« Labour PPC joins the Conservative Party | Main | Chishti - The Movie »

Comments

People greatly over rate the accuracy of Opinion Polls, the polls could show the Conservative Party with a 10%+ lead all the way to the General Election and because of reluctance of many Labour voters to say they were voting Labour and some waivering at the last minute the Conservatives could still lose and equally if the polls were to show a 10% Labour lead all the way to the General Election then it could turn out that people just were reluctant to admit that they were going to vote Conservative and the Conservative Party might still win narrowly.

From what I have been reading in the press, the damage to Mr Blair will be more if he has to rely on Tory Support.

Mr Cameron's real gamble is to bet that Mr Blair needs him. If the bill passes without needing Tory votes, then Cameron will be damaged.


Alice Miles argues cogently for the Tories to kill off the bill tonight.

Not at all a good poll after Jowell, sleaze etc but light in gloom as that poll also says that Cameron v Brown takes us back up to 37% v 37%.
Now can we have a bit of Punch & Judy on pensions at PMQs - watchdog condemns govt, Browns tax raid on peoples savings for old age etc (but plan for the riposte on misleading pension sales pre-1997). See we are going for a bit of P&J on the timetable for Education Bill - support the reading, but try to extend the pain by going for a longer debating timetable.

"Mr Cameron's real gamble is to bet that Mr Blair needs him. If the bill passes without needing Tory votes, then Cameron will be damaged."

Spot on Serf. It is hard to tell right now who is setting who up. Vvery interesting indeed.

I have relatives in Liverpool and Scotland who were ready to vote Tory after Dave's election. They now see him as a politically correct Blairite and have switched back to the Liberal Democrats. Sad but true.

I am always amused reading political comment here or on the news regarding the damage to Blair over the defeats in parliament. Whilst I am sure it is true of the damage within his won party - the general voting public that I talk with have no clue and are not bothered what goes on in parliament (although they should do).

As always they look at the policies and what will it mean to them when they decide to respond to pollsters or vote. It will take more than 100 days for DC to formulate enough basic policy detail, put this to the public, the public to read and here about it and then form a decision.

I am still amazed that anyone expects the Torys to have any lead in the polls at this early stage after an election defeat.

You'd have thought they'd have the intelligence to keep their germs to themselves, instead of going round giving them to everyone else. We cannot have the entire front bench team off sick because someone turned up with flu and gave it to everyone else. If you're sick, stay at home, in the long run 'sick days' are less because less fall ill in the first place. Is this what being a caring, sharing conservative is about?

The first 100 days can set the tone and mood for the rest of the leadership. It is very important. The country is ready for a change. If we cannot take a substantial poll lead with the government embroiled in sleaze and disunity, it is very worrying.

>The country is ready for a change<

But a change to what. I can't think of the last person I spoke to who supported the Labour Party. They used to and voted in the last election for Tony blair and now feel let down. They are ready to jump ship and vote Lib Dem or Tory when they know what they are voting for. It brings back memories of 1992 when so many people were fed up of the Torys but still voted for them as there was no one else to choose from. I know because I voted for in 1992 for the Tories. I the spoilt my ballot in 1997, 2001 and 05. I voted Tory in all the local elections though.

If I was polled today I would say that I do not know how I will vote, but If there was an election tomorrow and DC has put the policies in place as he is saying then I will vote Conservative.

I'm afraid that a prerequisite of Tory victory is a huge cock-up by the Labour party. I mean something that the whole country will notice, like Black Wednesday. That debacle killed our hopes for a decade. It might happen.

Cameron's strategy won't show any dividends until Brown is leader. He's preemptively attacking Brown, because that is who he will be facing. Also the "ashamed to be a Tory" poll effect will start to work again, and I think the polls will show Labour votes and don't knows where people have decided it's safe to vote Tory again.

All we can do is be competent, present a reasonable alternative, and show the loonies the door. You can't point at Cameron and blame everything on him. It's very obvious he is better than the last four leaders we've had. Hang tight.

Let's wait and see what YouGov says. ICM may be the best of the paleo-pollsters, but they are paleo nonetheless.

And isn't it odd that some polls have us doing better against Brown than Blair, whereas other polls put it the other way round?

