The fact that a normally confident Scottish Tory Boy starts of the comments thread in the vain hope that it was rumour rather than truth. Then the CyberNats got going with a whole range of deflection and distraction tactics and quite plan stupid comments:
Of course that depends just how many people do vote for Harry Wills and is a ridiculous statement for anyone to make as only voting for somebody could get them elected.
Of course someone was so clearly flustered that despite our candidate being named in the piece they mixed him up with the Tory, not once but twice before later saying that if the Tories were becoming the Scottish Conservative and Nationalist party they were being pragmatic and proactive but failed to mentioned two faced, a farce and not standing for what they believe in.
One even said the Lib Dems should distance themselves from Labour, while at the same time happily sidling up to the Tories (what double standards), which we clearly have been with our recent tax proposals, our interventions and warning months ago of impending financial issues and a clarity in how to handle it. Then decided to turn his attention to voting records of which only one candidate has one. As for the parties the Tories side with Labour a lot of the time in Westminster and the SNP most of the time in Holyrood, clearly unsure which way they'll turn of for that matter how a Nat would turn at Westminster, if elected.
However, Jess the Dog did come up with one interesting statement that needs investigating further:
"Seems to me that the only beneficiary of such a pact would be the Conservatives,
who could claim to be participants in a Machiavellian ploy rather than simply
no-hopers in Glenrothes."
Well what of the benefits for the newly rebranded Scottish Conservative and Nationalist Party what would they gain from such whispering in Westminster between Angus Robertson and David Mundell. Especially as they didn't deem it necessary for this plot to take place in the vaults of the Palace. Jeff went so far as to say it was naivety of me with almost 20 more years of political activism than him to think that with 4 weeks to go and such revelations that this was now anything other than a 2 horse race. Sorry Jeff but I have seen elections turn on less, with less time available than this in that time, far from naivety I call that knowledge of what can be achieved.
It is all just a matter of a few things. What is at the heart of such an agreement between 'such strange bedfellowes'? What lies beneath this unlikely pact? Plus getting that message out to the people who matter namely the voters who decide the fate of the Glenrothes seat in the Houses of Parliament.
Therein lies a mystery, or does it....
It may well be that like some sort of Martin Bell-like figure Harry Wills comes through as a candidate with his own clear (party) platform not shrouded in murk and intrigue of politicking and plot.
4 comments:
Let me say Stephen how much I appreciate having the headline comment on your page.
Let me also say this - STOP CALLING ME A CYBER NAT!
You know as well as I do that even if you yourself lived in Glenrothes and had 200 votes yourself, Harry Wills wouldn't get more than 2,000 votes.
So let me qualify the statement. Yes, only voting for Harry Wills will get him elected (unless he stands in Zimbabwe...). The point is this. However much you try to dress it up, this is a two horse race - and Harry Wills is not one of those horses I'm afraid. So, for once, maybe a Lib Dem election leaflet might be accurate in saying only one party can win there.
And its not them. Sorry Stephen!
Sorry for tarring you a CyberNat Malc, but I had to cover the whole gumult of comments and CyberNat was a handing recognisable coverall for most of them.
As you comment that I would in anyway vote rig an election by voting 200 times that is underhand.
But it also falls short on so many levels. There are still 4 weeks to go in the this election, that is plenty of time to change the perspective of voters if something that may have a bearing on how they vote, especially tactically, comes to light.
I wasn't suggesting you would rig an election Stephen. I was suggesting that, ancient-old-voting style, were you to have a bulk vote, it still wouldn't make a difference. And I think you knew that's what I meant.
But you might be right. I just saw Harry Wills on BBC Breakfast. Apparently Glenrothes "will be nothing like Glasgow East - the Lib Dems will not be squeezed like they were there". According to Brian Taylor's chat anyway...
Yes Malc I was hoping that is what you meant, but I have to think of some future reader of this comments thread. Don't forget the risk that Kez mentioned earlier in the week.
I'm glad you agree to some extent. Glasgow East we were in somewhat of a hinterland with no clear message. People at the time said we needed one. We now have one. This time it will be different. Plus when all sorts of people are praising Vince Cable at a time of economic uncertainty we certainly may well have something going for us over the next few weeks that others may wish they had in their locker.
Post a Comment