Starting with Labour, Tom Harris offers us his final thoughts, and also puts himself in the frame as the director of Labour’s next party political broadcasts. They’d be worth watching if he did them.

Yousuf charts the role Glasgow has played in the history of the Labour Party.

However, BellgroveBelle and Anne McLaughlin MSP look at some of Labour’s campaign material in the city and aren’t overly impressed. Allan doesn’t particularly like what he sees from them in neighbouring Renfrewshire either.

Mr. Eugenides casts his eye over Labour calls for tactical voting, while Steven wonders how Labour can square the use of the word ‘future’ with constant references to the past.

Meanwhile, Jess the Dog hails this as a day of change from Labour, while Paul Pearson looks at the Labour candidate who tore into Gordon Brown this week. With allies like those…

Cllr Cameron Rose explains why he is a Conservative, while Fitaloon endorses his local Tory candidate.

Stuart asks if the key question for this election revolves around David Cameron’s ability to bring about change. Alex Massie argues that Cameronism (is he worthy of an ‘-ism’ yet?) appears to stop at the Tweed.

I suppose in that context, maybe this Tory poster, flagged up by Andrew Reeves, which depicts the UK but omits the Western and Northern Isles, isn’t bad. It’s still pretty embarrassing when the message is “We’re all in this together”, though.

BellgroveBelle and Holyrood Patter both endorse the SNP, with BellgroveBelle also reporting on Tusday night’s ‘Ask Alex’ event.

Stephen Glenn sums up the LibDem position, with an obvious focus on Linlithgow and East Falkirk, where he’s been on the ballot paper.

Allan is backing the LibDems this time, but Joan McAlpine clearly isn’t.

The Shoogly Peg hopes for a Hung Parliament, while Subrosa is of the view that none of the parties deserve her vote.

Jeff discusses a blogpost he wishes he hadn’t published about postal votes – and the unfortunate consequences it’s had for him. Caron looks both at that and the possibility that the Tory candidate in Livingston has broken the Data Protection Act.

Neil Craig looks at campaign activity (or perhaps, lack of it) in Glasgow, while The Shoogly Peg gets exasperated at everyone’s claim to being part of a ‘two-horse race’.

James reviews the last Scottish Leaders’ Debate, and Stuart focuses on the speakers’ answers to the expenses questions thrown at them during Sunday night’s proceedings.

Tom Harris gives us a transcript of a slightly surreal canvassing phone call.

Angus Nicolson sums up the candidates’ positions in Na h-Eileanan an Iar, while Philosophical Zombie looks at the overall campaigns.

Alan Trench assesses the ‘devolution literacy’ of the parties’ manifestoes.

Paul, James and Malc give us their reflections on casting their vote.

Lallands Peat Worrier gives us his version of the Charge of the Light Brigade.

Allan looks forward to tonight’s proceedings, while Dave isn’t sure where to get his coverage from. Why, from Joan McAlpine on BBC Scotland, of course!

Crystal Ball time: Boxthejack, Julie and Bright Green Scotland all take a look at the result and its aftermath will be.

Jeff takes the view that if David Cameron walks into Downing Street, his opponents should show grace in defeat.

Mr. Eugenides looks at what will come next for Labour, and is amused at what he sees.

Mark reminds us that there’s also been a Council By-Election in Glasgow today, to replace Steven Purcell.

Former LibDem candidate Kelvin Holdsworth has his thoughts on the election, and compares attitudes involved in politics with those involved in the Church.

Returning Scot looks at the mood of the nation, and reflects on attitudes to equality in Norway.

Caron has warm recollections of polling days past.

Finally, Ellen asked her kids what they thought of the election.

And that’s it: I’m aware that besides myself, Holyrood Patter, Malc and Subrosa will be liveblogging. If you’re doing the same, drop us a line in the Comments section, but that’s it for this Special Roundup – I’ll be back on Sunday with the weekly edition, and as always, you can nominate posts for that by filling in the thingummydoowop on the right, or by sending us an e-mail to scottishroundup@gmail.com. We’re also on Twitter @ScottishRoundup. Bye-de-bye!

