lichtgilphead

You consider a UK minister abusing his position to tell lies in an attempt to influence a UK General Election to be a 'local' issue?

Here's an overview of her performance at the UKIP Scottish Campaign launch http://www.buzzfeed.com/aidankerr/ukip-scotland She seemed nervous in the presence of the media, was chaperoned at all times by a UKIP spin doctor, and was unable to answer a question about UKIP’s ambitions in the Gordon constituency. After failing to answer the question, Santos was prompted by the spin doctor who told her: “Words – use your words.” “I don’t know,” she responded.

Knapdale is in Ayrshire now, is it? When did they move the Argyll county boundaries? Anyway, f**k the beavers. When they arrived, they built dams and flooded the path around Loch Coille-Bharr. We practically had to swim to complete our Sunday walk.

Turn the water heater thermostat up to full & open all the windows

You're using Iain Dale as a source?????? I got as far as INVERNESS, NAIRN, BADENOCH & STRATHSPEY Danny Alexander Majority: 8,765 over Labour Prediction: DEAD CERT LIBDEM HOLD Even the LibDems think Alexander is going to lose this seat! Did you not see thier own polling?

So, now that you're completely unable to back up your original point, you resort to personal abuse. Well done you.

No seethe mate, just a request that you provide some proof that Panelbase's current methodology is flawed. You ignored the request in your response above, so I'll give you a second chance. Otherwise, we're only left with your opinion as to their credibility, and I've seen nothing from you so far that leads me to believe your views are valid or credible.

I assume you're going to provide some proof that Panelbase's current polling methods are flawed, Ecto? Otherwise, all you're saying is that Panelbase consistently get a higher "Yes" percentage than your favoured pollsters, but not giving any reason why you consider their figures to be incorrect. Without a reason, that's just an opinion, not a fact. Who's to say that Panelbase aren't correct & YouGov are wrong?

Still waiting for the link to your figures... Edited to add - Scot Goes Pop has been updated since my original link. Now shows figures with DK included & excluded. Still at a loss as to why No consider this to be significant movement...

Do you have a link? I've only seen it reported as 47% Yes 53% No (obviously excluding DK's)... The link below states no change to Yes or No http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/

So, even though Rory Best & Gordon D'Arcy both represent the same national team at rugby, in your view they are currently foreigners to each other?

I note that Lex fails to mention that the comparison he's quoting is against a Yes Scotland Panelbase poll instead of against the previous Sunday Times Panelbase poll. As slightly different question series are asked, these polls are not directly comparable. If you compare against the previous Sunday Times Panelbase poll, the actual figures are Yes 41% (+1) No 48% (-1) As such, I'm not sure why Lex appears to be celebrating a further decrease in the shaky "No" lead

Is it you that claims to be doing maths at uni? If there's no overround, the odds have to add up to 100%. The odds you quote add up to 103.33%..

Wow Lex! Just Wow! There's one way Brazil can win the WC - win all their remaining ties. There's one way they can fail to win the WC - fail to win all their remaining ties. Progress to the semi-final & final is conditional on winning the previous matches. Similarly, winning a 2 horse race is conditional on getting out of the starting gates, clearing every jump & crossing the finishing line 1st. If a horse in a 2 horse race falls at the 1st fence, is that any different from losing by a nose on the line? In both cases, you lose!

So, as the referendum result will exclude the people who choose not to express their opinion in the voting booth, would you agree that using polling figures that exclude the "don't knows" will produce a result that is likely to be closer to the final result on the 18th September?

Half_Baked is a well known troll who continually asks questions along the lines of "Have you stopped beating your wife - Yes or No" As his question above falls into that category, I don't see any point in answering it. However, in response to your point, I would agree that the SNP are the main driving force in the independence debate. Other parties (the Greens & most parties of the left) also support independence. However, not every member of the SNP, Greens & Socialists will vote Yes. Similarly, not every Labour, Libdem, Tory & Ukipper will vote No. As such, the debate is between those of us that believe that Scotland will prosper under indy, and those that believe that we will prosper under the Union. Accordingly, it's not wholly about the SNP. Surely you can appreciate this distinction?

Meanwhile, the UK Government is quietly funding Better Together's private polling http://www.sundaypost.com/news-views/scotland/independence-referendum/uk-government-accused-of-funding-no-campaign-1.435240 Even though the Secretary of State for Portsmouth had previously stated “the principle is it’s government research and we don’t release it”, the principle does not appear to apply to sharing the information with the "No" side

In that case, if the result is 55% Yes & 45% No on an 80% turnout, will you and Ecto start a campaign to have the result overturned because the Yes vote has been inflated because the non-voters weren't counted? In Ecto's eyes, that particular result would mean that Yes only gained the votes of 44% of the total electorate, whilst the No vote (36%) and the non-voting 20% would total 56%.

Don't expect a coherent answer. Ecto appears to have given up any pretence of defending his lie.

Can you specifically point out where she was asked to comment? As far as I can see, her quote is contained in an SNP press release. The release gives some figures, then Nicola gives her unsolicited take on what the figures mean. I fail to see how this differs from what Eck did. Seriously Ecto, stop digging. Admit you lied & were called on it.

So, when Alex Salmond comments on a poll result, that's somehow different from Nicola Sturgeon commenting on a poll result? Surely you're not suggesting that there is a serious difference because Alex appears to have worked out the percentage excluding DK's by himself, and Nicola has had someone do the sums for her? What a strange view to take. Eck is a bad man because he can do arithmetic

Give up, Ecto Here's a direct quote from Sturgeon on 23rd February SNP Depute Leader and Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon said: “These are very encouraging figures, indicating a two-point tightening of the gap since the last Panelbase poll two weeks ago. Yes is now at 44 per cent once ‘don’t knows’ are excluded." http://www.government-world.com/panelbase-poll-shows-2-point-narrowing-of-gap/ Are you finally going to admit that the story you made up about Salmond was a lie?

Oh dear. Keep digging, Ecto. Same search as before with the word "Sturgeon" added throws up Nicola using figures with "Don't Knows" excluded back in January 2014. http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/independence-referendum-snp-claim-within-3065487 What next? Are you going to claim that Salmond was the first male politician to use this dastardly trick? My allegation that you were talking sh*te has been proved to be correct. Congratulations (yet again) on buying into the whole "Better Together" ethos.

Ecto - it's not about defending Salmond. It's more about exposing the lies promoted by the No side, including your ridiculous assertion that Salmond was the first to exclude "Don't Knows" when reporting poll results. Now you've put a date on your claim, all I need to do to prove that you are wrong is to find one earlier occurrence where someone else uses figures that exclude don't know. A two minute google search brings up this article, by John Curtice, published on Friday 14th March 2014, in which he states "In a dozen polls conducted between September and November, the Yes vote was put on average at 38 per cent (excluding the 'don't knows'). In 13 polls fielded since the end of November through to the middle of February, however, that average has increased to 41 per cent." http://www.ippr.org/juncture/how-the-snp-could-win-the-independence-referendum Now, I'm not suggesting that Curtice was the first to do this, but it conclusively demonstrates that people were using figures with "Don't know" excluded before Salmonds appearance on the Andrew Marr show. So, as we all expected, my allegation that you were talking sh*te has been proved to be correct. Congratulations (again) on buying into the whole "Better Together" ethos.