Satisfaction with Cameron steady at 71%

The main topic of January's ConservativeHome survey was LibCon co-operation.  The results were published on Tuesday.  Summarised below are the regular tracker findings on David Cameron's performance.

Satisfaction with David Cameron (amongst Tory members) remained steady in January at 71% and dissatisfaction remained at 28%.  31% of members are "very" satisfied with David Cameron.  40% are "fairly" satisfied.

72% think it very or fairly likely that David Cameron will be Prime Minister after the next General Election.  Only 38% think he will be leading a majority Tory government, however.   Last January the proportion expecting David Cameron to be Prime Minister was 77%.

67% think the Tory party is on the right course.  27% think it is on the wrong track.  Last January 76% of members thought the party to be on the right course.  Only 17% thought it on the wrong track.

Comments

[Matt Wright]

After a decade in opposition, we face the prospect of a hung parliament and further years in opposition ahead. By the time we win, our period without forming a majority will in all likelihood rival the 1906-1922 period.

And for what? To wait ages to elect the most unambitious Conservative opposition anyone can remember. Far less ambitious than Thatcher in 1979 or Heath in 1970.

[Adam]

Thatcher wasn't very ambitious in 1979.

[TomTom]

Govts with large majorities have done enormous damage to this country which has no checks and balances.

These large majorities gave us The Single European Act, the Nice, Amsterdam, Dublin, Mastricht Treaties and emasculated Voter control of the political system.

We need the power of political parties weakened and a period where politicians have to be very attentive to the wishes of voters

[simon]

'Governments with large majorities have done enormous damage'.....Well, i think it's more to do with the fact that MP's have become poodles of the whips and go 'Mooing' through the lobbies. That, and the fact that when people get elected to the Commons they lose all sense of reality. If the SEA and Masstricht Treaty were put to the country in a referendum they would NOT have been passed.

[simon]

'Governments with large majorities have done enormous damage'.....Well, i think it's more to do with the fact that MP's have become poodles of the whips and go 'Mooing' through the lobbies. That, and the fact that when people get elected to the Commons they lose all sense of reality. If the SEA and Masstricht Treaty were put to the country in a referendum they would NOT have been passed.

[Matt Wright]

"Thatcher wasn't very ambitious in 1979." Er, no. From TIME Magazine May 14, 1979:

"It is in domestic policy, however, that Thatcher's government will differ most from its predecessor. In essence, her aim is to point Britain back toward a market economy by dismantling much of the apparatus of government controls and regulation built since the end of World War II. The means have already been made clear: curbing public expenditure, restoring personal incentives by cutting the income tax (a prohibitive 83% at the highest level of earned income), removing such restraints on private enterprise as wage and price guidelines and foreign exchange controls, redressing the balance of power between the unions and the rest of society by correcting the most flagrant abuses of organized labor."

[Andy Stidwill]

It's interesting to hear the views of so many Tory supporters who seem to be no longer interested in a big majority.

Until quite recently, it seemed as if 90% of Tories always wanted as big a majority as could possibly be won. That seems to have changed for some reason.

[Jon Gale]

Well, I certainly want to see the biggest Tory majority possible, but as long as Britain doesn't get another damaging term under Labour I'll be more than happy.

Incidentally, I notice no mention of privatisation in that TIME magazine quote.

[Geoffrey G Brooking]

Three cheers for SuperCam yet again.

[Matt Wright]

"Incidentally, I notice no mention of privatisation in that TIME magazine quote."

From 'The Right Approach to the Economy: an outline of the economic strategy of the next Conservative Government,' 17 August 1977:

"The long-term aim must be to reduce the preponderance of state ownership and to widen the basis of ownership in our community. Ownership by the State is not the same as ownership by the people. It is the very opposite."

[Rudyard.]

And ownership by the EU Corporations, is good for us,or not?

[James Buchan]

"Thatcher wasn't very ambitious in 1979."

Hardly.

"We shall cut income tax at all levels to reward hard work, responsibility and success."--the 1979 Conservative manifesto.

[Rachel Joyce]

I think David Cameron has great ambitions for an incoming Conservative Govt. However, he recognises that you have to first get people to listen to you, then identify the real problems that matter to ordinary people(public services, crime, social breakdown). Finally we then show that we have made a considered look at what works to solve those problems, and are not just suggesting policies because it suits some sort of political dogma.
I was listening to IDS the other day on social justice, and he is doing just that - get people to listen because they see we care, then get them to agree social breakdown and family breakdown is a huge issue affecting this country. Finally the policies that will come out look like they will be radical, but also based on evidence of effectiveness. This is the way to take people with us - and we can be more ambitious if we can do this.

[TomTom]

who seem to be no longer interested in a big majority.

Government itself is the problem irrespective of party.

The disaster is that noone can trust politicians not to destroy the economy and the society after the track record

[Richard]

Margaret Thatcher's proposals in 1979 might not have been as radical as they would later become but at the time they were considered a major break from the past.

[conservative historian]

"Incidentally, I notice no mention of privatisation in that TIME magazine quote."

"Report of the Nationalised Industries Policies Group," leaked to The Economist in May 1978:

"Our political objective must be to fragment the public sector of industry into a number of smaller units, which could eventually be denationalised."

[matt wright]

Can I point out that the "Matt Wright" that posted above at the beginning of this thread and at several points is NOT me ie not the Matt Wright who regularly posts on this site. I don't agree with his pesimism and agree more with Rachel Joyce. I think DC has worked to get people to listen first and the radical side will come. In fact we already have a foretaste of radicalness as tackling "social responsibility" is truly ambitious and exciting. Keep at it DC,

Cllr Matt Wright

[Alex Forsyth]

"67% think the Tory party is on the right course. 27% think it is on the wrong track. Last January 76% of members thought the party to be on the right course. Only 17% thought it on the wrong track."

THAT is the really interesting statistic.

[party worker]

"In fact we already have a foretaste of radicalness as tackling "social responsibility" is truly ambitious"

And no specifics or plan at all. DC is about the election not about government. Like Blair, he's not a conviction politician. Blair wanted to split the difference between Old Labour and the Tories. Cameron wants to split the difference between Thatcherism and New Labour. It's as simple as that.

[matt wright]

Thatcher didn't have any specifics or plan either until she got into office,

Matt

[Cllr Paul Johnston]

With Cameron's less than deft handling of the Mercer affair and today's announcement of the visit of Al Gore (of all people) as though this was a triumph for the party we seem to be doing our best to minimise the scale of our victory and ensure a hung Parliament. Add to that the seemingly uncritical acceptance of the Green agenda at its most theological and tax-raising proposals and other statist paraphernalia to go with it and we might still end up as the Opposition to a Lab-Lib Dem coalition. What ARE our leaders up to?