« Fox brings Giuliani to London | Main | Another 7% Labour lead »

Comments

Put it into perspective, the results could have been far worse. The Conservative vote held up and that has not happened in by-elections for a long time. The Lib Dems did not come close to winning. Labours vote was down.

Cleo, you're living in cloud cookoo land.

Can't see that the advice of Heffer et al would benefit a campaign in Southall or Sedgefield.

What they all overlook is that for the first time in decades we saw a concerted effort in what was previously a no-go area.
Voters there may not have come over, but at least they noted, as did others in other parts of the country, that the conservative party might be interested in them for the first time.

These results will only help Brown's poll bounce. He will be very tempted to call an early general election after the Labour conference in September.

The problem is that we are not ready. New candidates in many target seats have not had the opportunity to make an impact. My candidate appears to be very green (not in the environmental sense).

The other problem that I have highlighted on another thread is the falling membership. My association has fewer activists and lacks the cash to fund the general election campaign.

The real price of Thursday's failures could be five more years of Brown's Old Labour government. Cameron must act quickly or he will be toast.

I thought "Cleo" was a CCHQ troll but "her" OTT one-liners are beyond parody. More likely she is a Labour troll trying to make Cameron look ridiculous.

We should be doing better. People think the party has changed but they don't think it stands for anything. We need practical solutions to real problems. More talk about crime, transport, tax. Things that matter to real people. Less about climate change, which has helped change the perception of the party but we need to move on.

Well said Cleo, you've got it spot on. See my comments on Evening Standard on Ealing thread.

Olivepeel. You make the point that the Party was making an effort in a former "no go area". I'd make the following observations. If this were true then the tactics (see Mark Fields article) were wrong. i.e. why did we set ourselves up for fall in a ‘no hope seat’, rather that using it as a building block to other contests, as you suggest.

Secondly, I suspect the Tory councillors in Ealing would suggest that this wasn't entirely a 'no go area'.


It is high time to get back to Conservative values that most people in the Country yearn for. Get rid of the buffoons now before the Conservative Party becomes even more of a laughing stock under the leadership of Dave.

Oh right Steve. You think there was a possibility the Labour vote might have gone up in Blair's constituency. Ever heard of a personal vote? Stop pathetically trying this spin. These elections were slow-motion train crashes.

Read the papers today. "Cameron under pressure to rethink his leadership style", "Cameron under pressure to become more trad Tory", "the party's poor showing", "The Conbservatives poor showing", "Embarrassing setback". There's much more.

And what are Cameron and his people doing? They're on a publicity stunt jolly in Rwanda. Some people will hope they stay there.

Brown's 'new' regime has simply halted the rot and voters were less inclined to give the government a drubbing in the by-election. That is all that can be read into the results. Voters in these by-elections were not calling for a Conservative opposition reverting to the old messages. Bring on the policy groups and the modernisers move forward to the next election with all to play for.

I really wish that we should really take on board the lessons of the last couple of days. It is something that I have feared all along that in trying to change the Tory Party,David Cameron and that willing bunch who appear to be populating CCHQ are near to destroying it.If we don't win the next election then it will be too late as there will be no Party left as many committed activists will have nowhere to go as the Party will be in danger of going into freefall. One question that should be asked of the Leadership is how our membership figures stand in comparison with what they were before this purge of Conservative values was set in place.Many a loyal candidate has been swept aside in this mad rush to observe quotas and bring in people as candidates who have never previously shown any inclination towards this Party. What good is all this if it leads to disillusionment by many lifelong members and workers.It should be understood that CCHQ cannot run an election in the country without local activists and Constituency Members and their views must be listened to. A few more Constituency Chairmen are required to take a stance and not to be dictated to by CCHQ as to whom they choose as their candidate. I say this as a former constituency Chairman and if they don't like what a Constituency says then they can sack them but then they can't sack them all.

I thought you might be interested to see the comments of a recent defector from the Lib Dems to the Tories in Bromley, as posted on another website:
---------------------------------
Paul Seery says (on libdemvoice):
"What would have happened if there was no Paul Seery campaigning hard against them?
The latter one I will answer with pride. During this by-election I delivered 13,000+ pieces of literature thoughought the ealing Southall seat. This included all the wards in the seat and all but 7 yes 7 polling districts in the seat also.
My efforts were so magnificant that it recieved such high praise not only from other conservative activists but from PPCs (Marke Clarke, Louise Blagshaw) and also MPs (Justine Greening, Grant Shapps etc.) that helped out there.”

If you didn't listen to the Today programme this am, Matthew D'anconna debated the result with Peter Hitchens.

0853: At the Ealing by-elections voters were not invited to vote for the 'Conservative Party', but 'David Cameron's conservatives'. They still came in third - do people not like Cameron or not like the conservatives?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/listenagain/

"Carry On" Cleo is beyond parody. Recent polls show that voters are sceptical about climate change. They are concerned about crime, security, immigration, rising taxes and poor public services.

Cameron is not talking about these issues.
This weekend's Rwandan publicity stunt (at whose expense?) will make him look even more out of touch. Brown is taking full advantage and the polls prove voters prefer him to the Conservatives self-styled "heir to Blair".

If we carry with the PC, green agenda, we will lose the next election.

Has any senior member of the local association in Ealing Southall given a view to the media? We know that a few were miffed at the initial selection but it would be interesting to hear their views on the effect, if any, of the donation to Labour. My own impression was that there was a definite and palpable buzz about the campaign until last weekend's disclosures.

It is the Brown honeymoon, voters were not prepared to give the 'new' regime a drubbing.

"Carry on Cleo" ;-)

Bruce Mackie raised the issue of party membership figures.

As I wrote yesterday, informed sources say that party membership is plummeting, down by about a quarter since Cameron became leader.

My association has lost a third of its members. Neighbouring constituencies, also target seats, have experienced similar falls.

My advice to Cameron is to give up politics and take up Origami.

Politics needs a strong opposition, to have a strong opposition you need a strong leader, not a fop who wafts around with every change of breeze.

What polls show voters are sceptical about climate change? Climate change is the big issue of our time, debate the ways in which governments can or can not try and mitigate the damage to the planet fine but don't claim that voters do not believe it is happening. It undoubtedly needs global solutions but people can contribute closer to home too. It has to be part of any prospective governmental programme.

Gordon Brown hasn't yet been prime minister for a month! Everyone should calm down and look at the situation long-term. Gordon Brown becoming prime minister was just another Labour re-shuffle. It won't be long before the non-political public notice that they have been given last years christmas present in this years wrapping.

Give David Cameron credit for what he has achieved so far and remember that it wasn't the Conservative vote that fell in Ealing and Sedgefield, it was the Labour vote that dipped by 7% and 14%. Hardly a resounding endorsement of Labour, especially after a change of leadership.

What planet is Tony Makara on? Yes the Labour vote fell but voters did not switch to the Conservatives (whose share of the vote was virtually static compared to 2005). They chose the Lib Dems and minor parties instead.

In 2001, Douglas Carswell (now MP for Harwich) got 20% of the vote in Sedgefield. On Thursday, our candidate got less than 15%.

They won't give Cameron any credit because they want him replaced with a right-wing leader with the old policies so they can achieve another 31% at the next election.

What the hell is "Carry on Cleo" wittering on about?

I'm not sure whether climate change is stoppable or not, but either way it has no more to do with party politics than your choice of rock music. The Labour and especially the LibDems probably have better "green" credentials anyway.

Im not necessarily against the party having a green agends but there's no way its going to win elections.

I’m not sure if Tony and Cleo are making their points to support Cameron, of whether they actually believe them. Either way pretending that Thursday didn’t happen and that the results were better that anyone has realised is utter madness – we came third in both seats…read today’s papers and at the same time drink some coffee and ‘wake up’!!!

It's got nothing to do with the policies. Its been proved that people liked the so-called right-wing policies. They were disillusioned by the party because of past incompetence and sleeze.

Cameron got support because he was a new face and an unknown. Now that he's getting known people don't like what they see.

Actually - I think "Carry on Cleo" is a Labour plant – moreover I think he's joined the Cabinet in having a bong! Clearly high as a kite and having delusions

I simply said the results could have been far worse: vote share could have plummeted, Conservatives could have come 4th, Lib Dems could have won. End of story, move on, sharpen up the message for the next election.

Anybody who posts here with messages that don't chime with the negative, Ant-Cameron, old policies back theme that is constant on this website is called names and a troll!

Conservative party activists who hope for power – personal power – should stop shouting platitudes at each other reinforcing their erroneous belief that all is well with Cameron’s Conservatives. They should listen (interesting word that – missing in action?) to what their natural supporters want.

Rwanda, hugging hoodies and huskies, selecting a candidate for the Commons who supported Labour with money only a couple of weeks before, and all the rest of the nonsense, do not feature or resonate with most people’s lives.

The Party has not only lost millions of votes at the ballot box but large numbers of activists, including whole wards in natural Conservative territory.

HM Opposition is a failing brand. Where is the nearest ‘shark’ to snap it up?

Look “Carry on Cleo”, I think you protest too much, however happy to apologise if I’ve caught a raw nerve.

But lets be honest, I’m disagreeing with your assessment of the situation. It’s your views that are barmy, not your support of Cameron.

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/opinion?articleid=3049826

Tom Richmond: Writing is on the wall for amateurish Tories

But what I did not expect to discover was the, frankly, amateur level of its campaign machinery in Yorkshire – one of the key battlegrounds ahead of the next General Election.

Cleo - "climate change is the big issue of our time".

In which case why is Cameron flying to Rwanda? Rather a large carbon footprint created there I'd say. If he wants to see deprivation how about a trip to Hull or Sheffield instead? I don't see how we can blame Gordon Brown for Africa's problems but we can point to the failure of decades of Labour policies in the urban north.

The working class voters we need at the next election are concerned with issues like immigration, crime, housing and transport. If the Cameron cultists ever spoke to factory or shop workers they might understand this.

Hug a hoodie, hug a husky, hug a Hutu.

That might go down well in Notting Hill but do you that impresses anyone in Bolton or Bradford or Birmingham?


http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/opinion?articleid=3049826

Tom Richmond: Writing is on the wall for amateurish Tories

But what I did not expect to discover was the, frankly, amateur level of its campaign machinery in Yorkshire – one of the key battlegrounds ahead of the next General Election.

If it writes like a witless troll it probably is a troll.

Good to hear a voice of intellect and sanity in the person of Lindsay Jenkins of the Bruges Group

I thought "Cleo" might enjoy the comments I posted on the Daily Telegraph site

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/yourview

"David Cameron is facing pressure to rethink his leadership style"

LEADERSHIP, what leadership? The only similar leader I can think of is Lord Cardigan.

"What should Cameron do to fight back?"

He could not fight his way out of a paper bag. For all our sakes he must go, now.

"Tory strategy has gone badly awry?"

What strategy?

What was the carbon footprint of the Rwandan trip Mr. Cameron? How many votes gained for the tories?

I'm sure that Dave's trip to Rwanda is well intentioned, but bearing in mind what happened on Thursday he'll get murdered by the press and Government. Whilst Gordon is running the country, Dave’s ‘running away’.

I'm sure that Dave's trip to Rwanda is well intentioned,

better than getting wet in flooded England I suppose....like Blair always anywhere but here

We have to get the balance right. We would be wrong to gloss over this and we should take lessons from it. Heffers reaction however shows up his agenda even more clearly. Instead of him making rational suggestions he points the finger at the easy hit of candidate selection in Ealing. Other commentators need to be listened to though. We can get this right and win but need to focus our efforts in a practical way.

"he points the finger at the easy hit of candidate selection in Ealing."

It's an easy hit because it was a crass error.

Matt, how many more mistakes should Cameron be allowed before he is shown the door?

Think Cleo is probably right. Rwanda trip seems reasonable to me. Only problem might be that Brown comes out with Housing policy at same time with no senior Tory to respond.

I'm not quite sure what Heffer is going on about. In a seat that is barely a third white british, surely a white middle class lawyer would have got an even greater drubbing than Mr Lit?

David Cameron's trip to Rwanda is completely justified. Should David Cameron become prime minister he will become an international statesman and will need to have a first-hand understanding of the world beyond the United Kingdom. We all remember the shocking images of Rwanda from a few years ago. The country recovering and saddled with incredible poverty. David Cameron is showing initiative and statesmanship by wanting to find out more about nations like Rwanda.

Forget Cleo - worry about Cameron's Newsnight interview last night - if that sort of performance is repeated in a genetal election we will be dead in the water. Get him back from Africa and give him some media training. "The phrase rhymes with clucking bell"

"...should David Cameron become prime minister..."

Says it all really. We can't even say he will with any certainty.

Matt, candidate selection did play a part. Not least as it would appear that once again CCO failed to listen to the local association and went over their heads in terms of the selection. You can’t ignore the people who work for you voluntarily, even though it might pain you to do so. This would appear to be classic case of the “we know best" element surrounding Cameron.

"I really wish that we should really take on board the lessons of the last couple of days"

I am sorry Bruce but I would say that David Cameron and his team are too busy trying to learn the lessons of the last 12/14 years which IMO is a far more important area to be concentrating on.
Every point you make could be levelled at every leader and GE result since 97' with bells. How much has our membership fallen or how many natural Conservative voters have we lost in that time?
A little perspective is needed here, in fact it is a shame that we did not have a hell of a lot more perspective on the reasons why we not only lost the last 3 GE's but did not advanced more than 30 seats in all that time.
And if we are going to rattle on about figures for our party membership, how about looking at some useful comparisons with Labour and the Libdem for the same period just to be fair. Are some of you so desperate to blame Cameron for a phenomena which has been sadly true of all parties for a long time as people become more disillusioned with politics and politicians in all parties.

