Tonight we have the first voting intentions since the General election. ComRes in the Independent on Sunday/Sunday Mirror have voting intentions of CON 38%, LAB 34%, LDEM 21%. From the general election the Liberal Democrats are down and Labour up, presumably a direct defection of Liberal Democrat voters who are more inclined to Labour and opposed to the party joing the Conservatives in coalition.

41% of respondents thought that the Liberal Democrats had sold out their principles, with 47% disagreeing. This included 34% of Liberal Democrat votes. 35% of respondents agreed with the statement that Nick Clegg should have opted for a coalition with Labour rather than one with the Conservatives, that includes 33% of Liberal Democrats (presumably 33% of remaining Liberal Democrats, as opposed to 33% of those who voted Lib Dem in 2010).

ICM in the Sunday Telegraph have voting intention figures of CON 38%, LAB 33%, LDEM 21%. The figures there are almost identical to ComRes, and show the same pattern – a 3 point or so shift of support from the Lib Dems towards Labour.

ICM’s other questions found 64% of respondents backing the coalition as the right way forward. Asked about specific policies, 75% backed keeping inheritance tax and increasing capital gains tax in order to increase the personal tax allowance, 63% supported fixed term Parliaments, 56% backed a change to AV. ICM also asked about the Labour leadership – 32% backed David Miliband, 11% Harriet Harman, 9% Ed Miliband, 8% Ed Balls and Burnham and Cruddas were both on 2%. Bear in mind, however, that leadership questions like this reflect recognition to a great degree – most people will have little or no idea who Andy Burnham or Jon Cruddas are. If you go back to questions on the Tory leadership straight after the 2005 election Ken Clarke tended to be the winner, with Cameron around 2%-4%.


960 Responses to “New ComRes and ICM polls”

1 2 3 20
  1. Both Polls confirm the anti-Labour majority?

    64% support the Coalition in the Torygraph poll

  2. Don’t winning parties usually get a post-election boost in the polls? I remember that happening in 1992 but perhaps that was a one-off.

  3. I noticed that Ed has parked his campaign on Cruddas’ ground with his speech at the Fabian Society today.

    Is this a cynical attempt to split the lefts vote to help his older brother out?

  4. As a LD not as bad as I feared .

    Confirms the view that maybe 1 in 10 of LD supporters are defecting in ‘disgust’ at the coalition .

    Lets see what it looks like when the cuts start to bite !

  5. @ Matthew

    Sue Marsh was trying to dig up whether a post-election boost for the winning party was the norm.

    Apparently so, it seems. For Labour to have picked up 3-4% since the GE & 5-6% since the prior ICM/ ComRes poll is a ‘new politics’ story. A significant % of LibDems are not happy, so far, with their party’s current situation.

  6. I can not uinderstand why people are upset. All the polls indicated the Tories would get the highest vote and most seats. Clegg said he would deal first with the party that got most seats/vote.

  7. It is remarkable that Labour are up 3-4% despite having no leader and having lost the election, with Cameron now PM and Brown having resigned.

    It doesn’t bode well for the Lib Dems that there has already been a swing away from them and to Labour – and thats before the government have done anything right-wing and unpopular to their own supporters.

    On the Labour leadership I would agree that it is meaningless as very few will recognise many of the runners and riders. However it is interesting that Harriet Harman is so highly recognised having ruled herself out. Maybe she will regret not going for it.

  8. I think if Labour handles itself well in the next six months this could be a historical turning point…perhaps the most significant since the Liberal surge in the 1974 election…

    I don’t think the Labour Party is about to repeat its mistakes in 1971-73 and after 1979…but I could be wrong…

    But all in all this is encouraging for them…now they need to select a leader who connects via the media new and old…

  9. Thank goodness we’ve got some VI polls to talk about. I was getting withdrawal symtoms.
    This is exactly the trends we can expect. Cons won’t do too badly in the long run with this coalition as it puts them in the centre and softens their more unacceptable right-wing policies.
    For the LD’s though, it will prove to be a disaster.
    I was criticised for predicting the result of the next election a couple of days ago, too far away some people reckoned.
    But it’s never too far away for us poll junkies.
    Next GE, Labour at 42% and an OM, Cons at 32%, LD’s 18%.
    And yes, if I’m right or close, I AM petty enough to dig out this prediction in 5 years time. ;)

  10. These results if repeated would see the Conservatives drop about twenty and Labout up about same….different ball game altogether….

  11. What would be interesting would be to see where the Lib Dems support has fallen away. I suspect they will have lost most of their support in northern cities such as Liverpool and Sheffield where many voters thought the Lib Dems were more left-wing than Labour and are probably feeling betrayed.

  12. I don’t think one should read too much into these 2 polls. That said, the numbers are almost exactly what you’d expect.

    Anti -Tories leaving the Lid Dems, some would say disappointing for Labour now that GB is factored out and Anti-Tory consolidation in their number of 33-34%.

  13. So basically what these polls are saying is that if everyone who defected to the lib dems, hoping for a liblab coalition, had voted labour we would have had a liblab coalition. Oh the irony must be sickening ;)

  14. JG

    A projection 5 years hence is brave. Surely it will depend on the electoral system in use then?

    The drop in LD support is surely explicable by anti-blue tactical voters going home to Labour.

  15. @ Gary

    I don’t know as well Sheffield as Liverpool, but in Liverpool LibDems are considered a rightwing party – and they are in local politics. So the argument does not hold (and lost the city anyway).

  16. @JACK JACKSON

    “Anti -Tories leaving the Lid Dems, some would say disappointing for Labour now that GB is factored out and Anti-Tory consolidation in their number of 33-34%.”

    Not really.

    Normally the polls straight after a general election tend to be better for the governing party and worse for the defeated party.

    This poll seems to reverse that trend slightly.

    Also it shows Labour support has risen to higher than it was at any time in the campaign despite the fact that they technically have no leader, have just lost an election and need to create a whole new policy platform.

    I think Labour will be optimistic based on that – post election they are clearly not disliked as much as the Tories were back in 1997 when they were rejected after a long time in office.

    It offers a good platform for Labour to build upon – of course they could always mess it up by choosing a poor leader and policies and the ConLib deal could be more successful than people think.

    We will have to see – long way to go until the next election I suspect – especially if the 55% rule is passed.

  17. A pretty short honeymoon. I was expecting general approval num,bers in the upper 70’s/ early 80’s and Labour to be the same as election.

    These ‘pro’ coalition figures are not party specific they are ‘what else could we have done’ numbers. As government decisions and contradictory messages emanate over the coming months this will fall.

    Conversely, the party specific numbers are the….er, party specific numbers. They tell their own story…..on day THREE of the coaliton.

    As someone else alludes to: not a single decision taken yet and DEMS already down 3/4%.

  18. @LAZSLO

    “I don’t know as well Sheffield as Liverpool, but in Liverpool LibDems are considered a rightwing party – and they are in local politics. So the argument does not hold (and lost the city anyway).”

    Fair enough. My main point was that there may be some cities or areas where the Lib Dems have a disproportionate loss of support in comparison to others. Where they lose their support would be crucial in terms of the effect on the election result and on future council, Scottish, Welsh or European elections.

  19. @BILL R
    Brave or just reckless? ;)
    These polls are not just interesting for the drop in LD support. They are remarkable for the rise in Labour support so soon. After 13 years in government , a week after losing the election they’re on the way up again.
    For the Tories it’s not too bad, but there’s not going to be much of a honeymoon. Not so much a Caribbean cruise as a weekend in Skegness.
    Definitely new politics.

  20. @ Gary

    You are right (just wanted to say that the UK is rather colourful and in cities like Liverpool non-Labour means right of the national party – when there were Tory MPs and a fairly strong conservative council group around here, they were also right of the national party) and I think LibDems will loose not only in Labour areas, but also in Tory ones. And I think their biggest fear is about council and devolved elections. They are more reliant on local party units than the other two parties.

  21. I wouldn’t pay too much attention to these polls until after the conference season. By then Labour will have a new leader and if there is to be a bloodbath it will be then. As the tories right wing has had to soften, so will labours nanny state/authoritarian position.

    Personally speaking I like the language that Ed Milliband used and I think it will appeal to those labour supporters who didn’t agree with the Iraq war and hopefully the wider electorate.

  22. Just to illustrate that Labour is not doing as badly as other losing parties here is the ICM poll after the 1997 election:

    Lab 62%
    Con 23%
    Lib 14%
    Oth 2%

    Thats a 39% Labour lead.

