#HR21 Game On. #Scexit vote 2? Bring it On. Best Result? #SNPOut.

With Holyrood 2021 fast approaching, it’s worth taking stock of the state of Scottish politics and what it means for us and the next five years of our Scottish Parliament and our politics in general.

Basically it’s goosed. Scotland faces, even if the Nationalists (SNP/Alba/Greens) only get a minority of the votes (less than 50% on less than a 50% voter turnout) getting royally goosed, again. We’ll suffer another 5 years of appalling division and nationalist hatred of our UK, the UK we, the majority of the Scottish people, chose in a once in a lifetime/generation vote only 6.5 years ago. The arguments have not moved on, the economics have deteriorated and the Nationalist lies and spin have never stopped for a second. They have no logical case.

Our problem is a devolution settlement that has been kidnapped and bastardised by Nationalists, morphing it into a completely binary choice between remaining in or leaving our UK, #Scexit. Scexit destroys all other considerations for the Nationalists, it’s their all consuming passion/obsession and their primary objective regardless of the cost to future Scottish generations. Their constitution shows how Scexit obsessed they are, clause 2a is actually their primary clause.

The Nationalists have no real overall political affiliations, they are experts at jumping onto any bandwagon that gets them votes, one time left, next time right, in fact anything perceived as popular. It doesn’t matter to them as they don’t deliver unless it’s an obvious bribe, such as offering free computers to kids and 4% NHS pay rises, Baby Boxes, free this & free that paid for by UK tax payers. The SNP can pander to the uninformed, as our (pathetic) Scottish Government (ne administration) they don’t really have to pay a penny, our UK pays for it all. We earn way, way less than we spend on essentials, we’ve done so since the SNP came to power in 2007. Yes, that’s right, 2007. So if they get in again that’ll be 19 years they’ll have made Scottish politics all about Scexit. Without UK pooling and sharing we could not even afford to police ourselves.

Could we leave the UK and become an independent state? Of course we could. Are we too small, too poor and too stupid to go it alone? Of course we are not, but Nationalists ignore and lie about the reality of the consequences of that irreversible decision. We’d face at least one if not two or more decades of mega ‘real’ austerity, with services slashed and taxes increased. That sadly is the good outlook, in all likelihood Scexit would initiate mass capital flight to the rUK, by businesses, entrepreneurs and skilled people, our wealth creators, our tax payers. Scotland already has way more Public Sector employees than England and our PS employees rely on all UK tax payers for their living. Imagine the implications for them if we lose our wealth creators and tax payers while also losing the billions of funding we get from our UK from pooling and sharing.

So where does this leave us? Basically up the creek without a paddle unless we actually DO something positive about it. We face yet another 5 years of divisive division while Scotland continues to suffer. Before Nationalism took hold like a cancer we had three competing main political parties, Labour, Tories and LibDems, essentially Left, Right and Middle in their approach to politics, but all focused on the same agenda, improving the lives of the people, their voters, us.

Regardless of what Nationalists say, the election is going to be primarily about Scexit. When the other parties voice their concerns about separation and another referendum vote, they are accused by the hypocritical SNP of making it not about politics but about seperation, which makes me think they think we are stupid, look back up at their constitution, it’s all about Scexit and their daily politics and their (her) daily Covid wibble show is also all about Scexit. The main parties can’t win, as if they try, as they all have, to make the election about ‘normal’ politics, it always comes back to Scexit.

So what are the outcome scenarios? 1) Nationalists lose their minority government status, 2) Nationalists win a majority of votes (not seats, seats don’t count in an election forced into a binary process structured around Scexit).

Scenario 1 is unlikely to happen now (especially now Alba and A4U are in play) as the Nationalists are now playing tactical voting, with Alba standing in the List vote only (looking to take the ineffective SNP List votes) & the Greens standing mainly in the List (interestingly Alba could destroy the Greens as they are only tolerated by the SNP).

This tactical approach (welcomed by the SNP or not) makes scenario 2 more likely than before Alba surfaced. Below is the outcome (ignoring the potential damaging impact A4U would have on the Anti-Nat vote unless all Anti-Nat parties accommodated their involvement) if Alba were to gain 30% of the SNP regional vote;

Note there is NO change in Nat/Anti-Nat vote percentages, Greens lose 3 seats, SNP lose 3 seats, yet Alba helps with 14 List seats to increase the nationalist seat majority from 9 to 25! (Data source is me, I have a fully functional Holyrood Election model that covers Constituency and List votes on a seat by seat and regional basis).

UK support has options, we either let them carry on and suffer a further 5 years of division (Alba or not the SNP will likely still form a minority government) and repeatedly resist a second referendum plea, as there’ll be no real mandate. It’s unlikely the SNP will fight the election on a Scexit only manifesto, it will be ‘understood’ but not up front and centre. We can take the fight to them and get them out, by getting the main parties to fight tactically, examining each constituency seat and list area and agreeing to stand down, allowing the most likely Anti-Nat candidates the chance to take seats. The Tories (very badly via open letters etc) have suggested they are open to this approach. To work, Labour & the LibDem’s, for the sake of Scotland and the Union, should ignore the poor Tory open letter communication and bite the bullet of cooperation. Listen to George Galloway even if you don’t involve him in a pact, the concept (as #SNPOUt has said for years) is everything. If Labour (essential to the tactical option) refuse to play ball the Tories could act independently, but I don’t think that is a very likely scenario, it takes two to tango.

So, there IS a way to game the system, the Nats have shown this very clearly. If we game it and win, we can all move on with life. If however the Nats have the better game and win the most seats, we’ll just have to grin and bear it, there will be no second Scexit vote as seats will not deliver them a mandate, but we all suffer their whinging division again. If however the Nationalist game plays well and we walk off the field, then they may well get more than 50% of the vote (particularly if we have a low turnout favouring the Nats). This would deliver a ‘moral’ mandate of sorts and would pressure UKGov to respond. My advice would be, even though there is no legal precedent and the constitution is reserved to the UKGov, and the response of ‘now is not the time’ being perfectly logical, I would manage a delivery of a final (for a real generation) Scexit vote.

Do I want one? No. Should there be one? No. Would there be a legal basis for one? No. Can we hold one and win and chuck the issue into the long grass for a real generation? Absolutely Yes!

We could agree to provide a Section 30 once a second Edinburgh Agreement had been reached, if no agreement were reachable then a vote wouldn’t happen. The EA2 would be much clearer and firmer in it’s detail, utilising the elements of turnout threshold, win threshold and a confirmatory vote post leaving negotiations if LeaveUK became the electorates choice. Other issues would be who could vote, ie British Citizens in Scotland or those with settled status and our Armed Forces abroad along with minum age requirement. It would also stipulate the the minimum time period before another S30 could be granted, a generation, 35 years, allowing Scotland to get on with normal life and politics, using our powers and UK support to work on improving peoples lives in Scotland, normality.

For now, think strategically, vote tactically. Vote for the Anti-Nationalist constituency candidate most likely to win regardless of party. Vote for your Anti-Nationalist party preference in the list vote. Consider only voting Labour or Tory to maximise list seats. Resist minority candidates, the likely outcome of giving them your b]vote is they will lose the major Anti-Nat parties seats. Use your common sense, think about the greater good for Scotland.

#SNPOut

Steve Sayers 29/3/21

Post Indyref BPC Polling as at 26/3/21 Source: All poll data (hyperlinks below charts).

Recent polls including a run of 23 with nationalists in the lead have had their supporters and SNP Politicians claiming Leave UK is now in the majority and the settled will of the Scottish people. All they need is a #Scexit vote soon and they will win. Utter nonsense.

There are a number of (some complex) charts in this post that show the lie to their claim. My recent Blog on polling in much greater detail is here https://stevensayers.wordpress.com/2021/03/11/the-trend-is-nigh/ Pre selection of those polled via propensity to vote is one particular issue.

Note the media concentrates on the headline percentage ‘excluding’ undecideds, this is disingenuous as the bulk of these uncertain people (DK’s) do vote when it comes to a real vote, they tend, as happened in 2014, to gravitate towards the status quo rather than the risky option in a binary choice. In the 19 pre referendum polls in September 2014 80% of the DK’s reverted to the status quo and voted to remain in our UK.

I like the first chart below (with polling from 2011) which gifts Leave UK ALL the undecideds, which of course would NEVER happen.

The internal SNP target of 60% in the polls for a 12 month period is pie in the sky. Its why they are probably pretty unhappy at HQ and why Sturgeon has stated that she will only hold a #Scexit vote if it is via a UK sanctioned Section 30.

I do not want and I don’t think we need another divisive #Scexit vote, but, this constant harping about the constitution is tiresome, most Nats seem, frighteningly, economically clueless and factually bereft (or they lie).

Perhaps giving them another go and getting their second fail might shut them up? Without going into the detail of an Edinburgh Agreement and or the issues of win and turnout hurdles, or the confirmatory vote options, I think democracy in Scotland would prevail and it would be the final nail in their #Scexit coffin.

If in Holyrood 2021 the SNP win 51% of the vote, based on a clear cut manifesto that is specifically #Scexit based, that elusive second vote being their primary/key policy and objective, then let’s go for it! Crush it for a real pre agreed generation this time.

Note my paragraph from the last polling update 13/7/20, It’s as I said, Brexit is done and Covid reality is sinking in, “For those of a nervous disposition, by then Brexit will be history and the Scottish Covid failings regarding testing and care homes will have been fully exposed”.

Steve 13/7/20 – Updated 26/4/21

#SNPOut

Full poll list below. Note not all links resolve to original source data, some pollsters delete or relocate tables after time passes. The two Hanbury Strategy polls excluded DK”s so their results have been adjusted to include them based on actual DK statistics from the major pollsters. Also not the Wikipedia page EXCLUDES polls carried out on behalf of Scotland In Union as they use the Leave Remain UK question (only nationalists thinks this is an issue).

27–30 Oct 2014YouGov/The Times1
30 Oct–5 Nov 2014Panelbase/Wings Over Scotland2
6–13 Nov 2014Survation/Daily Record3
15–18 Dec 2014Survation/Daily Record4
9–11 Dec 2014YouGov/The Sun5
29 Jan–2 Feb 2015YouGov/The Times6
12–17 Feb 2015Survation/Daily Record7
10–12 Mar 2015YouGov/The Times8
12–17 Mar 2015Survation/Daily Record9
13–19 Mar 2015ICM/Guardian10
8–9 Apr 2015YouGov/The Times11
20–23 Apr 2015Panelbase/Sunday Times12
22–27 Apr 2015Survation/Daily Record13
29 Apr–1 May 2015YouGov/Sunday Times14
3–6 May 2015Survation/Daily Record15
19–21 May 2015YouGov/Sunday Post16
26 Jun–3 Jul 2015Panelbase/Sunday Times17
3–7 July 2015Survation/Scottish Daily Mail18
24–30 Aug 2015Ipsos Mori/STV19
12 Aug–1 Sep 2015TNS20
7–10 Sep 2015Survation/Scottish Daily Mail21
7–10 Sep 2015YouGov/The Times22
4–10 Sep 2015Panelbase/Sunday Times23
9–13 Oct 2015YouGov/The Times24
6–13 Nov 2015Panelbase/Wings Over Scotland25
8–12 Jan 2016Survation/Daily Record26
8–14 Jan 2016Panelbase/Sunday Times27
1–4 Feb 2016YouGov/The Times28
1–7 Feb 2016Ipsos Mori/STV29
11–16 Feb 2016Survation/Daily Record30
25–29 Feb 2016Survation/Scottish Daily Mail31
7–9 Mar 2016YouGov/The Times32
10–17 Mar 2016Survation/Daily Record33
7–11 Apr 2016YouGov/The Times34
6–15 Apr 2016Panelbase/Sunday Times35
15–20 Apr 2016Survation/Daily Record36
23–28 Apr 2016Panelbase/Sunday Times37
2–4 May 2016YouGov/The Times38
25 Jun 2016Survation/Daily Record39
25–26 Jun 2016Panelbase/Sunday Times40
24–28 Jun 2016Survation/Scottish Daily Mail41
20–25 Jul 2016YouGov42
29–31 Aug 2016YouGov/The Times43
10 Aug–4 Sep 2016TNS44
5–10 Sep 2016Survation45
5–11 Sep 2016Ipsos Mori/STV46
9–15 Sep 2016Panelbase/Sunday Times47
28 Sep–4 Oct 2016BMG/Herald48
24–29 Nov 2016YouGov/The Times49
9–16 Dec 2016BMG/Herald50
29 Aug–16 Dec 2016YouGov51
20–26 Jan 2017Panelbase/Sunday Times52
26–31 Jan 2017BMG/Herald53
7–13 Feb 2017Panelbase/Wings Over Scotland54
23–27 Feb 2017BMG/Herald55
24 Feb–6 Mar 2017Ipsos Mori/STV56
8–13 Mar 2017Survation/Scottish Daily Mail57
9–14 Mar 2017YouGov/The Times58
13–17 Mar 2017Panelbase/Sunday Times59
7–11 Apr 2017BMG/Herald60
29 Mar–11 Apr 2017Kantar61
18–21 Apr 2017Panelbase/Sunday Times62
18–21 Apr 2017Survation/Sunday Post63
24–27 Apr 2017YouGov/The Times64
15–18 May 2017YouGov/The Times65
22–27 May 2017Ipsos Mori/STV66
31 May–2 Jun 2017Survation/Sunday Post67
1–5 Jun 2017YouGov/The Times68
6–7 Jun 2017Survation/Daily Record69
2–7 Jun 2017Panelbase70
9–13 Jun 2017Survation/Daily Record71
31 Aug–7 Sep 2017Panelbase/Sunday Times72
8–12 Sep 2017Survation/Scottish Daily Mail73
2–5 Oct 2017YouGov/The Times74
27–30 Nov 2017Survation/Daily Record75
1–5 Dec 2017Survation/Sunday Post76
12–16 Jan 2018YouGov/The Times77
24-28 Jan 2018Survation/Daily Record78
05-11 Mar 2018Ipsos Mori/STV79
23-28 Mar 2018Panelbase/Sunday Times80
1 -5 June 2018YouGov/The Times81
30 May -5 Jun 2018YouGov/Future of England82
8–13 Jun 2018Panelbase/Sunday Times83
5–10 Jul 2018Survation/Daily Record84
24–29 Aug 2018Deltapoll/OFOC & Best for Britain85
28 Sep–02 Oct 2018Survation/Sunday Post86
28 Sep–04 Oct 2018Panelbase Sunday Times87
03–05 Oct 2018Survation/Scottish National Party88
18-21 Oct 2018Survation/Daily Record89
2-7 Nov 2018Panelbase Constitutional Comission90
9-13 Nov 2018Survation Scotland In Union91
30 Nov – 5 Dec 2018Panelbase/The Sunday Times92
15 – 21 March 2019Survation Progress Scotland93
18 – 23 April 2019Survation Scotland in Union94
18 – 24 April 2019Panelbase (DRG) The Sunday Times95
24–26 Apr 2019YouGov/The Times96
14–17 May 2019Panelbase/Sunday Times97
18–20 Jun 2019Panelbase/Sunday Times98
30 Jul–2 Aug 2019Lord Ashcroft99
30 Aug–3 Sep 2019YouGov/The Times100
12–16 Sep 2019Survation/Scotland in Union101
30 Sep–9 Oct 2019Survation/Progress Scotland102
9–11 Oct 2019Panelbase/Sunday Times103
20–22 Nov 2019Panelbase/Sunday Times104
19–25 Nov 2019Ipsos MORI/STV105
3–6 Dec 2019YouGov/The Times106
3–6 Dec 2019Panelbase/Sunday Times107
10–11 Dec 2019Survation/The Courier108
20–22 Jan 2020Survation/Progress Scotland109
22–27 Jan 2020YouGov110
28–31 Jan 2020Panelbase/Scot Goes Pop111
7–14 Feb 2020YouGov/Hanbury112
24–26 Mar 2020Panelbase/Sunday Times113
1–5 May 2020Panelbase/Wings Over Scotland114
1–5 Jun 2020Panelbase/Scot Goes Pop115
15–19 Jun 2020Panelbase/Business for Scotland116
30 June – 3 July 2020Panelbase/Sunday Times117
6-10 August 2020YouGov/The Times118
6-13 August 2020Savanta Comres119
12-18 August 2020Panelbase/Business for Scotland120
2–7 Sep 2020Survation121
17–21 Sep 2020JL Partners122
25 Sep–5 Oct 2020Survation/Progress Scotland123
2–9 Oct 2020Ipsos MORI/STV124
9 Oct 2020Savanta ComRes125
28 Oct–3 Nov 2020Survation126
6–10 Nov 2020YouGov127
5–11 Nov 2020Panelbase/Scot Goes Pop128
20–26 Nov 2020Ipsos MORI/STV129
2–7 Dec 2020Survation130
11–15 Dec 2020Savanta ComRes/The Scotsman131
11–13 Jan 2021Survation/Scot Goes Pop132
8–13 Jan 2021Savanta ComRes/The Scotsman133
19–22 Jan 2021Panelbase/Sunday Times134
4–9 Feb 2021Savanta ComRes/The Scotsman135
15–21 Feb 2021Ipsos MORI/STV News136
18–22 Feb 2021Savanta ComRes/ITV News137
25–26 Feb 2021Survation/Daily Record138
12 Feb–1 Mar 2021Hanbury Strategy139
26 Feb–4 Mar 2021Savanta ComRes/Daily Express139
4–5 Mar 2021Savanta ComRes/The Scotsman140
3–5 Mar 2021Panelbase/The Sunday Times141
4–8 Mar 2021YouGov/The Times142
5–9 Mar 2021Hanbury Strategy143
5–10 Mar 2021Savanta ComRes/The Scotsman144
9-12 Mar 2021Survation/Scotland in Union145
11–16 Mar 2021Opinium/Sky News146
11–18 Mar 2021Survation/DC Thomson147
16–19 Mar 2021BMG/The Herald148
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_on_Scottish_independence

