Woodchopper wrote: Fri Feb 24, 2023 6:53 pm
Survey of Scots who voted SNP has Forbes ahead, with people interviewed this week from Monday to Wednesday. About a third say they don’t know.
It was carried out by “communications agency the Big Partnership” so I’m not sure how seriously to take it.
They have the results here - clicky. It took me a little while to work out why I was only seeing one result (click on the question to see more). You do get to see the breakdowns by the other questions by clicking on the "by" at the top right.
In addition to the don't knows, none of the above got 14%.
No methodology. No idea how trustworthy they might be.
Kate Forbes is currently more popular among the Scottish public than is Humza Yousaf, although none of the candidates to replace Nicola Sturgeon has a positive rating among the public. Forbes has a ‘net’ favourability score of -8, with 27% of the public saying they have a favourable opinion of her and 35% unfavourable. Humza Yousaf’s net score is lower at -20 (22% favourable, 42% unfavourable). Ash Regan’s is lower still at -24 (14% favourable, 38% unfavourable), while 13% of the public say they don’t know enough to rate her.
Ratings of Yousaf and Forbes are closer among SNP voters. Yousaf has a net score of +11 (38% favourable, 27% unfavourable) while Forbes’ rating is +6 (37% favourable, 31% unfavourable). Ash Regan receives a net score of -7 among SNP voters (22% favourable, 29% favourable).
There's probably a selection bias in effect - often it's only questions that are too close or politically hot that go to a two way referendum, and get the results published heavily. Ones where a much larger margin are expected either won't go to a vote, or won't be reported nearly as much.
So that limits the effective possible range significantly.
If you wanted to test how often that result comes up, look at US state ballot questions. There are loads of them, and often for things that seem obvious.
having that swing is a necessary but not sufficient condition for it meaning a thing
@shpalman@mastodon.me.uk
@shpalman.bsky.social / bsky.app/profile/chrastina.net
threads.net/@dannychrastina
Peter Murrell, Nicola Sturgeon’s husband, has been arrested by Scottish police in an investigation into the Scottish National party’s fundraising and finances.
Police Scotland said a 58-year-old man had been “arrested as a suspect” on Wednesday and added that its officers were carrying out searches at a number of addresses linked to the investigation.
The investigation was launched after complaints about the SNP’s handling of £600,000 in donations raised by the party ostensibly to campaign for and hold a second independence referendum.
It is alleged the money instead was used to help with the party’s day-to-day running costs.
In a short statement, the police said: “A 58-year-old man has today, Wednesday, 5 April 2023, been arrested as a suspect in connection with the ongoing investigation into the funding and finances of the Scottish National party.
“The man is in custody and is being questioned by Police Scotland detectives. Officers are also carrying out searches at a number of addresses as part of the investigation.
“A report will be sent to the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. [As] the investigation is ongoing we are unable to comment further.”
ETA for Nicola Sturgeon it looks bad which ever way her legal team argue. If she knew then she's just as guilty in a moral sense if not legally. If she didn't she presumably had some kind of 'don't ask don't tell' arrangement with her husband, which seems pretty dodgy for £600 000 worth of donations.
A lot of CyberNats BTL pointing out that poll is a bit of an outlier with other contemporary ones showing a slightly narrowing SNP lead but not a complete collapse.
Could be a reflection of the high level of support for Labour in other parts of the UK, and the SNP's change of leadership. If the latter then Humza Yousaf will need to make an impression soon.
ETA for Nicola Sturgeon it looks bad which ever way her legal team argue. If she knew then she's just as guilty in a moral sense if not legally. If she didn't she presumably had some kind of 'don't ask don't tell' arrangement with her husband, which seems pretty dodgy for £600 000 worth of donations.
If she knew this was coming out, at least she had the decency to resign in advance of it, unlike certain Johnsons we could mention. Though maybe she should have resigned a long time ago.
This issue has been hanging around for 2 years or more now. Almost 2 years ago, Douglas Chapman resigned as SNP Treasurer, saying he did not have access to sufficient information on the finances of SNP to carry out his fiduciary duties. Something is a bit odd when the Treasurer is not the one in control of that information. A complaint to the police over the £600,000 predates even that resignation. It makes you wonder why this comes out just now. What did Sturgeon know back then? Surely she wasn't going to accept the blandishments that made Chapman resign.
lpm wrote: Wed Apr 05, 2023 3:18 pm
They're digging up the garden? There's literally bodies hidden?
Or maybe they just made some heavy hints as she's planning on putting in some tatties and neeps.
My avatar was a scientific result that was later found to be 'mistaken' - I rarely claim to be 100% correct
ETA 5/8/20: I've been advised that the result was correct, it was the initial interpretation that needed to be withdrawn
Meta? I'd say so!
lpm wrote: Wed Apr 05, 2023 3:18 pm
They're digging up the garden? There's literally bodies hidden?
“There’re” if it’s multiple bodies.
X
It first was a rumour dismissed as a lie, but then came the evidence none could deny:
a double page spread in the Sunday Express — the Russians are running the DHSS!
discovolante wrote: Wed Apr 05, 2023 6:12 pm
Is it wrong that I'm a bit frustrated by all the instability this is likely to cause more than anything right now? I'm a bit sick of it all.
It's entertaining TV news that is great for the stability of the UK...
EACLucifer wrote: Tue Apr 18, 2023 11:14 am
Is it bad when your treasurer is arrested in an investigation into your finances?
Speaking to journalists ahead of his statement, Mr Yousaf said Mr Beattie's arrest was "clearly a very serious matter indeed" but he had not been suspended from the party as "people are innocent until proven guilty".
One of the reasons to suspend someone is to stop them from doing any harm while the matter is being investigated. Waiting for a guilty verdict would potentially mean doing nothing for years.
