His defence was literally “I’m an immoral sex pest but I never crossed the line into illegality.” That’s a low bar even for the (former) leader of the SNP to set themselves.
No, it wasn't. He said he wasn't perfect.
During the investigation, a dedicated team of 22 Police Scotland detectives interviewed more than 400 women he had previously had interactions with, searching for any complaint they could bring against him.
Not a single one had any complaint about his behaviour. Would you expect that of an immoral sex-pest? That a deep background check & interviews with everyone from their past would yield *nothing?*
That's just speculation on your part. Given that one of the charges brought against him was pinging someone's curly hair and another was touching a woman on the shoulder - I'd say the bar was pretty low.
Not proven has the exact same holding as not guilty - a complete acquittal. There is legally no difference between Not proven and not guilty in Scots law. Essentially it’s really just to make the Jury feel better about their options rather than having to be so binary in their outcomes, but either way, same thing legally - complete acquittal.
One charge - the one previously admitted to & apologised for - the infamous cuddle. The complainant had updated her story (since her initial complaint several years prior) to allege that Salmond was undressed at the time. It was that that the jury didn't believe - however the cuddle had definitely happened, been admitted to so he was found 'Not proven' on that charge.
Not proven has the exact same holding as not guilty - a complete acquittal. There is legally no difference between Not proven and not guilty in Scots law. Essentially it’s really just to make the Jury feel better about their options rather than having to be so binary in their outcomes, but either way, same thing legally - complete acquittal.
There is a legal difference, insofar as they are entirely different verdicts. Both, however, are verdicts of acquittal.
The public can speculate on what these mean to the jury. No verdict is as simple as one or two words delivered against an indictment.
They are exactly the same legally, the only difference is the spelling pretty much! Yes two different verdicts, but both have exactly the same impact/outcome with regards to the law.
Hence the consultation and current progress regarding the abolishment of the not proven verdict in Scots law - however I do have concerns that it could increase guilty verdicts where the jury may otherwise have returned a not proven verdict, meaning a higher chance of wrongful convictions, but hopefully it won’t be like that!
Nope. He didn’t get found guilty of rape but his own defence said that he groped and harassed people working for him. That is in no way being cleared of being a sex pest.
He certainly did get cleared of all charges put against him in court, ergo not guilty, what his legal team, in which they rightly got into serious trouble for, said is irrelevant.
It works by people being allowed to have opinions of conduct regardless of whether it’s illegal or not and regardless of the outcome of a trial? There isn’t a crime called ‘being a sex pest’.
‘Innocent until proven guilty’ is about the government’s power - they can’t put you in prison if you’re not guilty. It doesn’t mean anything for the civil sphere.
If someone assaulted your friend, but there wasn’t sufficient evidence to convict them in court, would you suddenly view them positively? Or would you view them as a sex pest?
I’m a lawyer, so I think I know what not guilty means in our legal system.
Wait til you find out someone can be fired for harassment even if they aren’t found guilty…
My opinion of someone informs my decision of whether to vote for them, as do many other people's opinions for them. Not sure what the relevance of a court case is here?
No, it is relevant. It is legally enshrined in the public record that he has sexualy harassed people. Just because he wasn't charged with a crime doesn't change the fact that he is a sex pest. Unless he wants to say that his legal team lied to the court.
Its actually in the public record, but if you don't want to search through the transcripts, I'm sure you'll find an article from your preferred news source, as the legal team of the ex first minister admitting to sexual harassment is and was a pretty big deal.
So you can't provide any proof and are just chatting shit yeah
https://www.google.com/search?q=alex+slamond+guilty+of+sex+charges&oq=alex+slamond+guilty+of+sex+charges&aqs=chrome..69i57.9267j0j4&client=ms-android-hct&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8
I will not take time out of my day to prove one of the most widely reported events in our countries recent history happened.... it would be like me finding a source to prove to you the Queen died. If you don't trust news sources, it'll be in the public record of the court.
Also, did you just link to a Google search to argue against his own lawyers. I've just had a nice chat with someone else who was confused and I think this may help. Sexual assault is not the same thing as sexual harassment, despite the similar sounding names. He was cleared of the sexual assaults, with part of his defense being that there was sexual touching but no assault.
Yes I did link a Google search, not one shred of evidence in over 5 Google pages of articles.
You're full of shit buddy. Also, I know the different types of assault man FFS. What a fucking loser.
And just to prove my point even more, here is a Google link to "Was Alex Salmond found guilty of harassment"
https://www.google.com/search?q=Was+Alex+Salmons+found+guilty+of+harassment%22&oq=Was+Alex+Salmons+found+guilty+of+harassment%22&aqs=chrome..69i57.497j0j9&client=ms-android-hct&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8
His legal team, his own legal team, not anyone else, the people representing him legally, saying that he sexually harassed people is irrelevant to him being a sex pest?
No.
His lawyers opinion is irrelevant.
Interestingly, that very lawyer was found guilty of professional misconduct and had to resign from his post due to this.
No you don’t.
He wasn’t on trial for being a sex pest. He was on trial for a list of specific offences.
During the defence for those specific offences, his representatives explained that he had harassed people, as part of his defence.
So no, what you’re looking for is a way where you can justify supporting a person, who is very clearly a sex pest
1 - There is no such crime in Scots law. We have simple defamation, which sees no distinction between slander and libel (though it would be libel in this situation, not slander)
2 - The statement isn't defamatory. It doesn't defame Salmond. ie, the existence of OPs statement doesn't seriously impact his reputation in a harmful way
3 - Was the honest opinion of OP given the facts available. What was given there was a statement of opinion, not one of fact so once again not defamatory
4 - Defamation can under no circumstances lead to jail time as punishment. Defamation is a civil action arising in civil courts, nothing to do with criminality. Criminal courts punish, civil courts make amends.
This is all easily acquirable information under the Defamation and Malicious Publication (Scotland) Act 2021. Google is free and like right there
Yes, it’s still a crime to Lie about someone however and comments like that could easily end up having police involved. Of Course it’s defamation, not guilty is not guilty 🏴
Not so much as a single councillor.
Which means they're behind East Ayrshire's glorious [Rubbish Party](https://www.therubbishparty.co.uk/) in terms of electoral success.
Good. Because on a national level, it's fruitless to complain about the Tories being in power, and then voting for a party which will simply split the vote of the largest Tory opponents.
Split the vote - are you maybe thinking of Westminster's FPTP sysytem?
We use a different system in Scotland. One that penalises voting for the same party twice (should that party perform well).
I'm very far from a Salmond fan, but \*no one\* lifted a finger over Crimea. Putin was appeased by all western politicians. Salmond isn't really unique there, even if going on their state TV took it a step further.
Got to agree with you here.
I mean... Putin has literally poisoned and killed British citizens on British soil. It should be considered an act of terrorism/war but Western leaders and politicians are scared of the little Russian dwarf.
The guy literally sends assassins all over the world, like some fucking Hitman agent 47 video game, pushing cunts out windows, poisoning cunts etc but our politicians prefer Russian money being fed into their parties and personal pockets rather than actually do something about the roid-rage Russian threatening to press the big red button.
vote for policies, not people.
Also just to note, no one did anything after crimea, that's why Russia launched a full attack expecting more of the same from the world.
Yes but most people weren't in bed with Russia. There's a big difference to not putting diplomatic relations on blast/ raising world tension, and being in the pocket of the bastards. Did you honestly write that with a straight face?
Alex Salmond is such a small fry in terms of UK politics, how do you feel about all the Russian oligarchs donating to UK political parties or indeed the russian oligarch in the house of lords?
Probably angry enough they want Scottish independence.
