Clyde1998

I wonder what the nickname would be when the royals get kicked out.

Second response made - you can get very little written with 1,500 characters.

That makes a bit more sense now.

This is all I could write with 1,500 characters (I actually have 16 characters left though...): Hello, I'm writing again in response to the response that I received a couple of days ago on the issue of the SNP topic on Thursday's Question Time. First of all I agree that all the comments made on the program are the views on the individual who made the comments, and they aren't necessarily the official stance of the BBC. However, in the response I received it was noted that "[Question Time] aims to enable viewers to make up their own minds by giving the opportunity for a variety of viewpoints to be heard." My main concern with this is that the SNP were not represented on the panel - despite a question being asked about SNP policy (that seemed to be chosen before the programme). This means that viewers may hear view on the SNP that could be damaging to their election chances - especially when the party itself are unable to defend or explain their reasons for their policies. It could, also, mean that people formulate their views without hearing the position of the party, leading to inaccurate opinions and increased stigma against the party, and its supporters, that could be unwarranted – this could lead to divides among the constituent parts of the UK. Additionally, as the SNP were unrepresented it means that comments such as the ones made by the UKIP MEP could have been debated. Especially the comments about English tax paying for Scottish services – in which all the free services listed were introduced when the Scottish Government had a budget surplus. Any changes that anything think I can make before I send it?

May2015 Calculates with: SNP - 52% (55 seats) LAB - 24% (4 seats) CON - 14% (0 seats) LIB - 4% (0 seats) UKIP - 2% GRN - 1% with: SNP - 42% (45 seats) LAB - 24% (10 seats) CON - 24% (4 seats) LIB - 4% UKIP - 2% GRN - 1% That works well for the Tories...

Quite bad to watch

If you're referring to me - Reading.

I'll see what I can do.

I am able to respond to the response - within a certain time period. Is there anything that people wish for me to ask based on the response? I'll bring the quoted point up.

The BBC responded to my complaint about that segment of the program: I understand you feel some statements made by panelists [sic] on the programme were inaccurate. Question Time aims to generate lively weekly debate on topical issues and to represent a broad range of views within each programme. It also aims to enable viewers to make up their own minds by giving the opportunity for a variety of viewpoints to be heard. This week's episode featured UKIP MEP Paul Nuttall and Liberal Democrat MP Tim Farron, who, like all guests, were there to show the public their personal political views on the subjects at hand. Their comments on SNP policies and Scotland in general are their views alone; as a debate programme, Question Time does not claim that panelists' [sic] views are completely correct. I appreciate you found the panel's responses to the question on Scotland to be inaccurate, and I'd like to assure you that I've registered your comments. We value your feedback, all complaints are sent to senior management and programme makers every morning and I included your points in this overnight report. These reports are among the most widely read sources of feedback in the BBC and ensures that your complaint has been seen by the producers of Question Time quickly. This helps inform their decisions about current and future programmes. Thank you again for taking the time to contact us. Where to begin? The correct British spelling of "panelist" is panellist - http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/panellist How can people make up their own minds on a subject if they are only hearing one side of the story - from nearly all of the panellists. I specially brought up Nuttall and Farron in my complaint - so that's why they're mentioned in the response. I brought up the taxation figures for Scotland - 2012/13 was a one off year where Scotland contributed less than it received (with the previous four years [and probably more] having Scotland as net contributors to the UK). Nuttall seemed to think that Scotland were using English tax money to fund free services - when all the services he brought up have been free of charge for a number of years. No-one made an attempt to correct any inaccurate comment made by a panellist. As I only had 1,500 characters in my complaint, I was unable to ask why a question was chosen on the SNP without the SNP being able to respond on the show.

Nationally - you'd end up with: SNP - 30.8% LAB - 27.3% CON - 17.9% LIB - 17.4% The Liberal Democrats hadn't gone into coalition when the last election was held... Locally (Kirkcaldy & Cowdenbeath) - you'd end up with: LAB - 49.8% SNP - 25.2% CON - 10.2% LIB - 7.8% Same comment about the Lib Dems, also Labour's candidate was Gordon Brown in 2010... The SNP won the Kirkcaldy seat in the 2011 Scottish election with 45.2% of the vote, and narrowly lost the Cowdenbeath seat with 41.6% of the vote. I'd expect a close race between the SNP and Labour here.

I've lodged a complaint with the BBC about this segment of the show [for factual inaccuracies] - I'm not expecting a positive response though.

Next set of data released: https://www.ipsos-mori.com/Assets/Docs/Scotland/scotland-pom-jan-2015-tables-pt2.pdf List vote: SNP - 48% LAB - 22% CON - 11% GRN - 10% LIB - 5% UKIP - 2% SSP - 1% Others - 2% Seat calculation: SNP - 72 (+3) LAB - 27 (-10) CON - 12 (-3) GRN - 11 (+9) LIB - 7 (+2) Others - 0 (-1)

From Ipsos Mori - so not a major surprise. Looking at the data tables - the SNP should be rounded up to 53%.

Qatar are ranked around the same as Lithuania and Latvia - around the 40th best European teams. Can't we play against a higher ranked team?

Ashcroft are currently doing polling in Scottish constituencies, so we will hopefully get a clearer picture on how the election campaign is going in Scotland - when these polls are released.

I used the regional sub samples, so the sampling variations could be wild. The Greens seem to be picking up lots of SNP supporters for the regional vote though.

Holyrood Seat Projection: SNP - 71 (+2) LAB - 25 (-12) CON - 13 (-2) GRN - 11 (+9) UKIP - 5 (+5) LIB - 4 (-1) Others - 0 (-1)

Westminster SNP 45.8% Labour 26.2% Conservatives 14.2% Liberal Democrats 6.7% UKIP 3.8% Green 2.6% Holyrood FPTP SNP 50.0% Labour 25.7% Conservatives 12.2% Liberal Democrats 5.8% Holyrood Regional SNP 38.6% Labour 22.9% Conservatives 13.6% Greens 10.4% Liberal Democrats 7.1% UKIP 6.0%

Berwickshire, probably. Gain from Lib Dems.

http://electionforecast.co.uk/tables/SNP_seat_gains.html Predicting 84% chance of an SNP gain. http://electionforecast.co.uk/tables/current_vote_by_seat.html Predicts: SNP - 41% (+25%) CON - 21% (-9%) LIB - 17% (-21%) LAB - 15% (+1%) Seems to be a very odd prediction then...

Vote share SNP 41% (-5% on November poll) Labour 31% (+3% on Nov) Conservatives 14% (-1% on Nov) Ukip 7% (N/C on Nov) Lib Dems 3% (N/C on Nov) Others 3% (+1 on Nov) Seats SNP 35 (+29) Labour 20 (-20) Conservatives 2 (+1) Lib Dems 2 (-9)

Happy New Year everyone.

Didnae take long for the "Yes" jokes...

The final few polls put yes at around 43%-45% (including undecided voters). It's possible that the split of the "don't knows" meant that the polls could have been accurate. Those who didn't know, voted no.