Wow!

"Brown as leader would be gift to Tories" is the headline in tomorrow's Guardian above a poll that puts the Tories 15% ahead should Brown succeed Blair.  The Tory lead is 10% - with Tories on 41% - with Blair as leader.

I'm off to watch Man Utd's FA Cup replay now.  More thoughts at 10pm-ish.

9.30am update on Tuesday morning: The poll suggests that the strength of the Conservative position is despite public opposition to green taxation.  62% of those questioned by ICM disapproved of extra taxes on motorists or airline passengers. Interestingly 58% thought that any extra green taxes should be used to fund environmental projects whereas 36% agreed with the Tory policy that they should fund other tax cuts.

Comments

[Henry Cook]

Damn Cameron and his green taxes, he's ruined everything...

The best poll yet, and I suspect most or possibly all of the survey was done before the weekend's excellent conference coverage, so the figures could have been even better. I'm starting to believe we could actually win, is there something wrong with me?

[Umbrella Man]

I do not believe the Brown numbers but the 10% lead is encouraging.

[steve e]

Game over for GB - anybody who thinks his fortunes will improve when he is PM is delusional.

[Tory T]

Wow is right and a generous and accurate assessment from you Tim. As a dyed in the wool Cameroon who has, in the past, expressed frustration at ukip trolling on ConHome I also thought your piece on the impact of the green taxes was extremely lucid - pointing out as it did that toughness and willingness to stand on principle may well outweigh specific objections on one policy (and indeed, these are to be balanced with tax cuts elsewhere).

So, ConHome at war with the party? I think not, and I am a full-throttle Cameroon.

But to the poll. What can you say. I don't know if it will last. But these numbers are just, just fantastic. The public can sense the Labour party death spiral. Cameron is cheered by doctors at an NHS rally. Labour's "knife culture" features on the news daily. Gordon Brown slopes off to a private dentist...

The activists in our marginal seat are engaged, enthusiastic and ready to take Labour on in May.

Francis Maude: congratulations

[Umbrella Man]

Who else than Brown?

Miliband ain't anything special.

Reid is a thug.

PS Like the new font and presentation Ed! Enjoy your game.

[Tory T]

From the Guardian story:

""To judge from the data, what you are left with is the fact that Cameron is an asset to his party and neither Brown nor Campbell are," said Nick Sparrow, the managing director of ICM."

[Modern Conservative]

I think it's telling that the Lib Dem vote totals are beginning to come down now - the sustained focus on the environment over the last 18 months, coupled with the substance in the green tax proposals, will I reckon be getting tempted but previously sceptical Lib Dems to come over.

This poll is as bad for Ming as it is for Brown.

[Umbrella Man]

Good point MC. We could have two leadership races after May if the LibDems crash...

[steppenwolff]

This poll is absolutely fantastic news and a great boost to Cameron in the lead up to the Budget. I wonder if it will make Charles Clarke or Alan Milburn itch more and make one of them stand for the leaderhsip?

[steve e]

Is that a 9% swing from the GE? Con from 32% to 43% and Lab from 35% to 28%

[Chris Palmer]

The problem with polling the Lib Dem vote is this: in some areas of the country (the South West and Scotland) they are particularly strong - elsewhere they are relatively weak. Therefore, because the polling looks at their party nationally, it all averages out - and I think does not give a true indication of how well (or not) they are doing.

[Mark Fulford]

I’m amazed that Vince Cable and David Laws haven’t defected yet. They’re apparently isolated in a party that’s on a road to nowhere and with nowhere to turn for a better leader. Nobody would blame them for jumping while they can.

[Richard Tyndall]

ICM again. No where near as reliable as Yougov and some of the other polsters who are stil putting the lead at around 6%. I think they are right that the leda improves with Brown in charge but still find their methodology dodgy given their history in the run up to the last election.

[Andrew Woodman]

I'm worried by this poll and think we should Lat off Gordon Brown. There is a danger that he won't become leader!.

[Lordhawhaw]

I am normally the first to moan about ConHome agenda but credit where its due. Well done for the positive coverage of this poll. Let us rejoice in that news to coin a phrase.

[xenon]

There is practically no chance that it will be anyone but Gordon. I can't wait until May when we beat Labour the length and breadth of the land!

