Conservative Home's debate blogs

Advertising

  • DVD rental
  • Conservative Books
My Photo

Conservative blogs

Blog powered by Typepad

  • Tracker 2
  • Extreme Tracker

« Hustings Report (9): London | Main | Sky TV Debate »

Comments

malcolm

I wish I 'd had any 'eduction' Jack.It sounds a good a good idea.

wasp

Well said Jack Stone.

DVA I still think Blair unpopularity is good for us. If he stays on till 2008 as I think he will then Labour could be tearing themselves apart. Making a united and sensible Conservative party far more unattractive.

I agree with Jack Stone on the EPP, IDS's one contribution was to take Europe off the agenda, it needs to stay there.

Disappointed Eurosceptic

"IDS's one contribution was to take Europe off the agenda, it needs to stay there."

So why did Cameron make such a song and dance about taking us out of the EPP before Christmas?

Daniel Vince-Archer

"DVA I still think Blair unpopularity is good for us. If he stays on till 2008 as I think he will then Labour could be tearing themselves apart."

I kind of agree with you here Wasp. In many respects Gordon faces a tough choice. Does he let Tony carry on until 2008, with the risk that anti-Blair rebellions cause lasting damage to Labour, so that the next election falls during his honeymoon period? Or does he stick the knife in now and engineer Tony's downfall, risking a backlash and negative perceptions about disloyalty, so that he can get an iron grip on Labour now and steady the ship?

Bruce

Should we get excited over a poll showing DC 5% down to Gordon Brown? After all, the Tories came within 2-3% of Labour the last election. After 8 years of one-party government, the opposition party historically has done better in the polls than this.

Deckchair of despair

I object! I'm an 'ordinary person', and I *do* care about the EU issue. If we hadn't wasted billions and billions of the national wealth on our pointless membership of this worse than useless organization, our public services and our armed forces would now be in a better state.
I always feel that when 'ordinary persons' are asked what they regard as most important, politically, their reponses are very much influenced by what they have had rammed down their throats all the time by the media, especially the television news programmes. The fact that the BBC, for instance, have, over the last twenty-odd years, made a point of generally never mentioning the EU at all, except on the rare occasions when they can spin the news to make the EU somehow look 'good', has had a big effect on what people regard as 'important'.

TC

"Alternatively, we can start to persuade people that on these subjects our view is better than that of the BBC and the other opponents of conservative reform."

If the BBC is so hostile, why does the Conservative Party not have a policy to at least make the TV licence optional?

media coverage is obviously all that matters

Because that would antoginise the media, especially the BBC, which, as we know, is always a bad idea. It's because they don't like us that we've been out of power all this time. Except, they didn't like us much when we were in power either.

The bear

But get Murdoch onside?

Ed R

Fun poll result, but doesn't tell us anything more than we already knew:

Brown is more popular than Blair
Cameron is more popular than Davis

Any further conclusions are difficult to distinguish. What about the LibDems? UKIP? The nationalists? They'll all sway the poll result.

Plus, the real unknown quantity here isn't Cameron but Brown. Where does Blairism end and Brownism begin? There's lots of notions about what Brown might think in the broad sense, but in many ways we know even less about a Brown premiership than we do about a Cameron one. So far the assumption is that Blairism ends with the bad bits and Brownism starts with the good bits -- and Labour has been perfectly happy with that because it keeps all parties sweet.

But when the game kicks off for real, I fancy all this will move quite quickly indeed.

James Maskell

A joke stops being a joke when someone has to explain it.

malcolm thomas

disappointed eurosceptic - you cheer up!!!

Roger Helmer, Liam Fox, William Hague, Michael Gove, Douglas Carswell (direct democracy) have all looked into Cameron's eyes and they all trust him to act as promised...take note especially of Roger Helmer who has been fighting on the front line of the EPP quagmire for a very long time.

Of course a leader has to delegate the actual work to his minions - he is responsible for the strategy and the culture of his Party - delegating the EPP 'tidy up' to his Shadow For Sec is not a climbdown or a watering down, or a sop to europhiles. It's the executive order to proceed with the task.

If all the above known Eurosceptics are willing to trust Cameron, then so am I, and so should you be. (It does help that I've met one or two and know others who know them well etc).

