|
|
Post by James E on Jan 9, 2023 21:03:48 GMT
From John Curtis ''as many as 80 per cent of those who in 2016 voted Remain say they would vote to rejoin, a figure that has largely held steady over the last two years. The oft-made suggestion that most Remainers have come to terms with Brexit receives little support in the polls'' Think there is an assertion in that part sentence that is questionable. Voting for Rejoin in the event of there being a referendum is not the same as not coming to terms with Brexit; or arguing for a rejoin referendum any time soon. I was a remainer and would vote re-join should there be a referendum at some point (although the terms might affect some rejoiners including me in theory). However, I accept that a decent period outside the EU has to occur first in order for the Brexit vote to have any meaning, so I would be looking for a re-join option in later in the next decade perhaps. In this sense I have come to terms with Brexit while acknowledging I would vote re-join even if the ref came earlier than I would prefer. Without timing options desire for a re-join referendum %age are of less value. There has been significant movement over the past year - not only in the percentage wanting to rejoin, but in the numbers who now want another EU referendum in the next 5 years or so. www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-poll-referendum-rejoin-eu-b2250813.html"The number who say there should be another vote is now 65 per cent, up from 55 per cent at the same point last year, although they are split over the timing. The most popular options were now, at 22 per cent, and within the next 5 years, 24 per cent, followed by within 6-10 years, 11 per cent. Just 4 per cent thought another vote should be in more than 20 years, while those who said there should never be a second referendum have fallen from 32 to 24 per cent." To add the comparative figures from the same polling question a year ago: whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/when-do-you-think-if-at-all-there-should-next-be-a-referendum-on-whether-or-not-the-uk-should-re-join-or-stay-out-of-the-european-union/ |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Jan 9, 2023 11:21:06 GMT
kay9: "I thought that Trevor has been outed as a collective.? (Apologies if I am wrong)."My recollection is that TW as a collective was initially suggested here (or in the previous place) as a joke. TW then appears to have seized on the idea.... It was Trevor himself who first stated that there was more than one person posting using his log-in (about 5 years ago) ; this was by way of explanation for some contradictory arguments, apparently both by him. He's said several times since that it's now just him posting. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Jan 7, 2023 20:03:25 GMT
That's interesting. As a number of the over 65s in 2016 will have died and been replaced by a younger group (who were around 59-65 in 2016), that suggests that as people age they see the wisdom of leaving the EU. Though why people keep banging on about it when we have left and are unlikely to even apply to rejoin for a good many years, and then probably wouldn't be accepted anyway, baffles me. By the way, that's not directed at you James E . You just report the figures. Thank You, mercian . YouGov's figures show a very clear divergence between the over 65s and the rest of the electorate, with the former possibly backing Brexit in the same or even larger numbers than they did in 2016, and all age groups under 65 turning against it. But it looks to me like the largest move towards 'Bregret' is in the next-oldest age cohort : today's 50-64s. Using the average of the most recent couple of YouGov's Brexit Hindsight tracker, compared to their June 2016 analysis produces the following comparisons: Age 18-24 : Now 87% to 13% 'Wrong to Leave' compard to 71/29 Remain in 2016. This implies a 16% swing compared to 2016 (although of course this entire cohort was too young to vote then). Age 24-49 : Now 71% to 29% 'Wrong to Leave' compared to 54/46 Remain in 2016. This implies a 17% swing compared to 2016, but this is more like 12-13% if compared to an estimate of 18-43 year-olds of 2016. Age 50-64 : Now 59% to 41% 'Wrong to Leave' compared to 40/60 Leave in 2016. This implies a 19% swing compared to 2016, but more like 14-15% if compared to an estimate of 44-58 year olds in 2016. Over 65s : Now 64% to 36% 'Right to Leave' compared to 64/36 Leave in 2016. This implies no change in 6 years or perhaps a 1-2% swing towards supporting Brexit compared to over 59s in 2016. For me - and probably for a Labour Party strategist - the crucial cross-break is how C2DE voters now regard Brexit. Accoring to YouGov, they voted 65/35 for Leave in 2016. However, YG's 3 most recent trackers (all post 6 Dec 2022) are a mixed bag, showing a tie, a small lead for 'Wrong' and an even smaller lead for 'Right'. Overall they now average 49% 'Right' to 51% 'Wrong to Leave' across the 3 YouGovs since 6 Dec, so a swing of 16% since 2016. This is somewhat higher than the overall 13% movement shown by the headline tracker figures in the same three polls, which average at 39% 'right' and 61% 'wrong'. yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2016/06/27/how-britain-voted |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Jan 6, 2023 22:09:14 GMT
Omnisis
@omnisis
·
6h
A possible shift in public sentiment in our Brexit tracker this week, with a four-point boost in favour of a ‘re-join’ plan:
*Inc DKs*
🇬🇧 Stay out: 30% (-2)
🇪🇺 Re-join: 49% (+4)
*Excluding DKs*
🇬🇧 Stay out: 38% (-4)
🇪🇺 Re-join: 62% (+4)
[These figures look on the high side for 'rejoin' but the norm now seems to be close to a 60:40 majority in favour of the UK being inside the EU ]
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Jan 6, 2023 21:28:20 GMT
The age diffentials really are staggering ...[Cons lead by 20 points with over 65s and trail by miles with everyone else...] As ever, the YouGov Brexit tracker provides further stark evidence of the age divide. Voters aged under 65 divide 71% to 29% in thinking that leaving the EU was the wrong decision - a 19% swing compard to the 2016 referendum result when they voted 52/48 for Remain. Over 65s divide 64% to 36% for 'Right to leave' which is exactly in line with how the same age bracket voted in 2016 (per YG's own analysis). (excl DKs) docs.cdn.yougov.com/nr27ysntzp/TheTimes_VI_230105_W.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Jan 3, 2023 17:22:44 GMT
Happy New Poll "Redfield & Wilton Strategies’ first voting intention poll in 2023 in Great Britain finds the Labour Party leading by 20%, up three points from our last poll on 11 December 2022. Altogether, the full numbers (with the changes from 11 December in parentheses) are as follows:" Labour 47% (+1) Conservative 27% (-2) Liberal Democrat 12% (+3) Reform UK 5% (-2) Scottish National Party 4% (+1) Green 3% (-2) Other 1% (-1) redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/latest-gb-voting-intention-2-3-january-2023/ |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 23, 2022 17:23:51 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 22, 2022 23:36:14 GMT
I suspect that the capping of rail fares announced today is going to be another subtle switch of taxation collected from the whole UK in favour of the Home Counties. I have not heard the BBC R4 news background programmes discussing this, perhaps because their presenters and producers are among the gainers. A ticket from Inverness to Edinburgh costs the same as one from Southampton to Waterloo - £50 - despite being over twice the time and distance.
Ruddy Radio 4 and the Home Counties!  We've had 12 years of (mostly) above inflation increases in rail fares, which would suggest the opposite to what Davwel implies above. "Britain's train fares increase every year. Here are the average annual rises since 2010, provided by the Rail Delivery Group. 2010. 2011: 6.2% 2012: 5.9% 2013: 3.9% 2014: 2.8% 2015: 2.2% 2016: 1.1% 2017: 2.3% 2018: 3.4% 2019: 3.1% 2020: 2.7% 2021: Around 2.6% in England and Wales. In Scotland, peak and off-peak tickets rose by 1.6% and 0.6% respectively." www.mirror.co.uk/money/largest-rail-fare-rise-10-26354158iamkate.com/data/uk-inflation/ |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 22, 2022 23:04:23 GMT
Only two polls I know, but the last one we saw a few days ago from another firm, also indicated a potentially similar shift. Only two polls I know, and I do understand margin of error (moe), but even so, it will be interesting to see the next couple to see if these two polls are early signs of another shift towards Labour, or else, and perhaps more likelier, were just just a matter of coincidence in having two moe-heavyish polls in a row. And I accept that I may well be just wanting to see positive signs a bit too much and so am getting a tad over-excited. 🙂 The other recent polls from Ipsos Mori had fieldwork from mid-December, and looks like a bit of an outlier as others did not show any shift to Lab. This Omnesis is 'one-of-a-kind' for now. Before now I had not looked at Omnesis's tables, but having done so I do like the fact that they sample by SIX separate age bands including one for voters aged 75+. With age now the dominant determinant of voting-intention, sampling needs to be done very carefully and age-bands that span 25 or more years are surely far too broad. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 21, 2022 11:34:21 GMT
Without suggesting that YG's Scots polling is necessarily "better" than others (though I think their methodology makes that more likely) their 7 Scots crossbreak average continues to be consistent with its Full Scottish polls.
