New ComRes poll shows 38/29/19
After the wild moves in Ipsos MORI’s last two polls, which showed the Tory lead tightening to 6 points and then spiking back to 17, we’ve almost the mirror image from ComRes. Their last poll showed a 17 point, and tomorrow they have a new poll in the Independent that shows a sharp reduction. The topline figures, with changes from their poll just over a week ago, are CON 38%(-3), LAB 29%(+5), LDEM 19%(-2).
Whereas the big movements with MORI were down to the lack of political weighting allowing a sample with a very perculiar amount of 2005 Labour voters, with ComRes my guess it is the rather more mundane explanation of a rogue poll – in hindsight the 17 point Tory lead in their last poll looks wholly anomolous, the only other pollster showing such a low Labour share of the vote was Angus Reid, who seem to consistently show a lower level of Labour support for methodological reasons. If we put ComRes’s previous poll to one side and look at the one prior to that, the shifts are far smaller, with the Conservatives up, Labour up 2 and the Lib Dems down 1 – no significant movement in itself, but chiming with the recent slight strengthening for Labour.
So, as we head to the end of the year (YouGov/Telegraph is still outstanding in theory, but I’m not sure when it will arrive), we still have quite a broad range of polling figures, with leads between 9 and 17 points – from a hung Parliament to a Tory landslide. The Conservatives are in the range 38%-43%, but of the 12 polls in December 9 have put them at 40% or 41% – that’s a noticable difference from November when 7 out of 10 polls had them below 40%. Lib Dem support ranges between 16% and 21%, but mostly between 18% and 20%. The real variation is in the level of support pollsters are finding in Labour’s support, from 23% to 31%. However, the lower figures there are either AngusReid or that single ComRes that appears to have been a rogue, and other figures are in the tighter range of 26% to 31%. That leaves us with an average lead of around 11 points or so – on a UNS right on the cusp of a hung Parliament, though in practice it would probably result in a Conservative majority.
(As an aside, if you are following the polls in the glorious rumourmill of Twitter then the 3 point Tory lead in MORI on Sunday has been followed by CON 40%, LAB 31% in this poll. Boy, are polls in the general election are going to be fun there!)
Filed under: Communicate, Voting Intention
It doesn’t take many chinese tweets for ’some new account called ‘africansontoast’ to become ’some people’ to become ‘reliable sources’.
I’m hearing yougov is 39 30 19. Maybe people feel more charitable and labourish around xmas, maybe I’m just reading my stereo. Maybe I shouldn’t have bought something from a compant that couldn’t get it right the first 393018 times.
do the newspapers have any sway over the polling companies methodology?
On the last part: I confess that was my fault, I misread the blogpost by the Independent as saying the Tory figure was down one, so did the maths from there, it actually stated the lead was down 1 point since last month! : /
This poll is better for Labour than some others recently in terms of the Tory lead but their share on 29% is not particularly good news for them in my view. I think most Labour supporters would have preferred a 41-32 poll if there was to be a 9% Tory lead. As Bob Worcester says the share is the most important thing.
@Andy Stidwill
Cons low in relation to Lib Dem’s helps reduce the Con gains in the south, so if Labour is in defensive mode, I think they would prefer 38/29/19. Of course it all depends on where the movements occur. As Statto says, swing is the most important thing.
One thing that stood out for me amongst Labour 2005 voters, 10% of them are either undecided or Don’t Know as opposed to 4% for the Tories. Labour could yet get them back.LD has in fact 12% Don’t Know but that is not surprising, eventually they will vote LD.
Page 9 of Com Res summary
Andy Stidwill: This poll is better for Labour than some others recently in terms of the Tory lead but their share on 29% is not particularly good news for them in my view. I think most Labour supporters would have preferred a 41-32 poll if there was to be a 9% Tory lead. As Bob Worcester says the share is the most important thing.
Did Bob W really say that as I think it is counter intuitive.
Let’s say 41-32-17 vs. 38-29-23
The Labour Tory swings are the same. But LD’s surely will do better with the latter.
All based on UNS.
I think, for any given difference in the Con-Lab spread, Labour would prefer a lower Tory figure [ which, of course also means a lower Labour figure ] but a high turnout.
Labour has far less to lose from a high LD vote than does the Tories. Unless Clegg screws it up, tonight’s debate announcement gives the LD’s one or two points extra.
And… Back to where my trend model was predicting we’d go…
I did some experimentation with estimating seat allocations with improved Lib Dem figures… Basically, no, it’s not bad news for Labour if Lib Dem share goes up, so long as it doesn’t eat into Labour’s share. If they, as I would expect, eat mainly into ‘others’, floating voters, and just nibble at Labour and the Conservatives; then the result is a two or three point increase in the lead that the Conservatives need to get a majority.
The polls seem as reliable as the uk in the snow and economic forcasts remember how everyone predicted growth when we ended up still in recession ?
WMA 40:28:19 as you say this is a mirror image of their last poll, deviation in CLead 3% which is well within MoE. Nothing going on here at all.
However the wider picture is that the downtrend in the CLead is now essentially non-existent. Over 140 days it has an R2 of .46, but over 2 months the R2 is only .29 and over the last month there is an insignificant uptrend R2=.21.
I think the polls show that the old way of polling does not work anymore
@NBeale
Conversely, the trend generated from my set shows a significant downward trend at R2=.81
I suspect it’s because I remove Angus Reid, and use an unweighed MMA, and you don’t.
The cons won by a majority of 21 or so in 1992 and only had 7% lead and now boundarys have changed to favour the tories so surely they should get about a 50 seat majority if they had a 9% lead
Coincidently, an explanation of what an R2 figure is for other commentators. In layman terms, it tells you how well the trend fits the data, and therefore estimates how likely it is to fit future data. The number ranges from 0 to 1. So R2=.01 is a very poor trend from very random data, and R2=.99 is a very clear trend from predictable data.
R2=.21 is not a very clear trend, but R2=.81 is.
@Paul B
No, because political populations have moved about quite a bit since 1992. It’s not just the redistricting that’s changed the political landscape, but changes in demographic make up and voting trends of key constituencies.
It’s not impossible that the Tories could win an overall majority with only a 7-8% lead if the swing in the marginals is much larger than in safe seats. In 1992 the swing to Labour was double in the marginals compared to safe seats (4% v 2%) which is why they almost wiped out Major’s majority despite trailing in the popular vote by 7.6%.
I’d also like to mention something else about movement in the polls…
You can expect up to 4 to 5% movement between polls just from Sample Error.
So while it’s very very tempting to say that X Poll shows the Result of Y event, if the movement is less than 5%, then you’re probably seeing more effect from Sample Error than you are what ever event. This is why I work from a moving average of polling, as that diminishes sampling error by allowing the error of various polls to cancel each other out. It also allows me to generate a more predictive trend, as my data is less noisy.
Conversely, my data will only react to an event a few polls after it, so might be slower to adjust that trend to reflect a significant change in the situation. But the last time we had significant poll movement outside of sample error within a short time frame was the expenses scandal. Otherwise, the story here has been steady movement along a trend.
@Andy Stidwill
But the only data we have on the marginals has been contradictory, and suspect.
A low sample rate regional poll suggested that the Conservatives might out perform national swing in the northern marginals. But local by-elections saw Labour doing surprisingly well in marginals, and particularly well in London. Neither of these can really be said to be sure predictors of what will happen in the marginals.
So labour voters move but tory voters dont what a load of rubbish your telling Me that you know where people move ? The only way you could be right is if the government has planted voters In places
I agree that the trend is what matters, and the Tories have been about 10-13% ahead for a long time now. Labour only have about 15-20 weeks to change that which will be a difficult task.
I think many lib dems will vote conservative to get rid of labour if Im right it could produce large swings the lib dems vote is down who is taking there vote?
That could be right Paul, but it could well be that such voters are already shown in the polls as intending to vote Conservative anyway.
The LD vote appears to be down most in Scotland but it’s not the Tories who are benefitting from it. Some surveys are showing the Scottish LD vote has been halved from 22% in 2005 to 11% now. Mind you, they must be doing okay in the rest of the country since they’re only slightly down in the national polls compared to their GB vote in 2005.
Andy Stidwill
I have to admit I’m a natural pessimist!
While I think that much of the LD vote has gone SNP, I’m well aware that many will make up their minds in the polling booth.
I’m conscious of the TNS Scottish polls
Party, Apr 05 poll, 05 election, Oct 09 poll
Lab, 45%, 39%, 39%
LD, 14%, 23%, 12%
SNP, 23%, 18%, 25%
Con, 14%, 16%, 18%
Kalman filter says Tory lead 10.8%
Con majority 7.
http://www.titanictown.plus.com/hp/kalman.png
Btw, looks to me that the Tories are in a “descending triangle” pattern, which is considered bearish.
http://www.chartpatterns.com/descendingtrianglecharts.htm
Hung parliament on
http://hungparliament2010.blogspot.com/
The Cs will need a bigger lead over L than in 1992 because the LDs hold a load of former C seats and there are more seats held by others. It’s not just the lead that counts but the share of the vote. John Major got 43% of the vote – if that is share repeated with the current splintering of party political support C would have a huge lead over labour.
Comparisons with other elections are no longer fully valid because bit bit by bit the political landscape is changing as the two biggest parties become less dominant.
The next election is likely to produce a C majority but it may well be the last majority government we see for many years.
Why is this poll in particular being spun so much? The BBC picked it out in their first paper review of the morning on the Today programme, and Reuters UK site has the headline “Conservatives poll lead at 6-month low” (although it should be said that the article is not internally consistent, since it concludes with the sentence “recent polls have shown the party’s lead fluctuate between as much as 17 percent and as little as six percent”).
Somebody, somewhere, seems to be putting a lot of top-spin on this poll which is bizarre given how volatile the overall picture has been recently.
It’s because the press (and press agencies) like uncertainty of outcome, so a close poll is always going to be more widely reported than a divergent one
“I think many lib dems will vote conservative to get rid of labour if Im right it could produce large swings the lib dems vote is down who is taking there vote”
Lib dem voters that know what they’re doing will hope for the situation that the polls are suggesting, at which point lib dems will hold all the cards.
I have a suggestion that I’m not sure people will make of. Wouldn’t it be better of sampling over 1,000 random people, to instead sample the same number but in chosen constituencies and to change these constituencies week by week? For example, 400 from Seat A, 400 from Seat B and 400 from Seat C? I say this because I see three major advantages: Firstly, It takes the currently undetactable ‘personal’ vote into account, which is a major factor in many seats and bucks national trends. Secondly, it would give us a more indepth understanding of those all-important marginals, in which the Tory lead is said to be greater, but of which we have no definitive proof. And, thirdly, it would be easier to spot a rogue set of results because of an identifiable cause i.e. A wing of a local hospital has been closed. From experience in local polling I can say that particularly in the North of England local issues take far greater precedence over national issues. There can be a psychological as well as an economic detachment from Westminster and the South, that polls do not adequately pick up on.
The big problem we seem to be having with the polls at the moment is that there are great fluctuations occuring for no apparent reason- For example, a tightening in the polls after the PBR when many were expecting an increased Tory lead.
Further to the impact of polls, we need to keep in mind who actually is influence.
We can all accept that the man/woman on the Clapham omnibus does not scrutinise and follow each poll as slavishly as us, sad,nerdy people. For him/her, polls register significantly either in an election period or for the impact the polls have on the commentariat in the media.
We are not in an election period quite yet.
For the ordinary voter, the polling impact is from how it is playing in the media coverage of the government. Which brings us back to a common theme on these message boards of the ’self-fulfilling’ poll boost.
i.e. a couple of polls which aid the government=media coverage of closing polls= media impression of government resurgence= Clapham man getting a better impression of closing polls= Clapham man likely to tell the pollster that the Government is doing better= a couple of polls which aid the government.
This is all well and good, but it continues to leave the Government at the mercy of events which can change the media trends in a matter of hours. The government gives the impression of being grateful for the breathing space without really knowing why either. Unless Labour’s operation takes a firmer hold of the news cycle, events (as they must) will blow the polls apart once again.
“One thing that stood out for me amongst Labour 2005 voters, 10% of them are either undecided or Don’t Know as opposed to 4% for the Tories. Labour could yet get them back.LD has in fact 12% Don’t Know but that is not surprising, eventually they will vote LD.
Page 9 of Com Res summary”
An informative comment from Surbiton, thanks.
This sheds light on Labour’s agreement to the TV debates. They’re likely hoping to persuade some Lab don’t knows; &/or that Nick Clegg’s inclusion will put Lab DKs into the LD camp, together with firming up LD’s own DKs.
The polls following the TV debates will be fascinating.
Not much change really with a Conservative average of 40% and Labour Average still below 30% this still points to a Conservative majority in May.
As I’ve said before this election more than any other will be decided by the English Marginals!
Con ~ 40-42
Lab ~ 28-30
LD ~ 18-20
Conservative Majority – 20-50
A lot of the commentary in the media seems to be around whether Cameron has ’sealed the deal’. All the recent polls, despite the swings, suggest that he has: or at least with 40% of the electorate. He can’t get much higher and he doesn’t go much lower.
The next election hinges less on the Tories and more on the extent to which Brown ‘heals the deal’ with the Labour electorate. The variations in the Labour polling seem consistent with an analysis that suggests that a proportion (perhaps 20%) of Blair-Labour voters really are swinging from Labour to don’t know depending upon current news agenda.
The Tories need to do three things to this constituency: 1) keep them out of the polling booths by making the Tories less monstrous to them, 2) get them to vote Labour in the south (pulling votes from Lib Dems), and 3) get them to vote Lib Dem in the North (pulling votes from Labour). A delicate political strategy indeed.
@ Cap’n Scooby
The mainstream media are pretty firmly against Labour. That’s another reason why Labour have agreed to the TV debates, I’d think.
Regarding events, here’s the 2 that I think will have a major effect on polling:
1. Employment figures – Lab don’t knows will forgive the deficit if it’s working & employment figures are static or better than forecast.
2. Ireland – If Ireland comes out of recession sooner &/or has better growth, then the mood will favour cuts in public spending.
Unless there’s a random, ‘personality’ type event that blindsides everybody, I think the above are the biggies.
In reply to South Londoner -
In my (far from brilliant) understanding of Polling Methodology, by picking specific areas you risk ending up with wildly unrepresentitive results. Randomness is the key – I believe (despite being 4 at the time) that the 1992 election was predicted so wrongly because random samples were not used. By being too specific as to where you poll, or who you poll, you warp the result. Granted, it would be useful to get opinions from the local area, but i don’t think you could do that by only polling that area.
I’m also not convinced you could easily identify the cause of a rogue poll, even if there has been a relativly major local incident/event that could be blamed, it would be very difficult to find a causal link between an event and a change in polling.
I believe Ireland has already come out of recession with the latest quarterly figures showing 0.4% growth. I do not think this will aid the hackers’n’slashers though. Ireland is suffering horribly for this anaemic growth, with enormous public sector unrest in the pipleine.
Figures released in the last week show that the number of those seeking jobseekers’ allowance has fallen for the first time in nearly two years and the unemployment rate showed its slowest quarterly increase in 18 months. Total unemployment figures are at around 2.8 million, well below the 3 million forecast last year by all the doomsayers.
To clarify, those employment figures relate to the UK not Ireland
Has there been a recent analysis of marginal constituencies or an indication that one is to be published soon? I’m just wondering why, when every poll is followed by the qualification “on a uniform swing,” that more emphasis isn’t given to uncovering what we can expect from marginal constituencies.
Surely a rigorous attempt at concluding whether a uniform swing is likely and to what extent is of more value than a string of wildly different topline figures?
The problem is that as you tighten the geographic area, the harder it is to get a random sample, and the bigger the sample error you get. And getting a large enough random sample of a single marginal seat would cost the poll taker as much, perhaps more, as doing a national poll.
You Gov have published one regional at the request of the newspaper publishing it, showing Conservatives would do well in northern Marginals, but haven’t repeated that again. And it’s hard to take anything from it, since it’s one poll, with a suspect sample size for the constituencies.
We did have a lot of local by-elections in marginals recently, which had Labour doing well, especially in London where they out-performed substantially. But Local Elections are not General Elections.
It’s be nice if we had finer grain regional polling, then we could do monte carlo simulations on a seat by seat basis to generate a much more accurate seat majority projection. But that’s unlikely to happen since we don’t get reliable fine-grain regional information.
If you have ever used one of the electronic swingometers you can see how floored they are if you say Labour have 0% votes somehow they still get a few seats lol I think anything about 5% will give the tories a small majority.
@Jay. How do you get an R2 of .81?? What do you take and over what time period?
Anthony: Reading the idiotic commentary in the Independent I wonder if we could go to the PCC and get them to ban innumerate journalists who should know better. The massive innumeracy of the Great British Public is a serious enough problem, and journos should not be wilfilly making it worse.
Labour puts drunks and druggies on incapcity benifits even though there unemployed. The inactive rate is about 8 Million the highest it’s ever been.
@TOME
Thank you for your reply. I’m an amateur at this but just wanted to hear some of the criticisms to the idea, which I’m sure has been thought of before.
I should have made it clearer, though, that I would combine the results of seats A, B & C to iron out local prejudices, which would hopefully make the poll more representative. Obviously, the more constituencies covered the more reliable the results would be too.
@NBeal
MMA, 10 poll recent window, trend generated over the time period of the last 20 polls. And I don’t use Angus Reid’s poll results, since I don’t consider them a true voter intention poll.
@ Cap’n Scooby
Thanks for the update on Ireland; apparently the 0.4% growth needs to be revised downwards as being attributable to Multi-Nationals electing to be taxed in Ireland.
If the latest employment numbers don’t deteriorate post X-mas; & if they are widely reported, I’d expect to see Lab improvement trend sustaining.
I really see those numbers as being key to getting Lab influencing ‘don’t knows’.
@ Paul B
Your comments on UK unemployment have zero to do with polling outcomes/ predictions.
@ NBeale
I thought the detailed commentary in the Independent was interesting especially the analyses by age, gender & ABC etc groupings.
What did you find idiotic about the commentary? Are there conclusions that don’t align with the actual polling data?
What’s going on with the weightings for the site’s average?
there’s nothing more entertaining that reading all of the “experts” here back- tracking and flip-flopping when polls with different readings come out.
All the reasoning done here is in hindsight.
Flippety-flop…………………….
I think how labour rewards the underclass and bankers for being useless and wreckless has a lot to do with voting intention as well as how many teachers are assaulted by pupils
@ Bert, AFAIK there’s only 1 expert here, most of the rest of us know as little as you.
Those interested in trying to work out what unemployment ’should’ be….difficult considering changing cultures of, e.g. the critically endangered housewife…may want to have a poke around here
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/STATBASE/tsdataset.asp?vlnk=429&More=N&All=Y
@ Cap’n Scooby
I agree on employment figures importance in shoring up Labour figures and would add moderate growth (2-6% annual) in house prices as another factor that will assist that process. Both (if positive) will narrow the 8-13% Conservative lead we currently see between now and the election.
But Ireland ???!!!
Ireland will have absolutely zero impact on this UK general election- either people (the vast majority) are utterly disinterested in what goes on over there or- if knowledgeable- implicitly understand that to try and compare Ireland and UK is ‘nonsense on stilts’ !
Compare Ireland with Iceland or Latvia. Have an acceptable comparative methodology.
The nature of our economy and our tax system and our society is totally different from Ireland. Their version of arthur daley tax haven construction flotsam based “Celtic tiger boom” does not have the industrial, financial sector (having been saved by the public sector) foundation that we have nor the entrepreneurial infrastructure nor status as (i.e. London) world-global city no matter how hard Dublin tried for the last 20 years.
The Irish HAVE to cut drastically- in large part because their boom times largesse significantly outstrips in its irresponsibility what has happened in the UK- but mainly because they are a tiny country/ economy locked into the Eurozone and with very little alternative functioning economic base to replace the capacity destroyed in last 3 years. If they don’t they’ll do a Greece, Latvia or Iceland.
UK is so important to global financial system that credit down-ratings/ refusal to fund sovereign debt etc etc will not happen to UK despite the loud public politicking of certain ‘businessmen’ and journalists (archetype being Jeff Randall and his chums).
Anthony,
Might it be possible to bring the tables up to date with the last 3, possibly 4 polls, prior to Christmas.
Paul: There’s a lot I could say about that comment, but I’ll settle for pointing out that it’s hard to call bankers ‘wreckless’. They wrecked the economy pretty well, after all…
Jamie – I think there’s a typo in the database that has buggered up the calculations. I’m trying to correct it, but I can’t access it properly from work so it may have to wait for tonight (edit – nope, can’t get onto it now, so I’ll correct it later).
Barry P – it is a knock-on effect from the error Jamie noticed. It should sort itself out when I fix the database problem.
In my opinion Paul you should stop talking twaddle & concentrate on the polls rather than air your prejudices in the way you do. It’s totally subjective & you should show some respect for other points of view as most others here do.
Jamie/Barry – Hurrah, managed it. All should be sweetness and light once again.
@ Anthony Wells.
Unless I am getting a false screen view here, the polls of YouGov and Mori prior to ComRes are not showing.
Anthony.
Solved it. Cache memory needed deleting, things fine now. Must have been playing at silly beggars.
My formula for forecasting the most likely general election result is to see what YouGov were saying at this stage of the previous Parliament (December 2004), how the figures compared with the subsequent general election, and add the differences on to what YouGov are saying now.
I choose YouGov as they were the most accurate (except NOP which doesn’t seem to do regular polling anymore).
Therefore my current prediction is;
C 41, Lab 29, LD 18, Oth 11
C 346
Lab 232
LD 42
Oth 11
C overall majority: 42
That would be based on a uniform swing, so I it’s probable the overall majority will be rather higher. I know it’s not a perfect formula but I am open to better suggestions.
My LibDem percentage should have been 19.
Andrew
I wouldn’t go so far as to say that uniform swing has had its day (except as far as Scotland in GB is concerned), but it does seem, currently, to be misleading.
The change in the English Midlands does seem to have been around for some time now, and may well be significant. The differential performance of the LDs in their traditional strongholds as against LDs in commuter belts may well be influential as well. Unfortunately, the polls don’t give sufficient data to remodel your predictions!
I still think there has been a recovery in the labour poll ratings in the last few months, but I believe that there is still some suspension of judgement on the goverment – and only when the recession is declared over will there be any permanent movement. It seems like the polls are there for labour to narrow rather than the tories to extend. I think the tories have definitely peaked in thier popularity.
I agree with Philip Williams. I think people have got thoroughly fed up with the constant mud slinging directed towards Brown & Darling, much of it totally unjustified. I think the turning point was the Sun’s scurrilous attack on Brown for the letter to Mrs Janes. The government is beginning to attract support for their doggedness in the face of this continuous abuse.
The economy is almost certainly recovering, and it would appear that Brown & Darling have been doing the right thing all along.
@ Philip Williams
“I still think there has been a recovery in the labour poll ratings in the last few months,……”
Can you please explain over what period you base this ‘recovery’.
Martin Williams
‘The economy is almost certainly recovering, and it would appear that Brown & Darling have been doing the right thing all along’.
I would be surprised if many voters would agree with that, seeing that UK is slowest to recover, although darling can hardly be blamed. He arrived after the horses had bolted.
I always reckoned that the biblical Joseph was using plain common sense when he advised that one should save in the time of plenty ready for the downturn. It is strange that GB with his background
was so caught out.
I agree that negative campaigning is wrong, and if the Sun continues ‘nasty’ campaigning then the Tories will suffer.
The media is odd at the moment, with the Sun saying they support the Tories and then damaging them, the Mail attacking David Cameron at every opportunity, and the Guardian almost seeming to prefer DC over GB. Only the Mirror remains true to its roots.
@ Rob Sheffield
Re Ireland – Actually, I raised the point. Cap’n Scooby was simply responding to me.
I think Ireland’s progress will matter. If its economy begins to show improvement, I believe the Conservatives will use it to say that public sector cuts work & vice versa for Lab.
When it’s used in that way, I believe it will influence people’s perceptions re whether to slash public spending or simply freeze it at current level & allow increasing income to reduce the deficit.
COMRES asked a question about the economy, cuts etc in their latest poll. This showed Con & Lab with the same rating; each will keenly be seeking evidence to support their strategy.
Some voters will know that UK & Ireland are comparing apples & oranges; but as our closest neighbour, I think they’ll be considered a valid comparison point for ‘ordinary’ voters.
One question in this poll seems to have gone unnoticed. 55% of voters agree that ‘the threshold for paying inheritance tax should be raised to £1 million’, against 38% who disagree.
A point I made on my (new) blog is that this is pretty low when you think Labour is trying to use the IHT pledge as a dividing line. And yes, this is a shameless plug and advert
@ bert
there’s nothing more entertaining that reading all of the “experts” here back- tracking and flip-flopping when polls with different readings come out.
All the reasoning done here is in hindsight.
Flippety-flop…………………….
—————–
Showing some ignorance there.
All Sciences work in this fashion.
Theories are proposed. Evidence gathered. Theories modified.
All of the posters on this blog – regardless of their political persuasion – are acting in that fashion. And correctly so.
