Conventional pollsters show big Labour leads
January 30th, 2005
-
The methodology divide deepens
Three new surveys this morning from conventional interview-based pollster show big leads for Labour and contrast sharply with the interviewer-free YouGov poll on Friday that had the party just 1% ahead.
ICM in the Sunday Telegraph, which uses telephone interviews, have the Labour margin down by 2% on last week’s survey by the same pollster in the Guardian. The shares are - CON 32(+1): LAB 37(-1): LD 21(nc). Interestingly both YouGov and ICM are recording the same trend.
The MORI poll in the Observer is the first to be published from the firm since November and the comparison is based on that survey. The figures - CON 32(+1): LAB 38(+3): LD 22%(-1). The pollsters uses conventional face-to-face interviews.
Communicate Research for the Independent on Sunday has, with comparisons on their last survey six weeks ago, LAB 40 (+1): CON 32 (-2) LD 20 (+1). This contrasts sharply with ICM which has seen a 4% drop in the Labour lead during the same period.
The Lib Dem share remains fairly constant at 20-22% with all the pollsters. CR’s lower figure is probably due to the fact that, uniquely, it does not prompt with the party options.
The huge gap between the conventional firms and the internet-based YouGov is underlined by two surveys on how people would vote in the Euro Constitution referendum - the formal question for which was announced during the week. ICM record 39%: YES 41% NO. Compare that with yesterday’s YouGov figure which has 24% YES: 45% NO.
There was a difference in the questions that were put. YouGov - where respondents read from a computer screen - had “If a referendum was held tomorrow, would you vote Yes or No in response to the question ‘Should the UK approve the treaty establishing a constitution for the European Union?’ The ICM telephone interviewers asked: “Should the United Kingdom approve the treaty establishing a constitution for the European Union?
The internet pollsters would argue that when you vote you do it in private at a time that you choose by reading a question and marking a ballot paper without the potentially distorting intervention of another human being.
The telephone pollsters argue strongly that internet survey samples are skewed because they are restricted to those who have access and are members of the pollster’s panel. Maybe this will be the biggest question to be resolved on May 5th.
Latest IG Index spread prices: LAB 355-362: CON 189-196: LDs 70-74
Latest Spreadfair prices: LAB 357-359: CON 189-195: LDs 71-73.4.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Huh?
January YouGov Poll - UPDATED 2 (28Jan)
CON 34%, LAB 35%, LD 22%
http://pollingreport.co.uk/blog/index.php?p=261
[1] http://pollingreport.co.uk/blog/index.php?p=265 and
http://pollingreport.co.uk/blog/index.php are better links to follow.
Ron - I’ve now put a good link for the YouGov figures into the article. Thanks for this.
By the way, for those inclined to gamble, is there actually a market for betting on the European constitution outcome?
Nick
I don’t think that ICM Euro Constitution result does much to enhance their main poll’s credibility.
Nick 4. There was a market on the referendum with Bet365 but they seemed to have dropped it. The odds were 4/9 No - 13/8 Yes.
Alex 5. On this one I go with ICM rather than YouGov, and that will probably surprise you Nick. The precise wording of the question - the use of the phrase “Should the UK approve” invites a “yes” and YouGov did not test that. Also I’ve always regarded YouGov as a bit suspect on EU matters since their exaggerated figures for UKIP. Even so I was quite surprised at that ICM had it as such a close run thing.
Article in the Telegraph today claiming that Anne Jobson (Tory PPC) has survived a deselection attempt but that Ashley Crossley (Tory PPC Falmouth and Camborne) faces another one!
As the Americans would say : What is it with you guys?
A few weeks back the Daily Record carried a poll saying Labour were at 48% in Scotland. However the Scottish edition of the Sunday Times is saying that Alisdair Darling and Nigel Griffiths have been put on an ‘at risk’ list and are to be given extra resources. It also reports that the strategy in Scotland is not to gain any seats but to hold onto the ‘the ones that matter most’. I understand the poll was carried out by Scottish Opinion (using a sample of 850) who use phone polling. If the reporting in the Sunday Times is correct these polls may prove to be as innacurate as System Three’s were back in 2003.
I’m not aware that there are any marginals Labour could gain. Technically Dumfries and Galloway is now a labour seat. They might try to take back Carmarthen East in Wales and one or two seats in England (SW Bedfordshire, Boston and Skegness, Basingstoke and Beverly and Holderness)
Andrew, my point was that the Record’s poll was suggesting Labour were going to improve their showing in Scotland compared to 2001. The article suggests that this is unlikely to be the case. The quote about holding onto the seats that matter was specifically about Scottish Labour. It also had an unnatributed quote from Scottish Labour backbencher complaining about the lack of activity in other, more marginal seats. Ochil and South Perthshire was cited specifically.
Thinking about the polls today in the paper, the one we seem to be missing out on this site, is the one YouGov have done of the EU Referendum. It seems stunning to me that the numbers are so close between the two sides. I always thought the numbers saying no were probably on the high side, but I never believed the numbers would be this close. Is this just a rogue poll, or is pointing to something us Politicos have missed out on?
By the way I still expect the NO camp to win in 2006 (who I support anyway) as I believe it is harder to defend the constitution than to attack it. Also most referendums on the EU in recent years have been lost (eg Sweden) or lost and then won (eg Ireland) in countries that are far more pro EU than the UK is.
I’m inclined to think that it is a blip (obviously I hope it is).
