Saturday normally doesn’t see any polls being published, so I missed a new ComRes poll for the Indy last night. Topline figures were CON 39%(+2), LAB 36%(+1), LDEM 15%(nc), Others 10%(-3). Changes are from ComRes’s previous online poll a fortnight ago and the poll was conducted wholly after Ed Miliband’s leader’s speech.

Last week I also missed a YouGov Welsh poll. Voting intention figures there with changes from August’s YouGov/ITV Wales poll are CON 22%(nc), LAB 44%(+5), LDEM 11%(+1), Plaid 19%(-4) for the constituency vote; CON 20%(-1), LAB 41%(+2), LDEM 12%(+3), Plaid 19%(-4) for the regional vote. Voing intention in the referendum on extra powers for the Welsh Assembly stands at YES 49%(+1), NO 30%(-2).

111 Responses to “New ComRes VI and YouGov Welsh polls”

1 2 3
  1. It be very good for Welsh Labour if the Yougov poll for the Welsh Assembly was translated into votes for the Asembly next year. However I think that it is more likely a blip. I think that Labour is still between 39% – 42% and that Plaid are still slightly ahead of the Tories.

  2. As said in the other thread- given a new leader AND a conference this is a very disappointing poll for Labour.

    Explanations regarding media bias don’t really cut-it.

  3. It is worth noting the massive overrepresentation in LD voters in the Comres sample ( as in their previous online poll ) which needed large weighting adjustments to the Labour and LD figures . In the unwighted sample the vote at the last GE was Con 38 LD 29 Lab 24 .
    I would suggest Comres and Yougov exchange some of their panel it may help to stop Comres oversampling LibDems and Yougov undersampling them .

  4. YG Wlaes poll also asked voters if they’d be more likely to back Labour if ed or Dave (Mili) was in charge… They marginally favoured Ed M, evidence I think that Ed plays more to heartlands…

  5. Eoin

    “They marginally favoured Ed M, evidence I think that Ed plays more to heartlands…”

    One of the reasons why he did not get any of my preferences ;-)

    The key question? Which we won’t know the answer to for at least 6 months maybe even 12.

    Does he ONLY play to the Labour heartlands?

    Or can he construct a pan geographic/ cross income group coaltion?

    Without that we lose in 2013-2015.

  6. The methodolgy for ComR says that they telephoned people ‘online’

    What does that mean?


    politics Home say they conducted an email poll and weighted it… did they do it themselves or did YG do it for them?

  7. Given the refereindum to set up the assembly was only won by a squeak the big lead on extra powers is very positive for the initial devolution.

  8. @ Rob

    If I’d said, right after the election, that following Labour’s conference they’d be neck & neck with the Tories – wouldn’t you have bitten my hand off?

  9. Middle-class

    Instead of blethering ’round with terms like “middle-class”, (which can mean anything to anybody), let’s look at some actual salaries

    * 10-15K: call-centre, secretarial, library assistant
    * 15-25K: soldier, nurse, IT worker
    * 25-35K: accountant, statistician
    * 35-50K: lawyer, quant
    * 50-70K: actuary, MP
    * 70-100K: GP
    * 100K+: surgeon

    All salaries are:
    * approximate
    * pa
    * for people in their first job on/after qualification
    * national averages

    All salaries will be larger for:
    * people moved up the supervisory ladder
    * older people
    * people in the South-East of England

    No account has been taken of auxiliary factors (e.g. pensions, transferability of skills)

    So. Are any politicians willing to commit to an actual number rather than arbitrary terms like “middle-class”?


    If those numbers continue to go in that direction, then I suspect, (given the current popularity of coalitions), LAB would continue with the existing LAB/Plaid WAG coalition. Geraint, comment?

    Regards, Martyn

  10. Eoin

    I think Anthony has said in the past that the “more likely to / less likely to” questions aren’t particularly useful.

    Either that, or half the Labour vote in Wales is soft, and depends on which leader they have!

  11. Con +2 Lab +1 the week after the Lab conference with their new “different” leader? That’s poor result isn’t it? Could it be the labour bounce was already factored in so they’re simply holding steady. Con have their conference starting tomorrow and there’s news of IDS’ benefit reforms breaking the news. I expect Con to be surging a bit this week. Labour should be disappointed.

