politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » ComRes phone poll moves from 4% CON lead to level pegging
ComRes ends a few days when all the movement was to the Tories particularly with the phone polls. On Monday Ashcroft had a 6% CON lead while the Guardian had a 3% one.
There could be something in the theory that phone polls conducted during the week rather than the weekend are better for Labour. (Tomorrow's Ipsos may change that)
Sorry folks but this ComRes poll is an outlier. Conservatives more votes in Scotland than Labour? Maybe but rather unlikely. The whopper though is on page 15. 30% of the sample think of themselves as Labour while only 23% think of themselves as Conservative. By that measure alone, Labour should be 7 points ahead but in fact they're just even indicating that there is a lot of crossover.
There could be something in the theory that phone polls conducted during the week rather than the weekend are better for Labour. (Tomorrow's Ipsos may change that)
Noting that the election is during the week rather than a weekend (something else due for reform, frankly - why not conduct them on Sundays like most of Europe?).
Sorry folks but this ComRes poll is an outlier. Conservatives more votes in Scotland than Labour? Maybe but rather unlikely. The whopper though is on page 15. 30% of the sample think of themselves as Labour while only 23% think of themselves as Conservative. By that measure alone, Labour should be 7 points ahead but in fact they're just even indicating that there is a lot of crossover.
The England figures are out of line as well - level pegging on 36%, the last 10 sets of England figures from those pollsters who provide them, have had Tory leads of 3-8%.
Still no enduring trend for Con. This election is lost. Tories cannot break clear by enough to make any government option for them viable, given losses to their only potential major ally (and an ally that is by no means assured of cooperating), even if they can manage enough to get most seats, maybe.
No this is not overreacting to one poll. It's that we haven't seen enough of a trend of improvement for them to justify believing it will continue to improve for them by the amount they need in the very small amount of time left. Nothing anyone can say in the remainder of the campaign will be new to the electorate, surely, and if it hasn't sparked a better trend than what we've seen to date, it is not going to.
Edit: YouGov will probably show a Con+4 lead now, just to show me up.
Why would you want the Tories to break clear?
We're moving towards the best possible future for Britain - an SNP controlled government. The most popular government party since the second world war gets to run the country. That's a Win/Win right up until Scotland casts those outside Scotland away to fend for themselves.
But you will be happier standing on your own two feet.
I will be emotionally devastated by the end of the union but I am resigned to that. But it doesn't matter whether I would prefer Con break away or not - I merely laid out why I cannot see it happening if it has not already. I don't think an SNP-Lab alliance necessarily need be as destructive as the worst case scenarios put it, though with the sides needing to fight hard at HolyRood very soon it does not encourage a peaceful arrangement to say the least. And that is more pressing. With the SNP winning a landslide the union is already dead - I cannot see them making the mistakes of PQ in Canada - so its about management of the nation in other ways now. I don't think Ed M would be a disastrous PM, I think his hands will be too constrained to be one, but though I am one of those oddballs who did agree with the austerity agenda and was angry the Tories failed in their plan for it, so I do have some trepidation about throwing caution to the wind.
You'll notice many PB Tories who dismiss YG will now get excited over this. Looks like there is genuine movement towards the Tories, but it's a small lead.
That Tories have to rely on assuming Miliband will become very unpopular and either go down in 2016 or 2020 as comforter is very revealing (which is not to say they may not be right in that assessment, but things clearly are not promising for right now in that case).
It's not "enormously tight", tish tish, it's entirely what I have been predicting for a year. A very very small Miliband plurality, which will lead to a horribly weak minority govt, dependant on a separatist party - a govt which will therefore collapse on or around the Holyrood elex of 2016.
Miliband will be PM for about a year.
Buckle up, batten down, it's going to be a rough ride, but entertaining. After 2016? IF the Tories can install the right leader, they could romp home.
Sorry folks but this ComRes poll is an outlier. Conservatives more votes in Scotland than Labour? Maybe but rather unlikely. The whopper though is on page 15. 30% of the sample think of themselves as Labour while only 23% think of themselves as Conservative. By that measure alone, Labour should be 7 points ahead but in fact they're just even indicating that there is a lot of crossover.
The England figures are out of line as well - level pegging on 36%, the last 10 sets of England figures from those pollsters who provide them, have had Tory leads of 3-8%.
So, after tonights polls are the PB Hodges declaring neck and neck or are we still in the "Tory most seats nailed on, Tory majority within reach" territory.
I read somewhere today that Lewes and Eastbourne are vulnerable to the Tories at this low level of support for the LDs..is that correct?
