The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

Running away with it

Posted on August 10, 2015 by

Social media is alight today with the latest extraordinary opinion poll for next May’s Holyrood election, which puts the SNP on a record-breaking 62% to Labour’s 20%.

(The Conservatives and Liberal Democrats trail in with miserable stats of 12% and 3% respectively, which means that within the standard margin of polling error it’s possible that NOBODY in Scotland is still planning on voting Lib Dem.)

Pollsters TNS report the findings under what might in the circumstances be seen as the slightly negative headline “SNP holds poll lead in spite of mixed views on record in government”, which relates to figures concerning the Nats’ performance in power.


But there’s an interesting quirk in those numbers.

It’s often said that the SNP’s continued high ratings, despite having now been in government for over eight years, are a result not of public support for independence but for the party’s record of administrative competence, particularly in the face of an ineffective and shambolic opposition.

The poll backs that up – in three of the four categories the most common response is that the government is performing adequately (“Neither good nor poor” was the option given in the questions), rather than well, suggesting a sober and critical analysis by voters rather than the demented, unthinking cult often portrayed by pundits.

But we couldn’t help noticing that if you discounted every last voter who rated the SNP “Good” in each category – who in each case are unsurprisingly mostly planning to vote for the Nats – they’d still be leading in the polls.

Remove the 25% “Good” respondents on the economy and you get:

SNP 37%
Labour 20%

Do the same with the 34% of “Good” on the NHS and it’d be:

SNP 28%
Labour 20%

Take out the party’s keenest backers on Education and the numbers are:

SNP 32%
Labour 20%

And finally on Crime and Justice:

SNP 39%
Labour 20%

That’s an average 14-point lead even after you’ve taken out the people who think the SNP are doing a good job. If it could be possible to more strikingly illustrate the total contempt that Scottish voters currently hold the opposition parties – and particularly Scottish Labour – in, we’re at a loss to think of how.

Print Friendly

    2 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

    1. 10 08 15 18:08

      Running away with it | Politics Scotland | Sco...

    2. 10 08 15 18:45

      Running away with it | Speymouth

    212 to “Running away with it”

    1. scottish_skier says:

      It’s a stupid way of asking.

      The ‘neither poor nor bad’ are basically saying they are satisfied / ok with performance. They don’t think it crap, nor obviously really good, just ‘no bad’. Think of it if you were asked in the same way to rate your hotel room… If you thought it decent enough, but not ‘wow’, you’d pick the middle option. If you thought it bad, you’d say so.

      That’s why the SNP get 7/10 sat ratings (add the ‘neither’ to the ‘good’). The ‘no bad’ and ‘good’ people both tick ‘satisfied’.

      If the poll had asked straight satisfied vs dissatisfied, you’d be looking at ~7 in 10 satisfied on most issues.

    2. Lenny Hartley says:

      I’m can’t understand that the SNP are polling these figures and yet we are told that at best the Yes vote for indy2 is at best only up a percentage point or two from Indyref 1 .

    3. Jim says:

      NET approval is important. Tories were averaging -20. Sounds like no-one cares too much about the so-called ‘scandals’ in the Record.

      For the economy in particular the devolution of powers would allow people to make an honest appraisal.

    4. Donald MacKenzie says:

      But I’m sure that all we’re here from our friends in what used to be the mainstream media will be that the electorate don’t like what the SNP is doing in government.

    5. Des says:

      It’s time to start doing the maths folks on the second vote. Wait and see how it is going in your area and then do your best to work out if it is better to vote for other YES parties/candidates.
      Wouldn’t want to piss my second vote away if I can help it.

      Take a look at how SLAB got on in the Glasgow regional list in 1999 for example Sweet F*** All after winning all the constituencies,_1999

      Think here in the Highlands SNP will sweep the board, so what to do with the second vote?

    6. call me dave says:

      Eight years on and gaining support. This is remarkable and when, as you have pointed out, taking out the 25% still puts the SNP well ahead in the selected categories very heartening indeed.

      Dealing with the NHS, Crime & Justice and Education, SNP bad, attacks more effectively from the usual suspects and tightening up where it is deemed necessary will ensure the numbers stack up well for the elections.

      SNP SG is working away for the benefit all all Scotland, not perfect, as others have commented but who else can folk really put their trust in?

      Still no comment on the poll, that I can see, on the BBC web site or in the radio news programmes…good old auntie.

    7. Lesley-Anne says:

      I hope no one tells moaning Minnie about these results. If she ever finds out about the INCREASE in the S.N.P. lead and seat numbers she will refuse to return to Glasgow to sit in the new House of Lord’s once wee Kezia has finished building it. 😀

    8. Harry Scott says:

      “3% respectively, which means that within the standard margin of polling error it’s possible that NOBODY in Scotland is still planning on voting Lib Dem.”

      Apologies for pedantry, but while it is possible that a statistically insignificant number of people are planning to vote Lib Dem. It’s obviously not possible that NONE are: otherwise nobody would have ticked the Lib Dem box and the poll would show zero percent.

      Good news Lib Dems: According to the data tables you have at least 20 supporters. Normal statistical rules no longer apply to you, you exist only in the realm of Quantum Politics.

    9. ronald alexander mcdonald says:

      The only good thing for Labour is that there’s no evidence of a Tory revival. If anything they seem to be going backwards as well.

    10. Peter Wilson says:

      Personally I’m completely weary of BBC Scotland and Labour whining on about missed waiting time targets in the NHS in Scotland. Most companies in the private sector would bite your leg off to achieve a 95%+ batting average in their targets. I think I might not be alone in this view, hence the SNP being able to maintain momentum in the face of continuous splenetic outpourings by Kezia, Jackie B and the Beeb’s ludicrously partial health correspondent.

    11. gordoz says:

      Interesting informative take Stu:

      As said on previous thread – sure this will be splashed all over front pages tomorrow – NOT !

      “So in the best BBC North Britain / Douglas Fraser / Eleanor Bradford / Jamie McIver / Andrew Black .. speak, is it still SNP Bad ?”

    12. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      It’s worth noting that of course taking all of the “Good” respondents away from the SNP alone is being very harsh on them.

      In reality you’d be subtracting quite a few Labour, Tory and Lib Dem voters from the Nats’ figures, because significant minorities of the other parties think they’re doing a good job but still aren’t going to vote for them.

      (On the economy, for example, they get a “Good” from 18% of Labour voters, 7% of Tories and 27% of Lib Dems.)

    13. Colin Church says:

      The commentariat still do not get it. But the BBC and MSM will still defer to the usual labour has beens, paid unionist mouthpieces and “SNP observers” like the turgid Torrance. Constant SNP accused stories (latest a thing on the Tweed fishing tax that didn’t but might happen)

      Rising SNP is a reaction to not being listened to. As they refuse to hear and it seems at times deliberately troll us(latest wheeze Sir Danny!) the vote goes up and up.

    14. Ali says:

      This is Scotland. “Aye, no bad” is about equivalent to the American “Awesome! Yeah!!”

    15. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Apologies for pedantry, but while it is possible that a statistically insignificant number of people are planning to vote Lib Dem. It’s obviously not possible that NONE are: otherwise nobody would have ticked the Lib Dem box and the poll would show zero percent.”

      That’s not really how it works.

    16. gordoz says:

      Why is there never a simple BBC Type question of ‘SNP Bad ? Yes/No’

      Wouldn’t that be clearer & fairer for ‘Proud Scot buts’ to identify with ?

      Clearly this is just another fixed poll for YES side and hard for UKOK types to deal with.

    17. David McCann says:

      Des. If you are worried about your second vote, dont use it!

      Just vote once.

    18. Juteman says:

      SNP twice for Holyrood. Anything else risks a Unionist gaining a seat.
      That’s if your main aim is independence, obviously.

    19. One_Scot says:

      Given that no one is guaranteed a win via FPTP. It would be madness not to vote SNP/SNP.

    20. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Harry Scott (5.07) –

      ‘Normal statistical rules no longer apply to you, you exist only in the realm of Quantum Politics.’

      !! 🙂 🙂

      Love it.

    21. Dr Jim says:

      And those percentages are against a backdrop of an anti SNP message of failure constantly pumping out from the Media and opposition Parties like a Disco next door

      So you’d have to say the response of AYE they’re no bad is sensational

    22. Effijy says:

      The Poll should really have used a Flow Chart.

      If you think the SNP Government are doing a Good Job, move to either “You are wrong”, or alternatively Turn on the TV to listen to Ant-SNP propaganda from the BBC.

      Those in areas with poor reception can be indoctrinated by the Daily Redcoat.

      O/T I’ve been listening to BBC Radio directed at Scotland each morning. It really is quite pathetic as a daily dose of BBC and Labour’s United SNP Bad Show.

      Why does a SLAB member get on every show when the BBC is supposed to be reflecting Scottish life.
      The country just demonstrated their view on Labour by voting in 1 MP out of a possible 59.

      I do think an invitation every 59th show is justified.

    23. jimnarlene says:

      What, Ali @ 5:12 pm, said.

    24. Bugger (the Panda) says:

      David McCann says:
      10 August, 2015 at 5:16 pm
      Des. If you are worried about your second vote, dont use it!

      Just vote once.

      Can you not vote SNP twice?

    25. Dr Jim says:


      Pretty obvious what to do with your second vote Des SNP+SNP

      Do you want Independence? That’s how to tell them

    26. aldo_macb says:

      Des, even on 62% of the vote the SNP are not likely to sweep all Highland seats. The Scotland voted website predicts Lib Dems to win Shetland on those figs. So your 2nd vote in Highlands should pick up at least one list SNP MP. And it would be a brave person that confidently predicts the Orkney outcome.

    27. CameronB Brodie says:

      Lenny Hartley
      I’m certainly no expert, but I don’t think you can expect SNP support in poles, to result in equivalent Yes votes. Folk vote SNP and No, apparently.

    28. Kevin Evans says:

      Interesting polls but it confirms my belief that people in Scotland believed the bullshit that were stronger as a union.

      I think the added 17% (62% – the 45% yes vote) do believe the SNP are the best political party to protect Scotland but believe there is strength remaining in the union. That is the main and most important myth the YES need to disspell if we are going to win indyref2

    29. mike cassidy says:

      BBC ‘report’ poll findings in the middle of an article on — the Scottish Labour leadership contest.

      Now who would have expected that!

    30. CameronB Brodie says:

      Good news Lib Dems: According to the data tables you have at least 20 supporters. Normal statistical rules no longer apply to you, you exist only in the realm of Quantum Politics.

      Does this mean that Scottish Lib Dems are now technically a theoretical proposition, rather than a political party (branch office)? 🙂

    31. Macart says:

      Oh dang! Now that’s got hurt.

      Eight years in and gaining support. 🙂

      Dear Kez/Ken – Ooft!

    32. AAD says:

      I’ve just sent in post saying that the BBC website was not reporting the poll. Thanks to Mike Cassidy for reading the BBC website more carefully than I did and finding the mention.

      I am still moaning, however, because I’d still like to see it reported fully on the BBC website.

    33. IvMoz says:

      O/T Apparently there’s a new Scottish Independence Party.

      Anybody know anything about it?

    34. Brian Powell says:

      It’s hard to imagine what was going through Nick Clegg’s mind when he put Danny and Vince up for gongs.

      I can imagine what Dave would be saying, ” Yeah Nick, your party may be down at the moment, but a couple of knighthoods will cheer them all up.

      And the public are big on ceremonies and a bit of pomp, look at the Olympics and the royal sprogs, the plebs will be thrilled with some knightyhoods and lordybits.

      And there’s a connection, Vince sold the Royal Mail, Queen on the stamps, knighthood. Public will love it.

      Then Danny did great work for us in the Cabinet and Treasury. Toryhome loved him. It’ll be fine. Go for it, Nick. Votes a plenty will come your way with this. You look a but hollow eyed there, you should take a holiday, a few years maybe.”

    35. K1 says:

      Ah know Ali…I think you are quite correct there, we don’t tend, as a rule, to be ‘extreme’ in our expressions.

      Recall, Scotland doesn’t ‘riot’ we very much to take to the streets in a peaceful and measured manner in support of our causes et al. I’ve often wondered in light of the ‘unusual’ expression of plain ‘happiness’ expressed by those on the Yes side, whether it was just too much to bear for those of a more small ‘c’ conservative position.

      And of how with no real coverage of the actual Yes movement from the media, they were free to exaggerate this ‘upbeatness’ and characterise us as some sort of ‘hoardes’ who were ‘fanatical’? Rather than simply report what was taking place, they heavily focused on the other political party’s interpretation of this outpouring of engagement, and twisted it to suit their narrative; frightening those less informed amongst us and in essence holding on to their remaining ‘faithful’ flock.

      It’s quite laughable to suggest that swathes of a population from one of the most stable countries on the face of the earth, suddenly ‘got hoodwinked’ by the ‘evil’ SNP. And I think May’s results vindicates the lie that was perpetrated and is still ongoing, that somehow we’ve all (those on the Yes side) become hypnotised imbeciles blindly following the SNP. Without a sizeable percentage of those from the No side, the GE results would not have been quite so stunning.

      So I’ll just restate my position in light of the above; I want the bastards completely wiped from the political map of Scotland (oh! is that a bit extreme!). They will never be in the position again, to terrify our elders with the threat of the loss of their pensions.

      We’re not ‘hypnotised’ we’re sorting things out and we are doing it in, I think, a quite typically ‘Scottish’ manner: Democratically. It’s what we’re good at.

    36. One_Scot says:

      100% agree with the Doctor, if you want Independence for Scotland you need to use both your votes for SNP.

      It is the only way we can send the strongest possible message down south to Westminster that we mean business.

    37. Iain Gray's Subway Lament says:

      You can sense the desperation amongst the Pouters and the westminster bubble in trying desperately to find an “SNP bad” story in a poll showing us at 62%.

      The truth is those numbers for satisfaction in policy areas are actually pretty damn good and reflect the scottish public’s trust in Nicola and the Holyrood adminstration.

      All this while the westminster bubble idiots are still obsessing over the ‘outrage’ of Corbyn being more popular than the other three insipid Blairite drones.

      Keep in mind this isn’t just the same out of touch twits in the media who used to tell everyone that the hilariously bad Kendall was Labour’s ‘best hope’ – but it’s also the same westminster bubble that doesn’t appear to have noticed just how badly the current tide of westmisnter corruption and sleaze is gonig down with the public.

      You don’t just have the odious Blairites threatening to overturn Labour’s leadership vote, you also have former tory PM Ted Heath under scrutiny for child abuse, similar stories involving several of the establishment’s ‘finest’ also threatening to break cover and the ludicrous spectacle of Lord Sewel and ‘Sir’ Danny Alexander making the honours system look even more of a corrupt laughing stoack than when Blair’s cash for honours stories were doing the rounds.

      Make no mistake, there is going to be PLENTY more of this kind of corruption and scandal to come since the westmisnter establishment are utterly incapable of anything other than incompetence and corruption while being ridiculously out of touch with the average voter.

    38. Brian Powell says:


      I’m sure RIC and SSP will be fine with Unionist newspapers and commentariat using them to show dissent in the Independence side.

    39. Janet says:

      A vote for the SNP is an unambiguous two fingers at the corrupt Establishment. Votes for others can always be misinterpreted by meeja types.

      Like Her Maj once said, think very carefully!

      Vote SNP, including for that list vote.

      Clear message is then sent to Westminster.

    40. Camz says:

      The SNP are riding high on being “not the Westminster Establishment” and other assorted chalices, such as honours, scandals and so on.

      Long may it continue, and maybe the others will get the picture.

    41. Mealer says:

      Hmm.A cursory glance at the figures suggests No voters are more likely to vote SNP than Conservative.Unionists Must Unite.Trouble is,they seem to be uniting behind Nicola to keep the dross out of Holyrood.

    42. Bill Hume says:

      New Independence party….SIP…..Coinneach Mac Eachain and perhaps another few people. Never heard of him. The words barge pole and wouldn’t touch with, spring to mind.

    43. R-type Grunt says:

      @Lenny Hartley

      It’s because, in my opinion, the numbers were always as they are now. Near enough anyway. We did not lose that referendum. I can’t prove it but I’d stake my life on it. We’re nothing but mugs.

    44. Des – as Scot Goes Pop has gone to great lengths to stress in recent weeks, trying to guess the outcome of the constituency votes and then using that to dictate your list vote is just asking for trouble.

      If you want the SNP to win seats, then you should vote SNP both times. Otherwise, you run the risk of a couple of freak results in the constituencies leaving the SNP with no back-up in the list.

    45. CameronB Brodie says:

      This course looks interesting. I think you’ll probably come away with a good idea as to what the foundations of modern Britain are built on. 🙂

      Corruption: Concept and Practice in Britain and its Empire, c.1600-1835

    46. IvMoz – BuzzFeed doesn’t really do serious news.

    47. galamcennalath says:

      Great poll. So far ahead when so many voters seem to think the SNP are just “no bad”.

      Thought. OT. Do you think there are stupid people out there who believe the two Holyrood votes are first and second choice, rather than constituency and list?

      I’m getting to the stage where nothing about some people would surprise me!

    48. msean says:

      It is because,whether you voted snp or not, they actually are a decent government,and the talent pool got enlarged with the new recruits since last year.

    49. Kenny says:

      Des, you are lucky to live in the Highlands because the remarkable “independence climber” Lindsay Jarrett is standing there on the Solidarity (peach coloured) list!

      She hails from Kinlochleven in Lochaber.

    50. Shug says:

      I do hope that anyone with time will call into Tokyo key’s call in with this news cause that’s the only chance the BBC will cover it

    51. G says:


      “Tonight on Scotland 2015”, the Scottish Government have banned the cultivation of GM crops – “could the country lose out”.

      FFS. No chance of the BBC screening The World According to Monsanto then? 😀

    52. Nation Libre says:

      I think what is also quite often missed is that during the SNP’s 8 years in power, they have had to deal with real term budget cuts to the block grant in almost every year in power

      It would be interesting in these polls if that was part of the question i.e. Given the SNP Government has had real term budget cuts in 6 of the 8 years (or whatever it is) in power, how would you rate …

      I realise that it’s quite leading but believe it is a very important point to make which would see a significant increase in the ‘Good’ percentage

      Rev, any chance of seeing an article on budgets since 1997 for comparison through the various administrations?

    53. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      When you put the figures from the TNS poll into the seat calculator at:-

      This is the result.

      SNP – Constituency 71, Regional (List) 7 – Total 78
      Labour – Constituency 0, List 25 – Total 25
      Conservative – Constituency 1, List 14 – Total 15
      Green – Constituency 0, List 9 – Total 9
      Lib-Dem – Constituency 1, List 1 – Total 2

      An SNP/SNP choice has got to be the way forward.

    54. Increasingly clear that the Referendum, only eleven months ago, was a fraud. We must make sure that the next one is properly supervised by a Third Party, say Russia.

    55. G H Graham says:

      Stop whining about the BBC. The only way to effect ANY change in Scotland, is to do one of two things, preferably both.

      1. Cancel the BBC License Fee & ask for a refund
      2. Stop visiting any of the BBC’s websites

      When you agree to pay the License Fee, you are giving the BBC permission to continue to write, publish & broadcast its own propaganda on your behalf!

      It will not reproduce your unfiltered viewpoint & certainly not the unfiltered commentary of the SNP or indeed anyone else’s opinion which happens to promote the idea of Scottish independence.

      Meanwhile, the BBC Trust works to achieve only two basic over arching aims.

      a). Continuing political support in Westminster regardless of government

      b). Maintain its BBC License Fee funding mechanism

      By securing these two outcomes, it protects its singular cartel of tax funded information to further its London centric agenda, usually to propagate jingoistic, British neo-conservative propaganda.

      It’s really that simple.

    56. galamcennalath says:

      “Labour – Constituency 0, List 25 – Total 25
      Conservative – Constituency 1, List 14 – Total 15”

      Down, but by no means out!

      The BBC will continue to treat them as the main parties!

    57. heedtracker says:

      It’s worth noting that of course taking all of the “Good” respondents away from the SNP alone is being very harsh on them.

      Also very harsh, daily UKOK media SNP reportage.

      Here in London, BBC London teatime news, usual tube strikes, housing shortage etc but then sudden switch to Edinburgh Festival thing with Gurkha’s display at the festival and their ongoing Gurkha/UK status dispute, which ends abruptly with sonorous BBC London chump going-

      “But they’ll get a warm welcome from Scottish politicians, who wont have to pay for them.”

    58. Russia? Aye, let’s get North Korea in as well while we’re at it.

      The referendum wasn’t a fraud. Not all SNP supporters back independence – in fact a surprisingly high number don’t. But the party has succeeded in reassuring such folk that they can vote SNP without having to be in favour of independence.

      That message clearly hasn’t gotten through to everyone…

    59. Gary45% says:

      The SNP could find a cure for cancer, world debt e.t.c. and the British Broadcasting C**ts would still report the same daily pish eg SNP BAAAAAAD.
      Every morning before we put the radio on the wife and I normally guess what SHI*E they will lead with.

      In about a week and a half’s time the story will be about the awful treatment the elderly receive in care homes and it will be all the SNP’s fault.
      As the BBC in England reported this problem down there, we will get the same story up here, with only the SNP getting the blame.

    60. Cuilean says:

      If you want the SNP to remain a majority Govt, you have to vote SNP in both your first and second choice. I’ve lost trust in the Greens, given the abysmal track record of their one and only MP at Westminster. The Scottish Greens have never criticised the Greens Westminster voting record. So its ‘Game Over’ for the Greens, as far as I am concerned.

    61. call me dave says:

      Loved this bit from the BBC.
      One of their previous leaders – former First Minister Henry McLeish – admits the party has been taking voters for granted in Scotland.

      He told me they had become complacent and entitled.
      Asked if the party had now hit rock bottom he said: “I hope so, but I fear we may not have reached our nadir.”

      Kezia’s bad enough surely not followed by Nadir… 🙂

      The direction pointing directly below a particular location; that is, it is one of two vertical directions at a specified location, orthogonal to a horizontal flat surface there.


      No wonder labour are in trouble, they don’t know what way to go!

    62. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      O/T (I hope it’s far enough into the comments!)

      Wings get-togethers being organised for Edinburgh in September and Dundee/Invergowrie in October. Join the conversation in ‘off-topic’.

    63. Donald says:

      There may be a certain percentage of people who say neither good nor bad because they believe that without full powers, holyrood has very little influence on things like the economy.

    64. msean says:

      Saw that on the bbc news24 Newsnight 2015 anchor report about Labour,where’s the usual reporter?

    65. fermerfaefife says:

      So Scottish education is in crisis ? All our kids are getting let down by snp?according to Kez. Record pass rates and 70% !!! Saying the snp is doing a decent job on education. Kez very much whining up the wrong dreel.

    66. Brian Powell says:

      TNS poll under 55s 71% SNP.

    67. Mealer says:

      Fermerfaefife 7.59
      Up the wrang dreel? Needin all her time to be in the right field.

    68. heedtracker says:

      “I hope so, but I fear we may not have reached our nadir.”

