CROWDFUNDER: A third Scot Goes Pop poll on independence as No Deal looms

Click here to go straight to the fundraising page. 

Hi, I’m James Kelly, and I write the pro-independence blog Scot Goes Pop, which has a particular emphasis on opinion poll analysis. Earlier this year I crowdfunded two exclusive Panelbase polls on independence, and although they both showed exactly the same result (Yes 52%, No 48%), they were both landmarks in their own ways. The poll in January showed Yes at the highest level of support since the immediate aftermath of the EU referendum in 2016, suggesting that the general election result had been a gamechanger. And the poll in June was the first to show that, entirely against the initial expectations, the events of the pandemic had pushed Yes back into the lead after a slight dip. It turned out to be the first in an unprecedented string of seven polls showing a pro-indy majority.
With your help, I’d like to commission a third poll before the year is out. Once again, we’re in a new environment, and public opinion may have moved on as a result. The Internal Market Bill has trashed both international law and the devolution settlement that was so overwhelmingly endorsed by the Scottish public in the 1997 referendum. A No Deal Brexit appears to be moving closer. On the other hand, there have also been recent high-profile events that may have worked against the Yes side. So there are no guarantees of what a poll will show, but I firmly believe that polls on independence are good things in themselves. At this stage our opponents would dearly love the issue to be forgotten about, which perhaps explains why around half of the indy polls this year have been commissioned by Yes-supporting alternative media clients. If we weren’t doing the job ourselves, it’s almost true to say that it wouldn’t be done at all. The mainstream media have all but given up on indy polling.
To be clear about what you’ll get for your donations: if the target is reached (or close), I’ll commission a poll from a firm affiliated to the British Polling Council at some point between now and Christmas. It will ask the question “Should Scotland be an independent country?”, a party political voting intention question, and a number of supplementary questions of interest to the Yes movement. Bear in mind, as always, that there’s no way of knowing whether there’ll be a Yes lead or a No lead. It’s always a bit of a gamble, but with the right result and the right timing, the impact can be considerable.

87 comments on “CROWDFUNDER: A third Scot Goes Pop poll on independence as No Deal looms

  1. […] Wee Ginger Dug CROWDFUNDER: A third Scot Goes Pop poll on independence as No Deal looms Click here to go straight to the fundraising page.  Hi, I’m James Kelly, and I […]

  2. yesindyref2 says:

    It’s keeping the pressure on the Unionists, the UK Government, the Tory party – and its leader.

    That’s very naughty of you.

  3. dorancaird says:

    Thanks for this. Good luck with the fundraising

  4. grizebard says:

    Funny how it’s JK who (for the third time now) is taking up the challenge of a poll, when another (alleged) indy supporter who boasts of a large war chest – funded by many generous supporters for exactly that kind of proactive effort – is somehow otherwise engaged…

  5. Daisy Walker says:

    Will donate. Appreciate your good work. Would really like to know the electorates view on a Plebiscite Holyrood Election for Indy. Not a clue how you would phrase it.

  6. Sorted, donated and tweeted – now let’s get at them

  7. Julia Gibb says:

    I will never give a penny to Wings again so I will be happy to direct my funds to a site that actually supports Independence.

  8. Capella says:

    I can’t say I will never give a penny to Wings again – there is always hope – but happy to contribute to JKs fundraiser. It’s got off to a good start.

    The Herald and National are headlining good news from Angus Robertson’s Progress Scotland poll showing 64% believe the next Indyref will result in a YES vote. However the newspaper reviewers on GMS today were less than enthusiastic about it saying 28% are solid YES, 28% are solid NO, and the rest are in the middle. That’s why we need JK to analyse the results of polls and how the media are framing them.

    • barpe says:

      I’m afraid, Capella, that I can’t be as optimistic about ‘Wings’, he crossed the line a long time ago for me.
      Never recovered from his ‘beating’ (financially that is) by Kezia Dugdale.
      I used to be a daily reader, and supporter of his – but never again.

