Survation had a new Scottish poll out for the Daily Record this morning. It showed the same sort of surge in SNP support that we’ve seen in other recent Scottish polls from Ipsos MORI, YouGov and Panelbase – in this case Westminster voting intentions are CON 17%, LAB 24%, LDEM 6%, SNP 46%, UKIP 5% (tabs are here.) I don’t imagine uniform swing calculators are really any sort of guide to how things would work out in a re-alignment of this sort of huge scale, but on paper these figures would give the SNP 52 seats in Scotland and Labour just five, and in practice it would surely produce a huge number of SNP gains. The question remains whether Labour can mount a recovery in Scotland prior to the election once they have elected a new leader, or whether this SNP surge will be maintained.

This afternoon there was also some reporting of a new Opinium poll (tabs here). Opinium don’t seem to have officially released voting intention figures, but they are provided as crossbreaks on a new poll, so we can see that the VI figures would have been CON 34%, LAB 33%, LDEM 5%, UKIP 18%, GRN 4%. This would be the first Tory lead from Opinium since the Omnishambles budget, and the lowest any poll has shown the Lib Dems so far this Parliament.


291 Responses to “Survation Scottish poll and a Tory lead from Opinium”

1 3 4 5 6
  1. Does a poll (Stockport S) in which 35% of 2010 voters

    !Con 30% : Lab 31% : LD 45% : Oth 32%)

    say they don’t know how they’ll vote this time, tell us very much?

  2. @OldNat

    Tells is that maybe the SNP should stand there (joke)

  3. Well if I read it aright Nat, yes. It is now putting Tories top?

  4. It’s also not clear that Survation have done any political weighting. The recalled 2010 percentages are:

    Con 44.7% (38.9)

    Lab 40.9% (38.3)

    Lib Dem 10.4% (15.1)

    Other 4.0% (7.7)

    Actuals in brackets. That said this is an ultra marginal and Labour should be well ahead not just behind (or maybe just ahead if you adjust).

  5. Good Evening All.
    JOHN B:
    I think the projected House of Commons figures will have been changed by May 2015, with more Tory MP’s and far fewer LD MP’s.

  6. OLDNAT
    Allan Christie
    “Actually think I might become a kipper.”
    ……

    “With your English heritage, shouldn’t you become a bloater instead?”
    _____

    Hmm it sounds medically off putting but I would settle for a Buckling to resonate with my birth place proximity to Buckinghamshire.

  7. Ashcroft polled Stockton South in May with a result of

    Conservative 36
    Labour 43
    LD 5
    UKIP 12
    Other 3

    http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Stockton-South.pdf

    So that was a very clear Labour lead back then. If it is now neck and neck, that means that all of those other marginals polls that showed Labour with big leads may be showing something similar!

  8. ChrisLane1945

    Numbers are important (as your own demonstrates)! You were replying to JohnB160, who, I believe, it someone other than JohnB, the current writer.
    Apologies to JohnB160 for having taken what would probably have been his/her (one never knows!) preferred nomenclature.

    I’ve not been commenting much recently due to work commitments and the belief that others are saying better what I would be saying were I to contribute. That’s not to say I’m not following the erudite and learned (and also the less so…) here on UKPR.

    My guess is that I shall have more to say following tomorrow’s by-election and Scottish Labour’s leadership election. Hopefully the former will produce some interesting developments in the Tory south; equally I’m rather hoping the latter will not have much effect on present Scottish polling levels, although I rather suspect I’m in cloud cuckoo land on that one!

  9. @Chris Hornet

    “I happen to believe that a large proportion of the 83% that actually vote in 2015 will go on to vote SNP”

    Let’s assume that 83% of Yes voters vote SNP in May. We will also have to assume lower turnout than the referendum (but higher than the rUK). Let’s ignore the issues of turnout, as it can be used to make either side of the debate work.

    83% of 45% is 37.35%

    Now have a quick read of this:

    http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2013/08/nationalists-for-no/

    “According to MORI only 70% of those who would currently vote to keep Alex Salmond in power say they will vote Yes, while 17% indicate they propose to vote No. Even Panelbase, whose figures tend to be rather rosier for the Yes side, report on average that just 68% of SNP voters would currently vote Yes and that no less 14% are backing the No side.”

    So there’s a figure, somewhere between 14% and 32% of SNP folk that in 2013 planned to vote ‘No’. The polling at that time was approximately:

    Lab 40%
    SNP 25%
    Con 20%
    Lib 9%
    UKIP 3%
    Green 2%
    Others 1%

    Lets take the 14% and 17% numbers from the quote, err on the side of caution and call it 15% for simplicity. So 15% of 25% would have been 3.75%.

    Take that and add it to the 37.35% and we get 41.1%, which is remarkably similar to the current YG polling average for the SNP. Perhaps it’s a complete coincidence.

    You can see the MAD averages here:

    h ttp://www.statgeek.co.uk/polling/median-absolute-deviation-mad/recent-mad-poll/

    Using the data from the UK and Scotland charts in the Electoral Calculus site gives:

    Lab 307
    Con 264 (assume any UKIP seats gained are in here somewhere)
    Nat 45 (36 gains, so 42 of these are SNP)
    Lib 15
    Other 1 (Green?)
    Northern Ireland 18

    Labour could probably manage a minority government, with occasional help from Lib, SNP or Con. In reality many bills will get passed by Lab / Con agreeing on many issues. Given that Sinn Fein do not sit, we have a majority of 323 required, and Lab and Lib would be 322, so pretty close. Lab / SNP would be 349, with 296 against, so a majority of 53.

    I don’t generally believe the SNP on 45% or more as credible for 2015. Labour’s core low point seems to be 25%, Con 15%, Lib 5%, with Greens and UKIP making perhaps 5% between them when low. That’s 50% when all the other parties are at their lowest, and at least one of them is bound to have a better election than the others.

    However, the SNP’s recent membership explosion suggests that their low points of 15% will probably have risen for the time being. I would be very surprised if the SNP polled less than 25% when at a low point, which would suggest that Labour are unlikely to rise above 40% for some time to come.

    Lastly, I am not a Scottish National Party activist. I have never been a party member or activist (any party), but I find the SNP to be the least dislikeable at present (I can’t stand Jim Sillars or Alex Neil for example, but have plenty of time for Angus MacNeil), and they can cause the Westminster parties far more headaches, which is surely better for democracy in general?

  10. Movement since May (different polling firms of course, so may also be some ‘house effect’ particularly as this is Survation and we know they generally show higher UKIP numbers)

    Cons +3
    Lab – 6
    LD – 2
    UKIP +6
    Others NC

  11. @Postage Included – yours of 2.06

    I tend to agree with your conclusion that the present situation is chaotic. I get rather annoyed with contributors who seem to think that we are still in a two party set up – that a one or two point lead for their particular party of choice will lead to a definite outcome, when, with all the churn and ‘minor parties’ still showing considerable advances (and no sign of that going away) the FPTP system is likely to produce a whole tranche of strange results come May. IMO.

    And perhaps

  12. @Old Nat

    Re: Stockton South (not Stockport South as you suggested)

    Surely the very fact that such a large % say they are uncertain how they will vote in indicative of the present rather chaotic situation. If the Labour VIs are truly down as suggested by the latest Stockton South poll, then it looks interesting for a whole series of north of England Labour targets.Equally, of course, the volatility means that it is all to play for, and that Labour may equally recoup the, at present, lost votes.

  13. “and perhaps” ought to have been removed before posting. Apologies.

  14. Statgeek

    Thanks for yours of 6 p.m.
    Very helpful – though I still think slightly too positive for SNP

  15. JOHN B>
    Many thanks for your reply and I look forward to your erudition being manifested on UKPR soon I was replying to JOHN B 160. who is. as you say, probably not the same person as JOHN B, to whom I am responding at the moment, I think.

  16. John B

    The large numbers of DKs in Stockton Thanks for the correction) did suggest to me that we are in Alec’s Milk Marketing Board Territory.

    For 35% of the electorate to say DK (often meaning “don’t care, probably won’t vote, but I’m not going to admit it”) is quite normal.

    For 35% of 2010 voters to say DK seems more likely to mean that they have not decided who to vote for, aren’t convinced their choice last time was particularly good, and they’ll make up their minds nearer the election.

  17. Anyone fancy a job?

    “Role: General Secretary – Scotland Salary: £54,016.30 + £2,249 Location: Scottish Labour Party HQ Glasgow”

  18. @Oldnat

    “Something happening in Stockton?”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockton_South_%28UK_Parliament_constituency%29#Elections_in_the_2010s

    Con / Lab marginal, and interesting that UKIP isn’t changing the marginal balance. Lib Dems are way down instead, which looks really odd for those that don’t think of churn.

  19. @Oldnat

    http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/11/poll-for-unite-says-labour-will-fail-to-take-its-seventh-target-seat-from-the-tories/

    “Poll for Unite says Labour will fail to take its seventh target seat from the Tories”

    I suppose that’s a big-ish headline.

  20. Regarding theoretical models to predict the next GE, earlier in the thread,

    Given the old swing-thingy doesn’t really go Con to Lab and Lab to Con any more, but has the additional dimensions that have become a factor this Parliament, surely it’s time to create the ‘quantum string chaos theory of parliamentary swing’?

    All the new factors have made the old model useless (sorry Robin Hood). We do have a few physicists here, and I’m sure a dose of thorium would be helpful.

  21. @Statgeek

    If Labour can’t take Stockton South back with ease, it’s will a terrible GE for them.

  22. Is everyone sure UKIP is going to win tomorrow? Reason I am asking is that loads of cabinet ministers were there today and Cameron has been there five times. Usually if the party thinks they are going to lose they avoid the place

  23. Statgeek

    A biggish headline – but ignoring 35% of the previous voters would mean that result is calculated on a turnout of around 44% in one of the closest marginals.

    If turnout is that low in such a constituency in May then democracy is in even more dire straits than we had thought.

  24. Constituency polls do not actually have a very good track record and have often been wide of the mark. For some reason it appears more difficult to put together a representative sample in a single seat than across the country as a whole. I suspect that it would be a mistake to be over reliant on Ashcroft’s polls or to take them too literally.

  25. Couper

    “Is everyone sure UKIP is going to win tomorrow?”

    Well, YG asked me today who would win. With my massively intimate knowledge of the constituency, the candidates, and the local issues :-) I said UKIP.

  26. @COUPER2802
    It is apposite that I was posting about UKIP’s attitude towards immigrants just yesterday. I mentioned a predilection for repatriation,
    blow me down Reckless has been reckless, blabbing all sorts of stuff on the subject. Its embarrassed UKIP, ( well it would have embarrassed any normal party), whether it damages the Reckless vote, I dinna ken.

  27. @Couper

    Ukip will win for sure. The questions are (a) by what margin and (b) what the other parties need to poll so that it isn’t considered a disaster for them.

  28. Smithson on his twitter a/c says:

    Survation Unite Stockton S poll NOT past voted weighted. 48. 2% of sample were 2010 CON voters when actual figure was 38.9%

    https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/535148373175963649

  29. @ Couper

    Usually if the party thinks they are going to lose they avoid the place
    ________________________________

    I think it is more to strike fear in the heart of the next set of defectors. That is really the big risk for them here, UKIP winning one seat is pretty meaningless, but if it sparks lots of defections it could prove a disaster.

    IMHO…

  30. Roly

    That is a foul disparagement of Nessie who is more believable than any party leader, any where, any time.

    That includes Nicola Sturgeon, who had the temerity to become FM-elect on International Men’s Day – thus undermining the absolute control that we men have rightly exercised for eons.

    Harrumph!

  31. ‘Smithson on his twitter a/c says:
    Survation Unite Stockton S poll NOT past voted weighted. 48. 2% of sample were 2010 CON voters when actual figure was 38.9%’

    You’d think UNITE would insist that Survation did things a little better than this or do they have another agenda?

  32. Apparently, this is also “World Toilet Day”. Is this a deliberate insult to the “seat uppers” from the “seat downers”.

    It’s an international conspiracy, and we should leave the UN now!

  33. OLD NAT
    I thought she looked quite fetching today, professional but fetching.
    Dare I say, a bit like Maggie in her prime.

    I can now be shot on two counts.
    1) Looking at a woman as a woman.
    2) Giving praise to Thatcher.

  34. Well I am no expert on weighting but looking at table 6

    Q4. Thinking back to the General Election in May 2010, can you recall which party you voted for in that election?

    Conservative 29%
    Labour 26.6%
    LD 6.8%

    So not sure where Smithson gets his figures from, but I would say he is wrong… I would trust Roger Mexico’s figures above as he is our expert and even Anthony rates his contributions!

  35. Roly

    You’re too late.

    Ruth Davidson already made the comparison of Nicola with Maggie (in a good and clever congratulatory speech)

  36. @Roland

    The SNP have been fortunate to have followed one charismatic leader with another.

    NS has always struck me as someone with more command of the detail than AS. She’s a very impressive debator too.

  37. @ANNE IN WALES
    I am really very sorry. BTW, I suppose those commentators write for the Guardian?

  38. @RAF
    More command of detail than her ex (male) boss or nearest rival.
    Very spooky, do you believe in reincarnation?

  39. Well,
    I wasn’t aware Tim Montgomerie did but who knows.By the way it was the Guardian who were in the Vanguard of the attacks on EM last week.What is it
    with this persistence of the belief that the Guardian supports Labour.They support the LibDems.

  40. re -Stockton South poll
    I suspect that Smithson may have been referring to the unweighted data.

  41. RAF

    “NS has always struck me as someone with more command of the detail than AS”

    Well, it’s a lawyer replacing an economist.

    A cynic (Who? Me?) might suggest that lawyers use forensic analysis to get the guilty off the hook, while economists speak with great authority on things they don’t understand.

  42. What would the poll of Stockton S result be if it were weighted?

  43. @Graham

    I suspect that Smithson may have been referring to the unweighted data.
    __________________________________

    Yes, that does work out to 48.1.

    But a bit of a daft comment from Smithson imho, the weighting that is applied reduces the overstatement of Tories down to Roger’s figures, and the 2010 Labour voters are also overstated! It is simply the age old problem of pollsters cannot find enough people who remembered they voted for the Lib Dems in 2010.

  44. “What is it with this persistence of the belief that the Guardian supports Labour.They support the Lib Dems.”

    Really Ann? I would not have thought, with its circulation, it would have mattered who it supported, unless the online viewing is a magnitude greater than that of the printed version. Even then, your statement had my eyebrows disappearing over my forehead.

  45. NewForestRadical – Survation never do any political weighting in their constituency polls.

  46. Howard,
    I regret the state of your eyebrows.However if you can show me an article by a
    guardian leader writer critiscing the LibDems my eyebrows will be in a state to
    equal yours.

  47. STATGEEK

    Your post at 6pm……….One word for it..
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .MAD :-)

  48. Apparently, Ken Clarke has said of compulsory voting, ‘You could’ve an election settled by winos & people who come out to avoid a fine’

    But haven’t MPs always been involved in settling elections?

  49. @Howard

    The Guardian do indeed have an extremely large online readership. According to the NRS in August, it was the most read UK newspaper site, with 8 million web-only UK readers in June.

    The days of judging the reach of a newspaper by print sales are long gone. The Guardian is probably now read by more people than it ever has been. So who it supports probably does matter.

1 3 4 5 6