Yet another Tory leadership contest!

[Ben.]

Apparently, Davis is losing support from waverers to both Cameron and Fox

Dave

Looks like Cameron is pushing Davis from the left and centre of the party (lots of MPs who's initial support was probably more to do with Davis being "inevitable" rather than any great liking for the man or his politics), I wonder if Willets is regretting his backing for Davis over Cameron now? 

At the same time disillusioned Tory MPs within Davis right-wing base seem to be drifting to the more polished and effective Fox, slimy little ba*tard that he is. Before this I already though the cornerstone group of hard right Tory MPs would back Fox now I think its even more likely. 

The race might even end up as Fox vs. Cameron, as of now though I think Davis has got to really blow it before he fails to reach the final round, but with Rifkin likely to be the first out and with his support breaking up between Cameron and Clark (Rifkin’s Campaign Manager Crispin Blunt seems to already be allying himself with the Cameron camp) probably means that Clark or Fox then go out in either the second or third round leaving Cameron to face off against Davis, in which case I think Cameron wins amongst the membership.

And Labour will be in big trouble if Cameron fulfils even half of his initial promise, and that applies especially to a Labour Party lead by Gordon Brown.

       


Al – good news about Sheffield Central, does Hallam become more marginal in favour of the Tories or Labour? Of course I’d expect it to be the Tories but is it? 

[Filuwaúrdjan]

And Labour will be in big trouble if Cameron fulfils even half of his initial promise, and that applies especially to a Labour Party lead by Gordon Brown.

Probably not, at least not directly. Can't see Cameron appealing much to people that voted Labour in May; too posh, too socially liberal. LibDems could be in a lot of trouble though. If the Tories pick Cameron and Labour head off in a moralist direction (as looks likely IMO) we could see some big changes in voting patterns in some areas (ie; more Tory gains in London and some very nervous Tory M.P's in East Anglia. Those seats are nowhere near as safe as there majorities look. I can explain more if anyone wants...) 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Hallam was shockingly marginal under the initial proposals; isn't under the revised ones. Labour vote will go up though; a big ward from the abolished Hillsborough seat's been added. Reading through the minutes from the Sheffield review is quite interesting.

[afleitch]

The day the Conservatives become more socially liberal than Labour then Labour will finally have jumped to the right of the Tories. Very strange idea indeed.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Labour then Labour will finally have jumped to the right of the Tories.

Yes and no; economically that's never going to be the case

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well... not really. Social liberalism in the Labour party is a relatively new concept (and has always been a minority position among it's voters).

Always remember that the first labour party was founded in a Methodist chapel in Bradford

[Platypus]

I presume someone has already made this joke, but...

I reckon that it'll be someone posh or a psycho

i.e., a member of the Conservative Party.

[Ben.]

And Labour will be in big trouble if Cameron fulfils even half of his initial promise, and that applies especially to a Labour Party lead by Gordon Brown.

Probably not, at least not directly. Can't see Cameron appealing much to people that voted Labour in May; too posh, too socially liberal. LibDems could be in a lot of trouble though. If the Tories pick Cameron and Labour head off in a moralist direction (as looks likely IMO) we could see some big changes in voting patterns in some areas (ie; more Tory gains in London and some very nervous Tory M.P's in East Anglia. Those seats are nowhere near as safe as there majorities look. I can explain more if anyone wants...)

Remember Al, that Labour's best performance at the election was amongst better off voters, it saw slow erosion in its support amongst poorer more working class voters to the Tories! Sure Labour lost plenty of GMW to the LibDems but at the same time some moderate voters fed up with Labour but unhappy with the Tories plumped for the LibDem more as a vote of “no confidence” rather than any thing else.

Those moderate voters who where tired of Labour but distrustful of the Tories and either stayed home or voted LibDem could well be attracted to a Tory party fronted by a fresh-faced, moderate, media friendly figure like Cameron. On top of that with the economy likely to have slowed down and a Brown lead Labour party plenty of the moderate better off/ middle class voters who saved many a marginal seat for Labour in May are going to gravitate to a Cameron lead Tory Party. Cameron is unlikely to make much progress in urban Britain or the north, but in the south and west midlands a ‘Cameroonian” Conservative Party will really press a “Brownite” Labour Party.

