The monthly online ComRes poll for the Sunday Indy and Sunday Mirror is out tonight. It has topline figures, with changes from their last online poll a month ago, of CON 31%(-2), LAB 43%(+2), LDEM 10%(nc), UKIP 8%(-1). The twelve point lead is the largest ComRes have shown this Parliament in either their online or their phone polls.

The fieldwork was done between Wednesday and Friday, so most of it would have been finished before the results of Thursday’s election. It is too early to expect any impact from them in the polls. Normal caveats about the poll apply anyway: sure, it could be the sign of a further shift to Labour, but equally it could be normal variation within the margin of error.

UPDATE: Tonight we also have the fortnightly Opinium poll for the Observer. Their topline figures, with changes from a fortnight ago, are CON 32%(+2), LAB 39%(-2), LDEM 8%(-1).


195 Responses to “New ComRes and Opinium polls”

1 2 3 4
  1. First

  2. Good news stories for Ed!

  3. Some of the mud slinging by Titus Oates-Watson sticking, perhaps?

  4. In conjunction with Ipsos-Mori,Labour lead firming up I think.Will Youguv show the same trend in the morning?

  5. @ RunnyMede

    What do you mean?

  6. A further shift to Labour? Hasn’t their lead been very consistent for at least a few months now?

  7. Can’t believe the Tory reaction to the Corby by election result. It is either a very determined attempt to appear unruffled or extreme complacency. Possibly a bit of both?

  8. Opinium in the Observer shows Labour lead reduced to 7points.Seems the only thing we can agree on is that Labour is leading at the moment.

  9. Opinium poll also show a 56% sceptic view on EU. So if there were a ‘debate’ prior to a referendum, it could go back the other way just like the AV issue did. Voters have not confronted the issue and more importantly have not been subjected to massive publicity by big business.

    In any case there would have to be a huge (80% plus) opinion result before any mainstream party took it on board. A bit like the hanging issue really.

  10. @Runnymede

    “Some of the mud slinging by Titus Oates-Watson sticking, perhaps?”

    Is this a dig at Tom Watson, by any chance? If so, I suppose you think his recent questions in the Commons about re-opening investigations into child abuse in North Wales care homes in the 1970s is boosting Labour’s standing in the polls.

    I’ve read some rather convoluted arguments on these pages over the last three years, but this one may take the biscuit!

  11. Anyone know what UKIP are in the Opinium poll? or where the crossbreaks are? thanks in advance.

  12. Looks like the Tories have taken the plunge and roped in Lynton Crosby

  13. Oh just found it by reading the article, UKIP on 10%

    LD 8%
    UKIP 10%

    AW can you pleae fix the error of not including UKIP, thanks.

  14. Lynton Crosby, “the Australian Karl Rove.”

    So they haven’t learned anything from Obama vs Romney at all.

  15. The polling on the EU is good news for UKIP. It shows that Labour is fertile ground for their message and also even the LD. UKIP have a lot of room to continue to grow.

  16. @SMukesh

    The Independent did report a fortnight ago that Andrew Cooper is heading for the door. Lord Ashcroft is on record (ConHome) as saying hiring Crosby would be a mistake.

    One of the stumbling blocks (apart from sky-high fees) had been the insistence that Crosby/Textor takes the polling contract currently awarded to Populus.

  17. @ Jim

    Despite rising in the polls, I think the Thursday mini elections proved that UKIP are not likely to ever be a force in British Politics (or at least for a long time) other than to take votes off the Tory Right. They need to be grabbing a headline somewhere and UKIP beating the Lib Dems in Corby is more for a Lib Dem headline than a UKIP one.

    With such low turnouts there was a chance for them to target and make an impression somewhere but they failed to do so. They need to be getting a 2nd somewhere and a load of councillors as well.

    I think you are right they can target anti EC Labour and LIb Dem supporters but the way I read their manifesto is for semi-privatising of the NHS and I think if they ever became a threat to LAB or Lib Dem the rest of their policies would be hightlighted to minimise the defections. At the moment they are clearly taken more votes off the Tories so no need for Lab and Lib Dem to be anything other than supportive towards UKIP.

  18. @ Jim / Shevii

    UKIP currently polling 10% in the North region…UKIP got 6% in Rotherham in 2010 (compared to 3.1% nationally and 3.5% in England). UKIP up to 4.5% from 1.5% in Manchester Central. UKIP polled 6.1%, up 3.5% from 2010 in Cardiff South and Penarth. UKIP up to 15% from 5% in Corby.

    The three by-elections, and especially the publicity of the Corby Lib Dem overtake by UKIP is quite crucial.

    I’ll pop a virtual fiver on UKIP getting 20% in Rotherham. Maybe more, given that some folk might take a protest vote away from the Conservatives. Remember the low turnout of the time of year. Who knows?

  19. Statgeek, thanks for all that interesting info!

    I think you may be right about Rotherham, that would be a great result. I certainly hope you are correct, purple looks so nice in all those results tables :)

  20. Shevii, I’m not sure you have it correct regarding the NHS so I don’t think that will be an issue. But even aif it were something Labour and the LD could smear UKIP with, I’m not so sure it would be as potent of an argument as it once would have been. Given current levels of abuse of the system, immigration, and national debt I’m not so certain that privatisation of the NHS in an insurance system is as toxic of a sare tactic as it once would have been. I there any polling on that issue?

  21. Good Evening All. Bad day in Norwich. Was John Garret and Charles Clarke’s seat.

    I find the poll variations to be so great that they make me question the reliability of the figures.

    Does anyone know what the swing was in Fulham in 1986 please? 12.4% in Corby seems to be on the brink of being a very good swing for Labour at this stage.

  22. How reliable are the polls given the variations?

  23. Does anyone know what the swing was in Fulham in 1986 please? 12.4% in Corby seems to be on the brink of being a good swing for Labour at this stage but not totally convincing as a mid term staging post for GE victory

  24. @BILLY BOB

    Tories have got to try something…What they are doing now is not working!The 2015 campaign could be very negative and I can guess who their target will be.

  25. Youguv
    C-33,L-44,LD-9,UKIP-8.

  26. @Jim

    From UKIP’s 2010 Manifesto…

    “Encourage County Health Boards to put out to tender key NHS services ranging from Long Term Care to local hospitals and GP surgeries. This will be done by franchising key services.”

    Now thats not a million miles away from what’s being done now, but I think it is something that would put off a large number of Labour voters – though maybe not current Lib Dems…..

  27. John Ruddy, I think that can be sold on 2 points
    a) It saves taxpayers money and gives better service
    b) It has been run horribly as is for years under Labour so why not try something new?

    Not sure about this, but doesn’t Canada successfuly operate as outlined so perhaps they could hold that up as an example?

    At the end of the day I think most Labour voters are educated and intelligent enough to realise that things will have to change as we cannot continue to live off of our children’s future tax revenue. I think UKIP can argue that we can mae these changes now to save money or wait until the debt causes it to be out of our control and we lose the NHS entirely. Even most Labour voters know that money doesn’t come out of thin air.

  28. ChrisL

    three polls – 7, 11 and 12.

    Average 10

    they are reliable when taken together it seems to me.

  29. Can someone give me the election sequence [Euro/Council etc] through to 2015, with particular reference to the possible/probable negatives for LD in losing more of their local networks please?

  30. PAUL.
    Thanks for the average.

    The Corby swing, as GRAHAM wrote, was higher than the 1972-1974 period.

  31. jim

    I don’t think I’ve read a post that long where every single opinion has been so completely wrong.

    Congratulations. Pretty good going.

  32. @Jim
    “a) It saves taxpayers money and gives better service”

    I’d think the public recognise that is rarely the outcome when the private sector is invited to the taxpayer trough. Usually it’s sweetheart contracts for the well connected, front line cuts to improve the bottom line and taxpayer rescue when it all goes tits up.

  33. NICKP, so you are saying that Labour voters are not educated and intelligent?? This could be why they are coming to UKIP in droves- we don’t insult their inteligence. Sorry, but I just couldn’t resist :)

  34. Lynton Crosby? So Tories really are panicking then. Thought he only worked for winners?

    They think because he won for Johnson he can do the same with Cameron, that is a very big and very costly mistake!

  35. Jim

    ” Even most Labour voters know that money doesn’t come out of thin air.”

    Oh dear, that’s like a red rag to a bull. I’m sure that most labour voters do know that money doesn’t come out of thin air, that’s what the vast majority of people know, but the problem here is that what everyone knows is wrong!! Money does indeed come out of thin air via the magic of double entry book keeping and fractional reserve lending.