If you don’t like people talking about polls and extrapolating information from them, you need to go elsewhere.
David in France,
I thoroughly agree. If you can’t modify your opinion based on new information then you will end up stuck in the past.
David in France
I wouldn’t go so far as to dignify our necromantic endeavours as a “science”, but I agree with your sentiments.
Actually, Science is about observing something, then *making a prediction* you can test, and testing that prediction.
Jay Blanc
Science is a little more than that. It’s not just making a prediction, but explaining the hypothesis underlying that prediction – and that means testing the validity of the hypothesis by repeated experiments, under controlled conditions.
The conditions in our area of study can’t be controlled, and circumstances never repeat exactly.
@Amber: What’s idiotic is that these polls have a 5% margin of error on the CLead, and an even higher margin of error on any of the breakdowns. That a ComRes poll moves from a CLead of 17% to 9% does not necessarily tell us anything about the underlying shift of opinion, it could all be down to sampling error.
And the statements about the sub-samples are even more prone to error. The paper talks about the opinions of the AB and DE social groups but there are only c250 in each sample so the MoE will be roughly 10%.
In response to Barry B;
I think after the party conferences, where Labour seemed to come out of it better than most expected and the tories didnt manage to create the ‘government in waiting’ impression they were hoping for. Also the tory proposal to effectively give a pay to cut to the majority of public sector workers and the age of austerity talk. The class war tactics coupled with the inheritance tax cut ‘benefitting the few not the many’ argument seems to have re-energised the core labour vote eating into an opposition poll lead which very rarely stays above 40.
@ NBeale
Thanks for the response.
@ All readers
Would anybody dispute that conclusions drawn from a sample of 250 will be unreliable to the tune of
+/-10%?
@ Philip Williams
“I still think there has been a recovery in the labour poll ratings in the last few months…”
“I think after the party conferences, where Labour seemed to come out of it better than most ….”
Party conferences ended on the 8th October. So, taking all polls from the 8th October a straight line trend of labour support is downward, albeit minimal, but, it is downward.
Having said that, so it Tory support
@ all members
I have only particiapted in this blog for a few weeks but, I have found in that short time it stimulating and thought provoking. Doubdtful after this morning if I will be able tofollow threads over the Christmas period so, an early thanks to everybody of all political allegiances and hope you all have a Happy Christmas and Propserous New Year
Barry
Barry
Perhaps party conferences are a turn-off. Politicians are like 14 year olds. Ok on their own but unpleasant in gangs.
I agree with you it’s a fascinating site. Presented with identical information, apparentlyy educated people can draw diametrically opposed opinions. And get quite hot under the collar too!
Happy Christmas to you too!
@ BARRY P
“Can you please explain over what period you base this ‘recovery’.”
If you stand back a little it is pretty obvious.
I use Anthony’s post 2005 graph more & more as a guide. The recent wide variations in the Polls are incomprehensible to me-as is much of the so called explanation of them.
The Graph filters out all the short term stuff & allows you to see the wood for the trees.
My take on the trend prtrayed is :-
After a steady decline post 2005GE, Brown’s leadership produced the first of three reversals in that long term Labour downward trend.It put the Tory long term climb post 2005 into reverse….but it had all disappeared by end 2007.
Labour reversed the long term trends of Con gain/Lab fall for the second time towards the end of 2008.
For the second time it was not sustained & had disappeared within the first few months of 2009.
The summer collapse in support for both parties following the Expenses disclosures was followed by recovery for both parties:- For the Tories to a narrow oscillation about a mid point of 40%-for Labour a steady gain of 10 %points . narrowing the Tory lead.
The big question now for Labour is whether this third major reversal of the long term post 2005GE decline will sustain-or collapse like it’s two predecessors.
The Tories seem to have waved goodby to the heady days of 45% and settled into a steady 40% mid point.
Are the TV debates going to give Cameron the means with which to retrieve 45% -or will something happen to chip away at 40% just when Labour are clawing their way back?
@P WILLIAMS
The thing about making derisory remarks regarding the Conservative Party and their 40 % is that it is far more solid than Labour’s chance of hitting 30%.
These assertions about “the Tory vote peaking” is just opinion and biased opinion at that. Its all very well hateing the the Tory Party but either you wish to keep abreast of the polling situation, or you just want to pretend Labour are actually winning.
At the present time that is not happening.
I’d rather be peaking at 40% than struggling to get 30%.
Of course I’d much rather be on 100%
Well to get 100% you’d have to kill me first.
For those who wish to discuss Irish politics, its a free country.
However, it will have zero impact on the UK GE. Mr Gladstone
spent far to long worrying about the Irish Question when he should have concerned himself with Britains decline and Germany and the US riseing in the world. We have plenty of worries of our own once again.
Although in Gladstone’s defence, Ireland was a full part of the union and her choice of MPs was very relevant to him at the time…….. /pedant off
@ Colin.
I can’t understand what all your coments are about. Philip Williams said, and I quote “….in the last few months…” So, what has 2005 got to do with this argument?
“….towards the end of 2008″. What has this got to do with the last few months.
“…first few months of 2009″ See as above.
If you feel obliged to pass comment on one of my questions to another member, please try to ensure you are at least commenting on the question in hand not, a broad spectrum of over 4 years, but a ‘few’ months as in my question.
If I wanted to know the ’swings and roundabouts’ of the last 5 years of this government, that is the question I would have asked.
@ Barry-”If you feel obliged to pass comment on one of my questions to another member,”
I will certainly try to curb the desire in future Barry.
Happy Christmas.
In response to Roland Haines;
I certainly dont think the comments I made about the Conservative party were ‘derisory.’ I think any informed political observer will be aware that for a swing necessary to assure a even a tiny Tory majority they need to be consistently polling in the 40s. Taking into account the bias of the electoral system in Labours favour I think my comment was an entirely fair and objective one to make.
And Happy Christmas and New Year Wishes to you Colin.
Here’s hoping the run up to the GE is as interesting as it suggests it could be.
Barry
In response to Barry P,
I think it all comes down to how you interpret the polling data. It is true that after the conferences there wasnt some very noticable gain in the labour vote, but i think as the dust has settled people are scrutinizing the tory proposals more. The electorate are more aware of the Tory proposals and the conferences would have been part of the process of bringing the issues to their minds. I also think that the conferences served to informally in a way start the firing gun for the GE a trend which is obviously going to continue, and voters are thinking more objectively about who they want to form the next goverment as opposed to merely indicating a protest vote. Having said that it may be the case that the majority find favour in tory proposals, but at this stage, with an average lead or around 11 points – there hasnt been a full endorsement of the Tories yet.
I would be surprised if it was not a tory landslide. Why is this blog not representive of the polls it seems you just have desprate Labour voters on here.
Twaddle i have two degrees and I also know that there is no such thing as a representitive 1000 people in 40million or so people. It’s common sense verses mathematical assumptions which do not relate to reality.
Paul B
I’m always suspicious of those who claim that having the same number of degrees as me (though I’ll raise you a couple of diplomas!
) means that they know anything at all. I’ve done far more learning on this site from those who have fewer, less or more degrees than me.
No Paul. You read the threads on the constituencies and you’ll find no shortage of Tories there.
As for me, I am a Labour voter but don’t describe nyself as desperate!
Partisan comment is deplored here but partisan over-optimisim is also a problem on this site. I’d like to hear from pessimists/realists. Perhaps there are very few because they don’t join parties or are unwelcome.
Its entirely possible that the election result will disappoint every party.
“partisan over-optimisim”
I have observed three schools of thought:
a) I am so perceptive that I know exactly where public opinion lies, and the polls support my perceptiveness.
b) I am so perceptive that I know exactly where public opinion lies, and the polls are plainly wrong.
c) I know all polls are rubbish yet I am peculiarly drawn to post on a polls discussion forum.
Thank you Anthony for your fascinating site, and happy holidays everyone!
Shop rents are due tomorrow. It will be interesting to see if any big names bite the dust.
Been an interesting year. I look forward to the freneticism of the New Year, when we’ll have polling materials and “big moments” coming out our ears.
A Merry Christmas/ Happy Chanukah/ Joyful Eid el-Mubarak/ Fertile Feast of Mithras, and a peaceful Midwinter Festival to all our readers.
Paul B
What a odd comment – taking into account this web site is about discussing facts in an unpartisan way, and not what we want to happen.
I’d be amazed if it was a land slide, based on polls. Labour seem to have a core support that would avoid that.
Partisan over-optimism I feel. If anything, for me, the polls are too generous to the tories.
The 9-17 Labour range to me is a bit worrying for the tories.
It probably reflects an electorate that is still in “protest” mode. As in, wanting to vote someone out, rather than really wanting the opposition in.
In my opinion, in my experience, a big chunk of that tory “support” could well vanish on polling day.
I’d say that the 9-10 lead we’ve seen over the last month or so is probably more reflective than the 13-16.
Just on the basis that I don’t think mistrust in a government is enough unless the opposition do a good job as well
“The cons won by a majority of 21 or so in 1992 and only had 7% lead and now boundarys have changed to favour the tories so surely they should get about a 50 seat majority if they had a 9% lead”
You have it wrong. The boundaries have changed in such a way that they’ll need even more support to gain seats.
It’s why Cameron wants to cut the number of MPs by 35. I’d imagine the 35 unlucky people would just be ditched to favour the tory party in future elections.
I think a 9 point poll lead would actually be a majority of about 5 these days. Maybe even hung.
I think they’d need at least 11-12 to even be safe of getting a majority.
If your talking a good majority (50+) I’d say they’d maybe even need 15+ to be safe.
You have to remember that these polls could well be 5 points off! They are done with a margin of error
“So labour voters move but tory voters dont what a load of rubbish your telling Me that you know where people move ? The only way you could be right is if the government has planted voters In places”
It’s not that at all. You are talking about all types of social progression.
Economic immigration hitting areas like Newcastle in the 1970s isn’t going to change their voting habits. It will strengthen it.
Areas around London, Midlands, South coast these days are a lot more multi cultural now than they were in the tories prime.
Not to get too partisan, but immigration, and multi culturism hurts the tories in regards to power.
The more multi cultural, multi religion, the country gets, the harder the tories will find it to win elections.
It’s why the tories want a tougher stance on it. And Labour generally follow the European model, and promote open border economic immigration.
The tory strongholds are generally middle class, white areas. When these areas (especially around London) start changing from that, they struggle to keep them.
Take London as an example. I’d suggest the tories will struggle greatly in the capital, no matter how bad Labour are.
I may be wrong, but they used to dominate London until the 1980s
“I think many lib dems will vote conservative to get rid of labour if Im right it could produce large swings the lib dems vote is down who is taking there vote?”
You are way way way off. There has been next to no Lib Dem to Tory swing in the polls.
The swing has been Lib Dem to Labour. Labour have benefited greatly from Lib Dem support in polls over the last year.
The tories are doing well, but there main problem (as in getting a decent majority) has come from their inability to attract Lib Dem and core Labour vote.
Blair won a landslide as he did both. He destroyed the tories core support. As well as attracting Lib Dems in huge numbers.
“The next election hinges less on the Tories and more on the extent to which Brown ‘heals the deal’ with the Labour electorate. The variations in the Labour polling seem consistent with an analysis that suggests that a proportion (perhaps 20%) of Blair-Labour voters really are swinging from Labour to don’t know depending upon current news agend”
Cameron’s problem is the fact that 10-15% of Labour support is still in the “undecided” category. They haven’t made the move yet.
The recent poll trends could just be showing them heading back.
Not that Brown has won them back, but Cameron hasn’t done enough at the other end.
Labour’s success in the election will be decided on how their core support votes.
Said it many many times on here. Don’t underestimate how hard it is for Labour voters to vote tory.
There is still a heck of a lot of hate of Thatcher and Major.
“If you have ever used one of the electronic swingometers you can see how floored they are if you say Labour have 0% votes somehow they still get a few seats lol I think anything about 5% will give the tories a small majority.”
Not a chance. The tories could possibly lose on 5%. In fact they’d more than likely lose the election if that polling was accurate.
To even get a 5 seat majority, they’ll need 8 or 9% lead. To guarentee even the smallest majority, I’d say they will need 10%
“Why is this poll in particular being spun so much? The BBC picked it out in their first paper review of the morning on the Today programme, and Reuters UK site has the headline “Conservatives poll lead at 6-month low” (although it should be said that the article is not internally consistent, since it concludes with the sentence “recent polls have shown the party’s lead fluctuate between as much as 17 percent and as little as six percent”).
Somebody, somewhere, seems to be putting a lot of top-spin on this poll which is bizarre given how volatile the overall picture has been recently.”
——————————————————————————–
It works both ways. Sky News generally only ever cover polls if it shows an increased tory lead.
The BBC to be fair, generally cover both increases and falls in tory support/
The tories are actually benefitting from poll spinning to be honest.
Some of the coverage of polls in the press is quite mystifying.
I quote the Guardians poll last month, when tory lead fell from 12 points to 9.
Their headline “Cameron seals the deal with voters”. On the basis that his personal rating went up by about 1 point.
Totally ignoring that voting intention had dropped by 3!
I was quite mystified by that one. Especially as the guardian is often thought of as a left wing paper
Shows how loyalty in the press (other than the mail and mirror) generally last as long as you are the one in power, setting the media laws!
@ SHOPKEEPER MAN
May I suggest d) for addition to your list:-
“I don’t understand what the Polls are saying about Labour support recently & I can’t wait for the General Election to find out.”
This talk of bias in the system always intrigues me ! Isn’t there a Boundary Commission that sorts these things out.
Has anybody thought that Labour supporters vote more intelligently ? In Richmond, Surrey , for example, I can assure you Labour support is more than 10%. But over many elections they have learnt that voting Labour in their seat would be a waste of a vote. Hence, they vote LD. Same here in Surbiton.
What is the point of coming a good second 15% behind ? Like the entire Tory vote in Scotland.
The Labour vote is more efficiently distributed. Simple.
PAUL B
“Why is this blog not representive of the polls it seems you just have desprate Labour voters on here.”
Why do you ask this?
Surely, such posters are no more “Desperate” as you put it, than Conservative Supporting commentators on the Site who are advocating equally persuasive arguments?
I have to say, hopefully without being too Partisan, that given the fact that the UK is emerging from one of the worst economic recessions it has known since the 1930’s, that the Conservatives Should Be Polling Considerably More Than 38% in the Polls.
Surely both Labour, the Conservatives and the Lib Dems need their “Core Voters” as well as their “Swing Voters” to be motivated to turnout on Election Day in order to win the “Key Marginal Seats”?
Where does Labour see its core vote? I would have thought universities would be core so I’m surprised Labour have announced such large ( for them ) cuts.
@Wolf
The student vote is impossible to chase effectively. Very few students are kindly disposed to this government due to Iraq, top up fees and the loans fiasco.
It is impossible to gauge how many students operate a postal vote in home constituencies, and many simply don’t vote at all. Whilst not irrelevant, the student vote is at best marginally important.
‘WOLF
Where does Labour see its core vote? I would have thought universities would be core so I’m surprised Labour have announced such large ( for them ) cuts.’
but students dont vote.
I like comparative politics; without offering a candle to Labour it is worth noting that much of the western world is in the same problem we are (albeit to a slightly lesser degree). I argue that the problem we have is caused by labour espousing Tory economic free market policies (privatise!). I certainly think we’d be in much the same problem if the tories had been in power; both followed silly excessive freemarket policies (like the USA) and have paid the penalties.
And which economy didnt; China. Which is the new strongest economy? Guess… (And Abu DHabi…)
‘NORTHAMPTON JAMES
PAUL B
“Why is this blog not representive of the polls it seems you just have desprate Labour voters on here.”’
Would say that overall the vast majority of emails here are pro-tory; often extremely so (rural rump / UKIP / BNP). This site has a handful of party faithful from other parties and a handful from ‘none of the above’ would be my view after having read this site for a couple of years.
I would never view this site as pro–Labour. In fact the amount of slurs (’ooooooh it’s a Guardian reader’ worthy of a Tory Panto…) against anyone who does not follow tory lines gets annoying…
(Reason 60001 not to vote tory in the coming election; they are actually bothering with a free vote on retracting the anti-hunting bill. At this point of the economic disaster dont we have more important things to worry about than returning rural England to an historic theme park?)
I had a poke around with UNS and the total share of the vote from 1979 to 2005, and how the projections compared to the actual seats.
It looks like whoever wins gains 20-25 seats over the UNS projection (lowest 10 (2005), highest 38 (1983)).
I can’t say why this is, but I really think that the chances of a hung Parliament are much slimmer than newspapers like to think so that they can create a lot of copy…
@ Wolf
Unis might be a core vote for Labour, notwithstanding what I’ve seen in my own university, but they rarely vote (something like half as likely to vote as over-55s and half as many of them).
