A significant force or RISE 2.0

Yesterday saw the publication of the first full scale opinion poll since the launch of the Alba party giving us all our first opportunity to gauge the possible electoral impact of Alex Salmond’s new party. Fieldwork for the poll, commissioned from Survation for DC Thompson publishers took place on Monday and Tuesday of this week, when media coverage of the new party and the former first Minister’s announcement that he was seeking to return to Holyrood was intense, and the press and broadcasters were consumed with speculation about how this development would affect the SNP’s chances in May’s election.

However despite the claims by some supporters of the new party that it was set to take a huge chunk of SNP support and to succeed in its declared aim of forming a pro-independence super-majority in the next Scottish Parliament, the new poll has found that the Alba party’s appeal looks likely to be far more limited. On the all important list vote where the Alba party is standing four candidates in each region of Scotland, the poll placed Alba on just 3%, meaning that on these figures, if they were evenly distributed across Scotland, the party would fail to win a single MSP. The Greens registered 11% on the list vote, whereas the LibDems seem set to take 8%.

Meanwhile the poll suggested that despite the inclusion of another pro-independence party on the ballot, the SNP still seem likely to win a narrow outright majority, taking 66 seats in total, while the Greens seem set to win 11 seats. That would produce an SNP-Green super-majority for independence in the new Parliament composed of 77 seats for pro-independence parties as opposed to just 52 seats for Labour, the Conservatives and the LibDems combined. The big losers look likely to be the Conservatives, who are forecast to lose 10 of their current 31 seats and be left with just 21, and will be overtaken by Labour as the second largest party. Labour is forecast to hold on to its current share of 24 seats but not to make any gains. These results would be a disaster for the Conservatives’ new Scottish leader and suggest that his tenure in post may be as brief as his predecessor Jackson Carlaw’s.

The poll also found that 71% of respondents had an unfavourable opinion of Alex Salmond and a majority of those asked believe that the Alba party is hindering the cause of independence.

It should immediately be noted that this poll does not mean that Alba has no chance of winning any seats, If the poll results were replicated uniformly across the country they would not, but that doesn’t take into account local and regional factors. Alex Salmond has a significant local support base in and around his old Westminster constituency in the north east and it remains likely that he could be returned on the list for the North East Scotland region, where he tops the Alba party list.

The Alba party’s supporters have tried to put a positive gloss on these figures, pointing out that their party’s support is registering in opinion polling despite only being in existence for a few days. A single poll does not a trend make, but the problem however is that new “insurgent” parties must make an immediate impact while they enjoy the full glare of media attention and publicity, and then must build on that momentum over the course of the election campaign when they can struggle to get their messaging across amidst the competition from the more established parties. With an initial breakthrough below the level necessary to win seats, and a broadly unfavourable public view of the party leader and his suspected true motives for setting up the new party, Alba is not dead on arrival, but the new party is going to struggle to establish itself as a viable contender among the general public outside its already committed and engaged support base on social media.

The real danger, if Alba remains on this level of support is that the new party will not attract enough votes to win any seats but will split the pro-independence vote on the list allowing a unionist party representative to slip in on fifth or sixth place and take a seat that might otherwise have gone to the SNP or the Greens.

The danger that the presence of Alba might unwittingly backfire and lead to greater anti-independence representation is being compounded by the behaviour of some of its angrier and more vociferous supporters online, who are calling for constituency ballots to be spoiled or even for constituency vote for Labour’s Anas Sarwar in the hope of unseating Nicola Sturgeon. There are those who have managed to convince themselves that Nicola Sturgeon is so opposed to independence that they would prefer to vote for an out and out unionist. This is a perfect example of allowing your anger to lead you into a situation where you not only cut off your nose to spite your face, but then you put your cut off nose through a sausage mincer and flush it down the toilet pan. Even on its own terms it is a spectacularly petulant and childish line of argument.

Politics, as this blog has frequently pointed out, is not about facts, it’s about narratives and stories. So let’s assume that the highly unlikely event of pro-independence Sturgeon haters succeeding in getting Anas Sarwar elected instead of Nicola Sturgeon does come to pass. Then, no matter how many pro-independence MSPs are elected to Holyrood, the only narrative in the media will be that the head of the SNP has lost her seat and this will be spun by the exultant Conservatives and their allies as “proof” that Scotland has rejected calls for another independence referendum. Even with substantial pro-independence majority in Holyrood it will provide Johnson and the Conservatives with the political capital that they need to block another independence referendum.

The success of Alba’s strategy crucially depends upon ensuring that the SNP sweeps the board in the constituency vote. Hopefully over the next few days Alex Salmond and other senior figures in Alba will send a message to the angrier end of their online support and remind them of that political reality and to ensure that even if they do not wish to actively support the SNP in the constituency vote, they cease trying to damage it, because by trying to hurt the SNP in the constituency vote they are only making it harder for their own party to achieve its goal. There will be more opinion polls to come. We will have to wait and see whether the Alba party will be a significant force in this election, or whether we are looking at RISE 2.0,  which was launched prior to the 2016 amid great excitement and hype, but which failed to rise, and just sank without trace on election day.

This is your reminder that the purpose of this blog is to promote Scottish independence. If the comment you want to make will not assist with that goal then don’t post it. If you want to mouth off about how much you dislike the SNP leadership ,or about some other issue not directly related to Scottish independence – there are other forums where you can do that. You’re not welcome to do it here.

You can help to support this blog with a PayPal donation. Please log into Paypal.com and send a payment to the email address weegingerbook@yahoo.com. Or alternatively click the donate button. If you don’t have a PayPal account, just select “donate with card” after clicking the button.

Donate Button

291 comments on “A significant force or RISE 2.0

  1. gullaneno4 says:

    I have felt all along that Alba will fail to win one seat.
    I shall vote as I normally do SNP1 Greens2.
    I believe many other Scots will choose Greens for the second vote,
    A vote for a safer world and Independence, what is not to like.

    • Captain Banana Hands says:

      Interesting you say “for a safer world” as I’ve been feeling recently that no one seems to see the Greens as actually doing anything vital … so, yeah, perhaps everyone needs reminded of this.

    • bettybiscuit says:

      Seconded. I’m in the Glasgow region, so my List vote will be cast from the SGP, unless there is any danger that my unshakeably SNP constituency (or any of the others comprising the Glasgow region) are facing any threat, in which case I’ll be SNP 1 & 2. I’m so disappointed in Alex Salmond, whom I once held in high regard. If he doesn’t reign in his ego and the spiteful ‘burn it all down’ element of his supporters and damages our urgent need for Indy, then damn them all to hell.

  2. thesnpleftme says:

    I will still be voting SNP1/ALBA2

  3. Old Pete says:

    Totally agree with you Paul.
    Must be SNP in both the constituency and list for southern Scotland. I would probably vote Green on the list if I lived on the central belt, I would not support the Alba party.

    • Christopher Rosindale says:

      Yes, I would agree with that. The Tory vote down here in the South is strong and that, coupled with the fact that this part of Scotland would be most affected in everyday terms by Independence – people cross the Border every day to work, shop, go to school etc – means that the Unionist vote is large and determined. The Tories have been exploiting that to encourage tactical voting, resulting in the post-2014 election of 3 Constituency MSP’s and MP’s and creating a blue belt along the Border. These Tories will be hard to dislodge, an example being SNP candidate Richard Arkless’s failure to oust Tory MP Alister Jack in 2019, despite being Jack’s predecessor as Dumfries and Galloway MP between 2015 and 2017. Arkless did cut Jack’s majority, but couldn’t beat him in 2019. I fear that Emma Harper will achieve the same outcome against Finlay Carson and be forced to stay in her current List seat. Voting SNP in both votes down here may be a valuable insurance.

      • I agree Christopher Rosindsle

        • Potter says:

          Just seen a prominent ALBA supporter stating the SNP should vote ALBA in the list in South because their all going to vote SNP now, because of that the SNP will win all the constituencies.😂

          • Roll up for the magical, mystical mathematics tour…

          • gullaneno4 says:

            Voting for the SNP is not what an awful lot of Alba supporters on Wings seem to be saying.

            • Oops, that reply was meant for Terence. It should make sense now.
              Check my recent posts, I’ve been arguing SNP + SNP throughout.

            • bettybiscuit says:

              I swear, I’ll never forgive them if they cock this up now.
              Indy is far more important than any one individual;
              I happen to like Sturgeon very much, yet I’d hold my nose and be prepared to vote for anyone who can realistically bring it to birth.
              I find reports some that Alba supporters

      • Wee CB from Dumfriesshire says:

        I’m originally from Dumfriesshire. We need as many SNP votes as possible back home. There are a lot of people back home who have retired to D&G and also well off farmers and that really does influence the Tory voting. There’s more money than you think. Also the local media, especially the newspapers, are so howlingly pro-Tory. My folks save the local papers for me when I am able to see them – I haven’t seen them since Christmas day – and every week at least one of the Mundells have their photo in them with some story. The letters pages have loads pro-union letters too although I know the local Yes groups back home, who do a great job, do occasionally get published. I don’t think the independence referendum did enough in 2014 to address the cross-border living and working concerns of the locals back home and if we’re to succeed this time, this absolutely must be addressed and looked at. Still both votes SNP.

        • Mark Robertson says:

          Paul for someone who has repeatably Called for no posting of negative Talk on independence on your site you seem to Now be doing the same ! Based on a poll on a New party that is only One week old is pretty much stretching the facts out a bit !
          But hey its your BLOG !

        • Christopher Rosindale says:

          All good points, especially about the cross-border issues not being addressed in 2014. That left an open goal which Better Together exploited. And will do so again in Indyref 2 unless the issue is dealt with head-on. The benefits of being part of the huge European Single Market, compared to the much smaller UK one, need to be carefully explained, along with the fact that Member States are treated as equals in the EU, rather than ignored by England as in the UK. Ireland’s support from its 26 fellow member states throughout Brexit, compared to Scotland being dominated and ignored by England, is the classic example.

  4. P Harvey says:

    As I said in the earlier post
    Let’s keep the heid
    Don’t be distracted by the background noise
    SNP 1 & 2

    • marconatrix says:

      Wherever there are several SNP gains in the constituences, an SNP list vote is effectively worthless …

      • But you can never know beforehand, so assuming a repeat, or bettering of, 2016’s constituency results is not analysis, it’s wishful thinking.

        • marconatrix says:

          I’m starting to think the system was genuinely designed to confuse, befuddle and disorientate the voters …

          • You are not wrong there.

            Why do you think we had 4 (3 since Brexit) completely different electoral processes?

            All designed to confuse and confound the electorate.

  5. Scott Napier says:

    I think something should have been said of the Scottish Greens’ intention to stand in 12 constituencies; the naive and selfish action of putting party before cause (competing against the vehicle which will enable its policies to become a reality post-independence) could deprive us of a Pro-independence majority. Let’s not forget they competed against the SNP before, narrowly costing them victories.

    • Captain Banana Hands says:

      I don’t think the Green’s “cause” is independence. I’m sure it’s something to do with the environment ….

      • scottnapster says:

        I didn’t say the Greens’ cause was independence. Without it, however, they’re not going to achieve everything they want, and standing in constituencies could set us back if we don’t achieve a Pro-Independence majority.

      • Mark Robertson says:

        So why is Queen nicola Not backing Alba instead ? Anyone could make up green policies without a party telinga you how to do IT

        • Duncan says:

          Did Alba engage in any sort of consultation with the SNP with regards to this strategy, did they give them any form of pre-warning, was there any planning done between the two – or did Alba simply appear, popped-up, out of nowhere one day with no forewarning and start making demands of the SNP that they tell their supporters to back them and that they fall in line with their strategy?

    • Duncan says:

      Why are Alba standing candidates in list regions where both votes SNP is vital – the Highlands & Islands and the South?

  6. yesindyref2 says:

    What gets me about this whole tactical voting thing is the idea that over 1 million SNP voters who don’t tune in to any political programs or pay much attention apart the news, are going to be robots and listen to some people they’ve never heard of, led by someone they definitely have and mostly don’t like.

  7. Sophie Grace Chappell says:

    A lot of Alba fans are saying that 3% is very respectable polling, “only 3 days after the launch”.
    That right, aye? Here’s a wee blast from the past. The SDP’s official launch was March 26 1981. MORI polled the SDP at 32% *3 days before* their official launch.
    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/voting-intention-1979-1983

    • 2p3rf3ct says:

      Thanks for that – I was wondering – am old enough to remember the ‘shizzle’ then ‘fizzle’.

    • weegingerdug says:

      Change UK also did well in early polling and attracted the support of some big name figures. Shortly after launching they polled 18%, while they were still calling themselves the Independent Group

      https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/02/28/what-does-public-think-independent-group

      However in the 2019 European elections they managed just 3.3% of votes cast. In that year’s Westminster General election they stood three candidates, all sitting MPs who had defected to the new party and who could presumably have benefited from a degree of personal loyalty in their seats. Former Conservative Anna Soubry did best, taking 8.5% of the vote, Former Labour MP Chris Leslie, who served as a junior minister in Tony Blair’s government, received just 3.6% of the vote in his seat and lost his deposit

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Change_UK_election_results

      • 2p3rf3ct says:

        Party loyalty trumps polls … indeed.

      • Tam the Bam says:

        Showing my age here….Roy Jenkins (SDP) became my MP at that election and no…I didnt vote for him!

      • DH says:

        I can’t back this up with any statistics, but I would be willing to bet that the overwhelming majority of voters vote for party in both 1st and 2nd, as opposed to being swayed by the candidate. The only exception to that seems to be Green members, who always seem to never vote for X SNP candidate because of one thing they tweeted, or because they haven’t said XYZ clearly enough (usually GRA Reform).

        My prediction is that ALBA will get no seats, but if they do it will probably be AS in NE Scotland. I really , really, really don’t want him in Parliament and that has nothing to do with his criminal trial. His supporters massively overstate his skills imo – he has changed a lot from way back when and times have also changed a lot as well since his heyday between 2007-2011. I think politics used to be a lot simpler in the 2000s and early 2010s – pre-culture war and all that.

