Ipsos MORI’s monthly political monitor came out today, with topline figures of CON 49%(nc), LAB 34%(+8), LDEM 7%(-6), UKIP 2%(-2). Changes are since their April poll, conducted just after Theresa May has called the general election. Fieldwork was Monday to Wednesday and tabs are here.

In this morning’s Times we also had voting intention figures from YouGov, which showed topline voting intention figures of CON 45%(-4), LAB 32%(+1), LDEM 8%(-1), UKIP 6%(+3). Changes are from the YouGov/Sunday Times poll at the weekend. Fieldwork was on Tuesday and Wednesday and tabs are here.

We’re continuing too see a narrowing of the gap between Labour and the Conservatives – though given the head start the Tories began the campaign with that still leaves them a very long way ahead. Far from gaining during the campaign, the Liberal Democrats appear to be fading away. UKIP are being squeezed away completely (not long ago the six point figures from YouGov would have been absolutely awful for them, now it’s one of their better figures from recent polls).

Part of Labour’s recent gain may well because the fieldwork in most recent polls was conducted in the context of Labour releasing lots of broadly popular policies and hence getting lots of comparatively positive coverage. The next round of polls though will have been largely conducted when the media was busy giving lots of coverage to the Conservative party’s policies and promises. These were not as obviously crowd-pleasing as Labour’s offering, but I guess we’ll get a better idea of how they’ve been received and if there is any significant impact in the weekend polls.

Looking at the rest of the MORI and YouGov polls, YouGov asked some questions on whether people thought taxes would rise if Labour or the Conservatives won. I expect very few will be surprised to find that far more people expect taxes for the rich to rise if Labour win than if the Conservatives win. More interesting is that expectations of tax levels for “people like you” are very similar for Labour and Conservative – if Labour win, 47% expect their taxes to go up, if the Conservatives win, 46% expect their taxes to go up. Labour aren’t seen as necessarily meaning ordinary people would pay more tax, people expect their taxes to rise whoever wins.

MORI asked a question about whether Labour were ready to form a government (30% think they are, 60% think they aren’t) and whether Jeremy Corbyn is ready to be PM (31% think he is, 60% think he isn’t). Both questions were also asked about Labour under Ed Miliband in 2015 – figures on the party being ready for government are similar (33% thought Labour were ready in 2015, 30% do now), on the leadership question Jeremy Corbyn actually scores substantially better (31% think he is ready to be PM, only 21% thought the same about Miliband).


432 Responses to “Latest YouGov and Ipsos MORI polls”

1 2 3 4 5 6 9
  1. @Oliver “Yougov Scotland
    SNP 42
    Con 29
    Lab 19
    Lib 6”

    That would mean 8 seats to the Tories on a uniform swing. So realistically 6-10

  2. @Julius
    To quote one of Britains finest institutions

    “He’ s not the messiah, he is a very naughty boy…”

  3. @ Kehu

    I take your point. Apologies to Alec for the way I put that last night (too much beer prior to posting) – the ‘monumental drubbing’ phrase just seemed to me to be at odds with the trend of the latest polls.

    I like your football analogy, and particularly your scoreline (I witnessed my team give their rivals a monumental 5-1 drubbing in recent cup final so it resonates). If you want to use football results I would say 2015 was more like a 1-0 after extra time and this one seems to me 5-2 with 30 minutes to go, with the team behind having been 5-0 down.

    Incidentally I’m not a Labour supporter having never voted for them in my life at any level, so I am really not partisanly in favour of Corbyn who I think would be a poor PM but I get a little annoyed and defensive about the media portrayal of him. I do like the Labour manifesto though, which at least is trying to make a difference.

  4. As I see it the football analogy applied up to 2015, when a stock-broker in the crowd from a minor public school with a cravat and a pint of beer shouted to a stockbroker on the field wearing Etonian colours: “I say old boy, why don’t you pick up the ball and run with it, what what?”, and the Etonian asked, “You mean stop immigration? “Yes, old boy, it’s all the EU’s fault – hold a referendum on leaving the EU.” “I say, old boy,, what a jolly good idea,” said the Etonian, picking up the ball and running with it. “Come on chaps, we’re bound to win the referendum.”
    “I say you fellows,” cried a girl called Theresa on the touch line, “Your new game looks awfully jolly. Can girls play?”

  5. UKIP at 6% in the context where they are sitting in only a fraction of seats in the You Gov poll is clearly a gross error. I think Tories are still solidly at 48%. It will depend in the marginals.

