|
|
Post by James E on Oct 21, 2022 16:30:06 GMT
From YouGov "Which, if any, of the following would you **most** trust to manage the British economy?" None of them 37% Rishi Sunak 32% Boris Johnson 12% Don't Know 11% Penny Mordant 3% Ben Wallace 2% Others 3% On a hypothetical 'Best Prime Minister' question, all possible candidates trail Keir Starmer, but Sunak by only 9 points, Johnson by 13 and Mordant by 15 points. docs.cdn.yougov.com/8w0a2xhvy8/TheTimes_VI_Results_221021_W.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Oct 21, 2022 15:48:44 GMT
Westminster voting intention:
LAB: 56% (+5)
CON: 19% (-4)
LDEM: 10% (+1)
REF: 5% (+2)
GRN: 4% (-3)
via
@yougov
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Oct 21, 2022 9:18:44 GMT
From People Polling - presumably with fieldwork before 1:30pm yesterday:
"If Liz Truss should be replaced as the leader for the Conservative Party today, who would you like to see as her
replacement?"
Dont Know 41%
Rishi Sunak 19%
Boris Johnson 16%
Prefer not to say 9%
Penny Mordant 5%
Wallace, Hunt, Javid and Badenoch, each 2%
Braverman 1%
Shapps, Zahawi, each 0%
Johnson does lead with Con2019 voters, with 38% support, and this rises to 50% if you exclude the DKs and those who prefer not to say.
With 2016 Leave voters, it's a tie between 'Don't Know' and Boris Johnson, each with 29% support.
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Oct 21, 2022 8:57:05 GMT
I think most of us are taking People Polling with a pinch of salt at the moment due to lack of a track record. The one I want to see is Kantar. Unless every other polling company is wrong, the movement from their previous poll with the 4% lead is going to be spectacular! For a long time, Kantar have produced the most favourable polling results for the Tories - going back to at least GE2107. So I'd be expect that if and when they poll again, their figures will be a noticable lower Labour lead. People Polling clearly belong at the opposite end of the scale - although I do wonder whether GB News are regretting chosing them as their pollster. I give most weight to those polling companies who have the best track record over the past 5 years ago - such as YouGov, Survation and (despite their methodology change) Opinium. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Oct 20, 2022 19:21:19 GMT
Insane in the sense that 23% of people still want the Conservative Party in government.  East of England again  Or perhaps not..... Your comment sent me off to check what current cross-breaks for East of England look like, and R&W's tables for their 6 polls so far in October all show Labour leads of 20 points of more for their East of England sub-samples. Usual caveats apply, with these each being around 100-150 people, and not internally weighted. The E England average across those 6 polls is Lab 53% (+29) Con 25% (-32) Comparisons to GE2019. So the Tories are still doing a little better than their GB average in the Eastern region, but not by much. And this is actually an even bigger swing than in the South West of England, where the 6 poll R&W average is: Lab 52% (+29) Con 22% (-30) This is somewhat boosted by today's SW figures which show Lab 62%, Con 13%. And it would now be enough to unseat even Christopher Chope in Christchurch. In fact, there seems to be a clear pattern of the Tories losing most support within the regions and demographics where they were strongest 3 years ago. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Oct 20, 2022 14:35:37 GMT
That poll is insane, the Torys are going to get what they deserve after this shambolic last 8 years. Con 23%, Lab 52% is exactly in line with the average of all 9 polls we have had since 10 October. The average lead of 29 points is just a couple of points lower than Labour's 10-poll peak during 1994-97 (which was a 31 point Av lead in Dec 94 to Jan 1995). [Update 8:30pm, post R&W (36%) and Omnesis (35% lead) polls: Average is now set to match the average level achieved in the 'peak Blair' period in early 1995. I think we're due a YouGov tomorrow, which is likely to confirm this] |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Oct 18, 2022 19:02:08 GMT
jimjam Do you have any idea how Starmer's leadership ratings compare with Blair's a couple of years out from the 1997 landslide? Would be interesting in the context of current speculation about Lab landslides alongside a Tory PM with rock bottom leadership ratings. Forgive the late response, but I think it's really worth noting that Blair enjoyed relatively modest leads over Major as 'Best Prime Minister' for much in the final year when he was Leader of the Opposition in 1996-97. news.bbc.co.uk/news/vote2001/hi/english/opinion_polls/newsid_1306000/1306664.stmThe actual article linked above relates to 2001, but there is a graph a little way down for 1996-97. This shows Blair scoring around 37-41% for 'Best PM' against Major who ranged from 19-29%. Blair's average lead as 'Best PM' was around 10-15%, so much in line with his eventual winning margin at GE1997. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Oct 18, 2022 16:20:44 GMT
R&W's 'Red Wall' poll with a 40% Lab lead matches up with their 36% GB lead yesterday. Both represent 24% swings on GE2019.
This is still very good news for Labour, as most regional cross-breaks had shown their progress as a bit lower in the North of England, and the Tories may yet benefit from some first-time encumbency. But at the moment, the polls don't support that.
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Oct 17, 2022 18:17:49 GMT
It's worth remembering that in 1997 Labour 'only' managed a lead of 12.5% despite the huge historic opinion poll numbers we've been hearing about recently. A few things different now: I'd argue Labour are in reality in a slightly worse position than they were under Blair (in terms of front-bench quality, media savviness etc). This is however counter-balanced - and more - by the terrible state the Tories are in. I thought I'd do a bit of a comparison between the current polls and those of the nadir of the Conservative Government of the 90s. The most recent 10 published polls now average a 28% Lab lead. Those from Blair's peak in opposition seem to have been around the end of 1994 and start of 95. From that time, there is a 10-poll sequence with a 31% average Lab lead. It's perhaps easier to remember the 40-point Gallup leads than the 18%s from ICM. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_1997_United_Kingdom_general_election |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Oct 17, 2022 17:29:34 GMT
R&W's Con2019 cross-break is interesting, as it's the first in which more say they would switch to Labour than 'Don't Know'.
Con 37%
Lab 26%
DK 25%
LD 4%
Lab to LD is 2%, with 35% of 2019LDs saying they would now vote Labour. Those are farily typical for R&W who generally show lower 'churn ' than YouGov.
Lab to Con is 0%.
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Oct 16, 2022 21:20:47 GMT
A poll by Opinium for the Trades Union Congress using the MRP method to estimate constituency-level results, projected a 1997-style landslide for Labour, with the party winning 411 seats. It suggests the Conservatives would lose 219 seats to end up on 137, with the Liberal Democrats on 39 seats and SNP on 37, with 10 cabinet ministers including Jeremy Hunt, Jacob Rees-Mogg, and Thérèse Coffey losing their seats in a general election, along with former prime minister Boris Johnson. More realistic numbers than the projections that have the Tories under 100 seats (that is not going to happen) but I suspect our Scottish correspondents won't be buying the SNP 37 figure. Lib Dem number is at the high end of expectations. This is based on Opinium's polling so we can assume that it reflects their weighting methodology which generally produces the lowest Labour leads of any regular pollster. As you say, this does make it look rather more realistic. I think that Coffey's Suffolk Coastal seat, which needs a 17.6% swing would be among the hardest targets to fall per these figures. After allowing for Lab gains from SNP (17?) it would seem that on UNS, those 411 seats would take Lab gains from Con down to number 223 on their targets list, which would include Fylde, Wantage and Tatton. www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Oct 15, 2022 21:07:06 GMT
oldnat The Tories recent collapse seems to have been deepest where their support was largest. But I don't think that it's really 'inevitable' as they could (in theory) shed 20 points across all 'regions' from GE2109. For a precedent, their loss of around 11-12 points at GE1997 was close to uniform across Britain, just a little higher in the South of England. Moreover, there does seem to be a trend in recent GEs for Labour to improve their position in parts of the South of England, as well as London. Hence the Con>Lab swings against the general trend at GE2019 in places such as Canterbury, Wycombe and Runnymede and Weybridge.
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Oct 15, 2022 20:15:04 GMT
"It just shows that if pollsters don't take into account local socio-economic factors their predictions are useless. For example - in Surrey the Tories will lose seats to the Lid Dems, not Labour, in the next election."
Clearly, the tactical position in some Surrey seats makes them likely LD gains at the next GE - especially Guildford or Esher and Walton.
But in so far as we have socio-economic data from GB polling it really doesn't support your view. Firstly the Con>Lab swing is somewhat larger with higher social classes (especially C1s) than with C2 or DE voters. And recently, voting intentions for ABs and DEs have been near-identical - with both showing similar large Lab leads.
And by geography, the South of England is consistently showing the largest swings of anywhere in Britain. To take a couple of pollsters' figures:
YouGov - Combined South England (most recent 4 polls average)
Lab 49% (+23)
Con 29% (-24)
LibDem 12% (-4)
(Changes from GE2019)
R&W - SE England region only (most recent 5 polls average)
Lab 45% (+23)
Con 33% (-21)
LibDem 13% (-5)
(Changes from GE2109)
These are unprecendented figures. At GE1997 Labour trailed the Tories by 8 points in the Combined South (SE+SW+E) and by 13 points in SE England, so these figures are 12-14 points better for Labour in the South than their previous best performance.
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Oct 15, 2022 16:33:16 GMT
steve At the opposite end of the age sub-groups, the 18-24's - who of course were too young to vote in 2016 - divide by 87% to 13% for 'Wrong to Leave' per the average of YouGov's recent polls. lensThe demographic forces - with 64/36 Leavers being replaced by 87/13 Remainers - will have resulted in about a 4% swing over the six-and-a-bit years since the 2016 referendum. So I'd say that this has been around a third of the overall 12% movement from Leave/Right to Remain/Wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Oct 15, 2022 16:06:14 GMT
Those figures are very close to the long-standing YouGov tracker - "In hindsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the European Union?" They have asked this three times in Sept and Oct, with results of 34/53, 35/52 and 34/52 for 'Wrong'. This question has consistently seen much less movement than Voting Intention polls, but has overall been slowly drifting towards 'wrong'. This is despite around 75% of those who voted Leave still thinking it was the right decision. But as I've noted before, the movement is there. And views on the issue have become ever more age-divided. Over 65s still think the decision was 'Right' by a 64/36 margin which matches exactly the way the same age cohort voted in 2016 (excl DKs). Those aged 18-64 now divide 70/30 for 'Wrong' , so an 18-point swing compared to the referendum itself where those aged under 65 voted narrowly to Remain by 52/48. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Oct 14, 2022 9:45:59 GMT
Yep, agreed. I can't think of a southern Tory constituency that Blair once held which wouldn't go Labour on these current polls. A few of the ex-LibDem ones may struggle though as they've really been buried in some places.
For me, the 'real' blue wall (which isn't real, of course) is made up of the seaside seats of Worthing and Bournemouth, a handful of Surrey/Hertfordshire/Buckinghamshire seats and those delicious London ones like Chingford and Uxbridge. But is that really a wall? They were all heading Labour/Liberal anyway, before the current crazy crop of polls. Demographics innit.
A real 'real' blue wall would need to be full of surprises, a la '97... Aldershot? Reigate? Horsham? Henley? Witham? Maidenhead (gasp)?
Ha, I live in Aldershot and would love to see it go red. I've only lived here for a couple of years so I can't claim to be an expert, but it is an interesting constituency in some ways. It's quite different from a lot of the neighbouring seats eg North East Hampshire, South West Surrey, Guildford. It's less affluent and was a lot more Brexit-inclined, Aldershot itself being an army town which voted even more heavily for Brexit than Farnborough, the other town that the constituency centres on (unlike some of its slightly more sprawling neighbours, there's not much in the way of villages/rural hinterland in this seat). I can't say how alike it is, but I wonder whether it might share more in common with some of the Essex towns pjw1961 cited than some of the nearby leafy Tory/Lib Dem battlegrounds. At a local electoral level Farnborough tends to vote in fairly typical Tory fashion and there's only one Labour ward, but it's more of a mixed picture in Aldershot itself with about half the wards Tory and the other half Labour. I do also wonder whether there's some demographic change going on. The town is a little run down but there is some redevelopment going on and although it's only anecdotal stuff, I know of several friends and colleagues (mostly 30-something professionals) who have moved out this way from the Guildford area, either as first time buyers or renters, as the area is much more affordable (I think similar demographic change has been going on in Surrey too with London-dwellers moving out to leafier commuter land). I reckon it's the sort of place that would ordinarily be very unlikely to go Labour. The Tories have rarely had huge majorities in the seat, but they've mostly had very comfortable ones, and it's never really threatened to go red. Cons also haven't really been taking much of a hit in local elections here. That said, there are some Laboury ingredients and I reckon in a landslide election (of the kind the polls are currently pointing to) it would stand a reasonable chance of falling. Thanks for that ptarmigan. Agree with your characterisation of Aldershot constituency: it's important to remember that Aldershot itself is the smaller of the two towns, so that although there has long been some potential for Labour there, Farnborough is far more difficult. In 1997 2001 and 2005 it was one of the small number of constituencies where anti-Tory voters were divided, and the Tories held the seat on 42% of the vote while other seats at that level fell. One further point to consider with SE England is that while Labour are clearly making progress*, it is hard to turn that into seats. The Labour vote is rather concentrated in the most urban constituencies, while the smaller towns and rural constituencies require swings of around 17-20%. By my calculations, Lab would need to be around 8 points ahead in the South East in order to overtake the Tories on seats in the 'region' - so a 20 point swing from GE2019. (* the most recent polls again show Lab leads in S or SE England of around 20%) |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Oct 10, 2022 20:33:20 GMT
Today's R&W poll is their 10th in succession to show a Labour lead in the South West of England, covering all their polls since the start of September. It shows Con 29, Lab 49, which is actually a slightly smaller lead than their previous two SW cross-breaks. Average of their past 6 SW cross-breaks is:
Lab 47% (+24)
Con 25% (-28)
LD 16% (-2)
(Changes from GE2019. Greens and RefUk pick up a few points too.)
The 26% swing in the South West is nine points ahead of R&W's average GB swing of 17% from the same polls.
This would be enough to unseat all Tory MPs in SW England with the exception of Christopher Chope in Christchurch, where a swing of 26.3% is needed.
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Oct 9, 2022 20:42:16 GMT
graham "On the basis of current polling Labour could expect to poll over 30% in Woking - sufficient to make the seat a 3-way contest." Current Polling shows the Conservatives at only around 30% in the SE or South England cross-breaks - and their 2019 vote share in Woking (49%) was 4-5 points lower than for the region as a whole. Labour's recent South or SE share ranges from 40-52% across Opinium, Delta, YG, PP and R&W. Of course, the Tories must be expected to make some kind of recovery over the next two years, but without this, the Woking seat would be a near-certain loss for them, regardless of tactical voting.
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Oct 9, 2022 18:31:37 GMT
James, ''Opinium's methodology effectively re-allocates the 'DKs' according to the numbers of positive voting intentions recorded. In the case of the 2019Con DKs in their latest poll, that would be around 60% of them back to the Tories and 25% of them to Labour'' Do they not do the same for WV as well? In which case the Tories get a lift of 35% of the re-assigned 29% (DK+WV). In turn this means around 35% of 29% of the 44% vote share at the last GE or about 4.5% on their VI over Labour. This is inexact as a reiteration for higher notional turnout would be needed increasing the impact v Labour, they do the same for all parties 2019 - DK/WV which gives a little compensation and the 44% at the last GE might be slightly lower due to demographic changes. Shows though, that as there are more direct switchers the impact of Opiniums reallocation reduces somewhat. When they first changed the impact was around 8% perhaps it is nearer 5% at present. (IIRC Peter Kellner said their 19% lead a week ago would have been 25% under their old methodology so in the same ball-park as my rough calcs). Yes, I think you're right. For most pollsters, DKs (and WNVs) are all treated as non-voters, so the effect is to produce figures which show a very low turnout for any party whose voters say either of those responses. Opinium re-weight the positive VIs to reflect turnout at the last General Election. With 29% not giving a VI, I think this means that the Conservatives get 43/71 and Labour 18/71 of the re-allocated share. Incidentally, I am sure that the net effect of their methodology changes was 7 points in each of the first 3 or 4 polls after they made changes at the start of this year. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Oct 9, 2022 14:23:08 GMT
Further to Lululemon's earlier comment re the Sky News forum. The 7 members of the forum,previously Con voters, initially were asked if they would be voting Con. All 7 indicated they would not vote Con and spoke very negatively about the government. I therefore suspect that Opinium are wrong in allocating a significant number of DKs to Con in their final result. Don't DK's result from the actual Poll response? Its Headline VI where "allocations" are used. The Polls say around a quarter of 2019 Con voters are DKs and have not responded with either a Con or Lab VI.-yet Opinium's methodology effectively re-allocates the 'DKs' according to the numbers of positive voting intentions recorded. In the case of the 2019Con DKs in their latest poll, that would be around 60% of them back to the Tories and 25% of them to Labour. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Oct 9, 2022 13:27:32 GMT
One other point from Opinium's cross breaks: their last two polls confirm much the same English regional pattern as I've noted with YG and R&W. In the context of polling that shows an overall Con>Lab swing of around 16%, Opinium's combined averaged regional swings are:
North of England 14%
Midlands 16%
South of England 22%
London 10%
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Oct 9, 2022 12:59:02 GMT
Opinium's figures are fairly similar to YouGov's last two Con2019 cross-breaks, which are: Con 37%, 38% Dont Know 26%, 26% Lab 17%, 15% Would not Vote 9%, 6% Refuk 5%, 6% LD 2%, 4% Grn 2%, 1% YouGov tend to show lower vote retention than all other pollsters, across all parties. It's the re-weighting of the 2019 vote which is the main cause of the lower Lab leads with Opinium. Worth noting that an ICM-style reallocation of YouGov's Don't Knows would knock about 5 points off their Lab lead. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Oct 8, 2022 16:06:10 GMT
YouGov tables here for the 52/22 poll. docs.cdn.yougov.com/tfd4mzb2ab/TheTimes_VI_Results_221007_W.pdfI've done a bit of anlysis of the 2 post-mini-budget YouGovs compared to their own analysis of GE2019 voting patterns. In the context of an overall 21-22% GB Con>Lab swing, this is what their last 2 polls (@33 &30 Lab leads) show. 2016 Remainers 13% Swing 2016 Leavers 27% swing Age 18-24 15% swing Age 25-49 19% swing Age 50-64 26% swing Age 65+ 21% swing ABC1 class 22% swing C2DE class 21% swing South England 26% swing Midlands + Wales 24% swing North England 18% swing I've not analysed London or Scotland or Wales, as better data is available in other polls. All show lower than average swings, and it seems reasonable that YouGov's 'Midlands+ Wales' figure largely reflects the English Midlands. The other thing to note in this poll is that YouGov have repeated their long-running Brexit tracker as to whether 'In hindsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the European Union?'. This shows 35% Right, 52% Wrong, so around 40/60 after excluding the 13% DKs. It's not quite as high as the record 34/53 they found in September, but still reflects the slowly growing disillusionment among Leavers (75% of whom still think it was 'right'). |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Oct 7, 2022 17:24:49 GMT
Latest Poll (52/20 People Polling)
The 5 PP Scots crossbreaks in Sep/Oct show SNP VI at 61%, 48%, 62%, 56%, 57% : mean = 57% ; which is clearly rubbish.
Their weighting factors are run of the mill - "The sample has been weighted to be representative of the population on the following variables: gender, age, socio-economic group, region, vote in the 2019 General Elections and 2016 Brexit referendum vote", which makes me suspect the sampling.
"The data is acquired from a panel provider offering participants the chance to win money. The sampling relies on an online quota approach. Specifically, participants are sampled to meet Office of National Statistics quotas for gender, age, region, socio-economic group, vote in the 2019 general election, and vote in the 2016 Brexit referendum. No criteria are used to over- or undersample respondents. To ensure the polling is representative of the target population, we use official and reliable data sources to match the sample to demographic population targets."
Naturally, they don't identify the panel provider, but it is at least possible that it is a panel that normally focusses on retail questions or similar. If so, the sort of people that join the panel will be skewed to begin with - perhaps folk who are young (or want to be thought of as young  ).
Nothing suggests that the Scots sample would be uniquely skewed, so some doubts might be raised about the overall poll.
Thoughts?I don't think that those Scots crossbreaks look particularly divergent, given that some of them would have had samples of 100 or lower and none would have been internally weighted. While it's clear that People Polling are producing leads on the high side for Lab, it's still interesting to see the trends they produce. And I particularly like the way they provide figures by Social Class as AB/C1/C2/DE. These now show remarkable similar figures across all four groups (at around 50/20) but that's only happened in their two most recent polls. Until then, they were still suggesting a Tory lead with C2 voters (who were their stongest cohort at GE2109), but this group has now shown the largest recent movement, while AB voters (among whom Lab were already doing well) have shown the least. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Oct 7, 2022 15:52:27 GMT
The other group where Labour have made surprising progress is 2016 Leave voters. YouGov (@33% Lab lead) have level -pegging between Con and Lab with Leave voters, Opinium (@ 19% Lab lead) still have the Tories 8 points ahead with this group, but Omnisis (@32% lab lead) have Labour ahead 43/34. Again, these cross-breaks show a higher-than-average swing, as YouGov's analysis of GE2019 showed the Tories enjoying a 60-point lead (74/14) with those who had voted Leave 3 years earlier. That's not unexpected. A lot of Leave voters were lifelong Labour voters. Many of them held their noses and voted Tory in 2019 simply because Boris was the only leader with a chance of power who promised to deliver on the 2016 referendum result. It was always going to be hard to keep those voters now that Brexit has (more or less) actually happened. Boris might have held on to most of those voters simply because he is a good orator and has a gift for somehow giving the impression that he has something in common with working class people despite going to Eton and so on. Truss is a poor public speaker and her attempts to paint her background as less privileged than it was don't go down well (though I doubt many voters are even aware of that)..... The higher movement with Leave voters looks to me like it's a recent thing. YouGov's 5 polls in July and early August still showed the Tories leading by an average of 56/21 with 2016 Leavers. This was roughly a 12% swing in the context of an overall Con>Lab swing of about 10%. Now with YouGov, Opinium, Omnisis and People Polling all showing close to level pegging, this would imply a 30% swing on that 60-point lead at GE2019, compared to the overall swing of around 20%. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Oct 7, 2022 15:04:29 GMT
There surely has to arrive a point at which these leads stop getting larger! It's a London poll. The 10% swing from GE2019 is a lot lower than the 18% which GB-wide polls are showing at present. However, Labour already had a big lead in London, and previous polling had shown lower swings in London than in the rest of England. But it certainly says something when GB polling figures now look like London polls... |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Oct 7, 2022 9:01:10 GMT
New Poll from Techne, with a 22-point Lab lead. www.techneuk.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/R37-UK-2022-10-7-DATA.pdfLab 48% (+1) Con 26% (-1) LD10% (-1) Green 6% SNP 4% Although this is a lower labour lead than most pollsters, it is the highest recorded by Techne. Their cross-breaks for GE2019 look plausible enough, but they are getting very different results for 2016 Leave voters than YouGov, Opinium and Omnesis. Techne's figures show them breaking 49/25* to the Tories, whereas other pollsters show much closer figures. * even this is an 18-point swing from GE2019. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Oct 6, 2022 20:05:59 GMT
@ Robbiealive
Thank You. And you are quite right that the'gender gap' was found to be almost entirely due to young women backing Labour disproportionately whereas older women and men backed the Tories evenly.
The other group where Labour have made surprising progress is 2016 Leave voters. YouGov (@33% Lab lead) have level -pegging between Con and Lab with Leave voters, Opinium (@ 19% Lab lead) still have the Tories 8 points ahead with this group, but Omnisis (@32% lab lead) have Labour ahead 43/34. Again, these cross-breaks show a higher-than-average swing, as YouGov's analysis of GE2019 showed the Tories enjoying a 60-point lead (74/14) with those who had voted Leave 3 years earlier.
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Oct 6, 2022 19:32:43 GMT
Unless I am mistaken, the latest R&W is the first I have seen which puts Labour ahead of the Tories not only in all 'regions' but in all age groups. In their Over-65 sample of 313, their figures show Con 36%, Lab 39%. The Over 65s were reckoned to have backed the Tories over Labour by around 65% to 15% at GE2019, so a swing of 26-27%. This is actually larger than the overall 20% swing. Most other recent cross breaks show the Tories around 10 points ahead with this age-group - but even that is a very substantial shift in a group which has normally been the least volatile section of the electorate. The recent Opinium poll had the Conservatives ahead among the 65+ age group but only by 39% to 36%, so it seems something is going on. Interestingly, the Conservatives best English region was the West Midlands (Lab lead 4%) - not their old heartlands in the South East, South West (both Lab leads of 12%) or East Anglia (Lab lead 14%). We could end up with some 'shock' Labour gains and Conservative holds in the next GE. I don't think much can be deduced from a single cross break of around 150 people - which is what the Opinium figures for the W Midlands represents. Besides, their 4 point Lab lead in WMids represents a 12% swing in the context of a poll showing a GB swing of 16%. So not particularly variant. But, based on the analysis I've shared before here, I'd certainly agree that we are seeing some astonishingly high swings in the figures for the South of England regions - especially the South West. My own figures (mostly from YouGov) show that Labour are also getting 'above average' swings in the English Midlands. However, before the 'mini-budget' and the Tories implosion, the swings in the North of England and Wales were both somewhat smaller. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Oct 6, 2022 18:47:56 GMT
Unless I am mistaken, the latest R&W is the first I have seen which puts Labour ahead of the Tories not only in all 'regions' but in all age groups. In their Over-65 sample of 313, their figures show Con 36%, Lab 39%.
The Over 65s were reckoned to have backed the Tories over Labour by around 65% to 15% at GE2019, so a swing of 26-27%. This is actually larger than the overall 20% swing.
Most other recent cross breaks show the Tories around 10 points ahead with this age-group - but even that is a very substantial shift in a group which has normally been the least volatile section of the electorate.
|
|
).