We have the usual glut of polls in the Sunday papers, with new figures from YouGov, ComRes, Opinium, BMG and Deltapoll. Topline figures are below:

Deltapoll/Mail on Sunday – CON 45%(+2), LAB 32%(+2), LDEM 15%(-2), BREX 3%(nc). Fieldwork was Thursday to Saturday, and changes are from last week. (tabs)
YouGov/Sunday Times – CON 43%(nc), LAB 34%(+2), LDEM 13%(nc), BREX 2%(-2). Fieldwork was Thursday and Friday, and changes are from the start of the week (tabs)
Opinium/Observer – CON 46%(-1), LAB 31%(+3), LDEM 13%(+1), BREX 2%(-1). Fieldwork was Wednesday to Friday, changes are from last week (tabs)
SavantaComRes/Sunday Telegraph – CON 43%(+2), LAB 33%(-1), LDEM 13%(nc), BREX 4%(-1). Fieldwork was Wednesday and Thursday, changes are from their mid-week poll (tabs)
BMG/Independent – CON 39%(-2), LAB 33%(+5), LDEM 13%(-5), BREX 4%(-1). FIeldwork was Tuesday to Wednesday, changes are from last week.

Polls in the last week had been consistent in showing a small decrease in Conservative support and a small increase in Labour support, marginally reducing the Tory lead. While these polls aren’t quite so uniform (Deltapoll show the lead steady, ComRes shows movement in the other direction… though if you consider ComRes carry out two polls a week, their lead compared to a week ago is actually unchanged), most still show movement in Labour’s favour.

There remains a significant difference in the overall size of the lead, varying from just six points in the BMG poll to fifteen from Opinium. It is hard to put a specific figure on what sort of lead the Conservatives need to secure an overall majority – it obviously depends on exactly where they gain or lose votes – but as a rough rule of thumb it is probably somewhere around six or seven points. That means at the moment the vast majority of polls are still indicating a Tory majority, but there is no longer that much room for further tightening.

537 Responses to “Sunday polling round up”

1 9 10 11
  1. Electoral Calculus have done a recent-ish update but of more interest for folks who want to know how their model works and how it compares to YG MRP numbers they have a piece a little lower down on their homepage:

    “Predicting the election with modern statistics”


    Short-version is they are coming in 10-14 below YG MRP in terms of CON seats (and hence the see LAB 10ish higher). They are also a bit lower for SNP[1] and a bit higher for LDEM. However, the difference are well within the MoE of either model.

    Hence, roughly EC’s new CON “central” number of 342 would probably be YG MRP around 355 (but note the HUGE range, 175 seats!!! that they put around their central number)

    [1] Not sure why they have SNP so low, especially in the “range” number (23-48?!!??) 40-53 would seem a more realistic range.

  2. @Bantams

    Is that the EC prediction with the separate Scottish VI input? I get differing results with differing EC calcs.

  3. I am not an expert but i have been following this link, the information on seats after the next general election is based on the favourite in each constituency based on actual bets placed, this in my opinion, is this a good indicator ?. Its in line with a lot of the seat forecasts i have seen on this platform…


  4. Interesting bit of electoral nostalgia – https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1200081786690244608

  5. “Indeed if you look at Labour’s sister parties on the continent, the ones which are still dominated by the centrist third way tendency are being crushed in the polls.”


    Fans of the “third way” like to call it centrist. But Blair carried on Thatcher’s work and actually went beyond Thatcher in numerous ways: more privatisations including the health service, and putting other services in hock to the private sector via PFI, workfare with ATOS, introducing tuition fees, setting up the free schools thing with Academies, overseeing the influx of millions keeping wages cheaper etc.

    And it’s not like voters were clamouring for all this were they? They might actually have been hoping for so,etching a bit more left wing, that’s how Lib Dem’s started picking up votes, moving into that space (until getting into power of course).

