r/Scotland • u/Crow-Me-A-River open to change • 2d ago
Political Scottish Westminster Voting Intention
53
u/InternationalFig9358 2d ago
I wonder how much of an effect the dipshits in the GPEW are having on the Scottish Greensā support.
48
u/Flowa-Powa Highland 2d ago
The Mannivannan farce will have definitely lost them a substantial amount of votes
24
u/Kalspiewak 1d ago
Someone who has only spent 1850 days as a non citizen in a country, is not fit to make decisions for the future of that country
Also applying for the rector role at St Andrews, whilst serving as MP, is arrogance and greed at the highest order.Ā
But that makes me a transphobe or something. The greens and their members are fucking insaneĀ
7
u/Mossi95 1d ago
They are insane- any form of discussion on here gets you downvoted and comments hidden. Reddit is a terrible place for discussion on woke issues, comments are buried and ill-advised leading to no progress or understanding on either side
-7
u/Flowa-Powa Highland 1d ago edited 1d ago
A lot of people threw SGP a list vote because the planet is burning, or because of indy, without worrying too much on who the actual candidate is.
If SGP put that wee creep up who is it going to be next time?
1
u/BarrettRTS 1d ago
If SGP but that wee creep up who is it going to be next time?
What makes Q a "wee creep"?
1
u/Flowa-Powa Highland 1d ago
Stating that rape is "a spectrum", is that not creepy enough for you?
Also starting a gofundme to pay for his visa application when he's on an Ā£80k salary, what the actual fuck is that about?
2
u/QWERTYRedditter 1d ago
there's statutory rape, there's coercion, there's kissing without consent, there's gang rape, there's verbal harassment
rape in the "societal" sense (as opposed to the legal definition) can come in a lot of different ways, some deserve more punishment than others
i would encourage you to critically think about someone's statement before making a judgement
but honestly why i am even replying to you? using he instead of they proves bad faith in an argument, if you purposefully get that wrong, that's an attack on something that is completely irrelevant to this topic anyways
0
u/Flowa-Powa Highland 1d ago
Oh right, so you're trying to defend the rape spectrum comment. What an extremely odd thing to try and do
0
2
u/BarrettRTS 1d ago
Stating that rape is "a spectrum", is that not creepy enough for you?
No, because I actually understood the point that they were trying to make instead of ignoring the context of the quote. There is a perceived view from some that rape is just some thug waiting to drag a woman into a dark alley and not a wider myriad of issues regarding coercion or other things related to consent. Marital Rape for example wasn't formally considered a crime in the UK until 1991 partly because of this belief.
To this day, people still have fucked up views on consent and there are genuinely people who are like Dennis in the real world who think that it's all good, even when there's coercion involved. Some people wouldn't consider that at all when thinking about it. For example, there are genuinely bosses and landlords out there who think it's acceptable to coerce their employees and tenants into sleeping with them.
So yeah, it's "a spectrum" in a sense because there are multiple acts that constitute rape that a chunk of society wave off as woke nonsense. All of them are still rape and all of them should be treated as such. Q's exact words were "none of which is any less or worse" because their point was to demonise all forms of rape, not to make light of them. They even apologised for their choice of words too, so it's not like they had some dark intention behind it.
I've met many creepy people in my life. They're usually the people trying to defend why some things aren't as bad, not the person saying more things are bad.
Also starting a gofundme to pay for his visa application when he's on an Ā£80k salary,
So this shit (incorrect pronouns aside) I fully agree with is messed up. They're getting paid good money to be an SMP and they should use that to cover their own costs. Them applying for a rector role while also being an SMP is fucked too. They're representing a body of people in Holyrood, they shouldn't have to represent another body of people for a different institution for money.
There are many negative words I'd use to describe them for this, "creep" is not one of them.
1
2
u/KerrJardine72_ 1d ago
Not necessarily: theyāre a list candidate, Iād wager most people voting on the list ballot donāt have the candidates but rather the party in mind.
0
u/Flowa-Powa Highland 1d ago edited 1d ago
Not if they think they might get some wee weirdo who considers rape is "a spectrum"
18
u/Deadend_Friend Cockney in Glasgow - Trade Unionist 2d ago
It's the risk they took when they started to cosy up to them since Zack became leader
17
u/twistedLucidity Better Apart 2d ago
Lots of people also won't understand that they're an actual party, they'll think it's like "Scottish" Labour or "Scottish" Tories; a branding exercise for a UK party.
4
6
16
14
u/FOARP 1d ago
This sub every single day: āhere are some polls that confirm my priorsā
I mean the worst for this are the Indy polls which only ever are selected to align with the favoured position of the poster. But WM polling at this stage, with no election coming up, is pretty pointless as well.
10
u/Crow-Me-A-River open to change 2d ago
Also a Holyrood VI:
Holyrood Voting Intention:
Constituency: SNP: 36% (-2) LAB: 21% (+2) RFM: 15% (-1) CON: 12% (=) LDM: 10% (-1) GRN: 3% (=)
Regional: SNP: 30% (+3) LAB: 20% (+4) RFM: 17% (=) CON: 13% (-1) LDM: 10% (+1) GRN: 7% (-7)
Via @Moreincommon_, 9-13 Oct. Changes w/ 2026 Election.
9
u/SeanTNL2 2d ago
Bit of a disaster for the greens, the momentum Burnham is having considering Scottish Labour is doing nothing and Westminster Greens are awol currently too. Lot of pushing on the bus fares and data centre pause and none of the credit for it.
9
u/ancientestKnollys 2d ago
The English/Welsh Greens have been having a hard time recently, and I wouldn't be that surprised if some voters are punishing the Scottish Greens for that as well (I'm not convinced all voters realise they're a separate party).
2
u/PCBuilderCat 1d ago
This is how Iāve learned theyāre separate parties and I consider myself to be fairly switched on when it comes to politics so yeah think youāre spot onĀ
3
u/whackabunny 2d ago edited 2d ago
I think them splitting from the rest of the green party but keeping an almost identical name was a bit of a fumble.
Even though they are entirely separate people will forgot this and judge one based on the actions of the other over and over.
2
0
u/yugedowner 2d ago
Sounds like "Zionism is racism" is working well for them
6
u/SCO_Bub 2d ago
Different party.
1
u/SeanTNL2 1d ago
Which is exactly the issue tbh. If they changed their name to something else, not only would they not suffer the mistakes of their English counterparts, but they might even start to convince the working class Louden Tavern go-er. š
1
u/Connell95 1d ago
I thought Ross Greer confirmed he completely agreed with the motion? So whether its technically a different party with the same name doesnāt greatly matter.
2
u/SCO_Bub 1d ago
He agreed with it in a personal capacity but I don't believe it's the party line or policy. Members would have to have a vote on that I imagine, but I'm no expert on their party setup as I'm not a Green voter.
4
u/Connell95 1d ago
When you are party leader, people are going to take it as the party position and respond accordingly.
0
u/yugedowner 1d ago
Kind of? If we want to argue that their policies are different sure, they have policies specific to Scottish issues. But they certainly massively influence if not mirror each other.
43
u/rk1993 2d ago
Reform + tories having 34 MSPās is honestly an insane & depressing thought
19
3
0
u/lifeisaman 2d ago
I can believe it, the tories have always been strong in certain areas of Scotland and reform appeal to the same sort of anti-establishment voter that the SNP appeal to which is especially relevant given all the issues that have happened in the past decade.
2
u/Alteisenrise 2d ago
Good take, some of the crossover will be (naively) based on economics too. Reform want(emphasis) to be seen as a working class, socially conservative anti-establishment party, that would appeal to some SNP voters.
We may know that Farage, Tice etc all are just reheated thatcherites out to fill their own pockets and strip what's left of the public sector but they have tried to pretend to be interested in the working class, posing for photos in steel mills pre-nationalisatiom, opposing the 2 child cap (before reversing that stance) but how much that's cut through to the public...
-2
u/motownclic 2d ago
No. Reform appeal to thick unionists and racists no one else
4
u/PhotonToasty 1d ago
I vote SNP but this surface-level understanding of peoples views is just embarrassing
1
1
u/ancientestKnollys 2d ago
They're definitely getting some of the same supporters that the SNP got at their height in the 2010s and early 20s. Obviously their main base is more unionist and ideologically right wing, but plenty of other voters are more flexible.
