YouGov’s weekly poll for the Sunday Times has topline voting intention figures of CON 44%(-1), LAB 35%(+3), LDEM 9%(+1), UKIP 3%(-3). Changes are from the YouGov/Times polls in the week. The fieldwork was, as usual, conducted on Thursday afternoon and Friday, so was wholly after the Conservative manifesto launch (though, of course, before much of the media reporting and discussion of it)

The nine point Tory lead is the lowest we’ve seen so far this campaign, the first in single figures. As ever, one should be cautious of unusual polls and wait to see if the trend is backed up by other polls before getting either too excited or too panicked (depending upon one’s point of view!). Perhaps it could be that the Conservative manifesto and the coverage of the changes to care funding has knocked their support. Perhaps it’s just a continuation of the gradual narrowing of the Tory lead that we have been seeing anyway over recent weeks. Perhaps it’s just a bit of a outlier, and the next round of polls will go back to showing a larger Tory lead. Time will tell.

There is also supposedly a Survation poll in the Mail on Sunday. No idea yet if that was after the manifesto launches and whether or not it will show a similar tightening.

UPDATE: No figures from the Survation poll yet, but according to the front page of the Mail on Sunday it was done after the manifesto launch and shows a Tory lead of 12 points.

UPDATE 2: The Survation figures are CON 46%, LAB 34%, LD 8%, UKIP 3%. Tabs are here. Changes are complicated – Survation’s previous poll had an 18 point lead, but that was conducted by telephone for Good Morning Britain, while this one is online. Survation’s last online poll using a comparable method was, I think, back in April, and had only an 11 point lead for the Tories.

816 Responses to “YouGov/Sunday Times – CON 44, LAB 35, LD 9, UKIP 3”

1 15 16 17
  1. Bardin1,
    “Or you agree reciprocal arrangements for cross border access”

    There were already bilateral agreements for e.g. access to healthcare between UK and several other European countries before we shared EU membership. AFAIK EU rules don’t forbid us going back to this.

  2. AW
    I somehow got 2005 in Table.2 column 1

  3. I think that the u-turn will have more effect on Tory VI than the original policy. I believe that the two main reasons the Tories have been polling at a stable position so far are Brexit and ‘Theresa May is strong and stable’. Whilst Brexit won’t go away, May has just torpedoed the latter in an unforced error, if recent polls are anything to go by.

    I doubt this story will linger across the next two weeks, especially if something bigger appears, but I suspect we might finally see a dip in the supposedly rock solid Tory VI this week (even if it recovers by next week).

  4. 47%-33% Con-Lab in that ICM/Guardian poll will be hugely reassuring for TM

    Is there a YouGov one this evening?

  5. DANNY @ BZ
    Yet the attempt to so do using the manifesto has still been defeated by the party.

    Yes, I spotted that too. Like most such gaffes, it will probably pass over and make little difference in the GE, although the “strong and stable” meme may need changing and has given Lab at least a glimmer of a chance.

  6. Also, for those saying that the ICM poll is reassuring for TM – how is it?

    Sure, it (probably) means the policy wasn’t causing a loss of votes, but then that just means she’s caused a massive fuss with a u-turn over nothing, which could potentially be more damaging.

  7. Ne thread, BTW

  8. MarkW

    Thanks for the link to John Weeks’s article. He is as solid on economics as one can be. I fondly remember his refreshing articles in the those years of theoretical emptiness of economics in the 1980s.

  9. @Phil – “I don’t get why none of the parties tell the truth on this and just come clean that none of it s fit to purpose”

    Because voters badly want to believe that it’s possible to have it all?

    Louis XIV’s finance minister declared that “the art of taxation consists in so plucking the goose as to obtain the largest possible amount of feathers with the smallest possible amount of hissing”.

    Louis XVI came a cropper because when he sensibly tried to tax the aristocrats for the first time to plug gaps in the budget, they threw such a hissy fit that he caved and taxed the peasants instead, triggering the French Revolution.

    Another example: if you could go back to 2003 and tell the Venezuelans that voting for Chavez’s “freebies for all” policies would result in the collapse of the economy and people lynching each other in the street for a fiver, would they be deterred? Or would they fervently cling to the idea that it’s possible to have it all, because that is what they badly want to believe?

  10. Barbazenzero

    It all depends how you view strong leadership though. She could have closed her eyes and put her fingers in her ears and pretended there wasn’t a problem. She could have done that but would that have been strong ? Or she could listen to the criticism and accept it was valid on this issue and she had not gone to it right and tried to meet people’s concerns. Which attitude makes for a better leader ?

  11. @MarkW

    “One of my favs”


    indeed it’s a classic…

  12. @Phil
    She could always have followed the recommendations of the expert panel that the Coalition appointed to consider – over a number of years – this very issue? Instead she tried to make up an alternative solution on the fly…. it’s not surprising really that it didn’t turn out well.

  13. @S Thomas

    “Has this particular socialist sect got a name?”


    Dunno but in most of the examples you cite you could call it “pragmatism”.

    In many of the examples you cite, the reason not just socialists but many parties adopt universal benefits despite the rich also getting them is that…

    – you eliminate costs and stigma of means testing

    – everyone is invested and hence more likely to accept it

    – you can claw it back from the richer through general taxation anyway.

  14. PHIL, out of interest in which other way, bar the way the NHS is already funded, could we fund the NHS? A lot Tory voters have gone mad at May and co for telling them there’s going to be a [change to the social care funding]. Not sure people, on any side of the political persuasion, will accept a different way of paying for the NHS.

  15. @ANDY R: “They are most certainly NOT under represented on social media.”

    I think you’re missing my point. Out of over 70,000 ‘votes’ cast on that page – which is being distributed via social media – the majority are overwhelmingly and disproportionately Labour votes. Why is that? Why is it attracting so few Tory votes? If I was throwing resources into social media – as the Tories clearly are – I’d be worried.

1 15 16 17