Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Rutherglen and Hamilton West (... eventually)

We'll see a bit of this next year, like the 2017 General Election: Tories voting Labour to ensure the Nat loses. Given that the bigoted, sexist eighteenth century knuckledragger standing for the "Scottish Family Party", was gloating about the SNP's defeat last night, I suspect even he voted Labour.

The Emperor of India will be bitterly disappointed with his tally of just 34, but gained valuable experience and will look to bounce back next year in Hyderabad South, which will be less stony ground for him.

The Nats have a half hearted farrago of limp excuses, they will point to Margaret Ferrier, bad weather, an unlucky revelation of the queen of spades during a game of gin rummy between Humza Yousaf and the candidate the night before the election, etc etc. They need to find a compelling few reasons for their support to turn out, and an exhausted and whiffy government well past its sell by date, will find that tough in the next twelve months. Not sure that claiming a majority of seats is a mandate for independence is the way to go, given that the legal / fiscal infrastructure to push it through in the parallel universe where Westminster agrees to that, just isn't there.

Heavy losses look likely next year. The SNP deserve a good kicking. But neoliberalism and late capitalism triumphs whatever the result.
 
Had to look up Garry Cooke's position. He was standing to 'make history' by pressuring the English Premier League to allow Rangers and Celtic to join.

I think it's fair to say his narrative didn't cut through to the electorate.
Tactical voting by the Scottish Bournemouth and Sheffield diaspora cost him the seat obvs...
 
The only surprise for me was the size of the increase in Labour's vote ... a 20% swing, if repeated next year in a general election, would garner Starmer a landslide into power.

The tactical voting I could see was anything to avoid the SNP & Tory party.
 
The only surprise for me was the size of the increase in Labour's vote ... a 20% swing, if repeated next year in a general election, would garner Starmer a landslide into power.

The tactical voting I could see was anything to avoid the SNP & Tory party.
Yeah, I fear you’re missing some Scotland-specific nuance. Yes, the size of the swing was a surprise, but it was achieved with the help of Tory voters voting Labour.

A tactical vote against the Tories in that constituency wouldn’t make sense. The tactical vote was by Tories. Who bolstered the SNP vote flooding to Labour.
 
We'll see a bit of this next year, like the 2017 General Election: Tories voting Labour to ensure the Nat loses. Given that the bigoted, sexist eighteenth century knuckledragger standing for the "Scottish Family Party", was gloating about the SNP's defeat last night, I suspect even he voted Labour.

The Emperor of India will be bitterly disappointed with his tally of just 34, but gained valuable experience and will look to bounce back next year in Hyderabad South, which will be less stony ground for him.

The Nats have a half hearted farrago of limp excuses, they will point to Margaret Ferrier, bad weather, an unlucky revelation of the queen of spades during a game of gin rummy between Humza Yousaf and the candidate the night before the election, etc etc. They need to find a compelling few reasons for their support to turn out, and an exhausted and whiffy government well past its sell by date, will find that tough in the next twelve months. Not sure that claiming a majority of seats is a mandate for independence is the way to go, given that the legal / fiscal infrastructure to push it through in the parallel universe where Westminster agrees to that, just isn't there.

Heavy losses look likely next year. The SNP deserve a good kicking. But neoliberalism and late capitalism triumphs whatever the result.
Well, the Scottish Family Party has such a high profile that until reading your post, I'd never heard of them. Your synopsis saves me the bother of now looking them up.
 
30% apparently, I thought by elections always had a fairly low turnout though, not sure if this is remarkably low

e2a and as usual it winds me up when I see a low turnout, trade unions held to far higher democratic standards than this. Far higher.
Unless you introduce compulsory voting, it is difficult to see how you could impose a minimum turnout figure on elections.
 
I’ve not seen the turnout. Was it down?

Turnout 37.2% - pretty low.

Varying amounts of copium on twitter although party activist Marcus Carslaw has a sensible take. This is primly and tartly dismissed by Mhairi Hunter, the voice of the leadership on social media, whilst various @Gary457676767687s claim that the SNP lost because they didn't talk enough about independence.Screenshot 2023-10-06 at 13.32.13.png

Screenshot 2023-10-06 at 13.32.38.png

Screenshot 2023-10-06 at 13.33.01.png


:facepalm:
 
It is interesting that a man from the SNP on Radio 4 congratulated the successful Labour candidate for calling for the abolition of the "two-child limit" on Universal Credit.
 
It is interesting that a man from the SNP on Radio 4 congratulated the successful Labour candidate for calling for the abolition of the "two-child limit" on Universal Credit.
Some background.

 
  • Like
Reactions: PTK
30% apparently, I thought by elections always had a fairly low turnout though, not sure if this is remarkably low

e2a and as usual it winds me up when I see a low turnout, trade unions held to far higher democratic standards than this. Far higher.
Aye, if they were more consistent, a turnout of less than 50% would bar prospective MPs, councillors or assembly member from taking their seat. Null and fucking void.

But then restrictions against trade unions have always had fuck all to do with democracy.
 
Back
Top Bottom