It’s been a long journey, but we’ve finally arrived at the eve-of-referendum polls. For a lot of the Scottish referendum campaign the discussion about polls was one of right or wrong – we had lots of polls showing the same trend (flatlining!), but showing different absolute figures. Companies like MORI, TNS and YouGov were showing big NO leads; companies like Panelbase and Survation were showing a tight race. Then we had a period of some companies showing a strong movement towards YES, some not, and we have ended up with everyone showing much the same figures (what was the true picture earlier in the campaign we will never know for sure – by definition you can check eve-of-election results against reality, but never mid-term ones). With one MORI poll still to come, here are the YES shares in the latest polls from each company (taking the online and telephone methodologies seperately for those companies who have done both):

Ipsos MORI (phone) 49%
ICM (phone) 49%
TNS (face to face) 49%
YouGov (online) 48%
Panelbase (online) 48%
ICM (online) 48%
Opinium (online) 48%
Survation (online) 48%
Survation (phone) 47%%

Essentially everyone is predicting the same result, the margin of error on most of the polls is around plus/minus 3%, every poll is within two percentage points of the others. This isn’t going to be a case of individual pollsters getting it right or wrong, they’ll either all be around about right or all be horribly out.

There’s a temptation when the polls are like this to say YES and NO are within the margin of error, that it’s “too close to call”. It doesn’t really work like that – these polls are showing NO ahead. The margin of error is on each individual poll, and it’s equally likely to happen in both directions. Hence if the “true” balance of public opinion in Scotland was 50/50 we’d expect to see a random scattering of results around that point, some polls showing yes, some polls showing no. We’re not seeing that. We’re seeing polls randomly scattered around the 48/52 mark, suggesting that’s most likely where public opinion is – a very small lead for the NO campaign.

It’s possible there will be a very late swing, that people will have changed their minds in the last few hours or in the polling station itself. In most polls there really aren’t that many don’t knows left to make their minds up though.

The alternative route to an upset is if the polls are wrong, if there is some systemic issue above and beyond normal random sampling error that affects polls from all the companies. I wrote yesterday about what the potential risks are – the main challenges in my view are first whether people who are on the fringes of society and normally play little part in politics don’t get picked up in polls but do vote; and secondly whether there has been an issue of differential response rate, have the obviously more enthusiastic yes voters been more willing to take part in polling that no voters are?

Personally I’m a little more worried about the latter – I think there’s more chance of the polls ending up underestimating the NO vote than the YES vote, but there comes a time when you just have to trust the data. The polls say the result will be around about YES 48%, NO 52%. We will see on Friday morning.


166 Responses to “What the final polls tell us”

1 2 3 4
  1. @Pete b

    You misunderstand the Barnett Formula. It allocates changes in spending levels and does not determine the absolute level. So the Westminster Government will still be determining fiscal policy and there would still be a fixed block grant. So the devo something sometime is not worth the paper it is written on.

  2. @Candy – relying on Bing is problematic. You need to assume it accurately samples all sections of the electorate in proportionate amounts, which I would imagine it patently doesn’t.

    Around 25% of the population don’t have access to a computer, and 10% of Scottish adults don’t have a mobile phone. I suspect a much higher percentage won’t have a smart phone with internet access.

    My guess – and this is only a guess – is that most of these categories will be older people, and we know from polls that older voters are far more heavily No than Yes.

    If these notions are correct, we would intuitively want to see the Bing and other social media based metrics give Yes a bigger lead to account for the likely distortion caused by what is in effect a skewed sample, with the missing sample being the one group expressing a very strong No tendency.

  3. @Numbercruncher 7.05

    Presumably by ‘the islands’ you meant the Northern Isles, not the Hebrides. Very different things – though how they’ll vote I have no idea.

  4. @ Rosie and Daisy

    “This is genius and the turning point of the whole campaign.”

    He’s quite the speaker. Love Gordon Brown.

    Of course, I liked Gray Davis too and his public persona was worse than Brown’s (and not nearly as good a speaker). I don’t know what it is but I always go for the super dour, unfriendly, completely unpersonable politicians. They’re the ones who always strike me as honest and trustworthy. Of course, they usually always lose.

  5. @Candy

    Did you see the history for Bing? A couple of days ago NO had it’s highest showing. If anything that’s just a return to the norm

    And as many people have said, I don’t see many older folk taking to twitter and facebook to debate.

  6. @Skippy

    I hears it was going to be published in the morning edition of the London Evening Standard, but it hasn’t been.

    Maybe it will make the later edition. The same thing happened with the last London Mayoral election. I don’t like the idea of polls being published on election day. The electorate should at least have a space of a 24 hours to make their final decision without further distraction.

  7. I hear.

  8. @ John B I meant both, although I’m most unsure about the Northern Isles

  9. @Number cruncher

    I thought they had decided to choose the ‘Norwegian Protectorate’ option at the next referendum.

  10. Thanks for clarifying that OldNat, I suspected that was the case.

    The most positive thing I can bring myself to say about the closing weeks of this referendum is that I can’t imagine anyone who has been convinced to vote would react at all well to not being able to (even if part of the reason was bad planning).

    As the SNP in particular and Labour to a lesser extent have both rightly said, there should be an opportunity in any outcome to convert this into longer term political engagement from people who have previously shown little interest in how the country is run, although if the campaign is anything to go on I’m dubious about whether either party will try to convert this into a mature debate on why they differ on issues which would be on the agenda regardless of today’s result (such as health policy, education, the balance between tax and spending, welfare, pensions and so on), or whether the result is an increase in tribalism and taglines come campaign time.

    In fairness to both parties, they have shown the capacity to do the former in very recent times (the SNP’s campaigns in 2007 and 2011 obviously featured a vision for an independent Scotland, but in fairness they got in by campaigning on their domestic differences with Labour, rather going down the Jim Sillars route of trying to convince people that it was more patriotic to vote SNP than a Westminster party).

  11. Isn’t it illegal to have posters displayed outside a polling station?

    http://tinyurl.com/ook2kvy

  12. I’m sure the polls are all wrong. The Scots are a very intelligent people and won’t have anything to do with this independence lark. ‘No’ will win and by a thumping majority, at least 60-40.

  13. AS the Act of Union came into effect on 1 May 1707, this I realised makes Great Britain a Taurus.

    So I thought I’d seen what the daily horoscope says this morning. Russel Grant in the Daily Mirror says for Taurus..you couldn’t make this up (even if they do)…

    “It won’t be easy to set up the right framework when working with a group towards a mutual goal. You might think you’ve been teamed up with the wrong person as you have different working methods”

  14. On the basis of when in doubt do nowt, surely the vast majority of undecided will vote ‘No’. In that case we are more likely to see a 55-45 vote in favour of ‘No’.

  15. @Candy,Alec, skippy

    The interesting thing to me about Bing is that its figures are so close to those of the polls. This suggests that whatever the degree of bias in its sample, it is no more affected by this than are the polls who get round enormously unrepresentative samples by weighting.

    One possible reason for the convergence is that Bing’s prediction is said to be based on a program that learns. This implies that it has a criterion and as there has been no referendum vote it seems most likely that the criterion has been something like the average of polls at the time. Hence no surprise that the two seem to converge.

    Whatever the reason, the point that Bing has in its favour is its immediacy. It seems to show that Yes and No are creeping together at a rate of around ,55 a day. This would not be taken into account in say YouGovs latest polling which took place over three days, although they could presumably present the figures by date. It can also be checked against MORI’s poll although that will be subject to margin of error.

    Personally I think No will win and perhaps by a bigger margin than 4 points because of the shy Nos. However, I think it perfectly possible that Yes will win because of the under-representation of certain groups in the polls and because the Yes side knows where its voters are and is able to get them out. Hence if I was a betting man I would bet ‘yes’ staking an amount which I could afford to lose but which if I won would give me enough to drown my considerable sorrows.

  16. @Charles

    5.7/1 on Betfair right now. You could make a killing.

    I keep telling those oh-so-confident yes voters to do this and show me their slips after they bet their life savings on YES… but none of them have been so confident to do it.

  17. Apropos of nothing, what has been the largest gap on record between the predictions of reputable polling agencies and the outcome of the thing being polled?

    Does anybody know?

  18. @Skippy

    Is your house on No then?

  19. @Hireton

    Scots still enjoy some 20%+ higher per capita public spending under the Barnett formula than the England average, pretty well the same as when the formula was introduced in the 1970s.

    And if it doesn’t like the size of the UK cake, the Scottish government already has powers to levy additional taxes on Scots, powers which will now be extended. Who knows, one day they might actually be used.

  20. I think the polls will be pretty accurate if I’m honest – Yes’s main hopes of upsetting the odds being those who have decided to vote No not turning up in sufficient proportions (that may sound preposterous, but I’m talking about one camp’s exceptional turnout being outshone by the other’s even more exceptional turnout, rather than apathy), systemic bias towards No in the polls (unlikely given that previously radically different polls have all reached a similar climax, although I don’t rule it out entirely), and a larger proportion of current DK’s than I would expect voting Yes.

    I think to a certain extent Yes will benefit from all three of those things, but the Shy No factor will negate any impact on the result. I do however think that the likely size of the Shy No has been overestimated: be that mainstream predictions of 55-45 or in one case “at least 60-40”. I don’t doubt for a second that there are several thousand people who are uncomfortable about indicating a No VI [either because they are “deferred Yes’s” (embarrassed) if you believe certain people associated with Yes Scotland, or as a result of intimidation if you believe certain people associated with Better Together], but I find it difficult to believe that this figure runs upwards of 100,000, which a swing of 3% or more would imply based on predicted turnout being above 80%.

  21. @ The Sheep

    “Yes, it should be that way, but often isn’t. Underfunding of elections isn’t something new on either side of the Atlantic….”

    No. It’s the law. If you’re in line to vote when polls close, you are legally entitled to cast a ballot. Funding has got nothing to do with it. My late grandmother used to volunteer her time to run precincts on election day. It was always fun running into her.

  22. @phil haines

    Yes but the differential is reducing as England’s population has been growing faster than Scotland’s. And of course the England average masks a lot of regional variation.

    The ability to vary the standard rate of income tax without any control over thresholds and allowances let alone any control over indirect taxation is pretty much worthless. The Westminster Government increases income tax take mainly by not uprating thresholds in line with salary/wages growth so more people find themselves in a higher tax band (or exempted if the basic allowance is increased). The only income tax rate which Westminster politicians have felt able to increase in recent years is the top tax rate.

    And I still have not discovered the answer to the question as to why the UK Treasury would allow the Scottish Government ( or any devolved administration) to increase the overall level of public expenditure even if it is fully financed by tax. That would weaken one of the key macro economic and fiscal controls it has surely?

  23. The greatest beneficiary of the Barnett Formula is Northern Ireland but even without Barnett to help it it’s London which is the real junkie, receiving 124% of UK ‘identifiable per capita expenditure’.

  24. I’m on a break from polling station duty.

    When does the Evening Standard poll come out?

  25. I’m reading the ‘voted’ thread on twitter

    https://twitter.com/search?q=voted&src=typd

    Goosebumps time…reminds me of when we voted in SA to allow De Klerk to proceed with negotiations with the ANC…there are few votes you get in life that can re-write history.

  26. @Gattino
    Don’t know. But my view of polls has always been affected by an incident late on the evening before the 92 GE. We all “knew” Kinnock would win but a Tory, I think Peter Brooke, said in front of a studio audience that their numbers told them they would win. The audience laughed but his puzzled reaction suggested he wasn’t joking and that he knew something they didn’t. We all know what followed and it left me with the impression that party machines tend to have a good impression of where exactly they are. If No get 56% here then my view on that will be significantly reinforced.

  27. @Hireton – “So the Westminster Government will still be determining fiscal policy and there would still be a fixed block grant. So the devo something sometime is not worth the paper it is written on.”

    Interestingly, under a properly functioning currency union Westminster will still, in effect, be determining fiscal policy, as spending, debt and tax levels would all need agreement. In this case, Scotland presumably would have 8.4% of the decision making capacity on such matters, but with no MPs at Westminster to affect the overall direction of government policy. Even less influence than as at present.

    In addition, for the currency to function properly, capital flows would still be required between the different parts of the union area. If, as nationalists believe, Scotland is better off overall than England, Scotland would be required to remit a proportion of it’s revenues to Westminster, and receive back a smaller proportion of ‘federal’ spending. The reverse of Barnett.

    Just what is it that independence campaigners wish for?

    For me, my own wish is for a logic infusion.

  28. Hireton,

    “And I still have not discovered the answer to the question as to why the UK Treasury would allow the Scottish Government ( or any devolved administration) to increase the overall level of public expenditure even if it is fully financed by tax. That would weaken one of the key macro economic and fiscal controls it has surely?”

    As if no country around the world has devolved taxation!

  29. Gattino

    Concrete evidence to support the shy no hypothesis [from the Independent]:?

    “It found that a strikingly high 46 per cent of No supporters felt personally threatened by the Yes campaign during the referendum, while 50 per cent did not. In contrast, only 24 per cent of Yes supporters felt personally threatened by the No campaign and 72 per cent did not (“don’t knows” excluded).

