Glasgow NE result
What a disastrous result for almost everyone, but most especially for the SNP.
The one winner was Labour who couldn't energise it's voters - as evidenced by a 1/3 turnout - but still somehow manged to take nearly 60% of the vote and keep the majority at a respectable and healthy margin.
The LibDems must be putting the periscope up to see if they find dry land, and some prospect of survival, coming a very, very, poor fifth.
As for the SNP: this was disastrous for the natural party of opposition, who should have been able to capitalise on distrust and disillusion with the Government, and who should have been able to get their vote out. Instead the managed to lose 900 votes.
So why did this happen?
Simple - the SNP are the party of Government in Scotland and as such they are being blamed for economic mismamgement and the economic problems in exactly the same way that they have blamed Labour and Tories over the past decades.
It is a consequence of being the party of power that you stop being the party of hope, and start being just another party who says one thing and does another. Such is the price of power.
What makes that interesting is the impact that this new realism will have in Scotland at the next General Election.
I was surprised how well Labour did last night, but I think that it is more about how badly the SNP are doing. Or more accurately, how the imnpact of their policy decisions is feeding through to the voters.
I predict that Labour will do much better than currently forecast at the Election, and that the SNP will be hard pressed to get more than a dozen seats. I also think that there will be some surprise, local, results which will be more about the individuals than the parties, but that the overall political landscape will barely change.
As I have said before, the SNP's greatest set-back was becoming the party in power in Holyrood, which will prove a millstone rather than a springboard, and were Labour still running the show, you would be looking at the SNP being within spitting distance of a majority at this point in the electoral cycle.
However, it is the unexpected events that will drive the result of the Election; and I look forward to an exciting, incident-filled, campaign next year. Sadly, I expect a dull, dreary slog that will alienate the voters.
The one winner was Labour who couldn't energise it's voters - as evidenced by a 1/3 turnout - but still somehow manged to take nearly 60% of the vote and keep the majority at a respectable and healthy margin.
The LibDems must be putting the periscope up to see if they find dry land, and some prospect of survival, coming a very, very, poor fifth.
As for the SNP: this was disastrous for the natural party of opposition, who should have been able to capitalise on distrust and disillusion with the Government, and who should have been able to get their vote out. Instead the managed to lose 900 votes.
So why did this happen?
Simple - the SNP are the party of Government in Scotland and as such they are being blamed for economic mismamgement and the economic problems in exactly the same way that they have blamed Labour and Tories over the past decades.
It is a consequence of being the party of power that you stop being the party of hope, and start being just another party who says one thing and does another. Such is the price of power.
What makes that interesting is the impact that this new realism will have in Scotland at the next General Election.
I was surprised how well Labour did last night, but I think that it is more about how badly the SNP are doing. Or more accurately, how the imnpact of their policy decisions is feeding through to the voters.
I predict that Labour will do much better than currently forecast at the Election, and that the SNP will be hard pressed to get more than a dozen seats. I also think that there will be some surprise, local, results which will be more about the individuals than the parties, but that the overall political landscape will barely change.
As I have said before, the SNP's greatest set-back was becoming the party in power in Holyrood, which will prove a millstone rather than a springboard, and were Labour still running the show, you would be looking at the SNP being within spitting distance of a majority at this point in the electoral cycle.
However, it is the unexpected events that will drive the result of the Election; and I look forward to an exciting, incident-filled, campaign next year. Sadly, I expect a dull, dreary slog that will alienate the voters.
17 comments:
Well, as others have pointed out, the people of Glasgow North-East would vote for a bucket full of shit if it happened to be standing for the Labour Party. Also worth considering is the fact that something like 82% of the electorate did not vote for Labour.
More worring is that 66% did not find any alternative to Labour so did not vote.
Once again the voters have proved that it is not opposition parties who win elections, it is Governments who lose them.
The UK press have (as always) underestimated the degree to which Scotland regards Holyrood as its Government - this is actually nothing at all to do with Gordon Brown.
The SNP have today had a fairly aimed shot across the bows from Glasgow North-East. And that irrespective of the quality of the candidate, as Costello points out so eloquently.
Perhaps Alex Salmond should be flattered: this is the kind of thing that happens to all Governments, sooner or later.
Presumably, Costello, you will also demand that the SNP get 50% of the possible votes before they claim a mandate for separation?
After all, 80% of the Scottish people didn't vote SNP at the least election.
Funny that; the SNP using the discredited 40% anti-devlution rule to justify their own failures.
Laugh? I nearly pissed myself.
"the people of Glasgow North-East would vote for a bucket full of shit if it happened to be standing for the Labour Party"...apart from the people who don't vote Labour, of course. The latter are intelligent discerning thoughtful souls, esily distinguishable from the ignorant, unambitous creatures of habit who vote Labour. All the parties would do well to take a more considered view of why people vote the way they do rather than hurling abuse at those whose votes they need.
It is not permissable for a bucket full of shit to stand for Parliament unless the bucket takes human form. It can then be elected to either the UK or Scottish Parliaments and, in at least one well-publicised case, be elected to both.
Labour will play the "We won't get rid of invalidity benefit if we stay in power, but the Tories will" card at the May 2010 UK general election. Result; most of Glasgow comfortably in the bag for them.
Cynical? Moi?
