Does the Times/Populus poll vindicate the Balls approach to the deficit?

Sunder Katwala has details of this latest poll, which shows the public rejecting the Coalition's hell-for-leather deficit reduction policy:

Populus asked the public to identify which of three deficit reduction plans they agree with most, without identifying which party or group was advocating each position. Over a third of voters, 37 per cent, say they prefer Labour’s position [i.e. the Darling plan, taken forward by David Miliband - SP] to halve the deficit by the next election and deal with it over ten years.

The same number [37 per cent] say that protecting the vulnerable and keeping unemployment as low as possible should be bigger priorities than reducing the budget deficit.

Only one in five voters, 22 per cent, agree with the coalition plan to deal with the deficit by the next general election, in five years’ time.

Whose policy did Populus have in mind in asking about the second policy option, which prioritises jobs and protecting vulnerable people over the deficit?  I imagine supporters of Ed Balls will infer that Populus had in mind his approach.  So I expect to hear the following kind of argument now from them, in light of the poll:

The Balls plan, as this poll shows, chimes with the instincts of voters, even though it has no support to speak of in the media, and has only recently come to prominence, through the Balls campaign.  If, under these conditions, it level pegs with the Darling/David Miliband plan to halve the deficit, we should be confident that it would win the argument if adopted wholeheartedly by Labour.  Labour needs to have the courage to break out of the cosy rightwing consensus on the deficit, and reap the electoral rewards.

This response, however, is not yet justified, because Populus did not give people a choice between the Balls plan and the Darling/DM plan.  Both the first two options which Populus gave to respondents could be fair descriptions of the Darling/DM plan.  This is because, as Duncan Weldon, Hopi Sen, myself and others have all emphasised, the latter comes with an escape clause whereby deficit reduction can be frozen or slowed if the economy shows signs of going south.  David Miliband's plan does not prioritise the deficit over unemployment and vulnerable people - far from.  So it would be a mistake for Labourites to read from this poll that there is a head of steam building building behind the Balls strategy.  Indeed, that looks unlikely, because, as Sunny Hundal has shown us, other polling indicates that the public do believe that there is a need to tackle the deficit through at least some cuts.