‘The Trend Is Nigh’

Or, why polling shows us our nationalist friends haven’t a hope in hell of winning a second RemainUK/LeaveUK referendum even if by some chance they wangle one.

As we move into another Holyrood election season, one that could yet see another parliament session with a minority secessionist ‘government’ in control – if successful they’ll have been in power for 19 years by 2026 – it’s worth taking a closer look at the current public appetite for the single blinkered issue that dominates their thinking, focus and interactions with our UK., #Scexit. That appetite is regularly measured by professional polling companies, 99% of whom are members of the British Polling Council (BPC), who’s president is Professor Sir John Curtice from The University of Strathclyde.

We’ve just passed an 8 month period in Scottish #Scexit politics, during which It seems all there is in Scottish politics now Brexit is finally done (as a RemainEU voter who accepted democracy I just wish we can now all move on), is Scexit & Salmond. During this period the BPC polls have shown a lead for LeaveUK 23 times consecutively. You’ll probably have heard about it, as it now seemed the polls really mattered when nationalists are in the lead, well, let’s humour them a bit, it’s the only decent run they’ve ever had or are likely to have.

Since I took a keen and detailed interest in the polls (after the referendum was announced), there have been 253 since November 2011 and 143 polls since the referendum in 2014. In the post referendum polls, LeaveUK has led 38 times, their longest run before their recent run of 23 was 3. It doesn’t seem coincidental to me that the run coincided with two key issues: a combined last ditch attempt by the SNP and remainers to attempt to stop Brexit, which failed, and an anti Boris led Tory government elected in December 2019 kickback. We have now left the EU, we left at the end of January 2021, and it’s shortly thereafter (and prior to Salmond and Sturgeon appearing at the Inquiry) that the mildly positive trend for LeaveUK reversed, the last 6 polls showing RemainUK in the lead again. As well as Brexit receding as an issue now the deed is done, it’s also quite possible the UK’s excellent Vaccine handling investment and rollout have also positively impacted on peoples perceptions, positive towards our UK that is.

In reality is there’s no convincing lead for LeaveUK, no majority, no ‘settled will,’ there never has been and most likely there never will be. Even when LeaveUK are gifted ALL of those don’t know/undecided poll votes, they never get anywhere near their (The SNP’s never contested) internal target of achieving 60% in the polls for a 12 month period. When we exclude DK’s (all polls show results for LeaveUK, RemainUK and Don’t Knows/Undecideds/Wont Vote – DK’s for short) LeaveUK has never achieved 60% for one poll, never mind one year, and that’s in 6.5 years of polls. In the 9 months to 22/2/21 (23 polls) the average for LeaveUK was 54% excluding DK’s, with only one poll at 59%. This period from 5/6/20 was the zenith for LeaveUK, the start of their 23 poll lead sequence. Since the start of that period there has now been 29 polls and LeaveUK’s average is 53%, starting at 52% and ending now at 49%. Immediately after the referendum in 2014, the first poll showed LeaveUK at 52%, with their current polling at 49% it’s clear there is no significant change, remember, DK’s are ignored, so the reality would be that percentage would drop in a real vote..

Individual polls by themselves mean nothing, yes they are of interest, but not as illuminating as the trend over time of multiple polls from a number of polling companies. Abstracting trends of individual pollsters is also interesting, we will look at one of these abstractions shortly as it’s current and is carried out regularly. When you look at the wider trend and consider the previous three paragraphs, it’s evident to those with logic that the SNP led LeaveUK have a huge battle ahead of them this coming Holyrood election. They and their nationalist supporters desperately want a referendum, yet there is no perceived majority for and indeed no moral mandate for such a referendum. The SNP have to win in May to keep their Scexit flame alive and they also have to promise their support a referendum is coming, thats a cleft stick as the public are tired of the hatred and division their obsession causes. The only way they can get anything approaching a moral mandate is to campaign on a Scexit manifesto. This from a recent tweet of mine: “There’s no SNP #Scexit mandate now. The only way of getting a publicly accepted mandate, is by getting 51%+ of #HR21 votes based on a manifesto with Scexit as its primary promise. Nothing else cuts it & it isn’t going 2 happen, Scexit won’t be their primary manifesto commitment.” So not only are the polls against them but it’s unlikely they will go all out in the campaign for a second referendum, the combination of lack of commitment and fading polling will lead, in my view, to further falls in support for ‘independence”a positive word bastardised by Scottish nationalists.

The interesting fact about polls is that due to weighting aspects (polling technical data handling) I believe they are even worse for LeaveUK. So, those of you not interested in detail and numbers may well want to stop reading now, because this is going to get somewhat detailed, and as is evident from the preceding paragraphs, LeaveUK is on a hiding to nothing anyway.