Anywhere *may* be vulnerable but I'd be distinctly wary about reading across from the national polls directly to specific Lib Dem-held seats. Local factors matter too much and while 7% would be an extremely poor result, it wouldn't necessarily be catastrophic: they'd still be likely to end up with more seats than in 1983 when they polled 25%.
Sorry folks but this ComRes poll is an outlier. Conservatives more votes in Scotland than Labour? Maybe but rather unlikely. The whopper though is on page 15. 30% of the sample think of themselves as Labour while only 23% think of themselves as Conservative. By that measure alone, Labour should be 7 points ahead but in fact they're just even indicating that there is a lot of crossover.
Yep true but i claim first dibs on it being an outlier.
My 20 poll average now has the Tories 0.5% ahead, probably their biggest lead since at least the flounce bounce. The last time either party was so much as 1% ahead was the end of February.
I read somewhere today that Lewes and Eastbourne are vulnerable to the Tories at this low level of support for the LDs..is that correct?
Anywhere *may* be vulnerable but I'd be distinctly wary about reading across from the national polls directly to specific Lib Dem-held seats. Local factors matter too much and while 7% would be an extremely poor result, it wouldn't necessarily be catastrophic: they'd still be likely to end up with more seats than in 1983 when they polled 25%.
You'll notice many PB Tories who dismiss YG will now get excited over this. Looks like there is genuine movement towards the Tories, but it's a small lead.
You'll notice many PB Lefties will now try to play down YG..... yadder yadder....
Sorry folks but this ComRes poll is an outlier. Conservatives more votes in Scotland than Labour? Maybe but rather unlikely. The whopper though is on page 15. 30% of the sample think of themselves as Labour while only 23% think of themselves as Conservative. By that measure alone, Labour should be 7 points ahead but in fact they're just even indicating that there is a lot of crossover.
The England figures are out of line as well - level pegging on 36%, the last 10 sets of England figures from those pollsters who provide them, have had Tory leads of 3-8%.
Sorry folks but this ComRes poll is an outlier. Conservatives more votes in Scotland than Labour? Maybe but rather unlikely. The whopper though is on page 15. 30% of the sample think of themselves as Labour while only 23% think of themselves as Conservative. By that measure alone, Labour should be 7 points ahead but in fact they're just even indicating that there is a lot of crossover.
I looked back at their last poll (headline result Con +4) -- on the same metric ('do you think of yourself as') -- the scores were Con 26, Lab 27.
As ICM might say, this sample might be a bit too Labour...
I read somewhere today that Lewes and Eastbourne are vulnerable to the Tories at this low level of support for the LDs..is that correct?
Anywhere *may* be vulnerable but I'd be distinctly wary about reading across from the national polls directly to specific Lib Dem-held seats. Local factors matter too much and while 7% would be an extremely poor result, it wouldn't necessarily be catastrophic: they'd still be likely to end up with more seats than in 1983 when they polled 25%.
Eastbourne will never be vulnerable to the tories, the people there have yellow blood and drive yellow cars!
It's pretty clear that our pollsters have lost the knack of prediction. They cannot agree with themselves let alone each other. Either that or the electorate is uniquely excitable, volatile etc (when we know that out on the street most are bored to tears).
Sorry folks but this ComRes poll is an outlier. Conservatives more votes in Scotland than Labour? Maybe but rather unlikely. The whopper though is on page 15. 30% of the sample think of themselves as Labour while only 23% think of themselves as Conservative. By that measure alone, Labour should be 7 points ahead but in fact they're just even indicating that there is a lot of crossover.
It might well be an outlier as it's only one poll. But the pattern of more people thinking of themselves as Labour is traditional - we've seen it in most polls that ask the question for at least a decade, and it's also why more people always say they "like" Labour than the Tories. Labour's classic problem is that general sympathy doesn't always convert into votes.
I'm not surprised at that at all - just because Clegg wants a Con/Lib coalition, doesn't mean it'll go through. He needs the support of his party, and given their brand has been so damaged in the last five years, they'll be very cautious of a second coalition.
Sorry folks but this ComRes poll is an outlier. Conservatives more votes in Scotland than Labour? Maybe but rather unlikely. The whopper though is on page 15. 30% of the sample think of themselves as Labour while only 23% think of themselves as Conservative. By that measure alone, Labour should be 7 points ahead but in fact they're just even indicating that there is a lot of crossover.