Whilst I would agree with the Sun that David Cameron should always behave with courage and integrity it is difficult to take lessons in either from that newspaper.One thing that we can be assured of with the Sun is that it will back who it thinks will win.Principles,values and political beliefs will form no part at all in its calculations.If I was Cameron I would be tempted to tell their Editor to go forth and multiply,fortunately DC probably has more sense!
On a related subject,did anyone listen to the Naughtie v Willets interview on Today this morning?Dear old Jim couldn't hide his deep dislike of the Tories at all.How Willets remained so calm and reasonable I have no idea.

So who in Blair's coterie wrote/read out to a murdoch minion the Sun article. It'll be interesting if we do (ever) gain poll leades of 10% to see the News International folk scurrying over.


We should be careful of overreacting to an individual poll. We have an enormous amount of hard work ahead of us to convince people that the party has changed and changed for good.

"We have an enormous amount of hard work ahead of us to convince people that the party has changed and changed for good."

Don't you think that what's it changing *to* matters just a little?

The key is to be realistic, blind hope will just perpetuate the stop-start failure and keep Labour in power for many years to come.

Is it really likely that Cameron will win at the next general election? What %vote share would he need?

Playing with ElectoralCalculus.co.uk suggest the Tories need to increase their vote share by 10% from here. I doubt that is achieveable.

If that is roughly the case, then shouldn't the strategy be to build real foundations of values that will last for decades but may not come to power until the election after next, rather than rushing (or "Built Too Fast" as Private Eye bills it) everything with a flimsy strategy that coould well be dumped wholesale if the next election result is disappointing.

You can't convince people that you have changed until you have actually changed.

From an excellent start, I have seen exactly the same view changes as Selsdon Man where intially LibDems considered the switch but now do not believe it.

Let's slow down and get it right, not rush, confuse everyone and end up standing for nothing other than election.

Amen, Chad.

Interesting to compare the CHome comments with the LDs on politicalbetting. Most discussion there seems to be about Brown bad polling rather than Tory share.

Hmmm, the education Bill...I dislike a lot the Conservative tactics here, that is to support the bill, causing division within the Labour camp. As for the Bill itself, I wont be supporting it. Down here in Kent the Bill could potentially take apart the system in place. I support the 11+ system and the Bill is a threat to it.

Simon Heffer is not a Tory. He might be a (small-c) "conservative" but he is, has and always will be signed up only to the Simon Heffer Party.

"Simon Heffer is not a Tory. He might be a (small-c) "conservative" but he is, has and always will be signed up only to the Simon Heffer Party."

That depends on how you define Tory. If you define a Tory as someone who is loyal to the leadership then no, he isn't. If however you define it as someone with British Conservative principles then he is.

"The 3% Labour lead takes the party back to its BC (Before Cameron) position. As Stephan Shakespeare of YouGov argues - on YourPlatform - this is a leadership that takes opinion polls very seriously. The ICM survey is only one poll, of course, but the party leadership is some way behind the lead that it had hoped the waves of positive publicity would produce."

Well well well. I know the road to recovery is long and rocky, I know it's still early days, I know the policy groups won't be reporting until next summer blah blah blah, but surely, litany of excuses notwithstanding, everybody will acknowledge how disappointing this poll result is, even Jack?

I hope this is a blip, but I also hope it will hammer home the fact that glorified rebranding exercises just aren't enough to restore our party to government.

"Simon Heffer is not a Tory. He might be a (small-c) "conservative" but he is, has and always will be signed up only to the Simon Heffer Party."

That all depends on how you define "Tory". If you define it as loyalty to the leadership then no, he isn't. If you define it as someone who believes in British Conservatism then yes, he is. Those One Nation Tories who opposed Thatcher were still considered to be Tories.

Sorry for repeating myself but the website is going weird and despite initially showing my first posting, it then erased it before restoring it!

Chad
Let's slow down and get it right, not rush, confuse everyone and end up standing for nothing other than election.

What's with the 'we' - you left the party in a hissy fit, calm down, come back on board and then we can make the slow steady progress to a modern party that you and I would both like to see; until you become a Conservative again though the 'we' sounds a bit hollow as you intend to have candidates standing against Conservatives (though I doubt very much this will happen).

Hi KingBongo,

I have never stopped being a conservative, but that is not the same as being a member of the Tory party.

I wish it was, but it isn't. There are millions like me I suspect.

Far from a hissy fit, I resigned because my fundamental core value is "no preference, no prejudice" and I cannot be part of a party that contravenes this.

