Monday, March 24, 2025

Navel-gazing stats post: Scot Goes Pop solidifies its position as Scotland's third most-read political blog

When I changed this blog's masthead a couple of months ago to say "one of Scotland's three most-read political blogs", I thought it would be a one-month wonder and that I'd quickly have to change it back to "one of the five most-read", but in fact Stuart Campbell's favourite comparison site has shown further progress for Scot Goes Pop since then.  Now, to be clear, that comparison site may not be especially accurate - a couple of years ago it claimed that Wings was based in Glasgow (as opposed to, say, Bath), had around 15 "employees" (as opposed to, say, zero), and had an "annual turnover" of around £15 million (as opposed to, say...well, I'm not sure if the exact figure is publicly available, but even Stew's crowdfunding doesn't extend to the multi-millions).  However, as the Wings disciples treat the stats as gospel, I may as well embrace them when they're favourable, and here's how they stand at the moment...

Estimated visits for the 28 days up to 21st March:

1) Wings Over Scotland: 221,110
2) Wee Ginger Dug: 89,576
3) Scot Goes Pop: 60,830
4) Grouse Beater: 38,042
5) Talking Up Scotland: 26,721
6) Robin McAlpine: 25,824
7) Bella Caledonia: 23,558
8) Munguin's Republic: 14,586

Now, I realise that anyone who hasn't kept an eye on these numbers will probably think that's still quite a healthy lead for Wings, but in fact it's come down dramatically.  When Stew last mentioned the numbers himself in November, the monthly visits for Wings supposedly stood at 559,284 - so his readership appears to have fallen by well over half since then.  That in itself is a good reason to be sceptical about the estimates, but Stew has repeatedly insisted in the past that they're extremely accurate, so if he still believes that, I suppose it's up to him to explain why his site's popularity appears to be collapsing at lightning speed.  He also used to repeatedly boast that the non-Wings blogosphere was essentially irrelevant because Wings had more visits than all of the others combined - as you can see for yourselves, that's no longer the case (if it ever really was).  And he specifically used to boast about having around ten times as many visits as Scot Goes Pop - that's now come down to less than four times as many.  So I'm delighted to say we appear to have a somewhat healthier and more balanced blogging ecosystem these days.

Incidentally, I left Craig Murray out of the list because since October his blog has been almost exclusively about international affairs, and he's only mentioned Scottish politics once.  However, if he was included in the list, he'd be in fourth place with 55,660 visits.  In practice that may give a slightly false impression because he now duplicates his blogposts on a Substack site, so that might be artificially reducing the numbers on his main site.

To get back to the subject of Stew, he actually posted a screenshot of one of my entire blogposts on Twitter the other day - 

If he carries on like this, I'm going to have to start charging him for royalties.  But I suppose I should be grateful to him for bringing such a cracking blogpost to a slightly wider audience, even if they're mostly comprised of bots.

What does take the biscuit, though, is that within 48 hours of the above tweet, he was back to his usual schtick of "I don't stalk James, James stalks me".

Twice all year, Stew?  Well, let's look at the evidence, shall we?  Exhibit A - 

Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D (with added paranoia) - Exhibit E - Exhibit F - Well, you get the picture. On and on and on and on it goes.  And let's not forget about "Scot Goes Pop Night" on the main Wings site back in January, when Stew lovingly archived and annotated no fewer than sixty-four posts from this blog.

It's stalking, Jim, but exactly as we know it.
Posted by James Kelly at 2:42 PM 26 comments

Sunday, March 23, 2025

More evidence of a public backlash against Labour's "Arbeit Macht Frei" reinvention as Reform take the joint lead in an Opinium poll for the first time since they were called the Brexit Party

In the immediate wake of Scotland's latest footballing collapse, all I can say is: a) come on Bruce Mouat and co, win the world championships for Scotland in two weeks' time and give us something, and b) in the meantime let's distract ourselves by taking a look at the latest GB-wide opinion poll. 

Opinium have stood out in recent months as consistently the most Labour-friendly polling firm, continuing to show Keir Starmer's party in the lead with close to 30% of the vote - until now.  This weekend's poll shows Labour slumping to a post-election low of 26%, allowing Reform to move into joint first place for the first time in an Opinium poll since the party's 2021 rebrand.  Curiously, Opinium was one of two firms (the other was YouGov) that put Reform in the outright lead in mid-2019 when they were still called the Brexit Party.

