Ipsos MORI’s monthly political monitor has a much closer race than ICM’s last poll. Topline figures are CON 36%, LAB 35%, LDEM 11%, UKIP 8%, GRN 4% (full tabs are here.)

The poll was conducted over the weekend before Theresa May became Prime Minister, though did include a question on whether people thought she had what it took to be a good Prime Minister (55% of people though she did, 27% did not).

Given it is being rampantly misrepresented on social media, I should also explain about MORI’s turnout filter and how they present their figures (and why, therefore, some people are tweeting entirely different MORI figures!). These days the overwhelming majority of opinion polls contain some sort of adjustment for how likely people are to vote. The general pattern is that older people and middle class people are more likely to vote than younger people and working class people; older people and middle class people are also more likely to vote Conservative, younger people and working class people more likely to vote Labour. This means if a poll just included everyone, with no reference to how likely or unlikely they actually are to vote, then it would overstate Labour when compared to actual election results.

Polling companies account for this by weighting by likelihood to vote (the more likely you are to vote, the more your answer is counted) or filtering by likelihood to vote (only taking people who say they are likely to vote), based either on how likely people say they are to vote, or on demographic modelling. In the case of MORI, their topline figures are based only on people who say they are at least 9/10 likely to vote AND that they always, usually or have sometimes voted in the past. This makes a substantial difference to their topline figures – without this adjustment they would have been showing a five point Labour lead.

MORI’s headline figure is the one that is adjusted for turnout – the one point Conservative lead – which they regard as a better indicator of actual voting intention. However, because MORI’s political monitor has been going since the 1970s they still publish the figures without the turnout adjustment to preserve the data trend, even if they don’t feel it paints an accurate picture in an era of lower turnouts.

In short, if you are looking at Ipsos MORI figures with a view to seeing how well the parties might do in a general election tomorrow, you need to look at the figures that account for how likely people actually are to vote, not take false solace from figures that don’t take turnout into account.

842 Responses to “Ipsos MORI/Standard – CON 36, LAB 35, LD 11, UKIP 8”

1 15 16 17
  1. @ Mr Nameless

    In a way, all the major English parties are pretty close to each other (well, PLP), which creates these odd transition. In a link I shared a day or two ago, as many as 15% of new London labour members voted for the green mayoral candidate. I think it is the ingrained habits it the LP that obstruct the attempt to create a coalition.

    While you are right in stating that the labour left has been against PR, it may eventually go to the heads that in a coalition the important is the leading roles and the compromises, so PR would actually good for the left (providing that the LP thinks it’s a leftist party).

    Now the LibDems were punished for going in a coalition. But was it because they formed a coalition with the Toeies (the other one had no chance) rather than having a coalition at all.

  2. Pete B
    Wishful thinking I’m afraid it’s only just begun.

  3. @ Wood

    The whole campaign didn’t make any sense

    However, people (the electorate) translated these messages (and ignored others, as they always do when they read newspapers, hence the newspaper influence is hugely overstated) to their everyday life, or to their prejudices, and voted accordingly – the turnout was huge. Actually, remain was miserable in a political sense, but in terms of aesthetics was not worse that leave …

    Saatchi put out their adverts that the remain campaign didn’t approve. It’s very, very interesting.

  4. @ Pete B

    I have been to a family birthday party (special one). It has a good Irish root, so it was a large one.

    All but three members of the family (oddly one in Scotland voted for Leave) voted for Remain, and they continued to argue even among each other, so it will not go away any time soon. So, people are carrying on with the argument.

    Furthermore, well, it is my interpretation from hearing them – C1B) they want the negotiations to fail … Now that’s something.

  5. Back from family holiday in Islay with my kids and grandkids.

    Good to see Islay joining in the Scotland wide campaign against Trident renewal, with a rally in Bowmore.

    Haven’t seen much on the Sturgeon/May meeting but, judging by the report in Saturday’s Herald, it looks like a sensible bit of negotiation between the new leaders

  6. Sorry C1B was meant to describe the people’s social stratification.

  7. Pete B
    Wishful thinking I’m afraid it’s only just begun.

    but bear in mind…. sharing horizons that are new to us, talkin’ it over, just the two of us, workin’ together day to day….

    It will be alright in the end.

  8. @ALEC
    @Robert Newark – yes, I’ve always found the left to be characterized by a near total lack of imagination. Any good ideas come from unconventional sources and they tend to be very slow to pick up on radical thinking, being generally hidebound by structure and process instead of impact and results.’

    You may be right but I was a bit surprised to read that Lord Mandelson now puts the blame for Brexit ‘clearly, logically and in full at the feet of New Labour’.


    ‘The anti-austerity agenda is not only correct, but necessary. Furthermore, it needs to be embraced whole heartedly by Labour’s right wing and communicated effectively to the public. Only if Labour does this (because the Conservatives can’t or won’t) can anti-immigration sentiment be challenged and only then will a Prime Minister have the public support for a beneficial trade deal with the EU. He even held out the prospect that, were there a significant enough swing in public opinion, a pragmatic spanner might be thrown into the one-way travellator of Article 50, potentially reversing the decision to leave the EU.’


  9. Forgot to question why Mandelson isn’t supporting Jeremy Corbyn … or is this the old habit of triangulating?

  10. “can anti-immigration sentiment be challenged ”

    Because stealing skilled staff from abroad is the only way the elite class can think to grow the economy.

    Why spend money educating and training your own people, when you can get another country to spend the money on their own people, and then you move in an nick them.

    That old colonial attitude of raiding foreign countries for their resources refuses to die I see.

    Net immigration is a way of avoiding the tough questions about productivity and acceptable activities. That’s why politicians love it. None of them have to live with the social consequences of the policy. They just extract the benefits.


    Me too.

    I had been hoping Cons would shift in this direction after DC-but didn’t expect it to be in such dramatic circumstances.

  12. @ Szygy & Alec

    The PM said “Brexit means Brexit” and methinks the “lady is not for turning”. The principle has been decided and there is no need for a 2nd vote.

    As for the COMRES poll, it is revealing that among Labour votes, there is more support for Corbyn, than either of his 2 challengers for the Labour leadership. There is no point in ditching him until he has failed electorally, and this has not yet happened. People don’t like a dishonourable Brutus (Heseltine/Gove or Eagle/Smith).

  13. ALEC

    @” if St. Theresa does what she says on the tin she will be elevated to a deity, ”

    No she won’t. She will just be a moderately competent politician with broad national appeal.-the most one can ask or expect.
    Messiahs are to be profoundly mistrusted.

    @”You may be taken in by the first day speeches of an incoming Tory PM, but some of us have seen it all before.”

    Yes-I’ve seen & heard a few-14 or 15 PMs . Can’t remember all their speeches though.

    But It wasn’t only her “first day speech” Alec. It was her honesty with her Party 14 years ago , and the determination with which she has retained those views. And it is the views of the man who wrote the Downing Street speech. I lived in Birmingham too & came to appreciate Joseph Chamberlain:-


    Chamberlain’s active championing of civic institutions & localised industrial activism sit well with GO’s Northern Powerhouse. Note that May criticised the latter , not for its central philosophy, but its narrow focus.

    No doubt May will disappoint-they usually do. But some don’t & I think she stands a chance.

    If I were to identify the areas of most risk for her they would be her alleged control freakery. -She will not be able to micromanage what she wants to do domestically . Effective teams have freedom & delegated authority-as well as loyalty to the leader.
    and the limits & risks of direct State intervention in Industrial Policy. Provided her emulation of Jo Chamberlain doesn’t stray into “Picking Winners ” again she just might pull it off.

    Having said that, I would trust her with a £100bn of fiscal expansion, but wouldn’t let Corbyn/McDonnell within a mile of it :-)


    @” it demonstrates that Scotland has rather different views.”

    Well who would have thought it ?

    I was more interested in revelations like this actually :-


  15. I remember when Cameron & Clegg formed their duo, I said that if they succeeded in getting rid of deficit, restoring UK manufacturing base and rebalancing exports against imports (all promised – remember the march of the makers?) then they would deserve my vote.

    Well, they didn’t get my vote.

  16. @ Candy

    Turns out the EU Commission knew about VW’s diesel emissions problems since 2010:

    My local garage proprietor told me about the emission fiddles nearly a year before the story broke.

  17. A worry for Conservatives that only 10% of people think Mrs May would be a great person to go to the pub with?

  18. Reported by Number Cruncher Politics:


    CON 39 (+1)
    LAB 29 (-1)
    LD 9 (+1)
    UKIP 14 (-1)
    GRN 4 (=)
    SNP 4 (-1)

    Apparently the Conservative lead increases to 15 pp when the leaders are named.

  19. Muddy waters that poll will concern Labour party members who are keen to win the next election.

    I see that Smith is on Andrew Marr this morning.

  20. ProfHoward

    Muddy waters that poll will concern Labour party members who are keen to win the next election

    Indeed. But it’s not obvious to me how many LP members fall into that category.

  21. “Continuity Labour” headed by Kinnock jnr ………mmmm :-)

  22. @Prohhoward

    A worry for Conservatives that only 10% of people think Mrs May would be a great person to go to the pub with?

    I don’t think this matters in the slightest.

    The characteristics of a drinking buddy are probably a tad different to those required for PM.

    I hope.

  23. And so it goes no !

    ” Mr Corbyn vowed to overturn the latest attempt by rebel MPs to oust him as leader and insists he won’t quit as he has a responsibility to members who voted him in.
    Jeremy Corbyn is exploring a legal challenge to new Labour leadership voting rules stitching him up.
    In a sensational twist to the civil war tearing Labour apart , Mr Corbyn vowed – in an interview with the Sunday Mirror – to overturn the latest move to oust him.
    It comes after Labour’s ruling national executive imposed a back-dated voting ban on members who joined after January 12.

    Anyone wanting a say on who will be leader has just two days this week to sign up and must pay £25, compared with £3 last year.

    That also goes for union members opting for Labour membership.

    Mr Corbyn said: “I’m very concerned. We haven’t heard the end of this. A lot of people joined the party in the last six months and will be extremely annoyed.

    “They joined because they want to be involved in the party and they’re not being allowed to.

    “There may be a legal move, but nothing has been decided yet. Not by me anyway.”

    What a rabble.

  24. So yea of little faith…what did I tell you?

    Nicola on Marr confirms Scotland has a ‘veto’ on Brexit.

    Or in her words when directly asked if Scotland has a veto, answers twice that ‘Scotland is in a very strong position’

    Of course T May can change her mind and go ahead without Scotland’s agreement but the situation at the moment is that Scotland has to agree before article 50 is triggered. As previously pointed out Scotland will only agree if Scotland is guaranteed to remain in EU, which is a long shot.

    So what is May playing at? Is this May’s out, no Brexit and Scotland will take the blame?

  25. @Colin

    Being objective, it seems to be Corbyn’s critics who are changing/bending the rules ad-hoc through this process

    The question you raise is valid, but which side needs to provide the answers?

  26. @ProfHoward

    I have no doubt Mrs May is very popular and it is absolute testament to the Conservative’s unity and election winning abilities. To lose an referendum without a plan, lose a PM, install a new PM & have a 10% lead in the polls within a month is incredible.

    There has been almost no fall out amongst Conservatives, the membership has happily accepted not having a vote in the leadership and the world goes on.

    So my interest is: is there anyway Labour can save itself. Out of the ashes of this meltdown con a left of centre party arise, a party that can be in a position to challenge the Conservatives in 2020?

  27. Neil Wilson

    Brilliant post at 7.30.


  28. Neil Wilson

    It surprises me that Labour doesn’t say it.

    Shouldn’t they be pressing for training our own rather than importing from abroad?

  29. Justine Greening is very good thing for the Conservatives isn’t she?

    Owen Smith v Angela Eagle: hard to predict this but I think Smith.


  30. @Couper

    Or in her words when directly asked if Scotland has a veto, answers twice that ‘Scotland is in a very strong position’

    Though I hope she does, that”s the kind of circumlocution that could equally be read as confirming the she doesn’t have a veto.

  31. COLIN
    I was more interested in revelations like this actually

    The link you provided doesn’t seem to quote the source, but the graph shown does seem to be about the same as p9 of the new ComRes poll’s tables. The data isn’t available [and the cross-break too small] to do a similar breakdown for Scotland, although the national cross-breaks are shown on p9 as:

    E & W: May 59% Corbyn 19%
    S: May 44% Corbyn 25%

    Given that in SGE 2016 SLab got only 22.6% of the plurality vote and 19.1% of the de Hondt vote, that represents improvement for them in Scotland, so perhaps a pity that Kez isn’t a Corbynista.

    Clearly Lab have a major problem until or unless they can reconcile their internal problems and become an effective opposition. Eagle & Smith didn’t seem to be in a mood for that on Marr this morning, so little is likely to improve for Lab before the autumn.

  32. Barbazenzero/CattmanJeff – Caroline Lucas’s bill is a Ten Minute Rule bill. The debate on Wednesday will be purely to see if it can be introduced and get its first reading, and they normally go through on a voice vote rather than have an actual division.

    It’s is extremely unlikely it will ever even be debated for second reading, let alone get it as there is no time provided for Private Member’s Bills under the 10 minute rule, only for those Private Member’s Bills introduced through the ballot procedure.

    In practice the ten minute rule procedure is more an opportunity for MPs to speak about a subject of their choice for ten minutes than a realistic route for legislation. The actual Bill won’t necessarily ever be printed, not all ten minute Bills are, often they discuss only the principle and leave it at that.

  33. CANDY
    Turns out the EU Commission knew about VW’s diesel emissions problems since 2010

    Shock horror. EU bad again. To be fair, the article itself only claims that: Since at least 2010, the European Commission has been in possession of concrete evidence….

    Yet you don’t mention that it took until 2012 for the RDE-LDV working group to examine and confirm that evidence, at which time the EC quite rightly informed the relevant ministries in several EU countries, including the British, French and German environment ministries.

    So the EC respected the sovereignty of the member states and in the UK it was the Con government which suppressed the evidence-based information provided by the EC for 3 years.

    Yes, how awful that the EC didn’t just ring the tabloids in 2010 before they had proof! Or would that have been an even better EU bad story?

    In fact, this is a fairly good example of the way the unionist media in Scotland manufactured SNP bad stories to the point where much of the population have ceased to countenance them.

    Doubtless the same media approach in the EU referendum actually helped to secure the remain majority in every voting region in Scotland.


    Thanks for that. I’d hoped that it would be an early slot in the Private Members Bill process, which would have outed some of the Lab detractors, but at least being straight after P*M*Qs [gets automodded without the *s] it has a chance of being noticed.

  35. Colin

    Wonderful quote from the mirror, demonstrating that its perfectly possible to report one thing and include quotes which totally contradict the article. No one even notices!

  36. @Barbazenaero

    Are you claiming that Der Spiegel – who broke this story and whose link I provided – is “unionist media”?

    I’m afraid you’ve quite lost the plot.

  37. Coup
    It isn’t a veto.

    “Are you pregnant Mrs Bloggs?”
    “Well, I’m in a very strong position ”
    “Yes, but are you pregnant?”
    “I’ve just told you,I’m in a very strong position “…….

  38. CANDY
    Are you claiming that Der Spiegel – who broke this story and whose link I provided – is “unionist media”?

    Not at all. I suggest you’re trying to claim it’s an “EU bad” story when it’s actually an “EU cautious but member states bad” story. Perhaps the measured reporting threw you off the scent – it’s in the kind of language the FT uses rather than the Sun’s.

    Should the EC have asked experts to have confirmed the evidence? Yes, in my opinion, and those experts could have informed their own governments in the meantime should they have thought it wise to do so before the evidence was clear.

    I’m afraid you’ve quite lost the plot.

    The “plot” is clearly to smear the EU, at which you seem to be inexpert but very keen to do, for reasons you never explain.

  39. Valerie

    Quite correct. She was speaking to Marr as I read Coupers comment. Sturgeon does not have a veto, she is in a strong position (in her view.) If she had a veto, she would have said, Yes, I have a veto.

  40. What is Brexit?

    Brexit means leave the EU. That’s it. That’s all.

    We will trigger Article 50 of the Treaty of Lisbon. This will be approved via an Act of Parliament.
    On immigration, at the end of the two years, in order to restrict the numbers, certain market
    sectors will require foreign workers to register with the local police, perhaps every quarter.
    Probably there will be other additional administrative (and onerous) processes applied, to also claim to dissuade people to come here.
    I can see thinking down this track as being able to create a persuadable argument
    to meet the Brexit demand of controlling immigration.

    For trade I can also see another administrative solution. Non-tariff barriers (NTBs) will be agreed such that we can continue to trade freely within Europe, but some sectors, probably within agriculture given the influence of both the French and Eastern European countries, will required additional paperwork to enable trade to continue.

    That is Brexit.

    Perhaps after five or 10 years, these measures will start to be gradually reduced until we reach a point, perhaps 2030, when the UK moves to a Norway-EEA-equivalent relationship. We will effectively have freedom of movement but it will be controllable via administrative processes that we can choose to apply at any time, but will be countered by the EU NTBs, so it in fact makes no sense in invoking them anyway – but we CAN, if we want. Oh, yes, we can.

    So this is what will happen, after a number of years sliding to this position.

    That is where Brexit will take us (basically back into the EU!).

  41. Two more Islamic attacks, one in France, another in Germany.

    With the French now more or less openly blaming the insanity of Chancellor Merkel for allowing so many migrants into her country without vetting any of them, and now an axeman injuring 20 on a train near Würzburg surely her poll ratings must have fallen through the floor?

    Makes you wonder what it takes for people to realise the monstrous mistakes of a leader makes them too dangerous to continue in power.

  42. Recent YouGov poll shows 44% of people back Trident, 22% oppose, 24% aren’t sure.

    The other 10% fancy Corbyn’s idea of unarmed submarines. I want some of what they’re smoking.

1 15 16 17