Forum menu
Spot on.
Link to the panelbase poll please
Fair assessment of the UK ernie, however allows nationalists to feel entitled to dust off their Che Guevara t-shirts and back slap their socialist leanings, as if they actually care.
Ben, you often link to sites showing sensationalist headlines from the gutter press to back up a point. Don't know if a post showing the front page of a newspaper not yet printed at the time, prior to reading any report is a step up. At least it is the Herald this time, and not the Daily Fail.
Take that back - I've never linked to the Daily Mail 😉
You link to WOS that does. Allows Daily Mail to be used indirectly. That was the s**t doesn't stick.
The Herald report may be interesting, however an image of an as yet unprinted newspaper doesn't reveal much.
Piemonster linked to the herald article up there ^
And since you don't like WOS, how about the Sunday Times?
[img] 
[/img]
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/ScottishReferendum/article1396930.ece
Hard to read on a mobile, who commissioned that poll
Ignore that, I can see it now. Should have known really
It was the same polling company that correctly predicted the swing towards the Nat's at the last election.
It was 694 years ago today ..... 😉
It was the polling companies customer I was interested in.
In response to Duckman.
[i]It was the same polling company that correctly predicted the swing towards the Nat's at the last election. [/i]
Polling companies do not predict outcomes they ask people questions and then present the results of those question. Panelbase tend to show higher support for independence than other polling organisations. One high poll does not show an increase in support for the yes vote it shows that panelbase have more independence supporters in their polling group.
The lowest poll for a yes vote in 2014 was 29%.
The highest poll for a yes vote in 2014 was 41%.
The lowest poll for a no vote in 2014 was 42%. (Yes on 29%, don't know on 29%)
The highest poll for a no vote in 2014 was 57%.
The average Yes vote over the last 20 polls since November is 33.75%.
There has been no continual month on month rise in the Yes vote. So there are no figures that suggest a lead in the polls come July. The average of the polls predict a No vote although there are still enough undecided voters to make a difference.
Now, in response to a Freedom of Information request, the Treasury says it has no record of when Macpherson first warned Osborne against a currency union before the February 11 memo, raising further questions about its credibility......"Given the lack of documentation around Sir Nick's position, it is impossible to claim that ruling out sharing the pound was ever anything more than an ill-advised campaign tactic cooked up by Alistair Darling, as has been reported.
the first part is indeed strange that their is no other documentation relating to advice or discussions on this given how big an issue it is.
I think the conclusion is OTT and as politically motivated as the first now may have been
i said originally the fact the CS said no to union added weight but this is not good if the CS are not impartial and no paper trail exists
Seems like the claims of lies and smears [ to be fair yes are trying to smear here] goes in both directions.
Who would have thunk that.
There has been no continual month on month rise in the Yes vote
GENUINE QUESTION ALERT
has the no vote changed? ie are people moving form No to not sure which one could [ tenuously] class as movement towards the yes position?
Seems there has been a month on month rise in the yes vote according to UKpollingreport.co.uk
Polls so far are here. Different Scottish polls from different companies tend to produce slightly different figures, especially in terms of don’t know. For trends it’s probably best to repercentage to exclude don’t knows, and one should certainly only compare polls from the same company:
Taking them one at a time, ICM had YES on 40% last September, then 46% in January, then 43% in February – YES appear up on September, but recent trends are unclear.
Ipsos MORI we had YES on 34% last September, 37% in December, 36% in February. Again YES appear up on September, but the recent trends are unclear
Survation we had YES on 38% in January, and then on 45% in February and March… but there was a significant methodology change between January and February, so don’t read too much into that shift.
TNS-BMRB we have what looks like a trend. YES was on 36% in October, 38% in November, 40% in December and January, 41% in February.
YouGov appears to show a similar steady but slow trend – 38% in September, 39% in December and January, 40% in February.
Panelbase have consistently shown better scores for YES than other companies, but until today have not really shown a clear trend: 44% in September, 45% in October and November, 43% and 44% in February. Repercentaged to exclude don’t knows today’s YES figure would be 47%… so higher, but not something that couldn’t be normal margin of error.
Putting it all together whatever trend is present is only small, so in individual poll series it is difficult to distinguish it from normal sample variation. Looking across the board though, the direction of travel in recent months does appear to slightly be towards YES.
Does anyone know How this latest poll wad conducted?
[u]Looking across the board though, the direction of travel in recent months does appear to [u]slightly [/u][b]be towards YES.[/u]
I get around change 1% in the last 5 months with an average of 33.75% saying they will vote yes. The figures quoted by gorimor also remove the don't knows, there has never been a poll showing higher than 44% support for a yes vote since 2012 and that is a distinct outlier.
Faaternotfatter your link doesn't work
Sorry Gordimhor it wasn't a link and should have looked like this.
[i]Looking across the board though, the direction of travel in recent months does appear to slightly be towards YES.[/i]
I get around change 1% in the last 5 months with an average of 33.75% saying they will vote yes. The figures quoted by gorimor also remove the don't knows, there has never been a poll showing higher than 44% support for a yes vote since 2012 and that is a distinct outlier.
copy and paste that would ye?
Huh, I was able to view that this morning.
Anyone able to copy and paste the below.
Well, the actual report its about is here:
Basically, the lights will all go out in England if we don't keep getting electricity from Scotland, so they are generously offering to retain a shared market rather than independence 😆
The cynic would suggest that the appearance of this paper might, possibly, just, be linked to the upcoming DECC report later this week which is expected to say that Scotland benefits disproportionately from central government renewables investment and subsidy...
the cycnic would say both reports were politically motivated
I doubt anyone really thinks scotland is not windier than rUK on average hence why more are there.
[img] 
[/img]
Disproportionate to what? Population, generation?
It's certainly to be expected that post-independence, the rUK would want to import electricity from Scotland- the infrastructure, the capacity and the demand all exist obviously. Mutually beneficial situation
@JY, I'm not convinced it's that simple, it's not like England or Wales have filled their usefully windy spots. Strikes me as a correlation rather than a cause.
Ooh you old cynic.
I'm sure they'd never do such a thing.
should have thought an iS would be rubbing it's hands together. if the UK's energy requirements are not being fulfilled domestically, then by increasing iS's provision there's a ready made customer on your doorstep and it would make it an easy sell to the rest of UK? the infrastructure operated by the national grid is already connected to Scotland's, as well as the continent, so it should be a pretty easy sell, right?
get building them [s]nukes[/s] low carbon power generation systems!
should have thought an iS would be rubbing it's hands together. if the UK's energy requirements are not being fulfilled domestically, then by increasing iS's provision there's a ready made customer on your doorstep and it would make it an easy sell to the rest of UK?
Well, you'd think so - but I guess the counter argument is that most of the renewables are loss making and only operable with significant subsidy, so in an independent Scotland, who's going to underwrite the payments to the operators?
The English, we just punt youse our surplus for an over inflated price, job done!ninfan - Member
should have thought an iS would be rubbing it's hands together. if the UK's energy requirements are not being fulfilled domestically, then by increasing iS's provision there's a ready made customer on your doorstep and it would make it an easy sell to the rest of UK?
Well, you'd think so - but I guess the counter argument is that most of the renewables are loss making and only operable with significant subsidy, so in an independent Scotland, who's going to underwrite the payments to the operators?
I'd rather buy off the French (spits on floor) 😆
Let's not forget the water that Boris,you know the guy who could be future leader of this country, said you should pipe down to the sarf of England,because you have regular shortages. " och don't worry,it's all the peat that gives it that yellow colour and salty taste... 😈
@JY, I'm not convinced it's that simple
I dont do complicated 😉
Fair point I am sure other factors need to be taken into account
The Scottish government said the comments were "crass and offensive".
Again terrible reporting from the BBC.
So the whole assembly, all said this? Or was it from a spokesman or the yes camp BBC?
I presume a spokesperson for the Scottish government (i.e. the SNP).
This is more love bombing, is it?
Again terrible reporting from the BBC.So the whole assembly, all said this?
And yet again another pointless attack on the BBC !
"The government" doesn't mean "the parliament" which I assume is what you mean by "the whole assembly". And as bencooper's points out ministers and others have the authority to speak on behalf of the Scottish government.
It doesn't mean that every MSP said the identical thing and most people realise this which is why the BBC didn't need to point it out 🙂
They've trotted out another Lord!
Can almost hear the meter ticking over as another few undecided go Yes.
What a load of bollocks that was. The fear, smear, and sneer campaign is getting desperate.
If Scotland not being in NATO is such a problem to the Western world, then the answer is simple, ask Scotland to be a member.
then the answer is simple, ask Scotland to be a member.
But I thought SNP policy was against joining NATO - so even if they were asked, they wouldn't join, surely?
It's not the first time Robertson's been wheeled out to talk pish about NATO- any time they want a scarestory but can't get it from NATO because they try to base their positions on reality, they bring him forth because of his past association with the organisation. He can give the impression of representing NATO while having nothing to do with them. It's a shame really.
(see also- last year when he was telling us that "unresolved border disputes" would prevent us joining NATO. Oh and suggesting Scotland would be responsible for the cost of relocating Trident)
Hard to see this as turning out to be anything but another project fear own goal though, it'll play well with their supporters but you can already hear people say "Whose business is it of America's what we do?"
"The government" doesn't mean "the parliament" which I assume is what you mean by "the whole assembly". And as bencooper's points out ministers and others have the authority to speak on behalf of the Scottish government.It doesn't mean that every MSP said the identical thing and most people realise this which is why the BBC didn't need to point it ou
Its misleading. They should be clear 'a spokesman for X released this' or name the person who said it.
When the 'British Government' says anything its common to state who is saying/clarifying basically no?
The BBC were being a wee bit naughty, as though theres a united thought at Holyrood.
piemonster - Member
Hmm, not sure if he's trollinghttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26933998
In contrast! 😆
nope.ninfan - Member
then the answer is simple, ask Scotland to be a member.
But I thought SNP policy was against joining NATO - so even if they were asked, they wouldn't join, surely?
Here is the Yes scotland position on nato
The current Scottish Government supports continued membership of NATO, albeit with the significant caveat that membership should not require retention of nuclear weapons in Scotland.In their white paper ("Scotland's Future: Your Guide to Scottish Independence") the Scottish Government explains its view that "NATO membership is in Scotland’s interests, and the interests of our neighbours, because it underpins effective conventional defence and security co?operation".
Robertson language is shocking - I await the Union supporters attacking him as they do AS.
That attack and language is way OTT...was he tired and emotional?In a plea to the former politician, she said: "I'm not the person using language like cataclysmic and suggesting that independence would aid the forces of darkness."I would invite George Robertson to come back into the realms of decent and rational debate, because that is the kind of debate we should be having."
THISIts misleading. They should be clear 'a spokesman for X released this' or name the person who said it.
No it is not misleading and you will find examples everyday of thisWhen the 'British Government' says anything its common to state who is saying/clarifying basically no?
Its clarified right there in your own question its the BRITISH GOVERNMENT saying it 🙄
Its not common the most common clarification is a "spokesperson" which tells you next to nothing