Well, as others have pointed out, the people of Glasgow North-East would vote for a bucket full of shit if it happened to be standing for the Labour Party.
Spoken by a true Nat. If they didn't vote for us, we will just disregard them, insult them and ignore them.
You are such bad losers. Get a grip and get used to it because you may get some more shocks during the forthcoming elections.
Sadly, I expect a dull, dreary slog that will alienate the voters
Oh come on Angus, with stunning, inciteful and intelligent debate and comment such as that spoken by Costello, we must be in for a spectacularly intellectual campaign from the SNP.
There's a drastic and dramatic solution to your problem, Costello. Perhaps the SNP should enter the Glasgow North-East consituency, shift the people from their homes and replace them with an entirely different electorate.
Or he could put an end to his patronising remarks and try to stop the SNP being largely a 'regional' party, only enthused about furthering the interests of the people it represents - and ignoring the rest! Who knows? It might even become a truly national party if it did this.
At the moment, with the standard of some of its elected representatives and Ministers, the first scenario seems considerably more likely. The second would be a much more revolutionary change!
"Presumably, Costello, you will also demand that the SNP get 50% of the possible votes before they claim a mandate for separation?"
I'd demand a hell of a lot more than 50% of the possible votes before considering the SNP to have any kind of mandate to break up the United Kingdom.
"Spoken by a true Nat. "
Nope.
"There's a drastic and dramatic solution to your problem, Costello."
What problem would that be? I did not name or highlight any kind of problem. I simply made an observation. I enjoy the occasional canard as much as the next person but the knee jerk assumption that anyone who despises Labour - and who might hold those who would vote for that repulsive party after the last 12 years of government and having had 74 odd years of poverty while represented by them - is automatically an SNP man is really rather silly.
If contempt for Labour makes one a Scottish Nationalist then the SNP can truly look forward to support on a UK-wide level.
Re Costello
Forgive the false assumption.
However, what comes across in your earlier post is not your contempt for the Labour Party - but your scorn for those who vote for them. Even your use of such a choice expression underlines this.
And that kind of judgement devalues people - implying that their opinions and experience are worth a great deal less than your own.
Perhaps it's time you got off your own particular bucket and planted your feet a little more firmly on the ground.
I'm a Glasgow North East resident and I voted for Mikey, no wait sorry I meant that I voted for Labour.
The so called bucket of shit is at least a local man and not a chancer looking for glory.
Everybody who believes in democracy has a duty to accept last night's result in Glasgow North East.
You have to believe that the people of Glasgow North East cast their votes after looking at all the issues.
You have to believe that, after long consideration of all the options, they used the gift of their vote with care and they chose Labour.
In spite of the war in Afghanistan, in spite of the almost daily parade of flag-draped coffins, in spite of the fact that our brave soldiers are forced to buy their own boots while MoD fat cats scoop up cash bonuses for their hard work, the people of Glasgow North East chose Labour.
In spite of the worst unemployment figures since Tony Blair was elected, in spite of the worst youth unemployment EVER, the people of Glasgow North East chose Labour.
In spite of the fact that Glasgow North East has the seventh highest number of people on benefits in the entire UK, they chose Labour. In spite of the fact that the election was caused by the most shattering scandal in the history of Westminster, they chose Labour.
In spite of the fact that Michael Martin was forced out of office as Speaker - the first time that's happened in more than 200 years - they chose Labour.
In spite of the fact that Mr Martin spent £1.7million of their money on doing up his London residence, they chose Labour.
In spite of the £1,400 he claimed for chauffeur-driven cars to take him round Glasgow North East, they chose Labour.
In spite of the £95,000 he claimed for his Glasgow home in the past seven years, in spite of the seat in the Lords he was given, in spite of the £350 he can claim - tax free - every day he turns up there, they chose Labour.
So, really, there's only one question left.
What would the Labour Party have to do to people in Springburn to make them stop voting Labour?
A bad day at the office for the Nats.Their candidate was caught lying about his place of birth - he laughed at Caledonain Uni, calling it a joke - he laughed at people and was all smarmy on TV. But the good people of glasgow north east are canny and they had the last laugh...... so f.... right off - Opus Dei man
Anon 6:32
It's not 'their' money that the Labour Government are spending, because as you say they have the seventh highest number of people on benefits in the entire UK, they therefore do not contribute to what the Government spends, they just take!
Therefore in answer to your question, cut their benefits!
This election proves how much the SNP lied in their manifesto both for the Westminster and Holyrood vote.
It's great being in opposition because you can promise the earth but you don't have to deliver.
I remember during the Holyrood campaign wondering how the SNP were going to afford all their promises. The fact is, they couldn't, and now they are being shown up as a typical political party, reneging on their promises and letting everyone down.
They are stronger in opposition.
6:32pm
The answer is simple. It is the same that would stop SNP stalwarts vooting for Salmond and his dodgy claims for food money etc., The barra boy and his claims for toblerones and other affairs, the beach boy for being one of 4 SNP MSPs who claimed for a wreath. The tories stalwarts, well enough said and the Lib Dems.
In short depending upon where you are there will always be people who will vote a certain way because that is what they do.
What would the SNP do about the recession, the war (oh we wouldn't have a professional army or any army would we? We wouldn't need the range in Uist would we?) The SNP like most political parties are a load of self interested toads.
Post a Comment