Monday is the busiest day each week for polling results, though today we have just the three regulars – YouGov’s daily poll, Populus’s twice weekly poll and Ashcroft’s weekly poll. Topline figures are:

Populus – CON 33%, LAB 36%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 15%, GRN 4% (tabs)
Ashcroft – CON 30%, LAB 31%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 19%, GRN 5% (tabs)
YouGov/Sun – CON 34%, LAB 33%, LDEM 6%, UKIP 15%, GRN 6%

There are some methodological differences between the pollsters meaning there are some consistent “house effects” (Populus, for example, tend to consistently show higher shares for Labour and Conservative than Lord Ashcroft’s polls do), but all three are showing figures pretty much in line with their own recent polling: Ashcroft an extremely narrow Labour lead, Populus a Labour lead of a few points, YouGov pretty much neck-and-neck.


141 Responses to “Latest Populus, Ashcroft and YouGov polls”

1 2 3
  1. @MrJones and Mike N

    It would be interesting to see some more in-depth work done on 2005 voters and what their VIs are now. Probably a very difficult task, but it would add some greater perspective to the present rather confused situation.

  2. @Guymonde – yours of 5.32

    Yes, some more work on the VIs of second and third generation immigrants from the Indian sub-continent would be useful, just to see what effect they are having on the general situation. It may be that ‘Empire’ is now so far in the past that old assumptions about Conservatives=pro empire and Labour=against (and Labour having ended imperial rule in India) no longer hold as important factors – assuming they ever did.

  3. John B

    Although if it varied dramatically by religious background it wouldn’t be that.

  4. Soe posters have been discussing what conditions were like in the 1930s.

    I do not remember the 1930s, however, in the 1960s I found a book in the library, which was published in 1935.

    It was shocking and it made an impression on me .
    which is the same today. The book was called No Mean City and it was a documentary novel, about life in Glasgow between the wars. It is exciting. It is violent. It is about poverty. I could n’t believe it, that this world, that Dickens perhaps could recognise, could exist, relatively recently, and in Britain.

    The book is by H. Kingsley Long and Alexander McArthur. I picked up a copy of it again more recently in our local library, and I noticed that, at the back of the book, the authors answer readers who do not believe that the conditions described in the book really exist or have existed. The authors publish contemporary newspaper accounts of events similar to those described in the book.

    I have listened a little to what my parents have said on the subject. My father was from the South East. He has said that the 1930s were n’t so bad. He remembers the British dance bands. He said that they rarely moved out of London. My mother was from Yorkshire. She and my father met during the War, in Manchester,when people were stationed in places away from their home base.

    My mother has said that the 1930s were not so rosy, and my father said yes, it was tougher in the North.

  5. @ Phil,

    So at last – the Holy Grail – some analysis of current UKIP supporters voting patterns in 2005 as opposed to 2010. On that basis, I disagree with the academics conclusion that UKIP are hurting the Conservatives much more than Labour. Labour’s failure to win back those of its 2005 supporters who switched to Tory in 2010 is a big problem for them and one to which UKIP is clearly contributing on this evidence.

    Ye-esss… but I think we do have to ask to what extent those voters would be recoverable under any circumstances. If they really are upset about immigration or immigration-as-proxy for economic woes, Labour can never out-compete the right on immigration. If it’s really immigration they’re concerned about, they’re lost forever. If it’s immigration-as-proxy the only solution is to fix the economic woes so these voters feel less woeful and stop projecting that anger onto immigrants and immigration falls in salience, and if Labour are capable of doing that at all, they certainly can’t do it from opposition.

    Under what possible set of circumstances would Labour be in a position to win these voters back in 2015? Everyone on the 2010 leadership slate was as or more pro-immigration as Miliband, everyone was as or more spaddy and metropolitan (although Andy Burnham is slightly better at faking the “man of the people” stuff). There’s nothing on offer from any imaginable permutation of the current Labour Party that might appeal to them.

    @ Mr. Jones,

    Well, it could be that plus confounding factors. South Asian Hindus and Muslims are not exactly traditional allies- if the Labour Party is perceived as being on the side of the Muslims, it might drive the Hindus into the arms of another party once disagreements over imperialism faded enough that they felt free to withdraw their support.

  6. @spearmint

    “Ye-esss… but I think we do have to ask to what extent those voters would be recoverable under any circumstances.”

    I agree that’s likely true, for those people who started drifting away in 2000 or 2001 or 2005 it’s been ignored too long. The question is how much more is there to lose?

    Lab could quite easily get back people who only started drifting more recently and slow down the rate of loss among those who are only starting to drift now. Their real problem is they can’t do that without losing votes at the other end.

    “South Asian Hindus and Muslims are not exactly traditional allies- if the Labour Party is perceived as being on the side of the Muslims”

    It’s been like that for years except it was inside Lab vs Lib. The shift now is part of the Lib collapse.

  7. @Spearmint

    Under what possible set of circumstances would Labour be in a position to win these voters back in 2015?
    __________________________________________

    Well looking at the BES data it is a lot more than just immigration that is the issue for UKIP voters.

    For one – trust in MP’s in general – compare UKIP and Green voters to Lib Dem/Cons and Labour voters

    http://tinyurl.com/ps884tx

    No Trust
    UKIP 34%
    Green 25%
    Labour 13%
    LD 5%
    Cons 5%

  8. The discussion of the lonk between bookmakers odds and election results reminds me of two things. Firs tthe lower odds have “predicted a winner vitually always always . Go on line and see the evidence they offer for UK and US over decades.. No bookies give the Tories a majority of seats if 3 to 1 AGAINST is meaningful. Labour are usually just ODDS ON ! They are in business and don’t want to pay much to the winners who they JUDGE from how much is being bet on a party. Theyto be simplistic say people putbtheir money where their mouth is. They may not take a vast number of bets , but far more than all the polls taken !!
    They almost certainly look at averages from polls . Polls tend to work . As Labour currently is leading they have a new plan to get more on Labour . Most seats and a majority. Maybe many will be tempted in a two horse race. AND who will THEY then vote for ???

  9. The level of aspiration cannot be dismissed. Immigrants supporting Labour as the party who support the poor, is ok until the Hindu family who came from East Africa in the 70’s, has produced the owner of 14 Pharmacies, a thoracic surgeon and 3 daughters who are married to millionaires. The Pakistani family who came here in the 90’s with nothing, probably still has nothing. Furthermore, the fact that some members of the family have nothing to do with westerners at all, does not help. They vote for Pakistani local politicians, who are Labour and still feel that the party that looks after immigrants, (Labour) is for them.

  10. @ John B: “It would be interesting to see some more in-depth work done on 2005 voters and what their VIs are now. Probably a very difficult task, but it would add some greater perspective to the present rather confused situation.”

    Yes, it would be interesting. But at this point remember that 2005 electorate misses 10 years of new voters (young and new citizens) and includes some who have already “gone to glory.” even UKIP can’t hold them forever.

    I’m thinking young voter turnout is going to be essential for 2015 given the age skew in the corssbreaks. In the US, the toggle between a younger electorate in the presidential election and older electorate in the congressional “off year” elections has become quite pronounced as the second chart on this pages illustrates http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/11/05/as-gop-celebrates-win-no-sign-of-narrowing-gender-age-gaps/.

    The difficulty is getting young people to turn out without a single, charismatic figure. Given that our “off years” have some similarities to parliamentary elections, I’m thinking the same problem will apply. And I’m guessing EM is not that figure.

  11. “The level of aspiration cannot be dismissed.”

    There’ll be lots of different reasons but any polling that doesn’t include religious background will miss one of the biggest factors.

  12. @ Richard,

    Sure. We can put that down to either

    a) General woe (Ukip voters are more pessimistic than average about almost everything) or

    b) The spaddy metropolitaness of the entire political class, which makes them appear out of touch, corrupt and unlikely to fight for the interests of ordinary people

    But I think my point still stands- a Labour Opposition led by a Miliband, Ed Balls, Andy Burnham or Diane Abbott couldn’t fix either of those problems, the first because it’s an opposition and the second because they all hail from the same professional background and with minor variations they all talk like New Labour apparatchiks.

    (The Greens I think are a separate case- a Diane Abbott-led Labour Party might be able to win some of their votes, although probably no one else’s.)

  13. @Mr Jones

    Getting religous affiliation tied up with party politics is a slippery slope.

    Best not go there.

  14. Richard
    Spend a few hours on the site of a well known right wing magazine. There are virtually no Tories. Some Labour kamikaze’s who try to wind extreme right wingers up, and Kippers, loads and loads of Kippers. They refer to other parties as liblabcon. They are all as bad you see, traitorous Europe loving lefties, who wish to wreck Britain. Who is the worst, you may ask? Cameron, he is despised and detested. The point is, the nub of all this malice, is DISTRUST. They have no belief or faith in Lab or Con whatsoever. Frankly, I think most of them are gone for good. The LD’s are seen as a splinter group not worth mentioning.
    Report comment

  15. “Best not go there.”

    bit late now

  16. @AW
    I have reported my own comment. I hope it is obvious these are not my views, but the views of the UKIP supporters we are currently discussing. My point is justify my contention that they will not return to Lab or Con.

  17. @Spearmint

    The call must go out to Dennis Skinner then…..

  18. The DUP have ruled out joining a coalition government in the event of a hung parliament. Rather a major development in my view.

  19. @ADGE3 – 6.43 p.m.

    Yes, the book was recommended to me by someone who had lived in Glasgow as a child in the 1920s and 30s and she told me that it gave a very realistic portrait of the city as she remembered it.

  20. AW
    Thank you.

  21. @MrNameless,

    “The DUP have ruled out joining a coalition government in the event of a hung parliament. Rather a major development in my view.”

    So, it seems, have the SNP. I expect both the DUP and the SNP would do a deal with the Tories and Labour respectively, but this would fall short of forming a coalition.

  22. roland

    “I have reported my own comment”

    Cuts out the middle man I spose.

    [NB a JOAK]

  23. ROWLAND

    I don’t think the UKIP posters you have encountered are necessarily representative of all UKIP supporters just as the people who post here are not necessarily representative of the public as a whole. It is unfortunate that some previously interesting sites have been rendered completely unusable by these strange people but they will undoubtedly grow out of it given time. Just don’t feed them.

  24. @MrNameless

    Yes, if both DUP and SNP refuse to enter a coalition (the former with the Tories, the latter with Labour) then we may be in for a period of minority government. Would that spook the markets?

    Scotland survived for four years with minority government, and it is surely not unheard of for countries to be governed in this way….. though a devolved administration is not the same as the government of a sovereign state, as those of us who noticed the referendum will remember.

    I am intrigued by how both the two (not so) big parties are going to react if they fail to win. Will heads roll? Will there be disintegration?

    And what happens if the Tories win handsomely in the south of England and Labour in the north (both therefore assuming that they represent ‘the real people’ because they have no way of communicating with the other end of the country)?

    Many of us assumed that by now the two big parties would be re-establishing themselves as the obvious choice for the vast majority of voters, whereas the two together seem to be able to reach only around two-thirds of them (us!). That’s an awful lot of people who are not convinced by either the Tories or Labour!

  25. To add to my post regarding odds. .Tonight Ladbrokes are offering lower odds= 4-1 cf 5-1 Labour v Tory. The whole list shows Labour as I said with lower odds than the Tories (a few tied) . This is for an overall majority.
    Most odds for most seats are similar and tend to “favour” Labour . So the poster who says the bookies back Labour has not studied current evidence . Even Ed Miliband has lower odds to be PM with the few who offer them. You can bet that the Tories are looking at ODDS CHECKER on the net as they want to see where people put their money !!!

  26. JOHN B
    Minority government, its beginning to look as if we will have no choice. Further, your last sentence backs up what I have just posted about the most voracious Kippers. Tory, Labour, no chance mate.

  27. Much can happen in the next few months.Far too early to be talking about
    minority governments as inevitable etc.

  28. Good Evening All.
    The ‘Road to Nab End’ by Woodruff, and Bill Naughton’s accounts of Lancs in the inter war years are also well worth a read.

    My Grandmother never forgave the system in which food stamps had to be paid for by selling furniture. Her Husband lost his foot in The Great War, and that was his reward for fighting for King and Country; he found employment hard to acquire in Cardiff, until we found the money to employ men again, in 1938-1939.

    The link to VI was that certain areas never forgave the Tories, but, I think, in 1978-79 a new anti-left folk lore replaced the Hungry Thirties, as the Left went to war with Callaghan, and later Scargill tried to go to war with capitalism.

  29. Was the DUP ever in serious consideration for coalition? I think they’ve never wanted to be part of a Westminster government. They’re the kind of Unionists who really really believe in the Union, so long as they’re in charge of a Northern Ireland with virtual home-rule. Stormont has basically taken the wind out of looking for coalition partners in Northern Ireland. The DUP would think coalition with the Conservatives to just be to much political risk, it might lose them seats in the Assembly.

    Conversely, the SNP clearly are positioning themselves to be coalition partners if they can, in order to try to get Better-Than-Smith devolution. (Or at least appear to get it…)

  30. @Spearmint

    “Ye-esss… but I think we do have to ask to what extent those voters would be recoverable under any circumstances.”
    ______________________

    Well in 2012 the Labour VI was fluctuating around 42% to 44%, with leads nudging around 10%, and the UKIP surge had yet to happen. It’s reasonable to conclude that a lot of those since lost to UKIP had returned to Labour under the circumstances prevailing at that point.

  31. Presumably DUP fear backlash from working class unionists but have they ruled out confidence and supply arrangement ?

    Osborne made clear the government offer on corporation tax was dependent on deal over NI with Sinn Fein.

    So are both sides just upping the anti before cameron visits on thursday.

  32. @jayblanc

    I think you are right that the DUP is unlikely to join or even support a coalition in Westminster. Their position in the NI Assembly is so much more important to them that it would not be worth the risk of losing NI voters who prefer labor or UKIP. (And UKIP would have plenty of support in rural, unionist areas).

    If it is really close, I do wonder if one or two Alliance seats might help labor. I think Naomi Long defeating the sitting head of the DUP was one of the most under reported stories of the 2010 GE as it points towards the rise of a post-conflict politics. There are structural reasons why Alliance cannot do well in NI Assembly elections, but they could be attractive to Belfast voters who want a voice in Westminster.

    Add in the North Down independent Sylvia Herman who was to far to the left to stay in the UUP and won anyway (with Alliance support) and Labor could be looking at three seats from NI on C&S at least.

  33. ANN in Wales
    Indeed, you are sounding like me. I frequently tell posters who seem to think one poll in November or December, has an election won next May. On the other hand, we are just jogging along in a very peculiar atmosphere, that seems to suggest the two main parties are becalmed.

  34. In other news, whilst Marine le Pen got 100% votes from her party, Angela Merkel has got a paltry 96.72% backing at her conference.

  35. new thread

  36. Wow. Amazing the things you learn on UKPR. I’d never twigged the story about Naomi Long beating Peter Robinson and I take a vague interest in NI politics (very vague obviously). Under reported as in “not at all” it would seem.

    Thanks pthiers

  37. CatManJeff – “Getting religious affiliation tied up with party politics is a slippery slope.
    Best not go there.”

    This.

    People in N.I. might vote on religious lines, but in mainland Britain it doesn’t hold up.

    How to explain Muslims voting for a Labour party that took us into wars into Afghanistan and Iraq, and passed many laws regarding rights for gay people? And who are currently thinking of putting a Jewish man into No 10?

    Think about the following conundrum: in the gay marriage vote in the House of Commons, all the Labour Muslim members of Parliament voted in favour, As did the Labour Sikh MPs, Labour Christian ethnic MPs (Keith and Maria Vaz) and other Labour ethnic minority MPs. On the Tory side voting against was one Tory Muslim MP (Rehman Chishti) and one Tory Hindu MP (Priti Patel), plus 136 other Tory English MPs, all christians. The majority of muslim MPs in parliament were in favour of gay marriage – and none of them will be punished by their voters for it.

    The conclusion must be that voters in Britain vote on economic lines not on religious ones.

  38. JohnB – “Scotland survived for four years with minority government, and it is surely not unheard of for countries to be governed in this way”

    It’s hard for UK govts to do so, thanks to some quirks in the law regarding tax.

    Robert Peel’s innovation of Income Tax is still “temporary”. It expires each 5th April and has to be renewed by a Finance Bill – which needs to be passed by a majority of Parliament.

    This is the chief reason we can’t go two years like the Belgians without a govt – collection of income tax would then become illegal which would create immense problems. And that’s the reason the Civil Service prepared so hard for a coalition and pressed parties to agree to it speedily – the coalition was set up within a week of the election. It’s all down to the need for a stable majority to pass the wretched Finance Bill.

    Can you imagine the havoc of a minority govt relying on perhaps three other small fractious parties to get the budget through? From all accounts the Callaghan govt of the late 70’s struggled and they only had one party to deal with (the Liberals).

  39. @Candy

    Well, the Populus poll shows the biggest chunk of the Greens’ support comes from C1s (i.e. lower middle class), and then it’s evenly split between ABs (upper middle class) and DEs (unskilled working class and unemployed). They get the least support from C2s (skilled working class). They seem to take most of their support from former Lib Dems rather than from Labour by a margin of 3 to 1.

    As a Lib Dem myself, I can say that they’d be my second choice if I lived in England (I prefer the SNP).

  40. @Laszlo

    I don’t agree, That is a real re-writing of history. Labour was formed to give the working poor representation. Keir Hardie stood on a platform of Health and Safety in Mines. 8 hours maximum working week. Votes for women and home rule for Scotland – plus ca change. The first two for the interests of manual labour. Look at the 1918 manifesto – house building, land reform and note ‘ no burden should be placed on the poor ‘ in the section on free trade. Also there are sections on Nationalisation of utilities & being a woman’s party. I could vote for that party.

  41. Stat geek. Would be great if you can talk about UK and Scotland and not National and Regional. David Cameron spent the referendum campaign insisting that Scotland is a nation and UK is a family of nations. So when you talk about national results it’s not clear which nation you mean.

1 2 3