The mid-week polls so far are below:

SavantaComRes (25th-26th) – CON 41%(-1), LAB 34%(+2), LDEM 13%(-2), BREX 5%(nc)
YouGov/Sky/Times (25th-26th) – CON 43%(-1), LAB 32%(+2), LDEM 13%(-3), BREX 4%(+1)
ICM/Reuters (22th-25th) – CON 41%(-1), LAB 34%(+2), LDEM 13%(nc), BREX 4%(-1)
Kantar (21st-25th) – CON 43%(-2), LAB 32%(+5), LDEM 14%(-2), BREX 3%(+1)
Survation/GMB (20th-23rd) – CON 41%(-1), LAB 30%(+2), LDEM 15%(+2), BREX 5%(nc)

Taken individually, almost all the changes in these polls are within the margin of error (Kantar is the only exception). However, looking at them as a group there is a clear trend, with every poll showing a slight drop in Tory support and a slight increase for Labour. Taken together it’s clear there’s been a slight narrowing of the race though, of course, that still leaves a Conservative lead between 7 and 11 points. As usual, it is almost impossible to ascribe specific causes to this.

As well as the standard polls this week, YouGov published their MRP model. MRP is a method of using a large national sample to project shares at smaller geographical areas – in this case Parliamentary constituencies. By modelling how different demographics vote in seats with different characteristics, and then applying that model to each constituency, the MRP model produces vote shares for each individual constituency and, via that, projects seat totals for each party. Famously the YouGov MRP model projected a hung Parliament in 2017 when most people expected a Conservative majority.

The model this time is less surprising – it projected national vote shares of CON 43%, LAB 32%, LDEM 14%, BREX 3% (so very much in line with YouGov’s traditional polling), and seat numbers of Conservative 359, Labour 211, SNP 43, Liberal Democrat 13. This represents a Conservative majority of 68, much what we would expect to find on those shares of the vote (though the detailed projection is interesting, with the Conservative gains coming largely in the North and the urban West Midlands, with notable gains in West Bromwich, Wolverhampton and Stoke). Full details of the MRP model are here.

Finally this week, we’ve seen what is only the second Scottish poll of the campaign, this time from Ipsos MORI. Topline figures with changes from the 2017 election are CON 26%(-3), LAB 16%(-11), LDEM 11%(+4), SNP 44%(+7). Tabs for that are here.


724 Responses to “Midweek polling update”

1 2 3 4 5 15
  1. @Danny

    “Presumably the conservatives reckoned the ice better represented them?”

    ——

    Possibly, but the block of ice did actually show up for the debate.

  2. Prof Howard

    Can’t wait.

    My gut feeling is that the Tories are already at peak Brexit so their VI cant really go much higher.

    The only question is how long can the moderate soft remain leaning Tories continue to hold their noses and vote for Johnson.

    I suspect some of these will start to leak to other parties or just simply decide to abstain on the day.

    I still think Labour are within 2 or 3 percent of stopping a Tory majority again.

  3. Given that C4 say they asked the other parties if Gove could take part and they said no, it:

    a) shows that their own rules weren’t set in stone about it being leaders (and it makes sense to send the Environment Secretary, this is quite a detailed and rapidly-changing topic); and

    b) It is in fact the other parties that are running scared of Michael Gove.

    Which I can sympathise with, Gove’s a strong debater and would have been able to cogently make the right links between Environment / climate (he’s already shown he takes climate change and the environment very seriously and innovatively), and the economy and Brexit to ‘bring it all together’ in a way that would have exposed the unrealistic and nonsensical hyperbole that other parties are falling over themselves to ingratiate the Greta Thunbergs with.

  4. @ FROSTY – “Proper” SW has some interesting seats and you pick a good example.

    You also see the issue I’m about to mention to some extent in other ‘Leave” coastal seats (eg NE.England). Start back at the “coalition” aftermath.

