If you were an MP, who would you support in the first round of voting?

This (unscientific) survey will only allow you to vote once in any 24 hour period but please email your friends and encourage them to take part as a way of sending a message to the parliamentary Conservative Party.  If you have already voted but want to check the results simply click the yellow 'View Stats' text and you can see the voting tally (without affecting the result).

7pm update on 18/10: The voting has now closed.  803 people voted.  43% supported David Cameron; 27% Ken Clarke; 11% David Davis; 19% Liam Fox.

Comments

[Mark Fulford]

Thoroughly unscientific. The results of this poll mean absolutely nothing. I don't know why you even bother running it ;-)

[houndtang]

Does anyone know what is going to happen in the event of a tie between any of the candidates?

[James Hellyer]

In 2001, Michael Ancram and David Davis tied for last place in the first ballot. Sir Michael Spicer therefore discounted that ballot and ran it again.

[Cllr Graham Smith]

Unfortunately this simple indicator cannot take account of the pairing factor that will almost certainly occur between individual members of the Parliamentary Party, especially I suspect those who have not overtly supported any of the candidates. By which I mean two friends agreeing that they do not want to support candidate w under any circumstances, but would be prepared to serve under x, y or z although they would prefer either x or z.

In these circumstances the two friends would agree that one will vote for x, the other for z, so as to stop w.

Now let us consider those people who have previously declared their support for a candidate only to have changed their minds. Such members cannot make their intentions clear without burning their bridges with the candidate they are snubbing (and we have all heard rumours of the sort of threats being issued by certain people with experience of the Whips Office - if this is truly how they are behaving when trying to woo supporters, then God help us if they ever get any real power). I suspect such people will continue to support candidate w in public, just not quite so enthusiastically as in the past. When it comes to round one, I suggest they will almost certainly vote for candidate y, hoping therefore to ensure that candidate w falls out in round one, whereupon they will breath a sigh of relief and switch their vote to candidate z.

Now all that remains is to put names to the faces of candidates w, x, y and z

[Editor]

Mark, it is 'unscientific'. You're absolutely right and I use that very word myself at the start of the post.

It IS useful, however, to see what the balance of opinion is amongst those who visit the site (whether, for example, they are different in their perspective from the minority of visitors who regularly post).

The last conservativehome survey was not too different from a (scientific) survey by YouGov of Tory members and in due course we'll be able to compare the results of conservativehome surveys (there will be more!) with actual voting on 6th December.

[Andrew Hickling]

I am not familiar with the process of the secret ballot.I understand that that no-one knows who voted for who but are the figures made public?

I am not familiar with the process of the secret ballot.I understand that that no-one knows who voted for who but are the figures made public?

Yes.

[Mark O'Brien]

I realise this survey is unscientific, but the low level of support for Davis is interesting to note. 66 MPs have pledged him their support, which is significantly above the level of support from MPs for the other candidates. One MP took away his support after Davis's conference performance. We all know that this is a secret ballot, and we all know that politicians have many pressures on them when they cast their vote.

Considering all that, how likely is it that some MPs might desert Davis without officially taking away their support, so that he might end up with fewer than the 66 votes he's expecting from those who have pledged?

[Shaun]

Hi, can ayone tell me what are the reasons for the Tory MPs voting in a secret ballot? I know it is universal voting practice to protect voters from intimidation and fear of retribution, but aren't elected MPs public figures whose actions and political motivations should be known to the public?

[James Maskell]

Does it really matter how scientific this survey is? This is a poll to see who we would vote for. Nice and simple and does what it sets out to do.

[AnotherNick]

"Hi, can ayone tell me what are the reasons for the Tory MPs voting in a secret ballot? I know it is universal voting practice to protect voters from intimidation and fear of retribution, but aren't elected MPs public figures whose actions and political motivations should be known to the public?"

In theory intimidation can occur just among a political party too. I think it is only right the vote is secret, all the MPs have the chance to state who they back if they wish.

[AnotherNick]

Not only is the poll interesting reading now, I imagine that the difference between this result and a follow up one after the first elimination, will be even more interesting. good idea Mr Editor!

[Nelson, Norfolk]

I feel the idea of the survey is a good one. It gives visitors to the site an opportunity to view the current level of support for each candidate.

The figures to date are not very different from the figures published in the papers.

Well done Mr Editor for maintaining an excellent site. I am grateful to you for giving us the opportunity to comment on this very important leadership race.

Also well done for all the good work that you are doing for the overall conservative cause.

[Editor]

I like you Nelson!

[Mark Fulford]

My first post was supposed to be obviously very tongue-in-cheek. I'm sorry Editor that it come across as I intended.

[Wat Tyler]

Ed- I hope when you comment on this poll for R5 or whoever, you remember to point out that very many visitors to your site are not Tory party members.

Indeed, I've even heard it suggested (on LD site Political Betting) that many are LibDems. You know, those guys with a worldwide reputation for nobbling unscientific polls of this type.

[Rick]

Just voted four times in 2 minutes and now i am bored...............can't you automate multiple voting to save time ?

If Lib Dems were voting Davis would be streets ahead because they know he would be the easiest (along with Fox) of our lot to beat. They are afraid of Cameron and Clarke. But I can see where you are coming from, Wat - hoping this ranking isn't an omen for Tuesday.

[Selsdon Man]

"My first post was supposed to be obviously very tongue-in-cheek. I'm sorry Editor that it come across as I intended." Eh?

"Just voted four times in 2 minutes and now i am bored...............can't you automate multiple voting to save time ?" Oh dear! That is what I feared.

[Mark O'Brien]

Perhaps if Lib Dems were voting, they'd be voting for Cameron and Clarke to try and get more Tories out there stopping those two. And as it is those two who are ahead on that poll, they might be doing just that.

(But I've never been that good when it comes to political intrigue!)

[James Hellyer]

You can't vote more than once in a 24 hour period. The software logs your IP address to stop that. So "Rick" wasted three clicks...

[Editor]

Wat,

Let me get this right...

DD is scoring low on this poll because of LibDem infiltration....

DD doesn't do well in public opinion polls against Ken Clarke because Ken has been around for so long...

DD didn't deliver a bad speech in Blackpool. It was all a press conspiracy to boost DC....

'No. No. No.' as the lady who just turned 80 once said.

DD is scoring/ performing badly because he hasn't risen to the challenge of this high stakes contest.

We're all beginning to wonder if he can or whether a Cameron leadership will soon become inevitable...

[Selsdon Man]

"Ed- I hope when you comment on this poll for R5 or whoever, you remember to point out that very many visitors to your site are not Tory party members."

How do you know, Wat? Most posters seem to be Conservative members or voters. Perhaps you do not like the current results.

[James Hellyer]

DD doesn't do well in public opinion polls against Ken Clarke because Ken has been around for so long...

DD didn't deliver a bad speech in Blackpool. It was all a press conspiracy to boost DC....

The opinion poll point is fair. Clarke has always done better simple because he's well known (and is the least worst option for people who would never vote Conservative anyway).

As for DD's speech, IMO it was uninspring in terms of content and delivery. In other words, it was poor. The point about the media only really comes in as far as their desire to have a "Davis fails" narrative for the week.

The media can however be fairly criticised for puffing up DC. His speech wasn't that amazing. It was content light, delivered with no real passion, and was full of contradictions. That it's delivery was far better than we could have expected allowed it to become to corrolary to the DD fails story. In so doing, the media failed in their duty to hold DC to account. I've not seen a single paper look at what he said in terms of policy - and that's where his real weakness lies.

[James Hellyer]

DD is scoring/ performing badly because he hasn't risen to the challenge of this high stakes contest.

This is true though. It's just a shame that Davis's parliamentary support may mean he bedblocks his way onto the final ticket. Of course, that support may collapse unless he can do something to show he still deserves it.