    The tables for the questions that Buzzfeed commissioned in this survey by YouGov aren’t published yet, but the Sun/Times bit with the same sample is:

    http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/8kmy85paxa/Final_Times_Sun_140917_Website.pdf

    It reports only 20% of No voters have “personally displayed a poster, worn a sticker or badge supporting the […] NO campaign” – far less than 46%. So it would suggest that many of those feeling threatened are basing their feelings on what they get from the media rather what has happened to themselves. This ties in with the main difference between Yes and No being “I was worried about getting a negative reaction from other people”, people are reacting to what might happen rather than what actually has.[1]

    So the “strikingly high” difference seems to be due to perception, itself probably due to the hysterical and rather biased coverage of what incidents have occurred[2]. Some of the bias may be political but more due to wanting to fit stories into the usual template of what is ‘dramatic’ and disappointment at the Scots failing to enact the stereotypes that they think they should.

    But such things are bound to affect some people. I don’t think it would necessarily produce ‘shy Noes’ though – no one thinks that someone is going to come out of the computer screen and duff them up. You might get it where there is more human interaction in the polling process, but the phone polls and TNS’s face to face are producing similar figures to them at the moment. Indeed they tended to be strongest for No in earlier polls which suggests that what silence there was was on the Yes side (perhaps because of class perceptions?) but that has now gone.

    [1] It’s worth pointing out that the half of Yes voters who chose not to display their colours were more likely to say “I wasn’t asked to do so by anybody” or “Don’t know”. These seem less plausible given the strength of campaigning and you wonder if fear of offending played a part with them too, but they didn’t want to admit it to themselves given the higher visibility of the Yes campaign.

    [2] For example, if England had been the location, you can imagine the same press pack mocking Miliband for withdrawing from a walkabout under the same circumstances as happened in Edinburgh. Even though most of the problem was caused by the media themselves plus some SWP-types apparently unconcerned with independence either way. They also mostly failed to report that Miliband had had successful and trouble-free similar events earlier in the day.

  30. Isn’t there a chance that Yes will get more of their vote out?

    Estimates are that 80% will vote and the result will boil down to which 20% don’t end up voting.

    It is in the nature of the debate (IMO) that Yes voters will be more enthusiastic and they might get a bigger proportion of their supporters into the polling station?

  31. “So the “strikingly high” difference seems to be due to perception, itself probably due to the hysterical and rather biased coverage of what incidents have occurred”

    Not sure your second assertion follows on from the first. It’s normal for fear, e.g. of crime, to be based on perception rather than experience. It doesn’t require hysterical or what you claim to be biased (evidence?) coverage. But does does it really matter what the cause is? It’s the effect that matters.

  32. @ Roger Mexico

    I’m not sure you measure the likelihood of feeling personally threatened on whether you’ve stuck upf a sticker or not. Surely it refers to atmosphere, conversation, mood, and above all who is shouting loudest. The perception from what’s happening to other people is as likely to be from knowing other people as it is to being particularly susceptible to believing the wicked english media propaganda.

    And of course it depends on what you mean by feeling personally threatened. It doesn’t imply someone has grabbed you by hte throat and said “or else!”, but whether you feel on an instictive level its not wise to speak up in the company around you.

    If there were not a single reported incident of “exuberance” its perfectly easy to imagine just being outside the group, a barrier to the great “project” which is exciting the yeses around you, would leave any reasonable person wary of being labelled all manner of unpatriotic things.

  33. @SoCalLiberal

    The law says many things, only some of which are actually enacted. We saw that in the 2012 Presidential election! If you buy cheap voting machines (remember Florida?), or don’t have enough staff at polling stations to meet demand, you run into issues…

    I think over here it’s actually down to guidance from the local returning officer, rather than an actual law. I’m sure one of the others on the site will correct me if I’m wrong…

  34. @Roger Mexico – I do think you need to be careful attributing this to biased reporting.

    Tom Brady of ITN blogged that covering the campaign was an unpleasant experience. He said that reporters had not experienced anything like this, even in violent and divided Northern Ireland at the height of the troubles. His view was that the minute he asked relevant questions of Yes supporters the tendency was to receive ‘a volley of abuse’.

    I think there are too many of these stories, from multiple sources, to dismiss them so lightly. I myself was in Scotland last week, and I learned quite quickly that you had to be circumspect in how you expressed yourself. Far to many people were ready to question my patriotism if I queried some of the rather flimsy Yes assertions.

  35. @ The Sheep

    Way past my bed time but if anyone out here, running a polling precinct or not, did that at a polling precinct, they would be guilty of a felony crime. It’s not up to their discretion. Now, the United Kingdom is different I’m sure. It certainly was in 2010.

    Now you might have to wait 8, 10, or more hours to cast your ballot but once you’re in that line, regardless of how long it takes to vote, you will be able to.

    Now here’s something I’m pretty certain you don’t have. Sometimes when there is high turnout coupled with ballot shortages and long lines to vote, judges will extend the close of polling. They have the authority to do that.

  36. They also mostly failed to report that Miliband had had successful and trouble-free similar events earlier in the day.

    If I attended four events, and was chased out of them by a group of people calling me a “[expletive withheld] liar” and serial murderer”, I would probably conclude that I had an eventful day. To Miliband’s credit he wasn’t the one trying to make a big deal out of it.

    Whether some coverage of it was biased or not is almost a side issue: the only way to eliminate press bias is to eliminate the free press. For those of us not advocating that, the relevant question is whether the story was an appropriate one to cover. Given that the person in question was leader of Scotland’s biggest Westminster party days before a decision is taken on whether Scotland will remain part of the UK, without question it was.

    And even that’s secondary. The root cause of this is that the debate got a lot more heated in the final six weeks of the campaign, partly inevitably, partly as a result of the way the two debates between Salmond and Darling panned out. The majority of nationalists who are not thugs have to accept that this comes with both positive and negative consequences.

    Positive: a lot of normally politically indifferent people have gotten engaged in the debate in recent weeks.

    Negative: a few of those people are idiots, and a few of those are now doing idiotic things in your name.

  37. They also mostly failed to report that Miliband had had successful and trouble-free similar events earlier in the day.

    If I attended four events in public places, and was chased out of one of them by a group of people calling me a “[if you’ve followed the coverage you know what the offending phrases are: trying to quote work-safe forms of them got my post pre-moderated]”, I would probably conclude that I had an eventful day. To Miliband’s credit he wasn’t the one trying to make a big deal out of it.

    Whether some coverage of it was biased or not is almost a side issue: the only way to eliminate press bias is to eliminate the free press. For those of us not advocating that, the relevant question is whether the story was an appropriate one to cover. Given that the person in question was leader of Scotland’s biggest Westminster party days before a decision is taken on whether Scotland will remain part of the UK, without question it was.

    And even that’s secondary. The root cause of this is that the debate got a lot more heated in the final six weeks of the campaign, partly inevitably, partly as a result of the way the two debates between Salmond and Darling panned out. The majority of nationalists who are not thugs have to accept that this comes with both positive and negative consequences.

    Positive: a lot of normally politically indifferent people have gotten engaged in the debate in recent weeks.

    Negative: a few of those people are idiots, and a few of those are now doing idiotic things in your name.

  38. Re being in a queue when the polling station closes:

    http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0013/142006/Polling-station-handbook-SLG.pdf


    Make sure that nobody joins the queue after 10pm.

    – If there is a queue at 10pm and if the polling station can accommodate all the electors in the queue, ask electors to move inside the
    polling station and close the doors behind the last elector in the queue.

    – If the polling station is too small to accommodate all the electors in the queue, a member of the polling station team should mark the end of the queue by positioning themselves behind the last elector in the queue.

    – Explain to anyone who arrives after 10pm and tries to join the queue that the poll has closed and that, by law, they cannot now join the
    queue to be issued with a ballot paper.

    • Anyone who was not in the queue at 10pm must not be issued with a ballot paper.

    • Anyone who has been issued with a ballot paper must be allowed to vote.

  39. Ipsos-MORI:

    No 53%
    Yes 47%

  40. The tables for those Buzzfeed questions are now available:

    http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/8hz0m9s4jb/Final_Buzzfeed_140917_Top_Line_W.pdf

    though irritatingly they don’t seem to have come up with anything wacky enough to match usual Buzzfeed expectations (and the cross-tabs are limited to Yes/No).

    I also wonder if there may be an element of partisan response going on when you look at the differences between the Yes and No columns. No voters are overwhelmingly more likely to say the campaign has made “Scottish society in general” more divided – 86% to only 30% for Yes.

    However asked about “My friendship group” and “My family” about 60% say it has made no difference and the split between Yes and No isn’t anything as dramatic. This suggests that they are basing their feelings on how they perceive Scottish society through the media rather than by interaction within their own little bit of it, which seems much more amicable.