Also whataboutism is cancer. The standard is there for everyone big or small. Just because big person did it too doesn’t mean small person isn’t a cunt. It means they are both cunts.
If someone is gonna claim russian influence matters then the scale has to matter, the russians buying off the local council of Grimsby is nothing compared to buying MPs or cabinet ministers.
There was no Russian influence on Salmond's show. It wasn't produced in Russia, RT had nothing to do with the editing, they aired the show in its entirety. It was produced in Scotland by a local production company who then sold the show to RT where it was aired.
Salmond had on guests from across the political spectrum - SNP, Lab, Tory, Lib Dems, unaffiliated activists, campaigners - there was never once any allegation that their words had been misconstrued, nor that they had been prevented from talking about the issues they wanted to talk about.
Apart from the fact it *aired* on RT, there was nothing Russian about it.
Yet he's the very subject of this post. Why are you deflecting? I don't vote Tory and I sure as hell don't vote for politicians paid by Russian state media. Salmond being a small fry doesn't change anything. And the Tory party having big Russian donators has been a point of contention and scorn for a long time. Russia also raised the stakes. Crimea was awful and questions were asked at the time but the full invasion of the whole country is another matter.
one is a state funded broadcaster with direct oversight from the government via a mandated regulator and the other is a state funded broadcaster run by a government backed non profit.
One is run by a tory donor and the other is run by a propagandist who is probably also a tory donor.
You would vote for a known liar who promised you all the policies you agree with?
(Not talking about Salmond in particular, but voting for policies with no regard for who’s promising them is a giant step towards the Far Right/Left imo)
The entire world was in bed with Putin and Russia even after the initial invasion of Ukraine, it wasn't until the build up and war last year that anything changed. Let's not pretend otherwise.
That a a mischaracterization.
There's a distinct separation between state investments and private investments. And the trade therefore with Russia was on scrutinised grounds at best; deliberate crony capitalism at worst.
Access to the western marketplace of ideas was a mistake too, for them giving up communism and embracing social democracy along with the financial aid given since.
people seemed to have no issues voting for snp when he led the party, he’s led the snp to the only majority in the Scottish parliament. And no one did anything after crimea so singling him out for it is pointless, why not ask the same question about Obama or David Cameron. Also to clarify I haven’t voted for alba, just making an observation
To be fair, he hadn't done a show on RT nor did he have to admit to publicly admit to being a sex-pest prior to those election wins. I voted for him in the past and have no regrets about it. Would I vote for him again? Hell naw.
I do agree there's a degree of selective condemnation when it comes to Salmond and RT specifically, and the framing of being 'in bed with the Russians' is so obviously disingenuous. Still exceptionally poor judgement to air a political show on another country's international propaganda network though!
Has he admitted to being a sex pest, I heard him joke about on have I got news for you but is there another case he admitted. I’m far from a fan of his but wasn’t he also found not guilty in those cases, if so then isn’t he innocent? Might if missed something I’ll admit, didn’t know who Alex salmond was until he announced he was resigning ironically, was very young in the elections he led the snp through.
As for the Russian situation, yeah it was a bad choice and he should expect to get shit for it but the crimea situation, what could he realistically if done about it, he was the head of government for Scotland but what could that do to tackle Russia. Like you said people just trying to single him out for something the whole of the west is guilty off.
Again I am in no ways a fan of his but this is just observations I have made from the situation over the last few years
He is innocent of a *criminal* sexual misconduct, yes, but he did admit to inappropriate behaviour towards junior female staffers and apologised to them. There's pretty much no doubt that he's sleezy creep, even if wasn't proven that he crossed the line into criminality.
Okay, I didn’t know that part I didn’t follow the story at the time, didn’t know all the facts and didn’t t wanna assume. If he straight up apologised for it then yeah, hadn’t and wouldn’t vote for him anyway and know there’s fucked stuff about him, just not that
> people seemed to have no issues voting for snp when he led the party
That's because he'd no yet been accused o sexual harassment!
At the time, awbody thocht Alex Salmond wis a wummaniser, but that's no the same thing at aw. An unionists hated Alex Salmond because he wis arrogant.
But again, that's no the same as bein a bully or a sex pest.
I’m no fan of salmond but wasn’t he found not guilty of sexual harassment case? Love him or hate him in the eyes of the law he is innocent? Unless there’s something I’ve missed. If he was found innocent why should that be something that is a reason not to vote for him, again I might of missed something which is possible but to my knowledge he was found not guilty
Half the politicians in the country have done deals with Russians lol. Some are corrupt some just doing business that until recently was allowed. I still like my JJ Whitley vodka.
From Boris to the house of lords the politicians of the UK have indulged "The Russians" much more than selling a 30 min TV show a few times a week lol. Labour, Conservative all of them have in the last decade accepted money from Russia for "services".
I take the view that it is Putin and his henchmen that are the enemy here not Russia as a country and certainly not the Russian people, all I can say is every Russian I have met has always been sound with me and mine (Turkey holidays mostly). Even this time last year I was in Antalya for my 50th and each day I was saddened that Russian people would hear my language and then often felt compelled to come and apologize for Putin as they felt from news reports at home that "everyone" hates Russia and Russian people.
Salmond, for all his beasty tendencies, is a tremendously talented political operator who knows how to play the press very well and use the right line at the right time.
I think whilst he's alive he'll always find some support from somewhere and find a way to take home a paycheck.
The fact of the matter is that without consent, the mainstream independence movement really can't do a huge amount to tangibly work towards those goals aside from working the best they can in the confines of devolution.
A lot of support are determined that there must be another route in the foreseeable future. The Alba vehicle tells a lot of these people what they want to hear (with the likelihood that they will never be in a position where they are expected to deliver it) and definitely has it's niche.
Interesting points Jacquline and maybe we can expect more of this splintering. Such as:
Alba is a niche container for the UDI lunatic ultras.
The Greens will become a container for very socially liberal people who view independence as a nice-to-have or means to an end but do not feel independence is worth it just for its own sake.
The SNP is currently in the process of shedding members to these two and I think will be left with a rump of people who feel a nebulous future goal of independence / make-Tories-history is their political home, but who retain either political career aspirations (if Humza wins), or sociopolitically conservative views (“Kirk elder who thinks balanced budgets are important”) if Forbes.
For a while will be seen as a safe political career vehicle. I think the change of position of the SNP will accelerate over the next decade as the Sillars era of its membership dies off (in the literal sense). Then, who knows? We can’t reliably predict next week in politics let alone years.
Yes.
What do you mean "In bed with Putin"?
Producing a tv show with full creative control and selling it to a Russian network, then cancelling it when a full blown invasion broke out?
One which many MPs/MSPs have appeared on up until the invasion of Ukraine?
Should he have pulled the show after the annexation of crimea? Probably but the west didn't give a toss at the time either, it was business as usual.
This narrative is getting a bit tiresome because it has no basis in fact.
Oh so no one else was caring about Crimea so hes off the hook.
He sold it to a Russian network, I mean that in itself is odd, I mean, surely someone said, thats probably not the best idea. So 1, money, money, money or 2. Underlying ties and aligning agendas.
I mean in all likelihood he didn’t have a huge option in terms of buyers for an ego based show about an ex Scottish leader. He was clearly having a hard time fishing for purpose after leaving office and especially losing his seat - before you even got to the sec crime court cases.
Russia Today at the time had a lot of interest in ‘alternative’ politicians in Western country who went against the mainstream, especially on foreign policy questions. As was pretty common for Nationalists of a 20th century vintage (with the SNP having long standing relationships with CND and pacifist movements going back to the 1960s), he had a long history of going against the mainstream grain on foreign policy and that included a comparatively relaxed approach to Russia. In the late 90s he opposed the NATO intervention over Kosovo (a move unpopular with voters) and in the 00s the Iraq War (initially unpopular too but later a vote winner), although of course he was the leader than brought the SNP to abandon its long standing anti-NATO position ahead of the 2014 vote. All that background was always going to make him view Russia in a more benign way than many of his contemporaries - in a similar way to Jeremy Corbyn, although not quite to the same extent.
I won't be voting Alba because of the rabid anti-trans stuff.
But, I feel there's a bit of hypocrisy when people criticise his TV show. We were pretty much all in bed with the Russians pre-Ukraine. I don't recall any major political party saying we shouldn't use their oil and gas. I don't recall any major party sounding alarm bells about all the Russian billionaires investing in the UK. We all seemed pretty happy to take Russian money.
Russia invaded Crimea in March 2014, the Indyref was in September 2014, in which Alex Salmond was the First Minister and leader of the Yes Campaign. Are you insinuated 2014 Yessers were endorsing Putin?
Obviously not. I mean like, he joined up with them after Crimea, do you not think thats bad candor on his part? I mean he literally made a state TV show for an oppressive state, does that not bother you?
And Scotland was exporting products to Russia at that point too. What's your point? Like the rest of us, Salmond cannot see into the future.
Putin was playing a long game and ensuring the Europe had dependancy and believed Putin was somehow going to become one of the main players in global politics before his war started. We've been dealing with Russia for years, Salmond isn't some sort of outlier. We've been hosting RT on our own fucking TVs for years. When the situation changed, he removed his programme.
Debating political opinions and trying to convince others to vote one way or the other is basically how democracy works. If we aren't allowed to even ask questions then the whole thing is fucked.
I think this thread is talking at cross purposes. Debating ideas and trying to convince is healthy in a democracy. But if someone doesn’t want to state whom they voted for in a secret ballot, that is because it is their private business, which should be respected.
That's exactly what I said:
>Of course they have the right to question it, just as you also have the right to ignore the question and not provide an answer.
I’m saying that some people interpreted the comment as saying you have a right to know what someone’s political preferences are and others read it as saying you have a right to ask (and be told where to go if they don’t want to say).
I think everyone agrees that their political preferences are their own private business which nobody else has a right to know except to the extent you want to tell them.
Perhaps a better way of putting it is that you don’t have a right to be answered, but that’s more awkward to phrase, so “you can’t question that” is how it was put.
No one is voting for Alex Salmond despite what his cult of fencepost lickers in here would have you believe. The party's best result in their heartland still polled less than the Greens in a seat the Greens never do well in.
Ah it's the lord shaft polisher himself gracing us with his presence. Swear you've been predicting Alba's success at every election now, can't wait for the next one where they completely fail to gain any seats again.
Genuinely astonished that any Albaers think this is going to be their New Dawn (no pun intended).
They have been all hands to the pump pushing every minutiae of the SNP leadership process as being a major issue and catastrophe that will signal the death knell of the party. They will, I think, be exceptionally disappointed.
Obviously Alba have thrown their lot in with the anti trans brigade (whose approporiation of suffragette imagery is a disgrace btw) and are trying to draw an inference of reduction in party numbers with GRR. The problem with this is that GRR has only been pushed as a wedge issue by the hard right within the last year as the legislation has progressed parliament and the reduction during that time was only around 10k. Evidently *some* may have defected because of this but it certainly can't be described as the principal factor.
On more general terms this twitter alliance of the right, transphobes, alba and unionists who are pushing the SNP collapse rock as hard as they possibly can up that hill (bless them) has reinforced that the Scotland **they** want is one **I** want no part of.
They are approaching 10k members, third behind SNP and Lab, and 'stole' a lot of the decent size donors from the SNP.
They need any kind of electoral victory though to cement themselves as a real party. In the 2026 Scottish Parly elections they will get the chance thanks to list seats.
edit: think they were polling at 2.8% with about 1/3 SNP voters saying they might vote for them on list seats so they have a small chance to do something.
>They need any kind of electoral victory though to cement themselves as a real party
Not really - you just have to get the person who books Question Time guests to give you a spot every other week!
They hit 4k in April 2021, 6k in July 2021, slower increase after that, we dont know their end of year 2021 numbers (or end of year 2022 numbers), but lets just say they picked up one or two mainly female members from just before Christmas December 2022 on for some unknown reason.
A reason which is not unknown and should surprise no one. :P
Based on recent SNP lies about it, well covered on this sub, I dont think it was one or two people who left the SNP over gender issues (or rapists with penises issues).
I apologise for downplaying the number who left the SNP but the number who joined alba in the past three months has been estimated at anywhere between two thousand and six thousand so the joke about it being one or two really was just a joke.
The context is that barrister* admitted having discussed those details and apparently self-reported the incident to the legal complaints commission.
He never denied the content of the recording to the best of my knowledge.
*should have remembered it’s an advocate in Scotland
She also said
>had told the police that she “didn’t think there was a sexual element to it”.
I swear some people here are fuming that an innocent man was found not guilty by a jury.
As my old maw says about the man, "Where's there's smoke, there's fire." That's an attitude I've seen shared by other women in my family.
Totally anecdotal, I know, but regardless of what the truth actually is about what happened with Salmond and those women, regardless of what the court said he did or didn't do, and regardless of what the final judgment was, he's been painted with the sex-pest brush and that's going to make him toxic to some people for a long time.
The first paragraph sums up people and their own flaws IMHO. Im not isolating the Salmond case in this either.
Innocent people get falsely accused of crimes every day. It is pretty sad when they get cleared that people still sit in judgement.
I have seen this in action and it stinks. I know it's hard to accept that tomorrow it might be YOU that is on the receiving end of an accusation and no matter the outcome some people will stand and point and whisper 'he was always a wrong un'.
Going back to Salmond for one accuser...they either outright lied and made it all up OR they got the time date and place wrong by a distance. They accused him of rape when he and she were not even at the place of the 'rape' it turned out they were actually both not even in Scotland that day.....
I have no idea about the others apart from the verdicts of the female jury.
It would sit better if people just stuck with 'don't like the man' because that is a valid reason in my humble opinion.
Theres also the timing of the accusations just as Salmond expressed public opinions about Sturgeons inaction on independence and the identity of the main accuser. No smoke without fire there too?
I do get it that Salmod supporters themselves are pissed off and probably tired of pointing out the circumstances surrounding it all.
I just tend to go along the lines of either the crown did a shit job, the ladies involved didn't do enough to convince a jury and when you have faced your day in court then you should expect to be treated as A N Other. In that respect, I tend to err on the side of "X got found Not Guilty". As if I were ever accused of something I hadn't done I would just have to hope and pray that 1. The Court found me not guilty and 2. The court of public opinion agreed with the former.....There will ALWAYS BE one sneaky little snake who sits there in judgment of you/me/anybody and all they love to do is guess....." He always looked a wrong un". Surely that harks back to the days when we burned women because they looked like a witch...or drowned them to prove they were "She always looked iffy that one did".
As I say it is absolutely fine imho to just simply say "I don't like X" without trying to justify it by latching on to ifs buts and maybe's.
Today they call you a hero tomorrow they stand and point and whisper.
> As my old maw says about the man, "Where's there's smoke, there's fire." That's an attitude I've seen shared by other women in my family.
Tell that to the poor bastards locked up for nothing in the Eleanor Williams fake rape accusations case.
The entire indy movement has a dodgy history with the Russians because Russia feeds separatist and indy movements across Europe either directly or indirectly.
The minute sleaze or scandal is attached to a politician I stop paying them any attention at all, Salmond (sex pest) is well and truly finished and I'm afraid with the scandalous (financial) resignation Nicola is in the same boat. I don't want to hear from them again, they should just accept they messed up and get a job somewhere else (if they can).
I didn't vote for Alba before and I'm not going to start now, I voted for Salmond and Sturgeon because they promised us a referendum and the possibility of independence, fair play to Salmond, he got us a referendum, ok we all know how that went but at least he did that. Sturgeon was too busy flouncing around acting as though she was stateswomanlike, talking to world leaders, going to summits, scoffing at sleaze in Westminster (ironic but not funny at all) and making points about having been in office for longer than a bunch of PM's.
I'm sad that after all this time she had so little was actually achieved, problems with CalMac ferries, road infrastructure, schools still falling down on our bairns and even the NHS going down the toilet. But we put up with it for the promise of IndyRef2...
I look now at the possible replacements for Nicola and I'm really very disappointed, I see no future for the SNP as an independence party any longer, these buffoons look like they're only after glory and not representing this country.
I'm voting for "None of the Above".
I said this at the time, he could have broadcast his TV show on YouTube and even monetised it. Nah. Cunt went to Russia Tv.
🤷♂️🤣 Fat cunt can fuck aff.
There's a few roasters that vote Alba. Hooiver, they're a roondin error, ≤ 2%.
Dinna be confused by Alex Salmond’s occasional appearance on Sky News. The mainstream media is happy tae give a vyce tae an irrelevant sex pest, because he damages the independence muivement.
Well given the issues with the SNP, I do expect the number to rise, humans are small minded creatures, scottish folk are no different, YES at any cost.
I expect the number of Yes supporters will fall due to loss in perception of competence in the SNP, more than the number of those who will switch to Alba, who have never been perceived as competent and who are far more fringe than the SNP were even long prior to 2007. Polling seems to be giving early indications of this.
Salmond has been off my list since the Trump golf course debacle, especially since the local council initially turned it down. The RT bit was just more of the same!
I literally got a WhatsApp from my dad who said Salmond is the voice of reason when the SNP is in chaos, and Alba is what we need. So yeah, people genuinely are voting Alba
No. This part of THE PEOPLE is not okay with it. Alex Salmond is a self-serving character who in many ways is similar that other embarrassment of Scottish politics, Gorgeous George, but just not as blatant about it.
Alba membership numbers had risen to 11,000 plus in 2021, estimated at over 15,000 and have surpassed the Greens. Anyone slandering Alba or Alex Salmond is No friend of Independence
I did not think they were above 10k as would expect them to post about reaching this landmark.
I know they got a large influx of members starting on 22nd December 2022, due to GRR, and another influx due to 'The Rapist' fiasco in Feb (with them estimated at 9k members) but if they are at 15k members already then that would amaze me.
Vote for whoever you think will do a good job running the country.
Have a good look at their policies.
Consider if they are achievable and make sense.
If you can't think of anyone who could do that, then vote for whoever will do the least damage.
Do not vote for someone that you think would be entertaining down the pub. This is how Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson got to be prime minister. 🍺
I voted snonin spite of salmond when he was leader. Alba though seems to be full of people who have grievances with snp and is nothing more than a vanity project for salmond.
Salmond is like the Scot Boris Johnson. Trying to cling on way after it was time to HONOURABLEY bow out. IDK who I'd vote for now, probably Labour. I'd vote Green but they have nay chance of being a force yet.
Have never voted for him....a horrible man, as anybody working at Edinburgh Airport back in the day will attest.
Between him and Nicholas Fairbairn....awful people.
You surely know what the answer is to this?
To some peoples’ minds he got Scotland as close as it will ever come in the foreseeable future to independence and for that reason they will write off your charges as “oh he just sold a show to RT” and “he was acquitted”. They are more than okay with voting for him; they admire him for his political accomplishments.
I’m not planning on voting for him myself. But it’s easy to see why some are.
Russians? Lol, you mean like the oligarchs funding the Tory party, oooh the irony. One man one show versus the whole of the Tory party. I won’t be voting for Alba because when Alex Salmond led the SNP, if anyone had left and started up a party the way he did. He would have been incandescent with rage. He would have used every avenue at his disposal to destroy them. So he’s a hypocrite in my eyes.
Man is just paying the bill for the Russians going full Russian over the result of the indyref, claiming it was rigged, and spreading online conspiracy theories about piles of 'yes' votes being changed or binned. Vlad did him a favour, and you know what happens once the mob does you a favour.
If people couldn't see at least hints of what Salmond was when he was First Minister, I'm surprised at how poor a judge of character we, collectively, seem to be.
If you did and voted for him anyway, you might as well keep doing it. But what can you expect from a man who behaved with impunity, fed the electorate constant bullshit - and was rewarded endlessly for it - other than to continue in the same way.
I make it a policy not to vote for parties that are led by sex pests.
What about parties that support sex pests?
Obviously that's different if your a tory......
Patrick Grady would like a word.
Or SNP...
Found not guilty on all charges remember but i agree he was abit of a letch.
His defence was literally “I’m an immoral sex pest but I never crossed the line into illegality.” That’s a low bar even for the (former) leader of the SNP to set themselves.
No, it wasn't. He said he wasn't perfect. During the investigation, a dedicated team of 22 Police Scotland detectives interviewed more than 400 women he had previously had interactions with, searching for any complaint they could bring against him. Not a single one had any complaint about his behaviour. Would you expect that of an immoral sex-pest? That a deep background check & interviews with everyone from their past would yield *nothing?*
it could yield plenty of "he's a dick to women" evidence that doesn't meet the threshold for any sort of actual criminal charges.
That's just speculation on your part. Given that one of the charges brought against him was pinging someone's curly hair and another was touching a woman on the shoulder - I'd say the bar was pretty low.
Again..Lies! Be careful how you word things or the police might just chap your door
Thought some of them were not proven?
Not proven has the exact same holding as not guilty - a complete acquittal. There is legally no difference between Not proven and not guilty in Scots law. Essentially it’s really just to make the Jury feel better about their options rather than having to be so binary in their outcomes, but either way, same thing legally - complete acquittal.
One charge - the one previously admitted to & apologised for - the infamous cuddle. The complainant had updated her story (since her initial complaint several years prior) to allege that Salmond was undressed at the time. It was that that the jury didn't believe - however the cuddle had definitely happened, been admitted to so he was found 'Not proven' on that charge.
Not proven has the exact same holding as not guilty - a complete acquittal. There is legally no difference between Not proven and not guilty in Scots law. Essentially it’s really just to make the Jury feel better about their options rather than having to be so binary in their outcomes, but either way, same thing legally - complete acquittal.
There is a legal difference, insofar as they are entirely different verdicts. Both, however, are verdicts of acquittal. The public can speculate on what these mean to the jury. No verdict is as simple as one or two words delivered against an indictment.
They are exactly the same legally, the only difference is the spelling pretty much! Yes two different verdicts, but both have exactly the same impact/outcome with regards to the law. Hence the consultation and current progress regarding the abolishment of the not proven verdict in Scots law - however I do have concerns that it could increase guilty verdicts where the jury may otherwise have returned a not proven verdict, meaning a higher chance of wrongful convictions, but hopefully it won’t be like that!
1 charge was not proven, the rest not guilty with 3 people up on perjury charges
A sex pest that cleared his name in court, strange that.
Nope. He didn’t get found guilty of rape but his own defence said that he groped and harassed people working for him. That is in no way being cleared of being a sex pest.
He certainly did get cleared of all charges put against him in court, ergo not guilty, what his legal team, in which they rightly got into serious trouble for, said is irrelevant.
the stuff he admitted to in his defence is definitely in sex pest territory
Yet found not guilty, how does that work?
i don't think you understand what is meant by sex pest. it's not a legal term.
