With the window for taking part in Labour leadership election closing and ballot papers going out there were several polls over the weekend asking about the leadership candidates, though no fresh polling of people voting in the actual contest. ComRes, Opinium and Survation all had polls asking about the general public’s perception of the candidates. While the polls weren’t presented that way, I’ve seen various people writing about them as evidence of which candidate would actually do better as leader. In particular the Survation poll had Jeremy Corbyn ahead among the public after they were shown video clips, so was taken as a sign that he may not be as damaging electorally as the commentariat widely assume.

Questions about how well different leadership candidates would do in a general election are always popular and sought after, but extremely difficult if not impossible to make meaningful. Asking the general public who they think would do better or worse is perfectly reasonable, but is a different question. Who people think would do better is not the same as who would do better, it’s just asking the public to answer the question for you and a poll is not a Magic 8 Ball. Asking the general public who they prefer doesn’t answer the question either, it contains the views of lots of committed Labour and Conservative voters who aren’t going to change their vote anyway, and preferring is not necessarily the same as changing your vote.

If you ask how people would vote with x, y or z as leader, or if people would be more or less likely to vote Labour with each candidate as leader then you are getting a little closer, but the problem is still that people are expected to answer a question about how they would vote with the candidates as leader when the general public know hardly anything about them. A fair old chunk won’t even know the candidates names or what they look like, the majority will have little real idea what policies they will put forward. None of us really know how they will work out as leader, what the public, press and political reaction will be, how they will really operate. How can respondents really judge how they would vote in a hypothetical situation with so little information? They can’t.

Some polls try to get round that by giving respondents a little more information about each candidate: a run down of their main policy positions perhaps, or in the case of the Survation poll a little video clip of each respondent so people could see what they looked and sounded like. This is better, but it’s still a long way from reality. It’s like the famous market research failure of New Coke – in market research tests people liked the taste, but release it out into the real world and people wanted their old Coke back. A video clip or a list of policies won’t factor in the way the media react, the way the new leader is reported, how they actually handle leading, the way their party and their opponents react. There is no really good way of answering the question because you’re asking respondents something they don’t actually know yet.

Is there anything polls can really tell us about how the leadership contenders would do? Well, firstly I think we can be reasonably confident in saying the polls don’t suggest any of the four candidates is any sort of electoral panacea, the most positive net rating in the ComRes poll is Andy Burnham and just 19% think he would improve Labour’s chances, 14% that he’d damage them (Corbyn gets more people saying he’d have a positive effect (21%) but much more saying he’d have a negative effect (31%). None of them have obvious election-winning magic like, say, Blair did in 1994.

They can also tell us some things about people’s first impressions of the candidates, something that shouldn’t be underestimated (people probably made their minds up pretty quickly that Ed Miliband didn’t look Prime Ministerial, for example, or that there was “something of the night” about Michael Howard. Those early impressions are hard to shift.). On that front the Survation poll is pretty positive about Jeremy Corbyn with people saying he came across as more trustworthy and in touch than his rivals (though such polls are always a bit tricky because of the choice of clips – Survation tried to iron out any potential biasing effect by having clips from each candidate being interviewed on the Marr show, so they were all interviews, all the same setting and same interviewer… but even then you ended up with two candidates defending their position on the welfare bill, one talking about the EU referendum and one talking about rail nationalisation. It’s almost impossible to do such things and have a truly level ground).

The argument against Corbyn isn’t about his personal image and manner though, it’s that he’d put the Labour party in a ideological and policy position that wouldn’t win votes, that the Labour party itself would risk ripping itself apart under a leader with little support among the Parliamentary party and a long history of rebellion. On individual policies I’ve seen Corbyn supporters taking succour from polls showing, for example, that a majority of the public support rail nationalisation or much higher taxes on the rich and drawing the conclusion that there is a public appetite for much more left wing policies. Be careful – look at this YouGov poll which shows a majority of people would support renationalisation of the utilities, increasing the minimum wage to £10 and the top rate of tax to 60%… but also a total ban on immigration and benefits for anyone who turns down a job, making life mean life with no parole in prison sentences and stopping all international aid. There are some policies to the left of mainstream public debate that are popular and some to the right that are popular, it no more means that the public are aching for a far-left political party than for a far-right one. Essentially you can pick a list of appealing sounding policies from almost any ideological stance, from far-left to far-right, and find the public agree with them. In reality though policies require trade-offs, they need to be paid for, they are attacked by opponents and the press. They are judged as a package. In terms of how well the Labour party would hang together under Jeremy Corbyn, polling of the public can’t really tell us – a poll of Labour MPs perhaps!

Bottom line? There is no way of doing a simple poll that will give you a ready packaged answer as to how well or badly a potential party leader will do, and the things that Jeremy Corbyn’s detractors worry about are not things that are easily tested in a poll anyway. My own guess is that those who think Jeremy Corbyn would struggle electorally are correct, though it does depend on whether the Conservatives also pull themselves to shreds after the EU referendum. I am a little wary about arguments about parties not winning because they are too left or too right. While putting yourself broadly where most voters are is sensible enough, those voters themselves don’t necessarily see things as ideologically left and right and specific policies aren’t really that important in driving votes. However, broad perceptions of a party, its perceived competence and the public’s views on how suitable its leader is to be Prime Minister are incredibly important. It will be an extremely hard task for Labour to succeed if it is seem as taking up a risky and radical route, if it’s trying to rebuild a lack of public confidence by selling an approach that is radically different from what a normally risk-averse public are used to, if it is seen as being riven by internal dissent and splits, if their leadership patently doesn’t have the support of its own MPs. Maybe he’ll surprise us, but I wouldn’t count on it.

On other matters, the ComRes poll also had voting intention, their first online VI figures since the election (rather to my surprise. Their online polls for the Independent on Sunday dried up during the election campaign itself and I’d wrongly assumed they’d come to halt as part of ComRes moving their phone contract from the Independent to the Daily Mail. I’m pleased to see I was wrong, and the ComRes/Indy on Sunday relationship continues!). Topline figures are CON 40%, LAB 29%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 13%, GRN 4%, and ComRes have adopted the same socio-economic based turnout model for their online polls that they have started using in their telephone polls.


We have good four or five polls in the final Sunday papers before the election, here is what’s appeared so far:

Opinium in the Observer continue to show a very tight race, in this case with the Conservatives just ahead. Topline figures are CON 35%, LAB 34%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 13%, GRN 5%. Full tables are results are here. Note that while the Observer describe the poll as the last Opinium/Observer poll before the election that doesn’t mean it’s Opinium’s final call, they’ll hopefully have another poll in the week.

ComRes have a new telephone poll for the Independent on Sunday and Sunday Mirror. Their topline voting intention figures also have the race right down to the wire – CON 33%, LAB 33%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 13%, GRN 7%. Interestingly this is a telephone poll rather than an online one, in the past ComRes have tended to do online polling for their Sunday newspaper contract and phone polling for their daily newspaper contract. It suggests we may not be getting an online ComRes poll we can compare to the election result. Tabs are here.

Survation for the Mail on Sunday have Labour ahead. Their topline figures are CON 31%, LAB 34%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 17%, GRN 4%. Their poll also included a version of the question prompted with candidate names in respondents’ own constituencies (something MORI used to do in their face-to-face polls at election time and Angus Reid did in their election polls in 2010) – that produced figures of CON 29%, LAB 33%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 16%, GRN 6%. Tabs are here.

The YouGov poll for the Sunday Times continues to float around neck-and-neck. Today’s figures are CON 34%, LAB 33%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 13%, GRN 5%. YouGov and the Sunday Times also have a new (separate!) Scottish poll, that has topline figures of CON 17%, LAB 25%, LDEM 5%, SNP 49%.


-->

There are three GB voting intention polls in tomorrow’s papers – YouGov, Opinium and Survation. Topline figures for all three are below:

  • YouGov/Sunday Times – CON 32%, LAB 34%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 14%, GRN 6%
  • Opinium/Observer – CON 34%, LAB 33%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 13%, GRN 6% (tabs)
  • Survation/Mail on Sunday – CON 33%, LAB 30%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 18%, GRN 4% (tabs)

Two polls tonight – the regular Opinium/Observer and YouGov/Sunday Times weekend polls:

YouGov have topline figures of CON 33%, LAB 36%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 13%, GRN 5%
Opinium have topline figures of CON 36%, LAB 32%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 13%, GRN 5%

A three point Labour lead from YouGov, a four point Conservative lead from Opinium. They are each a nice corrective for anyone liable to get too excited about the other one, we are probably just seeing normal variation about that same old underlying position of Labour and Conservative being pretty much neck and neck.


There are two polls for tomorrow’s Sunday papers, YouGov in the Sunday Times and Opinium in the Observer. Neither suggests anything other than business as usual.

YouGov in the Sunday Times have topline figures of CON 34%, LAB 34%, LDEM 7%, UKIP 13%, GRN 6%. Opinium have topline figures of CON 36%, LAB 34%, LDEM 7%, UKIP 11%, GRN 6%.

Full update to come tomorrow (in the meantime, the Election Guide part of the site is now updated to take account of the full nomination lists in all GB constituencies with the exception of Sutton & Cheam and Carshalton & Wallington, where nominations still aren’t on the council website).