The Dirty Independence Question

[eFestivals]

You are just winding me up. You must be. Do you read any of my posts ?

As far as i remember, it's the first time you've explicitly acknowledged it.

[eFestivals]

It's what the Greens are saying, so they're probably selecting the most favourable poll. https://www.fundsurfer.com/project/a-green-mp-for-bristol-west

That said, ones the Labour candidate has linked to put Labour first, Greens 2nd, Lib Dems 3rd. Of the last dozen polls I've seen Lib Dems have been a close 3rd in all of them.

This is what i saw:-

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/bristolwest/

[Comfy Bean]

I've taken your comments about Smith as you ridiculing it. Was I wrong doing that?

Bollocks. You agreed with my post earlier about what Brown said compared to what was in the vow so I know you read that one

As I said earlier, you totally mis-representing the point I`m trying to make does this discussion no favours. I have accepted that I maybe didn`t make myself clear on the punching yourself in the face stuff but I certainly made it clear that I`m not argueing against Smith delivering on what was described in the vow ( and to the agreed timescales ) and I know I don`t want to see a Tory Govt no matter how many times you say I do.

For what it`s worth, I don`t agree with Gary that I am cutting my nose off either but we can just agree to disagree on that one.

[kaosmark2]

This is what i saw:-

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/bristolwest/

That's not actually a poll, that's the 2010 result.

[kaosmark2]

to be fair to Salmond, i think that's more done by over-enthusiastic nats than him personally.

The white paper clearly stated that 85% of the current defence spend by Scotland (which includes its share of Trident) would be spent on the new iScottish defence forces - so there'd be no "Trident bonus".

(that 85% is very laughable, because it also says it doesn't cover all Scottish defence needs. The extra bits Salmond said rUK would provide to iScotland for free - which is ridiculous).

The "no English nukes in Scottish waters" campaign was something he championed as a reason for independence. It's been carried on by over-enthusiastic nats, but its his claim that's been taken up.

[kaosmark2]

Comfy, re. the "SNP enabling Tories", what do you have to say in response to my comments about my own voting intentions here:

I'm going to be voting Green in Bristol West in the GE. It's currently polling to be a 3-way marginal between Green, Labour and Lib Dem, with the first two being favourites.

I am very aware that a consequence of this could be the Tories form the next government. I think it unlikely, and I'm willing to take that risk because I believe having another Green MP, and having one in my constituency, is better for the future of the country and its politics than having Labour in would be.

In 12 months time, I may regret this decision. I want Labour to form the next government, but I also want an end to 2-party politics with single-party majorities. I want a credible centre-left alternative, etc. If I don't support minor parties in the next election or two, I feel we could end up returning to the 2-party system.

If comfy feels the prospect of a SNP MP and a Tory government is preferable to a Labour MP and Labour government, that's his choice, but there won't be any party with a comfortable majority, and the SNP will not form part of any coalition. They may have an agreement in principle to support a Labour minority, but it's trusting in other areas of the country to vote as you want. I'm gambling on it, and I'd be hypocritical to say comfy shouldn't, but it's vital to be aware that every seat Labour could win and doesn't, increases the chances of the Tories remaining in power.

[eFestivals]

This was your response to my post trying to get my head round the punching yourself in the face arguement. In my post, I refered to your good self 10+ times in a ( failed ) attempt to make it clear I was talking about you. I even wrote it like " you " hoping that would make it clear I was not talking about me.......but you know that of course In that post I also stated I have never in any election ever voted for the Tories. I can add to this now ( no offence Gary ) that I cannot see any circumstances in my lifetime that I will ever vote for the Tory party.

So.....your response to my post ( above ) is doing nobody any good *

As I`ve said many times. I CAN see myself voting for Labour or the SNP. I believe that a Scottish Labour party not involved in becoming electable in England would be more likely to return to their roots / values. You will remember the Branch Office story.

Scottish Labour should go back to representing Scottish Voters. We see a different path on austerity and social justice not to mention Trident. IF they returned to some of these values and appeared to be representing the wishes of their constituents then you could have relied on the usual massive majority of Scottish Labour MP`s. In years gone byofcourse this hasn`tactuall made any difference.

