THAT’S the trouble with opinion polls. Even when you try and fix the outcome with an outrageously misleading question, those damnable miscreants, the members of the Scottish public, can still refuse to give you the answers you want.
Much was made yesterday of the Scotland in Union (SiU) poll which asked people whether they would like to Remain or Leave the United Kingdom, instead of Yes or No as in 2014.
What a wizard wheeze by a shadowy organisation bankrolled by anonymous donors that include a private school in London and millionaires who don’t even live here.
The usual running dog lackeys of the Unionist media and their online hangers-on duly printed the SiU press release claiming 60% wanted to Remain – funnily enough it was 62% who wanted to Remain in the EU back in 2016, so might there have been some confusion because of the question? Oh, and that was the figure leaving out Don’t Knows.
Even funnier, however, was the question about whether people wanted a second indyref – SiU campaigns most vigorously against giving the people of Scotland that choice. Examination of the outcomes showed just what a boo-boo the SiU Survation study has turned out to be.
For the figures show that with Don’t Knows included – against the SiU’s usual wont – just 36% of those surveyed did not want another referendum. In other words, 64% of those polled either wanted another referendum sometime, or hadn’t made up their mind yet.
It got even worse for SiU and their daft poll. For those tricky swines, the members of the Scottish public, told them that support for the SNP had grown to 39%, up 2% from the 2017 General Election. Analysis by Professor John Curtice immediately suggested that such a result at a General Election would give the SNP 42 MPs at Westminster, winning five seats from Labour and two from the Tories. All of which leads The Jouker to conclude that more polls like these from SiU are welcome.
- It’s now been one day since David Mundell last threatened to quit as Scottish Secretary. He’s in, he’s out ... nobody seems to know quite what he actually thinks of the Brexit deal. The Jouker will be keeping a close eye on Mr Mundell – and holding him to his promises.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel