Contrasting figures in Sunday’s polls
Yesterday I said I hoped we would get some voting intention polls that would help us judge how the PBR had actually gone down. Today we have no fewer than 3 new voting intention polls, but are none the wiser as to what effect the PBR had on Labour support as they directly contradict each other!
BPIX in the Mail on Sunday has figures of CON 41%(-2), LAB 30%(+1), LDEM 17%(+1) (a narrowing of the Tory lead there – but the changes are from a BPIX poll way back in October, so we can’t ascribe it to a PBR effect – just in line with the general narrowing of the lead over the last couple of months)
YouGov in the Sunday Times has topline figures of CON 40%(nc), LAB 31%(+4), LDEM 16%(-2). Changes are from YouGov’s poll just before the PBR, so taken alone that would suggest it has given Labour a boost.
However, ComRes in the Independent on Sunday has topline figures of CON 41%(+4), LAB 24%(-3), LDEM 21%(+1). Changes are from their poll at the very end of November. Taking their figures alone, the PBR would appear to have been disasterous for Labour.
The question I’m sure you’ll be asking is who is right? Has the PBR sent Labour craashing back into the low 20s, or pushed them back in the 30s? ComRes’s poll was conducted one day earlier than YouGov’s, but it’s not realistic to think there was such a huge shift in support between Thursday and Friday (especially since the press coverage at the time was hardly glowing for Labour). Overall the figures for Conservative support are very similar, the difference is all down to the division between Liberal Democrat and Labour support. YouGov do tend to show the lowest level of Lib Dem support, so that perhaps explains a little of the gap, but does nothing to explain the different direction of travel. I guess we are just going to have to wait for some more polling to see what the dominant trend is.
Filed under: BPIX, Communicate, Voting Intention, YouGov
Looks like the support for the Tories is pretty consistent 40/41/40.
As you rightly said the inconsistencies are between Labour and the Lib Dems. I cant help thinking this is going to be a tactical election.
I wouldnt be surprised if the Lib Dems lose a lot of seats South of Birmingham and gain seats in those areas in the North where Tories and Lib Dems will vote tactically to oust a residing Labour MP.
My prediction is that the Tories will probably end up with a majority of 60+ come the election. I would definitely vote against a hung parliament that is for sure.
Anthony,
Thanks for your note but are the detailed regional tables published anywhere yet?
I ask this as I wonder if there is anything in the tables to indicate any reason for the difference.
I think the added difficulty we have now is that within the last five polls we have two polls with Labour in the low 20’s, but with the rest showing them at or around their highest recent levels of 30/31%. It’s not just that we have a divergence, but that the divergence is at the extreme ends of the scale. This is critical in terms of the narrative – are we back in landslide territory or is Labour closing the gap and breathing down the neck of hung parliament territory? If these extremes we’re from one pollster only we might be tempted to view them as normal sample errors etc, but each extreme has at least two examples.
Following my earlier contribution on the last close result in 1992
I have just put in the 1992 figures into the polling
prediction site and Con 41.9 Lab 34.4 Lib Dem 17.8
would produce a hung parliament with Con 13 short
next year
It’s pretty clear that all Tories out there should not
yet be counting chickens!
@David Greybeard
Dont believe that Labour are on 34.4% average. I would say there average is nearer to 29-30%. Majority to the Tories of 50-60+
Where did you get 34.4% as a matter of interest?
@ David Greybeard – what figures are you using? Labour’s average is several points below 34.4, as Mark says. I don’t think they’ve polled that high even once for well over a year.
Anthony,
I think you need to introduce a new policy banning people from making election predictions. It seems like every other post at the moment is along the lines of “I feel x will win y seats.” That’s not really interesting to read.
@Mark R
He was using the figures from the 1992 election. I have to admit, I have no idea why.
As for these divergent polls, it is hard to understand how they could get such completely different results. I was beginning to think the AngusReid polls were some sort of hoax, but now ComRes are showing similar figures.
In some ways the static nature of the results of polls over the last year is the most surprising. It certainly looks like a Conservative majority and probably a lead of around 100 seats over Labour.
Once they have the poisoned chalice they’ll be forced to drink from it. it beats me that politicians are vain enough to think they’ll have a different end to their predessessors.
But then financial bubbles always are based upon the notion that this time its different.
I don’t think there’s any reason for Labour not to hang on until June in the ‘hope’ that something will turn up…it’s what haoppened in both 64 and 97.
Major went a little early in 92 but he was a lot closer in the polls and had a fighting chance…he was also better liked than Brown.
It’s interesting to remeber how big the popular vote win was for major and how small his overall majority.
Still it was said that Labour could never win an election again after that defeat…then look what happened.
Until Labout is at and above 32% and the Tories below 40% I think hung parliament talk is just talk.
Political polling is a very specialised aspect of political interest, in the sense that it needs a lot of experience and longstanding observation to make a contribution; so I offer this observation cautiously.
Political polls are given credence by, among many other things, their demonstrated political neutrality. Yet there has been a marked shift from discussing the political reasons for movement in polled political support to discussing the political leanings of the various polls. It is as if some commenting has moved from considering why neutral polling is showing voting-intention shift to the inferred politics of the polls themselves.
If this purely, in passing, observation is correct, polls and their analyses are losing any specific expertise value and becoming submerged in general political analysis.
Which is a great pity as we lose a means of pushing our political agenda-makers, rather than being pushed by them.
@ JAKOB
Thanks for that. I wondered where the figures came from. Not the best figures for David Greybeard to work on I would suggest.
I think there is some definite consistency for the Tories 40/41/40. I think the lead over Labour is probably something like 13-15%. Enough for a reasonable majority to the Tories.
@ Jakob – If Anthony bans predictions then there won’t be much left to talk about on this forum.
In case he does I will make one more.
I think that the Tories are solidifying at the 40-41% level and that they may get 1-2points more in the actual election as UKIP support drifts back – I am expecting the three main parties to poll 90%+ on the day.
So the 1992 figure of 41.9% is spot on. Call it 42% for the sake of rounding.
Labour are nowhere near the 34% they need to bring about a hung parliament. I will give them the benefit of the doubt and say 28% which is 1 point more than the current WMA.
And I will assume 20% for the LDs which again is 1 point more than the WMA.
42:28:20 gives a majority of at least 78 but possibly as high as 90-100.
This assumes that the Tory marketing during the campaign (which is far better funded than Lablour) will not have any impact at all.
Indeed, even without the UKIP support we are still looking at a majority of 40 seats.
The evidence just does not point to a hung parliament at this stage.
I think these polls suggest that Labour are at best on 28. The most suspect thing about the Yougov’s poll is the 16 for the Lib Dems. The previous 8 polls from 23rd Nov to Dec 10th show the Lib Dems to be averaging slightly above 19. Therefore we subtract 3 points from the Labour score and give that to the Lib Dems we have a more realistic score of Lab 28, Lib Dems 19. This would be more closely in line with the Comres score of Labour 24 and Lib Dems 21.
The Tories I would say have at least a 12 point lead over Labour.
@ Andrew Myers
I agree with your figures. I think these are pretty realistic
It is interesting to note that over the last week most of the expectation for a hung parliment came fron the Indy&the Guardian. With the latest poll for the Indy giving a high Tory support their Sunday reporting has forgotton the concept of a hung parliment.
My own opinion is that nothing has changed. Ukip voters would be mad to vote on a one issue ticket.and induce a LD/LAD ticket with their views on Europe. No I am sorry, those of you fratically wishing a drift toward the left are living in cloud cooko land. Labour has abandoned the middle ground.
It seems that Mark R, Andrew Myers, Phillip JW and I , all see
the results of these polls in a very similar way.
I hope we can now be spared “Councillor Foodbottem, the Tory in Chalfont St Agatha has just been defeated” type comments until a serious series of polls puts Labour within 4 or 5 points of the Tories in England and Wales.
Have the Tories picked all their PPCs yet? I would think there’s lots of votes to be lost in that process for them.
@ WOLF
Probably not enough to affect the outcome of an election, I would suggest. Its more to do with people not trusting this government and having enough of them. On that basis I doubt PPCs will be the be all and end all
@Jakob – “He was using the figures from the 1992 election. I have to admit, I have no idea why”. I would have thought it’s pretty obvious why he’s using these. What he is saying is that if labour really is on 31%, which technically the most recent poll tells us, they have added about 3-4% in the last six weeks or so, and if they could continue in this vein they are into hung parliament territory. I would have thought his point was pretty clear clear really – note he didn’t state this as a prediction or suggest it is an outcome he supported. he appeared merely to be raising the fact that some further small poll movements would alter the GE outcome if this is indeed the current position, which of course it might not be.
@Philip JW – “I think these polls suggest that Labour are at best on 28″. I would be very careful in deciding how you should adjust polls to make them less’suspect’. I’m tempted to ask why you select the YouGov poll as being suspect when 2 of the 3 recent polls show Labour on 30/31 and LD on 16/17 – in close agreement – while one has Labour on 24 and LD on 21. In the absence of any statistical reasons for the difference, a dispassionate reading of these polls would tend to suggest that 2/3 has more chance of being correct rather than 1/3. Personally I tend to view polls showing the LDs on 21% with some surprise, but I accept tham as valid and genuine polls. Someone is right here and someone is wrong, but simply drawing a line down the half way point might make us feel more comfortable but doesn’t necessarily answer the key question.
I’ve no idea where people are getting the ‘Conservatives Steady at 40′ from. In September the polling was from 45-40. Now the polling is from 37-41. There is a very obvious downward trend in Conservative figures since conference time, and even more so if you project back a year to when they had their best figure of 48. The conservative voting intention peak is now behind them.
The moving average I generate for the Conservatives now sits at 39%, down from 41% in November. While Labour have picked up from 26% to 29%. (Click on the name of this post for the graphs)
As I see it, the only thing that can be inferred from the recent polls is that the Conservatives seem to have over the medium term a solid core of support of around 40%, while the support for Labour and Lib Dem seems to fluctuate.
Some commentators here believe that the 40% represents a ceiling for Conservative support. Personally, I’m not sure that I agree with such an arbitrary judgement (especially as in the medium-long term the Conservatives have polled in the high 40s). Entering into a GE campaign in such a position will put the Conservatives at an advantage as they can focus their time and money on extending their already stable support beyond 40%, while Labour and the Lib Dems will first need to solidify the variable support that they have before they can consider moving forward.
@ JAY BLANC
so the Tories being on about 40% consistently isnt wrong then.
What about Labour going from 24-31%. I would suggest these figures have just as much if not more volatility about them?
@Mark R
All Politics is Local.
The voting intention before there are declared PPCs can be taken as a ‘generic conservative vs the incumbent’. After a PPC has been declared, and people have had a few leaflets shoved through their door, they have some idea what the conservative PPC is like. And this can shift the polling quite a bit.
If the Conservatives have issues recruiting appealing PPCs, they might see a drop.
@Mark R
No. My point was there there are trends here, and movement. There has *not* been static polling around 40 for the conservatives, the trend is that they’re losing votes. There is downward momentum starting above forty and going below it, not ’steady at 40′.
@ JAY BLANC
I dont believe PPCs will give a significant enough bias to make people change their minds. Whilst I agree it could make a small difference, I do not believe it will be enough to alter any outcome. I vote for what is best for me and my family and not on a PPC.
@Mark
Let’s be generous, and say that only 2% of voters at an election vote for the candidate who has the nicest photo, and sweetest platitudes, in their election pamphlets.
A 2% swing can very much decide an election.
@ JAY BLANC
I hear what you are saying about Tories losing momentum but if you actually look at polls over the last week or so thay have actually moved up from 37% (at there lowest) back consistently to around 40%. I dont believe that the Tories will poll anywhere near 45% but 41-42% would not be out of the question.
In the same way I dont believe that either 24% (lowest)or 31% (highest) for Labour is true. I believe them to be on 27-28%.
@ JAY BLANC
The difference is that i do not believe 2% will be enough to affect the outcome of this election. I believe the Tory lead is between 12-13% and so that would put them on 10-11% still a majority to them. Presumably the same rules could be said for the other parties as regards candidates too?
@JAY BLANC
Yes this a real issue for the back-sliding Tories. Labour candidates all modern day Aneurin Bevans and Barbara Castles,
whilst the hooray Henry’s and Henrietta’s of the Tory Party just stand on the door steps of the nation bleeding votes.
No wonder all the polls are wrong and their vote is colapsing.
@Mark R
Comparing polls over the last week is comparing single polls from different poll outfits. And as I’ve said, you can’t do that and expect a meaningful result.
The ‘polling’ hasn’t gone up between Populus’s 28 and ComRes’s 41. That difference is going to be from their methodologies, not from real voter intention.
Compare across the polls from one poll outfit, or across the trends of a substantial number of all polls.
And the conservatives have not simply ‘lost the momentum’ in these trends, they’re losing ground.
@JAY BLANC
Sorry but we are going to have to agree to disagree on this point. I dont accept that the Conservatives are losing ground but losing momentum for the time being possibly.
I think these polls are showing that although the Tories will win, it is far from clear what margin that will be. I personally would like to see the breakdown on results, particularly by region and income. This will say a lot of the changes.
POLL ALERT – Scotland on Sunday
New ORB poll for the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party. Note: ORB are a member of the British Polling Council and must therefore publish the detailed datasheets within 2 working days.
________
“Last night it was reported that Labour staff were getting ready to go any time after New Year.
Meanwhile, polling conducted for the Conservatives has given David Cameron’s party cause for optimism after so long in the wilderness north of the Border.
The survey, conducted by ORB, showed that 67 per cent of Scots believe the Tories will win the general election next year. Almost three-quarters (73 per cent) agreed Labour looked tired.
Tory party strategists have targeted 11 Scottish seats they believe they can win, a figure that assumes the party’s only MP, David Mundell, will hold his Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale seat. Internal Tory research, seen by Scotland on Sunday, reveals that three-quarters of Scots believe the SNP is “ineffective” at Westminster. The poll of 1,000 voters across Scotland showed that 74 per cent of the sample agreed that the SNP stood up for Scotland but was not effective when it came to Westminster.
Even allowing for the fact that the questions were posed by the Conservatives, they would appear to signal a revival for the party that was banished from Scotland in the wipeout of 1997. Former Scottish Tory leader David McLetchie has been appointed campaign manager by current leader Annabel Goldie and Scottish party leader Andrew Fulton.”
@JAY BLANC
“Comparing polls over the last week is comparing single polls from different poll outfits. And as I’ve said, you can’t do that and expect a meaningful result.”
So what do we do in this case? Ignore the facts before us, ignore Anthony Wells, and just take on bored the slanted anti Tory Party spin you choose to put on every set of figures that are produced. Its gone beyond a joke.
@STUART DICKSON
Thank you Stuart very interesting reading.
@ King Harold
Totally agree.
Jay,
5 of the last 6 polls have put the Conservatives on 40/41%, so it’s fair to describe them as being steady on that figure.
As it happens, Labour were within low single figures of the Conservatives, exactly 12 months ago.
@ Sean Fear
Thanks Sean I am glad someone else backs me up.
Stuart,
You missed out the bit where the articles said that privately that the expected to win only three or four of them. In theory the Tory’s across the Uk could if all went well win over 420 seats….but I wouldn’t put money on it.
Having read the SoS ( apt given its current circulation) this morning I think the editorial line is pretty clearly “Anyone but the SNP” with features talking up both the tory and Labour prospects at the election and every story about the SNP in a negative light.
I am not normally one to have ago at the press but today was a particularly bad one for anyone expecting objective journalism.
Peter.
@Cllr Peter Cairns (SNP)
Not sure that David Cameron will be that bothered. I doubt he is expecting to set the world alight in Scotland. i would suggest that the SNP just concentrate their efforts on Labour.
@ Peter – from what I can make out, the SNP has been rather faltering in polls over the last few weeks. I’m interested in what you think the reasons for this might be and whether the SNP has done any research into which of its policies are less popular. I’m not sniping here but genuinely curious given that the SNP seemed to be making significant gains not all that long ago.
@Stuart
“Who will Win?” is not “How will you vote?”, and couple that with the caution against taking anything from a poll released by a political party, and that’s pretty meaningless.
2% may not make a difference to the national projections, but how many of the seats Tories need to win are likely to be won by small margins? Probably quite a number. 2% overall might not change things but 2% either way in the right seats may well be the difference between
a majority or a hung parliament.
@ Jay Blanc
You obviously dont like polls very much unless they go in Labours favour of course. Begs the question of why you look at a site like this that is decicated to unbiased polling. Maybe the Guardian is your best bet.
@Jakob
Anthony,
I think you need to introduce a new policy banning people from making election predictions. It seems like every other post at the moment is along the lines of “I feel x will win y seats.” That’s not really interesting to read.
———-
Agree with this. It does make boring reading. And it is becoming more and more prolific.
There is too much of it. Too far from GE day.
The point of the blog is to comment on the polls or polling in more general terms. Not gaze into blue or red tinted crystal balls.
@Mark and King Harold
My projection is still for a conservative government, but a minority one. I don’t get where you’re seeing the ‘Labour Bias’.
All I have done is comment that the momentum is currently against the Conservatives and eating into their lead. Something supported by the polling.
I invite you to take the polling figures, generate moving averages and trend plots of your own. I doubt you’ll see a significant difference in graphing from my own.
@David
Don’t forget some people have yellow tinted balls…
Altho, that might be because of a vitamin deficiency.
The problem with the authenticity of YouGov as I see it is they have a data base of all the people whose voting intentions and political allegiance they already know. At each poll they produce they ask a percentage of those on line subscribers to contribute. They can of course exercise control over whom they ask. This is the reason why at the moment I believe YouGov have the Conservative party with only an 8% lead. They could just as easy produce a poll tomorrow (Depending whom they invited to participate) giving the Conservatives a 25% lead or indeed Labour a 10% lead. Politics is a nasty business. I seem to remember it being stated that Ian Duncan Smith could accurately predict a certain forthcoming poll by YouGov some years ago. There are also another two polls out today. One with a 17% Tory lead and the other with an 11% Tory lead. Who do we believe? Its difficult to say.
I have no idea whether or not Jay Blanc’s figures are correct. But I’m not overkeen on one or two personal comments being made against that commentator. He/She is surely entitled to make his/her point without unpleasant comments?
If you want to do that type of thing, can I suggest you go to one of the very many bickering blogs that are available elsewhere on the internet?
In other words, even if we disagree, can we try to do so with civility please?
@PETER CAIRNS
On a left / right basis how broad a church is the SNP?
For example could you compare a right wing SNP supporter with say a moderate English Tory. Would most middle of the road people be like say English Lib Dems or Nu Lab supporters?
I think it’s interesting that Pro Conservative papers always seem to be showing the lead as close. Could it be more to try and get a snap election???????
Maybe tories are saying they would vote Labour to convince the Labour party to have an election soon.
@DAVID IN FRANCE
If the next 4 polls all show Labour @ 37, Tory @37 or similar, and I persist in posting explanations which belittle the Labour position and falsely inflate the Tory position, feel absolutley free
to be impolite to me.
Incidentally, in hopes of dispelling the “Labour Bias” argument, I’m going to declare my voting history. It’s Lib-Dem at every general election since I was first able to vote in the 90s. I’m personally opposed to *both* Labour and Conservative. Maybe I have a ‘hung-parliament’ bias?
@ JAY BLANC
Thanks for coming clean. I just had the feeling you weren’t for a pro Tory Majority. I respect your honesty.
As a matter of interest do you feel that the Lib DEms will do well North of the Midlands and not so well South of the Midlands.?
‘JAMES LUDLOW
@ Peter – from what I can make out, the SNP has been rather faltering in polls over the last few weeks. I’m interested in what you think the reasons for this might be and whether the SNP has done any research into which of its policies are less popular. I’m not sniping here but genuinely curious given that the SNP seemed to be making significant gains not all that long ago.’
My belief would be if true it’s because it’s about Westminster, not Scotland. SNP for Scottish Parliament is a very broad group of support; wider than those who will vote SNP for Westminster…
This set of polls are just so much junk.
How can they be trusted? Could it be that there are so few labour and libdems around that when they find an extra few one way or another it twists the result?
King Harold did hit a true if unintended note when he called Tory candidates Hooray Henrys and Henriettas.There is a perception amongst members of the public that the Tories are out of touch with ordinary life (whatever that means) This perception could cost seats for them as the Labour Party will use the soft toff card when they can. I still think the election will be in May. All this talk of March polls is spurious gossip.
yes it is confusing – the common theme though is Tory vote at 40% but falling slowly – anti Tory vote at 60% and rising. It just depends how long the Tory slide continues and/or will it change pace – and how the anti-Tory vote splits. As for local variations, it is widely accepted by many that a good campaign or organisation or candidate (or poor incumbent) can make a difference of up to 5% – 2-3% is typical.
Is there any Scottish breakdown for any of these polls?
@ Lin Rees – “There is a perception amongst members of the public that the Tories are out of touch with ordinary life (whatever that means) This perception could cost seats for them as the Labour Party will use the soft toff card when they can.”
From the ComRes poll:
The fact that David Cameron went to Eton makes it harder for him to be a good prime minister for the whole country
Agree 20%
Disagree 70%
Don’t know 9%
Doesn’t look like a winning tactic to me.
The WMA is 40:28:18 normal random variation easily accounts for the fact that these polls are +2, -2, -3 from the underlying value.
The 150 day trend remains down for the CLead but interestingly the 40 day trend is static and it will be intruiging to see what happens next. The media seems to have made up their mind about the PBR but I’m not convinced that this has much effect on the public at large. In Sept 08 the WMA CLead dipped to 8% but was 20% in a couple of months. We shall see…
PS why on earth is there a problem comparing polls from 3 different organisations? If they have 3 different methodologies they are less likely to have a correlated error and thus the avearge is more likely to be right.
I agree that YouGov is a bit suspect. It’s surveys are not froma random population; they are volunteers who sign up to take part.
This suggests to me they:
1. Almost certainly have access to & frequently use the internet;
2. Are educated & have an interest in news, current affairs & politics.
I am not arguing that they are completely unrepresentative but I think it’s likely that entire sections (I can’t think of a better word) could be under-represented.
Does anybody else have information or an opinion on this?
For what it’s worth, I think the major parties do their own polling. My thought is they’ll pay particular attention to the trends in the marginal seats.
Then the government will go for an election when enough of those seats are either strongly in their favour or at least trending favourably.
Therefore, if the movement between Labour & the Libdems has moved marginal Tory seats to the LibDems, Labour could go for a March election date.
Does anybody know when we get a look at the latest public poll of the marginals?
@ Lin Rees
The Labour party and its supporters keep on using the “toff” trumpcard and its playing straight into the Tories hands. It just goes to show how desperate this government are. They know they are in trouble.
Its a bit like me saying well lets not vote Labour because their MPs are uneducated and dont have the brains to run the country.
The “toff” trump card is just plain wrong.
The toff card may be wrong but Zac Goldsmith has played into their hands beautifully.Cameron has been forced to issue a ‘policy’ today.
@Mark R
We simply don’t have big enough sampling in regional polls in this country to say anything about what the swing will be in any particular seat. Hence my attitude about the “Conservatives will outperform the polls in the Marginals” idea based on regional polling.
If we did have high-sample rate regional polls, I’d be doing a Monte Carlo seat allocation projection (similar to Nate Silver) instead of trend estimates.
@NBeal
Here’s an example. You have three test tracks. One test track has gravel patches, one is wet, one is covered in sand. Then you test three different cars on one test track each. Car A on track A, Car B on track B, Car C on track C.
Is it fair to judge that Car A is faster than Car B and Car C based on just those results? Or is it better to wait till you can test each car on all the test tracks?
Likewise with Polls.
Something I’ve observed since the mid ’80s is that it always seems that the Liberal Democrats’ polling result understates their actual vote in the election. In most of the elections it’s the Conservatives who are a point or two down on election day but my *recollection* is that in 2005 it was Labour who were a point or two down from their polling figures in the actual vote. I don’t know where to find polling figures for the month leading up to the 2005 election, so I can’t check to see if my memory is right. But if it is, with the exception of 2001, it strikes me as a last minute tactical vote against the incumbent party. However, the polls seem to me to show the Lib Dems picking up support two or three months before the public’s perceived most likely general election date.
What I am getting at is that I think the Liberal Democrats will poll significantly better than their current rolling average and the main loser is likely to be Labour. You might say that as a Tory this scenario suits my desires, as it would likely give the Tories a thumping big majority. However, it’s what I honestly believe and if the Tories are to win a landslide victory, I’d really prefer them to do it with 45%+ of the popular vote because it would give their government credibility. Unfortunately, I don’t think it’s currently possible for any of the major parties to win 45% or more at a general election. That may change in a decade or two’s time but not in five months.
Toff Trump Card.
It is like picking on the posh kids at school because they have a different background and often speak differently.
It used to be popular at my school in the 1970s, but in those days it was accompanied by picking on the immigrant children because they had a different background and often spoke differently.
Same sport, same rules, same players.
The country has moved on, via Crewe and Nantwich.
@Shopkeeper Man
Well said. Do think that the Toff Trump card will play into the Tories hands ( i.e do you think it will damage Labour).?
@Charles Stuart
It’s not a given that increase of LibDem votes come at cost to Labour. Nor does the current trend show that, if anything it shows that movement of people towards LibDem and Labour from Conservative.
And because of the way UK polls are run, ‘Undecideds’ are not included in the headline poll results. What I think happens is that LibDem get a much bigger share of that unreported Undecided vote on election day.
This does cut into how much of a lead the Conservatives need over Labour to avoid hung parliament. If, for example, Lib Dems get back up to the 24% from the last election, the conservatives have to get a lead of somewhere above 12% to avoid hung parliament. And much less chance of being able to form a government if there is a hung parliament as the Lib Dems will have more seats and will have greater ability to dictate who forms government.
Jay Blanc: I like your moving averages. Graphs always tell a good story. The trend is clear.
I have been backing a 37:32:20 distribution for sometime. Your trend is heading directly towards that.
The moment “we are out of recession” comes out alongwith “this is not the time to inflict more pain until the recovery takes hold” Labour points will go up a notch or two. People generally have always preferred to have the cake and eat it. Why should they be different now ?
Jay: It would clearly be daft to take the C figure from Poll 1, the Lab figure from Poll 2 and the Lib Dem from Poll 3. But that is not what we are doing. We effectively have a 3-D random variable X=(X1,X2,X3) where X1 is the C share, X3 the Lab Share and X3 the Lib Dem share, and we have 3 observations with random errors so:
A = X+EA
B = X+EB
C= X+EC
If EA, EB and EC are uncorrelated and have mean 0 then (A+B+C)/3 will be a better estimate of X than any of A, B or C. Now I have over 390 polls with a WMA comparison and YouGov and ComRes have average errors (0.2 and 0.3) which are zero FAPP. It’d true that BPIX has a long-term average error of 1.9 but it’s really complicated having adjustable errors in the WMA (and frankly it only makes .63 difference and this is within the margin of error of the WMA)
Perhaps your predominantly Tory contributors could have a go at explaining Labour’s four council by-elections gains last week, including two from the Tories?
@ Jay Blanc – “Let’s be generous, and say that only 2% of voters at an election vote for the candidate who has the nicest photo, and sweetest platitudes, in their election pamphlets.
A 2% swing can very much decide an election.”
Well, in this instance, not really – because it’s highly unlikely that the candidates with the nicest photo etc will all come from the same party.
@Surbiton
Cant see why the government should take the credit for getting us out of a recession when they never had the foresight to see it coming in the first place. I dont believe for one minute that we are out of the economic woods just yet and dont believe it will be in time for the election.
@ SURBITON
Your prediction makes the assumption that the Tory vote will continue to decline. Do you have evidence to assume this?
With VAT returning to 17.5% in January and the hit of the new National Insurance rate hitting OUR paypackets in April more people MAY turn away from the labour party (Perty for jay).
@Dont Tell Em Pike
I agree not sure what source of information Surbiton is using. 37:32:20 Seems like he has taken the worst poll of the Tories and the best poll for the Labour & Lib Dems. Why?
The consensus of opinion and backed up the polls is 40:28:19
@Mark R
I’m watching the polls to see. I hope not, bigotry is the last refuge of the desperate.
From what I can work out, 40% of the electorate are content with the Conservatives post the austerity-conference, but Labour, Libdems and others are bouncing around.
Sorry to irk other posters but I’ll predict 40, 32, 18. Surely part of poll watching is wondering where the trends will end up?
Unless somehow Clegg can generate some of the old Kennedy magic and make Chilcott/Iraq and issue. I can’t see the Lib Dems making 23 again without an anti-war flag to gather round, nor can I see UKIP making great gains apart from in the Speaker’s seat. I expect recent Labour momentum to get the vote out up to 32% but the tories’ marginals warchest to give them a majority. BNP might affect a few seats but surely tey won’t win one. SNP will do fine because they seem to be making a reasonable fist of things in Scotland and will gain from the Libdems and a few from Labour.
In the interests of openness, I don’t think it will affect me greatly whoever wins the election, but I’d like to see a hung parliament because I think it would be politically interesting and I have never seen one in my voting lifetime. Thus I think I shall vote tactically and will consider for whom later.
Mark R: Despite the belief of Tory supporters that the public in general think that the recession is Labour’s fault, this is not correct. Labour could not have been responsible for the recession in USA, Canada, all over Europe , Japan , Taiwan… do I need to go on.
Therefore, the public quite correctly concludes that it was a global event.
Regarding reducing the deficit, the public will always back “savage cuts” tomorrow. In the USA , it was actually Reagan who ballooned the deficit and it was Clinton who cut , only for Bush/Cheney to balloon it all over again. The public . in reality, does not pay too much attention to these matters until the interest rates jack up. and hit their wallet. How many people know what the PSBR is ? They do still remember 15% interest rates ! So do I. My first mortgage was taken out in 1990.
In the current climate, it will a long time before gilt prices dive [ or interest rates spike up ]. The interest rates could yet be Labour’s saviour. For all the threat from Moody’s etc. about the PBR fallout, the AAA rating has not budged. Can you imagine the furore, if those same rating agencies who were giving AAA ratings to Lehman Brothers until 14 September 2008, suddenly became a puritan with a Labour government. Japan has debts of 170% of GDP. I don’t hear anywhere that they are bankrupt. Yes, as a percentage of GDP, the borrowing is now high, but let us not forget the debt servicing cost is much lower. The government could yet get away with this one.
Re Lib Dem vote share.
It is generally accepted that in a GE campaign they increase thir vote share versus polls entering but it is their performance in seats they are defending from the cons that IMO has the greatest impact on the overall GE result.
I have suggested on a thread a few weeks ago that should the LD’s only lose 5 or so seats to the cons the main consequence is that the Tories have to go deeper in to Lab targets to win an outright victory, perhaps down to target 123 (one of my local seats Stockton South) for example.
Re the trend I am with Jay in that the lead was clearly trending down but NBeale has stated with his always useful analysis what intuitively seems to me to be the case that this is no longer happening.
DON’T-TELL-EM-PIKE
Yes you’re qute right about the VAT increase to 17.5% but I think you’ll find the NI increase is not coming in until 2011. It’s only the frozen personal allowances and the 50% income tax that’s coming in in 2010 but arguably that’s partially offset by the 2.5% increase in the basic state pension.
In other words unless you’re a pensioner there’s only the prospect of a reduction in your standard of living this year!
Furthermore unemployment is still likely to rise from now until April and April figures won’t be published before a May election.
With that background is May better than March? Not an easy choice, unless you are particularly risk averse
Surbiton
If you read my comments carefully I didnt say that the recession was the governments fault but not to have the foresight to see it coming. That is why I cannot give them credit for getting us out of it ( should this happen anytime soon.)
@Surbiton
By the way I forgot to mention, that I lost my job and so the memories of this recession are not particularly pleasant and I dont thank the government for this by the way. I also agree with Dont Tell Em Pike that there is still difficult times ahead on the job front although I hope not.
Jim Jam
“Re Lib Dem vote share.
It is generally accepted that in a GE campaign they increase thir vote share versus polls ”
Not this cracked record again.
Look at the 1992 election polls.
I’m amazed I have to keep correcting this point.
The LD share did rise a the start of the campaign, but it would appear mainly against one Harris poll which had them very low (contradicting one of their own).
The LD result of 18.3% was below the average of the last 16 days of the campaign, and a clear majority of the polls in that period had them above the result.
1992 also has some similarity to the current situation – the first proper contest for a good few years, and a recession where most people will want to take a decision about the national government one way or the other.
@David D
Thanks for the correction re: NI – my mistake.
Am I missing something as quite a few people are mentioning that Labour are on 32%, where is this figure coming from? are these predictions or actual figures?
‘MARK R
Surbiton
If you read my comments carefully I didnt say that the recession was the governments fault but not to have the foresight to see it coming. That is why I cannot give them credit for getting us out of it ( should this happen anytime soon.)’
As somebody uninspired by the main parties I feel it germane to add to discussion of the economy that they all fell for – to a greater or lesser extent – the same right wing free market policies which caused the economic mess in which we now live. Ok, one party was in power (and I do note Cable’s complaints) but in essence no-one was saying stop the catastrophe that is coming.
So? Anyone who blames Labour for the problems also has to blame the Tories and the bizarre thinktanks like the Adam Smith Lot; after all there is no morality in business their aim is profit (one notes, for example, that Concentration Camps were businesses).
Bluntly, it is about time we stopped this belief in free market economics being the saviour of the world. We need Governments to own key economic areas because business can be trusted; business morality is solely profit and that has been clearly shown to be a flawed model.
oops
Redo last sentence
We need Governments to own key economic areas because business can NOT be trusted; business morality is solely profit and that has been clearly shown to be a flawed model.
JJB – you are better researched than me so I am sure you are right about ‘92.
How many seats did the LD’s lose in ‘92 and what was their vote share compared to the Alliance in ‘87?
My main point, though, is that the LDs tends to do better when defending seats they already have whovever the challenger and IMO they will lose many fewer seats than UNS projects.
Just as the con performance will be better than UNS in marginals against labour….probably, which will compensate for them having to go deeper.
In fact deeper than Stockton South, to perhaps requiring a 7% swing in Lab/Con marginals. (I incorrectly thought the target list was boundary adjusted when writng my earlier post)
Did you ever get to Roseberry Topping?
@ Jack
Here what you are saying but cant see a free market economy or Capitalism disappearing anytime soon. With that in mind, sorry but I do blame this present government for my current predicament (being made redundant). I cant blame the Tories as it is not them that have been in power for the last 12 years.
Very simple analogy I know but this is how I feel.
The ORB poll for the Scottish Tories and fed to Scotland on Sunday, that Stuart referred to is interesting – if only that they paid out good money to discover the bleeding obvious!
Clearly they revealed the best news that they could from the poll.
If they had good voting intention data, they would have mentioned it. In fact their released results are -
“67 per cent of Scots believe the Tories will win the general election next year”
“73 per cent agreed Labour looked tired.”
“74 per cent of the sample agreed that the SNP stood up for Scotland but was not effective when it came to Westminster.”
While one would want to see the wording of the questions (especially the one which produced the last of their 3 claims, none of these imply that the Tories are going to gain Scottish votes at the GE.
King Harold
I won’t try to answer for Peter, but you asked “On a left / right basis how broad a church is the SNP?”
My take on that is to say it’s not a meaningful question.
A regular saying by a poster on Brian Taylor’s blog was “one-dimensional politics is only appropriate for those who find the idea of a flat earth over-complicated”.
“A moderate English Tory” would probably find themselves on the right wing of the Scots Tories, but in the SNP left/right is not the issue. The SNP accommodates people from a wide spectrum on that issue – as it does on Green issues etc.
KING HAROLD,
Not that broad in to the extent that it’s to the left of the UKIP and the BNP and left of the SSP and Solidarity. Its probably closest to Labour but with a fair bit of LibDem and a little tory.
In fact if you were to say that without the SNP Scotland would probably be something like 50% Labour 25% Tory, 15% LibDem and 10% others with greens the largest part of that, then that is probably about right for the SNP.
Certainly if I was in England I’d be borderline Lab/Lib.
In a way it is an achievement to bring all that together but it does give us a true pragmatism and diversity held together by a common purpose and mutual respect.
In the last year I’ve both agreed and disagreed with Rob Gibson who is at the green end of the party, and disagreed with Mike Russell.
I am a friend of Jim Mather and think he is excellent on enterprise but I have disagreed with him in debate at national council.
We have heated debates on policy and strategy, but we all know that it’s about the right means to achieve the same end, a better future for our country.
It actually makes us a formidable opponent and a potential force for good. For all the criticism of the Megrahi decision it showed that we could do our own things and that we offered a true alternative to the UK parties.
People might not like the decision but it showed we could make difficult decisions without ducking the issues or making excuses.
James.
We have probably had our worst month since we came to Power(ish), but to be honest its probably be an average one for Jack McConnell.
Alex had to demote a minister but after two and a half thats not the end of the world particularly as in the same period Labour has had three leaders and in the last two and a half years of the last parliament their cabinet had more shuffles that Las Vegas.
Part of the problem is that what hasn’t got across is the culture change we are trying to bring about in that we want to try to get better for less and at all times are trying to focus on outcomes.
However given the nature of Scottish politics for decades has been about input success being seen as extra spending or more Police or Nurses we had a manifesto that was full of those easy to understand commitments that mirrored that.
So we committed to 1,000 extra police officers and class sizes of 18 in P1-3. These were just about achievable and we could have done them without that pesky recession as Scooby Doo villains say….
For me the annoying thing is that we are being hurt by people attacking input policies that were always suspect in an era when input politics is effectively dead.
Darling tried the extra this and that last week and the nation just laughed because we know those days are over.
The next decade is about keeping things going with less resources and living within our means while the last was about more means better and bigger is best and we increased tax and spend each year and called it investment even though progress was limited and it was funded by debt.
Extra police isn’t an end it’s a means, lower crime is an outcome, we have been attacked for delays in getting the extra police but the last national survey said people are felling safer.
Having 56,000 teachers rather than 55,000 isn’t a success better outcomes are, and so far that seems to be improving although its still too slow. What matters most is how well each child is educated and if they are reaching their potential not the national total of teachers.
The old way of record this or that smacks of an Old style five year plan, like Soviet tractor production. Sure we have made more tractors than last year but people are still queuing and hungry.
In short I think we have the right ideas and are actually what Scotland needs right now but we aren’t just fighting Labour ( and much of the press) but a culture that says the State should buy its way out of problems.
That is not only the right way forward but given the fact that national debt is hitting £180bn we don’t have any other choice.
Peter.
Cllr Peter Cairns (SNP)
I wasn’t aware this was forum for party political broadcasts.
I will ignore it as does most of Scotland and all of England.
Not enough Vino for this kind of rant !
In fairness to Peter he was answering a direct question from another contributor, albeit at considerable length. But then I think it is not a very easy question to answer briefly.
Where “Nationalism” fits in on the normal axes of “Left-Right” orientation is a quandary.
BRYAN,
I was asked two questions the first about the membership of the SNP and the second as to why we were not making progress.
I answered them both.
If you don’t like the answers thats your choice.
Peter.
The encouraging thing for the Tories is that 3 of the last 10 polls have given them a lead of 17% (albeit 2 of those from the same pollster) and all but 2 of the last 10 polls have put them at least 10% ahead.
@ Peter – thanks for your reply. It sounds as if the SNP is getting a “shoot the messenger” response to some extent.
@ BRYAN – King Harald and I asked Peter these questions and he has kindly responded. It’s good to know what might be behind certain findings or trends in the polls and it’s only “partisan” if advocacy is involved. I don’t think Peter’s replies were advocacy. They offered an interesting insight.
so Gordon has spent the night in Afghanistan and now promising to ‘review’ the defence budget. Should gain him a point or two in the polls but ashame that it is just electioneering. We cant be far off now. March???
Point of Information!
