For today's YouTube commentary, I bring you the results of the weekly GB-wide poll from YouGov, which are unusually good for the SNP on the Scottish subsample. I also discuss Andy Maciver's view that John Swinney's new independence strategy, insisting that only a single-party outright majority for the SNP will count as a mandate for independence referendum, "accepts the fact" that independence is off the agenda. I explain why Mr Maciver is wrong about that, because John Swinney is not accepting a fact - he's needlessly creating a reality that forces independence off the agenda for at least five years. The SNP faces a choice of two futures at its conference, because Mr Swinney's target of an SNP-only majority is totally unachievable, whereas the alternative proposal of seeking an outright mandate for independence on the list ballot, and with votes for all pro-indy parties contributing to that mandate, is perfectly achievable, and if successful would push independence right back onto the agenda again. Why is John Swinney pushing for obviously the wrong one of those two strategies?
It may be that he wants to get back to his comfort zone, and intends to engineer a situation where he can say "we went all out for a cast-iron mandate that couldn't be ignored, but fell pitifully short - that shows how far away we are from building the trust of the people, and we now have to accept that's going to be a very long-term project". I think that may be part of it, but it's not the whole explanation. I think he also believes that the SNP will get a better election result by linking independence to votes for the SNP alone and setting the unattainable target, and he is therefore using independence as a tool to win elections for the SNP, which he regards as an end in itself. He therefore isn't unduly concerned if the independence cause is harmed along the way. Most SNP members, I would suggest, think it should be the other way around - they understand that independence is the goal, and that the SNP should be used as a tool to win that goal.
You can watch the video on the embedded player below, or at this link.
Could it be John Swinney's plan is actually a good one if the polls are improving so much, is he concentrating voters minds on what he believes will count?
ReplyDeleteThat only makes sense if you really think Swinney is going to do so well that he'll improve on Nicola Sturgeon's 48% of the vote from 2021 (which wasn't quite enough to win a majority). You don't believe that any more than I do.
DeleteMaybe John Swinney is just using a get everybody riled up reverse psychology thing to get everybody's blood boiling to the point the branches wake up and come up with something productive whilst in rebellion mode. LOL! On a serious note - the Holyrood Sources bods are absolutely right on the impacts of the loss of Kate Forbes and that's bound to impact on the next set of poll data where the not indy supporting but SNP supporting bods might want to back off and out. I hope nobody is betting their house on any specific Holyrood 2026 outcome. Not even any surety that John Swinney will get re-elected let alone anybody else people are anticipating to take on specific roles here and there.
DeleteAre Alba out on the campaign trail yet - or are they going through some re-thinking and moving around of candidates, increasing the number of their candidates maybe sniffing more opportunities if the movement continues its anti-SNP stuff?
Alba used up their final opportunity a long time ago.
DeleteSo what you're essentially saying: John Swinney is putting Party before Country?
ReplyDeleteIt's pretty hard to deny, I would suggest, that a message of "only SNP votes count towards independence" is a party-first attitude and a party-first strategy.
DeleteIndeed James. If this isn’t 100% what a party-over-country strategy looks like, then what exactly is?
DeleteYou're a good comfortable listen on Youtube James. You have a good voice for it. A refreshing change from the shouty aggressive podcast Youtubes of which there are too many. Means you're a good listen and increases the attention span.
DeleteImpact of the looming departure of Kate Forbes yet to be seen in the polls. She brought in moderate voters to the party fold that otherwise might go... somewhere else, but not sure where? Perhaps the LibDems? Perhaps to not voting at all? SNP really missing a trick if it's seen to be not just doing without her in HR but forgetting the substantial slice of the electorate of like mind and political instincts as her.
ReplyDeleteAlways thought she was right wing. Too right wingers she is a moderate.
DeleteIf YouGov had contacted me (I know they don’t, they use their own panel of lightly-paid volunteers), I’d have told them, accurately, that I intend to vote for Corbyn’s party.
ReplyDeleteBut does that unnamed party still just count as Other? Does YouGov even have a place for it in their model yet? Are they waiting on it getting a name?
And might this murky uncertainty be the real reason for Swinney’s unexpected “surge” in YouGov’s figures?
The answer to your final question is almost certainly no, but it's true that YouGov aren't offering the Corbyn party as an option yet, and that may be giving us a misleading impression of the state of play. In particular, Labour support might be overstated at the moment.
DeleteI read that the Corbyn party was estimated to have 600,000 supporters already - but maybe all those articles referring to 'supporters' as opposed to 'members' maybe just means a name hasn't been finalised and that the Electoral Commission registration process hasn't gone through. Could it be that sort of waiting for administrative confirmation and no official capacity yet to legally accept subs being an issue - that has affected a no inclusion just yet on the YouGov data?
DeleteLabour only had 25k members in Scotland at the last count. Corbyn would wipe the floor with Sarwar up here if they run in 2026.
DeleteIf were seriously expecting scotland to go it alone and face down London, the least international viewers will expect to see is a majority of votes for a party advocating independence. Some coalition of different parties is a starting point but isnt as strong as a snp majority. That would set the cat among the pigeons.
ReplyDeleteA referendum was achieved with an snp majority before. It can happen again.
Does "international viewers" include the hamster population of Uzbekistan? We mustn't neglect them. Very difficult to impress but we can't expect to get anywhere without them.
DeleteIf were seriously expecting scotland to go it alone and face down London, the least international viewers will expect to see is a majority of votes for a party advocating independence.
