Bloody hell, the BBC website is actually covering the Ipsos-Mori poll. So the answer to the question, how many Yes-majority polls does it take to get the BBC to report the story, is "about ten in a row".
— James Kelly (@JamesKelly) October 14, 2020
It might be worth starting with a discussion of how many ''in a row" it actually is, because that's no longer such a straightforward question. The first port of call for many people will be Wikipedia's list of polls (if only because it's top of the search engine rankings), which suggests we've now had ten Yes majorities in a row - but that's including the Survation/Progress Scotland poll, which asked a "non-standard question". The snag is that it's only a few weeks since Wikipedia's inclusive policy towards non-standard questions stretched as far as Scotland in Union's notorious propaganda polls using the "Remain in the UK/Leave the UK" format. If those polls were still being included, we'd currently only be on three Yes-majority polls in a row, because believe it or not there was a poll as recently as mid-September that purported to show a majority for "remaining in the UK". For my money, the most logical approach is to only include polls that ask the standard, binary-choice independence question, and on that basis it's nine Yes majorities in a row.
The BBC website's unexpected acknowledgement of the Ipsos-Mori poll came in the form of an analysis piece by John Curtice, who surprised me somewhat in the angle he took. He suggested that we'd need further polls before knowing whether "the higher level of support for Yes" is just "random variation". I actually think it's highly unlikely that there has been a further recent increase in the Yes vote, but I don't think the 58% in the Ipsos-Mori poll is random variation either - it's almost certainly caused by methodology. If you look back over recent years, telephone polls by Ipsos-Mori have again and again stood out for producing better results for Yes than online polls conducted at around the same time. For example, the most recent Ipsos-Mori poll before yesterday was in the middle of last year's general election campaign, and showed an exact 50-50 split. Online polls during the campaign consistently had No ahead.
Incidentally, it may not be just the telephone data collection method that sets Ipsos-Mori apart - I believe I'm right in saying that they also only weight by demographics, and not by past vote recall. That probably makes it easier for Yes to poll well. The datasets show that the weighted sample for the new poll was made up of 398 people who recalled voting Yes in 2014, and only 375 people who recalled voting No. It might seem obvious that this undermines the credibility of the poll's results, but I'm not sure it's as simple as that - we're now more than six years on from the indyref, and pollsters who do weight by recalled vote are taking a big gamble that their respondents will accurately remember votes that were cast a very long time ago.
Scottish Parliament constituency voting intentions:
SNP 58%
Conservatives 19%
Labour 13%
Liberal Democrats 8%
Scottish Parliament regional list voting intentions:
SNP 47%
Conservatives 19%
Labour 13%
Greens 9%
Liberal Democrats 8%
Seats projection: SNP 73 (+10), Conservatives 22 (-9), Labour 15 (-9), Greens 10 (+4), Liberal Democrats 9 (+4)
Pro-independence parties 83 seats (+14), anti-independence parties 46 seats (-14)
Those are truly abysmal figures for both the Tories and Labour - the former are down in the teens, and the latter are barely even in the teens. It's hard to say which of the two parties should feel more chastened.
I have more analysis of the poll in The National - you can read it HERE.
* * *
Lack of reporting could be attributed to poll-fatigue.
ReplyDeleteThe results of the poll could be attributed to an awful lot of people liking life in a totalitarian police State run by a popular dictator with a very unquestioning media and a plastic parliament.
Tee-hee.
DeleteRun back to your Tory hole.
DeleteGood to see Mouse taking it so well.
DeleteSkier - tee hee - one of your better posts.
Delete"Lack of reporting could be attributed to poll-fatigue"
DeleteOther way around, surely, if it took them until the tenth poll to start reporting.
Oh, and a plastic government that apparently doesn't even make cabinet decisions...
ReplyDeleteMaybe the next poll should ask people how much they like Vladimir Igor Putin as a heads-up comparison.
http://media1.tenor.com/images/2695df0a67b9e57f09981ae635ebff4e/tenor.gif?itemid=12400026
DeleteBoris'll be muttering under his breath "We used to control these countries-now they're demanding we take action"!
ReplyDeleteAye, and it's grim up "North".
Nobody knows their place any more.
Greets intae his Eton mess.
"...John Curtis, who surprised me somewhat in the angle he took....."
ReplyDeleteWell he didn't surprise me at all - Britnats are Britnats. He didn't get his knighthood for analysing polls objectively.
Just to be clear, I wasn't in any way suggesting he was being biased.
DeleteJames never thought you were and I never intended for it to come across that way. But I am happy to have helped make it clear that Sir Poultice may be better than your ordinary hack at hiding his bias but ultimately he is no different.
DeleteI seem to remember that this isn't the first poll where recalled yes votes outnumbered no's. In fact I think it's not particularly unusual. Might an alternative theory not cast doubt on the referendum result itself.
ReplyDeleteDave, take your endless little obsession somewhere else, please. Thanks.
ReplyDeleteFMQs today
ReplyDeletePresiding officer: "we seemed to have lost Johan Lamont"
Me : for goodness sake don't even look for the woman.
