Scottish Labour’s Michael Shanks has won the Rutherglen and Hamilton West byelection in an overwhelming victory over the SNP that the party leadership declared “seismic”, and a clear demonstration that Scotland could lead the way in delivering a Labour government at Westminster at the coming general election.

In a result that exceeded Scottish Labour expectation, Shanks beat his closest rival, the SNP’s Katy Loudon, by 17,845 votes to 8,399 – a majority of 9,446 and a resounding swing of over 20%.

  • fruitleatherpostcard@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The SNP kidnapped a popular Scottish idea and warped their power to their own short term ends. Sad but true. They were their own worst enemy. The Tories continue to snort and spew an increasingly large foul puddle toxicity and filth off the slope of the failed Scottish referendum and Brexit. They (edit: the Tories) do not deserve, under any moral compass, any power in government yet they and their dark money backers have sewn up the system.

    • butterypowered@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I honestly think the SNP still want independence, and to have a referendum, but they have no official route to get one. Which is completely wrong, democratically speaking.

      • frog 🐸@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        The question that I have is… say the SNP had another referendum, and the results were the same as the previous one. Would they then want another one? And another one after that? Would they just keep asking the same question until, by chance, it eventually comes out as 51% of the electorate wanting independence? If the SNP had the ability to call a referendum on independence whenever and however often they want, would there be a mechanism in place to stop them doing it every 6 months until they get the answer they want?

        I’m not opposed to Scotland becoming independent if that’s genuinely what Scotland wants. But given support for it isn’t overwhelming, according to all the polls, it’s not a given that a second referendum would go the way the SNP wants. So at what point would they give up on independence if there was never enough consistent public support for it?

        • fruitleatherpostcard@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s a good point. The thing is that I did not, and still do not see the economic argument for a rational independence. Which is a pity. Perhaps with renewable energy there might be some sort of basis.

          The biggest shame, IMHO, is that the Tories are so toxic and greedy that they have fucked up the ENTIRE UK which could otherwise be a great and productive union. There could be ‘enough to go round’ and create unity rather than embittered divisions.

          • butterypowered@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Not that I particularly want to open this can of worms here, but I’m pretty sure that Scotland has more resources than a lot of lim independent European countries. Colossal amounts of renewables potential, oil (just don’t burn it), whisky, tourism, etc.

            I agree about there being enough to go round. Unfortunately I don’t think the Conservatives or Labour are interested in that model, and FPTP elections are never going away at Westminster.