Since it backs up some of the points I made in my previous post, here's details of an opinion poll showing the state of play as the Scottish Government approaches it's first 100 days in power:
If a Holyrood election was held tomorrow, which party would you vote for?
SNP 48%
Labour 32%
Tories 8%
Lib Dems 8%
Greens 2%
SSP 2%
How satisfied are you with the SNP's performance to date?
Very satisfied 10%
Quite satisfied 30%
Neither 25%
Quite dissatisfied 7%
Very dissatisfied 5%
Unsure/don't know 23%
Would you approve or disapprove of Scotland becoming independent?
Approve 31%
Disapprove 49%
Unsure/don't know 20%
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
A storming result for the SNP and gallons of satisfaction for Alex Salmond who is surely the main reason for the high polling numbers.
The 49% disapproving of independence worries me though. Mostly because I can easily imagine the SNP (Alex or others) pushing too hard and too early for independence and this gap over Labour reducing sharply as a result. Mind you, so far everything has been pitched perfectly so there's no reason why that won't continue.
Who would have dared dream such polling results even a year ago?
Yes, storming indeed. The independence numbers always vary dependant on the question being asked, though.
For me, it just shows how important it was to emerge from the election as the largest party. Ex-Labour MSP Brian Fitzpatrick had a letter in the Herald this week, seeking solace in the fact that 'Labour had done as badly as they were ever going to, while the SNP had done as well as they ever could, and had still only won by 25 votes in Cunninghame North'. This poll helps bury that argument once and for all. The demons that the SNP somehow 'can't win', or that the SNP in government would be a 'disaster' have both now been comprehensively demolished.
As for independence, I don't see any appetite in the SNP to rush things. The white paper will come out, which itself will give the idea further legitimacy. There'll be an extended 'discussion', where the other parties will have to explain to voters why they don't think they should be trusted to have their say in a referendum. And all the while, the unionist rhetoric about alternately 'running scared' and trying to 'hoodwink' voters will sound increasingly ridiculous to voters' ears.
I think there's a whole tranche of Scottish opinion out there waiting to be convinced about independence. In the meantime, it's great fun watching the diminishing ranks of union jocks stew in the failure of their own prophesies :-)
As someone from South of the Border, why do you think anyone is against independence? Is it just an economic thing or is there a genuine feeling of Britishness? I'm also baffled by watching Old Firm matches, Glasgow Protestants apparently greatly value the Union whilst at the same time hating the English. Any way you can explain this?
"As someone from South of the Border, why do you think anyone is against independence? Is it just an economic thing or is there a genuine feeling of Britishness?"
Umm... good question. Some people cite economics as their reason for being against independence, even although there's plenty of economists who'll tell you that Scotland would do a lot better as an independent country. The 'we canny afford it' line is one which you tend to hear, either in resigned defeat, or as a sort of circular, sneering "I'm smarter than you because by mentioning economics, that obviously means I know more about these real world issues than feckless dreamers like you", argument. Fortunately, it's not one you hear so much these days, although Labour did their best during the last election, where the Scottish 'deficit' varied between £6bn and £13bn depending on which leaflet you read/spokesperson you listened to.
It's always seemed a very negative argument, because it's never cast in terms of what Scotland might actually be gaining from the Union. It also seems a very conditional argument - if it could be proven beyond all doubt that Scotland would be more prosperous under independence, would all those economic unionists suddenly change their tune? Surely, you pick your preferred constitutional option and argue for it from that positive premise?
For some, particularly amongst the older generations, there is a genuine feeling of Britishness. It had its high water mark with WWII, and many still define their 'unionism' by using language like 'we stood together in the darkest hours of our nation'. Understandably, it's stirring stuff for some, but that sort of rhetoric doesn't really resonate with the majority any more. Like the economic 'argument', it seems backward looking, negative, and defines you by what you are against, rather than what you are for.
"I'm also baffled by watching Old Firm matches, Glasgow Protestants apparently greatly value the Union whilst at the same time hating the English. Any way you can explain this?"
There's plenty unionists who would bite the hand that they claim feeds us - just one of the many contradictions of Unionism. In my experience, though, the anti-Englishness which exists in Scotland, while contemptible when it occurs, is nonetheless exaggerated.
Scotland is now largely a secular country, so the religious aspect which once underpinned Scottish Unionism is far less significant than once it was. Nonetheless, it's one of life's little ironies that folk down Govan way belt out 'Rule Britannia' every second week during the season, yet given that Govan has an SNP MSP, a fair few of them must also be voting for the SNP. The only conclusion you can draw from that is that people are quite happy to separate the identities they adopt within the confines of a football stadium from their voting preferences.
Post a Comment