ICM: Conservatives 12% ahead as Cameron's advantage over Brown widens

ICM monthly survey for The Guardian has none of the volatility of today's Ipsos-MORI poll.  The Tory advantage is steady at 12%.

Like other pollsters ICM finds David Cameron is increasing his advantage as favoured Prime Minister:

"David Cameron's personal lead over Gordon Brown is even bigger: 45% of those polled say he would make the best prime minister of the three main party leaders, compared with Brown's 24%. Cameron's 21-point lead over Brown is an increase of 13 points since the Guardian and ICM posed the same question in April 2008. About one in six Labour voters, 17%, say Cameron would be a better prime minister than Brown."

Comments

[Jack Stone]

If it wasn`t for David Cameron I just wonder what the position would be. One of the weaknesses of the Tory party is there leadership team and I think that when people start to judge them as a potential government that could make people think twice about there readiness for government.

[Malcolm Dunn]

An interesting if typically moronic take Jack on a poll that if it were repeated at a general election would result in aTory landslide.
As it happens I think David Cameron does take too prominent a role with the media. He is a huge asset but the fact that there has been so little coverage of Hague, Grayling, Gove, Fox etc needs to be rectified.

[Cleethorpes Rock]

I believe in another poll, our frontbench spokesmen led their Labour counterparts in each area, with the largest leads being enjoyed by Ken Clarke and William Hague. That would suggest that these two should be playing a far greater role.

[joshuwahwah]

Remember that Labour only need 36% to win the next election. It's too close to call.

[ross.warren]

Unchanged or up or ,this is looking like a solid if still disappointingly small lead for now. The Tory front bench are doing somethings very well but have yet to really start campaigning. I see the Pope is being totally useless again. That American president is a real problem for us in some ways. I do worry that Labour might benefit from a false dawn financed on all the freshly minted money. This is why our lead is still not enough and we all know how volatile things can be. 42% of Americans think Obama is wrong.

[StevenAdams]

Jack Stone, did you take some kind of ostrich course in politics? I mean... head in the sand just doesn't come close to explaining some of your posts.

I mean, what is it about the top team that you think is going to turn over the public opinion? Is it Harriet Harman's glowing reputation compared to William Hague? Perhaps you think that Hazel Blears is held up on a pedestal in the electorate's affections? No, no... it must be Lord Mandelson – yes, the public just love him. Ah no, I'm being ridiculous, it must be Jacqui Smith or perhaps the Miliband duo. Yes, you're right Jack... Labour's team are widely adored and Hague, Clark, Osborne, Lansley, Grayling etc are loathed. Yes, that must be right.

[Alexander Drake]

I knew John Howard was lost here in early 2007 when Kevin Rudd drew even - or ahead - in the "preferred PM" question in the polls. It's a polling question that usually favours the incumbent as they can be supported by the prestige of the office.

Even allowing for the difference between asking for the "best" PM and one's "preferred" PM, if Cameron is leading on this question by twenty points - then surely it's all over. That's a devastating figure for the Government.

[John Broughton]

The problem is that we should be polling at 50% plus when the record of this incompetent government is the badge that Brown wears.

The big question is "why are we stuck in the 40s?" I have several suggestions but I'd like to see what others think.

[Geoff Buckley]

Iwonder what all the unforunate folks who have bee repossesed feel warmly towards The Great clunking fist Brown right now > Geoff the Bear

[Anon R]

Talk is about Lib Dems in government ! In Coalition . Deputy PM - Clegg, Chancellor- Cable, Home Sec - Huhne, Foreign Sec - Ashdown, Attorney General - Carlile - and that;s just the start. Looks the strongest team to me !!

[Steve Tierney]

John Broughton at 21:22
>>The big question is "why are we stuck in the 40s?" I have several suggestions but I'd like to see what others think.<<

While thats an interesting question its been debated here so many, many times.

The UKippers will say its because we wont say "no" to Europe.

Some trolls will suggest its because "Cameron hasn't sealed the deal" or that "George Osborne isn't very good" (though I notice that particular complaint has gone much more quiet lately.)

Personally, I just think that Labour has a fairly substantial base that are just too obstinate to ever vote another way. I was talking to an intelligent, thoughtful Labour supporter at the weekend and he said: "I'd never vote Tory. I couldn't. I've said too many things over the years... it would make me look a fool." When I asked how he might vote next time then, he said: "I probably wont." But if a poll asked him his opinion he'd proclaim "Labour" same as he always has.

You also need to bear in mind that the masses of "I'll never work", "the country owes me a living" and "I'm getting fat on the public sector" folk are a sizeable client group who aren't going to vote for a party that can see they are issues which need addressing.

In the end, I think I'm in the same camp as the UKippers, though not so extreme. The big vote we could get, but aren't getting, is the Euro-sceptic crowd. All we need to do, literally, to be sure of most of that vote is promise the Lisbon Referendum, whether it has been ratified or not. There, I suspect, is another 6% or so in a flash.

[Peter Buss]

In fairness to Jack Stone, he does make a valid point. David Cameron is in my view without doubt our biggest asset and frankly without him I think we would be stuck in the low to mid 30's. he is the first leader we have had for yonks who is seen as a credible PM. I am amazed that, despite that fact he so frequently gets castigated on this Board.

We do have genuine talent on our front bench but I do have to say (apart from the much maligned George Osbourne) where were they when David Cameron was away. Did they step up to the plate. Frankly No. They were distinguished by their absence. Can't blame it all on the Media - Campbell would never have allowed that media absence to develop with New Labour - and neither should we.

All in all though a good poll as underpinning these figures are 2 key indicators essential for electoral success ( although the first was absent in May 79 when Callaghan was consistently rated ahead of Maggie as the best person to be PM), namely that Cameron is way ahead of Brown personally and nearly 70% reckon its time for a change. A powerful mesage indeed.

[joshuwahwah]

'All we need to do, literally, to be sure of most of that vote is promise the Lisbon Referendum' This will NEVER EVER happen, fact!

[Freddy]

This is a very good poll, especially Cameron's ratings and 69% saying it is time for a change. The 12% lead over Labour is to be expected bearing in mind that Cameron, our greatest asset, has been on compassionate leave.

I wish DC all the best in holding Brown to account. As I've written on another thread he is the best party leader we've had since Maggie.

[Freddy]

@Anon R

Are you joking or are you serious?

[pp]

I think public mistrust of politicians means that many will vote for the tories if they think it is needed for them to win (or to depose brown), but would run a mile if they thought their vote would contribute to a tory (or any parties) landslide.

Many "get rid of brown" fans may be thinking of voting against labour for the firt time in their lives -- but if they don't think their vote is actually needed they may well rather abstain.

Regarding the top team -- they are unproven, that is a feature of being an opposition! -- but it would be very hard to do worse than labour, so they really don't have too much to prove.

[Steve Tierney]

>>Anon R<<
Irony, I trust?

I don't think there's more than a handful of Libdem MPs I'd count on to tie their laces successfully, let alone into actual government.

Most certainly not "nationlise anything that moves" Vince Cable or "I'd love to be David Cameron but I have no charisma" Clegg.

[oldrightie]

I think that when people start to judge them as a potential government that could make people think twice about there readiness for government.

Word for word that said about Blair's Labour Party. That was, however proven to be true.

[Steve Foley]

"I see the Pope is being totally useless again."

Ross, what has the Pope got to do with the Conservative 12% lead in the Polls? Also what is so useless about him? I am not a Roman Catholic but so far I am quite happy about what he is doing although there are some points of Doctrine and Dogma where I would disagree with him.

[Anders]

This is rather good for David Carmeron. For obvious reasons he has been out of the news, while Gordon Brown has had near blanket coverage but it still 12 points behind.

I do believe Cameron will be the Prime Minister next year, albeit with a narrow majority. Brown's only hope is that the economy will have recovered sufficently by this time next year and that with low inflation the price of living will be low. Against him though will be the 'Time for a change' mood with the public after 13 years of Labour in power.

However whoever wins the next election will have two do to highly unpopular things very quickly to decrease the massive Government debt, first - Raise taxes. Second - Cut public spending.

Because the economy is in such a mess and debt is so enormous, tough decisions will have to be made.

[Oberon Houston]

I'd expect that we may be squeezed after the G20, as we always are after a Brown publicity stunt, just like the phony leadership launch, re-launch, general election and bank bailout. The public are increasingly aware that Brown is a fake, so I foresee more sawtooth polls, but with us increasing our lead on trend.

[Onthejob]

Could anyone have named the Labour Shadow Cabinet in 1994 who was not

a) A member of Labour
b) A member of Parliament (though this may be debatable whether they could anyway)
c) A political Geek
d) A member of the Labour shadow Team

I happen to agree that perhaps too much emphasis is on DC but then looking back to the 1990s and the 1980s it was the same with Labour in the 1980s it was like having labour campaign for us (thank you for your help mr Kinnock and foot)

A good lead for the moment ties in with us heading for victory and i htink if Brown trys to do to many givaways at the next budget he will get crucified by the press as being irresponsible and bribing the British Public.

69% of the nation in this poll have said they feel it is time for a change that is a high number of people who have had enough of labour

[StevenAdams]

For clarity, I agree that DC is our greatest electoral asset, I'm just stunned by the range of excuses found to explain away the Con lead, poll after poll after poll.

I'm inclined to agree with Oberon; we'll see more sawtooth polls as the local/EU campaign impacts, as Brown and DC step up the pace toward the end of the year, and as the conflicting inputs of govt borrowing vs. depression each impact different regions and demographies differently.

However, as he says, on trend the Cons lead will strengthen as pensions and investments (including houses and cars) devalue and jobs continue to flee the economy at a rate of knots.

[Jack Stone]

Onthe job.People may want change but they will not make a leap in the dark which is what they are being asked to do by the Conservatives with there lack of policies and no vision for the country. Its like asking people to cross a road blindfolded.

[rascalrob]

I agree with a lot of the statements on here, the shadow cabinet does need to be more prominent but I think they are being hamstrung lately by The BBC acquiescing to Labour's demands and not allowing members of the shadow cabinet to appear on the same programme as ministers. The tories have two of the biggest hitters in parliament in Clarke and Hague and they should be looking to maximise their exposure, Clarke in particular. Whenever he does appear he should make an offer to Mandelson to appear on aprogramme together so they can debate the issues as they're unable to do it at parliament.

I'm not sure what category I'd fit into that ICM poll. I voted Labour in '97 and now bitterly regret it. I would vote Tory in the upcoming elections but as I'm based in the Rhondda I'm afraid it would be a vote wasted, so unfortunately I'm forced to vote tactically so I'll be voting Lib Dem (Will never vote for the nationalist even if theyy're second largest party in the area).

I've a feeling the poll lead will widen another five points as the recession (or is it a depression yet?) bites and Brown will be ousted by his own party before the election. His personal rating is -22 and in the present climate is down.

[rascalrob]

Sorry, should have read -25 rating for Brown and the only way is down in the present climate.

[Mark Williams]

"17% of Labour voters say Cameron would be a better prime minister than Brown" !!!

[Serf]

Its that old lack of policies canard again.

The Conservative party has outlined is principles very well I think. We know what the priorities of a David Cameron led government would be. The details as always will wait for closer to the election.

Imagine if we had written a manifesto last year. Everyone would have been happy that we had policies, but by now we would have needed to rip it up and start all over again.

[Super Blue]

Quite right, serf, but Draper-Stone doesn't have the vision to spot them.

[Steve Foley]

Ross, having only heard it this morning on the Today Programme on Radio 4 I can now understand your remark about the Pope although it has absolutely nothing to do with the Tory lead in the opinion polls.

As it has no connection with the topic I will only say on that issue than that I agree with you Ross that the Pope was wrong in saying that issuing condoms spreads HIV/ Aids as these are one of the best ways to protect against catching this disease. I would assume that this fallacious statement is driven by his Church's long-standing opposition to Contraception, and that is one of the issues, along with Abortion and Euthanasia which I also favour, where I totally and uttrely disagree with the Pope and the RC Church. There are other matters however where I find myself in agreement with Pope Benedict XVI.

However, back on topic, the OTT leads shown recently giving 100 plus majorities for the Conservatives at the next Election seem to be working themselves out of the system and more realistic polls showing 30 to 50 seat majorities are now appearing.

One point that must be emphasised is that complacency is our greatest enemy. A Tory win at the next election is not "low hanging fruit" but will need to be worked for. The Euro Elections in June of this year should give a far better indication of how the Parties stand and of particular interest will be the effect of UKIP and BNP intervention.

[David Belchamber]

"The Conservative party has outlined its principles very well I think. We know what the priorities of a David Cameron led government would be. The details as always will wait for closer to the election".

Although I agree with you on the whole, Serf, I do not think that the Conservatives principles are well enough known. I take a keen (amateur) interest in politics but I could not easily define what our current position on the EU is, nor on transport and much more important what our plan is to guide the country out of its present economic mess.

I believe it would be of interest to build up over the next few weeks on ConHome the guiding principles (not detailed policies) that we would like to see embodied in the eventual manifesto.

One example would be to promise to raise the level of personal income tax to subsistence level, so that low earners are not taxed on income that then has to be replaced by benefits because they don't have enough taxed income to live on.

[Jack Stone]

Superbore. Don`t know who Draper stone is but there you go. The Conservative party`s principles are to do nothing while people lose there jobs and there homes. They are the do nothing with no ideas party nothing more, nothing less.

[John Broughton]

Is Jack Stone a nom de plume for one G Brown? Brown of the headless chickens in the bunker party.

[Roger Clark]

"The big question is "why are we stuck in the 40s?" I have several suggestions but I'd like to see what others think."

Well you have obviously got the poison Thatcher legacy to contend with. Now the funny money "economy" is sunk, there's not a lot left is there? And that's your fault in large measure. I agree Zanu have been even worse in many ways.

But what I want to know is

Why is "Dave" a supporter of the Communist UAF?

http://isupporttheresistance.blogspot.com/2009/03/hammer-attack-on-liverpool-bnp.html

http://isupporttheresistance.blogspot.com/2009/02/uaf-police-and-tuc.html

[Roger Clark]

"Remember that Labour only need 36% to win the next election. It's too close to call.

Posted by: joshuwahwah | March 17, 2009 at 21:08"

That would be around 1 in 5 of the eligible vote, again.

But no doubt a 1 in 5 Tory elective dictatorship would do nicely

[Super Blue]

John Broughton,

I don't think so - Brown can spell although neither of them can add up. Perhaps they just share a bunker and, next month being April ...............

[Marc]

In the end though how many of Labour 30% are actually going to bother to vote? Even if 90% vote the share of the vote is suddenly down to 27%.

I would say the Covservatives have a very good chance of getting the full whack of the 40% down the polling booth plus some.

Suddenly the lead is looking a lot bigger and a landslide on the '97 scale a likelyhood.