As Cameron becomes favourite can Conway save it for Davis?
October 7th, 2005updated 0645
-
Will the Davis waverers resist the ex-whip’s “overtures”?
With David Cameron now the 1.36/1 firm favourite the focus in the Tory leadership battle moves to Westminster next week where the big issue will be whether the MPs, pictured here on the David Davis website, will stick with the Shadow Home Secretary.
Before the conference they had all agreed to allow their names and pictures to be associated with the campaign and if they don’t change their minds then Davis is almost guaranteed a place in the short-list of two that will go to the membership. But if enough of them slip away to Clarke, Cameron or Fox then the first round results might look very different.
It is here that the legendary Derek Conway comes in. He built a fearsome reputation as a whip for the final three years of the 1992-1997 Tory government stopping a seepage of votes following the Maastricht treaty. Now his style of “charm” is at the disposal of David Davis and all those on the list are going to be under enormous pressure to stick by their man. Their phones are not going to stop ringing until the first ballot is over.
Following Davis’s “lacklustre” conference performance - a verdict first made here within an hour of the speech and since used everywhere - it’s been suggested that some of his supporters only signed up because they thought he was a certainty. Now Davis is second in the betting will Conway still be able to convince them that it is in their long-term political interests to stay on board?
-
Subtle is not a word that is used often by those who’ve been at the receiving end of the Conway approach. It would not surprise anybody if he had found ways of ways of sowing doubts in MPs minds over ballot secrecy issue and he and his team will be watching every move of “their” people in the coming days.
For a Tory MP not to have signed up to the Davis ticket is one thing. For one of those on the list to be known to have defected could seriously undermine a career - if Davis does do it. This is real political gambling.
New Betting Market with who will be in second place
A new betting market which includes provision for the runner-up has been opened by Spreadfair. A point score of 25 will be given to the winning candidate with 10 to the second.
Latest spreads are Cameron 11.5-13 Davis 11.2 - 12.9 Clarke 5.7-7.2 Fox 1.8-3.2 Field 0.8-1.8. The second place 10 points makes the Clarke and Fox prices quite attractive.
-
Other prices
Conventional bookmakers best price: Davis 5/4: Clarke 4/1: Cameron 5/4: Fox 12/1 Betfair betting exchange: Davis 1.82/1: Clark 5/1: Cameron 1.36/1: Fox 13.5/1 BinaryBet spread market. Davis 34-42: Clarke 14-20: Cameron 34-42: Fox 4-8
MessageSpace Advertising
Wouldn’t like to question you Mike, but I don’t think Conway was a whip during the Maastricht rebellions.
Nice recovery
Alex 1. He was a whip from 1994-1997. I’ve slightly amended the piece.
I still think Davis is going to get far fewer votes then have pledged. Now that the impetus is against him, MPs are going to think twice.
If an MP switches his/her vote in the secret ballot (and he/she doesn’t tell anyone that he’s switching), how could Conway discover who was the “traitor”?
The fact that the aura of invincibility seems to have worn off from Team Davis should give some of his less enthusiastic supporters pause for thought.
What will be interesting to see is if the events in Blackpool have had any impact on the polls (be it public, Conservative supporters or Conservative members). If the numbers really start to slide for DD then we may see some defections amongst his supporters.
Any reason why Davis is losing out to Cameron as opposed to Clarke?
7 Because Cameron won’t split the Party.
Clarke is anathema to a large tranche of Davis (& Fox)supporters
4 - I think that is unlikely. Davis will get about the number that he has pledged but I doubt now that he will get any/many more. Once you have gone public it is very poor form to rat confidentially. If people want to change I suspect that they will quietly let the Davis team know and then they are free to vote differently with a clean conscience.
5 - the different campaign team leaders have reportedly all agreed to get together to swap notes on pledges after the first vote. That should give them a pretty good idea on who has double pledged, who has been loyal and who has ratted!
BTW I have now decided who I will be supporting and will make a public declaration shortly. Hold the One O’Clock News! lol
“BTW I have now decided who I will be supporting and will make a public declaration shortly. Hold the One O’Clock News! lol :-)”
And now, exclusively from Sutton, the news they’ve all been waiting for…
10 - It’s David Cameron.
I think the one-nation wing will win the vote if the loser out of Clake and Cameron manages to put together a package of the other as Deputy leader. I think especially if Cameron wins if he can get Clarke as his deputy he will have pulled off a real coup and it would also mean those of us who think Clarke only puts himself before party were not entirely accurate. It’s the only real worry I have about Ken.
But I think it might still be better for DC to use KC as his snowplough to power.
[9]Glad you slept well, Rik
- one point in your post which interested me: if people want to change I suspect that they will quietly let the Davis team know and then they are free to vote differently with a clean conscience - what’s the “form” for a campaign manager in this situation? Either you keep it quiet and then look silly when your man polls less than his “promises” or else you announce a lower figure of support before the poll? Not a dilemma on whose horns I’d sit comfortably…
Don’t know if anyone else has picked this up but Jeremy Hunt (Surrey, SW) & Jim Grey (North Wilts) have both declared for David Cameron. With either KC or DC at the helm I could almost start looking forward to 2007!
I wish to announce in the privacy of Pb.com (which I follow with interest) that I will not be anybodys deputy.
It is simple economics I have been promised the deputy chairmanship of Boot Alliance (Unichem) and BAT - why oh Why would I give those up if the party was daft enough to ignor their best chance of an electable leader (me!)
It does seem that perhaps Cameron almost did better than most of the one-nation team really wanted. I get the impression that what we were looking for was a strong Cameron performance so he could add youthful balance to a Clarke bandwagon. but it seems like the added engine has gone streaking off on it’s own. Might it not be that Cameron is ultimately too lightweight to win against Davis on his own?
I damn well hope not and my first thought when Howard stood down was “has to be David Cameron” but that changed for me when KC decided to stand. I’ll be delighted with either of them :-). It will be fascinating which way the MPs vote.
I reckon the real Ken can spell ignore
13 - I dont know that there is a “form”. If it were me, I think I would quietly drop them from my list without publicity (so watch the Davis website next week!) and hope that we picked up a few extras to compensate. Davis must be almost a cert for the final round with his level of support and once MPs return to Westminster on Monday I cant see more than a very few changing their publicly declared allegiance.
Where Davis’s problem comes I think, is in the greatly reduced likelihood now of him picking up many more previously undeclared MPs in order to keep the momentum going. He is now seen as a “wounded beast”, whilst Cameron is seen as a “rising star”. With his lack of ability to inspire the Conference why would a wavering backbench MP come out for Davis now?
I have been very interested to listen to conversations in the Officers Mess (RAF) where I am this week. Yesterday lunchtime a group of young officers were discussing the leadership in the ante room. All bar one seemed keen on Cameron and impressed by his conference speech. No-one thought Clarke was the answer, and all thought that Davis was a competent but dull politician. Friends I have sounded out over the last few days all agree. Even a right wing Eurosceptic friend last night told me (unprompted) that he was backing Cameron now, having been a fervent Davis supporter until this week!
Something has definitely shifted in the party, strongly away from Davis, and if the officers in the Mess are any guide, something similar is happening in the country, for those who are interested at this stage.
Whilst Davis may be a cert to get through to the final ballot due to his existing support, I think he will struggle in the party vote, unless of course he is lucky enough to be up against Fox, when I think even I would return to the Davis camp.
Michael Portillo on This Week made the good point that DD will have more than his 66 (?) declared MPs, so he can “afford” to lose a few backers without being seen to drop below his declared support.
It just depends how many he loses.
19 - I am not so sure Portillo is right about this. I know some of the “extras” that the Davis camp are relying on and I dont think that they can rely on all of them any more. Add in a few defections from the existing 64 (which I think is the real number) and he could get only about 66!
I think there is absolutely no chance of David Davis not making the run-off. The only true disaster would be if Fox went through with him but I can’t see that happening.
“If people want to change I suspect that they will quietly let the Davis team know and then they are free to vote differently with a clean conscience.”
rofl! I get on with Derek Conway all right, because we both have links to Cats Protection, but if you become an MP, Rik, and ever feel the urge to tell Davis and his team that you’re not supporting them if you said you would, lie down and wait for the feeling to pass if you value having your four limbs intact.
20. How many “extras” do you think he has?
Thanks for your answer, Rik [18] - I’m glad I’m not doing the job (for any candidate in any party)
Is it any wonder that one of the campaign managers in a famous leadership election in 1990 took to the bottle!
Prediction expect to see some papers doing head to head polls amongst members Davis V Cameron, Clarke V Davis etc. If they show Davis trailing by around 5 Points or more to anyone especially Clarke, MP’s will feel more sanguine about giving Conway the Churchill salute, and taking the risk of Davis still making it through because of the likelihood of his ultimate defeat amongst members. Right wing support may well leach away fastest to come up with a Candidate to beat Clarke/Cameron.
19 - I’m not so sure that his team were that shrewd. Davis has already been quoting betting odds to support his favourite status which is not a smart move.
Judging by what you say then Rik- it will be Davis versus Cameron in the final round- but surely the party will be livid not to even get to opportunity to vote on Ken Clarke?
Has the Cameron momentum killed Ken? If so, I suspect some ructions to come, surely?
3. I think Conway was the heir and successor to the equally feared and famous or infamous “Terminator” Lightbown.
22 - Nick - I think it comes down to having some moral fibre. Not all MPs are duplicitous wimps are they?!
If you are seriously suggesting (as I am sure you are not!) that Davis’ team would use threats of physical violence against MPs who have got cold feet with Davis, then his support really could collapse in the privacy of the ballot box. After all, if another leader is elected Davis will have very little ability to exact vengeance.
In answer to your direct question; if I was an MP and Conway threatened me, I would tell him exactly where to get off!
There is also the factor that like you say Rik, despite everything that went wrong with him, Davis’ biggest crime is still that he is seen as competent but dull. If he does get through to the final ballot then “competent but dull” will still have a massive chance - for obvious reasons if up against Fox or Clarke, and because a month is a long time for opinions to change about Cameron. Remember despite everything his status is still based on
1) a slightly dubious looking exercise on newsnight
2) one and a half speeches that have got a very favourable press.
