politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The first Indyref conducted after Osborne’s intervention is
Comments
-
I don't know how they preserve the ice, what with them being so hot etc etcAnorak said:
You'll show them your stones, will you?TheLastBoyScout said:I quite fancy Britain/Scotland in the glamour curling.
0 -
My prediction is unchanged - on balance "No" to win 60-40 barring black swans.TheLastBoyScout said:
You have such a nice way with words. Presumably you are just smarting because you most recent prediction was proved laughably wrong, hence why you are now being rude.TGOHF said:
It's lefty handwringers like you that have indulged the separatists with Labour's stupid asymmetric devolution settlement that puts the noose around the Uk's neck.TheLastBoyScout said:
No wonder Yes has the momentum when Scots read unpleasant sentiments of this nature.TheWatcher said:
'South of the border' can only benefit from full independence. No DevoMax.Norm said:I have changed my mind on this issue and now back independence. Partly this is because The Scottish people have every right to go it alone if that is what they want and partly because with demographic changes I can't see the Tories getting a majority again without ditching the MPs north of the border. Although such a move certainly doesn't guarantee a right of centre majority in the rest of the UK, anything that will hamper the Labour party south of the border can only be a good thing. Finally it may even be with their independence granted I actually think the Scots will come to like the rest of us more (and we them). Give them the Pound and it probably won't even feel that much has changed given the amount of devolution they already have. My only regret - the loss to the World of the distinctive Union flag, the shared history will remain.
It's a shame we're not allowed to vote too - I wouldn't be surprised to find that the English are more 'Pro' than the Scots.
Labour need to start worrying - 53 anti Con MPs could be about to leave Westminster forever.
Instead of sniping about GO etc what is Ed Miliband doing ? Ferk all it appears.
Captain nothing doing nothing achieving nothing and saying nothing.
The Labour leader too scared to join the battle..
It will be no thanks to Labour so-called Leader Ed Miliband who has done nothing for the No cause.
He may need some brown trousers if the vote gets close - imagine his paymasters fury if the electoral prospects are dashed whilst he hid in his bunker. Even Gordon Brown has been campaigning.
0 -
Nice guy, this sniper who's taken out 13 people of a morning.0
-
Theuniondivvie said:
I lost the will to live after 'their smears'.Random said:
Probably a foolish question (asking cybernats to back up their smears usually is), but do you have any cites for that (the "PB Tories" bit)? As a relatively neutral observer, (Welsh, pro-independence but thinking cybernats are a very poor advert for the cause) it's always seemed to me that it's the cybernats who are desperate to portray the Conservatives as monolithically pro-union, not the Conservatives. Doubtless the tactic is to portray a pro-independence vote as an anti-Tory vote, but as we've seen on so many other issues just because the SNP wishes something to be true doesn't make it so.
Whoever did it, the creation of the PB Tory meme was a work of staggering genius. You actually get Tories coming on to PB whining that they're being smeared by being called PB Tories!
Necessity is the mother of invention.
Better to thank those who made it necessary, though I don't think that was their intention somehow.
*chortle*0 -
cluck! Cluck! And you "probably" don't know the difference between "optioning" and "buying", I'd "estimate"....Mick_Pork said:
*tears of laughter etc.*CarlottaVance said:
That was your source.....Mick_Pork said:TheLastBoyScout said:I'd be interested in a thread on the campaign funding situation. My sense is that Yes is better funded and better staffed. I wonder whether funds are coming from across the Atlantic from rich Scots-Americans? Be keen to read up on this.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16537073
She thought it was all Yes propaganda from one fashion student.
.....my source was the Telegraph:
Bless.
She finally found it. So much for it being Yes propaganda from a fashion student when it was blatantly obvious he had sourced it from your favourite unionist paper the Telegraph. I gave you so many hints at the time and even burst out laughing when you linked another telegraph piece immediately before you poured scorn on the very notion of a £7 million warchest or advertising blitz. You completely failed to catch on.
You just can't help yourself, can you dear?
Enjoy another week of pointless shrieking safe in the knowledge that we will be laughing even harder this week at the hilarious notion of scottish tories or PB tories being in touch with scottish public opinion.
0 -
Years ago some investors used to say that they would never invest in a country with green colour in the national flag.Patrick said:The Union Jack is an iconic and deeply cool piece of graphic design. You see it on handbags, T-shirts, wallets, etc the world over. The Chinese call it the 'Mi Zi Qi' - literally the Rice Character Flag (as the chinese character for rice is a cross overlaid with a diagonal cross).
If Scotland goes we should keep the basic design. But..we could play with the colours a bit. The underlying white background / red cross for England should remain. As should the diagonal red cross, thus retaining the 'divided into 8' core of the design. MAybe the dark blue background should become dark green to reflect the red/white/green colours of the welsh flag and some sort of muted tribute to NI / Irish elemnts of our history.
Actually that's it. Just turn dark blue bits to dark green and otherwise leave alone.
0 -
There's surely a comment about "slipping in", but I'll not go there. [oops, too late]TheLastBoyScout said:
I don't know how they preserve the ice, what with them being so hot etc etcAnorak said:
You'll show them your stones, will you?TheLastBoyScout said:I quite fancy Britain/Scotland in the glamour curling.
0 -
Malaga? Meet you for a beer there I hope - hopefully we will both be celebrating the result.malcolmg said:
Jack, so technically we are both correct. I leave for Catalonia on the 19th of September ( well Malaga actually but close enough ) so will be giving them tips on how to get a YES..JackW said:
Yes you are losing your mind .... but you'll get in back after the NO on 18 Sep .... Chortle ....malcolmg said:
Jack , I may be losing my mind but I thought I said that th eonly thing that changed was the UK, so all you have done is elaborate more fully on my answer. Or am I confused.JackW said:
No quite so.malcolmg said:
Scotland is part of Britain and will remain so, it is the UK that will cease to exist, British Isles will still remain.TOPPING said:
"People wishing to stand as an MP must be over 18 years of age, be a British citizen or citizen of a Commonwealth country or the Republic of Ireland"Patrick said:At independence would every current UK passport become an invalid travel document? I expect the passport office will need a practical plan on replacement of the entire nation's stock of passports. And the new Scotland will need a similar plan.
From parliament.uk.
I suppose they would bolt on "Or Scotland."
You are confusing the nation that is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland that presently by various Acts of Union includes Scotland and the geographic Britain and British Isles that also includes the Republic of Ireland.
An independent Scotland would no longer be a member of the first but would be of the second and third.
The remaining elements of the UK may still wish to be called UK as the nation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland or The United Kingdom of England Wales and Northern Ireland. The former is more likely as Great Britain is a political construct rather than a geographic one.
You indicated that the UK would cease to exist. In its present form yes but in the amended form as I illustrated no.
0 -
I find your opinion of Scots patronizing. Do you think they make political decisions based on football scores and the long jump ?TheLastBoyScout said:
With that prospect, plus the spectre of a propaganda free hit for Salmond in the Commonwealth Games (in which Scotland competes independently, unlike the Olympics), it could be a double whammy from the sporting world this summer @SocratesSocrates said:
This is a fascinating point I hadn't heard before. There's nothing Scots going chippier about than England doing well in sports, and English fans boasting about it. If the Welsh did the same thing, they don't have an issue with it, but it really gets under their skin if it's the English. I could really see this moving votes.Stuart_Dickson said:
England are 35/1 (YouWin) to win the World Cup. If that shortens, I will be a happy man. The Yes team needs to see the English lads getting into at least the last eight.TwistedFireStopper said:Why is that an unpleasant post?
Is it just the Scots who are allowed to show a bit of patriotism?
For what its worth, I'm hoping for the Scots to vote YES, as I fancy being able to call myself English, without being called a little Englander.
0 -
Not many, and certainly none of a sport that is so wealthy. Indeed, much of that wealth is down to Ecclestone's (brilliance/greed - delete according to bias). I've got a lot of time for the bloke - after all, he drove a car in a support race at the first ever British GP in 1950, the day the championship was born. In many ways, he is F1.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Jessop, I rather like this line:
"The F1 chief executive has ruled the sport for almost four decades."
I wonder if any other individual has had such a singular power or prolonged tenure as Ecclestone has over F1.
It's also an odd relationship: he does not, and never has, run the sport. (he did run Brabham for years, though). Running the sport is the FIA's responsibility. But Ecclestone's grabbing of the sports rights in 1981 and later made him immensely powerful as he (and not the FIA) grew the sport's popularity.
This victory is worrying for Ecclestone. If anything, it makes him more likely to stand down IMHO.0 -
TwistedFireStopper said:
Stuart, I'm an English patriot, not a fantasist!Stuart_Dickson said:
England are 35/1 (YouWin) to win the World Cup. If that shortens, I will be a happy man. The Yes team needs to see the English lads getting into at least the last eight.TwistedFireStopper said:Why is that an unpleasant post?
Is it just the Scots who are allowed to show a bit of patriotism?
For what its worth, I'm hoping for the Scots to vote YES, as I fancy being able to call myself English, without being called a little Englander. I was just thinking the very same @TwistedFireStopper
0 -
I must admit I have never grasped why Tories on PB object to being called PB Tories!Mick_Pork said:Theuniondivvie said:
I lost the will to live after 'their smears'.Random said:
Probably a foolish question (asking cybernats to back up their smears usually is), but do you have any cites for that (the "PB Tories" bit)? As a relatively neutral observer, (Welsh, pro-independence but thinking cybernats are a very poor advert for the cause) it's always seemed to me that it's the cybernats who are desperate to portray the Conservatives as monolithically pro-union, not the Conservatives. Doubtless the tactic is to portray a pro-independence vote as an anti-Tory vote, but as we've seen on so many other issues just because the SNP wishes something to be true doesn't make it so.
Whoever did it, the creation of the PB Tory meme was a work of staggering genius. You actually get Tories coming on to PB whining that they're being smeared by being called PB Tories!
Necessity is the mother of invention.
Better to thank those who made it necessary, though I don't think that was their intention somehow.
*chortle*0 -
40 years between them, and gathering rumours that Blatter will run again (and therefore win again). Havelange was also on the IOC from 1963 to 2011.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Anorak, have they been at it (ahem) for so many decades, though?
EDIT: Havelange took the top spot in FIFA four years before Bernie took over F1.0 -
No, but it could swing a few key votes I suspect.MonikerDiCanio said:
I find your opinion of Scots patronizing. Do you think they make political decisions based on football scores and the long jump ?TheLastBoyScout said:
With that prospect, plus the spectre of a propaganda free hit for Salmond in the Commonwealth Games (in which Scotland competes independently, unlike the Olympics), it could be a double whammy from the sporting world this summer @SocratesSocrates said:
This is a fascinating point I hadn't heard before. There's nothing Scots going chippier about than England doing well in sports, and English fans boasting about it. If the Welsh did the same thing, they don't have an issue with it, but it really gets under their skin if it's the English. I could really see this moving votes.Stuart_Dickson said:
England are 35/1 (YouWin) to win the World Cup. If that shortens, I will be a happy man. The Yes team needs to see the English lads getting into at least the last eight.TwistedFireStopper said:Why is that an unpleasant post?
Is it just the Scots who are allowed to show a bit of patriotism?
For what its worth, I'm hoping for the Scots to vote YES, as I fancy being able to call myself English, without being called a little Englander.
0 -
That's worrying! Leave it alone then.perdix said:
Years ago some investors used to say that they would never invest in a country with green colour in the national flag.Patrick said:The Union Jack is an iconic and deeply cool piece of graphic design. You see it on handbags, T-shirts, wallets, etc the world over. The Chinese call it the 'Mi Zi Qi' - literally the Rice Character Flag (as the chinese character for rice is a cross overlaid with a diagonal cross).
If Scotland goes we should keep the basic design. But..we could play with the colours a bit. The underlying white background / red cross for England should remain. As should the diagonal red cross, thus retaining the 'divided into 8' core of the design. MAybe the dark blue background should become dark green to reflect the red/white/green colours of the welsh flag and some sort of muted tribute to NI / Irish elemnts of our history.
Actually that's it. Just turn dark blue bits to dark green and otherwise leave alone.
Actually I just Wiki'ed 'Union Jack' and see that the Royal College of Arms has said we can just leave it. So maybe that's best.0 -
It will either be over very quickly, or work it's way up to a civil war. Either option will be bloody.Anorak said:Hells bells. Beeb livestream:
Thirteen of the protesters killed in Independence Square on Thursday morning died from single gunshot wounds fired by a sniper, a medic in Independence Square tells Interfax-Ukraine news agency.
Trains with "40 carriages of military servicemen" are moving towards Kiev from Kremenchuk, the Ukrayinska Pravda website reports.
This can go a few ways, and none of them are good.
0 -
Into exile ....malcolmg said:
Jack, so technically we are both correct. I leave for Catalonia on the 19th of September ( well Malaga actually but close enough ) so will be giving them tips on how to get a YES..JackW said:
Yes you are losing your mind .... but you'll get in back after the NO on 18 Sep .... Chortle ....malcolmg said:
Jack , I may be losing my mind but I thought I said that th eonly thing that changed was the UK, so all you have done is elaborate more fully on my answer. Or am I confused.JackW said:
No quite so.malcolmg said:
Scotland is part of Britain and will remain so, it is the UK that will cease to exist, British Isles will still remain.TOPPING said:
"People wishing to stand as an MP must be over 18 years of age, be a British citizen or citizen of a Commonwealth country or the Republic of Ireland"Patrick said:At independence would every current UK passport become an invalid travel document? I expect the passport office will need a practical plan on replacement of the entire nation's stock of passports. And the new Scotland will need a similar plan.
From parliament.uk.
I suppose they would bolt on "Or Scotland."
You are confusing the nation that is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland that presently by various Acts of Union includes Scotland and the geographic Britain and British Isles that also includes the Republic of Ireland.
An independent Scotland would no longer be a member of the first but would be of the second and third.
The remaining elements of the UK may still wish to be called UK as the nation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland or The United Kingdom of England Wales and Northern Ireland. The former is more likely as Great Britain is a political construct rather than a geographic one.
You indicated that the UK would cease to exist. In its present form yes but in the amended form as I illustrated no.
Malcolm Over The Water ....
0 -
You dont have to be a Tory to be a PB Tory - we are a very inclusive group. Once you learn the secret handshake.TheLastBoyScout said:
I must admit I have never grasped why Tories on PB object to being called PB Tories!Mick_Pork said:Theuniondivvie said:
I lost the will to live after 'their smears'.Random said:
Probably a foolish question (asking cybernats to back up their smears usually is), but do you have any cites for that (the "PB Tories" bit)? As a relatively neutral observer, (Welsh, pro-independence but thinking cybernats are a very poor advert for the cause) it's always seemed to me that it's the cybernats who are desperate to portray the Conservatives as monolithically pro-union, not the Conservatives. Doubtless the tactic is to portray a pro-independence vote as an anti-Tory vote, but as we've seen on so many other issues just because the SNP wishes something to be true doesn't make it so.
Whoever did it, the creation of the PB Tory meme was a work of staggering genius. You actually get Tories coming on to PB whining that they're being smeared by being called PB Tories!
Necessity is the mother of invention.
Better to thank those who made it necessary, though I don't think that was their intention somehow.
*chortle*0 -
And it's this shot for the medal for Scotland/Britain/Great Britain/EU in the Olympics...0
-
Team GB women curlers secure bronze medal beating Switzerland 6:50
-
Great Britain win the bronze medal in the glamour curling.