        Now for a related rant.

        They all give him *way* too much credit for securing Indyref1 , and hold Nicola to the same standard (e.g. she has failed so far, therefore she is rubbish). They seem to miss one very relevant fact, which is that indyref1 was *the first* referendum, called at a time when support for independence was low. It wasn’t that hard. The sheer lunacy of this idea that Nicola has had mandate after mandate to “deliver independence” since basically the day after the referendum – just want to be clear on that:

        1) 2015 vote was not a mandate, because indyref2 was (rightly) not in the manifesto
        2) 2016 was also a pretty weak mandate – no evidence of change in attitude since 2014 vote
        3) European Elections were not a mandate, turnout was 35% and even then the SNP got 38%!! (up to 46% if you include Green – strangely similar to the 45% in 2014)
        4) 2019 General Election – not really a mandate – oh my god it was 45% again!

        Brexit vote is “kind of” a justification, provided you also have evidence of the result being substantially different if you called it tomorrow.

        There has only been, in my view, any real sense in which Nicola has had any kind of serious “mandate” since about May 2020. It has only been since then that support has risen and settled continuously above 50% (something AS was not able to achieve).

        Now I am “not” saying that you only have a “Mandate” if you get over 50% of the vote, but you can’t complain about not holding a referendum in circumstances were (a) there has basically just been one, and (b) if we’d followed the bloggers advice (Present company excluded) we would have lost again, and (c) there has been no real evidence of a change of opinion until the last 18 months.

        What the bloggers don’t seem to understand is that Indyrefs are different in character to other elections owing to turnout. There are vast swathes of people (about 1/3 of the population on my count) who never vote, *except* if it is a referendum on independence. John Curtice poll in 2014 after the result demonstrated that those people (the “never voters”) overwhelmingly vote No. For some reason, people who vote Yes are much, much more likely to turnout to elections and vote. So even then, the figures I gave above in terms of %ages would not really be representative.

        The bloggers live in a weird bubble where, according to them, basically everyone actually supports independence already. People would be perfectly happy with UDI! They do not realise how fragile the average Scottish voter is when it comes to this question – it takes a very slow, careful approach which cultivates support gradually. I still think if you held the referendum tomorrow it would be 49:51 to No- maybe 50:50 at best.

        Aha! but they say “there hasn’t been a campaign, and the campaign last time increased support by circa 15 points!”. That is because it was fresh and new, and most people hadn’t properly engaged with the idea before the vote was called. This time, there will be no such significant rise. I think we could hope for a couple of points at most, maybe 3/4. None of the serious arguments by the NO side are even really being made properly.

        I do not understand the bloggers (present company excepted- I wont keep saying that). They are appalling strategists. WOS did a good job with the Blue book and it was pretty appalling that it was left to him to do. They genuinely seem to think that if Alex had been in charge this whole time, things would have been radically different. One hope I have is that, if Alex does not succeed in his endeavour this May, that some of them realise that he is not all that. Of course they won’t – it will all be blamed on SNP and Nicola. The cult of personality that has arisen around Alex is, whilst smaller substantially than that around Nicola, far more fierce and ferocious/concentrated. His followers don’t seem to understand that the absence of conviction means the absence of criminal behaviour, not the absence of being inappropriate. I learn Alex is a letch by taking him at his word and only listening to Alex. I can listen only to what he has said, believe him entirely, and conclude he was inappropriate with women. I can reach that conclusion by disbelieving everything the women have said!

        Anyway rant over jesus this was its own blog post. Had to say it, im sorry its been driving me to distraction all this Alba stuff.

        • DH says:

          OH – as if it wasnt long enough I also forgot to mention – these are the same people that think it would have been a golden idea to throw a referendum (presumably a unilateral one) DURING a global pandemic! Yep that wouldn’t have gone down like a lead brick! Jesus wept…

          Anyway im sure a bigger majority in Scots Parliament and Alex’s tough talking is all that is needed for Boris Johnson to change his mind on indyref2… Because that is so different than already having a pro-independence majority. Id have a lot more respect for it if they just said “look its a not woke version of the SNP- we are the SNP but not woke- we stand on policy and that is our thing”. Great – good I can back that. But this “supermajority” nonsense is a non-starter. Ive spoken so much now I will stop.

        • grizebard says:

          You’re not wrong either in any of that. Tough love! {grin}

  8. Eilidh says:

    I had a look at Alba candidates for West Scotland list. 3 former Snp councillors and their former equalities convener all who defected to Alba. Even if I was thinking of giving my 2nd vote elsewhere none of that lot would convince me to. I think those councillers should be forced to have by elections. Becoming an Independent is one thing but joining another party is not what electorate voted you in for

    • 2p3rf3ct says:

      And therein lies the problem. How quickly will they jump ship Alba after voting for them? Loyalties are important to most people. Alba are not inspiring that.

    • Eilidh , dont SNP do that too ?

      • Eilidh says:

        When and Who from Snp did that Terence. I know Neale Hanvey was technically elected as Independent as he was suspended from Snp at the time but the ballot paper said he was Snp as it was too late to change it then he ended up in Snp again before jumping ship to Alba of course

        • To SNP Eilidh to SNP
          You were apportioning blame to ALBA for accepting people jumping ship from SNP to ALBA

          There are people who have jumped ship from Labour and Lib Dems to SNP

          Whats the problem if the rules allow it and they do allow it , usually the MPs who jump ship say its because the party they were in no longer represents the values and aims they campaigned and were elected for , how do you prove they are right or wrong ? impossible i would say .
          I think its best that people sit with the party closest to their heart.

          • Eilidh says:

            Terence which sitting councillors Msps or Mps jumped ship from a.n other party to the Snp you haven’t told me one name that is why I asked when did this happen and who did that

  9. Capella says:

    My feeling is that the Alba Party will be very disappointed with a 3% share of the vote. They would have expected around 20 – 30% of frustrated SNP voters to flock to the banner delighted to have the Great Helmsman back to boldly lead them to independence, after elbowing the “cautious” Nicola Sturgeon aside. (Split infinitive deliberate in deference to Trekkies).

    Not going to happen. Alex Salmond might be able to squeeze through in North East region but my guess is that even that would be hard. He’s not as popular as he thinks he is. We can also expect the mainly hostile MSM to circulate a stream of disagreeable articles about him until the election.

    That would be a sad end to what could have been a successful career in politics marred by events of his own making though amplified by dark players.

    • Petra says:

      ”He’s not as popular as he thinks he is.’

      He’s probably been duped by Mr Popularity the Braggart from Bath. Conned by the stats demonstrating how many people visit his site. No poll carried out right enough to ascertain how many people actually like the blog owner and / or the substance of his articles. No poll carried out either to see how many posters on said site actually live in Scotland, hence can actually vote in May .

      • Captain Banana Hands says:

        I think it’s the guy from Bath that’s been duped by AS to be honest. He played him like a fiddle, and instantly had all his readers on his side.

        • Petra says:

          You might be right CBH and after using him he’ll be dropped like a hot potato when it comes up Alex’s humph.

  10. Alba could win a couple in Salmond’s former stomping ground in the northeast.

    For myself and Mrs PC – both our Costituency votes are going to SNP (Nicola Sturgeon). If SNP do not have more than 5% lead in national opinion polls over its nearest rival then we’ll be SNP 1 &2. If the SNP does have a 5%+ lead over its nearest rival then it’ll be SNP1 and OtherIndyParty 2.

    The OtherIndyParty might be Greens or Alba – it depends who has the highest % polling before the vote. If Greens are polling 11% and Alba 10% then the Greens will get our List vote or vice versa. If it’s a tie at, say, 10% each, then Mrs PC will vote Green and I’ll vote Alba on the List.

    Just trying to max the Indy representation.

    Britnats be afraid – be very afraid.

    • Jonathan Marshall says:

      Yep same for me… SNP 1 for my hard working constituency MP (Although I did send him an email about SNP figures accusing another pro Independence Party of gaming the system… Perhaps they would be better remembering the whole system has been set. up… gamed so to speak to prevent independence) On the list… well it will be Alba or Green whoever looks most likely in the weeks ahead.

    • Sophie Grace Chappell says:

      I’m in the NE. I ain’t voting for Salmond, not when he jumps into bed with that pack of chancers. #BothVotesSNP

      • You know what – I’m not the least bit interested in who you’re NOT voting for. It’s just not something that I, or I imagine anyone else, really needs to know. Just both votes for Indy is all we need to know – and that’s all good.

        • I’m curious to know how voting for a party that’s unlikely to gain a seat (as things stand), but could damage another indy party’s chances is “all good”.

          Who, exactly, are you to be jumping down Sophie’s throat, for expressing an opinion? If you want an echo chamber, I’d recommend that you start your own blog.

  11. Ken says:

    5 weeks to go. A week is a long time in politics. Keep the heid. When all around are losing theirs.

    SNP1 Alba 2 is the sensible thing to do for an all out Indy majority. It is a no brainer. Get the unionists out. Break D’Hond’t.

    It has taken 20 years. Do not lose it. Take advantage. Independence is all that matters for a better society. More equal, calm and prosperous.

    It is not about personalities. It is about winning. People do not suit everyone. A variety. Independence is the goal to improve the lot of everyone. Go for it,

    • 2p3rf3ct says:

      No. SNP1 Green2 in areas outside H&I/SouthScot is the best way to get a supermajority. The greens have a solid base. Alba is more or less totally unknown.

      Take Central Scotland – from 2016

      1900 SNP2 to Green2 bags a Tory seat
      14700 SNP2 to Alba … bags a Tory seat

      Easier?

    • Sophie Grace Chappell says:

      If you want to split your votes, surely what you should do is pick *the two biggest* Yes parties. It looks like that’s going to be SNP and Greens. Alba aren’t in the picture.
      Personally I don’t think you should split your votes. It might work, but it’s very risky. It means you’re staking a lot on how other people vote. It only works, actually, if not everyone does it.
      If you don’t split your votes, they should both go to the biggest Indy party. We all know who that is.

      • 2p3rf3ct says:

        Actually … not really. D’hondt takes a lot … very high number … to get a list seat if you have all the constituency seats.So take Central Scotland again:

        10000 Tory2/Lab2 to SNP2 to get 1 list seat.

        Back to 1900 SNP2 to Green2 – a much easier job.

    • grizebard says:

      You can sloganise “get the Unionists out” like a stuck record as much as you like, but that’s only possible by diminishing their vote. Alba are plainly not going to do that, and if their current poor but non-negligible ratings persist, they can even rob the SNP or Greens of sufficient votes to let more Unionists IN. Try thinking about that before you harp on and vote in haste.

    • Duncan says:

      But it’s not the sensible thing to do though, by your and the AP’s own logic. It must be SNP1/SNP2 in the specific regions of South Scotland and the Highlands and Islands, and in all other regions the most sensible way to max the Yes is by voting for the pro-Indy Greens on the list, who are polling much higher.

  12. Colin Alexander says:

    @Paul Kavanagh

    You state: “the purpose of this blog is to promote Scottish independence”.

    I think I am not the only one who now thinks you now use your website to uncritically support Sturgeon’s SNP, even at the price of damaging the campaign for independence.

    Believe me Paul, I am sorry I feel that criticism is necessary, when you have previously done so much good work for Scottish independence.

    • yesindyref2 says:

      Go away Coco,

      You might fool the people on Wings, you don’t fool me.

      And it’s very very rare I’m this rude.

    • weegingerdug says:

      For reasons I have previously laid out, I do not believe that Alex Salmond’s Alba party gamble is going to assist the cause of independence. You are welcome to your opinions, just as I have every right to mine. I will continue to advocate SNP 1 & 2 just as Alex Salmond himself did in the only Holyrood elections where the SNP won a majority.

      We shall see after 6 May who was right

      • Colin Alexander says:

        @Paul Kavanagh

        Thank you for your courteous reply. “A week is a long time in politics” so it will be interesting to see if support for the Alba Party continues to grow.

        From everything I’ve read, Alba are encouraging people to vote SNP in the constituency. The Alba Party is NOT trying to undermine constituency support for the SNP. ( Individuals are responsible for their own decisions and hopefully they will think before they act).

        Despite being a long-term critic of the SNP, precisely because of the Max The Yes strategy being promoted by Alba and other independence supporters, I now intend to vote:

        Constituency: SNP; List: Alba.

        I am putting my personal feelings about the SNP to one side for the greater cause of Scottish independence.

        I hope others can also put personal loyalties – or grudges- to one side for the greater cause of restoring Scotland’s independence.

        • Golfnut says:

          Don’t talk rubbish Colin, you’ve been trying to undermine the SNP/ Nicola since you first turned up on wings, long before the bathistan seer went over to the dark side.

          • yesindyref2 says:

            Was it him we correctly called “Grima Wormtongue”?

            • grizebard says:

              Yes. After even the most open and friendly among us finally gave up on trying to follow his ever-changing stances on almost everything. It was bait-and-switch on steroids, the only consistent feature being an insidious undertone of negativity towards the SG.

        • Petra says:

          ”From everything I’ve read, Alba are encouraging people to vote SNP in the constituency.”

          You’re not trying to tell us that you don’t read posts on WoS are you, Colin? Alex Salmond’s, hence Alba’s, mouthpiece is encouraging people to vote for Sarwar to bring Nicola Sturgeon down and many of his acolytes are stating that they won’t be voting for the SNP at all. In fact some are going to vote for BritNat candidates right across Scotland (that’s if they actually live here).

          • Colin Alexander says:

            @Petra I think it’s fair to say, many Wings commenters now think Nicola Sturgeon and her husband Peter Murrell should not be in charge of the SNP. And I think they are right to think that.

            Some on Wings have said they won’t vote SNP or are wrestling whether to vote SNP this time. I can understand that too. That’s been my feeling for years.

            But, no matter how angry or bitter anyone is about Sturgeon’s SNP, I cannot see any good coming from voting for Unionists. It would be cutting your nose off to spite your face.