It might well be an outlier as it's only one poll. But the pattern of more people thinking of themselves as Labour is traditional - we've seen it in most polls that ask the question for at least a decade, and it's also why more people always say they "like" Labour than the Tories. Labour's classic problem is that general sympathy doesn't always convert into votes.
But as I've pointed out, it's very different to the last ComRes, where the gap was only one point.
It's pretty clear that our pollsters have lost the knack of prediction. They cannot agree with themselves let alone each other. Either that or the electorate is uniquely excitable, volatile etc (when we know that out on the street most are bored to tears).
"Bored to tears" might equate to volatility, if people don't think there is much between the parties it might be easy for swing voters to go Tory one day, Labour the next, or they might not have much interest and pick parties almost at random.
SeanT Personally I trust Nate Silver that Tories will just about be largest party, helped by squeezing the UKIP vote, Labour backbenchers will dump Miliband if Labour come second on seats
Sorry folks but this ComRes poll is an outlier. Conservatives more votes in Scotland than Labour? Maybe but rather unlikely. The whopper though is on page 15. 30% of the sample think of themselves as Labour while only 23% think of themselves as Conservative. By that measure alone, Labour should be 7 points ahead but in fact they're just even indicating that there is a lot of crossover.
It might well be an outlier as it's only one poll. But the pattern of more people thinking of themselves as Labour is traditional - we've seen it in most polls that ask the question for at least a decade, and it's also why more people always say they "like" Labour than the Tories. Labour's classic problem is that general sympathy doesn't always convert into votes.
I hate Labour, and detect no sympathy for it. I don't know where all these "likes" come from.
If Cameron is going down, it'll be sweet consolidation to take as many of these double-dealing, yellow-livered, two-faced backstabbers with him as possible.
But that's enough about News International.
I also hope he makes a few gains from the Liberal Democrats as well.
I read somewhere today that Lewes and Eastbourne are vulnerable to the Tories at this low level of support for the LDs..is that correct?
Anywhere *may* be vulnerable but I'd be distinctly wary about reading across from the national polls directly to specific Lib Dem-held seats. Local factors matter too much and while 7% would be an extremely poor result, it wouldn't necessarily be catastrophic: they'd still be likely to end up with more seats than in 1983 when they polled 25%.
If they get 7% I just can't see that
7% is about 2m votes. That's more than enough to win 25 seats if concentrated in the right areas. It'll mean a hell of a lot of lost deposits though.
Those "leaked" £8bn of welfare cuts seem well-thought through and eminently sensible to me.
Absolutely. Considering its policy to find £12bn of cuts, that would reduce the cuts needed to be found to just £4bn. Looks good to me.
Me too. I have never understood why you get the same amount of child benefit and CTCs for each successive child, at the very least there should be a taper.
If Cameron is going down, it'll be sweet consolidation to take as many of these double-dealing, yellow-livered, two-faced backstabbers with him as possible.
But that's enough about News International.
I also hope he makes a few gains from the Liberal Democrats as well.
I'm not surprised at that at all - just because Clegg wants a Con/Lib coalition, doesn't mean it'll go through. He needs the support of his party, and given their brand has been so damaged in the last five years, they'll be very cautious of a second coalition.
Yes indeed. I can just about believe Clegg would genuinely want to go into coalition again, that he shares the view that if the LD numbers together with Con is enough for a majority, they have to take it. Power first and all that. But as bruised and battered as they are and will be, I cannot see the remainder of the party thinking the continued cost worth what little power they would have. That doesn't mean the party has no point, as some claim, but it is a reasonable assessment that the price of further coalition is not worth the cost to the party or country (parties often conflating the two of course). Half of LD voters jumped ship immediately in 2010, but they've gone down even further since then, particularly in the last year, and that says to me those who had stuck with them in 2010-13 did not think the cost was worth what they were getting out of it. And the parties MPs seem unlikely to think different I suspect, at the prospect of doing that again.
Sorry folks but this ComRes poll is an outlier. Conservatives more votes in Scotland than Labour? Maybe but rather unlikely. The whopper though is on page 15. 30% of the sample think of themselves as Labour while only 23% think of themselves as Conservative. By that measure alone, Labour should be 7 points ahead but in fact they're just even indicating that there is a lot of crossover.
It might well be an outlier as it's only one poll. But the pattern of more people thinking of themselves as Labour is traditional - we've seen it in most polls that ask the question for at least a decade, and it's also why more people always say they "like" Labour than the Tories. Labour's classic problem is that general sympathy doesn't always convert into votes.
I hate Labour, and detect no sympathy for it. I don't know where all these "likes" come from.
kle4/Dair Disagree on both counts, in 1993 it was the BQ who won a landslide in Quebec at the Canadian general election under a charismatic leader and held a referendum 2 years later they still managed to lose, the mistakes were made by the PQ before the 1980 referendum, the 1995 referendum was very focused. But Sturgeon will not hold another referendum unless certain of victory or following an EU out vote anyway, post-election the Smith Commission proposals will be legislated for and if Labour lose they will get a more effective leader, if the SNP hold the balance of power they will no longer be a party of protest at either Holyrood or Westminster
Sorry folks but this ComRes poll is an outlier. Conservatives more votes in Scotland than Labour? Maybe but rather unlikely. The whopper though is on page 15. 30% of the sample think of themselves as Labour while only 23% think of themselves as Conservative. By that measure alone, Labour should be 7 points ahead but in fact they're just even indicating that there is a lot of crossover.
It might well be an outlier as it's only one poll. But the pattern of more people thinking of themselves as Labour is traditional - we've seen it in most polls that ask the question for at least a decade, and it's also why more people always say they "like" Labour than the Tories. Labour's classic problem is that general sympathy doesn't always convert into votes.
I hate Labour, and detect no sympathy for it. I don't know where all these "likes" come from.
Facebook?
Hate is a strong word comrade
Don't call me comrade, unless you want a slap. This is Britain, not the 1950s Soviet Union.
Those "leaked" £8bn of welfare cuts seem well-thought through and eminently sensible to me.
Absolutely. Considering its policy to find £12bn of cuts, that would reduce the cuts needed to be found to just £4bn. Looks good to me.
Me too. I have never understood why you get the same amount of child benefit and CTCs for each successive child, at the very least there should be a taper.
People on £49k pa getting child benefit - Labour and LDs want to preserve that.
Sorry folks but this ComRes poll is an outlier. Conservatives more votes in Scotland than Labour? Maybe but rather unlikely. The whopper though is on page 15. 30% of the sample think of themselves as Labour while only 23% think of themselves as Conservative. By that measure alone, Labour should be 7 points ahead but in fact they're just even indicating that there is a lot of crossover.
It might well be an outlier as it's only one poll. But the pattern of more people thinking of themselves as Labour is traditional - we've seen it in most polls that ask the question for at least a decade, and it's also why more people always say they "like" Labour than the Tories. Labour's classic problem is that general sympathy doesn't always convert into votes.
I hate Labour, and detect no sympathy for it. I don't know where all these "likes" come from.
It does not matter if Clegg wins or not. What remains of the Party will ensure that he is not part of the decision process going forward
A more interesting process if he wins his seat though. Makes the setting him aside something that actually have to sack up and do, not just the electorate removing that obstacle.
I'm not surprised at that at all - just because Clegg wants a Con/Lib coalition, doesn't mean it'll go through. He needs the support of his party, and given their brand has been so damaged in the last five years, they'll be very cautious of a second coalition.
Yes indeed. I can just about believe Clegg would genuinely want to go into coalition again, that he shares the view that if the LD numbers together with Con is enough for a majority, they have to take it. Power first and all that. But as bruised and battered as they are and will be, I cannot see the remainder of the party thinking the continued cost worth what little power they would have. That doesn't mean the party has no point, as some claim, but it is a reasonable assessment that the price of further coalition is not worth the cost to the party or country (parties often conflating the two of course). Half of LD voters jumped ship immediately in 2010, but they've gone down even further since then, particularly in the last year, and that says to me those who had stuck with them in 2010-13 did not think the cost was worth what they were getting out of it. And the parties MPs seem unlikely to think different I suspect, at the prospect of doing that again.
The LD's have lost what they reasonably stood to lose by joining the Tories in 2010, I don't see them losing much more if they stick in government if they can. Partially because they don't have much more to lose. May as well go out with a bang than a whimper.
I'm not surprised at that at all - just because Clegg wants a Con/Lib coalition, doesn't mean it'll go through. He needs the support of his party, and given their brand has been so damaged in the last five years, they'll be very cautious of a second coalition.
Yes indeed. I can just about believe Clegg would genuinely want to go into coalition again, that he shares the view that if the LD numbers together with Con is enough for a majority, they have to take it. Power first and all that. But as bruised and battered as they are and will be, I cannot see the remainder of the party thinking the continued cost worth what little power they would have. That doesn't mean the party has no point, as some claim, but it is a reasonable assessment that the price of further coalition is not worth the cost to the party or country (parties often conflating the two of course). Half of LD voters jumped ship immediately in 2010, but they've gone down even further since then, particularly in the last year, and that says to me those who had stuck with them in 2010-13 did not think the cost was worth what they were getting out of it. And the parties MPs seem unlikely to think different I suspect, at the prospect of doing that again.
