I have seen a surprisingly well attended constituency party event in a constituency where they came fourth and I think the number of active party members may not be in proportion to the vote. Sometimes the vote is an anti-Labour or anti-SNP vote and while there is hard core of committed party members who will do some work when called upon on (rather like the Socialists) Labour and SNP also have a wider membership which includes fair weather friends. Theese will enthusiastically back their party when it is winning and will drift away when it is not.

The few remaining Conservatives are loyal and, in Scoland, they need to be to persevere.

I can’t be sure, but I would imagine that Con activists in Scotland are far from evenly dispersed. The problem is more likely to be the opposite – they are too concentrated in areas like Tayside and Grampian where they will be expending their efforts against an equally strong SNP machine instead of those weaker Lab or LD seats where their efforts would be better rewarded.

The quandary is that it would be wrong in democratic terms for Cons to abandon those areas where they were “strongest” in 2005 simply because their prime opponents are stronger still.

I agree with modt of your analysis, not least with your conclusion that there will be no great progress for Cons in Scotland. In fact I do not see any reason to believe that there wil be much change for the other parties either.

Labour and the LibDems are losing votes and the SNP are on the way up so I think that Con gains from SNP are very unlikely. There are only two anyway and there would need to be serious negative local issues for such an upset against the trend.

As I am In Argyll, I should be the first to see if your speculation about spending money in LibDem seats is right.

The Libdem MSP will certainly lose a proportion of his previous share of the poll. If it is a small percentage, it needs to brake unfeasably in favour of the Con for there to be a change of party and if it is a large proportion, and the share that goes to the SNP is greater than the Con share as I expect, then the greater the LibDem loss, the more likely an SNP win.

I think the C|on will still be in second place, but I wouldn’t bet on the winner.

Your point about the resources on the ground may be the determining factor. Con activists are too evenly dispersed. If none of the Ashcroft largesse is spent in Scotland, you can expect OLDNAT to tell you that this is a foretaste of a Con government’s lack of interest in, and unwillingness to spend money on Scotland.

Peter / OldNat..I think that this poll is , as you note, instructive not in what it tells us about Scottish opinion but in what it tells us about Scottish Tory strategy for the campaign. However, I think you may be misreading the purpose.

While it is widely accepted that Cons have a sizeable war chest to spend on the national campaign, it is not evident that the Party in Scotland is awash with cash – still less the manpower and on-the-ground resources to use that effectively. The difficulty Cons face is that in a tight contest, campaign expenditure would deliver more seats in England than in Scotland. There is also the separate problem in Scotland that the seats in which Tories have the strongest baseline in 2005 are mainly not Labour held.

The absence of a voting intention question is instructive. I suspect that the real purpose of this poll is not so much to test ability to influence voters, but more to determine whether it is worth devoting resources to target seats in Scotland.

The findings suggest that it is worth targeting SNP seats, but also, that there may be more mileage in targeting LD held seats – or at least those Lab or SNP seats where there is a sizeable LD vote to squeeze.

At the same time, one can discern key themes for a Scotland wide campaign to ensure that the overall Tory vote holds up – even in those seats which have not been targeted. This matters since Tories will want to demonstrate not just additional Scottish MPs, but also that they have a base across Scotland, not just in a handful of seats. That is especially important if the target seats campaign only delivers 2 or 3 seats rather than 5-8.

The next poll is going to be even more fascinating than normal! To have a party with public division on policy is bad enough, but a leadership challenge when the Tories have launched theirs on the basis of a “strong leader” – see the Scottish Tory poll details – is insane.