  12. Old Nat,


  13. jimjam

    “Given the referendum to set up the assembly was only won by a squeak the big lead on extra powers is very positive for the initial devolution.”

    I’m not sure that it’s ” very positive for the initial devolution” – unless you are arguing that getting a Welsh Government with minimal powers has persuaded the majority (of those would vote) to go for more powers. That was the great fear of the Brits here (and, I presume, in Wales who saw devolution as a “slippery slope”.)

  14. Eoin – I think it means they’ve made an error in describing it! I’m assuming it’s a standard online poll. PoliticsHome polls have nothing to do with YouGov, I believe they have a small panel of a few thousand who they survey every day.

  15. @Amber

    “If I’d said, right after the election, that following Labour’s conference they’d be neck & neck with the Tories – wouldn’t you have bitten my hand off?”

    As you have asked me directly: I think we would have a greater-than-m.o.e. *lead* by now (4-5%) had the leadership result gone the other way. There I said it.

    That aside: trailing the Tories in both YG and CR polls with the ICM lead is not good enough this weekend IMHO.

    But I hope EdM is as good as you predict over the coming 6-12 months because I want us to win.


    Social class in the UK has historically- and as far as I am aware only- been linked to/ defined by occupational status not income level.

    So: the blue collar (manual skilled and unskilled) employed/ white collar (non manual and professional) employed/ landed-inheritee threeway delineation.

    Though- granted- as income diversity has become so extreme since 1986 then specific income levels have also been deployed as well.

    Also the USA style ‘underclass’ (no skills, no job, wholly entitlement dependent) which has grown up in the UK since the 1980’s is also a complicating factor to social group analysis, as has been large scale net inward migration.

    Overall though the blue collar-white collar split is still of some analytical use: note also that in 1974 blue collar status was roughly ascribed to two thirds of the electorate and white collar a third.

    By 2005 these proportions had totally reversed….

  16. Garry
    Like old nat I appreciate the complement
    P G Woodhouse captured it saying “it is never too difficult to tell the difference between a Scotsman with a grievance and a ray of sun-shine”

  17. Rob Sheffield:


    The ABC1 vs. C2DE analysis is still useful. However, the difference in voting intention between these two groups has become significantly smaller over the last quarter of a century.

    Clearly other issues, apart from social class, are assuming a greater importance in determining party allegiance. Possibly attitudes towards things such as race, immigration and gay rights – which tend to be determined by levels of education rather than by social class – now have greater significance than before?

    Perhaps this reflects similar trends in the US – where wealthy socially liberal north eastern states like Connecticut have, over time, moved from the Republican to the Democratic column (whereas poorer southern states – like West Virginia – have moved in the opposite direction).

  18. Anthony,

    Ta for that.

    Ref ComR online panel… when did they implement it? They had an unweighted automated response panel of 15,000 for the ITV PM debates- is it an extension from that? I have noticed their sample sizes are regularly up to 2000ish now, as opposed to their 500 rolling samples…

  19. @ Rob Sheffield

    As you have asked me directly: I think we would have a greater-than-m.o.e. *lead* by now (4-5%) had the leadership result gone the other way. There I said it.
    Let me explain why you are wrong. The Tories & media have had a long time to prepare for a David Miliband win. They had an absolute battery of negatives ready to throw at him – “A Coronation of the bottler who could have chosen to usurp Brown but didn’t have the guts” would have been the least of it, I’m sure.

    Ed M’s election cuaght them on the hop. So they did a bit of the Red Ed, union man stuff but it was lame & tame compared to what they’d have hit David with.

    All the eulogising of David in the media is simply a way to get at Ed. It would have been a very diffent scenario, had David won. Be certain, David M would have gone down in a hail of negative press – I have a very good idea of some things they had ready & waiting to unleash, given the opportunity.

  20. amber,

    Your ‘priced in’ theory turned out to be applicable of whoever was going to win.

    The Cain and Abel show did not help.

  21. Robin hood
    In the us the best statistic for predicting whether someone votes Rep or Dem is haw far he or she lives from their nearest neighbour!
    Millionaires in flats vote democrat, poor farmers vote republican.

  22. @ Éoin

    I am astonished that somebody as smart as Rob cannot get his mind around the fact that Labour electing a new leader, in itself, does absolutely zero for the average voter.

    The little bit of good polling news we got was because Ed M unexpectedly won; we would not have gone ahead, if it had been a David win. 8-)

  23. The phrase ’24 hr spin’ was often used to describe labour media handling but one thing I noticed after DM/HH’s exchange as well as the 72 hours after the Labour result being announced. The 24 hr media scrutiny that reds were put under in gov. has not abated one bit. The pressure left them while they selected a new leader…..

    But the media since Sunday were in some sort of frenzy especially in regards to psycho-analyzing and bullying DM. As a narrative, the public seem to enjoy a red soap opera more. This in many ways, is down to the menu served to them by the press.

    Overall, it prob. cost Labour 1-2% in those VI polls folowing the conf.

    Tonights poll could be good for reds… the pressure on DM and the soap opera has now faded from memory a little.

  24. From previous thread…..

    As you’re all discussing Ed’s potential way forward, us activists got a direct mail today.

    Movement for change X 10!!

    All about invigorating the grassroots, training, local party organisers, connecting with the electorate on a personal level.

    As you all know, I fell for DM because I loved the idea of Labour becoming the movement it began as. We saved a worse defeat because we pounded the streets til our feet hurt.

    If there were 2, 3 ,4 times as many of us, all trained to do the job well, all singing from the same hymnsheet, Labour would be unstoppable.

    Why? Because we’d be out there, talking to the people we want to represent – middle class, working class or little green alien. Just like we were 90 years ago

  25. Barney:

    Yes, that’s a handy way of looking at it!

    Mind you, it’s not universally true. There are vast rural areas in New York state but their inhabitants are far more likely to vote Democrat than rural people in Alabama.

    There are a number of other yardsticks that also seem to correlate with voting patterns in the US: how far you are from a beach, for example. Notice how interior states have moved to the Republicans in recent electoral cycles. (Missouri, for example, used to be a classic bellwether, in that it is in the centre of the country, has two large cities but is also partly a farm belt state and partly a southern state – in other words, it supposedly reflected the union’s different cross-pressures. Well, no longer. it’s now very much a ‘red’ state).

    Another important factor is: which side was a given state on during the civil war? Apart from Virginia and North Carolina, the whole of the old confederacy voted for McCain in ’08.

    Anyway, we digress.

  26. Amber/Eoin – I came out from A’s speech. Everyone was buzzing, the atmosphere was sky high, we were all broadly behind Ed after a better than expected speech.

    I came outside to have several microphones shoved under my nose asking what DM would do next. I told them they should worry about what B was going to do next!!

    Last year, I came out of Peter Mandelson’s speech, which couldn’t have been more supportive of GB (possibly the reason the party went into the election as united as it did) to hear a BBC journo asking the world “Who would be the person to stick the knife in?”

    They just all make it up as they go along.

  27. Sorry, first line should have been “ABs speech”

  28. I’d be more inclined to trust a YouGov or ICM poll than a ComRes one, in general. That said it’s not wholly inconsistent with other polls at the moment.

  29. @ Martyn

    I imagine the continuation of the Labour-Plaid coalition is the most likely outcome of the Welsh Assembly election. I would imagine that, by May, the Conservative-Lib Dem coalition would be very unpopular, making it difficult for Plaid to go into a Rainbow coalition with the Tories and the Liberals.
    It would make a Labour-Lib Dem coalition difficult too.

    Of course, the outcome of the powers referendum will also play a role, if it falls, and Plaid believe it is due to Labour not pulling it’s weight, then a Rainbow coalition would become more of a possibility.

  30. @Amber Star – “… I have a very good idea of some things they had ready & waiting to unleash”

    Spell it out!
    Are you so sure the electorate would have been impressed. ;)

  31. In the Guardian Michael Gove says: “I like Ed Miliband personally. Ed was a great speaker, fluent, witty, authoritative, intelligent – tripped me up several times with some of my lazy thinking. And always nice, not in the sense of being soft or yielding to a Tory on anything.” He goes on: “It would be fatal, absolutely fatal, for us to underestimate Ed Miliband’s strengths. He is intelligent, he is decent, he is humane. During a time of economic austerity that could be made palatable.”

  32. Rob Sheffield – replying to you on this thread as the caravan has moved on.

    Re Jon Cruddas, I was trying to make the point he wasn’t a cockney born and bred (he was born in Cornwall)- I think of Hampshire as South West rather than South East, but I realise that it’s a matter of great geographic dispute.

    As to his class, according to Wikipedia his thesis was in Philosophy, on An analysis of value theory, the sphere of production and contemporary approaches to the reorganisation of workplace relations; which sounds to me like the more theoretical end of Industrial Relations. You’ll be pleased to know he did get his PhD though, and taught for a year in America. Of course you can be a university lecturer and still very working class in background and viewpoint; it’s just that many people would see it as the epitome of being “liberal elite”. ;)

    Actually what struck me, while scanning through the CLP voting figures, was that the large urban CLPs weren’t where Ed Miliband’s support was coming from. The split between the brothers was pretty close and evenly spread across the country, and it would be a mistake to over-emphasise differences. However, of the CLPs with a membership of over 500, Ed won none of the 33(!) in London and only 3 of the 15 outside London; in fact most of the CLPs he won tended to be in the North. (This is all before transfers of course)

    Labour party membership is certainly very “metropolitan” and it voted more for David Miliband as the representative of New Labour. Remember that Diane Abbott could not even win (or come second in) her own constituency. It’s the members of the “working classes” in the unions that seem to have voted for Ed (most of the societies also went for David).

  33. Comres were very accurate at the GE – more so than ICM!

    [No they weren’t. ICM were closest to the actual result – AW]

  34. ok im confused by this sites swingometer, how can the tories lose more seats than the libs, the majority of labours rise in the polls is from the lib fall? is it just me or is that totatally innacurate?

  35. Roger Mexico – I noticed DM won nearly all the southern, Tory massive majority seats. Ed needs to show those areas he has a serious plan for winning the southern seats.
    The direct mail today was a good start.

  36. I think all lot of the Labour percentage has been factored in for a long time.

    Ed and his new team will come up with a convincing and persuasive alternative spending review and over the next 6 months Ed will carefully hone his public image.

    The right wing press will be unable to maintain anything resembling a RED ED attack simply because new Labour policy simply won’t fit the bill.

    I’m not worried that the election of Ed reduces Labor’s chances in 2015, because i believe the next election will be well before then and any early election is going to be Labour’s to lose.

    When do people think that the blessed Vince is going to get so fed up that he’ll resign from the Government thus precipitating the unwinding of the coalition?

  37. @SUE
    That’s good news re. the Movement for Change. IMO it was one of the most important ideas in Labour for a long time.

  38. Ooooh, I can see an exciting plan forming down Labour way.

    I think I mused once the results of the leadership were in, that maybe David should be channelled into rejuvenating the “Labour Movement”. far from a waste, it inspires him, and he could inspire us.

    An email today suggests that’s exactly what he’ll do, and Ed’s direct mail was clear that Labour needed to be a movement again.

    Exciting Times as Wayne might say.

  39. @ Billy Bob

    Spell it out!
    Are you so sure the electorate would have been impressed.
    I really like you & Sue. I respect your 1st choice of David for leader. I am not going to give an airing to stuff that is now irrelevant.

    My hope is that during this ‘down-time’ for David, he has the opportunity to quietly & effectively deal with the subjects of these rumours. I have faith that he will do so & they will prove unfounded.

    I do not believe that he would have been given the opportunity by the media to prove the rumours are unfounded. It would have been a disaster for the Party. We need a leader who is fully focussed on being an effective opposition & taking the fight to the Tories.

    IMO, The electorate would certainly have been ‘impressed’. I have ‘thinkingly’ voted Labour at every election. If the rumours I have heard were proved to have substance, I would not have voted for the Labour Party with David as leader.

  40. @ Sue

    I believe David leading the Movement for Change would be a brilliant use of his time & talent. IMO, the more time he spends away from the Westminster bubble/ rumour mill, the better it will be for him & the Party. 8-)

  41. Bullman,

    swingometers are complicated even for those who know a lot about them. The patterns of winners and losers varies (although not as greatly as some might think) from region to region.

    The swingometer you are looking at is called a UNS (uniform national swing). It is quite blunt but as 2010 showed once more, it stands up quite well.

    All of that is the simple stuff..

    Yellow decline, can favour blue more than red … yellow gain tends to favour red more than blue…

    On the specific question you raise- yellows have got quite good by uk standards at targetting their vote. They poll big in the seats that matter…. the extra 900,000 votes Clegg picked up actually on net result lost them 4 seats at the last election. 1. Because their vote was already targetted. 2. They could not get the activists on the streets to harness the vote in new areas where they were polling big.

    A concentrated vote is crucial. In the past Northern Irish Unionists or have been able to win a near dozen seats on c.125,000 votes.

    I better stop there since my post is already rather unweildy. perhpas if someone else wanted to give you a more clear explanation.

  42. On the opinion poll disappointment for Labour,

    I think that it is obvious that Labour will NOT WIN the General Election in 2015.

    Now that ‘We Have Got our Party Back’ from the winning New Labour formula on gone for a heartland plus appeal, Labour will find it a struggle to keep up with the shifting demographic and social/cultural trends.
    As some one has said, the Cain and Abel show did not help.

    Only in 1970-74 did the Cons not have more than one term, since the 1874-1880 Ministry- Dizzy against the Grand Old Man, and ED is not another Gladstone.

  43. Sue,

    Do you mean the Project Game Plan mail shot?

  44. No Amber no.
    You can’t tell us there was a rumour about DM which would have stopped you voting Labour and then say you won’t tell us what it is.
    That’s torture.
    Mmm. Have I just inadvertently worked out what it might be?

  45. Julian Gilbert

    “Mmm. Have I just inadvertently worked out what it might be?”

    What? Covert rendition of non-Labour voters in certain constituencies? I thought everyone knew that one. :-)

  46. Sorry about the italics – should have used “/” :?

    With respect to ComRes, I’m a bit dubious about this “Random Online Sampling” they use for 70% of the sample. After all, if it produced a representative sample 86% of the population would have voted, not 65%. We don’t know what hidden biases there may be in the sample that weighting doesn’t get rid of.


    Actually the last thing that Ed needs to do is plan for “southern, Tory massive majority seats”. The seats he needs for a majority are in London, the Midlands, the North West.

    Can any of the Labour people here explain the massive discrepancy between where the Labour members are and where the Labour seats are? I’d noticed the tendency before, but when I went through the list to discover that 33 of the 73 London seats had big LP memberships, but only 15 of the nearly 600 outside, it was a shock. Has this always been the case?

  47. Julian,

    I have conciously ignored the three serious rumours to do the rounds on DM. For one, I don’t like the rumour mill unless it is policy related. On your allusions to ‘torture’ DM was the best foreign secretary Labour had in my opinion. He was not foreign sec. at the time of the Iraq war but post Iraq, UK done some really good things in international diplomacy. No I am afraid some of the rumours are much more grubby than that.

  48. @Amber
    “My hope is that during this ‘down-time’ for David, he has the opportunity to quietly & effectively deal with the subjects of these rumours. I have faith that he will do so & they will prove unfounded.”

    You really are a tease Amber. Obviously I immediately googled “David Miliband Rumours” and searched on recent dates. All I could come up with was that he might try to head the IMF!

    I suspect that you have something else in mind, but that rumour is in itself terrifying. To have someone who was a leading member of a government that nearly bankrupted the fourth biggest economy in the world running the IMF! Is it possible to bankrupt the whole world, I wonder?

  49. @Eoin
    More grubby? In that case I don’t want to know.

  50. Roger,

    what do you mean by big? What quantity were you thinking of?

1 2 3