Communicate Research: polling in the old fashioned way
November 28th, 2006-
Labour ahead in the paper that brought you the Harman poll cock-up
Back in 1992 they used to run polls like the one by Communicate Research that appears in the Independent this morning. That was the year of what Nick Sparrow of ICM calls “the great polling debacle”
The final opinion polls gave the Conservatives between 38% and 39% of the vote, about 1% behind. On the day itself exit polls were carried out and everything was pointing to a hung parliament. But when the votes were counted the Conservatives, under the leadership of John Major, had a margin of 7.6% over Labour.
Much work was done by pioneering pollsters like Nick Sparrow after that disaster and now all the firms, bar Communicate Research, carrying out telephone surveys use a system known as “past vote weighting” to ensure balanced samples.
For the big challenge is that the process of telephone polling almost always seems to produce many more people saying they voted Labour at the previous General Election than actually did so.
-
Thus in all the published data in the year after the 2005 General Election from the two polling firms that ask how respondents how they voted last time an average of more than 44% said Labour - compared with the 36% that the party got.
Thus, for whatever reason, getting on for a quarter more people say they voted Labour than did on May 5th 2005 and this pattern is repeated in poll after poll.
ICM and Populus adjust their figures to take part of this into account allowing for a level misremembering. Communicate Research, which has just started regular surveys for the Independent, does not.
When their first Independent survey appeared last month showing a 6% Tory lead I wrote: “This is quite remarkable given the findings. For the main impact of past vote weighting is usually to reduce the level of Labour support because telephone surveys, for whatever reason, invariably find many more people who voted Labour last time than actually did.”
All this is by way of preamble to today’s CR shares which are: CON 34%(-4), LAB 36%(+4), LD17%(+3). Clearly, as we saw in last week’s ICM poll, there has been a move away from the Tories in the past month.
-
I think it is a sad and retrograde step that the Independent should now be commissioning polls in a form that was so discredited a decade and a half ago.
I am emailing Andrew Hawkins of Communicate Research to ask if he wants to respond.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
test
So the Tories could still be in the lead if they weighted the figures to allow more accurately to reflect past votes?
It is sad that the Independent should suggest why Labour is in the lead, that Labour looks tough on crime and terrorism after the Queen’s speech and the Tories look soft, especially when they do not give any warnings about the margins of error in the poll. Surely the Independent could do better than that?
Yes, but don’t we need to uncover the reason?
If people are accurately recalling their past vote then this kind of “past vote weighting” seems fair enough.
“Past vote weighting” would also appear to be a useful correction work if past vote recollection is biased, but only if future voting intention is also affected in the same way. For example bias in favour of:
1) The most popular party
2) The labour party (perceived as less ’selfish’)
But what about a third source of bias…
3) Bias according to what people now think
If this is important a “past vote weighted” survey would (in the current context) underestimate tory gains. And if all factors are in play then all surveys past weighted or not would underestimate tory revival.
Past vote weighting make poll results more stable and less susceptible to sampling error. But even corrected this way it seems the polls could still be subject to this kind of sytematic bias?
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2475122,00.html
This for me represents how labour are totally dominating the economic arguments of the day. How often does Osborne actually try attacking browns record rather than his personality. In fact can we say that in the last year Osborne has managed to nail brown 5 times.
I really think the tories are making a big mistake here. They are going to end up defining Brown as someone who is maybe too serious but with that will be a reputation cemented in his utter competance it will eventually work to the positive as did thatchers chracture as being a b!tch but being firm at the same time
There are no real details at all from today’s Labour Party/Populus leaked poll, published in The Herald.
All we know is that “Populus found Labour lagging eight points adrift of the SNP on both the constituency and the regional votes. One analysis of those figures suggests Labour would lose 14 of the 50 seats it holds, while the SNP would gain as many as 18 seats, on top of the 27 it won in 2003.”
The only other substantive information is:
*the poll was completed just after the SNP’s annual national conference
*the SNP would win nine seats more than Labour
*Stephen Lawther, Labour’s in-house polling expert, suggests in a memo: “that the one pollster giving Labour a lead may be getting it consistently wrong. “It’s starting to look more like the TNS System Three result should be discounted, which makes the position even bleaker.””
http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/75470.shtml
I’m not surprised if Conservative support has dropped over the last couple of weeks. Their PR operation seems to be all over the place. I just don’t understand why they are wandering about making comments like “Toynbee is our philosophical guide”, if the moment anyone questions them they respond with “look beyond the headlines to see what we are actually saying”.
re 3. The issue that ICM and Populus have to face is whether the distortions are down to sample bias or misremembering. What they both do is have a formula that sets it somewhere in the middle. Thus in the past five ICM and Populus polls for which there is past vote weighting data available the average responses were
CON 29.1%: LAB 44.3%:LD 19.7%
The GB actuals from May 2005 were:-
CON 33.2%: LAB 36.2%:LD 22.7%
The current weightings that are applied are:-
ICM: CON 32.3% LAB 38.4%LD 21.7%
Populus: CON 32%: LAB 40%:LD 21%
5
I should have mentioned that this year’s Scottish National Party conference was held between 16-20 October 2006, in Perth. Therefore the Populus fieldwork must have been approx 22-25 Oct, meaning that this data is just over one month old. The more recent ICM, YouGov and Progressive Partnership (but not Taylor Nelson Sofres System 3) polls have seen the SNP pulling ahead of Labour, so it would be great to know what Populus are showing after the Scottish Labour Party’s annual national conference in Oban last week. The powerful focus on the SNP, especially in Tony Blair’s keynote speech (to a mere 500 delegates), has boosted the SNP’s public profile.
The main question is: why was this leaked? The most likely answer is that it is a Brownite/Westminsterite leak against Jack McConnell and the Holyroodites who are in the driving seat of the Labour campaign, to the chagrin of Gordon Brown, Douglas Alexander et al. If they can discredit the competence of McConnell as campaign manager then they can wrestle more control for themselves. But McConnell is not as daft as he looks, recently taking on board Wendy Alexander (Douglas’ sister) into the election campaign team (”keep your friends close… and your enemies even closer”.)
Alternatively, it is the usual Machiavellian tactic of leaking a poor poll, so that when (or if!) you get a better one later on you can spin that “our opponents are in freefall” or somesuch. Its the way you tell ‘em.
