At the weekend we had a positive glut of national polls. In the last couple of days they’ve been joined by London and Wales polls from YouGov.

The Welsh poll for ITV Wales has Westminster voting intentions of CON 28%(-1), LAB 29%(+4), LDEM 12%(-4), BREX 15%(+1), Plaid 12%(nc). Changes are since mid-October, and show Labour retaking the lead over the Conservatives in Wales. While recent movement is in Labour’s favour, compared to the result at the 2017 general election these would be terrible figures for Labour. Compared to the shares of the vote in the 2017 general election in Wales the Conservatives are down six points, Labour are down twenty(!) points, the Liberal Democrats up seven, Plaid up two. So while the Tories are losing support, the slump in Labour support would likely result in many Labour seats falling to the Tories. As ever, Roger Awan-Scully has more in depth analysis here.

The YouGov London poll for Queen Mary University London shows similar dynamics in the capital. Current vote shares are CON 29%, LAB 39%, LDEM 19%, BREX 6%. Compared to the 2017 general election results in London that represents a drop of four points for the Conservatives, a drop of sixteen for Labour, an increase of ten for the Liberal Democrats. While the Conservatives are losing support, the large scale movement of voters from Labour to the Liberal Democrats may well win them a significant number of seats. It is a reminder that while people have been looking towards the more “leave-inclined” Labour seats in the North and Midlands for potential Tory gains, it is perfectly possible for them to win in more remain-inclined seats where they are losing support, so long as Labour are losing more support.

How it actually translates in terms of seats is difficult to know (especially in a city as politically diverse as London, where the dynamics of the race may be radically different in the inner-city seats, the leafy Lib Dem-Con marginals of South-West London and the more typical Con-Lab marginals in North London). Over the last few days we’ve also seen a drip-drip of constituency polls by Survation, primarily conducted for the Liberal Democrat party. So far they have published polls for South East Cambridgeshire (showing an 11 point Tory lead, a Con>LD swing of 11.5%), North East Somerset(a 16 point Tory lead, a Con>LD swing of 15%), Portsmouth South(a 3 point Lib Dem lead, a Lab>LD swing of 15%) and Cambridge (a 9 point Lib Dem lead, a Lab>LD swing of 16%). Obviously they all show the Lib Dems doing well, but I would urge some caution in their interpretation, as I would with any political party commissioned polls. It is impossible to know how many constituency opinion polls the Liberal Democrats have commissioned, so it’s perfectly possible that they have commissioned another ten, twenty, thirty constituency polls in seats where they weren’t doing quite so well, and choose never to publish them. We’re probably only seeing the constituency polls that the Lib Dems want us to see.

Finally, while I am not going to update with every individual national poll – the best way of looking at voting intention polls will always be to look at the broad trend – I’ll just update with those we’ve seen since my last post.

There is a new ICM poll for Reuters, the first of a regular series for the election campaign. Topline figures are CON 38%, LAB 31%, LDEM 15%, BREX 9%, GRN 3%. Fieldwork was over the weekend. It’s been almost a month since the last ICM poll (their regular voting intention polls seemed to peter out somewhat after Martin Boon left to set up Deltapoll), so changes since their last poll aren’t really relevant. This poll got some attention from the single digit Labour lead, though given the paucity of ICM polling in the last year we can’t really tell if that’s movement, or just ICM’s methodology.

Secondly there was a new YouGov poll for the Times. Topline figures were CON 38%(-1), LAB 25%(-2), LDEM 16%(nc), BREX 11%(+4), GRN 5%(+1). Fieldwork was over the weekend and changes are from last Thurs-Fri. The YouGov/Sunday Times poll at the weekend had some sharp movements: a six point increase for Labour, a six point drop for the Brexit party. Today’s poll partially reverses those changes, suggesting it was probably something of an outlier… though that means Labour are still four points up on the YouGov/Times poll last week.


529 Responses to “London, Welsh and Constituency polling”

1 8 9 10 11
  1. EP and JJ As part of my (ineffective) efforts to understand exactly how polling companies are doing MRP (they don’t even agree what the M stands for), I looked up YouGov’s explanation. They said that part of the technique involved using people from outside to boost the numbers in the constituency Their justification was that people with similar characteristics generally vote similarly irrespective of where they live, Hence I assume that if you don’t have enough people with a given constellation of characteristics to properly represent the constituency you parachute some in from outside. I am wondering if the people they use for this purpose tend to share the same area codes as the target constituency and that this might explain YouGov’s odd behaviour.

