Tonight’s YouGov poll for the Sunday Times has topline figures of CON 37%, LAB 42%, LDEM 8%. I’ll do a proper write up of the poll tomorrow morning once the tables go up on the YouGov website.

So far I am not aware of any other polling in the Sunday papers.


104 Responses to “YouGov/Sunday Times – CON 37, LAB 42, LDEM 8”

1 2 3
  1. Robert C
    “Given the lynch mob mentality that exists…The probability that a gay, ex-banker Liberal Democrat MP would get a fair trial is next to zero.”

    I am almost lost for words!

    Essentially you acknowledeg there is a case against Laws but then seek to defend him by contending that posters on here are homophobic and pretty much everyone else is unable to view things objectively and reach a just decison based on evidence and the helpful guidance from a judge were a case to reach court.

  2. I think this whole argument shows what a disaster the expenses rules were and still are. Instead of being based on standard, generally agreed principles, they were thrown together to reflect a bunch of different opinions and public prejudices which could be almost guaranteed to conflict with each other. Then whenever a ‘scandal’ took place further alterations were made.

    As a result (as Alex pointed out before) which MPs got frozen out by their Parties ended up being about favouritism rather than the actual offence that did (or didn’t) take place. If Gummer’s moat is a hanging offence, why isn’t Cameron’s wisteria? I suspect Parliament’s own sanctions also depended on who you were. Certainly when you got caught and if the newspapers decided to go for you or not makes a big difference (so yet more levels of favouritism).

    What’s more because the there was no coherent hierarchy of principles underlying the rules, even when rules are broken, the offender can often be defended as claiming in the spirit of some principle which might apply; while others following the letter of the rules could be seen as violating their spirit.

    Of course the most depressing thing about it is, if this is how MPs behave when constructing a system to deal with something relatively simple and over which they have complete control, what are the chances of getting things right when they have to enact laws for the real world.

  3. Exit Polls from Cyprus GE (average from 3 institutes)
    Democratic Rally DISY (EPP): 35.8 (2006: 30,3)
    Party of Working People AKEL (European Left): 32.6 (31.0)
    Democratic Party DIKO(center-left) 14.4 (17.9)
    Social Democrats EDEK (PES) 8.4 (8.9)
    European Party EUROKO (right) 3.5 (5.8)
    Green Party KEP 2.0 (nc)
    So center-left remains majority, there is a polarizing tendency towards the two main parties favoring more DISY than AKEL. Government parties (AKEL+DIKO) around 47% (-2 from 2006), a rather decent result. Nevertheless they might lose OM in Parliament (2006: AKEL 18 + DIKO 11 = 29 for a total of 56. Projection: AKEL 19 + DIKO 9 = 28). Of course this does not affects the government, Cyprus’ system being fully presidential, but it might affect the election of the new President of the Boule (Parliament), actually belonging to DIKO. EDEK is rather hostile to government (this is why I would never vote social democrat in Cyprus, they are objective allies of the right), but the Greens might provide the supplementary vote.

  4. @ Amber Star

    “And Robert C, I have actively supported the Lesbian & Gay movement all my life, even when it wasn’t ‘fashionable’ to do so. And, FWIW, I don’t believe people should be outed, if they want to keep quiet about being gay. But, IMO, it is not acceptable for a person who has chosen public life to use being gay as a reason for rule breaking.”

    I know this wasn’t addressed to me but I thank you and appreciate your position. I agree with you fully that being gay should not be a reason for rule breaking.

1 2 3