Populus’s latest poll is out and has topline figures of CON 29%(-5), LAB 40%(+1), LDEM 11%(nc), UKIP 12%(+4). Changes are from Monday and of course, while they could in theory suggest a sudden large shift from the Conservatives back to UKIP, just as likely they reflect normal random sample variation. The great benefit of high frequency polling is that we only have to wait until Populus’s next poll on Monday to find out. Full tabs are here

Meanwhile the daily YouGov poll for the Sun is much more typical of their recent polls, showing topline figures of CON 34%, LAB 40%, LDEM 10%, UKIP 11%. Full tabs here


231 Responses to “Latest YouGov and Populus polls”

1 3 4 5
  1. @WES
    We are very close: Econ. L/R -6.12
    Soc. Libertarian/Author. – 7.18.
    According to the other test, I am a Social Democratic Cosmopolitan (it doesn’t surprise me, that’s how I would describe myself!)
    Cosmopolitan 53%
    Secular 69%
    Visionary 31%
    Anarchistic 22%
    Communistic 7%
    Pacifistic15%
    Ecological 18%
    No big surprise here either, except from the fact that I would expect a more “pacifistic” profile, but maybe this is due to the fact that I tend to justify military operations when directed against regimes that do not respect human rights and civil liberties..

  2. @MrNameless

    Given the margin of error with the samples sizes involved, 2 % could just be a bit of sample variation.

  3. My test result just said : “What a great bloke.”

    Which was nice.

  4. I am proudly sitting between the Dalai Lama and Nelson Mandela . ????

  5. That sounds like a fun conference.

  6. Big shock in the Scottish “Premiership” today with Celtic beating Ross County.

    Who’s have thunk it?

  7. I just ended up on RevLeft (don’t ask how) on a thread about Trotskyism, and my god is it hilarious to watch the Maoists fight the Trotskyists fight the Stalinists.

    It’s actually fascinating how obsessed they are with the minutiae of communism that they forget to say anything at all about how to solve people’s real problems in the short term.

    I know we’re supposed to be non-partisan, but surely communists are fair game?

  8. “hilarious to watch the Maoists fight the Trotskyists fight the Stalinists”

    Probably less so in real life……………….

  9. Considering they’re likely dweeby armchair revolutionaries, it definitely would be.

  10. On the 1st test I was a “Solidarist”. I’d never heard of solidarism so had to look it up, and I have to say it’s probably not too far from where I am. Actually the result was “authoritarian solidarist”, but as I was only 4% authoritarian, I think I can drop that part. I was also pleased that their were 0% that matched my scores, and that 70% of people were more extreme than.me. I had one quibble. The opposite of secular is religious, not fundamentalist.

    On the second test, I was on the “Libertarian Left”. I’m not really a leftie at all, but am a civil libertarian, so that’s not too far wrong either.

  11. @ RiN

    ‘I find it scary, it’s like the nsa stuff but instead of the state security it’s the political parties. I feel like it’s all about manipulation rather than ideas and values’
    —————————————————————————–

    It actually like shoppers’ loyalty cards.. they pick out the policies and spin specifically tailored for you… and then once elected, the politicians feel no compunction to do anything they said they would do… Its the post-democratic era. Obviously, Markets can’t be free if interfered with by the people having their say (see Fracking) but as you’ve pointed out before, we don’t have ‘free markets’. What a conundrum :)

  12. Political Compass always puts me somehwere between Hollande and Tsipras (-2.25x -0.51y), or there abouts. I don’t think so. I’m more 0, 0 with a view to moving in any direction as the wind changes.

    Politicaltest.net has me down as an ‘ordoliberal’, and the only real standout was that I’m apparently 62% antropocentric.

    http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic2/357727_eng.jpg

    I take exception to that. On the question of humans v primates I read ‘rights’ as heat, sustenance and shelter. Primate do not need this in the wild, so did not agree. Obviously I missed the point.

    Or…it refers to the leaders of the church, in which case the 62% stands. :)

  13. Congrats to Wiggins (Tour of Poland Time Trial),- great comeback – and Trott (Ride London Sprint) yesterday.
    Interesting how cycling has now married British time trialing and track cycling with the Tour of France tradition through Wiggins and others’ Olympic and Tour successes. I particularly like the concept of “domestique” – Wiggins’ role in the Tour of Poland. We should all have one in real life, preferably younger and more lithe than oneself.

  14. STATGEEK
    Youl’d be interested, or not, to knw that Bronislaw Malinovski included ‘detumescence” as one of the basic human needs – not rights, mark you – of human beings. I imagine we must share this with primates of both kinds.

  15. @JP

    More of a natural reaction to non-stimuli, rather than a need, surely. Nature generally solves these things in its own time.

    Or are you campaigning against a certain popular tablet beginning with ‘V’?

  16. AMBER
    “@ Allan Christie
    Can we have some vans in Scotland please?
    ————–
    No.”

    Massive slogan across a road bridge on the Edinburgh to Glasgow road, when i arrived there to work in 1962:
    “GO HOME SASSENACHS!”
    The debate over public attitudes to immigrants is confused by the inappropriate simplicity of a poll question which asks do you support the Govt’s policy on plackarded
    vans offering repatriation. This does not allow for the understanding on the part of respondents, or of any majority of the population, who may think that the potentially difficult or even harmful effects of the policy or its implementation – e.g. in causing negative responses to govts, of both stripes, on the part of the wider immirgant population or support from govts with similar historic situations which are themselves unscrupulous and vicious(yanmar v. ethnic Kachin), or which would simple welcome an example of an easy solution to an intractable problem (Bulgarians v. ethnic Turks) but who nevertheless see that this is at least an attempt at action and has good intentions. It is not likely to represent the general view of the public to illegal immigrants in low paid jobs who may – as in the States – eventually be brought into the mainstream by a brave and far-seeing govt. or who will manage p;rocess of adaptation and absorption themselves.

  17. yanmar -Myanmar

  18. STATGEEK
    “Strimuli”
    Agreed, but I a;lways felt for him; there he was for several years, a great anthropologist in the exchange theory and empirical research tradition of the Annee Socioligique (the Kula Ring, beautifully fulfilling the classic theories of “The Gift”, and he was not in the words of Stones getting any satisfaction.:

  19. ST/YG another 6 point within usual 32/34 and 38/40 range.

    Con 32%, Lab 38%, LD 10%, UKIP 13%; APP -29

  20. And Lib Dems stubbornly remaining in double figures these days (just).

  21. Good Morning All.
    Holiday polls slumber times.

  22. @mrnameless

    “I know we’re supposed to be non-partisan, but surely communists are fair game?”

    Only if the EDL and BNP are as well.

  23. Well given that this is an election polling site, any ideology that doesn’t believe in representative democracy should probably be open to ridicule!

  24. MRNAMELESS
    China, Lao and Vietnam, all one-party communist states, and with growth rates of 7% plus for the past ten years or s, mainly from private enterprise,
    China have twenty times the high speed rail of the UK, and the major provider of our sovereign debt,, with better higher educational levels than ours, are byuying our financial exlpertiese, and are seeking guidance from the West on how to adept their economy to quality growth and social equality,. You think they should be treated with ridicule?

  25. I did that political compass test and it said i was a lefty libertarian.I was more to the left of Ghandi who would have thought it.Might shave my head and start a peaceful campaign to remove the ruthless British rule that has taking over the British country.Just need a pair of penny spectacles and an old sheet and i am set to bring peace and freedom to our enslaved people.

  26. @John P,

    Surely the excellent growth rates of “communist” countries simply reflect a catching up, now that they have integrated into global capitalism, from the depressed economic performance they managed when they were properly (ridiculously?) Communist?

    Plus of course the advantage of being able to impose conditions on your country’s workers and householders without them having any effective say over it (for fear of imprisonment or a small injection of lead).

  27. NEIL A
    It’s a question which needs both facts and thought. But I think that the answer is not so: both China and Vietnam have for centuries been agrarian countries, but – China in particular- having major trading centres and city economies. What both have done is to liberalise the market economy, with controls and interventions by the State, but bascially letting major corporate enterprises grow, and SMEs or individual petty entrepreneurs do what they wanted, with whateer they could lay their hands on. Because they have generally highly disciplined populations and draconian penalties against “anti-social” behaviour, by and large corruption is relatifely rare. And they, especailly China, have built the infrastructure to go with it: massife roads and airports programs. So, I think, not industrrial or market growth built on a zero baseline, but new, and in many aspects, liberal economies. We’ll do well to provide servuces to Chaina’s commercial and industrial sector, which don’t in any sense kow-tow to them or accept illiberal policies at the expense of trade, but recognising that they are here, are big and are going to stay.

  28. @John

    That all sounds about right. But surely the point is that it isn’t Communism that has made them successful, rather it is a combination of capitalism and authoritarianism?

    Leaving us open to ridicule Communism (as an ideology) if we are so inclined, without feeling contradicted by their examples?

  29. I agree with you Neil A – happed to south Korea albeit with their great advance coming under overt authoritarian capitalism as opposed to nominal communism.

    Once a certain level is reached without the social freedoms which nuture the mindset for continued innovation etc economic advancement is impeded.

    Notwithstanding the excesses within social and economically liberal economies and the emergence of reactionary theocratic forces in the last 2 decades imo as per Francis Fukiyami (spelling sorry) the most efficient broad yet non-authoritarian model is clear and will become virtually universal over this century.

  30. NEIL A
    My problem is that there are probably as many versions of communism as there of representative democracy, and they are now and for the past decade suffering from the same problems of ineffective or distorted financial and banking structures. So it might be dangerous to pick and choose which systems to ridicule. On the other hand, i don’t think we have any choice on who to trade with.
    There’s always ping-pong, of course.

  31. NEIL
    And I don’t think it is understood how close Gorbachev came to reforming and saving the whole Soviet system, starting with the reformation of the agricultural production and marketing system to restore the small farmer and private and cooperative market system that existing prior to Stalinist collectivisation.
    It was the financial subsidisation system and failure of the banks to maintain cash flow to industry and agricultural collectives and state farms, as much as the revolt of the Baltic States, which did for him.
    We need to be very careful in assessing the open-market models of China and SE Asian tigfers, and their process of change – which are changes to both the communist and to free market systems – before making simplistic Thatcherite assumptions about what’s good for other countries or about our own needs to reform and adjust.

1 3 4 5