ComRes released their monthly telephone poll for the Daily Mail last night, topline figures were CON 39%, LAB 30%, LD 9%, UKIP 12%, GRN 4%. While the nine point Conservative lead looks similar to most recent polls, note that ComRes have been showing larger Conservative leads of late (typically around 12 points) so comparing like-to-like this represents a narrowing of the lead. The poll was conducted over the weekend, prior to Jeremy Corbyn’s speech (tabs here)

241 Responses to “ComRes/Mail – CON 39, LAB 30, LD 9, UKIP 12”

1 3 4 5
  1. I know we are not supposed to comment on QT, and that it is a show.

    However, I don’t comment on content – simply saying that I’m convinced that at there will be a major purge at a scale that would probably throw off the Labour Party for 18 months. But it would be healthy from a party point of view, and probably for VI too. Or maybe Tom Watson has a better plan for limiting the number of expulsions, disselections.

  2. @Lazlo

    DD missed an opportunity. Kinnock seemed to be saying if Labour decides against unilateralism Corbyn would have to stand down as leader. I wish DD had pressed him on it.

  3. Lazlo

    “that would probably throw off the Labour Party for 18 months. But it would be healthy from a party point of view, and probably for VI too.”

    That’s more or less the point I made last night. Parties become captured by careerists/opportunists etc and fossilise around their self-protection.

    “Continuing (or at least periodic) revolution” within parties is no bad thing, in order to consign those self-servers to the oblivion [1] that they so richly deserve.

    [1] Except when the media wheel them out from time to time to bewail the current regime.

  4. I really couldn’t believe that there were three politicians on the panel discussing the extension of the Syrian involvement (bombing), and not one of them (or the audience, or the show master) mentioned that there is a non-fly zone for anyone but the Russian airforce for the time being in Syria.

    So, Corbyn is safe on this debate, as it won’t happen for the time being.

    (There are also pieces of news, although seem to be far fetched that Iranian regular troops arrived to Syria).

  5. @ OldNat

    Yea, I noted your point, and I agree.

    @ Cooper2802

    I think Labour MPs don’t know where the boundaries are at the moment, so they are very guarded beyond a ring fence that could be right or wrong.

    From the perspective of an observant of human behaviour (which I occasionally use in a professional setting), it has been fascinating both at the conference and in tonight’s show how elementary beliefs override logical thinking. It is not a critical observation of a particular person, but it was a case that could perhaps be generalised.

  6. The other fun thing about council by elections is seeing e spin after the results –

    Irvine Valley first preferences:(unsurprisingly, SNP won on Green 2nd prefs)
    SNP – 49.8% (+5.3)
    CON – 24.0% (+5.8)
    LAB – 23.8% (-6.3)
    GRN – 2.4% (+2.4)

    Again low turnout, but excited tweets from Tories and right wing journos that the Tories beat Labour.

    Come a full election, one would anticipate that same Tories voting again would have a lower % of the vote.

    What might worry LiS, on this kind of result, is not that Lab Unionists are now voting Tory (though they might be), but that the Corbyn bounce that might have been hoped for from corbyn’s visit today – and finally tasting Irn-Bru, at Kez’s insistence – produced no enthusiasm to vote.

  7. Lazlo

    “(There are also pieces of news, although seem to be far fetched that Iranian regular troops arrived to Syria).”

    I have no idea whether the Lebanese sources are reliable or not.

    And maybe China too?

    All we need now are India, Pakistan and N Korea to join in – as well as Israel (which doubtless already is) and we can have a nuclear party in Syria!

    The Rapture cometh!

  8. @ Old Nat

    The Herald story is rubbish & the link is spread all over this site like litter on a beach.

  9. Amber

    Just drink your Irn-Bru [1], as Kez insists (and remember to put the bottle in the recycling). :-)

    [1] Foul muck, IMHO, and I do agree with Corbyn’s comment that “he had never tasted anything quite like it before” :-)

  10. OldNat

    Don’t mention “Scotland”, Labour MPs told

    It sounds like a classic bit of Scottish Labour control freakery: bossy, pointless, ineffective and immediately leaked to the media. I had great fun at the weekend reading Joe Pike’s Project Fear:

    which has some amazing tales of SLab foolishness during the referendum and the general election

  11. OldNat

    But always being seen with a IrnBru can in his hand worked so well for Jim Murphy. Why stop when you’re ahead?

  12. @ Laszlo

    ‘it has been fascinating both at the conference and in tonight’s show how elementary beliefs override logical thinking.’

    Is this quote, reported the other day in the newspapers, the sort of thing that you’re meaning?

    ”Making her first political appearance since her maternity leave, Reeves said “we will be back” and went on to say that those on the right of the party should go on the doorstep to say the leadership did not represent the party.’

    I thought it quite extraordinary!


    Though previously if someone made a firm commitment to something whilst standing as leader, and was then elected leader, it would be taken as a given that it would become policy – at least for the time being.

    Not actually true for the Labour Party (or indeed other Parties I suspect, come to that). Party policy remains as it is unless explicitly changed by whatever decision-making process a Party has. Even if there is an explicit policy review going on, the old policy remains in place.

    Of course in the past Labour leaders have tended to ignore Party policy completely and make it up as they go along. But Corbyn has spent most of his life complaining about this, and in any case is using the Party’s processes to circumvent having policies imposed on him by the CLP. So he can’t announce that everything is different without looking like a hypocrite and putting the PLP in (legally justified) revolt.

  14. I find it odd Corbyn had never tried Irn-Bru. It’s widely sold in England, and a friend of mine in Sheffield is an avid consumer.

    Personally I think there’s not enough flavour to outweigh the amount of sugar and never buy it, but I have had it a few times.

  15. ‘Elementary beliefs overide logical thinking’

    Indeed- I thought “nuclear weapons did not help America on 9/11” was an absolute stinker of the genre!


    Why odd? I never heard of the stuff until it was in the news. Could be because I don’t drink sugary drinks. I am sure there are lots of stuff sold in supermarkets that not everyone buys.

  17. So kids: where exactly has the post LAB conference / new LAB leader polling bounce gone?

    Anyone able to give some educated observations (as opposed to Corbyn’esque refusnik propaganda)?

  18. I don’t see how they can continue making irn bru now there is nobody producing the girders.

  19. Before the Scots narrative totally takes over, Lab gain in Cherwell DC last night.

    Lab + 5.9%
    Con – 7%
    UKIP +8.6%
    Lib – 1.5%
    Gre – 6.1%

  20. @JohnB160

    Labour won the ward in 2015. Swing from then is 2.6% from Con to Lab.

  21. Ok so Zac Goldsmith has been chosen as Tory candidate for London Mayor. If I remember correctly he’s a bit of a trendy-lefty Conservative and the little snippet on the news had him talking about housing in particular ‘Londoners being priced out of London’

    So what’s the thinking/polling two strong candidates?

  22. @Rob Sheffield

    “Corbyn’esque refusnik propaganda)?”

    Lost none of your flair for lazy labelling, I see. No nuance, or shades of grey, just boxes to fit people into and labels to attach.

    Ladies and Gentleman, I now give you a box labelled “Corbyn’esque Refusniks”.

    I always thought of myself more as a Reeves Revisionist or even a Burnham Believer, but there you go. At least those labels have the merits of being alliterative.

    Corbynite Cretin next, perhaps?


  23. It’s always interesting to see what gets picked up from a leader’s speech and what gets ignored. So while great fuss was made about Corbyn taking material from a speechwriter even though it was offered, everyone seems to have missed his stealing themes from our own Phil Haines:

    So what are our first big campaigns?

    I want to start with a fundamental issue about democratic rights for Britain. Just before Parliament rose for the summer the Tories sneaked out a plan to strike millions of people off the electoral register this December. A year earlier than the advice of the independent Electoral Commission.

    It means two million or more people could lose their right to vote.
    That’s 400,000 people in London. It’s 70,000 people in Glasgow. Thousands in every town and city, village and hamlet all across the country. That’s overwhelmingly students, people in insecure accommodation, and short stay private lets.

    We know why the Tories are doing it. They want to g***ymander next year’s Mayoral election in London by denying hundreds of thousands of Londoners their right to vote. They want to do the same for the Assembly elections in Wales.

    And they want to g***ymander electoral boundaries across the country. By ensuring new constituencies are decided on the basis of the missing registers when the Boundary Commission starts its work in April 2016.

    Conference we are going to do our best to stop them. We will highlight this issue in Parliament and outside. We will work with Labour councils across the country to get people back on the registers. And from today our Labour Party starts a nationwide campaign for all our members to work in every town and city, in every university as students start the new term, to stop the Tory g***ymander. To get people on the electoral register.

    It’s hard work – as I know from 10 years as the election agent for a marginal London constituency. But now we have new resources. The power of social media. The power of our huge new membership. Conference, let’s get to it. Get those people on the register to give us those victories but also to get fairness within our society.[1]

    It’s interestingly that something so internal and geeky should be picked up as Labour’s first campaign – but also significant because it’s something they genuinely can do something about that will make a difference. It is also geared towards the long-term and relies on building up the organisation across the country[2]. I was also impressed that the point was raised about the December figures being used for the new boundaries – something I’ve not seen discussed except here[3].

    Whether the central organisation will be up to it or has even considered doing anything about it before is another matter. I could see union people being brought in run things – something that Corbyn’s campaign did and Watson’s close links would suggest.

    [Reposted from moderation after adjusting Mr Corbyn’s references to Our Gerald]

    [1] Paragraphed up to save space and make more readable. Text taken from:

    though marked ***CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY*** as obviously it would be beyond anyone at LPHQ to do so themselves and put up a definative version for people to read.

    [2] Incidentally it’s also a very good way of getting all those new members involved, training them to door knock and incorporating them into the the local structures. You do wonder how some CLPs have been coping with the influx of new members. The good ones will have been setting up all sort of introductory socials, political discussions, local campaigning and so on to harness all that enthusiasm and keep the new people attached. I’m afraid some other ones will be hoping that all the new people just go away and stop bothering them.

    [3] As with other organisation matters this looks like it has Watson behind it. The comment about working with the Universities was interesting as well – it sounds like the Sheffield model. Did MrNameless have a little chat with Watson during one of his canvassing visits to Hallam?

  24. @Laszlo

    There have been Iranian ‘advisors’ in Syria for some time. Quite a lot of the flow into Europe is of young men who don’t want to die in a general Middle Eastern war. A choice between being crucified or hung on cranes
    ( someone in Iran must be acquainted with the famous hanging of Ewa Paradies ) lovely.

  25. @Roger Mexico,

    Actually, yes. During the second visit (canvassing Banner Cross) we had a long chat about the student campaign and the effect the university had on it.

    There were just shy of 3,000 students on the electoral roll out of 4,200 in the Endcliffe and Ranmoor villages by close of registration – once you strip out the international students that’s very high indeed. About 75% of those registered to vote did so, and according to my friend who was at the count and watching that box, about two thirds of them voted Labour.

  26. @Couper

    Polls that have been conducted so far with Zac v Sadiq (all pre-candidate selection, I think for Sadiq as well as Zac) all suggest a very close race. The Tories will think they’ve done well out of these selections, I suspect some Labour people will be a bit worried. But I think Sadiq should start as favourite – all other things being equal London is more favourable to Labour than the Tories, and I’m not convinced that Zac is quite as good a candidate as some Tories think.

  27. @Roger M

    “It’s interestingly that something so internal and geeky should be picked up as Labour’s first campaign – but also significant because it’s something they genuinely can do something about that will make a difference.”


    One would have thought they’d be doing quite a bit about it already? Says it all if not…

  28. @Crossbat

    “Ladies and Gentleman, I now give you a box labelled “Corbyn’esque Refusniks”.”


    At least you’re not in the English Imperialist box like Amber!!…

    (…unless you’ve ever disagreed with Coups, in which case…)

  29. Typical. Everyone complains about the lack of polls and when one comes out no one talks about it. Anyway, when we’re waiting for Anthony’s view on it here are the tables:

  30. What kind of question is:
    ‘Labour still haven’t faced up to the damage they did to the economy’ ?

    Honestly YouGov is that a professional question or just reinforcing a Tory attack line?

    Perhaps Labour left the economy in a pretty good state, strong enough to withstand the global crash and with growth returning.

    How do I answer if that is my view?

  31. The jury is still out on the effect of the new LP members. Down here despite personal invitations including door knocking they are not “engaging” in any numbers. We could do with the numbers but I am beginning to suspect that they are cyber warriors, unfortunately the 2016 local elections will not be won and lost in cyber space, a few more years before that is the case.
    Deselecting an MP would also involve attending the odd meeting and on support coalescing around an alternative candidate.
    I am reserving judgment until May next year, if the New Model Army turns out we will sweep to victory, if not the result will reflect the national swing, as usual.

  32. Couper
    “Honestly YouGov is that a professional question or just reinforcing a Tory attack line?”

    This raises something I have been thinking about recently, I should state I’m not accusing YouGov of rigging polls or anything of the sort and for the likes of me I can’t see why they might be biased towards one party or another but some of YouGov’s actions of late concern me.

    For example several very recent articles on the YouGov website are at best very pessimistic about Corbyn at worst outright hostile, honestly they wouldn’t look out of place in the Daily Mail. For articles designed to explain, impartially the results of polls all the Corbyn/Lab related ones seem to contain very leading questions, or the summary article seems to cherry pick results to paint a negative picture often going to pretty extreme lengths to find something to criticise.

    For example one is prefaced with the tag line
    “Jeremy Corbyn’s supporters and the general public are divided by a gulf that is unprecedented in modern British politics”

    OK that’s fairly sensational what evidence do we have for this. Well the questions are pretty woolly. For example….

    How left wing do you think you are=Pretty irrelevant since the public don’t think on left right spectrums while politico’s always do.

    Support abolition of private schools=That’s a very “out there” policy that even Corbyn doesn’t advocate.

    Support abolishing the monarchy=Another “out there” policy that Corbyn says he won’t campaign on.

    Who do you admire more Tony Blair or Tony Benn=Most people won’t even know who the latter is.

    Then one of the most leading questions I’ve ever seen “Should the government do more to help the poor, by taxing everybody else?” Hell what answer did they expect from a question like that?

    The only reasonably legitimate questions was “Who do you think would be a better PM Corbyn or Osborne?”. What’s weird is the random comparison they give, comparing the results of those who voted Corbyn in the leadership election (96% say Corbyn would be better and I’m honestly surprised its that low) vs the potential Lab voter category where only 32% say Corbyn would be better, but this compares to only 25% who say Osborne and a very large 44% don’t know vote, so what on earth does this question prove? Corbyn voters like Corbyn more than Osborne? SHOCK!!!!

    The only interesting part of that question is the GB electorate as a whole result which they oddly omit from the article. On face value its a bit concerning for Lab but not insurmountable. (Osborne 33%, Corbyn 24% Not Sure 43%) Why was this omitted its the only worthwhile part of the survey?

  33. Re: by-elections in Scotland

    SNP retain big lead but average SNP lead over Labour is approx 15%, this compares to a 2015 general election SNP lead of 26%. So maybe that’s something to watch – could be a Corbyn effect. Tories have gained in all Scottish seats.

  34. As Anthony hasn’t had time to comment yet, I add my piece. I’ve no doubt the headline that will be promulgated will be on the response to Do you think Jeremy Corbyn will do well or badly as leader of the Labour party? (Asked about Ed Miliband in 2010) where ‘total well’ drops from 50% to 36% and ‘total badly’ rises from 24% to 44%. But such polling on what people ‘think’ will happen tends (logically enough) to reflect the media rather than people’s own feelings, and coverage of Corbyn hasn’t exactly been positive or optimistic on the whole.

    In fact it, and the other questions, show a similar picture to other polls. The level of support is actually about the same as for Miliband, but the number undecided is very much less than it was five years ago[1]. The big increase is in ‘Very badly’, almost entirely from the supporters of other Parties (and you suspect the more diehard ones).

    Similarly the number who are ‘delighted’ with the the prospect of the new leader as PM is similar (18% v 20%), but the rise is in ‘dismayed’ (28% to 44%) again nearly all from other Parties. And the increase in those saying that “Labour has moved to the Left” under its new leader and that this is “a bad thing for Labour” comes from don’t knows. Contrariwise the increase in those say it’s true and a good thing (21% to 32%) comes from a decrease in those saying it’s untrue. Which is probably true enough.

    There also a series of ten statements about the Labour Party and it’s notable that the majority of them only vary from 2010 by a few points. There are only two significant changes[2]: a drop in agreement with Labour these days are mainly a party for immigrants, benefit claimants and trade unions – indeed more now disagree[3]; and an increase in If Labour returned to government they would put the country into even more debt.

    The second of these probably explains why McDonnell and Corbyn unexpectedly decide to tackle the deficit theme so early, though most of the change may have happened before the last election (it’s the change over five years) rather than because of Corbyn. But the overall picture is one of little change.

    Of course Labour needs to do more than just stay in the same place and there are a few worrying hints in the minutiae of the poll. But the main picture is of stasis rather than a disastrous collapse caused by the election of Corbyn.

    [1] There is also technical reasons for this in this particular poll, which was exactly five years after the 2010 one. That was only taken after Miliband had been leader for three days, Corbyn was elected 16 days before his and of course was seen as the front-runner from late July. Ed’s election was a surprise to all except, well, the UKPR gang.

    [2] The biggest drop is in agreement with After a short period in opposition Labour will be ready for a quick return to office, but given that Labour has already had five years in opposition, people presumably felt that was a logical impossibility.

    [3] There seems some evidence that Labour is winning the argument on benefits, perhaps as more people realise that they, or those close to them, may be affected by the cuts as well. The ComRes poll showed that 42% would now trust Labour more on benefits and only 33% the Conservatives. Recently the area had been more of a Tory plus because being seen to be ‘tough’ on benefits is considered important.

  35. There were seven by-elections in Scotland last night SNP won 6 and the final went to an independent. It looks like Tories increasing their vote but it is very low turnout and as we know Tories vote.

    There is no sign that Corbyn is helping Labour or that he is helping turnout although there could be churn going on. The danger for Scottish Labour is that the unionists align behind the Conservatives, which I think is very possible.

    Of course this is Scotland and the dynamic in England is very different. And Labour won a local election there with a small swing.

    I have to say I feel very sorry for Corbyn, he has the responsibility of the hopes of all his supporters on his shoulders, and his PLP are being so unsupportive. Can you imagine a Tory leader being greeted with such nastiness after an over-whelming election. It’s a bit like John Major and his ‘xxx’ but it has started immediately after Corbyn’s election so he hasn’t been given a chance.

  36. @couper2802

    “There is no sign that Corbyn is helping Labour”

    Well not really. If you look at the average of the by-election results, Labour have halved the SNP’s lead since the general election. Of course they’re only by-elections and we need much more data to be sure of anything, but from the information we have so far it seems that the lead has changed.

  37. @Pete B
    @Bill Patrick

    The small chance fortnight since comes on the back of similar change since before the migrantness though.
    Yougovs Con/UKIP, May to Oct

    There’s many reasons for Cons to change, fewer for UKIP. I’m not up for triple regression statistical T tests or whatnot, but if we really must talk about polls, that _looks_ like a change.

  38. @Omnishambles

    They’re local elections with very low turnouts and all (Moray aside) with a swing from Labour to SNP, I don’t think you can compare to the GE. In Ayrshire Labour was in first place in 2020 and in Linlithgow Conservatives in first place in 2020, yet SNP won them both.

    This is the honeymoon period for Corbyn, if he was going to have an enthuse Scots and attract people back to Labour, I wouldn’t have expected Labour’s % share to grow not fall and Labour to win one or two of the seats.

  39. @Omnjshambles

    I realise my last paragraph makes absolutely no sense but you get the drift – LiS need a game changer and if Corbyn is a game changer I would have expected Labour to turnout and potentially win one or two of these seats.

  40. @couper2802

    But the last time these local seats were contested was years ago, I think around 2012. So any swing which has happened since the ascendancy of Corbyn has to be set against the entire rise of the SNP. The net is clearly a swing to the SNP, but clearly if the Labour/SNP situation hasn’t changed since the general election, we would expect a much larger SNP swing.

    Let’s be clear I’m not saying Labour are going to do great in the 2016 Scotland elections, just that – from the tiny amount of info we have right now – the SNP’s lead may not be as huge as it was.

    BTW new thread

1 3 4 5