Clydeside_Sheep

Was at Kula Shaker this evening, had a good time. I thought it would be good, but it was better than I expected. The swg3 hall they had was better than the Zutons one, as it didn't have the pillars in front of the stage. They waited till the very end to play Govinda, which was excellent - funny to hear pissed weegies singing in sanskrit! Had a few pints at Patrick Cross before it, and a munch in German Doner Kebab. Great stuff!

So, as the Sturgeonites line up one by one to endorse Swinney (just as they did with Humza), an Ipsos poll shows more of the general public would prefer Forbes. When limited to SNP voters alone, though, they prefer Swinney. Who would have thought that a failed leader from 20 years ago, who is known to be keen to retire and is heavily associated with all the shite of the Sturgeon years, would fail to get voters' juices flowing? (Wings is calling him Volkssturm John - hilarious!) Two things are clear: (i) The ruling SNP faction couldn't give a fuck about growing support / widening appeal. They are in this for themselves and they all want a punt at FM or a ministers job to get one of those fat pensions Humza is walking off with. They just need to keep the plates spinning for long enough. God knows, most are wholly unemployable outside of Holyrood. (ii) As I alluded the other day, there is not a lot of thinkers among the SNP support. They claim to want to win a referendum, but reliably choose / support options which alienate the wider public. What an odd bunch, totally lost without Salmond. I saw a nationalist tweet the other day "we need to get Nicola back" - it was exactly like the huns "get Walter back" pish. The two groups have a lot in common. There is obviously support for Forbes, but outwith the ruling faction. She obviously knows she has to pick her time carefully. Maybe she will be happy for Swinney to do what is being asked - be the fall guy for the two likely poor elections the SNP faces, then step down to let a new, untainted leader in. Maybe Kate sees herself as that leader. Crazy the party is putting itself through this, all because Kate doesn't approve of men bumming each other. And she only said it because she was asked directly, not shouting from the rooftops. Even crazier that the action is to appease a piece of dirt like Patrick Harvie.

It was in The Herald over the weekend that the Greens are riven with internal acrimony (good). However, one chilling detail was that Ross Greer refers to John Swinney as "work dad". Just when you think these people could not disgust you any more, they always find a way......

So, now hes quitting, that means Humza (aged 39) gets £52k per year from the taxpayer for life. If he lived to 90 - not unlikely given he's never done a good days work in his life, nor will he ever - that would come out to be over £2.6m, in return for doing nothing. He became an MSP in 2011, meaning a Holyrood career of just 13 years, during which time he could not point to a single significant success of any type. And this at a time when theres a cost of living crisis and services being cut. You are correct I want it shut down.

How could we be sure the video was definitely him? Is there still a link?

'The National' today tweeted a picture of likely SNP leadership candidates. One of the pics was Ash Regan 😆

So, first you allude its a smear on him, but now you say good on him! Come on man, this aint serious!

And when he said this, he went out again to the Jews, and saith to them: I find no cause in him.

The always interesting Robin McAlpine says the SNP must appoint Kate Forbes, saying this is their last roll of the dice before the Holyrood Elections: http://robinmcalpine.org/the-snp-must-choose-forbes/ However, Wings says the Greens have done a U-turn and said they will support the Humza Government in the confidence voting, which most probably means Forbes has no chance: https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-feral-ferret/ (having said that, they U-turned on supporting Humza - and their climate targets etc - why not Forbes too? If you dont like Harvies principles, he has others).

No, he probably on some jolly abroad at our expense. Perhaps its Tartan week in Tajikistan, or opening a new SNP-embassy in Burkina Faso.

Agree with analysis of swinney. Re what the telegraph accuses him of: - its a matter of record he did vote for the GRR which would have allowed 16 yr old to self declare a gender with no medical input or evidence (all of this is obscene nonsense of course). - as for an LGBT curriculum, its this kind of thing: https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/scotland-first-country-in-the-world-to-embed-lgbt-education-in-school-curriculum-3393389 https://www.thenational.scot/news/23741392.first-school-scotland-embeds-lgbt-education-curriculum/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/17/scottish-primary-schools-appoint-children-lgbt-champions/ https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/12504427/scottish-primary-schools-lgbt-champions-trans/ For a nationalist, you seem very poorly informed of what they spend their parliamentary time on, instead of independence.

You prove my point about nationalists over and over, in that you are disinclined to engage with people of a different pov, anyone with a different opinion is "blinkered". You lapse easily into caricatures / tropes of who these different people are. I dont vote for the tories, though I do support the rwanda legislaiton, it already has illegal immigrants fleeing into rep ireland. I dont know what this legislation against the mentally ill is, but if its something anti-trans then it can only be a good thing.

Thanks, thats a better explanation than mine! Interesting that the no confidence motion is still in a Yousaf government then, which the greens pledged not to support over the weekend.

Disagree, I think it is accurate. How else to explain a party where so many bland, unremarkable people rise to the very top simply through ultra-loyalty to a benefactor? Yousaf, Gilruth and MacAllan are all examples of this from the Sturgeon years. Neil Gray is the example from Humza's time. How else to explain a party where a piece of nonsense like the GRR could get to the stage of almost being enacted in law? Sturgeon was notoriously intolerant of different opinions. This article from early-Sturgeon period (2016) already describes the party as being "too intolerant of dissent". https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/apr/20/scottish-elections-snp-dominance-leaves-opponents-fighting-for-second Then you have the attempted legal assassination of Salmond and how Forbes was treated in the leadership campaign for her own values, in the effort to shoehorn Humza in. This despite both UK parliaments noting when creating gay marriage that people who retained Forbes views had a view "worthy of respect" (were they lying?). Humza tried to continue in the same vein, with his suspension of Fergus Ewing. Its a system which empowers yes-men, discourages discussion and alienates thinkers. Its also the sign of paranoid and weak leadership which puts self-preservation before the party goals. Finally, in the last 10 years the party has not progressed one jot and now appears to have run out of road. if large swathes of the party are not unthinking (or, at least, easily impressed) how could this stasis have gone on for 10 years? Edit - remember, the party chose Humza over Forbes last year. it was tight, but thats what they did.

How dare you Sir? I say all manner of accurate things!