The Betting Markets move further to Davis?
September 25th, 2005Tory leadership betting: RED Davis, BLACK Clarke, BLUE Cameron, GREEN Fox
-
But what if the rule changes are rejected?
With the Labour Conference, the Scottish by-elections and the announcement on Tuesday of whether the Howard changes to the Tory leadership rules have gone through it’s the biggest week in British politics since the General Election in May.
For the Tory leadership our latest chart shows further a improvements in the implied probability of David Davis winning based on the latest best betting prices.
It certainly looks as though the momentum is with the Shadow Home Secretary and the view of the other contenders, as the Observer reports this morning, is that Davis will benefit most if Tuesday’s decision on how the leader is chosen puts the final say in the hands of MPs. This is a complete reversal of the view at the start of this contest when it was thought that Davis would fare better if it went out to the membership at large.
-
We had thought that the move to Davis in the past few days was based on leaks about how the rule change ballot was going. However the amount of money that’s been required to shift his price has been very small - just £8,000, for instance, in a week has been traded on him on Betfair.
The big factor will be what happens in Blackpool next week. What will be mood of the party as one candidate after another set out their stalls to delegates? Opinion polls could also be crucial in shaping views particularly if there are more surveys showing Clarke convincingly ahead in both the country and amongst Tories.
Blackpool also gives a chance to the other contenders - Liam Fox, Sir Malcolm Rifkind and David Cameron - to put some traction into their campaigns. They must be hoping to make a speech that resonates with the party because this could possibly make a difference.
Davis’s big challenge is that he is still relatively unknown amongst the general public and the last time the party chose someone like that they ended up with Ian Duncan Smith.
Davis’s strong point is the support he has managed to garner amongst the party’s MPs - though whether they will do in private what they say in public is a different matter. This could be crucial if the rules remain unchanged because then the parliamentary party ballot to select which two contenders go on to the final ballot of members. Anti-Clarke factions could work to block him out of this even if the polls continue to show that he is the first choice amongst the membership.
It is hard to call against Davis but he still has a lot of work to do.
Tory leadership betting prices
Conventional bookmakers best price: Davis 8/15: Clarke 9/4: Cameron 13/2: Fox 16/1: Rifkind 25/1 Betfair betting exchange: Davis 0.47/1: Clark 4/1: Cameron 12.5/1: Fox 14.5/1: Rifkind 47/1 BinaryBet spread market. Davis 59-66: Clarke 19-25: Cameron 6-10 Fox 5-8: Rifkind 1-3
MessageSpace Advertising
It all depends how far he is ahead among Mps though. The problem for Ids, and a fundamental flaw in the current rules, is that he wasn’t required to get close to a Majority of votes among Mps. As a result when questions about his leadership surfaced it was easy for them to remove him - it is not very difficult for any individual to vote against, in a confidence motiom, someone who they never supported in the first place. To let this situation recur, in the circumstances (unlike last time) where there is a clear choice of Mps, and Vote for someone who has marginal support would be stupid, and a powerful argument in Davis’ favour with the membership (if it even got that far).
Hi Mike,
You raise a very interesting point in your introduction that I have been giving a lot of thought to myself.
KC has (unfortunately from my perspective)had some success convincing some of the grass root membership that “only I can win - the opinion polls say so”.
How much success is anyones guess and I would say still nowhere near enough. If the rule change is rejected, time will tell.
As a safeguard against KC though, I’m increasing inclined to wonder whether the MP’s wouldn’t in any event ‘do a Portillo’ on him to prevent him getting into the final two that are put before the membership.
Reading these Boards and talking to people it seems to me that only Rifkind of the current contenders would lean towards KC if and when he is eliminated, presumabley a good number of his supporters might
similarly switch allegiance.
Whilst Camerons ‘block’ is difficult to call,I’m increasingly inclined to think he is moving ever more strongly towards DD. The barbed attack on him by Berkow on TV a little earlier reinforces my suspicion that he isn’t going to do a deal with KC.
With an electorate of 198, you only need 67 to make the final.
At this point in time, I simply don’t see where KC’s 67 are going to come from.
If, just if, it does pan out this way, and DC is promised a key role in the DD team and decides to pull out, could it fall to Liam Fox to act (either by design if onboard with DD or genuinely)as the spolier ?
I don’t think he would win, or expect to, but it could make trading on him at 16/1 a profitable punt ?
Mr Smithson, your remark about Sir Malcolm is exactly what I have been arguing (in the face of much derision I have noted) for some time. He is a powerful orator and projects the right image to our party of a strong, uncontroversial, safe pair of hands who can engage the electorate tired of the gimmickery of the socialists and rightly suspisious of their liberal fellow-travellers.
I only wish that we had the sort of electoral arrangements that meant that our vote could be counted; after all, if First Past The Post is good enough to elect our MPs, its good enough to present our members with a field of which they will select the “first among equals”.
Sadly the quality of our parliamentary party has been much diminished since 1997 and we continue to have to suffer the consequences of the vanity of a rump of delusionals.
[3] Surely, Nuala, the “quality” of the Parliamentary Conservative Party has increased beyond all measure with the return of Sir Malcolm for Kensington & Chelsea :). I’m only saddened that Sir Julian Critchley is no longer with us, unless perhaps you’ve been talking to him via the ouija board…
Nuala - I agree with you regarding all of Sir MRs qualities but he is a leading figure, not a leader. I would like to see Rifkind playing a major role in the next shadow cabinet, but as what? He has the qualities to be shadow foreign (but I suspect wouldn’t want to), shadow chancellor (but would have to take on Hague, Willetts, Osbourne, Fox et al), shadow home (the poisioned chalice role in my view, because I’m not so sure that DD would let go of that portfolio), shadow leader of the house (rather a political backwater) … where would you like to see him placed if (shock ‘o’ shocks) not elected leader?
DD, if elected leader, has the best position in terms of shadow cabinet talent yet. Fox will have matured by then, and Willetts has really come forward. Plus if people like Maude, Green, Kirkbride are willing to serve also, it could be a fight to get into the top team again.
In terms of quality, the size of one’s parliamentary party isn’t necessarily the deciding factor. There are thousands (sic) of Labour MPs yet I believe this has been the least talented government since 1923. Blair’s MPs are so talentless he’s having to recycle (e.g. Blunkett, Mandelson, Harman et al). Why? Well the MPs who won their seats in the 97 landslide were excellent candidates, many of them very good and assid. constituency MPs but not cabinet material. And beware Tories, for many of your 05 intake are the same. They can organise a petition to save a local Post Office (maybe one the LibDems want to privatise) but can they juggle with the nation’s debt-to-GDP ratio?
If Davis gets, say, 80 votes in the first round and nobody else gets more than 30odd then how can anyone make a realistic case for him to not be leader? That is the big question if the new rules don’t go through and the old ones stay in case. And I don’t see how you can discount that scenario. Davis is already miles ahead on declared supporters, and his team seem to be engaging in a strategy of building up the momentum declaring 3 or 4 more every few days (another 4 this morning).
I think Sir Malcolm should stay in his present position if/when DD becomes leader. Pensions is one of big issues we need to nail labour on. The raid on pension funds needs talking up especially as it is now affecting people coming to retire. The sudden way it was implemented instead of phasing it out needs to be seized upon (a few years too late but that’s the nature of pensions policy). Sir Malcolm could do a real service by highlighting this more.
Regarding other key portfolios, Hague as shadow chancellor if he’ll serve. Perhaps with Osbourne with him as he’s made a promising start to his surely shortlived tenure as shadow chancellor. Willetts may well be offered shadow home office. Fox may well stay where he is as well as Cameron in Education where again we can lay blows on the government and we need a good performer. Health needs a fresh face so perhaps Damien Green.
6-”Blair’s MPs are so talentless he’s having to recycle (e.g. Blunkett, Mandelson, Harman et al).”
I don’t think he keeps recycling them becuase the others are talentless, but just because when he likes someone, he wants to have him/her around him.
“Well the MPs who won their seats in the 97 landslide were excellent candidates, many of them very good and assid. constituency MPs but not cabinet material.”
As you says, it’s not only a Labour problem, many tory and libdem MPs are not cabinet material.
Them in the 1997 landslide even some people who should have never been MP managed to get elected.
9-ops, “then”, not “them” at the beginning of the last poragraph.
8.”Perhaps with Osbourne with him as he’s made a promising start to his surely shortlived tenure as shadow chancellor.”
Promising start? It seems he has completely failed to do something memorable (or at least something someone will remember) so far.
I remember his first Commons appearance as Shadow Chancellor and Brown was amused by him (and more annoyed by Lynn Jones trying to speak than Osbourne). Then, what has he made?
He proposed to take in considereation the flat tax. Well, I suppose Labour is hoping that the tories will adopt it and it’ll have the same effect it had in Germany.
7 Alex - I think and hope your analysis is correct.
How indeed ?
Who are latest four to back DD?
Did anybody see Liam Fox and Tony Blair on Andrew Marr’s showing this morning. The former seems to have put on a lot of weight and did not seem very much at ease with himself. Blair, on the other hand, was in fine form and the idea that he might be about to stand down seems remote. It is hard seeing any of the Tory contenders, apart from Clarke, dealing with him.
Davis is very smart but has little presence.
I am trying to understand this love of Clarke.
Mike why do you think Clarke is the only one to deal with Blair? (I accept Fox is not up to it)
8. I don’t see the point of emphasing the pension fund raid, unless the Tories are actually prepared to reverse the cut in Pension Dividend Tax Credit. Are they ?
14 - It is very simple. Opinion polls (although they still show Clarke losing heavily, and one would have thought he would have less “room for improvement” than others).
12 - One of the Sundays (Telegraph or Times) said David Lidington +3.
13 Sorry Mike - it’s your page and it’s only right that you should have the final word, but I totally disagree with your assessment.
13. Blair is gaing weight fat too, Mike. And he’s not aging well.
Just saw Sky News with Adam Boulton from Brighton.
Some comments:
-John Reid is a useless buffoon (he’s not even funny). Hope he’ll stand for the leadership and he’ll be trashed.
-Is John Prescott real? The body, the head, the neck (or lack of it)….. all seem so “unreal” like he has just came out from an horror movie or a cartoon.
