Sunday, February 28, 2021

Yes lead maintained in latest update of Scot Goes Pop Poll of Polls

One reason I started the Poll of Polls on this blog in 2013 was to counter hysterical reporting of individual polls that were better than usual for No, and to put them in their correct wider context.  Today would therefore seem to be an excellent moment for an update.  Just as a reminder, the Poll of Polls consists of an average of the most recent poll from each firm.  In this case that means an average of five polls - one from Survation, one from Ipsos-Mori, one from Savanta ComRes, one from Panelbase, and one from YouGov.  I've removed JL Partners from the sample, because their sole poll (which was exceptionally good for Yes) was six long months ago.


Should Scotland be an independent country?

Yes 51.6% 
No 48.4%

That gives a much more meaningful sense of the state of play than a single poll from a firm that in recent times has been on the No-friendly end of the spectrum. 

Nevertheless, the Yes lead has undoubtedly contracted somewhat.  There are times when setbacks can prove to be blessings in disguise - for instance, the 2004 European election turned out to be a good election for the SNP to lose, because it shocked the party into a realisation that John Swinney's leadership wasn't working out, and led to a change at the top that paved the way for the Holyrood win in 2007.  Hopefully the disappointment of a 50/50 poll will lead, not to a change of leader, but to an urgent reordering of priorities and to a greater focus on what is actually important.

Voters quite rightly want and expect the SNP to prioritise the pandemic over independence.  They do not want or expect the SNP to be obsessing, especially at a time like this, over "transphobia", "misgendering" or "deadnaming".  That is a fixation shared by only a tiny minority of the public, and to the extent that people know what's been going on, they must be utterly bewildered by it.  So from now on, the pandemic, independence, and reversing the harm of Brexit must come before identity politics.  I'm not remotely impressed by the suggestion from some quarters that the SNP must take a hardline pro-self-ID stance or risk losing the enthusiasm of young people.  The idea that this is the number one priority for young voters is very much a social media 'bubble' illusion - in reality young people have a broad range of political passions, not least poverty, the climate emergency, and independence itself.

When harm has been done, the most important thing is to do no more harm.  So no more divisive frontbench purges on the eve of a crucial election.  No using the new definition of 'transphobia' to suspend or expel good people from the party.  No more illegitimate uses of coronavirus briefings to try to tarnish the reputation of a former First Minister and SNP leader.  Unfortunately we'll have to wait patiently for the ongoing inquiries to play out to their conclusion, but when they do conclude, the necessary corrective actions should be taken immediately so we can all wipe the slate clean and get on with winning an election that is make or break for this country's hopes of an independent future.  That will mean the departure, at a minimum, of Leslie Evans and Peter Murrell.  No more sticking of heads in sand and pretending that they somehow acted properly.  Mr Murrell's defence for having tried to pressurise the police, ie. that it should be taken as a sign of how "upset" he was, is essentially the Cole-Hamilton defence of "look what you made me do", and cannot be taken seriously by anyone.

As for Alex Salmond himself, I suspect the plaudits he won for his evidence to the committee on Friday may embolden him to seriously consider some kind of involvement in the election.  That's just speculation, but I think it might.  I know people keep saying that any new party would be timed out by the Electoral Commission, but there are other options open to him - he could join forces with a party that is already registered, or he could stand as an independent in the north-east and endorse independent candidates in the other seven regions.  It might be no bad thing if he does stand, because it will give a constructive focus for the energies of people who are disillusioned with the SNP leadership.  We need all Yes supporters to spend the next two months enthusiastically campaigning and voting for their favourite pro-indy party - not spreading weariness and cynicism and urging abstention.  One thing we can be sure of from past history is that any Salmond-led party will be relentlessly positive and will have a laser-like focus on maximising the number of pro-indy seats.


  1. Anyone with sufficient knowledge & understanding will not just look at one poll in isolation, so I think your poll of polls looks about right as a snapshot of what the country thinks.

  2. Point of information James. Up to now we all seem to accept the Greens as a pro-indy party, and I personally for the first time was thinking of voting Green on the Lothians list.
    The first two candidates Alison Johnstone and Lorna Slater are of a high standard IMO but the third is Kate Neven who apparently backs federalism.
    Sorry, but after spending a lifetime fighting for independence the Greens have blown it for me.
    Unless there's a well known AFI candidate in Lothian I'll be SNP/SNP for me in May.
    Be warned - do your homework on list candidates and don't vote Unionist by mistake.
    James, would you consider investigating some of the Greens on the other lists.
    Election opponents of Indy by default in a tight election could be disastrous
    Although Patrick Harvie leads the Holyrood Greens, they're not an easily controlled ot whipped force.
    Witness Andy Wightman's exit.

    1. I wouldn't particularly worry about someone who is number 3 on the list, because she won't be elected anyway. But there is a more general issue with independence supporters voting 'strategically' for a party that is pro-indy but doesn't regard indy as its number one objective, and that has a unionist minority in its ranks. It's not that long ago that the Greens had an anti-indy co-leader (Robin Harper).

  3. "Mr Murrell's defence for having tried to pressurise the police"

    Murrell's message can be read as over zealous. However, Strathclyde uni got serious rapped for not being zealous in the Kevin O'Gorman case. Also, if loads of women at my work had made allegations about sexual assault from a colleague, I'd be pretty keen that the police not twiddle their thumbs.

    Did he try to pressure the police? Have we some letter / emails to that effect? And simply phoning them up to find out what was going on is e.g. quite different to clearly using influcence to pressure the police into wrongdoing. It is that which would be bloody serious if so. Yet all we have a whatsapp message that can be ready different ways and this:

    Alex Salmond: Crown Office told MP there was 'no evidence' Murrell pressured police

    In July of last year because rumours had been current in the SNP for some time about such messages, Kenny MacAskill wrote to the Crown Office, and I have a copy of the letter which I will give to the committee, asking if there was any evidence of pressurising the police by Mr Murrell and he got a reply saying there was no such evidence.

    1. And of course Murrell is powerless to put pressure on anyone in the police. He's just a man on the street. He has no power over anyone in Police Scotland or the Crown office. The most he could do would be the same as any friend / colleague of a victim could do.

    2. Did he try to pressure the police? Have we some letter / emails to that effect? And simply phoning them up to find out what was going on is e.g. quite different to clearly using influcence to pressure the police into wrongdoing. It is that which would be bloody serious if so. Yet all we have a whatsapp message that can be ready different ways and this:

      I think Salmond's point there isn't that there was no evidence that Murrell pressured the police, but that the Crown Office were claiming that wasn't the case despite the existence of the text messages which suggest he attempted to do so: i.e. the Crown Office were in on the cover-up.

    3. Murrell asked Ruddick to get folks to pressurise the police. Bloody obvious even to the most dim witted who these folks were. The people they encouraged to become alphabet women that's who.

    4. "The text messages don't suggest he attempted to or succeeded in pressuring the police."

      And is it wrong to put pressure on the police to investigate sex offences such as attempted rape, particularly when the accused is a member of your organization, and maybe has abused some of your workers?

      At the time, for all everyone knew, Salmond might well have been a sex pest. It is only in the court case we found out he wasn't. I hoped he wasn't and stood by innocent until proven guilty but I couldn't know.

      We are looking at the text messages with information murrell didn't have then. He instead faced 9+ women making a range of allegations, some very serious, against a well-known party member under his CEO watch.

      Would people have preferred him putting pressure on the police to ease off Salmond and try to keep the allegations hush-hush? I'm sure if Salmond was guilty, the media would be all over murrell for not doing enough to pressure the police at the time.

      Seems to me Salmond is annoyed at Murrell's over zealousness, I guess because the two don't see eye to eye on political matters?

      Anyway, Salmond is saying there is no evidence Murrell pressured the police and so do the CPS. The text messages provide no evidence any pressure was applied. Even if Murrell was on the telephone encouraging the police, on behalf of the SNP, to get to the bottom of the serious allegations, I can't see something overly wrong here. Victims, their family, friends and colleagues do this all the time. Sometimes they go to the papers to apply pressure on the police. Is that wrong?

      We really need Sturgeon telling the police to manufacture evidence, force a confession out of Salmond or something for some sort of financial / career reward. Otherwise, this is all just personal gripes.

      If Murrell was over zealous because he didn't like Salmond, that's pretty unbecoming. It's not some government toppling conspiracy at every level.

      I am yet to see any evidence of any conspiracy, which is why even Salmond didn't call it that in his submission; just he believed 3 individuals overstepped the bounds into maliciousness.

    5. SS

      Should the police even need any encouragement to investigate allegations of attempted rape? I think the police would say that they take all such allegations seriously (although victims may beg to differ, social class, occupation, race and place of attack all seem to skew things)

      Two separate middle class, senior civil servants alleging a workplace attack by the same individual were always going to get priority treatment. That doesn't rule out that there may be collusion and malice in such allegations but such claims tend to trump less immediately newsworthy allegations. In short any query regarding police investigations if it occurred was pushing at an open door.

      I'm not sure wanting police action is even considered a bad thing.

    6. I am going to repeat this for the dim witted. Neither Murrell or Ruddick were going to pressurise the police directly Murrell told Ruddick to get folks - meaning the accusers(alphabet women ) to pressurise them.

      Also Smearers post above are just lies like the Britnats do.

    7. Also for the dim witted so how did Murrell and Ruddick know who these people/ accusers /alphabet women were/ are. Because he and Ruddiick rounded them all up to get Salmond. As Anne Harvey stated a witch hunt.

      Yet Murrell lied at the Committee and said he had no knowledge of any complaints against Salmond. Bloody liar Murrell actively got the group together.

      Ruddick has never been before the Committee or to my knowledge ever been asked to account for her actions in writing.

      They are guilty of shocking behaviour - trying to send Salmond to prison on false charges. Yet both are still picking up their salaries from the SNP. What the hell us wrong with SNP members.

    8. Anyway, Salmond is saying there is no evidence Murrell pressured the police and so do the CPS.

      Is he? Where?

    9. Keaton - Smearer Skier is just a blatant liar. What is his motivation? Does he really think that trying to cover up this level of wrong doing will help the cause of independence.

  4. James would it be possible ( if somewhat tedious ) and can it be done to put together a max the Yes guide for voting in Scotland, list and constituency. Ie it doesn't follow that SNP 1st / any other Indy list is uniform across the country

  5. I think Mr Murrell should go, (should have gone when NS became FM), but not for the reason you give. We need to take cognisance of the issue of "Me Too", that many women have been abused by powerful men, whether criminally, or simply through bad behaviour. So when the Police & subsequently the Crown were considering where to go for evidence and what to do with it they were walking a tight-rope of, on the one hand, not doing enough to uncover possible criminality and on the other being over-zealous. The one would have the accused of letting a powerful ex-politician off the hook, cronyism etc, and the other is what we have now got with lots of frothing at the mouth.

    AS may have given a good performance, but he still has not provided irrefutable proof of a conspiracy, and I seriously doubt it exists.

    Now we have Jim Sillars accusing NS of breaking the Code with her remarks the other day during a Covid briefing. It may have been unwise to reply, but equally unwise not to. After all, the claim by Salmond that she had "lied" and broken the Code was all over the press for weeks. Is she just supposed to ignore these accusation.

    If there is a "conspiracy" it could be one that's determined to bring Nicola Sturgeon down.

    It seems like personal vendettas, egos and inflated opinions of certain people's estimations of their indispensability, egged on by some of their supporters, are more important than actually getting independence and freeing ourselves from a far-right, English Nationalist regime headed by Liesalot that is determined to emasculate devolution and reduce Holyrood to little more than a Community Council.

    1. There is definitely a concerted unionist party and media effort to bring down Sturgeon and Salmond. She after all is his legacy; if she falls so does he. Her legacy is his.

      As for the me too thing; if Salmond was in jail now having been found guilty of attempted rape and other assorted sexual assaults, Murrell surely would be hailed a hero for having apparently put pressure on the police when they were twiddling their fingers?

      While we now know Salmond had not acted criminally, we did not know that until his trial and neither did Murrell.

      We have to look at what went on in that light. It's certainly what I'm doing and I'm not on any side.

      Leslie Evans should go; malicious or not she totally screwed up. The buck stops with her on the botched UK civil service investigation.

      I await the committees findings myself; preferring that to trial by English right-wing blog.

    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    3. Smearer Skier says - "I'm not on any side" lying again Smearer. You are standing in the gutter with Sturgeon. Get your gators on.

      You used to say I'll wait till I hear from Salmond directly. Now you have you lie and misrepresent what he said just like the Britnats.

    4. All I've been doing is posting articles from the national, extracts from Salmond's submission and asking some questions.

      You very much seem to have a side so people can't rely on your judgement as it seems biased. I mean don't you have a single question about Salmond's story? None? Don't you wonder why his team didn't appeal to have this mysterious 'key evidence' allowed in court?

      Your behaviour seems quite cult like and unquestioning.

    5. And I totally agree with Salmond that Leslie Evan should resign while it is up to James Hamilton to decide whether Sturgeon has acted in accordance with the ministerial code.

      Are you against Salmond or with him on this?

    6. And I totally agree with Salmond that Leslie Evan should resign while it is up to James Hamilton to decide whether Sturgeon has acted in accordance with the ministerial code.

      He's very clear that she did break the code in his view: "I have no doubt Nicola has broken the ministerial code, but it's not for me to decide what the consequences should be."

    7. Phase 4 of the Inquiry is The Ministerial Code

      The Inquiry are looking at the Ministerial code as well as James Hamilton's investigation specifically into Sturgeon self referral. Thus the reason Salmond sent his seperate submission on the Ministerial code to both Hamilton and the Inquiry.

      Smearer Skier was using the Britnat media tactic of only telling half truths. Is he a Britnat - he lies like them.

  6. The trouble is James bampots like Smearer Skier have already branded him a traitor if he stands for another party.

    THE PARTY comes first is this type of person - smacks of the Soviet Union and the Communist party in China.

    1. Salmond is free to stand for whoever he likes, however if he stands against the SNP and his allies in it, he's obviously not going to retain any sort of SNP hero status. How could he; he'd be anti-SNP?

    2. Aye Smearer you make a good communist party member. Orwell warned about people like you.

    3. It would help the discussion if posters could try to be polite.

      As for comments about Sovite Union, Communist Party, Banana Republic, One-Party-State, Kim Jong etc these sort of slanders current in the media are beneath contempt.

      Two other points: Tickell's article today is worth reading, esp. his point about why did AS's team not challenge the ruling about inadmissible evidence.

      And secondly, Peter Osborne's item about the daily lying and breaking of the ministerial code and all the other routine examples of corruption in Westminster never seem to make it into the English press and no one demands resignations.

    4. Dornaidh

      1. It would help the discussion if people didn't deliberately lie.

      2. Salmond was in front of the Committee for 6 hours perhaps someone should have asked him. Perhaps you should write to Salmonds lawyers.

      3. Dornaidh says - So Westminster is corrupt and it doesn't make any difference that the Scotgov is corrupt. So let's just do the same as Westminster and ignore it is what you are saying. So we just accept a corrupt Scotgov because Westminster is more corrupt. What level of corruptness is acceptable to you?

      Get your wellies on Dornaidh.

    5. I have only ever heard unionists use language like 'communists, soviet union, china' etc in reference to the SNP.

    6. Smearer Skier (liar since 2014) - you really really cannot read well can you.

      I said you dummy not the SNP

      # Skier lying for Sturgeon.

  7. We are watching trumpian levels of attack on Scottish democracy now, led from the south of England by right-wing bloggers and the 'British Trump' ((c) Joe Biden) himself.

    ...It was in fact Jack McConnell (above) who in his appointment of Elish Angiolini started to move away from the political link, and her retention in the first SNP Administration by Alex Salmond confirmed that policy for Scotland.

    The situation is far more political south of the border of course. For example the much criticised Suella Braverman, the Attorney General (the equivalent UK Government post to the Lord Advocate) is currently the sitting Tory MP for Fareham whilst her predecessor Geoffrey Cox (the Tory MP for Torridge and West Devon) was so much a party politician that he was chosen to laud Brexit and Teresa May from the platform of the 2018 Tory Party Conference.

    In his answers in the Scottish Parliament on Wednesday James Wolffe reminded his former trainee, the Tory MSP Donald Cameron, that the Lord Advocate’s job is to “uphold the rule of law and the administration of justice in Scotland” and added that “it is a safeguard for the rule of law that there are senior lawyers in the Government appointed on a non-party basis (that is the Lord Advocate and Solictor General) whose fundamental responsibility it is to protect the integrity of the administration of justice in Scotland”.

    That is what James Wolffe and all his modern predecessors have done and it is deeply destructive to the well being of our whole society if their impeccable work is assailed and undermined for party political reasons without a scintilla of evidence.

    1. £20 million and rising for malicious prosecutions is more than a "scintilla of evidence"

      # cover up.

    2. Attacking the team who will defend Scotland's indyref from legal challenge by England. What a surprise.

    3. Smearer Skier (liar since 2014) defending the waste of public funds on malicious prosecutions. What a surprise.


  8. It is all in preparation for trying to overturn the coming democratic election, claiming it corrupted / not representative with Scotland's institutions needing to be put back under direct rule. We shall witness unionists attempting to 'storm of the capitol' in Edinburgh in some form. You'll see the usual suspects on here cheer them on. Wait and see.

    1. To add... Anyway, I'd not want to be unionists challenging iref2 in the court of session after calling the Scots judiciary the 'corrupt clown office'.

    2. Smearer Skier (liar since 2014) needs help.

      # pathological liar is Skier.

    3. It will be James Wolfe, Alison Di Rollo and their legal team who will advise ministers on the iref2 bill to ensure its compatibility with Scots law. They will then defend it from attack should London try to challenge it in the Scots courts.

      And so they are under full frontal assault by unionists.

      Was Alison Di Rollo in on the plot out of interest?

    4. Hey stupid Smearer make up your mind. You said there wasn't a plot.

  9. It is about time some of you took James's advice, namely, "No more sticking of heads in sand ....."

    That doesn't apply to Smearer he is actively engaged in lying for Sturgeon.

    1. No, I back Salmond. He's never said there was a 'conspiracy', just some malicious individuals in his opinion. I agree with him that Evans should resign for the botched UK civil service investigation and also 100% support his view that it's up to James Hamilton to decide on Sturgeon and the ministerial code.

    2. You Smear Salmond. If you agreed with Salmond you wouldn't say "botched "as Salmond went out his way on multiple occasions to say it was unlawful, unfair and tainted by apparent bias NOT botched.

      "Just some malicious individuals" says Smearer.

      Aye the Chief Exec of the SNP, the Chief Operating Officer of the SNP, the Compliance Manager of the SNP, the First Ministers Chief of Staff, the First Ministers Permanent Secretary.

      Smearer Skier you are a liar and a charlatan.

      # Lying and smearing for Sturgeon

    3. The stalker keeps on trolling. You are getting yourself into a situation that you are not equipped to deal with. As the week will unfold your goal will start disappearing. No amount of personal attacks from you or your friends from the fishwife of Bath on this site will alter the situation. It is not going your way and you know it. Have a good week in the circumstances.

    4. Unknown that post is gibberish. I'm guessing you are Grizebard but more likely Terence. Hopefully for your sake you are pished.

      " Not going my way." didn't realise I was in a competition.

  10. I remember my ex neighbour Jim "the egg man " Murphy espousing on how great new labour were and how great Tony was. I told him he was a great politician, a great actor and a great fraud. Funny enough he didn't agree.

    I spotted a fraud back then and I spy another fraud now. Someone else who is a great politician and a great actor and a great fraud.

    Needless to say he never asked me how I thought he would get on as Labour Leader in Scotland. The egg man was guilty of switching what he claimed was his home address from Clarkston to London to get better expenses. His family never moved from Clarkston.

    If the SNP accept the type of behaviour their officials have been up then they truly have morphed in to Britnat Labour in Scotland.

    1. Hey unknown if you are the same unknown who keeps trolling me then that is quite good for someone who hasn't the wit to think up a moniker. Other than that zero points for a zero contribution.

  11. To the best of my knowledge the revised grievance process is OK and is still in place. The handling of the grievance against Salmond was illegal because Mckinnon (who never seems to get a mention these days) was overseeing the grievance despite having had dealings with the two complainants in preparing for the grievance, in breach of the grievance process rules on Chinese walls. If because of the complainants grades there was no one higher ranking other than Mckinnon and Evans to oversee the grievance then they should have borrowed someone from the Scottish Office or DWP or similar. The failure to handle the grievance according to the grievance process rules made it illegal not because the process itself is illegal. Both Evans and Mckinnon should take responsibility for the way they handled a straight forward grievance.

    Mckinnon's excuse that she wasn't fully up to speed with new process might cut ice but for the fact that I'm pretty certain the para on separation of duties was in the old process too. Certainly my old department had such a rule.

    While Vole-Hamilton might well want to use the inquiry to retry Salmond he is onto plums. They are supposed to be investigating why the handling failed to remain legally within the bounds of the grievance process. That should be an achievable goal despite all the party politicking amplified a hundred fold with a full on election campaign kicking off in about 6 weeks.

  12. HandandShrimp - the best of your knowledge ain't very good. Best try and improve your knowledge before posting in error. Best not to follow what the Britnat media tell you in general but more so if you support independence.

    The process was judged unlawful not illegal and it was unlawful because the process was unlawful. Not because it was wrongly applied.

    The process was judged unfair because it was unfair. Not because it was wrongly applied.

    The process was judged tainted by apparent bias because McKinnon had prior contact. If the Judge had the papers which the Scotgov hid at the time showing Evans the Perm Secretary and decision maker had also been in touch with the accusers then I am pretty sure the word apparent would have been removed in the judgement.

    Try reading the papers in the Inquiry website. Also Salmond also made it clear in his testimony. The process was unlawful. It still is.

    The process is currently under review by an independent lawyer. It was a codged together process to get Salmond. It was never fit for any other purpose other than to get Salmond and even then it failed. Although it still smears Salmond in the minds of the uninformed.

    So the process you call grievance ( you are the first person to call it grievance) is not ok and not in use. If they put it in to use against anyone they would be immediately sued and lose even more public funds. Evans tries to kid on it is in use by saying it is still on the books.

    McKinnons excuse cuts no ice at all because she was in touch with the accusers before the new process was even in place. So she could hardly be up to speed with a new process that didn't exist.

    Your comment " They are supposed to be investigating why the handling failed to remain legally within the bounds of the grievance process. " - every part of that sentence is just plain wrong. The remit is on the Inquiry website. It doesn't say what you posted. I hope you are just misinformed and not a deliberate liar like Smearer Skier.

    HandandShrimp your post highlights how so many people have a very poor understanding of this matter. This has been created by the Britnat media and by people like Smearer Skier posting Britnat lies.

  13. Reflecting on James’ experience of chatting with his mum takes me to Friday evening when my lady wife returned from work snd announced ‘that man will break Scotland’ ‘his anger is too great’
    My missus cannot abide AS and as others have suggested of voters, I think her 2014 vote will have been in large part a judgement placed by her on AS himself.
    Dunno what that all means, but clearly individual reaction to this current ‘situation’ is a messy and unpredictable thing. And if your view on whether Scotland should be independent or not is coloured by or effected by stuff like this, then clearly you are not ready for independence’ yet’.
    That’s why it would all be much simpler for lots of people here if England just decided to go it alone, or if someone, anyone, could just ‘decide’ that we will be independent.

  14. Since it would appear that a resident from the old folks home called going bonkers with WGD is determined to troll me I thought I would peer into the mad house to see what they are saying.

    They have truly lost the plot. Quoting Dani Garavelli from the SCOTSMAN. The Queen of Britnat journalists who worked with some of the alphabet women to write her previous character assassination of Salmond. It even had a higher lie per line than Smearer Skier usually has. And that is a high benchmark.

    None of them seem to have watched what Salmond said or read his submissions but they know exactly what is going on.

    1. Scotsman is at least based in Scotland. You are directing us to the English Times below.

  15. The Sunday Times has a copy of the Geoff Aberdein submission to the Inquiry and have reported on its contents. This is the submission that the Inquiry have kept hidden because the Britnats in the Crown Office said it had to remain under lock and key for legal reasons. Let's see if the Crown Office prosecute the Sunday Times. If not then it is obvious the Crown Office were hiding it to help Sturgeon.

    This would be a Crown Office not only undertaking malicious prosecutions but interfering in a Scottish Parliamentary Inquiry to protect the current Scottish Government and its First Minister.

    1. Sunday times is a 'britnat' paper from England.

      So much for you telling us not to trust the britnat media.

  16. The Inquiry have written to the Crown Office on Friday 26/2 using their legal powers to tell them to provide the documents they have been holding on to "by 12 noon on 2 March 2021".

    "This notice seeks the following documents relevant to the Committee's remit as described above:

    All documents the COPFS possesses that represent correspondence involving the Chief of Staff to the First Minister - Liz Lloyd, Peter Murrell, Ian Mc Cann and Sue Ruddick respectively, for the period November 2017 to January 2019."

  17. I agree to a degree with you, James, regarding the self-id obsession by some in the SNP and that they have to stop, but you do have a blind spot when it comes to AS. He's being used at the moment by the unionists press and politicians and he doesn't care about it as his ego seems to be more important to him than independence (or anything else for that matter). TBH he has to stop as well. He's too press-savvy to not know what's he doing at the moment. He can either retire or stand at the elections as an independent or for his party or for someone else or whatever, but he has to let SNP be. As it looks now from where I'm standing, it won't be a couple of self-id nerds who are going to screw up independence, but him.

    1. I don't think James has a blind spot when it comes to AS at all. I think you are oozing Sturgeon sycophancy myself. Salmond had his day in Court but he is still it seems on trial and Sturgeon is using her office to continue to try him. Well she used a Covid 19 briefing to launch a hysterical almost slanderous attack on the Jury for one.

      Sturgeon abused her power in attacking the Jury. Sturgeon has thus demonstrated that she is unfit to be FM any longer.

      Oh and it seems to me that the Brit Nat Press and Media has Sturgeons back right now or she would have gone already.

      It is Sturgeon and her coven that is screwing up Scots Indy. They have done nothing at all to promote Indy in the last 6 or so years.

    2. Erm, in the covid briefing she reiterated the jury's findings; that Salmond isn't a criminal. That was the court's conclusions.

      Having extra-marital sexual relations with aides on the job isn't illegal. being a bit too touchy feely likewise. The jury agreed.

      It's ridiculous for people to hero-worship the man the way some are doing. He's only human and he/his defense team openly admitted that the 'made mistakes' and 'could have been a better man'.

      It's just silly to pretend he's pure as the driven snow. He broke no laws but as a nat FM, IMO he should have known better than to give UK civil servants any opportunity for such honey pot gold dust. MI5 would not have been doing their job if they didn't try to catch him with his pants down.

      At least he was honest enough not to say 'I did not have sexual relations with that woman!'. We all know where that got Clinton.

      Apparent Salmond supporters are demanding a detailed Salmond history be put on the SNP website so as people know 'the truth'. Should that include the bute house sex stories? It's the truth after all.

      I'm actually pleased at how tolerant Scotland is about people's sex lives being their own business, but Salmond lived a wee bit too dangerously as FM in his own words. Even if there were no harassment allegations, our own Monica Mclewinski would have given the press a decent field day anyway.

      And Sturgeon is Salmond's legacy. I trusted Salmond on Sturgeon. The whole party and voters did. If she's a disaster, I hold him responsible and I won't put my trust in his advice again.

      That's his problem right now. He trained Sturgeon up and asked us to trust her as part of his leadership and legacy. He can't now turn around and tell us not to trust her but still trust him when he f'n chose her. If he made a huge mistake, he needs to say 'Scots I am so sorry. Forgive me. I never saw this coming. I misjudged Sturgeon and I understand if you can no longer trust me. That would be the honorable thing.

      He cannae adise Scots on what's best for the nation after saying his previous key advice was a grand fuck up of epic proportions that may have cost us indy in the short term.

      I personally think he judged pretty well with Sturgeon. Like Salmond, I think it's Hamilton (and independent expert observer from Ireland appointed under Salmond) to decide on her conduct.

      Evans should go. I'm waiting for the committee on Murrell etc as it's not biased, being majority non-SNP.

    3. # lying for Sturgeon.

      # covering up for Sturgeon

    4. # IFS, trolling for the British State.

    5. Martin, you are wrong Sturgeon is screwing up both the SNP and Scottish independence. That is obvious except for those who refuse to look because they have their head in the sand. Did you want Salmond to lie like most of the others who have been in front of the Inquiry. Like Murrell or Evans.

      Martin where you are standing is in the gutter with Sturgeon. Wellies for Martin frank.

    6. Unknown it is good that you still have the mental capacity to find your way to SGP from the bonkers old folks home called WGD.

      I post the facts you troll in ignorance.

      # raving looneys are us at WGD.

    7. Hello IoS
      You are reminding me more and more of teenage and young adult behaviour between siblings at the dinner table - smart enough and sharp enough to keep needling but so self centred that they do not see when to stop. The difference seems that you have a plan (is it your own plan?) that means you will not stop, but just keep needling. That’s a plan for disruption, not progress.

    8. Donald - I guess you are referring to me Independence For Scotland not IoS.

      The clue is in the moniker. I'll stop when there is no longer a corrupt government in Scotland. It's bad enough having a corrupt government in Westminster I am not accepting a corrupt government in Holyrood. If you can accept this then that is for you to live with. Is your vision of independence a corrupt Scottish government rather than a corrupt Westminster government. It ain't mine.

      What disruption am I causing - is it to people who are living in a fantasy that Sturgeon will deliver independence.

      I don't have a plan and your insinuation is just pathetic. I suggest you heed James Kellys advice and get your head out the sand.

      Challenge for Donald - Out of all the independence bloggers name one who doesn't know what has been going on. What percentage of the bloggers think nothing has been going on?

    9. If Sturgeon is the disaster some claim, then Salmond has failed in his leadership.

      30 years 'like family' and 10 at the helm together. His Padawan.

      Scots trusted him to hand over the reigns to someone who would deliver indy. She was prepared for decades, elevated to second in comment, and finally anointed. If he was wrong, he's in no position to advise us now on leadership.

      I suspect he still has faith despite their disagreements, hence not calling for her to resign.

      But if she is forced out for acting improperly, then I won't be taking Salmond's advice on anything again. I doubt many Scots will. Once bitten, twice shy as they say.

