The very bottom of the barrel
We thought we might as well take advantage of an excellent new facility revealed to us by an alert reader last night, whereby we can now link you to permanent full copies of web pages without directing traffic to the website in question or faffing around with awkward and flaky things like Google Cache.
Unsurprisingly totally ignoring yesterday’s dramatic poll revelations, the Scotsman’s big political story this morning is “Better Together” campaign director Blair McDougall throwing a barely-believable playground tantrum about Alex Salmond saying some words that Mr McDougall likes to say.
You can read it, without earning the Scotsman any undeserved ad revenue, here.
Meanwhile, around 20 hours after our first reveal of Panelbase’s dramatic poll findings, we’ve had our very first mention from a mainstream media news source, in the form of the BBC’s James Cook.
(We’re just waiting for Panelbase’s approval for the next release, which investigates Scottish people’s feelings about the media. We’ll have it up as soon as they okay it.)
Apologising for not responding to our tweet to him yesterday as he was at Edinburgh Zoo reporting that a panda may or may not be pregnant (fair enough – we wonder what everyone else’s excuse is?), he had a read and then tweeted this:
While we don’t want to appear churlish and wouldn’t dream of telling a fellow journalist what to report, it’s an odd thing to pick out. It’s not exactly news that Scots want welfare and tax devolved more than defence. We asked the first question mainly in order to establish and quantify what we were asking about in the other two, which produced far more dramatic and, we’d have thought, newsworthy results.
We’re not accusing James Cook of spin. It may well be the case that he genuinely thinks that’s the most interesting finding of the poll. But if WE were looking for the best possible way to acknowledge the poll’s existence truthfully while still playing it down as much as humanly possible, that’s pretty much what we’d have come up with.
18% would want indy Scotland to join Uk seems the main point.
Pitch should be in Sep 14 on the day we vote Scotland is neither in UK or indy, we are in the middle and can fall either way.
So the option is not change to indy, it is to go to UK or go to indy. That perception would be a winner.
Bit like on election day, there is no government, we start from a blank canvas.
Would it kill this Blair McDougall guy to wear a tie ?? He looks dreadful.
Wasn’t the part Cook has mentioned the very first “reveal” that you gave us? Maybe he just read the first part then buggered off.
Venom alert.
John McTernan was communications director to Australian prime minister Julia Gillard and political secretary to Tony Blair. He will be writing a weekly column for The Scotsman from next week
What a hat trick Brian Wilson, Michael Kelly and now McTernan
Bliar McDougall from that article :
“Their attempt to steal our language is an embarrassing admission that it is our pro-devolution campaign that is offering what the clear majority of people in Scotland want”
Excuse me …. your what (?) campaign??? Oh dear, the lad just cant help himself, can he? That’ll be our “pro-devolution” campaign that all the signatories of fought tooth and nail to ensure that further devolution WASN’T an option for the people of Scotland.
Blair McDougall really needs to grow up. The hapless helmsman of the campaign to deny Scotland’s rightful constitutional status looks increasingly like he has completely lost control and is desperately flailing around looking for a straw to clutch as the good ship Project Fear founders on the rocks of public scepticism and disdain.
And, of course, he lies. He describes Better Together as a “pro-devolution campaign” – as if he imagines we have all forgotten that this cabal of self-serving British politicians vehemently rejected further devolution as an option in next year’s referendum.
As if he thinks we haven’t noticed that the Tory/Labour/LibDem alliance against independence only started talking about “more powers” after they realised their mistake in rejecting a “second question” on the ballot.
As if he thinks us too stupid to recognise that all the talk of further devolution is just empty rhetoric with no substance whatsoever. There is no offer on the table. There is no promise of more powers for the Scottish Parliament. And no way to guarantee delivery in any case.
Better Together is NOT a “pro-devolution campaign”. How could it be when there is no such option being offered to the people of Scotland? The only thing that Blair McDougall and his ilk are for is the preservation of the British state and the structures of power and privilege from which they benefit.
Both sides lay claim to the phrase “best of both worlds”. But when unionists use the phrase they mean best for themselves and the vested interests they represent. When independence campaigners use the phrase they mean best for the people of Scotland.
It may well be, that the only polls which are going to be widely published in the media, or given the wall to wall headline treatment by the state broadcaster, are those that favour the Naws.
Ive posted a comment on The Herald forum (if mods allow) re new interesting Panelbase poll results and looking forward to reading them in The Herald. Wont hold my breath.
Weeeeelll, we already know what the public think of McDougall’s gaseous exhalations thanks to the WoS/PB poll. I think we can pretty much completely ignore what the fella says and feel pretty confident we’d be part of the majority view.
On Mr Cook? Its a dancing bear scenario. Not a case of that the bear dances well, but that it dances at all. Or not a case of what was actually said in the poll, but that it got mentioned at all by an MSM source.
He (McDougall) really can’t stop himself winning Numpty Of The Day on a consistent basis…
Well said Peter.
