How many Tories have voted?

"Around half of the 253,689 eligible party members are now estimated to have voted in the leadership contest, even though the deadline is Dec 5.  Party sources said, however, that as only 79 per cent voted in the last full membership ballot in 2001, effectively 60 per cent of votes had probably been cast."

My own information is very slightly different from that of The Telegraph - from which the above quotation comes.  I understand that only a little over 40% of members have voted.  Nonetheless. if those who have already voted have voted in line with last week's YouGov poll we can expect David Cameron to be enjoying a 2-1 lead.  All of those yet to vote will have to vote in at least that proportion for David Davis to have a chance of winning this contest - a scenario that now seems very unlikely.

David Davis has one best, last chance to produce something dramatic tomorrow lunchtime when he goes head-to-head with David Cameron on ITV1's Jonathan Dimbleby programme.  The programme goes out at 12.35pm tomorrow (Sunday).  I'll blog the debate immediately afterwards.

If you haven't entered the run-off stage prediction competition it's not too late to do so.  Click below to vote in ConservativeHome's own leadership ballot...

Comments

[JohnBrownD]

Does it mean it's over? Not if people - in the last minute - concentrate on reality not spin.

Take Cameron's supposed 'business experience'. Cameron likes to say he has some. But are you aware of what his business experience actually was?

Chief salesman for one of the biggest disasters in business history!

That’s right: Cameron’s one ‘real job’ in life, as City spokesman for Carlton, was trying to sell shares in Ondigital, which collapsed shortly after claiming to be on its way to raging success. Hundreds of millions of pounds were lost by investors, hundreds of thousands of consumers were left with pointless gadgets!

Good job Cameron! Are you going to make the Conservative Party another ONdigital?

Or maybe a better model is Cameron’s other ‘job in business’, consultant in Urbium, pushing 24-hour boozing facilities.

His whole campaign is like this. His leadership will be like this. Good salesmanship of bad products. Wake up Tories! This isn’t the world we want!

[Jack Stone]

David Davis supporters, after trying to beat DC by attacking his beliefs and policies, now resort to type by attacking him personally. What a surprise!
Daid Cameron as advised leaders of our party since he was twenty five. He as been in Parliament just four years and is on the brink of becoming the party leader.
To achieve what he as in such a short time shows that the man is not only no idiot but that he as something very special.

[Prodigal]

Good to see Jack Stone coming out firmly against personal attacks and sneering comments about leadership candidates. I'll just go and prepare the fatted calf.

[Ted]

JohdDBrown "This isn't the world we want"

Sorry John

the reason many of us are lining up behind DC is that we DO want a different world from the party of the last decade - one where the Party isn't continually at war with itself, one where we present an optimistic view of what Bitain can achieve, one where we appeal again to a wider range of opinion, where "core"policies exist surrounded by the "apple" of softer compassionate conservatism,

At its simplest a world where winning a vote in the commons or driving a minster out isn't viewed as better than supportng the Government when we beieve their proposals improve the lot of our fellow citizens. Constructive, searching, innovative in opposition and in power.

[Kate Castle]

A few weeks ago the editor was 'accused' of being pro-Davis. Truth is there now seem to be very few pro-Davis arguments, just two sides pro-Cameron or against-Cameron, but with little to offer by way of positive talk about Davis.

Personally, Davis has impressed me, and I hope he and his campaign don't affect his chance of high office under Cameron by their tactics in the last few weeks. The debate on why we should vote for each is over and the indications are that Cam is going to win.

[JohnBrownD]

Don't be silly, Jack Stone: this is a LEADERSHIP RACE, remember? It therefore IS about the man! How foolish can you get! It can hardly be about policies, can it, given DC doesn't like them.

Cameron himself constantly talks about his 'experience in business', so it's entirely appropriate to discuss his experience in business.

There's absolutely nothing inappropriate about discussing Cameron's salesmanship of ONdigitital, and absolute business disaster.

PLUS Cameron made it his job to be consultant for Urbium, publically supporting what they do - even within this race. So how can discussing what Urbium does be somehow unfair?

Don't you see how ridiculous it is? By attacking me for making a reasonable comment, and by refusing to deal with the substance of the comment, you, Jack Stone, show yourself unwilling to take part in debate.

[Rick]

"Daid Cameron as advised leaders of our party since he was twenty five. He as been in Parliament just four years and is on the brink of becoming the party leader.
To achieve what he as in such a short time shows that the man is not only no idiot but that he as something very special."

Truly Jack Stone is in love...........it is the kind of swooning declaration one hears from Tessa Jowell and Harriet Harman about "Tony" or Ed Balls when speaking of the revered "Gordon"

[JohnBrownD]

Jack Stone, just out of interest, please tell us what we are allowed to discuss? After all,

- we can't discuss Cameron's lack of policies, because that's unfair, because only a stupid person would have policies at this stage, etc etc etc

- we can't discuss his previous advisor roles (though you puff them up) because, as we learned in a previous thread, Cameron can't be held responsible for campaigns he devised and supported (eg Michael Howard's ghastly attempts)

- we obviously don't want to discuss if or when Cameron stopped taking drugs (he admitted on Paxman that there was a time he took drugs - but I readily agree this is a pointless subject)

- now Jack says we can't discuss Cameron's business jobs, selling the disastrous ONdigital and the awful Urbium

So what exactly CAN we discuss, Jack? The greatness of Cameron's directions? His beautiful speaking style? What?

I mean, it's not as if he's an under-age royal. He wants to be leader and Prime Minister. It's time we treated him like a grown-up, isn't it? His past work 'in business' must surely be legitimate subjects for scrutiny, no?

[Jack Stone]

I have no argument with people discusing the merits of the two candidates. What I do object to is this attitude of Davis supporters that not only is Cameron some sort of idiot which clearly he is not but that he is the devil in disguise which clearly he is also not.There is an agression and to be frank hatred about Davis supporters comments that I personally find totally distastful.
Rick.Grow up!

[JohnBrownD]

Jack, no-one said Cameron was an idiot. He's no genius, but that's not a problem.

But Cameron hasn't actually achieved anything. He hasn't stood up for anything worthwhile and carried it out to completion.

All he's done - apart from a series of PR jobs that can at best be described as yukky - is perform well at Blackpool. Maybe that's enough these days.

But I bridle when I hear him talk about his 'business experience'. He has NO business experience. He briefly had a job in the private sector, yes, but that's not 'business experience'!

Business experience to me means leading and taking decisions in the process of building something up. Being spokesman for Michael Green? For goodness sake!

DD has had true business experience. He was an executive director of a major, important British public company. That's experience of business. DD then used his experience to save the country hundreds of millions of pounds in his role as head of the public accounts committee.

Can the Tory party no longer tell the difference between the two? It really makes wonder.

[blue2win]

Jack Stone You are so right.

The nasty party is alive and well in these comments. If these vociferous anti-Cameron posters would tell us why we should vote for DD rather than attempting to smear DC then the tone would be better, the debate more informative and the party more effective and united.

I hope these personal attacks with partial truths are not part of the Tory future but can soon be consigned to a postscript of our sad past.

[JohnBrownD]

Blue2win, I gave at least one reason in my last post.

Why is it ok for the Cameron to mercilessly attack DD, and it becomes 'smears' to point out Cameron's weaknesses?

I have no problem with DC as a person. He's playing his role very well. I just don't think he's qualified to be leader.

I have no problem with people wanting to vote DC. I may well be wrong in my assessment. DC and DD supporters will have to work together soon in the Conservative cause. No problem.

But I DO have a problem with DC supporters who think we have to worship at their shrine. It is not a smear to point out the on-record reality of what Cameron calls his business experience!

If you call this kind of honest criticism 'smears', just because you disagree with it, then no, I don't regard you as someone working for unity!

And please don't forget the viciousness of the Cameron campaign's anti-DD spin-machine. Don't try to tell me it's been sweetness and light.

[Henry Fitzpatrick]

What I don't understand about "Jack Stone" and his pash for Dave is - why on earth won't he use his real name? Come on Jack, out yourself.

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

I am minded to refer DD and his team to the Party's Ethics Committee for bringing the Party into disrepute. DD's team have smeared all the rival candidates from Dr. Fox to DC.Those responsible should be disciplined.

[petersmith]

Justin, don't be pathetic.

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

Watch this space!

[petersmith]

Is this for real? Is this really the Chairman of Tottenham Conservatives? Is this official from the Cameron Campaign?

[reasonable]

I've just had a look at the tottenhamconservatives.com website, which appears to be an official Conservative Party website. And yet it declares its support for David Cameron. Is this allowed by the rules? Can whole constituency associations declare for a candidate and use their website to promote him? If so, I'm surprised. I realise that individual officers can declare as they wish, but I had no idea that associations could use their resources to promote one side.

[Wat Tyler]

Doesn't sound at all right to me reasonable...almost certainly a disciplinary offence.

[JustinHinchcliffe4Ever!]

Barbara Villiers will love this extract from the Enfield Independent last year! "Mr Hinchcliffe, now 20, was himself suspended by party chiefs in 1995 for his outspoken views on the elderly and the unemployed and was the real life inspiration for comedian Harry Enfield's Tory Boy character."

[Impartial]

I'd be very surprised if Tottenham Conservatives have more than 1 member, if their chairman is anything to judge by. He doesn't seem the sort to encourage people to stay, does he? On that basis, it's probably correct for Hinchcliffe to declare unanimous support for Cameron, because he's the only one.

[petersmith]

Not just BV - I love it too. This is the guy telling us how bad us DD supporters are, and threatening to take DD to the standards committee? How funny.

[Rumpole of the Bailey]

Question to Mr Hinchcliffe - do you need a good lawyer?

[Barbara Villiers]

John Brown D

Well done - I am sick and tired of being censured (and pretty soon it will be censored) by those worshipping at the altar of Cameron.

And speak about nasty tactics - the story is going around that if Cameron wins he is going to offer Davis a job that is so paltry as to be embarrassing and that he will have no choice but to turn it down. Put that in your pipe and smoke it Justin.

Okay so you want reasons to vote for Davis. Here goes:

1)He has a wealth of experience especially in his role as the Chairman of Public Account Committee. It is here where he amassed much a huge amount of knowledge on public spending.

2)He has had the scalps of Blunkett & Hughes

3)He is earnest about helping those at the bottom 25% of society and has firm ideas about how to do so. I especially like his idea of turning the useless city academies into grammars and having more vocational schools.

4)He is a self made man, made a success of himself against the odds and this is very inspiring to us who haven't had all the advantages. He wants to help everyone raise their game - that is real compassionate Conservatism

5)His tax policies make sense - lower taxes mean more people working and more tax revenue (to be it simplistically). He has not specified which taxes but he doesn't necessarily mean income tax.

6)His statesmanlike attitude at the Despatch Box after 7/7 and his generally very good, solid performances there.

7)No tuition fees. The fees that are being charged won't make a difference as regards to improving the quality of education so we might as well not have them. Far better to get rid of the useless courses.

8)He is for liberaling licensing laws only AFTER the binge drinking culture has been tackled.

9)As a father of 3, he is well aware of the dangers of drugs and would not reclassify ecstasy but would upgrade cannabis

10)He wouldn't know a soundbite if it bit him in the bum. He is plain spoken, no nonsense and no frills. How refreshing.

11)It was HIS idea originally to have elected police commissioners, not Cameron's. He is also an advocate of local policing and localism in general.

12)His policy on the EU and the Human Rights fiasco is very sound - take back our powers but have a loose confederation of trading partners. He has already established a commission to look at the Human Rights Act.

Is this enough for you to go on for now?

[Barbara Villiers]

Oh, and Hinchcliffe sounds like a real s..t!