I want principles not presentation.

The deafly silence on the loans sleaze issue makes me ashamed of the Tory Party.

The application of positive discrimination, the call for localism whilst not actually applying it were all too much as for me, the Party is currently not acting like a conservative party.

I will not apologise for being driven by values and not simply political tribalism.

um, "deathly", sorry.

In short, to borrow from Mr Cameron:

"There is such a thing as conservatism, it is just not the same as the Tory Party"

I'm sorry you are having posting problems, Richard. I only pay US$15pcm for this site so can't complain too much if there are occasional problems!

I was looking on the politicalbetting website listed here last night and found this link

http://www.mori.com/polls/trends/voting-all-trends.shtml

My question is, do polls mean anything? This ones seems to consistently, without exception, underepresent tory support. Most polls seem to have an in-built pro labour bias.

Chad

you wrote about changes in the Conservative party and used 'we' - that's all I was saying; I'm certainly not asking you to apologise for anything.

I think you have principles but I also think it's better to argue your case from within and move things your way. Change can be by inches and be very frustrating. I don't agree with everything the party does, far from it but it's still the best hope for people with a dislike of the big state. You do rather imply that anybody who stays in the party despite wanting it to change lacks values and principles but I'm sure you didn't mean to.

This poll did show that if Cameron was facing Gordon Brown they would be on 37% each.

Hi KinbgBongo,

I think you have principles but I also think it's better to argue your case from within and move things your way
Absolutely, where change is possible, you should fight from within, which is why I joined the Tory Party in the first place. I also voted for Cameron as he pledged to leave the EPP (which MEP's like Roger Helmer were convinced meant 'immediately').

However, when you realise (from Cameron's statements on the a-list) that he is digging in his heels and will not be moved on the subject, what should you do?

You do rather imply that anybody who stays in the party despite wanting it to change lacks values and principles but I'm sure you didn't mean to.
Yes I did. If the party contravenes your core values, and there is no hope of them changing direction, the only principled action is to resign.

However if you believe change is possible, or you are happy with the direction, then of course you should fight from within.

I'm sorry, I don't mean to sound negative, as I really thought that although a polished presenter, Cameron would have substance and deliver on his pledges, but I no longer believe that to be the case.

Chad: Cameron is delivering on at least one of his pledges. During the leadership election he promised to do anything short of all-women shortlists that was necessary to achieve a better proportion of women MPs. You just don't like the way he is delivering it.

HiRob, don't jump the gun. You don't know that for a fact yet.

I'll repeat what I have said before, positive discrimination is prejudice. Simple, prejudice nothing else.

Let's think about diversity. Why do we want it at all? Because our communities are diverse. So trust communities to select the right candidate and you will get a diverse mix that truly reflects our communities.

Any artificial CCO-controlled GM diversity will back-fire as it cheapens the efforts of those who have succeeded despite their 'challenges' and prevents talented people from even having a chance because they happen not to be a one-legged green lesbian.

Trust communities Cameron says, whilst steadfastly refusing to do so, so as not to weaken central control.

I totally understand the issues with associations not acting fairly, so my challenge to David Cameron is this:

If you really want to encourage diversity, and associations refuse to play ball, do not impose a cco candidate, instead pitch them against the association choice and let the local communities decide. It is not as good as open primaries, but it shows trust in local communities.

So yes, I strongly disagree with this approach, and as Cameron refuses to listen or move on the issue, it was right to resign.

Chad: I have no wish to defend the Gold List approach. It certainly isn't ideal. I was merely making the point that Cameron is delivering (or, if you're being picky, doing something which he hopes will deliver) on a pledge.

On the issue of trusting communities versus central control, this is a point that you have made before. I am not sure what Cameron has said about communities that you have in mind. But I do note that in at least one other area he is talking both about local autonomy and central authority. In the section of his leadership manifesto on high standards in health and education he said "More choice, competition and local autonomy must be matched by strong
leadership to raise standards."

I think it will be very interesting to see how the balance works out in practice when we get to detailed policies.

Hi Rob,

May I ask you a question that we discussed on Serf's site and another one related to the sleaze?

1: Cameron has unequivocally pledged to withdraw from the EPP. Roger Helmer was sure that Cameron meant immediately but that of course has not happened.

Where do you draw your mark in the sand to believe this pledge will be delivered?