    Makes the Tories 5% lead look a bit poor in comparison.

  23. @Richard

    I suspect that many of the “1 in 10 of LD supporters” defecting were actually Labour-supporting tactical voters. Presumably they will be happy when they don’t vote tactically and get a Conservative majority government.


    56% for AV, but how many against rather than don’t knows?

    Have the pollsters worked out how they would deal with AV? Would they just ask about first preferences and, if so, is that enough to make a reasonable projection of seats?

  24. Quid of Harriet Harman? Could she be a credible option? After all, eight socialist parties in Europe have female leaders (Denmark, France, Finland, Flanders, Hungary, Iceland, N. Ireland, Sweden), of which one is already PM (Iceland) and three others are expected to rise in power soon (Sweden, Denmark, France).

  25. Polls at this stage don’t mean very much at all. Perhaps it’s surprising that there hasn’t been a honeymoon but these are unique circumstances. The total votes for Tory and LibDem combined are only very slightly below the GE scores so the support for “The Coalition” hasn’t fallen. There is obviously a drop in LibDem support amongst anti-Tory voters, but it is only around 2-3% (ie around 10% of their total vote). If 90% of LibDem supporters are sufficiently supportive of the party to keep on board after they’ve hooked up with the Tories, then that’s not really disaster.

    I’d expect the support for the coalition to fall once the tax rises and spending cuts come into force. I think by the time Labour has a new leader the polls will probably be around level pegging. But that’s the price of honest government. I think Cameron and Clegg are counting on getting the pain out of the way in the first three years so that the trajectory into the next election is upwards.

    Ultimately, whatever the public thinks of this outcome, it’s what they collectively voted for.

  26. !997 is not the election that should compare to this one. It was a landslide election.

    This is a much tighter one.

    64 is probably the nearest comparison after 13 years of Conservative Government.

    74 maybe not really, it followed a 4 year Tory administration that was inept

  27. @ richard dawson

    agree entirely re lib dem support and think NC should be reasonably content this Sunday morning.

    Given that the pollsters were asking a daft question – offering people an option of a Labour LD coalition that no-one ever agreed even had the votes – to be almost within the margin of error of their election showing is perfectly respectable.

    @ gary

    You think its amazing that Labour without a leader has gone up?

    I’d have been amazed if Labour – without Gordon Brown – had not gone up, since he was the ‘game-changer’. What might have been if Miliband or Johnson had had the courage to challenge him…..

  28. Given that ICM is now officially the Gold Standard- I am sticking with their scores. Blueys gaining from polling day and reds but others on just 8 (Hmm….). LDs are in freefall and it will get worse and worse and worse.

  29. So, the polls say:

    * ComRes (May 15th): CONDEM 59% (38+21), LAB 34%
    * ICM (May 15th): CONDEM 59% (38+21), LAB 33%
    * YouGov (May 12th): CONDEM 60% approve, 33% disapprove
    * YouGov (May 11th): CONDEM 56% approve, 38% disapprove

    Initial signs are *very* good for coalition forces – as Gary points out, LAB had 62% immediately after the 1997 election. And LAB went on to stay in power for thirteen years…

  30. @ Eoin Clarke

    Freefall? -3pc?!

    What does that make Labour’s rise? Astonomic? Stellar?

    Let’s keep some sense of proportion shall we?

    Wishful thinking on your part I rather think.

  31. Pre and post election ICM polls 1992, 1997, 2001, 2005 and 2010 compared.

    1992

    LAB 38% then 34%
    CON 38% then 45%
    LIB 20% then 17%
    OTH 4% then 4%

    Thats an 11% widening to the winning party

    1997

    LAB 43% then 61%
    CON 33% then 23%
    LIB 18% then 12%
    OTH 6% then 4%

    Thats a 28% widening for the winning party.

    2001

    LAB 43% then 46%
    CON 32% then 30%
    LIB 19% then 18%
    OTH 6% then 6%

    Thats a 5% widening for the winning party.

    2005

    LAB 38% then 38%
    CON 32% then 31%
    LIB 22% then 23%
    OTH 8% then 8%

    Just a 1% widening for the winning party.

    2010

    LAB 28% then 33%
    CON 36% then 38%
    LIB 26% then 21%
    OTH 10% then 8%

    A 3% shrinking of the lead for the winning party.

  32. I have just picked up a rumour that Frank Field has agreed to be DC’s poverty Czar.

    Can anyone confirm please?

  33. Either quite a few Labour supporters approve of the coalition, or the supporters of the small parties are pretty much unanimous in doing so….

  34. @Gary

    You said “…It is remarkable that Labour are up 3-4% despite having no leader and having lost the election, with Cameron now PM and Brown having resigned…”

    It is remarkable. But I do need to point out that with CONDEM at ~60% VI, 34% for LAB is nowhere near close enough.

    You said “…It doesn’t bode well for the Lib Dems that there has already been a swing away from them and to Labour – and thats before the government have done anything right-wing and unpopular to their own supporters…”

    That’s true actually. After a firestorm of negative reporting from the Mail, disbelief and disgust from Melanie Phillips and whatsisname from the New Statesman on “Question Time”, expressions of disbelief from the MyFaceSpaceBookThing generation, Jeremy Paxman doing the curlylippy thing and David Dimbleby going “ewww” in the patrician way that only he can, LIB support has dropped from 24% (GB) at the election to…21%. Wow: three whole percentage points! Of course, those numbers can keep dropping as those who’ve left can leave again, and again, and…but whoops, you can’t leave twice.

    I am worried by the meme building up in Labour circles that a) LIB votes were only ever protest votes by people who wanted a Labour government *really*, b) the ConDem Nation will last only five minutes and there’ll be an election…oooh, in six month *tops*, and c) one big heave and LAB will be back in 10 Downing Street easy, no messing.

    Conversely, it *just* might be that a) LIB actually does have a core vote, b) the coalition might actually be quite popular and last 4-5 years, and c) by focussing on personalities instead of policy ideas, LAB is failing to get to grips with its lack of a new narrative.

  35. Ref Frank Field. Got it. Its in the Telegraph.

    He hasn’t agreed the rumour is that he will be offered it.

    soory if I gave anyone heart attack !!!!!

  36. @Cardicam,

    Naive ot say the least.

    We cannot compare ICM and ComRes with the actual election.

    We compare ICM and ComRes with the last figures they gave Liberal Democrats…

    Given that Yellows were grossly overestimated, it is silly/naive to take this 21% at face value.

    It is not wishful thinking on my part but entirely logical to deduce that they have been overestimated again…

    That is unless ICM and ComR want to tell us of methodological changes

    Well have they?

    No I think not!

    Ah well…………

  37. Cardicam,

    Also on UNS the Liberal Democrats would lose 20% of their seats if these results were repeated at an election….

    That in my book, given that the election was only last week constitutes free fall…

    Also, do not put words in my nouth- I said nothing of reds except to note that they were up…

    Wishful thinking ? Nah.

  38. Viriglio,

    Harriet Harman has said she will not stand. She is of course a hate figure for the right, but has been a very effective public face of New Labour, especially in the run up to the 1997 election. She is currently ‘acting leader’; she did have periods when she was ‘out of favour’ with Blair though.

  39. @MARTIN

    “Conversely, it *just* might be that a) LIB actually does have a core vote, b) the coalition might actually be quite popular and last 4-5 years, and c) by focussing on personalities instead of policy ideas, LAB is failing to get to grips with its lack of a new narrative.”

    Please don’t misunderstand my remarks Martin. I did state that this was a possibility that the coalition could be popular or Labour could ‘mess it up’.

    The more general point I was making was that Labour are NOT that far behind the Conservatives in terms of popular support. Certainly they are closer than the Conservatives were in 2005.

    Combining the Liberal Democrats and Conservatives score is onlt useful in polling terms if the two parties eiher merge or refuse to put candidates against each other at a future election. I see no likelihood of this happening.

    More generally about the Lib Dem support – my point was merely that it will be interesting to see how their poll numbers hold-up if there are decisions made in government that are unpopular with their own supporters/voters. The same could also apply to the Conservatives.

  40. Of course Labour may be seen more favourably now as Gordon Brown has gone and they are out of government. The polls continue a trend from beofre the election with Labour rising and the LDs falling – peaking too late / early.

    I think we should wait for a new trend over the next couple of months – there sin’t going to be an election now.

  41. This is an opportunity of a lifetime to really damage the Labour movement. Imagine the coalition works, Britain is stronger and in 5 years time there is AV voting. Imagine the relationship that the LD and Cons have built up over working together for 5 years. They share ideas and trust each other The leaders debate, Clegg and Cameron are hardly likely to slag each other off, Cameron could say ‘Vote Conservative and put LibDem down as second choice’ Clegg vice versa – What would the labour leader say? Vote labour and 2nd choice er um? Think of a seat like Ed Balls where the vote was Lab 18000, Con 17000 and LD 8000. Quite possible coalition votes combined could oust Labour in safeish seats. Suppose I’ve been hitting the bottle too much. Oh well I can dream cant I

  42. @ Eoin Clarke

    I meant wishful thinking in relation to your ‘fall and fall and fall’ point.

    Unless you can see the future or you are a time traveller, that’s pure random and pointless guesswork – or, er, wishful thinking. .

    Truth is none of us have the slightest idea what is going to happen in the next 1,2,3 or 4 years and all of this tonight (while maybe fun) doesn’t add up to a row of beans.

    We are in totally unknown territory, both because of the coalition and impending cuts. All comments more sensible when both had had time to bed in and we’re six months off an election. No-one has a clue…..

  43. I think it’s a dangerous assumption of putting everyone in favour of CONDEM coalition as being Con Lib supporters – they’ll be Labour supporters who agree this was the only option for stability and certainly those against, can’t be assumed as being Labour/Other supporters – they’ll be CONS and LIB’s amongst these.

  44. @adrian – you say dream, i’d say bloody fantasy – it’s virtually win win for Labour – sole opposition to what will be an unpopular government – they should clean up.

  45. @Cardicam,

    I’ve dealt with hundreds of posts like you in my time. Effortless these days.

    I have analysed minor coalition partners polling performances.

    I have analysed polling trends following honeymoon periods.

    I have read intently other posters analysis such as Virgilio on international example sof which I was not aware.

    Thus, my reasoning whether you like it or not, is not grounded in a tardis.

    You stick to your way of doing it, I’ll stick to minue. It has served me well thus far :P

  46. @ Eoin Clarke

    Are you the only person left in Britain who thinks still UNS is even worth considering?

    I thought it died on May 6/7?

  47. @Cardicam

    Enlighten me with your analysis of UNS performance of the UK GE 2010?

    I’m intrigued. Do you swallow rhetoric you read or have you conducted an analysis of UNS performance?

    Hmmm…..

  48. “Ref Frank Field. Got it. Its in the Telegraph.

    He hasn’t agreed the rumour is that he will be offered it.”

    Yes John-to work with IDS.

    Another good move by DC.

    Hope FF accepts-a dream ticket with IDS

    This is a race against time-to remove the need for a Labour Government in five years.

  49. @ADRIAN

    “Vote labour and 2nd choice er um? Think of a seat like Ed Balls where the vote was Lab 18000, Con 17000 and LD 8000. Quite possible coalition votes combined could oust Labour in safeish seats. Suppose I’ve been hitting the bottle too much. Oh well I can dream cant I”

    Interesting idea – it would of course stand or fall on the popularity of the coalition and how many of the LD voters are unhappy with the direction the party has taken. Also, would such an attempt be popular or be punished by the voters?

    I’m not certain that Labours bid for tactical voting helped them in the last days of the election.

    The Ed Balls example might not hold up for example if some of the LD voters switch back to Labour on the basis that they are anti-tory. Certainly there is a strong anti-Tory bias in the Wakefield half of that constituency. I suspect that Ed Balls may increase his majority at the next election and the Lib Dem vote may be well down but we will see.

  50. @John Fletcher

    You said “…I have just picked up a rumour that Frank Field has agreed to be DC’s poverty Czar…”

    See->www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/david-cameron/7728859/David-Cameron-lines-up-Labours-Frank-Field-as-poverty-tsar.html

    It does appear that the latest (rumoured) appointee to the Coalition Provisional Authority for the United Kingdom is Frank Field. If this continues, my only-in-jest suggestion that Peter Mandelson be reappointed as European Commissioner for Trade (on grounds of sheer ability) may actually come into existence: it certainly couldn’t be more surprising…

1 2 3 20