Very narrow escape for Scotland, who almost lost.0 -
I suppose so. Our Swedish public school boy thinks sport is instrumental in Scots politics.TheLastBoyScout said:
No, but it could swing a few key votes I suspect.MonikerDiCanio said:
I find your opinion of Scots patronizing. Do you think they make political decisions based on football scores and the long jump ?TheLastBoyScout said:
With that prospect, plus the spectre of a propaganda free hit for Salmond in the Commonwealth Games (in which Scotland competes independently, unlike the Olympics), it could be a double whammy from the sporting world this summer @SocratesSocrates said:
This is a fascinating point I hadn't heard before. There's nothing Scots going chippier about than England doing well in sports, and English fans boasting about it. If the Welsh did the same thing, they don't have an issue with it, but it really gets under their skin if it's the English. I could really see this moving votes.Stuart_Dickson said:
England are 35/1 (YouWin) to win the World Cup. If that shortens, I will be a happy man. The Yes team needs to see the English lads getting into at least the last eight.TwistedFireStopper said:Why is that an unpleasant post?
Is it just the Scots who are allowed to show a bit of patriotism?
For what its worth, I'm hoping for the Scots to vote YES, as I fancy being able to call myself English, without being called a little Englander.
0 -
Ladies curling team get bronze0
-
There are reports that the protesters have captured dozens of the police. A positive interpretation of this would be that the security services are beginning to refuse to fight their own people. If most of them refuse to follow orders it could bring a rapid end to the present conflict.TheWatcher said:
It will either be over very quickly, or work it's way up to a civil war. Either option will be bloody.Anorak said:Hells bells. Beeb livestream:
Thirteen of the protesters killed in Independence Square on Thursday morning died from single gunshot wounds fired by a sniper, a medic in Independence Square tells Interfax-Ukraine news agency.
Trains with "40 carriages of military servicemen" are moving towards Kiev from Kremenchuk, the Ukrayinska Pravda website reports.
This can go a few ways, and none of them are good.
There are negative possibilities if their capture is mishandled, though.0 -
Can I join?Neil said:
You dont have to be a Tory to be a PB Tory - we are a very inclusive group. Once you learn the secret handshake.TheLastBoyScout said:
I must admit I have never grasped why Tories on PB object to being called PB Tories!Mick_Pork said:Theuniondivvie said:
I lost the will to live after 'their smears'.Random said:
Probably a foolish question (asking cybernats to back up their smears usually is), but do you have any cites for that (the "PB Tories" bit)? As a relatively neutral observer, (Welsh, pro-independence but thinking cybernats are a very poor advert for the cause) it's always seemed to me that it's the cybernats who are desperate to portray the Conservatives as monolithically pro-union, not the Conservatives. Doubtless the tactic is to portray a pro-independence vote as an anti-Tory vote, but as we've seen on so many other issues just because the SNP wishes something to be true doesn't make it so.
Whoever did it, the creation of the PB Tory meme was a work of staggering genius. You actually get Tories coming on to PB whining that they're being smeared by being called PB Tories!
Necessity is the mother of invention.
Better to thank those who made it necessary, though I don't think that was their intention somehow.
*chortle*0 -
The presumption/insinuation is that PB Tories are one homogenous mass, sharing the same opinions and views, and having an inability to think critically outside the hive-mind. Irritating, no?TheLastBoyScout said:
I must admit I have never grasped why Tories on PB object to being called PB Tories!Mick_Pork said:Theuniondivvie said:
I lost the will to live after 'their smears'.Random said:
Probably a foolish question (asking cybernats to back up their smears usually is), but do you have any cites for that (the "PB Tories" bit)? As a relatively neutral observer, (Welsh, pro-independence but thinking cybernats are a very poor advert for the cause) it's always seemed to me that it's the cybernats who are desperate to portray the Conservatives as monolithically pro-union, not the Conservatives. Doubtless the tactic is to portray a pro-independence vote as an anti-Tory vote, but as we've seen on so many other issues just because the SNP wishes something to be true doesn't make it so.
Whoever did it, the creation of the PB Tory meme was a work of staggering genius. You actually get Tories coming on to PB whining that they're being smeared by being called PB Tories!
Necessity is the mother of invention.
Better to thank those who made it necessary, though I don't think that was their intention somehow.
*chortle*
Of course the irony is that "PB Tories" use "Nats" in almost the same way.0 -
Brogan posted this yesterday around 6pm:
Downing Street seems resigned to an upsurge in support for independence as a result of this pro-UK bluntness. But not worried. Why? I've asked around and thought it worth recording the gist of the thinking at the centre. In Downing Street they have been studying the undecideds, who seem to account for about 15 pc of the electorate. The No camp believe that the undecideds are susceptible to difficult messages about the economic consequentials of independence. Their hearts steer them towards a yes vote, but when pressed their heads tell them no. The British government wants to get the message up in lights that, however uncomfortable it may be, independence will not go as Mr Salmond wants us to imagine it will.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/benedictbrogan/100260377/scotland-referendum-why-london-believes-hard-truths-can-win-the-vote/0 -
Pick off a few of the captured police with snipers, and blame the protestors for their murder. A perfect excuse for the government to go in heavy handed with lethal military force. Horrible, but don't believe it couldn't happen.OblitusSumMe said:
There are reports that the protesters have captured dozens of the police. A positive interpretation of this would be that the security services are beginning to refuse to fight their own people. If most of them refuse to follow orders it could bring a rapid end to the present conflict.TheWatcher said:
It will either be over very quickly, or work it's way up to a civil war. Either option will be bloody.Anorak said:Hells bells. Beeb livestream:
Thirteen of the protesters killed in Independence Square on Thursday morning died from single gunshot wounds fired by a sniper, a medic in Independence Square tells Interfax-Ukraine news agency.
Trains with "40 carriages of military servicemen" are moving towards Kiev from Kremenchuk, the Ukrayinska Pravda website reports.
This can go a few ways, and none of them are good.
There are negative possibilities if their capture is mishandled, though.
0 -
Consider yourself one of us from now on.TheLastBoyScout said:
Can I join?Neil said:
You dont have to be a Tory to be a PB Tory - we are a very inclusive group. Once you learn the secret handshake.TheLastBoyScout said:
I must admit I have never grasped why Tories on PB object to being called PB Tories!Mick_Pork said:Theuniondivvie said:
I lost the will to live after 'their smears'.Random said:
Probably a foolish question (asking cybernats to back up their smears usually is), but do you have any cites for that (the "PB Tories" bit)? As a relatively neutral observer, (Welsh, pro-independence but thinking cybernats are a very poor advert for the cause) it's always seemed to me that it's the cybernats who are desperate to portray the Conservatives as monolithically pro-union, not the Conservatives. Doubtless the tactic is to portray a pro-independence vote as an anti-Tory vote, but as we've seen on so many other issues just because the SNP wishes something to be true doesn't make it so.
Whoever did it, the creation of the PB Tory meme was a work of staggering genius. You actually get Tories coming on to PB whining that they're being smeared by being called PB Tories!
Necessity is the mother of invention.
Better to thank those who made it necessary, though I don't think that was their intention somehow.
*chortle*0 -
Thanks!Neil said:
Consider yourself one of us from now on.TheLastBoyScout said:
Can I join?Neil said:
You dont have to be a Tory to be a PB Tory - we are a very inclusive group. Once you learn the secret handshake.TheLastBoyScout said:
I must admit I have never grasped why Tories on PB object to being called PB Tories!Mick_Pork said:Theuniondivvie said:
I lost the will to live after 'their smears'.Random said:
Probably a foolish question (asking cybernats to back up their smears usually is), but do you have any cites for that (the "PB Tories" bit)? As a relatively neutral observer, (Welsh, pro-independence but thinking cybernats are a very poor advert for the cause) it's always seemed to me that it's the cybernats who are desperate to portray the Conservatives as monolithically pro-union, not the Conservatives. Doubtless the tactic is to portray a pro-independence vote as an anti-Tory vote, but as we've seen on so many other issues just because the SNP wishes something to be true doesn't make it so.
Whoever did it, the creation of the PB Tory meme was a work of staggering genius. You actually get Tories coming on to PB whining that they're being smeared by being called PB Tories!
Necessity is the mother of invention.
Better to thank those who made it necessary, though I don't think that was their intention somehow.
