« Ming's "pitiful" call for in-out EU vote | Main | The good economic times appear to be over for Brown and debt-ridden Britain »

Comments

On PB the poll is being compared, methodologically to the last Sunday Times poll (the 10pt lead one) as opposed to the last YouGov which was for GMTV. Either way it's a fall for Labour or no change (plus or minus one with the two main parties are negligable changes)

Yes, it will be interesting to see how it looks a month from now. All this cornfirms that the next GE will be the most exciting since 1979. I really can't see Gordon Brown getting a better lead than this, he might just be tempted to go to the people.

What is consistent, whatever way you look at it, is that Labour remain ahead and that the election winning required Tory lead is simply not materialising. I sincerely hope that the Party conference will bring forth announcements and firm policy positions that can change that, not just new taxes on ordinary people, but after the last few weeks I'm not holding my breath.

Compared to the large lead that Cameron had over Blair, this poll is very disappointing at this stage in the electoral cycle. The only comfort is that the Lib Dems are facing meltdown.

Given the Northern Rock crisis and the prospect of a recession next year, Brown would be wise call a general election after the Labour conference.

Anthony Wells states the only conclusion you can draw from this is that the Brown bounce is down from its highs. Fieldwork was Thurs, before Northern Rock collapsed and is therefore somewhat irrelevant IMO.

The danger must be *activist* that the recent economic difficulties may benefit Labour.

Did you see yesterday's Times poll on who voters would trust when economic difficulties arose?: "According to Populus, this is a clear victory for Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling over David Cameron and George Osborne, by 61 to 27 per cent."

Jennifer, that is not surprising considering the benign economic conditions over recent years. It is HOW a Labour government will handle the much more volatile conditions, especially if we see a real downturn in the British economy.
Only then will we be able to judge if the public feel so confident about Brown and Darling at the helm, and remember Brown has claimed credit for the low interest rates and end to boom and bust cycles.
There will be much more intense scrutiny from the media and the voters if we see any more scenes like those outside Northern Rock branches in the last couple of days.

Very disappointing for the Cameroons. Cameron just isn't working. 10 years of Labour and we are STILL behind! To think 18 months before the 1992 General Election Labour were 25 points ahead and still went onto defeat! We can't even get 1 point ahead. Frankly its pathetic.

Yet people still make excuses for Cameron. Talk about putting your head in the sand. What's going to happen when the conferences are all over and Labour still leads? What's the excuse going to be then? I don't see how a conference will change anything much. Let's face it we know Brown is going to have something up his sleeve when its his conference and he's going to give all he's got to undermining the tory conference. If you think this is not the case you still underestimate Brown.

Cameroonism is out of touch and distant. The party made a huge mistake in electing him and will pay the price come the next General Election. Sad but true.

On these figures Electoral Calculus shows that Labour would increase their majority to 96.

34% is just slightly higher (by 0.76%) than what we got in 2005 under Howard. Hasn't Cameron done well? He's managed to make hardly any progress, increase the chances of a higher Labour majority and annoy thousands of tories!

But lets not criticise Cameron, after all he's principled and has advocated sensible policies. Oh wait, he hasn't. Cameron was chosen because people thought he could win. He has showing that not only can he not win but that he's helping Labour.

Browns boast that he had ended boom and bust will inevitably haunt him in the years to come.

It is good sign that we have people like radical Tory and Effie on the site (clearly both Labour supporters - at least effie admits it). It means that Brown is panicked each of them comes with poorly thought through reasoning (because a spin doctor has provided them with it) to say how Brown is clever and wonderful, ignoring mountains of evidence to the contrary. Their arguments both for Brown and against Cameron are shallow and transparent. If you then ask them to explain further you are accused of being personal or still being a member of the nasty party. There appearance is a sign of panic by Brown that people don't believe him, he knows he had one chance to distance himself from Blair and one chance to restore peoples trust. He is far too arrogant to truly try and do that and therefore the only thing we are likely to see is a continuation of stunts like citizens juries to try and fool the British Public that he has changed etc, he is panicked because like the little boy putting his finger in the dyke to try and prevent the whole thing collapsing a daily influx of bad news due largely to his incompetence will quite quickly destroy his spin.

The headline in the Sunday Time is "Labour lead halved as voters feel pinch".

GORDON BROWN’S opinion poll lead has halved in the space of a month, making an early election much less likely, according to the latest Sunday Times-YouGov poll of more than 1,800 people.

While Labour enjoys a five-point lead over the Conservatives, it has slipped three points from 42% to 39% while the Tories have climbed from 32% to 34%. The Liberal Democrats, on the eve of their party conference, have edged up from 14% to 15% but remain well down on their 23% share of the vote in the May 2005 general election.

That's what readers are going to see. It's quite a comprehensive poll actually, with figures about the economy and Europe that will worry Brown. He really can't wait any longer than the autumn or spring to hold an election.

voreas06 | September 16, 2007 at 09:00

Oh Sure I am worried, I look at the polls and quake in my shoes.
Take a reality check voreas06.
You are living in a dream world, at least most of the bloggers on here face the facts, you are doing an Emu.

Effie "I look at the polls and quake in my shoes."

Are those the polls that show Brown's lead halved in a month. The bounce is on its way down, and with the drip drip of bad news that your lot have caused, it is only a matter of time before the lead disappears. You need to start asking yourself what happens to Labour once Brown is beaten. New Labour was a sacrifice of almost everything your party believes in for power and with Brown your party is going further and further to the right. Once that power disappears there will be the mother of all panics, New Labour will have failed and old Labour will be as unpopular as ever. This scenario is likey even if Brown wins with a reduced majority. I can't see the Labour party surviving defeat, neither can Brown and that is why he is reduced to desperate stunts and spends his whole time trying to destabilise the opposition. It is also why he will fail because the public want somebody who can tackle their problems not the person who caused and is likely to exacerbate them.

Dream on Voreas06 dream on.
Time will tell.

Effie "Dream on Voreas06 dream on.
Time will tell."

I never cease to be amazed at your debating skills effie, you really tore my arguments apart with that one.

Labour's lead has been halved from 10% to 5% in the past 3 weeks according to YouGov.
It should be remembered that YouGov has been giving Labour higher ratings than all the other polling organisations. Therefore we are likely to be seeing Tory leads from other companies in the not too distant future.

YouGov don't take into account likelihood to vote. There is in any case anecdotal evidence of known Conservative voters being reduced in their polling. Many posters have found it odd that they are no longer contacted after Brown took over. Why expend emotion on these statistical games?

Brown is vulnerable. His majority in Scotland is no longer safe. Wales Conservatives are doing well. England wil react politically to the credit crunch. In the South we have a nice swing while labour are piling up useless votes in the North. Th detail for the Conservatives is looking a lot better.

Could any of the doom-and-gloom brigade tell me how long Gordon Brown has been in office? Less than 3 months, isn't it? Also, maybe we could know how long Major, aka Mr Grey Pea-Counter, had a bounce for? 6 months or more, wasn't it?

So they expect Gordon Brown's bounce to last not nearly as long as John Major's?

This poll isn't great for anyone. Labour will be pleased they haven't slipped more, but it may suggest they've lost the best of the bounce - should have called the election when you became PM, Gordo.

Id be grateful for any polling agency that goes to the trouble to convert their pdf versions of polling data into Excel.

Voreas 06.
I never cease to be amazed at your debating skills effie, you really tore my arguments apart with that one.

Just take a short breath and consider the facts.
Cameron was ahead in the polls for two reasons, the first being the unpopularity of Tony Blair.
The second being a lot of the dyed-in-the-wool old Labour types absolutely detested Blair, they deserted Labour and a lot now are probably returning to the fold, now whilst they would not vote for Cameron they probably were down as floating voters.
Just take a look at where Tony Blair was in the opinion polls at the same stage of the cycle when Major was in power and then compare that with where Cameron is now.
Have you any concept of the mountain Cameron has to climb to gain just even a hung parliament let alone an overall majority?
That is the reason I do not give a monkey's about what people think one way or another of my debating skills. I will debate and start to panic when Cameron has a lead of 10% or more for more than a few weeks, I think that is highly unlikely though.
Cameron is just not going to cut the mustard.
To gain power he has to be in double digit poll leads for yonks, he has never manage to sustain that ever since he has been leader.
His lead was down to Blair's unpopularity nothing more nothing less.
Blair is not there now and I do think Cameron in all probability will close the gap, but not with sufficient for him to win.
BTW I seem to remember Cameron had the idea that the electorate would be completely turned off by Brown...Whatever happened to that notion?
As for Brown's lead dropping, if the Government was so unpopular would Cameron's crusade not be showing better polling figures?
I would rather have my leader where he is now than your leader who is behind, especially after 10 years of a government.
How sad!!

voreas06 - put your head in the sand all you want. I'm a tory supporter an active member of the conservatives. The fact that you think me being anti-Cameron means im not a tory shows how out of touch you are with the reality of situation.

Im being told to say things by labour spin doctors? What other conspiracy theories do you believe in? I could say its quite obvious you are some CCHQ pen pusher but im interested in discussing issues not making personal attacks on people I happen to disagree with.

Effie "Just take a short breath and consider the facts."

There is little that is factual about what you are saying. Your two reasons for Cameron's lead are not right. If it was all about a protest Menzies Campbell would have been the recipient.

The methodology used in polling in the 1990s had nothing like the accuracy of todays polling, which is still not perfect but 20 to 30% leads are never going to happen now, just look at the polling in comparrison to what Blair actually got which if I recall was less than what Major got in 1992.
Of course Cameron has a mountain to climb because the current boundarys for constituencys make it far easier for a labour MP to gain Power than a tory. Despite todays poll I can't see Brown getting more than 35% of the vote there is no enthusiasm for the man and the longer he stays in power the lower his ratings will fall. While Labour may not outright lose the next election I think a reduced majority (20) or worse a hung parliament will be enough for Cameron to win a second general election.

I think the electorate will turn on Brown as it becomes increasingly clear he is devoid of principle conscience or competence. I think you will see this fairly soon - probably within six months.

Radical Tory "im interested in discussing issues not making personal attacks on people I happen to disagree with."

Ok, lets discuss the issues, last time I tried I got told I was being personal so again I will ask in the light of you being a conservative supporter what is your problem with Cameron's policies? Do please explain or else I shall continue to regard you as nothing more than a troll.

Although I am a tory supporter, I do have some sympathy with Effie's arguments at 12.45 but take leave to differ with her comment:

"His lead was down to Blair's unpopularity nothing more nothing less".

While Blair was neither wholly honest nor competent, there was also the all important fact that Cameron was relying almost entirely on his personality alone to beat Brown. Until recently, the tories have just not had any policies to set against Nulabour's.

When a tory manifesto emerges (hopefully very soon) and we can see what recommendations from the policy groups come through and what are discarded, we will see the real differences between a conservative and a labour government.

We have to nail Brown for being thoroughly disloyal to his then leader (why did he not resign?), for spraying taxpayers' money around without anything like the commensurate improvement in public services, for putting taxes up over 100 times (including IT on the lowest earners), for wrecking private pension schemes, for endangering soldiers' lives in war by refusing them adequate protection, for selling off gold reserves at a knock-down price, for the fiasco of working tax credits and all the other similar things that changed him from a prudent chancellor at the start - who had inherited a very healthy surplus of payments from the tories - into the archetypical tax and spend labour chancellor whose house of cards economy looks likely to implode at the moment.

A clear statement of policies that are identifiably conservative in nature will, I am sure, bring the polls back together. If Brown then goes for an election and wins, I suspect it will be a hung parliament and then Brown will be on the ropes.

"Very disappointing for the Cameroons. Cameron just isn't working. 10 years of Labour and we are STILL behind! To think 18 months before the 1992 General Election Labour were 25 points ahead and still went onto defeat! We can't even get 1 point ahead. Frankly its pathetic."

An argument as old as the hills. Can't believe I'm still having to point these things out:

1) It's ten years of the government, but a NEW Prime Minister (remember Major in 1990. It was his 'new face' and a hard-hitting campaign which swung 1992).
2) Polls pre 1996/7 were usually well out, and it was unlikely Labour were ever 25% ahead in reality before, then, or since. Polling agencies have since changed their methodology, and 5 points down after a 'new face' has been installed is acceptable.

''Ok, lets discuss the issues, last time I tried I got told I was being personal so again I will ask in the light of you being a conservative supporter what is your problem with Cameron's policies? Do please explain or else I shall continue to regard you as nothing more than a troll''

That's not true. You made personal attacks and never wanted to discuss the issues. If you haven't picked up why I dislike Cameron yet I feel sorry for you. For example his huge emphasis on environmentalism, his feeble policies such as agreeing with Labour's spending and city academies, his numerous gaffes such as the Rwanda trip, his by election defeats, his arrogance (David Cameron's Conservatives on the ballot paper), his personal attacks e.g calling tory supporters delusional, his avoidance of issues which matter e.g schools (who would disagree with trusting the professionals?), messing up on campaigns which matter e.g the hospital closure campaign, failing to take us out the EPP.....

Cameron gives no reason to go out and vote conservative. He refuses to make tax cuts yet is happy for poor people to be deterred from flying, he refuses to take those on the min wage out of taxation, he refuses to introduce school vouchers, he refuses to talk about zero tolerance policing for fear of upsetting people who will never vote tory. The man is not a leader, he's happy to follow the PC class.

Do you like everything Cameron has done?

Finally you can regard me as a troll all you like. I now think you are a troll, posing as an extreme Cameroon to try and make the party look divided. Bury your hand in the sand. But when Cameron gets defeated don't be surprised when you see people going for his throat and uproar within the party.

David, every time something that looks like a policy emerges Cameron has to do a quick exit stage left. It is usually ripped to pieces by the Media.
Watch next week now these policies have been announced how fast Brown will pinch the best, pretty them up a bit and present them as his.

Voreas06, there is not a snowballs chance in hell of DC. having two bites at the cherry.
The only reasons the men in grey suits have not paid him a visit is:
a) there is nobody else at the moment capable of taking over.
b) GB. has got them by the you know whats, Conservatives dare not get rid at the moment in case GB calls an election as he is not going to hang around waiting for a leadership election.
Keep trying lads you just might manage to convince me, but I very much doubt it.
Do you know it was not so long ago that this blog site was filled with people gloating about Cameron's 5-6-7-8-9% lead.
So much so that little squeaky voice Gideon Osborne even taunted TB about it at the dispatch box.
How quickly this tune has turned and now we have to read those self same polls in a different manner because they were not the same as in Major's day.
Whose kidding who?
At 70 years old do you think I am going senile?
I have been there seen it and had the Tee shirt.
Give me a break lads and do not teach your Granny to suck eggs.

Labour is having a new Leader bounce and Brown has appeared all primeministerial in times of crisis. The Conservatives on the other hand have been bickering for months because many in the party harp on about the past, demand a lurch to the right and majoring on Europe and immigration while the general public are somewhere else entirely. It is no wonder that Labour is still in the lead.

''An argument as old as the hills. Can't believe I'm still having to point these things out:

1) It's ten years of the government, but a NEW Prime Minister (remember Major in 1990. It was his 'new face' and a hard-hitting campaign which swung 1992).
2) Polls pre 1996/7 were usually well out, and it was unlikely Labour were ever 25% ahead in reality before, then, or since. Polling agencies have since changed their methodology, and 5 points down after a 'new face' has been installed is acceptable''.

1. You mean the John Major who went onto win 1992 GE? GB is also new according to you, I wonder what will happen....All you've done is agree with me. If John Major's example is anything to go by than Brown will win. Thanks for that example.
2. How convenient. 5 points behind is acceptable because he's new? So if there was a polling day for a GE tommorrow and Labour won with 5 points ahead (and so a 96 maj) that would be acceptable because GB is new? What a weird and frankly pathetic argument. You think conservative members would say 'oh that defeat is ok since GB was new after all'. Already making excuses for defeat I see.

The truth is this:
1. Cameron has had 2 years to tell the country about what he stands for. They now know and they don't like it. If they did he'd be ahead in the polls.
2. What ever happened to 'GB will be a walk over'? The Cameroons sure got that one wrong.
3. I see no reason why things will get better for Cameron. The economic problems may even help Brown.
4. GB has dominated politics for 10 years. I don't view him as a new face. Neither do the public thus I don't buy this 'its because he's new' view. Stop grasping at straws.

Face facts - Cameron was a mistake. Did anyone really think that this long into David Cameron's leadership we would be 5 points behind in the polls and facing the possibilty of an increased Labour majority?

