YouGov London polling

Over the last couple of days the Evening Standard have been reporting the contents of a new YouGov London poll – yesterday here and today here.

YouGov found London voting intentions of CON 35%(nc), LAB 45%(+3), LDEM 8%(nc), UKIP 8%(-2), GRN 4%(nc). Labour are up three since June, but this poll would still suggest Labour doing slightly worse in London than elsewhere (a ten point lead for Labour in London is a 4 point swing since the general election, whereas GB polls are currently showing a 5 1/2 point swing to Labour.)

YouGov also repeated a batch of questions about Boris Johnson returning to Parliament. 37% of Londonders now think it is reasonable for him to seek to return to Parliament in 2015, but 43% think he should not consider doing so until he has completed his term as mayor. If he were to be elected as an MP in 2015 50% think he should stand down as mayor immediately, 34% think it would be okay for him to do both for a year.

Finally today’s poll looked at the possible Labour candidates for London mayor. Tessa Jowell comes top… but only on 12%, narrowly ahead of Diane Abbott on 8%. Amongst London Labour voters Jowell also comes top, but still only on 16%. I think the reality is that questions like this are largely just a recognition contest… and none of the candidates are particularly well known (I haven’t seen anyone even bother asking who should succeed Boris as the Conservative candidate!)


454 Responses to “YouGov London polling”

1 7 8 9 10
  1. Pressman

    I think you should read what Anthony has to say about such questions before making assumptions that they are actually informative.

  2. @Pressman I understand from your previous posts that you are with the News International organisation.

    Your latest post refers to “the Tory press”. Is that the same thing? Is News International part of the Tory press?

    I think that News International has supported Labour in the past.

  3. Latest Opinium poll in the Observer is Labour 35%(+1)., Tory 32%, (+2)UKIP 15% (-2), L-Ds 7%,(-2) Green 5%.(+1).

  4. Latest Opinium poll in the Observer is Labour 35%(+1)., Tory 32%, (+2)UKIP 15% (-2), L-Ds 7%,(-2) Green 5%.(+1).

  5. Apparantly this is the lowest UKIP figure from Observer Opinium Poll since February 2013.

    On a lighter note, perhaps, the Commonwealth Games have had an affect upon we English as it seems by 63% to 19% those polled by Opinium said they want NO to win the Scottish Independence Referendum.

  6. TOONIE.
    Thanks for the poll news; interesting.
    Why are the LD’s at 7%?

  7. Because only 7% of people want to vote for them Because they’ve not really been visible really and also fluctuation around 8%.

  8. @CHRISLANE1945

    Do not know, looks a bit low to me,

  9. TOONIE.
    How many seats will come from 7% is not easy to work out.

  10. CHRISLANE1945

    Do not know why do you not put the figures in the calculator like everyone else, bot as we know using the UNS will still not give you the figure.

    What is your estimate?

  11. I’d say it is well high impossible to calculate. Try the swingometer. A Con/LD marginal (say 30% each) and Lab on around 22% will, with a large LD drop, result in a Con victory. But will it? Similarly with other two-way marginals with the third party not too far off. With the addition of the Greens and Ukip, it makes it impossible to know how tactical voting will go.

  12. TOONIE.
    I think STARRY has answered the question about the calculator, but I think that the LD Party may well reach double figures in terms of MP’s.

  13. I have checked Politco’s Guide. 1966 had Liberal Party on 8.5% with 12 seats.
    Led by J Thorpe.

  14. Why?

  15. Response to 10-13 post

  16. ANN IN WALES.
    Hello to you.

    Why? Well in 1966 that is what people voted, with the seats as they were then distributed.

  17. ADG3

    Yes [News International] have but to the chagrin of most of the staff that have been employed at the primary papers in my time.

    My view is that the campaign should be more personal than 83 87 or 92 because you can’t scare people with the threat of Labour now because of the major party similarity , this has to be about personality for [them] to win.

  18. Toonie

    Seems like there’s another indy poll tomorrow putting Yes at 47%. Nice of so many of you to want us to stay. Mind you, that question wasn’t just for “we English”, those living in Wales were included as well.

    I do hope that Opinium’s ability to count overall results isn’t as poor as their calculation for the 2 SNP votwers living outwith Scotland. 1 wants independence, 1 wants Scotland to stay in the UK. Remarkably Opinium manage to sum those as 2 (100%) against independence.

    On the whole, I prefer pollsters who can do sums! :-)

  19. Chris Lane,
    Good evening .I think you are the Michael Gove of this site,in terms of courtesy I mean!
    I was responding to the Idea that the Lib Dems might reach double figures in 2015. I think we got our wires crossed.

  20. @OLDNAT

    Yes you are correct I should apologise to thr Welsh and indeed the Scots.

    However, it does remain true that a majority of English seem to have expressed thier love for Scotland.
    Having a Scottish Grandmother I prefer to leave the decision to the Scots.

    Polls do sometimes throw up some strange figures I noticed the last Scotland cross-breaks for the YouGov GE poll actually give the Tories a lead over the SNP.

    For those interested here are the Opinium tables:

    http://news.opinium.co.uk/sites/news.opinium.co.uk/files/vi_29_07_2014.pdf

  21. Toonie

    I might have been unfair to Opinium. It might just have been a glitch in GCHQ’s UNDERPASS program, that I mentioned last night. They might just have altered the totals, and not the individual responses.

    The UK Government has a remarkably poor record in commissioning software. :-)

  22. Charles/Steve2

    Survation poll – “Has Scotland’s organisation of and performance in the Commonwealth Games… made you: More likely to vote ‘
    Yes’ 12%
    ‘No’ 7%
    No diff’ – 82%”

    A marginal help for Yes doesn’t seem surprising (a marginal shift the other way wouldn’t have been either). A big shift either way would have been astonishing!

  23. Chrislane,
    Jo Grimond was still Liberal leader in 1966. Whilst the Libs polled 8.5% that year they fought barely 40% of the seats.

  24. Graham,

    yes. i’d noticed that…the liberals rarely fought a majority of seats at general elections before 1974, so the figures aren’t comparable.

    we’re in unchartered territory regarding liberal vote share, when they are fighting most seats…next year will cost the party quite a bit in lost deposits i should imagine.

  25. James Peel

    The Liberal party still exists, but fights very few seats now – and lose their deposit. The Liberal Democrats seem to be heading in the same direction! :-)

  26. @HOOKESLAW

    ‘peter Crawfird says – ‘fed up with what they regard as metropolitan elite agenda of cameron… ”
    I grow a bit tired of this regular moan and conclude its just put up by people who cannot think for themselves.’

    Either that or by people who have thought and feel it expresses what they think. But obviously poor benighted souls not privy to your own incisive and irrefutably correct take on things.

  27. Pressman

    The recent poll by Com Res showed that having Miliband as leader made 54% of those polled less likely to vote Labour. And this was a poll that had the Tories at 27%.

    I hadn’t looked at the tables for this before:

    http://www.comres.co.uk/polls/The_Independent_Political_Poll_29th_July_2014_9847.pdf

    but they’re a good example of why Anthony gets so irate at ComRes’s dis/agree questions.

    The actual question was Ed Miliband puts me off voting for Labour at the next General Election, but because (as usual with ComRes) the only alternatives were Agree(54%), Disagree(41%) and Don’t Know(5%), there’s no real assessment of how much people were put off in practical terms. In addition the vast majority of those who agree they were ‘put off’ may be those who will never vote Labour in the first place.

    Furthermore unless you have an equivalent question for the other Leaders/Parties there’s no way of even beginning to work out whether this is something that will make a difference ion how people actually vote. Actually I thought the most interesting thing about the response was how high that 41% was even after nearly four year of relentless denigration of Miliband by the media (and the metropolitan elite if you like). Even 33% of UKIP voters disagree.

    That isn’t even the worst question of that set, which is I believe what Ed Miliband says more than I believe David Cameron, again with only the standard responses available. Of course anyone who thinks they are both equally dishonest (or equally men of probity) will be obliged to ‘Disagree’ in the same way as if they were Cameron fans. No reverse question was asked and no gradation of feeling tested.

    So if someone really has been going round asking if the amount of oil in the North Sea is going to increase (presumably because someone is putting it back in the oil fields), ComRes certainly have form for not telling their commissioners that they’re asking silly questions.

  28. PRESSMAN
    “The recent poll by Com Res showed that having Miliband as leader made 54% of those polled less likely to vote Labour.”

    That’s the 54% which intended to vote Con, LD or UKIP anyway, then. What’s new, Pussycat?

  29. Latest YouGov / Sunday Times results 1st August – Lab 38%, Con 35%, , LD UKIP 12%, 7%, Greens 4%, Nats 3%, Others 1%,; APP -20

    Cons again taking a higher proportion of ex 2010 LD’s 16% in this poll, the average used to be about 11/12%, but in the last few weeks it is been more often than not 15%+

    LD stuck on 7% rather than their Winter average of 10% because Greens and Cons taking more of their 2010 vote consistently.

    The economic questions are static this week same as last Sunday, except the question –

    How do you think the financial situation of your household will change over the next 12 month? down to -17% (better 18%, worse 35%) – this back in the 2014 range of -15% to -21%

    This week Cons very positive +22%, but Lab -38%, UKIP -40% very negative – all as usual. The reason for the drop from last week is the LD back to their average this year of slightly negative in this one -8%

    It looks as though there was no particular boost to wages in July, the drop this week is nearly all due to 25 -39 year olds becoming more pessimistic (40 to 59 year olds) continue to be very negative) maybe that wage slip was disappointing or maybe those bills were higher than expected.for July.

    Or maybe nothing has changed all year

  30. Looks like Nigel has rattled Ed Balls :-

    “Ed Balls has called for tougher restrictions on freedom of movement within the European Union,”

    politics home.

  31. @Old Nat and Steve Many thanks for informed replies to my question.

  32. Blues have a 3% lead among 18-24 group. Amazing.

  33. OZWALD

    Not if you look at their answers on economic & personal finance matters.

    They see a pretty optimistic group :-)

  34. Blues have a 3% lead among 18-24 group. Amazing.

    Sample error more like.

  35. GRAHAM.
    Thank you!
    I thought I was wrong about our Jeremy Thorpe, and thank you for your post!

    ANN IN WALES: I read your Michael Gove compliment.

  36. OZWALD, COLIN and CATMANUEFF.

    I think the young people I teach tend to be self reliant, individualistic, less prone to look to the State for culpability, and are also very charity-supporting minded, as well as being optimistic.
    Therefore more Blairitie than Milibandite.

  37. “The recent poll by Com Res showed that having Miliband as leader made 54% of those polled less likely to vote Labour”

    That question gets even dafter the more I think about it. If they asked the same question of whether Cameron made me less likely to vote Tory I’m not sure what my answer would be.

    Instinctively I would say yes but since I’m never going to vote for them under any circumstances it’s not strictly true to say he is making me less likely to vote for them!

  38. @Colin, Catmanjeff, Chrislane1945
    Thanks. I agree with all your points. I do not take crossbreaks too seriously but the sampling of the 18-24 group does seem to be a slight problem. Perhaps it will even out over time. I am more concerned about the lack of prompting for UKIP by major pollsters. Doesn’t feel right IMHO.

  39. The 18-24 sample had an unweighted sample size of 208 – an MOE of +/- 6.8 %.

    I would expect this subset in isolation to be extremely variable.

  40. The other age subsets:

    Age – Unweighted Sample – MOE

    25- 39 – 427 – +/- 4.7
    40-59 – 864 – +/- 3.3
    60+ – 588 – +/- 4.0

  41. Interesting report on party income (and expenditure) with 2013 figures just published by the electoral Commission. Income figures were as follows:

    Labour Party – £33,336,000
    Conservative Party – £25,352,000
    Liberal Democrats – £7,303,514
    UK Independence Party – £2,479,314
    Scottish National Party – £2,038,245
    Co-operative Party – £1,187,120
    Sinn Fein – £1,161,163
    Green Party – £881,819
    Plaid Cymru – £667,718
    British National Party – £605,208
    Democratic Unionist Party – £474,147
    SDLP – £360,483
    The Socialist Party of Great Britain – £340,863

    BBC report is here which gives a link to the Electoral Commission website where you can find details (too many filters though!)

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28542408

    Plenty of surprises in there for me (especially Labour raising more money than the Conservatives). As usual the reporting isn’t great and taking the BBC report and a Guardian report there were a few things I didn’t understand.

    Labour income seems to include £7m of public funding (“short money”) for research compared to £0.5m for the Tories. I am assuming this discrepancy is because the Tories being in government can do their own research as part of the government?

    Also only £3m for Labour from trade Unions which still leaves a hefty income from elsewhere (£23m)- again a surprise.

    I’m assuming election year is when these things really hot up and the Unions play a bigger role and maybe the Tories surge ahead in income?

    Like I say I found the electoral commission stats hard to access so maybe someone else can have a look (I volunteer Colin!) and explain some of the questions I have.

  42. Shouldn’t it be:
    “Ed Miliband puts me off voting for Labour at the next General Election”
    compared to….Gordon Brown/Tony Blair/Ed Balls

    I suspect EM might be quite pleased by those results. Add any more and you might get “who he/she” with the rest of the Shadow Cabinet.

  43. Is there an historical link between the money raised by each party, and their chance of winning the next GE?

    For example, does the money follow the likely winner, as it isn’t just newspaper owners that like to be seen backing a winner?

  44. @CMJ

    I suspect it’s a bit more sinister than that. There is little point buying influence from a party which is unlikely to have any power.

  45. Roger, John. Paul and Starry,

    Thanks for rebutting Pressman I did not have the energy last night.
    I think you confirm that there is no polling evidence that EM is deeply unpopular.
    Of course Pressman and his NI colleagues might be correct but it is just assertion based on the evidence that he is not particularly popular; perhaps though with a whiff of wishful thinking.
    Worth repeating that others on this board who analyse these things have pointedd out that, whilst cross-breaks are small samples, EM scores best amongst 2010 LD-Lab voters, even better than among 2010 Lab voters.

  46. I wouldn’t go that far. EM is consistently shown to be deeply unpopular in the polls approval ratings. But would someone else be more unpopular? Depends. I just can’t see either of his nearest challengers (Balls/Cooper) adding any votes.

  47. The questions which pollsters don’t ask are just as interesting to me as the ones they include.

    If your fruit and veg shop sells sub-standard vegetables then tiz best to ask the customers what they think of your fruit.

    But maybe your rivals sell nicer tasting fruit anyway. In which case don’t ask questions about the taste but ask who sells the largest apples and bananas. Or ask which items look the best, or last longer before they go off. Or which are cheaper per kilo.

    You choose which wicket to bat on. The answers to the questions which survive the filtering can be mathematically honest and pure. But there are lots of ways to nudge the outcome in a particular general direction , and so set up the headline you want.

    Same applies to politics IMHO. In 2010 pollsters could have asked “Would you be happy to have a PM who has had no previous ministerial experience ?” I don’t think they did though.

  48. Sorry Starry for misrepresenting you.

    I ask in all seriousness not in Paxo style how not been popular equates to ‘deeply unpopular’

    Particularly among key voters such as 2010 LDs – Lab.

    That Ed is a drag to some degree on Lab VI and that a more superficially charasmatic leader, if one was available, would add some VI is not the issue.

    It was interesting when Ken Clarke stood down that many posters commented on how he would have been much better for the Tories image in 2001 and 2005.

    Trouble is that he could not have united the party and a similar problem would in many peoples opinion occurred with David Milliband as leader.

    Ed’s achievement of keeping the Labour family largely united with a only few grumblings from some self appointed Blairite torch bearers has been imo impressive.

  49. Anthony has warned us repeatedly that pollsters have difficulty in finding sufficient numbers of 18-20yr olds so I’m not sure a 3pt lead for either team is of particular value.

1 7 8 9 10