Poll - 2019 Shetland MSP by-election

[fina]

Now that Michael Stout has announced he's standing too,

deciding who to vote for is going to be really difficult.

 

Could they make it a job-share between 2 or 3 folk?

[Ghostrider]

On the face of it, there's only two or three, maybe four, that have any realistic chance of winning it. The independents are difficult to call, I guess we'll just have to wait and see how much impact make and in what they they make it during their campaigns. The Nat's vote has probably already been split to an extent by whose in the field already, whether any of the indpendents folk know little about manages to split any other party's vote, again I guess will become more apparent during the campaigns.

 

While its good to have have so much choice, there's a goodish risk that with such a relatively small electorate only a handful of votes will divide first and second place, potentially leading to the rise of a 'Not my MSP' mob in the aftermath if the winner is at the opposite end of the political spectrum to the second placed candidate.

Edited July 26, 2019 by Ghostrider

[admin]

Here's the full list of candidates for the Shetland MSP by-election on Thursday 29 August 2019

 

Name of candidate (and party if applicable)

• Johan Adamson - Scottish Labour and Co-operative Party
• Brydon Goodlad - Scottish Conservative and Unionist
• Stuart Martin - UK Independence Party (UKIP)
• Debra Nicolson - Scottish Green Party
• Ian Scott - Independent
• Michael Stout - Independent
• Peter Tait - Independent
• Ryan Thomson - Independent
• Tom Wills - Scottish National Party (SNP)
• Beatrice Wishart - Scottish Liberal Democrats

[Windwalker]

On the face of it, there's only two or three, maybe four, that have any realistic chance of winning it. The independents are difficult to call, I guess we'll just have to wait and see how much impact make and in what they they make it during their campaigns. The Nat's vote has probably already been split to an extent by whose in the field already, whether any of the indpendents folk know little about manages to split any other party's vote, again I guess will become more apparent during the campaigns.

 

While its good to have have so much choice, there's a goodish risk that with such a relatively small electorate only a handful of votes will divide first and second place, potentially leading to the rise of a 'Not my MSP' mob in the aftermath if the winner is at the opposite end of the political spectrum to the second placed candidate.

Dunna worry about it Ghostie, if we dunna lik da outcome we can just argue fir anider vote. Dats whit da remainers and the SNP are doing. If it’s guid enough fir dem, it’s guid enough fir wis.

[JGHR]

Dunna worry about it Ghostie, if we dunna lik da outcome we can just argue fir anider vote. Dats whit da remainers and the SNP are doing. If it’s guid enough fir dem, it’s guid enough fir wis.

You'll be getting another vote in 2021 if you don't like the outcome, and following that, another one every four years thereafter .

 

If its good enough for you why do you suppose it shouldn't be good enough for them?

[Muckle Oxters]

Dunna worry about it Ghostie, if we dunna lik da outcome we can just argue fir anider vote. Dats whit da remainers and the SNP are doing. If it’s guid enough fir dem, it’s guid enough fir wis.

 

And here's me tinkin dat regular voting is part o democracy!

 

And things change. Circumstances and plans aroond Brexit (and if we crash oot, Scottish Independence) ir significantly different noo fae da last referendum. Whit's da problem wee checkin if folk are still in agreement?

[Ghostrider]

^ I don't see what's different. The Brexit referendum questions were 'Remain' or 'Leave', if we're now finally heading for a 'no deal' leave, that's exactly what the country voted for, and a 'no deal' leave means exactly the same now as it did at the time of the referendum, and always will mean exactly the same as it did then, 'no deal' cannot change what it is.

 

Folk weren't asked to vote to 'Leave, but only if we can get a deal we like', that wasn't an option on the ballot. A plain 'Leave', which was what was voted for, can only mean spin on our heel and walk away empty handed. Those punting about the idea voting 'Leave' meant anything else that simply walk away with nothing, are wishful thinkers trying to re-define the English language.

 

As regards Scottish independence, the possibility that we might be leaving the EU was already out there and known when the last Scottish referendum was held, and it obviously didn't scare enough voters to plump for Scottish independence then. Similarly, when the Brexit referendum was held, it was already out there any known that the SNP would consider the UK leaving the EU a 'significant change' and would be seeking another Scottish independence referendum, the SNP never missed an opportunity to say so, but obviously the threat of Scotland leaving the UK in the event of Brexit didn't scare enough of the UK in to voting against it either.

 

By all means, once Brexit has occurred and if Holyrood decides the outcome is intolerable for Scotland, let them hound after another Scottish independence referendum all they want, but we've already done referendus in the relatively recent past for both Scottish independence with the threat of Brexit on the table, and for Brexit with the threat of Scottish independence as a result on the table. Doing it again is either going to change nothing, or add to the confusion and prolong the agony.

 

The biggest problem with running another referendum on either Brexit or Scottish independence so soon after the last one, and before anything has actually changed, is that with the losers in both having done nothing but deny the results since the last ones, and use every method they can lay their hands on, including the obtuse and bizarre, to discredit and overturn them. Are they any more likely to accept the outcome(s) of either referendum if they were to be re-run and produce the same result as previously, and if in re-runs went 'Yes' to Scottish independence and 'Remain' in the EU, do they really expect the losers in that scenario to behave any differently than the losers have in the recent referendums we've had.

Edited July 27, 2019 by Ghostrider

[Windwalker]

 

Dunna worry about it Ghostie, if we dunna lik da outcome we can just argue fir anider vote. Dats whit da remainers and the SNP are doing. If it’s guid enough fir dem, it’s guid enough fir wis.

 

 

And here's me tinkin dat regular voting is part o democracy!

 

And things change. Circumstances and plans aroond Brexit (and if we crash oot, Scottish Independence) ir significantly different noo fae da last referendum. Whit's da problem wee checkin if folk are still in agreement?

Du must be an SNP man as du seems tae be suggesting democracy is fine when it suits de.

[Muckle Oxters]

"Du must be an SNP man as du seems tae be suggesting democracy is fine when it suits de."

I don't see how du comes tae dat conclusion. I hae nae particular interest in Scotland becoming independent, but I hae nae problem we folk being asked what dey tink either, particularly when dirs been a change in circumstances.

[Muckle Oxters]

^ I don't see what's different. The Brexit referendum questions were 'Remain' or 'Leave', if we're now finally heading for a 'no deal' leave, that's exactly what the country voted for, and a 'no deal' leave means exactly the same now as it did at the time of the referendum, and always will mean exactly the same as it did then, 'no deal' cannot change what it is.

 

Folk weren't asked to vote to 'Leave, but only if we can get a deal we like', that wasn't an option on the ballot. A plain 'Leave', which was what was voted for, can only mean spin on our heel and walk away empty handed. Those punting about the idea voting 'Leave' meant anything else that simply walk away with nothing, are wishful thinkers trying to re-define the English language.

 

Dat's wan wye o lookin at it, but naebody campaigning for Brexit was even spaekin aboot a no deal scenario at da time - not Boris Johnson, Farage or onybody else. 

 

Among some o da things Johnson promised wid be in place wis a free trade agreement, tariff-free access tae EU markets, nae hard Irish border, £350m a week for da NHS, lots o deals we idder countries - it a lang list dat's been ignored or dey came to realise canna be delivered, and now folk are trying to say crashing oot on WTO rules has always been da plan - but dat simply isna da case.

 

Lookin at it anidder wye, if a political party was voted in on da back o a pile o promises dat dey ignored or couldna deliver, den we'd hae da chance o voted dem oot at da next general election. In dis case, Leave made a lot o promises dat dey hiv ignored or canna deliver but dey expect folk to sit on dir hands and let dem do whitever dey want.

 

So, a simple question... noo dat da (lack o) detail is clear, whit's da problem we checkin we folk to see if a No Deal Brexit is what dey want? If dey are, den nae odds.

[Windwalker]

 

"Du must be an SNP man as du seems tae be suggesting democracy is fine when it suits de."

I don't see how du comes tae dat conclusion. I hae nae particular interest in Scotland becoming independent, but I hae nae problem we folk being asked what dey tink either, particularly when dirs been a change in circumstances.

The problem is, is that we were already asked and they decided just to ignore the wishes of the majority and carry on as normal with their desire to have an independent Scotland.

Glad to hear your not an SNP man though.

[Ghostrider]

 

^ I don't see what's different. The Brexit referendum questions were 'Remain' or 'Leave', if we're now finally heading for a 'no deal' leave, that's exactly what the country voted for, and a 'no deal' leave means exactly the same now as it did at the time of the referendum, and always will mean exactly the same as it did then, 'no deal' cannot change what it is.

 

Folk weren't asked to vote to 'Leave, but only if we can get a deal we like', that wasn't an option on the ballot. A plain 'Leave', which was what was voted for, can only mean spin on our heel and walk away empty handed. Those punting about the idea voting 'Leave' meant anything else that simply walk away with nothing, are wishful thinkers trying to re-define the English language.

