Davis (Aslan) trumps Cameron (Frodo) in focus group

David Davis cannot have enjoyed his weekend.  His campaign faced one blow after another.  A YouGov poll gave his opponent a commanding lead.  The Daily Mail endorsed Mr Cameron and then William Hague and Liam Fox did the same.  Yesterday morning saw The Sunday Times declare for the frontrunner.  The Economist, FT, Independent and Times had already endorsed Mr Cameron.  The sluggish Telegraph is yet to nail its colours to the mast but it is unlikely to endorse the Shadow Home Secretary.

After the weekend of gloom Mr Davis will have enjoyed this morning's Today programme.  A focus group of north London floating voters - assembled by Opinion Leader Research for that programme - gave a unanimous thumbs up to Mr Davis.  None of the group's members wanted David Cameron - who was found to be too similar to Tony Blair (at a time when his star is fading) and had been born with a silver spoon in his mouth.  David Davis, on the other hand, was thought to have the "common background", character and spirit to be a successful Tory leader.  When asked to compare the two men to an animal one woman chose a leopard for Mr Davis.  Like a leopard he wouldn't change his spots, she hoped.

Another compared Mr Davis to C S Lewis' Aslan - because of his character and charisma.  David Cameron (who has been likened to Tolkien's Frodo) was compared to a monkey - he looks cute but could easily be aggressive, said one of the group's members.

This group's conclusions are not scientific, of course, and contrast with the findings of similar research carried out by Frank Luntz for Newsnight.  You can hear the group's discussion by accessing the 7.10am slot on the Today Listen Again page.

If you would like to hear David Davis this Thursday night at the Centre for Social Justice please access ConservativeHome's new Events listing service.

Comments

[Selsdon Man]

The picture is of a lion. I suggest a visit to the optician, editor.

[wasp]

It depends entirely on what clips you show the group. The reason why Cameron won the Luntz one was because it was platform speaking they showed, if it was on the TV sofa or radio then Davis usually comes off better.

[Rick]

Did I read that Frank Luntz was at Oxford with David Cameron ?

http://www.dkosopedia.com/index.php/Frank_Luntz

http://www.mediatransparency.org/personprofile.php?personID=123

http://dir.salon.com/story/politics/feature/2000/05/26/luntz/index.xml

[Rick]

But Luntz argues that regular polling often misses what's really going on with voters. "Human behavior studies have consistently proven that people will reveal their innermost thoughts only to those [with whom] they believe they share a common bond," he wrote in a 1994 polling-report article called "Voices of Victory."

[modern conservative]

"This group's conclusions are not scientific"

Comparing leadership candidates to zoo animals....you believe me it isn't scientific!

I'm sure monkies are much more appealing than lions anyway.

Plus lions are rather lazy, arrogant and only occassionally make a kill.

Perhaps it is scientific after all.

[exposed]

Rick - not only was Frank Luntz at Oxford in 1986 with David Cameron, but he was a friend of Michael Gove as both were active in the Oxford Union. Interestingly for the anoraks Gove was not a Tory then - he became President of the Union in 86 beating Peter Wilson who, according a Mail on Sunday article at the time, was the Tory candidate and had Ed Vaizey on his team. Small world.

[Barbara Villiers]

You know Cameron supporters, they can dish it out but they can't take it. Often a sign of immaturity. (JOKE)

[Wat Tyler]

I'd certainly like to believe this is meaningful. And of course, it's consistent with that Sunday Telegraph focus group way back in May.

But having watched that egregious Luntz/Newsnight f group, you have to conclude they are virtually worthless as a guide to real opinion. They're like management consultants: the conclusions reflect the needs of whoever's paying.

The BBC- and maybe the media in general- don't really want the audience to think the contest is now a foregone conclusion: "it's actually a lot closer than we've suggested- so keep listening...please." And come to think of it, that may explain the extraordinary "mix-up" between Populus and the Times over that "Davis Ahead" poll last week.

Who knows how the real voting will finally turn out, but my view of these "public" focus groups is that they are mainly a weapon of media war.

[Peter]

Tim had you decided which person to support after your 12 questions as it seems David Davis would not have had to go to extra time on what you posted.
Again on the youGov poll do we take into account a poll of less than 0.3% of members, if they were all members. This because I'm one of them and nobody locally have been asked wether I am a member of the party or not?

[michael]

Didn't YouGov get it right in 2001 re IDS v Clarke?

YouGov haven't asked me either and I'm voting for Cameron.

I have to say that with such overwhelming Parliamentary support, for members to elect Davis would leave him extremely isolated as leader.

[Peter]

Michael I have been asked, but YouGov have in my mind not made any checks to see wether I'm a member of the party or not. That I think is important don't you?
It doesn't matter about MP support as it didn't help Thatcher, Major or Hague that they had majority support within the party MPs did they?

[houndtang]

If DD is elected he could be removed instantly by a confidence vote by the MPs.

[a-tracy]

What a silly comment Houndtang surely the MP's would respect the decision of the members.

[loyal_tory]

The fact that this latest focus group totally contradicted the Luntz focus group illustrates the dangers of selecting a leader according to focus group or opinion poll findings or the views of the media. The party needs the self-confidence to ask (1) what changes are necessary in Britain to solve the biggest problems people have? Then we should ask (2) what is the best way to sell those solutions? Of course, it is difficult to be self-confident after three big defeats--but still worth it.

[Jack Stone]

If the party elect a leader who the majority of the parliamentary party believe is not up to the job before the leader is even elected you will simply be electing a lame duck leader.
All we will get is yet another re-run of the IDS fiasco as soon as we get near to the election and the polls don`t shift which personally I am sure they won`t with DD as leader.
The most important thing is that we elect a leader we can unite around. David Cameron as shown the way he as attracted supported from all sections of the party that he can unite the party. David Davis just doesn`t have the support to do that.

[a-tracy]

So you don't think the members should have a say at all then Jack?

[James Hellyer]

"All we will get is yet another re-run of the IDS fiasco as soon as we get near to the election and the polls don`t shift"

What happens if they don't shift under DC's leadership? Do you think MPs would continue to bow to his inexperience?

[Jack Stone]

Under a Davis leadership the party as no chance of winning the next election. Under a Cameron leadership I think we will!
Have faith and ye shall see!

[James Hellyer]

Answer the question please, Jack, or stop making such baseless assertions.

[Derek]

Whoever wins should have the support of the MPs. The rules should be changed to make it much more difficult for MPs to remove the leader, either by increasing the number of MPs needed to put down a no confidence motion, or to require a 66% vote of the MPs in order to carry it. We must stop this "change the leader" mentality.

[houndtang]

A-Tracy - since when have the MPs respected the views of the members? My comment was that under the present ludicrous system, a leader can be elected without the support of the MPs but can be removed by them.

[James Maskell]

The first comment about the lion. Aslan was a lion...thus the picture of a lion. Im pretty sure I saw the very same picure as being from the new Narnia film.

[wasp]

One of the main reasons for trying to change the rules that having one group of people employ somebody and another remove them may not be legal.

I don't think the rules should be changed immediately but an electoral college or primary system should be proposed before the next leadership election, whenever that should be.

[henry curteis]

David Davis could still win if he can portray himself as the man of the people up against the metropolitan elite. Who wants more Blairism for heaven's sake?

The europhiles are desperate to close the deal and get Cameron into the leadership. Why doesn't Davis extend his offer of a referendum to include one on EU membership and set the cat amongst the pigeons? If the EU gets the thumbs down he can then renegotiate with the EU for a free trading relationship and exit the EPP.

Davis has to play the democratic card to stay in the race - there is nothing to say he cannot win. He may not be liked by the media luvvies but this is politics - not X factor.

[Barbara Villiers]

Jack,

You just don't get it. Cameron has the support of the MPs BECAUSE the think he is winning. Just like Davis had it when they thought HE was winning. Nothing to do with policies and everything to do with being on the winning side. When you have known as many MPs as I do it will be an easy concept for you to grasp.