(07 May 2015, 10:29 pm)MurdnunoC wrote I don't blame the SNP for ensuring another five years of Tory rule. I disagree with the principle of tactical voting. People should vote for whichever political candidate they feel represents them the best. If Scottish voters believe the SNP will represent their interests best then so be it - even if it has the inadvertent effect of enabling another period of Tory rule. Labour (and the Lib-Dems) should have done more to appeal to the Scottish electorate. If they failed to do this, it's on them, not the SNP.
Sorry, meant to reply last night.
I have had conversations with colleagues and ex-colleagues, who live down south. They have openly admitted to being traditional lib dem supporters and live in marginal areas (not sure on the constituencies).
Rather than vote lib dem and risk the SNP having a voice via any lib lab alliance (as unlikely as that may have been), they voted tory.
One quote, from a highly educated and 'sensible' ex-colleague was: 'I voted for them. It (SNP) definitely influenced my vote, but I didn't think it would make much difference. I thought the others would have done better'.
Granted, that is only a handful of people, but thought it was an example worth sharing.
Tactical voting may not be something you agree with, but it happens.
UKIP are saying a lot of their voters, went tory - simply because they didn't want to risk a lab snp coalition.
Whether that is accurate or an example of them being upset, no idea.
The independence debate stirred up nationalism in Scotland and resentment in England.
Cameron is the only winner and has been twice over.
The SNP campaigned against austerity, yet won't change anything, other than maybe forcing through another independence referendum. They are as big as they can get and for all they may be riding on the crest of a wave, their influence, isn't going to hold much sway in Parliament.
Patriotism and hot air in Holyrood? Definitely.
Influence and change in Westminster. No way.