The Guardian themselves seem to have put a pause on reporting their polls, but they are wisely continuing to commission their series of ICM/Guardian polls so as not to leave a gap in the data. Topline figures in the first post-election ICM poll are CON 37%, LAB 31%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 13%, GRN 5%. Tabs are here.

In terms of methodology ICM are using the same method as before the election – except, of course, that the data is weighted using people’s recall of their 2015 vote, not their 2010 vote. ICM’s tables make is abundently clear that is just a holding position, and that they are keeping their old method for the time being while they continue to investigate what went wrong and until they are sure of the right solution.


212 Responses to “ICM/Guardian – CON 37, LAB 31, LDEM 8, UKIP 13, GRN 5”

1 2 3 4 5
  1. I’m still no more decided on who to vote for, and can only say it won’t be Corbyn or Kendall.

    As a Milibandite (yeah we did exist!) there is no option in this contest for me.

  2. OLDNAT
    Think you’ve confused Kendal (in red) with Cooper on left of screen. If so tend to agree with your view

  3. NMidlander

    I think you have confused my joke with a serious comment.

    The one standing on the left of the screen was Laura Kuessenburg.

    She has at least three things in common with Nicola Sturgeon.

  4. Ed Balls to join Harvard University as academic researcher

    Ed is going back to school.

    Ed Balls to join Harvard University as academic researcher, where he studied as a postgraduate, with onus on European economics

  5. I’m really gate full to the Conservative party that one of their nominees for the chair of the Health Select Committee.

    Is it what is planned for the NHS?

    http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2009-10-14c.412.0

  6. To the previous: traditional Chinese medicine as we know it today was invented at around 1954 under Mao’s order as there were not enough resources, many doctors were killed in the civil war, and many immigrated. So The patients, instead of health service received “Traditional Chinese Medicine”.

  7. If you are looking for a big brain, guts, integrity and stature, try Denis Healey. He may have slowed down a bit, but the 4 persons currently running are not fit to clean his boots.

  8. @Laszlo

    Is Sarah Wollaston standing again?

    I rate her highly (unlike some of the people in her own party).

  9. Reckon ed balls just pinched ed Ms dream job !!..

    Looks like the labour leadership will turn into a war of attrition.

    Meanwhile back in the here and now who knows what will happen in greece and what effect that will have on others and our referendum.

  10. @ CMJ

    She does, and she put out a very good statement (she also has more support, but you never know with these votes). Yes, she is very good, so I have hopes as it is Tory against Tory, and many other-party MPs support her.

  11. Is that the denis healey who said he would squeeze the rich.until the pips squeak -sounds good to me ,bring him back-ed miliband as his chancellor.

  12. Lazlo

    Did you see this?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-33168125

    I wonder how Hungary is going to stop immigrants from entering through Romania or Croatia?

    Maybe there’s a homeopathic solution? :-)

  13. Sunreada,

    He actually said he’d squeeze “property speculators until the pips squeak”, not “the rich”. But that’s me nit picking.

  14. @ OldNat

    There’s a huge billboard war is going on in Hungary as well, but in spite of the activism (and lots of humour) according to the polls, the majority supports the government (what a surprise – finding enemies outside. Also because the majority of the population has access only to government media).

    It’s all posing, and probably the company that got the contract to build the fence is owned by a friend of the PM.

    Serbia is upping the game and talking about Auswitz. The Hungarian PM’s last friend in Western Europe is DC … juncker calls him dictator publicly.

  15. Yes fair enough mr N plenty of those misquotes ,bit like the prince of darkness saying he was intensly relaxed about people becoming filthy rich (as long as they pay their taxes).

    Play it again sam etc etc

  16. Actually there is an even longer fence between Bulgaria and Turkey.

    Nice new world. Oh, and the Pope had some interesting things to say today on immigration. Mind you he has a degree in chemistry, so he won’t believe in homeopathy (but he believes in other things).

  17. Forgot to say ,like roly we would both have the old major back anyway.

  18. CMJ

    Sarah Wollaston – my favourite politician

  19. Good evening all from East Renfrewshire. A little chilly but dry.

    Seen part of the Labour leadership hustings on the TV. Is Nicola Sturgeon the bench mark for the wannabe leader?

    Also..Why does it take so long for both Labour and the Lib/Dems to choose a leader?

  20. MRNAMELESS
    .
    “As a Milibandite (yeah we did exist!) there is no option in this contest for me”
    __________

    Oh crikey you need to get out more. Next you will be telling us there is such a thing as Milibandism!!

  21. I too am wondering why Labour take so long over this. It’s a vacuum, which their enemies fill. In 2010 it was the Tories, now it’s the SNP.

    I’m beginning to think we should dispense with Labour and get something a little better.

    I’m also wondering why, as Cathy Newman in the DT muses, Harriet Harman isn’t in the race.

    She’s now done the job on a temporary basis twice, in the most difficult of circumstances, and shone on both occasions. She has a track record of activism that keeps the left happy, is content with much of the New Labour era, and has the ability to look down her nose at Cameron and make him look small at QT. Her responses to the post election set pieces have been excellent, and she has gravitas.

  22. My view on the debate was that it was indecisive.

    Burnham was probably the worst performer. I cannot believe that he was given 45 seconds to introduce himself and so mistimed his delivery that he chronically overran and Laura K had to interrupt him several times and insist that he finish.

  23. Alec

    “I’m beginning to think we should dispense with Labour and get something a little better.”

    That “something” may involve both a different constitutional settlement so that the current GB parties no longer even try to appeal to voters across GB on all issues, combined with a greater willingness to form strong alliances to govern on whole-UK issues.

    Did you read Curtice’s analysis that Exile linked to above?

    The election “marked the final death-knell of the idea that there is such a thing as a single Britain-wide electoral contest”.

    Can anyone imagine any conceivable circumstance in which Labour could reach out simultaneously and successfully to those voters who now vote SNP, UKIP and Tory?

    Without successfully doing that, Labour will never have the numbers to form a majority government at Westminster under current arrangements.

    Other parties aren’t the “enemies” of Labour any more. Labour doesn’t need enemies. It’s unwillingness to recognise and adapt to the new political realities of the 21st century UK means that it is its own enemy.

  24. ALEC

    “I’m beginning to think we should dispense with Labour and get something a little better”

    “I’m also wondering why, as Cathy Newman in the DT muses, Harriet Harman isn’t in the race”
    ________

    I think we already have dispensed with Labour, well at least for the next 2 or 3 elections. I also wonder why Harriet Harman isn’t in the race?? She is about as good as it gets for Labour and a natural leader.
    ………….
    MILLIE
    “My view on the debate was that it was indecisive”
    ______

    The whole direction of the Labour party is indecisive. I mean is it going left, going right, going to the middle?

    Personally I think the party should turn to Angela Eagle and Dennis Skinner (the present day Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels) and try and get them to bring in some Classical Marxism to the party, like English and Scottish political economics and French socialism but that could be fine tuned into Welsh socialism.

    Get that right then the party might be in with a shout for the 2050 election.

  25. Allan Christie

    I saw that Dennis Skinner has atoned for his 1979 apostasy and voted with the SNP during the Scotland Bill.

    However, even Dennis will be deid by 2050!

    The Hansard scribes are having to learn a whole new set of colloquialisms. I hear they had to seek clarification from Alison Thewliss as to ” Lab scunnered folk” and that they “slung them a deafie”.

    Linguistic enrichment of the HoC lexicography!

  26. MILLIE

    Burnham constantly had to be stopped by LK-he seemed irritated by her , and bored with the whole thing. When he kept going on about taking Labour away from the “Westminster Elite”, I longed for someone to ask -” is that the same elite you belonged to in Government-or is it something you just nicked from Nicola Sturgeon ”

    Cooper betrayed her intense loyalty to Labour’s financial record-the thing which lost them the Election.

    Kendal tried very hard to be honest about taking Labour “out of its comfort zone” -which infront of that audience was simply writing her own rejection note.

    Corbyn at least tried to articulate what he believes in with some conviction. If you believe the theory of Free Money he was the stand out winner.

    Conservative MPs must have been doing cartwheels watching this sorry bunch of hopefuls.

  27. Colin

    I think that was a very fair comment.

    Liz K actually performed quite well, and is probably the best choice for Labour electorally, but her rather brave defence of things like deficit reduction will not go down well. She is drifting in the betting, and I don’t think she has much chance: she may be playing the long game and will emerge as the ‘I told you so’ candidate after either poor polling mid-term or another defeat.

    Corbyn did quite well and it seems to me that he is going to get a surprising level of support from the Party, as he did in the room. I note his price is shortening quite quickly.

    Burnham was poor, and looked a bit like a contestant on a Cilla Black light entertainment programme. He is looking seriously out of his depth, and weak.

    Which leaves Yvette, who was her usual reliable and robotic self. But she performed solidly, and looks a better bet than Burnham. And Labour must be ready for a female leader. At 3/1 she looks the value bet, and I might even place a small bet on her today.

    I thought Burnham would win, but he is beginning to look inadequate, and I suspect it is becoming obvious.

  28. Cant wait for the tory contest

  29. @ OldNat

    ‘Other parties aren’t the “enemies” of Labour any more. Labour doesn’t need enemies. It’s unwillingness to recognise and adapt to the new political realities of the 21st century UK means that it is its own enemy.’

    100 per cent agree but it is not going to happen. Labour seems inherently incapable of accepting pluralist politics and all that that means.

    On the debate, it was pretty depressing stuff, wasn’t it? Not an idea in sight, not even an old one dressed up in new clothing!

    Burnham seemed very nervous, said nothing close to interesting all evening and seemed to be playing for a draw. I was minded to support him before the debate but won’t be now.

    Kendall was lively and quite engaging but strikes me as a massive opportunist whose commitment to Labour’s core values is actually wafer thin. I also don’t think she is polished enough: less Sturgeon, more Leanne Wood!

    Which in terms of serious contenders leaves Cooper. That’s where my vote will probably now go, not because she excites me particularly, but because ultimately I think she will do job the best of the available candidates.

    As for Corbyn, it was good to have his positions articulated. I agree with him on immigration and many of his comments on the welfare system, but that view is incapable of mobilising majority support in FPTP.

  30. To clarify , Corbyn’s view would not be able to gain majority support in any electoral system. What I meant was that under PR a leftist party would at least get some seats whereas under FPTP it would get very few.

  31. “Cant wait for the tory contest”

    ———–

    Though if Cameron does a Farage and decides to stay on?…

    Blair clung on for ages…

  32. MILLIE

    I agree about Burnham.
    For me he came across as a chancer who seems to think that being a Scouser has mass political appeal.

    I thought there were two particularly interesting moments:-

    AB talking about what is important for the Labour Party-and LK telling him that what mattered was what is important for the country.

    The chap in the audience who complained about lack of a “compelling vision” from any of them. After they had all responded LK asked what he thought & he said he wasn’t convinced.

  33. Its burnhams to lose and I still cant see that happening.He has managed to face every which way in his career so defo a bit like cameron in that respect.

    Either he gets a big first preference vote and wins with corbyns second preferences or

    Its much closer ,again corbyns switch to burnham and faced with the choice politics suggests coopers will split more to burnham than kendall and the same with kendalls second preferences.

    The only way I can see a different result is if labour members are adamant they want a woman leader and ignore the candidates known politics.Maybe that could happen -wouldnt like to say who is the more likely under that scenario.

    The verification should do for toriesforcorbyn-but keep the £3s rolling.

    On the deputy not that its that important I suspect members will try to gender balance as they did in 2007.

  34. A lot of nonsense.

    The whole idea of political parties is outdated hogwash.

    Labour. Conservative. LibDem (do they still exist?)

    It is time to run a country based on pragmatism; if a left wing policy is required to resolve a particular issue, let’s have a left wing policy. If a right wing policy is required, let’s have a right wing policy.

    The idea that only left wing or only right wing policies work, at all times, in all events, is laughable.

    I’ll vote for the Pragmatic Party!

  35. I think it would be a touch unfair to write off the leadership candidates at this stage, or conclude there is no vision.

    The required process is to:

    – diagnose the GE failure
    – offer a new vision
    – flesh out the policies to deliver the vision

    Given the debate was 60 minutes, and removing say 12 minutes for the non-candidates talking, each person perhaps got 12 minutes to speak.

    It would be good going to go through those three steps in that time.

    I would hope they use the weeks ahead to clarify what they have to offer, but they need a chance to do this.

  36. Not too impressed with the BBC’s inability to count last night. On Newsnight Lara Kuensberg stated several times – repeated later by Evan Davis – that the candidates had 4 months left to convince party members when the new Leader is to be revealed on September 12th which is less than 3 months away!

    I think too much emphasis is being placed on what these woud-be leaders would have to offer at the next election when the key factor is likely to be how the incumbent Government has performed in the intervening period. If the economy goes ‘tits up’ any of the three main contenders would be well placed to win – or at least get the Tories out of office. Had any of them been leader in May 2015 I suspect Labour would have managed 250 seats with the Tories on circa 310 – a vey Hung Parliament with the LibDems too weak – and almost certainly disinclined – to prop the Tories up.

  37. Select committee chair results starting to come through. Probably the best outcome for any of the contests IMO is that Sarah Wollaston (a former GP) beat her only opponent, David Tredinnick (fan of homeopathy, and opponent of evidence based medicine) by 532 votes to 64.

  38. Meg Hillier new Public Accounts chair -bet google,facebook,starbucks,amazon are pleased Margaret Hodge has stood down.

    Mind you the EU commission are talking big on tax avoidance and evasion -about time frankly.

  39. I’ve seen AB a few times and just never been convinced. He’s weak in parliament, he has Mids Staffs written all over his track record and struggled to convincingly run his department.

    LK is saying all the right things and is the key player, but just doesn’t have enough name recognition and appeal to get elected by the Lab Party (I think … would be interesting to see what would have happened if the Leadership election had been held after each had spoken to conference like the Tories did in 2005). But she would do the best with the country.

    So I think those that put LK first will put YC second which could make it close in a run-off with AB.

  40. Labour mps said to think it will be yvette as she will be everybodys second choice .

    Said to be indecisive so her supporters hope she wont have any decisions to take.

    I wont be voting for her or corbyn.

  41. “Said to be indecisive so her supporters hope she wont have any decisions to take.”

    I can’t see such a problem coming up as leader of the opposition or PM.

  42. New poll from Ipsos MORI:

    CON 39 LAB 30 LD 9 UKIP 8 GRN 6

    Lib Dems back in third place!

  43. @07052015

    It seems to me that not only is Cooper’s best chance currently second preferences but that she knows that and is structuring her campaign as such. It is a risk but one that might pay off. I can see her being the second choice of a lot of both Burnham and Kendall supporters.

    I didn’t think any of them were terrific during last night’s debate but nor were any of them bad enough to make much difference to their campaigns – Burnham will regret the ‘party over country’ line, mind.

  44. Details of the Ipsos-MORI Political Monitor here

    https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3588/Labour-leadership-race-tight-as-no-candidate-is-able-to-open-up-a-clear-lead.aspx

    There seems to have been a variation in the methodology for identifying those in the headline figures

    “All 9/10 certain to vote, and always/usually vote/it depends (at Q15a General Election vote frequency)”

    Still concatenates different systems, of course. The useful English VI is –

    Con 43% : Lab 31% : LD 10% : UKIP 9% : Green 7%

    Scots wee sample – SNP 56% : Lab 22% : Con 17% : LD 5%.

  45. Preference for Lab leader in MORI poll

    DK : 34% : None of them 18% : AB 15% (but only 6% in London!) : YC 14% : LK 11%.

  46. I’ve said this before but I think general polling on leadership contests is next to useless. Useless as a guide to the state of play because the selectorate is a tiny, unrepresentative proportion of the electorate; useless as a guide to public views because the public know so little about the candidates and in the end will judge them on how they go in office. Polls of the selectorate are much more useful but still need massive health warnings because getting a representative sample is extremely difficult.

  47. Jack Sheldon

    Agreed – but wouldn’t it have been fun if Lewis had been challenging for the lead?

  48. “It is time to run a country based on pragmatism; if a left wing policy is required to resolve a particular issue, let’s have a left wing policy. If a right wing policy is required, let’s have a right wing policy.”

    That’s a bad idea for a few reasons.

    Firstly what is a solution and what is a problem are in many cases inherently partisan. For example, housing – is it a solution to a problem to build lots of houses so everyone can have a house, or is it a problem because it lowers house prices of people who saved up lots to buy them and feel financially secure because of that?

    Secondly, pragmatism quickly turns to populism, doing things simply for the sake of them polling well or being seen as “common sense” with no long-term thought or consideration put in.

    Thirdly, if you govern by wildly implementing a left wing policy here and a right-wing policy there, government quickly becomes incoherent. If you raise taxes to socialist levels but don’t use the funds to invest in public services and jobs, your people are crushed by taxation and starve. If you slash taxes but pour money into public spending, your deficit balloons, you lose all investment and the economy tanks.

    Taking any route to get out of those problems – in the first case investing in public services or lowering taxes, in the second case cutting public spending or raising taxes – requires that you naturally fall into a coherent left-wing or right-wing equilibrium.

    The job of running a government is a bit like running around a sewer fixing pipes that all have too much pressure on them. Patching up one hole moves the pressure further along the line and another leak comes along, and all you can do is keep patching them.

    The ideal situation is pressure the pipes can handle – a stable population, and no crime, technological change or natural disasters. But of course, we live in the real world.

    And there’s the guarantee that no matter how good a job you do patching holes, the longer you go on the more people think you smell.

  49. It look like the Parliamentary ‘status quo’ will win by not allowing EU Citizens or 16 and 17yr olds to vote in the EU referendum.

    By ‘status quo’, I might mean Status Quo – a group who have been knocking around for decades playing the same three chords, and every song sounds the same.

    No similarity then ;-)

  50. Re the debate which I watched

    One problem is that for professional politicians winning is everything – otherwise they are powerless and impotent. Therefore professional politicians are inclined to trim their beliefs, attempt to appeal to people with diametrically opposed views (ie waffle), and engage in double-speak.

    Ordinary party members and for that matter the non-aligned, tend to believe in things, and want politicians who stand for roughly the same things they stand for. They have lives outside politics, and losing isn’t the end of the world.

    The FPTP system requires coalitions to be built within a party, which has always been tricky and is now approaching impossible. It would be better to have a PR system which would enable most people to have a party they believe in, even if compromises and coalitions have tio be built afterwards.

    I strongly suspect that all 4 candidates, even Ms Kendall, do actually have views as to how to make a better country, but are too tied down by this need to avoid offense to articulate them. It’s OK for Corbyn, as he isn’t playing the same game. So the audience spends its time trying to work out what the candidates really think, while they try strenuously to avoid giving any hints. The result is frustration, just as people are frustrated at the general election. No-one pays any attention to the slogans, which is all we get.

    At least Burnham and Cooper have a history on the basis of which we can judge them. Personally I favour Cooper, who is economically literate, although whether I can face the deluge of spam and money requests by registering as a supporter is another matter

1 2 3 4 5