There's a fascinating piece of speculation on Eric Joyce's blog today that a post-apocalypse Scottish Labour might reinvent itself as a proper Scottish party separate from the London organisation, and then perform the ultimate act of triangulation by embracing independence and actively campaigning for it. At first glance, the idea seems totally ludicrous, but I must admit it's occurred to me before in an idle sort of way. It's become abundantly clear since Jim Murphy took the reins that he and his acolytes believe in absolutely nothing (other than nuclear weapons), and are prepared to reverse almost every policy if they think it will help them win back the ex-Labour Yes voters they need to limit their losses in May and beyond. The obvious eventual destination of that process is to adopt the policy those voters feel most passionately about, ie. independence itself.
The historical precedent that suggests this might just happen can be found in the late 1980s. Labour astonished themselves by adopting soft nationalist language about popular sovereignty, and committing themselves to a devolution package that was much more radical than they had put forward when actually in government a decade earlier. Why did they do it? Partly it was triangulation - the Govan by-election demonstrated there was a huge threat on their left flank unless they could nick the SNP's clothes. But an equally important reason was that faith in the normal electoral pendulum was starting to crumble - the Thatcher government seemed utterly entrenched, and it began to look as if the only way Scottish Labour politicians could ever hope to enjoy real power again would be if they challenged the Tories' legitimacy in ruling Scotland on a small minority of the vote.
You can see how a similar perfect storm might be brewing now. If a Tory-led government is re-elected in May, and if the Scottish Labour contingent at Westminster is largely wiped out, Holyrood would for the foreseeable future be left as the only realistic avenue for aspiring (or current) Labour career politicians. If a breathtaking gesture for the benefit of Yes voters was the only way of getting the party back in the game at Holyrood, that might just begin to look like an attractive option. It would have the potential of reuniting the old Labour coalition, because left-wing anti-independence voters who truly believe in the Dunc Dinctum guff about "UK solidarity" would have nowhere else to go - much as the likes of Jeremy Corbyn and Tony Benn had nowhere else to go in the 1990s. It would be an immensely satisfying example of Blairite triangulation in reverse.
The snag is that there's a third component of the Labour coalition, which hasn't actually deserted the party yet - namely centrist, affluent, anti-independence voters. Those people do have somewhere else to go, because they could vote Tory or Lib Dem. So I suspect that, no matter how bleak things look for Labour after May, the most we can hope to see from them is some kind of fudge. They might embrace something much closer to Devo Max, or they might commit to another referendum in a few years' time, and promise their membership a "free vote" next time around - as Harold Wilson did in the Common Market referendum of 1975.
Monday, March 9, 2015
Scottish Labour leadership crisis continues : who will replace Jim Murphy if he loses his seat in May?
I was a touch bemused by the supposedly "relieved" reaction of some of Jim Murphy's media cheerleaders to the news that the Ashcroft constituency poll of East Renfrewshire put their hero just 1% ahead of his SNP challenger Kirsten Oswald. The reality is that, even if you take that result at face value, it's a "statistical tie" - the standard 3% margin of error means that it's impossible to know whether Murphy or Oswald is in the lead. But it's even worse than that for Murphy, because the poll's methodology was almost bending over backwards to produce a result that would flatter him...
1) Because weighting by 2010 vote recall was foolishly used, the SNP vote was massively downweighted, and the Labour vote was significantly upweighted. For the headline results, the 120 people who recalled voting SNP in 2010 were scaled down to count as just 67. A proportion of that adjustment may have been warranted if SNP supporters are simply keener to speak to telephone pollsters, but it seems likely that for the most part, people who are mixed up between how they voted in 2010 and 2011 were wrongly downweighted.
2) The results of the second voting intention question (asking respondents to think about the candidates in their own constituency) were used for the headline figures, rather than the results of the standard voting intention question, which favoured the SNP more. There's nothing wrong with asking voters to think about local circumstances (in fact it's a very good idea), but that should really be part of the wording of a single voting intention question, so that people don't feel that they "ought" to give a different response at the second time of asking.
3) The Greens received 3% of the vote in the poll, and yet someone who attended the Greens' spring conference emailed me today to say that they'd heard the party won't be standing in East Renfrewshire. If true, it seems plausible that those votes will break more for the SNP than for Labour. Admittedly, it doesn't always work that way when lower preference votes are transferred in local council elections, but it's murderously hard to see the average Green supporter being a fan of Jim Murphy.
4) Even with the help of all these factors which boosted Murphy's position in the poll, he was STILL fractionally behind the SNP. The only reason he was eventually reported as being slightly ahead was the "spiral of silence adjustment" which assigns a large portion of undecided voters to the party they voted for last time around (and thus almost always aids the incumbent). That procedure is claimed to improve the accuracy of the results, but to the best of my knowledge it hasn't been tested in extraordinary circumstances like these.
So there are good reasons for supposing that Murphy may actually be trailing in East Renfrewshire. OK, he still has time to turn things around, but if he fails to do so his brief leadership of Scottish Labour will come to a very abrupt and ignominious end. It may be theoretically possible that the rule insisting that the leader must be a sitting parliamentarian could be finessed, but it would be politically unthinkable. So who would replace him, and become the FOURTH Scottish Labour leader since the 2011 election?
It's safe to assume that it won't be another Westminster MP, because there'll be so few of them left. Neil Findlay would almost certainly put himself forward again, in which case Kezia Dugdale would be under huge pressure to stand as the "stop Findlay" candidate. She's the current darling of the unionist press, so the leadership would be hers for the taking if she wants it - but does she? If not, Jenny Marra would be a possible Plan B, but she seemed just as reluctant as Dugdale to sup from the poisoned chalice last time around.
* * *
UPDATE : SNP draw level with the Liberal Democrats in new Britain-wide Ashcroft poll -
Conservatives 34% (n/c)
Labour 30% (-1)
UKIP 15% (+1)
Greens 8% (+1)
SNP 5% (+1)
Liberal Democrats 5% (-2)
Plaid Cymru 1% (n/c)
The Scottish subsample figures are : SNP 54%, Labour 21%, Conservatives 16%, Liberal Democrats 5%, UKIP 3%, Greens 1%.
1) Because weighting by 2010 vote recall was foolishly used, the SNP vote was massively downweighted, and the Labour vote was significantly upweighted. For the headline results, the 120 people who recalled voting SNP in 2010 were scaled down to count as just 67. A proportion of that adjustment may have been warranted if SNP supporters are simply keener to speak to telephone pollsters, but it seems likely that for the most part, people who are mixed up between how they voted in 2010 and 2011 were wrongly downweighted.
2) The results of the second voting intention question (asking respondents to think about the candidates in their own constituency) were used for the headline figures, rather than the results of the standard voting intention question, which favoured the SNP more. There's nothing wrong with asking voters to think about local circumstances (in fact it's a very good idea), but that should really be part of the wording of a single voting intention question, so that people don't feel that they "ought" to give a different response at the second time of asking.
3) The Greens received 3% of the vote in the poll, and yet someone who attended the Greens' spring conference emailed me today to say that they'd heard the party won't be standing in East Renfrewshire. If true, it seems plausible that those votes will break more for the SNP than for Labour. Admittedly, it doesn't always work that way when lower preference votes are transferred in local council elections, but it's murderously hard to see the average Green supporter being a fan of Jim Murphy.
4) Even with the help of all these factors which boosted Murphy's position in the poll, he was STILL fractionally behind the SNP. The only reason he was eventually reported as being slightly ahead was the "spiral of silence adjustment" which assigns a large portion of undecided voters to the party they voted for last time around (and thus almost always aids the incumbent). That procedure is claimed to improve the accuracy of the results, but to the best of my knowledge it hasn't been tested in extraordinary circumstances like these.
So there are good reasons for supposing that Murphy may actually be trailing in East Renfrewshire. OK, he still has time to turn things around, but if he fails to do so his brief leadership of Scottish Labour will come to a very abrupt and ignominious end. It may be theoretically possible that the rule insisting that the leader must be a sitting parliamentarian could be finessed, but it would be politically unthinkable. So who would replace him, and become the FOURTH Scottish Labour leader since the 2011 election?
It's safe to assume that it won't be another Westminster MP, because there'll be so few of them left. Neil Findlay would almost certainly put himself forward again, in which case Kezia Dugdale would be under huge pressure to stand as the "stop Findlay" candidate. She's the current darling of the unionist press, so the leadership would be hers for the taking if she wants it - but does she? If not, Jenny Marra would be a possible Plan B, but she seemed just as reluctant as Dugdale to sup from the poisoned chalice last time around.
* * *
UPDATE : SNP draw level with the Liberal Democrats in new Britain-wide Ashcroft poll -
Conservatives 34% (n/c)
Labour 30% (-1)
UKIP 15% (+1)
Greens 8% (+1)
SNP 5% (+1)
Liberal Democrats 5% (-2)
Plaid Cymru 1% (n/c)
The Scottish subsample figures are : SNP 54%, Labour 21%, Conservatives 16%, Liberal Democrats 5%, UKIP 3%, Greens 1%.
Sunday, March 8, 2015
SNP lead by 15% in new Poll of Polls
It's been a while since I last updated the Poll of Polls, and I was interested to see how this one would work out, because the Scottish subsamples over recent days have been all over the place. There were a couple of narrower gaps reported by YouGov on Thursday and Friday, but any slight worries we might have had over those were allayed by huge SNP leads in Friday's Populus subsample, and in today's YouGov poll for the Sunday Times.
This update is based on seven Scottish subsamples from GB-wide polls - five from YouGov, one from Populus and one from Opinium. As a number of us have been pointing out for a few weeks, the new Opinium methodology is utterly bonkers, with their Scottish subsample figures practically constituting works of fiction - so the fact that Opinium accounts for as much as one-seventh of today's sample effectively means that the SNP lead is being artificially adjusted downwards.
Scottish voting intentions for the May 2015 UK general election :
SNP 42.1% (-1.7)
Labour 26.9% (+3.0)
Conservatives 18.7% (+1.3)
Liberal Democrats 5.4% (-1.5)
Greens 3.6% (+0.3)
UKIP 3.0% (-1.5)
(The Poll of Polls uses the Scottish subsamples from all GB-wide polls that have been conducted entirely within the last seven days and for which datasets have been provided, and also all full-scale Scottish polls that have been conducted at least partly within the last seven days. Full-scale polls are given ten times the weighting of subsamples.)
* * *
Kenny "Devo or Death" Farquharson live-tweeted Jim Murphy's speech at the Scottish Labour conference yesterday, and there was one line in particular that made me laugh -
"Reminds me of John Smith's platform speeches, some of which were awful."
It took a good twenty seconds for the implication to fully dawn on me. It was a bit like saying : "Jim isn't always a good public speaker, but then Jesus had his off days as well, which means...oh my God...wow."
This update is based on seven Scottish subsamples from GB-wide polls - five from YouGov, one from Populus and one from Opinium. As a number of us have been pointing out for a few weeks, the new Opinium methodology is utterly bonkers, with their Scottish subsample figures practically constituting works of fiction - so the fact that Opinium accounts for as much as one-seventh of today's sample effectively means that the SNP lead is being artificially adjusted downwards.
Scottish voting intentions for the May 2015 UK general election :
SNP 42.1% (-1.7)
Labour 26.9% (+3.0)
Conservatives 18.7% (+1.3)
Liberal Democrats 5.4% (-1.5)
Greens 3.6% (+0.3)
UKIP 3.0% (-1.5)
(The Poll of Polls uses the Scottish subsamples from all GB-wide polls that have been conducted entirely within the last seven days and for which datasets have been provided, and also all full-scale Scottish polls that have been conducted at least partly within the last seven days. Full-scale polls are given ten times the weighting of subsamples.)
* * *
Kenny "Devo or Death" Farquharson live-tweeted Jim Murphy's speech at the Scottish Labour conference yesterday, and there was one line in particular that made me laugh -
"Reminds me of John Smith's platform speeches, some of which were awful."
It took a good twenty seconds for the implication to fully dawn on me. It was a bit like saying : "Jim isn't always a good public speaker, but then Jesus had his off days as well, which means...oh my God...wow."
Davis Cup photos, or 'Entering the Lair of the Union Jack'
If you caught any of the TV coverage of Friday's rather wonderful session of the Davis Cup match between Great Britain and the USA, you'll have heard the Scot Goes Pop horn going into overdrive for Andy Murray and James Ward. That's not a creepy euphemism - I was given a free horn when I arrived at the venue, and as a result I made my presence well and truly felt.
Now, obviously entering a "Deepest Fantasies of Craig Reedie" theme park in the East End of Glasgow does pose some dilemmas for a vile Cybernat such as myself. For example...
