Tory YouGov lead cut to 5%
December 1st, 2006
-
The internet pollster follows the trend of the other firms
With David Cameron due to celebrate his first year as Tory leader in five days time the latest survey by YouGov for the Daily Telegraph reinforces the trends in all the other polls in November bar Mori showing a decline in his party position in relation to Labour. The figures for today’s poll with comparisons on the October survey are: CON 37 (-2): LAB 32 (nc): LD 16 (nc).
So the three firms that take measures to ensure representative samples - YouGov, ICM and Populus - are all in the same ball-park. Today’s YouGov CON-LAB split is exactly the same as that which ICM found last week.
These shares, if repeated at a General Election, would produce a nail-biting finish. Labour would lose its overall majority but even being five points adrift they could still have more MPs than the Tories. Cameron needs a national vote margin of at least 10% for a majority government.
So while all focus is likely to be on the Tories the poll will be disappointing for Labour where Gordon Brown’s heightened profile does not appear to be having much impact and for the Lib Dems who continue to find the internet pollster coming out with lower ratings than those firms that use interviews.
The named leader measure that YouGov uses - a forced choice asking “would you prefer to see after the next election, a Conservative Government led by Cameron or a Labour Government led by Brown” - also shows a closing of the gap. These are the responses to that question for the past year:-
NOV 2005 CON 37: LAB 46 (LAB +9)
FEB 2006 CON 37: LAB 43 (LAB +6)
JUN 2006 CON 44: LAB 38 (CON +6)
AUG 2006 CON 43: LAB 36 (CON +7)
OCT 2006 CON 46: LAB 33 (CON +13)
NOV 2006 CON 43: LAB 34 (CON +9)
So although the Tories continue to enjoy a healthy margin on this question November has seen the party’s position move backwards. Taking a longer term view, though, the change on a year ago been enormous and provides little comfort for Labour.
-
In the run-up and immediate aftermath of the Tory leadership change a year ago I resisted the temptation to come to any conclusions for three months. I think the same caution will be a good policy with the Labour change-over.
A key element in all of this is how the Lib Dems will be seen and here the polls, when taken as a whole, are giving a mixed picture. While ICM’s rating for Ming’s party remained at 22% in November the shares from Communicate Research, Populus and Mori all showed significant moves forward. I think a lot of the difference is down to the methodologies.
As to the betting there seems little point in locking up cash on a General Election that might be three and a half years away. Potential Tory backers, though, might be advised to wait until Gordon has moved in next door because there is likely
to be a Labour bounce resulting in a better Tory price. The question is whether an improved Labour performance will be sustained?
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
I don’t understand what the hell the Telegraph want! Turn the clock back 18months. We’ve just lost the 3rd General Election in a row. The Leader of the Party has resigned and we are behind in the polls, consistently.
If someone offered me this situation in June 2005 I’d have bitten their arm off.
Whilst there is some small movement either way from one week to the next, the headline figures are fairly stable and well within the MoE. We are ahead, not by enough, but ahead. We will make gains at the next General Election. Not enough to win it though. Not yet.
Thing is, two or three years out from the GE, are we unhappy with our position? Not really. I’m certainly very happy with a consistent Conservative lead in the polls.
1 DC is dragging the Party kicking and screaming into the 21st century, Ben. There are bound to be complaints.
I’d be happy with these results if I were a Conservative.
I’d also be happy with the score from Adelaide, Conservative or not.
All the polls show the Tories slipping back, but vote shares are quite weird. One pollster has had the lib dems on 22% for months. You Gov has had us on about 16% for a similar period. The lesson seems to be that you can pick up trends from the polls, but that what are the real figures for support are is anyone’s guess.
I agree with your caution on the impact of Brwon. For the Tories the problem may be that their armoury is exhausted before Brown takes to the field of battle. Indeed on these trends the Tories might be behind before Brwon takes over - something I thought inconceivable a few months ago.
I’m feeling relatively upbeat about lib dem prospects, particularly in the wake of the Newcastle result yesterday.
2 - Adelaide looks pretty good to me too. But call no cricket team good until you have seen them bowl…
Have just signed up for an ICM panel - seem to be copying YouGov (I am banned on yougov for changing my details!). Do internet panels work differently from old fashioned polls? How many do ICM and the others telephone to get the 1000 they need?
OT thanks for tingle creek info - saw Kauto star at Ascot - seems v good.
OOT I seem to have aw32.stration.cx@mm virus - any suggestions how to get rid have symantec virus protection but useless.
Cricket cheering - a couple of 4s from petersen
There is an interesting piece in the times
And a quote from an old friend of Mike’s
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2480986,00.html
4 Pietersen is doing well. Hope it does indicate that he is about to hole out.
re 4. Sorry about the virus Icarus. I replaced Symantec with the AVG free version and have found it great. http://free.grisoft.com/doc/1
Somewhat worrying signs in terms of the trend but I remain happy with our overall vote share.
Does make you wonder, though, whether we would have been advabcing further had David Cameron not erred with the ‘hoodie’ narrative.
PtP says he’d be happy if he were a Conservative, well as one, I am. The Labour rating hasn’t risen, LDs stay at 16% and Anthony King’s analysis says that more LDs supporters are viewing Tories favourably - which has an impact on possible tactical voting unwinds and shifts. The real campaign starts when Brown takes over and then is the time to harden policies and opposition.
8 I agree, Ted. Battle hasn’t really been joined yet.
A pretty neutral poll all round really, although confirming recent trends of a slight Tory slippage in support. As already stated, this may continue if the Govt gets a good run and no major gaffes (unlikely but there you go!)
If I were a Tory (heaven forfend!) then I would be pleased with DC’s progress over the past year. However some of his coterie and cheerleaders in the media seem to think he is the ‘coming man’ and is a shoe-in at the next GE. They are underestimating Labour and Brown enormously. Labour may even pull level pegging with the Tories BEFORE GB gets into no 10.
As a Labour supporter, I am relatively pleased that we seem to be consolidating around roughly a third of the vote. We in the party have been spoiled by never ending poll leads and landslide victories!!! Mark my words, the next GE is ALL to play for.
As usual, Ben summarises the position well. A transformation from our May 2005 position that we should credit DC for, but more progress to be made over the next 2-3 years in order to secure government.
I used to think a 10% swing into government was unlikely in one go… after 12 months of almost sustained lead (most of it 5%+ IIRC), it now looks more plausible.
I disagree that DC has nowhere else to take us. The policy announcements will take the air out of any Brown dead-cat bounce, make the switchers more sticky, allay some of the concerns of the core vote (and hopefully anger them also, or there is no point to the policy review), and switch the reminder that are needed to move to 10%.
I would be concerned if I were Brown. In the period when he has been having good & extensive coverage over a wide policy brief and he is now widely regarded as facing no competition (at the same time as DC’s coverage has started to become a little less favourable), his polling appears not to have moved (or possibly by a point).
Viruse problems. What’s that? Should try switching to Linux…
o/t - 2 very public utterances from Charles Clarke: one on trident here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6159035.stm and another reported in Metro attacking green ‘fanatics’.
Is is just my suspicious mind or is this CC dipping his toe in the water in contemplation of a leadership / deputy-leadership challenge?
Seems unlikely he’d get much backing within the Labour party, but why else the sudden burst of activity?
12. Save his seat, maybe?
Havant BC- Hart Plain ward
Con 839
LD 593
Lab 84
turnout around 21%
Con gain from LD (but IIRC Con topped the poll this May too)
Some Labour Deputy Race news from the Guardian:
Beverly Hughes is backing Alan Jahnson.
Gareth Thomas and Ian McCartney are running Benn’s campaign which is set to publish a list of supporters next week.
Jon Cruddas is apparently expected to explain why he voted for the war.
“CC dipping his toe in the water. . .? ”
I think maybe he’s realised that no one will want him any more in any senior role in the Labour Party so he’s going to try to carve out a media (ie money) role for himself as a ’senior dissident’ voice in the wilderness.
A marginally-less-fascist version of Blunkett, if you like (or don’t).
I agree with most of the other comments: a fairly neutral poll in line with expectations. We really will have litte idea of the outlook until GB has taken over and both sides have fired off new policy announcements. Labour has had a pretty awful 10 months followed by a couple of fair months: the Tories the reverse. The 3% swing to the Tories since the GE is proving fairly stable, but Labour seems to have a floor of around 30% regardless of the news, which isn’t a bad basis for the new regime. I’m cautiously optimistic, though retaining the support of Stephen Glover at the Mail might be a challenge!
14. Correct Andrea..it’s about a further 3.5% swing to the Tories since May. Hart Plain will be in the new Meon Valley seat.
15. Beverley Hughes is backing Alan Johnson. Is that good news?!
Does anyone know what happened in the straight fight between the Tories and the BNP in Scarbourgh?
Do the predictive models for seats based on percentages make sufficient allowance for the “Others figure of “15%?
20. Tories won with over 70% according to Vote-2006 site.
20. Easy Con win…look at yesterday’s thread
19. HenryG. It can get worse if he adds Hodge too!
Btw, IIRC you mentioned some weeks ago in an older thread (when we’re discussing Lab MPs retiring) about Barbara Roche and Frank Cook’s seat…did you see the top thread on LabourHome? Cook didn’t take it well!
I disagree that there will be a Brown Bounce at all. Opinion on this is based mostly on the reaction in the polls to Major taking over from Thatcher when there was a sustained turn round in the Conservatives position.
But as I have speculated before I don’t think that will happen, much as Labour supporters hope that it will.
I don’t under estimate GB as a political genius and expect him to have a flurry of really radical ‘announcements’ within weeks of taking over especially on things like the constitution (WLQ, perhaps a Bill of Rights etc) and pensions.
But Gordon Brown isn’t new, he is old hat. His Cabinet won’t be new either; it will be made up of many of the stultifyingly dull anoraks that he surrounds himself with at the moment.
Every survey there has been asking the question Brown/Cameron shows a drop for Labour under Brown; So why will there be a poll bounce?
I know I may be biased, but shouldn’t the Tories be doing much better in the polls after all the bad press Labour has had, mistakes, infighting etc? Consistent leads of 2-5% are impressive by recent Tory standards, and as I have said before, DC should be congratulated for that. I just can’t help thinking that any other party would be 10%+ ahead now. This seems to mirror the internal polls, if we believe the Times article featured in Post 5 from Peter Pigeon.
25. Yes, and as Nick said above, since the conference season Labour has had a decent couple of months and Cameron’s been a bit off the boil. A 10% lead would certainly be better and while the direction of travel for DC has been right, the delivery’s been a bit unfocussed during that time.
On the Brown / Blair takeover, I’d have to agree with Marcus at 24. Major offered a clear break - especially on the crucial policy question of the Poll Tax, but also in tone and style. Brown won’t do, not least because the plan seems to be to have an almost seamless transition. You can’t have both that and a radical change at the same time. Besides, there’s no really unpopular policy that Brown can jettison in the same way.
andrea - Hot news from selly oak !
Current view from region is that the new Birmingham constituencies will not be selecting MP’s until AFTER the may elections, and that MP’s are to concentrate on campaiging only in the wards they are responsible for (under the old boundaries)
My ward ( Bournville) is being targetted by the Greens as their sole Birmingham contest - havent thought this through yet but it does provide Lynne with a chance to win support by helping us to stop the greens.
Ah a decent poll. Many thanks for bringing it to us Mike. Not as good news as last months Yougov poll, and together with ICM it certainly is believable.
However at the same time in the 1992 to 1997 electoral cycle ICM adjusted figures showed similar fluctuations.
So when are the next polls? Ido hope we don’t have to wait quite so long.
re 25. I think that we are now in an era of very stable polling which does not over-estimate Labour in the way it used to. It is much less exciting but the massive leads when Labour was in opposition were partly the product of polling methodologies.
You are right that the Tories do need a margin of 10% and really everything depends on how Gordon and Dave perform against each other. I am afraid we are going to have to wait.
23. From what I understand a large number of whips are backing Johnson, with the Blairite ‘payroll’ left under no illusion who to support. There’s clearly a push to keep Blairism alive among a Brown premiership.
The Labourhome article is very funny Andrea. Apparently Frank Crook was overheard saying that Barbara Roche would succeed him ‘over his dead body’. Since he’ll be at least 74 at the next general election this is not an unlikely prospect.
One of the (many) things that will undermine Roche’s bid is that Dari Taylor is expected to stand out in Stockton South. Party rules mean that she will have to been succeeded by a woman. Clearly Barbara isn’t interested in this seat which has a smallish majority, but Stockton North members will use it to argue for keeping their constituency should be open to all. I think Frank genuinely doesn’t want to stand down yet, but will do so eventually on the insistence that it’s not an all-woman shortlist and that there are no ‘parachutes’.
re 28. My understanding is that the next scheduled poll will be Populus in the Times on Tuesday December 12th.
Where were IDS, Hague and Howard in the polls at the same point ?
19. HenryG. According to the Indy, Shahid Malik, Shona McIsaac, Claude Moraes and Twiggy are also supporting Johnson
27. Thanks Crossland. So even Ladywood won’t select before May 2007?
24. ‘But Gordon Brown isn’t new, he is old hat. His Cabinet won’t be new either; it will be made up of many of the stultifyingly dull anoraks that he surrounds himself with at the moment.’
Related to 23 - I’ve heard that Gordon Brown wants Barbara Roche in the Cabinet (!!!) and that is why Nick Brown is giving her the regional tour. If Barbara Roche is ‘the future’ under Brown, I won’t know whether to laugh or cry.
34. Actually it’s clearly ‘cry’.
Well if Barbara Roche is being touted round NE Labour seats it doesn’t say much for Labour’s chances of winning back Hornsey - whither the Whithington thread?
36. She will never be seen in Hornsey again! She’s told a friend of mine who is a councillor that she’s happy to support her as the new candidate. Not sure how helpful that will be.
Re Redflump at 10, i totaly agree. It is all to play for. However I can’t believe anyone thinks the next GE is a shoe in. It will be a hard fought battle. No question. The Conservatives are looking alive again, which is very good progress and of course I am pleased but we are a long way off a GE and a long way off winning one as well.
37. She won’t be seen there, because she doesn’t want to see them anymore or because they don’t want to see her again!
I loved the comment on LabHome about the first thing to ask her in the selection meeting is “what happened to the 20,000 majority?”
Henry g
“From what I understand a large number of whips are backing Johnson”
Ive spoken to one or two and agree,however they were also pretty certain that a significant part (they argued majority) of Johnsons support would swing behind Hazel blears if she enterd the contest.
Andrea,
No , current rumour is that ladywood will be selected last.
39. At the last election Frank Cook polled 20,012 votes. So yes, going by form, Roche should have it down to a dozen before long!
A colleague of mine who has made it onto the Amicus parliamentary panel was interviewed by a team of MPs including Barbara Roche and PB’s very own Nick Palmer! It’s clear that Barbara is trying to ingratiate herself with the unions, but my feeling is that members and trade unionists in the North East have never been less inclined to select someone with no roots in the region. Sorry Babs.
A third term Labour government:Iraq, Afghanistan, cash for peerages, all the other stuff and the Tories are happy with their present position!The term a poverty of expectation and ambition springs to mind. Just imagine Labour lose the next GE, so what, three terms, no Labour government has ever managed that before. Most Labour supporters, would shurg their shoulders and say, ‘Well we were going to lose sometime, need a rest, few years on the opposition benches etc. If the Tories lose a fourth time, the effects on that party would be incalculable, already out of office for longer than at any time in what? the last two hundred years, if the Tories lose, where do they go: left, right,up, down, where?
41. Thanks Crossland
42. But the 20,000 was over the tories…against the Libdems she had a 25,000 majority in 1997. So in 2 elections, going by form, she can go into negative territory!
We’re a bit harsh with her today, maybe. I appreciated her work in the equal rights for gay people field.
40. Yes Crossland. A Blears candidacy could fatally undermine Harman and even lose it for Johnson. Will the Blairites risk this? My gut instinct is that Blears won’t stand in the end, but I have no evidence for this whatsover.
I wholly disagree this poll is disappointing for Lab. The Tories are slipping back from 40% when a govt in waiting would be surging past that barrier.
