tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22403989.post93116640543046986..comments2024-01-18T10:54:54.459+00:00Comments on Iain Macwhirter Now and Then: Even the SNP don't believe their polling numbers.iain macwhirterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14486911281896217461noreply@blogger.comBlogger25125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22403989.post-86470965024969873822011-05-09T17:48:32.241+01:002011-05-09T17:48:32.241+01:00Then why don't you answer my question and clea...Then why don't you answer my question and clear it up for me?RevStuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03915111503712807257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22403989.post-31645472485902918182011-05-07T23:09:50.287+01:002011-05-07T23:09:50.287+01:00"What I've said is that he/she clearly ap..."What I've said is that he/she clearly appears to believe *the Scottish public* is."<br /><br />And you'd be wrong AGAIN!Jo Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08536467440869239587noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22403989.post-68204544352581465592011-05-02T21:01:31.890+01:002011-05-02T21:01:31.890+01:00iain,
I am not so sure an independence referendum...iain,<br /><br />I am not so sure an independence referendum would be lost. <br /><br />I know all polls show a majority against it> But I this just shows that the majority is reasonably comfortable with the current settlement. And in the same way that the Scottish parliament polls shifted when voters started to give more thought to that election, I think we could well see polls on independence move – because voters might comfortable with the current settlement but when actually given the options and thinking about them, they might feel even more comfortable with independence.<br /><br />Also do not underestimate the capability of any NO campaign to make big mistakes (especially if it is Scottish Labour-led {and if it is Tory or Lib Dem-led, that would already be the big mistake already …}).<br /><br />For example, how would a NO campaign react to all those false / arrogant statement about Scotland that constantly appear in the UK media already? Oppose, ignore, agree – each of these options opens a can of worms / would be very difficult to explain.Christian Schmidtnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22403989.post-76351062085060109662011-04-27T09:12:52.821+01:002011-04-27T09:12:52.821+01:00"They quoted Gray in the same article express..."They quoted Gray in the same article expressing his agreement to the policy"<br /><br />Sigh. No they didn't. They quoted him as saying he "didn't object" to something, which is NOT the same as saying you support it. I don't object to Partick Thistle or St Mirren, but I don't support either of them. I don't object to the Green party, but I don't vote for them.<br /><br />But once again: if the headline HAD been "Gray Backs Gay Marriage", would that then be a pro-SNP story? By your logic it would. But why?RevStuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03915111503712807257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22403989.post-65194090292551522232011-04-27T09:07:34.746+01:002011-04-27T09:07:34.746+01:00"You can't retract what you've typed...."You can't retract what you've typed."<br /><br />I'm not retracting a single word.<br /><br />"Your posts queried Jo G's motivation"<br /><br />They did absolutely no such thing. Quote me any part that queried her motivation. What Jo said was:<br /><br />"the Sunday Herald is trying to help [Labour] out with banner headlines today declaring "SALMOND BACKS GAY MARRIAGE" <br /><br />Either of you - explain to me why the Herald publicising that story would help Labour out UNLESS you believed backing gay rights was a vote-loser for the SNP.<br /><br />If you don't believe the Scottish public are homophobic, that story can't possibly be any help to Labour. Therefore, if you say the Herald covering it DOES help Labour, you're saying that you believe the Scottish public is homophobic.<br /><br />I have not said ONE WORD to the effect that I think Jo G is homophobic, because I have no reason to believe that he/she is. What I've said is that he/she clearly appears to believe *the Scottish public* is. There is no other explanation for believing that the Herald running that story is an attempt at helping Labour.RevStuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03915111503712807257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22403989.post-76789096310858610342011-04-26T21:41:46.873+01:002011-04-26T21:41:46.873+01:00Thank you Vronsky. I don't think it is a vot...Thank you Vronsky. I don't think it is a vote loser either nor did I personally imply that it was. What I objected to was the Herald using it in the way it did. The Herald clearly intended to suggest otherwise. <br /><br />They quoted Gray in the same article expressing his agreement to the policy yet his name wasn't in the huge headline, nor was it seen as a "risk" for him as it was for Salmond. <br /><br />In any case (although this was not a direct quote) the Herald also said <br /><br />"The First Minister told the Sunday Herald he was in favour of same-sex couples being allowed to wed in church, but opposed denominations being forced to allow such ceremonies."