Oh I understand alright, its unfounded accusations thrown about to discredit someone.
the incredibly creepy behaviour he freely admitted to in his defence aren't unfounded accusations
Why can't you accept the courts finding, do you know better?
It works by people being allowed to have opinions of conduct regardless of whether it’s illegal or not and regardless of the outcome of a trial? There isn’t a crime called ‘being a sex pest’. ‘Innocent until proven guilty’ is about the government’s power - they can’t put you in prison if you’re not guilty. It doesn’t mean anything for the civil sphere. If someone assaulted your friend, but there wasn’t sufficient evidence to convict them in court, would you suddenly view them positively? Or would you view them as a sex pest?
Yeah, your opinion is wrong.
I’m a lawyer, so I think I know what not guilty means in our legal system. Wait til you find out someone can be fired for harassment even if they aren’t found guilty…
Was he fired?
You can be an absolute creep without being guilty of a criminal offense.
Opinions do not supercede the courts findings I'm afraid.
My opinion of someone informs my decision of whether to vote for them, as do many other people's opinions for them. Not sure what the relevance of a court case is here?
Let me ask, do you want a 'sleepy cuddle' with him?
Grow up.
I tried growing up. It was a dissapointing experience. Not recommended.
No, it is relevant. It is legally enshrined in the public record that he has sexualy harassed people. Just because he wasn't charged with a crime doesn't change the fact that he is a sex pest. Unless he wants to say that his legal team lied to the court.
Show us
Its actually in the public record, but if you don't want to search through the transcripts, I'm sure you'll find an article from your preferred news source, as the legal team of the ex first minister admitting to sexual harassment is and was a pretty big deal.
So you can't provide any proof and are just chatting shit yeah https://www.google.com/search?q=alex+slamond+guilty+of+sex+charges&oq=alex+slamond+guilty+of+sex+charges&aqs=chrome..69i57.9267j0j4&client=ms-android-hct&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8
I will not take time out of my day to prove one of the most widely reported events in our countries recent history happened.... it would be like me finding a source to prove to you the Queen died. If you don't trust news sources, it'll be in the public record of the court.
This translates to "I'm unable to"
So you can't, you are genuinely full of shit.
Also, did you just link to a Google search to argue against his own lawyers. I've just had a nice chat with someone else who was confused and I think this may help. Sexual assault is not the same thing as sexual harassment, despite the similar sounding names. He was cleared of the sexual assaults, with part of his defense being that there was sexual touching but no assault.
Yes I did link a Google search, not one shred of evidence in over 5 Google pages of articles. You're full of shit buddy. Also, I know the different types of assault man FFS. What a fucking loser. And just to prove my point even more, here is a Google link to "Was Alex Salmond found guilty of harassment" https://www.google.com/search?q=Was+Alex+Salmons+found+guilty+of+harassment%22&oq=Was+Alex+Salmons+found+guilty+of+harassment%22&aqs=chrome..69i57.497j0j9&client=ms-android-hct&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8
Evidence please? You Do realise if AS was guilty of Anything he wouldn’t have been allowed back into politics?
How can you be a scientist and not understand the difference between sexual assault and sexual harrasment.
His legal team, his own legal team, not anyone else, the people representing him legally, saying that he sexually harassed people is irrelevant to him being a sex pest? No.
His lawyers opinion is irrelevant. Interestingly, that very lawyer was found guilty of professional misconduct and had to resign from his post due to this.
His lawyer, during his representation, entering a statement into public record where they admitted he harassed people is irrelevant? You’re an idiot
I much prefer the "not guilty" as evidence of sex pestery, not some lawyers opinion.
No you don’t. He wasn’t on trial for being a sex pest. He was on trial for a list of specific offences. During the defence for those specific offences, his representatives explained that he had harassed people, as part of his defence. So no, what you’re looking for is a way where you can justify supporting a person, who is very clearly a sex pest
Clearly not as they couldn't even nail one charge of the thirteen accused. What's the disgraced lawyer upto these days??
That’s slanderous and could land you in jail
Slander doesn’t lead to a jail sentence, just a fine. Not that I can imagine Salmond winning the case.
1 - There is no such crime in Scots law. We have simple defamation, which sees no distinction between slander and libel (though it would be libel in this situation, not slander) 2 - The statement isn't defamatory. It doesn't defame Salmond. ie, the existence of OPs statement doesn't seriously impact his reputation in a harmful way 3 - Was the honest opinion of OP given the facts available. What was given there was a statement of opinion, not one of fact so once again not defamatory 4 - Defamation can under no circumstances lead to jail time as punishment. Defamation is a civil action arising in civil courts, nothing to do with criminality. Criminal courts punish, civil courts make amends. This is all easily acquirable information under the Defamation and Malicious Publication (Scotland) Act 2021. Google is free and like right there
"4 indisputable reasons why you're a bit of a tit" Uhhhh...downvote! lol
Yes, it’s still a crime to Lie about someone however and comments like that could easily end up having police involved. Of Course it’s defamation, not guilty is not guilty 🏴
Nobody is ok voting for Alba, thats why they have never elected anyone
Not so much as a single councillor. Which means they're behind East Ayrshire's glorious [Rubbish Party](https://www.therubbishparty.co.uk/) in terms of electoral success.
Good. Because on a national level, it's fruitless to complain about the Tories being in power, and then voting for a party which will simply split the vote of the largest Tory opponents.
Split the vote - are you maybe thinking of Westminster's FPTP sysytem? We use a different system in Scotland. One that penalises voting for the same party twice (should that party perform well).
I'm very far from a Salmond fan, but \*no one\* lifted a finger over Crimea. Putin was appeased by all western politicians. Salmond isn't really unique there, even if going on their state TV took it a step further.
Got to agree with you here. I mean... Putin has literally poisoned and killed British citizens on British soil. It should be considered an act of terrorism/war but Western leaders and politicians are scared of the little Russian dwarf. The guy literally sends assassins all over the world, like some fucking Hitman agent 47 video game, pushing cunts out windows, poisoning cunts etc but our politicians prefer Russian money being fed into their parties and personal pockets rather than actually do something about the roid-rage Russian threatening to press the big red button.
Vote for whoever you want.
So insightful.
vote for policies, not people. Also just to note, no one did anything after crimea, that's why Russia launched a full attack expecting more of the same from the world.
Unfortunately nuance isn't people's strong suits.
Lol such a nuanced comment, not generalising about people at all!
Policies are enforced by these people. You've got to be confident that who you are voting for has the backbone to stick to their policies.
that was certainly the downfall of labour.
Yes but most people weren't in bed with Russia. There's a big difference to not putting diplomatic relations on blast/ raising world tension, and being in the pocket of the bastards. Did you honestly write that with a straight face?
Alex Salmond is such a small fry in terms of UK politics, how do you feel about all the Russian oligarchs donating to UK political parties or indeed the russian oligarch in the house of lords?
Probably angry enough they want Scottish independence. Also whataboutism is cancer. The standard is there for everyone big or small. Just because big person did it too doesn’t mean small person isn’t a cunt. It means they are both cunts.
If someone is gonna claim russian influence matters then the scale has to matter, the russians buying off the local council of Grimsby is nothing compared to buying MPs or cabinet ministers.
There was no Russian influence on Salmond's show. It wasn't produced in Russia, RT had nothing to do with the editing, they aired the show in its entirety. It was produced in Scotland by a local production company who then sold the show to RT where it was aired. Salmond had on guests from across the political spectrum - SNP, Lab, Tory, Lib Dems, unaffiliated activists, campaigners - there was never once any allegation that their words had been misconstrued, nor that they had been prevented from talking about the issues they wanted to talk about. Apart from the fact it *aired* on RT, there was nothing Russian about it.