As this is leaked, I don’t suppose Populus are obliged to release the dataset under BPC rules, are they? What methodology do Populus use?
Wasn’t the Telegraph’s Yougov poll supposed to be out today?
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/funding/story/0,,1958626,00.html
Looks like panic is starting to set in at Labour HQ.
It is tempting to assume that tight limits would benefit the LDs disproportionately, but I tend to think a lot of the extra money available to Labour and the Tories is wasted anyway.
As always it’s more interesting to discuss the poll we’ve got than to spend all our time shooting the messenger. And anyway CR haven’t changed their methodology since last month so it’s a 4% swing to Labour however you look at it.
If this continues will Cameron move to the right like his predecessors? I expect so. Blair and Kinnock shifted Labour over a period of 12 years. It was thought out and incremental. Cameron is moving like an out of control kite. His own supporters don’t know where he’s taking them. They don’t even know if he knows!
9 Jack W said he had insider information that it was. Jack?
Maybe they have given up on the poll.
For international political anoraks, Canada has 2 byelections yesterday. Liberal held London Centre North (Ontario) after a strong challenge by the Greens. The result was: Liberal 34.9% (-5.2), Green 25.9 (+20.4), Con 24.4 (-5.5), NDP 14.1 (-9.6), Others 0.7
Bloc Quebecois held easily their Repentingy seat. Result: Bloc 66.3% (+3.9), Con 18.7 (+0.6), NDP 7 (-0.7), Liberal 6.2 (-2.4), Others 1.9
The Bloc candidate (now MP) is a Catholic Priest, former gay prostitutr and leather bar worker. His colorful past and present gained a couple of headlines (for a by election in a safe seat)
“The Bloc candidate (now MP) is a Catholic Priest, former gay prostitutr and leather bar worker”
That should give Cameron some ideas for his next A-list
test
7. Nice hatchet job, Mike….would I be right in thinking that if weigted by past vote this poll would produce results quite similar to the recent ICM/Yougov surveys?
14. Roger, I think Chairman Maude would be delight to find such candidate available in UK
12 Commentator. It appears that the Telegraph pulled the poll from today as they’ve run big with their Grade/ITV scoop.
I did suggest yesterday that the Telegraph might do this, but thought the reason might be Harriet Harman scratching her rump !
The fact is that polls are easy to move dependent on the rest of the news cycle.
13 Andrea. How dull our by-elections are by comparison. Even Lib Dem bar chart erotis*sm can’t compete with priestly frolics in gay leather bars.
8. Surely the story is that when the SNP have a charismatic leader as they do in Alex Salmond they do well and when they haven’t they do badly? I’m not sure why anyone would be interested in a poll that’s a month old when three new ones have come out since and if it shows anything it shows that the SNP were doing better a month ago.
18 Jack then we can expect it tomorrow?
Well the question is when do we get a poll we can trust?
Mike is of course right that there is litle point in either commisioning or reporting a 1992 style poll.
7 Mike , what is the reasoning for ICM and Populus using the weighting figures that they are using rather than any other figure ?
When the Telegraph used Gallup, Gallup used to record the largest Labour leads. It was always amusing, to read a Telegraph editorial, saying how hideous the Labour government was, then turn the page and see a poll giving them a 15% lead.
Tweo attempts to post have just disappeared without trace (not “held for moderation”) - I’m not sure what makes this happen? Briefly, in case it happens again, I think it’s generally sensible to compare like with like, and the 4% swing to Labour is large enough to suggest something is happening. IMO the main thing is simply that the Tory rebranding effort has overreached itself, and people are starting to think “this is getting silly”.
21 You will not trust a poll unless it shows the Conservative lead is increasing , Benedict .
You would have thought the independent if it is desperate to be taken seriously, as taken by the fact its bringing back monthly tracker polls, would have demanded that Communicate Research actually added past weight recall. it just find it very hard to be swayed by any poll which doesnt take a past vote recall. My old GCSE statistic teacher (who was also my maths teacher) would have been spitting feathers about that.
RE 25, No Mark, I don’t trust polls that look ridiculous in terms of their methodology. You might as well rely on my anicdotes of Labour voters switching to Conservatives as being a guide to the next GE.
Also in the Indie: “A poll by Ipsos MORI among members of the Political Studies Association shows that 49 per cent regard Mr Brown as the most capable next Prime Minister while only 14 per cent opt for Mr Cameron. Mr Brown is rated the most successful post-war chancellor and is regarded as the most capable chancellor by 68 per cent. Only 4 per cent back George Osborne, his Tory shadow.”
Who are the PSA? See http://www.psa.ac.uk/
25. Not when its method is so discreditated.
RE 10 Jon, Yes that story looks like Labour are afraid. Very afraid!
re 7. Applying the average of the wieghtings that Populus and ICM use to the CR figures and we get CON 35.1: LAB 33.2: LD 18.1. So only a little bit of change and shares that are very close to what Mori wass reporting.
19 Roger
I agree that it is slightly out-of-date data, and therefore slightly less relevant, but AFAIK it is the first Populus poll of Scottish voting intention ever published, which surely makes it of some interest to us anoraks? Remember, we have had an absolute dearth of Scottish voting intention data since The Herald stopped commissioning its monthly series of System 3 polls at the end of 2003, so please allow those of us concerned with Scottish politics to enjoy this almost unprecedented luxury of plentiful polling, from a wide variety of pollsters.
Your “charismatic leader” theory is almost (but not quite) as weak as Mike Smithson’s “rugby union” theory! Billy Wolfe (who he? you rightfully ask) led the SNP to its best ever election result, in 1974. Billy is not a bland character, but hardly fits the mould of the great charismatic politician! He was never even successful at getting himself elected, and therefore had a very low media profile.
It’s true to say the Telegraph, isn’t totally on board with project Cameron. However would they have pulled the poll, if it had been really good news for the Conservatives? All will be revealed!
Stuart @ 26: I think it is the other way round. I think the Indy wanted to have figures without past vote weighting.
If I were Jack W I’d be checking my Telegraph source
(Well, if I actually were Jack W I probably wouldn’t be, since if I were Jack I wouldn’t work at YouGov and wouldn’t be in a position to know when the Telegraph poll is conducted, and wouldn’t be in a position to know that my source was wrong. Such is life.)
