pink_triangle

I get the impression that SNP voters want to vote for Kate without the religious nutter side, but that Kate doesn’t exist in the real world. It seems like Hamza may win by default, rather than a ringing endorsement of him as a leader. One of Sturgeons legacy may be that she didn’t pave the way for a successor.

Would it be acceptable if she said she didn’t believe in mixed race marriage, but wouldn’t legislate against it due to collective responsibility. I think a persons views will influence the type of leader they are.

How about the mental health of the young people coming into work without the same support network in place. I don’t think it’s as simple as some make out.

I have big concerns in the NHS for home working. What I am noticing is new starters feeling unsupported and isolated because they don’t have that network when everyone was in the office. While it’s true you can have teams meetings, you miss so much from those informal chats, listening how your colleague deals with a situation on the phone and even just a colleague noting your not yourself and offering that emotional support. There are pros and cons, but I think some people underestimate the negative side.

I mean we all talk stupid at times, this is coming from me the person who didn’t think Saka was a footballer! I struggle to see the contrast with the conservative leader who you highlighted as saying he would vote against gay marriage, when Kate has now said the same.

To me it looks like 2 flawed candidates are going to result in a slightly less flawed but lightweight candidate Hamza winning the race. Forbes statement today must have been music to his ears.

Have you changed yours?

Nobody would accept in 2023 a politician coming out and saying they didn’t believe in equal rights for black people, but they are democratic and wouldn’t force their racist views on others due to collective responsibility. We therefore shouldn’t give our free passes to those who come out with the drivel that Forbes does. Completely unfit for such an important role.

The favourite for the SNP leadership “I think for me, Angela Merkel is the example I would follow, I would have voted, as a matter of conscience, along the lines of mainstream teaching in most major religions that marriage is between a man and a woman”. She may try and hide behind collective responsibility, but these are the prehistoric views she believes in. I may glad to say that in 2022 I don’t believe we would ever get a major contender for the labour leadership spouting this rubbish.

I think it is amazing that a party who many supporters (including some on here) claim to be left wing, is considering in 2022 choosing a leader who can’t say it’s great that 2 men can marry if they choose, or can’t fully get behind a woman’s right to choose.

I agree, that is why I support funding the nutrition of the kids who need it. In view of the fact we can’t fund everything, I would prefer the money from my kids (not that I live in London, so hypothetical) to go to helping those kids/families who need it more.

Unfortunately the tax intake is not unlimited and we have to make decisions how best to target it. My decisions would be to target at those most in need. Money spent giving middle class kids free meals is money that could be spent on poorer kids instead. I would like to see a national care service, but realise this is going to be very expensive, therefore need to be more careful with what we spend. I get the point about the NHS, but I feel more strongly that is the government responsibility to fund health than (for those who can afford) meals.

Every pound spent on my kids meals is a pound that could go to a family who really need it. I would prefer a more progressive system which does not divert a limited pot of money from the poor to the middle class.

We all contribute through tax, but I would prefer more of that tax go to people who need it more than me. In my kids schools the payments for school meals is all done online for those who pay, so the stigma isn’t there compared to when I was a kid.

I personally think I should pay for my childrens meals as I can afford it. This doesn’t seem progressive to me.

The SNP are no more left wing than labour. I honestly don’t believe their political centre is any different. They are also possibly going to appoint someone who struggles to support gay marriage and abortion as their leader. I think you have been reading too much lefty social media if you think they couldn’t do anything. I could easily see them finding common ground on social care, NHS, climate change. Things they can’t agree like Middle East politics and Nukes will just be parked. There will be areas where they need to undo Tory changes and at times will meet in the middle and compromise. if you ask me do I think the socialist group will bring down a labour government (resulting in a Tory one) just as a protest then I think no. There may be a few of the louder ones who kick a fuss, I think most want to get things done. I don’t think everyone looks at things purely through a right/left spectrum.

The left of labour vote regularly with labour now, why would they stop doing this if labour is in power? The same is true with the SNP. What all have in common is they don’t want to see the conservatives in power and that is the only other party in town. I think you are massively exaggerating the difference between the factions, they have plenty in common, the differences just get more attention.

Firstly the SNP are not significantly to the left of labour. I think they could find common interest on a load of issues, in Westminster they regularly vote together. Also the left of labour regularly vote with the current labour leadership, if they didn’t they would be voting with the conservatives, they would just find common ground.

I took it as being in a post Brexit world where SNP had then won a referendum. LJS said he would accept multiple referendums (against his view) with a significant change. The big question to me then is which side decides what is a significant change.

Who determines a significant change in circumstances? That sounds quite vague.

So who would they have confidence in instead, the champion of the left sunak?

Of course they would offer them something, they don’t want the Tory’s printing that on an election leaflet.

I don’t think so. One of the key arguments the SNP make is about Scotland not having a say about a Tory government. If the SNP enabled one I think they would be the losers.

Then we have a conservative government which they have enabled, they lose a big chunk of their centre left vote.

Considering the tories use it as an attack point. It would be madness to say anything else.