ICM give the Conservatives an 11-point lead
A new ICM poll in the Sunday papers apparently has topline voting intention figures (with charges from their last poll) of CON 41% (+4), LAB 30% (-1), LDEM 19% (-2). The exact dates of the poll aren’t available yet, but normally ICM polls published on a Sunday have fieldwork conducted between Wednesday and Friday, so it’s likely this poll was conducted when Labour’s funding row was at its height. (UPDATE - the News of the World report is here, and the poll was actually conducted on Wednesday and Thursday. It should go without saying that this isn’t the strongest Tory lead for 15 years, it’s the strongest lead for 8 months…but hey, that wouldn’t have been a less impressive headline wouldn’t it? Sheesh)
If confirmed the the changes in vote share would suggest a boost for the Conservatives, a slight fall for Labour and a larger fall for the Liberal Democrats since the last ICM poll a week ago. However, that poll was itself somewhat strange, showing a huge drop in Conservative support and an equally massive 6 point jump in Lib Dem support. I suspect those were down sample error, and hence the Conservatives haven’t really risen so much and the Liberal Democrats haven’t really fallen in this latest poll.
Putting the immediate changes from the rather dubious last ICM poll aside, the poll confirms the same picture we’ve seen elsewhere: the Conservatives are pretty steady around the 40% or low 40s mark - YouGov had them up at 43% but we’ve seen no consistent sign of them profiting from Labour’s misfortune. The Lib Dems have progressed from their autumn lows are are back in the mid or high teens depending on the pollster. Labour’s support has fractured over the last month, compared to the polls at the end of October they are between 6 and 8 points down. As with YouGov and MORI’s recent polls - the picture ICM are giving is that Labour are back where they worse during their worst ratings under Tony Blair.
Filed under: ICM, Voting Intention
The last 2 ICM polls are quite consistent within sampling margin of errors , The one poll that is completely out of line is Yougov and the differences in LibDem support cannot be explained by M of E . Populus to come and I expect it to confirm this . Some serious questioning to be done at Yougov methinks .
Mark
I am sure that Peter Kelner will be hanging off your every word.
After the week Labour have had this isn’t nearly as bad as I was expecting…
MARK SENIOR & BRIAN SWIFT :-
I don’t think you’ve seen the worst of it yet / YouGov seem to be the most reliable source for most POLLS
“Populus to come and I expect it to confirm this . Some serious questioning to be done at Yougov methinks .”
But it might be YouGov which is in fact the most accurate. Populus is the most Labour-friendly pollster of all - they still have a 1% lead for Labour at the moment! As unreliable as ComRes, the most Tory-friendly pollster.
Andy , yes of course it could be Yougov is correct and all the other pollsters wrong with regard to LibDem support levels but it is rather more likely that it is Yougov that is wrong . We do know why Comres is the most Conservative ( and Others ) friendly pollster and why Populus is the most Labour friendly pollster and ICM the most LibDem friendly pollster - it is the differing weightings they apply to past voting . We can debate which is likely to be the most correct . The very low Yougov LibDem figures compared to the other pollsters is down to a more fundamental cause ( and has been there since late 2005 ) so I am sure that Peter Kellner is giving it some thought .
I’m not sure why Mark has it in for YouGov. They predicted 24% before the May 2005 election for the LDs which was more than what they had, but generally turned out to be quite accurate.
You Gov proved to be the most stable and accurate pollster during the 2005 general election.I’m inclined to believe their figures until they are proved wrong when it matters, at a general election.
Anthony: What happened to the polling organisations Harris and NOP? They used to be as common place as You Gov and Mori.
Prior to the last GE Yougov weighted by past vote as do the other pollsters now ( except Mori ) . It is a mystery to me as to why they changed a successful formula . ICM were also pretty spot on at the last GE so I will give their figures more credence than Yougov as they have not changed their methodology .
Intesting that the Tories have stuck in the low 40’s. Intuitively one would have thought this week would have been a Labour massacre, but the polls don’t really show this so far. I genuinely think the next election is up for grabs, but I have a strange feeling that I’d rather be in Brown’s position than Cameron’s, highly odd as it might sound at the moment.
I will also be interested in Brown’s personal ratings once this dies down. I have detected an odd shift in the media attitude to him - there have been plenty of positive comments made on his performance over the last few days, as he stands alone on the blazing deck.
Im kinda surprised by the Lib Dem drop, personally i thought they would gain a boost from this week, what with disaffected Labour supporters and Cable’s fantastic performance at PMQ’s
Well as noted the Weighted Moving Average is 41:32:17 C lead continues to climb (9.3) and the Retrospectives show that it was about 10 2 polls ago so probably 12 now. Lab have dropped 3 points in the week and will doubtless drop another 3 in the next week or so.
Alec: this *is* a massacre for Labour it’s just that, once you remove the noise, the polls move in slow motion. They have had a 17% swing against them in 2 months, involving a 9.5 point drop in their support. Another couple of months of decline at this rate and they’ll be the 3rd party.
And please don’t imagine that the negative news-flow has ceased. Still to come: Harman, Dromey, Mendelson and Darling going (12 months max, 1-2 months for the first 3), house prices falling, serious economic difficulties, more problems with Northern Rock, more leaks of trouble at the top of government, more government resignations (Drayson was the first, the next ones won’t feel the need to spin it) and more Unknown Unknowns. Brown has alienated almost everybody (including the Garden Girls) and has no store of goodwill on which to draw.
That Labour haven’t fallen so far is probably down to 3 reasons
1) There are some people who just would never vote Tory and would do anything to prevent a Conservative government (e.g. the monolithically Labour seats of Liverpool, Bolsover, S Yorks etc.)
2) There’s still a latent distrust of the Tories that has to be expunged, and could only be so by an inoffensive Conservative government in the future
3) Any anti-Labour vote in Scotland is likely to be going to the SNP at the moment. To a lesser extent Plaid will be benefitting from some anti-Labour sentiment in Wales. In 1992-7 there wasn’t really a credible anti-Tory alternitive (these days I suppose we’d see a healthy boost for UKIP as an anti-Tory government vote)
Brian - Harris stopped doing political polling in the UK a long time ago now and moved into online polling. In the US they do online political polling as well - but not here (though they did dip their toe in the water just before the 2005 election. I thought that might result in someone signing them up and regular Harris Interactive political polls turning up, but it never happened).
NOP are still around and are a major player in market research. They still do carry out political polls for the media, but they don’t have a regular contract for anyone and - unlike MORI - don’t carry out regular voting intention polls anyway just for the publicity. Prior to the 2005 election they had a regular contract with the Independent and called the election precisely corrected. They were rewarded by having their contract cancelled. Life’s not fair is it?
Mark - the major change in YouGov’s methodology since the last Parliament was the switch from weighting using recalled data, weighted to an estimate of what the recalled data should be if false recall works how they guessed it did, to weighting using contemporary data weighted to fixed contemporary targets. This was presumably to remove the need to estimate the level of false recall, something that couldn’t previously be done. You’d have to ask Peter for the reason to go for party ID rather than past vote, but IIRC it is more stable and should allow new panellists to be integrated with less guesswork. There shouldn’t be any difference in actual results between weighting using the two different targets.
ICM have introduced two changes to their methodology since 2005 - they moved to filtering by likelihood to vote rather than weighting by likelihood to vote (which probably makes very little practical difference, though I haven’t studied it), and shifted their weighting formula so it is 70% of the way towards the actual 2005 result compared to the average recall in their polls, rather than 50% as they used to use (and Populus still do). This increases the target for weighting past Conseratives and past Liberal Democrats.
Anthony: What happened to Gallup?
Weighting by past vote sounds credible but isn’t as straight forward as it sounds.
If people have changed their minds, many (but not all of course) will lie or - even forget - about what they voted before.
Also, if you apply too many sets of weights you can fall into the trap of thinking you are making it more accurate, but in fact, you can easily be increasing other inaccuracies in the data, so you need to make careful judgements and sometimes fine-tune, according to what is really necessary.
For years when the Tories were flatlining at around 30-33% people used to say they needed to be polling in the high 30’s. When they achieved this everybody used to say they should be polling in the low 40’s. Now they have achieved that people are saying they should be polling in the mid 40’s….
An 11 point lead is an 11 point lead as far as I’m concerned. And theres no reason to suspect that Labour can’t fall lower over the next month, even if the Tories remain in the low 40’s. As far as the Conservatives moving into the mid 40’s, my guess is it won’t happen until they set out a coherant vision for the country. But I believe that day is coming and when it does we’ll see the Con’s into the mid 40’s.
(edited for spelling)
Tories need to be 40+.
If they can keep up the pressure they should start to get the odd 44 or 45.
I’m a Tory and am slightly concerned that all this row about sleaze will start to turn voters off both parties, with the pious Lib Dems saying look at all this yah-boo etc.
The Tories turned things around at their Conference by setting out sensible but sharpened up policies, and they need to push that agenda aswell.
It’s also a good time to revive issues such as the pensions which Gordon Brown has wrecked. They made some impact on this earlier in the year, but people were still cagey because they believed Brown was competent with financial matters then. I’m not sure they still do.
ALEC :-
“I have detected an odd shift in the media attitude to him - there have been plenty of positive comments made on his performance over the last few days, as he stands alone on the blazing deck”
You must have a great detection system - i have’nt heard anything postive from the media about Brown - only Brown’s colleagues have said anything postive about him ! Some have even stabbed him in the back fairly quickly .
More excrutiatingly painful POLLS on the way for Brown now till at least January - after that they won’t get any worse because he will have reached rock solid Labour support at the high 20’s . The Liberals will peak at about 18% by January - they will slowly drop back to about 14% to 16% support , that too being rock solid support .
As for Scotland which keeps getting mentioned a lot - people seem to think that Scotland is grass roots Labour - go back to the 70’s and the Tories had a very good share of the vote there and seats - lost during the Thatcher years / all of that can easily be resurrected given time and circumstances .
Philip - I think the Telegraph terminated their contract and they decided to stop doing political polling in the UK.
I don’t agree that the Tories will ever do well in Scotland now- I think it’s gone for good, especially if the Tories persist in talking about the West Lothian question and mocking Brown’s scottishness (which is a fair enough tactic, it just won’t help them in Scotland). Nevertheless, the anti-Toryness of Scotland is certainly quite…shall we say… impressive, and remarkably long-lasting.
In Wales I think the Tories can recover to 1992 levels. They’ve already made a lot more progress there than in Scotland- where they’ve not improved at all since 1997.
Paul D - very much agree with your points. There is still an anti Tory element, and electoral conditions today are very different to the 70’s and 80’s when we essentially had a 2 party system. The Tories are not as popular as they think and a lot of voters are still hoping Labour aren’t so bad that they can’t vote for them.
Mike Richardson - you’re quite wrong, and can’t have been watching the news this week. All the media commentators rated Brown’s Monday and PMQ performance as good, last night he got good comments from BBC/ITN news and the printed press has been in similar vein. Will this last beyond the current crisis? Who knows.
You’ve also misread completely the Scottish situation - Tories are now the fourth party, and Cameron is absolutely not the man to deliver any meaningful recovery for them. This matters - the last Tory government needed Scottish seats to form a majority. Long term, if they are to regain their position as a regular party of majority government they need to bury the Lib Dems so the third party returns to 10 - 12% in the polls and recover 20 seats or so in Scotland and Wales.
With a dire Labour performance they could still win, but Labour will recover to some extent at least and I feel things are going to be tight. Labour was 14% ahead 2 months ago - remember that?
Yes, I am perhaps a little surprised that the Tories aren’t even further ahead, especially since Labour was supposed to be 13% behind in 1 poll even better this grim news broke. This situation is very poor for Labour, but is certainly by no means beyond recovery. Mind you if these ministers keep dropping like flies I could be PM soon……..
sorry that should have read “even BEFORE this grim news” etc.
Yes - these are very good figures for the Tories, but there is more to do.
They don’t point to anything near conclusive about the next election. This is not 1995.
Barnaby,
People base a lot of ‘the Tories should be doing better’ argument on polls from the late 1990s. As methodologies have changed across the board doing so produces nothing accept for a bit of spin for Labour ministers.
“Philip - I think the Telegraph terminated their contract and they decided to stop doing political polling in the UK.”
That surprises me. We have a lot to thank Gallup for. They began opinion polling in the UK way back in 1937 - that’s when it was all born. And to just to be thrown on the scrap-heap like that in 2001! It would be wonderful and greatly appreciated if Anthony could put up pre-1987 polls in the “historical” section imho.
This idea that the Tories should be doing as well as Labour did in the mid-1990s is quite absurd (I’m not saying Joe is suggesting that) - they were the precursors to the biggest landslide for over 60 years.
