Ipsos MORI’s monthly political monitor is out in today’s Standard. Topline figures are CON 30%(-4), LAB 33%(nc), LDEM 8%(+1), UKIP 16%(+1). The 16% for UKIP is up only one since last month, but that makes it the highest UKIP score MORI have yet recorded. There was a similar pattern in this morning’s YouGov poll for the Sun – topline figures were CON 30%, LAB 34%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 18%, beating YouGov’s previous UKIP high of 17 (Tabs are here: MORI, YouGov)


685 Responses to “Ipsos MORI/Standard – CON 30, LAB 33, LDEM 8, UKIP 16”

1 12 13 14
  1. That Populus poll questioned 114 people in Scotland.

    If it was perfectly weighted, the the MOE is +/- 9.18%.

    Seeing as it wasn’t weighted (I don’t think) then the MOE is probably much worse.

    You might as well analysis the data from the Drumnadrochit Dog and Duck darts team.

  2. Correction

    That Populus poll questioned 114 people in Scotland.

    If it was perfectly weighted, the the MOE is +/- 9.18%.

    Seeing as it wasn’t weighted (I don’t think) then the MOE is probably much worse.

    You might as well analyse the data from the Drumnadrochit Dog and Duck darts team.

  3. @Phil Haines/Statgeek
    “Sadly, there’s a good chance that Jo Swinson will go too. With a majority of 2K in a LD seat that got 36% of the vote, it is tipped to go NAT, and if it doesn’t, it will probably go Lab, or even Con at a pinch.
    Chance of winning:
    LIB 12.4%
    LAB 22.9%
    CON 17.9%
    NAT 45.0%”
    _____________
    I don’t place much store by the overall Electoral Calculus predictions of GE outcomes, nor do I place much store by their predictions for East Dumbartonshire. In fact I don’t place much store by Electoral Calculus predictions full stop.
    You may be tipping the SNP, but here’s what the betting markets think of East Dumbartonshire:
    Lab 4/7
    LD 13/8
    SNP 10/1
    Conservative 100/1
    UKIP 100/1
    Those generate equivalent probabiilities of winning, after scaling down to remove the bookies’ margin, as follows:
    Lab 56%
    LD 34%
    SNP 8%
    Con 1%
    UKIP 1%
    Granted, the SNP should be shorter than 10/1, but favourites?”

    This debate highlights something I have been mulling over recently. I actually think the potential rise of an insurgency party coming from massively far back to take a seat might end up favouring the current incumbent. This is because usually at GE’s it tends to need a marshalling of the potential opposition to unseat that sitting MP.

    So in Dunbartonshire East it may well end up that those wishing to get rid of Jo Swinson end up splitting their vote between the SNP (now seen as the potential challenger) and Lab (the long standing challenger and expected to collect the seat from the LD’s woes).

    Without reliable constituency polling the voter can have no accurate way of where to target their vote to achieve the best possible outcome. Something the Scots have probably got quite good at over the years with 4 party politics.

  4. @ Statgeek

    “Portsmouth South, OTH gain from LIB, Mike Hancock”

    The same argument would apply in Portsmouth South but replace the SNP with UKIP as the insurgency party.

  5. John B

    Of course, that will be the interpretation from those on the Left. For those on the Right, well I’m sure you are aware of RM’s view on matters.

  6. I think the current churn and twists at the moment in VI makes any predictive models very dodgy indeed.

  7. @Statgeek

    I do not find Electoral Calculus at all convincing in terms of the way it makes predictions of what will happen in 2015 using probabilities. At the moment, based on polls up to the end of September, it is quoting a 63% chance and a big Labour majority. I don’t find that at all convincing and nor did I find its far higher % predictions of a Labour majority convincing in earlier months and years.

    If you disagree, and think that that EC current probabilities were pretty well spot on given what we knew at the start of the month, then by all means use that model to quote probabilities for East Dumbartonshire. If you share my reservations about the EC probabilities generally, it would be best not to quote them for specific seats.

  8. It’s funny how everyone’s predictions (on here) for 2015 seem to fall entirely along partisan lines!!

  9. Roger Mexico

    While I agree with many of your comments on TNs, the tables themselves indicate that we have only been given a partial set of results.

    The only questions for which we have the tables are 1a-e and Q4 (the recall 2011 vote question).

    It would be unusual for TNS to sandwich commercial questions between Qs 1 & 4, so the assumption should be made that they are political too – VI seems the most likely. We’ll see.

  10. @Catmanjeff

    Drumnadrochit – you know it well? Dog and Duck? Darts team? Perhaps.

    @GRHINPORTS

    Your assumption that Labour must be doing well in E&W and will win many seats there because it is not doing well in Scotland and the UNS give Labour an overall majority may need to be questioned.

    The difference between Scotland’s historic Labour support and what appears to be happening in rGB is that Labour in Scotland is (was!) quite geographically concentrated and therefore picked up many seats without having a hugely dominant voting support. UKIP in rGB has the exact opposite situation, of course, whereby they poll fairly well overall, (better at present than the LDs, for example) but stand little chance of winning 10 seats.

    Now, my question is this: will Labour have enough concentrated votes in, say, Northern England, to pick up the seats they need to counterbalance any losses in Scotland? They may well, but it will take many more votes in the south (which includes northern England from this perspective) than they lose here in Scotland. At least, I think so.

    And in any case, the assumptions lying behind the UNS seem to me to require some tinkering if the reality on the ground is to be properly mirrored in the result.

  11. @Pressman

    No, I’m not at all sure I know what RM’s views are. Nor do I much care. All I know is that he seems to support people who have views of the world which I simply cannot understand. But that’s probably my fault for believing that society is strengthened when people care for one another….

  12. For what it’s worth, I think predicting the outcome this far out is fun but almost entirely futile. The polls will continue to change – and, in, any case, it seems that supporters of party X/Y/Z seem to let their own political bias cloud their judgement.

    I suppose that’s why people like Anthony are paid to analyse the polls for us.

  13. @AW

    Could you set up an advanced swigometer (or even swingometer!) which separated England from GB? It seems strange to assume that GB=England, given what is happening in these turbulent times…..

  14. @Ambivalentsupporter

    Good to know from your name that you”re supporting both (all?) sides.

    Personally I’m only trying to analyse what the polls are saying in the here and now and feeding the figures into the (not always satisfactory) models.

    To suggest that I, or anyone else on this site, is silly enough to think that ‘events’ ceased with the end of MacMillan’s premiership would be to do us a little bit of a dis-service, I think.

    Yet with six and a half months to go before the GE the general fog seems to be as dense as it was six months ago.

  15. On point regarding a Scottish Tory revival – they are offering the best Devolution deal of the three unionist parties and this has been mentioned a lot in the MSM.

  16. Interesting commentary on take-home pay & seismic political shifts in the Comres blog.

    http://www.comres.co.uk/blog-post/79/has-immigration-caught-westminster-off-guard.htm

    What tends to happen in the immediate aftermath of a recession is that the political status quo more or less holds together. The recessions indicated in the ONS chart above coincided with elections featuring relatively small swings between the two major parties: Harold Wilson’s wins in 1964 and 1974, and John Major’s in 1992.

    Macroeconomic (GDP) recession does not necessarily cause the sands to shift significantly. A prolonged downturn in take home pay, however, does tend to shake up the party system. The big landslides came in 1979 and 1997, in both cases after household income had dwindled for at least five years.

    So the 2015 election is the one that has all the makings of a “seismic shift” moment in British political history. While we did have a change of government in 2010, David Cameron has largely continued along the social and international policy framework laid down by Tony Blair, while George Osborne’s deficit reduction strategy has ended up looking very similar to Alistair Darling’s original proposals. That shift is not, however, likely to produce a landslide victory but instead create a completely new electoral scenario with the rise of a 4th political party.

  17. @ Couper2802

    On point regarding a Scottish Tory revival – they are offering the best Devolution deal of the three unionist parties and this has been mentioned a lot in the MSM.
    ————–
    Do you usually trust the MSM to read the ‘small-print’ of a political policy & interpret it accurately? Just asking…

  18. how many seats do we think ukip will win in 2015…most people think it’s more than 4, but some are saying as high as 10….this would be extremely significant.

  19. @JohnB
    “Yet with six and a half months to go before the GE the general fog seems to be as dense as it was six months ago.”

    6 Months ago. Lib-dems had hit a low of ~10% & UKIP were ~13%. Consensus appeared to be that UKIP were peaking for the Euros & would fade, and that lib-dems had bottomed out…with split opinion as to whether they’d recover, change leader, hold their seats with incumbency, etc. Labours shrunken lead was thought by some to be temporary, by others to be the beginning of cons overtaking.

    Libs have gone even lower, and the time for them to do anything drastic seems to have passed. UKIP are going from strength to strength, it’s now a matter of will they get squeezed in the campaign itself &/or how many seats they’ll take.
    The shrunken lead has settled in as the new normal.

    I think things have become a little clearer…there’s less stuff that can happen now, and especially less time for it to happen in.

    By far the biggest clarification: Scotland.

  20. The Thurrock Ukip candidate has been de-selected & rumours abound that it’s to make way for a ‘big fish’

    http://www.yourthurrock.com/UKIP-candidate-Kerry-Smith-selected/story-23226874-detail/story.html

  21. @ JohnB

    “@GRHINPORTS
    Your assumption that Labour must be doing well in E&W and will win many seats there because it is not doing well in Scotland and the UNS give Labour an overall majority may need to be questioned.”

    I take you points since we haven;t a clue how the seats can be imputed from VI…and its well recognised that UNS is a busted flush.

    Given what we know though about the inherent biases of the system (in favour of Lab) (see AW’s excellent piece on this which I’m sure you have probably read) it would seem utterly extraordinary to imagine a poll lead for Lab over Con and not get a seat total lead by Lab (probably considerably so).

    And if Lab are on 21% in Scotland and 35% nationally then they must be proportionately ahead in E&W to make the numbers work…Most particularly their lead over the Cons in E&W will be more than the 2% nationally suggested by this poll (especially given that this was poll in which Con scored more than Lab in Scotland)

    Its the Lab versus Con lead that is crucial because whoever is to form the next govt (whether in majority, minority or coalition) the first thing they need to do is be ahead of their major opponent….in seats!

  22. @Catmanjeff

    “That Populus poll questioned 114 people in Scotland.
    If it was perfectly weighted, the the MOE is +/- 9.18%.
    Seeing as it wasn’t weighted (I don’t think) then the MOE is probably much worse.
    You might as well analysis the data from the Drumnadrochit Dog and Duck darts team.”

    Of course this one poll could be an utter nonsense.

    I just wanted to illustrate the point that in any polling sim that has Lab trailing badly in Scotland but leading nationally is actually probably something the party can live with.

    In fact if we really do end up with a Lab lead govt but with hardly any Scottish MPs (I am fairly sceptical about this actually happening by the way) it might make life considerably easier for that party in determining its approach to future constitutional arrangements.

  23. @ GRHINPORTS

    I think I’d look at those number differently. Yes, Labour will be higher in E&W, but so will the Conservatives. By my reckoning, LAB lead over CON is 10 or 11 points:

    http://numbercruncheruk.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/scotland-update-is-snp-surge-real.html

    So if you take the UKPR GB average of 2 points, then Labour’s lead over the Tories in E&W will have to be *smaller* by as much as a point (or more if you think Scottish turnout will be higher next time as some people do) in order to get to the GB figure.

  24. Peter Crawford

    UKIP seats? Who knows? It depends.

    1. A lot may depend on Rochester, If UKIP win then there will certainly be momentum and possibly further defections. But if, as reported, the Cons are throwing the kitchen seat at it then it may be more Newark than Clacton. However, Reckless is a better candidate than Helmer.

    2. Which brings me to a favourite subject of mine, the quality of UKIP PPCs. This may be of key importance in determining whether UKIP win 4, 10 or 20 seats. Given that Helmer was selected for Newark and Roger Lord was the candidate for the GE in Clacton ( I know Clacton wasn’t actually a target, but its certainly somewhere you would expect them to choose one of their better candidates) it may be that quality PPCs are very thin on the ground.

    3. The debates. If there are debates and Farage gets a chance to participate then this is likely to help a great deal (IMO). It doesn’t matter if three quarters of those watching think him a poltroon. If 25% come away thinking, “There’s a man who is saying what I am thinking” then that will have been an excellent result.

  25. 10 or 11 points in Scotland, obviously!

  26. @Ambivalent Voter

    “It’s funny how everyone’s predictions (on here) for 2015 seem to fall entirely along partisan lines!!”

    This is something I have always been very aware of reading this blog and following other discussions on polling over the year.

    I have always been completely puzzled about it because shouting how much your side if going to win by does nothing to advance the argument your side is trying to put forward. Yet regular commentators on here from all side seem to believe that to deviate even one iota from saying their side is going to win, almost as an article of faith, somehow compromises the very political beliefs they hold. Its weird.

    That said with this particular GE my long standing prediction is actually what I believe will happen. To illustrate if I may just be allowed to lay my cards on the table (and if I’m not Anthony thats fine as I certainly shall not be attempting to defend my position) I want their to be a Lab-LD coalition after the next GE and this has long been my standing prediction. I actually scrutinise all possible arguments against the likelihood of this to try and correct my own possible biases getting in the way. Conflating what I want with what I rationally think will happen.

    Nevertheless I still think we will end up something in the vacinity of the following numbers:

    Lab – 305
    Con – 278
    LD – 25
    SNP – 15*
    UKIP – 6*
    PC – 3
    Green – 2*
    DUP – 9
    SF – 5
    SDLP 3
    NI Alliance – 1

    * Its possible we could see total insurgency madness between now and polling day and these asterixed parties might go so far to triple their seat count…but its still my belief that Lab would have a seat lead over Con as both parties would be hit equally IMO by the increased insurgency effect.

  27. LRR
    ‘Poltroon’ is a ‘coward’ (I admit I did not know that).

    Do you think that 75% think that of Farage? I would like to see polling evidence.

  28. One thing that seems clear to me is that, as in life, stuff effects other stuff.

    The polls will feed into people’s reactions which will feed the next lot of polls.

    The thingy in the wotsit that is new and potentially dramatic is clearly UKIP but an ascendant SNP [ 363 seats and counting] and a nose-diving LD [36 seats and disappearing] will mean the ripples go on for a long while and it may not even be clear next Spring wot de fu*k am happening.

    Still, n’eh mind ay?

    I’ve always got my family, pups and music.

  29. A poster up page says he is interested in the here and now, with regard to polling figures. This is fine, as long as that is understood. However, many people get so carried away with their own parties gains, they lose site of the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune that can wreck any election campaign.
    This time around, Labour needs to really come up with very much more convincing agenda, regarding being able to handle money. The Tories need to stop saying that they will out UKIP, UKIP and actually DO something about certain issues.
    Until these thing occur, if they ever do, the polls will be largely constipated.

  30. LRR
    Er, on further thought, you aren’t continuing this punning are you?

  31. @Number Cruncher

    “@ GRHINPORTS
    I think I’d look at those number differently. Yes, Labour will be higher in E&W, but so will the Conservatives. By my reckoning, LAB lead over CON is 10 or 11 points:
    http://numbercruncheruk.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/scotland-update-is-snp-surge-real.html
    So if you take the UKPR GB average of 2 points, then Labour’s lead over the Tories in E&W will have to be *smaller* by as much as a point (or more if you think Scottish turnout will be higher next time as some people do) in order to get to the GB figure.”

    Except in Scotland Lab are not leading Con by 10 or 11 points. In todays Populus and YouGov they are trailing the Cons by 3 and 2 points respectively.

    Obviously there are massive health warnings on all these cross tabs. And Im sorry but I’m not convinced even by your synthetic attempt to create accurate data. Properly weighted consistent of polling of Scotland outwith rUK is required to get a handle on it.

    I simply wanted to illustrate that a scenario such as painted in todays Yougov and Populus in Scotland (in which they are in 3rd place in both) is no great disaster for Lab if they are leading nationally – which both polls show they are.

  32. @GRHinPorts
    It’s mostly just slight delusion. Everyone has it. There was a thing about people liking things more once they’ve chosen them….hang on.

    http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_gilbert_asks_why_are_we_happy

    It’s in here somewhere. Giving paintings to amnesiacs. Thinking the party you support has a better chance of doing better is pretty much the same thing, I reckon.

    Also, I’ve seen a few people suggest Greens might get ‘a couple’ of seats…what is the other one (than brighton) people are looking at?

  33. Howard,

    I doubt many think Farage a poltroon, buffon or dragoon for that matter. It doesn’t matter. For our Nige to have a great night he needs a relatively small number of people to think he’s a good bloke. Given a national TV debateI think he could achieve that.

  34. New thread

  35. @GRHINPORTS
    I fully understand what you are saying and what is more, I have posted similar type posts over the years. As an aside, Your preferred outcome, is my worst nightmare, no matter. The point is regarding predictions of this sort is the lack of logic. Cameron has lost much support for being too liberal, not too right wing. Furthermore, the public attitudes on most major issues, EU, European court of HR, immigration, the concerns surrounding nervous officials and police turning blind eyes to
    Pakistani gangs running 12 year old prostitutes, are hardly conducive to Lib Lab coalitions. More like Tory UKIP coalitions. It is these factors which make me as an example, think you could well be wrong.

1 12 13 14