Tuesday, February 6, 2024

It's official: the Norstat independence poll has Yes drawing level on 50% of the vote

You might remember that about ten days ago, the Sunday Times published a poll from Norstat, which recently took over Panelbase.  On the independence question, it showed Yes closing the gap to just one percentage point before the exclusion of Don't Knows - which raised the obvious possibility that Yes might have drawn level at 50/50 on the rounded headline numbers after Don't Knows were stripped out.  However, it was impossible to know because for some reason the Sunday Times didn't bother to mention those numbers in their write-up of the poll (or they didn't as far as I could see).

I drew a blank when I initially looked for the Norstat data tables last week, but I've just found them, and the headline result is the one we were hoping for.

Should Scotland be an independent country?  (Norstat / Sunday Times, 22nd-25th January 2024)

Yes 50% (+2)
No 50% (-2)

Rounded to one decimal place, the figures are Yes 49.6%, No 50.4%.

I also couldn't find any sign of percentages for Alba in the Sunday Times write-up, which I had assumed meant that Alba weren't even offered as an option to respondents.  However, it turns out they were offered as an option on the Holyrood list question, and were on 3% of the vote.  It's difficult to know how to interpret that, because Panelbase typically produced more favourable results for Alba than other polling firms, often as high as 5% or 6%, so if Norstat have continued with exactly the same methodology as Panelbase, 3% should arguably be seen as a slightly disappointing result for Alba.  However, that's a very big "if".

Also of interest in the data tables is the further evidence of how complex Labour's coalition of support has become, which may prove to be a major problem for them either before or after the general election.  Among likely voters, no fewer than 25% of Yessers from 2014 are now planning to vote Labour, as are 19% of people who would vote Yes in a new referendum right now, and indeed 20% of people who voted SNP in the 2019 general election.  In terms of raw numbers, 54 respondents have switched from SNP to Labour since 2019, compared to only 28 who have switched from Tory to Labour.  We know from the independence question that many of those SNP-to-Labour switchers must still be pro-indy, which means Labour are actually more reliant on Yes voters than on unionists if they wish to make progress in this election.  That puts them in an awkward position given that their default setting is to pump out relentless Brit Nat propaganda which would be far more likely to appeal to former Tory voters.

Amusingly, it looks like the Sunday Times asked for a downright leading question to be asked as one of the supplementaries, but still didn't get the result they wanted or probably expected.  Respondents were asked if they would support the reintroduction of university tuition fees or a graduate tax "if it led to more university places for Scottish students", but even with that extremely strong nudge they still said no by a margin of 43% to 33%.

*  *  *

Before we finish, a reminder that the Scot Goes Pop opinion poll fundraiser urgently needs a boost - let's not leave it in limbo for months.  It's important that not all Scottish opinion polling is commissioned by anti-independence clients - we need to make sure that occasionally questions are asked that Yes supporters want asked.  Donations can be made via the fundraiser page HERE.

However if you have a Paypal account the best way to donate is via direct Paypal payment, because that can totally eliminate fees depending on which option you select, and payment usually comes through instantly.  My Paypal email address is:

jkellysta@yahoo.co.uk

17 comments:

  1. Certainly very encouraging. If only the SNP could get its act together.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They’re doing what they were elected to, as Continuity Team in the leadership election: No Indy please, we’re progressives.

      Progress towards what? Labour rule, apparently.

      Delete
  2. Hey Stewart, you’re likely to be deleted. I think you’re way over the top in how you put your argument, ranting against Salmond and even throwing “QAnon” into the stew. This isn’t America, thank god.

    If Alba were neck and neck with the Greens, your point about splitting “the yes vote” to Labour’s advantage would make more sense. Perhaps you should point your fire at your friendly allies who will cost you several seats soon enough.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Replies
    1. Nom nom nom nom! Independence is near. Unite behind the party. We’ll ask for section 30 with vigour this time! Nothing can stop us.

      Delete
  4. The people who are undermining and betraying independence are Sturgeon's gang. The people undermining the SNP are the Britnats in the SNP.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As I said in my post above, the SNP really needs to get its act together, however I think you’re going way over the top in describing them as Britnats.
      Nobody denies the SNP under Sturgeon were pretty bad, however hopefully things are going to get better from here, in all probability with a new FM, hopefully before the GE, but certainly after.

      Delete
    2. Steve P says : - " Nobody denies the SNP under Sturgeon were pretty bad" - really look at the post below yours. Plenty people still think Sturgeon was great and is great. People who have high levels of cognitive dissonance. There are Britnats in the SNP because they don't want independence - they are happy with devolution - so no I am not going over the top never mind way over the top.

      Delete
    3. Stewart Dredge - yes the polls were good as you say but Sturgeon's gang did nothing about getting independence. What she did do was raise money off the back of multiple promises of holding Indyref2. A classic scam.

      Delete
    4. Exactly. “Nicola did no wrong. It was all those mean boys over there.” Its indefensible bollocks that would insult a schoolboy but they parrot it all the same.

      Delete
  5. Sorry for stating the obvious, but 2014 was a decade ago.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Stewart, if you can't post constructively, just don't post. As I said the other day, I don't want to have to turn pre-moderation back on simply because of one troublemaker.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Stewart, either post constructively or go away.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Talking about people like Stewart Dredge here we have another poor soul suffering from cognitive dissonance on WGD.

    I give you Handandshrimp says:- " I've become increasingly convinced that Branchform is a Putinesque effort to undermine and, if possible, destroy political enemies of the state. " Now it is not impossible that the British state is milking the situation for all its worth but who keeps giving them the ammunition. Sturgeon's gang that's who. It's not made up lies by the Britnats. The shrimp should ask himself where is the £600k, why has a motor home been sitting on Murrell's mother's driveway for years, why has Murrell been giving undeclared loans to the SNP, why did Murrell lie about the membership numbers, why do SNP politicians lie that the £600k is SNP money?

    Handandshrimp also has this to say:- " We may never know if the accusations against Salmond were politically motivated or not."

    We do know Shrimp - it was Sturgeon's gang - right from the off in late 2017.

    The shrimp, with a straight face, no doubt, also says:- " That was a painful episode and we may never know just how much of it was political dirty tricks to attack the SNP."

    So the shrimp thinks Salmond went through two trials just to attack the SNP. The highest levels of cognitive dissonance I have ever seen in any WGD numpty. It was Sturgeon's gang ya numpty.

    Of course in this discussion Irish Skier throws in his usual Salmond was innocent but sleazy comment and finishes by saying:- " England's civil service headed up by ' London's woman in Scotland ' failed to take him out." Aye Skier got that one right Sturgeon failed again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 2017 was the turning point. We had the wind of inevitability in our sails but all of this suddenly arrived, just in the nick of time. Just in the Nickie of time, you could say. Because, frankly, who else could it be?

      Delete
  9. South Africa taking the UK to the ICJ for facilitating genocide. What a shithouse of a place the UK is, run by shitty politicians. David Cameron called Putin all sorts of names when he massacred Syrians in Aleppo to kill the people he wanted dead - flattened the city - but here he is today facilitating the same approach but on a much larger scale in Gaza. Double standards - it's not what's being done but who is doing it that counts for UK governments.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. All true. We do still need independence, after all!

      What dismays me is when the National and the rest are full of UK Bad stories—agreed, London Rule is toxic—and that's it. You'll have had your full.

      It's all worth reporting on, I’m sure. The problem is: SO WHAT DO WE DO ABOUT IT?

      The one thing we shouldn't be doing is slapping ourselves on the back and toddling off to another Westminster junket. "Down with Britain!" Down all the way to the restaurant.

      Delete