Never underestimate the importance of the battle of the narratives after a landmark event like the Supreme Court ruling. The dearth of independence polls in the immediate aftermath gave the unionist parties the opportunity to fill up the space with - frankly - lies about what they were finding on the doorsteps, with voters supposedly reacting like obedient slaves to the discovery that their country does not have the legal ability to decide its own future, and saying that their government should just accept that Scotland is in a prison and get on with serving the sentence. Even the appearance of the Redfield & Wilton poll showing outright majority support for independence didn't thwart the unionist propaganda plan too much, because Labour in particular just studiously ignored the independence numbers and concentrated instead on the finding that the SNP's lead in Westminster voting intentions had dropped sharply - which they were to some extent able to get away with because, after all, it's a Westminster election that the SNP are now planning to use as a de facto independence referendum.
Today's new Ipsos UK poll, however, puts unionists in danger of losing the battle of the narratives - and it's up to all of us to make sure the numbers become as widely known as possible. (The fact that STV were Ipsos UK's client should help considerably, although there's still the challenge of making sure the London-based media don't ignore the poll.)
Should Scotland be an independent country? (Ipsos UK / STV, 28th November - 5th December 2022)
Yes 56% (+6)
No 44% (-6)
Scottish voting intentions for the next UK general election:
SNP 51% (+7)
Labour 25% (+2)
Conservatives 13% (-6)
Liberal Democrats 6% (-4)
Greens 3% (-)
Seats projection: SNP 58 (+10), Labour 1 (-), Conservatives 0 (-6), Liberal Democrats 0 (-4)
This poll differs from the Redfield & Wilton poll in quite a number of respects. Although both show a pro-independence majority, Ipsos UK shows the Yes vote increasing by a larger amount (six points rather than four), and also shows a Yes lead that isn't within the standard margin of error. In other words, the Ipsos UK poll unequivocally shows a pro-independence majority, whereas Redfield & Wilton could technically be said to have shown a 'statistical tie', to use the American term.
But of course by far the biggest differences are to be found in the Westminster numbers, with the trends reported by the two polls not being even remotely reconcilable with each other. Redfield & Wilton showed the SNP down four points and Labour up twelve, working out at a very substantial sixteen point drop in the SNP's lead over Labour. Although Ipsos UK also show a boost for Labour, it's a statistically insignificant two points, while the SNP are up seven points and have thus considerably extended their lead. This also moves the SNP above 50%, which is no longer just a psychological barrier - it's their self-defined target for victory in a plebiscite election. Indeed, in combination with the Greens, the Westminster vote for pro-indy parties stands at 54% - just a touch below the Yes vote on the standard indyref question. That's another big difference with Redfield & Wilton, who suggested that the combined vote for pro-indy parties was a full nine percentage points lower than the Yes vote.
It obviously matters tremendously which pollster is getting it right and which is getting it wrong, because if Redfield & Wilton are right, a Westminster election used as a plebiscite may not be winnable for the pro-indy camp due to the Labour surge, whereas if Ipsos UK are right, the SNP are shrugging off the Labour surge down south and tightening their grip on Scottish politics. If we (or rather the SNP leadership) read this situation incorrectly due to faith in an incorrect poll, it could have catastrophic consequences if the wrong strategic call is made as a result - ie. sticking with the Westminster plebiscite plan rather than using an early Holyrood election in 2023 instead.
My suspicion is that a gulf is opening up between Ipsos telephone polling and online polling from the other firms. There won't necessarily be such a big gulf on indyref voting intentions, but on Westminster numbers my guess is that the other online pollsters will be closer to Redfield & Wilton - I say that in part due to the straws in the wind we're seeing from subsamples. So if the SNP put their faith in the Ipsos numbers, that may mean putting all their eggs in one basket, because it could mean assuming that the other pollsters are all wrong. That would be a big call. Remember that Ipsos have in recent years tended to be on the Yes-friendly end of the spectrum - a complete reversal from the 2014 campaign, where they were just about the most No-friendly firm.
In a nutshell, I would still strongly argue that the most promising strategy for a de facto referendum is to engineer an early Scottish Parliament election next year, possibly in the autumn at around the same time the referendum had originally been planned for.
UPDATE: The poll also contains Scottish Parliament voting intention numbers...
Scottish Parliament constituency ballot:
SNP 50% (-2)
Labour 24% (+7)
Conservatives 14% (-5)
Liberal Democrats 7% (+2)
Greens 3% (-)
Scottish Parliament regional list ballot:
SNP 43% (-)
Labour 21% (+6)
Conservatives 14% (-6)
Greens 13% (+1)
Liberal Democrats 6% (-)
Alba 1% (-)
Seats projection: SNP 67 (+3), Labour 26 (+4), Greens 16 (+8), Conservatives 15 (-16), Liberal Democrats 5 (+1)
SNP OVERALL MAJORITY OF 5 SEATS
Note: The reason the percentage changes look more flattering for Labour than on the Westminster numbers is simply that there's a different baseline. Ipsos' most recent Westminster poll was earlier this year, whereas they don't appear to have polled for Holyrood voting intentions since 2021.
I know some people will triumphantly point at these numbers and say "look, the SNP are 1% higher on Westminster voting intentions than Holyrood constituency voting intentions!", but that doesn't remotely impress me, because a) 1% is not a significant difference, and b) the SNP's vote is much more likely to hold up during a 'home fixture' Holyrood campaign. It's very difficult for the party to get a fair crack of the whip from the broadcasters during a Westminster campaign - as we saw in 2017, for example, when the SNP were powerless to do much about the Corbyn bandwagon effect. I'd also just note that the combined vote for pro-independence parties on the Holyrood list is a remarkable 57%, and that pro-indy parties are on course to take 62% of the total seats in the Scottish Parliament, with the Greens overtaking the Tories to move into third place in terms of seats.
* * *
If you'd like to help Scot Goes Pop continue, donations are welcome HERE.
According to Stephen Flynn support for the SNP north of 50% .I can't find the figures anywhere.So getting over 50% in a plebescite hard but it is doable
ReplyDeleteThose figures are in the blogpost above.
DeleteSorry .A plebescite election is winnable .Will come down to turnout .We need to get chapping doors and more doors
DeleteLooking forward to the Rev’s take on this XD
ReplyDeleteProbably SNP supports has been stagnant at 51% for approx. 27 years
DeleteI rarely say LOL, but LOL.
DeleteWOS is dead - nobody cares about it anymore - largely forgotten except for the SNP giving it oxygen. WOS may reanimate but things are clear - either YES delivers an enthousiastic simple campaign (fk the currency twaddle) with some badly needed gusto or we lose.
DeleteSome interesting nuggets buried in the data tables. Some as expected, e.g. massive support for Indy amongst voters under 55, some less expected (to me at least), e.g. the South of Scotland being strongly Yes, and stronger Yes support amongst those with educational qualifications vs without - that’s a common unionist attack line skewered.
ReplyDeleteWhat is very encouraging is the broad support for the SNP and Indy across virtually all of the breakdowns. Age, Social group, region, none of it matters very much. The only categories that show much of a divergence are Owner occupiers vs Renters and born in Scotland vs born elsewhere.
Also nice to see something like a quarter of Labour voters would support Indy. You just wonder why they still plan to vote Labour, especially in a de facto referendum…
Have you a breakdown of age group voting intentions ?
DeleteToo many numbers to type, but the data tables are published here: https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2022-12/scotland-political-monitor-tables-december-2022.pdf
DeleteAlba should definitely count towards YES too. The three parties together seems fair. I'll probably vote SNP anyway, this time, if it's 100% in their manifesto that they'll negotiate independence after a win
ReplyDeleteIt's hilarious coming right after Gordon Brown's big splash. One possible narrative is that Labour's extremely weak devolution offer has cancelled out the surge of Tory voters they've recently scraped up. And not by sending them back, but by sending a different set of Scottish Labour voters elsewhere.
ReplyDeleteThat theory doesn't really work because of the poll's fieldwork dates.
DeleteThe big splash over the weekend was preceded by a week or two of ground-preparing hype. We saw the damp splat coming, a feeble echo of early September 2014. Ideally, the next poll will show some further movements to validate that narrative.
DeleteWhatever caused it, the "torification" of Scottish Labour is difficult to deny. They are now in a dilemma where they may retain those Tory voters by burning the bridge any more traditional Labour voters just used to cross to the SNP, or they may try to win those traditional voters back at the expense of giving up that ex-Tory boost.
Merry christmas!
Puts paid to the daily express farce of a poll. So which is more trustworthy: online polls or telephone polls?
ReplyDeleteDo WM polls sample the electorate eligible for WM elections (the wm register of over 18 UK citizens etc) or do they use the local election franchise for Scot Govt elections?
ReplyDeleteI ask as sometimes from some pollsters you get both Westminster and Holyrood voting intentions - and I wondered if the sampling frame was different..
ReplyDeleteAnother striking variance between IPSOS (28th Nov - 5th Dec) and Redfield & Wilton (26th - 27th Nov) is that in terms of personal popularity, Starmer and Sarwar have swapped position.
ReplyDeleteStarmer (R & W) +11% to (IPSOS) -13%
Sarwar (R & W) -12% to (IPSOS) +3%
In terms of going head-to-head on the debate stage, Sturgeon would now be better off facing off against Starmer at a Westminster GE than Sarwar at a crash, Holyrood plebiscite.
Gawd knows what Sarwar did to improve his numbers.
Starmer’s “muscular unionism” isn’t paying well. And that’s before his “get back in yer box Jocks” performance on Monday.
Also worth mentioning, the “referendum over my dead body” contingent has dropped 5% since May to 26%. Baron Reed of Allermuir did us all a favour on the 23rd November, as anyone familiar with our thrawn character could have predicted.
SNP need to make some solid announcements such as
ReplyDeleteOnce Scotland is independent we will increase the State Pension by 50%
Once Scotland is independent we will end charitable status for private schools
Once Scotland is independent we will increase investigations of criminal tax avoidance
Once Scotland is independent we will spend more on the NHS than ever before
Once independent Scotland will immediately introduce its own currency
Etc etc etc
Not difficult to do
And not costly if Scotland does introduce its own currency
Terence Callachan
But they’ll lose the shires with red meat like that!
DeleteJoking aside, it’s vitally important to win people to Indy across all of Scotland. Is losing soft Yes in Land Rover country really worth pleasing us urban plebs who are already in the bag?
Because the few of them I know personally really do wring their hands about their school fees. You would if you were paying 20k/year.
I should add: the few I know are 2014 No who are currently leaning to Yes. Their votes do count.
DeleteI think denying indyref2 is colouring temperaments blue and white a little BUT rather the looney Brit govs have scared GenEatOrHeat Scot to the marrow and they're thinking, 'Fk it, anything must surely be better than this'. AND if the coming few months prove awful then this 56% might prove stable-ish. This is without even a +ve campaign - 60% or near it (57% - 59%) is not impossible.
ReplyDeleteIt is for the Scots via their parliament - Holyrood to determine whether Scotland should decide on independence.And I believe the youth of Scotland must have their views expressed, and a Holyrood election delivers that opportunity for them.
ReplyDeleteWill Fm Sturgeon enable this? I very much doubt that her ego will allow her to resign and set in motion the necessary procedure.
Why on earth would she resign? she's the most successful FM since devolution and winning everything in sight at the pace she wants to win at
DeleteBecause a technical resignation is a necessary part of the process to bring about an early election.
DeleteHope this helps.
Anonymous - Sturgeon is successful at winning elections on the back of promising indyref2 which she has not delivered never mind actually delivering independence. That may be your idea of success it's not mine.
DeleteJames, a lot of these anonymites either do not read your articles or they have a very poor ability to understand and retain what you say.
DeleteAnyway, it's nice but I'll be a believer when 6 polls show a YES 56% result.
ReplyDeleteI'm also in favour of the plebiscite being held in a Holyrood election, but how can it be approved if we need a two thirds majority of MSPs to sign off on it?
ReplyDeleteSimple answer: we don't. That's a complete red herring thrown up by the SNP leadership as an excuse for not doing it. If the Scottish Government resign, there is no viable alternative government, so an early election would inevitably follow.
DeleteOne interesting thing about the poll is Indy ranking 3rd in the voters’ list of priorities, level with education. Only the NHS and cost of living crisis were higher, and even the economy was lower!