[George]

I think this is poll result is fantastic news for Cameron and the Conservative Party. However, my chief worry is that voters are unaware yet what vision and direction Gordon Brown has for the Labour Party; people only know him as Chancellor, not as PM. Hence we should not become complacent, but anticipate, I believe, a gradiose proposal for the country which I suspect Brown has tucked up his sleeve, waiting eagerly to disclose it as soon as Blair steps down. Notwithstanding, well done Cameron - you're doing a great job; especially brilliant support from junior doctors at the protest the other day.

[Richard]

Excellent news, although I agree with those who favour Yougov polls. There certainly seems to be positive support for the Tories as well as dislike of New Labour.

[Chris]

Richard, I'm not sure where you have got he idea that ICM is particularly inaccurate.

ICM 03/05/05
CON 32 LAB 38 LIB 21

YouGov 04/05/05
CON 32 LAB 37 LIB 24

General Election 05/05/05
CON 32 LAB 35 LIB 22

Not much difference between the two pollsters in their 2005 predictions.

[Ted]

George, agree that until we see Brown as PM we cannot know what the public will make of him. However I'm in mixed mind about his "100 Day Shock & Awe" . Grand plans have a habit of falling apart. Remember the build up to UK chairing G7 & the EU - even without the bombs both were far below expectations.

There's the Scots & Welsh parliamentary elections, the English locals, then, perhaps more dangerous the EU Summit in Berlin and the Berlin Declaration (Blairs parting gift?). Who knows what will be the situation in Iraq, Iran, Pakistan or Afghanistan?

[Richard]

"Richard, I'm not sure where you have got he idea that ICM is particularly inaccurate."

I'm not saying they're inaccurate, just that Yougov polls tend to be the most accurate. I do trust ICM more than some others though.

[EML]

Blimey, poor old Brown. And Sir Ming.

We're edging towards that magical 40% figure in the poll of polls.

Another few polls similar to this before the May elections and Labour really will be wiped out. Hopefully we can keep the momentum going.

[Ash Faulkner]

Hmm...I wouldn't write off Brown yet. It's quite likely he'll have a honeymoon, and if he's clever, he'll call an election within that time period.

The Cameroons have got to get some real direction: what they want to do about crime, what they want to do about education, what they want to do about the economy. There's no need for specific policies (though a few here and there to add spice to the vision wouldn't go amiss), but if they don't have an established vision before Brown gets in, he could call an election and the Tories will have their pants down.

Cameron's honeymoon is over now; he's got to fill the void with a vision. Not a manifesto, but a vision. Brown no doubt already has that vision, and if there's an early election, it'll be a huge contrast unless Cameron gets his act together.

Year one, change the party's image, and he's done a great deal on that (though the spin, no ties, partings etc all annoy me, I can see where's he going with it). Unfortunately, he's replaced the nasty party image with the unprincipled party image, and in some ways, that's even worse, because it seems we have no vision for government.

The leadership have been saying 2007 will be the year of policy. For their sake, I hope that is the case.

[Jake]

Mr "nations and regions" Brown is even more anti English than Blair . His becoming prime minister
- with all the democratic validity of the passing of the Roman empire from Augustus to Tiberius -
would in all liklihood be the terminal factor for the British Union . He is now deeply unpoular in both England and Scotland. He is not new . He has all the popularity of a used bin bag . He is only up for consideration because the tired 1990's Labour clique can produce no one else . He would be a gift for the Tories .

And yet he is not to be underestimated. If Mr Brown were to come out for an English Parliament and campaign vigorously for it , he could yet turn it all around and , with a general election , cement his position as British Prime Minister .

He must realise this .

[Paul D]

"Who else than Brown?

Miliband ain't anything special.

Reid is a thug."

UM is correct - NuLab is, and always has been, a band of pygmies led by two giants. We need to ensure that we don't make the same mistake by having credible alternatives in CMD's cabinet so that, when he does call it a day (be it as a one-term wonder or, ideally, handing over during a dynastic Conservative age) we can have a genuine contest with a number of potential leaders involved

[Richard Tyndall]

Hmmm

rather cheeky Chris, taking the polls 2 days before the elections and saying 'oh look how accurate they were'. Try going and looking at all the data for the year before the election. In that case you have the following:

ICM range of Labour Lead 3-8% Averaging 6%
Yougov range of Labour Lead 1-6% Averaging 3%
Actual result Labour Lead 3.2%

In 2001 ICM were even worse with the labout lead averaging over 16% (and peaking at 19%)in the 6 months leading up to the election with the actual winning margin being 9%

Of course MORI are even worse so that is some consolation for ICM.