Radical Tory | September 16, 2007 at 14:45

Well Radical Tory, I read your piece and I was utterly amazed.
This is exactly what people who are not Conservatives have been saying for ages, at last a Conservative with common sense..what a rarity these days.
Most have their head in the clouds dreaming of a Cameron Utopia which is never going to materialise.
Now sit back and wait for the backlash and onslaught, it will come thick and fast.

Cleo, you said 'The Conservatives on the other hand have been bickering for months because many in the party harp on about the past, demand a lurch to the right and majoring on Europe and immigration while the general public are somewhere else entirely'.

This is completely untrue. The general public are very concerned about Europe and immigration and Cameron knows this. That's why he's started to address these issues.

I agree that party disunity is holding him back though. Disgruntled party members need to stop talking to the media and get behind him like the Bennites got behind Blair.

Radical Tory, you don't rate Cameron and I presume you never did. That's fair enough, but others did vote for him and he is the leader until after the next election. Whether you support the present leadership or not, you need to remember that at the end of the day that we need to get more MP's elected and we don't do it by fighting among ourselves or changing leaders every couple of years.
But if you think that daily rants about your dislike of him is adding in anyway to the real debate of getting a Conservative government elected, its not.
It is boring and repetitively and serves no positive purpose.

As regards the polls and local elections at the moment, I would not put money on the outcome of the next GE based on either the present honeymoon bounce enjoyed by Brown or the 900 local council seats won by the Conservatives back in May.
No party has won or lost the next GE based on the last 5 months of politics.

"Now sit back and wait for the backlash and onslaught, it will come thick and fast."

Effie, that advice should be aimed at Brown and Darling at the moment.....

The polls say that the general public wants a say on the reform treaty yes but polls show people are far more concerned about health and education and a great many other things over Europe in general. The Conservatives have for too long been obcessed about Europe over and above everything else and this put people off.

Scotty - I want Cameron to remain leader until the GE is over. If we get rid of him now the wets will blame sensible tories for the defeat which Cameron has made inevitable. Its best to let Cameron mess up, watch him get defeated, oust him if he tries to stay on and than have a conservative leading the conservative party. It will put the wets back in their place for many years to come.

I want a Conservative government elected. But it must be more than a name. It must stand for Conservative policies. Cameron is not offering that, he's offering New Labour with a green face.

If you find my posts boring just don't read them.

Radical Tory "That's not true. You made personal attacks and never wanted to discuss the issues."
Nonsense. but I am glad you have at least had a go this time.

"his huge emphasis on environmentalism"

Ok go join a party that does not believe climate change is a serious issue.

"agreeing with Labour's spending"

Actually spending totals and it neutralises any rubbish about cutting schools and hospitals.

"city academies"

Personally I am no fan of city academies I fail to see how they improve educational standards and I believe the latest figures show that.

", his numerous gaffes such as the Rwanda trip"

Yes I agree a poor decision.

"his by election defeats"

Irrelevant, Brown was at the top of his bounce.
"his arrogance (David Cameron's Conservatives on the ballot paper)"

Decided by the local candidate

"his personal attacks e.g calling tory supporters delusional"

Poor choice of language but the fact remains Thatcher closed down more Grammar schools than anyone, and there are hardly any left.

"his avoidance of issues which matter e.g schools (who would disagree with trusting the professionals?)"

How is that avoidance, rather trusting professionals, giving them local control and making them accountable to parents than centralised targets any day.

", messing up on campaigns which matter e.g the hospital closure campaign"

The emphasis was all wrong talk of a fightback etc, he should have just said hospitals are in danger of closing people aren't being listened to how typical of this government and typical of Gordon despite his damascene conversion to teamwork and listening.

"failing to take us out the EPP....."

Rubbish, the decision has been kicked into the long grass are you in any urgency if so why?


"He refuses to make tax cuts"

Rubbish he has not refused to make tax cuts.

"happy for poor people to be deterred from flying"

What makes you say this - can you please try and give some evidence rather than a soundbite.

"he refuses to take those on the min wage out of taxation"

I have heard nothing about this so again I would be happy to know where you have got this information from.

"he refuses to introduce school vouchers"

Good, I can't see the point of this gimmicky policy.

"he refuses to talk about zero tolerance policing"

Rubbish - As far as I am aware Cameron is Pro zero tolerance.

"The man is not a leader"

On the contrary I think he has been leading the debate on what matters i.e. policy for a year and a half now.

If you (as you clearly do) hate Cameron and you are a Conservative then what on earth do you think you are achieving by attacking him with every single slur and falsehood that has come out of Labour spin doctor's mouth. I think any supporter of the party may disagree with Cameron but the vehemence and persistence of your attacks say to me that you are either a troll or you have a personal axe to grind. Perhaps you are actually that bloke, can't remember his name who left because Cameron wouldn't give him a peerage.

Effie "Well Radical Tory, I read your piece and I was utterly amazed.
This is exactly what people who are not Conservatives have been saying for ages,"

You see effie tells us she is old Labour and Radical Tory says he is a right wing head banger and yet they use exactly the same arguments, and I feel just about to have a beautiful friendship. something here doesn't add up and Im afraid it is Radical Tory's claim to be a Conservative. Either that or I should get a career in match-making.

Effie, that advice should be aimed at Brown and Darling at the moment.....

Posted by: Scotty | September 16, 2007 at 15:30

Get a grip Scotty, now you do me a favour "young fellow me lad"
Go back on these threads to last Friday, be a good fellow and scroll down and just have a look at who the electorate..including Tory voters trust more with the economy.
Do not take my word for it, it is there in black and white for all to see.
Then sit back and Ha a good greet!!

''Nonsense. but I am glad you have at least had a go this time''.

If you read my past posts in other threads from recent days you will see I often talk about policies. Do some research.

''Ok go join a party that does not believe climate change is a serious issue''.

I believe its better to stay and fight from within. Your argument is weak - 'go somewhere else if you don't like it'. Not exactly grown up.


''Actually spending totals and it neutralises any rubbish about cutting schools and hospitals'.

So Cameron agrees with spending totals. Thanks for agreeing. We need radical reform to schools and hospitals instead of letting Labour run the show.


''Personally I am no fan of city academies I fail to see how they improve educational standards and I believe the latest figures show that''.

Thanks for agreeing.


'Yes I agree a poor decision'.

Again thanks for agreeing with me.

''Irrelevant, Brown was at the top of his bounce''.

Coming third in two by elections is not irrelevant especially against Brown who was thought to be so dour when up against Cameron. How do you explain Bromley? Just clinging onto it was a disgrace.


''Decided by the local candidate''

But approved by DC. Do you really think candidates get that much freedom in a by-election?

''Poor choice of language but the fact remains Thatcher closed down more Grammar schools than anyone, and there are hardly any left''.

Thatcher isn't running to be PM.


''How is that avoidance, rather trusting professionals, giving them local control and making them accountable to parents than centralised targets any day''.

How are they accountable to parents under tory plans? They are still accountable to LEAs. Parents can't take their children out as there are no proposals for vouchers. Its avoidance because its rhetoric that is said during every election campaign. It's just a soundbite. Who would argue for less discipline in schools?

''The emphasis was all wrong talk of a fightback etc, he should have just said hospitals are in danger of closing people aren't being listened to how typical of this government and typical of Gordon despite his damascene conversion to teamwork and listening''.

Thanks for agreeing me. You seem to be quite critical of Cameron yourself!

''Rubbish, the decision has been kicked into the long grass are you in any urgency if so why?''

He made a promise and we're still waiting. Its a test of his character. If two years later we're still waiting for this, whats he going to be like as PM?


Tax cuts:
If he was in favour of tax cuts he would have said so. He has not. He has fudged the issue with talk of stabilty etc failing to realise stability comes from tax cuts.

"happy for poor people to be deterred from flying"

''What makes you say this - can you please try and give some evidence rather than a soundbite''.

By rejecting such proposals as car parking charges for out of town shopping complexes in the Q of L report but not reject VAT on domestic flights and short haul flights to Europe he has shown he agrees with VAT on these flights. Otherwise he would have rejected them to prevent anger within the party.


''I have heard nothing about this so again I would be happy to know where you have got this information from''.

The fact that he has not proposed it.


''Good, I can't see the point of this gimmicky policy''.


Gimmicky? Tell that to the Dutch and Swedes.

''Rubbish - As far as I am aware Cameron is Pro zero tolerance''.

Really? Evidence? So how many more police does he want? How many more prisons?


''On the contrary I think he has been leading the debate on what matters i.e. policy for a year and a half now''.

Leaders don't follow New Labour and the Guardian. Leaders suggest original ideas.


''If you (as you clearly do) hate Cameron and you are a Conservative then what on earth do you think you are achieving by attacking him with every single slur and falsehood that has come out of Labour spin doctor's mouth''.

Yeah because Labour spin doctors love school vouchers, more prisons...

I feel it would be wrong for me to sit back and let Cameron go by without pointing out his numerous faults.


''I think any supporter of the party may disagree with Cameron but the vehemence and persistence of your attacks say to me that you are either a troll or you have a personal axe to grind''.

Ever thought I'm just principled?

I notice how you end with yet another personal comment. Couldn't just stick to the issues could you?

Right - enough now of the Radical Tory - Effie - voreas06 exchanges.

How convenient. 5 points behind is acceptable because he's new? So if there was a polling day for a GE tommorrow and Labour won with 5 points ahead (and so a 96 maj) that would be acceptable because GB is new?
David Cameron would probably continue as leader if that happened, certainly if it involved the total number of Conservative votes going up to or above where it was in 1997 in which case it would amount to the strongest vote for the Conservative Party in a General Election since 1992 by any measure, whether David Cameron was considered to be responsible for the difference or not I think he would get the benefit of the doubt, just as Neil Kinnock did in 1987. Not that I'm saying that that would be the right thing to do, I just think that that would be what was likely to happen.

COMMENT OVERWRITTEN BY THE EDITOR.

BACK TO THE SUBJECT OF THE THREAD PLEASE.

Editor, you have every right to call a halt to any discussion on this blog.
I unconditionally accept that.
I also respect your right not to answer this next question but it would be helpful if you did.
Why have you drawn a line under this/ there was nobody being impolite to anybody else or insulting. In my view is was good natured banter.
An answer to this would be helpful for future occasions in case you feel anybody has over stepped the boundaries.

The debate was getting way off the topic of the thread, Effie, and getting a little close to being too personal. I'm sorry if I've been too limiting.

Effie, imagine that Brown is a goalkeeper and the foundations of his fiscal rules is the goal posts he stands between.
While others might have concentrated on making sure a goal scorer never got pass his defences, Brown on the other hand concentrated on running around moving the goalposts to prevent it. Result, the amount of own goals start piling up faster than Gordons wee legs can run.
He has been moving the fiscal goalposts for electoral gain rather than long term stability, and we now have an economy built on government and consumer debt with no safety net to catch us. The hapless Darling is now left trying to fight a rear guard action of spin to pass the buck. Not a pretty sight.
And as for me greetin, I think that the whole nation should be doing that because WE have wasted the golden goose of an economy that was inherited by those two hapless loons Blair and Brown. Just look at those large majorities squandered with no discernible long term benefit to the nation, its enough to make you weep.

Ok fair enough editor, can I just pass one final comment to Radical Tory which is yes I agree with you on some points there is no harm in that. People are allowed to agree.

If I can't then again fair enough.

Of course we can agree voreas06. I think we agree on quite alot having read your post.

I understand if the Editor doesn't want this posted. Back to the thread now.

I am completely and utterly baffled am I allowed to tease Scotty a bit?

The polls are a barometer of public sentiment we cannot ignore. We cannot expect to snatch the reins of government based on what Labour are not doing so well, or hoping that they make more serious mistakes. To show that we deserve to be elected to govern, we must distinguish ourselves with sound wholesome policies, clear evidence of competence and unity of purpose.

As a loyal Conservative I do feel quite glooomy about this poll. We could and should be ahead of the government who are (trying to be unbiased and objective) simply not very good at governing.The fault seems to lie with all members of the party from the leader down.From the grammar school fiasco, to the antics of Mclean,Ancram, Mercer and Bercow we have shown an amazing propensity to shoot ourselves in the foot again and again.
All Conservatives face a stark choice,we either pull together in the next few days and weeks or we give Brown a bigger majority over the next five years than he has now.That may please some of the regular posters on this blog but I hope the sensible majority will think about what I've said and do everything they can to ensure we have a successful conference and start fighting our real enemy, Gordon Brown and our disgusting government.

Radical Tory - your waffly answer to my earlier point is - naturally - failing to see the point.

You're comparing a possible 2007 election to the 1997 election. You should be comparing it to the 1992 election, as I pointed out .

10 years of a government, with a new leader. That's more like 1990-92, than 1997.

Therefore, it will be a close election and who knows what might happen. Yes, Brown is favourite to win currently, but he won't call one this year and the longer he leaves it, the more he is in danger of losing it.

Cameron was the RIGHT choice, he is our best leader for some time and he's back up off the canvas after a poor August.

It would be great if you could cease the effluent that tumbles from your fingertips for at least a while and be positive. Yes, that word that begins with 'P' that isn't 'Peeved'.

"Cameron was the RIGHT choice, he is our best leader for some time and he's back up off the canvas after a poor August."

Oh yes, it reminds me of a Rocky film, where the slurring hero leaps up from the canvas to deliver the knock out blow.

Those taxes, announced in September, on poor people to prevent them flying on cheap domestic flights is just such a killer blow. I can see Brown being entirely floored by that one !

I can see the crowd jumping to their feet, applauding and crying the name over and over: 'Davie, Davie, Davie...'

Edison Smith

You seem to be getting confused. I'm not comparing a possible election with 1997, if anything I'm comparing it with 1992. Please read my point 1 again. Brown - new (for you), Major - new = who wins?

Thus thanks again for helping to stress my point that things don't look good for Cameron. If the period you seem so interested in (1990-92) is anything to go by than DC will lose like Kinnock did.

Don't you see MY point? The 'New' factor saved Major and if you judge Brown to be new than why won't it save Brown?


Your optimism is just that, its not based on reality at all. If there is a defection to Labour during the tory conference will you still be so optimistic I wonder?

I'm not interested in personal issues so I won't address how you end your post. It's beneath me.

Stephen - nicely done.

"Those taxes, announced in September, on poor people to prevent them flying on cheap domestic flights is just such a killer blow. I can see Brown being entirely floored by that one !"

But sadly you don't seem to share any enthusiasm for the only party advocating social responsibility, the family or even sharing the proceeds of growth!!!
It is not the Conservative party that advocates taking more tax every wage packet from the poorest earners in society!!

E Smith makes some good points. Brown is like Major coming in after Thatcher - and she lasted longer than Blair. To keep talking of 1997 shows that people have their fingers in their ears and have a partisan agenda to undermine the Tories.

"It is not the Conservative party that advocates taking more tax every wage packet from the poorest earners in society!!"

Really ??? I recall one Gideon Osborne saying that the Tories would, at the very least, meet current Labour spending targets. They've also ruled out tax-cuts. I can see that if I'm on a modest wage, regularly use cheap short domestic flights, drive a car, have a slightly less energy efficient house than is ideal - I'm going to be taxed even more !

Unfortunately for the Tories, that makes up much of the 'Mondeo Man' group - the very people the Tories were so successful at wooing in the 1980s. Not now, though. Taxation being a major contributor - they'll just stay away from the polls.

'Stephen - nicely done.' - Thanks Rad Tory.

Brown is like Major coming in after Thatcher - and she lasted longer than Blair
It has to be said that Gordon Brown and John Major have little in common, for one thing John Major hadn't been Chancellor of the Exchequer for 10 years and Tony Blair no doubt could have carried on for as long but as the numbers of Labour MPs wanting him to go built up he decided to call it quits, Margaret Thatcher on the other hand faced a stalking horse and then a serious challenger before calling it quits and she had announced she was going to go on and on, Tony Blair on the other hand had decided before the 2005 General Election that he would not go on to be leader into the General Election after. They went in different ways.

"Really ??? I recall one Gideon Osborne saying that the Tories would, at the very least, meet current Labour spending targets. They've also ruled out tax-cuts."

Share the proceeds of growth!!!

Raj - whose talking of 1997? I certainly never bought it up (I did bring up 1992 however) yet E Smith thinks I somehow brought it up and you seem to have swallowed his bait.

It is vital that the Tories are prepared for defeat (I don't mean meakly accepting it, but not sticking your head in the ground and ignoring the likely result) and do not go into meltdown when it occurs as the next Tory leader is highly likely to become pm if you keep things together, imho.

David Davis' time is coming and I'd love to see Priti Patel as deputy. Sure she will be inexperienced, but she has more balls than all the metrosexual Cameroons put together.

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