Any promise can be doubted, but as regards Cameron and the EPP, please relax and try trusting. To erase all doubt read Alistair Campbell again who now knows that Cameron has outmanoevred him. Campbell gave him full media backing, hoping for a cosy arrangement, but it's now clear that this strategy has backfired. The displeasure of Mr Campbell, evidenced by the present raft of attempted smears on Cameron, assures your pleasure 'disppointed eurosceptic'! ENJOY!!!

wasp

"So why did Cameron make such a song and dance about taking us out of the EPP before Christmas?"

Because Cameron is very concerned about the importance of consistency, believing it to be a prerequisite of a Government in waiting.

I just happen to disagree with him on this particular issue - however it is not an important one that would influence my decision on who to vote for.

Sherlock Holmes

The Case Of The Consistent Candidate:

Ecstacy: will be declassified to demonstrate Tory Party in touch with modern Britain; next day it's a Shadow Cabinet decision and not very significant, and they might not even get round to considering it.

Tax Cuts: in the morning, DD is copying what DC has been saying all summer; in the afternoon its irresponsible grandstanding which no sensible person would ever do.

EPP: when Helmer's vote is up for grabs, we'll be out of the EPP by Christmas; now he's committed publicly, it's a shadow foreign secretary matter and could take years.

The Blair legacy: he's been a disaster and the era of spin is coming to an end; except of course that until he actually goes we'll prop him up.

Watson, when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth....

Daniel Vince-Archer

Good work Holmes. Please allow me to bring some more incidents to your attention:

exhibit A - dumping on charity - exploiting the hardworking Third World Christian charity Christian Aid by using their images to portray himself as a caring, compassionate Conservative in his campaign literature then launching a stinging attack on the same charity in a bid to attract support from free-marketeers

exhibit B - the phantom manifesto - Conservatives lose election fighting on policy platform that Cameron co-ordinated and with manifesto that Cameron drafted on May 5th, Cameron launches Change To Win campaign disowning policy platform and manifesto on May 6th

exhibit C - global warning [sic] - Cameron announces proposal to establish a new unelected, unaccountable quango, the Carbon Audit Commission (presumably to work alongside the already existing Carbon Trust) to show his commitment to tackling global warming, whilst using fuel-guzzling, emission-heavy air transport to get around the country, including the marathon journey between Newcastle and York

exhibit D - adoption amnesia - Cameron votes against adoption rights for gay couples and abstains from vote on adoption rights for unmarried couples then claims during leadership campaign that he's always been in favour of gay adoption rights in attempt to pander to the gay rights lobby and present himself as caring, compassionate Conservative

I'm sure there's plenty more where that came from... The lady may not be for turning, but Cameron certainly is. Flip-FLOP!!!

James Maskell

Part D grates very hard against me as someone with a very strong interest in the adoption system. I am a product of that system and I am proud to have been given the second chance. I have no problems with gay adoption as long as they go through the same process as any other potential adopter. I cant support someone who wants to restrict the chances of a child in care finding a good home.

Jaz

If all conservatives stuck the views that they currently hold... My advice would be to move to the USA.. Atleast there you might just get accepted in society.

Cameron has every and any right to make his own policies now, this might even be against what he did in the past. There is a reason for this... When he is leader, he calls the shots and there's no whip to keep him inline with conservative policy.

Back to the thread, before it got hijacked by Cameron flamers...

This poll demonstrates what many people have been saying for a long time... electing a leader which is now CLEARLY unpopular with the public isn't exactly a good step in the right direction of "connecting with the people"

Daniel Vince-Archer

Sorry James M, I can assure you that no offence or slur was intended and I apologise profusely if it came across that way.

Richard Carey

"This poll demonstrates what many people have been saying for a long time... electing a leader which is now CLEARLY unpopular with the public isn't exactly a good step in the right direction of "connecting with the people"

I couldn't agree with that more, and I am starting to resent the bleating "partisans" in our midst... you can have the greatest programme for Government ever, and it matters not one jot if you are never electable enough to get the opportunity to deliver it. The tone of some of the posts here from (I presume) fellow Conservatives does the Party no credit.

I will personally back whichever leader of the Party is democratically elected, and will continue to work for the Party in whatever role I am required. I invite "Sherlock Holmes" and Daniel Vince-Archer make the same pledge here and now, and explain how they will credibly do this given the current tone of their criticism.

Barbara Villiers

I'd be most interested to know how many were sampled in the poll, whether they were the general public, Conservative voters or Conservative members.

I would also like to remind you that up until Bush was re-elected, Kerry was ahead in the polls and I woke up expecting him to be prez. Now the Cameroonies might say that is wishful thinking on my part but I've still yet to see any proof to explain why you are getting the champagne ready - and please don't cite media popularity because you all know what I think of that crap.

John Hustings

And this seems to be the only reason that the Tories will elect David Cameron as leader: they want to be popular again.

After 8 years (actually, make that 13) of feeling impotent and being scorned by all sections of the media, the public and even our own party as nasty, depraved, warped, evil, sadistic etc. tory members just want to be popular again. They crave popularity so much that they are willing to overlook the fact that the man they hope with achieve it for them is the antithesis to everything they stand for.

Rather than abandon our principles -- rather than submit defeat to the liberal consensus -- why not argue our case and demonstrate that they were wrong about us?

Members were never at fault for the "nasty party" image. It was MPs' fault -- avaricious, power-hungry MPs -- the "young turks" that Alan Clark describes who plotted for power in deposing Mrs Thatcher. They were more interested in their own careers than Tory principles. Like Michael Portillo, they'd happily drop any policy or belief for the sake of power.

But it is the poor members who have faced the brunt of the criticism for their MP's failings: constantly derided with unfair stereotypes of the "blue rinse brigade" and "victor meldrews" (and often these stereotypes are most often advanced by the left-wing of our own party).

We have the great advantage that we are in the right. The country has fouled up in so many ways, and it is the liberals' fault in most cases. There is a great danger that some day the public may wake up to the damage that the culture of promiscuity and selfishness which the liberals have wrought upon us. And the minute they do this, we shall have abandoned it ourselves.

For what? The desire not to be derided anymore; to be popular.

I hope it's worth it.

Barbara Villiers

John,

Hear, hear!

True Conservative principles are timeless and to sell them out like is happening is disgusting. The interesting part is that many of the members doing the selling out are the older ones who are probably hoping to see one last victory before they peg out!
But victory at what cost?

Daniel Vince-Archer

"You can have the greatest programme for Government ever, and it matters not one jot if you are never electable enough to get the opportunity to deliver it."

Electability in itself is not and should not be the determining factor for choosing someone we deem to be suitable to run a country. It needs to be married to political virtue if it is to mean anything at all. If we all thought electability was the quality we desired most from a leader, then we should all have voted Labour at the election as Tony Blair is clearly more electable than Michael Howard. I refuse to subscribe to this mentality akin to that of a small child unwrapping its presents on Christmas Day and being more interested in the wrapping paper than what is inside.

"I will personally back whichever leader of the Party is democratically elected, and will continue to work for the Party in whatever role I am required. I invite "Sherlock Holmes" and Daniel Vince-Archer make the same pledge here and now, and explain how they will credibly do this given the current tone of their criticism."

I've already dealt with this issue when confronted by the 'conform or bugger off' agenda by some of your fellow Cameronites previously. I won't repeat myself here but I will point out that my concerns about a NewLabourised Conservative Party won't miraculously vanish on December 6th just because (as seems likely) Cameron has become leader.

Barbara Villiers

Daniel,

Are you, John and I the only voices of reason here?

Your point about electability is terrific. Well done!

Bruce

I've looked around and I couldn't find anything on yougov.com on the details of the poll, probably because it was commissioned by an outside party. I've looked elsewhere but haven't found the details. Does anybody know what questions were asked and in what order, how many people were polled, what was the response rate, and all the other details? Without these details, all we have to go on is the sky news summary, which is about as intellectually valid as newspaper articles generally are. Without more details, NOBODY can make any proper judgments about this poll or its "results".

The comments to this entry are closed.

About Conservative Home

Subscribe

  • Conservative Home's
    free eMailing List
    Enter your name and email address below:
    Name:
    Email:
    Subscribe    
    Unsubscribe