A variety of new and newish polls today.

Starting with the newest of the regular polls, Kantar‘s latest topline figures are CON 43%(+1), LAB 33%(-1), LDEM 11%(+2), UKIP 4%(nc). Fieldwork was between Thursday and Tuesday. The changes are not significant in themselves, but unlike most recent polls don’t show continuing movement towards Labour. Note also that there is a methodological change – Kantar now estimate how people who say don’t know will vote based on upon their demographics and whether they find May or Corbyn more trustworthy. The impact of this chance is to decrease the Labour vote by a point (so without it, the Conservative lead would barely have changed at all). Tables are here.

We also saw a Panelbase poll today. This is not actually new – it is the poll that was in the field during the Manchester bombing last week, which Panelbase made the decision to withhold in the light of the tragedy. Topline figures are CON 48%, LAB 33%, LDEM 7%, UKIP 4%. Fieldwork was back between the 19th and 23rd of May. I’ve not included changes as there are significant methodological changes here – Panelbase have tightened their turnout filter to only include people who say 10/10, and they reweight their voting intention question so the age matches the age profile of people who voted in 2015. As with other companies whose turnout model is based upon replicating the age profile of 2015 voters this has a substantial effect. Panelbase say without it their poll would have shown the lead narrowing by 6 points from their previous poll (implying they would otherwise be showing an eight point Tory lead on their old method!). Panelbase tabs are here. In their comments Panelbase also say they will be releasing a new poll in the next day or two which again has the Tory lead falling.

Thirdly there was a new Ipsos MORI Scottish poll. Topline voting intention there is SNP 43%, CON 25%, LAB 25%, LDEM 5%. As ever, the SNP are in a clear first place, but down from the last election. Where it had appeared that the Scottish Conservatives were now the clear second placed party, this suggests that Labour may have recovered into joint-second place (that would also be very good news for the SNP – under FPTP the SNP benefit from being the dominant pro-independence party when the unionist parties are split three ways). Full details are here.

There was also a new SurveyMonkey poll for the Sun. This has topline figures of CON 44%(nc), LAB 38%(+2), LDEM 6%(nc), UKIP 4%(-1). Now, SurveyMonkey are not members of the British Polling Council and we don’t have any tables or further methodological detail to examine. However, they did poll at the 2015 election so have a record to judge. Their method is unusual – sample is gathered by randomly selecting people at the end of other surveys hosted on the surveymonkey platform. Back in 2015 they were the only company whose pre-election poll got the Conservative lead about right…but because they got both Labour and the Conservatives too low their average error across all parties was the highest (and the BPC inquiry found that their sample was still heavily skewed towards the politically interested… though they may have corrected that since then). In short, make of that what you will – it may be that their approach does do something that traditional polling does not… or it may be they just got lucky in 2015.

770 Responses to “New Kantar, Panelbase, MORI and Surveymonkey polls”

1 10 11 12 13 14 16

    I didn’t say Labour doing badly, I said Tories doing well.

    If you’re 17% ahead in one region and 3% (the most optimistic) behind overall, then its a mathematical fact you must be struggling elsewhere.

    If you could choose, you would probably prefer a smaller London lead and some of those votes to be distributed in other regions.

  2. And if Leicester can win the Premier League.

    Nobody I know expects Corbyn to be in No. 10 but it’s great to see my Labour friends with a spring in their step.

  3. S thomas, oh no… The trouble as we have seen in the last two weeks is that the tory shield wall is a hindrance to offensive action or observation of the enemy. And hot.

  4. Apologies, I should have mentioned in my last missive that one of the reasons for increased optimism at Labour HQ was knowledge of that Panelbase poll, and the fact their methodology had changed.
    That, and the fact that private polling for the party shows an even better picture.
    The figure from HQ stated that they believe the Midlands and North are coming home to the fold in their droves.

  5. Mike N,
    I thing May took that walk on the moors and decided she was not willing to push through hard brexit against the wishes of the British people. So she decided to test it. All the rest is window dressing.

    Yes if this had come off then it would have strengthened her position. But it looks like the uk is voting against hard brexit.

  6. Good afternoon all from a warm and partly cloudy P(S)RL.

    The London poll does not surprise me, for some time I’ve thought at worst Labour would stem the tide, now it looks reasonable to assume they will gain some seats. Buts its in other areas of the country that Labour have a real uphill struggle atm. In Scotland, as long as left-wing voters continue to give their vote to the SNP on the basis of the independence issue it is extremely difficult for Labour to win enough seats for an overall majority.

    I still haven’t seen any evidence to convince me that Labour are seeing off the challenge in the marginals, and outside of London / SE I actually think the ‘dementia’ tax may actually be approved of by the pro-Brexit wc voters that are being targeted by the Tories.

    Corbyn’s focus on Brexit as opposed to other issues, which have been the focus of the campaign to date and to the benefit of Labour, is either a sign of growing confidence or a monumental error. It is a big risk to allow this issue to dominate the last few days of campaigning – it is what the Tories want and plays to their whole electoral strategy. If Corbyn is going for the jugular and gets those wc Brexit voters to doubt May on this issue it could pay off, put to my mind that’s a big ‘if’. As I’ve commented before many of these voters have been casting their vote on the basis of immigration/Brexit for the best past of 10 years – I cant see them shifting from this stance is large number over the next week.

  7. If Corbyn does pull out some kind of victory, which I still think is unlikely but if he does and the blairites try to take credit I will be incensed. I might even start throwing bricks

  8. DrMibbles

    “That London poll, by the way, backs up the YouGov seat prediction model on a constituency-by-constituency basis.

    “No way LAB are over 50% in Tooting”
    “No way Kensington is anywhere near marginal”

    Oh really?”


    Well Tooting was *47.3%* Labour in 2015 general election- so whoever said there was ‘no way Tooting is over 50%’ seems a tad naive! Did anyone actually say that or did you imagine it?

    But anyway: let us take Kensignton- as you’ve mentioned that one several times over the last 3 days.

    YG London poll today

    LAB: 50%
    CON: 33%
    LDEM: 11%
    UKIP: 3%
    GRN: 2%

    London Vote 2015

    LAB: 44%
    CON: 35%
    LDEM: 8%
    UKIP: 8%
    GRN: 5%

    Change with todays London poll since GE 2015

    LAB: +6
    CON: -2
    LDEM: -3
    UKIP: -5
    GRN: -3

    4% swing to CON

    Kensington result GE 2015

    LAB: 31.1%
    CON: 52.3%
    LDEM: 5.6%
    UKIP: 5.1%
    GRN: 2%

    Kensington 2017 = calculated using today’s London poll

    LAB: 37.1%
    CON: 50.3%
    LDEM: 3.6%
    UKIP: 0.1%
    GRN: 0%

    NOT a marginal BUT Conservatives **THIRTEEN** (13.2%) points ahead of Labour.

    This type of dynamic is played out all across this panel model extrapolation of individual seats.

    I suggest to UKPR readers: choose one or two seats that you know really really well. Then look at the YG model ‘nowcast’. I suspect most of you will react with a ‘Hhmm’…

  9. cambridgerachel

    Will the corbynites take credit for the coming May majority?

    Or will they blame it on “the coup” ?!

  10. Themushypea: I think the reason people have strong opinions about fox-hunting is first and foremost because it is a very easy issue to understand, compared to, say, quantitative easing or export tarriffs, which are far more important to the future of our country but also enough to bore any non-wonk to sleep.

    In other words, it’s a classic case of Parkinson’s Law of Triviality (aka the bike-shed effect):


  11. Rudyard

    “Apologies, I should have mentioned in my last missive that one of the reasons for increased optimism at Labour HQ was knowledge of that Panelbase poll, and the fact their methodology had changed.
    That, and the fact that private polling for the party shows an even better picture. The figure from HQ stated that they believe the Midlands and North are coming home to the fold in their droves.”

    The opposite of the Ashcroft panel exercise and the HP focus groups in fact…!

  12. “Tory shield wall ”

    Lol. Is this anything like the notorious Roman army shield wall – which was not impregnable? In battle in places it was thin and failed; and it didn’t prevent defeats and the fall of Rome.

    The shield wall is irrelevant today.

  13. Adding Panelbase to latest MoE analysis:-

    YouGov MRP 42 38 (7day rolling to 31st) (40-45, 35-41 confidence)
    Opinium 45 35 (23-24th)
    ComRes 46 34 (24-26th)
    ORB 44 38 (24-25th)
    Survation 43 37 (26-27th)
    ICM 45 33 (26-29th)
    TNS 43 33 (25-30th)
    YouGov 42 39 (30-31st)
    Panelbase 44 36 (26-1st)

    MoE range

    Con 43-45%, Lab 36%
    Con lead 7-9%

    No changes

    Keep Calm and Carry On Polling

  14. LASZLO

    Thanks for the heads-up re the May speech.

    Unfortunately, all the news sites I’ve tried so far don’t mention the NHS bit and have no video.

    If you or anyone else have a link, please post it. Meanwhile I’ll try a few more sites myself.

  15. @Rob in Sheffield.

    What do you think the Tory majority will be? 100+?

  16. Valerie

    Not less than she currently has

  17. @Danny

    “I thin[k] May took that walk on the moors and decided she…”

    …didn’t have the stomach for a fight with her backbenchers? Some would certainly say so, adding that she has continued to show that lack of stomach for a fight all the way through the campaign.

    This is the crux of the campaign from here on in – how do people (and, more importantly, key sections of the electorate) view May? Is she a bulwark protecting Brexit from those who would derail it, or is she a “blowhard who collapses at the first sign of gunfire”?

  18. One or two posters here really do know what they’re talking about, but most of us just seem to be fishing in the dark (some more politely than others!). The Yougov Election Centre gives food for thought though… Amber Rudd losing her seat, Kensington and Chelsea up for grabs…. I doubt these non-predictions are very reliable on an individual basis, but is it possible that we are going to see a lot of seats change hands, both ways? Indeed, three ways?

    If I was an MP of any party I’d be looking at my own majority nervously.

    BTW, what’s happened to TOH? Hope he’s all right. I miss his self-assurance.

  19. @Rob

    Could the same argument not be applied to the Tories as you are applying to Labour in London?

    ie that they are piling up votes in safe blue Leave seats where they don’t need them?

  20. @jonm
    that seems to be the lead now across most polls 6-9%,this would still give a TM a decent majority.The Tories have polled mid 40,s the whole way through,unless this changes,we will NOT be having a hung parliament or JC as PM.
    Btw every Poll in recent memory has over estimated Labour’s vote,I will just leave that here

  21. @Rich
    It wasn’t you I was thinking of. My opinion of the most likely outcome is pretty similar to yours but I still have no faith in that result. I wouldn’t be entirely surprised if Labour became largest party or Conservatives did get the 100seat majority that was talked of. It seems wide open to me.

  22. I don’t understand why people are so sure of a Conservative majority based on recent polls.

    In 2015 CON were 7% ahead of LAB. So they need to be >7% to increase their majority. <7% lead suggests hung parliament.

    The way the polls are moving I don't see how anyone can be confident that CON are going to improve on the 2015 result.

  23. Barbazenzero

    I watched it on some live stream on FB, but here’s Guardian’s transcription.

    “Q: [From Channel 4 News’ Michael Crick] Aren’t you doing badly because all you come out with is cliches? Can you tell us where the extra funding for the NHS will come from?

    May says the Tories have shown that, with extra money from a growing economy, they are able to generate more money for the NHS.

    Q: So if the economy goes downhill, the money won’t be there?

    May says people should vote Conservative to ensure it does not go downhill.

  24. @Valerie

    It’s possible ol’ Robert protests too much. After all, he stayed put in France even while we elected Cameron and they elected Hollande!!

  25. @Valerie

    Not really its been 10 out of 10 from day one.

  26. One assumes that with that poll, Labour would surely take Brentford and Isleworth too no?

  27. Carfrew

    Wrong Robert.

    Like so much else!


    The basis that I am working on is “assume the polls are correct within the statistical margin of error”

    All that the analysis shows is that currently all of the most recent polls from each company can claim to be correct within the accepted margin of error (or confidence interval in the case of YouGov’s MRP model).

    Obviously some of those polls are getting quite out of date, but as we stand the 7-9% Con lead fits every one of them, even if the headline figures may suggest otherwise.

    It is just a matter of keeping calm when we see each poll come out and not jumping up and down in a partisan manner.

    At the moment there is the possibility of a result that means every single one of them is statistically correct.

