ICM’s monthly poll for the Guardian is out today and has topline figures of CON 38%(-2), LAB 32%(+1), LDEM 8%(+1), UKIP 13%(+3), GRN 3%(-1). The full tables are on their website here.

The fieldwork for the poll was Friday to Sunday, meaning just over half of the interviews were conducted before Jeremy Corbyn was announced as Labour’s new leader. If you are waiting to see the impact of Corbyn on Labour’s voting intention figures, you’ll need to wait for another poll (and even then, if the next poll has Labour down a bit or up a bit, unless it’s a huge great shift it will be indistinguishable from normal sample error. As ever, we’d need to wait for a couple of polls showing movement in the same direction before concluding there had been any real effect).


350 Responses to “ICM/Guardian – CON 38, LAB 32, LDEM 8, UKIP 13, GRN 3”

1 2 3 7
  1. First

  2. Anthony

    Sir! Sir! Some newbie outfit called YouGov have done a poll in Scotland.

    Probably a bunch of chancers in YG, who know nothing – but you might think about putting up a thread on it, so we can all have a laugh at them.

  3. Interesting that the gap between the two main protagonists, Con and Lab have closed and that UKIP is retaining strong support.

  4. Meantime, we can have a giggle at ICM’s methodology.

    The vote figures shown in the tables are calculated after ICM has excluded those who say they will not vote, refuse to answer the question or don’t know who they would vote for (but see below).
    Adjustment process 1: ‘Partial Refuser’ Reallocation A.) 75% of 2015 Conservative and Labour voters who refuse to answer the vote intention question or say they don’t know, are added back to the party they voted for in 2015. B.) 50% of 2015 voters for all other parties who refuse to answer the vote intention question or say they don’t know, are added back to the party they voted for in 2015.
    Adjustment process 2: ‘Total Refuser’ Reallocation ‘Total refusers’ are people who refuse/DK their future vote intention AND also refuse/DK who they voted for in the previous General Election (2015). Given the lack of any political information about such respondents to date, ICM has excluded them from the vote intention figures. However, our post-2015 Recall Survey revealed that Total Refusers (who were subsequently willing to tell us what they did in the 2015 General Election) split disproportionately across different parties. Indeed, one important observation was that more than half of all Total Refusers actually voted Conservative, with more than twice as many voting Conservative than Labour.
    Our new adjustment thus reallocates some Total Refusers back into the poll sample. This is achieved in the following way: 1. The number of Total Refusers on any poll is multiplied by the proportion of Partial Refusers who were (already) re-allocated in Adjustment Process 1. (For example, if 60% of Partial Refusers were added back, then 60% of Total Refusals will be added back).
    2. Total Refusers are then multiplied by each party’s share of reallocated Partial Refusers. (For example, if 40% of already allocated Partial Refusals were 2015 Conservative voters, then 40% of remaining Total Refusals will be reallocated to the Conservatives).
    3. ICM’s default position is that Total Refusers at least look like Partial Refusers in terms of political make-up. However, given the findings of our Recall Poll, we believe that Total Refusals are probably even more pro-Conservative than pro-Labour. In order to allow for this, the share of Total Refusals added back to the Conservatives is increased by 20% (for example, from the 40% mentioned in (2, above) to 60%), with a corresponding reduction of 20% in the share of Total Refuser reallocation to Labour.
    Our expectation is that the combined effects of Adjustments 1 +2 as described above will have the net effect of adding c.1-2 percentage points vote share to the Conservatives, and reduce the Labour vote share by c.0-1 percentage points compared to the pre-2015 ICM adjustment process.

    Translation – “our numbers are probably carp, so we have fiddled around with them to get an answer that we think might be vaguely in the ballpark.”

  5. So basically, “Total Refusers” tend to be Conservatives. Who knew?

  6. Good Evening All from a cold Bournemouth where the football is challenging now.

    It has been quite a challenging time for some people who are passionate about Politics.

    OLD NAT: On the methodology question: Do you think that the Lib Dem figure on ICM is a little high?

    Just a thought.

  7. @David

    To be fair, you can’t conclude that Con and Lab have moved closer from one poll.

    Much more polling is required to establish if anything has changed.

  8. ChrisLane1945

    Re LibDem figure

    Probably a little high – due to adding back 50% of their Refusers, rather than the more nuanced 48.7% that I would have applied.

    It’s still better than Scotland Votes as a predictor of Holyrood LD MSPs, however.

    Reduce LD VI to 0% – and Scotland Votes still makes Shetland an LD hold – perhaps they are applying their Norwegian algorithm.

  9. ChrisLane1945

    Are you on your post-retirement temporary contract now?

  10. Maybe they’re using Duckworth-Lewis – that doesn’t work brilliantly either…

  11. @OldNat
    Translation of ICM poll: “We got singed underestimating Tory swingback at the last GE, so we will incoporatete a few % on to the Tory score as some people lie to pollsters”.

    Moving swiftly on, I think Corbyn missed a trick in not hiring enough young blood. To withstand the onslaught he is going to face over the next few months will require a huge amount of energy and enthusiasm.

  12. Carfrew

    Or maybe they are using John Lewis – allegedly, according to this Mr Ethical tweet –
    John Lewis Financial Services (HSBC) were adding illegal charges to accounts between 2004-2010. Report to FCA tomorrow.

  13. Good evening all from Giffnock.

    Not much of a Corby bounce in tonight’s poll.

    I really can’t take Labour seriously at the moment. The party looks as if its just been taken over by a military coup and all looks a bit chaotic.

  14. SNP 51% (+2)
    Labour 22% (-3)
    Conservatives 18% (+3)
    Liberal Democrats 4% (-3)

    Regional list ballot :

    SNP 45% (+2)
    Labour 20% (-4)
    Conservatives 18% (+2)
    Greens 9% (+2)

    Again no Corby bounce, What’s going on?

  15. @RAF

    Did Stella Creasy refuse to join the Shadow Cabinet? I can’t find anything relating to that.

    I think JC’s Shadow Cabinet is quite well balanced. There are some fresh faces, but also some MPs with more experience.

    Both energy and some old-time wisdom are required.

  16. CMJ,

    Stella Creasy was offered a position which would have enabled her to attend Shadow Cabinet, but only when discussing youth related matters. She turned it down.

  17. @RAF

    I was surprised to see Cat Smith go ignored.

    So it seems the TU bill passed, Ayes 317 Noes 284.

    It strikes me that there are notably more than 284 in opposition to oppose/defeat this, and that they haven’t – I’ll be interested to see who.

  18. @Oldnat

    “It’s still better than Scotland Votes as a predictor of Holyrood LD MSPs, however.”

    Orkney to go SNP?

  19. CATMANJEFF
    @RAF

    “I think JC’s Shadow Cabinet is quite well balanced. There are some fresh faces, but also some MPs with more experience”
    ________

    Well balanced? Do you mean in seesaw terms? You couldn’t get a more unbalanced crop of people even if you tried your hardest.

    Half the cabinet don’t agree with his polices or with each other. It’s a mess.

  20. Statgeek

    Based on previous performance of the Orkney Movement (I presume) it shows Orkney as having an “Independent” MSP.

    Has to cast some doubt on their prediction that Ayr and Galloway would go Tory on these figures (though they might).

  21. I’m just glad Michael Meacher isn’t in there.

  22. @MrNameless

    She said she’d return to the backbenches, if not made deputy, in any case.

  23. Oldnat

    Constituency votes…who knows. There has been a rise of Con and a drop of Lab this week, but it might be stat noise.

  24. @Funtypippin

    I really enjoy Michael Meacher’s daily blog posts.

    What don’t you like about him?

  25. CMJ

    He comes across as well meaning but he’s also a 9/11 truther, which for me would make him utterly inappropriate as a cabinet minister.

  26. @Carfew

    “So basically, “Total Refusers” tend to be Conservatives. Who knew?”

    It’s not that surprising. After all when I was at school (an international school), you could always tell which people supported Bush for President; if you asked ‘who did you support?’ you got one of two answers ‘Kerry’, or ‘I’m not telling you/that’s private’.

    People seem oddly reluctant to admit that they’ve backed lunatics. Which could, of course, mean that we now have a shy-Labour effect and they’re really on 42%.

    @Allan

    “Half the cabinet don’t agree with his polices or with each other”

    In fairness that’s almost certainly true of all cabinets; this one is just not bothering of going through the facade of lying about it.

  27. @Paul Bristol

    Sounds about right. Along similar lines I found this to be an accurate (and funny) summing up of it:

    http://flyingrodent.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/just-any-kind-of-sign.html?m=1

  28. Survation Full Scottish poll (Fieldwork 7-10 Sep)

    http://survation.com/archive/2015-2/

    All figures with undecideds removed.

    EU Referendum : Remain 63.6%, Leave 36.4%

    Indyref2 : Yes 49.3%, No 50.7%

    Westminster VI : SNP 51.2%, Lab 21.3%, Con 16.2%, LD 5.8%
    Holyrood Constituency VI : SNP 53.9%, Lab 21.8%, Con 14.3%, LD 5.5%
    Holyrood List VI : SNP 42.4%, Lab 21.0%, Con 13.1%, Green 11%, LD 6.0%, UKIP 5.1%

  29. Panelbase Full Scottish poll (Fieldwork 4-10 Sep)

    http://www.panelbase.com/media/Polls.aspx

    Indyref2 : Yes 47%, No 53%

    Holyrood Constituency VI : SNP 52%, Lab 23%, Con 14%, Green 11%, LD 6%
    Holyrood List VI : SNP 48%, Lab 22%, Con 15%, Green 6%, LD 6%, UKIP 3%

  30. YouGov Full Scottish poll (Fieldwork 7-10 Sep)

    https://yougov.co.uk/news/categories/politics/

    Indyref2 : Yes 47%, No 53%

    Trident : Replace with equivalent 24%, Replace but downgrade 29%, Abandon WMD 37%

    Holyrood Constituency VI : SNP 51%, Lab 232%, Con 18%, Green 11%, LD 4%
    Holyrood List VI : SNP 45%, Lab 20%, Con 18%, Green 67%, LD 4%, SSP 3%, UKIP 2%

  31. Keyboard playing up on that YG poll!

    Holyrood Constituency VI : SNP 51%, Lab 22%, Con 18%, LD 4%
    Holyrood List VI : SNP 45%, Lab 20%, Con 18%, Green 7%, LD 4%, SSP 3%, UKIP 2%

    And finally, the earlier TNS-BMRB Full Scottish poll (Fieldwork 12 Aug -1 Sep)

    Indyref2 : Yes 53%, No 47%

    Holyrood Constituency VI : SNP 58%, Lab 23%, Con 12%, LD 5%
    Holyrood List VI : SNP 51%, Lab 24%, Con 11%, Green 6%, LD 6%, UKIP 1%

  32. @Funtypippin

    He comes across as well meaning but he’s also a 9/11 truther, which for me would make him utterly inappropriate as a cabinet minister.

    I must admit, I don’t share your view.

    The official 9/11 Commission version of events looks incomplete at times, and at other times illogical.

    If Mr Meacher has reached these conclusions, I fully understand how he got there and don’t see that as an impediment to serving in a Cabinet or Shadow Cabinet.

    Crikey, we have people in the Cabinet and Shadow Cabinet who believe in ‘trickle down economics’!!

  33. “Half the cabinet don’t agree with his polices or with each other. It’s a mess.”

    That used to be the norm though, up until the 80s. Bevan and Bevin. Jenkins and Healey.

  34. Sorry, “Benn and Healey.”

    Dunno how Roy Jenkins managed to sneak in there. Rascal.

  35. The TU Bill debate demonstrated that Eagle is a very effective operator at the dispatch box, and some other facts relevant to coming months: [snip] another is the affinity of SNP and Lab back benchers in the HOC; a third is that the Tories have managed to unify and give voice and passion to a TU backed opposition to them up to the next GE and for generations to come.

  36. and that it will be difficult to distinguish between bounce caused by this bill and Corbyn.

  37. Amidst the hullaballoo is anyone else struck by the similarities between the tory and old labour models of government.?

    1.The only two people who matter are the leader and the chancellor who take every important decision ignoring their cabinet and their mps.Osborne was camerons campaign manager,mcdonnell was corbyns.

    2.Then you appoint ambitious nonentities under the guise of gender equality,tories -truss,morgan,patel,rudd, Labour malhotra,berger,alexander,del piero,,.Their job is to be on message at all times and speak dalek -“I am very clear that jeremy corbyn is a threat to world security .Exterminate.”

    3 Both want to eliminate the deficit as per o level accountancy ignoring convential economics.Tories by cuts on the poor and downtrodden.Labour by not replacing trident and making the rich and companies pay their taxes.

    4.Both will ignore convential members views as a badge of honour ,Tories gay marriage ,Corbyn Terrorism.

    Wonder if the voters will notice ,probably not if the blair dictum of left and right parties plays out.

    Need some polls to see whats what.

  38. @OldNat

    I don’ see the referenum question in the YouGov Poll Tables but it was reported as: 52No 48Yes

  39. @OldNat

    Looking through all the tables I really don’t see any red flags for the SNP: Appoval of Nicola, their policies, no sign that they will lose more than they gain from a Corbyn victory.

    On the other hand Labour’s best chance of picking up votes was from the Tories, with 31% saying that they would consider voting Labour, with Corbyn leader that now looks unlikely.

  40. “Dunno how Roy Jenkins managed to sneak in there. Rascal.”

    A brilliant summary of Jenkins’s career in exactly 10 words.

  41. Latest ICM poll on the EU:

    Stay 43%
    Leave 40%
    DK 17%

  42. The amusing thing about all the methodological contortions that, as OldNat quoted, ICM go through, is that they made not the slightest bit of difference to their results in this poll (compare p 6 with p 7 of the pdf). Which suggests that hunting for yet more ‘shy Tories’ to explain what went wrong in May may not explain things.

    All that happens is SNP lose a point, presumably because they were on 5.5% given their vote comes from only 8.5% of the electorate. UKIP gain a point because phone polls, such as ICM, clearly have a ‘shy UKIP’ problem which they can adjust for better now they have a GE result to calibrate against.

    Otherwise the ICM figures yet again illustrate just how little has changed since the election. Neither Jezzamania nor horror at the forthcoming dictatorship of the proletariat seem to have much effect on the punters. As usual likelihood to vote has the effect of widening the Conservative lead (from 36-33 to 38-32), maybe a revived Labour Party will counter that, but it’s a very long standing problem for them and not easy to fix.

  43. Oldnat,

    It’s interesting how most of those tell a similar story, except TNS RMB who have the SNP doing much better than the others. Overall, one could say that the SNP look like doing even better in Holyrood than at Westminster; Labour look to have decline a lot even from their poor result in 2011; the Tories and the Lib Dems are just about flatlining on their 2011 results; and the Greens look to have made a little improvement but basically be stuck on their 2011 support.

  44. Of course, if the SNP, Labour AND the Lib Dems are all moving at least somewhat to the left, that puts a lot of pressure on the Greens. It’s hard to know where a Green surge could come from in Scotland these days.

  45. The “Would you consider voting for party X?” answers in the Yougov poll are really interesting. The SNP has a tremendous degree of stability across diffferent age groups (47% to 55%) whereas SLAB have a low ceiling among older age groups (31% for the over 65’s) and there is a similar pattern to SLAB for the Lib Dems. The Scottish Tories vary from 22% to 28%, with their highest numbers among the youngest and oldest.

    The SNP have one thing to worry about: a surprisingly high number of those who intend to vote for them next year wouldn’t even consider the idea of voting for them. (1%.) One wonders what SNP HQ plans to do about this problem, before it gets out of hand…

  46. It’s also the first research I’ve seen on the extent to which there was tactical voting in Scotland, and which parties it hurt. The results are as you’d expect: the Lib Dems benefitted a lot from those currently planning to vote Tory or Labour, while Labour benefitted to a lesser extent from Tory tactical voters. The Tories had no statistically detectable benefit from tactical voting.

    To give some sense of the scale of tactical voting: a little more than half of 2015 Lib Dem voters plan on voting for someone else next year.

  47. Lovely day today, down here.

    OLD NAT: yes, in part time post-retirement work, for the year.

    Labour do not seem to be recovering in Scotland, or in England,either.

    They seem to be still doing a core vote approach. It may be unsuccessful!

  48. That Krugman article nailed it – “….the strange, sad moral and intellectual collapse of Labour moderates.”

1 2 3 7