  36. Will Crosby’s polling outfit be asking the Dave or Boris question?

  37. Jim

    I can only assume that you are new here cos most folk have given up on the magic money tree argument in the face of my zealous and quite boring explanations of the nature of money

  38. RIN………..Although I appreciate your deep insights into the world of money, my rather simplistic view, as a banker, ( and we all know what that means :-) ) is that value added can be measured or perceived, dodgy property bonds are perceived added value, to sell on, as is David Beckham’s signature on a 50p football. However, adding real value, for instance, a field of wheat from plough to Greggs is obvious. Thin air money does of course exist, but we invest in real money opportunities.
    As an old sage once commented, ” it works in practice, but does it work in theory ? ” :-)

  39. statgeek

    UKIP got 6% in Rotherham in 2010 (compared to 3.1% nationally and 3.5% in England).

    It’s an odd constituency (aren’t they all) but it may be that any boost in UKIP last time came from opposition to the high-pro-EU profile of MacShane than from anything else. In any case, although UKIP saved their deposit, they still came sixth.

    It’s also complicated by the fact that the BNP got 10.4% last time (their best result outside the Borough of Barking) so some discontented right-wing votes may go there rather than UKIP (it’s the same candidate and there seems to be a personal element to the vote). There’s English Democrats and an EDL-affiliated independent as well.

    There was also a selection row in Labour because a local councillor was left off the list. His supporters stormed out, leaving the successful candidate to be chosen by a members vote of 13-2. Which suggests there may not be much local help in the campaign. Respect may benefit, though possibly not enough to make a difference – unlike Bradford the asian vote is only about 5%, though there are other sources of discontent.

  40. @Richard in Norway
    ” Oh dear, that’s like a red rag to a bull. I’m sure that most labour voters do know that money doesn’t come out of thin air, that’s what the vast majority of people know, but the problem here is that what everyone knows is wrong!! Money does indeed come out of thin air via the magic of double entry book keeping and fractional reserve lending.”

    And, of course QE. Or “Amber’s Tables and Chairs” as we now know it.

  41. RIN, thank you but I favour a return to a non debt based currency that is issued to reflect wealth created in the economy. But even in the system of fractional reserve banking money can not come out of thin air in perpetuity as eventually it has to have some semblance of reflecting wealth created, otherwise inflation. I will try in the future to clarify that ‘tax money does not come out of thin air’…it comes from loading our grandchildren with debt as we all know.

  42. CHRISLANE1945,
    The swing to Labour at the April 1986 byelection was 10.5%.

  43. I know everybody is going “Lynton Crosby! Scary man! Ooooh, run hide!” but I remember him f***ing up the Libertas campaign in Ireland and he ran Michael Howard’s 2005 campaign…badly. I know Boris thinks he’s the bogs dollox but I think he’s overrated, to be polite.

    Rgdsm

  44. Berious @ Jim
    “a) It saves taxpayers money and gives better service”

    An insurance based system is inherently more expensive because for the same level of service, the entire cost of the insurer, every salary every paperclip every profit comes out of the total pot and there is ipso facto less for the provision of services.

    The cost of costing everything so as to charge it out doesn’t come cheap.

    There can be no economies of scale such as can compensate. The staff are not notoriously overpaid.

    Always overlooked is the cost in qualty of service of lower morale when staff see tha theprimary objectiveis to make a profit.

    Another cost always overlooked is the huge increase in the opportunty for fraud at every point in the system – patients, GPs, hospitals, insurace companies and staff.

    At the moment most of the fraud is in fiddling the crazed NewLabour target systems.

    If the data is used for assessment of performance of staff or organisations and it is recorded or subjectively measured by the same people, you would need to be a complete numpty to believe any of it.

    The Russians learned that lesson but only after it destroyed their economy.

    and usually forgotten is the cost of fraud

  45. @John B Dick

    My comments refer to the NHS in England, but might be relevant to Scotland too. (I have no detailed knowledge of the system there).

    “An insurance based system is inherently more expensive because for the same level of service, the entire cost of the insurer, every salary every paperclip every profit comes out of the total pot and there is ipso facto less for the provision of services.”

    Are you saying that these things don’t come out of the total pot now?

    “The cost of costing everything so as to charge it out doesn’t come cheap.”

    This is already done. There is a very complex method of costing hospital procedures, which is then (currently) charged to PCTs.

    “Always overlooked is the cost in qualty of service of lower morale when staff see tha theprimary objectiveis to make a profit.”

    Even if there’s profit-sharing?

    “Another cost always overlooked is the huge increase in the opportunty for fraud at every point in the system – patients, GPs, hospitals, insurace companies and staff.”

    Those opportunities are already there. I don’t see why they would be any worse in a different system. GPs have always been private businesses (not that that means they are more likely to be fraudulent). Hospitals try to charge PCTs as much as possible, and every NHS organisation has to employ bureaucrats to keep an eye on overcharging by other parts of the NHS.

  46. PETE B

    If there is no insurer, then the pot is not reduced by their profits and costs.

    The administrative costs of health provision, are actually increased by the need to provide staff to create the bills sent to the insurers.

    The internal NHS market in England, must produce similar waste.

    The English model of NHS Trusts that had been imposed here was abolished by the Lab/LD Government in 2004. It isn’t a contentious issue in Scotland, where both major political parties agreed with Malcolm Chisholm then –

    “The winding up of the Trusts formally signals the end of the old approach that saw duplication and competition instead of streamlined, collaborative structures.”

    http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2004/04/5329

  47. @ Gracie

    Lynton Crosby? So Tories really are panicking then. Thought he only worked for winners?
    ———————-
    Michael Howard didn’t win.
    8-)

  48. @ RAF

    And, of course QE. Or “Amber’s Tables and Chairs” as we now know it.
    ——————-
    :-) You remembered! :-)

  49. @ Nick P

    “Lynton Crosby, “the Australian Karl Rove.”

    So they haven’t learned anything from Obama vs Romney at all.”

    Karl Rove is really overrated I have to say. So are a lot of these guys but Rove seems to be the star of the overrated party. In fairness to him for this year, he didn’t run the Romney campaign. And this shows you what a joke our campaign finance laws are but basically when you can’t coordinate with a campaign officially, what you do is look at their ad strategy and their campaign strategy and you mimic it (or compliment it in your own ways). So Bill Burton (once he figured out how to raise money), had a relatively easy time running ads that complimented Obama’s steady strategy and campaign theme.

    Karl Rove wasn’t running Mitt Romney’s campaign. But with that 300 million or 400 million he had from his plutocrat friends, he had the job to mimic Romney’s campaign. Romney’s campaign shifted and changed positions every 5 minutes. I mean, he reinvented most of his campaign platform in the first debate (and tried again in the third debate) and ignored the RNC’s. So for Rove and some of the others, it was difficult to actually figure out what to run ads on and how to tailor the message. Of course Rove blew a lot of money on downballot races too.

    Maybe I should credit Guy Cecil and Robby Mook (who ran the DSCC and DCCC respectively) for defeating Rove and the GOP’s efforts. They’re geniuses of course (though it seems clear from following Cecil’s social media accounts that his true life dream is to land his own reality tv show). Then again, perhaps they were blessed with good candidate recruitment and some truly gifts of opponents. I mean how many times did GOP Senate candidates go off on tangents about rape? Can’t neccessarily blame Rove for that.

    Reminds me. I often said during the campaign that Romney’s campaign seemed like it was being run by people who had watched the Iron Lady movie one too many times. His post election commentary (showing his utter hatred and contempt for the working man, his disdain and near contempt for anyone who isn’t in his income bracket, and his firm belief that wealth is a mark of one’s superiority and entitlement to societal leadership) kinda confirms that. He’s basically what you’d call a hardcore Thatcherite Tory.

    Rove wasn’t watching the Iron Lady. He was just clueless that the attempt to channel Thatcher wasn’t working.

  50. Con 33, Lab 44, Lib 9, UKIP 8
    Approval -32

    Net Approval:
    Cameron -17 (-1)
    Miliband -21 (-3)
    Clegg -55 (nc)

    Pure Approval:
    Cameron 39 (nc)
    Miliband 34 (nc)
    Clegg 18 (nc)

    Economic View –
    The economy is getting worse – 38
    The worst is over but no signs of recovery – 35
    Economy is bad, but showing signs of recovery – 21
    The economy is improving and on way to full recovery – 2
    So both Labour and Tories can claim narrative victory here – Tories can say that the public don’t view things as getting worse, but Labour can say that the public don’t see things getting better.

    With DKs removed –
    Worse – 40
    No signs – 36
    Bad – 22
    Improving – 2

    Support/Oppose policies (with DKs removed)
    Tax allowance for married couples –
    Support – 61 (73)
    Oppose – 23 (27)

    Reducing the top-rate of income tax to 40p –
    Support – 21 (23)
    Oppose – 70 (77)

    Reduce corporation tax –
    Support – 27 (32)
    Oppose – 57 (68)

    Future Tory manifesto promises? ;)

1 2 3 4