31. The last pre 2005 GE CR poll was Lab 39, Con 31, LD 23… what would they have produced with ICM/Populus wieghting?
27/29 - You weren’t discrediting it because of methodology last month when it showed the Conservatives 6 points in the lead see Benedicts comments on the thread on October 24th .
We shouldn’t even be having this discussion: third term Labour government,Afghanistan,Iraq,cash for peerages, etc. etc. Tories should be a stonking 15/20% in the lead, that should be it!
RE 36 Mark, Unless its a Yougov or ICM poll, I may be pleased with the results, but I don’t take them that seriously. That said CR showing us in the lead when their method favours Labour is good news when it happens.
34 Anthony W Delphic, but I know you are right.
Anthony when will there be another YouGov poll?
Mike, although that shows a Tory lead, I hope we see it stretch shortly. I want to see leads in the sustained 5% range. A 2% lead is mildly disappointing. I await the next real poll with interest.
Looking at that picture of John Major on his soap box reminds me of the way that he campaigned in 92′, he seemed to relish taking on the hecklers in the crowd. Blair did something very similar in 2005 when he took part in various TV debates with at times hostile audiences.
It will be interesting to see if Gordon Brown or David Cameron do something similar at the next GE.
I think the surge in SNP support in Scotland recently, has more to do with dissatisfaction with the Lab/Libdem coalition at Holyrood and Labour in Westminster rather than because of a big increase in support for independence. I think that when the results are in we will see them surge in some area’s but not in other’s. A bit like the conservatives have in the South of England while still struggling in area’s in the North.
28. Nick. Interesting. Many on here have said that a year is about as far as you can take fashion shows and photo ops before people get bored. What was a breath of fresh air once now looks tired. Could he cycle round Parliament Square with matching cycle shorts and helmet and avoid getting laughed at? Wouldn’t the webcameron have to go into his bedroom for anyone to show the slightest interest anymore?
Anyway I’m off to let the NHS and BUPA do their worst and if all goes well I’ll report on their relative performance when I get back!
41 ChrisD - “when the results are in we will see them surge in some area’s but not in other’s”
Well, of course, because throughout the electoral history of the planet there has never been such a thing as uniform national swing - that is just a psephological conceit, albeit quite a useful one, especially for punters.
Where do you think the SNP surges will occur?
re 35. That final 2005 CR General election poll would have produced using the Populus/ICM weightings LAB 36.01: CON 32.1: LD 24.5. So pretty close.
RE 44, Mike, in which case why not produce CR adjusted by PB figures for the CR polls?
It would save us disscussing eronious figures.
41. Three aberrant apostrophes in a single ppgh…please!
45. Thanks Mike. The Lab and Con figures would have been pretty close.
44 Mike So let me get this straight.
Let’s say there were two polls taken:
The first January 2005
The second January 2006
Each poll returns exactly the same raw response.
L 36 C 36
The figures also give the same past voter recall: L 36 C 36
My questions are:
In the the ICM’s weighting system, which will give the biggest lead and to which party?
Has the Tory’s capacity to show a lead gone since the last election, because of Labours reduced showing at the polls in 2005. So the same poll will systematiclly show a different result?
20/40 Commentator. Who knows now !!
The thing with daily newspaper polls is that they can pull their poll from the paper if spacing for other stories means the poll is less newsworthy that day. It’s not as if other papers have the story. It’s their very own little scoop, but they do want to get a decent bang for their buck, £5,000 normally, on the front page.
IIRC earlier in the year the Guardian held an ICM poll for several days and trailed the contents like the dance of the seven veils !
34 Antony.
… once I deciphered the post !
………………….
Caption Competition.
1. “Yes over there …. that’s my mistress, Edwina !
2. “I’m not sure about this dark chocolate ice cream cone.”
3. “I’m a pink teapot …..”
Jack. What I am saying is that you clearly don’t have a “source” that is in any way reliable or knows the first thing about it and I wish you’d stop pretending that you did.
I was asking Anthony since he also was saying your “source” doesn’t have the first clue.
Morning all :). Definite straws in the wind showing the Conservative lead narrowing but a long long way to go yet.
Re: 10 - I used to be an opponent of State funding but I’ve come to the view that if it becomes necessary to level the playing field then that has to be done. In a genuine mature democracy voters are faced with equal points of view and have to choose between them. In a capitalist democracy, the party with the most money gets to shout its message the loudest to the detriment of other messages. It cannot be healthy to have one Party with all the money blanketting billboards and newspapers with its messages with the other parties unable to reply. We all know (and the US is a good example) that if a message is repeated often enough and loudly enough it gets through.
If democracy can be “bought”, it is no longer democracy. In an ideal world, the parties themselves would agree a code of campaigning conduct (and I think ALL parties have produced leaflets which have crossed the line) for both election and non-election periods. Even so, a spending limit for parties (pretty small) should be imposed.
Back to yesterday and it was fascinating to read the views on politics in Scotland the desire for independence. The Unionist die-hards or should that be dinosaurs, paint apocalyptic pictures of checkpoints at Carter Bar and Gretna and of something more akin to the 38th Parallel.
Rather like Conservative or UKIP policy on Europe, I need to understand the distinction between the aim and the process. Is there anyone, even in SNP circles, who advocates an aggressive and unilateral move to independence (akin to Rhodesia in 1965)? IF there is a genuine desire among the Scottish and English people for the Union to end in its current form, that signifies to me the beginning of the next process toward the redefining of the political and economic relationship between Scotland and England as well as the other constituent parts of the UK.
Britain, like France, has never been a “federal” entity. Although in the French example, areas like Burgundy, Savoy and Lorraine were at periods not part of France and were either independent principalities or occupied by foreign powers (Lorraine was part of Germany from 1871 to 1918), the French “state” has exercised strong central control from Paris like the British state has from London.
Redefining the Anglo-Scottish relationship won’t therefore be easy and will take, I suspect, months if not years of negotiation. One option might be to treat Scotland like Canada or New Zealand where the Head of State is the same but the Government is different. The Dominion of Scotland might be one alternative. Of course, a redefinition of the Amglo-Scottish relationship could trigger a redefinition of the Anglo-Irish relationship so a “British” entity might genuinely reflect all those who live in the British Isles (also including the IOM).
I do think it would be fascinating to hold a referendum in Scotland in 2007 (300 years after the Act of Union). I think the Scots should be offered three options: status quo, separation or a re-negotiated relationship. That might make political life interesting too.
50 Commentator. If I’d realized it was your intention to be offensive I wouldn’t have bothered … and certainly won’t in the future.
For the record, I had a brief conversation with a Telegraph journalist yesterday who indicated they had a poll ready. I posted that information in good faith, adding the rider that I did.
Sometimes sources make mistakes, if indeed they have here, unlike yourself of course whose blinding integrity is on full show when ever you bend over !
49&50. Must admit that when I saw the Telegraph leading with the Michael Grade story last night I gave up on the their YouGov poll being in today’s paper.
This poll from CR does not ring true with the reaction on the doorstep where there is a growing anti-Labour feeling.
CR uses likelihood to vote weighting, which AFAIK as I know wasn’t a part of the 92 polling scene. happy to be corrected if this is wrong.
I assume they use as an alternative method of holding down the “soft/not real” Labour vote than past vote weighting. A bit unfair to accuse them of “92 style polling” if that’s the case. I’ve not idea if they’re weighting is valid, but they are trying to hold down those who arent “real” voters.
The big news here is not that CR doesn’t weight by past vote, but that 2 polls now show the political scene tightening after a period of reasonable tory leads.
btw- those of you with access to JSTOR (eg everyone in parliament web service), might want to google search for “The 1992 British Election: The Failure of the Polls” as the whole article is available on line and is very interesting.
52. OUCH.
44. Mike. That last CR poll in 2005 was for the Sunday before the election and had fieldwork carried out 23-28 April.
Given that according to Polling report ICM produced a near identical poll the very next day (it had LDs down one point compared to CR), I think that there’s as much chance that the poll was pretty accurate, and labour slipped a couple of points in the intervening period as that the sample needed to be weighted.
Jack. I find your posturing as an insider very boring, and am aggravated by your pretence at Conservatism when you are in fact a LibDem. Anthony Wells actually works for YouGov and confirms that you are talking nonsense about a poll due out today and “held” for Michael Grade. Enough with you.
Jack. I find your posturing as an insider very boring, and am aggravated by your pretence at Conservatism when you are in fact a LibDem. Anthony Wells actually works for YouGov and confirms that you are talking nonsense about a poll due out today and “held” for Michael Grade. Enough with you.
Commentator. To be misinformed about the date of a Yougov poll isn’t a hanging offense! Fortunately CR stepped up to the plate so nothing was lost!
43. Stuart, I think you will do well in your heartlands and where the SNP are a strong 2nd to Labour. I would also be interested in seeing how well you do in the Labour heartlands in the central belt, with the SSP/Solidarity vote effected by the recent Tommy Sheridan court case you might receive a tactical vote boost.
“I used to be an opponent of State funding but I’ve come to the view that if it becomes necessary to level the playing field then that has to be done.”
Guido Fawkes speaks for me wrt State funding.
Mike (7) is right to point out that the overstatement of recalled Labour past vote is a combination of sample bias and misremembering. Panel surveys (e.g. British Election Study) have indicated that around half of the difference between recall and result is misremembering/misstatement and therefore the other half is assumed to be sample bias. That is why Populus weights by past vote to the mid-point between recall and result, which was the methodology pioneered by Nick Sparrow at ICM that made them Britain’s most accurate pollster.
11. Roger observes re the CommR poll that since they haven’t changed method since their previous poll, “its a 4% swing to Labour however you look at it”. Unfortunately that cannot be assumed to be true. Recalled past vote is surprisingly stable over time but can be spiky from one individual sample to another. Not only does past vote weighting make polls more politically representative, it also makes them comparable. With a poll that is not past vote weighted, not only will it have too many Labour voters, but because recall is not perfectly consistent, it is literally impossible to judge if variation from one poll to the next is actual switching or just a blip one way or another in recalled past vote of that sample.
It is worth remembering that even past vote weighted polls have in general tended still to overstate slightly Labour’s support, and understate the Conservatives - non past vote weighted polls have a significant degree of Labour bias.
For comparison with CommR’s figures of 36%/34% to Labour, our last Times poll would, without past vote weighting or turnout filter, have been Labour 35%/Conservative 32% (and I believe that CommunicateResearch apply some kind of turnout weighting, which will be bound to improve the Conservative position relative to Labour by a per centage point or so).
A caveat to Mike’s application of his calculation of Populus & ICM weightings to CommR numbers: our weights are applied to each individual line of data, effectively compounding the value of each respondent’s answers by reference to the accumulated effect of their response to the questions by which we weight (principally past vote and likelihood to vote), so though what Mike is doing will give a reasonable rough guide to how a poll would look if it were so weighted, it is very crude (and certainly not accurate to one decimal place, let alone two, as in 44 above).
[58 & 59] Commentator, I think I see the difference now between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats - the Conservatives exclude anyone who will not sign up for their agenda in toto- “unless with us, then against us”, whereas the Lib Dems say “if not against us, then with us”.
Are sure that telling people who might be sympathetic -from Jack to the CBI- to get lost, is such a great strategy for Little Daves Woodland folk?
59 Commentator. It appears you can’t accept that sources and posters may make mistakes without pouring scorn. Nevertheless I’m sure we all stand in awe at your infallibility.
I’ve done battle with several other “commentators who’ve decided my political philosophy and I’ll not bother others with a repeat, unlike you @ 58/59.
I’m sure you’ll be glad to hear that like Nick Palmer, I’ve my own “can’t be arsed list” that I’ve happily added your moniker to.
[62] Sean- Absolutely. NO STATE FUNDING!!!
It will only reward the crime.
61/43 - I’m not sure the SNP ‘heartlands’ are up against Labour - they are historically the rural NE where the Tories are the main challanger.
In the central belt (particularly) the western bit Labour’s vote is pretty monolithic and their majorities in most seats are vast. Even with a 6% swing to the Nats then most of these seats would stay red. There are a few exceptions - Kilmarnock for example where the SNP have been breathing down Labour’s neck. As an interesting aside - does anyone think Nicola Sturgeon will finally take Govan? My feeling is that although on paper she should, having not done so by now might make it beyond reach. If there’s a book on particular seats I’m sure the odds on a Labour hold would be attractive.
