« Cameron distances himself from liberal interventionism | Main | Promising nationally, acting locally now »


"I don't know if you saw it but Fraser Nelson was brilliant on Question Time last night. "

I thought it OK, nothing brilliant, but I note you don't refer to F.Maude's poor performance, who fulfilled the low expectations people here on ConservativeHome had of him. How is it possible that he couldn't score against a Labour Government which had just had a critical report reporting on the disastrous election debacle they had staged in Scotland? Well F.Maude managed to achieve it.

This is all excellent news and I would love to have been a "fly on the wall" at the Cambridge Union in order to see the expression on Quentin Davies' face as the result of the vote was declared!

I would just like to point out that the NOP gave Labour 38%. We really need to address the reasons why so many people seem prepared to support this shambolic government. One suggestion; voters are comparing Brown's economic activities with myths of Tory economic activities over the 18 years. (I refer to the facts re black wednesday which are far better re Lamont/Major than the image. Also, people still think the "heartless" Tories gleefully put millions out of their jobs - see Nick Clegg. Above all there is a need to point out the expansion of public services when voters are told they were cut and that colours their view of any Conservative government) If you watch BBC they continue to present the myths as facts. Until this is addressed, one way or another, many people will still be dubious about a Tory government whatever they think of Brown.

I thought Fraser Nelson was all over the place. Made some odd claim about us being in deep trouble if immigration was stopped cos we couldn't then support the 5 million of working age on benefits! Reminded me not to reinstate a subscription to The Spectator. [Come to think of it there wasn't anyone talking sense on the panel last night - one or two of the audience had something sensible to say.]

David Sergeant, agreed which is why some of us are so fed up of incompetent Tory politicians who are incapable of putting the Conservative case forward, defend their corner, let along being able, or having the will, to politically knife Labour.

I thought Frazer was excellent, the only guy talking sense on that panel. And Realcon, what dont you understand? We have something like 15% of the workforce on benefits, amazingly high. If it wasn't for the immigrants we'd really notice this: the economy couldn't grow because we wouldnt have the workers. Immigration has allowed Labour to cover up its failure, using foreign workers rather than getting our unemployed into work. This, as I understood it anyway, is what Nelson was saying. If more Tories made this point, we might actually get somewhere.

As I've written elsewhere, Mr Cameron was on Alan Titchmarsh's show on ITV this afternoon.

I didn't know this until I spoke to my mother, who was positively gushing about him and wouldn't stop talking about our beloved DC and what a lovely family man he is, and how extremely well he came across, sticking up for 'Samantha' etc!

Okay, this can be seen as mere ephemera, but as with Blair pre-1997 daytime 'family' shows such as these and GMTV etc are an excellent way to get through to voters who don't keep up with politics or current affairs.

With the help of Coulson, Mr Cameron is upping his name and face recognition, and is rapidly becoming the "housewive's favourite" - according to my mother anyway!

The Conservative media operation has come on leaps and bounds since the summer and there's Tories Tories everwhere at the moment. This must be maintained

You say - The centre right has a growing number of intelligent and compassionate people who will serve great causes in the years ahead. Let's not forget our very own leader is one of them.

What is the point of Maude?

Edison: The Conservative media operation has come on leaps and bounds since the summer and there's Tories Tories everwhere at the moment. This must be maintained

I agree, Edison - we must sustain this, not just the conversational stuff that so usefully sets the tone, but having a well-briefed spokesman available at a moments notice with a thoughtful contribution on breaking news stories.

We must also keep this momentum up on the ground, too. I'm taking a team out door-to-door here tomorrow to follow up a ward newsletter. I grant that here in South Lincolnshire we're hardly a target seat (!) but we still need to be working hard to fufill a role as a "powerhouse" of Conservatism, recruiting and training up more members and activists we can deploy in partner targets.

Deborah: What is the point of Maude?

He's the Shadow Cabinet Office Minister, working on how we implement our policies in Government. What is the point of you?

" If it wasn't for the immigrants we'd really notice this: the economy couldn't grow because we wouldnt have the workers. "

Unless, just maybe, the benefits were withdrawn?! Time-limiting welfare in the USA in the 1990s seemed to help their economy, as well as reducing the welfare rolls. Of course here we would also need to sort out incapacity benefit, which now commonly substitutes for unemployment benefit.

Matthew D'Ancona is busy singing Fraser's praises over on the Coffee House blog as well. Not sure what to make of this as I think I must have missed something. I thought he was adequate, but hardly stellar. Galloway stole the show, and yes, Maude was particularly poor. Nelson writes well, and his performance was calm and generally evry sound, but I'm not sure that basic ability deserves rave reviews? Or are we a little short of stars in the right-wing hemisphere?

"Or are we a little short of stars in the right-wing hemisphere?"

We are better off than those in the dripping wet Europhile hemisphere that calls itself the Tory Reform Group.

Actually it's been a while since the TRG pronounced much on Europe, but it has managed to host well known wet Andrew Mitchell to speak thoughtfully on the role of the UN. By 'right-wing hemisphere' I was, in fact, referring to the broader interpretation of 'right-wing', but I digress...

Agree with this and like others was particularly pleased to see the humiliation of Quentin Davies.
Very suprised that you included Douglas Murray in the list of bright young stars of the future. I know he's an uber neo-con but he is also a fantastically bad advocate for his cause. His anger at those who don't share his view appears to make rational debate difficult for him. The last time he was on Question Time the majority of the audience appeared to be laughing at him, the first time ever I've seen that.

Well done to those in Sefton-is there a possibility that we could take this seat from Labour?

I'm actually glad you included Douglas Murray. He's clearly a gifted young writer and public speaker.

The last time he was on Question Time, it was the schools edition, and he had to put up with a fair bit of leftist immaturity from the morons in the audience. I would show 'anger' too if I was debating an imbecile like Davina McCall, a terrorist apologist in Sayeeda Warsi and a room full of Hamas supporting teenagers.

He stood his ground, argued back and actually won many in the crowd over. Just like Melanie Phillips and Christopher Hitchens did, when they were confronted by the moral relativists and anti-American brigade, when they appeared.

(He was powerful and convincing in the Spectator Intelligence Squared Debate too).

Good for him. We need more people like him on the offensive.

You think so N John? We must have a different Question Time because on the one I saw poor Douglas far from winning anyone round had lost the audience completely by the end, they were laughing at him.
We obviously prefer very different debating styles as I find the certainties of Melanie Phillips rather offputting. As for Hitchens, like his brother he doesn't really debate at all does he? He pronounces on any subject and takes no account whatsoever of the views of others.Another dreadful advocate for his cause.

Yes, I do 'think so' actually.

Perhaps you were watching another Question Time. It's still available to see online at their website.

He got the usual hysterical animal noises and protests from the leftists in the audience, but received much support for his comments on Islamism, Hamas, Live Earth and university placements.

(All you have to do is watch it)

I also like the 'certainties' of Melanie Phillips, when she stands up to relativists who think Bush is a bigger threat than a nuclear Iran. These people don't deserve respect or ambiguous replies.

And I also liked the 'dreadful advocacy' of Hitchens defending Salman Rushdie's knighthood from the idiotic and cowardly Shirley Williams (and the credulous audience response).

When it comes to radical Islam, negotiating with Hamas, Iranian proliferation or defending novelists from state-sponsored assassination - then I guess I do prefer a morally clear and robust debating style.

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