Yes, but Chibnall may not have known they existed.

Historically Lib Dems were always strong supporters of local governance, which is popular in areas like the Highlands. The Conservatives were too elitist and Labour too urban and centralising.

Voters rarely decide based on individual candidates, Wishart just had a safer seat and weaker opponents.

Losing a seat shouldn't have to mean the end of a political career, they could run again next election or for the Scottish Parliament or in a local election.

Probably some. They could also densify some existing areas, and not build such spread out housing as is often the case.

Those 1.4m do not all require their own home.

If you weren't on social media much, it was easier to have not heard anything of Rowling's views at that point.

Clearly those activities have failed to provide a true substitute for the position religion once held in society. You can also argue religion is the reason for peace and human rights just as much as for violence and oppression. Anyway I have strong doubts that a lack of religion would have decreased violence historically.

So about the same as the average Briton about 60 years ago. It also means that half don't think it should be illegal.

Religion can be very beneficial to a society, for example being religious makes people on average happier, less socially isolated and seems to correlate with a healthier lifestyle. The secularisation of modern society is a major factor in some of its biggest issues.

I'm not particularly religious myself, but reddit has a far too narrow-minded view of religion.

Anyone is allowed to vote for an Islamic party if they wish, just as much as they can vote for a Christian, Hindu, Jewish, satanic etc. party.

Probably thought they were making it up.

May be more than rumours, with stuff like this.

Morocco (1930) - one of the dullest films I've seen.

Grand Hotel (1932) - just doesn't engage me at all.

Stella Dallas (1937) - that story is awful.

Giant (1956) - I don't understand what is good about this film.

There are also quite a few comedies that I just don't find funny, such as:

The Philadelphia Story (1940)

The Lady Eve (1941)

Unfaithfully Yours (1948)

How to Marry a Millionaire (1953)

Fortunately these films are very much the exception for me.

I saw it once and kind of felt this way. Much preferred Odd Man Out for Carol Reed films.

Very politically uninformed - hasn't kept up with the shift on civil rights in the Democratic party.

Could - perhaps. But I think Nixon wins narrowly. He does worse in the south, midwest and rural areas generally, but makes up for it in the northeast and among Catholic voters.

LBJ is hard to predict. He would have done much better in the south, but worse in some other areas. It would depend on his performance in the Midwest most likely.

Kennedy had some disadvantages, and Stevenson would have done better with some voting groups. Albeit worse with others. Overall Nixon probably wins narrowly.

Attenborough is a close relation of one at least.

You should be pleased Labour aren't winning the seat then.

The Highlands have more of a history of voting Liberal than SNP. And the eastern part of the lowlands is historically a core region of SNP support. Even the southern lowlands has some history of voting SNP (especially Dumfries and Galloway and its predecessors, in October 1974, 1997 and 2015). Also if you go back a few decades, the Highlands voted Conservative just as much or even more than the Scottish Borders.

Not this time, but in recent elections the Tories got over a quarter of the vote in Scotland. Maybe not full of them but Tory voters were clearly widespread.

If people don't vote for pro independence parties, then independence clearly isn't a priority for them, even if they nominally support it. 65% or so for unionist parties is a pretty clear mandate not to have a referendum any time soon.

He could always run again in the future.