    Personally I am deeply distrustful of MRP, acknowledge it seems to work, but feel that in an election where the determining characteristics may have to do with such things as local party organisation or beliefs about who is going to win, it may still mislead,

  2. What is interesting about Nick Conrad is that he has been approved and then selected in a safe seat. Usually dodgy candidates are in unwinnable seats (Like Sheffield Hallam in 2017) where vetting is less rigorous.

    Again little traction although after Cairns if 2 or 3 more examples of Tory misogyny manifest it might have some effect.

  3. @carfrew (and @Sam) – “Indeed, we have discussed before the Tory plan to frustrate Labour by locking us into EU State Aid rules on Brexit, even where Tories didn’t need to.”

    I have just noticed this from your 12.02pm and it is something that interests me.

    While the state aid rules are complicated, and I haven’t completed a detailed trawl through Labour’s manifesto plans, those that I am aware of don’t seem to be affected by states aid rules, as far as I can tell.

    While the Conservatives are no doubt happy for the impression to be given that they are willing to adhere to state aid rules after Brexit as a means to spike Labour’s guns, I don’t think this stacks up as a viable reason.

    I rather suspect that the real reason is that they want to retain a reason to continue a far more laissez faire approach to industry, and they are looking ahead to the time when a Conservative government will appreciate having an excuse not to intervene in an industrial arena.

    Of course, the other reason is that they need to accept this in order to get a trade deal, but I don’t think there are many implications for Labour policies from state aid rules.

  4. @charles

    Part of the nice thing about YouGov’s MRP in 2017 was that rather than saying “X wins Y” it gave the actual probability estimates, both for constituencies and the result as a whole, which gave a better impression of how much effect purely local factors might have … and also made clear that it wasn’t just some magic predictor but had quite a large margin of error on it.

    Most of the others so far just seem to give the central case for each constituency, which can seriously overestimate the scale of results in some situations if there are lots around the 51% mark, as well as being perhaps oversensitive to small changes in polling.

  5. I really find the involvement of Plaid in the Remain pact all but inexplicable.

    They obviously cannot assist in the English seats, where a rapprochement between LDs and Greens perhaps makes some sense. In Wales, they are standing aside in Vale of Glamorgan for the Greens, where neither has been anywhere in the past. And the LDs are very unlikely to benefit in Montgomeryshire and Cardiff Central.

    Which leaves Brecon and Radnorshire, where the LDs are struggling to hold the seat, and Plaid normally poll less than 2000, If TBP step aside, the LDs are probably toast anyway.

    So the LDs are supporting a party that seeks to break up the Union, and are denying their supporters to vote in three constituencies, whilst claiming to be a national party.

    On the off chance of it making a difference in B & R.

    Try explaining that to your Scottish voters, where the main opponent is the SNP. And to everyone in England who values the Union.

    Plaid, meanwhile, get a free run in seven seats, where the LDs will voluntarily consign themselves to history.

    The core problem with this plan is that parties will only agree to ‘give up’ a seat if they poll very badly there. Which means that their paltry vote can bring little benefit to their partners in the Remain coalition.

    A tiny transfer of votes is the outcome, and the overall impression around the country is negative. And slightly desperate.

    I think Swinson is looking a little out of her depth.

  6. @Carfrew – “Oh, no one is disputing you said stuff about State Aid, that’s another misrepreentation, and you just repeated it, but amazingly it all lacks the essential quality of establishing where the limits are in practice (as opposed to the theoretical case of there being no limits. !!!)”

    It looks like I’ve had a lengthy explanatory post disappear.

    I remain somewhat confused. In my 11.12pm post yesterday I covered state aid limits in some detail, and you then subsequently said that remainers don’t ever do this.

    I get the feeling you might have missed this original post? That would make sense.

    I hope we can agree on this. I’ve covered the technicalities of state aid definitions, extent, limitations, exemptions, GBER etc etc many times on UKPR, so I was a bit surprised at your claim that this is something that is ignored.

    That isn’t true, which is the point I was looking to make.