  29. Having watched the BBC TV Leaders debate last night in Canada and listened to Amber Rudd talk about “a coalition of chaos” I thought I would share with you what a four year agreement with confidence and supply looks like:


    I think the following are chief operative clauses of how the agreement will function

    1. Should the Lieutenant Governor invite the Leader of the BC New Democrats to form a new government, this agreement will continue until the next scheduled election*.
    2. The Leader of the New Democrats will not request a dissolution of the Legislature during the term of this agreement, except following the defeat of a motion of confidence.
    3. The BC Green MLAs will neithe rmove, nor vote non-confidence during the term of this agreement, so long as the principle of good faith and no surprises has been observed.
    …5. While individual bills, including budget bills, will not be treated or designated as matters of confidence, the overall budgetary policy of the Government, including moving to the committee of supply, will be treated as matters of confidence.
    6. BC Green support for policy and legislation which does not relate to confidence or supply is not subject to this agreement and will be decided on an issue by issue basis.

    * like the UK we have fixed term elections legislation, and it will be interesting to see how these two parties pull this off with a one seat majority, especially if the BC Legislature is in a tied situation with their Speaker always having to break the tie.

    I understand that the SNP and Scottish Greens may have had a similar arrangement in the past and/or have one now, so you may have a working model for the UK to consider already.

    Other than that you might want to look over the areas of policy agreement to consider if it would be possible in the UK to put together such a supply and confidence agreement with sufficient parties and individual MPs to create a working government for a fixed term.

    Neither the NDP or the Green Party have ever had a working relationship in British Columbia, but on the night of election day the Leader of the Green Party spelled out his bottom line of three conditions:

    1. Party status in the Legislature
    2. An end to corporate and union funding of elections
    3. Proportional representation election reform

    … and then offered to negotiate a working agreement with either of the two other parties.

    Negotiations broke off with the BC Liberals on a Sunday night four days after the final count of votes had confirmed the result was 43 seats for the BC Liberals, 41 for the NDP and 3 for the Greens, and an agreement in principle was announced on Monday at 2.00 PM local time with the NDP – with a signing ceremony with both caucuses on the Tuesday afternoon that was then handed in to the Lieutenant Governor for consideration.

    The BC Liberal Premier has declared she will meet the “House” to test the will of the newly elected MLAs, but does not expect to retain confidence of the “House”.

    We have not had a minority government for 62 years, so as a political scientist I will be interested to see how it all works, as for example:

    “Immediately employ every tool available to the new government to stop the expansion of the Kinder Morgan pipeline, the seven-fold increase in tanker traffic on our coast, and the transportation of raw bitumen through our province”.

    …will be enacted despite federal Canadian government approval of the pipeline and to the consternation of the first NDP government in Alberta, the landlocked neighbour to the east of BC.

    That all said I am enjoying watching the last week of your election, having already voted for Caroline Lucas via mail proxy as an overseas voter

  30. They already have it!

  31. Am most interested to see how this Shield Wall thing holds up, or whether it’s more of an ego defence wall kinda thing.

    A lot hinges on it, including Robert’s return!!

  32. Danny
    “I thing May took that walk on the moors and decided she was not willing to push through hard brexit against the wishes of the British people. So she decided to test it.”

    It is evident TM had been planning to call a GE long before she went walkies in Snowdonia. Her argument she made the decision only then is IMO bogus.

    I don’t know whether TM is really for hard or soft Brexit. Which is weird considering Brexit is the subject of much of her speeches.

    So, did she want a big majority to pursue hard or soft Brexit and to overwhelm the Leave or Remain elements in the Tory party? ‘Strong and stable’ IMO is what she wanted to obtain for herself in her party from the GE. Increasingly as we enter the last seven days, she’s not going to get this – which leads me to believe her position will continue to weak and unstable and untenable.

    ‘Coalition of chaos’ ? IMO this is the adoption of UKIP policy and supporters by the Tory party.

  33. @Patrick, Rob Sheffield

    I think the point about the model is that it doesn’t simply call each seat in isolation. It calls all seats at once, many many times, and then averages the results. All seats will have a margin of error, but the idea is that an error in one seat (K&C for example, will likely be balanced out by an error in the other direction somewhere else.

    On top of that, each run of the model will give a different seat distribution, and it is this that we need to look at. Does th model consistently project a narrow range around 317 seats, or this just the median in a wide range of values from e.g. 280-360?

    It would be really good to see the full set of predictions, in the way that Nate Silver’s site does for US elections. I can’t find anything of that sort, but maybe it’s hidden on the site somewhere?

  34. Blimey

    Watched the two Leader speeches – JC winding up now and he’s kicked the goal.

    Let’s see what the questions are like!

  35. @ Rob

    In England there were 2.3m UKIP votes in Tory held seats averaging 7663 per seat.

    In England there were 1.2m UKIP votes in Lab held seats averaging 4,654 per seat.

    I’ve left out Wales because there are more likely to be 3 way marginals and complications with the Plaid vote and UKIP is not that relevant to Scotland.

    Given the majority/only Tory swing (obviously a lot of churn going on as well) is coming straight from UKIP (currently maybe 50% of the UKIP vote) then I’d suggest that within that UNS the Tories were proportionately taking UKIP votes in seats they already hold.

    That said it isn’t a given that the UKIP to Tory swing is a simple UNS either so we’re not to know if the Northern UKIP supporter is reacting the same way as the leafy shires UKIP supporter and whether they behave differently in a marginal seat.

  36. Philotes

    “I don’t understand why people are so sure of a Conservative majority based on recent polls”.

    Across the board, I doubt that they are. In fact I guess most thinking Conservatives would be extremely worried about the polls at present. Similarly most thinking Labour people would be pretty pleased. The latter’s concern would be to do with swingback in the latter stages and the former’s hope would be the same.

  37. Corbyn has always been brilliant at campaigning, as his history of mass rallies shows. But campaigning is a long way removed from the daily grind of running a country, as Trump is also discovering.

  38. JONM

    “It is just a matter of keeping calm when we see each poll come out and not jumping up and down in a partisan manner.”

    You obviously weren’t here during the 2010 GE !!

    Joking aside it can be difficult when one polling company releases data far more frequently than others do- it makes quite a few posters on here believe that this companies numbers are the only ones (and to ‘forget’ tat other companies are coming to quite different results) as well as the ‘only true ones’. because thats what they want to beleive. Its the oldest statistical failing there is!

    It’s happened before- crowding out of contradictory data- its why the ‘Britain Elects’ rolling average specifically models to iron out over-representation of a particular polling company. So as to get a balanced reflection of what’s going on. EC do something similar to- though their poll data are over a longer period so could be argued to not relfect a fast changing environment as well.

    Anyway, balance is not something this site has ever been renowned for- especially at election time…

    Whatever, the egg is piling up to be catapulted onto faces next week. On whose we shall have to see.

  39. Didn’t seem to be any questions..?

    Teresa May earlier speech was okay (more positive than recently) but questioning had changed tone completely in tone from early in campaign “is the reason you are doing so badly…” etc etc

    I think the easy ride might be over – going to be hard if that stays the same

  40. Welsh poll due at 4pm

    The Principality is moving back to where it is most comfortable.

  41. I think TM must be worried, there has just been such a major shift in 1 day. I feel the parties tend to know more than we do, remember Trump campaigning in Michigan and everyone laughing.

    They must have some internal polling which is causing major concern.

  42. Comparing the Tories position in 2015 and now, I think Theresa Mag would bite your hand off for that.

    The assumption that UKIP voters would all go to the Tories was flawed, voters are far more free in their affiliations, and it’s the uncertainty of a much larger % of genuine swing voters that makes this election so interesting and nothing like the procession it could have been.

  43. @Rob Sheffield


    I was on about Valerie’s response to Mr Robert Newark, who she actually named and quoted in her reply, and his deliberations over staying in France. How does that make it the “wrong” Robert?

    Is there some other Robert Newark on the board also wondering over whether to leave France when the wine is so cheap etc.?

  44. @Robin interprets, and expresses the last part of the model properly. Random samples are run to improve the sample distribution (matching the population) improving the a priori probabilities.

  45. The first rule of moderation, never discuss moderation…

  46. Roy Barraclough’s demise has now been knocked off “Most Read” by the item on the planted left-leaning Shills within ladt night’s ineffectual debate.

  47. @Rudyard

    Never could see Bridgend, Wrexham and Deeside turning true blue!

  48. @Danny:

    “I thing May took that walk on the moors and decided she was not willing to push through hard brexit against the wishes of the British people. So she decided to test it. All the rest is window dressing.”

    Hard Brexit/soft Brexit is just a rhetorically appealing gloss put around by those aching for No Brexit. Soft Brexit is taken to mean EEA membership, which Remainers presented in the referendum campaign as pointless Brexit.

    Anything else exists on a continuum of better or worse deals, closer or more distant relationship.

    Labour claims to want to end Freedom of Movement. The EU’s position is that this makes them no different from TM. So either Labour is going to throw in its hand, or it is also going for a Hard Brexit, whatever that means.

1 10 11 12 13 14 16