Jump to content
Cold?
Local
Radar
Snow?

Scottish Politics 2011-2017


Recommended Posts

Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

     "a vile racist who wants to rip families apart" 

     

    Yes, French Mrs SS and I feel ripped apart every day. Our daughter is completely torn by it all.

     

    We've sent so many letters to No 10 and the French government pleading for a UK-France union but all to no avail...

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Spotted a post you think may be an issue? Please help the team by reporting it.
    • Replies 30.9k
    • Created
    • Last Reply

    Top Posters In This Topic

    • Scottish-Irish Skier

      8874

    • mountain shadow

      1528

    • skifreak

      1435

    • frogesque

      1306

    Top Posters In This Topic

    Popular Posts

    And that ignorant, offensive, rant sums up exactly why the YES campaign failed  

    Good god. What a load of boarish spiteful bile from bad losers has been posted during the night. I actually dread to think how Scotland would be run if this is representative of how the yes vote behav

    I'm disappointed in the lack of grace shown by some across the net in accepting this No vote. A complete lack of any empathy and understanding as to why fellow Scots didn't vote Yes.   I personally

    Posted Images

    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    I was wondering what use I might find for ICM’s wisdom index poll. Here, they ask people who they think will win the next UKGE, not what people will vote.
     
    And then I thought oh….
     
    It’s only a ~160 subset (although that actually matters a lot less in this case as it’s not a VI poll), but since March, Scots prediction for Labour share of the vote has dropped from 38% to 33%, which is into 'Labour won't get a majority land. They also have the Tories up since June to 28%.
     
    UK-wide, the Tories (31%) are just one point behind Labour (32%).
     
    I think I’ll start tracking this. After all, in the run up to September 2014, it is well established that the prospect of a Tory government post 2015 should comfortably swing the vote to Yes.

     

    --------

     

    Meanwhile, for a laugh, a quote from Willie Rennie, leader of the Lib Dems - Scotland's 5 th party behind the Greens...

     

    “To start talking about Scotland being under the cosh and undervalued by others may just stir up beliefs that Scotland should somehow be better. That’s what I think is dangerous.â€

     

    And you wonder why the Libs are falling behind the Greens... Thinking of a better Scotland is 'dangerous'. 

     

    It's a bit like Lord Foulkes and his 'SNP are deliberately trying to improve public service provision in Scotland'.

     

    http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2013/09/16/why-willie/

    Edited by scottish skier
    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    Interestingly those Scots i was talking to the other day are v much against full independence but v much pro devo max.

     

    Yes, as I've said before, it's roughly a 1/3 each between full indy, devo max and status quo. It's the devo maxers which will decide it.

     

    If Westminster comes up with a clear, concrete commitment to transferring all taxation (inc oil and gas which is a large component of the scottish economy in terms of both production and the global services exports) and welfare to Scotland, then indy would be defeated (at least in the short to medium terms).

     

    However, that's not on the table.

     

    I'm not sure it can be as Scots MPs could no longer realistically elected to vote in Westminster as it would be foreign affairs / defence alone they could only have a say on. Thus the whole electoral system would need revising, with some sort of 'federal' chamber for such matters. It would make Westminster more England's parliament but then that has knock on effects for Wales and N. Ireland too... Devo max for all the home nations?

     

    This is the problem; Devo max sounds perfectly reasonable to many Scots - it would certainly solve any issues with 'who subsidises who' etc and would allow Scotland to decide what it spends on welfare etc. However, the implications for the UK governance structure are huge. Those in charge have little incentive to change things! The current system suits Labour and the Tories very well.

     

    The recent polls are showing this: without a firm commitment to Devo max, you see No's moving to DK or Yes and DK's moving to Yes. Polls at this stage also suggest up to 7 in 10 don't believe more powers will follow a No vote, but a fair fraction presumably are still waiting to see... However, time is running short. What will they do if we reach September next year and there's still no concrete commitment to significantly more devolution?

    Edited by scottish skier
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Maddiston , Falkirk, Scotland 390ft above sea level
  • Location: Maddiston , Falkirk, Scotland 390ft above sea level

    Catch My Drift -You are correct the propaganda by the British Unionists has led to some people actually believing that Scottish Nationalism is racist but British Nationalism is the only legitimate nationalism. I am actually not a nationalist. I am a Scot who wants our country run from our capital city Edinburgh and not England's capital London. If that makes me a racist then so be it. There is nothing worse than inverted racism and that is what these types are suffering from. Wouldn't the world be wonderful if it was all British...all the countries that are pink used to be ours...we have moved on from imperialism in Scotland and they just cant accept it.

