Friday round-up

A quick round of today’s polls. There were two voting intention polls out today, both of which I expect were slight outliers from the norm… but in opposite directions.

Both Populus and YouGov have been showing average Labour leads of around 3-4 points this month. YouGov’s poll this morning had topline figures of CON 32%, LAB 39%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 13% – a seven point Labour lead (tabs here). Populus’s poll had topline figures of CON 35%, LAB 35%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 14% – both parties equal (tabs here.) In both cases, I suspect we’re just seeing normal sample variation.

The other “new” poll out today was the latest TNS Scottish referendum poll. As usual the face-to-face methodology means the poll is actually pretty old – it was conducted between the 25th June and 9th July, so the start of the fieldwork was three weeks ago. Topline referendum voting intention is YES 32%(nc), NO 41%(-5). Without don’t knows, that translates to YES 44%, NO 56%… TNS has typically been showing yes support at 40-42% once you exclude don’t knows, so this is a good YES poll by TNS standards.


113 Responses to “Friday round-up”

1 2 3
  1. Hookeslaw,
    I think you will find that your post wii elicit a firm response based on fact rather
    Than opinion!

  2. Toby Helm @tobyhelm · 1m

    Labour lead at 4pts in latest Opinium/Obs poll. Lab 34 (-1), Con 30 (+1), Ukip 17 (-1), Lib Dems 9 (+2). Cam and Mili personal ratings up.

  3. Privatisation of the railways is generally regarded as a mistake and is probably a vote loser. This ignores the fact that before privatisation the railways were going through a period of managed decline as they were generally seen as an outmoded form of transport. Privatisation changed all this and rail travel is now more popular than ever before.
    I have no doubt that re-nationalissation would be very popular and might even be the right approach if done in the right way. This ignores the huge change in attitude to the importance of the railways brought about entirely by their privatisation and without which our road network would have collapsed entirely.

    Please excuse any smelling mistakes. Auto correct drives me mad.

  4. “Privatisation changed all this …”

    It happened despite privatisation, not because of it. Correlation is not causation.

  5. Does anyone know/understand why – given that the plane crash is in Ukraine – Ukraine plus experts don’t just go to the site, effectively challenging armed groups there to add to the tragedy by resisting?

    I can’t imagine that Putin would back resistance to a peaceful, multi-national mission to ascertain facts and retrieve bodies.

    The photo of an armed rebel with a doll held in one hand and a fag and a rifle in the other spoke volumes about insensitivity.

  6. And there ROGERH we disagree. The state owned system could not and would not respond. The whole ethos meant that passenger numbers had to be managed down to suit the available capacity.

  7. @RMJ1

    Ethos doesn’t depend on ownership There may have been changes that happened following privatisation (such as the substantial increase in public subsidy) but that was a consequence of a change in the political attitude; privatisation wasn’t a necessary requirement. The evidence is there in other railway systems. The ‘public bad, private good’ attitude has caused untold damage in the UK.

  8. @ROSIEANDDAISY

    I’m sure they would like to but lots more people would be killed. You have to remember that the west, particularly the EU has been portrayed to these people as a fascist construct which will destroy and enslave them.

  9. (New thread, BTW.)

  10. Carfrew
    Immigration in the Scottish debate?
    Immigration in fact is very low in Scotland compared to England and most of that is to either Aberdeen or Edinburgh. The snp will be centring their campaign on areas of almost zero migration with the promise that immigrants going to other areas will provide the tax to keep the system going.

  11. @ROGERH

    There is no point in continuing with this. We will always disagree. Incidentally your public bad private good comment is too simplistic. Even the most right wing Tory would say it depends on what you are talking about. There is no doubt however that finding a mechanism to get a market price, is useful.

  12. It’s your interpretation of my comment that is simplistic.

  13. hello Ann in Wales –
    Are you referring to my comment – viz:-
    ‘The Labour manifesto of 2010 said that enough money was now being spent on the NHS it would have its budget frozen and embark on a £20 billion savings drive.
    Labour talk on the NHS is a pack of lies.’

    If so, do you deny what was in the Labour manifesto? I am speaking copper bottomed truth. There is no arguing about it, it is a plain fact.

1 2 3