Even just for a second, think through the possibilty that the clusterfuck Labour have become up here " may" be to blame for voters deserting them in their droves. Just for a second don`t just take the easy route of balming the SNP. The Labour party left the door open for them to drive a bus through.

I agree with you that there is a core vote who will never vote for Labour again due to Indy. They are probs the 30% you mentioned earlier. I am not one of these 30% just like I am not a Scotsaman who prefers the tories.

For clarity, I don`think that come May Labour will be wiped out as the polls are showing. As i`ve said before though, I believe this could happen next year and I don`t think Murphy is the right man to stop this happening. Labour won the Indy vote remember. They cannot have expected to be so far behind at this stage after appointing Murphy.

* mostly you

As far as I can work out from reading things back my brain was thinking "Labour" but my fingers typed "tory" (tho perhaps I was thinking in a different way to how i'm thinking on read-back now?). So I'll apologise for that part.

Please take it as me saying "well, I guess the first Scotsman admitting he prefers Labour is at least a start with Scottish clarity."

Cos I *want* people in Scotland to keep that as their primary thought, cos if they do that means we might actually get a Labour govt.

[gary1979666]

G. I`ve said umpteen times that I understand the basic maths. Yes.

People voting SNP will not however add to the total of 300+ seats that the Tories hope to win. Scotland will return maybe 2 or 3 towards that total.

But that's defining a win as a majority. A win is whoever is in No 10.

Mark's earlier post about voting Green is a similar principle although 1 constituency has less impact than the 59 of Scotland (or the 20 or so that the SNP may win). But that aside, I got the impression that if Dave was to end up in No 10 again and the Green's won Mark's seat, then although he would probably complain (and rightly so given his views), he'd have understood the his vote contributed to it slightly. Whereas your posts give a 'not my fault' vibe.

[eFestivals]

Bollocks. You agreed with my post earlier about what Brown said compared to what was in the vow so I know you read that one

yeah, but that's only about whether the vow is what was promised.

That's nothing of whether you think 'the vow' (what Smith will deliver) is what Scotland should have.

I've pointed out that only 30% of Scots think Smnith doesn't go far enough, so the indy view is on the slide if Smith in reality meets the expectations of it.

As I said earlier, you totally mis-representing the point I`m trying to make does this discussion no favours.

seriously, I am not trying to mis-represent you (or anyone else).

I do at times make pisstake comments back at some of the more-daft things you've said (mostly around when what you've said you 'believe' doesn't match any known or stated fact), but that's no attempt at mis-representation.

For what it`s worth, I don`t agree with Gary that I am cutting my nose off either but we can just agree to disagree on that one.

So if SNP rather than Labour seats causes a tory govt, you'll take that on the chin and won't complain about the result that Scotland has brought on itself?

[kaosmark2]

Cos I *want* people in Scotland to keep that as their primary thought, cos if they do that means we might actually get a Labour govt.

This is the thing, as long as Scotland returns 20+ Labour MPs, we probably will get a Labour government. Libs will lose to Labour and Tory (and maybe Green), Tory will lose to UKIP, Tory will lose to Labour. The only party likely to take more than a couple of seats off Labour is the SNP. If Labour gain 50 seats around the rest of the country, the only way the Tories can be the largest party is if they're wiped in Scotland.

I'll still accept part of the blame if they don't win Bristol West and don't end up in government.

[kaosmark2]

But that's defining a win as a majority. A win is whoever is in No 10.

Mark's earlier post about voting Green is a similar principle although 1 constituency has less impact than the 59 of Scotland (or the 20 or so that the SNP may win). But that aside, I got the impression that if Dave was to end up in No 10 again and the Green's won Mark's seat, then although he would probably complain (and rightly so given his views), he'd have understood the his vote contributed to it slightly. Whereas your posts give a 'not my fault' vibe.

This. That's why I made the post. I'd be unhappy about it, but I'd accept my contribution to it. Although as you say, 1 constituency has less impact than 50 (factor in Lib Dem seats, the safe tory seats, and the ones that are already SNP).

[eFestivals]

This is the thing, as long as Scotland returns 20+ Labour MPs, we probably will get a Labour government.

the current polling numbers suggest that anything less than the same number of Labour MPs from Scotland as 2010 makes a Labour govt unlikely.