  6. @ BANTAMS – Make sure to open up the Scotland bit in Electoral Calculus and fill those numbers in separately. Don’t use Scotland x-breaks in any specific poll though, stick with a Scotland only poll or use numbers from someone who is combining Scottish polls/x-breaks, eg:

    Election Maps numbers for Scotland[1]

    SCON: 27
    SLAB: 18
    SLIB: 11
    BXP: 1
    Green: 1
    SNP: 42

    That should get SNP up to 44 (+9) seats which is more realistic than allowing it to do its own thing for Scotland and come up with 32 (-3)

    [1] Those %s seem reasonable and can be found by using the drop down button and changing to Scotland. Note at those kind of %s there are a lot of marginal seats in Scotland.


  7. so,etching = something

  8. @Martinw – thanks, saw a quick snippet but will try and watch it later. Why would you want a buffoon to run the country? Re: an honest answer, i don’t know how people come to that conclusion, i guess they see that he is not reading from a script and associate that with honesty? Was watching something the other day where a long-time labour voter was saying boris was a ‘man of his word.’

    Hello to you.
    I remember the period 1973 to 1979. with the first three GE’s in that period; I had begun my post-A Level studies prior to making my first steps into teaching.
    The behaviour of the trade union movement, in alliance with the then Left was quite upsetting for those of us who were loyal to the Wilson-Healey-Callaghan part of the Labour Party.
    The young Kinnock against devolution; Heffer leading revolts against Healey’s budgets; Benn attacking the Cabinets in which he served; the Ashfield by election and then that awful 1978 winter.

  10. Quickly scrolling down britainelects twitter it looks like yougov was released Tuesday last week and Wednesday the week before. Maybe it was Tuesday last week because of the MRP release on Wednesday?

    I think we should get Kantar later tomorrow.

  11. @ IAN – With models and MRP analysis coming up with roughly the same numbers then it is not surprising punters are centring on roughly the same outcomes as well (as the more “professional” punters will be using polling, models and MRP to spot “smart” bets).

    Early on the models were showing overall numbers 20-30+ above the bookies which was, IMO, due to punters expecting a bit of narrowing in the polls (and/or a bit more tactical voting on the day from Remain side) – you could see that at a seat level with LDEM having worse odds on a lot of seats (and better odds now).

    NB The overall numbers are an aggregation of the individual seats but if you’re looking at individual seats then you can see some are far more marginal than others and that would feed through into “confidence ranges” at specific seat and aggregate level.

    NB2 In GE’17 then YG MRP was a bit of a “shock” and highlighted the “uni seat” issue that most folks (notably the bookies) didn’t. Not so much “fun” this time. You to “guess” where the polls are going rather than be able to spot something that the bookies have missed.

  12. Martinw,
    “There was a fascinating focus group on C4 News.”

    Saw some of it. The group was asked to write a headline they expect to see in six months time. One wrote ‘Brexit boom’.

    So thats what BJ has to deliver. I’d guess the leavers here think it doable, and the remainers think there is no chance whatever.

    Question is if brexit goes forward without a boom, what will leave voters do then?

  13. How does MRP do in factoring in celebrity endorsements – i see that Hugh Grant was photoed on the doorstep with Luciana Berger last night and is encouraging people to tactically vote for her?* Might put some people off of course (!) but maybe draws the attention of a few people who would otherwise not notice much about the possibility of tactical voting. He also was encouraging people to vote labour to kick out IDS.


    *Before you all jump in, this was a rhetorical question. There will be some kind of an effect but putting a number to it, even a rough number, would have little scientific basis (there may be some random study on this somewhere but i would have thought that every situation is unique)

  14. Artemis

    “Over 60s already have free bus and train travel in NI.”

    As they do in Scotland, Wales, and within English regions.

    That wasn’t what I was asking about, but about Prof Howard’s reference to a Labour policy of a “National Oyster Card for all public transport”.

    There are a number of passcard systems in cities around the UK. Is it the intention to replace them all with a “National” card, and is that nation England only, or all-UK?

    It was a straightforward question as to the intended geographic extent of the policy.

  15. @Robbiealive

    “But Miliband admitted he fought a far too timid Tory-light campaign & allowed the Tories to shape the “narrative”.


    Miliband hadn’t really engaged with the core problem that Corbyn is now taking on, and I’m not sure Corbyn really gets it fully.

    Although a lot of the somewhat-liberal, third way centrism, from Atos and PFI, to depressed wages, privatisations and tuition fees, was not really what people were clamouring for, Blair found that ramping up property prices and protecting boomer pensions will buy you quite a bit of third way stuff, albeit at the expense of the youth.

    This double whammy of property and pensions is so powerful it is hard for Corbyn to come up with a manifesto to overpower it.

  16. @ Trevor

    OK, got it.

    CON 341
    LAB 225
    LIB 17
    Brexit 0
    Green 1
    SNP 44
    PlaidC 4
    UKIP 0
    Other 0
    N.Ire 18

  17. @Martinw

    Yes watched it – very sobering viewing for those who want Labour to win or to remain.

    The Tories have done a very good job of getting their message across to their targeted voters.

  18. @Danny – investment has been withheld over recent months due to brexit uncertainty – there may thus be a boost to investment if we leave on 31st January but with the next deadline only 11 months away and uncertainty over what the trading arrangements will be after that maybe there won’t be much of a boost at all.

  19. The Trevors,
    ” With models and MRP analysis coming up with roughly the same numbers then it is not surprising punters are centring on roughly the same outcomes as well ”

    Its not surprising punters are centring on these forecsts because they are splashed all over the news, and even people here talk about them as it they were credible predictions of the outcome.

    The models will produce the wrong seat forecasts if they are given wrong data. If they are given the same data, it isnt too surprising different models will come up with similar predictions, if they are any good as models.

    The probelm is the data. We will not have accurate data over vote share until we get the election results, and can then retrospectively look to see how good the models were. Until then we are making do with out of date data from last week, which simply shows what voters thought then. It doesnt say what they will think on polling day.

    There are clear reasons why vI measured right now could be significantly different by polling day. Indeed, is expected to be different by polling day.

    So why is no one talking about the results they expect in two weeks time instead of the one which might have happened had the poll been last week?

  20. I would suggest that Labour under Corbyn are doing as well as any Labour leader would. They have a coalition of the Anti Tory/ Anti Brexit / Anti Austerity and student vote. The issue is if the Tories get a majority then these conditions may not be at play at the next election to keep this coalition together. If they moved more to the centre they would risk losing votes to Green Party as they become new in thing amongst Younger/ Left wing orientated voters. On the other hand they would gain votes from Con and it might see Lib Dems gaining more seats in the south and rural areas.

  21. Calling DrMibbles !! You said before you are on auto mod. Do you have a view on student voting this time? Will a lot of students have gone home? I never went home early at Uni but I was doing a straight science and we had labs and lectures right until the final day.

  22. Frosty,
    “@Danny – investment has been withheld over recent months due to brexit uncertainty – there may thus be a boost to investment if we leave on 31st January but with the next deadline only 11 months away and uncertainty over what the trading arrangements will be after that maybe there won’t be much of a boost at all.”

    My guess is that a labour win would lead to immediate boost to the economy, house prices rising, investors trying to get ahead of a boom. Because Brexit would be cancelled.

    Whereas a con win at best means another year’s indecision, maybe several years, followed by at best a soft brexit and at worst a very hard one.Either way continuing uncertainty. Investment still on hold. Confidence at rock bottom.

    If labour do win, they will have additional income to match their spending plans. Con win and revenue continues to falter.

    “Yes watched it – very sobering viewing for those who want Labour to win or to remain.”

    I’d say, very sobering viewing for con, because they cannot deliver on their election promises. I think they are in one of those situations where, after an already condemned man promises on pain of death to teach a horse to speak if he is given a year to do it, the hero explains his reasoning as, ‘the horse may die, the king may die or I may die’.

  23. @MATT126

    I think if Labour had changed leaders 18 months, kept the same basic policies but given less time for the Tory press to their work it may have made a difference.

    I think the damage has been done, Labour has has already lost its Leave voting supporters and I cant see them returning to the fold in the next week. I don’t think the Tory VI has peaked – I think a lot of the DKs are actually ’17 Labour Leave voters who will break for the Tories. On reflection, I think Labour will be lucky to keep the gap to 8%.

  24. @TrevorWarne

    Thanks for your explanation…

  25. @Danny

    I’d say, very sobering viewing for con, because they cannot deliver on their election promises.

    That may be – but by that time the damage will most likely have been done.

  26. Some handy charts from FT that show the breakdown in the move in the polls split by Remain and Leave side

    As LDEM shrink and hand Remain VI to LAB then that is less important in terms of seats than LAB being unable to recover Leave VI – as it is the WHERE aspect of the Leave VI that matter (and CON are keeping a chunk of their Remain VI on the view that Corbyn is worse than Brexit – plenty of polling co.s ask that one!)

    There is very little LDEM vote left to squeeze in most LAB-CON marginals (especially in North+Midlands) but despite low GB wide % then CON can still potentially squeeze BXP where they need to (or the current trends reverse a bit, for one or both main parties).

    Still “all to play for” ;)


  27. New thread

  28. @Trevors

    If I had to choose, I would definitely prefer to be in the Tories’ position than that of Labour. Labour simply doesn’t have a single issue that can be used to capture swathes of seats as the Tories do with the Red Wall seats.

    The best Labour can do, if they keep inching up on the Tories until election day, is to break even in terms of seats. That would be relative success for them. They then need to rely on the SNP getting to 50+ to ensure a “well hung” parliament. After all, a hung parliament with the Tories on or around 320 seats is not that hung at all. It’s effectively a majority. However, Tories at 300 would probably be the end of Boris. The polls to date suggest that even in a best case scenario for Labour, the former is far more likely than the latter (320 more likely than 300).

  29. Frosty,

    Re: investments on hold. I don’t share you optimism that ending uncertainty is necessarily a good thing – it depends what the decision actually is.

    This and more is covered in Chris Grey’s blogpost

    “As the certainty grows that the terms of trade are going to be inferior, perhaps very substantially inferior, to single market membership then investment will continue to stall and more individuals and businesses will relocate or make their new investments elsewhere.”

  30. redrich,
    “That may be – but by that time the damage will most likely have been done.”

    Well to them, yes.

    “I think the damage has been done, Labour has already lost its Leave voting supporters ”

    I fancy it had lost them probably by the 2015 election, and gained on its 2015 result in 2017 despite that. The predicted losses in 2017 due to labour going leave failed to occur.

    I can see there is an interpretation of these events that those supporters stayed with labour that time, but now have deserted it. But I dont see it. The evidence from issues labour supporters found most important suggests that 2017 labour leave stayed with labour because they value labour’s other policies more than they valued leaving. While also the percentage of remainers has risen slowly over the years since the referendum, and is even greater now than in 2017. The obvious explanation of why 2017 labour voters might now be ‘dont know’, is that they have found labour unconvincing remainers.

    The yougov tables for VI now compared to 2017 vote show con have retained 71% but lib and lab only 54%. From memory, these numbers sound as though lab have recovered some VI they had lost in earlier surveys.

    What however occurs to me to wonder, is whether this apparent churn or loss between lib and lab isnt loss at all, but voters who have already determined to vote tactically for the opposite party.

    If so, it implies a lot of voters piling up where they would be most useful to lab or lib.

    So what might be regarded as a bad sign, lost voters, could in fact be an indication of useless votes in unwinnable seats being transferred to effective votes in constituencies which are winnable.

  31. @ Danny

    “Libs have done best to my memory when the two big parties dont differ very much and are both being objectionable.”

    You’ve got a situation where both of the main parties are fairly unpopular and led by extraordinarily disliked leaders that few really think should be Prime Minister.

    I’m not on the ground so I can’t know what’s what here but it seems to me that if all the Lib Dems are running on is Brexit, that’s kind of a recipe for political failure. Because ultimately, you have to be for something in politics to win (well….usually anyway). And voters want to know what you’ll do for them.

    “Right now the big issue is brexit, and the two big parties are more or less on opposite sides, though it has been a painfull process getting there. Since there is a clear division on the most important issue of the day, there is no room to waste your vote by supporting a small party.”

    Seems like it cuts both ways. There were Tory held seats in 2017 that unexpectedly went to Labour where the Remain vote was strong. In most of these, increased Lib Dem vote likely puts them back into Tory hands. (Kensington is probably one exception although even there polling shows a Tory lead even on significantly decreased voting intention from last time). But in a number of safe Tory seats that were strong remain, an increased Labour vote probably keeps those seats Tory held.

    You would think that in the Lib Dem – Con marginals, that the Cons all swept in 2015 due to Labour voters no longer tactically voting, the Lib Dems could regain strength based upon the fact that Boris is unpopular.

  32. Kantar, MoE, basically unchanged:

    CON: 44% (+1)
    LAB: 32% (-)
    LDEM: 15% (+1)
    GRN: 3% (-1)
    BREX: 2% (-1)

    via @KantarTNS, 28 Nov – 02 Dec
    Chgs w/ 25 Nov

  33. @PR
    I see this talk about uniting the two wings of the Labour coalition being impossible/difficult. I don’t really see it that way. In my CLP there are a smattering of centrist Blairites and a smattering of zealous Corbynites but the vast majority, including much of Momentum, are not at those poles at all.
    They don’t like Blairite centrist approaches and they do like proper socialist/Soc Dem policies as promoted by JC but they recognise that the country (and voters) need to be persuaded and that a more compromising message will be more likely to get (most of) what they want.
    Corbyn – fairly or not – is quoted on the doorsteps as a negative in this campaign far more widely than in 2017 though McDonnell, arguably ideologically to the left of JC, is more likely to be cited with approval – which is new.
    OK I know – one CLP, a few dozen voters, and all in W London.
    I’d like to see a leader from the centre ground of the Lab party, ie on the left but inclusive, who I believe could carry both wings with her/him bar a few zealots at both ends. If we had that, with someone who inspires trust, I think this election would be no contest. But at present I don’t know who she is.

  34. Wow, that’s stopped the LAB narrowing trend (need 3 to confirm tho)

    LAB: 47% (+8)
    CON: 30% (+1)
    LDEM: 15% (-4)
    GRN: 4% (-1)
    BREX: 3% (-3)

    via @YouGov, 28 Nov – 02 Dec
    Chgs. w/ Nov

  35. but in London LAB are “surging” so most of the LAB front-bench will maintain huge majorities in N1 London


    IDS might be a bit nervous but winning 1-2 more seats in an area where they already have most seats isn’t going to help LAB is they lose dozens in North/Midlands (and a few in Wales?)

  36. NB The 11:38am poll is London only!! Commentary in 11:48am.

  37. In terms of seats then the new London poll suggests only 3 change from GE’17.

    LDEM take Richmond Park from CON (pretty sure that is a safe bet)

    and then LAB and CON swap 1 each.

    LAB take IDS’s seat Chingford and Woodford Green from CON

    but CON take Dagenham and Rainham from LAB

    zzz ZZZ

    I’d be surprised if London was that boring but it’s not where the battlegrounds are in this GE.

1 9 10 11