More Sunday polling

A final chunk of polling from the weekend – the YouGov tables should be up on the website shortly, but looking at what is available on the Sunday Times website the latest YouGov AV polling has YES on 45%, NO on 55%. This is tighter than the recently polling we’ve seen, which has tended to show the NO lead in the high teens, but I’ll repeat the caveat I added to my Scottish post a few minutes ago that we should always be cautious about drawing conclusions from a single poll (besides, there are four days to go, and the polls are showing NO leads between 10 points and 20+ points – the game appears to be over).

Secondly, the Leicester South by-election seems to have been rather forgotten about due to all the other elections on the same day, but we do have a poll on it in the Independent on Sunday from Survation. Topline figures there, with changes from the 2010 result in Leicester South, are CON 20%(-1), LAB 61%(+15), LDEM 14%(-13), UKIP 5%(+3) – not much change for the Conservatives but the Lib Dem vote fracturing towards Labour, much in line with the national picture.

Thirdly, it’s not really a poll but it’s the best guide we have to the locals – Rallings and Thrasher’s latest local government projections based on their model using local by-election data has the Conservatives on 35%(down 5 from 2007), Labour on 38% (up 12 from 2007) and the Lib Dems on 17% (down 7 from 2007). This would equate to a Labour gain of around 1300 council seats, with the Conservatives losing just shy of 1000 and the Lib Dems losing around 400.


288 Responses to “More Sunday polling”

1 4 5 6
  1. Right, to try and get this Bin Laden stuff onto a non-partisan, polling focus …

    … I do wonder whether this might, contrary to an earlier post, do a lot of lasting good to Obama’s numbers. Certainly there is bound to be a bounce in his approval rating for a few days but I do wonder whether his approval rating may settle at the 50%+ mark for a while rather than the 45% mark it’s been hovering around.

    I think this will shift a few undecided Independents who were unconvinced about Obama’s Nat Sec credentials into the Obama-camp. It also helpfully comes as many of the GOP nominees are making themselves look silly.

    Report comment

  2. Socal,
    I was mainly just being rhetorical.
    The whole ‘Left wing governments support dictatorships!’ or ‘Right wing governments support dictatorships!’ talking points are nonsense.
    Governments of all economic leanings supported and continue to support dictatorships when it benefits their country to do so – that’s just the realpolitik.

    Do I wish it were different? Yes.
    Unfortunately, that’s just the way international relations works.

    But these sorts of partisan talking points need to just be bluntly ridiculed (hence my rhetorical question) enough so that people (of both economic ideologies) stop using them.

    Report comment

  3. Paddy Power have just paid me out over 200 quid on a no vote. They obviously think it’s all over and the odds at other bookies look ominous for the yes campaign. Ladbrokes are no longer taking “no” bets while others have unbackable 1/20 or even 1/33 prices.

    Report comment

  4. @ Adrian B

    I think the most important thing it does long term is get rid of the meme that Obama hasn’t gotten anything done. This is something concrete and understandable to the public.

    Whatever high approval ratings this may create in the shrot term, there’s always a question as to whether it will last like with Bush in 1991.

    @ Tinged Fringe

    I get it. There’s a lot of sillyness out there.

    Report comment

  5. “Certainly there is bound to be a bounce in his approval rating for a few days but I do wonder whether his approval rating may settle at the 50%+ mark for a while rather than the 45% mark it’s been hovering around.”
    I personally wouldn’t be surprised if Obama’s approval rating sky-rocketed. We’ll obviously see in a few days.

    It took Bush’s approval a long time to decline after 9/11 (where it hit 90% approval) so if Obama could get a moderate boost, he would probably be able to keep enough of it until the presidential elections.

    Report comment

  6. @Alec

    I just wanted to say how much I value your thoughtful, considered posts. I always look out for and read them in full. I think your statistical and economic analysis is second to none on this site and I have learned a great deal from it. :-)

    I don’t always agree with you. I’m not a republican or a royalist but I enjoyed watching the whole ‘do’ on TV. I am happy for the British monarch to be the Head of State as long as she or he keeps out of politics. I don’t believe elected heads of state are all they are cracked up to be: the names Sarkozy ,Berlusconi and Dubya come to mind. Would I rather DC was wholly in charge? I don’t think so.

    It doesn’t bother me whether Bin Laden is alive or dead. I’m sure he would have snuffed my life out without a second’s thought. I’m opposed to the death penalty and public executions. I do find the American people’s response to his demise rather disturbing -I guess I see it as ‘blood lust’ and in some way part of their character. Sorry Socal Lib but I tthink it had to be said. 8-)

    Report comment

  7. Welsh Watcher,

    Interesting data… thanks for posting it.

    Labour’s lead and performance in Wales has been remarkably consistent across these YG polls… Looks like they are in with a chance of a majority…

    They have been particularly determined in their campaigning to delineate themselves with PC, and it appears to have paid off.

    To think in June 2009 that the Tories topped the polls in Wales is quite remarkable given reds 24% lead over them now.

    Report comment

  8. Welsh Poll

    From the %s of this poll and (big And!) if the +/- from 2007 figures are the same throughout all regions then it seems to pan out something like:

    Party Const Region Total
    Lab 29 1 30
    PC 6 4 10
    Con 2 10 12
    LD 3 2 5
    UKIP 0 3 3

    One of the regions % (SW) there is a tie between Con and PC for that 4th regional seat, given to PC. Most of the 4th seats of regions are only shaded by .2 of a % or less.

    UKIP would pick up a seat in each of SE, Central and N.

    Report comment

  9. @Peter Bell

    So to set the scene for Newcastle: LD 16, Lab 9, Ind 1 (up for grabs),

    and the starting point on the night will be LD 26, Lab 25, Ind 1.

    A exciting night on many fronts.

    Report comment

  10. @Eoin

    The tory vote is holding up though . (only 1.4% down on 2007 and others are being exagerrated on this poll – will likely be only 4% max as 26/40 seats don’t have others)

    As for UKIP only question is if they can the SE Wales list seat .

    On only 7% the LDs might only get 3 seats but maybe they will manage 4. (losing out in SE wales and N wales)

    Labour really has to take Aberconwy and Cardiff N to get a majority.

    Report comment

  11. @Raf – “Al-Q is, and always has been a myth. Islamist groups have been aroundfor centuries, based on their individual histories.”

    I was aware of the killings in Pakistan but I also largely agree with your statement above. Even at the time I said to myself that 9/11 wasn’t an earth changing event – or at least it shouldn’t have been. It was just a very lethal terror attack, essentially identical to many other similar unjustified attacks except a different mechanism that devastatingly exposed considerable security flaws.

    It was the response to it that changed the world, largely for the worst. There has been islamic extremism for a considerable while, but I really don’t think we have helped move towards a long term solution by the reaction.

    BTW – there was an excellent three part documentary two or three years ago on BBC2 charting the interlinked rise of islamism and Al-Q and the parralel rise of the neo cons in the west. I can’t remember the title but it very informative. Essentially both sides had a vested interest in building fear of Al Q for their own purposes, with the neo cons needing to replace the soviet bloc to maintain their power appeal. It was clear that Al Q had failed in every muslim country they had ever engaged in and were marginalised everywhere – until we stepped in.

    @Valerie – thank you for you thoughts – very kind.

    Report comment

  12. Welsh Poll

    Some notes of caution about the poll:
    Regional vote
    Labour 41%
    Conservative 20%
    Plaid Cymru 18%
    Liberal Democrat 7%
    UKIP 7%
    Green 4%
    Other 5%

    Firstly it adds up to 102%.

    Secondly in 2007 BNP got 4.3% and Others 4.5%
    In this poll BNP either has been omitted or is combined into the ‘Others’. If omitted then the overall total exceeds 102%. With the very closeness for the 4th seat in each region, small anomalies and rounding up/down make a huge difference.

    Report comment

  13. Adrian,

    Good post, good context…

    Report comment

  14. “BTW – there was an excellent three part documentary two or three years ago on BBC2 charting the interlinked rise of islamism and Al-Q and the parralel rise of the neo cons in the west. I can’t remember the title but it very informative.”

    Adam Curtis’s ‘The Power of Nightmares':

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qk1WkmioQvA

    Report comment

  15. @ Rob Sheffield

    ““If Gorgeous ‘El Galloway’ is annoyed then something absolutely marvelous must have occured.”

    :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)

    Report comment

  16. @Alec

    h
    ttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Power_of_Nightmares

    Also, I remember reading a book in the 80s by a US insider highlighting unintended consequences in Iran… flowing from the funding of fundamentalist groups as a way to counter the pan-Arab socialism of Gamal Abdel Nasser.

    Report comment

  17. @A Brown
    “Labour really has to take Aberconwy and Cardiff N to get a majority”

    Cardiff N does seem an essential gain, but not necessarily Aberconwy, which looks a tall order. IMO a more plausible route to the 31st seat, in place of Aberconwy, is for Labour to take 4 seats in Mid Wales (2 constituency, 2 list), which would require the seats to split 4 PC, 4 Lab, 3 Con, 1 LD. Quite plausible, given that Lab start on 18.4% and PC had an entitlement of 5 in 2007 with only 31% of the list vote.

    For the LDs to end up with just 1 seat depends upon them losing Montgomeryshire to the Cons, which still appears on the cards. So could we conceivably see Labour supporters voting Conservative tactically with their constituency vote in Montgomeryshire in order to avoid LD regional overrepresentation on the d’Hondt quota? Perish the thought!

    Report comment

  18. Does a general feel good factor favour the incumbent party/parties I wonder?

    With all this beautful weather, lots of Bank Holidays, Royal Weddings and now the death of Osama, will the electorate be less likely to register a protest vote against the coalition parties?

    Report comment

  19. “With all this beautful weather, lots of Bank Holidays, Royal Weddings and now the death of Osama, will the electorate be less likely to register a protest vote against the coalition parties?”

    No.

    Report comment

  20. “With all this beautful weather, lots of Bank Holidays, Royal Weddings and now the death of Osama, will the electorate be less likely to register a protest vote against the coalition parties?”
    That would be my guess (although more likely to vote Con than Lib – Con is definitely seen as the controlling partner).

    I think it all depends how David Cameron plays it for the next few days.
    If he focuses on the persona of the statesman and not the bully (lately been more focused on the latter), Tories could see a polling boost.

    Report comment

  21. @RAF,

    Whether “Al-Qaeda” is a myth or not is largely semantics. Whatever you call it, there has been a large, motivated and well-resourced group of Islamic terrorists operating in Afghanistan and the Pakistani border provinces for a couple of decades. That group was centred around Bin Laden (probably initially because of his wealth) and a circle of fellow travellers, and fed by a stream of volunteers from the Pakistani madrassas, Dewsbury/London mosques and elsewhere. That group planned and executed a number of acts of international terror aimed at the United States.

    Yes they are not the only Islamic-oriented terrorist group in the world. Yes there have been militant Islamists throughout history (some-including the militants themselves-might argue that it is the origin of Islam itself). Yes the idea that there is some sort of properly organised international network with branches everywhere is a simplification designed to make life easier for people who couldn’t point to Pakistan on an atlas.

    But there was/is a “gang” of terrorists. That gang called themselves Al-Qaeda. That gang killed thousands of Americans. That gang was hunted down. Most of that gang’s senior members were captured or killed. Now that gang’s leader has been killed. Seeing it in those terms may be unsophisticated, but it’s not exactly inaccurate either.

    Report comment

  22. @ Tingedfringe

    That would be my guess
    _______________________________________

    I was also thinking in terms of those who are less politically active, but who might have had a minor beef with the Government and were thinking of voting against them to register their displeasure, but now simply won’t both because they generally are feeling better about things now then they were a couple of weeks ago.

    Report comment

  23. NEILA

    “That gang killed thousands of Americans.”

    ….And Tanzanians, and Kenyans, and Madrileños, and Londoners, and Balinese, and Moroccans, and Hindus, and Muslims………….

    Report comment

  24. @ John Fletcher,

    I’m with RogerH on this. The death of Bin Laden at the hands of American special forces is unlikely to sway those going to the polls in Redcar or anywhere else.

    Sun will benefit Labour as they get more of their vote out.

    Bank Holidays – council elections are always immediately after the May Bank Holiday.

    And whatever the weather incumbent parties almost always suffer badly even when they are nationally popular.

    Report comment

  25. TINGED FRINGE and OTHERS

    I don’t think the Osama killing will make any difference at all to Cameron’s or the Tories’ standing.

    In fact, if we get another boorish performance from Cameron at PMQs that could harm the Tories at the margin.

    Conversely, the excellent performance by Ed Milliband in his interview with Sopel on the Sunday Politics Show coulod help Labour a bit – again at the margins (but we all know its the margins that matter under FPTP!).

    Report comment

  26. Seems the ‘yes’ campaign will get the last word. The No2AV have their final TV slot tonight but Yes2AV have theirs tomorrow.

    Report comment

  27. “Seems the ‘yes’ campaign will get the last word. The No2AV have their final TV slot tonight but Yes2AV have theirs tomorrow.”
    Hope it’s better than their first attempt.
    The Yes2AV’s first TV ad didn’t actually really explain the point of AV, just gave a sort of wishy-washy ‘It’ll make your MPs work harder’ message.

    They need to put on something like:
    http://www.youtube.com/user/thepeoplesayyes#p/a/f/0/HiHuiDD_oTk
    Explains the split-vote problem and the way AV fixes it.

    Yes2AV had the hardest job but they really bungled it.

    Report comment

  28. Yes, they’ve all been pretty dreadful. The cat one would be my favourite but I imagine it’ll be the Eddie Izzard one, which isn’t too bad. (Why, though, do they not respond to the false but damaging No2AV claim about FPTP being about ‘One Person, One Vote’?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ah7vy4qFGU0

    Just had No2AV’s one on R4 and it was the rubbish horse racing one again.

    Report comment

  29. “Just had No2AV’s one on R4 and it was the rubbish horse racing one again.”
    Best thing about this – I have seen a local LibDem campaign leaflet (I can’t find a copy online. Lack of google-fu.) which used the horse-race analogy to explain why ‘only the LibDems can win here’.

    If you’re trying to defeat your opponent’s analogies in one thing, don’t use it in another.

    Report comment

  30. @RAF

    “Do they? I think you’ll find many of these people have been supported at some point by Western governments of the right and left.
    Also, when did GG ever show support for OBL?”

    Apologies for possibly raking over the coals of a spent argument but my excuse is that I work for an accursed business that ignores May Bank Holidays and I’ve only just been able to dip into the thread! I haven’t been able to read all the 270+ contributions either, so I risk repetition too.

    SocalLiberal made a similar point about Robert Newark’s erroneous point and I’d like to add the reminder that realpolitik isn’t a preserve of any particular ideology. Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden, however, are classic examples of how, in the West, when those two Cold Warriors extraordinaire were in tandem, Thatcher and Reagan, we got it wrong to a disastrous degree.

    Let’s look at Saddam first. When we decided that the emergence of Ayatollah Khomeini in Iran was the greater threat to our interests in the Middle East, once our old friend the Shah was gone, we armed and backed Saddam in the Iraq/Iran war, turning a blind eye to his appalling use of chemical weapons against Iranian troops. Our enemy’s enemy was our friend, but we created a hideous monster who destabilised the region for 20 years and who went on to murder thousands of his own citizens in almost unimaginably barbaric ways.

    At a similar time, such was our obsession with the “evil” Soviet Empire and its works that we decided in the West to kill Soviet troops by proxy in Afghanistan. Our friend in so doing was none other than the Mujahideen’s favourite Saudi born mercenary, Osama Bin Laden. Another terrible beauty was born, nurtured and supported by his Western friends when we were contenting ourselves that he was killing the right people.

    I’m not an implacable opponent of a pragmatic and self-interested foreign policy, but the total absence of a moral dimension inevitably leads us into the dark recesses of both hypocrisy and counter-productiveness. The current Libyan intervention, though wrapped in the cloak of a moral cause, strikes me as being in danger of committing these very same sins once again.

    Report comment

  31. @Crossbat,

    I agree about Iraq and Saddam. Realpolitik at it’s most odious. But I think the Bin Laden in Afghanistan thing is a bit of a canard.

    Bin Laden wasn’t “created” by the Americans. He was already an extremely wealthy Jihadist when he went to Afghanistan. The Americans supported the mujahideen movement in general, which was far wider than the Islamists, although they played a part in it. Bin Laden wasn’t a major player in the Mujahideen alliance, and although the Mujahideen were Islamists, it was only a fraction of them that later peeled off into anti-American activity and the Taliban.

    If the Americans had never supplied arms to the Mujahideen, Bin Laden would still have existed, would still have been a terrorist, would still have had the arms and means to attack the West and would still have attacked New York. Unless of course the Soviets and Afghan communists had won the war in Afghanistan and killed him.

    Report comment

  32. @ Valerie

    “It doesn’t bother me whether Bin Laden is alive or dead. I’m sure he would have snuffed my life out without a second’s thought. I’m opposed to the death penalty and public executions. I do find the American people’s response to his demise rather disturbing -I guess I see it as ‘blood lust’ and in some way part of their character. Sorry Socal Lib but I tthink it had to be said.”

    You’re entitled to your opinion even if I disagree with it. I can’t tell you what to think. The reactions are not driven by bloodlust but a sense of relief and joy over the fact that a man who committed such atrocities, who was seemingly incapable of being caught, who could strike at will, who encouraged others to take up arms against us, who promised to destroy us….is now dead. The families and friends and lovers of the 9/11 victims will never be forgotten and never recovered. I don’t think there’s anyone who’s not been affected in some degree of relation to the 9/11 attacks.

    Bin Laden managed to excercise great psychological control over the U.S. and deeply impacted life for most Americans, between the ridiculous airport security measures to terror alerts to increased levels of surveillance to major cities having to have entire neighborhoods cordoned off every time some bozo accidentally leaves a package on a street corner. To know that he’s dead is an incredible relief and a moment of joy for people. That he was killed by U.S. ground troops, without any loss of American or civilian life, is an incredible moment of pride. That’s why people went out to celebrate last night and have been celebratory today. It’s not bloodlust.

    Report comment

  33. @ Crossbat11

    “SocalLiberal made a similar point about Robert Newark’s erroneous point and I’d like to add the reminder that realpolitik isn’t a preserve of any particular ideology. Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden, however, are classic examples of how, in the West, when those two Cold Warriors extraordinaire were in tandem, Thatcher and Reagan, we got it wrong to a disastrous degree.”

    I don’t like any dictators. Hell, I’m such a Jeffersonian Democrat, I refused to watch the Royal Wedding (the only Fergie I recognize is the slutty punk rocker lead singer of the Black Eyed Peas who warns people not to phunk with her). But I’m also aware that the U.S. cannot go around the world picking fights and starting wars with whoever we’d like. We have to work with others and get along with others (regardless of whether we like them). Now that doesn’t mean we should undercut democracies and democratic movements and support dictators (and we have done that many times in the past….and it’s always come back to bite us in the ass and I feircely oppose that kind of foreign policy) but we have to work with what we can.

    Report comment

  34. @ Neil A

    “Whether “Al-Qaeda” is a myth or not is largely semantics. Whatever you call it, there has been a large, motivated and well-resourced group of Islamic terrorists operating in Afghanistan and the Pakistani border provinces for a couple of decades. That group was centred around Bin Laden (probably initially because of his wealth) and a circle of fellow travellers, and fed by a stream of volunteers from the Pakistani madrassas, Dewsbury/London mosques and elsewhere. That group planned and executed a number of acts of international terror aimed at the United States.

