Indyref 2 (2)

[Clyde1998]

12 minutes ago, aaid said:

The first thing to be aware of is that the percentage change figures in brackets are from the 2019 general election, they’re not over the last week or month but the last three years.   As we know, since then or more realistically in the last few months, Labour and the Tories have switched places, but Labour in Scotland, while showing an improved performance, it’s been a fraction of what’s happened in England. 

The other thing is that - consistently- over that three year period, the SNP have polled within the band of +-3% of the 45% they got in 2019.  This poll is just outside the bottom end of that range.  It may be an outlier, it may be the start of a trend, we just need to wait and see what happens next - I’ll be amazed if there aren’t polls from other companies out soon.  This. Support for the SNP being low doesn’t really compute with the rises in Indy questions either, so that raises a flag. 
 

Edit. Redfield Wilton don’t appear to have done a Scotland wide WM poll before, so that’s another reason to not jump to any conclusions. 

I would say this poll's Westminster VI figures are broadly inline with the polls from Panelbase, YouGov, ComRes and Survation from around the time of the 'mini-budget' when Truss was still PM (the average of those five polls were SNP 44.4; Lab 30.4; Con 14.6; LDm 6.4). The last poll by Panelbase (7-11 Oct) showed SNP 42, Lab 30, Con 16, LDm 6 - which is very similar to this poll.

Around that time, Labour were polling just over 50% in GB polling with the Conservatives around 25%. There's been a slight decrease in the Labour lead over the Conservatives in that time, but small enough that this poll's figures could well be replicated by a poll from a more established pollster in Scotland.

What may be happening is the media attention on the 'leadership' at Westminster has made a certain percentage of people think voting Labour would remove the Conservative government, when it would have little to no impact on Labour's ability to win the next UK election.

I imagine Labour's support will decline, across GB, once people start scrutinising their policies and when 2019 Conservative voters who are presently undecided are forced to make a decision (I imagine they'll break more towards the Conservatives than Labour). That will likely have an impact on their standing in Scotland too.

[AlfieMoon]

Don’t quite know how to square WM voting intention with potential de facto indyref.  The pollster and the electorate are certainly not working on those terms.  
 

In terms of the indy question poll showing increase support for Yes - I fully expect that this is just a short term knee jerk response to the Supreme Court ruling. Folk will have forgotten about it in a month and support will drop back to previous level. 

[aaid]

14 minutes ago, Clyde1998 said:

I would say this poll's Westminster VI figures are broadly inline with the polls from Panelbase, YouGov, ComRes and Survation from around the time of the 'mini-budget' when Truss was still PM (the average of those five polls were SNP 44.4; Lab 30.4; Con 14.6; LDm 6.4). The last poll by Panelbase (7-11 Oct) showed SNP 42, Lab 30, Con 16, LDm 6 - which is very similar to this poll.

Around that time, Labour were polling just over 50% in GB polling with the Conservatives around 25%. There's been a slight decrease in the Labour lead over the Conservatives in that time, but small enough that this poll's figures could well be replicated by a poll from a more established pollster in Scotland.

What may be happening is the media attention on the 'leadership' at Westminster has made a certain percentage of people think voting Labour would remove the Conservative government, when it would have little to no impact on Labour's ability to win the next UK election.

I imagine Labour's support will decline, across GB, once people start scrutinising their policies and when 2019 Conservative voters who are presently undecided are forced to make a decision (I imagine they'll break more towards the Conservatives than Labour). That will likely have an impact on their standing in Scotland too.

Panelbase released two polls in quick succession in October 7th and 11th, the SNP figures were 45% and 42%, so there’s a great example of the margin of error at work.  I also think the Labour lead in England is soft and the gap will shorten. I wouldn’t be putting money on the conservatives though. 

[aaid]

10 minutes ago, AlfieMoon said:

In terms of the indy question poll showing increase support for Yes - I fully expect that this is just a short term knee jerk response to the Supreme Court ruling. Folk will have forgotten about it in a month and support will drop back to previous level. 