At the moment the press are all on his side. Whether the Labour press in particular allow this situation to continue is another matter.
He may rise to the challenges to come, but he will have to show more (and despite what you claim Rik, the ‘policies’ on his website are extremely thin - we know about specialist schools, keeping top-up fees (that’ll cause some ructions), elected police officers, some madcap scheme for ‘national service’ and a lot of vague rhetorical questions and aspirations. He’ll have to answer some questions about his views on drugs as well)
18 - Rik W - “… and if the officers in the [RAF] Mess are any guide, something similar is happening in the country …”
They won’t be. On the contrary I can’t imagine a less representative group of people! They are precisely the sort of people who WOULD be impressed by Cameron - but that doesn’t give any judge of the country as a whole.
22 - “I get on with Derek Conway all right, because we both have links to Cats Protection”
Yours to the League, and his to the Racket?
“She’s a beautiful tortoiseshell. It’d be terrible if Davis lost and something happened to her.”
27. It’s most unlikely but the Militant Sanity tendency in the party is trying to explore if it could be at all possible to engineer a win win scenario for the Party in a Clarke V Cameron final. The latter got the full michael crick treatment last night and still came out well.
33 - Portillo mentioned that. Clarke vs Cameron must be totally impossible though.
[32] :-)) “Ah, Mr. Bond… you turn up with the tedious inevitability of an unloved season…”
30 - Alex I accept what you say but it is a long way to a General Election. I think what Cameron has successfully done is set out his general stance on issues and the direction he is going. That is all we need from a potential leader at this stage. The key thing is the “X factor”, the ability to inspire and lift the party and then the public. Cameron has amply demonstrated that he can do this. What he now needs to show is how he performs under pressure. The next few weeks should allow him to demonstrate this too.
Davis has already proven that he can be good under pressure (as I would expect from an ex forces man) but unless he finds a way to inspire and lead, he is not going to impress as I hoped he could.
It will be some weeks before we party members have to cast our votes and I will be watching closely how all candidates perform, in case my new favoured candidate doesnt make it to the last two or three.
I think Rik at 18 has a very accurate assessment of what is happening on the leadership front.
Pity I never got to meet you at conference Rik, but maybe next year and the same to AH Matlock. Although I was pleased to meet Woody and his campaign for elected sheriff’s yee-haa and Andy.
[32] Well done, BV - you found the words for me….
[31] Indeed - I was told that when it was founded the SDP had no stronger supporters than in the Officers’ Messes of all three services (presumably on the grounds that it had never cut the Defence Estimates :roll:)
[30] This raises the question of who Labour and the Lib Dems fear most of the candidates - remember that Blair was able to get the “Granita” deal because party members believed the Tories feared him more than they feared Brown. Yes, I know they say they don’t fear any of them, but I’m old enough to remember what Mandy Rice-Davies said, too…
14. Not surprised Jeremy Hunt has declared for DC. I worked with him for the direct democracy and it sounds like a few of the new intake will declare for DC. I overheard quite a few stop Clarke conversations during the week. Shame you missed the conference Max. Was lots of fun.
31 - Stonch dont diss the Officers in the Mess! They are precisely the sort of Conservative inclined people who should be voting Conservative but recently havent been. The group I refer to were all 30 or under I would guess and were talking about it in a very non-party way. I accept that many of my friends are politicos or may be influenced when they talk to me by their knowledge of my views but this was a group which I dont know, chatting together about their impressions of conference. Almost as good as a Newsnight poll I would suggest
36 - it was just a comment on what could happen in the race, Rik. It’s very easy (and possibly accurate) to say that policies etc don’t matter now, in the context of the next general election. But that doesn’t mean you can get away with none in a leadership election - the trick is to get away with committing yourself as little as possible.
I saw Cameron on Newsnight last night and for the first time I thought he was pretty good and quite likeable. It’s interesting the influence newsnight has had on recent Tory fortunes.
It held a focus group before the 2005 election and the Milton Keynesians(?) pressed their ‘approve buttons’ every time Howard mentioned immigrants and Gypsies. And largely as a result he based his campaign around these issues which almost certainly cost the Tories seats. This time they had a focus group who pressed the ‘approve button’ every time Cameron opened his mouth and this is where his momentum started. I’ll go so far as to say that if Cameron wins he would not have done so without that newsnight focus group.
42 - Does anyone know if there was a broad social mix on the newsnight panel? A mix of Northerners/southerners?
[42] So we can expect the losers to blame the BBC, then?
“he could get only about 66!” says Rik. With 198 voters unless 2 others also get 66 he is through. Then is it 5 or 6 weeks of “promises” to the voters in the country - would have thought DD would be better at that.
45 - Yes there is a fundamental difference between Davis now and Portillo in 2001. Portillo didn’t have enough declared votes to get through to the final. Davis does. When you consider that Davis will pick up votes from Fox if he drops out he won’t even necessarily have a “stalling” campaign. Needless to say Davis should be praying that Fox drops out in round 2 IMO.
My general viw on life is that things are never as good or as bad they first appear. DD can use this to his advantage, if he’s clever, by making a show of listening more, being humbled and rebounding from setbacks. Better for him that the wobble happened now and not in 2 weeks time. DC by contrast has as much to lose as Davis. Sure he’s built up momemtum, but wouldn’t he prefer that ‘big mo’ in a fortnight? As the frontrunner, people will undoubtedly be out to get him and his aura of invinicibility could evaporate as quickly as it came.
I’m reminded of when George Bush lost the New Hampshire Primary to John Mcain, having been a certainty to secure the nomination. It forced Bush to re-think, listen and not be so arrogant, and of course he secured the nomination. This should be Davis’ template.
Interesting that KC seems to have slipped under the radar. My belief is that the momentum will shift to him at exactly the right time, as it did in ‘01. I know there’s plenty of talk about a “stop Ken” campaign but my view is, when something is so heavily trailed, it often never materialises. The things which do the most damage in life are the unforseen and spontaneous events, and “stop Ken” has been going on for years.
Despite current press ballyhoo, I expect a Davis v Clarke run off.
39 - Yeah sounded good Woody. Hopefully make it next year allthough have the Scottish conference in Perth first. Have to say Barcelona really wasn’t all its cracked up to be I’d much rather have been in Blackpool.
45. Only 66 in the first round. Portillo came first in the first round. If he isn’t seen to increase support from his “core” 64, he could be seen as a lame duck.
Good point about Bush/McCain Adrian. I was trying to think of an analogy in the United States.
40. Rik, had your straw polls of the officers’ mess been accurate in the past, Michael Howard would be in Downing Street by now…
49 - that doesn’t really make sense Jon. What matters is that you pick up support when other candidates drop out. Not that you are penalised because all your backers are open about who they support.
42. Alex. I doubt it would have had a geographical mix but certainly a cross section politically.
Alex
I think it was more your snide comment “Labour know that everytime Howard appears on television he costs himself votes”. It is nonsense and I doubt you can justify it.
It was interesting that this weekend I had to do some RAF reservist trg and was chatting to colleagues in the Officers Mess. They are not political and in the past would have been natural Tories but in recent years are a mix of views. They were generally impressed with Howard, in agreement with his immigration campaign and unimpressed with Labour’s dirty tricks. As reservists they come from all walks of life and all round the country and are not all natural Tories by any means.
So my straw poll suggests that your comments are baseless.
Comment by Rik — 1/2/2005 @ 12:48 pm
49 - Excellent point. There is a huge, monster danger for DD that if he doesn’t do *really* well in the first round, OR if he doesn’t increase when Rifkind gets knocked out (assuming Rifkind will be the first knocked out) that votes will drift away.
29. Paul Marsden’s stories are instructive here, are they not?
54 - Chrisco - so that would be why Labour lost 6% of its vote and the Tories gained 31 new seats. And your point is……?
52. Alex
But if he only gets his already declared votes and no more it doesn’t look good, cant win votes, shows lack of momentum, etc.
All he did wrong this week was deliver a competant speech instead of a great one and look what happened!
48. Prefer Blackpool to Barcelona. Don’t hear that very often.
Help, Help I am going to public meeting this evening with David Cameron and Andrew Robathan (MP for Blaby) -not sure that having Mr Robathan supporting you is very encouraging but I suppose they all count.
Any ideas for questions I can ask??
9.”the different campaign team leaders have reportedly all agreed to get together to swap notes on pledges after the first vote. That should give them a pretty good idea on who has double pledged, who has been loyal and who has ratted!”
If I’m a tory MP who wants to change my vote, I won’t tell anyone about it (especially if I know the pledges will be compared). So it would be difficult to discover I’m a “traitor”.
“….I think it was more your snide comment “Labour know that everytime Howard appears on television he costs himself votes”
While you were doing your straw polls at the officers mess Rik I was down the Old Kent road at the Salvation army soup kitchen and it bore out exactly what alex said. Every time Howard appeared on their TV (admittedly the reception was poor) they spilt their soup and said “Can’t stand the geezer. I’m going for Charlie”
61 - Davis gets less than his stated support. Conway has a private conversation with everyone of his declared supporters.
“Did you support David in the polling booth?”
63 - it probably depends which David…
54 - always good to see a demonstration of my sound political judgement regurgitated!
Now about why the Tories shouldn’t choose Ken Clarke…
I reckon someone should become a party hero and lamp Conway.
57 - “Chrisco - so that would be why Labour lost 6% of its vote and the Tories gained 31 new seats. And your point is……?”
Who did Labour’s lost votes go to in the main, Rik? I think Chrisco’s point is that Labour have a very healthy Commons majority and you need to gain four times as many seats as you gained this time in order to replace them as majority party. Had you cared to divulge in April what you thought would consitute a reasonably good result for the Tories, we all know it would have involved a number way in excess of 200 Tory MPs.
64 - you’ve failed to pass the test, bv
Roger - I agree with you wholeheartedly about Newsnight - and, to a degree, I would say Question time has swung in the Conservative’s favour too, if only they could put up someone who would punch with decent weight (the only one to have impressed and stayed in the memory recently would be good old Boris)
But I have to take issue with one well bounced fallacy to do with MH and the last election. Howard did not bang on about gypsies - he was talking about illegally settled sites - he was not targetting a specific ethnic group.
