A NEW poll has found that the Conservatives would become Westminster’s third party behind the SNP in a snap election. A poll of 28,000 people for The Telegraph found that if there were an imminent General Election then the Tories would be left with fewer seats than the SNP.
This would mean that SNP Leader, Stephen Flynn would become the leader of the opposition. The figures, from pollsters Find Out Now and Electoral Calculus, report Labour winning 49 per cent of the vote while the Tories would win just 23 per cent.
The style of polling used means results could be calculated in individual seats. The SNP would win 50 MPs according to results while the Tories would have just 45, down from 365.
Meanwhile, the new polling forecast that Labour would gain 306 seats, taking its total number of MPs to a record 509 out of 650 available.
Elsewhere, the Liberal Democrats would more than double their number of MPs from 11 to 23 while Plaid Cymru and the Greens would be unchanged at four MPs and one respectively.
The polling was carried out from January 27 to February 5.
On a seat-by-seat basis, 15 Cabinet ministers would lose their seats including Rishi Sunak, Foreign Secretary James Cleverly, Home Secretary Suella Braverman and former prime ministers Boris Johnson and Liz Truss as well as ex-chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng.
Chief executive of Find Out Now Chris Holbrook told the newspaper that the forecasts made “shocking reading for Conservatives”'
Martin Baxter, chief executive of Electoral Calculus, added: “The Conservatives have been far behind in the polls for the last four months, with little sign of improvement.
Casdon
Read the Daily Mail piece DaisyAnne, they are not biased to Labour (as if).
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11735381/Tory-woe-Labour-sails-victory-West-Lancashire-election.html
What are your own suggested answers to the questions you posed?
Perhaps you could just look up the thread a few posts Casdon.
DaisyAnne Sat 11-Feb-23 09:49:23
The aim of this exaggeration of the swing to Labour is to encourage would be Labour voters to be complacent about victory a stay at home.
If the Daily Mail actually wanted the Tories to lose (which is hardly likely) they would be advising Labour supporters to get out and vote Labour in all the constituencies where they have a good chance of winning and in the many other constituencies where the Liberal Democrats are the challengers they should vote LibDem. Here is a helpful list-
twitter.com/rolandhoskins1/status/1624313053679435776?t=TW9s7Q_VTjWrurScxugBHg&s=19
I don’t get this, because Labour voters are hardly going to be subscribing to GB News or the Daily Mail are they?
If you want your party to win, you are more likely to turn out to vote, that’s one of the big lessons from Brexit, which I think most of the electorate have grasped. That is exactly what Labour will be telling the electorate at the next election, and my prediction is there will be a big turnout - there always is at general elections when dissatisfaction runs high - the ones staying at home will be disenchanted Tories who can’t bring themselves to vote for Labour or the Lib Dems, or for that matter for the Reform Party, who I think will split the Tory vote too.
What are your answers to your questions DaisyAnne, I’d really like to know?
Here’s the ‘left’ take on the victory. Not much different.
www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/breaking-west-lancashire-election-blow-29175281
varian
The aim of this exaggeration of the swing to Labour is to encourage would be Labour voters to be complacent about victory a stay at home.
If the Daily Mail actually wanted the Tories to lose (which is hardly likely) they would be advising Labour supporters to get out and vote Labour in all the constituencies where they have a good chance of winning and in the many other constituencies where the Liberal Democrats are the challengers they should vote LibDem. Here is a helpful list-
twitter.com/rolandhoskins1/status/1624313053679435776?t=TW9s7Q_VTjWrurScxugBHg&s=19
The aim of this exaggeration of the swing to Labour is to encourage would be Labour voters to be complacent about victory a stay at home.
That and to persuade the voters who swung to Conservative in the last election and might be thinking of swinging back again but don't want too big a majority, not to change. I would guess Varian
Casdon
I don’t get this, because Labour voters are hardly going to be subscribing to GB News or the Daily Mail are they?
If you want your party to win, you are more likely to turn out to vote, that’s one of the big lessons from Brexit, which I think most of the electorate have grasped. That is exactly what Labour will be telling the electorate at the next election, and my prediction is there will be a big turnout - there always is at general elections when dissatisfaction runs high - the ones staying at home will be disenchanted Tories who can’t bring themselves to vote for Labour or the Lib Dems, or for that matter for the Reform Party, who I think will split the Tory vote too.
What are your answers to your questions DaisyAnne, I’d really like to know?
I answered this Casdon. Either explain what you want an answer to or read what I put (or both)
‘But I would still ask the question, Why was this article in this paper and what is their aim in it being there in such a hyped manner. I really do not think it was to help the Labour Party win, not do I think it was on a whim, with no intention.’
This DaisyAnne. I had read your previous posts, but to be honest I don’t understand what you’re trying to get across, what your own view is. All media has a bias, surely?
Can’t remember if on the radio or tv but the argument was that younger mps would have more drive, energy and new ideas.
In reply to Daisy Anne
ronib
Can’t remember if on the radio or tv but the argument was that younger mps would have more drive, energy and new ideas.
I'm not so sure that I want MPs with "new ideas" - well, not some of them anyway. 
1979 -97 most populated age bracket for mps was 40 - 49. Every election since 1997, the most populated age bracket was 50 to 59.
House of Commons library
I wouldn't mind some MPs who actually know how a national economy works... That would be novel...
MaizieD
I wouldn't mind some MPs who actually know how a national economy works... That would be novel...
Are you standing?
2019 election 10 per cent of mps have a degree in economics and 20 per cent in politics. 19 per cent of mps Oxbridge educated.
Oxford, Cambridge, LSE and Manchester top four universities attended by mps in 2019.
Maybe draw your own conclusions?
MaizieD
I wouldn't mind some MPs who actually know how a national economy works... That would be novel...
I wouldn't mind if both left and right, especially their extremes, did not insist theirs is the only way to understand an economy. Then, abracadabra, we are all meant to believe their running of the economy, seen through their particular rose-coloured economy glasses, will make even the most extreme of their views will work.
MaizieD
I wouldn't mind some MPs who actually know how a national economy works... That would be novel...
A message:
ronib
2019 election 10 per cent of mps have a degree in economics and 20 per cent in politics. 19 per cent of mps Oxbridge educated.
Oxford, Cambridge, LSE and Manchester top four universities attended by mps in 2019.
Maybe draw your own conclusions?
2019 election
10 per cent of MPs have a degree in economics
20 per cent in politics
19 per cent of MPs Oxbridge educated.
Oxford, Cambridge, LSE and Manchester top four universities attended by MPs.
Sorry to reorganise it ronib but it makes it easier for me to read. I can't extrapolate anything from that but perhaps someone cleverer than me will be able to.
Casdon
‘But I would still ask the question, Why was this article in this paper and what is their aim in it being there in such a hyped manner. I really do not think it was to help the Labour Party win, not do I think it was on a whim, with no intention.’
This DaisyAnne. I had read your previous posts, but to be honest I don’t understand what you’re trying to get across, what your own view is. All media has a bias, surely?
Sorry I haven't written so you can understand what I am saying Casdon. It may become clear over time - or not.
Daisy Anne sorry I didn’t think about presentation of the data. Just pointing out that some mps do have formal degrees in economics and politics . Bit puzzling really.
ronib
Daisy Anne sorry I didn’t think about presentation of the data. Just pointing out that some mps do have formal degrees in economics and politics . Bit puzzling really.
If you mean they have PPE degrees they really seem to mean sweet F A.
www.theguardian.com/education/2013/sep/23/ppe-passport-power-degree-oxford
MaizieD I was just looking up the syllabus for PEP at Oxford. For once we are in complete agreement. What a ragbag!
MaizieD
ronib
Daisy Anne sorry I didn’t think about presentation of the data. Just pointing out that some mps do have formal degrees in economics and politics . Bit puzzling really.
If you mean they have PPE degrees they really seem to mean sweet F A.
www.theguardian.com/education/2013/sep/23/ppe-passport-power-degree-oxford
It was in the Guardian, Maizie. All newspapers have their bias.
I certainly admit to wishing we had a team that spent more time running things than playing politics.
MaizieD
I wouldn't mind some MPs who actually know how a national economy works... That would be novel...
I suspect that some of them do know. However, it suits their agenda to peddle the household budget line.
growstuff
MaizieD
I wouldn't mind some MPs who actually know how a national economy works... That would be novel...
I suspect that some of them do know. However, it suits their agenda to peddle the household budget line.
I expect all those at the top of their party to have access to the very knowledgeable where the economy is concerned.
It's economics by ideology that is the issue. On one extreme, you have the "you haven't paid in enough so we can't do it, but we can tax wealth less and you may get a crumb out of that" lot who think the only way of growing the wealth of the country is to grow the wealth of individuals and profit makers who are already wealthy.
On the other extreme, those trying to convince us that just because we print or electronically create the money, we can spend what we like, even if it outstrips our own economic growth or expected growth. Also, we do not see the need to show the rest of the world what they need to know to support us. Everyone else, apparently, is too stupid to know the new Messiah has risen.
While the Conservatives have moved far enough right to accept their extremist's views (so far), I don't think Starmer, et al have moved as far to the left as much as their far-left economists would like to push them.
Which far-left economists? I assume you're back to your hobbyhorse about MMT. Economists who actually know how the economy works (ie not like a household budget) have a range of political views - some don't have party political views at all.
Ironically, Truss' and Kwarteng's big plan would have "created" more money than Labour ever will. The Conservatives have "created" more money over the last couple of years than any government in history. They're hardly "far left"!
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join the discussion, watch threads and lots more.
Register now »Already registered? Log in with:
Gransnet »Get our top conversations, latest advice, fantastic competitions, and more, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter here.
