After four days without a GB voting intention poll (which suddenly seems like quite a long time!) we’re back into the normal cycle. Topline figures for the daily YouGov/Sun poll tonight are CON 36%, LAB 41%, LDEM 10%.

UPDATE: The poll also asked about AV. Adjusted for likelihood to vote and excluding don’t knows and won’t votes, NO now has a 18 point lead, 59% to 41%. The change from YouGov’s previous AV poll is only minor, but it suggests the NO campaign are consolidating that big lead that opened up last week. Conservative voters remain overwhelmingly opposed to AV (by 82% to 18%), Lib Dem supporters remain overwhelmingly supportive (84% to 16%) and Labour voters remain split almost straight down the middle (49% pro, 51% anti).

Full tabs are here.


358 Responses to “YouGov/Sun – CON 36, LAB 41, LDEM 10”

1 4 5 6 7 8
  1. Well I for one dont support the Royals my hero is Oliver Cromwell, and if it was not canvassing on Friday I would be praying for rain.

  2. “retraction” / “out of date URLs”

    These are the current online URLs for FT employed staff at QUB:

    – the ‘academic staff’

    h ttp://www.qub.ac.uk/schools/SchoolofHistoryandAnthropology/Staff/AcademicStaff/

    – the research staff

    h ttp://www.qub.ac.uk/schools/SchoolofHistoryandAnthropology/Staff/AcademicStaff/

    – and the listing for University Tutors

    h ttp://www.qub.ac.uk/schools/SchoolofHistoryandAnthropology/Staff/UniversityTutors/

    You are not on any of them.

    If you post a URL which illustrates you are a FT employee of QUB I will *happily* ‘retract’ !

    But you can’t can you…?

  3. Pete,

    As I hope you remember, I enjoy a friendly tribal joke :)

    You have missed a lot of goading, I could repaste but it is most unsavoury

  4. Rob,

    You are 6 minutes from the one hour…

    You made an accusation you must retract or I shall proceed. My partner has already copied the data of November 2010 and March 2011 necessary to take this further.

  5. I have provided the telephone details to verify my job title
    I have provided the email details to verify my job title
    I have provided a scanned copy of my contract to verify my job title

    All the while a contributor to UKPR wished to slander.

    3 minutes.

  6. Pete B

    I can’t let you give us all the credit. :-)

    England has managed to keep up an antagonism to the French, despite your last having been on the different sides in 1815.

    (OK I know that’s only 196 years – but you’re getting there). :-)

  7. I make that time up:

    If you post a URL which illustrates you are a FT employee of QUB I will *happily* ‘retract’ !

  8. rob,

    Details were already with my solicitor [as of two days ago]

    You will hear in due course

  9. @Eoin – yes, in my view it was quite poor, mainly in the selection of data and the interpretation of some of them. Sure – they are facts, as I have never questioned, and some of them are positive. But a reasoned discussion of the state of the UK economy it wasn’t, and many people on here agreed with me. Some of the data is good, some displays real economic weakness.

    A good economist would have recognised that and portrayed a more balanced critique, in my view.

    The original prediction range for the figures from the main forecasters was from +0.4 – +1.1, so the numbers came in right at the low end of expectations. The bottom line is that we have an economy that didn’t get the expected bounce back from Q4 and has been stagnant for 6 months. There are some signs of improvement, but most forecasters predict Qs 2 & 3 to be tougher than Q1. Suggesting this will be good or bad for a government in 4 years time is guesswork and you shouldn’t be surprised if people take you to task for such statements.

    I’m off to bed. I really hope it stays peaceful on here.

  10. Alec,

    You chose to comment on point 15.
    I listed 14 others.
    Were they also quite poor?

    or was is just 1/15th.

  11. @all

    Have I arrived at a bad time?

  12. RAF

    Seems so. How about posting on something entirely different?

  13. @Oldnat

    “England has managed to keep up an antagonism to the French, despite your last having been on the different sides in 1815.

    (OK I know that’s only 196 years – but you’re getting there). :-)”

    Well personally, I still resent the Normans. They come over here, taking all our land…..

    Oh, and can the relevant parties lighten up please? If you insist on getting litigious, I really don’t think this is the forum for it. Can’t you attack each other on Facebook or something?

  14. Wow, it is always this lively on here?

  15. @Eoin – “or was is just 1/15th.”

    Really Eoin – if that’s the level you’ve got to it is getting a very poor show. I listed 5 points in my original post – could have been more, but for heaven’s sake, we’re not in a point by point rebuttal exercise here – we’re engaged in a mildly diverting but essentially pointless online chat. My view of you post is clear.

    I think you make some very interesting points across a number of areas, but I genuinely think that on several occasions when you have delved into current economic issues, particularly detailed statistics of economic performance and government spending, you’ve not done yourself justice, in my view.

  16. Pete B

    Parvenu!

    How about those damn Danes? or aggressive Angles? or seditious Saxons? not to mention rampaging Romans?

    I bet the Iceni were interlopers too! :-)

  17. lazyscroungingscousestudent

    Lively? Just wait till we start discussing Kate’s wedding dress!

  18. Alec,

    I missed any substantive argument from yourself… the gist of your rebuttals are usually that I’m over a cliff, or not an economist…

    so you had 5 points did you…

    I argued that the 15 pieces of economic data showed that the Tories were a ‘little’ bit on the way to re-election.

    Your argument was

    a) that analysis was ‘quite poor’
    b) that I am no ‘economist’.

    Not much of an argument…

    Do those 15 pieces of data show the tories less likely to be elected? Hmm.. Because by implication, for my argument to be ‘quite poor’ by inference that is surely what you are arguing..

  19. @PeteB

    The funny thing is that I am a litigator who happens to be om annual leave but keeps being reminded of work!

    I did try to escape the real world today, watching a preview screening of Thor 3D, and a scuffle – or should I say footie semi final from Madrid, but it wasn’t to be. Enjoyed Thor. Very entertaining.

    I still can’t get over the fact the French took Moscow (briefly) in 1812.

  20. “Have I arrived at a bad time?”

    comment of the day! :-D

    “How about posting on something entirely different?”

    There are new yougovs on the wedding showing strong support and William overtaking Liz in the popularity stakes.(USURPER!! :-D) So I expect we can look forward to more amusing comment on that.

    Just as I was getting over the shock of William on a motorcycle a supposedly serious American News anchor just asked Cameron if he was having tea at his Royal knees up! I don’t know why the U.S. Networks don’t just run Mary Poppins on a loop for the next few days just to reinforce every English stereotype known to man. Thank god for the Daily show. ;-)

  21. OldNat
    As Tony Hancock once said when giving blood “I’m pure Anglo-Saxon with just a dash of Viking”.

    Apparently, ‘they’ recently did some DNA tests on people in Cheddar. and one chap was related to the ice-age skeletons they found in the caves there. Now HE’s entitled to resent invaders. :)

  22. RAF
    “I still can’t get over the fact the French took Moscow (briefly) in 1812.”

    Everyone gets lucky once in a while. We burned the White House to the ground in 1812 I think.

    Oh, and the French were led by a Corsican.

  23. Pete B

    I saw that on the Cheddar chap. My reaction was he was an invader too – just there to grab the reindeer, who in their turn invaded the real original English – the lichens!

  24. Pete B

    “We burned the White House to the ground in 1812”

    Wasn’t that the Canadians – who look like being taken over by the Socialist hordes of the NDP.

  25. @Virgilio

    Thanks for drawing our attention to what’s going on in Canada. I for one had overlooked it. Here’s a link to a useful site I’ve found for anyone wishing to look at the situation in more detail:
    http://www.sfu.ca/~aheard/elections/polls.html#NATIONAL

    The absence of an overall seat prediction to accompany the polls on the site is a weakness – although as the regional variations in Canada combined with FPTP make that a nightmare I can see why. Do you know of any site that compiles such summaries on a reasonably reliable basis?

    The graph showing the very rapid rise in NDP support does make me rather fearful (from the perspective of the left) that it might not be turned into reality when people actually vote – 2010 in the UK is surely a case study of how a poll bubble can deflate in the polling booth.