      Kezia’s bad enough surely not followed by Nadir…

      Silly old Dunc knows. That little aphorism cant even come close to end of the line SLabour. If they didn’t have vote BBC SLab Scotland…

      Pinned Tweet
      Duncan Hothersall ?@dhothersall Jul 23
      First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, and then you realise this little aphorism doesn’t always work out.

    69. HandandShrimp says:

      I thought Magnus was looking particularly sad in his Herald picture today 🙂

      It doesn’t really matter what way it is cut, 62% is amazing.

    70. Petra says:

      I had problems getting on to Wings. The message said ”This link is not authorized by Yahoo. If you would like to continue to this link’s intended destination at your own risk, click here.”

    71. MJS Dundee says:

      Thon BBC article about the SLab leadership, they’re at it again … . Sarah Smith (no less) writing:

      “Unless they win back a substantial number of the seats they lost to the SNP, Labour will almost certainly never form a government in Westminster again.

      If they fail to regain their Scottish heartlands they would have to instead win seats in England that even Tony Blair could not conquer in 1997.”

      1997 result – Blair wins 417 seats. Subtract 60 odd (all, round number for ease) Scottish ones and he’s got 357 seats – he needed 330 for er … an overall majority. With er, … no Scottish seats at all. Doh!

      How dim are they, or how dim do they think we are?

      A “steaming pile of preposterous piffle”, seems to about cover it nicely.

    72. Sinky says:

      The Indian lady in UKOK BBC feature on two unknown Scottish leadership contest was certainly not happy to have Kezia and a camera crew at her front door.

      Meanwhile on the latest opinion polls, not all voters know that as well as protecting the most vulnerable from Tory welfare cuts, crime is at a 40 year low, there is record spending on the NHS and the number of full time college places has increased with a higher proportion of full time further education college students completing their course successfully.

      In government the SNP has protected the Small Business Bonus Scheme – benefiting more than 90,000 small businesses – and has recently announced that the modern apprenticeship programme will be extended to provide work for 30,000 young people per year by 2020.

      The SNP Government has also maintained the popular People’s Policies which help ordinary families across the country – including maintaining free prescriptions, free university education, 1000 extra police officers, keeping the council tax frozen and maintaining free personal care in the face of unprecedented Westminster cuts.

      Council Tax freeze until 2016 is delivering a fair deal for families, saving the average household around £1,200.

      SNP protecting the NHS budget, allowing deliver of faster and better treatment.

      1,000 extra police on our streets – officers who have helped drive down recorded crime to a 39-year low.

      Free education is helping to keep student debt levels the lowers in the UK. the average Scottish student loan debt is £6,850 compared to £19,740 in England.

      Young Scots a fair start in life with Opportunities for All initiative – offering all 16-19 year olds a place in education or training – and a fair chance at a job with 25,000 modern apprenticeships every year.

      Nursery provision increasing by around half giving 3 and 4 year olds 600 hours a year. And we are extending this to a quarter of all 2-year-olds from the hardest pressed families.

      Nearly 34,000 jobs have been created or safeguarded through work on inward investment.

      £74 million seized from criminals invested in CashBack for Communities projexts, funding 1.2 million activities and opportunities for young people.

      Protecting free prescriptions, keeping the NHS free at the point of need.

      SNP have built 4,432 new council houses and are on track to complete 30,000 affordable homes by 2016.

      46.5% of Scotland’s gross electricity consumption is from renewable sources, with the renewable energy sector now employing over 11,000 people.

      SNP acting to ensure that the poorest in society are protected from Tory welfare cuts, pledging £68 million to replace the cut in Council Tax benefit and £35 million to effectively abolish the hated Bedroom Tax in Scotland.

    73. Dr Jim says:

      @Douglas Daniel

      Sorry Douglas, the Referendum WAS a fraud as I for one have already posted and proved and have the Evidence to attest to it
      The Postal vote in my area was rigged because many of the so called voters had their cards filled in for them as I have said by a very nice lady from a Particular Party as she had done in previous years

      You say A surprisingly high number of SNP supporters don’t back Independence

      From where does this come, what numbers can you show for this, and one last thing
      None of these non Independence supporters are in my branch
      Do you really believe post Referendum 1000,000 people joined the party NOT to want Independence

    74. Dr Jim says:

      I guess it’ll just have to be the BBC party as sole opposition now

      Union Jackie Burd for First Minister
      Eleanor Bradford Health Minister
      Sarah Smith Drivel Minister (new post)

      I’ve just scared myself….sorry

    75. Phronesis says:

      Very gratifying stats- Scotland’s electorate is using the information gained over the last few years to slowly challenge a political UKOK orthodoxy that has presented the quest for autonomy as dangerous, deviant, delinquent and disordered.

      In therapeutic counselling there are 5 stages on the roadmap to positive adaptation,autonomy and resilience-engagement, assessment, contracting, work and transition. The YES movement initiated that journey to answer doubts about Scotland’s competence, resources and evidence base in managing its future. The journey is incomplete but going at a steady pace towards the finish line.

    76. Alan Mackintosh says:

      Had a wee wander over to the SiP FB page. Seems they’re being outed as some Britnat nawbag pouters. Seems they are a badly/barely disguised front. Shame, could have been worth some humour had they continued for a bit longer.

      In other news, for those musing about 1st and 2nd votes, its worth having a look at Scot goes pop where this was discussed a few weeks ago. In essence its the 2nd/list vote which is the critical one, rather than the 1st/constituency one. 1st is for who you want as an MSP, 2nd is for who you want in government.

    77. Schrödinger's cat says:

      Disappointed to see labour support at 20%

      If Corbyn is elected by the rank and file and then deposed by the labour mp’s , it might drop a bit further. Here’s hoping

    78. Dr Jim – my evidence is from actually talking to folk. Door-chapping, as well as the fact that even the two folk in my team at work who I didn’t manage to convert to Yes before the referendum voted SNP in May, because there was no one else worth voting for.

      These aren’t SNP members. Supporters and members are not the same thing. And there certainly aren’t 1,000,000 SNP members (yet).

      Although as it happens, polls suggest around 15% of SNP voters don’t support independence. If anything, that’s possibly an underestimate.

    79. Morag says:

      Why do people read the words “SNP supporter” and hear “SNP member”?

      There are about 120,000 SNP members. If that was the total number of people who voted SNP, they wouldn’t have won a single seat. Over 1.4 million people voted SNP. Some of these people don’t support indepedence.

      The referendum wasn’t “rigged”. A collection of individual petty fiddles involving fraudulent voter registration and “helping” the elderly with their votes doesn’t amount to systematic wholesale fraud organised by the state.

    80. Cal says:

      Great poll result! Definitely SNP/SNP for me.

      This new independence party (if it really exists) seems to be very popular with BritNats – tells you all you need to know really….

    81. Morag says:

      Funny thing. I once heard Alex Salmond say he was sick and tired of all the “nazi” jibes and that if he was starting the party from scratch he’d call it the “Scottish Independence Party”.

    82. pitchfork says:

      Duncan’s aphorism should surely read:

      First they vote for you, then they see through you, then they scorn you, then they laugh at you, then they ignore you…

    83. Ach, what do we know Morag? We’re only out speaking to folk every evening and weekend. The real knowledge is in the echo chamber Facebook groups and blogs by random folk.

    84. Iain More says:

      I don’t believe these figures. The idea that a huge chunk of nawbags are going to vote SNP beggars belief.

      The question on the economy is of course utterly irrelevant as well, as the SG has no effective economic powers. The Brit Establishment will never surrender those.

      Of course if you believe the rest of the figures it might actually reflect a level of maturity in the electorate. Considering that the SG has had to perform whilst dealing with real terms cuts in what is patronisingly given back to us by the sleazebags in WM. It is a level of maturity that was strikingly absent during the Referendum as evidenced by the 55 to 45 Naw vote, ho hum!

    85. woosie says:

      These figures underline the fraud that was our referendum.

      A few months after a narrow defeat, the uk ge, which the establishment didn’t feel necessary to rig, shows a much increased SNP sympathy – which I continue to believe is the same as a yes. I don’t vote SNP on their policies, it’s much more important than that!

      The new increased support also shows that fewer and fewer are taking in any of the lies and drip-fed anti-Scottish smears from ebc. Also, the corrupt, self-serving ermine chasers, like Alistair Carbunkle, aka Judas Escargot, betray their parties’ real policies; get elected at any cost.

    86. Petra says:


      From the SNP Website.

      Knighthoods continue Westminster patronage circus Mon, 10/08/2015 – 14:37

      ‘There are reports that a number of Liberal Democrat MPs who lost their seats at the election in May are to be rewarded with peerages and knighthoods – despite being comprehensively rejected by the electorate.

      The LibDems have now just one MP in Scotland but look certain to add to their tally at Westminster with the imminent creation of another 50 or so peers – to add to the cronies and party funders who make up Westminster’s second chamber. It now seems likely that in addition to the new peers, a number of ex-MPs will be awarded knighthoods.

      Pete Wishart, SNP MP and Shadow Leader of the House, commented:

      “Not content with stuffing the absurd House of Lords even more with his cronies and donors, the Prime Minister now feels obliged to reward his former LibDem helpers with gongs. Knighthoods are not just a consolation prize, though. They are a lucrative reward for these failed politicians which will doubtless open many a boardroom door.

      The suggestion that Danny Alexander is to receive a Tory-nominated knighthood – despite being comprehensively rejected by voters in the Highlands – simply underlines what is wrong with the whole system.

      The people of Scotland will be observing this circus with growing contempt – the whole Lords, Ladies, Knights, patronage nonsense is becoming something they see as beyond ridiculous. Yet we will soon have almost a thousand unelected Peers, which just highlights the profoundly undemocratic nature of the House of Lords and the need to scrap it, given the ludicrous waste of public money involved.”’

    87. Grouse Beater says:

      I heard Alex Salmond say he was sick and tired of all the “nazi” jibes … he’d call it the “Scottish Independence Party”.

      He said the same to me in response to a direct question. I can’t see why the part can’t alter its name. But SIP might not be it – The Scottish Party is all that’s required.

    88. Harry Scott says:

      Rev. Stuart Campbell says: “That’s not really how it works.”

      How does it work? Have I got the wrong end of the stick somewhere?

      As far as I can tell, according to the data table for the TNS poll, at least 20 people (all voters based in Scotland over 16) said they were planning to vote Lib Dem. 20>0 so it’s not correct to say that within the standard margin of error there might be no Lib Dem voters, because looky here: there are 20 of them. You can’t extend the error margin beyond what the hard data allows, you might as well say there could be a negative number of Lib Dem voters.

      Anyway, pedantry as I said before and not relevant to the gist of your post which is sound and makes a very good point. I haven’t spent as long as you looking at polls so if I’m being daft, please graciously point out my error.

    89. Flower of Scotland says:


      Look at the web site. When the word separatist appears you know it’s the Britnats!

      This needs some dissecting methinks by our Rev.

    90. call me dave says:

      The other side of the coin.

    91. ronald alexander mcdonald says:

      The support for the SNP since the referendum makes me believe that approx 60% of the population would like Scotland to be Independent, but fewer have the confidence to vote for it.

      Voting SNP does not constitute a risk as they are aware that only a YES vote in another referendum can deliver Independence. That is why the unionist politicians will get nowhere scaremongering about another referendum.

    92. Brian Powell says:

      A tweet form the news watch site MediaLens.

      “Media Lens ?@medialens; What does #Corbyn tell us? That politics and media have been waging a war on political choice so effectively that no-one noticed until now”.

      We saw this in Scotland long, long before Corbyn, surprised MediaLens didn’t notice.

    93. Morag says:

      In my experience Ronald is right. It’s all about confidence. I don’t know how we get that into people, but that’s what needs to be done.

