Since the YouGov poll showing a narrow Yes lead was published at the weekend the Westminster Village has flailed into hyper-active over-drive. Even today’s Prime Minister’s Questions was cancelled to allow the three party leaders to descend on Scotland and bolster the flagging No campaign.
Personally I cannot begin to describe the extent of my ambivalence. As a federalist, I’m caught in a pincer of equal distaste for Alex Salmond’s and his cybernats’ nationalist aggression and the shrill Anglo-presumption of unionist politicians and commentators that the Scots need saving from themselves.
The Better Together campaign’s frayed nerves will be partially soothed by the latest poll released tonight purporting to show No leading by 53%-47%. I use the word purporting quite deliberately. Here’s why, courtesy ComRes’s blog:
Ignore the “don’t knows” at your peril
Most of the recent headlines have been generated by reports which have excluded “don’t know” respondents from the calculation. This gives a neat prediction of the final split. But it can be a misrepresentation of the polls.
An analogy: if we asked 1000 people whether they prefer Coca-Cola or Pepsi, and 400 preferred Coca-Cola, 350 preferred Pepsi, and 150 had no strong opinion or were undecided, it would then be wilfully misleading to say that 53% of them prefer Coke. This is effectively the analysis that many journalists (and some pollsters) have been making.
The truth is that while the two headline-grabbing, market-bashing polls of the week are each showing the same trend (an upward tick in “Yes” support), they are otherwise showing two very distinct pictures:
The question is whether TNS-BMRB’s “don’t knows” will split evenly into “Yes” and “No”, or whether they are more likely to break towards one side. The evidence from previous referendums worldwide is that most “Don’t know” respondents will end up backing the “status quo” option on voting day. If that is the case, then “Yes” should be very concerned about their 39% figure this close to the vote.
Some will argue that there no longer is a status quo option on the ballot – that we are now into Devo Max vs. Full Independence territory. But the former clearly involves less change and less of the unknown, and we should still expect cautious and undecided voters to lean this way on voting day.
Keep your eye on the “don’t knows”.
Yes. And another thing to keep your eye on is the polling trends. You can see all the polls published to date at UK Polling Report here. Perhaps we’ll be blind-sided by a late surge, but it’s going to take more than one poll well within the margin of error to convince me Yes Scotland have a hope of winning outright.
* Stephen was Editor (and Co-Editor) of Liberal Democrat Voice from 2007 to 2015, and writes at The Collected Stephen Tall.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Back on the campaign trail
1963: London's summer of the Hoverbus
Have resignations led to a rethink?
Chloe
Abrial Jerram
Neil Hickman
30 Comments
Then there’s the turnout. Will Yes voters be more ready to turn out? Have the elderly already posted their votes? Unless there’s a 100% vote none of these figures are any kind of prediction.
I’m sure that the Yes side has never taken any result for granted (not because of any superior insight, but because they’ve never been in a position to). I can’t say the same of the No side: again, not because of any deficiency of insight, but because it’s looked for a very long time like No would win without even trying. That could hardly do anything but breed complacency.
The Poll I really want to see is ICM, the only firm to get The AV Referendum right, thats due at the w/e. I suspect a lot of the Dont Knows are shy No Voters & a chunk of The Yes side wont vote.
Theres not going to be an Exit Poll apparently, not important enough ! Does anyone know if the count will be overnight or next morning ?
Stephen Tall wrote:
“have a hope of winning outright.”
In a referendum with a binary choice, it is only possible to win outright.
Ed Wilson wrote:
“Will Yes voters be more ready to turn out?”
Many “YES” supporters appear to be very fanatical, but they may not represent a majority, or even a large minority, of those who tell pollsters that they intend to vote “YES”. There has been an assumption in the media that “YES” supporters are more likely to vote than “NO” supporters, but I wonder. The middle-class is overwhelmingly “NO”, and the middle-class is historically more likely to vote than other demographics. Similarly, old-age pensioners have a historically high turnout, and appear to be mainly “NO” supporters. Conversely, the demographics that are most likely to vote “YES” have historically low turnouts, and many of them live in localities, such as Drumchapel and Easterhouse, where turnouts are usually very low.
Overnight, Paul.
This sort of phrase — “distaste for Alex Salmond’s and his cybernats’ nationalist aggression ” has been used in LDV more than once. But it is not something I recognise in the real world amongst family and friends who have voted YES already or are determined to do so next week. Most of them are neither SNP supporters nor cybernats ( whatever a cybernat is ).
Some media reports, generally the better informed more objective reports point to the grassroots, community based campaigning of the YES side. So the Don’t No equals Status Quo feature of other referendums may not apply. The ability of polling organisations to be able to calculate an accurate result for either side may be limited because a lot of voters are under the radar.
My instinct is that the NO side will win — especially now that the London based media has piled in with the BBC in a panic of nonsense about The Queen, the Banks etc.
I think all polling organisations now recognise that there is a powerful YES vote in poorer areas amongst those who have suffered most over the last thirty years from the Thatcherite consensus. I doubt if they will be convinced by The Queen or The Banks. Where were these intuitions when the shipbuilding and mining industries were being wrecked? I do not recall The Queen interfering in the politics of Scotland then to save the communities and jobs of Scotland’s traditional industries. The banks were clearly on the side of the Thatcherites.
Despite this I think this last panic dash by the London media and the top down unionist overkill will scare enough elderly people ( the best demographic for the unionists) to vote NO and win. I hope I am wrong.
If a NO win is achieved on the back of false scare stories and wheeling outThe Queen it might be a temporary rather than permanent fix.
With most young people and the poor voting YES whilst the elderly vote NO in can only be a matter of time before change comes. Those first time 16 year olds who vote YES will not forget. Nothing will be done for the poor if Scotland stick with London rule. They too will not forget.
As far as I can see nobody on either side really believes that Cameron and Miliband have suddenly been converted to federalism and maximum devoution in the last five days. Everyone knows that this scratching around by the NO campaign offers no guarantee of anything other than minor tinkering. It is not even devo lite let alone devo max.
I hope I am wrong and the establishent suffer a huge defeat at the hands of the YES voters.
Why has LDV changed my name to ” JohnTilleyBi ” ???????
I am still just plain JohnTilley. Where did the “.Bi” suffix come from?
So English people like me arguing for more powers for Scotland, but not independence, have been put in the same bracket as cybernats and Alex Salmond?
In a tight run debate I think the No campaign can do with support from the rest of the UK, as long as we don’t lead it.
I can understand independence and I think I have made most of my points now, but nationalist propaganda needs challenging. As does unionist propaganda.
Outrageously partisan comment by BBC this morning. Boss of John Lewis says ‘prices may diverge’ in an independent Scotland, and this is reported as JL boss says ‘prices may be higher in Scotland’. No BBC – diverge means different, they could be lower.
The closer we get the more hysterical the ‘Better Together’ arguments seem – ‘black wednesday’ – sense of proportion please. And yes, the ‘yes’ campaign has come out with a load of ‘William Wallacey b&llocks’ (copyright Marcus Brigstocke) but overall it has been the most engaging/substantial campaign prior to a vote that I can recall in my lifetime in politics. And at the end of it all I am still a don’t know!
I can also forsee that some of the arguments now being used will reemerge when (if?) we have an EU referendum.
This entire campaign has been treated disgracefully by the leadership of all national political parties (including UKIP).
Until the last week, they have left it to some rather ‘worthy’ but not particularly inspiring performers in Scotland to ‘get on with it’ as though the referendum was some kind of chore which simply had to be got through and then everything would be restored to normal. They have completely ignored the ‘heart’ argument as well as the ‘head’. In terms of the people of England and their elected representatives , how much effort and organisation has there been telling the people of Scotland how much they love them and want them to stay part of the same country?
Overall, the most major constitutional vote in our history, like the slightly-less important but still huge AV one before it, has been left to a band of not-so-gifted amateurs. The ‘Y es’ campaign on the ground are massively more motivated on the GOTV operation and could still win the vote even on a minority of support. If they do not, it will be no thanks to the major ‘British’ political parties, especially their Leaders,who appear to have treated the referendum rather like a boring ‘safe seat’ parliamentary by-election. If the Union dies next week, these MPs may not have murdered it but a charge of manslaughter could well stick.
Speaking as an Englishman, I truly wish the Yes voters all the best, and I hope they get the result they want. It will frankly cause utter chaos from here on, (North & South), no matter the result, but in truth, we voters, desperately need this almighty shake up, because it is not just the Tories, but the whole of the Westminster ‘crew’, who need an Eff…ing, kicking. And we must *all* keep kicking till the Eff..ing, bar-stewards’, in Westminster…GET IT…’??
Roll on the May 2015 general election?
Ed Wilson: Big mistake to imply it is mainly ‘the elderly’ who have postal votes, certainly not since they became available on demand. My experience is that a high proportion of today’s postal voters are those who travel with tneir work, are on call, work shifts etc. Does anyone know if the number of PVs in the referendum is higher than in 2011.0? Given the issues and the interest I would expect both a very high turnout amongst postal voters, and probably a higher than average number handed in on the day in urban areas.
I was going to saymore, but John Tilley has already made my points, and probably in more eloquent prose!
