Lib Dem Polls - How Low Can They Go?

[butchersapron]

ipos-mori

 

[frogwoman]

god its taken a fucking nosedive hasnt it?

 

[Callum91]

ipos-mori

Almost makes me erect just looking at that graph.

 

[killer b]

what gave them that big jump at the beginning of october? conference?

 

[Streathamite]

what gave them that big jump at the beginning of october? conference?

yup - and the dive was due to the student fees thing

 

[where to]

hammered in a by-election in Sandwell tonight, 2% of the vote. beaten by the NF and nearly by the Greens. Big Labour win.

 

[killer b]

how did they do last time?

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

hammered in a by-election in Sandwell tonight, 2% of the vote. beaten by the NF and nearly by the Greens. Big Labour win.

it's hardly surprising tbh.

 

[killer b]

16.5% swing from the tories - Labour 1320, tories 643, NF 76, lib dem 45

edit: greens at 42. if only they'd had 4 more votes...

 

[frogwoman]

I'm hoping there'll be a lib dem split soon, that will be a bit of lightness and joy to take our minds off the grim economic news.

 

[Combustible]

how did they do last time?

2010 result Con 1989 Lab 1938 BNP 615 LD 534

But it looks like they haven't always contested the seat.

 

[where to]

Labour has a one-point lead over the Conservatives, with the Liberal Democrats at their lowest level in a ComRes poll since the election, according to a survey for the Sunday Mirror and The Independent on Sunday tomorrow.

Con 37% (+2)
Lab 38% (+1)
LD 13% (-3)
Other 12% (-)

Also of note:

Do you agree or disagree with the following statements:

I expect to be worse off personally as a result of the spending cuts

Agree: 65% Disagree: 16%

The cuts are unfair because they will be felt more by the poor than by wealthier households

Agree: 56% Disagree: 30%

The scale of the cuts planned is too severe and too fast

Agree: 51% Disagree: 34%

The need for cuts at the scale proposed has been exaggerated by the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats for party political reasons

Agree: 37% Disagree: 42%

The Government is cutting public spending in a way that is fair to every section of society

Agree: 32% Disagree: 52%

The Coalition Government is ensuring that the most vulnerable sections of society are protected from the spending cuts

Agree: 28% Disagree: 51%

 

[treelover]

'The cuts are unfair because they will be felt more by the poor than by wealthier households

Agree: 56% Disagree: 30%'

Interesting statistic, better than in the past and this is before the visible impact of the cuts, evictions, job losses, nurseries/nursing homes closing

 

[treelover]

'I expect to be worse off personally as a result of the spending cuts

Agree: 65% Disagree: 16%'


this one is perhaps the most significant, self interest, all to play for

 

[One_Stop_Shop]

Any updates?

 

[butchersapron]

Yes, latest ( for the times tmw i believe) is the lib-dems back on 9% again (three times now) - 40/40/9 - and the coalition on 14% approval - the lowest yet.

 

[shagnasty]

-14 it,s no more than they deserve

 

[Nylock]

Yes, latest ( for the times tmw i believe) is the lib-dems back on 9% again (three times now) - 40/40/9 - and the coalition on 14% approval - the lowest yet.

14% approval?!?!

I know it's only a poll and all but that's a stunningly bad number...

 

[shagnasty]

I think butchers left out the minus sign an easy to make typo

 

[butchersapron]

Oops, yes - 36% approve 50% disapprove

 

[butchersapron]

Notable (pdf) that the lib-dems are on 5% for Scotland, 7% for the Midlands and 8% for London. Clegg's approval rating are shocking as well - they're split into groups of people who think he's doing either very well/badly or fairly well/badly - both groups of approval added together are smaller than the single group who think he's doing very badly, and when fairly badly is added he ends up with -24% approval.

 

[ernestolynch]

It'll keep getting worse as more and more pissed off 18 year olds enter the franchise.

Lol.

 

[Balbi]

It shows that no amount of outside political action can be as damaging as a few power thirsty fuckwits making a considered decision

I'd put my deckchair up to watch, but it's fucking cold out.

 

[Kaye]

Notable (pdf) that the lib-dems are on 5% for Scotland, 7% for the Midlands and 8% for London. Clegg's approval rating are shocking as well - they're split into groups of people who think he's doing either very well/badly or fairly well/badly - both groups of approval added together are smaller than the single group who think he's doing very badly, and when fairly badly is added he ends up with -24% approval.

Link doesn't appear to work.

 

[butchersapron]

Should now

 

[killer b]

it's http://today.yougov.co.uk/sites/today.yougov.co.uk/files/YG-Archives-Pol-ST-results-261110_0.pdf

 

[ymu]

Oops, yes - 36% approve 50% disapprove

That is a lovely, lovely graph.

 

[Balbi]

Yougov always amuse me with their pop-culture questions - Wagner and Widdecombe this week.

 

[free spirit]

Notable (pdf) that the lib-dems are on 5% for Scotland, 7% for the Midlands and 8% for London. Clegg's approval rating are shocking as well - they're split into groups of people who think he's doing either very well/badly or fairly well/badly - both groups of approval added together are smaller than the single group who think he's doing very badly, and when fairly badly is added he ends up with -24% approval.

IMO the most shocking aspect of that poll is the voting intentions of people ho voted Lib Dem at the last election. The headline figure of only 44% of lib dem voters from the last election saying they'd vote lib dem again is bad enough, but that's 44% of those who ere able to state their current voting intentions. 8% of lib dem voters say that they'd not vote at all, and 22% don't know, meaning that 30% of former lib dem voters were excluded from the headline figure. If you included these voters, then basically only 30% of people who voted lib dem at the last election are sure that they'd vote for them again today.

those are incredible statistics, and the sort of stats that really should be sending shockwaves through the lib dem party, and ought really to result in the wider party asserting it's authority over clegg and forcing him to start defending Lib Dem policies within this coalition or risk being removed from the leadership of the party. This would of course require the lib dem party to grow some balls, but there are signs that this is starting to happen, eg with the choice of party chairman.

 

[ymu]

It's fairly easy for the Lib Dems to force a leadership contest. I can't remember the numbers, but it's summat like 75 constituency parties have to demand it - which is tiny given the number of constituency parties. Time to start writing to them. It's about the only way they can recover any credibility now. They'll be dormant for another 60 years otherwise.