As well as the Opinium poll I’ve already written about, there is also a ComRes poll for the Sunday Mirror and a YouGov poll for the Sunday Times tonight. In addition there’s a Panelbase poll of Scotland for the Sunday Times.

The ComRes poll has topline figures of CON 50%(+4), LAB 25%(nc), LDEM 11%(nc), UKIP 7%(-2), GRN 3%(-1). It echoes the same pattern we’ve seen in every other poll conducted since the general election was announced – UKIP dropping, the Conservatives increasing, and a huge lead for the Tories. The fifty point share for the Conservatives is apprently the highest ComRes have ever shown for anyone, though the last time any poll showed it was, I think, MORI giving the Conservatives 52% in 2008. Full tabs are here.

UPDATE: YouGov‘s Sunday Times poll has topline figures for Great Britain of CON 48%(nc), LAB 25%(+1), LDEM 12%(nc), UKIP 5%(-2) – changes are from the YouGov/Times poll in the week. UKIP are continuing to fall, 5% is the lowest YouGov have shown them for five years. According to Tim Shipman the Panelbase/Sunday Times Scottish survey is also very strong for the Tories, I’ll update when it appears.

UPDATE2: There is also a Survation poll in the Mail on Sunday. Survation topline figures are CON 40%, LAB 29%, LDEM 11%, UKIP 11%. Changes from the last Survation poll in January are Conservatives up two, Labour unchanged, the Lib Dems up one and UKIP down two. The hyperbolic Mail on Sunday headline about the Tory lead being halved appears to be based on comparing it to the ICM poll conducted straight after the election was called. As ever one should only compare polls from the same company conducted using the same methodology – otherwise it’s just as likely that any difference is down to different methodological approaches (there are significant differences between how ICM and Survation weight their data, model turnout and deal with don’t knows).

However, ignoring the Mail’s write up and taking the Survation poll on its own merits, it is showing a tighter race than the other polls – Labour and UKIP are a couple of points higher than other companies’ figures, the Conservatives lower. The fieldwork was a little later (conducted on Friday and Saturday), but time will tell if it’s because the Tory lead has peaked and dropped or just because of methodological differences. Tabs for the Survation poll are here.

Meanwhile the Survation/Sunday Post poll of Scotland has topline figures of SNP 43%(-7), CON 28%(+13), LAB 18%(-6), LDEM 9%(+1). Changes are from the 2015 general election – if repeated they would reflect a drop in the SNP lead and a very significant advance for the Scottish Tories, making them the clear second party in Scotland. A Panelbase/Sunday Times poll of Scotland is also due out overnight – I’ll update on that tomorrow.


129 Responses to “YouGov, ComRes and Survation voting intentions”

1 2 3
  1. @Anthony Wells

    Thanks. It was this Twitter post from Mike Smithson that threw me:

    https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/855913078864719872

  2. @ Richard

    Good summary, much as I suspected from the DM

  3. @Laszlo

    I think having a manifesto promise to not raise taxes is very foolish and illogical.

    In five years things can change unexpectedly. Under different circumstances, old promises can become an irrelevant albatross around your neck.

    I do find the way political parties, particularly during elections, turn the refusal of an opponents to rule something out as a sign they will definitely do it quite annoying and tiresome.

  4. @Laszlo

    “I actually witnessed a collapse of a political system (and in my capacity I fought both for and against it, and I can assure you that blaming the electorate is a bad idea.”

    Whether the electorate is to blame or not, one hopes that our Prime Minister (whoever that may be after this election) will not be a British version of Viktor Orbán.

  5. RAF

    By all likelihood Orbán will win in 2018. The only thing he has to do is to retain about two million voters. For the time being it is successful (terrible).

    My hint in the comment was about 1989-1990. I had no feeling for the regime, but I didn’t want the regime to change because then the policies I would have liked wouldn’t have been possible. So I had to argue for both for and against (much like Corbyn, but unlike him, I actually did it, and did it honestly).

    Anyway, I knew more about both the faithful (I taught them on evening classes), and the not so faithful (I lived among them) voters, than those who organised the way in which our first democratic elections (actually the 1985 one was quite democratic) would be conducted. I had formal and informal talks with all kinds of audiences – miners, factory workers, agricultural labourers, what have you. It reinforced my view that the given regime wasn’t sustainable. We needed a radical change on the bases of a broad consensus on the medium term, and act as a coalition led by the agreed goal. Oddly, the so called leftists (rather similar to those with whom I can’t have a conversation in the Labour Party) thought instead of this by removing the centrists, it would open the way to a proper leftist agenda and the people would line up behind them (by removing the centrist with whom they would have previously removed the rightists (well, they were crowded out in two months by the centrists), while criticising me to be too leftist and too rightist at the same time..

    My final contribution was writing the housing policy (hence my complete disbelief of Corbyn’s promise) and sector specific economic policy of the party. It was approved, but then the only leader from the past and thought to be for the future said that if it was a party policy (among other things) he would join the alternative party, so the meeting decided that the policy papers didn’t exist. Had they offered the slightest glimpse of hope, I wouldn’t have cared, but there was none.

    And we have Orbán today (but there is no continuity between the events described and his lead in the polls).

  6. I foresee a large Tory majority as the polls are showing. The reasoning for this though has not been touched upon. I’ll try to be concise.

    Background: I predicted the Lib dems would get 10-15 seats at the 2015 election (they got 8, most though it would be 25-30). For two reasons, 1) they were not trusted (tuition fees/coalition govt) 2) they offered a 1/2 way house of nothing (a head to labour a heart to Tories). The problem with that was if you wanted to vote left, then you’d vote for Labour, if you wanted to vote right, you Vote Tory. Your not going to vote LIb Dem offering nothing.

    Labour in this election has the same problem.!) Corbyn is not trusted (Defence IRA/Hamas sympathiser, Tax everything on the economy). 2) the define issue will be/is Brexit (other issues will come and go). If you want to ensure brexit you’ll vote Tory. If you want to stop it/go EEA then you Vote LIb Dem (moved past the trus issue now). Why would you vote Labour? who offer Bexit, but not quite Breixt, but no sure at all?

    Labour will sink to their very strongest of core vote and will, I predict get about 20%(18-23%)of the vote. Tories will be 44%+ Lib Dems around 20’s, near, close to Labours vote.

    also Big Tory gains in Scotland. Ruth Davidson, is some force of nature and Labour seem lost up there. Amazingly Tories seem to be the only viable alternative to SNP.

  7. @CATMANJEFF ” think having a manifesto promise to not raise taxes is very foolish and illogical. In five years things can change unexpectedly. Under different circumstances, old promises can become an irrelevant albatross around your neck.”

    I agree, it is utterly illogical and doubly so when we could experience a financial shock depending on the terms of exit from the EU.

    Whole sections of the 2015 Tory manifesto were ill-judged with bits that could directly contradict one another. Single Market vs In/Out Referendum being the prime example.

    What it has exposed is:

    1) Cameron’s timidity that he could actually win the 2015 election. He promised a lot of stuff he thought could be negotiated away in a repeat coalition with the Lib Dems.

    2) His utter arrogance that he would win the EU Referendum with a minor renegotiation dressed up as a big change in circumstances like in 1975.

    TM has to stand her ground on taxes or the triple lock and not make the same mistake.

  8. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/22/lib-dems-no-coalition-tim-farron-general-election#comments

    Farron has ruled out a coalition with any party and declared he wants the Lib Dems to be the main opposition. (note: He has left himself some weasely wiggle room to form a coalition with a non-Corbyn led Labour – though that will be lost on most of the electorate I think)

    I believe that with the UKIP vote coalescing around the Tories and this split on the Left and in a split in the Remain camp significantly increases the probability of a bumper landslide majority for the Tories.

  9. Impressive polls for the Tories, but too soon, surely. I don’t think the public will welcome a massacre. I have a strong feeling that the voters will at some point accept that a Tory win is inevitable, and will then start to consider what message they want to send to the victors.

    The exception to this is in Scotland, where a different narrative is conducted. I imagine the Tory rebound will be sustained. Likewise, probably in Wales, where Labour will continue to struggle.

    The LDs desperately need a couple of positive polls to establish momentum, and make the prospect of replacing Labour as the opposition a serious message.

    UKIP in obvious decline, but may have a small boost from ardent Leavers anxious to send a signal to TM, once they are convinced of a Tory win.

    Watch out for independents: as a Tory triumph becomes a certainty, voters may indulge themselves on, for example, single issue candidates.

    Corbyn has started quite well, by the way – he is looking quite chipper, almost liberated by the election. Labour not falling apart, yet.

  10. Sea change,

    Saying that Farron’s statement means a split on the left suggests there was at some time some unity of purpose between Corbyn and Farron, which there has never been!

    Meanwhile ruling out coalitions is politically necessary for the Lib Dems but a bit like ruling out tax increases. However I don’t see the Lib Dems wanting a coalition with anyone without cast iron guarantees on electoral reform! ( Or possibly on another referendum)

  11. @ANDREW111

    That’s true, however, surely this statement scotches all this talk of backing anti-Brexit candidates with informal co-operation between parties and will to an extent split the Remain vote on the left.

    That’s not to say the Tories won’t push the coalition of chaos line anyway (which will gain some traction as it did in 2015 no doubt)

  12. Comres’s weighting adds nearly 20% to the tory numbers (41 -> 50%). That is a big fudge factor. Are they over compensating for shy tories?

  13. Can Corbyn win ?

    I am not sure you can totally write him off, as it is never going to happen, because most of the country does not share his politics and he is carrying too much baggage.

    Something seems to happen to Corbyn when a campaign starts. His eyes light up and he has much more energy. He seems to enjoy debating and answering questions from the public.

    It is possible that a good campaign from Labour might see their vote increase to the low 30’s. They might actually increase the number of votes cast for them, compared to 2015. Many Labour Brexit supporters are not going to vote Tory, based on that issue alone, unless Corbyn says he will continue free movement from the EU. The main problem for Labour might be losing enough votes to UKIP, that they lose more seats.

    And what happens during the campaing might well be crucial. The Tories are not united on Brexit, as many want single market access and are prepared to negotiate paid access with some free movement. Also we have the possible prosecutions of some Tory MP’s in regard to election spending, where i am not sure what might happen e.g candidate suspension ?

    All of the current polling suggest a bigger Tory majority, but there is a possibility, if the campaign does badly for the Tories that they could lose their majority. You can never predict what might happen during an election campaign and even a helpful media would have to cover the story of the day.

  14. Nickname –

    No, it doesn’t. You’re comparing page 3 in the tables to the final results. However, most of that difference isn’t anything to do with their adjustments, it’s just the effect of re-percentaging to exclude don’t knows and won’t says, which obviously increases every other party in exactly the same proportion.

    So, 41% of ComRes’s sample said they’d vote Conservative. If you exclude don’t knows and won’t says, that then goes up to 47%. ComRes’s turnout model then increases it to 50%, so what you call their “fudge factor” is increasing the Tories by 3 points, not by 9. Obviously we can’t tell until 8th June if it’s overegging it or not, but bearing in mind the scale of the error of 2015 it doesn’t seem unreasonably large.

    It’s also worth pointing out that it’s not seeking to correct for “shy Tories” – the inquiry after 2015 largely rejected shy Tories as an explanation for the error. Rather it’s trying to correct for samples that have people who are too interested in politics, too likely to say they they will vote by weighting down those demographic groups who usually have lower turnouts (so, generally speaking, younger people and more working class people). That doesn’t mean it can’t be wrong of course, but it’s not a shy Tory adjustment that’s the issue here.

  15. Anthony wells

    good to see you up early riding shotgun on your site!

  16. OK, i can’t see the actual numbers in the tables anywhere but removing the don’t knows will increase all parties numbers in proportion, yet labour have gone down in the final figures. This must imply that the turnout model is penalising them heavily? And indeed i see they are getting a very high turnout figure for conservative in the turnout table.

    Time will tell i guess.

  17. Jones in Bangor,
    You make an interesting point whether labours current low is a blair legacy, and the answer must be yes. Corbyn was elected because of a reaction by party members against both right wing policy adopted by labour and right wing mps put in place to support them. This may or may not have been a winning strategy with voters, but has alienated party members. So milliband and then corbyn were the result. It remains questionable whether any right wing leader candidate can win against one of the left, so the parties woes will continue until the views of members and mps once again align.

    The problem is strategists seeking to drag a party into areas it does not want to go.this has to fail eventually. I think that Abbott was correct to predict the demise of the labour party unless the members – mps split can be rectified. Hence her comment about corbyn saving the party from even worse performance. Whether this is the right way to go about it is another matter, but politics is the art of the possible.

    Laszlo,
    I take on board what you say, but return to my view that voters do behave like sheep. There has to be some party articulating a policy before they will go in that direction. Thus remain are currently adrift for lack of a party clearly articulating the remain case, and similarly while corbyn seeks to create a party of the right, those who ought to be his supporters persist in rubbishing his proposals. No party articulating either case.

    The analysis someone posted about voter churn over brexit concluded a massive movement to ‘don’t know’. Exactly demonstrating what I posted.

  18. Er, that should have been corbyn wants to create a party of the left. These labels are so fluid.

  19. Millie,

    “Public not welcome a massacre”…why not, we seemed to be ok with it in 1983 and 1997. I think you underestimate peoples desire to be with the perceived winners.

  20. In this election the Tories have the huge advantage of being the default option. As around 55% are pro-Brexit they will automatically gravitate to the Tories, while the remain supporters are deeply split. Labour has no ‘pull factor’ any more – people don’t really know where they stand on Brexit and the socialist agenda no longer works in a highly materialistic society. The LibDem problem is the same as two years ago: they are not trusted by the left because of the coalition with Cameron and the pro-remain right prefer to stay loyal to the Conservatives.

  21. Any thoughts on whether we can pull any meaningful conclusions from next month’s local elections to inform the general election predictions? Turnout it likely to be v low in the local elections, but are there any headline figures on seats won/lost from which we can extrapolate?

  22. Bill
    The conventional wisdom seems to be that Labour will lose quite a few council seats. I would have thought that if they limit their losses to perhaps 30-40 (or even gain a few!) it would give the Tories pause for thought.

  23. Britain Elects? @britainelects 9m
    9 minutes ago

    More
    Westminster voting intention:

    CON: 48% (+2)
    LAB: 26% (+1)
    LDEM: 10% (-1)
    UKIP: 8% (-)
    GRN: 3% (-1)

    (via ICM)

  24. Could be wrong here but I think the percentage the Liberals are getting in the polls are way out. In 2015 they got 7.9% of the vote, they were deeply unpopular with many who switiched to them in 2010 feeling betrayed. I was not surprised they only got 7.9%, infact thought it might be lower.
    But now being the party many remainers feel represent their position, plus their mea culpa and promises not to go into another coalition and the deep unpopularity of Labour I cannot believe they have only increased their vote by a couple of three points.
    Time will tell I suppose

  25. Question for those who follow these things more closely: how does the time between the election being called and election date compare to previous elections?

    The reason I ask is that it feels a lot shorter and therefore presumably less of a chance that the polls change materially between now and election day given that there is less time for the narrative to change, politicians to make gaffes etc.

    Obviously one difference is that there was no build up before the election being called this time, whereas usually there is speculation over the date but its known for a long date what the date will be within +/- a month or so

  26. Bill –

    The patterns of support will be very useful, but the overall share won’t be. People vote differently. We had the same situation in 1983 and 1987 when there were local elections a month before the general election – the projected shares at the locals bore little resemblance to the general election vote shares a month later.

    I would expect Labour and the Lib Dems to do better in the projected local shares than they are doing in the national polls, and for lots of people to get overexcited about it and decide it means the polls must be wrong.

  27. Lawson, writing in Sunday Times today, seems to be switched into my head as he says what I’ve been thinking for years about elections generally, namely: the campaign is of little or no account, people have long made their minds up about the matter before the campaign starts, having seen all the main candidates almost daily over a long period of time and formed a view of them.. So the result is always a foregone conclusion, one just doesn’t know what it is until it reveals itself on election night.. Polls do what they can to reveal it earlier but they are only are only ‘guesstimates’ and can mislead, particularly when results are close, but it would be truly astounding if they could be 15-20% out. So this time I suspect the forgone conclusion is Mrs May by a considerable margin.

  28. According to my model, if Labour are to lose by about 20% in June, we should expect them to be behind in the NEV scores by about 12% in the Locals…

    That would be the worst performance by an Opposition on record, slightly worse than Foot in the 1982 locals, held during the Falklands War.

    Any negative result for Labour in the locals would suggest a Tory lead of at least 12% in the general election.

  29. Has Nicola Sturgeon’s call for a second independence referendum backfired ?

1 2 3