0
1
2
-1
u/cmfarsight 2d ago
You could just look at the data and see that you're wrong but I guess you are too thick for that.Ā
-6
u/lifeisaman 2d ago
Their is defiantly going to be an overlap of decent size between people who just want āchangeā itās similar to how the some yanks went from Sanders to Trump, a significant portion of both these parties are built off putting themselves as outsiders.
-4
-1
0
1
-3
u/Best-Lobster-8127 2d ago
Yes very depressing. The parliament should be 100% SNP with no other parties getting a look in.
3
u/rk1993 2d ago
Conveniently leaving out that Iād be fine with Labour, Greens or Lib Demās getting more seats.
Nothing wrong with hoping the right wing ghouls get as little say in how our country is run when they all despise us and think weāre inferior to them
-1
u/CFDsForFun 1d ago
Youād be fine with more greens? God help us. I like the idea of more labour for less SNP.
-4
-9
u/fisico002 2d ago
Just like the continued presence of the incompetent SNP is for an awful lot of people
-1
u/makefascistfearagain 1d ago
They should have around 58 together, since they're as popular as the SNP.
2
u/Best-Reputation9719 1d ago
Well that's a lie š
0
u/makefascistfearagain 1d ago
Snp 30%
Rfm + con = 16+13= 29%
1% less. Error margin considered, that's the same popularity.
Do you often think super hard maths (like 10+3) are a lie?
2
u/Scrimge122 1d ago
Why are you combining cons and rfm together? They are different parties.
0
u/makefascistfearagain 1d ago
Because in a truly democratic system their would have the same combined representation as the SNP, and I'm sure the far right restore and Tories would team up on much
Instead the SNP gets far more influence.
1
1
u/Best-Reputation9719 1d ago
That's not how voting works in Scotland šš
If they were as popular they'd have way more seats, cope harder ššš
1
u/makefascistfearagain 1d ago
Sorry, I see my comment has gone above your heard.
When I said they should have as many seats, I was lamenting how undemocratic the system is that despite being equal in popularity to the SNP, reform and conservative voters would have much lower representation.
I was not suggesting that I had come from the planet mars and couldn't comprehend that they didn't just divvy up seats by % points.
2
u/Best-Reputation9719 1d ago
You do realise we used the English system the SNP would have around 100 seats with no other party getting close right? ššš
This system we have only hurts the SNP, every other party benefits from it ššš
Again cope harder ya wee minority ššš
0
u/makefascistfearagain 1d ago
I'm confused, who mentioned the English system? Which itself is hugely undemocratic and a farce?
Strawman bullshit.
1
u/Best-Reputation9719 1d ago
It was just an example of another system.
No matter what system we use the SNP will dominate as they should as the majority of people vote for them with no close competition.
You're digging a hole for yourself mate šš
→ More replies (0)-3
1
u/zellisgoatbond act yer age, not yer shoe size 2d ago
In terms of the parliamentary arithmetic this would be the first really significant change since 2016. Since then the SNP have always been able to work with any party to get legislation passed. If they can't do that, things start to get quite a bit trickier, and the Lib Dems in particular gain a lot more leverage.
1
-5
u/quartersessions 2d ago
Nice little pro-union majority there.
Quite different from 2007-11, I suspect. Back then, the pro-union parties indulged a new SNP administration. If that happened now, they'll be doing everything within the Parliament's power to undermine it.
1
u/ElectronicBruce 1d ago
Itās pretty weak seeing how long the incumbents have been in power. Also it seems the Pro-Indy sentiment is the majority one now going by polls, so not really you can say āa pro-Indy majorityā when polling itself doesnāt support it. Plenty of pro-Indy folk in Labour and Lib Demās.
0
u/Thurpno 2d ago
Its a pretty meaningless one. Conservatives and labour will never work together on anything and reform will never show up. So SNP will still form the government only having to make small concessions to a fractured opposition.
2
4
-9
u/lifeisaman 2d ago
If this was the result of an election I imagine they SNP would end up making some kind of deal with the Lib Demās to create a government.
6
u/dnemonicterrier 2d ago
I can't see a unionist party like the Liberal Democrats going into partnership with the SNP in Holyrood that would be political suicide for them, you can't claim to be for staying in the UK and then go into the partnership with a party that wants to have Scottish Independence.
4
u/ancientestKnollys 2d ago
You can if you use your leverage to block anything that advances independence.
0
u/lifeisaman 2d ago
It would be unlikely to be a true coalition but their is definitely some room for making agreements around non-Indy stuff with the Lib Demās and their probably the least hostile of the options the SNP would have and then isnāt going to be a grand unionist coalition.
1
u/dnemonicterrier 2d ago
The only way that there would be an agreement between the two is if the SNP put aside Independence for a term or if Liberal Democrats agreed to support an Independence Referendum, that would be their big ultimatum to one another and neither would agree, the last time Liberal Democrats offered to do a deal with SNP over a budget with SNP the first thing Liberal Democrats said was "put aside another referendum" and if I remember correctly no deal was done between them.
0
u/lifeisaman 2d ago
The SNP have gone into coalition with the tories in the past, it was hardly a deal breaker back then, if the SNP are forced into a position where they have to work with a unionist party to create a functional government they very well might need to look beyond Indy for once.
The only real option is the Lib Demās given I canāt imagine them working with the tories or reform and labour are very anti-SNP, that means the only workable option is to make a deal with the Lib Demās.
2
u/dnemonicterrier 2d ago
With The Tories it's always been on policy, we're talking about partnership for government here and it won't happen on that basis.
2
u/lifeisaman 2d ago
If nationalist canāt manage a majority of seats then they will have to negotiate to Frim a governing especially if they are still a plurality as in this case, they might just have to drop Indy for a term and focus on trying to make Scotland better rather than just pushing nationalism. Could do everyone some good to put that dead horse away for a few years.
3
u/dnemonicterrier 2d ago
Speaking of the majority, I'm pro Independence but that being the only time we can get another referendum isn't exactly a fair playing field, 2011 was a fluke, getting a majority in Holyrood is notoriously difficult to do, I highly doubt it could be done again by any party.
1
u/lifeisaman 2d ago
Letās start of with nationalists trying to actually get a majority of people to vote for them and then we can re-open this conversation if they ever manage that, not likely considering support for them is falling.
→ More replies (0)-1
1
2d ago
[deleted]
6
u/Alteisenrise 2d ago
Might be fairer to say a government isn't popular in power, which is pretty common in any parliament. Labour are only recovering nationally because they have a leader who shows some optimism (pre-budget at least)
5
u/d_devoy 2d ago
Not when you get proportional representation. When we have to vote in the broken first past the post system down south we have to vote tactically to try and keep out tories and reform. But I'm sure that's stupid because it disagrees with what you think.
-8
2d ago
[deleted]
2
u/PhotonToasty 1d ago
And Independence parties got more in 2021, yet this meant nothing.
Yoons are the best at moving goalposts
5
u/d_devoy 2d ago
Which point do you want. I can accept democratic votes, democracy is not static you get to vote again when things change. Obviously. I want to see the argument again and I think indy is the right choice regardless of who'd voting for who because I don't think it's a great metric for understanding the question. Least democratic?! The ONLY reason I'm pro indy is that we have a proportional system up here, fptp is barely democracy. Anyway have a good life buddy.
1
u/Kane_richards 10h ago
What I find funny about this is that it feels a bit like Labour are getting a boost simply by keeping the heid down and having the other parties just throw shit at themselves. If you can't be good, just be less shit than your rivals.
2
-25
u/Otherwise_Fan_4864 2d ago
30% for the SNP is outrageous. Even half of that would be too much.
One can clearly fool some of the people all the time.
25
u/ASlimeAppeared 2d ago
There's nobody else for moderate pro-independence people to vote for in Scotland. Its not about people being fooled, its about them constantly being the least-worst option.
7
u/Ziazan 2d ago
Yep, nobody else is really campaigning for an independent Scotland. If you want to see an independent Scotland, who else are you supposed to vote for? Even if you disagree with some of their policies, it's a bit like, who else even remotely represents my views? Every other major party has said "nope." on that matter. The scotgreens have warmed to the idea with the rise of the right in England, but they're still relatively marginal, however they have overtaken the lib dems.
The remaining westminster parties are all utterly rubbish. Labour have been red tories for ages now, the tories have been tories forever, reform are all the worst parts of the tories amplified, the lib dems are orange tories and will never recover from 2010. It's tories all the way down.
At least Andy seems marginally better than the majority of his recent predecessors.
4
u/ancientestKnollys 2d ago
Everyone gets called a Tory. Besides the red and orange Tories, you have the Tartan Tories (SNP) and Tories on bikes (Greens).
4
3
11
6
u/Bobanders93 2d ago
It's the independence vote.Ā Some people will always vote for them for that reason aloneĀ
14
5
u/PoachTWC 2d ago edited 2d ago
To be fair if your main political interest is advancing Scottish independence (and research has shown that the Scottish electorate are now primarily divided first and foremost by their opinion on independence) your options are the SNP or the Greens, which for most people means the SNP is the only viable choice. If you're anything other than seriously socially left wing, the only choice is SNP.
This is why despite only really being able to attract around 40% of the vote, the SNP always get almost all of it and the Greens get single figures, leaving the SNP as the largest single party of them all.
In comparison, on the other side of the constitutional question you have choices across the political spectrum. The only thing Unionist parties don't clearly cater to is very socially left wing people.
This is why Unionist parties struggle to get as large as the SNP: they're competing for a far more fractured electorate. Where the SNP can be assured of almost all pro-Indy voters, no Unionist party can assure themselves of almost all Unionist voters.
-10
u/Otherwise_Fan_4864 2d ago
In terms of Scotland and England, there are no "unionist" parties in Scotland. This is a category invented by the empty-headed Nats.
12
u/PoachTWC 2d ago
It's commonly accepted that the political parties opposed to Scottish Independence can be termed as Unionist, due to holding that position on the constitutional question.
It's entered mainstream political understanding.
-8
u/Otherwise_Fan_4864 2d ago
Absolutely not. "The Union" was a one-off in 1707 that created the Kingdom of Great Britain in perpetuity.
The beef is about separatists and normal people who oppose Britain being partitioned.
Nationalism vs Unionism is a direct import from NI, where those designations make sense.
8
u/Eky24 2d ago
Youāre welcome to your opinion, though it is certainly a minor one.
-1
u/Otherwise_Fan_4864 2d ago
What? That there are no unionist parties in Scotland is a matter of fact!
1
u/Careless_Departure10 1d ago
So supporters of the one-off Act of Union in 1800 can be called unionists, but supporters of the one-off Act of Union in 1707 can't?
1
-2
u/quartersessions 2d ago
Historically, of course, Unionist simply meant Tory.
Given the name dates back to opposition to home rule in Ireland - unionists and home rulers being seen as opposed camps - it's arguably a bit odd to apply the term to those who do support home rule, ie devolution, today.
2
u/Best-Reputation9719 1d ago
Bet you're a reform voter too š¤¢š¤¢š¤¢
1
u/Otherwise_Fan_4864 1d ago
Look at you with your childish wee emojis!
And no - I'm not a xenophobe. I leave that to Reform and Nationalist voters.
1
-11
u/Old-Ingenuity-4346 2d ago
Sadly, you can fool a statistically significant number of people any time you want. As Nigel Swinney and John Farage understand...
21
u/ASlimeAppeared 2d ago
Why do you both use the word "fool" as though people think theyre voting for something other than what theyre going to get with the SNP? People voting for them just don't see anyone else that they can vote for.
Out of curiosity, who should SNP voters being voting for to make Scotland better for as many people as possible?
-8
u/Old-Ingenuity-4346 2d ago
Farage and swinney are both appealing to the same thing... Nationalism. You could argue that one is civic and joyous and the other is bigoted... They are BOTH rooted deeply in the same Impulse. Lines drawn on a map hundreds of years ago will "help" nobody.
12
u/ASlimeAppeared 2d ago
...okay? That answers neither of the questions that I asked you. I'll ask again:
Why do you use the word "fool" as though people are expecting something other than what they get?
Who should SNP voters in Scotland be voting for to make Scotland better for as many people as possible?
Fair enough you dont like nationalism in any of its forms, thats totally fair and legitimate. But at the end of the day, every party represented in Scotland is either Scottish Nationalist or British Nationalist, you simply cant vote for a non-nationalist party in Scotland
0
u/debauch3ry Cambridge, UK 1d ago
It is not fair to label either side as necessarily nationalist. Nationalism is just a potential motive. For the pro-unity parties, nationalism doesn't need to be the motive at all since they have the economic arguments.
