Cringe of the month
At the time we write this, the Herald’s inaccurate story about Faslane jobs remains uncorrected. But as we were scouring the page last night for any sign of the Herald’s “clarification” of its figures, we stumbled across a gem in the comments.
As long-term readers will probably be aware, Terry Kelly isn’t just some random comments-page troll. He is in fact an elected Labour councillor for the lucky people of Paisley North West, though such is the volume of his daily outpourings in various newspapers (he’s one of the few people the Herald appears to see fit to bless with automatic comment approval) that it’s a wonder he finds any time to represent them.
Terry’s we-wish-it-was-unique blend of arrogance, smugness and complete ignorance is pretty standard No-campaign troll fodder, but the example above is particularly fine.
Faced with a serious and polite question about poverty and war, Terry’s glib and flippant defence of the Union is that it will enable Scots to continue watching a few TV shows. Leaving aside the fact that even if you do it the unmerited courtesy of addressing it on its own terms the argument is moronic and factually wrong on all sorts of levels (Coronation Street is made by ITV, a commercial company who’d be unaffected by Scottish independence), it’s the last two examples that tell the story.
Because only within the UK, asserts Councillor Kelly, will the people of Scotland be graced with “real news” and English football. Hear that, Scottish viewers? Your news is not “real” and nor is your football. Only English news and football are “real”, and anything that happens in your silly wee parochial region is unworthy of attention.
In fairness, unlike so many of his “Better Together” brethren, Cllr Terry doesn’t regularly feel the need to insist that he’s a “proud Scot”. If you search his comical website you’ll find many proclamations of his pride in his Britishness, but none about being Scottish. The closest he ever comes is when in writing about a refugee family being made welcome in Motherwell he grudgingly notes (our emphasis) that “if you must have something that makes you proud of your country then you should start right here.”
Readers, if you feel that the only “real” news and sport comes from England, we urge you to join Terry Kelly’s side. You and he deserve each other. Mind you, we’re not so sure that the good people of England do.
Please don’t call Terry Kelly a troll. The Troll Defence League is threatening an action for defamation.
Having watched English football and BBC news in numerous countries across three different continents now, I am confused as to why Edinburgh would be the only place not broadcasting it?
I won’t be able to watch Coronation Street? I hadn’t thought of that – I think I’ll have to vote NO after all.
Not.
I was kinda hoping that under Independence we would lose all of the aforementioned.
Tell me I’m not wrong.
Terry Kelly is quite an astonishing person. I would see him as a possible replacement for Johann Lamont were she ever to stand down.
Here is his spin on the Matheson affair, from The Herald:
“Stand aside the Great Train Robbers, Peter Manuel and Butcher Cumberland. The snp have found a greater villain than all of you. These comments are very illuminating, describing them as completely over the top would not do them justice.
Sometimes it is not enough to try to explain what the snp/separatist/cybernats are like; you have to occasionally let the public see for themselves and every now and then they let the tartan veil slip and we get a look at the truth and it’s not a pretty sight. It’s a great pity Arthur Miller is dead, this could have been “The Crucible Mark 2” with Glasgow standing in for Salem and the snp for the witch hunters.
Sometimes we get a glimpse of what an snp dominated independent Scotland would be like and it is scary, backward and thoroughly nasty. Does anyone honestly want to give these people power and influence?”
I think that is a tad OTT. But who could every argue against his commitment? Every embarrasment can be turned to advantage.
Terry was taken to task a while ago. Frankly his unbending intellect shows no signs whatsoever of wavering. I think the Queen should give him an OBE.
Genuine question..
how does such a mentalist get elected? I assume its the red rosette on a monkey syndrome?
McHaggis,
We have got to assume so
😉
Oh no! What ever will I do withoot a regular diet of Corrie and MOTD??????
The horror! 😮
The NO camp have based their whole campaign on hate and lies and they cannot escape from the consequences of it now for the overwhelming evidence is out here on the web for the whole world to see.
Nothing they can do now will repair the damage they have self-inflicted on the NO campaign.
“Sometimes we get a glimpse of what an snp dominated independent Scotland would be like and it is scary, backward and thoroughly nasty. Does anyone honestly want to give these people power and influence?”
Have I been missing something for the past 5 years?
As an ex Labour voter (Switched to voting SNP at the 2011 SGE) I have been living in this “scary, backward” country and found it to be a much better place than it was under Labour’s tenure and a damn site better than it was before the parliament was reinstated in 97.
These types of comments from the Labour party allied to their shift (lunge would be more appropriate) to the right are entirely symptomatic of the reason I stopped voting for them.
The shamefull acts of Labour during the section 30 debate this week was further reinforcement of just how far from the people of Scotland they really are.
A yes vote in 2014 is a no brainer now.
Its not so much the cringe here that angers me. Its the contempt for the opinion of the poster. His wavey handed disregard and his “let them eat cake” response by citing TV shows. This was his moment to make a case for Union and all he had was – a list of light entertainment shows.
The more I see this sort of thing, the more confident I get that we will wipe the smile of that smug unionists face. My response to him then will be to watch some TV, its all he’s good for.
Ummm….he is beyond words.
A bit OT and most of you have probably seen it before but check out the video below. A masterclass in debate from Duncan Hamilton puring cold water on a feeble attempt from the no camp to make a positive case for the union.
Youtube vid
Let him rant on, inconsequential meaningless dribbling like that only shows him up as an example of why we need a Yes vote. I’m sure many read this crap and wonder why we’ve put up with it for so long.
I think the ‘real news’ in 2014 will be a shock for him.
I would like to say the man is a neep, but that would be an embarrassment to neeps.
“Terry Kelly” another good reason to vote YES.
Alba Gu snooker loopy!
Actually I wish Terry Kelly could get as much publicity as possible. This guy could drive swathes and swathes of people to the Yes camp with his unrelenting idiocy.