  7. Is not MRP just more detailed stratification applied at a constituency level.

    So we know polls are weighted by various factors but no single seat will match the demographics across the country so UNS wont apply to any seat totally accurately as different demographs are likely to change their aggregate voting behaviour differently.

    So once it is estimated that say, Jewish Voters, have moved their VI in aggregate across the country (or perhaps a region if possible) that shift in VI can be applied to Jewish voters in any seat.

    I doubt it will be sophisticated enough to compare secular Jewish peoples VI movement to non secular for example so their will be flaws.

    There are other flaws as well but results do suggest.

    MRP may well use proportionate vote change – not sure?

  8. There are other flaws as well but results seem better than regular polls so far.

  9. @EOTW

    Mail was entertaining late last night, numerous stories about Watson, none I could see about Tory woes. Sure they were there but buried

    They got a mention in earlier in the day – but of the three political coverage gets less prominence in the Mail. A lot of people who wouldn’t ever buy the print version do read the website – so it does provide a broader reach for pro-Tory propaganda (I’m sure someone on the site will argue that the Mail is a paragon of impartiality). Conversely, the guardian is looking v pro Labour on line, Austin was hardly getting a mention last I looked.

  10. Davwel

    I was being a little ironic in my account of SCon in Aberdeen South!

    It has been a widely held view for a long time that the local party had decided not to have “SNP Gain Thomson” as their candidate at the next election. That the chairman told him that his nomination papers wouldn’t be signed, wasn’t surprising.

    He didn’t “resign”. He was sacked, and the office-bearers (presumably) had selected Lumsden to carry the banner quite some time before.

    Quite why Lumsden immediately closed his Twitter account is unclear, though no doubt some captured tweets will surface.

    Although I find Thomson’s brand of right wing British Nationalism execrable, it is possible to feel some sympathy for him on a personal level.

    He isn’t the first MP to have gone from having some status as a councillor to realising he is but lobby fodder, and having no influence at Westminster, and taking to the cheap drink.

    Many can do that without revealing the nastier side of their character, but if they can’t, better to lay off the booze

    Eric Joyce was another, and there will be many more.

  11. @CARFREW

    And as for leaving it to business, there are many casss when business is unlikely to do it, either because too expensive, or can’t marshall enough resources, e.g. the NASA’s space programme, or it’s against their business interests, e,g. Funding cures vs treamebts for symptoms,

    These are still markets are they not take space: The ESA lives on subsidies and state aid does it not!!!! You cannot distort a market where there is only one player

    As to finding cures again rather like the US does we can give money to university fund new Horizon programs and the like for technologies that EU believe it needs in the 21st century.

    You act as if the EU does not do this sort of investment and subsidy when in fact it does lots of it.

    What I have been saying is that the UK government has CHOSEN not to do the subsidies that they are allowed and because of this I am saying even when given more freedom the obvious thing is they will not do any more than they do now when they already have the freedoms to do more

  12. Millie

    Not putting up a candidate in a seat where a lost deposit is likely saves £500 a skull plus not having to spend any scarce cash in that seat, while releasing some activists to campaign elsewhere.

    Admitting that would destroy any claim to be a “national” [1] party, but cloaking it under the guise of selfless sacrifice in the national interest sounds positive.

    [1] National means Wales for Plaid and GB for LD, Con & Lab since they all exclude NI from their “nation”, just as Sky does.

  13. @Jim Jam

    “I recall the difference between John Reid and Charles Clarke both of whom had no time for Gordon Brown but while Clarke sounded off unhelpfully to whoever would give him a platform (he thought he could be leader one day) Reid just stayed quiet and if asked said he was supporting Labour or some such construction”
    ……………………………………………………………
    I think the agreed line was that he was just focused on being Chair of Celtic. The pay off was an Honours List peerage. Not bad for a former Communist turned Blair loyalist. But I defer to Old Nat if he corrects me.

  14. TW

    “Another LDEM backed poll from Survation – Esher and Walton (Raab’s seat and home to TOH IIRC)”

    I do not live in Esher & Walton, I have a much maligned ex Cabinet Minister as my MP wnich should give you a clue.

  15. J S-B

    No correction required!