Do I follow the instruction that came with my ticket to wear red, white and blue to show my undying devotion to all things British? Er, probably not.
Do I proudly belt out the "national anthem", ie. God Save the Queen? Er, probably not.
Do I stubbornly decline to see anything remotely provocative in the "let's all back the Brits in Glasgow" tweet from David Cameron that is gratuitously displayed on the big screen? Er, probably not.
Do I resist the temptation to groan when the introduction for Andy Murray inevitably contains the dread words "seventy-seven years" and "Fred Perry"? Er, probably not.
I had thought of getting my retaliation in first by bringing along the saltire that I bought for the closing ceremony of the Commonwealth Games, but I reckoned there was sure to be some fascistic Olympic-style ban on the flags of undesirable nations such as Scotland, and I couldn't be bothered with the hassle. Credit where it's due, though - there were no ridiculous rules of that sort, and plenty of saltires could be seen in the crowd. I suspect there would have been even more if people had realised it wouldn't be frowned upon.
I have to say that James Ward's epic comeback to beat John Isner was the most exciting sporting occasion I've ever witnessed in the flesh, although after the best part of five hours I was starting to think back to a quote from a female tennis player years and years ago (I don't recall who it was) after she won a ridiculously long match at Wimbledon -
"I knew I wanted to win, I just couldn't remember why."
Saturday, March 7, 2015
Return of the Syd Little of British politics
Just a quick note to let you know that I have a new article at the International Business Times, about the nostalgia-inducing foray into Scottish affairs of a former Prime Minister who was memorably described by Ben Elton as "the Syd Little of British politics". It can be read HERE. (It's also on Yahoo HERE.)
Wednesday, March 4, 2015
SNP set to defeat Charles Kennedy, and are just 1% away from unseating Jim Murphy, according to rip-roaring Ashcroft polls
If anything, the new batch of Scottish constituency polls from Lord Ashcroft is even more devastating for the unionist establishment than the results we saw a month ago. Eight constituencies have been surveyed (slightly more than I expected), and for the most part they are seats which voted No by a wide margin. In six of them, the SNP have a clear lead, and they're also level in one. Do you want to have a guess which one they're level in? No, seriously, go on, have a guess.
It's Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale - the only Tory-held seat in the whole of Scotland.
And it gets even better - because in the one and only seat in which the SNP are trailing, they're just 1% behind. Do you want to have a guess which one that is? No, seriously, go on, have a guess.
It's East Renfrewshire - the seat that is supposed to be utterly beyond their reach because of the fabled (and yet strangely elusive) "personal vote" of new Scottish Labour leader Jim Murphy.
Actually, the sheer impotence of the big names in bringing their personal vote to bear is something of a recurring theme of the Ashcroft polling - Douglas Alexander wasn't able to do it in the first set of polls, and Charles Kennedy hasn't been able to do it this time around. The former Britain-wide leader of the Liberal Democrats is estimated to be trailing the SNP in Ross, Skye and Lochaber by some 5%. To be fair to Kennedy, though, at least he's keeping the Lib Dems in the hunt, which is more than can be said for his counterpart in West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine, who is miles behind the SNP, as is the Conservative hopeful in the same constituency. That's a less eye-catching finding, but it's arguably more significant, because it's a seat which the Tories fancied might fall to them in the event of a Lib Dem collapse. On this sort of trend, the Lib Dems would be wiped out everywhere apart from Orkney & Shetland, and it's quite possible that the SNP would be the beneficiaries everywhere - including even in Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk, which the conventional wisdom states ought to be a Tory gain.
Here are the full results from all eight seats. The percentage changes listed are from the 2010 general election result.
West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine :
SNP 39% (+23)
Conservatives 25% (-5)
Liberal Democrats 20% (-18)
Labour 10% (-4)
(This would be an SNP gain from the Liberal Democrats. Sir Robert Smith of the Liberal Democrats would lose his seat.)
Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock :
SNP 42% (+24)
Labour 31% (-16)
Conservatives 21% (-5)
Liberal Democrats 2% (-7)
(This would be an SNP gain from Labour. Sandra Osborne of Labour would lose her seat.)
Dumfries and Galloway :
SNP 34% (+22)
Conservatives 30% (-2)
Labour 28% (-18)
Liberal Democrats 2% (-7)
(This would be an SNP gain from Labour. Russell Brown of Labour would lose his seat.)
Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale :
SNP 34% (+23)
Conservatives 34% (-4)
Labour 18% (-11)
Liberal Democrats 7% (-13)
(It's unclear whether this would be a Conservative hold, or an SNP gain from the Conservatives. If the latter, David Mundell of the Conservatives would lose his seat.)
East Renfrewshire :
Labour 34% (-17)
SNP 33% (+24)
Conservatives 26% (-4)
Liberal Democrats 2% (-7)
(This would be a Labour hold. Jim Murphy of Labour would retain his seat - just.)
Edinburgh South-West :
SNP 40% (+28)
Labour 27% (-16)
Conservatives 19% (-5)
Liberal Democrats 4% (-14)
(This would be an SNP gain from Labour.)
Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath :
SNP 45% (+31)
Labour 39% (-26)
Conservatives 7% (-2)
Liberal Democrats 3% (-6)
(This would be an SNP gain from Labour.)
Ross, Skye and Lochaber :
SNP 40% (+25)
Liberal Democrats 35% (-18)
Labour 9% (-6)
Conservatives 8% (-4)
(This would be an SNP gain from the Liberal Democrats. Charles Kennedy of the Liberal Democrats would lose his seat.)
As things stand, the SNP are clearly on course to gain a significant number of seats in strong No areas on the basis of a relatively small minority of the vote. In any seat where they're not too far ahead, the party in second place may feel that there's a potential silver lining to this polling - ie. anti-independence voters might be persuaded that the best strategy for tactical voting has now been definitively established. But it cuts both ways - in a few seats, Labour were until now hoping to benefit not only from Tories voting for them to keep the SNP out, but also from SNP supporters voting for them to keep the Tories out. The message of "the SNP can't win here, it's a straight fight between Labour and the Tories" has just been killed stone dead in Dumfries & Galloway, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale & Tweeddale and East Renfrewshire.
And the hopes for an informal unionist voting alliance have been complicated in West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine and Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale & Tweeddale as a result of the Conservatives emerging as the SNP's main opposition in both seats. It's not unreasonable to suppose that it would be a lot easier to persuade Labour or Tory supporters to vote Lib Dem, or Lib Dem or Tory supporters to vote Labour, than it will be to persuade Labour or Lib Dem supporters to vote Tory. In fact, I rather suspect that the average Labour voter in Dumfriesshire will be much more tempted by the golden opportunity to get David Mundell out by switching to the SNP this time around.
Eyebrows will doubtless be raised at the particularly enormous swing from Labour to the SNP in the seat that Gordon Brown will shortly be vacating, but in truth that represents a fairly predictable unwinding of the former Prime Minister's personal vote, and probably doesn't indicate that Labour are doing any worse there in "real terms".
You can read more of my thoughts about the Ashcroft polling, including the familiar doubts over methodology, in a short article I've written for The National - it can be found HERE.
It's Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale - the only Tory-held seat in the whole of Scotland.
And it gets even better - because in the one and only seat in which the SNP are trailing, they're just 1% behind. Do you want to have a guess which one that is? No, seriously, go on, have a guess.
It's East Renfrewshire - the seat that is supposed to be utterly beyond their reach because of the fabled (and yet strangely elusive) "personal vote" of new Scottish Labour leader Jim Murphy.
Actually, the sheer impotence of the big names in bringing their personal vote to bear is something of a recurring theme of the Ashcroft polling - Douglas Alexander wasn't able to do it in the first set of polls, and Charles Kennedy hasn't been able to do it this time around. The former Britain-wide leader of the Liberal Democrats is estimated to be trailing the SNP in Ross, Skye and Lochaber by some 5%. To be fair to Kennedy, though, at least he's keeping the Lib Dems in the hunt, which is more than can be said for his counterpart in West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine, who is miles behind the SNP, as is the Conservative hopeful in the same constituency. That's a less eye-catching finding, but it's arguably more significant, because it's a seat which the Tories fancied might fall to them in the event of a Lib Dem collapse. On this sort of trend, the Lib Dems would be wiped out everywhere apart from Orkney & Shetland, and it's quite possible that the SNP would be the beneficiaries everywhere - including even in Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk, which the conventional wisdom states ought to be a Tory gain.
Here are the full results from all eight seats. The percentage changes listed are from the 2010 general election result.
West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine :
SNP 39% (+23)
Conservatives 25% (-5)
Liberal Democrats 20% (-18)
Labour 10% (-4)
(This would be an SNP gain from the Liberal Democrats. Sir Robert Smith of the Liberal Democrats would lose his seat.)
Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock :
SNP 42% (+24)
Labour 31% (-16)
Conservatives 21% (-5)
Liberal Democrats 2% (-7)
(This would be an SNP gain from Labour. Sandra Osborne of Labour would lose her seat.)
Dumfries and Galloway :
SNP 34% (+22)
Conservatives 30% (-2)
Labour 28% (-18)
Liberal Democrats 2% (-7)
(This would be an SNP gain from Labour. Russell Brown of Labour would lose his seat.)
Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale :
SNP 34% (+23)
Conservatives 34% (-4)
Labour 18% (-11)
Liberal Democrats 7% (-13)
(It's unclear whether this would be a Conservative hold, or an SNP gain from the Conservatives. If the latter, David Mundell of the Conservatives would lose his seat.)
East Renfrewshire :
Labour 34% (-17)
SNP 33% (+24)
Conservatives 26% (-4)
Liberal Democrats 2% (-7)
(This would be a Labour hold. Jim Murphy of Labour would retain his seat - just.)
Edinburgh South-West :
SNP 40% (+28)
Labour 27% (-16)
Conservatives 19% (-5)
Liberal Democrats 4% (-14)
(This would be an SNP gain from Labour.)
Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath :
SNP 45% (+31)
Labour 39% (-26)
Conservatives 7% (-2)
Liberal Democrats 3% (-6)
(This would be an SNP gain from Labour.)
Ross, Skye and Lochaber :
SNP 40% (+25)
Liberal Democrats 35% (-18)
Labour 9% (-6)
Conservatives 8% (-4)
(This would be an SNP gain from the Liberal Democrats. Charles Kennedy of the Liberal Democrats would lose his seat.)
As things stand, the SNP are clearly on course to gain a significant number of seats in strong No areas on the basis of a relatively small minority of the vote. In any seat where they're not too far ahead, the party in second place may feel that there's a potential silver lining to this polling - ie. anti-independence voters might be persuaded that the best strategy for tactical voting has now been definitively established. But it cuts both ways - in a few seats, Labour were until now hoping to benefit not only from Tories voting for them to keep the SNP out, but also from SNP supporters voting for them to keep the Tories out. The message of "the SNP can't win here, it's a straight fight between Labour and the Tories" has just been killed stone dead in Dumfries & Galloway, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale & Tweeddale and East Renfrewshire.
And the hopes for an informal unionist voting alliance have been complicated in West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine and Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale & Tweeddale as a result of the Conservatives emerging as the SNP's main opposition in both seats. It's not unreasonable to suppose that it would be a lot easier to persuade Labour or Tory supporters to vote Lib Dem, or Lib Dem or Tory supporters to vote Labour, than it will be to persuade Labour or Lib Dem supporters to vote Tory. In fact, I rather suspect that the average Labour voter in Dumfriesshire will be much more tempted by the golden opportunity to get David Mundell out by switching to the SNP this time around.
Eyebrows will doubtless be raised at the particularly enormous swing from Labour to the SNP in the seat that Gordon Brown will shortly be vacating, but in truth that represents a fairly predictable unwinding of the former Prime Minister's personal vote, and probably doesn't indicate that Labour are doing any worse there in "real terms".
You can read more of my thoughts about the Ashcroft polling, including the familiar doubts over methodology, in a short article I've written for The National - it can be found HERE.
Roll of honour
Political Betting/Stormfront Lite's resident pub bore "Carlotta Vance" was beside herself with excitement today after a possible sighting on Twitter of PB's former leading Labour poster Tim - who was hounded off the site a couple of years ago after numerous temporary bannings, and having his personal details revealed without any protection at all from the Tory moderators. It may or may not be coincidence that one of those moderators (the notorious "TSE", who is currently guest editing in place of Mike Smithson) once lost a bet to Tim but delayed settling it by telling two cynical and contradictory lies about family tragedies.
Ms Vance celebrated the occasion by doing one of her hilarious "let's gloat about the left-wing/pro-independence posters who can't answer back because they've all been banned for no reason LOL LOL LOL LOL" posts. You know the drill by now - the marks of ellipsis indicate the points where you're supposed to be laughing. Gosh, there are a lot of them.
"The spiel sounds familiar.....3,000+ tweets and fewer than 80 followers.....bless.....
Perhaps like the Oscars & BAFTA we should have an 'In Memoriam thread.....
tim 'he rode a horse, shopped in Morrisons, COULSON!!!!!!!!'
Comical 'its a victory for Eck' James
Mick 'SHRIEK!!! You don't understand! Its all about GOTV!' Pork
And then there was Yellow Box Avery, who at least added to the sum of human knowledge, rather than subtracted from it....."
Well, I'm teetotal, so at least I generally leave the UK's stocks of alcohol in a stable state, rather than subtracting from them as someone else seems to be doing on a regular basis.
I've no idea whether this 80-follower Twitter account really is Tim, but I can set Ms Vance's mind at rest about myself and Mick Pork. Scot Goes Pop currently gets an average of 20,000 unique readers per month, which I suspect is considerably more people than ever used to read my posts on PB comment threads. And Mick now posts on numerous high-profile sites. Perhaps we should hold a memorial service for our former anonymity.
Ms Vance celebrated the occasion by doing one of her hilarious "let's gloat about the left-wing/pro-independence posters who can't answer back because they've all been banned for no reason LOL LOL LOL LOL" posts. You know the drill by now - the marks of ellipsis indicate the points where you're supposed to be laughing. Gosh, there are a lot of them.
"The spiel sounds familiar.....3,000+ tweets and fewer than 80 followers.....bless.....
Perhaps like the Oscars & BAFTA we should have an 'In Memoriam thread.....
tim 'he rode a horse, shopped in Morrisons, COULSON!!!!!!!!'
Comical 'its a victory for Eck' James
Mick 'SHRIEK!!! You don't understand! Its all about GOTV!' Pork
And then there was Yellow Box Avery, who at least added to the sum of human knowledge, rather than subtracted from it....."
Well, I'm teetotal, so at least I generally leave the UK's stocks of alcohol in a stable state, rather than subtracting from them as someone else seems to be doing on a regular basis.
I've no idea whether this 80-follower Twitter account really is Tim, but I can set Ms Vance's mind at rest about myself and Mick Pork. Scot Goes Pop currently gets an average of 20,000 unique readers per month, which I suspect is considerably more people than ever used to read my posts on PB comment threads. And Mick now posts on numerous high-profile sites. Perhaps we should hold a memorial service for our former anonymity.
Clegg crestfallen as SNP and Plaid Cymru draw level with the Liberal Democrats across Britain
When the news came through last night that the Liberal Democrats had slumped to a historic low of just 5% in the latest GB-wide YouGov poll, I wondered if that might mean that the SNP and Plaid Cymru had drawn level with them - and so it has proved.
Britain-wide voting intentions (YouGov, 2nd-3rd March) :
Conservatives 36% (+1)
Labour 34% (+2)
UKIP 14% (-1)
Greens 6% (n/c)
SNP/Plaid Cymru 5% (+1)
Liberal Democrats 5% (-2)
The Scottish subsample figures are fairly routine : SNP 40%, Labour 27%, Conservatives 20%, UKIP 6%, Liberal Democrats 4%, Greens 2%. As usual, the SNP lead would have been even bigger if it hadn't been for the misconceived downweighting based on Westminster-centric party ID target figures - 42 SNP and Plaid identifiers have been downweighted to count as just 32 respondents, in spite of the fact that Scottish respondents in general have had to be slightly upweighted.
Some people are confidently suggesting that today will bring the publication of more Scottish constituency polls from Ashcroft, although as far as I'm aware the man himself hasn't publicly confirmed that. If true, I'm fairly sure there'll only be a limited number this time, perhaps concentrating mostly on constituencies that have big name sitting MPs (such as Ross, Skye & Lochaber and East Renfrewshire). It might leave quite a distorting impression, because if any seats are likely to buck the national trend, those are the ones.
Britain-wide voting intentions (YouGov, 2nd-3rd March) :
Conservatives 36% (+1)
Labour 34% (+2)
UKIP 14% (-1)
Greens 6% (n/c)
SNP/Plaid Cymru 5% (+1)
Liberal Democrats 5% (-2)
The Scottish subsample figures are fairly routine : SNP 40%, Labour 27%, Conservatives 20%, UKIP 6%, Liberal Democrats 4%, Greens 2%. As usual, the SNP lead would have been even bigger if it hadn't been for the misconceived downweighting based on Westminster-centric party ID target figures - 42 SNP and Plaid identifiers have been downweighted to count as just 32 respondents, in spite of the fact that Scottish respondents in general have had to be slightly upweighted.
Some people are confidently suggesting that today will bring the publication of more Scottish constituency polls from Ashcroft, although as far as I'm aware the man himself hasn't publicly confirmed that. If true, I'm fairly sure there'll only be a limited number this time, perhaps concentrating mostly on constituencies that have big name sitting MPs (such as Ross, Skye & Lochaber and East Renfrewshire). It might leave quite a distorting impression, because if any seats are likely to buck the national trend, those are the ones.
Tuesday, March 3, 2015
Murray Foote reels in disbelief as bombshell poll reveals most people think the Daily Record is ghastly
Many thanks to the 609 of you who participated in Scot Goes Pop's groundbreaking research into public attitudes towards the Daily Record newspaper. As you'll recall, the survey consisted of a straight Yes/No question, so the results you're about to see are pretty startling.
Is the Daily Record a good newspaper?
Propagandists : 458 (75%)
"Scotland's Champion"?! Don't make me laugh : 447 (73%)
An embarrassment : 446 (73%)
Notoriously inaccurate : 440 (72%)
Found guilty by industry watchdog : 421 (69%)
Mistrusted : 412 (67%)
Driven by hate : 410 (67%)
Hypocritical : 407 (66%)
Falling circulation : 388 (63%)
Wreckers of lives : 332 (54%)
Seduced by Cameron : 239 (39%)
The one minor piece of salvation for Mr Foote is that "only" 39% of you think that he's been seduced by the dubious charms of David Cameron, so that's something, I suppose.
Is the Daily Record a good newspaper?
Propagandists : 458 (75%)
"Scotland's Champion"?! Don't make me laugh : 447 (73%)
An embarrassment : 446 (73%)
Notoriously inaccurate : 440 (72%)
Found guilty by industry watchdog : 421 (69%)
Mistrusted : 412 (67%)
Driven by hate : 410 (67%)
Hypocritical : 407 (66%)
Falling circulation : 388 (63%)
Wreckers of lives : 332 (54%)
Seduced by Cameron : 239 (39%)
The one minor piece of salvation for Mr Foote is that "only" 39% of you think that he's been seduced by the dubious charms of David Cameron, so that's something, I suppose.
Monday, March 2, 2015
Seriously, guys, what is your problem with freebies?
To all you vile Cybernats out there - I'm sorry to take a contrary view, but I have absolutely no problem with the UK government's plan to adorn projects they've funded with the Union Jack. In fact, I think the proposed message is far too modest, because some people might still assume that the government are getting the money from Scottish taxpayers, or Scottish oil revenues, or some other equally improbable source. It should really read - "Funded by the UK government with revenue direct from the Hackney platinum mine. This isn't costing you a penny, folks!"
* * *
The Daily Record are running a poll today asking "Is William Wallace a freedom fighter or a terrorist?" Interesting use of the present tense there, but it gets even better, because the two possible answers are "Yes" and "No". That hasn't deterred people from voting, and the current result is Yes 80%, No 20%. Make of that what you will.
Today's Scot Goes Pop poll will hurt your head much less. It's a genuine Yes/No question - "Is the Daily Record a good newspaper?" You can find the voting form at the top of the sidebar, and multi-voting is enabled, so you can vote for as many answers as you like.
* * *
Today's Scottish subsample from the GB-wide Ashcroft poll : SNP 40%, Conservatives 22%, Labour 21%, Greens 8%, Liberal Democrats 8%. Farage's mob failed to trouble the scorer this time.
When Ashcroft's focus groups in England were asked to list the good things that the UK government have done over the last five years, apparently one of the suggestions offered was "managing to hold onto Scotland". Doesn't it make you feel wonderful to be talked about like a trophy wife? Perhaps not.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)