            My SNP / Alba votes will be for independence, not for Sturgeon or SNP devolution.

          • Petra
            That’s my take too. WoS comments read like a Unionist site. The bile and vitriol is off the scale, but that’s a reflection of the attack pieces by the Host, running for months now. Pump priming for the Salmond Party.
            I think Salmond will quite like that poll of 3%. Just enough to siphon votes from SNP and endanger a majority. Alba is a revenge vehicle, nothing more. Salmond could have quite easily joined ISP, if it was about Independence.
            The attacks on Sturgeon have been heinous,,and when the Committee process failed to bring her down, Salmond had to pivot to the Alba vehicle, waiting in the wings.
            Ultimately, he’d like to see SNP lose out on a majority, and hope that results in her resignation, or Plan B, get Alba supporters voting Sarwar.
            What a shitshow.

        • Duncan says:

          Can you explain why they’re advocating Alba 2 in South Scotland and the Highlands and Islands when there is should be both votes SNP?

    • grizebard says:

      (For those innocents here who don’t know, indyref2 upthread is right, this character is a particularly insidious troll. There’s nothing genuine about him, not even his name. He will engage spuriously at length with anyone foolish enough to imagine he actually cares.)

  13. 2p3rf3ct says:

    Have to note, online where a tiny %’age of people who involve themselves in discussion etc, there is little understanding that the vast majority of people in Scotland do not ‘tweet’ etc.

    Alba arrived too late, at a time where even canvassing is restricted, and without a normal partys setup that takes decades to get.

    A smile on TV is not enough.

    • Duncan says:

      If they were serious about their plan and intentions they would have established themselves and publicly came out as a party well before the 6-weeks-to-the-election mark. When I was wee my mother lectured me on the importance of not leaving things til the last minute!

      • Mark Robertson says:

        Same could be said for the SNP tactics on Plan B or Any plans for the future independence Scotland ! Oh thats right we have to keep them Close to Our chest incase the unionists hear about them SHHHH

        • Duncan says:

          I am not sure what your point is Mr. Robertson. Does that make it okay or strategically wise to leave the creation and announcement of a new party until the home stretch, a mere 6 weeks before the election? I think not.

  14. […] Wee Ginger Dug A significant force or RISE 2.0 Yesterday saw the publication of the first full scale opinion poll since the launch of […]

  15. Dr Jim says:

    I’ve read nothing from the Salmond party that indicates support for the SNP when they realise they’re losing, I’ve only read talk of wrecking, they talk like Unionists

    • Golfnut says:

      The comments on FB, my links at least, from the Greens represent just about 10% of those urging you to use your second vote for another Indy party. The Greens have 10% support, Alba has about 3%, strange don’t you think.

    • Completely agree. Alba is a narcissist’s revenge vehicle aimed at Sturgeon.
      Both votes SNP for me.

  16. jfngw says:

    If the Green’s are standing a candidate in your own constituency but did not last time and you gave them you list vote then I would think twice this time. They are almost certainly going to take votes from the SNP constituency candidate, this risks both the constituency and list seats.

    Not sure what the Green’s logic is here because the less constituency seats the SNP take the more likely they are to win list seats, this will almost certainly be at the expense of seats the Green’s held.

    • Capella says:

      They stood constituency candidates in 2016 which allowed Ruth Davidson to get a constituency seat by taking votes from the SNP. The Greens knew they couldn’t win the seat and that Alison Johnston was No 1 on the List and would get a list seat anyway. Andy Wightman was no 2 on the list and also got a seat.

      When challenged, Patrick Harvie said that they were a political party and were entitled to stand candidates wherever they chose. Which I suppose is true. It also reduced the SNP to under a majority so they were dependent on the Greens to win votes and had to support Green policies.

      • jfngw says:

        It’s always the dream position of small parties to hold the balance of power, you can have policies passed that would never see the light of day otherwise. SNP supporters should always view all other parties as opposition, whether they support independence or not.

        I have a feeling many non politically engaged voters don’t weigh this up when voting, they vote SNP and decide they can vote Green on the list because it makes them feel good.

        Mind you if you could get rid of James Kelly (the politician not the blogger) from my region I would be eternally grateful.

      • grizebard says:

        I’ve always felt it was the little guy trying to show he’s playing with the big guys, a posturing that is actually counter-productive to their electoral interests. Almost a reflection of their parliamentary leader’s own personality, even. But as they say, it’s a democracy, and I suspect it’s part of a longer-term strategy to attempt to achieve primacy over everyone else, which is their right. They are quite strong in Glasgow, for example, which could actually rebound very badly if they get even a little more support in the constituencies, since it could let Labour back in by a squeak. Kelvin, in particular.

        It’s party politics at a particularly injudicious time, IMO, because it’s SNP support that the BritNats will be using to argue we don’t want another indyref. I might have been willing to lend the Greens my list vote here, but because of their posturing, I don’t feel it may be safe to do that. Their bad.

    • jfngw , bright green the UK blog for greens from all four countries says that in Wales
      the greens and plaid cymru both decided not to contest seats that the conservatives usually win
      they both stood aside to allow the Lib Dems to win and depose the tories.

      Tactical voting goes on everywhere not just in Scotland and its not new.

      The green party in Scotland has always had a fairly high number of members who are against Scottish Independence but in 2019 they elected Mr Harvey and Ms Slater as co-leaders
      Co- Leaders ? Thats new !!
      both say they support Scottish Independence

      other senior positions in the scottish greens were won by the left leaning socialist group
      cid:2C08F155-E9ED-4D3A-B168-258833677EFE
      I hope they support scottish independence too

      If the green party do , as a majority , support Scottish independence i can see the attraction of giving them a vote for the LIST
      But i cant see that giving them the constituency vote helps Scottish independence unless they are better placed to win than SNP

  17. Not-My-Real-Name says:

    Please bear with me on this …….if you can…and read to the end….if you have the time. Sorry that it is so long..if too long scroll on by….I’ll never know will I…….Lol.

    I personally have been on a journey….I was an SNP member…then I left the SNP as a member as I got caught up in the intense anti SNP rhetoric that was being spun by specific factions within the Indy movement thus I contributed to comments on a specific individual’s blog….though I never fell into the trap of criticising this blog, WGD, that I now write this comment on….OR any people on here who previously posted on that specific blog…….

    I did however not leave the SNP because I was swayed by these individual’s opinions but because I agreed that there were certain new bills/Acts that the SNP were implementing that I did not agree with……..I also disagreed with Joanna Cherry being removed from the front bench as her expertise and contribution is invaluable and I saw her as an asset to the SNP…..and she is allowed to have a differing opinion from the party on specific issues she personally sees as important…..after all what should distinguish the SNP from the Tories is that they welcome a pool of opinions within the party without resorting to shutting them down.

    However I am now tempted to believe that the groundwork was perhaps being laid to aid the emergence of this new Alex Salmond party Alba…..thus the fury that was being whipped up against Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP was actually quite tactical in order to pave the way for a supposed alternative Indy party lead by Salmond …a new party that would capture the votes from those within the Indy movement who were now firmly well groomed and conditioned to be disenchanted with the SNP ….with the proviso that in voting for this new party you would deprive the Unionist parties from gaining list seats……

    During and since the trial of Alex Salmond there has been a furious backlash against Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP……what is shocking and unbelievable is that this has come from those who are supporters of independence…..as opposed to the onslaught emanating from the true enemies of independence….i.e. Unionist politicians, the MSM and all of their supporters.

    We can all continue to fight from within thus help give credence to Unionists political parties and the media that we are indeed disunited and thus give the outward impression that we are , as a movement, in chaos……and to those voters less politically engaged this will not inspire confidence in joining us I think….and

    Also while we continue do this we will give unnecessary ammunition to the REAL opposition and in doing so fail to highlight the continued sh*t show of failures that they have and are imposing on us all……from Tory corruption, doubles standards being applied, failure of Brexit that was imposed upon Scots who did not vote for it, a failed and costly Test and Trace system as managed by a private company, failing to reward the NHS with appropriate pay increase, renewing Trident, reneging on manifesto promises made pre 2019 GE, political aides and Tory politicians breaking Covid rules, PPE contracts awarded to Tory donors and pals of the Tory politicians, Tory ministers breaking ministerial codes with not repercussions, the current PM, when London Mayor, using public money to pay his alleged mistress’s ‘company’ plus numerous other failings too long to mention………then we have the Labour party ,who ousted Corbyn, only to replace him with a Tory lite leader who has shown that as the supposed opposition leader in HOC there is more that unites his Labour with Tory policies than divides them…..as to Lib Dems well they scavenge votes dependent on what way wind is blowing as in yesterday they were THE most pro EU party in the UKnotOK supposedly and today not so much…..basically all Unionist parties just want us Scots to move on and forget which basically leaves us as, as usual , just being ignored and our needs and wants being disregarded and never met.

    To those who support Alba….you have to remember that prior to the emergence of your favoured party the vitriol that was being unleashed against , not only the SNP , but also upon those who still supported the SNP was pretty intense and ugly….and for some it still continues…yet those who stayed loyal to the SNP are expected to just ‘move on’ and ignore this and embrace this unknown and unproven political entity created by a former SNP FM who himself has been only too willing to stir the pot of division among the Indy movement against Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP.

    People do not just move on easily and forget when they have been are still being attacked. Healing and compromise takes time and thus cannot be demanded by those who for the last God knows how many months have been relentless in their condemnation of both the SNP and it’s members and supporters…..if however we do not all eventually come to a consensus on how to proceed as a united front then will we are gifting the Unionist political parties an undeserved and unwanted advantage.

    So I think that when reality dawns as to what is now at stake by continuing to pursue this unwanted and counterproductive infighting that is playing out between us…..then for many of us, from both sides, if we do not begin the healing process and desist from attacking each other….. then we will fail in ending the current division between us and thus fail to focus all of our attention on the real goal and the real opposition….the real goal being getting independence and the real opposition being the Unionists who oppose us and who are trying to prevent us from achieving our goal…..specifically the Unionist political parties, the MSM and rabid prominent Twitter Unionist warriors.

    Finally…thank God you say …if you have bothered to read this far….this week, Tuesday to be precise , I rejoined the SNP….long journey but worryingly could see potential writing on the wall…saw the light ….and did the right thing IMHO…..now like many others I hope to get that Indy majority via chosen party and then we can all begin the fight to win independence and be free from all of eternal chaos, mismanagement and corruption that flows endlessly via all UKnotOK governments….irrespective of who is in power in UKnotOK……where Scotland is treated as the Blacksheep of the (non) supposed family of nations. The alternative to NOT getting independence is having to be tied to the current dysfunctional status quo that exists courtesy of remaining a part of the UKnotOK.

    Don’t shoot the messenger…as above is only my ,probably, over long, ever so humble, personal and honest opinion perhaps at times clumsily written but with good intentions…..if you think I am wrong, presumptuous or an idiot then so be it….but something’s gotta give or rather some of us have to concede that to continue fighting and arguing among ourselves serves only those who currently are relishing the fact that we are deflecting attention away from them AND who will also use this internal squabbling to try and promote that the SNP are incapable of uniting not only those who support independence but indeed the country…….like the chancers that they the Unionist opportunists all really are.

    ps. Read Dross has a policy….unfortunately it’s not a political one….it’s an insurance one…

    Apologies to Paul for overlong comment…..

    • Capella says:

      Good points. Well done for rejoining the SNP. I was near to resigning over policies I strongly disagree with. But I want independence more than I want to be right. We can change policies and repeal or amend bills later. We won’t get independence later if we don’t act together now.

      • 2p3rf3ct says:

        Well done both of you. And moreso, we get indy and we can fix everything. We can fix nothing without it. They can take it all away.

        As an SNP member and monthly doanter to Green you can imagine where my loyalties lie. Alba are too new to kick up the dust and be noticed. Green is the best ‘2’ vehicle – I’m mathematician who can only see this as the way to get indy looking at 2016 figures.

        In H&I/South Scot … its SNP1/2 … elsewhere … be wary.

        • Bob Lamont says:

          I sincerely wish I could be a doanter, does it involve surgery ? I
          Your “moreso” glitch gave you away

        • I’m no mathematician, but I do have a scientific background, so I’m no stranger to statistical analysis. I’m somewhat alarmed that you’ve drawn your conclusions based on 2016 alone; too many assumptions there for my liking. If you compare and contrast with 2011 you’ll see that the list vote was vital in delivering the SNP overall majority then.

          I’m SNP + SNP (Lothians) as insurance against the Tories flipping Edinburgh Pentlands and the SNP failing to make headway I n the 3 Unionist seats here. It’ll take better SNP polling numbers than we had prior to the 2016 election before I’ll consider getting cute with my list vote.

          • 2p3rf3ct says:

            We have two datasets 2011/16. The rest is very ancient history. One key thing, if you look, is that 2011 results were very odd for one reason. The Greens did not stand in all regions, leaving a ‘list seat’ open to be taken by the SNP. That will not happen again, and 2016 reflects how the voting system works far better.

            There is a reason why that interesting Salmond video of him finding out the result in 2011 … he was shocked, walked away from a TV interview – it was unexpected and look whats happened now. 10 years later?

      • Not-My-Real-Name says:

        🙂

        Have a good evening Capella

    • Not-My-Real-Name says:

      @ Me @ 4.07pm correction to gobblygook…Lol

      *we will be*

      if however we do not all eventually come to a consensus on how to proceed as a united front then *WILL WE ARE* gifting the Unionist political parties an undeserved and unwanted advantage.

    • Golfnut says:

      Humble, when did that happen? 🙂

    • It is quite a skill to generate deep regret, sadness, burgeoning confidence in a positive outcome for Scotland, and exhilaration at the prospect of Scotland free once again, all in one piece of excellent, clearly highly emotionally charged, prose, NMRN.
      Loved your piece.
      No need to apologise for this stirring essay.
      The combination of tears of joy and sadness clearly present in your writing will be shed in bucketloads by all of us on Independence Day.
      Fast forward to the now imminent day when an English Parliament and the Brit Oligarchy have absolutely no say in the running of Scotland.

