One thought on “Why giving your second vote to a small pro-independence party will not increase the overall number of pro-independence party MSPs in Scotland and risks even increasing number of unionist MSPs so ‘Both votes SNP’ – short video”

1. Second vote aka List vote.

   Two things about the Green party and why I cannot give them my second vote in May.

   1/ The way that they , in the past, once turned on the SNP when Harvie and Slater were in charge of them , so they gave political ammunition to the MSM , including the BBC.

   2/ Under their new leadership they are now declaring that they are supposedly “strengthening ties” with the Green party in England and Wales, where in England they, the Green party, are seeing a surge of interest and support just now under their new leader Zach Polanski.

   So I feel that the Green party here in Scotland are being a tad too opportunistic in them hoping that they will somehow be associated with the Green party down South , and so then they too hope to benefit from some of that same surge of interest and support and also they hope, some future success, in May’s elections.

   I do feel that I, personally, need to stand by my principles in some of the negative things that I have said in the past about the Scottish Green party on this very site, as in that I no longer trust them.

   After all how many times do we say on here ‘fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me‘.

   Also we can hardly criticise other voters for continuing to vote for some UK parties time and time again only to then be constantly disappointed by those they voted for. I am not willing to take that risk with the Green party, they may support independence but let’s not forget they are a different party from the SNP. So nothing is guaranteed in as much as getting their future support and votes to pass SNP bills, Scottish Budget etc in our Scottish parliament.

   New leadership of a party does not necessarily mean real change…..

   That has been abundantly clear given the various change of leaders in UK parties.

   I think , in the past and also still for some people, the confusing aspect for Indy voters is that there is so much conflicting information from different Indy supporting sources.

   So many people ask what happened to allow the then SNP FM Alex Salmond to once gain a majority for the SNP at Holyrood ?

   Are any UK parties declaring that people should also give ‘both’ votes to them in May ?

   You know this conflicting info happens every bloody year , is the formula to achieve success, via gaining a majority, a secret, because I have yet to see any political pundits , commentators or the (so called) Scottish media explain fully how the system can work for one party to win a majority outright, this of course was a voting system that Labour introduced as a voting system at Holyrood elections , all to try to thwart a party like the SNP from gaining a majority at Holyrood.

   Thanks for your input on your site via this post and also the written post on this on your site , which does at least gives examples , a good argument and also tries to explain more on the voting system here.

   It is clear why Labour did not want a FPTP voting system at Holyrood but in Scotland that would have potentially prevented Reform UK from getting any access into our parliament this May, a parliament that their HQ leader, Nigel Farage, does not even believe should exist as a separate parliament from WM, nor does he think it should get any money (back– as in it is our money that we paid into the UK) from the UK Treasury.

   Labour now in freefall and where the Hell is Sarwar , as in the pretend Scottish MSM hero , so hard to see Labour making a political comeback….barring a (media) miracle that involves a mega #SNPBAD.

   No chasing after Sarwar in the corridors of the parliament at Holyrood though, to ask him his opinion on all of this debacle within his party , as that, as an action, is only done by the likes of the BBC when it is just the SNP that they, the BBC, need answers from (mostly answers that come from questions and attacks via opposition parties, to whom the BBC seems to represent politically).

   Post Morgan McSweeney resigning Andrew Fisher a columnist for the I newspaper said this on Sky News:

   “Unless Labour starts coming up with answers, doing things that improve peoples lives, they’re going to continue being deeply unpopular, just as the last Conservative govt was“

   He also said “Its not about the personalities, its about the policies & the culture of the party’s got to change.. unless that changes it doesn’t really matter who’s at the top, it will carry on like this“

   Starmer should never have been picked as Labour leader but the right of the party felt that he would be the best option to match the Tories same rhetoric and policies, however did they also factor in him matching Reform UK’s same rhetoric and policies too ?

   Labour still in shambles really, so to quote Theresa May “Nothing has changed” post McSweeney’s resignation, as the ‘fish rots from the head down’………..also there is more that rots below McSweeney within the Labour party, both at HQ and the branch office here in Scotland.

   Liz S

   LikeLike

   Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.