ComRes’s poll was supposed to be embargoed until 10pm, but given both ITV’s Meridian Tonight and Conservativehome have already published it it seems somewhat pointless to wait. Their rolling poll for ITV and the Independent has figures of CON 36%(+3), LAB 29%(nc), LDEM 26%(-3). ComRes’s fieldwork would have been conducted between Monday and Tuesday, so wholly prior to the Mrs Duffy incident (though at the same time as Populus’s poll yesterday, which also showed 36% for the Tories).


365 Responses to “ComRes/ITV/Indy – 36/29/26”

1 6 7 8
  1. TNS BMRB – 34/27/30

    Anthony has put up a new thread.

  2. @Sue,

    Yes of course,

    They say (Ben Page MORI c.8am this morning) that many voters will actually only make up their mind in the polling booth.

    It all depends how you read ‘soft’ and ‘undecided’ voters and well as guaging turnout.

    Only two things can happen at an election. Voters can a) eject a governmnet
    b) vote in a popular oppostiion

    In 1905, 1945, and 1997 voters voted in a popular opposition but this is rare. More often that not voters remain unsure as to whether or not they should eject a lusy government. 1992 is a good example. in the end they did not in sufficinet numbers eject blueys…. for a time it looked like they might but sufficient blueys got up off their rears and said “hey we might not be fussed on this crew yet, but we are not that sure about you lot”.

    1979 is a good example. With inflation as high as it was, and the winter of discontent that preceded it, Thatcher only been the union ridden shambles that was old Labour by 7%.

    1950 was a strange one, Although Curchill won and evicted Atlee’s crew, they actually beat his share of the vote.. In fact, would you believe it if I told you that more people voted for the failed Labour election bid of 1950 than voted for labour’s landslide victory in 1945.

    what i am trying to explain is that we should make two mistakes.

    1) To assume an opposition is gifted victory.
    2) to assume that disgruntlement is converted to ejection.

    Thus turnout will surely rise…. of this I have no doubt…. I think as the event draws near and the epic nature of it becomes apparent voters will concentrate more, frame theri decision in a more calculative manner. Above all else, you British are a conservative (small c) bunch.

    I think this is more applicable to women voters. In the polling booths, women voters much more than men will think of health, education, the economy and even blues would have to concede that MRSA waiting lists, Ruth Kelly’s fiasco over list 99- they are alll distant distant memories.

  3. Anthony

    Thanks for that answer, I thought that might be the case and that’s a clearer way of doing it.

    While you’re around can I (re-)ask a question on weighting:

    You said that YouGov polling rests on the assumption that, within a certain demographic group, online users are politically representative of those not connected. I can see this being true of younger age groups up to say 50 – 60, but those older than that may not be the same, especially those whose children left home before the Internet arrived.

    With this group (such as the famous Mrs Duffy), overwhelmingly retired, the cost of connection/use and the unwillingness to learn new skills, may make many unwilling to use the Internet. Those that do are more likely to be professionals, the AB social groups and so on.

    This in turn may make Labour voters under-represented among you respondents. Is allowance made for this using for example social class?

  4. Is it just me, or did yesterday feel like an episode of The Thick of It?

  5. The effect of GB’s gaffe will be probably not be more than a few percentage points off L, probably only increasing the large group of disaffected voters. It reduces the probability of NOM and increases the probability of a C OM. So LD is probably just as much the victim as L.

    Tonight’s debate has much greater potential to affect the outcome than GB’s blunder. I’m not an L supporter, but if I were I would direct my anger at GB, perhaps, but not at L. No point cutting one’s nose off to spite one’s face.

  6. New thread

  7. @ Leslie

    But it wasn’t sweary enough! :)

  8. Eoin,

    But surely this is an unusual election. There’s a poll in Metro today (though it is Harris) which is interesting for the way it shows the breakdown among age groups.

    w w w.metro.co.uk/news/823850-general-election-2010-metro-harris-poll-points-towards-hung-parliament

    Might we have a situation in this election where, in a very simple sense, the younger voters are acting as if they’re in one of your rare elections rather than the standard referendum on the government of the day?

  9. Roger – yes, they are weighted by social class (and the panel itself is recruited to make sure those harder to reach groups are represented).

  10. As for flockingate, I was under the impression that Brown was blind in one eye, not deaf in both ears.

    Context and presuppositions are important to how we understand the language use of others. You barely have to look at most of the words in these sentences, because there’s a set context and structure to which they fit.

    If Brown was assuming that a senior woman talking about immigration would be using that kind of language, that tells us more about Brown’s presuppositions rather than exonerating him in any way.

    But, as has been pointed out at length (mainly by people trying to distract from the incident) it doesn’t really matter. Everyone who knows that Brown is as two-faced as any other politician won’t change their mind as a result, while those who elevate his character above that of a normal politician will find mental gymnastic ways of addressing this.

    I doubt it will affect the polls directly, though it will hurt Labour’s momentum and reduce Brown’s effectiveness to some degree. On the other hand, it will squeeze the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats out of the headlines, so it’s not exactly in their interests either.

  11. Eoin,

    Just to be pedantic, Labour won the 1950 election both in terms of the popular vote (they got over 50%) and the number of seats (they got the largest minority).

    It was in 1951 that Labour got the largest popular vote, but the Conservatives had more seats and were able to form a government with the National Liberals, who did very well in the 1951 election.

    A similar eventuality occured in February 1974, when the Conservatives got the most votes and Labour got the most seats. Had the Irish Unionists not split in reaction to Heath’s Northern Ireland policy, Heath would have been in position to form the next government.

  12. If we assume a turnout of 65% and a Tory vote of (say) 35% , Lib dems on around 30% of that and Labour around 28% of that.

    This converts to a share of the available votes

    Tory 23%
    Lib DEm 20%
    Labour 18%

    Hardly a ringing endorsement for any party really. No Lady or Gentleman would dream of taking office with such low support.

    Only a power hungry cad would even consider it.

  13. Anthony Wells

    I posted this at 10.58am but you haven’t replied.

    “Anthony – re your comment that “All that you can’t to is seperately publish the figures for those who have already voted.”

    Does this mean that pollsters MUST not separately identify the voting of those who have already voted by post in the data/analyses provided to the poll sponsor?

    Do you know, based on previous elections where there were postal votes, which groups of people tend to vote postally?”

    Thanks

  14. Mike N – you can provide what you like to the poll sponsor, as long as they don’t publish it. Strictly speaking, you shouldn’t be able to work it out from the tables either, but I doubt the CPS would be that anal about it.

    For a prosecution, I think you’d need to demonstrate that it had actually influenced votes.

  15. Anthony
    Thanks

1 6 7 8