  16. ToH

    “I have a much maligned ex Cabinet Minister as my MP”

    Not much of a clue – there are a very large number of such people. :-)

  17. Good start by the new Speaker:

    “Back with a Westminster focus, the new Speaker of the House of Commons says he will not permit the kind of parliamentary manoeuvres recently used to block a no-deal Brexit allowed by his predecessor John Bercow.

    Sir Lindsay Hoyle says he would not allow the procedures used by MPs to seize control of the agenda.”

    It seems we now have somebody who understands the Speakers role and the need for absolute impartiality.

  18. More on LDEM-Green pact – some indirect help for CON??

    beyond the obvious help to LDEM in a number of LDEM-CON marginals (and see earlier post of indirect help to LAB in 2-3 seats) then there are a few “interesting” ones where Greens helping LDEM might indirectly help CON keep/win the seat.

    Watford is probably the best example.

    Firstly note this an excellent example of ABC Tactical Vote (TV) boosting LAB in GE’17 (even though CON did end up keeping the seat)

    GE’17 result (change v GE’15)

    Con 45.6 (+2.2)
    UKIP 2.0 (-7.7)

    Lab 42.0 (+16.0)
    LDEM 9.1 (-9.0)
    Green 1.2 (-1.1)

    So despite LAB coming 2nd and being not far from winning the seat then it’s “U-turn” on TV for GE’19 and LDEM doing pacts to try and improve their chances?!?

    LDEM were 2nd back in 2010 on 32.4% but it doesn’t look like one they can win but instead they might well drain LAB and Green votes and allow CON to keep it on a smaller % (even if BXP drain some CON VI).

    The other thing to note is Watford’s CON MP (2010-2017 GEs) was the xCON Harrington so the new CON candidate will lose any “incumbency” benefit.

    PS Is anyone actually interesting in talking about Tactical Voting and specific seats?

  19. @Millie

    “So the LDs are supporting a party that seeks to break up the Union, and are denying their supporters to vote in three constituencies, whilst claiming to be a national party.”

    The LD PPC for Pontiprydd is going to stand as an Independent against PC for precisely these reasons.

    “… Mike Powell, who had been the Lib Dem candidate in Pontypridd, said he would run as an independent against Plaid Cymru.

    He told Radio 4’s World at One: “I think the people deserve to have an opportunity to vote for someone who is going to represent the people of Pontypridd, rather than standing to represent a cause to remove Wales from the United Kingdom.

    “I know there is an awful lot of members in the Welsh Liberal Democrats who are extremely unhappy with the way these negotiations have been dealt with.” (Source: BBC.)

  20. @ CIM – Agree with your reply to me. On MRP and YG model then some of the wide range in their prediction would have been down to the very wide range in polling. TBC is polls “converge” or whether we have large differences between companies again this time.

    The bigger issue this time will be the potential for huge swings – notably “intra-Remain”.

    My guess is the seat specific ranges will be BIG and that will make the overall range in “forecast” BIG (70+ seat range for CON and LAB and v.likely the difference between CON majority, “mess” and maybe even LAB minority with SNP getting them to 330+)

    @ TOH – Gauke? I might have guessed Hammond but thankfully he seems to have decided to “go quietly”. I doubt Gauke or any “lesser names” will have much cut through if they cause a nuisance.

  21. @ Carfrew 1.53 pm

    Yes – there`s been a silence here from the RU supporters on Saracens` breaking the salary cap. And no explanation of how that fits with sport`s belief in fair play, which was getting undue praise last week.

    So I detect some hypocrisy, but also feel sorry for the talented players involved. Without more details, we can only blame the owner yet.

    On Cambridge, I doubt many students will remain beyond full term in order to attend the Varsity RU match at Twickenham.

    That second week in December used to be the time for admission exams and interviews. I remember ploughing through tough papers on the Tuesday morning, then afterwards going down to Twickenham for the game. Another candidate had a car, needless to say from a private school, but we never saw him again.

  22. @ TW

    Not sure I can agree that any LD/Green/Plaid pact can help the Tories- after all we are still dealing with electors that can chose whoever they like- it’s not like Green are passing their voters votes on to LD is it?

    I mean things could get complicated- possible that with no LD option some will vote Tory and help Tories indirectly. It’s equally possible that if the Greens aren’t standing then many of their votes go to Labour rather than LD. If you were voting on Green issues then it seems very likely to me that your second choice would be Labour rather than LD if Green is not available.

    There is rather an assumption that remain is the issue here- not always so and I could actually imagine some of the roughly 25% of Green voters (from 2016 EU referendum- maybe not current) who voted leave will be unimpressed that their party has stood aside for LD on a remain ticket. I know that many Greens are very unhappy with Alde in the EU parliament (with which LD are grouped) because of their lukewarm commitment to climate change.

  23. @ Davwel

    “That second week in December used to be the time for admission exams and interviews.”

    Yes, you’re right, it still is. Typically it’s first year students that get turfed out to accommodate applicants. But I would guess it varies by college, most things do.

  24. @ ToH

    “Back with a Westminster focus, the new Speaker of the House of Commons says he will not permit the kind of parliamentary manoeuvres recently used to block a no-deal Brexit allowed by his predecessor John Bercow.

    Sir Lindsay Hoyle says he would not allow the procedures used by MPs to seize control of the agenda.”

    It seems we now have somebody who understands the Speakers role and the need for absolute impartiality.””

    Have you a reliable source for this, Howard?

  25. I think Boris’ plan is:
    1. Get the 2017 vote out.
    2. Squeeze Brexit to UKIP 2017 levels.
    3. Hope Lib Dems take big chunk of Labour vote where it maters i.e. where Tories can win marginals or Labour to Lib Dem seats. Trust Big Jo and Big Jez coalition is a Not an option.
    4. Hope SNP finish off Labour in Scotland.
    5. The best media campaign.
    6. Fear of Corbyn must mean Boris cannot lose.

    My view so far on feedback:
    1. No chance. Dismay at GE timing.
    2. No chance. If they are on the ballot in a constituency, they are good for at least UKIP 2015 level.
    In some West Midland seats over 20% unless a deal is done by individual candidates with Farage.
    3. Unknowable and totally out of Boris’ control. Not a great strategy for a Boris leads from the front and takes control. But Trevor Warne is the betting expert, so we look to his research.
    4. Ask Old Nat.
    5. Maybe the fourth best unless they up their game.
    6. Risky especially in mid-December which is not a sober season.

  26. @ON

    Yes, I can see the ‘sacrifice’ line being used.

    @RAF

    Thanks for that. Rather confirms my point: it may well upset more people than it pleases. Especially in Wales.

    I did predict ( a long time ago after the 2015 election ) that the LDs and Greens might merge, and I wonder whether that is being contemplated.

    I can’t help feeling that Swinson is losing credibility by claiming to be running for Prime Minister whilst at the same time cobbling together irrelevant deals with minor parties.
    But I’ll reserve judgement until the Monster Raving Loonies join the Coalition.

  27. They are behaving as if Boris just has to do his stardust but like all comedians and rock stars to keep the impact you ration your appearances. Other than that people see you as wall paper, you get over-exposed, the same songs and jokes start to grate. People get bored.
    Conversely, the overdone attack lines on Corbyn just wear thin and people tune them out.
    If no fresh material, people will go numb on all attacks on Corbyn.
    When The Conservatives are fielding Michael Fallon in prominent national interviews, then you have to think the bench is concerningly thin (lots of injuries and suspensions because of Yellow and Red Cards for media offences).
    One question to Fallon about why he had to resign and
    another attack line on the Tories is re-opened (needlessly).

    We will find out on Friday December 13th but the Tory ability to score repeated campaign own goals then claim economic and foreign affairs competence is a good trick if you can do it.
    If Big Jo really blows it mid-campaign, then Remain voters will go to Labour in England and Wales.
    If people grasp the detail and that Boris’ ‘Good deal’ is just wishful thinking, then Brexit Party can rocket.
    If Boris had not got stuck with it hoping for his October 31st deadline, he would be saying it is a ‘bad deal’ which it is.
    This Tory cake could deflate when it is taken out the oven.
    If Farage is in a debate with Boris, I could see the one take off and the other collapse.

    Javid is their star on economics (because they will not use Redwood). He is not doing much media because he knows the spending plans are tough to pay for.

