| Archive for Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org Scottish Politics Discussion Forum / Messageboard - Dedicated to online discussion about Scottish Politics and an Independent Scotland, as well as Scottish Society today. We also have a section dedicated to Banter, Sport and Recommended Sites. |
| Mctosh45 |
Will Central Belt Labour Voters Go For Independance?Thats the question!They're the one's the independance movement need to convince. Given most of the electorate vote with their wallets in mind i.e. "the economy stupid". One would think the games up for the Unionist cause, given the overwhelming advantages economically that an independant Scotland would bring! But no, thus far they still seem wedded to the past.  Discuss.
Regards Mctosh45. |
||||||||||||
| SLG |
I don't think it's that simple. Years of Unionist scare-mongering and the uncertainty of the transition period into independence make the status quo hard to give up. As Holyrood becomes more established, I think folk are becoming more willing to take the plunge though. Mibee not by 2007, but our time will come soon enough.
As for the central belt in particular. I don't think they are any less supportive of the SNP or independence in general than other parts of the country. The difference is the strength of the Labour party. The SNP actually poll higher in some central belt constituencies and come second than some other constituencies where they come first. The decline of the Labour party is as important in the central belt as the SNP winning any arguments. PR in local government will do a great deal to weaken the Labour party. |
||||||||||||
| The_Unionist |
I have to say that it appears to me that Glasgow and Edinburgh are more pro-union than other areas of the country. They have a more cosmopolitan atmosphere, and tend to be more outward looking, so I would say that these areas are aware of the economic and cultural benefits of union, at least more so than the Highlands and Islands, which have populations with a strongers sense of identity and history. | ||||||||||||
| SLG |
Pro-independence votes on the list in 2003 were Glasgow - 41.48% Lothians - 43.91% This compares with the national average of 38.77% So you are completely wrong.
Well you are right that these areas are more cosmopolitan. If you are also right that they are more outward looking and aware of the relative economic and cultural benfits of Unionism and independence, then it is interesting that these electorates are more likely to vote for pro-independence parties than elsewhere. |
||||||||||||
| Aventinian |
I imagine the results are skewed in Glasgow, SLG, by the support for the Scottish Socialists - who would still easily achieve the same number of votes if they weren't Nationalist.
If you asked me to label the most Unionist part of the country, it'd probably be the rural south-west. |
||||||||||||
| The_Unionist |
Indeed, where the only Uk parliament Tory constiuancy is located - Scottish tories back in Westminster at last | ||||||||||||
| Mctosh45 |
Aventinian, the Unionist,
What utter nonsense, the biggest hurdle to Scottish Independence is the central belt Labour voters, particularly West Central Scotland where half of Scotlands population lives!!!! ,some who I would point out still consider the S.N.P. as "Tartan Tories". |
||||||||||||
| SLG |
Well I don't have polling evidence for how Glasgow and Edinburgh would be expected to vote in a referendum, so I thought I'd compare the party positions to the rest of the country. If we look at the most recent devolution referendum as another guide, the average yes vote was 74.3% and was 71.9% in Edinburgh and 83.6% in Glasgow. As for the skew. I would not say that the figures are skewed in Glasgow. Yes many SSP voters are not 100% behind the independence issue, but equally Glasgow is dominated by Labour, a large proportion of which support independence. |
||||||||||||
| Mctosh45 |
SLG,
Forgive me but i'm confused.What's the point of a "Labour Independence" voter, IF THEY DON'T VOTE FOR INDEPENDENCE?? |
||||||||||||
| macnumpty |
They might vote for a Unionist party for other policy issues, or for tactical reasons - to keep a Tory out for example - just as a non-independence supporter might be tempted to vote SSP or Green on policy, or SNP (though this is less likely) for policy or tactical reasons.
The key is to secure the referendum: those Labour independence supporters which do exist - John McAllion was one when he was a Labour MP/MSP - will then vote Yes. |
||||||||||||
| Mctosh45 |
Macnumpty,
Hmmm....I just wonder how many of these Labour independence supporters actually exist! Given there's plenty other choice in political parties to vote tacticaly. (\_/) (О.о) (> < ) ^ ^ |
||||||||||||
| Aventinian |
I'm not arguing that they're not, but I imagine you see all Unionists are your ideological enemies - and the Tories are the most vocal of Unionist parties, which is probably why it came up. |
||||||||||||
| macnumpty |
Well, certainly in the days when Labour stood for something, and the SNP appeared distrustful of tacking any extra politics besides Independence onto its programme, your Left Wing nationalist would have had a real dilemma, particularly when Labour was supporting even a limited measure of Home Rule. These days, anyone who stands for anything is quitting Labour for another party, so admittedly there will be fewer Labour independence supporters than say 20 years ago, just as there are fewer left-wing Labour supporters thanks to the SSP and to a degree, the SNP as well. However, I have met a couple who are still kicking around. Sadly, all I have is anecdotal evidence, though. PS Thank you for spreading Bunny. 
