Remember this?
That rather crude front page was four years ago, and while Scotland’s (ahem) more quality papers (and also, the Daily Record) didn’t go quite as far as the Sun in their SNP scaremongering, the message was pretty much the same as it always had been: “We don’t like the SNP, we don’t like independence, we don’t think you should support the SNP or independence”. Â Okay, so I’ve probably phrased that slightly less, what, filled with rhetoric, than they did – but you get the idea. Â On the SNP’s side they were not.
Fast forward to 2011, and the media picture has changed considerably. Â While most of the nation’s press spent the four years of SNP government attacking them, many have come out in favour of a second SNP term. Â Okay, in some cases that support is qualified – at best – but its a different media landscape for the SNP, and one which they are not used to. Â In 2007, they had the bunker mentality, the “world’s-media-is-against-us” thinking, just as they had for generations before. Â But today they have the support of much of Scotland’s printed press.
The Sun came out for the SNP several weeks ago:
The Scotsman offers its qualified support to the SNP in today’s editorial, though they want Annabel Goldie’s Conservatives there to keep Alex Salmond on the straight and narrow. Â This seems as big a Road to Damascus moment as, well… the original Road to Damascus moment. Â Guess that’s why we use that metaphor. Â The Herald too, provides support for the SNP in its editorial, though elsewhere it is more circumspect about the campaign and the promises of each of the parties. Â The Sundays have led where their sister papers followed, with the Scotland on Sunday citing Labour’s “appallingly negative” campaign as part of the reason why they see Salmond and the SNP as better for Scotland. Â Meanwhile, the Daily Record focuses solely on the apparent 50% of the electorate who remain undecided and tells them they should vote for Labour.
I’ve already noted my frustrations with the campaign – and several of my friends and colleagues have mentioned that they too feel that the lengthy six-week campaign has failed to inspire. Â Last night’s TV debate, while better than what went before, did nothing to instil any confidence in the leaders’ ability to change the record. Â Tavish Scott got his “police” message in up top, and then again later in the debate. Â Annabel got her “common sense” and “I’ll hold them to account” point in. Â Salmond was his statesmanlike self, though unnerved by a couple of questioners and Iain Gray was better than he had been… until asked about his Subway encounter, when the Angry Man took over and his comment about “pointless conversations” undid anything good he had done to that point. Â All in all, the debate itself wasn’t exactly an edifying spectacle.
So where does that leave us? Â Well, polls open in around 20 hours. Â If the latest STV poll is to be believed, the SNP are headed for a landslide, winning 61 of the 129 seats – not quite a majority, but pretty damn close. Â Labour are to slump to 33 (down SIXTEEN from 2007) with the Tories on 18 (up 1) the Lib Dems on 9 (down 7) and the Greens close behind on 8 (up 6). Â I’m never convinced when polls show such wide margins – I think it’ll be a bit closer – but if the SNP’s vote comes out and Labour’s collapses as predicted, I’ll be eating humble pie.
I’ll get my finalised predictions (based both on numbers and intuition) out before polls close tomorrow, and I think Jeff and Kate are planning the same – then you can giggle at how wrong we are. Â But just remember, the only poll that matters….
#1 by BM on May 4, 2011 - 10:01 am
The 50% undecideds are people who are leaving labour, and considerign their other options. Tory is a no and Liberals are Tories. The only options left are SNP, Green, and the minor Socialist Parties. Most of this fifty percent will stay at home. Labour cannot gain anything from the undecideds, since they’ve already lost them; that’s why they’re undecided.
#2 by aonghas on May 4, 2011 - 11:52 am
I’ve crunched the numbers* and come up with this.
SNP: 57
Labour: 40
Tories: 18
Lib Dems: 11
Greens 3
George Galloway: 2
(*rabbit entrails).
#3 by Malc on May 4, 2011 - 12:03 pm
Great… but you’ve got 2 extra seats. Holyrood only has 129 – and you have 131.
On another note, I’d love to see George Galloway split in 2… but 2 Galloways might just be too much to bear!
#4 by aonghas on May 4, 2011 - 12:32 pm
My first estimate had 134 seats and no George Galloways. I stuck a couple in there just to scare people.
#5 by Donald McKinney on May 4, 2011 - 12:10 pm
In my long years in politics the one adage I hold dear is never underestimate the ability of the Liberal Democrats to get the vote out. Here in Caithness the only other politicos we’ve seen are Liberals and while who knows what else is happening in this vast crazy seat of Caithness, Sutherland and Ross I suspect that the Liberals will either win or lose by not that much.
#6 by douglas clark on May 4, 2011 - 12:16 pm
Malc,
A bear is a caniform, a dog like carnivore. Surely George’s preferred animal is a cat?
#7 by Malc on May 4, 2011 - 12:18 pm
Groan.
#8 by Richard on May 4, 2011 - 12:52 pm
Can’t wait to read your seat by seat analysis great blogs guys really enjoyed it thanks
#9 by Doug Daniel on May 4, 2011 - 2:59 pm
Despite the frustrations of the campaign, I don’t think I’ve been this excited about anything since I was sitting in the London Astoria, waiting for Mike Patton to come on stage and start belting out songs from The Director’s Cut. That or Christmas.
Shame I’m working offshore and have to be up at 6am on Friday, so I’ll miss out on the election night fun. Unless I go to bed REALLY early on Thursday…
#10 by Stuart Winton on May 4, 2011 - 6:27 pm
Malc, pedantic point perhaps, but the HeraldScotland leader supporting the SNP was in the Sunday Herald, while the one you describe as more “circumspect” is the weekday edition. I think, since the website can be, er, confusing!
But as Iain Macwhirter said in a recent column, the Herald will “maintain its long-standing neutrality”, by which I assume he means the weekday edition.
Which seems a slightly strange thing for a freelance (?) columnist to say, but knowing the Herald’s website it perhaps wasn’t IM who said it at all ;0)
#11 by Malc on May 4, 2011 - 9:03 pm
Thanks for that Stuart. The website is totally confusing. So the Sunday Herald is supporting Salmond but the Herald itself is staying above the fray? I suppose that’s clearer.