THE thrust of Mark Smith’s article ("The phenomenon helping Sturgeon do well in the polls", The Herald, October 19) is that the principal contributing factor to the majority for independence in current polling is the Scottish electorate’s perception of the relative abilities of Nicola Sturgeon and Boris Johnson. The First Minister is regarded, rightly or wrongly, as handling the coronavirus crisis more adeptly than the Prime Minister.
It should be realised that independence would essentially be forever, whereas the political lives of Ms Sturgeon and Mr Johnson are most certainly not.
David SW Williamson, Kelso.
THE thoughtful analysis by Mark Smith of the apparent support for the SNP made some interesting points, but he did not consider two important aspects.
The first is the growing acceptance of the normality of national independence as a historical reality. This groundswell of belief exists irrespective of traditional party politics and is identified with the SNP only because the other parties are so obviously dedicated to the anachronism of the monolithic UK. This feeling is even in evidence in the growing resentment of London parochialism in areas of England outside the Home Counties.
The second point is that the electorate is not in an informed position to consider the economic consequences of independence because no proper analysis of the relative assets and liabilities of Scotland has been made. Instead, there have been innumerable pronouncements by pseudo-independent think-tanks, all based on a limited and carefully selected set of data.
Dr PM Dryburgh, Edinburgh EH10.
NOBODY on either side of the independence debate could, or would want to, deny that the present dominance of the SNP is due in part to the lack of any credible opposition. With regard to quality of leadership, the Labour and Tory parties at UK level are pitiful shadows of the great parties they once were; and in Scotland they are represented by specimens who are poor even by the sorry standards prevailing in their parties.
Unlike some of your correspondents, my reaction to this is to give heartfelt thanks that in Scotland there is one party, and one party leader, equipped with a measure of ability, integrity and vision. And unless your unionist correspondents are pinning their hopes on a sudden miraculous blossoming of talent in the London-based parties and their Scottish branches (and surely they are not deluding themselves to that extent), I would invite them to consider the advantages to Scotland of freeing itself from the dismal swamp into which Westminster has degenerated and setting a new course for itself under a capable independent government.
Derrick McClure, Aberdeen AB24.
RACHEL Ormiston, Research Director of Ipsos MORI Scotland, sounds rather pleased with herself when reporting that a recent poll of 1,045 adults in Scotland said they would vote for independence (“Leadership is key to SNP’S good showing in the polls”, The Herald, October 16).
It cannot have escaped her attention that the demographic most likely to vote No is that of older people who don't have all the latest technology enabling them to respond online to give their opinions. I am left wondering how Ipsos MORI acquired the phone numbers they used to contact 1,045 adults. Nobody has ever phoned me using my landline number. The 2014 referendum was lost mainly because of older people, who were not swept along by raw emotion, voting NO.
Elizabeth Mueller, Glasgow G12.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel