This morning’s YouGov poll for the Sun has topline figures of CON 35%, LAB 36%, LDEM 10%, UKIP 11% (tabs here.) Over the last week YouGov’s daily polls have averaged out at a two point Labour lead, compared to five or six before the budget, suggesting there has been a genuine narrowing. Whether it lasts or not is a different matter.

One thing worth noting is that if the average position in the polls settles down to a Labour lead of two points or so, then it is almost inevitable that sooner or later normal random sample variation will spit out some polls with the two parties equal, or the Conservatives ahead. It won’t necessarily be particularly meaningful in terms of the individual poll (as ever, it’s the underlying trends that count) – but politically it may well have an impact in terms of narrative and the morale of the Parliamentary political parties.

YouGov also asked about European voting intention and found topline figures of CON 24%, LAB 28%, LDEM 11%, UKIP 26%, GRN 7%. Labour remain in the lead, but its very close between Labour, UKIP and the Conservatives, with just 4 points separating Labour in first place from the Conservatives in third. Taking just those who say they are 10/10 certain to vote would put UKIP up into first place, on 30% to Labour’s 29%. Note that the fieldwork started before the Nick v Nigel debate, so be carefuly of reading too much of a post-debate effect into the results. Tabs are here.

This morning we also had the second of this week’s Populus polls. Topline figures are CON 35%, LAB 37%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 12% (tabs here)


189 Responses to “YouGov/Sun – CON 35, LAB 36, LD 10, UKIP 11”

1 2 3 4
  1. Not sure how the elder Miliband can be considered A-grade political leadership material when his younger brother outmaneouvred him politically. If you are not even the best politician in your own family…

    Report comment

  2. @Colin

    “How about just asking Ukrainians what they want to be .”

    Fine! Agreed!

    But we need to ask the Russians living in Ukraine what they want their territories to be too perhaps?

    Report comment

  3. If they had a case (and perhaps they did) they lost it when they sent in the troops.

    Report comment

  4. @TOH: “We still have a big state, that’s the problem.”

    Coincidentally, I suspect, the services you think excessive are not ones you use yourself.

    Report comment

  5. And of course Saint, sorry Brother David is now comfortably ensconced in New York with his wife who is of American origin. Why would they want to return to the UK? No doubt they dine regularly with the Louise Mensch and her spouse.

    Report comment

  6. @Valerie

    “Why would they want to return to the UK? No doubt they dine regularly with the Louise Mensch and her spouse.”

    ————-

    Now to me, that would be good enough reason to return…

    Report comment

  7. @Mr beeswax

    “claimed the least expenses”
    ————————————-
    fewest expenses, surely?

    Report comment

  8. Since 1945 we seem to be locked into an international mind-set that national boundaries are set in stone like some Holy Writ.

    There are so many countries around the world that have regions/localities/provinces that are within them that are there for the most spurious/y historical or accidental of reasons. Why-oh-why does the international community have such a hang-up when one of these areas wants to redefine its allegiance?

    Yes, there is a fear of returning to the bear garden of war and stolen territories – but surely with the UN/G8/EU etc territorial plebiscites can be held in a peaceful manner along with transferance from one nation to another if desried by the locals.

    Plebiscites determining national borders were undertaken reasonably peacefully in Upper Silesia and Southern East Prussia under the auspices of the League of Nations in the early 1920s – surely we could settle that sort of thing today in the same democratic way?

    Report comment

  9. TONY DEAN

    @”but I suspect Russians are fearful rather than imperialistic.”

    Putin is clearly in empire building mode.

    If he tells ordinary Russians in someone elses country that they are under threat from “Fascists” there-no doubt many of them will become fearful.

    His administration seems to be built of a Gas company , a series of obscenely wealthy stooges , and a readily available retinue of big blokes with beards & tattoos who will turn out on the streets with weapons as required.

    The only Russians in Ukraine which I have read about & have some sympathy for are the employees of the factories in eastern ukraine. Soviet era Energy gulping, innefficient Heavy Industry .
    Their continued existence depends on cheap Russian energy & customers in Russia.

    They must know that membership of EU will expose them to competition they could not cope with.

    I guess HUngary & Poland went through that transition -but it must have been very painful.

    The Western Ukrainians will certainly go through it, having just taken the IMF’s money.

    It just depends on your situation & background I expect:-

    Elderly ethnic Russian, washed up on the shore of Ukraine during the Soviet era, working in a factory reliant on Russia for energy & custom.

    Young Western Ukrainian, who knows the shops over the border in Hungary & Poland, wants a slice of that life; hates the corruption & poverty at home.

    You don’t need to guess which choices these two would make.

    Report comment

  10. “I suspect Russians are fearful rather than imperialistic.”

    It’s possible to be both. Imperial insecurity is the normal state of imperialism, in fact.

    Report comment

  11. “Since 1945 we seem to be locked into an international mind-set that national boundaries are set in stone like some Holy Writ.”

    Nope: you can have national boundary changes all you want in the post-WWII eras, PROVIDED you don’t make them happen via military force.

