SNP leadership election

[aaid]

14 minutes ago, PapofGlencoe said:

I just don't see it for Forbes at all.  Her views will be a constant barrier (like it or not) and I'm not seeing the charisma that others claim to see.  

Humza doesn't do it for me either.  I think we need a new face, nothing particularly against him but people have already made their mind up about him.

Regan sounds like she needs a bit more media training/ministerial experience but otherwise has the only pragmatic plan I can see with even a hope of working.  and is a new face.

It's really not a great choice.

Regan doesn’t actually have any sort of plan at all, if you think she has please can you explain it.

It’s a combination of bluster, bluff and magical thinking that is the worst of what we saw on the Brexit side, especially in the 2019 UKGE. 

Still waiting for Yousaf and Forbes to outline their plans, that’s different from them not having one.

[TDYER63]

3 minutes ago, aaid said:

Branch organiser is akin to a chairman position and so neutrality is assumed.  Personally I don’t see the issue with an MP or MSP communicating directly with their constituents or indeed members, I’d have thought that generally that would be a good thing.   There’s no requirement to be neutral.   There are loads of MPs and MSPs openly advocating for one or other of the candidates.  The only people who’d have an issue with this would be people who are against the candidate being supported.

I would prefer MPs and MSP’s did not endorse candidates at all and it was left for members to make up their own mind and not swayed by their MP. But thats not the rules.

What I was unsure of was whether they we’re allowed to send blanket emails out endorsing candidates as opposed to just endorsing them via the media etc. 

[Alibi]

20 hours ago, Ally Bongo said:

The 2017 General Election where the SNP (wrongly in hindsight) ran with a "stop Brexit" campaign and lost 21 seats

That is when imo the SNP shat it, gave up and concentrated on remaining in power than trying to get Independence 

Yes, exactly that.  Something changed around that time.  We had an open goal and she Iwelumoed it.

[Alibi]

2 hours ago, aaid said:

Some of the utter nonsense that I’m seeing on here and on social media is really moving me towards Humza. 
 

It’s the same thing as GRR, once I got my head around what the bill did and didn’t do, it was the sheer dishonesty of the arguments against that convinced me. 

That you recieved your instructions from Peter?

[aaid]

4 minutes ago, TDYER63 said:

I would prefer MPs and MSP’s did not endorse candidates at all and it was left for members to make up their own mind and not swayed by their MP. But thats not the rules.

What I was unsure of was whether they were allowed to send blanket emails out endorsing candidates as opposed to just endorsing them via the media etc. 

I think it’s important that with - in particular - MSPs, you know who they are backing.  It’s one of the things that will make me make my mind up.  It would be a concern from me to vote for a candidate that didn’t have much support and I’d be looking for evidence as to how they would win over those MSPs who didn’t back you.  Backing one candidate doesn’t mean that you couldn’t work with another, but we have seen real life examples in recent years in both the Tory and Labour Party as to what happens when the parliamentary part doesn’t back the leader.

Just saying “I will unite the party” doesn’t cut the mustard with me, I want to know how and be able to trust they’re capable of doing that.

[aaid]

3 minutes ago, Alibi said:

That you recieved your instructions from Peter?

Nice little snide comment there.  

[Alibi]

I don't think MSPs should be sending out circular letters basically canvassing support for any candidate.  The decision is supposed to be by the membership.  Obviously MSPs will have a vote in the contest themselves, but there is a lot of inequity in allowing MSPs to try to influence other people's votes in this matter and in using SNP resources to help them do it.  This smacks of an electoral stitch up.  Oh, and Peter Murrell should be nowhere near this vote.

[Alibi]

4 minutes ago, aaid said:

Nice little snide comment there.  

Thank you.  I have plenty more of them in stock.

[aaid]

TBF, this is pretty funny.
 

 

[Alibi]

7 minutes ago, aaid said:

I think it’s important that with - in particular - MSPs, you know who they are backing.  It’s one of the things that will make me make my mind up.  It would be a concern from me to vote for a candidate that didn’t have much support and I’d be looking for evidence as to how they would win over those MSPs who didn’t back you.  Backing one candidate doesn’t mean that you couldn’t work with another, but we have seen real life examples in recent years in both the Tory and Labour Party as to what happens when the parliamentary part doesn’t back the leader.

Just saying “I will unite the party” doesn’t cut the mustard with me, I want to know how and be able to trust they’re capable of doing that.

That's a recipe for more of the same - you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours.  What the SNP needs now is fairly radical change - more of the same won't do anything but lose votes.  Reinstating an elected NEC might be a start. to improve internal democracy.  The NEC shouldn't be chosen by royal appointment.  the correct candidate here is the one who will actually prioritise independence while running Scotland well.  If they're going to kick the can further down the road - someone mentioned 2050 but I haven't seen the article from which that came - then we might as well just give up for the next 20 years.

I have a ticket for the Dumfries hustings - should be interesting although allowing 1 unionist journalist in with a camera crew might tend to discourage folk from asking any controversial or searching questions as the whole thing will be misreported as usual.

[PapofGlencoe]

Just now, aaid said:

Regan doesn’t actually have any sort of plan at all, if you think she has please can you explain it.

It’s a combination of bluster, bluff and magical thinking that is the worst of what we saw on the Brexit side, especially in the 2019 UKGE. 

Still waiting for Yousaf and Forbes to outline their plans, that’s different from them not having one.

As far as I can tell it's having the people decide if they want to be independent or not by means of voting for it at elections.  If a majority is taken, we request negotiations to begin.  We hope WM agree.  If they don't we continue to build the majority off the back of that scandal in every subsequent election until either a settled will emerges or... and this is quite possible, it doesn't.  

It's upto the people either way.  It may take many elections, it may take 1, it may never happen.  It depends how much Scots want it.

To me this is the only pragmatic route.

I would probably change the route slightly by saying this is the campaign taken at WM elections only.  HR elections are for devolved government.

Ultimately the party needs to provide an opportunity for people to vote for independence even if the UK are saying no.  If the SNP take it off the table, I see no point in voting for the same party over and over again.   Especially at Westminster.

I have swithered on this but I can't think of any other way forward and for the life of me don't see it as the radical approach.  To me it's an approach that offers a voice.

[aaid]

1 minute ago, PapofGlencoe said:

As far as I can tell it's having the people decide if they want to be independent or not by means of voting for it at elections.  If a majority is taken, we request negotiations to begin.  We hope WM agree.  If they don't we continue to build the majority off the back of that scandal in every subsequent election until either a settled will emerges or... and this is quite possible, it doesn't.  

It's upto the people either way.  It may take many elections, it may take 1, it may never happen.  It depends how much Scots want it.

How is that fundamentally any different from every single election there has been in the last 8 years?

[PapofGlencoe]

39 minutes ago, aaid said:

How is that fundamentally any different from every single election there has been in the last 8 years?

It's asking the people to provide a mandate to begin negotiations on creating an independent state.  Not asking for a referendum or similar as has been the case before.  

I'd be more wondering how it is in any way the same to any of the last 8 years to be honest?  Especially, Holyrood elections with day to day issues inherently prevalent.  

I repeat, in the age of a London brick wall I don't think this is the radical option.  It's the option that  provides the continual opportunity to make the voice heard at each election.  What London decide to do with a majority vote request is up to them but we don't do their job for them by taking the option away from the Scottish people.    

Also if it was, which it obviously isn't, the same as every other election.  It's hardly bluster and idiocy is it?  It's exactly what we've all been supporting Nicola on until...being directed otherwise.

Edited March 1, 2023 by PapofGlencoe

[Orraloon]

The idea that the media should be allowed into record the SNP hustings is outrageous. These hustings are for SNP members and got fuk all to do with the media. Of course, people who work in the media can attend these meetings but only of they are also SNP members.

[Ally Bongo]

1 hour ago, aaid said:

TBF, this is pretty funny.
 

 

1 - Do you think Unionist KF has any real pals within the SNP ?

2 - Is it more likely this statement was given to him by Team Murrell ?

[aaid]

7 minutes ago, PapofGlencoe said:

It's asking the people to provide a mandate to begin negotiations on creating an independent state.  Not asking for a referendum or similar as has been the case before.  

I'd be more wondering how it is in any way the same to any of the last 8 years to be honest?  Especially, Holyrood elections with day to day issues inherently prevalent.  

I repeat, in the age of a London brick wall I don't think this is the radical option.  It's the option that  provides the continual opportunity to make the voice heard at each election.  What London decide to do with a majority vote request is up to them but we don't do their job for them by taking the option away from the Scottish people.    