GB-wide voting intentions (Opinium, 19th-21st March 2025):

Reform UK 26% (-1)
Labour 26% (-2)
Conservatives 21% (+1)
Liberal Democrats 13% (+1)
Greens 8% (-)
SNP 3% (-)
Plaid Cymru 1% (-)

If something has changed recently, the overwhelming likelihood is that it's Liz Kendall's House of Horrors coming back to haunt Labour.  The idea that Labour sources were punting only a few weeks ago that Starmer's strutting around on the international stage was going to produce a Falklands-style effect and lead to electoral recovery now looks like an absolute fantasy.  The Oval Office episode probably did produce a modest and temporary Labour boost, but it's since been more than offset by the Kendall factor.  Perhaps Starmer should have heeded the wisdom of his own party members and not appointed "Mrs 4%" to such a key Cabinet role.

A little caveat, though - a Techne poll was conducted at around the same time as the Opinium poll and did not show any new setback for Labour.  However, we've now had three polls since the Kendall announcement, and two of them have shown a Labour slump.
Posted by James Kelly at 7:30 PM 193 comments

My day out in Perth

So I asked a few seasoned conference-goers what they thought the status was of the SNP constitutional conference that I attended as a delegate in Perth today (or technically yesterday as it's now after midnight), and the general consensus was that if the media weren't present, it sounded very much like a completely private session and I therefore shouldn't say much about it at all apart from the fact that I was there.  Consequently this is going to be quite a short and unilluminating blogpost, but I'll pad it out with some photos of the impromptu walking tour of Perth that I did during the lunchtime break.

Several people encouraged me a few months ago to rejoin the SNP with a view to actually getting involved and trying to be a voice (or at least a vote) for both internal democratisation and a more radical strategy on independence, so that was certainly my thinking in asking to register as a delegate for the conference.  I'm sure you all know by now where I'm coming from on these issues, and that I did my level best to vote for whatever seemed to be the options that maximised democracy and transparency.  If anyone else is thinking of rejoining the SNP for similar reasons, although obviously it's a very personal decision for each individual, I certainly think it's well worth considering, because remember this isn't Alba we're talking about - the SNP are the governing party of Scotland, so even if you find yourself consistently on the losing side in internal debates, you're unlikely to look back and think it wasn't worth the bother of trying.

Although this was completely coincidental, I must say there was a neatly ironic symmetry to it - I was expelled from Alba for using my elected position on the Constitution Review Group to push hard for democratisation, and then after rejoining the SNP practically the first thing I did was register as a delegate for a constitutional reform conference.








Posted by James Kelly at 1:36 AM 88 comments

Friday, March 21, 2025

Analysis of the SNP's two spectacular by-election wins in Glasgow

Just a quick note to let you know I have an analysis piece at The National about yesterday's two local by-elections in Glasgow, both of which produced pretty spectacular wins for the SNP.  The article is accompanied by a photo of John Swinney in a novelty hat, so please do brace yourselves.  You can read it HERE.

Posted by James Kelly at 6:34 PM 168 comments

Thursday, March 20, 2025

Find Out Now! Find Out How? Find Out ZAP! WHAM! POW! Labour deservedly slump to just 22% in the first GB-wide poll since society's most vulnerable got thoroughly Kendalled

We all know there are people out there, sometimes quite poor people, sometimes even quite left-wing people, who resent anyone that doesn't work and regard the 'workshy' as the source of all society's ills.  When I was growing up, I had a great-aunt who was born in the early years of the 20th century, and who I always assumed to be a lifelong Labour voter, and her catchphrase (well, one of several) was "they neither work nor want".  In my view it's faulty thinking caused by what's in front of people's noses - anyone on a low income will know lots of people who are 'economically inactive', but very few of them will know any billionaires, so it's quite hard for them to visualise the fact that if you just got a few fabulously wealthy individuals to pay their fair share, the funds raised would dwarf anything you could get by hammering the disabled or those with mental health problems.

Nevertheless, the fact that the faulty thinking exists has given Labour hope that they could get away with savage cuts to benefit payments that not even the Tories ever attempted.  I've even seen the "Scotland isn't really more progressive than England" brigade on social media predicting that Liz Kendall's announcement would go down better in Scotland than elsewhere in the UK.

That presents us with an interesting test case, because it's unlikely the numbers are going to lie to us - if forcing the most vulnerable people to choose between work and starvation is something the typical man or woman on the street approves of, we should now see Labour's poll ratings start to recover.  But I must say that anecdotally, everything I've heard from the people around me has led me to conclude that the complete opposite is likely to happen - I've heard nothing but shock and outrage at what Kendall has done.  The first GB-wide poll to be conducted since the announcement is consistent with that interpretation...

GB-wide voting intentions (Find Out Now, 19th March 2025):

Reform UK 27% (-)
Labour 22% (-2)
Conservatives 21% (-)
Liberal Democrats 14% (+3)
Greens 11% (+1)
SNP 3% (-)
Plaid Cymru 1% (-)

22% equals Labour's record post-election low across all polling firms.  It's little more than half of the 40% vote share that the supposedly "unelectable left-wing extremist" Jeremy Corbyn led Labour to in the 2017 general election.

*  *  *

I launched the Scot Goes Pop fundraiser for 2025 in January, and so far the running total stands at £1661, meaning that 24% of the target of £6800 has been raised.  If you'd like to help Scot Goes Pop continue with poll analysis and truly independent political commentary for another year, donations are welcome HERE.  Direct Paypal donations can also be made - my Paypal email address is:   jkellysta@yahoo.co.uk
Posted by James Kelly at 10:27 PM 83 comments

Nicola Sturgeon cleared

Doubtless there's someone in Bath that will be devastated by this news, but most sensible people in the independence movement, both inside and outside the SNP, will be extremely relieved.  None of us know exactly what has gone on, but the idea that anything good (from an independence point of view) would have come out of the former SNP leader being faced with prolonged legal action is obviously for the birds.

The Peter Murrell case will still attract a lot of press interest, but now that he's left the SNP, and now that he's separated from Ms Sturgeon, and now that Ms Sturgeon is leaving the Scottish Parliament anyway, a firewall of sorts is in place and we're getting a lot closer to the point where we can look to the future for the independence cause without the constant dark whispers that the Branchform monster is going to turn up at any moment and destroy everything in sight.  That's a good thing, not a bad thing.
Posted by James Kelly at 2:27 PM 197 comments

Wednesday, March 19, 2025

More analysis of the new Survation poll showing the pro-independence majority at Holyrood is on course to be retained

Just a quick note to let you know I have a new article at The National, discussing the new Survation poll which suggests the pro-independence majority in the Scottish Parliament is on course to be retained in next year's election.  In particular, I take a look at the implications of Reform UK's record high showing in the poll.  You can read the article HERE.

Posted by James Kelly at 7:05 PM 38 comments

Stonking Survation survey shows the Scottish Parliament on course for another PRO-INDEPENDENCE MAJORITY next year - and the fieldwork took place BEFORE Labour hammered society's most vulnerable

From memory, I'm pretty sure that the previous Survation poll in early January was the only Scottish poll from any firm over the last few months that didn't show pro-independence parties on course to retain their parliamentary majority next year, so it's extremely heartening that has now been rectified and that all pollsters are in agreement.

Scottish Parliament constituency ballot voting intentions (Survation / Quantum Communications, 6th-13th March 2025):

SNP 34% (-1)
Labour 23% (+1)
Reform UK 17% (+4)
Conservatives 12% (-2)
Liberal Democrats 8% (-)
Greens 4% (-2)

Scottish Parliament regional list ballot voting intentions:

SNP 29% (-2)
Labour 20% (-1)
Reform UK 16% (+3)
Conservatives 13% (-1)
Liberal Democrats 9% (-1)
Greens 8% (-1)
Alba 3% (+1)

Seats projection: SNP 55, Labour 19, Conservatives 17, Reform UK 14, Liberal Democrats 13, Greens 10, Alba 1

SNP + GREENS: 65 SEATS
ALL OTHER PARTIES: 64 SEATS

SNP + GREEN MAJORITY OF 1 SEAT

PRO-INDEPENDENCE PARTIES: 66 SEATS
ANTI-INDEPENDENCE PARTIES: 63 SEATS

PRO-INDEPENDENCE MAJORITY OF 3 SEATS

You can guarantee that Alba HQ's resident young whippersnapper Robert Reid (who interestingly is never allowed to put his own name to any of his 'official' pronouncements) will be wound up like a clock to proclaim this poll as some sort of breakthrough.  As ever, don't shoot the messenger here, but there's no breakthrough at all, and 3% on the list is actually a poor showing for Alba that would be extremely unlikely to win them any seats.  The Diffley Partnership were commissioned to do the seats projection, and they must have some quirk in their model that awards one seat to Alba even on 3%, something that I'm almost certain wouldn't be the case if John Curtice was doing the projection.  

It's not totally inconceivable that could happen in the real world election, but it's very, very unlikely.  Small parties have picked up one seat on a low national vote share in the past, but that was because their vote was disproportionately concentrated in particular geographical areas - for example, Tommy Sheridan outperforming the SSP's national vote in Glasgow in 1999.  One of the reasons that Alba weren't even close to a list seat in 2021 is that their vote was pretty evenly spread across the country, and until that changes they'd need to be on 5% or 6% of the national vote to expect to make a seats breakthrough.  I'm wondering if the Diffley Partnership may have relied on Survation's regional breakdown to produce the Alba projection, and if so I think that's a questionable way of going about it, because the margin of error in any regional subsample is bound to be enormous.

A lot of the hype surrounding this poll is about Reform UK's showing, and actually that's fully justified, because no poll from any polling firm has produced numbers anything like this before.  Reform's 17% on the constituency vote is a full three points higher than their previous best of 14% (recorded by Norstat), while their 16% on the list vote also beats their former high watermark of 13% (recorded by both Norstat and Survation) by three points.  However, for as long as the SNP and Green vote holds up, Reform will look less like kingmakers and more like spoilers for the unionist side.
Posted by James Kelly at 12:08 PM 94 comments

Tuesday, March 18, 2025

The in-built features of the British political system that have led to Labour's war against the most vulnerable

I've been asked quite a few times how I know that Chris "Mad Dog PRIMUS" McEleny actually instigated the Alba expulsion proceedings against me, rather than him just acting as the monkey to the Tas organ grinder.  My answer has always been that I don't know for sure that he was one of the instigators, but what I do know for sure is that expelling people is something that he really enjoys doing.  It gives him immense personal satisfaction and pleasure.  I could see it in his eyes during Colin Alexander's expulsion hearing, and I see much the same look in Liz Kendall's eyes as she talks about destroying the lives of disabled people, and people who suffer from mental health problems.  

For Starmerites, this is the stuff that really turns them on.  They didn't enter politics because they thought big business was a problem or because they wanted the wealthy to pay their fair share.  They entered politics because they feel an utterly irrational level of resentment and anger towards the most vulnerable in society.  When they look back on their careers, they want their legacy to be a "solution" to the "problem" of vulnerable people's existence.  Perhaps even a final solution, if Kim Leadbeater gets her way.

However, there are two other factors specific to the British political system which have greatly contributed to us reaching this point - 

1) The funding model for political parties.  When Rachel Reeves is presented with a choice between taxing the wealthy or getting the funds from disabled people instead, and she reacts as if the latter is the easy option and the former is utterly unthinkable, that must in part be due to Labour's reliance on wealthy donors.  If you had state funding for parties, or a cap on spending, or a cap on the size of donations, the range of policy options open to governments would suddenly and radically expand, because left-wing parties wouldn't have to fear losing their level playing-field if they genuinely pursued social justice.

2) The absence of proportional representation.  If we had PR, a socialist party to the left of Labour would be viable.  As is the case in Germany, it might take around 5-10% of the vote and thus take around 5-10% of the seats.  That would mean there would always be a price to pay for Labour in tacking too far to the right, because left-wing voters would have somewhere else to go.  As it is, Labour just ignore their left flank because most of the left are still sitting powerlessly within the Labour party itself.  (OK, that's an over-simplification, because the Green Party is stronger than ever before and Labour are also threatened by left-wing independents in certain areas.  But Starmer, Reeves and Kendall continue to think and act as if they needn't worry about the left.)
Posted by James Kelly at 12:03 PM 42 comments

Monday, March 17, 2025

Can anyone imagine the "Rearm Britain" brigade sending troops to fight the Americans if Greenland is invaded?

