YouGov have released an enormous poll of 100,000 respondents, which attempts to identify how different segments of the electorate voted on May 7th. From an SNP point of view, I think the most interesting finding relates to newspaper readership...
Percentage of each newspaper's Britain-wide readership that voted SNP :
Record/Mirror : 6%
Sun : 4%
Guardian : 3%
Independent : 3%
Star : 3%
Express : 2%
Mail : 1%
Times : 1%
Telegraph : 0%
It's quite difficult to interpret these numbers, because we'd need to know what percentage of each newspaper's readers are to be found among the Scottish subsample - for example, we know that the Independent has a disproportionately small readership north of the border, so it's hardly surprising that only 3% of its readers voted SNP (if anything, I'd have expected the figure to be lower still). But even allowing for the likelihood that a particularly high percentage of the Mirror/Record's readers in the sample are Scottish, it's quite striking that more Record than Sun readers seem to have plumped for the SNP, even though it was the Sun that endorsed Nicola Sturgeon.
There are two ways of looking at this - a) now we know why the Record had to hedge its bets, and ended up hilariously advising only English people on how to vote, and b) the paper's more subtle attempts at propaganda and smearing were an utter failure. It's hard to see how they can ever go back to being an out-and-out Labour publication after this - their readers would simply desert them.
It's also fascinating to see how impotent the Telegraph in particular were in their endless Nat-bashing - they successfully "persuaded" virtually all of their readers to reject the SNP, and yet the SNP still got 50% of the vote. Says it all, really. The Mail's editorial stance appears to have been almost as great an irrelevance. They were preaching to the converted, while the Record were haplessly attempting Neuro-Linguistic Programming techniques on the unconvertible.