The weekly YouGov results for the Sunday Times are up here; topline voting intentions are CON 33%, LAB 36%, LDEM 7%, UKIP 15%.

Nick Clegg always scores badly on leadership ratings anyway, but following last week he’s broken his own records. 13% think he is doing well as Lib Dem leader, 78% badly, a net figure of minus 65 (which now nudges him below Gordon Brown’s worst ever figure of minus 62). 41% of people think that Nick Clegg should resign as Lib Dem leader, 32% think he should remain. However, amongst Lib Dem supporters (a small sample, given their decline!), 62% want Clegg to stay. YouGov asked about alternative leaders, but the most important finding there is quite how unknown they all are – the majority of people say they don’t know enough about Ed Davey, Tim Farron or Danny Alexander to answer, while opinions are evenly divided over whether Vince Cable would be better or worse. Bear that in mind when you see any polls asking about alternive Lib Dem leaders – the people answering don’t know who these people are.

There are similar divisions on attitudes to the Liberal Democrats and the coalition. Amongst the public as a whole only 30% want the Lib Dems to remain in coalition, 53% would like them to leave (26% to leave the coalition but allow a Tory minority government, 27% to leave the coalition and bring down the Tory government). Amongst Liberal Democrat supporters themselves 51% want them to stay in government, 40% would like them to leave (24% to leave and support a minority Tory government, 16% to leave and bring the government down). While most Lib Dem voters still back their coalition with the Tories, their hearts are elsewhere – if they had to choose 57% would rather work with Labour than the Conservatives.

YouGov also asked about Cameron’s planned EU renegotiation. Asked what they’d most like Cameron to look for in any renegotiation with the European Union immigration and the right of EU citizens to claim benefits in the UK are by far the most popular opinions – unsurprisingly given how much debate about the European Union seems to have become tangled up with immigration in recent years. Asked more specifically what they’d like to see, 37% would like a total ban on EU citizens claiming British benefits, 34% restrictions (15% would oppose either, and wish to keep present arrangements). On EU immigration the most popular choice was limiting EU immigration to skilled immigrants (43%). 19% would prefer a cap on EU immigration, 20% the status quo. 8% would like all EU immigration stopped.


154 Responses to “YouGov/Sunday Times – CON 33, LAB 36, LD 7, UKIP 15”

1 2 3 4
  1. @Welsh Borderer,

    I think a lot of English people see Germans (along with Scandinavians) as “like us”.

  2. Disappointed, but not paticuarly surprised that YouGov would ask a question like “Would you describe youself as… prejudiced angainst people of other races?”

    They can’t have read Wikipedia: “there is a broad scientific agreement that essentialist and typological conceptualizations of race are untenable… among humans, race has no taxonomic significance… all living humans belong to the same species, Homo sapiens, and subspecies, Homo sapiens sapiens.”

    The concept of race is a folk taxonomy rather than a scientific classification.

    YouGov’s other questions in that section have more validity in the sense that racism is one of the social functions which an untenable folk taxonomy serves.

  3. MARTYN
    “Labour do not labour”
    The C2DE breakdown of VI is Con 27,Lab 40, LD 5, UKIP 19. While a lot of Con and Kippers also labour, I guess the predominant support of labour for Labour and vice versa hasn’t changed much since Kier Hardy, and, interesting to see for the coming GE, may not have been much affected by recent and proposed changes in the relationship with the unions.

  4. @Martyn

    Ah yes. The Empire.

    Okay….let me rephrase my point. Bar in a few exceptional cases those voting at next year’s GE will be UK citizens.

  5. BILLY BOB

    @” racism is one of the social functions which an untenable folk taxonomy serves.”

    You can’t have it both ways.

    If genetic differences between groups of humans should not be categorised as “racial” difference, ( and I agree that they should not ) then the very term “racism” cannot have any meaning .

    If we should not speak of human “races” , then we should not speak of human “racism”.

    Surely when people exhibit antipathy to a different group of humans , it has nothing to do with ideas of “racial ” difference at all-but is to do with cultural difference.

    It seems to me that prejudice /intolerance between groups of humans is nothing to do with how the “others” look-but how they behave & interact with “us”.

    This is cultural intolerance or at it’s extreme, cultural prejudice.

    There may be perfectly valid reasons for it , seen from the viewpoint of the host culture-or there may be no valid reasons at all .

