The article states that the Conservatives have not made the breakthrough to give them an overall majority. I find this very frustrating, as it would be oh so simple to do so. How about promising an end to headlines like ' failed asylum seeker on his way back to the midlands to claim more benefits from same dole office as before, after being deported once at a cost of £800.'
This article appeared in a midlands newspaper next to another stating that home help fees for our own pensioners are to rise by up to 40% in the same region.
One firm statement from the Tories that they will put an end to this foreign abuse of our welfare system would give them a majority to be proud of.

tlowe, birmingham, uk

In my country we've had a proportional electoral system for 65 years. That meant 40 years of hung parliaments and 65 years of governments that couldn't realize coherent policies because of vetos from the smaller parties inside their coalitions. Not very pleasant, actually.

In Germany it seems to work slightly better, but parties that collect less than 5% of votes have no representation in the Parliament. For the good of that country.

My impression is that, in the long run, the Anglo-Saxon electoral system works much better .

Marco, Venice, Italy

I think the decline in the polls shows how people feel that they could trust Tony, who has done a marvellous job steering Britain through some of the worst times in its history. Too many people do not consider the ideology but rely slavishly on facts and reality. And not enough credit is given to Gordon Brown. If the polls suggest he is going to be any less of a leader than Tony, then it is insulting. When have you ever known Gordon to say anything controversial or out of line, on any of the great subjects that have come up over the last ten years? Oh yes and I believe you will find that Gordon can fly as well.

EyeSee, MK, UK

Well Mr B'liar wanted a legacy, didn't he ?

CWW, Ipswich,

Ever since the hilariously inaccurate Polls of 1992 forecast a drubbing for John Major's government, I have been hoping someone will kindly explain the methodology involved.
It seems that here Populus took a random sample of 1500 adults, and "the results have been weighted to be representative . . ." - what?
I believe opinion polls should be banned for a clear month before elections as in some other countries, lest they influence the outcome in even the smallest way.

MikeM, St. Albans, England

A conspiracy theorist would conclude from the last few years of Blair's premiership that he has been deliberately brewing up a very nasty poisoned chalice for his successor.
When Blair finally goes, the lid on his 10 year old can of worms will have been completely removed to reveal failed policies on immigration/asylum, education,transport, Iraq.
The NHS is disintegrating, our armed forces stretched to breaking point, under-resourced and now a laughing stock, Europe's once best Pension system stealthily plundered by Commissar Brown of £ 100 billion.....the list goes on and on.

Rick, London, England

If we had unlimited political parties with influence in Parliament, there would be no body holding sufficient power to govern. As a result, there would be endless wrangling and discussion with nobody in a position to make decisions. Politically, there are far too many 'loose cannons' representing every crackpot interest going that, given too much power, would disrupt the ongoing process of governance to our detriment.

JP, London,

I think Blair faces what Bush faced: a no-confidence vote on his Iraq policy, and a no-confidence vote on his cronies.
It's unlikely the conservatives will do better, but people just vote for a change after a prolonged period of dissatisfaction.

Bill, Bristol, UK

Jon, that's nonsense. Why should "all the smaller parties have some seats in Parliament" unless they get enough votes?

I'm not saying that the current system is perfect: it isn't. But you should surely need significant voter support to merit a vote in Parliament. Otherwise, we could all become a small party and demand a seat.

David Hoggard, York, N. Yorks

The decline of New Labour under Blair is not from a real high. NL have been pulling in relatively low numbers in historical terms since their beginning. The real crisis is in the application of democracy itself. No one was ever enthusiastic about the NL project because it merely exploited the public's detachment from the party political system. It is because of this that it was bound to be something that created nothing on which to build a future. Blair's cynical, managerial style has led to an unprecedented decline in political debate and activity. The support for fringe parties represents a protest vote but does not constitute a rise in useful political thought. Only a return to ideas, ideals and principals can rescue politics from New Labour under Blair Brown or Cameron for that matter.

Dave Humphrey, Manchester,

Regardless of who leads the Labour Party after Blair departs Labour has has their day. Most of us are sinking under the weight of ever increasing taxes and personal debt is out of control. The Iraq war,above all, has tainted the whole administration. There is more than a strong possibility that we shall be in the midst of a deep recession when we go to the polls in 2009/10.
The party that engendered so much euphoria and hope within the nation when they came to power in 1997 has failed miserably. Good riddance to them.

rita, norwich,

Politicans are what they are-- by-products of their society.

It is a merry go round, Mr Blair will bow out and excuse me who is next ?

Really are human conditions curable as politicans would want us to
believe-- will Mr Blair be haunted by the body bags as a consequence
of the highly dubious and even enigmatic Iraq war ? Is it of any worth?

No doubt as a politican you are not allowed to have any feelings
otherwise the jobs would not be done regardless of which party
you belong to--in other words it is all the same as we are only
humans!

Ian, spore, spore

Jon your point is good...until we look at what would happen if every small party was elected...eternal co-alitions, where professional poltiicans carve up power leaving their manifestos far behind...in fact the same politicans could stay in power staying in different coalitions for their whole career! That is certainly not democratic and is a recipe for massive cronyism and corruption.

I admire your idealism...its just not rooted in reality! We need FPTP so we can kick the Government out when the power goes to their heads.

Gareth Wallace , London ,

Dissatisfaction with New Labour is not being reflected with an increase in popularity for the Conservatives, who continue to flatline at around 37-38%. I am not surprised that a third of voters fail to support the main parties; perhaps Mr Cameron shoud consider promoting policies that offer voters a real choice over Labour - lower taxes, reducing public expenditure and waste, an equitable solution to the West Lothian question - and he may be pleasantly surprised in the polls. Otherwise many potential voters will opt for UKIP, etc with all that implies for a hung parliament.

Mike, Carlisle, Cumbria

re Tony Blair.........

what was that song called?

if you gotta go go now....

well he's gotta go and he shouldgo now

How about a 'GO NOW' page on the web.........

Not forgeting something along the lines of

'A Gordon's (NOT FOR) me and a Gordon's not for you etc etc............

mike, oxford, England

I agree with Jon (Northumberland) above: this country really needs Proportional Representation. Having 2 parties in power, which are really only 2 sides to the same coin, is not a democracy - it is a bit of a farce. And this from a country that, like the USA (another 2 party/same coin state), takes such a strong-arm approach to forcing this pale "democracy" down the throats of other nations.

As we face issues relating to the consequences of our unsustainable way of living and of doing business, we should really face up to the fact that the Greens are probably the only party with a clue: they have been debating these issues over the last 20+ years, have well thought out and developed policies in a comprehensive portfolio and are genuinely committed to issues like social justice, democracy and sustainable living, issues that this 2 party state only pays lip service to.

Guess who I'll be voting for!

andy wolfe, London, UK,

The poll result is as expected. The decent citizens of this country have at last realised that:
This nulabor government is corrupt. The corruption is absolute, lead from the top down, includes the government institutions, and is out of control. Being rotten to the core and from the core, everything it touches it taints. Having neither the ability nor inclination to change, outside intervention is indicated.

martin brighton, sheffield, UK

Labour, Conservative, Liberal Democrats: mistake after mistake, year on year. Yet we still vote for them in our millions. And they say we evolve. How would Darwin explain that?

jj, Cambridgeshire, UK

Adieu Mr. Blair, adieu New Labour! Your only legacies will be the squandering of public money, an unjustified and illegal war, sleaze and incompetence in public office and untruths (lies in plain English!). Please make your departure sooner rather than later!

Rod Ballard, Leicester, Leicestershire

Jon,
We in Scotland, like MOST other EU contries have an electoral system that gives "small" parties representation in Parliament.

bryan clark, Stornoway, Scotland

I agree with Jon but why not develop this further and elect the right person for each post irrespective of the party they come from. The notion that one party with 40% of the votes takes power seems flawed. People should vote on individual policies not parties.

Chris, Bristol, UK

This poll shows us that large parts of the electorate are disillusioned with the opportunism and cynicism of our main parties and want more choice. People may be sick of Labour but what real alternative are the Tories or Lib Dems offering. We need real reform of our electoral system of our public services and honesty about what the NHS can be expected to do if it is to be funded as it is at present. None of the parties can do that. Lets have a new party committed to reform of the cosy consensus. Let's have it in time for the next General Election.

Paul Owen, Birmingham, UK

Any attempt to rebrand as "New New Labour" will fail; for 10 years, Brown has been part of the Blair team (or should that be vice-versa?)

Perhaps the two dislike each other. It's not relevant. They worked for, voted for, implemented the same policies. Neither resigned in protest.

We have had New Labour (washes whiter than white) once already. Isn't it time to switch brands?

Michael Bruce, Selby, Yorkshire

If we were a true democracy all the smaller parties would have some seats in parliament, this would make every vote count. In this age of choice why should people settle for 3 parties!!?? Its so out of date, for example just look at TV in the 70s and 80s most people had 4 tv channels but we now can choose to watch specialist channels that interest us, so why not political parties?

Jon, Northumberland, UK

The two party mindedness of British voters has been the downfall of good politics and good politicians. Scotland has been a labour stronghold, no matter what, there's still a touch of that left, but, thank God, it's weakening. Vote for the candidate, for the country, not the party!

Mo, LA, CA

The country is still overrun with stupid people and bought and paid for voters. After ten years of government corruption, waste and ruin many more rely on a Labour government to fund their lifestyle.
We would never have had this vile government for three terms if the voting system was straight.

David Thijm, Stourbridge, UK