A good start
Posted on
October 19, 2014 by
Rev. Stuart Campbell
From a blog post by Hopi Sen, former head of campaigns at the Labour Party.
Scotland is one of the more dramatic areas of Labour decline (it’s now the party’s second-worst “region”), but it’s far from alone. Fewer than 80% of Labour’s 2010 general election supporters now say they’ll vote Labour in 2015. The party is shedding votes everywhere and in every demographic group, as the post notes in detail.
With barely six months to the election, Labour’s average poll lead down to around 1%, UKIP continuing to grow and the expected traditional incumbency effect, it’d be a brave voter indeed who’d put a fiver on the increasingly hapless Ed Miliband taking the keys to 10 Downing Street next year.
Hmmm. What could have possibley happened in Scotlandover the last 2 years to cause such a dramatic decline in support?
And still we get the Labourites saying vote labour to keep the tories out! They are living in some other parallel reality. Not wanting to be sadistic but let them die a slow death
As much as I despise the Tories, I hate “Scottish” labour even more. They have spent decades shitting on their traditional supporters, to enrich themselves and their pox ridden party. I truly hope we see the death and rebirth of labour, as it should be; a defender of the weak and the poor, a party of the people serving the people.
In the mean time, I’ll continue voting SNP.
Just a reminder to Alert Readers that Electoral Calculus allows you to use poll data or make your own predictions of how the 2015 election may turn out.
Here is the link: link to electoralcalculus.co.uk
I would go further and say it would take a STUPID voter to back Labour to win the GE.
Its good but is it good enough?
It is only at 28% that Slab really starts to lose its WM grip. But then it is pretty dramatic and if they did end up at the 19% to the Tories 20% that YouGov had a few days ago, we would be left with just 3 Slab seats Coatbridge, Glasgow NE and Kirkcaldy, Tom Clarke, Willie Bain and the Clunking Fist. Ah dreams!
The British left groups used to say “Vote Labour to get the Towries Aht. When Labour was in they used to say “Vote Labour and Keep the Towries Aht”.
Theior choice. I think the CPB are the only ones now left saying that.
[…] From a blog post by Hopi Sen, former head of campaigns at the Labour Party. […]
Thought I’d share a little teaser of my upcoming Devo Files, which will discuss Inverclyde MP Iain McKenzie and the ridiculously fragile New Labour hold over the constituency:
Inverclyde has never voted Conservative either, yet look how often we got a Tory government. You seem perfectly happy with that state of affairs. 27,000+ of your constituents clearly are not. Maybe that’s part of the reason New Labour control over Inverclyde has been plummeting since 2011?
In 2010, 20,993 (56%) voted for New Labour, compared to 6,577 (17.5%) for the SNP. In your own election in July 2011, the Labour vote plunged to 15,118 (53.8%), while the SNP’s rose to 9,280 (33%). That’s not even a Parliamentary term, that’s one year. In one year, New Labour in Inverclyde lost 4,014 votes, while the SNP gained 2,703. That’s a majority of 14,416 in 2010 to 5,838 in 2011. A 59.5% decrease in New Labour’s majority. In one year. What happened to those votes, Mr McKenzie?
Your New Labour MSP friend Duncan McNeil doesn’t have it much better. In 2007 the New Labour for Inverclyde vote was 12,753 compared to 8,236 SNP; in 2011, New Labour remained practically static at 12,387, while the SNP rose to 11,976. Duncan McNeil’s been the New Labour MSP for Greenock & Inverclyde since 1999, and has consistently hovered around the 40-45% mark: in contrast, the SNP vote has consistently risen since 2003.
The council? It’s on the tightest rope of all: the last election saw Labour with 10 seats compared with the SNP’s 6, the Liberal Democrats’ 2, the Conservatives’ 1, and the independent Ronnie Ahlfeld. With Vaughn Jones coming out in favour of independence and subsequent resignation, Labour’s overall control of the council was lost. Either they form a coalition with the Liberal Democrats, or even the Conservatives – as has been done in Aberdeen and Stirling. So in the same year Mr McKenzie proudly cited his constituency’s Labour-controlled council, New Labour lost overall control – and it wasn’t even an election.
All this, and not even counting the fact that Inverclyde’s SNP has flourished from 200 members to over 1,000 in the space of a month.
Hilariously, Mr McKenzie used his victory speech to try and spin this catastrophic turn of events for New Labour into some sort of victory:
So instead of being a loss of around 9,000 votes, it was “only” a loss of 4,000. After one year.
No, Mr McKenzie, Inverclyde has never voted SNP, any more than Inverclyde has ever voted Conservative. For the moment, Inverclyde is still New Labour. But for how much longer will that be the case?
Never underestimate the pull to the dark side for Labour voters.
Labour believe that the fairies fought the Indyref campaign with the hated Tories.
Not them, no way, don’t be silly..big boy did it..etc etc
They hate being reminded, let’s make sure we don’t.
@ Taranaich
You did some great work on MPs Vote record etc ,which you posted a link the other day .
Some may have missed it .
Can I urge you to post the link again , eh and again later on another thread .
Everyone needs to read it .
Thank you.
Labour deserve to lose support, especially in Scotland where they were more than happy to do the tories’ dirty work. Brown, Darling, Murphy et al are the lowest of the low.
JimnArlene says:
“As much as I despise the Tories, I hate “Scottish” labour even more.”
That is now firmly my stance, but it didn’t used to be.
Labour … the Red Tories … should no longer be allowed to represent Scots! Their moral mandate has already evaporated.
The momentum SNP now has, combined with as much of Yes
grassroots as possible, need to kick SLab’s arse well and truly in GE 2015.
Those who feel cheated in the referendum, or just disappointed PLUS No voters who start to see they were lied to and duped PLUS those who want Devo Max and will never get it PLUS anyone who cares about democracy and social justice … that adds up to a lot of people who should act to remove what ‘Scottish’ Labour has become.
I doubt if there will be a formal Indy Alliance, but voters understand tactical voting, and with first past the post all Yes supporters and the angry should vote for effect rather than principle.
youtube.com/watch?v=d2zI2cMuoQQ If a Labour in Scotland MP like Hood can rage away in the House of Commons he’d vote No even if it made his constituents poorer, you have to despair at the mentality of No thanks Labour voters.
Catching up today on some Political TV stuff from this week , I got a distinct feeling some Labour Parliamentarians etc wanted to Vote YES but felt the need to hold the “Party Line” and F@@@ the people . They Totally deserve whats a commin ! I truly hope the “YES Movement holds their strength for GE 2015 , only 7 months away Tick Tock !
Alright, ye twisted my arm!
link to wildernessofpeace.wordpress.com
BTW, before anyone brings up Anna McCurley, the constituency of Inverclyde has only existed since 2005, so we can indeed technically say Inverclyde never voted Tory in those 9 years. Yet even if you consider Inverclyde geographically, remember that Anna McCurley only won 30% of the vote, compared to Labour & SDP’s 29% each, and also that Inverclyde was joined with West Renfrew (as Renfrew West and Inverclyde). To say Inverclyde voted Tory because 30% voted for McCurley instead of one of three other parties just shows you the idiocy of First Past the Post – which Mr McKenzie, of course, seems perfectly happy with keeping.
Revenge is a dish best eaten cold.
As Labour implodes, the other YES parties need to seize every opportunity to drive home the message that the Union is dead. The closure of the HMRC office in Glenrothes is a good example. Won by Lindsay Roy for Labour in a 2008 by-election, unexpectedly (SNP were well ahead in the polls), with a suspiciously massive increase in postal voters and with the voters register going missing after being handed over to the Sheriff Clerk!! Plenty ammunition for a campaign.
I have felt for some time that we have seen the last UK Labour Government.
In all democracies you have party of the status quo. Its objective for its members is to have what they hold, retain wealth, privilege and power.It is ideologically fluid or entirely non ideological and trims to suit circumstance. It is free to offer any selection of policies and positions that it feels will achieve majority support and with the support of the media which it owns and controls it has a huge advantage.
