Secret opinion poll convinced Salmond he would pull off shock victory

Daily Record ^ | 24th September 2014 | David Clegg

[the scotsman]

'THE Daily Record can reveal analysis - of a secret poll carried out by Canadian voter contact specialists - claimed the Yes campaign would win the vote by 54 per cent to 46.

ALEX Salmond was convinced he was on course for a historic referendum win right until the votes were counted, the Daily Record can reveal.

Private polling by a firm of election experts had the First Minister believing he would pull off a shock victory.

The nationalists had employed Canadian voter contact specialists First Contact to conduct secret opinion polling.

And an analysis of their findings by two leading academics in New York said the Yes campaign would win by 54 per cent to 46.

The SNP were widely thought to have the most sophisticated data-modelling system in the UK before the vote.

But it failed to call the referendum right. Salmond was devastated and announced his intention to step down as First Minister within hours .

The false impression caused by their internal polling meant the SNP leadership were confident of winning until the first local authority areas began declaring results early on Friday.

The Yes camp contacted a number of journalists at around 10pm on Thursday and gave details of a planned victory speech by Salmond.

And First Contact were so confident of the result they revealed their 54 per cent Yes prediction to the Canadian press before the votes were counted.'

[Nervous Tick]

>> The SNP were widely thought to have the most sophisticated data-modelling system in the UK before the vote.

I bet these are the same guys that build our climate change models. Sophistication high; predictive power low.

[centurion316]

I didn’t read the article, as the web site wants me to pay for it with information that I would prefer not to provide.

However, the facts as presented in the excerpt appear to confirm the unreliability of polling these days, even these expensive private polls that deep pocket politicians pay for. For us, I think that the lesson is to ignore most of the polling data on the November election, it’s not likely to be a very good predictor.

[SMARTY]

Must be the same data collection group that has America convinced that “O” is God on earth!

[Flintlock]

Shoulda used Karl Rove.

Thaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat woulda fixed everything!!

[VanDeKoik]

Well obviously they put their Yes numbers and No ones in the wrong spot.

Maybe these are the same people the PQ hired to do their polling.

[BatGuano]

What amazes me is how the question was presented. The “yes” vote, a positive was to separate from the Union, a negative. The “No” vote meant a positive thing, staying in the Union. I realize it is a matter of perspective but that's my take. The “Yes” was a vote for a communist leader, Salmond, to take over the country.

More importantly, with an issue as significant as this, only a simple majority was required? I would think that a minimum of 60% to end a historic relationship, testy of course but 307 years together.

[Gay State Conservative]

The “Yes” was a vote for a communist leader, Salmond, to take over the country.

It's my understanding that Salmond was given *everything* he wanted in setting up this referendum.The fact that "yes" was for separation was part of that strategy and was a huge advantage for him.what I read went on to say that the "Unionist" strategy was born of overconfidence but 56% to 44% isn't really close...IMO.