The LD's have lost what they reasonably stood to lose by joining the Tories in 2010, I don't see them losing much more if they stick in government if they can. Partially because they don't have much more to lose. May as well go out with a bang than a whimper.
I agree. But there are a few hard core plotters waiting the moment to sieze power.
I'm not surprised at that at all - just because Clegg wants a Con/Lib coalition, doesn't mean it'll go through. He needs the support of his party, and given their brand has been so damaged in the last five years, they'll be very cautious of a second coalition.
Yes indeed. I can just about believe Clegg would genuinely want to go into coalition again, that he shares the view that if the LD numbers together with Con is enough for a majority, they have to take it. Power first and all that. But as bruised and battered as they are and will be, I cannot see the remainder of the party thinking the continued cost worth what little power they would have. That doesn't mean the party has no point, as some claim, but it is a reasonable assessment that the price of further coalition is not worth the cost to the party or country (parties often conflating the two of course). Half of LD voters jumped ship immediately in 2010, but they've gone down even further since then, particularly in the last year, and that says to me those who had stuck with them in 2010-13 did not think the cost was worth what they were getting out of it. And the parties MPs seem unlikely to think different I suspect, at the prospect of doing that again.
But they have nothing to loose by going into Coalition with the Tories and potentially a lot to gain.
All those voters who are upset with a coalition have already gone-but there are plenty who might come back-especially during a Euro referendum.
A Euro referendum that that the IN side win could be a massive boost for the Lib Dems in 2020
Bakcbench Tories will be just as hostile to a full coalition, but as mathematically a Tory-LD coalition is unlikely to have a majority anyway confidence and supply is more likely
Comments
I'll get my coat....
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/593524967666384897
The daily mail readers didn't like the fact he won the Labour leadership let alone if he became PM this way.
Patrick Wintour ✔ @patrickwintour
Danny Alexander exposes the 'secret' Tory planning for £8bn in welfare cuts. Tories say not true. http://gu.com/p/48xja/stw
We know what the bbc will be running with tomorrow.
I notice they didn't get their copy of the Times today at Beeboid towers.
YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Tories have a one-point lead: CON 35%, LAB 34%, LD 9%, UKIP 12%, GRN 4%
I wonder if Ed Balls will be invited back to complete his PP Broadcast for Labour. after all he was only allowed 15 minutes this morning.
He must know he is toast.
Sun Politics ✔ @SunPolitics
YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Tories have a one-point lead: CON 35%, LAB 34%, LD 9%, UKIP 12%, GRN 4%
That Tories have to rely on assuming Miliband will become very unpopular and either go down in 2016 or 2020 as comforter is very revealing (which is not to say they may not be right in that assessment, but things clearly are not promising for right now in that case).
PS Basil is happy he has the night off.
https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/593528976762478592
Cherio Dave.
As ICM might say, this sample might be a bit too Labour...
For completeness, it's also the equal worst-ever Lib Dem score on a ComRes phone poll, matching that of 29/6/2014.
The 35% is also within a point of the Tories' best score with ComRes since 2012.
Unless Dave has more than 30 odd in England his is screwed.
Cherio Dave.
The phones meanwhile had the Tories ahead at this time. If the phones are right, YG is consistently wrong because of the weighting decision.
But as I've pointed out, it's very different to the last ComRes, where the gap was only one point.
Facebook?
At least on the plus side the heir to Blair will be replaced.
But that's enough about News International.
I also hope he makes a few gains from the Liberal Democrats as well.
Cable on an anti Con rant in the Indy too.
If he does he really has lost the plot.
'Bloody hell the Lib Dems must have some shocking private polling'
Don't you mean competitive.
Yep, I'm reading a one point Labour lead as a half point Conservative one at the moment.
However since YG are polling 7x a week and the press report the headline only it has changed the narrative of the election significantly.
What remains of the Party will ensure that he is not part of the decision process going forward
They have probably already all voted by post.
All those voters who are upset with a coalition have already gone-but there are plenty who might come back-especially during a Euro referendum.
A Euro referendum that that the IN side win could be a massive boost for the Lib Dems in 2020
Twitter is evil.
» show previous quotes
I hate Labour, and detect no sympathy for it. I don't know where all these "likes" come from.
Facebook?
Trade Union Pilgrims??
Everyday working people?