Steve Comer, for really eloquent writing on Scotland and independence I recommend. —
Lallands peat worrier
http://lallandspeatworrier.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/tackety-boot-unionism.html
In particular, this bit from a recent post —
Cue a jungle column of political explorers, wending their way north from London, to prognosticate on the future of the Union and the chances of victory. In their train, we can also apparently expect a band of UK “heavyweights”, in the political patois, to press home the case against independence. Both enterprises, the commentary and the campaigning, are fraught with a kind of peril. On the media side, some pieces of writing have been much better than others. Folk like Paul Mason have shown a real interest and sensitivity to their subject. Others rather less so, like the pith-helmeted imperial anthropologists, who gain a superficial knowledge of their subjects, and trump off to pen the authoritative tome, shot through with their own problematic assumptions and cultural blind spots.
The strange inarticulacy of the rash of tin-eared UK paper reviews and columns on Scotland tells its own story. Do you think, after three years, anybody with half a brain in this country is in danger of conflating the referendum with a general election? Do you think anybody earnestly considering putting their cross in the Yes box can’t countenance the idea that independence means independence? Why assume, on the basis of no real information on the poll, that for the Yes campaign to have run Better Together close means that the punters are nitwits who haven’t been applying themselves in a serious-minded, considered way to the range of alternatives, facts, arguments and uncertainties which have been presented to them? “I know nothing much about the referendum, but if you are inclined to vote Yes, you must have neglected the homework that I’ve… um… never done on the subject.”
This is a reheated version of an auld sang we’ve heard many times before. Independence is bonkers and unthinkable, and if close to a majority of folk living in Scotland are willing to countenance it, they must either be in the grip of a childish and petulant “anti-politics sentiment”, have been beguiled by that mischievous peddler of villainy, Alex Salmond, or have failed really to understand what they’ve been asked. All of which might be more impressive, had the incredulous scribbler composing it shown any interest or sensitivity to the Scottish question these last many years, or a decent level of respect for the intelligence and responsibility of the public.
A couple of points – firstly the fieldwork for this poll started as the YouGov one was finishing – so it may not reflect fully the momementum this one yes poll may have created.
Secondly what evidence is there that undecideds vote more for the status quo? At this stage in the campaign I would assume they vote in the same proportion as declared voters or not at all.
the trend in any two-horse race is that punters instinctively want to back the winner.. so convincing them you can win is half the game..
One interesting feature in the polls is the gender gap. Given that the campaign has been caricatured as ’emotional yes vs rational no’ does that mean that men are more emotional and women more rational?
Discuss!
Arnieg, do you have a vote? You said you were a don’t know before. If so, have a chat with someone from Better Together and Yes Scotland and see how it goes. Personally, I think a Scottish parliament with more powers in a bigger UK is a very good deal for Scotland.
With most young people and the poor voting YES
I thought the polls had most young people voting No.
Those first time 16 year olds who vote YES will not forget
Neither will the first time 16-year-olds who vote No so as not to throw away the glorious legacy of Britishness that they are heir to.
Dav
I think you have been looking at polls from June perhaps?
As to your perception of “the glorious legacy of Britishness”, what does this mean???
This is a genuine question — I would like to know what this “glorious legacy” is that the Scots should be so indebted to the English that they must vote for continued rule by London.
> I think a Scottish parliament with more powers in a bigger UK is a very good deal for Scotland.
I always thought that was Alex Salmond’s preferred, but unspoken, outcome…
I would like to know what this “glorious legacy” is that the Scots should be so indebted to the English that they must vote for continued rule by London
Surely it’s no more ‘rule by London’ than in an independent Scotland Orkney would be subject to ‘rule by Edinburgh’?
As for the glorious legacy… one of the greatest Empires in the world, saving Europe and the world from domination by the French and then the Germans (and helping against the Soviets), spreading the rule of law across the globe, building, basically, the modern world, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. Basically all the reasons why Britain is the greatest country in the world and it would be madness to tear it apart (something which hasn’t been said enough during this whole process, which has got bogged down on such trivial matters as currencies and the NHS and whether people will be twenty quid better or worse off, so the more the vital historical importance of this moment in not squandering the legacy of Britain can be repeated now the better).
Dav
Would you be prepared to accept that your rather chauvinist take on the history of the British Empire is not rooted in Liberalism
Would you admit that it is not a view that would be shared by 90% of the ubjects of that empire who have achieved independence since 1947 ?
Do you not find it odd that all those countries that we now call The Commonwealth opted for independence because they were not so impressed by the great British Imperial legacy that you hold to?
There are plenty of Scottish MP’s in London ruling England and Scotland. You may have heard of Gordon Brown for example. This rhetoric about England ruling Scotland is disgusting. We have been Britain for over 300 years. The parliament is in London, but everyone in the UK has an equal say as Scottish Nationalists know very well but choose to distort. Democracy means accepting governments you didn’t vote for as long as you had a decent and even chance to vote as everyone else.
