Tonight’s YouGov poll for the Sun has topline figures of CON 35%, LAB 43%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 8%, giving us the second poll this week with the Tories up to 35%. Last night we had an 11 point Labour lead, so the underlying Labour lead is clearly still around about the 9 or 10 mark, but nevertheless, the Tory share is worth keeping an eye on.

There are also new YouGov figures for Welsh voting intention. Full figures with changes since April are

Welsh Westminster: CON 23%(nc), LAB 54%(+4), LDEM 4%(-3), PC 10%(-2)
Welsh Assembly Constituency: CON 19%(nc), LAB 50%(+2), LDEM 7%(nc), PC 17%(-1)
Welsh Assembly List: CON 11%(-2), LAB 35%(+2), LDEM 8%(-1), PC 20%(-2), UKIP 12%(+2)


226 Responses to “YouGov/Sun – CON 35, LAB 43, LD 8, UKIP 8”

1 3 4 5
  1. Actually – I missed something factually incorrect in your post that should have been so glaringly obvious –
    Vote share – i.e share of those who’ve voted – has increased for the Conservatives each year since 1997 –
    1997 – 30.7
    2001 – 31.7
    2005 – 32.4
    2010 – 36.1

    Unless you do mean ‘votes’ instead of ‘vote share’ –
    If that’s the case, then the Greens have done the same each GE since 1997 – even though the increased electorate meant their share of the total electorate in 2010 decreased slightly.

  2. First of all, apologies for kicking off what turned into an awful and substandard knockabout regarding Scottish affairs. It really did get to the stage of utter irrelevance.

    In my defence, I was trying talk about political views in England as I see them, and in this vein I did want to finally respond to @oldnat.

    You said – “England has “a centre of political mass.”?

    Do you mean that it has Westminster as its only political focus – in which case Westminster is simply England writ large?

    Or that England is simply so dominant in terms of population, within the UK, that its “mass” drowns out everything else?”

    This, I feel, shows your tendency to become blinded by your Scottishness on occasion. This issue I was talking about had nothing to do with Westminster, the UK, parties representing England/UK, or indeed parties themselves.

    I never mentioned any of these, but your obsession with seeing anti Scots designs in apparently any and every statement is notable.

    All I was talking about was my personal belief that the English voters (that’s the key bit) on average have a view of how they want their nation to be constructed and it’s relations with the EU, that is going to find greater support amongst other European populations in the years to come, and that similar sentiments are likely to hold sway in Scotland too.

    I said this as I feel that, as you pointed out, in so many ways, cultural and economic divisions are being broken down, and my view is that as this happens, populations will seek new ways to retain their national identities.

    Why you had to turn this into something about English parties speaking for Scotland, or Westminster dominating UK politics etc etc is quite beyond me.

  3. SCLIB:

    “someone who didn’t like his act”

    well it would be a hell of a way to show your appreciation – even in the States!

  4. @tingedFringe – thanks for the numbers. I read about the UKIP vote rise thing and clearly I’ve missed something or it was inaccurate. It was probably votes, and whoever wrote it ignored the Greens.

    Either way, my central point is still that while UKIP are a very small party, they are growing and appear to be on a long term slow growth path. Another % or two will make life harder for the Tories, in the main.

  5. @ R Huckle

    “The London Tube has slightly expanded outwards over the years and there is the cross rail project currently underway. But it has always been a mix of underground and overground services. There is little point expanding the Tube further, as any time delays on a longer run would cause major problems in the centre of London. There are overground services which are much faster from further out and there are linked stations so people can change to continue their journeys in the Tube.

    You mention that it is illegal in the US for Real Estate Agents to target people from certain ethnic backgrounds and that would be the case in the UK in any advertisements. Instead I think they just make a load of contacts with foreign social interest groups/societies that can spread the word about properties that may be available. Also they may advertise in publications that are likely to be seen by wealthy foreign buyers.

    For information, just looking at London prices. There is an 11 bedroom house in Chelsea for sale at $65 million dollars and there are several properties listed as more expensive than this, but you have to show your credentials before they will tell you the price.”

    I watched another episode of Selling London tonight. The homes are absolutely incredible. I think I finally understand why some of the inner city wealthy Tory constituencies have such low voter turnout. It’s a stark contrast to wealthy Congressional Districts in the U.S. that typically have the highest voter turnout. A lot of those expensive neighborhoods have large foreign populations. So there are only so many people in these wealthy neighborhoods who are British and can actually vote.

    And 65 million for a home in Chelsea? Wow. It almost makes Holmby Hills, Bel Air, Brentwood, and Pacific Palisades look like discount housing ghettos/barrios. I think in some cases (at least I’ve seen this in the Platinum Triangle), owners list these homes not because they have any intention of actually selling them but because they want to show off to one another, how much money they have and show off how their home is worth the most.

    But these London neighborhoods are legitimately expensive. There was one poor guy tonight, an architect who wanted a move-in ready home in Notting Hill and could not find what he wanted for his 2.5 million pound budget. He got shown his perfect home and found it was just under 3 million and was unhappy with his agent. You would think for that kind of money, he could get something that was satisfactory (I mean the conversion rates make that even more in U.S. dollars).

    I find it fascinating how changes in neighborhoods, especially when it comes to gentrification, totally changes politics. For example, the wealthy who got priced out of Kensington and Chelsea and similar neighborhoods moved into Battersea, causing major political changes there. I don’t think I can identify a single case anywhere in the United States where the gentrification of a neighborhood or skyrocketing of prices in a neighborhood fundamentally altered its politics.

    I love subways (I am a major advocate and proponent of subway expansion…….it drives me politically) and the first one I ever rode on was London’s. Has there ever been talk of creating a system similar to Paris’s RER so as not to overextend the tube?

  6. @ Paul Croft

    “well it would be a hell of a way to show your appreciation – even in the States!”

    LOL.

    Goodnight guys, don’t fight too much over who’s not Scottish or not English enough.

  7. Alec: Good points. In my defence I’m afraid I’ve got to the stage where I bridle [probably excessively] at unnecessary anti-English sentiment – which we seem to be expected to accept in good nature.

    Its stopped raining in Durham!

  8. @SoCalLiberal

    Like the RER? Wow, the part of the whole system that my Parisian friends most laugh at…

    BTW from way back: Athens of the North = Edinburgh. This has been a UK marketing ploy for a long time, for example Birmingham, the Venice of the North. I’ll believe it when I see Venice branding itself as the Birmingham of the South.

  9. “Venice – Italy’s Canvey Island” has a better ring.

  10. Alec,
    I agree – I don’t think that UKIP are going away because there is a fundamental split between the capitalists and the traditionalists in the Conservative party – UKIP is pulling away the traditionalists and as the Conservatives push to be more libertarian-capitalist, UKIP will continue to gain them.
    Of course – UKIP suffers from the same problem, it deems itself a libertarian party but many of it’s policies are socially conservative/traditionalist so will end up suffering from the same internal struggle which divides the Conservatives.
    But that’s a long-term issue, not something that have to resolve in the short-term as they grab votes disillusioned ex-Conservatives.

    I can’t see, without a referendum along-side the GE 2015, that UKIP won’t increase their vote-share.
    All the parties have promised referendums on the EU at various time, but always it’s become ‘if.. but.. based on these conditions.. only at this certain time’ so I don’t think the public trust any of the major parties on it.

  11. Nothing to do with Scotland, but I’ve been really fascinated to see the rise of a pretty unusual coincidence of views from the right and left as the banking crisis rolls out.

    Last night Douglas Carswell MP tweeted a supportive text about Paul Mason on Newsnight, describing the piece as being about ‘corporatist kleptocracy’. Charles Moore has written several columns in the Telegraph in a similar vein.

    What I find fascinating is that these sentiments could almost have come direct from the 1970s Socialist Workers Party play book. Of course, the policy framework to deal with the issues identified varies widely from left to right, but the coincidence of views on what the problem is is striking.

    Charles Moore himself writes that his mantra since the banking crash is ‘everything is different now’, which is as good a motto for politicians as I think it gets. I suspect we are inching our way to a new consensus, which will be radically different from what has gone before.

  12. I also find the unresolved conflict between libertarian-capitalists and traditionalist-capitalists interesting within the Conservative party (and Republicans, etc) – they’re both capitalist but in a fundamentally different way.

    It’s an interesting case study – much like the divisions on the left are – because as long as they have a common set of enemies they can be united despite their fundamental differences.

    It also brings up interesting questions about an ideological vs a class model of analysis.
    #nerd

    But anyway – even if UKIP do grow, it doesn’t necessarily mean that the Conservatives will fail to gain – turn-out is still historically low, so there could be lots of ideological conservatives who’re disillusioned with the Conservatives but think that UKIP are too small who’ll turn-out to tackle a strong Labour party.

  13. @CHASGLAS

    British & Scottish, and you can add half a dozen others in my circle to the count. There’s seven. Maybe you’re asking in thewrong places?

    I’m neither unionist or nationalist by the way. Yes I do have a choice, and as I once commented in the past, being set in stone politically is no way to look forward and adapt, as the world changes.

  14. Ukip had a vote share of 3.1% in 2010 (+0.9% on 2005), that rises to:

    4.5% (+0.7) South West
    4.3% (+1.1) Eastern
    4.1% (+1) South East
    4% (+0.8) West Midlands
    3.3% (+0.6) East Midlands
    3.2% (+1.2) North West

    3.5% (+0.9) for England as a whole

    1997… 0.3% (Referendum Party 2.6%).
    2001… 1.5%
    2005… 2.2%

    So not until 2010 did Ukip surpass the 2.9% resevoir for in-out EU referendum type parties… but their vote share is stonger in regions where they have a potential to harm Tory prospects. They were polling at around 13-14% where they had candidates in the May local elections.

  15. Alec
    I agree that the old consensus is collapsing – but the big question is, what will be the new consensus.
    But I disagree that it’ll be more radical (whichever political direction it travels) than the previous consensus – I suspect it’ll be more like the post-war consensus in the US. Capitalism that things are ‘too big to fail’ being regulated so that they can’t fail.

    That’s all that seems to be talked about – the need for regulation to prevent future crises of capitalism.

    I haven’t heard many commentators talk about the problems inherent in rentier capitalism which led to the crash (and will continue to lead to future crashes) – the conflict between corporate structures and their masters – the conflict between rentier classes and investment classes – the lack of structural reform to transition to any corporate structure that isn’t traditional capitalist (whether that be state, fascist, mutualist, etc).
    And I don’t necessarily mean them using those words – obviously nobody’s going to directly advocate fascism – but none of the arguments are fundamentally structural, they’re all about regulation within the current economic structure.

  16. “Capitalism that things are ‘too big to fail’ being regulated so that they can’t fail.”
    Should read ‘Capitalism with things that are ‘too big…’

  17. ALEC

    @Nothing to do with Scotland, ”

    On UKPR EVERYTHING is to do with Scotland.

  18. @Colin – indeed. I live and learn.

  19. @SOCAL

    Don’t think London is planning a Paris RER system, although I am no expert. Crossrail is currently the biggest construction project in Europe. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossrail

    The problem with London, as I understand it, is that underneath there are loads of very old drainage systems and all sort of obstacles that would get in the way. This makes it very expensive. There was a recent BBC programme on the Tube, where they discussed some of the issues.

    You also have to be pretty careful. In Sydney they were building some tunnel underneath the city and buildings above were apparently shaking.

  20. Speaking as someone who lives in London and visits Paris a lot, I would say that Crossrail will simply be an RER by another name. The idea is very similar to RER line A.

    Thameslink is to all intents and purposes an RER as well, similar to RER line C, but initially done on the cheap by converting disused tunnel infrastructure because BR had very little money to spend.

    The RER is sometimes grubby, crowded and late, but it is fairly quick (there is a big variation in quality cross the network). I cannot image how Paris would cope without it.

  21. Went to Skye yesterday with my sister and law and her family who are over from Toronto. Not only was it a brillant day… It was actually clear enough to see the tops of the Cullins, I managed to miss a quite dreadfully selection of posts about Scotland.

    Peter.

  22. Peter: How d’you know??

  23. PAULCROFT,

    EH…. I read them this morning!

    Peter.

  24. Ah… so you didn’t really miss them then.

    I’m afraid my contributions were based on many years of observation and – as a Scot by birth and English by parentage -surprise and sadness.

    Anyway sounds like you enjoyed your day – Skye, Arran and Orkney are the ones I’ve visited and they all utterly magical.

  25. @Old Nat

    Murray is the first Scot to reach a Wimbledon final in 116 years – when Edinburgh-born Harold Mahony won the title.
    ————————
    Harold was born in Edinburgh but Wimbledon records his nationality as Irish, so Andy Murray will be the first Scottish person to win a Wimbledon singles final. Maybe not this year but I think he will do it eventually. :-)

  26. @Billy Bob

    I knew UKIP had reached 3.1% so had a double take earlier. Their increase in actual votes has definitely been bigger with each election, to the point where 5% would give them enough votes to fit the pattern (919,000 to about 1.5 million in 2015).

    Though for a good year now I’ve felt they’ve had 2 million in the bag, which is only 6 or 7 percent. It seems Europe is the gift that keeps on giving.

1 3 4 5