Yeah thanks Rev for this new thingy that…er….thingy… web – lets us read newspaper pages without giving the sods any site traffic is what I’m trying to say. I used to get annoyed by that.
By the way, Newsnet have given you a write up, but what’s the bit about about Panelbase not releasing the data yet ? Presume it’s just an administration error or something ?
Have they mentioned the poll on BBC or just on Twitter?
“Have they mentioned the poll on BBC or just on Twitter?”
Just on Twitter, AFAIK.
@Tartanfever.
The NNS final para is
“Newsnet Scotland understands that Panelbase originally planned to release details of the pollyesterday evening but have delayed publication for reasons yet unknown.”
Is this meant to be sinister?
Hail Alba
“The NNS final para is
“Newsnet Scotland understands that Panelbase originally planned to release details of the pollyesterday evening but have delayed publication for reasons yet unknown.”
Is this meant to be sinister?”
Heaven knows, but I went to post a comment to correct it and found that I’m now on pre-moderation.
So BT tested the phrase ‘best of both worlds’ and – gasp! – people liked it. People wanted the best of both worlds. Simple logic proves that, as BT have called devolution ‘the best of both worlds’, people who want the best of both worlds also want devolution. The only possible strategy for Yes Scotland now is to tell the public that independence is ‘motherhood and apple pie’ and that extra powers are ‘a free lunch’.
Rev, you’re too gracious to accuse Cook of spin. So let me, churl that I am, do it for you. He’s spun the story into exactly what his paymasters would expect.
Any undecideds on here should take note of how the MSM ultimately treats the Rev’s poll. If, as one suspects, it is either given Cook-esque spin or ignored completely, please ask yourself why that is, given the data comes from a respected polling company.
Incidentally, the BBC is this morning taking a breather from constitutional issues to ask listeners for ‘ghostie stories’. ‘Sounds spooky’ said a presenter on GMS. Who said Pacific Quay dumbs down?
If you read a story on the BBC website (or any media site, really), they’ll blurt out the interesting bit in the first line, to grab folk’s attention. Perhaps he’s so used to this that he instinctively assumes that the most interesting part of an article is mentioned at the start?
Either that or he just gets really excited by introductions…
Hmm looks like the Nuclear issue is not nearly as big for the Scottish people as it is for WOS contributors. It’s certainly the most interesting result of the polling released thus far.
The results of which powers *should* be devolved holds no surprises, nor does the nonsensical question of “if you were an independent country which power do you want to give up to joing the union?”
It is not a “nonsensical question”. Simply a different way of looking at the issue. It may problematic only for those who lack the imagination to deal with it. But, in reality, it is very straightforward.
In urging a No vote in the referendum, unionists are asking the people of Scotland to formally forsake the status and powers of an independent nation. The sacrifices are the same whether we are voting to stay in the union or to hypothetically join a union on the same terms as currently exist.
If the latter is unacceptable, as it should be to any self-respecting citizen of Scotland, then the former is an at least equally objectionable proposition.
“Hmm looks like the Nuclear issue is not nearly as big for the Scottish people as it is for WOS contributors. It’s certainly the most interesting result of the polling released thus far.”
Wait, what? I wasn’t aware we’d released the nuclear issue data.
Presumably this is B McD’s reaction to coming bottom of the heap for truthfulness and, most importantly, public recognition.
“Hullo, Scotsman, no-body knows who I am, can you help?”
Yes campaign accused of stealing our language?! What he really means is those sneaky separatists want to have their cake and eat it – how dare they want the best for their country & people when they ought to listen to their betters?
Independence is the best of all worlds Mr McDougall – it is beyond me why you think our independent country would wish to be anything like the nightmare you are peddling. Please feel free to ponder why only 18% would sign up to the Union now and while you are at it, why folk think you are offering nothing and aren’t to be trusted.
McDougal’s bald faced lying is breath taking. Thank god we now know from the poll that the majority of people can quite easily smell his shite.
I think I agree with James Cook, the way you present the first set of questions does mean it’s easy to grab the 1st question is the point of the article. Q3, although it ‘goes’ with the first 2 question doesn’t really sit well with them in the narrative of the article.
I think Q3 should have been it’s own article all to itself. It’s fresh and interesting and new and deserves being placed on a pedestal.
Alistair Sheehy Hutton,
so why didn’t James Cook see that then? He’s supposed to be a journalist, is he not?
@ Peter Bell,
That’s far too logical for most, I reckon. Seems to me that many people are thinking ‘We wouldn’t do it again, but what’s done is done, and we’ll just live with it, because changing it is too scary.’
A team of Met police investigating if huge pay-offs to BBC staff amount to fraud. £25 million of severance payments of licence payers cash doled out to 150 staff over 3 years.
link to telegraph.co.uk
I note with pleasure that the WOS Panelbase poll is being quoted all over the threads.
It seems our Yes Missionaries on here are busy spreading the gospel.
#RevStu2013-08-09 09:24
“Newsnet Scotland understands that Panelbase originally planned to release details of the poll yesterday evening but have delayed publication for reasons yet unknown.”