  6. I predict a narrowing of polls over the coming week, as people digest the manifestos. Pensioners might not like some of the Tory proposals and even with Brexit which they might trust Theresa May on, they might decide to switch away from the Tories. And not surprisingly many who are passionate about animal welfare won’t vote Tory because of Mays position on Fox Hunting.

    It would help Labour if there was a bounce in support for the Lib Dems in some areas and this might happen. They will get the support of those who don’t want Brexit to happen.

  7. @sea change

    Or in other words a huge landslide for the SNP.

  8. @Hireton

    Yes a landslide in that region of the UK. A bit like the landslide of seats Labour will get in Liverpool & Manchester.

  9. Looking beyond the GE it is clear from the Conservative manifesto that the government believes there can be a “deep and special” relationship with the EU. The EU, on the other hand, has settled its negotiating position. The UK, on leaving, will have “third country” status. That is the position of the 27 EU countries and I think there is no going back on it.

    Also, it is unlikely/impossible that the EU will allow the UK more favourable terms than other third countries. To do so might encourage other countries to leave the EU seeking that “deep and special” relationship and third countries to seek the same special treatment as the UK.

    The Conservative manifesto and the letter triggering Article 50 make it clear that it remains the UK position that a trade deal with the EU can and will be negotiated at the same time as the terms for leaving are being negotiated. This is impossible. First, it is not possible to achieve a trade deal within the timescale of 2 years. Also, it is the position of the 27 EU countries that the terms of leaving most first be agreed or substantially settled before attempting to negotiate a trade deal. If those two opposing positions of the UK and EU cannot be reconciled, negotiations will fail at the first hurdle.

    There is nothing in the Conservative manifesto at all about any transitional arrangements. It looks as if Mrs May is pinning everything on a deal being reached in 2 years.

    On the EU side it is beginning to dawn that the “divorce bill” might trigger the breakdown of negotiations. France and Germany do not want to increase their contributions to EU funds and other countries are not willing to receive less money from EU funds.

    Also, the EU negotiators feel the need to build into their approach the growing willingness in UK public opinion for a disorderly Brexit. The Conservative manifesto repeats that no deal is better than a bad deal, softening up public opinion for the possibility of crashing out of the EU. On the other hand, if the threat to leave without a deal is no more than a posture, it serves no purpose. It will eventually be seen as no more than a posture as negotiations proceed.

    It seems unlikely that the EU will change its opening stance, except perhaps over the “divorce bill”. It has the agreement of the 27 countries and “third country” status looks inevitable. Agreeing a trade deal in 2 years is not realistic. The UK may have to accept that. If so, the UK may have to put forward some transitional arrangement belatedly.

    The Conservative manifesto does not look either strong or stable with regard to Brexit, IMHO and it might be that the talks break down completely early on.

    https://www.conservatives.com/manifesto

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/18/brexit-talks-could-collapse-over-uk-divorce-bill-says-eu-negotiator

  10. @Alec

    “In my own, safe Labour, north eastern constituency, which our local paper says has been red since 1903, the former Labour MP and candidate says the Tories could win, and for the first time in living memory there is a mass mobilisation of party members to attempt to fight off the unthinkable.”

    I’m hearing the same and I’m not even sure we’re talking about the same seat. It shows how close we could be to a cliff edge. However Labour definitely have momentum in the polls at the moment, that is the only thing that may not be going according to the Tory plan.

    Labour seems to be concentrating its campaign on London and London Issues ( eg Housing, Trains – The East Coast Mainline is absolutely superb, god forbid we go back to how it was in the 70’s, 80’s, but I do acknowledge the issues in the South East). The Tory’s seem to be targeting those seats out of the London area ( Heathrow to go ahead, £100k estate limit on the care policy)

    Regarding Policies it’s already been pointed out their limited effect on Voting Intention. especially this time when there is a massive Brexit ‘X factor’ which WILL force policy changes anyway depending how it goes.

    I think the Labour %age vote is going up mainly from increased VI in very safe labour areas, not marginals. Is there any polling evidence of this?

    On a last note…Many round here will find it impossible to vote Tory, Labour turnout will be the key.

  11. R. Huckle

    If there is to be a real narrowing of the polls it has to come out of the Tory vote – solidly at between 44% – 49%. Can’t see pensioners switching away because they find things in the Tory manifesto they don’t like. They don’t much like socialism either.