Time will tell, let’s see where we are the other side of Christmas 

[Caledonian Craig]

10 hours ago, Rich NATA said:

Anyone got a definitive list of the businesses who were against it?

David Cameron had some of them in the back door at Downing Street, didn't he? Asked them to put something out about costs increases; put the sh*ts up the pensioners 'n' that.

Pretty sure M&S, John Lewis/Waitrose, Asda, B&Q, Co-Op were making such statements, which of course influences some people.

Pretty sure Morrisons and Tesco didn't take any side. 

No Morrisons definitely threatened to pull out of Scotland if we went independent. M and S I think sat on the fence.

[Caledonian Craig]

5 hours ago, AlfieMoon said:

Don’t quite know how to square WM voting intention with potential de facto indyref.  The pollster and the electorate are certainly not working on those terms.  
 

In terms of the indy question poll showing increase support for Yes - I fully expect that this is just a short term knee jerk response to the Supreme Court ruling. Folk will have forgotten about it in a month and support will drop back to previous level. 

Sadly, I would agree with this.

[Caledonian Craig]

9 hours ago, aaid said:

Was one of them Ronnie Corbett?

Another was defo Sir Alex Ferguson. He paid £1.5 million into the Better Together fund.

[exile]

Regarding whether a GE or Holyrood would be better for a plebiscite referendum:

One factor is surely whether there are more indy supporters who normally vote Labour, than unionists who apparently vote SNP for Holyrood.

[hampden_loon2878]

9 hours ago, Clyde1998 said:

I would say this poll's Westminster VI figures are broadly inline with the polls from Panelbase, YouGov, ComRes and Survation from around the time of the 'mini-budget' when Truss was still PM (the average of those five polls were SNP 44.4; Lab 30.4; Con 14.6; LDm 6.4). The last poll by Panelbase (7-11 Oct) showed SNP 42, Lab 30, Con 16, LDm 6 - which is very similar to this poll.

Around that time, Labour were polling just over 50% in GB polling with the Conservatives around 25%. There's been a slight decrease in the Labour lead over the Conservatives in that time, but small enough that this poll's figures could well be replicated by a poll from a more established pollster in Scotland.

What may be happening is the media attention on the 'leadership' at Westminster has made a certain percentage of people think voting Labour would remove the Conservative government, when it would have little to no impact on Labour's ability to win the next UK election.

I imagine Labour's support will decline, across GB, once people start scrutinising their policies and when 2019 Conservative voters who are presently undecided are forced to make a decision (I imagine they'll break more towards the Conservatives than Labour). That will likely have an impact on their standing in Scotland too.

Completely agree with that

[Caledonian Craig]

1 hour ago, exile said:

Regarding whether a GE or Holyrood would be better for a plebiscite referendum:

One factor is surely whether there are more indy supporters who normally vote Labour, than unionists who apparently vote SNP for Holyrood.

Well in 2014 (according to this poll done afterwards) more voters for unionist parties voted Yes than SNP voters voted No.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/20/scottish-independence-lord-ashcroft-poll

[hampden_loon2878]

Think the same pollster is releasing a holyrood poll later today or tomorrow

[TDYER63]

11 hours ago, AlfieMoon said:

 

In terms of the indy question poll showing increase support for Yes - I fully expect that this is just a short term knee jerk response to the Supreme Court ruling. Folk will have forgotten about it in a month and support will drop back to previous level. 

I agree however what does fill me with some hope is that when there is an event that shows how we are not in a fair union support for Independence does rise. Like this Supreme Court ruling and Brexit. So there is some passion out there,  we just need to find a way of maintaining it. I would feel more pessimistic if there was no change at all.

11 hours ago, Clyde1998 said:

I would say this poll's Westminster VI figures are broadly inline with the polls from Panelbase, YouGov, ComRes and Survation from around the time of the 'mini-budget' when Truss was still PM (the average of those five polls were SNP 44.4; Lab 30.4; Con 14.6; LDm 6.4). The last poll by Panelbase (7-11 Oct) showed SNP 42, Lab 30, Con 16, LDm 6 - which is very similar to this poll.