[kaosmark2]

the current polling numbers suggest that anything less than the same number of Labour MPs from Scotland as 2010 makes a Labour govt unlikely.

Most of the ones I've seen suggest that Labour will gain about 50 seats elsewhere and the Tories losing 20-30 net. I'd thought the polling numbers suggested Tories and Labour would be pretty close if the SNP mass conversion does happen, with the question being if Lib Dems have enough to prop up either.

[Comfy Bean]

G. I`ve said umpteen times that I understand the basic maths. Yes.

People voting SNP will not however add to the total of 300+ seats that the Tories hope to win. Scotland will return maybe 2 or 3 towards that total.

Honestly don`t know what you mean by " SNP turncoats like you " ?

I understand the arithmetic of your arguement in that any seats Labour lose to the SNP won`t help them get the total number they need in WM but I`m confused by some of the stuff you say around it. All this " punch yourself in the face " talk seems a bit unnecessary

I`ve mentioned a couple of times that I understand the maths around Neils arguement. I thought Scotland could / should be an Independent Country but 55% disagreed with me. I am pleased that we had the vote and onwards and upwards I hope ( the dream will never die ). I have never once accused all these people who disagreed with me of " punching themselves in the face ".

Woops. Forgot that bit. Like the maths side of Neils arguement, this is factually correct. As I`m sure you know, Scotland will return a majority of either Labour or SNP MP`s. We will not have voted for the Tory Govt.....if we get one.

As far as i remember, it's the first time you've explicitly acknowledged it.

[Comfy Bean]

As far as I can work out from reading things back my brain was thinking "Labour" but my fingers typed "tory" (tho perhaps I was thinking in a different way to how i'm thinking on read-back now?). So I'll apologise for that part.

Please take it as me saying "well, I guess the first Scotsman admitting he prefers Labour is at least a start with Scottish clarity."

Cos I *want* people in Scotland to keep that as their primary thought, cos if they do that means we might actually get a Labour govt.

Fair enough. No probs

I think Labour could still take 20+ seats in Scotland. I am surprised at the Polls. Jimbo has seen no bounce but there is time. Remember the SNP only got 6 MP`s the last time and some of Labours majorites are huge. I do think alot of these majorities will be greatly reduced.

[kaosmark2]

Fair enough. No probs

I think Labour could still take 20+ seats in Scotland. I am surprised at the Polls. Jimbo has seen no bounce but there is time. Remember the SNP only got 6 MP`s the last time and some of Labours majorites are huge. I do think alot of these majorities will be greatly reduced.

I estimate 20-odd SNP seats. I'd be shocked if they had the dominance some are predicting.

You haven't responded to my comparison of Scottish voting with my own intentions yet though.

[MichaelsBeard]

Woops. Forgot that bit. Like the maths side of Neils arguement, this is factually correct. As I`m sure you know, Scotland will return a majority of either Labour or SNP MP`s. We will not have voted for the Tory Govt.....if we get one.

You're absolutely right. You didn't vote for a Tory government but the absolute key thing to remember is this - you didn't do anything you could in your power to prevent one either.

[gary1979666]

comfortablynumb1910, on 30 Jan 2015 - 10:47 AM, said:

You agree, then contradict yourself though. That's why we're getting frustrated. There's not much difference between voting for a tory govt and taking action that could stop it.

[MichaelsBeard]

Comfy genuine question because it puzzles me - people say Scottish Labour are out of touch with its constituents and no longer represent them however they walked the last GE up here. So, what has Scottish Labour done in the last 4 years to swing public opinion so much? Is it merely that they sided with the Tories on the Indy question (as they absolutely should have as the Labour Party is commited to the UK rather than just Scotland),

All I can think is that the people turning from Labour to SNP up here are not doing so because they no longer feel represented. They're doing so as a result of a petulant protest vote at not getting independence. A petulance that may well give them the Tories.

[eFestivals]

I think Labour could still take 20+ seats in Scotland. I am surprised at the Polls.

there's a big part of me that thinks like that too .... but at the same time I'm presuming that those pollsters know more about how it might pan out than I do from my casual view of thing.

Jimbo has seen no bounce but there is time. Remember the SNP only got 6 MP`s the last time and some of Labours majorites are huge. I do think alot of these majorities will be greatly reduced.

Labour's only hope is if people in Scotland actually start to reference facts and not fantasies.

Currently, mostly what i'm seeing are people with your view, that there's no difference between the 'blue tories' and the 'red tories' - and yet there's over £30Bn's worth of difference.

it works like this (from what each party has stated):-

Labour: 5% further cuts to Scottish public spending, to get the UK deficit down to somewhere in the range of 0-3%.

Tories: 10% further cuts to Scottish public spending, to remove the UK deficit entirely and create a surplus, and to give £7Bn in tax cuts.

SNP: 8% of further cuts to make "full fiscal autonomy" workable with a Barnet-style rUK top-up, and 12+% of further cuts to make "full fiscal autonomy" workable with no Barnet-style top-up.

Is Scotland listening? Nope.

Might they listen when the next GERS comes out in March? I live in hope, but it's probably misplaced.

[Comfy Bean]

I estimate 20-odd SNP seats. I'd be shocked if they had the dominance some are predicting.

You haven't responded to my comparison of Scottish voting with my own intentions yet though.

Apologies Kaos. In short, I suppose I believe that people should vote for what they believe in and we should respect every vote. Tactical voting is taking us away from that I fear. I asked Neil the other day if he wanted to see just a 2 party system. That could be the impression you get here about the " consequences " if you don`t vote for 1 of them.

For clarity, I realise there are of course consequences in everything we do . By tactical voting, I mean not voting for what you believe in.

More detailed response to your post to follow mate.

[Comfy Bean]

Comfy genuine question because it puzzles me - people say Scottish Labour are out of touch with its constituents and no longer represent them however they walked the last GE up here. So, what has Scottish Labour done in the last 4 years to swing public opinion so much? Is it merely that they sided with the Tories on the Indy question (as they absolutely should have as the Labour Party is commited to the UK rather than just Scotland),

All I can think is that the people turning from Labour to SNP up here are not doing so because they no longer feel represented. They're doing so as a result of a petulant protest vote at not getting independence. A petulance that may well give them the Tories.

I agree with you that there will be a protest vote at play. Lets say it`s 30%. By coincidence that is the number of old skool Indy folks who were in the 30 / 70 NO split a couple of years back. 30% is also the figure Neil quoted earlier who don`t think the Smith commission delivered.

I disagree with you that Scottish voters are " not doing so because they no longer feel represented ".

Remember we have had our own election as well between the general elections that was BEFORE the Indy vote. How do you explain the way the voting went then. As I understand it most pundits were shocked at the size of the SNP victory the way our system is designed.

I often refer to LJS `s point about the red rosette on a monkey up here. The changes haven`t just been since September.

Murphy ( Scottish Labour ) seems to have one thing to say. Vote SNP get Tory ( he should sign up on here ). Well 2 things sorry. I watched him on the box on Sunday saying how he would vote against fracking this week. He didn`t, he abstained. Here`s his latest offering. Scotland top - check mention irn bru - check. Bit light on why I should vote Labour.

The articles I posted yesterday from that actor fella and the union guy last year describe whats happening better than I can.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/jamieross/its-been-easy-its-been-to-outdo-the-snp

[Comfy Bean]

Sorry...I forgot to ask if you think it was " petulance " at the last Scottish election ? Prior to the Indy vote as I mentioned. Does no -one think Labour are due any " blame " for the shambles thay have become up here. Do you folks think it is it all down to trolling by Salmond ? Really ?

Edited January 30, 2015 by comfortablynumb1910

[eFestivals]

I asked Neil the other day if he wanted to see just a 2 party system. That could be the impression you get here about the " consequences " if you don`t vote for 1 of them.

I want a PR system, but that doesn't mean I'll vote within the current system as tho we already had PR. That would be stupid, as it would lessen the power my vote might otherwise have.

We have what is pretty much a 2-party system, and for the moment at least FPTP is going to keep delivering a 2-party result.

I want the best I can out of the reality of the world that is around me, and I don't get that by voting against the best outcome I might get.

[eFestivals]

By tactical voting, I mean not voting for what you believe in.

is there any party that you believe in?

Or is it really that you're voting for the least-objectionable party, because none of the parties believe the same as you do?

In much the same way as you vote for the least-objectionable party, you could also vote for the least objectionable result and have the least objectionable life that's available to you from the real-life options.