    “Plebiscites determining national borders were undertaken reasonably peacefully in Upper Silesia and Southern East Prussia under the auspices of the League of Nations in the early 1920s – surely we could settle that sort of thing today in the same democratic way?”

    Actually, it was the understandable outrage that Germans felt about those plebiscites (held at the point of a gun, on terms and with borders chosen by the high and mighty, only in those annexed parts of Germany where the people were expected to give the “right result”, and with the ultimate insult of this being supposedly more democratic than, say, classic imperial conquest) that was partly to blame for those problems we had in Europe in the 1930s and 1940s.

    Of course, if Russia really WANTS to have EU supervised plebiscites in Tatarstan, Chechenya and Dagestan, they can do that even under existing international law.

    Report comment

  12. Also, allowing any territory to have a referendum on its membership of the national state would be a great way at suppressing local government, and a great way of generations of civil war in the FSU.

    Report comment

  13. “Russia’s President Vladimir Putin has described the collapse of the Soviet Union as “the greatest geopolitical catastrophe” of the 20th century.
    Mr Putin’s annual state of the nation address to parliament was broadcast live on Russian television.

    He said the break-up of the USSR in 1991 was “a real drama” which left tens of millions of Russians outside the Russian Federation.”

    BBC
    2005

    Report comment

  14. I feel as if I have been banging the drum for Putin this afternoon – I am not – I agree with you Colin about the nature of his regime!

    I just wish we could sit down with the Russians and hammer out a deal, including regional plebiscites, under international supervision, of the 1954 Russian transfer territories to Ukraine, in return for Russian recognition of the right of rUkraine to become a candidate EU country if it wishes – rather than all this Russian sabre rattling and sanctions on our part.

    Report comment

  15. Putin in 1999-

    “Ukraine’s territorial integrity is not subject to negotiation.”

    (Actually, he said ‘Russia’ rather than ‘Ukraine’, but what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.)

    Tony Dean,

    “I just wish we could sit down with the Russians and hammer out a deal, including regional plebiscites, under international supervision, of the 1954 Russian transfer territories to Ukraine, in return for Russian recognition of the right of rUkraine to become a candidate EU country if it wishes – rather than all this Russian sabre rattling and sanctions on our part.”

    That would be great, if the Ukraine didn’t already have that right. It would be like us saying to Russia “We’ll negotiate a deal with you on the disarmament of all of your nuclear weapons, in return for recognising your territorial integrity.”

    Report comment

  16. Putin in December 2013-

    “We will seek leadership by defending international law, advocating respect for national sovereignty, independence and the uniqueness of peoples”

    A great aspiration for Russia.

    Report comment

  17. rogerh

    Not a valid comment. My views on the size of the welfare state have not changed since I was a young man with b***** all.

    Report comment

  18. Just got 10 (yes, ten!) letters through the door from the Hallam Lib Dems. Since I live in a student village they probably had to deliver them by armoured personnel carrier, but it was a semi interesting read before I threw it in the bin.

    They seem to be pushing for the pro-EU vote, and repeating their usual line about Labour being silent on Europe (still don’t know where they’re getting that). There’s a focus on national policies though, while lambasting Labour for local policies. Very strange.

    One other interesting thing – they state that ‘elections in Hallam are between Lib Dems or Labour’ – a marked shift from trying to court the Labour vote as they did when it was between the Tories and Lib Dems. There’s a risk for them that people who used to back them will say “Since it’s not you or the Cons any more, I see no reason to vote for you”.

    Report comment

  19. @MRNAMELESS

    “Just got 10 (yes, ten!) letters through the door from the Hallam Lib Dems.”

    ——–

    Well at that rate at least that committed activist would get through his bundle of leaflets quickly, in time for a Saturday night out…

    Report comment

  20. “I feel as if I have been banging the drum for Putin this afternoon”

    ———–

    well at least you weren’t warning of the imminent resumption of Operation Barbarossa…

    Report comment

  21. A poll which might be of interest to folks is being featured in the Guardian.
    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/29/general-election-could-hang-on-how-private-tenants-vote

    Below is an extract:
    The number of people who are forced to rent their homes from private landlords because they cannot afford to buy could determine the result of the next general election in dozens of key parliamentary seats, research reveals today.

    Polling by ComRes for the campaigning organisation Generation Rent finds that 35% of people in the private rented sector describe themselves as floating voters who could cast their votes on the basis of the parties’ housing manifestos.

    The figures, combined with analysis by the same organisation of the numbers of private renters in key constituencies, shows there are 86 parliamentary seats in which the sitting MP has a majority of less than 35% of the expanding tenant population.

    Report comment

  22. They’re all individually addressed to the 10 residents of the flat, which is a ridiculously inefficient way of campaigning. Suppose I should be happy to suck up their resources though…

    Report comment

  23. @THE OTHER HOWARD

    “Not a valid comment. My views on the size of the welfare state have not changed since I was a young man with b***** all.”

    ———-

    Not a valid comment, since your answer doesn’t invalidate his comment, on account of it addressing something else instead…

    [And besides, this is really a site about public opinion in general. Rather too much of it these days seems to be discussing the political opinions of one particular member of the public, the Other Howard - AW]

    Report comment

  24. Amber – I suspect its the sort of complete rubbish “how important will a single issue taken out of context be in deciding your vote at the next election” stuff I’m always complaining about: http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/8286

    Always treat any poll commissioned by a pressure group claiming to show that the issue that they happen to be campaigning on will have a decisive effect at the next election with the sort of scepticism you’d treat someone promising to give you £2m if you’d just help them get some money out of Nigeria.

    Report comment

  25. carfrew

    Is is immaterial because whether or not I use the services of the welfare state (and of course I use some) it in no way determines my attitude to the welfare state. I used more services when i was younger which is why I made the comment I did.

    Are you a spokesperson for rogerh? I’m sure if he didn’t understand my reply he could have asked.

    Report comment

  26. http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/03/gay-marriage-is-a-triumph-for-our-arrogant-political-class/

    There’s a piece here in the Speccie on same sex marriage that is stunningly mean-spirited in tone, almost on a par with that awful Jan Moir article a few years ago.

    Report comment

  27. AW

    Thanks and I agree we should be talking about polling. I believe there is an Opinium poll tomorrow as well as YouGov. Do you know of any others?

    Report comment

  28. @ Amber Star
    “The number of people who are forced to rent their homes from private landlords because they cannot afford to buy could determine the result of the next general election in dozens of key parliamentary seats, research reveals today.”

    There are certainly many people in that position (including yours truly) – particularly in and around London. However, as AW says, I’m not sure how much this tells us about the next GE.

    Report comment

  29. Agreed Anthony. Am sick of pressure group based ‘polls’, which more often than not get front page in the [] press. Vested interest….

    Report comment

  30. @ Martyn

    “I obviouly can’t stop you believing that, but the EU couldn’t instigate a coup against a mouse in a cathouse. It wasn’t EU troops on the streets in Crimea, it wasn’t EU helicopters violating Ukranian airspace, it wasn’t an EU annexation of Crimea that deprived the Ukraine of 40% of its coastline and (if the Crimean nationalisation of the offshore fields goes unchallenged) all of her gas reserves. It was Russia.”

    Lol.

    @ Amber Star

    “Joking aside, this is about the gas bill. If the EU & US pay the bill, Russia will leave the rest of the Ukraine alone; if they don’t then Russia will ‘repossess’ it. One way or another, an independent Ukraine is over; it’s now just a question of who their new owners will be: Russia or the IMF.”

    How about this deal? Russia gets Crimea and in exchange the rest of Ukraine joins NATO plus some cash to off-set the territorial swap.

    Report comment

  31. @ Anthony W

    Are you saying I should not trust Kevin from Nigeria?

    I’m getting one hell of a deal.

    Report comment

  32. Slough put forward motion to Labour Conference to introduce rent control.

    Report comment

  33. The Other Howard – probably not. The only regular polls for Sunday papers these days are the weekly YouGov for the Sunday Times, the fortnightly Opinium for the Observer, the monthly ComRes for the Indy on Sunday (which we’ve already had this month). Survation seem to do one roughly once a month for the Mail on Sunday, but again, we’ve already had that this month.

    Report comment

  34. @SoCalLiberal

    Thanks for updating me about Henry Waxman. I looked on the web (and failed) to find a picture of him from back in 1969 when he first served in the state legislature, or even 1974 when he was elected to Congress.

    I see Wendy Greuel is one eleven Democrats hoping to get the nomination for his seat in June.

    Report comment

  35. @THE OTHER HOWARD

    “Is is immaterial because whether or not I use the services of the welfare state (and of course I use some) it in no way determines my attitude to the welfare state. I used more services when i was younger which is why I made the comment I did.

    Are you a spokesperson for rogerh? I’m sure if he didn’t understand my reply he could have asked.”

    ——

    Eh? I didn’t speak for Roger or say anything about your views or his, I simply pointed out a logical error. (Which remains, but it’s Saturday eve, AW’s not happy, and I’ve discovered sherry, so I’ll leave it witcha…)

    Report comment

  36. ‘Putin in December 2013-

    “We will seek leadership by defending international law, advocating respect for national sovereignty, independence and the uniqueness of peoples”

    A great aspiration for Russia.’

    A great aspiration for the UK and USA too!

    Report comment

  37. “Always treat any poll commissioned by a pressure group claiming to show that the issue that they happen to be campaigning on will have a decisive effect at the next election with the sort of scepticism you’d treat someone promising to give you £2m if you’d just help them get some money out of Nigeria.”

    ——

    Or indeed if they turn up and want to read your meter and want to save money on your bills…

    Report comment

  38. I wasn’t really commenting on Howard’s personal finances so much as making a general observation that people rarely complain about the state spending taxpayers’ money on services they themselves enjoy. Ditto BBC channels and programmes.

    Report comment

  39. Graham,

    I quite agree.

    Report comment

1 2 3 4