Cameron won two-thirds of the voluntary Party's vote during the 2005 leadership election - a crushing endorsement. In the same contest, he gained support from the right of the Party in Parliament as well as the left and centre. Much of the media greeted him with enthusiasm. Five years later, he's viewed with suspicion by many within his own Party and the blue parts of the press. He can only rely on three columnists to consistently champion his approach; Daniel Finkelstein at The Times, Bruce Anderson in The Independent and Matthew d'Ancona in The Sunday Telegraph.
Team Cameron's modernisation drive provides much of the explanation. The right, especially the parts which didn't support Cameron, has always been distrustful of elements of it. The Telegraph and Mail stables have been resistant. But policy alone isn't the reason for this tense relationship. From the first, Team Cameron's been a small, tightly-knit group of politically motivated people bent on driving change through. The Shadow Cabinet hasn't been a decision-making body. Shadow Ministers are at a further remove from the leadership. Utilising MPs' policy views isn't a priority. Older MPs resent Cameron for his handling of the expenses scandal. The voluntary Party is increasingly reliant on long-standing activists, and there's often a generation gap between Team Cameron's view of the world and theirs.
He has the authority of the new Prime Minister but two new questions hang over his leadership; his failure to deliver outright victory at the General Election and the scale of the secretly agreed concessions given to the Liberal Democrats, in order to secure the coalition deal. His leadership style will be tested during the Parliament to come.
