ComRes and YouGov both had post-Corbyn polls in the Indy on Sunday/Sunday Mirror and Sunday Times respectively. Tabs are here – Comres, YouGov.

ComRes had topline voting intention figures of CON 42% (+2), LAB 30%(+1), LDEM 7%(-1), UKIP 13%(nc), GRN 3%(-1). Changes are since their August poll and show no obvious impact from Jeremy Corbyn becoming leader.

YouGov had topline figures of CON 39%, LAB 31%, LDEM 6%, UKIP 16%, GRN 3%. YouGov haven’t released voting intention figures since May, but as you can see, the gap between Labour and the Conservatives is barely changed from the election (the difference between the 12 point Tory lead in ComRes and the 8 point Tory lead in YouGov will be at least partially because ComRes have adopted their new socio-economic turnout model, which weights down younger and poorer voters who are historically less likely to vote. YouGov are still reviewing their methods post-election).

YouGov included some more questions about early attitudes towards Jeremy Corbyn. Most people don’t think he has much chance of being Prime Minister (only 14% think it’s likely), but beyond that attitudes are currently quite evenly divided. 30% think he’s strong enough to be a good leader, 41% think he is not.

36% of people agree with the description that Corbyn has dangerous and unworkable views and would be a threat to the economy and national security, but 32% agree with the description that he’s a man of integrity & principle who has caught the mood of people disillusioned by politics. 7% don’t agree with either, 6% agree with both (which is fair enough – one could be a decent and principled man with unworkable and dangerous views!).

YouGov also asked about a list of policies that have been supported by Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell in the past, announced by Corbyn or floated as possible Labour policies. Again, they found a mixed bag. Some, like withdrawal from NATO, negotiating over the Falklands and abolishing the benefit cap are extremely unpopular, but other things like a higher top rate of tax, rent controls and nationalising the utility companies meet with wide public approval.

The rest of ComRes’s poll had bank of favourable/unfavourable opinion questions on leading politicians. Boris Johnson had the most favourable net score of those asked about with plus 8, followed by David Cameron on minus 7, Theresa May (minus 11), Vince Cable (minus 14), George Osborne (minus 17), Jeremy Corbyn (minus 18), Nicola Sturgeon (minus 19), Nick Clegg (minus 27).

Tom Watson actually had a comparatively good score – minus 8 – but on a low number of responses (71% said don’t know or no opinion), Tim Farron and John McDonnell got similarly high don’t knows, though more negative scores. At this stage, the public simply aren’t familiar enough with them to hold any strong positive or negative opinions.

UPDATE: I missed a third national GB poll, Opinium for the Observer. They had topline figures of CON 37%, LAB 32%, LDEM 6%, UKIP 14%. Opinium also included a best PM question (Cameron 41%, Corbyn 22%) and had some figures on whether Labour under Corbyn could win that were a little more optimistic for them – 32% think Labour could definitely or probably win under Corbyn, 55% though they probably or definitely could not. Tabs are here.

345 Responses to “Latest ComRes and YouGov polls”

1 2 3 4 5 7
  1. @Amber Star

    Do you know you are in the minority?

    According to Opinium Scots when asked:
    “We’d now like to ask you about how you think of yourself and your identity. Which, if any, of the terms below would you say form a part of your identity?”

    Only 46% select British as part of their identity.

  2. Pete B
    You’re comparing a man who will have been a moderately successful chancellor for nearly 10 years

    That’s a bold claim.

  3. @Amber

    But what happens if Coups makes an error and has to correct herself? Would that make her an English Imperialist too?

  4. @Rob Sheffield – I thought you were joking but googled to make sure. It seems the rumour is indeed there, occurs in an unauthorised biography and is noted in the daily mail.

  5. Couper/Amber

    I think you are both missing the point.

    Those of us living outwith England (other than some of those in Scotland served by English based TV) get regular, indeed excessive, coverage of domestic English politics. That allows us to have some understanding of these matters, although they only have an indirect effect on our lives.

    In contrast, those in England have to make something of an effort to comprehend Scottish politics (as RAF points out some do).

    It’s exactly the same for those outwith Wales and Northern Ireland. Other than some issue picked up by the media in their locality, few people have any understanding of the politics of these parts of the UK.

    Analysis of BBC coverage, for example, has shown there is even less coverage on English TV of politics in the devolved nations than there was pre-devolution (and there was damn little then).

    In the same way, US politics gets a reasonable amount of coverage in the UK, so we feel able to comment on that.

  6. Charles

    “occurs in an unauthorised biography”

    I don’t imagine that it would appear in a biography that Cameron had authorised! :-)

  7. Re the Cameron story it apparently occurs in a book by Lord Ashcroft and a collaborator I found the following on the web and it seemed to me interesting..

    Legend has it that LBJ, in one of his early congressional campaigns, told one of his aides to spread the story that Johnson’s opponent ****** pigs. The aide responded “Christ, Lyndon, we can’t call the guy a pig******. It isn’t true.” To which LBJ supposedly replied “Of course it ain’t true, but I want to make the son-of-a-bitch deny it.”

  8. I have to say, the Lord’s Revelation is quite something.


    It seems that polling companies didn’t excel themselves in Greece.

    No. Interestingly it looks like a similar problem as with their referendum recently – an underestimation of the No/SYRIZA vote and an over-estimation of Yes/ND. If you look at the latest figures from the Ministry of the Interior:{“cls”:”level”,”params”:{“level”:”epik”,”id”:1}}

    SYRIZA’s 35.6% is higher than any figure in September’s numerous polls; ND’s 28.1% lower than any except two (one an obvious outlier). The swing to ND is a miserable 0.5 points from January. There did seem to be a slight movement to SYRIZA in the polls in the least few days, but effectively returning to January’s figures was completely unexpected. Even the exit polls didn’t get it right.

    What is strange is that both this and the referendum had low turnouts (this was only 56.4% compare to 63.6% in January). Normally you would expect this to favour conservative Parties, with their older, more settled voters. But the opposite seems to be the case. In fact I wonder if there is something wrong with the figures that the pollsters use – are they sampling too many older people for example (this would explain why the exit polls were wrong as well). January’s polls overestimated ND as well (except for Palmos who went well under) though they got SYRIZA about right.

    It’s possible that the polls themselves altered events. Because they reported the tussle for first (and so the extra 50 seats) as being so close, it might have swung some votes from other Parties on the Left to maintain SYRIZA’s lead. The KKE might have lost up to a point (they’re still about where they were) and the SYRIZA rebels, LAE, about the same. In their case this left them below the 3% threshold (currently on 2.87%) which might not have happened if the polls had reported SYRIZA with the comfortable lead they actually had.

  10. Will the Lord be ensuring there is polling on the matter?

  11. There is so much funny stuff on twitter. Apparently it was part of an initiation ritual to a dining club. A lot of right-wing types saying ‘everyone does this sort of thing when they’re young’ To which the answer is ‘no really they don’t’.

  12. Charles

    I saw that Twitter comment too.

    Of course, we don’t know whether the Piers Gaveasto story is true – nor do we know that the supposed LBJ “legend” is an old legend – or one dreamed up by one of Cameron’s team, in response to the story.

    Politics can get very muddy when porkies are being told on both sides. :-)

  13. One of the interesting things about Ashcroft’s claim is that a photograph might exist. As much as I enjoyed Ashcroft’s polling at the last election I’d prefer he spent his billions buying a print of THAT instead.

  14. *Cough*

    What about the tennis, eh guys?

  15. The architect of the Conservative campaign cited the threat of the SNP pulling the strings as a significant contributory factor to their victory, such that Lynton Crosby singled it out on his departure to pastures new. Those running the Labour campaign clearly came to the same conclusion, and bemoaned the fact that Miliband did not even then act decisively to try and stop the hare running – remember the angst in Patrick Wintour’s article on the inside story of the Labour campaign? They all had access to private polling which will have informed those views. It led the Conservatives to place more and more emphasis on the issue in their almost daily leaflets and direct mailshots targetted at English marginals, such that it became their most consistent theme of the final few weeks. The public polling around the time of the election backed that up. And I know from my own experience on the doorstep that it was being brought up without prompting as an issue in the midst of routine door and phone canvassing, the more remarkable since the only other unprompted issue that I regularly came across were comments about Ed Miliband as a leader.

    The BES give no detail of any evidence that backs their assertion to the contrary, and all they really come up with is that “we cannot say for sure that this didn’t matter” and that “our explorations suggest it is a difficult effect to pin down”. It sounds to me that they didn’t really scratch the surface very hard with their statistical modelling, while ignoring all of the other copious evidence in the public realm.

  16. @ Old Nat

    I think you are both missing the point.

    No, I got the point just fine. Rather than this being a forum for people to share their views on politics, Couper 2802 wants to exclude anybody who isn’t Scottish from sharing their perceptions of Scottish politics. That’s taking nationalism to a place where the ‘F’ word wouldn’t be out of place!

  17. In all likelihood, an independent country that shares a single land border with another 11 times its population will have to pay attention to the goings on. That country’s government. Just ask Canada or Denmark.

    It need not be arduous though simply not calling them named will go down well.

  18. @Phil Haines

    There was a program on the parliament channel where the BES presented their findings,….

    If I remember correctly the problem was that Miliband was perceived as weak and would be pushed around by Sturgeon or Merkel etc. So the anti-SNP line was exploiting a weakness that Miliband already had as opposed to creating a weakness. If the SNP had not been used something else would have been to capitalise on the weakness.

    I think Miliband just added to the impression of weakness by giving into pressure and ruling out more and more deals with the SNP eventually ridiculously ruling himself out as PM, if he had to work with the SNP.

  19. Oldnat your point is a reasonable one, just one that the counter to is that people on UKPR are exactly the kind of people who will make the effort to look at local sources when commenting. I have found a very well informed set of comments from non Welsh about Welsh politics. Calling people imperialists and other nonsense looks pretty desperate.

  20. @Amber Star

    Don’t be ridiculous I am just fed up of the same arguments going round in circles. If you read some of the posts earlier in the thread they were insulting to the SNP and Scotland – people react and we go over and over the same ground. My point is this is meant to be the non-partisan discussion of polls not a Scotland v England match.

  21. DW

    “simply not calling them named [s?] will go down well.”

    Indeed – though surely that works both ways? I presume that you deprecate name-calling or stigmatisation of any nation (or group) by another. You detest “Irish” jokes etc etc.

    At the same time, there are intolerant people everywhere. I have no problem with them being laughed at and humiliated.

    Sauce for the goose etc (though the species may not be the most appropriate tonight).

  22. Well if you Google “David Cameron” the first completion suggestion that comes up is “pig”.

    It all turns up to come from a book written by our old friend Lord Ashcroft and Isabel Oakeshott according to the Mail who are serialising it

    there’s actually stuff that might be more damaging concerning tax statuses and drugs.

  23. @DW

    Well quit with the comments such as
    Westminster won’t allow another referendum for 30 years’
    ‘let’s have a UK referendum and kick Scotland out’ t
    ‘Scots must start to see through the SNP’s self-righteous us-v-them narrative.’
    The old chestnut who can or can’t use the pound with the assertion that a Scottish pound would be ‘worthless toilet paper’

    We are only missing oil price.

    Quit stirring things up and being partisan is my point.

  24. DW

    One of the joys of UKPR is that it (mostly) consists of reasonable people. Many of them also do make the effort to understand politics outside their own wee patch.

    There are also the idiots who proudly proclaim that they have “no interest” in , (on a GB site,usually Scottish) politics”. These strike me, not as “English imperialists”, but just as very narrow-minded, intellectually barren, self-centred fools.

    Every political grouping has to suffer such folk as supporters. Scottish political sites have the equivalent.

  25. For what it’s worth, the Piers Galveston lot were, according to old press reports from the 1980s, infamous for (among many other things) having severed pig heads around the place.

  26. @ Couper 2802

    My point is this is meant to be the non-partisan discussion of polls not a Scotland v England match.

    It takes two to tango.

    If you are going to defend the SNP/ Scotland every time somebody else makes a comment about either then of course the discussion will become partisan, descend into ever decreasing circles & finally deteriorate into Scotland v England.

  27. “We are only missing oil price.”


    Yes, sorry about that Coups, but you do have a point. You don’t think the ignorant should post, but a fair few peeps were ignorant on the oil price thing and I don’t see you saying they shouldn’t comment any more.

  28. @Amber

    It’s ok, Coups has ruled out anyone ignorant over oil prices from ever commenting on Scottish politics ever again.

    Which is nice.

  29. @ Carfrew

    I reckon we should shut out everybody who doesn’t understand QE or thorium reactors. People who don’t understand such things should just trot off & be ignorant somewhere else. :-)

  30. @Amber

    Don’t forget storage!!

  31. It’s fortunate for David Cameron that Ed Balls is no longer on the Labour front benches; an oik oinking during P M Qs would be quite the sledging!

  32. PETE B

    OldNat: “During the Brown Premiership there were lots of comments of that type about not wanting any Scots “to have any say in the next UK government” ”

    Well those comments have proved to be a true forecast at least for this Parliament.

    Well providing you ignore Michael Gove, and Iain Duncan Smith and …

    (they get everywhere those Scots)

  33. @ Carfrew

    LOL! :-)

  34. Nice to have you back Amber. (Even if you are an English Imperialist!!…)

  35. Carfrew

    Lots of people are ignorant on oil prices.

    Currently, Brent Crude is around $47.55 per barrel (the actual price varies minute by minute).

    For whichever government (UK or Scotland) that enjoys the revenues, these are much lower than when the Saudis massively increased production (their drilling costs are around $6 per barrel). They have said they would happily see crude prices at around $20 per barrel to ensure their market share, as they compete with Iran.

    Like the London based financial sector the revenues from these sources are volatile [1]

    Fortunately, the non-oil Scottish economy operates at around 99% of the whole UK one, and reduced oil revenues are mirrored by the consequent lower energy costs which benefit both economies.

    I’m sure you must have had a point to make – but what was it?

    [1] If oil wasn’t volatile it would have zero value. In the same way, the finance sector is hugely volatile in terms of location. If they don’t get their own way from the UK Government, they could easily relocate. The oil, on the other hand, remains where it is as a future resource.
    If oil in Scotland, or finance in the UK provided more than 15% of GDP, that would increase economic vulnerability to the volatility – neither, however, is the case.

  36. “I’m sure you must have had a point to make – but what was it?”


    That claiming the ignorant shouldn’t post rules out those who were wrong on oil prices. (Your diversion into the Saudi influence on oil price doesn’t change that. It just highlights how spectacularly wrong it was to ignore such influence, especially after what happened in the Seventies.)

    You could write reams more on many other diversions and it still wouldn’t alter that point. Instead, best enjoy Murrays’ excellent tennis performance and get some kip!!

  37. Carfrew

    “That claiming the ignorant shouldn’t post rules out those who were wrong on oil prices.”

    Oh well, since everybody was wrong about oil prices, then nobody should post at all. Everyone got that wrong – though, in due course, everyone will have got it right at some point!

    However, since you have posted similar comments about oil prices before, in different contexts, the unwary might be forgiven for assuming that you had another agenda in mind.

    As to sport- I did note that Japan humbled South Africa, Dunblane humbled Australia and Aberdeen remain unbeaten in the Scottish Premiership.

  38. @Oldnat

    Those of us living outwith England (other than some of those in Scotland served by English based TV) get regular, indeed excessive, coverage of domestic English politics.

    Indeed. In fact sometimes England & Wales news is mis-represented as UK news, such as E&W NHS stories.

    My own take is simple. We can all have an opinion on everything, but we can’t all have a non-partisan, well-informed opinion on most things, and especially things through one type of media source, or from afar.

    I’ve lost count of the number of deep-fried gags, despite never having eaten a mars bar in such a fashion. I don’t like haggis, I don’t drink very often, and I’m not a subsidy junkie (or any other sort of junkie for that matter). I hired a kilt twice in my life before receiving one as a present on my 40th birthday (and have worn it once).

    Once we pass by these often used stereotypes to denigrate those that live far from us, we have to confront the uncomfortable fact that they are people too.

    I generally keep schtum on parts of the UK other than Scotland. Not informed on such matters (it’s of little interest to me too), so I would look foolish if I tried to pretend I knew anything beyond the polling, and I would look like a complete idiot if I attempted to label a section of London or England as ‘scroungers’ or right-wing or left-wing loonies.

    Scotland and UK level politics is more than enough (with occasional issues on things that affect either, such as ‘London-centrism’). That attitude generally works for me.

    I understand that a far off place’s politics can affect other parts of the UK to the point of frustration (London is one example, and I suppose Scotland is another). That’s no reason to assume that opinions from other parts of the UK are of less value. I won’t agree with any number of comments / people, but I won’t play the man unless I sense a troll.

    If we are ‘Better Together’ it’s not obvious in the comments on most places on-line, and certainly not from the media in general. And folks, if that somehow makes me a nationalist (pejorative usage or otherwise), for giving my parochial point of view from the part of the world I inhabit, that’s fine with me. We all do it at some level. It’s impossible not to. It’s no different from how the UK media operates, and I don’t profit from my point of view.

    Just a random collection of thoughts, that don’t gel well as a story, so don’t hope for continuity or a punchline. :))

  39. N.B. – Not all aimed at Oldnat. Just the first response.

  40. Statgeek

    Inevitably, people’s comments will reflect their own political views, experiences etc.

    Hopefully, on this site, they will be illuminated by polling data – as most are.

    Then there are the others. Governed by faith, prejudice, and partisan loyalty to a particular set of career politicians and/or the “Establishment”, they are a sorry sight.

  41. @TOH


    David Cameron got up to what most people that went to uni in the 1980s got up to, shocker.

    Seriously, this serialisation is likely to run for a couple of weeks and will probably produce some inconvenient headlines. Not ideal timing when the Tory strategy is to try and frame public perceptions of Corbyn.

  42. TOH,

    This is why I’m quite careful never to be too scathing about the press. It’s not fun when it’s my side in the crosshairs but sometimes my opponents get got just as well…

    Jack Sheldon,

    I dread to think what sort of university experience you had.

  43. No-one would have known about Cameron and the pig, but for the fact that someone squealed on him…

  44. @Couper2802

    I’m not going to offer opinions as to the detailed reasons for the outcome of the general election in Scotland. Living outside of Scotland and not seeing the campaign at first hand, I’m not in a good position to form a judgement.

    For the same reason though, I consider that it is difficult for others to form an outsider’s view as to what swung the result in the English marginals, where the Conservatives concentrated most of their very considerable campaign resources and greatly outperformed their showing in other seats. That is where I do have first hand experience of how the Conservatives went about defending their English marginals from Labour, given that I live in one such seat and was part of the Labour inner team in this constituency that took on that defence. As such I saw all of the leaflets and mailshots that they put out in their very intensive campaign, which was generic to all of the English Con-Lab marginals (in so far as most of it was nationally funded and thus not subject to local campaign limits on spending).

  45. @Oldnat

    North Sea oil is on a par with Cardowan Colliery as a future source of energy.

  46. @MrNameless

    Mine was extremely sedate. But then I wasn’t at uni in the ’80s and even now it is hardly a secret that a lot of students engage in drug taking and participate in extreme initiations.

  47. @John.

    I don’t agree that Sturgeon was presented as the “darling of the country” by the media.

    It was stated many times before and after the election that the rise of the SNP was harmful to Labour in England.

    Miliband’s team have blamed the rise of the SNP (and a fear of a coalition) for their defeat.

  48. Jack Sheldon

    I don’t think it makes a jot of difference to the Corbyn scenario, which is already set, but it will probably make fun reading for a while as did other DM pieces on such as EM’s father etc etc. We all need a good laugh from time to time.


  49. @Statgeek:

    Also, I understand why the poll included Sturgeon as she is one of the most powerful people in the UK given the number of SNP MPs.

    She may not lead the Westminster Parliamentary Group but is there any doubt she sets their policy as party leader?

1 2 3 4 5 7