« State funding rejected by 81% of Conservative members | Main | All MEPs can compete with the A-listers »

Comments

If these polls show anything at all they show how volatile opinion is amongst those who take a definite interest in Conservative politics. We are much more likely to be influenced by a statement here or there on specific issues we hold dear. Often these will pass the public by completely.

You are right to say that winning is the most important thing to most, and as long as the party keeps winning he can visit the Arctic and no one will worry.

Probably the effect of an apparent drop in the (pre-election) polls. Obviously a lot of Tories would prefer a different leader, but will support Cameron while he appears to be an electoral asset. When that factor appears to be disappearing, the support will obviously wither (as it has with Blair).

I've always voted that I'm satisfied with Cameron, even last month when there was criticism flying about. I might think again after the A list and the way people have been flung on the scrapheap through CCO centralising image preening.

I think the last survey was the first one where I said I was dissatisfied with him. Due to recent events (local elections, statement on the HRA etc) I shall probably express satisfaction in the next survey.

I think it's when he supported State Funding and offered to eliminate 10% of MP's, and did not fully oppose the second reading of the 'End of Parliament' Act.

His offer on the HRA is more cosmetic than real. He has yet to quit the EPP.

Those who believe that Britain's independence is crucial - and that the EU is a major threat to our way of life, standard of living and security, i.e. the majority of conservatives, will not hang around for long unless Cameron shows that he will put up a fight on our behalf.

There are other less palatable options in the political marketplace. It will be tragic if Cameron drives his right wing out of the Party.

Too many respondents believing that winning is about talking to one's own people.

Wakey Wakey, Europe Immigration and lower taxes failed at the previous GE's.

Worrying about whether David meets "our" needs is just plain selfish and too inward looking. We have 200,000 Members but really need to attract 5 million more votes.

Cameron has to fill his tent from all sides to win. Not an easy task. Losing either wing is a luxury he cannot afford.

I don't agree about the 2005 general election.

http://rightlinks.co.uk/linked/modules/wiwimod/index.php?page=Postal+Voting

Cameron did a few things on 4th may.

Won an addition 300 councillors. Halted LD gains. Had direct gains from Labour. Massive swing in london. The right wing did not drop off.

People are very satisfied with that result.

Cameron did a few things on 4th may.

Won an addition 300 councillors. Halted LD gains. Had direct gains from Labour. Massive swing in london.

That's interesting.

I thought John Prescott's affair, Charles Clarke's sytematic failure, Patricia Hewitt's heckling, and Sir Menzies Campbell's ineffectuallness played a large part. As did committed Conservative activists.

Clearly I was mistaken, and Dave deserves all the credit...

Now, I'll admit that David Cameron helped make the Conservatives seem less offputting to some switching voters, but to ignore all the other factors is somewhat blinkered at best.

We already knew, James, that when things go well it's down to Cameron, and when things go badly it's the party's fault...

James

Agree that it was dissatisfaction that drove change but we saw the Libdems falter, the forecast small party surge not really occur and we built our share on top of what had been a good record in 2004.

I'd say that in 1979 it was probably Callaghan & Winter of Discontent, in 1997 Major's government & party probably did more to lose than Blair did to win. The only election I can really think of where it was the incoming party's manifesto that won was 1945 where people chose the Labour Party's vision over continuance of the pre-war government (which had had a pretty popular mandate).

To a great extent the job of an opposition is to create an acceptable & competent alternative and then through a mixture of exposure and opportunism take advantage of the governments failures.

I agree with importance of committed activists, but the SWP has those (as do Labour, Libdems etc.). What the election and performance of Cameron achieved is that we became an acceptable choice again so the work of our activists was better rewarded. He can lose that image if he departs too radically from the broad conservative consensus, if he is seen as an ineffective opponent and if our party becomes again riven by factions.

I have voted 'very Satisfied' or 'Fairly Satisfied' ever since he was elected.I tend not to make rash decisions and think he is a failure just because he does a few things i dont agree with.I will always support the leader of the party,i will always support the party.I have said it before but i tend to think that some of my fellow members can be very selfish.They look through blue tinted glasses and feel deprived and let down if he goes against their personal wishes.What they/you fail to see is the wider prespective.That is that the conservatives are now being taken seriously again,people are listening and people are liking David Cameron.The last thing we need now is for internal polls like this showing that David has not got our full support.We need to show a united front.On the A-list,i dont know what the fuss is about!
As far as i can see some of the names on it are very impressive,good hard working people.People who if elected would change the face of the party for the better.Ok i can see some names that begger beleif,of course Adam Rickket seemsa to be causing a bit of a stirr.I agree is is awfull,has no skills and can hardly string a sentance together let alone give a constructive comment ot argument.Back on topic,i am very Satisfied with David Cameron.His main job is to win elcetions,he has won one already,any satsfaction poll should reflect his sucsess in acheiving that,in my opnion it should not refect the personal opinions of jumped up, and sefish members.

