There is also a Harris poll for the Daily Mail out tonight – the topline figures there are CON 33%(+1), LAB 24%(-1), LDEM 32%(+2). No vast change there, though Harris are showing a much lower level of support for Labour than some other pollsters, and the highest Lib Dem score we’ve seen from any company for about a week and a half.

I’m not aware of any other polls tonight – there have been rumours of a MORI poll, but as far as I can tell this comes from a comment by Kevin McGuire talking about an old poll that has been misconstrued.


771 Responses to “Harris/Mail – 33/24/32”

1 10 11 12 13 14 16
  1. Re: UNS. It would almost certainly be better for the Tories than that though, if you factor in regional/marginals swing.

  2. Swansea West,

    If you believe the Wales poll published today then I would predict that Labour will just hold Swansea west, 36.3% Lab to 34.2% Lib Dem without any marginal boost (although I have assumed all the labour votes will go Lib Dem in this target seat, and not to the Tories)

    However there are suggestions that the Wales poll is not too kosher

  3. Rumours are that DC has a 7 point lead over the 2nd place on ICM poll

  4. @ Rob A

    Totally agree. Why don’t people just wait and see. instead of lording it with alleged polling figures.

  5. @RobA – normally I wouldn’t but this particular guy (Kratz on PB) has posted information before and it has *always* been accurate. He clearly has a bona fide contact.

    However, on reflection , since anyone who want this info knows what site to get it on, I shan’t do it again here!

  6. Assuming a glut of polls tonight, I think the Tories will be looking for at least two of them to give them 37% (or more). Around 35% and they still can’t quite heave the sigh of relief they desperately want to do. At this point in the campaign they really need their vote to be drifting ever so steadily upwards – they won’t mind so much dragging the LibDems with them since they can’t win in terms of seat numbers, but 37% plus no blunders in the last few days should nail it for them.

  7. Might I venture to suggest that “rumours” about what will happen are the stock in trade of the gambling market (in other circumstances they are called “tips”). To people who are interested in the politics not the odds a rumour is of no value whatsoever.

  8. @Neil A

    True to a certain extent but that involves a three way switch – where did these ‘switchers to clegg who then switch to Cameron’ come from in LAB/CON marginals.

    My guess is they would be coming from non voters or LAB not CON. Therefore if they decide Clegg isn’t up to it my guess is they would either decide not to vote (quite likely0 or switch to Brown, albeit reluctantly, mmore than they would switch to Cameron, just because of where they started from

    Just speculation of course, but that is my logic

  9. @ Pankot

    Sorry I might have overreacted a little. It’s just annoying how often these rumours turn out to be nothing more than that. But it looks like you might have an accurate source there so my apologies.

  10. @NeilA
    “Given that the Tories dropped from 39-40% to 32-33% when the LibDems surged, I would imagine there is quite a lot of scope for the opposite happening.”

    Some scope but not a lot in my estimation if one factors in non-swingers, i.e. undecideds and those not previously likely to vote. You did say quite a lot though, which is hard to quantify.

  11. @EoinC
    “Well not if your left leaning :P ”

    …or utopian!

  12. I don’t see the problem with people posting rumours so long as it’s made clear that they are just rumours.

    It’s not much different to people posting their carefully calibrated (or not!) predictions.

  13. @Scotty Dog,

    I refer again to the big drop in support for the Tories that came along with the LibDem boost. There was clearly a movement amongst those who were persuaded of the “Time for Change” agenda from Cameron to Clegg. All I am saying is that a voter who has made that journey (who may very well be in a Tory-Lab marginal, no reason to suppose they wouldn’t) is unlike to make the follow on journey to Brown. If they did it would suggest that the net effect of the LibDem boost was to increase the electability of Brown at the expense of Cameron, which I don’t think reflects the evidence available.

  14. @GreenG,

    Surely it must perplex you when the UK claims to have a left wing eg (lab/Lib). Surely with all your readin gof Bakunin etc.. you would describe these parties more as centrists?

  15. Tory support has peaked. It won’t go any higher.

  16. @neil a

    fair enough Neil, I see your logic too. Your position depends on shifters being able to shift from LAB-CON-LIB in enoug numbers

    Perfectly possible, especially if they are shifty characters in the first place

    ;-)

  17. @Rob A

    That’s ok – in fact the situation has “developed” since then and I have a more detailed “rumour” but won’t post it here.

  18. OK…

    PREAMBLE
    * Following the 2nd debate, things settled down at about CON 34, LAB 27.5, LIB 29.
    * Initial thoughts after bigotgate/3rd debate are that LAB lost about 1.5 percentage points, LIB gained about 0.5 percentage points, CON didn’t move. So we have a possible new equilibrium of CON 34, LAB 26, LIB 29.5.
    * Six polls due out tonight (YG, ComR, ICM, Populus, MORI, BPIX)
    * So taking the average of those six polls:

    CON
    If the average of those six polls for CON are

    * on/under 30.9: definite signs of a CON drop
    * between 31.0 and 31.9: tentative signs of a CON drop
    * between 32.0 and 35.9: no change, just MOE wibbling around 34
    * between 36.0 and 36.9: tentative signs of a CON surge
    * on/over 37.0: definite signs of a CON surge

    LIB
    If the average of those six polls for LIB are

    * on/under 25.9: definite signs of a LIB drop
    * between 26.0 and 26.9: tentative signs of a LIB drop
    * between 27.0 and 30.9: no change, just MOE wibbling around 29
    * on/over 31.0: further evidence of a LIB surge

    LAB
    If the average of those six polls for LAB are

    * on/under 24.9: further evidence of a LAB drop
    * between 25.0 and 28.9: no change, just MOE wibbling around 27
    * between 29.0 and 29.9: tentative signs of a LAB surge
    * on/over 30.0: definite signs of a LAB surge

  19. “either a) the feildwork is always rather outdated (eg Harris/TNS)”

    The Harris fieldwork was all post-debate, as per the Daily Mail.

    In the Graphic panel:

    h t t p://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1270171/Labour-course-worst-poll-result-92-years-support-crashes-just-24.html

  20. @Tony E,

    If oyu have been following harris you will no that this is the exception rather than the rule…
    also with sample sizes like their’s the MoE is as big as Jabba da hut’s butt :)

  21. “That’s ok – in fact the situation has “developed” since then and I have a more detailed “rumour” but won’t post it here.”

    Please do. We are willing to accept it’s just a rumour. Besides, reporting/analysing rumours is part of the fun of this site.

  22. @EoinC
    “Surely with all your readin gof Bakunin etc.. you would describe these parties more as centrists?”

    Indeed so – one of the limitations of having to get elected as a government (especially under FPTP)

    I suspect you will agree that GB’s heart is not pulsing in his manifesto but rather lying dormant. :-)

  23. Just write ‘Rumour’ in bold and capital letters at the top of your post.

  24. Pankot,

    No fair teasing everyone like that – if you have news, even if it’s just a rumour, please share!

    All,

    I’ve not been around much last 24 hours – so sorry to hear Al J’s news. Has anyone been able to get in touch to find out if he’s OK?

  25. @GreenG,

    100% correct. Tis a pity :(

  26. Pankot

    I love your “rumour” followed by “a more detailed rumour”. It sounds as if there is a rumour room full of number crunchers working to perfect a “rumour model” coupled with a sensitivity analysis. Seriously, don’t take this the wrong way – just a humorous diversion – I hope!

  27. lol ok

    **RUMOUR** for ICM

    Con 36
    LD 29
    Lab not known but in 3rd.

  28. @Colin Wobbles,

    ‘Conservatives are absolutely odds on to win Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire on ‘

    Just seen this old post.

    I think you have miscalculated the swing. The majority is 2063 which is a lead of 5.4%. Con will take it on a swing of 2.7% (ie half the lead). The current Lab/Con swing for Wales on the most recent poll was 3.65. That is why it is odds on to fall with the bookies.

  29. I think that we need to remember that pre-Clegg-bounce the Tories were generally around 36-38, sometimes higher, sometimes lower. If, as Mori have suggested, the Clegg bounce is largely from ex-don’t knows and won’t votes, their decline is largely due to increasing the effective pool of voters.

    The same is largely true of Labour.

    I think it is really down to strength of feeling – will Labour voters be disaffected or galvanised by fear of Tories? Will Tory voters grab the opportunity for a blue win, or are they fed up with policy-lite Cameron? And will the LibDem’s new voters lapse back into apathy?

  30. @Martyn
    @Pankot
    “**RUMOUR** for ICM

    Con 36
    LD 29
    Lab not known but in 3rd.”

    Could that be 35.9 and 28.9?

  31. There is an Angus Reid out today… Not yet released mind you

    IT will be bad news for Labour hoping for decent average %s., since AR give them a notoriously low share.

  32. @Greengrass – rofl

    We’re working on the 4th decimal at the moment.

  33. @Greengrass

    Could be, but I’ll work off the averages of the polls, not an individual one: the graphs are dancing like a heart attack victim as is. RL beckons: will post more (much) later tonight.

  34. @ SKUDOR

    “Let’s face it, M King wasn’t wrong when he said that the next government is getting a poisoned chalice.”

    Too right.

    You only have to watch the red flags on the streets of Greece & Portugal to see why he said that.

    A perverse part of me would like to see how a Labour government would face them here.

  35. John Rentoul is a reliable Tw T (insert vowel as you see fit)

    he has signalled that the ComR poll will be “interesting”. Given that he is a journalist for the left leaning indy, i’ll let you make of that what you will.

  36. @Colin
    “You only have to watch the red flags on the streets of Greece & Portugal to see why he said that.
    A perverse part of me would like to see how a Labour government would face them here.”

