There are two new Scottish independence polls in today’s papers – ICM for Scotland on Sunday, and Survation for the Sunday Post, both conducted just after the SNP’s conference last weekend (though as ever, correlation should not necessarily imply causality.)

ICM in the Scotland on Sunday has topline figures of YES 39%(nc), NO 42%(-4). Getting rid of the don’t knows brings us to YES 48%, NO 52% – leaving aside the SNP commissioned poll with leading questions last year, this is the highest level of YES support recorded so far.

Note that there was a slight shift in ICM’s methodology from last time – rather than just weighting those with a declared 2011 recalled vote to the correct proportions of the 2011 vote, they are now also weighting the sample so the correct proportion of the sample claim to have voted in 2011. This should have the result of increasing the proportion of won’t votes and don’t knows, but won’t necessarily have any impact on the proportions of YES and NO.

The second poll for Survation has topline figures of YES 38%(+1), NO 46%(-1). Without don’t knows the YES vote is at 45%. This is a slight move towards YES since Survation’s previous poll a week and a half ago, but looking more widely it’s more of a “no change” poll, Survation also showed YES on 45% in March and February.


516 Responses to “New Scottish Independence polls”

1 2 3 11
  1. The referendum certainly seems winnable at this point for both camps. If either side wants to win at all decisively, then they have a lot of work to do, especially the Aye camp.

    It would feel a little ridiculous becoming independent if only 50.1% of those voting wanted independence, and the Union would hardly be tenable in anything like its current form if 49.9% wanted independence.

  2. Does anyone watch the BT ad? Well the offer is under the door.

  3. @BILL PATRICK

    Looking at the Quebec referendum, “Yes” enjoyed 20% leads right to the very end, and still blew it.

    Shy no voters, anyone?

  4. @Bill Patrick

    “It would feel a little ridiculous becoming independent if only 50.1% of those voting wanted independence, and the Union would hardly be tenable in anything like its current form if 49.9% wanted independence.”

    A moot point and I think this is where turnout will be critical in determining the democratic validity of the outcome. A narrow margin of victory for either Yes or No on something like a 50% turnout would make it very difficult to say that the verdict had expressed the will of the people. One side would have won the Referendum, certainly, but may have done to on the basis of about a quarter of the population supporting them.

    Pure speculation, I know, but I wonder if the NO campaign might have an easier time defending a narrow win, especially if there has been widespread abstention. Might they not argue, with some justification, that abstention was a tacit vote to retain the status quo? I mean, if you really wanted independence, you’d get off your backside and vote for it, wouldn’t you? Giving the vote a miss would suggest no strong feelings either way.

    It’s those advocating Independence who have organised the Referendum, after all. Much more beholden on them, I think, to obtain the strong mandate for such a gigantic step.

  5. BILL PATRICK
    “It would feel a little ridiculous becoming independent if only 50.1% of those voting wanted independence, and the Union would hardly be tenable in anything like its current form if 49.9% wanted independence.”

    But didn’t the AV referendum confirm that the “British” plurality system, where one vote more than 2nd place wins, is what most want?

    Surely 50% plus one vote would satisfy everyone, except those who wanted Devo-Max, of course.

  6. @Barbaazenzero

    50% + 1 will pretty much satisfy no-one. It would be a disaster either way – although probably more of a disaster for the Yes camp (if they won) than the No camp – because there is every possibility of another independence vote if No just win.

    But a newly independent nation where almost 50% of the population didn’t want independence… not a great start.

    Of course the actual plurality system is one of representative democracy, not plebiscites. I’d also wonder how you would expect a yes/no vote to work under AV.

  7. Are Mori the only firm which continues not to weight by 2011 recall/vote?

  8. CROSSBAT11
    “I think this is where turnout will be critical in determining the democratic validity of the outcome”

    Persuading past non-voters to turn out is certainly something the RIC are working very hard on, and seemingly having some success with DEs now being 34% Y vs 30% N in the latest face-to-face [TNS] poll.

    Today’s Sunday Post has a fairish article on it at http://www.sundaypost.com/news-views/scotland/independence-referendum/independence-on-trial/hidden-power-of-a-million-undecided-voters-1.327498

    Including: “The … Easterhouse scheme in eastern Glasgow … had the lowest turnout in Scotland for the 2011 Holyrood elections at just 34.5% and is also where Tory Welfare Secretary Iain Duncan Smith had his ‘road to Damascus’ moment … is now at the centre of the referendum ‘ground war’.