Around that time, Labour were polling just over 50% in GB polling with the Conservatives around 25%. There's been a slight decrease in the Labour lead over the Conservatives in that time, but small enough that this poll's figures could well be replicated by a poll from a more established pollster in Scotland.

What may be happening is the media attention on the 'leadership' at Westminster has made a certain percentage of people think voting Labour would remove the Conservative government, when it would have little to no impact on Labour's ability to win the next UK election.

I imagine Labour's support will decline, across GB, once people start scrutinising their policies and when 2019 Conservative voters who are presently undecided are forced to make a decision (I imagine they'll break more towards the Conservatives than Labour). That will likely have an impact on their standing in Scotland too.

I agree. I think Labours support in Scotland is reflecting an overall rise in support throughout the UK. However , although it would probably wane a bit closer to an election,  it needs to be taken seriously. 

Anyone who is considering voting Labour needs to remember why they lost Scotland in the first place . The SNP did not win the 2011 election on an independence surge they won because Labour had taken the utter piss and were treating Scotland like lap dogs. There is absolutely nothing to suggest they would not do the same again. Ffs they dont even think we have the right to a referendum.

Beware , fool me once. 
 

 

[mccaughey85]

I think support for indy will see a slight surge this winter. Ppl are struggling to pay bills and heat their homes. Add in the supreme court ruling then you have a fair few undecideds swinging over to the yes side.

England winning the world cup might nudge figures up slightly as well lol. 

Only problem is actually getting westminster to agree to another referendum.

[Caledonian Craig]

Breaking news....

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-63821836?fbclid=IwAR3ozX3qjz1RoHBDtVwpPjUTtiRKUvDcjw92Hg6FQR3evBjc_urABa49NOo

[hampden_loon2878]

49 minutes ago, Caledonian Craig said:

Breaking news....

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-63821836?fbclid=IwAR3ozX3qjz1RoHBDtVwpPjUTtiRKUvDcjw92Hg6FQR3evBjc_urABa49NOo

Something definitely going down in the background. I would take cherry in a heartbeat however she would split the party 

[hampden_loon2878]

1 hour ago, mccaughey85 said:

I think support for indy will see a slight surge this winter. Ppl are struggling to pay bills and heat their homes. Add in the supreme court ruling then you have a fair few undecideds swinging over to the yes side.

England winning the world cup might nudge figures up slightly as well lol. 

Only problem is actually getting westminster to agree to another referendum.

It needs to be highlighted, over and over again that Scotland is a net produces of oil,gas and electric 

[mcguffin]

17 hours ago, Hertsscot said:

You're right it wasn't bagpipe lessons but they were in the same class at school. Haven't seen either of them for ten years but, although one gets some flack, I would say that both of them are decent human beings. I doubt think either would be particularly well informed on Scottish politics and I'm happy to accept they genuinely liked the idea of a United Kingdom, that might be true of most of those celebs. I don't attribute malice to them, just a naive ignorance laced with a measure of sentimentality.

Thanks! Very interesting insights. It's good to hear that this pair sound like decent types. And meant well when they signed the letter. (I'm hoping the majority of signatories were similarly signing the letter with the best of intentions. I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt....at least till they sign 'The Letter to Scotland 2.0' 😉)

[mcguffin]

16 hours ago, aaid said:

AC Grayling has definitely changed his mind as he was the guest speaker at a London SNP branch meeting a few months ago,

Wow! Didn't know that! 👍

[aaid]

19 minutes ago, hampden_loon2878 said:

Something definitely going down in the background. I would take cherry in a heartbeat however she would split the party 

I doubt Cherry will get it for the reasons you’re stating. In an ideal world she’d be the Justice shadow but she needs to be prepared to toe the line more and I’m not sure she’s prepared to do that. 

[Alibi]

Regarding Labour's chances in Scotland:  Starmer has made it clear that Labour support brexit, are against freedom of movement and the single market, oppose immigration, and oppose independence or even another referendum.  Tell me why that list of policies would be attractive in Scotland?  If there is a current increase in the Labour vote, it is most likely from disillusioned Tory voters.  A lot of folk are probably unaware what Labour's attitude to these matters is.  It needs to be pointed out to them, and that will surely drive a few potential converts away from Labour.  Wait till an election campaign starts and let's see Ian Murray try to sell Brexit etc. to Scottish voters.  He'll get ripped to pieces in any debate.

[Alibi]

20 hours ago, aaid said:

I couldn’t disagree more with this.

The only plus point I can see for this is that it possibly makes the franchise slightly more pro-Indy.   

If you assume an election in 2023, then there were 113,471 births registered in Scotland in 2006/7 - people who would be 16/17 in 2023.   Some of those will no longer be in Scotland but let’s just assume for the argument that there’s been an net inflow and that’s the number.   That demographic group generally polls well for Indy, it’s not actually the strongest, that’s people in there 20s/30s.  If you assume they vote 70/30 in favour and that they actually vote at 85% - bother of those I think are optimistic - the votes either side are (rounded) 67500 for Yes and 29000 for No.  So the benefit of having their votes for Yes would be 38,500 votes.   That might be enough to make the but it’s less than 1% of the electorate.

Then there’s to other, larger group who would be excluded from the franchise in a WM election, the “foreign voters”.   The truth is we know very little about this group, we don’t even know how many there are and won’t do until the Census is data released next year.  We don’t know what their views are on the constitution as they’re never polled as a group.   There seems to be a received wisdom that they *must* be pro-Indy because of Brexit.  However, the reality is that for EU citizens in Scotland while they may feel more “loved” and may have more affinity to an independent Scotland, their status in Scotland - post-Brexit - will not be impacted by a pro-Indy vote, which was a big difference to what they were told in 2014.  The best you can say about this grouping is that you just need to consider them as having the same profile as the rest of the electorate.

The other thing that everyone who is pushing a Holyrood election over a WM one - and bringing that forwards by collapsing the government - seems to just blithely ignore is that everyone - or at least all the Pro Indy, soft nos and don’t knows - will be absolutely fine with that.   People need to remember that voters tend to get annoyed with governments which call elections “for no good reason” and they make their feelings known at the ballot box.  To get away with this, you’d need to first have the support for Indy to be demonstrably in the high 50s or 60s to bolster against that backlash.

The main reasons I’d put forwards for going with a WM election is that the problem lies with WM, not Holyrood.  It is WM that is not respecting the democratic will of Holyrood, so you take the fight to them and you fight them on their own ground.  It also upsets how the Tories, Labour and media see type next election playing out as it throws a large constitutional hand grenade into their favoured two-horse race. 

Thanks, Aaid, interesting to read your analysis there.  Couple of points: the percentages might be fairly small, but they might also be crucial.  Also, in a WM election, I reckon the message will get swamped by all the UK issues that will be promoted heavily in the MSM.  In a Scottish election, all the extraneous noise won't be there.  Also think that in a UK election, the SNP vote would be very unlikely to get to 50% - in a Scottish election using the constituency vote as the measure, I would say 50%+ could be achievable.

Of course a bolder course of action would be to use a UK election but make the bar a simple majority of indy-supporting MPs, as used to be the case (and as we are no longer allowed referenda, why should we not revert to previous accepted protocols?). It could be done on the basis that a majority meant indy talks would begin (which  would be unlikely to be agreed by WM).  I hesitate to suggest that as an alternative it could mean that it would be a democratic justification for a section 30 as long as that was included in the manifesto that was voted on, although even then I suspect WM would just park the bus.  If we get to the point that there is no democratic route to indy (if indeed we are not there already) it should become obvious to everyone that we are prisoners no matter what we try to do democratically, and at that stage I assume we could involve the UN.  In the meantime, I am expecting WM, emboldened by the SC decision, to try to alter the law some time soon to make independence illegal.  Heaven knows where that would lead.

