Scottish Politics / Independence - Vol 11
Discussion
'Why you should ignore Nicola Sturgeon's PretendyRef', excellent article by Stephen Daisley.
"The consultative referendum is not just a sop to nationalists; it is a red rag to Unionists. Part of Sturgeon’s strategy will be relying on the emotional incontinence of her legion of haters. I’m not talking about voters who think she’s a terrible First Minister (she is) or that her government is hamstrung by incompetence (it is). I’m talking about that section of Unionism that despises her with a white-hot fury, people for whom reviling Sturgeon has become a political personality in itself.
Unionists cannot win Sturgeon’s referendum and that is why they must not participate. You cannot win a referendum held on your opponent’s preferred territory, on their terms of reference and when you already know that even in defeat they will not concede. Some Unionists will be tempted to exploit this as another opportunity to scrutinise the SNP’s prospectus for separation but this would be strategically unwise. "
https://stephendaisley.substack.com/p/why-you-shou...
"The consultative referendum is not just a sop to nationalists; it is a red rag to Unionists. Part of Sturgeon’s strategy will be relying on the emotional incontinence of her legion of haters. I’m not talking about voters who think she’s a terrible First Minister (she is) or that her government is hamstrung by incompetence (it is). I’m talking about that section of Unionism that despises her with a white-hot fury, people for whom reviling Sturgeon has become a political personality in itself.
Unionists cannot win Sturgeon’s referendum and that is why they must not participate. You cannot win a referendum held on your opponent’s preferred territory, on their terms of reference and when you already know that even in defeat they will not concede. Some Unionists will be tempted to exploit this as another opportunity to scrutinise the SNP’s prospectus for separation but this would be strategically unwise. "
https://stephendaisley.substack.com/p/why-you-shou...
Yes. Good article. This is on the money. Any Sturgyref needs to be ignored. Why take part in something Where the other side won't accept the result. Unless anybody thinks after losing the SNP would shut up shop and go away.
"Unionists cannot win Sturgeon’s referendum and that is why they must not participate. You cannot win a referendum held on your opponent’s preferred territory, on their terms of reference and when you already know that even in defeat they will not concede."
"Unionists cannot win Sturgeon’s referendum and that is why they must not participate. You cannot win a referendum held on your opponent’s preferred territory, on their terms of reference and when you already know that even in defeat they will not concede."
...isnt this playing into Salmonds grubby hands - if NS cannot get section 30, and its a "soft" referendum, he can argue that he delivered a real one, and therefore sit on the fence shouting "we want independence, this is rubbish dont bother with it, i delivered a real one" , and perhaps the core Nats will end up moving more over to him? its sort of a unique position in that everyone knows he wants indy, yet he can actually destroy NS and SNP with this "soft" vote.....
rider73 said:
...isnt this playing into Salmonds grubby hands - if NS cannot get section 30, and its a "soft" referendum, he can argue that he delivered a real one, and therefore sit on the fence shouting "we want independence, this is rubbish dont bother with it, i delivered a real one" , and perhaps the core Nats will end up moving more over to him? its sort of a unique position in that everyone knows he wants indy, yet he can actually destroy NS and SNP with this "soft" vote.....
Salmond would love to drive a wedge straight through the SNP. If he does independence fails spectaularly. The 2 parties will be a shell of their formerselves. rider73 said:
...isnt this playing into Salmonds grubby hands - if NS cannot get section 30, and its a "soft" referendum, he can argue that he delivered a real one, and therefore sit on the fence shouting "we want independence, this is rubbish dont bother with it, i delivered a real one" , and perhaps the core Nats will end up moving more over to him? its sort of a unique position in that everyone knows he wants indy, yet he can actually destroy NS and SNP with this "soft" vote.....
I don't think any of this is that sophisticated. Salmond is a busted flush, and if/when Sturgeon arses it up then she arses it up for the whole independence campaign. Even if you disregard the current local administration's incompetence, there have still not been A. any valid arguments put forward to say we would be better off independent, or B. appetite to deliver a "it's gonna be a tough, s
tty 20 years if we go it alone, but we will be better off in the end" kind of message.This
This blog covers it well.
http://ianssmart.blogspot.com/2022/06/constitution...
Unionists should ignore any "referendum". Don't engage with the argument. When the SNP "win" the UK govt point out
""The SNP have spent £20M of public money to establish that fewer people want Scottish Independence now than did in 2014. We could have told them that for nothing."
http://ianssmart.blogspot.com/2022/06/constitution...