DeleteOh, is it a majority of votes now? Good to hear the SNP have decided a majority of seats wouldn't be quite challenging enough
Maggie, Maggie, maggie believed seats won is enough.
DeleteAn outright snp majority could be won on less that 50% of the vote, which would immediately invalidate it.
ReplyDeleteOne of the most morale-sapping things that the SNP keep doing is coming up with these proposals about how to get a referendum that have so many holes and internal contradictions that it's obvious they're not actually intended to work. Often they don't even bother getting their bullshit straight with one another, as we saw the last time they pulled this nonsense and we had one minister saying we were aiming for a popular majority, while another would say it was a seat majority. No wonder even the "duggers" are losing patience
DeleteParliamentary elections are assessed on the basis of seats won, not the accumulated percentage of votes at the end of thr election. A majority of seats was achieved with less than 50% of the votes back in 2011. It was the seat majority than won the case for a referendum.
DeleteIt can only be a majority of votes. Westminster and unionists won’t accept any less.
DeleteIt’s up to us all to get all independence supporters out to vote.
Absolutely on the button Keaton.
DeleteGood to see so many catching up with what IFS has been saying for years.
DeleteThe greatest frustration when people talk about these things: How few people seem to understand the D'Hondt voting system used in Scottish Parliament elections, the mathematical fluke that resulted in a majority in 2011 and there being no realisation/curiosity as to why a majority hasn't happened again since.
DeleteThey did worse in 2011 than in 2016 & 2021 so why did they win a majority then but not in 2016 or 2021? A lot more people voted SNP, they swept the constituencies... so why did that result in fewer seats?
Because D'Hondt is designed to balance things out and top up parties on the Regional List who underperform on the Constituency. 2011 was a sweet spot between the two, an improbability that shouldn't have happened as the system was designed to prevent majorities from happening. It's ludicrous to aim for one again as you won't be able to repeat the same circumstances.
The so called "duggers" only lose patience with people like @Keaton and your Westminster pals because they know what you are all about
DeleteI doubt duggers like you know what day of the week it is.
DeleteAnon at 9.52. Thanks for making this point again. Swinney’s’s proposal amounts to this. Dear Voters. Here is the bar for Indy to be progressed after Holyrood 2026. It’s an impossible bar to reach. If
Delete(When) it’s not reached, Independence is being put on the back burner. Please vote for us. No? Why not?
Whatever the system, pr or ftp or dhont. They will count the number of votes.
DeleteJames - what was the size of the subsample?
ReplyDelete"because Mr Swinney's target of an SNP-only majority is totally unachievable"
ReplyDeleteWell, considering YES is around 54% but the SNP is still low 30s, all they have to do is encourage ALL Indy supporters to vote SNP. And they do have until early next year to launch that part of their "plan".
An overall majority for one single party is vastly more impressive than sharing it with the likes of Harvey, Slater, Chapman & Greer certified non-accountants and charter members of the MBPC (Mass Bullsh4t "Progressive" Club). Who would trade wingey support for Indy for some stupid ultra-progressive pie in the sky like trying to beat the UK by a few months to a glass bottle deposit scheme which wouldn't work.
So, best foot forward for Indy is one single party who are flat out for Indy. To encourage back those 530,000 lost voters, even holding their noses for the sake of Indy.
All the SNP have to do is BE that party, and convincingly so. And they do have until around March 2026 to do that - before the postal votes go out.
Can they do it? Splutter! But perhaps it's what Swinney is trying to do, gently gently scare no monkeys.
Really not looking good for the Scottish Greens is it?
ReplyDeleteSo it depends if you lean into lime green or reach out to those who favour British Racing Green. I can't see a reconciliation and nor can Dame Kay Adams of London.
DeleteJohn Swinney dismisses SNP members' rival independence plan.
ReplyDeleteSNP leader John Swinney has dismissed an independence strategy backed by more than 40 party branches, saying it is “not going to work".
Interesting point: All three of the SNP leadership candidates from 2023 will no longer be SNP MSPs after the next election — and in all likelihood, none of them will be MSPs at all.
ReplyDeleteThere are now over 25 SNP MSPs standing down, the highest number since devolution began. If they truly believed independence was on the horizon in the near future… wouldn't they want to stay and see it through?
Also, from the opposite perspective: why aren’t they staying aboard the gravy train? If you’ve sacrificed your principles, your sincerity and your reputation for a career at the tasty trough, why not stick around for as long as the grub keeps coming?
DeleteAre even the paid politicians that caused all this getting scunnered now? Bless them.
Mr. Swinney wants a new majority for his support base of salary and pension takers. Competence, some of the time, in running a devolved government does not inspire voters struggling against neoliberal austerity to feed the super rich.They may vote SNP as a lesser evil but that is all.
ReplyDeleteThe opposition strategy offers a step in the right direction. With it must come a drive to help public opinion to see that the UK is in thrall to the failed economics of Freidmam, Laffer et al. Socially inclusive economic alternatives will have to be offered while patiently making the links to show that the UK is incapable of such change and only self determination will enable Scotland to deliver.
Does anyone seriously believe that the current SNP leadership could do this ? If so let's hear the evidence !
Laffer curves and Neoliberalism well to one side, it would be a breath of fresh air if they actually talked about what would CHANGE for independent Scotland!
DeleteIf you sound like you don’t even believe it yourself, you’re not convincing anyone. So they don’t even try.