[michael]

In that case you are saying ICM are giving an advantage to labour, so are we doing even better?

[Richard Tyndall]

Nope,

just that there is something screwy with the ICM polls. They seem to magnify leads and make the separation between the parties much larger than they really are. For sure the Tories are leading but I suspect that on past records and results from local council by elections the lead is closer to the Yougov 6% than the ICM 10%.

This makes a big difference as the ICM poll would give a small Conservative majority and the Yougov one a hung Parliament. Something atht would be disastrous whatever wing of the Tory party you come from.

[Chris]

Richard,
The reason I used polls from a couple of days befor the election was because they are the only opinion polls which can be directly compared to election results. The issue with polls outside of election time is you can never be sure which one was right, in 2001 its perfectly possible that Labour had that big a lead, but then lost it, because there is no data to prove otherwise.

I have no real issue with yougov, I just sometimes question the way how its samples are drawn from the small number of people that are registered with them. I imagine the majority of yougov subscribers are politically minded, and hold a particular allegiance, which might explain why it never changes that much.

[Ben Redsell]

One swallow doesn't make a summer. As anyone out delivering today will know after last week. Good poll, will cheer the troops at just the right time. Will upset the Chancellor and give him bad headlines the day before his budget. But in the end, it is only one poll so far.

However if we were to see several like this by May/June then PM Brown will be in serious trouble, as will Sir Ming.

I agree with whoever said this will hide regional variations. I would think that the South East, Labour almost wiped off the face of the planet. However have we made the progress we need to make in the North of England, in Scotland, and in Wales? NO not yet.

On the right track, but still a long way to go.

Mind you, we're making faster progress than I thought we would, and the Captain is taking this ship in the right direction!

[Ben Redsell]

Just for a laugh put the Brown results in the Electoral Calculus website predictor. 180 seat majority with 5 Cabinet Ministers losing seats - John Hutton, Jack Straw, Ruth Kelly, Tessa Jowell, Alistair Darling.

Jon Cruddas would lose as well. Does this mean Gordon might not get a clear run at it? What would that mean for the Conservative Party strategy of taking down Gordon before he even takes office? An unknown would get a bounce, a snap election, and could get a majority. Major did it, so could the likes of Hutton or some such. Miliband maybe?

[Editor]

Thanks Ben. I enjoyed your post!

[RobC]

I doesn't suprise me that the polls suggest the Brown would do worse the Blair. I have thought for a very long time that middle class, middle England who voted for Blair would not vote for Brown. Although I'm not a fan of personality politics, for a lot of voters it is about the personalities of the leaders. In my mind Gordon clearly fails my 'do you fancy going for a quick beer?' test.

[James Maskell]

This poll has a strange conclusion. The public dont like our policies but they would vote for us to form a Government?

[ToMTom]

I bet The Mirror and The Guardian are just waiting now for That Oliver Letwin Moment when he lets the air out of the balloon....again !

[TomTom]

The public dont like our policies but they would vote for us to form a Government?

This reads: The public know Labour policies; don't want them. Anybody but Labour

[Sean Fear]

Mark, why would we want either David Laws or Vincent Cable to join the Conservative Party?

[Mark Fulford]

"The public dont like our policies but they would vote for us to form a Government?"

James, last time they liked our policies but wouldn't vote for us. At least the symmetry is logical ;-)

[Yet Another Anon]

In that case you are saying ICM are giving an advantage to labour, so are we doing even better?
It is advantageous for one of the big 2 main parties to be shown up with lower support than they actually have and for the other to be shown as doing better than they are because when a parties supporters think that their party is heading for a large victory then they will be less likely to turn up, but as happened in 1951 for Labour and 1992 for the Conservatives - if it looks like the other main party is heading for victory that motivates the supporters of the other to turn out and vote for it.