@ Jack
Your claim about the BNP and UKIP being “tory rump” are not substantiated by the polling data.
Look at where BNP votes come from; white, young, class DE males in the North-West of England and industrial towns? Not exactly a hotbed of Thatcherite neo-liberals, methinks…
Rod Crosby wrote an interesting article for PoliticalBetting in April 2008 which explains why it’s unlikely that regional differences will give the Tories more than a 5 seat bonus:
http://tinyurl.com/yama6xp
Colin
Having read the last twenty or so posts, I’m adding;
e) If I start any point with the words “I’m not being partisan but” it automatically makes the rest of the paragraph wholly balanced, regardless of what words I choose to put in the said paragraph. Fact.
There is nothing more fascinating then a lack of self-awareness.
On your more substantive point about Labour’s recovery, it is there for all to see. However overall it has been a poor 2009. The tories are pretty much where they started in January, despite mix-ups on european referenda, austerity and duck houses. Libdems have advanced very slightly. Labour are down a few points on the second Brown bounce.
I feel Brown has promised more than he’s delivered, twice. Firstly he promised us a vision in 2007 and if we got one, it wasn’t hugely visible. Then he promised more than he could realistically deliver on the economy in late 2008. Both bounces were accompanied by tory wobbles, firstly on grammar schools as I remember, then in late 2008 they were (presentationally, at least) all at sea regarding the financial crisis. I think this latest Brown bounce has been more to do with tory wobbles (austerity, europe) than any particular promise from Brown, hence the bounce has been less pronounced.
I think there is plenty of scope for better economic news to give Brown a boost on his own. Should that be accompanied by another tory wobble, then things will get interesting. However the tories have been remarkably consistent of late, suggesting to me that they have sealed the deal with at least 37-8% of the electorate – not quite enough, but formidable. We’re reasonably sure that, even in a bad year, the tories are good for 30+% and Cameron is more popular than Hague or Howard, so we should be able to add a few on to that.
The debates will be interesting. Conventional wisdom has it that Cameron is the one with all to lose, but luckily he’s reasonably good on camera. Could go either way. Clegg’s performance will add a third dimension, at present he’s not well known.
Also it would seem for the first time in a GE that incumbency is an encumbrance. As Labour have the most incumbents, they may get the backlash from the expenses fiasco. If ever there was a time to be a PPC rather than a sitting MP, 2009 surely is it.
I’m sure we can all agree that this is the most interesting (in terms of uncertainty) GE since 1992 if not further back The economic environment makes it feel more like the 1970s in many ways and the uncertainty regarding the GE reflects a 1970s feel too.
Time for bed. Goodnight all.
Clearly, the polls are not producing any pattern in voting. This coming GE could be the end of the current way of polling, as no one seems to have a clue of the size of Cameron’s majority.
Re the site, it has changed in the last 3 months.
As an open Labour Party member there was a time 6-9 months ago when I was in a very small minority trying to seeks crumbs of comfort, straw clutching etc.
The poster population is more balanced now but Labour leaning (and in my view over optimistic) posts have been more frequent.
King Harold must be on holiday as he redresses the balance (may be tips it) on his own.
As a labour party member you would expect me to be critical of Cameron but I have to try to place myself in the mind of a swing voter – not easy.
So when I say that I think Cameron lacks depth and Osborne is unimpressive and that as the GE approaches this will cost the cons support, am I being partisan and over optimistic or realistic.
Like Old Nat I have learnt a great deal from this site in 2 years or so and enjoy reading alternative opinions/analysis and now feel I have develop less subjectivity in my analysis.
So in an attempt to give a real Labour view, here goes.
GB unpopular and much core vote feel let down by Labour.
Whilst their is a debate aroundfiscal stimulus the Governments actions have credibility and the timing of the debt reduction is a genuine difference between the parties that will energise some disappointed former labour support.
Cameron is not particularyly convinciung but he presents well generally and this will probably be enough to see him home as ‘Time for a change’ will resonate.
Osborne is a liability (Conservative friends of mine agree) and any victroy will be in spite of him.
Therefore, whilst I believe we will get a ‘79 type result (adjusted for Nats and LD growth) with a working con majoity there is still scope (hope if you like) that the Labour (and LD in their inTory targets) vote will hold up enouigh to deny cameron an outright majority.
I only started using this site since the glasgow north east by-election. Since then I have found the opinion generally informed and interesting.
I would (also with my two degrees ‘OLDNAT’) like to wish you all the very best of the seasons greetings whichever party you support and look forward to the continued detailed observation of the polls in the new year.
Merry Christmas.
I don’t really know why the Conservatives have agreed to the debates including the Lib Dems. Without them, it made a certain amount of sense, as Cameron has more charisma that Brown… But with the Lib Dems it’s giving them free publicity, legitimising them as potential winners, and gives Clegg a podium. And Clegg is just as charismatic, perhaps more so, than Cameron.
The Lib Dems pick up after any publicity, as people remember they exist. Reminding people there’s an alternative anti-government vote is the worst thing the Conservatives could have done. And they don’t have an anti-Lib-Dem strategy, concentrating instead on attacking the government.
And there is significant risk here… Every point that the Lib Dems gains increases the lead over Labour needs. And there’s a tipping point at which the Lib Dems eat so much into conservative marginals that even with a lead in the national vote the largest party would be Labour.
Most interesting detail in this poll.a majority of respondents don’t think that the Tories are a good alternative to Labour.This could develop into a better the devil you know situation next May.
@Jay Blanc
Agreed.
A three-way TV debate is actually a real potential threat to Cameron as by the time it happens Clegg will know (if he does not already) that he has to concentrate his fire mainly at the Tories- both in terms of the electoral map/ math and also in terms of the key issue. That is of course the ‘economy stoopid’ where LD’s are much closer to Lab on need to phase in cuts as opposed to economically extreme crash-bang-wallop austerity medicine of Camerborne which many leading economists proclaim will acquire the UK a ‘double-dip’ in fast measure.
A Brown Vs Cameron match up held much less danger for Cameron but he rather idiotically boxed himself in by demanding a full 3-way debate in the immediate aftermath of being elected leader when Tories were behind or in a tiny lead (if I recall “cowardly labour” ,”undemocratic”, “authoritarian”blah blah blah ad nauseam).
I’d also like to see a Darling Vs Osborne Vs Cable debate as well…one can only imagine there being a single catastrophic loser in that debate…!
It’s not impossible that Brown and Cameron will do a great job of destroying each other during the debates, but forgetting that there’s a third person there who’ll come out looking like the victor.
@Richard Manns
“Your claim about the BNP and UKIP being “Tory rump” are not substantiated by the polling data. Look at where BNP votes come from; white, young, class DE males in the North-West of England and industrial towns? Not exactly a hotbed of Thatcherite neo-liberals, methinks…”
Despite introducing this as a retort to BNP/ UKIP being ‘Tories’ you then only deal with the former !!
UKIP voters are predominantly rural, shire, county and suburban and heavily concentrated in south east. south west and east of England though healthily represented elsewhere also.
UKIP voters are-by vast majority- natural Tories.
One of the fascinating elements of the upcoming election is going to be just how much of the Tory vote leeches to UKIP as that could seriously reduce possibility of Tory overall majority.
On BNP I agree totally: main caveat though is that these are not lost labour votes in the sense that BNP voters are not- for the large part- previous labour voters. No- they are lost potential votes in the sense that these C2 DE white male under 35’s will never have voted once before in their entire lives. Sure in the past they would have been natural labour constituency: but their votes are not lost to Labour in the way that UKIP votes are by a heavy majority lost to the Tories. UKIP voters will predominantly have voted before and they will have predominantly voted Conservative.
The UKIP impact on the Tory vote is much more significant than the BNP vote on Labour.
Labour actually has more to fear from the Green Party at the next election (as do the left fringe of the Lib Dems). Due to war, environment, public sector paying cost for bailing out the bankers, strong approach to controlled migration etc the ‘middle class lefties’ have all deserted Labour- some for Lib Dems but most for the Green party.
The greens are to labour what UKIP is to the Tories.
Rob Sheffield
While I recognise that most posters here are talking about the English political system (and probably drawing a lot of conclusions from behaviour in the South and Midlands), it’s worth while remembering that many inferences don’t apply north of the Border.
Here the polls suggest that the Tories are not seen as likely to be a good government for Scotland – even by 20% of those who will vote Tory for the Scottish Parliament!
It will be interesting to see how many Scottish Green Party candidates stand for Westminster. Currently they put up no candidates for the FPTP seats at Holyrood – selecting to stand only for the list seats. They are no significant threat to Labour here, but dependent on the dynamics of individual seats, what you describe as the ‘middle class lefties’ (who are probably very centrist in Scotland) are likely to vote tactically for the most electable non-Tory, whether SNP, Labour or LD.
@OLNAT
My analysis is for England.
That is where UK general elections are won and lost.
That will be even more so the case after the next GE as -whoever is in- the government will not be able to resist the pressure for a more equitable central-local financial settlement (than the Barnett formula) and for the reduction of the number Scotts/ Welsh and Ulster seats for the UK parliament.
As I have mentioned before UKIP will hold their noses and vote tory. As an outed tory I know many who voted for UKIP and without exception they are not even going to “not vote”. They are terrified by the possibility of a hung Parliment with the thought of a LIB/LAB pact and what it will do to there European ambitions. I am afraid I do not know of a single BMP member, and I cannot believe they could eminate from the tory fold.
@glen Otto
Cameron already betrayed them on Europe and furthermore will have to tack back to the centre (as Indie editorial suggested the other day) between now and the election to actually have a chance of winning a workable majority (i.e. 12+ to give him a four year opportunity before By-Elections take his majority away).
Both these elements (and the final tepid light blue nature of the Conservative election manifesto) will put off the majority of the UKIP supporters from doing what you assert.
The key question is: do they vote against the Conservatives in all the hundreds of constituencies where they are standing against them? Or do they sit on their hands. The former will be a huge problem for the Conservatives.
You seem to be praying for/ relying upon a ‘1997 scenario’. This is *not* a 1997scenario when a lot of the far left (vis-a-vis groups like GROT) voted for a single time for Labour. There is no supra-Conservative major emotion for ‘getting rid of them’. There is no supra-Conservative great enthusiasm for the Conservatives as a alternative government. The small parties are going to be crucial in this coming election.
I think you are completely wrong on this one.
Rob Sheffield
As I indicated, my guess was that you were arguing from an English perspective, but you did not make that clear initially.
I’m interested in your assertion that there will be a further reduction in the number of Scots MPs (other than a proportionate reduction if Cameron reduces the total number).
It would be odd if that happened if Labour managed to hang on – as you suggest. If they do, then 2010 will be one of those very few election years in which a tranche of Scottish Labour MPs actually do allow that to happen. That would, of course, invalidate your second sentence.
Such a reduction would, however, be reasonable if Scotland gained fiscal autonomy under revised financial arrangements.
A couple of points re the TV “debates”.
First, the format has not yet been decided as I read it. ie Whether questions will be ad hoc from the audience, or via the Chair-or from the Chair with no audience participation.
The three sessions are to be themed-but the subject areas are not yet decided.
All of these matters can favour one or the other of the three participants & enhance or reduce the element of inter-play between them.
I see Cameron’s open sessions with live audiences around the country as good grounding for full audience participation. Brown on the other hand might be happier with prepared questions on known policy areas where his love of detail & numbers can be used.
Second, I believe that the effect of these sessions on the TV audience will be as much about how the participants say things & conduct themselves, as about what they say.
@ Rob Sheffield
I am sorry you could not be more wrong. UKIP hopes to dislodge the speaker to make a point. You obviously do not know any UKIP supporters. They are not looking back at the past. They are looking forward and see the tory party as the best way of positioning on Europe. They are also, as a party broke.
@ GLEN OTTO
I think you must be correct re UKIP.
What does any UKIP supporter gain by putting Labour back in?
LIbDems have the most slavishly pro EU attitudes.
Brown has just allowed himself to be outthought & outmanoeuvred by the Sarkozi / Merkel axis on post Lisbon appointments.As a result our influence has been reduced.
To vote for either of these parties would seem to be self defeating madness for a UKIP supporter.
At least with Cameron there is the feel of Euro Scepticism, which might be used to stem the tide .
@glenn otto
you sound as if you believe you know every UKIP voter in the country! I think you are generalising from your own circle of- I am guessing- UKIP members (as opposed to voters).
As said, Cameron has already stabbed the UK Eurosceptic voter in the back on the issue of a referendum and the mood music on Europe in the run up to the election will- as with other areas of policy- tack back towards the centre. There are no positives for Cameron in chasing the right wing fringe as all elections are won in the centre ground.
UKIP are standing in hundreds of constituencies not just against the speakers- where (by the way) an alliance of Lab/ Lib Dem/ Green etc will vote Bercow back in. Across those hundreds of constituencies anti European voters will vote for the only party that has the smack of genuine scepticism about it: and that is not the Tories. Farage is quite articulate in his argument on the matter of why- if you are a sceptic- you most certainly should not vote Tory !!
@Colin
UKIP voters won’t vote for Lib Dems or Labour and I am not aware of anyone saying that in this thread !!
They will vote UKIP; or they will sit on their hands; and a small minority who are really disgruntled Tories and anti Labour first and foremost will vote Conservative. But these will be in a small minority of UKIP voters.
@oldNat
Scotland won’t get fiscal autonomy; like Wales they’ll get a cut in central funding and a reduction in MP’s the main result being that the Welsh and Scottish administrations will have to cut spending and raise taxes (in Scotland by the maximum leeway they are allowed within their constitutional settlement; and in Wales if as seems likely they are given this kind of power after the election). This will be a gift from whatever party/ coalition is in power in Westminster after the next election.
This is partly a matter of an idea whose time has come (updated west Lothian question) i.e. England (and English voters/ tax payers) largely subsidise the perceived better deal on public spending (such as health and education) that (in particular) Scotland has managed to retain up-to-now; plus in the severe public spending climate of the next 3 years it will be an obvious target to pass the responsibility of cutting to the regional administrations by cutting the money the UK parliament gives them.
Buy you are not going to be getting (fiscal) autonomy any decade soon.
Rob Sheffield
It may be Xmas, and Anthony may have given posters a present in allowing more partisan posting than normal. However, this is still a site where assertions require a substantive basis – preferably from polling evidence, but at least from some authoritative base.
I note that you supply none. I thought your original response to my post sounded a little petulant – you’ve now confirmed that impression.
i wish you a Merry Christmas – and the gift of a little humility in the New Year.
@oldnat
Petulance?! Read back your own posting(s)…..plus in them I read only assertions/ potential scenarios that have no concrete empirical basis to them. But- of course- in the realm of politics and policy (and in the run up to an election especially) it is rather ‘Cnut’-like to demand pure ’scientific’ and ‘evidence-based justifications’ for what are political debating points and psephological speculation!
I am not commenting in any of my replies on Bayesian polling methodologies etc etc I am reporting matters that are debated in political circles. Such as the changes to the Barnett Formula already being planned by Brown and the further steps down the road towards a ‘equitable settlement of the British Isles’ hinted at By Cameron in a speech at the Welsh Assembly a few months ago. I am surprised you seem unaware of either….
And of course- clearly being a ‘Scots Nat’- you will find my account on that subject rather uncomfortable: I thoroughly understand that.
But please do not try to censor posters or close down debate simply because it is not to your partisan taste. Nor cloak this attempt at partisan debate-suppression as somehow about ‘backing your arguments up’! That’s cheap that really is.
I wish you a merry Hogmanay !
Rob Sheffield
“UKPollingReport is a site for non-partisan discussion of polls.”
@oldnat
as I just said
“please do not try to censor posters or close down debate simply because it is not to your partisan taste”.
I am debating various issues here rather thasn trying to stop that discussion from taking place.
Plus- of course- I am non-aligned: you clearly are not…
.
@ Rob Sheffield
I personally suspect that UKIP causes more of a drain on the Tories than the BNP.
But polls asking UKIP supporters about their former support don’t seem to support that. I suspect that the Tory drop is mainly due to core Tories saying they won’t vote in protest, rather than a UKIP boost, as I don’t recall a boost in UKIP support since the Lisbon Treaty was ratified.
@ ROB SHEFFIELD
“UKIP voters won’t vote for Lib Dems or Labour and I am not aware of anyone saying that in this thread !!”
I didn’t suggest they would.
I was trying to highlight the pointless risk of voting in a way which might deprive a Conservative of victory -ie another Labour Government & a possible LibDem influence in it-both representing the antithesis of what that UKIP voter actually wants.
As to “They will vote UKIP; or they will sit on their hands”-well we shall see.
I agree with OldNat that mere assertion isn’t a basis for any argument-least of all on this website which is frequented -in the main-by thoughtful & analytical people.
@Richard Manns
I’ll be interested to see any polls in the new year and in the campaign that look at individual seats in East England, South East and South West where UKIP in those sub regions of the Euro constituencies scored their double digits in the Euro Elections six months ago.
In the YOUGOV poll conducted 10-11 December UKIP got 4% UK national rating; in the poll conducted 3-4 December they got 5% UK National rating.
The concomitant UK National ratings for Green party and SNP were 3;2 and 3;3 respectively. No one thinks SNP will get 3% in Scotland; and Brighton is predicted to fall to the Greens.
The issue is what are UKIP getting in their core rural/ shire/ county/ suburban heartlands and how that translates into a general election performance and debate what it means for the Conservative vote in those places.
@Colin
” “UKIP voters won’t vote for Lib Dems or Labour and I am not aware of anyone saying that in this thread !!”
I didn’t suggest they would.”
er: “What does any UKIP supporter gain by putting Labour back in? LIbDems have the most slavishly pro EU attitudes. To vote for either of these parties would seem to be self defeating madness for a UKIP supporter” this is what you posted earlier. Why have I had to remind you ?!
Furthermore, I am always rather sceptical of people indulging in self-promotion ergo proclaiming themselves “thoughtful and analytical” compared to others !
@ ROB SHEFFIELD
“proclaiming themselves “thoughtful and analytical” compared to others !”
Read what I said my friend -the first person singular is absent & deliberately so.
Humility is a Christmasy kind of thing don’t you think?
Rob Sheffield
“I am non-aligned”
With the Tories lead slipping away I can eat my Christmas dinner in peace. Bring the election on Gordon the Tories will not win!!!
I am sorry that I put the cat among the pigeons.
May I wish you all,including Rob, a very merry Christmas and a healthy and exciting New Year.
Glenn
Happy Christmas one-and-all!
It is nice to know that I can come here to read sober [sp: WikiDictionary] comments when Mike’s place reverts to kindergarten-mode. Here is looking to 2010!
Rob Sheffield,
I expect that UKIP will poll better than last time, perhaps with 3% of the total vote, rather than 2%. If the County Council elections are any guide, their best votes will come in seats that are safe for the Conservatives, (or in some cases, safe for Labour) whereas in marginal seats, their voters will disproportionately favour the Conservatives over Labour.
Merry Xmas Anthony and all his gang.
@ jay blanc
‘legitimising them as potential winners,’ don’t we live in a democracy or is this a two party state ?
aww diddums Jay Blanc !! Did the nasty voters go and spoil your two party dream ? Tell you what why not abolish all parties except Labour and Tory and make membership compulsory better still how about only one party being allowed!!
The debate should be between any registered party that is fielding candidates in the vast majority of all UK constituencies currently that means only the big three qualify
Clegg is included because the Lib Dems got 22% of the vote last time versus 33% Tory and 35% Labour.They are hardly a fringe party !Electoral Law rightly compels the broadcasters to be fair and base coverage on the shares of the votes at the last election.
Like it or not and many Tories don’t (’we want to win power on our own’)the days of two party domination are dying so TV debate needs to reflect that.
There is also the small matter of what happens in a hung parliament scenario which makes Clegg a highly relevant player
Um… I did mention before that I was a Lib Dem supporter didn’t I? I’m just a realistic one.
@ Jay Blanc
Your comments seemed somewhat at odds with that and somewhat typical of many on Conservative Home.
Anyway your comments were interesting to read and its better to provoke a strong reaction than non at all !
Merry Christmas
@Jay Blanc
Rereading your comments I apologise I think the pre Christmas Dinner yellow mist descended !
All the best etc
Rob Sheffield
You have made some interesting contributions recently, along with OLDNAT as usual, but
‘I’d also like to see a Darling Vs Osborne Vs Cable debate as well…one can only imagine there being a single catastrophic loser in that debate…!’
Should that not read two and I don’t include Vince Cable.
@Davey
Vis tactical voting by UKIP voters.
I just cannot see it this time- especially on the right flank of British politics: there just is not that same ‘GROT’ mood music that you had in 1997.
I think the voters who have left the Tories over the last 5 years for UKIP (like those who have left Labour for Greens, LD’s and fringe Trot parties) are not going to be in the business of tactical voting next year. This does not feel like that kind of election i.e. one where the lost middle class lefties for example flock back to Labour as they fear a majority for Cameron, or similarly where betrayed Eurosceptics decide to hold their nose and vote for the Tories.
It feels more like 1992 with Brown as swing-voter repellent as Kinnock- but with no great enthusiasm for Cameron i.e. Major. The vote then was Con 42.2 Lab 30.8 LD 22.6 which on a uniform swing gives 36 majority to Tories.
BUT: into that you have to factor UKIP (in rural and suburban southern/ eastern England constituencies), BNP (in urban white working class areas all over England), Green (in student and middle class lefty places especially in southern England) and Respect (in constituencies with a large Muslim population concentrated into key wards). UKIP take mainly from Con but also LD; BNP mainly Lab but also Con; Greens take from Lab and LD equally; Respect well who knows! Only a few percentage points (i.e. a few voters in each hundred) have to shuffle these 1992 type numbers and you are quickly due to the electoral math into a whole new ball game which you can largely file under ‘Hung Parliament’.
Plus you also have the expenses scandal poisoning the image and popularity of the sitting MP- which in southern and eastern England is a majority conservative scenario. Watch for opposing candidates- in every constituency where the sitting MP (of whatever party) is not standing down- plaster their constituency with copies of expenses claim forms from 2005-2008.
All in all a very complicated and very interesting election to come next year for political junkies like myself…
@Colin
“Read what I said my friend -the first person singular is absent & deliberately so. Humility is a Christmasy kind of thing don’t you think?”
Well of course it is: and you have not shown an ounce of it! Rather smug self-righteousness, itself not a Christmassy sort of thing (note the spelling ).
Oh by the way- in said posting you began the final sentence of that triumphant peroration with the words “I agree”…!!!
@oldnat
“non-aligned”
I am non-aligned in the sense I don’t have a single preference in a positive sense.
But I guess, likewise in reverse, I *am* aligned in the sense of a utter revulsion for one specific party.
@Davey
When I did the uniform swing calculation just now (transposing 1992 for 2010) it should have said *18* rather than 36- which underscores the potential slender thread of victory for whoever next year even more I think.
i am normally a independent minded person but as far as the next govenment i can see no way of getting any other than a conservative govenment with the lib dems near level pegging with the labour party or a conservative govenment that has no real oppisition
OldNat:
“Here the polls suggest that the Tories are not seen as likely to be a good government for Scotland – even by 20% of those who will vote Tory for the Scottish Parliament!”
That’s a measure of tactical voting, not a measure of right-leaning voters view of the appropriateness for Scotland of UK Conservative’s policies. A similar proportion of SNP voters for the Scottish parliament see the SNP as irrelevant at Westminster and are bored by the independence debate.
Conservatives are a wasted vote in all but a few constituencies. Under Ms Goldie’s leadership, they have garnered their list potential, though the long term trend is very marginal decline.
“Middle Class Lefties” or if you prefer the rational and tactical negative FPTP voter who is anti-Con, may well form the largest political grouping in Scotland, exceeding the total of committed core voters for all the parties together.
You overlook the posibility that, where there is no risk of electing a Conservative, they may choose to vote against a Labour incumbent. This is how the SNP stands to win the FPTP jackpot, not in 2010, but after a short hung parliament. An ignorant and insensitive Conservative government and an impoverished and self-destructive Labour party is all you need.
The dilemma in some constituencies, such as Argyll, is that you even if you were unimpressed with the LibDem incumbent, voting for the third placed SNP risks letting in the Conservative.
On the other hand, we know that LibDems are losing votes and the SNP are gaining, so not going with the flow might also have the outcome that you most want to avoid.
In that particular case there isn’t a big risk, because if the % loss of the poll the LibDem currently has is at the lower end of what is possible, the Conservative would need to take an improbable proportion of them for the seat to change hands. The greater the % loss of the LibDem share of the vote, the smaller proportionate split in favour of the SNP that is necessary for the SNP to win.
That’s why I don’t dare to predict the winner, but I’m sure the Conservative will be in second place. Labour can’t be squeezed any more and have nothing to lose.
Rob Sheffield & OldNat
If Labour do hang on, it won’t be by much and surely can’t be more than the Scottish contribution to the majority over Conservatives. That will be 31-33 in my reckoning.
If England gets a Labour government again, you know who to blame.
A new ICM poll appararently shows the Greens leading in Brighton Pavilion, by 35%, to 27% for the Conservatives, and 25% for Labour.