Polls are weighted, this from Anthony Wells from YouGov: “Weighting by Demographics As we’ve seen from the sampling article, no sampling technique is perfect: quasi-random sampling by definition has some random variation in it and even YouGov, who know the demographics of all the people they invite to a poll, can’t be certain they will all respond at the same rate. If an achieved sample doesn’t match the known demographics of Great Britain (Scotland) then pollsters deal with it through weighting. https://ukpollingreport.co.uk/faq-weighting” This from respected Times journalist Kenny Farquharson: “FWIW, having commissioned and reported polls for almost 30 years my conclusion is this: it is much more useful to have the naked snapshot of public opinion, unweighted for turnout. Only when you are close to polling day does it become relevant to bring turnout into the picture‘. https://twitter.com/KennyFarq/status/1368471320359485440?s=20 Weighting really is more complex and difficult than YouGov would have you believe, especially in relation to Scexit polling which has a number of unique aspects.

When I first looked at data from polls around and after the referendum (polling companies publish a high level of detail as well as the headline results used by them and those who commission them) only survation weighted results by the ‘likelihood to vote’. Most other pollsters in polls pre & after the referendum didn’t use turnout weighting. Even Mark Diffley when working at Ipsos Mori (he’s now with SNP backed Angus Robertson’s ‘Progress Scotland’) didn’t use it, Survation was followed by others later who now all use it. The reduction in people questioned varies from 10% – 20%, this in my opinion has to increase the MOE (margin of error, normally +/-5%) and reduce DK%’s significantly. This means if the poll asks 1020 people to take part, they prune down the number asked the actual LeaveUK/RemainUK question by somewhere between 100 and 200 people. This turnout pruning is via a question asking how likely they are to vote on a scale of zero to ten, they then exclude those who selected (normally) 8 or less where 10 was most likely/definite to vote. It seems to me when it’s a simple binary question, excluding those from 1 – 8 is going to reduce the number of DK’s in the final result. These DK’s are the very people who decide a referendums outcome, they either vote one way or the other when push comes to shove. In 2014 those DK’s gravitated hugely towards RemainUK when people were actually faced with the vote. The same will happen again, lack of information and poor forecast detail from the SNP will ensure it. In the 3 polls on the day prior to the referendum, the average results were: LeaveUK 44%, RemainUK 49% and DK 7%, you know the result, LeaveUK picked up only 1% of those DK’s, RemainUK picked up 6%, (86%) of the undecided vote to produce the 55.3%/44.7% RemainUK result. Comparing that to the latest 3 polls, LeaveUK 44%, RemainUK 46% and DK 10%, on a similar pattern (which is highly likely) to 2014, the result tomorrow would be 54.5%/45.5% RemainUK, absolutely no significant change. Bear in mind this is even with genuine DK’s now being removed from the polling results – I did say it would get detailed!

Chris Curtis from Opinion Research (pollsters) is of the same opinion as me, here’s his Tweet from the 7/3/21 when some people were ‘up in arms’ when Savanta Comres released a snap ‘unweighted’ Scexit poll recently: “I wouldn’t bother weighting a Scottish independence poll by turnout anyway. We have to assume almost everyone is going to vote (like last time) and there is no way of telling who won’t at this stage regardless” .https://twitter.com/chriscurtis94/status/1368555673848586245?s=20

As well as turnout weighting, weighting is applied to party voting intention, previous referendum voting, age profiling, sex (not gender) and location, so it’s always worth looking at the initial raw data to get a feel for how much weighting has been done. Pollsters will of course defend their weighting, but to me, the more complex it gets the more MOE must increase. There is one other key aspect that has, again in my opinion, altered the LeaveUK/RemainUK polling results in favour of LeaveUK examined below..

Young voters/Age Weighting. 16 and 17 year olds are now included in nearly all Scexit polling, their propensity to vote is low. In 2014 110K registered, 75% of them say they voted. They represent 2.5% of those who can vote and at that does not appear to be fully covered by any weighting. “Daily Express, Scotland and the Union Poll – 8 March 2021 Savanta ComRes interviewed 1,004 Scottish adults aged 16+ online from 26 February to 4 March 2021. Data were weighted to be representative of Scottish adults by age, gender, region, 2019 General Election recall and 2014 Independence Referendum recall. Savanta ComRes is a member of the British Polling Council and abides by its rules. Full tables at www.comresglobal.com.” In this poll of 1004 people, weighted down (for all factors) to 825 who were actually asked the question, the LeaveUK results (outcome 43%) were as follows: 16-34 yr olds 60%, 35-54’s 47 and 55+’s 29%. The ‘complexity’ comes in when you look at two things, firstly that the first age group are much less likely to vote by a considerable margin and secondly even after weighting, the reduced sample size of 825 is not representative of the respective age groups as a percentage of our population, namely, 16-34 27.4%, 35-54 32.4% and 55+ 40%, you do the math.

For those that bothered to read past paragraph six, I hope the detail that followed has enlightened you a little. I would encourage you to look into the data tables yourselves when published. In the meantime, you can follow my charting of Scexit poll trends by following my pinned tweet on Twitter @SteveSayersOne where you will see my latest trend charts and occasionaly some light analysis. #SNPOut

Ooops! Nearly forgot about that single pollster abstraction, here it is:

Steve Sayers 11/3/21

Our Future FM? – SNP and Progress Scotland’s Rising Star Erin Mwembo – February 2019

Yesterday I wrote a blog post about the launch of Angus Robertson’s Progress Scotland company, lauded by the SNP including the first Minister and other senior SNP politicians. You can find that blog post linked below, before you finish reading this one its probably worth reading yesterdays (if you haven’t already seen it) before reading this one, as they are intrinsically linked.

https://stevensayers.wordpress.com/2019/02/06/progress-scotland-snp-rising-star-miss-erin-mwembo-february-2019/  

Quick synopsis;

Erin was apparently (ish) a No to Yes convert at the age of 12 (ish), having come (timescale hard to pin down) to realise post indyref that Yes was the way to go. This was ideal for Angus’s new Yes promoting arms length (from the SNP) company.

The issue though is it’s not exactly clear if Erin was telling the truth (you will get that from yesterdays blog) or being willingly “coached.” Did Progress Scotland (or someone else) coach and guide her into less than truthful waters? Did she mislead them or us, perhaps by wishful misremembering?

When twitter became twitchy about the new company and its primary ‘Star” (Erin has been a very involved energetic activist and visible campaigner for the SNP and other organisations since joining the SNP in October 2015), Erin and her mum locked down their twitter accounts (not sure what’s happened on facebook) and alegedly went on a tweet delete spree (not before some were captured by screenshot), apparently this also happened on facebook, where users local to that area (East Lothian) commented about post deletions and the fact it was common knowledge that Erin and her mum were very pro SNP and had been for some time (they did take screenshots). I of course am now blocked on twitter.

In the meantime, SNP and Yes twitter went mad in defence, snarling and snapping at anyone daring to criticise this young woman, with Progress Scotland, Angus, Humza and many other SNP politicians horrified at the unionist trolls for daring to question the matter, making out Erin was a victim. The National even wrote a typical diatribe attacking some unionists for having the audacity to question a “young 17 year old girl” I have a funny feeling Erin would tell them where to go for calling her a “girl” along with the evident misogynistic and ageist connotations. Erin is an extremely active and high profile SNP activist who has never shied from stating her opinion that voting as an adult at 16 is her right, while strongly promoting independence and women rights.

Sadly, Scottish Nationalists think pro-union people are “trolling” Erin about this. This is mainly untrue (you always get a few idiots), its the misdirection from the SNP (don’t tell me they aren’t involved), Progress Scotland and Angus Robertson that our justified ire is directed at. Erin has, whether complicit or not, been very badly used and exposed. Shame on them.

Todays situation;

Here are some facts following yesterdays blog.

2019 Erin aged 17 publicly states she would “probably have” voted No in 2014 aged 12

2018 Erin told the Holyrood Magazine

“Erin Mwembo, 16, is a fifth-year student, also in the middle of her prelims, arriving to speak to Holyrood straight after her Modern Studies exam. She had heard her family talking about politics and, keen to learn more, started watching YouTube videos of Scottish political debate during the 2015 general election campaign. “I just wanted to know what was going on,” she explains.

But Erin has no doubt that 16-year-olds should be able to vote. “You’re an adult at 16, so you should be able to vote at 16, it’s as simple as that. But also, it’s about having the same rights as every other citizen – for example, I think everyone should be entitled to the Living Wage at 16. There shouldn’t be some sort of hierarchy based on age – everyone should be treated equally.”

For a politicised 16-year-old, it must be hard to watch middle-aged politicians announce that you are incapable of using the vote responsibly.

“It’s frustrating because I find the counter-argument is ‘they’re not mature enough’, but everyone’s experience is different,” she says. “You could be 24 and be the most sheltered person ever, or you could be 16 and not. But it’s about deciding how you want your country to be – and everyone should have a say in that.”

2017 Erin did a (probably) No to Yes video for Phantom Power (link and wording in yesterdays blog)

2016 Erin became Vice Convenor for YSI East Lothian – was mentored by Joanna Cherry – at 15 was used in an SNP official promotional video – was mentioned in dispatches (conference video) by Mhairi Black – campaigned and did back office stuff for the SNP all over Scotland

2015 Erin Joined the SNP on 23rd October.

2014 Erin aged 12 reply tweeted Alex Salmond’s statement tweet on the 19/9/14 at 10:04 to commiserate losing the referendum and his job “Sad but whatever you gotta do” – 12/9/14 replied ‘Truth” to a facebook post of a song about how voting No would be the wrong thing to do – on the 14/8/19 replied “Yup” to a rather dreary poem about a grandchild remonstrating with her grandfather for voting No.

I will leave the readers to decide how they view all this. Was she coached? And if so by whom? Did she lie on purpose or is she just an excited youth? Why has she locked her twitter account and why has mum deactivated hers? What involvement did the SNP, Progress Scotland and Angus Robertson have in producing and broadcasting this dubious No to Yes story?

For the record, I did not take the screenshots but I believe them to be absolutely genuine.

Steve 7/2/19

PS. Destined for greater things (especially when you see the praise and photo opps in yesterday blog).


The Battle Of Britain- Harris Tweed Skirmish

Screenshot 2018-11-13 at 11.55.05.png

Last week the Scots nationalists preoccupation with “flegs” waved its weary head above the parapets again, this time in Inverness.

The stooshie revolved around a new shop in Inverness (I won’t name it here, as its probably still licking it’s wounds and bemused after discovering this small but vocal prickly side of a minority of its local customers). The shop had the temerity of attaching priced sales tags emblazoned with the Union Jack (that flag that includes the Saltire) and the words ‘British Tweed” to some Harris Tweed products – probably made overseas, which is where much of the Harris Tweed post weaving product manufacturing takes place.

Screenshot 2018-11-13 at 11.52.13.png

You could be forgiven for thinking this true yet innocuous event wasn’t of any consequence, sadly not.

Some very vocal small minded anti British Scottish nationalists spotted the – in their eyes – offending tags. Social media mayhem ensued along with about six Scottish mainstream (if you count The National as mainstream) news outlets annoyingly stirring up the stooshie. They claimed The Harris Tweed Authority (HTA) had rapidly intervened and “instructed”* the villainous shop to remove the offending price tags. (Times, Sun, Mirror, Mail, Herald and National).

Some background (from the HTA website);

Screenshot 2018-11-13 at 11.45.07.png

HTA is the body tasked with protecting the unique qualities and brand of Harris tweed worldwide. Not only does it have a board and a CEO in Stornaway buy it has it’s own British Act Of Parliament to help it –

“The passing of an Act of Parliament in 1993 brought into being the Harris Tweed Authority, a new statutory body replacing the original Harris Tweed Association set up in 1909. The fundamental role of the organisation was to undertake responsibility for promoting and maintaining the authenticity, standard and reputation of the world famous HARRIS TWEED cloth.

The Authority oversees the production and inspection of the cloth from start to finish and only when satisfied that the article is genuinely deserving of our historic Orb will we brand the cloth with the mark.

The mark of the Orb, pressed onto every length of cloth and seen on the traditional label affixed to finished items, guarantees the highest quality tweed, dyed, spun and handwoven by islanders of the Outer Hebrides of Scotland in their homes to the laws outlined in the Harris Tweed Act of Parliament.”

The definition of HARRIS TWEED contained in the Harris Tweed Act of 1993 clearly defines HARRIS TWEED as follows:

“Handwoven by the islanders at their homes in the Outer Hebrides, finished in the Outer Hebrides, and made from pure virgin wool dyed and spun in the Outer Hebrides.”

“The Act ensures that all cloth certified with the HARRIS TWEED Orb symbol complies with this definition and is genuine HARRIS TWEED, the world’s only commercially produced handwoven tweed.

The legislation and organisation allows the safeguarding of the HARRIS TWEED name, quality and reputation of HARRIS TWEED ensuring that every metre of the world famous cloth conforms to the same exacting standards and gives legal powers to address imitation and counterfeiting of the cloth worldwide.”

Screenshot 2018-11-13 at 11.45.49.png

You will have noticed that this amazing British protection for a Highlands and Islands product is unique, the only product protected this way for over 100 years, however, anyone in the world can buy Harris Tweed, and make it into products. It is only these products that can use the HTA proprietary branding with its wording and logo. In fact the HTA has just recently won a court-case and damages for an Edinburgh outlet incorrectly using Harris Tweed branding on its facade.

Factually Harris Tweed is a British product protected by a British Act of Parliament enforced by the HTA, which sees the people and community it protects and serves as benefiting immensely from its British protection. The tweed is undeniably Scottish, but equally undeniably it is British. The shop did nothing wrong at all.

Contrary to the storm “in a British tea cup” the media attempted to stir up, the HTA did NOT instruct or request the sales tags to be removed, they simply tweeted a four part twitter thread outlining their remit in an attempt to take the heat out the situation.  It didn’t work, the stooshie continued to cause embarrassment. The final part of the thread was very clear that NO action by HTA had been taken;

“The union jack & any other labelling on a product made using HT fabric is branding ADDED by an independent retailer or manufacturer who has bought HT & manufactured it into finished goods. The union jack labels/tags were NOT produced by us, or by any of the HT mills. (4/4)”

This did not suit the mob of howling social media nationalists, who kept on insisting they had somehow won the battle and that the HTA had delivered their killer blow for them.

I’m fairly active on twitter and I like things to be reasonably fact based and this fleg nonsense irked me (I have a blog on another Flag stooshie but that’s a different fight), so I asked the HTA directly about their involvement;

Me “As reported in the press, did you instruct/ask the retailer to remove the British sales tags”?

HTA  “Thank you Steve for contacting us. You’re absolutely correct. The HTA has not instructed the removal of the ‘British Tweed’ sales tags”.

Screenshot 2018-11-13 at 12.04.01.png

Pretty damned clear to me.

The actual skirmish and vocal stooshie was between a wee shop in Inverness (being intimidated to remove sales tags) and some petty and intimidatory vocal Scottish nationalists.

There’s probably only one response to this nonsense, which is to say to these shoulder chipped and blinkered flag obsessed nationalists, get a life, stop interfering with a brilliant Scottish brand and causing potential harm to Scottish jobs.

Or do these same woad wearing Saltire wavers want Britain to stop protecting and promoting this iconic Scottish product which contributes khjgkjh to Scottish GDP and protects the jobs and community lifestyle of the Highlands and Islands? – Japan is one of Harris Tweeds biggest markets and Britain helps it as much as it can with embassy promotion;

July 2018 – “Two iconic Isle of Harris brands are to showcase their wares on a trip to Japan this week.

Screenshot 2018-11-13 at 11.55.29.png

The Isle of Harris Gin and Harris Tweed will be showcased at a reception at the British Embassy in Tokyo where Fiona Hyslop MSP, the Cabinet Secretary for Culture, Tourism and External Affairs, will promote Scotland as a home for Japanese investment.

Delegates will be offered the Isle of Harris Gin as a welcome drink before being given the opportunity to view Harris Tweed garments and accessories which will include a quirky ‘Hello Kitty’, the fictional character created by Japanese illustrator Yuko Shimizu, clad in the textile.

The purpose of the visit is to build relations with the community of investors, trade partners, Scottish companies and intermediaries in Japan; while showcasing the best of Scotland on a global stage”.

Screenshot 2018-11-13 at 11.46.39.png

Screenshot 2018-11-13 at 11.56.38.png

PS No donations required.

* Note the Herald article author objected to me saying they had said “Instructed” I think their intent in the article is clear, pandering to the nationalist flag brigade.

Headline “Union Jacks removed from Harris Tweed clothes as overseers hit back at lack of action criticism”

 

 

#FlagGate January 2018 – 15 down to 1

(Updated May 31 2018 following rejection of ScotGov complaints from IPSO).

There was a wee stramash about flags this month (January 2018) in case it passed you by. It’s a bit complex, stick with it.

Screen Shot 2018-01-31 at 23.49.11

#FlagGate synopsis; 

Official instances of the Union Jack flying on Scottish Government buildings has reduced from 15 in 2017 to 1 in 2018.

Conflation – Alex Salmond claimed he had made the “change” in 2010 – he was in fact referring to the Lion Rampant being used as an alternative.

Lie? – Nicola Sturgeon denied there had been any changes to flag policy since 2010

ScotGov appealed to IPSO about two articles highlighting the shift in policy – the first time a Government has complained.

May 18 both complaints rejected.

Detail;

There is a “flag protocol” for Scottish Government buildings. It’s a document produced by the Scottish Government and has the heading “Days For Hoisting Flags On Buildings Of The Scottish Government” and the latest version below, effective January 2018, is version number 23.

Screen Shot 2018-01-31 at 23.46.49

This “Protocol” has been in place for well over 8 years and probably originated when the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Executive, sorry, Scottish Government, first came into existence. For the purposes of FlagGate we need to look at January 2017 version 22 (below) versus January 2018 version 23 (above).

Screen Shot 2018-03-26 at 15.16.03

The flag protocol document is a regularly reviewed Scottish Government document. It even has its own little department looking after it, the aptly named “Protocol & Honours Team.” Between versions 14 through 22 there were hardly any variances. Between versions 22 and 23 there is a marked difference between the two versions

The crux of the matter is the number of instances of the Union Jack being flown has substantially reduced, almost eradicated, between the two versions, down from 15 to 1!

This was, via the media, initially attributed to the wishes/instructions of the FM Nicola Sturgeon, who then proceeded to have a massive hissy fit and tweeted umpteen times in the course of two days (even at 11pm at night)! Also tweeting a thread of EIGHT sequential tweets, just about flags (astonishing)! Things got a wee bit agitated to say the least.

Note the conflating switch from media claims of Union Jack to Lion Rampant (and note it’s not given its formal name, The Royal Standard).

Screen Shot 2018-02-01 at 00.17.57

From the two versions of the protocol shown above it’s evident the number of times the Union Jack is to fly officially has reduced from 15 to 1.

This is where FlagGate starts to get quite complex, the media claimed Nicola had made the changes which she immediately refuted.  To resolve the “claims” and to add conflation and confusion to the matter, it was Alex Salmond to the rescue! With his typical bluster he released press statements saying it was he who altered the 2010 version to the the Lion Rampant (The Royal Standard), so it could be flown instead of the Union Jack on St Andrew’s Day – he had discussed this with Her Majesty, assuring her that the Scots loved the Lion Rampant. Paraphrasing Salmond – “So whats the fuss? All above board, the Queen was happy, it was me what did it.” The Queen of course is unlikely to get involved with this tawdry wrangle. Nowhere does he mention the “reduction” in instances of the Union Jack.

Screen Shot 2018-01-31 at 16.27.42

This sent the media into a tizz as they thought “Crap! HM involved, Salmond on the warpath and looks like Nicola didnae dae it.” So they apologised, in a fashion, roughly saying “we accept the policy did not change under Nicola Surgeon and that it was changed by Alex Salmond in 2010.”

Screen Shot 2018-02-01 at 00.16.26

But there is a problem with this “outcome” – as Salmond’s meeting with the Queen was in 2009, what was changed was presumably the Union Jack for the Lion Rampant (Royal Banner), it’s obvious there has been significant change to the protocols WELL AFTER Salmond made his minor change for the 2010 version.

With typical evasive words our FM, aided by her predecessor, has managed to conflate and confuse the issue pushing the MSM to stand down and let the issue dissipate.

The thing that may have got our journo’s slightly confused is the detail in all of this, the two readily available versions when this blog was originally published showed massive variations (I posted v14 & v23 in active threads on twitter a number of times), all versions need a very close inspection. As well as the basic difference re the number of flying times, each version has a visual ‘Key” and the key to FlagGate are the “keys.”

In v22 the UJ & Saltire combination is key “A”, if there is one flagpole only, the UJ takes precedence. In version 23, the UJ Saltire combination is key “C” – St Andrew’s Day remained as “B” in both versions. Another little wrinkle is that the Lion Rampant has to be flown by Royal assent (presumably given after AS met HM), however technically even the LR need not be flown, leaving only the special Armed Forces Day flag as the sole British flag in the whole year. The new key on version 23 is very unclear about what happens on St Andrews’s Day if there is only one flagpole. There is a heap of smoke and a bunch of mirrors in play here.

Fact – the reduction in UJ’s flying from 15 to 1 is down to the Scottish Government changing protocol from 2017 to 2018, this is on Nicola’s watch nothing to do with Salmond.

The SNP led Scottish Government attempts to eradicate Britishness at every opportunity, we can now plainly see that. It needs to be explicitly clear who instigates these significant changes.

After receiving version 22 via FOI I’ve emailed the department of Protocol & Honours for additional clarification. I await a further response and answers to some additional questions.

#FlagGate might be gone, but it’s certainly not forgotten, I intend to get to the bottom of the decision making behind the changes.

———————

Update 31/5/18 – Formal response below that has prompted additional questions, more when I get them!

Two complaints by ScotGov against press articles in the Daily Express & the Daily Telegraph have been rejected by IPSO – independent regulator for the UK newspaper and magazine industry.

I am continuing a fact finding process via FOI, unlikely to be resolved prior to June 18.

Screen Shot 2018-03-26 at 15.47.18.png

Note there is no apparent ministerial sign off, who instigates changes is yet to be established.

Steve.

31/5/18

The Need for a Super Majority in Referenda

Screen Shot 2018-01-21 at 13.43.39

Simple majority referenda are crude divisive binary methods of establishing the will of the people for major constitutional change.

