# Jim Murphy is new Scottish Labour leader.



## treelover (Dec 13, 2014)

Well, that could be the end for S/L, Murphy is a unreconstructed Blairite, as NUS leader he helped grease the way for the abolition of student loans, he was an Employment Secretary under N/L and facilitated the abolition of Incapacity Benefit and the introduction of ESA, he is a defence hawk, one could go on,

but he is very polished, media savvy and combative, so who knows..


----------



## nino_savatte (Dec 13, 2014)

Talk about shooting oneself in the foot. If they wanted to stop the rot, they've failed. Scottish Labour are finished.


----------



## treelover (Dec 13, 2014)

> “There can be no excuses now: we have the power, the question is do we have the purpose?” Says the Scottish Labour party will use the powers for fairness and an end to poverty.
> The SNP and in particular Nicola Sturgeon have ben accused of stealing Labour’s clothes on social justice in recent weeks. This morning, Murphy is taking them right back.
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/live/2014/dec/13/scottish-labour-leadership-election-results



Libby Brooks wrote the last sentence, its ridiculous, Murphy won't take on social justice issues, he helped create the misery in the first place.


----------



## nino_savatte (Dec 13, 2014)

Murphy had been eyeing up Lamont's job for some time.


> In a scathing attack, veteran Glasgow South MP Ian Davidson said Johann Lamont, who quit as leader last Friday, had been treated shamefully by the shadow international development secretary's allies, who conducted a whispering campaign against her.
> 
> He did not name Mr Murphy, but in a bid to derail his leadership ambitions, Mr Davidson said it would be "absurd" for Labour to elect a Scottish party leader who had never previously considered a role at Holyrood.
> 
> ...


----------



## J Ed (Dec 13, 2014)

I bet the nats are thrilled!


----------



## Sue (Dec 13, 2014)

Interview with him now on R4. He's all about social justice apparently.


----------



## articul8 (Dec 13, 2014)

This could be the end for Scottish Labour.  wouldn't rule out Unite in Scotland disaffiliating


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Dec 13, 2014)

articul8 said:


> wouldn't rule out Unite in Scotland disaffiliating



I would


----------



## FiFi (Dec 13, 2014)

Sue said:


> Interview with him now on R4. He's all about social justice apparently.


Since when?


----------



## Sue (Dec 13, 2014)

FiFi said:


> Since when?


 
SInce he cynically realised that's what he needed to say..?


----------



## Celyn (Dec 14, 2014)

nino_savatte said:


> Talk about shooting oneself in the foot. If they wanted to stop the rot, they've failed. Scottish Labour are finished.



Sadly, no.  Some people will still go along with it, and with Jim Murphy, 'cos ma faither voted Labour and ma  grandad voted Labour ...  _repeat and fade._


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 14, 2014)

treelover said:


> Libby Brooks wrote the last sentence, its ridiculous, Murphy won't take on social justice issues, he helped create the misery in the first place.


And this is the point. The rehabilitation of Murphy will begin in the media. All of a sudden he'll be moderately left, with a heart of gold, a nice guy and the salt of the earth.

I can read the Daily record lionisations already .


----------



## nino_savatte (Dec 14, 2014)

Celyn said:


> Sadly, no.  Some people will still go along with it, and with Jim Murphy, 'cos ma faither voted Labour and ma  grandad voted Labour ...  _repeat and fade._


You could say the same about Labour south of the border, yet some of those people will vote UKIP.


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 14, 2014)

nino_savatte said:


> Scottish Labour are finished.



nino_savatte : Do you actually predict this for definite? 

May be somewhat premature. I post from strict realpolitik only -- ie I'm urging caution rather than overdetermined predictions.


----------



## nino_savatte (Dec 14, 2014)

William of Walworth said:


> nino_savatte : Do you actually predict this for definite?
> 
> May be somewhat premature. I post from strict realpolitik only -- ie I'm urging caution rather than overdetermined predictions.


Well, I'm not a fortune-teller, but I do know this: Murphy is deeply unpopular with voters. For starters, he's a member of the neo-conservative and warmongering Henry Jackson Society (along with Gisele Stuart). When he was president of the NUS, he tolerated no dissent. Scotland's political landscape has shifted to the left. Murphy is no left-winger and even if he constructed a left-wing façade for the election, people will see through it.

Interesting article from Cat Boyd in today's Scotsman
http://www.scotsman.com/news/cat-boyd-left-needs-to-fightback-against-blairite-1-3633968


----------



## Threshers_Flail (Dec 14, 2014)

Is the NUS stuff and Henry Jackson Society membership common knowledge though? Or do people just see him as that twat with the crates of Irn-Bru?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 14, 2014)

nino_savatte said:


> Murphy had been eyeing up Lamont's job for some time.



Lamont was absolutely fucking hopeless. The charisma of a festering testicle and debating skills somewhat less than that of my cat.

Boyack, ditto.

Findlay is a swivel eyed loon.







Thee only reason that Findlay did as well as he did was the affiliate vote, i.e. the unions. 

Of the three, Murphy is the best candidate by a long shot.

He has a hell of a job in front of him, and hopefully will not be undermined by Findlay and his cohorts. The days of the unions calling the shots in the Labour party are long gone, but in Scotland they haven't yet got the message.

Murphy hasn't got long before the next GE, and it is absolutely vtal that the Labour support in Scotland gets behind him, and gives up their factional infighting, for a while at least.

The next GE will dictate the shape of the nation in the coming days. He needs to hit the ground running, and work his balls off for the next six months, if he is going to stop the Scottish National Socialist Party from holding the balance in Westminster, which would be absolutely dreadful.

The SNSP lost the referendum, this needs to be hammered home.


----------



## gosub (Dec 14, 2014)

Not too hard, Sturgeon is talking about oil being $100 dollars a barrel oil next year, OPEC is talking about $40 according to todays papers.  At $40 all North sea production would be mothballed


----------



## youngian (Dec 14, 2014)

And Murphy's an experienced hack who will have little problem reinventing himself if need be.



gosub said:


> Not too hard, Sturgeon is talking about oil being $100 dollars a barrel oil next year, OPEC is talking about $40 according to todays papers.  At $40 all North sea production would be mothballed



It would all be different if was England's oil and this is clearly Westminster's fault. What's the point in having Trident warheads if you can't bring a few OPEC members into line.


----------



## weepiper (Dec 14, 2014)

Sasaferrato said:


> the Scottish National Socialist Party


Sas. This is embarrassing.


----------



## Frankie Jack (Dec 14, 2014)

Threshers_Flail said:


> Is the NUS stuff and Henry Jackson Society membership common knowledge though? Or do people just see him as that twat with the crates of Irn-Bru?


The IrnBru/egg twat. Concerted efforts going on to pass on just how much of a right wing Neocon he is though.


----------



## Frankie Jack (Dec 14, 2014)

weepiper said:


> Sas. This is embarrassing.


He on the Nazi theme again?


----------



## weepiper (Dec 14, 2014)

Most people in Scotland will still see him as the face of the No campaign. Draw what conclusions you will from that.


----------



## gosub (Dec 14, 2014)

youngian said:


> It would all be different if was England's oil and this is clearly Westminster's fault. What's the point in having Trident warheads if you can't bring a few OPEC members into line.




Russia has over 3000 nukes, isn't stopping OPEC fucking them over.

As more and more of the North Sea gets moth balled over the coming months, its going to get clearer how lucky an escape Scotland had in September


----------



## youngian (Dec 14, 2014)

The nuke stuff was a joke by the way, I in no way advocate nuclear annihilation over oil prices.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Dec 14, 2014)

Murphy was bad in the NUS/NOLS and hasn't got any better; as said earlier in thread the nats must be chuffed.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 14, 2014)

weepiper said:


> Most people in Scotland will still see him as the face of the No campaign. *Draw what conclusions you will from that*.




*Some* of those conclusions might? end up (for some?) coming from the fact that the No vote ended up _slightly_ higher than the level that the polls and media generally expected?/predicted? 

The 'shy no' thing? Look at the hard stats.

Note those question marks, and bolds,  above -- not trying to overdo this.

I'm not from or in Scotland, but I'd *very gently* urge against *OVER*-predicting a Labour wipeout there.


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 14, 2014)

And don't forget that machine politicians can be better and more efficient organisers** than leaderless chaos

(leaderless chaos as recently reflected by very high SNP levels in polls -- a bit unrealistically high *perhaps .... * in terms of how short term opinion polls REALLY work??)

**However dislikelable they may be *politically*, don't overcomplacently underestimate their *chances* of getting their old style machine-shit together ....


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 14, 2014)

weepiper said:


> Sas. This is embarrassing.



Ask youself 'What can I do that I could not do before they were elected?' then ask yourself 'What can I not do that I could do before they were elected, and what is in the pipeline'. Then ask yourself, is there any real need for such legislation, or is it simply a body creating legislation because it can?


----------



## The Boy (Dec 14, 2014)

Sasaferrato said:


> Ask youself 'What can I do that I could not do before they were elected?' then ask yourself 'What can I not do that I could do before they were elected, and what is in the pipeline'. Then ask yourself, is there any real need for such legislation, or is it simply a body creating legislation because it can?



Have you been drinking?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 14, 2014)

I am no lover of Murphy, or of the Labour party in Scotland, but, I love Sturgeon, and her band of merry halfwits even less.


----------



## The Boy (Dec 14, 2014)

Sasaferrato said:


> , I love Sturgeon, and her band of merry halfwits even less.



That's not really an excuse to embarrass yourself by talking shite like 'SNSP'.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 14, 2014)

The Boy said:


> Have you been drinking?



Why not try answering the question? Tell you what, an easier one, as the first is obviously too difficult. They passed one piece of legislation that actually enabled people to do something they previously couldn't. What was it, and why did they do it?


----------



## The Boy (Dec 14, 2014)

So you have been drinking?  I'll leave you to it.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 14, 2014)

The Boy said:


> That's not really an excuse to embarrass yourself by talking shite like 'SNSP'.



That is how I view them, I don't ask you share my view, just as I probably don't share yours, however, I am not so arrogant as to feel that you are not entitled to your view. In this at least, I am considerably more libertarian than you.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 14, 2014)

The Boy said:


> So you have been drinking?  I'll leave you to it.



As I thought. You have no idea. The uninformed criticising the informed. How quaint. 

Why not just admit that you cannot answer the question, through lack of knowledge?


----------



## The Boy (Dec 14, 2014)

Sasaferrato said:


> As I thought. You have no idea. The uninformed criticising the informed. How quaint.
> 
> Why not just admit that you cannot answer the question, through lack of knowledge?



Yes.  The reason I have not answered your daft question is because I have not a clue of what I speak, while you, as you rightly point out, are 'the informed'.  It has nothing to do with not wanting to enter into a debate with a swivel-eyed, old goat who bandies terms like 'national socialist' to refer to the SNP. 

Kindly stop quoting my posts now, ta.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 14, 2014)

The Boy said:


> Yes.  The reason I have not answered your daft question is because I have not a clue of what I speak, while you, as you rightly point out, are 'the informed'.  It has nothing to do with not wanting to enter into a debate with a swivel-eyed, old goat who bandies terms like 'national socialist' to refer to the SNP.
> 
> Kindly stop quoting my posts now, ta.



Ad hom = equals lost argument, hardly surprising as you launched in never thinking you might actually have to provide some evidence to back up your argument.

The only piece of non-restrictive legislation (that directly affects people), was those aged 16 and 17 being allowed to vote in the referendum. Even this deeply cynical ploy; an attempt to capitalise on the naivety of children, backfired.

The referendum was lost. Rejected by the people. It is time Sturgeon was forced to recognise this.


----------



## weepiper (Dec 14, 2014)

Abolished prescription charges
Abolished tuition fees for higher education
Removed tolls on the Forth and Tay Bridges
Increased payments for free personal and nursing care
Got 1 million more people registered with NHS dentists than were under the previous Labour parliament
Abolished Right To Buy (you'll probably say that's a bad thing, of course)
Built or refurbed 330 schools
Expanded free nursery education
Extended Free School Meals
Violent crime down by a fifth and knife related crime down 30%

Fucking nazis, eh.

I'm not an SNP fangirl by any means (Police Scotland being pretty much unfettered alarms me for a start) but really comparing the SNP with naziism is completely ridiculous.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Dec 14, 2014)

I don't like the SNP but the nutter Sasserferato makes me want to vote for them


----------



## The Boy (Dec 14, 2014)

Sasaferrato said:


> Ad hom = equals lost argument, hardly surprising as you launched in never thinking you might actually have to provide some evidence to back up your argument.
> 
> The only piece of non-restrictive legislation (that directly affects people), was those aged 16 and 17 being allowed to vote in the referendum. Even this deeply cynical ploy; an attempt to capitalise on the naivety of children, backfired.
> 
> The referendum was lost. Rejected by the people. It is time Sturgeon was forced to recognise this.



You silly oaf .

Evidence for what argument?  That your use of 'national socialist' was crass nonsense of the sort spouted by dribbling pub bores ?  It is, and no amount of bleating from you changes that.  Take issue with the SNP all you like, they ain't my mob and I couldn't give a fuck.  But banging your fash drum *is* an embarrassment.

That last sentence is gold though.


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 14, 2014)

Just to clarify -- because I'm not in or from Scotland, I've been posting *very* cautiously.

My earlier posts were purely about electoral predictions/speculations. And about whether (or not) Murphy (as an experienced machine politician) has a _somewhat_ better chance of getting Labour's shit back together in Scotland than some in this thread are assuming.

In other words -- Labour aren't 'finished' in Scotland yet -- *necessarily*. 

Contradictions/discussions I'd welcome, posting as a Wales-dwelling outsider ...


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 14, 2014)

Sas, there's a reason we need to be accurate with language. We owe it to the victims of the Holocaust, to history and to humanity to take it seriously. A Nazi is not "someone with whom I disagree", it's not some handy hyperbole to fling at folk,  it's not a term that means "they wanted to dissolve the UK and I despise them for that"; it means something.

You're entitled to disagree with the SNP. But they're not Nazis.


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 14, 2014)

danny la rouge Sasaferrato 

I'm pretty annoyed by these distractions and Sas's rubbish hyperbole -- I'd rather there was a practical, *analysis based* discussion about Scotland's/Murphy's/Labour's/the SNP's/everyone else's political and electoral prospects.

I'm only an outsider and I don't much like the SNP to say the least, but even I know enough to know that 'Nazi'-type talk about them is ridiculous talk.


----------



## kebabking (Dec 14, 2014)

William of Walworth 

when i lived in Scotland i would certainly say that part of the drift away from Labour and towards the SNP - apart from Labours' rank, couldn't-find-their-arse-with-both-hands incompetance - was the perception/reality that for the 'big beasts' of the Labour Party, Scottish Labour and Holyrood was a small pond for small fish. a stepping stone, a regional office to be left when the first opportunity to go and run with the big boys at Westminster presented itself. not so with the SNP - for them, the Westminster crew were the second string, with Holyrood being where the quality went.

the Labour people who were left at Holyrood were the complete non-entities, the utter no-marks who were so devoid of personality and competance that if they went to Westminster they wouldn't get to the dizzy heights of Minister of State for football holliganism and listening to the Arts Council winge at the DMCS.

people in Scotland picked up on that pretty quickly, and it went down like cold sick. Murphy, whatever his other failings, is by any definition a 'big beast', or what passes for a big beast in the current Labour party. that will, possibly, and in fact probably, have some effect in revitalising SL as an organisation/party both as it sees itself and how others see it.

Johann Lamont - to quote Mark and Lard - Wwwhhhhhhhhoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo?


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 15, 2014)

William of Walworth said:


> I'd rather there was a practical, *analysis based* discussion about Scotland's/Murphy's/Labour's/the SNP's/everyone else's political and electoral prospects.


Hi Will.

Here's the thing.  The polls have been consistently predicting Labour in Scotland will do badly.  And if the General Election was tomorrow, they would do very, very badly indeed.  But it isn't.  And Labour is the party of the middle class here in Scotland, and the class will rally round.  Murphy will say what he needs to say, and civil society's movers and shakers will do what they have to do to whitewash him, rehabilitate him and paint him as The Second Coming Himself.

But on the other hand, the Scottish Labour Party as an _organisation _is in very poor health.  That may well contribute towards its tumbling support, but is a separate factor from its support. Its membership is low, its branches are inactive, and Murphy himself is a divisive figure.  People within the party are unhappy about the way Murphy is said to have engineered Lamont's downfall.  And let's not forget he is an enthusiastic supporter of Trident, a member of the Henry Jackson Society, his stance on Israel/Palestine - especially visa vis Gaza - has sickened many ("Israel has a right to defend itself"), he is by all accounts not personally liked even by his supporters, and he comes across badly on TV.  He is their most right-wing, least popular leader yet.

However on balance, I think Labour will lose many seats in Scotland next year, but not as many as polls taken now suggest.  This will enable the media and Murphy to claim a victory.  Things won't be as bad as predicted. (The polls aren't wrong: they're measuring feeling _now.  _They _can't_ measure feeling next May).  Remember the Better Together organisation was dysfunctional and had vanishingly small grass roots. But the media and the coordinating class pulled out the stops and the last minute.  They'll do the same for Murphy and Labour.

Don't get me wrong: I regard Scottish Labour as the enemy. And Murphy is an example of the worst of them.  I hope they go down and go down badly.  But I doubt that'll happen.  Their electoral demise (to do a disservice to Mark Twain) is being greatly exaggerated.  Their organisational demise is being accurately reported.  Their moral demise was long ago.

Ian Jack in the Guardian.

Cat Boyd in the Scotsman.

Steven Griffiths of Scottish CND.


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 15, 2014)

Thanks a lot for those sets of analysis, kebabking and danny la rouge -- exactly the sort of areas I was interested in seeing discussed.

My interest is pretty much entirely polling/election centred -- I was sceptical myself that current polling was anything more than a current snaphot and was already thinking that it was an exaggerated snapshot.

Not disagreeing with danny about Murphy's politics and him living in an integrity free zone, but I was more interested in the organisational side. There's surely no way a new leader can be any _more_ disorganised/chaotic than a leaderless vacuum for the SLP -- and I reckoned recent polls were heavily influenced as much by recent Labour chaos as other stuff. That's why I stuck my head out a bit, earlier on, and questioned some posters' wild talk of the Labour Party being 'finished' in Scotland. That looked more like hopecasting than analysis to me.

Lets see what happens between now and May.


----------



## Frankie Jack (Dec 15, 2014)

Looks like Murphy plans to try and cut the ties that bind between Slab and LabLondon. 



> In his first major speech since becoming leader, the East Renfrewshire MP will call for changes to the party's constitution to seal its autonomy from UK Labour and emphasise its commitment to campaigning "in the national interest of Scotland".
> 
> Symbolically, the new mission statement will be set out in clause four of Scottish Labour's constitution.
> 
> ...


The Herald


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 15, 2014)

William of Walworth said:


> I was more interested in the organisational side. There's surely no way a new leader can be any _more_ disorganised/chaotic than a leaderless vacuum for the SLP


Will, the vacuum in Scottish Labour wasn't at the top.  There's _only _a top.

Even locally here, the only activists that Labour could count on during the referendum were their councillors.  There seems to be no grassroots supporting them.

That was clear too when RIC and others were mobilising the big estates throughout Scotland.  Labour had no organisational reach in those areas.  Nothing.  The party has atrophied.  It can staff a stall in the middle class West End of Glasgow, but it can't staff a stall in Drumchapel or Sighthill.

Why is this?  It's due to the fact that it no longer represents the class it was formed to represent.  It no longer represents the working class ideologically.  And it no longer literally represents them.  It is the party of the media lovies, the professional classes, the business elite.  The technical term for this is that it's in _organic crisis_. 

The post referendum tumble is because of that - it has nothing organisationally to stem the haemorrhage with.  But it is haemorrhaging in the first place because of the sight of Labour politicians standing shoulder to shoulder with Tories on TV debate after TV debate.  Laughing with them at each other's jokes.  Watching each other's backs.  Supporting each other's arguments. Top Labour politicians who were on boards of companies got those companies to make threats about job losses if Yes won.  And  so on and so on.

Whether they voted Yes or No, people were disgusted.  Labour became toxic.  More toxic even than it had made itself by the Iraq War and the Blair/Brown attack on the poor, the disabled, the single parents, the working class.

Their vote will rally from the extremely low polling it is at now, because it can't go any other way.  We had polls suggesting only 2 Labour MPs in Scotland if the election were held at the time of the poll.  Of course it will go up from there, electorally speaking.  And it'll rally because the media and the coordinator class will get behind it.  And it'll rally because the middle class will want its champion back.  But it will not recover its rank and file.  That's gone.


----------



## Celyn (Dec 15, 2014)

Sasaferrato said:


> the Scottish National Socialist Party



Oh look, a Godwin!      Would you explain, please, in what ways the SNP resembles the Nazis?



> ...
> from holding the balance in Westminster, which would be absolutely dreadful.



I think it unlikely that the SNP (or SNP, Plaid Cymru and possibly Green) will hold the balance of power, but I'd like to know just how dreadful that would be

Opposing attempts to privatise the NHS, preferring renewable energy sources to nuclear, opposing university tuition fees, preferring not to go and bomb the shit out of any random country just because the USA wants to have a war and invites the UK to join in, recognition that immigrants are not the devil incarnate, but actually quite good....

Yes, utterly dreadful.



> The SNSP lost the referendum, this needs to be hammered home.



Oh, Godwin again.

"Hammered home" seems to have a vindictive tone to it that I don't quite like.

What form should this hammering take?  Who will do this hammering? Does this hammering apply only to the SNP or to each and every party that you don't like?

And just why, anyway, should there be any hammering at all?  I'm pretty sure that Nicola Sturgeon is aware of the referendum result already.


----------



## Celyn (Dec 15, 2014)

Sasaferrato said:


> ... 'What can I not do that I could do before they were elected,



Well, what is it that I can't do?  Genuine question, btw. There probably are examples but none spring to mind right now.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 15, 2014)

Celyn said:


> I'm pretty sure that Nicola Sturgeon is aware of the referendum result already.


This comes back to something I was asking Quartz about in the big indy ref thread.  He said that people had opined that the SNP wouldn't "accept the result" of the referendum.  He wasn't able to answer what that meant.  Sass belongs to that camp, too.  The SNP should "accept the result".

The SNP does accept the result.  They, like all of us who voted Yes, know that No won.  There was no majority for independence. We haven't got independence.  We're still in the Union.  We know that.

But I don't think that's what Sass and others meant.  They wanted the SNP to dissolve.  Now that their goal of independence has been defeated, they should go away.  But that isn't how it works.  When Labour lost the last Westminster general election, they didn't give up and go home, take up gardening.  Nor, when they lost the Holyrood elections in 2011 did they shut up shop and put "closing down sale" in the window in Bath Street.

The SNP and its members will still continue to believe what they believe in. And support them or not (and I don't), they are still the elected government in Holyrood. They won that election. They might lose the next in 2016 (though I doubt it), but even then they wouldn't disappear.  Why would they?

What Sass also means is that the SNP should be punished for having the referendum.  They should be punished because No won.  But it's Labour who are being punished.  They're being punished for their alliance with the Tories. And for the ideological ease with which a lifelong Tory like Sass can join Labour without having to shed a page - not even a sentence - of his principles. Because the Labour Party are the vehicle he thinks can best deliver those principles. And they're being punished because of the threats made to ordinary Scots if they voted Yes.  Oh, they voted No.  But they didn't like the threats.  Not one bit.


----------



## Celyn (Dec 15, 2014)

Sasaferrato said:


> ... those aged 16 and 17 being allowed to vote in the referendum. Even this deeply cynical ploy; an attempt to capitalise on the naivety of children, backfired.



Extension of the franchise to people aged 16 and 17 was a SNP policy of very long standing.  It would have been pretty bad  and hypocritical NOT to allow this when they were in a position to do so.

It is (or was, 'cos god alone knows what their policies are now), a long standing policy of the Liberal Party then the Lib Dems,  it is policy of the Green Parties, and it was also stated policy in the Labour Party's manifesto for the 2010 general election.  I think the Tories are against it, and I don't know offhand what are teh policies of various smaller parties.

If they can work and pay taxes at 16, have sex, get married, join the army at 16, then why not allow them to vote at 16?


----------



## gosub (Dec 15, 2014)

If you looked at the post referendum polling 16-17 was one of the strongest supports of Indy Scotland, hard to see how you would say it backfired


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 15, 2014)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> I would



They won't between now and 2016 certainly. It's one more blow to the link though.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 15, 2014)

William of Walworth , you might be interested in this: http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides...be-reduced-to-driftwood-paul-sinclair-claims/

"Some say the party has been damaged by joining with the coalition parties in Better Together. I think the real damage is that the Tories and the Liberal Democrats saw first hand that the 'Labour machine' didn't exist."


----------



## nino_savatte (Dec 15, 2014)

Sasaferrato said:


> Of the three, Murphy is the best candidate by a long shot.


So says the self-described Tory.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 15, 2014)

nino_savatte said:


> So says the self-described Tory.


You're out of date on that one. Sass left the actual Tories.


----------



## Celyn (Dec 15, 2014)

Frankie Jack said:


> Looks like Murphy plans to try and cut the ties that bind between Slab and LabLondon.





> "patriotic party"


  WTF?  

That is a bit odd, and isn't it the kind of thing that would only be liked by UKIP and BNP and their friends?


----------



## Frankie Jack (Dec 15, 2014)

There are a couple of 'groups' that will like that.


----------



## weepiper (Dec 15, 2014)

He's trying to out-nat the Nats. And yes, it's calculated to appeal to the SDL Rangers fan Jimmy Union types.


----------



## articul8 (Dec 15, 2014)

This new constitution bollocks is dreadful.  We are a patriotic party inspired by Burns' poetry...  Why not just say we drink Irn Bru and listen to the Proclaimers.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 15, 2014)

he's a wanker's wanker - met him when he was scottish nus president and nus president. he was a tosser then and he's a tosser now.


----------



## articul8 (Dec 15, 2014)

All NUS presidents are wankers.  It's in the job description


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 15, 2014)

weepiper said:


> He's trying to out-nat the Nats. And yes, it's calculated to appeal to the SDL Rangers fan Jimmy Union types.


Ironic that the chat is all about endevouring to reconnect with the average person whilst this attempt to appeal to yes voters is utilising an ethnic form of nationalism that doesnt seem to correlate with anything the yes campaign or yes voters were about


----------



## Celyn (Dec 15, 2014)

danny la rouge said:


> Will, the vacuum in Scottish Labour wasn't at the top.  There's _only _a top.





> Nothing.  The party has atrophied.  It can staff a stall in the middle class West End of Glasgow, but it can't staff a stall in Drumchapel or Sighthill.



Holy shit, here's someone who has even heard of Sighthill.   (Famous for being home of the wonderful Celyn.  Or, in fact, not famous at all.)


Your point is valid about the general uselessness of the Labour Party, but there is still much inertia, and when the Labour Party is in charge of the council such that people can be convinced that anything other than Labour  will cause plague and famine and horror and pestilence to stalk the land, it's hard to know how things can be changed.


----------



## Quartz (Dec 15, 2014)

The Guardian is reporting that Murphy is pro-nuclear which is a big point in his favour.


----------



## Lo Siento. (Dec 15, 2014)

Quartz said:


> The Guardian is reporting that Murphy is pro-nuclear which is a big point in his favour.


Of course. Why spend money fixing actual problems when we could spend it fighting our corner in the imaginary future apocalypse.


----------



## articul8 (Dec 15, 2014)

Quartz said:


> The Guardian is reporting that Murphy is pro-nuclear which is a big point in his favour.


is it?


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 15, 2014)

articul8 said:


> is it?


No.


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 15, 2014)

danny la rouge  : Just digesting your earlier post atm ...

Will read that linked article in that later post of yours when I'm less knackered (this _was_ a night in  ) but I was doing a bunch of boring domestic stuff this eve ....

All pretty interesting though.


----------



## weepiper (Dec 15, 2014)

*snort*


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 16, 2014)

Has anyone got an electronic version of Carolyn Leckie's piece in yesterday's National?


----------



## Celyn (Dec 16, 2014)

Yes, but I don't know how to make it sendable.


----------



## Frankie Jack (Dec 16, 2014)

danny la rouge said:


> Has anyone got an electronic version of Carolyn Leckie's piece in yesterday's National?


Here.


----------



## Frankie Jack (Dec 16, 2014)

All issues.


----------



## Frankie Jack (Dec 16, 2014)

Just the Leckie article.


----------



## Celyn (Dec 16, 2014)

Good!  I've  been trying to work out how to send it and I just keep getting really muddled.  More coffee needed


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 16, 2014)

Frankie Jack said:


> Here.


I'm not on Facebook, so that doesn't work for me.  But the PDF should do the trick.  I though William of Walworth might appreciate it.


----------



## Frankie Jack (Dec 16, 2014)

danny la rouge said:


> I'm not on Facebook, so that doesn't work for me.  But the PDF should do the trick.  I though William of Walworth might appreciate it.



No probs. Took a few minutes to get the single article page and wasn't sure it would upload.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 16, 2014)

Cheers Frankie Jack


----------



## Frankie Jack (Dec 16, 2014)

Forced myself to get them up on Google Drive. Been meaning to do that but couldn't find the 'be arsed'. Odd naming of files to get them in a quick semblance of order. 

Here.


----------



## nino_savatte (Dec 16, 2014)

Murphy's speech to the HJS. Fill yer boots.
http://www.jimmurphymp.com/news-room/Speeches/news.aspx?p=1041364


----------



## articul8 (Dec 16, 2014)

God.  The HJS are a bunch of neocon loons.


----------



## articul8 (Dec 16, 2014)

> It was Henry Jackson who said: "... the best politics is no politics.'


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 16, 2014)

nino_savatte said:


> Murphy's speech to the HJS. Fill yer boots.
> http://www.jimmurphymp.com/news-room/Speeches/news.aspx?p=1041364



Even if neoconism is your thing, the tone of the speach is about as safe and banal as you'd expect from a crappy newlabour character such as jim murphy.


----------



## nino_savatte (Dec 16, 2014)

Henry 'Scoop' Jackson according to Wikipedia.


> Opponents derided him as "the Senator from Boeing"[11] and a "whore for Boeing"[12] because of his consistent support for additional military spending on weapons systems and accusations of wrongful contributions from the company; in 1965, eighty percent of Boeing's contracts were military
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_M._Jackson



It seems to me that Murphy, being a supporter of Trident, is in the right (no pun intended) company.


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 16, 2014)

articul8 said:


> This could be the end for Scottish Labour.  wouldn't rule out Unite in Scotland disaffiliating



With Neil Findlay being given the fair work brief in Murphy's shadow cabinet, will this help keep unions on side in scotland do you think?


----------



## articul8 (Dec 16, 2014)

xslavearcx said:


> With Neil Findlay being given the fair work brief in Murphy's shadow cabinet, will this help keep unions on side in scotland do you think?


I think they'll stay until this side of the GE - and have a leadership contest if they do badly and he won't resign.


----------



## geminisnake (Dec 16, 2014)

Threshers_Flail said:


> Is the NUS stuff and Henry Jackson Society membership common knowledge though? Or do people just see him as that twat with the crates of Irn-Bru?



Might not be all over MSM but IS all over social media/the web, the more people that know the more can tell those not online. Been seeing it for about 2 weeks now. Think William is right about over predicting Labour's demise. I think their vote share/no of MPs will drop but not a wipeout unfortunately.


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 16, 2014)

articul8 said:


> I think they'll stay until this side of the GE - and have a leadership contest if they do badly and he won't resign.



thanks.


----------



## Sue (Dec 16, 2014)

articul8 said:


> I think they'll stay until this side of the GE - and have a leadership contest if they do badly and he won't resign.



Eh? Who'll have a leadership contest?


----------



## articul8 (Dec 16, 2014)

Scottish Labour, if they do really badly under Murphy in May


----------



## Sue (Dec 16, 2014)

Can't see that at all. It'll be like all the New Labour stuff -- it's not the message that's wrong, it's the way it's been communicated and Murphy just hadn't had enough time to communicate the message. Besides, given what a careerist Murphy is, do you really think he'd take this on unless he'd been given the very strongest assurances that he's there for the duration?


----------



## articul8 (Dec 16, 2014)

Who could give him those assurances?  I guess he'll try to blame Miliband and suggest moving further right.  That way could spell a split


----------



## Sue (Dec 16, 2014)

articul8 said:


> Who could give him those assurances?  I guess he'll try to blame Miliband and suggest moving further right.  That way could spell a split


 
A panicking London Labour who still don't get it. Imagine half of Scottish Labour hate his guts but don't see many other options at this point. Why would there be a split?


----------



## weepiper (Dec 16, 2014)

> There are three problems with Jim Murphy. This first is that he is tied so inextricably to Labour's past decade. At a time when it's clear to everyone that Scottish Labour needs to dramatically break from Blairism, he is a well known supporter of the Iraq War, Trident and austerity. Whatever pretty words he uses to pitch himself to the left, he's got a voting record at Westminster going back 17 years showing otherwise. Labour's problem isn't so much that they say the wrong things, but that people have come to the conclusion that they don't really believe anything. It's not that they need better policies (though they do) it's that they have to actually believe in them.
> 
> The second is that he is inextricably tied to Labour's recent past. If the problem facing the party is that a significant portion of its base voted yes, then one of the most prominent and, in some ways, aggressive figures from the No campaign is perhaps not the person best placed to win them over.
> 
> The third is that he is tied to his own past. Scotland's a small country, and social media has shrunk it further. Whether or not the tales of bullying and nastiness dating back to his time in NUS are true, they keep appearing in my Facebook and Twitter feeds from disgruntled members of the Labour party whose dislike of him is more personal than political. They needed a unifying figure, and they got a man who seems to have spent a lifetime making enemies.



https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/adam-ramsay/raising-blue-labour-saltire-on-sinking-ship


----------



## Sue (Dec 16, 2014)

Only three?


----------



## weepiper (Dec 16, 2014)

Sue said:


> Only three?


The _fourth_ main problem is.... Dammit! I'll come in again.


----------



## articul8 (Dec 17, 2014)

Sue said:


> A panicking London Labour who still don't get it. Imagine half of Scottish Labour hate his guts but don't see many other options at this point. Why would there be a split?


There would be a split *if* and its still an if, a significant minority of the Scottish labour left thought the party's name had become irredeemably tainted with the Westminster parties and the right that it couldn't recover.


----------



## Sue (Dec 18, 2014)

articul8 said:


> There would be a split *if* and its still an if, a significant minority of the Scottish labour left thought the party's name had become irredeemably tainted with the Westminster parties and the right that it couldn't recover.


 
I'm not convinced there's much of a Scottish Labour Left left tbh. Think that ship sailed quite a long time ago.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 19, 2014)

Sue said:


> I'm not convinced there's much of a Scottish Labour Left left tbh. Think that ship sailed quite a long time ago.



The Survation monthly poll for the Daily Record is due for release...should be interesting to see what, if any, effect Murphy's elevation has on the numbers.


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 22, 2014)

I'm all for being allowed to have a drink at the football match but when Jim Murphy suports the general principal of 'working class people being   Able to have a drink at the fitba' and that the ban should be lifted on a trial basis it all comes across as a bit desperate and populist really....


http://www.theguardian.com/politics...ed-lift-ban-alcohol-scottish-football-matches


----------



## Sue (Dec 22, 2014)

Jim Murphy, desperate and populist?


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 22, 2014)

Sue said:


> Jim Murphy, desperate and populist?


Monkey tennis!


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 22, 2014)

Sue said:


> Jim Murphy, desperate and populist?


desperate anyway


----------



## brogdale (Dec 22, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> desperate anyway


"..._youth hosteling with Chris Eubank?" _


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 22, 2014)

brogdale said:


> "..._youth hosteling with Chris Eubank?" _


tell you what, i'd pay good money to see eubank whack murphy round a boxing ring.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 22, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> tell you what, i'd pay good money to see eubank whack murphy round a boxing ring.



..or arm wrestling with Chas & Dave?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 22, 2014)

brogdale said:


> ..or arm wrestling with Chas & Dave?


no, unlikely to result in serious head trauma.


----------



## Trendy Lefty (Dec 22, 2014)

I am no nationalist but it's no surprise that we've seen the rise of the SNP in Scotland. Voters are fed-up of Labour's shift to the right and see them just as much a part of the Westminster, out-of-touch elite as the Tories. There are people voting for them who don't even want Scottish Independence, but just find the more left-leaning views of the SNP on social/economic issues to be more appealing.


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 22, 2014)

Trendy Lefty : I agree, so the answer for Murphy should be obvious then.  come up with some left-leaning policy -- not as if he has to be a full on socialist to win  back a few votes (and he's never going to be one), but some basic stuff about housing, wages, etc would be a start.

On a pragmatic, poll-focussed  level alone, left leaning policy wouldn't lose votes in Scotland.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Dec 23, 2014)

William of Walworth said:


> Trendy Lefty : I agree, so the answer for Murphy should be obvious then.  come up with some left-leaning policy -- not as if he has to be a full on socialist to win  back a few votes (and he's never going to be one), but some basic stuff about housing, wages, etc would be a start.
> 
> On a pragmatic, poll-focussed  level alone, left leaning policy wouldn't lose votes in Scotland.


tbh I wouldn't be surprised if he did come up with some interesting policies on wages, housing, and energy bills there's plenty of Progress types up for that.


----------



## Celyn (Dec 23, 2014)

I think I'd like to know Jim Murphy's view on this:



> THE leader of cash-strapped Glasgow City Council is facing criticism after spending thousands of pounds of public money to have his closest aides accompany him to Labour Party conferences.
> 
> 
> Gordon Matheson is under fire after almost £4000 was spent on hotels, flights, train tickets, cab fares and restaurants for his adviser Paul Kilby and principal policy officer, Dominic Dowling.
> ...



http://www.heraldscotland.com/polit...l-to-send-aides-to-labour-conference.26133563

because surely that cannot be the normal way to do things?  Or is that the way all councils carry on?  I'm inclined to think Glasgow City Council is the most awful shitheap of dodgy behaviour, but that sort of thing could be normal, for all I know.

It's possible that Murphy, Matheson & Uncle Tom Cobleigh have responded to that article, but I'm being disorganised and might not have seen their responses.


----------



## Trendy Lefty (Dec 23, 2014)

William of Walworth said:


> Trendy Lefty : I agree, so the answer for Murphy should be obvious then.  come up with some left-leaning policy -- not as if he has to be a full on socialist to win  back a few votes (and he's never going to be one), but some basic stuff about housing, wages, etc would be a start.



You'd think so. Got a feeling he's too Blairite to achieve that.


----------



## weepiper (Dec 28, 2014)




----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 28, 2014)

David Miller isn't a fan...

http://thepeopledemand.org/?p=690


----------



## weepiper (Dec 28, 2014)

danny la rouge said:


> David Miller isn't a fan...
> 
> http://thepeopledemand.org/?p=690





> *Murphy the War Hawk*



Honestly read that as 'Murphy the shitehawk' first time.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 5, 2015)

This is how dire and desperate Jim Murphy is:

*Labour pledges 1,000 Scottish nurses funded by English mansion tax*
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...ish-nurses-funded-by-English-mansion-tax.html

It's a General Election 2015 pledge.  



More nurses.  Great.  But here's the thing - Scottish Labour has admitted they don't know how many nurses the SNP will pledge.  Just that, whatever it is, they'll top it by 1000.  So, if the SNP says "OK, one nurse per person.  That's 5 million nurses", Labour will still say "1000 more".  (And pay for it with the English mansion tax).

That's nuts.  How do they know the Mansion Tax will cover it?  How do they know people in England won't want it spent on something else?

This isn't about saying how great having more nurses would be, it's about saying "more than them", no matter how much they pledge.  (What if the SNP say "1000 more than Labour", or "infinity +1"?).

Furthermore, it's a _Westminster General Election pledge_.  But Westminster doesn't set the number of nurses the NHS in Scotland has - Holyrood does that.  So they _can't even deliver_ on the pledge if they win in May (supposing it was deliverable).

And yet another thing, it's not even clear that it's allowed under the current devolution legislation to fund Scottish Government expenditure in the way proposed - the allocation of funding is for the devolved government to determine; Westminster can't ring-fence (that's the point of devolution), and anyway, budgetary provision is via the Barnett Formula, which decides what proportion of Westminster Treasury money goes to Holyrood.  Now Labour are saying "that plus whatever the nurses will cost, from English Mansion Tax take".  It's chaos. And pathetic.

Is any further demonstration needed of how utterly at sea Scottish Labour are?  Or of how they no longer have any direction, except to try to outflank the SNP, no matter how nonsensical a position it puts them in?  This isn't principles, it's desperation.


(Edited to try to make room for the formatting of the embedded tweet).


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 5, 2015)

Electors of England, what is your view on mansion taxes raised in England being used to provide the Devolved NHS in Scotland with 1000 more nurses than whatever the SNP will subsequently pledge?


----------



## weepiper (Jan 5, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Electors of England, what is your view on mansion taxes raised in England being used to provide the Devolved NHS in Scotland with 1000 more nurses than whatever the SNP will subsequently pledge?


I believe they don't like it up 'em.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 5, 2015)

weepiper said:


> I believe they don't like it up 'em.


I'm not so concerned with what the "wealthy English" think, more the ordinary voter who may have had other priorities for any mansion tax windfall to the Exchequer.


----------



## Sue (Jan 5, 2015)

I imagine it'll go down very badly indeed. Free prescription charges, for example, seem to massively wind people up -- they're always, always mentioned when people are being indignant about how 'cushy' the Scots have it on 'their' (English) taxes -- so can't see this'll be any different.

And this against a backdrop of the NHS down here massively creaking at the seams, with hospitals seemingly daily declaring major incidents as they can't cope with the number of patients turning up at A&E etc.


----------



## weepiper (Jan 5, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> I'm not so concerned with what the "wealthy English" think, more the ordinary voter who may have had other priorities for any mansion tax windfall to the Exchequer.


I should think they'll be pretty fucked off too. I can't blame them really.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 6, 2015)

Sue said:


> I imagine it'll go down very badly indeed. Free prescription charges, for example, seem to massively wind people up -- they're always, always mentioned when people are being indignant about how 'cushy' the Scots have it on 'their' (English) taxes -- so can't see this'll be any different.


 Except that it is different: the former is an oft-repeated myth and misunderstanding, whereas this really would be using English taxes to pay for Scottish services.


----------



## Sue (Jan 6, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Except that it is different: the former is an oft-repeated myth and misunderstanding, whereas this really would be using English taxes to pay for Scottish services.



Yes, it is different but think this just feeds into those erroneous perceptions. Be interesting to see how this is reported in the press.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 6, 2015)

Sue said:


> Yes, it is different but think this just feeds into those erroneous perceptions. Be interesting to see how this is reported in the press.


What's interesting is that the Labour Party seems either to share those misconceptions, or (more likely) to think Scottish voters do, and that this is the only way that Labour will keep seats in Scotland - by paying for Scottish services with English taxes.  Which is dire.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 6, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Electors of England, what is your view on mansion taxes raised in England being used to provide the Devolved NHS in Scotland with 1000 more nurses than whatever the SNP will subsequently pledge?




Most significant thing (to me) about Murphy's bizarre statement, is how on earth he can make pronouncements like that, at a time when every other senior Labour spokesperson (generally) has to run everthing with cost implications past Balls/Miliband first, before being allowed to say it in public.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 6, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> Most significant thing (to me) about Murphy's bizarre statement, is how on earth he can make pronouncements like that, at a time when every other senior Labour spokesperson (generally) has to run everthing with cost implications past Balls/Miliband first, before being allowed to say it in public.


That's because it _has_ been run past Balls/Miliband.  This is a General Election strategy for May 2015.  The Labour leadership clearly thinks it can only keep seats in Scotland by taking such measures.  Which, actually, is incredibly insulting.


----------



## coley (Jan 6, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Electors of England, what is your view on mansion taxes raised in England being used to provide the Devolved NHS in Scotland with 1000 more nurses than whatever the SNP will subsequently pledge?


I just wish you lot would hurry up and get your independence


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 6, 2015)

coley said:


> I just wish you lot would hurry up and get your independence


Indeed. But it's hardly fair to blame us for Labour's electioneering. 

I personally think Labour's attitude towards Scottish votes is insulting.


----------



## coley (Jan 6, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Indeed. But it's hardly fair to blame us for Labour's electioneering.
> 
> I personally think Labour's attitude towards Scottish votes is insulting.


The only interest they have in Scottish votes is in order to cling to power in Westminster and your right, their attitude is insulting.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 6, 2015)

coley said:


> The only interest they have in Scottish votes is in order to cling to power in Westminster and your right, their attitude is insulting.


Indeed.  That's exactly it.


----------



## kebabking (Jan 6, 2015)

unsurprisingly, its gone down like a bucket of cold vommit here in middle England...

direct quote from a non-political (in the widest sense) colleague over tea this morning 'they must think we're fcuking stupid..'. the first reaction i can see is disbelief, people (me included) are somewhat stunned that Labour think they can tell the Scottish electorate that it'll be partytime on our credit cards, while saying to us that its going to be austerity 2.0 for us and somehow thinking we won't notice headlines from sources other than the Worcester news...

its just astonishing, and as has been said by others just a teensy-weensy bit insulting to the intelligence to all concerned. the mans a cock - and i'm not taking about Jim Murphy..


----------



## newbie (Jan 6, 2015)

wannabe London mayor Diane Abbot just described it as expropriation from London to buy Scottish votes. 

fightfightfight


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 6, 2015)

Labour polling slightly improved over last week - cross breaks from YG have it SNP 46/Lab 30. That means both +3 though. Going to be a terrible squeeze on others.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 6, 2015)

newbie said:


> wannabe London mayor Diane Abbot just described it as expropriation from London to buy Scottish votes.
> 
> fightfightfight


 Much as Murphy's desperation to demonstrate independence was, in UK terms, politically spectacularly inept...Abbot appears not to know how her own party's policy will work.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 6, 2015)

newbie said:


> wannabe London mayor Diane Abbot just described it as expropriation from London to buy Scottish votes.
> 
> fightfightfight


and she called him _*John *_Murphy.


----------



## newbie (Jan 6, 2015)

that's how the center lets the periphery know how little they matter


----------



## gosub (Jan 6, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Much as Murphy's desperation to demonstrate independence was, in UK terms, politically spectacularly inept...Abbot appears not to know how her own party's policy will work.



or how Barnett formula works.   Just coz it mainly effects London doesn't mean mansion tax isn't a national tax. Holyrood could do what it likes with its portion of the extra revenue


----------



## JTG (Jan 6, 2015)

Remarkable. It's like with every move they make to try and shore up the Union and their vote, they weaken its long term prospects ever more


----------



## brogdale (Jan 6, 2015)

gosub said:


> or how Barnett formula works.   Just coz it mainly effects London doesn't mean mansion tax isn't a national tax. Holyrood could do what it likes with its portion of the extra revenue


All true, but looking to those English marginals where the GE will be decided, Miliband can't be happy with Murphy's desperate punt for domestic credibility.


----------



## gosub (Jan 6, 2015)

brogdale said:


> All true, but looking to those English marginals where the GE will be decided, Miliband can't be happy with Murphy's desperate punt for domestic credibility.




Making election pledges for things that aren't covered in the election doesn't do much for credibility


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 6, 2015)

Jim Murphy promises ALL THE NURSES


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 6, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> Jim Murphy promises ALL THE NURSES


Infinity nurses!


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 6, 2015)

gosub said:


> or how Barnett formula works.   Just coz it mainly effects London doesn't mean mansion tax isn't a national tax. Holyrood could do what it likes with its portion of the extra revenue


Indeed. Even if all the Mansion Tax returns were eligible for Barnett formula consequentials (which it isn't), he can't just allocate it all to Scottish NHS spending. He appears to think he can allocate it in addition to the Barnett allocation. If he doesn't think that, I'm at a loss to work out what he thinks he's promising, if he does think that, it shows he doesn't know what he's talking about. Which is a worry.


----------



## gosub (Jan 6, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Indeed. Even if all the Mansion Tax returns were eligible for Barnett formula consequentials (which it isn't), he can't just allocate it all to Scottish NHS spending. He appears to think he can allocate it in addition to the Barnett allocation. If he doesn't think that, I'm at a loss to work out what he thinks he's promising, if he does think that, it shows he doesn't know what he's talking about. Which is a worry.



Think it would be eligable, as its a national tax, but would be PART of Barnett.  Think he's saying tax take would be increased and Barnett would rise according and here's how Scottish Labour would spend their share...  I say I think that, what I believe is Murphy thinks having a spatt with London will make him seem less of a quizling


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 6, 2015)

gosub said:


> Think it would be eligable, as its a national tax, but would be PART of Barnett.



That's what I mean. It's not all of the Mansion Tax  
that would be allocated, it's a Barnett share.


> Think he's saying tax take would be increased and Barnett would rise according and here's how Scottish Labour would spend their share...


But even if that is what he's saying, he doesn't know yet what number of nurses he's paying for, because the SNP hasn't announced its pledge yet (nor will they until a year after a hypothetical Labour Westminster win, because it's a Holyrood issue, not a Westminster issue). All he knows us it's SNP pledge + 1000.

And there's nothing a Labour Westminster government can do about Holyrood NHS expenditure allocation.


----------



## gosub (Jan 6, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> That's what I mean. It's not all of the Mansion Tax
> that would be allocated, it's a Barnett share.
> But even if that is what he's saying, he doesn't know yet what number of nurses he's paying for, because the SNP hasn't announced its pledge yet (nor will they until a year after a hypothetical Labour Westminster win, because it's a Holyrood issue, not a Westminster issue). All he knows us it's SNP pledge + 1000.
> 
> And there's nothing a Labour Westminster government can do about Holyrood NHS expenditure allocation.




Agreed, but after a year of vote NO and the NHS is privatised, agreement that Health is a devolved matter is a bit refreshing


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 6, 2015)

gosub said:


> Agreed, but after a year of vote NO and the NHS is privatised, agreement that Health is a devolved matter is a bit refreshing


There seems little understanding of how devolution works on the Labour side, though. 

(Furthermore, I'm still not persuaded the NHS is at all safe from privatisation).


----------



## FiFi (Jan 6, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> There seems little understanding of how devolution works on the Labour side, though.
> 
> (Furthermore, I'm still not persuaded the NHS is at all safe from privatisation).


Most Politicians are clueless!
Also, if you're worried about privatisation now, wait 'til the Yanks get their mits on more of our health services and TTIP means we can't prise them loose!


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 6, 2015)

FiFi said:


> Most Politicians are clueless!
> Also, if you're worried about privatisation now, wait 'til the Yanks get their mits on more of our health services and TTIP means we can't prise them loose!


TTIP is one of the reasons I'm worried about the NHS.


----------



## FiFi (Jan 6, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> TTIP is one of the reasons I'm worried about the NHS.


I've worked in the NHS for over 25yrs and I've never been more worried about it's future.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 6, 2015)

FiFi said:


> I've worked in the NHS for over 25yrs and I've never been more worried about it's future.


I'd have liked that post, but it seemed wrong. It's extremely depressing. I don't trust politicians of any party with the future of the NHS.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 7, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> TTIP is one of the reasons I'm worried about the NHS.




One of my old friends (now based in York as it happens) is _heavily_ involved in online and other campaigns against this.

His pessimistic view is that *NO* political party anywhere in the UK will be able to resist is implications concerning either the NHS, or public services more generally.

I think he's right. Note my emphasis above on 'NO' though ...


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 7, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> One of my old friends (now based in York as it happens) is _heavily_ involved in online and other campaigns against this.
> 
> His pessimistic view is that *NO* political party anywhere in the UK will be able to resist is implications concerning either the NHS, or public services more generally.
> 
> I think he's right. Note my emphasis above on 'NO' though ...


I'd agree with your friend. But, tell us, Will, since you were moved to add emphasis to his "no", what do you think are the implications of that?


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 7, 2015)

That the SNP would have no greater power over the matter than Labour would.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 7, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> That the SNP would have no greater power over the matter than Labour would.


Is there any particular reason you thought I needed to hear that emphasis?


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 7, 2015)

Not you particularly tbf. Apols if that looked exclusively aimed at you.

But my (outsider) opinion is that the SNP are undercriticised on here by many.

Just because they're successsfully sticking the boot into Labour politically and polling-wise atm, doesn't mean they're any less establishment-colluding, or any more willing/able to resist things like TTIP**.

**(Nearly posted that as 'TITP' but my opposition to ultra-corporate festivals has already been covered on Urban elsewhere   )

I doubt you'd disagree with the above too much.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 7, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> Not you particularly tbf. Apols if that looked exclusively aimed at you.
> 
> But my (outsider) opinion is that the SNP are undercriticised on here by many.


Cheers for the reply, Will.

I disagree that the SNP are under-criticised. They seem to me to be just as criticised as any other party.  (Here is my view on whether socialists should vote SNP in May).

As I said above, I don't trust politicians of any party with the future of the NHS.  

However, you may remember me supporting a Yes vote in the referendum.  That wasn't because I thought a bunch of suits in Edinburgh were going to be better than a bunch of suits in London, but because I thought the break up of the UK would be an historic moment when the demands of the working class would be given urgency and clout by events.  I still believe that to be true.  I don't, however, think additional devolution powers will bring those circumstances about, so I'm not motivated to support extra devolution.  (Indeed, I think the package on offer - the Smith Report - would be disadvantageous; perhaps disastrously so, and precisely in relation to the ability to cushion ourselves against austerity.  There is no party opposing the Smith package, though, so it looks like we'll get it, good for us or not).


----------



## JTG (Jan 7, 2015)

tbh, I think much of the fallout from the No vote - Murphy's latest bollocks, the so-called additional powers etc - will do nothing to halt the eventual break up of the UK but will make that break up far more bitter and resentful than it needs to be. It's a shame.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 7, 2015)

Mind you, when Ruth Davidson (Scottish Tory leader) says the idea of Alex Salmond as deputy prime minister "scares the bejesus" out of her, it does tempt me to help bring that about, if only just for the devilment...


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 7, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Cheers for the reply, Will.
> 
> I disagree that the SNP are under-criticised. They seem to me to be just as criticised as any other party.  (Here is my view on whether socialists should vote SNP in May).
> 
> ...



Just on the Smith package, I guess the reason no party in Scotland is opposing it is because 55% voted No in the referendum and not Yes? 

And that one of the reasons for lots of people sticking with No was that a version of devo-max was being advanced. Which is why (I wonder?) that a lot of people in Scottish (establishment) politics see the Smith stuff as the least worst option for now.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 7, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> Just on the Smith package, I guess the reason no party in Scotland is opposing it is because 55% voted No in the referendum and not Yes?


Why does that mean all the parties have to support it?  It's not as if it's the only possible devolution package.



> And that one of the reasons for lots of people sticking with No was that a version of devo-max was being advanced. Which is why (I wonder?) that a lot of people in Scottish (establishment) politics see the Smith stuff as the least worst option for now.


Well, devo max actually means something in particular, and the No parties themselves (as opposed to the media, including the BBC) were very careful not to use the words "devo max" prior to Sept 18th.  Indeed, the No party representatives have been at pains to point out, since the referendum, that devo max was not offered.

Gordon Brown was somewhat different.  He said he would stand as a guarantor for what he called "near federalism", something he also referred to as "as close to a federal state as you can be in a country where one nation is 85 per cent of the population".  (Scotsman).  The other parties let us believe he spoke for them all.

Of course, he could never be a guarantor, he was just a back bench opposition MP.  And one who has since announced his resignation as an MP and that he'll "step away from front line politics". (Indy).

So, no guarantor at all.

Nor is Smith "near federalism".  It's not even an improvement on the status quo; in fact, it's worse.  Here it is, have a look: https://www.smith-commission.scot

My problem with it is not that it's "not enough", but that it would actually *make things worse*.  How?  Well, take the much vaunted tax raising powers: we're told "control over bands and rates of income tax" will be devolved.  But personal allowances, capital gains tax, inheritance tax, dividend tax will not be.  VAT was also a much heralded new power, but actually Holyrood would only get half of the VAT raised in Scotland, and it will be taken back from the block grant.

What Smith gives us is raised expectations that aren't met and, more importantly, _worse_ than no tools to effectively combat Westminster austerity: Not only will the Barnett funding reduce (it's calculated as a percentage of English public spending), the greater share of Holyrood public spending will have to be supported by taxation powers that aren't up to the job.  It is, in short, a fiscal trap: only 40% of the budget controlled by the Scottish Parliament will now be supported by a share of UK taxes (and remember that means taxes raised in Scotland collected by the treasury and paid back to Holyrood via the Barnett formula, not a "grant from England"), the rest will have to come from inadequate direct tax raising powers.  This means that austerity is going to be far harsher in Scotland than elsewhere in the UK, because of the multiplier effect of the shortfall that'll result from the 60% supposed to be covered by the shoddy tax package.

Now, remember this.  The Smith proposals were not on the ballot paper in September.  A No vote was not a vote for Smith, since Smith was only published in late November, more than 2 months after the referendum.  Are we to be given the chance to vote for or against Smith in a referendum?  Nope.  What about by voting in the GE for parties that oppose Smith?  Nope, they're all signed up.  Call that democracy?  I don't.

Were we given the chance to choose between Smith and the status quo, I'd choose the status quo.  But no such chance is being offered.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 7, 2015)

Lots to digest there  , but thanks.

Will get back to this tomorrow.


----------



## weepiper (Jan 7, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Mind you, when Ruth Davidson (Scottish Tory leader) says the idea of Alex Salmond as deputy prime minister "scares the bejesus" out of her, it does tempt me to help bring that about, if only just for the devilment...


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 7, 2015)




----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 8, 2015)

danny la rouge Thanks for clarifying some details of the Wilson proposals yesterday, particularly about the discrepancies between what GB promised near referendum day and what Wilson seems to entail in reality. Not sure for now whether or not I agree with you that some is better than none in this instance. (There could be indirect implications for Wales -- my manor! - as well, over time).
But I really do need more thinking time -- have family business to deal with from tomorrow and over the w/e.

Just for now though, a question : has there been any detailed polling in Scotland of reactions to Wilson and related details?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 8, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> danny la rouge Thanks for clarifying some details of the Wilson proposals yesterday, particularly about the discrepancies between what GB promised near referendum day and what Wilson seems to entail in reality. Not sure for now whether or not I agree with you that some is better than none in this instance. (There could be indirect implications for Wales -- my manor! - as well, over time).
> But I really do need more thinking time -- have family business to deal with from tomorrow and over the w/e.
> 
> Just for now though, a question : has there been any detailed polling in Scotland of reactions to Wilson and related details?


Wilson is going back a while! 

Just to be clear, in this instance I think none is better than some, not vice versa. (Specifically I oppose Smith and prefer the status quo). 

As for polling, ICM found 63% in Nov 14 wanted full devolution of tax and welfare (Smith falls far short of this), but as far as I know nobody has thought to ask whether people prefer Smith or status quo.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jan 8, 2015)

Bit of drift from the main topic perhaps, but I wonder if the tories will hang on to their sole Scottish constituency at the GE?  They're not that far ahead of Labour, but with Labour haemorrhaging votes to the SNP that'll probably help them - or could some insane swing to SNP oust them?  Is there anywhere else where a swing from Labour to SNP might let the vermin in?


----------



## Sue (Jan 8, 2015)

Dogsauce said:


> Bit of drift from the main topic perhaps, but I wonder if the tories will hang on to their sole Scottish constituency at the GE?  They're not that far ahead of Labour, but with Labour haemorrhaging votes to the SNP that'll probably help them - or could some insane swing to SNP oust them?  Is there anywhere else where a swing from Labour to SNP might let the vermin in?


 
Think they'll hang onto it.


----------



## JTG (Jan 9, 2015)

Dogsauce said:


> Bit of drift from the main topic perhaps, but I wonder if the tories will hang on to their sole Scottish constituency at the GE?  They're not that far ahead of Labour, but with Labour haemorrhaging votes to the SNP that'll probably help them - or could some insane swing to SNP oust them?  Is there anywhere else where a swing from Labour to SNP might let the vermin in?


East Renfrewshire used to be the safest Tory seat in Scotland until 1997. 2010 Labour majority was around 10,000 - one J Murphy elected


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 14, 2015)

Jim Murphy tells the BBC he's "never been a Unionist", and that we've never been at war with East Asia.

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-30810362


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 15, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Wilson is going back a while!
> 
> Just to be clear, in this instance I think none is better than some, not vice versa. (Specifically I oppose Smith and prefer the status quo).
> 
> As for polling, ICM found 63% in Nov 14 wanted full devolution of tax and welfare (Smith falls far short of this), but as far as I know nobody has thought to ask whether people prefer Smith or status quo.




danny la rouge  : Been away from this for a while ... just wanted to say that last week I screwed up the wording in my previous post  that you quoted. I grasped all along that you thought the status quo was preferable to/less bad than the Smith proposals. My next task is to try and get my head your specific reasons .... "more later" etc.

On polling though, I think some company/organisation in Scotland should do some specific surveys on the 'Smith or nothing' point ASAP.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 15, 2015)

Aye, William of Walworth,  it'd be interesting to see whether people are reading Smith and have spotted the drawbacks. I suspect they're just relying on the media etc, who say it's "more powers".


----------



## newbie (Jan 15, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> What Smith gives us is raised expectations that aren't met and, more importantly, _worse_ than no tools to effectively combat Westminster austerity



are you sure separation from Westminster would insulate you from austerity?  I mean, I don't know but the greater you disentangling your oil economy from the rest of us the more exposed you are. 


On Sept 18 the Brent crude spot price was 96.8, it's now 46.9.		 http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/xls/PET_PRI_SPT_S1_D.xls




> Carney told MPs on the Treasury select committee that falling oil prices would deal a blow to the Scottish economy but that the decline would be offset by the boost to the wider British economy due to the falling petrol prices. “It is net positive for the UK economy,” he said. “It is a negative shock to the Scottish economy, which is substantially mitigated … by the nature of the economic union that exists.”
> 
> He was asked about an estimate suggesting the price slide could wipe £6bn off Scottish GDP, but he said the bank had not calculated the hit to Scotland.


http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jan/14/oil-price-slump-could-threaten-north-sea-oilfields


I don't know if Carney is playing politics or simply doing his job as an economist but you may have had a very fortunate escape that none of independence, devo max and Smith have happened.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 15, 2015)

newbie said:


> are you sure separation from Westminster would insulate you from austerity?


What?

You may remember that in September last year there was a vote on this.  The majority voted No.  There is therefore no immediate prospect of Scotland pursuing "separation from Westminster".  Nor is the he passage of mine that you quote about "separation from Westminster", since that is not currently an option.

The post of mine that you quote is about the devolution proposals put forward by the Smith Commission. All of the parties who had representation in the Scottish Parliament were signed up to the Smith Commission procedure - Tories, Labour, SNP, Lib Dems Greens.  

By contrast, I don't support the Smith proposals.  My preference would be to retain the status quo, that is the current devolution set up and not go with the Smith proposals.  (I have stated this several times in the thread, in as many different ways as I can).

The question you pose therefore has no relevance to the point I was making ("Smith puts us at a disadvantage in comparison to the status quo").


----------



## newbie (Jan 15, 2015)

Suit yourself. You were in favour of separation not so long ago, and you're now arguing in favour of the status quo. That change of heart appears to be because the "tools to effectively combat Westminster austerity" are not on offer ie you'd take them if they were. 

Just as you'd apparently prefer Holyrood to have taxation powers that are 'up to the job', with control over the things you detailed that Smith reserves for Westminster: personal allowances, capital gains tax, inheritance tax, dividend tax?  Would you advocate taking those powers if they were on offer?


Or has the collapse of the oil price and with it much of the case for a specifically Scottish economy influenced your thinking at all?


----------



## heinous seamus (Jan 15, 2015)

I'm currently sitting across the aisle from Jim Murphy on a train. How should one react to this situation!


----------



## heinous seamus (Jan 15, 2015)

He did that weird thing with his crisps where you rip the packet right open and scoop them off the flat surface.


----------



## The Boy (Jan 15, 2015)

heinous seamus said:


> He did that weird thing with his crisps where you rip the packet right open and scoop them off the flat surface.



Should only be done in a social setting where the crisps are to be shared, imo.  He was obviously lonely .


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 15, 2015)

heinous seamus said:


> I'm currently sitting across the aisle from Jim Murphy on a train. How should one react to this situation!


kick him in the shin by accident


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 15, 2015)

heinous seamus said:


> He did that weird thing with his crisps where you rip the packet right open and scoop them off the flat surface.


thats an invite to help yourself to his crisps


----------



## gosub (Jan 15, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> thats an invite to help yourself to his crisps


Only reason for doing it.   Used to know someone who used to open one side, as opposed to an end.  V weird and not sure how he did it


----------



## heinous seamus (Jan 15, 2015)

He had his cronies with him but he didn't share. So much for socialist Jim 



The Boy said:


> Should only be done in a social setting where the crisps are to be shared, imo.  He was obviously lonely .


----------



## geminisnake (Jan 15, 2015)

heinous seamus said:


> I'm currently sitting across the aisle from Jim Murphy on a train. How should one react to this situation!



I'm fairly sure I would have had to have bought a hot beverage and accidentally spilt it in his direction. Or moved, complaining loudly about the people on trains now!


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 15, 2015)

newbie said:


> Suit yourself.


Who else would you propose I suit?



> You were in favour of separation not so long ago,


I still am. But the majority rejected it, and it is currently off the table. I hope it will be back on the table in the not too distant future, but for now we have to deal with the situation that faces us now. 



> and you're now arguing in favour of the status quo.


Not quite correct. I prefer the status quo to the Smith Commission proposals.  Do you think I should accept any package described as "further devolution", because something is better than nothing? A sort of constitutional blank cheque to accept any change simply because it's change, even if I think it's damaging change?

That's utter nonsense. It's the sort of thinking behind saying "you support PR? Well, we can't offer that, but we can offer AV; it's proven to be less proportional than FPTP, but at least it's change. And it's what's on offer."

Whoever goes for that line of "thinking" must buy all sorts of shit they don't want.



> That change of heart appears to be because the "tools to effectively combat Westminster austerity" are not on offer ie you'd take them if they were.


Em, yeah. What is your problem with that? I would like the tools to combat austerity, but we're not being offered them. (Incidentally I haven't had a "change of heart" - I still support independence).



> Just as you'd apparently prefer Holyrood to have taxation powers that are 'up to the job', with control over the things you detailed that Smith reserves for Westminster: personal allowances, capital gains tax, inheritance tax, dividend tax?  Would you advocate taking those powers if they were on offer?


Yes. Have you read my posts? 




> Or has the collapse of the oil price and with it much of the case for a specifically Scottish economy influenced your thinking at all?


No, the oil price has no bearing on my dislike for Smith. I think Smith is a fiscal trap that will spin Scotland into a downward spiral of cuts and austerity of far greater severity than will be the case in other parts of the UK.  I've said so quite plainly. 

The oil price will fluctuate whether Scotland is in the UK or not. The price of a barrel of crude has been lower in the last decade - it's currently around $45. In 2008 it dropped to $30.   The UK should have had an oil fund, it didn't - that's spilt milk.  Incidentally Scottish Labour scoffed at the Yes campaign plans for such a fund, but is now actually proposing one itself!

It amuses me that oil is an asset to the UK, but would have been a terrible burden to an independent Scotland. 

The reason for the current dip is not so much the production of fracked oil in the US, but OPEC's need to undercut that, to make it uneconomic. The market is flooded with comparatively cheap oil. There will therefore be job losses. But the price will rise again in the future. 

Why would that make me want to accept a fiscal trap set by the Smith Commission?

As for the case for a "specifically Scottish economy" having collapsed, that's nonsense; oil is  not all there is to the Scottish economy, inside or outside of the UK. What does your phrase a "specifically Scottish economy" mean anyway?

In conclusion, supporting independence does not necessitate supporting devolution (and indeed vice versa); they are two different things. And supporting devolution in principle does not necessitate supporting the specific proposals of the Smith Commission (or indeed the Draft Bill we expect shortly to emerge). 

Here's an analogy - I generally approve of ice cream, but I actively dislike mint ice cream. If you offered me an ice cream but it turned out to be mint, I'd decline the offer. Hope that helps you with the concept.


----------



## weepiper (Jan 15, 2015)

heinous seamus said:


> I'm currently sitting across the aisle from Jim Murphy on a train. How should one react to this situation!


Did you bam him up for the lols?


----------



## heinous seamus (Jan 15, 2015)

That wasn't me.


----------



## newbie (Jan 16, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Em, yeah. What is your problem with that


I think you're misunderstanding, I'm not arguing with you, or trying to persuade you for or against anything, just curious about how the changed circumstances of the oil price collapse are playing politically.  Because if the referendum had been timed just a few months later the economic arguments would have been very different. Wouldn't they?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2015)

newbie said:


> I think you're misunderstanding, I'm not arguing with you, or trying to persuade you for or against anything, just curious about how the changed circumstances of the oil price collapse are playing politically.  Because if the referendum had been timed just a few months later the economic arguments would have been very different. Wouldn't they?


You are, though, confusing devolution and independence.  The two things are different.  Devolution is ice cream.  Independence is a cup of coffee.  It does not follow from ordering coffee that I'd necessarily want ice cream if no coffee was available.  Nor that any flavour of ice cream would do.

As for the oil prices, that is irrelevant to devolution.  Whatever increased devolution we do or don't get, the oil prices will be whatever they are.


----------



## gosub (Jan 16, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> As for the oil prices, that is irrelevant to devolution.  Whatever increased devolution we do or don't get, the oil prices will be whatever they are.




But not irrelevant to Independence.


----------



## newbie (Jan 16, 2015)

Oh, I get the difference, just as I get that what's desirable on a warm evening after a good meal is not necessarily appropriate in the cold light of a new day.


----------



## Frankie Jack (Jan 16, 2015)

Edited. Bindun.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2015)

newbie said:


> Oh, I get the difference, just as I get that what's desirable on a warm evening after a good meal is not necessarily appropriate in the cold light of a new day.


well, why did you say I'd had a change of heart?  You said I backed independence, but now I was opposed to a specific devolution plan - why the change of heart?  It isn't a change of heart.  That's the kind of sloppy millimetre deep analysis that pisses everyone off up here.

As for oil prices and independence - I always knew oil prices fluctuated.  It's hard to miss. Crude was $30 a barrel in 2008.  It wouldn't have changed my vote.  If you're arguing Yes would have lost by a bigger margin, then you're going to need a better understanding of Scottish politics than you possess.


----------



## newbie (Jan 16, 2015)

you're very touchy.  It sure looked like a change of heart, to move from cheerleading independence to backing the status quo. But you've clarified that you're still for separation, the status quo is only preferable to the Smith proposals.  And for that I'm grateful.

You've also clarified that in your view the oil price fall would not change independence referendum voting, either by you personally or in the wider Scottish population.

To me it seems the difference between 2008 and now is that the fall then was caused by reduced demand, now by oversupply.  In 2008 resumption of demand to previous levels was a realistic aim, whereas now worldwide oversupply will only be resolved by attrition, and once closed an expensive facility like a North Sea field may never be reopened.  

So I'm surprised, but then I have no understanding of nationalism. I come to threads like this to try to figure out how much of the desire for self-determination, whether through independence or through some form of devolution, is hard headed materialism.   Given that the economic debate prior to the referendum was largely about the two key Scottish industries, oil and finance, and finance scaremongered that it would move to rUK, a large part of the pro-Yes economic case was that Scotland had a rosy future mostly reliant on oil.  

You're now suggesting that the oil price collapse doesn't much matter, in political terms.  Does that mean the appeal of independence is more romantic than material?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2015)

newbie said:


> You've also clarified that in your view the oil price fall would not change independence referendum voting, either by you personally or in the wider Scottish population.


No, I didn't. 



> To me it seems the difference between 2008 and now is that the fall then was caused by reduced demand, now by oversupply.  In 2008 resumption of demand to previous levels was a realistic aim, whereas now worldwide oversupply will only be resolved by attrition, and once closed an expensive facility like a North Sea field may never be reopened.


There are differences, of course. But the North Sea has be "close to closure" before. We'll have to see what happens. 



> So I'm surprised, but then I have no understanding of nationalism.


Are you under the impression that I'm a nationalist? No wonder you can't figure out my stance.



> You're now suggesting that the oil price collapse doesn't much matter, in political terms.  Does that mean the appeal of independence is more romantic than material?


No, I am suggesting that you don't understand the motivation. That despite several very big threads you are still so wide of the mark that you could be that cartoon of George Osborne in a hospital saying "it's like a foreign language - WHO GETS THE MONEY"

For avoidance of doubt, the appeal of independence for me is to create an historic moment when the neoliberal elite is on the back foot and power is in the hands of the masses. 

That, incidentally, cannot be created in a devolution programme, which is about political elites redividing the power they already have.


----------



## newbie (Jan 16, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> For avoidance of doubt, the appeal of independence for me is to create an historic moment when the neoliberal elite is on the back foot and power is in the hands of the masses.



for you, yes.  But are you really asking me to believe that's the case for the wider Scottish voting population, which is what I was talking about?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2015)

newbie said:


> for you, yes.  But are you really asking me to believe that's the case for the wider Scottish voting population, which is what I was talking about?


No, that's why I said "for me". I note you spotted that.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2015)

Also, I'm not "touchy", you prick; I'm cantankerous. And patronising. 

Get it right.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 16, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> For avoidance of doubt, the appeal of independence for me is to create an historic moment *when the neoliberal elite is on the back foot and power is in the hands of the masses*.



In real, actually existing politics, the chances of such a radical shift of power if people had voted 'yes' in September, would suely have been minimal? Or at least very limited?

Not least because Alex Salmond/the SNP are part of the elite themselves ... just as much as all the other parties.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> In real, actually existing politics, the chances of such a radical shift of power if people had voted 'yes' in September, would suely have been minimal? Or at least very limited?
> 
> Not least because Alex Salmond/the SNP are part of the elite themselves ... just as much as all the other parties.


The point is not about who would have formed the government but their capacity to resist demands made of them. 

The analogy I've used before is winning the welfare state after WWII. That wasn't granted by beneficent politicians, but won by a populace with  more clout than previously.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2015)

Will, I've said all this many times over the years.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 16, 2015)

I know, but I might? be a bit more sceptical about how effective popular demands/clout would have turned out in reality.

All this is now counterfactual speculation though, I accept.


----------



## gosub (Jan 16, 2015)

2008 flat line only lasted a couple of months.






while fair to make a comparison at mo, early days.


----------



## tim (Jan 16, 2015)

heinous seamus said:


> I'm currently sitting across the aisle from Jim Murphy on a train. How should one react to this situation!



Congratulate him on his ability to alienate  potential Labour votes not just in Scotland but also in London.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> I know, but I might? be a bit more sceptical about how effective popular demands/clout would have turned out in reality.
> 
> All this is now counterfactual speculation though, I accept.


You're entitled to be sceptical; it is, as you say, academic now anyway, and I feel disinclined this afternoon to reheat cauld kale.


----------



## The Boy (Jan 16, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> reheat cauld kale.



Three pages on the correct pronunciation of this by tea-time.


----------



## newbie (Jan 16, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> No, I am suggesting that you don't understand the motivation.



so enlighten me, I've already told you I don't get it.  You've told me what motivates you towards independence, and clarified that that's not really what motivated some 45% of the Scottish voters to vote Yes. They're not trying to get rid of neoliberalism, even if you are. So what is their motivation, if it's remained unshifted despite the economic case changing?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2015)

newbie said:


> so enlighten me, I've already told you I don't get it.  You've told me what motivates you towards independence, and clarified that that's not really what motivated some 45% of the Scottish voters to vote Yes. They're not trying to get rid of neoliberalism, even if you are. So what is their motivation, if it's remained unshifted despite the economic case changing?


Thread started 2012, fill your boots; it’s all there.

http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/will-you-vote-for-independence.287096/


In 2006, I said this:

http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/break-up-of-the-union.114631/#post-3848991


Something I said about devolution in 2007:

http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/scotland-it-gets-stuff-that-i-dont.157226/page-2#post-5253091


A thread about nationalism from 2013:

http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/nationalism.307604/

My records aren't as good as pogofish's, though.


----------



## newbie (Jan 16, 2015)

interesting.  Nothing's changed since 2006/7, nothing since you bickered with CR in 2013 about your rather different views of nationalism, no re-evaluation by Yes voters since it was all thrashed out before Sept 2014.  ok, tvm.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2015)

newbie said:


> interesting.  Nothing's changed since 2006/7, nothing since you bickered with CR in 2013 about your rather different views of nationalism, no re-evaluation by Yes voters since it was all thrashed out before Sept 2014.  ok, tvm.


Did you read ska invita's thread? There's lots of stuff in there about what people wanted from an independent Scotland. Lots.


----------



## newbie (Jan 16, 2015)

yes, all 207 pages.  I even contributed slightly to it.  It's the changes in peoples thinking since then I'm interested in.  What with changes in external circumstances and all.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2015)

newbie said:


> yes, all 207 pages.  I even contributed slightly to it.  It's the changes in peoples thinking since then I'm interested in.  What with changes in external circumstances and all.


Oh. Well, did you take into account that many of us were not trying to create a neoliberal economy? That oil, for example, is actually something of which many of us think we should be planning for the diminution? That Yes groups like Women for Independence, RIC and Commonweal are continuing to have packed meetings and new set up  projects. That there are real practical things to come out of the Yes movement, like the food solidarity campaign that donates food parcels to benefits sanctioned claimants? And so on?


----------



## newbie (Jan 16, 2015)

yes.  Is it now your position that that represents the views of 45% of the voters?

All I've been trying to understand is whether people _who are not you personally_ have shifted their positions since the oil price collapsed.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 16, 2015)

but you started out asking danny if he personally had shifted views and the whole 'change of heart' line


----------



## newbie (Jan 16, 2015)

The first post I made was a little ambiguous, I was thinking about Scotland but I can see it could be read as personal. In any event he subsequently clarified his own position, and the conversation moved on to the wider political question.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Jan 17, 2015)

newbie said:


> yes, all 207 pages.  I even contributed slightly to it.  It's the changes in peoples thinking since then I'm interested in.  What with changes in external circumstances and all.


That's stretching the definition of contribution


----------



## gosub (Jan 17, 2015)

newbie said:


> yes.  Is it now your position that that represents the views of 45% of the voters?
> 
> All I've been trying to understand is whether people _who are not you personally_ have shifted their positions since the oil price collapsed.



Was back up in Edinburgh for Hogmanay, tried to do same, talked to most vocal at time Yes mates, and it was all "Oil will go back up again" and "settlement wouldn't have been til 2016".


----------



## geminisnake (Jan 17, 2015)

newbie said:


> yes.  Is it now your position that that represents the views of 45% of the voters?
> 
> All I've been trying to understand is whether people _who are not you personally_ have shifted their positions since the oil price collapsed.



To me the oil is irrelevant. It's a bonus as danny says, it never was and never will be the B all and end all. I still want my country to be independent. I want people to come before profit. I want the sick, disabled and elderly to be cared for not shat on. I want nukes out of Scotland, free higher education, WAY less than 50% child poverty in Glasgow. 
I will not change my mind on this, if anything I feel this more strongly since September. I'm sick of being shat on by governments I didn't vote for, I'm beyond disgusted at the Labour party. My son's middle name is Keir after the late, great Mr Hardie. 

We've had oil for 40 years and what good has it actually done us?? Fucking NONE!! The A9 is a fucking joke,  none of our roads are decent tbh, except round Traquair, where they were lovely for some reason. We see boats from our living room window regularly sitting there, all the way down the coast from Aberdeen because the harbour is woefully inadequate.  Tbh I won't give a shit if the oil disappeared.
Sorry for swearing but I'm really fed up with this country's attitude to North Sea oil


----------



## pogofish (Jan 17, 2015)

newbie said:


> All I've been trying to understand is whether people _who are not you personally_ have shifted their positions since the oil price collapsed.



Why would they have?

Oil is far from the main motivator for independence for a great many people!


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 17, 2015)

pogofish said:


> Why would they have?
> 
> Oil is far from the main motivator for independence for a great many people!


Exactly. The press and the BBC were transfixed by the oil. But that was them.


----------



## Frankie Jack (Jan 17, 2015)

The oil issue is of little importance to many of those I communicate with on a daily basis. It's the principle of independence we wanted/want, and, as others have said, not towards a neoliberal government/economy in any way. 

Danny and Gemini have said it in terms that are representative of the many who wanted a Yes vote. 

There are of course many other diverse thoughts among independence supporters and those are still going forward as Danny pointed out through the many meetings and actions still ongoing. 

Polls are showing that Scottish Labour/Tory/Dem MP seats are under real threat because of the way the incumbent MPs have treated people. This is happening because people are still talking and campaigning, not getting back in their boxes like it was believed they would.