- “… from what I can make out, the SNP has been rather faltering in polls over the last few weeks…”
Err… you may not have seen this (although Anthony DID report it) but the most recent full voting intention survey, conducted in late November by Ipsos MORI, had the SNP in the lead on both Westminster and Holyrood voting intention:
Scottish Public Opinion Monitor November 2009 (fieldwork: 19-23 Nov 2009; sample size = 1009)
Westminster v.i.
Con 15%, Lab 32%, Lib Dem 12%, SNP 34%
Holyrood v.i.
Con 12%, Lab 32%, Lib Dem 12%, SNP 36%
Ipsos MORI Scotland link:
http://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/poll.aspx?oItemId=2523
Anthony’s report:
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2364
Fascinating website!
But I have only seen one commentator seriously addressing the West Lothian question. On the assumption that SNP may make a few gains in Scotland at the expense of Labour, (and assuming all nationalist parties continue their policy of abstention on English matters) in reality DC requires 275 English seats to prevent GB (including his 35 or so Scottish Labour MP’s) from effecting any policy which effects England only. That means DC needs 86 English gains to give 275 seats and remove this government from power or a 5% swing. Equivalent to approx 36.5% in the polls. Given that the latest reports suggest 43% + in the English marginals, it will take a miracle (and a constitutional crisis!) for GB to remain PM.
@Mark Johnson.
I think that about Captchas the situation.
(Sorry, it’s early yet)
I think the election will be very sensitive to events week by week and be volatile – but the conservatives have had ‘the edge’ for a long time and this ‘edge’ may take them through any ‘wobbly’ moments. Jay Blanc’s graphs are interesting in that they point up in the ‘difference’ graph the slow decline of the conservative vote since the middle of the year.
Mark Johnson ,you are way out with your comment both in its tone and accuracy.In simple terms if you look at national debt as a percentage of national income,the position of the UK is not as bad as the Tories make out. Greece,Ireland,Japan,Italy and the US and Spain are in a worse position.The UK position is close to Germany and France.The figures are available on page 22 of today’s Guardian.
MJC-L,
Save what you have typed – highlight and press ctrl C.
Then if CAPTCHA does not work you can go back andf do Ctrl V to get back in the box.
Apologies if you know this already not intending to sound patronising.
Don’t agree with your assessment BTW.
Debt Interest is the crucial factor and someone with more knowledge than I can advise what it was in 96 and is now as a %age of GDP.
As others have demonstrated UK Gov’t debt is typically longer than anywhere else and will remain at lower IR for longer as a result.
You do seem to overlook also that parlous state of Public Services bequeathed to Labour in ‘97.
Just as arguably the beneifts of a more flexible Labour market took years to manifest (I think mitigating the recession now) so will the better funded Education and Health service reaps dividends later on.
There is a genuine argument around delivery, value for money and targets but the higher level of spending is irrefutable.
@PETER CAIRNS
Thanks for the explanation Peter, its about what I had thought.
However, good to have it confirmed by one who knows.
@ Mark Johnson-Chadderton-etc
Shouldn’t you be reading the Comments Policy?
I honestly don’t think that there’s much point in analysing these three polls in much detail. People in December seem to have other things on their minds. If last December’s figures had been consistent into January, we’d have had a general election last March.
@DAVID IN OXFORD
Look out for Peter Cairns, Old Nat, Stuart Dickson and John B Dick. These gentlemen will entertain you regarding Scottish politics. They make an interesting site the more so.
, @JACK
“So? Anyone who blames Labour for the problems also has to blame the Tories and the bizarre thinktanks like the Adam Smith Lot; after all there is no morality in business their aim is profit (one notes, for example, that Concentration Camps were businesses).”
Gulags were not businesses, they were correction centres for an over powerful state which wished to control even an individuals thoughts. Is this a good system because its anti business ?
The closer you look at the numbers, the more dire it gets for Labour. On the uniform swing, you have the Cons at 350 seats. But if the swing is slightly higher in the English marginals, (which has been confirmed in private polling for the Cons according to The Times a couple of weeks ago) Labour in England could be headed for the oblivion of less than 100 seats…..from 282! My view is that the firming up of the Labour vote which we are seeing is coming from their traditional strongholds where the the SNP and Plaid are set to inflict the deserved damage. The election is going to be decided in the 180 English marginals which will fall on a swing of less than 10% and at the moment I don’t see any reason for DC to be losing any sleep!
David in Oxford –
Unless they cough up some actual polling figures and tables to prove it, I’d always advise people to ignore what political parties *claim* their private polling shows.
And even when they do reveal a private poll… Consider that you haven’t seen their other private polls, and can’t identify a trend or an error tendency in that poll. And remember that they will only ever release the polls that are good news for them.
Re that ORB poll that Stuart mentioned earlier in this thread. Tables are now out.
I wonder why the Tories chose not to publicise Scots views of Cameron?
“Please tell me whether you have a very favourable, favourable, unfavourable or very unfavourable opinion of David Cameron?”
Very favourable – 4% : Favourable – 48% : Unfavourable – 33% : Very unavourable – 15%.
The other questions were as leading as one might have guessed.
Stuart Dickson,
The UK General Election next year is likely to result in either a Conservative or Labour government in Westminster. Regardless of how you intend to vote, which do you think would be best for Scotland, a Conservative government in Westminster, or a Labour Government?
Conservative Government
Labour Government
Both the same (DO NOT READ OUT)
Don’t know
Do you feel that this question is somewhat loaded?
Particularly since the third question should not be read out loud. I mean surely it would be better to not read out any of the answers and ask…
The UK General Election next year is likely to result in either a Conservative or Labour government in Westminster. Regardless of how you intend to vote, which do you think would be best for Scotland?
Ipsos Mori also seem to reduce the difference between Holyrood and Westminster voting intentions. The Conservatives seem stuck in their 2005 general election result. It would be interesting to see if their vote is becoming regionalised in the marginals as some suggest here.