If he was, he would have had the resignation of one of his most senior aides in his constituency campaign who is in fact Romany, a fact that is publically known within his constituency, and an individual who is now being touted by the local paper as his successor as Folkestone MP. Trus me when I say that if there was a hint of “targetting Gypsies”, then he would have had his family jewels offered to him on a platter then tossed to the sheep on the Marsh to chew over
63. My answer: “yes, darling, I voted for him. I’m so angry that someone betrayed him. I hope you’ll find out who the responsibles are and they’ll be deselected”.
Perhaps, the “darling” is too suspicious.
57. With a smaller Tory share of the vote than in 1945 and only one more seat… The point is Rik that your straw polls in the RAF officers’ mess have been proven to be about as useful as your placard counts…
“Look behind you Del Boy, I just saw a defector”
[runs away very quickly]
72. But Super-Widdy will enter in action and she’ll stop Conway while he’s trying to kill the defector.
Milkybar. In an election the detail gets lost and all people hear-those who aren’t anoraks-are ‘dog whisles’. And I’m sure if everyone had chosen to investigate the Tory policy on Gypsies it would have been as you say an attack on illegal sites. But we all know that is never what happens. Whether this was deliberate by Mr Howard or just poor concentration by the electorate I don’t know. But I can tell you that people who dont like Gypsies felt they had found a champion.
Ken looks good value on Betfair at 7.2
If Jack is reading, I’m sure he’ll be starting to write “Carry On Whipping”.
David Davis: Bernard Bresslaw
Derek Conway: Sid James
Ann Widdecombe: Hattie Jacques
Justine Greening: Barbara Windsor
Sir Peter Tapsell: Charles Hawtrey
Michael Fabricant: Kenneth Williams
Amazing considering that Nick Palmer said davis had it all but wrapped up earlier this week.
75. I think you should do the decent thing Guido and credit the graph of DD’s betting probability that’s on your site to Mike…
Guido 75. Welcome to the site and I notice that you plagiarised the DD implied probability that I had here yesterday morning. You have rightly objected when the mainstream media has taken stuff from your site without attribution and in the past when you have copied my charts you have given a credit. I hope that this was an oversight
76 - Having seen the pictures of DD with the two young ladies I thought it was more Benny Hill than Carry On. Liam Fox could almost pass for Jim Dale though. Now that Widders has been chose to play Hatty Jacques I’m lost for someone to play Joan Sims. The only person that springs to mind is the former Tory MP for Edgbaston but I can’t remember her name. Was it Dame Jill Knight?
80. yes, Dame Jill Knight was the MP for Edgbaston.
http://assembly.coe.int/Members/Alpha/4271-en.asp
Baroness Knight of Collingtree- hmmm.. yes more like Joan Sims- really not sure about Justine Greening as Barbara Winsor though…
How about Amanda Barrie as Theresa May?
So Conway as the Spanish Inquisition:
“NOBODY expects the Spanish Inquisition! Our chief weapon is surprise…surprise and fear…fear and surprise…. Our two weapons are fear and surprise…and ruthless efficiency…. Our *three* weapons are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency…and an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope…. Our *four*…no… *Amongst* our weapons…. Amongst our weaponry…are such elements as fear, surprise…. I’ll come in again”
Roger - fair enough, I suppose it is only natural that people focus on aspects instead of the whole - do you think this is the same as those who focused on Blair in 1997, all they heard was “Education Education Education” (although I have heard some argue that is literally all that was said!), and focused on that, rather than investigate the actual mechanisms and details of the policies?
It does seem that we are heading that way in politics - is this the fault of the politicians, the newspapers, TV, or the ever diminishing state of, well, the education system
76 book value. I do have to make a crust on the markets you know !!
Ann Winterton to play Joan Sims - A bit harsh on dear Joan as in her pomp she was quite a looker and until the arrival of Babs Windsor played the buxom roles.
BTW I see Mary Ann Sieghart has come out for Cameron …. Oh dear
76/80. I suppose Gwyneth Dunwoody will play Hattie Jacques in the Labour’s version
86 - So that’s Bruce Anderson and Mary-Ann Sieghart so far. When does William Rees Mogg declare?
You beat me to it, Alex. Any candidate endorsed by those three knows he’s doomed.
I’m still concened that the membership at large might still vote for “random right winger” when put up against a one-nation candidate.
mmm
89 - Of course the nightmare scenario for you Sean, is that the combined effect of their endorsements doesn’t kick in until the General election…
Did anyone see the Cameron profile the other day on the BBC? very favourable, very good, came across very well indeed.
Though the bit about ‘Whites’ was kinda wierd if you ask me… oh to be a member of ‘whites’
… damn it! what could that have on a good old fashioned Labour club?!?
Baby Burco doesn’t like David Cameron’s background.
89/91 Sean/alex. I think DC has avoided the Simon “Death Warrant” Heffer acclaimation.
