New YouGov poll
There is a new YouGov poll out for Channel 4. The topline figures, with changes from their previous poll, are CON 41%(nc), LAB 27%(-1), LDEM 17%(+1).
There is, clearly, no significant change from their previous poll conducted last week with all the parties within one percent of their previous level of support. The poll was conducted yesterday and today, so much of it would have been after the dropping of the Conservative pledge on a Lisbon referendum had become clear. Of course, much would have been before the media reaction and before people had properly reacted to the news, so it’s far too early to conclude that it hasn’t had an effect, but the early signs point in that direction.
The meat of the poll was the issue of Afghanistan. The two questions YouGov asked have been asked twice before, most recently a week and half ago. In the time since then the second round of the Afghan election has been cancelled and several British soldiers were killed by an Afghan policeman. In just that time attitudes have shifted significantly against the war.
Only 5% of people think British troops are winning, and 57% of people think victory is not even possible, up from 48% in the previous poll. 35% of people think british troops should be withdrawn immediately, and a further 38% within the next year or so. This compares to 25% and 37% a week and a half ago.
Filed under: Voting Intention, YouGov
In my part of the UK, only major economic policy and defence/foreign affairs are relevant to the next UK GE.
The perception of those UK citizens polled seem to suggest that Labour’s policy lacks much support.
I remain stunned and bemused as to how the regime (all of ‘em), have completely failed to make the case for any of these military excursions.
Not even a “war on drugs” or something tangible that people could relate to.
It’s just a saga of ugly mess, and poor distrought families with fathers, sons, brothers, mothers, daughters, sisters, dead for no reason that makes any sense to most people (as far as I can tell).
The only way the polling makes any sense is if you assume that the political parties in general are held in equal disdain and contempt… 27% for Labour and 41% for Tory makes no sense unless it’s 27% of sweet FA.
This is now becoming our Vietnam, and there are no JFKs or LBJs on the horizon for us… just more patronising disingenuous turkeys.
So the drop in the Libdem vote does not appear to be a blip.
I think the Labour vote will slip towards 25% in most polls in the run-up to Christmas as people become more disillusioned with Brown’s Afghan strategy.
I do not think many of the 27%supporting labour do so because of their role in Afghanistan (or the illegal war in Iraq), even though this poll asked specific questions of this area and most of us are upset by the recent murders.
Quite a large minority of the population have gained from considerably higher benefits of all types, and in addition many people have gained from new jobs in the public sector and significant increase in salaries particularly among the higher paid. They cannot afford not to vote labour.
Many of the 41% of Tory supporters and 18% of Liberal Democrats will be voting not for the party policies but to get rid of what they see as a bad government and, for those in the private sector, one that has created hardship and unemployment.
Most small business people vote anti-labour anyway. However, Alan Sugar (lord) has just reminded them why.
Davey – many of us vote for Labour for honourable reasons, and it does you no credit to dismiss us.
The sine non whatsit of this site is a modicum of respect for each other and a hearty support for apparently irraional public opininion. e.g. The most fervent defenders of the Tory IHT policy could never possibbly benefit from it, and there’s a host of issues that majorities can be foun=d to support despite no benefit accruing. I would be better off financially from a 5 year Cameron term than from a 5 year Brown term (I think), but that doesn’t buy my vote.
Most small businesses would have gone bust if Osborne had been in power and applied Redwoods idea of closing down our banking system for a few hours. I thinka lot of them realise that too, and that’s part of why the City is a bit worried about Osborne.
John TT
A number of people support political parties for their beliefs. It is a pity that perhaps this has declined over the years. It would be great to see large membership of parties, and for the parties to listen to these members.
I support the LDs mostly because of their views on individual liberties, which is important to me.
Possibly, many people (including me) support a political party for selfish reasons, which is fair enough. Perhaps, most people feel that the government has performed badly, which contributes to its unpopularity.
Seal Pup,
“This is now becoming our Vietnam, and there are no JFKs or LBJs on the horizon for us… just more patronising disingenuous turkeys.”
Nonsense….
The US lost 58,000 men in the ten years between 1964 and 1974, including almost 40,000 in between 1967 and 1969. we have lost just over 250 in eight years. We are losing in the region of forty men a year compared to the US figure of close to 6,000.
On and between JFKs Bay of Pigs fiacso and LBJ using the Gulf of Tokin incident to escalate the war and then start Rolling Thunder I for one an glad neither has anything to do with running this war.
Peter.
I wonder if Salmond would have deployed Scottish troops to Afghanistan.
Andy Stidwill
That would rather depend on whether Scotland was independent, Salmond was the SNP leader, the SNP had a majority in the Scottish Parliament, whether the Scottish Parliament had decided to agree to joining NATO etc.
I wonder if Tavish Scott would have deployed Scottish troops to Afghanistan.
So Greetings i’m new to posting to the site.
Im more in favour of labour at the moment. (thought id get that out of the way)
But regarding the topic id have to agree with John TT you cant just discredit peoples “opinions” in polls just because you think they might be getting something out of it. Though that being said arn’t the policys that gain favour or disfavour the ones that hit closest to home with the individual?
So wouldn’t the majority of votes for any party fall under the described as “dis-honourable” motives for voting?
Reguarding Afghanistan i cant help think that the whole problem is the international community swaying from one side to another on a virtual daily basis. I personally think that one of two things need to happen. Either it needs to gain alot of focus from the international community and some solid dedication. Or we need to pull out in a constructive way (im against a pull out myself it would do more harm then good in my opinion). This middle of the road stance that so many governments on all tiers of the “left-right-o-meter” appear to be causing more harm then good.
Onto another subject I’m personally a little puzzled by this whole public sector/private sector debait. The bank bail outs saved a huge part of the private sector. While its only one part of the vast private sector. Now with more pressure and incentives being put on the banks to “spread the wealth” that would trickle through the private sector and help alot more (Assuming and Hoping that happens sooner rather then later). Can we ask any more of a government ANY government in power then this for the private sector?
On another note thanks to all the people that have commented on this site its been an incredible read while frankly teaching me alot of things about politics
Davey
I find it odd that the claims that a group of voters who are – for example – public sector employees, will naturally vote for a party which has allegedly favoured them as a group, seem to come mostly from the political right.
Does that mean that right-leaning voters are themselves so swayed by pork barrel politics that they impute such motives to others?
Classification is the problem.
One of the things I learned cataloguing historical musical instruments in a museum is that any classification system obscures the potential of any other classification system.
Classifying someone as a “Public Sector Worker” prevents you classifying her as Grandmother or Alcoholic or Pacifist.
So public sector workers vote Labour and home owners vote Conservative? What about private sector workers living in rented accommodation and state employees who own their own homes? They can’t all be LibDems.
That it is almost exclusively a right wing confusion may be because it is an matter of faith. Adam Smith knew better, but his followers take as gospel truth the notion that to a fully informed and rational person economic advantage is all that matters.
The desire for more resources (more food, access to more women) is primarily a male strategy for promoting the survival of genetic material into successive generations.
It is not the strongest human instinctive reaction. That belongs to the half of the population that sits down to pee, who have other priorities and other strategies with the same objective.
This poll demonstrates what many of us in the political world already know – the Lisbon Treaty never was an issue with the British Public.
The labour poll ratings continue to sag back to the mid 20s. Blair won an election depite Irak because of the economy, fear about C policy on public services and because he was a better candidate for prime minister.
This time..
Mr ‘no more boom and bust’ has been found out, C have a better candidate for prime minister and both parties will reduce public spending. L seem to have run out of steam. None of this looks like changing.
People will perceive any economic improvement as being depite the government (as in the 1990s).
Unless Cameron fouls up, and Brown improves – no evidence to date – L will continue to sag. LD seem to be failing to capitalise so logic dictates that C will win by a margin of 15% +
I think the Glasgow NE by-election will have a significant effect on Labour morale, especially if they lose it.
Andy Stidwell – Surely not?
I agree with Neil the most significant part of this poll is the LDs on 17% following a 16% in the previous one.
2 in a row at the wrong end of Moe (or a blip) is possible but I guess unlikely. One of you stats guys may be able to help.
Secondly Others still 15% which may be the BNP factor, not just votes for them but reminding people there are other others but I would have thought the %age would be easing back by now to the conf season 10-12% – maybe Lisbon has boosted UKIP a little?
At the GE others will be 12% max maybe 10% so we can add 1-2% to Tory and Labour each.
NB) I know this is s aUK poll and does not measure Scotland properly and SNP (PC) get stuck in as Others – if I did not before ‘Old Nat’ has ensured that I do now.
BTW, Davey – I am a proud Labour supporter who has worked in the private sector for all my working life, over 20 years, and a well-being profile that your analysis would assume to be conservative.
Next open thread if suitable I will give some of my reasons. Sufficient to say here, though, that categorisation may assist insight in to tendencies but should not simplistically applied.
Could labour retain South Shields in a by election in Miliband goes to Europe?
There is little new to say about the polls but the following seem to resonate
1 The Tory lead in the YouGov polls is gradually creeping up again but future expansion must be curtailed by the continuing support for the minor parties.
2 The difference in the share of the vote ascribed to the Lib Dems as between the YouGov polls and the ICM polls has been with us for a long time. They can’t both be right.
3 The 15% share of the vote for ‘others’ in the latest poll is a sign that public disquiet with MP’s expenses has not gone away. I still doubt that they can achieve this at a GE unless they put up more candidates than last time and get some attention from the media.
4 I wonder if in Scotland whether the result of the Glasgow by election could be something of a game changer. None of the major parties can be entirely happy with the current state of play and my perception is that Scottish public opinion is more fluid than it has been for some time. Which way it jumps nobody can foretell.
And we have only 6 months to go….
I think people are waiting to see what effect the Lisbon Treaty will have on the country and their lives. The current Labour government is in no state to resist anything it doesn’t like about it. A incoming Conservative government may be in a position to test the boundaries of sovereignty and thus what exactly it can do. Thus, I think the verdict on Lisbon may come slowly for many people.
@ ERIC GOODYER
I agree Eric, and I have had much pleasure saying so on the Guardian post site. Yesterday they where they confidently predicting Tory meltdown regarding the Lisbon issue. What rubbish. With a sick economy and the Afghan situation worse rather than better, Labour are in trouble.
Keith, Lisbon will not be remembered next year as its changes will be the norm for people.
With both parties always believing that new policies have to be announced every day no matter how poorly thought out–and then the ‘joys of the election’–the newspapers will be bogged down by enormous amounts of new policies (especially in the normal suffering areas of education / NHS / social welfare) so any changes in how Europe is run (how minor, how far away…) will only be of interest to right wing tories/ UKIP / BNP with the odd support of the tabloid press. (Oh, and the chattering classes like us.)
Its assumed Brown will hold the election the same day as the locals.Why do people assume that will be in May,I seem to remember in 92 or 97 the locals were moved to june?
“john tt
Davey – many of us vote for Labour for honourable reasons, and it does you no credit to dismiss us.”
You crack me up!
“Cllr Peter Cairns (SNP)
Nonsense….”
It’s not about the numbers though is it… it’s about the tolerance… there was much higher tolerance for death in VN because of the tangible threat of the spread of global comintern and MAD; plus WW2 was not long past.
Nowadays, tolerance is much much lower; expectations, much much higher. We’re not fighting for the survival of civilisation as we know it as we were in the Cold War; we’re fighting a third world bogeyman, who, as a result of globalisation, may live next door.
When I talk of VN, I’m invoking the social, cultural, and political impact; not correlating the numbers of casualties.
Similarly, you are surely also aware that in raising those acronymical figures I’m talking about their significance in terms of the same socio-cultural poltical effects; not specific cherry-picked military decisions.
The media environment and culture is also dramatically different, where desperate newspapers use desperate human-interest tales to rally public emotions.
This is a long war – longer than WW2, and heading towards VNWar length – that is defining for a generation of military personnel, their families, and friends, especially in the context of recent (legal) wars in Iraq.
It’s a toxic issue for labour when working class boys are being shot up by asians in a far away war for no obvious benefit.
In short, I think you know exactly what I’m on about.