Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Two new Scottish referendum polls have the gap getting clo
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Two new Scottish referendum polls have the gap getting closer
Two new referendum polls this weekend see the gap between YES and NO getting narrower. ICM for Scotland on Sunday has, after the exclusion of DKs, YES up 3 to 45% with NO down 3 to 55%.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Keep Calm and Carry On, Scotland will vote No. And it will be down to the SNP/Yes campaign failing to convince the young and the old, and women voters of all ages.
This is the same split between Yes and No as ICM recorded in a poll for Scotland on Sunday back in March.
It will be interesting to see if there are any skews by independence VI on the "divisions" question once the tables are up.
"ALMOST two fifths of people in Scotland believe the country will be left “badly divided” after the independence referendum, according to the first poll to measure the effect the constitutional debate is having on Scottish society.
In the ICM poll, conducted for Scotland on Sunday, 38 per cent of those surveyed thought that divisions would remain whatever the outcome of the September 18 poll, compared with 36 per cent who disagreed when asked if Scotland would be left “badly divided”.
The poll also looked at how the constitutional issue was affecting people’s relationships with their families and friends.
It found that 42 per cent of families are split over independence, while one fifth of those questioned (21 per cent) admitted that discussions with family and friends about the forthcoming referendum had degenerated into rows."
According to the survey conducted on 9-12 June, female support for Yes has increased by five percentage points to 32 per cent since last month.
It's the JK Rowling effect. Death eaters indeed.
I stated a few months ago on PB that Salmond and the SNP/Yes campaign had a problem with women, they see him and the Yes campaign as acting like a bunch of Glasgow spivs. I also predicted that this Indy Referendum was going to prove extremely divisive among families and friends. But for the betting fraternity here on PB, I still maintain that they should Keep Calm and Carry On, Scotland will vote NO!
The Cybernat operation online isn't winning over voters, its in fact turning them off and making them go silent in their views on Independence to save a rammy.
*Your currency will go
*Your wean will die of cancer because it won't be treated in London
*Putin
*Obama
*J K Rowling
*The Pope
*Hillary Clinton
but yet the polls are not shifting towards them.
If that's what's happening we probably shouldn't expect the peak yes scores to hold up in an actual vote, which will be decided by hope vs fear whereas the polls can be swayed by cost-free "Don't tread on me" responses.
And crossover of a sort: 45% think the economy is being managed well against 44% to the contrary.
No seem to be talking at people from on high while Yes seem to be talking with voters face to face as equals. The comfortably off will vote no, I suspect whereas those who feel hard done by after 30 years of Toryism/New Labour along with say creative young, greean and liberal types will go for yes.
I believe we will see odd bed fellows on both the No and Yes sides when the final vote is analysed. In today's Scotsman, the leaders of LibLabCon, to use a phrase, have promised ill-defined powers in the event of a No vote. I'm not sure if that's a good idea if there is an anti-politcs mood and voters believe they are all the same.
Now we have the No side questioning the legitimacy of the referendum itself because they claim it is splitting families. Oddly, it has not stopped the Tories claiming to promise a referendum on the EU in 2017.
1) Arming Hague's Hearteaters - the policy that Blair has been cheerleading all along - has had its predictable and malign effect by overspilling into Iraq.
2) The Shia-Sunni civil war would be maybe 5% of the current scale if it hadn't been for Blair and Iraq.
As other have said, all the polls make grim reading for the Liberal Democrats.
Does anyone know, by the way, how many of the Scottish electorate think of themselves as English? If it turns out that the "no" majority is less than that number, we really will never hear the last of it on either side of the border...
It might not be voters that Cameron needs to convince, so much as his own MPs. As with Ed and The Sun, you have to wonder what Cameron and his team were thinking when they picked this wholly unnecessary fight (presumably that Mrs Merkel would stop him).
I suspect that these polls are not much more than statistical noise. As I have said before it is quite some time since I met anyone who has not made their mind up for months now. Neither campaign has any obvious traction. The Yes campaign has been a joke, full of incredible promises and absurd positions. The no campaign looks disorganised and divided which is not surprising given the range of views within it. Labour in particular seem to want to do their own thing more and more which is probably a good idea.