    You may not be the only one!

  37. @ MITZ

    SUE & I are regulary posting messages for AL J in case she feels up to visiting the site, even if she doesn’t feel up to posting anything.

    Everybody from her UKPR ‘family’ has sent messages of support but we don’t have any way of contacting her directly.

  38. @Andrew McCaig

    Way of working out swings is easy. Take the old % of votes of A from the new % of votes for A. Take the old % of votes for B from the new % of votes for B. Swing is half the combined difference between the two. Remember drops in votes is -ve and increase in votes is +ve.
    Swing A/B is (A Difference – B Difference)/2

    Easy to work out when you get the hang of it.

  39. There is something very amusing about all the posts spreading *rumours* about *possible* results of *one* of *tens* of polls being released over the next few days.

    I mean, there’s healthy speculation and analysis, and there’s unhealthy obsessiveness where you jump on every internet rumour as if it somehow validates everything you believe…… I wonder what some of the people here will do when the PM is elected – some of them will probably find out that their wife left them a fortnight ago!

  40. Good afternoon, everyone. I am very excited to see all the polls that are due out today!

    I am surprised that VI %s are always shown as integers… Due to rounding a movement from 34.5% (34%) to 34.6% (35%) wuld be seen to be a distinct movement whereas it is actually very minimal…

    This has probably been discussed before and I am late to the party!

  41. Dotski

    Well ignore them then. This is no place for elitism.

  42. ‘wonder what some of the people here will do when the PM is elected – some of them will probably find out that their wife left them a fortnight ago!’

    Every cloud …………. :)

  43. AmberS
    ” Everybody from her UKPR ‘family’ has sent messages of support but we don’t have any way of contacting her directly.”

    Anthony has and, if he does consider it appropriate, I would ask him to add my sympathy

  44. @ DOTSKI

    First post? A tad smug, IMO :-) But Hello & Welcome anyway.

  45. A perverse part of me would like to see how a Labour government would face them here.

    The “they got us into this mess, they can get us out” conjecture!

  46. Thanks Amber.

    Al J,

    Thinking of you. Some things are so much more important than anything else.

  47. Dotski

    Now I understand why the children have been pestering me with “Where’s Mummy?”

  48. I see some contributors on here have been debating the “shy tory” hypothesis again which suggests that the Tory vote, on the day, is always bigger than that predicted by the preceding polls, and vice versa for Labour. The theory goes that Tory voters are less willing to reveal their allegiances to pollsters, possibly because of the embarassment of being associated with a party perceived by many to be naff, unpopular or untrendy. The existence of this factor obviously gives succour to Tory sympathisers when presented with disappointing poll ratings for their party, allowing them to speculate on it all being “alright on the night” when the shy Tories reveal their true identity in the privacy of the polling booth. I’m sceptical about this, I have to say, and while I accept there was some evidence of this in Thatcher’s days, and in the 1992 election that Major won, I’ve seen no real evidence of the phenomenen manifesting itself since then, either in subsequent General Elections, Euro elections, Local Government elections or Parliamentary by-elections (and talking of by-elections, isn’t it extraordinary that the Tories have only won two against Labour since 1992? That would be another psephological fact that would cause me a slight queasiness as a Tory strategist as May 6th approaches).

    Besides, why would it be true now in current political circumstances? The zeitgest is Conservative, the print press and media almost universally so too and, if there’s been a better time to be self-avowed Tory in the last 20 years, could somebody please enlighten me when that was? Surely, if a shyness exists, isn’t it likely to be amongst Labour voters instead. Think of it like this. The party has been in power for 13 years and we’ve just been through the longest and deepest recession in 60 years. The party is led by a figure who has become the most publicly reviled and ridiculed politician that I think I can remember, with the possible exception of Major in 1997. Despite all this, there are arguments for sticking with them, but these arguments don’t play well in media studios, golf club bars and pubs. But they might play rather better in a polling booth.

    We’ll shortly find out.

  49. Eoin help me out of this hole I’ve dug please
    YouGov 28.4.10
    %s before allocating DK’s are
    %
    Total weighted polled 1530 100.0
    Con 430 28.1
    Lab 355 23.2
    LD 400 26.1
    Others deduced 122 8.0
    DK deduced 147 9.6
    NV 76 5.0

    After allocating DK’s and LTV adjustment (say 1%)

    Increase
    % %DK +LTV
    Total weighted voting 1454 100

    Con 494 34 44

    Lab 392 27 25

    LD 451 31 35

    Others 117 8 -4

    I’ve got a bit screwed up somewhere but see what you think – part of the Tories extra is LTV adjustment

  50. 1149 Patrick Hennessy, political editor of the Sunday Telegraph, is such a tease. He Tweets: “Sun Tel/ICM national poll shows significant moves for 2 of the 3 main parties post TVdebate -but which 2? And which direction? Details later”

    From the Torygraph’s election live blog.

1 10 11 12 13 14 16