James Morton,
Terry Kelly is a man of the people. And has read a book called ‘The Crucible’. Which makes him an intellectual giant amongst us pygmies. There is another way of reading Arthur Millers text. It is this.
I seem to recall that the nearest that Scotland ever got to the Salem Witch trials was the utter nonsense of the Orkney Child abuse cases, which did involve Satanic practices as part of it’s prosecution. That damaged lives and communities. It is what you get when fools are allowed to lead us up a garden path. The judges conclusion was this, from Wiki:
“The case came to court in April, and after a single day the presiding judge, Sheriff David Kelbie, dismissed the case as fatally flawed and the children were allowed to return home. The judge criticized the social workers involved, saying that their handling of the case had been “fundamentally flawed” and he found in summary that “these proceedings are so fatally flawed as to be incompetent” and that the children concerned had been separated and subjected to repeated cross-examinations almost as if the aim was to force confessions rather than to assist in therapy. Where two children made similar statements about abuse this appeared to be the result of “repeated coaching”.[3] He added that in his view “There is no lawful authority for that whatsoever”. Sheriff Kelbie also said that he was unclear what the supposed evidence provided by the social services proved.”
See? Anyone can play the new game of ‘Witch Trials’.
All it takes is a vivid and warped imagination.
You should try exchanging emails with him!
Rev I saw that at the time and wondered – is Terry Kelly being sarcastic, and turning to the light of the YES?
But if you walk into a pub here on a Saturday or Sunday afternoon you’ll see them stowed out, the only days of the week, with all three screens on, possibly two different football matches, both of them English League. You’ll be buying your pint and from some part of the bar suddenly there’s a hugh shout. You turn around and see fists punching the air – because Spurs scored against Arsenal, or Aston Villa against Wolves.
This is in Scotland. I realised that Terry is being serious. and you have to ask: would there be the same crowd and enthusiasm if it was Quuen of the South v Partick (apart from Iain Davidson), or even Kilmarnock v Inverness Caley? Maybe.
Had a look at coonsillor Kelly’s website.
Avanti poplo?????? Forward the poplars?????????
Socialist credential FAIL
All in all a vile little site for a vile little man.
Is my comment really awaiting moderation or is this because I asked for a sort of duplicate post to be deleted?
You should try exchanging emails with him! As for the video above, fantastic talk by Duncan Hamilton, confident assured and with a bit of fire in his belly.
dadsarmy – would there be the same crowd for Stoke versus QPR? Ask yourself that.
Anyway, once we’re independent, maybe TV channels could start showing some more exciting foreign football. The EPL has become dull and predictable. The Bundesliga is where the cool kids hang out now. And I expect there are people in Austria bemoaning the number of people who go to pubs to watch German football and ignoring Austrian football!
Mmm, I guess Czech Republic will be sad if the rUK loses influence in the EU:
“EU summit: UK and Czechs refuse to join fiscal compact”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-16803157
Not that I’m saying Karel Schwarzenberg otherwise known as 007 in disguise, is self-interested …
OT
Here, at last, Nicola Sturgeon’s and Dennis Canavan’s speeches from Wednesday night. I understand an official video is forthcoming, but in the meantime those who are desperate can watch this. Dennis Canavan starts at about 15:30.
I managed to watch BBC news in France and Austria last year. My relatives in Donegal, Dublin and Cork do the same.
Is there any reason beyond Unionist trolling why I couldn’t do the same in Edinburgh?
Doug, you’re absolutely right – there would be the same crowd and interest for Barca v errrr, sorry I’m more of a rugby guy myself 🙂
dadsarmy,
I suspect that most of the people in the pub have a bet on the game, rather than be genuine fans of a particular team. Though, that said, I am now a huge fan of Swansea. Which reminds me that I have to now bet against the ‘Grand Old Lady’ to cover my winnings! What you are seeing is a meeting of Gamblers Anonymous with whisky.
Sometimes what you see is not what it appears to be!
Wow, I’ve followed the defence closely, being a main interest of mine, but saw this from a Herald poster (James Morrisey), and googled the link:
http://www.scottishtimes.com/scottish_independence_uk_defence_minister_outlines_scotland_share_of_military_assets
Now anytime anyone says “oh yes you’ll get a fishery protection vessel and a few Browning 303s, they can be corrected from their own mouths, with the increased proviso:
“However, these assets are based on figures from 2006 and do not take into account what Scotland’s share of large new expenditures such as the Trident missile system or the Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers.”
Astute is nuclear powered, so it’s unlikely we’d take one of them even without the SNP anti-nuclear stance (maintenance / training), so a cash equivalent or extra Typhoons / ships would be in order, and just buy 2 diesel electrics.
Of course if the SNP hadn’t lied initially about a separate Scotland continuing to receive the current BBC output post-separation these points would be moot.
Another SNP assertion turns out to be fantasy la la land nonsense…
Getting a wee bit embarrassing chaps, no?
Grahamski o great see’r of Falkirk, your post simply reinforces the cringeworthy attitude you hold as well as a complete lack of understanding of what this particular article is about.
please do try harder.
Mr McHaggis
I merely point out that a campaign predicated on false assertions will come unstuck as the lies are exposed.
Was Mike Russell just ignorant or was he lying when he claimed a separate Scotland would continue to receive the full output of the BBC post-separation?
The fact that his colleague, Pete Wishart MP, has since admitted that the only way Scottish people could continue receiving the full BBC output in the unlikely event of separation was by paying a provider like SKY or Virgin is neither here nor there…
Matt,
Thanks a lot for putting that up here.
Grahamski
Why would the BBC not be interested in selling their output to Scotland?
Blair Jenkins confirmed last night (to Douglas Fraser’s surprise) that we would continue to receive the output so maybe he is lying too.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-21088109
Maybe in a newly Independent Scotland you can stand as a Labour MSP in a Labour government and keep us all right.
