After the tears and disappointment of election night, the SNP is now embroiled in angry recriminations over who is to blame for the party's catastrophic defeat.
Perhaps, not surprisingly, some prominent figures are pointing to Nicola Sturgeon who, rather than supporting the candidates at counts in Glasgow, where she is still an SNP MSP, chose to give a running commentary on their demise in an ITV studio.
But what is more pressing politically are the questions being raised about her long serving deputy John Swinney - now of course First Minister and SNP leader.
And if he is to blame for the loss of 39 SNP seats, does it make sense for him to carry on as leader?
READ MORE: 'Too close to Sturgeon': John Swinney faces calls to resign
Speaking on Friday, Mr Swinney accepted he was responsible for the party's campaign - and by extension the heavy defeat.
However, he has given his party his 'get out clause' to avoid taking ultimate blame which usually ends with a swift resignation.
Mr Swinney has repeatedly pointed to the situation that he took up the role of SNP leader and First Minister just eight weeks ago.
He has been determined to present himself as a rather selfless figure stepping up to do his duty at a critical period for the party and one able to steady the ship.
READ MORE: SNP fury mounts with Sturgeon and Swinney in angry blame game
But others have a different interpretation.
Former health secretary Alex Neil's is that Mr Swinney was Ms Sturgeon's "cheerleader in chief", her deputy during her time as First Minister.
If people blame Ms Sturgeon's era of leadership and say the party - and government - need to move on from her period in office (as Mr Neil does), it's not credible to do that with Mr Swinney at the helm, the party veteran told us.
"He is not a fresh leader. He is associated with the Sturgeon years and the mistakes Sturgeon made. He was her chief cheerleader and implemented a lot of the daft policies that she tried to push through the parliament and of the way the party and the government was run.
"John is seen as part of the Sturgeon problem - not the answer to it."
Mr Neil has become an outspoken figure about the SNP under Ms Sturgeon since he stood down as an MSP at the Holyrood election in 2021.
Nonetheless, it doesn't make his argument wrong. The SNP may well perform better in 2026 if it changed leaders now rather than agree to Mr Swinney leading the party into that poll in 22 months.
But the mood in the party does seem to be behind the MSP for Perthshire North remaining in post. Indeed neither of the suitable candidates Mr Neil would like to succeed him appear in any mood to stand against him.
Deputy First Minister Kate Forbes endorsed Mr Swinney's leadership back in May when she opted against throwing her hat into the ring and spark a new contest, while the party's Westminster leader Stephen Flynn has just been re-elected as MP for Aberdeen South but with much reduced majority.
Both are in favour of Mr Swinney remaining as leader for now anyway.
The apparent lack of a suitable replacement for Mr Swinney was a point made by Mr Flynn's predecessor as the SNP Westminster leader Ian Blackford in an interview on Sunday.
Asked if Mr Swinney would be able to turn the party’s fortunes around, he said: “Time will tell but there isn’t really anybody else, so he’s the man for it.”
It's hardly a glowing endorsement of Mr Swinney's leadership.
But with such resistance to change, the party is likely to face an uphill battle in 22 months at the Holyrood election.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel