Ignore the voodoo polls, Clegg won
A lot of comments here citing various voodoo polls from newspaper websites. Ignore them – they reflect the party allegiances of that website’s audience (the Guardian’s web poll has Brown second – shock! Daily Mail has Cameron first- wow!), do not attempt to be politically balanced or representative and are easy for interested parties to manipulate.
There were two properly conducted instant polls following the debate, carried out by YouGov and ComRes. Both show Nick Clegg winning, Cameron second and Brown last (YouGov has NC51, DC29, GB19. ComRes has NC 46, DC 26, GB 20). Angus Reid are also doing some polling, but it seems to be live overnight with final figures tomorrow.
The questions now are who people think is the winner once it has been filtered through the media tommorrow, and more importantly, what impact that has on voting intentions, how much of a boost will the Lib Dems get? Our first chance of getting a really good idea of that will probably be the polls on Saturday or Sunday.
UPDATE: There was also an instant Populus poll for the Times. Once again, it showed Clegg winning (though by an even larger margin that the other polls!), followed by Cameron then Brown – figures were Clegg 61%, Cameron 22%, Brown 17%.
I expect the Labour vote to fall below, or around, 30% in the next few weeks – to the benefit of the Lib Dems. I don’t think the Tories will hit 39/40 either. Lib Dems to rise to around 27-28% tonight IMO.
“could a 34/34/26 stick?”
I would be very shocked if Labour get 34% on May 6th – what with the Lib Dems eating away at their vote. I think they’d do very well to reach 31/32%.
Let me start by saying I think Clegg clearly won. Cameron came second but should be disappointed. I thought before the election Clegg would come across as a paler version of Cameron it appears to have become the other way round. Brown a;lways had a difficult pitch.
There have been lots of comments, but one or two points that people have not picked up.
I thought Brown was hampered by the number of questions on which Alastair Stewart had to remind viewer that powers had been devolved in parts of the UK. So Brown was answering on things in which he had no personal stake. But Cameron and Clegg did not dare point it out (it is time the English stopped being short-changed by politicians kow-towing to other parts of the UK). But there was an indirect effect in that Brown was unable, on e.g. health and education, to point to examples from his own consitutency as did Cameron, and in particular Clegg.
If TV debates occur at future elections it will be seriously questionnable whether a party can afford to have a leader from aregion/country in which Westminster has few repsonsibilities within the UK.
My second major point is that Clegg scored on being the “neither of the above” candidate. So we should ask what would have happened if the debate had not been disgracefully confined to the three major parties. UKIP’s Lord Pearson is I think a wrtie-off in terms of TV presentation. But I think Caroline Lucas of the Green’s would, unless she fell on a verbal banana skin, have wiped the floor with the three who did appear. We know from “Question Time” that she is an excellent TV performer, In addition, Cameron. Clegg and Brown, particularly the first two, came across as all having the same suits. They even all had plain ties, differentiated only by colur. Quite apart from her policieis, Caroline Lucas would have looked fresh and diffferent. No wonder the estatblishment stitch-up excluded her. Brown and Cameron might regret it now, as it is Clegg who would have been hurt if Lucas had been there. She would have beated him for the “time for a change” lobby.
Brown is advantaged by never being “pig in the middle”; but probably not enough to offset eye contact problems that are the good reason for this relating to his disability. Actually, last night it was more noticeable than usual that Brown only has sight in one eye. I think this helped him. If people are seeing that he has a vision problem they may take on board why they get less eye contact, whereas if they don’t realise the problem they may be unconsciously puzzled by getting non-standard eye contact.
Brown was also the only one to get a laugh, which is to his credit.
The debate last night was the one that mattered. The next one is only on Sky, and is about foreign affairs which in some ways is of lesser interest. And can people tell me, but I suspect some voters will already have cast postal ballots by the time of the important BBC debate on the economy.
Clegg could be more vulnerable in the next two debates. Next week, Brown and, particularly, Cameron could have a go at him for being too Europe. As over voting reform, however, they may hold back becuase f how they need to act aftr the election, but frankly I don’t think thye can afford this.
The clever “spin” in the economic debate would be to get Clegg for actually being one of the very few people who have worked for the compnaies that credit rate governments. A skilful political operator (hers’s a test for Brown and Cameron) could turn his image into one of connection with the financial establishment that has caused ordinary people financial misery, forcing the Conservatives and Labour to do things they don’t want and that are contrary to the interests of the voters as opposed to business and international interests.
I think the netw effect of the debates could be to put up the LibDem percentage to 25 – 30%. I suspect in particular that it coould cost Cameron quite a few seats in places like the South West. Although an interesting point was made on TV last night that less tactical voting in consequence of the debate could cost Labour Conservative-Labour marginals. So even though I suspect the effects of the debate will be fairly uniform nation wide, in todays’ electoral circumstances the effects of an increased LibDem vote, for instance, need to be considered in relation to diferent tyoe of seats, not just interpreted as a uniform national swing.
P.S. To those of you who know that I am a regular contributor, I am going quiet now until the election. I have got a minimum wage type job ringing people up for the opinion polls (through a general agency, no psephological skill required). I hope you think that’s a waste given that I have a 1st. Class Honours degree and a Master’s degree in Psychology. But needs must as I have been unemployed for a long time. And whilst this is a site for non-partisan poltics, Perhaps you will realise that this is partly why my comments look for proper democracy rather than what we are served up with now, which has for years -ever since the late 1970s denied so many peopl jobs. But a final thought, the establishment entrenching Alternative Vote is not the answer.
“So Cameron now clearly last. Perhaps the more people reflect the poorer his performance was? Or clips are doing him no favours? Or perhaps he was too defensive againist Brown’s agression?”
Problem is that’s the equivalent of the Tory supporters quoting the other polls, all of which showed Cameron clearly second.
Ian “…Brown’s agression?”
GB clearly enjoyed the opportunity to question and challenge DC.
Looking ahead, how will DC respond in the next debate? I think GB was baiting him.
It will be interesting to see what changes the Leaders/Advisers adopt for the next two “contests”. Cleg over performed whilst Cameron underperformed against expectations. The polls in the next few days will be very interesting!
@Alec
Once the air of invicincibility of the frontrunner is punctured, all kinds of things can happen.
—-
I usually feel that phrases of ‘air of desperation’ about one party usually say more about the person who proffers it, but the posts on ConHome do sound somewhat crest-fallen (once obvious trolling is discounted).
Judge for yourselves.
I think if there is any hint in the media that Labour might see off yet another Tory leader could further undermine DC’s credibility.
Just out of interest, what do you guys think the YouGov poll will show tonight? It showed 6% before the debate, so which way do you think it’ll go tonight?
The Lib Dems must be glad that the Press gave Sir Menzies Campbell such a hard time about his age. Don’t think he woud have come across too well.
@MikeN [10.35]
“I think GB was baiting him”
A subtle point sir. Aggression by GB? Or a deliberate attempt to goad DC into an outburst? Mandy probably had a hand in shaping the strategy.
David Cameron is in for the toughest weekend of his political life.
It is often said that his biggest challenge is to bring his own party with him.
I felt a bit sorry for him. He had a handful of policies he did not support.
Where was his own society theme? Domestic policy is his strong point. I think if voters had heard what DC himself believes then blue would have done much better, especially at teasing away soft libs.
If he thinks there is a nuclear threat from China, I dread to think how the next debate will go for him.
What was surprising was that Cameron lost a debate which included 2 of what should have been the Tories’ strongest areas (immigration and law & order). Brown looked uncomfortable on immigration & Clegg was a bit wishy-washy, but Cameron failed to capitalise. The next 2 debates are on topics that favour the Government: economy, international affairs etc.
Matt
If the debate has had any effect on voting intentions, on the basis of purely the debate polls, I would expect LD to have improved by 2 to 4 points at the expense of L and C in equal measure.
Thus, something like C35, L29, LD 27 IMHO.
Cozmo – “…attempt to goad DC into an outburst”
I agree.
9.4 million viewers is the confirmed figure for the debates, the highest of any programme yesterday. The politicos will be pleased with that I guess and will be interesting to see how those figures hold up for the next two.
IMO Clegg’s performance this time will have helped increase interest in what happens next time so perhaps not such a falling off as others are predicitng?
Evidence from an all postal vote in Brighton shows most postal voters return their ballot papers pretty much straight away as soon as they receive them, around 50%.
My council is sending opuit the postal ballots on the 27th, so a day before the final debate.
I suspect those who are still undecided could well delay their vote until after the last debate, which being economy based and closest to election day is by far the most important
Eastenders live got double those viewing figures lol.
Sorry for the many typing errors in my previous post, which I wrote in a hurry. But I think the contents are clear.
According to broadcastnow.co.uk :
The UK’s first television election debate peaked with nearly 10m viewers (38.6% share) last night – with ITV1 holding on to an audience of more than 9m for almost all of its 90-minute running time.
So it will be interesting to see how pollsters analyse the data and their conclusions. I would be very interested to know more about the demographic and voting intentions of the TV audience. 10 million is a big sample – but is it representative?
The expectation was there for David Cameron to seal the deal last night. At present public opinion does not show that he has done this.
Matt and Marchee
Using Marchee’s YouGov prediction this would translate using the proportional swing method to
Cons 281 seats
Labour 255 seats
Lib Dems 78 seats
Certainly this would make Clegg the Kingmaker since he would be able to deliver an overall majority to either Labour or Conservatives.
This is the position we would love to be in after the election.
As a genuine floating voter, I’m curious as to why the big two parties have always ignored the lib dems, treating them with patronising disdain. I think Clegg did well in the debate, but do the lib. dems have any strength in depth? I’d like to see a genuine debate between the leaders in which substance takes priority over style and spin in an unrehearsed setting. I would also like to see more open policy discussions between the parties post-election.
Well we are six pages of comment and I have just read everyone of them. There is no doubt that Clegg won, a little debate of who came second though this actually makes not a lot of difference IMHO.
A few days ago I posted that NC and the LibDems had the opportunity to cause a techtonic shift in UK politics but that he/they had to act in this first debate to achieve such in this GE. The major question concerning the outcome of this debate is has NC done this? My answer would be ‘maybe’.
The debate has certainly brought NC and the LibDems into the centre of the political arena, they have hoisted their colours as a centre-left party, they have shown perhaps to their biggest audience ever that they have policies. NC has shown that he treats both Labour and Conservatives as the same, however, you can see it coming I am sure – there is a big ‘BUT’!
GB played as good hand as he could in last nights debate, what is important though is that he GB made it clear that Labour and LibDem policies were often akin. This was an attempt to do two things: 1) An attempt to stop Labour supporters switching to LibDems, and 2) To indicate that he would form a coalition with the LibDems. This also neutered NC in his attempt to differentiate the LibDems form Labour in voters eyes.
DC truly underperformed last night, why this was I do not know but having thought about it it would seem a very good outcome for the Conservatives in this the first debate. If this outcome was intentional or not does not matter, the fact is that now DC and the Conservatives will continue to make the news – GB will not, in otherwords by underperforming expectations last night DC is now in control, he and the Conservatives can dictate much better than if they had won last night.
A few days ago my prediction was that should NC and the LibDems take the opportunity they could in this GE replace Labour as the major party of the centre-left in British politics, I am of th opinion that last night they made a major move towards doing exactly that.
One final thought, perhaps GB being placed so low in comparrison to the other two could well indicate just how much trouble Labour are in, the polls may show them on the low 30%’s but the thing is they look as if they would have a hell of a time getting that vote out to the polling booths.
And NC is not Barack Obama, far from it – but then again neither are DC or GB.
What is interesting is the degree to which this seems to have engaged the 18-24 age group.
My 2 grandsons (both staying with me during the break from university) spent the night watching the debate and exchanging views on twitter/facebook with their friends. Despite being highly intelligent, neither has ever shown any inclination to vote and both have always sneered at my interest in politics as “uncool”.
But both watched to the end and even spent time arguing after it ended.
They (and most of their friends) will now vote, which can only be good for democracy. Clegg may not have been the only winner last night if the turnout is raised as a result.
Eoin – that’s cos Eastenders really affects people’s lives; politics is just a soap opera after all
I predict a Tory lead of around 6 tonight in the YouGov poll(i.e. unchanged when compared to before the debate) and a sharp rise in the Lib Dem vote. My prediction is:-
Cons 35
Labour 29
Lib Dems 27
I think the Labour vote may well dip below 30%, with the Tories also losing 2%.
Frederic it’s a shame you’re going quiet on us since I find your comments always interesting, and you so often bring an angle to things that others don’t. Best of luck & hope you stay in gainful employment as long as possible.
@Woodsman
How very true
I think (without stating the obvious) that a Tory lead of more than 6% would delight the Tories, whilst a lead of less than 6% would delight Labour supporters.
Is there anybody who thinks that YG will put the Tories anywhere near 40?
@Eoin,
Probably not. I expect both the Tory and Labour vote to suffer. Labour below 30% would be a disaster for them if they want to be the largest party IMO.
@EOIN
I agree. I was somewhat surprised by Camerons’ performance. After all the debate was on Domestic Policy an area where he does have strong ideas (whether you agree with them or not). Where was his big society, national citizen service, volunteer army, people power? Plenty of very clear opportunities during the debate and instead he went for soundbites pandering to traditional Tory views – immigration has to come down, discipline in schools, locking people up and so on.
Very strange approach from him I thought.
IMHO GB and the Labour party will be delighted with the debate. Strong messages from GB, consistent line of attack on the Tories and just ‘toying’ with NC.
GB is never going to be hugely popular with or without a hostile media, but unless things have changed we are still electing a Party to govern.
Within the headline results on the Angus Reid poll there is good news for Labour amongst undecideds, although trailing the Lib Dems and NC they are ahead of DC and the Tories.
The debate confirmed my opinion (as a LibDem) that Cameron is really pretty moderate – probably more moderate than his party. I think the LibDems could work with him & he would benefit from the LibDems making it impossible for his backwoodsmen to hold him to ransom, as they would if he had a small majority.
I am basically pointing out that a Lab/LibDem coalition in a hung Parliament is far from a given.
MATT: ‘Problem is that’s the equivalent of the Tory supporters quoting the other polls, all of which showed Cameron clearly second’.
That’s not really the problem. The problem is that Cameron was expected to win the debate and in some polls he couldn’t even best Gordon Brown.
The headlines say what a victory for Clegg but actually, given Clegg won’t be PM, the big political news is a what a defeat for Cameron. If a leader cannot dominate a 3-person debate, he’s frankly not much of a leader.
An unpredictable election just got very murkier …
I got the feeling from last night that NG seems to prefer a Lib/Cons coalition, if anything. Perhaps it’s only because the Tories are head of Labour in the polls, who knows?
Matt – we concur
On the basis of last night I would be pretty surprised if anyone achieved an overall majority (wishful thinking aside).
However, there is one truth in all of this: there are still 20 days to go, and in politics that’s a mighty long time. All, therefore, to play for.
@FredericStansfield
“I think Caroline Lucas of the Green’s would, unless she fell on a verbal banana skin, have wiped the floor with the three who did appear.”
—
Attaboy
“That’s not really the problem. The problem is that Cameron was expected to win the debate and in some polls he couldn’t even best Gordon Brown. ”
Yes, but if people think that the electorate will forgive a leader for a poor performance, because their expectations were already low, I think they are very mistaken. The floating voters will be as ruthless and as judgemental as they always are IMO. The fact is that to gain votes, all the leaders will have to convince the floating voters via the debates and their election campaigns – they will not let GB off the hook just because he isn’t a natural orator IMO.
@Bill Roy – “in otherwords by underperforming expectations last night DC is now in control, he and the Conservatives can dictate much better than if they had won last night.”
Bill – in general I find your posts intelligent and insightful and agree with many of them. On the comment above though I disagree vigorously. I think there is no question that all politicians seek to win and gain momentum, at all times. Additionally, it’s impossible to go into a three way debate and contrive not to do very well as a tactic – it just isn’t that predictable that you can pre select the result through your own actions. 22 days out from the most significant GE for 31 years and there is no question Cameron wanted to win and win big. A dull election, with no surprises and no change to the overall perceptions of the parties was what Cameron would have prefered. The very last thing he would have wanted was something that puts things into the melting pot, which is what this debate might just have done. Cameron wanted to be the change by default – last night Clegg pulled the rug from under him, and voters will now be wondering how mauch value there will be in voting Lid Dem.
Fred S
I shall miss your erudite and thought-provoking contributions, so I hope you look back to see this post of thanks.
The last one will be re-read as I have copied over (first time I’ve ever done that).
Because of the debates, last night’s polls got swamped. May I ask AW about the face to face one (TNS) . Are these the people who give the pollee a PC to ensure anonymity?
I think when we see the outcomes following the debate, we need to bear in mind the shift that already took place.
Does anyone now doubt that the Debate was an Event (previously doubted by some)?.
“However, there is one truth in all of this: there are still 20 days to go, and in politics that’s a mighty long time. All, therefore, to play for.”
Very true. Politics is a very unpredictable thing.
A LD/CON pact is a possibility but I don’t think it would happen in reality becuase their policies are so far apart. Any government would fall apart pretty quickly. The Tories would not be able to push through their manifesto pledges at all – the LDs would block most of their more right wing policies.
More interesting might be LAB/LD with GB as PM, Cable as Chancellor (though Darling rates pretty highly in opinion polls), Clegg as Home Secretary and then a bunch of other Labour ministers. I’m not sure Clegg would like it but ti would be far more workable than LD/CON.
@ Greengrass,
Yeah, I do think it’s unfair that the more minor parties don’t get much media exposure.
I like the greens – I love their message on climate change and how we need to protect the environment. Therefore, I hope they do well at this GE. The only thing that puts me off the Greens is that I’m more of a centrist, and the Greens seem very much on the left when it comes to social/economic policy.
@Andy W – LD/CON pact:
Leeds Council has operated with such a coalition for a number of years (5+) where Lab are the largest party just sort of maj. with the LD and Cons only just able to get the maj.
However, I do agree that at national level a LD/Lab coalition would be more likely.
At Leeds they also share the leadership . . .
six months Con then 6 for LD – bizarre . . .
@Rosie P
LD/CONS also did the same in Cumbria – calling themselves the Alliance(!) but it all fell apart.
@Matt
they will not let GB off the hook just because he isn’t a natural orator IMO
**********************
At the risk of sparking a love-in, again I agree.
Last night’s polls are grim reading for GB and DC, period. All the pre-debate expectationeering was, in the context of how people will cast their vote, chaff thrown up by diehard supporters.
Andy – the LD / Con sharing at Leeds has lasted fairly well – much to the chagrin of Lab who are by far the largest group.
Not sure the citizens get vfm though!
@ Rosie
Think its great that collaborative politics can work. Nothing is a bigger turnoff than the sight of politicians acting like they’re in the playground. I often think it’s the media who play on these things and ensure that people working together is seen as somehow weak.
Still don’t think CONS/LD would work nationally – on a local level with local politicians it’s a different matter.
Astonishing that even on a thread under an article warning against voodoo polls there are still dozens of comments blithely citing voodoo polls. Do you guys ever actually read the articles or do you just leap straight into comments clutching your straw poll of regulars at the Dog and Duck?