Dear see’r,
ok, but the full BBC output WILL be available, glad we’ve cleared that up.
Now on to matters of substance. Just how do you regard cllr Kellys flippant, incorrect and cringeworthy response to a perfectly fair, valid and serious question?
Could there be method in Terry’s madness?
I do not wish to belittle anyone but it’s quite obvious that everyone who frequents this site is of decent intelligence and politicaly engaged.
The average punter on the street (I would describe my dad as such) doesn’t watch FMQ, read the herald or the scotsman and has a mere cursory glance at the Daily Record whilst he flicks through to the form guide. He most certainly has no access to the internet and has no wish to do so either.
Although he is now commited to voting yes his only real needs in life now are the cost of his half pint at the local boozer (he’s retired BTW) and whether or not he will still have Channel 4 racing after independence. He worked hard all his life and these are now his simple pleasures in life.
Losing channel 4 racing would be a devastating blow to him (and I really do mean that!).
I believe there are large swaithes of society just like my dad and these are the traditional Labour voters Terry Kelly relies on to return him to office. These members of society need to be shown the truth in as simple terms as possible.
My dad doesn’t understand budget deficits, has no idea what exactly the credit crunch was (other than “it was something to do with banks”) and wouldn’t know full fiscal autonomy if it jumped up and bit him on the erse!
Terry Kelly’s reply insults our intelligence but I can see how it would reassure my dad.
We have a bit of work to do folks in putting our message accross to a fair proportion of society in it’s simplest terms. Not everyone is engaged or informed and have grown up having it drummed into their heads that Scotland is too poor, too wee and too stupid to survive without England. If we can enlighten them then we’re home and dry.
My fathers conversion to voting Yes actually came from a conversation in the local boozer with some of the “young uns” who were still working in the Clydesdale steelworks. He was convinced in the simplest terms mentioned above.
Well, until I read TK’s name at the bottom, I was sure it was satire (the use of irony in pursuit of a point).
How does someone this many slices short of a loaf get people to vote for him? It must be that well-worn phenomenon of sections of the Scottish electorate voting for any dancing monkey the Labour Party offer as candidate.
Nice work if you can get it. Dancing monkeys everywhere take note.
An interesting BBC programme for a change. This morning’s GMS with Derek Bateman
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01prbls
go to 1m 35 seconds I think.
Grahamski
More fool me, but I just had a swatch at your blog.
Two things jump out at me;
1. None of the books on your bookshelves have titles.
2. Its a pile of shite.
Regards
Dave
Grahamski,
Is that your best shot? I do not believe that the BBC will give up on it’s license fee post independence. It would not be in it’s commercial interests to do so.
What pray tell, is your next negative comment going to be?
For you and yours assume apocalypse whenever we discuss independence.
It is frankly a stategy that doesn’t work, at least not around here, no more.
You, sir, are a script bot from a previous century.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0JvF9vpqx8
“The average punter on the street (I would describe my dad as such) doesn’t watch FMQ, read the herald or the scotsman and has a mere cursory glance at the Daily Record whilst he flicks through to the form guide. He most certainly has no access to the internet and has no wish to do so either.”
The quaint phrase now used to describe such people (because whichever side you’re on it doesn’t do you any favours if you just come out and say people who disagree with you are thick), is “low-information voter”.
@Marcia
Such an interesting piece from the Professor!
Did anyone hear the piece earlier in the programme? (39 minutes in )
It was to this effect:
Derek Bateman’s line was ‘where has the Yes Scotland campaign been as the language turned sour?’ He was making the point that the Yes camp were not refuting the remarks coming out from Better Together citing Anas Sarwar’s slight this week to the whole of the Scottish Parliament and Alasdair Darling’s derogatory remarks re the head of the Civil Service in Scotland. He said the silence from the Yes camp on points that they could refute was surprising because it looked like they had nothing to say. He said ‘if you’re under attack do you not need to respond at some stage?’
He wondered if it was just a media perception that unlike BT, who started their campaign later and ‘were running away with it’ , the ‘Yes’ seemed not to be dynamic enough (my words) He said ‘ I am not getting emails on an hourly basis as I do from political parties’. Denis talked about the huge success of Yes Glasgow mentioned an office in Glasgow that was churning out press releases and asked ‘where was the BBC?’ …..There was a lot more. Derek Bateman together with Angus MacLeod of The Times were saying that the ‘positive’, ‘fluffy’ broad brush messages which mark out ‘Yes’ wasn’t cutting it -and they had the more difficult task (cited polls for Yes not increasing and still 20 points difference). consensus seemed to be that the Yes campaign would need to become what they called ‘political’ very soon because that was what it was about and their task was going to be much more difficult than the No camp.
“Of course if the SNP hadn’t lied initially about a separate Scotland continuing to receive the current BBC output post-separation these points would be moot. Another SNP assertion turns out to be fantasy la la land nonsense…”
I’m unaware of that having been demonstrated, old fruit. Can you point me to the announcement by the BBC that it would be withholding or blocking broadcasts to an independent Scotland? Because, much as I hate to point out the obvious, if you can’t then your view is nothing more than an “assertion” either, no more or less true than the SNP’s, which means that if they’re “lying” so are you. And they at least have the benefit of precedent and common sense behind their opinion.
It is sort of interesting that the Unioniists are out in force. Bloody hell, we have even had a Scotsman unionist appearing here. I suspect that their own polls are none too sanguine about the outcome……
Rabb, I agree, we do have a long way to go, although momentum seems to be with us. I had a jaw dropping conversation the other day with a friend i hadnt seen in a couple of years. He was always a Labour / Socialist voter and former CND marcher. His comment re-independence “The country (UK) is in such a bad state that this is a ridiculous time to consider breaking away.” What!? How do you deal with that sort of thinking?
