What? No conspiracy theories about the spoiled papers?

Oh well, only 21 reads so far. The night is young.

By the way, I've still got some of those old bumper stickers:

'Diebold. Machines That Vote So You Don't Have To'.

If you find the culprit I'll run up some local versions.

Nice phrase  , Dude.

Apparently 1.5mio frogs have voted on the things, gotta get Arse into Gear on that; but much else to do.

If the Evil One wins here, will have to accelerate, as he'll be onto it, Bush-like...

We shall have to wait and see where these spoiled papers are. If as I suspect they are in Labour holds where the majority is less than the number of spoiled ballot papers then we might have a problem.

Wow! Look at this coincidence turns out one Lord Kinnock is a director of the firm which was in charge of the fix

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20050415/ai_n13609048

Of course the lying oil soaked thoroughly corrupt Murdoch owned media aren’t going to report on any of this. They love war as war means big bucks for their buddies in the arms and security industries

Wow! Look at this coincidence turns out one Lord Kinnock is a director of the firm which was in charge of the fix

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20050415/ai_n13609048

Of course the lying oil soaked thoroughly corrupt Murdoch owned media aren’t going to report on any of this. They love war as war means big bucks for their buddies in the arms and security industries

With a turnout less than 50%, the SNP gains are somewhat less than impressive - in fact, the proportion of the electorate who actually voted for them turns out to be roughly the same as the polling support for independence, approx 25%. So in effect, no real change in SNP support across Scotland - increases here and there can be put down to the anti-Blair effect. Whats intriguing is what happens next between Labour and the Lib Dems who are in a much stronger position now vis-a-vis a coalition than before; Labour will have to take on board a lot more of the Lib Dem programme in order for the coalition to continue, with an SNP minority government being the alternative.

Of course, the Nats are bursting out all over with the overweening, snarling bombast they`re so good at, along with that breezy, starry-eyed faith in independence, as if there never could be any downside or negative consequences of it. What they utterly fail to realise is that there are many people in Scotland whose attachment to the Union is as fervent and deeply held as their yearning to break it, so isn`t it likely that independence would create extremist unionism, just like in, uh, Northern Ireland? If that scenario ever came to pass, it would make the Troubles look like a mild tiff by comparison.

Shock horror, the SNP intends to abolish the council tax, get  rid of Trident, introduce progressive taxes and spend more on health and education.  Clearly 'snarling bombast' has got the better of them. Unable to see the negative consequences of elementary social justice their 'starry eyed faith' in independence looks like improving human welfare and increasing social cohesion north of the border.  What a disaster for the Anglo American security state and its desperate defenders. See above....

Did you know....

1.  80% of all votes in America are counted by only two companies:  Diebold and ES&S.

2.  There is no federal agency with regulatory authority or oversight of the U.S. voting machine industry.

http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0916-04.htm

3.  The vice-president of Diebold and the president of ES&S are brothers.

http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/private_company.html

4.  The chairman and CEO of Diebold is a major Bush campaign organizer and donor who wrote in 2003 that he was "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/07/28/sunday/main632436.shtml

http://www.wishtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=1647886

5.  Republican Senator Chuck Hagel used to be chairman of ES&S.  He became Senator based on votes counted by ES&S machines.

http://www.motherjones.com/commentary/columns/2004/03/03_200.html

http://www.onlinejournal.com/evoting/031004Fitrakis/031004fitrakis.html

6.  Republican Senator Chuck Hagel, long-connected with the Bush family, was recently caught lying about his ownership of ES&S by the Senate Ethics Committee.

http://www.blackboxvoting.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=26

http://www.hillnews.com/news/012903/hagel.aspx

http://www.onlisareinsradar.com/archives/000896.php

7.  Senator Chuck Hagel was on a short list of George W. Bush's vice-presidential candidates.

http://www.businessweek.com/2000/00_28/b3689130.htm

http://theindependent.com/stories/052700/new_hagel27.html

8.  ES&S is the largest voting machine manufacturer in the U.S. and counts almost 60% of all U.S. votes.

http://www.essvote.com/HTML/about/about.html

http://www.onlinejournal.com/evoting/042804Landes/042804landes.html

9.  Diebold's new touch screen voting machines have no paper trail of any votes.  In other words, there is no way to verify that the data coming out of the machine is the same as what was legitimately put in by voters.