  9. Welsh Sion says:

    This on Bella today:

    https://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2020/10/11/almost-a-third-of-no-voters-will-now-vote-es-and-the-highest-ever-poll-predicts-scottish-independence/

    Almost a Third of No Voters will Now Vote Yes – and the Highest Ever Poll Predicts Scottish Independence

    Published on 11th October 2020

    And apparently, Nicola Sturgeon was on Sophy Ridge (Sky) this morning. I didn’t see it, but I understand some phoney ‘Rev’, did so – that being the case I haven’t read his blog.

    • Capella says:

      I just did. You’re right – it isn’t worth it other than for social research reasons. He and his legions spin a mountain of candy floss from the flimsiest of ingredients.
      Oh, and NS blinks a lot. In their cod psychology world that means you are lying.. So be careful, if you are ever interviewed by the gutter press, to stare unblinkingly into the cameras. (Then you’ll look even more like a psychopath).

      • Robert McCandless says:

        Sorry, did you miss the bit where Nicola feels Salmond is angry at her for not covering for him?
        I don’t think that is quite right.

      • Dr Jim says:

        His legions are a whole lot less legiony these days, bit more like a platoon, and not many of them survived in that movie

        • yesindyref2 says:

          Two vulnerable people were invited on tee-vee, flattered and told “secrets” afterwards. Vulnerable because some in the SNP quoted them regularly, and so they expected to be patted on the head by the SNP but instead were spurned for other reasons. One was able to stop – just- short of that invisible line, with scrivings, the other more naive, wasn’t. Both egged on by people who wouldn’t be sharing the consequences. And that’s all I have to say about THAT.

      • grizebard says:

        I dunno about “legions”, more like “minions”, because – as is usually the case – it’s only a relatively small number of actual posters, and I would wager that the readership (and consequent influence) isn’t anything like it used to be, and continually diminishing, due to the relentless negativity. These zoomers are, I suspect, increasingly shouting into the void, though I don’t expect we’ll get any stats update about that any time soon.

        It’s such a shame really, because it’s possible to be critical yet remain positive, and popular support for independence has crossed the halfway mark and rising, so there’s a huge potential readership out there, and they can already get more Tory talking points than anyone would ever need from the regular media. WoS used to be a jewel, albeit a rough diamond, but now it’s almost like a black op.

      • Hamish100 says:

        Yeh blinking can also mean you have grit in your , you have dry eyes, contact lens are uncomfortable! Conspiracy theorists abound!

      • Petra says:

        ”You’re right – it isn’t worth it other than for social research reasons.”

        Spot on, Capella, and I’m sure that research will be carried out to highlight, as an excellent example, how easy it is to actually brainwash people. We’ve moved on to promoting ”blink, blink, propaganda now along with the internet sleuths doing their Miss Marple / Poirot act led by Sherlock Holmes2 😎.

        They say, that if you blink too often it’s a sign that you’re a liar 😀. It’s got nothing to do with you having dry eyes, feeling tired or your eyes being aggravated by bright lights, reading for long periods of time and so on.

        One expert points out that, “When you feel stress and you feel that you have to protect yourself, your eyes stay open longer to keep you safe from any danger that may be lurking. On the other hand, when you feel safe, you may blink more often. This symbolizes that you feel safe enough to let your guard down and relax.”

        When you study what’s going on elsewhere you can see that it’s not blinking that’s the problem it’s got more to do with the blind leading the blind or more to the point the Pied Piper leading them all down the garden path.

        …………………………………….

        Thanks for the James Kelly link Paul. Happy to donate.

      • yesindyref2 says:

        Blinkin’ ‘eck!

        That’s me totally doomed after scraping off some loose dry powdery filler 😦

        That’s if you actually believe that’s what I was just doing.

        As for that other place, it’s still a must-read place for some – just not for the reasons the blogger intends probably.

  10. Alex Clark says:

    Here’s the full interview of Nicola sturgeon by Sophie Ridge on Sky this morning.

  11. Capella says:

    And here is an interview with GMB from 23rd Sep where she explains why Covid-19 restrictions in Scotland are more severe though based on the same evidence as BJ has. She also says it’s disgraceful that the Westminster govt is boycotting GMB and haven’t been on for 145 days.

    She blinks throughout. Is this significant? Or is it just a habit of NS to blink regularly, rather like the rest of us? I notice her lips are rather thin. This could indicate a Vit B deficiency. Should we have a regular feature of diagnosing political leaders’ physical and mental health? For example – what is wrong with Donald Trump?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBYCnTmb53s&t=632s

    • Hamish100 says:

      Capella, Someone called Mack has remarked on you Vit D deficiency. Obviously iron (y) deficiency is beyond some folk.
      Still no mention of helping the fundraiser.

      • grizebard says:

        Well, if you really supported independence, you would think another potentially revelatory poll was worth some (positive, even) mention in your blog (even if it wasn’t your show) wouldn’t you…?

        (Though it wouldn’t be the first time in history where a toxic combination of ambition, frustration and grievance has caused someone to take a wrong turn, alas.)

      • Capella says:

        Mack? Where? I said a Vit B deficiency. Is Mack dyslexic?

          • Capella says:

            OK. I looked it up. It was a comment by Bob Mack. As usual, those conspiracy theorists are unable to read properly. I said the thin lips are a sign of possible Vit B deficiency. Nothing to do with blinking.

            it’s quite striking how irrational those people are. They are quite incapable of reading plain English. So hefted are they to their conspiracy theory that anything can be twisted into the shape they desire. Scary.

  12. Petra says:

    Thanks for that link Capella. Same person, same background and same amount of ”blinking”. Oh but wait a minute she’s changed her top from being red to black. Isn’t that significant? Maybe ”red” relates to lying and ”black” to telling the truth. If that’s the case the ”sleuths’ are on the wrong track and just wasting their time. Next up trolling through videos to check out what she’s wearing and of course the dates that relates to 😀.

  13. Dr Jim says:

    In the world of the average male, history social attitudes and hormones don’t change overnight, they’re difficult to accept and in the new world that can be a problem, once upon a time women were helpmates sisters daughters wives and employees to be instructed and ordered by men to perform all duties that men decided to attribute to them to fit any circumstance that may arise that the man deemed was a woman’s area of responsibility to be carried out to the man’s satisfaction

    That has nearly all changed, I say nearly because it still has a long way to go and perhaps not all women will enjoy the outcome as much as they think they hope to, however things are what they are so we all just blunder along, well most of us, trying to get things right not always succeeding

    So here we are today in the word of women politicians, and women in powerful places such as our own FM yet still folk expect her to be their sister daughter wife and mother while at the same time doing a job men previously did and no one expected men to be all those things, men put on a suit or an overall and became the job they represented

    Women are still not treated in the same way, and actually even many women don’t treat women in power the same way as they do men in the same positions

    The folk squealing about the FMs attitude at the moment are displaying their own childlike behaviour in expecting *Mammy fix everything or I hate you* because she refused to fix another weans problem that would have compromised her position, her career, her very prospects in life and the faith of the Scottish people who depend upon her, and any *friend* who would ask her to risk such things is not a friend they’re a child

    The First Minister of our country is not our Mammy even though she does her damndest to try

    Did anyone think David Cameron Boris Johnson Theresa May or even Alex Salmond was a reflection of parenthood? I bet they didn’t, so why does everyone run to Nicola Sturgeon squealing help me Ma, gonnae sort it fur me Ma gonnae dae the talking fur me Ma, gonnae face the media cameras and answer questions fur me Ma

    An if ye don’t ah hate ye

  14. Hamish100 says:

    Alex Salmond brought much of the issues on himself. He is married and while working as FM on our behalf behaved less than appropriate. He’s no angel he has already stated. I do not know how often he blinks but I cannot but feel as one who supported his crowdfunding let down by him. Not the current FM but him.
    It is about time others stop being the hypocrites. He was subject of complaints. Once that happens the ball starts rolling and where it ends up no one knows. Maybe mysogonists complaining elsewhere should recognise that.
    Could AS not say I support Independence ( can’t say that would be a surprise) and Nothing and noone that prevents an SNP victory next year should stand it’s way. Scotland first.

    • yesindyref2 says:

      Yes, I supported his crowdfunding too, and in spite of everything, I still would.

