« Live blog on Sedgefield and Ealing Southall by-election results | Main | No charges over cash for honours »


All cameron has to do is to maintain position for the arithmetic to move his way. Lib Dem by-election winning record is in tatters, and their polling numbers are in terminal decline. Labour are losing large swathes to the BNP, and the BNP are in the process of rolling out from a few hotspots to the general Constituncies.

If Cameron can tdiy up the act a bit, keep his momentum going, keep sucking the oxygen of publicity away from Labour nd Lib Dem, the scene is now set for the electoral arithmetic to shift towards a Conservative victory.


I am not a CCHQ troll, anybody who does not toe the traditional party line is called a CCHQ troll on this site!! Ever wondered why this site is called CONtinuityIDS on PB?

Bloody Minded, answer cleo's question, you coward. Why didn't right-wing policies win in 2005, 2001 or 1997? Continued silence from you shows you admit she's right.

Or are you a Labour HQ troll, working with your close buddy "anti-geek" - or are you the same person?

Cleo must be a socialist and/or a Tory Reform Group member. She did not comment on my points and changed the subject to immigration. As a "localist", I have never advocated campaigning on immigration.

Raj, vouchers are very popular with black and ethnic minority parents in the US. They are working in other countries. Policy Exchange, the "Cameroon" think tank, published excellent reports on school choice a few years ago.

Raj and Cleo are not modernisers but statist Luddites.

cleo, don't worry. They've just lost the argument, so they're resorting to cheap tactics.

Raj, your obnoxious and abusive post at 20.46 is hardly an argument. It was you who resorted to cheap, and nasty, tactics.

Maybe if the party bangs on about the failed right-wing policies a few more times the party will win?


You're a hypocrite for attacking cleo because she didn't answer your question - you dodged mine. I never said they couldn't work, I said that they're not popular. If you were in government you could try it, but you can't win an election with a policy people don't like.

Why the hell are you bringing up other countries? What do you want to do, get some black guy from the US to say on a party broadcast "Hey! I'm black and in the US these things work great"?!?!

Choice is not a bad thing, but you need to deal with the negative view. You can't just dig your head in the sand and say "but people SHOULD like them".

I find it interesting you've made a personal attack too. Neither I nor cleo have actually said what is the best idea, just questioned the attitude of some very stupid people in your party with their heads in the sand. So that makes us "statist luddites"? Either we're with you or we're the devil?

Well, clearly under the leadership of people like you the Tory party would be a wide church.....

So state opt-outs for the middle classes is localist is it? Localism to me is strengthening local councilc, making police accountable, giving powers to doctors and teachers, ending centralised targets.


My post wasn't an argument, it was a rebuttal of a childish comment made towards me. What the hell was I supposed to do, kneel down and apologise for criticising the great centre-right agenda?

The fact you're covering up for a nasty git like "Anti-Geek" shows what a hypocrite you are.

I was not covering up for anyone, just objecting to an abusive post that should have been deleted by the Editor.

Where is the proof that vouchers are unpopular? They are state opt-outs for everyone, not just the middle classes. Research in several countries shows that the poor benefit most.

I prefer to give power to parents, i.e. the people who use services, and patients rather than teachers and doctors (the producers). That is real localism.

BTW, I went to a state comprehensive school with streaming and hated it. There is nothing worse than being lectured by those who had the benefit of an expensive private education but want to deny others a similar opportunity.

The key question has still not been answered- why will the old failed policies bring about a Conservative landslide next time?

What are the failed policies that I am supposed to have argued for?

Dismayed - you've hit the nail on the head and I absolutely agree with you.

I am pleased that Cameron supported gay rights and wants to bring in more women and minorities into Parliament. But everything else he's done has been unimpressive to say the least.

I want a leader who isn't an authoritarian and will lower tax, encourage more privatisation, more entrepeneurship and more localism.


So why didnt you criticism the abusive posts towards cleo and myself?

Where is proof they are unpopular? Well geez, I don't know - maybe the 2005 election?

Can I ask a question - why do you keep avoiding the fact it is not about whether the ideas are GOOD it is how they are PERCEIVED. I have never said I thought they were bad. But you can't win an election without addressing the perception. I know they're not just for middle classes, but the perception is that they're the ones most likely to benefit because they can afford the difference between the voucher and the cost of private education/private healthcare.

cleo is talking about the 1997, 2001 and 2005 manifestos. You're not going to try to claim they were packed full of left-wing ideas, are you?

Michael Davidson

I would like someone who would cut taxes, but at every election you guys have tried that platform it hasn't worked. So are you just refusing to accept a tax-cutting position won't win an election, or do you know full well but don't care?

The vouchers system for one, Labour successfully portrayed it as a mechanism for the middle-class opting out of state schools/hospitals. I am not saying Labour is right but they got the message to stick and the Conservatives did not win. Public services are a key election issue just like tax was in the 1990s and the party has to show how it will improve all schools, not make it easier to opt out or just talk about building grammar schools. Localism comes from ending of top-down targets and giving power to teachers and parents in terms of shaping their schools and adapting curriculum to suit local needs.

What the majority of the Conservative Party can not/do not want to accept is that the world has moved on. The agenda has changed. The party has to respond by saying how it will make things better and not go back to past solutions. Labour has set the agenda like the Conservatives did in the 1980s. Labour responded (eventually) by accepting the Thatcherite settlement and moulding it to meet its own aims. The Conservative Party has to accept the current state of play and respond with how it will improve Britain.

Raj, your post was much more abusive.

Voters do not read manifestos. They form a view of the parties based upon the performance of leading politicians and media coverage in the months and years before a general election. Voters are also influenced by local factors and the quality of their candidates too.

Hague's problem was his stupid baseball hat rather than his manifesto. Michael Howard blew his opinion poll lead a year before the 2005 general election. The voters simply did not like him.

The voters warmed to Cameron initially. They now see him as the "heir to Blair" as Osborne wanted. The people were glad to see back of Phony Tony. They are willing to give Brown, rather than Blair's heir, a chance.

If Cameron wants to win, he needs to demonstrate that he can deliver results. Too many of our "policies" are PR gimmicks or managerialist puff like an independent NHS board.

Brown's tax increases are now biting hard, especially as interest rates are going up too. People were not so bothered about tax 5 to 10 years ago. They are now but we are avoiding the issue. Timing is everything.

The way to win public acceptance of vouchers is to limit their initial availability to poor familes. Once accepted, you extend the availability...

Vouchers for everyone except the poor? That sounds like an progressive election winning formula.

Interesting to see the friendly state of Tory party debate these days. With battles like this who needs any external opponents!

"Go see a psychiatrist to deal with your paranoia - you'd then benefit from seeing your GP so he can remove the stick crammed all the way up your arse.

Posted by: Raj | July 20, 2007 at 20:46 "

Must be Raj Persaud ! LOL !


I'm closing this thread. It has degenerated very badly. Those who have been guilty of stupid name-calling will be banned if I see them up to the same stuff again.

The comments to this entry are closed.



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:

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker