It's been a terrible couple of weeks for Labour but the latest YouGov/ Telegraph poll shows that a Tory poll lead of 3% in the last YouGov poll (for The Sunday Times) has disappeared*.
The number thinking that David Cameron is proving to be a good leader of the Tories has shrunk from 46% last month to 38% this.
The much better news for the Tories is the declining appeal of Gordon Brown. One year ago Gordon Brown was preferred to Tony Blair as Prime Minister by 40% to 30% of voters. It's now just 31% for Brown over 30% for Blair.
A year ago 61% over 19% of voters thought Brown was doing a good job as Chancellor. That's just 49% over 30% today. 50% of voters think that there is a black hole in the nation's finances.
* If you are trying to understand why the poll changes in the ConservativeHome graphic are different from the Telegraph graphic it is because ConservativeHome is comparing this YouGov poll for The Telegraph with a more recent YouGov poll for The Sunday Times. The Telegraph is comparing with its own YouGov poll of last month.
On the other hand forecast uk is now predicting a hung parliament with either a lib-lab or con-lib coalition a possibility
Posted by: wasp | March 31, 2006 at 12:13
The point is, the voice of the Government (ie. the BBC) is doing an excellent job of deflecting the loans saga onto the Conservative party.
Posted by: Chris Palmer | March 31, 2006 at 12:15
Built To Last Quote:
We must be different. We must think and act for the long term. Our challenge is to provide a serious alternative to Labour so we can offer Britain the change it needs.
So what have we had so far?
Cameron votes with Blair over Education.
Cameron votes with Blair over ID cards.
Cameron supports Blair over State Funding.
Cameron supports Blair over stopping selection in schools.
Cameron and Blair implicated in opaque party funding.
Different?
What would anyone not currently in the Tory Party see as 'different' other than the name of the party and leader?
Posted by: Chad | March 31, 2006 at 12:40
Agree with the above. And who remembers Cameron saying in November: ""I will withdraw the Conservative Party from the EPP by Christmas."?
Then consider his bon mots on housing, immigration, state funding for parties, his evident dislike of the Thatcher legacy and his wooing of the Orange Book liberals - well, where are we with this man? Still, at least he has found time to issue his formal "leader" photograph in an appropriate soft focus.
Posted by: John Coles | March 31, 2006 at 13:04
Cameron's supporters have been arguing all along that we must make changes to gain power. They have continually *assumed* that they have the answers to electoral success, and if we follow Cameron, victory is all but inevitable.
So even if we may find Cameron's leftist outpourings painful, we should grit our teeth and bear it because it is part of a grand and ingenuous strategy of getting us back into power where we can impliment solid Tory ideas.
The trouble with this argument is that it easily backfires when Cameron's poll ratings plummet. Persuading traditional tories to ditch their ideals to gain power only works if you are seen to be able to deliver, otherwise you've ditched your principles for nothing.
Cameron's chances of winning the next election are dwindling. Where does that leave us? Did people really elect him because of his potential to win the next but one elections? Would they really have put up with the excruciating nonsense he comes out with for that?
Saying this, Cameron's supporters have still to wake up to how badly their boy is actually doing. Reading the posts of Cameron loyalists, you'd think we had a 10% lead in the polls. And they are *still* offering the "purity over power" argument even though that's not really the choice, since with Cameron we'll have neither.
When are the Cameroons going to realise the error of their ways? When are they going to realise that getting elected isn't as easy as they thought? And when are they going to realise that our electoral woes were not the result of being "too right wing"?
Posted by: John Hustings | March 31, 2006 at 13:16
It is a fact that David Cameron is doing no better than Michael Howard did at a similar stage of his leadership.
Posted by: Sean Fear | March 31, 2006 at 13:30
And who remembers Cameron saying in November: ""I will withdraw the Conservative Party from the EPP by Christmas."?
Not me. I remember him saying something quite different. Could we have a quote?
Posted by: Mark Fulford | March 31, 2006 at 13:32
John, 6 paragraphs from you talking up Conservative defeat.
You don't mention Gordon Brown's 'dwindling' prospects once.
I'd urge other Conservatives who want to win the next election, to talk up our chances and to campaign with confidence and self-belief.
Posted by: michael | March 31, 2006 at 13:33
I want Cameron to see the error of his ways. I want him and his little kitchen cabinet to realise that the people of this country are not quite as obsessed with the fact that he drinks fair trade tea as his cronies are.
His strategy since becoming leader has been so incredibly stupid that, to me, he *deserves* low poll ratings. Its justice for a crass and cowardly campaign.
Posted by: John Hustings | March 31, 2006 at 13:38
Guido quotes Christmas EPP withdrawal pledge from Cameron
Posted by: Chad | March 31, 2006 at 13:45
"Apparently Cameron has promised Bill Cash and Daniel Hannan that Tory MEPs will be out of the EPP by the end of Cameron's first week as leader."
Chad, that is not a quote of what David Cameron said, it's just more Guido rubbish.
Posted by: Chris Palmer | March 31, 2006 at 13:48
It seems to me that just being 'nice' is not getting anywhere, despite very large salaries!, not only that as a result conservatives - ordinary conservatives may well be getting depressed.
It must be daunting to be faces by the apparent invincibility of the incumbent government, but that after all, has been the main occupation of this government over the past eight years or so - to create and maintain an invincibility. This came before egercation, hospitals and everything else.
I sometimes think that people who are at the very centre of things, busy with meetings, schedules, and speeches, not to say lunches as well, don't have the 'space' to analyse the long term effects of proposed new laws etc:. Oh, of course that is why they employ analysts and advisors on huge salaries, but those people are themselves also caught up in meetings, schedules, and speeches! And so it goes on down the line. Perhaps those people who are not involved at all have a greater chance of 'seeing the bigger picture' ugh!
Posted by: Patsy Sergeant | March 31, 2006 at 13:52
I did a Google search and found many articles referring to the pledge - including one in the Telegraph and a whole thread here on conHome. Someone definitely heard something, but it would be good to hear a first hand reference.
The nearest I have found is Roger Helmer on his site saying that he understood the withdrawal pledge to mean immediately.
Will anyone who has first hand knowledge of the pledge, I gusee from the hustings, please speak up?
Posted by: Chad | March 31, 2006 at 13:53
Campainging hard as we are for the a good result in the local elections in London would read the comments of JH with profound dismay. There are a lot of people working very hard to try and knock Labour of their perch in those elections. We can do without the crude attacks and stupid negativity of these type of contributions.
Posted by: Robl | March 31, 2006 at 13:56
EPP latest here.
Posted by: Guido Fawkes | March 31, 2006 at 14:22
Removing Tory MEPs from the EPP will not resonate with the general public. They don't even know what the EPP is. The only people who will be pleased are the tory right wingers.
If Cameron really wants to win the next GE he has to put a wide gap between himself and Blair, and come up with some radical, good for the pocket policies. What is wrong with promising a cut in taxes when the time is right? Taxes are at their highest for years, and yet the muppets will still vote for NL.
At the moment nobody can see any difference between NL and Con, and they will vote for the devil they know.
Posted by: Margaret | March 31, 2006 at 15:00
I've posted before drawing your attention (not really required I hope) to the failure of DC to pull away from Labour in the polls despite Labour's appalling record (failing NHS, rising taxes, failing education, sleaze etc etc). Now, together with further disappointing news from YouGov comes the fatuous "compromise" on ID cards spun by D Davis as a major government climbdown. (Even my cat laughed at that one!)
The Conservatives are heading for humiliation in the May local elections (certainly here in London Borough of Haringey). This could be a positive outcome if and only if it forces a major re-think at Central Office. If it doesn't then the Conservative Party is effectively dead: going into the next general election as the third social democrat party is a recipe for disaster and we'll end up with the LibDems becoming HM's Opposition to Gordon Brown's Old Labour administration.
Posted by: Umbongo | March 31, 2006 at 15:01
Well, Rob, it would be a little easier to respond were your comments just a tad more grammatical. Notwithstanding that, I offer my "crude attacks and stupid negativity" out of a genuine concern for where Mr Cameron is leading the party. For me, it seems like a horrible re-run of the Heath years. What are Tories wanting a conservative government to do - mutely support this death march into the swamp of the middle ground? Mr Cameron is young enough to learn and I (and, I suspect, many others) just hope that he will soon start to do so. The views of the metropolitan elite might seem very seductive to him but there is a whole different world that he must consider, beyond the M25.
Posted by: John Coles | March 31, 2006 at 15:11
I'm pretty sure we're not "heading for humiliation" in the local elections
Posted by: Sean Fear | March 31, 2006 at 15:20
Here we go, same ole same ole
"Cameron's not at 50% in the polls it's all a disaster it was so much better when we were at 28% in the polls doomed doomed we're all doomed I tell ye"
I admit to having been disappointed over ID cards and very angry about letting the corruption stories impact on us as well as the Labour party but get a grip guys.
In order to win the GE we need to have the country ready to hate the incumbent government and I think we're just about there. Next we have to give them a positive reason to choose us and that is a job not yet done. All any of the polls have shown is that within their margin of error the two parties are neck and neck.
We might be surprised because of the awful nature of this government but remember yougov shows people claim they still want more spending and it is Labour that is promisng it to them.
We are going to give Labour a very well deserved kicking in the locals and I think we should concntrate on aiming our fire at the enemy (for some of you I would point out that means the Labour and LD parties not the Shadow cabinet) and securing over 40% of the vote on May 4.
Posted by: kingbongo | March 31, 2006 at 15:47
As I have been saying for weeks now: Project Cameron is flopping.
It will have to be re-calibrated or it will go down.
Posted by: Goldie | March 31, 2006 at 16:05
I can't say this result is particularly dissapointing or even unpredictable. Why should people want to vote Tory when they still don't know what the Cameron Conservatives stand for? If we're not doing better when policies are being announced then we should worry.
Posted by: Richard | March 31, 2006 at 16:32
"yougov shows people claim they still want more spending and it is Labour that is promisng it to them."
Do YouGov ask, "do you want more spending if it costs you personally an extra 3% on your income tax"?
I'd love to set some YouGov questions wouldn't you? It's about time the Government started being honest about how much their promises are going to cost long term.
As for polls, all this says to me is that the people questioned are disillusioned with all three parties and you'll be lucky to get people off their settee to bother to vote at all-unless the sitting Council have p'd them off locally.
Posted by: a-tracy | March 31, 2006 at 17:02
I doubt that Camerons performance is reflected on this..
Frankly, with the corruption charge in new labour becoming more apparent, NHS going down the drain again... Labour's time is up.
Its just that the alternative has not been presented, DC is lacking the policies he needs to drive the Tory party well into the lead.
Posted by: Jaz | March 31, 2006 at 17:03
I am very depressed with DC- I always voted Tory and voted for them enthusiastically under Michael Howard because:
1. They acknowledged the NHS was wasting money and not looking after us properly- and had a solution.
2. They wanted tax cuts- and had a way.
DC arrives and says
1. The NHS is super, as is.
2. No tax cuts unless PRUDENT!
No wonder the Tories are getting hammered...because we are the New New Labour Party...when actually, 25 % of the British electorate is BEDROCK, HARD RIGHT, DIE-HARD, THATCHERITE TORY- 25 % is one hell of alot to leave out for the garbage man.
Posted by: eugene | March 31, 2006 at 17:47
One would think this site was full of people who supported the Conservative Party. Evidently not. Perhaps I should ignore this site and go back onto the streets, where the Conservative Party is being listened to far more than at any point in my (admittedly short) political life.
Posted by: Cllr Iain Lindley | March 31, 2006 at 19:13
I wonder if Iain would be so unflinchingly loyal if Fox or Davis had won the leadership contest and pursued a very different agenda.
Posted by: John Hustings | March 31, 2006 at 19:30
The Gordon Brown findings are interesting. I was one of those who advised against concentrating our attacks on the Chancellor in the last ConservativeHome poll, but his seemingly freefalling ratings would appear to indicate that there may be something in this negative campaigning malarkey after all.
The David Cameron findings aren't particularly surprising - not dreadful, but nothing to write home about either. It doesn't indicate election-winning form (unless your name is J. Stone) but it doesn't really justify the hysterical wailings coming from the usual doommongers - speaking as a repented sinner that is!
Posted by: Daniel Vince-Archer | March 31, 2006 at 20:21
Why is criticising Cameron "doommongering"? I fail to understand that.
Posted by: John Hustings | March 31, 2006 at 20:32
I'm always so late to these things. I expect you've all gone home.
If Blair resigns in June / July as many now expect, what will we all say then.
There would be very good reason to argue that Cameron got his man and killed him with kindness.
Then you have Cameron vs. Brown (probably) and then Cameron's plan really kicks in.
The first phase of ANY Tory revival had to be the removal of Blair.
Wait and see. Wait and see.
(Did the Tories really vote in favour of ID Cards?)
Posted by: Richard Bailey | March 31, 2006 at 20:44
Yes, they really did. David Davis's ending speech at Parliament was strange. He said that he really didnt like the Bill and if he becomes Home Secretary he will get rid of it, but the compromise is worth supporting!
Posted by: James Maskell | March 31, 2006 at 20:46
Eugene,
Lovely sentiment but do the maths - 25% doesn't get you elected. Never has and never will.
Since when did Tories abandon their electioneering skills. Do what it takes to increase appeal, win power, cut taxes, reform NHS.
Please understand. Please.
Posted by: rwdbailey | March 31, 2006 at 20:50
"Why is criticising Cameron "doommongering"? I fail to understand that."
I didn't say it was - I'm not exactly shy to criticise David Cameron when the occasion calls for it!
I was referring to comments like "Cameron's poll ratings plummet", "the Conservatives are heading for humiliation in the May local elections", "the Conservative Party is effectively dead: going into the next general election as the third social democrat party is a recipe for disaster and we'll end up with the LibDems becoming HM's Opposition to Gordon Brown's Old Labour administration", "death march into the swamp of the middle ground", "Project Cameron is flopping" and "the Tories are getting hammered"...
Posted by: Daniel Vince-Archer | March 31, 2006 at 20:51
D Chameleon has mastered PR and followmanship- He must now master Leadership. We need less government, less tax take, more self help, a proper and polite final no to Europe and all its works (if only for their own good), less immigrants and a fair deal for them anyway. We also need a proper defence, not the rundown and motheaten old carthorse we now have.
Posted by: John Prendergast | March 31, 2006 at 20:54
Not all of those comments are doom-mongering (and those that are aren't regular contributers).
Saying his poll ratings are plumetting is just a fact. I'm not actually unhappy about it, so I'm hardly doom-mongering. I've been trying to argue for a long time that Cameron's perverse tactic of appealing to a very narrow group of people (metropolitan elites) is a very stupid one. The purpose of me pointing out these bad poll ratings is to demonstrate just how poorly this tactic of his is working.
Furthermore, I have felt the strong need to point out that the common Cameronian argument ("principles don't work without power") doesn't hold any water anymore because their boy hasn't brought us any nearer power. He is flatlining in the polls, so they need a new argument as to why we've ditched all our principles.
To express our dismay and disgruntlement at Cameron's performance is not doom-mongering, it's just that: an expression of dismay.
Posted by: John Hustings | March 31, 2006 at 20:59
"We need less government, less tax take, more self help, a proper and polite final no to Europe and all its works (if only for their own good), less immigrants and a fair deal for them anyway. We also need a proper defence, not the rundown and motheaten old carthorse we now have. "
That's far too right-wing! You need another party if you want that. We are all social democrats now.
Posted by: John Hustings | March 31, 2006 at 21:02
I am however, appalled by Maude's handling of this loans affair.
The whole thing was ignited by Brown (Harman and Dromey) to get Blair. We had nothing to do with it. So what did we do? We sounded off promising to come up with some new policy ideas for party funding, shouting "hello, hello, we did it too and were over here!"
Then we, THE TORIES, suggested STATE FUNDING. AAAAAARRRRGGGGGHHH.
Then we take longer than anyone to get our list sorted out thus dragging the story out for even longer so that it does us even worse damage than it did Labour.
Then Maude goes on Sky News and give the most insincere and frankly embarrassing interview I've ever seen.
Gordon Brown must have absolutely died laughing, but I can assure you I have not.
Get a grip.
Posted by: Richard Bailey | March 31, 2006 at 21:02
We should also note that the media honeymoon is now over. It seemed to me that the media took a shine to Cameron and told their readers he was wonderful. Now that such enthusiasm has died down, Cameron has to make more of an effort to impress.
Posted by: Richard | March 31, 2006 at 21:26
My word, it's like dinner with the Heffers on this blog sometimes.
I am hardly the staunchest of Cameronites, but the relentless negativity of some folk here really does take the biscuit.
On a personal level, I can now appreciate the frustration my unenlightened headbanging must have caused Iain, Mark and Michael during the leadership contest!