No, there was never a plan for Panelbase to do that. Some people misinterpreted a comment about the second Wings post. Tables will be out this afternoon.
Many thanks for that clarification Stu – NNS Team
My take on it Blair spits the dummy.
If you guys have RevStu on pre-moderation (as well as having me on pre-moderation for daring to complain about a blatant inaccuracy in an article), why should I bother reading the site, I wonder?
Hi Rev,
Do you think your other results from the poll will be out before Brian Taylor’s “Big Debate” on BBC Radio Scotland at noon today. If so, surely someone will give it a mention. Unless the BBC warn the audience before hand to toe the unionist line or you are out in your ear.
If anyone reading this is going to be there, then please give this poll the air time it deserves. The show is in Millport today.
More to come Rev?
Are you saving the best till last? 🙂
“More to come Rev?
Are you saving the best till last?”
Should be three releases today, pending Panelbase approval. Two of them are ready to go.
By teatime we’ll have all the political answers out, and the data tables for those will be released to the press. We’re holding the sport question over until probably Monday.
@PeterABell
It is a nonsense question for one simple reason.
The way someone answers a question will very much depends on the status quo. The result of the question is wide open for attack for leading and does nothing to give an indication for “yes” or “no” at all.
Your current situation will very much influence your decisions. Which is why its a pretty transparent device by Yes Scotland to portray a majority opinion for Indepenence. This is made clear by a comparison to any other poll asking “Do you think Scotland should be an independent country”
And the question is meaningless without context. “Would you give up powers to join the union [if eveything was going to shit] Would you give up powers to join the union [if eveything was cholocate rivers and gummy drop smiles] would yield two completely different results.
When polling you have to be as neutral as you can be to have any chance of being taken seriously. The reason Why cook picked up on the Nuclear angle is simple; it is, thus far, the only newsworthy result of the poll.
Well, I tried to explain it. Ho-hum!
It appears Blair Mcdougal has direct access to the media, no drivel too superficial to put in front of the paying customer. To everyone who buys a newspaper the next time you go to hand over your money, this is what the political journalists and editors think of you .”People in Scotland use phrases” . Now I hope that information has enriched your lives and you can go out today safe in the knowledge , other people through out Scotland may use the same language as you.
Is it a case of throw any old keech to keep the Yessers occupied Or are we deliberately trying to scunner folk so they switch off?
Imagine having the ability to get the attention of a country ? Think what you could do with that ? The impact of the bedroom tax, what’s the clear up situation in Dalgety Bay, the A9, Plasma services uk being sold off ? Nope ,people in Scotland can string words together
Let’s not knock Blair McDougall. A recent Panelbase poll showed that, where people expressed an opinion, for every 1% of respondents that thought he was always truthful 33% thought he was always lying. That’s a 33:1 deficit.
While the public appear to have a healthy scepticism for people working in the field of politics, it would seem Blair McDougall is in a universe of his own. He seems to be a PR liability and is achieving outstanding negative returns. In terms of a candidate profile for running a campaign Blair McDouguall is surely the negative image.
have a look at this http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/bigscreen/tv/episode/b036rg3p/
may explain your media woes. 1day left
I have said before and I will now say it again in the hope that this can become a widespread along all in the YES community
DO NOT BUY THE SCOTSMAN and actively discourage any people you know from doing soDO NOT LOOK AT THE SCOTSMAN WEBSITE because this provides Johnston press with an advertising revenue at the Rev Stu has mentioned. We have all be tempted to peek at the latest horror from Kelly and Wilson et al but you know what you are going to read before you look so why bother? The circulation is collapsing and their revamped website is there to trap the curious an earn a revenue they cannot achieve from the paper copy.
They must be on commercial life support anyway by now and their collapse will have caused by their own hand because of their rampant Unionist bias and alienation of independence supporting Scots. The YES community have the power time to use it.
“We have all be tempted to peek at the latest horror from Kelly and Wilson et al but you know what you are going to read before you look so why bother?”
It’s now possible to read it without giving them the traffic, of course.
Braco Says:
so why didn’t James Cook see that then? He’s supposed to be a journalist, is he not?
Because the article isn’t really structured in a way that shows off Q3, the article is a discussion on Q1 and Q2. It’s Q1 and Q2 that leap of the page. Q3 kind of hands around at the bottom.
Arajag – “It is a nonsense question for one simple reason.
The way someone answers a question will very much depends on the status quo.”
That can be applied to just about every question that has ever been asked in any opinion poll. It’s true of all the questions released from Stu’s poll so far, so why do you think that ONE question is somehow exempt from that?
@Rev
Outstanding.
Just time to head down for a fresh supply of munchies then. Judging from the reaction to the first few releases this should be good.
In response to mcdougals churlishness, I claim the word Scotland. I’d like to see him campaign without using that.
Looks like we really will all have to learn Gaelic when we’re independent, simply to ensure we don’t use any words that are used in Westminster. Anything else isn’t real independence. But this does explain why BT like to use the term ‘separation’: it’s because Yes Scotland have already baggsied ‘independence’.
The way someone answers a question will very much depends on the status quo.
Yes, it will. Fortunately, we know what the status quo is, so we can take that into account.
@Doug Daniel
Its scary to the opposition because there was no caveat. It didn’t mention whether we lived in an ideal independent Scotland or not. Just would we throw what we have away today for a union run under current circumstance.
“If Scotland was currently an independent country, would you vote to surrender control of taxation, welfare, defence and oil revenues in order to join the Union?”
I’d say that was a neutral question with a very scary result for BT. Kind of leads you right to the front door of who do you trust to run your affairs doesn’t it?
Maybe the Scotsman newspaper is on a suicide mission. After all, is it not the fondest wish of the British establishment that Scots, Scotland and Scotsmen die.
In other newspaper observations. Gardham joined the Herald at the time its status changed from National to Regional. I’m only surprised they did not change the title from the Herald to the North Brit.
Although they at least are nowhere near as bad as the Scotsman newspaper.
Isn’t it about time we got some neutral monitoring of the Scottish Press?
Arajag.
Spinning, spinning. Show us a little respect and tell us who you work for.
I’d say that was a neutral question.
Yes it was neutral specifically because it didn’t imply that the hypothetical independent Scotland was either good or bad (e.g. in terms of prosperity etc), nor did it do that for the union. It merely presented independence – the ‘standard’ situation for countries – vs the current union in terms of the main areas where Westminster has control over powers which Scotland would have if independent.
I don’t think it would be possible to make it any more neutral.
Morag says:
If you guys have RevStu on pre-moderation (as well as having me on pre-moderation for daring to complain about a blatant inaccuracy in an article), why should I bother reading the site, I wonder?
I never even go to the site now, after they put me on pre-moderation (without notice or explanation) then ignored my emails asking about it. I had, until then, been commenting regularly and had planned to contribute a historical article to the site (as all of theirs had been awful). I assume my crime was that although I was openly and vigorously pro-independence, I was also occasionally critical of the SNP when I thought that was merited.
Rev hate to be a pest however got to go out soon wondering when next revelations are due?
“Rev hate to be a pest however got to go out soon wondering when next revelations are due?”
Turned out Panelbase sent an email last night that got lost. Latest release is up now.
@skier
I’d also say that particular question’s result was the real story from yesterday. Looking forward to today’s releases.
I read the articles and some are quite good, but some of them are terribly spun and some of them are from absoute plonkers. Even the ones that seem quite good are by-lined “a Newsnet reporter” or something like that so you don’t know anything about the authorship.
They’re also absolutely terrible about giving references for many of their statements. I once wasted an entire morning trying to find the basis for a claim that was being spun like mad, when the article really only said in effect “google it yourself”. I finally discovered it was wrong. Reporting this finding in the comments got me put on pre-moderation.
Since then if I comment, even about matters I’m an expert in, it can take days for the comment to appear if it ever does. I’ve had comments appear and then be removed again. Readers seem to be treated like naughty children if they dare to depart from the party line.
Yeah, I read some of the articles, but seldom much if any of the nodding-dog yes-men comments which seem to be all that’s allowed. And I don’t trust the spin and the lack of links and references. And I REALLY don’t like the anonymity of the people who run the site. I don’t mean they should be using their real names, we all know people have jobs, but I don’t even have a net handle to attach to any of them.
That they have now put RevStu on pre-moderation is feeling like the last straw for me.
There are a few reasons why Labour is so keen on the Union.
The Labour politicians don’t want to lose the positions of power, even though they can see the Westminster Tories are coming up with real plans to reduce that power. Redrawing constituency boundary lines for the UK. Resolving the West Lothian Question, so it will be unlikely that a Labour politician from Scotland will ever hold a senior Cabinet post ever again. Drawing the Labour Party to the right so that its own supporters won’t know how to vote.
Labour in Scotland really believe that only they have the power to save the whole country from Tory rule, and rescue the poor and every one else. Even though their main voter bases are still some of the poorest constituencies in Scotland, after voting Labour for 50 years, and Labour had overwhelming control of Westminster for 13 years.
Their failure to do anything is too humiliating, and if things stay as is, they can keep pretending they have and will do something.
Alistair Darling is a special case, he simply doesn’t want to be found out, as well as hold onto power and cash etc.
NNS has introduced a “quality” filter on comments, only the ones that “contribute” to the article are allowed, the rest are considered an annoyance by the moderator.
By the by but DO NOT click on the link till the Rev substitute it for what he was talking above:
link to heraldscotland.com
@Vincent McDee
I should have thought people ought to be clicking on the articles that are fair. It might encourage more of them.
I don’t mind clicking on a Robbie Dinwoodie article!
Another London Dividend
Will J McTernan be writing that from an Aussie Federal prison or one of the illegals islands?
I believe his papers weren’t quite up getting an easy entry Visa. Maybe he mistook the current Australian visa immigration policy still to require a criminal conviction?