    10. @IfS ( I blame apple for iOS)
      The government at Holyrood ‘is’ Westminster’s government. It’s not really ours, no matter who we elect to it.
      I can’t comment on any bloggers and what they do or do not know. I’m just a guy making a living in my shed instead of my previous office.
      I’d really like complaints snd criticisms of our current politicians to be accompanied by a reasonably set out and achievable path for change that will take us to independence. I don’t see much of that. Rumour seems to have it that we will all be blown out of the water by shock at some imminent change or happening; hey ho.

  18. Of course Swinney was also endorsed by Salmond in terms of leadership; the two of them were as close as Sturgeon and Salmond. Then there's e.g. Fergus Ewing who Salmond trusted to be in his cabinet, and the list goes on...

    If all these SNP Salmond told us to trust as cabinet / leaders of Scotland are actually 'corrupt traitors', then that's the last time I'm ever listening to the man on anything.

    1. Smearer Skier (liar since 2014) I very much doubt that Salmond cares what a liar and Smearer like you thinks about anything. Get back to bashing rocks.

  19. Turns out No wasn't ahead in that poll. 50/50 in terms of support.

    No only get a teeny legs up using survation's own in-hoose guestimate approach of who might turn out to vote.

    Normal demographic weighting:
    42.36% Y
    42.36% N

    Survation LTV weighting:
    43.53% Y
    43.76% N

    Thats just a single vote swing away from 50/50.

    So all the polls being 50 or above is correct.

  20. I always knew that they talked a lot of shit on WGD but now Mr Kavanagh literally has them talking shit. Since we are on that theme the wee ginger dug is pissing all over you Grizebard, Callachan and all the rest of you smearing Salmond.

    1. "I am, and I know I’m not alone in this, thoroughly scunnered with the entire Salmond-Sturgeon saga. I’m sick to the back teeth of those who are hell bent on adding fuel to the bonfire of the dispute without giving a moment’s consideration of the effects of their angry self-righteousness on Scotland’s prospects for independence"

      Thanks for the heads up. I couldn't agree more. I imagine Scots voters are sick of unionists doing this too.

      I've certainly had enough of all those unionists and English right-wing bloggers attacking all those hard working SNP members and voters, none of which have ever Salmond any wrong.

      Salmond pointed his fingers at 3 SNP folks he thinks are bad eggs. That's it. To blame the rest is pure Brit loyalist.

    2. Smearer Skier (liar since 2014) - here's another heads up for you - about 10 months ago Mr Kavanagh wanted Sturgeon to go quietly because he knew the shit storm that was on its way which Sturgeon was responsible for.

      Now if you actually read his posts, and reading is an obvious problem for you, you would see he never actually ever says Sturgeon is innocent of any wrongdoing. He is very careful with his words.

      You lie again Skier - Salmond pointed the finger at others who he could not name for legal reasons. He says that in his statement and I have posted that before but you continue to lie. Smearer you are a blatant liar.

      So I am scunnered by Smearers and liars and hypocrites.

    3. Erm, what does it matter what Kavanagh thinks? His view is as important as mine or Salmond's. Nobody in Scotland is special so that their view trumps other people's.

      Even Salmond says it is for Hamilton to judge Sturgeon and nobody else. It's you going against Salmond by attacking Sturgeon; I agree with Salmond about who's the judge here.

      The only people Salmond can't name for legal reasons are the complainers, 7+/9 of which are civil servants, 1 an SNP employee and 1 a politician (potentially former)

      If this matters to people, they can do a wee bit of educated guess work and can be up to 100% sure they are not voting for any of these.

      I mean if it's a man, they can be bloody positive it's not one of the complainers. If it someone that you know has never been a civil servant at Holyrood, another very safe bet. If it's someone that's never worked closely with Salmond, e.g. in a party role, again it's very, very unlikely they're one of the complainers.

      With a wee bit of thought, the odds of you voting for a complainer can be reduced to almost zero if it matters to you This isn't rocket science.

  21. Much as I enjoy the tirade, it's comforting that 'independence' or 'skier' aren't in charge of anything in the real world, or their mental faculties. They sound like men that have early dementia with an internet connection.

    1. Mouse - Have some cheese and put a cork in it. Can't stand rodents squeaking away.

    2. Of course not. I've already helped secure another couple of yes voters this week at work (recently got citizenship but really wanted EU passports). It's that which gets us slowly there. This is just for fun during lockdoon.

    3. Smearer Skier (liar since 2014) - oh and I guess you joined the Avengers and saved the world over the weekend as well.

      # Smearer pathological liar.