YouGov’s daily polling for the Sun this morning has topline figures of CON 30%, LAB 40%, LDEM 12%, UKIP 13%. While we have seen much higher from other online companies, it is the highest UKIP score that YouGov have shown so far. All the usual caveats apply: one should never get too excited about a record breaking score as it will almost always be a bit of an outlier. What counts is the underlying trend, and these figures underline the ongoing increase in UKIP support, and indeed the recent modest recovery in YouGov’s Lib Dem support.


595 Responses to “YouGov/Sun – CON 30, LAB 40, LD 12, UKIP 13”

1 2 3 12
  1. ….exciting time for pollsters

  2. The only thing a strong UKIP vote will do is of course elect a Labour Government in 2015 – then all those who voted UKIP will be in an even worse situation than now!!

  3. I can’t help feeling that the whole UKIP rise spin is because the media is a bit bored.

  4. @ Mark Johnson

    “The only thing a strong UKIP vote will do is of course elect a Labour Government in 2015 – then all those who voted UKIP will be in an even worse situation than now!!”

    Why is that (being in a worse situation)?

  5. @ Couper2802

    And Europe never goes off from the screen – people do get fed up with it.

  6. @ Laszlo
    Simply because the Labour Party have always leaned more towards the EU than the Conservatives, certainly in more recent times.

  7. Mark – you define the UKIP supporters dilema which is whi imo many will vote Tory at the GE and some lefties ones Lab of course.

    So 12% UKIP may split in the end.
    5% UKIP, 5% Con, 1% Lab, 1% others for example

  8. @MARK JOHNSON

    Labour are the only party that have given a referendum on EU membership (Common Market in those daya) Labour had withdrawal in their 1983 manifesto. Labour kept us out of the Euro while the Tories took us into the ERM.

    It is because of the fault lines in the Tory party over Europe that they appear to be more anti-europe. But Labour must have their sceptics too they just don’t fight about it so much.

  9. Going to have to considering adjust our seat calculations now with the UKIP hitting this sort of support more regularly. Less than 10% probably means no seats, maybe 1 or even a small handful with 13%?

    Then again it could all collapse back to 5-6% and it won’t matter, apart from splitting the centre-right vote a bit more than last time.

  10. Both very fair assessments from Jim Jam and Couper to be fair.
    However I do believe that out of the two Labour as they stand now are much more pro EU than the Conservatives.
    The EU has got itself into one hell of a mess on many grounds and they are finding out that it was partly built on quicksand!

  11. The Evening Standard are apparently reporting a poll that finds Con/Lab tied on 37% if Boris was leader.

  12. Alec –

    Indeed, though broadly consistent with the previous times that YG have asked the question so not world-shattering:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/6139
    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/6202
    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/6291

  13. (I should really do a page collecting these at some point, like I did with the old Gordon Brown hypothetical polls)

  14. The ongoing excessive moderation is a very effective way of stagnating and eventually smothering this site.

  15. Alec,

    I am astonished at that poll.

    Boris representing the UK in the world would reinforce the very stereotypes of the British nation that we have been trying to offload for the past few decades.

  16. The Boris poll is theoretical fiction: if it happens he’ll be torn to shreds like all before him.

  17. @ PaulCroft

    I think it would rather be melting than shredding.

    It’s the wishful thinking of some Tory grassroot I suppose (plus the Evening Standard, which is the newspaper for some of them).

  18. @Lazlo

    For obvious reasons for all those who disagree with your political views.

  19. I suppose that the ukip Vi would be higher if folk thought they had a chance

  20. At last my prayers have been answered and we have a new thread

  21. You have to wonder why Cameron hired Crosby, other than that Johnson insisted upon it.

    Months after the appointment, an interviewer turns up at Crosby’s office only to find a lifesize cardboard cut-out and framed photo of Boris Johnson; full of praise for the London Mayor but he “appears to have very little interest in engaging in the ‘Cameronian’ project”.

    Also some Interesting detail on the closing stages of the relationship with Australian PM John Howard:

    h
    ttp://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/the-wizard-of-oz-camerons-controversial-campaign-strategist-grants-a-rare-interview-8483770.html

  22. I am sure Alex S is ‘praying’ for a Boris led Tory party come 2014.

  23. Really entertaining Tory Civil War coming up.

    Ed M by 170 seats when we finally get a pop at it.

  24. Anthony, any chance of adding UKIP into the swingometer?

    It would be interesting to get some idea of how much of the vote UKIP would need to be in reach of actual seats.

  25. I am still very underwhelmed by the level of UKIP support. Certainly since the early 1970s about =/- 10% of the voting population like to support a “respectable” mid-term protest party – in the case of the Liberals/LibDems this has sometimes clung on from mid-term to the subsequent GE polling day. If you take the current LibDem level of support and add the UKIP level to it, you roughly speaking have the sort of mid 20s level of support that used to unite around the Libs/LibDems – half of it being genuine Liberal support and half being “protest” vote.
    Now that the LibDems are in govt they don’t get the “protest” vote anymore – so UKIP have got it all. I guess one might say 3% genuine UKIP and +/- 10% “protest” vote. This would explain why their current levels of support are coming from all over the political spectrum rather than just from the anti-EU right.
    Ultimately, what it reads to me is that unlike the LibDems who have pockets of genuine historic support (and thus seats under FPTP), UKIP is almost all protest…which has a habit of being very “frothy” support at best.

  26. How do people think the Tories should fight the South Shields by-election.

    If the fight to keep UKIP at bay and split the vote then Labour could look stronger. They could also risk coming second.

    If they coast then as it is a by-election UKIP could do well and create the impression that they could take seats off Labour too.

    In terms of preparing for 2015 do the Tories want to try to kill UKIP and risk failing or do they want the to be taken seriously as an alternative in Labour seats.

    Peter.

  27. @ The other Howard

    My political views are irrelevant in it (and those are not labourite, just to make it clear, even though if I have a choice…).

    It is simply the view of the view of about 40% of the population about a person who never has been challenged (in spite of being the Mayor of London). I suppose about 20% of those couldn’t be changed, 10% would support him, because of being Conservative and perhaps retains 2% of the rest would stay.

    That was all.

  28. @PETERCAIRNS

    In South Shields the Tories have no option but to put up a candidate and put forward their stall. They have insufficient roots up there to do anything about the outcome which will be a comfortable Labour hold with UKIP a “surprisingly” good second – having garnered all the protest vote against Tory incumbancy at national level and Labour incumbancy at local level.

    I expect no surprises from somewhere as “solid and stoical” as South Shields!

  29. @Mark Johnson

    Altho, it may very well be that the ‘worse position’ is “Absolutely livid that the country didn’t collapse under waves of foreigners getting gay marriages and free mansions like they said it would”.

  30. Do I read that Standard poll correctly and YouGov has a 6% lead for Labour? They don’t seem to show comparisons in the article to previous polls either.

  31. @Tony Dean

    I don’t think there are enough Conservative voters there for a UKIP protest vote to be large enough to get up to second place. I’d guess that the contenders for second are Lib Dem and Con, UKIP *might* get enough to come third if the Con vote has a serious collapse bellow 2005 vote share.

  32. The only interest in South Shields will be the level of turn out, no parties other than Labour or UKIP have the slightest chance of winning, I predict it will be yet another low turn out by-election the only party it would be a disaster for would be Labour in the very unlikely event of a UKIP win.
    Much more interesting will be the one in Portsmouth if Handcock ends up in the dock, all the parties are in with a shout, and it’s possible that UKIP could have there first MP which really would put the cat amongst the pigeons.

  33. Shevii – no, remember when YouGov do an if Boris was leader question they ask a “control question” with the current leaders. The 6% lead is the control question.

    Normal VI questions do not mention the party leaders

  34. Looking at previous South Shields results, the effect of parachuting in an ‘effete southerner’ was to depress the Lab vote considerably.

    Nevertheless never to a point where outright victory (over 50%) was not obtained. I did notice that BNP scored quite well in 2010. So there might be something for UKIP to go at.

    The conflation of the EU with perceived unwanted immigration is perhaps continuing to be a fertile field for UKIP, but I wonder if in the Newcastle area, whether the strong maritime links with the mainland do not outweigh that sort of propaganda.

  35. Going to have to considering adjust our seat calculations now with the UKIP hitting this sort of support more regularly. Less than 10% probably means no seats, maybe 1 or even a small handful with 13%?

    The Alliance won 25.4% of the vote in 1983 just 2 % behind Labour and received less than 1 seat for each percentage won.

    FPTP is very cruel to Smaller parties with no geographic preference which is why along with LD’s UKIP favours PR.

    I would put folding money on UKIP getting no more than 1 seat at the 2015 GE while probably finishing First in the Euros

  36. @ Howard

    I guess that assumes the BNP do not stand- be interesting to see the UKIP leaflets if they do- ‘vote BNP- get Labour’ anyone?

  37. Steve
    Yes I think that is correct but I think most of us think there is a difference between the UKIP 13% and the LD 13%.

    If the migration to UKIP is temporary and returns to the main parties in a GE, then not even the one seat is remotely possible.

    I had jokingly written that if we had a third 13 for LD then ‘woohoo’, but in the event is was a 12, domage.

    That nevertheless means quite a shift from the 7s and 8s of the nadir and the difference for LD is that it really will produce extra seats.

    In summary, i agree with you that the UKIP tendency is only good news for EM and he must be finding it difficult not to appear smug.

  38. SHEV11
    Very good.

    If anyone thinks this seat is not going to Labour, then they do not read UKPR enough.

  39. @Steve

    Not until UKIP have some weight in seats they can win. At the moment, the only effect they have is relatively even splinting of votes away from the Conservatives across the country, which will already show up in swing allocation.

  40. AW
    Given that the unweighted sample sizes match, in the latest YouGov/Sun and YouGov/Standard polls, that it was the same people in the sample?

    All:
    Tables here: http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/1gfd35wvzs/YG-Archive-Boris-results-130327-Conservative-leader.pdf

    If so, changes between standard VI and prompting for leaders is
    Con 31 (+1), Lab 37 (-3), Lib 12 (nc), SNP 2 (nc), Other 18 (+1)
    UKIP isn’t given, but 96% of UKIP voters would vote Other, which should effectively put them on 12/13.

    Boris shifts very few Lab voters and most of his gain seems to be from UKIP voters (29% of 13 is 3.3%, which explains almost all the gain), plus approx 1.2% from the LibDems.

    Obviously actual results with Boris as leader would be different, given extra media attention (both positive and negative), but I found the lack of real Lab>Con switching with Boris mentioned interesting.

  41. UKIP’s vote is evenly spread across the country, so they’ll pick up something between 5% and 20% of the vote in seats they contest, but never actually win anything.

    LD’s vote share is clustered around certain geographical locations. So in some areas they’ll get tiny vote shares, but in some areas they’ll have enough to win some seats.

    This is why UKIP strongly support party list PR.

  42. South Tyneside council also covers the Jarrow constituency, but in the 2012 local elections Labour’s vote share increased in every ward but one of the 18 contested… on average by about 17%.

    Labour has gained 12 seats on the council since 2010 and holds 48 out of the 54 (4 Ind, 1 Con, 1 UKIP).

  43. Another interesting poll.

    I fully expect many more polling twists over the next two years, especially as we draw nearer to the next GE in 2015.

  44. Hmm. My comment about the Boris poll has gone in to auto-moderation. No idea what set it off.

  45. Incidentally, the “Boris would wipe out the labour lead” comes with the idea that if Boris were leader he’d be able to take the party in a totally different, better direction. Low information voters may even think Boris is on the right wing of the party, and that direction would be to the right.

    We have recent history that polling showing a change of party leader increasing their vote share is very unreliable.

  46. South Shields could be interesting. Normally it would be considered one of the safest Lab seats in the UK. UKIP have no history in the NE of England and would not normally be considered as a serious opponent.

    However, S Shields has a much higher Asian population than other NE areas. While I am not aware of any racial issues (there do not seem to be any mentioned in the local press), if there are any such sentiments simmering beneath the surface then UKIP may perform much better than expected.

    I would expect a local Lab candidate (as a previous contributor mentioned, there is a dislike of “southern softees” being parachuted in) and in this case I would anticipate an easy Lab victory. However, if someone from outside the region is selected then it could become very interesting.

  47. Peter Bell
    IPPR did a study on this (in regards to BNP voters) and actually found that the inverse is true – the higher levels of immigration, the lower levels of BNP vote, and BNP did the best in areas with lower than average immigration.
    The study also mentions a previous study, which found people who have interactions with migrant groups are less likely to be concerned with immigration.

    So presumably the same would apply to UKIP voters concerned with immigration[1].

    [1] I have no data to actually back this up, I am making an assumption based on the BNP data – but if someone had the effort/time, they could probably look at the areas where UKIP are currently doing well in the locals and then look at the demographic make-up of the areas.

  48. YouGov with their usual helpfulness have already put the tables up:

    http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/1gfd35wvzs/YG-Archive-Boris-results-130327-Conservative-leader.pdf

    the interesting thing is actually how little difference putting Boris as leader makes. As Anthony says today’s 10 point lead[1] drops to 6 when voters are reminded of the Party leaders[2] and then to zero when Boris replaces Dave. As you would expect Boris gets the some of his extra votes from UKIP[3] but I reckon about half comes from current non-voters, though a lot of this is from the ‘nudge’ effect. Of the rest about half is from UKIP and a quarter from Lib Dems

    Why I’m saying that this is not a big difference is because of what Anthony warns about hypotheticals – that some voters use them to send a message and won’t really change their vote. Furthermore Boris’s popularity is in part based on the fact that his personality is well-known but his politics aren’t. So voters may be seeing what they want there and the inevitable scrutiny if he became leader might not reveal what they wanted. Taking those factors into account the change isn’t particularly significant.

    [1] Which may be a bit odd in itself as it shows a Labour lead of only 2 points in the under-25s for example.

    [2] It’s interesting that asking VI again with current Party leaders reduces non-voters from 25% to 21%. What seems to happen is that any second VI question acts as a “Now, how will you really vote” nudge. So changes at this stage may not be just because of the leaders, it may be partly structural.

    [3] As I haven’t said so before thanks to YouGov for now giving us a cross-tab column for UKIP voters. It’s slightly spoilt in this poll by then re-submerging UKIP voters into Others on the lines across – though oddly they do provide a separate SNP/PC line.

  49. Anthony

    Have you put a block on all links again? Both tinged’s and my post went into automod with the same reference to the tables (which is why I also posted it as I couldn’t see tf’s).

1 2 3 12