What lies behind the Tories' poll bounce?

The Tories surge past Labour in the polls after Cameron's rejection of a new EU treaty.

Suddenly, after remaining static for months, the polls are moving again. The latest Reuters/Ipsos-MORI survey, carried out after the EU summit, puts the Tories in the lead for the first time this year, with support for Cameron's party rising seven points to 41 per cent and support for Labour falling two points to 39 per cent. Similarly, the latest daily YouGov poll has the Tories two points ahead of Labour, the first time they've led with that pollster since December 2010. Labour's lead, which has stood at five to six points for the last month, has evaporated.

Of course, correlation does not equal causation, but it certainly seems as if Cameron's EU stance has benefited his party. This may seem surprising, since, as polling by Ipsos-MORI regularly shows, only four per cent of voters regard Europe as one of the most "important issues" facing the country. And yet it can still shift polls. There are at least two plausible reasons why. Firstly, for a minority of voters, Europe clearly is very important. The rise in support for the Tories has coincided with a revealing fall in support for Ukip. For a period, with ratings as high as seven per cent, Nigel Farage's party was snapping at the Lib Dems' heels but the latest YouGov poll has them on just three per cent. Britain's eurosceptics are returning to the Conservative fold.

Secondly, as UK Polling Report's Anthony Wells points out, Cameron's bulldoggery (and the favourable headlines it garnered) may have changed perceptions of the PM himself and his leadership. He notes: "[I]f it makes people think David Cameron is a stronger leader who stands up for the country it may improve perceptions of him across the board." Cameron's personal approval ratings remain higher than Miliband's, a fact Tory strategists have continually drawn comfort from. As I've noted before, leadership ratings are often a better long-term indicator of the next election result than voting intentions. Labour party frequently led the Tories under Neil Kinnock, for instance, but Kinnock was never rated above John Major as a potential prime minister.

It remains to be seen whether the Tory surge hardens into a permanent advantage. But the fragility of Labour's lead has been exposed for all to see. Miliband's party will still likely walk to victory in tomorrow's Feltham by-election but an unusually strong Conservative showing would raise further questions for Labour.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

@Simon_Cullen via Twitter
Show Hide image

All 27 things wrong with today’s Daily Mail front cover

Where do I even start?

Hello. Have you seen today’s Daily Mail cover? It is wrong. Very wrong. So wrong that if you have seen today’s Daily Mail cover, you no doubt immediately turned to the person nearest to you to ask: “Have you seen today’s Daily Mail cover? It is wrong.”

But just how wrong is the wrong Mail cover? Let me count the ways.

  1. Why does it say “web” and not “the web”?
  2. Perhaps they were looking on a spider’s web and to be honest that makes more sense because
  3. How does it take TWO MINUTES to use a search engine to find out that cars can kill people?
  4. Are the Mail team like your Year 8 Geography teacher, stuck in an infinite loop of typing G o o g l e . c o m into the Google search bar, the search bar that they could’ve just used to search for the thing they want?
  5. And then when they finally typed G o o g l e . c o m, did they laboriously fill in their search term and drag the cursor to click “Search” instead of just pressing Enter?
  6. The Daily Mail just won Newspaper of the Year at the Press Awards
  7. Are the Daily Mail – Newspaper of the Year – saying that Google should be banned?
  8. If so, do they think we should ban libraries, primary education, and the written word?
  9. Sadly, we know the answer to this
  10. Google – the greatest source of information in the history of human civilisation – is not a friend to terrorists; it is a friend to teachers, doctors, students, journalists, and teenage girls who aren’t quite sure how to put a tampon in for the first time
  11. Upon first look, this cover seemed so obviously, very clearly fake
  12. Yet it’s not fake
  13. It’s real
  14. More than Google, the Mail are aiding terrorists by pointing out how to find “manuals” online
  15. While subsets of Google (most notably AdSense) can be legitimately criticised for profiting from terrorism, the Mail is specifically going at Google dot com
  16. Again, do they want to ban Google dot com?
  17. Do they want to ban cars?
  18. Do they want to ban search results about cars?
  19. Because if so, where will that one guy from primary school get his latest profile picture from?
  20. Are they suggesting we use Bing?
  21. Why are they, once again, focusing on the perpetrator instead of the victims?
  22. The Mail is 65p
  23. It is hard to believe that there is a single person alive, Mail reader or not, that can agree with this headline
  24. Three people wrote this article
  25. Three people took two minutes to find out cars can drive into people
  26. Trees had to die for this to be printed
  27. It is the front cover of the Mail

Amelia Tait is a technology and digital culture writer at the New Statesman.