|
||||||||||||
| Mctosh45 |
Macnupty,
Well let's hope unionists of all persuasions finally come to their senses and vote for Independence first. Then worry about the political make of Scotland once it's acchieved (Independence)that is. Indeed Aventinian / The Unionist, it seems to me it's the only way a right of centre party will recover any ground in Scotland. |
||||||||||||
| Aventinian |
Why? There are plenty of economic liberals who are Unionists and voting Liberal at the moment.
Indeed, Nationalism fundamentally conflicts with Liberalism in the classical sense, so that's a whole section of the party that could never go Nat. |
||||||||||||
| Mctosh45 |
Aventinian,
More utter guff! THE LIBERAL PARTY is not a right of centre party. "Nationalism" I presume when you say "in the classical sense" would be in the perjoritive sense & though I suspect you already know this, is not the nationalism espoused by the S.N.P. you halfwit! Forgive my tone but I don't like the word Nationalism as it has or can be consrtued as having many negative connotations, of which you are guilty of just doing. I prefer self determination. |
||||||||||||
| Aventinian |
The Liberals are not right of centre, no, but their party appeals to a lot of right-of-centre voters.
When I said 'in the classical sense' I was referring to Liberalism. Unfortunately the term has been somewhat hijacked in the present day, particularly in America, and so I feel the need to distinguish it. I'm talking about the Liberalism of Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill, Friedrich von Hayek, Milton Friedman and so forth. I know many Nationalist don't like the term. Just as many racists don't like the term they have found themselves presented with. Or indeed many socialists, when they hear people mentioning National Socialism. Unfortunately you're going to have to live with it, just as I have to live with the negative connotations of Toryism and conservatism (although I emphasise that I am little more than a fair weather friend of the present Tory party.) Self-determination only, to my mind, works for the self - ie, the individual. A nation cannot self-determine being that it does not have a conscious mind. It is collective determination however you look at it (personally however I don't support democracy as anything more than a check on power) - you are still being ruled, just from a city somewhat closer to your present location. Nationalists are so labeled because they believe the legitimacy of states can be based only on nationality, that is culture, identity, ethnicity; whatever they choose to pick out. I am anti-nationalist because I believe these matters are not within the legitimate interests of government. To me, a just government is one which respects liberty and human rights. |
||||||||||||
| neil8r |
To answer the original question posed, yes many of them will. | ||||||||||||
| IF Convenor |
I see Aventinian is still trying to smear supporters of independence by rarely mentioning nationalism without mentioning racism in the same or the very next sentence. It's pathetic.
To answer the original question, support for independence covers a spectrum. At one end are those for whom it is the most important thing. At the other are those for whom the Union is the main priority. Most people fall somewhere in between these viewpoints. There are many people who would be more for than against independence, but who vote Labour (or some other unionist party) because they prefer that party's policy on education, or health, or something which is important to them. This is why the only true test of support for independence is a single issue referendum. We have to isolate the question from all other matters and ask it in a simple yes/no format so that that is the only issue people are deciding on. Then, and only then, will you get the true measure of support for independence. |
||||||||||||
| Aventinian |
I mention Nationalism quite often without mentioning racism, however if someone raises an ideological point, I will respond with ideology in its broad sense. When speaking of applications in the real world, racism and nationalism are ripe for comparison. As I've said before, I actually consider nationalism to be worse than racism, so it certainly isn't intended as an insult.
Feel free to highlight your differences from the other branches of your ideology, but there's very little point in trying to completely disassociate yourself from them when your rhetoric is at times virtually identical. |
||||||||||||
| Highlander |
If there was a referendum I would want it a multiple question one.
e.g. Should the Scottish parliament; Stay the same? be independent? have more devolved powers? be revoked? I want the referendum to have a quetion or a possible answer where we can get rid of the Scottish parliament or take away power. |
||||||||||||
| neil8r |
What, even UK nationalism ? |
||||||||||||
| Maol.Chaluim |
Why? We've already been consulted on devolution. |
||||||||||||
| Niall |
A Charaid. A survey done by Independence First indicates that over 40% of labour voters support Independence. However Class loyalty and tradition are huge hurdles to overcome when it comes to voting for the SNP or any other pro Independence party. 'S Mise Niall |
||||||||||||
| Mctosh45 |
IF Convenor,
I think I understand your point but it seems to me an independence supporter that votes for a unionist party is oxymoronic for whatever policy reasons they feel aren't being catered too by any given pro independence party, and have got things "arse over tit " so to speak. Surely the goal of self determination far outweighs specific policy issues? So I suppose the only way to address this would be a referendum 
Regards Mctosh45 |
||||||||||||
| neil8r |
If you want that option campaign for it, the SNP however want a referendum to ask one question, Should Scotland be an independent nation again. |
||||||||||||
| neil8r |
By your version of things the only way you should vote for a party is if you agree with every policy they have. People prioritise in regards policies and unfortunately so far its plain to see that a large amount of people who would vote for an Independent Scotland don't vote for a pro Independence party, therefore they consider other policies to be more important. |
||||||||||||
| Aventinian |
Of course. And for the benefit of all, I am talking about politicised nationalism - everybody has a right to the identity etc they want to follow. The two are often confused. I don't have anything against how people choose to live their individual lives. |
||||||||||||
| Mctosh45 |
Niall,
Well if thats the case, these Labour voters should show some "Backbone" & "Get over it" and stop holding this country back...... It's Time!! Regards Mctosh45. |
||||||||||||
| Mctosh45 |
Neil8r,
......Duhh! & I'm saying they've got their priorities all wrong, If independence is your goal common sense dictates everything else is subordinate. Regards Mctosh45. |
||||||||||||
| IF Convenor |
Mctosh, it is clear that you are very near the end of the pro-independence spectrum. However, if independence is to be won we must get every possible pro-independence vote there is. Even if you don't understand it, it is clear that more people support independence than vote for pro-independence parties. The only way to get them voting for independence is to take all other matters off the table and hold a referendum.
Highlander, what would be the mechanism for deciding a multi-option referendum? Would it be winner-takes-all or would there be a transferrable vote, or maybe a run-off between the two most popular options? You see, multiple options means no single option is likely to gain a majority (50%+1) so how do you decide the outcome? If multiple options were such a good idea, why weren't they offered in 1997? Why was it only possible to choose between the status quo and devolution? Why wasn't independence on the ballot? Why not include a dictator for life option? |
||||||||||||
| Niall |
A Charaid. That is correct. However some political party policies such as the SNP's profoundly dishonest 'Independence in Europe' is a huge turn off to many voters. I do vote for the SNP but I do it through gritted teeth to ensure the Toraidhs do not get back in. I firmly believe that if the SNP shoot this sacred cow then they would have a landslide victory, but that would mean admitting that s core policy from 1988 was a vote losing disaster. I am working to free Scotland from the shackles of westminster not to imprison her in the EU straitjacket. Airson Alba! Niall. |
||||||||||||
| October1974 |
The rise of the SNP vote in Dundee dispels the notion that the Labour vote cannot be overcome in the central belt. It was and still is a mostly working class city. | ||||||||||||
| FALSYDE |
For general interest when the SEP was thinking about 'to do or not to do' one of the things we had a look at and studied in detail were the issues the question asked about Labour. What we think we found, and the stats baer it out to some extent is, that the Labour vote is on a steady shallow slide down wards if for no other reason than the die hards who would vote for a tailor's dummy if it has a red rosette on it are quite simply falling off the perch or are now too gaga to be bothered with politics. Also their sons/dtrs and grandsons/dtrs include a significant section who are more asperational for themselves and families, many are educated to higher levels than their parents and also many have or are travelling the world seeing the way things go there and feel this is something they want for themselves so if another party comes along and seems to ring some of those bells their votes are now mobile.
Finally we have a whole new way of voting and lots of these folks are now savvy about how to vote strategically, IF THEY VOTE AT ALL. That's the problem, 51% stayed away last time, if the parties, all of them, fail to get voters out then who knows what the result will be. personally my gut feeling talking to people is they feel seriously pissed off by the antics and incompetence at Holyrood and might come out en masse and give their taunters a good smack. Anyone care to offer odds on that? Incidentally, anyone who thinks/believes the LibDems are right of centre clearly they haven't been following the story so far. |
||||||||||||
| Avatar |
well the only way the unionists would win is by splitting the vote - hence Highlanders sugestion. |
||||||||||||
| SLG |
The Unionists often tell us that the SNP (or pro-independence party) vote equates to the total pro-independence vote. So lets look purely at how the votes fell at the last last Holyrood election on the list vote...
35.86% want full independence a la SNP, SSP and SGP 29.3% want the status quo a la Labour 17.01% want extra powers for the parliament a la the Tories and Dennis Canavan 11.78% want federalism a la the Lib Dems So it would appear to me that full independence is the most popular choice. At the very least, this makes it worthy of having a referendum over. No-one wants to return to a centralised UK, few want a federal UK, extra-powers of the kind they are talking about are not really worth having a referendum over. So we are left with a single question... Do you prefer independence or the status quo? |
||||||||||||
| Aventinian |
I don't think at the last election that more powers for the Scottish Parliament was a settled policy of the Tory Party. | ||||||||||||
| SLG |
Fair enough. So if we lump them in with Labour, we have almost 45% status quo vs almost 36% independence. If there's going to be a referendum, based on these figures, these are the only two games in town. | ||||||||||||
| Hendry |
Your wrong, but in mitigation that mistake is a very common one amongst activists. Activists like to think that everyopne else would put the policy of independence in an overriding position, as they do themselves, but there is no logical or evidential support for that notion. Quite the contrary. Polling evidence clearly indicates that a majority for independence would be obtained in a referendum but also indicates that support for PI parties totals something far less than this. This would tend to support the rather more expected result that voter distribution on the independence issue approximates to a normal distribution and not some weird polarised thing. See here:- http://www.independence1st.com/IFLeafletPage2b.htm It is also a mistaken perception of many PI activista which Uscum are only too glad to sieze on when trying to peddle the 'support for PI parties = the support for independence myth". A myth, no doubt, which they will continue to peddle for all their worth until such time as a majority of PI parliamentarians is achieved, at which point of course, they will immediately switch to insisting on a referendum. Remember, the political cesspit they bottom feed in has only one mores - "the end justifies the means", and of course in their screwed-up perception, Scots must be saved from themselves by any required means. Some Uscum even try to imply that if a Scot favours independence, but does not have it at the top of his policy list, then that doesn't count. How ridiculous is that? Yet I have come across some so deluded they believe it. By that criterion there is not a policy of any kind anywhere that could be adopted. However, it is indicative of the levels of self-deception these creatures can accomplish. |
||||||||||||
| Hendry |
Even the British Electoral Commission would not entertain anything other than a straight Yes or No for an independence referendum, and the UN observers would wet themselves at anything else. |
||||||||||||
| Hendry |
In fairness to the SNP, the "Independence in Europe" was dropped some time ago. Their currant wordage of choice for an independence referendum makes no mention of Europe. But you are absolutely correct, to mention Europe in a referendum question (whether for or against) would completely compromise the result. However no respectable electoral commission, even the British one, would allow such blatant question fixing, neither would it be rcognised by the UN. |
||||||||||||
| Rinty |
y
I think that Canavan and the Pensioners party (swinburne) both support independence and Margo Macdonald a a huge list vote in Lothians, did you count her in? |
||||||||||||
| SLG |
Re: y
I included Margo MacDonald's vote - yes it was very substantial, but I was unsure about Canavan and the SSCUP. I reckon that Canavan would support independence, but I can't recall ever seeing any categorical statement, and anyway, my figures were just based on the list vote and he only stood FPTP. The SSCUP would I think support a referendum, but I'm not sure about independence, I'd put them in the camp of wanting more powers for Holyrood without wanting full independence. Swinburne also recently came out with a statement saying that in any coalition talks, he would naturally fall in with Labour. |
||||||||||||
| Hendry |
Re: y
I think he may be referring to an analysis written by me on behalf of an online community who held discussions and contributions in an onliine forum a few days after the 2003 election, and widely distributed to activists and politicians at the time. Several members of the on-line community went on to found Independence First and other initiatives still to emerge. Anyway here is a copy where you can find the voting assumptions listed in an appendix:- http://homepage.ntlworld.com/charles.mcgregor/Politics/ereport2003.doc Note someone said he thought the SW had the largest support, in fact it has the least. |
||||||||||||
| SLG |
Alright Hendry, not seen your analysis before, I was just taking a simple look at the figures from the Alba Politics site. Your analysis is a wee bit more in depth!