Please sign and share my petition, the logic is below the link;

Legislate that all UK constitutional referenda must have a super majority

Having been through a number of referendums in my lifetime (the two most recent being Brexit and Scottish Independence), I’ve come to the conclusion that a simple majority is not at all in the countries best interest.

In those last two I won one (Indyref) and lost one (Brexit), both were won on tight percentage margins, 55/45 in Scotland and 52/48 in the United Kingdom.

I am not a remoaner, I lost, the country spoke via the rules of the referendum instigated by our democracy. I now just want us to get on with it, without internal UK and SNP hindrance to our external negotiations, lets try and get the best deal for everyone.

I’ve started this parliamentary petition (again) to legislate for a Super Majority and whilst I am a known advocate for Scotland remaining as the UK, there is no political edge to my logic for requesting a parliamentary debate and hopefully legislation to support the idea.

“Super majority” is effectively the hurdle rate for success of a referendum, Brexit & Indyref were “Simple Majority” referendums with anything 50% plus (even 1/2%) deciding the outcome, there was also no turnout hurdle rate either.

Indyref was rejected 55.3/44.7 with a turnout of 84.6%, NO won with only 46.8% of the registered Scottish electorate.

Brexit was agreed by 51.9/48.1 with a turnout of 72.2%, Brexit was carried by 37.47% of the registered British electorate.

So, our two most recent constitutional binary permanent result referendums were carried by less than 50% of the electorate. I don’t want that again, the past is the past and I respect both results, but abhor the inability of those who lost to accept them and move on. The amount of debate and post referendum divisiveness caused by both very close results, has damaged the country, friends and family relationships and of course ongoing Brexit negotiations. We need to prevent this divisiveness in future.

Referenda are very different to General Elections, elections are normally for a relatively short fixed period of time, they are not binary and and there is choice for everyone to consider political points of view via manifestos etc. Referenda are stark binary black and white single issue votes, with long term no going back tough luck outcomes.

I personally believe the cases for major constitutional change should be far more representative of the electorate and that they must demonstrate a clear and decisive will of the people to make what are crucial decisions for the country. My petition is asking for a hurdle rate of 60% and a turnout of 75% to decide the outcome, this means registered electorate approval of 45%, not 50%, just 45%.

If there is a debate I’m also open to a sliding scale solution based on 45% of electorate approval, ie. if turnout is only 72% then to achieve 45% support the hurdle rate changes to 62.5%. This idea is not in the petition but would hopefully form part of the debate.

Please give this proposal some consideration and sign it if you agree then share with as many people as possible. If you disagree I would be grateful if you still shared it with friends family and colleagues, as they may see the situation differently from you.

Screen Shot 2018-01-21 at 13.31.07

For those still suspicious of my reasons, if this was adopted it would make the dissolution of devolved administrations, such as Holyrood, that much more difficult to effect, but thats only fair for major constitutional change, we should not let the SNP’s 10 years of mismanagement be the death knell for the Scottish Parliament.

Steve.

Oh Dear I’m a “Shameful Unionist Troll”

It seems I’ve caught the attention of the New Sunday Herald’s senior investigative reporter.

The pictures below says it all really.

Update 21/8/17 – Over a week now and The Herald refuses to respond to this post on their article or tweets sent to the paper, editor and the journalist. In fact the editor Niel Mackay has even blocked me on twitter, pathetic.

I think he must have known the reaction he would get from me re this Sunday’s abysmal piece on North Sea Oil  taken almost verbatim from Business For Scotland, an evident propaganda arm of the Yes movement.

Find the article here Shameful Unionist Trolls – Me? Nah.

Screenshot 2017-08-16 14.07.29

Screenshot 2017-08-16 14.07.44

Twitter CyberSadNat list – faNATics all.

As I’m “officially” back on Twitter and active again as @SteveSayersOne (July 17), the Twitter @ list of “CyberSadNats” below, many of whom managed to get my old @SteveSayers1 account suspended, may be of interest.

I was not suspended for abuse or homophobia as @RobbyCameron has claimed (check @CheckThisAllOut to learn all about “Mark”). Note there was no “aggressive following” “cross posting”or “evading” but I was “lightly” guilty of the first transgression, but not in a disruptive fashion. Two of my (at the time) six accounts were in fact business accounts, the other 4 were not in breach to my knowledge (multiple accounts have always been allowed) and one of the four was a backup account due to the many temporary suspensions I was given (thankfully twitter are a bit better at ascertaining rule breaking these days).

Background;

My original Twitter account  (@SteveSayers1) had a policy of never blocking people, wasn’t easy, but I thought it better to enter dialogue/debate to see what was being said by those I disagreed with, either to persuade them of my point of view or to refute lies spin and misdirection. (Wings block list certainly doesn’t help the free and open debate concept, it now stands at over 6,300)!

Over time my reasons for not blocking gained another facet, the more their angry and abusive arguments failed, the more they deflected and tried to make things personal, the more convinced I became they harmed their own cause, so it became a point of principle. If people saw their awful behaviour then my cause, Scotland remaining as the UK, benefited. My new account continues the policy of not blocking, I also dont mute individuals on @SteveSayersOne but will occassionaly mute a tedious conversation – thanks for that addition Twitter!

An extremely nasty side to twitter is when you are vocal and can back up your assertions via facts, research and logical argument (like some of those in my wider blog), you are often the victim of some very  extreme personal abuse in an attempt to shut you up. It seems the open nature of twitter, where you can search for subjects that interest you and join in the conversations, results in the less well informed blinkered Scottish nationalists switching, from failed logic and misinformation (often @WingsScotland or Business for Scotland sourced), to horrendous personal abuse because you have the temerity to disagree.

Scottish politics (the active little Twitter corner that I inhabit/inhabited), was/is rife with these trolls (CyberSadNats), lying, spinning, abusing, harassing and so forth, in order to intimidate and shut down debate. It’s quite hard to keep track of who was genuine, whether outwardly anonymous or not, with a lot of Nats having multiple accounts to aid mass reporting and general abuse.

After Twitter introduced ‘mute” I did on occasion, in extremis, mute certain individuals for a day or two – it went against the grain, but was useful in preserving temper and sanity. My most muted account being the “delightful” @ScotsNat (after his account was suspended he now tweets as @DrScotRef – check his timeline back a few months, that’s if he hasn’t deleted it for the third or fourth time of course. (Update Feb19, he seems to have seen the light a little and tweeting as @RumpleFinkin has even called out, quite forcibly, some of the CyberSadNats, lets hope its a permanent conversion)

I never did get to the bottom of his obsession with me, as he lied, changed accounts, deleted whole swathes of tweets and set up accounts like @Pappalazzaroo just to be vindictive (that account still open, but reclaimed after deletion I think). He was extremely odd, kept dreadful company, like serial abusive, harassing, stalking troll Bill Brady (35 identities at least so far, see list), Mark Burnett @Widster  Mark Robertson @RobbyCameron1 and others, he was was an all round sad excuse for a democratic citizen.

@ScotsNat kept blocking and unblocking me, repeatedly haunting my timeline and the timelines of those I interacted with, with no logical reason and for some sad purpose known only to him. It was too aggressive and personal to purely be political. I’m going to be gracious and say its because he was just incredibly stupid, although attacking my family (and the families of others) means with that level of stupidity and venom, he and I will never ever see eye to eye. Within hours of my new account he created a stupid parody @SteveSayers0ne. After having been forced to delete tweets he then morphed into the sick @YoonAway. (He was not the only one to create a new smearing account).