"That might go down well in Notting Hill but do you that impresses anyone in Bolton or Bradford or Birmingham"

Who cares what people in Bolton or Bradford or Birmingham think? I seem to recall we did reasonably well in 1979, 1983, 1987 and 1992 without having to bother too much about such places. Although I suppose we could offer free bags of chips, a state-subsidised Jeremy Kyle channel and slash VAT on chimney sweeps.

Bloody Minded

So the question goes out again - why did "working class people" not vote Tory in big enough numbers in 1997, 2001 or 2005 when tough immigration policies were put forward?

Come on, if right-wing policies can win elections, why did they fail at the last three? Lets get some answers. Why the continued silence on this matter? What are people here trying to hide or are not willing to admit?

Posted by: Raj | July 20, 2007 at 20:08

What right wing policies are you talking about?
I cant be bothered to go over that old ground again you obviously haven't been paying attention to the comments made in the past, but please tell how you come to the conclusion that Dave is a great success - a man trailing the most incompetent, disastrous government in living memory. I'll grant you Dave has changed the Conservative Party - its magic - now you see it, now you dont.
I see that Dave has taken to calling his Party, Cameron's Conservative Party - it is more likely to be thought of as Brown's Conservative Party.
Come back John Major, all is forgiven - I am only joking! He started the demise of the Tories because he was a right winger.
He was a right winger, wasn't he? Anybody who wanted to be "in the heart of Europe" must be a right winger, Ken Clarke was another right - winger?


Personally all I am interested in is seeing the next policy come out. We've had education, museums, and binge-drinking, what's next? It is on policy not worries about personality or spin that will decide the polls and the next election.

>>worry about Cameron's Newsnight interview last night - if that sort of performance is repeated in a genetal election<<

Freudian slip Ghosty?

Personally I think where this incompetent buffoon Cameron is concerned "genetal" (sic) is the appropriate description.

Words rhyming with "rowlocks" and "sickbed" come to mind whenever he appears on TV.

Get rid of him while there's still a party left! If he stood against Davis today Davis would walk it.

"That might go down well in Notting Hill but do you that impresses anyone in Bolton or Bradford or Birmingham"

Who cares what people in Bolton or Bradford or Birmingham think? I seem to recall we did reasonably well in 1979, 1983, 1987 and 1992 without having to bother too much about such places. Although I suppose we could offer free bags of chips, a state-subsidised Jeremy Kyle channel and slash VAT on chimney sweeps.

Posted by: Oliver Arthurs | July 21, 2007 at 13:32

1992....yes that was the last election the Conservatives managed to win...15 years ago......free bags of chips would be most welcome....will William Hague be delivering them or is his post purely ceremonial ?

A) During the Brown bounce is obviously a bad time to fight a by-election.

B) Picking Tony Lit as a cndidate was plain dumb.

C) Cameron does at least recognise that the "Nasty Party" image was holding us back, and has acted to decontiminate us - but now these "nice" things like the Rwanda trip are now looking gimmicky, and must stop.

It is time for Bread & Butter isues - luckiliy just as the policy groups are about to report back.

D) Getting rid of Cameron as some on here wish would be be the biggest mistake we could make, and condemn the country to Gordon Brown until 2014.

Henry Mayhew@13:35

I don't agree that General Elections are won on policy. This is particularly not true of opposition victories. Rather, General Elections are won on positioning. We need just enough policy to unpack and vivify our positioning - to show how it unpacks in practice.

Positioning has been the Conservative Party's great failing over the past three General Elections.

1997 -
New Labour: "Thatcherism with a human face"
Conservatives: "We'll occasionally stop attacking each other if someone's offering a large enough bribe."

2001 -
New Labour: "The fruits of prudence to renew the public services"
Conservatives: "Run! Run! The Germans are coming!"

2005 -
Labour (sic): "Eight years of solid growth. Why change a winning formula?"
Conservatives: "We'd seduce you with a dog-whistle, if we only knew how to whistle."

2009 - Well, that remains to be seen. But I reckon it's currently shaping up as something like
Labour: "Serious solutions for an prosperous but dangerous world."
Conservatives: "Believe in us. We believe in you."

We're getting closer to Labour, but at the same time they're getting tougher. We need to damage their positioning and enhance ours. But the big advantage I hope we will have this time is actually *having* a positioning...

Sorry. I put this on the wrong thread...

I haven't posted here for some time and its good to see that opinion has now swung very firmly against Cameron and his socialist clique. The last time I posted it was probably running just in favour of the Cameroons.

So I'd like to share with you what I was recently told by a Tory MP from the NW about a neighbouring constituency where the MP is very unpopular. Basically their membership is in freefall. Guess whose?

I'll give you a clue. It starts with a "T" and ends in "n"

I personally believe that David Cameron is pushing the party in the right direction, however the means that we employ to get to that end may not be the right ones. A few things have started to trigger alarm bells in my head recently:

1. The use of Cameron's Conservatives - this not only makes it personal for David Cameron, but it also demeans the whole team ethos that we should be pursuing in the Party - as the Royal Navy would say 'the team works.' Maybe we should be bringing more of our front bench team to the front lines.

2. Despite the last general election result crime, immigration, etc are still important issues to address. My personal opinion is that we should continue addressing the cuddly issues of the environment alongside the harder issues.

3. Considering I never met the man, I can't really comment on Tony Lit's selection. I'm sure his photo with Tony Blair is just that: a photo. I'm a Conservative, but if I had the chance to have a photo with the Prime Minister (or former Prime Minister) then I bloody well would do. If I was chairman of a company, or in charge of a charity I would have a photo with anybody who was willing to support the campaign, despite my own political leanings.

4. Finally, I think that these setbacks make it tempting for people to 'jump ship', however there are still loads of positive areas that we should remember from the last couple of years: the increase in our share of the vote in polls, hundreds of new councillors in two sets of local elections, more new councils than any other party. It was the Conservatives (not the Lib Dems, although they've been trying for years) who put the environment at the forefront of the Government's agenda.

OK, rant over. I know a lot of people may disagree with what I've said - and if you do then go easy (please) as I'm not particularly well- versed in all things political - just an average student Tory supporter.

Maybe the demographics have changed significantly in Ealing since the mid 90s. Im too lazy to look up ethnicity stats for the area, but its a fact of life the left have courted the non-white vote better than the right. I dont know why this is, i dont think non-whites are any less conservative than whites, if anything they are more so with many asians being business owners and exhibiting far stronger family ties. IIRC the republicans in the US have courted the hispanic vote sucessfully with their 'less government' agenda.

Well 'Scotty', I was interested in your post but I still stand by mine on this issue and it might be that you know me from somewhere and if you do,you will be fully aware of my committment to the Party over many a long year. This also applies to all of my family but enough said as I will no doubt have ruled out any chance one of them had of landing of a good seat this time around. Pity because like me,this one is a real Tory streetfighter and the like of which are few and far between.We could do with more committed Torys as Candidates not johnnie come latelys. Not that those in CCHQ will concern themselves with the opinions of the rank and file Party Members.

"I'm sure his photo with Tony Blair is just that: a photo."

Do we know for sure that he was even in the photo with Blair? I'm sure Labour HQ possesses a copy of Adobe Photoshop. Just a thought.

I see that the same old bash Cameron brigade is out in force again. I guess I see the election results a little differently.

Yes there were mistakes & ones we need to learn from but the fact is the Lib Dems failed to take either of the seats (which they would have expected to do on previous form)but did well enough to avoid triggering a leadership challenge to good old Ming.

Yes, the fact that Tony Lit had been photographed with Blair was an embarrasment, and one we should learn from, but if we are to regain our position as the most popular party we need to reach out and embrace people outside of our own circles. Tony Lit is precisely the type of person we should be anxious to recruit.

As some of the posters on here have said, we cannot retreat back from the centre ground and must continue down the modernising path.

The IDS report and hopefully the other policy reviews will enable us to start shape the political debate, just as Cameron's espousal of Greener issues succeeded in setting the agenda after his election.

Brown is in his honeymoon & I seem to remember the editor reminding us a while ago to hold our nerve. This is what we need to do, continue to campagain locally and build those pledges at a ward and constituency level.

If some people on here used as much energy in working positively for the party as they seem to attacking it, we'd be in a much stronger position.

I like to think that we all want the same thing - the end of the Brown government, let's focus on the things that unite us rather than those that we may choose to differ on.

For the record I've been an active member of the party for 25 years and am a local Councillor & no CCHQ plant, as no doubt someone will accuse me of.

I see that the same old bash Cameron brigade is out in force again. I guess I see the election results a little differently.

Yes there were mistakes & ones we need to learn from but the fact is the Lib Dems failed to take either of the seats (which they would have expected to do on previous form)but did well enough to avoid triggering a leadership challenge to good old Ming.