Doug Daniel: “That can be applied to just about every question that has ever been asked in any opinion poll. It’s true of all the questions released from Stu’s poll so far, so why do you think that ONE question is somehow exempt from that?”
None of the other questions are taking the staus quo and flipping them on their head.
How do you explain the discrepancy between polls that says “do you want an indepedent Scotland” and “If Scotland were an independent country would you want to join the Union” if not for the status quo having a leading affect?
Rev Stu:”Wait, what? I wasn’t aware we’d released the nuclear issue data.”
Only 35% of respondents wanted to see Defence powers devolved to Scotland in the event of a No vote. The question explicitly mentions Nuclear weapons
That in itself speaks volumes and is by far the most interesting result so far.
“Only 35% of respondents wanted to see Defence powers devolved to Scotland in the event of a No vote. The question explicitly mentions Nuclear weapons
That in itself speaks volumes and is by far the most interesting result so far. “
Ah, right. That’s not the “nuclear issue” data, which is coming up later today. And as noted in the piece, it’s perfectly rational – DEVOLVED defence makes no sense. INDEPENDENT defence does.
This from my bro in Australia works for a senetor there.
(McTernan) “He was considered to be a very arrogant & remote character – Gillard defended him to the hilt a bit like Thatcher’s Bernard Ingham (?). Caused a bit of grief for our side as was on a temporary work visa – a 457 – which implied that there was no Australian journalist that could do his job!!! Never applied for citizenship, never explained … Malcolm Tucker? Not as rabid, or as rude – Julia loved him.
SCED300 says:
Arajag.
Spinning, spinning. Show us a little respect and tell us who you work for.
Show me some respect and assume I am here simply because I am interested in the debate, which, incidentally, happens to be the case. I was of the understanding the WoS welcomes all debate on the Indepedence question. Or is it the case that anyone that does not tow the party line is accused of “working for someone”?
That in itself speaks volumes and is by far the most interesting result so far
==========================================================
interesting for who ?
To me the most interesting thing so far has been the Scottish voters very wise not believing the BT smears,sneers and jeers
You really are scraping the bottom of the barrel if the best you can come up with is Please Miss Please Miss, he is copying me. FFS!
As for the Scotsman even entertaining this as a story as a straight bit of news and not something for a political diarist to make fun of…Words fail me.
How do you explain the discrepancy between polls that says “do you want an indepedent Scotland” and “If Scotland were an independent country would you want to join the Union”
I thought this was obvious? In the simplest terms, the first reflects what people would like and the second reflects whether they are prepared right now to potentially vote for it and all it entails.
‘I’d love a new car but not sure I can afford it’. ‘I want to move house, but I’m not sure it’s a good idea to do it right now because…’
What people want and whether they think that’s a good idea at a given instant are quite different things.
However, when forced to chose, people typically opt for what they want, especially if they are unsure. When the head doesn’t give a clear answer, they go with the heart, even if they feel nervous doing so.
Alastair Sheehy Hutton,
yes I know that. My point was that if you can see which was the interesting stand alone news item (inspite of the Rev’s release format), why couldn’t a professional BBC journalist?
To me, the most interesting result is the implication that most Scottish voters want the conditions that will be fulfilled by independence, although a substantial number of them seem still to be shying away from actually voting for it.
This is a very very good position to be in, a year out from the vote itself. It’s far easier to show people that you are offering them what they really want, than to persuade them to want something different.
Sorry there Alistair for spelling your name wrong.
Blair MacDougall seems that stricken with fear that he cant help but lie, its become second nature to him and the NO Scotland lot. You know, one thing this has taught me, especially the results of this survey so far is that, whatever happens, it appears that a majority of the YES support want to know the real state of affairs with the vast majority of the public and where they are at in their thinking whether they are for, against or somewhere in between a YES and a NO vote.
In stark contrast it seems that quite a number of the NO side are going into delusional mode the nearer we get to the referendum. I dont know if its because the msm has convinced theirselves that NO will win, END OF. They wont or cant contemplate a YES vote.
Personally i would want to see what is coming hurtling towards me down the track at full speed so that i can prepare and postion myself for either eventuality. That would seem the logical thing to do. So in these poll findings and hearing what the public want, we start to really get a feel for what is on the ground. It seems the Independence supporters have been so used to the medias’ bias against them that we have a better sense of reality as opposed to the NO support who are really going into this with their eyes wide shut having fell for the line that no-one wants independence.
We are months away from our long awaited referendum despite the naysayers and the full weight of the British Unionist msm throwing everything but the kitchen sink against us. How will one of the NO lot like MacDougall who are in complete denial feel the day after a YES vote?
How do you explain the discrepancy between polls that says “do you want an indepedent Scotland” and “If Scotland were an independent country would you want to join the Union” if not for the status quo having a leading affect?
Yes the status quo does have an effect. If Scotland were already independent we would not be voting for change. But we are voting for change and for many change is often a disturbing thing, bringing with it not only challenges and opportunities but fear and doubt. People are understandably nervous. However, this does not invalidate the poll. It shows that in their hearts the people of Scotland have no love for the union, in their hearts they really want Scotland to have the powers of every other normal nation.