Against this comes ideologically driven parties with reforming agendas. The status quo party opposes them but over a period of time concedes this and that to a popular revolution while trying all the while to retain power.
When the revolution achieves most of its gains it has also periodically achieved power. This attracts to it those who seek power as much as revolution an aim.
The revolutionary party is then finished. It has become a facet of the establishment. It becomes a body that has as it main aim the assumption of power. To do that it gets close and cosy to the establishment levers that affect power.
All my adult life I have watched Labour travel that road.
The road leads to political oblivion. Labour has been absorbed into the establishment. The establishment in UK is known as Tory. The first Tory to lead Labour was Tony Blair (who sought Tory candidacy before he got a Labour adoption).
The threat to the status quo in UK now comes from the right. The only ideological contest in Scotland is for independence.
I don’t think we should underestimate what has happened to Labour in Scotland
In Northern ireland the Social Democratic and Labour Party, also unkindly known as the Stoop Down Low party in some circles, (SDLP) , which is affiliated with the British Labour Party, has also been haenorrhaging support over the past few years.
An irish nationalist party, the SDLP, unlike Sinn fein, takes its seats in Westminster and votes on issues.
They were always opposed to violence and their then leader John Hume played a major, major role in the Peace Settlement in NI.
Again like Scotland, is the failed attempt to re-arouse the Conservative party in NI. They folded and were disbanded after a disastrous performance in the last general election.
Also worth noting is that all Unionist parties in northern ireland- (the democratic Unionist party (DUP), the Ulster Unionist party (UUP) and the traditional Unionist party (TUV) – are heavily controlled by the Orange Order. Does the OO have the same political weight in Scotland?
Hell mend them.
Wait until we get closer to the time and the Scottish press try to lever them in.
Fantastic work Stu.
We can see for ourselves that Labour are falling apart but the wee graph gives us a lift. I remember a few weeks ago saying we need to wipe out Labour but had a few reservations. Some of their supporters are die-hard and blind to anything other than the party line. They are dinosaurs thanks to the referendum waking most of us up.
Maybe , just maybe , along with the dynamic energy of the YES movement , we can finally get rid of the bastards.
No longer can Labour claim to be Scotland’s champion. They have sold their collective souls for Ermine robes.
I consider my self an even handed guy. But watching these rats sink with the good ship Union will give me as much pleasure as the pain after the ref result. So i can freely admit to being a little vindictive..
SNP/Greens/SSP. Prepare your troops for the spring offensive. Once Labour are gone we can celebrate a massive victory and send a message to the whole world.
Scottish independence is very much alive.
Great to have you back Stu. A true Scottish Champion.
Labour for Scotland:
“Many Labour supporters voted YES, they wanted change“.
No, they wanted independence!
[…] A good start […]
Beware the Red Tories in May 2015 ringing the old folks and convincing them to vote for SLAB, (and voting early by postal,just to be safe)because those nasty any other parties will take their pension, drive up taxes, drive business out of Scotland, and put them in danger of a Russian invasion, with added terrorists to boot.
It’s a winning formula, and it worked at Indy time.
I’ve just put yesterday’s YouGov poll data for Scotland into the electoral calculus algorithm.
All I can say for the scottish new labour ("Quizmaster" - Ed) party is…. Ouch!
The plain fact is that Labour in Scotland will have to take its punishment for shagging the Tories throughout Indy.
The likely outcome will be banishment.
Something similar is in the pipeline, or should be, for the BBC DR etc.
If I was a member of BBC Scotland’s executive
I’d be considering my options, none of which would be in Scotland.
@ben madigan
“Does the OO have the same political weight in Scotland?”
Excellent question that, Ben. Probably nothing like as much weight, that said, my experience to-date has been that Scots academics and the Scottish media have traditionally steered-clear of the question; so who can really say with certainty?
The Tories are pondlife but what Labour do is worse. They say they are on your side , betray you and stop you having a proper alternative. Whether it’s cowardice, stupidity or straight up lies, it doesn’t matter any more .
Enough people are seeing them for what they are. Thicko, greedy , arrogant 3rd raters that put themselves and party above what’s best for the country.
No wonder Scotland has social problems with people like that making decisions. A Slabectomy urgently required
Swami Backverandah says:
19 October, 2014 at 4:44 pm
Beware the Red Tories in May 2015 ringing the old folks and convincing them to vote for SLAB, (and voting early by postal,just to be safe)because those nasty any other parties will take their pension, drive up taxes, drive business out of Scotland, and put them in danger of a Russian invasion, with added terrorists to boot.
It’s a winning formula, and it worked at Indy time.
Yep, we know well the BBC and Labour tactics at elections. We know exactly what they will do and when. The question is, how do we deal with them effectively? I think we need to start early – get in first and sow the seeds. With an a huge army of indy volunteers, it is possible to go round the old folks homes and visit the usual Labour targets before they do. A wee red book, exposing Labour for what they are, would also be an idea if WoS has the resources to consider.
A wee clip from Kevin McKenna ( made me chuckle ) He is talking about the current political situation.
“Labour’s response: people know we still offer the best prospect of keeping the Tories out. While the rest of Scotland has moved on to digital technology Labour is still working with an abacus.
Apart from the estimable Kezia Dugdale and Jenny Marra, there is no one else on its frontbench you’d trust to go out for the messages. ”
link to theguardian.com
Aye an Jenny Marra gets ma goat as she talks over everyone !
As someone else commented recently, “The modern Labour Party. The party that always tells you they’re on your side…. but whose MPs for some reason always end up in the House of Lords”.
No tears for Labours steady demise.
Yet again our fine impartial Newspapers & TV state that Labour are concerned about their dwindling support and are now listening & will respond to the peoples wishes.
A bit late; the SLAB MSP’s have not changed direction since the messages of 2007 & 2011 as they still take their lead from London.
No backbone to come out for YES at indyref; so who was listening to constituents of Glasgow / Dundee etc.
Their MP’s have used the people so often to line their own pockets. The true self interest part of Wesminster.
Remember this Scotland at GE 2015
Labour have become the Tories. I see no difference between any of them beating a path to Westminster. To them people are electoral currency not constituents in desperate need of effective representation.
They abandoned us and betrayed their ideological roots. Come May, vote for any party that will protect you from the worst effects of Westminster governance. SNP, SSP, Green an independent. If they stand a chance of taking a seat, then vote for them, but keep the three Tory parties out.
from McKenna in the Graun:
“Three years after their annihilation at the Holyrood polls they still do not appear to have grasped the reality of their situation. Their slavish devotion to the Tory-led campaign for the union saw them punished by their own supporters, tens of thousands of whom voted yes in solid Labour enclaves. Labour’s Scottish membership has rarely been lower while the SNP is now the third largest party in the UK. Labour’s response: people know we still offer the best prospect of keeping the Tories out.”
It’s easy enough in the aftermath of the Referendum result to be focussing on what appears to be the train-wreck of Labour membership. And so they should. But it’s not all about the numbers in the party.
May 2015 is still a fair way off politically speaking.
Instead of banging on about keeping the Tories out, SLAB may make much more use of an argument to the electorate – especially the elderly – that goes something like this:
We kept you in the Union – this is what you wanted.
We got you extra powers – as we said we would (whatever they turn out to be).
We kept your UK pension. And the pound.
That argument will be hard to counter. And, for all their apparent weakness at the moment, shouldn’t be underestimated.
The Sunday Herald today just doesn’t cut it any longer as a pro-Indy paper – if it ever truly was.
I certainly won’t be buying it again. The truth is it’s one half of Siamese twins, with two voices but only one heart.
@Josef O Luain.
Organisations like this are always trying to give the impression they have more influence than they have. ( O/O Masons, Knights, Jesuits) they’re all the same. Look behind their facade and you’ll discover the pond life that lurks there and is protected by them.
Remember to contact all companies advertising in the Daily Retard. Say you are a patriotic Scot and the Retard was complicit in denying us independence and subverting the democratic process by acting as a free publicity machine for the Red/Blue Tories. Organise Facebook pages against all companies advertising in the Retard.
