Poll List: ICM show Tories back up to 40%

Surveys done in the middle of the day, reach housewives, children, students and unemployed people to a greater extent than they reach people who go to work. Not a broad sampling method.

Same with surveys at shopping malls, on the internet, etc. Respondents are essentially self-selected or the sampling is biased toward one particular demographic.

The big pollsters deal with these problems with various corrective algorithms. A lot of research and money has gone into the art, mainly by marketing interests rather than political interests. "Will you buy product X?" is a better question than "Will you vote for X?".

Even so, what people say they will do and what they actually do are often two different things.

To get really precise answers takes a huge amount of money. I am skeptical about the real meaning of the margin of error that is frequently cited when survey results are reported. It suggests the data is far more precise than is justified given the quality of the data and the unmeasured sources of error.

yes it is interesting reading Ludwig because in many ways it is the way we should look to challenge Cameron and shows Cameron has deep problems with the right of his party which if he does not deliver a 50 seat majority will explode right in his face

Ludwig, how they will try and sell it by taking something off elsewhere but in truth the cut would be totally over ridden by the VAT rise they will do if they got in

As for polls, do try taking a statistics course sometime, and learn why many polls and surveys, particularly those with biased samples, loaded questions, false causality and data manipulation are not taken seriously by statisticians.

Polls can be viewed as a snapshot of opinion. That is, as a survey of voters’ thoughts given the information known at the time the poll was taken. It is understood that voters’ opinions might change if the information changes. For example, polls are often used to tell candidates what information to emphasize or to offer—or to withhold!

Take the Scott Brown, Martha Coakley race in the USA. The differences in polls was huge. Pajamas Media had Brown ahead by 15.4%, a whopping lead, while other organizations even had Brown down a point or two.

Not everybody who says they will definitely vote will vote. Some who said they will not vote will. And the fraction of those who said they might or might not will be variable. These ambiguities are always a large source of polling error. To estimate it would require re-calling ALL of the same people and asking whether or not they voted. And then hoping they tell us the truth.

Another source of error: people tell lies. Actually, this is an understatement. People lie like dogs. If you call a left-winger and he suspects that the polling organization is right-wing, he will more likely lie. People lie not just in saying they will vote for the opposite person, but they say they are undecided when they are truly not. They say they will not vote when they will and vice versa.

Often people misunderstand the questions and answer oppositely of what they truly mean. So bad/loaded questions and poor English is another source of error.

Then there are those who were sampled. Ideally, we would only sample people who WILL actually vote. Since this is impossible, we are led to report on who said they would vote (or are "likely" to).

Finally there are some who said they will vote for a candidate, change their minds and vote for another.

Just seen a whole glut of ghastly posters appear all over our town; saying something like: "If you've not thought of voting Tory before, they've got some lovely family friendly policies..."

(indidentally, it was an image of a comfortably well off 2 parents and 2.2 children!)

Oh yes- what would that be then? Tax breaks for married people
in middle and upper incomes?

It always amazes me that cosy images of "family" are used as a political gimmick- even seen this on BNP leaflets!!!

Alex- had you thought of some LL posters as well as T shirts please? I'm more than happy to plaster some up at strategic points!!!

Jo.

@Hazico

According to The Times around 75% of their readers agree with the Tory policy of tax breaks for married couples.

Potential tory voters support it, what Labour supporters think is neither here nor there.

'According to The Times around 75% of their readers agree with the Tory policy of tax breaks for married couples.'

Excellent - 391k people. I wonder if it will appeal to LGBT, single parents, widows, married couples with no kids, married couples with no kids under the age of 3, couples who do not wish to marry, and so on. How are they intending to fund it when they propose to introduce it in 2010-11? What is the cost - £3.2bn?

@Ludwig

391,000 readers, or however many of those who responded, of The Times seems a pretty good sample of Tory supporters and potential supporters.