    Yes they are not the only Islamic-oriented terrorist group in the world. Yes there have been militant Islamists throughout history (some-including the militants themselves-might argue that it is the origin of Islam itself). Yes the idea that there is some sort of properly organised international network with branches everywhere is a simplification designed to make life easier for people who couldn’t point to Pakistan on an atlas.

    But there was/is a “gang” of terrorists. That gang called themselves Al-Qaeda. That gang killed thousands of Americans. That gang was hunted down. Most of that gang’s senior members were captured or killed. Now that gang’s leader has been killed. Seeing it in those terms may be unsophisticated, but it’s not exactly inaccurate either.”

    Thanks. :)

    Report comment

  35. 1300 seat gains would be a fantastic result for Ed Miliband. With that he will be well on course to lead Labour into the next GE.

    Less than 1000 seat gains combined with a NO vote in the AV referendum would have further destabilised his leadership, subject, as it has been, to a little speculation internally. 1300 gains would be a significant achievement and should silence many critics within the party.

    Report comment

  36. @Socal liberal

    You seem to be saying that every single American is traumatised because of the actions of one man and his followers. 9/11 was a terrible , shocking event but it was a single terrorist attack that occurred 10 years ago. It wasn’t a military attack or campaign. How can this one event have caused a nation of 300 million people to be traumatised for a decade?

    With respect, I can’t help but feel that America’s response to this act of terroism has caused unnecessary suffering around the world to as many innocent victims as were destroyed on that day.

    Report comment

  37. @ Valerie

    “You seem to be saying that every single American is traumatised because of the actions of one man and his followers. 9/11 was a terrible , shocking event but it was a single terrorist attack that occurred 10 years ago. It wasn’t a military attack or campaign. How can this one event have caused a nation of 300 million people to be traumatised for a decade?”

    It was basically a military attack on civilians. It could have been far worse had it not been for the Flight 93 resisters. But yeah, people were traumatized (and your description is rather insensitive). You don’t forget the losses of loved ones. You don’t forget the destruction of a great symbol of your country. You don’t forget being made vulnerable. When you live under the threat of a madman who threatens to kill you, you don’t forget that. When your government and military are seemingly unable to stop this madman, you learn anxiety. Don’t forget also how it made Americans feel about our own abilities in the world.

    Lives changed because of 9/11 and the actions of Bin Laden. And this guy had put together an organization to destroy the United States and kill as many Americans as possible (as well as others around the world including those in Madrid and London). The losses of our young men and women in Afghanistan continue to be a reminder of the great sacrifice that’s been made. U.S. troops have been in Afghanistan for 10 years now, that’s a very long time. Quite contrary to the opinion of foreigners, Americans do not like war, killing, and massive security measures by the government. For many people, this presents a hope we can succeed in ending these things.

    “With respect, I can’t help but feel that America’s response to this act of terroism has caused unnecessary suffering around the world to as many innocent victims as were destroyed on that day.”

    The Iraq War was not a response to terrorism. I assume that’s what you’re reffering to.

    Report comment

  38. @ Socalliberal

    I agree with Valerie that the sight of US citizens’ hysterical joy at Bin Laden’s death was pretty nauseating. Everything you say demonstrates the remarkable American belief that what happens to the US is more important than what happens to anyone else. The idea that Bin Laden had put an organisation together to “destroy the US” is a perfect example of US over reaction. 2001 changed lives, so did the 2008 economic crisis which was mainly caused by US financial instability & incompetence. Besides in the US more people are killed EVERY YEAR by guns than were killed in 2001. And yet you Jeffersonian Democrats preach the “right to bear arms” drivel which intensifies the carnage. You even have a nasty tradition of political assassinations, lets-make-our-arguments-with-violence culture, which most Western countries — thank god — have grown out of. And why does US society keep vast numbers in prison, well over a million, the vast majority of whom are black or Hispanic. But what can you expect from a nation that thought that the sentimental hogwash of Forest Gump was a great movie!

    Report comment

1 4 5 6