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 2 3 4 5 6
  1. @peter crawford

    Do you think the public spend 5 years thinking about the next election?

    Why do you think the parties bother spending time and money on a campaign just before the election?

  2. Assiduosity

    It’s often suggested that any squeeze of the minor parties would deliver a small but significant Green to Labour boost.

    However, if I’m reading the figures correctly they suggest the largest beneficiary of a falling off in Green support could be the Lib Dems, though there would be an up tick for Labour.

    I think you’re misreading them (see p 2). Of the 365 Green voters in the original sample, 42% said they could consider voting Labour, but only 26% Lib Dem. Some of this might be influenced by tactical considerations of course and there are presumably more places where switching to Labour would make a difference than backing the Lib Dems.

    The UKIP voters are also worth looking at (sample 1032). 37% might go to Conservative, but only 14% to Labour[1]. This suggests there indeed some potential for the Tories there. Though, as Anthony loves to remind us, people are usually very bad predictors of their own future behaviour.

    [1] The extent to which this is an anti-Establishment vote is shown by the fact that 10% would consider the Greens, though on 7% the Lib Dems – and there may be constituency-specific factors there.

  3. Let’s not go by the assumption that Labour voters hate the Tories more than anyone else and couldn’t possibly dislike any other parties more, and Tory voters hate Labour more than anyone else and couldn’t possibly dislike any other parties more.

    That’s a very 2 party view of things in a post 2-party world.

  4. @ Unicorn, Roger Mexico and Catmanjeff

    Oh yes, and one more thing does a Labour weighted value of 1.14 and Conservative weighted value of .93 mean you have a swing of 10.5 to Labour?

    As compared to an unweighted swing of 5.9 when you use an unweighted Labour value of 1.10 and Conservative one of .982.

    I am getting the hang of this or am I off in left field somewhere?

    Again I note that prior to the EU 2014 vote that a number of pollsters had Labour too hgh as compared to the outcome, so was that purely “house effect” or something else?

  5. I keep coming back to the same thing…

    1. LAB to lose almost as many seats as they gain (so no great change).

    2. CON to lose slightly more seats than they they gain (so no great change).

    3. The SNP to reach 45 seats (+/-5) thus replacing LD as the party who calls the shots!

  6. I’m looking at the comments and i’m looking at the stats.

    The stats say Ukip February 14.37%
    March 14.58%

    So unless you are prepared to call the (almost) inevitable Yougov Ukip 15% a surge, stop calling a couple of polls a crash. They may herald a crash but they certainly aren’t saying that at the moment.

    You can’t have it both ways and only accept the evidence that agrees with your wishes.

    As to the interpretation of news events to account for the last couple of polls I really don’t think they have sufficient saliency to account for anything much. What may be at play is that Ukip haven’t been in the news much recently.

    Just wait for Nigel Farage’s kitchen to be unveiled full of wholesome roasts, horse brasses and old maps of Kent with an old uncle mending a fob watch in an armchair.

  7. @Roger Mexico

    This is part of a post I made earlier this mornong on the previous thread:

    In 1995 Canada came within a “hair’s breath” of breaking up:

    No 50.58%
    Yes 49.42%

    Out of 4.57 million votes cast in that Quebec referendum Canada came within 54,288 votes of breaking up.

    Why? Those who lived outside of Quebec could not agree on how to amend the constitution to accommodate First Nations and the Quebecois.

    The lesson learned is that when you don’t include someone in the day to day running of your country, they have no good reason to stay in that country.

    I diagree with nationalists, in fact nationalism terrifies me, but is has never stopped me from agreeing to work with anyone to find solutions that work for the good of the country.

  8. “So unless you are prepared to call the (almost) inevitable Yougov Ukip 15% a surge, stop calling a couple of polls a crash. They may herald a crash but they certainly aren’t saying that at the moment.”

    There’s loads of wishful thinking. The ukip “collapse” to 7% by polling day, of course, isn’t going to happen.

  9. CHRIS RILEY

    @”That’s a very 2 party view of things in a post 2-party world.”

    Your right- but this is UKPR-not the real world where real voters live

    :-)

  10. I agree that it’s obvious when there’s a strongly anti-UKIP poster around. It’s someone who calls a drop from 15% to 13% a “collapse” but makes no comment when UKIP’s score goes from 15% to 17%.

    Very transparent.

  11. UKIP

    LIFO:

    Not convinced. I think if voters move away from UKIP the reason for their move is more important than how long they have been in the UKIP column. In other words, Redkippers return to Labour because Farage says that he would support a Tory government, not because they were the most recent to flock to Nige’s banner.

    The Campaign

    I think it’s worth remembering that since OfCom decided that UKIP was a major party it will be getting a great deal of publicity in the campaign. All things being equal, I would expect this to assist it.

    The Debate

    Farage doesn’t need to convince everybody, or even most people. if he comes out of the debate with 20-25% of people thinking he is credible and reasonable, he will have had a great night. Even if the other 75% think he’s as mad as a box of frogs.

    It’s not that long since we saw UKIP on 17% in a poll, I think that talk of its demise or single figure VI is premature.

  12. Farage doesn’t need to convince everybody, or even most people. if he comes out of the debate with 20-25% of people thinking he is credible and reasonable, he will have had a great night. Even if the other 75% think he’s as mad as a box of frogs.
    It’s not that long since we saw UKIP on 17% in a poll, I think that talk of its demise or single figure VI is premature.

    Great comment. He only ever needs to talk to 25%, maybe 30% of the electorate…all his comments about race relations, political correctness, young mothers being an employment risk etc. all of it is directed to this minority. he isn’t stupid.

    The chat about ukip collapsing to 7% or so is crazy. if NF does well in the debate next week, they’ll be up there again…I expect they’ll get 13-15% in the real thing.

  13. So no Vat increase,no NI increase ,no income tax increase and so on.

    All down to cuts then

  14. TNS are joining in the UKIP are doomed debate despite the 17% on their last poll.

    http://www.tnsglobal.com/uk/press-release/tns-poll-signs-ukip-support-may-fall-ahead-of-election

    “As well as immigration becoming a less salient issue and Nigel Farage’s popularity decreasing, UKIP support appears to be relatively soft indicating that their performance in the election may be worse than polls currently suggest. Whilst 73% of Conservative supporters tell us that they are certain to vote for the Conservatives and 72% of Labour supporters are certain to vote for Labour, this is only 59% for UKIP.”

  15. 07052015

    There won’t be cuts on the scale suggested by Osborne either.

    A landslide government would have trouble following Osborne’s plans, let alone a coalition. The last five years demonstrate this.

    These are all politicians in a democracy, not Nicolae Ceaucescu.

    They wouldn’t happen even if they made economic sense.

  16. TNS are right. The UKIP vote is soft. Whether they get squeezed now or later is irrelevant – the squeeze is coming.

    People are generally reluctant to waste their vote if they can identify a lesser of two evils and influence that outcome.

  17. I thoroughly recommend reading the actual interview with Alex Salmond in the New Statesman. Some really interesting snippets in there.

    Firstly he gives his favourite Tory as John Biffen who was for many years my MP and for whom my father, (like Salmond not a Conservative supporter or voter) had a lot of time for. Salmond’s reasons given being “I felt John Biffen knew more about English history than most Conservatives since have ever learned.”

    Secondly an interesting snapshot of Salmond’s having spoken at a meeting in Kelso “I went to Kelso and I spoke to about 500 people. And that’s our worst seat.” So SNP strategists obviously feel the 3 border seats are trickier to gain than even Glasgow North East / East Renfrewshire but still in play. I’ll assume he’s ignoring Orkney & Shetland for these purposes.

    A very interesting interview indeed.

  18. CB – agree we need to be cautious and I did say in my reply to Colin that we had polls to come from pollsters who tend to show a lower Lab+Con.

    However, our stats experts have shown to my shown to my satisfaction that the UKIP and Greens have nudged down with both Lab, Cons and LDs benefitting after churn..

    I think Farage himself would not be surprised at some softness and tactical voting by erstwhile the UKIP supporters.

    For me, The UKIP element of the equation remains will their VI fall below 10% and if so will the cons benefit where it matters? Thus far no indication this is happening.

    LRR – yes the issues is what will drive support back but more recent converts will need less of an issue or less issues accumulatively to return as they are less entrenched.

    Much of the 2010 Con-UKIP support has been in place for over 2 years and some over 3 which is along time to get used to some of their idiosyncracies; these voters will take more moving back to the main 3 (E&W) parties.
    Hence CBs view that it won’t happen which is perfectly credible as is mine that it will in marginal seats.

    This must be a great GE for the non-committed?

  19. OMNISHAMBLES

    All that has happened (so far) is that some froth has been blown off the top of UKIP support.

    Unfortunately for the Conservatives, as much of seems to have gone Labour as Tory.

  20. So these are my numbers for the first three weeks of March and we are now in day four of week four:

    Conservative 33.4%/32.9%/33.2%
    Labour 33%/33.2%/33.1%
    UKIP 14.4%/14.9%/14.6%
    Liberal Democrat 7.5%/7.2%/8%
    Other 5.4%/5.7%/6%
    Green Party 6.3%/6.1%/5.1%

    I will wait until Sunday before I talk about this week, which is so far interesting but not conclusive.

    A poll does not a trend make and a trend does not become reality until after every vote is counted on election day.

    And I simply do not get this obsessive fear of SNP being a part of C & S, other than it reminds me of UKIP’s fear and obsession with immigrants – basically a fear of the “other.”

    The origins of Quebec nationalism were grinding poverty and an inability of the French Quebecois to work their way out of that grinding poverty.

    In politics one has one of two choices. Hurl ephithets at ones opponent, which is what most politicians do or listen to ones opponent or the “other” and address the problem in such away that an agreed upon solution is found.

    Quebec nationalism has diminished because the underlying issues that caused people to consider leaving Canada were partially addressed.

    If the Scottish people send 40 to 50 SNP MPs to Westminster they are sending a very loud message they want their issues taken seriously and dealt with.

    Isolating and pillorying those MPs across the floor of the HoC will not help the cause of the union one bit.

    I once met a Quebecois man in Regina, Saskatchewan, whose family was so poor he had rickets as a child, and then I remembered an Anglican missionary in the 1950’s in London talking about Quebecois children running through the streets of Montreal without shoes in minus 20 celcius weather.

    That man was one of those children and he will never forgive “Les Anglais” for what he experienced as a child. It wrecked his health for the rest of his life and on those kind of experiences “separatism” is born.

  21. @hawthorn

    Considering Labour were *leading* the Conservatives at Peak UKIP in October, and now the big 2 are tied, it’s fair to say the Conservatives have absorbed more of the froth. Indeed, if we make the safe assumption that Labour have benefited at the expense of the Greens’ VI ebbing, they have absorbed less than it seems from UKIP.

    But sure, so far it’s just the froth and chocolate sprinkles.

    … so far (:

  22. Omnishambles.

    Tory VI was pretty much flat from October to the end of January.

    Wherever the rest of the froth went, it was not to the Tories. It could have gone to the NOTA party. I suspect a lot of the UKIP VI is from people who have never (or not recently) voted for any other party.

    Just plot out some rolling average charts if you don’t believe me.

  23. As ever I agree with posts like PeterCrawford’s that urge a need look to long term trends.

    I am, however, surprised that Farage chose South Thanet where UKIP only got 5% in 2010 when he could have chosen a seat where UKIP was closer to 10%.

    Ultimately it is not what UKIP get in the overall vote across the UK, but what they get and how close they get in their target seats that counts.

    It is the same for the Green Party and the LD. The fact that Ashcroft constituency polling has only found a total of only 14 seats where LD support is above 33% and only 6 above 40% woud be deeply troubling to me if I were an LD supporter.

    Labour on 35% is clearly not a good sign for the 18 Conservative MPs who won by a 1,000 votes or less and I would not be sleeping to well either if I was one of the further 16 Conservative MPs who had won by 2,000 votes or less.

    And of those 34 seats only 7 are Con-LD marginals, as the remaining 27 are all Labour marginals. Add 13 LD-Labour marginals to the total and you are up to 40 seats.

    This election is front end loaded for a small swing to Labour to gain 40 seats. Labour on 268 after losing 30 seats to SNP, only places them ten seats behind Conservative on 279 after losing 27 seats to Labour.

    Labour do not have to win the vote count on May 7th to win, they just have to stay in the hunt, whereas the Conservatives actually have to gain some distance between themselves and Labour.

    Just do the math and so far Conservative has not been able to create that gap in support between itself and Labour.

  24. Andy – the Cons will take seats off the LDs of course as well putting them around 290 in your scenario over 20 ahead of Labour.

  25. OMNI

    They’ll just read it upside down :-)

  26. @hawthorn

    I was looking at the change in the entire period. Lots of that post-January froth seems to have gone to the Tories. Yes you are correct, the falling UKIP VI didn’t affect the Conservatives before January, perhaps they were people who never vote, flirted with UKIP and then decided against it.

    Don’t you think the Tory increase has to come from somewhere? Isn’t it much more likely to come at the expense of UKIP than Labour voters converting to Tories? It certainly wasn’t from the almost-static core LD vote.

  27. Survation / Mirror poll

    chg vs 24/02:

    LAB 33% -1
    CON 32% +3
    UKIP 18% -1
    LD 8% -1
    GRE 4% nc
    SNP 4% nc
    AP 1% nc

  28. Andy Shadrack.

    If the parties are tied, that is a 3% swing from Con to Lab in GB as a whole. That would imply Labour gaining 38 Tory seats (where the Tory majority is 3%.

    So you calculation should be 277 Lab, 270 Con if I follow your logic correctly.

  29. Re: Survation

    Seen through this lens http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/9103 it’s pretty much in agreement with the rest

  30. “If the parties are tied, that is a 3% swing from Con to Lab in GB as a whole. That would imply Labour gaining 38 Tory seats (where the Tory majority is 3%.”

    Not quite right. I make it a swing of 3.25% from Con to Lab in GB BUT it’s the swing in England that’s key. Labour are roughly 15-20% down from where they were in Scotland at GE2010. That equates to approximately at least 1% in GB terms

    So, the key calculation is [(36.9% – 29.5%-1%)]/2 to calculate the swing in England & Wales, this is [8.4/2]= 4.2%. On a UNS basis, this equates to the loss of about 50 seats. For the record, I don’t think labour will win this many- more like 40- but please don’t be surprised if this is what happens.

    Since all the seats which labour are going to win from the tories are in england and wales, the swing in scotland is irrelevant and should be stripped out of any such calculation.

  31. OMNISHAMBLES

    I agree that the UKIP froth went to the Conservatives in February, as I have said all along.

    The problem for the Conservatives is that in March (specifically since week beginning 16th) it looks to have gone to Labour.

    To go back to 2010 VI, UKIP need to drop about another 10 percentage points. Only 1-2% tops of the remaining VI could possibly be ex-2010 Tories. You might as well argue that the SNP are going to collapse before May (in which case it would be Game Over for Cameron).

  32. @hawthorn

    I am not for a moment suggesting UKIP will fall back to their 2010 VI of 3.1%. 7% or 8% sounds more likely

    ” Only 1-2% tops of the remaining VI could possibly be ex-2010 Tories.”

    Assuming you’re right, 1-2% to the current Tory VI is all you need to boost their voteshare beyond what they achieved in 2010 (36% = 306 seats).

  33. PETER CRAWFORD

    Thanks, you are quite right to correct my rounded figure.

    I tend to agree that on current polling evidence, 40 seats is the expectation, but I think that figure is more likely to be wrong on the downside, given the batch of Ashcroft polls including High Peak and Colne Valley. There will be a few of coin-toss seats.

    I think the polling evidence of 2015 so far supports a swingback to both Labour and Conservative hypothesis.

  34. The Scottish result is obviously important but the LibDem result will be decisive – for if they go for supply and confidence with Labour because Labour, getting supply and confidence from the SNP, makes it impossible to guarantee a stable government by any other route which after all, is the very same argument the LibDems applied to the Parliamentary arithmetic in 2010. On this basis to have a chance of an effective minority government the Conservatives and their notional parliamentary allies must be able to outvote Labour & SNP and to do that i suggest the Conservatives need to be nearer to their current strength of 300….

  35. OMNISHAMBLES

    That’s how I got the 1-2% figure. The only way it could be higher would be with very odd churn patterns.

    If UKIP got down to 7-8%, then some of the vote would split to Labour. Some of the UKIP VI will include a lot of the Labour VI from when they were polling in the 40s in 2011-2012. If you plot the rolling averages back to May 2010, it is clear that some of the decline in Labour VI from 40% must have gone to UKIP. That is not the same as saying they are actual Labour 2010 voters of course.

    Therefore, you would expect a decline in UKIP VI to benefit both Labour and Conservatives, even if it does not include many people who actually voted for those parties in 2010.

    I just don’t see why that should actually happen to any great extent. Even if it does, it would just mean that Labour and Conservatives would both be on, say ~37% each rather than ~34%. The swing would remain the same.

  36. hawthorn

    I tend to agree that on current polling evidence, 40 seats is the expectation, but I think that figure is more likely to be wrong on the downside

    I am seen as a pessimist on the tory side, but 40 seat losses to labour is actually quite optimistic, as you say, from the tory point of view.

    most polling this year suggests a 4-5% england only swing from con to lab. On a UNS basis this is a loss of english seats of about 50-60….so you’re right.

    I am actually optimistic, as far as the tories are concerned, given the current polling. the loss of 40 seats implies a swing of about 3% from con to lab.

  37. @hawthorn

    We seem to be broadly in agreement. I’m also clear that the squeeze benefits both Labour and the Conservatives. I expect the Labour VI to continue improving as UKIP declines, I just expect the Tories to improve slightly more. Why? 1) The simple fact that the Tories have increased more than Labour since Peak UKIP, although both have gained. 2) Some of the Labour gains we have seen must have come at the expense of the Greens.

    “I just don’t see why that should actually happen to any great extent. Even if it does, it would just mean that Labour and Conservatives would both be on, say ~37% each rather than ~34%”

    It should happen because although some of them won’t vote, or will “waste” a vote on UKIP, I think people prefer to have an effect on the election so in marginal constituencies you’d see them voting to “keep Tories/Labour out”.

    I actually am expecting to see Conservatives and Labour on pretty high VI compared to 2010. We should see the Big 2 vote increase to 70% or higher, because the LD vote collapsed and must go somewhere, and the UKIP vote is soft.

  38. Survation tables here

    http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Full-Mirror-March-Tables.pdf

    I tested my theory that it was the social class vs income weighting that was causing the high UKIP scores, with a less convincing result this time.

    Survation social class ratio
    AB 21% C1 19% C2 28% DE 31%

    If I re-weight to the social class ratio used by most other pollsters
    AB 27% C1 28% C2 22% DE 24%

    I get headline of
    Cons 33
    Lab 33

  39. OMNISHAMBLES

    We are not in agreement.

    I don’t expect much of a decline further. The idea that a load of VI that has been annoyed with both Lab and Con since before 2010 is suddenly going to go to either party before May is for the birds.

  40. oops, pressed submit

    cont…
    LD 8
    UKIP 17

    So the net effect is Cons+1, UKIP -1. Less dramatic than in the past because they had UKIP more balanced across the social classes this time.

    So still haven’t solved the reason for the high UKIP Survation scores…

  41. @hawthorn

    Fair enough – we are in disagreement.

  42. Now that I’m home, I’ve checked back on YG weightings of SNP/PC party ID, and there doesn’t seem to be a relationship between the weightings and the SNP score, so probably just noise.

  43. @Oldnat

    Well Survation does have more ‘normal’ figures for Scotland, so I tend to agree.

    Survation

    -If all stand

    SNP 47
    Lab 19
    Cons 17
    LD 11

    In your constituency considering likely in contention

    SNP 47
    Lab 19
    Con 13
    LD 15

    So it looks like some of those Cons voters may be moving to Lib Dem to block SNP, would have to know where those were to know if it would have any impact.

  44. I’m not sure that this particular election Labour will underperform the polls as has happened in the past. It depends of course on why they did tend to underperform. I personally suspect that it because a percent of labour voters who expressed support for the party in the polls were actually more likely to vote tactically on the day to try to keep Conservatives out in their area. Given that the Liberal Democrats were the main beneficeries of this approach I think there will be less tactical voting this time and Labour’s poll share will hold up.

  45. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2015_United_Kingdom_general_election

    Few would deny that there has been a falling off in support for Ukip since October. However the hyperbolic assertions about ‘collapse’ are way off the mark. The diminished level is still at the confidently declared high water mark of the previous two Mays. I really don’t see how that purple line gets to 7% this May.

    That may well secure only a handful of seats this May. However if the bookmakers are to be believed then Ukip will be in second place in around 237 seats – more than any other party.

    Turn the wikipedia graph on it’s side and look at the purple and red lines since the start of 2013, they could have been turned on a potter’s wheel.

    This is a most surprising thing. I don’t buy the line that ‘The red Ukip vote is softest’. The reasoning is that , if you take the view as is asserted ad-nauseum that Ukip are ‘far-right’, then surely the red-kipper has crossed a wider rubicon than the blue-kipper and is less likely to go back?… sadly the stats don’t support this theory.

  46. Richard

    Thanks for the data.

    The LD leaflets in the constituencies they currently hold (ie for the rest of this week).have been pushing the “only we can stop the SNP” line.

    As you say, whether Tories voting LD to bring that about actually achieves that end, or lets the SNP through the middle by splitting the right-wing Unionist vote is something we can’t tell – except through constituency polling.

  47. @mrbeeswax
    “The diminished level is still at the confidently declared high water mark of the previous two Mays. ”

    That graph you’re looking at hasn’t been updated since early March. It doesn’t show the more recent decline. The graph I posted earlier from Election Forecast is actually updated.

  48. OLDNAT,

    “splitting the right-wing Unionist vote”

    Other than the Tories and a spattering of UKIP is there such a thing in Scotland?

    Peter.

1 2 3 4 5 6