This applies to no voters as well! You have also been cheated on the “vow”. So let us come together and punish the Daily Retard and the Red Tory Party for this.
No voters, you have been shafted as much as we have. If I were you, I would campaign for indy so we can set ourselves out, set an example to enormous stretches of England also desperate for an alternative to their FOUR Tory Parties… then you are very free to organise your own referendum for a new, revived, caring, social-democratic union of the whole British Isles! I might even vote YES to that!
But first we should all concentrate on defeating the Retard, because it and the BBC are the oxygen without which the Red Tories cannot survive. Let’s put our boot squarely on their windpipe and watch these money-mad little ("Tractor" - Ed)s gasp and squirm.
Does the Scottish Government have any power over postal voting?
If they do, they need to reform it urgently.
@ Kenny.
Let’s be efficient here. 20% of the advertisers will contribute 80% of their income stream.
Who are the 20%, target them.
I don’t buy the Record so I don’t know who their advertisers are.
Any Media analyst help?
Swami Backverandah says:
May 2015 is still a fair way off politically speaking.
Instead of banging on about keeping the Tories out, SLAB may make much more use of an argument to the electorate – especially the elderly – that goes something like this:
We kept you in the Union – this is what you wanted.
We got you extra powers – as we said we would (whatever they turn out to be).
We kept your UK pension. And the pound.
That argument will be hard to counter. And, for all their apparent weakness at the moment, shouldn’t be underestimated.
Indeed, with the old NO voters, that may strike a chord.
But what about those thousands of Labour voters (or ex voters) who voted YES?
Elephant tick, Room tick.
Swami Backverandah
“That argument will be hard to counter”
To some extent I agree. There is that hard core of Old Labour, who will be old in years too, who will go along with that argument.
However, it will be a first past the post battle with multiple parties, including UKIP who with a lot of help from the BBC will soak up some Lab & Con voters.
The SNP don’t need the 45% of the referendum to achieve a landslide in first past the post. Though the more they get, the further the Unionist mandate is destroyed and the Union become untenable.
@swami Backverandah
If I was a politician I would counter those arguments with:
We got you extra powers – Devo nano? A poisoned chalice of raising a wee bit more tax (but losing it again in the block grant?) Responsibility without power, the hallmark of the serf.
We kept your UK pension. The lowest in Europe 2nd lowest in OECD, after Mexico.
And the pound. Well we would have kept that anyway and it might have been worth more and you would certainly have had more of them.
Sorry pensioners, you were duped.
Taranaich, I being a little older remember when the Great Hector McNeil a true labour man used to get upwards of 60K votes but I think that there have been boundary changes since those days. Either way I agree with you Pink Tories are on the way out.
Auld Rock
The SNP already have a lead over Labour in the most recent opinion polls for the GE. And this is BEFORE the Smith Commission tells us we’re onto plums.
That lead can only grow as the people of Scotland look to punish Labour as retribution for being sold down the river by the Red Tories.
Firstly, thanks to the folks for their responses (I hope you can see that I’m not making a case for anyone, just trying to think a bit ahead as to the foes strategy (forewarned/forearmed etc)
I think what I see as the main danger to SNP/Alliance/Indy parties picking up loads of seats and seeing off the WM Unionists might be, not what I’d call an expectation of success, but the concern that they could be blindsided.
The SLAB message I posted above, delivering re Union, powers, pension, pound, etc., 6 months down the track could appeal to a good number of traditionally SLAB voters for two main reasons.
The first, and weakest, of the reasons, is that the points are arguably true. They promised, and they delivered – even if we on here could point to all the nuanced technicalities, and percentages of to what extent these promises were or weren’t delivered.
Which brings me to the second and more powerful point.
Many voters in party political UK elections are much less engaged with the process, and much less engaged with the nuances, technicalities and finer points of the arguments.
Which is why the above-mentioned SLAB argument could be so effective.
Not only is it true – we promised, and we delivered, we can be trusted, we deliver on our promises – it will also appeal because it’s very simple.
I had a lifetime to spare this afternoon so trawled Google for some information on Labour ‘listening’.
Turns out it’s not a new idea…
Miliband vows to ‘listen and deliver’ after narrow win over Ukip
10 Oct 2014
Miliband in listening mode as Labour regroups for next general election
27 May 2014
Ed Miliband are you listening at the Labour Party …
24 Sep 2013
BBC News – Miliband: ‘Labour didn’t listen on immigration’
12 Jan 2013
Let’s have no more pointless ‘listening exercises’
16 Apr 2012
Workers are agents of economic change: so why isn’t Labour listening to the unions?
16 Sep 2011
The Labour Party today held what it called a “listening exercise” on a scale hitherto unachieved by a British political party.In the wake of its defeat at last years election Labour did what modern political parties do and launched a ‘listening exercise’.
25 Mar 2011
Labour values » Re-building our party from the ground up
There are three tests of how well our politics are rooted: are we ensuring our representatives better reflect the people we serve? Are we building membership in those communities? Is our policy making coming up from the ground through Conference to the leadership?
All of us who have been at the top of the party now need to accept that we currently don’t pass any of these tests, and our next leader must set out how to do so.
18 Jun 2010
Gordon Brown’s speech on becoming Leader of the UK …And having visited every part of Britain and listened to and learned from the British people, ..
24 Jun 2007
British Labour Party conference: Brown stands up for health …For months, sections of the British Labour Party, the trade unions and … had issued a press statement praising Brown, the “listening” chancellor, …
29 Sep 2006
Labour Party conference: Why We Need A New Workers’ Party
Despite coming under siege over foundation hospitals, tuition fees and Iraq, he is neither listening to his party nor the majority of people …
4 Oct 2003
etc etc etc. Phew!
I also came across this little gem – well worth a quick peruse:
the british labour party’s transition from socialism to capitalism
link to tinyurl.com
In the case of the Labour Party, the ‘little cant word’ is ‘modernisation’
by C Leys – ?1996
I wandered away from here about an hour ago, to look at UK Polling Report.
There is a woman who posts on there, a member of the Labour Party’s North British section (although she doesn’t like to be considered a spokeswoman for them, which is fair enough).
She explicitly stated that she had accepted that Labour would be made to pay for “doing what is best for the country”, and that in suffering this, they were putting country ahead of party!
That almost makes sense, I suppose, if the country concerned is the UK. It probably is for her; she was one of those who didn’t want “her” country broken up, and believed there should never have been a referendum.
She also believes that Labour “won” the referendum, that they had to put in double shifts to undo the damage to the campaign by Cameron, Farage, etc, and so on.
I don’t, of course, agree that the Labour Party put anything ahead of itself, but I mention her in case she is representative of their thoughts, and that this could help to identify productive strategies to use against them.
PS – some months ago, the first post on the subject that I saw by the woman mentioned above stated that the reason for voting No was to ensure the return of a Labour administration at Holyrood.
She may be rethinking that now; she fairly rapidly added that she liked the status quo, but I thought her knee-jerk reaction quite revealing -and definitely not putting country before party, except that she probably really does equate Labour in power with “best for the country”.
Hmm crazycat, I see the point they put the British party, before loyalty to their Scottish members etc., but what I will never understand, not that I care really, but why didn’t they just take a No stance on their own platform?
I’ve never supported them, but from what I read there are lifelong members of Scottish Labour, that are emotionally and mentally traumatised from seeing them share the platform with Tories, and its why ("Quizmaster" - Ed) became common currency for them. Their decline started with Blair, but it will end in Scotland
A look at the fascinating website “Political Compass” shows a graph of where Britain’s parties stood politically in 2010: link to politicalcompass.org
As you can see, Labour’s closest “neighbours,” their potential coalition partner so-to-speak, are DUP and BNP. I don’t think anyone proposes that they have improved since 2010? Further down that page is another graph that shows how the parties have developed. You can see that Labour are now diametrically opposite to what they were in 1972. I guess there are still a few people around who vote Labour on the basis of what Labour was in 1972, but not for much longer, methinks. The political position that used to be Labour’s is nowadays occupied by the Green Party.
I don’t actually think that anyone will be fooled by whatever the Smith Commission come up with as it will not be what was voted for by no and what yes wanted, and will more than likely not be what the pro-indy parties and the majority of private individuals and groups who have contacted it with their suggestions and that is FFA with defence and finance kept with Westminster for the time being.
Anything less for the rest of the Scottish populace will not be accepted.
There is also the fact that the Labour Party will be fighting on three fronts, Wales, England and Scotland.
Question is. Which of these will be of the most importance? It certainly won’t be Wales and Scotland as the majority of their vote appears to be in of all places London.
Also due to their dimishining membership, they will have less money for campaigning and won’t have their Tory backers this time.
It’s also why the new radical proposal is for the new Labour birth to break ties with London Labour. I think they are just treading water
She explicitly stated that she had accepted that Labour would be made to pay for “doing what is best for the country”, and that in suffering this, they were putting country ahead of party!
Yes. It needed a totally futile gesture to show how feckless is Labour in Scotland, and the under-privileged to understand that is their righful place in society.
Before any further voting takes place in Scotland I’d like to see the voting system shored up so the result is conclusive.
Exit polls, observers at the counts IN THE ACTUAL POLLING STATIONS where the votes are cat. No shifting ballot boxes around and out of sight otherwise we end up no further forward than we are now.
Lots of Labour led councils out there with too much to lose.
@Swami Backverandah
“Which is why the above-mentioned SLAB argument could be so effective.”
Next year, I don’t see reminding voters of the referendum as the most effective tactic for Labour.
All the memories of campaigning alongside the Tories will come flooding back.
And many Labour seats are in areas that voted YES.
I don’t underestimate Labour and the possibility of them retaining most of their seats. But that is mainly because of the usual media focus on the London parties at UK elections, where the SNP is sidelined. And the huge majorities in many seats.
But there is also the feeling that this time could be different, with the chance of major swings.
1. Genuine anger at the ‘Red Tories’
2. Labour’s devolution proposals are the weakest of all.
3. Scots voters have no great affection for Ed Miliband.
4. Facebook and Social media are far more prevalent
5. Thousands of new SNP activists.
Those numbers look like they are based on regional sub-samples.
Scotland’s regional sub-samples in YouGov polls are not remotely accurate. You can trawl through their polling data prior to the 2010 election – SNP was getting over 40% in some of the subsamples.
We need Scottish specific and weighted polling to get a clear picture.
@Onwards
thanks for your response
I agree with you re the points you made.
I’m trying to spot some of the snipers lurking in the bushes 🙂
manandboy at 6.20
Eh?
INDYREF PART 2 ROUND 1 MAY 2015
Labour coming together etc etc
BBC full on
STV full on
Daily Record, Herald etc full on
Fear and smear and scaremongering campaign, again.
John McTernan – again
Threats to the elderly – and to the Poles, Italians etc
Core hardline Labour voters
Core hardline unionist voters – all the usual suspects
Vote conducted by all the same people from local Councils as in Indy. Same vans same drivers.
Same postal voting system under Labour franchise.
800,000 spare ballot papers as per Indy, (still unaudited.)
Still think it’ll be a doddle, a foregone conclusion?
We still have Nicola’s tour of the cities, the SNP conference, the publishing of the White Paper and the Westminster dog fights between Labour and Tory. Plenty opportunity to increase the SNP lead further. Also the Greens and SSP can be raising their profile as much as possible. I’m looking forward to it. It certainly seems to me that the sands are shifting under the feet of the old dinosaurs.
Re how to counter the Labour election message, they say every picture tells a story, well I seem to recall folk talking of one where Johann Lamont was pictured high fiving with Tories at the referendum result.
I would suggest that that one and every other like it might come in useful!
@Square Haggis 7:42pm
I had an interesting short chat with one of the South Ayrshire election officials when attending the postal vote opening. They effectively stated that the Referendum would be “the last time that we would use this system”.
The implication was that we would move to an electronic voting system, probably from iDox (who were the providers of the validation system for the PV opening). I can’t be absolutely sure if that will happen for the next GE but I took that as the meaning.
I’ve since had a trawl around the ol’ interweb and haven’t found anything that supports that premise. So, still none the wiser but,I do agree that we need to be far more organised to ensure that we do have better observation and verification next time round.
@manandboy
“Labour coming together”
I think/hope the same will happen as with the referendum, a lot of their traditional activists just won’t turn out on their behest any longer. You are right, in that they are far from a spent force, but I think they are further down than in 2010/2011.
“BBC full on”
They won’t be quite full on. BBC Englandshire will see Scotland as an irrelevant side show, unlike in the referendum. They will be wall to wall Lab, Con and for some inextricable reason Lib … Plus UKIP. Their eyes will not be on an SNP threat. Now BBC Scotland, that’s perhaps a different matter. They will certainly be pushing their political wing, SLab. However with London preoccupied ScotBeeb will present less of a problem than the BBC as a whole.
“Still think it will be a doddle …?”
Nope. But the SNP are perhaps at their strongest ever, and if as much of the Yes grassroots as possible goes pro SNP, or at least anti SLab, a definite victory for the Indy cause is possible.
not sure why people think browns seat is so safe
2010 GE
Labour 29,559 G.Brown PM
SNP 6,550
Tories 4258
Libdem 4269
62% turnout
2011 HE
Lab, 24300
SNP 23400
Tory 3685
Libdem 1422
46% turnout
@Jim Thomson,
It beats me how we can buy and sell to anywhere on the planet 24/7 365 using a wee plastic card and yet we still use paper, pencils & plastic boxes to vote in elections.
Defies logic IMO.
@Gerry Parker and Josef O Luain
Raised the question of OO political influence in Scotland because 1)another poster on another thread mentioned they were supporting the labour party,
2) their pre referendum marches and post referendum behaviour
3) voters should be aware of which candidates in the 2015 GE and the 2016 scottish election are members of the OO. They should know they are not just voting for Mr X member of whatever party but that mr X is a member of the OO.
4) in NI the OO certainly has great political weight across the Unionist spectrum right as far as loyalist paramilitary groups, far beyond the free masons (though there may be an overlap in membership) and certainly the jesuits. They also extend into both houses in Westminster
5) they are another factor to take into account (however minimal you may feel they are) when planning local 2015/2016 election strategies and tactics- if the scots want to ensure victories for the Independence parties
Squarehaggis – you are right – they did a trial run on electronic voting when I worked in Stirling Council, but for some reason it never came into full force. Stirling is a small Council, but covers a very big rural area, so the Chief Exec at the time – about 7 years ago – wanted to try it to increase turn-out.
It beggars belief that we cant have a safe and secure portal to have voting done, but maybe that’s the point????
@Square Haggis
I also worry about “electronic” voting on a few fronts
You STILL don’t know that the person presenting themselves for the vote is who they claim to be.
If there’s some form of verification card to be used, what’s to stop the untrustworthy from multiple voting? e.g. they “helpfully” gather all the cards from a nursing home and vote on the residents’ behalf
How confident are we that the core software can’t be spoofed or have a “back door” that allows tampering with the data? This includes having off-site access to the system and maybe phantom polling stations.
Not sure how exactly we guarantee adequate safeguards in any “electronic” scenario. Not that I’m at all skeptical or cynical in any way, of course.
I like the system used in countries where they do try to ensure no double voting – dip your finger in some indelible ink immediately after you vote.
Why not count the votes in the polling stations immediately as they close under the eyes of those entitled to view the process and the count.
The completed votes could then be transferred to the main counting area and double checked if necessary. That way the ballot boxes are always in view and the count done prior to transport.
Works for me.
First-time poster although, have been an avid lurker for some time (& have found many of the posts & contributors here inspirational).
Will the under 18’s be permitted to vote in either the GE or SE? If not, how many of the 1.6 million who voted YES does that exclude from contributing to removing the red Tory muppets?
@ben madigan
Raised the question of OO political influence in Scotland
______________________________________________________
link to sconews.co.uk
“Although a council spokesman claims that ‘Mr Matheson, (Leader of Glasgow City Council) committed to no more than is stated in the policy— that there will be an annual review, which is under way,’ Robert McLean, executive officer of the Grand Orange Lodge of Scotland, said the organisation was delighted at news of a council policy rethink on the matter.
“Mr Matheson admitted the policy was wrong and we’re now hoping he will review the parades policy,” he said. “We do not tell our members who to vote for but as a unionist organisation they should be supporting a unionist candidate.”
Recent figures show more Orange marches are held in Scotland each year than in Northern Ireland.
Right, now let’s see what we’ve got –
Labour is in bed with the Tories and the Orange Order,
but where’s the LibDems?
Oh oh, going to need a bigger bed.
Oh dear, picking a colour is not going to be easy.
@Alex,
Yep! I’ll second that.
@Alex Clark
just responded with a link in OT 😉
That is absolutely disgusting on the OO
Don’t worry about the size of bed Manandboy – the closer they huddle, the better!
just make sure the sheet the scots use to cover them all up and bury them is blue with a large white X in the middle!!
Schrödinger’s Cat: One thing I don’t understand about those numbers. Westminster constituencies are generally bigger than Holyrood and the turnout was a higher percentage for Westminster.
That being the case, why were more votes recorded for Holyrood than Westminster?
Have I just missed something?
@Alex Clark – that is exactly my view. Why do they have to transport them to a huge counting stations – it makes no sense.
The votes would be counted quickly cos there would be fewer of them and security would be easier since no chance of them ‘getting lost’ on route
It’s definitely more democratic to have the result from every polling station counted and publicised. Why we don’t yet must just be an historical thing, we can change that by demanding it.
Doing the count in the polling station and checking the results in the the main counting centre must be the way to go. I doubt it would slow things down and may even speed them up if you can consider bundles of votes arriving at the main centres already sorted.
It would be great to have a more robust system. I doubt may would disagree with that.
Absolutely against electronic vote registering and counting.
Attend the polling station, show your ID, collect your ballot paper and tick your box. Votes to be counted at the polling station.
Collection of postal votes at nursing homes by political parties illegal.
@Swami Backverandah at 7:11 pm
I agree wholeheartedly. I think Labour will use the referendum result for all they’re worth. However, that in itself is a double-edged sword, because they joined with the Tories to do it.
Labour will be fighting two distinct battles in Scotland and England – and there lies the chink in their armour.
In England, Labour will try to retain and gain seats by “out-Torying” the Tories – witness the new rhetoric on immigration, for instance, and the refusal to reverse any current and future austerity measures.
In Scotland, however, the opposite is required. More than any policy issue (at least for the present), it is a question of trust, and the betrayal of core values.
They’ve already started tackling that one – witness the very public soul searching and seeking of forgiveness for their ‘temporary loss of direction’, as evidenced by the plethora of MSM articles recently. This may also include portraying themselves as victims – “We had no choice, we HAD to do it to save your pensions/pound, etc
As the election approaches, they’ll ramp up the loud proclamation of the rediscovery of their socialist values, which is where the referendum result will come into play – “We saved this, we saved that…”
To counteract that you’ll need to point out the differences in the rhetoric of the two distinct campaigns. So any effective messages could be based upon what the Tories have/will cut, simply applied to Labour.
Something along the lines of “Pensioners in England will lose their fuel allowance/bus pass/free prescriptions – you’re next! Vote [insert party of choice] to stop it!”
@Swami Backverandah at 7:11 pm
@Jim Mitchell at 8:12 pm
On a related matter, I also think there’s a need to build up a stock of campaign “hit squad” material such as:
A stock of short sharp soundbites – quoteable one-liners
Remember the ridiculous “Independence would leave every Scot £480 worse off” ? It was nonsense but it got around. We need some ‘headlines’ – using proveable facts, of course!
Photos – a picture is worth a thousand words. Jim’s “Rogue’s Gallery” idea is great.
These would also provide anyone with a talent for producing posters/ leaflets with enough material to be getting on with.
As for circulation, it’s amazing how many “dookits” you can find in public places! A dozen or so dropped off at the hairdressers, post offices, even churches, can help spread the word.
Totally O/T but just wanted to say that was at the Moray hustings tonight where Stewart Hosie gave a big shout out to Wings. And got a sustained round of applause for it.
So yay!
@Shuggy
I agree with the distinctions between the WM rUK Labseats, and the Scots Lab seats. They will most likely be fought in distinct campaigns.
Also agree with the soundbite type messages required. That’s a key. Most aren’t particularly politically engaged, and many don’t turnout for the vote. hence need for some key, simple, messages.
However, for those who like a bit more sauce with the meat and veg, here’s one to be going on with.
Why Labour sucks 😉
from the Groan tonight
“According to commission sources, Milburn will say the Labour minimum wage target, announced with fanfare by Miliband at his party conference, is “not at all ambitious as it implies a slower rate of increase between 2014 and 2020 than there was between 1999 and 2014” and, if that trend continued, the minimum wage would “actually be worth £8.23 an hour in 2020, not £8”.
@Annette,
thanks for your link to the political compass website – a very intereting article and just shows how much the Labour Party has drifted towards the right away from its original values.
The fact that it is more authoritarian or fascist that the Tories and UKIP actually explains a lot. it should be pointed out to Labour supporters where their party now sits on the political spectrum.
I also liked the quote “Election debates between mainstream parties are increasingly about managerial competence rather than any clash of vision and fundamental difference in economic direction.”
Very interesting – deserves a wide a distribution as possible…
link to politicalcompass.org
Now I understand why I feel that I am living in an Orwellian “1984” type State! The blue and red Tories have become the real fascist parties.
There was talk about wolves on the previous thread.
We have far too many wolves in Scotland. The only problem is they are in sheep’s clothing. They need to be exposed for what they are and banished from Scotland.
Zero Labour MPs from Scotland in 2015 must be our top priority.
@Dr JM Mackintosh
There is no doubt in my mind that we live in an Orwellian state. The timing doesn’t matter and we may be only at the beginning but it is an Orwellian state all the same.
Whether Independence comes to Scotland or not we have to resist their ideals and plans for us. We won’t lie down.
I do agree with Jim and Velofello. I don’t see how you can ever trust electronic voting in a situation where powerful vested interests have a big stake in the outcome. No matter what safeguards are devised, some hacker will see them as a challenge. There can be no transparency and no confidence.
@Morag 12.45pm
Have to agree with you RE electronic voting.
Have a brother in the IT industry and my conversations with him about this convinced me that for the foreseeable future it would be impossible to have a system that was totally secure.
It would be interesting to get the rev’s take on it though.
Morag,
“I do agree with Jim and Velofello. I don’t see how you can ever trust electronic voting in a situation where powerful vested interests have a big stake in the outcome.”
But you categorically believe that it was totally, one million percent, impossible and beyond the British establishment and GCHQ to rig the referendum with about 200,000 fraudulent postal and other votes?
(I am not doubting the integrity of the vote COUNTERS so please don’t go on about that.)
@Swami Backverandah at 11:22 pm
“However, for those who like a bit more sauce with the meat and veg, here’s one to be going on with.
Why Labour sucks”
Love it – those three little words everyone should hear!
Just for fun, I’ll see your sauce and raise you an extra portion of veg (!) with this campaign poster:
Your minimum wage will be worth less
Your pension will be worth less
Your savings will be worth less
Describe Labour’s policies.
@Annette and Alex,
I took the test on the Political Compass website. It turns out that I am now a stong left wing libertarian which is a real surprise to me as I have always thought that I was a bit moderate and middle of the road.
Truely – it is a most interesting site.
So it looks like over the years I have become more libertarian and left wing without really realising it. But when I really think of what my views were many years ago I suppose I have but it is still a bit of a revelation to me. Quite proud of my scores!
Over the years Labour have been following the exact opposite path to my own and therefore it naturally explains my dislike of the Labour Party as they are now diametrically opposed to most of my views.
What is very revealing is how close they are drifting to the BNP, DUP and even Hitler in the Authoritarian axis.
Kind of flips the “SNP are Nazis” argument from Darling on its head as the SNP come out as pretty moderate and slightly left wing.
Also explains the current crisis in SLAB as they are finally realising that they are not the political party that they used to be. Quite understandable considering where they are now compared to where they were in the 70s.
The UK data is from 2010 – it would be good to see an update as the three Unionist parties have all drifted even more to the neo-liberal and authoritarian extremes. Are the Lib-Dems still a libertarian party? I doubt it ! UK to drop European Human rights laws – no one that bothered?
Hopefully, there will be an update for the 2015 GE – cannot wait to see it.
Highly recommend this site – Politcal Compass – one of the best things I have seen on modern politics- aside from Wings. (Grovel, grovel…)
Messing with electoral calculus and I noticed an interesting peculiarity. Look at Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill (CCB). Put in Con 20%, Lab 19%, Lib 7%, Nat 42%. CCB is Nat. Drop Lib by 1% to 6%, and CCB is Lab. Here are the two tables:
Lib at 7% – Lib at 6%
———————
Lab 38.91 – 38.91
Nat 38.93 – 38.69
Con 11.36 – 11.32
Lib 1.24 – 0.63
Oth 9.55 – 10.44
Dropping the overall Lib vote by 1%, seems to have that Lib drop (0.61% in CCB) moving to “Others”, but also taking Nat votes (0.24%) with it!
It shows there are quite severe errors and false assumptions in the algorithms for EC which, bearing in mind the poll reversal of SNP / Labour, makes you think.
In the run up to the General Election, it will be very, very interesting to see how Scottish Labour try and gain the trust of the Scottish public once more. I have no doubt the likes of the BBC and the Daily Record will promote helpful stories for them (doing good deeds within the community, etc)
I have no doubt that quite a few will lose their seat come 2015, but I also expect some to survive. How many …well that is the question that no one can answer at the moment. For a few of the MP’s (especially some of the higher profile ones) such as Margaret Curran and Ian Davidson must be wondering what their futures really hold for them, even if they do manage to retain their seat beyond 2015.
Brown’s ‘vow’ will haunt Labour like a stain that cannot be removed. The longer that the ‘vow’ remains unfulfilled, along with the possibility of a Tory-UKIP government, then we really will have many Scots moving towards the ‘Yes’ campaign. In the end, we may have ‘nationalist’ Scotland v ‘nationalist’ England, the ‘Yes’ Campaign v the Tory-UKIP coalition, Holyrood v Westminster. For Labour (and especially Scottish Labour) …what side do they choose, for both options spell disaster. Choose the retainment of the Union means following the Tory-UKIP policy (with possible EU exit) which will only fuel resentment in Scotland, while if Scottish Labour eventually do gravitate towards ‘Yes’, then it means the descent of a slow death for the ‘greater’ Labour Party in the long run within the UK!
Oh, how Gordon’s vow has become the poison to the Labour Party that cannot be cured…
There is absolutely no evidence such a thing happened, and no conceivable way as far as I can see for it to have happened without leaving any evidence.
And by the way it would have needed 400,000 fraudulent votes, not 200,000.
That’s the thing about crosses on a piece of paper. Relatively speaking, unhackable. Small-scale fiddling is a breeze, but 400,000 votes? If anyone can explain to me in detail how such a thing was or might have been done, I’m listening, but so far no takers.
One thing that has to be done is the destruction of the ‘Gordon Brown’s actually a decent Old Labour type, trapped by the system’ meme. It carries a lot of currency with die-hard Labour types.
The story about his blatant lies over organ donation services is a good one for that.
I wouldnt be too hasty in celebrating the much wished for demise.
I was at a Christening on Saturday where an in-law started asking me about the Referendum. I moved onto the GE to which he replied “It will be Labour for me”. I asked “Why?” and he replied “Ive always been a Labour man”. When pushed he said “They understand the working man” to which I asked him to name an Labour MP who had worked. Cue Tumbleweed.
I fear Labour do understand the Scottish “working man” only too well sentimental vote wise, and sadly we might see some stalwarts help keep them alive.
I don’t believe the result.
I don’t believe the postal ballot count at above 95% in some areas which is a figure virtually impossible to achieve.
I don’t believe the result because it is very seriously at odds with the figures achieved in the biggest series of mass canvasses ever done across Scotland which canvassed all areas,all social groups and all age groups and which showed a continual movement to YES and a tight finish.
I don’t believe the result because the confidence being shown by the Better Together campaign was unrealistic,unjustified and uncanny.
More significantly an engaged section of the public do not believe the result.
I suspect the constant repetition of the phrase “the silent majority” could have been a device to justify a hard to explain result . More like “the invisible majority”
Anybody who believes we were not facing a resourceful,very clever, dishonest, devious and entirely unscrupulous British establishment should go back to school.
“I don’t believe the result.
I don’t believe the postal ballot count at above 95% in some areas which is a figure virtually impossible to achieve.
I don’t believe the result because it is very seriously at odds with the figures achieved in the biggest series of mass canvasses ever done across Scotland which canvassed all areas,all social groups and all age groups and which showed a continual movement to YES and a tight finish.
I don’t believe the result because the confidence being shown by the Better Together campaign was unrealistic,unjustified and uncanny.
More significantly an engaged section of the public do not believe the result.
I suspect the constant repetition of the phrase “the silent majority” could have been a device to justify a hard to explain result . More like “the invisible majority”
Anybody who believes we were not facing a resourceful,very clever, dishonest, devious and entirely unscrupulous British establishment should go back to school.”
We led in two polls in three years. I don’t believe every polling company is corrupt. It’s extremely normal for there to be a last-minute swing to the status quo in any referendum on major change, and we were up against an entire media. Not one paper backed Yes on the morning of the vote.
Were there irregularites? Yes. Were there isolated incidents of fraud/attempted fraud? Absolutely. Is the postal vote system massively insecure? Definitely. Do some things need explaining, like the large number of reports of blank-backed ballot papers? Undoubtedly.
But the bottom line is that we never managed to get public opinion onside in any robust, sustained way. Canvass reports are useless – I’d tell someone whatever they wanted to hear to get them to piss off when I was having my tea. Lots of people kept quiet because they were embarrassed to be No and didn’t want to either be harangued on their doorstep or have to face up to the irrationality (or selfish rationality) of their position.
Had we led in the polls for the whole of the last month and then lost, I’d have been suspicious. But we NEVER led in a full-sample poll beyond the margin of error. The result was disappointing, but it rings true.
Hate to be negative, but from Sen’s figures that Stu quotes, Labour’s vote seems to be stronger in most parts of the country bar Scotland compared to what it was in 2010. This would appear to signify a Labour victory in UK next year. (Though the vagaries of the first past the post system would still have to be factored in. It’s possible that working class votes for UKIP might let the Tories in).
On the positive side, if this holds up to 2015 and British Labour fail to make a come back in Scotland, we can continue to argue for and make political capital out of the distinctive political culture of Scotland within the UK. It is further evidence of divergence. It also augurs well for Holyrood in 2016.
I entered the latest Yougov poll figures into the electoral calculus and the number of seats looks promising
Conservatives – 3
Labour – 13
Lib Dem (pandas)- 1
SNP – 42
This could be a dream but … its a target worth aiming for
Morag
I always enjoy your certainties.
I rarely agree with them.
Obviously if anybody here could explain how 200,000 ballot votes were rigged they wouldn’t have done it that way. (It would only have taken around 200,000 votes the other way to reverse the result)
AS several court cases and convictions in England have established the postal ballot system is a recipe for fraud. Anybody who insists that the UK establishment machine does not have the intelligence,the resource and the ability to rig a postal ballot suffers from a serious imagination default.
Whoever,for instance,checks the veracity of the signature on the application and signature on the actual vote has almost total power over the ballot.
