The monthly ComRes poll for the Independent on Sunday and Sunday Mirror is out tonight and has topline figures of CON 30%(+2), LAB 38%(+1), LDEM 8%(-1), UKIP 15%(-2). The figures don’t show any significant change from a month ago. The only other poll I am expecting in the weekend papers is the regular YouGov/Sunday Times which, as usual, I’ll post on tomorrow.

72 Responses to “ComRes/IoS – CON 30, LAB 38, LD 8, UKIP 15”

1 2
  1. @Turk

    That’s a bit unfair: she was certainly involved in the build-up, the assembly of the Coalition (the Gulf War I military alliance, not this one), and Desert Shield ( the precursor to Desert Storm)


    The Other Site is saying tonight’s YouGov is Labour leads the Tories 42% to 31%, followed by the Lib Dems on 12% and UKIP on 11%.


  2. Interesting stat about being at war almost constantly, I saw a similar one for the US, with much the same conclusion

  3. RE: the welfare issue and is effect on polling.

    Those opposed to the coalition welfare cuts tend to feel very strongly, they are often directly affected, or close to those that are and hold these views in the face of several years worth of misinformation and distortion by government and media – there is plenty of evidence that people massively overestimate the level of welfare ‘fraud’ and the amount of money people receive.

    So even though those opposed to the the welfare cuts are a minority – they are strongly held views and they are more likely to argue and campaign then people who nominally support the welfare cuts. Given this its not that surprising that the coalition welfare policies have had no impact on their vi, those who dont agree with them are more likely to remove their vote from the coalition then then the other way round – if that makes sense.

    It similar with thatcher – those who a despised her are a minority (albeit a significant one) but hold these views very strongly and are willing to act on them.

    The numbers who consider themselves passionate thatcher fans are far fewer, whilst there is larger group who think she was overall a good PM but its not a big deal to them – so they are unlikely going to download a tribute song and send it up the charts to compete with Ding Dong the Witch is Dead.

    Thats the trouble with polling – much of it measures how people feel about a particular issue – but not how much that matters to them. The person opposed to the bedroom tax because they being turfed out of their home by baliffs is going to feel a lot strong about the issue than someone forms their opinion by glancing at the daily mail and nodding along with someone moaning about ‘skivers’ on a radio phone in.

    Whats surprised me about the ding dong furore (the ding dong, ding dong?) is that its been massively promoted by the likes of the mail and tory mps – its them who have driven up the sales. Every time they take to the airwaves or fill their papers with outrage that these people are insulting the greatest prime minister ever etc another thousand people hit the download button. They are being trolled and are completely falling for it.

  4. I’m not partisan , but many in the serious media and the Labour Party comment on Labour’s lame performance in classic mid term situations and their absence of solid policy alternatives .

  5. . chasglas

    “i’m not partisan”

    “A party of opposition that struggles to reach 39 % is not worthy of the title .”

    Very droll. Let’s strip them of their title immediately

  6. Paul , I agree .

  7. ‘Voters disagree with David Cameron’s description of Margaret Thatcher as “the greatest British peacetime prime minister” by 41 per cent to 33 per cent, The Independent on Sunday’s ComRes poll has found. Only in the 65-plus age group do more people agree that she was “the greatest” than disagree.’

  8. Good early morning all. First up.
    11% Lab lead, so no change for YG.

  9. I have avoided this place for the past week or so because I suspected there’d be too much ‘non-partisan’ discussion that had nothing to do with polling.

    Is it safe to come out and start talking about polling again, or should I disappear for a while again?

    YouGov/Sunday Times (listed as The Sun on the YouGov site – someone didn’t drink their coffee again) –
    Con 31, Lab 42, Lib 11, UKIP 12
    Approval -35

    Pure Leadership Approval:
    Cameron 35 (-1)
    Miliband 31 (+2)
    Clegg 18 (-1)

    Net Approval:
    Cameron -24 (-1)
    Miliband -25 (+5)
    Clegg -54 (nc)

    The reason on my Sun Times posts I included pure approval is because I noticed that often Miliband was less disliked than Cameron but not more liked – so his net approval was higher, but his ‘actual’ approval was lower.
    This pattern I found quite interesting, because it brings up a good question about how leadership opinion may affect polls – a leader may have poor net approval in a divided country but still go on to win, because they’re still popular with those who would vote for them.

    Interesting division on past PM performance –
    Thatcher –
    20% Great PM
    26% Good PM
    10% Average PM
    9% Poor PM
    26% Terrible PM

    Unsurprising on the divisions over whether she was a good or bad PM (warning: subsamples) – the further north you go, the worse opinion is of her and young people have the highest DK rate (with 40-59 age group having the lowest opinion of her).
    Completely unsurprising on partisan split – Tory voters thought she was great, Labour voters not so much.

    Blair –
    Great PM – 4%
    Good PM – 26%
    Average PM – 30%
    Poor PM – 22%
    Terrible PM – 14%
    Partisan split on Blair is a lot less wide – and young people, unsurprisingly, have a lot less DKs than with the Thatcher question.

    Gordon Brown –
    Great PM – 2%
    Good PM – 8%
    Average PM – 25%
    Poor PM – 31%
    Terrible PM – 31%
    As the man who produced Labour’s worst electoral victory in almost 30 years, it’s completely unsurprising that he’d have such low ratings.

    John Major –
    Great PM – 1%
    Good PM – 11%
    Average PM – 40%
    Poor PM – 26%
    Terrible PM – 9%

    Lots of Qs on Thatcher’s policies, I’m sure AW will have a full breakdown in his post, so I won’t bother.

    VI 7-day weighted average (with changes on a week) –
    Con 30.7 (+0.2), Lab 41.3 (nc), Lib 11 (+0.3), UKIP 11.2 (-0.7)

    VI 30-day weighted average (changes on a week) –
    Con 30.5 (nc), Lab 41.2 (+0.2), Lib 11.2 (-0.1), UKIP 11.4 (-0.2)

    No real change, except for UKIP, which looks to have fallen from an average of 12 to 11.

    Speaking of approval ratings (or not?) –
    This chart may be a bit difficult to read so I’ll explain – I created this to put the approval ratings of PMs (and opposition leaders) over time in to perspective.
    It only includes data in periods where there is a opposition leader so there are some gaps not shown (so when Cameron came to power, he had a few months with no opposition, etc) – this means there will be some stretching/squashing of time.
    This only includes the ‘satisfied’ rating, it is not a net figure.

    I alternated dark/light blue/red for each party leader, to try to make it easier to read the overall trend and it goes as far back as far as the Ipsos-Mori data.

    As you can see, Cameron isn’t doing too terribly as PM – while his ratings have dropped, they haven’t dropped as far as Thatcher’s did each term, Blair post-2005, Brown post-crash or Major post-1992.
    All PMs (excl Callaghan) seem to have a boost pre-election, although the extent of that boost varies massively (compare Blair/Thatcher pre-third term to final term and Major post-1992).

    And Miliband is doing as well, currently, as Kinnock or Smith in opposition and better than Cameron pre-crash – nowhere near the levels of Foot, Howard, Duncan-Smith or Hague.
    Enough to win the next election? Possibly not – although in the case of Cameron, he was rated lower than Miliband pre-crash and he went on to become PM (note: this has a specific context, there probably won’t be another crash or similar destabilising event and even if there were, Labour might still take enough of the blame to prevent Miliband’s approval rise.)

  10. 54% of Labour supporters & 51% of 2010 Labour voters think it was Wrong to reduce the top rate of Income Tax from 83% to 40%.

    We have been warned !

  11. ^

    Well, it wasn’t reduced straight down, it went to 60% first. I’m guessing most of those don’t want to return to 83% but just feel 40% was a little low and want to keep 50% or return to 60%.

  12. It will be interesting to see where the Con VI settles, if it settles.

    Post-Eastleigh 29% – 32%.
    Post-budget 29% – 33%.
    Post-Thatcher 28% – 33%.

    Sample variation/first sign of an upturn/almost by definition a rougue/normal margin of error?
    I’m a bit of a fan of frequency…

    The 28% (post-Thatcher event) is unique in YouGov history.
    33% has history.

    It made two appearances in the Summer of 2005, once more in April 2006, and a comeback with four dates in Summer 2008.
    33% really is a stalwart, six appearances in the first half of April 2010 saw off pre-election nerves and Cleggmania, then a well earned rest broken only by a rouge poll in March 2011.

    33% really came into its own in March/April 2012 and has been pretty much a fixture ever since, mixing with 34s and 35s in the good times, being leant upon by 31s and 30s in the bad.

    33% seems to be on a break though, only two appearances recently… perhaps it was Moody’s, perhaps it was Eastleigh, perhaps it doesn’t like keeping company with upstart 29s.