This autumn? End of 2006? End of 2009? Or Are you happy to wait indefinitely?

2: Do you think the Tory Party should voluntarily declare the source and structure of its past and present loans to enable transparency and full scrutiny of party funding?

Chad:
1. We discussed EPP withdrawal a couple of days ago on this site and I said that I thought the commitment was to withdraw in 2006. I subsequently tried to find the source for that understanding and came up with a semi-authoritative reference to "within a matter of months" (or words to that effect). That rang a bell. So I shall start worrying if the pledge has not been delivered by, say, the end of June. (As an aside, I find it curious that William Hague gets such a high satisfaction rating in this blog's monthly poll when he is the person who has been given the task of arranging the withdrawal. He won't be getting better than "don't know" from me until it is clear that EPP withdrawal is being delivered). I shall certainly be very disappointed in DC and WH if the pledge isn't carried out.

2. Yes

I've said it before and I'll say it again. The Cameron Project is flopping.

He's radically changed the policies of the Party and the result in the polls is simply not good enough.

Taking into account that the conservative core --the 'base'-- may well be depressed and therefore turn out less, and that many may opt for UKIP etc., the poll numbers are simply disastrous and becoming more so.

With the inevitable power hand-over to Brown at some point, let's say about a year before the next General Elections, the electorate's thirst for "change" will have been satisfied and it will be a new dawn for Labour.

Cameron's Leftie Toffs will be routed at the election and his position will quickly become untenable.

I suspect that a disastrous result in the May election may already make them very nervous.

Thing is: if you radically alter your party's ancestral position, you'd better achieve results (as Blair did for Labour). If you fail to do that, you cannot reasonably expect to survive very long as leader.

Maybe Hague will return as leader?

The day hague becomes leader again is the day when the Tories will lose all credibility with the electorate..his leadership has already been voted upon and rejected by the public.

As a true blue Conservative, I am very disappointed with Cameron. He wrote the Conservative manifesto for the 2005 election, and when he was elected leader he did a U turn on and ditched it. Why should we trust him when he has proved himself completely untrustworthy.

I think he is Blair's alter ego and will do anything to become PM, even if he ditches all Conservative principles.

Hague is too sensible to return as Leader. Why should he when he's doing very nicely without all the hassle?

DC has created a "big tent", just like Blair, and we have yet to see him oppose anything Blair introduces in the HoC.

"Cameron's Leftie Toffs will be routed at the election and his position will quickly become untenable."

How Goldie? If he convinced somebody as rabidly opposed to his platform as you are to actively support his leadership campaign, who is to say that he won't pull the same trick with the voters?

Those who voted for Cameron was for change, during change you should have never expected the same policies that voters rejected in the 2005 GE election to remain.

There is no such thing as a leftie tory, there is such a thing as a free-market tory. The rest of the bunch, like myself do believe in free-market but nothing to an extent where we should abandon the NHS and not support some of our most needy.

"I'm sorry you are having posting problems, Richard. I only pay US$15pcm for this site so can't complain too much if there are occasional problems!"

No problem, I suspect it was the computer I was using.

DVA: No, no. I fingered DC three years ago as the next Conservative prime minister. I still support him if he would only get rid of his ridiculous PC project, which most emphatically is NOT as advertised. I still hope a sound trashing in May may get him to reconsider.

Ian Sider's point is very interesting. Why do some polls say that Brown as leader would benefit Labour. and others say the reverse?

We really do need to know what the truth is about this, because it could affect our entire strategy in the future.

Rebel<\i>:I still support him if he would only get rid of his ridiculous PC project, which most emphatically is NOT as advertised. I still hope a sound trashing in May may get him to reconsider.


So you support the Party leadership, but yet presumably do not plan to lift a finger to help get Conservative candidates elected in May?

How can that be a consistent position? With suporters like that, who needs opponents?

Personally, I hope to see solid gains in May (although admittedly from a high base) and will do everything in my power to help achieve them. I look forward to your comments when we do.

Apologies, the italics seem to have gone mad...

Italics stopped!

Thanks, rescued at last!

From what I have been reading in the press, the damage to Mr Blair will be more if he has to rely on Tory Support.
I don't think most people in the country care where the support comes from, in fact if he gets the bill through in the teeth of opposition of Labour rebels then it will just be a case of Blair Triumphant and the people who were for it will remain for it and the people against it will remain against it.

If the Bill is lost on the other hand then it brings into question the remainder of Tony Blair's programme before he chooses to stepdown as Labour leader in order for his successor as PM to be chosen and another loss or 2 and he might just say it's been good while it lasted but it's time for someone else to take my place and Gordon Brown could be PM by the end of the year, otherwise I imagine Tony Blair intends to leave office having been PM longer than Mrs Thatcher, even if not much longer.

But it's unlikely that Tony Blair's going a couple of years earlier will make the slightest bit of difference to the result of the next General Election and if the Conservatives defeated a bill that they supported most of and then lost the next election then everyone would say that it was all for nothing.

>>>>From what I have been reading in the press, the damage to Mr Blair will be more if he has to rely on Tory Support.<<<<
This bit should have been in quotes.

I think many more people are ready to think about voting Conservative again. Making them comfortable about doing this and giving them the rationalisation to do it will take time and involves hitting on the right feeling/what we stand for. We are heading in the right direction. One thing is for sure just doing what we did before won't work.

Matt

>>>>The day hague becomes leader again is the day when the Tories will lose all credibility with the electorate..his leadership has already been voted upon and rejected by the public.<<<<
Both Jacques Chirac and Francois Mitterand lost 2 Presidential Leaders before eventually becoming President (much as I loathe and despise Jacques Chirac), Richard Nixon lost the 1960 Presidential Election and eventually lead the Republicans back into control of the White House, Clement Attlee lost for Labour in 1935 and went on to be PM for 6 years, Hugh Gaitskell lead Labour to a spectacular defeat in 1959 but actually showed every sign of being on course to win the following election but died prematurely, Edward Heath lost badly in 1966 but won in 1970 even though he did go on to make a total mess of things.

>>>>lost 2 Presidential Leaders
Elections that should say not Leaders.

...and Winston Churchill lost two elections as Conservative leader before being elected at the third attempt.

My God, what a lot of nonsense. You people should start to live in the real world. Anyone who thinks the Fighting Foetus could be a credible Prime Minister is barking mad. He's a joke and a prat, nothing more, and he was recognised as such in 2001. As for others on here, who are Europhobic and simultaneously think we should live up the USA's backside, you can sod off. You 51st staters are nothing other than a pack of scummy traitors who want to sell our future off to the Bushite Yankeedoodle warmongers.

Reading the sort of tripe some of you people have posted up there you're going to lose the next election, and a good thing too. The day the Tory Party finally dies is going to be a day to celebrate. The end of the 'Nasty Party'.

That was a party political broadcast on behalf of NuLab :)

Tory Assailant is such a coward that he's disabled his web address.Personally I think the Editor should make this 'post of the week' and use it as an example of the sort of moron that still believes in New Labour.

"You people should start to live in the real world. "

A real world where 42% of GDP goes to fund a state that creates dodgy dossiers, illegal wars, robs pensions and leaves an NHS in huge deficit.

"Anyone who thinks the Fighting Foetus could be a credible Prime Minister is barking mad. "

Yet he has inspired 20,000 new party members as opposed to inspiring 52 backbench rebels.

"You 51st staters are nothing other than a pack of scummy traitors who want to sell our future off to the Bushite Yankeedoodle warmongers."

I don't see our leader being referred to as "Bush's poodle".

"Reading the sort of tripe some of you people have posted up there you're going to lose the next election, and a good thing too."

And yet still remain as largest party in local government, largest party in Europe, largest party in GLA, largest share of the vote in England and given that bills are now requiring Tory support to pass please ask yourself who actually runs the country?

"The day the Tory Party finally dies is going to be a day to celebrate. The end of the 'Nasty Party'."

Such nastiness as right to buy council housing, free to socially climb, having the government run the country as opposed to the trade unions. You may accuse the Thatcher years of nastiness if you like but you can't accuse them of the spin, lies and corruptions that we've seen over the last 8 years.

Nice reply Paul,but I suspect that Tory Assailant is the sort of person who will be far too blinkered to respond to any form of rational argument.

The comments to this entry are closed.

#####here####

Categories

ConHome on Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Conservative blogs

    Today's public spending saving

    New on other blogs

    • Receive our daily email
      Enter your details below:
      Name:
      Email:
      Subscribe    
      Unsubscribe 

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker