Latest Polls and Latest Odds

[lichtgilphead]

9 hours ago, RuMoore said:

 feel free to lash out like last time and spend 2 days down voting all my posts, it suits you better. 

It was one of your multi-banned aliases that introduced what you referred to a "retaliatory dotting" to the forum. I'm just responding in kind. 

I would point out, however, that I spent around 5 minutes dotting around 15 of your nonsensical posts in the Politics forum, not "2 days" as you claim. In addition, I didn't follow you around the whole board, dotting random posts on non-political subjects. For instance, what did you find so objectionable about this exchange?

On 20/07/2023 at 11:58, barnseytheclaret said:
Looking forward to Forfar-Arbroath: a local derby!  Keep an eye out for 3 random Burnley shirts!

On 20/07/2023, I replied

Aye, these maroon & light blue shirts will really stand out amongst both the Arbroath & Forfar colours

Anyway, I feel another wee dotting spree coming on, so I'm preparing for a week long binge this time. See you in the notifications pages.

[lichtgilphead]

Aww. It only took a couple of minutes.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

3 minutes ago, lichtgilphead said:

Aww. It only took a couple of minutes.

He's a c**t who should just be put on ignore along with his sock puppets and the other puddle-drinking simpletons.

[RuMoore]

1 hour ago, lichtgilphead said:

It was one of your multi-banned aliases that introduced what you referred to a "retaliatory dotting" to the forum. I'm just responding in kind. 

I would point out, however, that I spent around 5 minutes dotting around 15 of your nonsensical posts in the Politics forum, not "2 days" as you claim. In addition, I didn't follow you around the whole board, dotting random posts on non-political subjects. For instance, what did you find so objectionable about this exchange?

On 20/07/2023 at 11:58, barnseytheclaret said:
Looking forward to Forfar-Arbroath: a local derby!  Keep an eye out for 3 random Burnley shirts!

On 20/07/2023, I replied

Aye, these maroon & light blue shirts will really stand out amongst both the Arbroath & Forfar colours

Anyway, I feel another wee dotting spree coming on, so I'm preparing for a week long binge this time. See you in the notifications pages.

 

[lichtgilphead]

19 minutes ago, RuMoore said:

 

Exactly how is András Aratóa, a Hungarian retired electrical engineer relevant to the politixs thread? Are you hoping to be banned again for spamming the thread?

 

[sophia]

25 minutes ago, lichtgilphead said:

Exactly how is András Aratóa, a Hungarian retired electrical engineer relevant to the politixs thread? Are you hoping to be banned again for spamming the thread?

 

Why, in the name of the wee man, are you investing any of your time in the likes of stormzy?

[GTee]

It seems to be around 50/50, but appears to be heading in the direction of the good guys. Hopefully the youngsters and our European friends staying here will get us over the line. Probably after my time.

[RuMoore]

10 hours ago, lichtgilphead said:

Exactly how is András Aratóa, a Hungarian retired electrical engineer relevant to the politixs thread? Are you hoping to be banned again for spamming the thread?

 

At your big age too...

Someone's going to have a belter of a hangover. 

[BFTD]

11 hours ago, sophia said:

Why, in the name of the wee man, are you investing any of your time in the likes of stormzy?

Oh shit, that's Stormzy?

Disappointed that there was no "just here to troll the Nats" message at the start of this account. That's the kind of behaviour we should be encouraging. Nobody can complain about still reading at that point.

[lichtgilphead]

4 hours ago, RuMoore said:

<<Typical unfounded abuse>>

What sort of sad act trawls through posts from weeks ago, then chooses to red dot a single post relating to the death of a suffering family pet?

You really are a piece of shit, Stormzy

[AyrshireTon]

On 05/08/2023 at 09:46, Johnny Martin said:

We aren't ruled by Westminster.

Excellent news.

Any chance they could give me my taxes back then?

[Johnny Martin]

22 hours ago, lichtgilphead said:

Using either the list or the constituency vote is disingenuous, as the Indy vote will be boosted by around 5% by the Labour voters who will vote "Yes" in a referendum. No other party splits by as much as 70:30 on this subject

The only reason that you've picked the FPTP constituency vote (i.e. the least democratic option available), is that it effectively excludes 2 of the 3 main independence supporting parties, as one doesn't stand at all in constituencies, and the other only stands in a handful.

However, using the regional list gives every party a realistic represenrtation and you don't need the single-issue parties to get an indy majority. If we restict our count to the top 6 parties (i.e. those that got over 1%), Indy supporting parties took over 50% of votes cast. The game's a bogey for the Yoons as soon as you add the Alba vote

SNP 40.34%, Greens 8.12%, Alba 1.66% TOTAL 50.12%

Tories 24.39%, Labour 17.19%, Lib Dems 5.06% TOTAL 45.74%

70/30, who told you that.. Sean Clerkin?  You're overstating the proportion of Yesser Labour voters in recent elections.  There are SNP voters who would vote No too btw.

Your mind-reading skills have let you down, as that isn't the reason for me picking the FPTP constituency vote at all.  The reason I chose it was to counter DeeTillEdDeh's mental point that a majority of parties vote for parties who want independence.  They don't.  It's also far more logical to use the constituency vote as a barometer of support for partition over the list, because people vote for wildcards on the list.

I see you left out lots of the parties when adding up your totals.. I wonder why?

22 hours ago, lichtgilphead said:

Didn't you mean "The scottish electorate voted against independence nearly 9 years ago, and the Yoons are terrified of asking them again"?

As I'm sure you are aware, the Scottish electorate is not totally made up of people who consider themselves Scots

No, I meant that Scots don't want independence.

22 hours ago, lichtgilphead said:

Don't you believe in the English Doctrine of Parliamentary Superiority then? Surprising for a Yoon

What are you on about?

[Wee-Bey]

On 07/12/2022 at 20:09, Herc said:

I enjoy everyone going crazy over polls. 

 

[lichtgilphead]

17 minutes ago, Johnny Martin said:

70/30, who told you that.. Sean Clerkin? 

Clerekin is a useful idiot for the Yoon side, isn't he. In recent times, I note that only Yoons post his pathetic videos.

If you look back at my previous posts, you won't find anything from me supporting his nonsense. In particular, I recall calling him a racist idiot when he stood on the A1 border north of Berwick with his "English Out Of Scotland" banner during lockdown.

24 minutes ago, Johnny Martin said:

You're overstating the proportion of Yesser Labour voters in recent elections. 

As you well know, 'recent elections' don't measure support for "Yes" However, most datasets for recent polling on Indy break down support by recalled vote at previous elections.

Here are some recent polling figures (June & July 2023) for "Labour Yes" based on 2019 Westminster votes (all taken from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_on_Scottish_independence). In every case I have stripped out don't know & would not vote 

Redfield & Wilton July 2023 - Labour Yes 28.4% 

YouGov June 2023 - Labour Yes 33.7%

Survation - June 2023 - Labour Yes 27.8%

Find Out Now/Independent Voices  June 2023 - Labour Yes 25.4%

Panelbase June 2023 - Labour Yes 27.0%

Savanta June 2023 - Labour Yes 30.0%

Find Out Now - Alba Party - Labour Yes 37.8%

Redfield & Wilton June 2023 - Labour Yes 28.0%

I make that an average of 29.8% Accordingly, If I am overstating the proportion, it's by a massive 0.2 percentage points. Effectively, 30 out of every 100 Labour voters that expressed an opinion say they would vote "Yes" at a referendum.

1 hour ago, Johnny Martin said:

There are SNP voters who would vote No too btw.

Yes, I know. That's why I specifically said that "No other party splits by as much as 70:30 on this subject"

Some ballpark figures suggest that around 8% CON, 10% SNP & 15% LD voters would vote against their party's stated position

1 hour ago, Johnny Martin said:

 The reason I chose it was to counter DeeTillEdDeh's mental point that a majority of parties vote for parties who want independence.  They don't.  It's also far more logical to use the constituency vote as a barometer of support for partition over the list, because people vote for wildcards on the list.

I assume that you mean 'voters' rather than 'parties' the first time you use that word? Otherwise your point makes no sense. I note that your method (constituency votes) gives Alba 0% and the Greens 1.3%. Even you must admit that these figures are totally unrealistic. 

Accordingly, the list vote is far more representative. It's actually there to balance out the exrtemes of FPTP. All these 'wildcards' have a position on Indy

2 hours ago, Johnny Martin said:

I see you left out lots of the parties when adding up your totals.. I wonder why?

Because the first 3 indy-supporting parties hoovered up a majority (50.12%) between them. Even if every other party was full of frothing rabid Yoons,  the maximum total "No" could reach would be 49.88%. That's how democracy works.

2 hours ago, Johnny Martin said:

No, I meant that Scots don't want independence.

The Scottish electorate isn't made up of Scots. There are numerous other nationalities entitled to vote. In addition, your figures are nearly 9 years out of date. The Yoons are scared to ask us a second time,

2 hours ago, Johnny Martin said:

What are you on about?

The Doctrine of Parliamentary Superiority (aka Parliamentary Supremacy or Parliamentary Soverignty). it holds that the legislative body (i.e. Westminster) has absolute sovereignty and is supreme over all other government institutions, including executive or judicial bodies. It's a cornerstone of the UK's unwritten constitution.

It means that we are currently ruled by Westminster.

[Boo Khaki]

2 hours ago, orfc said:

The greens only getting 8% as a second choice shows how much of a weirdo shit show they've become. A proper green party focusing on renewable energy / energy efficiency should be pulling in 20-25% of a list vote at least. Insisting they're an indy party to get a suck on the glans of power probably costs them a large chunk of that. Anyone whose prime concern is indy will vote SNP/alba.

I think a big part of the reason they don't is nothing to do with policy, and more down to the fact that a huge proportion of the Scots electorate still don't have a clue what the constituency/list system actually is, so just vote SNP/SNP, Labour/Labour, Tory/Tory and so on.

[Johnny Martin]

On 06/08/2023 at 20:23, lichtgilphead said:

Clerekin is a useful idiot for the Yoon side, isn't he. In recent times, I note that only Yoons post his pathetic videos.

If you look back at my previous posts, you won't find anything from me supporting his nonsense. In particular, I recall calling him a racist idiot when he stood on the A1 border north of Berwick with his "English Out Of Scotland" banner during lockdown.

Fair enough.  I commend you for that.

On 06/08/2023 at 20:23, lichtgilphead said:

As you well know, 'recent elections' don't measure support for "Yes" However, most datasets for recent polling on Indy break down support by recalled vote at previous elections.

Here are some recent polling figures (June & July 2023) for "Labour Yes" based on 2019 Westminster votes (all taken from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_on_Scottish_independence). In every case I have stripped out don't know & would not vote 

Redfield & Wilton July 2023 - Labour Yes 28.4% 

YouGov June 2023 - Labour Yes 33.7%

Survation - June 2023 - Labour Yes 27.8%

Find Out Now/Independent Voices  June 2023 - Labour Yes 25.4%

Panelbase June 2023 - Labour Yes 27.0%

Savanta June 2023 - Labour Yes 30.0%

Find Out Now - Alba Party - Labour Yes 37.8%

Redfield & Wilton June 2023 - Labour Yes 28.0%

I make that an average of 29.8% Accordingly, If I am overstating the proportion, it's by a massive 0.2 percentage points. Effectively, 30 out of every 100 Labour voters that expressed an opinion say they would vote "Yes" at a referendum.

You've done your homework and it appears you're right.  Even when we dismiss the laughing stock that is Find Out Now you're still in the ballpark, so I'll eat humble pie.

On 06/08/2023 at 20:23, lichtgilphead said:

Yes, I know. That's why I specifically said that "No other party splits by as much as 70:30 on this subject"

Some ballpark figures suggest that around 8% CON, 10% SNP & 15% LD voters would vote against their party's stated position

You may be right here.

On 06/08/2023 at 20:23, lichtgilphead said:

I assume that you mean 'voters' rather than 'parties' the first time you use that word? Otherwise your point makes no sense. I note that your method (constituency votes) gives Alba 0% and the Greens 1.3%. Even you must admit that these figures are totally unrealistic. 

Accordingly, the list vote is far more representative. It's actually there to balance out the exrtemes of FPTP. All these 'wildcards' have a position on Indy

Yes I meant voters!  My bad.  I don't think the Alba and Green constituency votes are unrealistic in the context of our discussion as they'll just vote for the SNP anyway.  The list vote may be more representative in terms of the wider D'hondt method, but in terms of it's votes being used as a barometer of support for partition, the constituency totals give a better view.  People will be more likely to vote for single issue, wildcard, niche or joke parties on the list.

On 06/08/2023 at 20:23, lichtgilphead said:

Because the first 3 indy-supporting parties hoovered up a majority (50.12%) between them. Even if every other party was full of frothing rabid Yoons,  the maximum total "No" could reach would be 49.88%. That's how democracy works.

Yes, but detailing the rest of them tells us what actually happened, and allows us to analyse the situation properly, which ends up undermining the idea of using the list votes as a true reflection of support for Guess or Naw.

On 06/08/2023 at 20:23, lichtgilphead said:

The Scottish electorate isn't made up of Scots. There are numerous other nationalities entitled to vote. In addition, your figures are nearly 9 years out of date. The Yoons are scared to ask us a second time

OK, Scottish electorate then.  They don't want independence.  This is obvious by the many recent opinion polls, especially when you take into account that opinion polling was generous to the Nhats pre Sept 2014 compared to the actual result.  If that's still the case then we are looking at an ever larger gap than before.

On 06/08/2023 at 20:23, lichtgilphead said:

The Doctrine of Parliamentary Superiority (aka Parliamentary Supremacy or Parliamentary Soverignty). it holds that the legislative body (i.e. Westminster) has absolute sovereignty and is supreme over all other government institutions, including executive or judicial bodies. It's a cornerstone of the UK's unwritten constitution.

It means that we are currently ruled by Westminster.

I note you've dropped the word 'English' from 'Doctrine of Parliamentary Superiority' - why?  Of course parliament has sovereignty, which is normal for any country.  Our devolved assembly in Edinburgh is merely an arm of that parliament.  Us having a parliament, which is normal in any democracy, doesn't mean we're ruled by it.  Parliamentary Democracy means we're not ruled by anyone.

[lichtgilphead]

15 minutes ago, Johnny Martin said:

Yes, but detailing the rest of them tells us what actually happened, and allows us to analyse the situation properly, which ends up undermining the idea of using the list votes as a true reflection of support for Guess or Naw.

OK, looking through the other parties that stood, I can perhaps see 3 that specifically supported independence. They are the Libertarians & Scotia Future (who both had Indy as a specific policy, and the Communist Party of Britain (who I seem to recall supporting Indy, but I'm not certain)

If we add their 0.2% to the 50.12% already gained by the other Indy supporting parties, it only increases the majority. Accordingly, I'm not sure what point you are trying to make.

27 minutes ago, Johnny Martin said:

OK, Scottish electorate then.  They don't want independence.  This is obvious by the many recent opinion polls, especially when you take into account that opinion polling was generous to the Nhats pre Sept 2014 compared to the actual result.  If that's still the case then we are looking at an ever larger gap than before.

The "Nhats"? Oh dear!

The rest of the paragraph is pure supposition. 

Can you provide some evidence for your claim that opinion polling was generous to Yes, with specific reference to the effect of "The Vow", published by the Daily Record on 16th September 2014?

Can you also provide evidence that the factors that led to this supposed generousity to Yes have not been addressed by the various pollsters?

Without some evidence, you are only posting your own opinions, which I am not inclined to believe.

42 minutes ago, Johnny Martin said:

I note you've dropped the word 'English' from 'Doctrine of Parliamentary Superiority' - why?  Of course parliament has sovereignty, which is normal for any country.  Our devolved assembly in Edinburgh is merely an arm of that parliament.  Us having a parliament, which is normal in any democracy, doesn't mean we're ruled by it.  Parliamentary Democracy means we're not ruled by anyone.

I used the word "English" because the doctrine of parliamentary superiority was imported into the UK parliament from the pre-1707 English parliament. It is an alien concept to the pre-1707 Scottish parliament, where the people were always considered sovereign. 

It is also an alien concept to any country with a written constitution. They are bound by that constitution. For example, a simple majority in the US parliamentary system would not be sufficient to ban firearms possession in the USA. They would have to amend the constitution, which is far more complicated than a single vote and requites super-majorities (two thirds in both the Congress and the House of Representatives then agreed by three quarters of the individual states)

However, as Westminster can pass any legislation they like (as long as it does not bind any successor parliament), 326 MP's could vote that we all had to carry AK-47's at all times, and that would eventually become law, even if the House of Lords disagreed.

I stand by my view. Westminster is sovereign under the UK's "unwritten constitution", It can do whatever it wants. Accordingly, all UK citizens are ruled by Westminster.

 

 

[Johnny Martin]

On 13/08/2023 at 22:34, lichtgilphead said:

OK, looking through the other parties that stood, I can perhaps see 3 that specifically supported independence. They are the Libertarians & Scotia Future (who both had Indy as a specific policy, and the Communist Party of Britain (who I seem to recall supporting Indy, but I'm not certain)

If we add their 0.2% to the 50.12% already gained by the other Indy supporting parties, it only increases the majority. Accordingly, I'm not sure what point you are trying to make.

My point is that on the list, people will be less inclined to fall down the lines of Unionism and Nationalism, because there are always a plethora is single issue, niche parties that people will "give a chance" to.

On 13/08/2023 at 22:34, lichtgilphead said:

The "Nhats"? Oh dear!

The rest of the paragraph is pure supposition. 

Can you provide some evidence for your claim that opinion polling was generous to Yes, with specific reference to the effect of "The Vow", published by the Daily Record on 16th September 2014?

Can you also provide evidence that the factors that led to this supposed generousity to Yes have not been addressed by the various pollsters?

Without some evidence, you are only posting your own opinions, which I am not inclined to believe.

Yes, the result on the actual day was 10.6%, whereas polling both before and after The Vow was made (which was kept) had much smaller gaps.

On 13/08/2023 at 22:34, lichtgilphead said:

I used the word "English" because the doctrine of parliamentary superiority was imported into the UK parliament from the pre-1707 English parliament. It is an alien concept to the pre-1707 Scottish parliament, where the people were always considered sovereign. 

It is also an alien concept to any country with a written constitution. They are bound by that constitution. For example, a simple majority in the US parliamentary system would not be sufficient to ban firearms possession in the USA. They would have to amend the constitution, which is far more complicated than a single vote and requites super-majorities (two thirds in both the Congress and the House of Representatives then agreed by three quarters of the individual states)

However, as Westminster can pass any legislation they like (as long as it does not bind any successor parliament), 326 MP's could vote that we all had to carry AK-47's at all times, and that would eventually become law, even if the House of Lords disagreed.

I stand by my view. Westminster is sovereign under the UK's "unwritten constitution", It can do whatever it wants. Accordingly, all UK citizens are ruled by Westminster.

Thanks for the historical points, I didn't know that.  I still don't frame it as us being Westminster ruling us though, as we elect the MPs so ultimately it's the people who are sovereign.

[Wee Bully]

4 hours ago, Johnny Martin said:

My point is that on the list, people will be less inclined to fall down the lines of Unionism and Nationalism, because there are always a plethora is single issue, niche parties that people will "give a chance" to.

Yes, the result on the actual day was 10.6%, whereas polling both before and after The Vow was made (which was kept) had much smaller gaps.

Thanks for the historical points, I didn't know that.  I still don't frame it as us being Westminster ruling us though, as we elect the MPs so ultimately it's the people who are sovereign.

Translation - “I don’t like “facts” and similar things, so I’m going to ignore them.”

[Johnny Martin]

5 hours ago, Wee Bully said:

Translation - “I don’t like “facts” and similar things, so I’m going to ignore them.”

Tell your translator not to give up his day job.