Talk Elections

We're now roughly 6 months into a Tory-led government.

Who has begun to impress enough that in the future (probably after the next election) they could be considered leadership contenders.

Ken Clarke is surely too old now.
William Hague would be a good continuity candidate, though I'm not sure if he would want it having already done it once.
Liam Fox has made something of a name for himself at Defence, but this may have irritated the powerbrokers in the party.
George Osborne might be a potential candidate, though it depends how tied to the economic mess he is.
Michael Gove certainly is also making a name for himself, though has been seen to drop the ball a couple of times over the academy/free schools issue.

I suppose it depends on the circumstances by which a new leader is needed. If they are still in government the response would be different to being in opposition.

George Osborne is certainly a contender, however he has not connected as well (yet) with the party as Cameron has done. Liam Fox has too many enemies inside and outside the party. Michael Gove is probably the strongest suite even though he is the 'third man' to Cameron and Osborne; in fact it's probably because of that position that he is strong. Gove keeps himself sufficiently 'detached' from the party cliques but is strong attached to Cameron. Having said that, if Cameron has to be 'pushed', then he would be the man to do it.

Outside the box, Jeremy Hunt and Nick Herbert spring to mind. Of course, it could be one of the 2010 intake.

Agreed. But why they chose Hague and IDS over him....I don't know. Yeah, there's an obvious excuse....but still.


He would make the best leader out of all the current Tory cabinet ministers, imo. He has a good personality, is a skillful debater and he seems to have become more moderate in recent years.


Hmmmm....maybe.


Not the most likeable person in the world, but a good debater, and probably quite a clever man in his own way.


Hasn't made much of a name for himself yet....we'll see.

No love for Boris Johnson here...

You mean after Margaret Thatcher dies and stops controlling them behind the scenes?[/Labour election strategy 1992-present]

Fox's unique and fascinating use of the English language is worth mentioning here, of course.

Nick Clegg. [/hack]

But seriously, it'll end up being the last person we think of. The Tories never go with the obvious.

Why would he want to go back to being an MP?

No matter how weak a candidate Livingstone is, Johnson has only got (at best) a 50% chance of re-election; the second set of elections is usually brutal for governments in their first term.

New conservative leader? Is that terrible man gone? Why? What happened?

Cameron's still there and, apparently, safe... unfortunately.

Huh?  2001, 1983, October 1974 (if that counts), 1966 and 1955 were pretty good elections for the first-term incumbent governments.

Unless you're only referring to the London mayoral elections, but we only have 2004 to go on as an example of what you're saying...

I think he meant local elections, our 'mid-terms' to use an Americanism.

1966 possibly doesn't count either. But in the local elections between 1966-1970....Labour got....errr....hammered, to put it mildly.

I thought George Osborne was percieved to be "the weakest link" of Cameron's government, and wasn't very popular? If so, I doubt the Tories go for him. I think Hague appears to be too controversial, for obvious reasons. I like the idea of Liam Fox as leader.

Ah ok, got it.  Still not sure what that has to do with Boris Johnson's re-election chances though.

Right. Sorry. I meant elections for local authorities and devolved governments. From the second year onwards the governing party tends to do very badly (the first year seems to depend on other factors; at the very least seats gained in opposition are lost by the bucketload). London is interesting because we don't even have to look at municipal elections; London always had its own government in some form or other until Mrs Thatcher decided it was irritating her.

The GLC covered the same area as the contemporary GLA and existed from the mid 1960s until the mid 1980s. It had six elections during its lifetime and the main party in Opposition won a majority every single time. In four out of five elections after the first the swing was above 10pts.

Now, that Livingstone won in 2004 (even as his party lost the GLA elections on the same day) shows that this anti-national-incumbent swing isn't as strong under the Mayoral system, but it's still there. Johnson knows this, which is why he's been as carefully critical of the government as he has been.

He was the weak link in the Cameron shadow cabinet (he was barely seen during the election campaign), but his ratings have improved since the "emergency" budget in June. If anything, it's Nick Clegg who's the weak link in Cameron's government now...