    The left-leaning Radical Independence Campaign has held a series of mass canvasses in Easterhouse, chapping doors that haven’t been touched by political parties for decades, and they claim they are getting big returns for a Yes vote. It is the same, according to SNP strategists, in similar areas across the country, from Dundee to ­Stirling.

    Better Together is canvassing in these schemes too, but its message – often perceived as ‘more of the same’ – is a harder sell in places where hope can be in short supply.”

    Anecdotally, BT are also finding it much harder than Yes to put boots on the ground.

  9. The CBI’s decision to align with the No campaign and the subsequent resignations might give Yes a further boost. There is an organisation Business for Scotland I had never heard of until the CBI situation – who align with the Yes camp and have many members.

    I think until now it had appeared that business was on the side of the status quo but this situation has highlighted the support for Yes in the business community – which could give people confidence to vote Yes.

    I notice the the Yes campaign is gearing up across Scotland – they obviously have to get the timing of the momentum right. I noticed slight panic on twitter at the SoS poll and headline by the Yes camp in case of complacency and peaking too soon. In one tweeted reply to an over enthusiastic supporter a Yes tweeter said exasperated ‘Of course we can lose we are still behind’

  10. Pure speculation, I know, but I wonder if the NO campaign might have an easier time defending a narrow win, especially if there has been widespread abstention. Might they not argue, with some justification, that abstention was a tacit vote to retain the status quo?
    ————
    If either side attempt to argue that abstention should’ve been a vote for them, they’d be wrong. In a Yes/No referendum, the decision gets made by those who show up.

  11. I was going to post observations on the dynamics of the referendum debate on the last thread, but thought better of it, but as this is a dedicated Scottish thread, I’ll have a go.

    What interests me is the resilience of the Yes vote. Even allowing for biased media reporting, since the publication of the SNP’s White Paper in September, there really have been numerous potentially highly damaging interventions on central planks of Yes and SNP policy that by rights should really have dented their credibility.

    I’m ignoring as far as possible the more nonsensical ‘bombshells’ that are thrown in, but there have been some very serious questions raised about the shape of a future independent Scotland, and I’m also concentrating on those from independent sources, rather than UK government or political campaigners.

    As examples, the leading Scottish expert on aging has been extraordinarily critical of the SNP’s pensions claims, a string of major companies have issued risk warnings to investors and began establishing mechanisms to transfer to England, independent forecasters have pretty much unanimously trashed the very optimistic projections on oil and gas output (along with finding a significant methodological flaw in the SNP’s method of calculation) and last week Salmond’s own former senior economic adviser stated that it would be a mistake for Scot’s to think that the good GDP per head figures would mean they would be better off. In fact, he raised the spectre of Ireland, with apparently strong GDP figures hiding large offshore income flows which impoverished the national population. (This has also been quoted by the Glasgow University based CPPR, which pointed out that the extremely optimistic SNP oil revenue projections failed to take account of the high overseas income flows which come straight off the GDP calculation and bypass the Scottish economy entirely. Effectively, the SNP is assuming they will get these in the future, while current and past UK figures don’t include them).

    In my electoral experience, I can’t actually recall any campaign that had suffered so many really quite serious blows to it’s credibility but remains still standing, let alone increasing its vote share in polls. We certainly can’t implicate a compliant press as the reason, so clearly there is something psychological going on.

    My two thoughts are that firstly, the doubters are being discredited before the doubts are addressed. Perhaps this is a result of crying wolf too often? I’ve long felt that the No campaign should stand up and state clearly where independence could work well, as this bolsters the public’s tendency to take them seriously where they raise more substantial risks.

    Secondly, perhaps voters just want to be optimistic? A No campaign is, at heart, always going to be negative. Without a devo max option, No has nothing to campaign for, other than what polls show Scot’s want least, so will end up with little option than to attack Yes ideas.

    I do think that this is all serving to hand Yes a substantial advantage. Essentially the Yes vote is largely based on wanting things that won’t happen, but challenging those assumptions seems increasingly beyond the No campaign, both because of the structure of the referendum question and probably, the people seen as delivering the No message.

  12. Crossbat11,

    It would be good for those in the Naw camp who want more devolution. A narrow win on a low turnout would certainly be a much easier position for the Naw side than the Aye side, since it would indicate a lack of passion for independence.

    The ultimate constitutional nightmare would be that (a) there is a 50.1% type vote for independence in September and (b) enthusiasm falls off as negotiations with the UK and EU go badly. That would leave the Scottish government in the position of either going back on the independence referendum and driving nationalists into fits of hatred or starting out with, say, 55-60% of the population against the independence deal we ended up getting. That’s a lose-lose situation for the SNP.

    Skippy,

    It’s very hard to judge. We have about 20 weeks to go, and just once week is a long time in politics.

    Barbazenzero,

    I’m less interested in clever sarcasm and more interested in analysis of polls and voting.

  13. THESHEEP
    “I’d also wonder how you would expect a yes/no vote to work under AV.”

    As this particular referendum is a binary choice, AV would make no difference to the result.

    OTOH, an AV referendum could allow ranking of options such as the Devo-Max [that Westminster ruled out] which would have won at a canter and/or a “None of the above” option provided what happened in that event was specified.

  14. My last comment was, of course, a blinding flash of the obvious. But nevertheless, I thought it needed to be said.

  15. @Bill Patrick – I’ve held for a long time that a narrow win for either side (anything less than 60/40 I’d suggest) would be bad news.

    The SNP/Yes side would be happier to be on the losing side of such a vote than No, as the nature of independence campaigns is that you keep coming back when you feel the tide has edged higher. Getting near half your compatriots to vote for independence would still be a big achievement in historical terms, and independence would remain very much alive as a future option.

    Of course, No’s would be happy to win a narrow vote, but losing a close fought contest in these circumstances would be very interesting. Whatever they say on results night about accepting the will of the people, I would ignore.

    If there is a Yes win, the negotiations start. Especially given the way polls in the UK are moving (see previous thread) the deal on offer at the actual point of independence is going to look significantly different to what Scots think they are voting for now.

    This might not matter to them – they may already understand this and have discounted many of the claims from the Yes team, as they seem to have done from the No’s.

    Even so, there will be significant ammunition for No’s to ask for a conforming vote – especially (and possibly crucially) if opinion polls show any slippage.

    At this point, we have an actual vote on independence in prospect – not as we have now, a vote to commence negotiations that is being billed as a binding vote on a settlement that isn’t yet settled.

    Were this to happen, and the SNP/Yes to lose, that would be the worst outcome of all for the SNP I feel. It would imply that Scots have sniffed independence, got a sense of what it actually means, and then rejected it. Very little hiding place for the SNP in that scenario. Far better to lose the current vote narrowly, and hope to return in a few years with circumstances in the UK favourable for a big Yes vote at the first bite.

    All speculation and personal opinion at this stage of course, but there is an expectation that Yes won’t stop after a No vote – why should they expect No to stop after a Yes vote?

  16. BILL PATRICK
    “I’m less interested in clever sarcasm and more interested in analysis of polls and voting.”

    I don’t see any sarcasm in my earlier response to you.

    I’m certainly no fan of the 1870 plurality system, but I’m patently in a minority as the AV referendum confirmed.

    When the UK Government for 5 years could be accidentally determined by a single voter in a single constituency and no UK Government has had a majority of popular votes for more than half a century, perhaps you would explain in more detail why 50% + 1 of valid votes would be unacceptable.

  17. Agree with @alec. A narrow win for either is a bad result and will lead to problems and tension down the road, possibly even another vote at some stage.

  18. Alec and Rich,

    The “second vote” is a fascinating idea. I don’t see it ending well for either side if we vote “Aye, but Naw”. Alec has explained very clearly why it would be a disaster for nationalists. I would add that it would be a disaster for the Union, in the same way that going half way through divorce proceedings is not a good thing for a marriage.

    Barbazenzero,

    It seems I misread you. Sorry.

  19. Alec – “In my electoral experience, I can’t actually recall any campaign that had suffered so many really quite serious blows to it’s credibility but remains still standing”. The main point is that you will not have had experience in this kind of election before, I imagine.

    Certainties in a first-ever situation are few, you have to trust one side or the other, and it seems that trust is being awarded in one direction more than another. Apart from the difference between attitudes to the two governments, these days who can trust an “expert” – there are as many as there are pockets to pay for them. I think potential voters actually look rather better informed than in previous polls, with first-person, civic involvement replacing ideology – can’t be bad, surely.

    Fiinally, as a Scot writing from abroad, looking at what is happening to public life in England under Westminster, I’d wonder what was wrong with the Scots if they did not take the chance to do their own thing when offered. A personal opinion, of course.

  20. How close would the referendum result need to be for it to be reasonable to demand a recount? My mind goes back to the Wales Devolution referendum in autumn 1997 which Yes edged with 50.3% – a mere 6000 votes of the one million cast. I was surprised – and dismayed – that there was no clamour from the No side for a recount – such a margin could well have been overturned.

  21. @Bill Patrick – I don’t actually think you’re correct. I suspect the ‘aye but naw’ scenario would be very good for Scotland and for the UK as a whole, in the long run.

    I think your 11.26am post nails it. Such a scenario would guarantee a good devo max settlement, if nothing else to head off full independence. Devolution is already leading to gently moves in the north of England to secure some level of counter weight to a more powerful Edinburgh, and people are beginning to recognise a more genuinely decentralised power sharing structure could be more widely beneficial throughout the UK.

  22. Alec

    There is a big difference between those who say YES or NO (neck and neck) and those who would accept the validity of a result however narrow (just about everyone).

    It does indicate however why Salmond was so wise to get Cameron to sign up to the Edinburgh Agreement back in 2012 in which both sides signed up to accepting the vote in clause 30.

    Perhaps in this Salmond was several steps ahead of his unionist opponents.

    Finally the things you describe as major blows for YES are nothing of the sort. More Scots now believe that it is increasingly silly to argue that one of the world’s most prosperous countries couldn’t make a success of independence. They are right.to think so.

  23. @Skippy

    Turnout in the 1995 Quebec referendum was 93.52%

    compared with 69.6% – 67.0% turnout in Canada-wide general elections 1993/97

  24. Alec,

    I hope you’re right.

  25. L HAMILTON
    “There is a big difference between those who say YES or NO (neck and neck) and those who would accept the validity of a result however narrow (just about everyone).”

    Personally I would go along with that, but I’m unaware of any “narrow result” questions having been put to anyone in any poll. If anyone knows of any such, please post links!

    OTOH, Prof C’s site has started monitoring “W[hat] do you think would happen to the Scottish Parliament after a No vote?” from the last two ICM polls for SoS with expectation of extra powers diminishing and diminished powers increasing.

    See http://whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/would-do-you-think-would-happen-to-the-scottish-parliament-after-a-no-vote

    IMO, we will need to wait until after the “regulated” campaign begins [one week after the Euro results are published] to see whether any irregularities spotted are sufficient to allow either side to call “foul”. With the international media watching closely, even the BBC may need to follow its own editorial guidelines.

  26. I hope my English friends will not take this amiss but as someone who knows nothing about polling I have this question about Scottish independence polls.

    Who poses the questions?

    To be blunt, do the questioners have English accents? I suspect some Scots are more likely to report a “don’t know” than a “yes” if the questioner has an English accent.

    Just a question, not meaning to suggest English voices should not be doing the polling or that Scots are duplicitous or whatever but I think it could be a factor.

    [All but MORI and TNS are done online, so there is no interviewer – AW]

  27. What ever the result around 50% of those casting their votes are likely to be disappointed.

    However, the difference between this and any other vote is that if Yes for Independence narrowly wins it can’t be reversed by those participating if they change their mind. Which is always a distinct possibility on a close vote especially as Younger Scots appear less enamoured of the idea.

    If Scotland opts narrowly for independence and no one on either side is suggesting it’s going to be a landslide then that’s it.

    In order to reverse such a decision Scotland will need the consent of the Other constituent Nations of the UK.
    It isn’t remotely clear that it would be forthcoming.

    I suspect Pro Independence Campaigners will suggest why should opinions change you only need to look at Scotland’s own Political History to see why they can and do.

    In the 1960’s 50% of Scots voted Conservative and the SNP regularly picked up 1% in elections

  28. In my electoral experience, I can’t actually recall any campaign that had suffered so many really quite serious blows to it’s credibility but remains still standing, let alone increasing its vote share in polls.

    Really look at the Labour Party massive media opposition all other political parties blaming them and yet Nationally, as in UK wide support up 20% from the General Election.

  29. The CBI’s decision to align with the No campaign and the subsequent resignations might give Yes a further boost. There is an organisation Business for Scotland I had never heard of until the CBI situation – who align with the Yes camp and have many members.

    -The Largest Company signed up to Business for Scotland is Commsworld which employs just 150 staff

    The CBI include all the Major Oil and Gas Companies in Scotland which employ a Quarter of a Million People between them.