Naturally the Labour MacBlogosphere has been sounding a triumphant/triumphalist note following their candidate’s overwhelming victory. Possibly first off the blocks was Yousuf, who points out that Willie Bain’s success occurred during a recession and at the end of a third Labour term at Westminster. Alex Salmond’s boast that the SNP could win 20 seats at next year’s general election is ridiculed by the Grumpy Spindoctor, who concludes: “The Salmond magic touch has lost its lustre somewhat.”

The Grumpy SD also asks why Alex Salmond hasn’t been around to account for the SNP defeat and questions why the party didn’t learn lessons from their reverse in Glenrothes.

Tom Harris rather obtusely compares Labour’s by-election record with the Tories’ while in office before 1997 and concludes that “Cameron has most definitely not sealed the deal”.

Away from the immediate aftermath of the declaration Yousuf highlights emerging divisions in the SNP over the decision to cancel GARL, and also outlines its impact on the by-election and future ramifications.

The Nationalist bloggers are understandably downcast and some have clearly decided that ‘no comment’ is the best strategy, but there’s still plenty reflection and suggestions for future strategy, not to mention predictable opprobrium aimed at Labour.

SNP Tactical Voting’s Jeff claims that Labour’s “dastardly” tactics and message utilised in the campaign won’t play well in other parts of the country. By the same token, the inimitable Lallands Peat Worrier – who headlines simply with “Gubbed” – posits (I think!) that Labour’s parochial neo-”Clydesideism” emphasis may be apt to “depress their broader electoral fortunes”.

Jim at No More Diaspora opines that the SNP’s candidate didn’t resonate with voters, and those who could be bothered voting just “went with the devil they know”. As a reformed Labourite Christian Jones dissects his former party’s approach, and uncompromisingly laments its lack of a positive message and lambasts the “level of downright lies and nasty personal attacks” which was a “new and rather crude development” He further claims that the SNP needs a “treasured local stalwart”, which would be preferable to a “bright young thing”. A more magnanimous Moridura takes solace from his view that Willie Bain seems more “old” than “new” Labour, and emphasises both the critical nature of candidate selection in view of the intense scrutiny during a campaign and the importance of one or two core issues that will be subject to “spin and distortion”.

North to Leith confines himself to expressing the irony of relief at the Tories coming third (thus ahead of the BNP) and Indygal conveys a similar sentiment. But the MSP also slates Jim Murphy for suggesting the SNP got “too big for its boots”, conflating the Scottish Secretary’s view of her party with the “people of Scotland” and the country generally.

As for the edgier pro-independence blogs, Wardog laments the “poverty of ambition” and “lack of aspiration” in the constituency. An indignant Omar at Advanced Media Watch points out that the prime minister was barely mentioned by Labour during the campaign but a victorious Willie Bain had declared his triumph an endorsement for Gordon Brown. Key Bored Warrior advises Alex Salmond to tone down his act but paradoxically advocates a course of action unlikely to be adopted by SNP strategists, at least in the literal sense: “The SNP need to get down in the sewer with Labour and start grabbing them by the bollocks and squeezing.”

For the Lib Dems, Caron puts her party’s poor performance down to a lack of financial resources while attributing the overall result to the SNP’s “shocking” performance rather than any Labour advance. Andrew Reeves compares the Glasgow East, Glenrothes and this week’s by-elections, and congratulates the Lib Dems much-criticised candidate Eileen Baxendale. John Ault says Labour have learned lessons from previous by-election defeats and thinks this presages a long general election campaign.

Tory Bear thinks Labour’s reaction to their victory is overdone in view of the ultra-safe nature of the seat, the low turnout and the “negative kitchen sink” campaigning thrown at David Kerr.

In the less partisan reaches of the MacBlogosphere Alan at Aye We Can claims Willie Bain is a “cut above the average Scottish MP”. James Kelly thinks Nick Griffin’s appearance on Question Time provided the BNP with a by-election fillip, but yours truly suggests that if UKIP had stood – as they did in May’s European elections, when they outpolled both the BNP and Tories – then this could have split the right wing vote and propelled Tommy Sheridan into third place.

On a lighter note Polaris at Wholly Rude suggests a secret plan to reverse the SNP’s fortunes in Glasgow – splitting off “TraitorLand” from the rest of Scotland and towing it into the Atlantic, as part of a strategy culminating in “Bagpipes, Whiskey, Tartan Dolls and Haggis for every patriot for generations tae come”.

As for the MSM blogs, at The Steamie David Maddox points out that although the SNP only secured 17.6% of the vote in 2005 they are now consistently showing around double that in opinion polls, and are thus likely to significantly increase their representation at Westminster from 6 seats, although 20 seems unlikely. And the Nationalists’ “dream” of 20 MPs is suggested by Alex Massie to mean that while once a dozen or so seats would be regarded a great success, “now, thanks to the SNP’s over-inflated rhetoric and hubris, it will look like failure”.

Brian Taylor underlines the “oppositional” nature of Labour’s campaign, which paradoxically concentrated on the record of the SNP administration at Holyrood in a Westminster contest, and also alludes to a Glasgow v Edinburgh dimension. And he doubts the SNP’s claim of a dearth of “aspirational” voters as distinguishing Glasgow NE from last year’s Glasgow East contest.

Well that’s it folks, and since the next Roundup election special will probably be the big one, I nominate, ahem, someone else!

If you want to send in a link for next week’s Roundup, you can use the thingy on the right, or send us an e-mail to scottishroundup@gmail.com. You can also follow us on Twitter: @ScottishRoundup.

Anyway. On that very subject, Duncan looks at how the blogosphere has been deployed in this By-Election, but wonders if it’ll have had that much impact.

On the other hand, Anne McLaughlin wonders what activists taking part in the ‘ground war’ must look like to the general public.

In terms of the campaign itself, it’s been flatter than James Kelly expected. And it’s been far too flat for Alex Porter, who believes that the constituency needs a fighter.

Meanwhile, Brian Taylor tries to make sense of what those who don’t declare their intentions to canvassers are thinking. Frankly, we can’t ever know this, as they won’t tell us.

Yousuf hails Sir Alex Ferguson’s endorsement for Willie Bain (he’s pwoud, vewy pwoud, as Jonathan Watson might say), but Chris Stephens recalls the time Bain was jeered at the Labour Party Conference.

Subrosa publishes the results of a series of questions she posed to John Smeaton – stealing a march on The Steamie – but Stuart Winton looks at whether or not the BNP could steal Smeato’s thunder.

Meanwhile, Anne McLaughlin wasn’t impressed by either Smeato or Mikey Hughes at the hustings she attended.

Schism_schasm appears backs the Green candidate, despite calling him “the most prematurely aged twenty four year old I’ve ever seen”. He should have seen me when I was 24…

Incidentally, schism_schasm has produced this series of caricatures of the candidates. They’re rather impressive, though I must admit to mistaking the drawing of Willie Bain for Ruth Davidson. I believe that says more about the two candidates in question than about my eyes or the drawings!

But mostly, this By-Election has seen all sorts of statistics bandied about regarding the state of the area. David Thomson offers pictorial evidence, while Brian Taylor crunches the numbers.

Montague Burton and Archbishop Cranmer join in the number-crunching, but still see a Labour victory as the most probable outcome.

On the Labour side, Yousuf and Michael are optimistic. In the SNP camp, Jeff is not overly optimistic, but Torcuil Crichton reckons that Gordon Brown is sufficiently optimistic to have booked a slot on the Today Programme for tomorrow morning.

That said, over at The Garden Lobby and The Big Dollop, the feeling is that some factors may well work in the SNP’s favour, and the result may be closer than many think.