      Events have proved that what was happening was wrong, and it did need to be challenged in the courts. It was totally regardless of any actual innocence or guilt.

  15. Tatu3 says:

    I donated to Alex Salmond’s crowdfunder and joined the SNP at the same time. I also feel a little let down. I am glad he was found not guilty of rape/sexual assault, but I didn’t like hearing about how he was a bit “hands on” “touchy feely”. I had a boss like that when I was only 18 and it wasn’t nice. So yes, disappointed in him.

  16. Bryan Ritchie says:

    If WOS was to be an MI5 front would it look any different to its current appearance?

  17. Doug says:

    Independence, first and foremost. We need a leader who understands this.

  18. jfngw says:

    Andrew Bowie tweets ‘ And this Internal Market Bill, is just the start. The UK Govt is back in Scotland. Get used to it.’

    The Tories, like a jackboot on the throat, no matter how you vote you will do as you are told by another country.

    • Capella says:

      Yet another menacing message from a Tory gauleiter. No, I do not intend to get used to it. I intend to vote for freedom from such bullies.

  19. Velofello says:

    So, complaints are received about past behaviour of Alex Salmond. An investigative procedure is developed by the Scottish government and Civil service, and is to include past grievances. Westminster is consulted and advises against enabling past grievances to be addressed.The Scottish Government, headed by Ms Sturgeon decided to proceed nevertheless.

    And today we hear via Sky News Ms Sturgeon surmises that Alex Salmond is angry with her because she wouldn’t “collude” to dismiss the allegations against him.Collude? She actually against the counsel of Westminster, put the retrospective complaints procedure in place to enable litigation to be actioned against him.
    Note also that Alex Salmond proposed arbitration on the complaints rather that legal proceedings, Nicola Sturgeon declined that proposal.

    And so, following reportedly substantial police investigation resources, a court case, and Alex Salmond is cleared of all charges.

    And the consequences for those in this failed, this reportably huge wasted expenditure of our taxpayer monies? Zilch!

    It is just past 6 pm so plenty of time for grizebard to call me a f…… idiot. And for Petra to chase me away to “that other website”.

    • jfngw says:

      Your comment doesn’t seem completely unbiased. It was the Scotgov and the head of the civil service that pursued the court case rather than arbitration, the head of the civil service should have resigned or been removed for this.

      Once the allegations have been made the police have no option but to pursue the case, what are you suggesting, they just ignore it, I think that would have blown up in their face. Whether they did a fishing exercise is something that needs examined but it seems standard police practice now, not something I agree with. The prosecution is brought by COPFS, nothing to do with politicians, unless you believe they are following orders.

      Those that believe AS is going to be resurrected and lead Scotland to independence are sadly deluded, he is tarnished, it doesn’t matter what the outcome of the court case was. He cannot win independence for Scotland as it will be raked over continuously during any campaign. The same could be true of NS at the end of this, I’ll wait and see.

    • Dr Jim says:

      Firstly you appear to want Westminster to run the Scottish parliament then you presume because the former FM has not been convicted of any crime he’s an innocent man when he himself admits he is not, Nicola Sturgeon is in no way responsible for the former FMs drunken behaviour around women which left him open to attack resulting in a court case against himself and bringing the party into disrepute
      Any waste of money is surely down to the former FM for his own entanglement in a case that would never have been brought if he had conducted himself in a manner befitting his position rather than abusing his position by being stupid

      What you are exhibiting is defence of a blogger with a grudge who’s using the former FMs predicament as the vehicle to prosecute his own personal agenda

    • grizebard says:

      Consider it said.

      Meanwhile, while the assorted loonies across the way busily disappear up their own backsides in full Judah Liberationalist mode (and occasionally spill their venom over here besides), Andrew Bowie boasts that the London Tories are back in Scotland with a vengeance. Fritter away all you like, dance away on your little pinheads, that’s your perfect right, but we here are keeping our eyes steadily on the ball in this game, not vainly fusspotting about the rickety turnstile at the entrance. Nor even worse, visibly aping the enemy. {quack, quack}

    • And if Nicola Sturgeon had taken Westminster’s advice , well I say Westminster’s advice but who in Westminster ? We never hear who ? was it the janitor ? the cleaner ?

      Of N S had refused to allow investigation what would have been said of her ?
      What would be in the news over and over and over ?
      I will tell you what
      Constant calls for her resignation
      What has she got to hide ?
      Ten women accuse Alex and one woman N S refuses them justice

      That’s what you would be hearing in the news even now , forevermore

      N S was wise , allow the investigation if he’s guilty he will be found and should be found guilty

      If he is not guilty he will be and in fact was found not guilty

      WIN WIN for Alex and for N S

      But the weasels appeared , those who were waiting for N S to refuse investigation so they could attack her for denying justice now attack her for allowing justice

      There’s no war between N S and A S no evidence has ever been produced that shows there is
      They both support Scottish independence
      They have different responsibilities now

    • Petra says:

      ”And for Petra to chase me away to “that other website”.”

      Eh? I’ve never at ANY time told ANYONE to do that on ANY site. Get your facts right, hard as that seems to be for you, in relation to a number of comments that you’ve made in your last post. More than anything grow up and cut out lying about people.

  20. velofello says:

    And further comment – If I had been presented with complaints of the nature described in court – levelled against a former colleague of some 30 years working together, and knowing him well,I would have protected my + 60 year old former colleague against criminal proceedings, keenly accepted Westminster’s counsel, especially so since if found guilty, my colleague would spend the remainder of his life in prison.

    • grizebard says:

      A full and frank admission that you would protect any privileged sexual predator against any investigation, however justified. Welcome to Savilleland, folks!

      I smell fish. Rotten fish.

    • jfngw says:

      You are blind by devotion then. If this had been ignored and the press had become aware of it, and they would, it would have blown up to a level that makes the current situation look like kindergarten stuff.
      .
      Nobodies denying AS has been a great servant to Scotland but as with many men (most actually) they often overstep what is considered acceptable by others. There is a difference to what is criminal and what is acceptable in a workplace, the current committee is not examining this but the procedures used. Don’t expect any clarity, just recommendations about future procedures.

    • Dr Jim says:

      And if the FM had colluded in the protection of Alex Salmond she would have been guilty of misleading a legal enquiry in court thereby abusing her position as FM and bringing the party into disrepute

      Now you’re suggesting the Nicola Sturgeon should have committed a crime to protect someone who was at that time suspected of committing a crime and doing exactly what Nicola Sturgeon said that was her taking the flack over someone else’s behaviour, why on earth should any friend expect their friend to commit perjury and or subvert the law

      I’m afraid this constant rabbit hole digging to retrospectively find the former FM as pure as the driven snow is delusional, he’s the guy who was in the wrong here not the the FM

    • Eilidh says:

      Speaking as someone who was a victim of sexual harassment by 2 different colleaugues in the 1980s I am sincerely glad I never worked with you. It is never acceptable to protect someone from any allegations even if they are your mentor, best mate or even partner. As the senior Snp politician Nicola had no choice but to let an investigation take place without any interference from her or the Snp. I don’t give a flying feck what Westminster thought, that place has been full of sexual misconduct for centuries. Anyone who starts quoting Westminster’s ideas has a distinct smell of unionist troll about them and there is more than a whiff of it with you. So toddle on back to where you came from I am sure you will find the twat entrance no bother. I would like to point out I am a fan of Alex Salmond and am very glad he was not guilty of the charges.

    • Petra says:

      Why would the ScotGov want to adopt the notorious Westminster ‘cover-up’ policy? And AS, not being a total dummy, should have protected himself, the current FM, his party and country.

      ”Alex Salmond missed the key vote on the principal law he was prosecuted under. On 10 June 2009, the then First minister was the only one of the SNP’s 47 MSPs not to back his own Government’s Sexual Offences (Scotland) Bill at its third and final Holyrood stage. Also an MP, he was in Westminster, speaking in an SNP-led debate. Mr Salmond knows all about the legislation now. The law was used for 11 of the 13 charges he faced on the final indictment. It repealed a series of common law sexual offences and replaced them with statutory ones.”..

      http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18328475.salmond-era-law-used-prosecute-former-first-minister/

  21. Alex Clark says:

    What you are supposed to believe is that Nicola Sturgeon conspired with her husband to have Alex Salmond jailed.