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0225-05.htm

http://www.itworld.com/Tech/2987/041020evotestates/pfindex.html

10.  Diebold also makes ATMs, checkout scanners, and ticket machines, all of which log each transaction and can generate a paper trail.

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0225-05.htm

http://www.diebold.com/solutions/default.htm

11.  Diebold is based in Ohio.

http://www.diebold.com/aboutus/ataglance/default.htm

12.  Diebold employed 5 convicted felons as consultants and developers to help write the central compiler computer code that counted 50% of the votes in 30 states.

http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,61640,00.html

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/10/301469.shtml

13.  Jeff Dean was Senior Vice-President of Global Election Systems when it was bought by Diebold.  Even though he had been convicted of 23 counts of felony theft in the first degree, Jeff Dean was retained as a consultant by Diebold and was largely responsible for programming the optical scanning software now used in most of the United States.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0312/S00191.htm
http://www.chuckherrin.com/HackthevoteFAQ.htm#how

http://www.blackboxvoting.org/bbv_chapter-8.pdf

14.  Diebold consultant Jeff Dean was convicted of planting back doors in his software and using a "high degree of sophistication" to evade detection over a period of 2 years.

http://www.chuckherrin.com/HackthevoteFAQ.htm#how

http://www.blackboxvoting.org/bbv_chapter-8.pdf

15.  None of the international election observers were allowed in the polls in Ohio.

http://www.globalexchange.org/update/press/2638.html

http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2004/10/26/loc_elexoh.html

16.  California banned the use of Diebold machines because the security was so bad.  Despite Diebold's claims that the audit logs could not be hacked, a chimpanzee was able to do it!  (See the movie here:  http://www.bbvdocs.org/videos/baxterVPR.mov.)

http://wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,63298,00.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4874190

17.  30% of all U.S. votes are carried out on unverifiable touch screen voting machines with no paper trail.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/07/28/sunday/main632436.shtml

18.  All -- not some -- but all the voting machine errors detected and reported in Florida went in favor of Bush or Republican candidates.

http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,65757,00.html

http://www.yuricareport.com/ElectionAftermath04/ThreeResearchStudiesBushIsOut.htm

http://www.rise4news.net/extravotes.html

http://www.ilcaonline.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=950

http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0411/S00227.htm

19.  The governor of the state of Florida, Jeb Bush, is the President's brother.

http://www.tallahassee.com/mld/tallahassee/news/local/7628725.htm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10544-2004Oct29.html

20.  Serious voting anomalies in Florida -- again always favoring Bush -- have been mathematically demonstrated and experts are recommending further investigation.

Aw, shucks, I just lurve that Cassandra and that cute way s/he equates the SNP with social justice.

Well, how about this for some social justice? - more details of the Scottish parliamentary election just in, showing that the SNP share of the vote was about 31%; on a turnout of 50% or less this becomes a whopping 16% of the total Scottish electorate! Well, michty me! - I guess that means that about 84% of Scots voters didn`t vote for them! So all this chunter about changing Scottish politics forever is just media blather. Any coalition that takes power in Holyrood will be skating on a thin ice of legitimacy: it is arguable that a pro-union govmt would have a greater mandate than an anti-union one on the basis that there is no grassroots groundswell of support for independence, at least nothing that is currently getting more than 25% going by recent polls.

And as for the SNP `improving human welfare and increasing social cohesion north of the border`, you`ve got to be kidding! Their avowed intent is the breakup of the union and the guaranteed consequences of that would be civil unrest, divided communities and fighting in the streets. Now that`s what I call a negative consequence, though no doubt Cassandra will be swift to poohpooh my savagely cynical views.

Dear Swingy baby, check out the real situation.

Conflating the situation in Scotland with Northern Ireland is nothing less than a form of historical and political illiteracy. The SNP are not physical force republicans fighting against the rigged demographics of partition, and unionists in Scotland do not form a seperate ethno-religous sector within the society.  Forget the Enoch Powellesque nonsense about rivers of blood and civil unrest. It's totally different historical and cultural context. The only losers under Scottish independence are Bush and Blair.

Everyone in the UK will benefit from a more humane regime in Scotland. How long will the Council Tax last in the UK when it's abolished in Scotland?. What about tuition fees and free care for the elderly?  The end of Trident is a victory for everyone concerned with peace and global stablility.  Changes in Scotland may also provide a significant challenge to the the cynical politics of consensus south of the border  and threaten the stablity of the business party with two wings (labour/conservative) that's caused so much misery for so long.

The media and political establishment are uniformly hostile to independence;  it's not a view thats advocated anywhere in the corporate or state media. Despite a media system rigged to prevent political change and destroy independent thought, the people of Scotland have created a participatory political movement and elected an administration committed to independence and social change. it's withing this context that Alex Salmond can refer to Blair as a murderer and war criminal and achieve electoral success.. And it's not just the SNP. Both the Greens and Socialists are equally committed to a referendum for independence.. But Mr Swing, you would presumably go against every progressive force in Scotland and support a Labour or Tory administration and business as usual for Blair and Bush. and a secure future for weapons of mass destruction in Scotland..?

A-NonnyMouse said: "Despite a media system rigged to prevent political change and destroy independent thought, the people of Scotland have created a participatory political movement and elected an administration committed to independence and social change."

Egad, sir! Pardon me while I - !THOK! - slap myself on the forehead in exasperation. It really gets my goat when folk start talking about `the people of Scotland` as if they were some homogenous mass of like-minded human beings, when I know from lifelong personal experience that...it aint so, joe! Every nation, even every city, is a patchwork of communities and with our history, doubly so for Scotland. And the truth is that one community has backed the SNP, nationalists and independence supporters who, with a turnout of 50%, managed to muster 31% of the poll.

So, 50% of 31% is how much, comrades? - yes, 15.5, say 16% of the TOTAL ELECTORATE. I realise that I`m labouring this point, but even when all that can be said has been said, we have to say it again because no-one was listening. So, in short, 16% support may be enough to elect a minority government but there is no way it confers a mandate or significant grassroots support for independence. Thats it, full stop, end of story.

In fact, I had an epiphany about this while out and about in Partick today, namely that any independence supporter can be treated thus: `Ah, right, so you voted for the SNP? Well, congratulations! - you must be one of the 16% who did. So tell me, why the fudge should the other 84% of us take serious notice of anything you say about independence?'

Oh, and as for my supporting a Labour or Tory administration....strewth, that`s waterpistols-at-dawn talk, fellah! As a radical democrat I would sooner drink Magaret Thatcher`s bathwater before supporting any government that had a Tory component. Labour involvement might be acceptable, but they`d have to ditch Joke McConnell and 3/4 of their policies (oh, and do a conga-line down the Royal Mile, naked with tulips up their fundaments...)(aw, okay, make it a feather)...hell, ye get my drift...

16%. It is to laugh.

Dear Swingy,

'Every nation is a patchwork of communities,' but of course, and that's the whole point of independence and regional autonomy - to decentralise power away from Westminster and the corrupt elite that's  managed it's cyncal business for so long. Maybe I've missed something, but I'm at a loss to understand how any self styled 'radical democrat' can object to scrapping WMD, impeaching Blair, raising taxes for corporations, providing free care for the elderly and abolishing tuition fees, reducing the power of Baliffs to enter and seize and scrapping the most hated and regressive tax in Britain. Admittedly, it's not the full programme of Anarcho-syndicalism, but it's a big improvement on God Save the Queen and business as usual.

Me thinks you're confusion is at least in part explicable: you see all nationalism as an assertion of cultural chauvinism and seperatism, an attempt to reduce diversity and undermine pluralism. By your logic nationalist figures as diverse as Gandhi, Hugo Chavez and James Connolly become virtual equivalents to Ian Paisley and Jean-Marie Le Pen. You've conflated the grand nationalism' of Imperial nations with the 'nationalism' of their former colonies   But the two movements are polar opposites .one seeking to reduce diversity, centralise power and eliminate minority languages and culture, the other an attempt to articulate the right of people to diversity,  autonomy and control over local resources - hence abolish Trident and scrap the council tax. Hardly 'right wing' policies.