Two factors which are probably good for Labour in a Brown vs. Cameron contest, Brown solidifies the Labour vote (say +2% from the LibDems’ as well as bring out those who didn’t vote) and the LibDems themselves will be hurt very badly by a Tory leader who brings all the appeal of Kennedy or a young Blair but with more plausibility than the former.

But overall a contest under the circumstances which are likely to be prevailing in four years time, and of course we have to guess, and with the clear contrast being Brown vs Cameron will not favour Labour IMHO.           



Ps: Did you see Question Time the other night? Starkey was on his usual scathing form… very funny.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Remember Al, that Labour's best performance at the election was amongst better off voters, it saw slow erosion in its support amongst poorer more working class voters to the Tories!

Not true actually; the exit poll's class breakdown blew up and blew badly. Looking at the actual results, it's clear that Labour pretty much collapsed with white collar voters, while polling much better with working class voters than the exit polls indicated. If the exit polls were right, we certainly wouldn't have lost Putney, St Albans, Reading East etc. while we would certainly have lost Pendle, Tamworth, Keighley, Redditch, Burton etc. and Battersea would not have gone to, what was it? Three or four recounts.
Labour's best showings came in places like the Black Country... trying to find affluent seats where Labour did well is very hard; the only ones I can think of are that belt in Northeast London (Harrow, Brent North, Hendon etc) along with Leeds NE (which is very similer)... and that's more to do with ethnic/religious composition than affluence. And even then we lost a lot of votes in those seats... by "good" showing in them I pretty much mean "we held them, just".

Now, I'm not sure why the otherwise good exit polls got this wrong... but is it possible that the apparently good prediction from it was a fluke? Most of the other breakdowns included in it seem a bit off as well, although not as misleadingly so.
And some things that should have been polled were not... even though they'd have been very useful.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It's never a good idea to predict how the economy will be doing Best trick is always to see how well the U.S economy does (when America sneezes the world gets a cold and all that), but I don't see any evidence whatsoever that middle class voters saved Labour many (or more than Finchley) marginals at all... certainly in the West Midlands, middle class voters abandoned ship en masse (with two exceptions; Brum Selly Oak (personal vote for M.P), Wolverhampton SW (race... sadly...) and the same is true in Northern England.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

"Screw the West South, we'll take the rest" (doesn't work as well as the Canadian orginal does it? Damn). Bearing in mind the social composition of our remaining southern (non-London) seats, we don't have that much to worry from Cameron on that front. The LibDems do. Oh dear, oh dear... that could get rather brutal...
And we certainly don't have to worry about him in the West Midlands; the sort of Tories that do well here tend to be rather Powellite (it's not "nice" to admit it, but it doesn't stop it from being true...) Whatever Cameron is, he ain't Powellite.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Indeed. I think he's getting dangerously close to being a parody of himself

[Filuwaúrdjan]

We have some polls!

ICM/BBC:

Clarke 27% (-13)
Davis 13% (+3)
Cameron 13% (+4)
Fox 7 (+4)
Rifkind 3% (-1)
NOTA 8% (+4)
Dunno 30% (-3)

YG/Sunday Times

Cameron 39% (+23)
Clarke 26% (-4)
Davis 14% (-16)
Fox 13% (-)
Rifkind 1% (-3)

This is all academic for now though; all that matters for the time being is M.P's. Cameron says he's got 28 confirmed. Davis still saying he has 60 plus.

[Ben.]

This is all academic for now though; all that matters for the time being is M.P's. Cameron says he's got 28 confirmed. Davis still saying he has 60 plus.

The word is that more than a 1/3rd of Davis' 60+ declared supporters are wobbly right now, whats the betting he gets bellow 60 on the first ballot, with Cameron around 35-40 and Fox higher than expected.

YouGov got the last Tory Leadership race right, and they have both Clark and Cameron beating Davis amougst Tory members, Cameron by a big margin (somthing like 60-30!).

[Peter]

Labour lost Reading East because the local party suffered a rift - it probably would have held if it weren't for that.