ReplyDeleteHopefully the unionists will now drop their tired argument that Indy is not a priority for the people of Scotland. Otherwise they’re effectively also arguing that education and the economy don’t matter!
Support for SNP at Westminster rises to 53% when asked as a defacto referendum
ReplyDeleteThese are really good figures and hopefully can continue to push.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to see the movement come together and really start a united positive case. Hopefully from January the foot is placed on the accelerator.
On a side note, Wings is sadly becoming a hindrance to the movement. On a day like this, it goes on a negative on a clearly positive day. Almost a bit suspect if you ask me.
He's been doing that sort of thing for years. First big red flag I noticed was when the prorogation case was going on in 2019. He wrote a pretty bonkers article about how every possible outcome in the case was a disaster for the SNP and independence - even his regulars at the time were calling him on it.
DeleteI think that may also have been around the time he was pushing his genius masterplan that the SNP should vote through the Brexit deal in return for the Tories' word (stop laughing at the back there!) that we'd get a referendum afterwards.
The staunchest of unionists would struggle to concoct a more poison pill for the indy movement to swallow.
Speaking of which: anyone seen IFS today? He's usually so cosy here…
DeleteAnyone seen an anonymous poster on here. Oh that's right they are all over the place - like a rash - posting pish that WGD numpties would be ashamed of - correction - probably are WGD numpties hiding amongst the crowd of anonymites too scared to come out.
DeleteYou lot of anonymites don't even have the courage call yourself anonymous1 or anonymous2. Mind you it would be more appropriate for some of you to be tosser1 and tosser2.
A prediction. The single newspaper the BBC omit from tomorrow's "What the papers say" segment has a big "56%" on the front.
ReplyDeleteAssuming it's not a rogue outlier poll and is backed up by a similar one from another pollster, it actually should put more pressure on the Holyrood option than the Westminster one.
ReplyDeleteStrike whilst the iron's hot, etc.
2 years of not much else happening before a GE, the polls could easily regress somewhere back to the status quo.
Important caveats on the Holyrood numbers, James! More than that though, I'd imagine the two probably aren't terribly comparable in the first place, for anyone looking to find evidence that a Westminster plebiscite is preferable. The SNP have spent weeks and months stressing the idea of a Westminster defacto referendum. There's been next to no chatter about a Holyrood plebiscite election. That's bound to have some sort of impact and influence with voters re Westminster vs Holyrood voting intentions.
ReplyDeleteWould be quite interesting to see what the Holyrood numbers would be if voters were explicitly asked how they would vote in a Holyrood plebiscite election, as well as a Westminster one. But unfortunately it doesn't seem like Ipsos asked the former, just the latter.
Not meaning to rain on the parade but can you make any sense of the 2014 weightings used in this poll? They look unusually weighted to Yes, even after making a back of the envelope adjustment for the demographic changes since then.
ReplyDeleteUnless they've changed their methodology, Ipsos don't have any 2014 weightings. I'll check, but as far as I know that's still the case.
DeleteOn page 3 of the tables. Am sure they’ve a good reason for it but I can’t figure it out. https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2022-12/scotland-political-monitor-tables-december-2022.pdf
DeleteI can't see any evidence there that they've introduced 2014 weightings. Quite the reverse, in fact.
DeleteI was just looking at the ‘Yes 479, No 403, no vote/too young 139’ and trying to tie that back to 55/45 adjusting for demographic of the 14 vote. But you’ve looked at a lot more of these tables than I have so if there’s nothing jumping out at you from that but will more than happily defer.
DeleteBoth STV news and Reporting Scotland do not include the poll in their headline news items at the start of their programme. Both have a range of negative stories about Scotland. Both mention the poll towards the end of their programme but do their utmost to minimise saying 56%. Both show Flynn asking his first question at PMQs today but not the second question where he mentions the 56% yes poll. Coincidence or Britnat collusion?
ReplyDeleteNote to anonymite numpties it ain't me who thinks the BBC is a key and valued institution. Its Sturgeon.
WGD numpty the Skier of many nationalities says:- " Anyone Ken if I’m a Sturgeon loyalist or not."
ReplyDeleteOf course you are not a loyalist Skier. You are a lying Sturgeon propagandist.
Happy to clear that up for you. No thanks or a Xmas card necessary.
Here's an interesting question. Out of Wings and Dug. Which site is more beneficial to independence RIGHT NOW?
ReplyDeleteI'd say it was previously wings. e.g. Pressure to hold a defacto and holding the Scot gov accountable for that. The 'everything is fine, there's definitely a plan' from the Dug was clearly delusional.
But now that there IS a defacto happening. I'd choose delusional positivity over delusional negativity any day, if you're wanting to motivate people.
This is why I always come here. It sits somewhere in the sensible middle.
Nice big 56% on the front page of The National. At least we can't have the perpetual Indyref2 is just around the corner stuff any more. Stick to facts The National and stop being an SNP fanzine and be a proper independence paper.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous - Delusional positivity is the WGD stock in trade. They believed Sturgeon for years that there would be an Indyref2. I said I would believe it when I saw a date in law being set. Obviously Sturgeon set a date but not in law to keep the delusional on side for a bit longer. Numpties now believe this is all part of a secret masterplan that Sturgeon keeps safely hidden in her handbag. One numpty even posts that the changeover to Flynn is part of her plan. Delusional all the way to the end.
ReplyDeleteNow you anonymous believe there will be a de facto referendum. On what basis do you say it IS happening? Or is the SNP now a faith based organisation like a quasi religion? The faith is strong but past evidence demonstrates Sturgeon does not keep promises. Just hang in there with your faith for another couple of years if you want.
That’s not my point. Or at least not what I meant. I think they need to be held accountable. The SNP. I’m not fully sure they will have the balls to actually do a defacto ref. I really hope they do. Especially as some of the prominent members were saying the opposite of Sturgeon (hopefully the new Westminster leaders are better about this).
DeleteBut let’s just be kind to them and say it’s happening. If that were the case. Then what would be better for the independence movement and number of yes votes. Delusional positivity. Or absurd negativity. I’d pick the former. Even tho I can be arsed reading it personally.
Anonymous - no evidence to back up the fact that a de facto will happen. Just your desire it would be nice if it happens. Yes the SNP needs to be held accountable because at present they are not a credible political party of Scottish independence. Your approach seems to be let's all just keep our fingers crossed that the SNP actually do something. How about the SNP getting rid of GERS or will that be available for the Britnats during a de facto referendum. What sort of Independence Party produces a document every year saying Scotland has a massive financial deficit? It is also obvious that a Scottish Parliament de facto next year is the best option for a good yes vote but Sturgeon blanks it. The party that blanked having any discussion on independence now all these years later is having a conference - a conference - next year at some unspecified date while Scotland freezes and people are struggling financially - pathetic.
DeleteWhat has been absurd is the actions of the SNP if they want independence.
Last stand by The Bathtub Admiral on WGD:-
ReplyDeleteyesindyref2 says:
December 8, 2022 at 1:45 pm
What an eejit he is, he is actually good with his defence brief.
I think Flynn should refuse to accept his resignation. Or appoint him as defence spokesman.
Being more of a Bathtub Pacifist myself, I'd have to disagree with him about that. McDonald's resignation is extremely heartening as far as I'm concerned.
DeleteI still can't understand why we should give up an Indy majority in Holyrood as getting an even bigger majority ain't going to make a bit of difference to Westminster.
ReplyDeleteIs this not really about Alba a Westminster election puts Alba's two MPs at risk and Alba would be an irrelevance in such an election.
Is this not really about allowing Alba to campaign for list votes.
It would fail and all that would happen is too many Alba supporters instead of campaigning positively for Alba they would just start an anti Nicola anti SNP campaign.Which would scupper any chance of SNP voters giving their list vote to Alba and giving the Unionists lots of ammunition.
Rocksie - the kindest thing I can think to say about that post is that it is gibberish and only an Alba hater could come up with that nonsense.
DeleteA question, i did not choose to be listed here as “anonymous” I don’t know how this happened , did I miss a question at registration ? I certainly didn’t tick a box saying yes I want to be anonymous , my earlier post here above 7th dec 5.15 I have inserted my name terence callachan , how do I change anonymous to terence callachan where di I make this change, thanks
ReplyDelete