Will DD's surplus supporters vote tactically? And who for?

David Davis' number of publicly declared parliamentary supporters hits 56 today with news that two of David Willetts' former supporters (Messrs Lidington (DW's former campaign manager and one of parliament's most decent men - pictured) and Hoban) have jumped aboard The Good Ship Davis - as has former Portillo ally, Mark Field.

Mr Davis is now so far ahead that the issue of tactical voting is being discussed in the Westminster village.  It is a dangerous tactic.  Last time (2001) some freelancing IDS supporting-MPs voted for Ken Clarke because they preferred their man to face KC (rather than Michael Portillo).  The tactic almost backfired when IDS only finished one vote ahead of MP MP.

Some of DD's supporters may be inclined to 'lend their votes' to a candidate that their man would be most likely to beat in a final round.  Davis supporters might, for example, vote for David Cameron in a penultimate round on the basis (which might or might not be correct) that Clarke or Fox would be harder to beat.  Rumour has it that Team Rifkind are inviting Davis supporters to back their man on the (reasonable) basis that he'd be easiest for DD to beat.  Quite Extraordinary!  'Who would be most beatable' will partly depend on whether MPs or the rank-and-file choose the next Tory leader... Only three days until we finally know that... Tick tock, tick tock...

Comments

[James Hellyer]

The Straw Man is a type of Red Herring because the arguer is attempting to refute his opponent's position, and in the context is required to do so, but instead attacks a position—the "straw man"—not held by his opponent. In a Straw Man argument, the arguer argues to a conclusion that denies the "straw man" he has set up, but misses the target. There may be nothing wrong with the argument presented by the arguer when it is taken out of context, that is, it may be a perfectly good argument against the straw man. It is only because the burden of proof is on the arguer to argue against the opponent's position that a Straw Man fallacy is committed. So, the fallacy is not simply the argument, but the entire situation of the argument occurring in such a context.

"When your opponent sets up a straw man, set it on fire and kick the cinders around the stage. Don't worry about losing the Strawperson-American community vote." (James Lileks)

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

Straw man: James Hellyer's favourite put-down for anybody who dares disagree with him ;-)

[James Hellyer]

No Daniel, only for for arguments that rail against a misrepresentation rather than an actuality.

[James Maskell]

Thanks for the definitions...found a different and slightly easier to understand one on wikipedia of all places! (nothing against you)...basically the arguer doesnt actually debate the actual issue but deviates slightly and after refuting the deviated issue claims to have defeated the initial issue. Similarly you can attribute arguments in that way but generalising or deviating. Cheers everyone. You learn something new everyday!

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

"It was Bruce Anderson who said Rifkind would give the best conference speech (but that it would be too late to save his campiagn)."

Thanks for the info James H. When Bruce made that prediction, he probably expected more of a gap in level of support to have emerged between the non-Davis candidates. As it is, none of them has yet to emerge as the main challenger to Davis so there is still plenty left to play for.

Poor old Malcolm won't have had his confidence boosted by the poll in the Mail on Sunday though! First, someone on this site claims he looks like a rat, then the day after, the Mail on Sunday announces that only one in a hundred women finds him attractive!

[James Hellyer]

It's a good job Sir Malcolm already has a lovely lady wife...

[Peter]

I think the only figures that people should be looking at are the offical declare list (Tims' list) as we all know what disinformation has been thrown about(Willets 20 plus etc). One thing through is that Clarke got nearly half his vote last time from uncommitted, this he can't do this time if the new rules come in as he needs like everyone 20 offical backers to start. As for the result under the new rules only Fox I think can know defeat Davis and with that others will need the present rules kept for them to have any chance?

[Afternoonreturn]

Enough Example,apparently energy volume series working contrast map gate parliament representative benefit general familiar vital deep opportunity sample base little vote escape cold move law animal skin sign drop below video curriculum start influence promote shake include sentence threaten call lose notice executive liability live settle tradition your well pressure goal element media her grey similar push court satisfy never employ recent finish used charge want arise father enjoy address dress narrow copy visit invite danger talk understanding payment married kitchen evening recognition branch fruit pressure via no-one

[Bred 11s for sale]

Cheap Jordan ShoesBred 11s for saleJordan 11sGrape 5s outletreal river jordanBred 11sGrape 5sBred 11s for kidBred 11s onlineBred 11s on saleCheap Bred 11sBred 11s outletcheap Bred 11s for saleGrape 5s onlineGrape 5s on saleGrape 5s for cheap Cheap Grape 5s for sale Cheap Grape 5s Grape 5s shop Jordan Grape 5s