There is one key difference between your figures and mine, you have lumped all the anti-independence votes in together. My post was in answer to someone who was looking for a multi-question referendum based on four possible positions: full independence; federalism; present settlement and scrapping devolution. So I calculated the pro-independence votes (as you show ~36%), but I take separate the federalists and the 'more powers' folk from the 'status quo' folk (giving a status quo vote of 45%). The other options fail to attract more than 10% to any particular option. So the only valid referendum would be between these two positions. I think the person who mentioned the SW was a Unionist who was refering to it having the largest support for the Union. |
||||||||||||
| Mctosh45 |
Hendry hi,
Nice piece of statistical analysis. But I would refer you to my first post:- They're the one's the independance movement need to convince (they being Labour voters). I already know they don't prioritise independence highly:roll: Ergo my arguement, you have toconvicethem & others (the big hump in your graph) that they should prioritise & worry about the political make up of Scotland once Scotland is Indepentdent. Dry analysis is fine but all it tells you is where your at. My arguement is where we want to be. Regards Mctosh45. |
||||||||||||
| SLG |
Mctosh45, I'd say there are two ways to target these votes. First is to ask these people to raise independence up their personal agenda, and therefore to sacrifice other aspects in favour of independence. The second is to broaden the spectrum of pro-independence politics, so that for every Unionist party, there is a pro-indepence party covering the same region of the political spectrum.
I think it's clear that the way forward is a mixture of both. We need to keep independence high on the agenda, get folk thinking about it and voting accordingly - especially in preperation for a referendum. But in a parliamentary election, t's never going to be a priority for everyone and as has been shown in this thread, the SGP and the SSP have brought new people into the fold that the SNP no matter how they were positioned could not have won over. |
||||||||||||
| Mctosh45 |
SLG,
I agree, the problem i've got is too many people seem to be calling for a quick referendum. I DON'T CARE what the statistical analysis says about there being a big proportion of voters who believe in independence but don't vote for it. I don't trust ,not the analysis but the people responding to the pollster as to wether they're giving an honest reply! I think the arguement hasn't been won, no I know the arguement hasn't been won and as such think we (pro) independence voters would loose an early referendum. No best get an S.N.P./S.S.P/GREEN/ LIBERAL Executive (or combination thereof) in place first and proove their worth to the Scottish people. The gradualist approach. That said the big test is to maximise our vote to acchieve the above Regards Mctosh45. |
||||||||||||
| neil8r |
i have to disagree with what you are saying here completely, i've stood on doorsteps and talked to the people who vote for the Labour party and seen their reaction to the independence question, some flat out say no, most however say yes without blinking an eye about it. It's very clear that given the chance they would vote for Independence but as it stands they haven't been given that option and they fall into that belief that if they don't vote Labour they could get the Tories again. That is a very strong fear that a lot of these people have. |
||||||||||||
| SLG |
Well, I'm one of those calling for a quick referendum Where quick would mean 6 months to a year or so after next May's election.
So it would take a majority of votes for pro-independence parties before you would want to see a referendum? I really don't think it works like that for two reasons. 1. The SNP is the major party for independence. A lot of people don't like the SNP and will never vote for them. This might be for whatever reason such as meeting an anti-English activist one night, or Fergus Ewing's borderline homophobic comments or whatever. It's enough to put some folk off for life. So if you are pro-independence and not on the far left or environmentalist fringe, who do you vote for? There is no choice. I have come across this so many times, there are folk out there who just won't vote SNP. 2. The Labour party. Labour is so ingrained into some of our communities that some folk will vote Labour till they die just because they are Labour folk. Yet speak to these people and ask them how they would vote in a referendum on independence and a surprisingly high proportion say they would vote yes. That's because in these areas, for these people, Labour is not a Unionist party, it's something very different and many Labour voters could quite happily balance up voting Labour in a parliamentary election with voting yes in an independence referendum.
Well you can never trust them completely. Over the scheme of things they do tend to represent the underlying situation. It's not just telephone polls, but you also have internal party polling. If you take 90% of the pro-independence vote, and add a significant proportion of the Unionist vote, I think you get the same slight majority that the polls show.
I agree, the argument hasn't been won. The argument will never be won completely and it will go right on into the day of the referendum. We have to be confident of our argument though. Part of the problem has been the low key nature of the argument. The parliament has given the SNP and others a great platform to make the argument and it's working, slowly. A referendum organised for a May 2008 would further bring the argument out into the open. The more open the argument the more we have to gain. IMO it won't be until a referendum is organised that we can put the party politics to one side and concentrate on the issue at hand. When we do that, we will win the argument with enough people to win a referendum. I'm sure of that.
Why? If the SNP or whoever fail to 'manage devolution', why should that lead to a rejection of independence? It's like trying to fight with one hand tied behind your back. If anything it will be the failures in devolution that really highlight the need for independence.
It is the next big test. And I for one hope it's followed by an even bigger test 
|
||||||||||||
| Mctosh45 |
Neil8r,SLG,
I bow to your experience of the doorstep. I've voted S.N.P. since 1979 elections, except once to vote Labour in 97' much to my shame! It's just my mistrust you see comeing through, so many false dawns! But in my defence a healthy scepticism is no bad thing. Regards Mctosh45. |
||||||||||||
| wisnaeme |
It is not neccessary the over riding factor for the independence movements to convince many of the disillusioned labour voters to vote for them. Take a leaf out of the unionist rule book of negativity by turning the argument upside down. I put it to you that by convincing many voters who have in the past voted for the unionist orientated political parties, particularily Labour to change their allegiance, it is necessary only to convince them that it is not them that are moving away from Labour. Indeed it is Labour that has moved away from them with their policies of the past nine years. An enhanced continuance of conservative policies, of right wing policies even.Which of those policies can be proven to have worked? Which of those policies of Labour can be proven to have been "value for money"? The Labour supporters of the past now realies that they have been taken for a ride in a direction not quite what was intended by their vote. Use that pessimism, use that disillusion to reinforce the perception that any future promises by Labour of "things are getting better" will be more of the same, more failure to deliver. Indeed the goal is to reinforce their Labour pessimism. So a two pronged attack is necessary, an in your face frontal attack of cofident can do,will do and things can only get better from the independence movements. But just as important an assault with no holds barred on Labour's dismal record not just in Scotland but also New Labours' dismal record in the UK. Scottish Labour should be made to pay the price of association with the New Labour government's disastrous stewardship of the UK and of their foreign policies as well, they cannot, nor can Scottish Labour be allowed to distance themselves from New Labour UK. To a lesser extent, the FibDems in Scotland can also be perceived as guilty by association and it is up to their political opponents to ensure that the FibDems will not be given the opportunity to allow them to distance themselves from their "partnership" in the Scottish Executive. As I said before negativity and pessimism are the preferred weapons of the unionists, so why not use them against them? |
||||||||||||
| SLG |
Don't get me wrong Mctosh45, there is absolutely nothing to be complacent about. But at the same time, we shouldn't be too pesimistic. It might not come off in 2007, but the important thing is that we're heading in the right direction. Compare the situation now with 79, you can't say we've not made progress despite the ups and downs. And where the SNP are pushing the envelope, we now have a serious body in the parliament who, even if they don't support independence, are calling for extra powers. Even the Tories are coming on message! And more important that anything else IMO are the cracks we are starting to see in Labour's dominance. I'm not sure folk realise the impact that PR is going to have on the fortunes of the SNP and Labour. | ||||||||||||
| Mctosh45 |
Wisnaeme,SLG,
I hear what your saying, by all means fight them with every tool at our dispasal & on every front. But why these dyed in the wool Labour voters' would still vote for Noo Labuor is beyond me, are they totally unprincipled or just incapable of rational thought?
Regards Mctosh45. |
||||||||||||
| SLG |
The folk I've met who are pro-independence are generally older working class people who have voted Labour all their lives. Labour were the people in their community who they felt were trying to help them and they still go by that. The SNP has a lot of catching up to do on that front. The folk I've spoken to, like most folk, aren't quite that up to date with current affairs as most of us are. Asked if they liked Blair - no, hate him. Asked if they would vote Labour again - yes, because Gordon Brown is going to replace Blair, and he's old Labour... isn't he? They are on the verge of quiting Labour, but they'll give them one last chance with Brown leading them. I think it's quite different with most of the younger generation. They've grown up with the SNP being a force and if they are pro-independence are more likely to vote SNP. Similarly anyone coming on the scene and forming an opinion of Labour post-'97 will see them in a very different light from previous generations. |
||||||||||||
| Avatar |
"the Pensioners party (swinburne) both support independence"
wow a branch of the tories support independence! hehe resisted as long as I could.
|
||||||||||||