The only poll I know of tonight is YouGov’s daily poll in the Sun. The topline figures there are CON 37%(-3), LAB 31%(-1), LDEM 20%(+2). A fall for the Conservatives and I’ll offer my normal caveat after any interesting changes in the polls: it’s the trend that counts, so wait and see if it is repeated elsewhere. It could be a genuine shift, or it could be as transitory as the 5 point YouGov lead we had earlier in the week.

The additional questions today were a repeat of the “who is doing best in the campaign” questions that showed the Lib Dems doing so well when YouGov first asked them at the beginning of the campaign – after the first week the Conservatives come top – 32% think David Cameron had the best first week of the campaign, with Clegg and Brown equal on 16%. 25% think the Conservatives have been the most impressive in the campaign so far (16% think the Lib Dems have, with Labour last on 13%). Finally, 31% think David Cameron has been most successful in getting his message across, followed by Brown on 15% and Clegg on 13%.


461 Responses to “Conservatives down 3 in today’s YouGov poll”

1 7 8 9 10
  1. Didn’t this happen the other day, then the Conservatives went back up to 40 again the following day?

  2. “@JOHN TT
    Go to the top of the class. Grammer = sentence construction ect, Grammar = a selective school where state education is …”
    In which language exactly? Not in English!

  3. Like I side, Ambér – just like a sonic screwdriver.

    John TT – I don’t think very many people at all pay any attention to the intricacies of the manifesto itself, vever mind the building where it is launched. I agree – the Tories are just opening themselves up to an easy counter attack by even mentioning it. As usual, it’s all about how these things end up being reported that will resonate most with the electorate.

  4. Adam – tsk

  5. Good grief, I’ve got fingers like sausages today: side=said.

    Having corrected my own typo, why do so many people abbreviate “et cetera” to “ect”?

  6. Sue what soes tsk stand for?

  7. Sue,

    You just typed a response two words and a hyphen longer than that post deserved.

  8. As most posters know the last thing I would do is rain on the Labour supporters parade. However, the delight you all show regarding the YG London poll is perhaps a little OTT. A poll on or about 12 March gave a result virtually identical with today. A poll on or about the 22 March suddenly saw Labour loose 4 points.
    Therefore, todays poll takes us to a point which is the same as a month ago. The sudden loss of 4 points for Labour towards the end of May if kosher has now come back. If a bit “unexplained” shall we say, it has now righted itself. The point is, the Tories are still likely to pick up 12 seats from Labour. I have to admit, thats all I expected.

  9. Roland – loving the “ect” there ! These teacher types don’t know there 3 r’se from their elbows, do they?

  10. @ ROLAND
    “It used to be the way to the stars for poor kids and the equivalent of a public school education for lower middle class kids.”

    And still the best way it seems Roland.

    Did you see this report today ? :-

    “In the latest study, academics from Buckingham University analysed the proportion of deprived pupils at each school – and compared numbers to the social make-up of the local community.

    Prof Alan Smithers and Dr Pamela Robinson found that the most popular comprehensives, which are not supposed to select pupils, were “more socially exclusive” than England’s remaining academically selective grammar schools.

    The 164 most exclusive comprehensives took only 9.2 per cent of pupils from poor backgrounds, even though around 20 per cent of children living in their surrounding area were “income deprived”. By comparison, some 13.5 per cent of children from 164 grammar schools were from poor homes.

    The study suggested that grammars – which select pupils on the basis of the 11-plus entrance exam – were more transparent as they identified pupils “with talent, irrespective of their backgrounds”.

    Comprehensives, which normally admit children by distance to the school gates, give parents more chance to play the system by moving “close to the desired school”.

    Great isn’t it?

  11. Adam ‘ think Labour have just thrown the general election away ‘

    They’ve surfaced. It was metaphorically like a U boat coming up from being depth charged and resorting to its surface gun.

  12. Roland,

    Rain? No, you’re right. Hail, sleet and snow, more like.

    That said, I do agree that whilst perhaps encouraging for Labour supporters, the latest London marginal poll is not something to get overly excited about yet. But I wouldn’t exactly be triumphantly yodelling about it from the rooftops if I was a Tory either.

  13. @Marchese

    Sorry to take so long to reply. I was actually getting on with some work for a change. I think I am not alone in having got hooked on this site.

    You may have genned up on some of this already so I’ll keep it short.

    You will be aware of the Sally Clark case where she was wrongly convicted on the evidence of Sir Roy Meadow stating that the chances of having two cot deaths in a family was 1 in 73 million (from memory). This was calculated by squaring the likelihood of having one cot death among the general population.

    While numerically this can be justified on the flip of a coin principle, firstly the comparison should have been made only with the population where 2 reported cot deaths occur in a family and then reduced to those where it was known that both had been proven to be murder. But in addition the confidence interval and confidence level in this case was as near as dammit to zero and there was no room at all for margin of error (MoE).

    Opinion poll sample sizes have been developed statistically (on a principle first set out by a certain Mr Gallup) to achieve a high confidence level (normally 95%) with a margin of error that can vary but is minimal in %age points. Raw data are adjusted to take into account sample variations from known population profiles and other known factors, with some less-known factors (such as “shy” voters) having an effect on the results

    In the case of the London poll, the sample size happens much larger proportionately than that for the UK-wide polls that have generally proven correct predictors within the MoE, but that does not make a great difference if the statistical adjustments are correct. These adjustments have also been the subject of continuous development based on historical data allowing for greater precision.

    Clearly no-one in the Sally Clark conviction understood statistics.

  14. This is off topic, but there is an argument that spelling is all in the mind, so to speak.

    So lnog as you get the rhtgit letters, and crocterly choose the fisrt and lsat lttrees, the reader’s brain works out what the word is. I think.

  15. Andrew – totally agree, the YouGov to-night could easily jump across the MOE again…

  16. @JULIAN GILBERT
    Well its what they taught me at a Grammar school 50 years ago. Has the language changed? After all, a language which has changed is it not, to innit, is capable of anything.

  17. Mike N,

    Very weird that. Seen the phenomena before. The only mangled word in your post that jarred was “rhtgit” – because an extra “t” had crept in.

  18. Long live the grammar schools!

    (person from Kent)

  19. I have a feeling MITZ is going to be a very sad person on 7th May 2010. Still never mind, chin up MITZ it will only be another 5 years before you can dream of a Labour government again. And even if it is a hung parliment with the tory’s no doubt being the biggest party they will soon change boundaries so they are fair and then win the election with a big fat majority.

  20. @MITZ
    Of course like a typical gaga Tory I have started talking about the 22th of May rather than March, the point is, the sudden out of blue loss of 4 Labour points looks a bit suspect, and now its back. No change since March 12th.
    @COLIN
    My daughters Dad in Law, is a retired headmaster, son of a coal miner from Northumberland. He would tell anyone that the path via Grammar school took him forward and changed his life.
    He also says he would not be able to repeat it today.

  21. Roland – not sure if you’re double-bluffing or really making a case against grammar schools!

    Adam – “it will only be another 5 years” is a bit pessimistic if you are a Tory. The convention is to aim to go after 4 years unless you are way behind in the polls after 4 years.

  22. Mitz – “…because an extra “t” had crept in.”

    Er, that was a deliberate error…not.

  23. @JohnTT

    How is Roland making a case against Grammars???

  24. @JOHN TT
    Good heavens no John, just because I went to one does not make what few are left bad schools. We have them here in Bucks and excellent they are.

  25. @MikeN
    So lnog as you get the rhtgit letters, and crocterly choose the fisrt and lsat lttrees, the reader’s brain works out what the word is. I think.


    Dyslexics of the world untie

  26. I fnoud it ienrtnestig baescue the olny wrod taht my biran stueggrltd wtih was the one wtih an eorrr oditsue of the prraaetmes. So your deliberate error added significantly to the experiment!

    Cheers!

  27. @Adam

    Good post! I’m fed up of this raising ‘child poverty’, the truth of the matter is that people should only be having children if they can afford them. You can’t keep taxing everyone to pay for whoever is poor and shacks up to have a child!

    Survival of the fittest still exists!

  28. I know john but in all honesty I cannot be bothered argueing with people and if I am honest it will probably be closer to 12-13 years of a tory government but I am a floating voter and will vote with my brain. Most people support political parties like they support their football teams and support them even if they are useless and that is unfortunately why governments let us down because they are always guaranteed loyal fools no matter what they do and that is why both of the main parties have not listened to the public in the past. I just responded like that because of comments made about my earlier perfectly fair comment.

  29. The brmb analysis of things of importance to voters suggested unemployment was number one.

    Since then, Land Rover & Jaguar have confirmed higher than anticipated sales and orders which looks set to secure up to 30,000 jobs (direct & undirect).

    This will be comforting to those 16% of voters who responded.

    The “economy stupid” is where the election will be won/lost and a number posting here have already mentioned that some important eco-data will be published before end of April . . .

    . . . . then the polls may be volatile .

  30. It does occur to me, looking at the London polls, that MPs in marginals can sometimes be harder to get rid of than one would expect. I remember in 92 being surprised by some Conservatives bucking the national swing to hang onto seats where they were clearly well known and popular. Those factors aren’t considered in UNS type projections but I wonder if they may account for the weaker than expected swing in the marginals.

    FWIW I’ve had my money on CON 38 \ LAB 32 for over a year and have seen nothing to alter my prediction. I think the swing in the marginals will generally not be much above the UNS but that we’ll see wildly different results in different places – a bit like 2005.

  31. Jason,

    What have your views on having children to do with this site?

    At least Adam gave a view on electoral prospects (not with much research behind it admittedly).

  32. @JASON
    I could not possibly concur with your block on totally feckless behaviour which concludes with the birth of another member of the underclass. Where would Labour get 50% of their vote from? Think of democracy.

  33. They don’t vote Roland. :-)

  34. I don’t really want to get involved in the Grammar school debate. But we should remember the flip side of the argument.

    It would be hard to get much enthusiasm for the return of Secondary Moderns.

    I suspect this may get moderated out as it’s my first post and it doesn’t have a lot to do with polling!

  35. Double whammy for the Tories this afternoon. IFS analysis pretty scathing about Labour’s records on both taxation and spending, but far tastier meat pounced on hungrily by Cameron regarding Labour’s Expenses 3 demanding legal aid. I imagine that these two stories, particularly the latter, will come up on Thursday evening, no matter what the official subject is supposed to be. Makes Liam Byrne banging on about the Tories miscalculating a few billion quid in their fuel duty plans look a bit uninspired.

    So far in the campaign (and I mean the more long term posturing that has been going on for months, not just the official 6 day old campaign) no one issue has made much difference in the polls. I would imagine that legal-aid-gate (as it will inevitably be called) might buck the trend.

  36. Re Spelling and Grammer/Grammar

    I suggest those of you feeling discombobulated, ought to go and read a bit of Chaucer, then sigh and roll with the changes

  37. My post was in answer to one that was culled. So please cull mine as it tried to lighten what was becoming offensive..

  38. Sue,

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but Chaucer lived in an age when only a small percentage of people could read and write at all, there were no conventions in spelling or grammar, and Dr Johnson wasn’t even a faint glimmer in anyone’s eye.

    These days, we have dictionaries. Sadly, very few can be bothered to use them.

    On the other hand, kids communicating with each other on MSN deliberately use a completely foreign language called “teenager” so that their parents can’t understand a word of it.

  39. @mitz

    “I would imagine that legal-aid-gate (as it will inevitably be called) might buck the trend.”

    I really think you are barking up the wrong tree on this one: Legal aid is not a government/ labour party decision it is one calculation that is a prt of due process.

    All labour party spokespeople need to do is condemn it in the same way- perhaps with a slightly less shrill tone- than DC has done.

    Sure the odd uninformed person will think this is a government decision for a few hours until they media contradicts that perception by reporting the condemnation from Labour spokespeople.

    Now what WOULD have been a game changer would have been if the government had tried to knobble the legal aid process to avoid just such headlines you are pointing at….

    As far as I can see they have played a pretty straight bat.

  40. But Mitz m8 u just sound like an old fogey. If u don’t like my Chaucer analogy, go back to the 50s. Languages change. Get wivvit bruv.

  41. Rob,

    Not for the first time today, I hope you’re right. But I do think that one thing DC is quite good at is taking a story with a small hint of bad news for Labour and running with it.

  42. Sue,

    Unintentionally, the nicest thing you have said to me to date. I positively revel in old fogey status. My daughter despairs of me but I am as with it as I care to be.

  43. I’m going all head girl again, but I could list a number of things that will play dreadfully for the Tories from today, but I don’t. Can we refrain from listing either parties own goals unless they become an issue that is obviously affecting the polls?

  44. So, leaflets about cancer going out to a large sample of people, some of whom have suffered from the disease, is scaremongering. OK. What does that make a leaflet about crime which has a picture of a bloody machete on the cover?

  45. Mitz – exactly one of the own goals I’d refrained from posting. I actually deleted two posts before posting them because no-one wants to hear what I think of manifestos or particular flash in the pan scandals.
    The cancer leaflets should be left well alone by the Tories. They could not possibly have had access to medical records and I expect some unemployed people got the unemployment one too etc. (ect)
    This kind of stuff just gets right on my nerves.

  46. Sue,

    I presume you are directing your headgirlishness at me (did you like my invention of a new word just then?) but in response I would say I was giving an opinion that these issues, and one in particular, would effect the polls. And unless Anthony tells me I’m not allowed to do that, I ain’t stoppin’.

  47. Rob I agree with MITZ on this one. I know it is not the government that has agreed to fund the legal aid but the point is that it is three labour or three ex labour MP’s that have the disgusting view that they are entitled to it. That is what might stick that it Is Labour MP’s claiming it. I agree with you that Labour can just come out and condone it but that will not matter as the public have so much anger over the expenses all they will see is three labour MP”s still at it.

  48. Adam,

    The difference between you and I is that I have highlighted one of the stories of the day in a non-partisan manner, with the opinion that Cameron may well try and use it to gain some ground. Your language in contrast is particularly partisan and boorish.

    Time for me to make like a tree and leave.

  49. @Adam-

    as of the prorogue of parliament they are not MP’s any more (no one is) and even SN will have to prefix with an ‘ex’ because they are not candidates either.

    Sorry- my last view on this: it is just another one of those bits of jelly that the Conservatives try to nail to the wall. By wednesday night it won’t even figure on the radar.

  50. MITZ I was agreeing with you but how can I make it partisan when it has nothing to do with the conservatives or Lib Dems it is Labours problem no one elses. So get a life. I am free to make any opinion I want as long as it is not offensive as you are. That is what I think members of the public feel and thats that. Looking at how many posts you make all day no wonder you vote labour as they are the party of the workshy after all.

1 7 8 9 10