Why no polls?

[Peppino Impastato]

Poll in terms sc8tsman the other day sowed 63% support for, independence.   In the sc8tsman. 

[Alan Stubbs]

22 hours ago, ScotSquid said:

I'd say it was more about the level of public spending . Not the strength of the economy although I know the two are obviously linked.

It's not that Scotland is doing badly as such, it's that our spending commitments make it look that way.

Rightly or wrongly long term and from a structural point of view, we can have a higher level of public spending now than if we were Indy. Short term. 

So an indyScot govt faces huge problems (and opportunities!) Post Indy.

For those absolutely wedded to the idea of Indy, they have to look at the climate and think are people going to vote for a more sober and realistic vision. Maybe yes , maybe no.

But there's a reason the White Paper cherry picked data when it did. It can't do so again . Also sharing the pound on a currency union is completely out the window if the view is iScot will be in the EU and the UK not.

So you have to think any economic debate will not be won by the SNP. Meaning you are reliant far more on people looking far down the line for longer term gain. Something that isn't I think plausible. 

I think the right time for another referendum is between 2022 and 2025. At the earliest.

Well, public spending relative to revenue. If we were Independent tomorrow, its pretty clear that public spending would have to come down. Hence why I'd like to see our situation to improve before feeling confident of a Yes vote in the immediate future. If I'm reading you correctly (apologies if I'm not), we'll have to disagree that Independence will always come at the expense of our public services. In this particular climate yes, generally speaking no.

Currency I'll give you. Salmond's flaking during the 1st debate v Darling was something akin to 90th minute goal to make it 3-1 having been under pressure type situation. Sturgeon will need to be stronger on this.

I don't want to repeat myself with posts that were long winded and probably boring enough the first time but there are no shortage of advantages to the Yes side's next campaign, as well as aforementioned disadvantages. With these factors pushing against each other, support coming in at the mid to high 40s are exactly where I'd have placed it on a guess.

[ArabianKnight]

The polls aren't questioning whether they think party leaders are "better" in comparison to the other party leaders, i.e ranking them alongside each another.

The polls are asking whether each leader is "doing a good job as party leader of x party", where as in Sturgeon's case it's as "doing a good job as First Minister".

 

Mmm those apples taste kinda orangey.

[ScotSquid]

21 hours ago, Alan Stubbs said:

Well, public spending relative to revenue. If we were Independent tomorrow, its pretty clear that public spending would have to come down. Hence why I'd like to see our situation to improve before feeling confident of a Yes vote in the immediate future. If I'm reading you correctly (apologies if I'm not), we'll have to disagree that Independence will always come at the expense of our public services. In this particular climate yes, generally speaking no.

Currency I'll give you. Salmond's flaking during the 1st debate v Darling was something akin to 90th minute goal to make it 3-1 having been under pressure type situation. Sturgeon will need to be stronger on this.

I don't want to repeat myself with posts that were long winded and probably boring enough the first time but there are no shortage of advantages to the Yes side's next campaign, as well as aforementioned disadvantages. With these factors pushing against each other, support coming in at the mid to high 40s are exactly where I'd have placed it on a guess.

Yeah, that's why I was trying to emphasise the short to medium term nature of the cuts we'd face. It's completely speculative what our position would be in 20,30 or 40 years relative to staying in the UK. 

But there was a lot of dishonesty in the first Yes campaign. The white paper was garbage and there was a refusal to accept the realities of the split in terms of the cuts we'd face imminently .

I'm quite encouraged with some of the more realistic analysis of late. Kerevan went off message and there will be more of that. There will be tough tough times following Indy. The spiel has to be that this will be short term pain for medium term gain. But honest as that would be it isn't a vote winner.

I think the SNP will be hugely disappointed with the current poll numbers. The EU referendum result, the Tory government in Westminster and the Labour shambles making a decade more of Tory rule likely, or indeed inevitable and still Yes is quite well behind. I think they'd expect parity at the worst at the moment.

But I suppose it makes the decision easier to not make. If it was say 54/46 consistently yes the trigger finger on indyRef2 would be twitching hard. As it is, we know there isn't going to be one any time soon. 

[John Lambies Doos]

Serious lack of polls? Is anything due?

[John Lambies Doos]

I guess not

[Colkitto]

Still private polling happening. Panelbase asking indyref2 question over the last few days I believe.

[John Lambies Doos]

Still private polling happening. Panelbase asking indyref2 question over the last few days I believe.

Why not publishing. Must be good

[Baxter Parp]

On ‎16‎/‎09‎/‎2016 at 15:19, ScotSquid said:

The white paper was garbage

Which bit was garbage?

[Colkitto]

18 minutes ago, John Lambies Doos said:

 

 

Why not publishing. Must be good

 

 

Hard to tell. Could be a political party who commissioned the poll.

[ScotSquid]

5 minutes ago, Baxter Parp said:

Which bit was garbage?

The economic claims were risible. Something many of us said at the time, and we were proved to be correct.

http://chokkablog.blogspot.co.uk/2016/03/the-price-of-independence.html?m=1

[Baxter Parp]

16 minutes ago, ScotSquid said:

The economic claims were risible. Something many of us said at the time, and we were proved to be correct.

http://chokkablog.blogspot.co.uk/2016/03/the-price-of-independence.html?m=1

That's a blogpost by a noted unionist, got anything else?

[ScotSquid]

'Evidence please?

'There you go'

'Umm, can I get different evidence please as that's proving what you said'

You're an idiot Parp. An idiot.

[Baxter Parp]

1 minute ago, ScotSquid said:

'Evidence please?

'There you go'

'Umm, can I get different evidence please as that's proving what you said'

You're an idiot Parp. An idiot.

Ok, fill your boots:

Kevveridge, the well known pet shop owner who's not an economist uses GERS as his basis for his claims and that's flawed for a number of reasons.

http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-six-key-facts-about-gers/

[ScotSquid]

Parp. You are an idiot. This is known. 

Did you actually read any of the White Paper? 

Did you read the claims Hague is eviscerating?

'On independence in 2016, Scotland's estimated financial position will continue to be healthier than the UK as a whole. We will set out on a firm financial footing'

Did this prove to be :-

A) False or

B) False?

Also, the cretin from Bath has been roundly ridiculed for his failure to understand GERS. That post you linked to is riddled with errors. Errors you see repeated by idiot MSPs.

[ScotSquid]

Top marks though for attacking the evidence provided (without reading it) on the basis that it 

a) is from a known Unionist and

b) isn't written by an economist

.....

And then countering it by...

A blog post from a Nationalist computer games reviewer.

[Baxter Parp]

5 minutes ago, ScotSquid said:

Top marks though for attacking the evidence provided (without reading it) on the basis that it 

a) is from a known Unionist and

b) isn't written by an economist

.....

And then countering it by...

A blog post from a Nationalist computer games reviewer.

Congratulations on doing the same thing I'm supposed to be an idiot for.

[renton]

On 16/09/2016 at 15:19, ScotSquid said:

Yeah, that's why I was trying to emphasise the short to medium term nature of the cuts we'd face. It's completely speculative what our position would be in 20,30 or 40 years relative to staying in the UK. 

But there was a lot of dishonesty in the first Yes campaign. The white paper was garbage and there was a refusal to accept the realities of the split in terms of the cuts we'd face imminently .

I'm quite encouraged with some of the more realistic analysis of late. Kerevan went off message and there will be more of that. There will be tough tough times following Indy. The spiel has to be that this will be short term pain for medium term gain. But honest as that would be it isn't a vote winner.

I think the SNP will be hugely disappointed with the current poll numbers. The EU referendum result, the Tory government in Westminster and the Labour shambles making a decade more of Tory rule likely, or indeed inevitable and still Yes is quite well behind. I think they'd expect parity at the worst at the moment.

But I suppose it makes the decision easier to not make. If it was say 54/46 consistently yes the trigger finger on indyRef2 would be twitching hard. As it is, we know there isn't going to be one any time soon. 

 

It's polling on a hypothetical. Yes spiked into a healthy lead in the immediate, panicked aftermath of Brexit, before breaking back to their fairly consistent pre-Brexit levels. There is no consensus as to what Brexit should be, literally no plan as we are finding out such that we are in a phoney war where there is no reason for people to concentrate their minds on the likely outcome of Brexit on their own fortunes. Given there is also no sustained campaign around independence at the moment, then the status quo rules supreme.

Indeed, you can flip it around and say that, since 2014 GERS shows a marked decline in Scotland's public finances with respect to the rest of the UK, that the oil industry - such a totemic plank of previous nationalist campaigns - is on it's knees, that last year it contributed literally no revenue to Scotland. You could further examine other less direct issues, such as SNP MPs like McGarry, embroiled in massive scandals - such things should obviously destroy trust in those preaching the virtues of independence. Yet, in the face of financial armageddon, growth stalling, unpluggable black holes and ruined trust in representatives the numbers for Yes didn't collapse and have been massively resiliant.

Just as issues like Brexit and Tory GE wins should be manna to Yes but have failed to move the polls, these GERS issues have likewise failed push No numbers higher. Largely, I think, because none of it is impacting on people's everyday lives. No one is paying attention. Yet.

IndyRef 2, should it come will have to a relatively short campaign, as it'll take more than a year post article 50 for the shape of Brexit to take hold, only then would a judgement on whether IndyRef 2 is desirable and winnable be useful.

[sergie's no1 fan]

Just completed a poll for Panelbase there.

Asked me if I think there should be another EU referendum, what did I vote, should there be another Scottish Indy Ref, how did I vote in that ect. There was asking about trusting professionals, do you trust bankers, teachers, politicians ect was a bit weird!

 

[ScotSquid]

1 hour ago, renton said:

 

It's polling on a hypothetical. Yes spiked into a healthy lead in the immediate, panicked aftermath of Brexit, before breaking back to their fairly consistent pre-Brexit levels. There is no consensus as to what Brexit should be, literally no plan as we are finding out such that we are in a phoney war where there is no reason for people to concentrate their minds on the likely outcome of Brexit on their own fortunes. Given there is also no sustained campaign around independence at the moment, then the status quo rules supreme.

Indeed, you can flip it around and say that, since 2014 GERS shows a marked decline in Scotland's public finances with respect to the rest of the UK, that the oil industry - such a totemic plank of previous nationalist campaigns - is on it's knees, that last year it contributed literally no revenue to Scotland. You could further examine other less direct issues, such as SNP MPs like McGarry, embroiled in massive scandals - such things should obviously destroy trust in those preaching the virtues of independence. Yet, in the face of financial armageddon, growth stalling, unpluggable black holes and ruined trust in representatives the numbers for Yes didn't collapse and have been massively resiliant.

Just as issues like Brexit and Tory GE wins should be manna to Yes but have failed to move the polls, these GERS issues have likewise failed push No numbers higher. Largely, I think, because none of it is impacting on people's everyday lives. No one is paying attention. Yet.

IndyRef 2, should it come will have to a relatively short campaign, as it'll take more than a year post article 50 for the shape of Brexit to take hold, only then would a judgement on whether IndyRef 2 is desirable and winnable be useful.

Your second paragraph there highlights the problem. Its widely recognised that the ref was lost because of the economic argument. Which the SNP's garbage White Paper sought to deceive about by choosing a 2 year period it cherry picked. The GERS figures since 2014 just reinforce the disaster indy would be for Scotland financially. 

So how is any new white paper going to address that gap? Convincingly. It can't. Which is why we've had transcendental nationalism from Sturgeon, and a lot of noise around immigration, the direction of moral travel etc. Anything but the economy, which she knows she can't win an argument on versus staying in the UK.

But that being the case, in a putative referendum are people suddenly going to ignore the financial consequences and vote Yes, in the current climate of massive gap in the GERS figures. Not a chance. That's why Nicola Sturgeon doesn't want another referendum.

I don't think the SNP being nose deep in the trough and riddled with sleaze will make much difference, true though that is.