PapofGlencoe

I'll have a look. if SNP figures didn't want independence in 2000 they would have stuck the knife in at a more opportune moment i.e during the big vote? I saw with my own eyes how the SNP leaders (like Swinney) conducted themselves, they all wanted independence from what i could see.

They need to get the corruption out and done with so we can all move on. It gives bad actors like Wings of Scotland the opportunity to implicate anyone he doesn't like. He'll be onto Kate Forbes now, you watch. I'm not convinced he wouldn't be onto her if she was leader either. He just wants the party dead. There is a cohort of carpetbaggers in the SNP only outnumbered by the wreckers who feel better moaning about "baddies" than facing up to the fact independence is favoured by less than half our people, not more. We need to start talking about independence again, be positive and be competent in government. We've got away from the Greens and can attempt a less dogmatic role in policy. Get rid of the gimmicks. They need to get on the front foot with the media again. Talk about the big policies which have positively affected people's lives and then the ones which are still in the offing. Too much energy is focussed on daft polices from all sides. Anyway i'm hopeful this will stem the tide. However it's a simple fact they've been in power nearly 20 years. They've actually only lost 10% of the vote. it's not even a complete collapse but there will always be voters you lose over that time.

What does he actually say though? specifically? Lloyd Quinan was saying the SNP physically corrupted the last leadership election with no evidence. I just don't find the man credible.

i'd be quite happy to see an election, don't get me wrong. I've got no reason to believe Swinney doesn't want independence and think he's the best option. He would have been the best option if he'd stood in the last election as well, for me. None of them are brilliant in my view, just the best of the choice available. So as well giving them a chance. i'm trying to be positive for a wee change! I've found quite a few SNP members to be quite condescending and get how you feel. They do need to remember the SNP exists because many Scots desire our country's independence, it's not supposed to be a run of the mill party. The cause should be first and foremost. I'm hopeful we'll get back to that, whoever can put a stop to the sniping and bring some positivity, i'm in favour of.

I think I'm for Swinney now. Give him a chance. I don't even think he's boring either. He can putdown quite well and still has fire in the belly. He's only 60. The first thing people think about Forbes is her religion. Poor but that's how it is. I see her as a wee lassie to be honest. I'm probably showing my age. Give her a few years as a deputy would be my choice. I'll back either of them though. I think they're at least brave enough to put their heads above the parapet. Getting the SNP's good policies talked about again is the main driver now. Plus a more positive take on independence than the doom we have been seeing recently. Even if it is out of our hands, what have we got to lose by pointing out we want to unite our people to an undeniable majority?

a HECK of a lot of people claiming virtuosity now were against gay civil partnership (not gay per se) back in the day. don't kid yourselves on. It's actually a good thing people can change their minds. It was a majority who were against it not that long ago which is unthinkable now.

Totally agree. The hilarious thing is, for anyone paying attention and given to a wee chuckle in the face of all this nonsense, is Scottish Labour support all the rubbish policies the SNP have supposedly lost support on. They also do not support Scotland's claim of right. Labour have done absolute nothing to push an position on anything. Charlatans. So we're in a position where some people have moved to an even worse version of the SNP they don't like. There is no getting away from this either. What will an election deliver? Labour and SNP on similar votes, Tories on slightly less. Or even Labour with loads more seats than anyone else. None of them will hold a majority by themselves and there is no grown up politics anymore. So both sides are in hock to Greens or Tories. Yipee.

to add, on the topic. I'm for Flynn but seen as he's out I'd go Swinney for now. Unless someone else comes forward and gives us something to shout about. Forbes doesn't do it for me, I had her third last time. I just don't see what others are seeing but fair enough.

my own personal view is that we need to just try and forget the last few years where some serious politicians felt they couldn't say children shouldn't be taking puberty blockers, men can be in women's sports and people can literally change sex. The tide has turned on it and no need to bring it back up. let people be that want to live their lives in an unorthodox manner, good on them and move on. No need to bring their lives up at every opportunity to satisfy some narcissists on both "sides" of that debate. it's a topic done to death in many european countries and north america. not unique to us. move on.

Salmond is by far the most canny and charismatic politician in Scotland in my eyes but he's lost credibility in the eyes of too many. For example, my wife is appalled I still give him an ear. She can't see past the allegations, no smoke without fire blah blah. a lot of folk like that, for right or wrong. what they probably should do is listen to his tactics and stop viciously attacking him though.

Flynn has backed out who would have been my choice. With all that's left, I'm probably okay with Swinney. He has more steel about him than he did 20 years ago. This is all about keeping the government together and avoiding an election rather than anything to do with independence, though. I want a decent government but many vote SNP for independence, including me. I find a lot of the discourse a bit over the top brought on by voracious opinonators on social media. The SNP are struggling because of splits in the party about gender reform, corruption allegations and Westminster calling their bluff on independence. Some of that is their own fault and some of it isn't. The same people moaning about the SNP also enjoy all the free-at-point of need things. Many would never be put forward by Tories or Labour tied to London Labour, fearful of a backlash. My own family have enjoyed free additional childcare which is much better than anything in England. Child payments, rent controls, free transport for kids, vast pay increases for public sector staff. A non-promoted Teacher can be on £60,000 a year. from £50k to £60k in 2 years. The median salary is £32kish, the gap between the two has widened substantially. For good or bad, the SNP have tried to cater to these "middle of the road" people. Yet despite this, a few miseries on less impactful polices are hitting support. They're now being abandoned by them. I don't see independence happening under the SNP alone and I don't see a suitable vehicle without the SNP signing it off. They are going to get anywhere between 25-40% of the vote for the foreseeable but never 55-60% which is required. In other words, they have become a political party, riven by the same problems political parties always have, instead of a national movement. They should have started a non-party political convention years ago. This was always on the cards whether you like SNP or not. Parties become unpopular over time. Howver, I think many of the politicians in the party have become disillusioned and don't believe their countrymen and women want independence strongly enough. So they are as well hoovering up the 40% of independence supporters votes where they can, try to fight Scotland's corner but never really push the boat out. Can you blame them?

Funny how things change. when SNP won by one seat in 2007 it wasn't questioned they had right to government. When SNP have nearly more than all parties combined, something that we're unlikely to see any other party succeed in doing, there are folk calling for an election. Scottish parliament is going to be a difficult place to create stable government in that case.

Stewart MI6donald has been on some gravy train trips and liked the comfort. Nothing against him on a personal level but his priority is not scottish independence anymore and he shouldn't take votes under false pretences. Very poor in my view.

The green coalition was a good idea of forcing home the view Scotland had voted by seats (and votes) for independence referendum supporting parties despite all attempts to dissuade us. It forced those down south to understand it isnt just an SNP issue but a Scotland issue. As the SNP have drawn back from any attempt at a defacto vote, the need for the coalitoin has been less obvious. I do have to say though the DRS scheme was not a bad scheme, I supported it. It was a green initiative and it was shackled by westminster. edited to add: If I was the greens, I would be removing myself from the coalition. They need to appear strong on the enivronment and get their message out on that (rather than other things). The backsliding on Climate targets would allow them to do that easily. They would look weak on their raison d'etre if they stay in, in my view.

Yes, I liked Sturgeon. I'd love to get inside her head on the decision to go to the SC and subsequent action. It seems Greens didn't even know she was doing it... says a lot for them apparently running everything... At the time I thought they had played a blinder as a defacto vote was the only way forward to anyone paying attention. The blind alley was the only route left, therefore knocking down the obstacles to a collision was the big heave needed to take it forward. But that needed more than just Nicola pushing it. She needed the entire Yes scotland gang onside to take that platform to the people. Instead we got Alba decrying it, Wings character assassinating, the greens unaware and SNP Members like Stewart McDonald and his acolytes publishing killer blows. Maybe she thought she could push it by herself but that was never going to happen. Marching us up the hill was fine but to then miss pulling the trigger when there...takes a three hundred year old movement backwards. It was selfish. I'm open to her own interpretation on this but really struggling with it. If she wasn't willing to go through with it, don't take your people there. She could have said, "I want us to concentrate on making independence the settled will. Once that has happened, the SNP will commence a defacto vote". Or she could have said, "EVERY SNP election from now on at Westminster is a decato vote on Union. If the people give us more than 50%, we expect this to be respected". She did neither and walked away. Independence will come again as an issue. It's too ingrained now not to. 10 years hence will be an interesting time.