UK General Election: Poll Watch

[Anarcho-Socialist]

YouGov 19 April:

CON 33 (+1)
LDM 31 (-2)
LAB 27 (+1)
OTH 8 (-)
http://today.yougov.co.uk/


Opinium/Daily Express 19 April:

CON 32 (-7)
LDM 29 (+12)
LAB 26 (-5)
http://www.ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/


ComRes/ITV News/Independent 19 April:

CON 32 (+1)
LAB 28 (+1)
LDM 28 (-1)
http://www.comres.co.uk/election2010.aspx


PB/Angus Reid 19 April:

CON 32 (-6)
LDM 32 (+10)
LAB 24 (-4)
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2010/04/19/pbangus-reid-has-the-lib-dems-up-10/

[non sociopath skin]

1. The phrase "all over the place" comes to mind ...

... but a Tory landslide seems to have slipped down the agenda.

The Skin

[Anarcho-Socialist]

2. I'm not sure a Tory landslide was ever on the agenda

Cameron's Tories would have to poll bigger vote percentages than all of Blair's and Thatcher's landslide results, which was still unlikely if the election had been held six months ago.

[Anarcho-Socialist]

3. Some previous polls

ICM/Guardian 18 April:

CON 33 (-1)
LDM 30 (+3)
LAB 28 (-1)
http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/media-centre-polls.php


BPIX/MoS 17 April:

LDM 32 (+12)
CON 31 (-7)
LAB 28 (-3)
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2610

[muriel_volestrangler]

4. If they thought they could win the election, 49% would vote Lib Dem

One reason why the Lib Dems could, just possibly, achieve this is revealed by YouGov’s latest daily poll. We asked: “How would you vote on May 6 if you thought the Liberal Democrats had a significant chance of winning the election”. The responses: Lib Dem 49%, Conservative 25%, Labour 19%. On the – admittedly unrealistic – assumption of uniform national swing, there would be 548 Lib Dem MPs, 41 Labour MPs and just 25 Tories.

It won’t happen. But this question does show that if Nick Clegg continues to perform well in TV debates and voters regard him as a serious challenger, then Lib Dem support could rise further from the 30% or so that, all pollsters agree, it has achieved since last Friday.

What is more, far fewer people are deterred by the prospect of a Lib Dem government. We asked people whether they would be delighted or dismayed by different election outcomes – or whether they wouldn’t mind.

Here are the responses:

				Delighted	Wouldn’t mind	Dismayed
Lib Dem govt under Nick Clegg	29%		38%		21%
Con govt under David Cameron	25%		20%		45%
Lab govt under Gordon Brown	18%		23%		51%
Labour-Lib Dem coalition	14%		35%		39%
Con-Lib Dem coalition		9%		33%		45%
Grand 3-party coalition		9%		24%		47%

http://www.today.yougov.co.uk/commentaries/peter-kellner/could-lib-dems-win-outright

[Anarcho-Socialist]

5. fascinating stuff

It's unlikely, but perhaps not as way off a possibility as once was thought.

[Anarcho-Socialist]

6. New polls out tonight 20 April

Populus/Times (their first post-debate poll)

CON 32 (-4)
LDM 31 (+10)
LAB 28 (-5)
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7103076.ece


Angus Reid/PB

LDM 33 (+1)
CON 32 (-)
LAB 23 (-1)
http://www.politicalbetting.com/


YouGov/Sun

LDM 34 (+3)
CON 31 (-2)
LAB 26 (-1)
http://today.yougov.co.uk/

[Anarcho-Socialist]

7. Harris/Metro 21 April: CON 31%(-5), LAB 26%(-1), LDM 30%(+7)

http://www.ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/

[Anarcho-Socialist]

8. MORI/Reuters 21 April: CON 32%(-3), LAB 28%(-2), LDM 32%(+11)

http://www.ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/

[Anarcho-Socialist]

9. YouGov 21 April: CON 33%(+2), LAB 27%(+1), LDM 31%(-3)

http://www.ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog

[Anarcho-Socialist]

10. TNS-BRMB 21 April: CON 34%(-2), LAB 29%(-4), LDM 30%(+8)

http://www.ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog

[LeftishBrit]

11. Thanks for keeping us in touch with all these!

I've never known polls this close between the three parties. I've always said that we have a two-party electoral system and two and a half main parties, which makes election results very unpredictable even if we knew the proportions of people supporting the partiess. This time, we have a two-party electoral system with *three* main parties - so the results are even harder to predict.

[Anarcho-Socialist]

12. YouGov/Sun 22 April: CON 34 (+1) LAB 29 (+2) LDM 28 (-3)

http://today.yougov.co.uk/politics/latest-voting-intention-22-april

[muriel_volestrangler]

13. 1st poll after 2nd debate:YouGov/Sun 23 Apr: CON 34(nc),LAB 29(nc), LDM 29(+1)

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2633

[non sociopath skin]

14. .... and let us bear in mind that it's highly likely that Murdoch/Fox UK Inc ....

... are cooking the books.

The Skin

[muriel_volestrangler]

15. The Independent pointed out The Sun censored the poll in reply #4 above

The Sun newspaper failed to publish a YouGov poll showing that voters fear a Liberal Democrat government less than a Conservative or Labour one.

The Liberal Democrats accused the newspaper, which is owned by Rupert Murdoch, of suppressing the finding. The paper, which endorsed Labour in the past three elections, declared its support for David Cameron during the Labour Party's annual conference last October. Like other Tory-supporting papers, it has turned its fire on Nick Clegg over his policies, pro-European statements and expenses claims since he won last week's first televised leaders' debate.
...
The Sun declined to comment last night. On the day the poll's findings were published on Tuesday, it focused on the Tories moving into the lead in the share of the vote and said there were signs that the Liberal Democrats' surprise surge was on the wane. An editorial comment said: "Mr Clegg is the political equivalent of a holiday romance. An exciting fortnight's flirtation so long as you don't ask too many questions. We cannot gamble the nation's future like that."

However, Sun journalists said YouGov's extensive daily poll always contained too many findings to publish. On Monday, the paper ran a front-page story saying the Liberal Democrats had taken the lead, based on the previous day's survey.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/sun-censored-poll-that-showed-support-for-lib-dems-1951940.html

I doubt they directly manipulate the poll figures, but they can ask for extra questions that may, they hope, turn Sun readers off the Lib Dems, or keep quiet about other questions that turn out positive for the Lib Dems.

[muriel_volestrangler]

16. Harris/Mail 22-23rd: Con 34 (+3) Lab 26 (nc) LibDem 29 (-1)

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2634

[Anarcho-Socialist]

17. ComRes/IoS/Mirror 25 April: CON 34 (-1), LDM 29 (+2), LAB 28 (+3), OTH 9 (-4)

http://indyeagleeye.livejournal.com/242880.html

[muriel_volestrangler]

18. Lots of polls now:

ICM/Telegraph: CON 35%(+2), LAB 26%(-2), LDEM 31%(+1)
Ipsos Mori/NotW: CON 36%(+4), LAB 30%(-2), LDEM 23%(-9)
YouGov/Sunday Times: CON 35%(+1), LAB 27%(-2), LDEM 28% (-1)
BPIX/Mail on Sunday: CON 34%(+3), LAB 26%(-2), LDEM 30%(-2)

and one which Anthony Wells says doesn't have known methods:
OnePoll/Sunday People: CON 32%, LAB 23%, LDEM 32%

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/

[craigmatic]

19. Labour is done for. It really says alot that lib dems are leading labour.

A centre-left coalition is looking better and better. Maybe then labour cand get rid of Brown and give the job to a younger man like Miliband.

[non sociopath skin]

21. And then find a way of explaining why we have another unelected Prime Minister ....

... in spite of having just had an election.

The Skin

[craigmatic]

22. Maybe he won't be afraid of facing the public and can pull off a john major style upset.

Brown is dragging the party down. I doubt MPs seriously like to campaign with him and a few of them may actually think he's hurting their chances. Milliband seems like the type to rebuild Labour's image and reputation.

[LeftishBrit]

23. Don't know about Miliband...

He comes across to me as rather smarmy and arrogant, not as bad as Blair or Cameron but in the same category. Personally I prefer a charmless but straightforward type like Brown. Also, I think that Brown has done a much better job as PM than Blair (I know, I know, that's not saying much!) and, if he's going to be replaced, I'd much rather it was by a more left-wing Old Labour type, than David Same-Old-New-Labour Miliband. There isn't anyone likely on the horizon. My preferred candidate Jon Cruddas, like most of my preferred candidates since I started voting, hasn't a hope in hell. But even between Brown's two most likely replacements, I'd prefer Alan Johnson to Miliband.

I think that in any case Labour would suffer, whoever the leader was, from being the incumbent party in a recession.

[Anarcho-Socialist]

20. YouGov 25 April: CON 34 (-1), LAB 28 (+1), LDM 30 (+2)

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/

[muriel_volestrangler]

24. Regional results from YouGov, over the last week

PoliticsHome have YouGov’s regional figures for the past week here. These are the first properly weighted regional breaks from YouGov on data entirely after the first debate (the data release last week straddled it) and they seem to suggest that the Lib Dem boost is stronger in the North.
...
On a uniform national swing, the data behind these figures would produce a seat distribution of CON 245, LAB 273, LD 100 – a hung Parliament with Labour the largest party. However, if we do regional swings based on this data, it produces a projection of CON 262, LAB 245, LD 111 – the Conservatives the largest party and an extra 11 Lib Dem seats. The difference is down to the Liberal Democrats gaining more Northern seats (most notably 6 extra in the North east, including all three Newcastle seats) and two extra in the South-West. The Conservatives would gain an extra 20 seats, partially offset by larger losses to the Lib Dems.

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2640

What might this mean in seats? Who knows.

The only predictor tool I know of that takes regional numbers is here on Electoral Calculus: http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/userregpoll.html?CON=33.8&LAB=27.2&LIB=30.6&ScotCON=14&ScotLAB=36&ScotLIB=25&ScotNAT=21&NorthCON=20&NorthLAB=39&NorthLIB=34&NWestCON=29&NWestLAB=35&NWestLIB=30&YorksCON=28&YorksLAB=32&YorksLIB=32&WalesCON=26&WalesLAB=33&WalesLIB=26&WalesNAT=8&WMidsCON=38&WMidsLAB=28&WMidsLIB=27&EMidsCON=36&EMidsLAB=29&EMidsLIB=29&AngliaCON=43&AngliaLAB=20&AngliaLIB=30&SWestCON=37&SWestLAB=16&SWestLIB=42&LondCON=36&LondLAB=31&LondLIB=28&SEastCON=46&SEastLAB=17&SEastLIB=31®ion=All+GB+changed+seats&seat=--Show+all--

It has slightly different regional definitions (eg 'The North' seems to be North East England + Cumbria), but I haven't taken that into account. These (if I've put the figures in right) gives Con 270, Lab 239, LibDem 109, Nat 11, Independents 3.

However, if you use Electoral Calculus's tool with just national figures for the big 4 parties, you get, using the national figures from the weighting that its regions should produce:
(C/L/LD share) 33.8, 27.2, 30.6: (seats) 269, 245, 104, 11, 3


So UK Polling Report reckons the regional breakdown benefits the Tories (+17) and Lib Dems (+11) consiberably, compared with a uniform national swing model; the Electoral Calculus tool thinks it makes hardly any difference (+1 and +5). :shrug: The differences in the areas may make a bit of difference, but not that much, I'd have thought.

[miscsoc]

25. nate silver has come to some fairly alarming conclusions re: vote share/seats

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/apr/27/nate-silver-labour-swing

i.e. he thinks the tories are likely to do much better and labour much worse than most swingometer type systems suggest.

[muriel_volestrangler]

26. Maybe - he says that's a work-in-progress

because the figures for how many voters have moved from one party to another are guesses rather than from poll data - they appear to be "think what numbers might be reasonable, and modify them until they fit the eventual results for the new vote share". And he points out the model assumes that the same voters stay voting, just possibly switching parties, rather than some stopping voting, others starting (which, in reality, may be larger numbers than people who change parties - eg past Labour voters may sit this election out, or previously-disheartened Tories may vote this time, when they didn't in the last few elections).