If so few folk feel defense would be better left in Westminster`s hands lets make the strong case for Scotland having it`s own defense force rather than an attack force. It will give us a chance to say how jobs on the Clyde could be secured by building what we need for our waters here and give detailed plans for our future naval,air and army bases.
When`s the white paper out? I look forward to it. I think it will be a turning point for Yes
I must admit to being interested in a thought experiment poll.
Ask one group of voters whether they would vote yes next year if they believed there was going to be a Conservative government in Westminster in 2015. Then, same thing if they believed there was going to be a Labour government. Then the same thing for the possible flavours of coalition (Tory/LibDem, Labour/LibDem, Tory/UKIP). Then the same thing for if they believed there was going to be a yes vote to the UK leaving the EU.
THEN ask them the straight question on their voting intention for next year.
Take a second group of voters as closely matched to the first as possible, and ask them the straight question FIRST, before asking them the range of what-if questions.
The idea being to see if being made to think about ALL the different what-ifs before saying yes or no to the basic question influences the answer. Let’s face it, it’s pretty irrational to say you’d vote Yes if any one of the entire spectrum of possible 2015 results transpired, but at the moment you intend to vote No.
Arajag
I’m not convinced by either point of view you raise.
Firstly, it is a perfectly reasonable way to think about any issue.
1) Do you want to leave this pub? Not sure, I suppose maybe
2) If you had gone to the Stag’s Heid would you want come here? Hell no! OK let’s go to the Stag’s Heid.
Yes the question leads people to think about the issue from a completely different perspective but the point of that doing that is to show both that people don’t have that strong an attachment to the Union and by getting that thought process out there to help others to look at it in the same way.
On nuclear issues, the question assumed Devo Max and whether Defence should be devolved. I want independence but if we end up with Devo Max I can’t see the practicality of devolving Defence. So no I don’t think you can draw the conclusion you have. I think there might be a separate nuclear question – let’s see what the answers are.
Rev Stu . Ah, right. That’s not the “nuclear issue” data, which is coming up later today. And as noted in the piece, it’s perfectly rational – DEVOLVED defence makes no sense. INDEPENDENT defence does.
It’s open to all sorts of interpretation, but I wont comment further until you release the relevant parts. I’ll await the data with interest.
NNS has introduced a “quality” filter on comments, only the ones that “contribute” to the article are allowed, the rest are considered an annoyance by the moderator.
The problem is that the only comments they seem to accept as “contributing” are the ones that slavishly agree. Sycophancy gets you everywhere on NNS it seems.
Sometimes articles contain errors. Sometimes commentators know more about the subject than the person who wrote the article. Sometimes commentators have contrasting or complementary views which can illuminate the debate considerably. NNS doesn’t see these as “contributing”, or as “quality”, they see them as stroppy readers getting above themselves and requiring to be put in their place.
Oh how refeshing is WoS, with all articles clearly labelled with their authors’ names, and when a reader points out an error (even if it’s only a grammatical slip) to see I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. It’s so much more grown-up, paradoxically.
HandandShrimp says:
9 August, 2013 at 11:53 amArajag
I’m not convinced by either point of view you raise.
Firstly, it is a perfectly reasonable way to think about any issue.
1) Do you want to leave this pub? Not sure, I suppose maybe
2) If you had gone to the Stag’s Heid would you want come here? Hell no! OK let’s go to the Stag’s Heid.
Woah there. A more accurate answer would be
Do you want to leave this Pub? No.
If you have gone to the Stags Heid , would you have come here? No.
There’s no “maybe’s”. In both instances the answer *at the moment* is clear. A majority do not want independence. A majority would not join the union were Scotland independent.
Since the second question is not the status quo, it offers no value to the Independence question
On nuclear issues, the question assumed Devo Max and whether Defence should be devolved. I want independence but if we end up with Devo Max I can’t see the practicality of devolving Defence. So no I don’t think you can draw the conclusion you have. I think there might be a separate nuclear question – let’s see what the answers are.
So let me ask you direct. In the event of a No vote, you would support devolution of Defence policy/spending? If you answer is no, how do you reconcile not wanting Nuclear arms on Scottish soil when it is an idependent country, but not minding when it is part of the UK, on account of practicality?
However, I agree, let’s see what the polls say. I will make this point though. this does illustrate the importanc eof have a simple, clear set of polls. I can understand why WoS has asked the amount of questions is has, but you have to be extremely careful not to ask questions which can give results that contradict each other
It’s not a question of not minding having nuclear weapons in Scotland if it remains in the union, but of recognising that it is utterly impractical to devolve defence within the union, and that if we vote to stay in then that inevitably entails keeping whatever defence installation the Westminster parliament with its built-in English majority sees fit to park here.
Braco said:
yes I know that. My point was that if you can see which was the interesting stand alone news item (inspite of the Rev’s release format), why couldn’t a professional BBC journalist?