So from a policy point of view it would seem the Tories have got it right to attract support.

As I said what labour party supporters think is fairly irrelevant if the Tories get their support in line isn't it?

Personally I look forward to one day having transferable personal allowances with my wife and I suspect the Tories would get a lot of support from the voters they want to support them if they did.

Again what labour supporters and voters think is not overly important to the Tory party.

Ludwig, Ian and Ralph: I greatly value your comments.

What goes around comes around....

Jo.

surprised tha tno one has mentioned the BPIX poll for MoS

CON 36%(-3), LAB 34%(+4), LDEM 18%(nc)

but in marginals the Tories are just about on target

massive survey over over 5000

@ Ian R

Looked at the Poll, ta. Apparently the Tories would not win all the marginals they need to get anywhere near an overall majority, but I may be misreading it. Peter Hitchens duffs over Cameron in the Mail. The Mail also refers to Ed Vaizey's 'mis-speaking' that Samantha C voted for Blair and might consider voting for Brown (haha!): here. I'm looking forward to watching the Rawnsley programme on Cameron tomorrow at 8 (Channel 4, I think), in which Vaizey makes this comment.

Ludwig, hasn't Hitches, duffed over every leader since his beloved Maggie ?

@ Ian R.

Yes, but it makes interesting reading.

@Ian

The size of the survey is fairly irrelevant once you get past the representative sample size that is required. If that is 2,000 then going from 2,500 to 5,000 tells you nothing more.

The issue is the statistical methodology used and in the case of all the polls the varied weightings they use. Frankly most of them seem to be little more than a personal view on the part of the polling company.

Remove the weighting from most of the polls of late and the Tories are well ahead, so the issue is whether the post polling fiddling that is being undertaken is too little, too much or about right. Previous GE form indicates it is more likely to be too generous to Labour.

Ludwig, this conversation is a waste of time. One side cant see beyond the rose tinted spectacles he is wearing. It reminds me of Tory friends at their demise in 1997.

We mustr break this tribal nonsense, bring on the Libs, Greens, UKIP give us PR it is the antidote.

Have a good weekend. I am going to tinker with the car and enjoy myself.

Can I ask Red Rag a question. Yes I realise that it will mean he can't plug his dreadful blog for a secodn but bear with me.

What made you so bitter and so keen to ride a class war?

It makes you sound like a hysterical petulant child that has been refused a lolly.

Please keep it up though because it will drive exactly the sort of voters Labour needs to other parties.

@ John Doe

'hysterical pertinent child'

What's one of those, then?

Damn spell checker - thats what.

:)

Does anyone know where Sam Cameron will be campaigning for the Labour Party? It's just that I want to have a word to her about that hubby of hers :-)

@ Red Rag

Samantha to you, mate. Her next canvassing venue is:
here

Ludwig,
it's Samantha to the high class hunting set, however, she likes to be called Sam when she's down pounding those pavements with a reusable Aldi bag full of Labour posters, leading from the front, with her band of closet Labour activists.

http://redrag1.blogspot.com/

@Roger

That is where you are incorrect. Yes, there are a core of supporters who are ex Labour voters but we now know that a % of ex-Tory voters will be voting BNP in this election. I cannot give you the stats from what we have found on the doorstep though. There will also be a % of Tories that vote Labour to shift BNP councillors where the councillors have not done any work.

Do not believe for one minute that the BNP support relies on a single party source.

There are a lot of people angry about with the big three partys at the moment. This election will not be the same as the previous one as politics is dynamic as various groups shift their decisions.

I will go into more detail after the elections on the who, why they voted.

'When the cuts come, public services will shed thousands of women's jobs first.' (Germaine Greer). That's an interesting perception.

There's a BPIX poll in the Mail on Sunday that puts the Tory lead back down at 2%. It's here http://bit.ly/b0jHKc , below the Sam Cameron votes Labour twaddle.

Conservatives 36%, Labour 34%, LibDems 19%, which translates to Labour 314 seats, Conservatives 259, LibDems 45

But before you all start celebrating, a guy called Andy Cooke has read between the lines and made an excellent comment on Political Betting here http://bit.ly/cnhLWg.

Basically, there's also a marginals poll, which the MoS has used to bash Ashcroft, and claim that his 5.1 million would only be worth an extra 13 seats. What they haven't said (and Andy worked out) is that the marginals poll would put the parties at

Conservatives 293 seats, Labour 269, LibDem 60

That's a huge difference from uniform swing. And also, it's good news for Nick Clegg, as the LibDem seats stay solid, and he has the real balance of power.

@ John Smith WB

BNP in Leics., south of Loughborough. Surveys have revealed that the paradigmatic BNP voter is an inhabitant of East Goscote Estate in Leics. It's the sort of people who voted for Thatcher. They may have turned temporarily to NL, but their sentiments are decisively Thatcherite.

Ludwig this is precisely the denial that is at the crux of the demise of the Labour party. Hear no evil, see no evil.... blah.

You can take any story and fundamentally blame the Tories. Is that progress; or is it tribal nonsense? I think your assertion is contemptible, it fails the reasonable test and smacks of pure desperation to make the point that suits YOU.

Ridiculous.

@ John Smith WB

Whenever you are ready to bring us some real information/data rather than your assertions, please feel very free to do so.

Well Ludwig,

Here they are, I believe that Gordon Brown is the architect of the economic demise of the UK. No comments on here deal with that. He has no answers for the future well being of the economy. I have been saying this for 2 years.

I have a democratic right to be angry and I seriously am. One of my best friends has been out of work for 12 months, he has 3 children.

We do not have a plan B for an economy outside of the city of London. He must be removed at all costs. I see nothing from the government that drives the economy to restart. Cheap degrees for all is it.

So you may call it assertions, we thats fine, becuase I sincerley hope that the PLP team think the way you do. I think they will and it will help Mr Browns demise.

I would rather the MRL party run the country than Brown.

@ John Smith

You have a right to be angry, although I'm not sure where 'democratic' is involved. I'm sorry for your friend; unemployment is a cause of depression and debilitation; I hope s/he and his/her family come through it. I'm not going to address your other points simply because they are assertions and they have, in fact, been much debated on here. I doubt that you understand my position. It has nothing to do with Brown or Balls or Mandelson or whomever: it is the prospect that only a Labour Party can, if it can recover its ethos, redeem this country, its economy and society. Therefore, I will continue to support Labour (except if Blair returns), but I will also exhort those who cannot vote Lab to consider the Greens, and I will also remain convinced that PR (not just AV) is the correct way forward for the equitable representation of all parties and all people.

So in spite of all the evidence that the BNP are receiving support from working class groups that finds it hard to get employment and fear that unfettered immigration has ruined their job chances, it's all Mrs T's fault. Well that is OK then, we can all sleep peacefully and leave the floodgates wide open. I think it worthy of noting that Mrs T, left front line politics 30 years ago at a time when such as the BNP were no more than a fringe group of nationalists. National Socialists at that with a heavy emphasis on the Socialism. The rise of the BNP is all down to failed Labour policies.

@ Roger J. Davies

Boy, you can twist anything. 'their sentiments are decisively Thatcherite' - they subscribe to that philosophy. That squarely places the issue on their own agency.

Boy, you can twist anything

Sorry Ludwig, this is impossible. The statement refers to you and your blind, blinkered loyalty.

@ John Smith WB

I've no idea what you are talking about. On Friday, I made a donation of £25 to the Greens for 1200 leaflets. I'm in favour of PR as a matter of equity. You disagree with my perceptions, fine.

@ Roger D,

" ... Mrs T, left front line politics 30 years ago ...."

Er, 2010 minus 1990 equals 20, not 30.

Five more years?

Oh dear it's getting to be like a Kiddies playground here the closer we get to a GE. Do you really believe that the not too photogenic profile of Hague and Ashcroft is worse than those traded by the other lot of Gordon Brown? Is this what your politics have reduced to?
Surely your text should be direct, to the point and arguing for 5 more years of Labour Gov. based on their record of the last 13 years? Is that a problem?

I see that the problem is that there is no ideological gulf between the Parties and everyone is arguing that they are best placed to manage Britain's decline. Because today there is only "decline" on the agenda. It does not matter much who forms the next Gov., the decisions have already been made and Public Sector sector spending will be cut back severely. You only have to ask yourself; should I trust Labour who have proved that they lack judgement and management skills or the wet behind the ears lot?

@ Roger J. Davies

Let's put it another way, then. The NF flourished whilst Lab was in government in the 1970s. When the government changed, the NF more or less disappeared. The BNP does not, apparently, contest safe Tory constituencies, perhaps because it recognizes that the Tories have not dissimilar policies and so there is nothing to gain there.

@ Roger J. Davies

That's precisely the point: Cameron lacks judgment and management skills.

@Ian
"is it me or are there simply too many polls ?

the daily tracker is a waste of time IMHO and almost daily other ones

as to the ICM figures just within the margin of errors but like with 'bullygate', Ashcroft has had no impact, is that simply the disrespect for all politicians is so deep, no one actually cares ?"

I agree with your points there. Too many polls (too far from polling day) and people seem unaffected by the Westminster-insider stories. I guess people basically go "yes, but how does it directly affect me?" - and the answer is it usually doesn't.

With regard to the idea of a Lib-Lab coalliton I remain unconvinced by it. There are a lot of left-wing Social Democrats in the Lib Dem party, but in recent years they seem to have lost control to the neo-liberals. I don't buy Cabel as a left-wing prophet - he was an economist for BP which hardly makes him a radical leftist. He came to my college a few years back and basically told us that the free market could solve almost any social problem. I don't think it was what I or anyone else was looking for and his reception was rather muted. On top of that you have Clegg calling for "savage cuts" (the sort of language Hannan would come up with) and the fact that Thatcher appears to have drawn her inspiration from Liberal thinkers rather than her own party's extensive philosiphers. The Liberals seem to get away with murder at times just because the media never give them any proper scrutiny and the other parties are too focused on bashing each other.

I'd expect them to probably give the Tories the first nod if it came to a hung parliament, but I could be wrong. Either way it may be the Libs have reached a high-water mark as they now have to decide which type of party they are - which risks offending either the left or right of their voters.

Meanwhile more classic Cameron Car Crash Campaigning to be viewed. Some Tory thought saying Mrs Cameron voted Labour would be a great idea.

http://redrag1.blogspot.com/2010/03/red-rag-more-classic-fuckupery-from.html

Hi Labourlist

the oly poll that matters is the day of the election, What will matter is the voters that dont get polled .

Danny

The only two polls in the last week that weren't YouGov with the more than slightly barmy weighting (which even Kellner himself couldn't explain) have the Tories at 39%/40% with an 8%/9% lead.

On top of this every poll of marginals still shows the Tory around 2% further ahead in the seats they have to win.

The UNS is a stupid thing to apply, done simply for speculative purposes as no one sensible expects it work that way (and the marginal polls back that view up).

Ashcroft I suspect will have little or no impact by the time of the election other than to cause a "plague on all your houses" mood set even further in. Already it is off the front page with attention on Brown's totally cynical trip to Afghanistan and the criticism from the Military about his "dissembling" at Chilcott.

So Tories still in the 38%-40% range, Labour in the 31%-33% range, even with dodgy methodology and the marginals with an extra 2% gap.

The thing to point out to you on the left is that Tory numbers have been consistent at 38% to 40% now for nearly 3 months i.e. that support is fairly solid. If pollster’s methodology once again underestimates the Tory vote at a GE (which it historically often seems to) and the marginals deliver an extra 2% lead, how confident do you feel then?

A Tory support level of 40% to 44% across the seats it has to win would I suspect be enough to deliver a majority.

Once in government a reduction in MPs forcing the boundary commission to act and stopping Scottish MPs voting on English matters would make a future 7%-9% lead a comfortable majority lead.

For all the near euphoria on the left of the last 3 weeks almost solely down to the YouGov tracker, have things really changed that much?

@Magna,
Well reasoned argument.

So either the panicky squawks from the Tories are the mis-guided sounds of those desperate to undermine DC, or as a whole they genuinely are concerned their tactics so far are backfiring.

Frankly, the more it looks being a marginal/no majority result the happier I'll be.

Why? Because the executive will have to listen to what their MPs are concerned about, to avoid a commons defeat, and the MPs will have to keep their listening ears on, on the off chance of an early second poll, either through goverment choice, or forced through on a no confidence vote.

I don't know. But I do feel confident that if the Tories carry on panicking it will have an effect on the polls because they'll always be those who'll say they are backing who they think will be the winner.

If the Tories act like they are not confident anymore then it will effect what these people say to pollsters.

Now whether that will have a knock on effect on polling day? That really is the sixty-four thousand dollar question.

'Why? Because the executive will have to listen to what their MPs are concerned about, to avoid a commons defeat,'

Thomas, the adoption of the Wright reforms the other day by the House also relieves the backbenchers from excessive control by the executive. I agree, however, with equitable representation of all parties.

@Ludwig,
Something for you to enjoy reading. Lord Ashcroft's tax status isn't just a Labour fixation

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/matthewd_ancona/7387071/The-Ashcroft-saga-shows-why-the-Tories-need-to-embrace-transparency.html

As for MPs ability to make the executive accountable. Whilst I'm hopeful, I can also see why the reverse of what I'd what could happen.

That's why I think it's worth while harping on about what should be expected.

@ Thomas F

Agree about your points. Apparently, Ashcroft will be retiring as Tory deputy chair after the election, so the LibDems have requested Cab Sec to publish all the docs relating to his peerage as a matter of urgency. Still, it may all prove counter-productive, as Ian implies, if people regard it all as a waste of time.

Thanks Ludwig, if this is not settled out of court would be a dynamite case I suspect

not clear if it will come to court before the Election though

However this whole thing about the YBF should be something we target, that is truly a danger to this country as it is something the Tories deny but links could not be clearer

so why would you deny something which is that blatant unless it is damaging ?

because everyone knows that brand of free market libertian thinking would never win an election

@ Ian

Yes, that YBF is a great discovery. I tried to get into Blaney's Blarney blog, but it wanted me to register. I might try tomorrow, registering as William Hague!

problem is Ludwig is these things we talk about does not get out into the mainstream and when it does the public says 'it is all of them'

is it me or are there simply too many polls ?

the daily tracker is a waste of time IMHO and almost daily other ones

as to the ICM figures just within the margin of errors but like with 'bullygate', Ashcroft has had no impact, is that simply the disrespect for all politicians is so deep, no one actually cares ?

The Stargate (Ashcroft) saga will run. He has started libel proceedings against The Independent - kick a paper when it is down. You would have thought that he would be trying to buy it instead.

what have the indy said to upset him

also with regards to the LD's seen the Guardian today where they claim there is a secret deal between LD and Lab, imagine Cable with the Tories, nope !!

but they are politicans and want power

Ashcroft libel case

I want the Libs to do well to temper the stupidity of the those who think they were born to rule (PLP & Tories).

I'm not averse to the LibDems doing well nationally. I just worry about their alliances with the Conservatives in some LAs, like Birmingham and Leeds, where they are out-Torying the Tories. I'd like the Greens to have some representation, presumably Brighton if anywhere.