NB I’m not saying Lab’s position is good (it’s poor), just that the polling this autumn is better than might have been expected. Need to bear in mind my view that the tide has gone out on a Lab majority ie I am discounting prospect of Lab working majority.
think brown’s numbers may go up in the next poll, as he gets a sympathy vote from the shocking news about his son.
45,
I think Harman’s campaign is dead in the water, my limited info is that the whips and some senior people in the PLP even think she will struggle to get the nominations !
I think Blear’s will only stand if Johnson looks in serious trouble, for example the ‘possibility’ of her standing was floated just after the faith schools debacle.
The MSM seem to building up Benn as the Blairite candidate .
I think Blear’s may turn out to be the true power breaker in this contest, her decision to stand or not will have a bigger impact than anything anyone else can do .
I agree with 47 and disagree with 46! I still believe that Labour can pull it out of the bag come GE time - our voter turnout will be all important. If all the polls point to a hung parliament or even a slim Tory victory, any Brown majority will be seen as a triumph. Hell, a Brown majority would be a triumph for Labour whatever. I am thinking of a working Labour majority of 25+.
Well, well is this a Daily Telegraph YouGov/poll I see before me !! …. the poll I advised was out there and was told I was a fantasist. I’m no “commentator” on these matters, nor will I indulge in childish recriminations ! ……so yah boo sucks ! willy, fart and knobs on !
43 - I think some Labour supporters might be worried about the prospect of a Tory government actually. It’s incredibly naive of you to be so relaxed about the prospect, its near-inevitability notwithstanding.
48. ‘I think Blear’s may turn out to be the true power breaker in this contest’. Interesting point. She’s often underestimated because she’s so annoying and on-message, but she’s a canny operator and good campaigner too.
On Harman I understand she has no union support whatsover and unless she polls heavily in the PLP she can’t win.
Re 31 Thank you Mike. You are right these new fangled vaguely accurate polls are less interesting that the wildd bunch we used to have before.
RE 50 JackW
52. Kevin Maguire in the NewsStateman suggested that she was concerned that she could have had troubles in the selection for the new Salford and Eccles, because Ian Stewart’s supporters got all the key position in the new CLP. So TPTP ordered to run the Stewart/Keeley run off for Worsley and Eccles South first.
55 - TPTP ??
56.. Sorry, I meant TPTB (the power that be)
Shopshire results last night
Shrops CC Whittington LibDem gain from Ind LibDem 680 Con 559 - 2005 result Ind 2148 Con 741
Shrops CC Oswestry Con hold Con 770 Lab 338 LibDem 324 - 2005 result 2 seats Lab 2210 Con 1810/1438 LibDem 1744/1603
Oswestry DC Whittington Con gain from Ind Con 314 LibDem 121 Lab 114 - 2003 result 2 seats Ind 422/275 Lab 149
Look at the fieldwork dates Jack, when you thought it was out there it hadn’t been done yet
Ostwestry was a poor result from Libs impressive one from Labour considering they didn’t stand in 05
59 Antony. So what you’re telling me is that the Daily Telegraph didn’t know two days ago that YouGov were doing a poll to be published on Friday !! … pull the other one it’s got voting intentions on it !!
60 Suggest you read the result again Stuart Labour came top of the poll in 2005 in Oswestry though only fielding 1 candidate
Sorry had missed that. Well i’ll change that to a poor result by Labour then
63 The turnout was very low in this ward only 15% so can’t read too much into it compared to a GE level turnout in 2005 .
By Chris Mead, PA Elections Editor
Liberal Democrats made a net four-seat gain in the latest council by-elections - three from Labour.
Their candidate Robert Field scored a landslide victory to win at Parkwood, Maidstone Borough, Kent, in a result that was also a blow to Tories as it cost them a chance to take outright control of the authority.
Lib Dems’ Lawrence Hunter triumphed at Lemington, Newcastle upon Tyne City, where they gained another ward seat in May.
The party’s third gain from Labour was at Northway, Tewkesbury Borough, Gloucestershire, where John Clucas came first from nowhere last time.
Liberal Democrats also picked up seats at Sutton on Sea South, East Lindsey District, Lincolnshire, and Shropshire County’s Whittington division.
But they lost to the Tories’ Elaine Shimbart at Hart Plain in Hampshire’s Havant Borough in a ward where Conservatives had also won another seat in May.
This result comes less than a month after Lib Dems gained elsewhere in the borough.
Tories also took the Oswestry Borough seat at Whittington from independent.
They kept their Shropshire County Council majority when they defended a marginal seat in its Oswestry division.
Analysis of 14 comparable results over November suggests a projected 21.6% Tory lead over Labour.
A calculation based on 10 contests where all three major parties fought both times suggests a line-up of: C 43%, Lib Dem 27.7%, Lab 23.2%.
These figures would mean massacre for Labour at next May’s main polls and fears about that could re-ignite calls in the party for Mr Blair to step down before then.
One shred of comfort for the party may be that Tories failed to gain any seats from Labour during the month - indeed they lost one to it at Hyndburn - and they have to advance on that front to make any general election breakthrough.
RESULTS:
Durham County - Ouston and Urpeth: Lab 665, Lib Dem 487. (May 2005 - Lab 2170, Lib Dem 827, C 588). Lab hold. Swing 11% Lab to Lib Dem.
East Lindsey District - Skegness St Clements: Lab 356, C 249, Ukip 157. (May 2003 - Two seats Lab unopposed). Lab hold.
East Lindsey District - Sutton-on-Sea South: Lib Dem 273, Ind 198, Lab 142. (May 2003 - Ind 358. C 217, Lib Dem 113). Lib Dem gain from Ind.
Havant Borough - Hart Plain: C 839, Lib Dem 593, Lab 84. (May 2006 - C 1089, Lib Dem 880, Lab 170, Green 119). C gain from Lib Dem. Swing 3.5% Lib Dem to C.
Maidstone Borough - Parkwood: Lib Dem 347, Lab 130, C 125. (May 2006 - Lab 315, Lib Dem 308, C 279). Lib Dem gain from Lab. Swing 18.3% Lab to Lib Dem.
Newcastle-upon-Tyne - Lemington: Lib Dem 1180, Lab 815, BNP 383, C 147. (May 2006 - Lib Dem 1591, Lab 1247). Lib Dem gain from Lab. Swing 1.1% Lab to Lib Dem.
Oswestry Borough - Whittington: C 314, Lab 121, Lib Dem 114. (May 2003 - Two seats Ind 422, Ind 275, Lab 149). C gain from Ind.
Scarborough Borough - Hertford: C 736, BNP 267. (May 2003 - Two seats C 700, 586, Lib Dem 571). C hold.
Shropshire County - Oswestry: C 770, Lab 338, Lib Dem 324. (May 2005 - Two seats Lab 2210, C 1810, Lib Dem 1744, 1603, C 1438). C hold. Swing 20.4% Lab to C.
Shropshire County - Whittington: Lib Dem 680, C 559. (May 2005 - Ind 2148, C 789). Lib Dem gain from Ind.
Tewkesbury Borough - Northway: Lib Dem 250, C 205, Ind 202, Lab 93. (May 2003 - Two seats Lab 380, 253, C 240, 191, Ind 179). Lib Dem gain from Lab. Swing 14.5% Lab to C.
end
42: Yes, interviewed and advised a dozen potential Amicus candidates with Barbara Roche and Mark Todd: we thought them an impressive bunch, so your friend should be confident, Henry. Barbara seemed to have been asked to take the lead role by Amicus and I get the impression that she wasn’t so much seeking heir support as already in receipt of it.
The deputy leadership campaign is very tricky to predict since people are timing their efforts differently. Jon Cruddas was first with a serious push and has IMO found limited appeal in the PLP though he should do quite well in the CLPs. Harriet Harman has been making the running in the PLP to try to establish an early pole position. Alan Johnson launched recently after speculation that he wasn’t that interested, and has a good website and canvassers building up loyalist PLP support. Peter Hain, Hilary Benn, Hazel Blears and (if he stands, which I slightly doubt) Jack Straw are yet to make serious public pushes: Peter’s launch will be impressive when it comes, though I’m sure you’d expect me to say that. The tricky bit is pacing: too soon and you look stale by June, too late and someone else corners the market. But lots of MPs are simply waiting to see who actually stands and gets enough signatures, and I’d advise punters to do the same.
Why do people keep saying the Tories need 10% lead to win?
We should assume a further decline in anti-Tory tactical voting (or even some pro-Tory tactical voting). At least the first of these is almost certain given a decade of Labour in power and Cameron’s emollient if vague noises.
I would be willing to bet the Tories will outperform the unadjusted model predictions against Labour.
I think if they get 7% that will be enough.
Re 67 Jon, have you got my email address OK now?
Just sticking in some reasonable numbers into Baxter gives a Tory majority of 10 though there are a few dodgy gains (Watford, Lincoln and Poplar and Limehouse (!) caught my eye)
No sorry didn’t see it
Has anyone got a rational explanation for yesterday’s local government by elections? I confess, I haven’t. What a weird bunch!
66. Thanks Nick. Thought Hain was pretty good on PMQs last night by the way.
RE 70, Jon, Well, if you are the same jon who was going to email me a picture of a Labour MP’s letter to constituents it is
benedictmpwhite at gmail dot com.
If you are not that Jon, please ignore this message
re 67 A fair point…but would you maintain the Tories could win a majority with 38%?
71. In some cases, I can’t even see the rational on how many candidates the parties fielded in previous contests (looking at the result)
The Durham big swing seems to be produced by the absence of a Tory candidate this time.
On its way to you now.
“Why do people keep saying the Tories need 10% lead to win?”
Because governments tend to recover support in the run up to the general election. I agree that anti-Conservative tactical voting will be less of an issue next time round, so a Tory lead of 7% - in a general election - might very well be enough to generate an overall majority.
As someone who is accused of a being a relentless Cameron critic, I must record that Cameron did write a first class article in the Standard on crime and punishment last night. If we get a good deal more of this kind of thing in the future, then I think Right Wing Conservatives will be a good deal happier.
Some interesting details in the YouGov poll on Anthony Wells:
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/index.php
As usual, something for everyone to be pleased about - I won’t quote selectively.
74 Martin. 38% would be tight IMO. Much would depend on the differential swings. Piles of votes in the south offset by poor results in the Trent North region would mean 38% almost certainly wouldn’t be enough.
Re 76 Jon, many thanks got it.
Re 77, Sean have you got a link to that?
re 65 Labour massacre in May
National poll changes point same way 8% swing lab to tory.3% swing lib to tory,5% swimg lab to lib
However many of contests are Lib/Tory. so overall a Labour massacre means landslide for Tories.and stay still backwards for Lib dems
rogerh
81 No, although it’s quoted from in Conservative Home.
82 Poll changes should be viewed cautiously as Labour had a big poll boost from the start of the Iraq war in 2003.
However, one very well-informed commentator on local government has advised me that any Labour councillor with a lead of under 10% in the South should be considered vulnerable. That would wipe out quite a few Southern Labour council groups.
82 The swings you quote are from when ? . As most of next years elections were last fought in 2003 and 2004 the swings from then will be much less and will not mean a landslide as you say .
Re 83 many thanks Sean.
66
Nick, if a significant number of MPs are waiting to see who emerges, what effect does that have on the nomination arrangements?
Candidates need, is it 44?, nominators and there is a large field at present. If you take out several dozen, (100?), a lot of potential candidates are going to struggle. Will this become apparent soon enough for support to re-focus round elsewhere, or might it be sufficiently level for the potential candidates’ core supporters to keep scrapping in the hope / expectation of finding the last few names?
It seems to me that, as well as interesting gossip, this will-X-get-nominated issue is jolly interesting for the main purpose of this site, unless, of course, the bookies and Betfair see the same issue as just making the whole shebang too dangerous to start a book.
OT. Interesting article in the Chicago Sun-Times predicting that local man Senator Obama will make a run for the presidency :
http://www.suntimes.com/news/sweet/154692,CST-EDT-sweet30.article
Will Brown get a sympathy boost with the publicity surrounding his baby?
Looking at this week’s byelection…well, they seem really bizarre:
East Lindsey District - Skegness St Clements..Lab was unopposed in 2003, but yesterday both tories and UKIP had decent showings
East Lindsey District - Sutton-on-Sea South…the tories don’t stand in a seat where they were second last time
Scarborough Borough - Hertford…Libdems don’t stand in a seat where they had decent vote (and they were just few votes away from a seat in 2003)
Shropshire County - Oswestry…Labour fielded just 1 candidate in May 2005 and they ended up topping the poll
Tewkesbury Borough - Northway…Libdem gain a seat where they didn’t even stand last time
Some parties seem not to have stood candidates last time in wards where they had a considerable support after a couple of years
Overall a bad night for Labour…probably not helped by the fact that some of those seats were last contested in 2003 and 2005 (GE day)
90 - Yes, Andrea, I look forward to Sean’s analysis tomorrow - he is going to have fun picking the bones out of that lot!
65 - An hour since that post and no sign of Rik to tell us how it is clear evidence that he is going to massacre all before him in Sutton next time.
Is he ill today?
90 Andrea. Now Andrea !!!! … forget all this politics nonsense !! .. what all the viewers in PB soapland want to know is ….. Have you or haven’t you ?? … we can’t wait for the Christmas Day Special, where in other storylines :
seanT is run over by long lost brother Nick Palmer
Benedict’s blog disappears up his own mince pies.
Phil Mitchell is mistaken for Tabman and becomes a focus leaflet addict … sorted !!
Young Matlock’s fruit and veg stall is relocated to the Lords.
Jack W takes over the Queen Vic and makes it a temperance stronghold.
RE 92, Park Town boy, No idea about Riks health but I can deputise if you like.
The Conservatives will of course get 90% of the vote in Sutton and Cheam next time sweeping all before them!
86 - There is a full text of Cameron’s article at
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/torydiary/files/camerons_evening_standard_article.pdf
And not only right-wingers as Sean Fear will attest to its force and good sense.
91 Augustus. I think the best thing for Sean to do is play political poo sticks and then sit down with honey for tea !!
94 Benedict. Only 90% !!! .. Rik must be ill.
Excellent result in Northway.
90 The Conservatives were hoping for if not expecting to win the Skegness St Clement’s ward . They certainly put in a lot of effort see comments from Geoffrey Brooking on vote 2006 .
87. Martyn Smith. I didn’t quite follow part of your thread. “If you take out several dozen,(100?)” etc. Do you mean that the candidate(s) who have declared their intention to run will potentially take out this number of supporters?
Just been watching the politics show. They have carried out a poll using Populus. First question was ‘I like DC but don’t know what he stands for’. This got a Yes result in the 40% area and this was considered positive for him as it meant more than 50% knew what he stood for!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What! Has nobody there got the brains to realise that by linking 2 conditions the result is completely invalid and the assumption they jumped to is also invalid i.e. they have just lumped in those that ‘Don’t like DC’ regardless of whether they know what he stands for with those that do like him and do know what he stands for. How can a polling organisation put out such a question?
RE 93, JackW are you saying you don’t like my blog? i am so hurt
RE 97, No jackW, It’s just the deputising service was unable to check todays prediction
ot. anyone see the politics show last night? fascinating debate between Ashdown, Portillo and Abbot….especially when they got on to Iraq and the future of Europe’s involvement in foreign affairs. thought that Ashdown talked a lot of sense up until he started advocating a closer integration of European defence policy. I am not against this necessarily i just think it is unrealistic.
on topic.I think the tightening up in the polls has been post Queens speech/post iraq enquiry debate +law and order issues and we may even see Brown taking a lead for a short period at some point. I do think that if he pulls a snap electin it is his best chance if this happens.
65. The Maidstone Parkwood result is a real surprise. The Parkwood ward has been a black hole for the Lib Dems for decades. I don’t think it was won even in 1991, which were the best set of local elections for the Lib Dems in Kent.
Martin/Jack - I think the Tories could just about win with 38% and Labour 31%. Such is the marvellousness of our electoral system. Stick the numbers into Baxter with a decent tactical swing… all seems reasonable enough.
101. That poll on the Daily Politics was bunkum.
Respondents were asked to agree or disagree with the statement:
“I like David Cameron but don’t know what he stands for.”
No 50%
Yes 46%
This was taken to be not bad for DC, because 50% disagreed with the statement that he doesn’t stand for anything.
