Tonight’s YouGov poll for the Sun has topline figures of CON 31%, LAB 34%, LDEM 6%, UKIP 17%, GRN 7%. The Labour lead of three points is actually larger than recent YouGov polls and for the first time in a YouGov poll the Green party are ahead of the Liberal Democrats (Lord Ashcroft’s polls have shown the same a couple of times). Both findings are well within the margin of error so don’t get too excited – recent YouGov polls suggest the underlying picture is that Labour have a wafer thin lead over the Tories for first place, and the Lib Dems have a wafer thin lead over the Greens for fourth place.


163 Responses to “YouGov/Sun – CON 31, LAB 34, LDEM 6, UKIP 17, GRN 7”

1 2 3 4
  1. Apropos nothing, why not use the old ITV regions as the basis for a federal England? It would make as much sense as anything else and each has its own cultural history (of sorts!).

  2. “Not sure why the BBC should be blamed…”

    Although having now read their letter maybe they do deserve it. And if they’re basing the decision largely on the 2010 GE why include UKIP?

  3. @ Allan Christie

    You will have seen that Old Nat writes SLab which I prefer to SLAB. I call them LiS – Labour in Scotland, which is more accurate but confuses people!

    Regarding your comment: “Murphy just banged on about the SNP, no mention of the Tories. You see that is the problem with Scottish Labour, they never mention the Tories and only the SNP are bad.”

    Interestingly, Sarah Boyack did a TV interview tonight &, IIRC, she didn’t mention any other Parties; she spoke about what people want Labour to do to improve things.

  4. @ Old Nat

    What is there left to flog off from the old family mansion? The portraits have all gone, and the servants have nicked the silver teaspoons.
    —————-
    Hang on a minute, it wasn’t the servants who ‘nicked the silver teaspoons’, ’twas the bankers. They did it when they dropped by for kitchen supper; they donated with one hand & slipped the spoons in their pocket with the other!

  5. RICHARD
    “Then we can hopefully turn the national debate away from immigration and Europe and onto something more positive.”

    We might, but history won’t. The immigration issue is that of the treaty based acceptance of a European single labour market and the social chapter, which defines how the social aspects of employment must be observed. Secondly the ready acceptance, not trreaty based but of historic political importance of the accession of the former East European CIS states into the EU. The UK has benefitted economically and politically from both, but now has to pay the price in the context of a mix of high skilled and desparately low paid work forces in the emergent EU countries.
    My fear for the Tory party is that it has turned its back on history, so is making contingent responses to a long-term and inevitable trend, attempt the imposition of restrictions on immigration rather than meet the need for constructive responses to post Maastricht economic reality. The question is, is that failure being reflected in VI?

  6. Amber

    I was thinking of “our servants” – the MPs. Still, as a fair few of them are actually the bankers’ servants, and not ours, we can reach an amicable compromise on the issue. :-)

  7. @ Old Nat

    :-)

  8. Anyone wrote about the Yougov economic survey just released?

    Consumer confidence has just dropped the most in 4 years. Perhaps explains why the tories are not making many strides as labour fumble around.

    The Guardian have an article – http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/oct/30/consumer-confidence-slumps-monthly-fall

  9. Surprise surprise, parroting of greens being ahead leads to lib Dems falling behind …. Sheeple strike again

  10. @Ashley

    I think you can take something to reduce the pain you get when a raw nerve is touched.

    Don’t take it personally. Perhaps the best advice for a LD supporter is to go and hide in as concrete bunker for 10 years.

    When you come out the electorate may have moved on from the ‘kick the Lib Dems’ stage.

    Overall, I think the Lib Dems are still a bit ahead of Greens anyway – for now at least. And they will have more MPs after the GE too.

  11. Latest YouGov / The Sun results 29th Oct – Lab 34%, Con 31%, UKIP 17%, Greens 7%, LD 6%, SNP/PCY 4%, Others 1%,

    Are we looking at the the 2 Nationalists parties combined as the next parties to overtake the LD’s?

    The Coalition parties combined score of 37% is the lowest I can remember in a Yougov poll and correlated with that is the high disapproval score of -28%

    In 2010 Con and LD combined score was approx 60%, so a loss of 23%. they have lost support to the ROC – UKIP and the LOC – Lab, Greens and SNP.

    Lab still showing extremely poor 2010 retention and a larger number of Won’t Votes compared to the Cons. The Red Dems giving almost an 8% boost – Lab would be down in the mid twenties without them.

  12. @MOG

    “I joined a party three weeks back for the first time in my life.”

    If you have only ever been a member of one political party, you are hardly in a position to compare your experience of internal democracy in that one with your prior experience in all the other parties that you were(n’t) a member of. You might be surprised, especially if you form your impressions based on what you read on this site.

  13. Contrary to the first impressions suggested in response to last night’s headlines, the crossbreaks in today’s poll show that with 5% of 2010 Lab switching to Green, the Greens continue to do considerable damage to Labour’s chances of leading an alternative government [Snip]

  14. James Peel,

    ” pie in the sky leftie bs [Tory nasty party image] ”

    Stop a few members of the public in the street and ask them the question “Which UK political party believes in allowing desperate refugees and economic migrants to drown in the Med – men, women, children and babies – to teach them a lesson and to warn others not to attempt the trip?”

    Guess which party/ies would come top of the list, then ask yourself why pollsters keep finding that those are the ones that regularly get the highest score to the question “Which party would you never vote for?”

    Whatever the accuracy of the accusation, it’s the image in the voters’ minds that matters in the end. There’s little point in trying to blame others for the belief; the Tories continually feed the ‘tough’ image. Others see it as just plain ‘nasty’ and polling seems to confirm this widely held view.

  15. If we must have SLAB,

    then we should also have SNAT, SCON, SLIDE and SGRN.

    SLAB has the unfortunate connotation of an inert lump one walks over. I would consider it to be slang, given emphasis by the capitalisation. It would be considered shouty if people here always referred to CON, LAB rather than Con, Lab etc.

  16. NEWHOUSET

    @”Stop a few members of the public in the street and ask them the question…”

    Of course your question might prompt some thoughts about the real issues in this complex question and why the EU thinks “Mare Nostrum” was helping to create the problem.

    http://time.com/3543082/italy-navy-mare-nostrum-migrants/

    There might even be people who consider that the best way to help is to provide aid in the countries in question, reducing the pressure for this sea journey.

    [Snip]

  17. @ Ashley

    “Surprise surprise, parroting of greens being ahead leads to lib Dems falling behind …. Sheeple strike again”

    Not sure you can really complain when roughly 25% of any LD leaflet that comes through anyone’s letterbox attempts the same sort of talking up with those bar charts which are not always to scale.

  18. Colin,

    We’re talking about the image of a political party, not the rights and wrongs of that view. In particular, the measureable effects showing up in polling results.

    (I’ll refrain from responding to your ad hominem comments. It’s not a field I specialise in.)

  19. So the next election will be fought upon the issues of immigration, NHS and the economy…but not the deficit which post election will be quietly shelved as the non-issue it always was, except politically.

    Lab ought to support free movement of labour in the EU, and proper funding of the NHS. They should support public services and when the other side steam about borrowing, point out that that Colation borrowed a lot more than Labour ever did.

    Labour need to get in mid/high 30% of the voters and they look very likely y do that…there is nothing to fear but fear itself.

    Don’t try to out-nasty and out-Tory the tories. Be the alternative.

    Protect the NHS.

  20. This post may not be of any interest or relevance – obviously I think my musings are interesting but don’t we all!

    UKIP have changed the game but what drives/unites their voters? And the others that are rejecting the whole political game? I’ve recently been doing some work (have to be a bit careful here) with some groups where ‘older’ people were involved – mixed classes really. What struck me is how ANGRY many of them were! At first I couldn’t figure the logic – some were angry at ‘immigrants’, some at ‘benefit scroungers’, some at other folks who seemed to have, in some mysterious way, robbed them. A woman, retired, who told me that she took five holidays a year also told me her and her husband could ‘barely live’.

    These people couldn’t fairly be described as stupid or nasty (although sometimes illogical – but aren’t we all). Reading back through my notes I decided there was a common factor and that was fear – of growing old! I don’t mean dying, I mean facing a long old age with no idea how much it will take to finance that or even how, where or with whom they’ll live. It’s a real good news story living much longer but I think it’s scaring lots and lots of folk.

    I don’t know what it means for politics but I think that fear is there – and it’s causing uncertainty – so fear – so anger. As I said not sure if it’s of any interest!

  21. NEWHOUSET

    I think you underestimate the public’s sense of what is fair & reasonable, and what isn’t. Particularly when it comes to immigration.

    And if you ask them the question YOU posed, in the terms in which you expressed it, I think you might be surprised at the thoughtfulness of the responses.

  22. it wasn’t the nasty image of the tories that has seen the UKIP VI surge from 3.1% at the last election to over 15% (at a modest estimate now)

  23. @Nick P

    Labour ought to support free movement of labour in the EU if they want to ensure that a large chunk of their 2010 support deserts them perhaps for good. It wasn’t any commitment to socialist principles that led the EEC to adopt the principle of the free movement of labour from the outset. It wasn’t an issue for many years but since the changes in 2004 has quite rightly become one. An oversupply of people willing to work for very low pay will do nothing to stem the widening inequalities in our labour market. The CBI know that, and love the policy. C2DE voters know that too and its why Labour has to date had such difficulty holding on to its core support let alone woo back disillusioned Conservatives.

  24. “Lab ought to support free movement of labour in the EU, and proper funding of the NHS. They should support public services and when the other side steam about borrowing, point out that that Colation borrowed a lot more than Labour ever did.”

    They do all those things. A big problem for them though are some journalists and other opinion formers (cough, Owen Jones) who seem to inhabit a bizarre bubble world where Tony Blair is still leader and anything less than full-throttle Bennism is an absolutely identical platform to the Tories. It’s bizarre and totally self-defeating because they’re running down and opposing a party a good deal to the left of where the Labour Party’s been for 20 years. But the meme continues.

  25. Maura
    Thanks for the observations. I think people’s fear and anger exists across the entire age range. Outlets for this to be expressed have to be found.

    For the vast majority of people in the UK there are worries about finances, health, shelter and sustenance (the latter two bound up with the former two.)

    The continuing financial uncertainties underly the fears and worries, IMO.

    It’s common for governments (and political parties) to find targets to vilify and direct the fears and anger of people. Immigrants are an easy target.

  26. MAURA

    Very interesting observation, though I’m sure you are familiar enough with the strictures of the psephologists on UKPR to know the difference between anecdote & opinion poll.

    I wonder if the incidence fear of “old age” as such has changed much over the years?

  27. @NickP

    “Protect the NHS”

    Nothing to fear, or so we were told here by all the WM parties in September.

  28. MIKE N

    Yes, I agree. I just found the level of fear and uncertainty about old age very interesting. I wonder also if it’s comparatively recent. My Grandad died in 1982 at the age of 84 and I remember the comments about his very long life and great age etc. Now he wouldn’t be considered that way at all. Perhaps the politicians need to really address this with some big thinking.

  29. The polling on UKIP voters had them top on – worried about losing their job, worried about losing their home and narrowly second to Labour on worried about having enough money to live. So fear and insecurity is driving folk to UKIP.

    Also I think a lot of UKIP are the Tory working class voters who voted for Thatcher but are alienated by the present Cons who don’t ‘look after people like me’

  30. NICKP

    “Protect the NHS.”

    Who do you suggest people should vote for then? Neither of the large parties are offering a solution to the 30-37 billion black hole in funding for the NHS. Yes Labour say they will spend another 2.5 billion a year, but the funding of that looks very shaky since the idea of a mansion tax started falling apart. So neither party is really offering anything.

  31. James Peel,

    “it wasn’t the nasty image of the tories that has seen the UKIP VI surge from 3.1% at the last election to over 15% (at a modest estimate now)”

    But was it one of the reasons why, despite almost unprecedentedly favourable circumstances, the Tories failed to win an overall majority in 2010.

    Don’t you ever wonder why the party has gone 22 years since last winning an overall majority in a GE? And, if the polls are accurate, an election a couple of days ago would have resulted in failure yet again. Should they lose to Labour (or another combination) in 2015, the Tories could be looking at a period of 28 years – yes, 28 years! – when they can’t win an overall majority.

    This isn’t rocket science; there’s something badly amiss. A previously fairly successful party, with legitimate policies and a substantial hard core body of support, cannot now gain those extra few percentages to take them over the line.

    Could it be that the Tory Home Secretary, Theresa May, was correct when she said that the general public see the Tories as The Nasty Party? And, since her warning, has the party been detoxified?

  32. Couper2802

    “Also I think a lot of UKIP are the Tory working class voters who voted for Thatcher but are alienated by the present Cons who don’t ‘look after people like me”

    I agree with that, but I think we can probably assume that Osborne will do something about that in the December statement and the final budget before the election.

  33. Couper2802
    “Also I think a lot of UKIP are the Tory working class voters who voted for Thatcher but are alienated by the present Cons who don’t ‘look after people like me’”

    Polling evidence?

  34. @TOH and C2802
    “a lot of UKIP are the Tory working class voters who voted for Thatcher but are alienated by the present Cons who don’t ‘look after people like me”
    Agreed, but they haven’t voted Tory for years. They are in the % UKIP is picking up from ‘did not vote’ Do you think a sop in the budget will get them back?
    Look at the numbers (not the %) who voted for Thatcher’s conservatives. UKIP have a lot more to get to yet. A lot live in Clacton, and in Rochdale by the look of it.

    If Labour were consistently safely about 5% clear of the Tories, the present fluctuations in their % would be dismissed as expected from MoE. Posters here are getting carried away by every small change, just like ordinary voters and the press.

  35. @Howard

    First points on insecurity was polling evidence second was my opinion based on ‘looks after people like me’ polling evidence. In Thatcher’s time she got a large chunk of non-union working-middle class votes by clearly being seen to be on their side – council house sales, shares in privatised industries.

  36. Mark Smithson has an interesting post on PB looking at putative Green voters’ intentions when asked about how they would vote in THEIR constituency. Greens switch in favour of the Coalition parties as often as they switch in favour of Labour.

  37. One shouldn’t exaggerate the supposed popularity of the Tories in the 1980s. The primary reason for their success was the effect of having a weak and divided opposition under the FPTP system.

  38. @Welsh Borderer re oppositions coming 3rd in a by-election within 7 months of a general election they then won.

    Liverpool Edge Hill in March 1979 seems to fit your bill.
    Liberal gain from Labour with the Conservatives in a poor 3rd place with under 10% of the vote.

    This in a seat where only 9 years earlier in 1970 the prince of darkness himself, Michael Howard, polled 42% of the vote for the Conservatives and came within 4,000 votes of winning.

    This Labour majority of 3,900 is reasonably comparable with the notional 2005 election result of a Conservative majority of 1,500 for Rochester & Strood on the current boundaries. 9 years to transform a seat politically & demographically is obviously plenty of time.

    All Rochester is likely to prove is that demographic and cultural change in voting patterns can quickly make election results from 10-15 years earlier irrelevant in drawing conclusions nationally from a one of by-election.

  39. I agree with that, but I think we can probably assume that Osborne will do something about that in the December statement and the final budget before the election.

    laughably optimistic. you can’t fatten a pig on market day.

  40. rogerh

    One shouldn’t exaggerate the supposed popularity of the Tories in the 1980s

    They were popular. Thatcher never got less than 42% of the vote in 4 general elections…that’s simply not on the cards these days, for various reasons.

  41. -28 Approval in today’s poll must surely be ringing alarm bells in the government.

  42. PC,

    If you call Thatcher’s party ‘popular’, then what do you call Blair’s 1997 result?

  43. NEWHOUSET
    “Could it be that the Tory Home Secretary, Theresa May, was correct when she said that the general public see the Tories as The Nasty Party?”

    Yes, it could be, possibly mainly among C-,DE voters who are bearing the brunt of a cost of living crisis, unemployment and reduced benefits.
    Could it also be that possibly more among ABC+ voters, they have become the party of poor long-term judgement and integrity on responding to EU immigration, as a development that they signed up to, and from which, if they responded with the clarity that marks their historic foreign and economic policy, they would support as good, with the right domestic policies, for the UK’s future?

  44. @Newhouset

    I share your view about the difficulties the Tories face with their image but to raise this fact in terms of its impact on polling, [snip] This is a shame because while we all have our various political views and party preferences (alright, most not all, allegedly) this website should be about discussing the strengths and weaknesses of a political party’s position and how it might explain its polling and electoral performance. In that context, it is entirely reasonable to raise the hypothesis that a negative image of the Tory Party still lingers amongst sections of the electorate and that this may explain their lack of success electorally over the years.

    To raise inconvenient truths isn’t bias it’s actually a way of informing a debate. Many Labour and Lib Dem supporters have volunteered reasons for their own party’s woes in the polls, some highly critical of policies and personalities, some relating to image too, but to suggest that the Conservative Party isn’t still saddled with the “nasty party” image flies in the face of all the available polling evidence.

    By the way, to talk about the “Nasty Party” image isn’t to necessarily agree that it’s either fair or accurate, this site isn’t the place for that discussion anyway, it is instead to recognise its existence and potential impact on polling. I’d be interested to hear from Tory supporters [ahem – can we please not think about it that way. Anyone responding in a “as a Tory supporter” type way would be ignoring the comments policy – AW], assuming that they don’t think such a negative image exists, as to what else is then contributing to their electoral and polling problems, now stretching back almost 25 years.

    P.S. Your point about “ad hominen” attacks is a good one too. Far too many for my liking on UKPR these days. Tongue-in-cheek, humorous mickey taking I’m fine with, but there’s a certain snidery beginning to creep in that worries me a bit.

  45. Serious Fraud Office has launched a criminal investigation into the £263m accounting scandal at Britain’s largest retailer.

    The Indy

  46. I.e Tesco.

  47. Northumbrian Scot

    Edge Hill 79 is indeed a good potential parallel with Rochester – I remember getting the result on TV and concluding (correctly) that the mood of the country was “get the rascals out” and so they did a few weeks later despite Thatcher’s inferior personal ratings c/w Callaghan (cf Miliband & Cameron).

    So I have to withdraw my prediction of Labour defeat next May if they are a bad third in Rochester, I suppose. Yet something still tells me that Labour’s cumulative performance in several byelections in the 2013-14 period is unlikely to be a foundation for GE victory, especially when added to mediocre local election results outside London and major E & W Cities, and accompanied by some shockingly bad performances in Scotland. Again I hope personally I am wrong but ….

  48. Crossbat,

    Thanks for your comments. To be fair, I don’t think that there has been any serious accusation of bias against me. In fact, I’m surprised how civilised the few responses have been.

    All I was asking was if the ‘Nasty Party’ tag is, at least partly, responsible for the Tory Party’s indifferent performance over the last twenty years and up ’til today. Not only the failure to win an OM over such a long period and the disappointing 2010 result but also the polling evidence of the Party still being a no-go area to so many voters.

    If the tag is not a significant problem, then what is the root cause of the Tories’ mediocre performance. (I’m thinking long term here and not considering the current, perhaps flash-in-the-pan, UKIP effect.)

  49. With regard to the Conservative poor polling position could it be something to do with the [perceived] poor record of the current administration?

    [Snip – discussion of whether the government record is any good or not is, alas, not compatible with non-partisan discussion- AW]

1 2 3 4