Today’s Sunday papers have the first polls conducted since the local elections, from Opinium and ComRes.

Opinium for the Observer have Westminster voting intentions of CON 22%(-4), LAB 28%(-5), LDEM 11%(+5), BREX 21%(+4), GRN 6%(+2), ChUK 4%(nc), UKIP 4%(nc). Fieldwork was between Wednesday and Friday, and changes are from late April. Full tables are here.

ComRes for BrexitExpress have voting intentions of CON 19%(-4), LAB 27%(-6), LDEM 14%(+7), BREX 20%(+6), GRN 5%(+2), ChUK 7%(-2), UKIP 3%(-2). Fieldwork appears to be all on Thursday, and changes are since mid-April.

Both polls have Labour and the Conservatives rapidly shedding support, with support growing for the Liberal Democrats and the Brexit party. I suspect we are seeing a combination of factors at work here, most obviously there is the continuing collapse in Conservative support over Brexit, a trend we’ve been seeing since the end of March, with support moving to parties with a clearer pro-Brexit policy. Originally that favoured UKIP too, now it is almost wholly going to the Brexit party.

Secondly there is the impact of the local elections and the Liberal Democrat successes there. For several years the Lib Dems seemed moribund and struggled to be noticed. The coverage of their gains at the local elections seems to have given them a solid boost in support, more so than the other anti-Brexit parties – for now at least, they seem to be very much alive & well again.

Third is the impact of the European elections. People are obviously more likely to vote for smaller parties in the European elections and in current circumstances obviously appear more willing to lend their vote to a different party in protest over Brexit. To some degree this will be influencing other voting intention figures as well, so I would treat Westminster voting intention figures with some scepticism in the run up to the European elections (and probably in the immediate aftermath as well, when those parties who do well will likely recieve a further boost in support).

In short, these are startling results – but we have seen startling results before (look at the polls at the height of SDP support, or just after the expenses scandal broke, or during Cleggmania). These are indeed very unusual results – the combined level of Con-Lab support in these polls are some of the very lowest we’ve seen, the Conservative share in the ComRes poll almost their lowest ever (I can find only a single Gallup poll with a lower figure, from back in 1995). What we cannot tell at the moment is whether this portends a serious readjustment of the parties, or whether things will return to more familar patterns once the European elections have passed, the Conservatives have a new leader and (assuming it ever happens) Brexit is in some way settled.

Both polls also had voting intention figures for the European Parliament elections

Opinium Euro VI – CON 11%, LAB 21%, LDEM 12%, BREX 34%, GRN 8%, ChUK 3%, UKIP 4%
ComRes Euro VI – CON 13%, LAB 25%, LDEM 14%, BREX 27%, GRN 8%, ChUK 6%, UKIP 3%

Both have the Brexit party ahead, though they are doing considerably better with Opinium than with ComRes. In both cases the Liberal Democrats have recieved a post-local election boost, putting them above the Conservatives in European voting intentions.


760 Responses to “New Opinium and ComRes polls”

1 10 11 12 13 14 16
  1. @Alec

    Give me a cheap bottle of sparkling rose every time, and let’s talk about things far more interesting than grape juice. :D

  2. peterw: … So it’s not the twin referendum concept per se that is a breach of trust.

    What can legitimately be presented as a breach of trust though is to choose a one stage process, as Parliament overwhelmingly did, and then seek retrospectively to revert to another process because you don’t like the result it has produced.

    I would say the breach of trust was to go ahead with a single stage referendum without a defined brexit.

  3. @STEAMDRIVENANDY

    Somehow I don’t see Con standing down in GE constituencies to give BXP a free run. Like Labour, they regard themselves as a full ‘national’ party that stands candidates in all constituencies, except those polities they choose to ‘ignore’. As an aside, that ‘ignore’ is possibly more apt than I originally intended. Surely their view would be that such a concession to BXP would not be reciprocated, would risk doing even more harm to their national party status and leave them hostage to the BXP in a future parliament. In short, they’d regard such deals as below their dignity and they’d prefer a period out of office than one at the beck and call of Farage

    I think it depends on the situation. If an LoC govt appears certain, then yeah I reckon the only situation CON would consider a deal would be where polling was so bad for them that Farage would never offer one. And if CON are faced with losing seats overall because of BXP but not really to them then I agree they’d take Opposition as a price to pay rather than more of the same with a worse hand.

    But if there were a possibility of a workable RoC majority (especially after an election that deselects or tactically sacrifices some of the CON remainer rebels) then I think there’s a fairly broad window in which a deal would be in the interests of both. BXP because it would guarantee them a sizeable HoC presence, CON because they’d presume much of that support would come back to them after leaving the EU.

    Not saying I think these sort of numbers are likely to stick around, just that if they were the polling numbers going into a GE campaign then there’s a good chance the two parties would behave very differently to CON and UKIP in 2015.

  4. @Colin

    Leader popularity. It’s like choosing your favourite disease.

  5. Danny,

    “The 1975 referendum settled the matter because 75% voted one way. 52% isnt enough.”

    Worth pointing out that even this result did not settle the matter. By 1980 Ipsos MORI was polling 60-65% in favour of Leave (1), a much larger margin than Remain has ever achieved in the present day, and Labour went into the 1983 election on a platform of leaving the EEC (though I was not around back then so cannot say how important an issue it was at that election). It seems to me that, referendum or no referendum, the issue of EEC membership was only settled (temporarily) in the mid-80s after the political demise of the Labour Bennites (the main advocates of leaving).

    Coming back to the present day, the shifts in polling on the issue appear much less dramatic than they were back then (albeit polling methods have changed/improved as well), and the difference is that the losing side this time round is far more politically powerful than the old Bennites, given that it represents the pre-2016 Westminster consensus whereas the Bennites were only ever one radical faction within one of the two main parties. With large numbers of MPs within both major parties as well as the support of the small ones, the Remain camp of the present day is able to put up much more of a fight regardless of the results of referendums or elections.

    (1) – https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/polling-history-40-years-british-views-or-out-europe

  6. @ DANNY – I don’t know why I bother replying to you occasionally but I will answer a few points. Your comments in quotes and italics

    In general YOU and I do mean YOU, need to look at some polling (specifically the x-breaks). So

    A: “On the basis of that paper alone, they would be just as likely to have flooded to support Brino.”

    ?!? Totally barking.

    1/ Look at poll question such as Opinium V202 (CON-Leave prefer “No Deal to a Bad Deal” and LAB-Remain just about prefer to say “B*llox to Brexit” but less so from LAB-Remain side)
    2/ Look at all EP polling. CON and LAB down. “Arch” parties up. Timing and magnitude was difficult to predict but #1 shows it was v.likely to happen and would hit CON the hardest.

    B: “But! These figures are for start of April, and are a month out of date. In this time lab and con have lost supporters so the current picture might be significantly different”

    ?!?! WTF

    Leave and Remain VI have been very stable with very little churn (reread my post). Also reread above answer and your own post.

    C: “But also! What do you mean by a con or lab voter?”

    In general I mean a GE’17 voter as that info is usually in the x-breaks of all polls (why I refer to as “loyalty” and “flow”).

    Perhaps try the “Fun DIY exercise” I suggested at 10:30am. Parties “fish” from certain ponds. CON “fish” from RoC, LAB from “LoC”. There is obviously fuzzy region in the middle but a die-hard Socialist is never going to vote CON and a die-hard Capitalist is never going to vote LAB – simples. If the salient dimension is now Remain v Leave (as we see in Most Important Issues) then the Y-axis becomes dominant.

    If you/others understand “market segmentation” you might understand this. If not then try google or ask anyone you know who has ever done any marketing in the Real World.

    Seriously though try that “Fun DIY exercise” out and you’ll see why your “cunning plan” that CON are Remain or should move to Remain is suicide. CON’s “pond” is RoC and “Leave” (with a bit of fuzziness on Remain side where CON loyalty is holding out as priority over Remain). See also the “flow” from 2015 to 2017 where CON lost their more fickle Remainers to LDEM (and took in roughly equal and offsetting number of LDEM-Leave)

    D: “Unfortunately this paper also fails to say how important brexit is to these people”

    For that look at polls that show Most Important Issues (e.g Opinium V101, or YG polls). As I repeatedly have to repeat CON-Leave see Brexit as v.important (LAB-Remain see it as important but lower than LDEM, as we see every day on ‘ere).

    Seriously, try looking at polls and stop believing everyone thinks the same way as you do. Polls are there so we don’t project n=1 opinions onto all voters.

    I respect Genuine Socialists will always vote LAB and respect a larger number of Remainers are “committed” to saying “B*llox to Brexit” – because we see that info in polling.

    I’m fully aware of bias, gr0upthink, etc – again why polling is so useful as a reality check on our n=1 (or n=gr0upthink) opinions.

    You know what they say about opinions?

    “Opinions are like *holes – everyone’s got one”

    SO LOOK AT POLLING and stop being an *hole.

    1 reply per week for you so next one after EPs.

  7. Under starter’s orders. The Boris is quickly out of the stalls.

    They’re off – Labour / Con talks

    “In a statement, Sir Graham said: “The Prime Minister is determined to secure our departure from the European Union and is devoting her efforts to securing the 2nd Reading of the Withdrawal Agreement Bill in the week commencing 3rd June 2019 and the passage of that Bill and the consequent departure of the United Kingdom from the European Union by the summer.

    “We have agreed that she and I will meet following the 2nd Reading of the Bill to agree a timetable for the election of a new leader of the Conservative and Unionist Party.””

    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/theresa-may-will-set-out-date-for-her-departure-in-june-a4144166.html

  8. COLIN

    What is really droll about the poll you showed was that – despite it actually saying it “on the tin” – 41% of respondents didn’t know what the policy of the BREXIT party was.

    It does make you seriously wonder if there should be a brief exam paper, in a pre-polling booth, which people need to pass in order to be allowed to vote.

    Not as difficult as – say – knowing wtf a “polity” is but, maybe, things like knowing the name of the Prime Minister or which party is currently in government and so on.

  9. Planning to run:

    BORIS JOHNSON, 54
    The former foreign minister is May’s most outspoken critic on Brexit. He resigned from the cabinet in July in protest at her handling of the exit negotiations.

    Johnson, regarded by many eurosceptics as the face of the 2016 Brexit campaign, set out his pitch to the membership in a speech at the party’s annual conference in October – some members queued for hours to get a seat. He called on the party to return to its traditional values of low tax and strong policing.

    On Thursday the BBC reported he had told The British Insurance Brokers’ Association, “Of course I’m going to go for it.”

    Full list of hopefuls at the link.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-leadership-factbox/factbox-who-is-hoping-to-be-next-prime-minister-idUKKCN1SM1IR?rpc=401&

  10. DANNY
    I agree with every word, but I’m just imagining a remainer and a leaver with a check list of specific questions, say 100, with the option to retain, alter or scrap each specific thing. When they hand their forms in, how many answers do you think might be the same? 80?
    That would leave only the areas of disagreement to compromise over. You could keep whittling them down and in the end I don’t care whether you call it leaving or remaining since neither exist imo.

  11. @ BFR – I’ll repost for the 3rd time, clipping just the bit that applies for the “pond” that LDEM should be fishing from.

    CON’17 Remain (10% of all voters)

    CON 60%
    DK 20%
    others 10% or less
    As per press articles CON are keeping most of their smaller pot and no one is making much gain from their Remainers (many of whom left in 2015 of course). Close to “tribal” floor?

    LAB’17 Remain (23% of all voters)
    LAB 58%
    DK 13%
    Green 11%
    LDEM 11%
    ChUK 3%
    Finally some noticeable impact but my hunch is we’ll see a higher “floor” here than we’ll see in CON’17-Leave (basing that on Most Important Issues polling)

    Others

    Also worth noting the LDEM “surge” is mostly them improving their loyalty (ie grabbing back defectors to ChUK, etc). They now have the highest “loyalty” of all GB wide parties at 63% (with a further 12% in DK). Only losing small %s to ChUK and others (note v.small x-break caveats)

    Some of the LAB flow is a “reversal” and fair play I didn’t specifically mention LAB and simply said ChUK, etc.

    Previously some LDEM had moved to LAB so I should have added in the ChUK bit. I’ll restate that small part

    LDEM “surge” is mostly them improving their loyalty (ie grabbing back defectors to ChUK, LAB, etc)

    Individual polls will be choppy of course but perhaps show a breakdown of current LDEM VI along the lines of the breakdown on PC VI that I showed earlier.

    LAB’17-Remain was a large “pot” at 23% of GE’17 votes. You’ve barely scratched the surface of that “pot” but I hope you do get more from there as it obviously lowers the “hurdle” in a lot of seats that BXP hopes to gain in a GE.
    (as I saved a few times, BXP want LDEM to be a bit more successful than LDEM seem to want for themselves).

    CON’17-Leave was an even larger “pot” at 28% of GE’17 votes of course and BXP have grabbed a whopping chunk of that (and about as much LAB-Leave as LDEM have grabbed from LAB-Remain, it of “ish” on that as it varies by polling company).

    BXP are more ambitious. 30% of GE VI and most seats (E+W) in next GE.

  12. Interesting to see the polling and anecdote about Labour losing out to Lib Dems and Greens. Very much my own view on how I’m likely to vote, and also prevalent among many friends.

    I’m almost certain not to vote labour on the 23rd, and will probably go Lib Dem. Green would be my preference, but on the basis that a more focused and headline grabbing surge for the Lib Dems would be more noteworthy I’ll probably lend my vote to them this time around.

    Interestingly, my calculation is, I suspect, like many others next Thursday – that primarily these elections don’t matter, so I’m free to send whatever message I want. Come a GE, everything changes, and I will be defending my Labour MP against Cons.

  13. Electoral Calculus prediction for the new IPSO Westminster poll;

    Con 259 (-59), LAB 287 (+27), LIB 22 (+10), UKIP 0 (0),
    Green 1 (0), SNP 55 (+20), PlaidC 4 (0), ChUK 0(0),
    Brexit 2 (+2) N.Ire 18

    Leave; Con/BXP/DUP: 271
    Remain; Lab/Lib/SNP/PC/Grn: 369

    Peter.

  14. Westminster based on Scottish crossbreeds using Electoral calculus Scotland;

    CON 0 (-13), LAB 0(-7) Lib 4 (0), UKIP 0 (0), Green 0 (0),
    SNP 55 (+20), ChUK 0(0 ),Brexit 0 (0)

    Two Parties worth of the border both pro remain.
    How does a Scottish Conservative Party with a pro remain leader that has built it’s support around opposition to Independence meet a challenge from the right.

    Never fight a war on two fronts!

    Peter.

  15. Alec, the irony being that if we end up staying in the EU you and other voters will probably have 2 x BXP and 1 x Lab MEPs rather than the other way round.

    In areas with larger seat numbers the equation is less clear cut.

  16. @JJ

    Thankfully in a 700-odd seat Parliament, one BXP MEP more or less won’t make much difference. Of course, if Corbyn had come off the fence as even Paul Mason is saying now (see my earlier posting for the link) he might have been able to keep 2 Lab MEPs.

  17. STATGEEK

    My favourite is neurasthenia. What about yerself?

  18. @Alec @Jim Jam

    I am with Alec and will vote either Liberal or Green (I am in the SW).

    I want to help send a clear message to “Respect the vote Remainers” Labour MPs that the vote they should respect is the one for a 2nd referendum in conference.

    Still can’t decide between Greens (Every parliament should have a Green caucus) or the Liberals (More chance of winning).

  19. ESTHER MCVEY, 51
    The pro-Brexit former television presenter, who resigned as work and pensions minister in November in protest at May’s exit deal with the European Union, has said she plans to run in the leadership contest.

    McVey told Talkradio: “I have always said quite clearly that if I got enough support from my colleagues, yes I would (run). Now people have come forward and I have got that support, so I will be going forward.”

    Hope she wears it – she’ll need it.

  20. More interesting stuff on p3 of the Welsh YG poll – LTV (ie self-reported expectation of turnout).

    Overall Certain to Vote is 52% which is unrealistically high (and I think YG probably use 8-10 LTV which would make it even higher?).

    In 2014 EP Wales had a 31.5% turnout[1]. It might be a bit higher for sure but I very much doubt it will be anywhere near 50%.

    However, self-report LTV does show a split by party that favours the “Arch” parties (ie “Protest Vote”)

    CTV for VI: Europe

    CON: 66%
    LAB: 67%

    LDEM: 80%
    PC: 77%
    BXP: 81%

    It seems likely CON and LAB will get a lower GOTV compared to the “protest” group so good to see self-reporting is picking this up. My hunch is this might still be a source of actual v polling “error” though (ie we’ll see a “Stay at home Tory” story – although at only 16% “loyalty” then how low can CON go in Wales?)

    (quick Q: I assume these numbers should be multiplied by 68.6%ish? to drop total Welsh electorate of 2.3million-ish to those that vote? that would get you to about the 52% and make more sense of the other x-breaks)

    GOTV could well make a material difference so very keen to discuss how Psephologists view self-report LTV knowing it is over-stated.

    In GE’15 the “shy Tory” effect was the #1 “error” for many polling companies and Matt Singh showed this was based on approval ratings for leader. If “approval ratings” are a factor then curious to see a poll that has Farage on it (to see how that compares to all other “leaders” fishing from the “Leave” pond).

    [1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/eu-regions/W08000001

  21. Edge of Reason,
    ” BXP because it would guarantee them a sizeable HoC presence, CON because they’d presume much of that support would come back to them after leaving the EU.”

    BXP are the enemies of the conservative party, not their allies. Far better for con to be in opposition to lab with some libs thrown in. But even there they thought they had slain libs, only for them to be stirring from their grave. But Bxp are (or would be) a challenger from the far right, whereas both lib and lab are after the same ground from their left.

    The Trevors,

    ” …Look at poll question such as Opinium V202 ”

    Ah trevors, but that isnt what you said. You said the yougov poll supported your contention, whereas I pointed out it did not. Now you are offering an alternative source.

    ” “But! These figures are for start of April, and are a month out of date.”
    ?!?! WTF”

    Er, they are a month out of date. Fast shifting numbers. Or are you confused because you are thinking of a different poll to the one you actually cited?

    ” : “But also! What do you mean by a con or lab voter?”

    In general I mean a GE’17 voter as that info is usually in the x-breaks of all polls (why I refer to as “loyalty” and “flow”).”

    Again, the poll you cited didnt explain this. It isnt what you meant but what did yougov mean?

    ” a die-hard Socialist is never going to vote CON and a die-hard Capitalist is never going to vote LAB ”

    I am sure some did in 2017. Especially considering the labels con and lab are very far from equivalent to capitalist and socialist.

    I recall looking at one of those charts plotting parties on left-right, which put the SNP well to the left of labour. Yet they seem to be hoovering up all sorts of votes in Scotland

    “.” D: “Unfortunately this paper also fails to say how important brexit is to these people”

    For that look at polls that show Most Important Issues ”

    At risk of repetition, that is not what you claimed. You claimed this yougov poll proved your point, but it doesnt.

    “Seriously, try looking at polls and stop believing everyone thinks the same way as you do. ”

    I never thought others think the way I do. Usually I get it right.

    Sam,
    ““We have agreed that she and I will meet following the 2nd Reading of the Bill to agree a timetable for the election of a new leader ”

    Thats what May said last time, and the time before. Set it for 2050, shall we?

    But I interpret this as part of the evidence she is about to revoke. That is the critical stage which has to be done under her regime rather than being the first act of her successor (and thus instantly destroying his reputation)

  22. @ALEC

    @Colin – “Sensational. It really is …”

    Is it?

    From a Welsh perspective then yes, I’d say a poll showing Labour not only losing but losing by nearly 2:1 is pretty sensational. Likewise a poll showing the Tories in 6th is worth a couple of really demonstrative eyebrows at the very least!

  23. STATGEEK

    :-) :-)

    It is with these two-for sure.

  24. R&D

    Its all a big farce isn’t it ?

  25. @Laszlo

    “In Germany over a hundred towns/villages/regions set up their own municipal grid, and cut themselves off the Eon operated national grid (using a kind of association company) in the last 8 years.

    It is in not against the EU rules (but as Corbyn doesn’t know about devolved matters in the UK, I don’t expect him to know much about the EU).”

    ———

    Yes, the concern is that the EU might be changing the playing field for the future. Firstly because the adoption of something like TTIP would restrict in allowing private companies to sue governments if they try and remunicipalise something.

    Secondly, because of Syzygy’s point of a few weeks ago to Crossbat:

    “You are right that it doesn’t seem to have restricted the Spanish Cities thus far. My point was that it is their very success which explains the lobbying to strengthen the Bolkestein directive. In future, they will be restricted because all schemes will have to receive assent from the Commission.

    After all, Municipals aren’t really in the spirit of EU competition rules or a level playing field…”

  26. STATGEEK @ COLIN

    Leader popularity. It’s like choosing your favourite disease.

    Agreed, and you might enjoy listening to Mike Agranoff’s take on the topic here.

  27. David Colby,
    “That would leave only the areas of disagreement to compromise over. ”

    They arent trying to reach an agreement because it isnt in their interests to do so. I mean, the WA essentially says we have to be in a CU, but it is the position of the government it does not say this and we will not. Labour agrees it does not say this, but insists it must. How can con then agree to put it in, if it is in already and their strategy is to pretend it isnt?

    Its barking.

    Alec,
    ” Come a GE, everything changes, and I will be defending my Labour MP against Cons.”

    I agree your logic why to vote lib now. A couple of short paragraphs rather than the Trevors pages of stats which still miss the main points.

    Not being tribal labour though, I will not be returning to them at the next election for that reason. It will be about policy. I have no idea what the state of brexit will be then. If we leave now, most likely we will still be arguing the deal details at the next election. Deadlocked. If we stop brexit now, then there will be a more minor push by BXP or someone to restart it.

    Leftieliberal,
    ” if Corbyn had come off the fence as even Paul Mason is saying now (see my earlier posting for the link) he might have been able to keep 2 Lab MEPs.”

    But the price would have been to get leavers backing con again (or never having deserted to Bxp). Would that be better or worse for lab?

  28. @Laszlo

    Bolkestein returns: EU Commission power grab for services
    Q&A on the proposed EU Commission veto right over local decisions

    29.11.2018

    https://corporateeurope.org/en/power-lobbies/2018/11/bolkestein-returns-eu-commission-power-grab-services

    “The EU institutions are currently negotiating new single market rules that could have a severe and distinctly negative impact on decision-making in parliaments, regional assemblies and city councils across Europe. The Commission is proposing to enforce the Services Directive – aka the Bolkestein Directive – in a new and extremely intrusive manner. In short, the Commission wants the right to approve or negate new laws as well as other measures covered by the directive. And the directive covers quite a wide range of issues: zoning laws (city planning), housing supply measures, energy supply, water supply, waste management and more.

  29. “I would say the breach of trust was to go ahead with a single stage referendum without a defined brexit.”

    I’d say that was more a breach of basic common sense. Or maybe just an attempt to game the situation that backfired.

    And for Parliament to say “we made a mistake and we are not now goingb to do what we undertook to do” may be argued as a justified restoration of that common sense. It may be argued as a correct judgment call and argued as a reflection of a higher duty to the public. But it is unarguably a breaking of that undertaking. However it’s done.

    That’s why I tend to the view that if Parliament is going to go back on its undertaking to regard the referendum as final, which it undoubtedly has the legal power to do, and if it is doing that on the basis that leaving the EU would be a worse breach of faith than going back on an undertaking that now looks a bit silly, then it should at least do so in a manner that involves not leaving the EU.

  30. PeterW,

    Parliament has never even voted for brexit, still less given any undertakings about the referendum being final. On the contrary, it was clearly stated that it was advising Parliament only.

  31. POLL ALERT : YG have a favourability poll (6th sense?)

    Net favourability (change since 22-24Mar)

    CON -46 (-7)
    LAB -35 (+2)
    LDEM -15 (+18) way to go LDEM!!!
    Green 9 (+5) the only +ve number
    UKIP -55 (-10)
    Brexit -24 (new)
    ChUK -19 (uc) but still a huge DK of 39% (-2)

    If you want to look at the x-breaks then “Remain’16” x-break with a net +ve number:
    Green +45
    LDEM +23
    ChUK +1

    For Leave’16 then +ve net numbers for:
    Brexit +33

    and that’s the only one! UKIP are -32 (too toxic by far – even amongst Leave’16 x-break). Good to see Leave’16 give Greens an OK score on only -28 (which is above UKIP and CON and way above LAB)

    For leaders a similar story, I’ll pick out the “Arch” sides:

    Cable net -18 (+12) – way to go Vince, although quite high DK at 36 (+2)
    Farage (my mate marmite) net -32 (+7 from way back in Nov’16)

    Why marmite? Farage is -83 for Remain’16 (but he’s not after your vote) versus +21 for Leave.

    That seems a pretty low score for Farage from Leavers until you see where they rate other “leaders” (May is -39 and Corbyn is -73). That low score might not help with GOTV from Leave side as fair to say Brexit Party is his party and 34% of Leavers don’t like him (mostly those sticking with CON given CON proclaim to be a Leave party and had a lot of Leave’16 in CON’17)

    Tough audience to please those pesky Leave folks :-) :-)

    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/ndcogs96i1/YouGov%20-%20Party%20and%20political%20figures%20favourability%20May%202019.pdf

  32. R&D
    “It does make you seriously wonder if there should be a brief exam paper, in a pre-polling booth, which people need to pass in order to be allowed to vote.”

    I blame the decision to let the working classes vote in 1918. The blighters won’t do as they’re told.

  33. Peter Cairns (SNP): Westminster based on Scottish crossbreeds using Electoral calculus Scotland …

    OK, we know Westminster has gone to the dogs – but Scottish Crossbreeds ???

  34. @Peter Cairns (SNP) –

    “Westminster based on Scottish crossbreeds using Electoral calculus Scotland;…”

    Wasn’t previously aware of such dramatic genetic divergence between Scotland and the rest of the UK, but if you say so…..

    :)

  35. Peter Cairns

    Re Scots crossbreak in Ipsos-MORI

    If anything like that does happen, then most Scots Unionists, who are Remainers, will have done the sensible thing and transferred their vote to a party that represents their views on both constitutional issues.

    That Unionists will have, once again, chosen to split their vote across three parties has a happy result for the SNP.

  36. [email protected]: … It does make you seriously wonder if there should be a brief exam paper, in a pre-polling booth, which people need to pass in order to be allowed to vote.

    Not as difficult as – say – knowing wtf a “polity” is but, maybe, things like knowing the name of the Prime Minister or which party is currently in government and so on.

    Such an exam should be no harder than what the government themselves could manage, so asking questions like “who is in charge?” are probably unreasonable. Even a multiple choice to distinguish ar535 from elbows would be pushing it.

  37. @ Old Nat

    I’ll be watching QT in Elgin with great interest, the first old geezer in the audience to use the word polity in a question or statement about Scottish independence will have us all pointing at the tele and shouting “it’s Old Nat!” :) :)

  38. Bantams

    I certainly won’t be on (or watching) that appalling excuse for a political debate!

  39. DANNY

    “Sam,
    ““We have agreed that she and I will meet following the 2nd Reading of the Bill to agree a timetable for the election of a new leader ”

    Thats what May said last time, and the time before. Set it for 2050, shall we?

    But I interpret this as part of the evidence she is about to revoke. That is the critical stage which has to be done under her regime rather than being the first act of her successor (and thus instantly destroying his reputation)”

    Yes, may be so. Stakes and a hammer needed, maybe. I would set it for 2050 with regard to the date May invokes “Revoke”.

  40. @ EOTW – SW.Eng Remain Tactical vote

    You have a tricky one for sure.

    “Still can’t decide between Greens (Every parliament should have a Green caucus) or the Liberals (More chance of winning)”

    LDEM look highly likely to get one seat and possibly even 2 seats (I expect a tight race for the 6th final seat with 2 parties narrowly missing it)

    LDEM 2nd seat is where your problem lies. If you “vote stack” LDEM at expense of Green you might accidentally “enable” a 3rd seat for Brexit.

    The 6th seat will probably go to someone on 10%ish which could be Brexit Party (3rd seat = 30%/3) or LDEM (2nd seat = 20%/2) or Green (1st seat on 10%).

    if LDEM + Green = 27% you’d be very upset if LDEM was 18% and Green 9% with Brexit party scooping a 3rd seat.

    Unless polling has clearly shifted to make it either:

    LDEM 23%, Green 4% (back LDEM)

    or

    LDEM 15%, Green 12% (back Green but don’t overdo it as still need to keep LDEM above 10%)

    then you’re gonna have to flip a coin and keep your fingers crossed (elections are “blind, one-shot” games in that you don’t know what other “players” will do and you can’t change your mind once you do know)

    However, some good news. CON unlikely to get above 20% so down to 1 seat with anything above 10% “stacked vote”. It’s also just about feasible LAB don’t get a seat at all. Both of those might mean LDEM get 2 and Green 1 anyway so just vote with your heart!

    SW.Eng Prediction centre case (68.2% confidence range), starting with who gets first seats

    BXP 3 (2-3)
    LDEM 1 (1-2)
    LAB 1 (1)
    CON 1 (1)
    Green 0 (0-1)

  41. I missed the Yougov May 1st poll which showed a sharp narrowing of the gap between Leave and Remain, down to a 4% Remain lead against 10% previously. I wouldn’t be surprised if the gap is down to level pegging after the EU elections.

  42. @ NEILJ
    “This shows very clearly with polling evidence that Labour need to move to a clearer remain stance”

    Labour are boxed in, but at the moment, it’s probably the best place to be.

    If the Tories fail to deliver a Brexit they are in serious, serious trouble, and Labour would be safe to declare “we always wanted to Remain” then.

    But as long as Brexit remains viable, then declaring for Remain is effectively falling into a Tory trap.

    Those Brexit party figures from Wales should sober up some Labour metropolitan champagne Remainers. I’d foresee a similar scenario in Midlands and North.

  43. @TW

    Thanks for that,

    so just vote with your heart!

    Green it is…

  44. @ BANTAMS – It will certainly rhyme with “OLD NAT” :-)

    I hope we hear from some minorities (eg Yes-Indy, Pro-Brexit types who exist in decent numbers to the East of Elgin due to long held hatred of CFP)

    Also, heaven forbid someone actually checks x-breaks and sees that SCON VI have a decent chunk of Leavers in as well (not that they are represented by Ruth or the Beard)

  45. @ Alec
    ” I suspect, like many others next Thursday – that primarily these elections don’t matter, so I’m free to send whatever message I want.”

    Blimey- for someone who used to have a Green Party logo on here in the good old days, I suspect you have voted Green less often than I have. Given this is the one election where your (former?) party has a chance and where D’Hondt seems to be a system that largely works against tactical voting I’m a little surprised.

    Your suspicion that it doesn’t matter either seems to mean a) we’re going to leave anyway or b) voting in the EU parliament is a waste of time and just there to make ordinary people think they have some power over what goes on there.

    A lent vote today means a two horse race in 5 years time!

  46. Trevors

    If you watch that piece of scripted political theatre tonight, you’ll hear exactly the voices that the BBC and Mentorn have decided you will hear.

    Indeed the “Britain First” supporting Audience Editor will have made sure that she has placed her chosen voices in their allotted seats, so that the chairwoman knows where to look, when their turn to speak comes.

  47. I found this interesting

    https://www.ecfr.eu/publications/summary/what_europeans_really_feel_the_battle_for_the_political_system_eu_election

    It shows a lot of voters all round the EU expect it to collapse within 20 years.

  48. “OLDNAT
    Bantams

    I certainly won’t be on (or watching) that appalling excuse for a political debate!”

    Hear, bleedin’ hear.

    Wot OleNat from the Northern Polity said.

    Actually I never watch any political proggies unless in error. [eg if I fall asleep watching footy and wake up to non-football related arguing on telly and can’t find the remote quickly enough.]

    JoneinB.

    “Those Brexit party figures from Wales should sober up some Labour metropolitan champagne Remainers”

    Gosh, you never weary of your childish, tired old cliches do you?

    It is possible to favour remaining in the EU without either living in London, being “elite” [whatever that is] drinking champagne, or anything else you want to copy and paste.

    If you’ve got a grown-up point to make then why don’t you just make it???

    Leaving aside the fact that I imagine some Tory, metropolitan, champagne-swigging, Eton-educated, PROPERLY elite Tories are even less thrilled.

    It probably won’t sober them up of course.

    [Well, not in cliche-land anyway.]

  49. EOTW
    Think of the headline “Lib Dems top poll in SW England, pushing Brexit Party into second place”

  50. Pete B: … It shows a lot of voters all round the EU expect it to collapse within 20 years.

    Actually, it does not say that at all. It says that they think it is possible that it COULD collapse in the period.

    When it comes to it, I suppose that rather fewer people think that the UK could collapse. But I think the UK is likely to collapse before the EU.

1 10 11 12 13 14 16