On a similar note, Lallands Peat Worrier offers a rather poetic note to proceedings.

Meanwhile, there’s a potential stooshie on the cards regarding postal vote applications: Anseo is concerned at the figures, while Tom Harris doesn’t see anything out of the ordinary.

Then there’s the reporting of the result: John Ault would like to remind everyone that if Labour win, it’s not a ‘Labour hold’ but a ‘Labour gain from Speaker’. All those Tories who complained about Michael Martin’s approach to impartiality might take issue with that, but technically, he has a point. And on a similar note, James reminds us that this By-Election is a rare beast: a By-Election in which the Government can increase its majority by winning.

Incidentally, for those who speak French (or have access to a decent dictionary/translator), check out this tale by Pepette, who’s been gearing up for her chance to vote, with the rather unfortunate ending, which, if you check the fine print on your electoral registration form, will become quite clear.

Finally, it wouldn’t be an Election night without Jeff hosting a liveblog!

So that it for this By-Election Special. On Sunday, Stuart Winton has the unenviable task of sifting through the reaction to tonight’s result, as well as all the other matters that have got you to your keyboards over the week. If you want to send in a link for next week’s Roundup, you can use the twiddlywotsit on the right, or send us an e-mail to scottishroundup@gmail.com. You can also follow us on Twitter: @ScottishRoundup. Bye-de-bye!

And just as the challenging party in America had enough momentum for some commentators to paint Barack Obama as a quasi-incumbent, so the media have viewed the SNP (who came second in 2005) in the same way. And just like Obama supporters on Tuesday, SNP tails are up. IndyGal, Anseo and Julie all hail the number of SNP activists in the constituency.

From a more neutral perspective, David Farrer dives right in to citizen journalism and gets a surprising level of access at the SNP’s campaign HQ in Markinch.

James, however, isn’t too impressed by the SNP’s attempts to compare itself with the Obama phenomenon, while Stephen Glenn accuses the party of trying to massage bookies’ odds. I just hope that anyone who did put a tenner on the SNP when their odds were slightly longer knew enough about betting to take the price they were being offered and get it written on the slip, as the odds have since come in. Stephen also comments on suggestions that Peter Grant doesn’t want to stay at Westminster for too long, while Jeff points out that he doesn’t want any Scottish MP to stay there beyond 2010.

For Labour, reports are not supportive. Mainly as they’re written by supporters of their main challengers: Calum Cashley accuses Labour of panic. BellgroveBelle questions the wisdom of deploying Sarah Brown in Glenrothes, while Anseo understands that Labour may have been using automated phone calls, which would be rather naughty. Ian Hamilton condemns the Labour staffer who warned journalists that they’d get shot if they got any closer to Mrs. Brown, while Jess the Dog reveals that Gordon Brown’s part in the campaign took place within a 500-yard radius of Labour’s HQ. And North Britain suggests an alternative reason for Labour not to stray too far from home too often, and to carry guns when they do.

Tom Harris, meanwhile, takes time out to mention an unfortunate canvasser who found herself on the wrong end of a very cheeky prank.

For the LibDems, reports are mixed. Caron compares the parties’ literature and concludes that the LibDems’ material comes out on top. Calum Cashley reports that the LibDem priority is to save the party’s deposit. Caron, however, prefers to talk about saving local post offices.

Stephen brings up various moments of inter-party bonhomie.

West World saw the candidates on STV, and was less than impressed with what he saw.

Jeff notes that neither Labour nor the SNP tried to keep expectations in check.

Now it’s prediction time:

Anseo tips the SNP.

Holyrood Patter calls it for the SNP, while remarking on how little of the Labour campaign can actually be dealt with by the winner of the Westminster By-Election.

Jess the Dog compares the two main campaigns and favours the SNP as the winner.

Steve Green predicts that the SNP will win, but that the damage to Gordon Brown will be limited. On a similar note, The Nameless Libertarian predicts that Labour will only consider the result to be important if it’s a Labour win.

Angus Nicolson predicts a close result, but hears that the SNP are ahead. He also points out that the victory won’t be all that sweet for whoever wins, while whoever comes second will face an unforgiving press.

Ewan Aitken predicts a close result, but puts Labour in with a chance. Luke Akehurst, however, has resigned himself to a Labour defeat.

Push Jelly, however, forecasts a shock swing to a certain Mr. B. Obama!

So that’s your lot: the regular schedule resumes on Sunday (I hope!), and I have a darkened room to lie down in. Bye-de-bye!

Most Scottish bloggers who expressed an opinion have come out for Barack Obama. Bill Cameron looks at the Obama 30-minute infomerical, and compares it with the McCain advertisements. His verdict is that the Democrat represents hope versus the Republican’s campaign of fear. Kevin Williamson produces a stronger verdict still: that an Obama win would be the triumph of hope over racism. Fraser Macpherson backs Obama, but is simply relived that the Bush administration is on its way out. Holyrood Watcher thinks that if the Senator for Illinois approaches office the way he’s approached the campaign, he’ll be remembered as a great President.

And there have been last-minute discussions of the campaign itself: Tom Harris MP asks whether the 30-minute infomercial last Tuesday might actually be counter-productive, especially as it caused the start of the World Series game to be delayed. Ewan Watt, meanwhile, is displeased that some of Obama’s supporters argued that to oppose their candidate was to be racist. Alex Massie argues that timing has been Obama’s strong point, and that the unique set of circumstances in play this year mean that it’s 2008 or never for the Senator. Malc notes that an element of complacency may have crept into the Obama camp. Meanwhile, Bernard Salmon reports on an endorsement that might spell trouble for the Democrat.

On the other side, Neil Craig offers his support for John McCain and Sarah Palin. But the Senator from Arizona doesn’t get much of a look-in from Scottish bloggers: most of the attention is on his Alaskan running-mate, and it’s not positive.

Malc suggests that McCain’s selection of Governor Palin was a mistake; Bernard Salmon notes that the McCain camp has started to shift the blame onto his Vice-Presidential nominee. James finds Palin’s record on issues surrounding Native Alaskans somewhat wanting, while Bernard notes her association with Alaskan Senator Ted Stevens, who is seeking re-election but last week was found guilty of corruption.

Staying with Palin, and a smile was raised when the former Mayor of Wasilla was hoodwinked by a Canadian prank-caller (theirs appear to be classier than ours), who managed to persuade her that he was Nicolas Sarkozy. Bill Cameron reckons it reflects awfully on her. Ewan Watt, however, feels that the BBC have made a meal of the story, and argues that it shows a pro-Obama bias in the UK MSM.

Speaking of which, Alex Massie finds Jon Snow’s reporting for Channel 4 sanctimonious and patronising. Personally, I thought that was C4’s remit. And Holyrood Watcher notes the UK media scrum, with the BBC, ITV and Sky all providing through-the-night coverage. Malc reckons that the US media has been pro-Obama, while Flying Rodent has his own views on the campaign, as viewed through the prism of the MSM.

Looking back, Bernard asks readers who ran the greatest post-war US election campaign, while Caron answers that it was Bill Clinton in 1992.

Silversprite is Our Man in the US, reflecting on his experiences in the thick of it.

Caron is trying to resist the temptation to stay up, while Holyrood Patter is pondering his likely sleeping patterns for the night. Malc assures us he will be up and blogging.

And now it’s prediction time: Andrew Burns sees an Obama landslide. So does North Britain. And Jamie Cooke. Jeff goes one further, raising the possibility of a clean sweep.

Last Year’s Girl simply asks her American readers to vote, while it’s right to leave you with these final thoughts from Mr. Smith

And that’s your wrap for now: I’ll be putting up links to liveblogs tonight, and don’t forget to join me again on Thursday, when I’m back to cast my eye over your views on the Glenrothes By-Election. Bye-de-bye!