Today’s Sunday papers have the first polls conducted since the local elections, from Opinium and ComRes.

Opinium for the Observer have Westminster voting intentions of CON 22%(-4), LAB 28%(-5), LDEM 11%(+5), BREX 21%(+4), GRN 6%(+2), ChUK 4%(nc), UKIP 4%(nc). Fieldwork was between Wednesday and Friday, and changes are from late April. Full tables are here.

ComRes for BrexitExpress have voting intentions of CON 19%(-4), LAB 27%(-6), LDEM 14%(+7), BREX 20%(+6), GRN 5%(+2), ChUK 7%(-2), UKIP 3%(-2). Fieldwork appears to be all on Thursday, and changes are since mid-April.

Both polls have Labour and the Conservatives rapidly shedding support, with support growing for the Liberal Democrats and the Brexit party. I suspect we are seeing a combination of factors at work here, most obviously there is the continuing collapse in Conservative support over Brexit, a trend we’ve been seeing since the end of March, with support moving to parties with a clearer pro-Brexit policy. Originally that favoured UKIP too, now it is almost wholly going to the Brexit party.

Secondly there is the impact of the local elections and the Liberal Democrat successes there. For several years the Lib Dems seemed moribund and struggled to be noticed. The coverage of their gains at the local elections seems to have given them a solid boost in support, more so than the other anti-Brexit parties – for now at least, they seem to be very much alive & well again.

Third is the impact of the European elections. People are obviously more likely to vote for smaller parties in the European elections and in current circumstances obviously appear more willing to lend their vote to a different party in protest over Brexit. To some degree this will be influencing other voting intention figures as well, so I would treat Westminster voting intention figures with some scepticism in the run up to the European elections (and probably in the immediate aftermath as well, when those parties who do well will likely recieve a further boost in support).

In short, these are startling results – but we have seen startling results before (look at the polls at the height of SDP support, or just after the expenses scandal broke, or during Cleggmania). These are indeed very unusual results – the combined level of Con-Lab support in these polls are some of the very lowest we’ve seen, the Conservative share in the ComRes poll almost their lowest ever (I can find only a single Gallup poll with a lower figure, from back in 1995). What we cannot tell at the moment is whether this portends a serious readjustment of the parties, or whether things will return to more familar patterns once the European elections have passed, the Conservatives have a new leader and (assuming it ever happens) Brexit is in some way settled.

Both polls also had voting intention figures for the European Parliament elections

Opinium Euro VI – CON 11%, LAB 21%, LDEM 12%, BREX 34%, GRN 8%, ChUK 3%, UKIP 4%
ComRes Euro VI – CON 13%, LAB 25%, LDEM 14%, BREX 27%, GRN 8%, ChUK 6%, UKIP 3%

Both have the Brexit party ahead, though they are doing considerably better with Opinium than with ComRes. In both cases the Liberal Democrats have recieved a post-local election boost, putting them above the Conservatives in European voting intentions.


760 Responses to “New Opinium and ComRes polls”

1 12 13 14 15 16
  1. Allan Christie,
    ” the fact remains most Labour constituency’s actually did vote to leave the morphing and integration project.

    Over to you ol Corby.”

    Indeed, and Corby has succeeded in bringing a lot of new people to labour. I dont know if they are this group which would otherwise be turning away from both lab and con, and turning to UKIP.

    Matt126,
    “Regarding CHUK it was a reaction to perceived extremes on both sides of the political debate and was designed to create a centrist voice.”

    surely, the people concerned formed Chuk because they could not tand the position of their current partis any longer, and the option would have been just to become independents. As a group they have more clout than separately, even if they never win an election in the name of the group.

    They have succeeded in applying more pressure for their cause, even if the result is a surge for the libs.

    Edge of Reason,
    ” witnessing the beginning of the end of a major party is pretty exciting”

    Indeed, and it could still be either lab or con, even more exciting.

  2. Jim Jam,
    “There will come a point when even if the proposition can’t pass that Labour will move to outright advocacy in order to position themselves for the next GE”

    Couple of difficulties with this plan. As things stand, I dont see why con would agree an election before 2022, unless they have concluded they want to go into opposition and are prepared to acept a lot of losses. They might like to go into opposition, but they would not like to cement in big losses to libs and possibly BxP. That would be very bad long term. So no election before 2022.

    The second is that a better option for con than another referendum is revoke. Revoke does not mean brexit is off, merely a delay a bit longer than the current installment plan which allows the EU to set the timetable. If the Uk did revoke and then give notice again in two years, it could still be out 6 months later (no need for negotiations)…coming back on track pretty much with the current government plan.

    So the conservative strategy for the 2022 election could perfectly well be to revoke now, create a settled plan for leave which it can support, and come to the next election with that.

    Or bite the bullet and come out for full remain -after being the party which revoked- and thus take the remain wind out of lab and lib sails. Might not work, but would probably save them from a meltdown and set them up for a comeback later.

  3. @ Danny

    “So the conservative strategy for the 2022 election could perfectly well be to revoke now, create a settled plan for leave which it can support, and come to the next election with that.

    Or bite the bullet and come out for full remain -after being the party which revoked- and thus take the remain wind out of lab and lib sails. Might not work, but would probably save them from a meltdown and set them up for a comeback later.”

    Yes when Philip Lee or Dominic Grieve are crowned Tory Leader, that’s a very likely strategy.

  4. @Pete B

    how about a degree is worth 2 votes and a Masters or PhD an extra 2?

    Having a qualification in more than one language 2 more points?

    Bringing up a child to the age of 18 who has left education with qualifications 1 point each

    working more than 10 years in public service of any kind 1 pt…..

    Seriously once you’ve taken away one person one vote the state has no legitimacy, only power; democracy exists on the principle of equality of citizenship rights

  5. @EoR – “I was curious what you think to my point too – that if the result were along the lines of current polls then it would be spun (with confidence and belief) three different ways and we’d be no further forward than we were?”

    EP elections offer the classic NTNOCN ‘Second Place in a By Election’ opportunity where everyone is a winner, for different reasons. I expect you are correct.

    However, looking at that BMG Wales Westminster poll offers another bit of evidence that the interpretation should be the march of the hardcore remainers.

    UKIP/BXP at standstill, Lab down but within MoE, Con likewise, and LD/GReen/Chuk up a combined 7%. Strikingly,. it’s the Lib Dems making the huge leaps, and this should be doubly worrying for Con.

    I’m not surprised that the brexit talks have collapsed this morning. The dawning realisation may well have fallen on the Labour Party leadership that while losing leavers will hurt them, losing remainers will be terminal for their prospects.

  6. oldnat,
    “[1] My own theory is that more men than women are opinionated souls, who are always more ready to commit (except to their female partner, of course)”

    Perhaps the problem there is also being too ready to commit, and then regretting it.

    Richard,
    “Do the polling companies still weight undecideds to prior vote? If they do, and its a situation like we have now where people are moving en mass to different parties that would then be another reason for error?”

    Polling mathematically seems to be taking the result of the last election, and then applying corections for small changes by the electorate. This must become increasingly inaccurate as the size of the changes grow.

    On the other hand, the basic idea is to pick 2000 random voters who seem to be repesentative of the population, and see what they say. The corrections are intended to improve accuracy from just a random sample. So the baseline accuacy is what you would get from a purely random small sample. Although if corrections from past elections are really badly off, there is the possibility they make the prediction worse, not better.

    Triguy,
    “Maybe I was being a little too conservative in my assessment.”

    Certainly the Trevors have been desperately trying to make a case why voters should not support a lib landslide, so I guess they believed it was possible.

    Jonesinbangor,
    “Yes when Philip Lee or Dominic Grieve are crowned Tory Leader, that’s a very likely strategy.”

    Thats why May has to be the one to revoke before she leaves. Once it is done, a leaver can say they would not have done it, but since it has been, better to get their case sorted before re applying.

    The tories always wanted to be in the EU but leading the cause to leave, and you cannot do that if you are out.

  7. REGGIESIDE

    “Big chap with a small moustache and the sort of eye that can open an oyster at 60 paces.”

    That’s him. Great post!

  8. Even for someone whose reputation has risen so low, the sound of May’s premiership crashing down is deafening.

    Everything she has done in No 10 has been an abject failure. Brexit will define her for evermore, but her stated objective of creating a country for the ‘left behinds’, left her behind long ago, and her publicly unstated mission of maintaining the unity of her beloved Conservative Party now stands as some kind of bad joke at her expense. Her leadership has been an unmitigated disaster.

    Probably the most nauseating aspect of this is to witness the men carping from the sidelines at her misfortune. Nick Timothy, for one, shouts loudly about how May’s failure was because she stopped listening to him.

    This, from the architect of the calamitous 2017 GE campaign? Without any apparent sense of humility, he maintains that the Brexit fiasco stems from May’s tacking away from the ridiculously badly conceived hard line message at the Lancaster House speech, crafted by none other than himself, without a shred of self critical insight that it was the setting up of such an impossible level of expectations that created Conservative problems in the first place.

    Timothy is one of those contemptible men that dominate politics, who are immune from any self criticism and even when faced with the blindingly obvious, cannot bear to accept and apportion any blame for themselves.

    He was, of course, appointed by May, which represents yet another calamitous failure of judgement on her part.

  9. @Danny

    “Thats why May has to be the one to revoke before she leaves. Once it is done, a leaver can say they would not have done it, but since it has been, better to get their case sorted before re applying.

    The tories always wanted to be in the EU but leading the cause to leave, and you cannot do that if you are out.”

    If that’s your hope for Federalists’ salvation from Agent Remain May, it is a pretty forlorn one.

    The winch crew are already gathering outside No 10. Rudd, Hammond are trying to board up the front door, Grieve and Greening have sneaked in the back to help.

  10. I know my wife followed this advice. Repeatedly she has told me that she loves me. Occasionally, she shines a torch light in one ear and makes rabbit shapes on the opposite wall. My first great attraction to her was that I was breathing.

    “Chumps always make the best husbands. If you marry, Sally, grab a chump. Tap his forehead first and, if it rings solid, don’t hesitate. All the unhappy marriages come from the husbands having brains. What good are brains to a man? They only unsettle him.”

  11. Danny’s suggestion conjured an image of a Tory party, once we’re out, waking from a dream and finding themselves standing naked in the middle of Trafalgar Square on an icy January morning.

  12. Alec,
    “Everything she has done in No 10 has been an abject failure.”

    Game isnt over yet. But turning around a situation where the governing party had promised to leave the EU on the back of a referendum confirming this, to a position where we dont leave, is a pretty remarkable success.

  13. Having just looked at the latest YouGov, I have to say that I did not expect to see LD in 2nd place. Brexit seem to be running away with it at the expense of both Con and Lab. I wonder if this poll may make some Greens and any remaining CHUKers swing behind LD.

  14. Steamdrivenandy,

    …with one angry mob coming in from the left and another coming in from the right.

  15. Danny – I was talking about the 2022 GE not necessarily an early one.

  16. @ Alec

    Don’t be too hard on Nick Timothy, it’s not just his fault. May was also set up by two other prize chumps of the male orientation, David C and George O.

    On the latest YouGov. Shame that in all the details they didn’t split the vote by EP constituency (again). But Election Maps seem to have done the MEP calculation – not sure if they have extra into:

    Projected Seats:

    BXP: 33 (+33)
    LDM: 10 (+9)
    LAB: 10 (-10)
    GRN: 8 (+5)
    CON: 5 (-14)
    SNP: 3 (+1)
    PLC: 1 (=)
    UKIP: 0 (-24)

    Changes w/ 2014.

    I suspect (but could well be wrong) that this probably represents the upper end of the range for BXP expectations, and it would certainly be a very impressive result for them if it did go this way. The other end of the range is probably ‘maintaining’ the 24 seats UKIP got last time.

    But, similarly to the Westminster VI where YouGov is more Con friendly, there are hints in the EP VIs that YouGov is more BXP friendly than other pollsters. YouGov and Opinium are the only ones to so far give BXP 34-35%, all others have been around the high twenties. We can’t tell which is right at this point of course, but it will be interesting to see which company gets closer to the final result. I think some of the pollsters will end up with egg on their face again, but which ones?

  17. PS Also note YouGov are the only pollster to give Lab below 20% so far, with recent numbers of 15 and 16%, a long way from the 20+ from all others. Another figure to watch I think. My gut feeling is that YouGov may be right on that one, but it’s purely that, just a gut feeling.

  18. You gov seem to be out on their own again.

    I thought at the weekend that their lower figures for Labour in the EU elections had been proved right when the other polling companies started to show a similar drop. However Yougov have now dropped Labour further and showing Brexit Party at its highest with any polling organisation I think.

    To some extent their reputation is at stake here in much the same way as ICM in 2017 but big kudos if they turn out to be right.

    Also I’m very very surprised when looking at the tables that a huge sample of 7,000 is not split into voting regions- this was the closest we were going to get to a constituency poll for the EU elections but while previously we did have the sub sample we don’t this time.

    @ AW (In case you still read comments)

    This is probably just nit picking but on page 4 of the tables UKIP “Westiminster VI” has been included twice in the columns- I assume this has no effect on the overall calculations?

    Tables are here:
    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/td77pezs07/Results_190516_EP_VI_w.pdf

  19. @ Triguy- that was a virtual snap! on your posts!

  20. @Alec:

    I know it is an article of faith to many that May set impossibly tough red lines, but surely if you leave the EU then leaving the Customs Union and Single Market follow? As the EU would see any half way house as
    cherrypicking, why leave and cede such extensive jurisdiction back to the EU?

    Surely, if you are no longer part of the EU’s decision-making, the EU should not be making decisions for you. The EEA is a very odd thing in the world of international relations. But you seem to think it it was an extreme action to rule it out.

    I can understand that a staunch Remainer might think that the advantages of EU membership are so great that no -voting membership is worth it. But it is hardly an extreme form of leaving the EU to decline a non-voting alternative.

  21. Joseph1832,
    “I can understand that a staunch Remainer might think that the advantages of EU membership are so great that no -voting membership is worth it. ”

    The government seems to think it is worth it. Are you agreeing my argument they are remainers? Or are you arguing that in reality many leavers have always been remainers for all practical purposes?

  22. Yougov EU poll this morning, Labour now third behind LD’s:

    Brexit Party – 35%
    Lib Dem – 16%
    Lab – 15%
    Green – 10%
    Con – 9%
    Change UK – 5%
    UKIP – 3%
    Other – 7%
    (Fieldwork 12-16 May)

    Also Westminster poll:

    CON: 25% (-4)
    LAB: 25% (-4)
    BREX: 18% (+3)
    LDEM: 16% (+3)
    GRN: 7% (+2)
    CHUK: 2% (-1)
    UKIP: 2% (-)

    via
    @YouGov
    , 13 – 14 May
    Chgs. w/ 30 Apr

  23. Regarding Ref2 I think the point I was trying to make, not very well evidently, is that I don;t buy the mystical polotical powers ascribed to it over and above other mechanisms that lead to remain.

    That Government or Parliament can employ various mechanisms that might or inevitably do lead to remaining in the EU is not the point. Legally they can. The referendum was advisory. No legal obligation is broken by failing to act on its advice, merely a political promise. Polotical promises are broken, and political prices paid, quite frequently.

    What I don’t buy is that the political price is mitigated by Ref2 as the mechanism. The same political promise (that Ref1 would be implemented) is broken regardless of the mechanism. The same people (those who would wish to see Ref1 implemented) are frustrated.

    Those within that group who are susceptible to a “betrayal by a remainer parliament” narrative will be susceptible to it because of the outcome, not the jusification.

    I can write the BXP argument now. A remainer Parliament was never going to leave however we voted. We must therefore elect a leaver Parliament. It runs equally however we remain.

    If you don’t buy the magic bullet theory for a second ref over other mechanisms to call a halt to this, then it has nothing to commend it. It’s still a fundamentally bad way to settle complex questions. It will almost cerainly produce an even more divisive campaign than last time. And it’s uncertain in outcome to boot.

    I was for some time a “seek a compromise leave that reflects that 52 beats 48 but only just” supporter. I’m a late convert to the “no, there’s not one avaialble, so let’s revert to what I actually want” camp. Those who were always seeking to prevent leaving bought Ref2 when it was the only game in town, the only possible (and even then long shot) mechanism that might lead to remain. It isn’t any more. Indeeed, with this Parliament at least, it looks more like the only possible mechanism that might lead to leave. Why do remainers love it so much?

  24. Helluva scoop from Peston here:
    https://www.itv.com/news/2019-05-17/revealed-the-governments-planned-brexit-deal-with-labour/

    Basically, May wants a set of indicative votes next week. 5 questions, paraphrasing slightly

    1. Do you want to leave with no deal?
    2. Do you want Brexit to go on forever?
    3. Would you NOT like our future trading relationship with the EU to be made out of unicorns with chocolate sprinkles on top?
    4. Do you want to admit to wanting a second referendum right now?
    5. Do you NOT want lots of lovely extra bits to make poor people happy?

    If you have answered all NOs, congratulations, you have passed Theressa May’s withdrawal agreement.

  25. Danny,
    “Or bite the bullet and come out for full remain -after being the party which revoked- and thus take the remain wind out of lab and lib sails. Might not work, but would probably save them from a meltdown and set them up for a comeback later.”

    That would be a very risky strategy for the Tories, because their membership and support base would be absolutely furious about it, while most Remain voters come from demographics that wouldn’t vote Tory in a million years.

    A scenario like that is probably Nigel Farage’s wet dream.

  26. ALEC

    Get ready (again) for more Malthouse proposals.

  27. Big turn to the right coming up as the Brexit Party hits its stride. Lots of stuff from the Trump campaign – it will be popular.

  28. @Jim Jam
    ‘The main reason for delay ultimately, though, is HOC arithmetic as, stating the obvious, there has to be 4 (since TIggers) more Tory MPs willing to back a ref 2 than Labour ones rebel against it and this has been 20-30 short for many months.’

    I know your role is to expound Labour Policy rather than to defend it. However, I don’t get the thinking behind this. There is not a majority for anything in the commons so refusing to back anything without a majority simply means having no policy that the House of Commons would consider.

    I also know that Labour want a general election and appear to believe that a) they can get one b) they will win c) they will be able to negotiate a more favourable deal and d) they will then be able to get this through the commons. It is conceivable that the probability of all this is more than `1% but to most people this combination appears almost vanishingly unlikely.

    As a result Labour’s majority of remain supporters are deserting it for the LibDems and the Greens. Not all of them will come back and the Greens in particular will start to be seen as a viable left-wing option (Lib Dems still suffer from the Rose Garden, IMHO). All of this is pretty disastrous for Labour.

    As far as I can see from the polls the overwhelming feeling in the country is ‘get this thing over and done with’. The only realistic deal at the moment is the May deal. Why not simply say that labour will support the May deal subject to the legally binding caveat that it is put to the people ‘May deal’ or revoke. May deal would not bring the thing to an end but would at least clarify something while revoke gets us out of the quagmire and in a position to start addressing the issues that really face the country.

  29. “Why not simply say that labour will support the May deal subject to the legally binding caveat that it is put to the people ‘May deal’ or revoke. May deal would not bring the thing to an end but would at least clarify something while revoke gets us out of the quagmire and in a position to start addressing the issues that really face the country.“

    ——

    Because the May deal might be a disaster for Labour. May is trying to do a deal intended to lock out Labour plans in the future.

    Labour’s priority is to stop the May deal.

    (Another other problem, is the EU are also trying to do things that would lock out not just Labour’s plans but also those of other councils in other countries adopting municipal socialism rather successfully to the benefit of their voters).

  30. Pete B,

    *”There have been one or two posts recently complaining about the ignorance of voters (R&D) and talking of ‘plebs’ (Statgeek). I may have missed others. Though I deplore the attitude, how about this as a solution?

    It would be politically impossible to take away universal suffrage, so how about giving everybody one vote, but others could be earned. Others might have different ideas how this could be done, but here’s my suggestion:

    1 extra vote for passing a simple political test as R&D suggested.
    1 extra vote if you are in full employment or have retired after having made (say) 40 years’ NI contributions.
    1 extra vote for owning non-mortgaged property (because you own a bit of the country).”*

    This is one of those ideas that pops up now and then. The fundamental problem with it is the same as that of the Jim Crow laws in the States – such rules would inevitably be abused by whoever makes them in order to marginalise groups that don’t vote for them (and since said groups are then locked out of the democratic system, they don’t have much of a voice to get the rules changed back). For example, a political test that rewards the “right” opinions, employment or property qualifications that poorer voters won’t meet…

    In the nineteenth century most European electoral systems did include some sort of property qualifications, e.g. the three-class franchise used in Prussia from 1848-1919, which divided voters into three groups based on wealth and apportioned each one a third of representation in the Landtag – result being that the smaller upper and middle classes had disproportionately more power than the large working class. All of them were swept away because the working classes eventually turned on the whole system rather than accept only token representation.