Also if it was, which it obviously isn't, the same as every other election.  It's hardly bluster and idiocy is it?  It's exactly what we've all been supporting Nicola on until...being directed otherwise.

If you saw Ash Regan being interviewed on this on the Sunday Show, you’d understand why I describe it as bluster and idiocy.  

Unless someone comes up with a proposal as to how we increase the level of support into the 60%+ for a continuous and sustained period then any talk of process is pretty irrelevant. 

[aaid]

4 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:

1 - Do you think Unionist KF has any real pals within the SNP ?

2 - Is it more likely this statement was given to him by Team Murrell ?

No, I just think it’s funny.

[PapofGlencoe]

1 minute ago, aaid said:

If you saw Ash Regan being interviewed on this on the Sunday Show, you’d understand why I describe it as bluster and idiocy.  

Unless someone comes up with a proposal as to how we increase the level of support into the 60%+ for a continuous and sustained period then any talk of process is pretty irrelevant. 

I didn't so can't comment.  You were talking about her plan, not her presentation.

Re second para, i thought the same but you need to have a path to get there.  The continual majority request of our people means your always campaigning and attempting this mandate.  To me, it is the pragmatic and long term way.  Declare this the new route and it may take 10 years, it may never happen.  But you have a path and you campaign accordingly.

 

[PapofGlencoe]

10 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:

1 - Do you think Unionist KF has any real pals within the SNP ?

2 - Is it more likely this statement was given to him by Team Murrell ?

I remember when KF had a minor influence.  Still lives in the 90s.

He outed himself when the fleeting defacto vote was declared.  Lost his cool.

Whatever Kenny advises, do the opposite.  

[aaid]

17 minutes ago, PapofGlencoe said:

I didn't so can't comment.  You were talking about her plan, not her presentation.

Re second para, i thought the same but you need to have a path to get there.  The continual majority request of our people means your always campaigning and attempting this mandate.  To me, it is the pragmatic and long term way.  Declare this the new route and it may take 10 years, it may never happen.  But you have a path and you campaign accordingly.

 

You can watch it on the iPlayer, I’d recommend it.  The presentation and delivery is pretty awful, but it’s the content which is concerning.  Watch it and see if you’re still convinced with her.

 

[PapofGlencoe]

16 minutes ago, aaid said:

You can watch it on the iPlayer, I’d recommend it.  The presentation and delivery is pretty awful, but it’s the content which is concerning.  Watch it and see if you’re still convinced with her.

 

what's concerning about the content?  seems clear enough to me as per my comment above.

I'm not "convinced" by her.  i remain very unconvinced by all of them.

[aaid]

4 minutes ago, PapofGlencoe said:

what's concerning about the content?  seems clear enough to me as per my comment above.

I'm not "convinced" by her.  i remain very unconvinced by all of them.

Watch it and come back to me.

[Caledonian Craig]

I just think we've spoiled somewhat of late with SNP leaders in Salmond and Sturgeon that supplied secure leadership and several election victories firmly establishing the SNP as the third biggest party at Westminster. 

The choices we have before us are of different calibre lacking in some department or perhaps lots. I cannot see any of the three (whoever wins) being anything more than an interim leader but whoever it is I want an aggressive approach to independence.

Edited March 1, 2023 by Caledonian Craig

[PapofGlencoe]

34 minutes ago, aaid said:

Watch it and come back to me.

not seeing any issue in the content at all to be honest (as I said I remain unconvinced by all of them in other ways..).  maybe you could just give your opinion on the content of The Plan rather than dodging. sounds like a dodge til you're told what to think.  

I don't care about the SNP.  I care about Scottish citizens being able to vote for independence, if it's done via elections,  all good.  If London says no, then it's on them.  If Paris says no, it's on them.  We can only do our bit and expect the SNP to do theirs as the main driver.  We'll only get it if we vote for it and we'll only vote for it if someone's offering it.  The plan and the campaign go hand in hand.  I'm more gradualist than most people, I could even be persuaded to vote for the Union but I am fundamental that we must have an ability to vote for independence.  I think Ash's plan is the best one for the short, medium, long term.  that's a different thing from being convinced by Ash Regan as the leader to do it.

the fact we have these three is probably going to kick it all into the long grass for various reasons so it's all moot.  

Edited March 1, 2023 by PapofGlencoe

[PapofGlencoe]

double post

Edited March 1, 2023 by PapofGlencoe
double post