THE “new” poll from JL Partners is actually a glimpse into the recent past – it was conducted in mid-September, so the rather wonderful results for both independence and the SNP can’t confirm whether the endless attempts of the Unionist parties and media to chip away at confidence in Nicola Sturgeon have continued to fail.
The real significance of the numbers is that they demonstrate for the first time that it’s possible for the Yes vote to exceed 55% in a poll conducted online. The only previous published poll to show a Yes share of higher than 55% was the Ipsos MORI poll earlier this month which reported the all-time high of 58% – but that was conducted by telephone, which in recent years has tended to produce more favourable results.
As JL Partners have never polled on independence before, there’s no way of knowing whether the high watermark for Yes in online polling has been reached because a genuine increase in support occurred in September, or because the firm’s methodology is slightly more Yes-friendly than other pollsters.
But if the 56% figure sounds familiar, it’s probably because that was the exact number rumoured to have been found by a private Government poll a couple of months ago. A few people have wondered whether the two polls are in fact one and the same, but that can’t be the case, because JL Partners’ fieldwork dates were around two weeks after the rumours began.
Nevertheless, the poll datasets are unusually extensive and detailed, and have at least the superficial appearance of a research poll for an organisation with extensive resources. Given JL Partners is run by Theresa May’s former private polling chief, is it conceivable that we’re being treated to a rare glimpse of internal Unionist polling? And, if so, why would Unionist strategists want to put such horrific results (from their point of view) into the public domain? This is obviously just speculation, but one possibility is a desire to shock London politicians into realising the depth of their plight, and to spark a hard-headed debate about workable means of fighting back.
In particular, JL Partners’s commentary on the poll singles out the finding that Rishi Sunak has a considerably better net personal rating than Boris Johnson. The suggestion is Sunak should routinely be used as a Unionist figurehead in place of Johnson.
That could well be misconceived London-centric logic – Sunak is still a relative novelty, and his modest popularity could quickly wear off in Scotland if he suddenly starts hectoring the natives about which side their bread is buttered.
Realistically a successful Unionist fightback would have to be fronted by homegrown politicians, but even the Scottish politicians cited as being supposedly popular by this poll, such as Gordon Brown, Alistair Darling and Ruth Davidson, all have net negative ratings.
That’s nothing, though, compared to the hole that the new Scottish Tory leader finds himself in. Having barely got his feet under the desk, Douglas Ross is regarded favourably by a measly 12% of respondents, and negatively by 37%.
Those numbers corroborate similar findings from Ipsos MORI and suggest the gamble of defenestrating Jackson Carlaw has definitively failed.
The Tories would surely turn themselves into a laughing stock if they changed leader yet again, but the thought is still likely to be crossing one or two panic-stricken minds.
Ultimately, though, the problem lies with the Conservative brand and not with any individual politician – 73% of respondents have a negative view of the Tory Party, a figure that implies the renaissance under Davidson might as well never have happened. Little wonder, then, that Unionists are starting to look towards an unlikely Labour revival as their last forlorn hope.
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