This morning’s YouGov/Sun daily polling results are here. Topline figures are CON 33%, LAB 38%, LDEM 10%, UKIP 13%. Two noteworthy things in the regular trackers – one, the gap between the people blaming the government for the cuts (29%) and the people blaming Labour (33%) is the lowest YouGov have had so far. Two, people appear to be getting less worried, the 63% of people who say they worry about having enough money to live on is the lowest they’ve shown since the election, so is the 53% who worry about losing their job or having difficulty finding work. Both are presumably a sign of economic optimism continuing to creep slowly upwards.

Meanwhile the twice-weekly Populus poll yesterday had figures of CON 32%, LAB 37%, LDEM 10%, UKIP 15%. Full tabs are here.

590 Responses to “YouGov/Sun – CON 33, LAB 38, LD 10, UKIP 13”

1 2 3 4 12
  1. I am probably not meant to mention it on this thread BUT tonight is a debate on the thing I can’t mention between the SLAB leader and the SNP deputy leader. Should be interesting and might affect the polls. Looking forward to it.

  2. @rogerh – I agree definitely more hope than belief I’d say despite the bravado by some on here. I don’t blame them I made the same mistake in 2010.

    Despite being blamed for the cuts and being least trusted on the economy labour has enjoyed a solid if not spectacular lead for 3 years now. Voters seemed to made their mind up with “fairness” and am “I feeling better off” being key themes. History has also shown that the election campaign has little baring on the election – with despite occasional ups and downs in polls – result staying pretty much on course predicted before the campaign. This hope that a late surge taking Cameron home is very much whistling in the wind for me.

  3. I agree with roger h; these “surges” are fantasy land stuff…the “surge” never even happened in ’92…the tories got most of their boost during that parliament when they ditched Thatcher in Nov 1990, nearly 18 months before the general election.

    People go on about 1992, but they remember very little about the circumstances of that election. There’s a very simple reason why the Tories won a slim majority in 1992. In 1987, Thatcher got a 102 seat majority. The tories went into the ’92 election with about 140 seats more than labour.

    They lost 40 or so and labour gained 40 or so. In short, they won the election because they had done so well in 1987. Spot the difference between 92 and 2015!!

  4. CB11

    @”. At the moment, the current government doesn’t appear to be reaping any sort of political dividend from the economic recovery and whilst posters like Colin, JimJam and TOH are convinced that they eventually will, ”

    In terms of VI they could point to a reduction in Labour’s lead from a steady 10 pts ish around a year ago.

    Now before you leap for your keyboard , I acknowledge that this reduction has resulted from changes in Labour VI more than that of Cons.

    However if subsidiary questions about economic effect on individuals are a factor of relevance, then these have been steadily moving in the Government’s favour. Mind you I think the corollary to that might be that responsibility for fiscal tightening is gradually being shifted to them.

    The Mori Feb “Issues facing Britain” is a case in point-“economy” moves down 2% pts , “unemployment” 3% pts.& “inflation & prices” down 2% pts.

    Now it may well be that these trends in a lower fear of personal economic hardship do not translate to a change in VI at all-and Labour will sail on with a steady 38% / 39% whilst Cons make no step change of permanence. And I am familiar with your oft expressed belief that this will in fact occur.

    For what it is worth-which is sod all-I think Cons VI will step change up because:-

    * There will be some returnees from UKIP come the day.
    * Employment & Pay will move in Cons’ favour through this year.
    * The mood music on GDP / Industrial Investment / House building which produces economic headlines, will be increasingly positive this year.
    * The GE Campaign is another Country-and Labour will have questions to answer-in the glare of publicity, which have not been asked yet.

  5. “I am probably not meant to mention it on this thread BUT tonight is a debate on the thing I can’t mention between the SLAB leader and the SNP deputy leader. Should be interesting and might affect the polls. Looking forward to it.”

    No idea what you mean couper2802…. are we back to the Daily Mail?

    Please explain.

  6. Any of the Labour supporting members here (you know who you are) may have heard of the recent drama surrounding the voting system used in Labour Students.

    Currently, it’s a FPTP election of a delegate from each university Labour Club, which the leadership has manipulated to get themselves re-elected using mechanisms devised in the 1980s to stop Militant.

    Many members want the introduction of OMOV for Labour Students policies and elections, but the motion was defeated (by delegates) last year.

    At the national conference this weekend, eleven clubs (including Sheffield) walked out of the hall as a result of derogatory language being used towards advocates of OMOV.

    The leadership of Sheffield Labour Students has now called an emergency meeting with a single item on the agenda – disaffiliation from Labour Students.

    Now I know this is about a political party in particular, and maybe pushing the comments policy, but I’m completely in a bind about which way to vote. On the one hand, what the Labour Students leadership is doing is horribly undemocratic and putting students off due to the lack of participation opportunities. On the other hand, I don’t want to take my ball and go home, and be part of a rogue unit that doesn’t get any help at all.

    So, any useful advice on what I should do? I wouldn’t ask but this is the only sufficiently anorak-y place I can go.

  7. Polls aren’t about predicting, they are about where we are now. Labour have a consistent 38% in the polls. This, if translated into votes at a General Election, would give them an overall majority. All the rest is for the birds and the whistlers in the dark.

    You can only guess as to what people might think, come election time. The clearest probability (for me) is that a 38% that has proved so consistent, and has remained impervious to good and bad news for Labour suggests a strong core of anti-Conservative voters who don’t want another Conservative government. To others, a bit less fear for their jobs and a bit of a rise in their real incomes are likely to swing enough of the remaining 62% who don’t currently support the Conservatives to the right, and so give the Conservatives a majority of seats or even an overall majority in Parliament. “We always fancied the Conservatives,” they’ll be saying on that interpretation. “If we had known all along they would edge the economy upwards – a bit – we’d have stayed loyal, despite etc. etc.” This seems improbable to me, because the Conservatives had spent 13 years being regarded as unelectable ever again, before 2010 – and there wasn’t even much of a Conservative vote in 2010 when Gordon Brown was a marked man. Those who did vote Conservative in 2010 hoped for something better (I would suggest) than a small improvement in an economy which was supposed to have been mended by now. Are there enough winners in a house price boom to make a nonsense of my reading? I think the late swing to the Conservatives story is whistling in the dark, but I could be the whistler instead – who knows?

  8. Couper2802

    What time tonight?

    I am watching C4 news (haven’t done that for ages) and Harman was literally just a one liner.

  10. @ Mr. Nameless,

    Don’t disaffiliate. Never disaffiliate. You always have more power to fight bad practice from within an organisation than you do by flouncing off on your own and ceding the field to the people who caused the problem in the first place.

    Stay but keep lobbying to change the voting system to OMOV. They’re not going to be able to resist a sensible democratic change forever, and with the advent of social media it’s relatively easy for your side to bypass the leadership to coordinate your campaign. This calls for a hostile takeover, not forming an impotent splinter group.

  11. @Nameless

    Remember the SDP. Stay and fight.

  12. Remember the Alamo – bugger off sharpish.


    Touch of the Hugh Gaitskells there PI.

  14. I feel a bit sorry for Harriet Harman, because she did not join NCCL as a Solicitor until 4 years after PIE had affiliated with NCCL. For the Dmail to link Harman with such a horrible pressure group, just because she happened to work for NCCL is a disgrace. Calling it a smear is really an understatement.

    The three Labour people mentioned by the Dmail, were just part of the executive board of NCCL. Have the Dmail asked all other executive board members about this matter ? If not, why not ? Have the Dmail asked Shami Chakrabati as the current director of Liberty to carry out an investigation ? It is only today that Shami has said that she will ask for all the archives, so they can be reviewed.

  15. @ R. Huckle,

    To be fair to the Daily Mail I’m sure they would be happy to call Shami Chakrabarti a paedophilia apologist as well.

  16. 5%, and based on all the posts I’ll take a pop at it’s anyone’s election (with Con OM the least likely). If I had to choose a result, I would opt for Lab minority. I think the Con side will close the gap as the election approaches (in Spring 2015).

    Of course the EU election and other events this year might change all manner of things, so I’m inclined to say ‘nothing to see here’ until October and we know more.

  17. Sir Michael Howard on first world War at 9 in BBC 2.

    I’ve been revisiting the series The Great War which I remember from my childhood. It still stands up remarkably well though I guess its florid language seems a little stilted these days.

    There once more appears to be a slight narrowing in the polls. The tide ebbs and flows.

    It is hard for me to judge how this Harman business will play out – I have good reason to thankful for the work of NCCL.

    It all seems a long time ago – the differential ages of consent etc and individual chiefs of police in name of their religious views pursuing and prosecuting gay men for what many even then thought were victim-less crimes. Society had after all swept up all sexual minorities under a single umbrella of deviant.

    Harman hasn’t played this very well media wise but that hardly surprises me as she often comes across poorly. The Mail group knows it is a complex business but like most witch finders general it bangs its drum to effect.

    The speculation about the Conservative Party manifesto excluding the possibility of a second coalition. That’s interesting – if its true.

  18. @MrNameless

    Spearmint is right.

  19. @John B

    STV at 10.30pm

    All the folk that dont get STV dont worry. The debate will be streamed live on and will be available on the STV Player. Viewers are encouraged to interact with #scotnight on @ScotlandTonight.

  20. I have this theory that with the exception of those who are active in politics including websites like this most people don’t have a clue what it is all about.
    there is tribal voting which is like a slavish following of ones favourite football team irrespective of the level of performance.
    then there is the anti whoever is in power vote.
    then the swing voter who is crucial to the outcome of marginal seats.
    so most of us here be it participants or those who enjoy reading the comments don’t make a lot of difference.
    the same with the paedophile fuss.
    I think it will blow over without any fall out save Harman may want to have a head ache and give PMQS a miss tomorrow.
    be grateful we have harriett and not that dreadful woman in the wheelchair and with the blond locks on her head in the Ukraine about which much is still to come.

  21. My prediction:

    I think a large Lab Maj is a possibility. The left Libs move to Lab and UKIP takes enough from the Cons. So Lab hoovers up the Lab\Con marginals and the Lab\Lib marginals.

    The right leaning Libs stay Lib so the Libs keep the Lib\Con marginals with a bit of tactical voting from Lab and a bit of help from UKIP.

    So Cons lose a lot, Libs lose some and Lab ends up with a 60+ majority on about 36.5% of the vote

  22. @Howard

    Ah! Where are the orators of yesteryear? I do miss them!

  23. @couper – very precise but it’s about where I see things landing in 2015. Lab poll about Tories 2010 share – cons dropping to 32, lib 12, Ukip 10

  24. Postageincluded,
    Thank you for your concern.Not needing too much Gaviscon,it tends to fluctuate along with the polls.LOL.

  25. @DrukenScouser

    Is it going to make some people less likely to vote Labour? If so, I think the Daily Mail will be very pleased.

  26. RAF,
    Methinks Daily Mail Readers vote for only one party,and it is certainly not

  27. @Postageincluded

    Not to mention the snow.

  28. @Ann in Wales

    Probably one of two parties. Actually, that may not quite be true. A relative was a regular reader. He said he wanted to know what his enemies were thinking :)

    DS’s concern however may well be that the DM has a large reach. It’s very popular in the Home Counties and across the South of England. It matters.

    Probably not so much to Harman’s constituents inner city London. I can’t really see the good folk of Camberwell or Peckham being too enthused by a right wing rag (Harriet has polled 60% of the popular vote in the last two GE’s). However, once the story gets legs (as it has done) and the broadcast media get involved, it’s much less about a single newspaper and more about whether the story has changed perceptions about Harman and/or Labour.

  29. “All the folk that dont get STV dont worry.”

    I was worried that maybe I did.

  30. Good Evening All, after a run on our beach, and seeing Man United lose again, at the moment.
    I think in 1992, after the ERM fiasco, people felt fragile, and did not trust Labour enough. That was Margaret Beckett’s view which she expressed in a Labour CLP meeting in Norwich before coming to give a speech in our school in Norwich.

    I think Kinnock’s view that the Shadow Budget was a mistake in terms of the timing which John Smith forced on him, is also interesting.

  31. @Chris Lane

    Perhaps the Tory majority of around 107 was also a factor.

  32. A link on the BBC site may be interesting.

    If you look at the section “where are the marginals” it seems to show that the largest number of key seats are in the west of the UK

    A someone who lives in the east of the UK I will refrain from comment about that.

    My prediction, based on the polls and a small swing back to Cons with some economic improvement, is still like John Pilgrim’s forecast , a small but workable Labour majority.

  33. @ Chris Not Lane,

    Why do you think the Tories will drop down to 32%? Even Michael Howard did better.

  34. We had exited ERM after the 1992 election

  35. John Pilgrim – Bill Patrick !

  36. CHRIS.
    Yes, but it was felt, I think, that the ERM was a fiasco, due to recession.
    Kinnock had, apparently, agreed to a deep devaluation if he had become PM.

  37. @spearmint – simple UKIP

  38. @Drunk

    You are at least the third poster here to have complained to the Beeb today (I’m one of them)

  39. Also barely Howard polled 32.4% in 2005

  40. @guymonde – make that 4.

  41. Looking at the marginals, with 51% of them in the South West, dare I suggest a robust LD defence there would the best present Nick Clegg could get Ed Miliband?

  42. @MrNameless

    If NOLS gets too depressing then just go and do work directly for the local CLP

  43. @ Catmanjeff,

    I think Clegg already gave him the best present back in 2010.

  44. Mr N
    I’m with Spearmint – stay

  45. United we fall – and it is a long way down.

  46. Well, that’s a near-unanimous stay vote so far. I think I’ll be voting against. Thing is, by this point it feels as though I’ll be putting the case for the opposition on my own. The leadership are talking about rescheduling the meeting so we’re in sync with other clubs for a mass disaffiliation.

    I don’t really know what to do if we do break away. Probably have to get involved with the Hallam or Central CLPs or form a rival society.

  47. I don’t know whether this came up on the previous thread, but I haven’t the energy to trawl back through it.
    The BBC website has a page showing the breakdown of marginal seats by region. I was surprised to see that most Lab targets are in the North of England, I thought that the Midlands were meant to be the battleground.
    Is it possible to work out which regions show the largest swing between Con and Lab?

  48. Mt N – it was actually SSIN a Socialist Organiser front that the rules in the 1980s where designed to thwart when the NOLS full time organiser was Sally Morgan no less.

    OMOV is ostensibly fairer but whether it actually is or not depends on circumstances as swamping with new members by Entryist may still be possible?

    I don’t know but better staying within or getting active in your local party which in the end is more meaningful.
    I guess if you want a career, though, in the Labour Party a NOLS role on your CV can help.

  49. YouGov/Sun poll tonight – Labour lead up one to six points: CON 33%, LAB 39%, LD 10%, UKIP 11%

1 2 3 4 12