There are two polls out tonight, both showing Labour and the Conservatives neck and neck on 35%. The first of ComRes’s more frequent telephone polls for the Daily Mail, ramped up to a weekly timetable for the election campaign, has topline figures of CON 35%, LAB 35%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 10%, GRN 7%. Meanwhile the daily YouGov poll for the Sun has extremely similar figures of CON 35%, LAB 35%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 12%, GRN 6%.

269 Responses to “Latest YouGov and ComRes polls”

1 4 5 6
  1. RAF

    “However, we have been led to believe that DC will resign as PM if Labour wins more seats.”

    Got a source for that? It would seem an odd decision if the Tories could form another majority coalition – unless Cameron is saying he would stand down to let another Tory become PM in another Tory led coalition.

  2. Omni
    Even if the 28% is wrong by a factor of 10, and the real figure is only 2.8%, if the majority of those in any constituency went in one direction, it would be enough to swing a few marginal seats.

    It shows that it really does matter that parties keep on campaigning to the bitter end.

  3. The newspaper that shall not be named reporting on a vote to be held tomorrow to oust the Speaker.

  4. If Labour wins more seats than the Tories then the arithmetic means that DC cannot under any circumstances form a government, so it goes without saying that he’d resign as PM (eventually). He would of course remain as PM for as long as it takes for Labour and SNP and/or LD work out an arrangement. That could be a week or more.

    Unless of course the SNP surge turns into something of a souffle and they drop back down towards the sub-20 MPs range. Even then, the maths is implausible.

  5. @pete b

    I completely agree. And it really shows you why parties like to campaign on simple, repetitive themes. And why fear is such a powerful weapon.

  6. @Andy Shadrack

    The Yes people were definitely influenced by the “It’s Scotland’s oil” slogan of the SNP.

    In particular they were influenced by Salmond saying ““Even with a cautious estimate of oil prices remaining at $113 a barrel, it’s clear that Scottish oil and gas could generate three times more than official estimates.””

    Bear in mind that oil was at $98 a barrel in Sept 2014, down from $107 a barrel in July 2014 – but SNP voters were thinking excitedly of three times that – $330 a barrel oil and thinking we’ll be rich, Rich! and it’s owr oil, we’re nae sharing with the English.

    It’s not like Quebec. More like Alberta deciding that they want to be independent because they don’t want to share the oil wealth with the rest of Canada. Then the price collapsing and everyone laughing and pointing, and Alberta angrily demanding that the federal govt come up with some subsidies for them to prove they are truly valued…

  7. @ Hawthorn

    When I ventured out onto the diving platform of prediction a few days ago I cautiously said labour 276-282 I believe.

    But I have also since then revised that to Labour 281 to Conservative 278.

    The issue for me is 5 potential UKIP seats where their base vote was 14.2% in 2010:

    Dudley South
    Wallsall North

    UKIP have consistently been higher in the Midlands and certain “immigration” hot spots along the East Coast.

    Then there is the fact that LD appear to be up a percentage point since February, which if real actually diminshes Conservative gains.

    Of the 5 LD seats with margins under 1,000 3 are Con and 2 are Labour. Of the next 7 under 2,000 3 are Labour and four Conservative, but there is a kicker Sutton and Cheam stays firmly in the LD collumn, St Austell and Newquay could equally go to UKIP as Conservative.

    And that becomes the problem for Conservative in that their LD marginals are not falling to them according to Ashcroft polls, because unlike the Labour/SNP marginals the LD vote is not callapsing.

  8. @oldnat

    Slightly different but we know DC will resign if he can’t deliver an EU referendum


    So he will resign unless he has enough clout to do that after the election

  9. Shy Lab voters in Scotland? I agree with Chris Lane and think Lab might not do as badly in Scotland as forecasts suggest.

  10. Andy S
    You mention 5 potential UKIP seats, but only specify 4. What’s the fifth, out of interest?

    You’re assuming that Cameron will keep his word.

  11. Noo Fred

  12. @omnishambles

    In order for Cameron to deliver on a referendum he has to persuade the other EU member states to go for a big renegotiation – while they are likely to resist like a hole in the head what with all their dramas with Greece plus the Spanish election coming up later this year.

    So it’s likely Cameron will say that he tried but it’s taking rather longer than he thought and everyone prudent should wait for a proper renegotiation rather than just rush into a referendum. And the majority of voters will agree to wait. Maybe he’s hoping the EU will collapse under it’s contradictions while he’s conducting his strategy of masterly inactivity. Which does look more likely as each day passes.

    Masterly inactivity on the EU is also Miliband’s strategy – so they are at one on this.

  13. Candy
    What will help Cameron if he is in a position to negotiate EU changes is that France will have turned right by then and the French centre right are no longer happy with the immigration rules. I don’t think he can duck 2017.

  14. @ Candy

    So while watching the Scottish referendum results live over the internet I was struck by the pundis and commentators on BBC stating that there was a very strong correlation between the Yes vote and unemployment levels.

    Can’t verify that but do remember social scientists writing papers and books on the correlation between ethnic political parties and nationalist movements and rates of poverty and lack of access to economic levers in various countries in the 1970’s and 1980’s.

    The “troubles” in Northern Ireland were very much focused around lack of access to housing and employment by the Irish Catholics.

    People may wrap theselves in flags, national pride, culture, etc, but at the end of the day it is all about putting bread and butter on the table.

  15. A bit O/T but readers should be aware of this.

    With all this back and forth regarding who wins the largest number of seats and the claims that the largest party gets to form the government,I think it is important to clarify the 1951 Westminster results.

    The 1951 Westminster results were as follows:

    Labour 295,
    Conservative 293,
    Liberal National Party 19,
    Ulster Unionist Party 9,
    Liberal Party 6,
    Independent Nationalist 2, and
    Irish Labour 1

    …. a hung parliament.

    The Conservative, Liberal National and Ulster Unionist Parties formed a coalition and governed with 321 seats.

    Labour actually won more of the popular vote (13,948,883) than the governing coalition
    (Conservatives 12,384,784 , Liberal National 1,58,138,and Ulster Unionist 274,928 for a total of 13,717,850)

    Now for the cherry on top, the Labour Party gained MORE seats than the Conservative Party.

    In 1951, the party with the largest number of seats in Westminster DID NOT FORM THE GOVERNMENT, the party coalition able to secure a majority of seats in the House of Commons FORMED the government!

  16. @ Roger Mexico

    Belated thanks for pointing out my error in reading the YG mega – poll, which does indeed confirm that Labour are the biggest gainers should the Greens droop, though there may be something in there to nourish to any putative Lib Dem resurgence too.

  17. @ Brian Nicholson

    Re the 1951 result, weren’t the National Liberals de facto Conservatives having signed an agreement in 1947? National Liberals would serve in Conservative cabinets in the 1950s, merger would follow in the 1960s.

    So on paper the Conservatives were not the largest party in 51, but the perception at the time may have been different.

  18. @ Pete B

    I think the 5th was South Thanet because of the Survation poll, but I think of the 5 that is the weakest one.

    I also do not understand why people think Clacton and Rochester and Strood will revert to Conservative, as there is no real possibility that Labour could overtake both Conservative and UKIP to win those seats.

    I think there are two kinds of UKIP seats ones were there is a very high Conservative vote where those voters might feel the Conservative party has taken them for granted and then inner city industrial ones where BNP and now UKIP have been elected as local councillors or as MEPs.

    The first seat that went Green in Canada was one that had a long history of voting for third parties, and it was a very Conservative seat overall as well.

    If I had more time I would go through all 650 seats in the UK and look at which seats had given the highest vote to third and fourth party candidates.

    People who consistently vote for third, fourth and fifth party candidates are not likely to support either Labour or Conservative when push comes to shove.

    There is also a growing generational divide in that it was not just 18-24 year olds who were looking at Green in the 2014 European election but 25-39 year olds as well.

    The latter group have a higher voter turnout and that is why Green is on the upswing compared to just four years ago. Younger people who said four years ago I should have voted green are older now and more likely to turn out to vote.

    And anecdotal information from campaigns around the world says that there are whole new generation of Green candidates and party volunteers who know that more is needed than to simply stick your name on the ballot and hope for the best,

  19. Does this feel a bit like the 1992 election to you? I think the Conservative support is higher than the polls suggest.

    Also someone on the radio said yesterday that half the electorate is undecided. Is that true? Then if so, the whole thing is wide open.

1 4 5 6