  12. I doubt most people even read manifestos outside of the already highly informed political interested class. And even if people side with Labour on certain economic issues they overall trust the Conservatives to handle the economy.
    The heart stays left but deep in your soul you know that these kind of concepts are not working well. Take a look at Venezuela.

    I expect the opposite reaction. The Conservative manifesto presentation on Thursday and chancellor Merkels stupid attack on british sovereignity regarding immigration will help Theresa May in the upcoming polls next week.

  13. I suspect some of the ‘horror’ at the revised care proposals stems from talk of integrating the NHS and social care, which may have given rise to a (subconscious?) belief that it would all be ‘free at the point of delivery’.
    What is proposed is not a tax, but a deferred payment, deferred to reduce worry for those needing care. Their heirs are the ones who will take the financial hit. Some may be heavily reliant on hopes of a decent inheritance. Others may have more than enough for their own needs already.
    Candy’s 9.38 post had a lot of sense, especially the idea of family responsibilities. For those interested in comparing Christian beliefs with current political ones, there is a commandment about that.

  14. ALEC
    “Touch of realism needed tonight, I suspect.”

    We seem to be going through a period of mostly agreement at the moment Alec, and I thought your piece under this heading was bang on.

    However I think you will now have to agree that the Tory manifesto puts a torch to the conspiracy theories that May will go for partial membership of the EU. I think that it is now clear that I have been correct all along in my reading of May’s view on what Brexit means

  15. That Yougov Scottish poll is very good news for CONs in Scotland. Be interesting to see whether there is any further drift to them which I suspect would come from Labour if anywhere in Scotland, given their current woes. I think they have probably taken all they will from the SNP (mostly Brexiters I would guess)

  16. @ OLIVER – thank you for posting the Scotland poll.

    I notice Ruth is out asking for SLAB tactical vote. It could make the difference in several seats (e.g. Aberdeen S. Stirling, Renfrewshire E.).

    I looked at 2010-IndyRef-2015 and saw evidence of SLIB-CON tactical voting to keep SNP out in 2015 (which mostly failed but inflated the SLIB support in some seats). Given the difference in LIB and CON at UK level that “Union” alliance might fail this time (making the two SLIB targets harder but not having much impact on CON targets).
    SLAB however, is a much larger slice of pie for tactical vote support.

    Is the SLAB-CON ideological divide smaller than the Union-Indy divide though? As a Southerner I’ve no idea how many SLAB might “pinch their noses” and vote CON to take a seat from SNP?
    For quid pro quo would CON voters support SLAB in Edinburgh South?

    Any thoughts from those in Scotland or with more Scottish knowledge?

  17. Wellytab,
    “That’s a pretty one-sided post Danny, but some interesting points nonetheless. ”

    Is it? Would you be so kind as to point out where it errs? I was simply trying to point out areas where the data might be telling us something a little less obvious. If it is one sided, that was not my intention, but really my conclusion from the data. Bottom line is, the undecideds are likely to break for labour.

    A couple of other points:

    I looked up the data which Yougov linked for their article about Remain voters who are willing to accept leave. The info isnt in this data set, where they ask the alternative question about whether people think it right or wrong to leave. This time it was 46% right, 43% wrong, whereas last time it produced a 1% edge for remain.

    The alternative question gave 45% voted leave, 23% voted remain but will accept, 22% voted remain and stick by it.

    If you then look at the breakdown of the figures for those who voted leave but would accept, it shows they make up 23% of CON VI, but 29% of Lab VI. The figures are not presented in such a way as to show their voting intention percentages directly, but they are overrepresented in labour and lib VI as compared to their proportion of the sample. So they are definitely not all rushing to the conservatives. Perhaps they are simply reverting to their party loyalty (data suggests remain voters tended to lib/lab 2:1 anyway, and similarly leave were 2:1 conservative)

    The 9% of people who responded ‘dont know’ to the long question about leave/remain are strongly over represented in the labour VI compared to conservative by 7:1. (yes, I know the figures are not strictly directly comparable but if there are fewer labour voters than conservative, this would adjust to make the ratio even higher).

    Why did people answer ‘dont know’? Is it perhaps because the answer options do not cover all possible cases, and some people might not agree with any of them? In particular, there is no column for people who voted leave but now want remain. Logically, they would be heading to lib/lab and away from con. The simple right/wrong to leave question suggests about 10% of people have changed their minds each way, so some remain to leave switching is being compensated by leave to remain switching.

    Much of what I have said concerns undecideds. It looks to me, since only 10% of the sample say they will not vote, that as a sample it grossly underrepresents those who did not vote last time. Some of them might change their minds now. Ok, other posters have discussed the effects of turnout. But this data doesnt tell us much if anything about the proportionate party support in people who did not vote before, and therefore if they do vote now who they would vote for. There are a quite a lot of these people. The final result seems to be all about the currently undecideds.

    Sea change,
    “The idea that Kippers are going to back Corbyn and Abbott over immigration after their stated positions rather than May is fantastical.”

    The kippers who are very keen on limiting immigration might be the ones who are still determined to vote UKIP now. They might boycot the conservatives as well as labour. The voting intention of UKIP supporters is worse than that of lab or con supporters. Some of these people might nave a natural home of BNP or suchlike.

    Julius,
    “Some people appear to be getting overexcited about Jeremy Corbyn and seem to view him as some sort of messiah; his polling figures (as opposed to the Labour Party in general) reveal a very different story.”

    I covered that. The yougov figures say just over half of people think he would be as good or better PM than Theresa May. The reverse figure is 3/4 think the same of May, but no means a decisive lead, especially when the polarisation is very party biased anyway.

  18. @Sam “This is impossible.”
    The word is ‘unlikely’. Clearly the starting positions of EU and UK are incompatible. Reconciling them is what negotiations are for. Speed of agreement or lack of agreement depend on how they are carried out.
    Incidentally, ‘third country’ carries a flavour of ‘third world’ but means simply ‘non-member’. The USA, India and China are ‘third countries’. I expect their status in EU eyes depends as much on their wealth as on EU law. I doubt whether all third countries are treated equally.

  19. Apparently yesterday’s Ipsos Mori poll came up with figures of Con 46% Lab 37% on the basis of the methodology used until post-2015 adjustments.

  20. Less than 3 weeks to go now! As a natural Con voter, have been very please with every day that has gone past without material changes in the polls.

    Similar to why the deadline for candidates passed with someone like Blair standing and creating now, feels a bit like the manifestos was always another moment which could trigger a broader change with the last one being registration of voters on Monday and a social media storm shipping up a lot of generally more left-of-centre young first time voters.

    Apart from just some drift of a couple percentage points (or the polls being wrong), what else remains which could cause a major change?

  21. The Other Howard,
    ” I think you will now have to agree that the Tory manifesto puts a torch to the conspiracy theories that May will go for partial membership of the EU”

    From the conservative manifsto,
    ” there is increasingly little distinction between domestic and international affairs in matters of migration, national security and the economy,”
    “we will govern in the interests of the mainstream of the British public”
    “The government’s agenda will not be allowed to drift to the right. Our starting point is that we should take decisions on the basis of what works. ”
    “to make sure our economy stays strong and to bring prosperity to the whole of our country”

    And I am sure there are lots more. I would interpret this as May will go for whatever solution benefits the UK in the long run, whether that means membership or non membership.

    I havn’t read far enough to tell if there are specific commitments on one kind of Brexit, but even if there are, they might well be seen as contradictory to what are stated as overriding principles. Especially in light of future events, such as the outcome of negotiations.

  22. @ADAM

    I can’t think of anything that make the kind of shifts that Labour would need. There’s maybe a couple of percentage points to be had from a gaffe or two (esp if Boris is unleashed) ,. The only thing I can think of would be some momentum (as the Lib Dems got in 2010) through Corbyn’s personal appearances which seem to be gathering good crowds, but I can’t imagine Leavers who have switched to Conservative to ‘ensure Brexit’ shifting back in enough numbers.

    There might be some gain in Corbyn attending a leadership debate but I doubt they will take the risk – I think they’ll actually be quite happy to get somewhere close (another couple of percentage points) so that ‘one of theirs’ can succeed Corbyn.

  23. 25-49 year olds

    We all know from the crossbreaks that Corbyn has most of the youth vote and CON have most of the grey vote but almost 50% of voters are in the (oversized) 25-49 bucket on YouGov polls.

    LAB are usually just a little ahead of CON in that group (if you look at polls that split that bucket down then as expected you see the young LAB/old CON leaning)

    Avoiding partisan bias has anyone looked into the “middle” age buckets? I would have guessed this demographic is the “battle ground” for switch voters/DKs/abstains (old enough to have a broader understanding of issues but still young enough to be open minded to changing party loyalty)?

  24. “I think the Labour %age vote is going up mainly from increased VI in very safe labour areas, not marginals. Is there any polling evidence of this?”

    Probably not- it’s a shame that Ashcroft’s marginals polling went so wrong in 2015 and he gave up on it, because that’s what we all want to see.

    However I think the same *could* be true of the Tory vote (safe seat increases). A brief scan of the target seats suggests a higher UKIP vote in the Tory marginals than in the Labour marginals.

    Because of churn it is obviously more complicated, but my simplified theory is that the only significant movement this election is UKIP to Tory so we ought to look at how this plays out and whether there are regional variations- ie in Basildon it ALL goes to the Tories but Hartlepool it doesn’t. That could make the difference between a 50 seat Tory majority and a 100 plus majority.

  25. Worth remembering that, by now, the public will be aware of whether or not there is a candidate from a given party in their constituency. That must surely reflect in the figures. Given that UKIP is fielding candidates in only around one half of constituencies that would tend to suggest UKIP support is near to where it was at the last election. The figures are likely to be skewed by factors like this. Do not write UKIP off yet.

  26. @SHEVII

    Good points.

    But, I’m hearing of a lot of solid long time labour voters saying they are never going to vote for Corbyn.

  27. @ Trevor Warne

    Did you spot this piece in Monday’s Guardian – Cons are have opened up a big lead Lab in the C2 category and narrowly lead in the DE. This is all part of the explanation why several constituencies in formerly solidly labour areas like the NE of England are very likely to turn blue. I think this is more significant than age segmentation for this GE.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/15/are-tories-workers-party-labour-polling-figures-suggest-they-are

  28. @SAM

    Did you not read the statement “UKPollingReport is a site for non-partisan discussion of polls” that is shown immediately above the box where you posted your comment?

  29. @ SHEVII

    “I think the Labour %age vote is going up mainly from increased VI in very safe labour areas, not marginals. Is there any polling evidence of this?”

    Have a look at the Guardian link I posted to Trevor Warne.

  30. @EXILEINYORKS

    Ahhhh VERY interesting, maybe they don’t like champagne socialism?

    Another point does the location of the labour leader’s seat effect regional VI?

  31. @ STEVII – I’m sure you saw the article on regional voting intentions (change from 2015 to a few weeks back).
    It suggests CON are gaining more than just the drop in UKIP in the LAB heartlands (taking share direct from LAB as well). In CON’s own heartlands some Rem-CON/LAB has gone to LDEM but not enough to risk many seats (a few in S.W.London perhaps).
    In terms of seats that means CON will keep their own safe seats and win lots of LAB seats. I agree how deep they penetrate the LAB heartlands will make the difference between 50-100+ majority.
    Some articles showing that although CON were making overall gains in LAB heartlands when asked specifically about their own seat the gain was much lower (suggesting some strong local LAB MP support on a seat by seat basis – with a CON majority assured some LAB voter fear of Corbyn as PM is not a concern so will vote LAB just to try and keep their local MP in place)

    Regional VI breakdown:
    https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/05/15/voting-intention-regional-breakdown-apr-24-may-5/

  32. @ExileinYorks

    The piece does have a caveat about small sample sizes so could be too reliant on the crossbreaks that Anthony warns us about. Maybe there is more statistical evidence that backs up the theory outside of what just appears to be one ICM poll of 2000 people and they are using that as a basis for a sound theory but I guess we have to wait and see on the day.

  33. @ NorthernRuralModeoMan

    “Another point does the location of the labour leader’s seat effect regional VI?”

    I don’t think it helps, but more telling is lack of substantive figures like John Prescott (Northern) or Alan Johnson (Southern) in the Corbyn team. Prescott and Johnson came up through the union route and spoke about issues in a way that many in the Labour voter base could relate to. This provided a counterbalance to the smooth metropolitan New Labour image.

  34. Danny

    Sorry but I think the following is quite clear:-

    “We will make sure we have certainty and clarity over our future, control of our own laws,……..”
    “As we leave the European Union, we will no longer be members of the single market or customs union but we will seek a deep and special partnership including a comprehensive free trade and customs agreement.”

    Page 36 of the Manifesto.

    You have clearly got your thinking quite wrong on this issue.

  35. @ EXILEINYORKS – thank you.

    That is similar to the YouGov piece that social grade is no longer the LAB/CON divide but age is.