    Edited by November13
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE

    I was just looking at the overall polling and I think what stands out is the number of undecideds and also the difficulties in using previous elections to determine whether a voter will turn out. With such a big decision I suspect many who wouldn't normally vote in a general election or even those who wouldn't vote in the Scottish parliament elections will turn out.

    It's likely that the Yes campaign will get a better percentage of likely voters because these will be more enthused to vote, so its important to view any polling with this in mind.

    An interesting aspect of the polling is the gender gap and this also needs to be taken into account. I will be interested to see the effects when the White Paper is released, but I have a question for those in Scotland, is this setting out a vision of what the landscape will look like and address issues that are still worrying voters, is this a fact based paper in terms of the discussions already held between Westminster and Scottish politicians.

    Also when exactly will Scottish voters have assurances in terms of the pound etc will these be included in the White Paper? Also the issue of Europe seems to be still rather foggy not in terms of continued membership but more so in terms of whether Scotland will have to renegotiate some terms?

    • Like 2
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    I was just looking at the overall polling and I think what stands out is the number of undecideds and also the difficulties in using previous elections to determine whether a voter will turn out. With such a big decision I suspect many who wouldn't normally vote in a general election or even those who wouldn't vote in the Scottish parliament elections will turn out.It's likely that the Yes campaign will get a better percentage of likely voters because these will be more enthused to vote, so its important to view any polling with this in mind.An interesting aspect of the polling is the gender gap and this also needs to be taken into account. I will be interested to see the effects when the White Paper is released, but I have a question for those in Scotland, is this setting out a vision of what the landscape will look like and address issues that are still worrying voters, is this a fact based paper in terms of the discussions already held between Westminster and Scottish politicians.Also when exactly will Scottish voters have assurances in terms of the pound etc will these be included in the White Paper? Also the issue of Europe seems to be still rather foggy not in terms of continued membership but more so in terms of whether Scotland will have to renegotiate some terms?

     

    I may be wrong, but as far as I'm concerned the white paper and the joint UK-Scottish government statement planned to coincide with each other (November) will detail what has been negotiated between the UK and Scottish governments for the aftermath of both a Yes and a No vote.

     

    The UK government has been saying it won't pre-negotiate, but then of course it would say that. Neither side will say anything until things are completely agreed. There was a reason the referendum is being held after such a long period; things need to be negotiated. The Calman Bill was quickly rushed through to get that out of the way, then the Edinburgh Agreement was signed and negotiations began behind closed doors.

     

    We know the Scottish Government has been chatting to NATO. They will also have been talking to the EU, UN etc along with the UK Government.

     

    People must remember that anything else would be ridiculous.

     

    While there will be an 'official' independence day, in the event of a Yes vote, Scotland will be defacto independent from the moment the result is announced. That would mean the UK no longer had any power over Scotland at all. Suddenly, it's nuclear arsenal would be in a different country for example. Also, the oil and gas it needs would also no longer be under it's control etc... People really need to understand this to realise why when Scots vote, they'll know what they are voting for.

     

    I mean if Scotland says Yes, could the UK government order the army into Scotland without the Scottish Government's permission? Not on your nelly; the UN would have sanctions and a no fly zone right quick it would be an invasion of a sovereign nation. A yes is possible and a Yes must be prepared for in the interests of both sides.

     

    Of course companies like Shell, BP, Total, Statoil... VW, BMW... the list goes on.. Will want to know exactly what currency they'll be using and when taxes are going to be shifted over. How can the UK buy oil, gas petrol etc from a country with no currency! The economy would ground to a halt in days. Then there's the fact all these big co's will want to know whether all their EU staff are still EU (and there's lots, believe me).

     

    Basically, just about everything is being pre-negotiated, from currency to defence.

     

    You only negotiate afterwards if you fight your way out with guns, bombs and stuff like Ireland. Otherwise, it's all done before to make everything smooth; no scaring the markets or massive economic shocks, no holes in Britian's / NATO's defence.

     

    We will be in the phoney war until the white paper / joint statement comes out. Then people will know what they are voting for on all the basics. They of course won't know if Scotland will be a roaring economic success in 10, 20 years time, what taxes will be, what welfare will be like.. But then they don't know that about Britain either...

     

    Of course when the white paper / joint statement appear, much of the pro-union campaign's failing arsenal will evaporate as most of the 'uncertainty' scare stories will vanish. It will no longer be a leap in the dark; just a straight choice as to whether Scotland is governed by Scots or London.

     

    The polls are coming close to parity and you see signs that when people are confident that things would be fine or better, suddenly they go equal or with the Yes well out in front (see recent post on ICM and panelbase latest polls). That's even before the white paper / joint statement.

     

    The Tories and Libs are both finished in Scotland (their best chance at making a comeback is independence); hence the negotiations are pragmatic as much as anything.

     

    Meanwhile, Labour has now lost Scotland too, to the SNP. It's still kicking and screaming though. 

     

    I suspect that Labour will spit before the referendum into a pro and against camp (The STUC is not backing the union camp and various unions/branches have backed Yes). The union camp will be smaller and dominated by the Westminster clique centred on Glasgow. We already know that a considerable number of Labour MSPs will vote Yes; they just can't say so for now. However, when things look like going to Yes, they'll come clean. Some will do it just for self interest.

    Edited by scottish skier
    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    On a different subject...

     

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-24126792

     

    MSP expenses claims fall by £500,000

     

    Good to see.

    Edited by scottish skier
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    I was just looking at the overall polling and I think what stands out is the number of undecideds and also the difficulties in using previous elections to determine whether a voter will turn out. 

     

    To add...

     

    You are absolutely correct here. The polling companies don't really no how to handle this. It's not an election, neither is a 'normal' referendum on e.g. AV. They have no previous 'independence' referenda to work with and certainly no Scottish ones (in terms of judging how well they did); although the 1997 devolution referendum might give a clue.  At the same time there are factors such as how much someone's national identity will play a role (and this is potentially a huge swing factor for those where the head is not giving them a definite answer on the day). Likewise turnout is very hard to predict.

     

    Yes went ahead in 2011 by a fair margin, then No took the lead. However, dig deeper and the No is weak; much of it due to fear. This is essentially all the pro-union camp have as a weapon and cry wolf is becoming a problem for them.

     

    I'm glad the pollsters are doing more 'what if' and 'would you potentially change your mind' etc as this gives more of an insight into what will happen over the course of the next year and how the electorate will firm up in response to events. The major ones are the white paper / joint statement (November), the EU elections (UKIP gains in the rUK?) and of course what is happening in terms of who might win the next UKGE and whether there is any hope of a concrete devo max proposal on the table.

     

    Anyway, my own prediction is 45Y/30N on a 75% turnout (which was standard prior to New Labour ending democracy). That would be 60% Yes. Turnout a little higher and Yes gains.

     

    In 1997 Q2 for max devolution on offer got 63.5% Y (was 74.3% on Q1). That's what polls suggested Yes would have got on an independence referendum at the time.

    Edited by scottish skier
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    Another morsel from the recent ICM poll, this time with 'No' to the question details.

     

    Should the Scottish Parliament be responsible for all taxation and welfare?

     

    59% Yes

    28% No

    13% DK

     

    There's yer at best 1/3 core No again.

     

    ---------------------------

     

    And why don't we run some really stupid polls which are a meaningless waste of money? Might even offend some people...

     

    First up, this from the Guardian:

     

    http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/sep/17/alex-salmond-aide-alex-bell-scottish?CMP=twt_gu

     

     

    Posted Image

     

    And in tomorrow's Daily Record:

     

    (obviously this is a joke as a Scottish newspaper wouldn't waste the money and try to offend the neighbours).

     

     

    post-9421-0-56261400-1379455791_thumb.pn

    Edited by scottish skier
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE

    Thanks for the replies SS. Do you think Westminster might go into damage limitation mode if the polls start showing consistent Yes leading by way of offering more devolved powers. Did you watch tonights Newsnight, it was interesting although far too short with so many issues to discuss. I think regardless of the White Paper a lot can happen in a year politically, and I think the economy in Scotland in the run up to the vote will make a difference.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    Ok, a final bit of fun (been report writing so burning the midnight oil)...

     

    BBC newsnight debate on indy from the borders. 'Straw poll' of the audience.

     

    62% YES
     
    38% NO

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE

    Ok, a final bit of fun (been report writing so burning the midnight oil)...

     

    BBC newsnight debate on indy from the borders. 'Straw poll' of the audience.

     

    62% YES

     

    38% NO

    Yes I saw that! Personally I could have done with the programme being much longer but it was interesting and I have a lot of time for Kirsty Wark. I'm sure by the time of the vote the Scottish electorate will have had enough of all these debates, you must be inundated already!!!
    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    Thanks for the replies SS. Do you think Westminster might go into damage limitation mode if the polls start showing consistent Yes leading by way of offering more devolved powers. Did you watch tonights Newsnight, it was interesting although far too short with so many issues to discuss. I think regardless of the White Paper a lot can happen in a year politically, and I think the economy in Scotland in the run up to the vote will make a difference.

     

    Damage limitation has already begun.

     

    The only people really pushing for the status-quo union in Scotland right now are Scottish unionist politicians; those being primarily MPs (Labour, Lib Tory). They could lose everything personally; no safe seats then ermine coats etc.

     

    Dave C has actually been very accommodating as he knows the Tories can't win and keep Scotland. We've had a couple of polls which showed this clearly (up to 56% yes); I imagine he has access to a lot more.

     

    I'll go out on a limb and suggest the Tories will offer reasonable terms (which is best for all) in the event of a Yes, and, if they want it all over sooner rather than later, no more powers or an end to the Scottish parliament in the event of a no.

     

    The constitutional question won't go away; this has been building for over 70 years. It needs resolved one way or another. It's some form of federalism or it's all over sooner or later.

     

    If I was to sum it up, a clear majority of the Scots electorate want 'independence' in the sense of the Scottish Parliament running everything day to day, they just don't want to feel they are 'breaking up Britain' as that suggests a slight to other decent folk across the UK with whom a bond exists for many. It is however, definitely a vote against Westminster rule with the electorate saying 'We are Scotland and reserve the right to do things our way'..

     

    If that makes sense.Posted Image

    Edited by scottish skier
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Carryduff, County Down 420ft ASL
  • Location: Carryduff, County Down 420ft ASL

    With one year to go to the referendum, this the motion being debated today....

     

    Alex Salmond's motion to be debated by the Scottish Parliament

    "That the Parliament agrees that Scotland has an abundance of resources and talent and can more than afford to be a successful, thriving independent country; notes that successive UK administrations have pursued an economic policy that has led to the UK having one of the most unbalanced and unequal economies in the developed world; agrees that it is wrong and costly for policies to be imposed on Scotland that have been overwhelmingly rejected by Scotland's political representatives, and welcomes evidence that shows that there are gains for families and communities when decisions about Scotland are taken by those who care most about Scotland, the people who live and work here."

     

     

    How can Labour possibly vote against that?, unless they think Scotland truelly cannot survive without England.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Bramley, Hampshire, 70m asl
  • Location: Bramley, Hampshire, 70m asl

    With one year to go to the referendum, this the motion being debated today....

     

    Alex Salmond's motion to be debated by the Scottish Parliament

     

    "That the Parliament agrees that Scotland has an abundance of resources and talent and can more than afford to be a successful, thriving independent country; notes that successive UK administrations have pursued an economic policy that has led to the UK having one of the most unbalanced and unequal economies in the developed world; agrees that it is wrong and costly for policies to be imposed on Scotland that have been overwhelmingly rejected by Scotland's political representatives, and welcomes evidence that shows that there are gains for families and communities when decisions about Scotland are taken by those who care most about Scotland, the people who live and work here."

     

     

    How can Labour possibly vote against that?, unless they think Scotland truelly cannot survive without England.

     

    Keith Farnan says ....

    " It seems the SNP are under the illusion that fossil fuels are made by the magical infinite pixies and such revenues will last forever. The plan smacks of a country in mid-life crisis where they’ve won the lotto and, instead of buying a house for the wife and family who they’ve been attached to for centuries, they get a fake tan, fix their teeth and leave to take up with a young hussy called self-determination.â€

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    Keith Farnan says ....

    " It seems the SNP are under the illusion that fossil fuels are made by the magical infinite pixies and such revenues will last forever. The plan smacks of a country in mid-life crisis where they’ve won the lotto and, instead of buying a house for the wife and family who they’ve been attached to for centuries, they get a fake tan, fix their teeth and leave to take up with a young hussy called self-determination.â€

     

    Reminds me of the UK.

     

    Unless that is the UK Government have a huge oil fund stashed away like Norway that I wasn't aware of.

     

    The UK; the only country to discover huge oil reserves and get poorer as a result.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    Ok, another little frightener for the No campaign.

     

    As discussed/shown in an earlier post:

     

    http://forum.netweather.tv/topic/69584-scottish-politics-2011-2016/?p=2787448

     

    Yougov have been the favourite of the pro-union campaign due to the wondrously high No and low yes they keep getting. I also commented on how this was in part related to flawed weighting methods; namely, that they past vote weight to 2010 rather than 2011.

     

    I have now been vindicated. They have stopped doing this in their latest poll and have made an attempt to 2011 past weight.

     

    This results in, with changes on their last poll, for a referendum held tomorrow amongst definite to vote (so not a good 2014 predictor - other pollsters are now asking what people will vote in 2014):

     

    No = 52% (-7%)

    Yes = 32% (+4%)

     

    Which is rather a large change!

     

     

    Still on the high side for No though. But then they still have a problem with their weighting.

     

    Once again, they make the assumption that Scotland is England (or the whole UK)…

     

    Yougov use the UK national newspaper readership survey data to weight (the only pollster to do so).

     

    http://www.nrs.co.uk/top-line-readership/

     

    This is a UK-wide survey and from the tables, has no breakdown or weighting to the Scottish demographic. Thus their Scottish sample is weighted to (largely) an English readership pattern, not a Scottish one.

     

    This is important as Scotland has a completely different ‘newspaper world’. We have a range of different titles not for sale in the rUK and our own Scottish versions of English newspapers which are quite different in content and reader demographic/political leanings. Then there’s the fact that over the past 12 years, the rate of decline for newspaper circulation decline in Scotland has been around twice that for the UK. Many titles in Scotland now are selling at best 40% of what they were in 2001. 

     

    You can see in the NRS that the the Scottish Sun and UK Sun are e.g. grouped together as one ‘Sun’ paper. In Scotland, the Sun is more SNP leaning and sitting on the fence indy-wise. That’s quite different to it in England where it regularly supports the Tories and/or right-wing New Labour. The Record and the Mirror are also considered the same yet are completely different titles. The only thing they share are Labour leanings.

     

     

    If we look at the Yougov unweighted numbers, we see a more correct readership demographic. The number of people reading the Sun is higher than the Record. There is a much bigger group of people reading ‘other’ or ‘no paper’ than the UK. Many of these are reading pro-indy online news sites for example. However, Yougov consider that Scotland is the same as England and down-weight these people 15-20%
     
    The biggest winners from this down-weighting of ‘other’ and ‘no-paper’ are Record/Mirror readers – both Labour stalwarts. They get a 1.8 x boost and that’s the biggest group in this weighting area.

     
    The fact that Yougov have more Record/Mirror readers than Sun/Star readers in their weighted numbers is case in point. That is a UK-wide weight. Scotland has the opposite; considerably more Sun/Star readers compared to Record/Mirror readers.
     
    This is not a reliable weighting method. Scotland is not England. To accurately weight, you need a Scottish national readership survey weighted to the Scottish demographic.

    Unfortunately, Yougov, being a rather cheap and cheerful poll, don’t tie back newspaper readership to voting intention. In that sense, we can’t gauge what effect this weighting has. However, up-weighting Labour voting Record readers by 1.8 times will definitely boost No. I suspect down-weighting those that don’t read a paper and particularly ‘others’ will diminish Yes. After all, all the mainstream Scottish papers lean Tory or Labour and are are biased against independence. Hence plunging sales.

     

    EDIT

     

    For the benefit of those outside Scotland, these are the main titles which sell here:

     

    Posted Image

     

     

    Posted Image

     

     

     

    Posted Image

     

    Posted Image

     

     

     

     

     

    Posted Image

     

    Which of course you won't find on news stands outside of scotland in general

    Edited by scottish skier
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Bramley, Hampshire, 70m asl
  • Location: Bramley, Hampshire, 70m asl

    Reminds me of the UK.

     

    Unless that is the UK Government have a huge oil fund stashed away like Norway that I wasn't aware of.

     

    The UK; the only country to discover huge oil reserves and get poorer as a result.

    Fracking heck!!

     

    and to quote again from whats his name..

    "Last but not least, we should not ignore the number of oil rich nations that have gone from peaceful tribal lands to dictatorships run by madmen with a penchant for gold cars and private jets made out of unicorn pelts. Alex “Mugabe†Salmond anyone?"

     

    I'm sure you've heard it all before but it brightened up my morning anway!Posted Image

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE

    I haven't looked at all the methodologies in these polls but any questions relating to previous elections are a waste of time and shouldn't be included as part of the voter screen. In a sense you'd be trying to compare apples with oranges, previous voter intention is irrelevant here because this referendum question needs to be looked at as a stand alone issue.

    In terms of demographics if the Yes campaign can improve their standing amongst women, the elderly and more affluent voters then they have a good chance of winning, if not then the maths really doesn't add up.

    At this moment in time I wonder whether some voters will bank on Westminster offering more devolved powers and will play a waiting game to see what happens there.

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    I haven't looked at all the methodologies in these polls but any questions relating to previous elections are a waste of time and shouldn't be included as part of the voter screen. In a sense you'd be trying to compare apples with oranges, previous voter intention is irrelevant here because this referendum question needs to be looked at as a stand alone issue.

     

     

    Quite.

    You can see how what might be considered minor change to methodology by Yougov changes the Y/N gap they get by a whopping 11 points.

     

    These are the main weighting factors:

     

    All of these are standard and census based so should be good:

     

    Age

    Sex

    Socio-economic grouping (ABCDE)

    Home ownership

    Public/private sector

    Affluence of area

     

    Additional:

     

    Regional (crucial but not always used or at least fully weighted)

    Past vote (ICM 2011, Panelbase 2011, Yougov 2010 now 2011)

    English Newspaper readership (only Yougov)

     

    The past vote weight is a really difficult one. It is not done to try and tie party affiliation with referendum intention, but to get a good demographic.

     

    An example would be the latest TNS who recently released a new poll in a series they plan over the next year to much fanfare.

     

    They, like MORI, don’t past vote weight. However, they did ask past vote for 2011 and included that in tables. The results looked standard for No ;  a drop but still at 47%. However, it was immediately noted that according to their sample, Labour won the last Scottish election by a very considerable margin! That resulted in polling experts calling the results into question and TNS are now off wondering what to do…

     

    EDIT.

     

    The other thing to take into account is the ‘unpredictability’ of the Scottish electorate.

     

    The classic example being the 2011 election. Just over 2 months before the election Labour were walking about with big smiles having a huge lead on up to 45% compared to the SNP who were down to 30%.

     

    Then, over the space of around 6 weeks, a huge 15% swing occurred, with Labour dropping to 30% and the SNP climbing to 45% then winning a landslide.

     

    It took all the pollsters and MSM polling experts utterly by surprise.

     

    There was a story behind it and one I’ve given my thoughts on previously. However, massive, sudden swings are not at all uncommon in Scotland.

    Even ahead of the devolution referendum the polls showed an apparently declining support which then, on referendum day, reversed in a big way.

     

    Posted Image

    Edited by scottish skier
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    Why do they weight polls anyway?, why not just report exactly what the people are telling them?

     

    As long as they get a decent demographic sample, that's probably the best thing to do right now. Trying to account for turnout etc - which is what pollsters are doing - can massively change things. They can have 36% of 1000 people say no, but this turns into e.g. a headline 51% once they try and apply turnout weightings (which they have no experience to base things on) making it appear that support for the union seems really quite strong.

    Edited by scottish skier
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Isle of Skye, 14m/49ft above sea level
  • Weather Preferences: Storms, wild! wild! wild! Frost, a wee bit o' sun....
  • Location: Isle of Skye, 14m/49ft above sea level

    Well, a year from today is when it all happens. I just hope that peeps get off their backsides and vote. That's one thing that gets on my wick, folk not bothering their a*rses and then complaining about whoever gets in. Nothing so important will happen politically in Scotland for a very, very long time, so I urge anyone living in Scotland to get off aforementioned backside this time next year and vote! ......Please...

    • Like 3
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    Looks like we're up for a poll every day now.

     

    A wee (straw presumably) phone poll result from Original 106 FM (Aberdeen and North East local radio station).

     

    http://www.originalfm.com/posts/results-the-original-106-independence-poll

     

    No option for don't know.

     

    Yes = 56%

    N = 44%

     

    Misty..

     

    I hope that with things now just a year away, people start taking the time to seriously think about what they'll vote, go online, read up on the issues from both sides.

     

    My impression is that this is starting to happen.

     

    Relatively new guy at my office, when the subject came up, said he was 'for the union I suppose but hadn't given it thought but was planning to look into the matter as wanted to make an informed decision'. Everyone in my office is Yes (oil and gas, so no surprise there), and the subject is now openly discussed, whereas before it wasn't. Anyway, he's been away reading and coming back with questions. He's now tuning into newsnight, following the debates, stories etc and has moved to DK / giving yes consideration.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest
    This topic is now closed to further replies.
    ×
    ×
    • Create New...