Ruth Davidson - Page 9 - Anything Goes - Other topics not covered elsewhere - Tartan Army Message Board Jump to content

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, ErsatzThistle said:

There's more to it than that.

Paper candidates in certain constituencies. Certain parties despite being on the ballot paper did only the bare minimum of campaigning so as to allow the primary unionist challenger to win. The Lib Dems and Tories hardly tried in Murray's constituency. Labour didn't try in East Dunbartonshire so as to get Swinson in etc.

A chunk of the SNP vote staying at home. Often overlooked is that Scotland's voter turnout was down. We lost a few constituencies to Labour by only a few hundred votes.

Derek Mackay's highly complacent, sometimes non-existent campaign which only swung into action in the last few days of campaigning. 

Brexit supporters in the North East going Tory.

All factors, i've no doubt.

I've just never seen the London commentariat be so wilfully ignorant. They sent their main correspondent Ben Chu up to Edinburgh to 'explain'. I watched it with my jaw open.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, exile said:

She 'won' (in 2017) by opposing something that wasn't even being proposed. (They may as well have proposed it!) 

Ben Chu literally described her as "election winning" on Newsnight :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Dave78 said:

Watching Newsnight. They led on Davidson. 

They portrayed her as the sole reason the Tories won 13 seats in 2017, completely ignoring the backlash to Sturgeon's 2nd referendum call which actually delivered those Tory seats.

The London-bubble commentariat are beatifying her in order to put pressure on Johnstone and his No Deal threat.

It's interesting (and quite galling) to see how Scottish events (that would otherwise be ignored) get used by the heavily Remain BBC in order to set the narrative.

Heavily Remain BBC - do you listen to the Today programme, Humphries doesn't even try to hide his pro-leave bias 

I think you're being somewhat disingenuous about the 2017 UK GE as well.  Remember that was off the back of a - relatively - successful Holyrood campaign when she took the Tories from something like 13 seats to 30 or whatever 

I saw the Newsnight piece and thought it was pretty fair comment and I've never bought into the Ruth Davidson myth.

However, what she was successful in doing was planting her flag squarely as the anti-Indy, anti-referendum party and managing to get votes from Labour's more traditional unionist support to take the Tories into second place in Scotland.  She was pretty much helped by Labour's demise at the same time.  And to be fair to her she's been banging that drum for the last four years.

She's a one trick pony though and that act can only get you so far and I think she realised that as well, basically shed run her course.

It is a big problem for the Tories though as they're whole brand in Scotland is the Ruth Davidson Party.  Even as late as this week  their leaflets for the Shetland bi-election described their candidate as "Ruth Davidson's Candidate"

What I didn't agree with though is that somehow the 13 Tory MPs are somehow more at risk as a result of her chucking it.  I think in the main they were all toast anyway. Possibly Fluffy might survive and Masterton in East Renfrew as he seems to be the only one prepared to make a stand  

Where I think is a bigger problem is who'll lead Better Together 2.   There really doesn't seem to be anyone you could see them getting that could be a leader that a movement could coalesce around  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, aaid said:

Heavily Remain BBC - do you listen to the Today programme, Humphries doesn't even try to hide his pro-leave bias 

I think you're being somewhat disingenuous about the 2017 UK GE as well.  Remember that was off the back of a - relatively - successful Holyrood campaign when she took the Tories from something like 13 seats to 30 or whatever 

I saw the Newsnight piece and thought it was pretty fair comment and I've never bought into the Ruth Davidson myth.

However, what she was successful in doing was planting her flag squarely as the anti-Indy, anti-referendum party and managing to get votes from Labour's more traditional unionist support to take the Tories into second place in Scotland.  She was pretty much helped by Labour's demise at the same time.  And to be fair to her she's been banging that drum for the last four years.

She's a one trick pony though and that act can only get you so far and I think she realised that as well, basically shed run her course.

It is a big problem for the Tories though as they're whole brand in Scotland is the Ruth Davidson Party.  Even as late as this week  their leaflets for the Shetland bi-election described their candidate as "Ruth Davidson's Candidate"

What I didn't agree with though is that somehow the 13 Tory MPs are somehow more at risk as a result of her chucking it.  I think in the main they were all toast anyway. Possibly Fluffy might survive and Masterton in East Renfrew as he seems to be the only one prepared to make a stand  

Where I think is a bigger problem is who'll lead Better Together 2.   There really doesn't seem to be anyone you could see them getting that could be a leader that a movement could coalesce around  

 

Agree with most of this. Couple of points though....

 

Fair enough, my 'heavily remain BBC' comment is based on the output i see (and specifically the stuff where the editorialising is evident), which is really only Newsnight.