Even twelve long years after I last posted there, I'm desperately sad to see what's happened to my old haunt of Political Betting, affectionately known as "Stormfront Lite" due to the excessive number of borderline-fascist nutjobs in the comments section.  It's now been completely taken over by "TSE", notorious for once inventing a family tragedy to avoid having to settle a private bet - which I suppose those with a sense of irony would say makes him the ideal man to edit the UK's best-known political betting site.  But it's actually not so much his welching that's the problem, it's the dismal standard of his political analysis and his puerile sense of humour, which I know he honestly thinks adds an "inimitability" to the site but is in reality making it too excruciating to read.  The saving grace is that there are often lengthy, thoughtful guest posts at the weekend, and it might almost be better if TSE just ran those and didn't even try to fill in the gaps in between.  His dreadful weekday posts are absolutely wrecking the site.

I believe he's a Tory member in Manchester or somewhere like that, and like so many clueless Tories south of the border he fancies himself as a bit of an expert on Scotland and Scottish politics.  His latest pronouncement is that Donald Trump's second term has killed Scottish independence stone dead - and he's tried to ward off suggestions that he's guilty of wishful thinking by pointing out that other people have in the past been guilty of wishful thinking on the subject.  But no, I'm afraid this is no more than yet another round of wishful thinking on stilts from a bog-standard Greater England imperialist perspective.

If he was actually immersed as most of us are in what is happening in Scotland, he'd realise that the issue of Trump is a red herring because by far the biggest barrier to independence at present is the SNP leadership's own reluctance to press the issue.  That is not an insurmountable barrier in the long run, but would anyone confidently bet on it being overcome during Trump's four-year term?  Most of us would regard it as an immense luxury if we could start thinking in terms of what external factors might get in the way of an SNP leadership that is seriously trying to win independence in the short-term.  (And any chance of a non-SNP route to independence has been completely ended by the insanely destructive behaviour of the Alba Party elite.)

By the time the independence campaign is fully back on track, it's likely that either there'll be a Democratic president and normal service will have been resumed, or JD Vance will be president, in which case independence will be a moot point because we might all want to take up Musk's offer of emigrating to another planet.

But in any case, TSE is making himself look more than faintly ridiculous by suggesting that campaigning for independence while Trump is president is like trying to do it during the Battle of Britain.  If we're supposed to believe that Trump's trade wars and his threats to invade Greenland are an existential threat on a par with 1940, one that puts an end to politics as usual for the foreseeable future, I'd suggest we'd first need to have a British government that recognises the existence of such a threat.  Instead, Starmer is still sycophantically paying homage to Trump as the leader of a Euro-Atlantic alliance and indeed as someone without whom no way forward in Ukraine is even possible.  If anything, all that does is make Scottish independence look more attractive, because the world order that Starmer is offering is plainly bankrupt.

There's now a Canadian Prime Minister who is using extremely belligerent language and talking of "the Americans" as an aggressor that his country needs to be defended from.  If Starmer was bold enough to verbally "stand with Canada" against the US threat, that might start to change perceptions in Scotland and make people feel that we've moved into an emergency situation which crowds out domestic issues like independence.  But I doubt if there's a single person reading this who can imagine Starmer actually having the guts to do that.  

Britain and other European countries are supposedly rearming so that they can act more independently in future, but does anyone seriously think that Starmer would send troops to fight against the US if there was a border incursion in Canada or a full-scale annexation of Greenland?  Of course he wouldn't.  He'd suddenly rediscover the realpolitik that he's thrown to the wind as far as Ukraine is concerned.  He'd say that a military solution was in the realms of fantasy given America's military strength.  He'd say a dispute between two valued allies was a matter of great regret, and he'd urge a diplomatic solution.  He'd argue that escalation must be avoided at all costs, and he'd suggest that until an amicable agreement can be reached, life wouldn't be so bad for those living under occupation.  After all, the Americans aren't a bad sort, and Donald is a great personal friend of his.

Not exactly the sort of Churchillian rhetoric that will inspire solidarity and put the Scottish independence cause on hold.

Posted by James Kelly at 5:52 PM 56 comments
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)