    94. CameronB Brodie says:

      Re. the House of Lords:

      Modernity is post-traditional. A society can’t be fully modern if attitudes, actions or institutions are significantly influenced by traditions, because deference to tradition – doing things just because people did them in the past – is the opposite of modern reflexivity. Because of this, Giddens suggests that societies which try to ‘modernise’ in the most obvious institutional sense – by becoming something like a capitalist democracy – but which do not throw off other traditions, such as gender inequalities, are likely to fail in their attempt to be successful modern societies.

      While the association of the concept of a risk society with disasters is not wrong, it is incomplete. Developed by the German sociologist Ulrich Beck in the mid-1980s (1991, 1995, 1996, 1998), the idea of an emergent risk society refers to a fundamental transformation or modernisation of industrial societies. More specifically, increasingly individualised and disembedded citizens question – partly in view of the devastating consequences of industrial production – the very foundations of the society, most notably the belief in economic growth, and political, technological and scientific control of production. This ‘questioning’ of the foundations results in ‘reflexive modernisation’.

      The UKOK plc. is a sick joke, but only in the traditional sense. 😉

    95. Mealer says:

      Harry Scott 9.40,
      Aye,20 folk out of the thousand or so said that they’d vote Libdems.The number is so small that if you asked a different 1000 people there might not have been any of them intending to vote Libdem.Of course,we do know that atleast those twenty are going to vote Libdem.So the Libdems won’t have 0.000000000% of the vote but they might only get 0.000000002%,which would be considered as zero in statistical terms for our purposes.If you see what I mean.

    96. louis.b.argyll says:

      Poll shows Lib Dems could poll less than 1%. Aka 0…

    97. Democracy Reborn says:


      Office for National Statistics report, June 2014:

      Scotland – the ‘best educated country in Europe’, and among the best educated in the world.

      Someone tweet Kez and tell her….

    98. ronald alexander mcdonald says:

      Morag,I’m convinced it’s financial.

      The SNP has to deliver a radical economic proposition that benefits the majority. Jeremy Corbyn is doing it. Look at Green/Investment QE and propositions to cut tax reliefs on Richard Murphy’s website.

      Even the FT last week reluctantly accepted it.

      We’re dealing with human nature. We have to answer the question, what’s in it for me?

    99. Molly says:

      I had the misfortune to be standing behind someone in a queue ( on the Saturday after the Ref) who had been ‘hueme ‘ to vote then after the show was “off back to Lundun”.

      It was individuals like the loudmouth in front of me , who technically may have hailed from here, certainly wasn’t based here.

      I sometimes wonder how many others ‘used’ their vote’ before flying back to Lundun ?

    100. Luigi says:

      woosie says:
      10 August, 2015 at 9:11 pm

      “..the uk ge, which the establishment didn’t feel necessary to rig,”

      Sorry, woosie, I don’t buy that for one minute. 56 SNP MPs is an absolute nightmare for the establishment. Would they have “rigged” the GE to prevent an SNP majority if they thought they could get away with it? You better believe it!

      I understand your attempt to explain the massive discrepancy though – it sort of blows a hole in the conspiracy theory! A rather inconvenient fact. If they got away with rigging the ref, why on earth would they risk everything gained by allowing the election of 56 SNP MPs at the GE?

    101. Breastplate says:

      Here we go again with the referendum wasn’t rigged.
      You 100% do not know that. Stop stating it as if it’s fact.
      Accept that you don’t know and it’s just a guess on your part.

    102. Morag says:

      It’s not a guess. The statistics of the voting patterns, down to ballot box level demonstrate that it wasn’t, and the known safeguards (including observation by representatives of both sides) mean that this would be essentially impossible to accomplish.

      Don’t confuse petty fraud by individuals acting on their own initiative with systematic subversion by state sponsored agents.

    103. Alistair says:

      Point of order about margin of error. The +-3% quoted is for ‘reasonable’ values, abover 10 or so percent. Very small figures (and by extension very large) like the lib dems 3% actually has a far smaller MOE so will be way more accurate than the SNP’s 62 percent

    104. Luigi says:

      I’m not stating anything as “fact”. I am just challenging the assumptions of those presenting the opinion that the ref was won by rigging as “fact”. If people are so sure that rigging swung it, then please answer this:

      Why was the GE result not rigged?

    105. louis.b.argyll says:

      Because indyref only needed one in twenty votes to be ‘adapted’..

      Wouldn’t be so easy in General to make a difference..

    106. breastplate says:

      I don’t believe there would be any need to rig the GE as 56 SNP MPs would be considered an inconvenience not a threat to the British state.

    107. NN says:

      Good to see, but only makes the current situation even more absurd and depressing.

    108. Luigi says:

      breastplate says:
      10 August, 2015 at 10:49 pm

      I don’t believe there would be any need to rig the GE as 56 SNP MPs would be considered an inconvenience not a threat to the British state.

      56 SNP MPs, Labour wiped out. Not a threat to the establishment?

      Aye, right!

    109. louis.b.argyll says:

      Hard to believe…that in their only opportunity to ‘discuss’ the. The poll…they (guess who) talk only about the Greens..

    110. breastplate says:

      I’m not confusing petty fraud by individuals with subversion by the state but you seem to be.
      Individuals would make little difference to the outcome.
      State intervention would.
      But of course according to you that didn’t happen because you and other representatives seen it not happening.

    111. Mealer says:

      The Scotland 2015 programme tonight had a discussion about the TNS poll.The presenter mumbled that SNP are on 62% and then went on to make the rest of the slot all about the greens.Pathetic,really.

    112. louis.b.argyll says:

      Hard to believe…that in their only opportunity to ‘discuss’ the TNS poll…they (guess who) talk only about the Greens..

    113. Luigi says:

      louis.b.argyll says:
      10 August, 2015 at 10:46 pm

      Because indyref only needed one in twenty votes to be ‘adapted’..

      Wouldn’t be so easy in General to make a difference..

      If they could do it on the industrial scale required for the ref result, with all the global attention, a messy postal vote confusion to secure at least a few key Labour MPs at the GE would have been a dawdle.

      I’m not saying they needed to save all the Labour MPs, only a few key ones like Murphy and Curran. As for the problem explaining any suspicious results – easy! All down to tactical voting! Believe me, they would have done it if they thought they could get away with it.

      Was there a wee bit cheating in 2014? Of course there was. But that is not the issue. Some are implying it was conducted in secret, on an industrial scale, which I find hard to believe. Secrets that big tend not to stay secret for long.

    114. breastplate says:

      Luigi, Is the British state still very much intact after the GE?

    115. Luigi says:

      breastplate says:
      10 August, 2015 at 11:11 pm

      Luigi, Is the British state still very much intact after the GE?

      Sort of, but they have been on a shoogly peg since 2007.

      Och I can see you won’t be convinced to drop the riggin argument, so we will have to agree to disagree on that. I do feel that it is necessary to challenge this though – I do feel we should be moving on cos we still have to reduce the red tories further in 2016 and 2017 so they are no longer an issue during indyref2. Perhaps we can continue this discussion later, I’m off to ma bed (work tomorrow)!

      G’nite all.

    116. NN says:

      Being viewed as competent caretakers is far from being sure of a pro indy supporter…BUT confidence increasing in local governance and showing that a government with a different attitude is possible does increase the chance, but only if the independence arguments are constantly hammered home and shown as the only true expression and way to take advantage of these possibilities.

      Along the way the media will suppress the good actions and aspects of Scottish government and spin everything to make the SNP look bad and the UK gov/Westminster look good. You can expect the dirty tricks to be turned up to eleven for the coming years, as well as the involvement of the various agencies and sleeper agents. The first and most obvious will be constantly dumping poisoned chalice type powers on the Scottish government to make them take the blame for austerity or the terrible results of austerity. The media will make this take hold very well in a large chunk of the population.

    117. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Nobody is suggesting that the referendum was rigged as a fact. Many people are suspecting that however (including me) which is a different matter. What I am absolutely certain of is that the UK would have had no hesitation about rigging it had they felt the need and the postal ballot is ripe for rigging.

      No one is suggesting that the rigging was done at any of the counts either. I have had it explained to me how ballot stored for six weeks in council computers could very easily be be interfered with long before the count and a further suggestion that it was overdone to produce a NO majority of 450,000 which is so far outside the expectation of reliable experts as to be very dubious indeed.
      At the end of it only one postal vote in four the other way would have reversed the result.

      There however is nothing that can be done to change the result.

    118. CameronB Brodie says:

      OT from the Rev.’s twitter feed.

      What does #Corbyn tell us? That politics and media have been waging a war on political choice so effectively that no-one noticed until now. – Media Lens

      You must walk around with your fecking eyes closed mate. It’s been pretty obvious to those that cared to see, just who has controlled British politics for the last forever. It sure ain’t the voters pal.

    119. Famous15 says:

      There may not have been rigging of the voting papers but i did not imagine the three phone calls I received stating i would lose my public service pension if YES won.

      The last call was from the Lib/Dems who I will never forgive and if that caller is still receiving therapy after my robust reply then my living has not been in vain.

    120. Alan Mackintosh says:

      I did post this in the previous article as a link I came across. This does seem to indicate that something is anomalous with the SIR when compared to other elections.

      This compares (AIUI)the magenta-normal curve, blue- ballot and black-best fit with degree of variance. You can see the SIR variance is nearly 10% or so equivalent to 460K votes, wheras the “normal elections have a variance of a fraction of a percent with some thousands of votes.
      As I said before, I’m not a stats person, but have tried to contact the author of this analysis to get more info. But this seems to counter the suggestion that everything was hunkydory. As I said before, if any one with stats knowledge wants to jump in then feel free.

    121. louis.b.argyll says:

      But they’d need to ‘adapt’ a huge number in the last GE..

      Point is. .the indyref was easy to fix.

    122. Jim McIntosh says:

      Every time someone says they believe the referendum was rigged, it is obvious that it’s a personal opinion else they would be offering irrefutable evidence.

      Why then are they treated by some posters on here as though they are loony tunes, while people who categorically state that there was no rigging are revered as wise sages who cannot be wrong, and should not be questioned. Isn’t this also a personal opinion?

      Annoys me more than a wee bit. Let’s be honest none of us know for sure. Why don’t both parties just agree to disagree and stop with the “Yes it was / No it wasn’t” comments.

    123. Ken MacColl says:

      I am fed up complaining about such manipulation. I switched to the BBC as I knew the dreaded Sarah Smith was not on . Then I saw Magnus Gardham -who thought he was a detached commentator(?)- when rather than discuss the huge SNP lead in the latest poll they elect to discuss the “surge” of the Greens from 6% to 8% and the huge significance of this!
      BBC Scotland becomes increasingly irrelevant day by day

    124. Dal Riata says:

      So, Alistair – “With both head and heart, I sincerely hope so [Scotland votes No in the 2014 independence referendum], because a Yes vote would be a huge risk for Scotland and a disaster for the United Kingdom.” – Campbell, ‘Director of Communications and Strategy for prime minister Tony Blair between 1997 and 2003’, says “Choose anyone but Corbyn for Labour leader”….

      That’s nice.

      And in other important news….

      Jeremy Vine, BBC presenter – “It was revealed on 4 February 2015 that Vine received a five-figure sum for a post-dinner speech at a £250-a-head banquet organised by ADS Group, the trade organisation that represents defence and security industries in the UK, and attended by global arms manufacturers. Campaign Against Arms Trade lodged a formal complaint with the BBC, claiming a conflict for the organisation appearing to support an industry which “profits from dictatorships which silence and suppress debate”. This prompted a BBC response saying: “Jeremy is a freelance presenter and so can make personal appearances without speaking on behalf of the BBC, as he did here.”” – has just been announced as the first of the ‘celebrities’ who will be appearing on the BBC’s Strictly Come Dancing, says the BBC.