The good news for no is that the tories are still behind nationally. If the polling swung their way consistently I fear it will become too close to call.
I disagree with Southam about no outstanding team. I was seriously impressed by the Dutch.
The broader point is that this is a great example of how democracy usually actually develops, despite obviously threatening the interests of the people who have the official power to stop it. They allow an election for something fairly minor to keep people quiet, thinking they can override it if it's inconvenient, then the elected person turns out to be harder to block than they expect. Then once the right of the election winner to get the job is established, each occupant leverages their mandate and gradually ratchets up the power of their office...
"That's a big gap between government approval and opinion on economic competency."
Not really, you have to look at how each party's VI votes. On Government Approval (-19), Labour and UKIP vote against and the LDs split.
However, on Economic Competence, the LD's split favours the Government and a lot of UKIP also support the Government - even 17% of Labour give their support!
It is not unusual for a lot of the UKIP VI to support the Government policies - except EU and immigration.
YouGov (Sun on Sunday):
Con 33%, Lab 36%, LD 8%, UKIP 14%, Green 5%
DC doing well / badly :
-15 to -7
EM doing well/badly:
-41 to -44
Coalition managing economy well/badly:
-5 to +1
NB. Not sure what date the comparators are for the above.
It was posited (possibly on PB) before the 2011 Holyrood election that the disconnect between high SLAB vi polling and the very low personal ratings of Iain Gray (compared to Salmond's) couldn't hold, and thus it proved. Currently Darling, the leader of Better Together, has a satisfaction rating of -16%, the BT campaign of c. -25%. The Yes campaign has generally neutral/positive ratings, while Salmond is the only one of two party leaders to have positive ratings (the other being Green Patrick Harvie, another Yes supporter).
The Yes campaign is much more than the SNP, and I accept that you can't directly compare GEs and referendums, I just put the comparison out there for consideration. Better Together have chosen the ground they want to fight on, but the polling suggests it's not so far been particularly advantageous to them.
The plan is still on to hold a PB gathering in the Yorkshire town of Ilkley on July 7th. I'm there on holiday linked to the TdF start on the Sat/Sun
I'm looking for a suitable pub that'll be reasonably quiet on a Monday night and is within easy walking distance of the station. The Cow & Calf has been recommended but that is a long way from the station. Any ideas?
Can you drop me an email at
mike at politicalbetting dot com
DavidL, that's clearly the same YG - the Sun just has the wrong Lab % by 1 point, and everything else is the same. The poll is very positive for the Government in the internals, but it's not helping their share of the vote. I meet people who say yes, the Government's doing OK on the economy, yes, they suppose Cameron looks like a PM, and hell no, of course they wouldn't vote for them. Those of us who are very interested in the details of politics often underestimate the fact that many voters are actually more tribal than we are.
http://www.football-italia.net/49519/italy-medic-sauna-and-ice-bath
You can no more break the rules of biology than you can of physics, salt and fluid loss are inevitable, and no amount of youthful vim is going to make up for that. The Italians were better prepared.
I think the slightly cooler conditions will be easier in Sao Paolo, but Suarez will be back, and Costa Rica no pushover. 4 points and good goal difference should do it, but I can't see it myself.
Thinking about your own LOCAL area, do you think...
There are more or fewer jobs available than a year ago?
More jobs available 21
Fewer jobs available 30
No difference 31
And LibDems are more likely to have gone on holiday abroad than supporters of any other party.
Lab supporters favour Tony Blair as President of EU by 43-34.
84% of Con supporters want Cameron to serve full 2nd term.
