Questioning David Cameron

The media has all sorts of faults.  At least three of them have been on evidence in Blackpool over the last few days:

• There has been over-interpretation.  At the weekend David Davis was portrayed as the more-than-likely victor.  Today his campaign is seen to be in crisis with Cameron riding high.
• The spectator sport of over-interpretation easily mutates into active agitation.  The journalistic pack loves to become involved in a story and scenting blood they are now chasing every possibility for the young David to topple the Davis Goliath.
• There has also been an excessive personalisation of coverage.  Little policy has been discussed.  Coverage has been biased towards considerations of age, looks, experience, charisma and oratorical skills.

The last 72 hours have undoubtedly been bad for David Davis but a few days should pass before an authoritative damage report can be made.  He certainly needs to re-jig his campaign.  This blog’s ‘Good Week, Bad Week’ has often complained about the DD campaign’s failure to inspire.  Yesterday’s wooden performance followed similar delivery problems on the fringe.  Just as Team Bush tried to minimise the number of presidential debates with John Kerry, I predict that the Davis camp will attempt to minimise the number of opportunities that party members will have to see Davis ‘hust’ with his final round opponent.

Blackpool’s Imperial Hotel and Wintergardens were alive with speculation about defections from the Davis camp.  David Davis needs to abandon his safety-first strategy or he does risk a haemorrhage of support.  He should begin by reshuffling his campaign team.  Three areas for overhaul stand out:

• His speech appeared to be written by a committee.  He desperately needs a speechwriter who can help him to find his voice.
• Clarke-ites and T-shirted Cameron supporters were leafleting the conference every day and delegates were handed a fresh newsletter every morning.  Why didn’t Team Davis organise anything comparable?
• His inner circle of parliamentary supporters is probably the weakest link in his set-up.  Any camp MPs who break the ‘Don’t speak ill of another Conservative’ commandment – that DD blazenly decreed yesterday – should be fired.

‘Not speaking ill of another Conservative’ should not preclude Team DD launching a rigorous examination of David Cameron’s beliefs, however (assuming a DD-DC contest).  DC’s Tuesday speech was well-delivered and its compassionate theme compelling.  But it lacked substance.  Team DD could recover its confidence if it can expose David Cameron as having the wrong views on such issues as drugs and licensing and ill-thought-out views on Europe.  The questioning of DC will either prove that he is too inexperienced to become Tory leader or the testing will prove him worthy of the Tory crown.

Comments

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

Another point - the next leader will need to show he/she can keep the party united rather than dividing it by trashing the brand (hypocritically!) and turning our party into a cheap, flimsy knock-off of the original plastic party, New Labour.

[Midnight Blue]

The point I was making is that there have been some overly harsh comments used about a man who is the first in YEARS to get the party good press, the first in YEARS to generate good vibes from a party conference and the first in YEARS to look like a winner, I just don't believe that DC would turn the party into "diet New Labour" in terms of policy but if he can replicate their electoral success (which I believe he could) then surely it's a possibility worth exploring after YEARS of monotone right wing leaders talking only to us

[James Hellyer]

who is the first in YEARS to get the party good press

That's untrue.

the first in YEARS to generate good vibes from a party conference

So's that.

and the first in YEARS to look like a winner

And so's that.

Have you anything other than wild hyperbole?

[Midnight Blue]

I have a desire to see the party I believe in win again James, the response to DC amongst people I know has been incredible, they look at him like they have looked at no other Conservative for as long as I can remember, none of them have ever voted Conservative. In the end - that is what matters.

I also have the intention not to be offensive to people whose opinions don't tally exactly with mine!

Incidentally who else do you think has looked like a winner? I can't actually think of any names....

[Mark Fulford]

Let me guess... Dr Fox?

[James Hellyer]

the response to DC amongst people I know has been incredible.

And I think the point is that some of us have noted a different reaction from people we know - Conservative and non-Conservative - that was less than incredible.

Incidentally who else do you think has looked like a winner? I can't actually think of any names....

Michael Howard - particularly in the aftermath of his accession to the leadership. That atmosphere was still there at his first Conference. The party had unity, discipline and a sense of purpose.

And yes, I think Dr Fox looks like one now. Cameron doesn't yet because there's no substance to him at all.

[John G]

I have a desire to see this party win again too. And regardless of whether Cameron is modelling himself on Blair, he reminds people of Blair. Enough journalists recognise that, sometimes meaning it as a compliment. But Blair is now very unpopular. So it doesn't matter if Cameron lies or not - he reminds someone of a vacuous liar (mainly through his own vacuousness) and so would probably tumble to a heavy defeat.

Moreover, he is utterly untested. Are you telling me that 6 months in a Shadow Education brief that has been totally dominated by a leadership contest are nearly enough to show a man has the experience to make the tough, alienating decisions that a party leader must now make? Especially without ANYONE experienced around him?

I saw Cameron's launch. I saw Cameron's speech. I know he is committed to a Conservative party with a foreign policy encompassing more than Zimbabwe and Gibraltar. Good. But he hasn't told us how he'll deliver it. The soundbites are good but, as the Editor says, where is the substance? For a leadership contest that started so well, with sensible input from the likes of Willetts, I'm disappointed that the last 3 months look like they'll be spent without discussing any of the issues that we should be discussing, and will instead focus on the personal charm of one man.