Personally, I think that asking people how *they* will vote is more likely to give you an accurate answer.
A story to gladden your heart - I spoke to a ferocious Tory who was fairly Eurosceptic ( I had to take a step backwards as she hit me with her views). She said she was in favour of the EU being “constituted” - I think she thought it was a sadistic punishment!
Andrew at 12: Personally I’ve always thought the yes side might well win: people will judge this complex issue by the company they’re in, and Blair+Brown+Kennedy+Ken Clarke will feel more comfortable to many than Howard+Galloway+Kilroy+Griffin (or whatever the respective names are then). OK, that’s a slightly selective line-up but that’s how it may be seen by many floaters, especially if it’s after another heavy Tory election defeat. “Those people you couldn’t bear to vote for now urge you to vote no…oh, and so does the Socialist Workers’ Party!” - unsubtle but probably effective.
If there isn’t a market out there, perhaps we can create one. What odds would you offer, Andrew?
Nick
Nick. Will Brown line up with the yes camp. He’s always ducked european issues before (part of his cunning plan of never being seen to be in the same boat as Tony - like his amazing ability to have never being seen to be pro-war without doing anything to say he’s against it)
I would offer about 3/1 on a Yes Vote and about 3/2 on a No Vote. If you look at other countries that have rejected EU treaties in the past, often the opposition has been an assorted bunch of political eccentrics and extremists but has still won. Look at when Ireland rejected the Nice Treaty (with Sinn Fein and the Greens the main opponents). Also the No campaign will be able to call on people like Bob Geldof, a selection of labour MP’s and hopefully some decent Tories (i.e. not just from the Thatcherite Right). I also believe that it is going to be harder to put a case for the Constitution than to argue against it. The NO campaign are looking to avoid their campaign getting to tied up with party politics, following the same strategy that worked in the North East.
Andrew, I’ll take £3 on Yes, and £5 on no.
Makes me a guaranteed winner! You can send the cheque to…
Andrew @ 16. If you offer 3/1 on one option and 3/2 on the other you will lose a lot of money. I could bet on both and be certain of a profit. You, on the other hand, would be certain to lose
Your correct Mike. I would put the chances of a yes vote at about 20% and the chances of a no vote at about 80%. As for Robert I was just laying my feelings as to how it will go. I won’t take your side bet. The way to win money on this one will be to work out what the numbers will be on both sides. Will it be very close or will there be a gap of 10% or more between the two sides.
Re 7 - It is being whispered in Shropshire that the Tory PPC for Shrewsbury (Daniel Kawzcynski)will be deselected in favour of a local Tory councillor. This is because of a very poor campaign to date and the fact that the Labour PPC (Mike Ion) is winning the press/campaign war hands down (he was on Radion 5 Live last night again - that’s three times since Christmas. What are the Tories up to?
Scholes re 20 - I very much doubt it!!
Scholes, at this stage if the Tories did that Ion would be all over it in a second and it would just hurt them even more.
I think I was the first on the site to mention that Ion was having a far better time of it than many had anticipated, the more I hear the better it seems to be going for him.
If Ion does win (and that’s looking more likely by the day) I think its highly likely that he will be very heavily entrenched by 2009. B
But first off he’ll have to win the place in the first instance and while he’s probably the favourite as of now, things will be close.
I agree, Andrew. While the No Campaign will obviously welcome Conservative support, they are not closely tied to the Conservative Party.
I think the No Campaign start with a number of advantages.
1. They (usually) have a big poll lead. Polling evidence also suggests that No voters are more likely to go to the polls than Yes voters or undecideds;
2. They are well-financed.
3. Eurosecptics have been making their case for years (while europhiles have constantly ducked out);
4. They seem to have more support on the ground. One can imagine plenty of No supporters canvassing, but far fewer Yes supporters;
5. They won’t let the Conservatives front their campaign, almost certainly preferring someone like Sir Bob Geldof. Nor do I think that having a campaign fronted by Tony Blair would be much of a benefit to the Yes side.
Nothing’s inevitable, but the Yes camp do have a huge amount of ground to make up.
Scholes(y)
- I’ve passed that on to someone I know who is acquainted with the aforementioned ppc, and who will be very happy to see their private opinion of said individual confirmed (even if its untrue - it still looks like lose/lose for the Tories).
Good news for Sean - William Rees-Mogg has dragged me back into the No fold re. the European Constitution.
Richard, Judging from your admirable postings, I wasn’t aware that you were drifting away in the first place.
Jon:”Ashley Crossley (Tory PPC Falmouth and Camborne) faces another one!”
How many deselection attempt will Ashley Crossley face? Now I’m starting to wonder if he’ll survive until the election.
Regarding Mr Crossely, now a gay assistent of his Labour opponent is accusing the Labour MP to ask him to find some dirty info about Crossley sex life.
Some Tories were so happy about the variety of canidates (asian, black, homosexual,…) they have this year, but it seems that not all the party members like it. This people are acting in a stupid way harming the chances on vicctory in some constituencies.
I think Falmouth and Camborne will be won by neither Atherton or Crossley.
The more I hear it sounds like a cert Lib Dem gain.
Ron from Pensacola asking if you have an rss subscription feed for your blog?
Hey this is a great blog and I really enjoyed all these comments. I really need to think about implementing one myself. I am surprised how many comments you get. Great work!
This is a great site. I am impressed with the comments and how active your site is. If you don’t mind I will back to visit.I will make sure to come back.