I also suspect that as the Labour vote declines it does so in areas where they are less entrenced or that voters more recently came over to vote Labour. Areas such as the Highlands, Aberdeen and Lothian do not have the almost 100 year Labour voting tradition of Clydeside. This is likely to mean that Labour will do worse in and around Edinburgh than Glasgow for example - which means Lib Dem gains rather than SNP ones. But feel free to accuse me of wishful thinking!
56/65 Thank you wife for buggering up my postings !!
Post 65 is from me !
Interesting how when the pollsters get it wrong it’s not their fault but the fault of the people polled who have ‘misremembered’ their previous vote. It seems to me that the most likely cause of error is simply that they are not sampling properly.
I have followed the recent US elections. They have what the call the ‘generic’ opinion poll which just asks Democrat or Republican. Most comments on this are that it usually gives the Democrats about 5% too much. The Democrats were ahead and won the recent elections but not by as much as most of these ‘generic’ polls.
What do the Labour party and the Democrat party have in common from a polling point of view? They are both predominantly urban parties. The Tories and the Republicans are largely rural. In both countries the battle is won or lost in the suburbs and middle sized towns.
It seems to me that pollsters are not able to properly sample the rural electorate.
66 State Funding from a matched funding pot.
Roger and other Labour people are guilty yet again of wishing this poll true.
The trend is important and I will concede that the upward trend in Conservative vote share has stalled.
I will also readily concede that by now I had expected polls to be nearer 40% than still at 37-38%, so I am not especially satisfied with my party’s current showing.
Having said all that every poll seen so far suggests that GB will further weaken Labours share.
And next year sees the Conservatives move on from our current position of closing down the debate on our past to opening up the debate on our future; and revealing much more detail about specific policy stances which I am certain will add at least 5% to our polling figures.
Doesn’t anyone else think that the Telegraph’s scoop is profoundly boring? Most of us wouldn’t recognise Michael Grade if we tripped over him. Who cares where he works?
70 It will all depend on how much the reality of Brown matches the characature of Brown. If you have faith that it’s spot on you might be right, if however Brown as pm is not as he’s been portrayed the polls may still move against you. We’ll see.
RE 58 and 59 Comentator, JackW is a liberal. Which party he votes for changes according to what they want to do, hence he voted Conservative in 1979 etc because they were most economicaly liberal.
Also I don’t see personal attacks as helpful between regulars.
re 63. Andrew - thank you for a very helpful post and for taking the trouble to share your experiences as boss of Populus with us. Your figures on how your last survey for the Times would have been without past vote weighting support very much the main argument.
I have maintained a spreadsheet on all the Populus and ICM surveys since the General Election and it is amzing how the average past vote weighting figures across the two pollsters remain so constant.
I think that it is great that the Independent is now commissioning a regular monthly poll but I do wish that CR would adopt past vote weighting.
66. Cicero, well said. But I think that we already have a form of state funding!
http://www.dti.gov.uk/employment/trade-union-rights/modernisation/what-is-the-fund/page20774.html
71. Thank you for saying so. I was shouting at the TV last night as I watched BBC journalists consider at depth the significance of their boss’s departure. Media navel gazing.
74 Do we know how the the past vote figures compare with 2001-05?
71 Nick P. I disagree. If news scoops were all about public recognition then the Telegraph would be leading on “I’m a Non Entity, Get Me Out of Here” and politics would be on page 37 !! Which brings me to ITV. The Grade defection is a good story. There’s no doubt that ITV needs revitilizing. In a few years its share has fallen from almost half to around a fifth. Advertizing revenue is well down and the Beeb need a strong terrestrial competitor.
Grade is a “will do” executive and I would predict a better future for ITV under his leadership.
71, 76. For once Nick, we agree!
The average man and woman doesn’t give a hoot who runs ITV, BBC, etc; nor should they, given its overall significance.
I too was yelling at the TV last night. The Beeb even ran it as a newsflash within the news, ‘we hope to have more soon’. For pete’s sake, get a grip.
Media stories about the media always make me slightly nauseous. Like novelists who write about novelists.
71&76. Watching the BBC/Sky coverage last night was the worst type of media naval gazing. Would love to know if their average late night viewing figures dipped.
Andrew Cooper
“11. Roger observes re the CommR poll that since they haven’t changed method since their previous poll, “its a 4% swing to Labour however you look at it”. Unfortunately that cannot be assumed to be true. Recalled past vote is surprisingly stable over time but can be spiky from one individual sample to another. Not only does past vote weighting make polls more politically representative, it also makes them comparable. With a poll that is not past vote weighted, not only will it have too many Labour voters, but because recall is not perfectly consistent, it is literally impossible to judge if variation from one poll to the next is actual switching or just a blip one way or another in recalled past vote of that sample.
It is worth remembering that even past vote weighted polls have in general tended still to overstate slightly Labour’s support, and understate the Conservatives - non past vote weighted polls have a significant degree of Labour bias.”
Very interesting and from a Conservative point of view reassuring. Thanks.
“Doesn’t anyone else think that the Telegraph’s scoop is profoundly boring? Most of us wouldn’t recognise Michael Grade if we tripped over him. Who cares where he works?” -says Dr Nick Palmer MP.
Is that not a case of the pot calling the kettle black?
Can somebody remind me what the last Populus for the Times came out at
Re: 62 - Sean (and others): I’m of the view that it MAY be the lesser evil in democratic terms. I don’t want to see State funding but nor do I want to see a situation in which our democracy is a commodity which can be bought by anyone having enough money to pay for it and that is, I fear, where we may be going.
The political “process” is becoming more costly - the recent US midterms “cost” $2.6 billion I believe - and as that cost increases, it will only be those parties which can attract such sums that will be able to compete. Other parties will be effectively disenfranchised by the financial cost of fighting elections.
There are effectively two solutions. One is to provide money for other parties so that they have a better chance to compete. The other and I think the infinitely preferrable is to reduce the amounts that can be donated by individuals and above all companies and reduce the amounts that can be spent outside constituency campaigns.
In the current situation, only the Conservatives, supported by numerically few but financially important backers will be able to deploy the full arsenal of political campaigning tools. This gives him a significant advantage over Labour, LDs and the others which may have more volunteers and may be able to campaign effectively in some constituencies but vannot match the Tories in terms of the broad national campaign picture (billboards, newspaper ads etc).
The current situation demeans and diminishes democracy. I am trying to argue for alternatives. I don’t expect the Tory-inclined to be interested - after all, the current process works to their advantage.
O/T UKIP resurrected from the dead? I have received an e-mail from Nigel Farage this morning to my District council e-mail inviting me to consider helping them in the run up to next years elections. I preusme this will be going to every district councillor (even LIBDEMs like me). Look for a sharp increase in UKIPs poll rating (with or without past recall adjustment) as we all splash our defections in the media
The Lib-Labs are having a public stushie over the new Single Transferable Vote ballot paper design, for the Scottish council elections in May. The SNP and Tories are siding with the Lib Dems. Labour are going to be incandescent with their coalition partners, and there are few things more amusing than a Scottish Labourite in a huff (witness Gordon Brown). I would not like to be in Nicol Stephen’s shoes.
http://www.theherald.co.uk/politics/75446.html
I got it Con 36 Lab 35. I wonder why their vote adjustment raised the Tories a full 4 points but left Lab untouched at 35?
It looks like the Tories and Labour will be down the pawnbrokers any time soon … whist the Lib Dems will probably have to do the odd car boot fair :
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6190510.stm
It looks like the Tories and Labour will be down the pawnbr*kers any time soon … whist the Lib Dems will probably have to do the odd car boot fair :
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6190510.stm
88/89. Apologies for double post. I thought “pawnbrokers” might have been caught in the spam trap, but it appears that was all balls.
Whatever the flaws with the Indy poll, what it does demonstrate is that Project Cameron is very close to veering desperately off track.
I say this as someone who was backing Cameron before Cameron had even decided to stand, and who has largely backed everything he’s done in year 1 even if much of it hasn’t personally resonated with me. However, one year on and with all the difficulties Labour has experienced, I really did expect to see clear blue water now in the polls, and whilst this did look like happening for a while, the truth appears to be that it is not doing. We may even be getting back to neck-and-neck.
I hope Cameron holds his nerve, and doesn’t veer off to the right. He is the first electable Tory in ten years, and people are recognising the Tories as a possible alternative government. Plus we’ve got the inevitable benefit of a Brown succession.
However, it’s time for some policies, gently right of centre, and offering an alternative to this discredited and incompetent government. Tory voters and potential Tory voters need to be excited, and it’s just not happening at the moment. He’s had a year to work on the image, to set up his focus groups, etc - but now it is very much time to deliver. The Tories need to be consistently at 40% by next summer, or else they will have blown it.
Blimey those are stonking debts - anyone know what they are as a proportion of annual turnover.
67.”As an interesting aside - does anyone think Nicola Sturgeon will finally take Govan? My feeling is that although on paper she should, having not done so by now might make it beyond reach. If there’s a book on particular seats I’m sure the odds on a Labour hold would be attractive.”
The Labour MSP risked deselection because even Labour thought it wasn’t hardworking enough. She would have no execuses not to take it this time
And her hairstyle (appearance in general) improved since 2003 leaflets:
http://gdl.cdlr.strath.ac.uk/aspect/aspect2003/snp/a03snpggo01a.html
86. o/t i know but since the argument is all countries are constraits of imagination and the current country is United kingdom if, like Quebec in Canada has to, scotland wants to seperate shouldn’t England Wales and Ulster vote on it it to, as it will affect the other countries in this union to.
91 a little harsh don’t you think. Though I reckon it is true that if the Tories perform anything less than very well in next May’s elections the Cameron wheels will come off pretty fast. I don’t know any Tories who agree with what he is coming out with - they all agree Tories winning elections though.
93 Andrea
Good-looking candidates clearly do better:
http://gdl.cdlr.strath.ac.uk/aspect/aspect2003/snp/a03snpban.htm
(Sorry Stewart!)
84.”The current situation demeans and diminishes democracy. I am trying to argue for alternatives. I don’t expect the Tory-inclined to be interested - after all, the current process works to their advantage.” Stodge, I disagree and the results of the last 3 GE elections are an excellent example.
The Libdems have performed well over the last 10 years without the kind of funds at their disposal which both Labour and the tories have enjoyed. The LibDems have effectively targeted their more meagre funding into marginal seats with a lot of success.
96. I was joking about her appearance having an effect, but I really think she improved in that field.
This local byelection candidate got my attention at the time:
http://www.glasgowsnp.org/category/Kings_Park_By-election/
91 Bob. Cameron is playing the long game. So far it’s served him well and turning round a few point deficit to a few point advantage (notwithsanding the CR poll today) is a good start. The danger is that the project stalls. I certainly think the “hug a hoodie” fiasco and Labour’s fear agenda have hit the Tories.
The policy framework will need to be carefully pitched, not to frighten the right wing horses whilst at the sane time tempting centre ground voters, the “Blair Tories” and C2s. A nifty trick if it can be pulled off. And then of course there’s the Scottish elephant in the room - Our Gordon !! ….. remembering of course that Scotland are World Elephant Polo Champions !! … plenty of scope to step in the political doings … and elephant sized doings at that.
34: “I think the Indy wanted to have figures without past vote weighting.”
If that is the case, and the pollster believes it significantly misstates the result, why would CR be willing to go along with it, when their reputation is ultimately on the line?
74. Mike, the reason that the Populus & ICM past vote weights are so stable over time is that - in order to avert blips in poll numbers arising purely from blips in recall of a given sample - we both put the recalled past vote from our latest poll into a series of recent previous and calculate the actual weights for the latest poll from the average figures for recall. In this Parliament so far, actual recalled vote for Labour at the last election in our polls has ranged from a low of 39.5% to a high of 49.7%, though most samples are much closer to the average of around 44%. If we didn’t base the weighting on a moving average we would pass these occasional blips in recall straight into the published vote intention figure. And if (like MORI and CommR) we didn’t weight by past vote at all we would be reflecting in our published figures a persistent, but randomly variable, pro-Labour bias.
77 Jonathan, on our data for the second half of the last Parliament (Populus didn’t exist until 2003), average recalled past vote from the 2001 election was about 51% Labour (i.e. 8% above their actual vote share), whereas in this Parliament it is around 44% Labour (i.e. again 8% above actual vote share).
83 & 87. Our latest published vote intention figures appeared in The Times on November 7th and were (with change from previous month) Labour 33% (-2%), Conservative 36% (unchanged), Lib Dem 20% (+2%). As I said in my earlier post, our pre-past vote & turnout weighted figures were Labour 35, Conservative 32. The past vote weight turned this into Conservative 34, Labour 33. The turnout filter then turned it into Conservative 36, Labour 33. We then apply a ’spiral of silence’ weighting (reallocating some of the don’t knows), which often puts a percentage point or so back onto Labour, but in this case did not make any net difference.
92 Jon. Labour and Tory loans to donations are running at around 6/1. The nature of the loans is the important factor. There are a variety of soft loans included in both sets of figures. In the short term they appear sustainable, in the long term ???? … perhaps that’s why we’ve been hearing all this state funding mood music !
67, 93. The Labour MSP for Govan, a highly-paid advocate, was well-known for dashing off to court the minute parliamentary business was over even in 2003 and it didn’t do him any harm. But then again the SNP fell back everywhere that year. I could see Sturgeon winning Govan next year, but only by a whisker; cf. the SNP gains in Dundee East and Ochil in 2003, which were very close - far closer, in fact, than the SNP’s performance in local elections in those areas might have suggested. (And the SNP don’t have that local government base in Govan - only one councillor currently.)
Elsewhere: broadly, I agree with Dan’s points, especially re Kilmarnock, but would suggest Cumbernauld & Kilsyth and possibly Renfrewshire West as other possible SNP gains. I suspect they’ll also be in the running in at least one of the two West Lothian seats, probably Linlithgow. And then there’s Dundee West and the Western Isles (ironic, isn’t it, that they’re called the Western Isles at Holyrood but Na h-Eileanan an Iar at Westminster?) But I can’t see many other realistic SNP targets at the constituency level.
101 Thanks Andrew, most informative, I went to ConHome and selected the wrong poll of yours.
Can you tell us why it is that Populus polls always seem to be best for Labour? The three main firms are ICM - best for Tories, YouGov - in the middle and Populus - best for Labour. Somehow in Populus polls the Tory lead is consistently smaller (after weighting) than the other two main pollsters. This is often a topic on PB.com.
Why do you think this is and are you confident Populus accurately measures the vote shares given YouGov/ICM usually has a slightly better Tory lead?
The Daily Politics are attempting to improve their viewing figures in Italy by having Alan Duncan on the show tomorrow.
Andrew on the spiral of silence factor, is there a poosibility of a small percentage of labour voters who say ‘don’t know’ now because its not fashionable or slightly embarrassing for some to admit that they’re Labour. In other words has the shy Tory factor disappeared and been replaced by its opposite. How does one prove that this has happened and, if one can, how can one put a figure on it? what worries me about all the polls is that they get so very far away from their raw data. Of course each correction can be justified but in total it represnts a very considerable change. What is wrong with going on ringing until you get a statistically valid sample which fits the population in terms of geography, gender, socio economic category, age group etc and then reporting what you find? Or do the costs of such an excercise make that unfeasible?
103. “The Labour MSP for Govan, a highly-paid advocate, was well-known for dashing off to court the minute parliamentary business was over even in 2003 and it didn’t do him any harm”
Now it seems he didn’t even attend some parliamentary business…his attendance record was one of the points that were argued by those who wanted to deselect him (I don’t know his attendance record in the previous parliament though).
One thing that can help Sturgeon can be the collapse of SSP vote if she manages to get a good proportion of it.
101. Very interesting - it becomes increasingly clear that a very great deal of statistical ’smoothing’ is going on as part of the production of some polls. I can see the advantage of this, inasmuch as it avoids the extreme fluctuations seen in the MORI polls, but there must be a risk that this will also mean the heavily ’smoothed’ polls could be slow to pick up genuine changes in support patterns for the parties…
105 ChrisD
.. they’d better get the high chair then.
103. I think that what ever the poll ratings are just now for political parties in Scotland the big story on the night will be voter turnout and tactical voting. Just how big a bl**dy nose will the Scots give Labour and how nifty will the Libdems be at disengaging themselves from any dissatisfaction at the current Lab/Liddem coalition at Holyrood.
110 Is there any actual polling evidence that tells us whether Scots are satisfied or dissatisfied with the ruling coalition at Holyrood as opposed to dissatisfaction with the Westminster government ?
103. Aidan Thomson, how much do you rate their chances in Paisley South?
Nick Palmer I reckon that a lot of people would recognise Michael Grade, grumpy old man and Channel 4 boss who told it as it was. Unlike the other grey faces at the BBC he has style and charm and energy, and that is why he is leaving the Bloated Broadcasting Corporation.
When are we going to get rid on the airwaves poll tax that funds that lavish bureaucracy?
107. Good point re the collapse of the SSP vote, which cost the SNP several council seats in Govan in 2003. There’s also something of a Muslim vote to consider in parts of the seat; historically it’s Labour but that may not be the case so much next year. (Though of course the 2003 elections took place just after the invasion of Iraq.)
112. In a word, slim. The SNP have always polled well in parts of the seat in locals, but are relatively weak in Johnstone (which makes up about a third of the seat). The local MSP is, if I remember right, Hugh Henry, a minister who is a safer pair of hands than some. If the SNP are canny they’ll be putting their efforts into Renfrewshire West.
Andrea – IIRC there’s a by-election quite soon in one of the Paisley wards (Elderslie) which may be a bit of a pointer to how things go. Can’t remember if that’s in North or South though.
As to Chris’ point I’m not sure Labour will get all that much of a bloody nose and I’ll be surprised if the losses are into double figures.
As I have said many times the current polls are pretty meaningless-they will start to become interesting 3-6 months after Brown becomes leader.
However, the fact that Cameron cannot get 10%+ sustained leads in the polls, in this period, at this time is not good for the Tories.
During the Thatcher era I was told Labour under Kinnock needed 10%+ consistent leads, sustained over 18 months to represent a genuine threat to the Tories. This only happened in the late 80’s/early 90’s when Lab started getting leads of 20%+ pretty much over that period. Cameron really needs this kind of head of steam now before the Labour succession.
I think that Cameron has probably done enough to breathe some life into the Tories which is some achievement. I genuinely thought the party was finished as a force of government, and was slowly being reduced to a narrow sectional interest group barking the mantra of the reactionary Daily Mail.
What really interests me is the strategic overview of where politics is going in the UK. It is beginning to look impossible for the Tories to win a majority, and even unlikely for them to be the biggest party- though that must be their realistic goal. But depriving Labour of a majority is a prospect, and then the interests starts.
I would expect a centre right grouping, and some hard bargaining. A Tory/ Lib dem alliance of some kind with the bargaining points being PR, an English parliament and a fully elected upper house.
There is a good likelihood that 2005 may be the last of single party government in the UK. If not 2005, then definitely 2009- it would be unthinkable for Labour to go on for more than 4 terms!!
99,
The damage may have already been done regarding `hug a hoodie`anecdotely at least especially with Blair Tories , c2s and most conservatives.
However the last group will put it to one side, if it means winning an election.
Nevertheless, snubbing the CBI and going to Irag looks like another PR stunt to far in search of the holy grail.
Ming C just been on talksport - said the WLQ is an issue which should be addressed and that he can envisage the day where Scot/NI & Welsh MPs dont vote on English only matters !
Re: 97 - Chris, as an LD I know full well how the Party uses its meagre resources and the use of volunteers to best effect. The fact remains, however, htta its “national” campaigning remains at a very primitive level.
As for the last three elections, I think there’s little or nothing the Tories could have done in both 1997 and 2001. As for 2005 and indeed 1992, I think the maounts of money spent by the Conservatives on, for example, anti-LD billboards in the south and west did have an effect in a number of marginal seats. In a close contest such as may happen, the “spend” factor may well come into play. I don’t know exactly how much the main parties spent in the last three elections though I suspect Andrea does…:)
I broadly agree with Jack W points on this thread. Cameron is doing reasonably well so far, but is starting to struggle due to a lack of policy and a bit too much spinning of controversial policy announcements. There was nothing wrong with the Tories stating that relative poverty was important but venerating Polly Toynbee was an OTT dig at the right of the party who do not share her statist approach for dealing with these matters. I think he sometimes forgets that most Tories are Thatcherite not Heathite these days.
I also think DC should think about taking Labour on in the National Security debate but vigorously and repetitively putting forward Conservative policies in this area, like our commitment to a border police, embarkation controls and a new homeland security department all of which seem to have survived the policy cull.
118. So now who is copying whose policies exactly?
115. Max, I think it’s in South. Labour had a 36% majority over 2006 in 2003 in that ward
114. Re Muslim voters. The SNP councillor in Govan is Muslim (Bashir Ahmad). He’ll be number 2 in the SNP regional list for Holyrood next year. So I assume pretty sure to get elected.
115. Elderslie is in Paisley South. It’s considerably (20%) more Labour and (13%) less SNP than the average for the seat, based on local results in 2003. Perversely, in view of my earlier post, I wouldn’t be surprised if the SNP were able to win the council by-election, but I still think they’d be hard pressed to win the Holyrood seat.
118 Ming accepts Tory policy of English votes on English laws?
I am very pleased, seriously. Perhaps we can work with the LibDems.
124.”Labour had a 36% majority over 2006 in 2003″
it should be over SNP…not sure why I wrote 2006
124 commentator- please read my post at 116. An electoral pact combining an English Parliament with PR could well drive the LD’s and the Tories together- both simply have too much to gain through such an enterprise, but would be the end of 1 part government in the UK, forever. Perhaps not such a bad thing.
Mike, out of interest: re the post of mine that was moderated and removed last night - was it the ellipsis wot dunnit, or had I written something more incendiary? Just wondering..
Ming has always accepted the WLQ needs to be addressed, although not necessarily by English Votes For English Laws (there are a few issues that need to be addressed that one for at start.) Sometime in the next couple of years the party should offically plump for a policy.
118 Jamie You mean the Ming finally uttered that word he so often seems to avoid: England?
126: we could be hearing much more of this in the run up to the next election with polls like these.
One of the key arguments against PR is that it would encourage hung parliaments, which would create weak Governments. However, compared to the current lot, would a coalition Government with agreed priorities and compromises between the parties really be a problem? In many ways, a situation where 2 out of the 3 main parties had to agree on an issue to get it through parliament would be a real improvement.
104, Commentator - the difference between Populus figures and those of ICM and YouGov is quite small really. Over the last year we have Labour averaging 34.3%, ICM have 34.0% and YouGov have 33.9%; Conservatives we have averaging 36.3%, ICM 36.8% and YouGov 37.5%; Lib Dems we have averaging 19.1%, ICM 20.5%, YouGov 17.3%. As these figures show, the main variation of view between the three companies is on the Lib Dems, not Labour or Conservative.And if you look at the variance overall, YouGov (because of the relatively big difference on Lib Dems) differs from ICM figures by nearly twice as much as Populus does. But you are right to point out that, however small the difference, we do consistently tend to find Labour a little higher and Conservatives a little lower than ICM and YouGov. The only real methodological difference I can point to between ICM and Populus is that, as explained above, we weight by past vote to the mid-point between recall and result and ICM weight rather closer to the actual result than that (though still not too the actual result). This won’t always make much of a difference to the end result, but the chances are that it will, crudely, take one off Labour and add one to the Tories. Given the degree of modelling that all this involves I don’t believe any pollster should - or can with any confidence - criticise another’s approach to past vote & turnout weighting and I would never, even privately, question Nick Sparrow’s methods: he pioneered the modernisation of polling techniques. All I can say in respect of the difference between how Populus weights for past vote and how ICM does it, is that we can only work on the basis of our own data and the other evidence we have access to - these weightings clearly involve informed judgement, but they aren’t arbitrary. I have no doubt that Nick Sparrow, similarly drawing on data at his disposal has come to a slightly different conclusion about how to weight for past vote. I keep these things constantly under review and if new information emerges we will respond to it. I can’t really comment on the comparison with YouGov who obviously have a rather different approach (which has proved its validity by result).
106, blue moon - more often than not we do indeed find that there are ’shy Labour’ voters showing up in our samples, it just happened to be the case that this didn’t happen in our most recent Times poll. The clearest measure of spirals of silence is to look at the past votes of the respondents who won’t say how they’d vote in an election now. Broadly speaking these should be roughly in proportion to the past vote profi