      That’s nice, too.

    125. Doug Daniel says:

      It’s simple, Jim. Stories like that have a nasty habit of snowballing on the internet, and before you know it, someone’s personal misgivings about the postal vote process soon become someone else’s irrefutable proof that the whole thing was rigged, which means that Yes actually won, so we didn’t actually lose the referendum at all, so there is nothing to learn for next time (except to ban postal votes, because that will fix everything), so if we just re-run the referendum without postal votes, we’ll win by a landslide.

      (Except that MI5 will just rig that one as well, so we might as well skip the whole process and declare UDI instead.)

      Bit extreme perhaps, but that’s essentially what’s happened in some corners since the referendum.

      If folk can’t admit that we simply lost, then how can we even begin to work out what we did wrong and how to win next time? How is it helpful for any discussion on how to do things better next time to have folk going “aye, but you know it was rigged, right?” in the background?

      And you’re being very selective if you think people only state it as personal opinion. The much-vaunted “report” that was doing the rounds a few months ago keeps getting brought up, as if it is an authoritative voice on the matter, rather than just a bunch of coincidences and misinformation cobbled together to reach the conclusion they were picked to support.

    126. Hamish100 says:

      Looks like the Herald is trying to stir up things — again with the fictitious SIP party. Keep going guys — I might still by the national but I will stop my Purchase of the Herald.

      No doubt BBC state broadcaster will be on am proclaiming the end of the snp


    127. Dal Riata says:

      @Doug Daniel at 7.27 pm

      Sorry, DD, I’m usually in agreement with what you have to say, but I have to question this:

      “The referendum wasn’t a fraud.”

      Really? And you’re absolutely certain about that?

      “…my evidence is from actually talking to folk. Door-chapping, as well as the fact that even the two folk in my team at work who I didn’t manage to convert to Yes before the referendum voted SNP in May, because there was no one else worth voting for.”

      That doesn’t prove anything, DD. – apart from, that two of your workmates voted for the SNP in the General Election who had voted for No in the referendum. How does that give conclusive evidence of non-fraudulent behaviour from the British state?

      Look, I’m not some conspiracy theorist nutter who imagines works of a dark nature must occur behind every important event, political or non-political. I’m just keeping all options open unless proven otherwise. I respect and abide by the result of the referendum. Until there is clear evidence of fraud or criminality then I will agree with the ‘will of the Scottish people’. Losing hurt like hell, but thems the breaks… or are they?

      From MI5’s own website:

      MI5 protects the UK against threats to national security

      The role of the MI5, as defined in the Security Service Act 1989, is “the protection of national security and in particular its protection against threats such as terrorism, espionage and sabotage, the activities of agents of foreign powers, and from actions intended to overthrow or undermine parliamentary democracy by political, industrial or violent means”.

      Our work is guided by the Government’s overall strategy to counter threats to the UK’s national security.

      I’ll just put this out there: Do you really believe, hand over heart, that MI5 was not in way “guided by the Government’s overall strategy to counter threats to the UK’s national security”?

      Me? I don’t know. But what bigger ‘threat’ to the “UK’s national security” than its dissolution?

      Would the government – and ‘others’ with a deep vested interest in upholding the existence of the UK – not be derelict in their duties if they ‘*didn’t* ask MI5 to “counter the threat” of Scottish independence?

      Apart from invasion or being blitzed by nuclear warheads, what other act could be viewed as serious a threat to the UK’s integrity than the UK, in effect, becoming no more, should the result of the Scottish referendum be a Yes? And that’s before mentioning the siting of Trident, North Sea Oil, and all other Scottish assets that are viewed by Westminster and the British state’s actors as ‘theirs’ and not up for discussion…

      I’m not saying MI5, or any other of the British state agencies, *definitely* employed dark-art or illegal means to achieve the ‘correct result’ on 18.09.14 – because I don’t know if they did or not. As I said, I abide by the result of the referendum – unless real evidence is produced to prove otherwise. I will, though, continue to keep an open mind about it.

      Your positivity, DD, of a clean and fair contest without outside interference is admiral… but, sorry, you saying it was so doesn’t necessarily mean that it was.

    128. Dal Riata says:

      “The referendum wasn’t “rigged”.”

      “Ach, what do we know Morag? We’re only out speaking to folk every evening and weekend. The real knowledge is in the echo chamber Facebook groups and blogs by random folk.”

      Sorry, DD, but there you go again.

      Because Morag likes to conclude that everyone else is wrong about even thinking that the British state would in any way take an interest in attaining the correct result in its favour and that everything was fair and above board doesn’t make it so.

      Do you think you’re the only one(s) “out speaking to folk every evening and weekend”? There are hundreds(?) of others doing the same; who have done the same, and will continue doing the same until Scotland’s independence is won or taken.

      And, anyway, so what? Being out speaking to folk every evening and weekend proves what? That you spoke/speak to loads of people who were/would be No voters? That the referendum *definitely* wasn’t “rigged”? Well, now, how does it do that? Genuine question, by the way. I’m intrigued as to how you come to such a definite conclusion of non-interference by the British state by speaking to people both at night and at the weekend.

      And, yes, there are lots of nutters and bampots all over the internet, never mind Facebook, commenting on all sorts of nonsense – but not all commenters are nutters and bampots. Some have valid points. Is the ‘suggestion’ of ‘possible’ British state interference in last year’s referendum to be dismissed as just conspiracy theorists in an echo-chamber of white-noise? And just because you, and others, say so?

      (Not having a go at you, Doug. Just wanting to know the hows and whyfors of your complete dismisal of any illegality in ref1. Cheers!)

    129. Wee Jimmy says:

      @Harry Scott (5.07) –

      ‘Normal statistical rules no longer apply to you, you exist only in the realm of Quantum Politics.’

      And based on that, I suggest an actual practical demonstration of the Schrödinger’s Cat thought experiment on Alistair Carmichael. I predict his parliamentary career will be simultaneously alive, dead, both alive and dead, and neither alive nor dead. But mainly dead.


    130. Richardinho says:

      I no longer live in Scotland anymore unfortunately so It makes me curious when I hear in the media, usually from opposition politicians, about what an awful state the police, nhs, education is in Scotland. I hate to dismiss people’s views out of hand so I do find myself wondering to what extent these might be exaggerations?

    131. O/T (and over-long, but so’s everybody else at this stage of the thread)

      Too much speculation about mass vote rigging at IndyRef1 is a waste of jizz. Until there’s cast iron proof, it doesn’t advance the cause of independence one inch. False or half-baked theories about how rigging was done could be massively counterproductive. Doug Daniel is right that our main focus should be on changing minds, rather than crying foul without proof. Even if we accept the hypothesis that the UK state will (and did) take any possible means to thwart our independence, our best response is to build a popular Yes majority too big to be obfuscated.

      However, there is absolutely nothing wrong with people forensically studying the result of the referendum (or any other vote), with a view to detecting or ruling out fraud. It can be perfectly healthy, sane, and pro-democratic: it’s a job for anoraks, the tinfoil hats are optional.

      I’ve been following the theories about organised rigging – I can enjoy a good conspiracy yarn, without falling for it. I see no cast iron proof, but there’s more than enough circumstantial evidence to warrant further investigation. Anybody who says they ‘know’ there was no orchestrated state intervention is as blinkered as somebody who ‘knows’ it occurred. Remember, finding solid evidence that the result was rigged would be the jackpot for the indy movement, so if a few people try, without distracting from the main political campaign, it hurts little.

      I’m about to list the main points that have been raised as evidence of rigging by the state. Personally, I don’t know that any of them are correct – but I’d need convincing counterarguments before I would dismiss them out of hand. Can anybody provide those?

      1) Statistical anomalies. The document linked by Alan Mackintosh is one of several doing the rounds that suggest the results were unnatural. Can anybody show how this could occur without some sort of anomaly – either a massive error in how votes were counted, or deliberate, massive feeding in of excess votes for one side, localised to specific local authority areas? Or are these stats just a hoax, or badly prepared? Any scientist who saw a graph like that would be seeking the systematic flaw in her experiment pronto.

      2) The postal vote overall was heavily weighted to NO in some council areas, compared to votes from polling stations. Does the argument that older voters use postal votes more, and were a NO majority demographic, really account for such a large discrepancy?

      3) The postal vote turnout (>96%) in some areas has no precedent in the history of democracy, even for such an important vote. The paper released by the group from Argyle & Bute demonstrates that such a high turnout was ‘miraculous’ in their area. Can those who dismiss that group’s findings give us an alternative, credible explanation for the (nearly?) impossible uptake of postal votes?

      4) The postal voting system is ripe for abuse. There have been several proven cases of organised fraud in previous elections. … several BT figures, including John McTernan and Ruth Davidson publicly incriminated themselves by claiming advance knowledge of the postal vote split. Why would they do that? What did they stand to gain by doing so?

      5) The UK Security Services had the motive, the ability, and the opportunity to inject NO votes into the postal ballot, without detection. A mechanism for this has been suggested by the A&B people. If this is implausible, why? The only argument against it that I’ve heard is rather weak: ‘that kind of stuff doesn’t happen here’; ‘the state isn’t anti-democratic to that extent’. Really? Are you sure? If they hushed up the rape and murder of children in living memory, is stuffing a few ballots beyond them? If the civil service can openly suspend impartiality because of the gravity of the situation, and the BBC can go on a ‘war footing’, why wouldn’t MI5 intervene?

      Please don’t dismiss the suggestion of rigging unless you have some credible rebuttal to those points. I’d much prefer to believe I live in a democratic, open society, where the people’s will is sacrosanct – but until I hear a credible alternative explanation to most of those 5 points, I can’t rationally see the rigging question as anything other than a moot point.

    132. Thepnr says:

      That’s impressive the SNP now having 62% of the vote in Scotland. The SNP vote has doubled in less than than 10 years.

      Well done Alex Salmond and Nicole Sturgeon.

      Where do you think that additional support has come from? Yes of course those like me, that were lifelong Labour supporters.

      This is all good, now we have another important vote coming up and have to decide how best we use that vote. Let’s be honest the majority of people reading here do not not how the system works when it comes to using your “second vote”.

      Everyone posting on this site wants to rid Scotland of the Unionist politicians, agreed? So do I, and it is possible if enough give their list vote to an Independence supporting party other than the SNP.

      My point is, I would ask all those former Labour supporters like myself to vote for the SSP or the Greens, Solidarity. Independents, the Communists or whatever.

      I am backing the SNP as the ONLY route to Independence, they do not though need your list vote in 2016, they are in to strong a position currently to fail having a majority government. Things may change!

      That is your job to pay attention closer to the vote.

      If I believed at that time that the SNP were unlikely to obtain a majority in Holyrood then I would ask you all to vote SNP/SNP

      I very much doubt that will be the case, so as well as those that have crossed the road from Labour to SNP I will ask those long time SNP supporters to consider giving their list vote to another pro-independence party rather than waste it on SNP, when it fails to win a seat.

      Every fewer Unionist in our parliament is a victory for those that voted YES.

    133. CameronB Brodie says:

      The fecking Communists supported Better Together. They are a bunch of reactionary determinist who’s whole ‘identity’ is limited by their worship of 19th theory on political economy, which they have subsequently turned into a fetish. Cultist freaks.

      Admittedly I have only skimmed through their 2015 manifesto but I couldn’t find a single mention of the environment. Forward looking bunch, NOT.

      @ Will Podmore
      Got an oppinion on the concept of umwelt?

    134. Thepnr says:

      @CameronB Brodie

      Didn’t know that, my point remains the same. If you REALLY want rid of the Unionists in Holyrood all YES supporters must support a pro-indy party other than SNP.

      The maths says so, not me. In fact it is obvious.

      Put your money where your mouth is, principle before party!!

    135. Thepnr says:

      If all that vote SNP in the constituency vote and an anti Unionist vote in their second choice, then it will be a landslide for YES.

      Make your own mind up and please don’t let politics get in the way.

      Winning, means making choices. Use yours wisely!

    136. Juteman says:

      That’s nonsense. The ‘maths’ doesn’t say that.
      Vote SNP twice is the only option for Indy supporters.
      You would be better targetting Unionist voters, and not trying to split the Indy vote.

    137. CameronB Brodie says:

      I suppose I could have made that clear as I didn’t mean to spoil your porridge. I wasn’t knocking what you were saying, as it’s your point of view. I don’t have any particular insight or specialist knowledge that proves otherwise, so I wasnie getting involved. 😉

      Truth is, the Communists are a bunch of One Nation Establishment stooges. Empire is not only extended through divide and conquer, it also employs encirclement. Where do you go if you’re on the left, sane and thinking about the future?

      P.S. The SNP have managed a remarkable balancing act, in order to get us where we are. I’m even thinking of joining and becoming a card carrying insurgent.

      Astonishing. 🙂

      The fight for radical federalism, as outlined in Red Paper, must begin now. At the same time the fight for the objectives of the People’s Charter and the People’s Assembly, backed by the united trade union movement in England, Scotland and Wales, must be stepped up. Radical Federalism will only be won on the basis of class mobilisation across the nations of Britain.

    138. Thepnr says:


      I respect you opinion and you have been posting your opinion on Wings well before I arrived.

      However I don’t be;ieve my opinion is nonsense at all. It is simply a FACT that if the SNP got say 60% of the constituency vote then under the system we currently use.

      Even if all those voters went for SNP/SNP they would win very few more seats, lets say half a dozen for arguments sake.

      My point is, how bid a majority do you need other than 1 if you have other pro-indy parties on your side in Holyrood?

      Look. I am far from advocating SNP/SNP as a stratagy, I’m just upset at those that say they also want to rid Scotland of Unionists and am trying to get across the point that if that is your goal.

      Them you must forget SNP/SNP as that doesn’t work mathematically.

      Vote SNP absolutely 100% If you really want rid of the Unionists in Holyrood then SNP will be a wasted vote.

      Pick your own choice as long as it is not Labour, Tory or Lib.

    139. Thepnr says:

      Just read my last post and even I couldn’t understand it.

      My excuse is I’m on holiday, time is behind and beer ahead. 🙂

    140. Juteman says:

      You are wrong Thepnr, and your strategy risks letting in Unionist Msps by the backdoor.
      James at Scot goes Pop has written many articles explaining why this could happen.
      If you want Indy as your main aim, then the only choice is SNP twice.
      Why do you think Unionists are promoting the split vote?

    141. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Thepnr –

      Glad to see you’re keeping up – some great rumbling arguments yesterday and day before, here’s hoping for more of the same today. Helps keep the embers hot.

      Feels weird saying ‘slainte’ at half-six in the morning, but cheers all the same – neck one for me, eh?

      Hoots! 🙂

    142. @Thepnr says:

      Them you must forget SNP/SNP as that doesn’t work mathematically.

      Pardon! I think some remedial maths classes are required as what you are advocating will only increase the unionist voice in Holyrood.

      Can you guarantee that the SNP will win every constituency vote? No you can’t as nobody can in a FPTP system so the SNPs’ only lifeline is increasing their list vote to compensate for any shortfall.

    143. Cal says:

      Here’s a good explanation of the d’Hondt AM system as used in the Scottish GE with a simple worked example based on the 2011 results.

      Conclusion is vote for who you believe best represents your views and priorities. I think it is impossible to vote tactically on the list vote because you’d have to know in some considerable detail the final number of votes for each party BEFORE you cast your own vote which is clearly not possible. I want independence before all else so that’s why I’ll vote for the party that prioritises that – SNP/SNP.

      If your priorities lie elsewhere then you should vote accordingly.

    144. Joemcg says:

      Possible rigging-I wonder how many of those Norn Ireland marchers at the BT /orange order carnival the Saturday before the vote managed to have a say at the ballot box through using other peoples addresses? Bear in mind the march itself took THREE hours to pass my house.

    145. Joemcg says:

      GCC have rejected a hope over fear rally on the 19th of September! WTF! Orangefest was mighty fine though eh?

    146. Wee Alex says:

      Sitting eating my toast when Ken McIntosh came on radio, Kezia tomorrow.

      He started by saying he wanted to promote Labour and not attack SNP or Tory. 30 second later he attacks the SNP with the usual misinformation over college places.

      then went on to pretend that Labour remains a left wing party and SNP has stolen its policies. Ken, as a former trade union rep. You are totally misguided. Brown and Blair moved you to the right, Mhairi Black got it spot on. When asked about Trident, he used the Ukraine conflict to justify his support but when asked if he would support its removal if Corbyn wins, he gave the pat answer about collective responsibility.

      It wasn’t the worst interview I’ve heard and the interviewer did ask searching questions but still Labour in Scotland don’t get it. He won’t push for more powers for Holyrood, so the Vow is done and dusted. He is content to remain a sub branch.

      Scotland migh not be ready for Independence but it wants control of the economy because control of the economy is key to social changes.

      Await tomorrow’s interview with baited breath, or maybe I’ll wash my hair.

    147. Michelle Mone has been appointed by the Government, presumably Westminster, to carry out a review into how best to encourage start-ups in areas of high unenployment. Now that’s telling you.

    148. terry says:

      O/T – feeling nauseous. Just heard Michelle Mone on radio scotland blabbing on about her new role as some sort of entrepreneurial tsar who has been appointed to conduct an “independent” review into entrepreneurship. The bit I just about puked at was her saying that the biggest barrier to people realising their dreams is confidence – and yet she did her best to destroy our confidence to run our own affairs – what a morally bankrupt individual.

      However on the plus side she represents all that is repulsive about Britnationalism. Next time as well as promoting the positive vision of an indy Scotland we need to portray the Union as a stale, creepy, corrupt old ship that is sinking. People in fear – particularly the old – cling to the familiar – we need to show them that this is a doomed strategy.

      PS – if you can stomach it she’s on Call Kaye soon – any Wingers care to debate with the saddest Tory bar IDS? Saying that she is so creepy she just might make a tit of herself without anybody’s input.

    149. terry says:

      Sod GCC – how about loads of flashmobs on the 19th September?

    150. Ian Brotherhood says:

      Heard Mrs Mone on GMS.

      Nice deep voice, sultry, like Glasgow’s answer to Lee Marvin.

      And now Call Kaye is starting – asking why more of us can’t be like her, start our own bra businesses etc.


    151. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Doug Daniels at 12.45

      “someone’s personal misgivings about the postal vote process soon become someone else’s irrefutable proof that the whole thing was rigged, which means that Yes actually won”

      Nobody here has actually said anything like that so I’m having difficulty reconciling that rant with your long record of first class posting on here .

    152. One_Scot says:

      OMG, it does not matter about the seat numbers at the end of the day and whether or not you think your regional SNP vote is a wasted vote. IT IS NOT A WASTED VOTE.

      Every vote for the SNP whether it went towards a seat or not is not that important. What is important is securing the highest percentage vote possible for the constituency vote and the regional vote, that way we can show Westminster that Scotland wants Independence.

      If you want Scotland to be Independent, then you have to vote SNP/SNP. End of. Seriously.

      Please do not make me say,‘maybe we really are too stupid’, again.

    153. Doug says:

      “Look. I am far from advocating SNP/SNP as a stratagy, I’m just upset at those that say they also want to rid Scotland of Unionists and am trying to get across the point that if that is your goal.

      Them you must forget SNP/SNP as that doesn’t work mathematically.

      Vote SNP absolutely 100% If you really want rid of the Unionists in Holyrood then SNP will be a wasted vote.”

      Except that voting for someone OTHER than SNP isn’t a vote for nice cuddly Patrick Harvie or laser sharp Andy Wightman. Its a vote for the whoever that party have put on their list in the order they have chosen.

      In Glasgow, SNP/Green will ensure you get Patrick Harvie. In Lothian, a LOT of SNP/Green are needed to get to second place on the list Andy Wightman. But in West of Scotland, SNP/Green gets you Ross Greer, and no one is going to convince ME that he would be anything other than a continued embarrassment for the Yes movement.

      A smattering of Greens in a parliament is a good thing. A serious quantity of them leads you into Green internal politics with its intolerance, its “no platform” policies, its witch-hunts and its extremism.

    154. Grouse Beater says:

      Ms Mone made Tory entrepreneur tsar.

      Question: why do the Tories feel they can govern as they wish on a UK vote less than 35%, yet the SNP feels we should not take what is ours on a vote over 50%?

    155. schrodingers cat says:

      if knowing the result before hand was a pre-equisite for tactical voting, then tactical voting wouldnt be possible in any election.

      I think what you are hinting at is that there is a risk lending your list vote to other pro indy parties, The system has an inbuilt balance whereby, eg in 2011 in mid scotland and fife, the snp won 8 of the 9 constituencies and one list msp. If we won all 9 constituencies in 2016, it is likely we wont win a list MSP. The risk is when we back the pro indy parties in the list and the SNP dont win all 9 constituencies.

    156. One_Scot says:

      Nobody is saying that the outcome of the referendum was affected by vote rigging, the point that is being made is they have conditioned us to be comfortable with vote rigging, meaning they can ‘F’ us at will.

    157. Karmanaut says:

      If GCC have rejected a Hope Over Fear /Pro Independence Rally on September 19th, then we should definitely hold the biggest ever Hope Over Fear /Pro Independence Rally in Glasgow on September 19th.

      What are they going to do? Arrest people for waving saltires?

    158. terry says:

      Sorry peeps. Looks like The Mone was too feart or busy sooking up to the Tory party to appear on Call Kaye – so it’s just the BBC blowing the Union trumpet again.

    159. Clydebuilt says:

      Monday Radio Scotland GMS brought on John McTernan to rubbish Jeremy Corbyn’s bid. He was introduced as a “Political Commentator” .

    160. ronnie anderson says:

      @ Michelle Moan not content with her ermine robes is now ah TZAR. We,ll be waiting on her visit to Scotland, ah hiv two spare Irn Bru crates Michelle, gives you height & lets you talk down to people.

    161. Ken500 says:

      Hooking up with IDS. Starving children. They have no shame. £20 a week from above average earners to stop the vulnerable starving.

      Oil sector taxed at 55% while (foreign) multinationals tax evade through the City of London. The Tories have ruined the Oil sector.

      Total taxes raised in Scotland £54Billlion. Total taxes raised in the rest of the UK (pro rata) £39Billion. Total taxes raised in the UK £466Billion.

      £466Billion minus £54Billion = £412Billion. Scotland 1/12 (5.2Million) Divide £412Billion by 11 (55Milion) = £39Billion (pro rata)

      The rest of the UK borrows and spends £90Billion and puts £9Billion of the debt on Scotland. Scotland doesn’t borrow or spend it.

      £54Billion – £30Billion? Block Grant – £16Billion (UK) Pensions/benefits – £4Billion Defence = £50Billion. Remainder £4Billion.

      Westminster has secretly and illegally taken £Billions from Scotland.

      Vote SNP/SNP

    162. gordoz says:

      Cant quite believe the widespread front page splashes for the recent TNS Poll putting SNP so far in front. 🙂

      Aye right; its as if they have been forced to say something they’d rather not comment on.

      Hate to admit saw that mince Scotland 2015 last night – they dont even try to mask their contempt of Scottish Gov now.

      TNS poll was mentioned but only in terms of the Green party success story ????

      Magnus Gardham asked about GM crop ban and then launches into cyborg SNP Bad SNP Bad SNP Bad.

      Show should be rebranded Scotland = SNPBad

    163. Ian Brotherhood says:

      Billy Idol, ‘Mony, Mony’ –

    164. Grouse Beater says:

      On a second referendum:

      Hope has bugger all to do with polls. Any experienced explorer will tell you, keep your sight on the Pole Star at all times.

    165. heedtracker says:

      A so so SNP polls well above SLabour and here’s Keiza in toryboy Herald with her theories-

      Yada SNP bad yada…”Scottish Labour given it had campaigned throughout side by side with the Conservatives. But she made clear that it was the right thing to do for the sake of Scotland’s future.

      “I did the right thing by my country. I believe the United Kingdom is a better, fairer place together. But…clearly that undoubtedly had a damage for the party.”

      Britnats in action. How to convert ex SLabour votes like me back though? Take that “its for your own good” hard core union jack draped BBC UKOK media route, that their Scotland region’s a shithole populated by thick gullible ingrates and scroungers that can only be saved by England?

      Rest of you love Keiza don’t you Herald thing greyed out.

    166. call me dave says:

      I’m reading all the points of view about splitting your two votes but I’m not convinced yet.
      SNP twice for me.

      The National front cover ” Even I wasn’t that bad” with a big photo of Murphy. Now that’s worth paying for even if your getting it on line now as I do.

      Mone and IDS in cahoots and GMS giving us the news where we are + ‘Your Call’ when will the love-in stop? 🙂

    167. CameronB Brodie says:

      Ian Brotherhood
      Well I went bust Ian. Bloody VAT error by HMRC, that was definitely not in my favour. ;(

      Lee Marvin – The First Thing You Know

    168. heedtracker says:

      “Members of the Labour Party cannot understand why it is necessary for their former leader to make so much money and to be travelling the world in private jets.

      Here, he suffers in contrast to Mr Brown, whose years since being removed from Downing Street in May 2010 have been characterised by modest living and circumspection, together with a few well-judged interventions, as during the final days of the Scottish referendum campaign in September 2014.”

      So come on modest living circumspecting Mr Brown, a well judged intervention now!

      Neat display of distilled BBC propaganda in one paragraph there though. I know, the clue’s in their name.

    169. call me dave says:

      Faint praise and some condescending words for our 56 daun Sarf!
      Nothing anyone says about the timing of a further referendum can be taken at face value. Mr Cameron says there will not be another one in this parliament. That is not something he can truly guarantee.

      While it is legalistically the case that it would require the approval of the UK parliament, it is hard to see how, in practice, it could be resisted if the SNP secured a mandate from the Scottish people to re-ask the question.

      I’m away to get some sunshine and gently sympathise with some depressed labour aquaintances down at the cafe as they sip their hemlock tea and empire biscuit. 🙂

    170. Donnywho says:

      Sadly we lost… Fixed rigged or free we lost. But for the cause of clarity the clear and obvious levers of the state were arranged against us. The media, the state broadcaster, the councils, the unionist commentators, the lack of exit polls, the demographics (retirees), a flawed postal system.

      What is of more interest is where we are winning right now. We are removing the trust in the media (lowest satisfaction in the BBC in uk), we must continue to undermine that trust.

      The councils were used to undermine the movement eg Aberdeen banning meetings on council property and others making their “view” heard. We must control them all by the time of the next referendum. And it looks like we will. Then use that power to allow free expression and support our national identity and culture rather than demean it.

      Can we reduce the unionist to the position of titled carpetbaggers, Lord Darling and Lady Mone suggest their marginalisation is complete more will follow. Who will be their big guns, and what relevance will they have. Their spokesmen need to be made irrelevant now… and it is happening.

      The demographics are on our side, but as unionists slide into the beyond we must make absolutely sure we hold onto the youth and not for any reason, take them for granted or misuse them. It is what got labour where it is today.

      The means of voting and it’s reporting need to be addressed and their must be no doubts about it’s honesty and transparency. Running the councils will help. But I think outside observers would help to keep things honest… I realize this is a reserved issue. But it does not preclude campaigning, debating and presurizing for reform.

      Exit polls are a must, again transparency and oversight of the process.

      I personally believe that the state used every trick in the book to win. Did they stray into illegality certainly, ( purdah, and the use of the civil service). Did they go further we will never know or at least not for 50 years. Nor does it matter, we need to pull the states teeth before the next one and we need to do it now.

      In summery, I think we are well on the way to neutralising their natural advantages. More will need to be done and new threats will have to be addressed before they emerge, (think yes minister) what new tricks will they use. The future looks a lot brighter than it did late September.

    171. galamcennalath says:

      schrodingers cat says:

      ” The risk is when we back the pro indy parties in the list and the SNP dont win all 9 constituencies”

      That’s the way I see it.

      Look at the extreme cases.

      If Indy people all voted SNP/SNP then at say 55% they’d pick up most constituency seats and top up with a few list. In regions where they failed to take all constituencies, the list would almost certainly add to compensate. Result – a safe SNP majority.

      If Indy people all voted SNP/Green then at 55% the SNP would get most constituencies but perhaps not quite a majority overall. The SNP would get no list top up. The greens, with 55% would take a majority of the list seats. Unionists might get only 3 seats per region. Result – a massive pro Indy majority, but no party in overall lead. SNP would need to form a minority or coalition government.

      Then we have all the woolly possibilities as different proportions of voters choose SNP/Green. All sorts of outcomes are possible, including SNP failing to achieve majority by topping up from the list and greens failing to get more than say 10-12 seats.

      NOW introduce the SSP and Solidarity into the equation. By further splitting the Indy vote you have the risk of some not making a breakthrough on the list and Unionists picking up seats. The Unionists may keep some constituencies and Lab+Con might get 25+15% on the list – with a low SNP list, but SNP winning constituencies plus a further split Indy vote, the Unionists might pick up most list seats!

      For me the low risk, best outcome, is achieved by SNP/SNP.

    172. Brian Powell says:

      Before Mone came along nobody ever started their own businesses.

    173. Big Jock says:

      Brian Michelle Mones business was set up by her husband. That’s the worst thing about her. She is a charlatan.

    174. Grouse Beater says:

      Before Mone came along nobody ever started their own businesses.

      And very soon a great many went tits up.

      (Sorry, couldn’t resist that.)

    175. Illy says:

      There’s another reason that the SNP are doing so well at the polls, which you didn’t mention.

      It’s nothing to do with how competent they are at doing their jobs.

      It’s that they actually keep their election promises.

      They are the only party elected to government in the UK in the last 30 years to do this.

      People notice.

    176. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Interesting to note that in some reports the Greens are seeing themselves as the major “opposition” to the SNP.

      Here’s a question I would ask any Green.
      “If the UK Government was to move onto a seriously Green agenda would you support Scottish independence?”

      I think I know the answer. Unreliable allies.

    177. Re voting:

      2007 C/SNP L/Gr result minority SNP Gov.

      2011 C/SNP L/SNP result majority SNP Gov

      So if independence is your priority then SNP twice is the one and only way of getting it.

      Ross Greer is the last person I would wish to see anywhere near Holyrood., he is a nasty sleekit person from where I am sitting.

    178. mr thms says:

      It will be SNP/SNP from me till Scotland becomes an independent country. I have no doubt the three unionist parties would form a grand alliance should they win the majority of seats.

    179. Donald says:

      O/T – apols. Been ‘accidently’ leaving Nationals in local cafe since it was launched. Today find out the owner and his manager are both SNP members. If you own a cafe, bar, hairdressers, etc. can you make sure the National is there in the freebie newspaper pile (as the Daily Mail and DR sure as hell always are)

    180. ronnie anderson says:

      Updating my post of 9.36 I,ll need tae look fur two Tizer crates, more befitting the newest Tsar.

      Who,s that Moaning in the background lol.

    181. R-type Grunt says:

      Interesting to note that the Mone & Kay (with an E) both think aspiration is good on an individual and UK level but somehow bad on a Scottish level. Considering they both did their level best to have us continue as “subsidy junkies” I smell shite. Sadly, it was ever thus.

      I also saw that shite on last night’s Scotland 2015 programme where they used a report on the latest TNS poll as a vehicle to promote the Greens. Clever really as they now can’t be accused of not covering the story at all.


    182. schrodingers cat says:

      the greens and the ssp dont make it easy for people proposing tactical voting.

      It is possible to argue against tactical voting in the list seat, without insulting the other pro indy parties, maybe some green msp candidates are luke warm about indy, they certainly have no intension of scotching such myths, but regardless, the other indy parties membership tripled after the referendum and that was due to an influx of indy supporters. If cameron goes ahead with his eu referendum in June 2016, we could be looking at indyref2 in sept 2016. we will need to come together again.

      Im sorry the ssp and greens did not take my advice and follow solidarity’s lead.

      It would have made this a lot easier PNR

    183. Clydebuilt says:

      Gardham et al have only got 9 months to get it into folks heads ….SNP BAD,……they’ll have us repeating it brushing our teeth.
      Got an old relative angry at Sturgeon for sending Scottish troops to Afghanistan.

    184. Clydebuilt says:

      Gardham et al have only got 9 months to get it into folks heads ….SNP BAD,……they’ll have us repeating it brushing our teeth.
      Got an old relative angry at Sturgeon for sending Scottish troops to Afghanistan.

    185. Drew Adamson says:

      Great to see that nice Mr Corbyn dahn sarff is running away with the Labour leadership contest. Can only be good for us if he gets it as it will either push them to the Left or split them altogether, and if they become more left (couldn’t be that hard, given their current stance) Engerland will be forever entrenched as a Tory state, as most Engerlanders (evidenced fro the GE) are righ-of-centre. Mibbe then the switherers up here will eventually smell the coffee and realise that the only way to get a socially inclusive nation is to vote SNP, another referendum and get us the the feck out of dodgy.

    186. ronnie anderson says:

      @ R-type Grunt Gary Robertson Bbc is getting as suttle as a sledgehammer & people arent that stupid to see their aims SNP bad ,is good, turns people off in larger numbers.

    187. Iain says:

      The essence of politics is surely to understand fully what the electorate wants,not hen to present policies which. Reflect that as far as possible. Why is Labour so totally unable to do this?

    188. CamernoB Brodie says:

      If the ‘Scottish Greens’ do not see how unsustainable England is in terms of the energy inefficient spatial organisation of development (in comparison to Scotland), England’s threatened water supply due to insufficient rainfall and contaminated underground aquifers poisoned by the dilution and distribution of landfill leachates (actually the DoE’s preferred method of ‘pollution control’, though perhaps not responsive to water tables rising as a result of mine closures), England’s inability to generate sufficient electricity to ensure the lights stay on, etc… or see how Scotland’s sustainability is diminished by union with England, I suggest they look in to things a bit more closely.

      Until the Scottish Greens write the aim of delivering Scottish Independence into their constitution, I’ll not bother thanks.

    189. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Point of order about margin of error. The +-3% quoted is for ‘reasonable’ values, abover 10 or so percent. Very small figures (and by extension very large) like the lib dems 3% actually has a far smaller MOE so will be way more accurate than the SNP’s 62 percent”

      Isn’t the margin of error bigger with smaller samples?

    190. Grouse Beater says:

      My opinion here is of little worth but I’ll state it just the same. 🙂

      I view the Greens as I once did the Lib-Dems; necessary as a third force, some excellent policies, some weak ones, a few daft ones, but entirely unelectable.

      They are simply not able to negotiate with the USA, or solve Middle-East turmoil, or assuage fear of foreigners.


      Their imposition of a redundant tram system on Scotland’s capital is a very large blot on their reputation. It shows them as political rank amateurs, in human terms, cruel.

      Electric buses exist at $1 million each USD, or less if buying in bulk. And the wonderful thing is, you don’t have to rip up a city’s streets for years to get them running.

    191. gillie says:

      I see BBC Scotland are claiming that Scottish Labour has 15,000 party members. Doesn’t cite any evidence to support that figure.

    192. Fred says:

      Slab imploding has Patrick Harvie looking forward to the Greens replacing them as “an effective opposition to the SNP”. Voting SNP/Green therefore is neither logical, sane nor sensible.

    193. ronnie anderson says:

      Sky News on thi IS threat, of awe the countries in awe the World Scotland is mentioned. Glasgow has a wee lassy trained by IS , I smell shite by GCHQ.

    194. Dorothy Devine says:

      Cynical Highlander, “sleekit” is such a wonderful word and so much better than any modern, sweary version.

      Scotland has such a rich and descriptive language it would be dreadful to lose it.

      Time we all started using it again so that the young can hear it instead of the “fs” and “c’s”in common parlance.

      Onomatopoeic “crabbit” ,my favourite “forfochen” and
      ” cowkin”,”dreich”” snochterdichter” – and my kids ask me for translation, I’m ashamed!

    195. ahundredthidiot says:

      Completely O/T

      Sky News breaking story about imminent IS attack in UK in which Glasgow gets a mention.

      BBC not reporting it yet – they must be having an internal debate about whether or not they can pin it on us good ole fashioned Scottish Separatist when/if it does happen, which, just like the rest of them, will be bullshit btw.

      This monkey has broken its cognitive dissonance disorder.

    196. Marie Clark says:

      @ Ronnie Anderson 10.21, thanks for that link. Had me up dancing for freedom.. Should do well next year when they release it.

      Fair cheered me up Ronnie.

      Nae arguing frae me SNP/SNP all the way till we complete the job.

    197. galamcennalath says:

      R-type Grunt says:
      “last night’s Scotland 2015 programme where they used a report on the latest TNS poll as a vehicle to promote the Greens.”

      If we see the MSM and BBC starting to push the Greens at the expense of the SNP, then it should ring alarm bells.

      That might be evidence that voting SNP+Green is, in the minds of the establishment, better than SNP+SNP.

      Perhaps the best strategy for the Unionists will be to firstly try to hang onto some constituencies (watch out for smears at a local level), and secondly to reduce the SNP’s list vote by giving publicity to Greens, SSP and Solidarity. If they can deny the SNP an overall majority, that would be the best outcome they could hope for.

      Classic divide and conquer. The Imperial weapon of choice.

    198. R-type Grunt says:

      @call me dave

      “hemlock tea & empire biscuit”. I am so stealing that. Brilliant!


      Aye, that’s the way I see it too. People’s eyes & ears are truly open now. The genie is out of the bottle.

    199. CameronB Brodie says:

      @ Will Podmore
      I had a look a Lenin’s “Materialism And Empirio Criticism”.

      Total mince!

      “The sensation of color cannot be accounted for by the physicist’s objective picture of light-waves. Could the physiologist account for it, if he had fuller knowledge than he has of the processes in the retina and the nervous processes set up by them in the optical nerve bundles and in the brain? I do not think so.” – Erwin Schrödinger

    200. crazycat says:

      @ Dave McEwan Hill at 10.40

      Here’s a question I would ask any Green.
      “If the UK Government was to move onto a seriously Green agenda would you support Scottish independence?”

      I was told the answer to that a couple of days ago by a Green candidate, without having to ask.

      The person concerned had campaigned vigorously, and, I believed, committedly, for Yes, so I was seriously taken aback at the revelation. The number 1 candidate on my list may have a different view, but it seems increasingly clear that for many of them, independence is the means and electoral success the end, whereas for me, independence is the end and voting SNP the means.

    201. Alistair Sheehy Hutton says:

      Isn’t the margin of error bigger with smaller samples?

      Yes, if the overall sample is smaller the the MOE for the survey will be larger but that’s not the same thing as a small sub-population in the sample. It’s not very intuitive that it would be the case that very small figures have a smaller margin of error but it is one of those fascinating statistical facts.

      Think of it this way. If the whole population is a million people and we survey 1,000 of them then sticking that into a “Margin of Error” Calculator gives 3.1% – what that MOE represents is 2 orders of standard deviation, this holds for decent figures like

      Now lets say in that population of a million people there are 30 people who have an outrageous view point (say wanting to vote Lib Dem).

      If we got all 30 of them in the survey we would say there was 3% Lib Dem voters – but that is the absolute maximum we cold hit. The standard deviation of the LD sample has to be far lower that of the main parties. If you were to run the survey again and again you’d get a figure between 0-and-3% so the SD has to be far loewr than 3.1%

      Jus to show I am not talking bollocks I have a simulation on my computer to test this empirically – a population of 100,000 people – 3000 of which support party ‘e’. I repeated a 1000 person survey 100 times and that gives a Standard Deviation for the ‘e’ voters of 0.5%, which would mean a MOE of 1%

      The ‘a’ party has 50,000 voters and their standard deviation is 1.503%, which gives a MOE of 3.006% which is a little shy of the mathematically precise 3.08% that ComRes’s MOE calculator would give for a 1,000 person survey of 100,000 people.

    202. Alistair Sheehy Hutton says:

      Basically the MOE figure is for a figure of 50%, as you go away from the 50% the MOE of a result decreases.

    203. orri says:

      You don’t need to spend $1M a shot for electric busses. You can get busses that run from overhead lines but have normal road wheels for far less. Of course they might need a bit more automation than a tram or a driver so swings and roundabouts as to total lifetime cost.
      If you had to I suppose you might add regenerative braking and a limited range off grid capability but even so I doubt it’d even come close to that figure.

    204. Morag says:

      Look at it this way. The maximum number of constituency seats the SNP can win is 73. Even on this new poll, the prediction is only 71 – losing Shetland and Roxburgh. I have to say at our meeting this evening we agreed we anticipate losing to the Tories in Roxburgh.

      However, the maximum achievable number of seats for the SNP in our current system is I believe 81. That is the number of available constituencies plus eight – one “extra” list seat in each region. In any region where the party loses a constituency, so long as the list vote is high enough, then an additional list seat will be gained. We hope to achieve this in South of Scotland, so that even if we lose Roxburgh as anticipated, we would then gain two seats from the list, so long as SNP supporters vote SNP/SNP.

      In regions where the SNP does succeed in capturing all the constituencies, the precedent from the North East in 2011 indicates that around 52% on the list vote should be enough for an additional list seat on top of that. That is 52% in the region of course, which implies probably more than that as an overall national figure.

      The example of the Lothians in 2011, given by someone above, is very deceptive and it is dishonest to bring it up in this context. The SNP failed to take one of the constituency seats, and then failed to get a compensatory list seat. The only region in the country where the party got no list seats at all. Why was that? The answer is Margo. A sufficient number of SNP supporters preferred to give their list vote to Margo than to the official SNP list candidate.

      Now I don’t see this as having been a problem when it happened. I mean, Margo. But it shows what happens when a significant chunk of SNP voters are persuaded to place their list votes for a non-SNP candidate. It results in the SNP losing a list seat, in this case one they would have otherwise gained to compensate for the lost constituency.

      Essentially, the “tactical vote” advocates are trying to persuade SNP voters to throw away maybe ten SNP MSPs. These seats are to be gifted to the Greens, apparently, since there seems little prospect of the SSP troubling the scorer short of mind control. The Greens who want to be the opposition to the SNP, who would harry the party constantly if a coalition were forced, and who certainly don’t have independence as their first priority.

      At the sort of numbers likely to listen to this nonsense, the “best” the advocates could realistically achieve would be one SNP seat lost for one Green gain. Where’s the advantage to independence in that? And this isn’t even guaranteed. If the numbers fell just wrong, the lost SNP seat could actually go to Labour or the Tories instead.

      For goodness sake, apply some sense here.

    205. Morag says:

      Because Morag likes to conclude that everyone else is wrong about even thinking that the British state would in any way take an interest in attaining the correct result in its favour and that everything was fair and above board doesn’t make it so.

      I’m getting a little tired of this.

      There is no evidence whatsoever to suggest the referendum ballot was systematically rigged or tampered with in any sort of scale by “the British state”. There is a hell of a lot of evidence that this could not be done without leaving evidence behind, and a hell of a lot of evidence that demonstrated it didn’t happen. I’m sick and tired of enumerating it all, only to be ignored in favour of attacking yet another straw man.

      This doesn’t mean there was no cheating. There was, but it was small-scale and piecemeal, by individuals who wanted a piece of the action. Some of them were probably doing it to boost Yes, too.

      It also doesn’t mean that “the British State” didn’t “in any way take an interest in attaining the correct result in its favour”. Of course it did. It did it in ways we know about, and in ways we can only suspect. (Why was Yes Scotland so all-encompassingly pathetic, ask yourself that.)

      But they knew they couldn’t tamper with the votes on a systematic, large scale. That’s why they chose other, indirect means.

    206. Fred says:

      We used to have them they were called Trolley Buses!

    207. Morag says:

      Because indyref only needed one in twenty votes to be ‘adapted’..

      Wouldn’t be so easy in General to make a difference..

      I think someone else already answered this, but it’s worth another shot.

      The smaller the constituency, the easier it is to fix the result. Council wards are the easiest, and it’s no coincidence that the vast majority of known cases of attempted vote-rigging have been in FPTP council elections. The small electorate plus low turnouts may mean that only a few hundred votes need to be “fixed”, in a relatively small number of ballot boxes. Even there, though, most of the attempts have probably been caught. It’s not especially easy to do it undetected even in a council ward.

      A nationwide referendum, with a high turnout, is the most difficult of all to interfere with. “Only” one in 20 votes is an enormous undertaking. Bear in mind that we had people at every count sampling nearly all the ballot boxes. Any box that was wildly out of line would have been noticed. You couldn’t simply take one box in tem and replace it with a box full of No votes. You’d have had to have “adapted” one vote in every 20 in every singly bloody ballot box.

      In the name of the Almighty, HOW??!!

      In contrast, as someone pointed out, the General Election would have been a cake-walk. Even a handful of seats retained by Labour would have been of enormous benefit to them. Target this crack squad of ballot-fixers on just a few constituencies, and save Jim Murphy and Douglas Alexander and Margaret Curran. If they could tamper with every single ballot box on referendum night, this would have been a doddle.

      They didn’t do it. Go figure.

    208. CameronB Brodie says:

      @ Will Podmore
      I hope your Radical Federalism and class mobilisation will accommodate and represent the rights of all that is human and non-human.

      Psychologists and psychiatrists tend to be little aware that (a) microbes in our brains and guts are capable of altering our behavior; (b) viral DNA that was incorporated into our DNA millions of years ago is implicated in mental disorders; (c) many of us carry the cells of another human in our brains; and (d) under the regulation of viruslike elements, the paternally inherited and maternally inherited copies of some genes compete for domination in the offspring, on whom they have opposite physical and behavioral effects.

      This article provides a broad overview, aimed at a wide readership, of the consequences of our coexistence with these selfish entities. The overarching message is that we are not unitary individuals but superorganisms, built out of both human and nonhuman elements; it is their interaction that determines who we are.

      ‘Mon the microbs.

    209. CameronB Brodie says:

      @ Will Podmore
      I’m not meaning to badger you but I’m interested in establishing what consideration Communists have given to intrapsychic and interpersonal factors implicit in human motivation, when defining ‘class’ and ‘class boundaries’. Can you help?

      Distinguishing Intrapsychic From Interpersonal Motives in Psychological Theory and Research

    Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.

    ↑ Top