- It’s now clear to the whole Britain that Katy Clark wants to talk about policies (how many did she mention this word? At least 5 or 6 in a single reply). At the end she refused to endorse Brown or someone else.
- Does Michael Cashman think he’s still on “Eastenders”? It seems he was acting while answering the questions. (but at least he was talking slowly and so it was easy, for me, to understand him).
18.” Blair is gaing weight fat too”
??
??
It should be “Blair is gaining weight too”
The thought of the next General Election being between Brown, Davis and Kennedy fills me with horror. I would rate none of them at more than 5/10 for presence and charisma; 4/10 for their public speaking abilities and 4/10 for their abilities on TV. Blair, by comparison, I would rate at 8 or 9 on each count.
But perhaps one of them might get over 3/10 for honesty!
20 - how about their ability to run the country?
13/17 Mike/TB. Mike’s got this one pegged. DD has got as much presence as a taylors dummy. To think he’ll best PM Brown is laughable, and DD for all his high profile in the media in recent years has barely stirred the electorate beyond bored indifference and frankly is only beaten to first place as Conservative most likely to induce stupefacation by Rifkind and Cameron …. and it’s a damn close run thing.
Does anyone know the format of the Conservative National Convention on Tuesday.
It still looks most likely that the rule change will be approved by approx 60% - ie less than a two thirds majority.
If this happens will there be scope at the meeting to put forward a new proposal of a 50% MPs : 50% members Electoral College for the fianl? If this were to be put forward I would have thought it would get almost 100% approval.
This is crucial because I would have thought that a 50:50 Electoral College would be enough to make Davis a near certainty to win - ie if Davis could get say 60% of MPs’ votes in the final he would then only need 40% of members to win the Electoral College.
20. Mike Smithson, maybe the point is that a PM should rule the country and proposing policies and not only being good on TV or having charisma.
I would prefere to have a strong political PM than someone who looks good on TV and has charisma.
My PM has charisma and is able to use TV very well, could I send him to you to fight the 2009 election?
25 - “My PM has charisma and is able to use TV very well, could I send him to you to fight the 2009 election?”
Perhaps Tony Blair has already thought of this and is going to try nominating his successor
12 - Plus Mark Field and Nigel Evans.
26. If he’ll lose next year election, he could be free for 2009.
I would happily take Brown in exchange.
Just imagine. An election where the primary issue isn’t presentation and how they are on TV, because they’re all useless. We might get some serious debates on policy! Heaven
Pie in the sky though…
29. No, Alex, it’s impossible. The next stage is that you’ll have Graham Norton and Davina McCall as PM candidates, becuase they’ve charsima, look good on TV and have public speeking abilities
30 - well i’ll leave a judgement on Graham Norton to your good self, but I would dispute your perception of how good Davina McCall looks on TV
And that voice!
The more the leadership race develops, the more a particular picture appears. For one, it is likely to be a fairly clear run-off between Clarke and Davis. Although some of his 2001 support have peeled off to Davis, Cameron and Fox (et al.) lack the traction to put in a serious challenge, though both have some kingmaking potential. Fox is likely to boost Davis’ campaign with his supporters, and Rifkind and Lansley are likely to swing behind Clarke when they are knocked out (sorry, Nuala, but that’s the way it appears); May I’m not really sure about. Cameron is the real mystery, and I think that he could make a difference if the contest is tight - strategically, he’s best going for Clarke.
Ironically, it seems as though Davis is more of a gamble. Clarke is a genial centrist who likely to deliver progress at the next election, although it is questionable whether he can achieve an outright majority. Davis, by contrast, is likely to offer a renewed right-wing approach which could either deliver huge gains (if there is the mood for a change) or collapse completely. At the moment, I think that the latter is more likely. Though on policy, I’d place myself in the Davis camp, I fear that the areas where his policy platform are most likely to do well are already saturated with Tories - the affluent South East. A 10% swing to the Tories in Surrey is no help whatsoever. To capture the Midlands marginals and even regain our 1992 tally, I think that a genuinely more centrist approach is needed. Constituencies like Cheadle, which should be solidly Tory, are unlikely to come back under a Davis leadership.
Of course, if you’re a purity before power person, elect Davis by all means.
31. Alex, to be honest I’ve never seen Davina McCall on TV. She was only the first UK host who came up in my mind.
I would happy to see a Brown/Davis or a Brown/Clarke contest in 2009. At least discussions about how much make-up the PM will wear could be avoided.
33 - yeah, it’ll be about hair, not makeup.
32 Another Alex. A very solid analysis. For me our Ken offers the best chance for the Tories. However even with Ken the scale of the challenge is huge. Running down the list of seats outside of the south east should be a very sobering experience for the Tories, especially as some seats will require a leap from third place and others a big switch from the LibDems.
34. well, at least we could avoid the PM wife talking about the PM sexual activities. At least I hope (discussions of Brown and Clarke night life are not my cup of tea! They could lead me to horrible imagines)
32/35 - I couldn’t agree more. I cannot see DD appealing to the middle-class professionals outwith the South East who no longer see voting Conservative as respectable. Without them we won’t win back places like Stourbridge, Solihull, Pudsey, Elmet, Edgbaston etc. All the Libs and Labs will have to do is ressurect his comments on hanging and we can kiss goodbye to those types of seats. We simply cannot win on a hard right-wing platform - unless people have learnt nothing from the last 8 years.
37 - “hard right-wing platform”. Do you think David Willets is supporting a hard right wing platform?
Afternoon everyone- and another most helpful and uplifting chart Mr S.
The sun is shining, DD’s on the home straight, and we’ve just had those fantastic local council results you discussed the other day. As someone who grew up in Eton Wick, I was extremely pleased to see us kick out Labour there (incidentally, for those that don’t know it, the Wick is very definitely not some posh annex of Eton; that was a REAL result).
And all you LibDems on this site must be as pleased as I am to see the Ken challenge receding. My advice is to enjoy it while you can.
10. Having one spelling error at that time of morning is a triumph. Although his first commons appearence wasn’t a great success, he improved afterwards and is looking to embrace new ideas.
15. We need to come up with new ideas about pensions. Whether we go back to the former position in full or part, I don’t know. I was arguing the method as well as the act needs attack.
32. I don’t accept that DD is this arch right winger that he’s being portrayed as. Would the likes of Ian Taylor, Davis Willetts and Damien Green come on board if a extreme right wing agenda is going to be pursued. As DD has said, our policies must be measured by how they help the most vulnerable in society.
37 - I’m saying that that is how i fear DD will be perceived and how our opponents will present us. You cannot say you want to bring back hanging and at the same time present yourself as a moderate, modern Conservative. It really worries me that all this will do is further alienate people who tradditionally voted Tory and will have the affect of weakening us further outside the South East.
37 Max. You are correct. How the Tories think they’ll win with DD and from the right is a mystery to me. It proved a disasterous error with Hague, IDS and Howard so what will change with DD, especially as the Tories are seen as well to the right of most voters.
I fear however that most MP’s and the wider Conservative party haven’t grasped these realities. And should PM Brown comfortably defeat DD at the 2009 election where do the Tories go from there ? …. yet another useless right-winger …..Oh lord !!
40. maybe I was too harsh with “Gideon”, but he has still to prove himself.
42.”yet another useless right-winger …..Oh lord !! ”
they’ll finish them at one point!
41 - if 3 years isn’t enough time to “change perceptions”, especially one who apparently has no public profile, then the Conservative party might as well give up now. Whereas Ken offers little that the public don’t already know about (and no policy platform at all, or even a pretence of one, looking at his website) and that’s only apparently (according to the polls) enough for another heavy defeat. He is far more the “wait for a collapse in confidence in the government” candidate.
It’s true thast DD’s hard-right credentials will be more a matter of perception than his actual position. I’m reminded of his time as Minister of Europe, when he knew perfectly well how to give rhetorical red meat to Eursceptics while sounding suitably communitaire in Brussels. But the perception in itself might be damaging, unless he can deliver a strong narrartive that convinces people to vote Conservative. And it’s questionable whether he’s dynamic enough to do that.
42 - Again I fear you may be right. I have nothing against David Davis but I don’t see what he offers that we haven’t tried before. He doesn’t strike me as particularly charismatic or inspiring despite being very competent. I hope I’m wrong but i cannot see any evidence to the contrary.
44 - the perceptions aren’t just of David Davis they’re of the party as a whole and its very deep seated. We are seen as being to the right of the general population and electing someone who is seen as being on the right of the Conservative party won’t address this. We keep ignoring the wishes of the public when we choose our leader and yet then expect them to listen to us. And yes some polls show that KC wouldn’t make much difference but others show he would do somewhat better than DD.
39 Wat. I’m afraid you are drifting off to victory celebrations a trifle early. Certainly thinking that DD winning the Tory leadership is an end in itself, it’s not. That comes when a Conservative leader enters No 10 as Prime Minister. And frankly DD’s shambling performances against a weakened government, where even Oaten appears statemanlike, do not inspire confidence. DD’s elevation to Tory leader = a fourth successive Tory defeat and the start of a lengthy period of Gordon Brown premiership.
40 - One of the slightly disconcerting arguments put forward by Green et al. for their support of Davis is his background. The problem is that it is quite clear that a modest background has little impact on voters’ perceptions of (particularly Conservative) politicians. Howard trumpeted from the rooftops that he was raised by a humble family in Wales, son of immigrants, grammar-school educated etc. ad nauseaum, but that didn’t prevent voters regarding him as well to the right.
[48] I trust that you’re heartened, Jack, by Brown’s latest re-iteration that he’s more Blairite than Blair - he sounded to me as though he was reading from a script written by Mrs Thatcher…
Oh and just for Andrea theres been a bit of talk in the Scottish Papers about the Cathcart (a seat we used to win as a moderate one-nation party!) by-election. The Sunday Herald was saying their is very little interest in the constituency itself and the SoS attributed a quote to an SNP insider saying that they fear the protest vote will split between the SNP, Pat Lally and ourselves.
Obvious ploy my Davis camp to drip feed support. Nigel Evans is my local MP and I am sure I have read that he was Davis supporters weeks a go.
51. Thanks Max. So it seems the most likely result is a Labour win with a reduced majority.
53 - Andrea, also our opponents have been up to some fiendish tricks. They vandalised Richard Cook’s posters by making the second ‘o’ look like a ‘c’!