As for DC himself I worry that the Tories will, as they did with Hague, go for youth and charisma(?) over all else. There is little doubt that DC enjoyed a very good launch and conference, but should he become Tory leader he will be subjected ruthlessly to the media spotlight and I have the impression that there is something of the rabbit in the headlight about him. I may be entirely wrong, but this Cameron euphoria seems to be broad based but thin on substance.
88 - WRM has already as good as backed Fox (I believe).
Simon Heffer doesn’t much approve of DC (and that is an understatement).
As a non-Conservative, it doesn’t bother me too much who the Tories pick to lead them. I remain far from convinced about Cameron - like Hague in 1997, his leadership “campaign” has not been without its wobbles and I’m far from convinced that, unlike Howard, he will remain steady under fire and you can be sure there will be plenty of that once “normal service” resumes.
Both Hague and Howard (and even IDS to a degree) started out by trying to reach out beyond the core Tory vote and certainly “talked the inclusive talk” but as soon as the polls failed to respond, they headed back to the laager of the 30% or so core vote. Will Cameron do the same ?
Michael Howard has officially resigned !! Gasp, shock, horror.
PB.com mentioned on BBC page :
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4318248.stm
97 - “they headed back to the laager of the 30% or so core vote.”
But which la(a)ger are they?
Ken Clarke has already claimed to be Heineken - reaching the parts other Tories cannot.
Liam Fox is Tennent’s Super - a Scottish brew for the hard core, but mainstream appeal less obvious.
David Cameron is Corona - a young brand, popular with the laydeez, but questions remain over its depth.
David Davis must be Stella Artois - once very popular but doesn’t seem all-conquering any more.
Have you looked at the Cameron web site http://www.cameroncampaign.org/index.html
Lots of “Recasting of values” - which I understand means changing current Conservative values to New labour values - We believe in limited Government BUT not too limited in case the weak get left behind. We believe in lower taxes BUT in sharing fruits of economic growth with higher spending on public services. We believe in an open and flexible Europe and engaging ethically with the wider world.
A bit of mish mash - but well presented
BV, just to be pedantic, it was Davis who claimed he was the Heineken man (after DC said he was the Coca Cola man - the real thing - oh dear) and Ken Clarke said he was the Hamlet man. Your view of things sounds a lot more realistic.
101 - “Ken Clarke said he was the Hamlet man”
Yes, you’re right, I remember now. I think I had repressed the memory due to the dark place of the soul suggested by the association of Ken Clarke with Bach’s “Air on a G String”.
99. Surely IDS must have already laid claim to the Corona brand - having had that piece of lime stuck down his throat…
100 - I’m glad someone else thought that the site was a bit insubstantial. Rik was making it sound like a manifesto for government yesterday
103 (con) - I exaggerate, of course, before Rik sees this
99 - At least none of them are claiming to be like Nastro Azzuro. £8.80 for two pints in Monty’s - I couldn’t believe it. I think I’ll just stick to G&T’s from now on!
99 - “David Davis must be Stella Artois - once very popular but doesn’t seem all-conquering any more.”
And I think we should stress that it is definitely not because the beverage is colloquially known as “wife-beater” (down my way anyway).
106. So they use the “Nastro Azzurro” name and they didn’t translate it in “Blue Ribbon”.
106 - “I think I’ll just stick to G&T’s from now on!”
Very wise. Particularly therapeutic if you have a cold, I find after self-medicating last night.
108 - yes. Most people find “Peroni” easier to say than “Nastro Azzurro” though.
108 - I had no idea thats what it meant. IIRC their used to be a really crappy chocolate biscuit called a Blue Ribbon.
106. No Max, ‘Nasty Azzuro’ would have to be either a) Theresa May or b) the whole party’s beer.
(Azzuro = azure)
Icarus at 60 - I would like to ask him:
1: What does he consider a good level of taxation? 40% higher or lower.
2: Does he believe that we should de-criminalise cannabis or other drugs?
3: Would he be happy to have all the losing candidates in his shadow cabinet?
4: Finally, has he offered shadow cabinet jobs to any of his backers?
Thanks
110/111. It makes sense: we don’t usually translate foreign branda eithers.
We translate the Queen’s name (Elizabeth becames Elisabetta and Charles becomes Carlo). We don’t translate William or Henry names. I think it could due to the fact that when Elizabeth became Queen, very few people knew English here and so the media started to translate the name.
111 Max. Can you still buy “Blue Ribbon” biscuits. I remember our school tuck shop used to stock back in the middle ages
I’m just getting to grips with political betting for the first time so perhaps I’m missing something but… To what extent do posters feel that the odds truly are influencing the electorate’s perception as has been alluded to on a number of occassions over the last few days? If the influence is real, however slight, does that not create an interesting opportunity for the candidates to manage appearances when the market volumes are fairly low. For instance, if I was David Cameron and the odds on my winning had become slightly longer over the morning, wouldn’t it be to my advantage that someone had just put £1500 on me thus stopping the price moving which might create the impression of slowing momentum? Or is that just too far fetched?
115. Are you sure Ruth Kelly hasn’t banned them?
James M - thanks for those.
I like Peroni’s Nastro Azzuro - having been a fan of Pizza Express since the early ’70s (founder a good Liberal). Always called it a “Peroni” but they changed the label a few years ago to “Nastro Azzuro” known in my pub as “Nasty Fizzy” - happily now changed to Peroni - so everyone happy again.
115 - I’m not sure, IIRC they didn’t really taste of anything so it’s probably no bad thing they’re gone!
“Blue Riband” are the chocolate wafer biscuits and they are still sold in Sainsbury’s
116 James. Depending on the market small amounts of cash can move a market considerably and some will bet not on the basis of who they think will win but on trying to predict market moves. Having said that in the broadest of terms I would say that in political events they is more scope for making a small killing as odds can change dramatically very quickly - just look at the DC price over the past weeks - moving from a decent second favourite to joint 4th favourite with Liam Fox, all points in between and now as odds on favourite !!
BTW David Mcletchie, Scottish Tory Leader, is facing questions about claiming almost £900 in public money in taxi fairs to visit his old law firm :
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4318918.stm
120- http://www.britsuperstore.com/acatalog/Nestle_Blue_Riband_6_Pack.jpg
One thing that i don’t understand is all this talk of right-wing Davis supporters, seeing their man apparently holed below the waterline, deserting to Fox for a candidate who can beat Cameron/Clarke. Fox’s speech has been the most over-exaggerated speech of the lot. It was what it was intended - a speech to look good and get a decent press from those at the venue by enthusing the activists in the hall. I doubt it connected at all with the wider watching audience (as indeed was suggested by the BBC’s perception panel thingy).
118. IIRC from my time living in Rome, Peroni and Nastro Azzuro are different beers, one a sub-brand of the other (much like Tuborg and Tuborg Gold, for example…)
123. I’m not sure it even did the job of enthusing those in the hall. I was standing at the back (where I was for all those I saw) and two members towards the right of the party said it was barely better than Davis - ‘he pressed the buttons, but nothing lit up’.
One thing perhaps worth discussing is if Davis supporters do start defecting, whether that is likely to seriously affect his chances of making the final two. Any candidate will need at least a third of the vote to be safe, and he’s only just at about that level. Presumably this will also influence the thinking of any Davis supporter who was previously thinking of voting tactically to engineer an easier contest later.
MESSAGE TO FOXY BLOGGER - just had a look at your website.
Can I make a suggestion? Do you candidate a favour by taking down that grainy photo of him under the religious icon - will turn people off no end! It almost looks like the kind of photo one would see on the front of a tabloid, taken secretly at a meeting to expose his fundamentalist leanings. Has the same effect!
http://liamfox.blogspot.com/
126. There’re lots of photos of Blair in church and none of them turned voters off.
126 - Of course - Nobody wants a Christian to run a political party, let alone be Prime Minister. So stupid of me.
Now, if you’d just like to cite me the relevant section of the Representation of the People Act that says unashamed Christians can’t be politicians and can’t express their views, I’ll oblige.
Peroni tastes of absolutely nothing. You may as well drink mineral water.
English / German / Belgian / Czech beer leads the way.
Peroni is the Brewery, N. A. the brew
128 - No one is suggesting this picture means Fox cannot be a politician, merely that it gives an impression of religious extreme which may add fuel to the fire of those who claim Fox would bring about an equivalent of America’s Bible-belt Conservatism (which if true, would see people like myself leave the Party).
Fox Blogger - that wasn’t quite my point. Its just that Blair’s religious belief have not led him to try and make political capital out of issues like abortion. Fox appears set to go down the neocon path if elected and that will worry people. So really I think playing up his religious leanings is a bit dodge for him.
If he held views which weren’t abhorrent to most people it wouldn’t be a problem for him - but he does, and when you throw in religion you have a very potent mix.
I’d leave the country if Liam Fox became PM.
Is it Friday afternoon already?
Will everything go quiet now? When does the H of C go back?
129 - Julian you are spot on.
If you must drink Italian beer, make it Moretti Doppio Malto.
If you must drink Peroni, drink Gran Riserva.
132 - Well, Blair’s voting record on abortion doesn’t put him in the anti-abortion camp, so there’s no comparison. Once again, your problem here seems to be that you just don’t want political stances on certain issues. You still haven’t explained why “issues of conscience” shouldn’t be party political. It doesn’t make sense to me that one moral issue (abortion) isn’t allowed to be party-political but others (fox hunting) are.
As a non-Tory I was surprisingly impressed by Fox’s speech. His attack on Davis’ over-use of his “back-story” drew blood like little else during the week. He had the advantage of responding to all other contenders but I thought he used that advantage to telling effect and that is an important skill. As to the others: Clarke is a seasoned pro and it came across. Cameron won plaudits for the off-the-cuff style and it was impressive but I suspect he had been rehearsing for weeks and query whether he can replicate it regularly. Davis appeared lazy more than anything - just underprepared and making textbook errors by looking at his notes every time he ought to have been reaching a crescendo. Nobody really criticised Rifkind’s competent but unconvincing performance, but then again why kick a man when he’s down.
135. Issues of conscience shouldn’t be party political whichever the party is because those sort of decisions create alliances across parties and splits within them. As would be obvious if that approach was ever tried.
