ICM study on the Conservative Leadership

There is an ICM study in today's Guardian which, like the YouGov poll in last week's Spectator, tries to get round the fact that some of the Conservative leadership candidates are very unfamiliar to the public by giving respondents information about the candidates before asking questions.

The ICM study used a panel of 100 floating voters, so while it was much larger than a traditional focus group, it was still more of a qualitative poll than a quantative one. Panellists were drawn from floating voters who didn't vote Tory in 2005, and were shown silent film of three of the candidates, in a technique apparently drawn from US pollsters. Hence opinions were based on the candidates' appearance, mannerisms and so on, rather than their political message.

Levels of recognition followed the usual pattern, 66% of people recognised Clarke, compared to 25% who recognised Davis and only 4% who recognised Cameron.

Panellists thought that David Cameron came across as presentable, confident and trustworthy, but also bland, shallow and too young for the job. He was considered the most likeable of the three candidates and was seen by far as the candidate most likely to appeal to young people. About half the panel though Cameron came across as competent, which was less than Davis and Clarke, while a third though he was charismatic, putting him between Davis and Clarke.

Ken Clarke was seen as jovial, genuine, approachable, tough and experienced, and was seen as an effective potential Prime Minister. 38% thought he was charismatic, more than Davis or Cameron, and 56% thought he looked competent. However, on the downside he was also seen as arrogant and less trustworthy than the other two candidates.

Finally David Davis was seen as smart, trustworthy, confident, young-looking and the sort of person who would be able to see where the Conservative party was going wrong. He was seen as the most competent of the three candidates, but fell down on charisma - only 20% thought him charismatic - panellists thought that he was grey and that the public would have difficulty relating to him.

Putting it all together, the panel were asked their favourite choice as leader - 41% chose Clarke, with Cameron second on 31% and Davis on 26%. However, when asked who they thought was the worst candidate the answers were almost the same - 39% thought Clarke was the worst, followed by 30% Cameron and 23% Davis. Ken Clarke was therefore the most popular candidate, but also the most disliked. Davis was the least popular candidate, but also the least disliked.

Asked to rate the candidates as potential Prime Ministers there was barely any difference - David Cameron was top with an average rating of 5.7/10, but since Ken Clarke's average was 5.69 they were for all intents and purposes the same. Davis was on 5.58/10 - so again no real significant difference.

There was no voting intention question, but asked how they would lean if Gordon Brown was Labour leader and each of the three candidates were Tory leader Cameron came out best, with 50% saying they would lean towards the Tories, compared to 43% with Davis and 41% with Clarke.