Poll: General election voting round 5 (final one)

[do_ron_ron]

This ground has been covered a lot - are you intentionally forgetting everything? It's rather repetitive having to reexplain simple concepts to you again and again. And I'm not saying I think they will, just that it's a real possibility (secondary to the first preference which would be an agreement with Labour so that the SNP have a say). Read my posts above about how abstaining and then getting a good deal for Scotland out of the next Parliament could be preferable to voting down the Tories/propping up Labour (without an agreement) and not having any say... just being Miliband's bitch, if he keeps his 'we won't do any deals with the SNP' line. If that happened, they could justify the former by saying how Labour gave them no choice/wouldn't negotiate at all/etc.

You do not seem to understand Scottish politics. The SNP cannot, under ANY circumstances, vote with the Tories. They have taken over the centre-left mantle from Labour in Scotland. If they voted with the Tories they would be out of office in Scotland next year and suffer a LibDem type meltdown in their support in the next Westminster election.

 

[robgmun]

You do not seem to understand Scottish politics. The SNP cannot, under ANY circumstances, vote with the Tories. They have taken over the centre-left mantle from Labour in Scotland. If they voted with the Tories they would be out of office in Scotland next year and suffer a LibDem type meltdown in their support in the next Westminster election.

Certainly after the show she put on in the debates. She was practically begging Milliband kneeling in front of him. Suprised that she didn't offer him a blowy right there and then at the rate she was going

 

[Schlong&Stable]

You do not seem to understand Scottish politics. The SNP cannot, under ANY circumstances, vote with the Tories. They have taken over the centre-left mantle from Labour in Scotland. If they voted with the Tories they would be out of office in Scotland next year and suffer a LibDem type meltdown in their support in the next Westminster election.

As Moses points out, the SNP don't need to vote with the Conservatives, they can just abstain.

I think that such a move might even be tactically sound; if the Tories have the most MPs they do have a mandate to form government, so causing the chaos of an election re-run would not be desirable and might be held against the SNP.

If anyone questioned the SNP's refusal to oppose the Tories, they could always just say Labour were unreasonable and they couldn't reach a deal. Putting all the blame on Labour won't damage them too much, because the people who back the SNP are backing them on the independence angle. Labour cannot complete there.

Such a move would put the blame on Labour and allow the SNP to say 'well we wanted to be responsible and make sure the UK had a government'.

The future of the SNP is pretty much in Milibands hands if he has the most MP's. If he makes a deal with them, SNP power will grow. If he refuses to play ball, the SNP will probably lose some of their support.

If the Tories come out on top, the SNP will probably be more advantaged by the Tories being in power as they can grind the 'Westminster is all public school toffs wah wah' line for another five years.

 

[D.P.]

So show us who said that and what it was based on, then? Otherwise merely appealing to an unnamed authority isn't the most convincing of techniques...

A lot of it comes from May2015.com and UK Polling report, others from Guardian/Independent/Telegraph

E.g., the stuff about the UKIP doing badly in a reelection comes from may2015.com but the website is unresponsive right now, no doubt getting hammered.

 

[The-Fender]

I can't believe people are still voting labcons, do you people even watch the news enough or do you just hear from word of mouth that they are great and you jump on the bandwagon just because its cool man to like flow with the politically correct masses man.

 

[the_r_sole]

As Moses points out, the SNP don't need to vote with the Conservatives, they can just abstain.

I think that such a move might even be tactically sound; if the Tories have the most MPs they do have a mandate to form government, so causing the chaos of an election re-run would not be desirable and might be held against the SNP.

If anyone questioned the SNP's refusal to oppose the Tories, they could always just say Labour were unreasonable and they couldn't reach a deal. Putting all the blame on Labour won't damage them too much, because the people who back the SNP are backing them on the independence angle. Labour cannot complete there.

Such a move would put the blame on Labour and allow the SNP to say 'well we wanted to be responsible and make sure the UK had a government'.

The future of the SNP is pretty much in Milibands hands if he has the most MP's. If he makes a deal with them, SNP power will grow. If he refuses to play ball, the SNP will probably lose some of their support.

If the Tories come out on top, the SNP will probably be more advantaged by the Tories being in power as they can grind the 'Westminster is all public school toffs wah wah' line for another five years.

abstaining from that vote would be as damaging to their 2016 scottish election campaign as voting for the tories imo - have heard the snp over and over again saying they will do whatever they can to make sure it's not david cameron in no 10, abstaining would lose them a lot of support

 

[Raumarik]

You do not seem to understand Scottish politics. The SNP cannot, under ANY circumstances, vote with the Tories. They have taken over the centre-left mantle from Labour in Scotland. If they voted with the Tories they would be out of office in Scotland next year and suffer a LibDem type meltdown in their support in the next Westminster election.

SNP could vote with the tories on certain things, they do have common ground and most Scots wouldn't care as long as the vote was seen as fair. If it's a major policy decision e.g. trident renewal then yes it'd be daft for them to do so but there is commonality between the parties and they have worked well together in the past in Holyrood.

It's unlikely to be a common thing though, saying they never could? That's just being daft though. Of course they could and should if it's the right thing to do from their manifesto etc.

 

[The-Fender]

And the people who vote for the same party no matter what simply just because they always have, its not football people you don't have to support the same team forever, you CAN change who you vote for based on common sense and logic, but a lot of people now a days have no common sense or logic.

 

[D.P.]

Going off current forecasts LabSNP would fall short, they would also need either the LibDems or the Greens+Plaid on board.

Labour are expected around the 270 mark and SNP around 55. Yiu oly need 323 for a majority in practice. Then there are thigns like the greens which will vote yes for labour and no to Tory, plus some of the other left wing contingent like Plaid Cymru and SDLP

There doesn't have to be a formal coalition between them, they just have to vote no confidence to a Tory led governent.

 

[D.P.]

SNP could vote with the tories on certain things, they do have common ground and most Scots wouldn't care as long as the vote was seen as fair. If it's a major policy decision e.g. trident renewal then yes it'd be daft for them to do so but there is commonality between the parties and they have worked well together in the past in Holyrood.

It's unlikely to be a common thing though, saying they never could? That's just being daft though. Of course they could and should if it's the right thing to do from their manifesto etc.

Voting in agreement with the Tori on a policy by policy basis is not the same as voting to put the Tories in control of the whole of the UK.

The former will ha[pen, the latter has about he same chances as winning the lottery every week for the rest of your life, IMO. It would kill the SNP.

 

[escape sanity]

I can't believe people are still voting labcons, do you people even watch the news enough or do you just hear from word of mouth that they are great and you jump on the bandwagon just because its cool man to like flow with the politically correct masses man.

No, none of us watch the news. We are all actually just voting based on what our favourite colour is.

 

[D.P.]

Anything other than links to specific articles evidencing your specific claims is pointless given the combined volume of material produced by those five sites on a daily basis! Otherwise we'll get people making stupid claims and saying 'source: somewhere on the internet - go and find it, yo'. When regurgitating in future, perhaps try and link to your source.

And you can do likewise, never sen you post any link to anything you have said. Does that mean it is your personal opinion and can be thrown out with the other trash that you regurgitate?

 

[gettothechopper]

after much office debate today based on the polling and last nights debate:

the most likely outcome is a minority labour governemnt with maybe some LD and some other little'uns - with no SNP coalition / agreements but basically SNP would vote in line with labour anyway - and most things the SNP would vote against (like trident) would get tory backing anyway

all it needs is labour to get the most overall votes so that they can go visit the queen first... (and no massive changes on the polling)

 

[Mr C]

As far as I can see, if there is a Labour-SNP coalition one of those parties is going to be severely crippled by the next election, either Labour is going to alienate their entire English fan base by pandering to the SNP's needs, funnelling even further resources to Scotland, dismantling Trident etc.. Or the SNP will fall out with all the scots because they were unable to deliver any of their promises under the labour government (Similar to the Lib-Dems in the previous Coalition) The lack of deliverance of their promises in Scotland would not only hurt SNP but would definitely hurt Labour even more (if that's possible) above the border considering they would be seen as the enemy that knocked back all the SNP's plans.

If there was a Tory-SNP (lol) government you could probably get away with blaming the Tories for not pushing through the SNP policies and would likely swing labour back into Scotland for the next election, since the SNP is likely to fall out of favour by having sided with the Tories in the first place.

Unless there is some major swing to Labour or Tory. I can see any coalition or minority government being almost catastrophic for whichever parties decide to get involved (similar to what happened to the Lib-Dems), there are too many conflicting interests among a disgruntled electorate where they are both pulling further away from the centre. Perhaps the Lib-Dems can retain enough seats to make a viable coalition with Labour or Tory but I don't see that happening. A minority government is going to be struggling to do anything when if you propose any policy reaching right (lowering high rate taxes, raising the limit before inheritance tax kicks in) the SNP and labour will make it difficult to implement, if you promote any policy reaching left (raising higher earnings taxes, removing non-dom status) I'm sure a handful of backbenchers from Labour/Lib-Dem coupled with the Tories are likely to be enough to make it difficult to pass anything on that side either. All of these will have negative consequences on whoever is leading the country as they will be seen as unable to get anything done under their 5 year term and likely to lose a bunch of votes to the extremes and the other mainstream party.

I think a re-election is the best outcome for all parties involved and perhaps instead of spending the entire time trying to make each other look stupid on TV they focus on making clear their policies on how to make Britain better, so less disillusioned voters don't see their vote as a protest against the mainstream.

 

[D.P.]

Just for Moses (althoguh I don't see why I should):
http://may2015.com/ideas/ukip-is-being-shafted-by-the-electoral-system-and-its-poor-ground-game/

Articles like this is why I said that UKIP wont do well at a reelection.
The main points, apart form FPTP, is that UKIP don't have the resources to do good ground work and canvasing. This quote is then particularly pertinent: "if Ukip struggle to cope with two constituencies going to the polls simultaneously, how will the party cope with 650 doing so?" And that onyl gets harder if they have to do it all over again.


there were loads of other such articles, and experts points out a likely Tory win if there is a re-election. but I am not trawling through 3 months worth of internet history just to point things out to one poster who has never substantiated anything he has said,.

 

[D.P.]

after much office debate today based on the polling and last nights debate:

the most likely outcome is a minority labour governemnt with maybe some LD and some other little'uns - with no SNP coalition / agreements but basically SNP would vote in line with labour anyway - and most things the SNP would vote against (like trident) would get tory backing anyway

all it needs is labour to get the most overall votes so that they can go visit the queen first... (and no massive changes on the polling)

I agree with the first point, for the last point there is no requirement for Labour to get the most seats to visit the queen first, that is a myth and has no basis in official rules.

 

[the_r_sole]

You have to remember that this would be in the context of Labour saying, 'no, we refuse to deal with the SNP. Go home, Jocky McJock - we don't want you'.

You have to remember that the snp have said to scottish voters they will do what they can to make sure cameron doesn't get in again - the scottish electorate will not accept abstaining from that vote as reasonable and it will damage the 2016 election campaign massively. The politics up here are a lot more involved at the moment, apathy isn't on the cards

 

[DampDog]

And the people who vote for the same party no matter what simply just because they always have, its not football people you don't have to support the same team forever, you CAN change who you vote for based on common sense and logic, but a lot of people now a days have no common sense or logic.

I think that's very true, and come what may they wouldn't even consider looking at other parties. Likewise it does them a slight injustice; in that there are possibly some older voters who have seen it all before and realise a leopard cannot change it's spots, and all the social media frenzy that we all now endure daily is more akin to 'The Emperor's new clothes.' Maybe they are just a little jaded with the system, can't say as I blame them. I can't say I'm enchanted by UKIP's vision of the world, were all our ill's are down to 'Jonny foreigners' or 'migrant hoards.' But when things are not going as you'd like, it's always easier to point the finger at someone else.

 

[Schlong&Stable]

abstaining from that vote would be as damaging to their 2016 scottish election campaign as voting for the tories imo - have heard the snp over and over again saying they will do whatever they can to make sure it's not david cameron in no 10, abstaining would lose them a lot of support

If you want independence, who else can you vote for? I don't think the SNP will lose a lot of their support in the Scottish parliament whatever they do. The price to be paid would be in 2020.

 

[the_r_sole]

If you want independence, who else can you vote for? I don't think the SNP will lose a lot of their support in the Scottish parliament whatever they do. The price to be paid would be in 2020.

any party that puts a referendum in their manifesto?
I really don't think that in the 2016 scottish election the snp will have a manifesto pledge for another referendum.
not everyone that signed up to become snp members want independence post referendum (although can only speak from the people I know that signed up) -what they want is change in the system and some left leaning political representation