UK Opinion Polls Thread

[Filuwaúrdjan]

People read manifestos?

Alright, anyone who voted for this, this or even this.

Ah, well, yes. But then those still pledged to voting LibDem generally didn't do so for those reasons. The people that did are the ones who've gone.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

People read manifestos?

Alright, anyone who voted for this, this or even this.

Ah, well, yes. But then those still pledged to voting LibDem generally didn't do so for those reasons. The people that did are the ones who've gone.

It seems that about a third of their core vote is opposed to the coalition government, I have no idea what kind of current LibDem voter would be against the Tories, Cameron, tuition fees yet still support the party.

Do you have any ideas?

[You kip if you want to...]

People read manifestos?

Alright, anyone who voted for this, this or even this.

Ah, well, yes. But then those still pledged to voting LibDem generally didn't do so for those reasons. The people that did are the ones who've gone.

It seems that about a third of their core vote is opposed to the coalition government, I have no idea what kind of current LibDem voter would be against the Tories, Cameron, tuition fees yet still support the party.

Do you have any ideas?

I've met one or two who oppose Tories and tuition fees. They seem very self-hating in their politics. They're the type of people who stone-cold honestly believe that the Liberal Democrats are still liberal in the small-L sense of the word.

[You kip if you want to...]

Dave still leads on prefered PM:

David Cameron 35 (+1 on July 19-20)
Ed Miliband 25 (nc)
Nick Clegg 6 (nc)

Headlines from this YouGov are 43-35-10 to Labour.

Just 5% are decided on their prefered PM, compared to 29% of Labour supporters. Ed's having a hard time turning those former LibDem voters from "don't knows" to "EM4PM"s.

39% of voters want a government involving the Tories (majority or otherwise), 43% want a government involving Labour (majority or otherwise).

38% of voters think the Tories will atleast the the largest party at the next election, 42% think it'll be Labour.

[minionofmidas]

My theory is that the Tories look dirty, and saying you back the LibDems is a way of saying "I back Cameron, but he's dirty"

Quite likely, yeah. Intracoalition shifts of that kind are very common where coalitions are common.
Or it's just noise.

[republicanism]

There is a redistricting prior to the next elections, right? How will it affect the current bias towards Labour?

[YL]

There is a redistricting prior to the next elections, right? How will it affect the current bias towards Labour?

Off topic for this thread, but:

No-one really knows at the moment.  It'll probably hurt Labour a bit, partly because Wales, where Labour are strong, is currently over-represented and this is being ended, and partly because some more Labour-inclined areas of England are losing proportionately more seats.  (NB the idea of over-represented Labour inner cities and under-represented Tory suburbs and countryside is over-simplified: many inner city constituencies have been growing in the last few years, and e.g. Manchester Central now has one of the biggest electorates in the country.)  However, my understanding is that most of the "bias" to Labour is a differential turnout effect, not one due to the constituency sizes, so it probably won't change things in the Tories' favour as much as some of them seem to think.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The key thing is that the 'bias' in favour of Labour isn't quite what people (especially Tories) think it is. At the last election, for example, Labour took about 40% of seats on about 30% of the vote, the Tories about 47% on about 37%. The 'bias' is that it is much easier for Labour to win a majority of seats, largely because of the strong relationship between patterns of class, turnout and Labour voting; it has nothing to do with the size of constituencies and is (in any case) not the sort of 'bias' that ought to be 'corrected', even if it were possible to do something about it. In my admittedly partisan opinion, anyway.

There's also the strangely ignored fact that since 1997 the LibDems have represented large parts of what was once post-war Tory bedrock, while Labour still has a near monopoly of representation in its post-war strongholds. Of course if current polls are even vaguely predictive, then that will cease to be an issue at the next election, no matter the boundaries.

[republicanism]

it has nothing to do with the size of constituencies

Well it has, when there are less Labour constituencies after redistricting. And that is what my question was about: To what degree will redistricting affect the Labour strongholds in the North in England and in Wales? Will it make it significantly more difficult for Labour to achieve a majority?

And by the way I am the last one to complain about the fact that Labour could get a majority more easily than the Tories.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

And that is what my question was about: To what degree will redistricting affect the Labour strongholds in the North in England and in Wales? Will it make it significantly more difficult for Labour to achieve a majority?

Won't find that out until we get a look at the new maps, basically. But it would be unlikely to be significantly harder unless the maps were drawn with that in mind; more likely is that it will be a little more difficult.

As to specifics, Labour won't be the only party that will lose seats in Wales as a result of the slashing of the number of seats (which is actually also the ending of a traditional constitutional 'protection' of Wales as a small but distinct nation), but because we hold 19 out of 23 seats in South Wales (20 out of 24 if you include Llanelli) we'll be hit harder. The same will be true of some other industrial areas in England, like the Black Country.

[Phony Moderate]

The polls have been incredibly stable since about December.

[You kip if you want to...]

This week's Sunday Times/YouGov, changes since last week:

44% (nc) Labour
35% (nc) Conservative
9% (-1) Liberal Democrats

Doing well/badly:

David Cameron - 40/54 (-1/+2) -14 net
Ed Miliband - 32/54 (-2/+3) -22 net
Nick Clegg - 20/70 (-4/+4) -50 net

Bad economic news is what's hurting Nick and Dave, presumably, although I can't think of why Clegg's suddenly dropped 4 points this week, maybe a return to his norm after hackgate. A post-hackgate slump appears to be Miliband's problem as he disappears from TV during the recess and the shine of the scandal wears off. Down from his "highs" of -15, he's far from his lows of -34 after his poor handling of the strikes at the end of June and his infamous "get back around the negotiating table" interview.