But you're argument amounts to this - accept imperialism and all it's prerogatives. Fight the class war within the parameters it sets. The alternative is a nightmare of racist bloodletting and social breakdown - making you the only 'radical democrat' in history to argue for Crown Prerogatives and the continuation of nuclear militarism as preferable to the imaginary horrors of national independence. Bizarre. Are you an English Stockbroker....?

Captainswing - your not George Foulkes by any chance are you, you sound a little confused? 1820 (http://1820.org.uk/ ) has the Mediwatch account on whats' actually happening here. Meanwhile Alan Smart's response to Hamish Macdonnell's piece ("DOUGLAS Alexander, the Scottish Secretary, was warned months before the Holyrood election debacle that the design of the voting papers he chose to use was likely to confuse people and cause them to spoil their ballots...") in the Scotsman (http://news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=709282007 ) is bang on the money:

"This get to the nub of the story. It was a politically motivated decision by Douglas Alexander to press ahead with the single ballot paper to minimise "ticket splitting" which had badly affected the Labour list vote ( and that of the other boig parties) in 2003, leading to the Greens getting 7 MSPs and the SSP 6.

Here the view of the main parties was that somehow or other the greens and SSP had stolen these seats, whereas all voters were doing was making efective use of the system, as they do in AMS systems all over the world. Douglas Alexander as Secretary of State for Scotland simply wore a partisan labour hat and ignored all independent advice to maximise the Labour vote, The fact this was endorsed implicitly by some low ranking officials from the other three big parties via consultation with the Electoral Commssion is no excuse. They did not take the decsion - opposition party officials dont run the country, nor are they accountable to voters -, and what party official in the world would fail to implicitly endorse a ballot paper that assisted them?

And what about the ,many objection from all the smaller parties - the parties decimated by the ballot design on Thursday, The Greens in particular. Do they not have right too?

But anyway, Governments, Secretary of States for Scotland have different responsibities - they are there to serve the public not party interest and are paid by the public, accountable to the public and obliged to listen to expert opinion such as the Cragg Roos Dawson Report, a report paid for out of public funds for this very reason

Douglas Alexander has but one option open to him -resign

Please sign this e-petition and help network it to others to help him on his way

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/ScottishVoteScandal2007/

Labour changed the voting system because they thought it would give them the maximum benefit in light of the rout that was coming! I had to read the information leaflet at least twice to understand how to fill in my postal vote and I'd consider myself above average intelligence. I found it really strange that the first vote was the regional list and the second vote was for your local MSP. Intuitively I'd expect that to be the other way around.

Please remember that the spoiled papers don't get counted in the turnout figures so turnout was slightly better than people are quoting above. Most people who don't vote have no strong feeling on the subject hence their abstention so to say they are on the side of the union is also a misguide belief.

I voted SNP for the first time as they have policies with more morality than Joke McDonald and his croonies. I'm sick of Joke giving us political babble instead of straight answers. By voting for them, I wasn't voting for independence, I was voting for the right to have an independence referendum but more importantly I was voting for fairer social justice after 8 years of the Lib-Lab administration. Too many of the above commentators have failed to recognise that the Scottish people were able to vote SNP and still believe in the union and many have done such.

Some of you need to stop listening to the Labour and Tory retoeric and actually read the manifesto of the SNP to understand what the outcome of the election actually means. It is unlikely that the referendum will happen as the majority of other MSPs were against it in the run up to the election. However, I'm still looking forward to being rid of the unfair council tax, seeing new ideas and improvements for education and the health service and generally see some innovation for a change. 

Radicals for Trident...? Revolutionary socialists for constitutional monarchy? Anarchists for corporate tax cuts? Syndicalists for fiscal stability? Radical Democrats for Ulster Unionism and Capt'n Swing for Prime Minister...!  Will wonders never cease. Surely we near the End of Days...?