A quick update on the latest voting intention polls. This morning’s YouGov poll for the Sun has topline figures of CON 33%, LAB 34%, LDEM 6%, UKIP 14%, GRN 8% (tabs) – more typical figures than YouGov’s Tuesday poll.

There is also a new TNS poll with topline figures of CON 31%(+3), LAB 31%(-4), LDEM 8%(+2), UKIP 16%(-2), GRN 7%(+2) (tabs). Up until now TNS have tended to release their polls incredibly slowly, often a week or more after their fieldwork was finished, rendering them out of date by the time we see them. Fieldwork for this one however finished on Monday so it’s more timely than usual. The last couple of TNS polls showed Labour leads of 7 points, significantly and consistently larger than any other company. Today’s looks more like other polls. (UPDATE – thanks to those in the comments section who missed something obvious in the TNS tabs that I overlooked! TNS have always weighted by 2010 recalled vote, but they are now weighting by 2010 recalled vote AND 2014 European vote – whether or not this is responsible for their figures coming into line with other companies’s is unclear.)

Finally Ipsos MORI put out their latest Scottish poll yesterday. Westminster voting intentions in Scotland were CON 12%(+2), LAB 24%(+1), LDEM 4%(-2), SNP 52%(nc), GRN 4%(-2). We’ve now had three Scottish polls conducted in 2015. The first one from Panelbase showed the SNP dropping four points and raised some speculation about whether their huge post-referendum surge was fading away again. The second from Survation also had the SNP down, but only by two points and this one from MORI has the level of SNP support holding steady. (On top of that, when tables for the Panelbase poll appeared it turned out that the voting intention question wasn’t asked first, it was asked after a question about whether or not falling oil prices damaged the economic case for Scottish independence, so the SNP fall in that first poll may be a question ordering effect rather than a genuine change)


419 Responses to “Latest YouGov, TNS and MORI polling”

1 7 8 9
  1. @ Laszlo

    “You keep on making the same methodological error. There is no individual party trend deriving from VI figure simply because it’s a zero sum thing. The only thing you can do is analysing distribution, that is how the adjusted 100% is distributed among the parties. It has nothing to do with what you conclude from the data.
    (You also misunderstand or rather ignore churn. AW summarised it very well how it works. It doesn’t affect ONE party).”

    To start first with ‘churn’, you are quite right that trend-watching is a simplified process that ignores such interactions and looks at the broad picture. You may or may not have noticed the detailed posts in which I have implemented a variety of churn assumption to see the effects on larger parties of (for example) Ukip or Green VI changes. (I can pull out the dates if you are interested.)

    Turning to your zero-sum comment, I think you may have overlooked the fact that this constraint is embedded in the regression equations themselves. My equations were based on figures from several hundred polls conducted over the first 11 months of 2014. In every single one of those polls, the different VIs were reported as percentages. That is, all conformed to the zero sum requirement. Because of this the only way that Ukip or the Greens could show a rising trend was by having a corresponding decline somewhere else (e.g., LD or Labour). My point is that there are more interactive constraints in this approach than you seem to have assumed. In short, the only trends that could ever have emerged from this process were patterns that intrinsically conformed to the zero sum requirement.

    I hope that settles your concerns.

  2. couper

    Yes, I realised that possibility after I posted but had to take Daisie to the Vet.

    She might need an op on her knee which is a bugger.

    Re “ranting” though – like “waffling” it is always something that other [that one disapproves of anyway]people do. I assume that you are fair-minded enough to accept that many people would feel it quite reasonable to describe – say – Salmond – as doing both at times?

    In other words it tends to be a subjective, rather than an objective, view of someone else’s actions and motives. On this site for example I have lost count of the number of times Ed Miliband has been described as “waffling”, rather than simply giving a speech or even just – wot I like to call – “talking”.

    tata fer noo the nooooooooo.

  3. @Oldnat

    “You missed out Gargarin Way in Lumphinnans”

    How could I forget that? :-p

    Actually I made a mistake. It’s Bevan (Nye) Place, not Bevin (Ernest – Bevin Boys) Place in Rosyth.

  4. Statgeek – I live in a seat with the road names Attlee Drive, Henderson Drive, Bondfield Walk & Lansbury Crescent. It doesn’t necessarily make somewhere safely Labour forever!

  5. @Mr N

    “What I AM surprised at is how brazen they’re being about targeting Tories and saying Labour’s only just behind”

    Could I suggest that you consider using your contacts to give Clegg’s local antics of running a campaign appealing to right wing voters a national airing.

    Or has he been sussed out long ago and is no longer worth bothering about?

  6. AW

    “I live in a seat with road names”

    You disappoint me. I had visions of you occupying a country seat with extensive grounds, with minions employed to distribute £50 notes to the serfs who produced your vast wealth.

    No more forelock tugging in your direction!

  7. Statgeek,

    “Nothing to see here!”

    That’s a bit rude. There are lots of things to see in Fife: St. Andrews beach, Anstruther, the birthplace of Adam Smith, North Queensferry, Cupar Angus…

  8. @Anthony

    Yes, and my point was that these places are traditionally Labour and will tend to be until the children and grandchildren of those miners are gone. It’s not a given, but it is fairly more likely than them becoming Conservative ultra safe seats.

    @Bill

    Try living in Fife for ten years!

  9. STATGEEK
    Fife will always tend towards Labour as the default option in my opinion.

    Don’t shoot the messenger. You may be correct, but last night’s result does suggest LiS need to put in some effort even in their heartlands for what you suggest to continue.

  10. “Try living in Fife for ten years!”

    Err [???????? think, think, think……]

    No thanks.

  11. AW

    @”It doesn’t necessarily make somewhere safely Labour forever!”

    Absolutely:-

    Baker Crescent; Cadogan Avenue; Cameron Drive; Carrington Road;
    Heath Gardens; Howard Road; Gladstone Road, Macmillan Gardens………and Church Hill !

  12. The Green policy of Land Value Tax instead of Council Tax has always seemed attractive, but this from the Scottish Land Revenue Group takes the idea to a whole new level.

    http://www.andywightman.com/archives/4050

    Lots of taxes can be avoided through various measures, but you can’t move land offshore!

    “The forecast assumes that the government would use its powers to rebalance the tax system. The process would begin by zero-rating the Income Tax, scrapping the existing property taxes and replacing the revenue with a new charge on location rents.”

  13. BBC website reported the sentence of a Royal Navy sailor for 14 years. Says “Officers traced the source of the photos to Rooney”. That was me, using RIPA. For what it’s worth, I only managed to trace him because he was an IT numpty. As the law and technology currently stand, he could have easily avoided detection (and plenty of others do).

  14. CB,
    Agree re QT and the week in politics both dreadful and rarely watch but occcassionally see bits and have my distain confirmed.

    Andrew Neil must have been on this site, though, as today on DP (which is a good watch imo) he demonstrated a good understanding of pollls and what they have along with a women from Coms Res.

    Sue Cameron shocking, a typical lazy journo.

    worth a view on catch up imo

  15. @ Laszlo

    “You also misunderstand or rather ignore churn…”

    Perhaps you’d like to reconsider this claim after you have had another look at my post at 11.07 pm on January 5th:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/9125/comment-page-1

    There is a great deal of scope for disagreement about how churn might work and I am only too ready to acknowledge limitations in my own treatment of VI distribution here and in other posts.

    But it would be interesting to hear where you think the shortcomings might lie rather than just posting a blunt statement to the effect that I misunderstand the phenomenon.

  16. New thread

  17. @ OldNat

    New thread will come when Anthony has finished his mutton pie and chips.

  18. @BillPatrick
    Indeed, I agree with all your points. Just concerned that casual listeners will go away with a view that a) continental Europe has solved the healthcare problem and if we copied them instead of sticking to a sacred cow all would be rosy and b) the NHS is overflowing with pen-pushing bureaucrats.
    Whilst nobody would argue that the NHS can’t be improved, both those impressions are misguided.
    I thought Tim Farron was very good on the (actual question asked), saying that it’s a choice we have to make, rather than some great inevitability.

  19. (test post)
    Can we do links?

1 7 8 9