50 IA. It’s clever positioning by GB, I’ve been expecting it for some time. GB knows he has to retain and build on TB electoral legacy and talking of a property and share owning democracy means that GB knows he has to position himself squarely with TB’s tanks on the centre lawns. GB will be smiling at the prospect of DD scrabbling in the bushes to the right and the Lib Dems wandering around the weeds to his left.
50. Lady Thatcher is possessing Gordon at the moment!
54. If it give you some confort, I could tell you that those acts heppen here too. No one is scandalized anymore.
48- Jack- thanks for pointing out DD’s election is not an end in itself. One of the main reasons I want him there is because I believe he can lead us back to power. Have you read his speeches? He’s not the right-wing zealot of myth and legend, and he’s going to give us a modern Conservative programme for tackling the social and public service problems that affect everybody. Especially the disadvantaged.
As new MP Greg Clarke- one of this week’s endorsements- says:
“David Davis has the right vision for Britain. When he was Party Chairman, he said that the test of any policy must be what it does to help the most vulnerable in society. He was among the first to recognise the need to bring our public services into line with the best in the world, and he helped construct policies to take power away from central government and unaccountable bodies and give it back to local communities and citizens.”
Have faith Jack (umm…Jack, I’ve wondered before, but I’m presuming you actually are a Tory, otherwise presumably you’d be backing DD…)
Wat - How do you think he will appeal to people outside the South-East? I’m interested given you’re own views on people from Scotland (communists) and people from the North (communist wasters).
57.”Jack, I’ve wondered before, but I’m presuming you actually are a Tory, otherwise presumably you’d be backing DD…) ”
Jack voted tory until 1992. In 1997 he switched to New Labour.
OT: Has anyone a list of fringe meetings at Labour conference?
The only things I was able to find out are the meetings of the Labour Left (one of their meetings even offers live entertainment and late bar! A must!)
Jack’s screechings are pushing me to DD out of sheer spite
. Oh do calm down, old thing, you’ll feel so much better after those venison burgers…
49. I think the background is just a complement to the policies being pursued. We lost that last election because our policies didn’t appeal. The manifesto was reactive, not proactive and had a touch of the Victor Meldrew about it. If we develop better policies, then DDs background will be a bonus to go with them.
57 Wat. I’m a former Tory voter 79-92, former NuLab voter 97-01 and hopefully former abstainer 05 !!
As something of an insomniac I’ll be sure to take DD’s little blue book of wisdom to bed with me ! Thanks for the remedy.
62. Jack, you’ve to come clean. We all know you voted Libdem last may
Mike L at 24. The Convention doesn’t meet on Tuesday, only the results of the ballot are announced. The next meeting of Convention is the morning of Monday 3rd October, the warm up before Conference proper starts at 2pm
But Wat - your guy is so boring. He has such little name recognition because he acts and talks just like another middle-aged man in a suit. I follow politics closely and I cannot recall Commons appearance, a turn of phrase, a speech, an interview or something that he has written that is MEMORABLE. He fails to make an impact. I know about his role in getting a Home Office minister to quit and his work on the Public Accounts Committee - all impressive but that hardly makes him a household name.
I would rate him behind Clarke, Rifkind, Cameron and even Liam Fox on these counts.
Wat Tyler [57] - you allude to DD’s reference to the need to bring our public services into line with the best in the world.
We are all agog to know which “the best in the world” are and how you can tell
23 Jack … Why aren’t I suprised you disagree with an anti Clarke comment ?
60 John O. Spite can be so jolly …. as Tories leadership contenders know so well.
BTW If Andrea provided the exact length of all post war Italian governments we could have a book on the closest in length to the Conservative leadership race !!
68.”BTW If Andrea provided the exact length of all post war Italian governments we could have a book on the closest in length to the Conservative leadership race !! ”
http://www.governo.it/Governo/Governi/governi.html
Click on the PMs names to see the government’s lenght
Tone at 6: “There are thousands of Labour MPs (sic)”. No there aren’t. We’re working on it, but it’s quite hard when there are only 650 seats…
I’m surprised that DD is stirring both strong support and opposition. He’ll be perfectly OK, just not anything special, in the same way that Howard has been - competent, fluent, reasonably flexible. The Tories need either a convincing new leader or a convincing new programme, and if they get the latter then DD would do OK, but he won’t set the prairie on fire. Cameron and Clarke are more interesting choices in their different ways, but higher risk as well - Cameron because of his youth, Clarke because he has a good many enemies in the party. It’s almost certainly going to be one of the three, so probably not worth worrying about anyone else.
63 Andrea. In the May 05 election, I’d soon pledge allegiance to the Hanovarians and have the Duke of Cumberland to lunch than vote for the Lib Dems
67 Tory Boy. Why indeed
Our Ken in excellent form with Dimbleby Jnr. “….. Liberal Democrats scared to death of me …. ” ….. ” we’ve had a disasterous ten years in opposition …. “
39 Good to see you Wat - it’s been lonely (apart from Woody!)
70 - I think you’ve missed the use (misuse?) of the ’sic’.
Surely someone as good as Howard, whilst lacking the vast majority of Howard’s negatives (ie. his past) would be as good as it’s going to get?
71 Jack - Typical Ken wasn’t he.
Shameless, bumptious and totally self opinionated (unlike any of us on these boards of course !!)
10 disasterous years……..whilst you did what to help the party exactly ‘our Ken’ ?
Apart from share a pro Euro platform with Blair and promote tobacco.
It’s so easy to see how he would be used to split the party if he came through the middle to win it would be funny if it wasn’t so serious.
There’s a few LibDems on here rooting for Ken. Unsurprisingly IMO. He’s their best chance of fundamentally changing the face of GB politics.
74. It was typical Ken. 100% self confidence/arrogence. I just can’t see how he can win though. The membership won’t vote for him against Davis.
61 - That’s precisely the problem I’m trying to diagnose. Davis’ most prominent policy pronouncements to date - his support for capital punishment and flirtation with flat tax - are firmly from the Right. Personally, I think that the flat tax is a good idea in principle, but was always sceptical about its appeal to the country at large, and the fate of Angela Merkel ought be taken as instructive. He is regarded by most people outside his immediate supporters as a traditional right-winger, and has done little so far to challenge that view.
74 - As I’ve said before, dissent dries up in the face of improved polling results. One could have made precisely the same argument against Thatcher in the late 70s - that a good deal of the party despised her - but the “wet” critique of Heath, Prior, Gilmour et al. ultimatley did little to challenge her Premiership. If the party looks like it will win, MPs start dreaming of red boxes, not assassinations. I’m fairly sure that had IDS been coasting in the mid-40s in the polls that he would not have been knifed.
74/5/6 TB/alex/woody. That’s why we love our Ken …. what you see is what you get … warts and all. Far superior to the other self evident also rans. Also did anyone else notice that our Ken has lost some weight ….. not from worry about the other candidates though
77 - what flirtation with the flat tax?
http://www.david-davis.co.uk/news/news_id.asp?id=33
http://www.kenclarke.co.uk/tck.htm
78- Jack, my dear, have you looked at the lenght of Italian governments? Look at how many failed to reach the second year!
All the ones that lasted less than 1 year and strong candidates to be shorter (not Clare!) than the tory leadership race
Don’t expect I’ll rank them for you (I’ve already produced the SNP target list yesterday. So I’ve already donemy homework!).
78. I think it must have been the camera work. I can’t see Ken going down the gym and taking on a crash diet. His missed a few bits with his hair dye. He described DD as a very good friend before hinting he was an extreme right winger.
77 Sorry AA/Jack on various threads - its clearly a case of when worlds collide.
Apart from a few meaningless Polls SUGGESTING that KC is more popular (I have yet to see or here of anything that suugests this isn’t down to name recognition rather than actual (so called) ‘preference’) there is nothing to back up the suggestion that KC would be a better leader.
He retains the ability to alienate a significant % of our core vote and split the party.
We’re clearly never going to agree - lot’s more postings desined on the subject yet I suspect.
For God’s sake let’s get on with the election !
Or Hear even !
78. Now I’ll post my useless comment of the day(we’re in the “silly hours” of the day), but I don’t like Davis’s website. He needs to re-design it.
Btw, I don’t like the tory symbol too. That torch….it seems they’ve to take part to the Olympics Games (maybe that’s why it seems they couldn’t care less about their defeats. It’s more important to take part than winning -here-)
79 - “Whatever the outcome, it is clear to me we need a flatter, simpler tax system.” - David Davis
81.”He described DD as a very good friend before hinting he was an extreme right winger. ”
Is it not possible to be a good friend of a right winger?
84. Surely any Tory contender must be looking at a simpler tax system.
85. It was the context Andrea. The old shake them by the hand and stab them in the back routine.
84 - that’s hardly the same thing!
“As a good friend I am very well positioned to tell you about his true political opinions…”
76 Woody. . You say The membership won’t vote for him against Davis.. Well the polls of Tory members seem to suggest otherwise. If only DD had 5% of Ken’s confidence and personality then you would be onto a winner. Sadly for the Tory party DD is probably going ot get it and we’ll be having the samev discussion here in September 2009 - except that even Ken, surely, would not be seeking the office at the age of 69.
DD - Mister Non-Personality - Mister Boring - Mister Labour Fourth Election Victory - Mister Loser
82 Tory Boy. ” Apart from a few meaningless polls …. ”
So meaningless that the other candidates and Labour and the LibDems are commissioning them !! and from what I understand …….. all of them show our Ken as the clear winner
81 woody. Our Ken on a treadmill
80 Andrea. It’s your homework for Monday !!
Personally i don’t understand why Conservatives aren’t more annoyed by the way that Clarke is regurgitating the old “if i can’t be PM nobody can” routine ie. by portraying all his opponents as extremists (which helps his campaign) he is making it much harder for any leader if he loses.
89. Mike Smithson and I are not related …… although he could be a very distant clan kinsman of another sept !!
89 - you seem unusually strident today, Mike, for someone who has (from a political perspective) a strong alterior motive in seeing the Tories make a bad choice. But anyway, seeing as he will (in your words) be up against two equally useless opponents in Brown and Kennedy then he must have a chance! Unless you’re clinging to this idea that Blair is going to stand again?