      Thank you yet again, NMRM.
      More please.

    • Not my real name…but i have never taken sides
      I dont blame NS for doing her job she does it well and honestly in my opinion
      I dont believe AS should be barred from Scottish politics he was found not guilty fourteen charges by ten people all that has stuck is “ there cant be smoke without fire “
      His trial continues , everyday in the media
      And every day people find him guilty
      That is a new phenomenon to me seeing a person found not guilty by a court but the treated as guilty by the media and a large proportion of the public, this goes hand in hand because the media influence the public.

      I dont know AS or NS never met either never seen them much on tv either til NS covid briefings so i treat them as heroes
      Both of them
      Because of what they have done for Scotland

      There is something missing from the AS trial that we the public have been barred from knowing
      There may and probably are very good and legitimate reasons for this
      But i keep an open mind because it will all come out one day

      I have no problem with SNP both votes
      I have no problem with SNP and greens other than that i know there are a sizeable number of greens members who are against Scottish Independence , i dont blame them for that , their top priority is ecology which is high on my list too.

      I will vote SNP and ALBA
      I live in Dundee West constituency a guaranteed SNP constituency win

      • Petra says:

        ”all that has stuck is “ there cant be smoke without fire,”

        Terence, Alex Salmond himself has conceded that he had behaved inappropriately (2013/14) towards one of the women who ultimately came forward in 2017/18. Instead of the complaint being dealt with via the ScotGov Fairness at Work policy, at that time, Alex decided to apologise to the woman in private with no one else in attendance. Bad move, imo. Now what really beggars belief for me is that the women in question could have been part of a honey trap in the lead up to Indyref1 and his actions could have scuppered our chances altogether. He’s a liability and his behaviour and actions since don’t generate a great deal of admiration or trust in the man even now.

    • grizebard says:

      Thoughtful post. Funnily enough, lately I had exactly the same thought about JK@SGP, in no way vitriolic himself but for a wee while steadily positing disenchantments – for perfectly understandable reasons, alas – then bingo!, support for AS right out of the gate. No hesitation, few doubts, right into there promoting, entirely contrary to all his previous reasoning. Just because…(?)

      Now, not being a member of any political party myself, I may not be the right person to offer any advice on the matter, but having much the same concerns myself, I would have thought that your action is the correct one, to re-join and challenge the choice of priorities along with everyone else, or at the very least give the SNP the benefit of the doubt for now because far bigger issues are immediately at stake.

      Among all the smoke and mirrors going on right now, that crucial fact seems to be getting lost by some.

    • Petra says:

      ”Finally…thank God you say …if you have bothered to read this far.” 🤣🤣🤣

      I managed and found your post to be extremely interesting, NMRN. I totally agree with you that we should be getting facts out there in relation to the BritNat corruption, threat / plans for Scotland in conjunction with informing people about Scotland’s lucrative resources and assets. That’s the only route to converting the waverers now.

      As to the divisiveness in the independence movement, well I don’t know if that will ever heal at all. Paul does his utmost to defuse the situation, however he’s up against certain individuals, elsewhere, who are keen to continue stirring the pot. On the other hand who knows, things may settle down post elections in May and see all *genuine* independence supporters pulling together to actually achieve our aim of independence. Hopefully 😀.

    • Macart says:

      Well reasoned and there are points many will recognise and have resonance with.

    • Duncan says:

      I think this is astute. It is clearly tactical. Before AP was public knowledge, in the wake of the Hamilton Report WOS was posting vitriol and doomcalling, lambasting the SNP and claiming that he was distraught and angry and that Scotland was a failed state and that the cause of Independence was doomed. However, days later, his new posts and narrative were that of “the lifeline” – AP. WOS has clearly been involved in the setup and direction of AP, and he would have doubtless been among those who knew of its existence and that it was soon to be announced at the time of his doomsaying posts. That is highly suspect and intellectually dishonest. It’s all about riling up his base. Why post claiming Scotland and Indy is doomed when he knew of AP?

    • Mrs Sheryl Hepworth says:

      Agree with ALL you said!! I do not understand any of this rage and anger at the ONLY party that will, eventually, bring about what we all desire.. Independence!!!

  18. Bob Lamont says:

    Excellent as ever, but may I throw a wobbly at you, JFS&G, what if AS is playing a double blind here, what if the objective is to play bad cop to concentrate minds on the effects of the constituency vote and it’s effects on the List rather than actually be elected ?
    By dissolution of both mass but competing Indy parties in this Alba process, AS has essentially left the GG and Ballantyne muppets beached, the only discussion left on the table is who pulls the trigger on Indy and which of the Opposition immediately says NO.
    Perhaps he’s played the bad cop, but perhaps we might thank him for it later….

    • Not-My-Real-Name says:

      Hi Bob, I am not very bright and been a long day for me…what or who is JSF & G ?…….

      Sorry……..

      🙂

      • Bob Lamont says:

        It’s an old acronym like the 7ps, but in this particular case you had more beers than I had prior to typing or are in need of the services of an optometrist.
        Your “JSF & G” versus “JFS&G” slightly yet crucially alters the intent of “Just for Shits and Giggles, but opens up the possible first WGD quiz as to what “JSF & G” could really mean.
        You’re the Referee 🤣
        Sorry, couldn’t resist… 😉

        • Not-My-Real-Name says:

          Lol…..Cheers…..told you I wisnae bright…..

          Oh talking of acronyms….I heard George Foulkes votes SNP at every election….as he thinks it stands for the Say No Party…. 😉

  19. Dr Jim says:

    There’s no altruism in politics the Greens support Independence but they’re own agenda of getting votes for themselves will always come first, the same applies to the Salmond party which isn’t a party but a lone ranger attempt at Salmond planting himself in Holyrood for the purposes of what exactly, the notion of putting Scotland first is certainly not the agenda here because if Mr Salmond really meant that he wouldn’t be standing a party at all he’d be getting up on his hind legs like a man and apologising to Nicola Sturgeon for hounding smearing and threatening her for the last two years on and offline, then he’d be publicly asking Scotland’s electorate to support the FM and the SNP in their bid to make Scotland Independent, now that might’ve carried some weight, but what has Mr Salmond chosen to do? why launch an undermining party to strategically remove votes from the only vehicle capable of actually delivering Independence using the suggestion that Nicola Sturgeon either isn’t capable or doesn’t want Independence

    Are votes coming from Unionists to the Salmond party? NO, so where and who are they coming from, this debacle ends only one way, right at this moment Boris Johnson is more popular in Scotland than Alex Salmond, right at this moment almost 60% of women in Scotland support the FM and SNP, when did Alex Salmond ever have figures like that, never

    No, the word altruism cannot be used for Alex Salmond’s motives in this, his record tells a different story

    • Legerwood says:

      Are the Greens standing a candidate in the constituency being contested by Angus Robertson? Ruth Davidson’s old seat.

      • Alex Clark says:

        Yes, they are standing in Edinburgh Central.

        Edinburgh Central – Alison Johnstone
        Edinburgh Northern and Leith – Lorna Slater

        Alison Johnstone is also No 1 on the list for them. Here are the full list of Green candidates both constituencies and region.

        https://archive.ph/CvDk2

    • Dr Jim
      Great post, every word. Exactly my thinking. I just posted similar upstream.

  20. Rab1942 says:

    Another worthwhile contribution from Jamie Jauncey:

  21. Hamish100 says:

    NMRN
    Thanks for your frankness. I hope others take note.

  22. Valkyrie says:

    They’re being beaten by the LibDems?
    Now that is embarrassing…

  23. Capella says:

    Interesting poll info from Ben Walker/Britain elects with a link to a detailed article in the New Statesman. https://twitter.com/bnhw_/status/1375461477834973184?s=20

    Min percentage of the vote Alba needs to win a list seat, and who it damages:

    C Scot: 5.8% (Lab)
    Glasgow: 5.9% (Grn)
    Highlands: 5.5% (LDem)
    Lothian: 6.6% (Lab)
    Mid Scot: 6.0% (Con)
    NE Scot: 6.2% (Grn)
    S Scot: 5.4% (SNP)
    W Scot: 5.3% (Lab)

    Src BE-NS model

    • Capella so its mainly unionist seats ALBA are after
      Of the eight here if ALBA won a seat in all 8
      they would replace three existing indy seats with three new indy seats and
      they would replace five unionist seats with five indy seats

      • grizebard says:

        You’re rather missing the point, namely that Alba have only half of the support they need to make any of those of those wondrous gains. (RISE redux., only popular enough – just – to cause collateral damage to indy.) And only now, with mere weeks to go, they’ve desperately started trying to woo SNP voters while simultaneously unable to quite stop trashing them. If Salmond & Co were serious, they should have been assiduously courting SNP voters for months in advance rather than engaging in an evident covert op to destabilise and decapitate the SNP. A self-defeating strategy if ever there was one.

        Except as we strongly suspect now, the original intention was entirely different, and Alba is a last-minute bodge to try and revive a failed situation. “From the fat into the fire”, one can all-too-easily imagine.

    • Alex Clark says:

      I’ve seen that doing the rounds but believe it is misleading,

      Green got the 7th and last list seat in Mid Scot for example in 2016, so assuming Alba support is expected to come from other Independence supporting parties rather than Unionists. Why would the Tories be damaged when they comfortably won the 6th list seat and not the Greens in 7th?

      In my view, Alba if they got enough votes would simply replace the Greens in Mid Scot, not The Tories.

      • jfngw says:

        These predictions people are making are assuming the percentages will be the same across Scotland, they don’t have enough data to do it at regional level. Using real data from 2016 the loss is 4 indy (SNP & Green) and 4 unionist. The object of the exercise is to make Alba the power broker, if they are not they are just a noise in the background.

        They are trying to run a knife edge game, damage the SNP enough to keep them from having a majority, but not enough to make themselves pointless and replace the Green’s as the balance of power.

        • jfngw says:

          Forgot to add, Ive said this before, the supermajority is nonsense, just a carrot to try and draw in the easily fooled.

          Even if it worked the public would see the election had been manipulated and the prospect of winning a referendum would be worse not better. All those possible Yes supporters seeing their vote in an election being effectively disregarded. You win by persuading the public, not manipulating them.

  24. Potter says:

    ALBA are a strange lot, last week it was gies yer vote or well no vote SNP, this week it’s gies yer vote and we will vote SNP. Hence the good cop, bad cop patter. Maybe now because of all that ALBA support the SNP will clean up in the constituencies making ALBA irrelevant.

  25. Alec Lomax says:

    The Alba Party doesn’t remind so much of RISE as it does of SDP. Salmond puts me in mind of late career David Owen.

    • grizebard says:

      Likewise. (Which is contrary to the evident expectations of the fans, who see him as still having irresistable charisma for voters. Only one view can be right!)

  26. yesindyref2 says:

    I said on March 31, 2021 at 6:00 pm

    “Current level (Alba) is 8,890 Followers, so an extra 1,024 in 3 days, 342 a day. ”

    Now at 9,246, an extra 356 in 2 days – down to 178 a day. But it is the weekend now.

  27. I dont go to WOS these days but thought i would check and see if its as bad as it was last time i visited.

    What is this all about ?

    We’re currently busy pursuing a rather larger story, readers, but to keep you amused in the meantime we thought we’d share this absolute belter from Wings contributor Angus MacNeil MP today in The National:

    https://archive.is/jTi3o

    • Angus MacNeil.

      This para in particular sticks out

      “Pressed if he would be voting SNP in both the constituency and regional list section of the ballot, he said: “I can see the argument people have when they use calculators and logic. If all SNP votes were to transfer on the list to Alba you would have 30 odd Alba seats and 30 less London party MSPs, but of course that is using logic and sense. Using politics as I do and have to do, it’s both votes SNP of course.”

      • grizebard says:

        Yes, because the vast majority of people don’t vote by spreadsheet. And any real player in politics knows that full well.

        It’s as Paul says, it’s about who can tell the most convincing story to the most people. And given the solid performance of the minority Scottish Government we’ve had since 2016, it’s very clear to most people which party that is, and what the necessary result (for pro-indy voters at least) should be.

        • So grizebard ,

          if people do not vote ALBA and SNP and greens do not get a majority
          Will you still be glad you told people not to vote ALBA on the LIST

          • grizebard says:

            You can’t TELL people how to vote. Everybody does their own thing, unsynchronised. That’s the fatal flaw in the shoddy, ill-prepared “it’ll be all right on the night” Alba offer, and in the entire list-bender approach. The fly in the ointment, the worm in the bud. But no doubt you people will have your alibis ready to shift the blame when it all goes belly-up. See, you’ve even started already…

          • So if the Greens and/or the SNP get squeezed out of seats by a few hundred votes and Alba get a few thousand, but no seats, it absolutely won’t be Alba’s fault if the Unionists squeak a majority by 1 seat?

            As of now Alba aren’t going to pick up a seat per region, they’ll have to more than double their current support to achieve that.

            With a couple of very loose cannons on board who’ll only take their feet out of their mouths long enough to shoot them, how do you expect Alba will get from 3% to 6.6% in the Lothians for example?

            You might be willing to excuse AS’s self admitted inappropriate behaviour because he was acquitted, but it would appear that the vast majority of the electorate (admittedly in only one poll so far) aren’t impressed with him or his party; his personal reputation can’t be ignored, as a reason, given the very low numbers he’s pulling.

      • WOS does not have any , in fact none that i came across after 20 minutes reading , that are saying do not vote SNP.
        The gist of things there , is that to get Scottish Independence we have to vote SNP in the constituency seats , its the only way to success.

        So many people there are saying that SNP need another party to bolster the overall
        pro independence number of seats and that can only be done by getting LIST seats that normally go to the unionist parties .
        They are also saying that because SNP will win most of the constituency seats the SNP will get hardly any LIST seats.

        If this is true it will be up to the greens or ALBA to get bolster the pro independence seats by taking LIST seats from the unionists.
        Lets face it most of those unionist constituency seats are going to stay with the unionists
        Theres never much movement in them

        • Tam the Bam says:

          …”WoS does not have any posters saying do not vote SNP….”

          Must try harder Terence.

        • Golfnut says:

          There’s that ‘ if ‘ word again.

        • Petra says:

          ”WOS does not have any , in fact none that i came across after 20 minutes reading , that are saying do not vote SNP.”

          Terence you and I must visit a different site. Here’s a recent example of what I’ve come across.

          ”My sitting MSP is a lying little Bastard who must be De-throned and I will campaign against her. There is no way this phycopath should be allowed to enter Holyrood ever again.”

      • richard mackinnon says:

        Terence,
        That paragraph you highlighted at 6.36 2 April is the dilemma faced by SNP supporters. There is no getting away from it; SNP 1 Alba 2 will rid Holyrood of all but a handful of unionist MSPs.

    • Potter says:

      Nae doubt you will go back and tell us.

  28. Hamish100 says:

    I see wings are drooling over the fact that somebody from burrheid has reported the snp over funds. I wonder who that can be? Now considering accounts are audited and passed or not why would a “ socialist” be interested in another parties finances? Jealousy maybe?
    Seems they albanites are aligning with the pro unionist and Brexit Labour Party. Are we surprised?

    Seems Alba supporters are more worried. Than we thought. I await the press release instructing snp supporters to vote for them.

    • Golfnut says:

      The funds nonsense was aired often enough on wos over the last 2 yrs, it became part of a cycle of SNP baad bad things over the last 2yrs, so no surprises that it should surface once again. The SNP have knocked them back, a leg up by the SNP was a prerequisite of early advancement in the polls, it’s back to SNP baad again.

    • Petra says:

      And that the Police visited Nicola Sturgeon at home prior to the debate on Tuesday night, Hamish. The man who refuses to live in Scotland, sits on his backside doing nought and professes to support independence is like some kind of poisoned dwarf. He’s been complaining about this issue for months now, so isn’t it strange, a bit of a coincidence, that one of his acolytes just happened to dial 101 to make a complaint now. Well timed, eh, and If he’s so keen on ”digging” maybe he could ”dig’ and inform us all about who’s actually backing Salmond financially.

    • Alec Lomax says:

      Barrhead Boy ? Someone else from outwith Scotland telling us what’s good for us. Same goes for the Bath guy.

      • Eilidh says:

        Is it true he lives in Spain?

        • Alec Lomax says:

          By his own admission he spends most of his time in Catalonia. Nowt wrong with that, I wish I could do that. What I object to is him and his expat buddy in Bath, putting the boot into the SNP, while their bossman kids on that he just wants to be pals with the SNP.

          • James Mills says:

            I misread that for ”Catatonia ” , and thought – How Apt !

          • Duncan says:

            Wings in England, Barrhead in Catalonia, Jeggit in Dublin – one has to wonder their true agendas. We criticise England-based unionists, both politician and punter alike, for getting involved in and making statements and posting opinions on our internal matters of Scottish politics. Why do we give a pass to these men based outwith Scotland for doing the same?

  29. Monymusk says:

    I remain undecided about where my second vote will go. I am genuinely torn between casting both votes for the SNP or giving my second vote to ALBA. I suspect I’ll decide nearer the time.

    I can’t deny I feel a personal loyalty to Alex Salmond who became the closest thing to a hero as I’m ever likely to have. I recall making the decision to join the SNP at the age of 16 after listening to Alex Salmond’s arguments in the ‘Great Debate’ held, I think, in the Usher Hall in 1992. Listening to the way Salmond argued the independence case despite the ganging up of his unionist opponents which included Donald Dewar and Ian Lang left a lasting impression on me and I believe his role in both making the SNP the natural party of government and the case for independence credible, will not be lost on me, even if it is by others.

    The character flaws which have been aired in recent months reveal he is a flawed human being just like the rest of us. And, in case of any doubt, I most certainly do not condone any of the allegations made against him.

    I’m sad at the way events have unfolded but also at the short memories evident amongst some people who have been SNP members long before 2014. As I say, living in central Scotland, I will be giving serious consideration to who will be the recipient of my second vote.

    • grizebard says:

      Well, since your (former?) hero isn’t standing where you are, you have to judge everyone who’s actually on the ballot on their own individual merits, and from what I’ve seen and read, somehow I can’t think it will be that hard…

    • Potter says:

      A hero rarely turns out to be what you thought they were. Mate oh mines brother worked for Salmond as a researcher, suffice to say a pretty picture was not painted.

    • Monymusk
      As you are making up your mind, you might want to consider the words of Andy Wightman, writing straight after the Committee on his Blog.

      “This whole sorry tale arises because the former First Minister, Mr Salmond behaved inappropriately towards female civil servants.

      There was an organisational culture of inappropriate behaviour by Mr Salmond and complicity across a number of fronts in terms of people not challenging that behaviour.”

      He is unequivocal, following what he heard from female complainants.

      Anyone who watched Salmond giving evidence could see he was a furious man, particularly over Sturgeon not intervening. Several times he tried to tell the Committee what to do.
      Salmond is raging that his footnote was going to be the trial and Committed appearance, with no scalps to show for it. Alba Is the puppet masters new footnote. I doubt he wants to sit in Holyrood as a single Alba rep??

  30. Tam the Bam says:

    I can only assume the Mayor of Bathistan has parted company with AS over the proposed SNP 1.. ALBA 2 policy since he is now trying to break a story of supposed financial wrongdoing.

    What a sulk this sorry individual has become.

    • grizebard says:

      Ach, this is another hoary old obsession of his. What about his own accounts, eh…?

      Oh, and while we’re at it, who exactly is bankrolling Alba…?

      • Tam the Bam says:

        Apparently AS won the lottery on April 1st!….True! (allegedly).

        • Tam the Bam says:

          Joking apart Grize…..it does ..on the face of it..suggest the Mayor is NOT on board with the SNP1..ALBA 2 proposition.
          Why would he attempt another SNP smear if he were?
          His over-riding passion now is to bring down the FM…not Independence.

  31. Golfnut says:

    The IFS are set to produce briefings for the Holyrood elections, apparently for the first time. During the 2014 Indy campaign most of their briefings were funded by the Treasury and the DWP, worth keeping an eye on.
    An academic report publish on the LSE website has been removed, it clearly indicated that Scotland was more than capable of becoming a successful independent state, we knew that of course, but it’s still nice to see it confirmed, oh, and even if westminster refuses to agree to a referendum, the world will still recognise Scotland as an Independent state.

    https://www.businessforscotland.com/westminster-refuses-to-deny-urging-deletion-of-academic-blog-predicting-indy-success/

  32. Wings over scotland advocates SNP and ALBA
    Scotgoespop advocates SNP and ALBA
    Barrheadboy advocates SNP and ALBA
    TalkingupScotland2 advocates SNP and ALBA
    Weegingerdug advocates SNP and SNP

    Whats not to like

    • I think SNP and SNP for definite in the South of Scotland
      I think SNP and ALBA for definite in the north east of Scotland where i live
      Everywhere else ? I think the people living there will make the correct decision

    • Petra says:

      Terence please give me a break with the WoS ”advocates the SNP” meme. Right now the blog owner is out to get the leader of the SNP jailed 5 weeks before the the most important Scottish election in over 300 years. What’s to like about that?

      • Rob Grant says:

        Petra, I think you will frnd that its Nicola’s husband Peter Murrell who is the principle target, if any, of WOS and many donors like myself to the missplaced indyref funds. Speaking as an accounting technician experienced enough to find a potential problem with the SNP accounts presented for audit I smell something not right there and Peter Murrell knows it. It is ridiculous to present accounts with a footnote of…£600000 + is woven throughout these books. A 1st year accounting student would roll on the floor laughing if presented by that. For the sake of the SNP Party itself it has to sho where the cash actually is. Its not for nothing the partys own NEC finance commt resigned a few weeks ago when faced with a flat refusal by Mr Murrell himself to give them access the books. now I realise that this info might seem an irrelevancr to the shhot the messenger ignore the message branch of the party but tough I dont want my donation to the indyref fund to be used for anything else. Unless Peter comes up with a believable explanation he WILL face criminal charges sooner or later im afraid.

    • Hamish100 says:

      What’s not to like? Fantasy land -Barrhead boy, wings all attack the FM and snp- you know that.

      Is this to divert from someone in Barrhead going to the police?
      Still 95% of voters don’t go to the blogs just geeks like us. Bottom line folk like me don’t trust WoS, Alba, Barrhead boy. So keep trying but my vote is secure. Alba won’t be getting any from my family

      • Petra , nothing.

        But there are a lot of people in Scotland who visit and post on WOS so for that reason alone its worth checking now and again.

        • Clydebuilt says:

          A lot of the posters on Wings are not supporters of Independence.

        • grizebard says:

          The less people who visit and see the anti-independence bile there the better, I would suggest. These days the Tories even go there for their talking points. If it disappeared tomorrow, I would be relieved, regrettably. It no longer serves any useful purpose except to BritNats.

        • Eilidh says:

          Terence there are approx 4.5 million adults in Scotland vast majority of them don’t even know what Wings over Scotland is let alone read or post there. The same goes for an awful lot of people who vote Snp and voted yes in the Indy ref so please stop defending that blog or the wee nyaff that runs it

        • Tam the Bam says:

          IT ABSOLUTELY IS NOT!!!

          • Tam the Bam says:

            Everything is back to front in terms of replies to replies…….either that or Paul is just havin’ a good laff tae himsel’…..and who can blame him!…lol

      • But you all used to trust them.
        I know why you dont now
        But there are bound to be a lot of sensible people still posting on them because as you know there is no site at all where everyone agrees on everything

        • Petra says:

          I used to trust him Terence and then I wizened up all of 2 years ago when I saw what he was getting up to. The point being Terence the owner of the blog doesn’t advocate anyone voting for the SNP and I doubt, no I’m sure, that he doesn’t support independence at all. I’m not even sure if Alex Salmond supports it either. It would suit him to sit in Holyrood, getting paid big bucks to shoot his mouth off, rather than sitting withering away at home, because there was nothing else left for him to do. Home or Holyrood.

      • Petra says:

        Did he say it was Barrhead Boy, Hamish? I thought that Barrhead Boy lived in Spain? Was it not just someone who lived in Barrhead that contacted the Police?

    • Tam the Bam says:

      your suggestions.

  33. Petra says:

    Dearie me 😉.

    ‘Labour loses bid to have Anas Sarwar’s name on ballot papers.’

    http://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/brexit-news/westminster-news/anas-sarwar-scottish-labour-bid-7864016

    …………………………………..

    Polls: a look at the longer story.’

    https://newsnet.scot/news-analysis/polls-a-look-at-the-longer-story/

  34. Dr Jim says:

    Tories Labour and Lib Dems are loving this they know it removes none of their votes, and when the counting’s done and Salmond wins no seats he will have won something, the grateful thanks of 10 Downing street for reducing the power of support for the SNP and ending the chance of a referendum anytime soon, and his reward, a seat in the House of Lords

    You wanna bet

    • Petra says:

      Did he not say, just a few short weeks ago, that Scotland wasn’t ready for independence or words to that effect? And then he changed his mind 🙄.

    • Yes i take that bet how much ?

      Tories Labour and Lib Dems are loving this they know it removes none of their votes, and when the counting’s done and Salmond wins no seats he will have won something, the grateful thanks of 10 Downing street for reducing the power of support for the SNP and ending the chance of a referendum anytime soon, and his reward, a seat in the House of Lords

      You wanna bet

    • Tam the Bam says:

      Behave yourself Dr Jim….aint gonna happen.

      SNP 1 &2

      • Dr Jim says:

        People who have known this man for decades want nothing to do with him, why!
        Alex Salmond always said the place he felt the most politically alive was Westminster and he missed the cut and thrust of that place
        Why are the only people speaking in defence of Alex Salmond people like George Galloway and Tory ex ministers
        What has his record been since 2014, columnist for the right wing Press and Journal, TV show on Russia today, these are not the actions of someone who has no self interest
        Not a soul on this planet can tell me that a man like Alex Salmond would be content with a paltry wee list seat in Holyrood his ego alone is the size of that building

        All the comforting blether he puts on cannot wash away the attacks on the FM, SNP, judiciary, lawyers, staff for the last two years using Wings Over Scotland as his Jehadi mouthpiece

        If an ex Tory or Labour figure behaved in this way would anybody be standing up for them

        • grizebard says:

          The only part of that I would disagree with is that I believe he sees his main chance at the moment is in Holyrood not WM, and rightly so, because he has some small chance of being a pivotal figure there if the arithmetic works out right for him (not us), which isn’t a “supermajority” as he claims, but a narrow SNP miss so he can exercise most influence.

          (Who in these crucial days really wants to represent Scotland down in that fusty corroding old place where the Scots MPs are routinely mocked? It’s virtual career suicide. Those that are currently serving there on our behalf should get a frontline “special service” medal when they come home. For all our sakes, may it be soon.)

        • Petra says:

          ”Not a soul on this planet can tell me that a man like Alex Salmond would be content with a paltry wee list seat in Holyrood.”

          Well he would Dr Jim if he had reconciled himself to the fact that no one else on the planet now gives a sh*t for him. He’s become a persona non grata. In other words he’s got nowhere to go other than Holyrood or sit in his bleeding hoose. Just sit at home looking at Moira (and who knows how that goes down) or wander out looking at the neighbours who are of course having a right good look at him now . in a different light.

        • Rob Grant says:

          And like many posters here ….nowhere in your post is there anything positive to persuade soft no’s and genuinly undecided to consider inddependence, warts and all. Not picking on you personally but the constant bitchin on these posts about big bad Alex or big bad stu is barely out of the primary playground stuff. My heartfelt advice is to respect pauls wishes and cut it out or for the real zoomers here go away and take yer divisive negative opinions with you or even better GROW UP.

  35. Petra says:

    ‘Constitutional pathways to a second independence referendum.’

    While there is room for debate on who may authorise a referendum, there is no doubt that only the UK Parliament can authorise the dissolution of the Union itself. This is why the commitment in the Edinburgh Agreement to abide by the result of the 2014 referendum was so important, albeit not itself legally binding. It with this fundamental legal reality that all proposals that try to circumvent the need for a referendum (for example by drawing the authority to begin independence negotiations themselves from a pro-independence Holyrood majority) eventually collide.”..

    http://www.centreonconstitutionalchange.ac.uk/news-and-opinion/constitutional-pathways-second-independence-referendum

    …………………………………

    ‘Constitutionally Sound: Scottish Independence, then and now.’

    ..”In this episode of Constitutionally Sound, our host Allan Little, is joined by Professor of Territorial Politics at the University of Edinburgh and Co-Director at the Centre on Constitutional Change, Nicola McEwen, and Professor of Practice in the Management of Public Organisations at the Blavatnik School of Government at the University of Oxford, Ciaran Martin.”..

    http://www.centreonconstitutionalchange.ac.uk/news_opinion/constitutionally-sound-scottish-independence-then-and-now

    • grizebard says:

      While I have respect for the “constitutional-changists” (though Jack may disagree {laugh}), I disagree myself regarding this apparent contention that the Westminster Parliament is the final and only arbiter, by virtue of the UK’s much-vaunted (by its own Establishment) strange supposedly-bendy non-constitution. It is indeed decidedly pragmatic all round to “play the game” by the existing rules, not least because the London Government (despite its public bluffing) already well realises that an ongoing refusal against the settled will is democratically unsustainable; however, in the end it is “we-the-people” who are paramount by right and by universal precedent, whatever a foreign parliament might determine is or isn’t legal.

      Our current difficulty is not with that principled matter, in any case, but rather in persuading sufficient people in Scotland that their own individual interests are best served by full sovereignty. Without that, we are nowhere, and that remains our prime task, so all this other stuff going on is pure diversion (and perhaps intentionally so). In that regard, it is essential to win the coming election to convincingly demonstrate to all that the weight of public opinion is moving towards independence.

      • Golfnut says:

        I commented a few weeks ago that they (westminster )had a real issue regarding what impact Scotland voting to end the union would have constitutionally. Boris himself wanted to know what our intentions were, I’m pretty certain that wasn’t meant to happen, so I take these legal opinions, union biased though they are, as serious signs of panic within the establishment ranks. Colonies leaving the empire had no impact on the imperial structures of the empire, I include Ireland in that statement. Nothing changed internally, they would seriously prefer if they could deal with Scotland in the same way, but they can’t because legally Scotland isn’t and never has been a colony.

  36. Petra says:

    ‘The Tories are getting away with corruption on an epic scale – how can Labour make them pay?’

    https://archive.ph/UaUPj#selection-2489.0-2489.92

    ……………………………….

    ‘We need to talk about Serco.

    https://centralbylines.co.uk/we-need-to-talk-about-serco/

  37. Petra says:

    Hahaha. Here we go again. A real vote winner 😀.

    ‘Douglas Ross mimics Ruth Davidson’s famous tank photoshoot in Holyrood bid.’

    http://www.thenational.scot/news/19207722.douglas-ross-mimics-ruth-davidsons-famous-tank-photoshoot-holyrood-bid/

    ……………………………

    FGS 🤬. The Fourth Reich.

    ‘Tom Hunt MP: Kids should be ‘educated’ to like compulsory Union flag flying.’

    ”A CONSERVATIVE MP has come under heavy fire on social media for suggesting that people who do not wish to see the Union flag flown outside every school should be “educated” into thinking otherwise.”.

    http://www.thenational.scot/news/19208058.tom-hunt-mp-kids-educated-like-compulsory-union-flag-flying/

    • grizebard says:

      Actually, there’s a part of me that can’t help but think that trying that Union Rag wheeze in Scotland could achieve nothing but hasten independence enormously. These EngNats just don’t have a clue about us, and the more people here who come to realise it, the better.

    • Captain Banana Hands says:

      FFS he actually manages to make the Ruth photo look iconic.

  38. Petra says:

    ‘Viewers in the south of Scotland will be excluded from next leaders’ debate.’

    http://www.thenational.scot/politics/19205825.viewers-south-will-excluded-next-leaders-debate/

    …………………………..

    Check out Ann’s latest links on the Indyref2 site.

    https://indyref2.space/forum/topic/links-friday-2-april-2021/

  39. Tam the Bam says:

    Stuart Campbell’s career prospects are cemented.
    He has provided ‘gold’ stories for the MSM
    He ‘popsup’ on a horrendously incompetent broadcast in favour of the Alba Party.
    he then has a )3rd….4th….6th) go at the FM…….’monies not accounted for’ …..oh please.

    I rest my case folks.

  40. Tam the Bam says:

    So…..from..”lets attack the SNP”….the Mayor of Bathistan today is publishing:-

    “Lets get Jackie Baillie!”

    Leave them to it Duggers……honestly.

  41. Captain Banana Hands says:

    This whole Stuart Campbell thing … get over it. He doesn’t care.

    It’s quite smart really, and it’s textbook – feed your audience, whip them up into a frenzy, milk them. The original indy movement was a bread winner for him, but then he had no audience so he moved on to being outraged at the trans movement, then he realised that was unpopular so …

    Then Salmond comes along and plays him like a fiddle, realising that he can capitalise on the Campbell crowd who will hang on his every word, like baby birds waiting on their mother’s regurgitation. Campbell begins this entire anti-Sturgeon movement, because who do indy supporters revere more than anyone? Salmond. That will bring in the crowdfunds. Salmond puts Campbell on a pedestal, letting him interview him, stand up for him and then pedal his new party’s ambitions.

    Where could the idea that the current SNP don’t want independence, claiming that this is because the supposed fight for independence is more lucrative for them? Someone for whom the fight for independence is more lucrative than actually achieving that goal. What need would anyone have for Stuart Campbell should Scotland become independent? We know the answer.

    So, feed your audience, give them what they want – someone to blame for them not getting what they want (and if it’s a woman, all the easier), and then continue to milk them.

    On and on it goes.

    There are always people out there who are eager to suck up a conspiracy theory – anyone with low self esteem, look for something that makes them special. They’re out there.

    Luckily, there appears to be about 200 of them. So … focus on something else. Campbell and his gang of angry morons are meaningless.

    • Dr Jim says:

      You got his personality pretty well there

    • Tam the Bam says:

      Have a banana Captain…I concur.

    • Petra says:

      ”Campbell and his gang of angry morons are meaningless.”

      Therefore Salmond who is of one of the angry morons becomes meaningless too. It doesn’t surprise me one bit. Alex Salmond isn’t just going to swan back into Holyrood unscathed. He’ll additionally have to watch his back when interacting with the women. He may say that you’ve not seen the last of my bonnet and me, but hey that referred to a Jacobite leader who fought to the fkn death for Scotland. Alex in saying that is living in cloud fkn cuckoo land. Got your measure now mister. A wee nonenity who couldnae fight his way out of a paper bag unless it was over women whom he felt he had control over. .

  42. malkymcblain says:

    I’m not really one for conspiracy theories however I do wonder. In such a high stakes international issue such as the potential demise of the UK and subsequent potential reduction of international power and relevance of London then you would think that the establishment from the monarchy and those who benefit from the power of the UK in monetary and diplomatic terms would use all of that power to do whatever is necessary to maintain the status quo. Given that it seems less and less likely that the establishment can convince the Scots to vote for the status quo then it would require them to adopt more nefarious tactics. It would only take the establishment via MI5 or others to find the dirt on elements of the Indy movement. If the dirt they find is the type of dirt when exposed would stick and be so rancid as to ruin or even imprison an individual then all it would take is a word in the ear saying something along the lines of… write this on your blog or start a rival party to confuse and manipulate or else we will expose you and show the world what horrible things you have been up to. Do what we say and you’ll be off Scot free don’t do it and your finished or jailed. All it would take is a squeeze here and there to get the puppets singing god save the queen. Or as Kenny Everett described on a visit to the dentist. Just as the dentist leans over grab him by the baws and say “now we’re not going to hurt each other here are we”.
    What did they find on Campbell’s hard drives and USB sticks I wonder. What other dark recesses are there that can be mined and used against other ostensibly Indy mouthpieces. Make no mistake Scotland is too precious to the establishment to just let her vote for Indy. You are all in the biggest politically high stakes game on the planet at the moment. The world is watching it is very very big and you will be the centre of international attention come the 6th of May and beyond.

    • Petra says:

      Got it in one Malky.

    • Capella says:

      Agree. I’ve always assumed this was an operation to discredit the two big leaders in Scottish independence, Nicola Sturgeon and Alex Salmond, while corrupting the two most read indy blogs, Stuart Campbell and Craig Murray. The tools are usually sex scandal or financial fraud. Links with terrorists or anti-semitism are also quite popular (Jeremy Corbyn).

      Next up – SC is working on financial fraud atm. So far, Peter Murrell has been too fly for him and not allowed his plants on the NEC to “see the books” i.e. find out what publicity the SNP has in place for the election and indyref. So they have been forced to quit and join Alba. But he will persist.

      If Alex Salmond hadn’t behaved inappropriately there would have been nothing to hang this tale on. He could just apologise and move on. But his ego won’t allow it.

      • Clydebuilt says:

        Absolutely. . . . . .

        Another point is no one pushed Salmond out. . . . He resigned the day after the referendum. . . . . With the world looking on. . . . Pumping up his ego. . . .

        • Clydebuilt says:

          It needed pumping up. . . . He had just lost the referendum!

          At our darkest moment all that man could do was think about himself.

    • Naina Tal says:

      Must admit the exact same thought crossed my mind a few weeks ago regarding Mr Campbell. Guess we’ll never know. Not in this lifetime anyway!

  43. Tam the Bam says:

    Get some sleep Malky… thats what I#m going to do.
    Tomorrow(oops…today) is another day.
    Sleep well folks.

    • malkymcblain says:

      I just got up a couple of hours ago Tam. It’s just gone midday here in Sydney on Saturday 3rd April and once I’ve finished my Saturday morning chores I’m off to the Lord Hopetoun up the road for lunch and a couple of pints. My Celtic supporting pal Calum Murray AKA squid hoops said he’d join me. He’s been uncontactable for the last few weeks. Sleep well I’ll hold the fort.

  44. Mbiyd says:

    Paul you can do better than pandering to Unionist hyperbole.

  45. Capella says:

    Richard Murphy debunks the FTs analysis of Scotland’s finances after independence. it’s the first of a series says the FT:
    The FT’s analysis of the economics of an independent Scotland is a catalogue of errors and false assumptions.

    https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2021/04/03/__trashed-2/

    • Golfnut says:

      Looks the indyref campaign has started all ready and we haven’t had the results of the Holyrood elections.

  46. yesindyref2 says:

    The National: “I’m aiming to serve full five years more as First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon says”

    But what Sturgeon actually said was: “I am putting myself forward for a full term of office as First Minister”

    It even caught regular supporters of Sturgeon. I wish people would read articles and respond to them, rather than headlines designed to provoke a reaction. Newspapers notoriously rephrase what people said wrongly, to their own twisted ends..

    If Indy Ref 2 was this year or next, Scotland could still be Independent in 2023 or 2024 – and so a “full term of office” would be 3 years not 5 years, if a Holyrood Election was held immediately after Independence.

  47. Hamish100 says:

    You can’t ignore what is happening elsewhere as others will dictate terms as we sit passively on our hands.
    It is clear that WoS don’t care for independence or social justice or they would be debating and analysing what the unionists support for such things as nuclear weapons over conventional forces, land reform, education, Eu/efta the adverse impact of Brexit and the rest.

  48. Hamish100 says:

    Re the FM 3 or 5 years doesn’t actually matter.

    None of us know for definite what will happen tomorrow. We can plan for and hope for just like some believe that the 2021 election will be similar to one in the past.

    • yesindyref2 says:

      The way it’s written does matter Hamish100.

      “5 years” implies very strongly, no Indy Ref in those 5 years. “Full term” doesn’t. And the comments below the line have made the interpretation that Sturgeon is kicking Indy Ref 2 into the long grass – which she hasn’t. The National trying to imply Sturgeon has no intention of Indy Ref 2 could cost the SNP votes – if that was their agenda.

  49. Dr Jim says:

    I do wish people would quote me properly, I am indeed putting myself forward to be elected to the office of FM for a full term, but during that early term if elected there will be a referendum on Scotland’s Independence, and should the people of Scotland choose to vote for that proposition a new set of circumstances will prevail, at this moment in time I can only deal with the circumstances that exist now

    I hope that clarifies my position, thank you,

    signed: The Mammy

    • Dr Jim says:

      Oh, and I’m not fiddling the piggy bank btw

    • yesindyref2 says:

      Exactly Nic Dr Jim.

    • Stuart McNicoll says:

      Serving the full 5 yrs makes lots of sense particularly in light of the intimation of a coalition gov with the Greens. Stable government will be crucial in dealing with the negotiations with westminster and certainly in dealing with the crap westminster will throw our way. It will take a couple of yrs at least to embed a written constitution in law.

      • grizebard says:

        Establishing a written constitution, while necessary, need be no impediment to achieving independence, as the Americans showed more than two centuries ago. We can start to enjoy the fruits of our freedom while concurrently taking the necessary time to get the fundamentals right. These matters are not in opposition, and independence is in no way contingent on getting every nut-and-bolt fixed first. Which is impossible anyway. Sovereignity isn’t an event, it’s an ongoing evolution.

  50. granda16 says:

    Paul,

    As someone who intends to vote Alba here in the NE Scotland region, I commend you for yet another lucid and sensible blog.

    I believe that the SNP are going to win back Aberdeenshire West, and that Alba will win at least 5% of the regional vote here in Salmond “heartland”. For these reasons, I’m going to vote SNP/Alba. If I were living in South Scotland, I’d almost certainly be voting SNP/SNP.

    If the SNP slip back in the polls, or polls show that I’m mistaken about Salmond winning a seat in the North East, then I will revert to SNP/SNP, because, although having Alex Salmond back in Holyrood would be “icing on the cake” for me, the size of the SNP cake is FAR more important.

    • Statgeek says:

      “Alba will win at least 5% of the regional vote here”

      7% is the minimum estimate of list seat gaining territory. Anything less is unlikely to result in a seat, short of there being a lot of similar low VI parties.

      • granda16 says:

        2016: West Scotland: Greens 1 seat (5.3%). NE Scotland: Lib Dems 1 seat (6.0%). Mid Scotland & Fife: Greens 1 seat (6.1%). Highlands & Islands: SNP 1 seat (5.7% D’Hondt). South Scotland: SNP 2 seats (6.4%, 5.5% D’Hondt)

        2011: Central Scotland: Tory 1 seat (6.1%), SNP 3 seats (6.6%, 5.8%, 5.2% D’Hondt). Glasgow: Greens 1 seat (6.0%), SNP 2 seats (6.6%, 5.7% D’Hondt). Mid Scotland & Fife: Lib dem 1 seat (5.9%). NE Scotland: SNP 1 seat (4.8% D’Hondt). South Scotland: Lib Dems 1 seat (5.4%) Highlands & Islands: SNP 1 seat (5.9% D’Hondt). Lothians: SNP 2 seats (6.6%, 5.3% D’Hondt).

        2007: Central Scotland: Lib dem 1 seat (5.2%), SNP 3 seats (6.3%, 5.2%, 4.5% D’Hondt). Glasgow: Greens 1 seat (5.2%), SNP 2 seats (6.7%, 5.4% D’Hondt). Highlands & Islands: SNP 2 seats (6.9%, 5.9% D’Hondt). Mid Scotland & Fife: SNP 1 seat (5.5% D’Hondt). NE Scotland: SNP 2 seats (5.8%, 5.1% D’Hondt). South Scotland: SNP 1 seat (5.6% D’Hondt). West Scotland: SNP 1 seat (5.7% D’Hondt).

        2003: Central Scotland: Lib dem 1 seat (5.9%). Lothians: Scottish socialist 1 seat (5.4%). NE Scotland: Greens 1 seat (5.2%), SNP 1 seat (5.5% D’Hondt). South Scotland: Greens 1 seat (5.7%), Scottish socialist 1 seat (5.4%), SNP 1 seat (6.1% D’Hondt). Highlands & Islands: SNP 1 seat (5.6% D’Hondt). Mid Scotland & Fife: SNP 2 seats (5.6%, 4.6% D’Hondt).

        By my reckoning (there may be more), in the last 4 elections, a total of 46 seats have been won with less than 7% of the vote. That’s nearly one fifth of the total regional seats contested in those four elections. I have NO idea where you got your minimum figure if 7%?

        • Statgeek says:

          4 elections. 46 won with less than 7%. 178 won with more than 7%.

          3 seats in 224 won with 5.0% or less. Any party wanting to win seats HAS to get more than that, or get very damned lucky with the way the numbers fall.

          And there’s only going to be 8 regions to get them. Not 4 election worth of regions. 8 chances for a seat, short of a massive shift in VI.

          • grizebard says:

            I fear you can’t argue with these people. They are blinded by their own numbers and calculations. As if politics operates by clockwork. All the while missing the obvious, that their little band of late arrivals haven’t put in the necessary preparation, the longstanding persuasion effort to bring sufficient SNP voters onside. It’s all too little too late, floating on a sea of wishes and simplistic belief in a faded Messiah.

            It reminds me uncomfortably of the people who were so very sure, back in ’14, that indy was in the bag. Just because they “felt it”. I shudder to think what they’ll feel like after they’ve flopped badly in the coming election, possibly taking a few essential SNP and/or Green seats down with them. While the broken-promises BritNats will emit a big communal sigh of relief, free of any responsibility themselves but with the SNP nicely trapped in another long stint of mitigation hell.

            • granda16 says:

              I fear you can’t argue with some people. They adopt a position, and then start to build walls round it, ignoring any “events” which might affect their conclusions.

              I’ve been as fierce an advocate as anybody for voting SNP/SNP, and have trashed the arguments of ISP and AFI for months, repeating the arguments that I had with RISE and Solidarity supporters prior to the 2016 election.

              If I lived in South Scotland, I’d probably STILL vote SNP, in spite of the latest poll showing Alba at 6%. However, I live in NE Scotland – Salmond heartland – and, despite the 7% threshold nonsense being punted by Statgeek, I would have voted Alba, even if the latest polls hadn’t shown Alba at 6%.

              I agree with the pre-2016 Stu Campbell (he’s totally lost the plot since then) and James Kelly, both of whom rubbished the idea of “max the Indy vote” nonsense. However, James Kelly has opined that the only person in Scottish politics, who has a chance of “bucking” that idea, is Alex Salmond, whose name recognition, and long association with independence and the SNP would give any party he associated with, a real chance of winning seats.

              This has now happened. I am therefore going to change my long- held opinion about voting SNP/SNP, because “events” have completely changed the situation.

              Those with more rigid belief systems might want to ignore “events” as though they haven’t ALREADY happened, and I fear that you just can’t argue with such people. Best just to express your opinion and intentions and leave it there.

              • grizebard says:

                I note that you generate lots of smokescreening to avoid addressing the substance of my posting, the Achilles heel of Alba, its complete lack of preparation. “Winging it” in more ways than one.

                And I wouldn’t mind, except that in going down, Alba can take the possibility of an independence referendum down with it. If that happens (and I pray it doesn’t, thanks to the good sense of most voters), I hope amateur enthusiasts like you will be able to live with yourselves.

                • granda16 says:

                  Grizebard,

                  Here’s more “smokescreen”.

                  Do you disagree with James Kelly? He has been an outspoken critic of “pop-up” parties, since before the 2016 election. Since then, he has added an exception to the general rule of “pop-up” parties being vote-wasters…… Alex Salmond ……. any party with Alex Samond as leader is NOT a run-of-the-mill pop-up party, for reasons which are apparent to all but the terminally dense.

                  If you are running on the single issue of independence, then you don’t need “preparation”. No doubt Alba will flesh out policies in the coming weeks, but I’m fairly sure that I won’t be the only one who has zero interest in any other policy that they might come up with. I’m interested in one thing – independence.

                  I will vote Alba for three reasons:-

                  1. I have total confidence that Alba will win at least one seat in NE Scotland, where I will be voting.

                  2. I will be voting for a party that, from top to bottom, is definitely committed to independence (just like the SNP), rather than voting Greens, whose commitment to independence is tactical, rather than ideological.

                  3. I can’t wait to see Sturgeon and Salmond eating DRoss, Sarwar and Rennie for breakfast every day in Holyrood.

                  I can express my reasons for voting Alba clearly and concisely. All you can offer are woolly platitudes. I suspect that, even if the polls were to show Alba growing in popularity to double figure percentages, dinosaur thinkers like you and Statgeek would stubbornly keep repeating your thought-free pablum.

                  If the polls wobble, and it looks as though my vote for Alba WILL be wasted, then I will immediately revert to voting SNP/SNP.

                  How about you? If the polls were to indicate Alba having ….. let’s say …..12-15%, would you throw off your carapace and vote Alba in the SNP-safe regions?

                  • grizebard says:

                    Indeed, more smokescreen. In industrial quantities. Yawn. You clearly discount the need for political hard work. The gambler’s mentality. (I can see the appeal of one to another.) But gambling is generally a losers’ game. Your mistake, as I believe you will soon discover.

                    • granda16 says:

                      Grizebard,

                      You clearly have no intention of moving from your entrenched position, regardless of how things change around you. If you think that Salmond’s 48 years (and counting) of political activism at all levels isn’t “political hard work”, then there really is no hope of persuading you to have a look around you and see what’s happening.

                      I have stated my position clearly, with my fallback position, if circumstances change. You, on the other hand are not prepared to think about things, because that might involve you moving from your lazily-held opinions.

                      I’m happy with my decision to adapt to evolving circumstances. You just sit comfortably behind your “mental Maginot line”. Don’t worry, the Germans would never try to come through the Ardennes……..

          • granda16 says:

            Well, I suppose I should be grateful that you are now talking about a 5% threshold, rather than the completely made-up 7% in your last post……

  51. Capella says:

    In 2016 James Kelly wrote an article debunking the possibility of tactical voting on the Regional list. He spells out quite clearly why this is not possible. Bellacaledonia refused to publish it because they were backing RISE. Is ALBA the new RISE?

    https://scotgoespop.blogspot.com/2016/01/exclusive-read-article-on-voting-that.html

    • grizebard says:

      Oh naughty you! {grin} Have they both done a turnaround since, or does Bella see ALBA as the new new {ahem} “third way”…?

    • granda16 says:

      Since that time, circumstances have changed, and James has written several blogs where he singles out Alex Salmond as being the only figure in Scottish politics who COULD win seats, because of his name recognition and his close association with the SNP.

      • grizebard says:

        Yes, that is his call, but he could be wrong now. He has abandoned his previous rationality and put all his rhetorical “eggs in one basket” without any obvious justification whatever for the change, just that {ahem} he likes the ex-FM, who was once very popular (before his character flaws became widely known). Methinks James would have been way better trusting to the thinking part of his brain, but we’ll see, and not before too long, I reckon.

        Time to get your excuses ready… (just in case, y’know… )

        • granda16 says:

          Grizebard,

          No, he hasn’t “abandoned his previous rationality”. His rationality is unchanged. When his original articles were written (prior to the 2016 election), the idea of Alex Salmond being out of the SNP was unthinkable, and just wasn’t an issue.

          Now it is, and James Kelly (quite rightly) has extebpnded his rationality to include the possibility of a Salmon-led party – something that didn’t exist before.

          Having made the (valid) point about a Salmond-led party being viable, he is merely speaking common sense.

          You really shouldn’t talk about “thinking parts of James’s brain” because the “thinking parts of HIS brain” seem to be functioning normally. If only folk would use the “thinking parts” of their brains, rather than adopting a position, and then rigidly sticking to it, regardless of circumstances changing around them……

  52. Not-My-Real-Name says:

    I see Anas Sarwar has now reverted back to his ‘normal’ self as opposed to the contrived ‘public persona’ he adopted for the Leader’s debate….he has stated the following :

    “Scottish Labour has launched a “clean up Holyrood” consultation to help hold the government to account”.

    Party leader Anas Sarwar said “trust and faith in parliament has been lost in recent years”.

    So let’s begin to look at TRUST and FAITH from a Sarwar perspective…….

    Sarwar has been exposed as having told a LIE on the leaders debate about a cancer patient….which since that debate has been called out by Doctors within Scotland….as they have had to correct Sarwar that the reason the cancer patient travelled to England for treatment was NOT as he stated i.e. due to a backlog….but was to get specialist treatment at an English hospital……

    If Sarwar wants to clean up Holyrood then he can start with Jackie Baillie…as her predictable muck spreading in her ‘interpretation’ of Anas Sarwar’s lie has also had to be corrected by a Doctor….she , Baillie, tweeted “What kind of country have we become under the SNP government that we are refusing to treat people who have cancer for a second time instead sending them to England for treatment”…….

    So I say he, Sarwar, can start with her but perhaps he should actually start with himself by cleaning up his own act…….then perhaps, or perhaps not, the public can have more “faith” and “trust” in certain individuals who are opposition MSP’s in the Scottish parliament

    Sarwar reminding us again what despicable tactics he chooses to use to regain “trust” and “faith” at Holyrood …as in the ones being used by him and his colleagues in the run up to this election….well currently he is displaying the fact that there is no distinction between his tactics and the Tories….play dirty…..spread lies and hope they plant seeds of doubt in the minds of the voters long before the truth comes out……..a dirty tricks campaign…how very Unionistic.

    Pathetic political point scoring in using people, who at a time of illness , is the lowest of the low and these individuals with serious illnesses should never be used as political pawns to gain an undeserved political advantage and is a strategy I have noticed that has regularly being deployed by Unionist parties in Holyrood……..where the skewed version of truth given by Unionists is far removed from the real truth and indeed far removed, I am sure , from the complicated circumstances of each individual’s case……and so the real victims are those being used and abused as mere political weapons to score a political point…a point that could have been demonstrated and addressed in a less public way for what is a very personal, stressful and painful situation for those individual’s involved.

    I suspect that Sarwar will find that many of us will never have “Faith” or “Trust” in him or his colleagues as long as they continue to spread lies to try to gain an undeserved advantage….. Labour, Tories and Lib Dems words are cheap….where as actions speak louder than words via the actions of the Scottish government who fulfil many promises which maintains our “Faith” and “Trust” in them as our preferred government at Holyrood.

    I think Sarwar will find tis him that the voters will hold to “account” in May….. and choose not to vote for him or his party ,via a majority, to be the next Scottish government …….that should perhaps let him know who it is who needs to “clean up” their own act before they presume to supposedly try to “clean up” and “hold to account” the Scottish Government, under the SNP, at Holyrood”……….

    • Bob Lamont says:

      Indeed had observed similarly elsewhere – It is not simply London rule Scots have become increasingly repulsed by, but it’s rotten and corrupt politics and media.

      London and Sarwar will get their answer on “Trust” from the Scottish electorate in May, it will not be to their liking…

  53. Colin Alexander says:

    I want Scottish independence so the Government of Scotland can be held to account by the people of Scotland, so scrutinised, criticised and kicked out if necessary. (In the UK, it’s England’s electorate who decides which UK Govt Scotland will get and they choose corrupt Tory Govts).

    Paul Kavanagh has said he wants to focus on the positive picture for Scottish independence and leave other venues for the scrutiny and criticism of devolution govt or the SNP. That’s reasonable.

    So, it would be a real shame if Paul’s consistently positive message about Scottish independence degenerated into a site focusing on slagging off Wingsoverscotland, Alex Salmond, the Alba Party and anyone else who aren’t part of the “I love Nicola” clique of outcasts from the Wingsoverscotland website.

    Paul Kavanagh has consistently written a positive case for Scottish independence, I hope he can get back to that, as that is what he did best.

    People can make their own decisions but I think it’s a mistake if any blogger becomes too closely aligned to any political party or politician, as their objectivity can appear to be compromised. It’s disappointing if any blogger on any site is perceived to be a party propaganda mouthpiece rather than giving their own opinions.

    It’s also sad to see bloggers conducting their personal arguments / rivalries with other bloggers in public. Especially as it encourages others to join in, taking sides and turning personal arguments into a school playground rammy.

    I hope Paul, other bloggers and the commenters on here can get back to the positive message of Scottish independence instead of a downward spiral of negativity and bitter rivalries within the Scottish independence movement.

    I’ve a lot of respect for Paul Kavangh. He has been an important ally in the struggle for Scottish independence and his writings have shown his enduring love for Scotland and her people.

    ————————————————–

    Thank you, Paul. Keep up the good work for Scotland’s freedom, please don’t let the others drag you down with them.

    • Dr Jim says:

      The “I love Nicola” clique of outcasts?

      You’re such a little twerp of a troll kid

    • What’s wrong; somebody stole yer scone?

      The scone being AS & Alba’s prospects.

      Would you be writing this guff if Alba were on track for representation? Of course you wouldn’t, you’d be talking them up, perhaps elsewhere. So now that Alba look like a busted flush, it’s back to the anti SNP NS stuff, hoping for a reaction to “prove” your point.

      More transparent than crystal.

    • Not-My-Real-Name says:

      Colin the below quote is from your above comment :

      “So, it would be a real shame if Paul’s consistently positive message about Scottish independence degenerated into a site focusing on slagging off Wingsoverscotland, Alex Salmond, the Alba Party and anyone else who aren’t part of the “I love Nicola” clique of outcasts from the Wingsoverscotland website”

      With all due respect Colin are you, with the above quote from your latest comment, not just continuing to do what you accuse others of doing….as in simply continuing to contribute to what you see as the ” downward spiral of negativity and bitter rivalries within the Scottish independence movement”………….also when you say the ” I love Nicola” clique of outcasts from the WOS website”…..way to go to start unifying us all and focusing on the positive message about Scottish independence….NOT.

    • P Harvey says:

      Paul is always positive about independence and delivers clear concise and insightful comment
      If only other sites would do the same!

    • cuckooshoe says:

      If I supported the Labour Party, Federalism, the Labour Party, Home Rule, the Labour Party, Full Fiscal Autonomy, the Labour Party, strong links with the Labour Party, the Labour Party, the trade unions, and the Labour Party, the Alba Labour Party would be my first choice.

      • grizebard says:

        {laugh}

        I think you’ve about covered it there! (Did the Greens not also get a look in? I forget, since I too eventually started skipping. Good reader, do the same. Your life will improve, guaranteed.)

  54. barpe says:

    I spent a lot of time scrolling past your comments on WoS in years gone by, Coco, and I see no reason to alter that now.

  55. Hamish100 says:

    I would still be on WOS putting my particular view and without the abuse, foul mouth rants of some others directed towards me.

    Unfortunately I was told to F off by the sensitive soul on WoS. Colin you were online then so nae harm to ye but you attacked the FM and SNP for the past few years.

    I have issues with the party too but I take them through the proper channels. Has it changed they way the party works? No, not enough but we find many of the sunshine kids after 2014 have now jumped ship or the older ones have a loyalty to the previous 1st Minister. I’ve have not voted for any other party since 1970’s than the snp. After independence probably will vote snp still since labour will still be pro nuclear weapons.

  56. Colin Alexander says:

    If Alba or the SNP achieve even one more pro-indy MSP and one less colonial administrator, Alba or the SNP will have achieved something.

    If the people get the MSPs and govt they voted for, that is also a success for the Scottish electorate. If only such success were possible all the time.

    Devolution does not change the fact we will remain under the control of the UK State, which can and does overrule the democratic will of the people of Scotland and her devolution parliament.

    For me, devolution is not something to be celebrated and neither is being elected to administer it.
    An SNP or Alba devolution MSP is preferable to a Unionist one but, our goal should be a parliament representing the sovereignty of the people of Scotland, not acting in servility to the sovereignty of the Crown in UK Parliament.

    Remember: devolution was brought in to PREVENT independence. To prevent democracy for the sovereign people of Scotland.

    • P Harvey says:

      And ironically, Devolution has delivered the conditions which have created and will deliver independence
      They hadn’t planned for that!🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

    • yesindyref2 says:

      Remember: Coco is Grima Wormtongue, who prattles to deceive.

      Where’s Gandalf when you need him? “You shall not pass” he says to Sturgeon’s Microbane, with a wave of his twig. You just can’t get the staff these days!

  57. Dr Jim says:

    Because since 2014 the SNP has grown so massively from the protest party it used to be into the now real party of government under the leadership of Nicola Sturgeon it’s practically a near impossibility to oversee every person and aspect of what’s going on all the time, so many joined the party post 2014 from other parties and none that all the motives of all those people couldn’t possibly be known all of the time

    The SNP proportionally is the biggest political party in the UK at around 125 thousand members or more, you’d need 48 hours in the day to keep all that in check unlike when it was only a few thousand members, so the odd pest or nuisance with ulterior motives will slip through, and it takes time to weed stuff like this out, take a look at the Labour party in England who grew massively when Corbyn became leader then subsequently all sorts of problems arose that he couldn’t keep tabs on even if he had been a good leader, which of course he really wasn’t, and his critics and the media made the most of it by hammering away at the poor old soul blaming him for everyone else’s conduct, It’s just too many fires for anyone to keep putting out in the face of a Tory centric media who forgive themselves instantly make up excuses for or don’t even report the behaviour of the ghastly Tories

    If you’re a critic just for the sake of it like the right wing press media and certain bloggers then it becomes meat and drink to find faults and amplify them as much as possible to aid the agenda of opposing for opposing’s sake, all political parties engage in the practice when they feel they need to but as I’ve said before I’m not a big fan of the Greens but for an opposition political party they don’t abuse this behaviour, they do work constructively most of the time while maintaining their positions

    The new Salmond party so far has displayed none of those traits in exactly the same as Tory Labour and Liberal Democrat, and now they attack the Greens for co operating with the SNP in the same way as those Unionist parties do as though somehow they are more entitled to exist in that space rather than the Greens who have worked hard at their cause for a long time, put in the time and co operated with government and earned their right to be there

    It’s rather telling about the self entitlement of certain individuals who believe their right to exist should be more important than another’s in a *get out of my way do you know who I am* attitude

  58. Clydebuilt says:

    Shona Craven A journalist who has a column in the National, but never has anything to say (in the paper) about Scottish Politics . . . . Has dreamed up a reason not to vote for ALBA. “Do Unionists Secretly hope Salmond Will Be Elected” Friday 2nd.

    She was on STV after this weeks BBC debate . . . . . Not one positive word about Nicola Sturgeon. . . Infact as I remember , not one word about Nicola Sturgeon.

    The go to journalist from the National for the broadcast media

  59. Not-My-Real-Name says:

    “The Met Police is investigating allegations that a serving officer raped two of his female colleagues. The officer was not charged and has not been suspended but faces a misconduct hearing more than… 3 years….. after…. the allegations were reported”

    Is this the SAME Met police ,that after a long and then stalled supposed investigation ,subsequently dropped the criminal probe into Leave EU spending……..

    The same Met police that dropped their so called rape investigation into a Tory ex minister….

    The same Met police that defended their handling of the Sarah Everard vigil….and where the Police watchdog, via their report on this incident, found that the Met police “did not act inappropriately”….

    The same Met police whose commissioner DEFENDED the brief attendance at this vigil of one Kate Middleton , minus face mask.

    It’s amazing how flexible you become when you have Dame as part of your title…..as in Dame Cressida Dick.

    Imagine for a moment if all of the above fell within the remit of the Scottish government…..would Unionists be asking for heads to roll………..not just within the police force but also the Justice Minister’s position would be promoted, by Unionist politicians and their supporters, as being untenable….

    Is Priti Patel conscious ATM……or indeed are the supposed official opposition ?

    Glass houses Union style…….perhaps DRoss and Sarwar should look at why and how their own HQ’s are failing to address and manage domestic matters….. before they hypocritically and unfairly criticise what they, in their ever so biased partisan opinions, promote as being solely unique to the supposed Scottish government failings….you know that same Scottish government via the SNP that voters have chosen to elect since 2007……and will again come May this year.

  60. Petra says:

    ‘A new public health body for the UK.’

    ..”However, the creation of UKHSA as a more powerful industrial and security oriented replacement for PHE may not be welcome in the devolved administrations, particularly as the policy paper makes clear it will lead and co-ordinate across the UK and will operate on behalf of the UK internationally.”..

    http://www.bmj.com/content/373/bmj.n875

    …………………………

    ”Deeply worrying. The CEO of Operose – the UK wing of the American health giant Centene that is taking over GP practices across London – has been appointed as a health policy adviser to Boris Johnson.” https://mobile.twitter.com/kuantancurls/status/1377779920080879619

  61. Petra says:

    ‘Here is the LSE report they don’t want you to read.’

    https://talkingupscotlandtwo.com/2021/04/03/here-is-the-lse-report-they-dont-want-you-to-read/

    …………………………………………………..

    Take your pick from 24 parties, FGS 😀.

    Philip Sim:- ”Having a scan through the regional lists for the Holyrood election, and I have added up 700 candidates from 24 different parties. Including 13 parties standing candidates in every region. A veritable festival of democracy. As well as SNP, Tories, Labour, Greens or Lib Dems, everyone in Scotland will have the choice of All for Unity (55 list candidates total), the Family Party (42), UKIP (39), Reform UK (36), Freedom Alliance (36), Alba (32), the Abolish Holyrood Party (13) or Libertarian Party (13).” https://mobile.twitter.com/BBCPhilipSim/status/1377590000913633281

  62. Petra says:

    David Shneider:- ”Is there anything more Tory than breaking the Ministerial Code by misleading Parliament about not replacing your ethics adviser who resigned when the Ministerial Code was broken?” https://mobile.twitter.com/davidschneider/status/1378039544356999168

    …………………………………………..

    Check out Ann’s latest links on the Indyref2 site.

    https://indyref2.space/forum/topic/links-saturday-3-april-2021/

  63. Petra says:

    Just to add to Capella’s post upthread.

    ‘Richard Murphy: What the Financial Times gets wrong about Scottish independence.’

    http://www.thenational.scot/news/19208656.richard-murphy-financial-times-gets-wrong-scottish-independence/

    …………………………………….

    Has Rooth the Mooth changed her mind? Decided that she’s no going to the HoL’s? 😀

    ‘Holyrood election: Douglas Ross replaced by Ruth Davidson on front of leaflet.’

    http://www.thenational.scot/news/19208403.holyrood-election-douglas-ross-replaced-ruth-davidson-front-leaflet/

    • Yes and on that tory leaflet its all about Labour ?
      About how Labour intend to consider allowing a Scottish independence referendum
      About how Labour refused to team up with the tories and lib dems in Scotland to campaign in the coming Scottish election

  64. yesindyref2 says:

    Basically speaking, 2,288,369 people voted for 73 Constituencies in 2016, so with the average vote to win a seat being less than 50%, that means more than 1,150,000 votes are wasted on the constituencies.

    See what you can do with the wasted word “wasted”, if you put your mind to it.

  65. I was reading bright green the magazine for the green party in england & wales , Scotland , Ireland , NI.
    Stories and reports about the greens in each of these countries.
    A particular story that interested me was the one about the greens in Scotland deciding last year to have two leaders instead of one , thats unusual i wonder why ? what happens if they cant agree what decision is made ?
    They also decided that from now on one leader must be female and one male..

    The story about the greens for england and wales also interested me , they voted in favour of GRE and decided their policy is that not only should people be allowed to choose their gender but they should only have to make a personal declaration to do so , no legal work or papers involved furthermore they decided that they should be able to change their documents including birth certificates and marriage certificates without legal recourse.
    I am agreeable to personal freedom to choose gender it does not worry me i do not agree with those who see danger to women everywhere with this but i do draw a line at being able to change a birth certificate .

    It made me wonder what the greens in Scotland decided , do they have the same policy i know they favour GRE review they have a fairly large LGBTQ membership.

    The point i raise here is that people are assuming that the greens are a safe bet for Scottish independence but theyre not if they hold the Scottish government to ransom on policies that the SNP would not normally uphold.
    I have tried to find out if the greens policy differs from the greens in england and wales on this but cant find clarity
    Perhaps someone here knows
    So many people have lost their cautious approach to the greens since 2016

  66. grizebard says:

    granda16 @ 19:11.

    If your insufferable self-conceit was based on anything substantive, I might be willing to concede you some leeway, but your absurd repetitive puffery is based on nothing (as yet) but an excess of faith in one person whose career is as likely to be subsiding (the “David Owen” fate) as it is about to be magically resurrected. Personally, for all the ridiculous WW2 analogies you now throw up, I prefer to place my trust in provable performance, good preparation and sound strategy rather than simplistically in a fading Führer.

  67. Mark Robertson says:

    3 days on and 3% Rise on the poll for Alba AND 6 list seats Whats Not to like for the independence cause ?

    • yesindyref2 says:

      Sneaks sneaking onto a 3 day old thread trying to get in the last posting, while attention is on the article where the blogger has had enough of the abuse he receives via email and replies on the blog?

      Is that what you mean?

      • Bob Lamont says:

        👍

      • grizebard says:

        Yes, about par for the course for these neo-Trumpists. Statistical variation between different pollsters and these hustlers are busily spinning more straw.

        But unlike the fairy tale even, only into fools’ gold.

  68. Clydebuilt says:

    Over on The Prof’s blog . . . He’s laying into Nicola Sturgeon A G A I N

    Angry at her because she hasn’t said she want’s Scotland to be an enemy of America. Or said bad things about Hilary Clinton.

    https://talkingupscotlandtwo.com/2021/04/09/salmond-doesnt-attack-sturgeon-for-going-easy-on-murderous-usa/

    I don’t think The Prof will be happy untill America does a Venezuela on us.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s