Tonight’s weekly YouGov poll for the Sunday Times has topline figures of CON 31%, LAB 43%, LDEM 9%, Others 17% (including UKIP on 8%). Fieldwork was, as usual, conducted between Thursday afternoon and Friday afternoon and, in practice, the large majority of the fieldwork would have been conducted before results to the local elections were known, so it’s too early to see any impact.

As usual, I’ll do a full update in the morning.

205 Responses to “YouGov/Sunday Times – CON 31, LAB 43, LDEM 9, UKIP 8”

1 3 4 5
  1. Angus:

    I know, that’s why I was surprised that by their bar chart, Labour (with 394) were shown to be miles behind the SNP (with just 30 more seats), behind others (with 219), and barely ahead of the Cons (115) and the LDs (71).

    In fact the difference between the LDs and Cons bars is actually GREATER than the difference between Lab and Cons.

    If that’s not a biased, and mathematically stupid bar chart, I have no idea what is.

  2. @Ashley
    Thanks for that. I am all for more grassroots power in all parties and I hope that LD activists hold their Westminster ‘Elite’ to account.

  3. Crossbat11 with gd asdvantage over Bolton you near as damn it safe now. Pleased for you if not DC.

  4. @ David, the only yellow background Ive noticed on this thread.

    This isnt supposed to be about personal politics, but for the record the closest colour choice for my backgroumd would be yelow.

    Others have already pointed out the incredible flaws in the liberal position. Its all very well to enter into a coalition where you give grudging support to joint policies and make clear your opposition. But the liberals have put up spokesmen positively enthusing over policies totally opposite to their election promises. This is gross hypocrisy.The liberals had an image of greater honesty in their approach to politics. It is this which has gone out of the window. I’m too young to recall the nature of political infighting at the time of the lib-lab pact, and perhpas it would not have been reported in such intimate detail as happens now, so I cant now easily compare the two cases. I do not recall that at that time the liberals gave the same performance of enthusiastically ditching all their policies. If the liberals have quietly engineered major shifts in what would otherwise have been conservative policy, it does not show. Instead they have been blamed by the right for inevitable policy compromises the conservatives would have made anyway, and by the left for a total collapse of their own values.No one speaks up for them, and nor do they themselves.

    I have never accepted the notion that the conservatives have any right to be treated as senior partners in the coalition. The british system is designed to work on a majority of 1, just as are all the others. Actual voting figures do not give any party a mandate from the majority of the british population, and I dont think they have in my lifetime.

    So the problem for the liberals is not tarring by being part of an unpopular government, but for wholly abandoning their voters. Unless they can somehow change that, I dont see how any of the dedicated protest voters, such as myself, can really continue to support them. What good is a party to an anti establishment man, if that party dtches what he voted for the second it has any influence on anything?

    They have the remainder of this term to redress this mistake by creating increasing distance from the conservatives. Already conservatives who understand this are seeking to ridicule the liberals further by ditching meaningful Lords reform, and any other liberal core policy they can. As deliberate attacks on a party which has done them nothing but harm simply by existing. Obviously labour too would like nothing better than the libs to cease to exist, and the libs are playing right into both their opponents.

    On present performance, lib vote share is going to go from bad to worse. Anyone know who will most naturally pick it up? UKIP, Galloway, Green…?

  5. @ the couple usual suspects

    On our core cities the redevelopment was the result of Urban Regeneration Companies.

    Largely funded by the RDAs these were private sector led (usually property / real estate sector) with the local council in a significantly reduced role!!!

    Also look up the term “counterfactual”: if we had mayors in the core cities over the last 15 years the redevelopment would have been even greater ;-)

1 3 4 5