Did no-one stop to consider that maybe they just don’t like him?
65. “Scarborough Borough - Hertford: C 736, BNP 267. (May 2003 - Two seats C 700, 586, Lib Dem 571). C hold.”
I have absolutely no knowledge of this seat, but it would seem apparent that in 2003 if the LDs had a 2nd candidate they should have taken the second seat. 571 voters had a spare vote. Many would have not used it and clearly lots used it on the more popular Conservative looking at the difference in the 2 Conservative figures, but if only 15 of them used their vote on the less popular Conservative they deprived the LD of 2nd place. 15 out of 571 seems very likely.
I assume that with no candidate this time and only 1 in 2003 they struggle to get candidates
107 It is unbelievable isn’t it. They either excluded all that didn’t like him, which makes it mind bogglingly biased as although he might be a likable chap there must be a sizable number of supporters of other parties as well as those who just hate all politicians that would like to put him against the wall and …
OR
The 50% is made up of:
Like him and know what he stands for
Don’t like him and know what he stands for
Don’t like him and don’t know what he stands for
If the latter 2 make 49% of those polled then the positive 50% as reported now becomes 1%
Garbage
106 The fallacy in your argument is putting those figures into Baxter which still gives false results , putting them into the Wells swingometer shows the Conservatives well short of a majority .
What else was on the Daily Politics about Cameron - who were the guests. I’m on the road but pleased with a still good 5% lead in You Gov.
Laat night was an extraordinarily successful one for the Lib Dems. To take five seats from other parties and lose only one suggests that the general situation is very encouraging for them.
So why do the Tory posters here always try to talk such successes down? Can it be that they have little confidence in their own political future?
111. Commentator. I was concentrating on my lunch too much to be much use to you!!! But there was discussion on Road taxing. Guests were ‘Uunknown woman’ and Matthew Wright (from the Wright show). There was a new Tory PPC, youngish woman, novelist, didn’t get the name. Very much on board the DC programme, but you would expect that wouldn’t you.
Lost interest in poll after the first meaningless question. Seem to remember the rest of the answers were considered favourable for DC, but it lost all credibility with me by this stage.
112 Because they are Tories, Tressage. Not that I have noticed too much talking down of the results.
Why just the other day the Tories gained a parliamentary by-election, and I found myself saying it wasn’t significant. (OK maybe not the other day. But one day they will - and I probably will say it.)
Thanks Kjh. I usually enjoy their perception panel so will have to watch online tonight when I get home.
OT, I watched 10 minutes of Question Time last night but had to switch over due to the dire standard of debate. Has the programme got worse or has it always been this bad?
104 - yes i agree it was a good debate between Portillo and Ashdown, personally I’d have liked the producer to sod the rest of the show and let them carry on.
112. Ah but we took a seat from you Tressage! Remind of the net gains for our parties in May again?
We have a future, yours is as ‘also rans’.
65. Nobody seems to have picked up on the statement tucked halfway through post 65 re local election results in November:
“Analysis of 14 comparable results over November suggests a projected 21.6% Tory lead over Labour.”
I would have thought that sounds pretty good for the Conservatives. It certainly points to a very poor result for Labour in May’s local elections.
Re 65. I was involved a bit in the Tewkesbury by-election. Last time it was a Lab / Con marginal where the Lib Dems did not even stand. This time the Lib Dems came from nowhere to win. There was a strong local independent who took votes mainly we suspect from invisible Labour. The Tories and Lib Dems both fought strong campaigns, the winning canddate is the son of well known Liverpool Lib Dem, Flo Clucas. Labour were hammered gaining just over 10% of the votes in a seat they won last time. This is not an inner City seat but includes a small “council estate” and a lot of new housing.
Suggest the results yesterday with three Lib Dem gains from Labour with show that Labour is still losing votes to the Lib Dems.
Deputy leadership: Martyn, MPs can nominate more than one if they want, though it’ll look a bit odd unless they have a good explanation (’I want to widen the choice for members’ would do, I guess). I think there will be enough to go round for all the front-runners.
And I don’t know about Tories here, but I definitely concede those were great results for the LDs last night. They’re also doing well in most polls except YouGov. I think they are probably more motivated at the moment - when I was canvassing a marginal Lab/Con ward last weekend, I found both Lab and Con voters a bit hesitant.
I note the cocky predictions of a Labour meltdown and Tory triumph in May - will remind you guys of it when we have the results. In Broxtowe, the Tories will be lucky to win more than a single seat from Labour, though they have a fair chance against two independents. (You can remind me if I’m wrong!)
You Tories had a decent result in May, DDC, but not half as brilliant as you all spun it to be. And since then you have started going downhill. I´m afraid your “future” is rather in the past.
This does seem a pity, since your Cameron is doing his best to put over the Lib Dem message. He doesn´t do it very well, of course, and I suspect that his heart isn´t really in it. But at least he highlights the Lib Dem talking points.
This would help to explain the very good crop of local government results for the Lib Dems this week, wouldn´t it? So, thank you Mr Cameron.
So - lots of lib dem gains and then yougov get a figure of 16% support. I know that (rightly) we castigate MORI because of the random volatility of their findings but the difference in percentages for the lib dem support from pollsters must cast doubt on other of them (yes I know there’s the MoE, but this appears to be a consistent variation).
Also noteworthy is the continued high figure for others, there are valid reasons for each of these parties to be polling well but it would be useful to see what happens if you squeeze them to see if they would change their vote in a close election.
“must cast doubt one or another of them” rather.
120 Well done. (I wondered about the surname).
123.”Also noteworthy is the continued high figure for others, there are valid reasons for each of these parties to be polling well but it would be useful to see what happens if you squeeze them to see if they would change their vote in a close election.”
ukpaul, wondering if even just a small % swing to some of the other minority parties could effect all the main parties in marginals. Have the Libdem’s finally lost their unique selling point with some voter’s because of the increased choice of where to put a protest vote?
123 You make a good point. The yougov panel seems to be diverging from the electorate as a whole. This is also a reason for taking all the minor questions with a hefty pinch of salt.
123 As I have noted before the combined figures for LibDems and Others is consistent in all polls at around 31% . The individual figures do vary between pollsters in a consistent manner far more than sampling/Margin Of Error would allow and therefore must be down to methodology . These byelection results wouls indicate that Yougov is understating LibDem support and overstating Others .
128. “These byelection results wouls indicate that Yougov is understating LibDem support and overstating Others .” Mark a lot of these smaller parties are not in a position to field candidates in all council elections, therefore could that not understate their support.
128. The problem with the ‘others’ figure is that it’s very difficult to test. Not everywhere gets Green, BNP, UKIP or other minor party representation at general elections. The only time the choice is available - Euroelections - the contest is held under PR and probably isn’t taken seriously by many voters anyway. If someone was asked to design an election to maximise minor party votes, it would be something like that.
Certainly, trying to work out minor party support from local by-elections is a pretty pointless task as there’s often a story behind many candidates standing under such flags which won’t be apparent when trying to pull the figures together at a national level.
The YouGov figure for others may well be right if all voters got the chance to vote for their preferred minor party - which they won’t.
102 Bendict. Not like your blog … I’m so hurt .. we at PB luv it !!
130. On a previous thread someone mentioned concern about the Green’s possible taking support from the Libdems in some constituencies. We know that UKIP support probable hurt the tories in a few marginal’s. Would be interesting to see if the triple threat of the SNP, Respect and the BNP would hurt Labour if they carefully targeted constituencies where they have strong support.
129/130 That may be correct but does not explain why other pollsters except BPIX and in their first poll Communicate did not pick up anything like the 15% support that Yougov found for
Others .
Re 131 Jackw
The PB poll of polls from my own polling organization - Anonymous Random Selection of Electors and taking in the last 5 different polls (excluding BPIX) gives :
Con 36.4% .. Lab 33% .. LibDem 19% .. Others 11.6%
94 - Thanks for that, I feel better now.
105 - Maybe not expected but they worked it pretty darned hard. Rumours of lots of help from various folk down the road in Folkestone.
123,128 et al - Self-evidently if some pollsters are regularly showing a Lib Dem score in the 15-17% range while others are regularly showing them in the 20-22% range some of them must be wrong!
“David Cameron today urged people to ditch TV dinners and spend more time in the kitchen preparing wholesome family meals to be eaten around the table.” The Guardian.
Does anyone else think that David Cameron is actually a spoof character invented by an advertising agency? Is it all part of some strange viral campaign to sell more tea coseys or tampons or something?
133. I agree that it’s surprising that there’s such a consistent difference. Presumably part of it’s down to how the figures are processed, but might another factor be the wording of the question? Perhaps those picking up higher ‘others’ mention them by name whereas those who get a lower score mention the main parties and then just ‘or another party’ which may have less of a prompting effect.
137. Eating a home cooked meal round the table with the TV switched off might just help a few parents engage with their kids.
137 - Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear. What is it about politicians that they feel qualified to tell us how to live our lives right down to the smallest detail? What next? Eat up all your greens?
It seems DC is now trying to gain some of the ‘Nanny State’ vote. There should be a slogan to go with it . How about ‘Back to basics’.
Just for Fun: Pure Gold…
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/goldanthem/#detail
140
“It seems DC is now trying to gain some of the ‘Nanny State’ vote.”
Dave keeps talking about society changing itself for the better whilst insisting government interference is not the answer. This is all very well, but he hasn’t even suggested what the alternative catalyst may be. He seems to be implying that he just needs to say something (don’t eat chocolate oranges, watch less TV…) and that will give us all the direction we need.
143. Quite the opposite, how about starting at the beginning with good parenting rather than coming in at the end with “Nanny/ASBO” interference.
Re 136 Park Town Boy, Pleased to be of asistance.
RE 141 just had to put that on my blog! Very funny!
Gosh, Benedict, do you have a Blog?
143 & 144 - If DC is going to keep on coming out with these valuable thoughts of how we can all improve the way we live our lives the whole impact will be lost if they aren’t remembered. He should publish them and hand them out to supporters. How about a little red book?
148. “He should publish them and hand them out to supporters. How about a little red book?” Think someone already did that, remember the Guido/Dale little red book of New Labour sleaze.
Anywhere I can buy that… sounds like a great Christmas present.
130 I think that Israel demonstrates that the way to splinter the vote most effectively is through a single national list. It also shows that in the major parties internal politics counts for a lot more than bothering about the electors :
100 Rather under the bridge now, I guess, but in 87 I meant that “If you take out as nominators the several dozen MPs who are not wanting to commit themselves to supporting anybody and so won’t sign any nomination papers …”
121 Thanks, Nick. Interesting though that the LDs are talking about moving away from multiple nominations though. Personally, I think our ptb are wrong; rather it is reasonable to say, “Widen the Choice” or indeed “I would be happy with X or Y, you decide.” I suspect that there’s a limit to the number one can say that about and remain realistic before you have to move to argument A.