This morning’s YouGov poll figures for the Sun are CON 35%, LAB 39%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 10% – it looks as if we are back to the sort of voting intention figures YouGov were showing before the conference. Full tabs are here. Meanwhile yesterday’s twice-weekly Populus poll had topline figures of CON 33%, LAB 40%, LDEM 10%, UKIP 10%. Full tabs are here.


539 Responses to “Latest YouGov and Populus polls”

1 2 3 11
  1. First

  2. 3rd is best

  3. Curious that everyone is pointing to a hardening of positions and lurches in different directions but the polls seem unmoved.

    Whatever.. my real purpose in commenting is to thank Robin and Statgeek for their efforts on my behalf. Additional information that I have suggests that Robin is almost certainly correct. What on earth is the link?

  4. 5th for UKIP

  5. Anyway back on topic…I see in the cross breaks (and I ken it comes with a health warning) the Tories are on 36% in Scotland.

    Now that should light up a few wee blue noses scattering about!!

  6. A report function? Crikey I better keep my posts clean from now on. ;-)

  7. Charles

    I don’t think the polls are unmoved at all, in particular as Colin commented on the last thread, govt approval is moving steadily upwards which surely must be of concern to the red side, however will better approval ratings translate into votes?

  8. Sorry Charles I just reported your comment. No offence but I just wanted to try out the function.

  9. I find this ‘report comment’ request a bit uncomfortable. It feels as if I am being invited to join the STASI or take part in a mild version of the practices of the Chinese Communist Party in its early days of power. It’s all very unlike Antony’s usual benign if inconsistent dictatorship. We must have driven him beyond reason.

  10. And now I am at odds with Allan Christie. Oh dear!

  11. CHARLES
    I have it on indisputable evidence that the reports are not going to Anthony at all, but to GCHQ Cheltenham

  12. RICHARD

    “however will better approval ratings translate into votes?”
    _______

    They certainly will. Labour were well ahead of the SNP in the run up to the Scottish election and then came along Alex Salmonds approval ratings.

    I tend to think many people vote for a party leader rather than the party it self.

  13. The Yougov results for October so far (changes since September in brackets):-

    Lab = 38.75% (+0.2%)
    Cons = 34.35% (+1.4%)
    Libs = 9.5% (+0.09%)
    UKIP = 10.75% (-1.3%)

    Labour lead so far in October = 4.4% (-1.2%)

  14. Charles

    And now I am at odds with Allan Christie. Oh dear!
    ____

    lol

  15. For what it’s worth, see the (MAD) outliers in today’s TG poll. Outliers in brackets.

    Con / Lab / Lib / UKIP / SNP

    UK (35) 39 9 (10)

    Lon 31 (37) 13 8

    RoS (44) 26 10 14

    M&W 32 (43) 9 10

    Nor (30) (53) 7 (10)

    Sco (36) 40 6 (1) (16)

    11 out of 25 are outliers, if compared to previous results. I added that last bit, as previous results have been odd enough of late. At a guess, the Scottish data is way off, while the rest are standard sampling variance (if that’s the correct term?).

    How much does the Scottish data affect the national data?

    36% of 8.7% of the UK population is 3.13%

    The Con VI is usually around 20% in Scotland, which works out at 1.74%

    So today’s Scottish cross-break has given the Conservatives an extra 1.4%

    None of that addresses the other outliers though.

  16. Thanks, STATGEEK.

  17. STATGEEK

    The Scottish cross breaks have been rather generous to the Con’s nationally. An extra 1.4% in UK terms coming from Scotland to the Tories!!! Definitely pinch of salt territory.

  18. Some breaking political news that won’t affect anything very much: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24442953#TWEET914913

  19. The big question for me is whether the (likely) strong growth due to be announced in the next month will have an impact on VI in the short, medium or long-term? Will it weaken Labour support, strengthen Tory VI, reduce the UKIP protest vote, or none of the above?

    It seems more likely, probably for the first time, that the economic situation will improve over the next year and a half…will this factor into the GE campaign and polling in late 2013/early 2014???

  20. If that economic growth is largely confined to the South East then, although it should help the Conservative VI, it won’t help them much, but if it percolates further north, then things might get interesting.

    Even so, it’s going to have to be quite a lot of consistent growth, enough to cause voters to swing over in the right places, and nothing else going wrong for the government in the meantime.

    I think another coalition is the best the Cons can realistically hope for, with a sharply reduced combined majority.

  21. “I think another coalition is the best the Cons can realistically hope for, with a sharply reduced combined majority.”

    I agree.

    Given current polling and various other factors, I still think a hung parliament is still the likeliest scenario in 2015…probably with Labour the largest party.

  22. Keith

    If the combined majority is sharply reduced, do you really think that either of the parties will go for another coalition? The libs will be skeptically to say the least and Dave will get strung up by his backbenchers if he did

  23. @ Ambi,

    The big question for me is whether the (likely) strong growth due to be announced in the next month will have an impact on VI in the short, medium or long-term?

    I think it depends on whether the main groups of defectors are persuadable.

    The big reason the Tories are no longer on the 40sih VIs we were seeing earlier in this parliament is their voters defecting to Ukip. Those voters are older and many of them are economically inactive, so they can be affected by rising prices (which show no signs of turning around) but don’t benefit from rising wages/improvements in the job market. Then again, they do have relatives who would benefit. So I think the jury is still out on whether or not they can be influenced by an economic improvement. My gut instinct is that it’s a cultural identity issue rather than an economic issue and now that they’re convinced Cameron is not an ally most of them will stick with Ukip until the general election rolls around and they begin to consider a tactical ABL vote, but we’ll see.

    The reason Labour are in Red Rag’s 35-40% bracket is the Lib Dem defectors. They defected in the summer of 2010, before Osborne’s economic plan could be seen to succeed or fail, so again my gut instinct is that the defection is a cultural one rather than an economic one. They dislike the tone of austerity rather than the impacts on GDP, so an economic recovery won’t persuade them to return to the Lib Dem fold. But again, we’ll see.

  24. @Spearmint

    Sounds fair. I’m starting to keep a close eye on Con + UKIP vs Lab + Lib, to see if the numbers change as (or if) the economy picks up.

    I don’t subscribe to the party + party, but it is a reasonable indicator of how Con or Lab are doing. I still think that perhaps 25% to 33% of UKIP VI is from Lab defectors, and what they do in 2015 will be very interesting.

  25. ALLAN CHRISTIE

    But if polling has validity, then the over-representation of the Tories in Scotland will be matched by under-representation elsewhere.

    On the other hand, that would suggest that the under-representation of the SNP in Scotland should be matched by over-representation elsewhere – so that doesn’t work!

  26. Allan Christie,

    “I tend to think many people vote for a party leader rather than the party it self.”

    In the case of Holyrood in 2011, I think ‘Ec made a big difference because there weren’t many other differences between the SNP and Labour, hence the focus on who had the best “team”.

    One goal for Miliband should be to set out clear “dividing lines” so that the focus is on Labour’s policies vs. the Tories’ policies rather than Miliband vs. Cameron. In this respect, Miliband’s more stridently left-wing approach lately makes sense, at least in the short-term.

  27. @ Richard in Norway,

    If the combined majority is sharply reduced, do you really think that either of the parties will go for another coalition?

    I’m not sure they’d have a choice. Even with a big cut in Lib Dem numbers, the amount of seats taken up by minority parties has increased dramatically since the 1970s. You can run a minority government on 310 seats the way Callaghan did- you can’t do it with 290 when Labour have 275. If the Tories lose twenty seats or so at the next election they’re going to need to at least get confidence and supply from the Lib Dems, or they’re not going to be able to form a stable government.

  28. Re Spearmint,

    ”The reason Labour are in Red Rag’s 35-40% bracket is the Lib Dem defectors. They defected in the summer of 2010, before Osborne’s economic plan could be seen to succeed or fail, so again my gut instinct is that the defection is a cultural one rather than an economic one. They dislike the tone of austerity rather than the impacts on GDP, so an economic recovery won’t persuade them to return to the Lib Dem fold. But again, we’ll see.”

    Cool analyses as ever. I think the Labour VIs react against the lack of even handedness in the delivery of austerity. If (say) eight people are all cast adrift in an open boat with only a bar of chocolate between them, their sense of right and wrong tells them that works out at a cube each – not half, or more, of the bar to the biggest and toughest in the boat.

  29. RIN

    I doubt Camroon would be involved if had not won.

  30. …I realise those numbers don’t add up at all if we’re assuming the Lib Dems lost seats. Um. Also assume a massive swing to Ukip and the Greens?

  31. @ Statgeek

    If you are keeping an eye on things could you have a look at the LD to Con figures. I tried a little theory I had that the Lab lead is lower when you get a bigger LD to Con move than normal- I gave up after 5 polls as this clearly wasn’t the case!. I just cannot work out where the additional Tory vote share is coming from (from 6 months ago) and it must be a mixture of firming up their vote from DK, a bit off UKIP and a bit off LD and maybe even Lab. It never quite seems to be a straight UKIP to Con switch.

    I think since the GE there has been a move of vote share of something like 2% LD to Con and at the margins this could be important to the 2015 result.

  32. @ Allan,

    Re. Salmond’s unexpected triumph, I think there’s an open question about how seriously people take the national assembly elections. Do they feel they’re electing their government or do they view it in the same way they view local and European elections, as a chance to cast a free protest vote, or the way they view London mayoral elections, as a chance to elect a head of state to advocate for the region?

    My impression is the seriousness scale goes something like Westminster Parliament > Scottish Parliament > Welsh Assembly > local elections > London Mayoral election > European elections, in declining order of how much people think their vote will affect their daily lives.

  33. Forgot about the two link moderation rule, so re-posted.

    @Shevii

    http://www.statgeek.co.uk/charts/uk-polls-mad-three-month-change.png

    That’s a three month change, mind.

    Con +2.3
    Green + 0.5
    Others +0.1 (Total of 2.9%)

    Lab -1.0
    Lib -1.0
    UKIP -0.8 (Total of 2.8%)

    None of my data takes into account DK churn. Too complicated to factor in, and it would be guesswork anyway!

    Or you can look at the calender month data:

    h ttp://www.statgeek.co.uk/charts/uk-poll-calendar-month-averages.png

    Compare the Con rises to the falls of other parties. I would say the first two points are UKIP to Con, and the others are Lib / Lab to Con. The last might be UKIP to Lab.

  34. @AW…two posts hit moderation. Thought it was two link rule, but the second got bumped too.

  35. For me it is Holyrood > Westminster > Local > EU. Who governs in Holyrood makes a difference, more than who governs in Westminster (for me at least).

  36. A good example of how serious people take the various elections, is to look at turnout. Holyrood only got 50% turnout in 2011, compared to nearly 64% a year before.

    With regards to the personality politics, we saw that in 2011, with a relentless negative attack on Iain Gray, contrasting him unfavourably with Alex Salmond and of course the “Alex Salmond for First Minister” party on the regional list cleaning up.

  37. To Shevii

    Not a ”straightforward UKIP to Con” switch indeed. A’s move to B’s, move to C’s, and so on – the soft votes swing about like that – but the most noticeable change is a slight ‘up’ to Con and a slight ‘down’ to UKIP.

    Because it’s the soft vote that swings about, however, it can go all ways, and the soft-voting electorate, being unsure of their own minds, are also hard to predict. Come the intensity of GE campaigning, however, the Cons will have to grab a whole big chunk of that soft vote to get any kind of majority at all, and that’s a tall order.

    Lab’s 38 doesn’t look to me to be very soft, by contrast. It dipped (a bit) at the height of the summer assault on EM. It rose a bit when the Cons were at their lowest ebb earlier in the year, and it rose again when EM launched some eye-catching moves a fortnight ago.

    There’s no question a proper economic recovery could induce a forgetfulness about the last three to four years in the Cons’ favour. But that requires a recovery in which those who have been hurt in recent years can say to themselves, ”It’s all right, we wouldn’t have taken this course, but we’re out of the wood now and it’s where you are that counts.”

    Do people really think the odd sweetie to sugar the nasty pills will do that? I can’t see the future, obviously, but I doubt it.

  38. Knew there had been previous polling on this:
    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/8069

    “More generally, the poll found that 27% of people in Scotland thought Westminster elections were more important than those for the Scottish Parliament, 18% thought the opposite, 53% thought they were equally important.”

    So generally its Holyrood = Westminster.

  39. @Colin Davis – but how about some people might [still blame Labour for recent economic problems – AW] and give at least some credit to the present administration for slowly but surely getting us moving again.

    [Snip… and the point, for others, isn’t whether you think those people are wrong or right, it’s whether those people exist, and whether some people do think that. The comments here are for discussing what public opinion is and polling about it, not for you to argue with each other about each others views. Oh, and as Amber has correctly noted further upthread, you can click a little button if you think a post is partisan now, rather than reply to it – AW]

  40. Talking about C&S, our two centre right parties signed an agreement with the minority Tory/Ukip govt which looks like they got more that the libs got going into coalition, and that’s with 12% of the vote as opposed to 24% for the libs

  41. allan christie

    “and I ken ”

    Make up yer mind.

  42. These last few posts seem to assume that the financial crisis is over. It’s not, not even close.
    There are several factors which could prompt another crisis and they could happen any time.
    If any of these are precipitated in the next twelve months the Tories are dead in the water.

  43. I make no such assumptions, Trots57, but the Cons have taken a small bite out of the UKIP VI over the last two months, so the theory is ‘in play’. I’m merely saying it will take more than a theory. It will take large-scale public agreement that life has changed for the better and is not likely to change back in a hurry for the Cons VI to swallow up the rest of the UKIP VI, and dent a so-far solid Labour 38 per cent.

  44. @ Trots57,

    US is looking a shade defaulty today…

  45. “@PETER BELL
    @ Sine Nominee (12.51)

    a reminder that we were part of a worldwide banking crash exacerbated by the fact that the UK was so reliant on banking. Indeed, before the crash the UK had good economic data.

    It is the Tories and the right wing press who have proposed the myth that the economic situation was purely the fault of the Labour government. ”

    This is absolutely correct and most on UKPR recognise this. However, in most of the polls I have seen, people blame Labour more than any other party or the banks. This is harsh and a result of the Tories successfully pinning it on Labour.

    If you remember the Tories changed their strategy early 2008, probably following on from Gordon Brown not going for an early election. Brown and Darling were given credit for their handling of the banking crash and there must have been concern with the Tory ranks that they were being too supportive of the government. They then changed their strategy because they believed the government should start cutting to avoid the deficit growing too much. This is where you get into the argument between economists as to what should be done in these situations.

  46. Can anyone illuminate, in relatively simple terms, what happens for them and the UK if they default?

  47. The USA, that is.

  48. @Colin Davies
    ‘Not a ”straightforward UKIP to Con” switch indeed. A’s move to B’s, move to C’s, and so on – the soft votes swing about like that ‘

    I had a go… looking back at tables from May (23/24th) when Labour had a 10 point lead, the major changes are a 7% swing from Others (UKIP probably) to Cons in CON 2010 voters. There is also a large increase in CON VI amongst 2010 LD voters (from 8% to 19%).

    Labours VI is virtually identical amongst 2010 voters from all parties in both polls. By my reasoning, any fall in their VI must be due to a drop in support in non-voters in 2010.

    It appears then that some LD defectors will move to CONs, but there is no change in the number saying they will vote Labour. It might be a difficult job for CONs to reduce LABs VI but theirs may increase.

    (I realise I have just compared two polls – I selected ones that looked in the middle of MOE- if anyone else wants to crunch some more numbers to give a more reliable picture…)

  49. @Statgeek
    “For me it is Holyrood > Westminster > Local > EU. Who governs in Holyrood makes a difference, more than who governs in Westminster (for me at least).”

    I would agree – in fact what happens at Holyrood should have more bearing on the quality of life etc. However, the majority of people dont think so. Large numbers still think the NHS is controlled in London, for instance.

    I fear this is the result of the SNP saying that everything is London’s fault – people dont think that Holyrood has the powers to change things.

1 2 3 11