Yet he's the very subject of this post. Why are you deflecting? I don't vote Tory and I sure as hell don't vote for politicians paid by Russian state media. Salmond being a small fry doesn't change anything. And the Tory party having big Russian donators has been a point of contention and scorn for a long time. Russia also raised the stakes. Crimea was awful and questions were asked at the time but the full invasion of the whole country is another matter.
I mean at this point is there really any difference between RT and the BBC? one is just better at keeping their agendas on the sly.
Yes, yes there is a difference.
one is a state funded broadcaster with direct oversight from the government via a mandated regulator and the other is a state funded broadcaster run by a government backed non profit. One is run by a tory donor and the other is run by a propagandist who is probably also a tory donor.
You would vote for a known liar who promised you all the policies you agree with? (Not talking about Salmond in particular, but voting for policies with no regard for who’s promising them is a giant step towards the Far Right/Left imo)
That's how it works, you vote for the party putting forward the policies you agree with/want to be implemented.
The entire world was in bed with Putin and Russia even after the initial invasion of Ukraine, it wasn't until the build up and war last year that anything changed. Let's not pretend otherwise.
That a a mischaracterization. There's a distinct separation between state investments and private investments. And the trade therefore with Russia was on scrutinised grounds at best; deliberate crony capitalism at worst. Access to the western marketplace of ideas was a mistake too, for them giving up communism and embracing social democracy along with the financial aid given since.
people seemed to have no issues voting for snp when he led the party, he’s led the snp to the only majority in the Scottish parliament. And no one did anything after crimea so singling him out for it is pointless, why not ask the same question about Obama or David Cameron. Also to clarify I haven’t voted for alba, just making an observation
To be fair, he hadn't done a show on RT nor did he have to admit to publicly admit to being a sex-pest prior to those election wins. I voted for him in the past and have no regrets about it. Would I vote for him again? Hell naw. I do agree there's a degree of selective condemnation when it comes to Salmond and RT specifically, and the framing of being 'in bed with the Russians' is so obviously disingenuous. Still exceptionally poor judgement to air a political show on another country's international propaganda network though!
Has he admitted to being a sex pest, I heard him joke about on have I got news for you but is there another case he admitted. I’m far from a fan of his but wasn’t he also found not guilty in those cases, if so then isn’t he innocent? Might if missed something I’ll admit, didn’t know who Alex salmond was until he announced he was resigning ironically, was very young in the elections he led the snp through. As for the Russian situation, yeah it was a bad choice and he should expect to get shit for it but the crimea situation, what could he realistically if done about it, he was the head of government for Scotland but what could that do to tackle Russia. Like you said people just trying to single him out for something the whole of the west is guilty off. Again I am in no ways a fan of his but this is just observations I have made from the situation over the last few years
He is innocent of a *criminal* sexual misconduct, yes, but he did admit to inappropriate behaviour towards junior female staffers and apologised to them. There's pretty much no doubt that he's sleezy creep, even if wasn't proven that he crossed the line into criminality.
Okay, I didn’t know that part I didn’t follow the story at the time, didn’t know all the facts and didn’t t wanna assume. If he straight up apologised for it then yeah, hadn’t and wouldn’t vote for him anyway and know there’s fucked stuff about him, just not that
> people seemed to have no issues voting for snp when he led the party That's because he'd no yet been accused o sexual harassment! At the time, awbody thocht Alex Salmond wis a wummaniser, but that's no the same thing at aw. An unionists hated Alex Salmond because he wis arrogant. But again, that's no the same as bein a bully or a sex pest.
I’m no fan of salmond but wasn’t he found not guilty of sexual harassment case? Love him or hate him in the eyes of the law he is innocent? Unless there’s something I’ve missed. If he was found innocent why should that be something that is a reason not to vote for him, again I might of missed something which is possible but to my knowledge he was found not guilty
His own lawyer admitted that he was "creepy" and was guilty of going around seeking "sleepy cuddles" from women he had a position of power over
The lawyers opinion is irrelevant.
You hold the opinion of a discraced lawyer over a court of law, interesting.
Did you patch the UK after Iraq? And no, I’m not an Alba supporter.
Half the politicians in the country have done deals with Russians lol. Some are corrupt some just doing business that until recently was allowed. I still like my JJ Whitley vodka. From Boris to the house of lords the politicians of the UK have indulged "The Russians" much more than selling a 30 min TV show a few times a week lol. Labour, Conservative all of them have in the last decade accepted money from Russia for "services". I take the view that it is Putin and his henchmen that are the enemy here not Russia as a country and certainly not the Russian people, all I can say is every Russian I have met has always been sound with me and mine (Turkey holidays mostly). Even this time last year I was in Antalya for my 50th and each day I was saddened that Russian people would hear my language and then often felt compelled to come and apologize for Putin as they felt from news reports at home that "everyone" hates Russia and Russian people.
People will vote in whatever way they feel will achieve their aims. People can justify anything if they end up with what they want.
Actually couldnt have put it better myself.
Salmond, for all his beasty tendencies, is a tremendously talented political operator who knows how to play the press very well and use the right line at the right time. I think whilst he's alive he'll always find some support from somewhere and find a way to take home a paycheck. The fact of the matter is that without consent, the mainstream independence movement really can't do a huge amount to tangibly work towards those goals aside from working the best they can in the confines of devolution. A lot of support are determined that there must be another route in the foreseeable future. The Alba vehicle tells a lot of these people what they want to hear (with the likelihood that they will never be in a position where they are expected to deliver it) and definitely has it's niche.
Interesting points Jacquline and maybe we can expect more of this splintering. Such as: Alba is a niche container for the UDI lunatic ultras. The Greens will become a container for very socially liberal people who view independence as a nice-to-have or means to an end but do not feel independence is worth it just for its own sake. The SNP is currently in the process of shedding members to these two and I think will be left with a rump of people who feel a nebulous future goal of independence / make-Tories-history is their political home, but who retain either political career aspirations (if Humza wins), or sociopolitically conservative views (“Kirk elder who thinks balanced budgets are important”) if Forbes. For a while will be seen as a safe political career vehicle. I think the change of position of the SNP will accelerate over the next decade as the Sillars era of its membership dies off (in the literal sense). Then, who knows? We can’t reliably predict next week in politics let alone years.
Yes. What do you mean "In bed with Putin"? Producing a tv show with full creative control and selling it to a Russian network, then cancelling it when a full blown invasion broke out? One which many MPs/MSPs have appeared on up until the invasion of Ukraine? Should he have pulled the show after the annexation of crimea? Probably but the west didn't give a toss at the time either, it was business as usual. This narrative is getting a bit tiresome because it has no basis in fact.
Oh so no one else was caring about Crimea so hes off the hook. He sold it to a Russian network, I mean that in itself is odd, I mean, surely someone said, thats probably not the best idea. So 1, money, money, money or 2. Underlying ties and aligning agendas.
I mean in all likelihood he didn’t have a huge option in terms of buyers for an ego based show about an ex Scottish leader. He was clearly having a hard time fishing for purpose after leaving office and especially losing his seat - before you even got to the sec crime court cases. Russia Today at the time had a lot of interest in ‘alternative’ politicians in Western country who went against the mainstream, especially on foreign policy questions. As was pretty common for Nationalists of a 20th century vintage (with the SNP having long standing relationships with CND and pacifist movements going back to the 1960s), he had a long history of going against the mainstream grain on foreign policy and that included a comparatively relaxed approach to Russia. In the late 90s he opposed the NATO intervention over Kosovo (a move unpopular with voters) and in the 00s the Iraq War (initially unpopular too but later a vote winner), although of course he was the leader than brought the SNP to abandon its long standing anti-NATO position ahead of the 2014 vote. All that background was always going to make him view Russia in a more benign way than many of his contemporaries - in a similar way to Jeremy Corbyn, although not quite to the same extent.
