I'm indebted to my Somerset-based stalker for posting a seemingly exhaustive list of every political blog of note in Scotland, and which shows Scot Goes Pop with impressive figures as the fifth most-read blog, ahead of sites such as Bella Caledonia, Effie Deans, Talking Up Scotland (which I affectionately think of as Global Ferry News) and best of all Blair McDougall's Notes on Nationalism. Indeed, if the figures are to be believed, Scot Goes Pop has a readership some sixty-two times bigger than Notes on Nationalism, a website that McDougall assumes is so well known to the public that he feels he only ever needs to refer to it by the admittedly amusing initials "NoN".
Sadly, the numbers and the rankings aren't remotely reliable, because they almost certainly come from SimilarWeb. As I've mentioned many times before, I used to doublecheck Mr Campbell's claims before SimilarWeb introduced a registration-wall, and the figures for Wings Over Scotland revealed that the site supposedly has around fifteen "employees", a "turnover" of several million pounds, and is based in Glasgow, as opposed to, say, Bath. If the traffic estimates are as reliable as those claims, there's something of a credibility problem. In truth, the likelihood is that Wings' traffic is wildly overestimated by SimilarWeb due to many of his regulars treating the site as a de facto discussion forum, meaning they constantly refresh the page to see if there are new comments, with each refresh counting as a fresh "visit". It was for exactly that reason that fifteen years ago Political Betting was able to honestly claim to be the UK's "most-read" political blog, even though Iain Dale's blog had a far higher number of unique readers, which is what really matters.
Nevertheless, because I now have such a high-profile source for the claim that Scot Goes Pop is the fifth most-read political blog in Scotland, I might as well take advantage of that, so I've updated the site's masthead accordingly. I was tempted to say "one of the four most-read political blogs in Scotland", because I'm not sure we should really be counting Somerset-based gender politics blogs as "Scottish", but I'll be ultra-generous and stretch the point.
Mr Campbell goes on to make my ears burn with this assertion -
"What’s left of the much-reduced Scottish political blogosphere has mostly reacted to these developments with either catatonic indifference or wild outbreaks of denial, clutching at all manner of straws to pretend that there’s any credible prospect of a pro-indy majority after the next Holyrood election...18 months is a long time in politics, but we’re going to call this one early: there is zero prospect of a pro-indy majority after the next Holyrood election. None. Barring a nuclear war or an alien invasion or some equally implausible revolutionary event, it’s simply not happening."
With all due respect (which admittedly is not much respect), that's an absolutely clueless claim that reveals a truly astonishing level of ignorance about the current state of polling, and also about recent political history in both Scotland and the wider democratic world and what it tells us about the volatility of the electorate. Mr Campbell is a good bit older than me, so he really ought to be able to remember the 2011 Scottish Parliament election, when a Labour-led government looked a racing certainty as late as February or early March, but a single-party majority SNP government was elected in early May. If predictions were that far out just two months before an election, it is just absolutely nuts for Mr Campbell to claim that a pro-independence majority can be completely ruled out some eighteen months before the 2026 election. Especially given that it's just one month since the seats projection from a Norstat poll showed the SNP and Greens in combination on 61 seats - just four short of a majority.
Nobody is suggesting that a pro-independence majority is the most likely outcome, but with so much time to go there are multiple ways in which it could still happen - most obviously by the UK Labour government's unpopularity continuing to deepen and voters drifting back to the SNP as a result. A major Green surge could also do the trick, as long as the SNP vote holds up reasonably well.
Mr Campbell also approvingly quotes Robin McAlpine, who all of us are completely in awe of for his wonderfully incisive policy and strategy analysis, but I'm not sure his analysis of our electoral system is quite up to the same standard here -
"If Reform ended up one point ahead of the Greens in every list, it is conceivable the Greens could be wiped out."
Well, I suppose that's theoretically possible, in the same sense that it's possible Shergar may yet turn up alive and well in a Chelsea penthouse, but with recent polls putting the Greens between 8% and 10% of the list vote, they look pretty well-placed to return a sizeable contingent irrespective of the Reform surge. The chances of them being wiped out completely are very low.