    EC have a good piece on where LDEM went at aggregate level (GE’10-GE’15):

    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/Analysis_votermigration.html

    GE’15 to GE’17 flow is much more a story of “lumpiness”. LDEM % went down a tiny bit but they won a few more seats (very obvious in Scotland but also a factor in England). For the “maths” to balance that means they recovered in places like SW.London but “got worse” in places like “proper” SW.England (Bath is not “proper” SW – too “posh” me luvly)

    Anyway, Boris is wise not to take SW.England seats for granted but if he fails to get the focus back on “Get Brexit Done” and “neutralises” domestic issues, then it’s not impossible to see the odd additional speck of Red in SW.England (and IIRC Truro has expanded it’s college campus so more 18-24yr olds registered to vote there this time?? Not quite as many as Plymouth S+D “uni seat” though)

    I expect CON will keep it as too many LDEM (or Green or Ind) VI will vote for their 1st pref rather than the fairly obvious Remain tactical vote pick of LAB.

    Good seat to examine though! if it gets to 10-1 or better then worth a cheeky fiver on LAB but at 11/2 probably not worth it.

  5. @BT

    Good one!

  6. @BT says

    “It is in fact the other parties that are running scared of Michael Gove.”

    ——-

    Well, they are not necessarily scared of Gove, it’s just that it is unfair to send specialists able to prep more for particular debates while the leaders are having to field for all of the debates and interviews, and sending Gove also has the rather unfortunate drawback that… he is not the leader. (He failed to win the leadership contest and does not appear to have adjusted to this new reality).

    The point of the leaders’ debates and interviews is not to just find out more about climate change or the NHS or whatever, but to find out what the LEADER knows and what they would do.

    I mean, you could send Putin to the debate in place of BJ, he might know more than BJ, but that would have issues too. Do you see?

    Accusing the other parties of being scared when the Tories didn’t dare send BJ to the climate debate, and he might even be ducking the Neil interview too, offers at least some mild amusement though. (After what happened with May in 2017, you can see why they might be scared…)

  7. @ FROSTY – Cornwall is an excellent example of where grassroots Remain “paper pact” could/would work.

    LDEM get St.Ives and North Cornwall and LAB get the other 4. Green and others vote accordingly as they have no chance in any of them.

    All the seats are CON’17 so no BXP candidates = Leavers vote CON.

  8. Asked about a viewer’s tweet calling his son “Pinocchio”, Stanley Johnson replies: “Pinocchio, that requires a degree of literacy which I think the great British public doesn’t necessarily have.”

  9. @btsays

    “Which I can sympathise with, Gove’s a strong debater and would have been able to cogently make the right links …”

    Gove is not the UK Secretary of State for the Environment. If the Conservatives wanted to field a representative it should have been Theresa Villiers. However, it is clear from the emails released last night by C4 that over the past 4 weeks when the debate was being organised that the Conservative Party never proposed that they should be represented by someone other than Johnson until the day of the debate. They weren’t interested in the debate presumably because climate change is not an important issue for them in this election and indeed showing interest might not appeal to their core vote and the more far right wing voters they are trying to attract from BXP, UKIP, EDL and beyond.

  10. dont think the tories making a fuss over the bloc of ice is a good idea – it elevates the story that Johnson ducked the climate debate (and the notion that he does not take climate change seriously) . And ducking the debate also elevates the story of him avoiding the Andrew Neil interview – and a narrative of Johnson “running scared” – and refusing to answer questions gets more legs than it would have done (see also his blustering evasiveness on t nick ferrari today .
    None of this will do anything to deter committed brexiteers voting tory – but it may depress the vote amongst tory remainers – and possibly trad labour brexit voters.

  11. @Danny

    “Nuclear power did come up, and the problem of needing to cover base load whent its dark, theres no wind and the tide is at neutral, but not in any real detail. It might be better to have gas or oil powered standby than nuclear. Even in terms of pollution on a cost benefit basis. It is looking to me as if the UK anyway should be thinking renewables rather than nuclear. No, not a wonderful deep debate, but infinitely better than Neil talking to himself.”

    ———

    Well, the point of using Thorium is that it would be in a liquid molten salt reactor. This allows you to drain the salt quickly, which in turn means you can spin the reactor up and shut it down quickly, unlike a conventional reactor. So you can use it to cover base load when it’s dark, no wind etc.

    Thorium is very abundant, and because easy to shut down by just draining the salt is a lot safer. It can also be used to burn up other long-lasting radioactive waste, and produce medically useful isotopes instead (or the right kind of plutonium for long-lasting missions around the solar-system etc.).

    Alternatively, if we use surplus renewable energy to electrolyse water to release hydrogen, then you can burn the hydrogen instead of oil or gas and cover the gap that way without stuffing the atmosphere with all that extra CO2 and burning up a finite resource.

  12. @TOH – “Since the Conservatives offered a perfectly reasonable substitute in Michael Gove, Channel 4’s behaviour was totally unreasonable.”

    Well we’ll just have to let people make up their own mind on that one, but to be honest, if you have a ‘Leaders Debate’ the clue is in the title. If your leader is too frightened to appear, your opportunity is vacated.

    Logically, when it comes to electoral law and fair coverage rules, it’s worth thinking about this using an extreme example. TV stations have to have an even approach to all parties, but what would happen if one party flat refused to offer any candidates for any debates or interviews throughout the campaign?

    Does this mean that no interviews could be held with anyone, because to do so would be unfair on the party not putting forward interviewees?

    That position is not credible. If a party declines to provide people to be interviewed, then so long as they have been offered an equal shot, that’s their lookout.

    C4 were quite correct to empty chair the PM. He had his chance, but sent his Dad. Pathetic.

  13. I read at least 36 hours before the C4 debate that it wouldn’t be BJ attending, pretty sure it was earlier in the week than that tbh, so that’s not correct Hireton.

    Also, I take your correction on current Environment Secretary but as she’s only just entered the role and Gove has been pioneering stuff in that dept for much longer up until 3 months ago, he would still have been the logical option – esp if you allow for a relevant part of the choice being who can articulate policy and debate better out of the available options.

    @CB11 – clearly Gove is one of the leaders in the broad sense, as he’s at cabinet level. Likewise other parties could have sent their ‘expert’ as long as he’s a true prominent party member/ shadow cabinet or whatever.

    Would have made a lot more sense of what the PM’s party (whichever party that turns out to be) would actually do in government than meaningless platitudes from party leaders who aren’t – and shouldn’t necessarily be expected to be – on top of this particular sort of brief.

  14. Correction: as long as s/he’s a true prominent party member. . .etc.

  15. Correction: as long as s/he’s a true prominent party member. . .etc.

  16. Reggieside

    The empty chairing / ice sculpture was already a prominent story, so made sense for Tories to get out their side of the story.

    Actually think too often they’re not rebuffing things that e.g. Corbyn and others are saying on primetime news, so maybe they’re upping the ante now and going on the offensive more.

  17. One anecdote from here in Bristol East. In one particular street in 2017 there was a forest of Labour flags in the gardens – almost every house had one. I drove past last night and there was not a single poster to be seen. This may not mean much, but it could just be an indicator that this Labour constituency has become marginal again.

  18. Jonboy, poster psephology may not be the most reliable polling method but fwiw I live in Bristol East and in my street we have four lab posters and one green, same as last time iirc.

    I don’t sense any shocks when chatting to people round here.

  19. RE: BT says

    If johnson had atteneded – or ignored the empty chairing – the story would not be as big as it is today. Most people wont have watched debate – but a significant number now know johnson didn’t turn up and will draw their own conclusions. And I dont think tory whinging over channel 4 ice sculpture stunt will get them much sympathy.

  20. I haven’t done any leafletting yet but plan to do so.
    Last year most people were happy to see us out and one lady even gave us some curry and naan.

    I will report back if I get out there.

  21. I had a YouGov survey yesterday, but as usual it was not a full polling survey – I have not had one of those for 2.5 years. Anyway it did ask me who I would vote for in my constituency and what my likelihood to vote was. Then near the end there was a very strange question. The question asked which of the following would have a bad outcome for the UK. It gave four options, the first being a Tory Brexit and the second being a Jeremy Corbyn lead Government. JC was the only politician named. Now if that is not a leading question I do not know what is.

  22. Reggieside

    I think it helps people to know there’s two sides to the story, both passionately held.

    This ‘score draw’ perception – remembering that few outside of UKPR will trouble themselves with the minutiae of this – makes the net effect more neutral for Cons, solidifying their base (it’s important, esp to a side’s soft supporters, to be seen as caring enough to respond rather than arrogant enough to not bother – people like to see their side fighting to win) even if it makes the story more prominent and for longer.

  23. @john33
    “If Labour get really thumped, then I hope that the decent Labour posters on this site can put it down to the anti-Semitic infiltrators.”
    Why do people obsess over this as a relevant factor in VI? It makes not a jott of difference to how people are going to vote.
    ………………………………………….
    Untrue,
    It matters a great deal to morally decent people. The majority of people who have voted Labour over the decades or might consider doing so this time, are morally decent people.
    Plenty of NOT this time Labour VI have given me this as the reason.
    I still think if Corbyn/McDonnell really wanted Labour to win/be biggest party, then they would resign today. Game changer boost for Labour.
    Instead they half-hope to get home on December 12th. But more realistically to secure their agenda in next Labour leadership so that ‘one day’ when finally the government has reached its end, any main opposition with whatever policies automatically wins. ‘Our day will come’ has always been their core belief.

  24. With regard to the channel 4 thing last night..if it was a leaders only debate .. why were the NI party leaders not invited .. isnt that part of the UK impacted by climate change ? And why was the Plaid leader only invited at the very last minute ? Also Sturgeon isnt even standing in this election . so why was she there. The SNP leader at Westminster is Ian Blackford .. so surely he should have been the person representing them. ? There are so many inconsistencies here that I’m not surprised BJ smelt a rat and sent Gove instead to call their bluff. If this was a genuine single topic discussion where each party could put their own points across and policies across then they should have been free to send whoever they felt was the best person to discuss it. Gove was the obvious choice given he has a track record of holding that portfolio in government .. if channel 4 really wanted to discuss this one issue so seriously then its the policies and ideas that should matter not who is stood behind the podium putting them forward. I suspect once the others realised Gove was in the building they are the ones that bottled it because he was always going to be more knowledgeable on the subject than they were given his job experience (except the Green leader I grant) and knew they were in for a tough time.

  25. “…clearly Gove is one of the leaders in the broad sense, as he’s at cabinet level. Likewise other parties could have sent their ‘expert’ as long as he’s a true prominent party member/ shadow cabinet or whatever.”

    =====

    Well we’re all probably leaders in a “broad sense”, BT. But in terms of the critical issue of leading a party and potentially the country, not so much, no.

    This is why everyone else sent their leaders, you see.

    And if you send people other than the leader, even if at cabinet level, not only are you not checking out the leader, but it creates an advantage in being able to send specialists who can prep for each debate, while the other leaders have to cover it all.

    This is one of the things it is useful to check out in a leader. Are you ok across the board, or do you have weak spots where you have to abdicate to someone else?

    Also, if you genuinely want a debate among specialists rather than between leaders, why leave it to the last minute so the others don’t have time to arrange their own specialists?

  26. Carfrew

    You seem to be covering multiple points I addressed in earlier posts, eg how last minute it really was, how each party could have done what Cons did, why it makes sense on some topics at least to not necessarily have ‘the’ leader – that’s if people really want to know what the government of that particular topic will be likely to enact, rather than ticking a ‘leader box’ and / or expecting party leaders to be specialists on all topics even those of a very scientific nature.

  27. “It matters a great deal to morally decent people. The majority of people who have voted Labour over the decades or might consider doing so this time, are morally decent people.”

    There will be a few, but nowhere near enough for it to be a factor in this election. There are many minority groups in this country who have been persecuted, discriminated against and the antisemitism should not be elevated above that. Many people, including me, will vote with their conscience. As I have said before, my financial situation would be better served by a Tory administration, but I am voting for disabled people, underfunded public sector institutions, and the other vulnerable members of society. This is the same for many, many people.
    As a ‘ man of god’, I find it laughable that you think you have the right to lecture people on morality and decency, when you support a party that has waged war on the worst off in our society. The type who votes Tory on the Thursday, then volunteers in the soup kitchen on the Friday. I loathe such hypocrisy.

  28. “It matters a great deal to morally decent people. The majority of people who have voted Labour over the decades or might consider doing so this time, are morally decent people.”

    There will be a few, but nowhere near enough for it to be a factor in this election. There are many minority groups in this country who have been persecuted, discriminated against and the antisemitism should not be elevated above that. Many people, including me, will vote with their conscience. As I have said before, my financial situation would be better served by a Tory administration, but I am voting for disabled people, underfunded public sector institutions, and the other vulnerable members of society. This is the same for many, many people.
    As a ‘ man of god’, I find it laughable that you think you have the right to lecture people on morality and decency, when you support a party that has waged war on the worst off in our society. The type who votes Tory on the Thursday, then volunteers in the soup kitchen on the Friday. I loathe such hypocrisy.

  29. @PETE B

    here is nothing in the constitution that says the PM has to be a member of the CoE. Indeed in all fairness the only PM who has been overtly CoE was May. No think of Boris as a member of the god squad it would like saying Trump is an evangelist.

    As other has said Brown was the son of a CoS minister so again it is not clear what the hell happens

    Interestingly the most overt intervention in the Arch Bishop role was actually Thatcher as I remember in recent times most every other one was seen as safe

  30. @jonboy & mark w

    I sense there are fewer posters out in Bristol East this time too, but what is really noticeable is that I’ve so far received no campaign material from any of party via my letterbox. Is it just my area? Are you guys getting stuff?

  31. Bad decision by BJ not to attend the Ch 4 debate. Likewise his embarrassing reluctance to engage with Andrew Neil.

    I am not convinced that the Tory team know what they are doing. Its probably not as bad as last time but once again it is a poorly managed and unexciting campaign.

    It all reminds me of the Sven Goran Eriksson approach – a goal up early on, retreat into you own penalty area, and hang on. It doesn’t work!

    However, although Labour are clearly gaining, they don’t seem to quite have the momentum of last time; I ascribe this to the fact that the JC magic has diminished somewhat ( although he is still effective on the stump ), and the Lab manifesto is irresponsible in the eyes of Middle England. Plus the Brexit policy simply does not appeal to anyone who wants the issue to be resolved one way or the other.

    So Tories poor, Labour poor, LDs poor. Sturgeon impressive as ever.

    A brief shout for Jonathan Bartley for the Greens – he is interviewing well. Very refreshing to see someone relaxed, engaging, and willing to answer a question. In other words, normal…

  32. I can’t see how the argument that Gove was a suitable alternative to Johnson in an environmental debate as he’d spent a while as Environment Secretary, holds up. After all, was it not Gove who uttered the famous phrase in the EURef campaign about ‘we’d had enough of experts’?

  33. Alec

    “Well we’ll just have to let people make up their own mind on that one”

    Happy to do that.

    I think it’s all frothy nonesense.

  34. @BT SAYS…

    “You seem to be covering multiple points I addressed in earlier posts, eg how last minute it really was, how each party could have done what Cons did, why it makes sense on some topics at least to not necessarily have ‘the’ leader – that’s if people really want to know what the government of that particular topic will be likely to enact, rather than ticking a ‘leader box’ and / or expecting party leaders to be specialists on all topics even those of a very scientific nature.”

    ———-

    Well, you may have “mentioned” those things, but that doesn’t mean you have properly addressed them.

    We all can see why it might be more informative on the issues themselves to have most anyone other than Boris at these debates and interviews. You will not find too much objection there!

    It’s just that there are these other problems with it, like not giving enough time for others to send specialists, and crucially, that it’s not a debate where we just invite the more knowledgeable. It’s a leaders’ debate, where we also want to know how much the leader specifically does or doesn’t know, what their approach is to the matter.

    And that currently seems to be quite revealing really, so I’m quite positive about it.

  35. Our future prime minister is a clown, a l!ar and a coward..

    And Conservatives are happy with that,

    The country is going to the dogs :-(

  36. Some of the partisan comments on this site, largely from Labour voters are absolutely disgraceful. Is there any moderation? Isn’t this about polling?

  37. RIC

    I’ll assume you are RoC as you have conveniently glossed over the deeply partisan comments of Conservative inclined posters on here.

  38. Millie .. I dont think he is that reluctant to engage with AN .. dont forget he did just that only a few weeks ago as part of the tory leadership campaign so its not like hes never met the bloke or knows how he operates. He hasnt said he wont do it either as far as I can see and the BBC hasnt said he has refused. I’m guessing but maybe hes quite enjoying watching labour have a tantrum and throw their toys about because they fear they might have been hoodwinked .. but in the end he will do it. In fact JC was so bad .. even if he’s equally as bad it will just be a no score draw in the eyes of any voters who tune it which is all he needs really. Incidentally .. I have no knowledge about running a campaign but if he really is worried about an flack coming his was post a Neil interview I would tell the Beeb he is available next Monday .. why .. well they are airing that panorama special with the woman who is making all the accusations about Prince Andrew at 8.30 so guess what will dominate the news agenda for the next day or so after that ? A bad performance with Neil will go pretty much unnoticed I would suggest ?

  39. @btsays

    “I read at least 36 hours before the C4 debate that it wouldn’t be BJ attending, pretty sure it was earlier in the week than that tbh, so that’s not correct Hireton…..”

    Of course you did because he refused to take part.

  40. Johnson’s comments about the working class and single mothers are getting a lot of traction at the moment

  41. @ Valerie

    I could say some nasty horrible & true things about your man but I have some restraint! :(|

  42. @RIC

    I would dearly love to know the grounds on which you feel that people who seek out and engage with a site connected with politics (polling or any other aspect) are in a y way likely to be politically unengaged.

  43. Westminster voting intention:

    CON: 42% (-)
    LAB: 34% (+2)
    LDEM: 13% (-1)
    BREX: 4% (+1)
    GRN: 3% (+1)

    via
    @PanelbaseMD
    , 27 – 28 Nov
    Chgs. w/ 22 Nov

  44. Westminster voting intention:

    CON: 42% (-)
    LAB: 34% (+2)
    LDEM: 13% (-1)
    BREX: 4% (+1)
    GRN: 3% (+1)

    via
    @PanelbaseMD
    , 27 – 28 Nov
    Chgs. w/ 22 Nov

  45. @ NeilJ

    Trending on the Labour left wing social media bubble presumably :)|

  46. I see Corbyn’s ‘car crash’ has really hurt Labour. The polls will continue to narrow and it will be irrespective of anything Corbyn says or does. A country divided over EU membership and two parties headed up by deeply polarising figures was always likely to return a hung parliament, which it probably will.

  47. @TOH – “I think it’s all frothy nonesense.”

    I tend to agree with you. This kind of thing gets a lot of coverage but probably doesn’t swing many votes in itself.

    However, I think the incident, and being seen to duck tough interviews, is adding up to something. Put this together with the growing perception that Johnson is a l!ar (the perception, whether or not we agree with it) I think in totality Cons have a developing problem.

    Can’t say yet whether this will trump Brexit as a motivator, but polls suggest a movement is underway and Cons position is not as strong as may at first appear.

  48. ELECTORAL CALCULUS

    Sorry if this has mentioned already, but Electoral Calculus are now predicting a CON majority of 12, down from 80-ish at the beginning of the campaign. History may be repeating itself.

  49. Carfrew

    Ok, at least we now disagree whilst understanding each other.

  50. Depends if you consider Sky news, the Independent, Daily Mail and Politics Live as part of the Labour left wing social media bubble

1 2 3 4 5 15