BertramCooper
Banned
Are most of these major outlets reliable when it comes to Scottish political polling?
Do they have good track records?
Do they have good track records?
Scottish Independence Referendum |OT| 18 September 2014 [Up: NO wins]
- Thread starter Ape Gone Insane
- Start date
- Status
I have no basis for this but I imagine most don't knows will turn to no. If they've not been swayed by yes then they'd stick with the status quo. I could be completely wrong though.
It'll be decisively no with another 30 years of broken promises and shit thrown at us until we get another referendum. Then everyone forgets history and trusts Westminster again. Votes no and the cycle continues.
Fuck politics
CyclopsRock
Member
This is basically unprecedented as a result so there's not too much to compare to - plus there aren't the traditional party lines here which are the bedrock of most polling. That's why they're all saying that these are unlikely to actually be *that* accurate.
They do, but all bets are off for this really. A lot of people who have never voted before, and a lot of people changing their mind constantly in polls. I have a gut feeling it's going to split a lot less evenly than the polls are showing.
The problem is that this is very different to a general election. In terms of similar referendums in the UK the polls got the results correct but all of those were landslides. That is why there is so much uncertainty.
That's what tends to happen, on the other hand Yes has been continually closing.
I don't see a Yes win but I hope it's close enough to give a scare, it might be the only protection against the inevitable backlash from our betters in Westminster. I mean it's already a 10% cut next year, I'd hate to see what happens when they get vindictive.
Yes's only hope is that a larger than expected proportion of young voters and people not previously engaged actually come out and vote and break overwhelming for yes. The first part might happen the second part probably won't.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
It's not always 3% - it depends on the sample size. The ICM poll which gave Yes an 8-point lead had a comparatively small effective sample size of just over 680 after weighting, which has a margin of error of 3.8%.
QuicheFontaine
Member
Unless you put a dab on with Betfair apparently!
Edit:
It still surprises me how such a slash in sample size (1000->680) only results in an increase of 0.8% in the margin of error. I never was very good at statistics though.
AHA-Lambda
Member
Rather status quo than that snake oil salesman fucking up the country.
The result isn't even legally binding. It's more of a gentlemen's agreement that it won't be contested, lol.
This isn't a general election.
We have a choice between self determination and Tory "blood baths".
EdibleExplosives
Member
Sounds about right, which is depressing.
He speaks a good game. Would be great if that guy got into some kind of position of power where he could have implemented some of those ideas he has. Hmm..
BertramCooper
Banned
I wonder how many of the "unsure" voters are former "no" voters who are now second-guessing their initial stances.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
It's also why polls of a larger sample size than 1,000 are rarely bothered with, because after that point that amount you need to increase the sample size to reduce the margin of error becomes very large very quickly. For example, to get a 1% margin of error in an opinion poll on the Scottish referendum, you'd need a sample size of 9,583, and that's after weighting and the removal of Don't Knows, not before. Given response rates in polling are usually around 7%-8%, the actual amount of people you need to ask is going to be around 150,000.
AHA-Lambda
Member
I'm well aware, I'll take the tories over nationalists.
QuicheFontaine
Member
Reminds me of this!
"There's 5 million people in Scotland. Do you know how many people there are in the world of Scottish descent?"
"I don't know"
"40 billion. Aye."
Just read an article on the BBC News website about this (sorry cba to find it again). Basically no, the result being close isn't grounds for a recount.
Also, unlike general elections where ties have been decided by coin flips in the past, there is no contingency for the extremely unlikely event of a dead heat.
JonathanEx
Member
I would have thought logic dictates that if it's 50% + 1 to win, then only 50% is a loss? An awkward one, but Yes won't have won, so by default....?
Different weight class. Make it Boris
Self determination or self harm IMO.
Anyway, I'm going to nail my guess to the mast conservatively at 57% in favour of yes.
I have more belief in the results of canvassing done by friends and family that I do in the polling.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
So far I'll plump for 47% YES 53% NO, which is basically current polling plus a very slight split towards NO amongst voters who remain undecided.
AHA-Lambda
Member
No, never voted tory, I'm more of a tactical voter; no hard affiliation.
And yes, I take my odds with the tories better than the nationalists.
I'm trying to work out why you are so at ease with the Tories continuing to wreck things up here with no mandate at all in the entire nation.
Because he's personalised this to that 'effing snakeoil salesman' he keeps talking about. It's the only way to explain the sheer hatred for a SNP government who aside from the contentious referenda call, their draconian "anti-sectarian" football bill (even then they had the support of other parties to a point) and their creeping centralisation have been extremely benign as a majority government in a parliament not used to majorities.
At this point it's like football, you demonise the opposition with the absolute certainty that no your guy didn't dive, and even if he did it just makes up for all those other times you didn't get the call. Tribal politics at it's best.
Salmonds a fat smug twat, but then he's a politician. Cameron's just as smug a twat, Milliband is a gormless smug twat and Clegg is a self-serving smug twat. It's pretty much a job requirement for a political leader in this county. Don't get me started on the Lamont, Rennie and Davidson, none of whom are bright enough to actually manage to look smug although they've got the twat part down pat. My point being, you can complain, dislike and even hate Salmond for his personality and his politics, but as an individual he's no better or worse than anyone else. It makes no sense to personalise it as much, unless you're looking for a bogeyman.
AHA-Lambda
Member
This isn't a vote for salmond. That happens 2016
AHA-Lambda
Member
Pah, if Scotland votes yes, he'll be PM no way it won't happen.
He's the face of Scottish independence, he'll win.
QuicheFontaine
Member
To be fair, nor is this a vote for David Cameron.
fizzelopeguss
Banned
Nor a vote for real independence.
Indeed it isn't but the Tories are by nature the party of govt. so whether it's Cameron or Oxbridge Bot No 233 matters very little. They'll be in power without a mandate in Scotland destroying things we don't want destroyed.
CyclopsRock
Member
I'm quite interested in the prospect of the right wing in Scotland. As someone mentioned before, it's the Tories rather than "the right" And there will inevitably come a new right wing party.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
How are they the party of government when they haven't had a majority since 1992 and are the odds-on favourite to lose the next general election too? There's a more than reasonable prospect we could go two decades without them ever taking a majority in an election.
Why do some of you see the only alternative to a current shit Tory government being nationalism? There's an election soon and I doubt the Torys will be in power afterwards. Labour has always been good to Scotland, no?
I know there's more pandas than Tory MPs in Scotland, but maybe we should campaign for and elect socialism for the entire UK together, rather than just Scotland.
I grew up near London and i have far more on common with working class Scots than i do with Westminster. I would hate to see Scotland go, and not only because it would give the Tory party a 50 seat head start.
I know there's more pandas than Tory MPs in Scotland, but maybe we should campaign for and elect socialism for the entire UK together, rather than just Scotland.
I grew up near London and i have far more on common with working class Scots than i do with Westminster. I would hate to see Scotland go, and not only because it would give the Tory party a 50 seat head start.
Meh, this is clearly a vote against the Tories, if Labour were governing the polls wouldn't be this close.
Labour don't exist. You're thinking of New Labour.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Most of the history in which they were the natural party of the government was the same history for which Scotland was one of the most steadfast Conservative strong-holds in the United Kingdom.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
Thats the biggest thing as a foreigner. I don't see them being the deciding factor or even a real factor at all (like ireland was).
I see a few difference (no more than exist in england) but chiefly I see people pissed they don't have more influence in Westminster even if it seems to me they have a lot of devolved powers and proportional representation compared to their population.
As an American it just seems strange. You guys have full representation, devolved powers, and things like that formula that gives you more money. Our independence would have been stymied if we were giving that. I don't understand how you guys aren't equal to the rest of the UK in your citizenship.
Self-determination is self-determination so its not as if the independence sentiment isn't valid but from what I've read ITT and in articles it seems the major argument is just "we'll be free from the conservatives" not "scotland should be free because its a country that's been unfairly treated and conquered". I see independence movements in Flanders, Catalonia, Basque Country has actually fighting for nationalism and a real resentment for conquest and subjugation.
Its why I just see disaster, the left thinks they're not going to have conservatives in their new country? That everybody is going to be happy? That now having to have debates about the military, immigration, monetary policy (which haven't been specific to scotland) isn't going to bring up great divisions in what ever their alternative to labour?
Some of the most popular parts of the SNP's policy are economically right wing. Sweeney could easily pass as a Tory, albeit a socially progressive one.
There's a clear gap for a competent untainted right wing party in Scotland, although (and the social attitudes survey bare this out to a degree) I don't think there's as much of an appetite up here for some of the more, shall we say, spikier parts of the traditional Tory social policies. But a new mainstream right of centre party would be able to shape itself free of that baggage.
- Status