91 alex. It’s simple the Conservative aren’t more annoyed because for more and more of them the penny has finally dropped - Our Ken is the man to take on the Labour and the Lib Dems.
Who will you be backing in 2009, Jack?
Good afternoon all , little point joining the DD/KC debate nothing new to add or contribute . Have been thinking about flat tax and reached the conclusion that there is nothing to stop any of the 3 major parties adopting it as policy . What matters about it is the level at which it starts and the rate . The Conservatives would no doubt use it as an opportunity to cut the taxes of their mainly wealthier supporters whilst the Lib Dems to help the less well off .
Nulab - who knows ? but the essence is not flat tax or not but what flat tax . I suspect that Merkel was harmed by it because in many voters eyes they perceived her as using it as a means to help the rich at the exspense of the poor .
89. I don’t rate the polls regarding the Tory leadership contest. If it went down to a final 2 of KC and DD, then the anti Ken feeling would see DD home cosily. If IDS can beat Ken by 20%, then I can’t see any reason why DD wouldn’t do the same. I don’t see that much has changed in the meantime as no one I’ve come across has been convinced the change in stance on Europe.
Regarding DD as leader, I don’t think we’ll agree on how he’ll fare and have to see how he develops.
The Conservatives would no doubt use it as an opportunity to cut the taxes of their mainly wealthier supporters whilst the Lib Dems to help the less well off
Of course
Nothing like a bit of mock impartial stereotyping 
On the KC/DD thing. I reckon KC might take votes from Labour. I can’t see him harming the LibDems though. This sample of 1 will probably be voting for them
86, 87 - As I said, I personally think that the flat tax is a good idea. But then I’m not a Midlands-marginal floating voter. Talking about a “flatter” tax system, for all its merits, is hardly going to shed a reputation as a right-winger.
97 - YouGov had the IDS/KC contest within a very small margin-of-error (about 2% IIRC). I think many of us Tories are still living in the aftermath of 1992; the facts are that many pollsters, and particularly YouGov, have employed more sophisticated techniques since then.
89 Mike - What polls among Conservative members?
If you are you suggesting that the majority of Conservative members want Clarke as leader - you are, quite simply wrong (IMHO)
As for you spit at the end - please, come on.
If you are contending
90. Jack, it’s a difficult homework! The problem is that after a PM’s resignation, the government is usually asked to stay in office for “current affairs” decisions while a new government is negotiated (these period are usually called “crisis of government”). So should I have take in consideration the date of PM resignation or the date when a government acutually went out of office (even if in the days/months before, it didn’t really take decisions, but only did the “caretake” job-)?
In 1972 an Andreotti’s government lasted 9 days, then he resigned and new elections were called, but he stayed in office until the end of the elections.
90 So Labour and the LD’s are commisioning information that will damage themselves and putting in the public arena to benefit the Conservativ Party are they ?
Ken is only the “clear winner” from their perspective - not ours
99. Any idea how yougov get them polls. I’m registered for surveys but have only been asked who I voted for. Never if I’m a Tory member or not.
91 Alex, I’d suggest it’s because he is (mis)playing straight into the hands of the majority of the membership who dislike him instinctively and are having their reasons for doing so confirmed first hand.
hysterical outbursts from Heseltine are also very helpful in this regard.
So far the polls are the only evidence we have as to how the electorate feel about the leadership candidates. I wonder if DD’s supporters would be rubbishing them if they showed their man doing well? As for him (KC) spliting the party the polls show that 14% say they would leave, I personally think he would attract new members especially in the constituencies where they are most needed.
94 Dream on !
105.”I personally think he would attract new members especially in the constituencies where they are most needed.”
Is the list of the total number of members per constituency availbale somwhere on th net (not only for the tories, but for Labour and Libdem too)?
102 - I think the point is its not in the public arena! I think Jack has his own means of finding out. As for the argument that the polls are largely about name recognition what does it say about the other contenders that so few people have ever heard of them?
105 Great plan Max, lose 14% of the mebership to possibly gain (or lose) x % of the general vote.
If that isn’t a desperate “stick it all on black” gamble I don’t know what is.
107 - I’m afraid not Andrea. The only way of finding out is to look at the accounts for each constituency party on the electoral commision website. Unfortunately only constituencies that have annual income or expenditure of £25,000+ have to submit accounts so the information is incomplete and even then not all accounts state the number of members.
95 alex. You’ve hit the nub. If our Ken is leader I’ll look at the Tories for the first time since 92.
102 Tory Boy. They are commissioning polls to see who damages them most and why. Public polls
101 Andrea. From the start of one government to the following polling day.
108 So let me get this right. Jack is a friend of the Conservative Party who is trying to help us by passing inside information that other partys secret polling data fear Ken Clarke ? Er OK !
Also, are you saying that leadership selection should be based on ‘name recognition’ over and above suitability for the role?
111 H’mm then using 3rd Parties to leak the (supposed) damaging information to the Public ?
109. Are you sure that 14% would really resign? It could be that they’re only over-reacting, but at the end they’ll find an excuse to stay.
110. It would have been interesting to compare election performance and the number of party members.
109 - Firstly, not everyone would go through with the threat to quit and secondly you can equally argue that the same poll would show that David Davis would cost us votes. Maybe we do need to take a bit of a gamble.
And is their any chance you could try being a little less dismissive/sarcastic/aggressive. I’ve said from the outset that the attitudes of some of DD’s supporters is what concerns me (I note Wat still hasn’t come back to me on his views on Scots) and you are not doing very much to dispell it.
108 - I think the serious point is not so much that the polls are meaningless. As things stand Clarke would probably do better than anyone else. But on the other hand I would argue that the current public perception of him is vastly improved compared to what the reality would be. Even if you accept that the public do know exactly what they are getting with him, the fact that the polls still show heavy Conservative defeat is hardly something in his favour. How is he going to improve the public perception of himself.
Whereas the others may currently suffer in comparison, but it is far easier to argue that their public persona will be improved in the future with greater exposure. That is the point. And to argue otherwise is to have absolutely no faith in your own opinions (if you are far more in agreement with them than KC’s policy free zone).
115. We’re not all aggresive Max. Great win yesterday for the Hearts. Down to 2-1 for the title now. Great stuff.
111 - I meant in the next leadership election, Jack
Obviously not something you, as a non-member need worry about, but something the Conservative Party as a whole, should.
118 - Elaborating. Most people, even Ken supporters, say they still think it’s unlikely they’ll win the next election. And if Ken’s not a candidate to win, then he shouldn’t really even be considered. They need someone to serve more than 4 years for once!
112/113 Tory Boy. I’ve passed on nothing that’s not already in the public domain about our Ken and the polls and indeed focus groups, just that unsurprisingly the private polling confirms the public ones. Did you really think that the other parties would be idle during the Tory interregnum.
108/110. So far only a Labour MP has openly said that he’s fearing Clarke more than others. It’s Ian Gibson from Norwich North. He’s a member of the Campaign Group: they usually really say what they think.
Clare Short hopes that Clarke will become tory leader. But only becuase they could oppose Iraq war together!
115 Max
If you recall I disassociated myself from any view Wat may or may not have made about the Scots (I didn’t see them)
Equally, I’m not from a happy clappy background either and I think my comment @ 109 is well within the bands of acceptable challenge.
Is your defence on the subject perhaps a little shaky ?
117 - I know Woody, I just find it a bit irritating that some of the people who go on about KC splitting the party seem to be amongst the least conciliatry. At the end of the day whoever wnins the party has to pull together - something I’m more than willing to do.
Yesterday was amazing I’ve allready bought my ‘2005-2006 Believe’ t-shirt. Probably the best game since the ‘98 cup final. Its probably the worst Rangers team in 20 years and fortunately Celtic aren’t much better!
112 - It is a sad comment on the state of the Conservative party in 2005 that there is noone other than KC with any public name recognition .
40 - I believe that DD has drawn support from the Tory Left-wingers such as Ian Taylor basically because he has fudged the issue of Europe. Taylor being staunchly pro-euro, I reckon he has got behind Davis because, if he were in charge, support for the euro would, apparently, not be regarded as “a test of party loyalty”. For the pro-European wing, I think not being kicked into the grass because of it is extremely important and DD has, astutely, tried to curry their favour by pledging that this won’t happen.
Would a DD leadership be tactically aware? Yes. But to me it remains far too weak on detail. Does Mr Davis believe that sound management of the health service, for example, is limited to getting better value for money?
Whilst I am loath to be negative, the Tories have appeared unable or unwilling to exploit many open goals in the government’s health and education policies. What, for example, has the Party said about the crisis we currently have in medical education?
120 I’m sure not Jack, and I’m even more certain that they wouldn’t be announcing they feared Clake most from every vantage point if they really did.
123. Max, you’ve to accept it. You, as a Scottish man, are a commie. Stop being in the closet, accept yout true self
http://www.rifondazione.it/eu99/img/man_vota.jpg
Woody at 97 If IDS can beat Ken by 20%, then I can’t see any reason why DD wouldn’t do the same
The alternative view is that you only need one in six of the members who actually voted for IDS to think that they made the wrong choic e (having seen what IDS didn’t achieve) and Ken wins. Combined with the fact that the members who are no longer with us were in my experience disproportionally IDS voters.
Give the membership some credit - I don’t think most want to make the same mistake again. Maybe it’s the circles I move in, but I see more anyonebutDavis sentiment than anyonebutClarke. And that wasn’t the same at the last leadership ballot.
124 Perhaps so Mark…. now list for me the regiments of famous Liberal Democrats
128 - Thats the difficulty in judging these things Andy. I imagine that the support for different candidates is different depending on where you are in the country. Its very difficult to build a national picture of how the membership feels.
118 alex. The next Tory leader but one ?!!?!?
I’ve said several times that even Ken will have a huge challenge ahead of him. Indeed he may end as the Tory Kinnock - bringing on new talent and making the Tories appear as a credible alternative government in 2013.
123 Max. Careful ….. chickens and hatched !!
128 Andy, re mine @ 2.
I totally accept that there has been movement in that direction.(for better or worse)
Then I’ll get a better fell this time next week.
127 - Never Andrea! Angus McLeod of the Times on the politics show was saying that the SNP are doing better in Livingston than Cathcart but are still likely to lose by quite a bit. In Cathcart they haven’t been able to rally the protest vote which ties in with what I heard about our own vote holding up. Also suggested turnout in Cathcart could be worse than the last election (around 45% IIRC).
130 Happy to part on an agreement before I enter GP mode.
Perhaps those of us in ‘the heartlands’ are too comfortable whilst those of you in ‘the regions’ are too keen to grasp at straws.
Probably, as ever, the truth lies somewhere in between ( but nowhere near Nottingham !!!)
Cheers
129 Max. You make Mark’s case. Even a Lib Dem party with few high profile figures provides a blocking minority on Conservative propects.
131 - I know, I know but you can’t help getting carried away when you have your best start since 1914-1915. It was considered the greatest Hearts team of all time before the entire first team signed up for the war (most with the soon to be abolished,Royal Scots). You can’t really see Rooney, Pennant, Dyer et al doing that these days!
135 - Always nice to end on a happy note!
136. Before the summer, The Times had a survey by Populus about recognition of tory politicians (they showed people pictures of tory MPs and ask to name them).
It emerged that people confused David Davis with Alan Duncan!
136 Sorry that should be Tory Boy not Max …. how could I get the two mixed up !
137 Max. Yes it’s a wonderfull start.
BTW when is the Royal Regiment to come into force ?
I remain amazed at two things some of the posters on here keep assuming.
1) Ken Clarke’s poll rating is just down to `name recognition’. It isn’t. When Labour had it’s last leadership election Tony Blair had done very similar jobs to David Davis. Every poll showed he was far more popular than John Prescott - who had just as much if not more recognition at the time. Like it or not Tony Blair has charisma, David Davis doesn’t.
2)There are constant dismissals of people who once voted Tory and say they would again if Clarke was leader. The objective of a political party is to win power. To do that you need to win voters over from the centre ground. This is rather obvious but Davis supporters don’t appear to believe this.
Also the mood of the membership has changed. There is, thankfully, an increasing recognition that you have to back someone who can actually help the party win. As for the comment above that if the Conservatives still loose the election under Clarke (119) there will have been no point voting for him, surely gaining more seats and having more appeal to the electorate is better than fewer seats and less appeal to the electorate.
128. There must be distinct regional variations then because I’ve come across no support for Ken at all around here. We’ll see what happens but I would expect DD to outscore IDS % win if/when it goes to the members. That’s a prediction competition to look forward to.
141 - my point was that since Clarke’s apparent appeal is based entirely on his public perception, and seemingly little else (in fact if you read his site the only significant reason he gives for electing him is his public perception) then any gains made at the next election are likely to be a false dawn. Any support he acquires for the Conservatives will drift away once he steps down (as, at age 70, he will have to realistically do). IMO he is a short term candidate who is unlikely to provide what the Tories need long term to return to power. Claims that he would be “the Tory Kinnock” are IMO completely wide of the mark. Kinnock provided everything that Labour needed except public popularity and did so over 10 years.
Anyway it’s just an opinion. I’m not a Tory member, so they can do what they like. I’ll be voting LibDem probably.
143.”I’m not a Tory member, so they can do what they like”
What?
I thought you were a tory!
144 - no.
The comment about voting LibDem was if KC wins though
145. That’s explain lots of things………
146 alex. And if DD wins ?
148 - Depends how he turns out.
I should however mention that when i have voted Tory it has generally been pretty easy because 1) they have not looked close to winning and so could be passed off as a tactical move to try and get as strong an opposition as possible 2) I’m in a Con/Lib constituency..
I don’t have a good record voting for winners, but then i have generally been expectant of their defeat when voting for them
I can say the same. If KC is Tory leader and if Brown and Kennedy are leaders of their parties then I would consider voting tactically for the Tories if I felt it would make a difference in my constituency. That decision would probably be taken on polling day itself.
147. ?
150. Why don’t you vote for Respect? Galloway has more charisma than the others 3 and he has public speaking abilities (especially if you don’t pay attention to what he’s saying)
151. I’m only teasing you.
Re 134.
Did Mcleod say where he had his information from?
Problem maybe for SNP in Cathcart is the 2005 Glasgow South result where they were well back in 3rd place, and where Cathcart is 2/3rds of that seat.
But is he just wishful thinking, or did he offer hard evidence. My gut feeling is that the results will be poor for Labour, mind you I thought the CDU/FDP would win comfortably.
150. Seriously, I’m not sure I’m following you. Why would you vote tory?
To help them to defeat Brown?
Is there anything more in the sunday press about the investiagtion into the lib dems by the electoral commission
155 - there was a joke about how some LibDems were celebrating because it was a sign they were being taken seriously
I am really quite appalled at the line being taken on this forum by Tory Boy and one or two other Davis supporters toward those of us who favour other candidates for the Leadership. You’d think we were committing some mortal sin by not getting out of the way and allowing their chosen one a clear run at our party’s top job, and THEY have the temerity to suggest that *others* risk splitting the party? I think people ought to calm down and remember that we’re all supposed to be on the same side when the dust settled. I do advise the more aggressive elements of the Davis camp to listen.
It has been no secret over the last few weeks that have decided to support Clarke since Cameron’s campaign has clearly faltered and I have concluded that he has no realistic chance of winning (this time.) I have been very careful not to criticise the other contenders on policy or personal grounds with a view toward having to fall in behind whomever emerges as the winner in due course, but I have to say that I agree with what some people above (Max, Andy, Mike S.) have been saying - I don’t think Davis has the presence required of a potential Prime Minister and I’m not sure I believe that he can develop it if he hasn’t already, having been in the House for as long as he has, nor do I quite understand how he expands our appeal beyond our core vote. I know very well that Ken Clarke poses some risks, but I am sick and bloody tired of being in opposition and I think it’s time that we got serious about winning, took a chance and showed the Great British public that we have learnt from past mistakes, are ready to move on and to govern this country again.
Re the 2 Scottish byelections , perhaps we can agree on here beforehand what would be a good/ok/bad result for each party before election day . I know , I know - it will take the fun out of every one trying to say their party did well despite finishing 6th .
Anyway here are my opinions ;-
Labour Good - 2 comfortable wins , Bad - any loss .
SNP Good - A win or very narrow defeat , Bad - Big defeat and not coming 2nd in both seats .
Lib Dem Good - 2nd place in Cathcart and not losing ground in Livingston Bad Losing share of vote in both seats .
Conservative Good - Finishing better than 4th in 1 seat . Bad - losing vote share in both seats .
It is time to bury this excuse of name recognition for why Clarke smashes Davis in opinion polls of who people would like to see as Tory leader. If there is such a diffeence in name recognition then it is a sad indictment of Davis. This is a man who is a ceaseless self-promoter. He was a minister in Major’s government, chairman of the most important select committee for 4 years, a leadership candidate in 2001, party chairmain and shadow home secretary since, and a contender in this election from May 6th. If he isn’t well known then that tells you something about his total lack of presence and charisma. This is a guy who effectively stood against IDS for leader in 2001 (Portillo, Clarke and Ancram were after different sections of the party) and lost! He probably wouldn’t be quite such a disaster but I struggle to see the differences between one middle aged grey haired boring right winger and another - except that Davis is older.
I say this in disappointment as politially I am closest to Davis. But Tories have got to realise that the country keeps sending us a message that we have got to change, and they like Clarke much more than any other hopeful. A vote for Davis is a vote for 1997, 2001 and 2005 ie a vote for higher taxes, fewer civil liberties, more regulation, more constitutional vandalism under a 4th labour government.
158. Labour
great: 2 wins with more or less the same majority
good: 2 wins with a reduced, but confortable majoirty
so and so: very reduced majoirty (under 10 in Livingston and under 5 in Cathcart)
bad: a loss in at least one seats
disaster: 2 losses
SNP
great: gaining a seat (or both)
good: heavily cutting Labour majoirties
so and so: marginally cutting lab majorities
bad: not making progresses
disaster: being overtaking by libdems
Libdem:
Great: clear second places in both seats
good: second place in at least a seat
so and so: third place in both seats
bad/disaster: losing votes
Conservative
good: gaining ground
so and so: keeping their voters
bad: losing voters.
159 - Spot on, Mr Bennett.
One part of me hopes Clarke wins just so that this debate can be settled once and for all
Not that it will be because if the predicted by some splits occur and the Tories spiral to electoral disaster then it will be blamed on the splitters, not those who supported his candicacy. And if he takes the Tories to electoral triumph after a Labour collapse then it will be put down to Labour/Brown failings with the implication that Davis or whoever would have won anyway, with the advantage that a Conservative program could have been put in place
162 - Alex: How do you arrive at a position of supporting Davis over Clarke, but then saying if Clarke wins, you’ll jump ship to the Lib Dems? I could understand your logic if you put it the other way round, but as you’ve described it, it sounds like some sort of personal vendetta to me. Your prerogative, of course… but I do find it rather bemusing.
153 - He’d spoken to ’sensible’ SNP insiders on Livingston. The suggestion was that this is where most of their resources had gone to. Also claimed they were saying that the campaign was going well but even then halfing Labour’s majority would be seen as good.
He’d been out and about in Cathcart and backed up every other report that the opposition is split and their is little enthusiasm for the contest in the constituency.
Developing a fuller range of policies would, I feel, be considerably more useful than the present debate abour personalities. It is hardly surprising that the Tory vote share is flatlining when the Party has often given the impression that there is no ‘meat’ in its health, education and transport policies, as though an incoming Tory government would do little which would be new in these areas.
Selecting the correct issues is just as important in terms of positioning as the orientation of the policies adopted on those issues.
164. Hopefully the canvassing returns of this “sensible” source are accurate. Canvassing returns from Cheadle didn’t seem very accurate: reports were indicating a better tory performance.
163 - Most people seem to agree that are strands of opinion in the Conservative party very similar to strands of opinion with the Liberal Democrat Party. So it shouldn’t be so difficult to flit between the two, should it?
Apart from Europe and Iraq (both of which i disagreed with him) I see very little in common between Clarke and the Lib Dems. He is strongly in favour of centralisation and seems to offer little in the way of new thinking on the public services. Really i see him as representing the past - a person who should have led the Tories probably in 1997 but to go back now is a sign of desperation. If the new wave of Liberals gain the ascendency then i don’t see why they shouldn’t be an attractive proposition for a someone somewhere on the libertarian wing of Tory opinion to vote for?