  26. Pete B,

    the Duke Of Wellington had the thickest Irish Brogue :) As did Edmund Burke :)

  27. A Polish army took control of the Kremlin 1610-11… they were to some extent invited in, but it did not end well for them either.

  28. The Green Benches

    I hadn’t heard that about Wellington. I do know that when someone called him Irish he replied something like “Just because a man is born in a stable it doesn’t make hm a horse”

    Oldnat
    According to Wikipedia (unreliable I know), the White House was burnt by the British Army. Of course in those days some of them may have come from what is now Canada.

  29. Pete B,

    Very very accurate comments. We should extend the same luxury to the wonderfully loyal British Arabs that pay taxes and keep the law in the UK. :) :)

  30. I say oldnat wasn’t born in Scotland, he was born in Hawaii.
    If he doesn’t produce a birth certificate forthwith he shall be hearing from Donald Trump. :-) You’re fired! ;-)

  31. Mick,

    Old N was born in Scotland, not in Venezuela :) :)

  32. Pete B

    We’re both right. In 1812 “Canada” consisted of British colonies. The actual troops involved were from the colonies, and were taking revenge for the Americans burning Toronto.

    I was born in Pictland!

  33. 0.5% after -0.6% last quarter – that’s not growth, that’s a dead cat bounce.
    8-)

  34. Amber

    “a dead cat.” That’s no way to speak of Iain Gray! :-)

    goodnight.

  35. Amber,

    Mostly right except..

    Q4 ’10 was downgraded [or up if you prefer] to 0.5%.

    Also a math dude has informed me that if you contract 0.0% and then grow 0.5
    youare in fact… still 0.025 off breaking even

    technically, less than flat-lining

    but the Darlingite consensus is ruining LAbour- Balls was right from day 1

  36. @ Old Nat

    Alec wants us to keep it peaceful, so I will say:

    Goodnight to you, my dear. :-)

  37. @ Old Nat

    “Not offended – but we are in the middle of an election campaign, and (while you meant nothing by it) that kind of thing is said by the SNPs opponents in an attempt to persuade those who like the monarchy that they couldn’t vote SNP.

    Think of it as a birther conspiracy.”

    I see. I understand. I’m glad you’re not offended because honeslty, can I be expected to know every last detail of Alex Salmond’s political platform and philosophy? It’s moments like this that I’m reminded of my gratitude for Article I, Section 9, Clause 10 and Article I, Section 10, Clause 3 of the Constitution. :)

    I happen to think though that it’s far less of an issue than the birther conspiracy, the stupidity of which blows my mind. And now that Obama released his birth certificate in a surprise today, it’s little surprise that the birthers are STILL complaining and criticizing. It’s pathetic. Absolutely pathetic.

    @ Eoin and Alec

    Don’t fight with each other. I respect you both even if I don’t always agree with either one of you. I think both of you have a lot of economic insights and I enjoy reading your respective analyses.

  38. @ Mick Park

    “Just as I was getting over the shock of William on a motorcycle a supposedly serious American News anchor just asked Cameron if he was having tea at his Royal knees up! I don’t know why the U.S. Networks don’t just run Mary Poppins on a loop for the next few days just to reinforce every English stereotype known to man. Thank god for the Daily show.”

    Yes, thank god for the Daily Show. It’s amazing when a comedy program winds up taking the place of news media because reporters cease to do their jobs.

    I don’t get the obsession with the royal wedding or why it’s getting covered over here (I mean maybe it’s the novelty of royalty). I’ve come to accept it though as a manifestation of Anglophiles. I’m an Anglophile so even if the Royal Wedding doesn’t concern me, how can I really begrudge fellow Anglophiles for obsessing over the royal wedding and the royal family

  39. @ Pete B

    “Oh, and can the relevant parties lighten up please? If you insist on getting litigious, I really don’t think this is the forum for it. Can’t you attack each other on Facebook or something?”

    Lol, agreed.

  40. @ Old Nat

    “Wasn’t that the Canadians – who look like being taken over by the Socialist hordes of the NDP.”

    Are they Socialist really? Jane Jacobs was a major supporter of them apparently. Their leader, Jack Layton, is kinda impressive compared to the others running. And that might be turning on voters.

    The leader of the Liberals, Michael Ignatieff, comes off (to me anyway) as an Obama wannabe (albeit he gives off a John Kerry vibe). It strikes me as phony and fake. Obama is like the political version of Tom Glavine. A lot of imitators but no one who can match the talent. A lot of left wing politicians around the world attempt to imitate Obama and they all fall flat. I think it comes off as phony and cheap.

    And I believe it was the Brits who burned down DC in 1812. I don’t hold any kind of grudge over it though.

  41. @ Phil

    “Thanks for drawing our attention to what’s going on in Canada. I for one had overlooked it. Here’s a link to a useful site I’ve found for anyone wishing to look at the situation in more detail:
    http://www.sfu.ca/~aheard/elections/polls.html#NATIONAL

    The absence of an overall seat prediction to accompany the polls on the site is a weakness – although as the regional variations in Canada combined with FPTP make that a nightmare I can see why. Do you know of any site that compiles such summaries on a reasonably reliable basis?

    The graph showing the very rapid rise in NDP support does make me rather fearful (from the perspective of the left) that it might not be turned into reality when people actually vote – 2010 in the UK is surely a case study of how a poll bubble can deflate in the polling booth.”

    The situation is slightly different I think between the Lib Dems in 2010 and the NDP in 2011 (though ironically more unusual for the NDP surge). The Lib Dems surged out of voters who were sick of the incumbent government but weren’t sold on the Tories. The Lib Dems faltered though a bit and a lot of voters who simply wanted a change in government went back to the Tories and voters who would not bring themselves to vote for the Tories moved back to Labour as their natural party.

    The NDP’s rise seems to come from something different. Their advancement seems to be in Quebec where the 4th party Bloc Quebec, which is an independence seeking party, has been dominant. The rise in NDP support there brought them up to even with the Liberals who had mainly stalled in the campaign and had continuously trailed the Tories. But the rise of the NDP nationally (on the backs of their rise in Quebec) seems to be pushing up the NDP elsewhere in Canada. What I’ve noticed though in recent polling is that the NDP seems to actually be closing in on the Conservatives (they’re only about 5% behind them nationally). Apparently, the current Conservatives are an alliance between the former Progressive Conservatives, who were routed in 1993, and the Reform Party. The Reform Party was a right wing party and won most of the western Canadian seats held by the Progressive Conservatives in that election. But the Reform Party also picked up a number of western seats from the NDP in that election. It makes me think that perhaps the NDP might actually be able to take from the Conservatives as well as from other left wing parties.

    One other thing to note about Canada too. It seems like this election, unlike the last two, a plurality or narrow majority of voters want Stephen Harper and the Conservatives out of power. But with two center-left parties, a broadly left-wing separatist party, and a very strong left-wing Green Party, FPTP might deliver a majority Conservative Government that is not wanted by the voters. But we’ll see if that actually happens. Interesting election though.

  42. @ Virgilio

    “Slightly off topic (but not entirely, since this is about a country whose citizens are Her Majesty’s subjects), has anyone noticed what is happening in Canada? Federal election is in five days, and for the first time ever Social Democrats (New Democratic Party / Nouveau Parti Democrate) are poised to overcome the Liberals as the second party. All polling institutes now converge in predicting a) that the incumbent conservative government will not get OM this time either, instead it will see its number of seats decrease and b) the NDP/NPD will get a record of votes (perhaps more than 30%) and seats (perhaps more than 100 out of 308). So what before the start of the campaign seemed highly improbable, now is a distinct possibility, i.e. a center-left socialist-led government, for the first time in Canada’s political history.”

    Ah Canadians, they have elections and no one notices. Well I kinda took notice. I feel like I should know who runs my tall, intellectual, eriudite neighbors to the north. Their election is between the Bush wannabe who’s simply too Canadian to ever really be like Bush (Stephen Harper), the Obama wannbe who really gives off a Kerry vibe instead (Michael Ignatieff), the bald guy who looks like Mr. Mandelbaum’s son on Seinfeld (Jack Layton), and the French dude (Gilles Duceppe).

    In all seriousness, I actually think it’s possible for the NDP, if their momentum continues, to pull ahead of the Conservatives.

  43. Socal,

    Thanks for you concern. But asserting one’s position is simply that. Enough goes unanswered from certain quarters. If it was not appendanged with the usual jibes not linked to the actual substantive points made it my post then it would be fine. But if it aint heading over a cliff, or comments delineating one’s ability to the detriment of another, there is always a qualitative judgement to be read… even where there is often no quantitative insight to be added.

    Not any more.

  44. Well that was an entertaining early morning catch up!

  45. Alec,

    On your main accusation…

    1. that I am not capable or qualified to comment on economic matter.

    You make it repeatedly.

    I simply reply than respected economists and tax experts have given some of my articles on the economy many plaudits.

    The exact same economic points when made on UKPR are rubbished with additional personal jibes from yourself.

    In the last 30 days, 3 separate occasions you have levied personal remarks towards me in response to points I have made on the economy when at that precise time [often on the same day] the exact economic point I had made is published in alternative sources to plaudits.

    I don’t that much of this which is why I didn’t mention it at the time. But if someone repeatedly insults my intelligence then you give me little choice.

    are they all wrong and you right?
    or are you judging me economic points not on their merits?

    I am firmly of the latter opinion. I am not better or no worse than the next citizen to make a point or two where I feel appropriate. You have shown repeatedly and inability to comment simply on the content without making a personal remark. It is for that reason and only that reason I have never wished to converse with you.

    I would gratefully prefer it that if you are incapable of commenting without adding qualitative and judicial comments on my character as you have done on the last three occasions, that you simply devoted your efforts to commenting on alternative posters material, or indeed topics or content of your own choice..

  46. It is this thread in particular were a high portion of the comments made towards me were as much about my character as about anything…

    The lack of politeness contained in this link I attach is not fit for people whom consider themselves a) polite or b) gentlemen

    It is on the basis of the link I provide that it is may expressed wish to avoid conversing with the same said characters

    h ttp://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3389

  47. Page 3 onwards from this link provided shows the, unprovoked, lack of respect to which I was afforded by the said posters..

    h ttp://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3389

  48. @ TGB –
    “Alec,
    I missed any substantive argument from yourself… the gist of your rebuttals are usually that I’m over a cliff, or not an economist… ”

    In his original reply to your 15 points Alec quite clearly made some reasoned points and supplied evidence. All he did on top did was say you’re not an economist.

    If any comments need retracting from last night I’d say it was yours about Alec’s chosen profession. Really spiteful.

    You can’t post onto an open forum and then say certain people aren’t allowed to respond. You’ve got your own website/blog now for heaven’s sake. If you want to control what people say in response to you then why not keep your pontifications there?

  49. OMG!

    Thank goodness there were (and are) a few people on here with a great sense of humour.

    I shall say no more for fear of igniting things again.

    As regards VI – yawn, not much happening, albeit the stability is worth noting I suppose.

    But I do wonder whether DC’s little PMQ quote will do him a fair bit of harm with joe public. We’ll see, but every time I see it I chuckle.

  50. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13218582

    Cost of aircraft carriers up by at least £1bn. possibly £1.8bn

    This fits in with the point I consistently make..
    since CSR, £0.7bn has been added to spending allbiet form the special reserve, to pay for Libya..

    c.£7bn has been added through PFI contracts this year alone

    c.£1bn has been shaved off MoD cuts, perhaps to be administered at a later date..

    c.£1bn has been added to Treasury outlay to cover first year of tuition fees rises.. the red book had banked on only very few of UNIs raising their fees to the full £9k..

    In addition, CSR said £700bn to be spent 2011-2012.. it is actually £10 more than that…
    given that this is not linked to debt interest payments, it marks in increase in envelope spending about at beyond what was laid out in week 3 [Oct.] 2010.

    c.£20bn extra is being spent this year that was not known in October 2010.

1 4 5 6 7 8