Increasingly it is looking like there might be a post victory downward blip for Labour when Gordon Brown takes over and that as it becomes clear that actually there aren't many radical departures from previous policy except that the general policies of what has become known as New Labour are intensified, and in fact Gordon Brown is it has become increasingly clear the driving force behind the economic and social policies of the Labour government with Tony Blair having been more focused on foreign affairs, many Labour supporters who thought they were getting John Smith II are likely to be dissapointed but then again some who want new policies of Labour since 1997 intensified and expanded he will probably be a welcome surprise over time.

[Yet Another Anon]

An unknown would get a bounce, a snap election, and could get a majority.
There is an unknown standing - John McDonnell, in the vastly improbable event he somehow won Labour would get a big bounce downwards and whenever the General Election was would be at risk of coming behind the Liberal Democrats.

Michael Meacher will probably say that Labour should not pay any attention to short term opinion polls because Michael Meacher is honest about such things, Gordon Brown's supporters and Tony Blair will also say this I imagine and Labour members will mostly take that view as will MP's, John McDonnell though no doubt will try to exploit such things and suggest that somehow there is massive support in the country for a revisit of Labour positions of the early 1980's.

[Twickenham Tory]

As a Twickenham activist, I have bitter experience of Vincent Cable's nasty campaigning tactics. The Lib Dems here a devious, lying bunch who use every dirty trick in the discredited Lib Dem campaigning

The Lib Dem council is levying punitive green taxes on family cars and putting up the council tax by 5%, the maximum allowed by Gordon Brown. Their election campaign was based on cutting council tax.

Cable has a personal track record of opportunism. He was a Labour councillor in Glasgow, defected to the SDP before joining the Lib Dems. Twickenham Tories would never work with him.

If Mark Fulford wishes to propose Cable's defection, he should come to our open primary on Thursday night and tell the members personally. I advise that Mark wears old clothes as the members would throw him in the Thames, just behind the venue.

[Mark Fulford]

"If Mark Fulford wishes to propose Cable's defection"

His defection would make good headlines but I’ll gladly bow to your local knowledge of the man and the impossibility of working with him.

[Yet Another Anon]

if it looks like the other main party is heading for victory that motivates the supporters of the other to turn out and vote for it.
I mean for their own party of choice.

If Mark Fulford wishes to propose Cable's defection, he should come to our open primary on Thursday night and tell the members personally.
He might be rather better discussing it with Vincent Cable first, one thing people tend to forget in these things that the defection won't happen unless the person in question decides they might be prepared to do this. I rather think that Vincent Cable has hopes of being the first Liberal Democrat Prime Minister.

[Scotty]

Another excellent poll from ICM in the Guardian but more importantly we are now within touching distance of 40% in the poll of polls, also shows us having a lead of nearly 10% over Labour.

[Ted]

Twickenham Tory - while I can completely understand your gripes against the LDs and their campaigning tricks two points to consider:

If (a big and unlikely if) Vincent Cable defected it would really hurt those very same LD activists

Politically it would help out every single Conservative Constituency Party in their campaigns against the LDs from Camborne and Redruth to Caithness.

That seems a small price to pay for Twickenham to have to then campaign on behalf of Cable.

[comstock]

I think I'll just give up and shoot myself now and have done with it :(

Crap weekend, crap day and now I come home to this.

Anybody else got any bad news for me? ;)

[Ted]

Comstock - things can only get better?

[comstock]

LOL @ Ted. They can indeed, mate :):D

[William Norton]

Comstock:Crap weekend, crap day and now I come home to this. Anybody else got any bad news for me? ;)

You've just been nominated for the Deputy Leadership of the Labour Party.

[comstock]

LOL @ William. :D I'm sure my appointment will push the poll ratings back the other way

Do I get two Jags as part of the salary and benefits package?

[Teck]

David C just gets better by the day - way ahead with the doctors' march in London; it was simply an unforgettable coup. Unless you're Pat H or Tony B!

[TomTom]

Posted by: Lordhawhaw | March 19, 2007 at 21:10

Lord Haw Haw had been a member of the British Union of Fascists under Mosley and as we know, was hanged for Treason

I hope this is not why you chose the moniker

[Alex Forsyth]

William Joyce ("Lord Haw Haw") was feared by his German colleagues at German Radio as a notorious hardline Nazi who would happily denounce any of them at the drop of a hat.

I think it is an entirely appropriate ID for this smug, ethics-free, Camerloon troll.