That said, it's worth noting that Robin McAlpine himself confidently stated at times during the 2016-21 parliament that the polling evidence showed there was no real chance of the pro-indy majority being sustained in 2021, so that's another example of how it pays to be cautious with predictions and how dramatically and unpredictably the state of play can change.
I know Mr Campbell was sort-of-quoting an Irish website with the following statement, but pedantry means I can't resist -
"Our dear cousins across the Irish Sea, incidentally, are in a similar boat. Last week’s election to the Dáil left the nation so split, with no party able to achieve even 22% of the vote, that a coalition of FOUR parties might be required to get anything done."
Hmmm. In fact, Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael in combination ended up just two seats short of an overall majority, so adding a third party (either Labour or the Social Democrats, who have eleven seats apiece) will put them well past the winning post with an extremely comfortable working majority. It's possible there may yet be a four-party coalition, but if that happens it won't be because it's arithmetically necessary, but simply because Labour and the Social Democrats are both looking for safety in numbers, ie. nobody wants to be the fall guy as the only junior coalition partner.
And needless to say Mr Campbell hasn't missed an opportunity to spew yet more random hatred about the Gaelic language. We knew you wouldn't let us down, Stu.
Lmao
ReplyDeleteCalm down Buster.
DeleteBut do the Greens still count, or can they really still be counted upon as a party of independence?
ReplyDeleteCan the Greens even be considered a party of environmental action any more?
DeleteRather like the SNP with indy, I find the Greens only mention climate change etc when they've finished talking about their latest social engineering project or if an election is looming.
I'm sure many people are so sick of their gender identity nonsense that they are prepared to 'throw the baby out with the bath water' and view all traditional Green issues negatively.
Again, as much as we need a new political vehicle for independence without the SNP's baggage it's probably more important for the future of everything that important messages about climate action can be decoupled from the loopiness of Slater, Harvie, Chapman and Greer.
I am an environmentalist but find the greens uninterested in it as their defining core.
DeleteI wish for a real green party literally worthy of the name.
A truly “Green” party would be neutral on issues such as independence and represent both Nationalist and Unionist environmentalists.
DeleteBollocks.
Deletethe greens are a death cult who want to starve the poor to death, stop women having babies, mutilate the children and import as much 3rd world mystery meat; they would kill themselves, but they want the rest of us to die first. Luckily, they are incompetent and slater couldn't even manage a "take your bottles back to the shop" scheme.
DeleteWouldn't a truly "socialist" party cater for socialists who support independence, as well as socialists who oppose it? Wouldn't a truly "conservative" party cater for conservatives who support independence, as well as conservatives who oppose it? Wouldn't a truly "liberal" party cater for liberals who support independence, as well as liberals who oppose it?
DeleteAnon 1.26 I agree, and wouldn't a truly pro independence party cater for people across the political spectrum, without judgement, instead of forcing me to accept that men have a right to breastfeed and denouncing me as a Unionist if I disagree.
DeleteAngus Brendan MacNeil has just joined Alba. Good or bad thing?
ReplyDeleteI'll let you know after Alba decide whether to expel me tomorrow night. If they do, and in view of the earlier expulsions this year, it would perhaps be safer for Mr MacNeil and others to think of themselves less as "members" and more as "pre-defendants" or "pre-expellees".
DeleteBetter for Alba than MacNeil I would suggest unless there's been promises of leadership, perhaps?
DeleteMacNeill is a bit too much thr joker?
DeleteHe sees an opportunity to feel important
DeleteAngus is one of the good ones.
DeleteInteresting to see that he hasn't joined up with Peter Bell's new party.
DeleteHe'll probably wish he did, once he discovers what a clusterf*ck Alba is on the inside.
DeleteAnyone who rules anything in or out 2 years on from today is wishful thinking.
ReplyDeleteSNP in power too long and tired , fair enough that happens to all parties.
BUT
Labour in power is falling apart already and already unpopular.
What is probable, though of course dependent on events, is two fairly unpopular parties (at least not resurgent) going into elections looking to squeeze a tiny "victory".
The next Parliament will be quite different with a majority unlikely. Could be good for 'normal' politics but won't take constitutional forward. However, it will remain as a dormant issue until a new resurgence. My question is do you get resurgence from a 2007 type number or is that now busted. It's hard to know.
Big issue is like the US people are tired of what they perceive to be the establishment. Trump fed on that and won massively, Reform are feeding on that sentiment here.