>>>>only election I can really think of where it was the incoming party's manifesto that won was 1945 where people chose the Labour Party's vision over continuance of the pre-war government (which had had a pretty popular mandate).<<<<
There hadn't been a General Election for 10 years in 1945, Labour had a number of stunning by election victories in the last 5 years of the 1930's and had substantially recovered support in 1935 to where they had been in 1929, if there had been a 1940 General Election probably the Conservatives would have won a large but significantly lower majority than they had at the time that the 1945 Election campaign was called - maybe more in the order of 50 or so, so really the 1945 General Election victory was less spectacular than is often suggested.

As to the 1997 General Election campaign - if Neil Hamilton had been bound and gagged and stuck in a closet and John Major had chosen to hold the election just before rather than during a major European Summit then maybe the Conservative Party would have done quite a lot better and Labour and the Liberal Democrats a fair bit worse - certainly the Conservative Party would have had a good chance of getting at least 35% of the vote and the Labour majority might well have been less than 100 rather than 179.

"David Cameron's moves to reassure the party's right on issues such as the Human Rights Act and euthanasia..."

I'm a new Conservative supporter who joined the party after Cameron was elected. I think I may be fairly typical of new recruits in that some of my views are typically 'right' (I want the HRA repealed) others more 'left' (I'm in favour of doctor-assisted suicide being legal), so only one of these 'reassurances' suited me. The most important thing though is that Cameron is a Conservative who makes being Conservative feel like a positive, upbeat thing again. Overall I'm definitely satisfied.

Dire predictions of electoral meltdown if ConHomies are unhappy with recent Cameron performance is perhaps to overestimate the importance of that feedback.

A few hundred confirmed right wingers versus the entire electorate? In 1997, 2001 and 2005 the electorate told us that we were not to be their government. Who are the leadership of the Conservative Party supposed to be listening to?

Those who do not learn from their mistakes are doomed to repeat them. Rewriting history will do nothing to ensure success in the future.

To equate 319 wins at the local elections to confidence/satisfaction with Cameron is a BIG (although comforting to some) mistake.

Labour were the very biggest of barn doors, and to have failed to have scored a big hit against would have taken a bigger loser than Cameron.

The simple fact is that Conservatives should have done MUCH better against the worst government in living memory.

Don't kid yourselves, we gained by default, and will be doomed and fail the country if we merely ape those we despise.

Henry

I don't think the survy participants are "a few hundred right wingers" - there may be a more active participation by the more sceptical on the threads but the surveys seem to reflect a broader more representative group.

I was disaapointed with Cameron's performance in April - I thought (and still do) that the leadership played the Cash for Peerages row badly, I thought the decision to vote with the government on the revised ID cards Bill rather than abstain was wrong.

However I thought the local election campaign was well run, the concentration in the broadcasts on what councils were doing rather rthan leading on national personalities or issues was well chosen. I thought DC in his harrying of Blair over the prisoner release issue at PMQs showed an underlying strength and confidence - compare his performance as a relative newcomer with Mings failures as an experienced parliamentarian.

We did well in May elections - building on our strong showing in 2004 and demonstrating a continued recovery from 1997. I believe Cameron has placed us well for a strong showing in the next election - a mountain to climb but perhaps not as tough as the various models say as I don't think these have been tested in situation where the winning party only had 36% of the vote.

Devolution has weakened Labour in Wales & Scotland, what effect will that have? The South & Midlands are swinging our way - and there are glimmers in some Northern seats.

Editor-as the survey is still up is there any way you could see what the change in result would be if you only took into account the post local election votes?

Well, there is nothing like winning elections to make people more satisfied. I have to say that by April, I was getting impatient with the flat-lining in the polls, despite the raft of bad news the Government was suffering from. I was fretting that Cameron was sliding into the same trap all previous leaders had succumed to, moving to the Right.

Well I find that I am actually thankfull, with hindsight to the Editor, who did not post my rather venemous 'Your Platform' piece on this subject last month. Since then, I have tempered my views, but only slightly...

Camerons real focus is on reassuring wavering voters that we won't do bad things to them if in power. Initially this does seem like lots of ' I promise we will not ' statements, mixed with waffle of ' compassion and hope '. But he needs to do this before introducing policy to make things believable. In many respects the bigger the beating he takes now for this, the better - and every time Tebit opens his acidic gob, I actually think Cameron is pleased.

Now, I think his strategy is sound, but his biggest risk lies closest to him, in his Shadow Cabinet. I'm not party to the subtilties of upper-echelon Tory politics to know all his reasons for their selection, but, crucially, if they show loyalty to him, who cares. If they don't, well disaster looms large. Now (in a big roundabout way) here is the importance of May Elections: His sucess has made that loyalty much more likely, and is a huge boost to him and everyone in the party. Those that sneer at his contribution should compare our performance to that of the Lib-Dems before critisising too much.

It is a huge hurdle, and if it is mixed with some luck, thats fine. I'm delighted.

"Camerons real focus is on reassuring wavering voters that we won't do bad things to them if in power. Initially this does seem like lots of ' I promise we will not ' statements, mixed with waffle of ' compassion and hope '. But he needs to do this before introducing policy to make things believable. In many respects the bigger the beating he takes now for this, the better - and every time Tebit opens his acidic gob, I actually think Cameron is pleased".

How sad to see an IRA bombing at Brighton survivor, "Tebit," described as having an "acidic gob".
Your man Cameron got lucky; three wheels of the Labouring hearse fell off just before the local elections making it unnecessary for the editor of this blog to make it known of the increasing dis- satisfaction with Cameron. Nevertheless, Cameron should have done much better. If he is to be regarded as a "Conservative through and through" in order to be effective he will have speak with a much more "acidic gob" sooner or later.

The Brighton bomb was a terrible incident, which Lord Tebbit, and of course especially his wife, deserve much sympathy and praise for their courage in coping with the aftermath.

However, I'm afraid, this does not make him imune to attack regarding his recent comments, or any other statements he makes that undermine our party.

Norman has consistently displays the habits of a Thatcherite ideologue, attacking any position that is not in his view conforming to this. He is probably too long in the tooth to adapt to a Britain that has moved on a long way from 25 years ago, and that is understandable, but his enthusiasm for 'his' cause is only matched by how out of touch he is with the views of the vast majority of Britons today (but not, I agree, a small minority).

Tebbit compares Cameron to 'Pol Pot', and previously gained a reputation for 'acidic' comments by banding around words 'sodomite' when referring to colleagues.

Look, we're getting off the point, my comment regarding the Lib-Dems is that, if we simply 'got lucky', how didn't they also capitalise on Labour's missfortune? The clear evidence is that voters are switching to us, not the Lib-Dems. This is a clear indication that we are becoming more electable as a party, not less electable as Tebbit claims will happen, in his continual critisism of Camerons leadership. If Cameron won a landslide tomorrow Tebbit would still be on the 'fag end' of the Today program boring everyone sensless about his betrayal of the Thatcherite flame. Has he not got anything better to do? No, folks unfotrunately he has not.

Don't kid yourselves, we gained by default, and will be doomed and fail the country if we merely ape those we despise.

Well now, there's a positive campaign... goof to have you on the team! (that "f" was typo, but I decided it was Freudian and I should leave it...)

Tebbit compares Cameron to 'Pol Pot', and previously gained a reputation for 'acidic' comments by banding around words 'sodomite' when referring to colleagues.

I agree with your stance - Lord Tebbit and his wife went through a terrible trauma, and are worthy of our respect. Some of the language on here has been a little intemperate. However, some stances are simply unacceptable - and attempting to undermine or torpedoe colleagues for whom others are actively working is not helpful.

Lord Tebbit is without doubt intelligent and politically experienced enough to fully understand the impact of his words and the way in which they will be spun in the media.

Your man Cameron got lucky; three wheels of the Labouring hearse fell off just before the local elections making it unnecessary for the editor of this blog to make it known of the increasing dis- satisfaction with Cameron. Nevertheless, Cameron should have done much better. If he is to be regarded as a "Conservative through and through" in order to be effective he will have speak with a much more "acidic gob" sooner or later.

All I can say is - "don't make me laugh"...

"All I can say is - "don't make me laugh"...


Posted by: Richard Carey | May 14, 2006 at 23:13

My feelings too!

My feelings too!

I *really* wasn't looking for your agreement, you know. Takes all sorts, I guess.

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