Yet another Tory leadership contest!

[Ben.]

If their clever they'll plumb for Cameron, their not though...

...it'll probablly be witteled down to Clark vs Davis with Davis winning and becoming an unspectacular leader with another mixed result for the party in 2009, baring a Labour collapse.

[Ben.]

Word is that some Davis supporters are getting cold feet and Cameron is really improving his position and standing.

I don't buy that Clark would hurt Labour in the long run in a huge way, Davis would probably be more of the same with slow reform and improvement for the party, Cameron is a huge risk but might just be their best bet, excellent speech the other day (as was Clark's)... all in all very impressive but perhaps its too soon for him, certainly he seems to have recovered from his earlier set backs and Davis is stumbling.
 

Clarke!

I'd have had you down as a Cameron supporter.

[Ben.]

O/c it's going to be harder for the Tories to gain more than a few seats next election than it was last one due to the boundary changes. Basically they are going to gain 10 to 20 seats notionally but have their hopes screwed in so, so many others... have a look at the new map for Northants

Do we have any idea of when the wonks will produce a notional set of results as they did pre-97 and pre-05 for Scotland?

Anthony Wells’ now does the YouGov polling sites’ webblog, but before that he had a blog of his own and produced a very detailed and impressive analysis of what the notional result for the various seats would be based both on the 05 general election results and the local election results in those areas… he had Labour’s majority down to about 45-50 I seem to remember.

Interesting fact is that the new Sheffield Central Seat will be notionally a LibDem seat, based on local elections with all the Labour seats losing their LibDem wards and areas to it… some other strange new seats emerging too.

As for the Tory leadership race, With Fox they’d get a disaster IMHO, more of the same at best but baring a Labour collapse nothing more, with Davis I think you’d have pretty lackusta leadership and again more of the same, with Clark you’d see progress but new problems might present themselves, with Cameron you’d get new problems as well but against a Brown lead Labour Party both Cameron and Clark could win and I think of the two Cameron would be very very well placed.           

[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? 

[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.

[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!).

[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.   

[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?   
 

[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

[Ben.]

This was the situation regarding the Conservative Party Leadership Race as reported in The Times   13/10/05 (so it may have changed a little today):

David Davis

Declared: 66 / Probable: 4

David Cameron

Declared: 32 / Probable 6 [including Michael Howard]

Ken Clarke

Declared: 23 / Probable 5

Liam Fox

Declared: 16 / Probable 8 [including former leaders William Hague and Iain Duncan Smith]

There are 18 'waverers': Davis or Cameron? [2]; Cameron or Clarke? [5]; Cameron or Fox? [3]; Davis or Fox? [8]

There are 12 'undecideds' and 10 'won't say'    

It was reported on Teletext yesterday evening that Ken Clarke is struggling to make it to the final three and according to The Herald http://www.theherald.co.uk/politics/48798.html a right-wing deal has seen Fox eclipse Clarke

Dave

I doubt Hauge will back Fox, personally i think he could back Cameron or Davis, IDS should be a lock for Fox along with a number of other right-wingers who might have been expected to have gone for Davis, but i don't buy that Hague will back Fox, though Howard is almost certain to back Cameron IMHO.

The drugs story was started by the mail and they seem to have taken a dim view of Cameron, personally i think his admission that a member of his family has had problems with drugs and he won't talk about it - is a very good move it further legitimises his stance and could even mean the story backfires on those seeking to smear Cameron.

The raising of class A drugs as an issue, is simply a tactical move if Cameron turns round and denies that he has ever touched speed (for example) he would then have to say weather he’d ever touched Dope, at the same time it places Cameron in an awkward position… entirely unfounded accusation and a darn dirty tactic, but that’s politics, what’s more its clear that the Davis camp are scared and the Clark camp is certainly not happy at all.   