Alec,
I would be the first to recognise the possibility of some Labour recovery. We just don’t know yet!
However you appear to be misinterpreting the media’s view on Brown this week. Yes a few commentators such as Polly Toynbee are prepared to say Brown has strong points but today on BBC she admits she does not know if he has the necessary leadership skills. Most e.g. Matthew Parris have given what appears to be convincing reasons why Brown has the wrong personality to be a successful PM.
You also seem to have misjudged the Scottish situation. There is little polling but the most recent polls the Tories have tended to be 3rd not 4th. While they may not make a major recovery for some time 3/4 gains at the next GE particularly any from Labour may be particularly relevant to the overall election result. My impression in Scotland, where I live, is that at the next GE there may be much more tactical voting against Labour rather than against the Tories as previously.
Andy D - the only polls I have details of from pre-1987 are Gallup’s ones and, since they weren’t actually the only show in town back then (there would have been Harris, NOP and others) pre 1987 pages would be severely incomplete. If anyone has nice lists of pre-1987 polls they can let me have then I’d be delighted to put them up!
Spinning is obviously here to stay. Last week Mark Senior made much play of the Rochdale local bye election which I mistakenly but understandably thought was something with the parliamentary constituency of that name. I still say Mark that that bye election on a 17% turnout was utterly utterly meaningless. The only party to make any gain last week were in fact the Tories from Independent which naturally Mark failed to mention but to be fair that was an equally meaningless result. You have got to have a spread of at least 10 council bye elections on the same day to draw any conclusions Mark. You can’t just pick and choose dubious individual results to suit your book.
As for the efforts of one or two Labour supporters on this site when will they wake up and realise that they have no divine right to keep winning elections? If they don’t face up to the prospect of losing then the morning after a defeat comes will be especially hard for them to live with.People like that are to be found in all parties. They merely create a rod for their own back by refusing to acknowledge that the other side could win. It’s their funeral.
Hi, I’m a new poster. I’ve been watching the site for quite a while and enjoying the debate and thought I’d like to join in. My first comment is below.
Much is made of the fact that some pollsters methods favour Labour and some pollsters methods favour the Tories. However, is it not true that polls in general over the last few years have tended to understate Tory support?.Tory support is usually higher at actual elections rather than in polls or so I am led to believe. Maybe some Tory supporters are shy about declaring views to phone pollsters. Anyone any idea why this should be ?
Nick
There are more than one or two Labour supporters on this site - most thankfully keep there views non-partisan, as do most of the Tory posters.
You make a good point with regard to complacency - if the Brown bounce effect had sustained and the Labour lead taken a course of slow declline, then complacency could easily have led to torpor in the next year, followed by a collapse in support and defeat.
On the matter of timing, this is not the worst time for Brown to be 11 points adrift, and at least one thing is sure : there can’t now be a SLOW decline in support for him; there could even be a slow incline, given that his approach from now on will be far from complacent.
When i said “there” I meant “their”, but did not mean to exclude myself!
John T
Yes Labour can recover from this position but it won’t be easy. It depends whether what has happened recently permanently damages Brown in voters eyes.
I think the Tories can win an overall majority at the next election with 42-43% given boundary changes help them and as long as they perform well in the marginals.
Regarding boundary changes - My own consituency was comfortably Labour at the last election (5,000)but will definitely go Tory
at the next election given the fact that a mainly Labour small town has been taken out of it and put into the neighbouring constituency which has a huge Tory majority.
To deal with my earlier point, no the Tories don’t need to be doing aswell as Labour in 1995 because, yes, they achieved a huge landslide, and we in the Tories don’t need that, nor is that going to happen.
But they need to make sure they keep it at 40 or above.
Alec, I have been watching the media all week and it has been excruciatingly bad for Brown. Just trawling through the papers this morning makes it clear how badly he is doing, hav e alook yourslef nothing positive at all. I watched at least 4 reports on PMQ’s with the most positive point being he didnt lose his temper. Most commenattors and media focussed on the fact he had been likened to Mr Bean (how is that positive).
I like this site because it gives even handed and factual based comment. Please leave the partisanship behind and focus on reality
Joe,
What the Tories need to get a reasonable majority is getting over 40%, and less Lib Dem to Labour tactical voting.
I think that everyone should remember that it’s two years to the next general election and if a week is a long time in politics (and how recent events have demonstrated this) then two years is an absolute age. I’ll be amazed if Labour doesn’t poll at least as well as it did in 2005 and if that’s the case the result will very much depend on the level of Liberal support so perhaps anyone with a long term perspective should be keeping their eye on the Liberal leadership election as a key to the future.
I’m inclined to agree that there doesn’t seem to be any particular enthusiasm for the Tories as yet.The fact that Labour are still hanging around the 30% mark,The Tories stuck around 40% and the LDs seem to be making something of a modest recovery, simply means it’s very much as we were both Brown took over.
Of course, this may change.But there’s no freefall as yet.
I share the caution of other Conservatives here.There is a lot do -and as David says, two years is an age in politics.
Nevertheless, looked at from Cameron’s viewpoint,ever since he became leader the Tories have been ahead, with the exception of the short lived Brown honeymoon.
Given the state of the party when he took over,his own lack of experience, and an initialy hostile press, he might be entitled to some satisfaction now.
It seems to me that he has grown visibly in self confidence since the Conference.Clearly Brown’s implosion , and a more positive press have helped-as have the Polls.But he is soaking up experience like a sponge.
Perhaps Conservatives should be looking for stability and consistency in the Polls now.
Flash in the Pan results which evaporate at the first whiff of grapeshot from Labour are pointless and would immediately destroy the good work of the last two years.
But a steady hold on the current Poll position, building credibility and policy will take a toll on Labour’s ability to fight back-and they will fight back.
I don’t accept that Brown is a busted flush.He is a very astute politician.
Nick Keene , I really don’t understand why Conservatives feel a need to decry real election results , winning elections is the name of the game not leading in opinion polls . So let’s look at all the byelections in November fought by the 3 major parties ( this leaves out 2 LibDem gains from Conservative not contested by Labour )
Total votes and share compared to last time fought .
Con 5275 30.0% previous 8887 31.1% minus 1.1%
Lab 3714 20.7% previous 8149 29.0% minus 8.3%
LD. 5570 31.1% previous 5239 18.0% plus 13.1%
Oth 3415 18.2% previous 6221 21.9% minus 3.7%
The LibDem votes up not just as vote share but in actual number of votes despite the much lower turnout . Now of course I would not say that LibDems will poll anything like that % in a national election but it is pretty clear that LibDem support is reflected rather better in polls by pollsters other than Yougov and that although Conservatives are polling well in the polls the people who are telling the pollsters they will vote Conservative are not that enthusiastic when it comes to getting off their backsides when they have the chance to cast a real vote .
In terms of boosting the Tory vote in Scotland Cameron is doing the right thing, keeping a low profile and not trying to play to Scotland.
His best strategy is to focus on UK issues and hope that the Scottish Tories through Holyrood can make gains themselves rather than him trying to do it.
When a Tory leader comes North people still think Thatcher, so he’s actually better staying away.
Something low profile like a short Scottish weekend break with the family that shows he likes Scotland and Scots but isn’t electioneering or playing to the cameras would be ideal.
Peter.
Oh and the Sunday night update,
Both Scotland on Sunday (effectively the Sunday Scotsman) and the Sunday herald, have had editorials and comment pieces effectively saying Wendy Alexander should resign….
The next key date in the Saga is the meeting of Labour MSP’s on Tuesday. For the (extremely) little they are worth both papers on line polls on WA have over 8)% saying she should go.
Unfortunately still not one poll amongst them… Cheap skates
Peter.
Whilst the figures for by-elections in November posted by Mark are arithmetically correct, they do include some distorting contests. Firstly, there was one in Scotland (accounting for 27% of the total votes cast in November) where the SNP nearly won on the first count. Secondly, in 3 of the 9 English by-elections fought by the main parties, the LibDems did not contest the previous election, whereas Labour fought 8 and the Conservatives all 9. This obviously boost the LibDem position relative to the previous elections.
Considering the 6 by-elections where all three parties contested the previous election we have:
Con 3,624 37.9% previous 5,628 41.8%
LibDem 3,976 41.6% previous 4,704 34.9%
Lab 1,535 16.0% previous 3,139 23.3%
Others 431 4.5% previous 0
In particular, although the LibDem share went up by circa 7% its actual vote fell.
Furthermore if we consider the 5 by-elections against the comparable ones in May 2007 we have:
Con 2,770 40.9% previous 3,795 44.6%
LibDem 2,280 33.7% previous 2,842 33.5%
Lab 1,358 20.1% previous 1,860 21.9%
Others 360 5.3% previous 0
Thus the LibDem share was little changed from May 2007, with others coming in at 5%+ at the expense of the Conservatives and Labour in the ratio 2:1.
This appears to give a somewhat different picture to the one posted by Mark above.
Something I’ve been wondering for about a month now but not posted here yet: In the lead-up to the Labour change all the polls showed a bigger Tory lead under Brown. Then the Brown Bounce happened and we wrote off those pre-change polls as having been people being bad at predicting how they’d react?
Is it not looking like actually people predicted it very well? For a couple of months now the Tories have been doing better than they did facing Blair in his dying days.
The difference is that Labour have been doing better too, but we’re now back to May levels of a Tory lead with the higher Tory ratings that were forecasted by the Brown choice polls.
Perhaps the polls back then with the “Brown as leader” questions were more accurate than we’ve given them credit for?
Mark Senior: I have no compulsion to decry real election results. Local by-elections with abysmal turnouts massively influenced by local factors (including simply who has any) are simply NOT real election results though.
As for people “getting off their backside” to cast a “real vote” - next time there is a real vote, 2010 probably, we’ll have turnout of at least 60% probably 70% or more. What is the turnout in these puny local by-elections?
Some misconception here that I’m a partisan Labour supporter - afraid not, and I’m not saying who I support either, (if anyone). My point is simply that with a truly awful week of headlines, on top of a month of very poor coverage, mid term of third parliament, and the Tories are only in the low 40’s. There is still no need for an election until 2010, and little snippets like the council by elections point to the fact that there has not been a national moment of revelation when the nation irreversibly turns against the government as in 1992. This could happen, but hasn’t yet.
Philip Thompson has really said it all for me in his well put response to Mark Senior’s continuing efforts at spinning so called Lib Dem “successes” in local bye elections. Number crunching at ankle level usually means tripping up over your own feet but Mark simply does not see this. The next GE is looking more and more like a two horse race particularly as the Lib Dems are seemingly set on choosing the wrong jockey-yet again!
Philip , you rightly point out that turnout is lower in council elections than a general election 30-40% generally rather than low 60’s but the effect of that has been well calculated over many years and can be allowed for . Yougov poll figures are based on a turnout of 79% ( last poll ) . Turnout will be nothing like that ,which party are the 15% who say they will vote but won’t support .
Nick , first you decry 1 byelection result and say you need a decent sample , then I give a whole month’s and you decry that . You make a bald statement without any evidence whatsoever that the next election looks more and more like a two horse race - this is pure wishful thinking on your part and any and every bit of evidence to the contrary is brushed aside . The LibDems are choosing the best leader out of a choice of 2 good candidates .
The plain fact is that the Conservatives have a lead in opinion polls but much of that is froth and based on Labour unpopularity . When voters have a chance to actually go out and vote Conservative , they do not feel strongly enough about it to actually do so and would rather sit at home in front of the box .
As someone who is old enough to remember the last Labour Government, and indeed the one before that, one thing that strikes me is that the Tories have not yet managed to make the breakthroughs in by elections and local elections that they made at the low points for previous Labour Governments. For example, Ashton Under Lyne Council was briefly gained by the Tories in the 1970’s; and in the late 1960’s they even gained control of Manchester. Despite healthy leads in the opinion polls there is not much sign of a recurrence of either at present!
The major difference of course is that the Liberal Democrats in England and the SNP in Scotland are much stronger than they were in previous periods of Labour Government. David Cameron knows that well, which is why he has made a deliberate pitch for the Liberal vote, and has tried privately and publicly to encourage Lib Dem MP’s to defect, including most notably Nick Clegg.
In deference to John T. , I shall henceforward be lower case and double T!
I agree that Cameron’s policy announcements (such as they are) have appeal to LibDem thinking (such as local accountability re Council Tax)
Without wishing any harm to any MP, I’d love to see a “big” bye-election to test the “Clegg” bounce, (if it is he). Perhaps a seat with a Labour majority of 5k, or even a Tory one.
Mark: Turnout may not be 79% (actually in a close race it might be) but it will certainly be far closer to that than it will be to 30%
A local council by-election is no more an “actual chance to go out and vote” comparable to a general election than completing a 100m sprint is comparable to running a marathon.
Anthony, do you know the Excel version of your swingometer is going to be made available again - when I click on the link it simply takes me back to the main page.
The link shouldn’t be there at all, it’s been surplanted by the html version. If you want to try chopping around with the figures to do projections other than a simple swing there is a csv file of the notional figures on the FAQ page which you can download, open in Excel and use as the base for whatever sort of swingometer you’d like to make.
Peter
Cameron is already visiting Scotland but no one has seemingly paid any attention. His in-laws have a home [Jura?] and the Cameron’s are regulars. It was once reported he didn’t want to upset the Scots because he didn’t want to intefer with his much loved holiday destination.
The detailed data from this poll is on the ICM website , it is interesting to compare with the ICM/Guardian poll . The new poll actually found a higher number of LibDem supporters than the Guardian poll but lower likelihood to vote and a smaller wighting adjustment gave a lower final published % .
To emphasise once again that the subsamples data are of little use , the Midlands area from unusually being the strongest in the Guardian poll for LibDems has returned to its usual position of weakest . The 18-24 age group has LibDems in a clear lead with Conservatives a poor 3rd , the Guardian poll was virtually a 3 way tie .
Mark Senior:-
“The plain fact is that the Conservatives have a lead in opinion polls but much of that is froth and based on Labour unpopularity ”
…So two years ago, a few months after winning a third consecutive general election, at the same time as Cameron became Conservative leader but not connected with that event-Labour suddenly became unpopular.
Then when Brown became Labour leader, they suddenly became popular again-but only for four months. Then they became unpopular all over again .
It’s a funny sort of “froth” isn’t it?
Colin , there is a group of floating voters who like water in the bottom of a boat are moving almost en mass from one party to another dependent on headline news stories . This group of voter support is froth for whichever party it is currently supporting . When Labour had a lead post Brown’s takeover , I said at the time that that lead was based mostly on froth and so it proved . Now this group are saying they will vote Conservative but again it is froth and could move to the LibDems when they have a new leader . They will then boost LibDem poll figures but again it will be based on froth and could disappear to another party and become their froth .
Mark-I do not need to question your figures. Others have done that for me. Please look again at the comments made by ‘middle englander’at 1.50 earlier today and answer the points he has made.
Neither of the two Lib Dem candidates for the leadership have made the slightest impression on the public so far partly to be fair because the media have shown a distinct lack of interest but also because they are clearly lightweight.
Governments lose elections rather than oppositions win them but when a government becomes unpopular voters tend to gather round the opposition party most likely to beat them —and that ain’t the Lib Dems.
AW, thanks for telling about where I can find a CSV file of notional seats.
However, I’ve being using Samplemiser to generate daily vote share figures from the end of August to November 29th (and yes I know there is a huge controversy about using a WMA vs Rolling Average). I’ve got 90 data points for each of the 3 main parties and I’m curious about what notional majorities these three set figures would have produced. Obviously, I could manually input the figures into your Swingometer or Martin Wells’ model. However, typing in 270 pieces of data would be extremely time consuming, and given that new polls in Samplemiser affect previous projections as well as current projections I’d have to re-input much of the data every time I updated my projections. Has anyone got any suggestions about how the process could be automated, using Excel?
Nick , ok middle englander has a slightly different analysis , I don’t know why he does not want to include the Dundee result , it was contested by the same parties as in May and although the SNP won easily , the LibDem vote actually rose more than any other party in % terms . May results are also available for the Norfolk byelection as it was fought in the district elections , including this would bring the results very much more favourable to the LibDems and more unfavourable to the Conservatives who would actually have won in May .
I am not trying to extrapolate these results into GE or polling figures simply pointing out that real election results are much less favourable to the Conservatives and more favourable to the LibDems than particularly Yougov would have you believe .
As I mentioned , I did not include the figures from 2 seats gained by the LibDems from the Conservatives as there was no Labour candidate this time .
I think most people do consider that elections in Scotland are somewhat different. Nevertheless, both the Conservative (~4% of first preference votes)and LibDem (~10%)did not do very well in absolute terms whilst the SNP (almost 50%) was included as others. This was in an election which accounted for 27% of the total votes cast in the selected 10 wards. It could therefore be regarded as distorting any analysis of the Con / LibDem / Lab performance.
I did include the Norfolk County Council election in the first analysis before excluding it in the second as it was for a different authority, and possibly differing issues, to the May 2007 elections.
It is of note that the Conservatives also gained two seats, in Telford and Wrekin from Labour and in Kerrier from an independent unopposed in May 2007. In neither of these seats did the LibDems field a candidate.
Surely the purpose of any numeric analysis of the elections posted on this site is to have a high degree of academic rigour. Mark did say in his posting of 9.42pm yesterday that the LibDem vote was up not only as a share but in actual number of votes despite much lower turnout. This was only true because the LibDems did not contest 3 of the selected wards the last time they were fought. The LibDem actual votes in the 6 wards fought on both occasions actually fell - albeit on a lower turnout. My spreadsheet identified this immediately and there I felt the need to repond to correct what I saw as an incorrect analysis.
“When voters have a chance to actually go out and vote Conservative , they do not feel strongly enough about it to actually do so and would rather sit at home in front of the box.”
Hello!How do you gain almost 1000 council seats without people actually voting for you?!
601 Hello !! We are talking about the situation now not last May much has changed since then including the Prime Minister
middle englander fair comment except that as the vote share changes in the Dundee byelection were small ( from memory 3% or less for each party including it does not distort the results nationally ( and despite the Little Englander trend in the Conservative party we are still a United Kingdom parliament ).
601 is correct.
The Conservative gain of 911 council seats in May - when the opinion polls were showing the party lower than now - were an excellent set of results (although there’s still more to do - in West Yorkshire, for example).
If those elections were held now, instead of last May, the chances are that result would be exceeded.
I’m not surprised other parties wish to downplay our achievement - that’s fair enough - but all I can say is it surpassed every independent commentator’s analysis of what we would need to do well.
Why are the Tories not profitting more from Labour’s fall? Another reason could be one that’s been theorised on this site before over the last 2 years - the Tories go up when Cameron is the story. At the moment he isn’t, Labour is. Yes, Cameron has been visible (inevitable given that he’s leader of HMO) but he’s not, in any way, the story. If, once all this dies down, he immediately launches a couple of eye-catching policies and can make himself become the story, you will likely see Tories polling 45+%
Andrew
I see that Mike Smithson over at political betting.com is highlighting the question of whether Labour’s fall is due to former Lab voters deciding not to vote rather than transferring to the Tories. We know this is an important issue in absolute terms though looking at the Nov ICM poll it looks to me like the not voting or don’t know share of former Labour voters has stayed the same . What’s changed has been the shift to LD and others. Could you update the fascinating analysis on your previous post on this issue?
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/1069
Chris, I’m not going to do a new post on the splits yet, the trends haven’t changed the the breaks are too small to really warrant commenting on individual polls.
I have updated the figures on the spreadsheet I use though, and I agree with you. It doesn’t appear to be a shift to non-voting. The average proportion of former Labour voters saying they are less than 7/10 likely to vote was 12%, it was 13% when I last did it. The change isn’t significant, but it certainly hasn’t gone up. Proportion of former Labour voters saying they will vote Lib Dem, or ‘other’, or don’t know do all seem to be up.
Very cautious about reading things into every change here though - it’s probably only robust enough to look at significant trends over time.
When is the next poll due? I will be very interesting to see if the trend are continuing. As you know I suspect that this latest somewhat understates C support…
Yes NBeale, I think Populus does so even more than MORI.
When people say that the Tories should be polling numbers like 45%+ they are confusing now with the mid 1990’s. In the mid 90’s when Labour were polling those huge numbers, they wern’t just heading for an election victory, they were heading for a 180 seat record landslide.
The Tories now, don’t need to do what Labour did then, to win a majority. Cameron will be looking for a majority somewhere around 30 seats. The polls that we’re seeing at the moment very much indicate thats a viable possibility. Will Cameron win a huge 1997 style landslide? NO! Will Cameron win a workable majority? Quite possibly.
*reposted for spelling*
Wish Peter was around. Would be interested to know how he feels the Human Sheild story is running in Scotland. Perhaps he is out - calling for Wendy’s resignation.
I wasn’t out, I was watching Celtic go down 0-1 to AC Milan, but as Benfica won in the Ukraine, we made the last sixteen of the champions league.
There is life beyond politics and sadly for me it’s football (or what passes for it in Scotland)
As to Wendy, human shield or not she got the unanimous backing of MSP’s today so she is probably safe ( but wounded) unless something else turns up.
Brian Taylor’s Blog pretty much sums it up,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/
This from BBC Scotland,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7126883.stm
The issue for Charlie Gordon is that although the report says that the company the donation was posted to a company that Paul Green has a controlling interest in, in the interview green states that it is a consultancy which he owns no part of.
I don’t think Gordon will resign as, even with a majority of 2,189, Labour wouldn’t want a by-election now.
Like I’ve said before I have Sympathy for WA as she has been let down and stranded by those around her.
Having said that she choose them, and to be honest even if it’s cynical politics, given that Alex is sharp and witty and Wendy aggressive and technical, having her wounded with Alex able to poke fun by asking her if she’s “checked her figures” every time she attacks probably suits us just fine.
I also think the fact that she effectively disappeared for the weekend has hurt her badly. When the going gets tough the tough don’t hide.
Peter.
This from the SNP tonight ( Tuesday 4th).
Bare in mind that it is a party press release, but I think the figures from YouGov should be accurate.
Yes they are obviously “Party Questions” but I think they give people some idea of the current feeling in Scotland. Not a full independent poll but the best we have at the moment.
For Immediate Release: Monday 3 December 2007
Attn: NEWS DESKS POLITICAL CORRESPONDENTS
SNP RELEASE SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT AND LEADERSHIP POLL FIGURES
GOVERNMENT APPROVAL RATINGS INCREASING
SALMOND OVER TWICE AS POPULAR AS BROWN
TWICE AS POPULAR AS LABOUR, TORY AND LIB DEM SCOTTISH LEADERS ADDED TOGETHER
The Scottish National Party today [Monday] released polling figures
commissioned from YouGov on support for the Scottish Government and
political leaders:
1. The SNP has been in government in Scotland for just over 6 months.
How do you think the SNP Government has fared so far:
Well: 63%
Badly: 26%
Don’t know: 12%
Among Tory voters it is 56% well to 32% badly; among Labour voters 52%
to 38%; and among Lib Dem voters 64% to 32%.
The last time YouGov polled on Scottish Government satisfaction
ratings, 60% of Scots thought it was doing a good job, and 27% a bad
job (1-4 October) – so approval for the Scottish Government is
actually INCREASING six months into government.
2. Thinking about the performance of Gordon Brown as Prime Minister
and Alex Salmond as First Minister of Scotland, which one do you think
is doing a better job?
Alex Salmond: 50%
Gordon Brown: 22%
Neither: 21%
Don’t know: 7%
3. Thinking about the performances of the political party leaders
since the Scottish election in May, who has impressed you most?
Alex Salmond, SNP: 46%
Wendy Alexander, Labour: 10%
Annabel Goldie, Conservative: 9%
Nicol Stephen, Lib Dem: 4%
Don’t know: 31%
The poll was conducted before the full extent of Labour’s leadership
crisis in Scotland became apparent.
Among Labour voters, Alex Salmond is backed by 34% - well ahead of
Wendy Alexander at just 24%.
Among Lib Dem voters, Alex Salmond is backed by 39% - more than
three-times the 12% who favour Nicol Stephen!
Among Tory voters, Annabel Goldie only just shades Alex Salmond – by
31% to
27%.
YouGov poll commissioned by the SNP, sample size: 1,111, fieldwork:
28-30 November 2007
Peter.
NBeale - Populus are due out next. They are usually the Tuesday after the first weekend of the month, so I did think they might have been today, but clearly it’s going to be next Tuesday.
I don’t like describing pollsters as understating or overstating a party’s support - it implies that the pollster in the middle is automatically the one that is right when that ain’t necessarily the case (e.g. 1992-1997 ICM were better for the Tories than all the other pollsters, but it was everyone else who was wrong and ICM were right), so Populus do not understate Tory support. They do tend to produce polls that are better for Labour and worse for the Tories than other pollsters.
So business as usual (which Cameron said when the Lib Dems were being squeezed in September. Now we are back to three-party politics with the LibDems well placed to advance under their new leader whoever thatmight be.
Interesting figures from Peter.
Wendy Alexander’s performances in the Holroyd Parliament are pretty woeful,
although I did think she was quite good and more relaxed on BBC’s Question Time.
ALEC said:-
“Mike Richardson - you’re quite wrong, and can’t have been watching the news this week. All the media commentators rated Brown’s Monday and PMQ performance as good, last night he got good comments from BBC/ITN news and the printed press has been in similar vein. Will this last beyond the current crisis? Who knows.” I KNOW ! - THE MIND BOGGLES WHAT MEDIA YOU WERE WATCHING , LISTENING TO OR READING - BUT ALL I HEARD WAS WORDS LIKE “MR BEAN” & “INCOMPETENT” - THESE ARE WORDS AND PHRASES THAT WILL HAUNT BROWN LIKE THE “GREY MAN” HAUNTED MAJOR .
“You’ve also misread completely the Scottish situation - Tories are now the fourth party, and Cameron is absolutely not the man to deliver any meaningful recovery for them. This matters - the last Tory government needed Scottish seats to form a majority.” I HAVE NOT MISREAD THE SCOTTISH SITUATION - THE TORIES HAVE ALREADY GAINED SEATS IN SCOTLAND WITH EACH GENERAL ELECTION - BUT BASICALLY , THE TORIES DO NOT REALLY NEED SCOTLAND TO WIN AN ELECTION AS WAS PROVED DURING THE THATCHER & MAJOR YEARS / BUT LABOUR WOULD BE LOST IF THEY DID BADLY IN SCOTLAND & WALES !
___________________________________
Now back to a normal typeface as i have answered the odd points aimed at me from Alec .
It was interesting this sunday on all the political shows that they had difficulty finding any high ranking Labour MP’s to appear - a point highlighted by Andrew Marr himself , but Cameron was available . Talk about running for cover when the going gets tough - all of this is seen by the voters .
Can’t wait for the next POLLS - I think ICM just timed their POLL a day or so too early - there is no way Brown will recover from these last few weeks - the one good thing the Liberals have done recently is come up with that name “Mr Bean” - you can’t help it - everytime you see Brown now you can see the similarity - i’m sure i’m not the only one who sees it !
I also did a post a short while back based on another billing - that i believe , that if Brown is interviewed by the police eventually - the fact that 2 Prime Ministers in the same party and government have been interviewed should be looked at with the possibility of the Queen dissolving parliament and calling a general election because of the amount of serious corruption going on . Mark my words there will be even more in the closet as well as more names and numbers to come yet just on this latest financing row alone.
Don’t forget she once dissolved the Australian government for a lot less .
My last point of the night - promise !
The Tory idea of capping funding at £50,000 is a great idea - including the Union funding / now that would be fair.
I can remember years ago when i was in a Union and i asked for my political levy to be stopped - the union representative was shocked that i wanted to / there should be an opt in option rather than an opt out option to funding Labour when you join a union .
Mike
I’d prefer a box saying which party you would like to receive your “levy”.
The Queen is unlikely to dissolve parliament as this would risk the rise of republicanism. In Australia, interference by the head of state never strengthens the monarchy system, so even to encourage it here rather paints you as a republican, and I’m sure you are not.
It is inconcievable that the Queen would dissolve Parliament or dismiss the Prime Minister on such grounds. The monarch would never risk doing anything that could potentially be seen as partisan.
The Australian precedent is the correct one (although the bar is undoubtly higher for the monarch to act than a governor general, if a governor general oversteps the mark they can be replaced, it wouldn’t risk the monarchy itself in the same way). The Whitlam government was dissolved because it was unable to pass a budget through the upper house for several weeks, yet did not resign, bringing the potential for the government to be unable to pay the bills. The dismissal was necessary to break a deadlock that was about to bankrupt the country.
Those are the circumstances where the monarch could feasibly dismiss a government in the UK - legislation needs to be passed each year to collect taxes, if it wasn’t, and the power to collect taxes lapsed the state would rapidly run out of money and government would collapse. Under those circumstances it would be appropriate for the Queen to dismiss the Prime Minister if an alternate PM would be able to solve the problem. If a Prime Minister lost a vote of confidence or failed to pass the Queens speech or so on but refused to willingly resign or ask for a dissolution and just ignored it, I expect the monarch would dismiss them too.
Short of that it isn’t going to happen, it’s a silly pipe dream. The monarch’s reserve power to dismiss a government is a constitutional release valve of absolute last resort, things like corruption and incompetence are dealt with by normal politics and policing.
Peter Cairns is spot on when he says that from a SNP( and other) point of view it is better if Wendy Alexander staggers on as Labour leader. She has lost any credibility she ever had and the chances of a Labour revival in Scotland are minimal whilst she remains in post.The same goes for Harriet Harman down south.Long may Wendy continue as a human shield for Harman and indeed Brown.I hope NONE of them resign.
Well the good news for Labour is that they have reached the middle of the week without a new disaster or cock up. Thank God. I don’t know about anyone else but I am exhausted by all this excitement. I’m all for a quiet week.
Mike, there is no constitutional grounds for the Queen to dissolve Parliament prematurely. Either the PM or Parliament (via a vote of no confidence) need to request the election.
What happened in Australia is not comparable. For one thing it was not her decision it was the decision of the Governor General. For another the situation was completely different, with Parliament having rejected the governments budget which is why the GG did it.
THE TORIES HAVE ALREADY GAINED SEATS IN SCOTLAND WITH EACH GENERAL ELECTION….
Yeah your right,
They have one, which is indeed an improvement on zero. If they keep this up, at an election every four years or so, they will be the majority party in Scotland by around 2120.
Maybe I am biased, but I am not holding my breath for the great northern Tory revival.
Peter.
Anthony - as a matter of pure interest - is this site covered against libel?
Type anything libelous and people can sue you. And me. And the host. So don’t.
People seem to forget the parallels with the late 1980s, when Labour was constantly and massively ahead in the polls - and the government in all sorts of trouble which excited the media - but still failed to win two elections. I suspect when it comes to marking their ballot papers voters will still think twice about voting for Cameron as they failed to do for Kinnock.
Undoubtedly there’s much more bad news to come, but the general election is 18 months away. The election is Brown’s to lose, and although the Tories have had a field day in recent weeks, who knows what nasties might surface (donors, racist candidates, European in-fighting, Boris Johnson)which could scupper their chances again.
And although undoubtedly very revealing of the mindset of the political classes, dodgy donors are not to be upmost in the elector’s minds come election day.
I know it’s not exactly a polls question but I was wondering if any of you political buffs could clear this up for me.
I’ve noticed a few times lately that Gordon Brown in PMQ’s has referred to Cameron as just “he” or “him”. I was under the impression that MP’s were supposed to always say “the Right Honourable Gentleman”. Is this allowed? I can’t recall TB ever doing it.
Just to clarify; obviously an MP can say “after” saying “the RHG” eg “The RHB has got his figures wrong, he doesn’t know what he’s talking about.” but can he just wave his hand dismissively in the oppositions direction and say “he’s talking rubbish
Sorry, I meant;
..”he” after..
It’s been a long day.
Steven- Speakers don’t sem to be particularly strict as they would be if MPs referred to each other by name or called one another “you”. (Actually thinking about it I think Cameron slipped up a couple of months ago and accidentally referred to either Brown or Blair as “you”.)
Peter
Thank you for the info and the links.
CLLR. PETER CAIRNS (SNP) -
Okay - i can understand your desire for there not to be a Tory revival in Scotland - but you would have to be blind not see that there is one there - what choice do the Scots have ? 3 Socialist parties :- Labour / Liberal / SNP & 1 mainstream centre right party the Tories !
The last election for Holyrood showed a massive swing to the Tories - they gained seats along with the Nationalists - did they not ?
Yes the Tories only gained 1 seat in the last Westminster election from zero / but if you look closely at the following seats you will see that the Tories are a risk to all 3 of the Socialist parties - especially if there is any tactical voting - these seats could quite easily fall to the Tories (look at the 2005 results before the Tories started to hammer both the Liberals and Labour :-
Aberdeenshire West & Kincardine - 3rd - 28.4%
Angus - 2nd - 29.4%
Argyl & Bute - 2nd - 23.5%
Berwickshire , Roxburgh & Selkirk - 2nd - 28.8%
Dumfries & Galloway - 2nd - 35.4%
Edinburgh South - 3rd - 24.1%
Edinburgh South West - 2nd - 23.3%
Moray - 2nd - 21.9%
Perth & North Perthshire - 2nd - 30.4%
Renfrewshire East - 2nd - 29.9%
Stirling - 2nd - 25%
The 11 constituences i have listed are all quite easy for the Tories to get with a bit of tactical voting against Labour and disillusionment for the Liberals - i have only picked constituencies that have narrow margins between all the parties - So PLEASE Peter - complacency is a dangerous thing - don’t forget who the Tories won Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale from - YOURSELVES !!
As i have said before - you and your party may give great creedance to Scotland being the only way that the Tories can win an election - that is so untrue - as you know they have won handsomely before without Scotland - winning more seats in Scotland would just be a bonus to them - it’s Labour that would die without Scotland !
The Herald today brings a few results from a YouGov survey they did for the SNP. It showed Holyrood voting intentions for SNP and Labour to be at 40% and 29%, respectively.
Iv’e heard about kettle calling the pot black…and I quote “the fact that 2 Prime Ministers in the same party and government have been interviewed should be looked at with the possibility of the Queen dissolving parliament”
Yhis from a supporter of a party who had it’s own prison wing the last time it was in power,it had so many jailed.
I give you Mr “Honesty” Archer,the man to lead London….OH I SAY!
I give you Mr”Swords of Truth” Aitken….OH I SAY!
ETC,ETC,ETC.
Re previous comments, and dissolution of the Australian Parliament. The Governor General’s dissolution of the Australian Parliament was damaging to the monarchy, but a Head of State whose idea of impartiality is never to take any positive action in public is also courting unpopularity by condoning crime and corruption. The classic example is the abolition of the Italian monarchy after the King had failed to act against Mussolini’s dictatorship until far too late.
In response to Mike Richardson and Phillip Thompson, as I understand it the constitutional position is that the Queen can dissolve Parliament whenever she likes. But actually she is constrained by convention which is ultimately upheld by what the public will accept. Charles I did not get away with the Divine Right of Kings!
Anthony,
will the full SNP results be going up and do they have set of Westminster results,
Mike Richardson,
Dear dear mike, you’ll have to do better than that.
The list does look impressive at eleven seats but a fact on it’s own is a lonely thing, so lets add the winning parties share and the required swing.
Aberdeenshire West & Kincardine - 3rd - 28.4%
LibDem seat, share -46.3%, swing required 17.9%
Even with the LibDems falling still a huge task,
Angus - 2nd - 29.4%
SNP seat, share -33.7%, swing required 4.2%
Unlikely with the SNP 10% up on 2005.
Argyl & Bute - 2nd - 23.5%
LibDem seat, share - 36.5%, swing required 13%,
Again unlikely and it should be noted that this was an SNP gain at Holyrood not a Tory one.
Berwickshire , Roxburgh & Selkirk - 2nd - 28.8%
LibDem seat, share - 41.8%, swing 13%
Again a really big ask for the Tories in the borders.
Dumfries & Galloway - 2nd - 35.4%
Labour seat, share - 41.1%, swing required 5.7%
This is a possible given Labours woes.
Edinburgh South - 3rd - 24.1%
Labour seat, share - 32.3%, but LibDems on 32.3% in Second.
swing required for Tories 8%
Unlikely to see the Tories pick up all the Labour and LibDem deserters, and much more likely a LibDem gain.
Edinburgh South West - 2nd - 23.3%
Labour seat, share - 39.8%, swing required 16.5%.
Even though he is struggling as chancellor, Alistair darling has a huge profile and a personal vote to overcome.
Moray - 2nd - 21.9%
SNP seat, share 36.6%, swing required 14.6%
No Chance Angus Robertson is hugely popular has a high profile as SNP leader in the house, and has lead on the Nimrod issue locally. Also the LibDems and Labour were both only 2% behind the Tories.
Perth & North Perthshire - 2nd - 30.4%
SNP seat, share 33.7%, swing - 3.3%
again given that the Tories are static and the SNP way up, highly unlikely.
Renfrewshire East - 2nd - 29.9%
Labour seat, share 43.9%, swing - 14%
Again a huge task for the Tories even with Labour in trouble
Stirling - 2nd - 25%
Labour seat, share 36%, swing - 10.9%
Another tough one especially as the LibDems were only 5% behind the Tories.
So on my count of the possible eleven gains you’ve identified only one is a good bet, three are unlikely and the remaining seven wishful thinking.
Oh and at the last election the Tories gained one and lost one so there record is actually 0,1,1 so they aren’t making any gains at every election.
Still on my take if you do go to two seats in 2010, you’ll be able to claim that the Tories had a massive success with 200% of the seats they previously held.
Peter.
Peter - yep, they are going up, they are just checking with the SNP which bits have been released so far. No idea what other questions there are (and couldn’t tell you if I did!)