Polls tonight

I am out tonight, so won’t be updating the blog until later. Due tonight we will have the daily YouGov poll for the Sun, and I am expecting Populus’s monthly poll for the Times. We have also yet to see anything from ICM for the Guardian this month.

I’ll update later when I return.


71 Responses to “Polls tonight”

1 2
  1. First! (on a non-thread) :-)

  2. Yougov director of political and social research just tweeted this –
    “YouGov has data from our teams in Denmark, France, Germany and Britain on #Eurozone and British veto. Results tomorrow.”
    Could be an interesting set of figures – we can be pretty certain that the British figures will be positive about the veto (given previous polling) but it’ll be interesting to see how the German/French public feel.

    It’ll be interesting to see if they have the same views as their leaders and press or if they’re more sympathetic to Cameron’s decision.

  3. I know a mate whose cousin’s friend workd for YouGov and he’s heard it’s a shock result. The Monster Raving Loony’s polling on 73% of the vote, apparently.

  4. Is it just me or has the last 12 months of polling been incredibly boring/stable. In the history of opinion polling have we seen such a stable situation for a year at a time? (Ignoring veto bounce)

    Is this stablity down to the regularity of polling esp. YouGov’s daily tracker and its affects on the polling graph here?:
    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/voting-intention

  5. JAMESP
    IIRC, AW posted about this not long ago and the period before the Iraq war was fairly stable and even then remained fairly stable following the post-Iraq drop/Cameron becoming leader until the world economy collapsed, at which point the Labour vote essentially collapsed.

    Not sure about it being as stable as now, but still fairly stable.

  6. I should note that I may be misremembering what AW actually said about polling stability – but those periods are fairly stable from what I can see.

  7. @ Old Nat

    “First! (on a non-thread)”

    It’s really an open thread, not a non-thread. IMO.

    Btw, you never answered me last night about your run-in with a French bashing jingoist at a Starbucks (hopefully the same Starbucks and not two different Starbucks branches that happenned to be across the street from each other).

  8. It seems appropriate, as we approach Xmas, that the word “stable” has appeared 5 times in the last 3 posts.

    Should we bring in the courts to decide whether such religious references are appropriate on a non-religious website?

    http://articles.cnn.com/2011-06-03/us/texas.school.prayer_1_graduation-ceremony-appeals-court-emergency-appeal?_s=PM:US

  9. SoCalLiberal

    I don’t think that the Republican candidate with the baseball bat was the guy. However, he did say he was an ex-Marine and big!, so I was somewhat guarded in my response – simply asking if he knew who the street was named after.

    Had a baseball bat been in evidence, I would have enthusiastically supported his stance against the French. :-)

  10. Here is a little something to cheer you all up/ cringe in horror (delete as appropiate)
    All credit goes to Chris Lane by the way as he is the one who inspired me to write this.

    1st January 2010.

    Prime Minister Tony Blair sat in his office at Chequers wearing a very pensive expresion. The new year was to be an election year and Labour was in for a kicking. Tony Blair was in the unprecedented position of being the first Prime Minister in living memory to run for a consecutive fourth term. But victory would be a mountain climb away.
    If the polls were to be believed, on 18% of voters would be voting Labour, four points behind the Liberal Democrats and a whopping 33 points behind the Tories.
    Things were looking desperate.
    Despite being the longest serving Prime Minister in living memory, Blairs girp on power seemed to be slacking due to the fallout of the MPs Expenses scandal, The Invasion of Iran and the Second wave of London Bombings ,Labour’s spectacular defeat in the Glenrothes By-Election which saw the SNP romp home with an 11,000 seat Majority and the sacking of Gordon Brown during the Northern Rock crisis during in the Autum of 2007.
    But like the EU President, Peter Mandelson, he was a fighter and not a quitter.

  11. @ Old Nat

    “I don’t think that the Republican candidate with the baseball bat was the guy. However, he did say he was an ex-Marine and big!, so I was somewhat guarded in my response – simply asking if he knew who the street was named after.

    Had a baseball bat been in evidence, I would have enthusiastically supported his stance against the French. :)”

    I think it’s unpleasant to be threatened or badgered by anyone, let alone by a physically large person claiming to be an ex-marine.

    If it was Carl Paladino, you would have made for a hilarious MSNBC guest.

    Paladino was all around hilarious. He once, in front of the press, threatened to take a hit out on someone bothering him. At the already-crazy gubernatorial debate, I think he went to the bathroom leaving the microphone on. On an otherwise depressing night, that concession speech provided great comic relief.

    He is the first politician to ever go down in flames for anti-gay rhetoric. Political candidates have gone down for making racist and sexist comments but never before for homophobic comments. So in an odd way, I’m grateful to him for that. He was going to lose anyway but the loss would have low double digits or high single digits, not the over 30% plus blowout loss he suffered.

  12. With Anthony out for the night I fully intend, probably after the 9.00pm watershed (hic, hic) to unleash a series of the most one eyed, partisan and vituperative posts that this fine blog has ever had the misfortune to witness. I will require little, if any, provocation, and I warn you all that I will be unsparing in my pitiless and cruel barbs.

    In mitigation, I hope you allow me some licence because I’m in the midst of unspeakable grief at the untimely death of Kim Jong-iL. I’m anticipating particular understanding and sympathy from Chouenlai during this very difficult time.

  13. SoCalLiberal

    I wasn’t being threatened! The guy just made assumptions that because I was “a Brit” (little did he know!) that I would share his view of Anglo-Saxons being alone against a sea of enemies.

    Just as offensive, are all the people who, in casual conversation, assume that because I am male, I’ll agree with their derogatory comments about women – etc etc.

    I suspect that such people are simply mental eunuchs – lacking the essential bits to relate to other people. Unfortunately some such people get elected to political office. :-(

  14. @ Crossbar11

    “I fully intend, probably after the 9.00pm watershed (hic, hic) to unleash a series of the most one eyed, partisan and vituperative posts that this fine blog has ever had the misfortune to witness. I will require little, if any, provocation, and I warn you all that I will be unsparing in my pitiless and cruel barbs.”

    Not not changing your usual mode then!

  15. And I will transfer huge chunks of the Guardian over here for you all to read.

    No need to thank me, Sergio.

  16. CROSSBAT11

    Nah. You are a sweet person, and such behaviour is beyond you (though I’m sure you could ape intolerance very well).

    Naturally, you might have been transformed by the death of the Dear Leader, so if you are mildly critical of others, we’ll forgive you.

  17. Nick P

    Now THAT is a serious threat! I may have to respond with extensive quotations from the Ecclefechan Courier!

  18. crossbat11
    nickp

    Wouldnt it kill you to behave and just enjoy the comment feature that this blog has and not spoil it with petty partisan points? Anything that you would have to say I probaly have heard it all before anyway. Dont embarras yourselves please.

  19. Might I remind anyone who wishes to get all tribal and partisan tonight the comments policy still stands if or if not Anthony is away.

    Over to you Anthony.

    ***UK Polling Report has a policy of encouraging only NON-PARTISAN comments.

    The comments sections on most political blogs is either one sided, or dominated by petty political point scoring and tired rehersals of party political spin. I wanted something else. Therefore the rule in the comments section is that all comments should be made in the spirit of non-partisanship, to try and all people here to discuss polls and politics like adults with a shared interest, despite supporting different parties.

    This means that it is not a place for spinning, not a place for saying how much you hate party X and wish they would lose, nor it is a place for saying what party should win, or what the public should support. We are interested in what will happen, what the public actually think, not what you think they should do. Treat other commenters who don’t share your views with respect – it’s your chance to understand their point of view, not score points off them – and indeed, politicans from opposing parties with respect. Comments that talk about Zanu-NuLab, one-eyed Scottish idiots and so on are not conducisive to the non-partisan sort of discussion we want here and will probably never leave moderation.

    As a nice rule of thumb, think of it as a site about politics, not a venue for politics.

    Comments from people who haven’t left one before will automatically be held back for moderation, as will comments containing links to other sites. Other comments may get held back in moderation if they contain certain words like viagra, poker, casino and so on (most notably “cialis” apparently some generic form of viagra, which unfortunately turns up inside the word so-cialis-m, so sometimes causes comments to be delayed) or if WordPress just takes an arbitary dislike to it. I’ll clear those comments out of moderation as soon as I can.

    Other comments that get moderated probably mean I have decided it doesn’t meet the comment policy. Read the start of this, and ponder whether your comment really was in the spirit of non-partisanship. I normally take a light touch approach to moderation and only step in when a comment really has leaped over the line, is clearly bound to provoke a partisan argument, or where a poster is treating the comment policy with contempt.

    If you see a comment from someone else that you think crosses over the line please do NOT respond with equally partisan rebuttals. If it is a new poster then please do welcome them, explain we don’t really do things that way round here, and point them in the direction of this policy. If it is someone who should know better, just ignore them: continuing a partisan argument is just as bad as starting it!***

  20. Crossbat

    I warn you I will be forced to respond with even more anti banker ranting!!!!

  21. “‘Kill the pig! Cut his throat! Kill the pig! Bash him in!'”

  22. Christ, I’ve just realised – if there a copper-cidal riot tonight, I’m looking at a 4 year stretch.

  23. SoCal,
    Can I pick your brain over the 2012 presidential election?
    I’m actually fairly ignorant over US electoral history so I’ll ask if you excuse that.

    Looking at the historical presidential voting figures, the democrats have improved the vote numbers every election since 1984 (in 1980 they lost 5 million votes compared to 1976).
    Republicans have had a much more mixed history, losing votes in 1988, 1992 and 2008.
    So if Obama increases Democrat votes by even 2 million (equalling their worst increase in votes, 1984) then the Republicans have to gain just over 11.6 million votes to beat him (beating Bush’s 11.58 million vote increase in 2004).
    How likely/unlikely do you think that scenario would be?

    I.e do you expect Obama to increase Democrat votes (as he did in 2008 – where he gained 10.4 million voters compared to 2004) or buck the historical trend and lose votes?

    That may have sounded like a very long-winded question, but if I could ask for a general answer?
    Apologies to everybody else.

  24. eh eh eh

  25. I wonder how the public will react to a classic piece of divide and conquer on the Unions in relation to the pensions dispute.

    For me, leaving the PCS isolated is something of a master stroke.

  26. Me has got the munchies!

  27. GOOOOOOOAALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL!

    Tonight’s YouGov!

    CON 38%, LAB 42%, LD 9%

    Get in! Normal service has resumed!

    The cats away, the mice will play! ;-)

  28. Well as AW is away, I’m going to reply to posts on the previous thread.

    @Colin

    I was not “sneering” at family life in the 50’s. I was a child in the 50’s for goodness sake. I had a happy childhood. Mum stayed at home and look after us three kids while my dad went out to work and, at the end of the week, gave her money for housekeeping.

    my mum had worked as a post woman in London during the war. Despite the dangers, imagine delivering letters during the blitz, I think she’d enjoyed having her own pay packet.

    Like it or lump it, things are different now. I don’t think kids are any happier now rhan we were, but you can’t put the clock back.

    @Chou

    You say your replies to my original post are in moderation. Given the stuff you post that does get through, I can only imagine your response. 8-)

  29. PAUL BRISTOL

    So after a brief little breeze, the polldrums (copyright Amber) return to GB.

  30. Latest YouGov/Sun results 19th Dec CON 38%, LAB 42%, LD 9%; APP -23

    Beautiful!

    So much for ICM’s six point Tory lead.

  31. Looks like the ‘EU bounce’ in Cons having the lead may be over – but if Cons stabilise on 38, rather than falling back to 35/36, then it will have given them a longer-term boost to their figures.
    It seems that every time the Cons go with ‘traditional’ Con policies their numbers improve, rather than when they go with Lib-Con policies.

    Perhaps there’s a lesson to be learnt there for Cameron and co?

  32. Brilliant!

    As a Conervative voter I am very pleased at tonights poll, this should ensure EM stays in place.

  33. This thread reads like a class of children, while the teacher is out of the room!

    ChrisLane – your time has come. Enter the classroom and restore order!

  34. Wonder how much coverage there will be about this poll. Labour have co distantly had a decent lead in the polls with no coverage. A couple of Tory leads and that makes the news!!!

  35. @richard in norway – “moral standards were very lax outside of the gentry in the Victorian age”

    I see the Independent is framing discussion the new sacking rights No 10 wants to give to employers, as a return to Victorian values.

    I don’t see Cameron making the connection explicit. In 1983 Thatcher attacked “socialist propaganda” for its false portray as an age of Dickensian squalor (sic), to her the Victorian age represented decent values, hard work and self-respect. Neil Kinnock’s reponse was”Victorian Britain was a place where a few got rich and most got hell”.

    As to the gentry, no doubt many were noble, high-minded exemplars of patiarchal marriage… however, the scale of prostitution (majority in the age range 15-22) as well as the prostitution of children, was one of the more shocking sights for visitors to Victorian London.

  36. It seems Labour`s figures are firming up too for some reason,two consecutive 42`s
    RICHARD O
    You can say the same thing when h`s prime minister
    I posted before…The extreme short duration of Tory lead shows that Cameron faces an uphill task of increasing his vote share beyond 40…He needs those boundary changes to win

  37. Hi Paul you may be distressed to know that there was a man called Paul Bristol who was one of the founders of the Monday Club!
    I would be surprised if the poll which put the Tories 6% ahead was anything other than an outlier. I think the Tories were probably 1-2% ahead up to the by-election but may now have surrendered the lead to Labour. But we will need at least one more consecutive poll after this one to confirm it with any certainty.

  38. @Smukesh,

    I am glad we have a strong effective opposition, it’s the best thing for democracy. The worst thing about the Tories vs Blair was that there was no opposition, which is bad for democracy, and why Blair ended up like a president type figure.

    There is still way too much kidding themselves though for many of the Labour fans on here. David M would have made a much better, stronger, and appealing PM. I still feel very strongly that EM will cost Labour when it gets to the big day.

    We can but only wait and see!

    richo

  39. @Richard O

    And I’m very pleased the eurosceptics are on the march.

    Seeing Bill Cash, Douglas Carswell etc on our TV screens everyday – bring it on! 8-)

  40. RICHARD O
    There was no opposition to Blair and Thatcher because there were towering leaders…There is reasonably effective opposition because Labour sees hope in Cameron being Tory leader…All those Tories who diss Milliband,has it ever occured to you that Labour wants Cameron to be in place come the next election

  41. Tonight’s details:

    Con 38
    Lab 42
    Lib Dem 9
    SNP / PCY 3
    UKIP 3
    Green 2
    BNP 1
    Respect 0
    Other 0

    Approval 32 – 55 = -23

    Non-voters 23%

    Tables are here:

    http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/vxg8k91ztj/YG-Archives-Pol-Sun-results-191211.pdf

    In the trackers it’s interesting that the personal boosts Cameron got a few days ago are already drifting down – ‘Sticks to what he believes in’ down 6 points to 33%, ‘Decisive’ down 4 to 25%. Both of these are still higher than originally (26% and 20%) but they show how quickly these news-driven poll changes can fade.

  42. @ BARNABY MARDER

    Oh No! Just had to look that up! It’s bad enough to be told that I look like Colonel Gaddafi! :-)

    Agree, another few more polls needed.

  43. The polls during the past year have shown that both the Labour and Tory vote are very soft. Relatively minor political events can shift support to/from Labour and the Tories. During a GE campaign a big shift either way certainly isn’t out of the question.

    Overall, I’d honestly say that the Tories will definitely be the happier of the two parties with how things have gone in 2011. Despite the EuroZone crisis, HackGate, faltering UK economy, very high unemployment, summer riots etc. etc. they are still neck-and-neck with Labour in the polls. I think many people – myself included – thought this very unlikely at the beginning (or, indeed, middle part of 2011). As I see it, Labour will never win a majority with Ed Miliband as their leader. He is simply too much of a liability to the party.

    Cameron will be breathing a huge sigh of relief as 2011 comes to an end…it could and should have been much worse for the Conservatives. As it is, things have been rather comfortable and easy for Cameron during his first year and a half in office.

  44. I agree Cameron is no Thatcher.

  45. The worry for Labour isn’t so much the polls IMO – they will undoubtedly get much of their pre-veto vote back from the Tories anyway. It is that once again Cameron (and the Tories) have been able to demonstrate that such minor events are seemingly able to re-galvanise support for the Tories and reduce support for Labour. Given Ed Miliband’s poor rapport with the British public, I am worried that a GE campaign would given the clear fragility in Labour’s support.

  46. Oh well, the eu veto boost was bound to end sooner rather than later.

    Glad to see Tory vote still up on general election and that the government still out poll the opposition though.

  47. Correction: Given Ed Miliband’s poor rapport with the British public, I am worried that a GE campaign would have the potential to erode the Labour vote given the clear fragility in its current support.

  48. Must agree with @ Ambivilent (reluctantly, I admit).

    With a better leader, Lab would have made much more of the Autumn Statement debacle, and the Eurozone issue, and would have played a much more strategic game with the Lib/Con splits.

    What this shows is that the veto was a definite bounce that has since evaporated (which we always knew it would), but that has still left Labour with only marginal gains to show for 2011. I fear that with Ed and Ed at the helm, it doesn’t matter how bad it gets in 2012, they will only gain a paltry VI boost (maybe staying at double figures for a few months).

  49. YG gap widening. The lefties must have gone all misty-eyed for the death of Kim Jong-Il…….

    DC needs to “fix”a leveller……….

    Too early to play the MT trump card though.

    Got to be Clarkson then…….er, possibly…….oh well, it is Xmas….. :-)

  50. @Smukesh

    “All those Tories who diss Milliband,has it ever occured to you that Labour wants Cameron to be in place come the next election”

    You make an interesting point. At the moment, Cameron is the dominant figure in British politics (with Alex Salmond running him a close second) but I think he’s being greatly assisted by the lack of impact Miliband has made thus far and the continuing disdain that the electorate seem to have for Nick Clegg. A bit like the one eyed man always being King in the the land of the blind, he’s prevailing more by dint of the inadequacies of his rivals rather than because of his own particular abilities and strengths. His personal ratings suggest sullen acceptance rather than enthusiasm amongst the populace and, as I said many months ago, I sense a politician with limited popular appeal who’s style may grate rather than endear as time goes by.

    In many ways, this is one argument for retaining shares in the Miliband stock, low as it may be now. It’s by no means a sure-fire investment, but if you were a Miliband shareholder, your main hope would be that his contrasting style and personality eventually starts to resonate with the electorate who, I suspect, may well then look to sell the Cameron stock quite suddenly and rapidly. As the political cliche-mongers amongst might say; I’m not sure Cameron ever sealed the deal with the British electorate.

1 2