-7
u/Old-Ingenuity-4346 2d ago
Your assumption is that all SNP voters are voting to make Scotland better for as many people as possible, which also implies that anybody who doesn't vote SNP is voting to make Scotland worse? Also, you are using the age old SNP trope that everything is nationalism. It's not.
5
u/ASlimeAppeared 2d ago
My first question doesn't imply that at all? Thats a complete false equivalence - I believe people are either voting to make the county better, or make things better for them and theirs generally, and we all have different opinions on how to best achieve that.
I also didn't say that everything is nationalism, but I am saying that every party in Scotland is either Scottish nationalist (SNP, Greens) or British nationalist (Labour, Tory, Lib Dem, ReForm/Store). They all either advocate for one or the other, theres no "middle way" party calling for i.e. further devolution or federalism whilst remaining part of the UK, you know?
1
-1
u/makefascistfearagain 1d ago
A super majority for independence! The will of the people will not be ignored!
-1
-1
u/Documental38 1d ago
I know they're not the Scottish Greens aren't the same party but the average voter doesn't, the Zionist resolution has utterly fucked them in the eyes of the general public
-4
-18
u/Scotsmanryno 2d ago
To get an accurate vote youād have to get every single Scottish persons vote, thatās why I find stuff like yougov polls a pile of sh
7
4
u/quartersessions 2d ago
Yeah, I mean, when's polling ever given anything approaching an accurate reflection of public opinion ahead of an election...
... Oh, regularly? Because that's what they literally exist to provide? Well, colour me shocked.
1
-5
u/rotgobbo Galloway 2d ago
Yeah to me YouGov and its ilk are nothing more than "this is how we'd like you to vote, actually"
-18
u/Eky24 2d ago
So can we look forward to the unionist parties having 67 seats and voting en bloc to defeat any progressive politics in Scotland?
8
u/ancientestKnollys 2d ago
Besides independence, there isn't any radical policy difference between the SNP and Labour and the Lib Dems. The right is way off a majority, so Scotland would stay on much the same centre left trajectory (it would just stall Scottish independence as a political force for a while).
2
u/rainmouse 2d ago edited 2d ago
Seems like some pretty fundamental differences to me.
- SNP: Renewable energy free from WestMinster control - Labour: nuclear based energy controlled by Westminster.
- SNP: Opposes Trident Renewal - Labour: Renew nukes.
- SNP: Price cap on essential foods - Labour: No price cap
- SNP: Rend controls - Labour: Opposes rent controls
-edit- removed benefit cap comment that was incorrect. My bad.
1
u/a_man_has_a_name 2d ago
Why are you just provebly lying.
Scottish labour supports the expansion of wind farms as it says on their website, and also using nuclear is a good idea to diversify the grid.
And labour already scrapped the two child benefit cap.
Also the other policies are short sighted.
Getting rid of our nuclear deterrent will do nothing other than make us more vulnerable.
And rent control and food price caps are both policies that a lot of economists agree are short sighted and don't really help the problem.
Rent control leads to people staying in their rentals longer because removing means paying more, it drives up the prices of uncontrolled rents because there is less on the market, and landlords neglect the properties more because they don't make as much money on them. It does nothing to solve the underlying issue causing high rent prices.
And essential food price have tempory relief but lead to supply chain squeeze as the costs are passed onto farmers and food producers who often work on tight margins already, and supermarkets end up raising the prices on items not capped to make up for the losses. It does nothing to solve the underlying economic issues, we tried it in the 70s and Hungary tried it recently and it didn't work in both cases.
Your post was clearly meant to be pro SNP, but you mixed it in with lies and made them look like short term thinkers saying whatever they can to appeal to votes, while not having a long term plan on how to solve any of the underlying issues causing the problems in the first place.
0
u/polaires 1d ago edited 1d ago
The irony but I bet you getting an award on that comment will reinforce that nonsense.
-2
u/Homebrand_Homie 2d ago
I didn't even know SNP were pushing for rent controls, makes Lib-Labour a bit more appealing tbh.
-1
160
u/backupJM public transport revolution needed ššš 2d ago
Its astounding how much of a negative impact Starmer had for someone so bland