You say i'm being disingenuous about her result in 2017... How exactly? Labour imploded (by far the biggest factor in her election 'win'), and she managed to rally the hardcore unionist vote. An effigy of King Billy with a tape recorder constantly repeating "NO TO A SECOND REFERENDUM!" would have gotten as many votes as her.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dave78 said:

Agree with most of this. Couple of points though....

 

Fair enough, my 'heavily remain BBC' comment is based on the output i see (and specifically the stuff where the editorialising is evident), which is really only Newsnight.

You say i'm being disingenuous about her result in 2017... How exactly? Labour imploded (by far the biggest factor in her election 'win'), and she managed to rally the hardcore unionist vote. An effigy of King Billy with a tape recorder constantly repeating "NO TO A SECOND REFERENDUM!" would have gotten as many votes as her.

 

 

 

The disingenuous comment related to you suggesting that the 13 Tory MPs in 2017 was as a reaction to Nicola Sturgeon's call for a second referendum in the wake of the Brexit vote.  While that had some impact, it was actually something that had started in 2015 and started to show fruit in the 2016 Holyrood election which was before any Brexit referendum and a campaign where the SNP deliberately tried to avoid talking about Indy. 

Maybe Kezia Dugdale should've tried to get on the white charger first, she didn't, Ruth Davidson did.

I'm not claiming it was a particularly sophisticated strategy but it worked for them insofar as it could do.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, aaid said:

The disingenuous comment related to you suggesting that the 13 Tory MPs in 2017 was as a reaction to Nicola Sturgeon's call for a second referendum in the wake of the Brexit vote.  While that had some impact, it was actually something that had started in 2015 and started to show fruit in the 2016 Holyrood election which was before any Brexit referendum and a campaign where the SNP deliberately tried to avoid talking about Indy. 

Maybe Kezia Dugdale should've tried to get on the white charger first, she didn't, Ruth Davidson did.

I'm not claiming it was a particularly sophisticated strategy but it worked for them insofar as it could do.

 

Ahh... i understand, yes. :ok:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, aaid said:

However, what she was successful in doing was planting her flag squarely as the anti-Indy, anti-referendum party and managing to get votes from Labour's more traditional unionist support to take the Tories into second place in Scotland.  She was pretty much helped by Labour's demise at the same time.  And to be fair to her she's been banging that drum for the last four years.

This.

When you look at the voting breakdown of Yes and No supporters, it's clear what's happened. A while back I looked at the final Survation polls for the 2015, 2016 and 2017 elections; both were slightly out on the overall headline figures, but close enough to be considered accurate.

Yes voters:

  • 2010: SNP 49%; Lab 29%; Lib 13%; Con 2% (Ashcroft 2014 'exit poll'*)
  • 2015: SNP 87%, Lab 6%, Con 2%.
  • 2016: SNP 86%; Lab 5%; Con 2%
  • 2017: SNP 71%; Lab 21%; Con 7%.

No voters:

  • 2010: Lab 35%; Con 28%; Lib 14%; SNP 6% (Ashcroft 2014 'exit poll'*)
  • 2015: Lab 42%; Con 27%; SNP 15%; Lib 10%
  • 2016: Con 36%; Lab 34%; SNP 16%; Lib 11%
  • 2017: Con 46%; Lab 33%; SNP 11%; Lib 11%

The SNP lost pro-independence voters back to Labour, explaining why they regained seats from the SNP - particularly in Greater Glasgow. The Conservatives took a lot of the Labour unionist vote, while the SNP had a relatively small loss of votes among their small 'unionist' vote. The pattern appears to largely be, therefore, SNP -> Lab & Lab -> Con; which is why the SNP vote was down about 13%, Labour slightly up and the Conservatives up around 13% - albeit the media conflated these 13% changes as being direct from the SNP to the Conservatives, which it (mostly) wasn't.

Of course, the Brexit situation would've factored into some of the changes. Some SNP/Yes voters might've moved to Labour due to their less pro-EU Brexit policy for example, but this would be less impactful than above. Also, 2015 SNP voters were the least likely of any party's 2015 voter base to vote in 2017 (IIRC, 25% of 2015 SNP voters didn't vote in 2017).

*The Ashcroft 'exit poll' from the independence referendum does seem to over poll 2010 SNP voters and under poll 2010 Labour and Lib Dem voters in the 'how did you vote in 2010' question. There are two possible reasons for this - 1) A conflation with how they voted in 2011, 2) How they would've voted at that time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Clyde1998 said:

This.

When you look at the voting breakdown of Yes and No supporters, it's clear what's happened. A while back I looked at the final Survation polls for the 2015, 2016 and 2017 elections; both were slightly out on the overall headline figures, but close enough to be considered accurate.

Yes voters:

  • 2010: SNP 49%; Lab 29%; Lib 13%; Con 2% (Ashcroft 2014 'exit poll'*)
  • 2015: SNP 87%, Lab 6%, Con 2%.
  • 2016: SNP 86%; Lab 5%; Con 2%
  • 2017: SNP 71%; Lab 21%; Con 7%.

