I'd been thinking over the last few days that we were strangely light on polls given how dramatic the recent events have been, but today has made up for that - we already have our second poll of the day, this time from Opinium.
Should Scotland be an independent country? (Opinium / Sky News)
Yes 51% (-)
No 49% (-)
So no change from the last Opinium poll - but across all firms, this is the seventh poll in a row to show Yes on 50% or higher, and the sixth out of seven to show an outright Yes lead of some description. It's arguably no longer really accurate to say that "the polls are broadly showing it's 50-50". There's a case to be made that the general picture is now of a Yes lead, albeit a very slim one.
Scottish Parliament constituency vote:
SNP 53% (+7)
Conservatives 21% (-3)
Labour 18% (-2)
Liberal Democrats 6% (-)
Scottish Parliament regional list vote:
SNP 44% (+2)
Conservatives 22% (-)
Labour 17% (-2)
Greens 7% (-)
Liberal Democrats 5% (-)
Alba 2% (+2)
There have now been five polls which offered Alba as an option, and that makes it possible to offer a slightly more confident estimate of the party's support as it seeks to establish itself. The median Alba vote share is 3%, and the mean average is 3.4%. As mentioned in the previous post, that's the sort of level of support at which the Greens and the SSP won one seat apiece in the 1999 election. So if things stay the same, we're falling between two stools - Alba aren't doing quite well enough to win a significant number of seats or to even be sure of winning any seats at all, but they are doing well enough that it would be ludicrous to pretend that they aren't in serious contention to win seats (even though a great many people are attempting precisely that pretence).
As I've said a few times now, if people are concerned about Alba votes being wasted and thus indirectly helping the unionist side, one logical way of resolving the problem is to campaign hard and spread the word and do everything we can to make sure that Alba have reached at least 5% by polling day. That option may be a lot more realistic than lecturing the existing Alba supporters about how they have to set aside all their misgivings over GRA reform, or the Hate Crime Bill, or the lack of progress towards an independence referendum, and obediently toddle back to the SNP on the list. It's hard enough for those people to vote SNP even on the constituency ballot, but they're doing that for the specific reason that Alba have recommended it as part of a two-pronged strategy for securing an independence parliament.
The extremely good news from this poll is that the SNP's constituency vote has shot right up, and if by any chance they can maintain that sort of popularity, the question of wasted votes on the list may not even matter. But as we saw in 2016, it's phenomenally hard for any party to maintain 50%+ support in the heat of a campaign - it's like gravity will always pull them back.
* * *
I don't think there is any doubt that Scotland wants independence, it just about how we get the politicians to deliver it.
ReplyDeleteI think this article spells out is the right approach, playing them off against each other.
https://iamscottpolitics.blogspot.com/2021/04/alex-salmond-vs-nicola-sturgeon.html
The article seems to completely ignore the Greens. A party that is actually polling high enough to gain seats. Alba is looking like a wasted vote polling at around the 3% mark. If you want a party to play off against the SNP then Green is the way to go.
DeleteJames, you have the median correct at 3% but the mean average is only 2.75%.
ReplyDeleteIncorrect. You're right that I made an error in the blogpost (which I've now corrected), but it made very little difference - the correct mean average is 3.4%.
Delete2% + 3% + 3% + 3% / 4 = 2.75%
DeleteYou've left out the Panelbase poll. And you've done that deliberately, let's be honest.
Delete2 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 6 / 5 = 3.4
Yes, I did leave it out deliberately. It is a poll conducted using a non standard question. Is it not hypocritical of you to include a non standard poll when it suits your agenda but won't accept a Scotland in Union poll as being accurate?
Deletehttps://scotgoespop.blogspot.com/2018/11/heres-why-scotland-in-union-propaganda.html
It didn't use a non-standard question - as far as I can see it used the same question Panelbase always uses. As we've now established that you arbitrarily left a poll out of your calculation, the mystery is solved and we can all get on with our day.
DeleteStatistically it's not really valid as one of the parties was clearly prompted for in a very different way to the others in the same poll. So it is an apples and oranges comparison. It would have been ok if all parties had leader names next to them, which is what panelbase should have done if they were determined to include Salmond's name.
DeleteYou may be right that the question itself was standard but you must admit that the way in which the options were presented were not standard and were in fact leading.
DeleteWhen was the last time you saw a poll where a small party was taken out of the "other" category and then had (led by 'party leader') added next to it.
Then you look at all of the other polls that did not use a suspect (led by Alex Salmond) after the Alba party and you see that they were 3%, 3%, 3% and 2%. I think it is fair to say the dodgy poll that has twice as high a result should probably not be considered.
"Leading"? It contained explanatory information in brackets after the party's name - on what planet was that "leading"?
DeleteAs I stated, you've made an entirely arbitrary decision to exclude one particular poll result that you dislike. Suit yourself, but that's not a credible approach and I certainly won't be following you down that path.
I don't think the question is leading, it's just the % for Alba isn't comparable to shares for the other parties as Alba were prompted for differently.
DeleteIf it had also said 'SNP (led by Nicola Sturgeon)' that might have caused Alba to lose support back to the SNP as respondents subconsciously weighed up both options more equally. We can't be sure because panelbase have not prompted on a comparable basis.
The 6% maybe shows what Alba could potentially get if enough people start to know about it, but it's statistically not comparable to the other shares nor other polling.
Of course folks can average their own PoPs as they see fit; methodologies are up to the individual. Statically though, in the panelbase poll, Alba were apples and the rest were pears.
Will be interesting to see panelbase maintain that prompt or revise to use the standard approach the others are using.
DeleteGravity affects everything equally though, not just the SNP.
ReplyDeleteFaced with the ballot paper, some of Alba's current '3.5%' may drift back to the SNP.
"Gravity affects everything equally though"
DeleteSo what you're saying is that all parties will lose support over the course of the campaign, and none will gain support? Talk me through how that is mathematically possible. Good luck.
I think Norm is very wrong, for those I know the shift away from SNP on the list is a one way shift already decided well before Alba. They now have a better option than spoiling ballots. It’ll be a cold day in hell before they turn to SNP (or Green) after the pauchling and controversial policies.
DeleteThese are some fierce women who are not afraid to resort to chalk ;o)
It seems a bit late in the day for a campaign to boost Alba's chances of getting a fist full of seats,especially as Alex Salmond's personal vote is rightly or wrongly not as high as some expected.
ReplyDeleteThe Greens are more established, and their policies more established and known about so probably a better bet in some regions for improving the total number of Indy MSPs.
I have Alba on 2.8(-0.2)% average. I can't in good conscience add in that dodgy 'Scotland in union style' panelbase one where Salmond alone has his name added as leader. If all leaders names were added it would have been statistically much more acceptable and have not stood out like a sore thumb the way it does.
ReplyDeleteYour point about it being unrealistic to expect Alba supporters to set aside their misgivings on GRA, the Hate Crime Bill, etc, is very true. But it also works both ways, James. It's no more reasonable to expect those on the other side of the discussion to set aside their misgivings about Alba's approach to these issues. Those people are much more likely to peel off to the Greens than Alba.
ReplyDeleteCertain commentators on social media have spent the last couple of years listening to their own echoes and convincing themselves they're part of a far larger group of indy malcontents than actually appears to be the case. And now they're bewildered that their social media bubbles don't seem to reflect reality, that retweets don't equate to votes.
It's a timely lesson - and it does rather vindicate your position that a non-Salmond led indy party would have been absolutely doomed to failure. You took pelters for that from some quarters at the time, but if a former First Minister with a dedicated core following is struggling to nudge above a few percent, we can only imagine how few votes an internet celebrity from Bath would have accrued.
I think your first two paragraphs are a great summary of the Alba "problem", but I do think Salmond recognises this and that he needs to convince people outside of that bubble as to the legitimacy of the project. He maybe just wasn't expecting so few folk to be convincable.
DeleteI have to say I am slightly surprised by how few seem willing to hold their nose and spend a vote on them, but maybe I've spent too long inside my own social media bubble...
"It's no more reasonable to expect those on the other side of the discussion to set aside their misgivings about Alba's approach to these issues."
DeleteLuckily I'm not asking for any such thing.
Well I'm glad that's the case, James. Others on social media have been insisting for years that there is substantial appetite for an "anti woke" indy party.
DeleteAnd while I do think there is certainly unoccupied space there for such a party to take advantage of, it nevertheless seems that the hunger for anti woke alternatives was substantially less ravenous than some in Twitterland had led us to believe.
That assertion seems to be totally unrelated to the comment you're replying to.
DeleteApologies, only the first sentence of that comment was really directed at you. The rest was expounding on the points myself and Siggah were making.
DeleteI think there is scope for a more socially conservative / Tory indy party. I've said many times that's missing. We have centre to left and left-liberal, but centre-right is missing.
DeleteBut its potential voter pool is not the centre-left liberal SNP/Green voting group, particularly if it persists in calling them 'Woke tranfans' and the like. That's the kind of language that gets right wingers on board and sends centre to left voters running. Hence Wings popularity crashing when his site went more dog whistling than the Mail/Express on GRA.
I don't know, what does social conservatism look like these days? I think the average voter is largely past caring about defending our Christian ideals, or the sanctity of marriage, or gendered familial roles and the number who do care is shrinking every year. Plus conservatism implies some desire to maintain the status quo and I think that reduces the pool of these voters who would support indy quite considerably.
DeleteSo I think you're left with very few, and very niche, issues to be socially conservative about. Hence the cesspit of the "woke" debate, with two very loud but vanishingly small groups of people screaming about issues that, while everyone will express an opinion on them if asked, the vast majority of people simply don't care that much about because they have absolutely no effect on their lives. Certainly not to the extent that they will vote on them.
As a political term, 'woke' is ancient. I presume elderly Scottish blog-n-Twitter bubblists reactionaries have never bothered to take 20 seconds look up the meaning of the term, and they probably don't know that 'anti-woke revulsion' was invented by Donald Trump's PR team.
DeleteAye, I ken the origin of woke. Given it's origins and continued use in the US civil rights movement, to use it pejoratively is, without doubt, up there with 'vermin' and 'picaninnies with watermelon smiles' on the racism/bigotry scale.
DeleteIt's one thing to be concerned about the drafting of well intentioned laws and how these may inadvertently impact existing legislation in a detrimental way, and another to make the mail/express blush when it comes to dog whistling.
At the same time, shouting TERF at everyone who disagrees with you is just as bad.
The gap between the SNP's constituency and list votes was between 5-12% during January & February. During March it was 4-11%. So far in April it's 9-15%.
ReplyDeleteJames does it show how many Alba voters are voting SNP on the constituency vote ? could the increase of projected seats for the SNP be because of the Alba party telling followers to vote for SNP on the constituency vote hence actually increasing the SNP's chance of getting a majority
ReplyDeleteI think that is true, Alba's presence is energising the campaign around independence whereas Nicola wanted it to be about what colour of baby box to offer. This re-energising may well get those SNP supporters who stay home unless excited to vote so I would not be surprised to see SNP constituency vote edge higher. Alba may also be getting people to think about not wasting their list vote but instead of plumping for Alba a lot are potentially selecting the Greens. Either way Alba will have performed a valuable service even if it does not get seats itself
ReplyDeleteCould I once again urge people not to reply directly to obvious trolls/astroturfers, because when I delete comments any replies are automatically deleted.
ReplyDeleteTactical Voting on the List.April 9, 2021 at 9:01 AM
DeleteI think your concept of an obvious troll is very different to most people's, it's generally someone who doesn't always agree with you.
I've been very much busying myself with disagreeing with James lately about Alba / the supermajority strategy and here I am.
The consistently high SNP Figures seem to suggest that most Scots won't be returning to the old Labour/Tory voting patterns.
ReplyDeleteThe Greens IMO are seen as the "Devil you know" for SNP voters who are breaking the habit of both votes SNP.
ALBA need to show they're more than the Alex Salmond party if they're to gain traction with voters in the next four weeks, or they'll be short lived as a serious force.
Their main achievement IMO has been to put independence at the front of the campaign, but they need to get out of Salmond's shadow.
Many, many people vote Green for reasons other than constitutional issues. I would say that that's pretty far down most Greens list of priorities.
DeleteHi Mouse, That may be true of some, but I think for most of us (Greens) independence is seen as an absolutely crucial way of trying to achieve other key priorities.
DeleteRamstam,
DeleteThat completely contradicts everything James has been saying about the "rules" surrounding pop-up parties. The "rule" is that pop-up parties will inevitably fail, unless the only person in Scottish politics with the "clout" to increase a pop-up party's vote to electability joins in. That person is Salmond. If the Alba party "gets out of Salmond's shadow", then they will frizzle to nothing in the sun.
There MAY be people who are voting for Alba because they hate what's happening in the SNP, but I would contend that the vast majority have little or no interest in those issues, and will vote for Alba BECAUSE of Alex Salmond. It is LUDICROUS to talk about Alba "getting out of Salmonds shadow". The ONLY reason why Alba is a viable prospect is Alex Salmond....
People are failing to realise that tonnes of voters haven't properly engaged with the election yet. When they do, when they realise Salmond is back and asking for their regional vote, I think there's an excellent chance a significant number will vote Alba. With a bit of luck we might see Salmond's new outfit up at ten percent or more
ReplyDeleteYou might be right that there are tonnes of voters ready to pop out of the woodwork to vote for Alba, but it's not an issue of people not "realising" it, it's that there's not yet been any convincing evidence that this hidden tranche of voters actually exists, or any clue as to when they might appear...
DeleteIt would be interesting to see some polling on how well recognised the party is, though.
DeleteI can't remember at what point before the 2011 election polls were suggesting Scotland's next fm would be the hapless Iain Grey. But I think those polls reflected an electorate that just hadn't properly considered the election. I suspect there'll be a "quickening" in the last couple of weeks before the vote. I could be totally wrong but I'm hopeful.
DeleteAlba is a very late entry (too late IMO to make big inroads), so it's a bit hard to judge.
DeleteFrom my own data going back to pre-2007, you see the trends starting to develop from the new year. For 2011, Labour peaked in January (one poll had them on 49%) and just fell steadily from there while the SNP gained ever more ground. From the low 30s in January, SNP got their first mid 40's (46%) in early April. The big straw in the wind for the landslide that was coming. It wasn't last minute anyway, but built steadily over 5 months.
2016 showed the same; SNP >50% highs eased off and steadily settled down to final results within MoE by later April (polling from the 20th-> got it within 2%). Again, it was a slow burn to election day, not rapid swings.
So voters do seem to be increasingly engaged at a stead pace from 5 months out; I guess the new year = new election year starts bringing things to their attention.
Of course only a modest % actually change their vote. At least 40%+ or so just vote SNP-SNP since 2011 and that's it. It would be quite a shift for that not to happen again.
It think a 'Yes Scotland Party' was what many have wanted and could have been a good thing. That would have really been the 'spirit of 2014 revived'. Alba just isn't it though. Too niche and seems like 'The Alex Salmond Party' to everyone watching. Great for his strong supporters, but not with wide appeal.
I don't know how many postal voters there will be at this election. Postal votes start going out from Tuesday. As we get nearer to polling day the polls will have to be tweaked to include those who had already cast a vote. There will be fewer to convince on polling day.
DeleteThe Opinium poll today asked this question about the Alba party:
ReplyDeleteQ:AS1. Alex Salmond recently launched a new political party called the Alba party which will be taking part in the May elections. Before taking this survey, had you or had you not heard about this story?
Just 7% said they hadn't heard about it.
Wow. Fascinating
DeleteThat's good as it means VI results should be pretty reliable.
DeleteAnd meanwhile due to England's brexit, northern Ireland burns.
ReplyDeleteThat's what happens when you don't respect how people vote. Violence follows like night follows day.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-56664868
The british brexit attack dogs have been emboldened. N. Ireland voted Remain, but that was overturned by England and victory handed to the brexiters. As a result, they feel they can push their hard-line stance.
You can expect those who rioted under the butcher's apron in George Square after the 2014 vote will start doing the same if London attempts to block iref2.
Well my mind is made up unless something radically changes between now and the election. It's SNP for constituency and Greens for the list here in the North East.
ReplyDeleteIt's the biggest chance of getting one or more pro-indy list seats, and involves the least amount of nose-holding for me.
Is any nose-holdong needed?! I think Maggie Chapman (the lead North East Green candidate) is excellent. Here's what she said a couple of weeks ago when she launched her candidacy:
Delete"We know that we need to focus on the real issues – even in the face of a UK government that cares more about statues than women. And we need to be able to break away from the failed UK state. A state that we’ve seen in the age of covid – a corrupt feeding frenzy of private profiteering that resembles vultures on a corpse.
"So we need to sort our constitutional future – we need to become the outward-looking country focused on solving the economic and climate crises for Scotland and the world. We need to leave the Westminster psychodrama behind and get on with creating a country fit to cooperate with others. A country focused on building a better future.
"And that constitutional future is vital. I mean independence, I mean working with other countries, not against them. But most importantly it means giving power back to people and communities. I don’t want to win power from Westminster to hoard it at Holyrood. I want to see power devolved to local authorities, to communities, to workers."
Ah, but does she support vast armies of salmond conspiracist pedo male rapists sneaking into the ladies by putting on a dress and make up, egged on by an evil cackling Sturgeon? Huh? Huh? Huh? Come on? Answer me you 'wokist'!
Delete#StuAnon
In the past, I have questioned the Greens' commitment to independence, and questioned the realism of some of their policies too, but I feel warmer towards them now than I have before. I feel cooler towards the SNP than I ever have before, for all the reasons everyone here are familiar with, so a degree of nose-holding required there. As for Alba, much nose-holding required thanks to Mr. Salmond, and I feel I do not know enough about their stance on, well, pretty much anything really to give them my vote. I fear that at present they might be all things to all men, and once they come out with some policies they might actually get harder to vote for.
DeleteStravaiger,
DeleteThere is no doubt that Salmond is a "Marmite" politician. However, the NE is is Salmond "heartland" and it's likely that while 3% might be the median for all of Scotland, in the "heartland" it's likely to be much higher.
I've been a fervent disciple of SNP/SNP since before the 2016 election, and I wouldn't have voted Greens in the NE this year for two reasons.... the first (and by far the most important) reason, is that I don't believe they will get enough votes to cross the threshold, and the second reason, is that the Greens are Indy supporters for tactical reasons, rather than for ideological reasons.
I'm voting SNP/Alba, firstly (and most importantly) I think Salmond is a "shoo-in" to win a seat, and secondly, i have zero doubts about his total commitment to ibpndependence.
If the prospects for Alba start to look shaky in NE Scotland, I will revert to SNP/SNP, because a SNP majority is (by far) the most important thing in our quest for independence.
I don’t know what will happen to the Alba vote, obvs. but I do agree with those here who say that their very existence has jiggled things about and made ‘everyone’ more aware that half the country wants independence - about now, thanks!
ReplyDeleteSo I am grateful to the Albans for that valuable contribution.
To Quote you James.
ReplyDelete"The extremely good news from this poll is that the SNP's constituency vote has shot right up, and if by any chance they can maintain that sort of popularity, the question of wasted votes on the list may not even matter. But as we saw in 2016, it's phenomenally hard for any party to maintain 50%+ support in the heat of a campaign - it's like gravity will always pull them back."
When I look at who the opposition is in the Constituencies. Well I see Parties headed up by Red Card Ross, Sarwar, Willie Rennie and Patrick Harvie and I just dont see the SNP being pulled back in the Constituency vote by what I view as a shower of clowns. A shower of clowns likely to reduce the electorate to stitches and rolling about on the ground.
Do you have view on what the turn out might be James and how that might affect constituency Results? Will the presence of the Alba Party boost turn out. It seems that the Alba Party wants its voters to vote SNP in the Constituency votes. Until the appearance of the Alba Party I knew of several people who just weren't going to vote at all.
No score for AllForUnity?
ReplyDeleteI worry that in my little twitter bubble i don't get a true perspective of how folk will use their second vote. All my real and virtual friends appear to be giving their second vote to Alba. So Alba's low polling surprises me. so i stepped out of my bubble and had a conversation with my daughter, who will be a first time voter. I asked how she and her friends would be voting. i do realise that as my child she is greatly influenced by my opinion so was not surprised that she will vote SNP1 Alba2. however she went on to say all her friends will be voting the same way. The exceptions being a few who will vote SNP1 Labour2 (that really threw me). she also said all of her friends (ages 16 to 19) get their info and form their opinions online rarely if ever referring to the MSM or Television. I asked if she felt Alba was being ignored by msm. She said "dad! are you listening to me? I don't read the papers or watch TV for news." So are the young yins polled?
ReplyDeletePolling is not affected by the twitter bubble. It's pretty reliable as it targets the average voter and not just the politically active.
DeleteAlba are, for now, on 3%, with a very good degree of confidence.
I do realise that. my question was "are the young yins being polled?"
DeleteThe answer is Yes, the Opinium poll published today had voting for 16 to 34 year olds as a group. They were voting 68% SNP on the list vote and 1% Alba.
DeleteWow! I find that very surprising. Perhaps my daughter and her friends are in their own little bubble too.
DeleteHere's a link to the tables so as you can see for yourself:
Deletehttps://www.opinium.com/resource-center/uk-scottish-parliament-voting-intention-1-april-2021/
Although 16 year old's can vote in Holyrood elections, they are not allowed to be subject to polling companies without their parent's permission.
DeleteGoes to show how important Holyrood elections are in the scale of things. Casting a vote is of much less import than being allowed to drive a car, or drink beer.
Shy Alba voters - will this be an issue for polling surveys? Who knows? A reluctance to admit voting Alba is understandable given the media/SNP attacks on As. Will it be significant? We will find out soon enough. :)
DeleteShy voters don't exist. They're just a lazy shorthand for explaining away myriad other issues with polling and/or low popular support.
DeleteCould Alba be under-represented in the polls or receive a boost due to unexpected turnout? Yes. But the simpler explanation is that they're just not very popular.
Shy voters don't exist? Aye right. Oh they exist alright especially on telephone polls l. Do a bit of research before you spout nonsense like that.
DeleteThe expected 40% postal votes should increase turnout which guards against anyone trying to undermine the validity of a big SNP/YES win.
ReplyDeleteAs for George Galloway, his performance on TV last night makes you wonder if its right for capetbaggers like him to be allowed to parachute into our Scottish election.
What's the betting he'll disappear like snaw aff a dyke after the election.
Doesn't worry me as he will split the rabid Yoon vote. I think we can all agree on anything that splits the drooling Yoon vote is good for Scotland. I hope the biased and poisonous Brit Nat Media continues to give him air time from that point of view.
DeleteI would be very surprised if more than 50% of the electorate bothered to vote. Turnout could well be as low as 40%.
DeleteIt was 55% after an energising referendum, without the plague, and without an inquiry that made the Scottish parliament look like a bunch of odious diddies.
It's mainly unionists that historically don't vote in Scottish elections, but turn out for Westminster.
Delete#pretendyparliament
DeleteI guess the London approach of saying 'Well, we'll just overturn the result, saying no to a referendum and taking back devolved powers as we see fit' probably doesn't help a lot either.
DeleteThe polls should give an indication as to which supporters are more motivated. YouGov haven't issued a recent poll lately. Once that comes out we can start tracking which party's supporters are most motivated in the run up to polling day with newer polls.
DeleteI took part in a YouGov poll this weekend which had many questions about Scottish politics, the parliament and independence.
DeleteBiden now calling for calm in the British brexit violence in NI.
ReplyDeleteN. Ireland voted remain, and unless that is respected with folks allowed to freely choose their path, this will only get worse.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/taoiseach-boris-johnson-and-joe-biden-urge-calm-following-northern-ireland-riots-1.4532102
It's a terrible slow-motion disaster, triggered by the usual Tory arrogance and myopia. But now the trigger's been pulled, what do you think the way back is? They've been forced into a crisis concocted in London and, as far as I can see, don't have any easy route out of it.
DeleteJust done a Panelbase poll on independence/election. Alba and AFU listed as a main option along with the rest. Questions on Alba and their strategy. Questions on the impact of the Salmond enquiry. Questions on GRA. Wings poll?
ReplyDeleteI assume it was a phone poll yeah?
DeleteSo the GRA and Salmond enquiry dead horses still being flogged.
DeleteUnionists and long term residents + lovers of Somerset, England, need to accept that strategy has failed miserably. SNP are actually on the rise in polls since Sturgeon was totally 100% exonerated.
Couple of politicians not getting on anymore and the finer points of some domestic legislation which will need to be debated / refined in or out of the UK is not going to stop inexorable march of a nation.
Meanwhile parts of the UK are on fire due to the unfolding epic slow motion train crash that is brexit, with the President of the US calling for calm. It's not going to get calmer, but the fires are going to spread.
The UK's f**ked.
Hang on, didn't you know that the GRA is the talk of every Scottish household ?
DeleteThe gr what ?
DeleteThat will be a Wings commissioned poll done by internet. Their leader's dire poll ratings must come as a shock to the Alba party. That is a problem when you live in a political bubble/echo chamber.
Delete... and following on from your comments Skier.....can you think of a better time for deflecting the public gaze?
ReplyDeleteI think you catch my drift.
The Brexit car crash is happening before our eyes, but "events dear boy, events" are obscuring our line of sight.
ReplyDeleteEventually though the truth will out that Scotland is bearing a heavy burden from decisions made in London by a government we did not elect and which doesn't give a toss for our economy.
Unionists need to explain why its OK for Scotland's PRO-EU vote to be ignored but fine for NI to remain effectively in the EU, while the SGs calls for Scotland to remain in the single market and customs union were routinely treated with disdain.
Any answers?
I would have more respect for that if the SNP (along with other pro remain parties) had voted to remain in the customs union when they had the chance.
DeleteAh a soft Brexiter. Bless.
DeleteAdam your respect means zilch to me
DeleteWhy ?
Because youre a blether
Scots voted against brexit, not for some sort of Tory brexit.
DeleteI certainly didn't vote SNP to have them then vote for any type of brexit. Which is I guess why they're on 50% in polls; they're doing what their voters want.
I'd have more respect for the UK if it respected how N. Ireland and Scotland voted.
DeleteN. Ireland is now on fire thanks to its remain vote being overruled by England, emboldening the brexit terrorists. The President of the US is even calling for calm as the UN peace deal there is threatened.
And N. Ireland is, in effect, still in the EU customs union.
The Scottish government bent over backwards to get a compromise deal keeping us in the single market.
ReplyDeleteBoth Nicola Sturgeon and the Welsh FM Mark Drakeford's were treated with disdain and disrespect.
They, and the countries they represent were excluded from the decision - making process.
But then, I'm sure you knew that.
But yet when they had a chance to be fully part of the decision making process (indicative votes) the SNP chose not to vote to be in a customs union. You can't moan about being taken out of something and then not vote to be in it when you get the chance.
DeleteWould of just being in a customs union been perfect, no, but better than have now and of course would of stopped all the problems with the exports that companies are facing now.
It's would have, contracted to would've, not "would of".
DeleteRamstam was talking about the single market, not the customs union; they are not the same.
Turkey, for example, is in a customs union with the EU, but doesn't enjoy the same privileges as, say, Switzerland in the single market.
Trying to counter ramstam's point by saying the SNP voted against something different, doesn't hold any water.
He referred to the customs union (to quote)
Delete"customs union were routinely treated with disdain"
Which I have correctly pointed out the SNP (along with other parties who said they did not want the UK to leave the customs union) failed to vote for when they had the chance.
To be clear I'm not singling out Ranstam on this, more calling out the myth that the pro remain parties did everything they could to stop a hard Brexit. They had the chance to vote for a softer Brexit but chose not too, instead chasing the union that was a second referendum.
As noted above, I didn't vote SNP to have them support Tory British brexit in some form. I've Labour or the liberals for that.
DeleteI voted for them to fight for what Scots voted for, which was to remain in the EU, ideally via independence.
50% of Scots seem to think they're doing things right here.
The SNP voted for common market 2.0 which would been Brexit of some form, they also voted for a second referendum, which could of resulted in brexit, they also voted on only invoking article 50 if there was not a deal (which would of resulted in brexit if there was a deal) so they supported some form of Brexit. The only thing they did not vote for was to remain in the customs union.
DeleteAs for independence, they had four years to hold a referendum and chose not to hold one.
So to sum up the SNP failed to stop Brexit, failed to vote for a customs union (thus stopping the problems that many business are facing now) and failed to secure independence before Brexit happened.
Wow that's a lot of straw men mixed with manure.
DeleteUnlike all unionists parties, the SNP's position on the EU/single market has been totally consistent throughout. They don't support brexit and would at best temporarily tolerate an EEA type relationship with full free movement. The have opposed anything that clearly goes beyond this, as voters asked of them.
They consistently support independence for Scotland and argue that the best route to EU/EEA membership is via this.
They have also consistently said they will respect the wishes of Scots and will seek to hold a referendum if the clear will of Scots is for independence. That seems to have occurred in the past year now, some 6 years from the previous vote. During that time they have passed legislation on the framework of a second vote and extended the electoral franchise in preparation, including EU residents etc.
The last vote was lost because a referendum was held when Scots didn't want independence. The reason Westminster facilitated it, was that they were pretty damn sure - as the SNP and I was - that No would win comfortably enough. And so it did. All the long campaign did (the SNP went for this in the vain hope of getting over the line while still giving time to start the process of negotiations before a new election) was to firm up the support for Yes of ~45% that was present in 2011 polling. It didn't really turn anyone else to Yes, just brought the flirters that had cold feet in 2012 back on board.
Time and tide has since been against the union with generational demographics causing more of a change than brexit itself. Although the brexit effect is likely to grow now the country is starting to burn due to it; this was always going to be a slow burning fuse before the bomb went off.
The pandemic has limited the scope for a new iref in the past year in addition to it being very close to the next election; an election that could in theory overturn a referendum, or at least end up with some sort of hung parliament mess much like the UK brexit mess of 2017.
So the SNP have decided to get the nod from Scots for a new push; Scots now seemingly behind Yes at 50%+, with another 5% or so flirters that could be brought on board with a new campaign.
This is why the SNP are polling 50% and rising ahead of may while unionists flounder. After all, the unionist parties all support brexit now, having completely about faced. The SNP and Greens remain totally consistent by contrast.
Scots have great respect for the SNP and it's leadership, and I'd suggest a pro-Yes majority will be the outcome in May.
With Sturgeon cleared completely as predicted, the run up to May could see the SNP vote grow even more.
So you are happy to be much worse off than Brexit then ? https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2021/02/04/indyref2-scottish-independence-would-be-2-3-times-more-costly-than-that-of-brexit-and-rejoining-the-eu-wouldnt-make-up-the-difference/ The sd thing is that the SNP know this and have been deliberately deceiving us https://twitter.com/kevverage/status/1284237443454115847
DeleteNope you said that "I voted for them to fight for what Scots voted for, which was to remain in the EU, ideally via independence."
DeleteI have pointed out that the SNP voted against your wishes to take the Scotland out of the EU (they voted for Common Market 2.0 which would of done this.). They also did not stop Scotland leaving the EU via independence as you wanted them to do.
Nothing you have written contradicts this.
Nope, the SNP have never voted to take Scotland out of the EU.
DeleteTheir UK parliament MPs have voted to try and limit the impact of the UK dragging Scotland out of the EU with it, while maintaining a hard line stance on what they believe in. That is quite a different thing to supporting brexit and it just looks stupid to try and argue otherwise. Folks can't one minute argue that brexit must apply to Scotland because it was a UK vote, then the next minute say it's Scotland leaving the UK. This is classic Andy Murray politics and why unionist are losing the arguments.
You are just sore because the SNP and Sturgeon are so popular, with Yes ahead.
Did you enjoy Sturgeon being completely cleared as predicted? I thought of you and smiled that day. :-)
But seriously, the UK is now on fire due to brexit, with the US president stepping in to try and stop the brexiter violence which threatens UN peace treaty... all while the economy is being utterly trashed with a mass emigration of businesses and workers underway... and the best you can come up with is 'Well technically the SNP voted to take Scotland out of the EU because they tried to limited the impact of brexit on Scotland!'?
DeleteJeez. If you want to know why the SNP + Greens are doing well, it's because this kind of rubbish is all their oppoents have.
The SNP via the elected repreantives votes to take the UK (and therefore Scotland) out of the EU (common market 2.0). No matter how you try to spin it this is a documented fact.
DeleteWhy did you think of me, you sound really creepy now - do you regularly spend your time thinking about people that you don't know? I also have made no comments regarding the potential outcomes Hamilton enquiry or the Scottish Parliament which makes you sound even more like a stalker.
Jock Tamsons Bairn - one of the 17.4 million geniuses. Jesus wept.
DeleteLOL. You and I had plenty of 'discussions' about Sturgeon and resignation before Hamilton stated the obvious and aye, then you did go rather quiet now that I think about it. I assume you trust Hamilton and totally agree with him on Sturgeon?
DeleteNo, SNP MPs voted against article 50; which is the legislation that took the UK out of the EU.
There is no such thing as 'common market 2.0'. It's fantasy poppycock and certainly not the EU. It's like the imaginary super brexit deal we were going to get!
A formal application to the EFTA; now that would have been something possibly viable, but would need the initial nod from other members first.
Do you really think Scots voters are raging at the SNP for 'taking Scotland out of the EU'?
I think the Yes majority and current VI polling has you losing your marbles. This is some desperate stuff and so 2-3 years ago. Have you not got something more current? It really is some dead horse you are flogging. Next you'll be saying Scotland needs to vote No to stay in the EU.
And meanwhile the UK literally burns. The fires will spread, literally and metaphorically.
There is no such thing as 'common market 2.0'. It's fantasy poppycock and certainly not the EU.
DeleteSo how comes the SNP supported it and voted for it?
Nope you are imagining things, we had no conversations about the outcome of the investigations. I'm still slightly concerned about the fact that you think about random strangers when you hear the news, but each to their own i guess.
Jeez, the UK burns are you are still going over the same crap from years ago that's got unionism absolutely nowhere?
DeleteThe SNP opposed brexit and voted against Scotland being dragged out. They then supported the UK entering EFTA/EEA at least; it would need to apply to join this following its Article 50 EU exit, which took it out of the EU/EEA. At no point did they ever support Scotland (as part of the UK) leaving the EU, or not applying to join the EEA/EFTA.
There is no 'Common market 2.0'. It doesn't exist. If it did, you could direct me to its website.
Aye, we chatted about the committee a few times. Like here:
Deletehttps://scotgoespop.blogspot.com/2021/03/drama-as-new-opinium-poll-shows.html?showComment=1616160830386#c1552229091062645780
Scottish Skier April 10, 11:53.
DeleteExactly...... exactly right.
I have just learned of the death of our Duke of Edinburgh. An inspiration to us all representing why we all wear the poppy with pride.
ReplyDeleteMight I suggest as a mark of respect that instead of the red poppies of Flanders Field we embrace a new Union Jack Poppy in the three colours that made the Duke's heart swell with pride?
Thank you for you decades of selfless service, Sir.
Nah
DeleteA beautiful suggestion
DeleteDidn't know the man myself, but sympathies to his family.
DeleteQuelle surprise more ridiculously biased Panelbase polling exposed https://twitter.com/AnguspfRobinso1/status/1380472181369491461
ReplyDeleteThankfully James tries to ask questions without much bias.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe slow fuse of brexit has now reached the bomb.
ReplyDeleteThe UK is now burning. English nationalism is a flaming wrecking ball.
Sadly, it was all predicted by sensible heads.
https://www.centreonconstitutionalchange.ac.uk/opinions/british-withdrawal-eu-existential-threat-united-kingdom
...Lastly, the impact on the island of Ireland of a UK exit from the EU should be considered. It could well be source of great instability...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-56699716
UK Riots: Police injured during another night of Brexit violence
I'd take this.
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/NewStatesman/status/1380464264448737281
NEW Scottish parliament forecast:
SNP: 66 MSPs (+3)
CON: 24 (-7)
LAB: 23 (-1)
GRN: 11 (+5)
LDEM: 5 (-)
ALBA: 0 (-)
Alex as Commander Zero ?
DeleteMaybe Commander One Zero wi any luck
Delete@Adam, How many folk believe the SNP are responsible for Brexit?
ReplyDeleteNobody I know. The Tories have taken their precious Union to the brink of disaster and are now looking for a fall guy - well its not the Scots is it.
62% of our people rejected the English nationalist project that is Brexit.
Labour, Tory, LibDems all say, "No going back" the people have decided.
We'll I'm listening to the Scottish people and they want their country as part of the international community.
Only achievable with sovereign statehood of course.
Over 50% in the polls as I write.
@Adam, all you have is lies.
You even misquote my post!
But..but...but the SNP supporting Scotland/the UK re-joining the EFTA / EEA was them supporting Brexit!
DeleteIt's obvious! Can't you see?
Responsible, no. Could of done more defiantly yes. Wise heads were saying that remaining in the common market was achievable. In stead of banking that, which would of not precluded the continuing to try for a second ref, pro remain parties (SNP included) decided to not to take this option instead spend their time sounding off pointless sound bites.
DeleteDespite failing to 'Stop Brexit' we are all meant to believe that the SNP will magically make everything alright if we just vote for them again.
It would be good for you to show how it was achievable when England wanted an 'end to free movement and brussels making laws for the UK', both of which would apply if the UK had rejoined the EFTA/EEA, which the SNP supported.
DeleteIt's certainly good that you highlight how powerless Scotland is within the UK Adam.
Of course if Scotland and N. Ireland were equal partners in the UK, brexit probably wouldn't be going ahead in current form as the one nation one vote 'senate' would be 50/50 split. Of maybe a simple veto from Scotland would have stopped it, much like EU countries have a veto on trade deals.
And N. Ireland would not be descending into violent brexit chaos.
May I ask who you are voting for next month Adam? I guess not SNP-SNP?
DeleteIn the second round of indicative votes if the SNP had voted yes instead of abstaining on the vote to remain in the common market it would off passed. So Scotland was not powerless, it just decided not to make a difference.
DeleteAs I said last night this would not of been perfect but would stopped the problems that exporters are having as well as stopping the border problems with Northern Ireland which are one of the factors causing problems currently.
You are correct I will not be voting for the SNP due to the fact that they failed to do anything meaningful to sop Brexit. I'll soil my constituency ballot and vote Green on regional (due to their enviromental policies).
I see, it's the SNP who's to blame for Brexit not the 17.4 million simple souls who voted for it.
DeleteIndicative votes have no impact on anything. It's nothing more than a consultation. It doesn't bind the government to anything.
DeleteThe SNP voted to revoke article 50 and failing that, to rejoin the EFTA at least ('common market 2.0'). They also voted for a confirmatory referendum on the way forward.
https://ig.ft.com/brexit-second-round-indicative-votes/
They abstained on going ahead with a hard brexit (customs union only) and super hard brexit (not even that, which is what we now have).
So you will abstain on the brexit issue on the constituency vote because you can't in principle support what's on offer? Like the SNP did on the customs union indicative vote, but you criticize them for that? The indicative vote was just that too; not a deciding vote. Yet your constituency vote is...
'It's fine for me to abstain, but not the SNP, who I don't plan to vote for anyway!'
DeleteThat kinda sum up your position?
And 273 + 35 SNP = 308.
DeleteThat seems notably short of a majority when there are 643 MPs in the HOC.
I will not vote for the SNP again because they failed to do anything to stop Brexit and I'm not going to trust them again. Are you seriously saying that Scotland being in the customs union only would be a bad thing? How do you know the indicative votes would not of had an impact? If the customs union vote had come out with a majority (of the indicative votes cast) then the pro remain parties could of backed that (remembering that the Conservatives did not have a majority).
DeleteAdam is like Goebbels in that he believes his own spin when he knows it is not true.
DeleteAye, it's pretty nuts. SNP are attacked for 'spending all their time trying to keep the UK in the EU' [and not enough on indy] whilst simultaneously 'not doing enough to keep the UK in the EU' [and focusing too much on indy]. Truly Schrodinger's SNP.
Delete#desperatestuff
Of course northern Ireland remained in the customs union.
DeleteThat's worked out well right?
Thanks for highlighting that the SNP managed to fail on both counts (neither kept Scotland in the EU via the UK) or securing a referendum. But both votes SNP next month and everything going to suddenly fall into place.
DeleteYeah and having a hissy fit abstaining is going to sort things out. As I said before, the fault for Brexit lies with those who voted for it.
DeleteI think only a prize idiot would vote SNP in the hope of them ultimately working to secure Scotland's future as part of the UK within in the EU.
DeleteAnd they have not failed to secure a referendum, but rather chosen not to hold one as until recently, it would likely result in a narrow victory for no. 2014 showed that Scots won't be bounced into indy.
Still, I'm glad you are voting for a Yes party. Although I note that the Greens too have also 'failed to secure a referendum' in this term. As they hold the balance of power, they could have brought down the SNP for not doing enough to secure one or likewise re keeping the UK in the EU. So it seems you are in fact quite happy to vote for parties that 'fail to secure referendums / don't do enough to keep Scotland / the UK in the EU'.
So, to revise...
'It's ok for me to abstain on important votes, but not for the SNP to do so on votes that won't change anything' and 'I won't vote for parties that have not secured a referendum / done enough to keep the UK in EU except when I do exactly that'.
This about right for you?
No I'm not voting for the SNP because in 2017 I was told"
Deletef the SNP wins a majority of Scottish seats in this election, that would complete a triple lock, further reinforcing the democratic mandate which already exists. And, in such circumstances, any continued
Tory attempts to block the people of Scotland having a choice on their future, when the options are clear, and on a timescale determined by the Scottish Parliament, would be democratically unsustainable."
in 2019 I was told:
Vote SNP on December 12th to escape Brexit and put Scotland’s future in Scotland’s hands.
I voted SNP in 2019 - did we escape Brexit. My votes in 2017 and 2019 (according to the SNP) were meant to put Scotlands future in Scotlands ands and my vote in 2017 was meant to make opposition to a second indy ref democratically unsustainable.
Yet here were are in 2021 being told that we need to Vote SNP to get the same things that we promised in 2019 and 2017? What is this third time lucky?
When the SNP deliver a second independence referendum I will happily give them credit for doing so; but I would not be at all surprised if we are back in the same boat in 2024 being asked to give the SNP our votes for a mandate of a second indy ref.
But you said you are voting Green, who could have forced the SNP to do all you wanted but didn't. The could have said 'New iref tomorrow or it's a no confidence vote' or 'vote for the customs union in Westminster or we'll bring you down'.
DeleteSo all the reasons you give for not voting SNP are just plain stupid; the Greens have done the same. They have been in effective coalition with the SNP since May 2016.
LOL. You really are tying yourself in knots here.
Anyway, I personally don't want the SNP to just 'deliver a referendum'; that's plain stupid. What's the point doing 2014 all over again?
I want them to deliver a referendum when Scots will vote Yes (and not cause lots of excess deaths by voting), but that's because I support indy. Obviously, if you support indy, this is the position you hold. But of you are unionist, you'd want a vote back in say 2017 when Yes was lower than 2014 in some polls.
As a yes voter, I've learned to not trust anyone that wanted a referendum when Yes was way behind in the polls and/or when a deadly virus was spreading through he population with very few people or none vaccinated. I trust my assessment here as much as I did about Sturgeon not having broken the code.
DeleteThe pandemic has only been going on since 2020, that leaves 2017,2018,2019. You will have to highlight were the SNP said that they will only call a referendum if they think yes is guarenteed to win.
DeleteBut based on your criteria I trust you will be calling for a referendum next Spring? The population will be vaccinated by then and yes is now in the lead, no reason to delay any longer than that.
You will have to highlight where the SNP have said they would, without question, hold a referendum even if Scots didn't apparently want one with Yes well behind. I recall them saying they'd seek to hold one if circumstances changed significantly and it became clear Scots now wanted to revise their 2014 decision. That seems to have happened now; we'll see next month if they get the nod.
DeleteSo, when would you have held iref2 in 2017/18/19 if you had been in charge? Just so I can check the polling average at the time to see how you'd most likely have done.
And I don't see the need to give any more than say 4 weeks notice for a referendum. If you get everything prepared, that's at most all you'd need. Then you hold it when you are best poised to win.
Why on earth do another 2014 with a date set in stone well in advance? That only gives your opponent the upper hand.
Spring could be fine, but if Yes has fallen back, then no, it may not make sense. Do you have lottery numbers for then? I mean how do you know Yes will have the upper hand a year from now?
Also, what if a new variant of covid appeared that current vaccines didn't work on and it would take a while to adapt these? You want to go ahead still?
It's only unionists that seem to want to know the exact plan right now. They do nothing but demand the precise date, plan b, c, d etc.
Elections are of course different as these absolutely must - barring some national emergency - be held within a specific time period. Referendums are very much 'when you like' and ideally that should be when you feel the public are ready for it.
Madam I'm Adam.
DeleteHahahaha!
You will have to highlight where the SNP have said they would, without question, hold a referendum even if Scots didn't apparently want one with Yes well behind.
Delete**
When they said they would if there was a material change of circumstances
such as the Uk voting to leave the UK.
***
And I don't see the need to give any more than say 4 weeks notice for a referendum
**
You just talking nonsense now. The referendum act 2020 (which will be legislation that sets out the process for referendums says:
Subsection (5) applies where a Bill is introduced to the Scottish Parliament which—
(a)provides for the holding of a referendum throughout Scotland, and
(b)specifies the wording of the question.
(5)The Electoral Commission must—
(a)consider the wording of the question, and
(b)publish a statement of any views of the Commission as to the intelligibility of the question—
(i)as soon as reasonably practicable after the Bill is introduced, and
(ii)in such manner as they may determine.
The Electoral Commission have already said that this will take at least 12 weeks. The commission also advised a 6 month period from publication of the bill to the actual referendum. You might get that shortened to 5ish but that's it.
You're ignoring the fact the polling averages for a period of time in the past show what peoples reponses at a time there is no campaign going on. Are you honestly saying that a campaign in say 2018 could not of turned a 47/53 deficit into a yes victory. Are you saying that the case for independence is that poor? I mean leave managed to turn a bigger deficit around just by writing a figure on the side of a bus!
DeleteYes averaged 45% in 2018, not 47%, so no had a 10 point lead.
DeleteThat aside, it's good that you believe the case for independence is so strong. I believe the case is very strong too and the support is there, but to get a Yes the timing needs to be correct.
70% could support indy in principle, but if only 45% are willing to vote for it at short notice, there's not a lot of point in holding a referendum quickly now is there?
Polling doesn't measure support for indy of course, just a willingness to vote for it at short notice. When you ask about 'in principle' support, you get notably higher numbers; it's timing that's key. Pandemic...wait and see on brexit etc all influence when the electorate agree that they are not willing to vote for it. It's why you see Yes rise and edge back in waves; people are responding to events and re-evaluating whether they are ready to go or want to hold back. Underneath that, support in principle has been growing long term, driven by generational identity changes in response to a changing UK and world.
I want to move to a slightly bigger house, but not for a year or two for various important reasons. The case for me moving to a bigger house is strong, but I won't be bounced into it. This is simple human rationality.
As for a campaign; it's never stopped. Been going in principle since 2011. Independence remains centre stage in Scottish politics. In 2011, yes was polling 45%, which is what Yes got in the end. Of course given the electorate were bounced into it, they resisted at first, with support seeming to drop away for an indyref 'tomorrow' through 2012. Then this slowly recovered up to voting day. The SNP were given a clip round the ears in 2017 for pushing too hard on the indy issue so soon again and while brexit was still unclear.
I give the Scottish electorate a bit more credit that those might have voted for brexit due to what was written on a bus.
I note the Tories are keen on rushing to iref2.
Deletehttps://www.thenational.scot/news/19225086.boris-johnson-told-force-indyref2-mid-pandemic-prevent-yes-victory/
yes was polling 45%,
Delete****
Yes was polling at an average of 37% in 2011 and in 2012 35% in 2013.
****
but if only 45% are willing to vote for it at short notice, there's not a lot of point in holding a referendum quickly now is there?
***
You contradicting yourself now, earlier you were saying that a indy ref should be sprung on the electorate with a four week notice.
***
I give the Scottish electorate a bit more credit that those might have voted for brexit due to what was written on a bus.
****
I agree, so no reason that with the benefits of independce (rather than the made up ones of Brexit) a campaign could not switch a yes deficit into a yes win in the referendum.
Ok, so it was 43% ex DK in the immediate aftermath of the election, with one poll even having yes ahead. But I was not far off.
Deletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2014_Scottish_independence_referendum#2011
Yes No Undecided
34% 52% 12%
39% 38% 23%
35% 60% 5%
37% 45% 18%
= 36% Yes / 49% No
Which is 43% excluding DK. 45% comfortably within MoE 3 years before the vote.
If people already appreciate the benefits of indy but have decided they don't want a referendum right now but at some point in the future, you will no do well by bouncing them into it. After all, they can just say no this time then vote for a referendum next time. It's only 4-5 years between elections.
Nope, I've never said an indyref should be sprung on an electorate which is saying no to indy polls. I've said it makese sense to hold it when people say in polls they are ready to vote Yes. We tried setting a date for one before when 43+/-3% were saying yes and we ended up with 45%.
I might also suggest the comparison with brexit is very flawed. It was a referendum on an independent sovereign state leaving a trade block. No country gained independence or started to self govern on the world stage. No new seat was created at the top tables such as the UN, WTO etc. The decision could be reversed in a matter of years with the UK rejoining the EEA and even the EU.*
DeleteScotland leaving the UK would mean the creation of at least 2 new sovereign states from 1. It's a very fundamental, existential constitutional change which history shows us is rarely if ever undone on short timescales. It's not a 'have a quick campaign and make a decision thing', but a 'the plates have slowly shifted and now the union is ending. Time to ask the electorate if they are ready to move on'.
This can be done relatively quickly if the evidence is that the electorate now firmly wish it.
I think we can be sure the SNP have done lots of in-house polling since 2014 to try and gauge when they might try again.
---
*My own opinion is that is what will happen. The UK will end and Scotland will join the EEA/EFTA or EU. N. Ireland will re-enter the EU via reunification. Wales will start to seek indy resulting in both it and England rejoining the single market either together or independently. The final end of the British empire project.
Ach, but dinna let arithmetic get in the wey o a guid haver eh?
ReplyDeleteAll of the above people have forgot the Scottish PEOPLE ARE SOVEREIGN.
ReplyDeleteDid anyone claim that they weren't?
DeleteI think if either side 'holds scots feet to the fire' on this, they will lose votes.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.thenational.scot/news/19225086.boris-johnson-told-force-indyref2-mid-pandemic-prevent-yes-victory/
Boris Johnson told to force indyref2 mid-pandemic to prevent Yes victory
I'm not sure how he'd go about this anyway.
What a surprise. The UK burns due to brexit and 'the British Trump' runs away.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.thenational.scot/news/19225162.northern-ireland-boris-johnson-resist-calls-special-crisis-summit/
Northern Ireland: Boris Johnson resist calls for special crisis summit
Well it appears Alba are having an impact afterall.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, that impact seems to be summoning and giving force to the idea that a "supermajority" would be the required benchmark to even hold a referendum at all in the minds of the public - the new Panelbase poll has 55% of people agreeing that a "supermajority" constitutes a mandate for a referendum, but evenly split even for an SNP-only majority.
Wonderful.
You can blame your disgusting maggot of a leader for that idea taking hold then. She's the one who told everyone that was what it meant.
DeletePS. Do you support reducing the age of consent to 10? A simple Yes or No will do.
The former First Minister of Scotland and Leader of the SNP for 20 years has explained in full what he means. You know what it means. Why are you spreading Yoon lies?
DeleteWhy do you support a party which tries to put their former leaders in prison?
Why do you support a party which won 56 out of 59 seats with over 50% of the vote for yes parties and which did nothing to advance their stated aims?
Why do you support a party which employs the unapolagetic and still proud of his actions, architect of The Vow, which won the referendum for No. Alongside the massive postal vote fraud 125,000 english holiday home owners and their families voting, english squaddies voting, english students voting and anyone else nicola murrell could include to prevent a yes vote.
She was in charge of the Yes campaign remember. She's the one who actually lost the vote, but she's not the one who resigned, worst luck.
Why are you interested in reducing the age of consent to 10 PJ?
DeleteAre you suggesting Westminster MPs should be able to overrule Holyrood MSPs when it comes to indyrefs PJ? I mean I take it you are referring to 2015, just after Scots had said no to indy?
DeleteAnyway, the number of SNP MPs in London is largely irrelevant to independence (other than them withdrawing based on a clear mandate). Westminster is for union governance, not Scottish self-determination.
You seem to be suggesting the 78% of votes that Scottish unionist MPs had (from 2010) in should have mattered in 2014? That they should have had some power to counter Holyrood?
Rev Stu posting as PJ, do you think Alba are going to be running a positive campaign? If so, your website suggests they won't. Suggesting to your gullible supporters all sorts of half baked conspiracy to wind them all up knowing very well what you are doing will harm Alba in the long run.
DeleteTime for Peejay's meds.
DeleteSo, am I right in thinking Scotland is now going to legalize pedophilia unless we vote Alba?
ReplyDeleteThis doesn't sound tinfoil morris dancing hat in any way. Not at all.
Scotland's doomed if we don't vote Alba (wink).
DeleteIt did not take long for them to go off the deep end. Welcome to Alba, where we hate Romanians and think gay bashing is progressive if it's women who are leading the charge.
DeleteGay bashing!
Delete*laughs head off*
As a gay man I feel entirely unbashed. And I'd vote Alba on the regional list.
This is just silly petty politics, I see no substance to these claims whatsoever.... Cool, though, that Alba is rattling so many cages.... Excellent stuff.... Really excited to see if they can take between 5 and 15 per cent on the day.....
I wouldn't bet your money on them getting 3% so maybe best you don't get too excited.
DeleteNot sure I see the logic in that. Why not just enjoy the excitement even if it ends soon?
DeleteSeriously though, I won't be surprised by 12 percent on the day
This is an icky Pandora's box that Salmond may well end up wishing he'd never touched.
DeleteFacts are chiels etc. The SNP won 56 MP's and just UNDER 50% in 2015.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately just a year after the 2014 Indyref.
If we're haein a rammy can we quote the correct information.
Is anybody suggesting we should've called for another Indyref then? NUTS!