 

Dat's wan wye o lookin at it, but naebody campaigning for Brexit was even spaekin aboot a no deal scenario at da time - not Boris Johnson, Farage or onybody else. 

 

Among some o da things Johnson promised wid be in place wis a free trade agreement, tariff-free access tae EU markets, nae hard Irish border, £350m a week for da NHS, lots o deals we idder countries - it a lang list dat's been ignored or dey came to realise canna be delivered, and now folk are trying to say crashing oot on WTO rules has always been da plan - but dat simply isna da case.

 

Lookin at it anidder wye, if a political party was voted in on da back o a pile o promises dat dey ignored or couldna deliver, den we'd hae da chance o voted dem oot at da next general election. In dis case, Leave made a lot o promises dat dey hiv ignored or canna deliver but dey expect folk to sit on dir hands and let dem do whitever dey want.

 

So, a simple question... noo dat da (lack o) detail is clear, whit's da problem we checkin we folk to see if a No Deal Brexit is what dey want? If dey are, den nae odds.

 

 

Did onybody believe wan wird o' a politician it ony time trow da referendum campaign, an if dey did, why?

 

It sudda been plen dat whaever dey wir, dey wir biased ta ta hilt, is dey wir aa declared fur tae side ur da tidder, naebody campaigned upoa a 'neutral' ticket an tried ta offer aabody independent avice fur da plusses and negatives o' baith sides.......IMHO dat' sudda been da government's job, bit dey shurly didna see it dat wye.

 

Does onybody takk seriously da campaign pledges an promises med be ony pairty ur candidate it ony election, be it MP ur Councillor? Shurly we're seen enyoch vottin noo ta ken it best whit onyeen says durin a campaign is a fantasy wish list hyped ta da deevil ta try an win an edge owre dir opponents. Why wid onyeen tink whit onyeen sed idda run up ta da referendum vottin wis wirt ony mair is dir kind sed idda run up ta ony idder vott?

 

Nane o' dem tryin ta gyt support fur Brexit hed da pooer it da time idda referendum ta deliver upoa onythin dey wir 'promisin' an it sudda been plen ta aa dat withoot dat pooer, aa dey wir tryin ta sell ta fokk wir draems an aspirations dat micht be possible if aa da dyuks lined up da richt wye, Da Government idda day wir da only eens it hed da pooer ta makk onythin happen, an unless dey idder took it upoa demsells ta ent da referendu result an makk it happen, ur wir tised/forced ur whitever be Brexit supporters ta makk it happen, deil aa wid ur cud ever change whitever Boris, farage ur onybody lukkit da public in ta believin.

 

Noo, I cud understaund if Brexit supporters wir tirn, fur whin Cameron sed da government wid du whit da fokk vottit fur, dat wis comin fae a man dat hed da pooer ta deliver upoa sicna promise, an it widna been surprisin if fokk hed a taen dat is a firm committment. Bit, is we noo ken, it wisna wirt da breath dat sed it idder.

 

Cameron didna believe da vott wid geen da wye it gud, an kent no whit ta du whin hit did, so nae shunner is he took a skoit aboot im, he wis fur da door is fast is his peerie legs cud kerry im ta geen a hoid. Mey da moaniment tocht sho cud sell fokk a set up worse is wir current membership is a 'gud deal', an cudna ken whit ta du idder whin sho wis seen trow. Sho's geen noo tu fur a mercy........

 

Da things Boris & Co wir speakin aboot pre referendum wir at least possibilities whin dey sed dem, an some micht weel a been realities be noo if sumeen wi a pair hed a geen ta Brussels streight efter da referendum an played hardball......Instead, Cameron didna even have the stones ta spaek wi Brussels, an Mey gud kepp a haund ta dem, laek da peerie boy Dickens' wrott aboot aksin fur mair.........Atween dem, an da tree year dir fiddled whin Breetin is brunt, dir da eens dats sold doon da river ony chance o' onythin Boris & Co pointed oot as possibilities becomin reality. Whidder Boris & Co cudda, ur widda delivered on onthin o' it ony better we'll never ken, fur dir been twartered be idders it every chance afore noo, an noo is owre late fur dem ta du it.

 

If da main excuse ta hadd anidder referendum is dat supporters o' a winnin side irna delivered upoa 'promises' dey med afore da vott. Idda first place, I tink da man needs ta be geen a chance, he's only been athin pooer a twartee days ta du ocht, an he's already sed he's no haein a hard Irish border, he's spaekin aboot trade deals tu......Da fact da previous twa PM's sed dey wid deliver, an didna, bit wir twarterin da loodest supporters o' Brexit fae duin ocht it da sam time, canna be led ta Boris' door. Boris is far fae whit I wid laek ta see athin No. 10, bit in compare o' da twa it gud afore im, he's a breath o' fresh air, fur he's da only een dats shawin ony sign o' duin whit he sed he wid.

