Vocal Voices

So, what can read from the weekend's various opinion polls? One quite in favour of Yes, and another quite in favour on No.

However, the poll giving a majority Yes has been rubbished, on the grounds that there was only a sample of 705 compared with the other's 1,000. The Yes poll was deemed to be unrepresentative.

Now from what I recall from my days of dealing with statistics, both samples are unrepresentative. I seem to recall that you needed a sample of at least 1,900 when dealing with polls of this ilk before you could start talking turkey with any form of authority.

Sampling size is important. I play a lot of Spider Solitaire on the PC. Over any given run of 30 consecutive games, I can average as high as 55% or as low as 30%, depending on the cards. But over 100 games, I'm consistently achieving between 40 and 49% (and yes, I'm mad enough to keep records)!

Which brings me onto a particular bugbear of mine - L'Oreal hairspray and Dove moisturiser, etc. All those TV adverts flash up in the small print "87% of 131 women agreed that this product gave extra volume", and so on. Absolute baloney if you're coming at it as a statistician. I'm amazed that the Advertising Stands Agency aren't all over them.

Anyway, can't stop on here to talk to you good folk. A recent survey of 1 Ostrich found that 95% of it was about to head for the biscuit barrel. The other 5% is going along for the ride .....

Well, thanks for that Ossie. Don't eat too many biscuits. A recent poll suggests that 100% of biscuit eaters find that too many make you put weight on.

The most important two statistics of all are entirely missing.

1. that circa 90% of all undecideds are going Yes
2. that there are almost always more undecided than the difference between the two polls.

That is a long term trend which has pushed the Yes vote up to where it is today. In the end it may tip the balance. Who knows. We'll all know on Friday.

I just did a straw poll of all those in my home.

30% of me wants a No vote - there are pros and cons.
10% of me wants a Yes vote - there are pros and cons.
0% of me is undecided.
60% of me does not care any more.

There has been so much bluff and bluster, nobody gives an honest answer to an honest question, every expert opinion for one side is countered by a diametrically opposed opinion from the other side's expert, so much so that the truth is hidden from view.

Not that it matters; Yes or No the damage has now been done. Father and mother against son and daughter, brother and sister against brother and sister, husband against wife, neighbour against neighbour. Relationships will never be the same again - no winners only losers.

I have lost interest and will wait till Friday to see the result.

Workingman wrote:
I have lost interest and will wait till Friday to see the result.

That makes two of us, probably more.

You mean you are not interested in the three earnest shysters, standing in front of the camera with their "sheet of lies"???

You are right though. It has come down to one question.

Are you willing to take a risk on running your own country. Yes or No.

In the end I think the No's may take it. I'll be sad but won't be surprised. Risk takers are few unless they think they have no other option. Most will prefer a life of some kind of comfort, managed by someone else, compared to a life of action, managing that life themselves.

In many ways I'm surprised it is so close as it is. The main factor now may be the undecided and the trend of the undecided. But I won't hold my breath. Today, back home, we have 4 middle aged ladies who have all posted their postal vote before coming out to visit. They are all a solid No.

Suff wrote: Today, back home, we have 4 middle aged ladies who have all posted their postal vote before coming out to visit. They are all a solid No.

Can you shed any light on the factors which tipped them to vote that way, Suff?

"The ties that bind"?
Disbelief of Salmond's vision?
Worry over NHS?
Worry over pensions?
Last minute Westminster bribery?

TheOstrich wrote:

Suff wrote: Today, back home, we have 4 middle aged ladies who have all posted their postal vote before coming out to visit. They are all a solid No.

"The ties that bind"?

Not really. Lukewarm on that. They're OK with England and the rest of the UK, but it's not a real issue, nice to have and to hold but not vital. If they had reason to believe that it would be really good for Scotland, rUK would be dumped in a second.

Disbelief of Salmond's vision?

Nobody believes all of Salmond's vision. Not even the Yes campaign, not me, not even Salmond. What most Yes people believe is that if we got even half of it; it would be worth doing 10 times over.


Worry over NHS?
Worry over pensions?

I'll take these two together and add in another bit. Pretty much all of them have bought into the Westminster/press/media BS that Scotland get's more from the UK than it contributes. It's much like the attitude I see in young people who firmly believe the UK is a borderline banana republic who couldn't finish a bar fight on Saturday night. Instead of being one of the top seven biggest economies in the world and the fourth largest nuclear power in the world.

It is very much a case of looking outside the cage bars and thinking it's a lonely uncomfortable place out there. Just bring me over another bale of straw so I can get comfortable. The cost of life for many Scots is not enought for them to take the chance. Although had we had this vote in 1995 it would have been a Very different result.


Last minute Westminster bribery?

As for this one. I haven't spoken to them much about it but I can tell you most of their positions. "What can you expect from politicians?" Remember they all voted before the Teflon Trio descended on Scotland.