or Green because of Indy but a few will have gone to the Libdems. The Libdems are not very attractive though because most of the Tory MPs (not the one who hangs out with the fascists or the one who thinks it's too complicated to have an opinion) and the Scottish party in general are remainers anyway.  As for the recent history of Tory support in Scotland, i'm not aware of any major changes perhaps you could explain.

  As for the Greens they increased their number of voters by more than 25%. I wonder how many European Green parties managed to do that. This was especially good for them given that they managed a similar increase at the previous election. They managed to "get the vote out" and then some. Their share of the vote was depressed simply because Brexit brought more people to the polling station. There is no Brexit option in the other EU states.

Edited May 28, 2019 by coconut doug

[Toggie88]

8 hours ago, coconut doug said:

 

The Green vote went up marginally as Greens stayed loyal. They did not attract remain support though because there were alternatives who could win the seat (SNP and Libdems) A vote for the Greens was widely understood to have little chance of creating a Green MEP. Thats what happened +1 for SNP and Libdems,  -2 for Labour.

 

The Labour vote did not stay loyal and replacing Leonard will not help. They are now an anachronism.

 

 

I would add that the SNP is seen as a pro-green party and widely rising to challenge set by climate campaigners. What I would stylise as soft greens, i.e. those who care about the environment but aren't solely motivated by green issues, don't feel like they're contradicting themselves by voting for a non-green party. The fact Greta 

 

Although I don't think this impacted on it as few people take notice, but the SNP also sit in the Greens-EFA alliance in the European parliament. In a sense, a vote for the SNP was a vote for the European Greens. 

[coconut doug]

8 minutes ago, Toggie88 said:

 

I would add that the SNP is seen as a pro-green party and widely rising to challenge set by climate campaigners. What I would stylise as soft greens, i.e. those who care about the environment but aren't solely motivated by green issues, don't feel like they're contradicting themselves by voting for a non-green party. The fact Greta 

 

Although I don't think this impacted on it as few people take notice, but the SNP also sit in the Greens-EFA alliance in the European parliament. In a sense, a vote for the SNP was a vote for the European Greens. 

Absolutely, Salmond was very supportive of Green issues and projects. Scotland's record is generally good on Green issues but a lot of the improvement can be explained by deindustrialisation. The main parties are not interested with many Tories refusing to believe in global warming and frequently telling us that the windmills don't work and that legislation to protect the environment is red tape. Labour has other priorities, very little vision and a complete inability to make anything work properly.

[JamboX2]

2 hours ago, coconut doug said:

I can't imagine why you would expect a collapse in the Tory vote. Where can they go? IMO the ones that want a hard or no deal Brexit voted for the Brexit party. The others who would have voted Labour in other times couldn't do so for a number of reasons and so they were left with no option but to support their usual party. This is different to England because there is significantly more support for remain in Scotland and Tory remainers would not vote SNP or Green because of Indy but a few will have gone to the Libdems. The Libdems are not very attractive though because most of the Tory MPs (not the one who hangs out with the fascists or the one who thinks it's too complicated to have an opinion) and the Scottish party in general are remainers anyway.  As for the recent history of Tory support in Scotland, i'm not aware of any major changes perhaps you could explain.

 

Recent Tory support in Scotland was such that they relied on the list and held 1 seat at Westminster. Recent Westminster polls show a Tory eradication in Scotland. Hence my view that I expected the debacle that is their handling to do them in at the European elections. It's not a wild jump.

 

As you say most Tory voters are pro-Remain and pro-Union. So I would have thought the Liberals would be the best bet for these voters not willing to endorse a saner Brexit and not willing to lend a vote to a pro-indy party.

 

2 hours ago, coconut doug said:

  As for the Greens they increased their number of voters by more than 25%. I wonder how many European Green parties managed to do that. This was especially good for them given that they managed a similar increase at the previous election. They managed to "get the vote out" and then some. Their share of the vote was depressed simply because Brexit brought more people to the polling station. There is no Brexit option in the other EU states.

 

8.1% Green 2014

8.2% Green 2019 

 

A 0.1% increase in vote share which under D'Hondt is the key assessment. A 0.1% increase in votes cast is not a great result. Circumstances - green issues being top of the political and global agenda and  being avowedly pro-EU - should've seen that share increase. It was not a good performance for the Greens at a time when the Tories and Labour were at their weakest. You seem to suggest that no Brexit option exists elsewhere in the EU. Yet the euroskeptics top polls in France, Italy, Hungary and Poland to name a few major states. So this seems an odd point to go for. 