If you control all elements of the process you control the result.
We have been guilty in the past in implying that a Labour Government in Westminster is better for Scotland than a Tory one.
This is damaging and we should stop all such suggestion.
A Labour Government in Westminster is actually worse for Scotland than a Tory one as a section of Scottish public opinion goes back to sleep when Labour is in power.
Stu is right. Propaganda is very powerful. Lots of people who should have and could have voted Yes have been brainwashed into believing that Scotland is too wee to survive alone. They have also been brainwashed into hating the SNP and into thinking Labour is the natural party of government in Scotland. It is remarkable that we achieved the political awakening that we did. This work of education and challenging unionist shibboleths that this site promotes must continue. There were 500,000 don’t knows or uncommitted voters who voted No in the end, who had only decided in the last three weeks of the campaign. Educate, educate, educate.
“There were 500,000 don’t knows or uncommitted voters who voted No in the end, who had only decided in the last three weeks of the campaign. Educate, educate, educate.”
It astounds me the number of people who only really decided in the last few weeks.
Not so much undecided, but those who seem to deliberately tune out politics, when the vote wasn’t imminent.
Iit is encouraging that there was a last minute swing to yes, until the final week reversed that.
The logic that Scots should govern their own country is powerful, so in a way, ‘Project Fear’ was the only way to defeat this.
But there are encouraging signs, although political change happens slowly in Scotland.
In 1979 there were only 1.2 million votes for a limited assembly.
1.The fact is that hardcore British unionists are slowly dying off.
2.The Scottish government is now an everyday presence.
3.The internet continues to reduce traditional media importance.
Next stage is further devolution. EVEL will be hard to resist for the Tories.
Include that in the manifesto, and they will gain a lot of UKIP votes.
It could be the difference between gaining power or not.
At some point, independence just seems like the easiest solution.
@YESGUY says:19 October, 2014 at 4:31 pm:
“SNP/Greens/SSP. Prepare your troops for the spring offensive. Once Labour are gone we can celebrate a massive victory and send a message to the whole world.”
Whoa! YESGUY, you missed something out in your assessment that really is a bad mistake to make. First because it distorts the truth but more so because we really do not want a wipe out of the Labour Party. It is not a good thing for only one group of people to hold office in any democracy.
The bit you missed out is, “Labour For Indy”, these, perhaps along with the SSP and Solidarity could be the basis of a real Scottish Socialist party in an independent Scotland.
Just some evidence that it was done at all? Just a suggestion of a possible method? Without either of these, we’re in fantasy-land.
And you still need 400,000 fraudulent votes, if you’re doing this by registering fictitious voters. If would only have needed 200,000 actual No voters to have voted the other way to reverse the result, but if you’re doing it by adding fake votes, you need twice that.
Unless you’re suggesting that 200,000 postal Yes votes were removed and replaced by No votes?
The arithmetic simply doesn’t work – either 400,000 extra No votes, or 200,000 Yes votes replaced by No votes. This is well explained in that Lawyers for Yes article I’ve linked to half a dozen times.
Yes, it’s possible to fiddle the postal ballot on a small scale. It’s very doubtful if it’s possible to fiddle it on a scale of 400,000 fictitious voters. It’s impossible in practical terms to do that without anyone noticing.
It can also be seen that it wasn’t done, by examining the arithmetic of the actual postal votes. Again, see the Lawyers for Yes article.
At every postal verification I’ve heard about, the signatures were carefully checked by the polling agents as well as by the council staff running the referendum. I know in our region a number of discrepancies were spotted and these votes were not counted. I’ve also heard several polling agents speak of instances where two people of the same name living at the same address had inadvertently signed each other’s declarations, and in so doing invalidated both votes!
In this context, I cannot agree that 400,000 extra fictitious voters somehow snuck past unchallenged and unnoticed by anyone.
@David MmcEwan Hill 11.50am
RE who is checking the signatures.
My daughter was one,because she was a council employee.
She was also working at the polling station on the 18th.
I am afraid Morag and the Rev are right because she was not the only yes voter on duty who was prepared to shout from the rooftops if they had seen any jiggery pokeary.
If there was any vote rigging it was not at that level.
That appears to be explained, to my own personal embarrassment.
All the ballot papers had numbers on the back. It’s impossible that any didn’t, because when the paper is issued to the voter, the polling clerk turns it over and makes a note of the number against the number of the voter it has been issued to. If substantial numbers of blank-backed papers had been printed, the polling clerks would immediately have realised, and they wouldn’t have been issued. One or two polling clerks have come on Wings and confirmed this.
The information that the papers should have numbers on the back was printed on the reverse of everybody’s polling card. There was an instruction that this number should be shown to the polling clerk before the paper was put in the ballot box. This procedure doesn’t seem to have been strictly followed – it only seems to be a precaution against someone accidentally putting their shopping list in the box by mistake, anyway, or maybe to guard against the legandary “Tasmanian Dodge”.
The point here is that substantial numbers of people may be assumed to have read that before they went to vote, and to have been aware that there should be a number on the back of the paper when it was issued to them, and indeed to have attempted to show it to the polling clerk before putting it in the box. Not one single person appears to have noticed and reported a blank-backed paper while it was still in their hand. ALL the reports are from people who say in retrospect that they don’t remember a number being there.
I did it too. I have a clear memory of folding my ballot paper and the reverse being blank. I appreciate now that it can’t have been. I know the polling clerk wrote down the number on my paper against my voter’s number, when she issued it to me. I saw her write it. I now know that number was on the back. I just didn’t register it when I was in the polling booth and folded the paper.
I don’t even remember seeing the numbers on the back during the count at Kelso. I was too busy looking at the front of the things. All the video footage of the counts shows the numbers were there.
People, including me, were simply mistaken. It seems to be a common mistake, by people who were focussed on the front of the papers, not registering the printing on the back.
I suppose the thing to ask people who think the back of their ballot paper was blank is this. Do you remember the polling clerk writing down your voter’s number and the number of the voting paper you were issued? They always do that, and I think many people will remember it being done.
So, where did the polling clerk get the number of the paper to write it down? The answer is, from the back of the ballot paper, which is where it was printed. Everybody’s ballot paper number was recorded when the paper was issued, and this could not have been done if there was no number on the paper.
Stuart: We NEVER led in a full-sample poll beyond the margin of error. The result was disappointing, but it rings true.
I entirely agree with that summation, irregularities and all.
Aware of the allegiencies of settlers and colonialists, of the Scottish ‘cringe,’ (wur no tha’ gid) of the power of the fear campaign, not a soul in my family believed we would win our nation back again, though each and every person voted Yes.
Buoyed by the freak poll in the lasy days I placed a bet in Hills on Yes, wondering as I waited at the counter if No was historically, and by empirical evidence, the safer bet. Loyalty to nation got the better of experience.
If Nigel Farage got elected as prime minister of the UK tomorrow, appear at the door of Number 10 wearing a black shirt uniform and a peaked cap with a swastika on it, and give a Nazi salute to the assembled hacks and cameras, I am not even sure those who voted No would be so reviled by the sight they would demand self-governance immediately. And, believe me, I am not a person who is either defeatist or fatalistic.
To be candid, I think a good portion of Scots as well as non-Scots would welcome the advent of ‘greater authority’ over immigrants and welfare spongers.
Amen.
Naivety unbounded
To be candid, I think a good portion of Scots as well as non-Scots would welcome …
That would be better prefixed with: “I have an ‘orrible feeling a good proportion of…”
Nobody for one moment has suggested any of the thousands of counters across the country, most of them council workers, would have had anything to do with interfering with the result.
That would be unreliable, unworkable and frankly bizarre.
Any rig would have to have been done on a much larger scale, much sooner by an agency or persons in the employ of the UK state.
The fact that John McTernon and Ruth Davidson have both disclosed that the NO vote was hugely in front at a point when that could only have been deducted by illegal means or by knowledge of some manipulation indicates that the confidence many here feel in the result is seriously naive.