    Firstly she persuaded the civil service to write a procedure for dealing with complaints of sexual misconduct and to make sure that said procedure included a means of dealing with complaints against former ministers.

    Secondly, the Murrels used their power and friends to persuade numerous women to make allegations of sexual misconduct against Alex Salmond so as they could nail him and be rid of him (from what) for a long time.

    Sturgeon then blocked any possible route to arbitration and told her senior civil servants to pursue him relentlessly. When they lost the civil case brought by Salmond against the Scottish government she determined to have him in the courts to face trial and in her opinion hopefully, he would have to do meaningful jail time. That would be him taught a lesson. She knew of course that she would be fully supported by the Unionist media in her quest to get Salmond, her reputation would remain intact and all that mattered was bringing down Salmond, the politician who was no longer in politics.

    At no time would the Unionist media turn on her, so she was safe to go after him, they had her back and she knew this and trusted them, acting accordingly.

    In this entirely fictitious account of events that I just made up, there is no explanation from the Salmond conspiracy theorists as to any possible motivation for Nicola Sturgeon to behave in anything like this manner.

    For me at least it is much easier to believe her version of events. Complaints of sexual misconduct during his time as First Minister were made against Alex Salmond after he had left office. He personally asked friend and replacement as First Minister to intervene on his behalf and seek arbitration as a means to resolve the complaints.

    A very reasonable request it would seem to me, however, she refused to be involved and wanted the complaints dealt with under the written procedure. In the light of what has transpired, for her, it is the only thing she could have done. To interfere in her position would have seen as putting pressure on the Civil Service in the Scottish Government to put aside their written procedure in the case of Alex Salmond at the request of the First Minister.

    Anybody think that this might have been used against her if she had argued for arbitration? Anybody think we would be being hit with a parliamentary inquiry into the behaviour of Nicola Sturgeon in trying to keep accusations of sexual assault against Alex Salmond secret and of hiding facts and information from the general public?

    Anybody think she might have been facing the sack for an attempted cover up? Anybody think this could have created a media frenzy and calls for her head?

    It was always going to be one or the other, not daft our opponents and this was always win-win for the opponents of Independence.

    Their job is to have us all fighting with one another and forgetting all about the real battle, the battle to win our Independence, don’t be distracted by the tactics of our opponents because their fingerprints are all over this. Our opponents are the real target and don’t lose sight of that.

    • fionamacinnes says:

      spot on, what I have always thought. i also believe that political fall outs can mend and the rationale of what may have seemed extreme and opposing positions understood by those who each found themselves having to take them. NS did the right thing and I still am an AS fan too.we need both to act with grace towards the other.

  22. velofello says:

    Dr Jim, were you present at your alleged Alex Salmond’s drunken behaviour towards women?

    Westminster offered a lifeline for the ScotGov to avoid it’s tangled mess.

    Alex Salmond proposed arbritration.

    Defending a Who, Where? Why? Eh?

  23. Dr Jim says:

    So back to sanity and the insanity of Johnson who has asked Theresa May to handle the COP 26 in Scotland, so far Mrs May has not consented but the difficulty seems to be at the moment she will not work with Dominic Cummings

  24. weegingerdug says:

    To everyone arguing about Nicola Sturgeon and Alex Salmond and who did or said what – this is a polite reminder to take it elsewhere.

    • Alex Clark says:

      Good point.

    • yesindyref2 says:

      Just delete all our postings on it WGD, you’ve warned us often enough, so we can’t be offended.

    • Velofello says:

      Paul, are you quite sure that you want to determine and control the subject of discussion on your site?

      Rejecting abusive personal comments I endorse – but Ms Sturgeon’s SKY performance was astonishing and is worthy of discussion.

      • weegingerdug says:

        I will remind you (and everyone else) of what the stated purpose of this blog is. If a discussion isn’t going to help convert people from no or undecided to yes, if it risks putting people off because all they see is falling out and disputes amongst yes supporters, then it’s probably not a discussion to be had here.