 

Due to ScotsNat’s “perseverance” at being a troll he did, along with @TheBillBrady (multiple suspensions see list for accounts) he did take top billing in a list of cybersadnats, those supposedly Yes supporting Twitter accounts – who’s personal interactions are pure venom, inflicting ad hominem, lies and aggressive insults at the drop of a hat, you will recognise quite a few. Bill’s abusive account tally stands at approximately 30! AS @RumpleFinkin ScotsNat does seem to have come to terms with his previous behavior and has to his credit called out, in quite forcible terms, many of these CyberSadNats recently, particularly Bill Brady, kudos for that.

The regular type of cybersadnat trolling and abuse takes the following form (not all accounts are guilty of all transgressions, some are just generally extremely abusive);

Publicising private and personal data (doxxing) such as;

Name, date of birth, address, family details, business dealings, pictures of family, pictures of property, phone numbers and email addresses.

Lies;

Accusations of child abuse. Accusations of owning accounts that are nothing to do with me just on a whim (think I have been nearly every prominent union supporting twitter user)! Accusations of criminal familial connections, accusations of racism, homophobia and of them having sexual relations with my family,

Threats;

Physical violence, threats of trolling abuse on children, threats to property, threats to continue abuse and publication of private details for the next twenty years, threats to family with multiple emails sent to many employers (they don’t actually know where my son works) in an attempt to damage career, telephone calls from smokescreen numbers to threaten & harass, contacting schools to accuse parents of being unfit, in fact nothing is out of bounds for them

My advice is not to block or mute until such time as you experience them for yourselves, the aim of the lists is to act as a friendly warning so you can be on your guard, I hope to see you on twitter in due course. I’m operating @SteveSayersOne in a different fashion for a while, if you don’t follow me there, please do, it’s appreciated.

Check back occasionally for a list update.  This blog post updated 19/2/19.

Steve.

Cybernats all, shame of the Yes movement.

James McGoldrick
@McGoldrickJa
@SayYesToIndy
@BenMcFadden10
@BenMcFadden11
@EKForIndy
@JohnCoy29071630

Mark Burnett
@Widster
@Sporan1314
@KennyLogan15
@ScotlandRab
@JCWallace12
@RonCorrie

Mark “Claire” Robertson
@Robbycameron1 Mark “Claire” Robertson
@robbycameronsc1 Mark “Claire” Robertson
@clairerobsc1 Mark “Claire” Robertson
@Clairerob1 Mark “Claire” Robertson
@clairerob91 Mark “Claire” Robertson
@stevencloud11 Mark “Claire” Robertson
@stevencloud12 Mark “Claire” Robertson
@ashortbread Mark “Claire” Robertson
@SNPOot Mark “Claire” Robertson
@ihatesayers Mark “Claire” Robertson
@stevekinross Mark “Claire” Robertson
@stevesayerss1 Mark “Claire” Robertson
@steveesayers1 Mark “Claire” Robertson
@Brian_Spanner Mark “Claire” Robertson
@JennyLovesTits Mark “Claire” Robertson
@JakeyTrollin Mark “Claire” Robertson
@SteveSayersO Mark “Claire” Robertson
@BeanzMeanzLies Mark “Claire” Robertson

Bill Brady
@Sailor_anon Bill Brady
@TheBillBrady Bill Brady
@Anon_Sailor Bill Brady
@votescotlab Bill Brady
@tehvlb Bill Brady
@Mrdavidtorrance Bill Brady
@Bill_Brady007 Bill Brady
@SuspendedBill Bill Brady
@fat_shady666 Bill Brady
@Watchingtrolls Bill Brady
@sirbillbrady Bill Brady
@BrianGalloway0 Bill Brady
@KnowsBill Bill Brady
@Bill_Bow7 Bill Brady
@SteveBr44949075 Bill Brady
@republican_scot Bill Brady
@lovelydevlin Bill Brady (I might have this one wrong).
@chiefbully Bill Brady
@welldonedonna Bill Brady
@TrumpIsMad Bill Brady
@TheBillBrady Bill Brady
@BillTheFinder Bill Brady
@BillTheFinder2 Bill Brady
@engineroom666 Bill Brady
@fundayherald Bill Brady
@williambrady666 Bill Brady
@murdofraser3 Bill Brady
@andrewmfraser Bill Brady
@snp_fail Bill Brady
@macporridgeoats Bill Brady
@geirrendour Bill Brady
@andrewfrazer11 Bill Brady
@loyalistsyes Bill Brady
@leakstwitt Bill Brady
@RepublicFife Bill Brady

ScotsNat
@ScotsNat ScotsNat
@f_farquar ScotsNat
@pappalazzaroo ScotsNat
@SteveSayers5 ScotsNat
@SteveSayers0ne ScotsNat
@YoonProducts ScotsNat
@scizznizzle ScotsNat
@vigovonfin ScotsNat
@lordfontelroy ScotsNat
@godalmightydude ScotsNat
@hamilton_elle ScotsNat
@ellephattlsist ScotsNat
@timeforpayback ScotsNat
@johnjonesyh ScotsNat
@beakersstore ScotsNat
@sc0tsnat Scotsnat
@torysleeper Perhaps ScotsNat?
@mrmanistheman ScotsNat – was beaker store
@keithdr0p⁩ ScotsNat – was mrmanistheman
@neiilovejoy ScotsNat – was Keith
@whioshairycrumb ScotsNat – was Neiil
@JohnJonesYH ScotsNat
@DrScotRef ScotsNat
@RumpleFinkin ScotsNatP

Paul Wright
@PaulaHoneyRose
@Paula_Again
@polamilros
@LukeLuciously
@AllSkipsAbout
@PaulaMilRose
@FalseYesNews

@BrechinDiocese

Jason Michael McCann
jeggit
@butterfly_reb
@u1789
@crimesofbrits
@crimesofbritain (possibly involved)?
@rpjblog
@geofedward
@leopoldonion
@lydiabrit
@joggerluscious (joint)
@FatzDomingo

Others – may belong to some of the above

There are tons of them, many not listed here are incorporated into my twitter account live list “CyberSadNats” those that block me disapear off the curated list.

@JohnToms became @RadioGuyGlasgow & @ComediansForYes & others
@YESThatcherDead
@Nobbyswizzle @sonofnobby @NorbertSwizzle
@camyx3raygun
@Politicsblog2
@SteveSayers5
@BigPoppaTotoro
@EllenCoylexohot
@skynednews
@bristolbogboy
@richisacunt
@Vengance_Ven
@stevespinkhag used a bio pic (private) of my wife.
@KhmeerYoo
@Timer_egg
@Egg_timer1
@Fan_Sayers
@HammerOfScots
@Nawbag_Sayers
@dietbet
@nawbag_sayers
@ihatesayers
@hearallabtit
@yoontracker1
@yoontracker2
@teacheradamsayers (trolling my son and interfering with his teaching career).
@169saysyes
@benmcfadden10

The Councillor, the Newspaper and the Critic

jillstephensonblog

The Councillor, the Newspaper and the Critic

At the end of 2016, the Scotsman newspaper announced that, to mark its bicentenary, it would enlist 200 amateur contributors to write at periodic intervals short articles about anything that interested them. I sent in two sample essays, and on 17 January received word that I was to join the Scotsman 200 group. My first article, ‘Two Referendums are Enough’, appeared on 6 February. My message was that ‘Momentous change requires unequivocal endorsement’. That is, a simple 50% + 1 of the vote was insufficient endorsement for major constitutional change, such as Scottish separatism or withdrawal from the EU. I did include some disobliging comments about Scottish nationalists and the way they treat those who disagree with them. This elicited a barrage of insulting tweets. QED. Nothing new there.

My next essay appeared on 9 March. It was called ‘Education Requires Effort from…

View original post 1,540 more words

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