A good morning for David Cameron.
Three new endorsements put him into second-place in the Who's backing who? list.
The newspapers are full of generous comment. See today's newslinks for more but The Sun Says is typical: "Leadership contender David Cameron delivered a passionate pitch for the party crown. His pledges to protect the less well-off, improve schools and understand the problems of mums and families defined clearly the concept of compassionate Conservatism."
And, thirdly, the pensioner who in my B&B who yesterday morning was undecided was wearing a 'I love DC' sticker this morning. Her conversion experience found echoes in a host of emails, text messages and phone conversations I have received over the last 24 hours. 'How can I tell other members of my association about David Cameron?' she asked me.
But... but... but... I thought he was awful!
Cameron's speech was fluent and interesting as a piece of rhetoric, but that's about all.
Maybe people were just ready to seize on the first speeches that didn't carry the message "you are crap"? ;=)
Posted by: James Hellyer | 05 October 2005 at 11:17
James, I am far from being convinced by Cameron but I think you are being unfair. Too much of his speech was both saccharine and self-righteous: the language often seemed to have been lifted directly from the works of Saint Anthony of Islington.
However, I thought he did a good job when confronted by Martha Kearney. In particular, she tried the old canard that unless and until Tory MPs misuse their children as guinea pigs by sending them to bad state schools just to make a political point, then they cannot be trusted with public services. Bercow and Gibb would have agreed with her. Cameron emphatically did not. An indication that he is not going to be dictated too by New Labour and the BBC about what social justice and compassion mean? let's hope......because God only knows, the Conservative Party needs some hope.
Posted by: Michael McGowan | 05 October 2005 at 11:27
Derek Laud, of Big Brother fame, has said he supports Cameron. Not that it means much since Derek didnt win.... Derek says that he represents the minorities since hes black, gay and a hunting fan and that Cameron is best.
Posted by: James Maskell | 05 October 2005 at 11:30
Was that the interview where he used his disabled child to score political points, by talking about fighting to keep his school open?
Posted by: James Hellyer | 05 October 2005 at 11:33
Derek says that he represents the minorities since hes black, gay and a hunting fan and that Cameron is best.
I'm not sure the black, gay, hunting, former Conservative specchwriting community is that large that we should target all efforts on it ;=)
Posted by: James Hellyer | 05 October 2005 at 11:34
Well
I hope that DC beats KC into third place. Then the party can have a real choice between two candidates from different wings of the party who are acceptable to the vast majority of members and MPs.
Though I support DD, I do not want to see him win by default against the Big Beast. That would not be the best thing for party unity afterwards.
Posted by: EU Serf | 05 October 2005 at 11:36
I too thought he was very good.He's been taking lessons from Mr.T.Blair in the oratory dept but let's hope unlike Blair he actually means what he says.It really is good to see a Conservative talking optimistically once again.
I was also very happy to see Ken Clarkes speech gain a standing ovation.I had wondered if the more boorish members of our party might boo him.
The contest is starting to get interesting!
Posted by: malcolm | 05 October 2005 at 11:45
Do you think it could be Davis v Cameron now? Will be very interesting to see where Clarke fits into the equation.
Any thoughts?
Posted by: Elena | 05 October 2005 at 13:39
Who knows? I hope the MPs are truly a 'sophisticated 'electorate and actually vote for someone who can win? Without power everything is meaningless. At the moment my hope would be Clarke as leader and Cameron as his deputy.All of the candidates have qualities however and my views are subject to change.Winning is the only thing however.
Posted by: malcolm | 05 October 2005 at 15:29
Malcolm, I have been thinking the same thing today. Cameron did pull off a great performance yesterday, and he's proven that he's one of the rising stars of the party.
.. But I think I'd like to see him get a bit more experience before putting him in the position of fighting and winning elections.
Therefore, the combination I'd most like would be Clarke as leader, with Cameron as deputy.
Posted by: Elena | 05 October 2005 at 15:37
I could happily live with the scenario you suggest, Elena and Malcolm.
Assuming we don't get the Clarke v Cameron run-off I'd love, I certainly hope whichever of them makes it to a head-to-head with (presumably) Davis gains the support of the other.
Posted by: Barry Graham | 05 October 2005 at 22:45
Elena, Cameron has been in politics much longer than he has been an MP. Perhaps Cameron can wait, but the Party can't. And why would we want to for the sake of four years additional experience? He has charisma, clarity and an ability to excite and engage floating voters. This is our chance, let's take it now.
Posted by: michael | 06 October 2005 at 11:38