  31. @Charles

    UK Brexit team seeks to exploit EU concern over Corbyn state aid plans

    Exclusive: Chequers plan ties future governments to EU rules on subsidies, negotiators say

    Daniel Boffey in Brussels

    Thu 2 Aug 2018 16.15 BST Last modified on Thu 2 Aug 2018 18.20 BST

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/02/uk-brexit-team-seeks-to-exploit-eu-concern-on-corbyns-state-aid-plans

    “Britain’s Brexit negotiators have tapped into growing concerns in Brussels over Jeremy Corbyn’s plans for the British economy, by stressing in recent talks that the Chequers plan would tie any future prime minister to the EU’s evolving rules on state aid in perpetuity, according to EU sources.

    The anger of Conservative party Brexiters has focused on the plan to maintain EU regulations in relation to goods, but the UK has privately emphasised its unprecedented offer to bind future British governments’ hands on state spending as part of a deal.

    British negotiators have sought to exploit concerns within EU institutions that a Labour government led by Corbyn would re-establish state subsidies, giving parts of the UK’s manufacturing base in particular a competitive advantage.

    The Labour leader made a full-throated pitch to blue-collar voters in a speech two weeks ago by pledging to use state aid powers “to the full” to support the sector after Brexit.

    The potential re-nationalisation of key sectors of the economy could also alter the trend towards privatisation on the continent, which has been a consequence of the European commission’s objective of greater economic convergence and the creation of a true single market.

    Sources close to the negotiations said that in the recent round in Brussels the UK stressed Theresa May’s significant offer on state aid, unseen in any previous free trade agreement.

    London has gone beyond the EU’s hopes of a non-regression pledge by including a commitment in its white paper to follow EU state aid laws to the letter as they change over time.”

  32. Charles – there is a strong argument that earlier unequivocal advocacy of Ref 2 by Labour and arguing for it would have moved the debate in that direction which is possible but not certain and we can’t test anyhow.

    There are over 50 Lab MPs who would have opposed a second ref if pushed earlier who would now be willing to support ‘as a last resort’ and a few more may join these soon, along with those who have favoured for a long time.

    I think the giant opinion poll that is the EP Election could persuade enough, just about, along with a few more Tory MPs to back a confirmatory ref amendment to the WAB.

  33. @CANADA

    Another difficulty with extrapolating the local election results is that with even Labour not standing in about a quarter of the seats then where people did have the option of voting for a Green or a LibDem candidate then we don’t know who else they were choosing between, whereas in the euros everyone will have a choice between every party that’s active in their region.

  34. Compete delusion here about another referendum. There is no way that the new Tory Leader will agree to that. The plan will be to go to Brussels and get the May deal made palatable.

    Probably try and flush out Labour whilst this goes on, if they’re silly enough to take the bait then a General Election between Captain Brexit Johnson and People’s Vote Corbyn is on the cards.

  35. @JIB

    The plan will be to go to Brussels and get the May deal made palatable.

    “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results”. Albert Einstein

  36. @EOTW

    Indeed, and especially with the same testers in place (i.e. the same politicians). Perhaps May and Co are hoping that the EU elections will shift the balance of EU negotiations, while the EU are hoping that a May replacement will precipitate a different approach, or that opposition parties will force a change of approach.

  37. New YG has an excellent write-up showing the “flow” of CON and LAB voters (ie of those who voted for them in 2017 who are they voting for in EP)

    Approx 1/2 way down, nice pretty infographics. The “trend” continues and the LAB outflow to LDEM puts on another 1%!

    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/05/16/labour-and-tories-lose-majority-support-brexit-pro?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=website_article&utm_campaign=European_VI_16_may_2019

    Also has link to the tabs.

    As others have pointed out, it is disappointing not to see the x-breaks split by EP constituency. n=7,192 so the x-breaks would have had decent size samples :(

  38. May is trying to blame Labour, and specifically their second referendum supporters for the talks breakdown – “….there isn’t a common position in Labour about whether they want to deliver Brexit or hold a second referendum, which could reverse it”.

    This is bizarre, and highly odd, for a democrat.

    In effect, she is admitting that a second public vote could end Brexit, but that she desires to carry on, even in the knowledge that Brexit may now be against the wishes of the people.

  39. All, but the Tory and ChUK leaflets have now arrived.

    The Green is quite professional, and clearly targeting segments rather than a broad brush. Yet, there are are cross-sets, so I guess they will be near 10% in the NW.

    One of the things that surprised me that UNISON didn’t vote for the boycotting the distribution of Robinson’s leaflets – as the leaflet attacks some of their members, they would have had a legal excuse.

  40. @Jonesinbangor

    “Probably try and flush out Labour whilst this goes on, if they’re silly enough to take the bait then a General Election between Captain Brexit Johnson and People’s Vote Corbyn is on the cards.”

    Labour need Starmer or Watson at the helm if they are to pull off a victory under that scenario. Even then with Farage in play success would not be guaranteed with the Northern Leave seats potentially swinging away from Labour.

    I would also hazard a guess that some sort of electoral pact between Captain Brexit and Farage is more likely than not making the situation worse for Labour.

    I could of course be completely wrong and Corbyn might romp home but a fear he has sat on the fence for far too long and is now glued to it.

  41. YouGov Westminster into Electoral Calculus;

    In Order of Seats;

    CON 275 (-43), LAB 267 (+5), SNP 56 (+21), LIB 22 (+10), Brexit 7(+7), PlaidC 4 (0), Green 1 (0), UKIP 0 (0), ChUK 0 (0), N.Ire 18

    Leave; Con/BXP/DUP = 293
    Remain; Lab/SNP/LibDem/PC/Grn = 350

    Peter.

  42. @ ANDREW111 – “The interesting thing is that some of the Leavers i know are voting Lib Dem (and even putting letters in envelopes for them)”

    We can always check polls to see how your small sample compares to a large weighted sample (see the YG poll as it very nicely breaks the info out).

    So 3% of Leavers ’16 are LDEM VI for EP
    and 4% of Remain’16 are BXP VI for EP

    So sure we both have some from each others side, not a lot and fairly small but certainly some.

    @ OLDNAT – :-) :-)

    Always hilarious to see the sn0wflakes get all upset. Happy to dish it out but can’t take it themselves ;)

    I was obviously joking with the word “Utopian” as once you start paying for yourselves then probably be more Venezuela, but without the nice weather and with a lot less oil reserves than they have.

    What I do like about your posts though is you clearly break the “stereotype” of a sn0wflake. They clearly aren’t all millennials ;)

  43. Statgeek
    “It sounds like you want folk that have been unlucky in life financially to get less political voting power than others. Those with patchy work records, or council house owners, or the young.”

    Thanks for the feedback, you make some good points. Just for the record I don’t particularly ‘want’ that system, I was just floating a possible solution to the posts complaining or implying that a lot of voters are too stupid or uninterested in politics to make a valid judgement. There could be other ways to qualify for extra votes such as having a degree or being under 30 (because you’ll have to live with the consequences longer). Neither of those would give me an extra vote.

    Thanks to the others who replied as well. Good points from all.
    ——————————————
    Danny
    Yes the number expecting war in Europe was rather worrying. I’d have to go in the Home Guard these days. I’d like to be Sergeant Wilson, but more likely Fraser.
    ———————————
    Carfrew
    “London has gone beyond the EU’s hopes of a non-regression pledge by including a commitment in its white paper to follow EU state aid laws to the letter as they change over time.”

    Is that treason?
    ————————————-
    EOTW

    So May is insane, not just incompetent.

  44. Electoral Calculus Scotland with YouGov crossbreaks;

    Con 2 (-11), LAB 1 (-6), LibDem 3 (-1), UKIP 0 (0), Green 0 (0), SNP 53 (+18), ChUK 0 (0), Brexit 0 (0).

    Compared it yesterdays Ipsos, a rise in BXP in Scotland seems to cost the SNP two gains while saving two Con seats…

    Peter.

  45. @Jim Jam

    Many thanks for your reply. You have a difficult role on this site IMHO and play it with integrity.

  46. @ Lazlo

    I didn’t know you were North West- the ballot paper runs to two pages so you can’t just be missing those two! We’ve just had far/farish right and Labour no EDL yet either.

    Has anyone received a Tory leaflet yet? I wondered if the associations were so cross that they are on strike?

    Interesting article about the Swindon count. I’m not sure it is the best journalism though or the locals haven’t got around to understanding yet. Seems very obvious to me from the returning officer quote- I made a mistake, I can’t legally fix my mistake, I can’t take it up with the courts and it is up to someone to take a court case to get the count re-run (which no doubt would be unopposed by her office).

  47. While our news channels are quite rightly focussed on the EU election next week and the deep hole into which the Tory party have plunged the UK, other issues are getting little attention.

    Oil production in the Middle East is threatened by possible wars stirred up by maniacs such as Trump; bad moorland fires are raging again:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-48301591

    And on one issue over which the Scottish Government has held onto power in the face of the UK Tory Government encroachment, the road signs on the new Aberdeen Western Peripheral Route have been approved by a special enquiry.

    Which translated for a wider audience means that the SG has refused to bow to Trump demands for signposting to his Menie golf course and vanity development. Much better than the sickening sight of Theresa May kow-towing to Trump, forcing HMQ to entertain him, and the Home Office wasting more UK millions protecting the rogue.

  48. @ TRIGGUY – “I suspect (but could well be wrong) that this probably represents the upper end of the range for BXP expectations”

    For EPs BXP must be getting close to “tribal” floor limit on CON-Leave (ie that cupboard is surely almost bare?)

    LAB-Leave is a small pot to begin with but they are more “loyal” than CON-Leave. BXP have nibbled more than I expected already.

    So it is difficult to see BXP going above 35%ish even in EPs. Their issue (as YG write-up shows) is that many of the CON’17 votes are “on loan” to BXP for EP but not a GE

    BXP’s challenge is to make the EP % “stick” post EPs. When Boris or similar replace May then that “loan” probably ends or at least makes it less likely BXP can make the EP % stick.

    They’ll certainly need some domestic policies and hope to be seen by voters as a credible contender in a GE (rather than just a CON vote splitter). Relates to the “tipping point” analysis which is as much cognitive as number crunching.

    However, some specific YG issues as well perhaps?

    The Certain to Vote (and hence filter from raw data to headline) looks wildly optimistic for BXP and other “protest parties”. It could be that enough Leave and Remain are genuinely so politically ENRAGED that turnout will be well above typical EP levels but I doubt BXP will get 85% turnout in EP (of those that would also vote for them in GE).

    BXP are doing very well with the older age groups and that will be relying on age demographic filters (I assume most companies are using 2017 GE turnout by age group)?

    Hopefully AW or someone like ROGER MEXICO can give us a run down of the different methodologies being used by the different polling companies for EP VI.

    YG’s fieldwork is more recent than the last batch but they’ve been “skewed” away from the average for quite a while. It would be great to hear if this is a methodology issue, sample variance or just a string of MoE variance that just happens to lean the same way (or a bit of all 3!)

  49. Everyone,
    I look to your wisdom, local knowledge, polling, polling analysis, and if clearly stated anecdotal knowledge, instinct, intuition.
    1. What do you sense on turnout compared to locals a few weeks ago? To Euro Elections in 2014 ? To GE ? To 2016 referendum?
    Are we back to 2014 Euro Election turnout ? Is it going to be significantly higher ?

    2. Are the polls you seeing this week broadly in line with what your research is showing ?

    3. If there was a GE within say a few months of the EuroPoll, would people be far more likely to stick with Europoll VI than if we run until 2022 under Fixed Term Parliament Bill.

    4. Basically if accurate polls at the moment, then will people stick with BP, LibDem, Green if the election is very much sooner rather than later.
    Ukip vote in 2014 on low turnout was lower than in 2015 on much higher turnout but a few months after 2014 vote Ukip were on 22% and won two by-elections for Westminster. It fizzled over Christmas and the Winter before 2015 vote.

    5. The ruling parties Conservative and Labour would do well to commission research on this because a very early election could be a disaster for them but the longer game could maximise probability of return to broadly two party choice polarisation normality.

    6. We will never know but an election in say September 2014 could have destroyed LibDems with total wipeout (best comeback since Lazarus in 2019), reduced the Tory vote by a third, and made Ukip the significant third party, and given Labour Ed Miliband as PM (with presumably no place for anti-Semitism in the party). But the winter 2014 to 2015 was a gamechanger in VI. It could be again even if Brexit Party and LibDems get 70% of the vote in the Europoll I advise Conservative and Labour to poll extensively on this topic. They may need to avoid collapsing Parliament before 2020 locals where Brexit Party and LibDems may find that VI does not become a habit in different elections.

1 12 13 14 15 16