Posted by: Daniel Vince-Archer | March 31, 2006 at 21:51
"D Chameleon has mastered PR and followmanship- He must now master Leadership. We need less government, less tax take, more self help, a proper and polite final no to Europe and all its works (if only for their own good), less immigrants and a fair deal for them anyway. We also need a proper defence, not the rundown and motheaten old carthorse we now have"
Bang on John: unless that is all going to be on offer there will not be any point in voting Conservative and I will be among the 25% aforementioned that Cameron does not need or want to vote for him and his oddly and whimsically named Conservative party.
Posted by: Dontmakemelaugh | March 31, 2006 at 21:58
"I am hardly the staunchest of Cameronites, but the relentless negativity of some folk here really does take the biscuit."
I don't understand why "positivity" should be expected of anyone. If I don't feel positive, I'm not going to make a positive comment.
There are plenty of things I *am* positive about. David Cameron just happens not to be one of them.
Posted by: John Hustings | March 31, 2006 at 22:04
I noticed that the vast majority of anti-Cameron people are the same people who started out voting for David Davis. Frankly i'm seeing it as disloyality to our leader. I don't agree that infighting is the way to go about things, I know that Cameron's government will be far better than Brown's or Blairs and that's what matters.
I will be voting Tory. No europe is not all bad, no immigration is not all negative, yes taxation cuts can cause some problems, yes the NHS proves to be a useful tool is people's lives and our military does a good job.
Get a grip and come back to reality.. You know that DC cannot deviate much from these issues if we are to seems respectable and not extremist.
Posted by: Jaz | April 01, 2006 at 00:17
Cameron has been the leader for the grand total of 4 months. Anyone who believes that the issues the Conservative party faces would have been solved in that time is living on cloud cuckoo land. We do know that our approach before was not attracting enough votes and just doing more of the same will not work. Change was needed. As a councillor I have very clearly seen new support from new quarters as a result of the different Cameron approach. This in the North well outside of the M25. To get our ideas across to the public we need to be listened to and to be listened to we have to cahnge the perception of the Conservative brand. Only when we are being listened to can we present policies and expect to get results. I think Cameron must not be distracted from his general approach however to illustrate I am not a blind cheerleader of Cameron I do concede one key thing. Namely that he has not yet crystallised a clear message about what the party stands for in modern times. This is a consistent issue that the public are confused about since 1997 and perhaps longer. When I talk to people they are more interested in our party and beginning to listen again (and they are more p'd off with Lab) but they are not sure what we are really going to do. The polls quite simply reflect that with a begrudging neck and neck profile that suggest the "jury is out". Cameron will have to start defining what we stand for soon,
Matt
Posted by: matt wright | April 01, 2006 at 01:10
"No europe is not all bad"
What are the benefits of the EU apart from free trade?
"yes taxation cuts can cause some problems"
Such as? Bearing in mind the government wastes over 80 billion a year and the James Review calculated spending cuts of over 30 billion that wouldn't harm frontline services it seems there is plenty of scope for tax cuts.
Posted by: Richard | April 01, 2006 at 07:42
"What are the benefits of the EU apart from free trade?"
That if you don't like Britain you are free to go and live in Spain, Italy, France, Germany, Holland, Ireland, etc... That's an enormous and underestimated safeguard.
That we’re able to offer the new member states an alternative to Russia and improve stability in our own region.
etc...
Posted by: Mark Fulford | April 01, 2006 at 08:04
This poll is interesting because it shows that Cameron's Conservatives haven't made the breakthrough we are hoping for (yet?) but that also that the Labour Party has lost support - barely a year after its election it is 3-5% adrift of where it was post election.
The tarnishing of Brown has been the second thrust of this party's strategy since December and seems to be bearing fruit. If DC & friends can come up with a stronger and more compelling narrative for what this party will do for Britain then the "direction of travel" (seems to be latest political jargon) will be Labour can't win here - and then its all to play for.
In the last election a number of people held their noses and voted Labout as Polly Toynbee put it. They will be less willing to do this next time - the last election looks to me more and more like 1992 when just enough voters decided to stay with the party on the basis of what it had been and for fear of old Labour.
But we need to be quicker on our feet, more opportunistic not less.
Posted by: Ted | April 01, 2006 at 08:59
Ted: "The tarnishing of Brown has been the second thrust of this party's strategy since December and seems to be bearing fruit. If DC & friends can come up with a stronger and more compelling narrative for what this party will do for Britain then the "direction of travel" (seems to be latest political jargon) will be Labour can't win here - and then its all to play for."
My only concern with this, Ted, is that it doesn't do anything about the LibDems. If Labour unpopularity is the main thing we help to achieve then the LibDems are likely to 'share the proceeds' of that unpopularity. We still haven't decided how to deal with the LibDem threat.
Posted by: Editor | April 01, 2006 at 10:54
Do what we always do. Soft on drugs, soft on crime. A local income tax will cost you more. They'll make us a province of Europe and their environmental policies are unrealistic. Their "policies" are empty promises which will never be delivered on. Protest vote if you want, it won't get rid of Labour and won't ultimately change anything. Their opposition to the Iraq war was one of the most sickening bits of political opportunism ever seen. They're also internally divided, orange bookers vs sandal wearers. Oh, and their leader probably won't make it to the next election.
Posted by: Henry Whitmarsh | April 01, 2006 at 11:11
Oh, and their leader probably won't make it to the next election.
An increasingly ageing population will not respond positively to ageist campaigning.
Posted by: Chad | April 01, 2006 at 11:25
A strong appeal to older voters is a big missing ingredient in Cameron's Conservatism. Freddie Forsyth wrote about this subject in yesterday's Express.
Posted by: Editor | April 01, 2006 at 11:51
They do say that young cardinals vote for old Popes.
Posted by: Henry Whitmarsh | April 01, 2006 at 12:27
Editor
Agree there is a danger we don't recognise the LD threat but I've mixed feelings on the Lib Dems - if you play around on Electoral Calculus and asume Tory votes around 38-40% then we can only win a majority by move of Lab voters to LD camp (much as we won huge majorities when SDP was strong).
In Scotland & Wales I think we are seeing this drift to LDs - if same is repeated in northern urban conurbations it could well be that Blair's NuLab legacy is that the LDs increasingly displace Labour.
We could well see Labour move to the third party in terms of votes in the May elections - and the LDs will increasingly make the play for soft Labour voters not trusting enough of Cameron Conservatism.
I do agree that we need to make a strong play for older voters - the appeal must be around enablement. E.g. Free bus & coach travel is a perk not a policy - how does it deal with rising costs of care? how does it help people on fixed incomes by putting yet more burdens on the hard pressed council taxpayer?
We need to say that we intend to give pensioners more of their income to use as they wish, that we will deliver basic care to all free at point of use, we will look at how to reduce the burden of council tax etc. That we'll do this in part by getting rid of burdensome targeted credits, by removing ill thought out perks. That rest will be funded by simplifying tax system, abolishing ID cards, cutting government waste.
Posted by: Ted | April 01, 2006 at 12:53
A strong appeal to older voters is a big missing ingredient in Cameron's Conservatism.
I think that's underestimating the intelligence and wisdom of retired voters.
Posted by: Mark Fulford | April 01, 2006 at 13:37
According to the ConservativeHome poll of polls, Labour is actually at a higher level of support than in last year's general election, at 36.6% compared to 36.2%. That's quite worrying, in my opinion.
Posted by: Andy Stidwill | April 01, 2006 at 17:12
According to Martin Baxter's site, the poll of poll figures would translate to a 54 majority for Labour, with the breakdown being 350/233/32...
Posted by: Daniel Vince-Archer | April 02, 2006 at 15:11
I agree with you on Electoral Calculus - For the new poll of polls in the sidebar I've removed the EC's projection. Thanks.
Posted by: Editor | April 02, 2006 at 15:13
Sorry, very late on this.
We are going to have a national election (albeit for local government) in 4 weeks. Let's bide our time, work together and see what befalls us. After that is the time to discuss what isn't working.
I have a fear of history repeating itself, that Cameron becomes Heath and condemns the country to impoverishment by implementing anti-market policies. But I'm willing to wait and see before I start protesting - 4 months is too short a time.
I'd like to see him take cognisance of the danger and allay the fear, but I'm sanguine about when he does so - it's much more important to split the anti-Tory coalition and use May 4th to establish ourselves as the government-in-waiting. Until that happens anything we say is largely going to be ignored.
Posted by: Giffin Lorimer | April 03, 2006 at 00:00