Stephen W,
I would have thought that event a Conservative supporter such as you would recognise that because of the large number of “safe seats” it is a fiction to suggest that we voters all have an equal chance of changing the government.
It’s like a bitter divorce.
The better to together alternates between, “Beep you, ‘, I paid for the house, And that chair, And the fridge. Mediation is not on the cards” and “baby’ please come back, I’ll change, Things weren’t that bad,” and then back to “Don’t ring me up when you can’t pay the bills, “. The next stage is the divorce papers and then going to the pub and boring everyone into a coma by having nothing else to talk about. , while Scotland moves into a nice new house and starts secretly dating America. Dude, it’s over.
In short I think Scotland will go, Sad , but that’s how it is.
Surely it would be best for Scotland to vote YES than for any Scottish liabilities to be borne by the English, Welsh and Northern Ireland taxpayers as could be the case with extended devolution ? Would there be any means to prevent a fully devolved Scottish or other regional Government from profligate and wasteful expenditure if the Bank of England and the English taxpayer had to carry the liability. We know that national Governments can be and frequently are irresponsible but in Spain many of the problems stem from the irresponsible spending of devolved regional Governments for example building unnecessary airports and such like to boost the egos and bank balances of local politicians who are either in cahoots with or actually are building contractors. We should be careful what we wish for.
I think a fully independent Scotland could be become prosperous but there might be a very rocky transitional period which could destroy the SNP. However, it is more likely that a Yes vote will be followed by a deal with Westminster which will give the Bank of England effective control of Scottish Government expenditure and Scotland will just be nominally independent with all the costs of maintaining embassies etc but none of the benefits of the boost that real independence and standing on your own feet would probably give. This is the message I got from John Swinney’s interview with the BBC World at One today.
There is a very interesting breakdown of the recent Survation poll in today’s DM:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2751102/Boost-Union-No-campaign-retakes-lead-new-poll-showing-Scots-53-47-against-independence.html
A few comments:
* “YES” seems to have picked up a lot of support in the North of Scotland since this process began. I have no idea why that is. This is a worry for our 7 sitting MPs.
* The South of Scotland figures are rather meaningless, in that this region includes rural areas that are close to England along with old industrial towns that would be expected to behave in much the same way as the two “YES” majority areas on either side of Glasgow. If the Borders and Dumfries were disaggregated, one would expect to see “NO” at 70% plus in that sub-region. In the unlikely event of “YES” winning, do these regions get an opt out?
*Glasgow has a “NO” majority, even though the regions around it have a “YES” majority. Glasgow, though mainly working-class, is an international city with a fair sprinkling of non-Scottish born residents who would not be expected to support separation. There are also many students.
* I am amazed that the West of Glasgow region should be as “YES” as the East of Glasgow region. The East region has very few middle-class enclaves, while the West region includes East Renfrewshire, Bearsden & Milngavie and Largs. (But we are dealing with a fairly small sample at this level.)
We now know where “YES” supporters are concentrated. They are to be found in huge numbers on the council estates ringing Glasgow. The Labour Party needs to go there in force and hammer home the message. Yes, this is a rare occasion that I am cheering Labour on. If they can save the union, I’ll forgive them a lot.
Normally I’d agree with ComRes about don’t knows, now I’m not so sure…
It is true that most people won’t vote to change the status quo (especially if there is a lot of risk involved, which in this case, there is) unless they see a real problem with the status quo, in which case they would almost certainly be a Yes voter anyway.
However one campaign canvassed council estates and found roughtly the same number of Yes voter and around 1/4 No’s and about 1/3rd undecided. It seems to me like a lot of people who are poor and the status quo isn’t working for are considering taking a gamble on independence, even if it wasn’t something that they really wanted.
The thing that jumped out at me on the Salmond Vs. Darling debates was they seemed to be arguing over who could be the most social democratic, Labour in Westminster or an independent Scotland. If the powers in London weren’t so concerned with invading other countries and cutting the debt by attacking the young, the poorest and sick Yes would have no chance of winning. The majority of people aren’t demanding independence, the problem is there might just be enough people that have been seriously screwed by the status quo to consider taking a punt on something else. Not a good reason the break up a country in my opinion but it might just happen.
How many MPs have a spare bedroom in their tax payer subsided accommodation? It’s one rule for them and another for us.
I think you have it spot on. The don’t knows have it. Most of the reporting on the polls has ignored this group altogether.
Safe seats only exist in places where a large majority of local voters repeatedly prefer a single party. There is nothing intrinisically undemocratic about that. Nor does it have anything to do with Scotland or the referendum. We all get one vote in general elections and elect MP’s under the same rules, whether Scottish, English, Welsh or NI. It is a deliberate distortion to suggest otherwise.