I hope all readers have now taken part in ConservativeHome's first regular survey of opinion amongst Tory members and supporters. The survey will probably pose new questions every month or so. Please consider forwarding information about the poll to other Tories you know so that we can maximise the sample size.
I'm currently drafting questions for the second survey that will go live in the next few days. I want to use this second set of questions to explore why people voted for David Davis or David Cameron and what they expect from the incoming leader.
As a believer in the wisdom of crowds I would be interested in your thoughts on what should be asked...
Tonight Channel 4 News gave its air time to Ken Clarke, Timothy (Quisling) Kirkhope MEP all scared that their cosy EU gravy train might be made to feel just slightly uncomfortable with Conservatives quitting the EPP under Cameron.
Same script as the Economist Bagehot column last weekend, and Peter Riddell in The Times - all saying Cameron will be making a big mistake causing a 'euro-row'. This is obviously another media-wide orchestrated campaign hopeing to stop Cameron from taking on EU corruption and croneyism. They thought by blanking Liam Fox and stopping his leadership bid in its tracks, they had stoppped the Conservatives from finding their true voice.
No air time for Roger Helmer MEP of course who has made a stand against corrupt parctices in the EU Commission. The one thing the media don't want people to know is the truth. So click www.rogerhelmer.com/contraepp.asp or find Daniel Hannan MEP writing for the Bruges Group.
It's amazing isn't it. Ken Clarke lost the leadership contest, but as a staunch defender of EU corruption and croneyism he's right there getting full screen media coverage. This is what Cameron must take on and not flinch - or we're doomed for sure.
Posted by: henry curteis | 01 December 2005 at 19:49
Cameron stops the Right (in the form of David Davis)=GOOD
Cameron does something Right (in the form of supporting withdrawing from the EPP)=BAD
Remember this.
Posted by: media mantra | 01 December 2005 at 20:02
"No air time for Roger Helmer MEP of course who has made a stand against corrupt parctices in the EU Commission. The one thing the media don't want people to know is the truth."
Thank goodness for the internet and this blog allowing you to spread the message eh Roger, ahem sorry I mean Henry, or is it Malcolm? ;-)
Posted by: Daniel Vince-Archer | 01 December 2005 at 20:06
Roger/Henry/Malcom makes a good point regardless. Cameron must prove he is a strong leader and take on the rebel MEPs who want to stick with the EPP, failure will simply show that Cameron really is all talk.
Posted by: Rob | 01 December 2005 at 20:30
Hey,I'm the 'real' Malcolm!
Posted by: malcolm | 01 December 2005 at 21:53
"Along with global poverty and terrorism, climate change is one of the three greatest challenges facing mankind today."
David Cameron
Posted by: | 02 December 2005 at 01:27
Did you see Denis McShane trying to lay into Cameron in PMQs and on the Daily Politics about the EPP.
I know the mans a raving federalist and polish to boot but I am worried about the potential for a Cameron government to be alienated in the community and get done over on the 2013 review of the CAP for instance.
Posted by: wasp | 02 December 2005 at 09:50
Back on why did people vote the way they did - I think in my case it was the Blue Skies v Black Skies division - DC was the optimist candidate, talking about going forward, constructive opposition, at ease whereas DD was the pessimist, anti how the world has changed (core conservative?), struggling against the tide, opposing for the sake of opposition.
That explains to me why the candidate whose policies fitted best with mine was also the one I was against.
Posted by: Ted | 02 December 2005 at 10:04
Some of the comments on this site get so silly sometimes they are comical.
Daniel makes it seem that David Cameron was Chancellor at the time of the ERM withdrawal and was to blame for the whole of the fiasco.
David Cameron was an advisor, no more no less. When your an advisor sometimes people take your advise sometimes they do not!
Posted by: Jack Stone | 02 December 2005 at 15:24
"Some of the comments on this site get so silly sometimes they are comical."
You mean like the comments that feature people making childish spelling mistakes such as the persistent mis-spelling of 'has'?
"Daniel makes it seem that David Cameron was Chancellor at the time of the ERM withdrawal and was to blame for the whole of the fiasco."
Please don't misrepresent what I said Jack - I pointed out that Cameron was special adviser at the Treasury, not Chancellor.
"David Cameron was an advisor, no more no less. When your [sic] an advisor sometimes people take your advise [sic] sometimes they do not!"
Considering one notable piece of advice that he gave was his memo to John Major advising him of the 'benefits' of rejoining the ERM, I'd say thank goodness people didn't take his advice!
Posted by: Daniel Vince-Archer | 02 December 2005 at 15:33
Now, now, Daniel. I'm sure that memo was an early example of the "Blue Sky" politics we've heard so much about.
Posted by: James Hellyer | 02 December 2005 at 15:38
Considering one notable piece of advice that he gave was his memo to John Major advising him of the 'benefits' of rejoining the ERM
Do they never learn ? Without a D-Mark Revaluation following Unification or a widening of the bands, Britain should have exited the ERM and stayed out.........if Cameron had no knowledge of Winston Churchill's disaster in 1925 he should realise how it haunted Churchill all his life - Helmut Schlesinger knew Britain was riding the yield curve to get Lawson's inflation down.
I am afraid "Special Adviser" sounds like "Special Needs" - less an expert, more a retard.
Posted by: Rick | 02 December 2005 at 16:32
"I am afraid "Special Adviser" sounds like "Special Needs" - less an expert, more a retard."
Careful Professor Sandmann, that's bordering on tasteless considering David Cameron's family circumstances.
Posted by: Daniel Vince-Archer | 02 December 2005 at 16:54
Careful Professor Sandmann, that's bordering on tasteless considering David Cameron's family circumstances.
Posted by: Daniel Vince-Archer | 02 December 2005 at 16:54
How tasteless of you DVA to make a general comment specific in such a way. "Special Adviser" is something the Thatcher years introduced and which New Labour has augmented hugely. I could equally well be considering my own university contemporaries inside Downing Street, but you chose to focus on David Cameron and then introduce his son into the discussion.
Is it possible you could rise above the secific to the general and leave David Cameron out of this ?
Posted by: Rick | 03 December 2005 at 05:18
These "Special Advisers" should be banned from the public payroll - when Hague was a "Special Adviser" to GEoffrey Howe his salary was paid by McKinsey & Co., Inc. as a piece of sponsorship.
If it is so essential to have Party Liaison Officers implanted in government ministries like Jo Moore then let them be sponsored and wear the T-shirt, but let us not pretend they are civil servants.
There is since Harold Wilson a limit on the numer of Cabinet Members allowed to be a charge on the Govt Payroll; Blair usurps this with "advisers" and "non-paid" Ministers. The system is basically over-staffed and it is time for Zero-Based Budgeting and lean government at the top.
Posted by: Rick | 03 December 2005 at 05:23
Rick, you referred to Cameron in the sentence preceding the comment I highlighted. Please forgive me for assuming two adjacent sentences would be connected.
Posted by: Daniel Vince-Archer | 03 December 2005 at 12:08