Monday, December 30, 2024

A challenge for Scot Goes Pop readers: can anyone establish whether Chris McEleny is being truthful in his claim?

My Twitter exchange with Robert Reid (about his false implication that several different polling firms are all showing Alba on course for Holyrood seats) dragged on for a bit, and eventually Chris McEleny made a really quite strange interjection.  Technically, this does not breach his well-established policy of never replying to me, because he nominally addressed his reply to Mr Reid.

"The same pollster had Alba Party at around 2% in April this year (depending on turnout) so this is a 4 point increase in a 7 month period."

What he's saying here is that there was a Find Out Now poll in April 2024 showing Alba on 2% of the Holyrood list vote, meaning there has been a 4% increase since then.  I have tried to verify that claim, but I have drawn a blank.  I'd have to say the claim appears to be untrue.  The two most comprehensive lists of polls (on Wikipedia and John Curtice's What Scotland Thinks sites) do not list any previous Find Out Now polls of Holyrood voting intentions, or at least not in the period since the May 2021 election.  There's also no sign of an independence poll having been conducted by Find Out Now in April 2024.  I also checked Find Out Now's blog, which is where they usually release data tables, and no Scottish poll is mentioned in April 2024.

I'm reluctant to accuse Mr McEleny of knowingly saying something that isn't true, so if any Scot Goes Pop reader can spot something that I've overlooked, please let me know.  I suppose it's possible Mr McEleny is talking about a poll that was privately commissioned by the Alba Party but never released. If that's the case, I'd suggest the onus is now on him to belatedly release it.

40 comments:

  1. McEleny is lying. Yet again. You can tell because his lips are moving.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Reid was lying. Now McEleny. Who votes for these people?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. “Who votes for these people.”

      Independence supporters who find it easier to vote for a party (Alba) with some unpleasant leaders rather than a party (SNP) run by a bunch of crooks.

      Delete
    2. Why make that choice? Why not Greens, the party most likely to get seats on the list vote? But you’re not really interested in that are you? SNP bad is your M O. Vote Alba, get Farage. Well done you.

      Delete
    3. “ Well done you”

      Vote Greens get extremists who like to interfere with children and want to ban roads. Well done you - weirdo.

      Delete
    4. Ah, Personal abuse. Yep, you’ve lost this argument so default position. And repeating back my words. Oh well, you know what they say imitation is. Dismissed.

      Delete
    5. Anon at 1.39. What’s your obsession with interfering with children? Get help.

      Delete
    6. “ Get help”

      It’s you who needs help with their reading. It’s the Greens and SNP
      who facilitate interfering with children. It’s you who needs help if you think this is acceptable.

      Delete
    7. I know what you introduced to this series of posts a propos of nothing. It’s up above in black and white. And you’re being called out. You are for the watching. As I said you are dismissed. Sad wee man that you are.

      Delete
    8. “You are dismissed. “

      Only an adolescent would post something like that.

      “You are for the watching”

      A Stasi adolescent no less.

      Delete
    9. I think it's a last century bot someone forgot to switch off.

      Delete
  3. There's a Redfield and Wilton had Alba at 2% - 6–7 Apr 2024 - according to wikipedia but 3% or 2% in the tables, having a quick look.

    https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Scottish-Independence-Referendum-and-Westminster-Voting-Intention-6-7-April-2024.xlsx

    ReplyDelete
  4. Alba competing for the political wooden spoon with ISP and Peter A Bell.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Peter Bell has launched a daft lobbying group masquerading as a Party and despite being in existence longer than Alba ISP have never onced registered on opinion polling. The Scottish Christian Party are more relevant than ISP atm.

      Delete
    2. Nobody ever heard of these guys I think there's only of them and he rights things with a lot of fake names like actors cause everybody knows Paul Mescal isn't a roman soldier called gladiator so it's the same thing

      Delete
    3. I engaged with PAB in the past. He uses lots of big words but says nothing other than that we are all idiots. He is seemingly a “thinker” . He actually tells you that on his blog. Presumably he has to because it not obvious from the nonsense he writes. He promotes UDI which is never ever ever happening in Scotland. I doubt if he has a membership in double figures. His pomposity is good for a giggle, so credit him for that.

      Delete
    4. I haven't heard of this person. Is he a leading figure in something?

      Delete
  5. Replies
    1. They can’t afford private polling

      Delete
    2. That's nonsense, their last poll was in October by Find Out Now.

      Delete
  6. It's Alba, the whole party is a lie

    ReplyDelete
  7. Looks like alba published a series of polls in April by Find Out Now. Most likely then

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I presume what you mean is they commissioned a series of questions in a single poll. If a Holyrood voting intention question was asked in that poll, it was never published - if it had been published it would almost certainly be in the lists on What Scotland Thinks and Wikipedia. Why might they have held such a result back? Most probably because it was extremely poor for Alba and they didn't want it to become public knowledge. But now that Mr McEleny has mentioned a detail from the result, I believe under British Polling Council rules that should automatically trigger full publicaton of the data tables. It'll be interesting to see whether that happens.

      Delete
    2. Well isn’t that the point. McEleny has said that the results only showed alba on roughly 2%? Why would they release the data then? The fact they didn’t publish it I think gives credence to the claim that there has been a significant increase

      Delete
    3. Yes, of course, keeping things totally secret is generally strong evidence of truth-telling and transparency. It was much the same with Nixon and Watergate.

      It's not complicated: if they've changed their minds and now think the poll is useful to them, release the full numbers and publish the data tables. What you can't do is cherry-pick one little detail, without mentioning what the source is, and expect everyone to take it all on trust.

      Delete
  8. So, to boil it down. Did he -
    1 Get his dates wrong?
    2 Get his polling companies mixed up?
    3 Quote unpublished data?
    4 Pull some figures out of thin air?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Douglas Adams, Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy: “‘But look, you found the notice, didn't you?’ ‘Yes’, said Arthur, ‘yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard.‘“

    ReplyDelete
  10. This madness must end.

    ReplyDelete
  11. You are George Washington and I claim my £5.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Jackie Bird gets an MBE for services to the British state propaganda.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bird didn't get much of a reward for all her hard-working. She was expecting to be made a Dame but only got the same as the postmistress in Unst.

      Delete
  13. Maybe he is lying, maybe he isn't.
    Regardless, I can't see Alba Party winning any HR seats, idea doesn't pass the sniff test.
    Does anyone seriously believe that that is on?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nope. They'll take 2% or so of the vote and no seats.

      Delete