Tactical Voting and #SNPOut

IMG_4852#SNPOut is the hashtag of choice for unionists who want to tactically see off the threat of SNP ascendancy on 7th May 2015, which some polls have suggested might see their seats increase from six to 40. I suspect this is another case of SNP premature speculation.

The main parties are all saying, as you would expect, vote with your principles, vote traditionally, vote for who you want to win. For many that principled decision has another darker dimension, the SNP’s ignoring of their loss of last Septembers referendum grates, making many sure the principle of stopping the SNP is of the highest order, putting country (the UK) before party – which might just be the most principled thing a unionist can do. It is amazing to see on social media people who are Labour voting for Tory and vice versa, united in their opposition of all the diviseivness SNP stand for. How can a party dedicated to the destruction of the UK, who only persuaded 38% of their followers to vote Yes, represent the Scottish majority or the UK? they can’t and they would not.

The facts are that non of the economic and strategic concerns that mitigated against separation have changed, some like oil have got worse. The SNP have ignored pre Indyref critique of White Paper lunacy, forgotten about currency union issues, debt share and repayment, interest rates, the EU etc., all still reasons why separation will never work. Latest GERS and the preposterous double counting FFA continue to show that the SNP grasp on economics is tenuous at best.

Some from left (surprisingly) and right have stated that if the UKIP candidate was best placed they would get their vote, and from the tone I believe them. I don’t vote UKIP, but I would to deny the SNP a seat if their candidate had the best chance of defeating the SNP one. The point and concept is that a UK Government is for five years only, separation is forever, no going back!

You might ask is tactical voting likely to happen? Well it’s certainly causing a stir and being discussed heavily on line and in the media, press and TV, plus it seems to have the nationalists in a bit of a tizzy if the noise and vicious ad hominem attacks are anything to go by. They can not leave twitters @SNPOut alone and constantly try and provoke a negative reaction. They see the real threat that tactical voting presents.

Twitter accounts @SNPOut (now suspended to to mass nat attacks) and Facebook accounts like SNPOut and Scotland’s Big Voice, act as social media fulcra similar to the BT umbrella during Indyref, they appear to be genuine grass roots movements with no political allegiances even though nationalists accuse them of being paid for stooges. They use updated tables and graphics showing voters who to vote for in each constituency and the reasons why it must be done. Main stream media has been picking up on this grass roots movement and the momentum seems to be building, tactical voting is no longer seen as unprincipled or disloyal, but as principled, strategic and crucial.

There are a couple of constituencies that stand out for significant reasons. There is Perth where Pete Wishart is the standing SNP MP, who has earned the approbrium of unionists for increasing division and coining the derogatory “naw bags” label. The vote there is Tory as they have, according to the stats, the best choice of ousting him. More importantly there is Gordon, where Salmond is standing to get his voice heard in Westminster, this is unthinkable for No voters, so watch the Lib Dems, seen as front runners, give him a bloody nose and second big defeat (please). As the election date looms, watch for more analysis and calculation of the best unionist candidates to minimise SNP gains.

“Westminster governments are for five short years and separation is forever”. No voters are incensed that the vow was made in the first place, unhappy that the SNP think it was not enough and positive that as long as the SNP retain clause 2 of their constitution they will never abandon their cause of separating Scotland from the rest of the UK, at disastrous cost to our economy, family, influence and standing.

If separatists think they can exit the UK while at the same time spending more to create their single state utopia, they are letting jaundiced heart rule brainwashed head and would walk us into decades of austerity.

Add to No voting unionists concerns the massive “surge” in SNP members, many of whom are not natural SNP voters and the picture gets very divisive (not sure how many are £12 £5 or £2 members) and helps explain the focus on tactical voting. Active Nats are saying unionists should cease talking about the referendum, accept it was No and move on, get on with life and each other. Not a chance, trust of Nats has completely gone, from the talk of UDI from SNP leadership (via the Hydro SNP rally and SNP conference speeches), it is evident separation is permanently at the top of the agenda, check the SNP constitution (short and dictatorial) for confirmation. How is it that after a once in a lifetime/generation opportunity (vocalised by both SNP FM’s) to abide by the settled will of the Scottish people, the SNP have totally and insolently dismissed the majority of Scots? 62% of us did NOT vote Yes.