    So The Tories to win if the poll was today. To win maybe next Thursday. But unless they improve their game, I think thereafter they slide. If they are not helped by ‘events dear boy events’ then I think they will lose seats overall by mid-December.
    Please remind me of this if I am wrong on December 13th.

  28. He’s referring to an interview in the BBC, but as usual has omitted some useful context.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-50336267

    “Sir Lindsay Hoyle said he would not allow the procedures used by MPs to seize control of the agenda.

    It would make it harder for MPs to derail a government after the election, even if it does not have a majority.

    Sir Lindsay said he wanted MPs to agree to change the Commons rules to close off those options.”

    Note the last line, MPs have to agree to undo the precedent set.

    “Sir Lindsay said the rules should be clarified – and his approach would make it much harder for a future House of Commons to resist the government of the day.

    “Those that may have advantage, now, out of that situation may be disadvantaged if that were to continue.

    “The country elects the government, and we don’t know what government we’re going to have after this, but I’m sure that they won’t want to be turned over on a day when they think they’re going to get the business through,” he said.

    He said a tidying up of the rules was needed to close loopholes – so there was complete clarity and “nobody could accuse the Speaker” of anything.”

    Ultimately the new rules will be up to MPs and so will depend on the makeup of the house post election, if it remains hung I can’t see MPs surrendering power in a hurry.

    I have to agree that some tidying is required though, though I’m not quite buying the disadvantaged logic, a point that has been made repeatedly is that MPs have only been able to do what they’ve done because the government has no working majority. A government with confidence of the house would not have had its motions amended.

  29. Millie

    “deals with minor parties” should have read “deals with other minor parties”

  30. @ Millie
    “A tiny transfer of votes is the outcome, and the overall impression around the country is negative. And slightly desperate. I think Swinson is looking a little out of her depth.”

    I disagree with your analysis. When you say a tiny number of votes you are looking at 2017 share. If you look at Electoral calculus predictions for these same seats now, some of the predicted percentages for the parties standing down are not insignificant.

    I think this gives LD an increased chance of winning in 18 seats (Bermondsey/Brecon & Radnor/Cardiff Central/Cheltenham/Finchley & Golders Green/Hazel Grove/Montgomeryshire/Cornwall N/Portsmouth South/Richmond Park/South Cambs/South East Cambs/ Southport/ Thornbury/ Wells/Wimbledon/ Winchester). This is not to say they will win in all of these, and some they would win even without the pact, but I think they are potentially in play for LD, and the pact helps them.

    Predicted share that the parties standing down would have achieved (using electoral calculus)
    Bermondsey – 3.9% (Green)
    Brecon – 7.5% (6.4% PC and 1.1% Green)
    Cardiff central – 14.3% (11.2% PC and 3.1% Green)
    Finchley – 4.1% (Green)
    Hazel Grove – 2.1% (Green)
    Montgomeryshire – 9.7% (PC 8.2 % and Green 1.5%)
    Portsmouth S – 4.2% (Green)
    Richmond Park – 1.8% (Green)
    South Cambs – 3.5% (Green)
    SE Cambs – 2.3% (Green)
    Wimbledon – 3.9 % (Green)
    Winchester – 2.2% (Green)

    The pact gives PC an increased chance of winning in Ynys Mon and the Greens a good shot at Bristol West.

    For all three of the parties involved it also shores up their existing seats.

    I think Jo Swinson is playing a blinder so far.

    Insofar as this hurts the LD in Scotland by denting their unionist credentials, for myself I am a remainer more than I am a Lib Dem (even as a Lib Dem member), so if it helps the SNP there (at the expense of LD), well the SNP are remainers too.

  31. @Cambridgecol

    Yes, very interesting.

    Could make the difference to Lib Dems in a number of Welsh seats – Montgomeryshire, Brecon & Radnorshire and Cardiff Central.

    Not sure it is so useful for Plaid, especially if they lose Ceredigion and end up with less seats than Lib Dems!

  32. N. B. Glyn Davies is standing down in Montgomeryshire, really genuine chap and carries a big personal following.

  33. @JONATHAN STUART-BROWN

    Are you surprised at this?
    1. I am not sure that he could have done it any other way so I do believe that getting out the GE2017 vote was important to him (like May he looked at the polls and said that is a gamble worth taking

    2. I think you are being harsh he has squeezed the BXP vote some is there any more to squeeze is a good question

    3. I agree, but there are places where that could happen say London for example

    4. There are a lot of marginal seats in scotland

    5. Boris is doing a May, He is using the Telegraph to do his bidding and using the fact that the Press tends to drive the news cycle to give him a platform
    6. I think the problem is that they are both looking at expansionary policies basically there is a MMT To say these guys will spend money and tank the economy but we will spend money and not tank the economy will be an interesting sell

  34. @shevii

    “If you were voting on Green issues then it seems very likely to me that your second choice would be Labour rather than LD if Green is not available.”

    That before or after Labour wanted to reopen coal mines?

    There was a pollster looking at this recently, I thought it showed greens breaking more to LD than lab, though still significant minority to the latter. Can’t remember which pollster or find the link which is annoying, anyone know where this is?

    I do suspect this is something that will have substantial local variance though. In these parts (bristol/bath) LDs are generally pitching more green than Lab are.

  35. @ JONESINBANGOR

    The assumption here is that every voter will fall in line and go for the single candidate be it Green, LD or Plaid. It just won’t happen!

  36. Richard Tice standing in Hartlepool, it will split the Leave vote down the middle and probably keep Labour in play.

  37. My comments on Tories not fielding Javid were before I caught 6pm lead story.
    He still intends to be next leader, and PM, so I guess he pledges spend, spend, spend. Trust us, we will pay for it.
    So the debt and the deficit are forgotten.
    If Corbyn offers to leapfrog you on every specific spending promise, what do you say then?
    The attack lines of 2010, 2015 and 2017 are gone.
    I suppose it is now the MD of Deutsche Bank Javid is clever with figures and has nous and savvy. Whereas they then say Corbyn/McDonnell are not.
    Not sure it will work.

  38. Ian Austin looks a lot older than his 54 years.

  39. @millie

    “I did predict ( a long time ago after the 2015 election ) that the LDs and Greens might merge, and I wonder whether that is being contemplated.”

    Can’t see that happening or lasting. They both support PR and once that happens will have little reason to stick together as a merged party.

  40. @passTheRockPlease
    ” I think the problem is that they are both looking at expansionary policies basically there is a MMT To say these guys will spend money and tank the economy but we will spend money and not tank the economy will be an interesting sell”
    ………………….
    I agree.

  41. @CAMBRIDGECOL

    But electoral calculus is based on data from opinion polls mapped against available demographic information – whilst the last GE result (which was not that long ago) was real votes.

    Opinion polls have had a very mixed success rate over the last few years, and people can respond very differently when a GE campaign is on with the poll in a couple of week that when VI is hypothetical. In a couple of weeks EC is likely to be a better indicator that currently – but till then it is in my opinion to use the last GE as the real base.

  42. CambridgeCol

    “Insofar as this hurts the LD in Scotland by denting their unionist credentials, for myself I am a remainer more than I am a Lib Dem (even as a Lib Dem member), so if it helps the SNP there (at the expense of LD), well the SNP are remainers too.”

    I think you have this the wrong way round.

    I doubt that the manoeuvrings of the parties in E&W will have any influence whatsoever in the Scottish polity.

    To the extent that it might (among the more Brit Nat component of SLD voters) such a perception would help SCon, not SNP.

    SLD politicians are ardent Brit Nats, so are unlikely to gain attractiveness among the (rather small) part of the SLD VI that are attracted to greater Scottish autonomy, just because in Wales, Plaid has done a deal with the (semi autonomous) Green Party in Wales and the Welsh LDs..

  43. @ JonesinBangor

    I would agree that Lib Dem get more out of the pact then either Plaid or Green.

    Pontypridd is an interesting one. Electoral calculus predicts that the Lib Dems and Green (who are standing down) would have achieved over 17 % between them there. Whether it makes this a Plaid target I’m not entirely convinced, but it makes it a little more interesting.

  44. @JONATHAN STUART-BROWN

    I think Johnson’s biggest problem is that if he had accepted the delay and scrutiny of his WA, I believe that he would have got it through with the amendments and then could have gone through and got the UK out of the EU by Jan. After that he could have then said I need a mandate and harried for one since brexit would have been done. He would have got it over the line

    Instead he is gambling:
    They are behaving as if Boris just has to do his stardust but like all comedians and rock stars to keep the impact you ration your appearances.

    he is actually very good at making speeches not very good at interviews and the forensic stuff (Andrew Neil interview ). He is doing a May lots of set pieces but no interaction with voters, rather like he did with the leadership contest. I believe he won’t do the debates for example.
    Javid is their star on economics (because they will not use Redwood). He is not doing much media because he knows the spending plans are tough to pay for.
    Poor Javid is Chancellor In Name Only a CHINO and I suspect the real problem is that all his numbers suggest that he cannot do tax cuts and have an expansive economy too.

    But unless they improve their game, I think thereafter they slide. If they are not helped by ‘events dear boy events’ then I think they will lose seats overall by mid-December.

    I think that they are still in the drivers seat they have the press on their side and that drives the News cycle I believe that people will not really pay attention until the manifestos come out and people start analysing them

  45. Why do election candidates keep putting their foot in the jobby?

    Kate Ramsden, a Labour candidate this time, has stood down:

    “A Labour general election candidate has quit after it emerged she likened the actions of the Israeli government to those of a child abuser.

    Kate Ramsden stood down over a blog in which she also reportedly alleged that antisemitism claims against Jeremy Corbyn were “orchestrated by the wealthy establishment”.

    The candidate, for the Scottish constituency of Gordon, said she was resigning for “personal reasons”, Labour said.”

  46. @ JamesB

    We’ll see when the manifestos come out but there is a real possibility that Labour will commit to 2030, whereas at the moment the Tories are 2050 (with the current government already not in line to meet that target) and LD 2045.

    Of course saying you are going to do this and actually doing this are two different things but everything I have read so far shows Labour firming up substantial policy commitments and LD still rather waffly (Green investment bank, citizens assemblies etc).

    On the point of where the Green vote ends up, I’m only making a guess so yes, polling would be interesting, but with the Greens relatively high in the polls compared to 2017 I doubt anyone would have that data on tactical votes yet.

  47. @JAMESB

    Note the last line, MPs have to agree to undo the precedent set.

    To allow a minority government to set and keep the agenda even if they do not have the votes is unprecedented is it not. If Iread theis correctly it would mean that a minority government can refuse amendments even if there is a majority for it?

    I have to agree that some tidying is required though, though I’m not quite buying the disadvantaged logic, a point that has been made repeatedly is that MPs have only been able to do what they’ve done because the government has no working majority. A government with confidence of the house would not have had its motions amended.

    Basically he has said that a minority government will still have all the powers of a majoritarian government no matter what!!! That is crazy. If a party loses a majority within the life time of the parliament they cannot just act like they are still the majority and have all the powers of the majority that makes no sense. It means elective dictatorship does it not

  48. Another potential scandal.

    Zara Sultana, Labour candidate for Coventry South has questions to answer after putting out on social media that she would “celebrate” the deaths of Tony Blair, George Bush and
    Benjamin Netanyahu.”

    Of course, like other numpties in doggy doings, she has apologised.

    Jane Aitchison, Labour candidate for Pudsey, when asked by Emma Barnett today whether she condemned these comments said, “People do celebrate deaths, sometimes, it’s not good is it? Is it really good to celebrate deaths? It’s not. But people do sometimes, because they feel strongly about whatever that person represented.”

    Pressed on this point, she said: ‘What I’m saying is that people, for instance… they celebrated the death of Hitler.”

    Is that a condemnation……..?

  49. @ Oldnat

    Yes I see what you are saying. I had not considered the effect as a possible boost to SCon. I doubt will save any SCon from the SNP wave that is coming though.

  50. Excuse me if this has been asked already:

    1) What are the chances that the EHRC will publish their report into the Labour Party before the GE?

    2) What are the chances that the London police complaints authority will publish its report into the Arcuri affair before the GE?

    Note: neither question is intended to imply any pre-judgement of what the findings will be.

1 8 9 10 11

Leave a Reply

NB: Before commenting please make sure you are familiar with the Comments Policy. UKPollingReport is a site for non-partisan discussion of polls.

You are not currently logged into UKPollingReport. Registration is not compulsory, but is strongly encouraged. Either login here, or register here (commenters who have previously registered on the Constituency Guide section of the site *should* be able to use their existing login)