Like i said earlier i wouldn’t be surprised if Clarke picks up votes from in Con/Lab constituencies. I don’t see why the LibDems should view him as a threat at all. Like a couple of LibDem contributors have said he removes at a stroke some of the strongest reasons for Conservatives not to vote LibDem in recent elections.
167 - There are strands of agreement, naturally, but I could not conceive of joining the Lib Dems (nor the Labour Party for that matter) irrespective of who the leader of the Conservative Party is and whether I supported his election to the job or not.
Nor do I quite see how opting for the same approach under Davis that failed us in 1997, 2001 and in 2005 albeit to a lesser extent, is any great vision for the future. Ken is the man the public want, his abilities are proven and he can stand on level pegging with Blair and Brown. Perhaps it’s time we listen to what the electorate?
169 - But that’s because you are a member of the Tory party so you will stick with them through thick and thin.
169 - Sorry, the last line should read ‘Perhaps it’s time we listened to the electorate?’
Re. 18, Andrea, he’s no better in person (and, what’s more, his appalling halitosis and mad bulging eyes are more noticeable). Unfortunately, all but one of my comrades in North Staffordshire are taken in by Cashman’s affected manner
Re. 123, Max, a Rangers fan I met in my newsagents this morning is convinced that Hearts will sink by Christmas. As someone whose second team is Celtic, I’m not so sure.
By the way, I know a Labour Party regional organiser who is that rarest of people, a Govanese Catholic Rangers supporter…
168 - I do think KC has an appeal with those who left us for the LD’s. Partly this is to do with tone and with the perception that he is quite centrist. Certainly the YouGov poll suggested that in a contest between KC and GB the Lib Dems would effectively be squeezed and lose a number of seats. Without winning back these seats its hard to see us winning enough from Labour to form a Govt.
168-.” Like a couple of LibDem contributors have said he removes at a stroke some of the strongest reasons for Conservatives not to vote LibDem in recent elections. ”
but, like some posters have already said, he removes the reasons why some voters left the tories for the Libdmes too.
170 - You’re absolutely right, Alex - and I can tell you there has been a lot more thin than thick the last few years precisely because we haven’t been listening, and I think it’s high time we change that.
174 - I didn’t think such things existed! I think we’ll be in it for the long-haul now we’ve got some money. But as I said its not just that we’re better its more down to how bad this Rangers team is. Althoogh as a Celt that wont unduly concern you!
172. yes, I know you aren’t a big Cashman’s fan. I suppose you didn’t vote him for the NEC.
You’re right about the eyes. They’re “strange”, it seems he had some work done.
He was goodlooking in his Eastenders days: http://www.bbc.co.uk/drama/tipping/images/article_4.jpg
175 - Well, yes AHM, but i think the problem, fundamentally can be put down to
1)Blair
2)the issues that the Tories have campaigned on
3)the solutions presented to those issues
The leader, other than the influence he had on 2 and 3, has been relatively unimportant. For a long time it has been received wisdom that the Conservatives haven’t fundamentally lost because of personalities. They didn’t lose because Hague was their leader or because Howard was their leader. And yet Clarke, who offers nothing but a new (old?) face at the top is suddenly THE solution?
I don’t think that a 2-3 pt boost in the polls is a good trade off for a failure to properly address issues 2) and 3) above. There is not much evidence to suggest that Clarke’s solutions have changed much from those he offered in the 80s and 90s. In addition i think that for the necessary changes to be made the leader must have undisputed authority over the party. Otherwise the first dodgy poll or local election result, and the sniping will start. As far as i can see Davis, with his substantial support in the Parliamentary Party, is the only one who can seriously hope to generate that authority. Having been elected because of the opinion polls Clarke will be forever at their mercy.
But that’s just my opinion.
157 AHM -
If I’ve said anything offensive please highlight it and I will review
it and apologise (if necessary).
I can only repeat that I believe your favoured candidate would prove disasterous for the party and split us down the middle.
Some of us believe that achieving power on our own terms is far more important than achieving power irrespective of the cost.
Sorry we seem set never to agree on this point, that’s life.
178 - Salient points, Alex. But I think it all comes down to ability, tone and branding. I’ve never argued that KC is the silver bullet to solve our problems, but electing him as leader would send a clear message to the electorate that we get it and we’re willing to begin compromising with them again. The leader has a clear and pervasive influence over how issues 2 and 3 are handled and in that sense his personality is vitally important. I think you are right that the slogging gets a bit easier once Blair goes because it is hard to see Brown having the same ability to convincingly put his finger in all our pies, but I think you are wrong about KC being left at the mercy of the opinion polls. A leader worth his salt will be able to stamp his or her authority on the party and rally his troops, Mrs Thatcher did it after 1975 despite the grave doubts that existed about her initially and even John Major managed it between 1990-1992. The fact that IDS couldn’t do it is one of the most damning indictments of him. KC is certainly no IDS, and I don’t believe DD is either, but in my view there is simply no contest in terms of which has the appeal and the ability to drive us forward.
The undisputed authority point is important. Portillo’s campaign (and his desire for the job) clearly faltered when it became clear that he wouldn’t have the support to do many of the things he wanted. Conversely, although IDS was clearly never quite up to the job, things were made a hell of a lot harder by the lack of support he had in the party (and especially from the main thinkers and opinion formers within).
179 - It’s your general manner that I’ve found offensive, TB - as though you think that I’m a traitor for supporting KC over your man. I think we should all be grown up enough to conduct this contest rather more maturely than that. Your last point is quite disturbing. Three catastrophic defeats in succession and you’re still talking about purity over power? My sense is that there are fewer and fewer members who are taking that view, but if it prevails then we are condemned to another defeat in 2009 and we’ll damn well deserve it. Do you really want a fourth Labour Government? tsk tsk.. Come along now.
182 - As you know I agree with all that. I don’t think you will ever have a situation where an ideologically pure party of left or right will ever win a majority. You need a broad coalition of people who are broadly right of centre if we are to win again.
178. Do you think Clarke would have campaigned on the same issues Hague and Howard campaigned on?
181 - A lot of that will depend on events after the fact, Alex. Clearly, KC is never going to convert the party on Europe and he’s bright enough to know that and won’t bother trying (as his recent statements on the issue demonstrate). His contribution can be made by expanding our appeal beyond our core vote based on the 95% of the views that he holds which are in harmony with the vast majority of the party. If he fails then that’s life, but it’s difficult to see him doing worse than Howard and much easier to see him doing significantly better than it is for Davis.
162 Alex - I agree that the repetitive nature of the debate is becoming tiresome.
I did suggest some time ago that if others chose to ease off, I would be delighted to do so too.
I agree, that what wil be, will be(and the sooner the beter all round)
163 AHM - You’re becoming paranoid !
169 AHM - Leaders lead, followers follow
186 - Nonsense. I’m being realistic, and if you tried it you might like it.
Just to break this debate before someone gets virtually injured, but I’ve just seen Prescott asking B&B to shake their hands. Sky was showing B&B with Prescott’s voice in the background; for a moment I thought they were playing a bad rap song at the conference, but then I realized it was Prescott speaking!
Btw, Iraq won’t be discussed. Blunkett and Hain said that Gordon is the big front-runner (Hein suggested that if someone will stand against him, he would face a crushing defeat). Reid is apparently the only one (together with the Left) who wants a real challenger to Brown.
182 Max. All of the main parties are broad coalitions of interests. The difficulty for the Tories is that their broad coalition sits too far to the right for the majority of, and especially swing, voters.
Our Ken provides the Tories with the opportunity to reconnect with these voters and get the Tories noticed once more. The media would salivate at the prospect of a heavyweight battle between old sparring partners Ken and Gordon, and Ken will provide the impetus to more effectively tackle the Lib Dems.
If it’s Ken and Gordon it’s seconds out, if it’s DD and Gordon someone better throw in the towel for the Tories for another eight years ….. sobering isn’t it !!!!!!!
Totally agree AHM. Maybe we’ve been around long enough to become pragmatic.
I leave the young turks with one point. The broad membership would never have selected Disraeli, Churchill or Thatcher as leader; yet I struggle to think of any Conservative leaders who have been in the same league.
190 - yes but few foresaw Thatcher’s success in advance, and by all accounts Churchill wasn’t great as a peacetime politician or leader
Anyway a hypothetical question. Would those who support KC maintain their opinion were DD to be the overwhelming choice of MPs?
This has been a very good thread. Thanks to all - I’ve certainly learned a lot and understood more and I’ve extended my betting position on Ken Clarke.
Given that Tuesday will be the day of the rule change ballot annoucement let’s make tomorrow will be a Tory leadership-free day on PB.C.
192. I’m on holiday for 5 days so I won’t bother you all with Tory ramblings. No doubt a labour story will appear of interest. Perhaps all us Tories could go back to attacking labour instead of each other. You know it makes sense. Lots more fun.
192.”Given that Tuesday will be the day of the rule change ballot annoucement”
Is the vote closed or are they voting until Tuesday? If the vote deadline is already closed, have they already started to count the votes?
“let’s make tomorrow will be a Tory leadership-free day on PB.C. ”
I was expecting at least a thread about terrible events casting doubts over Brown (and this week there was one of them. More important some highlighted in the past IMO).
Do people think Ken will even make the final two? His campaign seems to be stuck. Still no sign of any MP’s from the new intake that now makes up a quarter of the parliamentary party, and with quite a few of those who backed him last time now either out of the Commons or backing other candidates. Latest figures from Conservativehome.com -
David Davis (56 MPs) David Cameron (13) Ken Clarke (12) Liam Fox (10) Malcolm Rifkind (5)
With the Cornerstone group largely not declared for a candidate - and Fox their obvious choice - is Ken in danger of not making the membership ballot if the leadership vote change fails on Tuesday ?
I do not think the debate has been too vicious to non-Davis supporters. In fact I would say that amongst the prominent Tory posters on this site, most have called for Clarke.
I flirted with Clarke, but have now decided that pending some mad stunt I will back Davied Davis. I am not convinced that Clarke is as popular with the public as people say - I naturally distrust opinion polls and I am certain you can find as many stats to go against Ken and you can for him.
I do not pretend Davis is the best candidate the world has ever seen, but I like some of his recent policy statements, I think he is willing to use the party’s small, but occasionally good talents to good use and what is more he does not actually detest the party’s members!
I would love Clarke to get involved in the shadow cabinet (which he will not) and I am not going against him because I want purity over power…heck give me power now! But I just think, weighing all things up David Davis is the best of the bunch.
One thing is for sure - a few of us will be wrong!
195. Who are the Cornerstone MPs? Anyone has the full list?
Not sure exactly Andrea - about 20 in number - they might be listed in Edward Leigh’s publication - but I am not sure about that.
195 - that was the motivation behind my question in 191. Whatever the members views on the rule changes, surely they must accept some of the reasoning behind the changes - that in a parliamentary system it is important that the Leader has the broad support of the MPs. With this in mind will the result of the ballot impact on their opinions if they manage to get a vote at a future date (assuming KC does manage to make the final 2 which seems extremely dubious, or if some other system is devised which gives them a choice)?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornerstone_Group
Thanks Alex.
198. I found this list on Edward Leigh website:
http://www.edwardleigh.net/cornerstonesupporters.pdf
I’m not sure if there’re others around there.
202 - yeah i saw that Andrea. The wikipedia article probably took their list from the Leigh one, which implies there are other supporters.
203. The 6 new MPs who wrote that article in “The Spectator” criticizing the licentiousness of current British society (it’s all Lab/Libdem fault apparently) could be part of teh group (it seems they’ve the same views)
They were Brian Binley, Peter Bone, David Burrows, Philip Davies, Robert Goodwill and Mark Harper.
My edition of Robert Waller’s Almanac (I think from 1994) describes DD as “the next Prime Minister but one”, albeit noting that such a description can be as much of a curse as a blessing for an MP. I think his detractors overlook the fact that he has always been rated well above-average in terms of his ability.
I doubt whether being a supporter of the death penalty is a problem. Margaret Thatcher’s support of the death penalty didn’t hinder her chances. And most people support the use of capital punishment in some circumstances - it’s a mainstream viewpoint rather than a fringe one.
Anthony Wells had an interesting article on his website about 18 months ago about just how many leftish Tory MPs have voted in favour of capital punishment, and how many right wing Tory MPs have voted against it. It’s not a left/right issue within the Tory party.
205 - that should put the cat among the pigeons and keep the debate going for another week
206- for only another week? Then what will we talk about? ;-C
195 John T - As @ 2 - Couldn’t agree more that this is a very valid
(in my case very welcome) possibility.
That’s why I suggested Foxy @ 16’s might be worth positioning on.
I wonder if Robert got any money on?
206 - I meant just to tide us through to when we actually have a better idea of the form the contest will take
Then the fact that KC appears to have minimal support among MPs might actually be focussed upon as a rather crucial problem for his chances. For all the talk of various candidates “dropping out”, obviously nobody is going to do that whilst the fight for second place seems to open.
Of course being against Fox (or other, as yet unknown, right winger) would be Davis’ dream scenario. The chance to win convincingly with the membership whilst simultaneously presenting himself as a moderate.
Of course being against Fox (or other, as yet unknown, right winger) would be Davis’ dream scenario. The chance to win convincingly with the membership whilst simultaneously presenting himself to the wider country as a moderate by comparison.
209-”or all the talk of various candidates “dropping out”, obviously nobody is going to do that whilst the fight for second place seems to open. ”
yes, but at least Andrew Lansley could drop out!
Some “gossips” from Labour conference could entertain us next week.
212. Ops, it should be “gossip”. Gossips are people who spread gossip (Tabman, I pay attention to your lessons
One of tonight’s fringe meeting in Brighton is: “IRAQ: END THE OCCUPATION, BRING THE TROOPS HOME”
Chair: Alan Simpson MP. Speakers: Tony Benn, Jeremy Corbyn MP, Gerry Doherty (TSSA), Kate Hudson (CND), Reg Keys, Houzan Mahmoud, Michael Meacher MP, Andrew Murray (StWC), Milan Rai, Sami Ramidani, Christine Shawcroft (LP NEC)
I suppose Blair and Reid won’t attend
I don’t think the plural “gossip” is sufficient to incorporate any group of gossips with you in, Andrea
I think this part of the English language will have to be reconsidered. I will be writing to the OED in the morning.
214. Am I so bad?
Just teasing you, Andrea
FWIW, I’m also a Labour MP who thinks Ken C is more of a threat than the others, unless his selection resulted in serious internal dissent in the Tory party. But a bit of me would still like him to win, because it would settle much of the ideological argument, in the same way that Blair’s early changes settled a number of the arguments of the 80s, and Churchill and Macmillan accepted the NHS. A Clarke-led party would (I assume) be unlikely to rant about either Europe or immigration threatening our immortal national soul. Given that we won’t be in power forever, I’d be pleased if the main opposition party moved to the centre in the pursuit of power, which is what the selection of Clarke would signify.
216. Next time I won’t give the latest news about fugitive MPs or Labour left fringe meetings (tomorrow they’ve “Real Labour against New Labour- I leave the speakers to your imagination)
218 - you’ve threatened that before, you know you can’t resist
219. but I’ll post them anyway. I’ll only ban you from seeing them
Then I know you’re insterested.
Does that imply Nick, that you’re pleased that the sort of economic reforms carried out by the Thatcher government are now accepted by the political mainstream?
220 - I always knew you were a New Labour man at heart
222. Alex, sorry, but I haven’t understood your last comment.
223 - Never miss an opportunity to ban something.
224. but that’s now a new labour prerogative. Old Labour would have really liked the fox hunting ban too.
Sadly today I’ve no interesting little news from UK for you. I could post this one from NZ: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=1&ObjectID=10347190
225. “That’s NOT” instead of “that’s now”
Re. 191, it depends whether you believe Anthony Seldon (’Churchill’s Indian Summer’) or Andrew Roberts (’Eminent Churchillians’, ‘Hitler and Churchill: Secrets of Leadership’).
You should judge a person by the company they keep - DD has some dubious backers it is true but he also brings with him Green, Taylor, Willetts et al. I’d be a lot happier making a decision over the Con leader if we had a clearer idea of the makeup of the shadow cabinet.
191 - Andy: Glad you agree, and I think you are quite right about time lending perspective in these matters. Let us hope there are enough of us around to ensure the view is taken further!
192 - Alex: I don’t really know what you’re driving at with that remark, but I can assure you - if David Davis wins, I will regard it as my duty to work as hard as I possibly can to see that he becomes our next Prime Minister and I shall relish doing so despite the fact that he isn’t my choice to lead us. I think you should ask somebody like Tory Boy if he would respond in kind should KC win, because I suspect the answer is no, and if he doesn’t get his way, then he’ll pick up his marbles and leave. I’ve always believed in ‘My Party - right or wrong’ which includes the leadership.
You’re missing my point AHM (explained better in post 2000
*post 200
230. Although, I’m a DD man, I’d certainly work under Ken as like you my first loyality is to the party. I do know a fair few in my local party who probably wouldn’t though. Another factor which is being overlooked of course id how would KC becoming leader affect party funding?
Completely off topic but excellent news . Suusex won the British Inter Counties Bar Billiard Championship today which was held in Reading . The first time they have won it since 1981 . Oxfordshire have been champions every year since 1997 except for 1999 when Kent won it .
231 - You are suggesting that it is important for the leader to have the broad support of the Parliamentary Party. I couldn’t agree with you more. Keep in mind, that whatever MPs say in public, the ballot is private and there are a significant number left undeclared. DD hasn’t got a majority behind him yet either, remember. It also harks back to my argument earlier in the evening that a capable leader will be able to swing MPs who may not have initially supported him or her into line. IDS wasn’t capable of this, and he paid for it - I think KC is a man of greater abilities.
233.woody662, if your local party member were able to survive Edwina as their MP, they could survive Clarke as leader
233 - The donors would come around, Woody. People like Stuart Wheeler and Michael Ashcroft aren’t going to turn their backs on a potentially resurgent Tory Party under KC when they stuck with us through the lean years under Hague and IDS. KC also has enough respect in The City to attract substantial new benefactors as well, I’m sure.
235 - Of course it is a private ballot - my hypothetical question was predicated on the ballot having happened and the results being known. If, for example, Davis was the clear leader among MPs after the final ballot with the others scrabbling around for second, do you think there should be a vote among the membership which could potentially select the second placed candidate (and would you vote for them if it were Clarke)?
229 - DD has 55 ‘friends’ from all wings of the party, Ken has lost alot of ‘friends’ since last time.( now at 11 ) So if you judge a person by the company they keep the answer must be DD.
As for the Shadow cabinet, it really will depend how the leadership election goes. Strong performances deserve good jobs.
One thing is certain, Ken won’t work for the party under anyone else, which is a shame as I think we need a shadow cabinet of all the talents. I think if Ken had been willing to work for the party in the last eight years he would be getting more support now, particularly from new MP’s.
239 - It is a good point. AHM will work for his party, good or ill, but the wide perception is that KC has not done that (unlike, for example, Michael Howard who was prepared to work for Hague even after their pact had ended in recrimination and latterly as a major prop for IDS leadership. And he was rewarded for it)
238 - I make up my own mind. I will support KC unless somebody else convinces me they are better qualified. I won’t be affected by what anyone else thinks or does as far as my own personal choice is concerned. What I will do is accept the final verdict as reached and make the best of it, and if others would do the same, including MPs, the party will be the better for it.
239 - I used to hold that view, John; in fact I’m sure old threads from this very site could be dredged up showing me making that same argument. However, I’ve decided that it’s time to move on in the best interests of the party and select the best man for the job, petty past grievances notwithstanding.
Question:
Talking about DD, it’s sometimes mentioned that he has “dubious backers” (like Tone @229).
I know about Derek Conway. Are there any others or is it only Conway?
242 - It kind of depends how many of the band of brothers that he had around him in 2001 are still with him. Is Eric Forth for example? He was rumoured to have had a falling out when he didn’t stand against Howard. And presumably some of the Cornerstone group backed him last time (although i haven’t checked).
Sophia’s major objection was always to Derek Conway
Has anyone commented on the poll in the Mail on Sunday?
241 - I voted Ken Clarke last time ( I wanted to vote for Portillo )
Ken as a candidate has gone backwards since then. IDS was obviously going to be terrible so I swallowed ideological considerations and voted Ken. Since then Ken has been the biggest tory rebel, become too old, done nothing for the party and spent his time selling fags.
This time is completely differerent I want DD to win, but there are three or four candidates who could do a good job.
Ken could never hold the parliamentary party together - it is even more eurosceptic than ever before - for that one reason Ken should never be leader. A split party will never gain office.
244. I agree: Davis is sexier than the others.
It seems they polled lots of lesb*ians (”the next most attractive candidate to women is family spokeswoman Theresa May, who wins the approval of 17 per cent”).
246 - Lol. The poll didn’t really work properly, did it?
247- The Mail has even opened a forum to discuss the result, but no comment so far.
Another crucial finding: “Malcolm Rifkind, who is seen as attractive by one woman in 100″.
Nuala?
245 - We’ll have to agree to differ on a few things there, John. Like you, I would have backed Portillo given the chance in 2001 but in the end I supported KC over IDS. Your point about a split party never gaining office is well taken, but neither will a party that puts ideaological purity above power.
KC’s connection to BAT is irrelevant to me. This is a free country and he can work for whomever he wishes, and I think it’s a measure of his opponents who use that as a crutch to attack him with. Cigarettes are a legal product, and I find that whole line as tedious and tiresome as the Lib Dems who attack Letwin for working for Rothschild. The only thing we need to concern ourselves with about that is the assurance that KC has given that he will stand down from his directorships and devote his full attention and energy to the party should he become leader.
244.
At the beginning they say: “And crucially, despite rating Mr Clarke more highly on all serious counts, women are still more likely to vote Tory if Mr Davis becomes leader”
Then at the end they say: “But despite all this, two per cent of women say they are more likely to switch to the Tories if Mr Davis - who will launch his formal campaign this week - becomes leader, while three per cent say they would be more likely to vote Labour if Mr Clarke wins.”
Aren’t the 2 sentences in contrast to each other or should I go to sleep?
250. I should go to sleep. I was reading “tory” instead of “Labour” in the last line.
BTW and O/T - has anyone had any problems getting into Anthony Wells’ site? I’m getting some message up about installing WordPress.
48 Andrea. I understand Mal was lucky to get 1 vote and that was a reluctant won from Lady Rifkind !! He almost got a second vote from Nuala but peers, convicts and the mad were disqualified
252 Andrea. Mind you I’d be disqualified on 4 counts !!!!!!
249 - The point is more about the actual reality of our party - would Ken just sit on his hands, forget his previous beliefs and just spout a eurosceptic line to keep the party together - I don’t think he could. Otherwise the party would rebel against him, as in the Commons our party is more eurosceptic than ever before.
The BAT thing doesn’t really bother me either, I guessing the Lib Dems might make abit out of it. I would have prefered him to be to be in the shadow cabinet in the last few years working for a Tory victory myself.
252. you aren’t the only one.
253. I should organize a real poll with the true Westminster hunks.
255 - I would have preferred KC be a bit more cooperative over the past 8 years as well, John; and you are quite right that it would probably have expanded his base of support for this particular run, but in my opinion, that doesn’t change the fact that he is the best man for the job and represents our best chance of making rapid progress. KC has modified his position on Europe enough to mollify the party and the Euro and EU constitution are defused for the forseeable future. The party has got to get over this hang-up about Europe; I’m as Eurosceptic as anyone else, but this is not and has never been a one issue party. It must be borne in mind at all times that the price of all this squabbling has been three large Labour majorities with another one looming on the horizon unless we get our act together.
257 - I think europe will be a weekly issue if we had Ken as leader, but I think we are safe. He has been stuck on 11 MP’s supporting him for a couple of weeks and I can’t see this growing much. Ken has missed his time and has come to a eurosceptic view too late.
156- http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1797917,00.html
Good thread.
I just can’t imagine “Prime Minister Davis”.
258 - Sorry, can’t agree with you again. It’s passing strange that you should have a problem with his views on Europe now considering you claim to have supported him in the past when those views were far more strident.
Some Labour Conference updates: (Alex, these’re for you
For the first time in 70 years Gwyneth Dunwoody won’t attend the Labour Conference. She attended the conference for the first time in 1935 when she 5 years old.
Iraq won’t be discussed. Constituency parties voted to hold urgent debates about: National Health Service, gay rights, housing and pensions.
Thank-you Andrea
Back on topic, do people think John Bercow is operating in co-ordination with Clarke’s campaign team and does he think he’s helping him?
Alex [263] - we’re supposed to be having a Tory leadership-free day
264 - Oops sorry. I’ll shut up
When are we going to get that thread on Gordon Brown?
263 Alex, he’s definitely pulling for Clarke .. he was on GMTV yesterday morning .. and was particularly damning Cameron with faint praise.
If I read your question correctly, I tend to agree with the thrust of it.
Whether he’s actually “helping” (vs hindering)is another matter all together!
267 Me too - over and out !
Sean Fear at 222: Some of the things we accepted that I used to oppose I’ve come to see were right - for instance, I don’t think strikes should be legal without a ballot of the people who are asked to strike (Scargill’s behaviour during the miners’ strike persuaded me). Others, such as the refusal to go for a Scandinavianb-style high-tax high-welfare economy, are things which I simply feel we had to accept because the electorate wouldn’t go along with what we would have liked. In both cases, I think the arguments have largely been settled and no major change is conceivable for the forseeable future, in the same way as I can’t see the NHS actually being abolished by a future government, however much they might tinker with it.
37 Max. DD on hanging. You’d lose middle-class professionals because DD is in favour of hanging (even though he wouldn’t make it party policy). But you’d win lots of votes overall. It’s one of those issues where the public is a lot more authoritarian than the politicians. In fact I think one of the least democratic things about UK politics, whether you think it’s a good thing or not, is that the Westminster village is so much more liberal than the public at large.
Also, it’s not always true that politicians from the centre are more successful. Look at Bush and Thatcher, and Atlee for that matter. The politicians who really make a difference, for better or worse, are the ones who move the centre to them.
Nick Palmer @269 - Were you ever a unilateralist? Are you still? IMHO, Labour returning to multeralism was a key sine non qua for electability. One of the great counter-factuals of our time: what kind of PM would Hugh Gaitskell have been?
Oops, should be multilateralism…
269 - To be honest I don’t think its an issue where people would switch their votes towards a party, I can’t imagine people in the Labour eartlands supporting us because we’re in favour of hanging. Its one of these things where people may say in a survey they support but I can’t help feeling when it actually comes to the crunch a lot of people would be quite uncomfortable with it.
272.”I can’t imagine people in the Labour eartlands supporting us because we’re in favour of hanging.”
and then even if some voters in Labour eartlands will switch to Conservative, nothing will probably change. What’s the point to cut Lab majority in Bolsover if they’ll fail to win Hove or Battersea?
273 - Thats exactly what I mean Andrea. More votes in Bolsover and Bootle isn’t going to compensate for losing them in Solihull, Hallam, Edinburgh, Edgbaston etc.
It really does seem that the Tory Turkey’s are going to vote for Christmas. DD will not do better than MH did in 2005, and may well do worse. After all, what is true for the Lib Dems- Labour were more unpopular than they might have been, owing to the TB/Iraq factors that will not apply in 2009/2010- is also true for the Tories too.
KC may share some aspects of Lib Dem views on Europe, but he does not share much else. In fact the Libertarian facion in the Tories probably has more in common with the majority Lib Dem opinion than it does with Social Conservatives like Edward Leigh et. al.
Nevertheless, a senior Conservative Parliamentarian has said that he would join the Lib Dems if DD becomes leader. The rancour of this contest may be underestimated by those of us external to the Conservative Party.
KC is a divisive and dangerous potential leader, but so is DD so I think the Tories may be stuck in a Catch 22 from which they can never escape. perhaps this is why some of the brighter Tories are thinking out loud about coalitions.
Mr W once again you resort to personal insult in an attempt to belittle me. I don’t generally hold with all this socialist feminism nonsense, but there’s more than a smack of mysogeny about some of your comments. Your other artifice is to pretend you have some sort of inside information in order to save yourself from having to construct a proper argument. You quote some sort of vague polling evidence in support of your favoured overwight late middle-aged male candidate, rather than explaining how Ken Clarke’s programme for our party will actually engage the sort of voters who have, sadly, deserted us since 1997.
This Daily Mail poll is irrelevant as to whether Sir Malcolm is a suitable leader for our party. To my mind he offers all the advantages of Ken Clarke with none of the disadvantages, such as his odious Europhilia and dubious tobacco interests.
“Nevertheless, a senior Conservative Parliamentarian has said that he would join the Lib Dems if DD becomes leader.”
The same one who was so rude about David Cameron, perhaps?
277 - I doubt it. He was always marked for New Labour wasn’t he? At a guess if James is not making it up it’s probably someone in the House of Lords.
277/278- Are you talking about Bercow?
For the first time in 70 years Gwyneth Dunwoody won’t attend the Labour Conference. She attended the conference for the first time in 1935 when she 5 years old.
She’s taken the BBC shilling.
OMG get John Reid off the screens!
281. I haven’t seen him today, but I could share a preventive agreement!
282 - which UK TV channels do you have access to?
283. Sky News, BBC World (but it’s basically only world news. Though they showed the election night) and BBC Prime.
John O ar 270: yes, I was a member of CND and a candidate in 1983 under Michael Foot. I never thought that unilateralism would really make the world a vastly safer place, though, so it was one of the ‘compromises with the electorate’ that I found easiest to accept.
If you had any doubt that Gordon dreams of changing the world, I think it must have been extinguished
And Child Tax credits are the solution.
263- Alex, the mistery of the fugitive (former) MP becomes more interesting. Someone has seen her: she’s back in the country. She’s been seen in Kennington
http://www.getreading.co.uk/story.asp?intid=12922
This story seems so unreal, almost crazy!
Buy Cheap Fiber Optic Cable Manufacturer…
Thank you, I could not have sead it better my self….
ally canoe…
Didn’t notice it before . . . quite clever….
georgia partner yoga…
Thank you, I could not have sead it better my self….
day spa laser hair removal chapel hill…
Thank you, I could not have sead it better my self….
the best…
Like what you have to say. Your blog makes good since to me….