Yes, the fact that Tony Lit had been photographed with Blair was an embarrasment, and one we should learn from, but if we are to regain our position as the most popular party we need to reach out and embrace people outside of our own circles. Tony Lit is precisely the type of person we should be anxious to recruit.

As some of the posters on here have said, we cannot retreat back from the centre ground and must continue down the modernising path.

The IDS report and hopefully the other policy reviews will enable us to start shape the political debate, just as Cameron's espousal of Greener issues succeeded in setting the agenda after his election.

Brown is in his honeymoon & I seem to remember the editor reminding us a while ago to hold our nerve. This is what we need to do, continue to campagain locally and build those pledges at a ward and constituency level.

If some people on here used as much energy in working positively for the party as they seem to attacking it, we'd be in a much stronger position.

I like to think that we all want the same thing - the end of the Brown government, let's focus on the things that unite us rather than those that we may choose to differ on.

For the record I've been an active member of the party for 25 years and am a local Councillor & no CCHQ plant, as no doubt someone will accuse me of.

Oh yes - and by the way we lost 12,000 votes and gave a 14.7% swing to the Lib Dims at the Bromley and Chislehurst by-election.

23,583 votes in 2005 GE down to 11,621.
But of course, it could have been worse. What rubbish some of you come out with. "Head in the sand" springs to mind

"I guess I see the election results a little differently"

You would.

Fortunately some of us have enough independence of mind to be able to see beyond the CCHQ propaganda and hype to the sad truth.

Shepleytory - "If some people on here used as much energy in working positively for the party as they seem to attacking it, we'd be in a much stronger position".

I think you need to ask yourself why people feel it appropriate to use this site to express their own concerns and frustrations. The fact is the CCO don’t listen. I’ve written to Maples, Mary Macleod (chair of candidates) and CC’d Gareth Fox. Have I received a reply? – Not a chance! I’ve now written to the Party Chair, have I received a reply? – Not a chance. Now ask yourself why people vent their frustrations on ConservativeHome.

as the Royal Navy would say 'the team works.'

How is Faye ?

"How is Faye?"

OK, maybe I could have come up with a better example. You get the gist however.

If we stay with Cameron the party will continue to nosedive.

Which person would most people like to succeed David Cameron and how soon?

"Which person would most people like to succeed David Cameron and how soon?"

Baron Thatcher. Now.

>>Harry Randall<<

Hi are you Harry from Dorchester Democracy Movement?

If so best regards from Tony and Maggie

If you get rid of Cameron it is over, the party will be out of power for a generation

Cameron doing Rwanda makes me sick, what's wrong with Britains social problems.. ie.. health/education/drinking laws/prisoners let out early... Get a life Dave or GET OUT.

Cleo. Are you actually a Conservative?

I think you're just on here to stir and wind people up by posting rubbish.

‘Carry on Cleo’ has a point. It would be mad to remove Cameron - this isn't the same as IDS, who was truly dreadful. Not even the journo’s or editorials in today’s papers are suggesting that. But he is going to have to change. They are going to have to listen and consult more, particularly with the grassroots. So far they’ve been too arrogant and I think they now need to build some bridges. He’s also going to have to start spelling out what he believes in.

I am a floating voter Tony Barton but want a really 'new' government and considering voting Conservative at the next election as I am attracted to the progressive centre-right approach being put forward by Cameron.

If Cameron can be brought to heel, controlled by trustworthy people, and his leftist advisers and friends removed I agree we can move forward together.

But he will have to go after the next election.

I'm sure Cleo is a very nice person, just misguided.

Cameron won't be 'brought to heel' because he realises that the party has to look outwards to attract new voters to win rather than pander to right-wing prejudices that have held the party back since it deposed Margaret Thatcher. Cameron can win but he has to he backed by his party but clearly people on this site do not support him unless he reverts to old right-wing inward looking type of all recent leaders.

I was a big Cameron fan but have grown disillusioned.

All he wants is quick headlines and that is borne out by his appointment of a slick candidate in Ealing SOuthall who was not even a Tory.

The same can be said of his appointment of Sayyeda Warsi to the shadow cabinet. Whilst I like Sayeeda and think she has potential, she lacks serious experience and has been promoted ahead of time.

This leaves the party exposed as Cameron learnt when Marr interviewed him and questioned him on Warsi`s views on sex education and gays. DC was quick to distance himself from these.

The contrast of Sayeeda with his appointment of Pauline Neville-Jones, former Head of the JIC, BBC governor and no.2 at the Foreign Office could not be more stark.

DC must understand that tokenism and failure to do adequate due diligence on those he personally appoints will damage him and make the party look silly.