Current average (difference from their 9 Dec Scots poll)
SNP 43% (=) : SCon 14% (=) : SLab 27% (-2) : SLD 7% (+1) : SGP 4% (=) : REFUK 4% (+1)
So just moe differences. That must be reassuring for their weighting models. I wonder if they have considered doing occasional polls for each of the regions of England (and Wales), to act as validation for the other regional cross breaks. As far as I can tell from the Opinion poll Wiki page, other than London, the other regional polls have tended to be "region plus other factor" (for example: YouGov did a "South West of England that also voted Tory and also voted to Leave the EU") For those who may have missed it, this is something I have tried to address by comparing the comparative swings in cross-breaks from YouGov, Opinium and R&W's English regional cross-breaks. This has been for polls from late October onwards (so all from when the polls settled down a bit after Sunak became PM). The interesting thing is that YouGov (in 5 polls), Opinium (4 polls) and R&W (10 polls) all produce much the same English regional pattern - even though their headline figures vary due to methodological differences. To take the North of England first, YouGov show a Con>Lab swing 2% lower than their headline figures (and have consistently done so this year), while R&W and Opinium both have this as 3-4% lower in their recent polls. For the English Midlands, YouGov and Opinium show swings 2% above their headline figures, and R&W 3% above. For the South of England, YouGov and Opinium show swings of 4% above their headline, and with Opinium it's 5%. The London figures are more variable, but all three show swings significantly lower here by 5% (YG), 8% (Opin) and 11% (R&W). We have had the occasional London poll, which supports the pattern of a lower swing, albeit in the context of a large Lab lead. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 20, 2022 10:42:20 GMT
James E As a lib dem happy to report that I quite like Marmite. Yes, but if you check their tables then as a LibDem, Southern male, you are statistically far more likely to love/like Marmite than the average. Ipsos find that 66% of LibDems like Marmite, compared to 52% Tories and 47% Labour voters. However, supporters of all three of these parties are at least as likely as the average to like Marmite, which suggests that those who are resistant to Marmite either support other parties or are non-voters. There is also a 'gender gap' here, with Males being 21% 'net positive' (50/29) to Marmite, compared to just 6% Females (45/39).  www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2022-12/ipsos-poll-marmite-love-it-or-hate-it-2022.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 19, 2022 23:17:39 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 19, 2022 19:41:14 GMT
James E, do Ipsos Mori weight be past vote at all? I may be misremembering but I seem to recall that they just go by demographics and LTV figuring that if the demographics are right so will be past voting obviating any false recall with LTV picking a higher or lower retention from past voters. My understanding is that Ipsos Mori are the only pollster who do not weight by past vote at all. Their own description of their methodology (linked below) supports this. Because of this, they are one of the few pollsters who should not be affected by 'false recall' - the others being those with panels such as YouGov and Opinium. Their figures do seem to be prone to fluctuation rather more than other companies, though. www.ipsos.com/en-uk/ipsos-political-polling-methodology |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 19, 2022 15:24:01 GMT
Re Ipsos Mori's Lab 49%, Con 23%, lib Dem 13%.
This looks like an outlier, as the 7 other polls we have had between 7 and 13 Dec average an 18-19 point Lab lead - albeit that they range from 13% with Deltapoll to 27% with People Polling.None of the other 7 have the LDs higher than 9%.
One unique feature of Ipsos Mori polls is that they do not weight at all by past vote. This can be beneficial when the polls are affected by false recall - as identified recently by Kantar.
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 18, 2022 22:54:37 GMT
Another one for those interested in regional cross-break analysis.
What I have done this time is to analyse the 10 Redfield and Wilton polls from 30th Oct onwards. These coincide with the same time period as the YouGov and Opinium polls which I analysed earier today. While all cross-breaks are of course unweighted and subject to a very wide margim of error, the advantage of my approach is that we can cross-check to other pollsters to see if their findings are in agreement - and at the broad level of Noth/Midlands/South of England, they are.