        If you wish to discuss Nicola Sturgeon’s performance in that Sky News interview, there are other places to do it.

        As for “determining and controlling the subject of discussion”, I’d scarcely be the only blogger to do that – and I am considerably more tolerant than some.

  25. grizebard says:

    Getting back to the point, although I basically support this third outing as with the others, I have some reservations about the suggested timing of this one. There’s a danger, it seems to me, of people getting too distracted (mightily distracted, even, in current circumstances) in the run-up to, and during, the festive season. I would have preferred to wait until the first week in Jan, since then any residual illusions about Brexit will surely have been well-and-truly shattered.

    (Unless JK expects some significant political development to have happened by then, or conversely that the final Brexit Dirty Deal will prove to be a damp squib. Or {gasp} that he thinks that a decisive-enough poll result might even trigger that significant political development! {grin})

  26. jfngw says:

    In 2021 it will be the 35th election (excluding council elections) were the Tories have failed to win a majority or even the most seats in Scotland. Can we think of any other country that has rejected a party so comprehensively but still had them govern for 60% of this period. It looks like the perfect definition of a vassal state, it’s time to end it.

    • Velofello says:

      Eilidh; I regret if my comments offended you. My mantra, if I can term it that is “respect the dignity of women”. Call me old fashioned, I still open the door for a female, teenager or mature, though they may be much younger than me.
      I firmly believe in loyalty and truth and In my view the Salmond prosecution fell well short of my values.

  27. yesindyref2 says:

    “£3,124 raised of £6,000 target” so far. From the previous two I think that’s pretty good, considering it’s the weekend.

    https://www.gofundme.com/f/a-third-scot-goes-pop-poll-as-no-deal-looms

    If you’re not in – we can’t win!

  28. Alex Montrose says:

    After getting bumped by the man in the Bath, I looked around for another Indy site to frequent for my daily update of positive news, and decided to give Scott goes Pop a go.

    One of JKs favorite topics was voting intentions for next years Holyrood Election, according to JK it would be silly to vote any other way than SNP 1 and 2, even though in 2016 for 1 million list votes the SNP only won 4 list seats.

    In the North East Region the SNP got 134,000 approx list votes and won 0 seats.

    So I argued that Independence voter should consider voting SNP 1 Green 2, to increase the Independence majority at Holyrood and hopefully decimate the Unionist List MSPs.

    Clearly this didn’t go down well with JK and he deleted a lot of my posts, so for that reason I won’t be investing, and I’m out.

  29. Hamish100 says:

    I will vote snp 1 & 2 however i do not have and issue if someone wishes to vote 2 green from a pro independence point of view. They are an established party and with a number of exceptions ( football legislation) have been generally supportive of the government.

    As for so called indy parties 3, 4 and 5 they will not get enough votes to get regional MSP’s. Interestingly the one who flew a kite saying they would maybe ayes or maybes naw have a party called wings has kept quiet. Letting all the other hares run. Sits backs and watches and then I wonder on the last day of parties being accepted legally will come to the fore or support one of the new ones? Worthy of debate I would have thought. Still even if there is a wings type party they won’t have any MSP’s but may have helped the Lib Dem’s, labour or tories to pick up from the greens.
    Heh ho a unionist majority.
    For the other parties supporting independence will they not stand where the Greens have a better chance?
    Maybe WGD you could invite one of 2 new party leaders to discuss at the same time? Don’t want too much credence given!

  30. Noirin B says:

    I will support this but it is my opinion that we urgently need to concentrate on getting information out re the coming perfect storm. ..IMB and it’s intent to destroy Holyrood, Brexit, destruction of human rights, assault on health and welfare, animal welfare and food standards, Covid, union jackery and all the ways in which Scotland has been shafted as part of the UK. I speak to people regularly who do not know about any or even most of these things and that is worrying. With respect to JK and recognising that he’s also testing the right question there is a lot of polling going on and as we all know it’s only the big one that matters. To win and to win well we have to get the above information across to No voters and more importantly undecideds. I donated to a crowdfunded for billboards about a year ago. Never saw one yet. Does anyone know what happened to that?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s