    If we assume that is correct then age needs a lot more analysis. Young Corbyn and Old CON is obvious in the polls but what about the middle (25-49y old) where both parties are quite close in poll splits but offering a very different vision?

    If you are 25-49 you have many years of working (hopefully) and paying tax ahead of you before you retire, you are aware that UK has difficult Brexit negotiations ahead but you understand the country has domestic issues to tackle as well…. pretty much sums up a “shy Tory”?

    When asked on a poll or down the pub it’s easy to talk the socialist talk but in the privacy of the voting booth do people get a little selfish and walk the capitalist walk?

  36. *Anecdote alert*… here in East Devon there’s a definite ‘buzz’ about an independent challenger, Claire Wright, to the sitting Conservative MP Hugo Swire. She polled well at the last election and is probably serving as a focus for the non-Tory vote.

    From speaking to quite a few people here there are people thinking of voting for her who would otherwise vote Conservative as ‘the Tories are going to win anyway’. I wonder how widespread this attitude might be – I guess in theory this kind of thing should be caught in regular polling when trying to work out how soft support is or isn’t for peoples voting choices?

  37. The UKIP % in the latest YG poll seems high.

    Given that UkIP are standing down in a number of seats do the pollsters actually take this into account nationally.?

    I expect UKIP vote to fall nationally to < 3% on Election Day – this is likely to increase the Tory share by 2/3 points. ( unless UKIP voters stay at hone or go to the booth and then not vote for any of the others)

  38. The Other Howard,
    “You have clearly got your thinking quite wrong on this issue.”

    I try to think like a politician when interpreting the words of politicians.

  39. The pages of The Times today demonstrate what an extraordinary change May has imposed upon her Party.

    The ditching of all those Cameron promises on Tax , and the unwinding of his little bribes to the older voter.

    The letter from Norman Lamb & the article by Sarah Woollaston castigating the ditching of the cap on care costs. This centre piece policy is but one example of May’s apparent confidence in milking the better off retired. As the Times Leader puts it-“Mrs May made the political calculation that more voters will thank her for protecting their last £100k than will condemn her for putting at risk much larger accumulated assets. This is a gamble that only a confident Conservative could take.” Confident , presumably that these voters would never ever vote for a Corbyn lead Labour Party.

    And it isn’t just the wealthy retired Conservative voter who has woken up to “Mayism” .

    You only have to read the Manifesto pages on Industrial Strategy -National Productivity Investment Fund/Sovereign Wealth Funds/Cultural Development Fund/UK Shared Prosperity Fund ( to reduce “inequalities” )-and the mulitude of interventions into the Market Economy , Takeovers, Pricing, Hiring of immigrants, Pay etc , to show no surprise at the snort of derision from the paper’s Business Commentator:-
    Under a heading of “Nanny May dishes out the medicine” he writes :-
    ” There’s barely a single area of our lives into which Mrs. May isn’t planning to interfere., bringing her special brand of small-minded sanctimonious nannying”….” somehow when she’s not too busy criminalising pension offenders, reviewing rail ticketing, price-capping energy, penalising employers of non-UK workers and trying to build Heathrow. HS2 and Hinckley Point C she’ll find time to negotiate a nice hard Brexit. You do hope she can fit in that interview with American Vogue” !!

    Presumably TM calculates that this chap would find even more to write about if it is Corbyn writing the rules he operates by.

    I laughed when TM told Faisal Islam there was no such thing as “Mayism”. I don’t know whether this is Joseph Chamberlain Mk2-or even Edmund Burke resurrected. Last evening on tv news I saw Anthony Seldon opine that it looks a bit like John Major.

    We will all find out -if her gamble that none of these “outraged of Tunbridge Wells” types will abandon the Conservative Party pays off.

    If it does-its going to be different from Cameron & Osborne. That is for sure.

  40. @ Trevor Warne

    The trouble with that Yougov data is that it could potentially be out of date with the *possible* swings we’ve seen the last 2 weeks.

    I mean I think the Tories are good for a 100 seat majority and this election was done and dusted a long time ago once they swept up the UKIP vote but it does have the potential to be more interesting than just taking an average UNS so you can’t just add on 10 to the Tories in each seat. So I think regional variations could be significant.

    Oh if the prediction thing is still open.

    Con 47% (375 + 47)
    Lab 31% (197 -37)
    LD 7% (5 -3)
    UKIP 3% (0 -1)
    SNP 3% (50 -6)

  41. Danny

    “I try to think like a politician when interpreting the words of politicians.”

    It looks as though you failed in that then IMO.

  42. @ ANDY T – the UKIP pulled candidates equates to about a 1/3 of their 2015 vote. It’s possible that someone interviewed for a poll knows their own UKIP candidate is not standing and has therefore expressed VI for someone else hence reducing the poll v actual vote “error”. The YouGov poll asks what a UKIP voter would do if no UKIP candidate (see p4). The sample size is small so be careful reading too much into it. However as a % only 28% say they would vote CON, 12% LAB and a large 47% say another party(not sure who – independent?)/WNV/DK.

    My guess is the UKIP that have moved already are different to those that remain (fairly obvious you’d lose your least loyal voters first). My guess on the residual UKIP if faced with no candidate is 35% CON, 15% LAB (possibly with a regional twist) and 50% abstain/spoil paper. Some seat by seat factors as well. If a seat has a sitting LDEM or a strong LDEM risk then I think we can guess the UKIP voter will be more motivated to vote CON. If the seat is very safe LAB or CON then maybe more spoiled papers/abstain?

  43. Yes Colin but John Major had those’ bastards’ to appease.
    Adds credence to notion that the real purpose of this GE is to limit the effectiveness internal opposition.

  44. @ Colin

    Time to abandon the Tunbridge Wells stereotype. TW is full of right-on retirees from London who sold up and moved out. They are “outraged” all right but not by the things you might imagine. Note that TW was the only constituency around here that voted Remain. Expect Tory majorities there to reduce as the older gang die off. If you want the full on old-school outrage (mixed with white working-class Brexit badasses) your looking more at Tonbridge these days.

  45. Colin

    It is interesting that neither the press nor the TV channels picked up these kind of extra-budgetary funds, although they represent the steering direction very well. Of course, the sizes of these funds will also matter.

    I wonder if they appear in the election leaflets. It could be quite influential in many of the target areas.

  46. The winter fuel payment changes are another own goal by the Cobservatives. If I were Labour I would lead on this across all media: “the stories are taking away essentials from pensioners”.

    It’s the sort of issue that can persuade undecided voters to go for a particular side on an emotional choice. If so, I would expect to see a continuation of the improved polling for Labour.

  47. @Carfrew

    Don’t see why you are getting so touchy just because I don’t fully subscribe to the view that there has been a Liberal Party conspiracy in place since the 1930,s Better call Moulder and Scullion. (JOKE) Yes Liberals have been influential, Beveridge & Keynes, but they have coexisted and themselves been influenced by other political strains of political thought such as socialism. And I agree you can trace back key elements of the post-war consensus and the more recent neo-liberal economic consensus to the Liberal Party that existed prior to 1918. Where I differ is in viewing the Labour governments 1997-2010 and both Blair and Brown as Liberals. Brown’s inherent preference for intervention and redistribution in economice policy (tax credits which he sneaked past Blair introducing complex tax incentive programmes to influence investment etc) indicates that he was more Social Democrat than Liberal in the economic sphere. On a broad range of social policies Blair’s government was not Liberal – areas such as privacy, sentencing, etc.

    I think you are on firmer ground in describing Cameron’s governemnt as Liberal.

  48. COLIN

    I certainly agree that this is very different from May, much more the centerised “One Nation Tory” approach. Very clear, pulling no punches and reasonably realistic. Economically it’s way off what I want but that has always been the case whatever party was in power. Osborne got near it at times and I liked his desire to reduce the size of the state.

    Impressive in not being designed to “wow” the older voters. Will it have a major effect one way or the other, i doubt it. I agree with AW on the limited effect of manifestos.

    Personally i am very happy with what it say’s about Brexit, the third driver in this election IMO.

  49. what were the ratings of the debate?

  50. Sorrel

    You may be right, but I doubt any individual policy will impact on the overall flow or the polls.

    Looking at the press coverage today ( with perhaps one exception) the average voter is ” influenced” positively about TM.

    For what it’s worth, my parents are not wealthy ( they use the word comfortable) and they have said for years that they should not recieve winter fuel allowance. I do accept however that for less well off people the fear that they could lose the allowance is a real worry ( even though we have to assume they will still recieve it)

    I have a feeling after the Tory manifesto coverage that their poll score will edge up again at the weekend

1 2 3 4 5 6 9