Tonight’s YouGov poll for the Sun has topline figures of CON 39%, LAB 39%, LDEM 8% and others 14%. A draw between the two main parties, but still consistent with an underlying position of a small Labour lead, which is what the broad sweep of February’s polls suggested.


107 Responses to “YouGov/Sun – CON 39%, LAB 39%, LD 8%”

1 2 3
  1. Still no gap to think of.

    But The Lib Dems seem to be exaggerated in terms of their votes here, I believe

  2. Looking at the recent YouGov’s it seems we are still hovering with a 1.5/2 Lab lead that YouGov have been showing all Febuary, and was projected roughly by a number of other pollsters’ (Populus, ICM, ComRes). I suspect yesterday’s Mori, and Opinioum were slight MOEs. This month should be interesting though, to see wherther we do see any dramatic shift towards more bigger Lab leads. At the moment, I don’t suspect it, I have to say.

  3. Interesting report on increase in consumer confidence by YouGov. Just one or two indications that things maybe are beginning to move in a positive direction. Positives on economy could neutralise negatives on NHS.

  4. @chrislane1945

    “The Lib Dems seem to be exaggerated in terms of their votes here, I believe”

    The broken record gets in the first comment. Are these the only words you know?

  5. This poll puts Labour 1 seat short on the current boundaries and 13 seats short on the provisional boundaries, (using uniform swing of course).

  6. @Dingo

    Hopefully. Today funnily enough, the NHS hasn’t dominated the news. I’m unsure of wherther this is the beginning of the media furore dying down a bit, or just a slow news day though. The YouGov internals, though show a little comfort for the Tories – especially on tough and unpopular decisions.

  7. COLIN GREEN
    `The broken record gets in the first comment. Are these the only words you know?`

    It`s just a running joke…Have you seen Chris Lane`s posts on Ed Milliband?

  8. Anthony

    Have YG changed the sample for the Midland/Wales area .

    If you go back several months, Labour were often ahead in the Midlands/Wales area, but over recent weeks, the Tories are often ahead by a fair margin.

  9. Interesting response to statement……….’Prepared to take tough unpopular decisions’……….
    Applies to…… C 52
    L 9
    LD 4
    DK 14
    None 21
    Tories ahead in all category questions except, ‘most likely to chop and change’, where they come 3rd after Labour and LD’s.

    Looks like a shoe in for the Tories come 2015…… ;-)

  10. Like I said, Ipsos Mori was the outlier. YG consistently puts C between 38 and 40 and this is right there again.

  11. @Ken

    And the polling on those questions has been that way for sometime now.

  12. The government will attempt to bring the NHS bill to a conclusion in time for the budget on March 21st… bringing forward the original May timetable. Fears that the LD conference motion may come to nothing.

    Today’s letter to 22,000 family doctors from Dr Laurence Buckman, the chairman of the BMA’s GPs committee, is worth a read, even though most are closing their ears at this late stage.

    A reminder of where we are heading with the private health insurance model so favoured by Tories:

    h
    ttp://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/28/nhs-bill-private-insurance?intcmp=239

  13. Sorry AW, but no self-respecting observer of Britain’s relationship with Europe could let this breaking news pass:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/9116370/Eurovision-surprise-Engelbert-Humperdinck-is-UK-entry.html

  14. BOO BOO……..Tough love is a feature of good management, it seems that Labour is regarded as being too soft and inadequate when it comes to making decisions……..mind you I understand their reluctance to commit to policy in view of their record. Wallace doesn’t do dynamic, but then again, he doesn’t do anything……… :-)

  15. Interesting response to statement……….’Prepared to take tough unpopular decisions’……….
    Applies to…… C 52
    —————————————
    It’s obviously blown right past a few people; making unpopular decisions can often make you unpopular. :twisted:

  16. @Boo Boo (10.16)

    “Hopefully. Today funnily enough, the NHS hasn’t dominated the news. I’m unsure of wherther this is the beginning of the media furore dying down a bit, or just a slow news day though. ”

    —————————————————————————
    IMO any slow down in media furore will only be temporary.
    LD spring conference coming up in just over a week and one of the colleges of medics (forgot which one) are planning a special meeting of their members.

    IMO this will rumble on until the final commons vote unless the bill is dropped before then. Assuming the bill is passed then there could be more action by the GPs, BMA, nurses et al and every problem in the NHS will be blamed on the reforms.

    As I have said several times on here, the passing of this bill will be the demise of the Lib Dems. The Tories will probably escape with only a small reduction in VI because as others have said, Tory position re NHS is already built in to their VI.

  17. AMBER STAR………..Tough love eh! :-)

  18. Good news for Labour. A small lead of circa 2-3% appears to be opening up. On existing boundaries, this would equal a working majority of 20+. On the provisional boundaries, it would leave them just short or with a very small majority, but obviously these changes have still yet to be voted through and therefore are not certain to happen.

    Wonder if the trend of a widening lead will continue in the coming months?

  19. ‘Wonder if the trend of a widening lead will continue in the coming months?’

    Can’t see Labour getting more than a 2% lead overall any time soon but their performance could be a slight improvement in the Met areas this year.

    A landslide win in Bradford W could give them good press however.

  20. @ A Cairns

    What about the press following Labour’s result in a very probable Falkirk by-election? ;)

  21. The only reason the government poll high is because they have the support of the media…Can`t see Labour polling high unless Ed can convince some of the media bosses that he is going to get in,especially having antagonised the Murdoch press over Hackgate.
    None of the policies of the government actually work and they are running entirely on expectation and promises and if they lose the media support,they are there for the taking.

  22. @calum Smith

    Touche

    SNP have got to be favourites there although in the unlikely event of Labour holding on there they’d be entitled to spin it as a greater triumpth than the Glenrothes BE in my view.

  23. CALUM SMITH

    That Lamont wants Joyce to resign makes no difference, since he isn’t in the Labour Party any longer – and, as his supposed boss, didn’t even have any role in kicking him out in the first place.

  24. @Sergio – “Ipsos Mori was the outlier.”

    Averaging the prevoius 12 months IpsosMORI output gives
    Con 36%, Lab 40%, LD 12%
    so the latest one hasn’t deviated markedly from the sample.

    YouGov puts Con at 37-40% atm… all other companies have them at 35-37%.

  25. @ Old Nat

    Eric Joyce has not been ‘kicked out’; he’s been suspended after due process . And of course his suspension or eventual expulsion isn’t at the whim of his ‘boss’. That’s not how we do things in the Labour Party – & it’s not how the SNP do it either!
    8-)

  26. YouGov have Con 40% Lab 39% Lib 9% on their ‘Public Opinion’ main screen..

  27. The LDs taking of the road to oblivion is obviously good news for Labour.

    For the first time in a long time it appears that the centre left vote will not be split.

    That would mean the Tories have a mountain to climb to get an OM.

    Agree with Smukesh that the weight of anti-Labour propaganda is truly enormous. Labour needs to find ways of finding and promoting political talent. People with complete mastery of argument and who can articulate the anti-Tory message. I find most of the shadow-cabinet totally unimpressive – almost like their heart isn’t in it. Labour needs to come clean – Blair and Brown have done no favours for the working class which the Labour Party was supposed to represent.

    While he does OK at PMQs, Ed Miliband inspires no real confidence generally. Having said that John Major was no great orator and leader and he had seven years in No10. Anything is possible given the economic disaster which we face.

  28. IanAnthonyJames,

    “People with complete mastery of argument and who can articulate the anti-Tory message”

    Is that really all you wish for ? Sounds like a paucity of hope………..maybe that would be good news for Labour as you see it….

  29. IANANTHONYJAMES
    `I find most of the shadow-cabinet totally unimpressive – almost like their heart isn’t in it`

    I know what you mean…Rachel Reeves terribly disappointing on QT…Couldn`t give an answer when Dimbleby pointed out that only 7% of GP`s had replied to the RCGP survey out of which 90% opposed the NHS reforms.

    It is obviously a survey and if the rest of the GP`s support the reforms,then they could have answered the survey.Or when the RCGP called for scrapping the bill,they could have opposed their college.By not knocking false arguments on the head,they let them fester and lose the argument.

  30. Amber

    What was the “due process”? Shouldn’t he have been suspended by the leader of the party who is responsible for MPs from Scotland? Isn’t that Johann Lamont in your brave new world?

  31. @BooBoo
    “Looking at the recent YouGov’s it seems we are still hovering with a 1.5/2 Lab lead….”

    No we’re not. The simple mean of the latest polls from YouGov, ICM, Opinium, Ipsos/MORI, Populus and ComRes produces a Lab lead of 2.7% tonight. The fact that some contain higher leads than others is no reason in itself to discount any of them.

  32. @Phil

    Firstly, the fact the leads are higher do add reason to caveat them in the first place – mainly because of the probability that sample variation can cause MOEs/outliers, as well as comparsion with other polls to give a more understanding of the underlying position. Recent polling so far, as shown both Mori and Opinium are somewhat MOEs in their calculations – and I’m not looking for counting in MOEs, I’m looking at the underlying picture.

    I polls I don count are ICM, Populus, and ComRes who all are polling near the rough averagings we’ve seen. Looking at those polls, it’s clear we’ve got a 1.5 – 2 point Lab lead.

  33. @Billy Bob

    On average the Tories are 38 – 39 on YouGov. On ComRes they are 38/37. On ICM they’ve been 37/36. On Mori they averaged 35 from last year onwards. Populus, and Opinum I can’t recall.

  34. BOO BOO
    `it’s clear we’ve got a 1.5 – 2 point Lab lead.`

    I don`t think the lead is clear as yet…The more recent the poll (apart from Youguv ofcourse),the larger the Labour lead…So the larger leads may actually represent the trend the VI is moving to.

  35. Hey Ken. Tough Love? How does that go down with barbie? 8-)

  36. @Smukesh

    I’d say to you not only what I stated to Phil, but also this; that so far only two out of six polls we’ve had have shown leads starkly towards the top end scale of Lab lead – the majority, of them have reflected the movement shown in the last month roughly of 1.5/2.0 Lab leads. The polling we’ve seen over YouGov in the past couple of days in particular, has shown leads largely in average with what we’ve seen over the last four/five weeks, not a sudden reflection of Mori/Opinum polling. I remember ICM’s 5 point Tory lead along with YouGov’s – two polls there with starkly bigger Tory leads than the rest -came along. They were, clearly outliers. The main reason VI got pushed to 1 point Tory lead at the time was on those, and on that basis, I do question wherther a 1 point Tory lead ever existed even – or wherther it was just rough level pegging.

  37. If you look at tonight’s YouGov tables, the key age group of Tory voters is the 65+ group. It is widely assumed that people become more conservatively-inclined with age.
    18-24 Con 37 Lab 52 (Con -15 points))
    25-39 Con 35 Lab 42 (Con -7 points)
    40-59 Con 36 Lab 41 (Con -5 points)
    65+ Con47 Lab 30 (Con +17 points)
    This data set certainly shows this.
    Older people are more likely to believe that austerity works. They are also the group most likely to approve of the government’s record to date. The youngest age groups are much less likely to vote Tory. They are the group most likely to disapprove of the government.
    Lab needs to find policies which appeal to the +65 group and keep younger voters on side.
    The danger for the Tories is that the 65+ age group is the most likely to need the NHS services in the coming years. If the NHS does deteriorate because of the changes to the NHS then the Tories could be in trouble.

  38. @Aber

    “Lab needs to find policies which appeal to the +65 group and keep younger voters on side.”

    This is where the NHS policy is really stupid for the Tories. They’ll end up shortening life expectancy and kill their own support :-)

  39. ABERDABERDOO

    “Lab needs to find policies which appeal …..”

    Equally Con & LD need ” to find policies which appeal …..”

    That’s why UK politics is so dire. None of these parties articulate to voters a vision from which policies naturally flow. On many aspects of governance, most parties, in most countries broadly agree, and simply posture on minor differences of implementation.

    “Managerial” politics is no politics at all.

  40. @ Billy Bob (from the last thread)

    “A number of leading Labour politicians did make an appeal late in the 2010 campaign, for the Labour supporters to vote tactically in the seats where a Lib Dem candidate could keep the Tories out. I can’t see the circumstances where that appeal could be repeated. (It is not clear whether voters are always aware of the dynamics of their particular constituency anyway).

    On current polling Conservatives will be hoping to pick off more LD seats than Labour can gain from LD…. but they would be outnumbered by Labour gains from Con.”

    Here’s what I wonder though. There are Lib Dem voters who will cross over and vote for Labour in contested Labour-Conservative seats. At least in 1992, that was the analysis behind many of Labour’s 42 seat gain.

    In 1997, top target seats for Labour that Labour won saw a decrease in the Lib Dem vote (probably due to tactical voting) while in a number of seats that Labour won that they weren’t expecting to win, the Lib Dem vote remained fairly stable (it either stayed the same, went up slightly, or went down slightly but would not have affected the overall outcome). I wonder if there are some tactically voting Lib Dems who might not vote for Labour in the next election due to the Coalition. I wonder if that would help Conservatives gain seats from Labour. (And if so, which seats?)

    We’ve already seen from the special election in Oldham East and Saddleworth that in Labour-Lib Dem marginals, Conservative crossover votes to the Lib Dems won’t help the Lib Dems fend off Labour.

  41. @ Old Nat

    Shouldn’t he have been suspended by the leader of the party who is responsible for MPs from Scotland?
    ——————————
    Absolutely not. Our leaders are not dictators; Labour is a democratic Party. The National Executive have a disciplinary committee to whom such matters are referred. You can read all the details in the Labour Party Rule Book, if you are really interested.

    Here’s an almost identical process, as contained in the SNP Rulebook:
    23.1 A Disciplinary Committee shall be established in order to hear complaints and take disciplinary action, where it considers necessary, against members of the Party.
    23.2 The Disciplinary Committee shall be elected annually by National Conference, though no member of the National Executive Committee or Appeals Committee may be a member of the Disciplinary Committee.
    23.3 The National Secretary shall have the power to suspend a member he or she believes has contravened the requirements of Clause 4 of the Constitution. This suspension will be for a temporary or specified period, and the case will be referred immediately to the Disciplinary Committee forconsideration in terms of 23.4.
    23.4 The Disciplinary Committee may, on the proposal of the National Secretary, take disciplinary measures against a member of the Party on the grounds that the member no longer complies with the requirements of clause 4 of this Constitution, that the member has contravened the Constitution or Rules or has breached the Party’s Code of Conduct.
    8-)

    If Alex Salmond has suspended any members of the SNP, he must have been National Secretary, not the leader of the SNP, when he did it. And it would only have been temporary until the committee could convene.

  42. Amber

    I actually asked you for your “due process” – not ours.

    The announcement of Joyce’s suspension came from Milliband. If he did that on the basis of a recommendation of of a committee, then you will be able to specify which committee that was – and give a link to it.

    Naturally, you are ducking the key issue. Who is in charge of Labour MPs from Scotland? Milliband? Lamomt? Why did Milliband make the announcement that some committee or another had recommended Joyce’s suspension, and not Lamont?

    Many of us suspected that the new authority of the SLab leader over MPs was a pretence, and this event appears to confirm that.

    However, it will be very easy for you to demonstrate that Lamont was actually in charge – if she was.

  43. You tell him Amber.

    No doubt this will fly right over John B Dick’s head and he’ll continue with his tedious remarks about authoritaritarian followers, converting noone.

  44. You know, this is completely off topic. But I think I’m going to have to walk back some of my complaints about and criticism of British political reporters. They all seem to hate politicians and are often completely disrespectful towards them. They also jump in and make partisan arguments against the politicians they’re interviewing. Bill O’Reilly’s interview of President Obama was far more deferential and respectful towards the President than a typical British reporter interviewing a politician.

    But now I realize that this method of reporting does have significant advantages. And that is, none of your politicians, regardless of their party, can get away with lying about what is written in their proposed or enacted legislation. If they write or propose legislation and get criticized for it, they cannot go out there and say “oh well I don’t support that, I support something different” and not get called on what they’ve actually written by reporters.

    So, I say, advantage to you Brits. :)

  45. @BooBoo
    “Firstly, the fact the leads are higher do add reason to caveat them in the first place”

    No they don’t. Leads are YouGov 0, ICM 1, Populus 2, ComRes 3, Opinium 4, IpsosMORI 6. There’s just as much reason to selectively discard the lowest rather than the highest on that basis, not that there’s any reason to discard either. Note also that ComRes would have been 5 but for their as yet unexplained methodology change since January.

    “Recent polling so far, as shown both Mori and Opinium are somewhat MOEs in their calculations – and I’m not looking for counting in MOEs, I’m looking at the underlying picture.”

    No, you’re looking for polls which support the underlying picture as you expect to see it, and discarding those that don’t. If you start with your assumption (well rehearsed over countless threads) that opinion is set in concrete having not moved for months, then of course movement in any new poll must be down to MOE and thus, by definition, wrong in your eyes. Also, you should allow for more movement in monthly/fortnightly polls than daily YouGov polls, because there’s a greater timescale over which opinion can shift.

  46. @ Old Nat

    http://www.leftfutures.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Labour-Party-Rule-Book-2010.pdf

    Knock yourself out :-)

    It was the Falkirk CLP who referred EJ for suspension. I believe it was the Party whip who informed EJ he’d been suspended & either the whip or secretary who made the suspension ‘public’. That the media have chosen to say that EM announced it, well that is how it goes.
    8-)

  47. @ Old Nat,

    Many of us suspected that the new authority of the SLab leader over MPs was a pretence, and this event appears to confirm that.
    —————————
    No it doesn’t confirm any such thing. Neither Lamont nor Miliband have the ‘power’ to suspend me from the Labour Party, never mind an elected MP.

    You are in a hole with a straw man. Stop digging & let it go, sweetie. ;-)

  48. @ Old Nat

    “I actually asked you for your “due process” – not ours.

    The announcement of Joyce’s suspension came from Milliband. If he did that on the basis of a recommendation of of a committee, then you will be able to specify which committee that was – and give a link to it.”

    My understanding of “due process” is that it generally doesn’t apply to non-state actors (except in very rare circumstances). Is the British/Scottish conception of “due process” different?

    Internal Party affairs aren’t really a matter for outside comment (which is why I’m not too impressed with “Operation Hilarity”) except when the party does something so totally crazy that you can only stand back, mouth gaping open in complete disbelief, and comment.

    I think it’d be extremely weird if Lamont had the authority to withdraw the party whip from Eric Joyce. That’s because this Joyce fellow (is he any relation to James?) isn’t an MSP, he’s an MP. He belongs to a Labour caucus run by Ed Miliband. Lamont, on the other hand, is an MSP and leads a different Caucus.

    I’m trying to think of which Democratic Congressman might be crazy enough to do something like Joyce did….maybe Pete Stark (D-CA). So if Pete Stark got completely blotto one night and attacked a bunch of Republicans in a bar….who would be in charge of disciplining him within the party? I think it would be Nancy Pelosi as she is the Democratic leader in Congress. It would be weird if Governor Moonbeam or Assembly Speaker John Perez or whoever is running the State Senate these days was responsible for disciplining Stark. Yes, they may run the California Democratic Party (well titular heads anyway) and its platform. And Pete Stark is a Democrat from California. But he’s a member of Congress and the Democratic Congressional Caucus, not the Democratic caucuses within the California Assembly or California State Senate.

  49. Amber

    Thanks for that. It was what I was asking for (but no, I’m not going to read through the whole of your rule book! :-) )

    Naturally, I take your word for it that Falkirk CLP referred Joyce for suspension (though I haven’t seen that reported), presumably to the UK National Executive? – you haven’t said. The Falkirk CLP statement simply said that “Falkirk CLP do not condone such alleged conduct and welcome the prompt suspension by the Labour Party of Mr Joyce.”

    No doubt the Sky sources who said “the decision was taken by Labour leader Ed Miliband.” got it wholly wrong.

    You will have sources who say that Johann Lamont was, at least, consulted.

  50. @Socal

    “So, I say, advantage to you Brits.”

    I don’t. We’re plagued here with journalists who see it as their role to shout down and talk over politicians during interviews for no reason other than to foster their own egos or worse. It is largely impossible for politicians to develop any substantive political argument in so called interviews when being constantly talked over and interrupted. Paxman and Humphrys are the worst but not by much. I would far rather listen to a series of developed arguments from different perspectives and then make up my own mind, rather than constantly having these overpaid (by me) egos trying to put words in the mouth of those interviewed. Even “Question Time” on the BBC, where once the politicians alone did the debating, has now been debased by a presenter who sees fit to constantly interrupt contributions to get his own two pennyworth in.

    It was a revelation when we had a genuine debate from the leaders in the 2010 GE, in the style of your own presidential debates, simply because it was so unusual to be able to listen and then make up our own minds rather than being told what to think.

1 2 3