Because I’m an interested reader of Stu’s blog who already has a particular bent on the topic. I read the article top to bottom and some sections twice. For someone (Cook) who is just quickly looking at the article because the link’s been posted in their news feed it’s a whole different ball game. He’s looking for the punchline. That’s why news stories have big, often ridiculous, headlines to draw the reader in and prep them for the punchline of the article. Once the punchline has been delivered casual readership of the article will drop off.
The article started with:
“Since nobody wants to define devo-max and the parties of the Union won’t let anyone vote for it anyway (preferring the “Oh, we’ll sort it out for you later, just trust us”argument they so often berate the SNP for), the independence referendum has a great big hole in it where a very substantial proportion of the population would like to be.”
For me that means the punchline will be about devo-max. Q1 ans Q2 tell us about devo-max. People are going to stop reading/tune out at that point as Q3 isn’t about devo-max.
Arajag
Taking the second first, if it is No and if there is a Devo Max solution I can’t see any practical way of devolving Defence or Foreign Policy. I don’t want nuclear weapons here but I am also a democrat and if the will is Devo Max then I will just have to lump nuclear weapons and lobby Westminster to finally ditch these things.
On the first, There are hard Noes and soft Noes. I see the route to winning the Yes vote by dialogue just as I might if I was trying to persuade a friend to move pubs. So raising the consciousness of the public at large to the notion that there is another way of looking at this and that those who already have are not in favour of the union then perhaps they might also ask the question “would I have come here if it had been my choice”.
How’s this for starters; Where is Call(e) Kay(E)? Where is Joanne Lament? Where’s McTernan( the rotweiller – he thinks) going when OZ release him?
Well we know he’s linking up in an unholy trinity with those other shrinking violets, ever-rabid Wilson and smiles ever better Kelly for the Hootsman as they go into their final crash dive, but do you feel a plan is being hatched by the ever more self achieving numpties who are doing YES’s work just splendidly?
Of course they might be on holidays with the weans, or they might be on a pick-up on your bile development course, whatever can’t wait to get them back asap. It is a hoot!
There will be no Devo Max ‘solution’ after a No vote. Westminster will be fully entitled to say that with a No vote we have, at best, voted for the status quo, or, more likely, that we have voted to reaffirm our desire for a unitary state.
Alistair Sheehy Hutton,
are you suggesting that a professional journalist that produces articles in the manner you describe, actually requires their source material to be presented to them in just such a similar format! I am sorry but that is ridiculous.
My point remains. If you, an interested layman (i assume) is able to read and analyse the content of Rev Stu’s article, easily homing in on the stand out headline grabbing information, then why can’t a professional BBC journalist?
The answer of course is that he can, but chooses not to for whatever reasons.
By the way, do you also believe it is credible that a professional political BBC Scotland journalist would be unaware of WOS and the quality of it’s output?
“By the way, do you also believe it is credible that a professional political BBC Scotland journalist would be unaware of WOS and the quality of it’s output?”
James Cook follows us on Twitter and has done for a fair while. The first day he followed he tweeted a link to some story or other we’d run. Since then, nothing.
A majority do not want independence
Erm, ‘I really want to go to the pub tonight but can’t as I’m looking after the wee one.’
I’ve just had a poll request in my e-mail. This is the question:
Are you going to the pub tonight?:
Yes
No
What should I answer? It has to be no.
‘What I want’ is not the same as ‘what I am intending to do/what I think best at a given instant’.
If you keep confusing these you’ll struggle to understand polls.
A poster on CiF a few days ago drew attention to a Guardian blog post from June last year, by one John Drummond.
Last month [May 2012], Elliot Bulmer, the Constitutional Commission’s research director, took part in a meeting at the House of Commons to discuss constitutional change. Convened by a Labour MP, the group consisted of politicians from other parties as well as various luminaries including constitutional experts. After some debate, Elliot put the question:
“Oh, the latter, of course,” was the near unanimous reply. In obvious similarity to other empires in their last dying days, the aim is simply to keep the thing hanging together, and to use any fix to do so.
link to theguardian.com
That’s a really interesting concept. Few of these guys are in the first flush of youth. If they can delay the inevitable and keep the gravy train running for another generation, they’ll be retired on their big fat pensions before independence comes. So they won’t have to deal with it.
That’s all they’re trying to do, really. They can see which way the tide is flowing as well as any of us, but they hope their little sand-bar of lies will hold it back long enough to see them out.
It’s our job to make sure it doesn’t.
I think you’ll find they’re nowhere near the very bottom of the barrel. They’ll come up with more guff. Has McDougall from the Magic Runaround given an answer about the proposed debate yet? I would say not but he can find the time to greet to the press about a common phrase used by everyone and their dog.
McDougall from the Magic Runaround
*wins thread*
@Arajag @Brian Ritchie – I don’t think it is a nonsensical question but I don’t think it shows that people have no love for the union or that they want Scotland to have the powers of every other nation. I think it shows, as you said Brian, that people are averse to change and this could be inherent or it could be due to the cost, time and effort that changing from the status quo to independence takes, or vice versa. I think a useful comparison is between the two scenarios, which would seem to show slightly more people wanting to retain the status quo if we were independent rather than if we were a part of the UK.