What are those polls: Conservative members or registered voters?

[Ben.]

Labour lost Reading East because the local party suffered a rift - it probably would have held if it weren't for that.

What are those polls: Conservative members or registered voters?

The ones of Tory Members, done by YouGov who got it dead right last time, where as follows...

1.) All the candidates (-Rifkin) Head to Head.

David Cameron – 39%
Ken Clark – 26%
David Davis - 14%
Laim Fox – 13%

2.) Cameron vs Clark.

David Cameron – 60%
Ken Clark – 33%

3.) Cameron vs Davis.

David Cameron – 66%
David Davis – 27%

4.) Clark vs Davis.

Ken Clark 49%
David Davis 44%

5.) Davis vs Fox.

David Davis – 44%
Liam Fox – 41%   


…an ICM poll of the general public still places Clark well ahead, but again this is hardly surprising as for the general public Clark is by far the most recognisable sitting Tory MP in the country. But the results of that poll where as follows…

Ken Clarke 27% (was 40%)
David Davis 13% (10%)
David Cameron 13% (4%)
Liam Fox 7% (3%)
Malcolm Rifkind 3% (4%)
None of these 8% (4%)
Don't know 30% (33%)

…I like Cameron, indeed I’m prepared to say that he might well be a better PM and have a better prescription for the UK’s woes than a Brown lead Labour Party might, but that is a judgment well in the future, However I think this momentum is astounding when you consider that a little over a week ago his big was considered to be floundering.   

[afleitch]

The thing is Labour have no idea how to take on Cameron. He comes with no baggage having only been elected in 2001 so Labour can't drag out the whole 1979-97 record to attack him with because he simply wasn't there (In the same way Blair could not be pinned down either forn Labour's 70's mess as he was elected in 1983) Inexperience is not necessarily a bad thing as long as Cameron does not wrong foot himself.

This has been the most important Conservative Conference for a generation and I do believe it is the first step to see them regain power in  5 but more likely 10 years time.

[Ben.]

The thing is Labour have no idea how to take on Cameron. He comes with no baggage having only been elected in 2001 so Labour can't drag out the whole 1979-97 record to attack him with because he simply wasn't there (In the same way Blair could not be pinned down either forn Labour's 70's mess as he was elected in 1983) Inexperience is not necessarily a bad thing as long as Cameron does not wrong foot himself.

I must confess the whole attacking the Tories with the record of the Major/Thatcher years is getting a bit old these days, it certainly seemed that way during the election and the other night on Question Time Douglas Alexander's attempts to attack the Tories on the back of "Black Wednesday" really didn't work IMHO.

afleitch, weren’t you an active member of the Labour Party a while back or was that someone else?   
 

[afleitch]

Yes I was an active member of the Labour Party until about 18 months ago IIRC. I left for a variety of reasons, Labour's authoritarianism and straightjacket education system and so forth. Iraq wasn't an issue for me.

In Scotland it is the Conservatives who are the party of progressive ideas in a Parliament who are made up by leftists of all persuasions.

Labour for me is this unmoveable beast who refuses to allow people to be different. For my friends studying in England it is taxing and plunging them into a debt they don't deserve. I could be here all day really citing the reasons why Labour let me down badly.

As for the Tories I am from the libertarian/socially liberal wing and hope that either Clarke or Cameron win through so we can have a realyopposition to Labour this Labour autocracy that ignores conference notions, throws out an 82 year old man for whom the party is his life and annoints Gordon Brown as the next Prime Minister without a vote being cast.

[Ben.]

Yes I was an active member of the Labour Party until about 18 months ago IIRC. I left for a variety of reasons, Labour's authoritarianism and straightjacket education system and so forth. Iraq wasn't an issue for me.

In Scotland it is the Conservatives who are the party of progressive ideas in a Parliament who are made up by leftists of all persuasions.

Labour for me is this unmoveable beast who refuses to allow people to be different. For my friends studying in England it is taxing and plunging them into a debt they don't deserve. I could be here all day really citing the reasons why Labour let me down badly.

As for the Tories I am from the libertarian/socially liberal wing and hope that either Clarke or Cameron win through so we can have a realyopposition to Labour this Labour autocracy that ignores conference notions, throws out an 82 year old man for whom the party is his life and annoints Gordon Brown as the next Prime Minister without a vote being cast.

Gotta say i agree with you a fair bit, the whole nature of government has become very authoritarian and this is reflected with the Labour Party itself these days add on top of that the really authoritarian polices of Labour be they economic or social all give cause for concern... troubling really

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Labour lost Reading East because the local party suffered a rift - it probably would have held if it weren't for that.

True; but at the same time if the exit poll's MRS Social Grade numbers were correct, Labour would have held it

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The thing is Labour have no idea how to take on Cameron.

Up to a point yes; but then up to a similer point he doesn't know how to attack Labour. Both can lash out with vauge rhetoric, but neither have really been tested against each other yet.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Strictly speaking IDS's could have been attacked for that either as he only entered Parliament in 1992 and was an obscure backbencher for most of the Major period.
Having said that, Cameron wouldn't be personally attacked over it, but the Tory party as a whole still will be. And north of the Severn-Wash line, that attack will still work on the whole.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That the economic problems in the '70's (largely solved by '79, btw) were somehow Labour's fault is a very effective media myth and one that's somehow lasted... As an interesting little point, Labour's electoral woes didn't start in 1979 (Thatcher was very unpopular early on, Callaghan remained personally popular and Labour had a decent poll lead by the end of the year) but following the disasterous Conference in 1980 which resulted in Callaghan calling it quits, Michael Foot becoming leader and the SDP breaking away...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which is the problem. Ask the Aussie equivilent (more or less), Mark Latham, about that.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The word is that more than a 1/3rd of Davis' 60+ declared supporters are wobbly right now, whats the betting he gets bellow 60 on the first ballot, with Cameron around 35-40 and Fox higher than expected.

Interesting; although you always have to be very careful with rumours... I think that Davis has a couple of weeks to save his campaign otherwise he sinks like a Portillo.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which has me thinking this; Can Cameron keep his momentum? And if not... what happens then?

[Serenity Now]

Here's a little unauthorized political compass I've made:



*Notes:

1. Yes this is made fairly crudely, but it gives a vague idea of at least how they compare to each other (Theresa May isn't on here as I can't make even a crude assumption).

2. This is made according to what seem to be judging from the parameters on other charts on the political compass website. The test itself tends to be rather inaccurate, arguably scewing people more to the left.

3. Blair, Brown and Charles Kennedy have been added to make things more interesting.

Don't bite my head off if you disagree with how I've placed the candidates, it's just for fun... Plagiaristic fun!

[WMS]

Labour lost Reading East because the local party suffered a rift - it probably would have held if it weren't for that.

True; but at the same time if the exit poll's MRS Social Grade numbers were correct, Labour would have held it

Darn Reading East...

But Reading West - the closest U.K. equivalent to my beloved West Side Albuquerque - still holds.

[minionofmidas]

Gotta say i agree with you a fair bit, the whole nature of government has become very authoritarian

British politics has always had that odd authoritarian streak. In the 70s it was often called (by visiting Western Europeans) the most Soviet Union-like country in the West.
Then of course there was all that Thatcher anti-Unions business, with phone surveillances and all that.

[afleitch]

Sir Malcolm Rifkind has withdrawn from the race.

[Democratic Hawk]

Sir Malcolm Rifkind has withdrawn from the race.

I'm not surprised

Dave

[Democratic Hawk]

Well, if Cameron and Clarke represent the Tory 'Left', I'd say that Cameron is the true standard bearer since Clarke has the baggage of serving under the Blessed Margaret. Cameron, therefore, would be the genuine article

Cameron may be posh but the prospect of a genuinely compassionate conservative is preferable to some hard right winger of more humble origins

I was born Labour and I'll die Labour (much the same as with the Democrats) but the prospect of a Prime Minister Cameron, should he win the his party's leadership and the subsequent general election, can only be an improvement on 1979-97. Only time will tell and rest assured I'll working my butt off for Brown when the time comes

Dave

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Rifkind has endorsed Clarke