Britnat Labour 13%
ReplyDelete- so it looks like the strategy of continually changing the British Labour Leader in Scotland and telling the electorate that they are wrong to want to be a normal independent country is not working yet. My bet is they will stick with this strategy thinking it will work eventually. It won't.
I think voters recall is very unreliable in regard to Indyref1 . I said beforehand that within twen 10 years apart from the lunatic fringe of Unionism no one will admit in public to voting No.
ReplyDeleteI think many are beginning to realise that history will not be kind to those who voted No.100 years from now Alistair Darling will be spoken off in the same terms as the Duke of Cumberland
A call out for a courageous SNP member - obviously not Skier, Ramstam, Rocksie67 - to start the fightback against the hokey pokey wokies and criminals in the SNP.
ReplyDeleteWhere is a Braveheart ( that is just for you Detective Skier the sites own Pink Panther) that will start by requesting that Salmond is reinstated in the SNP history and all who conspired against Salmond are booted out. You could also ask how many members have left in the past 2 years.
To achieve independence you need to have a majority of the people of Scotland in favour but you also need the SNP in a fit state to deliver it.
At 58% in the latest poll would sort of suggest that the SNP are in fine fettle for the challenges ahead.
DeleteThe people most upset about the Alex Salmond are middle aged men check Murray Campbell Sheridan. Calling Nicola Mr Murrell sort of gives the game away in regard to their values
In the eyes of most of the electorate remember woman are the majority Nicola is given credit for not brushing the behaviour of a powerful man under the carpet thousands upon thousands of woman have experienced sleazy behaviour at the hands of male bosses.
Unionists and those who wish to damage Nicola are not getting the support they hoped from the public .Most admire Nicola for having the integrity to ensure this matter was fully investigated
Rocksie67
DeleteYou may want to consider the following but I somehow think you won't as you are coming across as a fanboy.
1. A poll does not make the SNP itself in fine fettle for the challenges ahead - that is if you are talking about gaining independence. If you are just a party Sturgeon fan boy then perhaps you are happy with that. Some of us want Scotland to be independent.
2. " Most admire Nicola for having the integrity to ensure this matter was fully investigated." - Rocksie67 you are way off base here to say the least. The new Harrassment process designed to target FORMER MINISTERS specifically EXCLUDED the FM of Scotland and said she should not even be told about any allegations or be included in any decisions taken or be involved in writing any reports etc etc . But you Rocksie67 said she ensured it was fully investigated. So are you saying she broke her own government's new process? Rocksie67 you really need to actually do dome research before posting your misinformed nonsense because you are as a Sturgeon fanboy actually accusing Sturgeon of unlawfully and unfairly breaking a Scotgov process. Oh that's right that's what the
Judicial review judge said.
Just like Sturgeon you are tying yourself in knots. Oh by the way Rocksie67 all thevbrushing under the carpet is being done by Scotgov/SNP and the stink is horrendous but perhaps you have covid and can't smell it.
It's right that politicians remove themselves from the process of investigating former ministers .Can you imagine the outcry if a FM started investigating the behaviour of a minister of another party .
DeleteAre you seriously suggesting that 7 woman and Nicola all sat down decided to make up allegations against Alex Salmond to further Nicola's career then decided to go through the ordeal of being a witness in court .
It's a nonsense and those in the Independence movement propogating this nonsense are doing the Independence movement great harm .
Personally, I think folk that go around calling people 'terfs' are just as pathetic as those that do the same with 'woke'.
DeleteThe hypocrisy of some English blogsites when it comes to this is quite something.
The new Harrassment process designed to target FORMER MINISTERS specifically EXCLUDED the FM of Scotland and said she should not even be told about any allegations or be included in any decisions taken or be involved in writing any reports etc etc
DeleteIt's good to have this confirmed; backs up everything I was saying. Sturgeon had nothing to do with the Salmond case as you say. She was completely out of the loop.
On this topic, I think this should be investigated retrospectively, even if the guy isn't a minister now.
Deletehttps://www.ft.com/content/0f1f9e84-ac08-4394-824c-87ff1e5620a0
Tory party criticised for not suspending ex-minister arrested on suspicion of rape
Rocksie67 says Sturgeon ensured the matter was fully investigated. Skier says she had no involvement. Hey fanboys sort out your story amongst yourself and come back when you have agreed your story.
DeleteSkier - Of course the new process says Sturgeon is not to be involved - I don't need you to tell me that I said that above and previously. Of course Sturgeon was involved contrary to her own process designed to give her a cover for smearing Salmond so she would look ok - nothing to do with me - she could say. The mask of course slipped on Sunday on the Sophy Ridge show.
Skier - the difference between you and me is that I want all truths out in the open you just want the Tories to be hammered. You are happy to cover up for the SNP - that means you ain't no Saint Skier - you are as guilty as the perpetrators.
DeleteRocksie67 - on the other hand just hasn't a clue. He can't handle the truth.
Skier - I will say this in big block capitals for you as you are hard of reading.
DeleteJUST BECAUSE A PROCESS SAYS SOMEONE IS NOT TO BE INVOLVED DOES NOT MAGICALLY MEAN THAT THEY WONT BE INVOLVED PARTICULARLY IF THEY ARE AS POWERFUL AS THE FM OF SCOTLAND.
It was of course deemed unlawful, unfair and tainted by apparent bias by the judge in the judicial review but still no one has been held accountable. It was the Scotgov who threw in the towel at the start of the case - totally wasting public funds.
Skier - personally I think calling people unionists who are Independence supporters who cannot accept criminal actions pretty pathetic.
DeleteSomeone who says it's wrong to "game" an election by casting your vote where you want - saying it's unfair and wrong but is willing to accept criminal wrongdoing that tries to send an innocent man to jail - well that is way beyond hypocritical. Skier that is you!
Shouting doesn't strengthen an argument, it weakens it.
DeleteWhy don't you go to the police with your evidence? You have said you are against internal government investigations into such criminal matters.
Instead, all you do is moan about it incessantly on a website, standing by while those you accuse 'walk free'. Where's the Braveheart in you?
I've always said folk should vote for the party they most strongly support on the most important list vote. You can't vote tactically on it as Wings says; only on the FPTP constituency.
DeleteISP are on less than 1% right now and have no chance of making the 5% threshold in my region, which is key to my decision making. 4.7% of votes went to the greens in my area last time but got no seats. Another 4.9% for ISP would mean nearly 10% of votes down the drain.
This is an excellent description of AMS:
https://wingsoverscotland.com/ams-for-lazy-people/
But what we’ve learned is that even an unimaginably huge tactical list vote will likely at best produce a net gain of a couple of seats for Yes/left parties, and at worst could cost the SNP some seats and perhaps even their majority.
(AMS, we must remember, was also specifically designed to make winning majorities very difficult, and the Nats currently technically don’t have one at all, holding 64 seats out of 128. On our illustrative calculations here they lose six list seats in just three regions, and we can’t be sure how many constituencies they might win to compensate and regain a majority. The most they can gain is 20, as they already have 53 of 73.)
It’s not this site’s business to tell anyone how to vote. What these numbers strongly suggest, though, is that tactical voting – of any sort and for anyone’s benefit – in an AMS election is a mug’s game. You should vote for the party or parties that you most want to see form the government, rather than trying to second-guess the system. Because if you try, chances are it’ll make a chump out of you.
Sturgeon Fanboys Skier and Rocksie 67 - lose the argument. Sturgeon cannot both be congratulated for ensuring the Salmond case is progressed and at the same time saying she has nothing to do with it. Mutually exclusive.
DeleteSturgeons gov are responsible for an unfair, unlawful and tainted by bias process, therefore Sturgeon is responsible.
You said above that Sturgeon had nothing to do with the process.
Deletehttps://scotgoespop.blogspot.com/2020/10/is-it-nine-in-row-for-yes-ten-in-row.html?showComment=1602782257006#c5985612234651045609
"The new Harrassment process designed to target FORMER MINISTERS specifically EXCLUDED the FM of Scotland and said she should not even be told about any allegations or be included in any decisions taken or be involved in writing any reports etc"
You are all over the place IfS. It's really not possible to understand what it is you are actually claiming. I guess that's why people have not gone to the police with any proof of wrongdoing; there isn't any.
And you seem to be trying to mislead people. The judge ruled that the process in the Salmond case wasn't followed properly, not that the process was wrong. That was Salmond's argument; the investigation was botched, not that pervs shouldn't be investigated.
And if Salmond was criminally framed, why's he not gone to the police? Why's he still saying vote SNP?
If I vote SNP next may, I am following the advice Salmond gave me. It's you telling me to act against Salmond's advice. You and English blog sites.
Skier says- " you said above that Sturgeon had nothing to do with the process " - nope yet another lie from Skier. Skier no shame. Lies are all he has.
DeleteSkier says - "you seem to be trying to mislead people" - nope - that is your game along with lying - I never said that at all. The process has only been applied once - ever - and thstbis to Salmond and gag is how the judge described its application. Who was responsible for the application of the process - the Scogov. Lies and misrepresentation are all you have Skier.
DeleteIn other news, seems Ferrier has not done anything illegal, however irrational and risky her actions were.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-54546058
Margaret Ferrier: Met Police to take no further action against Covid MP
The Metropolitan Police has said it is taking no further action against an MP who travelled by train from London to Glasgow after testing positive for coronavirus.
The force said Margaret Ferrier had not breached laws in England...
Skier -exactly unlike others in the SNP who have not been thrown under the bus.
DeleteShe should be in jail but then the Plods would have to arrest hundreds if not thousands of Tory/Yoon Rule Breakers as well.
DeleteI absolutely get the point, but the law is the law and the police have concluded she didn't break it (by the skin of her teeth).
DeleteActing to the letter of the law works both ways. If it's flexible one way, it's flexible the other. Hence it can't be flexible.