A couple of polls have found people opposing independence slightly over 55%, however, I don’t think any polls have had yes support as low as 18%.
& @Arajag Unfortunately a minority of posters on this site do not like it when people disagree with them, sometimes suggesting they are unionists.
Arajag. As the overriding purpose of the poll is to find out about people’s attitudes to Independence and the Union, that about defense and nuclear weapons, as important as any discussion about them might be, was not the most important information.
James Cook focused on defence as a devolved power, clearly diverting attention from the core information of attitudes to the Union. You echoed his ploy.
Defence is part of the argument which influences attitudes to Independence. How the Union is seen is the most important finding.
did anyone notice this yet? UKOK was a rebranding last May.. seems words can be used by anyone in the UK but not anyone from YES.link to news.bbc.co.uk
Since the second question is not the status quo, it offers no value to the Independence question
Absolutely disagree. It gives us an insight into how people feel about the union. And this is important, because this has a bearing on how people will behave come the day of the referendum; it tells us that the majority are not willing to actively support the union. And this just might have some kind of knock on effect at the ballot box, might it not?
And this just might have some kind of knock on effect at the ballot box, might it not?
I’d be really confused if it did not have a significant effect. It’s what happens in independence referenda and why Yes votes are by far the most common outcome. Quebec is probably the only sort of comparable example where this did not happen, and here it was a whisker away. Polls of 30% a year or so ahead of the vote ramped up to a vote of just shy of 50% on the day.
That’s why the unionist strategy has been to not allow a referendum to be held. If Scots wanted the union and would vote to retain it we’d have been given one years ago just to shut up independence supporters / put the matter to rest.
‘That’s why the unionist strategy has been to not allow a referendum to be held. If Scots wanted the union and would vote to retain it we’d have been given one years ago just to shut up independence supporters / put the matter to rest.’
Can’t be repeated often enough in my opinion. Along with the fact that the Scot’s electorate have never said NO in a referendum offering more powers to Scotland, even at the height of the Labour Party (and so Unionist) political hegemony in Scotland.
The only saving grace, up until now, that the Unionists have had is the ability to decide the referendum question(s) to be put to the Scots. So, they simply did not ask the Indy question and replaced it with this botched ‘devolution’ holding operation.
Well they stupidly threw away that historically effective tool when Westminster lost their nerve and Gordon Brown left his prodigy Wendy Alexander swinging in the wind after her politically astute, but far too (independently?) bold declaration of ‘bring it on!’
Now that we can, we are, and it’s curtains for the Union! Bigsmile
“We’re not accusing James Cook of spin”
You may not be, but I certainly am.
Earlier today I opined that this was simply McDougall bleating because the Rev’s poll shows no-one knows who he is, but on reflection I wonder if there’s more going on here.
Could the Scotsman be conniving with others to set him up for the chop by publishing this embarrassment of a story? Combine it with the unnamed BT spokesperson sticking to the party line over the LfI photo despite the Herald printing the true story, and the news of the wanderer’s return from Oz, and the idea gains traction.
So, McTeirnan as campaigns director for BT along with a side order of weekly Hootsmon column anyone?
Blair McDougall has been such a disaster that under normal circumstances his arse would be on the cobbles. But who else would want the poisoned chalice?
“Blair McDougall has been such a disaster that under normal circumstances his arse would be on the cobbles.”
I have never heard this phrase before. I like it.
I’ve maybe posted this before, but I can’t remember.
I’m not a tweeter, so I must have read it in an actual article, written just as it became apparent the referendum was going to happen.
McDougall was remarking that he had been asked to ‘go up to Scotland’ to sort out the unionist side of things. It sticks in my mind that his attitude then seemed to be one of, it’s below me, but I suppose I better do it. He came across in the article as if he was talking to some of his London friends.
Welcome to northern Britain, Blair.
For £100K I’d do it. Mind you I’d be really crap at it too.
Morag says:
.
..
Readers seem to be treated like naughty children if they dare to depart from the party line.
I still read the articles myself however I stopped posting there a long time ago. Not wanting to cast aspersions on another sites moderation policy however like many I also found myself pre moderated without notice or explanation although I can assume that it was because I had the audacity to correct a glaring inaccuracy.
In my opinion the moderation is getting completely out of hand. The latest I noticed appeared in the comments section of that very article, is a posters comment edited and moderators bolded comment to reflect the edit for using the term ‘Westminster’. In my opinion its absolutely petty and also ridiculous to change the register of someone’s comment in such a fashion.
I’m getting confused.
There is Hen Broon, Henn Broon, the ‘Real Hen Broon,………
Doppelganger Trolls
Juteman says:
10 August, 2013 at 6:35 pm
I’m getting confused.
There is Hen Broon, Henn Broon, the ‘Real Hen Broon,………
Ah Henn Broon is simply a character name that I used many years ago and seemed appropriate also as a screen name. If its causing so much confusion I’ll change it to something else.