Peter Kellner has a new commentary on the government’s approval ratings on the YouGov website here, looking at some of the cross-breaks behind the approval figures.

The decline from their peak at around the time of the budget, when 48% approved and 27% disapproved, is indeed largely down to Labour voters who had been suspending judgement now expressing their disapproval of the government. Approval of the government amongst Conservative voters remains strong (from 80% in June to 84% now), but looking at Labour supporters, 79% now say they disapprove of the government’s record with only 6% approving. In comparison, in mid-June only 51% of Labour voters had disapproved and 14% had approved.

Amongst Liberal Democrat supporters 53% approve of the government’s record, 19% disapprove and 28% don’t know. This is, however, amongst remaining Lib Dem supporters – amongst those people who voted Lib Dem at the 2010 election only 40% approve of the government’s record with 36% disapproving. It’s just that a lot of those former Lib Dem voters who disapprove of the coalition’s performance would no longer vote Lib Dem in an election tomorrow.

On that subject, we’ve also looked at the current voting intentions of people who say they voted Lib Dem at the general election, finding some support for the assumption that they’ve disproportionately shifted over to Labour. Only 46% of those claiming to have voted LibDem in 2010 say they would vote Lib Dem tomorrow, with 18% saying they would vote Labour, 8% Conservative, 5% other parties and 18% saying don’t know or wouldn’t vote.


82 Responses to “Govt approval and where those Lib Dems have gone”

1 2
  1. Jack

    Excellent post. I was to say this but on the refresh I see Roland already said it. It doesn’t invalidate my view. I believe the time could be shorter but this depends on the AV outcome.

    If the socialist turkeys vote for Christmas (remember AV could deliver them a landslide with no arguments about constituency differences) then I believe your 18 month timescale is about right.

    Report comment

  2. “That is conditional on it not falling apart in the next 18 months.”

    Spot on for very sensible evaluation.

    Report comment

  3. @ Wayne, Martyn & all who keep insisting the finances were in bad shape before the banking crisis.

    Please look back to Cameron & Osbornes speeches etc. prior to that crisis. They were comitting to continue with the same levels of public spending as Labour.

    The Dems had no plans to cut spending either. They were going to move it around more by cancelling Trident & reducing further education fees (or even remove altogether) but they were fine with Labour’s level of public spending.

    I will just keep posting this every time you chaps try to re-write the history of financial politics. 8-)

    Report comment

  4. @Amber Star – “Please look back to Cameron & Osbornes speeches etc. prior to that crisis. They were comitting to continue with the same levels of public spending as Labour.”

    I’m glad at least ONE other person remembers this! One of the many things I would have like to have heard being hammered home during the election campaign.

    Report comment

  5. Amber – Don’t like 30% cuts? Gracious how tribal. Nothing to do with their effects of course.

    Not convinced by AV? How tribal. Nothing to do with the fact it’s rubbish, of course.

    Dislike Clegg? How tribal. Nothing to do with his performance of course.

    Still, we’re just girlies. As if we could ever make our own decisions…..

    Report comment

  6. @Amber Star……………I agree that the finances were manageable prior to the meltdown, but they were based on heavy borrowing, having inherited, good set of numbers, Brown, to his credit, stuck to the Tory plans for two years, then he went mad. :-)

    Report comment

  7. Re spending : Your position is either

    a) our finances were a disgrace before 2010 election

    or

    b) our country was a disgrace before 1997 election.

    Never the twain shall meet.

    Report comment

  8. @ Sue Marsh………..Bingo ! :-)

    Report comment

  9. Roland – You say the nicest things ;)

    Ken – Just replied to a comment of yours ona nother thread, but in case you never see it:

    Ken 1.35 pm (Opposition to AV growing)

    I remember your position very well during the election – it was you who convinced me of FPTP. I remember saying something like, “against all probable logic, you have won me over to FPTP”

    It might even have been before Clegg became ridiculous.

    It’s the glamour and intrigue, I can’t help myself.

    Report comment

  10. @Amber

    You said (regarding who keep insisting the finances were in bad shape before the banking crisis) “…Please look back to Cameron & Osbornes speeches etc. prior to that crisis. They were comitting to continue with the same levels of public spending as Labour. The Dems had no plans to cut spending either…”

    You make a valid point. Although I contend spending was out of control before the crisis, I must concede that few were pointing fingers and actually saying this, and that no party comes out of this with much more credit than any other.

    And on that happy note of agreement, I must be off for now. Regards, Martyn

    Report comment

  11. Actually Roland, I have a serious question if I may?

    I think you and I felt much the same about DC before the election. I’m not sure if either of us felt he was up to much as a statesman or a politician.

    Since the election, he has seemed much improved, (Bloody Sunday, Afghanistan, devastating coalition bargaining tactics) yet even so, I’ve been surprised at just how favourable the comments have been – even from posters here like Eoin – at how well his personal ratings are holding up and also by how popular he is with women voters.

    Are you convinced? Have you changed your opinion of him? Hope you don’t mind me asking, but I know you’ll give me an authentic answer.

    Report comment

  12. @ Sue Marsh…………..Sue, I also remember you explaining your canvassing technique, and now I realise why you are so successful………..Oooooh. you are lovely. :-)

    Report comment

  13. Cameron says we were the junior partners in 1940 when we were fighting Germany and we are the junior partners now. What a knob. Who were we junior partners to in 1940? The French? But they surrendered in June1940 and took up cheese eating.
    No the fool means America which of course did not enter the war until December 7th 1941. So Dave picks the one year out of 6 that Britain stood alone. Dont these people have anyone to check what they come out with?

    Report comment

  14. @Howard
    Can’t figure out your reasoning about possible 18 month timescale for end of coalition. Can you explain.

    Report comment

  15. Interesting article by Lord Ashcroft no less on Conservative Home about AV – based on a Populus poll of 6000 voters in marginal seats. Comes to the tentative conclusion that maybe the Conservatives would not be hurt as much by AV as is usually thought.

    Report comment

  16. Roland – Yesterday, Cameron was introduced by Phil Redmond of Grange Hill fame and said that Gripper Stebson was his childhood hero. Gripper was a really nasty bully who made lives a misery and was expelled.

    Surely someone MUST have checked that one?

    Is a researcher about to be fired, or is Cameron boasting to the ignorant masses?

    Report comment

  17. @SUE
    I think he is a very smart politician who longs to be a statesman. Whether he will attain that level remains to be seen. As for the female voter popularity, it figures, he has a bit of charm, a very pretty, very pregnant wife, who he clearly adores. The death of his son and his family life make him appear “normal”. With the excrement thats coming up, if he can hold it together, he will be a statesman. If not, an over promoted little oik from a posh family.

    Report comment

  18. @ Roland

    Making ‘junior partner’ coalition remarks about WWII seems a bit off-side, IMO.

    Report comment

  19. RE Cameron as “statesman”

    Have just watched the extraordinary Press Conference with Obama.

    The personal chemistry was palpable. Obama was gushing. I didn’t expext it. DC clearly gets on with him.

    I guess being able to agree with BO that the decision on Magrahi was wrong, will have helped.

    DC looked & sounded like a “statesman” .

    Report comment

  20. Gonna have to go and watch this now.

    Two blues with completely different view….

    “Statesman” or “Knob”?

    Report comment

  21. “Making ‘junior partner’ coalition remarks about WWII seems a bit off-side, IMO.”

    He didn’t.

    The junior partner remarks came in a interview about his “realism” over “the special relationship”ie that USA is bigger & more powerful than UK.

    In the Press Conference, they both reminded us that British troops & US troops have died together over many years.

    Cameron said they had done so from “the beaches of Normandy” , through other named conflicts, to “afghanistan”. He was moving & sincere in this passage-and was emphasising-as did BO, that all these men paid the same price-equally.

    Report comment

  22. SUE

    ” “Knob”?”

    Who said that?

    Report comment

  23. @Colin

    “The personal chemistry was palpable. Obama was gushing. I didn’t expect it. DC clearly gets on with him.”

    Yep- immediately reminded me of Blair and Bush and the toothpaste ‘joke’.

    Let’s hope Cameron has the good sense to follow a centre-left President (or M*rxist as Faux News call him)- particularly in his use of Keynesian demand management policy- in the opposite of the way Blair followed a Conservative President.

    I think the latter is always a disaster whilst the former path lies nirvana !

    Report comment

  24. ROB SHEFFIELD

    “Let’s hope Cameron has the good sense to follow a centre-left President (or M*rxist as Faux News call him)- particularly in his use of Keynesian demand management policy”

    I have news for you.

    You need to get up to date.

    But go watch the PC for yourself.

    ( “demand management”-oh boy!)

    Report comment

  25. Colin – I was quoting Roland further up the thread who is most agitated by his gaffs.

    Report comment

  26. @colin

    “I have news for you.

    You need to get up to date.

    But go watch the PC for yourself.”

    The emperor has no clothes :-)
    .

    Report comment

  27. ROB SHEFFIELD

    “The emperor has no clothes ”

    Try to communicate Rob,-I don’t know what that means.

    What I meant was BO had things to say about his attitude to their deficit/debt-and his plans for tackling it “whilst recovering from recession”…”which will be difficult”……..which did not sound like the Keynsian you so desperately want him to be..

    Report comment

  28. Perhaps Roland meant, ‘ nob ‘ as in noble, rather than , ‘ knob ‘ as in knob. :-)

    Report comment

  29. Ken – More probably both?

    Report comment

  30. Ken – A Knob-Nob?

    (Sorry AW, got the giggles)

    Report comment

  31. In Cameron’s defense I think what he meant was 1940′s (as in the whole period). Although that still doesn’t make sense why he would consider Britain the junior partners at that time.

    Report comment

  32. There is actually a new thread although it’s a bit elderly now

    Report comment

1 2