    There is still some difference on the friends and family questions though, with Yes being more likely to say ‘more united’ and No ‘more divided’. But if Scotland is split 50-50 you would expect these to be equal – for every Yes support who has a row with a No supporter there has to be a No supporter having a row with a Yes, one. So there may be some partisan wishful thinking going on there by one or both sides.

    It’s probably more on the No side though, because 85% of Yes supporters said “No, I have not fallen out with anyone”, compared to 68% of Nos. Both are very high figures of course[1] but the difference suggests a minority of Noes (maybe 10-15%) are either repeating the media narrative or interpreting their experience through it.

    [1] They’re still probably both underestimates of the true amounts because YouGov panel members (Yes or No) are going to be more opinionated than normal and so more likely to express their opinions and have clashes.

  41. With regard to the discussion about pressure on polling stations I suspect everyone is over-estimating the potential problem. Remember when previous problems have arisen it has been at General Elections where, in England anyway, there are usually local elections on the same day. In this particular case there is only one piece of paper which needs only one mark on it and people will be in and out of the polling booth pretty quickly.

  42. “for every Yes support who has a row with a No supporter there has to be a No supporter having a row with a Yes, one”

    That doesn’t follow in teh slightest. It doesn’t ask about “rows” for a start.

    Imagine a married couple. She’s not been talking to him and he’s not even noticed anything’s wrong. Asked if there’s a problem, she’ll say yes while he remains completly oblivious to what the issue is. In his mind he’s been nothing but reasonable and doesn’t know what she could possibly have to feel upset about…

  43. Or another analogy is in the playground. One child may feel teh victim of a bully, but would the person percieved to be the bully recognise any bullying has gone on? Surely no one paints themselves a villain.

  44. So there may be some partisan wishful thinking going on there by one or both sides.

    It’s probably more on the No side though, because 85% of Yes supporters said “No, I have not fallen out with anyone”, compared to 68% of Nos.

    Nationalist by any chance?

    Another way of looking at those figures is that about half of the No voters who feel they have fallen out with someone decided to disengage rather than respond in kind. If you were to say your piece assertively and did not receive a similarly assertive disagreement, would you feel that you had fallen out with someone?

    To pre-empt the inevitable response, the above argument is based on the assumption that uncomfortable situations which led to an adverse response to the YouGov question were generally instigated by the Yes supporter.

    Here’s why I do not think that assumption is necessarily biased: Yes voters are unquestionably the more passionate of the two camps, and while passion attracts troublemakers (as I hinted in my previous post), I don’t think anyone is arguing that there is a correlation between being passionate and being a troublemaker. Equally, I don’t think it’s controversial to say that passionate and forthright people are more likely to make those with a differing view feel uncomfortable, even if they do not have a malicious bone in their body.

  45. SO there we go – all the polls in, all of them predicting a No victory.

    My formula of discounting the most favourable poll to both sides, averaging the rest and knocking off a point from yes and giving it to no (down to the DKs being mainly women, forced questions favour No, and inherent conservative reaction when faced with a big decision), produces a 47-53 (No victory).

    Note to media – this is not “basically tied” nor is it all within the margin of error!!!!

  46. And to take this marriage analogy further, what if the yes supporter is also having a row with their ‘lover’ too! (i.e. its not a 1-1 relationship).

  47. Martin

    But what happens if the spouse and the lover are also in a gay relationship with each other, and fall out too?

  48. @Chrishornet – with you on this. I had to bite my lip on a number of occasions, leaving vociferous Yes supporters probably thinking I agreed with them, whereas in fact I judged the situation to be liable to get very heated if I continued to make perfectly reasonable observations from an alternative viewpoint.

  49. Scottish Independence Poll (Ipsos-Mori):
    YES: 45%
    NO: 50%
    DK: 4%.

    Even if undecideds vote heavily in favour of Yes, according to this poll and couple of others yesterday, it most probably won’t be enough for YES win. Although, undecideds are more likely to favour NO when forced to choose (add conservative/fear/better devil you know/status quo factor on top of it) can’t see it happening for Yes campaign.

  50. http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/scottish-independence-all-to-play-for-as-exclusive-poll-reveals-six-point-lead-for-no-campaign-9740413.html

    Love the way a six point lead is STILL being reported as “being on a knife edge!”

    Andy Murray, surely too late to make a difference, and does he carry much sway (I thought most people knew he was in favour anyway, by the way he talked about it – “I’ve learnt from past experience not to share my views on this matter.”?)

1 2 3 4