Davis leads Cameron by 50% to 37% amongst Tory voters

A new poll for today's Times gives David Davis a surprising lead amongst Conservative Party voters.  Last month David Cameron led David Davis by 45% to 15%.  This month the Populus survey gives David Davis a 50% over 37% advantage.  The poll was taken after Mr Davis' pledges on tax and Europe and his well-received Question Time performance.  The swing to Mr Davis may also reflect Mr Cameron's muddled ecstasy policy.

The poll should be treated cautiously, however.  Populus surveyed Tory voters - not the members who wil actually elect the next Tory leader.  Populus' General Election tracker poll for The Times/ITN also predicted a very big win for Tony Blair just a couple of days before May 5th's contest.  Populus' reputation has never fully recovered since.

The survey also contains some good news for Mr Cameron.  All voters favour Mr Cameron over Mr Davis by 37% to 30% and most Tory voters think Mr Cameron is more likely to win a General Election.

It is no surprise that a leader in The Times endorses Mr Cameron.  The newspaper compares Mr Davis to IDS and suggests that he is the opponent Gordon Brown would prefer to face.  Mr Cameron, in contrast, is identified as the man most likely to "start a conversation with those sections of the electorate - notably the professional classes or 'ABs' - that have become detached from the Conservatives".  The newspaper is not blind to the risks associated with voting for Mr Cameron: "To choose an inexperienced figure with a somewhat ambiguous agenda is a gamble twice over."  It nonetheless urges Tories "to roll the dice".

Comments

[loyal_tory]

You may be right about his charisma, but that on its own is not enough and is no substitute for the right policies.

[michael]

I agree Loyal. The real disaster is that Davis has boxed himself in with the wrong policies too.

AS John Major pointed out on Sunday. Direction yes, policy detail NOOOOOOOOOO!

[johnC]

Cameron is absolutely right to criticise Christian Aid for attacking free trade.

A quote from Christian Aid's policy document 'A policy out of control: 25 years of pain':

'In reality, championing free trade was just a nicer way of forcing the developing world to swallow free-market medicine.

Liberalism and its handmaiden of conditionality did not in fact herald a new dawn of prosperity and growth in Africa - quite the reverse. The disaster was such that the whole experiment is now seen in many quarters as an embarrassing anachronism that should be kicked into the long grass for ever.'

Nothing could be much plainer than that: a clear statement by Christian Aid that free trade and free market economics are a disastrous anachronism.

Three cheers to Cameron for taking on the lunatic socialist nonsense of the charity campaigners. I had been undecided who to vote for but now it will definitely be him.

[Mark Fulford]

We’re each seeking a leader that we trust to react to unforeseen situations in a way that we would like – so we are judging personality alongside policy. It's essential that we do. To evaluate the personality we assemble the jigsaw of what we see and here. So, whether ingrained sexism is or isn’t a big deal, it’s certainly part of the picture. To me, it’s a big wart quite close to the mouth.

[loyal_tory]

If someone can tell us the direction the party will be taking on taxes and public service reform under a Cameron leadership, I think now is the time to tell us.

[loyal_tory]

Is his attitude old-fashioned? Yes. Is that unfortunate? Yes. Is it worse than having the wrong ideas for our party and our country or having a hidden agenda? No.

[Barbara Villiers]

Gareth,

Do you think because I am against ecstasy and a David Davis supporter that I am racist, homophobic, against abortion and birth control and sexist? That is a typical metrosexual attitude if I ever heard one. Simply stereotype anyone whom you think is old and out of it.

I grew up in an American metropolis, worked in the arts, later with drug abusers, voted Democrat until I came back here (I am British born. My two best friends are gay men, although I would never have an abortion myself I would never assume to deny anyone else the right to have one. I guess I am sexist because I am convinced that men have a gene that makes them unable to look behind the items in the front of a refrigierator. Other than that...

However, I support David Davis because I truly believe he has the gravitas and depth of experience to lead this country. Having worked in arts and media I know just how ephemeral image can be. I also support his belief in helping the bottom quarter of society - people who do not have a leg up as others may do. Taxes are ridiculously high across the board, Gordon Brown's fiscal policies are a disaster and even though my husband and I both work we just about make ends meet. I support his policies on schools and establishing new grammar schools - my daughter was one of 1100 girls chasing 160 places and she didn't make it in. If we had more schools there wouldn't be such fierce competition. I don't want intereference from Brussels, abhor political correctness and after 8 years of Princess Tony I just want a straight shooter to lead the country. Oh, and my grandparents were immigrants from Greece but I detest enforced multiculturalism and think immigration must be controlled.

So, I am afraid that I don't neatly fit into your stereotype!

No Barbara, but you do fit the core conservative sterotype, which unfortunately for a Prty that wants to form the next Government, constitues only 33% of the electorate.

No Barbara, but you do fit the core conservative stereotype, which unfortunately for a Party that wants to form the next Government, constitutes only 33% of the electorate.

[Henry Cook]

"Among Conservative voters, David Cameron is ahead:
by 45 to 11 on who would be most likely to win a General Election;
by 42 to 15 on who would be 'more in touch with ordinary people';
by 36 to 12 on who would unite the Party;
by 33 to 14 on 'bold, compelling policies on tax, economy and public services'."

Are you sure about these figures? These are entirely inconsistent with the headline figures that everyone is talking about (DD=50, DC=37). How on earth could you say that one person was all these things and not vote for them? Only 12% think Davis would unite the party best, and yet 50% want him to have the leadership? Whether you are a DC or a DD supporter, this is a bizarre poll. Let's look to see if this is replicated before drawing anything from it.

[michael]

Beacuse Henry - Conservative voters generally aren't fighting day in day out to get a Conservative Government! They wander along to the polling station every four years and put a cross next to the guy who appeals to them.

[James Hellyer]

"A comment by Andrew Cooper on Mike Smithson’s website, reveals that the Populus poll used a split sample for the questions meaning that the respondents who said they preferred Davis weren’t actually the same respondents who answered the questions about which candidate would be better at various things. In itself this makes no difference - once weighted both halves of the sample would be equally representative of the population. What it does mean is that the sample size for those questions was only 750 and, once you take only the people who say they will vote Tory at the election, the headline figure of 50% of Tory voters preferring Davis was based on only 150 or so respondents. That sample size has a margin of error of about 8% - that said, even at the extremes of the margin of error, Davis has still made huge strides in his level of support since the party conference."

http://www.yougov.com/interactive/blogIntro.asp?jID=3&sID=4&UID=

[Mike L]

The sample size for the DD 50 DC 37 question was just 150 Tory voters.

Re Henry Cook's question above, the Tory voters were split into two halves.

Half (ie 150) were asked who should be leader.

The other half were asked the 4 questions Henry has listed above.

[Gareth]

Barbara,

It was you who suggested that being a metropolitan liberal and (to use your still undefined term) a 'metrosexual', meant that I, to use your words, 'didn't speak for the rest of the country'. I have amplified what being a metropolitan liberal means to me. You have not defined what not-being a metropolitan liberal means to you.

You will have to do better than adopt the straw-man strategy of suggesting, in mock outraged tones, that I have implied your beliefs must be the opposite of mine. Once again, you resort to the anecdotal. I freely admit, if we are to battle it out on the basis of how your life experiences have influenced your opinions, you will always have the advantage over me, since I don't know you remember.

[wasp]

A poll with a sample of just 150 cannot be taken seriously.

[Barbara Villiers]

No name, you talk a lot of crap and if you had any cojones you'd give your name or even a clever pseudonym. I can tell by our earlier debates that you are blinkered and wedded to your own beliefs. That's fine because I too cannot be moved on my beliefs but yoour ageist stereotypes are sickmaking.

[Barbara Villiers]

I do speak from my life experiences, Gareth. Just admit that you're snookered.

[Sean Fear]

Judging by the views she expressed in her penultimate post, Barbara Villiers conforms to the stereotype of the average voter. Its her critics on this thread who are outlandish.

John C, I'm delighted to see DC criticising the socialistic rubbish that Christian Aid come up with.

[Gareth]

'Snookered'? Bless you.

I merely pointed out that a debate revolving around anecdotes about your life is bound to be rather one sided. Perhaps I should start throwing in anecdotes as well and then we can at least have one-sided debates in stereo?

I'm still dying to hear what 'metrosexual' means, not to mention which sepcific parts of the metropolitan liberal creed I outlined (a) make me so 'out of touch' and (b) you disapprove of.

The 'ageist' accusation really stings though, particularly since you earlier called me 'callow'. Is that not a tad 'ageist' Barbara? Tut, tut.

[Barbara Villiers]

Gareth,

It's been nice but I have a job to do - admit you've been snookered. If you don't know what a metrosexual is then your homework assignment tonight is this, young man, research it!

[Bruce]

Gareth, in comparing the British electorate to the US electorate, you declaim that "50% of the electorate here [in Britain] do not describe themselves as born again Christians". Where do you get the idea that "50%" of the American electorate "describe themselves as born again Christians"? I've never seen any poll, not even in the Guardian, claiming that.

[Gareth]

Barbara,

You gave me your CV, not an argument. They're really not the same thing you know and whilst it may work at the Women's Institute or on your CWCC committee, it cuts no ice here.

Anyway, sorry to distract you from today's 'Femail'. There's a particularly fascinating article on how cannabis use turns you 'metrosexual' I hear ...

[Mark Fulford]

Barbara, metrosexual is all about grooming and style. Please admit that you just used the wrong word - it's painful watching you squirm.

[pigmalian]

Watching the debate going on at this moment shows that DD is a genius and is very confortable at the box. He has steared the debate brilliantly and has allowed many people to make a point, non of which have made the case for 90 days.

[Barbara Villiers]

'A' for effort for you young man! However, like others of your generation you are not quite as literate as you should be - I am applying the word 'metrosexual' in the wider sense, as a type.

Now run along dear, and have a nice day!