*chortle*0 -
I'd like to be on your side in any future conflict. It would seem to be the safest option.TheWatcher said:
Pick off a few of the captured police with snipers, and blame the protestors for their murder. A perfect excuse for the government to go in heavy handed with lethal military force.OblitusSumMe said:
There are reports that the protesters have captured dozens of the police. A positive interpretation of this would be that the security services are beginning to refuse to fight their own people. If most of them refuse to follow orders it could bring a rapid end to the present conflict.TheWatcher said:
It will either be over very quickly, or work it's way up to a civil war. Either option will be bloody.Anorak said:Hells bells. Beeb livestream:
Thirteen of the protesters killed in Independence Square on Thursday morning died from single gunshot wounds fired by a sniper, a medic in Independence Square tells Interfax-Ukraine news agency.
Trains with "40 carriages of military servicemen" are moving towards Kiev from Kremenchuk, the Ukrayinska Pravda website reports.
This can go a few ways, and none of them are good.
There are negative possibilities if their capture is mishandled, though.0 -
Turkeys still confident Christmas will happen as usual.CarlottaVance said:Brogan posted this yesterday around 6pm:
Downing Street seems resigned to an upsurge in support for independence as a result of this pro-UK bluntness. But not worried. Why? I've asked around and thought it worth recording the gist of the thinking at the centre. In Downing Street they have been studying the undecideds, who seem to account for about 15 pc of the electorate. The No camp believe that the undecideds are susceptible to difficult messages about the economic consequentials of independence. Their hearts steer them towards a yes vote, but when pressed their heads tell them no. The British government wants to get the message up in lights that, however uncomfortable it may be, independence will not go as Mr Salmond wants us to imagine it will.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/benedictbrogan/100260377/scotland-referendum-why-london-believes-hard-truths-can-win-the-vote/
0 -
"Watching the mayhem, was a group of monitors from the European council, members of parliament from Estonia, Sweden and Holland who in their smart business attire, looked out of place in the chaos.
Their collective jaws dropped at what they were witnessing."
http://www.channel4.com/news/ukraine-kiev-independence-square-maidan-witnesses0 -
You haven't heard yet what you have to shake hands with !!TheLastBoyScout said:
Can I join?Neil said:
You dont have to be a Tory to be a PB Tory - we are a very inclusive group. Once you learn the secret handshake.TheLastBoyScout said:
I must admit I have never grasped why Tories on PB object to being called PB Tories!Mick_Pork said:Theuniondivvie said:
I lost the will to live after 'their smears'.Random said:
Probably a foolish question (asking cybernats to back up their smears usually is), but do you have any cites for that (the "PB Tories" bit)? As a relatively neutral observer, (Welsh, pro-independence but thinking cybernats are a very poor advert for the cause) it's always seemed to me that it's the cybernats who are desperate to portray the Conservatives as monolithically pro-union, not the Conservatives. Doubtless the tactic is to portray a pro-independence vote as an anti-Tory vote, but as we've seen on so many other issues just because the SNP wishes something to be true doesn't make it so.
Whoever did it, the creation of the PB Tory meme was a work of staggering genius. You actually get Tories coming on to PB whining that they're being smeared by being called PB Tories!
Necessity is the mother of invention.
Better to thank those who made it necessary, though I don't think that was their intention somehow.
*chortle*
0 -
Downing Street spinners in 'everything going to plan' shock.
That certainly worked well for Osbrowne's omnishambles and the kipper rise. 0 -
Ha ha. Very true Jack. Look before you leap!JackW said:
You haven't heard yet what you have to shake hands with !!TheLastBoyScout said:
Can I join?Neil said:
You dont have to be a Tory to be a PB Tory - we are a very inclusive group. Once you learn the secret handshake.TheLastBoyScout said:
I must admit I have never grasped why Tories on PB object to being called PB Tories!Mick_Pork said:Theuniondivvie said:
I lost the will to live after 'their smears'.Random said:
Probably a foolish question (asking cybernats to back up their smears usually is), but do you have any cites for that (the "PB Tories" bit)? As a relatively neutral observer, (Welsh, pro-independence but thinking cybernats are a very poor advert for the cause) it's always seemed to me that it's the cybernats who are desperate to portray the Conservatives as monolithically pro-union, not the Conservatives. Doubtless the tactic is to portray a pro-independence vote as an anti-Tory vote, but as we've seen on so many other issues just because the SNP wishes something to be true doesn't make it so.
Whoever did it, the creation of the PB Tory meme was a work of staggering genius. You actually get Tories coming on to PB whining that they're being smeared by being called PB Tories!
Necessity is the mother of invention.
Better to thank those who made it necessary, though I don't think that was their intention somehow.
*chortle*0 -
I'll be hiding somewhere. I've no wish to take part in the cruelty and misery that my fellow humans are more than capable of inflicting upon each other.Anorak said:
I'd like to be on your side in any future conflict. It would seem to be the safest option.TheWatcher said:
Pick off a few of the captured police with snipers, and blame the protestors for their murder. A perfect excuse for the government to go in heavy handed with lethal military force.OblitusSumMe said:
There are reports that the protesters have captured dozens of the police. A positive interpretation of this would be that the security services are beginning to refuse to fight their own people. If most of them refuse to follow orders it could bring a rapid end to the present conflict.TheWatcher said:
It will either be over very quickly, or work it's way up to a civil war. Either option will be bloody.Anorak said:Hells bells. Beeb livestream:
Thirteen of the protesters killed in Independence Square on Thursday morning died from single gunshot wounds fired by a sniper, a medic in Independence Square tells Interfax-Ukraine news agency.
Trains with "40 carriages of military servicemen" are moving towards Kiev from Kremenchuk, the Ukrayinska Pravda website reports.
This can go a few ways, and none of them are good.
There are negative possibilities if their capture is mishandled, though.
Look to Libya and Syria for reference of what governments are willing and able to do to their own citizens in a conflict.0 -
Nick Clegg has challenged Nigel Farage to a debate.
http://order-order.com/2014/02/20/nick-v-nigel/
"Mr Farage will give a full response to this development on LBC tomorrow morning"
http://www.ukip.org/newsroom/news/1177-ukip-responds-to-nick-clegg-s-invitation-to-a-televised-debate0 -
Sadly human rights legislation prohibits us from continuing the initiation ceremonies that the first PB Tories had to go through.JackW said:
You haven't heard yet what you have to shake hands with !!TheLastBoyScout said:
Can I join?Neil said:
You dont have to be a Tory to be a PB Tory - we are a very inclusive group. Once you learn the secret handshake.TheLastBoyScout said:
I must admit I have never grasped why Tories on PB object to being called PB Tories!Mick_Pork said:Theuniondivvie said:
I lost the will to live after 'their smears'.Random said:
Probably a foolish question (asking cybernats to back up their smears usually is), but do you have any cites for that (the "PB Tories" bit)? As a relatively neutral observer, (Welsh, pro-independence but thinking cybernats are a very poor advert for the cause) it's always seemed to me that it's the cybernats who are desperate to portray the Conservatives as monolithically pro-union, not the Conservatives. Doubtless the tactic is to portray a pro-independence vote as an anti-Tory vote, but as we've seen on so many other issues just because the SNP wishes something to be true doesn't make it so.
Whoever did it, the creation of the PB Tory meme was a work of staggering genius. You actually get Tories coming on to PB whining that they're being smeared by being called PB Tories!
Necessity is the mother of invention.
Better to thank those who made it necessary, though I don't think that was their intention somehow.
*chortle*0 -
Whatever the result, much better the Scots are clear on the consequences before deciding - when no currency union happens it won't be rUK that has misled voters.....Ishmael_X said:
Turkeys still confident Christmas will happen as usual.CarlottaVance said:Brogan posted this yesterday around 6pm:
Downing Street seems resigned to an upsurge in support for independence as a result of this pro-UK bluntness. But not worried. Why? I've asked around and thought it worth recording the gist of the thinking at the centre. In Downing Street they have been studying the undecideds, who seem to account for about 15 pc of the electorate. The No camp believe that the undecideds are susceptible to difficult messages about the economic consequentials of independence. Their hearts steer them towards a yes vote, but when pressed their heads tell them no. The British government wants to get the message up in lights that, however uncomfortable it may be, independence will not go as Mr Salmond wants us to imagine it will.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/benedictbrogan/100260377/scotland-referendum-why-london-believes-hard-truths-can-win-the-vote/
0 -
Not to mention the fact that part of the initiation was to win a bet off tim, which is tricky nowNeil said:Sadly human rights legislation prohibits us from continuing the initiation ceremonies that the first PB Tories had to go through.
0 -
I did warn you. Well, 'warn' isn't quite the correct term. Indicate that a desperate and toxic Clegg, watching himself become almost a complete irrelevance, was trying as hard as possible to boost the lib dem and the kipper profile. Thus helping the lib dems in tory lib dem marginal areas where a higher kipper vote could likely drive down the tory vote.anotherDave said:Nick Clegg has challenged Nigel Farage to a debate.
http://order-order.com/2014/02/20/nick-v-nigel/
"Mr Farage will give a full response to this development on LBC tomorrow morning"
http://www.ukip.org/newsroom/news/1177-ukip-responds-to-nick-clegg-s-invitation-to-a-televised-debate
If you can't change your own vote change someone elses. With the lib dems flatlining at 10% since late 2010 Clegg knows boosting the kipper vote may be one of the only things left to try.0 -
Yes, it would certainly stiffen the resolve of the security services if they feared the protesters would execute them.TheWatcher said:
Pick off a few of the captured police with snipers, and blame the protestors for their murder. A perfect excuse for the government to go in heavy handed with lethal military force. Horrible, but don't believe it couldn't happen.OblitusSumMe said:
There are reports that the protesters have captured dozens of the police. A positive interpretation of this would be that the security services are beginning to refuse to fight their own people. If most of them refuse to follow orders it could bring a rapid end to the present conflict.TheWatcher said:
It will either be over very quickly, or work it's way up to a civil war. Either option will be bloody.Anorak said:Hells bells. Beeb livestream:
Thirteen of the protesters killed in Independence Square on Thursday morning died from single gunshot wounds fired by a sniper, a medic in Independence Square tells Interfax-Ukraine news agency.
Trains with "40 carriages of military servicemen" are moving towards Kiev from Kremenchuk, the Ukrayinska Pravda website reports.
This can go a few ways, and none of them are good.
There are negative possibilities if their capture is mishandled, though.
The welfare of the captured policemen could be one of the more important factors determining where this goes next.0 -
??CarlottaVance said:
Whatever the result, much better the Scots are clear on the consequences before deciding - when no currency union happens it won't be rUK that has misled voters.....Ishmael_X said:
Turkeys still confident Christmas will happen as usual.CarlottaVance said:Brogan posted this yesterday around 6pm:
Downing Street seems resigned to an upsurge in support for independence as a result of this pro-UK bluntness. But not worried. Why? I've asked around and thought it worth recording the gist of the thinking at the centre. In Downing Street they have been studying the undecideds, who seem to account for about 15 pc of the electorate. The No camp believe that the undecideds are susceptible to difficult messages about the economic consequentials of independence. Their hearts steer them towards a yes vote, but when pressed their heads tell them no. The British government wants to get the message up in lights that, however uncomfortable it may be, independence will not go as Mr Salmond wants us to imagine it will.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/benedictbrogan/100260377/scotland-referendum-why-london-believes-hard-truths-can-win-the-vote/
The turkeys are the tories, not the Scots.
0 -
It also has the benefit of upsetting the 'greens' for Osbrowne campaign.TheLastBoyScout said:
I must admit I have never grasped why Tories on PB object to being called PB Tories!Mick_Pork said:Theuniondivvie said:
I lost the will to live after 'their smears'.Random said:
Probably a foolish question (asking cybernats to back up their smears usually is), but do you have any cites for that (the "PB Tories" bit)? As a relatively neutral observer, (Welsh, pro-independence but thinking cybernats are a very poor advert for the cause) it's always seemed to me that it's the cybernats who are desperate to portray the Conservatives as monolithically pro-union, not the Conservatives. Doubtless the tactic is to portray a pro-independence vote as an anti-Tory vote, but as we've seen on so many other issues just because the SNP wishes something to be true doesn't make it so.
Whoever did it, the creation of the PB Tory meme was a work of staggering genius. You actually get Tories coming on to PB whining that they're being smeared by being called PB Tories!
Necessity is the mother of invention.
Better to thank those who made it necessary, though I don't think that was their intention somehow.
*chortle* 0 -
I usually lurk but must comment.
There isn't a snowball in hell's chance of the Scots voting yes so can we please stop wasting time on this subject. It's making this site boring.0 -
One of us. One of us.TheLastBoyScout said:
Thanks!Neil said:
Consider yourself one of us from now on.
0 -
Mr. 1909, welcome to the site.
I suspect we'll have ebb and flow of Scottish coverage. It is an important matter but when the European elections loom nearer we'll probably focus more on that. And, of course, once F1 kicks off this season we'll all focus firmly on differential front end grip.0 -
It's a description of a mindset, not how someone votes. I doubt many Champagne Socialists are members of The Socialist Party, or members of the Liberal Elite have joined The Liberal Party.Anorak said:
The presumption/insinuation is that PB Tories are one homogenous mass, sharing the same opinions and views, and having an inability to think critically outside the hive-mind. Irritating, no?
Of course the irony is that "PB Tories" use "Nats" in almost the same way.
The one infallible rule is that anyone who whinges about being called a PB Tory is definitely a PB Tory.
0 -
Hi Rob!Rob1909 said:I usually lurk but must comment.
There isn't a snowball in hell's chance of the Scots voting yes so can we please stop wasting time on this subject. It's making this site boring.
I agree that the repetitive nature of the insults being flung about is getting a tad boring, but I imagine everyone is holding some material back for the future months of the campaign.
Give the precedence of large changes in vote intention during the campaigns for both the 2011 Holyrood elections and the AV referendum, I really cannot agree that the chances of YES are so low - unless you are implying that the Devil has chosen to eat rather than heat?0 -
Mr. Divvie, and those who said "I am not a witch" were definitely witches?
0 -
I don't object to being called a PB Tory.TheLastBoyScout said:
I must admit I have never grasped why Tories on PB object to being called PB Tories!Mick_Pork said:Theuniondivvie said:
I lost the will to live after 'their smears'.Random said:
Probably a foolish question (asking cybernats to back up their smears usually is), but do you have any cites for that (the "PB Tories" bit)? As a relatively neutral observer, (Welsh, pro-independence but thinking cybernats are a very poor advert for the cause) it's always seemed to me that it's the cybernats who are desperate to portray the Conservatives as monolithically pro-union, not the Conservatives. Doubtless the tactic is to portray a pro-independence vote as an anti-Tory vote, but as we've seen on so many other issues just because the SNP wishes something to be true doesn't make it so.
Whoever did it, the creation of the PB Tory meme was a work of staggering genius. You actually get Tories coming on to PB whining that they're being smeared by being called PB Tories!
Necessity is the mother of invention.
Better to thank those who made it necessary, though I don't think that was their intention somehow.
*chortle*
PB = home of incisive, acute, inspired political debate; Tory = superior being.
What's not to like?
Meanwhile, I tend to think that there will be a hokey-cokey on the vote. Previous couldn't give a damns have responded to Westminster'sfactual analysis of prospects of a currency unionbullying by responding YES. Now I would normally expect that reaction to dissipate but actually it will also have broken an important psychological barrier - it is possible to say "YES" and I feel quite good doing it.
Perhaps not as much swingback to NO as people think.0 -
It's posts like that that make PB what it is.Rob1909 said:I usually lurk but must comment.
There isn't a snowball in hell's chance of the Scots voting yes so can we please stop wasting time on this subject. It's making this site boring.
0 -
@CarlottaVance
'Whatever the result, much better the Scots are clear on the consequences before deciding - when no currency union happens it won't be rUK that has misled voters.....'