I seriously think that Steve Hilton should have a word and explain that his days may be numbered if such lack of judgement continues.

cleo | July 21, 16:03

The tricky bit is to attract new voters without losing the old ones!

How come over two thousand voters in Sedgefield voted BNP, as compared with a couple of hundred or so for NF in 2005 GE?

Protest rather than extremist vote maybe by folk who didn't feel that current main parties reflected their feelings?

Chris Carter - Spot on!

The immigration ticket worked a treat in 2005.

Chris Carter says he "was a big Cameron fan but" has "grown disillusioned". What surprises me is that more of those who supported his leadership did not do their own diligence before voting for him! I voted for the alternative candidate and rue the day Cameron won.

Chris Carter is right.

There is no substitute for experience and hard work. I have met Sayeeda and although she is a decent media performer, i felt she lacked substance.

I was also disturbed that she called terrorists in Kashmir "freedom fighters" soon after she became Vice-Chairman of the Party. Her lack of experience and judgement was ruthlessly exposed.

There was also a rather unflattering piece in Private Eye this week.

I cannot comment on Lit as I have not met him but the result speaks for itself.

".We could do with more committed Torys as Candidates not johnnie come latelys. Not that those in CCHQ will concern themselves with the opinions of the rank and file Party Members."

Bruce, I have been following ConHom for a long time and so am aware of your long term commitment to the party which I never questioned.
We do need old and new faces in the party working together as a team, and more importantly we need both to treat each other with a bit of respect for what they can bring to the party in terms of experience, new ideas and enthusiasm.
What is missing is the "team" mentality needed for success, ask Labour or the Libdems or even our armed forces how far they would get if they ran their operation the way we had done over the last 17 years.

Is it just me or has the site suddenly been invaded by a lot of new grumpy dour trolls all singing from the same hymn sheet in a boring and repetitive manner? Can you jazz it up a bit and throw in a bit more humour please because it really needs it or people will just skip the comments.

Bill

I felt that Cameron was the only credible candidate we had. It was choice between him and Davis and in my view, Davis is a mumbler and does not connect with people.

To be fair at the time I had not seen what kind of appoointments he would make. He has surrounded himself with YES men (and women) who just tell him what he want to hear.

So "Carry on Cleo" expects us to believe "she" is just a floating voter who is thinking about voting Conservative.

"She" must think we came down with the last shower of rain.

Floating voters who are thinking about voting Conservative don't post committed, albeit barmy, professions of love for Cameron and his mates hour after hour.

Cleo, love, if you really were some bunnyhugging lefty who thought the Yory Party might just be for you, you would have been frightened off a long time ago.

This isn't "David Camerons Conservatives". There are some real Tories posting here.

Cleo, the only criteria needed to get the "Bloody Minded" posters on this site to attack you in that manner is to show some enthusiasm for the present leader and the job he is doing so don't take it personally.
Their modus operandi is to try and undermine you and your views in this manner, just ignore them.

Scotty and Cleo - I think you're being a tad unfair here.

Many people in this party (including me) are not particularly happy with the way Cameron is running things and people use this site as an outlet to let off steam.

Now I would classify myself as a moderniser, but I am struggling to accept that Cameron is doing a good job. I think he's rejecting too much of the good parts of conservatism like lower taxes and grammar schools whilst perhaps not modernising enough in other areas.

Cameron's done some good things like encouraging more women and minorities into Parliament and approving of civil partnerships, but apart from that he's done little else and I don't think there's anything wrong with people on this site expressing disappointment in him.

We have to be open-minded and rationally discuss whether he's the right man for the job.

Michael, I don't think personally attacking other posters or David Cameron in every post is either rational or fair.
"We have to be open-minded and rationally discuss whether he's the right man for the job."
Eh! At the moment he has provided the most consistent decent poll ratings we have had in years and also has the biggest mandate from his membership out of all the main parties.
With a GE possible as soon as the Autumn you want to even discuss whether our present leader is the right man for the job, words fail me!

The biggest problem affecting the Conservative party is it lack of long term narrative.

Cameron needs a long term strategy of what he sees as the conservative party and what he sees as Labour. What I actually mean by this is that Labour have a deluded but effective view of reality where they are more clever, more interesting, nicer and stronger than the conservatives. Now this is as I say nonsense but in order to justify the ineffectiveness, inconsistencies and hypocrisy inherent in their world view they have to absolutely demonise anyone who disagrees. Everything and I mean everything leads from this so when Brown says I want consensus on 28 days he knows the public probably support it and therefore labour are stronger than the tories by not agreeing to Brown's consensus (View). Another example: When that ex blair advisor with the speech defect goes on Newsnight for "Analysis" it is actually to spin that the tories haven't yet modernised and by not agreeing with us on europe they are the same old tories. Meanwhile to put it in perspective Danny Finklestein is on the same programme actually doing some analysis. Another one: Jack Straw seriously agrieved that the radio 4 presenter had not let him speak about the by-election's as that was "part of the deal" apparently. Equally Granita pact and all the nonsense about Blair and Brown were just Cynical attempts to be more interesting as is campbell's diaries.

This is one of the reasons for Labour's electoral success. They have that narrative in mind in everything they do. The Conservative Party needs to respond with a narrative of his own. perhaps: Tories are more practical, reasonable, motivational, interesting and fair. Labour are delusional, incompetent, idealogical(europe), wasteful, partisan(West Lothian), liars.

This needs to be thought about right across the Conservative party and enacted through everything that is said and done. Most importantly it is necessary to expose Labour's daily lies so if Brown asks for consensus then we should reply that everyone knows what Brown actually means by consensus i.e it means everyone agreeing with him. If a Minister goes on Newsnight for example they are not there to debate the given subject they are there to use figures to distort the argument to make Labour look good and the tories bad. To counter this the conservative representative needs to doubt absolutely every word. They need to treat Labour for what they are: effectiely second hand car salesman trying to get one over on the public. They need to enforce the narrative and there needs to be a carefully thought through list of phrases to be used, so for example "same old labour lies" should be a phrase that we try and put out there frequently both because it is true and because it will effectively build the narrative.

"consensus on 28 days"

Of course should read 90 days

Rwanda

Why doesn't Cameron stay there?

As long as electorate feels that the economy appears to be going reasonably well (yes I know about Government debt, % of GDP on public spending etc may cause problems )and interest rate < 7% and no mass repossessions no leader of the Consevatives will lead the party to victory. Remeber Thatcher only got a majority of 30 when the country was nera total economic collapse. As to Ealing/Southall most immigrant communities know that Labour politicians will try like hell to get their arranged marriage spouses and the rest of the extended family into the UK. Living in Slough one could see from the photoshoots in the local paper how assiduosly Fiona McTaggert cultivated non-white ethnic groups in a way an even moderately right wing Conservative could never do. As to Rwanda David Cameron has the excuse to cancel seesing that a large part of his constituency is under water. Perhaps he can link the lack of help from the Army with the reports from General Dannant abouy the fact that the Army has no spare manpower

As long as electorate feels that the economy appears to be going reasonably well (yes I know about Government debt, % of GDP on public spending etc may cause problems )and interest rate < 7% and no mass repossessions no leader of the Consevatives will lead the party to victory. Remeber Thatcher only got a majority of 30 when the country was nera total economic collapse. As to Ealing/Southall most immigrant communities know that Labour politicians will try like hell to get their arranged marriage spouses and the rest of the extended family into the UK. Living in Slough one could see from the photoshoots in the local paper how assiduosly Fiona McTaggert cultivated non-white ethnic groups in a way an even moderately right wing Conservative could never do. As to Rwanda David Cameron has the excuse to cancel seesing that a large part of his constituency is under water. Perhaps he can link the lack of help from the Army with the reports from General Dannant abouy the fact that the Army has no spare manpower

As to Ealing/Southall most immigrant communities know that Labour politicians will try like hell to get their arranged marriage spouses and the rest of the extended family into the UK.

Actually the opposite is true. It is very hard to get a visa for a spouse to come to Britain; it is far easier for illegals to come in and stay here. That is one of the sore points with people trying to bring in relatives legally - it is expensive, slow, and difficult.....illegals in contrast have everything

Perhaps he can link the lack of help from the Army with the reports from General Dannant abouy the fact that the Army has no spare manpower

General Dannant is speaking of front-line combat troops of which we only have 40.000.

There are a lot more in the Army than front-line combat troops......all those women in the Armed Forces can go deal with floods, or the RAF Regiment, or the Royal Navy.......you don't need to use combat troops for tasks like that

How can David Cameron fight back? By getting serious about the concern that everyone I talk with seems to have - uncontrolled immigration and its consequences for this country.The Labourites try to stifle the discussion with accusations of racism, but that is only to deflect attention from the wanton inability of their government to tackle the issue over the past ten years. This is not about foreigners who want to come to the UK to work, settle and embrace our culture and way of life. It is about how we deal with those who are more concerned with destroying the "Britishness" that Brown is so keen on and/or contributing nothing to the economic development of a nation sliding into penury.Come on Dave, give us a policy that will weed out the wheat from the chaff and give Britain back its identity!

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

    Duty Editor

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

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker