Polling: 2017 General Election, Council Elections and Independence

[Dawson Park Boy]

10 minutes ago, Gordon EF said:

I'd agree that unionists see independence as riskier than leavers saw Brexit. 

Personally, I think people's feelings about these things run much deeper than that though. I think on all sides of both of these issues people tend use particular issues and arguments to mask more fundamental feelings on the topic. So leavers saw the risk in Brexit the same as remainers did but they either underplayed it or saw it as a price worth paying because what made most of the them leavers was more about how they felt than how they thought.

It's the same with independence. You could predict someone's vote on independence with incredible accuracy just by getting them to answer the questions "Do you feel more Scottish or more British?" That's not an accident. It's not a coincidence that people who answer "British" to that question will talk about "vaccines, furlough and currency" as if that's what swayed them to vote No. And it's not a coincidence that people who answer "Scottish" will see those things are far less important when it comes to the question of independence.

I agree with your analysis about Britishness v Scottishness. Yes, it’s how you feel that counts.

In my own case, I feel Scottish for some things - football, sport but British for others - international affairs, currency, economy.

When I’m abroad, I’ll say I’m Scottish and explain where it is in the UK, especially in America where geography isn’t there strong point.

I suppose I’d be classed as a yoon but not so set in my ways that I wouldn’t consider independence.

What needs to happen for me is someone credible explaining currency, whether they anticipate joining the EU (a negative for me), forecasts of government income and expenditure and the type of economy they envisage Scotland becoming. The Wilson plan wasn’t exactly encouraging and seemed to indicate years of austerity. The status quo, I find quite comforting, as we can do a fair number of things through Holyrood but can rely on the UK to subsidise us and provide the support of the BoE, as it does to all the regions out with London and the southeast. This is what the ECB doesn’t do and why some of the fringe EU countries suffer so badly.

The Nats tend to rubbish the annual GERS report but the SG happily produces it without explanation? Maybe it’s because they used to love it when oil was a big factor? Times have changed.

Theres obviously a fair head of steam for independence but I really just wonder if people have really thought it through properly?

Actions have consequences and we need a lot more information.

Anyway, just a few thoughts and maybe some folks on here have some of the answers.

[Dawson Park Boy]

6 minutes ago, HTG said:

Aye, that's my take too. The slight problem with it is that they can get themselves right tae f**k and then when they get there, they can f**k off. 

It’s this kind of language that puts me and others right off.

[Gordon EF]

12 minutes ago, Glen Sannox said:

Vaccines, furlough and currency and are massively important though, and you can rest assured the SNP will not have the answers to these impending questions. I think you might be underestimating “the broad shoulders of the UK” card, that will be relentlessly played.

These things might sway people who don't feel strongly one way or the other. They do absolutely nothing to people who do.

[Tattie36]

7 minutes ago, Glen Sannox said:

Vaccines, furlough and currency and are massively important though, and you can rest assured the SNP will not have the answers to these impending questions. I think you might be underestimating “the broad shoulders of the UK” card, that will be relentlessly played.

First post on this thread, sorry to jump in.

After 2014, there is no way that the SNP will be so unprepared on the currency issue this time as they know that it was a big, perhaps deciding factor for some people.

I really don't think it's as difficult to answer the furlough and vaccine questions. An independent Scotland would have funded furlough in the same way as everyone else, through borrowing. Similarly, the vaccine procurement would have been done though the same kind of deals that everyone else has done, I'm not sure if being in or out of the EU makes any difference. It's all irrelevant in the independence debate anyway as it will all be in the past and is unlikely to happen again in our lifetimes. If another pandemic does happen in the near-ish future then enough lessons  have been learned to make it "easier" to deal with.

[HTG]

12 minutes ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

It’s this kind of language that puts me and others right off.

No it doesn't. You'd be put off if everything was modulated by the queen. And you have no claim whatsoever over what puts others off. The UK govt can ram its symbol of ownership right up its arse.  This stunt will do no more than give their fear a fresh level of visibility. 

[parsforlife]

1 hour ago, Glen Sannox said:

You need to remember that the young very quickly mature and become aspirational. They will naturally replace the elderly no voters.

They all want to change the World but won’t help Mum with the dishes.

Do you have any evidence of this?

there is a narrative that people become more right wing(though independence shouldn’t be a right wing/left wing issue, often it is split on those lines).   But that ignores things like thatcher relying on youth vote to give her power.   
 

The generational gaps we are seeing worldwide in political outlook are very wide currently .  I think we are at an interesting point in history where different generations consume media differently and as a result their options are being shaped from different outlooks. 
 

Whilst the older generation are more likely to vote no, that doesn’t make independence as inevitable.    The unionists will need to replace dead voters,  and they won’t gain much traction in the voting population.  But how their argument plays long term in the u18s who’ll be eligible to vote in the next 10-15 years will be critical for both sides. That’s if it goes that far.

Edited March 24, 2021 by parsforlife

[Gordon EF]

27 minutes ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

I agree with your analysis about Britishness v Scottishness. Yes, it’s how you feel that counts.

In my own case, I feel Scottish for some things - football, sport but British for others - international affairs, currency, economy.

When I’m abroad, I’ll say I’m Scottish and explain where it is in the UK, especially in America where geography isn’t there strong point.

I suppose I’d be classed as a yoon but not so set in my ways that I wouldn’t consider independence.

What needs to happen for me is someone credible explaining currency, whether they anticipate joining the EU (a negative for me), forecasts of government income and expenditure and the type of economy they envisage Scotland becoming. The Wilson plan wasn’t exactly encouraging and seemed to indicate years of austerity. The status quo, I find quite comforting, as we can do a fair number of things through Holyrood but can rely on the UK to subsidise us and provide the support of the BoE, as it does to all the regions out with London and the southeast. This is what the ECB doesn’t do and why some of the fringe EU countries suffer so badly.

The Nats tend to rubbish the annual GERS report but the SG happily produces it without explanation? Maybe it’s because they used to love it when oil was a big factor? Times have changed.

Theres obviously a fair head of steam for independence but I really just wonder if people have really thought it through properly?

Actions have consequences and we need a lot more information.

Anyway, just a few thoughts and maybe some folks on here have some of the answers.

If I can ask, what answers would convince you to switch your vote and coming from whom?

Because, forgive me it I'm getting this wrong, but people who're genuinely open to changing their minds usually don't say "Here are some questions and if someone tells me the right answers then that'll be me convinced". They tend to have a clear picture of what it is that would change their mind and be able to verbalise that, rather than waiting for someone else to do it.

I accept you might feel enough detail hasn't been given but what are the answers you'd want to hear?

Edited March 24, 2021 by Gordon EF

[BFTD]

Slightly creased at the idea of someone who talks about gender-benders and being forced to suck cock being put off independence by people on the internet using harsh language  

[Dan Steele]

34 minutes ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

but not so set in my ways that I wouldn’t consider independence

 

41 minutes ago, HTG said:

Aye, that's my take too. The slight problem with it is that they can get themselves right tae f**k and then when they get there, they can f**k off. 

34 minutes ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

It’s this kind of language that puts me and others right off.

Aye, sweary words, eh? Best vote No.

[Guest Bob Mahelp]

44 minutes ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

 

 

Theres obviously a fair head of steam for independence but I really just wonder if people have really thought it through properly?

Actions have consequences and we need a lot more information.

Anyway, just a few thoughts and maybe some folks on here have some of the answers.

Come the second referendum, one of the things I want to see from the Yes campaign is to attack the idea that only the independence movement has to give an answer to every single question.

In 2013/2014, the No campaign was allowed to claim the right of 'status quo' almost unchallenged. They were allowed to create the image that a No vote would mean security, comfort, lack of change, and a lack of risk. They were allowed to plant their flag on the vital centre ground.

Of course, the 'status quo' quickly turned into anything but.  The promises in 'The Vow' were quickly forgotten about, we left the EU, and the UK elected the most right wing government in history who turned their attentions onto undermining the very concept of devolution (there's a lot more to come on this).

It's essential that the Yes campaign make people understand that a No vote carries with it consequences. That a No vote contains risks, change and a thousand unanswered questions. 

The No campaign will have to be pushed at every turn to answer exactly what the consequences will be. And when they do give answers, they should be pushed to explain exactly why we should believe their promises, given what;'s happened in the last 7 years. 

 

Edited March 24, 2021 by Bob Mahelp

[GordonS]

2 hours ago, Gallant Pioneer said:

The poll was commissioned by a right-wing  think tank but I can’t remember their name.

The polling company Hanbury Strategy were set up by a Dominic Cummings mate and another fud who was a David Cameron aide.

 

 

Ta. That explains why it's not been published. I saw Scotland in Union commissioned an independence poll that was good for No, but it turns out they didn't use the standard question so none of the poll trackers are including it.

56-44 is quite far off the current average so either there's been a shift lately or they have a house effect. 

[madwullie]

48 minutes ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

I agree with your analysis about Britishness v Scottishness. Yes, it’s how you feel that counts.

In my own case, I feel Scottish for some things - football, sport but British for others - international affairs, currency, economy.

When I’m abroad, I’ll say I’m Scottish and explain where it is in the UK, especially in America where geography isn’t there strong point.

I suppose I’d be classed as a yoon but not so set in my ways that I wouldn’t consider independence.

What needs to happen for me is someone credible explaining currency, whether they anticipate joining the EU (a negative for me), forecasts of government income and expenditure and the type of economy they envisage Scotland becoming. The Wilson plan wasn’t exactly encouraging and seemed to indicate years of austerity. The status quo, I find quite comforting, as we can do a fair number of things through Holyrood but can rely on the UK to subsidise us and provide the support of the BoE, as it does to all the regions out with London and the southeast. This is what the ECB doesn’t do and why some of the fringe EU countries suffer so badly.

The Nats tend to rubbish the annual GERS report but the SG happily produces it without explanation? Maybe it’s because they used to love it when oil was a big factor? Times have changed.

Theres obviously a fair head of steam for independence but I really just wonder if people have really thought it through properly?

Actions have consequences and we need a lot more information.

Anyway, just a few thoughts and maybe some folks on here have some of the answers.

We've been here before though mate. Someone (GordonS? ) answered all those questions thoroughly and thoughtfully and your position at the end was Yes but I feel British. 

Edit: what I mean is you don't actually want answers to those questions. You've just decided those will be what you hang your no vote on because you feel they are gotchas - but you'll vote no anyway, no matter who says what. You can't be convinced. You are a hard no. 

 

Edited March 24, 2021 by madwullie

[git-intae-thum]

5 minutes ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

I agree with your analysis about Britishness v Scottishness. Yes, it’s how you feel that counts.

In my own case, I feel Scottish for some things - football, sport but British for others - international affairs, currency, economy.

When I’m abroad, I’ll say I’m Scottish and explain where it is in the UK, especially in America where geography isn’t there strong point.

I suppose I’d be classed as a yoon but not so set in my ways that I wouldn’t consider independence.

What needs to happen for me is someone credible explaining currency, whether they anticipate joining the EU (a negative for me), forecasts of government income and expenditure and the type of economy they envisage Scotland becoming. The Wilson plan wasn’t exactly encouraging and seemed to indicate years of austerity. The status quo, I find quite comforting, as we can do a fair number of things through Holyrood but can rely on the UK to subsidise us and provide the support of the BoE, as it does to all the regions out with London and the southeast. This is what the ECB doesn’t do and why some of the fringe EU countries suffer so badly.

The Nats tend to rubbish the annual GERS report but the SG happily produces it without explanation? Maybe it’s because they used to love it when oil was a big factor? Times have changed.

Theres obviously a fair head of steam for independence but I really just wonder if people have really thought it through properly?

Actions have consequences and we need a lot more information.

Anyway, just a few thoughts and maybe some folks on here have some of the answers.

 

To take one part of your post. Citing GERs figures (which are not now, and have never been, intended to show the whole picture of Scotland's economy) to suggest Scotland is annually in multi billion pound deficit is an economic fallacy. 

It is pretty shameful how unionist politicians aided by a compliant media have succeeded in planting this myth in the minds of the gullible.

Professor Richard Murphy of Cambridge university has a whole series of GERs articles in his Tax Research blog. Well worth a read.

https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2020/08/29/why-is-gers-crap/

The annual GERs figures are produced off the back of a limited set of figures collected and released by the ONS. Many of these figures, particularly in relation to income are based on probability and estimate. Quite simply, there is a lack of capability at statistic gathering level to then provide a differential between Scotland and the rest of UK's income/ expeniture on many of the variables. The figures are also incapable of capturing key factors, such as the multiplier and Luxembourg effects. This almost definitely explain a lot of why Scotland (and the other other economic regions of the UK) appear to show such a high deficit as opposed to London and the South East. London sucks up the rest of the countries wealth.

As for why Scotgov persist with publishing GERs?......well it is frustrating given how they are continually misinterpreted by unionists for political reasons.

However the fact remains that the Scottish government does require something to base it's income/expenditure projections on......and the simple fact is.... there is nothing else. GERs is produced from what is unfortunately the most comprehensive collection of data available......whilst we remain in union.

 If we are to try and estimate a truer picture of Scotland's economy at present, it would perhaps be better to question why Scotland, a nation with a larger GDP, higher income and lower social/ health care expenditure than similar sized European nations appears to show such a huge deficit. A deficit which simply does not exist in those countries.

 

[San Starko Rover]

Do you have any evidence of this?
there is a narrative that people become more right wing(though independence shouldn’t be a right wing/left wing issue, often it is split on those lines).   But that ignores things like thatcher relying on youth vote to give her power.   
 
The generational gaps we are seeing worldwide in political outlook are very wide currently .  I think we are at an interesting point in history where different generations consume media differently and as a result their options are being shaped from different outlooks. 
 
Whilst the older generation are more likely to vote no, that doesn’t make independence as inevitable.    The unionists will need to replace dead voters,  and they won’t gain much traction in the voting population.  But how their argument plays long term in the u18s who’ll be eligible to vote in the next 10-15 years will be critical for both sides. That’s if it goes that far.

Of course there’s no evidence for it, “the people become more right wing as they get older” translating into people become more Unionist as they get older would be a valid argument if the tipping point was in the 30s as that the age when people will have more commitments children, mortgage etc so are less idealistic and a little more interested in their own situation and financial impacts. The tipping point between Yes and No appears to be in the 60s, people don’t really change their politics at that age and are pretty much set in their ways.

You’re right about the news sources Internet vs TV and as was posted above the pensioners and over 60s are more likely to see themselves as British as they grew up on the back of the Second World War and remember the UK when it was still slightly relevant in the last throws of Empire before every territory pissed off and declared independence. They also remember the UK before the EEC / EU hence why they supported Brexit. No’s biggest asset is the fact their voters (60s+) are more likely to vote. Their biggest weakness is their voters are getting older and unless something magically turns Yes voters into No voters in their 60s it’s only a matter of time before Yes massively outnumbers No.

[Gordon EF]

George Robertson: "Devolution will kill independence stone dead".

Twenty odd years of devolution later: Of folk who became adults at the time of devolution or later, about 80% support independence.

Oh George...

Edited March 24, 2021 by Gordon EF

[John Lambies Doos]

George Robertson: "Devolution will kill independence stone dead".
Twenty odd years of devolution later: Of folk who became adults at the time of devolution or later, about 80% support independence.
Oh George...

Oh George

[Dawson Park Boy]

1 hour ago, BFTD said:

Slightly creased at the idea of someone who talks about gender-benders and being forced to suck cock being put off independence by people on the internet using harsh language  

I certainly am put off the SNP with the GRA.

I appreciate the SNP are separate from the independence movement but this science defying stuff is not to my liking at all.

[Gordon EF]

10 hours ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

I certainly am put off the SNP with the GRA.

I appreciate the SNP are separate from the independence movement but this science defying stuff is not to my liking at all.

There is absolutely nothing about the amendments to the GRA that defies science.

Who is it you think is diagnosing gender dysphoria right now? Homeopathists? 

Edited March 25, 2021 by Gordon EF

[lichtgilphead]

32 minutes ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

I certainly am put off the SNP with the GRA.

I appreciate the SNP are separate from the independence movement but this science defying stuff is not to my liking at all.

Are you seriously suggesting that if the SNP did a u-turn on the GRA that you would consider supporting independence?

I find that hard to believe.

[Gordon EF]

15 minutes ago, lichtgilphead said:

Are you seriously suggesting that if the SNP did a u-turn on the GRA that you would consider supporting independence?

I find that hard to believe.

I'm sure he has a well documented pro-SNP voting record before he ever heard of the GRA.

Unionists, it's OK to criticise the SNP or independence without pretending that you're giving serious consideration to voting for them if only it wasn't for absolutely everything about them. I'm never going to vote Tory and I'm never going to vote for the union. It's OK to admit that. You won't be taken any less seriously because nobody takes the charade seriously to begin with.

Edited March 25, 2021 by Gordon EF