This morning’s YouGov poll for the Sun has topline figures of CON 32%, LAB 41%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 9%. Yesterday had a thirteen point lead, but today’s is very much back into the normal range. There is no sign of any bounce for the Liberal Democrats from their conference, but I wouldn’t necessarily expect one yet – any impact normally peaks after the leader’s speech. Interestingly enough where there is some whiff of a conference boost is UKIP, who YouGov have shown at 9% for two days in a row. Its not significantly above the seven to eight that YouGov normally record for UKIP so could easily be normal sample variation, but YouGov haven’t shown them that high for a good six weeks.

Tomorrow and Sunday’s polls will show any impact from the Lib Dem conference, although as always in conference season the peaks of troughs of each party as their conferences come and go isn’t really that important – it is whether things are any different once these short term publicity effects fade.


293 Responses to “YouGov/Sun – CON 32, LAB 41, LD 9, UKIP 9”

1 2 3 6
  1. Con shrinking?

  2. For Jim Jam and other phone users (FPT):

    Con 32
    Lab 41
    Lib Dem 9
    UKIP 9
    SNP / PCY 4
    Green 3
    BNP 1
    Respect 0
    Other 1

  3. As we approach Labours week, a pretty balanced assessment of EdM- the opps and threats ‘going forward’.

    http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/politics/2012/09/project-eds-charisma-mission-help-miliband-loosen

  4. Today’s YouGov poll seems to confirm that the Conservatives are really losing it among the over-60s – Labour is leading 37% to 33%.

    The reason the headline VI lead is down slightly is because of our old friends Da Yoof, where the lead is only 5 points (the underlying Labour lead is probably around 20). Although YouGov seems to have been making an effort over the last few polls to increase the sub-sample size, it’s still only about half what it should be and this mean every day seems to be odd in some way.

    The 5% for UKIP looks high for this group and the 2% for Greens low – but then the percentages are only based on the responses of about 73 people. However the weighting means that the choices of each under-25 respondent has perhaps three times the power to affect VI of those in other age groups.

    (Repeated from previous thread as more relevant here)

  5. Wonder if Cameron will receive a Letterman Chat Show bounce!! ;)

  6. thanks @rob

    “It is possible that the people who tell pollsters that they intend to vote for Labour will do exactly that.” is a thought that the Lib dems and Conservatives might want to consider, for that matter maybe Labour should consider it?

  7. I don’t usually bother with UKIP’s scottish figures but today has them at twice the LibDem level (8% v 4%).

    I suspect it is just the kind of sampling error we see with small parties in small subsamples but i was wondering if anyone (STATGEEK) has looked at long term UKIP/Tory/Libdem figures in Scotland.

    It might be that if Cameron as suggested makes some kind of pre election Euro referendum promise that the eu question starts to overlap with the independence referendum.

    How would Tory/UKip voter vote no if they thought that Scotland was out and the UK in or if a referendum was on offer ?

    Would pro EU Scots be more likely to vote Yes if they thought Scotland would be in but the UK out.

    Peter.

  8. thks Roger

  9. Thanks for the link Rob

  10. How do the figures correlate with polling in local government by-elections. UKIP have been polling strongly in these while the Green Party have been hammered or failed to put out candidates at all.

  11. @ Peter Cairns

    Funny you should mention that. I was just updating my spreadsheet.

    Scotland MAD for the past 3 months: ttp://i47.tinypic.com/352nbzd.png

    Scotland MAD; most recent v 3 months back: ttp://i49.tinypic.com/v74olx.png

    Scotland MAD; 3 month change: ttp://i48.tinypic.com/2z5rrj8.png

    Scotland calendar month (September incomplete : simple averaging with outliers included!): ttp://i47.tinypic.com/1265t2q.png

  12. @ Allan Christie

    “Wonder if Cameron will receive a Letterman Chat Show bounce!!”

    What school could not have taught him the meaning of Magna Carta?

  13. Wolf,
    Because people vote differently in different elections and turn-out is always a lot lower (especially in by-elections) and it might be too costly for just a by-election?

    If you look at the main local elections, it gives a different picture –
    Greens gained 11 councillors in 2012, taking them up to 147 in total – including minority control of a council.
    UKIP gained 0, maintaining 26.
    In 2011, Greens gained 14 and UKIP 0.

  14. what a boring lot of plebs you are becoming, why don’t you all agree to say “what will be will be”.
    You can pontificate all you wish but it IS all words and of no use to man nor beast

  15. Statgeek,

    Thanks for that.

    Pretty much what i expected, over the last three months Labour has gained in Scotland mostly at the expense of the SNP.

    The changes between everyone else are all within the margin of error or what you would expect from natural churn.

    Given that like most of Scotland even Tories here are a bit to the left of the UK I’d expect any movement to UKIP to be smaller anyway.

    Cameron is unlikely to make his “Referendum” announcement till after he an Alex Salmond agree the terms for the referendum on Independence which is scheduled for late October.

    I had thought that if he was to suggest a “Mandate to Negotiate” (MtN) referendum that the SNP might suggest the same.

    Under MtN the UK would say these are our terms and if you don’t agree then we leave.

    If the SNP went for MtN then it could negotiate for Devo-Max, the favoured option of Scots and if it didn’t get it have a mandate for independence.

    That would get round the two question issue and put the Uk government in a corner because we would be suggesting the same kind of referendum as they were.

    Peter.

  16. I can why a shrinking Tory vote would be useful for Labour I just don’t think it is going to happen (unless the Tory party does itself some real harm(which it could well do)).As the next election approaches the currant drift from UKIP to Tory should continue and UKIP will likely just poll about the same as in 2010. So the Conservatives could expect at the top end to gain 3% from this. Add on to this between 10% and 15% libdem and you get about 35% conservative
    However for Labour there is a much bigger prize that is the Lib dem vote, not just the losses since say 2003 but the losses in voter share since the “gang of Four” about 1/2 of the 2010 Libdem vote,they are not far from that now, and will likely be getting there soon. That is Labour polling at 46%
    The Libdems will probably be left with about 8% of the vote and around a dozen Mp’s that is they would have wasted the thirty years of graft it took them to get this far.

  17. @Rob S

    “As we approach Labours week, a pretty balanced assessment of EdM- the opps and threats ‘going forward’.”

    Thanks for the link and it was good to be given an excuse to delve back into the New Statesman after many years of abstinence! A very balanced assessment, as you say, and I couldn’t find much, if anything, to disagree with. In fact in the past, when the subject of Miliband’s leadership has arisen on these pages, I’ve actually tried to make some of the very same points that Behr is making in the article, although a little less convincingly and elegantly, I fear.

    I think the crunch period for Miliband, and Labour, is still some way off yet, probably 12 to 18 months from now, in fact. It’s quite possible that some sort of stuttering economic recovery will be underway by then (late 2013, early 2014) and the political argument will have probably have moved on quite a distance from where it is today. At that stage in the electoral cycle, Miliband will need to have positioned Labour as a party that is seen as offering more than just being able manage a stagnating economy a little more benignly and fairly than the Coalition; he will have to show that he is the man giving the clearest picture on how to avoid repeating the now notorious sins of the past. This means radical new thinking on banking, the nature of employment, pensions, education, care for the elderly, taxation, press regulation, welfare, transport, housing – you name it. Vast issues where the coalition is showing a real poverty of ideas, and where it is offering change of any sort, it’s retro-thinking, a nostalgia-tinged turning back of the clock.

    Miliband and his party need more time to develop radical policies suitable for 2015 and beyond. I don’t think you can do that in 2012. Sure, criticise, oppose, maybe even support where need be, existing policy prescriptions that the Coalition is using to address the challenges of today, and articulate what you might be doing differently, but the big ideas and policy details are for much nearer when the electorate is inclined to want to look in detail, and then decide. I think Cruddas and his policy review teams deserve more patience and time.

    Call me Mandelsonian if you like, but I want more mood music than detailed policy at Manchester next week. Alright, a few little policy teases too, maybe!

  18. WASTORY>>>

    If we’re that boring why not stop reading? Or write something interesting yourself for a change?

    The idea that we all write “what will be will be” and call it a forum is risible.

  19. Charles
    @ Allan Christie

    “Wonder if Cameron will receive a Letterman Chat Show bounce!!”
    ….
    What school could not have taught him the meaning of Magna Carta?
    ________

    A School for Plebs? :)

  20. Is there any real evidence that party conferences mid term actually do anything for that particular party’s lead in the polls, after all the opposition will not want to disclose any real policy’s so will by and large spend the majority of the conference attacking the government of the day’s position, which will appeal to the party faithful, but gives very little information to the floating voter trying to find out what the party policy’s are. And the government of the day will do the same with the possible announcement of a new policy or two, but other than that it’s all rather a lot of hot air.

  21. @TURK

    My recollection and I am sure this can be checked is that the parties get a bounce. So the libs should pick up a bit in the polls over the weekend.

    Because in general the press are quite benevolent especially regarding the Leaders speech.

  22. Regarding Roger’s post at the top re the seniors’ voting preference , there was an amazing speech from Labour’s Scotttish leader this week .

    She stated that free travel and personal care for housebound pensioners with what she regards as a middle income and above could not be sacrosanct under a future Labour administration in Edinburgh , as well as the Council Tax freeze.

    This policy , alongside Ed Balls announcement to the TUC that Labour would continue to cut spending and maintain a public sector wage freeze is an insight into current Labour thinking .

    As the election looms , Labour will have to produce more costed policy announcements and its not likely to please their core voters if the above is anything to go by .

  23. John Pilgrim,Indeed! Perhaps on the same sort of theme,it does seem rather
    odd that someone with an Etonian and Oxford education could have not made
    At least an educated guess at the meaning of Magna Carta,leaving aside the
    incredible fact that he did not know what it actually meant!

  24. Couper 2820.

    Trouble for the parties is even if they do get a bounce it’s soon levelled out by the next party’s conference bounce. I don’t think party conferences really play into the public’s thoughts they are more a means of steadying or inspiring the party activist’s or those who mind’s are already made up. Maybe that changes on the run up to the GE but even then I’m not sure I think the floating voter is more fickle than patiently wading through the different parties conferences to get a balanced view of which party is best for the country. Perhaps their more likely to be persuaded by the last few positive or negative headlines in the couple of month’s in the run up to the GE and maybe of course a televised debate between leaders.

  25. Ask yourselves why did Cameron do the Letterman Chat Show?

    Is it because he is looking to raise his profile in the USA and not stand at the next General Election (because he must know that he would likely lose it)?

    It would also be better for him to be seen to leave of his own accord rather than fail and be voted out.

  26. @TURK

    The leaders speeches are sometimes important such as Neil Kinock’s speech against Militant and Labour councils, David Steels ‘Prepare for government speech’ Margaret Thatchers ‘Lady is not for turning’, Tony Blair and clause 4: I am sure there are others.

  27. @SqueezedMiddle

    Boris?

  28. @Ann In Wales

    He couldn’t even remember where it was signed. Runnymeade isn’t even that far from Eton. An island on the Thames? What was he thinking?

    I was suprised DC did not do well, as he’s generally good at thinking on his feet.

  29. Regarding party conferences.Probably a lot more important than they are today.However they are the place for activists to connect with each other and
    For the leader to shape their thoughts ,reasoning,for the future.At least that is
    What I think but what do I know?

  30. RAF,but is he?He had an awful load of coaching for his appearance.

  31. The chap has been silent for two months atleast…I do believe that Ed`s campaign speech is going to be meaty.

    Not sure why Cameron thought he was going to try to beat Boris at his own game…Came across as slightly boring but atleast he din`t make any huge gaffes.

  32. Given that its a well known fact that toff’s children have Latin beaten into them from the age of three, that there are many words like Magna that mean big [ice-creams for one], that cartographer is an English word and that Letterman put his arms wide apart asa clue to “word one”, I can only think ole Dave didn’t want too appear too clever.

    And he didn’t.

    The good news is the Americans won’t have noticed ‘cos he does talk rather nicely [well – compared to Americans.]

  33. @SQUEEZEDMIDDLE

    You said “…Ask yourselves why did Cameron do the Letterman Chat Show?…”

    He’s too obscure for Leno and Conan, too right-wing for Jon Stewart, too left-wing for O’Reilly, too sane for Glenn Beck, too humorless for Craig Ferguson, and his breasts are too small for Wendy Williams.

    Pause.
    Tumbleweed.
    I’ll get me coat…

    Regards, Martyn

  34. CHASGLAS

    It would have been interesting to see what the response would have been if Lamont had given this “alternative” speech, which would have been mainstream SLab.

    http://nationalcollective.com/2012/09/27/what-johann-lamont-meant-to-say/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+NationalCollective+%28National+Collective%29

  35. Smukesh,yes I also think that a lot of thought has gone into this speech.At
    Least it will not be endless sound bites,hopefully.

  36. For those who haven’t been paying attention to Catalonia as a “quarrel in a far away country between people of whom we know nothing”, it could well create a situation that actually does affect you – like last time (though probably not in the same way!)

    http://rt.com/news/catalonia-public-consultations-independence-158/

  37. @ Billy Bob (from the previous thread)

    “I saw the video on Dr Raul Ruiz for Congress (I watched all 12 the other night – they’re only short) but it didn’t register with me that Soledad O’Brien is a CNN reporter, she’s good.”

    Oh she is good and yes, very much a CNN reporter. It was hilarious in Charlotte. Anywhere she walked on the public streets, there would be a massive pedestrian traffic jam of people stopping on the sidewalk to meet her and get photos with her. I actually got to meet her on the Convention floor. She’s very nice (very sweet) and very down to earth. I like how she’s starting to become more aggressive in her questioning without being rude or pushy about it. I think you can be that way (there’s a medium between British political reporters who go after politicians with a proverbial hatchet and American political reporters who often don’t challenge a lot of bs that politicians utter).

    “I note it was part of their “Latino in America” programming rather than a mainstream news item. Ruiz also won something called an Inland Empire Hispanic Image award. I don’t know… Hispanic/Latino? Do people also say Spanish American, as in Spanish-speaking Americans?”

    Hispanic and Latino are often used interchangeably but there is a difference. Hispanic refers to a spanish speaking American (or at least someone of spanish speaking ancestry) while Latino refers to someone of Latin American ancestry. This means you can have hispanics who are not Latino (Spaniards, Phillipinos, possibly Western Saharans) and Latinos who are not neccessarily hispanic (Brazillians, Haitians, Jamaicans, possibly people from Belize, etc.).

    When I can use them interchangeably, I prefer the term Latino and here’s why. Many Latinos speak English (Julian Castro as it turns out doesn’t speak Spanish) and those who are predominantly English speaking shouldn’t be reffered to as Spanish speaking. There are people who came to this country not speaking a word of English but are Caucasian and now speak English as their first language. We don’t refer to them as speakers of another language. Also when it comes to racial discrimination, I don’t think one is neccessarily discriminating against someone because of the language they speak (or that their ancestors spoke) so much as they are discriminating against them for their racial/ethnic background.

    Most Latinos are not Spanish American. Most are from Mexico, Puerto Rico, Cuba, and the Central American states (Guatemala, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Honduras). I think most Spanish Americans probably think of themselves and refer to themselves as “white” or “caucasian.”

    “As for Henry Waxman… “he’s going to be in Congress for 40 years.” You mean another 40 years?? Huh, medical science, they can do wonders these days..”

    No, no, that’s a strange idiom of speaking (I sometimes write like I talk, which is a mistake). What I mean is, he was first elected in 1974 and took office in 1975. If he is reelected this year, he will likely be in Congress until 2015 giving him 4 decades in Congress. It’s kinda incredible really.

    I never get the talk of legislative term limits btw. I mean, if you have an employee who’s doing a really excellent job in their position and they’ve been in that position for a long time, what boss or company on earth says “oh…sorry, you’re doing a great job but you’ve been here too long so it’s time to fire you and bring in somebody new.”? I mean, if a legislator is doing a good job, they should be allowed to stay as long as the voters approve of them. And because the voters get to decide every 2 years, I have no problem with it.

  38. oldnat

    Catalonia not that again, why have you not mentioned the riot in Madrid.

  39. SOCALLIBERAL

    What a great piece of writing on the evils of labelling people by language/ethnicity etc. Thanks.

    The “Liberal” in your moniker is well justified.

  40. Oldnat

    I saw that some Spanish(Madrid) papers were calling for the army to intervene, can you imagine English papers saying that about Scotland?

  41. @SoCalLib

    You said “…what boss or company on earth says “oh…sorry, you’re doing a great job but you’ve been here too long so it’s time to fire you and bring in somebody new.”?…”

    Generally speaking, the Army does do this to officers. It’s a natural hierarchy pyramid, so people have to get promoted or leave as they age. It’s not like squaddies, who level off at (say) Warrant Officer and can stay in for decades. It’s generally accepted that if you can’t get promoted from Major, you will eventually have to leave.

    (I realise your question is rhetorical, but – hey! – you learned something new today…:-))

    Regards, Martyn

  42. ROGERREBEL

    You do have problems, don’t you?

    I’m not Betjeman, you know! :-)

  43. Rogerrebel

    I find the situation in catalonia very interesting

  44. OLDNAT

    Did you watch Nicola Sturgeon tare Lamont a new one today during First Ministers Questions?

  45. Good Evening All.

    TONY WILLIAMS.
    I agree that the Tories are likely to recover much of their vote, as you have written so well here.

    I also agree that the Labour Party will probably pick up lots of Lib Dem votes and seats, so we will return to the situation of a two party sytem as in days of my youth.

  46. RICHARD IN NORWAY

    I think those papers were reporting the calls from Army veterans to use force to suppress Catalonia. No doubt some right-wing papers were supporting them.

    Most folk in these islands have more sense – but then ther is also Lord Frase of Carmyllie! :-)

    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/03/13/scottish-independence-england-would-bomb-scottish-airports-to-defend-itself_n_1341629.html

  47. ALLAN CHRISTIE

    Normally I avoid watching FMQs as I avoid watching PMQs – they are the most disreputable manifestation of politics – all heat : no light in either of them, normally.

    After Lamont’s redefinition of Labour as a party of the right, however, I did watch FMQs today.

  48. Has anyone watched the Michael Cockerell documentary on the Blair years; brilliant it is. On You Tube.

  49. Oldnat

    Oh good lord, the man is scared of the auld alliance, wasn’t that 500 years ago?

  50. oldnat

    I have no problem, I just cant understand what Catalonia as as to do with a UK polling site and your obsession with it.

1 2 3 6