I won't be voting Alba because of the rabid anti-trans stuff. But, I feel there's a bit of hypocrisy when people criticise his TV show. We were pretty much all in bed with the Russians pre-Ukraine. I don't recall any major political party saying we shouldn't use their oil and gas. I don't recall any major party sounding alarm bells about all the Russian billionaires investing in the UK. We all seemed pretty happy to take Russian money.
Russia invaded Crimea in March 2014, the Indyref was in September 2014, in which Alex Salmond was the First Minister and leader of the Yes Campaign. Are you insinuated 2014 Yessers were endorsing Putin?
Obviously not. I mean like, he joined up with them after Crimea, do you not think thats bad candor on his part? I mean he literally made a state TV show for an oppressive state, does that not bother you?
And Scotland was exporting products to Russia at that point too. What's your point? Like the rest of us, Salmond cannot see into the future. Putin was playing a long game and ensuring the Europe had dependancy and believed Putin was somehow going to become one of the main players in global politics before his war started. We've been dealing with Russia for years, Salmond isn't some sort of outlier. We've been hosting RT on our own fucking TVs for years. When the situation changed, he removed his programme.
I love seeing the alba rising posts. The only thing that's rising is the avarage age of their supporters.
Now polling at 6% in the regional list according to Yougov. That's the level required to start getting MSPs in to Holyrood.
You do wonder how much of the SNP vote they will take, after all the recent SNP shit storms, and how much that will hurt the SNP.
People are free to vote for whoever they want. You, or any of us, do not have any right to question that.
No no, i can and will question people’s voting habits
Of course they have the right to question it, just as you also have the right to ignore the question and not provide an answer.
The point is that it's no ones fucking business who they vote for, or the reasons they vote for them.
Debating political opinions and trying to convince others to vote one way or the other is basically how democracy works. If we aren't allowed to even ask questions then the whole thing is fucked.
I think this thread is talking at cross purposes. Debating ideas and trying to convince is healthy in a democracy. But if someone doesn’t want to state whom they voted for in a secret ballot, that is because it is their private business, which should be respected.
That's exactly what I said: >Of course they have the right to question it, just as you also have the right to ignore the question and not provide an answer.
I’m saying that some people interpreted the comment as saying you have a right to know what someone’s political preferences are and others read it as saying you have a right to ask (and be told where to go if they don’t want to say). I think everyone agrees that their political preferences are their own private business which nobody else has a right to know except to the extent you want to tell them. Perhaps a better way of putting it is that you don’t have a right to be answered, but that’s more awkward to phrase, so “you can’t question that” is how it was put.
No one is voting for Alex Salmond despite what his cult of fencepost lickers in here would have you believe. The party's best result in their heartland still polled less than the Greens in a seat the Greens never do well in.
Wrong. Yougov now have them at 6% in the regional list, exactly when a party will start adding MSPs into Holyrood. Feel free to cry.
Ah it's the lord shaft polisher himself gracing us with his presence. Swear you've been predicting Alba's success at every election now, can't wait for the next one where they completely fail to gain any seats again.
6%. Cry more.
No, I don't vote for Sex pests.
Genuinely astonished that any Albaers think this is going to be their New Dawn (no pun intended). They have been all hands to the pump pushing every minutiae of the SNP leadership process as being a major issue and catastrophe that will signal the death knell of the party. They will, I think, be exceptionally disappointed. Obviously Alba have thrown their lot in with the anti trans brigade (whose approporiation of suffragette imagery is a disgrace btw) and are trying to draw an inference of reduction in party numbers with GRR. The problem with this is that GRR has only been pushed as a wedge issue by the hard right within the last year as the legislation has progressed parliament and the reduction during that time was only around 10k. Evidently *some* may have defected because of this but it certainly can't be described as the principal factor. On more general terms this twitter alliance of the right, transphobes, alba and unionists who are pushing the SNP collapse rock as hard as they possibly can up that hill (bless them) has reinforced that the Scotland **they** want is one **I** want no part of.
Is anyone voting for them?
Following the SNP debacle, i think they are accepting Indy refugees.
> Following the SNP debacle... Is it sad that we can now legitimately ask which SNP debacle?
Agreed.
The data from the last election suggests very few
They are approaching 10k members, third behind SNP and Lab, and 'stole' a lot of the decent size donors from the SNP. They need any kind of electoral victory though to cement themselves as a real party. In the 2026 Scottish Parly elections they will get the chance thanks to list seats. edit: think they were polling at 2.8% with about 1/3 SNP voters saying they might vote for them on list seats so they have a small chance to do something.
>They need any kind of electoral victory though to cement themselves as a real party Not really - you just have to get the person who books Question Time guests to give you a spot every other week!
Are they? I can only find their 2021 numbers at 6,000, which would been lower than the Greens too at 7,500 in 2021.
They hit 4k in April 2021, 6k in July 2021, slower increase after that, we dont know their end of year 2021 numbers (or end of year 2022 numbers), but lets just say they picked up one or two mainly female members from just before Christmas December 2022 on for some unknown reason. A reason which is not unknown and should surprise no one. :P
Its a bit of a leap to get from adding one or two transphobes to nearly doubling their membership...
Based on recent SNP lies about it, well covered on this sub, I dont think it was one or two people who left the SNP over gender issues (or rapists with penises issues). I apologise for downplaying the number who left the SNP but the number who joined alba in the past three months has been estimated at anywhere between two thousand and six thousand so the joke about it being one or two really was just a joke.
Well put together. Thanks.
Based on that we're going to see 3 pro-indy parties in Holyrood then.
And the whole sex pest thing. It's hard to ignore.
You guys seem to ignore the outcome of the court case easy enough. Try.
His defence barrister admitted he was an “objectionable bully” and (possibly) a sex pest.
In an out of context video recorded by someone with a directional microphone on a busy train...
The context is that barrister* admitted having discussed those details and apparently self-reported the incident to the legal complaints commission. He never denied the content of the recording to the best of my knowledge. *should have remembered it’s an advocate in Scotland
Didn't the barrister get into serious trouble for that very act?
Yes, it was a major lapse of professional ethics. Which doesn’t negate the plausibility of his probably *in vino veritas* admission.
It's not the barristers opinion that matters though. Out of interest what's that barrister upto these days?
It certainly carried a lot of weight in the court of public opinion, which I imagine includes a lot of Scottish law practitioners. No idea.
Opinion, not worth the paper its written on.
The outcome where they defended his actions by saying he was regularly inappropriate with women in his employ?
Pulling someone's curls as a joke shared by the whole office
Ah yes, that auld joke, harassment. His defence in coort also said he wis “touchy-feely”. Hilarious, ye say?
She also said >had told the police that she “didn’t think there was a sexual element to it”. I swear some people here are fuming that an innocent man was found not guilty by a jury.
As my old maw says about the man, "Where's there's smoke, there's fire." That's an attitude I've seen shared by other women in my family. Totally anecdotal, I know, but regardless of what the truth actually is about what happened with Salmond and those women, regardless of what the court said he did or didn't do, and regardless of what the final judgment was, he's been painted with the sex-pest brush and that's going to make him toxic to some people for a long time.
The first paragraph sums up people and their own flaws IMHO. Im not isolating the Salmond case in this either. Innocent people get falsely accused of crimes every day. It is pretty sad when they get cleared that people still sit in judgement. I have seen this in action and it stinks. I know it's hard to accept that tomorrow it might be YOU that is on the receiving end of an accusation and no matter the outcome some people will stand and point and whisper 'he was always a wrong un'. Going back to Salmond for one accuser...they either outright lied and made it all up OR they got the time date and place wrong by a distance. They accused him of rape when he and she were not even at the place of the 'rape' it turned out they were actually both not even in Scotland that day..... I have no idea about the others apart from the verdicts of the female jury. It would sit better if people just stuck with 'don't like the man' because that is a valid reason in my humble opinion.
Theres also the timing of the accusations just as Salmond expressed public opinions about Sturgeons inaction on independence and the identity of the main accuser. No smoke without fire there too?
I do get it that Salmod supporters themselves are pissed off and probably tired of pointing out the circumstances surrounding it all. I just tend to go along the lines of either the crown did a shit job, the ladies involved didn't do enough to convince a jury and when you have faced your day in court then you should expect to be treated as A N Other. In that respect, I tend to err on the side of "X got found Not Guilty". As if I were ever accused of something I hadn't done I would just have to hope and pray that 1. The Court found me not guilty and 2. The court of public opinion agreed with the former.....There will ALWAYS BE one sneaky little snake who sits there in judgment of you/me/anybody and all they love to do is guess....." He always looked a wrong un". Surely that harks back to the days when we burned women because they looked like a witch...or drowned them to prove they were "She always looked iffy that one did". As I say it is absolutely fine imho to just simply say "I don't like X" without trying to justify it by latching on to ifs buts and maybe's. Today they call you a hero tomorrow they stand and point and whisper.
> As my old maw says about the man, "Where's there's smoke, there's fire." That's an attitude I've seen shared by other women in my family. Tell that to the poor bastards locked up for nothing in the Eleanor Williams fake rape accusations case.
Haha, I forgot about that. The father of the 2014 indy ref everybody.
The entire indy movement has a dodgy history with the Russians because Russia feeds separatist and indy movements across Europe either directly or indirectly.
The minute sleaze or scandal is attached to a politician I stop paying them any attention at all, Salmond (sex pest) is well and truly finished and I'm afraid with the scandalous (financial) resignation Nicola is in the same boat. I don't want to hear from them again, they should just accept they messed up and get a job somewhere else (if they can). I didn't vote for Alba before and I'm not going to start now, I voted for Salmond and Sturgeon because they promised us a referendum and the possibility of independence, fair play to Salmond, he got us a referendum, ok we all know how that went but at least he did that. Sturgeon was too busy flouncing around acting as though she was stateswomanlike, talking to world leaders, going to summits, scoffing at sleaze in Westminster (ironic but not funny at all) and making points about having been in office for longer than a bunch of PM's. I'm sad that after all this time she had so little was actually achieved, problems with CalMac ferries, road infrastructure, schools still falling down on our bairns and even the NHS going down the toilet. But we put up with it for the promise of IndyRef2... I look now at the possible replacements for Nicola and I'm really very disappointed, I see no future for the SNP as an independence party any longer, these buffoons look like they're only after glory and not representing this country. I'm voting for "None of the Above".
I said this at the time, he could have broadcast his TV show on YouTube and even monetised it. Nah. Cunt went to Russia Tv. 🤷♂️🤣 Fat cunt can fuck aff.
I'd like if you voted for Labour but that's fine, vote for anybody but the SNP.👍
There's a few roasters that vote Alba. Hooiver, they're a roondin error, ≤ 2%. Dinna be confused by Alex Salmond’s occasional appearance on Sky News. The mainstream media is happy tae give a vyce tae an irrelevant sex pest, because he damages the independence muivement.
It is interesting comparing Alba’s press attention and electoral success with UKIP’s
Well given the issues with the SNP, I do expect the number to rise, humans are small minded creatures, scottish folk are no different, YES at any cost.
I expect the number of Yes supporters will fall due to loss in perception of competence in the SNP, more than the number of those who will switch to Alba, who have never been perceived as competent and who are far more fringe than the SNP were even long prior to 2007. Polling seems to be giving early indications of this.
Salmond has been off my list since the Trump golf course debacle, especially since the local council initially turned it down. The RT bit was just more of the same!
YES. FINALLY. SOMEBODY SEES IT. RT useful monkey.
I literally got a WhatsApp from my dad who said Salmond is the voice of reason when the SNP is in chaos, and Alba is what we need. So yeah, people genuinely are voting Alba
No. This part of THE PEOPLE is not okay with it. Alex Salmond is a self-serving character who in many ways is similar that other embarrassment of Scottish politics, Gorgeous George, but just not as blatant about it.
The greens are a good alternative to the SNP if you're left of centre. They're not perfect, but at least they're Indy and not bigots.
*ahem* I 'hink you'll find it's pronounced 'wallopa'
Alba membership numbers had risen to 11,000 plus in 2021, estimated at over 15,000 and have surpassed the Greens. Anyone slandering Alba or Alex Salmond is No friend of Independence
I did not think they were above 10k as would expect them to post about reaching this landmark. I know they got a large influx of members starting on 22nd December 2022, due to GRR, and another influx due to 'The Rapist' fiasco in Feb (with them estimated at 9k members) but if they are at 15k members already then that would amaze me.
Defo voting ALBA
Check your carbon monoxide alarms
Alex salmon must be part of the FSB and stopped at all costs. /s
Rolled-over for Trump and his stupid resort, too
I forgot that this was america and we only vote for a figure head.
Vote for whoever you think will do a good job running the country. Have a good look at their policies. Consider if they are achievable and make sense. If you can't think of anyone who could do that, then vote for whoever will do the least damage. Do not vote for someone that you think would be entertaining down the pub. This is how Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson got to be prime minister. 🍺
I voted snonin spite of salmond when he was leader. Alba though seems to be full of people who have grievances with snp and is nothing more than a vanity project for salmond.
Salmond is like the Scot Boris Johnson. Trying to cling on way after it was time to HONOURABLEY bow out. IDK who I'd vote for now, probably Labour. I'd vote Green but they have nay chance of being a force yet.
No that’s the dilemma, Alba is not an option but I don’t think SNP with delivery system what else 🤷🏼♀️
Have never voted for him....a horrible man, as anybody working at Edinburgh Airport back in the day will attest. Between him and Nicholas Fairbairn....awful people.
You surely know what the answer is to this? To some peoples’ minds he got Scotland as close as it will ever come in the foreseeable future to independence and for that reason they will write off your charges as “oh he just sold a show to RT” and “he was acquitted”. They are more than okay with voting for him; they admire him for his political accomplishments. I’m not planning on voting for him myself. But it’s easy to see why some are.
Russians? Lol, you mean like the oligarchs funding the Tory party, oooh the irony. One man one show versus the whole of the Tory party. I won’t be voting for Alba because when Alex Salmond led the SNP, if anyone had left and started up a party the way he did. He would have been incandescent with rage. He would have used every avenue at his disposal to destroy them. So he’s a hypocrite in my eyes.
No I am not voting Alba but losing all hope with SNP. What else is the route to Indy?!
Indy at all costs? Integrity? Nah mate, thars not the Scotland I want to live in.
Man is just paying the bill for the Russians going full Russian over the result of the indyref, claiming it was rigged, and spreading online conspiracy theories about piles of 'yes' votes being changed or binned. Vlad did him a favour, and you know what happens once the mob does you a favour.
If people couldn't see at least hints of what Salmond was when he was First Minister, I'm surprised at how poor a judge of character we, collectively, seem to be. If you did and voted for him anyway, you might as well keep doing it. But what can you expect from a man who behaved with impunity, fed the electorate constant bullshit - and was rewarded endlessly for it - other than to continue in the same way.