Only 38% of voting Scots wanted separation and voted Yes, you would think it was the other way round, Nats act like they were robbed, many say the vote was rigged, that the elderly were cowards, and when shown evidence to the contrary either ignore it or call it lies. The hard core of separation at any cost is alive and kicking and the majority who voted No want a way to end the horrendous division caused by the independence vote. Tactical voting and #SNPOut is the means.
IMG_4940

Update 8/May2015 – Ah well, better luck next time 😜

Update 6/June/2016 – #SNPOut is alive and kicking as a movement again, this time some political commentators are saying perhaps 20% of us might employ tactical voting.

The separatists lost vote share in Holyrood and more so in the 2017 local elections. It is evident ten years of SNP failure and incompetence with regard to key elements, particularly education, have taken the shine off the SNP. Brexit has stirred the pot and as many as 25% of SNP voters are unhappy that they might be dragged back in to the EU on less favourable terms than the UK’s.

Sturgeon’s popularity has slipped into negative for the first time and her sly “mandate” for Indyref2 and refusal to rule out a third, even if the second is lost, is turning soft SNP voters off. Unlike last time anti SNP parties are quietly encouraging tactical voting and the rise of the Scottish Tories has the Nats well rattled.

It’s game-on on Thursday this week as tactical voting will, this time, play a more pivotal role in both reducing vote share AND seats for the SNP – personally I’m looking forward to staying up and watching the two sitting Perthshire SNP MP’s losing their seats #SNPOut

 

 

 

“It’s the economy stupid”

20140409-143057.jpg

A significant problem with the independence debate is that at heart, independence is only worthwhile (ignoring loyalty, history and heritage), if the numbers add up. The central tenets of separation are;

Self determination (myopic, local, parochial)
Fairness (their version, are we different from the rest in UK)?
Equality (their version, why would iScot be fairer)?
Being different and better (their unsubstantiated view)
Reversal of austerity measures (so called “bedroom tax” -which we can void at will- spending and benefits protection)
Protecting state services, NHS etc. (see above and devolved)
Ownership of assets (oil) (selfishness)?

Add in a large degree of left wing politics (ignoring the elements of anti Westminster and the English ) and that is essentially the separatists agenda.

To be successful iScot has to be economically viable in the long run. Separatists are fond of pointing to other smaller “successful” nations as evidence that we can do it and that Scotland is a rich country. Like Norway? http://www.ukscot.co.uk/ukscot_referendum_blog/ perhaps that aspiration should be revisited.

Although Scotland has had tax varying powers for many years, it has never used them, that really perplexes me, why? Can’t find any reasons anywhere, yet that is what they claim independence will give them. Shout loudly, “We already have them”.

Did you know we have additional new agreed tax powers coming?

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/news/news-calman.htm

Separatists claim “we are a rich country”, this is a mischievously incomplete sentence, which should read “we are a rich country as part of the rich and successful UK”

iScot is not an officially recognised nation state, that’s what the whole pro indy debate and referendum is trying to achieve. So “we” are not in existence yet and whether we will be “rich” post independence is very moot.

Post a Yes vote ScotGov (Salmond/Sturgeon/Swinney) will negotiate to settle the terms of independence. This will entail currency union – already refused some time ago and restated in no uncertain terms in February, all UK parties agree, no CU.

Debt will require agreement (refusal to accept debt is international economic suicide) and will be balanced against other assets and liabilities, such as oil and gas. We will be negotiating with cUK who will fight their corner ferociously as “we” (UK) are weaker apart, a simple fact. The cUK can of course, with a larger non oil dependent economy, recover much more quickly.

Trident, if it goes (some debate about that) who pays costs? All part of the negotiation.

So it is likely we will get a tough/hard/raw deal from a separatist perspective. This is so because they “have” to do a deal, they can’t walk away from the table, the timetable for independence has been set. The thoughts and consequences of reporting independence “can’t be done” after a Yes vote are unthinkable.

Add to the economic mix that our interest rates would undoubtably rise due to a reduced credit rating (high debt, high spending, single source skewed economy, employment mix, age profile, removal of EU rebate) and the economic model starts to groan.

You will note there are no GDP, growth figures or share of tax and spending comparisons quoted here, I could do that but it would bore many readers, you are all intelligent, look them up. There are a number of independent reports (although every report that does not match the separatist agenda is usually rubbished) detailing the potential post indy situation this is one of the latest from NIESR independent, established since 1938 http://niesr.ac.uk/sites/default/files/publications/dp426.pdf

I’ll let the economists among us argue the fine detail and forecasts and financial modelling, I would rather focus on common sense. But here is one analysis of the oil position (ignoring recent drop in output and lowered forecasts) https://fullfact.org/factchecks/will_an_independent_scotland_be_better_off-28889

The white Paper (here is a summary http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/26_11_13_scottishindependence.pdf) needs a thorough analysis as it is so biased and thin on costs it beggars belief, each week that goes by it loses credibility. As a document to base an economy on it is frankly pathetic. However, at 670 pages, the normal non-numbers trained voters have no real chance of comprehending the whole document. It’s an independence visual aid, it looks pretty held up in the air with a smile.

Here is the crux, here is why “it’s the economy stupid” should be ringing bells and sounding alarms;

Increased spending promises like triple pension lock, childcare, bedroom tax repeal, protection for minimum wage, tax allowances, tax credits, free this that and the other, embassies, broadcasting, privatisation of Scottish Royal Mail and so on.

Lower receipts like reduced oil revenues (http://www.oilandgasuk.co.uk/cmsfiles/modules/publications/pdfs/EC040.pdf) reduced corporation tax, reduced landing charges (APD), debt costs, EU rebate,EU trade tariff contribution, loss of UK green energy subsidies etc.

Never mind the P&L accounts, the balance sheet just does not add up!

Update 24/5/14 £3.25 Billion (via Scottish accountants) for indyref tax system? John Swinney does not know, Salmond thinks £250 million, it will be more than a billion and at least twice any real estimate.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-independence-tax-plans-could-cost-3-25bn-1-3416681

A well thought out fiscal analysis July 214

http://www.economicsuk.com/blog/002036.html#more

“It’s the economy stupid”

But don’t worry, if we vote for permanent economic separation we can always put taxes up and borrow more, gulp!

Ps if you think it’s not solely the economy, try this https://stevensayers.wordpress.com/2014/04/06/scotland-the-union-onwards-and-upwards/

20140409-143117.jpg

Philosophy Polls and Politics the Perfect Storm

20140408-161238.jpg

20140412-153326.jpg

20140412-152909.jpg

Philosophically, Unionists go about their own business and getting on with life. Separatists come along and for a host of myopic and parochial reasons, create division. Philosophically they are already and fundamentally separate, gone on “ahead” waiting for Scotland to catch up, they do not feel part of the Union that is normality for the majority.

When Unionists argue for (defend) the status quo they are derided by the separatists for being anti separatist, kinda QED really. All the positive words like pride, faith, loyalty, nationhood, ambition, adventure, self determination, freedom etc. are all “claimed” by the separatists, no justification for it, it just sounds good, stirs the troops. Those words belong even more so to the Union, whose adherents helped to create it in the first place and laboured to achieve it’s enviable position in the world today.

Separatists also throw all the anti establishment headlines around, poverty, cuts, fairness, inequality, bedroom tax, DLA etc. all real issues, all being dealt with by successive UK governments, so far all the Scottish Government has done is confirm massive spending in a sketchy and utterly fact free White Paper. How will they pay for it all? There is a huge economic argument, far too complex and detailed to be outlined here, perhaps another time another post eh?

