General Election - June 8th

[TinfoilHattie]

Another vote.

Can totally understand why May has made this move and it is very interersting from a Scottish perspective. Less about Brexit, more about another independence referendum.

I am very torn on who to vote for. It was exceptionally close between SNP and Lib Dem here last time round so it will probably be Lib Dem, but if polls show more chance of the Conservatives or Labour getting the SNP MP out on his ear I'd vote for either of those too. (V unlikely that Labour would be in that position though). Wouldn't ever vote Green.

We believe that the Scottish Parliament should have the right to hold another referendum if there is clear and sustained evidence that independence has become the preferred option of a majority of the Scottish people – or if there is a significant and material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2014, such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will. That is taken direct from the SNP's 2016 manifesto. I think the SNP have been very clear about their reasons for indy ref 2, before and after. Are you suggesting that the SNP should dismiss their own manifesto promises to please the percentage of voters who didnt vote them into power?

What are your thoughts on the Green party manifesto? If we're sticking the manifestos, a majority of voters voted for parties who would oppose another Indyref in the current circumstances (lack of public support for one).

Y0u, you are confusing a referendum majority (anything over 50%) with an election majority (whoever gets the biggest voteshare). If Scotland doesnt want another indyref, then they need to stop voting in indy parties in the majority (election wise) . It is really that simply. It doesn't matter what polls say before a referendum as people can change their minds. Look at the polls at the start of indyref 1 and then the final vote.

So, is the green party main objective now independence? What about the original green support who were voting for them on their environmental stance? Is that not important anymore that they are prepared to remove candidates to help the SNP?

If I was a traditional green voter I'd be very angry.

The Greens are a joke.

The majority of voters with a split vote. Hence, not an overall majority. The elections are not a two way race, unlike a referendum. I dont know what the Green manifesto is because I dont vote for them and haven't read it. From what I heard in the debates, I disagreed/agreed with as much as their views as i did other parties.

From the Green party manifesto:

"Citizens should be able to play a direct role in the legislative
process: on presenting a petition signed by an appropriate number of voters, citizens should be able to trigger a vote on important issues of devolved responsibility. As we proposed on the one year anniversary of the Independence Referendum, this is the Scottish Greens’ preferred way of deciding to hold a second referendum on Independence. If a new referendum is to happen, it should come about by the will of the people, and not be driven by calculations of party political advantage. In such a referendum the Scottish
Greens will campaign for independence."

There was no such demonstration of the will of the people, in fact there has been the opposite. If manifesto commitments must be upheld (and the SNP one talks about the right to hold a referendum, it doesn't lock them into doing it), then Scotland should not currently have Indyref2 on the table.

justnowords I used to vote SNP in the mid 2000s when Scottish Labour were at peak smug. I am definitely a unionist, and at the time independence seemed like a remote prospect..

Now I have no idea how to vote. I cannot bring myself to vote Conservative but I don't want independence either.

What do you mean by 'traditional green vote'? Do you mean unionist Green vote?

So, is the green party main objective now independence? What about the original green support who were voting for them on their environmental stance? Is that not important anymore that they are prepared to remove candidates to help the SNP? I can't say what the green party's main objective is, but im sure it will be in their manifesto. AFAIK as someone who doesnt vote Green, that Greens have always made it clear that they were a pro independence party, and would support another request for a indyref2. So id imagine most Green voters would have been aware of that as well. As for removing candidates, well its all tactical, much like the Labour/Tories/Libdem. Whilst they may forfeit their votes in certain constituencies in the GE (constituencies which they lost by a large margin to other parties so in effect not actually giving up a seat) they may gain in Holyrood elections. As a SNP voter, id now be inclined to give them my 2nd vote.

I would take the traditional green vote to be environmentalists. I'm sure many were aware that the Greens were Pro-independence, but I doubt many would have expected to break they're very explicit manifesto pledge to not support and Indyref under the current circumstances (see above). Likewise, if a person votes Green for environmental reasons, they might be angry that these principles are thrown under the bus to support an independence drive.

Well if we are going to go strictly by manifesto promises, I give you tuition fees and child benefit. Does that mean that Torys and Lib Dem voters shouldnt vote for their parties neither? I cant comment upon Greens, but the SNP laid out what circumstances they would request another indyref and stuck to their promise. I understand why as unionists you would be unhappy with a indyref, but to suggest SNP shouldnt do it because, well, because people who didnt vote them in dont want it, is quite frankly ridiculous. There is no majority unionist party in power in Holyrood. Im not even sure how the GE results would reflect Scotland. If Conservatives gained 10 seats at the expense of the SNP what would that mean, other than Conservatives are getting more votes. They could't even claim to represent the majority Scotland with 11 seats if the SNP had 46. To have any sort of claim on representing Scotland, Torys would need to win at least 30 seats.

Apologies for all the typos - that was awful!

Greens aren't throwing their principles under a bus. You can be both pro independence and pro environment. Its not one or the either. As for individual voters, if they are unionist they will have to weigh up what is more important to them. Much like I guess the tactical voters of Labour/Lib Dems/Tories will have to do. Are Conservatives throwing their principles under a bus when they ask their voters to vote Labour to oust SNP, or vice versa Labour asking its voters to vote Tory?

Yes I mean environmentalists. How long have the greens been explicitly a pro independence party? As far as I am aware this would have been just before the indyref ?

I think that dismissing the clear will of the majority of Scots because of a vague manifesto promise is absurd. And there must be a proportion of people who did vote them in who also don't want it, because the SNP vote share is higher than the independence vote share, and the numbers don't stack up otherwise. I accept that the SNP have a technical mandate for calling for another Indyref (although I think it was achieved in an underhanded way), but the Greens do not and, therefore, there shouldn't be another Indyref on the table right now. It's not just sour grapes to be angry about that either.

And the Lib Dems paid heavily for breaking that promise, although they were the minor partner in a coalition so you could argue that they needed to make compromises. The Greens don't have that excuse, and fully deserve to be punished by the electorate.

If Greens don't field candidates in order to help the SNP, then yes, environmental principles (and all their principles bar independence) are being thrown under the bus to prop up the independence vote. They are not giving people the choice of voting for their environmental principles. Are they now saying that independence is so important it transcends all of their other policies? What is the point in voting green in that case?

I'm not aware of any Labour/Lib Dem/Tory candidates standing down in this way. Voters will probably vote tactically, but they will still be given the choice.

It wasnt a vague manifesto promise, it was explicit and the topic of much discussion in the run up to the Holyrood election. As for the Greens, thats your interpretation of it. The people who actually run the Green party take a different stance. I dont suppose they give a second thought as to what anti Green voters think.

Also Lib Dems didnt renege on Child Benefit, that was Tories. What was their excuse?

I believe that the vast majority of SNP voters are satisfied with SNP's reasons for calling another indy ref and we can only have to wait till the next Holyrood Election to find out. We will also see how the Greens fare too.

In my view, there is no point in voting Green in some constituencies, as they are a minority vote (coming in last by a mile), financially not viable (less than 5% and they lose their deposit) and that this vote is given to another party with shared views, in return for votes elsewhere (Holyrood elections) where they stand a chance of being elected. Very clever tactical voting. Like I say, as a SNP voter, Green will be getting my 2nd vote at Holyrood.

Voters will probably vote tactically, but they will still be given the choice. in a way rendering the tactical vote far less effective and not guaranteed to win, as some people will still vote for their original party, and the unionist vote will still be split.

It's not just my interpretation of the Green manifesto, hence all the questions to Patrick Harvie (by the media and in the Holyrood debate) about how they could support another referendum given the circumstances. In their manifesto, they said they'd only support indyref if there was clear public support. Where is the clear public support? He waffled about the members deciding to overturn it at their party conference, but I doubt that's much comfort to the voters who actually gave them the seats in the first place. I'm sure SNP voters are very happy that they rolled over on this, but I also imagine that there are many Unionist Green supporters who are very angry at the situation. As you say, we'll have to wait for the elections to see how much anger there is.

The green party support an independent Scotland partly because of the attitude towards renewable energy here.

Well, if independence is more important than their environmental stance, I'm struggling to see what the actual point of the green party is, they may as well just join in with the SNP completely and push their green agenda from within.

Not that any of that helps my anti SNP stance.

Just because they voted once in favour of pro independence does not write off their environmental stance. How bizarre that you think it does . I would hazard a guess they haven't joined with the SNP because whilst some of their stances overlap (and when they do its beneficial to work together) some of their stances do not, and they would wish to remain autonomous over their party's objectives.

Just because they voted once in favour of pro independence does not write off their environmental stance. How bizarre that you think it does confused. I would hazard a guess they haven't joined with the SNP because whilst some of their stances overlap (and when they do its beneficial to work together) some of their stances do not, and they would wish to remain autonomous over their party's objectives.

We were talking about their bizarre decision not to stand in some constituencies so as to not split the independence vote. Which assumes that their following is indy and not primarily environmental and gives the environmental people (which the Green party presumable was set up to represent) no-one to vote for regardless of their views on independence.

Patrick Harvey was ripped to pieces by Gordon Brewer about this. He was embarrassingly bad (Harvey obviously, not Brewer)

I can't recall hearing the Scottish Greens talk about much other than Brexit or independence. Andy Wightman in particular doesn't talk about much beyond his obsession of who owns what land.