  6. Manifesto policies more important than party leader (37% to 17%) according to Survation poll:

    http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/MOS-Leadership-Contenders-Poll-1.pdf

    (Table 14)

  7. Populus VI: Lab 37 (+2); Cons 32 (-2); LD 10 (+1); UKIP 13 (-1); Oth 8 (=)

  8. ANTHONY WELLS

    I found a new tool for you to use if you ever need to clean up some of comments.

    You should link it up with the (report comment) link.

    http://lingdao.fr/outils/nettoyeurecran/cleanscreen.swf

  9. @Colin “You can’t have it both ways.”

    You seem to be arguing along the lines that if the “golden plates” did not exist, or were fakes, then we can’t talk about there being any such thing as the Church of Latter Day Saints.

  10. @colin

    “Surely when people exhibit antipathy to a different group of humans , it has nothing to do with ideas of “racial ” difference at all-but is to do with cultural difference.”

    But racists do – by definition – see themselves as racially superior to other groups of humans. Its is this ideology that drives acts of genocide and provided the justification for the industrialised slave trade – the victims are ‘de-humanised’.

    If you dont see your victims as a fellow humans – it makes it easier to inflict violence on them. This is also the effect – and indeed the purpose – of racist jokes and insults – to take away the humanity of the target by reducing them to a bestial status

    The argument that their are no racial differences between humans is not one that racists share.

    Racist parties such as the BNP, will use the ‘cultural’ arguments simply as a way of staying within the law.

  11. Roger,

    I guess people wish to be seen as not been attracted by superficial leaders personality issues and stating mainfesto implies to themselves (double think going on imo) that they are not shallow etc.

    Populus within moe but another looking a little better for Labour.

  12. REGGIESIDE

    Well clearly if a person or group of people express explicit belief in their “racial superiority” then I suppose we have to describe that as something-and racism will have to do.

    But I was referring to how we describe general antipathy of a poppulation at large the “incomer” -in the context of immigration.

    I do believe that this will be mainly to do with behavioural & cultural differences , rather than ideas of “race” per se.

    I think that if we can consign the term “racism” to the same trash bin that you wish “race” consigned to , then we can stop being diverted by thoughts that fear of morphological & physiological difference are at work, when it is different “behaviour” which people are reacting to.

    Of course I accept that, if jobs , housing etc are perceived to be preferentially allocated to the “others” , then that can breed prejudice against them. But again- I think this should not be called “racism”.

  13. BILLYBOB

    Not being a Mormon , I cannot really respond to that.

    But , in general, it seems reasonable to conclude that if a central religious tenet is shown to be factually incorrect, then the belief system on which it is built is not valid .

  14. @ Jim Jam

    I dare say you’re at least half right – who reads manifestos? There’s no clear evidence that the leader does affect voting, though it’s probably impossible to demonstrate either way with any certainty.

  15. @COLIN

    I agree that cultural etc differences are a factor but I think it’s disingenuous to suggest that ‘otherness’ in physical characteristics – ie, racism as it is generally understood – is not a major factor.

  16. Roger – I like too the term implied manifesto I picked up on here (maybe even from AW?).

    The ability of a leader to project a set of values and implied direction is more important than the actual manifesto which is just one route to articulation but also a possible source of banana skins for the media and opponents to search through.

    In this context the leaders presentational skills including providing a sense of their ability to realistic push through delivery is a genuine factor for parties and the electorate to be concerned with

    Sadly, the superficial can take over and often does.

  17. Colin

    “But , in general, it seems reasonable to conclude that if a central religious tenet is shown to be factually incorrect, then the belief system on which it is built is not valid .”

    Well as far as I can see that rules out every religion then.

    By the way, I’m agreeing with you. :)

  18. @ John Pilgrim
    “The C2DE breakdown of VI is Con 27,Lab 40, LD 5, UKIP 19. While a lot of Con and Kippers also labour, I guess the predominant support of labour for Labour and vice versa hasn’t changed much since Kier Hardy”

    In the YouGov polls in the run up to the 2010 election the C2DE VI was neck & neck for Con & Lab, with if anything a slightly higher Con VI, & say 15% for LDs.
    Within a few months the C2DE VI had shifted decisively to Lab & the LDs had fallen to 10%. This seems to be a major & not
    much commented on shift in voting intentions, although it is obviously complicated by the recent increase in UKIP VI.

    The current focus of the right-wing press on the LDs’ problems brings home to one how the “normal” state of affairs is a somewhat relentless focus on Miliband & Labour.

  19. “But I was referring to how we describe general antipathy of a poppulation at large the “incomer” -in the context of immigration.”

    And you dont think racism informs that antipathy?

    And there are many people who live in areas with high levels of immigration who DONT feel antipathy towards newcomers.

    Scapegoating immigrants – or minority religions – as being to blame for scant resources, jobs etc and who constitute an exagerated ‘threat’ is a centuries old phenomena – and is routinely exploited by certain political parties who wish to encourage division to build their own support.

    i,.e a poster with a big pointy finger saying
    “AND WHOSE JOB ARE THEY AFTER?”

  20. Colin is right on the money. Using the term “racism” makes no sense if the person (pejoratively) ‘accused’ of it does not believe the difference between him/her and the object of his/her dislike, fear, desire to hurt or kill, etc is ‘racial’.

    Otherwise, there are many words to describe generalised antipathy (and worse) towards others: ‘xenophobia’ (foreigners), ‘misogynists’ (women), ‘Islamophobes’ (Muslims), ‘homophobes’ (gay), ‘classist’ (class), ‘sizeist’ (‘fat’ people), etc.

    ‘Antisemitism’ can either be a sub-division of ‘racism’ if Jews are thought to be a racial category (which they are decidedly not) or akin to ‘Islamophobia’ (hence the term, ‘Judeophobia’).

  21. COLIN
    Barack Obama is called a black President, and much maligned on this account by the Republican right, yet his mother was white. Is this an example of racism based on his black face or a prejudice based on the fact that he had taken their job?

  22. Populus unweighted;

    Lab 40
    Con 28
    LD 9
    Ukip 23

    Whenever I post these figures someone always says; ‘but these are not the real results and tell us nothing’. What they do tell us is that Populus weights an awful lot.

    Looking forward to the day when a pollster overestimates Ukip support. Hasn’t happened yet, though Newark may be about to change that.

  23. That’s the highest Labour VI Populus have shown since the start of April. But before Team Red get too excited, we should take a look at the 2010 crossbreaks:

    Lab: 36.7%
    Con: 28.9%
    LD: 24.7%

    O brave new world, That has such crossbreaks in’t!

    Perhaps this poll is an extreme outlier and they will be back to their usual weighing shenanigans on Friday, but I rather think that we may have seen, all stealthy and unannounced, the second Great Populus Methodology Shift.

  24. Blech. Obviously the crossbreaks are Con 36.7%, Lab 28.9%.

    (Otherwise their weighing would be even worse than it was before.)

  25. RobbieAlive
    Those are very interesting data. I had no idea that was so (Con and lab level pegging among C2DE prior to GE 2010) and forms a danger to both parties IMO. I write IMO, because I have a preconception that this group is more volatile in VI than the ABC1 cohort. Does polling bear that out?

  26. A lot of academic work done on how Allied soldiers treated their enemies during the Second World War. Unequivocally , if the enemy was perceived as of a different ‘race’ i.e. Japanese,then little mercy was shown. However,if German or Italian then a far higher likelihood of being taken prisoner, rather than killed.
    Likewise the fighting on the Eastern front was marked by its lack of quarter, because both sides saw the struggle in racial terms. Teuton v Slav.

    Racism cannot be got rid of Semantically IMO.

  27. @ Mr Beeswax,

    Er, have you seen the European election polling? 60% of the pollsters overestimated Ukip support.

    Result: 27.5%

    Opinium: 32 %
    TNS: 31%
    ComRes: 33%
    Survation: 32%

  28. Ooh EL, what have you started now? I’ll bet we all thought immediately of many reasons why such conclusions could be mistaken.

  29. “‘Antisemitism’ can either be a sub-division of ‘racism’ if Jews are thought to be a racial category (which they are decidedly not) or akin to ‘Islamophobia’ (hence the term, ‘Judeophobia’).”

    Jews are treated as a racial category though. i.e you can be jewish and an atheist through your Jewish ‘racial’ heritage.
    the same isn’t true – AFAIK – for any other religion.

  30. “But , in general, it seems reasonable to conclude that if a central religious tenet is shown to be factually incorrect, then the belief system on which it is built is not valid .”

    Colin, as Norbold implied if only we could eradicate them all with logic.

    Saw a prog which proved beyond doubt that the “birthplace” of ole jesus was

    1/ Not where he could have been born for the census.

    2/ Carbon dated to be of a different, later time anyway

    …………….. as the crowds continued to pour in and pray – as they still do now.

    If you have faith then evidence is irrelevant.

  31. Howard
    Sorry for adding a Godwinesque note, I know how sensitive to that kind of thing you are !

  32. @R&D

    There are all sorts of historical inaccuracies in the bible, both old and new testaments. Another example is the census that was supposed to be the reason that Joseph & Mary travelled from Nazareth to Bethlehem. Never happened. The dates if Jesus’s supposed birth and Herod on the throne don’t match either.

    In fact there is no historical proof that Jesus ever lived other than the bible itself and a couple of passing references by early historians, but these were certainly not to a God like figure.

    But, as you say, faith conquers all!

  33. Dates of not if!

  34. Interesting snippet from the continuing good news from manufacturing PMI data. It appears that there is strong growth in capital goods, suggesting investment is picking up. Analysts are suggesting this has something to do with the recent doubling of the annual investment allowances.

    [Snip]

  35. Alec, I have to admit some surprise as to how well the UK economy is doing compared to our peers. While a chunk of the growth is credit-fuelled, we are certainly seeing strong performances in many more desirable aspects of the economy.

    I look forward to hearing from the SNP how similar growth in Scotland is all down to them.[/making mischief]

  36. Mr Beeswax

    ‘Populous unweighted’

    Has the same ring to it as ‘ Prometheus Unbound ‘, don’t you think ?

  37. A little while ago my 12 year old who like most that age is very inquisitive picked up on a comment about Kurds being the largest ‘Ethnic’ group without a homeland that is predominantly theirs.

    The questions he asked about how are they different from those around them and how do they differ as well then, what is an ethnic group… how are Serbs and Croats different came in etc got me in a right muddle.

    Thing is regarding the starting point for the discussion – second, third even by 4th generation descendants from post-war immigrants to the UK quite rightly in virtually all cases feel British (more than ‘White people who go with the constituent nations more I recall)

    It would seem logical that their family would have suffered at the hands of prejudice down the years (hopefully less now)and be more likely to be able to empathise with recent immigrants as people and baulk at certain phrases and terminology.

    The apparent paradox, which is consistent in my view, is that Britains from these back-grounds can also have a more restrictive view regarding future immigration than for example I might have as they have seen how divisive it can be if not managed effectively but reach a different conclusion to me on how to address.

  38. Oh dear, we are onto religion.

    I think it will be far safer for us all to move the topic back to allotments. :)

  39. @Spearmint

    “I rather think that we may have seen, all stealthy and unannounced, the second Great Populus Methodology Shift.”

    I rather think you’re right.

  40. @SPEARMINT duly noted, some polling does indeed overestimate Ukip support. Populus Unweighted DOES have a Mary Shelly vibe.

  41. @Steve2

    I have to admit some surprise as to how well the Scottish economy is doing compared to our peers. While a chunk of the growth is credit-fuelled, we are certainly seeing strong performances in many more desirable aspects of the economy.

    I look forward to hearing from the Unionists how said growth in Scotland is all down to them.

    [/also making mischief]

    As far as I’m concerned, the growth is down to the people. The governments watch and fiddle, and don’t do an awful lot. By the time they get their data, it’s out of date, and action is largely pointless.

  42. The recent and surprising achievement of Ukip is to redefine the “‘immigration problem” in terms of movement from other EU countries. Until recently, the immigration debate was about people coming from New Commonwealth countries (a euphemism meaning ‘black or brown skinned).

    To get people upset about EU immigration, you really need to characterise the newcomers as ‘not like us’ and potentially disruptive. Hence, I think, the Ukip emphasis on Romanians who many people are apparently willing to believe are all gypsies hell bent on stealing blond children and sitting around begging (when they aren’t out stealing scrap). As has been pointed out above, people aren’t worried by German or Dutch people moving in next door.

    I seem to recall a Ukip person (probably Farage) bemoaning the comparative difficulty Australians and New Zealanders have in entering the UK compared with EU citizens. Somehow I don’t expect to hear similar UKIP complaints about Jamaicans or Malawians finding it difficult to move here. Which is why I think at root Ukip is a racist party, not in the sense of hating people of other ethnicities, but in wanting to keep Britain full of people “like us”.

    The polling relevance here is that it would be very interesting to see some analysis of the attitudes of Ukip supporters to different immigrant groups and what they would like done. I wouldn’t be surprised, for instance, if a number believed that Ukip wanted to ‘send Pakistanis home’ or some such.

  43. Mr Beeswax & Spearmint

    Here is Populus’ most recent aggregation:

    http://populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/OmOnline_Vote_April_2014.pdf

    If you go to page 17, take a look at the ‘2010 vote’ numbers after weighting. After thy have weighted people by past vote, somehow there are almost as many past Lib Dem voters as past Labour voters, and past Tory voters outnumber past Labour voters by a manifestly disproportionate number.

    On page 29, which excludes the apathetic & undecided, we still see past Tory supporters outnumbering past Labour supports by 4394-3044. This is AFTER weighting.

    Something very strange is going on with Populus’ weighting.

  44. REGGIESIDE

    @”And you dont think racism informs that antipathy?”

    No.
    I actually think using the term for those people ( as opposed to white/black supremacists) is counterproductive.

    We are talking about cultural antipathy-or feelings of unfairness derived from perceived differential opportunities.

    If you continue to call them racists , a) you fail to understand their grievances & b) you will push them towards racial supremacist parties.

    Instead, one should look at the cultural objections & feelings of unfair treatment & see how much validity there is in them-whether the law , or government policy on housing, jobs, welfare etc needs changeing.

    Then these people will not turn to racial supremacists

  45. Just been talking to a friend who voted UKIP in the Euros.

    Retired military-I would guess Conservative supporter in the past.

    He intends to vote UKIP next year because of the current overseas aid spend. He believes that “charity begins at home”.

    Asked if he worried about putting Labour, he said no-it was just” propaganda “-they would win “one or two seats at most”.

    What about Lab/Con marginals ?………ah yes…….well…..hmmm.

    What is UKIP’s policy on foreign aid……..not sure, I’m going to write to him.

    Conclusion-this is an “angry old man” who won’t listen to any warnings about letting Miliband in.

  46. JOHNKAY – True, Farage has made the point very often about skilled immigration from non-EU nations versus unskilled from the EU. He does mention restrictions on skilled Australians a lot but far from that alone. Almost every time he says it he also mentions Indian doctors etc so your point that it is white only doesn’t stand.

    That UKIP do focus on EU surely shows they are not fixated with ‘race’ alone as almost all criticism is of whites. It shows the argument is about numbers and the effect of excessive numbers in a short period of time, particularly to the poor.

    The point with Romanians is perhaps because many people have seen eastern Europeans move near them and sarted to see Romanians, or feel the UK is more likely to see Romanians based on recent trends migration? How many Dutch or Germans have moved to towns and cities? Not many. Again, it’s a numbers thing, not ‘race’ or ethnicity for many people when talking about EU immigration.

    To go to the earlier points about racism in the comments, or cultural tolerance, more people may dislike Pakistani’s due to cultural behavior – sexism or homophobia for example. Plus I know of Pakistani’s that dislike some in the UK as they are from different castes / classes and social / religious / educational backgrounds. Pakistan and india still have very strong caste systems in place.

  47. Ashcroft Newark Poll:
    Con 42
    UKIP 27
    Lab 20
    LD 6

    Ashcroft national poll:
    Lab 34
    Con 25
    UKIP 19
    LD 6

  48. Not sure how to explain the seemingly increasing LAB lead in a few polls this week. Perhaps for some that dislike the Tories the realisation that they could well win next year has seen them go back to LAB. However, the size of the shift whilst UKIP ratings remain high and the LDs drop only a small amount suggests a good amount of CON/LAB switching, which would be slightly illogical given that nothing has happened to suggest that in the last week.

  49. “We are talking about cultural antipathy-or feelings of unfairness derived from perceived differential opportunities”

    So none of the antipathy towards immigration is informed by racial prejudice? Its all down to the fact that some people believe that ‘foreigners’ jump the housing que, are criminals, benefit tourists etc?

    Really?

    I spent 4 years working on a big social housing estate where non-white people moving in routinely had their windows bricked, were abused and attacked in the streets and had their cars torched. Most of the people on the estate were not hardcore racists or indulging in such behaviour – but far too many were willing to turn a blind eye to it.
    Those carrying out the attacks often used the justification of jumping housing ques, taking our jobs etc – do you think they were not racists – just misinformed?

  50. LDs at 6% in both, which if I remember correctly is reckoned to be their core vote.
    That 9 point Labour lead looks a little high , to paraphrase Chrislane !

1 2 3 4