OT (as was my previous post). Just mulling something over and 2 + 2 equals 5.
To redevelop an existing faciltity there are perhaps 5 phases:
1). Feasibility study
2). Planning
3). Relocation of existing
4). Demolition
5). Rebuilding
Just recently we hear that Astute is moving to the Clyde, and that BaE are shutting down 1 out of three – probably Portsmouth. Perhaps we are seeing UK Gov plan B Trident plan in operation already …
What they can legally receive in Switzerland. BBC’s, ITV’s, C4’s, C5. Not just sticking up a dish. One of several examples across Europe.
http://www.upc-cablecom.ch/en/sender.htm?region_change=2&firstclick=true
A case of channels dealing with operators. Individual content can also be bought in, which is already done on indy UK channels and also throughout the world.
Rev Stu,
Hopefully, there will be no such creature as a ‘low information voter’. I hope and trust that we will make sure everyone knows the score. That is what the next year and three quarters are all about.
OT. On the subject of the date of the referendum, I think September would be best for weather reasons. I don’t know about anyone else, but later we have darkness creeping in and people are just, well, generally a bit less confident.
Just saying.
@Grahamski
“I merely point out that a campaign predicated on false assertions will come unstuck as the lies are exposed”.
Well quite. The very reason the Better Together campaign will fail.
Now, you were involved in Labour’s campaign for the 2011 election, were you not? I seem to recall you telling everyone about the remarkably positive response you were getting ‘on the doorsteps’.
You must have achieved the remarkable success you did by ensuring your campaign was veracious and watertight.
Rev Stu
Pete Wishart SNP MP has already contradicted Mike Russell’s misinformation regarding the BBC service (or more importantly lack thereof) in a separate Scotland.
Was Mr Wishart lying when he did so?
Anyhoo, this is just another example of the problems the YESnp folk get themselves into when trying to pass of wildly optimistic wishes as statements of fact.
yet again another self loathing scot
Rabb, I’ve heard similar a few times. “It’s too early”, “things aren’t great best to leave it a few years”, “see how things go and then we’ll do it”. All wanting Independence, intending right now to vote NO, but YES in a few years.
This is why I keep saying it’s not the undecided to target, it’s the NO voters, including strong NO voters, who have often thought things through and come to their own cautious conclusions.
Well, now’s their chance. There might not be another one in their lifetime. Grahamski would do well to think about this.
You carelessly forgot to include a link to evidence of this contradiction. Will you be rectifying your error of omission any time soon?
and Grahamski, the great see’r of Falkirk, typically avoids answering any direct questions put to him. Two so far.
1 – What does he think of Cllr Kelly’s shallow (at best) response to a concerned member of the public,
and
2 – point to the BBC announcement confirming they will block transmission to an independent scotland
Some things never change.
Happy though that the great see’r is on the opposing side of the referendum as this is demonstrably helpful to the ‘Yes’ cause.
Dadsarmy
Good comment, shifting the NO’s from their present position would be the best rather than just targetting those undecided. A lot of No’s are from the canvassing I have done over the years, No but………….
grahamski,
You use the word ‘lie’ too freely. I might think, though perish the thought, that you are sounding a tad desperate? Are you actually imagining that you will convert a single person here to your losing battle?
Best of luck with that.
Marcia, it’s kind of a sales thing really. Some are good at the hard sell, some are good in other ways. My preferred way is to let the product sell itself, and if I get comments that the product isn’t good enough – then improve the product.
This is something the YES campaign can do quite easily, but the NO campaign will have a very hard job to do. Their product is static, and probably declining, whereas ours has the potential to be a competitor-beating product, it just needs work.
“Pete Wishart SNP MP has already contradicted Mike Russell’s misinformation regarding the BBC service (or more importantly lack thereof) in a separate Scotland.”
1. Has he? Not for the first time, you appear to have forgotten to include a link.
2. Since when did you, Grahamski, unquestioningly believe what Pete Wishart said anyway? Can you give us a list of which SNP MPs you consider authoritative and definitively truthful sources, and which in your view are bare-faced Nat liars? It’d really speed things up in future.
here are the listings for RTE for next week, why aren’t the BBC refusing to give RTE programme but for some strange imagination would deny Scotland the same programmes? BT clutching at imaginary straws again.
http://www.rte.ie/ten/listings/
Christian Wright says:
Well, until I read TK’s name at the bottom, I was sure it was satire (the use of irony in pursuit of a point).
How does someone this many slices short of a loaf get people to vote for him? It must be that well-worn phenomenon of sections of the Scottish electorate voting for any dancing monkey the Labour Party offer as candidate.
Nice work if you can get it. Dancing monkeys everywhere take note.
Christian,
I appreciate where your coming from but please be carefull where you make these comments. My old man is someone you would regard as “voting for a dancing monkey”. This is a deeply offensive remark to make about his generation.
Please understand that there is a generation of voters who were “conditioned” to vote Labour as this was the only way to ensure Scotland was protected from Tory rule. It was a falicy but a falicy that was very expertly orchestrated by the Labour partyin Scotland none the less.
It is only now that the red veil has slipped and we can finaly see the light.
Like I said, I appreciate your view and totally understand it but we must engage with that generation and explain our position to them in layman’s terms. We can leave the berating and mud slinging to the No campaign.
I didn’t get my edit in time, I was going to add:
Basically you could compare YES with an angus steak burger made fresh with freshly cut trimmings and spices of your choice with sides, against a frozen Tesco burger in a cardboard box. LOL.
For less money, too.
Dadsarmy
You mean the real thing rather than horsemeat.
Chrsitian Wright / Rabb,
I have no sympathy whatsoever for anyone that voted that clown into a position of influence. It is to the point to try to make the ‘YES’ referendum something that even old stager Labour voters can feel comfortable with. We need to disconnect the vote for a Party, Terry Kelly, et al, from a vote for independence.
They are not the same thing.
Sorry, and off-topic, but absolutely fascinating analysis of indy Scotland position re EU membership, NATO, UN, and split of North Sea, by very eminent international lawyer Prof David Scheffer on BBC Scotland.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01prbls – starts at about 1hr 36m
Just VPN’ing to San Jose to watch BBC America brb.
Hi Grahamski
I think you need a hug.
Stuart Campbell says: “The quaint phrase now used to describe such people (because whichever side you’re on it doesn’t do you any favours if you just come out and say people who disagree with you are thick), is “low-information voter”.”
Worth explaining that “low-information voter” is not a euphemism for “thick as two short planks”. Rather it means what it appears to mean.
Those voters simply choose not to be well informed of the issues that are the focus of our interest. They many be well informed with respect to other issues that matter to them.
I have a son who is mentally disabled. His mother (my first wife) is very engaged and knowledgeable is all aspects of government policies and legal statutes that relate to his care and security.
She knows the innards of the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003 and its associated amendments, backward, sideways and forward. She corresponds with local government and national government personnel and departments on a weekly basis. She knows her MP, MSP, and MEP, and is, properly, to them, a real pain in the arse.
However, she is not engaged in the current campaign for independence. She does not watch FMQ, unless I draw her attention to some question or answer that is of interest to her.
When talking about the goings on in Parliament, I mentioned the Labour leader of whom she had never heard nor recognized until I said, “You know, Sadie McCludgey frae ra steamie”. She was then immediately able to put a name to the face (she thought her a “hard bitten bitch”). She is vaguely aware of the unfairness of the attacks on Salmond and the Scottish Government, and the bias in the media.
She had never heard of Willie Rennie (many may think that a blessing) nor of Ruth Davidson. Section 30? Forget about it. She of course knows Salmond and other ministers, in particular Sturgeon in her (former) capacity as Minister of Health.
So here we have someone for whom the independence question has a low priority, and is for our purposes best categorized as a low-information voter.
I prefer to use another characterization that is less likely to be misinterpreted as pejorative, and that is: “Unengaged”. However, one can be unengaged and still be informed, so I guess we’re properly stuck with L.I.V.
Christian Wright
In all the decades of campaigning I have under my belt, one thing that comes to to fore during election campaigns is that not everyone is interested in politics. I suspect it is a minority who are really interested. When dooring knocking during election campaigns with the news dominated with election news for weeks I used to find people unaware there was an election on. Just because we may be interested in politics it doesn’t mean everyone else is.
“Worth explaining that “low-information voter” is not a euphemism for “thick as two short planks”.”
Indeed. It doesn’t mean low IQ per se, it means – crudely put – “person who votes without knowing what they’re actually voting for”. That COULD mean thick, but it also could simply mean “perfectly intelligent person who’s not interested in politics”. Which does raise the question of whether they should be voting, but it doesn’t mean they’re stupid.
Your ex missus actually sounds engaged compared to the folk that keep voting for our hero, Terry Kelly. It may be that her vote would swing on the basis of provision of ,say, respite care or summat. That does not make her a Low Information Voter. Indeed, my idea of a Low Information Voter is someone you haven’t talked to yet.
Get out there!
@grahamski
If you wish to stand by your statements you can post links to EVIDENCE, otherwise, given your track record in newspaper comment threads, we can dismiss it as zero-value crap as is your usual offering
and for anyone who doesn’t know, Grahamski is a dyed in the wool Labour and unionist activist.
most famous for a series (a plethora) of massively inaccurate predictions on the outcome of the 2011 elections, as well as several failed blogs. One blog to decry a referendum(b) ever actually taking place and was joined by 10 people including the sexual pervert smee… (has he been back here since being outed for his sexual preferences)
douglas clark says: “[A] Low Information Voter is someone you haven’t talked to yet.”
Ah, now that deserves a place along side, “It’s the economy, stupid”, in the annals of in-house campaign posters. Stick that up on the wall of the YES campaign headquarters.
douglas clark says:
Chrsitian Wright / Rabb,
I have no sympathy whatsoever for anyone that voted that clown into a position of influence. It is to the point to try to make the ‘YES’ referendum something that even old stager Labour voters can feel comfortable with. We need to disconnect the vote for a Party, Terry Kelly, et al, from a vote for independence.
They are not the same thing.
Douglas,
I’m not sure that the narative of my original post was presented correctly (I’m not a wordsmith by any stretch of the imagination).
The “conditioning” I referred to wasn’t entirely a political conditioning but a reinforcement that Scotland was a poor wee nation that needed to be protected from Tories. Labour was the only credible choice.
I would also like to question your comment that you have no sympathy for anyone who voted for Kelly.
I do have sympathy for these people because i’m sure if we looked at it we would see that the majority of people who voted for him were of said generation (the youngest amongst us don’t seem to bother their erses voting) who don’t have access to social media, lived in a world where there was no freedom of information act and where a man’s word was his honour.
That generation were also brainwashed into believing that Scotland imported more than it exported and would therefore be bankrupt without the union.
We both know that these assertions are entirely false but they are living life with what they have been brought up with.
I agree that there needs to be a concerted effort to remove party links from the referndum but we also need to show a level of compassion for those among us who didn’t have the benefit of social media and FOI.
Trust me, my old man won’t vote Labour again and is thoroughly disgusted at how his generation were misinformed.
Treating people with contempt for doing what they thought was best is not the way to bring them to the fold. They are a hardy bunch that won’t entertain young upstarts who seek to turn everything they believed to be true upside down.
Gently gently catchy (red rosette) monkey as they say 🙂
Marcia says: Just because we may be interested in politics it doesn’t mean everyone else is.
Words to live by, and easy to forget in the heat of a campaign.
“a Low Information Voter is someone you haven’t talked to yet”
Brilliantly put. That’s very much the philosophy of this site, and why we provide sources for our claims. If we can get the information to people in the next 18 months, we WILL win. Reaching them is the problem, not convincing them. That bit takes care of itself.
(It’s also, of course, why Terry, Grahamski et al are so desperate not to answer questions. They HAVE to keep the debate negative and abusive, because the facts destroy their position.)
What I’m trying to say Douglas is don’t pin your hopes on going round doors telling people it’s not a vote for the SNP or any other party.
They mostly believe we can’t do it because we’re too poor without the union.
Old Betty at number 34 might slam the door on you but Agnes at number 22 might be open to what you say and then persuade Betty at the pensioners club on Tuesday to change her mind.
Like I said, gently gently catchy monkey.
I honestly think some of those people who are ‘not interested in politics’ have been driven away by long term political and media corruption and negativity, not to mention the rightwards drift of Labour. I think if they really felt that their vote counted they’d pay more attention. Sometimes people reject something not because they aren’t interested, but because they are and feel demoralised about it or let down to the point of distancing themselves or turning away. They then pass this on to their children who might grow up more interested in celebrities, sport, TV, music, etc, than in the means to change society for the better.
As for the Labour councillor who made that comment, he was only voted in because it said Labour next to his name. Hence the appalling standard of Labour candidates not just in local government, but higher up. This will also be true for other parties, but I think it’s particularly true for Labour (and the Tories in a lot of English constituencies). The larger long term parties are particularly victim to this sort of complacency and rot. I don’t know about the LibDems, but it’s unlikely to be true for the SNP yet because they haven’t been this big for long, so a long term cross-generational voting pattern has not yet become entrenched. Give them long enough and it might well do.
I think it’s worth pointing out that whatever his views are on Independence, Terry Kelly could be a very good councillor, representing his ward and those who voted for him, just as well as another anti-independence Labour Councillor who posts occasionally in the Herald and elsewhere, who through my certain knowledge, represents his ward and area very well – I’ve voted for him, and would again.
Terry Kelly hasn’t posted here and isn’t here to defend himself …
Have the Yes side stolen a march on their opponents?
http://www.pressdisplay.com/pressdisplay/viewer.aspx
for readers of a nervous disposition it is an article by our friend Magnus but do read it, it doesn’t link directly to the Herald site but to a site hosting the full article.
Rabb,
Thanks for the reply. You write very eloquently indeed. Get that Scottish cringe off your shoulder right now 🙂
One of the definitions of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again despite it hurting you. It is for that reason that I despair of anyone that votes for Cllr Kelly. A wee anecdote, if I may?
When I was 16/17, something like that, I went to Paris and I thought it was quaint. Huge city, still living ten years in our past.
I went again a few years ago. It is actually like looking at the future we might have had, but don’t.
I don’t really know why that is, but the French seem, generally, to have an idea about themselves that is, at the very least, willing to embrace the future rather than rejecting it.
I watched some Tory on the telly the other day. The mere idea of having a written constitution seemed to be giving him apoplexy. What we really had to concentrate on was the next five minutes. Well, no, we don’t. That is what we elect these people to do. We can pause and reflect. The people, including those in Cllr Kelly’s constituency and the man your dad used to be, should lay out a vision and we should elect politicians that aim towards that.
Here is where the red mist comes down. People standing for public office that are negative should be given the bums rush by voters. I really do believe that the NO campaign consists of self serving arseholes who wouldn’t recognise a ‘Scottish’ interest if it bit them on the bum. They are too many to mention but a glance over the Westminster ‘debates’ over the last week are probably enough to be going on with.
We really, really, do not need anyone in elected office that doesn’t understand aspiration. The Labour Party itself would never have got off the ground had it been infested, and that is the right word, with the naysaying self serving bastards that are now pulling it into the gutter.
I bow to no-one in my respect for Cllr Kelly. Nothing will sway him from the path of socialism as delivered by the Labour Party. I look around modern Scotland and I remember Paris when I was seventeen and the Paris when I was sixty. It is as clear as night follows day that Paisley is a socialist heaven compared to that slum.
And he reflects in that glory with constant re-election. The people have spoken! The question is how have expectations been managed so, so low?
😉
dadsarmy,
Terry Kelly writes mince on the Herald. If challenged he runs away. I am sure I am not alone in thinking that you are defending the indefensible. Are you persuaded by the case he made ré Matheson? Would he have made it for anyone else?
Indeed he doesn’t want you near the levers of power, as can be seen from his diatribe.
“Sometimes we get a glimpse of what an snp dominated independent Scotland would be like and it is scary, backward and thoroughly nasty. Does anyone honestly want to give these people power and influence?”
Best of luck with that one, dadsarmy. He describes neither you, nor me, nor the good people that write and comment here. It is just pathetic bile. As grahamski appears desperate enough to comment here, I can assure you I would stand by my words if Cllr Kelly showed his face too. It is he that has something to be ashamed of, not me.
I am quite sure that the noble Cooncillor’s soubriquet on the old Herald, where he was routinely given a non-sexual dooin was “Baffled.”
Says it all really.
Douglas,
Thank you for your comments, you’re too kind 🙂
The Scottish cringe is a chip that fell off my shoulder a long time ago, however, I fear it’s embedded a lot deeper in my parents generation and will take some shifting.
I believe the timing of the referendum could prove to be a master stroke by Alax Salmond as it gives us enough time to slowly work away at loosening said chips from shoulders.
That said, I still think it needs to be done with a degree of humility.
I really need to go and speak to the guys in my old man’s local who convinced him to change his mind because god knows I have tried and failed on numerous attempts!
“Terry Kelly writes mince on the Herald. If challenged he runs away. I am sure I am not alone in thinking that you are defending the indefensible. Are you persuaded by the case he made ré Matheson? Would he have made it for anyone else?”
In fairness to DA, that wasn’t the point being made. The point was that he might be the biggest asshat in Renfrewshire when it comes to the constitution, but it didn’t necessarily mean he was useless when it came to getting potholes in your street fixed or whatever. As I noted in the article, the sheer amount of time he spends talking awful semi-literate bollocks on comment threads doesn’t seem to leave much for doing his job, but we don’t have the information to say that for sure.
I’ve read Terry’s comments in the Herald, and I almost replied complimenting him once on his perseverance in the face of, let’s say, very strong opposition.
He has his views. They are different from ours.
LOL, quite a lot different!
I see the hilarious village idiot from Falkirk has turned up here. Is it Eric Joyce?
When on a recent trip to my relatives in Dublin I was impressed when they said that they like the fact that they can view BBC for nothing, whilst we are expected to pay for it.
I was also able to watch BBC in Amsterdam last year. You just wonder why they would go to all the trouble to jam signals to a newly independent Scotland. I suppose that will be down to the same Westminster department that will be tasked with digging up rail tracks, motorways and cutting power line. Oh wait they import electricity from us 24/7. Oh well back to the rubber room for the village idiot.
@Marcia What’s the article title? There are lots of them.
Rev Stu,
Repectfully to both your good selves, you and dadsarmy, I am reminded of the quote from Oscar Wilde:
“We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.”
My point is merely that getting potholes fixed, if that is indeed the case, is a lesser attribute. It is his – wider – public persona that grates.
Again, it adds to my admiration for the man that he neither uses his honorific – Cllr – nor makes any claims whatsoever to having had any potholes filled in. That part of his curriculum vitae is completely lacking.
In any event, I would have thought that that is what we employ roadmen for. What, exactly, is the point of having a monkey when you can go directly to the organ grinder? It only makes the monkey think it has achieved something that would, otherwise, have happened in any case. This self serving entitlement culture, having your potholes filled in when there are far worse potholes elsewhere is nepotism by any other name.
Anyway, enough about management……
“That’s very much the philosophy of this site, and why we provide sources for our claims.”
.
Yes, citation is the signature value-added of this journal. The analyses are usually commendable, but it is the validating references to the empirical evidence that give them power.
” If we can get the information to people in the next 18 months, we WILL win. Reaching them is the problem, not convincing them. That bit takes care of itself.”
.
Indeed so, and while the other side continue own the megaphone, that is going to be a heavy lift.
With respect to reaching the Uninterested, convincing them, and motivating them sufficiently to get out and vote, we require a first class advertising operation bent on introducing simple accessible memes that will spread organically and selectively reshape the zeitgeist, such that “independence is good”, rather than “independence is bad” becomes the prevailing ethos. This ain’t rocket science.
Joe Kennedy in 1960 when considering his son’s presidential campaign understood this dynamic; “We’re going to sell Jack like soap flakes”, he said.
You will recall that Kennedy won. We need to sell independence in a similar fashion. It is not in the least alien to our culture – Tony Blair did it when selling NuLabour. Hell, MacMillan did it with the successful sell of “[You’ve] never had it so good”.
When that is in place, the ground operation, a well oiled machine that will by then have been running for two full years, will be able to get out the vote on the day.
Every voter will be known personally to a door-to-door activist, each activist facilitated by a ward supervisor, and each supervisor feeding real-time estimates of voting intention to local area campaign managers.
These data then flowing to campaign HQ. which should know with a high degree of confidence how each and every one of these lawful residents will vote on the day.
If this aspect of the campaign has been competently managed, the result of the plebiscite should come as a surprise to none.
Mmm, just finished the BBC Radio Prof David Scheffer interview, it’s great, except that he seems to be under the impression that London has the best of the oil with a straight median line cut of the oil. Puzzled he got that wrong.
But as an ex-advisor to Madeleine Albright, United States Secretary of State to Bill Clinton, who sided with Obama, it’s possible he represents the interest and opinion of the USA. Which is great – it should mean straightforward recognition and acceptance by the USA, which practically obliges the rUK not to try to play hard-ball in negitations.
It’s a must listen, URL again, thanks very much Colin Dunn:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01prbls
Sheffer is looking to talk with Salmond, but hasn’t been invited yet. I think Salmond should welcome him to Bute House and give him the run of the place, to his home and have a specially labelled crate of “Independence Malt” to take home with him!
“I see the hilarious village idiot from Falkirk has turned up here. Is it Eric Joyce?”
I shall thank you not to refer to one of WingsLand’s valued contributors in such a way, Mr Broon.
http://wingsland.podgamer.com/scots-would-remain-eu-citizens/
Eric is a cut above the likes of Grahamski, whatever you think of his politics.
@ dadsarmy says:
>> the BBC Radio Prof David Scheffer interview, it’s great, except that he seems to be under the impression that London has the best of the oil with a straight median line cut of the oil.
In fairness he did say that London could argue that a median line was one potential way of dividing the North Sea, but that whatever London argues Scotland could take to the international courts – something Westminster would prefer to avoid. As with the EU, UN and NATO, his main point seemed to me to be that Scotland has a very strong hand on all of these issues.
http://www.gro-scotland.gov.uk/press/news2012/increase-in-scottish-electorate.html
“On December 1, 2011: 4.01 million people were registered to vote in the local government and Scottish Parliament elections – an increase of 23,250 (0.6 per cent) compared to December 1, 2010”
If say this reaches 4.1 million by Oct 2014, I want all 4.1 million voters to vote YES.
Darn it, the BBC Radio recording seems to have been over-written by football.