R&W's figures show an overswing of 5% in the South of England (compared to 4% and 4% with YG and Opinium), 2% in Mids +Wales (c/f 1% YG and Opin) and 3% underswing in the North (c/f 2% and 3%). The comparison fares less well for London where it's 11% underswing with R&W (c/f 5% and 8%), but this may be due to smaller samples, and as with Scotland and Wales, proper weighted polling is available.
In the context of all 10 R&W polls since 30 Oct, with an average of 21% Lab lead (ranging from 24% to 17%), and hence a GB-wide average swing of 17 points compard to GE 2019, their regional/national sub-samples show:
London 6% Con>Lab swing (Lab lead of 28%)
East England 24% Con>Lab swing (Lab lead of 16%)
South East England 19% Con>Lab swing (Lab lead of 6%)
South West England 21.5% Con>Lab swing (Lab lead of 14%)
East Midlands 21.5% Con>Lab swing (Lab lead of 20%)
West Midlands 20.5% Con>Lab swing (Lab lead of 21%)
North West 15% Con>Lab swing (Lab lead of 39%)
North East 12% Con>Lab swing (Lab lead of 28%)
Yorks & Humb 13% Con>Lab swing (Lab lead of 23%)
Wales 13.5% Con>Lab swing (Lab lead of 31%)
Scotland 9% Con>Lab swing (Lab 12 points ahead of Con, but of course trail SNP)
The big surprise (for me at least) is that the large swing in SW England is exceeded by those in both East England and East Midlands - two of the most Brexity parts of England. And, as I suspected, YouGov's overswing for their 'Midlands +Wales' appears to be a combination of a lower swing in Wales, and a much larger one in the English East Midlands.
As ever, a degree of caution of needed with small cross-breaks, particularly the smallest ones in East, North-East and Wales, but there does seem to be very close agreement here across YG, Opinium and R&W as to the different English regional swings.
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 18, 2022 19:22:22 GMT
What a game!
I presume all English fans were supporting their near neighbours, once their team was out, so commiserations. Apparently, one in six of us* has traceable French ancestry - mostly French Huguenots who moved to London, Kent and East Anglia in the 17th century. My mother's male ancestors, who go by an Anglicsied form of 'Giroud' settled in Suffolk 350-ish years ago. londonist.com/london/history/huguenot-ancestry-london-french-names-spitalfields [ * including the likes of Nigel Farage and (self-evidently) Mark Francois] |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 18, 2022 15:48:50 GMT
For those with an interest in regional cross-breaks - I have done a bit of analysis of recent Opinium polls, these being their 4 from 26 Oct to 2 Dec. Unfortunately, we don't yet have the tables for the latest one. The aim of this was to test whether they supported the figures I have from YouGov and R&W suggesting a significantly higher swing in the South of England (and 'below-par' swings in London, Wales and Scotland). The short answer to this is that they do.
In the context of their 4 polls since Sunak became PM, Opinium show Lab leads of 18,18, 17 and 14, and an average GB Con>Lab swing of around 14.5%. However, their geographical sub-breaks show the following average swings:
London 6%
South England 20%
Midlands 16.5%
North England 11%
Wales 10%
Scotland 10%
Some caution is needed for small sample sizes, particularly in Wales and Scotland, and of course there is better, weighted polling for these polities. For the English sub samples, the approx samples sizes per Opinium poll are 220 in London, 680 for South, 320 Midlands and 500 for North.
Overall, very much the same pattern as YouGov, with a 5-6% over-swing in the South, a 2% overswing in the Midlands, and a 3% underswing in the North. The averaged Lab leads per English 'region' are 27 points in London, 25 points in the North, 12 points in the Midlands, and 8 points in the South.
[Edit: For comparison, these were the figures for YouGov to 4th Dec: "... this is from the sub-samples of the 5 most recent YouGovs, and is in the context of a GB swing of 18% Con>Lab
London 13% C>L
Rest Of South 22% C>L
Midlands+Wales 19% C>L
North 16% C>L ]
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 17, 2022 17:55:39 GMT
... The thing I genuinely find surprising is the very high VI in the polls which seems to be very patchy in real elections. I would have thought that if the voters weren't keen there would be more Don't Knows in the polls. Labour have done pretty well in Parliamentary by-elections though. Into GE'17 we saw a lot of pollsters get caught out with their weightings for age groups (which led to what was called the 'youth quake'). IIRC most of them have changed their approach since but it would be great if someone like James E who follows the methodology issues could chip in with a few comments. LEs don't IMO tell us anything and by-elections can have both a 'protest vote' (eg why LDEM often do well) and a 'can't be bothered' low turnout as it won't effect who is in power at Westminster. Polling companies also ask 'Likelihood to Vote' and adjust for that in headline VI, however, they rely on people stating their genuine intent..... It's certainly true that the pollsters over-adjusted their figures leading up to GE2017 in respect of lower turnout for young voters: they would have been more accurate just publishing their raw figures. This article gives a decent picture of what some pollsters got wrong, although of course Survation (@ 1% Con lead) and YouGov (@ 4-5% Con av lead) were quite accurate. www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/general-election-polls-how-the-pollsters-got-it-wrong-a3560936.htmlBut of course the pollsters were vindicated by the GE2019 result, so clearly they had learned from this. As for the stated 'likelyhood to vote' or 'Would Not Vote' in polls: you need to remember that polling respondents always overstate their likelyhood to vote. This happens at every election, so where we have 80% of respondents saying that they are either certain or likely to vote, this does not point to an 80% turnout. The best that we might do for turnout predictions is to compare the findings of polls before previous general elections to see if this has risen or fallen. To add: Having checked this in practice using 4 recent YouGovs and 4 from Nov/Dec 2018, the findings point to a lower turnout at next GE. The 4 most recent YG's show av 55% certain to vote, plus another 19% who are 7,8 or 0 out of 10 likely - making a combined 74% 'certain or likely'. But the comparative figures 4 years ago are 2-3 points higher, with an average of 56.5% certain to vote, and again 19% who were 7, 8 or 9 out of 10 'likely'. This of course gave a combined 75.5% who described themselves as 'certain or likely' to vote compared to an actual turnout in Dec 2019 of 67.3%. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 16, 2022 13:46:33 GMT
Interesting that YouGov do not show any narowing in the Lab lead, in contrast to Techne, R&W and Deltapoll. However, it is not hard to see from their figures (esp the high RefUK VI) how the Tories should make some recovery.
Their Con2019 cross break is:
Con 40%
Don't Know 23% (c/f Lab's 6%)
Reform UK 14%
Lab 9%
Won't Vote 7%
LD 2%, Grn 2%, SNP 1%, oth 1%
A 50% reversion of DKs would cut the Lab lead by 4 points per YG's figures, and recovery of RefUK VI may be worth about the same again.
[To add: YG's London cross-break is a very interesting one, with Plaid Cymru and the SNP each picking up 2% ]
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 16, 2022 12:55:30 GMT
Kantar have tweaked their weightings.
"We have re-analysed all the polls we have conducted since the last general election to
identify how reports of voting behaviour have changed since December 2019. This study
found a decline in the probability that a 2019 Conservative voter will now report having
voted Conservative in that election. If the outcomes from this study are ignored when we
weight our data, 2019 Conservative voters will be over-represented in the sample.
Consequently, we now incorporate the results from this study when constructing the target
political profile we weight our sample to. We will update this profile regularly as more data
is collected."
www.kantarpublic.com/expertise/solutions/kantar-public-polling-archive Ah the shy Tories re-appearing. For me this was always the advantage of the YouGov approach where they asked people how they had voted just after the election, so there was a lower risk of false recall (there is never a zero risk that people will lie to you how they voted). Added later: I suspect that Kantar had already made this change for their mid-November polling as this is within an MoE of December and very different from October and earlier. Firstly, many thanks to oldnat for bringing this to our attention. @ Lefiteliberal . False Recall is a different phenomenon to 'Shy Tories', and can apply in both directions politically. See for example, the YouGov article from 2019 when it was Lab2017 voters who were forgetting their previous vote. In the current parliament, I think there is also the likelyhood of 2019 LibDem 'forgetters' as several non-panel pollsters (inc R&W, Delta and Omnisis) all seem to be short of LD2019 voters, and have to upweight the samples of those declared 2019LDs they do have. The effects of this may be seen when comparing my averages of 4 recent YouGov and R&W 2019LD sub-samples: R&W's LibDems: Con 3% Lab 28% LD 50% DK 12% (& oth 7%) YouGov's LibDems: Con 4% Lab 36% LibDem 41% DK 13% ( & oth 6%) yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/07/17/false-recall-and-how-it-affects-polling |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 16, 2022 10:30:13 GMT
That 17-point Lab lead with Kantar is a surprise, as their previous two polls were leads of 15% in mid-November (when others were averaging 22%) and 4% in October (when the average was 15%). So their findings point in the opposite direction to most other recent polls. In fact, it's a 'record' Labour lead for Kantar - although their polls are rather infrequent anyway. As I mentioned some weeks ago, they have been typically showing lower Lab leads than other pollsters all this year, by an average of 5 points. The general Westminster VI average from the most recent 6 polls (from all pollsters) stands at 17%, down from around 22% a month ago. Re Stretford and Urmiston: very predictable result, and again nothing remarkable to report for either the Greens or Reform UK. The latter (@3.5%) managed barely one-fifth of the Conservatives 16% vote share, and it was even less than that at City of Chester two weeks ago. So I think we can ignore the 8 or 9% RefUK VIfigures that we've seen from some pollsters (such as people Polling) and indeed reporting such as the Daily Telegraph's "Reform UK polling at nearly half of Tory vote share" from a week ago. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_electionwww.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/12/09/rishi-sunak-news-strikes-tories-asylum-starmer-labour/ |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 15, 2022 17:34:24 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 14, 2022 19:30:37 GMT
Neither seat is at all likely to fall to Labour. On the other hand, I expect a stronger performance by Labour in Scotland than implied by the MRP survey. An important point about ComRes MRP poll is that with a sample size of just 6,200, it really can't be relied on for Scotland, in any case - the same of course must apply to their previous one in September (which showed 10 Lab gains in Scotland). Logically, with a GB sample of about 6,200, they should have polled about 500 in Scotland (and about 250 in Wales). These figures are way too low to get an accurate picture of the performance of the various parties in those polities. I suspect that the same applies in respect of the massive Con>Lab swings they found in Lincolnshire. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 13, 2022 18:26:08 GMT
Given it is a poll, worth quoting the figures in full: MRP Voting Intention: Labour 48% (+3); Conservative 28% (-5); Lib Dem 11% (+1); Reform UK 4% (+1); Green 3% (-1); change from Savanta MRP poll in September These are not especially exotic figures. The reason the MRP then gives the Conservatives only 69 seats is they are losing the wrong supporters in the wrong places from their point of view. Were this pattern to be repeated in a real GE it could mean the Conservatives doing worse than a uniform swing would suggest. Of course, it is too far in advance of the next GE to form any firm conclusions. It would be helpful if Savanta Comres could produce these MRP forecasts regularly (say every three months) through the next 2 years. That ComRes MRP has some staggering Labour gains: Surely the strangest of all is Boston and Skegness, requiring a 31% swing, and with the highest 2016 Leave vote of any UK constituency (75.6%). The swing there is way above that of 16% implied by the 20-point Lab lead. They also have a Lab gain Louth and Horncastle, which currently has a 55% Tory majority. In fact they have Labour winning all the Lincolnshire constituencies except South Holland and the Deepings. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 9, 2022 14:24:05 GMT
Hopefully an outlier [ComRes poll] It's not clear whether this poll's fieldwork was 25-27 Nov or 2-4 Dec, as both dates appear on their twitter account. But even if it is the latter, we have had 5 more recent polls, these being R&W (4 Dec), Delta (5Dec), YouGov (6-7 Dec), Techne (7-8 Dec) and People Polling (8Dec). These show Labour leads of 22,20, 24,21 and 27. So it is an outlier. A 10-poll average of all those with some fieldwork in december (and including this one) is a 20-point lead. So down a couple of points in recent weeks. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 9, 2022 11:35:07 GMT
James E - you are correct to highlight the strength of the Lib Dems at local level compared to national and the other complicating factor in local elections is independents, often strong at local level especially in rural areas, but rarely a factor in general elections (or in opinion polling for that matter). However, I do think local elections can tell you something if you look at them in the right way, taking account of the previous electoral history of that ward. Mercian tends to discount that and imply Labour really should win everything, no matter how unlikely. But equally there are seats that Labour probably should win based on the national position - many of which they have been winning. If they don't then it is reasonable to consider why - is it purely local factors or is that national polling lead essentially ABCON rather than pro-Lab - which in turn may suggest more tactical voting at a GE than the polls imply. I am happy to agree local by-elections need to be treated with caution and no one should get excited by a single dramatic result, whichever party is the beneficiary. That sort of thing is almost certainly meaningless. It would be interesting to know what the aggregated votes in local by elections actually are, although you would need to take a sample over many months, to give any chance of a fairly representative range of seats. Looking at the variance that AW found for 1997, 2001 and 2005, and taking JimJam's figures for the underlying current position for a GE 'tomorrow' as Con 30, Lab 45, LD 9, we might expect figures of about Con 28%, Lab 35%, LD 18%. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 9, 2022 11:23:43 GMT
Not a direct comparison, but to give an idea of the direction if travel, in the 2019 General election in Wales Labour were on 40.9% and the tories on 36.1% with PC on 9.9% Tx. I hadn't registered that PC are polling as high as this. These figures need to be compared to the Senedd election in May 2021. Constituency results, with Regional in brackets were: Lab 40% (36%) Con 26% (25%) Plaid 20 % (21%) LDs 5% (4%) So Lab have gained 4 points in the Constituency (and 2 in the Regional results), while PC are at the same level for constituency, and up 2 points in the Regional. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 9, 2022 10:47:19 GMT
Re Local By Elections - firstly, apologies for reposting exactly what I posted here 4 weeks ago (11 Nov) , but it looks relevant to the discussion above.
Our former host on UKPR1 wrote on this in 2009 : "Can local by elections predict general elections?"
Anthony Wells puts the level of LibDem overperformance and Labour underperformance as around 6% to 10%, and I suspect that about the same applies now.
Examples are:
"Sum of local by-elections Jan-May 2005: CON 33%, LAB 26%, LDEM 31%
Actual general election result 2005: CON 33%, LAB 36%, LDEM 23%
Sum of local by-elections Jan-Jun 2001: CON 32%, LAB 30%, LDEM 26%
Actual general election result 2001: CON 33%, LAB 42%, LDEM 18%
Sum of local by-elections Jan-May 1997: CON 28%, LAB 37%, LDEM 30%
Actual general election result 1997: CON 31%, LAB 44%, LDEM 17%"
So Labour underperformed by 7, 12 and 10 points in pre-GE local by elections, and the LDs overperformed by 13, 8 and 8 points. The Conservatives' share is quite close to the subsequent GE results, though.
Incidentally, the LDs overperform (and Labour tend to underperform) in all Local Elections: another UKPR article from 2012 puts the LibDem overperformance at 7 points on average.
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 8, 2022 18:53:05 GMT
That figure of just 1 in 8 of the under 50's planning to vote Conservative at the next election is a very stark warning to the future of the tory party There's a freak figure in this YouGov just with 2% of the 18-24 cohort backing the Conservatives; they normally manage more like 10% with voters under 25. However, in general, it does look like the Tories are seeing an exceptionally large drop in support with voters under 50. The last 5 YouGov polls combined average at 13.5% for the combined 18-49 groups, compared to around 31% at GE2019, per YouGov's own analysis. This is a loss of 56% of their 2019 support compared to 45% for the whole sample in the same polls . YouGov calculated 3 years ago that the crossover age at which voters were more likely to support the Conservatives than Labour was 39 - so a lot lower than the age of 47 for the 2017 Election. On current polling this is likely to rise to somewhere close to age 60 at the next election. yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/12/17/how-britain-voted-2019-general-election |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 8, 2022 13:26:33 GMT
It's interesting that YouGov's polls now show the largest Lab lead of any regular pollster except People Polling. This looks to me like an effect of their RefUK and Green prompt, as this is producing higher Con>Ref movement than anyone else is finding. Because of this, they have the Conservatives several points lower than most others - while their Labour 48% is exactly in line with this week's polls from R&W, Deltapoll and Techne. As usual, YouGov find more 'Don't Knows' across all respondents than other pollsters. Their current levels of 23% of 2019Cons and 9% 2019Lab would produce a 4-point reduction in the Labour lead if you apply the old ICM 50% reversion. The other perennial feature of YG is that they show much lower vote retention than other pollsters. Taking the totals including all responses (so inc DKs) and averaged over their most recent 5 polls, they have the Conservatives retaining 42%, Labour 74% and LDs 41% of their 2019 voters. The comparative figures from recent R&Ws are Con 53%, Lab 88%, LD 50%. |
|