DeleteHere ? You mean England.
Deletereform is a deep state pied piper affair; farage is an actor - he pretends to fight the system while being part of it. reform only offer neoliberalism on steroids; their correct name would be the "destroy" party
DeleteI'm surprised that Campbell has the brass neck to use the "I'm calling it early" line again. The last time he did that, he was "calling it" that Humza Yousaf had definitely lost the 2023 leadership election. LOL.
ReplyDeleteIn fairness to him.. he does usually get the big calls right.
DeleteI don't remember him claiming yousaf had definitely lost the election. Where is that from? He did call Swinney taking over and Forbes taking a back seat.
It is wrong to conclude there is no chance of a pro indy majority though if the SNP get 40ish and the Greens have a decent run at it.
But it does feel unlikely. I can't see the green getting 15-18 seats in a parliament which includes Reform.
I believe Campbell's exact words were along the lines of:
Delete"I'm calling it now. Yousaf has lost."
Having got it so spectacularly wrong, he then expended considerable energy trying to convince everyone that there had been caveats on that prediction (there weren't). I don't know why he bothered, though, given that his fan base contains so many useful idiots like you who conveniently "don't remember" every time he gets a big call wrong, and then hilariously muse that "in fairness to him, he does usually get the big calls right". Er, no he doesn't. In fairness to him, he's a hapless amateur as a political commentator who regularly gets everything embarrassingly wrong, even calling the 2020 US election for Trump the day *after* Biden was elected (that takes a very special kind of talent).
As far as the 2024 SNP leadership crisis is concerned, he predicted that Swinney would be caretaker leader (wrong) and that Neil Gray would take over as permanent leader thereafter (also wrong). That's 0 for 2.
Hey I was just asking for when he said that as I couldn't remember. Calling me a "useful idiot" is a bit over the top and snippy. I'm not in his "fan base" so also wrong.
DeleteHe has called a lot correctly. It's churlish to suggest otherwise. Swinney effectively is holding the fort, I don't think anyone serious denies that.
Sigh. No. He did not predict that Swinney would be "effectively" a caretaker leader and would hang around for years. He specifically predicted that Swinney would be LITERALLY a caretaker leader for a few weeks or months while a leadership election was held, which NEIL GRAY would win. Is Neil Gray the First Minister? No he is not.
DeleteIf you don't want to be called a useful idiot, stop claiming black is white. When your beloved hero gets it wrong, as he usually does and as he plainly did in the case of the Swinney / Gray prediction, admit it.
I do seem to remember him saying multiple times that John Swinney's whole purpose was to take the hit for electoral losses.
DeleteCampbell got a lot right? He lost a court case to Dugdale for good ness sake. A spectacular own goal and avoidable.
DeleteGod yes, his Dugdale misjudgement was grim. How much crowdfunded money from indy supporters did he throw away on that? Tens of thousands of pounds? Hundreds of thousands?
DeleteI agree with Anon at 10.02. If it was true that "the Rev" gets the big calls right, I think we would have noticed Donald Trump being re-elected in 2020, Kate Forbes becoming First Minister in 2023, and Neil Gray becoming First Minister in 2024.
DeleteHis Neil Gray prediction (which was supposedly based on inside knowledge) was a proper howler, let's be honest. It never seemed likely.
DeleteI seem to remember the Archbishop of Bath telling us that Mairi Macallan was the chosen one. In fairness, that may well turn out to be correct one day although it doesn't exactly stir the soul. If I was asked to give an example of a textbook career politician, it'd be Slippers or Macallan.
DeleteCampbell is irrelevant. He should stick to Somerset politics.. Maybe he should team up with his neighbour Rees-Mogg. Birds of a feather.
Deletebeen out of town - so who won last octobers referendum?
DeleteI knew nikki would not let us down, even if she has a new asian babe GF
greatly impressed by john swinney, the steady oarsman of the movement; he is like our marshal zhukov and 2026 will be our kursk moment when the unionist counter revolution are smashed; his slowness is a ruse, he draws his enemies in, then he pounces
DeleteI don't even think we should wait until he passes, John Swinney deserves a statue now!