<br /><br />That quote suggests to me that Salmond did not wish to "alienate" anyone by saying he opposed anyone being forced to allow such ceremonies. <br /><br />In short, much ado about nothing. But structured to create an impression which simply wasn't there.Jo Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08536467440869239587noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22403989.post-76213828486303556792011-04-26T21:38:46.309+01:002011-04-26T21:38:46.309+01:00Revstu: You can't retract what you've type...Revstu: You can't retract what you've typed. Your posts queried Jo G's motivation for the mention of the gay marriage story, which was answered but you still chose to query it despite it being answered in full.<br /><br />You have lost the debate- deal with it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22403989.post-50342715077218554392011-04-26T19:05:36.587+01:002011-04-26T19:05:36.587+01:00"The Herald, even in the headline, implied Sa..."The Herald, even in the headline, implied Salmond alone was risking alienating some voters by expressing a view."<br /><br />They didn't IMPLY that he risked alienating some voters, they just plain came out and said it.<br /><br />"Why did they not state in the headline that Salmond AND Gray were in agreement on the issue? "<br /><br />Because they're not. Gray's position is a weak non-committal mealy-mouthed fudge, which the Herald rightly drew attention to. He's taking that position precisely because - unlike Salmond - he IS afraid of alienating bigots.<br /><br />And I'm afraid that by suggesting that the Herald was attempting to score Labour some points in publishing the feature, you absolutely DID imply that it was a vote-loser. By definition. I haven't accused YOU of being homophobic in the slightest.RevStuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03915111503712807257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22403989.post-91092081220176216562011-04-26T09:24:00.557+01:002011-04-26T09:24:00.557+01:00Re that Herald headline, I'm a bit between the...Re that Herald headline, I'm a bit between the Rev and Jo G. I don't think the SNP policy is a vote loser but it looked to me as if the Herald rather hoped that it was, hence the big bold headline. Recall that the Herald has always seen itself as serving a very conservative community (I was around when they supported the Tories). I think they calculated that their headline might frighten a few horses.<br /><br />However they'll be back to sectarianism soon (not much else left) and when they do that we can all agree on their motives.Vronskyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17797785918817375436noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22403989.post-54793474102403523082011-04-26T00:43:17.889+01:002011-04-26T00:43:17.889+01:00RevStu
You said,"I don't think the Scott...RevStu<br /><br />You said,"I don't think the Scottish people are as homophobic as you're implying."<br /><br />I have now shown you that I said no such thing. I also did NOT state, or imply, that it was a vote-loser. <br /><br />The Herald, even in the headline, implied Salmond alone was risking alienating some voters by expressing a view. They did not do the same to his Labour opposite number. Why did they not state in the headline that Salmond AND Gray were in agreement on the issue? Why did they make the big deal out of Salmond alone saying it?<br /><br />I would repeat, I did NOT state or imply that it was a vote-loser and I would warn you again against throwing around reckless allegations on a site like this particularly when you introduce the homophobia word into the debate.Jo Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08536467440869239587noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22403989.post-3906419101656577802011-04-25T16:31:02.970+01:002011-04-25T16:31:02.970+01:00Mr McWhirter you wrote:
"Scotland on Sunday s...Mr McWhirter you wrote:<br />"Scotland on Sunday seemed to be a little wary of its own poll and RATHER DOWNPLAYED THE STORY [my emphasis], confining it to a brief side bar on page one. "<br /><br />NO SoS gave the poll results quite a bit of coverage. I get Scotland on Sunday and not only was the story on Page 1 but there was a very FULL breakdown of the poll results on Page 13.<br /><br />Stop basing your articles on a cursory reading of the front page of newspapers on your trip to the supermarket.<br /><br />As to the 'little difference' in their policies that 'little difference only came about after Labour made a series of U-turns that make the circuit at Brand's Hatch look like a straight line between two points.<br /><br />There is also a whole world of difference in quality that Iain Gray et al will never bridge - even if they get PFI funding.CWHnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22403989.post-1552819377742740042011-04-25T16:03:35.414+01:002011-04-25T16:03:35.414+01:00The Herald further notes:
"A 2009 poll found...The Herald further notes:<br /><br />"A 2009 poll found around two-thirds of Scots were in favour of gay marriage.<br /><br />Tim Hopkins, director of the Equality Network, said: “We very much welcome Alex Salmond’s personal position on the issue. Whoever wins the election, we look forward to a consultation and then legislation.”<br /><br />Labour leader Iain Gray said he “didn’t object” to gay marriage, but would not go beyond that."<br /><br />That seems very much to me to suggest that the policy would be a vote winner, and that the Herald should be commended for publicising Salmond's position. (Speaking as someone who wants the SNP to win.)RevStuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03915111503712807257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22403989.post-17097195276887010032011-04-25T16:01:07.704+01:002011-04-25T16:01:07.704+01:00That's a perfectly true and legitimate thing f...That's a perfectly true and legitimate thing for the Herald to say - the policy DOES risk alienating some religious voters. Religious groups are enormously at the forefront of opposing gay rights - it was the sole subject of the Scottish Christian Party election broadcast I saw.<br /><br />You, however, stated that the Herald was saying that in order to try to help out Labour, which is a completely unsubstantiated suggestion and therefore IMPLIES - not states - that you believe the policy to be a net vote loser. If you don't, you'd be delighted at the Herald highlighting it regardless of any spin they might put on it.RevStuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03915111503712807257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22403989.post-20187986529129839762011-04-25T14:04:02.542+01:002011-04-25T14:04:02.542+01:00"ALEX Salmond has declared his personal suppo..."ALEX Salmond has declared his personal support for gay marriage for the first time, in a move which risks alienating religious voters ahead of the election."<br /><br />There you are Revstu. Straight from the Sunday Herald. Not my words.Jo Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08536467440869239587noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22403989.post-4718144737861470712011-04-25T14:00:32.862+01:002011-04-25T14:00:32.862+01:00Revstu, go carefully, I implied nothing of the sor...Revstu, go carefully, I implied nothing of the sort. Your question should be to the Herald Group. THEY are the ones implying it is a huge issue and a potential vote loser. They include also a quote from Gray in the same article stating that he does not object to gay marriages. So how come only Salmond got the headlines? <br /><br />Again tread warily before you throw the homophobic word around. Thank you.Jo Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08536467440869239587noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22403989.post-15788263759755357192011-04-25T09:37:12.430+01:002011-04-25T09:37:12.430+01:00I'm a bit concerned by your implication there ...I'm a bit concerned by your implication there that backing gay marriage would be a vote-loser for Salmond. I see that Herald story as a very welcome one, because I don't think the Scottish people are as homophobic as you're implying.RevStuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03915111503712807257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22403989.post-30807933414669420062011-04-24T23:40:15.945+01:002011-04-24T23:40:15.945+01:00And the Sunday Herald is trying to help out with b...And the Sunday Herald is trying to help out with banner headlines today declaring "SALMOND BACKS GAY MARRIAGE" <br /><br />Gray is quoted in the same article as not objecting to the idea but the Herald didn't seem to find that controversial enough to put into a similar headline. <br /><br />Desperate times indeed.Jo Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08536467440869239587noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22403989.post-38267842038810775712011-04-24T23:27:57.391+01:002011-04-24T23:27:57.391+01:00"there is very little in terms of policy to d..."there is very little in terms of policy to differentiate the two parties"<br /><br />This has somehow become the conventional wisdom of the campaign, but it simply isn't true:<br /><br />http://wosblog.podgamer.com/2011/04/18/who-are-the-tartan-tories/RevStuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03915111503712807257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22403989.post-12936855964291941722011-04-24T22:05:22.685+01:002011-04-24T22:05:22.685+01:00"There is one final possibility. Labour could..."There is one final possibility. Labour could offer to join with the SNP in a grand coalition against the “Condem cuts”."<br /><br />Iain, have you been out in the sun? This would be the Labour Party who utterly rejected the possibility of a rainbow coalition at Westminster which would involve the same SNP? You personally condemned them for it. You said Labour had gone with the visceral hatred they harboured towards the Nationalists instead of looking for ways to avoid a Tory Government. <br /><br />Please rest over the Bank Holiday. We need you at your best over the next ten days or so.Jo Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08536467440869239587noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22403989.post-49700252593487243132011-04-24T21:54:10.589+01:002011-04-24T21:54:10.589+01:00Oh and Iain, the SNP are on record that Scottish W...Oh and Iain, the SNP are on record that Scottish Water is NOT for sale. That would be the LABOUR PARTY, along with the Lib-Dems and the Tories who want to do that. <br /><br />A significant part of Scotland made it clear to Thatcher that our water wasn't up for privatisation some time ago in the Strathclyde referendum on the issue. <br /><br />Salmond stated publicly last year that Scottish Water will NOT go out of public ownership.Jo Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08536467440869239587noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22403989.post-89603634526495759392011-04-24T21:49:48.712+01:002011-04-24T21:49:48.712+01:00I don't trust the polls either. Nor should th...I don't trust the polls either. Nor should the SNP. The Scottish press will also be trying to persuade them to go the complacency route for obvious reasons. Salmond won't fall for it. <br /><br />The vote on the day itself is what will count. I say ignore the polls.Jo Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08536467440869239587noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22403989.post-18822756256667895022011-04-24T21:32:59.268+01:002011-04-24T21:32:59.268+01:00while i am heartened by the polls, i will still wa...while i am heartened by the polls, i will still wait and see the results on 6th may before i start cracking open a bottle of milk. no counting chickens here.Megzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14748344464250249830noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22403989.post-19421172508450503492011-04-24T21:02:56.688+01:002011-04-24T21:02:56.688+01:00Are you not comparing the wrong polls Iain?
You...Are you not comparing the wrong polls Iain? <br /><br />YouGov last week gave a rise of 11%constituency 10%list and this week's YouGov a 13%constituency 10%list.<br /><br />Unionists think everyone thinks as they do, sorry to disappoint as the SNP don't follow the flawed British standard.cynicalHighlanderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06034325908473006163noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22403989.post-71878381321512079482011-04-24T18:45:30.331+01:002011-04-24T18:45:30.331+01:00Hi Iain, there are a couple of errors there - Gree...Hi Iain, there are a couple of errors there - Greens never made a Confidence and Supply agreement with the SNP. We agreed to vote for the installation of their Ministers right at the start, that's all. Also, we didn't withdraw support for the Budget - we were negotiating about it with Ministers, then it got taken over by Salmond and fell apart because he didn't understand what we were asking for.James Mackenziehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07707473889170111139noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22403989.post-41233081745417163262011-04-24T18:32:51.634+01:002011-04-24T18:32:51.634+01:00"starting to worry about complacency among pa..."starting to worry about complacency among party worker"<br /><br />Absolutely unknown phenomenon in the SNP - been beaten too often.<br /><br />"there is very little in terms of policy to differentiate the two parties"<br /><br />Hate these things in a post, but in this case the only possible comment is ROTFL!Vronskyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17797785918817375436noreply@blogger.com