Tonight’s is the last YouGov daily poll for 2011 and topline figures are CON 40%, LAB 40%, LDEM 9%, meaning we end the year with the two main parties neck-and-neck, which is at least quite tidy. I’m not sure if we’ll have any polls until next year now. We haven’t had an ICM poll for the Guardian yet this month, so perhaps they’ll pop up between Christmas and new year, or perhaps they’ve skipped a month. Either way, I’ll try to do a round-up post or two over the next week.


208 Responses to “YouGov/Sun – CON 40%, LAB 40%, LDEM 9%”

1 2 3 5
  1. Numero Uno!!

  2. The “Voting Intention Figures”are always almost a week out-of-date.Do the Polling Average and the UNS Projection numbers relate to the VI figures listed or to the up-to-date information?

  3. ….as my nominee for Man of the Year, Silvio Berlusconi would say!

  4. Colinn, you old spoilsport, you got in the way of what I hoped would be consecutive posts!!

  5. CROSSBAT11

    Alas, the evidence trail suggests that you are being Mandelsonian with the truth!

    1. there is no indication of consequentiality in your first post (as would have been indicated by a final “………”
    2. Your second post is timed 10 minutes after your first.

    Labour perfidy – has it got no lomits? :-)

  6. A nice Christmas present. LDs go into 2012 in single figures!

  7. @OldNat

    I was going to claim a system error but you’ve unmasked my deception once again. No wonder you’re routing my beloved party north of the border!

    It usually takes me ten minutes to think of something vaguely witty to say anyway!

  8. CROSSBAT11

    :-)

    I didn’t know the LDs were your beloved party! In Scotland, it may well be that they are in single figures, as JamesP points out – but in votes, not percentage.

  9. @OldNat

    “I didn’t know the LDs were your beloved party! In Scotland, it may well be that they are in single figures, as JamesP points out – but in votes, not percentage.”

    So I’ve been misunderstanding our old friend Henry all along then. When he said he reckoned the LDs would recover to “15-16” by 2015 he was talking about actual votes not percentages!!!

  10. OLDNAT

    A lovely Scottish crossbreak for you. Voting Intention.

    Lab: 35
    SNP: 28
    CON: 27!!
    LIBD: 6

    Conservative surge in Scotland. Will be in 2nd place. Ed will deter Scottish voters. Con rise Lab fall. Conservative landslide in Scotland. Or :) NOT! :)

  11. Replying to my own post.. Is this Conservative surge in Scotland due to the Cameron Big Society effect in the form of ‘Big Man’?

    Can the Big Man Boost last longer than the veto boost? Discuss
    (5 marks)

  12. JamesP Perhaps that they are all living longer.

  13. JamesP

    With the looming election of somebody to run London Transport, the figures in the English capital should be far more exciting!

    Con 50
    Lab 31
    LD 10
    Oth 9

    Boris (presumably) rules – doubtlessly in Latin.

  14. Last day at work before the holiday so I’m off to bed now before my 6.15am reveille. I expect I will suffer some polling withdrawal symptoms over the coming week or so and will therefore withdraw gracefully from the site until such time as I can once again experience that little frisson of anticipation and excitement as I click on to UKPR at 10.00pm every night to see what the daily YouGov tracker reveals. I’ve winced a bit over the last few days, but I’ve had some good days too!

    So Happy Christmas and New Year to my reader, as the Beano used to say, and best wishes to everyone on this superb site, whatever their particular political hue. We may not always appreciate it, especially when things may get a little fractious, but we’re all indulging in something quite wonderful and precious; open political discourse which is nearly always civil and intelligent. Diverse aims and very divergent opinions but I sense common cause; we all want to make this great island and nation we share a better place in which to live.

    Imperfect as it is, it’s still a great country which I love dearly, even with a Tory/LibDem coalition at the helm.

    A happy holiday to everyone and see you in the New Year.

  15. Crossbat11

    Nollaig Chridheil agus Bliadhna Mhath Ur

  16. @ Old Nat

    So, when are you going to choose a leader for “all the people”?
    ——————————————–
    Well, Ed M is the leader we have for “all the people”; & younger people seem to ‘get’ him much better than older ones.

    I think that Ed’s Promise of Britain, resonates most with younger people. I am not saying that only younger people ‘get’ it. Peter Bell’s views were great to have. Also John B D’s view made very interesting reading.

    Your comment about my mum being into politics when I was in nappies made me laugh. My mum used to have no interest at all. Her motto was: Don’t vote, it only encourages them.” However, my son’s interest in politics got her to pay some attention; & the villification of Gordon Brown annoyed her so much that she voted Labour in 2010.

    To my surprise, she ‘gets’ the Promise of Britain; especially from the perspective of the two questions which you asked:

    1. Why Britain, rather than Uk?

    Because many people think of themselves as Brits, few as United Kingdomers. The 3 boys that my mum cares for are British. Their mother is English, they all live in England but their father & grandmother are Scottish; they have Scottish names. So my mum is a British Granny.

    2. Why the Promise of Britain, rather than the Promise for Britain?

    The Promise of Britain means Britain as a society ‘promising’ that each generation will have the opportunity to do better than their predecessors. Using “for” doesn’t work in that context, hence “of”.

    And I would like to know, what are the ideas & feelings of her peers? What do they see as their roles in Labour’s vision of a better, fairer Britain?
    8-)

  17. Amended post

    Amber
    1. OK so you guys don’t care about part of the state that you are part of – I understand that perspective. Most people in the biggest part of the UK state seem to share that view.
    Seems totally disconnected from the supposed reality of the UK to me, but then I never understood you Brits anyway.
    2. So, you are suggesting that your “Britain” (representing only parts of the UK state, and not all of it) is unique in wanting to have opportunities for each successive generation, yet Labour’s policy has been to squander the one-off resource of North Sea Oil and Gas for the benefit of the current generation (or at least for the current generations of political leaders to posture on the world stage). Following Norway’s example might have been more sensible, but your party specifically rejected that in the past, and shows no sign of changing in the future.
    Your leader spouts aspirational vapours, and you expect people to be impressed?

  18. @Crossbat 11′

    Happy holidays. God bless us one and all! :-)

  19. @ Old Nat

    Why are you attempting to tar Labour with the Tory brush? It was the Baroness who lead the sell off of the family silver & failed to create a sovereign wealth fund.

    Why didn’t Labour create one, when they were in government? Because it must be all parties who agree else the others will simply promise to distribute said fund to the current population &/or current wealth creators in the form of tax cuts etc.

    I have yet to see the SNP’s plans for a fixed constitution which includes a sovereign wealth fund & the rules by which it will be added to & released. Have you been privy to any such policy document or are you just blowing off steam?
    8-)

  20. @ Old Nat

    Yes, the whole Britain & Northern Ireland thing is rather cumbersome. I’d be very happy, should the Northern Irish all decide to be British. I think some already think of themselves as Brits.
    8-)

  21. @ Old Nat

    Your leader spouts aspirational vapours, and you expect people to be impressed?
    —————————–
    Well, it works for yours. :twisted:

  22. Well folks, we don’t all see eye to eye politically on here, but there is definitely a bit of Christmas spirit in the air, it’s lovely, fair warms the cockles of me stoney Tory heart.
    Anyway, before I depart to much warmer climes for a couple of weeks, I’d like to wish you all a very merry Christmas and a happy New Year. I’m sure I reflect the consensus when I wish our brilliant host, Anthony, a wonderful yuletide break.
    Thanks for the fun. :-) :-)

  23. Ken

    When you come back, Amber and I will still be spatting!

    Have a good time.

  24. Amber

    In reverse order

    1. “Well, it works for yours.” Go look at the Scottish Election Study.

    2, ” I’d be very happy, should the Northern Irish all decide to be British.” But if they don’t, you are unwilling to deal with them as equal citizens of this state. Maybe not the most egalitarian thought that you have ever had.

    3. Don’t tell me you have never read the McCrone Report which was written for the Tory Government, but was endorsed by Labour when they came to power. Your ” Because it must be all parties who agree else the others will simply promise to distribute said fund to the current population &/or current wealth creators in the form of tax cuts etc.” is particularly weak. – Labour can do nothing unless the Tories agree. Says it all about why your party is languishing in the Scottish polls.

  25. @jamesp

    “Conservative surge in Scotland.”

    Not quite, but certainly an upturn of late.

    Looking at the last ten polls (9th Dec to 22nd Dec) the Con data:

    27 (22nd Dec)
    19
    25
    20
    26
    21
    18
    23
    15
    27 (9th Dec))

    Average of 22.1% for the period. While the ten polls from the 27th Nov to 8th Dec ( up to the wielding of the veto, as it’s called):

    18 (8th Dec)
    17
    14
    15
    19
    13
    22
    23
    20
    21 (27th Nov)

    Average of 18.2%, so an upturn of 3.9%. However, numbers below 16 and above 22 are outliers on my 60-poll, so it will take some time to see if these numbers stay high.

    Scots’ approval ratings for the Gov since 1st December (most recent at the bottom):

    -40
    -45
    -54
    -57
    -55
    -44 (8th Dec)
    -36
    -53
    -36
    -46
    -36
    -32
    -36
    -37
    -47
    -31

    The average for the ratings prior to the 9th was -49, and since it has been -39, so while still abysmal, a ‘rise’ of 10 points since the veto thingy. Small samples, so bear that in mind.

  26. @ Old Nat

    Your ” Because it must be all parties who agree else the others will simply promise to distribute said fund to the current population &/or current wealth creators in the form of tax cuts etc.” is particularly weak.
    —————————————
    No, it isn’t particularly weak. It is accurate. And unless you can show that the SNP have plans for a fixed constitution, the SNP can lay no claims to being any stronger in this area than the other Parties.
    8-)

  27. Statgeek

    I tend to agree with you that while (obviously) any single cross-break is meaningless, it would be unlikely for a series of them to consistently measure opinion in the wrong direction (unless the methodology is really poor).

    I can’t be bothered looking them up, but don’t recent Scottish polls show an increase/solidification of the Tory vote?

    What we can’t tell is where that comes from. I’d guess that it comes from those who feel British, and see the Tories as being better protectors of the UK state than either Lab or LDs.

  28. @ Old Nat

    I’d be very happy, should the Northern Irish all decide to be British.” But if they don’t, you are unwilling to deal with them as equal citizens of this state. Maybe not the most egalitarian thought that you have ever had.
    ———————————————-
    Sophistry by you, about me. You are simply making things up.

    And I am hoping that Labour will press on towards having Labour candidates in all the NI elections.
    8-)

  29. Amber

    Why on earth did UK Labour ever bother nationalising (or renationalising) industries then, if there was no Tory agreement (which there certainly wasn’t – though you may be too young to remember those days).

    Why did the last UK Labour Government legislate to impose a duty on all subsequent UK Governments to reduce child poverty, since any subsequent Government could simply remove such duty?

    “A fixed constitution”? What world do you live in? most countries in the world have a codified constitution that can be modified by the people. The SNP propose such a model for Scotland. You prefer the feudal model of English constitutional law that sovereignty lies with the “Queen in Parliament” – an emasculated Crown surrounded by politicians. What a dreadful stance for a democrat to take!

    We both know that UKLab nowadays won’t do anything to alienate Middle England, and pretending to be a world power (with the consequent expense) is simply part of that.

    I don’t mind you being a Brit – that’s a perfectly valid stance to take. It’s the pretence of acting in the interests of future generations, while squandering the resources that could sustain them, that I object to.

  30. @OLDNAT

    “What we can’t tell is where that comes from.”

    It’s generally coming from the rest. All the other parties:

    Same periods (ten polls either side of the veto):

    Con 18.2
    Lab 40
    Lib 6.2
    SNP 31.4

    Con 22.1 (+3.9)
    Lab 39.3 (-0.7)
    Lib 5.7 (-0.5)
    SNP 28.7 (-2.7)

    Signalling that some Con voters switch to SNP, either for tactical or desperate reasons. See the 60-poll Con vs. SNP and note the changes:

    h ttp://imageshack.us/f/507/consnp.png

    “I’d guess that it comes from those who feel British, and see the Tories as being better protectors of the UK state than either Lab or LDs.”

    No idea what the British ‘point’ is in that statement. You make it sound a little like “You’re either SNP or you’re not Scottish.” I can assure you, that’s not the case.

  31. @ Old Nat

    John Boehner reversed himself and completely caved today on unemployment insurance and payroll tax cut extensions. So I guess I’m back in a normal universe. It’s an embarassment for Boehner (who had been referencing the Braveheart movie) and a major victory for Obama. I’m glad though beyond the politics of it. Had Boehner not reversed himself and this has failed, it would have been just as much a political victory for Obama but the consequences would have made me very unhappy.

    But then I might be entering another alternate universe. Who would have thunk it? A majority of Americans trust Democrats more on the issue of taxation than Republicans. I mean, that’s like a majority of British voters trusting the Tories more than Labour on handling the HHS or a majority of British voters trusting Labour to protect the monarchy and House of Lords than the Tories.

    Not to worry though, the GOP still found time to blame Obama and to come up with the latest major criticism to lob at him. Yesterday, he went down to Alexandria (a place you should visit if you’re ever in DC) for an hour and did some Christmas shopping for his family at Best Buy and then went to Pet Smart for his dog Bo. Oh and then he stopped by a local pizzeria to get three pizzas. How dare he!!!!

    You know what I’ve noticed though by following British politics and by keeping track of other European politics as well as Canadian and Australian politics to some extent? The Republican Party is far more like a European style party in its incessant need to come up with any kind of criticism and complaint of their opponents for any reason whatsoever.

  32. Amber

    Sorry. I was confused by your words.

    “Why Britain, rather than Uk?” (Me)
    (You)”Because many people think of themselves as Brits, few as United Kingdomers. The 3 boys that my mum cares for are British. Their mother is English, they all live in England but their father & grandmother are Scottish; they have Scottish names. So my mum is a British Granny.”

    What on earth do the interests of all those who are part of the UK State have to do with your family? It would be as valid for me to advocate some form of political union between the parts of the UK (except Wales) together with the Netherlands and certain states in the USA because those are the places that my closest family live.

    You chose to exclude NI from your concerns – not me.

  33. Statgeek

    The point of saying “British” is that the constitutional dimension is one of the fault lines in Scottish politics. Yes, there are people who feel strongly British who vote tactically SNP. That some of those have moved away after the SNP gained an absolute majority is hardly surprising.

    At the same time, those who feel strongly that way have a choice of which of Con/Lab/LD that they would support. While their first preference on the left/right dimension might be for any party ( as I’ve said, including SNP because of “competence”), if they are prioritising their Britishness (and a fair number will be those who don’t see their permanent home being here), then making a rational choice between Con/Lab/LD as to which is most likely to preserve the UK Union will be a relevant factor.

    People take multiple factors into account when deciding who to vote for – main identity is certainly a strong factor in Scotland.

  34. @ Ray North (from the last thread)

    I read that link on the U.S. GOP Primary. It’s not bad though it misses a few key points. It also oversimplifies what happened in 2008 in the Democratic Primary but that’s okay as many reporters here did that too.

    My read on the GOP Primary is this. If we were to have a nationwide primary even one that relied upon delegates won at the state level, Newt Gingrich would win. He’s still the frontrunner in the race but he’s in an odd position in that he is not leading Iowa and New Hampshire and unlikely to win there. There are a few reasons for that. Gingrich has little money to spend on the race and he hasn’t spent that much time in these states. These states have voters who require and expect a great deal of personalized attention. New Hampshire Republicans are also less conservative and more libertarian and so they’re not going to warm to Gingrich.

    However, if Gingrich loses both early states (as he may very likely do), does he remain the national frontrunner? I’m not sure that he can. I think if he loses both but they’re split with Ron Paul winning Iowa and Romney winning New Hampshire, he can rally true conservatives to his side who abhor the policies of both.

    So it’s basically in donnybrook right now. I still think Gingrich will pull this out in the end but it’s too difficult to predict. I think this year’s Canadian and Scottish elections proved that in today’s political world, polling numbers can change in an instant and results that shock all expectations can occur. I think the Republican Primary may be like this.

  35. SOCALLIBERAL

    “John Boehner reversed himself and completely caved today on unemployment insurance and payroll tax cut extensions.”

    What brought that about? Isn’t it just a brief relaxation though? What happens in a couple of months time?

  36. @ Old Nat

    What on earth do the interests of all those who are part of the UK State have to do with your family?
    ————————————————
    Sometimes an intellectual debate can be made clearer & be given added resonance by the use of analogy or personal examples. If this sends you into a frenzy, I will try to desist in future.

    Last thing I heard, a majority of Scottish citizens prefer to remain part of the UK. And I think it’s evens on Europe, so your Netherlands family are almost ‘in’. I do recall their experiences in Holland being referenced in previous debates… but by all means, pull up the ladder behind yourself!

    There hasn’t been a poll about Scotland becoming the 51st state so you are rather out on your own regarding that. However, it’s not impossible that such a poll might be conducted, so we must wait & see.
    8-)

  37. @ Old Nat

    You chose to exclude NI from your concerns – not me.
    ————————-
    Nope, I excluded NI (& Wales too) from my illustrative example because it would’ve been stretching the analogy too far.

    You chose to ‘make something of it’.
    8-)

  38. Amber

    It’s a long time since any woman sent me into a frenzy! :-)

    Since we agree that your Mum and my niece aren’t really germane to the discussion, I still ask why Northern Ireland seems to be irrelevant to your considerations? Also, why you want them all to be Brits, and disregard their history? You could equally want them all to be Irish?

  39. Amber

    Last time I looked, Wales was part of “Britain” – or “Great Britain” if you wish to contrast it with Brittany.

  40. @ Old Nat

    Why on earth did UK Labour ever bother nationalising (or renationalising) industries then, if there was no Tory agreement (which there certainly wasn’t – though you may be too young to remember those days).
    ———————————————-
    I know! This was what turned Labour off from investing directly in key industries, building houses & having budget surpluses. The last time Labour did it, it all got sold off by Mrs T’s team. :-(

    A sovereign wealth fund would’ve likely gone the same way…
    8-)

  41. @ Ray North (from the previous thread)

    I hope people will forgive me for being imperialist tonight. But I wanted to add to my comment about misunderstanding what happenned in 2008.

    The way these races work, especially in the Democratic Primary where we don’t have winner take all, FPTP allocation of delegates (though we should) is that they become wars of attrition. Basically a candidate who wins enough and slowly builds up momentum ultimately wins because other candidates drop out as their fundraising dries up. So winning the early states is not so important for the number of delegates that they have but instead for the momentum they carry.

    Hillary’s campaign didn’t make the mistake of ignoring the caucuses, they made the mistake of assuming what worked for John Kerry in 2004 would work for them in 2008. In that race, Kerry won a surprise victory in Iowa giving him crucial momentum. But then what really helped was Howard Dean’s crazed concession speech featuring the infamous “Dean Scream” that saw his numbers reverse. Kerry soared to victory in New Hampshire. And with this momentum, the later states fell into line slowly forcing Dean out of the race along with others.

    Hillary’s campaign started out way behind in Iowa, which had a lot of anti-war voters. They should have just skipped that contest and moved on. It seemed like that’s what they were going to do at first. But then the campaign changed its mind and decided they were going to try and win Iowa. They brought in a high priced campaign consultant to run their campaign, Hillary devoted massive amounts of time to the state, and the campaign poured in financial resources to build up an organization capable of winning that state. You need a major organization to win a caucus and to do that requires a lot of money. And they spent a massive amount of money there. They also spent massive sums in New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina.

    Unlike the Obama campaign which spent money and put organization into the Tsunami Tuesday states, Clinton’s campaign largely ignored those states (both primaries and caucuses). They assumed that their early victories would give them momentum and they’d just win on Tsunami Tuesday.

    Well their strategy failed. Obama won Iowa. For the next five days, the campaign was in a state of what can best be described as complete chaos and paralysis. After Hillary won New Hampshire though, the campaign was basically out of money. When it came time for Super Tuesday, the Clinton campaign’s strategy could best be likened to the Russian naval response to the Japanese in the 1905 War. They rushed staffers into states across the country and spent what little money they had. Where their money was effective was in primaries but not in caucuses. So they didn’t ignore the caucuses, they simply lacked the money to contest them.

    Sorry for going into detailed explanation of this but this point is a minor pet peeve of mine.

  42. @ Old Nat

    I still ask why Northern Ireland seems to be irrelevant to your considerations? Also, why you want them all to be Brits, and disregard their history? You could equally want them all to be Irish?
    ——————————
    I am puzzled by your continued tapping on this spot. I didn’t say I wanted the people of NI to ignore their history & call themselves Brits, I said I’d be happy if they choose to do so.
    8-)

  43. @ Old Nat

    “What brought that about? Isn’t it just a brief relaxation though? What happens in a couple of months time?”

    I think what brought this about was the fact that his own party turned on him. The Wall Street Journal, radical right wing rag that it is, went after him. Several Republican Senators went after him and publicly too. Even Newt Gingrich told him to just accept the deal. It helped too that Boehner and his merry band of Teabaggers thought they could play a game of brinksmanship as they normally do and no one else gave in. Harry Reid put the Senate into recess and basically said “no, we’ve negotiated already.” Obama stood his ground too and simply demanded passage of the bill.

    It is for only two months.

    I’m sure that when that happens, they’re all going to go into yet another dispute and more brinksmanship.

  44. @ Old Nat

    You prefer the feudal model of English constitutional law that sovereignty lies with the “Queen in Parliament” – an emasculated Crown surrounded by politicians. What a dreadful stance for a democrat to take!
    ———————————-
    Au contraire, I’d like to see some polling on the Uk moving to an alternative constitutional arrangement. My democratic credentials are intact.
    8-)

  45. @ Old Nat

    “A fixed constitution”? What world do you live in? most countries in the world have a codified constitution that can be modified by the people. The SNP propose such a model for Scotland.
    —————————————
    And have “the people” decided what should be included in this constitution? Have they been asked? Or rather, will they be asked?

    Would it include creating a sovereign wealth fund? Something to prevent the Tory people selling state assets, if they were elected in a post independence Scotland? I’ll bet it doesn’t have any such thing.

    And so, it is all aspirational vapours & no substance.
    8-)

  46. Amber

    I “tap on this spot” because language is important and delivers messages, which are revealing of underlying attitudes.

    Had you said “I’d be happy for those in NI to be British or Irish” that would have delivered a different message. I’m surprised you don’t see that.

    I’m not exactly impressed by your idea that the UK shouldn’t have set up a sovereign wealth fund, because the Tories would have squandered it – so we chose to squander it as well.

    In an independent Scotland, an SNP Government would have established a sovereign wealth fund. That is long established policy. Since the principal opposition would have been the Labour Party in Scotland under such a situation, are you saying that Labour would have opposed such a policy?

  47. Amber

    I’m really enthused by your democratic credentials being based on what the polls say! Wouldn’t it be nice to have principles?

  48. Amber

    Have “the people” (how strange – or not – that you choose to put that term in inverted commas) ever been asked to approve Parliamentary Sovereignty? Do you know how unusual that concept is in the world?

    Conservatives (that’s only capitalised because it starts the sentence) are always concerned to preserve institutions as they are – though, under pressure, they may may make the most minimal change that they can get away with.

    Labour – thy name is Tory!

  49. @ Amber Star

    “Your comment about my mum being into politics when I was in nappies made me laugh. My mum used to have no interest at all. Her motto was: Don’t vote, it only encourages them.” However, my son’s interest in politics got her to pay some attention; & the villification of Gordon Brown annoyed her so much that she voted Labour in 2010.”

    That’s a very interesting and funny atttitude. My parents aren’t really into politics but they always vote.

    “Why the Promise of Britain, rather than the Promise for Britain?”

    I say this objectively. From a political standpoint, I think that “Promise of Britain” is FAR better than “Promise for Britain.” Promise for Britain implies that some politician somewhere is coming up with yet another long list of promises in order to get votes that they won’t actually fulfill and live up to. Promise of Britain suggests something different, instead it’s about what Britain can be, what average Brits can aspire to, etc. It’s something that can evoke a sense of pride and patriotism as opposed to a sense of “oh, there they go again.”

  50. @ Old Nat

    I’m not exactly impressed by your idea that the UK shouldn’t have set up a sovereign wealth fund, because the Tories would have squandered it – so we chose to squander it as well.
    ——————————————
    I don’t agree with the above statement.

    Nor did I say the Tories would have “squandered” it. I said they would have distributed it amongst the current voters/ ‘wealth creators’. “Squandered” is in the eye of the beholder. I disagreed with the Tory sell-off policy but people voted for it.

    And I’m wondering why you are so sure that Scottish citizens will vote for a sovereign wealth fund which defers gratification now for the benefit of future generations; has there been polling on this or are you assuming that your views are representative? 8-)

1 2 3 5