I am hearing of an English ex cabinet member in a Labour government who suspects the result was rigged. More anon perhaps if I am at liberty to say more
@Kenny
Love the idea of contacting the companies that use the “Retard”, if someone could compile a list I would be more than willing to give it a go. GREAT IDEA!!
“@SquareHaggis says:
19 October, 2014 at 7:42 pm
Before any further voting takes place in Scotland I’d like to see the voting system shored up”
Well said!!!…No more dodgy votes.
The postal voting system was easy to rig. The result will always be open to doubt because of that.
If it was rigged, it wasn’t done at the actual count.
Postal votes must be banned in future.
Has even one person still asserting that the postal vote was rigged “on a massive scale” even looked at the Lawyers for Yes article which explains how this didn’t actually happen?
Ok Morag, postal votes can’t be rigged.
Will McEwan: Niavety unbounded.
Ambiguity unrestrained.
could someone answer the question of brian s at 9.15pm
as i am interested as well
Brian: Will the under 18s be allowed to vote in the GE or SE?
Sadly not, Brian.
The Referendum was a one-off instance.
Damn it, a four year old has an opinion these days. So, I hope legislation will be brought in to allow youth to participate. And I hope they agitate for it, Brian.
Hint, hint.
I didn’t say that. I said that this one was in practical terms impossible to rig in a systematic manner on the scale required to alter the result, without leaving evidence to show that had happened.
I also pointed to a good article explaining the clear evidence that it didn’t happen. Do you understand? The evidence that exists after the event shows it didn’t happen. Not what was or wasn’t possible.
@ Morag
When my wife and I were asked by our local SNP to go as observers in the local elections even then we saw that the system was easy to beat. All you need are two ballot boxes one for the real votes the other for the forged votes. The counters were at their tables and they brought in the boxes from the polling stations and began the count. No one seemed to see that the boxes could easily have been changed during the transfer from the polling stations. No one was with the ballot boxes all the way from the outlying districts. No need to fix the postal ballot if you just control the whole procedure. Sorry I don’t want to believe it either BUT…they did have a lot to lose.
And how many people would have had to be complicit in this exercise? Many thousands. And nobody said anything? Not even the Yes voters among them?
And what about the ballot boxes that did have special care taken with them? Some of the polling agents were conscientious enough to follow the ballot boxes to the counts, and others put their own seal on the boxes in addition to the official seal, to be checked by their colleagues at the count.
None of these ballot boxes gave a result out of line with the rest of them, as far as I’m aware.
Morag
I for one am not for trying to tell you what to do, but I will now be ignoring all posts about vote rigging. That will be the best way in my view to put it to bed on these threads.
You can only say so much before it becomes very repetitive. I agree with you but will be keeping my own council from now on.
I know, I know. But the alternative is that the wild conspiracy allegations are allowed free rein with no contradiction or alternative point of view being offered.
I do worry about it. First that it encourages a belief that Yes really did win the popular vote, which could hinder addressing why we didn’t. And second, that it encourages a permanent sense of futility – after all, if we won and “they” falsified the vote, what’s the point in trying again because they’ll only do it again. After all, they’re all-powerful and capable of anything.
We were beaten by a ruthless, lying, shameless campaign with the entire might of both the British state and the mainstream media behind it. And even so we came damn close.
We need to look at what we can do to circumvent these power and media mind-games, and spread the vision out to more people next time. Continually obsessing about how to prevent small-scale postal vote fiddling isn’t the answer.
Morag,
“There is absolutely no evidence such a thing happened, and no conceivable way as far as I can see for it to have happened without leaving any evidence.”
The British establishment would certainly not leave any evidence.
However well educated you may be, I am certain that you don’t have even a fraction of the ability and deviousness required to “see” or understand how the black arts department of the British establishment works.
If people could “see” how they operate, they would have gone out of business a long time ago and Scotland would be flourishing as a Scandinavian type social democracy.
Just because we can’t “see” it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. All common sense suggests that they were well prepared to rig the vote if necessary.
And it did become necessary probably when the survey they hid from us showed that they were going to be defeated.
[…] A good start […]
You know, this is pointless. You don’t have a theory, or any evidence, you have an unfalsifiable belief.
I ask very specific questions.
Please give me a plausible method by which the vote could have been tampered with, in a systematic manner and on the required scale, in the light of everything we know about the conduct of the poll and the detailed results. I get nothing but “these people are all-powerful and can do whatever they like by some means too obscure for us mere mortals to comprehend.”
Please give me some actual evidence that gives rise to a serious suspicion of large-scale systematic tampering with the votes. I get nothing but the usual tales of petty fiddling on a penny-number scale, carried out by individuals, or else a repeat of the debunked contrived video “evidence” that doesn’t show any tampering at all.
Please point me to even one example of a voter who noticed that they’d been given a blank-backed ballot paper and challenged this before putting the paper in the ballot box. Apparently nothing of the sort happened.
Please explain to me the purpose of this remarkably complicated and risky scam to issue certain voters with blank-backed papers, that couldn’t be equally well accomplished using the normal papers. No answer.
It seems there’s no need to address any of these points, because everything can be dealt with by an assertion that the writer believes it “must” have happened. And that the state is some sort of cross between Ernst Blofeld and Derren Brown.
Well if that’s the position, I’m out. It’s one thing having a rational argument, but this isn’t rational, it’s blind unreasoning belief.
@Morag
Before you finish, read this and go to this website and tell me it wasn’t a test to see what the reaction was and to see if they could get away with it..
November 13 2009: Aftermath of the By-election – Claims of voting fraud – benefiting Willie Bain
a. The by-election, in Labour’s safest seat in Scotland, was caused by the resignation of the former Commons speaker, Michael Martin. In 2005, Labour candidate Michael Martin took the seat with 15,153 votes. This time the Labour candidate, Willie Bain, took the seat with 12,231 votes. The Scottish National Party came a poor second with 4120 votes. It is suspected that Labour Party’s Willie Bain may have benefited from vote fraud;
b. Police are investigating reports of voting fraud with multiple voting at polling stations. At the St Denis’s polling station, police were called in by staff after voters turned up to be told their vote has already been cast. “We have had three incidents at polling stations today where voters turned up and their name had already been crossed off,” said a council spokesman.
c. Glasgow City Council and The Scotsman claimed that over 6,000 people registered for postal votes in Glasgow North East, which is 10 percent of eligible voters. (Surely not that many people are bed ridden or in absentia, even in Glasgow North East?)
d. The Scottish National Party’s Alex Salmond, “told the Guardian that he had been very surprised at the large number of late postal vote applications submitted in this campaign. “Around 1,100 were made in the three days before applications closed.” “Equally chilling is the revelation that over 4000 extra voters have been added to the electoral register in the last month, accounting for 25% of those that voted.” – link to aangirfan.blogspot.co.uk
Oh look, some (rather speculative and circumstantial) evidence. Pointing to possible misconduct in a by-election five years ago.
I was asking for evidence from last month’s referendum, not something that happened five years ago in one particular seat.
And did anything come of that, anyway? If large numbers of names had been fraudulently added to the electoral register, which seems to be the inference we’re being asked to draw, that wouldn’t be particularly hard to prove. Actually, it sounds like the usual low-level penny-numbers fraud to me, and people exaggerating for effect.
@Morag
Only one thing left to say..WOW!!! I know Thomas was a doubter but this…WOW!!!
Ill just say one more thing search for, Market Garden, Arnheim and D-Day..I think the Government is VERY capable of organizing gigantic operations and keeping them secret.
Sorry I said it was the last time I would say anything.. SORRY.
You’re getting more and more desperate.
In wartime, a government which has the support of the vast majority of its population can accomplish some very large and very secret operations. Bletchley Park, for one.
In peacetime, in an open and free referendum, staffed by ordinary members of the public from both sides of the fence, not so much. Approximately half of the people handing out the ballot papers and sealing the boxes and driving them to the count, were Yes voters. How were thousands of these people persuaded to turn a blind eye to wholesale fraud, tell me that?