It may stop some whining,which part of No didn't you understand?0 -
Reductio ad Pbtoryum.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Divvie, and those who said "I am not a witch" were definitely witches?
0 -
Fighting talk! Sort of.
A UKIP spokesman said: “Mr Farage would like to thank Mr Clegg for his kind invitation to a debate on the great issue of Britain’s membership of the European Union.
The big question is whether it's limited to the no doubt massive LBC audience or if both of them decide to take it just a bit further with perhaps C4 or someone else keen to host a Clegg Farage face off. Something this entertaining might just pull in the viewers.
“Perhaps he could also let us know whether he has invited David Cameron and Ed Miliband too in order that the British people can see all their main political leaders argue their positions.
“If this challenge means that Mr Clegg is going to restore his backing for an In/Out referendum, which he gave before the last election but then withdrew afterwards, then it could be a significant moment in British politics.
“Mr Farage will give a full response to this development on LBC tomorrow morning.”0 -
We've had a week of PB tory Osbornegasms with little sign of them stopping even now.Ishmael_X said:
Spoilsport. Let Pork enjoy his little Ecktogasm.Rob1909 said:I usually lurk but must comment.
There isn't a snowball in hell's chance of the Scots voting yes so can we please stop wasting time on this subject. It's making this site boring.0 -
Interesting analysis of what's going on in Kiev:
http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/ukraine-euromaidan-yanukovych-protest-kie/#.UwXpHn8gGK10 -
http://survation.com/2014/02/a-note-on-methodology-for-our-recent-scottish-poll/
Survation have now published their note on methodological changes.
The lead for No has been reduced by 10.8%, compared to the previous poll. Of this, 6.5% is due to weighting changes (SNP supporters are weighted up from 30% to 37%) and 4.3% is a shift in opinion.0 -
OK, serious question to which I would really like to know the answer.Mick_Pork said:
We've had a week of PB tory Osbornegasms with little sign of them stopping even now.Ishmael_X said:
Spoilsport. Let Pork enjoy his little Ecktogasm.Rob1909 said:I usually lurk but must comment.
There isn't a snowball in hell's chance of the Scots voting yes so can we please stop wasting time on this subject. It's making this site boring.
You say the tories shot themselves in the foot by rejecting AV and clinging to fptp. It is clear that, purely in terms of HoC majorities, they are doing the same by calling for the continuation of Ther Union.
Which of the two policies, again purely in terms of electoral numbers, is the more damaging to the tories?
0 -
Just becomes something is electorally advantageous, doesn't mean it is the correct thing to do.Ishmael_X said:
OK, serious question to which I would really like to know the answer.
You say the tories shot themselves in the foot by rejecting AV and clinging to fptp. It is clear that, purely in terms of HoC majorities, they are doing the same by calling for the continuation of Ther Union.
Which of the two policies, again purely in terms of electoral numbers, is the more damaging to the tories?
0 -
...And abandon hope all ye who enter here.Richard_Nabavi said:
Not to mention the fact that part of the initiation was to win a bet off tim, which is tricky nowNeil said:Sadly human rights legislation prohibits us from continuing the initiation ceremonies that the first PB Tories had to go through.
That's Bournemouth.0 -
RobD said:
Just becomes something is electorally advantageous, doesn't mean it is the correct thing to do.Ishmael_X said:
OK, serious question to which I would really like to know the answer.
You say the tories shot themselves in the foot by rejecting AV and clinging to fptp. It is clear that, purely in terms of HoC majorities, they are doing the same by calling for the continuation of Ther Union.
Which of the two policies, again purely in terms of electoral numbers, is the more damaging to the tories?
I make the point twice in a four sentence post that the question is deliberately limited to only one consideration. But thanks.RobD said:
Just becomes something is electorally advantageous, doesn't mean it is the correct thing to do.Ishmael_X said:
OK, serious question to which I would really like to know the answer.
You say the tories shot themselves in the foot by rejecting AV and clinging to fptp. It is clear that, purely in terms of HoC majorities, they are doing the same by calling for the continuation of Ther Union.
Which of the two policies, again purely in terms of electoral numbers, is the more damaging to the tories?
0 -
......the change in methodology means that the results of our most recent Scottish poll should not be described as showing changes in public opinion compared to our previous Scottish pollSean_F said:http://survation.com/2014/02/a-note-on-methodology-for-our-recent-scottish-poll/
Survation have now published their note on methodological changes.
The lead for No has been reduced by 10.8%, compared to the previous poll. Of this, 6.5% is due to weighting changes (SNP supporters are weighted up from 30% to 37%) and 4.3% is a shift in opinion.
Oh dear.......as some of us pointed out well before the Eckgasm took over......but it didn't last long....0 -
Perhaps Osborne is a master strategist after all. If he sends Boris and Gove to campaign for the Union, it will be clear sign of what he's up to.Ishmael_X said:
OK, serious question to which I would really like to know the answer.Mick_Pork said:
We've had a week of PB tory Osbornegasms with little sign of them stopping even now.Ishmael_X said:
Spoilsport. Let Pork enjoy his little Ecktogasm.Rob1909 said:I usually lurk but must comment.
There isn't a snowball in hell's chance of the Scots voting yes so can we please stop wasting time on this subject. It's making this site boring.
You say the tories shot themselves in the foot by rejecting AV and clinging to fptp. It is clear that, purely in terms of HoC majorities, they are doing the same by calling for the continuation of Ther Union.
Which of the two policies, again purely in terms of electoral numbers, is the more damaging to the tories?0 -
The trend does show a tightening of the race. But, one has to distinguish between a shift in public opinion and methodological changes.CarlottaVance said:
......the change in methodology means that the results of our most recent Scottish poll should not be described as showing changes in public opinion compared to our previous Scottish pollSean_F said:http://survation.com/2014/02/a-note-on-methodology-for-our-recent-scottish-poll/
Survation have now published their note on methodological changes.
The lead for No has been reduced by 10.8%, compared to the previous poll. Of this, 6.5% is due to weighting changes (SNP supporters are weighted up from 30% to 37%) and 4.3% is a shift in opinion.
Oh dear.......as some of us pointed out well before the Eckgasm took over......but it didn't last long....
0 -
Come on Eck - show us your plan B:
If Salmond could reduce the level of uncertainty around the currency debate, perhaps by announcing a concrete Plan B, he could might be able to win over some of these wavering voters, but in the absence of greater clarity it seems likely the currency debate will continue to favour the “No” camp
. - See more at: http://survation.com/2014/02/a-note-on-methodology-for-our-recent-scottish-poll/#sthash.5OO5Q5H0.dpuf0 -
I've updated the thread header
UPDATE II
Survation have published a note about their methodology.
They say the effect of changing the weighting appears to account for approximately 6.5 of the 10.8 points of apparent reduction in the “No” lead compared with the previous Survation poll.
So swing like for like was 2.15% from No to Yes, which is half the 5.5% swing the initial headline figures suggested.0 -
yes - but several posters were talking wildly of huge swings - not something this poll supports....Sean_F said:
The trend does show a tightening of the race. But, one has to distinguish between a shift in public opinion and methodological changes.CarlottaVance said:
......the change in methodology means that the results of our most recent Scottish poll should not be described as showing changes in public opinion compared to our previous Scottish pollSean_F said:http://survation.com/2014/02/a-note-on-methodology-for-our-recent-scottish-poll/
Survation have now published their note on methodological changes.
The lead for No has been reduced by 10.8%, compared to the previous poll. Of this, 6.5% is due to weighting changes (SNP supporters are weighted up from 30% to 37%) and 4.3% is a shift in opinion.
Oh dear.......as some of us pointed out well before the Eckgasm took over......but it didn't last long....
0 -
Re: Clegg's invitation to debate with Farage.
Clearly Clegg thinks that cementing in the voters minds, the principle that the LDs are the main party advocating the EC is a winner.
Of course he may be overlooking the 40%+ of his voters who actually would vote to leave the EC.
Just one of those unforeseen consequences?
0 -
Yeah but the most recent YouGov poll showed there were nearly as many people wanting to remain in the UK as leaveTCPoliticalBetting said:Re: Clegg's invitation to debate with Farage.
Clearly Clegg thinks that cementing in the voters minds, the principle that the LDs are the main party advocating the EC is a winner.
Of course he may be overlooking the 40%+ of his voters who actually would vote to leave the EC.
Just one of those unforeseen consequences?
http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/godvnjvu91/YG-Archives-Pol-Trackers-Europe-110214.pdf0 -
Oh dear. Survation = Shrieking PB Tories!CarlottaVance said:
yes - but several posters were talking wildly of huge swings - not something this poll supports....Sean_F said:
The trend does show a tightening of the race. But, one has to distinguish between a shift in public opinion and methodological changes.CarlottaVance said:
......the change in methodology means that the results of our most recent Scottish poll should not be described as showing changes in public opinion compared to our previous Scottish pollSean_F said:http://survation.com/2014/02/a-note-on-methodology-for-our-recent-scottish-poll/
Survation have now published their note on methodological changes.
The lead for No has been reduced by 10.8%, compared to the previous poll. Of this, 6.5% is due to weighting changes (SNP supporters are weighted up from 30% to 37%) and 4.3% is a shift in opinion.
Oh dear.......as some of us pointed out well before the Eckgasm took over......but it didn't last long....
0 -
I do wonder if this might help the LD candidates in the EU Parliament elections, while hurting the LD candidates in the local elections.TCPoliticalBetting said:Re: Clegg's invitation to debate with Farage.
Clearly Clegg thinks that cementing in the voters minds, the principle that the LDs are the main party advocating the EC is a winner.
Of course he may be overlooking the 40%+ of his voters who actually would vote to leave the EC.
Just one of those unforeseen consequences?
0 -
Oh dear....Mick_Pork said:
It's an 11 point swing away from No to Yes. Not 4 or 5 or 6. On what far distant planet do you have to live to think that's a vindication of Osbrowne?? As the Bowie 'No speech' would have us believe, the Moon? Venus? Mars?Theuniondivvie said:'Different methodology' currently Top of the Discredit Survation Pops.
the change in methodology means that the results of our most recent Scottish poll should not be described as showing changes in public opinion compared to our previous Scottish poll
- See more at: http://survation.com/2014/02/a-note-on-methodology-for-our-recent-scottish-poll/#sthash.hVP4gE0a.dpuf
0 -
Is that a problem when you are trying to improve on 10%?TCPoliticalBetting said:Re: Clegg's invitation to debate with Farage.
Clearly Clegg thinks that cementing in the voters minds, the principle that the LDs are the main party advocating the EC is a winner.
Of course he may be overlooking the 40%+ of his voters who actually would vote to leave the EC.
Just one of those unforeseen consequences?0 -
Well they did say 4.3% was down to actual opinion change, which is just above MOE, surely?CarlottaVance said:
Oh dear....Mick_Pork said:
It's an 11 point swing away from No to Yes. Not 4 or 5 or 6. On what far distant planet do you have to live to think that's a vindication of Osbrowne?? As the Bowie 'No speech' would have us believe, the Moon? Venus? Mars?Theuniondivvie said:'Different methodology' currently Top of the Discredit Survation Pops.
the change in methodology means that the results of our most recent Scottish poll should not be described as showing changes in public opinion compared to our previous Scottish poll
- See more at: http://survation.com/2014/02/a-note-on-methodology-for-our-recent-scottish-poll/#sthash.hVP4gE0a.dpuf
0 -
If so, it is the LD cllrs that matter more at the GE, whereas reducing the loss of LD MEPs may just protect Clegg in the short term. His activists will like the pro-EC positioning in the headlines.anotherDave said:
I do wonder if this might help the LD candidates in the EU Parliament elections, while hurting the LD candidates in the local elections.TCPoliticalBetting said:Re: Clegg's invitation to debate with Farage.
Clearly Clegg thinks that cementing in the voters minds, the principle that the LDs are the main party advocating the EC is a winner.
Of course he may be overlooking the 40%+ of his voters who actually would vote to leave the EC.
Just one of those unforeseen consequences?
0 -
Yes but it is often the case that defining your position when a NOTA party is more likely to lose votes overall.TheScreamingEagles said:
Yeah but the most recent YouGov poll showed there were nearly as many people wanting to remain in the UK as leaveTCPoliticalBetting said:Re: Clegg's invitation to debate with Farage.
Clearly Clegg thinks that cementing in the voters minds, the principle that the LDs are the main party advocating the EC is a winner.
Of course he may be overlooking the 40%+ of his voters who actually would vote to leave the EC.
Just one of those unforeseen consequences?
http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/godvnjvu91/YG-Archives-Pol-Trackers-Europe-110214.pdf
0 -
More the law of unintended consequences. But as a proIndie chap I welcome Osborne's error.Anorak said:
Perhaps Osborne is a master strategist after all. If he sends Boris and Gove to campaign for the Union, it will be clear sign of what he's up to.Ishmael_X said:
OK, serious question to which I would really like to know the answer.Mick_Pork said:
We've had a week of PB tory Osbornegasms with little sign of them stopping even now.Ishmael_X said:
Spoilsport. Let Pork enjoy his little Ecktogasm.Rob1909 said:I usually lurk but must comment.
There isn't a snowball in hell's chance of the Scots voting yes so can we please stop wasting time on this subject. It's making this site boring.
You say the tories shot themselves in the foot by rejecting AV and clinging to fptp. It is clear that, purely in terms of HoC majorities, they are doing the same by calling for the continuation of Ther Union.
Which of the two policies, again purely in terms of electoral numbers, is the more damaging to the tories?
0 -
10% may not be the floor, it could be 6%!Verulamius said:
Is that a problem when you are trying to improve on 10%?TCPoliticalBetting said:Re: Clegg's invitation to debate with Farage.
Clearly Clegg thinks that cementing in the voters minds, the principle that the LDs are the main party advocating the EC is a winner.
Of course he may be overlooking the 40%+ of his voters who actually would vote to leave the EC.
Just one of those unforeseen consequences?
0 -
The Nats seem to have gone quiet.0
-
There's a niche of voters who are fervently committed to the EU, so it makes sense for the Lib Dems to target them.anotherDave said:
I do wonder if this might help the LD candidates in the EU Parliament elections, while hurting the LD candidates in the local elections.TCPoliticalBetting said:Re: Clegg's invitation to debate with Farage.
Clearly Clegg thinks that cementing in the voters minds, the principle that the LDs are the main party advocating the EC is a winner.
Of course he may be overlooking the 40%+ of his voters who actually would vote to leave the EC.
Just one of those unforeseen consequences?
There's a tipping point (at about 10% of the vote) where the Lib Dems go from having 8 or 9 MEPs to having just 1 or 2. It's vital for them to remain above that tipping point.
0 -
You mean Seant?CarlottaVance said:
yes - but several posters were talking wildly of huge swings - not something this poll supports....Sean_F said:
The trend does show a tightening of the race. But, one has to distinguish between a shift in public opinion and methodological changes.CarlottaVance said:
......the change in methodology means that the results of our most recent Scottish poll should not be described as showing changes in public opinion compared to our previous Scottish pollSean_F said:http://survation.com/2014/02/a-note-on-methodology-for-our-recent-scottish-poll/
Survation have now published their note on methodological changes.
The lead for No has been reduced by 10.8%, compared to the previous poll. Of this, 6.5% is due to weighting changes (SNP supporters are weighted up from 30% to 37%) and 4.3% is a shift in opinion.
Oh dear.......as some of us pointed out well before the Eckgasm took over......but it didn't last long....
PB Unionists welcome pollster increasing accuracy to show big swing to Yes, happy days.
0 -
In other words had it only been a 4 or 5 or 6 point reduction in the No lead then the polling would be unchanged from the last time and the effect of the Osborne blitz would have been zero. Still no boost for all that effort.TheScreamingEagles said:They say the effect of changing the weighting appears to account for approximately 6.5 of the 10.8 points of apparent reduction in the “No” lead compared with the previous Survation poll.
It wasn't a 4 or 5 or 6 point reduction though, was it? It was 10.8 which still means a clear 4.3 reduction in No and still a telling swing from No to Yes. Which was precisely why those of us who knew there had been methodology changes pointed to the size of the reduction in the No lead in the first place since it is clear that there was no way all of it could be accounted for by just the methodology change.
Thankfully the shriekers won't care about that and this should see them all the more determined to keep on with their Osbornegasm for another week and hopefully even longer as they completely fail to understand that, the significance of the TNS differential figures and the inevitable effect doubling down on the negativity will have.
0 -
Yeah, it could be 7.3%!RobD said:
Well they did say 4.3% was down to actual opinion change, which is just above MOE, surely?CarlottaVance said:
Oh dear....Mick_Pork said:
It's an 11 point swing away from No to Yes. Not 4 or 5 or 6. On what far distant planet do you have to live to think that's a vindication of Osbrowne?? As the Bowie 'No speech' would have us believe, the Moon? Venus? Mars?Theuniondivvie said:'Different methodology' currently Top of the Discredit Survation Pops.
the change in methodology means that the results of our most recent Scottish poll should not be described as showing changes in public opinion compared to our previous Scottish poll
- See more at: http://survation.com/2014/02/a-note-on-methodology-for-our-recent-scottish-poll/#sthash.hVP4gE0a.dpuf0 -
@CarlottaVance
'the change in methodology means that the results of our most recent Scottish poll should not be described as showing changes in public opinion compared to our previous Scottish poll '
Oh no ,you've pissed in Pork's soup, can hear the shrieking already.0 -
In my book this is a good poll for YES and probably makes 4-1 -> 9-2 value. Not 7-2 though.0
-
George Eaton on Labour finally wakening up to various possibilities.
'As a Labour MP put it to me, “If we lose Scotland, we could be completely buggered.”'
http://tinyurl.com/om9egrs
0 -
Yes - and Bwave Sir Ed hiding behind the sofa.Theuniondivvie said:George Eaton on Labour finally wakening up to various possibilities.
'As a Labour MP put it to me, “If we lose Scotland, we could be completely buggered.”'
http://tinyurl.com/om9egrs
0 -
It still shows a move to Yes, just not quite as pronounced.CarlottaVance said:
......the change in methodology means that the results of our most recent Scottish poll should not be described as showing changes in public opinion compared to our previous Scottish pollSean_F said:http://survation.com/2014/02/a-note-on-methodology-for-our-recent-scottish-poll/
Survation have now published their note on methodological changes.
The lead for No has been reduced by 10.8%, compared to the previous poll. Of this, 6.5% is due to weighting changes (SNP supporters are weighted up from 30% to 37%) and 4.3% is a shift in opinion.
Oh dear.......as some of us pointed out well before the Eckgasm took over......but it didn't last long....0 -
Indeed.Theuniondivvie said:
You mean Seant?CarlottaVance said:
yes - but several posters were talking wildly of huge swings - not something this poll supports....Sean_F said:
The trend does show a tightening of the race. But, one has to distinguish between a shift in public opinion and methodological changes.CarlottaVance said:
......the change in methodology means that the results of our most recent Scottish poll should not be described as showing changes in public opinion compared to our previous Scottish pollSean_F said:http://survation.com/2014/02/a-note-on-methodology-for-our-recent-scottish-poll/
Survation have now published their note on methodological changes.
The lead for No has been reduced by 10.8%, compared to the previous poll. Of this, 6.5% is due to weighting changes (SNP supporters are weighted up from 30% to 37%) and 4.3% is a shift in opinion.
Oh dear.......as some of us pointed out well before the Eckgasm took over......but it didn't last long....
PB Unionists welcome pollster increasing accuracy to show big swing to Yes, happy days.
Or as our PB tory chums would have it..
Triumph for Osborne!
LOL0 -
May I remind both sides of the debate though
We have not seen what the currency issue does to VI - the fieldwork is before this. Why thy are quite so slow getting the poll out I don't know.0 -
A 2.15% swing isn't a telling swing.Mick_Pork said:
In other words had it only been a 4 or 5 or 6 point reduction in the No lead then the polling would be unchanged from the last time and the effect of the Osborne blitz would have been zero. Still no boost for all that effort.TheScreamingEagles said:They say the effect of changing the weighting appears to account for approximately 6.5 of the 10.8 points of apparent reduction in the “No” lead compared with the previous Survation poll.
It wasn't a 4 or 5 or 6 point reduction though, was it? It was 10.8 which still means a clear 4.3 reduction in No and still a telling swing from No to Yes. Which was precisely why those of us who knew there had been methodology changes pointed to the size of the reduction in the No lead in the first place since it is clear that there was no way all of it could be accounted for by just the methodology change.
Thankfully the shriekers won't care about that and this should see them all the more determined to keep on with their Osbornegasm for another week and hopefully even longer as they completely fail to understand that, the significance of the TNS differential figures and the inevitable effect doubling down on the negativity will have.0 -
... waiting for Len to work out what to do.TGOHF said:
Yes - and Bwave Sir Ed hiding behind the sofa.Theuniondivvie said:George Eaton on Labour finally wakening up to various possibilities.
'As a Labour MP put it to me, “If we lose Scotland, we could be completely buggered.”'
http://tinyurl.com/om9egrs
That's a point. What happens to unions post Independence? Do they split, or continue to function on a pan country basis?
0 -
Pork, again: You say the tories shot themselves in the foot by rejecting AV and clinging to fptp. It is clear that, purely in terms of HoC majorities, they are doing the same by calling for the continuation of Ther Union.Mick_Pork said:
Indeed.Theuniondivvie said:
You mean Seant?CarlottaVance said:
yes - but several posters were talking wildly of huge swings - not something this poll supports....Sean_F said:
The trend does show a tightening of the race. But, one has to distinguish between a shift in public opinion and methodological changes.CarlottaVance said:
......the change in methodology means that the results of our most recent Scottish poll should not be described as showing changes in public opinion compared to our previous Scottish pollSean_F said:http://survation.com/2014/02/a-note-on-methodology-for-our-recent-scottish-poll/
Survation have now published their note on methodological changes.
The lead for No has been reduced by 10.8%, compared to the previous poll. Of this, 6.5% is due to weighting changes (SNP supporters are weighted up from 30% to 37%) and 4.3% is a shift in opinion.
Oh dear.......as some of us pointed out well before the Eckgasm took over......but it didn't last long....
PB Unionists welcome pollster increasing accuracy to show big swing to Yes, happy days.
Or as our PB tory chums would have it..
Triumph for Osborne!
LOL
Which of the two policies, again purely in terms of electoral numbers, is the more damaging to the tories?0 -
PB Separatists - yay we're being hammered by less !Mick_Pork said:
Indeed.Theuniondivvie said:
You mean Seant?CarlottaVance said:
yes - but several posters were talking wildly of huge swings - not something this poll supports....Sean_F said:
The trend does show a tightening of the race. But, one has to distinguish between a shift in public opinion and methodological changes.CarlottaVance said:
......the change in methodology means that the results of our most recent Scottish poll should not be described as showing changes in public opinion compared to our previous Scottish pollSean_F said:http://survation.com/2014/02/a-note-on-methodology-for-our-recent-scottish-poll/
Survation have now published their note on methodological changes.
The lead for No has been reduced by 10.8%, compared to the previous poll. Of this, 6.5% is due to weighting changes (SNP supporters are weighted up from 30% to 37%) and 4.3% is a shift in opinion.
Oh dear.......as some of us pointed out well before the Eckgasm took over......but it didn't last long....
PB Unionists welcome pollster increasing accuracy to show big swing to Yes, happy days.
Or as our PB tory chums would have it..
Triumph for Osborne!
LOL
0
![[Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/d2ea526b1b06ed109333f390c7ae956b_100.png)