[JamboX2]

1 hour ago, Toggie88 said:

 

I would add that the SNP is seen as a pro-green party and widely rising to challenge set by climate campaigners. What I would stylise as soft greens, i.e. those who care about the environment but aren't solely motivated by green issues, don't feel like they're contradicting themselves by voting for a non-green party. The fact Greta 

 

Although I don't think this impacted on it as few people take notice, but the SNP also sit in the Greens-EFA alliance in the European parliament. In a sense, a vote for the SNP was a vote for the European Greens. 

 

There's some truth in this. But speak to Green Party members and the SNP are not as green as others within the EFA-Green alliance. A party advocating tax cuts and licences for more oil and gas explorations is hardly one with the Green agenda at the top of it's agenda.

 

And that is where the Scottish Greens should be capitalising.

 

However there is also the fact that CocoD raises, a pro-indy green party wont win many unionist votes. So they're also, by choice, limiting their potential voter pool. Which is fine. But it's a clear symbol why Scottish Labour would fare no better by adopting independence as a policy. What gain is there to be made when Yes is a one band area?

[The Real Maroonblood]

Berlusconi elected as a MEP.

.

[Stephen Muddie]

On 27/05/2019 at 07:49, Boris said:

 

No doubt the Brexit Party are the biggest party, but interesting ho wthe vote has been split.

 

 

Interesting.  Shows how screwed up Brexit is.

You cannot prove that every vote for these parties combined was a vote for the Remainiacs - it's a false correlation. You CAN however prove 100% that the votes for Brexit were for OUT, no deal. Done. Auf Weidersen. Au Revoir. Ciao x

I would've thought a top political Jambos Kickback gangster like yourself to have thought of that fact by now. What you see is the percentage of folk who support NO DEAL

We will take it to a general to establish sovereign control over corporate/media/establishment forces if need be. We will still win. SNP embarrass me BTW. I'll always vote Yaaaaas in a Scotref, but may not necessarily live here afterwards, if it's EU Unionism

Edited May 29, 2019 by Stephen Muddie
Quick Euro chug - and typos

[Boris]

7 hours ago, Stephen Muddie said:

You cannot prove that every vote for these parties combined was a vote for the Remainiacs - it's a false correlation. You CAN however prove 100% that the votes for Brexit were for OUT, no deal. Done. Auf Weidersen. Au Revoir. Ciao x

I would've thought a top political Jambos Kickback gangster like yourself to have thought of that fact by now. What you see is the percentage of folk who support NO DEAL

 

 

Is it?  Each of the parties in the "Anti-Brexit" bloc were adamantly in favour of remaining in the EU and wanting a second referendum.  That would seem pretty clear, no?

 

I don't disagree that the votes for the Brexit party and UKIP would equate to a vote for no deal.

[The Real Maroonblood]

8 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

Is it?  Each of the parties in the "Anti-Brexit" bloc were adamantly in favour of remaining in the EU and wanting a second referendum.  That would seem pretty clear, no?

 

I don't disagree that the votes for the Brexit party and UKIP would equate to a vote for no deal.

Boris the gangster.

[AlphonseCapone]

35 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

Is it?  Each of the parties in the "Anti-Brexit" bloc were adamantly in favour of remaining in the EU and wanting a second referendum.  That would seem pretty clear, no?

 

I don't disagree that the votes for the Brexit party and UKIP would equate to a vote for no deal.

 

I think the difficulty Boris is that these parties, Lib Dems, Greens etc and SNP in Scotland, they are well established with clear views and manifestos about a variety of issues. It might be as simple as people voted for them on the basis of Brexit alone but we can't know that for sure. I'd be willing to stick my neck out and say the vast majority, almost all are likely remainers though. But we can't know it to the extent you can say it about the Brexit Party who stood on one issue alone. 

 

Stephen is also wrong to claim that everyone voting for the Brexit Party wants no deal though. Farage and Widdecombe are both on record on the night demanding to be part of the negotiation team (who knows what negotiations since they are done) but it's clear they think we can get some sort of deal with the EU that involves free trade. That isn't no deal. They did state they'd happy to go for no deal, but it can't be claimed as their first choice and therefore it's the same false equivalency to say their voters wanted no deal. 