 

A second referendum based only upoa undelivered ur undeliverable promises wid set a godless precedent da wid lead ta openin da floodgates, fur if dat can be a valid excuse wi a referendum, it follows it haes ta be a valid excuse ta demand a re-run o' only idder vott tu, an I tink it wid be nae understatement ta say dat if every undelivered ur undeliverable promise med durin a campaign be a pairty ur individual cud trigger a new vott, fokk wi gyt naethin idder dun fur gyaan ta vott owre an owre igyen.

 

Its up ta every individual dat votts ta ken whit dir vottin fur, an ta du whitever dey need ta du ta finn dat oot. Regardless o' wha sed whit durin da campaign, da question upoa da ballot wis a plen an simple 'bide' ur 'laeve', nae conditions an nae add ons. Idder keep as is, ur slip aa, wheel upoa heel an go. Regardless o' wha sed whit, wha implied ur insinuated whit, onybody believin dem did it dir ain risk, an if dey tink noo dey'r bein hard dun by an wir misled, den its upoa dir ain hedds dat dey didna fully inform demsells afore dey vottit whit dey wir vottin fur, Fur if dey hed, dey'd a seen baith campaigns fur whit dey wir, hot air, leak da rest o' wis did.

 

You gyt wan chance ta vott, an if you makk a mistakk you just hae ta live wi it, dats foo it wirks, we idder keep dat principle, ur we dunna, an eenoo wi still supposedly hae im. You only gyt anidder chance eftir a set time neest time roond, ur whin somethin alters enyoch ta justify wan, sae far dir naethin altered aboot Brexit, aathing wi ken noo wis kent tree year ago, an if fokk didn ken it, dey wirna educated demsells enyoch upoa whit dey wir vottin upoa, and dats dir ain fault alone.

[Spinner72]

I'm fine with another referendum in either case, simply because times have changed and people in general are more aware of what things mean and also the consequences of "assuming the landslide" so not bothering to vote.

 

It's good that for the first time we have a few genuine alternatives to the LibDem stronghold, and while the "tactical vote" has to be for any SNP candidate due to it being the overwhelming option for whoever wins actually being listened to, they are doing themselves no favors on todays visit.

 

The Shetland News headline sums it up : "Sturgeon arrives in town with anti-Brexit and pro-independence message"

 

Even primary bairns can see that's a direct contradiction, it can only be one or the other...

[Muckle Oxters]

@ Ghostrider

 

Du maks some good points, but dirs twaree logical inconsistency dat runs through it aa.

 

Du reckons it's up tae da voters to ken whit dir votin for (fair enyoch), but dat da voters soodna believe da very folk dat should ken i.e. da politicians who are makin da proposals in da first place. So whaa ir folk meant tae believe?

 

And how ir folk meant tae ken whit it is dir goin tae git efter dey vote if du's sayin dat we should ken dat da politicians canna dae whit dey said dey wir goin tae?

 

And den du's sayin da politicians dat we shouldna trust in da first place should noo be geen da chance to deliver whitiver it is dey want, despite da fact it's no whit dey said dey were goin tae dey. Why should we trust dem noo if we shoulda have trusted dem afore?

 

 

"sae far dir naethin altered aboot Brexit, aathing wi ken noo wis kent tree year ago"

 

Dat's no true. Dirs plenty we didna ken or see comin. As du says desel, it wis aa aspirations afore.

 

I widna hiv minded sae much if it wis a clear majority, but 48/52 whitever wye da vote geed, and based on a pile o lies and aspirations, is joost a scrape through. I see nae problem we puttin da details o da deal(s) on da table and askin da voters whit we tink.

[Wheelsup]

Ta Agree wi GR. I tocht a vott fur laeve wid be a clean brak an a bruk o sh*te. Dats why I votted Byde. A lot o da fok at votted laeve likkly tocht dey hed naethin to loss, and dat is mair dan likkly true for maist o dem.  Hoosumever a lot lat demsels be misled - and Ignorance is no Defence.

Bit aa fur dat, der is a fair case fur re-run, as der nae doot we wer leed til.

Tavish has drapped wis at a parteecularly ill-judged time. Da slaverin ower his saet is geen da Nationalists a fit i da door wi da "independents" playin in ta der hands, by spleetin the vott.