  13. @Phil Haines
    I would respectfully suggest that the Queen, unlike some politicians, is not swayed by Opinion Polls. As I understand it her planned attendance is mainly due to the fact that Lady Thatcher was the first woman to become Prime Minister.
    Opinion polls as we all know are an attempt at a point in time to measure how people feel about certain questions. I am not surprised at all at the findings of this poll, it probably reflects the divisive nature of the Thatcher years which has been punted so hard by the BBC and some of the media. I have made my own views quite clear over the last couple of days so I will not bore our readers by repeating them. I am very happy and relaxed about her place in history and do not need opinion polls to tell me.
    Don’t despair, still all to play for in 2015.
    I think I agree with most of your comments re the press reactions. My wife likes the Daily Mail so I read that almost by default, its coverage has been poor and blinkered. I tend to read the Telegraph & Times for news and have no problem with what has been written by them over the last few days. I used to read the Independent, but it has now moved too far to the left, so not followed it. I was going to read the Guardians reporting but unfortunately the first thing I did read there was a piece by Russell Brand which was on a par with what Glenda Jackson said in the H of C. My comment on Russell Brand is the same as my comment on Glenda Jackson which you can find on the last thread. So I gave up on the Guardian. I found the BBC initially good, then OTT and especially re devisiveness. I would not dream of involving myself with Twitter or Facebook, to me the Social media seem to reflect the worst of the modern world.
    Thanks for the detailed response to Amber on the YouGov question, very interesting. I suspect your right that Churchill would appear in the answers no matter how you asked the question. I have mixed views on Churchill as a peacetime Prime Minister, liked some things as outlined by Bill Patrick, but not others.
    Me too, media manipulation failure by the nasties.
    @COLIN & CL45
    As for the latest polls, they seem to reflect an on going 10% or so lead for Labour and YouGov detail shows some improvement for EdM’s standing. As I said at the time his H of C speech was Ok so no surprise. Lots more to do in the garden so have a good day all.

  14. @MiM
    Wondering where you got the information about the number 1 in the singles chart – as far as I can see, the Official Charts (run by the BPI) hasn’t released their information.
    I don’t hope Ding Dong doesn’t get to number 1 (although I would like to see Duke Damont knocked off the top spot) – but I’m just wondering where you got the information.

  15. “I don’t hope Ding Dong doesn’t get to number 1”
    Should read ‘I do hope Ding Dong doesn’t..’ or ‘I don’t hope Ding Dong does’..
    I’m too tired to construct correct English sentences.

  16. *second half of April 2010*

  17. Blunkett piling in today against the further left element of Labour. Some quite strong comments in relation to the public sector.

  18. TF – thanks for the details.

    Can you give more for.

    ”with 40-59 age group having the lowest opinion of her’

    I think this is significant as it is the alleged antipithy to the cons in large section of this age group as a result of the MT premiership and the strength of this antipithy that arguably that makes a Tory OM very difficult for the foreseeable future.

    This group settled in middle age some successful other less who will be more likley to vote than when they were young; also many will have kids of their own who inevitably will influence them.

    LIke you I have abstained from the ‘discussion’ about MT as little has been to do with polls but I think debate around whether her legacy is damagaing the current Conservative party is a fair one for this site to pursue.

  19. Jim Jam
    Thatcher polling..
    Great PM –
    25-39s – 10
    40-59s – 21
    60+ – 27

    Good PM –
    25-39s – 27
    40-59s – 24
    60+ – 28

    Poor PM –
    25-39s – 10
    40-59s – 9
    60+ – 7

    Terrible PM –
    25-39s – 24
    40-59s – 31
    60+ – 25

    Perhaps it would have been best to describe them not necessarily having the lowest opinion – that was badly phrased.
    Better to say that they’re the age group with the highest levels of low opinion – or perhaps the most divided.

    It should also be noted that 25-39s still have quite high DKs (17% vs 6% for 40-59s) so perhaps that also has something to do with it.

  20. Thanks TF – I agree the most divided age group and fewer DKs. Combined positive in fact slightly higher than combined negative but if terrible and great are weighted more than good and poor this could flip over.

  21. Colin

    Who cares if a govt in the future increases the top rate of tax, it’s mostly symbolic anyway, the tax code is like a Swiss cheese, most of the wealthy pay a smaller % of their earnings in tax than the lowpaid. But I do feel sorry for the folk that are wearily enoughto pay the top rate but are too poor to afford proper tax avoidence

  22. And Labour’s lead continues to slide, looks like UKIP has picked up some Labour voters.

1 2