Con supporters next Con leader:
Boris 37
May 19
Osborne 14
Gove 2
What seems to have happened is that UKIP had a similar gain in opinion poll support to last year, but most of it seems to have happened before the Euro elections rather than after (last year the increase seemed to continue for about a month after the County elections before their polling figures started tailing off). I can think of a number of explanations, not necessarily mutually exclusive:
* 15% is about a natural cap
* they got more publicity during the campaign itself, last year it was down to the news of their good showing in the County elections, so after the event
* the other parties' anti-UKIP campaigning worked
* Euro elections are seen as a "better" protest vote than locals, so this year people were happier to continue to say they will vote for their usual party in the GE while voting UKIP in the Euros
* We're getting closer to the GE so people are taking it more seriously
* They still seem to be a party with more of a smattering of fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists, more palaeo-conservative than libertarian, and moreover still seem deeply incompetent even when it comes to running a political party, let alone potentially a country
The last point does it for me: I've decided I don't mind voting for them in local elections if there is a suitable candidate, but nothing "bigger".
But I also grasp that the immigration has happened, that we have new neighbours, and that it is our absolute duty to get on with them and befriend them as best as we can.
And this is why I am so scornful of the windbags and panic-spreaders who now seek to make an issue out of the supposed takeover of some state schools by Muslims.
What twaddle this is. The Government quite rightly allows Christian schools in the state system – not least because it was the churches who took on the job of educating poor children when politicians couldn’t be bothered to do so.
Well, now we have a large number of Muslim parents, how can we reasonably deny them the same?"
http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/
"Should the British stop tolerating intolerance?"
http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/v0zlbnvgel/YG-Archive-Pol-Sunday-Times-results-140613.pdf
I wonder if it was a test run. I recall the diplomat I had lunch with a few weeks ago saying that the veto was unplanned - and viewed by the team in Brussels (ie Cameron and ?Hague) as a failure initially.
Basically they had pre-agreed a deal with Merkel, but then France called on their longstanding alliance w ith Germany and Merkel broke her side of the bargain. It looks - from newspaper reporting - that Metkel has/will fold under domestic political pressure in the case of Juncker.
Could it be that Cameron is fighting the Juncker case the test Merkel's reliability ( and susceptibility to the threat of the UK leaving the EU if you believe the German press)?
If true - and lots of supposition - that's quite canny, but also suggests Cameron May come round to the view that a meaningful renegotiation will be tricky. I wonder if we will see him nuancing towards 'may be we won't get a good deal and will have to leave'?
However, there has since the White Paper (when I got some cash down on Yes at 5 to 1) been a general trend towards [edit: not No but] Yes.. I'd like to see a few more polls to see if the current pattern persists, but I've always thought there would be a slow shift to Yes, all other things being equal, simply because
1. This is not an election but a referendum with two options - one familiar (NO) and the other unfamiliar (YES).
2. People - ordinary people not PBers - take time to consider the facts (especially when the Unionists do their best to suppress and confuse the facts and terrify people, in their soi-disant Project Fear).
3. Therefore people will tend to start by intending to vote No if in any doubt.
4. But there will be a shift to Yes from No and Undecided.
5. This process will take time as people know they don't have to vote till September.
6. To say that the gender gap is about women voting against the SNP is to make a double mistake - firstly, the conflation of Mr Salmond = SNP = Yes Campaign (as Mr Divvie said today); and secondly, it fails to appreciate that the question may be the wrong way round, as has been pointed out elsewhere: perhaps it is more useful to ask, why should men be going to Yes earlier than women? It may simply be that the sexes differ in the time they are willing to devote to politics and one sex is simply making its decisions later. This may be wrong, but it is certainly consistent with my overall view.
I also note two elements in the polling - the shifts in ABC and in Labour voter intentions to Yes: two current holdouts. Very interesting.
Sun Con 32, Lab 28, LD 8, UKIP 12, Lead=6
SonS Con 33, Lab 36, LD 8, UKIP 14, Lead=3
Yes, what was the government thinking - wanting to have influence on the EU of which we are the third largest member.
UKIP the most
Not a surprise
England
Con 28
Lab 27
LD 28
UKIP 34
The surprising thing was that posters on here thought that Labour voters being most enthused about the World Cup had anything to do the WWC
http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/v0zlbnvgel/YG-Archive-Pol-Sunday-Times-results-140613.pdf
28% of Con
27% of Lab
28% of LD
34% of UKIP
Muslim Quilliam guy slapping her down appropriately. Thank God we have these guys.
