Independence - how would you vote?

[H_B]

No news medium is,or should be, balanced. For example in a story about child abuse you wouldnt have 'on the other hand, children can be really annoying so there is a school of thought that says..."

I think political balance is very difficult for the bbc to avoid complaints on. In Scottish terms i think they do a pretty good job. I really like the bbc. Some of their journalism abroad is first class.

[barrysnotter]

Ahem...try paying a bit more attention...thie original point was about wings over scotland

You specifically asked about the BBC, STV and newspapers, then subsequently denied that you had asked about them. It's all there in black and white, anything else is complete obfuscation.

[Davi3j]

Look at my last sentence.

I did

Achieving balance should take cognisance of merit.

that dosent answer the queston tho, does it?

[H_B]

I dont think wos should be balanced. Its just a propaganda blog.

Got no problems with that.

[Davi3j]

You specifically asked about the BBC, STV and newspapers, then subsequently denied that you had asked about them. It's all there in black and white, anything else is complete obfuscation.

no i didnt...look at the quotes ffs

[barrysnotter]

I did

that dosent answer the queston tho, does it?

Your question was

ok, so what would you consider it to be, ffs

What would I consider what to be? If you want a specific answer try asking a coherent question.

[Davi3j]

Your question was

What would I consider what to be? If you want a specific answer try asking a coherent question.

wow...cant even describe what he thinks balanced reporting is

[barrysnotter]

wow...cant even describe what he thinks balanced reporting is

What part of,

Achieving balance should take cognisance of merit.

Do you not understand?

As an aside, is there a general correlation between acting like a spanner and supporting independence or is it just confined to P&b?

[Jie Bie]

Colkitto (and Archie Guevara) - Apologies if I missed you already responding to the new poll numbers - was off work yesterday, but the new graph shows a 3% reduction in Yes support and a 1% rise in No support.

Why is this? What do you think has happened since the last two polls to see the drop in Yes support and the rise in No support?

Just to refresh your memory, though that shouldn't be needed as you posted a lot about it at the time :-

July figures :-

Yes 37% No 46%

August figures :-

Yes 34% No 47%

What do you make of this momentum shift towards No?

Those results suggest to me that if the referendum were held tomorrow then at least one third of the electorate who would vote Yes and make Scotland an independent country. Not enough to win the referendum, but a pretty significant minority nonetheless.

But of course, the referendum isn't tomorrow, it is just over a year away. The vast majority of no voters I come across are willing to be convinced, and I think that as the campaign heads towards a conclusion we will see a surge of support for Yes. This isn't just a "feeling" - it is backed by history.

One week before the 1997 referendum the Herald commissioned System 3 / ICM to carry out a poll with a sample size of 1039. The poll asked both questions that were going to be put to the electorate.

Here are the results of the poll:

Should there be a Scottish Parliament: YES - 61% NO - 23% DON'T KNOW - 16%

Should it have tax varying powers: YES - 47% NO - 32% DON'T KNOW - 21%

Now lets take a look at the actual results of the referendum:

Should there be a Scottish Parliament: YES - 74% NO - 26%

Should it have tax varying powers: YES - 63.5% NO - 36.5%

Now just take a look at those increases in the YES votes for both questions,13 and 16 point jumps, and that was over the space of 1 week! To me that is a pretty damning indictment that when you offer the people of Scotland more powers they take it - even if polls in the run up to the vote suggest it might be close run thing (as they did with the tax varying powers).

[the jambo-rocker]

Those results suggest to me that if the referendum were held tomorrow then at least one third of the electorate who would vote Yes and make Scotland an independent country. Not enough to win the referendum, but a pretty significant minority nonetheless.

But of course, the referendum isn't tomorrow, it is just over a year away. The vast majority of no voters I come across are willing to be convinced, and I think that as the campaign heads towards a conclusion we will see a surge of support for Yes. This isn't just a "feeling" - it is backed by history.

One week before the 1997 referendum the Herald commissioned System 3 / ICM to carry out a poll with a sample size of 1039. The poll asked both questions that were going to be put to the electorate.

Here are the results of the poll:

Should there be a Scottish Parliament: YES - 61% NO - 23% DON'T KNOW - 16%

Should it have tax varying powers: YES - 47% NO - 32% DON'T KNOW - 21%

Now lets take a look at the actual results of the referendum:

Should there be a Scottish Parliament: YES - 74% NO - 26%

Should it have tax varying powers: YES - 63.5% NO - 36.5%

Now just take a look at those increases in the YES votes for both questions,13 and 16 point jumps, and that was over the space of 1 week! To me that is a pretty damning indictment that when you offer the people of Scotland more powers they take it - even if polls in the run up to the vote suggest it might be close run thing (as they did with the tax varying powers).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/politics97/devolution/scotland/briefing/scotpolls.shtml

They also had one commissioned on the 10th of September that had it's fieldwork done on 6-7th which had little to no change from the previous week. What looks to have came into it must have been more undecided voters going for both YES options, people who would have voted NO not turning up (60.4% turnout), or most likely a combination of both.

[Davi3j]

What part of,

Achieving balance should take cognisance of merit.

Do you not understand?

And you think that answers this question that you were asked???

Would YOU describe the bbc and telegraph as balanced?

at worst, a simple yes or no would have sufficed, but you couldnt even do that

[H_B]

Thing is.. that saw the majority position underplayed. The 1997 ref was a foregone conclusion. Everyone knew the result long before the actual vote.

This is a different dynamic because the significantt majority position is No. And its not as exciting voting to keep the union as it is to vote for a shiny new parliament.

I have no doubts that the end result, which we all know will be a very comfortable win for No will be closer than polling data suggests because No voters wont bother their arse to go vote. I cant be sure i will either. Depends what im doing that day.

[the jambo-rocker]

Thing is.. that saw the majority position underplayed. The 1997 ref was a foregone conclusion. Everyone knew the result long before the actual vote.

This is a different dynamic because the significantt majority position is No. And its not as exciting voting to keep the union as it is to vote for a shiny new parliament.

I have no doubts that the end result, which we all know will be a very comfortable win for No will be closer than polling data suggests because No voters wont bother their arse to go vote. I cant be sure i will either. Depends what im doing that day.

XBL will be distracting you from voting with his swallowing sword and fire-eating acts over the day IMO.

[Davi3j]

I have no doubts that the end result, which we all know will be a very comfortable win for No will be closer than polling data suggests because No voters wont bother their arse to go vote. I cant be sure i will either. Depends what im doing that day.

How can you be sure enough of them will turn up to vote then?

[barrysnotter]

And you think that answers this question that you were asked???

at worst, a simple yes or no would have sufficed, but you couldnt even do that

Swing and miss (again).

Over an hour ago:

I would consider BBC and STV to be fairly well balanced, on the whole. The telegraph I don't read but I suspect it is less so.

Like I said, start reading and responding to what is written and you people won't look so foolish.

[H_B]

 

How can you be sure enough of them will turn up to vote then?

Its a numbers game basically...

No is enough of a majority position to win twith a much lower turnout of its voters than yes.

If everyone of voting agee was compelled to vote no would win by 20 per cent. More probably. But they arent so its a turnout numbers game.

A higher % of yes voters will vote. But they are a minority group. It wont be enough even with No voting ennui.

[Colkitto]

Interesting that the 1995 Quebec referendum polls had the No vote at 67%. Actual result for the No was 50.58.

[Davi3j]

Like I said, start reading and responding to what is written and you people won't look so foolish.

HaHaHa

pot, kettle, black

[H_B]

Interesting that the 1995 Quebec referendum polls had the No vote at 67%. Actual result for the No was 50.58.   

Quebec voting polls also had Yes in the lead in the run up. No actually had a pre-ref surge.

Our referendum will be nothing like as close.

[Colkitto]

Quebec voting polls also had Yes in the lead in the run up. No actually had a pre-ref surge.

Our referendum will be nothing like as close.

Just shows you big leads can be lost