THE RESULT

DAVID CAMERON: 67.6%
134,446

DAVID DAVIS: 32.4%
64,398

ConservativeHome.com's review of the leadership contest will be posted on this site at 10pm.

A new 'Everything Conservative' site will be launched tomorrow.

Comments

[Henry Cook]

So cynical, but so true wasp!

[Martin Curtis]

What does not seem to have been mentioned is that DC, not only won with an overwhelming majority of those who voted, but also that more than 50% of the entire Party Membership voted for him - I think that extends his mandate even further.

[James Hellyer]

"Incidentally - we political anoraks may have heard much of what was in the acceptance speech before, but the general public will not have heard it. That is the speech that will be on all the news programmes and it was well delivered and fitting."

The point going forwards is that Cameron needs to broaden his range of material. The public may not have heard all that before, but people will notice if the same chunks of speeches are endlessly recycled.

[Henry Cook]

No Coxy, I wasn't attacking any Conservative Party leaders - I have a lot of respect for the men you mention. I was attacking the way in which some people see PC-ness as wholly bad. I think while it goes much too far, it has also helped to create a more tolerant and respectful society, and does not have totally adverse effects.

[Dave Carter]

"Patrick McLaughlin has been confirmed as Chief Whip."

Good. Can we please have a high energy, workaholic party chairman? We need one.

[John Hustings]

"If that means not calling disabled people 'spastics', not calling gay people 'queers', and not calling asylum seekers 'dirty foreigners', then I'm ok with that."

Which Tories advocate using these terms. Or are you not talking about Tories? Would you like to make it a criminal offence for anyone to use those terms?

I really don't expect this kind of rubbish from a conservative.

"If you mean 'PC' in another sense, then David Cameron has repeatedly attacked it in speeches etc."

*Repeatedly*? Funny that. Because I hadn't noticed. And I've been following quite closely.

Either way, are you saying the "white male" reference was not a PC statement? (Don't we get enough "white male" bashing from the left?) Evidently Cameron's "we need to change" mantra is about becoming PC (or in his words, "loving Britain as it is today"). If you didn't realise that, then I think you're a little naive.

Some of us believe that conservatives should be *fighting* the culture war, not surrendering to it.

[Biodun]

I have to say, I thought he gave a good speech. Very light, optimistic and encouraging. Anything more would have been overkill, I'm just glad it's all over!

Rooting for Ken Clarke and then David Davis, it seems like I always back the losers.

I just hope DC can dispel the reservations I have about his suitability.

25 mins ago, after much dilly dallying, I became a fully-paid-up member of the Conservative Party.
About time I put my money where my mouth has always been :-)

[Richard Weatherill]

"I have to say i was dismayed by the total number of votes. Is that all the committed Conservatives we have left? Some of the profit from this election should be used to finance a major recruitment drive in the first place."

Posted by: James Turner | 06 December 2005 at 16:27

And what's just arrived in my Inbox? An email from CCHQ, including a letter from DC for use in a local membership recruitment drive. Better get out there then!

[Coxy]

Camaroon could win the Boo Boys back by shifting Francis "don't trust the membership" Maude from party chairman.

Preferably to Cameroon, or somewhere a long way from here, where his anti-democratic views are more acceptable.

[Andrew]

His range of material has been carefully selected for long-term electoral purposes: give your opponent few targets and there will be even fewer cracks. If the election had been any contest at all he would have been forced to provide more detail, but as it happens he's given Labour nothing to smear him with.

Like him or not, anyone who rises from nowhere to win the leadership in such a short period of time is a formiddable political creature. Given that, his judgement on how much to reveal (and when) should be respected.

[Ian Sider]

Our support for David Cameron should be conditional -- at least in one respect:

He must implement his agenda as set out in his acceptance speech. The words and delivery may not have been as polished as Michael Howard's in 2003, but if, unlike Howard, he delivers on the content, then Cameron's speech will be by far the more significant.

If, however, Cameron forgets the reason why we elected him and reaches for a core vote strategy at the first sign of trouble, he will forfeit his mandate.

That said, he fully deserves his victory, and as long as he stands for 'modern compassionate conservatism' he fully deserves our loyalty.

[James Hellyer]

"His range of material has been carefully selected for long-term electoral purposes: give your opponent few targets and there will be even fewer cracks."

Yes, but that doesn't mean they have to be expressed using exactly the same words in exactly the same order each time! The problem is that can convey the impression that someone is reciting something learnt, rather than saying something they believe.

[James Maskell]

Maude's going nowhere. Im not happy about it. I think Camerons going to go the wrong way with goldlists. Its discrimination in reverse.

[Coxy]

Agreed James. For example, surely his tax policy could be explained in words other than "sharing the proceeds of growth....". Not exactly an eye-catching phrase is it?

[Goldie]

By the way, in the 1994 acceptance speech by Blair, he explicitly embraced his pride in Labour's "socialist" principles.

So, don't judge a leader by what he says and does immediately upon accepting the leadership.

[Coxy]

And before I log off for today, can I just say...? Jack Stone, learn to spell or go away!

[Innocent Abroad]

Couldn't agree more Coxy! IF Dave gets rid of Maude, the Boo Boys will give him a 2nd chance. Otherwise, we will have to drive him out of the leadership. He has been warned. Act now or feel ou reactionary wrath!

[give dc a chance]

"Maude's going nowhere." We don't know that. Give Cameron a chance to prove he is strong enough to appoint people on merit. Give him a chance!

[John Hustings]

"By the way, in the 1994 acceptance speech by Blair, he explicitly embraced his pride in Labour's "socialist" principles."

And his party has stuck to them!

"IF Dave gets rid of Maude," agreed but Cameron isn't like Maude. He's very committed to putting every ounce of effort into being leader. He's very professional in terms of how he conducts himself, even if you don't agree with him. I'm sure he won't have any time for people who prefer jobs and position to hard work.

[Tom Ainsworth]

Congratulations DC!

Innocent Abroad, are you the same chap who crops up on PB.C as a Lib Dem supporter?
I wonder how many of the other nay-sayers on here are infiltrators (not Hellyer, of course)?

[houndtang]

Muhahahaha! The party is ours! Now let us slaughter the traitors who denounce DC and do bloody murder upon the Davis-voting knaves.

[Andrew]

"Yes, but that doesn't mean they have to be expressed using exactly the same words in exactly the same order each time! "

Sure (although I was talking more about the extent of policy, rather than verbal presentation). In the hot-house of an election period, the latter needs to be very precisely crafted because of the ridiculous media micro-focus every phrase goes under. Boring for those who follow it closely, but at the end of the day it has succesfully kept the message consistent.

Don't hate the player......

[Sean Fear]

Great minds think alike. I was about to ask the same question Tom.

"Maude from party chairman. Preferably to Cameroon" There's loads of talented people who could be party chairman. I'm sure DC won't want to stick with Maude.