DeleteI have to be honest and say I've just read his article and agree with most of it. I don't think the current leadership are cowards though. I think, even if they wanted to, they can't push independence right now due to the electorates energy on the topic and the relative unpopulated of the SNP to realistically get 50 plus percent. You could have Willim Wallace in charge right now and it wouldn't work. This idea of getting to first principles needs to happen. Unfortunately, if you prized away from the niche issues the electorate don't like, you'd get a deluge of the SNP are "turning to the right".
ReplyDelete. which won't help the youth vote either.
I really struggle to see how the SNP and Greens in 2026 get a similar vote to the last election. That northstat poll looks like a high mark for the greens to me and it's still short.
In what way was the Norstat poll a "high mark for the Greens"? It put them on 10 seats. Not unusual at all.
DeleteI know what you mean but looking at it, the Greens had their best ever result last time and got 8% of the vote and 8 seats.
DeleteThat, in itself, was unusual for them. I don't see where the other two seats come from looking at the map, I should have said.
You're missing the whole point. There was nothing unusual about Norstat showing the Greens on 10 seats, other polls have shown the same, because Green support seems to be up slightly on 2021. What made Norstat unusual was the high seat numbers for the SNP.
DeleteThe issue though that independence is the SNP's unique selling point. Without that we're left to judge them purely on their record in Government since the last election in 2021... which hasn't exactly been rosy to put it mildly.
DeletePolls show a large disconnect between support for independence and support for the SNP, so there is a large section of voters they could potentially go after to retain power but at present they seem to be alienating those voters.
10.06 it would be unusual for the Greens to get 10 seats or higher in real elections though. It would be a literal high and they tend to poll higher than real elections.
DeleteI hope there is a pro majority independence cohort and if the SNP manage to stem the losses and Greens pick up more I'll be happy. I just don't think the SNP additional losses of today go primarily to the Greens. I think it's more likely to spread across Labour, Reform, Libs and Tories in NE.
What you're actually saying is that the polls are showing the Greens on course for an all-time high. Yes. That's what they're doing. Why you think that means they're wrong is not clear.
DeleteNo, they are not. They Greens were regularly polling 10%, sometimes as high as 13 and 14%, before the last election and ended up with 8%.
DeleteAlso from this blog.
"we know from past elections that late polls have a habit of overstating the Greens' support."
I could see them getting an increase in support but I dont see how it transaltes to two extra seats in the context of additional parties competing for the list vote. They would have to increase dramatically their votes to get the division high enough.
That's why I think it's unlikely. I'm not saying "it's wrong".
"we know from past elections that late polls have a habit of overstating the Greens' support."
DeleteWhat's the relevance of that? These aren't "late" polls.
The relevance is a good polling expert has consistently noted the Greens' tend to poll higher than the results they receive at the ballot box. I don't think the late part changes much unless the polls were showing them outperforming early polls. They did for some but most they underperformed. link here:
Deletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Scottish_Parliament_election
My main point is unless the Greens' get a huge increase (2% isn't that), their d'hont list division figures to win list seats over and above what they currently have is difficult. They'll win seats, they may even win more than what they have now, but winning so much more to mitigate the vast majority of SNP losses? That is a tall order. The SNP votes are not going direct to the Greens as the northstat poll shows.
They don't need to win "so much more". In the Norstat poll, they got the pro-indy camp to 61 seats with just a two seat increase for themselves.
DeleteThey need 65 and if you're relying on the Greens getting you the other 4 then they need need to win substantially more. It's unlikely they will poll high enough to do that.
DeleteIndy parties can only lose 7 seats total to lose the majority, I don't see the SNP gaining any so Greens' will need to be relied on to pick up. It would be undeniably a stupendous effort if they did so but they would need to poll higher than what they are and by some margin.
11.32 each additonal seat on the list becomes more difficult. You need the party to have enough to beat the next party after your votes have been discounted. Every single additional list seat requires a lot more residual votes.
DeleteIf SNP are going to lose seats? We don't know but that seems relatively likely then another Independence party is required to meet the slack. It means the Greens' have to poll high. Going from a party of say 4-8 and even to a party of 11-15 requires a big increase in underlying support.
"if you're relying on the Greens getting you the other 4"
DeleteWho's saying you are? If the SNP can recover to 51, then they can recover to 55, and 10 for the Greens would be enough of a conribution. I think you're determined to be a doom-monger.
I'm trying to show if the SNP lose ground, the Greens' need to have a large increase.
DeleteI don't think it's negative to suggest the SNP getting around 40% of the vote is a tough ask at the moment. Of course I hope that it would be the case but I think people can judge whether I'm calling doom or you're being optmistic to say the least.
We don't know what's going to happen. I'm just saying that northstat poll is good but actually underlines the point: good isn't good enough to gain a majority and each additional seat needed is difficult. You'll effectively get a majority (kind of) off 50% of the vote SNP and Green combined. We're on about 33%. Then the Greens need to be on 17%. That's a tough one. But it's made more tough by the emergence of Reform on a limited finite list.
"I'm trying to show if the SNP lose ground, the Greens' need to have a large increase."
DeleteAnd I've just shown that's not true. 55 is the SNP losing ground. It does not require a large increase from the Greens.
The SNP are losing more than 9 seats. Your optimistic poll result has them losing 13. Greens on 10 is a fantastic result for them, unprecedented. And for them to gain more, as they're likely to need to, it'll be incredible.
DeleteWe"ll agree to disagree.
"We"ll agree to disagree."
DeleteNo we shall not, you huggletensious jungle-flugger.
Haha I'm the best huggletensious jungle flugger out there, ill have you know
DeleteBear in mind some people actually vote green when they are in fact SNP supporters thinking the SNP have enough seats wrapped up.
DeleteEvery chance some of them would defend SNP as their real first choice when SNP under pressure.
Nothing clear cut.
SNP supporters are still considering voting Green after their incompetence in Government is largely responsible for the SNP's decline in the polls, they were willing to bring down the Government and cause an election if Humza didn't resign and they've stated a few times that independence isn't a red line for them?
DeleteI have to ask why is Campbell so interested in Scotland?
ReplyDeleteDoesn’t live here, appears to have no intention of returning and fighting for independence although it seems he doesn't believe in independence anymore, if ever. pro Brit Nat supporter.
Still James it must be nice to know he reads your blog.
It was a good source of income at one time. He might need to move on to another hot topic. Farage has immigration covered. So where does he turn? Conundrum.
DeleteCampbell and Barrhead Boy will grace Scotland once it is independent. Get the flags and banners oot !😂
DeleteIndependence? Not like the snp and greens have a plan.
DeleteI see the Bath Balloon is now describing the new 'Scottish' Tory leader Russell Findlay as "competent".
ReplyDeleteThis would be the same Russell Findlay who unreservedly backed LIZ TRUSS as UK PM!!!
Competent???
Campbell has become such a deranged parody, it has long passed the embarrassing stage.
He is a total fecking moron and so is anyone who still believes his nihilistic crap.
we need to take a moral stand and offer assisted dying to all at holyrood; life not worthy of life, and we know it is for the best. westminster too, first in fact. I mean - if you are useless and everyone wants you gone, why linger? They should do the right thing.
ReplyDeletealso take a stance on the primacy of abortion healthcare, which should be available to all women, at all periods, even post birth, up to 720 months
DeleteA Tory radge. Illiterate as well
Delete.
Campbell regularly gets things wrong and then tells his mouthfrothing fans that he actually got it right, despite the evidence to the contrary being there in black and white. But when he is talking to his cult followers he can tell them that black is pink and they believe him. And no, I’m not doing your work for you. Go and find it. It is there.
ReplyDeletePeople say I'm mercurial.
Deletehow can you get a pro indy majority when there are no pro indy parties with a chance of winning?
ReplyDeleteTake a leak, Hector!
Deletewhere is the evidence of the SNP or greens being pro indy? saying indeependens every few years to uncritical nats is like how the labour party would be as tory as the tories when in power, then out of it run around saying SOSHALIZM and saying "we will abolish the house of lords"
ReplyDeleteI will happily assist you, pal..........
ReplyDeleteOn a bus, I hope! Ooh, matron!
DeleteI'm in agreement with some of Wings' article, especially the hunkering down bit until ready to do battle.
ReplyDeleteWhat that doesn't mean though is the SNP dying. It means surviving for the next battle. We don't need our core supporters leaving, much better regenerating from 30% than 15%.
Especially if they try the Oslo Cakes strategy.
Delete