No matter how good any defence of the status quo is, being “opposed” to change is always viewed as being “negative”, which it is, it’s rejecting the ideas proposed by the separatists for destroying said status quo. Attack (aggression) as the best form of defence is well understood and used by the separatists, it’s why they howl about bullying, negativity, bluff, bluster, nonsense and lies, they already have closed detached separatist minds and will not attempt to listen to reason, there is nothing unionists can say to sway them. What they see as independence we see as separatism, they are unable to contemplate preserving the union, because at a basic emotional and psychological level they are hard wired to implacably mistrust anything none Scottish.

Funnily enough, when Unionists do attack, separatists cry foul and say it’s big brother denigrating wee Scotland. You will have heard the passive aggressive phrase “too wee too poor and too stupid” I believe John Swinney spawned/coined that phrase – Look here  in an attempt to describe how he thought the Union thought of Scotland, but hey, let’s not throw away a good anti union soundbite even if it’s origin is a twisted self observation.

Due to this “mental separation” Separatists do not need a detailed functioning economic case for seceding from the rest of the union. They have told us “we think you are rubbish and we want nothing (ahem) from you or to do with you politically”. They also think we are morally superior to the rest of the UK, I think the election of a UKIP MEP is just one indicator that has scotched that ridiculous notion.

So, the fact that the cases for currency, EU, UN and NATO under independence are fundamentally flawed is irrelevant, they simply do not care, because the criticism comes from “the enemy” they are already detached from across the philosophical divide. From the outside looking in they can not see that the Union has a democracy, it’s only a democracy if it’s their own local one. See https://stevensayers.wordpress.com/2014/04/11/if-scotland-votes-yes-is-it-a-blow-for-democracy/

As is the case with any minority that considers themselves better but downtrodden, they are a very vocal lot with a high social media presence that attempts to drown out any opposite views or criticism;

“Why is doing nothing better”? it just is, but sounds weak. Actually it’s better doing nothing than taking the separatist uncharted un-costed leap in the dark.

“Are you saying Scots can’t run Scotland”? No..that sounds weak, see https://stevensayers.wordpress.com/2014/03/25/dont-you-think-scots-can-govern-scotland-best/

“Westminster is undemocratic” It’s not. “It is, we cant affect the result” Scotland can, it does, it has 59 MP’s, it’s just that right now they are not part of the current government.

“We are a rich country, yes”? Well yes..””No problem then, lets go it alone” hmm, it’s just that Scotland is only rich now by it’s fantastic heritage within the union, see https://stevensayers.wordpress.com/2014/04/06/scotland-the-union-onwards-and-upwards/

And so it goes on, with a host of reasons and questions and demands to berate Unionists with when they are quite happy thank you. Of course the push for separation has divided Scotland and the media delight in the ups and downs of polls, commissioned by one side or the other and showing wild swings and gap narrowing. In reality the polls have not moved much and there are five more months of escalating “debate” (of which this is part) to come. Update > Result was 55/45% No. Only 37% of voters actually wanted separation.

One thing is certain, there will not be a big majority for separation, at the extreme outside the Yes vote might impossibly make a magnificent last minute rally, convert every single undecided voter and nick some from the No camp and they would get, say, 59%. (I’m glad that didn’t happen).

Scotland will then have a deeply divided country facing the biggest challenges ever since the world wars (when it fought in defence of the very Union the separatists want to destroy).

Let’s not forget this is no cyclical party election, this is a binary yes/no that will, if separation occurs, mean no going back, ever, period.

I have talked elsewhere, on another post in this blog, about currency and the EU etc. and it’s not worth repeating them again here, but the quite possibly unsurmountable challenges that would face Scotland are many, some as yet unknown. Rejecting the security and protection of the Union just makes the prospect, for me, chilling. Separatists have this sense of rebirth, renewal and freedom that leaves me stone cold dead.

Finally, and apologies to those of you of a nervous disposition, consider the scenario that Scotland votes Yes by a narrow margin. It enters negotiations with rUK and international bodies to find that only the UN allow us formal recognition. It can use the £ but can’t have currency union and the EU do not want Scotland to join, see https://stevensayers.wordpress.com/2014/03/24/can-scotland-become-a-member-of-the-eu-post-a-yes-vote/ We cant have all the oil we want because we don’t want our share of the debt and our interest rates soar. What does Scotland do then on Independence day? If it does not take that reckless leap, what then?

