Will Scotland Leave the UK?

The YouGov poll is good although worth nothing that some other polls, namely ICM and Survation, have it a lot closer.

Originally Posted by Damien

The YouGov poll is good although worth nothing that some other polls, namely ICM and Survation, have it a lot closer.

Indeed, however it's also worth nothing that ICM and Survation aren't very good at getting definitive answers out of people. For some reason they come back with relatively high levels of 'don't know' compared to YouGov. I'm not sure why this is, although I suspect there is something in the methodology that makes people more likely to give a firm answer with YouGov.

*If* there is any significance to the variation in 'don't know' between polls, it would tend to indicate that people who say they are undecided, when they do actually make a choice between Yes and No, are more likely to go for No.

Originally Posted by Chris

Indeed, however it's also worth nothing that ICM and Survation aren't very good at getting definitive answers out of people. For some reason they come back with relatively high levels of 'don't know' compared to YouGov. I'm not sure why this is, although I suspect there is something in the methodology that makes people more likely to give a firm answer with YouGov.

*If* there is any significance to the variation in 'don't know' between polls, it would tend to indicate that people who say they are undecided, when they do actually make a choice between Yes and No, are more likely to go for No.

Hopefully. It's odd to have polls so different from each other but aligning in different places. You have three converging around 40% and three converging around 45%. It will be different methodologies as they're too consistent for it to be anything else. Panelbase aligns, albeit a point or two higher, with ICM and Survation but for previously discussed reasons they're not massively trusted.

I wonder if it's sampling. How do you sample for a one-off event? I.E Do you go with the Holywood elections with might mean the sample is made up of a higher proportion of SNP voters than actually exists in the electorate or do you use some other criteria? I know I looked at Mori and they asked the question 'How would you vote in the next election?' and sampled the Independence Question on those findings (two different polls). Do you use the Scottish Election or the Westminster one? The first would oversample SNP the latter would undersample them! A combination? AGHHH.

It could be they're all messed up and Independence doesn't correlate well with political affiliation which would mean all the polls are suspect and we have no idea what is actually happening. Which is worrying. It would be interesting to see the Internal polling from the campaigns as they'll have a better idea of the questions to ask.

If the internal polls of the Yes camp were as rosy as some of the hard-line cybernats keep claiming, you can bet your lottery ticket that they'd have published them. For that reason, I suspect the Yessers' private polls are the same, or worse (for them) as the public ones.

On the other hand any research the UK government may have done, they would have to keep very quiet about - if they published a poll showing solid support for No, they'd immediately be accused of trying to unduly influence the debate and the vote.

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by Chris

On the other hand any research the UK government may have done, they would have to keep very quiet about - if they published a poll showing solid support for No, they'd immediately be accused of trying to unduly influence the debate and the vote.

Equally, on the other hand there is the argument put forward by the Yes campaign that if the Government are spending tax payers monies on polls and surveys then the tax payer has a right to see the results.

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

Equally, on the other hand there is the argument put forward by the Yes campaign that if the Government are spending tax payers monies on polls and surveys then the tax payer has a right to see the results.

I'm aware of that, though I'm not certain how FOI would apply. Perhaps the Yes should have a go. Assuming the poll they were talking about actually exists, that is. Its existence having been 'revealed' by someone who never worked for the polling company she claimed to work for, and all that.

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by Chris

I'm aware of that, though I'm not certain how FOI would apply. Perhaps the Yes should have a go. Assuming the poll they were talking about actually exists, that is. Its existence having been 'revealed' by someone who never worked for the polling company she claimed to work for, and all that.

And subsequently confirmed by David Cameron (5m:27s), and all that.

The Government almost certainly has polling on this. Governments poll people all the time so do the parties. The thing is they will be less interested in the headline result than they are the other questions that accompany the poll which will be used to direct their message/campaign. The revelation of which will be a hinderance to the campaign as it let's your rivals know what you're thinking as well as providing, for free, the results you got.

It's very likely that the Government polled on the question of a Currency Union before making their intervention for example.

The secret poll is just spin by the Yes campaign to fuel their sense of paranoia. It sounds dodgy but happens all the time. Governments poll on a lot of things.

[Mr Angry]

"....as well as providing, for free, the results you got."

The point is that it's not "for free" if it's tax payers money which funded it.

The "secret poll" isn't a "Secret poll". David Cameron has confirmed that it exists.

[nashville]

Just love that one

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

"....as well as providing, for free, the results you got."

The point is that it's not "for free" if it's tax payers money which funded it.

The "secret poll" isn't a "Secret poll". David Cameron has confirmed that it exists.

Government advice is also not free if it's tax payers money that funded it. You have to be able to govern without every thought, question, advice or information you have access too being widely distributed amongst the public.

It's symptomatic of the Yes campaign's flailing, scattershot, approach to every perceived slight from the UK and Better Together that they pretend this is new or unfair. They're trigger-happy opportunists that value winning the issue of the day on Twitter than winning the war at large. I suspect it's cooler heads at the SNP and the Scottish Parliament that have stopped them pushing it. They don't want to open that can of worms because, it's almost certain, that they've paid for polling and advice over Independence that they don't want in the public domain. Questions that might suggest they're open to nuclear weapons at Faslane, advice that might show the Currency Union isn't the massive bonanza of common-sense they have claim it is, maybe advice on if they could join the EU as quickly as they've claimed.

They probably have many polls commissioned by this stage and it's possible the one that triggered the Nats outrage didn't exist but Cameron in referring to the many others which may, or may not, be the one the random person 'revealed' in a newspaper letter. It's also 'secret' because they won't reveal the results in the same way Government advice is 'secret'.

It's secret in the same way the Scottish Government paid £20,000 to make sure that no one knew that the 'secret' EU legal advice they received didn't actually exist: http://www.scotsman.com/news/politic...ttle-1-3133692. They paid £20,000 to keep it a secret that the secret they had didn't exist so their sudden outrage over a poll is a bit rich.

[Mr Angry]

They're both at it Damien. Each side can be as bad as the other in some regards.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Chris

[/COLOR]Meanwhile, Colin Montgomerie's got it in one. Poor Eck.

[img]Download Failed (1)[/img]

Does Colin Montgomerie mean because the Government puts more money into Scotland than what it takes in taxes, because Scotland will become less competitive in the world or something else

If it us a vote for independence, does anyone know if we would we have border controls and/or have to use passports when visiting Scotland?

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Does Colin Montgomerie mean because the Government puts more money into Scotland than what it takes in taxes, because Scotland will become less competitive in the world or something else

If it us a vote for independence, does anyone know if we would we have border controls and/or have to use passports when visiting Scotland?

we don't know yet...

[Derek]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Does Colin Montgomerie mean because the Government puts more money into Scotland than what it takes in taxes, because Scotland will become less competitive in the world or something else

He means the current pledges by the SNP are uncosted and their own figures shows oil revenues declining over the coming years.

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

If it us a vote for independence, does anyone know if we would we have border controls and/or have to use passports when visiting Scotland?

No one knows. Initially I'd imagine it would be like the border between N.I. And the republic but if iScotland doesn't waltz into the EU with all the UKs opt outs and had to introduce Schengen who knows what would happen.