A quick update on polls in the weekend papers. The Independent on Sunday is no more, but the Sunday edition of the Indy’s website seems to be continuing with their monthly ComRes online poll (shared with the Sunday Mirror). Topline voting intention figures are CON 35%(-3), LAB 30%(+1), LDEM 8%(+1), UKIP 16%(nc), GRN 4%(nc).

ComRes still have the Conservatives ahead in the polls, but their online polls are consistently the most favourable for the Tories – the Tory lead here (and the contrast with other companies polls) are solely down to likelihood to vote weighting; before running the answers through ComRes’s turnout model Labour were ahead. The trend is exactly the same as in other polls, a deteriorating Conservative position. It’s a five point Tory lead this month, but a month ago it was nine points, a month before that fourteen points. Full tabs are here.

There was also a new Scottish poll by Panelbase, carried out for the Sunday Times. Holyrood constituency VI is SNP 51%, LAB 19%, CON 18%, LDEM 5%; regional VI is SNP 47%, CON 19%, LAB 18%, LDEM 4%, GRN 8%. Panelbase have Labour and the Conservatives essentially neck-and-neck in Scotland (and given the distribution of the vote and the impact of the regional vote, it may well produce more Tory MSPs than Labour ones) – this is something that YouGov Scottish polls have also shown, but Scottish polling from other companies has tended to show Labour in a clear second place.


148 Responses to “Sunday Polls – ComRes GB and Panelbase Scotland”

1 2 3
  1. Colin.

    where is this ‘lefty la la land’ and how do I go about moving there? Do I require a seperate passport or will my UK one be fine?

    Why are you the only.poster on this board who is unable to keep to to the remit re non partisan discussion of polls?

    Can you not set up a blog or something? because it’s really tiresome.

  2. Green constituency VI

    This seems related to the debate about the merits of the ‘thinking specifically about your own constituency’ question. I was surprised that made a different to declared VI – after all in a Westminster election one votes in a particular constituency context and some people take that context into account when making their decision – but I guess it just goes to show the extent to which people treat VI questions as an opportunity to declare party allegiance. But the puzzling thing is that respondents to a Holyrood election poll don’t have to do that, which suggests that there are an awful lot of people who don’t know they won’t be able to vote Green since I doubt they’re all declaring a Green VI because they’re planning to spoil their ballot to indicate that’s what they would have liked to be able to do.

    In general I’m dubious about questions which give people information they may not have had, because in doing so you make your sample unrepresentative and potentially bias responses. Of course people will find out whether there’s a Green candidate when they receive a ballot paper, but if you tell them in advance that they won’t be able to vote Green they might decide not to vote, whereas if they find out with ballot in hand they might vote for their second choice or spoil their ballot.

    An alternative to filtering response options by constituency would be to use a squeeze question on all the people declaring an intention to vote for a party not standing in every constituency (polls that are too far out for this info to be known would probably have to use info. from the previous election to decide to which parties the squeeze should apply).

  3. Louis,

    The Leavers have had four decades to produce credible figures and haven’t so I wouldn’t hold your breath.

    Theirs is very much a Tabloid campaign, a bit like surf on a beach…a lot of froth but very little depth!

    The £4,300 figure will be mince, but it’s a standard technique to express it as a personal loss because we know people are Loss Averse!

    Peter.

  4. Ken

    Don’t worry about voting Brexit because of the Treasury document. It’s well researched with splendid mathematics and at 200 pages it looks impressive. Unfortunately most of the assumptions on which it is based are almost certainly incorrect which makes it………………………………………………………………………………………worthless IMO.

  5. SORBUS
    Of course people will find out whether there’s a Green candidate when they receive a ballot paper, but if you tell them in advance that they won’t be able to vote Green they might decide not to vote, whereas if they find out with ballot in hand they might vote for their second choice or spoil their ballot.

    Thanks for that. I must confess I hadn’t considered that angle but you’re absolutely right. A pollster who did tell them clearly risks changing their voting behaviour. I wonder what the official BPC line is on such matters.

    They’ll definitely be able to vote Green on the list, of course, but if they’re told in advance that there’s no Green candidate for the plurality vote they may not bother even to cast the one vote that they could ensure went to the party of their choice.

  6. Which assumptions @ToH?

    And then the assumptions are ‘…almost certainly incorrect…’.

    There’s the rub, that line rather plays into ‘Project Fear”s core messaging.

    If the most stalwart of Brexiteers such as yourself concede (‘well researched’ ‘splendid mathematics’) that were the assumptions made by the Treasury to come about the economic implications could be unpleasant, then ‘almost certainly incorrect’ seems like a long way from ‘certainly incorrect’.

    You leave the door open to uncertainty. Something the British voter dislikes – as proven time and again in polls and elections.

    The problem with leave arguing on the economic case alone is that it pits the greater unknown of departing the EU against the relative familiarity of remaining.

    However, I know you’re acutely aware of this as you’ve been resolute in your predictions that remain will win.

  7. @TOH – Have you actually read the document? There are parts of it that I would have significant issue with, but it’s hardly out of line with other forecasts. In particular, the qualitative description of the various post-Brexit scenarios constitutes the first rigorous attempt by the Government to outline what Brexit in practice may mean. Without meaning to be facetious, what particular assumptions do you think are incorrect?

    I think the effect of EU migration on public services and housing is something key that’s missing from the document, but it’s not like the Leave campaign have been able to produce a coherent or compelling argument – of course, they have still plenty of time to do this.

  8. Sven Hassle Schmuck

    (Aimed at Colin)
    “Why are you the only.poster on this board who is unable to keep to to the remit re non partisan discussion of polls?”

    Funniest post I’ve seen for ages. Very good!

  9. Two comments in moderation for reasons I’m not able to fathom.

    Basic thrust:

    @ ToH “Unfortunately most of the assumptions on which it is based are almost certainly incorrect”

    Unfortunately ‘almost’ is probably not enough in campaigning terms – it leaves the door open for some of the assumptions to be correct. If they are correct you appear to acknowledge that the Treasury’s forecasts – ‘splendid mathematics’ – are plausible, and that the economic implications could be bad.

    In effect, this is an invitation to uncertainty, or at least will be painted as such by the remain campaign. Something of a gift for them.

    This is the problem (for ‘out’) with the debate moving to the economic sphere alone – for leavers will always be presenting the apparently more uncertain of the two options to the public.

    Also, one gets the sense that for many of the leave campaigners the economy is not their core ground – this is an issue of sovereignty for them – I felt this told with Redwood on the radio this morning.

    However the polls seem to indicate that for the public at large the economy is what will decide the referendum itself.

    Of course, like Tiresias, you know all this and already know the result too!

  10. Good Afternoon Everybody.

    The Tory Splits, I think, would be dangerous to their Party if the Labour Party came across as a united body

  11. @ chrislane1945

    “The Tory Splits, I think, would be dangerous to their Party if the Labour Party came across as a united body”

    There appears little chance of peace breaking out in the PLP, at least for now, when this type of dispute is emerging.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/mcdonalds-labour-party-conference-jeremy-corbyn-zero-hours-contracts-union-recognition_uk_5714e7cbe4b0dc55ceeaca26
    Corbyn is veggie snob say Blairite’s and McDonalds’ money is OK
    Versus
    McDonalds is a union bashing and obesity inducing corporation which is anathema to our values say Corbynites

  12. Going back momentarily to the ComRes poll.

    Ever the fan of looking at the ‘below the headline’ figures.

    Quite a part from the somewhat predictably poor showing of both David Cameron and the Conservatives on issues of taxation and representing the rich, there are a number of apparently ‘fun’ questions on the party leaders and … Boris Johnson.

    I’m slightly puzzled by the fact that when asking ‘who would you most trust to negotiate with terrorists / appear on ‘I’m a celebrity…’ with’ that both Cameron and Johnson are included alongside the other party leaders.

    It doesn’t give a proper sight of the public’s relative view of the two of them in comparison with each other or of either of them against the other party leaders (as they split the Conservative vote – such things often following party lines).

    Nevertheless, more caution here I would have thought about a prospective Johnson leadership of the Conservatives. He does well on:

    + being on your pub quiz team (1st)
    + having a meal with (1st)
    + appearing on ‘I’m a celebrity’ (1st)
    + going on summer holiday with (1st)

    Rather less well on

    + administering first aid (4th out of 5)
    + managing financial affairs (4th – Cameron finishes well on top despite, or perhaps because of, his perceived alacrity with tax schemes)
    + running the country (3rd – behind Corbyn, though this would likely change without Cameron in the line up)
    + negotiating with terrorists (3rd – again behind Corbyn)

    It seems as though Johnson hasn’t broken through to being regarded as a more serious politician than the PM, who elsewhere is clearly a diminished figure in the eyes of many respondents.

  13. SVEN HS

    @”where is this ‘lefty la la land’ and how do I go about moving there? Do I require a seperate passport or will my UK one be fine?

    I don’t know -it was LURKINGGURKIN’s phrase-see his April 17th, 2016 at 9:52 pm

    I used it as a quote in my response to him.

    Try reading posts more carefully then you won’t get so upset .

  14. ALUN009

    @” earlier you were complaining about lack of democracy”

    Actually I was offering a suggested snappy version of the “Leave” case essentials-which include accusations of a Democratic Deficit. in EU. governance.

    I know that FPTP doesn’t meet criteria for proportional representation-but it doesn’t claim to. Its a different system-one which the voters prefered , when offered a more proportionate alternative in 2011. I was one of those voters…….and didn’t think myself particularly “audacious” for being so.

  15. It’s LURKINGGHERKIN, not LURKINGGURKIN. Gods, man, learn how to spell.

    I shall now resume my lurking. As you were.

  16. ASSIDUOSITY:
    “this is an issue of sovereignty for them”

    I think it’s become that partially because the life has been choked out of their economic argument. Leave have tried to make an economic case, £55m per day, use it on the NHS etc. It’s not hitting home like they’d hoped, and this big clunking Treasury fist is going to kill all hopes of competing on the eonomy.
    They’ve painted themselves into a corner too. The defence seems to be “all economic forecasts are useless”, which may have a grain of truth in it, but certainly stops them from being able to say that we will be better off. If the fight on the economy is “worse if we leave” versus “you can’t know either way”, there’s only going to be one winner.

    Is the sovereignty argument enough? For some, sure. But we’re now getting into quite high-minded, abstract territory. It’s much harder to communicate that than pounds & pence. Vote Leave need to have an urgent meeting if they are going to claw this narrative back off Stronger In. Early signs are this is a bruising moment for the Outers.

  17. Henceforth you will be “Lurking” for me. Hope that meets with your approval.?

  18. COLIN:
    “Its a different system-one which the voters prefered , when offered a more proportionate alternative in 2011.”

    AV is not a proportional system, and is not what is on offer in Holyrood. The AV referendum was a straight choice between two systems, one bad, the other worse. Its rejection is no argument at all against the injustice of FPTP.

  19. ALUN009

    I don’t think there is any purpose or relevance in re-running that old chestnut here.

    People who think that some of the EU institutions are “undemocratic” are unlikely to be interested in the finer points of representative voting systems.

    They just think-who are these people-who voted for them?

  20. COLIN:
    There is every relevance. The legitimacy of the government’s majority informs the legitimacy of impositions on its power. If the Tories had a legitimate majority, calling on the structuring of political organisations to resist them would be wrong. That was your original thesis; I’m merely identifying that it rests on the notion that the authority the government has its fairly won. If you think that is the case, your point stands. I don’t agree, but add long as we’re clear on the presuppositions I’m happy.

  21. @Alun009

    ‘I think it’s become that partially because the life has been choked out of their economic argument…’

    I would agree that the economy is not necessarily the strongest ground for leave campaigners, as even the most robust of Brexiteers on their more reflective days will talk of the likelihood of short term pain to deliver (hoped for) long term gain. The so called ‘tick effect’.

    A degree of immediate and unquantifiable economic uncertainty or downturn for an even more uncertain and unpredictable future gain is not necessarily in tune with the electorate’s natural tendency for security and short termism. Of course, nothing is certain in the economy’s future should we remain, but this is a question of relative uncertainty as perceived by the electorate – the polling suggests by a factor of 2 to 1 remain is perceived less economically uncertain than leave.

    That said, I do think that a significant number of the key and long standing figures within the Vote Leave group are principled in their view that we should depart the EU and that their view is based primarily on constitutional issues relating to sovereignty and the primacy of the UK parliament. It’s a view they have held when the EU has functioned to our economic benefit and which pre-dates the large scale take up of freedom of movement. It’s a view unlikely ever to change, regardless of opt outs or renegotiations.

  22. @Colin

    “People who think that some of the EU institutions are “undemocratic” are unlikely to be interested in the finer points of representative voting systems.
    They just think-who are these people-who voted for them?”

    A very fair point. I wonder how many people realise that in the case of the Commission the answer would be ‘your government voted for them’.

    Probably as many people as realise – to answer Louise’s earlier question – that Lord Hill is the UK’s Commissioner in charge of some cobbled together portfolio aligned with the regulation of financial markets.

    Equally, most British people are probably unaware that those ‘regulations from Brussels’ have normally been voted for by the UK government in the Council of Ministers and that the UK has historically been one of the most enthusiastic pursuers of European level regulation going back to the time of Mrs Thatcher as a means of securing a truly fair and single market.

    To use the – as you pointed out in an earlier post – the ‘dirty word’ of the moment, UK government’s have ‘off-shored’ unpopular policies that they were in favour of privately but unwilling to support publicly to the EU allowing the institution to take the flack for their own agendas.

  23. Good evening all from a sunny rural Hampshire.

    I received a leaflet through my door this evening from some local busybody’s campaigning to save the recycling centre in nearby Alresford which faces closure by Hampshire county council.

    I’m just thinking that if everyone who wishes to return David Cameron’s little EU booklet back to Number 10 should instead send it to the recycling centre in Alresford and help keep this facility open.

    Also the 200 paged Treasury bluff and bluster dossier on how we would all be £4,000 worse off by 2030 would also help keep the facility open should people wish to send it to the recycling centre.

  24. SVEN HASSEL SCHMUCK
    Colin.

    “Why are you the only.poster on this board who is unable to keep to the remit re non partisan discussion of polls?
    Can you not set up a blog or something? because it’s really tiresome”
    ______

    Firstly I don’t think ole Colin is the only poster who is unable to keep to the remit re non partisan discussion of polls?. we have others who discuss allotments and someone even discussing breeding Flamingo’s with Sparrows but that side, Colin has set up his own blog.

    Read the first page to get a real flavour….I like it. ;-)

    http://joeh-crankyoldman.blogspot.co.uk/

  25. THE OTHER HOWARD
    Ken
    “Don’t worry about voting Brexit because of the Treasury document. It’s well researched with splendid mathematics and at 200 pages it looks impressive. Unfortunately most of the assumptions on which it is based are almost certainly incorrect which makes it………………………………………………………………………………………worthless IMO”
    _____

    You’re wasting your time, Ken is too busy taking selfies with Thomas the Tank engine and friends ;-) but I agree with your comment.

  26. Assiduousity,

    “off-shored’ unpopular policies that they were in favour of privately but unwilling to support publicly to the EU allowing the institution to take the flack”

    I call it the four box grid and saw it first hand as a Councillor. Two options Local or Central, two outcomes Popular and Unpopular.

    Wherever possible Politicians of all Parties, including my own, will try to do the popular things locally and take the credit while pushing the unpopular ones to the centre…and then complain about the outcome of the tough choices they ducked.

    On another issue if it sees it’s best hope in Middle England, Leave could equate “Going on Out Own” to leaving home and buying a house, sure in was a bit frightening and money was tight and first but look what we have now…best thing we ever did…. never looked back!

    You can see that as a Election Broadcast with slightly greying happy white people in an English country cottage garden looking out with there happy white grand children over England’s Green and Pleasant Land, with maybe a token Asian Postman waving as he passes… Nothing to worry anyone just the one in a meanial role.

    I was thinking a low volume orchestral version of Jersuselem as the backing track!

    I stop short of a Spitfire souring overhead though!

    Peter.

  27. PETER CAIRNS SNP.
    England your England by George Orwell puts it very well. The wrong family members in charge but still the family members close ranks when under threat.
    I found this passage very moving when I re read it in preparation for an Assembly I offered the Sixth Form on the EU.

    VB.
    Thanks for the links. The Labour Party is a cause of despair

  28. Thinking about Brexiters and back to the 50s….

    I met a splendid young Polish fellow the other day out on the old canvassing game. Lives in an ex council flat in a tower block, and tells me he won’t vote in the London Mayor Election because there’s nobody standing on good British values, such as bring back the British Empire which did the world so much good.

    Amazing people you meet on the stump.

  29. PETER CAIRNS (SNP)

    Lovely image Peter, but lets have the spitfire as well to remind the oldies who remember the bombing and the V1’s. They are the most likely to vote so we want them out in large numbers. I will be there at 7.00 am with my wife to vote leave.

    That merlin engine, what a sound, iconic…………………………………..

  30. Guymonde

    We welcome that Pole with open arms, a man after my own heart.

  31. I’m glad to see non-partisan discussion of Poles.

  32. Peter Cairns SNP

    Not an orchestral version of Jersuselem, not appropriate, Spitfire prelude and fugue by Walton much more appropriate.

  33. TOH,

    “They are the most likely to vote so we want them out in large numbers.”

    They are going to vote anyway and mostly to leave so why waste your Broadcast chasing a vote you have….besides you’d be better to remind most of them where they live as they’ll be in their eighties mostly!

    Target 40 year olds who own their home and can still remember buying it and how they overcome their apprehension and did the right thing!

    A teenage version is an aspirational lad who’s parents talk about all that student debt and stay here rather than move out…then cut to Student, first flat, interview, good job, driving up to park his Jag besides dads Mondeo outside the Council house……fad to slogan;

    “Isn’t it time to stand on our own to feet again!”

    Peter.

  34. Not sure that long-term economic predictions by either side in the EU debate are really worthwhile. By 2030 (or 2050 in a different prediction that was mentioned elsewhere) the world will be very different and it will be almost impossible to tell if the wealth or poverty of the country would have been different if the opposite EU decision had been taken.

    Most of the key figures from today will also not be around by then either. It’s a bit like getting your house sprayed against woodworm and receiving a 30 year guarantee. If you were even in the same house towards the end of that time you would probably find the firm who did it no longer existed.

    For me the vehemence of the argument is not really about economics for most active politicians – though it may be for swing voters. I think for the pundits it is about the symbolic place of this country (or nations and regions) in the world. Are we European, are we some sort of bridge between Europe and America, or are we perhaps for some other people a link to the commonwealth?

    And really I think that in the same way some people prefer jazz to classical music or punk or whatever, this a purely a matter of opinion, and not an area where true believers will change their minds.

    I appreciate CB11’s subtle analysis of the possible political fallout of the referendum by the way.

  35. That should be Two feet of course.

    If you want jingoism you could always skip the Spitfire and go Premiership.

    You schoolboy Bobby Moore look alike growing up with posters on his walls of his heroes….one by one changing to more and more foreigners.

    Being turned down and passed over by the latest foreign import….but he keeps on fighting, he gets his chance and he takes it ……fad on him leading England out, three lions on his shirt… And Slogan

    ” Why Not…Vote Leave”

    Fairly repugnant closet racism but it still might do the trick!

    Peter.

  36. ALUN009

    @”. If the Tories had a legitimate majority”

    They have. That is why & how they have formed a government.

  37. GUYMONDE.
    Martin Pugh’s History of the Labour Party explains how Labour did well in 1929/45/66/97 with Tory Socialism’.

    The early Labour tory socialists included men like Will Thorne, Will Crooks and Ernest Bevin later on. Orwell also was in this strand of opinion.

    They were proud of empire, flag and of England. UKIP in my opinion took 3.8 Million votes from this ‘constiuency’.

  38. “Empire, Flag & England”

    Actually although I wouldn’t use those three specifically a kind of Patriotic Three Lions might work for leave.

    Base it on those in Trafagar square, one left , one right, one centre with a word below each…..we just need three words…suggestions;

    Soverinty, Independence, Freedom, Democracy, any other ideas?

    I’s shy away from “Living Space for the British People!”

    Peter.

  39. @ Peter Cairns

    I find it very odd that you associate Bobby Moore and/or English football success with support for ‘leave’ and closet racism.

  40. Brexit this thread……..new polls on new one. :-)

  41. New thread – perhaps just in the nick of time given the way this one seems to be going.

  42. James E

    How about Ian Botham with his “England is an island, and we should be proud” comment – though being knowledgeable rather than proud of ignorance would be an improvement.

  43. James E,

    A sad reality is that part of what Leave has to tap into to win is the previously Labour voting working class who have switched to UKIP and the Union Jack shorts type person is part of that.

    I don’t like any of it but this is about how you get doubters to switch to you and supporters to turn out. A lot of what Remain is doing is straight “Project Fear” and there is broad agreement that Leave will struggle on the economics so what have they got left but appeals to a form of patriotism.

    To win Leave need to tap into a sense of nostalgia and loss of something, a hearts not heads approach. Unfortunately part of that unease many who might vote to leave feel is about the way their country has changed in ways they don’t like and sadly race is perceived by some as part of that.

    This touches on the bit of politics I think none of us here like, when and if you appeal to the negative to get what you think is best!

    I seem to recall a line from a Spenser Tracey film where he said something like;

    “I set out to reach the best in each of us and ended appealing to the worst in us all!”

    In a way I am speculating on how a campaign I oppose, can use tactics I deplore, to get a result I don’t want!

    Peter

  44. @Chrislane1945

    “Martin Pugh’s History of the Labour Party explains how Labour did well in 1929/45/66/97 with Tory Socialism’.”

    Like much else about Pugh’s poorly researched set of assertions masquerading as history, this mis-use of the pre-existing term ‘Tory Socialism’ is highly problematic.

    Generally speaking, it has conventionally been used to apply to governments of an ostensibly Conservative character that have actually put in place ‘large government’ or ‘social(ist)’ policies. Disraeli, Baldwin and especially Macmillan would fall into this category. So Pugh’s misappropriation is a strange contortion.

    Notwithstanding this, that it was necessary for socialists – in the form of the Labour Party – to convince the public that they were committed to “Empire, Flag & England” (though the last of these was used rhetorically far less at the height of the British Empire) was undoubtedly the case; however, there was not anything specifically ‘Tory’ about such a commitment.

    The Liberals had been fervent Empire builders in the 19th century – providing much of the moral justification for colonialism – and had led the governments during WW1, so were just as much a part of the general consensus on matters imperial.

    Additionally, the reasons why some within the socialist ranks were ardent supporters of Commonwealth and Empire were complex – ‘Shavian imperialists’ viewed these structures as a means of relaying social democracy around the world far more quickly than might otherwise have been possible and as a precursor to self determination (potentially within a framework of world government).

    This is a classic example of examining the data – in this case the past – in order to draw out politically convenient extrapolations for the present time. Something we should all be wary of when dealing with polls.

    Before asserting the idea that the 1945 Labour government represented ‘Tory Socialism’ it’s perhaps worth revisiting the manifesto it was elected on with clear pledges to self rule for India and ‘land nationalisation’….

  45. @ Peter Cairns

    My impression is that the ‘Leave’ campaign (in contrast to some of the things UKIP has said in the past few years) is being pretty careful to avoid being seen as overly backward-looking or Nationalist. It would backfire.

    It’s also been noticeable that Farage, and the other leading UKIPers have kept a low-profile. From a purely partisan point of view, I’d be happy to see more of him, as he would repel exactly the kind of people who are likely to decide this.

    And I simply don’t think that English football supporters – especially those whose own clubs sides are truly multi-National- would form a strong constituency for leave. This link might be of interest:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36043496

  46. COLIN:
    “They have. That is why & how they have formed a government.”

    Not so. You only need a majority to form a government, not a legitimate one. Legitimacy does not flow from the fact. You might argue that it is ALSO legitimate, as I argue it is not.

  47. People who think that some of the EU institutions are “undemocratic”
    Colin April 18th, 2016 at 5:13 pm

    It has been established on this thread that democracy appears in various guises. It has also been established on this thread that the EU is not undemocratic. You may not like their form of democracy, but there is democracy.

    So if you are going to be fair and un-partisan, you need to acknowledge that. You of course have the right to argue against it. If you see someone who says it is undemocratic you have a duty, if you want to keep the discussion honest and objective, to correct them and tell them that they are wrong — the EU is not undemocratic.

  48. @Peter Cairns

    It seems odd to expect a “Spitfires and Union Jack shorts” appeal to nationalism to be the most productive for the leave campaigners, if votes are won on the centre ground. Public sentiment (whatever the EUref voting intention) seems to clump around the dual ideas that Europe is great and people want to see ties between its countries, but that the EU approach to that is not particularly loved. Considered at that broad level, a campaign of jingoistic nationalism would not seem to appeal to the natural inclinations of voters.

1 2 3