And I don't think the Coalition has been that bad at running the country, personally.
BTW my past post - made a stupid slip, amended, About 800K residents * - 15-20% on shaky mental arithmetic - are English-born, whatever that means for their identity and politics. So presumably the electorate. In any case the referendum is, contra Mr Darling et al, not about ethnicity but about autonomy for where they live.
The Sunday Times has already been trying to push a nasty little line of argument of English incomers losing the referendum for Yes as part of whipping up a hysteria about division, and tried to argue for a disproportionate No vote in English incomers. However, the SNP and others on the Yes side vigorously condemned this approach. My own view is that the geographical distribution strongly suggested that that was due in substantial part to their demographics (retirees, ergo elderly, home owners, and so on). Another crude but interesting indicator about English incomers more generally is that the membership of the SNP, and MSPs, show comparable percentages of southern-born folk.
*http://www.heraldscotland.com/comment/columnists/to-make-no-a-positive-first-resolve-the-english-question.21578171
Is it really that weak; poor and insecure that BoJo's boys obfuscate it? Find out in the next few months....
The best way to get a deal is if the other side believe that you may leave. If they believe that Cameron will not leave over anything then his negotiating position is weakened. But, the evidence indicates otherwise. The review of EU competencies, have to date, been of list of minor matters which we have to take is a reading of the intention of Cameron to demand very little. Judge a man by his actions.
The other day Charles you stated the view that Cameron would avoid at all costs splitting his party. The EU competencies indicates that he does not recognise where he will end up in the medium/long term as a result of the actions that he is presiding over. A major strategic gap - and something that last minute swotting does not overcome. But then he could have avoided the EC rebellions in his back bencher if he had made the 2017 pledge earlier. Another strategic blunder.
Was he auditioning for Jamaica Inn?
My guess is that people are combining who they want with what they expect
"If your facourite was knocked out who would you want to win?"
UKIP lowest England, backs up the first point
Cleric: "It's very wrong to condemn these Muslim schools for extremism. Jews believe the same things as Muslims and would never be criticised in thsi way."
Quilliam guy: "I will criticise anyone that believes in stoning, whether they are Muslim, Jewish or anything else. Do you believe in stoning?"
Cleric: "We believe in supporting the existing laws of land, and stoning is not legal, so I wouldn't suport it."
Quilliam guy: "There's a lot of complexity around Muslim beliefs in an Islamic state that the audience might not be aware of. Would you support stoning under the context of an Islamic state?"
Cleric: "I think another part of this issue that needs to be addressed..."
Quilliam guy: "Please answer the question. Do you support stoning under the context of an Islamic state?"
Cleric: "I think other religions have very..."
Quilliam guy: "Yes or no, answer the question"
Cleric: "I can't give a firm yes or no"
Bam. The ugliness of conservative Islam is portrayed very clearly for everyone. Moderate people of all faiths will be turned away from it, and conservative Muslims will realise that this issue is a liability for them. They will need to react by 'reinterpreting' their views on this, come up with some excuse why it won't be needed ever again, etc. This is what Christianity did. This is what Judaism did. This is what Mormonism did. We need to give them hell over these sort of views until they have to buckle on it. We've been afraid to do it for too long, but the tide is turning.
If somebody else had won the election - say Helle Thorning-Schmidt, the socialist Kinnock in-law who wants Denmark to abandon its opt-outs and join the Euro - Juncker would have been exactly the kind of right-wing deal-maker the UK would have been pushing for as their "compromise candidate".
Lets all go dahn the BOOZER in LONDON and support someone other than England to win the World Cup!!!!
Whats the offside rule again Tarquin? Yes yes the others from the Fabian Society are meeting us there.. GO CHILE!!!!!
http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/06/11/63-expect-scotland-remain-uk/
Not sure it means much, but it's vaguely interesting in the way the ICM Wisdom Index is.
The very low DK/won't say response in Scotland is also notable.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2010/mar/26/islam-channel-intolerant-islam
Exactly what needs to be said. He's apparently standing as a Lib Dem candidate in the next election. I like him on this issue so much he'd be the one Lib Dem I might actually vote for.