I repeatedly warned that if independence supporters were foolish enough to vote Labour last Thursday (which undoubtedly happened in large numbers, although in the vast majority of cases for "Daily Record" rather than "Stuart Campbell" type reasons), the media and the establishment would leap on the outcome and try to turn it into a generational 1979-style setback that would draw a line under independence for the foreseeable future. We're seeing those attempts before our eyes right now, for example with Andrew Marr claiming that the 'risk' of the UK breaking up has "vanished" - an objectively ludicrous claim given that Scotland still has a pro-independence government and there is a clear pro-independence majority in the Scottish Parliament. Nevertheless, independence supporters are only human and it's possible they may be psyched out by this shock-and-awe Hollywood production telling them that independence is dead and that they have to "move on". It's therefore conceivable that the next few polls will show some movement towards No.
However that certainly didn't happen before the election, and we mustn't allow unionists to rewrite history about that. A frequent claim on social media in recent days is that it was never true to say that support for independence was "roughly 50%" and that it was actually averaging at 43%. The technical term for that claim is "complete and utter tripe". There have been twelve independence polls since John Swinney became First Minister, and here is the average result -
Should Scotland be an independent country?
Blimey, is that it? Only two ministers outside the Scotland Office and both of non-Cabinet rank? Would it be unkind of me to point out that the outgoing Tory government had similar levels of Scottish representation in spite of only having 6 or 7 Scottish seats?How has 37 helped? https://t.co/oYJonhljpO
— James Kelly (@JamesKelly) July 10, 2024
I’d say Andrew Marr exaggerates when he says the risk of the UK breaking up has “vanished “, however there’s little doubt it has diminished.
ReplyDeleteLet’s hope the SNP get their act together before 2026, otherwise the risk may well vanish.
Andrew Marr and his privately educated chums will still be claiming the risk of the UK has vanished after we're independent and it looks like Wales is leaving Rumpuk.
DeleteAndrew Marr, like the other former bbc luvvies, lowered their reputations going to LBC and others. Total narcissism.
ReplyDeleteNick Abbot LBC @ 10pm tonight.
DeleteLet's say it's 48% if we are rounding up. That is only 2% away from half the electorate. And this is without a referendum date, a campaign or any immediate chance of a vote.
ReplyDeleteI would be delighted to start a campaign on those numbers.
Mind, Indy is low down on people’s radar because it’s been left in the long grass by the SNP. Barely gets any mention outside of election campaigns, and there’s just no clear vision being made of an independent Scotland and what it means for me and you. If people could believe in that, they’d see the other issues all connect to independence.
DeleteFor now, though, the first question everyone asks isn’t what does independence look like but how are we going to get out of the cul de sac where we find ourselves thanks to the dodgy driver?
The SNP weren't allowed to open up the arsenal to hand out the weapons to all the "real indy" supporters, they were only allowed to speak about it and they did that a lot
DeleteI just know you regret not being handed a pitchfork or a torch to burn the witch
Still fear her return eh? so you should, it all might be in her book
I fear her lingering around in the shadows, spouting pish whenever she fancies the media might like it. I’d prefer she settled into her self-chosen political retirement and that she Wheesht for Indy for a change!
DeleteI was away election week, voted SNP for my MP who actually did campaign for WASPI. The manifesto was OK too, the campaign crud. Catching up, the last 4 articles on the SNP website older first, a snippet or title:
ReplyDelete"A strong team of SNP MPs will fight tooth and nail against Labour cuts" = Westminster
""The SNP is offering Scotland the hope of a better future: John Swinney’s letter to voters" but snippet = "This election is about who you can trust to put Scotland’s interests first in Westminster." = Westminster
"Only the SNP offers a better future. But we need to vote for it." but snippet = "From free tuition to public service reform to the game-changing Scottish Child Payment" = DEVOLVED Holyrood
"SNP will stand up for Scotland while Labour MPs stand meekly behind Starmer" = Westminster
Not one dickey bird standing out about I-N-D-E-P-E-N-D-E-N-C-E.
No post-mortem needed. Cowardice and stupidity lost the SNP the election.
No no, YI2. It was the mighty legions of Alba wot done it. The SNP must dial back independence, pronto, or no serious adults will vote for them again. Wheesht for Indy clearly doesn’t cut It any more. Let’s Wheesht for the Union too!
DeleteThe ravening hordes of Alba descended on the orcs and goblins of the SNP in a mighty and evil battle unleashing chaos and darkness all over Scotland ...
Delete... oh wait, wasn't that a game?
Deleted Anon at 11.49: I asked you earlier to stop posting. Please do so. Thanks.
DeleteDunno about orcs, YI2, but Alba did pull off a pretty faithful performance of the Spartans in 300…
DeleteMight be worth testing the waters with a poll of your own James. In a few weeks the election dust will have settled and a poll might give an interesting baseline for the Labour government era.
ReplyDeleteIndeed. It would also be interesting to probe Indy support (and opposition) with a few independence specific questions. Do people really feel it’s off the table and what motivates them to support or oppose it?
DeleteMarr is a Woke Yoon Narcissist - Give me a break from quoting him He will find many alphabet bandits like himself in the present SNP. He would be right at home in it. Indy is finished as long as the Poisonous Sturgeon isn't residing in a cell wearing Orange.
ReplyDeleteSuch Garbage. Stalker of the ex FM.
DeleteWill you share your cell with her?
DeleteNot guilty, therefore unlikely stalker
DeleteSupporting the people of Gaza is not the same as supporting Hamas. Opposing the indiscriminate military aggression of the Israeli state is not the same as antisemitism. Trying to fog these distinctions simply serves the interests of the Netanyahu apartheid state.
ReplyDeleteSeparately, independence supporters could move things forward a bit by joining and motivating the network of , non party political, pro independence groups which already exists across much of the country.
Deleted Anon at 12.39am: Go away, do not post here ever again, many thanks.
ReplyDeleteDeleted Anon at 12.41: Congratulations, I suppose, for a take that is competely bonkers even by the normal standards of trolling on this blog. Let's see...
* Referring to me as a young lad with a lot still to learn = should've gone to Specsavers
* Implying that anyone who calls out Israel's genocide is a "supporter of Hamas terror" = moral bankruptcy
* Threatening to oppose Scottish independence unless I and others line up behind Netanyahu and the genocide: no offence, but I don't think anyone is ever going to mistake right-wing nutjobs such as yourself as the natural Yes demographic.
What's completely barmy, though, is your suggestion that only supporters of the genocide can be "principled" and those who oppose it must be "bending with the prevailing wind", ie. saying what they know to be untrue. I'm afraid you're going to have to face the fact that I mean what I say about Israel. If you'd asked me in 2006 during the Israel-Hezbollah war, two years before I even started this blog, you'd have got the same answer.
By the way, if I'm supposedly using Gaza to drive up the popularity of this blog, why do I hardly ever mention the subject here? You're getting muddled up with my Twitter output.
In common humanity terms the taking and murder of hostages by Hamas was murder. The bombing of innocent civilians and aid workers by Israel is also murder. If some of the posters on here cannot fathom that one we are all in trouble.
ReplyDeleteEverybody understands that Hamas committed murder of civilians . But there is the nuanced position that when a people are deprived of basic human rights in their own country some of those people will be driven to extremist positions.
DeleteIt happened in N . Ireland , Cyprus and many other places.
"Nuanced" is a great word to use. It suggests erudition and sophistication. And even more so when used correctly.
DeleteSoonds like the biggest thing thee'll dee is in yer breeks.
Delete"Thee"? Very Yorkshire
DeleteKC did the Scots language course on Duolingo but accidentally selected the Leeds dialect.
DeleteWasnt KC . I was referring to Gupp when he was suggesting that I dont know what nuanced means.
DeleteI can assure that thee ( dee in shetland) is used in many Scots language dialects. After all many N English dialects are , or were , closer to Scots than to standard English.
That expression come from my wife who happens to speak the Doric dialect of Scots.
Ey up, lad. We missed you when you were down t'pit.
DeleteAe fond kiss, and then we sever;
DeleteAe fareweel, and then forever!
Deep in heart-wrung tears I'll pledge thee,
Warring sighs and groans I'll wage thee.
Who shall say that Fortune grieves him,
While the star of hope she leaves him?
Me, nae cheerfu' twinkle lights me;
Dark despair around benights me.
Burns ain't from Yokshire, lad.
He ain't from the "benighted" 21st Century either, bud.
DeleteMurdering and taking hostage ais depriving others of their human rights or does that not count? Being an extremist does not morally give authority to murder.
ReplyDeleteAre you talking about Hamas or the Israeli state?
DeleteRight wing folk such as you see everything in simplistic terms . As I said there's nuances in the Gaza situation that you obviously cannot or will not see. The Israeli state are guilty of depriving the people in Gaza of their basic rights . It's a sort of apartheid . Mind that Thatcher called Mandela a terrorist.
Delete"Nuances" again? Impressive. When used accurately.
DeleteYou’re coming over as a bit of a wank Gupp. Maybe grow up a bit
DeleteNuance = a subtle difference in shade of meaning .
ReplyDeleteAye , yes .
Hi James, it’s encouraging that support for independence has remained as solid as it has. Are you aware of any recent polls that also asked those who do support it when they actually wanted it to happen?
ReplyDeleteGood question which would be interesting to know.
DeleteAnon@1:32,
DeleteSadly for you, a majority of the Scottish people never want it to happen.
A large chunk, but no longer a majority. Go look at the figures yourself.
DeleteAs for when: "after I've retired" is all too common an answer in the post-2014 SNP.
Google "thee" Scots language:
ReplyDelete" " thee ( second person singular objective) survived in most [ Scots] dialects until mid 19th century and still exist to some extent in Southern , North Northern and insular Scots".
If you don't believe me Google it.
I rest my case and repeat to Gupp : the biggest thing thee'll dee is in yer breeks. Although I suppose the yer should be thy , but I've never heard that. Also many other words common to Scots and northern Enlish eg bairn.
I also ken fine fit " nuanced " means and if you insert the definition at 12.52 into what I said aboon it maks sense. Guid sense.
As I said we dinnae a' bide in the central belt.
Alba gu brath!
A majority would go for capital punishment and House of Lords. Not happening anytime soon.
ReplyDeletePeople mistake the UK for a democracy.
DeleteDeleted Anons at 3.04 and 3.31: Do not post here ever again, thank you.
ReplyDeleteI would be interested to hear how the IDF apologists apologise for the IDF murdering children and taking thousands of Palestinians hostage every day for years long before the Hamas atrocity in the West Bank.
ReplyDeleteDeleted Anons at 5.18 and 5.24: Do not attempt to post here ever again, thank you.
ReplyDeleteCan any poll on Scottish independence really be given any credibility given that all the people who commission them are against it, and they pay the money for the result they want the public to see?
ReplyDeleteYou gave yourself away there, Anon, the supportive comments were supposedly from other people, not from you.
ReplyDeleteApprox 1.7 million voted Yes in 2014
ReplyDeleteApprox 700,000 voted SNP in 2024
45% Yes in 2014
47% Yes in 2024
There are roughly 1 million Yessers who don't vote SNP, and half of those are former SNP voters.
Well done Sturgeon, et al.
Yet another post-election commenter's suggestion who would have us believe that he has indisputable forensic proof that Nicola Sturgeon is the root of all evil....(sigh).
DeleteSo you don't see any connection between the loss of a million SNP votes and the moribund decade of Sturgeon's 'leadership' (sigh)...
DeleteAnon 11:5pm.it was half a million SNP votes lost (not a million). in a much lower turnout,and a lot of tactical voting.Of course this was not a good election for the SNP,but every election has a psychology of its own.I have been there before in 1974 when the SNP was reduced from 11 MPs to 2 Mps.I also recall two general elections when Labour was reduced to one MP in Scotland
DeleteBurying your head in the sand is precisely what brought the SNP down last Thursday. The fact is that they have lost the support of thousands. Whether it is through tactical voting or apathy makes no difference until the party starts listening to the electorate again, something which they have signally failed to do since 2014.
DeleteYes it saves them talking about their own internal problems with their current leadership rather than from 3 leaders ago.
ReplyDeleteThose pitiful results for Alba also suggest that there's a hell of a lot more of us scunnered with you both, Jimbo. I voted neither SNP nor Alba, and so did hundreds of thousands more.
DeleteStill with 1.5% the only way is up….. eh naw, could still go down. ALBA and the other small parties need to merge.
ReplyDeletePeople rejected ALL of them, along with the SNP. Even Eva Comrie, who beat Kenny MacAskill in Grangemouth where they alone campaigned on the critically important issue of the refinery closure, got hee-haw. No one came out good from this election. The people's verdict was clear: to hell with all of you.
DeleteListen to their message. We can't go on like this. The factionalism, incompetence and sheer ego on display all round is the death of us.
This piece once again reinforces how the establishment controlled media feeds is a load of disinformation.
ReplyDeleteLabour's stunning victory where they secured 2 million less votes than Corbyn in 2017.
Independence collapsing.
Scotland not a country. No rights to a referendum...... we are fed what to think.
Robin McAlpine has a cogent pod on all of that:
Deletehttps://commonweal.scot/podcast/the-common-weal-policy-podcast-episode-214/
Obviously, Yes would never have reached 45% in 2014 if everyone trusted what the London media would have them believe. We can't expect that kind of assistance from the state we wish to collapse. They've always told us we're Too Wee, Too Poor and Too Stupid, and they always will. You can even hear it in their coverage of Ireland, now a *century* on after independence. Expect no favours there!
No, our failure in recent years comes down to Scotgov. Magnificent chances have been squandered, obvious to all, and the daily bread and butter basics are going pear-shaped with ever worse mismanagement.
In 2007-2014: Holyrood was our greatest lever for independence and the exemplar of our vision.
Since 2015: you just can't say the same.
All the scot gov fault/ I dont think so. Some faults yes but many soc-called "activists" also should look to themselves and ask if they also had a part to play in their false messages such as UDI which was never deliverable then or now and in the future well none of us can predict that.
ReplyDeleteWhy were the activists so much happier and more active in the past?
Delete