First round of voting on Tuesday and my personal expectation is that Davis gets something like 65 votes, with a handful of unannounced defections to Fox and Cameron, Cameron comes second with just bellow 50 (being optimistic ), Fox and Clark both finishing with around 30-35… of those two though Clark has seen lots of his potential backers either go to Davis (Damien Green for example) or, more importantly, to Cameron (two defections to Cameron the other day from Clark’s camp).

After that, an uninspiring placing for Davis (say bellow 63) would probably mean that anything from 5-25 of his backers might switch to Fox or Cameron. If, as now seems likely, Clark is the first to be eliminated, then I’d say that easily ¾ (or more) of his supporters will switch to Cameron with a few potentially flowing to Davis. Baring a complete meltdown for Davis even after a disappointing showing in the first round its hard to see Fox securing a place in the final members ballot in December and its hard to see Clark surviving to the second round. With polling giving Cameron big leads amongst the rank and file membership, I’d be surprised if anyone could beat him in the final round, though the margin won’t be as huge as the polls had suggested a few days ago (against Davis it’ll probably be in the region of 40-45%/ 55-60% in Cameron’s favour).   

[Ben.]

Not usually one to have any symphathy with Old Etonians...

Come now Al, that kind of overt prejudice is really beneath you

It doesn’t matter who you are, where you come from or even what advantages your parents may have sought for you in life as far as I’m concerned. In the case of Cameron his background might raise some questions about his life experiences and its relevance to most of the country but very few people outside of the political left care about that, and even fewer would hold it against him and they would be quite right not to if you ask me.

[Ben.]

Agreed Al, I think i read that Cameron had an audiance with dear rupert the other day... could prove interesting, Murodch liked Howard (unlike either Hauge or IDS) yet knew that Blair would win through in May, things could be far more fluid going into 2009/10 what more the divide between a pretty conventional, though apealing, Tory leader and Brown and Kennedy will be far sharper than we saw last May IMHO... 

"I grew up in a council estate, the child of a single mum"

"I grew up in a council estate, the child of a single mum"

"I grew up in a council estate, the child of a single mum"

"I grew up in a council estate, the child of a single mum"

"I grew up in a council estate, the child of a single mum"

"I grew up in a council estate, the child of a single mum"

"I grew up in a council estate, the child of a single mum"

"I grew up in a council estate, the child of a single mum"

"I grew up in a council estate, the child of a single mum"

"I grew up in a council estate, the child of a single mum"

"I grew up in a council estate, the child of a single mum"

"I grew up in a council estate, the child of a single mum"

"I grew up in a council estate, the child of a single mum"

"I grew up in a council estate, the child of a single mum"

"I grew up in a council estate, the child of a single mum"

"I grew up in a council estate, the child of a single mum"

Do you know what his voting record on benefits for single mums is, btw? Could make "interesting" reading...

...after his conference flop it seems that Davis has pretty much been reduced to this all the damn time! His argument that he’s the only Tory who could have some pull in urban and northern Britain, could well have some truth but in all fairness its besides the point!

..sure the Tories could do with reviving those moribund local parties in the North and the Big Cities and rebuilding their base in municipal government in both, but the Tories’ will not get back into government doing either, they need to win back the south and the west midland suburbs and that has to be their real hope, especially against a Brown lead Labour Party, there are comparatively few seats where the Tories would stand a chance of winning in urban or northern Britain even if lots of effort was spent reviving the party, at least in the foreseeable future.

[Ben.]

Hitler also grew up in a rubbish house with his mother and an alcholic and abusive father. Some people have had it worse than you David Davis

LOL!

[Ben.]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4345122.stm

Someone’s scared very scared

Though it was a poor performance and Davis pretty much got bullied and bated into it by Piers Morgan [spits]   

[Ben.]

Clarke now expected to be the first voted out, most of the movment amougst Tory MPs seems to be towards Cameron and Fox, very little positive movment for Davis or Clarke.

[Ben.]

Right I’ll make my call, I think Clark is going to be out beaten by a slim margin by Fox into fourth, I think Davis will underperform and that could cause him real problems (meltdown, perhaps?) while Cameron should get upwards of 50 votes.

If Davis gets lower than the 63 votes he claimed to have pledged at the time of the conference then I think his campaign could well collapse, but only if Fox is still in the race meaning right-wingers could swing to the “good doctor” while some of Davis more moderate (and indeed pragmatic) backers swing to Cameron. If Cameron gets over 50 he’s doing very well (he already effectively got 41-42 votes in the bag) and with Clark out (if that happens) he should come top of the poll on Thursday.

…Declaration around 5.30pm            

[Ben.]

I wouldn't be surprised to see some tactical voting from Clarke's supporters, ie. switching over to Fox in order to force a Fox vs Cameron final... though it could backfire, of course, and the Tories then end up with Liam Fox as their leader, which would make them about as electable as the bubonic plague. In any case, the next few days and weeks are going to be interesting, even though I'm sad to see Ken bow out.

I think most view Davis as more beatable than Fox, certianly Fox is the more articulate and personable candidate while Davis is wooden and wounded now... Cameron would probably dispatch Davis with relative ease in the membership ballot. 

[Ben.]

What was amazing IMO, was that after a few weeks of pretty tough coverage and with few people even knowing who he was other than a Tory, and perhaps what he looks like and the fact he’s “posh”… Cameron’s beating Brown amongst “swing voters” who’ve been polled by a clear margin, and remember Brown is very much a familiar “know quantity”, this is very good for Cameron – very good indeed.

The ICM poll for the Guardian had the numbers…

Cameron (Conservative) – 43%
Brown (Labour) – 38%
  
…on top of that the focus group work shown on News night showed that Cameron’s appeal looks set to grow still further. There is the risk that Cameron could slip up, that something from his past could damage him, but baring those possibilities voters seem to react to Cameron in a way very similar to how they reacted to a young Tony Blair and against Gordon Brown they much prefer Cameron’s affability to Brown’s more dour persona.

An interesting fact has also emerged, between Davis and Cameron, Davis who is now making a great play of his ability to appeal to urban and suburban Britain does far less well amongst those polled from the north and midlands… so despite some Labour hopes that Cameron’s background will play against him it looks like that won’t be the case.

It’s a long way out and I agree with Peter that a campaign in the country is essentially both out of principle and the fact that lengthening the debate across the party is helpful and it would further test Cameron… but its starting to look like Cameron just might be the man to build on the base that was built up under Howard and IDS (you may laugh but both did a lot of work in retooling the Party’s approach and emphasis on issues) and take the Tories back to power.

One of the most interesting parallels I’ve heard between a potential Cameron vs Brown fight is that it could be very like Kennedy vs Nixon, Brown; experienced but impersonal, Cameron inexperienced but likeable… on such things are elections largely decided, and it can only help that Cameron looks keen to ditch some of the Tories less sensible polices and embrace a king of Blairite consensus which the majority of the UK today seems to accept.

So to conclude, the kid might just have what it takes          


          

[Ben.]

Brown (Lab) 39% Cameron (Con) 36% Kennedy (LD) 18% Others 7%

If that Mori Poll was as acurate as its general election eve of poll, poll then it'd be somthing like...

Brown (Lab) 36% Cameron (Con) 36% Kennedy (LD) 17% Others 8%

[Ben.]

What was amazing IMO, was that after a few weeks of pretty tough coverage and with few people even knowing who he was other than a Tory, and perhaps what he looks like and the fact he’s “posh”… Cameron’s beating Brown amongst “swing voters” who’ve been polled by a clear margin, and remember Brown is very much a familiar “know quantity”, this is very good for Cameron – very good indeed.

The ICM poll for the Guardian had the numbers…

Cameron (Conservative) – 43%
Brown (Labour) – 38%

"Swing voters" being defined as voters who would consider voting Tory. Doesn't mean much; Labour are still leading in the main poll (not that means much either. See a previous post) and swing voters haven't decided an election since... 1970 I think.
  

I think its fair to say that in the forty or so “super marginals” now held by Labour all with majorities below 1-2,000, swing voters pretty much kept Labour in. Reliable exit polling showed that amongst the more prosperous voters Labour held firm while amongst poorer voters, it performed unspectacularly even seeing a slight swing to the Tories amongst the so called “white van types” (C2s). So I think you have to admit that Labour (with a vote share of just bellow 36%) got by thanks in large part to a strong performance amougst self described swing voters, despite at the same time failing to defend its left flanks against defections to the LibDems.          

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sample sizes far too small to draw any conclusions. I've had a look at the regional breakdowns of some polls done in the election; the numbers were just screwy (LibDems leading in the Midlands in more than one poll for example).

[/quote]

I agree the sample size is small, and to be fair I don’t put much store in it but the fact is that it undermines Davis’ newest commercial line as to why he should be elected, namely that he can perform far better in Northern and Urban Britain…not only do the Tories not really need to start contest old stomping grounds like Newcastle Central or Manchester Withington just yet in order to win, the evidence increasingly suggests that Cameron would have far broader appeal across the country than Davis and that includes in northern and urban Britian.  

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Early days yet. Cameron is still an unknown, Labour haven't had a go at his image yet and all that.

[/quote]

…I really don’t see how they can, if under Brown they go after Cameron for being, for want of a better phrase “too posh”, it could easily backfire with Labour being seen to be reverting to its type with coded class warfare, indeed such an attack would only underline the increasing suspicion (largely false IMO) of some voters that Brown is just an old style, intolerant, high tax, authoritarian Labourite.

A more sophisticated attack could perhaps work, but I don’t see how, simple fact is that to most people Cameron is very much like Blair was in 1997 an affable, almost unpartisan figure who embodies what many people aspire to be… there are plenty of aspirant people in British suburbia who backed Labour enthusiastically in 97 and 2001 and then less so in 2005 for whom Cameron is a very appeal proposition.

So in short he’s a hard figure to attack, maybe they’ll try and link him to Black Wednesday but that hardly worked with Howard in May and trying to link Cameron is even more of a stretch, the class issue would backfire big time and would probably be vetoed by either Brown or Blair for that reason… Labour might well have to dispense with the election winning slogan of “well at least we’re not the Tories” against Cameron because it just won’t work… Brown’s jibe at the Party conference fell flat and that was in front of hall of hardened Labour stalwarts, who generally are very favourable disposed towards the Chancellor.      
    

You must be logged in to read this quote.

IIRC they need a swing of about 9pts (might be a bit less but you get the idea) to win an overall majority of 1.

[/quote]



I seem to remember that after May’s election to swing required is more like 7%, such a swing is less than returned Labour to power in 1997… added to which such a model does not take into account the role of any LD to Tory swing which with Cameron as leader could be quite sizable (4-6% would be the right sort of range imo). I agree it would be tough, but I also would argue that after over a decade in power, a likely economic slow down, general voter fatigue and the contrast between Cameron and Brown (as best we can guess) makes a Tory victory possible… though four years is an eternity in politics.      

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That comparision is made of just about every new kid on the block in every country around.

[/quote]



…I know but I can see real rather than imagine comparisons between the experienced, eminently qualified but distant Brown and the less well qualified but more affable and optimistic Cameron. It is a factor that certainly played in 97 with the tired Mayor vs the energetic and likeable Blair.    

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I suppose you could make a case for '64 (Wilson swinging several key marginals in Liverpool) but other than that... no. Things just don't work like that here.

[/quote]

...from my experience, presentation matters a great deal in the UK, due to the nature of the political system its very different from the intensely personalised presidential or even congressional and local politics of the US, but in the 1959,64,66,83,92, 97 and 2001 the personalities and presentation of the different parties played a huge role in the eventual outcome of the elections.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

When he actually comes up with some policies, maybe

[/quote]



…he’s come up with some good, pretty sound stuff on health and education, dumping the “patient’s passport” idea for one, and to be fair its hardly the time when detailed policy gets thrashed out, it is a leadership election after all …in 94 Blair was very careful not to frighten the horses too much.

However a big difference with Labour prior to 97, and the Tories now is that policy wise they do not need to change a great deal to be electable it far more about image for the Tory Party than it ever was for Labour who’s great problem use to be policy… thanks to Kinnock and Mandelson presentation had pretty much been sorted by the late eighties, excluding a few hick-ups… as the economist said the other week, the Tories need to be rehabilitated and liked again and while some policy shifts are necessary its nothing like the reform Labour was in need of before it returned to power, its far more of a brand rather than product issue for the Tories… and there is a great deal of evidence to support that.        

[Ben.]

epsecially if the economy goes into meltdown.

Which isn't likely

Has slow down though, and added to this people are feeling the pinch from Brown’s high taxes… there isn’t going to be a huge crash or a melt down but a significant slow down is very likely and that will not help Brown at all.

[Ben.]

epsecially if the economy goes into meltdown.

Which isn't likely

Has slow down though, and added to this people are feeling the pinch from Brown’s high taxes

I'm pretty sure that lower inflation and lower interest rates, as a whole since 1997, more than offset any tax increases. New Labour does not tax punitively. And if tax cuts are all the Tories have to offer, then big deal

Dave

I think the main thing the Tories will offer under Cameron, is effectively what Labour promises back in 97 namely better Schools and Hospitals through effective reform of the public services after that you have a continuation of a hawkish Atlantist Foreign Policy, a more overtly sceptical approach to the EU (nothing radical though) and the “aim” of cutting taxes – with an especial emphasis on tax cuts to help the least well off in place of programs like the tax credit system.

So I think its fair to say that the Tories will be offering more than Tax-cuts, though if Davis by some miracle becomes Tory Leader then that pretty much will be all they offer… Davis seems more and more like IDS with hair. Added to all of this Cameron seems to carry with him something of the freshness and optimism that Blair once epitomised, and “that kinda stuff plays great in the sticks” (witness 1997 or even 1966)     

[Ben.]

On a personal level, I like Cameron but as far as party politics go, I'm rooting for Davis - I'm not having the party of Thatcher laying claim to the centre ground

Dave

Sadly for Labour, Cameron's probably going to get 65-70% against Davis. Meaning the Tories may well start to make progress, personally as much as I admire and respect Brown I'd prefer Cameron as PM... but that's just me and I don’t have a vote anyway

Wow, a fashionable, moderate, optimistic Tory Party now seems a real possibility who would have said that back when Davis looked a dead-cert? Long way to go and all that, but its looking likely… on top of this the betting markets are getting nervous over the prospects of a Labour forth term.     

[Ben.]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,1603965,00.html

The first significant policy difference of the leadership race between Cameron and Davis has emerged ............ and it's on the issue of tax cuts

In a speech on tax, Mr Davis promised to cut taxes for "the average family" by £1,200 a year, or 8p in the pound. But his rival Mr Cameron responded by saying it was neither "the right approach" nor "sensible to outline such proposals four years before an election".

Dave

From what I understand Davis is basically offering just what the Tories offered at the last election in terms of tax-cuts, the only difference is that the money set aside for borrowing goes into further tax cuts instead… I suppose they need to continue their Titanic Deckchair rearrangement at Fort Davis though  

[Ben.]

Things had been getting pretty quiet until Davis came out with his little plan (other than the pair of them getting booed at the national television awards).
Anyone got any idea how it'll play?

Saw a recording of the CH4 news from today, Cameron was surrounded by lots Party workers and activists in some sea side iddle (life’s departure lounge for Powelites I guess), Davis was wondering rather hopelessly around some oak panelled business centre with a small group (and I mean small!) of people holding a giant cheque... its still looking very bad for Davis.

Conway’s little outburst at Cameron daring to appeal to the media was rather funny, next he’ll fain outrage over Cameron attempting to win over voters