Tonight’s YouGov poll for the Sun has topline figures of CON 34%, LAB 33%, LDEM 7%, UKIP 14%, GRN 6%. It has a Tory lead of one point, following a Labour lead in yesterday’s YouGov/Sun poll. Realistically we are in a position where the two main parties are so close that normal random variation is going to regularly spit out both Labour and Tory leads until and unless one party manages to pull substantially ahead of the other.

Rather out of the blue there was also a Survation constituency poll of Stockton South earlier today – a Conservative held ultra-marginal, currently represented by James Wharton. The poll had topline figures of CON 39%(nc), LAB 37%(-1), LDEM 3%(-12), UKIP 18%(+15). Changes are from the general election and technically represent a tiny swing from Labour to the Conservatives. Clearly this is better than the Conservatives are doing in the national polls and they’d be pleased to hold such a vulnerable marginal, but it’s also just one single poll with a relatively small sample size (35% said don’t knows, so the topline figures are based on 571 people). Tabs are here.


228 Responses to “YouGov/Sun – CON 34, LAB 33, LD 7, UKIP 14, GRN 6”

1 2 3 4 5
  1. @CARFREW
    But Tories are not the party of multiculturalism.

  2. OLDNAT

    One final point just to be clear. I don.t think that anything i suggested above abrogate international treaties to use your words. Ir would be just part of the normal parliamentary process in the UK and i would not have any problem with the two year period to sort out the technicalities.

  3. @Roland

    Lol, if you say so. There are surely other differences ls between Tories and Ukip tho’?…

  4. @Oldnat

    “The only party which, within their area might have achieved the opposite wasn’t asked about”

    Interesting. Who made that decision, I wonder?

  5. @COUPER2802
    Its very difficult for me Coup. I swear my comment about the phoning session is not bullshine. It completely lifted my spirits and I now cannot see a kipper win @ 15% margin. Therefore, Tories 3 or 4% behind and Labour on 12 % overall, will put the feline among the fouls of the air.

  6. “So it is definitely happening then?”

    Not a clue but seeing as you’re the one professing to have been phone canvassing, maybe you can tell us. Whether you would be believed is something I could not guarantee though.

  7. @Richard

    “the London cross break is one of the most volatile”

    Plus or minus 6% MoE generally. I’m fiddling with my 25-poll weighted MAD calc today, so have some MAD values to add to your data (in brackets)

    UKIP 9-19% (11.7)
    Cons 24-38% (33.0)
    Lab 32-45% (37.9)

    Hopefully that’s a slightly better guess than a guess. :))

  8. Roland
    Surely on Polling Day you are simply seeking to get supporters out rather than canvass for votes?

  9. CARFREW
    Yes of course there are differences. But we are both parties of the right. I can easily see why an old fashioned Tory like myself, might go over to the dark side. But, a person so sensitive as to have Labour values, especially after Reckless being reckless, oh dear me no.

  10. @Roland

    Plenty of Tories have voted LibDem in the past tactically to stop Labour, despite Libdems having manifestos rather to the left of Labour…

  11. @GRAHAM
    Indeed, it goes like this: Hello Mr Graham, just calling from the local
    Conservative party office to check if you have voted yet?
    Mr Graham, yes we’ve been down this morning, and don’t worry we voted for Kelly.
    ME, Oh great, well thanks for that, we really appreciate your support.
    Bye Bye.

  12. @ ROLAND
    So these were people were people who had already promised to vote Tory?

  13. @CARFREW
    Indeed but whatever lunacy the LD’s have proffered, it has certainly never been racist. Furthermore, we are not the sensitive flowers who get so upset about “hate” language as many Labour supporters seem to do.

  14. Labour supported UKIP in the Euros against the SNP but that is Labour activists and politicos Labour voters have more principles so I wouldn’t expect them to back UKIP to thwart the Tories.

  15. Graham
    This morning and early afternoon it seemed like that. But, overall the number of dissenters, whilst a lot less than usual were still there.
    Response from my opening; we have voted but not for your lot thank you. Ok Mr Graham, as long as you have voted. Bye Bye.

  16. rolandgatinois

    So it is definitely happening then?

    Well if mean Labour voters voting tactically for UKIP, I did an analysis of what the Ashcroft polls showed earlier:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/9070/comment-page-2#comment-951497

    and that suggested about 20% of them would do so, half of whom might stay on for next May. Some of it may be cunning tactics, though much of it is directed against all the Westminster Parties.

    Whether it has stayed like that is another matter. The Labour candidate seems to have been generally agreed to be very good and both Mr Reckless and his Tory opponent less so, with the latter trying to out-kip her ex-colleague which might alienate potential ex-Labs and -LDs despite (or because of) Cameron asking for their votes to keep UKIP out. So there is reason for movement in all sorts of directions.

    The polls we’ve had for R&S have all looked a little Blue to me with 2010 Conservatives over-represented. Which might indicate a number of things, but, in those polls that do weight to 2010 result, could have been under-estimating the Tory vote if the number of 2010 voters was due to other reason such as misremembering.

    Incidentally I would imagine that if you are phone canvassing this late you are mainly being given number of people who are leaning towards the Tories for a final shove, so you ought to be getting a good response or they’ve not being doing their canvassing right.

  17. @COUPER 2802
    A very fair answer to a fair question.

  18. Roger in Mexico
    Perhaps that is the answer.

  19. Many Tories voted for George Galloway at the Bradford West byelection .

  20. Genuinely fascinating electoral contest coming up in May. Polls very tight, new dynamics north and south, and all manner of permutations for votes and seats. No question that Tories are back in the game, but only due to the weakness of their opponents, but to be perfectly fair, tradition in the UK is not to reward a heavily defeated party with a straight win next time around, so Labourites shouldn’t be too disheartened if they don’t cross the line in the end.

    Amongst all of this, I sense we are also witnessing one of the great movements within UK electoral history, as the Tory party comes slowly towards the conclusion of a thirty year struggle over Europe.

    They have become increasingly caught on the horns of a dilemma, urging free trade and open markets on the one hand, whilst seeking to preserve national sovereignty on the other. Ultimately, these factors are irreconcilable, and this debate is finally reaching it’s climax after over three decades of not so gentle foreplay.

    Tory leaders have repeatedly sought various formula to retain party unity and discipline in the face of seemingly implacable opposing forces, with varying degrees of success. Cameron’s in/out referendum attempt was the latest, and probably least successful, leading as it has directly to defections and the rise of UKIP.

    While GE2015 will be played against a complex background of much more than EU matters, we are beginning to see the endgame within Tory circles. The logic of Cameron’s stance is inexorable – he has forced upon his party and its members the need to crystallize it’s position into a binary yes or no to the EU. In doing so, he also ends the prospect of vague renegotiated change at some unspecified future point. Everything becomes fixed, and the choice must be made.

    This effectively ends the Tories overriding survival mechanism on this most toxic of issues for them, which is to bind themselves together to face down the threat from Labour, whilst politely ignoring the fact that they simply cannot agree on the EU. This ends with a Tory win in 2015. Historic Tory pragmatism ends with it.

    Seeing the contributions from Tory MPs, candidates, Ministers and former ministers over the last few days in response to this by election tells me that the game is nearly up. After thirty years of fudging it, the real decision is approaching, and to be honest, I don’t believe the Tory party is strong enough to survive what this will entail.

    Fascinating stuff for the post GE landscape.

  21. Roland
    I am just a bit surprised you would call any voter who had not already promised you support.

  22. @Graham
    @Roland

    In my experience – If the voters that you think are going to vote for you – are actually voting for you and have been out to vote then you usually win.

  23. New Survation/Unite poll on Rochester: Ukip 48% (+48), Con 33% (-16), Lab 16% (-13), Lib Dems 1% (-16).”

  24. @Couper
    That surely depends on how many promises of support you have been given!

  25. @Graham

    What you don’t want to do is remind the people that aren’t voting for you to go out to vote.

    But I imagine they are using previous Tory canvass returns – so if most are still voting Tory that is good news for Cons.

  26. @Graham

    Yes you have to be in a winnable seat. But the tactic is identify enough votes to win then get them out to vote. I have been part of that effort it many times and it works.

  27. Skippy

    Fieldwork was conducted by telephone from 27-28 October so I’m not sure the numbers would be the same now.

    I can never understand why pollsters ‘hoard’ polls like this – surely it serves no purpose when the fieldwork dates are so easy to find & makes it easier for opponents to discredit the company.

  28. I be surprised if UKIP/Con/Lab manage to hoover up 97% between them.

  29. RolandGatinois – “It interests me that the excuse of Labour voting UKIP, is being pushed forward by some posters. Is this to pre-excuse a very weak performance, or do they really hate the Tories so much, they could vote for a party that flirts with the repatriation of “hard working families”.”

    Well the Conservatives have been banging on about “Vote UKIP, get Labour” and Labour voters in Tory strongholds have heeded the message and are voting tactically to give Cameron a bloody nose and help Mr Miliband! They’re trying to help hard working families indirectly – it’s elementary Game Theory. Expect this to happen all over Kent in the General Election.

    Re your canvass this morning – you were getting out the vote, right? So probably speaking exclusively to known Conservative supporters?

  30. Re new Survation/Unite poll on Rochester: Ukip 48% (+48), Con 33% (-16), Lab 16% (-13), Lib Dems 1% (-16).

    This really demonstrates the futility of Clacton and Rochester. There is no real shift in public opinion here at all. For the electors of Rochester it’s win-win; they get to kick the Govt and keep their MP. Not dissimilar to the weird David Davis by-election. As I said before, how can Reckless lose.

  31. Surely this is the same poll Survation/Unite released at the end of October? Figures are identical.

  32. The bookies have UKIP as short as 1/100. Surely that is going too far? Unless somebody has had a sneak peak at postal votes…

  33. Skippy

    That’s not a new poll it was released on 30 October. I think they may be releasing a new poll at close of polling and this is just “Here’s one I made earlier” to provide some context.

  34. @oldnat, @the other Howard. I find myself in the unusual position of telling you that you are both right. In the event of a UK government deciding that the UK should leave the EU, there are broadly two ways of doing it. Version 1 involves using the exit clause in the treaties: this involves giving two year’s notice of exit, after which exit would be automatic (unless both parties agree otherwise). Version 2 involves the UK government and parliament passing acts that sever UK membership unilaterally at a date of the UK’s choosing. The former method is to be preferred, (in the same way that turning the door handle is to be preferred over blowing the b***** doors off), but both are entirely feasible.

  35. CANDY
    So sorry to have offended you.

  36. RolandGatinois – Huh?

  37. Alec,

    One could stress that national sovereignty and free trade ARE compatible, but politically very difficult (though not impossible) in that they require unilateral free-trade, which big business, wealthy farmers and academically influential export/industrial-fetishists don’t like.

    We could leave the EU tomorrow and have free trade with the whole world, and cheaper stuff for the poor, but if the Tories even suggested that then they’d have to kiss a lot of corporate and millionaires’ funding, and no party of any significance on the right will ever propose it. Indeed, even the Old Labour argument “Let’s get our food from whoever sells it to us cheapest” isn’t even on the political radar today.

  38. Survation R&S
    Lib Dems 1% !!!
    Bit high?

  39. Ukip activists have just walked into my local in Upnor and got loads of stick for ordering European beer!

  40. @CANDY
    I just thought you must be a bit upset, if you think a man who has been a Tory activist since 1970, needs to have tactical voting explained. Further, as I thought I explained to another poster, there was a degree of dissent today, but much agreement. The much respected Roger Mexico already made the same suggestion as you, up page. Your post simply confirms that despite some unpleasant tendencies regarding race, Labour supporters, who usually take the subject to unheard of levels of cant, are prepared to vote UKIP.

  41. Bookies giving odds of 1/100 on UKIP.

    Now I’m not a betting man, and I am sometimes a bit confused by the references to ‘odds’ on this site. I was always under the impression that odds changed to reflect the amount of bets being placed on a certain outcome, rather than being reliant only on the betting company’s assessment of the likelihood of said outcome. So if one person bets on an outcome, the odds may well be quite favourable. Should one million decide to bet that way, the odds would decrease dramatically. Obviously there has to be a starting point when the ‘book’ is opened – initial odds will be offered on the basis of assessed likelihood.

    Now my point, or question, is this: to what extent are the odds currently being offered on the result of the next GE dependent on the betting public and to what extent are they due to a realistic assessment of the outcome?

    Or is there, in practical terms, no difference between the two?

  42. Jack Sheldon
    If it’s 1 /100 on UKIP in R and S, I think I might have relaxed my attitude to betting. A 1% return in a few hours beats my deposit account in Natwest at the same *annual rate* (note), fairly comfortably.

  43. I am actually surprised they are still taking bets. I bet (pun) they are specifying a limit (probably 5p).

  44. John B

    With regard to odds, sporting index and the exchange section on betfair are pure markets, entirely determined by the flow of money on outcomes….

    Fixed odds are betting odds which are changed by the bookies on account of the flow of money. These change less and often can be slow to be adjusted. Fixed odds are the odds you get at ladbrokes, william hill, coral, paddy power etc.

    I and other punters prefer the betfair and sporting index exchanges because in fixed odds the bookie has an “overround”, which is their profit.

  45. @Roland Gatinois

    ‘Labour supporters, who usually take the subject to unheard of levels of cant, are prepared to vote UKIP.’

    Surely you are only suggesting that everyone is playing poker. The ‘tactical vote’ is so fundamental to the way many analysts view VIs that some forget that there are people around who only ever vote positively for their preferred option.

    That said, a Labour supporter’s traditional first task is to defeat the Tories – in any way possible, perhaps. Thus, for example, the ridiculous idea being proposed that to vote SNP is to vote (in effect) for the Tories. It’s the only way some people can understand political life. So if UKIP wins in R&S then it will, undoubtedly, be thanks to some Labour supporters.

    But the real issue goes deeper than that. The real issue, IMO, is that the 20th century political system is gradually crumbling, due, in part, to the large number of people who feel disenfranchised by the present situation whereby the two big political parties have abrogated their responsibilities to keep control of the economy and have handed over power to the multinationals and so on. Many see the EU in the same light – mistakenly, IMO, but there we are.

    One way of changing this situation would be to insist that no-one be elected to parliament until he or she has lived in the real world for a while…
    and can speak in ways which communicate with ‘ordinary’ people.

    (I’m just feeling a bit grumpy so please feel free to ignore the above…..)

  46. In Clacton we had a good response from our canvassed Labour voters on polling day as well. The overhwelming majority turned out to vote Labour.

    The problem was there weren’t enough of them……:(

  47. Martyn

    Indeed. I made that very point. However the consequences of the two actions are likely to be very different.

  48. @Peter Crawford

    many thanks for explaining that.

    So you are saying that it is the flow of money, rather than the likelihood of the event, which determines odds?

    You are also saying, of course, that people prefer to bet on things which are going to happen rather than things which are impossible, although there will be some entertainment involved in betting on something which might happen, given a bit of luck and a following wind.

    My point is that often on this site we see odds quoted with the comment that the bookies are telling us something. But if the bookies are only reacting to events (money coming in from the betting public) then the bookies are only the messengers, not the creators of the message.

    Just wondering…..

  49. @RolandGatinois – I think it must be you who is upset, hence the way you are allocating opinions to me! But I forgive you since you are probably too close to the events in Rochester to be objective.

    Think of things from the point of view of the voter in Rochester and Stroud. What on earth is the difference between having Mr Reckless as an MP with a Tory badge and having Mr Reckless as an MP with a UKIP badge? Absolutely none. It’s the same old Mr Reckless.

    If you are a Lab or LibDem voter in that constituency you know that you won’t get your true choice of MP, but there IS the option of having much malicious pleasure in humiliating the Prime Minister by proxy and they are seizing it.

    As for the protests from Tories about “race relations” – if they didn’t like Reckless’ views on the subject, why on earth did they select him as a candidate in 2010 and then again for the 2015 election? The Lib/Lab voter in that area is inclined to view such belated concerns as “Tory hypocrisy” only designed to get votes at the last minute, and curl their lips. In other words they don’t see much difference between Tories and UKIP, but view Tories as a bigger threat because they have the potential to form a govt.

  50. @Candy

    Although I agree in general with your points, might it not be the case that Mr. Reckless has changed his views on a few matters since he was first elected as a Conservative? Maybe he isn’t ‘the same old Mr Reckless’ as you put it.

1 2 3 4 5