  30. Good Afternoon All.

    If four of the Scottish Counties want to stay in The UK, will they be allowed to insist that two other counties join them, and then remain in the UK?

  31. Idon’t think the narrowness of the result either way (which looks inevitable now) makes any difference. Yes is Yes and No is No.

    If Yes sneaks it, BT/Lab/LD/ UK government will have very serious questions to answer concerning their refusal to countenance advocating Devo Max

  32. @LHamilton – “Perhaps in this Salmond was several steps ahead of his unionist opponents.”

    I think supporters tend to give too much credence to the wisdom of their own selected side. To be honest, the reverse of what you said is not possible. I can’t see anyone agreeing to a vote, and then not stating they will stick by it. Politically, it’s very easy to switch tack in the way I lay out anyway. By the time actual independence is upon us, No’s will be able to claim that the deal is different to the one proposed in September. Any party, but particularly the SNP with it’s willingness to trust the Scottish people, would struggle to argue against a democratic vote on a deal that has never been put to the people.

    And – “Finally the things you describe as major blows for YES are nothing of the sort. More Scots now believe that it is increasingly silly to argue that one of the world’s most prosperous countries couldn’t make a success of independence. They are right.to think so.”

    At n point did I suggest that independence would not be successful. I just think you need to define success.

    Salmond’s former senior economic adviser told us this week that Scot’s voters would be mistaken if they thought independence would leave them better off, Glasgow University CPPR confirms the consensus independent view that the SNP have greatly overestimated future oil revenues, the UK Statistics Agency criticised the SNP for supplying misleading figures on demographics, and Scotland’s leading expert on aging Prof Robert Wright said of SNP’s pension plans – “I don’t know why these guys are doing this. It is just shocking.

    “If people look at this issue objectively and make the comparisons with the UK, and run the figures through econometric models, then no matter what we put into this model, the answer is that there are big welfare issues.

    “If Scotland is not in the UK, it looks very much like we are not going to be able to pay for this increase in the elderly population.”

    More Scot’s may feel it is silly to take account of these independent views from non aligned experts, but many others might in turn think that is a silly attitude to take.

    I still maintain that the real question is to ask why such glaring contradictions of both fact and interpretation don’t seem to have had the remotest impact on public opinion.

    If Lamont, Davidson or Carmichael had produced an electoral so badly received by independent commentators in key areas, I’m sure the SNP would be keen to point out the basic flaws.

  33. @LHamilton – struggling to get a reply to you, which suggests I’ve strayed too far over a line. My ppoint was more one about the dynamics of the polling decision making. Yes voters appear to be more forgiving of uncertainties than is normal in electoral campaigns. Many of the rather significant No points appear to wash over them, even when from highly respected and non political sources.

    I’m just interested in the way this is playing out, which is quite unusual in UK politics I feel.

  34. If four of the Scottish Counties want to stay in The UK, will they be allowed to insist that two other counties join them, and then remain in the UK?
    —————–
    Yes.

  35. My memory of this is a big vague, but I remember 1996-1997 being a much rougher time for the pro-devolution camp than this campaign has been for the Aye camp. There was one point that Labour had about three different policies on the number of questions within six months; in particular, at one point it seriously seemed like there might be a THREE stage referendum process.

    And the Tartan Tax issue did get quite a bit of mileage, but I suspect that the movement of Labour to the right on tax policy in the mid-1990s took away whatever steam that much have had for a “Yes and no” response.

    In contrast, not one thing that the Naw campaign has done has got any mileage at all.

  36. Sorry to go off topic… but has there not been a Yougov poll on Friday that wasn’t reported here, probably being dumb, just can’t find it…

    Latest YouGov / The Sun results 17th April – Con 33%, Lab 35%, LD 11%, UKIP 15%

  37. @ Mr Beeswax

    That’s the YG/Sun poll which was reported on Thursday night/ Friday morning.

  38. CHRISLANE1945

    The Scottish Independence Referendum Act 2013 – see http://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2013/14/enacted – makes no mention of such possibilities, but under “Declaration of result” 35 (2) (b) it does require each Local Authority’s Counting Officer to “give public notice of those matters together with the number of rejected ballot papers under each head shown in the statement of rejected ballot papers”, so that it will be possible to compute the numbers you’re looking for.

  39. I don’t want to rain on anyone’s parade here, but I’m just wondering if these renewed spasms of deep analysis and excitement about the Scottish Independence issue are really justified by these two latest polls. Yes campaign up by 1% in one and unchanged in another. Admittedly the ICM poll suggests a significant drop in support for the No campaign (-4%), but that could be just about within MOE and, in reality, nothing much has changed there either.

    I can understand those lagging behind in the campaign looking for all sorts of evidence that points to shifting tectonic plates, or whatever, and the NO lead has quite obviously narrowed recently, but there’s little evidence that I can see of any great or decisive momentum for a Yes vote, despite anecdotes about how much different it all is “on the ground”. I’ve heard that one many a time before having been involved in quite a few losing campaigns myself! “Honest, these polls must be wrong, because every door I knock on………………”

    I’m not saying that YES can’t or won’t prevail in September; all I’m really saying is that it still doesn’t look very likely on the evidence of the polls, including the two reported today.

  40. I’m thinking that Mori doesn’t have political weighting to 2011 vote – but it’s also a telephone poll, so it’s difficult to know which of these factors are making it the poll which is out of step. Perhaps it is both combining to show the rather different picture which Mori got in their most recent poll.

  41. RAF
    “If Yes sneaks it, BT/Lab/LD/ UK government will have very serious questions to answer concerning their refusal to countenance advocating Devo Max”

    I’m sure you’re correct there and they will be wishing they had given more thought to WHY the SG was so relaxed about a 2nd question.

    However, the campaign proper doesn’t start for more than a full calendar month yet and meanwhile we will have UKIP’s Euro progress on almost every Kingdom-wide news bulletin while any progress they make in Scotland could well result in the Cons losing their 1 MEP.

    The setting of the regulated campaign period to begin precisely one week after the Euro results are known was obviously the reason for setting the referendum date of 18 September.

    If UKIP do as well in E&W as many here seem to predict it will be a great “starter” for the campaign and trump any EU rejection fears. If UKIP don’t make progress, then the SG may come to regret the timing.

    For the next month, it would make more sense for simultaneous Euro & Saltire polls to be kept on the same threads.

  42. Crossbat;

    I think its misguided to ignore the movement to the YES side in recent polls; especially with a large proportion of undecideds remaining.

    I still hold the view that a 45% Yes would be a result the SNP can keep its head up at; but its not without impossibility we are moving to a closer battle than that.

    Reflecting on the No vote; we can see the Better Together campaign is having little effect; which should come as a surprise to no one paying attention to the questions on what issues are important to the Scottish people. Wasteful start to 2014 with nothing but currency shouting, which no one in Scotland was giving two hoots about anyway.

    Yes campaign meanwhile finally seems to be finding a few legs to stand on by taking the focus off the SNP/Salmond. Going to be a very very interesting summer imo.

  43. For those talking about a second vote after the negotiations. I can’t see what benefit the UK government would see in not making the negotiations seem successful for both sides. The UK could never go back to how it is, even if the second vote was for no.

    The basic problem is that the UK is still essentially a unitary state, what we have is devolution, not federalism, and unless there was a move to a federal constitution then devo max is impossible because there could no longer be a unified Westminster system, i.e. Scots MPs couldn’t be counted in the government majority because they could no longer vote on English domestic legislation.

    So the situation is very different from Canada and I see no appetite for ripping up the traditions of British democracy even if it means the loss of Scotland.

  44. AMBER STAR
    If four of the Scottish Counties want to stay in The UK, will they be allowed to insist that two other counties join them, and then remain in the UK?
    —————–
    Yes.

    —————–
    Via what mechanism?

  45. Liverpool have won the league.

  46. BARBAZENZERO.
    The mechanism which brought Northern Ireland into existence is not likely I think.

  47. @Skippy

    Polls have yet to close and the results have yet to be declared.

  48. CHRISLANE1945
    “The mechanism which brought Northern Ireland into existence is not likely I think.”

    I certainly hope you’re right!

  49. A year ago I would have said YES had no chance, and I have to admit, I was completely wrong. I still think the odds are against them- it’s worth noting they have yet to draw even in a single poll, much less cross over- but with the enthusiasm gap on their side and Salmond leading them, the odds are looking more like 60/40 now, instead of 100/1.

    Whatever happens in September I think we can officially declare Better Together one of the least effective campaigns in the history of mankind.

  50. Via the mechanism of: post a silly question & you’ll get a silly answer. ;-)

1 2 3 11