In terms of the headlines, Labour appear to be moving further away from 6-point leads, more into the range of 8-9 point leads. The next major changes probably won't be until conference season (or if the world economy starts to lurch even further over the cliff before then).

[You kip if you want to...]

Take these with a grit bin of salt, but Survation (a questionable company to begin with) have taken some constituency polls of the areas affected by the Bombardier row.

Derbyshire South (Heather Wheeler)
45.9% (+14.5%)
31.9% (-13.6%)

Derby North (Chris Williamson)
51.1% (+18.1%)
23.0% (-7.7%)

"The Liberal Democrats would suffer heavy losses in both seats."

No full details out yet.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/aug/22/bombardier-conservatives-south-derbyshire

[You kip if you want to...]

The SNP take a 9% lead over Labour for Westminister.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3958

[afleitch]

The SNP take a 9% lead over Labour for Westminister.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3958

Expected. The SNP lead Labour in most polls in Scotland between 2007 and the start of the GE campaign. I expect them to do so again, to a greater extent...until the next GE

The Holyrood Constituency figures are worse for Labour and reduce them to 5 constituency seats, with the Tories on 1 and the Lib Dems on...2 (thank's to the Orkney/Shetland split)

[You kip if you want to...]

The SNP take a 9% lead over Labour for Westminister.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3958

Expected. The SNP lead Labour in most polls in Scotland between 2007 and the start of the GE campaign. I expect them to do so again, to a greater extent...until the next GE

Counting Scotland votes to stay in the Union.

[You kip if you want to...]

Most accurate pollster has LibDems plunging following conference, LOL.

38 (+2)
37 (nc)
14 (-3)

Ed's approvals are horrific, mind. Worse than Clegg's.

[republicanism]

That is an ICM poll, right? Checking wikipedia, no other pollster had the LDems so high and Labour so low sfor month.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Yes, ICM have been showing a consistently different picture for quite a while now. Significant? Probably not. Brutal reality is that the political situation we have now is completely new and untested so, to an even greater extent than normal, far more of it is guesswork than any company would be prepared to admit.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Posted simply because it's... er... different.

[You kip if you want to...]

Posted simply because it's... er... different.

Sort've shows how the Cameroons aren't New Labour and Labour in 2011 isn't the Tories in 1998...

[You kip if you want to...]

Pretty damning numbers on Ed's leadership in the Sunday Times/YouGov this week.
http://today.yougov.co.uk/sites/today.yougov.co.uk/files/yg-archives-pol-st-results-23-250911.pdf

"Best leader of the Labour Party":
30% - David Miliband
9% - Ed Miliband
8% - Ed Balls
6% - Harriet Harman
2% - Yvette Cooper

Also, a plurality see Ed as a Robin Reliant, if the leaders were cars.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Of course he does have image problems, but those questions were specifically designed to produce a certain set of headlines.

[Leftbehind]

That is an ICM poll, right? Checking wikipedia, no other pollster had the LDems so high and Labour so low sfor month.

Yeah ICM tends to consistently state by far the highest Lib Dem support, most of it's accounted for their presumption that 50% of Don't Knows will go back to their former party - which always helps government parties, but especially so when they've disillusioned large swathes of their support like the Lib Dems have done - but even then, there's about 2% either way.

I find it's worth checking the tables to see the figures before the adjustments, in any case.

An interesting poll recently by Yougov on regional representation [tables here] -
"How well or badly do you think the x party represents and understands voters in..." (Good - Neither - Bad - D/K)

Labour;

Scotland North Wales Midlands South

32% | 17% | 26% | 25% 41% | 16% | 23% | 20% 30% | 21% | 23% | 25% 30% | 22% | 26% | 22% 19% | 20% | 43% | 18%

Tory;

Scotland North Wales Midlands South

10% | 17% | 52% | 21% 12% | 18% | 52% | 18% 11% | 22% | 45% | 22% 21% | 22% | 37% | 20% 46% | 16% | 22% | 16%

[You kip if you want to...]

That is an ICM poll, right? Checking wikipedia, no other pollster had the LDems so high and Labour so low sfor month.

Yeah ICM tends to consistently state by far the highest Lib Dem support, most of it's accounted for their presumption that 50% of Don't Knows will go back to their former party - which always helps government parties, but especially so when they've disillusioned large swathes of their support like the Lib Dems have done - but even then, there's about 2% either way.

I find it's worth checking the tables to see the figures before the adjustments, in any case.

An interesting poll recently by Yougov on regional representation [tables here] -
"How well or badly do you think the x party represents and understands voters in..." (Good - Neither - Bad - D/K)

Tory;

Scotland North Wales Midlands South

10% | 17% | 52% | 21% 12% | 18% | 52% | 18% 11% | 22% | 45% | 22% 21% | 22% | 37% | 20% 46% | 16% | 22% | 16%

Toxic.

They can't go on ignoring massive swathes of the country (*cough* Scotland) if they want a majority.