Fortunately I think Scotland is too well established, too well resourced and far too intelligent to vote for destruction of it’s future potential. (My faith in Scottish common sense was well vindicated on 18/9/14).

Now that we have decided to decisively vote no, it is painful to see the 45 and alliance movements unaccepting of the democratic settled will of the Scottish people. Cries of foul and vote rigging are pathetic and downright insulting to the majority, only 37% of voting age Scots wanted separatism, let it go, fight for your political and social views within the UK.

Steve Sayers Utterly Unconvinced

20140412-153018.jpg

Wings Over Scotland

My apologies for this rather pointed critique of a specific individual, engaged in the social media “Scottish Independence Referendum” wider social debate. Apologies also for some of the crass language included in some of the images. Please read no further if bad language offends you too much.

Stuart Campbell is curator of a Scottish separatist website http://wingsoverscotland.com/ which is funded from public donations, it is located in Bath. Apparently there are specific reasons he resides there, you can find that out for yourself. The site claims to “soar above Scottish politics”, I leave you to decide if it does. Going by the “The Rev. Stuart Campbell” he has a full social media presence including Twitter and Facebook

https://mobile.twitter.com/WingsScotland
https://www.facebook.com/WingsOverScotland

He has attracted a certain notoriety for his, in my opinion, vicious attacks and his use of bad language on those holding opposite opinions to his. So much so he has his own dedicated Wikipedia page, describing him and his career as an electronics gaming journalist http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuart_Campbell_(game_journalist) in some detail. He apparently has experienced legal problems in the past, representing himself in court, so I think fancies himself as a man of learning, all there if you wish to read it.

I came across him again while tweeting yesterday, when a particularly vicious tweet caused me great offence, I leave you to decide if that offence was unwarranted. Here is what made me get involed;

IMG_1269
I had to respond;

IMG_1270
You will see the response from him was screen captured, I subsequently used this image (hence comment at bottom) to expose his lack of moral integrity. Even hardened Yes men are now concerned re his activities;

IMG_1218
Adding insult to injury, one of his delightful followers decided to support him;

IMG_1280

There are of course Unionists who say unforgivable things, I abhor that, it’s just I find this “Wings” out-pouring of misleading “facts” and dreadful comments constant and unnecessary. I have no doubt he will continue in this vein, but in my opinion he has the opposite effect he desires, by demonstrating he and his ilk have a chip on their shoulders so big it make them walk round in circles.

Don’t quote me, but I understand some SNP politicians, including NS have retweeted him and that one SNP politician asked that the website be used as an information source for schoolchildren, nice eh?

In closing, it looks as though I am not the only one questioning this mans judgement, have a look at this blog, which seems to hold him in even more contempt than I do, if that’s possible.

http://ahdinnaeken.wordpress.com/tag/wings-over-scotland/

http://neo-geo.com/forums/showthread.php?196192-Retro-Gamer-magazine-s-terrible-Metal-Slug-feature-reviewed!&p=2721236&viewfull=1#post2721236

Steve Sayers – Utterly disgusted.

iScotland, Onward into Europe 19/9/14

20140402-160054.jpg

Let’s presume that a Yes vote carries the day and we start the process of negotiation with the cUK, to become fully independent on 24/3/2016. Let’s further presume that cUK agrees to a formal currency union on acceptable terms to both foreign countries, we can now use the pound.

NATO are sanguine about Trident and the transitional arrangements for fixed nuclear assets being relocated, along with jobs, within the cUK (costs born by us no doubt, as it’s not the cUK’s wishes to move), so they agree formally to recognise us as a separate nation state. The UN welcome us with open arms, we only lose our voice at the Permanent Security Council, as we are too small for that (let’s hope it does not jeopardise the cUK’s position).

We start the process of applying to join the EU, hmm, this is not going to be so easy, they want us to agree to using the Euro before getting a vote. We also need a unanimous vote from all 28 member states. Spain and Denmark are grumbling about setting precedents, they have difficult separatist movements of their own to contend with, as do, surprisingly, a lot of member states (http://goo.gl/t7DmjX). In fact, our success in becoming independent has really fired up separatist movements throughout Europe. Hmm, this might take a little while, maybe 3, 4 or 5 years?

Oh, and while we are negotiating the EU has said that cUK has to change it’s EU status as well, rebate needs to be downgraded, MEP’s reduced, council votes reduced. We thought cUK would help in our EU negotiations, but they are looking a bit self interested now, perhaps the EU will use this situation to screw us both?

In the meantime cUK is our lender of last resort, control our interest rates and quite rightly spending levels, only fair and right for the security they provide and for allowing us to print Scottish currency. And of course they are still holding the Scottish Banks debt on our behalf, great neighbours.

Also in the meantime we are not members of the EU, have not got trade advantages, lost subsidies, lost our MEP’s, have no EU employees, no grants, no EU law protection, all gone.

It’s all very complicated, but I’m sure it will all be all right, we are a rich country anyway. What? The UKCS Oil industry is struggling, oops.

https://stevensayers.wordpress.com/2014/03/24/can-scotland-become-a-member-of-the-eu-post-a-yes-vote/

http://www.oilandgasuk.co.uk/cmsfiles/modules/publications/pdfs/EC040.pdf April 2014 UK Oil & Gas Voice of the Offshore Industry

20140402-155659.jpg

Why No means Yes and Yes means No

20140330-182046.jpg

Do you want to leave one of the most successful and democratic influential nations in the world?
Do you want our kids to be considered foreign and disadvantaged due to restricted access to UK opportunities?
Do you want to have to reapply for membership of all the international organisations that we already belong to – EU UN NATO?
Do you want to join the UK in a currency union, ceding sovereignty to a foreign country with no policy say ?
Do you want higher government borrowing?
Do you want higher government borrowing costs?
Do you want higher mortgage costs?
Do you want to to see supermarket food prices rise?
Do you want to stop using/printing Scottish £notes?
Do you want weakened immigration controls leading to border controls?
Do you want to join the EU which means adopting the Euro, meaning any currency union is either impossible or extremely costly and restrictive?
Do you want EU entry conditions to be less favourable than the UKs?
Do you want as a smaller economy to duplicate the expensive machinery of government and civil service, armed forces, passports, driving licences etc?
Do you want to pay for separate embassies around the world?
Do you want a massive pension time bomb due to ageing population?
Do you want a massive pension black hole due to EU pension border controls?
Do you want the tax regime significantly changed when as a devolved parliament we never used existing powers?
Do you want to lose our share of UK VAT?
Do you want a new social framework while promising spending increases, dropping landing charges, receiving reducing oil receipts, keeping triple pension lock and benefits cap?
Do you want to take our share of the UK debt at higher cost?
Do you want a poorer international credit rating?
Do you want to give up the most versatile passport in the world?

If you have not said Yes to most of these crucial questions, then be extremely positive, vote No. No is Yes for unity, fiscal strength, security, belonging, shared risk and reward, influence and partnership.

Steve Sayers Voting no for a positive future.

20140402-120016.jpg

The SNP’s Currency Nightmare

Notes from North Britain

The Chancellor’s contribution this week to the independence debate was dramatic. What does it mean? And where do we go from here?

What the Chancellor said was that there will be no currency union between an independent Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom. He said this on the basis of independent, expert and hard-headed analysis — all made public — prepared by HM Treasury and signed off by the Permanent Secretary to the Treasury, no less (the civil servant who is leading the UK Government’s ongoing series of Scotland Analysis papers, about which I’ve written before). The Chancellor’s verdict — that it could not be said to be in the best interests of the rest of the UK to enter into a currency union with an independent Scotland — is not a narrowly partisan position adopted in the interests of the Conservatives. It is, on the contrary…

View original post 4,219 more words

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