[Caledonian Craig]

18 minutes ago, Alibi said:

Thanks, Aaid, interesting to read your analysis there.  Couple of points: the percentages might be fairly small, but they might also be crucial.  Also, in a WM election, I reckon the message will get swamped by all the UK issues that will be promoted heavily in the MSM.  In a Scottish election, all the extraneous noise won't be there.  Also think that in a UK election, the SNP vote would be very unlikely to get to 50% - in a Scottish election using the constituency vote as the measure, I would say 50%+ could be achievable.

Of course a bolder course of action would be to use a UK election but make the bar a simple majority of indy-supporting MPs, as used to be the case (and as we are no longer allowed referenda, why should we not revert to previous accepted protocols?). It could be done on the basis that a majority meant indy talks would begin (which  would be unlikely to be agreed by WM).  I hesitate to suggest that as an alternative it could mean that it would be a democratic justification for a section 30 as long as that was included in the manifesto that was voted on, although even then I suspect WM would just park the bus.  If we get to the point that there is no democratic route to indy (if indeed we are not there already) it should become obvious to everyone that we are prisoners no matter what we try to do democratically, and at that stage I assume we could involve the UN.  In the meantime, I am expecting WM, emboldened by the SC decision, to try to alter the law some time soon to make independence illegal.  Heaven knows where that would lead.

I'd also use the opportunity to call into question the Scotland Act put together (I think) following devolution. It is a legally binding document that was the creation purely of unionists and created to cater for every whim of unionist Scots - hardly fair given that no unionist party has governed in Scotland for so long. Agreements such as these need to be democratic and fair to all. It clearly is not as it merely panders to every unionists whim.

[PapofGlencoe]

26 minutes ago, Alibi said:

Thanks, Aaid, interesting to read your analysis there.  Couple of points: the percentages might be fairly small, but they might also be crucial.  Also, in a WM election, I reckon the message will get swamped by all the UK issues that will be promoted heavily in the MSM.  In a Scottish election, all the extraneous noise won't be there.  Also think that in a UK election, the SNP vote would be very unlikely to get to 50% - in a Scottish election using the constituency vote as the measure, I would say 50%+ could be achievable.

Of course a bolder course of action would be to use a UK election but make the bar a simple majority of indy-supporting MPs, as used to be the case (and as we are no longer allowed referenda, why should we not revert to previous accepted protocols?). It could be done on the basis that a majority meant indy talks would begin (which  would be unlikely to be agreed by WM).  I hesitate to suggest that as an alternative it could mean that it would be a democratic justification for a section 30 as long as that was included in the manifesto that was voted on, although even then I suspect WM would just park the bus.  If we get to the point that there is no democratic route to indy (if indeed we are not there already) it should become obvious to everyone that we are prisoners no matter what we try to do democratically, and at that stage I assume we could involve the UN.  In the meantime, I am expecting WM, emboldened by the SC decision, to try to alter the law some time soon to make independence illegal.  Heaven knows where that would lead.

Talking about declaring indepdendence off the back of a majority of seats makes no sense.  You can get that off the back of 30 odd perecent of the vote.  In that case, it would be against the popular wishes of the people and should be put in the bin.

If we want a new state our people need to back it.  Not for it to be imposed on them.

 

[stocky]

@aaid @hampden_loon2878

I see Steven Flynn is an early favourite.

I don't know him or much about him.

thoughts?

who would you prefer? 

a north easterner could be good, a counter balance to the west coast/central belt.

 

 

[aaid]

I don’t really know too much about him.  Although he’s the MP for Aberdeen South, he’s a Dundee Utd fan from Dundee.  I’m never sure if Dundee is the North East or not.   I don’t think geography makes any difference tbh,

He’s always impressed me anytime I’ve seen him speak.  The only thing I’d mention is that before becoming an MP, he was the SNP opposition leader to the Tory/Labour coalition on Aberdeen Council - the period where the Labour councillors were all suspended - so he’s got experience of the “leader of the opposition” role.