----------



## Frankie Jack (Jan 17, 2015)

Is that what newbie doesn't understand? Why we've not just shrugged and gone back to UK business as usual?


----------



## weepiper (Jan 17, 2015)




----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 18, 2015)

weepiper said:


>



I can't see that embedded tweet, Weeps, is it this:


----------



## weepiper (Jan 18, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> I can't see that embedded tweet, Weeps, is it this:



it wasn't the picture but the same basic info, yep


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 18, 2015)

Put together with recent polls like this one, which suggest a majority might now vote for independence, it makes for interesting reading.

(As was the poll, I can't remember which, that had a majority "remembering" they'd personally voted Yes).


----------



## newbie (Jan 18, 2015)

Frankie Jack said:


> Is that what newbie doesn't understand? Why we've not just shrugged and gone back to UK business as usual?


fundamentally, yes, thank you all.  It's a few months on from the vote and there's a changed economic climate, it's not a forgone conclusion that Yes opinion would have solidified. It seems to have done both here, which I sortof trust, and in opinion polls (um, somewhat more ambivalent about).  That's positive, I'd have thought.


----------



## geminisnake (Jan 18, 2015)

I think the referendum got a lot of people who were demoralised and thoroughly not interested in politics thinking 'well actually, maybe we could do this'. This is what I'm picking up from various groups and campaigns. Even some No voters were thoroughly disgusted at the lies and underhand tactics used by Better Together. I don't know if you saw the shut up and eat your cereal ad(think it's in the thread danny linked to) but that really pissed a LOT of people on both sides off.
A lot of people have 'woken up' again and realised there IS a better way and it's worth trying to bring it about. Westminster has become more and more corrupt/incompetent and right wing in the last 20ish years and more and more people all over the UK want no part of that.


----------



## Sue (Jan 18, 2015)

geminisnake said:


> I think the referendum got a lot of people who were demoralised and thoroughly not interested in politics thinking 'well actually, maybe we could do this'. This is what I'm picking up from various groups and campaigns. Even some No voters were thoroughly disgusted at the lies and underhand tactics used by Better Together. I don't know if you saw the shut up and eat your cereal ad(think it's in the thread danny linked to) but that really pissed a LOT of people on both sides off.
> A lot of people have 'woken up' again and realised there IS a better way and it's worth trying to bring it about. Westminster has become more and more corrupt/incompetent and right wing in the last 20ish years and more and more people all over the UK want no part of that.


 
Yep. And Ruth Davidson calling the result 'a victory' on the telly when it became clear that No had won. Was watching it with my sister who voted no and that utterly pissed her off. (Obviously she's not a Tory so it's likely most things RD could've said would've pissed her off but this claiming victory thing at a moment when some grace was called for was, she thought, completely inappropriate.)


----------



## newbie (Jan 18, 2015)

geminisnake said:


> I think the referendum got a lot of people who were demoralised and thoroughly not interested in politics thinking 'well actually, maybe we could do this'. This is what I'm picking up from various groups and campaigns. Even some No voters were thoroughly disgusted at the lies and underhand tactics used by Better Together. I don't know if you saw the shut up and eat your cereal ad(think it's in the thread danny linked to) but that really pissed a LOT of people on both sides off.
> A lot of people have 'woken up' again and realised there IS a better way and it's worth trying to bring it about. Westminster has become more and more corrupt/incompetent and right wing in the last 20ish years and more and more people all over the UK want no part of that.


I wish that were the case but on the face of it I'm pretty sure that there's more chance of achieving the sort of change you outlined above in your neck of the woods than across the whole UK.


----------



## Frankie Jack (Jan 18, 2015)

newbie said:


> I wish that were the case but on the face of it I'm pretty sure that there's more chance of achieving the sort of change you outlined above in your neck of the woods than across the whole UK.


That's exactly why we are carrying on trying to achieve change here rather than take on board the idea that if it ain't happening across the whole of the UK then it ain't happening and give up.

It's not that we don't want change across the board, it's knowing that we can achieve change here and will continue to strive for it.

I think most of the questioning and chin rubbing is a lack of awareness that just because we are seen as still part of the UK post indyref it doesn't mean that we have to put up with the Westminster policies that are inflicting serious damage on the lives of many.

We WANT do to everything we can stop, mitigate or change them in Scotland.

Why shouldn't we.


----------



## geminisnake (Jan 18, 2015)

weepiper said:


> Did you bam him up for the lols?



It was the Independence Live man 

http://new.livestream.com/IndependenceLive/events/3731182


----------



## treelover (Jan 18, 2015)

Can I ask if A4E, Serco and all the other 'training' groups get contracts in Scotland, and would this happen still if Scotland went indie?

I think the Wise Group has contracts.


----------



## newbie (Jan 18, 2015)

Frankie Jack said:


> I think most of the questioning and chin rubbing is a lack of awareness that just because we are seen as still part of the UK post indyref it doesn't mean that we have to put up with the Westminster policies that are inflicting serious damage on the lives of many.
> 
> We WANT do to everything we can stop, mitigate or change them in Scotland.
> 
> Why shouldn't we.



no reason 

I dunno about questions from anyone else but from me it's down to you having something going on up there that I only know about from afar.  It's interesting.


----------



## Frankie Jack (Jan 18, 2015)

treelover said:


> Can I ask if A4E, Serco and all the other 'training' groups get contracts in Scotland, and would this happen still if Scotland went indie?



Mostly Working Links and Ingeus share the spoils in Scotland.

Scot Gov and the population would love control of Welfare/DWP. 

I think the possibility of a Yes vote really put the shitters up IDS. 

Probably paying for his 'wee hairy' by having this thrust on us. 


*More Sanctions On The Way For Claimants With A Mental Health Condition In Scotland*


----------



## Frankie Jack (Jan 18, 2015)

newbie said:


> no reason
> 
> I dunno about questions from anyone else but from me it's down to you having something going on up there that I only know about from afar.  It's interesting.


I realise much of the info about happenings in Scotland you may hear/read come from the MSM that spin us all to look like mad, ranty, cybernat, SNP members and worse.

We're really not. Honest. 

Edit: Well I can be sometimes


----------



## Frankie Jack (Jan 18, 2015)

Indyref gave us the chance to connect with people from all areas of Scotland to share info and details of activism. Posty Indy we are still communicating and sharing info. 

Things like, which candidates are standing where, potential candidates for the GE and what their background is   

Info that breaks down the waffle from politicians trying to either gain support or target.

Being a small country with limited seats we can see who is who from the borders to the Isles. Unlike over the border where people in the Lake District will perhaps have no clue who is MP for a constituency on the South coast.


----------



## newbie (Jan 18, 2015)

Frankie Jack said:


> Being a small country with limited seats we can see who is who from the borders to the Isles. Unlike over the border where people in the Lake District will perhaps have no clue who is MP for a constituency on the South coast.



That adds to the interest- London is a bit bigger than Scotland in population but much smaller in area.  Maybe we can learn something....


----------



## Sue (Jan 22, 2015)

So he's confirmed he's standing for Westminster again in May. How's this going to pan out? Is he going to do the double (something he previously wasn't keen on) or is there going to be a by election in East Renfrewshire in 2016?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-30934929


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 22, 2015)

Whatever it is he does, the media will be sure to tell us how clever it was., and how it was exactly the right thing to do. And then wipe their chins.


----------



## Sue (Jan 22, 2015)

Yep. Keeping his options open just in case or 'I can do both because it's the Scottish Parliament and being an MSP/First Minister'll be a piece of piss because I'm dead good and used to a *proper* parliament.'

(I could be projecting given I can't stand the man but...)


----------



## weepiper (Jan 22, 2015)

I will laugh if he loses his seat. LAUGH.


----------



## Sue (Jan 22, 2015)

weepiper said:


> I will laugh if he loses his seat. LAUGH.


 
I don't think you'd be laughing alone...


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 22, 2015)

weepiper said:


> I will laugh if he loses his seat. LAUGH.


I'm sniggering just thinking about it.   Make or break for him politically, surely.   Not losing his seat but a bad result would see him getting thrown overboard by his bosses, most likely.


----------



## The Boy (Jan 22, 2015)

weepiper said:


> I will laugh if he loses his seat. LAUGH.


As funny as that would be, I can't see it.


----------



## weepiper (Jan 22, 2015)

The Boy said:


> As funny as that would be, I can't see it.


Yeah I know, but don't harsh my vibe, man.


----------



## geminisnake (Jan 22, 2015)

The Boy said:


> As funny as that would be, I can't see it.



But we have hope over fear  And until May I will hope


----------



## 19sixtysix (Jan 23, 2015)

Need someone notable and left wing to put up against him. Maybe Dennis Canavan could be persuaded to stand.


----------



## The Boy (Jan 23, 2015)

weepiper said:


> Yeah I know, but don't harsh my vibe, man.



Sorry, bruh


----------



## 19sixtysix (Jan 23, 2015)

Murphy's campaign might be quite hard to get over the "I only want to sit in this job till I get a seat as an MSP now give us yer votes muppets" In fact I can see this poster all over east refrewshire.


----------



## xslavearcx (Jan 23, 2015)

19sixtysix said:


> Need someone notable and left wing to put up against him. Maybe Dennis Canavan could be persuaded to stand.



Don't think any left wing candidate would get much votes in East Renfrewshire sadly - remember that it took jim Murphy the quintessence of new labour to transition that seat from Tory to labour...


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 23, 2015)

Scottish Labour didn't so much as shoot themselves in the foot when they elected Murphy as leader. They took out an Uzi, emptied the clip and shot their foot into a bloody stump.


----------



## Celyn (Jan 24, 2015)

xslavearcx said:


> Don't think any left wing candidate would get much votes in East Renfrewshire sadly - remember that it took jim Murphy the quintessence of new labour to transition that seat from Tory to labour...



Also, wasn't the Tory M.P.for Eastwood, Allan (or poss.Alan) Stewart turning into a bit of an embarrassment, he and his not-old enough son waving shotguns around 'cos they disagreed with the M77 protest at Pollok?  Some sort of "breakdown" then retired, and after that Kim Murphy won the seat for "Labour".


----------



## Celyn (Jan 24, 2015)

Jim, not Kim, and pickaxe + air pistols rather than shotgun.


----------



## xslavearcx (Jan 24, 2015)

Forgot about that but yes I think that was a pretty significant contributing factor...


----------



## treelover (Feb 3, 2015)

> Jim Murphy and Gordon Brown will on Monday pledge that a Labour government would radically extend Scotland’s powers over welfare, following speculation that Brown is to take a prominent role in his party’s general election campaign in the hope of repeating the success of his last-minute intervention in the independence referendum.
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/feb/02/labour-scotland-jim-murphy-gordon-brown




Has Murphy had a damascene conversion or is it he will just will do anything to get into power?, this man as a New Labour Employment Secretary was one of the key architects of the Employment Support Allowance(ESA) and the abolishment of Incapacity Benefit and now he is claiming that benefits in Scotland are too low and in some cases will need to be topped up and a more benign regime put in place.


----------



## gosub (Feb 3, 2015)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/gen...wn-Higher-Scottish-benefits-are-Vow-Plus.html


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 3, 2015)

treelover said:


> Has Murphy had a damascene conversion or is it he will just will do anything to get into power?, this man as a New Labour Employment Secretary was one of the key architects of the Employment Support Allowance(ESA) and the abolishment of Incapacity Benefit and now he is claiming that benefits in Scotland are too low and in some cases will need to be topped up and a more benign regime put in place.


the second one. The futures not looking great for slab and he's desperately trying to sell himself as a non-blairite old labour man.


----------



## xslavearcx (Feb 10, 2015)

More substance less blairite rebranding excercises by Jim Murphy 

http://www.heraldscotland.com/mobil...ry-to-turn-labour-into-party-of-yes.117966622


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 20, 2015)

Labour's naked class politics: _we're a party of the wealthy_.

"Middle-class voters in some of Scotland’s most prosperous constituencies could rescue Ed Miliband and improve his chances of making it to Downing Street, according to _*unpublished doorstep canvassing*_ revealed to The Independent."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...er-ed-miliband-a-route-to-no-10-10057853.html


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 20, 2015)

jim murphy in still a cunt shocker


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 20, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> jim murphy in still a cunt shocker


How are you parsing that sentence?


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 22, 2015)

Independent in  highly dubious, statistically iffy, spin recycling, shite reporting shocker?

The standard of both poll reporting and political reporting (for all over the UK I mean, not just about Scotland) is truly horrendous in terms of wildly over-simplifying things. So what else is new etc.

For Scotland alone, some of the spin overinflates the SNP's strength, other reports claim too much for Labour. I suggest cautious scepticism about all claims.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 22, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> Independent in  highly dubious, statistically iffy, spin recycling, shite reporting shocker?
> 
> The standard of both poll reporting and political reporting (for all over the UK I mean, not just about Scotland) is truly horrendous in terms of wildly over-simplifying things. So what else is new etc.
> 
> For Scotland alone, some of the spin overinflates the SNP's strength, other reports claim too much for Labour. I suggest cautious scepticism about all claims.


Yeah, that's part of the story: the Independent at best swallowing Labour's comfort polling whole, at worst swallowing a made up lie. 

But the more striking part is Labour openly positioning itself as a party of the wealthy middle class.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 22, 2015)

weepiper said:


> I will laugh if he loses his seat. LAUGH.


jelly and ice cream for the day, having a party when murphy falls in the shit


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 22, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> How are you parsing that sentence?


it's not a sentence: no verb. i thought someone of your pedant skils would have seen that.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 22, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> it's not a sentence: no verb. i thought someone of your pedant skils would have seen that.


I did, but in the spirit of no-regrets, left it. 

In the spirit of rueing-the-day, I now regret my decision.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 23, 2015)

_Want Labour?  Vote Tory.
_
Or something.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 23, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> I did, but in the spirit of no-regrets, left it.
> 
> _In the spirit of rueing-the-day_, I now regret my decision.


or rouging the day


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 23, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> or rouging the day


I'm red-faced enough at the lapse without make-up.


----------



## Dogsauce (Feb 23, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> _Want Labour?  Vote Tory.
> _
> Or something.



I was just looking for the 'why labour is scum' thread to post that it. FFS.

(a friend on fb is using this to try and encourage people to vote green rather than labour)


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 26, 2015)

This is an interesting analysis in the Spectator:

"The Scottish Tories see matters more clearly. In Edinburgh and Glasgow and Aberdeen, cities where the SNP is challenging Labour, there is considerable anecdotal evidence supporting the suspicion that many Tories are prepared to vote Labour, the better to thwart the nationalist advance. They would rather risk a Labour government than an SNP landslide that might put Cameron back in Downing Street. "

http://www.spectator.co.uk/features...at-westminster-could-mean-the-end-of-britain/

Wasn't sure which thread to put it on .


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 27, 2015)

If the only people swinging towards Labour in Scotland are Tories, that's hardly going to be enough to save them.

If Scottish Labour have any competence or organisational nous at all, they won't be relying solely (or even much at all) on that. Surely?


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 27, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> If Scottish Labour have any competence or organisational nous at all


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 27, 2015)

That "  " smiley has just a tiny smidgin of complacency about it maybe? 

On top of all the very real evidence for Labour's uselessness in Scotland, naturally


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 27, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> That "  " smiley has just a tiny smidgin of complacency about it maybe?


No, I think Labour will do better than expected in Scotland. 

Also, suggesting I had "complacency" about it would suggest that I'm an SNP supporter; I'm not. 

However, I don't think Labour's performance will be related their efforts. They are imploding.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 27, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> No, I think Labour will do better than expected in Scotland.
> 
> Also, suggesting I had "complacency" about it would suggest that I'm an SNP supporter; I'm not.
> 
> However, I don't think Labour's performance will be related their efforts. They are imploding.


Do you mean the party is imploding danny? Rather than the vote?


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 27, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> Do you mean the party is imploding danny? Rather than the vote?


Yes, the organisation. Its support is unrelated to the activities of the party. I think the vote will rally regardless of what those headless chickens get up to. 

Actually a better metaphor would be a chickenless head.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 27, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Yes, the organisation. Its support is unrelated to the activities of the party. I think the vote will rally regardless of what those headless chickens get up to.
> 
> Actually a better metaphor would be a chickenless head.


The SNP think they're the body.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 27, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Yes, the organisation. Its support is unrelated to the activities of the party. I think the vote will rally regardless of what those headless chickens get up to.
> 
> Actually a better metaphor would be a chickenless head.


I've got an idea the vote will hold up - but a) the polls don't support it b) posters on here far closer to ground say no, it's over - so i'm reduced to just looking at what labour vote has done historically - such as increasing vote last time around.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 27, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> The SNP think they're the body.


They do. And you can see the suppressed triumphalism in their faces. "Must. Not. Display. Hubris".


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 27, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> I'vegot an idea the vote will hols up - but a) the polls don't support it b) posters on here going far closer to ground say no, it's over - so i'm reduced to just looking at what labour vote has done historically - such as increasing vote last time around.


I don't think it'll hold up a great deal. I think there will be significant losses. Losses that would be regarded as shocking, serious and game changing had it not been for the polls. But in the light of the polls, it will be seen as a victory and a triumph for Murphy's decisive leadership. It'll be nothing of the sort - it'll be habitual Labour voters turning out for Labour after all. Just not like previous Westminster elections.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 27, 2015)

That said, I hope I'm wrong. I hope they're wiped out as badly as the polls say.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 6, 2015)

Amusing article about Labour bickering over who deserves to be saved. 

http://m.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-labour-in-civil-war-over-strategy-1-3710887


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 6, 2015)

This is where we are: the Labour Party talking about abandoning the West of Scotland as a lost cause. 

It's a new world. That's just stunningly new territory, politically.


----------



## weepiper (Mar 6, 2015)

Indyref really has changed everything.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 6, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> This is where we are: the Labour Party talking about abandoning the West of Scotland as a lost cause.
> 
> It's a new world. That's just stunningly new territory, politically.


Humza Yousaf's best line on last night's QT was when he corrected Kezia Dugdale's assertion that the Scottish electorate had turned their back on the Labour party..he corrected her and said it was the other way round.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 6, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Humza Yousaf's best line on last night's QT was when he corrected Kezia Dugdale's assertion that the Scottish electorate had turned their back on the Labour party..he corrected her and said it was the other way round.


I didn't see QT (having been in the audience I know how it's done), but he knows how to deliver a performance.


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 6, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> (having been in the audience I know how it's done).



Me too, instead of being chaired by David Dimbleby, Derren Brown or Dynamo would seem more appropriate!


----------



## weepiper (Mar 6, 2015)

Article here about my seat, which was a Labour hold last time (but only just), SNP far in the distance in fourth place with only 7.7%

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...res-for-a-dogfight-in-edinburgh-10081136.html



> the sitting Labour MP, is now in a straight dogfight with the SNP.



In Edinburgh South! That seems almost impossible. The independence vote went 65% No here.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 6, 2015)

weepiper said:


> Article here about my seat, which was a Labour gain from the Libs last time (but only just), SNP far in the distance in fourth place
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...res-for-a-dogfight-in-edinburgh-10081136.html
> 
> ...


Yup. This is the sort of thing that's made me reevaluate my predictions for May. 

I had thought that the SNP results were being over stated. But you can't ignore the evidence.


----------



## Tankus (Mar 6, 2015)

Hopefully the complacents in labours taffia will get a wake up kick too


----------



## nino_savatte (Mar 6, 2015)

According to the Morning Star, Murphy made McTernan his chief of staff back in January. 


> THIS January Jim Murphy, Labour’s leader in Scotland, made John McTernan into his chief of staff.
> 
> I saw McTernan last September at the Tory conference, offering advice to the Conservatives and praise to Margaret Thatcher.
> 
> ...



Is anyone still thinking of voting SLAB in the General Election?


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 6, 2015)

I also read that a former local councillor has got the nomination for Midlothian, Kenny Young.
What, labour selecting a local as a candidate, they usually parachute one of their chums in! Maybe trying to win the locals over?


----------



## Frankie Jack (Mar 6, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> According to the Morning Star, Murphy made McTernan his chief of staff back in January.
> 
> 
> Is anyone still thinking of voting SLAB in the General Election?



Nope.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 6, 2015)

its inevitable really, slabour COULD have tried to outflank the SNP by me-tooing to soc\dec type stuff- but how can they when tied to the party whole that just won't shift an inch on issues that affect the w\c electorate

doomed! doomed I tell ye!


----------



## Ungrateful (Mar 6, 2015)

Aye, if Jim Murphy wasn't such an egotistical careerist, I'd be wondering if he wasn't deliberately trying to wreck Labour's chances in the elections. Instead his incompetence might in the long-run help the last few remaining leftists in Labour.

When Foot was fighting Thatcher, the right-wing sections of the Labour Party deliberately kept a low profile so that the eventual defeat could not be blamed on them, and it would be the socialists who were discredited. This time, if Ed fails, then Jim's making sure that the right-wing can receive its share of the blame.


----------



## weepiper (Mar 7, 2015)

Master of understatement:


----------



## FiFi (Mar 7, 2015)

weepiper said:


> Master of understatement:



The words "No" "shit" and Sherlock" spring to mind!


----------



## weepiper (Mar 7, 2015)

Some of the stuff coming out of todays SLab conference really has you with your head in your hands. Take this little gem from David Hamilton where he refers to the First Minister of Scotland as a 'wee lassie wi a tin helmet on' 



They can't even see what's coming.


----------



## FiFi (Mar 7, 2015)

weepiper said:


> Some of the stuff coming out of todays SLab conference really has you with your head in your hands. Take this little gem from David Hamilton where he refers to the First Minister of Scotland as a 'wee lassie wi a tin helmet on'
> 
> 
> 
> They can't even see what's coming.



Or they can and either think they can tough it out or pick up a few tribal votes from people who admire their loyalty. Either way they're barking mad!


----------



## xslavearcx (Mar 7, 2015)

Love the pure feigned glesga patter tone by that labour dude - jobs fur the Boyeees n that


----------



## Celyn (Mar 7, 2015)

weepiper said:


> Master of understatement:




That's lovely!    	In other news:

- Loch Lomond is a bit damp

- centipedes have several legs

- Usain Bold can run quite fast

I am just in from being bashed around by a scary big wind and I really could do with a laugh. Ooh, thank you weepiper, and thank you, Jim Murphy.

Those last four words I have never uttered before, and it's not likely I will do so again.


----------



## Celyn (Mar 7, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> This is where we are: the Labour Party talking about abandoning the West of Scotland as a lost cause...



Wow.  That's very ... something.  Interesting times. Well, they've taken it for granted for long enough.

I suppose Labour will hold onto some seats in Lanarkshire and Glasgow, though. Esp. Glasgow North-East.


----------



## Celyn (Mar 7, 2015)

weepiper said:


> ...David Hamilton where he refers to the First Minister of Scotland as a 'wee lassie wi a tin helmet on'
> 
> 
> 
> They can't even see what's coming.




"Wee lassie", is it?  What a lovely, democratic, not-sexist-at-all thing to say.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 7, 2015)

Celyn said:


> "Wee lassie", is it?  What a lovely, democratic, not-sexist-at-all thing to say.


Sturgeon won't be worried about shite like that...she's had a massive boost from Dave today...all that crap about telling Miliband not to do a deal with the nationalists...it's all still focused on Salmond; looks like they've concluded that Sturgeon does not repel voters at all.



> Speaking at an event to mark two months until polling day, Mr Cameron said: "If you thought the worst outcome in this election is a Labour government led by Ed Miliband, think again.
> 
> "You could end up with a Labour government led by Ed Miliband, *propped up by Alex Salmond and the Scottish National Party.*



I think she presents the tories with a problem.

Whilst on the subject of Dave's anti-SNP ranting, this took my eye..


----------



## co-op (Mar 7, 2015)

Tankus said:


> Hopefully the complacents in labours taffia will get a wake up kick too





Taffia was in Wales. You mean the Murphya.


----------



## Tankus (Mar 7, 2015)

Errr......  Exactly.......not the murphia ......the dead sheep vote also taken for granted in the other vassal state


----------



## Celyn (Mar 8, 2015)

And, today, just how much would Jim Murphy agree with Mary Barbour?


----------



## Sue (Mar 8, 2015)

xslavearcx said:


> Love the pure feigned glesga patter tone by that labour dude - jobs fur the Boyeees n that



And someone in Scottish Labour talking about 'jobs for the boys'...


----------



## Sue (Mar 8, 2015)

Was talking to a friend about this last night. He's not very clued up on Scottish politics and said that Jim Murphy seemed pretty good when he was interviewed and didn't get my Murphy hate. Don't worry, thread, had a bit of a rant and said friend now gets it...  (And no doubt wishes he hadn't asked.)


----------



## Sue (Mar 8, 2015)

(He's also now familiar with the use of 'heid buttons up the back'.)


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 8, 2015)

Jim Murphy. So bad it's worth saying twice.


----------



## xslavearcx (Mar 8, 2015)

I'm pretty much liking any post that articulates in any way Jim murphys wank-ness


----------



## Sue (Mar 8, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Jim Murphy. So bad it's worth saying twice.


It's Sunday morning and I'm hungover. Believe me, once is more than enough. 

Still, interesting to see that the uninitiated think Murphy comes across as reasonable, slick and *left wing*.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 8, 2015)

Sue said:


> It's Sunday morning and I'm hungover. Believe me, once is more than enough.
> 
> Still, interesting to see that the uninitiated think Murphy comes across as reasonable, slick and *left wing*.


I think Murphy hate probably isn't widely shared by non politicos. He probably wasn't known until recently by most. And he's done his best- aided by the media, who are presenting him as The Messiah - to reinvent himself. The reinvention is probably all the general public know.


----------



## Sue (Mar 8, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> I think Murphy hate probably isn't widely shared by non politicos. He probably wasn't known until recently by most. And he's done his best- aided by the media, who are presenting him as The Messiah - to reinvent himself. The reinvention is probably all the general public know.


This exactly. My friend admitted he'd only heard of him very recently and, not knowing any of the granny-selling back story, thought he came across v well.


----------



## murphy1970 (Mar 8, 2015)

The cybernats on twitter are having a field day with Murphy. He's given them so many hostages to fortune over the years that there is plenty of material to work with.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 13, 2015)

I remember when glue sniffing was all the rage. And I can remember whether I tried it or not.


----------



## treelover (Mar 13, 2015)

weepiper said:


> Some of the stuff coming out of todays SLab conference really has you with your head in your hands. Take this little gem from David Hamilton where he refers to the First Minister of Scotland as a 'wee lassie wi a tin helmet on'
> 
> 
> 
> They can't even see what's coming.





Shocking, a death wish?


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 24, 2015)




----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 24, 2015)

good to see jim destroying a once proud party


----------



## Sue (Mar 24, 2015)

Tbf, not sure he can take all the credit for that...


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 24, 2015)

Sue said:


> Tbf, not sure he can take all the credit for that...


oh, sure he's had some help. but he's merrily banging in the nails on that coffin lid.


----------



## Sue (Mar 24, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> oh, sure he's had some help. but he's merrily banging in the nails on that coffin lid.


I'd post a Tigerlilies youtube about now if I wasn't on my phone.


----------



## JTG (Mar 24, 2015)

I enjoyed Miliband's statement yesterday about the SNP and the Tories being in cahoots. Reassuringly barking.


----------



## 19sixtysix (Mar 25, 2015)

JTG said:


> I enjoyed Miliband's statement yesterday about the SNP and the Tories being in cahoots. Reassuringly barking.



It reminded me of the months of negativity from the no campaign which was Labour in cahoots with the Tories. Oh wait!


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 25, 2015)

Tories are vermin, but I have to admit them shouting out "SNP gain" every time a Scottish Labour MP gets up to speak is amusing.


----------



## JTG (Mar 25, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Tories are vermin, but I have to admit them shouting out "SNP gain" every time a Scottish Labour MP gets up to speak is amusing.


Excellent trolling


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 27, 2015)




----------



## brogdale (Mar 27, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


>



Quality.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 28, 2015)

"Jim Murphy, the Labour party leader in Scotland, owns a property bought with help from the taxpayer just two miles from the Palace of Westminster, which he let out. Over two years from 2012/13 he claimed £39,372 to rent another London flat for himself."

http://www.channel4.com/news/mps-expenses-46-claim-in-london-despite-owning-a-property


----------



## weepiper (Apr 11, 2015)




----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 11, 2015)

weepiper said:


>


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 11, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


>



the first time i met jim murphy he was president of nus scotland and he came to an nus london regional meeting - where we were expecting a member of the nus national executive - effectively to canvass support for the forthcoming nus conference at which he was elected president.


----------



## treelover (Apr 12, 2015)




----------



## weepiper (Apr 12, 2015)

graffitti in Partick


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 13, 2015)

Murphy hung out by Labour. (Scottish labour seats written off?)


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 13, 2015)

Murphy taking quite a bit of flak on this, and there was already speculation as to whether he'd still be leader for next year's Holyrood elections.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 14, 2015)

So, Murphy's strategy was to say that a) Labour wasn't an austerity cuts party and b) even if it was, Scotland would be treated different.

Miliband, Balls and Ummuna say a) yes it is, and b) no it wouldn't.

So, what the Labour leadership has decided is that the press that Murphy's pronouncements have been getting in the South are jeopardising Labour's chances there, and that it is best just to cut their losses in Scotland.  Murphy can be publicly humiliated, and Scottish Labour seats can be written off.

This is huge.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 14, 2015)




----------



## weepiper (Apr 14, 2015)

The _leader of the Scottish Labour Party_ needed a_ police escort_ to visit a steelworks in _Fife_ today.

http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/po...ce-during-jim-murphy-s-visit-to-fife-1.863769

I'm not sure anyone outside of Scotland is really going to get the significance of that.


----------



## starfish (Apr 14, 2015)

I don't think any of this is going to stop my mum from voting for him. My dad maybe.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 15, 2015)

Captions?


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 15, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Captions?


Boy puts cap on cunt.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 15, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Boy puts cap on cunt.


I was going to go for the more Dr Seuss themed '_the twat in the hat_'...but I think you've just won the competition.


----------



## xslavearcx (Apr 17, 2015)

Not looking good for Jim Murphy and Douglas Alexander holding onto their constituencies 

http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides...tituency-seat-according-to-new-ashcroft-poll/


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 17, 2015)

xslavearcx said:


> Not looking good for Jim Murphy and Douglas Alexander holding onto their constituencies
> 
> http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides...tituency-seat-according-to-new-ashcroft-poll/


grand


----------



## JTG (Apr 17, 2015)

45% - a losing total in a referendum but a handsome winning one under FPTP.

Alanis Morrisette could write a song about that


----------



## weepiper (Apr 17, 2015)

You may like these Glaswegian responses to being offered a copy of the Scottish Labour manifesto

https://www.facebook.com/Channel4News/videos/10152868226436939/


----------



## xslavearcx (Apr 17, 2015)

Crossed a road twice this week to avoid labour peeps canvassing ...


----------



## Tankus (Apr 17, 2015)

Not seen one yet ...or any posters


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Apr 17, 2015)

I have to say The National is just as much a laughable propaganda rag as any other paper during election time.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 17, 2015)

weepiper said:


> The _leader of the Scottish Labour Party_ needed a_ police escort_ to visit a steelworks in _Fife_ today.
> 
> http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/po...ce-during-jim-murphy-s-visit-to-fife-1.863769
> 
> I'm not sure anyone outside of Scotland is really going to get the significance of that.




I live near Port Talbot, and I *exactly* get your post.

I might gently suggest that some people who hate Labour to that level of Jim Murphy needing police protection in Scotland, have things slightly less in perspective than people in these parts of South Wales.

Who remember Thatcher better.


----------



## weepiper (Apr 17, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> I live near Port Talbot, and I *exactly* get your post.
> 
> I might gently suggest that some people who hate Labour to that level of Jim Murphy needing police protection in Scotland, have things slightly less in perspective than people in these parts of South Wales.
> 
> Who remember Thatcher better.


With respect, William, fuck off.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 17, 2015)

Where's the respect there, exactly?


----------



## weepiper (Apr 17, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> Where's the respect there, exactly?


Well spotted.

Really, though, what response do you expect to your ill-informed holier-than-thou nonsense? You think we don't hate the Tories up here too?


----------



## JTG (Apr 17, 2015)

I think maybe they're of the opinion that the Labour Party of 2015 is of slightly more relevance now than the political battlegrounds of the 1980s.

Btw, the Labour top brass back then were disgusting sell outs as well


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 17, 2015)

Fair enough point JTG, and I'll admit I don't know nearly enough about details of Scottish politics anyway.

I just fail to see why Labour are hated in Scotland to that *extreme* extent. Trying to understand it, but blatantly failing.


----------



## JTG (Apr 17, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> Fair enough point JTG, and I'll admit I don't know nearly enough about details of Scottish politics anyway.
> 
> I just fail to see why Labour are hated in Scotland to that *extreme* extent. Trying to understand it, but blatantly failing.


They're in bed with Tories. They actually want people to vote tactically for them to stop the SNP. It also seems to me that a party as rotten as Glasgow Labour (for example) are pretty easily deserted once a viable and less corrupt alternative appears


----------



## weepiper (Apr 17, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> Fair enough point JTG, and I'll admit I don't know nearly enough about details of Scottish politics anyway.
> 
> I just fail to see why Labour are hated in Scotland to that *extreme* extent. Trying to understand it, but blatantly failing.


Because we loved them, we were faithful to them and stuck by them through thick and thin, and they repaid us for that by going behind our backs and getting in bed with our worst enemy. Both by siding with the Tories during the indyref and by a number of Parliamentary votes in which they've voted with the Tories recently. There's more, but that's behind a lot of it for many people.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 17, 2015)

Do Scottish Labour *really* like the Tories to that extent though? 

Are they really *that* indistinguishable from them?? 

Even Nicola Sturgeon didn't quite claim that in the debate on Thursday.

I'm _sort of_ seeing your point, but not getting the detail properly.


----------



## redsquirrel (Apr 17, 2015)

There's also the point that voting SNP doesn't help the Tories in any way, as those seats were never going to be blue.

Either it's irrelevant (Lab/SNP marginals) or it actually hurts the Tories (SNP/LD marginals) by taking seats from their most likely coalition partner.

There was a good article on the Guardian making this point but I can' find it now, however, this one covers some of the same ground. So Scottish voters can show their anger at Labour and still block any Tory gov, they _can_ have their cake and eat it.



> This is because most seats the SNP doesn’t gain would stay with Labour, and most of the ones the Lib Dems lose in the South West battlegrounds would be Tory gains - meaning that when it comes to the two blocs (Labour+SNP vs Conservative+Lib Dem) most likely to vote in the next government there is no net impact in the race to 326 seats.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Apr 17, 2015)

I dunno - don't let's forget '79 - I'm not convinced the SNP wouldn't enable a Tory government if they thought it would help their ultimate cause.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 17, 2015)

redsquirrel said:


> There's also the point that voting SNP *doesn't help the Tories in any way*.



It may well do, South of the border.


----------



## treelover (Apr 17, 2015)

weepiper said:


> The _leader of the Scottish Labour Party_ needed a_ police escort_ to visit a steelworks in _Fife_ today.
> 
> http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/po...ce-during-jim-murphy-s-visit-to-fife-1.863769
> 
> I'm not sure anyone outside of Scotland is really going to get the significance of that.



it was two cops in a marked car, maybe not that significant, Duncan Smith has armed guards whose machine guns point outwards often at disabled people.


----------



## weepiper (Apr 17, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> It may well do, South of the border.


We've tried voting Labour as a country several times and we still got Tories. We want something different now.


----------



## weepiper (Apr 17, 2015)

treelover said:


> it was two cops in a marked car, maybe not that significant, Duncan Smith has armed guards whose machine guns point outwards often at disabled people.


It is deeply and culturally significant. An earthquake.


----------



## redsquirrel (Apr 17, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> It may well do, South of the border.


How? Scottish voters can't affect that number of seats Lab/Con will get in E&W. 

The only way that it could help the Cons is that they can use "the largest share of the vote should be gov" argument. However, as Danny has pointed out (on either this or another thread) seeing as though Labour have also been making that same stupid argument if it backfires on them they've only got themselves to blame.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 17, 2015)

weepiper said:


> We've tried voting Labour as a country several times and we still got Tories. We want something different now.



You may still get Tories, UK wide. And so might we further South.


----------



## weepiper (Apr 17, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> You may still get Tories, UK wide. And so might we further South.


If you don't want Tories, then get out there and do something about politics in your own back yard and stop blaming us for English voters' choices.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 17, 2015)

redsquirrel said:


> How? Scottish voters can't affect that number of seats Lab/Con will get in E&W.
> 
> The only way that it could help the Cons is that they can use "the largest share of the vote should be gov" argument. However, as Danny has pointed out (on either this or another thread) seeing as though Labour have also been making that same stupid argument if it backfires on them they've only got themselves to blame.




Fair dos, I did see danny's points elsewhere on that. Still trying to get my head round that one.

But if Labour lose most of their seats in Scotland, as seems  very likely, that leaves them needing that many more gains off Tories and Lib Dems further South to stop the Tories being the largest party UK wide. In terms of seats at least.


----------



## redsquirrel (Apr 17, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> You may still get Tories, UK wide. And so might we further South.


How would voting SNP enable a Tory led government? You keep saying this but unless the SNP do a complete about face as Spanky mentioned it simply isn't true.

(On an SNP-Tory alliance I'm not going claim that the SNP are more honest than any other party but I think they're smart enough to know that such an alliance would lead to wipeout even larger than the LDs are having)


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 17, 2015)

weepiper said:


> If you don't want Tories, then get out there and do something about politics in your own back yard and stop blaming us for English voters' choices.




I live in Labour dominated South Wales. English marginals are not my back yard.

I don't blame the Scots for anything but I'm on a complete understanding fail about why Labour are hated to the _extreme_ extent they seem to be at the moment up there.


----------



## weepiper (Apr 17, 2015)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> I dunno - don't let's forget '79 - I'm not convinced the SNP wouldn't enable a Tory government if they thought it would help their ultimate cause.


They would be insane to. We've a Scottish Parliament election in 2016 and they'd be heavily punished for that.


----------



## pogofish (Apr 17, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> I just fail to see why Labour are hated in Scotland to that *extreme* extent. Trying to understand it, but blatantly failing.



At its simplest, its because they have sold themselves and their supporters down the river continuously over many years - A lot since the 70s/80s yes but it took a particular turn for the worse when Scottish Labour almost entirely lost its identity when it let itself be subsumed into New Labour in the 90s.


----------



## xslavearcx (Apr 17, 2015)

when i started working in a youth project in the southside of glasgow i got my first insight into how shitty the labour presence in glasgow can be. One of the issue that came up was the lack of faclities for young poeple to do anything. Although on a par with other areas that had a dedicated youth centre in terms of deprivation according the scottish multiple index of deprivation, our area did not. What this actually meant soon became apparent to me when trying to hire rooms for various youth groups, going from community centres to churchy places it was often impossible to get a hire just for a couple of hours.

Except that there was a small community centre just accross the road from us. And when i did my nosey at the place, although there were signs stating that x y and z groups where on at such and such days and times, there was no sign of anything actually coming in terms of people coming and going. Spoke to people that knew the place well and they said fuck all happened there. The day to day running of it was done by a person on a paid wage who was also a labour councillor in the area. Who was also the chair of the community planning partnership who have a lot of clout in terms of how statutory funding is allocated to various agencies in the area. A lot of power to be concentrated in one persons hands. This person had history with one of the members of our management committee, i dont know why, but this meant that we were fucked for getting a hire at this community centre just accross the road from us. It also meant that we were not going to be able to get a sniff of any funding coming through the community planning partnership, regardless as to the merits of whatever pieces of work we were engaged in... So in summery, a community centre doing fuck all but paying her a wage, the ability to get things done with her as a gate keeper could only happen if you were part of a small clique - you get the picture..

Although the local councellor of our area, she had never once raised a single issue in the city chambers. There are lots of other dimensions i could mention about how people that were close to her personally could find themselves in employment, but maybe not best to be naming names on the internet.

This is just one small story from one pretty small part of Glasgow. But i suspect many people at many other parts of glasgow has similiar stories to tell. If you read this book by cathy mccormack the wee yellow butterfly, about campaigning in easterhouse to deal with damp housing, poverty etc and one can get a picture of what it is like to deal with the local politicians which in glasgow hitherto has been labour in the main.

This party has the name labour - it historically has laid claim to be the voice of the working class. And when thatcher was in, it was dead easy for labour to give it the big unn about how things would be different if they were in power. Except locally they always been in power here in glasgow and culminativly i think enough people know that they do not have our interests at heart. Likewise in power in the blair to brown days. At that time i was on the dole, and was involved a bit in a welfare rights organisation by and for people experiencing poverty. In that capacity, i witnessed the introdcution of esa and how they intensified notions of deserving and underserving poor. 

I think now with the tories being in and they have tried to shift their rhetoric leftward doesnt work in glasgow now, because of these culminative experiences that shows them for the shower of shite that they are. I think when Margaret Curran gives it the 'im fae the east end' chat it rings hollow when there has been little interventions in dealing with the issues the people of the east end has faced. Margret Curran who was a community development worker so is trained in the art of engagement but seems incapable of listening...Instead presiding over the commenwealth games, social cleansing that makes nobodys day to day lives better. IF you are a retail buisness looking to open up in the second biggest shopping place in europe glasgows yer place mind you and you will get the utmost support from gcc


I think basiclly now weve reached a critical mass, siding with the tories confirmed what people already experienced with labour over the years. It will be good to get them to fuck, hopefully once that has happened we can start talking about how to build real alternatives to the neoliberal shit thats been flung at us for years....


----------



## redsquirrel (Apr 17, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> But if Labour lose most of their seats in Scotland, as seems  very likely, that leaves them needing that many more gains off Tories and Lib Dems further South to stop the Tories being the largest party UK wide. In terms of seats at least.


Well pretty much all the polling has shown there's a swing to Lab from Con in England. It's not impossible that Lab will have fewer seats than the Tories but again the fact that they are the single largest party won't enable the Tories to form a gov if they and their likely coalition partners can't get a majority.

It's looking increasingly likely that no party is going to get a majority so rather than just thinking about the individual parties you need to consider the different blocks. Whichever party wins in a Lab/SNP marginal the number of seats in the anti-tory block isn't going to be effected.

The only time it might is if the split in the anti-Tory vote enables a LD/Tory to come from behind and get the seat. But that's extremely unlikely in most cases as the LD/Tory is starting from too low a base to make any difference. Looking at the most recent constituency polling, that's simply not going happen. (The Tories one gain comes from a LD seat so is effectively is a sum zero gain)


----------



## Frankie Jack (Apr 17, 2015)




----------



## Casually Red (Apr 17, 2015)

weepiper said:


> We've tried voting Labour as a country several times and we still got Tories. We want something different now.



Even when labour got elected you still got the Tories .


----------



## treelover (Apr 17, 2015)

> Likewise in power in the blair to brown days. At that time i was on the dole, and was involved a bit in a welfare rights organisation by and for people experiencing poverty. In that capacity, i witnessed the introdcution of esa and how they intensified notions of deserving and underserving poor.




Indeed, Murphy was one of the architects of ESA, he was Employment Secretary at the time of its inception.


----------



## 19sixtysix (Apr 18, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> Fair enough point JTG, and I'll admit I don't know nearly enough about details of Scottish politics anyway.
> 
> I just fail to see why Labour are hated in Scotland to that *extreme* extent. Trying to understand it, but blatantly failing.




I was discussing the decline of labour in Scotland today with a pal while visiting up home and the phrase "poverty of ambition" came up to describe labour.

Everything I see from labour exudes a poverty of ambition and resignation to the capitalist narative. Well the SNP have said things can get better and seem to be trying to do something about it. Labour is a tired mechanism with its systems destroyed by Blair to take control. Policy comes from a clique at the top and not a jot of say comes from the members. It's why I left the party. I'm in London and I expect I'll make my mind who I vote for this time in the poling booth.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 18, 2015)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> I dunno - don't let's forget '79 - I'm not convinced the SNP wouldn't enable a Tory government if they thought it would help their ultimate cause.


now? it'd be madness, the worst sort of short termist thinking.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 18, 2015)

19sixtysix : That's a pretty damned good summaey to be fair, so thanks. 

It's not like I'm any great fan of Labour myself, far from. What I was trying clumsily to unearth though is why they're so much hated in Scotland in particular and not so much elsewhere -- here in Wales its nowhere near the same. Probably not the North of England either.

I do get the thing about the SNP seeming/being like a refreshing change. They're not any less capitalist than Labour though.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 18, 2015)

weepiper said:


> If you don't want Tories, then get out there and do something about politics in your own back yard and stop blaming us for English voters' choices.


for our sins we had a scottish pm for many years from 1997


----------



## brogdale (Apr 18, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> 19sixtysix : That's a pretty damned good summaey to be fair, so thanks.
> 
> It's not like I'm any great fan of Labour myself, far from. What I was trying clumsily to unearth though is why they're so much hated in Scotland in particular and not so much elsewhere -- here in Wales its nowhere near the same. Probably not the North of England either.
> 
> I do get the thing about the SNP seeming/being like a refreshing change. They're not any less capitalist than Labour though.


Come on William, use your imagination a bit. Just think what the political mood in Wales would be like if the nation was split 50:50 on the issue of independence, had just been through a period of intense political consciousness-raising & activity and had witnessed the LP side whole-heartedly with the vermin to oppose those seeking change through independence?


----------



## weepiper (Apr 18, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Come on William, use your imagination a bit. Just think what the political mood in Wales would be like if the nation was split 50:50 on the issue of independence, had just been through a period of intense political consciousness-raising & activity and had witnessed the LP side whole-heartedly with the vermin to oppose those seeking change through independence?


...and Labour had called them stupid and tribal for it...


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 18, 2015)

Sure -- no disagreement. But I'm just saying things seem so hugely different in Scotland than most other places.

I can't blame Scots for getting pissed off with Labour about that, but there does seem a bit of a disconnect between the 54% No -- 46% Yes Indy result and the level of subsequent sheer hate for Labour -- clearly amongst a lot of No voters too given the polling. Call me puzzled but ...

Thinking about this now though (which I wasn't last night  ) In retrospect  both Scottish Labour and Labour generally will have to put their Indy tactics down as among their very worst errors of judgment -- tactically and in every other way. Looks like it will take them a long time -- if ever? -- to recover from that in Scotland. It would take a lot of bad shit from the SNP to help  that happen (don't rule that out in the long run mind you  ).

The very least ScotsLab need would be a new leader who isn't Jim Murphy (!). Very least. Plus Devo Max if not full Indy from the rest-of-UK LP.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 18, 2015)

I get the impression that while the no vote was strong and unionists have their reasons, the sight of labour shoulder to shoulder with the tories on indy reff was the straw that broke the camels back wrt labour.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 18, 2015)

weepiper said:


> ...and Labour had called them stupid and tribal for it...




Called whom?

See my post above too, though-- we're not *that* many miles apart probably.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 18, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> I get the impression that while the no vote was strong and unionists have their reasons, the sight of labour shoulder to shoulder with the tories on indy reff was the straw that broke the camels back wrt labour.




Surely that should have stopped more Scottish people from voting No though, if that's true (I'm not saying it isn't)


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 18, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> Surely that should have stopped more Scottish people from voting No though, if that's true (I'm not saying it isn't)


you can believe in the usefullness and structure of the union and still think labour have lost all mandate. I think thats partly what has happened


----------



## Dogsauce (Apr 18, 2015)

The only downside of the Labour>SNP shift is that it doesn't make Cameron look like a bungling prick for calling/playing the referendum, it seems to have worked well for him (damaging Labour). At one point it looked like a catastrophic misjudgement, but now he gets to be a bit smug, the ham-faced cunt.


----------



## Sue (Apr 18, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> I get the impression that while the no vote was strong and unionists have their reasons, the sight of labour shoulder to shoulder with the tories on indy reff was the straw that broke the camels back wrt labour.


 


William of Walworth said:


> Surely that should have stopped more Scottish people from voting No though, if that's true (I'm not saying it isn't)


 
No, I think a lot of people voted No *despite* the Better Together campaign. My sister, for example, voted SNP in 2011 because she thought they'd done a good job but had voted Labour back in the day then SSP/Green. She voted No because she thought a lot of stuff hadn't been fully thought through. She thought the Better Together campaign was awful and despises Labour. Not sure how she'll be voting this time but pretty sure it won't be Labour.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 18, 2015)

William of Walworth I think Sue, weepiper, brogdale and DotCommunist are all correct.  All those factors play a part.

But so does this sort of thing (tweet below, detailing a Daily Mail article saying Scots are raving mad and ungrateful).  People see this sort of thing, and their response is "Oh, you think so, do you? Well, we'll see about that"  We have an expression here to describe that sort of reaction, it's called being "thrawn".  It means something like "contrary, perverse and intractable".

Part of it is that some people are saying "well, we might have voted to stay in the Union, but that doesn't mean we're happy with the way things are done round here.  As you're about to find out".

Part of it is that people have woken up to the fact that Labour has been the party running local government in areas of greatest deprivation since the days of Keir Hardy and more than 100 years later, those are still the areas of greatest deprivation.  And they're thinking, "well Labour's more than had their chance, and we vote for them time and again in GEs to keep the Tories out, but win or lose, we get more of the same.  What's a good way of stirring things up?  Oh aye.  This".

And part of it is that Labour has just taken their voters in Scotland for granted.  In fact, their reaction to being found out has been to insult people.  

A commentator likened the phenomenon to the coming of punk.  Labour in this analogy is prog rock.  Their attitude is entitled, baffled, disgusted and angry.  And while the punks (the DIY, self-directed, homemade zine photocopiers intending to vote SNP) might not have all the answers, they have a feeling of release, of wiping the slate clean, and of a simplicity in the way they want to express their rage. 

(I think they'll be disappointed, but that's entirely besides the point).

All of this can be seen coming through the indy ref campaign, and with hindsight if you read the indy ref threads (especially the big one in the Scotland forum), you'll see it all there.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 18, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> Surely that should have stopped more Scottish people from voting No though, if that's true (I'm not saying it isn't)


No.  I don't have time right now, but no, that doesn't cover it.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 18, 2015)

Thrawn would be close to 'wilfuly stubborn'?

'Bloody minded' maybe?


----------



## weepiper (Apr 18, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> Thrawn would be close to 'wilfuly stubborn'?
> 
> 'Bloody minded' maybe?


It means doing the opposite of what you're being coerced into or steered towards because fuck you, that's why.


----------



## weepiper (Apr 18, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> Sure -- no disagreement. But I'm just saying things seem so hugely different in Scotland than most other places.
> 
> I can't blame Scots for getting pissed off with Labour about that, but there does seem a bit of a disconnect between the 54% No -- 46% Yes Indy result and the level of subsequent sheer hate for Labour -- clearly amongst a lot of No voters too given the polling. Call me puzzled but ...
> 
> ...


Anyone would think it was a different country or something.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 18, 2015)

weepiper said:


> It means doing the opposite of what you're being coerced into or steered towards because fuck you, that's why.


I think I may have been thrawny sometimes without even knowing it.


----------



## weepiper (Apr 18, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> I think I may have been thrawny sometimes without even knowing it.


Thrawn. Just thrawn.


----------



## Celyn (Apr 18, 2015)

Oh, I think "thrawny" might be a nice new word to have, though.  Might spell it "thrawnie".

Thrawnie Scotland. The Thrawnie Thrawnie Banks of Loch Lomond.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 18, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> I think I may have been thrawny sometimes without even knowing it.


you're better known as ornery tho.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 18, 2015)

weepiper said:


> Thrawn. Just thrawn.


last night i had something i just thrawn together for tea


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 18, 2015)

Celyn said:


> Oh, I think "thrawny" might be a nice new word to have, though.  Might spell it "thrawnie".
> 
> Thrawnie Scotland. The Thrawnie Thrawnie Banks of Loch Lomond.


I'm thrawnie, thrawnie, thrawnie. So thrawnie, thrawnie, thrawnie.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 18, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> I'm thrawnie, thrawnie, thrawnie. So thrawnie, thrawnie, thrawnie.


i'm too thrawnie for my job


----------



## Celyn (Apr 18, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i'm too thrawnie for my job



If we turned that into "jobbie", of course, the meaning would change somewhat.


----------



## Celyn (Apr 18, 2015)

Oh no, I didn't mean to derail the Murphy=nasty numpty thread.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 18, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> you're better known as ornery tho.


an ole cuss


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 18, 2015)

what confuses matters more is Admiral Thrawn from the star wars books keeps hoving into my thinking every time I see the word thrawn


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 18, 2015)

And that Mail story isn't a one off. It's day after day of the stuff. 

Here's another:


----------



## Celyn (Apr 18, 2015)

So Tory Alan Cochrane wants us to vote Labour.  Hmmm.


----------



## weepiper (Apr 18, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> Called whom?


Saw this earlier and couldn't reply - the people who voted Yes. Labour's alienated 45% of the voting population. That takes some coming back from in the polls. Labour politicians came out with some really vicious stuff during the referendum. See Ian Davidson's 'bayonet the wounded' comments, for example.


----------



## weepiper (Apr 18, 2015)

This article from the 2011 Holyrood election is good background reading on the dangers of associating with the Tories William of Walworth 

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2011/may/06/snp-election-victory-scottish-independence

 
The Libs copped it in 2011 and they're about to cop it again (their Westminster vote looks certain to collapse this time). Would the Labour vote be collapsing the same way if Labour had taken a neutral position on the indyref?


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 18, 2015)

William of Walworth said:
			
		

> Sure -- no disagreement. But I'm just saying things seem so hugely different in Scotland than most other places.
> 
> I can't blame Scots for getting pissed off with Labour about that, but there does seem a bit of a disconnect between the 54% No -- 46% Yes Indy result and the level of subsequent sheer hate for Labour -- clearly amongst a lot of No voters too given the polling. Call me puzzled but ...
> 
> ...





weepiper said:


> Anyone would think it was a different country or something.



Feel free to be as dismissively rude as you like, but how about reading my post that you quoted *properly*? 

In it, I was

(a) Saying exactly that -- I can see *quite well* that Scotland is different. Do you ever patronise people _yourself_ by any chance?

(b) Saying quite a bit more than that anyway, in my effort to understand it.


----------



## weepiper (Apr 18, 2015)

Fine, I don't know why I bothered trying to explain anything to you anyway.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 18, 2015)

weepiper said:


> Saw this earlier and couldn't reply - the people who voted Yes. Labour's alienated 45% of the voting population. That takes some coming back from in the polls. Labour politicians came out with some really vicious stuff during the referendum. See Ian Davidson's 'bayonet the wounded' comments, for example.



Your Scottish knowledge is obviously far greater than mine, but I suspect there are more objective accounts than the above. 

Such as that Guardian article you quoted just now, which expains things to me better than the above post.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 18, 2015)

weepiper said:


> Fine, I don't know why I bothered trying to explain anything to you anyway.



Contemptuous, much? It's not just the Labour Party you hate, clearly.


----------



## weepiper (Apr 18, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> Contemptuous, much? It's not just the Labour Party you hate, clearly.


Are you pissed?


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 18, 2015)

Not especially. Just finished a big meal.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 18, 2015)

weepiper said:


> The Libs copped it in 2011 and they're about to cop it again (their Westminster vote looks certain to collapse this time). Would the Labour vote be collapsing the same way if Labour had taken a neutral position on the indyref?



Being more serious -- that's a very interesting question. Was there ever any possibility in Scotland that the LP could have adopted a more neutral position? I doubt it.

But even as No campaigners, they could surely have made a lot more effort to steer much clearer of the Tories, and ended up being a bit more effective as a result. Counter factual speculation that though, I admit.


----------



## Sue (Apr 18, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> Feel free to be as dismissively rude as you like, but how about reading my post that you quoted *properly*?
> 
> In it, I was
> 
> ...


Have you any how that reads? You've no fucking understanding about any of this.  Ffs, get a grip


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 18, 2015)

Sue said:


> Have you any how that reads? You've no fucking understanding about any of this.  Ffs, get a grip



Trying to, I really do appreciate I'm an outsider, but I honestly want to know more -- I am reading all the links etc that people are putting up.

I know some of my stuff hasn't come over well, so apologies for that, but the post you quote was a response to quite a rude one directed at me by another poster.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Apr 18, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> Trying to, I really do appreciate I'm an outsider



Don't sweat it. A quite vocal proportion of new-to-activism SNP members have gone full zealot. It's quite a febrile atmosphere.


----------



## weepiper (Apr 19, 2015)

I'm going to be really childish now and point out that the Labour-dominated South Wales that William doesn't feel he needs to do anything about people voting Tory in because it's not 'English marginals' currently has 5 Tory MPs. Vs one in the whole of Scotland.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 19, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> Trying to, I really do appreciate I'm an outsider, but I honestly want to know more -- I am reading all the links etc that people are putting up.


Hi Will.

I'm not sure what it is that you don't get.  The Labour Party is finally tanking in popularity in Scotland.  The surprise to me is that it's taken so long.  

Other than coming here and seeing what's going on for yourself, I'm not sure what else to say.

However, maybe some articles and blogs might help.  (I'm not saying I agree with all that's said in these, just that they provide a flavour of the atmosphere):

http://www.bankierepublic.org/2015/04/look-back-in-anger/

http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2015/04/14/ish-the-problem-for-scottish-labour/

https://iainmacwhirter.wordpress.com/2015/03/04/the-independence-referendum-what-really-changed/

https://commonspace.scot/articles/1...hy-leadership-crisis-in-scotland-after-ge2015

https://commonspace.scot/articles/892/red-line-return-power-to-the-people


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 19, 2015)

Thanks for those linke danny la rouge -- I doubt I've seen any of them so will be on to them ASAP.

Will read them tomorrow/Tuesday though, as debbie will be calling me over to watch Poldark imminently ...  

Other than that I want to stay off this thread after this. I'm not making any friends on it and it shouldn't be 'all about me' (or even at all) anyway. Apologies to anybody/everyone I've pissed off. Genuinely.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 19, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> debbie will be calling me over to watch Poldark imminently ...


Get your shots ready.

We down a shot every time he rides a horse along a cliff top.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 19, 2015)




----------



## weepiper (Apr 20, 2015)




----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Apr 20, 2015)

tbh all those tweets and facebook posts about how this person and that has told me they hate Labour or are voting SNP reminds me of the breathless excitement from Respect and TUSC types and their "working class postman" who says he's had enough of Miliband's austerity lite etc.

It's the polls and the bookies odds that tell the true story (which just happens to be the same for once) imo.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 20, 2015)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> tbh all those tweets and facebook posts about how this person and that has told me they hate Labour or are voting SNP reminds me of the breathless excitement from Respect and TUSC types and their "working class postman" who says he's had enough of Miliband's austerity lite etc.
> 
> It's the polls and the bookies odds that tell the true story (which just happens to be the same for once) imo.


In general that's true.  But the guy weeps has quoted is a political journalist.  He's vox popping, in effect.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 20, 2015)

Playing for the reds this morning....







Go on caption fans, fill yer boots!


----------



## DexterTCN (Apr 20, 2015)




----------



## Combustible (Apr 21, 2015)

Were they holding up a giant mirror or something?


----------



## treelover (Apr 21, 2015)

Will the SNP hold to their new found left wing views and policies, what happens in the future, when the enthusiasm of many of its new converts has maybe waned a bit or people leave, or it is a near permanent change, is this possible?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 21, 2015)

treelover said:


> Will the SNP hold to their new found left wing views and policies, what happens in the future, when the enthusiasm of many of its new converts has maybe waned a bit or people leave, or it is a near permanent change, is this possible?


yes


----------



## weepiper (Apr 21, 2015)

Murphy pulling a massive crowd in 'labour heartland' Glasgow just now


----------



## gosub (Apr 21, 2015)

treelover said:


> Will the SNP hold to their new found left wing views and policies, what happens in the future, when the enthusiasm of many of its new converts has maybe waned a bit or people leave, or it is a near permanent change, is this possible?



I think the real test in Scotland is 2016, I get the logic of a strong Scots voice in Westminster 2015, but if Holyrood goes the same way, an even more overwhelming SNP, effectively a one party state, which I don't think is healthy.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 21, 2015)

gosub said:


> I think the real test in Scotland is 2016, I get the logic of a strong Scots voice in Westminster 2015, but if Holyrood goes the same way, an even more overwhelming SNP, effectively a one party state, which I don't think is healthy.


i don't know why you insist on blaming the electorate.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 21, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Playing for the reds this morning....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


murphy has only got one ball...


----------



## nino_savatte (Apr 21, 2015)

treelover said:


> Will the SNP hold to their new found left wing views and policies, what happens in the future, when the enthusiasm of many of its new converts has maybe waned a bit or people leave, or it is a near permanent change, is this possible?


"New found left wing views"? Much of the 79 Group's platform was adopted back in the very late 1980s.


----------



## treelover (Apr 21, 2015)

weepiper said:


> Murphy pulling a massive crowd in 'labour heartland' Glasgow just now



Its noticeable how few are following all the Labour caravans across the U.k, and that most are Labour Students(NOLS)


----------



## weepiper (Apr 21, 2015)

edit to add story


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 21, 2015)

Lord Tebbit says vote Scottish Labour. 

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...-supporters-vote-labour-scotland-keep-out-snp


----------



## weepiper (Apr 21, 2015)

*wipes tear*


----------



## Sue (Apr 22, 2015)

weepiper said:


> *wipes tear*




Almost starting to feel sorry for the man.



I said *almost*....


----------



## pogofish (Apr 22, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Lord Tebbit says vote Scottish Labour.
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/politics...-supporters-vote-labour-scotland-keep-out-snp



Fuck - That really is the kiss of death...!


----------



## nino_savatte (Apr 23, 2015)

Anyone seen this?


----------



## Belushi (Apr 23, 2015)

truly desperate stuff


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 23, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> Anyone seen this?


Utterly pathetic. 

Not least because the SNP don't want to be ministers in a Labour-led administration. They haven't asked for the job and would be daft to accept if it was offered.


----------



## nino_savatte (Apr 23, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Utterly pathetic.
> 
> Not least because the SNP don't want to be ministers in a Labour-led administration. They haven't asked for the job and would be daft to accept if it was offered.


I don't remember an election like this one: the desperation; the extreme scaremongering. 1974 gets mentioned but even that election wasn't at all like this one.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 23, 2015)

pogofish said:


> Fuck - That really is the kiss of death...!


Did you see this? 

Wee Ginger Dug: Death goes on the stump for Jim Murphy | Comment | The National 

http://t.co/vzvGUztTNd


"Tebbit was the evil uncaring embodiment of an evil and uncaring government which already had evil and uncaring off pat entirely without his assistance. Tebbit was the bitter icing on a rancid cake of greed and rancour.

He was Iain Duncan Smith without the compassion, Michael Gove without the social conscience,

George Osborne without the joie de gimp. And he wants you to vote Labour.

How low has Labour in Scotland sunk, how far removed has it got from its socialist roots, how distant from the dreams of Keir Hardie, for Norman Tebbit to advise people to vote for it.

Norman Tebbit wants people to vote for Jim Murphy – that’s the endorsement of death. "


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 23, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> I don't remember an election like this one: the desperation; the extreme scaremongering. 1974 gets mentioned but even that election wasn't at all like this one.


there were two elections in 1974.


----------



## treelover (Apr 23, 2015)

Gordon Brown has just said a labour govt after the election would immediately release emergency funds for food banks, but isn't this just institutionalising food banks as a key welfare state tool?


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 23, 2015)

treelover said:


> Gordon Brown has just said a labour govt after the election would immediately release emergency funds for food banks, but isn't this just institutionalising food banks as a key welfare state tool?


The Gordon Brown who isn't standing? 

Let's say he doesn't deliver this pledge he'll have no power to deliver, as an unelected citizen. Will we hold him to account by not not re-electing him?


----------



## Sue (Apr 24, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> The Gordon Brown who isn't standing?
> 
> Let's say he doesn't deliver this pledge he'll have no power to deliver, as an unelected citizen. Will we hold him to account by not not re-electing him?



Mind you, none of this stopped him promising stuff the last time (though suppose he was at least a backbencher then).


----------



## JTG (Apr 24, 2015)

Next week: Clement Attlee promises billions more for the NHS


----------



## Belushi (Apr 24, 2015)

It's really not going well for Scottish Labour  http://www.theguardian.com/politics...-from-disillusionment-to-meltdown-in-scotland


----------



## weepiper (Apr 24, 2015)

This is what years of electing a Labour council has done for Glasgow and is useful background reading for anyone trying to understand why Labour are falling from grace so spectacularly

http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2...emolition-city-troubled-past?CMP=share_btn_fb


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 24, 2015)

Belushi said:


> It's really not going well for Scottish Labour  http://www.theguardian.com/politics...-from-disillusionment-to-meltdown-in-scotland


good.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 24, 2015)

Belushi said:


> It's really not going well for Scottish Labour  http://www.theguardian.com/politics...-from-disillusionment-to-meltdown-in-scotland


They really can't see their own role in why people have deserted them, can they?


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 24, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> They really can't see their own role in why people have deserted them, can they?


did you see the reaction of the bent labour bloke who lost out to galloway after the bradford by election? (now theres a hobsons..but anyway). He was astonished and angry. Literally seemed to have no idea that a certain amount of shit sarnie-eating had been deemed too much shit, not enough bread by the electorate. Its an indication of the fact that labour take the votes for granted


----------



## weepiper (Apr 25, 2015)

weepiper said:


> Murphy pulling a massive crowd in 'labour heartland' Glasgow just now



Crowd for Nicola Sturgeon launching the SNP's 'women's pledge' in Glasgow this morning, for comparison

 

 

mm.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 25, 2015)

weepiper said:


> Crowd for Nicola Sturgeon launching the SNP's 'women's pledge' in Glasgow this morning, for comparison
> 
> View attachment 70680
> 
> ...


Worth noting that it's the same location.


----------



## weepiper (Apr 26, 2015)




----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Apr 26, 2015)

What happened to the Labour for Yes people have they all jumped ship to the Nats?


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 26, 2015)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> What happened to the Labour for Yes people have they all jumped ship to the Nats?


I know Allan Grogan, chief founder, went to the SSP.


----------



## Celyn (Apr 26, 2015)

weepiper said:


>




Oh, that's fun. It really is.	  Never mind that Labour had 41 seats at the 2010 election, but it sounds so good to say we're "confident" about getting 10.

Labour might actually get 10 seats, then it will be fun to hear all the triumphant after-count speeches about how it did really well, despite all those annoyances who thought they would join in the election game.

Then a Labour government advised by Michael Heseltine.  Oh joy.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 27, 2015)

"Labour's faltering campaign in Scotland reached a new low yesterday as internal divisions and bitterness seeped into public view for the first time".

[...] "Jim Murphy appeared to blame his Scottish leadership predecessors for the party's current problems".


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 27, 2015)

I heard a bit of Douglas Alexander's interview on Reporting Scotland this morning.  Gary Robertson was, surprisingly, pushing him quite hard on the notion that he was going to lose his seat and that he was fighting the campaign on Holyrood issues, not Westminster.  (The implication being that they've already given up on GE15 and have moved onto next year's Scottish Parliament elections).

In the space I was listening Alexander said several times that the referendum had been "bitter and divisive", and repeated it as a mantra, saying that voting SNP would cause more bitterness and division.

It's clearly their strategy to push that line, but I think it's another mistake; for most of those Labour has lost, that wasn't their experience of the referendum.  The Yes side report having felt a sense of empowerment, involvement, community, optimism and excitement that they hadn't experienced in politics before.  So, where Labour is getting this emphasis on a negative experience from, I don't know: are they privately polling No voters? 

The second line Alexander was pushing was that too much financial responsibility for Holyrood was dangerous, and that "pooling and sharing" with Westminster was best.  Again, I suggest, a dangerous line for them to take, especially if Labour is no longer trusted.

The biggest research, the Scottish Referendum Study by Universities of Edinburgh, Glasgow and Essex concludes that the median Scottish voter: wants almost all powers at Scottish level, questions legitimacy of Westminster government, and was optimistic about independence but had economic doubts. (This latter bit - the economic doubts - is why they suggest No won).

It looks like Labour still has no idea why it has haemorrhaged support.


----------



## redsquirrel (Apr 27, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> It's clearly their strategy to push that line, but I think it's another mistake; for most of those Labour has lost, that wasn't their experience of the referendum.  The Yes side report having felt a sense of empowerment, involvement, community, optimism and excitement that they hadn't experienced in politics before.  So, where Labour is getting this emphasis on a negative experience from, I don't know: are they privately polling No voters?


Seems particularly daft because if they want increase their share of the vote they are clearly going to have to be able to appeal to both YES and NO voters. Increasingly alienating such a large share of the vote seems utterly stupid, I can't believe that no one at central office hasn't pointed this basic fact out to them.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 27, 2015)

redsquirrel said:


> Seems particularly daft because they want increase their share of the vote they are clearly going to have to be able to appeal to both YES and NO voters. Increasingly alienating such a large share of the vote seems utterly stupid, I can't believe that no one at central office hasn't pointed this basic fact out to them.


Exactly my point.  If they're limiting their ambitions to only the No voters they've lost, their ambitions are clearly very low. It looks very much to me like all they're aiming at is the tactical votes of the 15% of voters in Scotland who vote Tory.


----------



## articul8 (Apr 27, 2015)

I think Danny's right to say they have yet to begin grappling with the extent of, and reasons for, their unpopularity. 

I think they should have started by reconstituting Scottish Labour as a new party run independently of the UK Labour party - and rejecting the politics of New Labour - but recognising the historical affiliations (similar to the SDLP/Labour relationship).


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 27, 2015)

articul8 said:


> I think Danny's right to say they have yet to begin grappling with the extent of, and reasons for, their unpopularity.
> 
> I think they should have started by reconstituting Scottish Labour as a new party run independently of the UK Labour party - and rejecting the politics of New Labour - but recognising the historical affiliations (similar to the SDLP/Labour relationship).


Second paragraph is an interesting point. It's worth remembering that there is actually no such thing as "Scottish Labour"; for example, in a recent employment dispute the employee had to sue HQ on London, as the Scottish Party had no legal status as a separate entity.  (Unlike the Tories in Scotland, who are the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party and a distinct though affiliated entity).


----------



## articul8 (Apr 27, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Second paragraph is an interesting point. It's worth remembering that there is actually no such thing as "Scottish Labour"; for example, in a recent employment dispute the employee had to sue HQ on London, as the Scottish Party had no legal status as a separate entity.  (Unlike the Tories in Scotland, who are the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party and a distinct though affiliated entity).


ha, when it suits them - the Bakers Union were told that although they are national affiliates, they never specifically affiliated to Labour in Scotland so couldn't have a vote in the union section of the leadership election


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 28, 2015)

So, we were right, they're targeting the tactical voters:


----------



## brogdale (Apr 29, 2015)

ScotLab MP talks sense shocker...


> 3m ago20:50
> 
> Senior figures in the Scottish Labour Party have demanded Jim Murphy resign after the election, according to the Telegraph. “*A man who leads us to disaster in a general election has then got little prospect of leading us to enormous success in a Scottish election,*” one Scottish Labour MP reportedly said.


----------



## superfly101 (Apr 29, 2015)




----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 29, 2015)

It's weird how the English and Scottish "editions" are more like "sister" papers than editions of the same paper. 

The English Sun is still running  scare stories and jockophobic hysteria. 

It's never a comfortable position to be in, to be "endorsed" by that filth. But it should be remembered that they're not leading their readership, they're chasing it. They want to sell copies. Chasing the 20% that say they'll vote Labour isn't a big enough market.


----------



## gosub (Apr 29, 2015)

brogdale said:


> ScotLab MP talks sense shocker...


iirc Murphy vowed not to lose a single seat when he became Scottish Labour leader.


----------



## agricola (Apr 29, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> It's weird how the English and Scottish "editions" are more like "sister" papers than editions of the same paper.
> 
> The English Sun is still running  scare stories and jockophobic hysteria.
> 
> It's never a comfortable position to be in, to be "endorsed" by that filth. But it should be remembered that they're not leading their readership, they're chasing it. They want to sell copies. Chasing the 20% that say they'll vote Labour isn't a big enough market.



They are both running anti-Labour angles though, probably (as the latest _Private Eye_ amply demonstrates) at the behest of Murdoch and because of his interests (rather than in order to follow what "their readership" wants, as if they have ever done that).


----------



## dishevelled (Apr 29, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> It's weird how the English and Scottish "editions" are more like "sister" papers than editions of the same paper.



It's not weird at all. What makes you think it's weird.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 29, 2015)

agricola said:


> They are both running anti-Labour angles though, probably (as the latest _Private Eye_ amply demonstrates) at the behest of Murdoch and because of his interests (rather than in order to follow what "their readership" wants, as if they have ever done that).


You think they'd come out for SNP if they were getting 17% in the polls? They've come out for SNP because they're getting 54% in the polls.


----------



## Tankus (Apr 29, 2015)

Play to your market to maximise profit .....


----------



## agricola (Apr 29, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> You think they'd come out for SNP if they were getting 17% in the polls? They've come out for SNP because they're getting 54% in the polls.



Really?  He doesnt want to support Miliband-era Labour, so he puts his support behind the only realistic alternative (which should be pointed out has been sucking up to him for quite some time).


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 29, 2015)

Yes, really.


----------



## weepiper (Apr 29, 2015)

Time for a reminder of this article? Yes, I think it is.


----------



## Sue (Apr 30, 2015)

weepiper said:


> Time for a reminder of this article? Yes, I think it is.


Oh my. Hadn't seen that before.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 30, 2015)

This can't fail, surely?

David Blunkett [the latest to] say Scots have "stopped listening... switched off to rational argument."

https://www.politicshome.com/party-...ami-will-be-milibands-biggest-challenge-david

_Dumb Scots.  Why won't you vote for us?  Stupid people._


----------



## dishevelled (Apr 30, 2015)

I find it amusing that when it was the referendem vote last year, you got all the total knobjobs with their open letters begging the people of Scotland to "see sense and remain part of this great nation that we have... "

Now they're sat at home going... "I wish I'd never written that fucking letter... I wish they had got independence... now I've got up to 50 fucking sweaties coming down here and telling me what to do. Fuck... fuck... fuckity fuck. I wonder what the property prices are like in Spain."

And you... yes you Susan fucking Boyle... you can fuck of 'an all!!


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 30, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> This can't fail, surely?
> 
> David Blunkett [the latest to] say Scots have "stopped listening... switched off to rational argument."
> 
> ...




Thats pretty insulting, and utterly crap.

But might there be a different case for saying that in Scotland, it really *doesn't* matter what Labour say any more, most voters have made up their mind and not in Labour's favour.

Not a 'dumb Scots' point from me at all, just saying intentions look pretty solidly fixed for most by now. The reasons will be in those links you posted for me way back   plus elsewhere in this thread.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 30, 2015)

but thats  what they're not saying. Saying 'We've lost it in most of scotland, they just don't want what we are offering'

'is different from Blunkett's 'reasoned arguments' that they aren't listening to. Just had enough of blairites would be more honest.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 1, 2015)

Oh, look, panicking Scottish Labour MPs fearing for their stipends: 

"Dump Murphy"

"people who enjoyed the referendum aren't scared of another referendum"

Who'd have thought it?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/gen...cottish-campaign-from-failing-Jim-Murphy.html


----------



## danny la rouge (May 1, 2015)

Just been sent this. Wasn't sure where to put it.

It's John Harris in Coatbridge.  Working class, Catholic, traditional Labour area.  Very like where my Dad's side of the family is from, Blantyre (coal mining, steel working area).  I know Coatbridge a bit, but it's very, very like communities I grew up knowing. The social club could easily be my granddad's club.

Anyway, what's interesting is how incredibly soft even the residual Labour vote appears to be.  The local Labour MP takes Harris to pre-selected strong Labour doorsteps, but just a few gentle questions gets them wavering.  Listen out for "Remember Keir Hardie?  _That_ was the right Labour Party".

The SNP also shows him pre-selected voters, of course.  But they seem more resolute.

If that reading is accurate: that even the 20% they have left is soft, then Labour are in even more trouble than I thought.

Also interesting is how insecure Tom Clark seems.  He comes across as very patronising, proprietorial, and keen to protect his position.  You can sense the entitlement and the sense he has of it slipping away.  And he's meant to be one of the good ones!

Anyway, here's the film:

http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...-snp-scotland-election-video?CMP=share_btn_tw


----------



## Frankie Jack (May 1, 2015)

Tried to watch that last night. It screams dinosaur to me.


----------



## treelover (May 1, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Oh, look, panicking Scottish Labour MPs fearing for their stipends:
> 
> "Dump Murphy"
> 
> ...



Couldn't happen to a nicer person.


----------



## Celyn (May 1, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> ...
> 
> Also interesting is how insecure Tom Clark seems.  He comes across as very patronising, proprietorial, and keen to protect his position.  You can sense the entitlement and the sense he has of it slipping away.  And he's meant to be one of the good ones!
> ...



Absolutely!  That bit where John Harris is trying to talk to the tame Labour voter and Tom Clarke interrupts, laughs, claps hand, generally blusters and hectors so that there can be no wee chat with the voter.      I didn't like his style at all - very "entitled".


----------



## Pickman's model (May 1, 2015)

there is only one tom  clarke worth mentioning and he died in may 1916


----------



## danny la rouge (May 1, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> there is only one tom  clarke worth mentioning and he died in may 1916


I disagree. There's another excellent Tom Clarke. 

You don't know him, though.


----------



## brogdale (May 1, 2015)

Come on you Jocks...what's not to like?


----------



## dishevelled (May 1, 2015)

brogdale said:


> Come on you Jocks...what's not to like?



It's great... desperation and futility. What a great match.


----------



## redsquirrel (May 1, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Just been sent this. Wasn't sure where to put it.
> 
> It's John Harris in Coatbridge.  Working class, Catholic, traditional Labour area.  Very like where my Dad's side of the family is from, Blantyre (coal mining, steel working area).  I know Coatbridge a bit, but it's very, very like communities I grew up knowing. The social club could easily be my granddad's club.


Amazingly I think Harris has become one the best mainstream political commentators around. His UKIP stuff is miles better than most and this article on the longer term problems the Tories have is worth a read at least (it's not saying a lot new, just another aspect to the long death of the Conservative party but it's still much better than most stuff).


----------



## Tankus (May 1, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Just been sent this. Wasn't sure where to put it.
> 
> It's John Harris in Coatbridge.  Working class, Catholic, traditional Labour area.  Very like where my Dad's side of the family is from, Blantyre (coal mining, steel working area).  I know Coatbridge a bit, but it's very, very like communities I grew up knowing. The social club could easily be my granddad's club.
> 
> ...



There are some excellent vids by tom Harris there, cheers for the link


----------



## dishevelled (May 1, 2015)

I see the bookies have the SNP doing a total wipeout in Scotland at 5-1

If I were a tory in Scotland?...


----------



## redsquirrel (May 1, 2015)

dishevelled said:


> If I were a tory in Scotland?...


Probably be happier than a Labour supporter.


----------



## dishevelled (May 1, 2015)

redsquirrel said:


> Probably be happier than a Labour supporter.



Probably be richer


----------



## Tankus (May 1, 2015)

Be really funny if the Tories come second such is millibands demise


----------



## dishevelled (May 1, 2015)

I'll just have the 5-1 on a wipeout.


----------



## DexterTCN (May 2, 2015)

Twitter reports say tories are joining Murph on the streets?


----------



## jakejb79 (May 2, 2015)

Does anyone think the SPANISH would go into a coalition Government with the tories.


----------



## Sue (May 4, 2015)

'Scottish Labour leader Jim Murphy and Eddie Izzard have been forced to abandon a rally on the streets of central Glasgow, as they were shouted down by nationalists chanting “Red Tories out!”.

Murphy at first gamely tried to turn the chant to “Get the Tories out!”, but judging by this footage from Channel 4 News’s Alex Thompson, the Murphy and his celebrity endorser cut their losses and escaped in a waiting car.'

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...knife-edge-ken-clarke-warns-chaos-second-vote

Not sure about the 'shouted down by nationalists bit'. Could be anyone really...


----------



## Celyn (May 4, 2015)

It was Sean Clerkin and friends.  According to Sean Clerkin, he heard about Murphy's little rally from members of the Labour Party in East Renfrewshire.


----------



## Sue (May 4, 2015)

Celyn said:


> It was Sean Clerkin and friends.  According to Sean Clerkin, he heard about Murphy's little rally from members of the Labour Party in East Renfrewshire.


Who's he?


----------



## Celyn (May 4, 2015)

He likes protesting at things.  Was once an SNP candidate for something or other, years ago, then moved to Scottish Socialist Party, I think.  Quite an equal opportunity protestor as he has protested against the SNP as well. Possible highlight of career = scaring off a previous leader of the Labour Party in Scotland, when said Labour guy (Iain Gray) ran off to hide in a Subway sandwich shop.   The really amusing bit was Labour leader saying he wasn't a bit upset, oh dear me no, and giving us all a tale of his previous heroic exploits, i.e.



> I spent two years working in the civil war in Mozambique, I've been to Rwanda two months after the genocide, I walked the killing fields in Cambodia and I was in Chile three days after Pinochet was demitted from office.


.[17]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iain_Gray

Labour guy then resigned about a month later after his party didn't do at all well in the 2011 Scottish election.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (May 4, 2015)

Found this on Twitter, make of it what you will.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2015)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Found this on Twitter, make of it what you will.



i think a lot of people would turn up to see ed miliband in scotland. not labour supporters, but hey ed should take what he can get even if it ends with him in some infirmary or other.


----------



## DexterTCN (May 4, 2015)

I wonder if the held it next to the subway entrance to make sure there would be people around?


----------



## Sue (May 4, 2015)

Ah, Iain Gray. I'd forgotten he ever existed...


----------



## weepiper (May 4, 2015)

Jim Murphy is well aware of the reaction he was going to get. In fact he's been getting much the same reaction every time he's turned up with his rent-a-crowd over the last few weeks. This is a total non-story being blown up into Nasty Nationalists Denying Oor Jim's Right To Free Speech, rather than the same small group of noisy hecklers that's been following him around since he started getting up on Irn Bru crates with his megaphone during the indyref. If you shout at us Jim, some of us will shout back.


----------



## Celyn (May 4, 2015)

Sue said:


> Ah, Iain Gray. I'd forgotten he ever existed...



Yes, he wouldn't qualify for a Sellers & Yeatman history, 'cos of not being "memorable", (well apart from the killing fields of Cambodia _etc)._


----------



## dishevelled (May 4, 2015)

Murphy just seems to have one of those faces that you'd just like to slap. Annoying toerag. I think so anyway.


----------



## krink (May 5, 2015)

dishevelled said:


> I see the bookies have the SNP doing a total wipeout in Scotland at 5-1
> 
> If I were a tory in Scotland?...



I can't find this. I'm not a betting man and I can't use google very well, can someone help me out?


----------



## dishevelled (May 5, 2015)

krink said:


> I can't find this. I'm not a betting man and I can't use google very well, can someone help me out?



I got it off the William Hill online betting site. I typed SNP into their 'search' option.


----------



## Idris2002 (May 5, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> even if it ends with him in some infirmary or other.



Should've worn his wellies.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 5, 2015)

Idris2002 said:


> Should've worn his wellies.







give it some welly


----------



## Idris2002 (May 5, 2015)

Or you'll be in the hospital or _infirmary._


----------



## danny la rouge (May 7, 2015)

If Murphy loses his seat and subsequently his leadership, Labour could do worse that Kezia Dugdale. I've been able to watch her talking since the election programme started without feeling rising rage or nausea. Why did they think someone unlikeable would be preferable?


----------



## dishevelled (May 7, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> If Murphy loses his seat and subsequently his leadership, Labour could do worse that Kezia Dugdale. I've been able to watch her talking since the election programme started without feeling rising rage or nausea. Why did they think someone unlikeable would be preferable?



danny... you don't vote in general elections. What are you doing... taking notes... writing. I'm slightly confused.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 7, 2015)

dishevelled said:


> danny... you don't vote in general elections. What are you doing... taking notes... writing. I'm slightly confused.


I have always felt able to comment on electoral politics nonetheless. Indeed, Dugdale is an MSP anyway. I'm not saying I'd vote for her, I'm saying she's far more likeable than Murphy. If I was Labour I'd pick her as leader. 

(As it happens I did vote this time anyway. First GE I've voted in this century).


----------



## dishevelled (May 7, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> (As it happens I did vote this time anyway. First GE I've voted in this century).



you are russell brand


----------



## danny la rouge (May 7, 2015)

dishevelled said:


> you are russell brand


Nope. I voted for entirely different reasons. Devilment mainly.


----------



## brogdale (May 7, 2015)

dishevelled said:


> you are russell brand


harsh


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2015)

dishevelled said:


> you are russell brand


no, dlr has some politicks


----------



## danny la rouge (May 7, 2015)

Thank you sirs.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (May 8, 2015)

And he's gone.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 8, 2015)

good.


----------



## redsquirrel (May 8, 2015)

Worth noting that it was a ~80% turnout in his seat, people determined to get him out.


----------



## Sue (May 8, 2015)

That was my Portillo moment of the night.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 8, 2015)




----------



## danny la rouge (May 8, 2015)

Not sure where I want to say this, but here's an interesting story for you.

An old friend of mine, English-born No voter who lives in Edinburgh South and voted Labour yesterday (unenthusiastically), has just emailed me.  He said more or less what I said here; he's looked at the results, is dismayed that Miliband's bid is as left as the establishment permits, and therefore has concluded that (I quote him here): 

"However seeing the results in England,  and with the realisation that no change can ever come there, I am finally persuaded that independence is the best course for Scotland, and the sooner the better".

This is what someone who has just elected the last of Scotland's Labour MPs is saying today: "bring on Indyref2"


----------



## weepiper (May 8, 2015)

Sue said:


> That was my Portillo moment of the night.


This was me, very quietly so's not to wake the kids, but literally dancing in my seat doing this at the computer screen


----------



## Pickman's model (May 8, 2015)

weepiper said:


> This was me, very quietly so's not to wake the kids, but literally dancing in my seat doing this at the computer screen
> 
> View attachment 71261


not what i thought you looked like i must say


----------



## weepiper (May 8, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> not what i thought you looked like i must say


It was a late night.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 8, 2015)

weepiper said:


> It was a late night.


but in at least one way, a good one


----------



## Sue (May 8, 2015)

Watched it with some English friends and they kept going 'eh?' at my continual 'Coatbridge!' 'Glenrothes!  Glenrothes FFS!' etc. Then had to try to explain how utterly fucked Labour were to be losing these kinds of seats.


----------



## Celyn (May 8, 2015)

And, of course, even if every single Scottish seat were Labour, it would not have changed the fact that we (I mean "we" as in the whole of the U.K. here) are stuck with a Tory government.

I am very very pleased with the Scottish results, and glad to get rid of Curran, Murphy _etc.,_ but am genuinely scared of whatever bad shit is going to happen regarding employment legislation, wages, housing, NHS*, social security, and just about everything.  For just one example, what about the evil plan not to allow anyone under age of 25 to have any housing benefit?   Doesn't affect me, of course,  but what a nasty horrible idea.

Bad bad stuff is going to happen. 

_*Yes, I know there is NHS England, NHS Scotland, NHS Wales, NHS Northern Ireland, but if the Tories fuck up the English NHS, then there is an effect on the funding for every NHS._


----------



## Pickman's model (May 8, 2015)

Celyn said:


> And, of course, even if every single Scottish seat were Labour, it would not have changed the fact that we (I mean "we" as in the whole of the U.K. here) are stuck with a Tory government.
> 
> I am very very pleased with the Scottish results, and glad to get rid of Curran, Murphy _etc.,_ but am genuinely scared of whatever bad shit is going to happen regarding employment legislation, wages, housing, NHS*, social security, and just about everything.  For just one example, what about the evil plan not to allow anyone under age of 25 to have any housing benefit?   Doesn't affect me, of course,  but what a nasty horrible idea.
> 
> ...


a hard rain's a-gonna fall


----------



## Celyn (May 8, 2015)

Sue said:


> Watched it with some English friends and they kept going 'eh?' at my continual 'Coatbridge!' 'Glenrothes!  Glenrothes FFS!' etc. Then had to try to explain how utterly fucked Labour were to be losing these kinds of seats.



I was amazed that Labour lost Glasgow North-East.  Kind of amazed at getting rid of Margaret Curran from Glasgow East too, but at least I had heard that the mood there was going to be good for SNP and bad for her. As for Jim Murphy - well, WOW.  And all those Lanarkshire places - holy shit.  Very pleased that Tom Clarke lost Coatbridge.

Ach, just realised I could go through a long list of ex MPs whose demise made me happy, but you get the general idea.


----------



## Celyn (May 8, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> a hard rain's a-gonna fall



Yes, it did have that sort of tone, I suppose.  But really, it is!  Hard rain gonna fall and bad stuff will happen.

Run for the hills!  Before the Tories privatise the hills.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 8, 2015)

Celyn said:


> Yes, it did have that sort of tone, I suppose.  But really, it is!  Hard rain gonna fall and bad stuff will happen.
> 
> Run for the hills!  Before the Tories privatise the hills.


----------



## treelover (May 8, 2015)

How does it feel up there now, you won, but won't you still have many of the brutal cuts/welfare reforms to face, though many are now devolved.


----------



## Celyn (May 8, 2015)

treelover said:


> How does it feel up there now, you won, but won't you still have many of the brutal cuts/welfare reforms to face, though many are now devolved.



It feels happy to get shot of a whole bunch of Labour MPs, most of whom were in it for a comfy career, and fuck-all to do with representing their constituents.  There's a whole culture of entitlement about those MPs - oh and in local councils too.  I have followed some of the stories here on Urban about, e.g. Lambeth council, and it sounds nearly as bad as Glasgow City Council -jobs for the boys, strange property dealings, and so on.

Sorry, back to your question.



treelover said:


> How does it feel up there now, you won, but won't you still have many of the brutal cuts/welfare reforms to face, though many are now devolved.



Oh yes, we will have all the same brutal cuts.  So many things are not devolved.  Tax, employment law, pensions, unemployment benefit - in fact the whole of the DWP stuff. Usefully, the NHS is for Scotland to manage, BUT if Westminster suddenly decides that it is only going to allow NHS England to have £5 and maybe a biscuit if it's good, that affects funding for NHS Scotland (and Wales and N.I.)

So yeah, we "won" but that makes no difference really. The hope is that this new set of MPs will at least try to do good stuff.  Labour MPs from Scotland tended to do whatever Boss-man Miliband/Brown/Blair told them to do, in terms of voting and all that. 

Remember, Jim Murphy and all of Scottish Labour voting for tuition fees in England?  They had no business doing so, but they did anyway, because that's what the boss wanted them to do.  SNP MPs have traditionally NOT voted on matters that are purely English. Labour has no such compunction.

Oops, that was a bit of digression, and I'm sorry. But yes, the same damn cuts.  Scottish Parliament has very limited powers, but can sometimes re-arrange the piggy bank a bit - like getting rid of the bedroom tax.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 8, 2015)

who is labour leader in scotland now? something of a poisoned chalice, i suspect


----------



## weepiper (May 8, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> who is labour leader in scotland now? something of a poisoned chalice, i suspect


Murphy has such an incredible brass neck that he's refusing to resign.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 8, 2015)

weepiper said:


> Murphy has such an incredible brass neck that he's refusing to resign.


oh my lord 

what a fucking piece of shit that man is


----------



## geminisnake (May 8, 2015)

Spud reckons he's staying on as the party needs him but Chairchoob(Ian Davidson) will stick a knife in soon enough I hope


----------



## Pickman's model (May 8, 2015)

geminisnake said:


> Spud reckons he's staying on as the party needs him but Chairchoob(Ian Davidson) will stick a knife in soon enough I hope


i hear there's quite the queue for stabbing duties.


----------



## Celyn (May 8, 2015)

Jim Murphy is.  Says he won't stand down because he's so bloody wonderful or something.

login.heraldscotland.com/login.cgi?referrer=http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/snp-claim-labour-leader-jim-murphys-seat-after-nearly-20-years.1431052473

And he says he's going to be First Minister next year.


----------



## Celyn (May 8, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> oh my lord
> 
> what a fucking piece of shit that man is



Nonsense!  He can shout loudly and ... ok .... that is the end of his skills list, I suppose.


----------



## Plumdaff (May 8, 2015)

Won't someone sack him?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 8, 2015)

Plumdaff said:


> Won't someone sack him?


there's no one left.


----------



## Plumdaff (May 8, 2015)

Harman?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 8, 2015)

Plumdaff said:


> Harman?


----------



## Celyn (May 8, 2015)

geminisnake said:


> Spud reckons he's staying on as the party needs him but e Chairchoob(Ian Davidson) will stick a knife in soon enough I hope



Is that the Ian Davidson who wants to go around bayoneting the wounded?


----------



## weepiper (May 8, 2015)

Celyn said:


> Is that the Ian Davidson who wants to go around bayoneting the wounded?


Yep. He can console himself by bayonetting crisp packets in the park with a sweepie pole.


----------



## Celyn (May 8, 2015)

Plumdaff said:


> Won't someone sack him?



Will no-one rid me of this turbulent pest?

Actually Boss of Labour Party could sack him, given that the whole "Leader of the Scottish Labour Party" thing is a fiction, as there is no such entity as the "Scottish Labour Party".

Of course Miliband has resigned, so it would be for the new boss to sack him.


----------



## Celyn (May 8, 2015)

weepiper said:


> Yep. He can console himself by bayonetting crisp packets in the park with a sweepie pole.



And when he meets any woman he doesn't like, he can threaten to give her "a do-ing".


----------



## weepiper (May 8, 2015)




----------



## Pickman's model (May 8, 2015)

Celyn said:


> And when he meets any woman he doesn't like, he can threaten to give her "a do-ing".


c4u


----------



## weepiper (May 8, 2015)

https://hasjimmurphyresignedyet.wordpress.com/


----------



## Celyn (May 8, 2015)

Haha.  Of course, in order to resign, he might need a pen and paper, so it will take a bit longer while he makes sure he puts it on expenses.


----------



## equationgirl (May 8, 2015)

Celyn said:


> Jim Murphy is.  Says he won't stand down because he's so bloody wonderful or something.
> 
> login.heraldscotland.com/login.cgi?referrer=http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/snp-claim-labour-leader-jim-murphys-seat-after-nearly-20-years.1431052473
> 
> And he says he's going to be First Minister next year.


*snorts* poor deluded idiot


----------



## Sue (May 9, 2015)

weepiper said:


> Murphy has such an incredible brass neck that he's refusing to resign.



Brass neck is not something he's lacking right enough. Who's actually going to want the job though..?


----------



## 19sixtysix (May 9, 2015)

weepiper said:


> Murphy has such an incredible brass neck that he's refusing to resign.



He's feert. Nine years and no degree and fuck all useful skills to show. He is as they say unemployable.


----------



## Belushi (May 9, 2015)

What the fuck is this loser doing refusing to resign? Someone needs to lock him in a room with a service revolver.


----------



## 19sixtysix (May 9, 2015)

Belushi said:


> What the fuck is this loser doing refusing to resign? Someone needs to lock him in a room with a service revolver.



He'd only shoot his toe off.


----------



## Belushi (May 9, 2015)




----------



## weepiper (May 9, 2015)

Neil Findlay isn't pulling any punches


----------



## equationgirl (May 9, 2015)

Interestingly, I could have sworn Jim Murphy studied at the same university as me but on checking his profile it wasn't mine. Looking at the timeline he must have frequently visited my uni when he was involved in the NUS. One of my flatmates at the time was very enamoured with him, and I certainly remember meeting with him on more than one occasion. Always got the impression he was in politics for himself rather than what he could for others.


----------



## weepiper (May 9, 2015)

Unite and ASLEF both calling for him to quit too

http://labourlist.org/2015/05/two-u...lay-resigns-from-the-scottish-shadow-cabinet/


----------



## Frankie Jack (May 9, 2015)




----------



## danny la rouge (May 9, 2015)

Was just coming here to post those stories. I see I'm late as usual.


----------



## Belushi (May 9, 2015)

He has to go if there's any chance of Scottish Labour rebuilding themselves.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 9, 2015)

equationgirl said:


> Always got the impression he was in politics for himself rather than what he could for others.


It's funny how he still gives off that aura.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 9, 2015)

Belushi said:


> He has to go if there's any chance of Scottish Labour rebuilding themselves.


Which is why I'd like him to stay.


----------



## Frankie Jack (May 9, 2015)

I was a tad scunnered today. The Murphy circus just keeps on giving and cheering me up.


----------



## weepiper (May 9, 2015)

I know a couple of SSPers who were at university with him and fucking _hate _him.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 9, 2015)

weepiper said:


> I know a couple of SSPers who were at university with him and fucking _hate _him.


I know people of different generations who were at Uni with him...


----------



## youngian (May 9, 2015)




----------



## Belushi (May 9, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Which is why I'd like him to stay.



I'd feel like that in your shoes but I'm south of the border and we neeeeed you


----------



## Hocus Eye. (May 9, 2015)

How did Murphy contrive to remain at university for 9 years? Did he keep changing courses, and how did he pay for it?


----------



## danny la rouge (May 9, 2015)

Belushi said:


> I'd feel like that in your shoes but I'm south of the border and we neeeeed you


What for?

It's nice to be needed and all, but serious question all the same.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 9, 2015)

Hocus Eye. said:


> How did Murphy contrive to remain at university for 9 years? Did he keep changing courses, and how did he pay for it?


He had a grant. Which he then worked to abolish.


----------



## weepiper (May 9, 2015)

Hocus Eye. said:


> How did Murphy contrive to remain at university for 9 years? Did he keep changing courses, and how did he pay for it?


He went before fees were an issue and when you could still get a grant. Then pulled up the ladder behind him.


----------



## Casually Red (May 9, 2015)

Celyn said:


> Jim Murphy is.  Says he won't stand down because he's so bloody wonderful or something.
> 
> login.heraldscotland.com/login.cgi?referrer=http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/snp-claim-labour-leader-jim-murphys-seat-after-nearly-20-years.1431052473
> 
> And he says he's going to be First Minister next year.



Totally Insane . He's turned into hitler in the bunker , he'll be poisoning his dog next .


----------



## gosub (May 9, 2015)

weepiper said:


> Murphy has such an incredible brass neck that he's refusing to resign.


TBF:  When he first got the job, he did say they could sack him if Labour lost any seats, to rob them of that one pleasure would be a bit unfair


----------



## DotCommunist (May 9, 2015)

someone needs to do one of them Downfall parodies about slab


----------



## Pickman's model (May 9, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> someone needs to do one of them Downfall parodies about slab


yeh but slab murphy good jim murphy bad


----------



## Pickman's model (May 9, 2015)

weepiper said:


> I know a couple of SSPers who were at university with him and fucking _hate _him.


i did not go to university with him and i fucking hate him


----------



## danny la rouge (May 9, 2015)

@Margaret_Curran: .@scottishlabour needs to rebuild and have an honest discussion about the future. Jim Murphy is best person to lead our party through that.


----------



## Idris2002 (May 9, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> @Margaret_Curran: .@scottishlabour needs to rebuild and have an honest discussion about the future. Jim Murphy is best person to lead our party through that.



Suffering Christ, I've seen it all now.


----------



## campanula (May 9, 2015)

They never fucking learn.


----------



## equationgirl (May 9, 2015)

There are just not enough faceplams. Curran lost her seat too, that should have told her something.


----------



## Celyn (May 9, 2015)

Hocus Eye. said:


> How did Murphy contrive to remain at university for 9 years? Did he keep changing courses, and how did he pay for it?


.

Get sabbatical years  in student union then in NUS, I think.  Plus, as has been said, grants and no tuition fees to worry about. Then straight into a job with the Labour Party, and there you pretty much have his entire CV.


----------



## Celyn (May 9, 2015)

19sixtysix said:


> He's feert. Nine years and no degree and fuck all useful skills to show. He is as they say unemployable.



I suppose his dodgy friends in the Henry Jackson Society might find him a job.


----------



## 19sixtysix (May 10, 2015)

Celyn said:


> I suppose his dodgy friends in the Henry Jackson Society might find him a job.



Just looked at their web site. Reminded of Jonathan Bishop in their self important title & posts


----------



## redsquirrel (May 10, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> @Margaret_Curran: .@scottishlabour needs to rebuild and have an honest discussion about the future. Jim Murphy is best person to lead our party through that.



Amazing, a bloke that has just led a party to an utter disaster, who's turnout in his own seat must have been amongst the highest in Britain because people dislike him so much and want to ensure he's kicked out - he's the best bloke to lead. Fucking insane. The fact is that despite this loss the SLP should be able to rebuild, it's still got a bedrock in a lot of communities, the SNP will have to manage the expectations people have of it. There are opportunities there for Labour to start to rebuild even if it will take time.

But the way it's going on it's not just not going to rebuild it's actually digging it's own grave even deeper. It's not just this idiocy it's the stuff in that Harris video you posted, When Harris made the argument that to that Labour member that the party would have to work with the SNP to oppose the Tories he empathically denied that they would. Just absolutely crazy.


----------



## weepiper (May 10, 2015)

Excellent article from Paul Hutcheon here.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 10, 2015)

19sixtysix said:


> Just looked at their web site. Reminded of Jonathan Bishop in their self important title & posts


they're probably more like harold bishop


----------



## co-op (May 10, 2015)

weepiper said:


> Excellent article from Paul Hutcheon here.




On Jim Murphy

"He snatched catastrophe from the jaws of defeat"



weepiper do you have any interesting links on the political splits within the SNP? Or maybe danny la rouge does?


----------



## weepiper (May 10, 2015)




----------



## weepiper (May 10, 2015)

co-op said:


> On Jim Murphy
> 
> "He snatched catastrophe from the jaws of defeat"
> 
> ...


Can't think of anything detailed offhand I'm afraid, danny might know better than me. The only particularly public thing that's going on atm is Salmond and Sturgeon disagreeing on whether 56 SNP MPs makes a difference to when the next indyref should be


----------



## co-op (May 10, 2015)

weepiper said:


>




I love it that he hasn't resigned. Wonder if he thinks maybe he did quite well.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 10, 2015)

co-op said:


> On Jim Murphy
> 
> "He snatched catastrophe from the jaws of defeat"
> 
> ...


I can't read the Paul Hutcheon because I've exceeded the Herald quota. But he's generally incisive enough to be hated by Labour and Nats alike. 

As for SNP splits, the fault line is going to be over managing expectations. Not just of whether it brings Indy closer, but what anti austerity measures are actually achievable. 

Salmond's is correct, though: independence is closer now that it appeared on Sept 19th last year. Whether that's because of the SNP MPs directly or because of the attitudes we're seeing now from both London based commentators and those English electors who resent the Scots for voting SNP, I'd say actually the latter. The Union can't survive if the attitude remains that Scotland should only vote for "acceptable" parties. If it really is the case that some people voted Tory, against their best judgement, because of fear of SNP influence on a Labour government (often shortened to "the Scots"), then how long can the Union survive now? That's surely the start of a messy, bad tempered crumble into dust?


----------



## frogwoman (May 10, 2015)

A woman i vaguely know started going on last night when i was out about how she feels 'really pissed off with scottish people for not voting labour'


----------



## co-op (May 10, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Salmond's is correct, though: independence is closer now that it appeared on Sept 19th last year. Whether that's because of the SNP MPs directly or because of the attitudes we're seeing now from both London based commentators and those English electors who resent the Scots for voting SNP, I'd say actually the latter. The Union can't survive if the attitude remains that Scotland should only vote for "acceptable" parties. If it really is the case that some people voted Tory, against their best judgement, because of fear of SNP influence on a Labour government (often shortened to "the Scots"), then how long can the Union survive now? That's surely the start of a messy, bad tempered crumble into dust?



Another reason maybe is that if Labour had staggered over the line with some kind of confidence and supply support from the SNP then (paradoxically) that might have been quite a good reason for not leaving the Union since it actually would have given the SNP a huge influence over Westminster for the next 5 years, the only things they would not have had a de facto veto over would be issues like (admittedly important things like) Trident where the tories and Labour would join sides and vote it through.

But now, they have not one iota of influence on central govt policy and they have clearly been elected on an economic manifesto which is fundamentally at odds with Westminster - why stay now? It's surely win-win for the SNP here - if they don't get independence they can (completely legitimately) blame everything on the English and Welsh. Or they get independence and hoorah.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 10, 2015)

frogwoman said:


> A woman i vaguely know started going on last night when i was out about how she feels 'really pissed off with scottish people for not voting labour'


And old school friend of Mrs la rouge - Labour voter, lifelong socialist - harangued her on the phone yesterday saying "the Scots" should "just fuck off".


----------



## Belushi (May 10, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> And old school friend of Mrs la rouge - Labour voter, lifelong socialist - harangued her on the phone yesterday saying "the Scots" should "just fuck off".



Jesus


----------



## Pickman's model (May 10, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> And old school friend of Mrs la rouge - Labour voter, lifelong socialist - harangued her on the phone yesterday saying "the Scots" should "just fuck off".


and so it begins


----------



## Belushi (May 10, 2015)

And they're going to


----------



## frogwoman (May 10, 2015)

But even if labour had won ever seat in scotland including the lib dem and tory seats the tories would still have won!,


----------



## Pickman's model (May 10, 2015)

if they had their way it would doubtless be the massacre of glencoe all over again


----------



## Pickman's model (May 10, 2015)

frogwoman said:


> But even if labour had won ever seat in scotland including the lib dem and tory seats the tories would still have won!,


yeh it's down to the utter inadequacy of labour who now wish to distance themselves from their abject failure.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 10, 2015)

I should point out, for those unaware of my family history, that Mrs la rouge is English.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 10, 2015)

south - to do battle in london!






the one thing i am disappointed about in the snp's stance is the lack of support for the jacobite cause.


----------



## butchersapron (May 10, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> And old school friend of Mrs la rouge - Labour voter, lifelong socialist - harangued her on the phone yesterday saying "the Scots" should "just fuck off".


She rang up just to say_ fuck off?_


----------



## frogwoman (May 10, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> And old school friend of Mrs la rouge - Labour voter, lifelong socialist - harangued her on the phone yesterday saying "the Scots" should "just fuck off".



One thing that the election campaign has created seems to be a really quite nasty anti scottish sentiment here in england. I might be naive but i never remember this sort of racism being common place in england at any time in my life.


----------



## co-op (May 10, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> And old school friend of Mrs la rouge - Labour voter, lifelong socialist - harangued her on the phone yesterday saying "the Scots" should "just fuck off".



Don't know if anyone else heard Jeremy Vine a couple of days before the referendum, just after the close polls and Cameron pulled out the Love Bomb idea (worked on Quebec apparently). R5 obligingly cleared the decks for a phone in giving listeners the chance to say how much they loved Scotland/the Scottish/The Union etc. I was kind of fascinated because this could have been History In The Making so I sat in the car and listened as caller after caller rang in and utterly failed to share the love. Two basic camps - (1) very reasonable and often quite fond of Scotland types saying it's really nothing to do with us if they want to go, that's their choice, and (2) they've been poncing off us for years, I'm fed up with their whining, it's time for them to sod off. 

After an hour the Jeremy pulled the phone in. I don't think the English do Love Bombing.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 10, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> She rang up just to say_ fuck off?_


Well ostensibly to wish her s happy birthday (belatedly). But maybe. 

They often speak on the phone.


----------



## butchersapron (May 10, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Well ostensibly to wish her s happy birthday (belatedly). But maybe.
> 
> They often speak on the phone.


_Happy birthday, now fuck off._


----------



## Pickman's model (May 10, 2015)

frogwoman said:


> One thing that the election campaign has created seems to be a really quite nasty anti scottish sentiment here in england. I might be naive but i never remember this sort of racism being common place in england at any time in my life.


----------



## co-op (May 10, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> _Happy birthday, now fuck off._



I'd do it the other way round, end on a positive note.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 10, 2015)

co-op said:


> I'd do it the other way round, end on a positive note.


on the basis never go to bed angry etc no doubt


----------



## danny la rouge (May 10, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> _Happy birthday, now fuck off._


Indeed. She's a bit of a zoomer, but it is a new departure. 

Amusingly, perhaps, she's a history & modern studies teacher in Manchester.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 10, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Indeed. She's a bit of a zoomer, but it is a new departure.
> 
> Amusingly, perhaps, she's a history & modern studies teacher in Manchester.


you'd have thought she'd have a broader perspective on this sort of thing then


----------



## butchersapron (May 10, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Indeed. She's a bit of a zoomer, but it is a new departure.
> 
> Amusingly, perhaps, she's a history & modern studies teacher in Manchester.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 10, 2015)

co-op said:


> After an hour the Jeremy pulled the phone in. I don't think the English do Love Bombing.


To be fair, I think that's more likely to be an attribute of Jeremy Vine listeners.


----------



## Idris2002 (May 10, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> _Happy birthday, now fuck off._



I thought that sort of thing only happened in our house.



Pickman's model said:


>



frogwoman is one of those young people, if memory serves.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 10, 2015)

Idris2002 said:


> frogwoman is one of those young people, if memory serves.


fw many things but neither a jock nor a geordie.


----------



## J Ed (May 10, 2015)

My personal view is that the anti-Scottish sentiment that has grown over the past four years is part of the wider trend of anti-'scrounger' rhetoric. People who would never dream of using a racial slur, though they may use PC language to say racist things, feel emboldened by the mainstream narrative to say bigoted things about the Scottish. They are unemployed, they don't talk proper English, they contribute nothing and most importantly they are mostly white. It's alright to dehumanise them just like it's alright to dehumanise Northerners, Scousers and 'Chavs' in general.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 10, 2015)

J Ed said:


> My personal view is that the anti-Scottish sentiment that has grown over the past four years is part of the wider trend of anti-'scrounger' rhetoric. People who would never dream of using a racial slur, though they may use PC language to say racist things, feel emboldened by the mainstream narrative to say bigoted things about the Scottish. They are unemployed, they don't talk proper English, they contribute nothing and most importantly they are mostly white. It's alright to dehumanise them just like it's alright to dehumanise Northerners, Scousers and 'Chavs' in general.


i wonder how much down to the greater familiarity people now have with the barnett formula


----------



## Idris2002 (May 10, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> fw many things but neither a jock nor a geordie.


I mean, old man, that your piece of DC Thomson nostalgia would be lost on someone for whom the Spice Girls are ancient history.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 10, 2015)

Idris2002 said:


> I mean, old man, that your piece of DC Thomson nostalgia would be lost on someone for whom the Spice Girls are ancient history.


ah! i thought you meant she was one of the young people depicted on the comic's cover.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 10, 2015)

I just called...to say....fuck oooooff


----------



## Pickman's model (May 10, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> I just called...to say....fuck oooooff


i just called to say i do not care
i just call to say fuck off
and i mean it from the bottom of my heart


----------



## frogwoman (May 10, 2015)

But i never remember any racism against scottish people before apart from stupid jokes about kilts etc, and it seems to be quite common now.


----------



## weepiper (May 10, 2015)

frogwoman said:


> But i never remember any racism against scottish people before apart from stupid jokes about kilts etc, and it seems to be quite common now.


It's always been there froggy. It's just more socially acceptable, in different circles than it used to be restricted to.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 10, 2015)

weepiper said:


> It's always been there froggy. It's just more socially acceptable, in different circles than it used to be restricted to.


i wonder how much of it is jealousy, that england stuck with the fucking monarchy and so on while the scots can do a number.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 10, 2015)

anti- irish bigotry was the more common one growing up. The war was still on with PIRA as well so people seemed to feel it was ok to do thick paddy stuff.


----------



## frogwoman (May 10, 2015)

Well when people used to be racist when i was growing up it would be about 'pakis', 'pikeys' etc, not the scots. not that thats any better or anything but it seems very new and i never used to hear this type of stuff before.


----------



## 19sixtysix (May 10, 2015)

frogwoman said:


> But i never remember any racism against scottish people before and it seems to be quite common now.



It was all more subtle before. I live in England it's the ones who use the word Jock that get my suspicions up. Ex forces its more a habit but non forces people who use it are usually cunts.


----------



## frogwoman (May 10, 2015)

Although when people used to make jokes about kilts and fried mars bars etc maybe they were being serious rather than joking? A lot is disguised with 'banter'


----------



## weepiper (May 10, 2015)

frogwoman said:


> Although when people used to make jokes about kilts and fried mars bars etc maybe they were being serious rather than joking? A lot is disguised with 'banter'


As with so many of these things, it's only funny if you're not the target of it.


----------



## frogwoman (May 10, 2015)

weepiper said:


> As with so many of these things, it's only funny if you're not the target of it.



Well yeah. But it seemed to not be 'meant' as racism whereas the other stuff i mention was.


----------



## weepiper (May 10, 2015)

frogwoman said:


> Well yeah. But it seemed to not be 'meant' as racism whereas the other stuff i mention was.


it's still racism, just the coward's option. I prefer yer honest EDL type tbh. At least they don't try to dress it up.


----------



## Sue (May 10, 2015)

J Ed said:


> My personal view is that the anti-Scottish sentiment that has grown over the past four years is part of the wider trend of anti-'scrounger' rhetoric. People who would never dream of using a racial slur, though they may use PC language to say racist things, feel emboldened by the mainstream narrative to say bigoted things about the Scottish. They are unemployed, they don't talk proper English, they contribute nothing and most importantly they are mostly white. It's alright to dehumanise them just like it's alright to dehumanise Northerners, Scousers and 'Chavs' in general.


I'd agree it's part of the scrounger narratIve. Got a lot of this round the referendum. Used to hear the Scots being hardworking/canny stereotype nearly as often as the negative ones. These days, I only really hear the negative stuff.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 10, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i wonder how much down to the greater familiarity people now have with the barnett formula


I think few are familiar with how it actually works, they just see it as "funding from us to them" rather than a mechanism to distribute funds that Scottish taxes and revenues also pay into.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 10, 2015)

frogwoman said:


> Although when people used to make jokes about kilts and fried mars bars etc maybe they were being serious rather than joking? A lot is disguised with 'banter'


If you watch a comedy programme like Have I Got News and Scots are mentioned, then the "joke" will always involve avoiding fruit and veg. "Scottish salad, that's chips isn't it?" That sort of thing. I'm sure it's hilarious, but it does pall after a while.


----------



## frogwoman (May 10, 2015)

weepiper said:


> it's still racism, just the coward's option. I prefer yer honest EDL type tbh. At least they don't try to dress it up.



Agreed.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 10, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> I just called...to say....fuck oooooff


To be more accurate, she was telling "the Scots" to fuck off, not Mrs LR, who identifies as English. The election came up in conversation, rather than being the purpose of the call (though, who knows, maybe she was itching to say it) and became heated on Sally's part. Mrs LR was amused but quite taken aback at how vitriolic her friend became.  

As an aside, Mrs LR voted SNP, and had decided to long before I had.


----------



## nino_savatte (May 10, 2015)

frogwoman said:


> But i never remember any racism against scottish people before apart from stupid jokes about kilts etc, and it seems to be quite common now.


Although it may not appear immediately obvious, so-called 'ginger jokes' are deeply rooted in English anti-Celtic sentiment. There are more red-haired people in Scotland than in any other part of the British Isles.


----------



## frogwoman (May 10, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> To be more accurate, she was telling "the Scots" to fuck off, not Mrs LR, who identifies as English. The election came up in conversation, rather than being the purpose of the call (though, who knows, maybe she was itching to say it) and became heated on Sally's part. Mrs LR was amused but quite taken aback at how vitriolic her friend became.
> 
> As an aside, Mrs LR voted SNP, and had decided to long before I had.



I take it she didnt share this piece of info?


----------



## krink (May 10, 2015)

My neighbours either side both talked about the danger of "those jocks winning all those votes, they get more money" fear and envy stuff. I couldn't believe it. Its only 50 miles away or something.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 10, 2015)

frogwoman said:


> I take it she didnt share this piece of info?


I'm sure she did. She's no shrinking violet.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 10, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> I'm sure she did. She's no shrinking violet.


no clinging vine


----------



## Frankie Jack (May 10, 2015)

frogwoman said:


> A woman i vaguely know started going on last night when i was out about how she feels 'really pissed off with scottish people for not voting labour'



Please tell her I said..


----------



## danny la rouge (May 10, 2015)

J Ed said:


> My personal view is that the anti-Scottish sentiment that has grown over the past four years is part of the wider trend of anti-'scrounger' rhetoric. People who would never dream of using a racial slur, though they may use PC language to say racist things, feel emboldened by the mainstream narrative to say bigoted things about the Scottish. They are unemployed, they don't talk proper English, they contribute nothing and most importantly they are mostly white. It's alright to dehumanise them just like it's alright to dehumanise Northerners, Scousers and 'Chavs' in general.


Further to this, John Harris' short film from Nuneaton was instructive. He's been actually very good. 

http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...015-scottish-get-in-with-labour-were-done-for

You can find much more vitriol on social media any day of the week. But I'm loath to use that as a measure of anything other than that the Internet teems with arseholes.


----------



## equationgirl (May 10, 2015)

frogwoman said:


> A woman i vaguely know started going on last night when i was out about how she feels 'really pissed off with scottish people for not voting labour'


That just fucks me off. Had a lot of vitriol along the same vein from a few English friends, one in particular was massively offensive about it. If middle England believed the tory rhetoric how's that the fault of people hundreds of miles away? She hasn't lived up here for years in any case.


----------



## Celyn (May 10, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> I can't read the Paul Hutcheon because I've exceeded the Herald quota. But he's generally incisive enough to be hated by Labour and Nats alike...



Here's a wee bit of it.  





> Murphy, who has never been on the intellectual wing of his party, has always been regarded internally as a
> 
> talented self-publicist who was adept at advancing his own interests.
> 
> ...


----------



## Pickman's model (May 10, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> Although it may not appear immediately obvious, so-called 'ginger jokes' are deeply rooted in English anti-Celtic sentiment. There are more red-haired people in Scotland than in any other part of the British Isles.


what like the south park ginger episode?


----------



## Celyn (May 10, 2015)

frogwoman said:


> A woman i vaguely know started going on last night when i was out about how she feels 'really pissed off with scottish people for not voting labour'


Did she notice that if all 59 Scottish seats were Labour, we'd still have a Tory government?

_edited: because Tory govt, not Troy_


----------



## danny la rouge (May 10, 2015)

Celyn said:


> Here's a wee bit of it.


Cheers. I subsequently bought the paper version.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 10, 2015)

Celyn said:


> Did she notice that if all 59 Scottish seats were Labour, we'd still have a Troy government?


we'd still have jm as scottish labour leader


----------



## Celyn (May 10, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> To be more accurate, she was telling "the Scots" to fuck off, not Mrs LR, who identifies as English. The election came up in conversation, rather than being the purpose of the call (though, who knows, maybe she was itching to say it) and became heated on Sally's part. Mrs LR was amused but quite taken aback at how vitriolic her friend became.
> 
> As an aside, Mrs LR voted SNP, and had decided to long before I had.



I hope Mrs LR *did* manage to have a happy birthday, despite weird friend.


----------



## Dogsauce (May 11, 2015)

I thought the standard Scottish stereotype was the incomprehensible alcoholic?

I imagine there's some jealousy because Scotland gets to have nice things, no student fees, no bedroom tax and so on. It's up to England to fight for those things, not whine at others getting them.  Same as ever, like people bemoaning the decent terms of employment the public sector gets (or used to) rather than demanding similar from their own employer, backed up with this nonsense that we can't afford things (rather than chose not to afford things).


----------



## danny la rouge (May 11, 2015)

Labour finally gets where it went wrong.  All it has to do is convince Scotland it can still be a valuable part of England:


----------



## Belushi (May 11, 2015)

Oops


----------



## co-op (May 11, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Labour finally gets where it went wrong.  All it has to do is convince Scotland it can still be a valuable part of England:




Is that real? 
Really real?


----------



## co-op (May 11, 2015)

I wasn't sure about this one at first

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


----------



## danny la rouge (May 11, 2015)

That's really Yveette.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 11, 2015)

co-op said:


> I wasn't sure about this one at first
> 
> http://www.buzzfeed.com/jamieross/its-been-easy-its-been-to-outdo-the-snp


That's really real.


----------



## frogwoman (May 11, 2015)




----------



## co-op (May 11, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> That's really Yveette.



Tweets below are saying it's a pisstake


----------



## frogwoman (May 11, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Labour finally gets where it went wrong.  All it has to do is convince Scotland it can still be a valuable part of England:


----------



## danny la rouge (May 11, 2015)

co-op said:


> Tweets below are saying it's a pisstake


Oh, it's not Yvette; it's Yveette.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 11, 2015)

thick twats, even a staunch scots unionist would take umbrage at that tweet. Valuable part of england lol..

The labourite hunt for a clue marches on...


----------



## gosub (May 11, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> The labourite hunt for a clue marches on...


They are in Waitrose apparently


----------



## Dogsauce (May 11, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> thick twats, even a staunch scots unionist would take umbrage at that tweet. Valuable part of england lol..
> 
> The labourite hunt for a clue marches on...



It's a pisstake.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 11, 2015)

Dogsauce said:


> It's a pisstake.


Spoilsport.


----------



## Celyn (May 11, 2015)

nm


----------



## Casually Red (May 11, 2015)

That was a good one, as pisstakes go . A lot of people will believe it if told in the pub . Sturdy enough to grow legs .


----------



## Frankie Jack (May 11, 2015)

Still hanging on.


----------



## xslavearcx (May 12, 2015)

Does anybody here kinda wish he stayed on? Im kinda enjoying the car crash nature of watching jim murphy as leader, like a really intense episode of the office, you cringe like fuck but for some reason its entertaining. If they do get rid of him, bring back iain grey. I always felt sorry for england not being able to witness the awesomeness of ian greys election campaign.

maybe not healthy for politics up here mind you


----------



## Frankie Jack (May 12, 2015)

Kinda. His gurning does my head in though. 30 seconds is too long.


----------



## treelover (May 12, 2015)

He was seen as a big pin up when I was NUS.


----------



## Celyn (May 12, 2015)

treelover said:


> He was seen as a big pin up when I was NUS.



You will make my brain explode.


----------



## Frankie Jack (May 12, 2015)

treelover said:


> He was seen as a big pin up when I was NUS.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 12, 2015)

treelover said:


> He was seen as a big pin up when I was NUS.


By whom?


----------



## Belushi (May 12, 2015)

Is he still refusing to go?


----------



## danny la rouge (May 12, 2015)

Belushi said:


> Is he still refusing to go?



https://hasjimmurphyresignedyet.wordpress.com/


----------



## Belushi (May 12, 2015)

What planet are Scottish Labour on?


----------



## danny la rouge (May 12, 2015)

Belushi said:


> What planet are Scottish Labour on?


This one:


----------



## frogwoman (May 12, 2015)

I wonder how the lone Scottish Tory feels about 'english votes for english laws'


----------



## danny la rouge (May 12, 2015)

frogwoman said:


> I wonder how the lone Scottish Tory feels about 'english votes for english laws'


----------



## co-op (May 12, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> This one:



But what's so weird is that they're already here






and yet they still want Cap'n Jim at the helm. I mean I guess most Labour MSPs are working on their CVs right now so maybe they're a bit too busy to apply for the leader's job


----------



## Frankie Jack (May 12, 2015)

Labour members call meeting in Glasgow to launch Jim Murphy leadership rebellion


----------



## DotCommunist (May 12, 2015)

well I suppose tenacity is one quality we can attribute to jimothy


----------



## treelover (May 12, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> By whom?



by the other NUS female Sabs across the Uk, etc, I remember him at one NUS summer gathering.


----------



## Frankie Jack (May 12, 2015)

Alex Rowley joins the resignation list.


----------



## treelover (May 12, 2015)

Anyway, its been reported today, that 36 of the SNP cohort are comprehensive educated, wonder what labours figures are?


----------



## Frankie Jack (May 12, 2015)

treelover said:


> Anyway, its been reported today, that 36 of the SNP cohort are comprehensive educated, wonder what labours figures are?



Mostly UniGrads.. Except Jim of course.


----------



## treelover (May 12, 2015)

Frankie Jack said:


> Alex Rowley joins the resignation list.
> 
> View attachment 71412





> In January 2008, while he was employed as a special adviser to the Secretary of State for Scotland, it emerged that in 2002 McTernan had branded Scotland as being "narrow" and "racist" during the period he worked for the Scottish Arts Council. In an email to the then Labour MSP Karen Gillon, who was about to make a trip to Sweden, McTernan wrote _“If you’ve not been to Sweden before, I think you’ll really like it – it’s the country Scotland would be if it wasn’t narrow, Presbyterian, racist etc. etc. Social democracy in action.”_[10] The email was obtained by the The Sunday Times under freedom of information legislation.[11][12]




Chief of staff?, that would be John McTernan, the Blairite scumbag who claimed Labour weren't the party for benefit scroungers and who as political adviser was so successful in Aus and N/Z, not! He also is claimed to have said the above,

what was Murphy thinking?


----------



## co-op (May 12, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> well I suppose tenacity is one quality we can attribute to jimothy



This is one of the things that fascinates me about JM; I mean the guy must have skin that makes rhino hide look thin. At what point does this complete oblviousness to reality and to what others are saying and doing flip over into full-blown sociopathy?


----------



## Frankie Jack (May 12, 2015)

treelover said:


> Chief of staff?, that would be John Mcternan,  the blairite scumbag who claimed Labour weren't the party for benefit scroungers and who as political adviser was so successful in Aus and NZ, not! He also is claimed to have the above,
> 
> what was Murphy thinking?


He has Gemma Doyles' hubs Greg Poynton, of the Falkirk farce, on his Comms team too.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 12, 2015)

treelover said:


> Anyway, its been reported today, that 36 of the SNP cohort are comprehensive educated, wonder what labours figures are?


It's actually 90% of SNP MPs that went to comprehensive schools. 5% was privately educated. (general population for UK is 7% privately educated).

I can only assume your figure is for "no further than comprehensive education", ie didn't go to college or uni after leaving school. Although I can't find that in the Sutton Trust report I assume you're using.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 12, 2015)

9 years on a university campus is enough to warp anyones mind. Have you seen veteran lecturers?


----------



## Idris2002 (May 12, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> 9 years on a university campus is enough to warp anyones mind. Have you seen veteran lecturers?


----------



## Celyn (May 12, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> It's actually 90% of SNP MPs that went to comprehensive schools. 5% was privately educated. (general population for UK is 7% privately educated)...



Sigh of relief! I just read the 36 figure above and was a bit shocked it could be that high. 90% is better.


----------



## Celyn (May 12, 2015)

> MPs educated at comprehensive schools now make up 49% if the House of Commons, an increase from 43% in 2010.
> 
> Almost two-thirds of Labour MPs and a third of Conservatives, 57% of Liberal Democrats and 90% of Scottish Nationalist MPs went to comprehensives, the analysis indicates.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-32692789


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (May 13, 2015)

mildly amused by the idea of 57% of 8 MPs...


----------



## Pickman's model (May 13, 2015)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> mildly amused by the idea of 57% of 8 MPs...


yeh one of them's been dismembered


----------



## danny la rouge (May 13, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh one of them's been dismembered


Excellent start.


----------



## weepiper (May 13, 2015)




----------



## Pickman's model (May 13, 2015)

weepiper said:


>



jim "no mates" murphy


----------



## steeplejack (May 13, 2015)

I think Jim will be consumed by these flames, to be honest. He can't survive this level of dissent.

If you didn't hear this interview on Good Morning Scotland today, it is well worth a listen.
_
"Labour needs a future, and Jim Murphy is Labour's past...he's just not trusted, or popular with the Scottish people"_


----------



## xslavearcx (May 13, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> jim "no mates" murphy


Jim Murphy : _hated by many, loved by a few, respected by all..._


----------



## xslavearcx (May 13, 2015)

xslavearcx said:


> Jim Murphy : _hated by many, loved by a few, respected by all..._


I'd actually love to see him wearing a t-shirt saying that ...


----------



## 19sixtysix (May 13, 2015)

weepiper said:


>




I suspect that lot are reading the future. Dinosaurs of the city council an extinction is on its way.


----------



## weepiper (May 13, 2015)

19sixtysix said:


> I suspect that lot are reading the future. Dinosaurs of the city council an extinction is on its way.


3 of them are candidates for the Scottish Parliament elections in 2016. No-one wants tarred with the Murphy shitty stick.


----------



## weepiper (May 14, 2015)

So that's Unite, ASLEF and now Unison too


----------



## weepiper (May 15, 2015)

Here is the General Secretary of the STUC basically saying Scottish Labour is irrelevant

http://www.stuc.org.uk/news/1163/stuc-on-the-scottish-labour-party


----------



## Fedayn (May 15, 2015)

Graham Smith from the STUC met Sturgeon the other day and they agreed on some ways of working re opposing austerity. Before the election Smith was saying the STUC/unions will possibly need to break the law to oppiose Austerity. Not heard him repeat this since the election but it might be interesting to see how the relationship with the SNP develops and how much he meant the need to break the law.


----------



## weepiper (May 15, 2015)

... CWU too now...


----------



## Belushi (May 15, 2015)

I'm waiting for him to throw his hat in the ring for the national leaders job.


----------



## treelover (May 15, 2015)

Celyn said:


> Here's a wee bit of it.




25 years too late..


----------



## andysays (May 15, 2015)

Belushi said:


> I'm waiting for him to throw his hat in the ring for the national leaders job.



Pretty sure he's ineligible, by virtue of no longer being an MP.

Otherwise he probably would...


----------



## xslavearcx (May 16, 2015)

Just went past the Scottish labour headquarters on bath steet on the bus there where Jims fate is currently being decided. My kids enjoyed the spectacle of the protesters outside


----------



## weepiper (May 16, 2015)

He's won the vote by 3 votes. Including one from himself and one from a Peer drafted in to replace one of the ex-MPs.


----------



## equationgirl (May 16, 2015)

weepiper said:


> He's won the vote by 3 votes. Including one from himself and one from a Peer drafted in to replace one of the ex-MPs.


For fucks sake, isn't that basically cheating?


----------



## weepiper (May 16, 2015)

equationgirl said:


> For fucks sake, isn't that basically cheating?


Well I'm waiting to hear him tell the press conference how it's not, yes


----------



## Belushi (May 16, 2015)




----------



## The Boy (May 16, 2015)

Has he sneaked in his resignation?


----------



## weepiper (May 16, 2015)

The Boy said:


> Has he sneaked in his resignation?



He will 'tender his resignation next month' apparently. Leaving the door open for doing a Farage I reckon. He's laying into the unions now


----------



## The Boy (May 16, 2015)

weepiper said:


> He's laying into the unions now



And everyone else by the sounds of things...


----------



## xslavearcx (May 16, 2015)

The Boy said:


> And everyone else by the sounds of things...


Jims message to em all...


----------



## equationgirl (May 16, 2015)

Love his statement about leaving labour with an agenda of reform,  almost as if he's saying 'i broke it, you lot fix it'


----------



## Belushi (Aug 15, 2015)

I see they've elected a new leader, Kezia Dugdale, is she any good?

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/15/kezia-dugdale-elected-scottish-labour-leader


----------



## weepiper (Aug 15, 2015)

Belushi said:


> I see they've elected a new leader, Kezia Dugdale, is she any good?
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/15/kezia-dugdale-elected-scottish-labour-leader



She was Jim's deputy. No, is the short answer.


----------



## red & green (Aug 15, 2015)

They have no originality - heard her on radio - seems to be a Mhairi black tribute appointment


----------



## nino_savatte (Aug 15, 2015)

Deputy 'fucking' Dug. Have SLab completely taken leave of their senses?


----------



## nino_savatte (Aug 15, 2015)

red & green said:


> They have no originality - heard her on radio - seems to be a Mhairi black tribute appointment


If Dugdale was anything like Mhairi Black, SLab would do well. As things stand, they can only go downhill from here.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Aug 15, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> Deputy 'fucking' Dug. Have SLab completely take leave of their senses?



Wow, an unflattering photo. How very tabloid.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Aug 15, 2015)

red & green said:


> They have no originality - heard her on radio - seems to be a Mhairi black tribute appointment


do all young Scots women sound the same to you?


----------



## weepiper (Aug 15, 2015)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> do all young Scots women sound the same to you?


This. She's absolutely nothing like Mhairi Black, more's the pity.


----------



## murphy1970 (Aug 16, 2015)

LP have signed their death warrant north of the border voting Kezia in as leader. She is simply the female face of Blairism, not as high profile as Jim Murphy but politically just as hopeless, a right wing technocrat dreaming of the old day where monkeys in red rosettes skated home.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Aug 16, 2015)

I've got a lovely image of monkeys ice skating in red rosettes now


----------



## Plumdaff (Aug 16, 2015)

In the interview I saw of her it was appallingly fascinating to see how the focus groups had come up with the phrase 'give us another look' and she was crowbarring this into every clause, let alone sentence. These bots never notice how dreadfully they come across, they're so submerged in this bullshit speech. Do they talk to each other like this? Is this how they end up thinking Cooper and Burnham are the brightest and best?


----------



## William of Walworth (Aug 18, 2015)

Wonder how she'll get on with Corbyn if he gets to be UKLab leader?


----------



## Celyn (Aug 18, 2015)

She said "eek, no, terrible, if Corbyn got to be in charge, Labour would be stuck forever "carping on the sidelines", then it transpired that he was quite popular, so she said she sort of approves of him now.


----------



## William of Walworth (Aug 18, 2015)

She can't be stupid enough to have failed to see the large turnouts Corbyn got in Glasgow recently ... (elsewhere in Scotland too? Not sure)


----------



## Celyn (Aug 18, 2015)

Oh by then she had seen that he was popular, so there was no more talk of carping on the sidelines.


----------



## Sue (Aug 18, 2015)

Celyn said:


> She said "eek, no, terrible, if Corbyn got to be in charge, Labour would be stuck forever "carping on the sidelines", then it transpired that he was quite popular, so she said she sort of approves of him now.


A true heir to JM...


----------



## brogdale (Sep 30, 2015)

Loving the plural of MP used in this article...

Jeremy Corbyn says Britain should apologise for slave trade – Politics live


----------



## Celyn (Sep 30, 2015)

Ah yes, all those many many Labour MPs in  Scotland.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 30, 2015)

what's jim murphy up to now?


----------



## The Boy (Sep 30, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> what's jim murphy up to now?



Finishing his degree?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 30, 2015)




----------