No voters:

  • 2010: Lab 35%; Con 28%; Lib 14%; SNP 6% (Ashcroft 2014 'exit poll'*)
  • 2015: Lab 42%; Con 27%; SNP 15%; Lib 10%
  • 2016: Con 36%; Lab 34%; SNP 16%; Lib 11%
  • 2017: Con 46%; Lab 33%; SNP 11%; Lib 11%

The SNP lost pro-independence voters back to Labour, explaining why they regained seats from the SNP - particularly in Greater Glasgow. The Conservatives took a lot of the Labour unionist vote, while the SNP had a relatively small loss of votes among their small 'unionist' vote. The pattern appears to largely be, therefore, SNP -> Lab & Lab -> Con; which is why the SNP vote was down about 13%, Labour slightly up and the Conservatives up around 13% - albeit the media conflated these 13% changes as being direct from the SNP to the Conservatives, which it (mostly) wasn't.

Of course, the Brexit situation would've factored into some of the changes. Some SNP/Yes voters might've moved to Labour due to their less pro-EU Brexit policy for example, but this would be less impactful than above. Also, 2015 SNP voters were the least likely of any party's 2015 voter base to vote in 2017 (IIRC, 25% of 2015 SNP voters didn't vote in 2017).

*The Ashcroft 'exit poll' from the independence referendum does seem to over poll 2010 SNP voters and under poll 2010 Labour and Lib Dem voters in the 'how did you vote in 2010' question. There are two possible reasons for this - 1) A conflation with how they voted in 2011, 2) How they would've voted at that time.

Informative analysis as always. Two questions....

1. Are you James Kelly?

And if not...

2. Are you his son (born in 1998)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Davidson, I think, loves her false reputation as something of a miracle worker. Under her recently the Tories success came about by one reason alone at the last GE. Far more organised and tactical unionist voting. Tories and Labour made the last GE all about another IndyRef and rallied unionists into voting in any which way to suffocate the SNP and as the SNP were less aggressive in campaigning it as about independence their vote suffered.

In the here and now though Davidson deep down knows the Tories are in for a nasty shock at the next GE in Scotland which will bust the false myth of her as a miracle worked and great leader. I think she is canny enough to hope thst the Tory losses will be put down to her departure alone and nothing to do with something of a surge in fresh SNP/Independence support and so the Tories and Westminster will try to use her exit as an excuse for a perceived upturn in SNP vote share.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Orraloon said:

She will be back.

Either as an un-elected member of the House of Lords. Or else gifted the chance to stand in a super safe Tory constituency in the English Home Counties.

Mind you she'll need to take the elocution lessons to get "the Scotchness" out of her first.

She could go to the same elocutionist that Jo Swinson has rather noticeably been using.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She was apparently in London a couple of weeks ago for a very unpublicised meeting with Boris. A few people thinking now that the new Scottish Office building in Edinburgh is ready they will start to disband the Scottish Parliment. Did she jump so she could claim she had nothing to do with it?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it any wonder nobody believes the News anymore and Fake News is a thing ?

The amount of shite in the last 24 hours about Davidson was incredible and had no relation to the reality 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ally Bongo said:

Is it any wonder nobody believes the News anymore and Fake News is a thing ?

The amount of shite in the last 24 hours about Davidson was incredible and had no relation to the reality 

 

 

I am just waiting for the next GE and Tories collapse in Scotland. We will then hear that if Ruth Davidson had stayed she would have been First Minister. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:

Is it any wonder nobody believes the News anymore and Fake News is a thing ?

The amount of shite in the last 24 hours about Davidson was incredible and had no relation to the reality 

 

 

Aye but Tories will still lap it up like others will do when Sturgeon leaves

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ParisInAKilt said:

Aye but Tories will still lap it up like others will do when Sturgeon leaves

The point is that the portrait they painted of Davidson was absolutely fuck all like the reality 

Her number of surgeries ?

Her courting of extremists ?

Dark Money ?

The Orange Order, Rangers FC and sectarianism had more of an impact in the increase in Tory votes than Davidson did

All swept under the carpet 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ally Bongo said:

The point is that the portrait they painted of Davidson was absolutely fuck all like the reality 

Her number of surgeries ?

Her courting of extremists ?

Dark Money ?

The Orange Order, Rangers FC and sectarianism had more of an impact in the increase in Tory votes than Davidson did

All swept under the carpet 

 

I don’t disagree. She’s a detestable politician. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:

Is it any wonder nobody believes the News anymore and Fake News is a thing ?

The amount of shite in the last 24 hours about Davidson was incredible and had no relation to the reality 

 

 

People believe what they want to believe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...