Unionists should ignore any "referendum". Don't engage with the argument. When the SNP "win" the UK govt point out
""The SNP have spent £20M of public money to establish that fewer people want Scottish Independence now than did in 2014. We could have told them that for nothing."
s2kjock said:
I don't think any of this is that sophisticated. Salmond is a busted flush, and if/when Sturgeon arses it up then she arses it up for the whole independence campaign. Even if you disregard the current local administration's incompetence, there have still not been A. any valid arguments put forward to say we would be better off independent, or B. appetite to deliver a "it's gonna be a tough, stty 20 years if we go it alone, but we will be better off in the end" kind of message.
Thispub survey "soft" referendum is a win win - Sturgeon has delivered a referendum and Ronsealed, and everyone who doesn't like the outcome/didn't participate can ignore it and get on with their lives anyway.
The more I think about it, this whole situation probably suits Sturgeon perfectly. She can say she "delivered a referendum" and, regardless of outcome, she's got a grievance she can use to continue to beat whoever is in place in Westminster. If it's a "no" then it's because the UK government wouldn't grant them a valid referendum and if it's a "yes" then it's continued bleating about the UK government keeping Scotland in the union against it's will.tty 20 years if we go it alone, but we will be better off in the end" kind of message.This
In the meantime, she can choose to either remain as el presidente for life or leave office in a blaze of glory and the adulation of her disciples.
If she decides to go, and regardless of which incompetent from her front bench is chosen to replace her, I still can't see how exactly Sarwar or Ross (with or without Cole-Hamilton's help) get the SNP out of power as the replacement will continue to use the same tired arguments which appear to be lapped up by a sufficient percentage of the electorate.
Scotland is f
ked.alangla said:
The more I think about it, this whole situation probably suits Sturgeon perfectly. She can say she "delivered a referendum" and, regardless of outcome, she's got a grievance she can use to continue to beat whoever is in place in Westminster. If it's a "no" then it's because the UK government wouldn't grant them a valid referendum and if it's a "yes" then it's continued bleating about the UK government keeping Scotland in the union against it's will.
In the meantime, she can choose to either remain as el presidente for life or leave office in a blaze of glory and the adulation of her disciples.
If she decides to go, and regardless of which incompetent from her front bench is chosen to replace her, I still can't see how exactly Sarwar or Ross (with or without Cole-Hamilton's help) get the SNP out of power as the replacement will continue to use the same tired arguments which appear to be lapped up by a sufficient percentage of the electorate.
Scotland is fked.
I think you're right there.In the meantime, she can choose to either remain as el presidente for life or leave office in a blaze of glory and the adulation of her disciples.
If she decides to go, and regardless of which incompetent from her front bench is chosen to replace her, I still can't see how exactly Sarwar or Ross (with or without Cole-Hamilton's help) get the SNP out of power as the replacement will continue to use the same tired arguments which appear to be lapped up by a sufficient percentage of the electorate.
Scotland is f
ked.More worryingly, if Ms Sturgeon leaves then who'll step in her shoes? Regardless of your politics, it's difficult to argue with the fact that Mr Salmond and Ms Sturgeon were both strong leaders. Charismatic in their own way, and they both led the Scottish Government and the SNP well.
Who takes over? Look around the current Cabinet and Ministers - do you see a future successful leader there? I don't.
It's like who will the electorate least object to from Swinney, Forbes, Brown, Somerville, Yousaf, Robertson, etc. There's no credible leader there.
Edinburger said:
I think you're right there.
More worryingly, if Ms Sturgeon leaves then who'll step in her shoes? Regardless of your politics, it's difficult to argue with the fact that Mr Salmond and Ms Sturgeon were both strong leaders. Charismatic in their own way, and they both led the Scottish Government and the SNP well.
Really? I'd be more than happy to argue that case. Mammy Sturgeon has demonstrably been a truly dreadful leader of the Scottish Government. Focused on protecting herself and her hegemony - see the Salmond inquiry for evidence of that. Struck down by repeated selective amnesia, the poor wee lamb could barely remember her own name. At Holyrood, in thrall to the revolutionary Greens, fully immersed in the anti-biological philosophy that men can become women and women can become bicycles, with members of her own team excluded because they believe in biology. Unable to progress her mantra of another referendum, so agitates for a further vote based upon - what precisely? No Section 30 order will be forthcoming, so is she positing that a further vote will be consultative only? Add to that a failing health care system, failing education, failing councils, failing Police, failing transport... I'd be intrigued to know which part of her leadership has been successful? More worryingly, if Ms Sturgeon leaves then who'll step in her shoes? Regardless of your politics, it's difficult to argue with the fact that Mr Salmond and Ms Sturgeon were both strong leaders. Charismatic in their own way, and they both led the Scottish Government and the SNP well.
@Burger. I'll give you charismatic. But not a good leader. Unable to delegate jn case anyone becomes a theeat why were the daily covid updates not from the health minister or the deputy now and then?
Signed off on the ferries for a £250M soundbite at the party conference against the advice from the experts.
Her fingerprints may not be on the contract but she is a micromanager no way was that done without her knowledge.
Fail MUP.
Failed drug deaths.
Failed education.
Failed census.
Failed income tax policy.
Signed off on the ferries for a £250M soundbite at the party conference against the advice from the experts.
Her fingerprints may not be on the contract but she is a micromanager no way was that done without her knowledge.
Fail MUP.
Failed drug deaths.
Failed education.
Failed census.
Failed income tax policy.
Roderick Spode said:
Edinburger said:
I think you're right there.
More worryingly, if Ms Sturgeon leaves then who'll step in her shoes? Regardless of your politics, it's difficult to argue with the fact that Mr Salmond and Ms Sturgeon were both strong leaders. Charismatic in their own way, and they both led the Scottish Government and the SNP well.
Really? I'd be more than happy to argue that case. Mammy Sturgeon has demonstrably been a truly dreadful leader of the Scottish Government. Focused on protecting herself and her hegemony - see the Salmond inquiry for evidence of that. Struck down by repeated selective amnesia, the poor wee lamb could barely remember her own name. At Holyrood, in thrall to the revolutionary Greens, fully immersed in the anti-biological philosophy that men can become women and women can become bicycles, with members of her own team excluded because they believe in biology. Unable to progress her mantra of another referendum, so agitates for a further vote based upon - what precisely? No Section 30 order will be forthcoming, so is she positing that a further vote will be consultative only? Add to that a failing health care system, failing education, failing councils, failing Police, failing transport... I'd be intrigued to know which part of her leadership has been successful? More worryingly, if Ms Sturgeon leaves then who'll step in her shoes? Regardless of your politics, it's difficult to argue with the fact that Mr Salmond and Ms Sturgeon were both strong leaders. Charismatic in their own way, and they both led the Scottish Government and the SNP well.
It's not about how she turned out as a leader but rather that she was groomed to be next the leader. Sturgeon was always the clear successor to Salmond since he returned as party leader in 2004.
It's not like the Tories where a bitter leadership contest can be held. The Independence movement really needs someone they can rally around and who continue the fight. The transition from Salmond to Sturgeon did that fairly successfully in her first term.
But she has been burning up her credibility for quite a while now. She uses her cabinet secretaries as human shields while she herself is nowhere to be found when there's bad news (see her silence on the Grady/Blackford affair). Meanwhile she claims any good news for herself, undermining her own ministers.
That she hasn't groomed a successor or even a number of party heavyweights is probably her second largest failing as a a leader, after not delivering independence (if you're a nationalist).
I suspect it has two sources:
1. She is arrogant enough to believe that she is the one destined to deliver independence rather than continuing to build momentum.
2. She and her husband cannot accept any potential challenge to their stranglehold on the party. For example, the way Johanna Cherry has been treated for challenging the party leadership. Equally the fact that Cherry hadn't been kicked out belies Sturgeon's weakness.
At this point Sturgeon is the biggest threat to the independence movement through disillusioning supporters and taking ever more risky gambles. She could set the movement back decades because she can't play nicely.
Watching Kate Forbes' performance today: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d86UPjD4ZKQ
I couldn't help but think that she's got the Sturgeon impersonation down pat. The body language, the intonation, the indignation. If you close your eyes, she even sounds the same.
I couldn't help but think that she's got the Sturgeon impersonation down pat. The body language, the intonation, the indignation. If you close your eyes, she even sounds the same.
A good leader would have surrounded themself with a half decent cabinet/deputies and put in place a succession plan - she has 128 to pick from after all.
Perhaps the fact that both she, and most of her "key people", are career politicians (and mostly at amateur level) is telling insofar as she has A. not been able to figure this out, and B. not been able to find any of the right persuasion from the 128.
Perhaps the fact that both she, and most of her "key people", are career politicians (and mostly at amateur level) is telling insofar as she has A. not been able to figure this out, and B. not been able to find any of the right persuasion from the 128.
750turbo said:
So today I inadvertedy put on First Mini's Questions, for 2 seconds, and there she was...
But at the same time a pic on Twitter pops up of her (Might have been the Mekon, not 100% sure)
So is she here, or abroad somewhere?
She will be here. Twitter a/c will be operated partly by a govt employee. So it can be updated for something that happened in the last few days at the same time she is in parliament avoiding questions.But at the same time a pic on Twitter pops up of her (Might have been the Mekon, not 100% sure)
So is she here, or abroad somewhere?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff