Today’s YouGov daily figures are CON 41%(+1), LAB 29%(+3), LDEM 17%(-3).

There’s obviously some jumping around here from sampling error, so it’s important to look at the trend rather than the day to day changes. Labour are up again, but below their peak on Wednesday. The Conservatives are above 40% for the first time in YouGov’s conference season tracker.

It’s a low score for the Lib Dems, but after a surprisingly good one yesterday I think I’ll have to reserve judgement on whether they are retaining any of that conference boost in support until the polls settle down a bit.

For the other questions YouGov re-asked those leadership quality questions for the party leaders.

The interesting one is obviously Gordon Brown: how has his conference speech changed people’s views of him? Overall, it looks positive, though we are obviously starting from a very low base. “Sticks to what he believes in” is still the quality most widely ascribed to him at 37%, up by 8 points. Honest is up by 7, strong up by 10 (putting him once again ahead of David Cameron), good in a crisis up by 7, in touch by 3, decisive by 4, natural leader by 3 (still at only 6%) and charismatic by 1 (to 2%).

The previous round of questions were asked just before Nick Clegg’s speech, so we can also look for changes there. However, for Clegg there is less good news – his ratings are largely unchanged, mostly up or down by a single point. Obviously there is no way of telling whether this is because it’s a whole week since Clegg’s speech and people have simply forgotten, or whether it didn’t make much difference in the first place.

David Cameron’s figures are, interestingly enough, also up in some places, without him doing much at all. At a stretch it could be the Sun’s endorsement and the halo effect from that. We’ll see the real effect on him though if the question is asked again after his turn in the spotlight.

40 Responses to “YouGov Daily Poll – 41/29/17”

  1. Any ideas yet how attractive the referendum on ATV is? Will it attract Lib-Dems to Labour just to get a thin Labour majority or hung parliament to ensure this crucuial vote. According to YouGov it would be an emphatic yes by 2:1.

    The other key policy is the National Care Service for the over 55s – who are the largest group by age in ‘undecided’.

    It will be hard for Labour to win, but a few key policies here and there may be enough

  2. Possibly yesterdays was a blip for lab and the day before for cons. This would seem about right for me, and we’ve had enough of these now I think to not think they’re freakishly out.

    Now will cons gain, or are they pretty much at the peak already….will they hurt lab, and when/if libs recover after conferences, at whose expense.

    I suspect any cons gain will be those who were thinking liberal, they’ve already had all they can off labour. Which just makes me think more they can’t get much higher….what’s left to gain is people like me, and I simply don’t trust the man….then again, if he promises good policies I guess I can not care about him being slimy knowing he’s committed to good stuff. Eh, I’m gonna have to pay attention to con-con I think.

    tl;dr – This one seems about right.

  3. “It will be hard for Labour to win, but a few key policies here and there may be enough”

    I think it would take a lot more than that for Labour to win. They only won the last election by 3%; after another 5 years it would take close to a miracle for them to win a majority. They might still have a slight chance of holding onto power in a hung parliament with LD support but it seems rather unlikely. The LDs may not want to be associated with a party and government on the way down.

  4. Eric Goodyer – I would be extremely sceptical about the YouGov question on AV. It was very much a leading question. Had it been phrased differently, I suspect it would have got a completely different response.

  5. @Eric, I don’t think it’s completely impossible for lab to win, but it’d take a hell of a lot more than a few key policies. A few interesting policies is what we got the other day and it MAYBE got them a few % back.

  6. So yesterdays headlines of a Labour slump have been reversed. Maybe it’s all those ‘Savvy Sun readers’ changing their minds again!

    The only definitive result from recent polls indicates that a result changing proportion of the electorate have yet to make a definite decision on who they will vote for next year. All is to play for between all 3 main parties.

    A contributor yesterday who said he was in his 50’s said this would be the last Labour Government in his lifetime, now I’m sure life expectancy will decline rapidly once Cameron and Osborne get their hands on the NHS but dont be too harsh on the Tories old bean, after all this is supposed to be a non partisan site is it not? :)

  7. Wood
    Strange comments “I suspect any cons gain will be those who were thinking liberal, they’ve already had all they can off labour. Which just makes me think more they can’t get much higher”

    – You seem to ignore fact Labour & Lib Dems have aggressively attacked Tories over past 2 weeks.
    – Cameron (apart from sun switch) has had minimal publicity over past 2 weeks
    – Cameron will now get the publicity & thrieves on it
    – As indicated by polls Cameron much more trusted than Brown
    – There are a lot of votes for grabs which are not currently committed to any of the 3 main parties
    Some of us think that if the Tories have a reasonable conference they will reach an average 15%+ polling lead against Labour.

  8. Andy, I would agree. A Labour win seems unlikely, unless by freak of the electoral system (i.e.winning on a lower vote than the Tories). I still think a hung parliament is likely. There is really no strong appetite for the Tories based on poll ratings in the high 30’s, and I suspect some LD’s will switch to Lab in tactical votes, possibly as Eric says to try and get some kind of PR debate.

    Perhaps we’ll see next week if Cameron has anything to enthuse the public – Austerity Britain for the majority, tax cuts for millionaire’s estates, doesn’t sound like the kind of thing that will have people waving the flags (outside of the conference hall, that is).

    Any sign of any non YouGov polls this weekend?

  9. 10 varied byelections yesterday with more real votes than all the trackers put together and a dismal set of results for the Conservatives , Labour well down except in their heartland seats where they are bumping along their core vote level and mostly good results for LibDems .

  10. Its looking like there will be some “big” events at the Tory Conference which may influence the polls. Rumours include Britain’s most senior union baron will speak at a Conservative party meeting and a leading Lib Dem is to defect to the Tories.

  11. Looking at the poll figures before the two conferences it would seem that Labour has gained only a very negligible boost if any at all. So unless the Conservatives unveil some spectacularly popular and believable policies, I suspect by this time next week.we will be looking at 41-42 Con, 27-28 Lab, 17-18 Lib

  12. Mark makes a valid point – in real byelections Cons are not shining at all. It will not take much of a shift for us to be in hung parliament territory as Con vote has not been over 40% for a very long time, and they just need to drift down a few points. 6 months is a long time

  13. Read the link I put up Eric, it isn’t a valid point, because there is no reliable relationship between how people vote in local by-elections and how they vote in general elections.

    I wish there was – it would give me a nice fun post to write every Friday morning – but I’ve crunched the numbers every which way I can and it’s impossible to get any useful pointer from local by-elections to how people vote at general elections.

  14. Eric,

    As a matter of fact, the Tory vote was above 40% less than two weeks ago. If 6 months is only a “long time”, I don’t see how two weeks can be a “very long time”.

    Anyway, this is more the kind of post-conference boost one would expect from Labour at this stage, albeit falling short of some of Thatcher’s darkest days of unpopularity. The key polls will be in about a month when all the dust has settled and the long-term impact (if any) of the conferences will be assessable.

  15. There’s a rumour of some really big polling news out later tonight, anyone have any idea what it could be. Anthony?

  16. After all the conferences I fear that the Tories will be on around 45% and Labour will drop down to about 25%. I think the Lib Dems will end up on around 18-20%.

    Will be very intriguing nonetheless!

  17. WMA 39:28:20 – and we now have a Retrospective on the CLead of 7 YouGov poll – it was indeed a bit of a rogue and the retrospective CLead was 11 as per the WMA.

    There are now 216 days until the probable GE date, and over the last 216 days the CLead has averaged 14.7 with a Standard Deviation of 1.7 and absolutely no significant trend. So it seems highly unlikely, in the absence of a major game-changing event, that the evntual outcome will be a CLead of 19.

    We shall see – events…. etc..

  18. Stephen – I know exactly what it is :)

  19. wel i wont ask you to tell us but do give us some idea when we will know, i need a bath and want to have my dinner ;-)

  20. I’m logged in but the CAPTCHA Code is still there. Maybe in this section being logged in doesn’t make any difference.

  21. Mike said:

    “a leading Lib Dem is to defect to the Tories.”

    Could be good news for either party that, depending which ‘leading lib dem’ it is : p

  22. It’ll be interesting to see if this “leading Lib Dem” is someone most of us on this blog have ever heard of.

  23. Andy – this and the constituency guide part of the site are actually completely seperate WordPress installations, so you can’t login to this part.

  24. That, sadly, I don’t know – depends when the newspaper doing it puts it up.

  25. Well I reckon its the sun doing its own poll to prove a point. I’ll wait and see.

  26. This poll comfirms that the tories will indeed be going into their conference with a 10+ point lead. It is a disaster for Labour where Gordon Brown’s speech is already just about forgotten!

  27. *2009 PoliticsHome Electoral Index goes live at 7am tomorrow*

    Isn’t this their detailed polling in the marginals?

  28. Anthony , I note the article but disagree with all your conclusions from the data you give .
    That data showed that the local election vote share is a good predictor of the Conservative vote share at a forthcoming GE . It shows that Labour perform better in a GE than local elections both byelections and country wide local elections ( mostly IMO down to increased turnout ) and it shows that LibDems perform better in local byelections than in a GE as they generally also do when local elections are held on the same day as a GE .
    Whilst those facts are given and it would be silly to take local election vote shares and say those vote shares would be the same in a GE , it would be even more silly to say there was no correlation at all .
    I am sure if the Conservatives were gaining seats in local elections then you would be saying that was a pointer to success at a GE .
    FWIW there is a pretty clear pattern to the byelections of the last two/three months of LibDems falling back in areas where they are weak and gaining ground in areas where they will be in contention in a GE and I think this a good predictor of what we will see in the forthcoming GE .

  29. What I’d like to know on today’s numbers is who are the 12% who think recalls are a bad idea?

    I do try to keep an open mind about certain issues, but I just can’t see any reason why recalls are a bad idea. Can anyone offer any suggestions? I’m honestly stumped.

  30. The only reason might be if people wanted to recall their MP for frivolous reasons, such as not supporting the right football team for example. But also I suppose it is part of traditional conservatism to always be sceptical about changes of this sort.

  31. @Mark M and Andy S

    The argument against Recall for corruption is very simple and it goes like this;

    1) Being convicted of serious offences (particularly corruption) disqualifies you from being an MP.

    2) If an MP is convicted of an offence there is no need for a Recall because 1) applies.

    3) If an MP is NOT convicted of an offence, on what basis would it be decided that the constituency was entitled to recall them.

    4) If an MP is demonstrably guilty of corruption, so that the constituency is entitled to recall them, why have they not been arrested and tried? Surely the law applies to MPs the same as everyone else.

    It seems to me that several dozen MPs were guilty of simple Fraud under the new Fraud Act in relation to their expense claims. The fact that none was arrested reflects two things. One is the fear the police now have of upsetting parliament (after the Damien Green fiasco) and the other is the (deliberately) extremely liberal wording of the expenses rules. Any other public sector expenses would be subject to very specific regulations and there would be no such thing as a claim that was “ethically wrong but within the rules”.

    The real solution is not recalls. It is to redraft the MPs expenses guidelines so that they actually mean something, and to arrest and prosecute any MP that submits a claim that is fraudulent. Their subsequent conviction will see them booted out. Anything else is “one rule for the governed, another for those governing”.

  32. Recall is a bad idea. It is one of those superficially attractive, California style, direct democracy solutions which lose a substantial amount of their appeal when you actually look at how badly California is governed. It is a recipe for placing every MP under the thumb of whatever well funded, well organised pressure group happens to exist in their area. I have yet to see set out a workable set of criteria setting out the circumstances under which recall of an errant MP could take place.

  33. Real elections?

    The tories did so well in the Euros and the locals that the entire labour party was thrown into turmoil – that was in June. The LDs did badly.

    We have had 2 weeks of their opponents having untrammelled media exposure and the result when compared to 21 Sept? Tories +1 labour -1 LD 0

    Oh ‘National Care Service for the over 55s’ Burnham has already said this is proposed to be paid for by £400 million from the NHS. And the rest?

  34. I’m unsure about it. If it does come in I think there should be a very high percentage of signatures required for recall to take place. In California you need 12% of the number of votes cast in the previous election. I’d set the barrier higher than that, maybe 20%.

  35. Kieran W

    I believe there is also a period of judicial review in California, in order to prevent frivolous reasons being used to trigger a recall.

    Neil A

    I would disagree with you on expenses guidelines. I would actually like to see the guidelines scrapped, and allow MPs to claim for whatever they want – but that all claims will be published online for all to see. We should allow the public to decide what are reasonable expenses (after all, we are technically the MPs bosses). Now, if you add recalls to the ability to see exactly what has been claimed, I think that would see the end of duck houses and moats.

  36. Can someone put us out of our misery? I have scanned today’s news in vain for something that would qualify as big polling news. Nothing about a LibDem defection – just some unlikely-sounding policy about a one-off payment of £8,000 at 65 funding residential care for life (has anyone done their sums?!).

    So if there is something bigger than this, what is it?!

  37. A one-off £8000 payment at 65 to insure against having to sell one’s home and to pay for residential care for the rest of one’s life, doesn’t sound right. It is supposed to be paid out of one’s retirement lump sum(at 65) or one’s savings. Only 20% of those paying would benefit and if one has an existing health condition you may be disqualified.
    Don’t most political parties accept that we will have to work beyond 65 because of the pension situation?
    What about those receiving Pension Credit or the Minimum guarantee-would they ever have been able to afford it?
    Am I missing something?

  38. for some reason october 2nd yougov poll is not up on this web site yet antoney is there any chance this can be sorted?

  39. Shame there’s no demographics to go with these polls.

    I think the phasing in of later retirement ages is already there… born ’59-’67 = 66, ’68-’77 = 67 etc…

    It’s a smart way of appealing the grey vote, I can’t think of much comparable by the other parties… a mini-coup perhaps.