[Boris]

3 minutes ago, AlphonseCapone said:

 

I think the difficulty Boris is that these parties, Lib Dems, Greens etc and SNP in Scotland, they are well established with clear views and manifestos about a variety of issues. It might be as simple as people voted for them on the basis of Brexit alone but we can't know that for sure. I'd be willing to stick my neck out and say the vast majority, almost all are likely remainers though. But we can't know it to the extent you can say it about the Brexit Party who stood on one issue alone. 

 

Yeah, I get that to an extent, although the figures were for the whole UK.

 

3 minutes ago, AlphonseCapone said:

 

Stephen is also wrong to claim that everyone voting for the Brexit Party wants no deal though. Farage and Widdecombe are both on record on the night demanding to be part of the negotiation team (who knows what negotiations since they are done) but it's clear they think we can get some sort of deal with the EU that involves free trade. That isn't no deal. They did state they'd happy to go for no deal, but it can't be claimed as their first choice and therefore it's the same false equivalency to say their voters wanted no deal. 

 

A fair point too, Al!

[Boris]

38 minutes ago, The Real Maroonblood said:

Boris the gangster.

 

Worse, apparently...

 

 

Better tell the Missus...

Edited May 29, 2019 by Boris

[SE16 3LN]

1 hour ago, AlphonseCapone said:

 

I think the difficulty Boris is that these parties, Lib Dems, Greens etc and SNP in Scotland, they are well established with clear views and manifestos about a variety of issues. It might be as simple as people voted for them on the basis of Brexit alone but we can't know that for sure. I'd be willing to stick my neck out and say the vast majority, almost all are likely remainers though. But we can't know it to the extent you can say it about the Brexit Party who stood on one issue alone. 

 

Stephen is also wrong to claim that everyone voting for the Brexit Party wants no deal though. Farage and Widdecombe are both on record on the night demanding to be part of the negotiation team (who knows what negotiations since they are done) but it's clear they think we can get some sort of deal with the EU that involves free trade. That isn't no deal. They did state they'd happy to go for no deal, but it can't be claimed as their first choice and therefore it's the same false equivalency to say their voters wanted no deal. 

I'm fairly sure that there was a statistic quoted after the GE that a that a third of SNP voters wanted to leave the EU. Maybe wrong though. 

[SE16 3LN]

All this nice stuff about the LIBDEMS. I'll never forget those lying *******s in coalition with the Conservative party. If they hadn't kissed Cameron's scummy bollocks we wouldn't be in this position in this position in the first place. Party of remain my ****ing arse.

[AlphonseCapone]

1 hour ago, SE16 3LN said:

I'm fairly sure that there was a statistic quoted after the GE that a that a third of SNP voters wanted to leave the EU. Maybe wrong though. 

 

It's a much quoted and debated figure. This article, by John Curtice and on a site that publishes polling, gives what I think is a good but nuanced answer. If you don't want to read it, it says summed up;

 

* A recent poll at the time of the article (Oct 2018) suggests SNP remainers outnumber leavers by 4 to 1.

 

* However, that poll is based on those who voted SNP in 2017, and evidence suggest the SNP lost some support from leavers so that biases the SNP sample to remainers. 

 

* The same poll I think found that the Yes movement in generally is a little less pro-remain overall than SNP supporters specifically. 

 

I think it highlights the inherent dangers in saying, people who vote for X party necessarily think Y on this issue and that. People vote for parties for a wide range of reasons and sometimes obscure ones. Not everyone thinks along the big issues all the time. 

Edited May 29, 2019 by AlphonseCapone

[Jambo-Jimbo]

1 hour ago, SE16 3LN said:

I'm fairly sure that there was a statistic quoted after the GE that a that a third of SNP voters wanted to leave the EU. Maybe wrong though. 

 

It was a survey published in the 'Herald' in December 2016 which suggested that 36% of SNP & Labour supporters in Scotland voted to leave the EU, even the Lib Dems who are an out and out remain party seen 26% of their supporters vote leave according to this survey.

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14950013.36-of-snp-and-labour-supporters-backed-brexit-finds-survey/

 

The simple fact is that every party be they the SNP, Labour, Tories, Lib Dems and possibly the Greens as well, will have leave & remain supporters within their own support base, only the two newest party's on the scene, the Brexit Party & Change UK would have I'd imagine, a 100% support base for either leave or remain, everybody else will have a mixture of leave & remain supporters to varying degrees of percentages.

Edited May 29, 2019 by Jambo-Jimbo

[coconut doug]

On 28/05/2019 at 14:41, JamboX2 said:

 

Was it not an increase below a % point? Like 0.2% increase.

 

I think for both the Greens and Labour it ultimately comes down to the constitutional question in Scotland. When that goes I'd expect the plates to shift away from the SNP back their way. Afterall 2003, 6 Greens and 6 SSP MSPs were returned. 

 

I don't think they're an anachronism as there needs to be some form of party which represents the centre left to the SNPs big tent of right to left nationalism. But I think this debacle stems predominantly from Leonard and his failings to run a strong campaign in Scotland. Both he and Corbyn have come to the end of the road imo.

Were you not telling us previously that the SNP would persist after Indy?

 

Labour are not near the centre left whatever that is. The Blairites are to the right and Corbynistas significantly to the left. The Corbynistas want a rerun of the seventies and eighties while the Blairites are just Red Tories. There is no place for a party with this composition in the modern world. They stand for nothing and everything and have been rumbled by the electorate.

Have you not yet understood the meaninglessness of your nationalism term? Can't you see that the reason the SNP, Greens and liberals all increased their vote in Scotland is because they have an internationalist agenda?

       The reason Labour lost in Scotland was surely because of their pro Brexit statements and their collusion with the Tories. It might have gone down better in Wigan or Rotherham than it did in Scotland but essentially they took a view on Brexit that was designed to limit damage to their party just the same as the Tories did. The tried to facilitate Brexit prioritising the needs of their sitting MPs in Brexit constituencies. There were none of those in Scotland.

  Once again they backed the wrong horse and once again they were virtually indistinguishable from the Tories. Leonard may be all kinds of eejit but even he cannot be blamed for not running a strong campaign when they had no clear campaign message. Some want to oppose Brexit and some of those want a 2nd referendum while others in that group do not, some want to work with the Tories and get the best deal possible whilst others want No deal.

[coconut doug]

18 hours ago, JamboX2 said:

 

Recent Tory support in Scotland was such that they relied on the list and held 1 seat at Westminster. Recent Westminster polls show a Tory eradication in Scotland. Hence my view that I expected the debacle that is their handling to do them in at the European elections. It's not a wild jump.

 

As you say most Tory voters are pro-Remain and pro-Union. So I would have thought the Liberals would be the best bet for these voters not willing to endorse a saner Brexit and not willing to lend a vote to a pro-indy party.

 

 

8.1% Green 2014

8.2% Green 2019 

 

A 0.1% increase in vote share which under D'Hondt is the key assessment. A 0.1% increase in votes cast is not a great result. Circumstances - green issues being top of the political and global agenda and  being avowedly pro-EU - should've seen that share increase. It was not a good performance for the Greens at a time when the Tories and Labour were at their weakest. You seem to suggest that no Brexit option exists elsewhere in the EU. Yet the euroskeptics top polls in France, Italy, Hungary and Poland to name a few major states. So this seems an odd point to go for. 

Many explanations have now been offered to you to explain what happened to the Green Vote. The share of the vote may give an indication as to its likely success but the total number voting Green gives a better picture of that parties popularity. The Green vote in Scotland increased by more than 25%. That means the greens are significantly more popular than they were in the last election.

 

              The voteshare percentage has been distorted because of the peculiarly British/Scottish context. Turnout is up because of voter dissatisfaction at the failure to deliver Brexit. The increased turnout IMO can be entirely explained by this phenomenon. That desire to register a complaint about the failure to Brexit has a reducing effect on the vote share fall all other parties including the Greens.

   It is true that the rise in support for the Greens was higher in England than in Scotland but it is also true that the rise in UKIP/Brexit vote was higher in Scotland. Local variations were also significant as was the likelyhood of the Greens actually winning seats. Most significantly in England there was no established proEU proGreen party like the SNP for those dissatisfied with Con/Lab to put their vote. 

What is not true is that the presence or otherwise of Eurosceptic parties in other countries can be realistically compared to the situation in the UK 

[Cade]

Farage in talks to join the far-right coalition in the EU parliament, alongside France's National Rally, Austria's Freedom Party, Belgium's Vlaams Belang and Italy's League Party.

Germany's AfD and the Finn Party are also in talks to merge.

 

A proper Axis of Evil.

 

[Unknown user]

4 minutes ago, Cade said:

Farage in talks to join the far-right coalition in the EU parliament, alongside France's National Rally, Austria's Freedom Party, Belgium's Vlaams Belang and Italy's League Party.

Germany's AfD and the Finn Party are also in talks to merge.

 

A proper Axis of Evil.

 

 

Joining a European coalition you say?