I’ve now managed to get three Yes inclined people onto the Electoral Register. It’s worth emailing such people this link and pointing out to them that if they do decide to vote it’s probably better to be on the register. Pointing out that they don’t have to make their details public has also helped persuade them.
Ah OK, sorry, deleted cache, used CCleaner and BBC Radio back again. At 1.36.
Rev Stu
Links as requested:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9149481/TV-viewers-in-separate-Scotland-to-pay-extra-for-BBC.html
From the SNP paper on broadcasting: ” Irish viewers can also, of course, access BBCchannels from the UK and a range of channels on other platforms, just as Scottish viewers in an independent Scotland would do.”
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2009/09/23125613/6
“Links as requested:”
Jolly good. Now, before we get down to analysing the content, if you could just clear up for us why it is you consider Pete Wishart a more authoritative source than other SNP MPs/MSPs?
I don’t think I’d bat an eye if the Beeb got shut down tomorrow, hardly ever watch it these days anyhoo. Pretty much spend most of my telly watching time on Sky channels. I mean dancing on ice, what’s it all mean!?!?!?! I’d probably be happy to pay up for anything with David Attenborough though. Oh wait now, his kit tends to wind up on Eden anyways.
But gotta say, nope wouldn’t miss it at all. Having said that the premise that some have voiced, such as Anas Sarwar, that Scotland would be a Beeb free zone. Laughable to say the least.
Rev Stu
Oh lordy.
So, Pete Wishart is talking rot?
@grahamski the great see’r of Falkirk…
I don’t see the issue here.
Officially, an independent Scotland could and would buy in services from the BBC.
At the same time, there are a multitude of different ways to get the BBC ‘unofficially’ as is the case in Ireland and other countries.
Your point is what exactly?
You’ve already admitted the full range of BBC programmes would be available to Scotland.
Kind of tied yourself in a cute wee knot really. Getting a wee bit embarrassing, no?
“So, Pete Wishart is talking rot?”
I didn’t say that. I asked why, when given two conflicting SNP views, you assumed him to be telling the truth and the other to be lying, given that 99 times out of 100 you’d dismiss anything Pete Wishart said as a lie.
These are the rules by which you insist on playing the game, dear. When you start giving straight direct answers, so will we.
“At the same time, there are a multitude of different ways to get the BBC ‘unofficially’ as is the case in Ireland and other countries.”
In fact it’s not “unofficial” in Ireland’s case.
Considering that Ferguslie has the unenviable record of being top of the charts for depravation and other negative social factors, you would think councillor Kelly would be far too busy and have little time to post his (mostly nonsensical) views on the Hearald website, never mind his blog. Regarding Ferguslie social problems, I wonder if he ever thinks that might be something to do with the union/labour dividend.
Just 2 points, I believe the ‘Royal ? Charter ‘ is up for review in 2016 , so no one may be getting the BBC as we know it .
The second point regarding Grahamski .The Labour Council in Falkirk introduced and implemented charges for things like MEX alarms, used in the main by the most vulnerable people in our area ,despite sitting on reserves ,(I believe ,but correct me if I’m wrong ) of 22 million. So ‘veracious’ ? Labour get the vote out in Falkirk -end of
I wish both campaigns would stop assuming that the BBC will become English post independence. Scottish tax payers have a 9.x% stake in this organisation, it’s assets, the goodwill accrued by the brand and all of its copyrighted content. In finance, any entity with more than a 5% stake is a major shareholder. There is no way on earth that such a large ‘owner’ of the organisation can be evaporated. Why do the YES campaign even acknowledge that Scot’s won’t be able to receive content they part own.
We may choose to go our own way post independence but the core reason for independence is to be able to make that choice – the actual mechanics of independence should have no effect on which channels we receive. I would be very angry if YES campaigners dilute our negotiation position now before we’ve even got to the referendum.
Kelly is a typical Labour breed protected by the media and will be unemployable outside that political grade.
http://councillorterrykelly.blogspot.co.uk/2010/02/cynical-highlander-heilan-supergrass-1.html
Callum
If you listen to Blair Jenkins being interviewed by Douglas Fraser, he says that we own 10% of the BBC, including things like the iPlayer.
“The average punter on the street (I would describe my dad as such) … he has no access to the internet and has no wish to do so either.”
These are the people that onl
y doorstep campaigning or other face-to-face conversation is going to reach. But you make an interesting point, there will need to be printed handouts as well with clear information, no point saying ‘look it up on blah.com/thingumy-whatsit.html’
“A Low Information Voter is someone you haven’t talked to yet.”
Nice!
Ysabelle: The larger long term parties are particularly victim to this sort of complacency and rot… it’s unlikely to be true for the SNP yet because they haven’t been this big for long, so a long term cross-generational voting pattern has not yet become entrenched. Give them long enough and it might well do.
If the SNP becomes The Establishment, you can be sure the same corruption will happen like we used to see in Labour, where the Labour candidate was pretty much guaranteed a seat and the *real* election was behind closed doors within the Labour party to select the candidate. I don’t see that happening though because success for the SNP contains the seeds of the party’s own destruction – once independence is achieved, why bother voting SNP?
I see the hilarious village idiot from Falkirk has turned up here. Is it Eric Joyce?
Don’t think so, Eric Joyce has had an article published here and commented under his own name.
Late reading this but just had a quick look at Cooncilor Kelly’s blog. I was dismayed at the level of pure anti-Scottish bile in his rants. Too many contradictons in his rants to list here and his bio reveals little about this deeply flawed character. Does anyone know what he does or did for work? I seem to remember him stating in one of his Herald posts that he had worked in England and all over Scotland. He lists football as one of his interests so I am also curious to know if he supports his local team and same street address neighbour, St.Mirren. Being vehemently against nationalism, sectarianism and bigotry in any form he surely does not support one of Scotland’s two most (foreign) nationalist-sectarian-bigotted teams? Shurely not…