On the day that the links between Bush’s decision making and religious beliefs are being so closely examined, I’d have thought it wasn’t a great idea to be pushing it as the way to go here. But then as I’ll be voting for Clarke or Cameron, I say: keep going!
Anybody think it would be a good idea for this site to actually have some kind of tracker on it listing those who have declared support for a candidate and those still undeclared. It would then makes it easier to make forecasts and see patterns, though I appreciate that it would be a time consuming task to compile.
138 - http://conservativehome.blogs.com
Having just got back from the gym, lunch and the Med centre, I am catching up on postings.
67 - James - I did say what I expected. I thought 215 seats for the Conservatives was a reasonable expectation and I remember posting that on PB.com! I also predicted a Labour majority of 60 (+/-10) to a large number of friends and family. I expected a squeeze on the Lib Dems, which the Tories managed but Labour didnt. SO I dont think I was too far out!
71 - I dont claim that by straw polls are scientific. They are more an interesting anecdote, thats all. They form a small part of how I make some judgements on potential leaders and others and so far they have rarely proved too far out. If you apply the same standards to other posters on here we would lose many interesting insights and opinions. We would also lose all those who predicted “Tory Meltdown” based on nothing more than a whim and something a Lib Dem canvasser told them once. I am happy to be judged on my firm predictions when I make them. I have predicted three out of the last 5 General Election winning majorities precisely (I was wrong in 97 and 01 but got 87, 92 and 05 spot on).
Interesting take on the Newsnight exercise which has has had such an impact on the Cameron campaign. The exercise was commissioned by non other than Robbie Gibb, former Portillo press man. Could that have had anything to do with the outcome?
135 - Fox Blogger. Let me try and make myself clearer as I think I have failed to actually make my point about Fox in recent posts. I would be interested to hear your response to the below.
First - abortion and similar “moral” issues as party political issues. I do think that a “moral” issues should not be party political per se. However I do think extreme caution needs to be adopted.
My main point about Fox and his stance on abortion, coupled with his religious beliefs is as follows.
I utterly abhor the way the right in America use issues like abortion to divide the nation and pally up to christian extremists. I think issues like this are used in the states as a smokescreen to divert from the massive and growing wealth and opportunity inequalities which Bush’s policies are creating. Also, the issue of abortion is tied up with a whole package of “traditional christian value”-based beliefs which are to my mind mind sexist and homophobic among other things.
It is known that Fox admires the current Republican administration, and am I right in thinking he has made trips to the states to build links with right-wing strategists over there. This causes me to suspect him of wanting to import the same politics over here - something I think would be very unhealthy for Britain. This concern appears to be justified the moment he starts hammering on about severely restricting a woman’s right to have an abortion. What I fear is that this one issue doesn’t stand alone but is just part of a broader very sinster right wing agenda.
Icarus - they go back on Monday I think.
136 James - I agree, another non-Tory here, watching on TV, they really seemed to like Fox’s dig at Davis and his backstory.
TORY LEADERSHIP UPDATE:
Deputy Leader & Shadow Defence Secretary Michael Ancram and senior backbench MP Sir Patrick Cormack have come out for Sir Malcolm Rifkind, according to the Guardian’s Politics website.
MP for Gosport asks for name to be removed from List of Davis supporters according to the Times. The first breach in the dyke?
141 - I have posted before (here and elsewhere) my percetion that the Newsnight poll was either rigged, or else inadvertently gave a flattering result for Cameron. The pollster would tell the crowd “wow! that’s an amazing result” creating a herd effect. And the clip of Cameron featured much use of “we”.
142 - I share your distaste for importing “moral” issues into Party politics. But I don´t think you make your case for a conspiracy.
136 - I generally agree. My expectations were quite low for Fox, but I thought he did very well. He seems to do a much better job of being DD than DD does!
143. That wasn’t necessarily support for Fox though. There were more than a few DC supporters who were pleased to hear those sentiments.
142 - Your problem seems to be more to do with the fact that you don’t like the policies that Fox et al promotes, RATHER than them being religious? Are you against any “religious” policies or just the ones you disagree with?
That the “religious right” have re-energised the Republicans is not in doubt. But to go from there to saying that abortion and the like are smoke-screens to diguise US military involvement is a jump too far. Are you suggesting that Foxy is using Mental Health / Social Decay as issues to smoke-screen his support for involvement in Iraq? If not, why did you bring it up?
Your use of language like “extremists” could be interpreted that you’re actually not interested in allowing this particular political perspective to be included in the corporate debate. Such language attempts to demonises a particular political perspective and then to practically outlaw it from discussion. Personally, I don’t find that liberal or democratic at all.
FWIW, I don’t think an anti-abortion perspective “extremist” in the slightest.
145 - The MP for Gosport isn’t one of Davis’ declared supporters so it would be a bit difficult to remove him from his list
149. Only reporting what the Times says. The Times says that his number of declared is now 64, having been 66. They also say Fabricant is now hiding behind his Whip position to claim he can’t back any candidate publicly. Rather convenient if you’re looking for a way to desert DD without officially ratting on him.
145 - The Times “source” for that story is ConservativeHome. He was never on the published list of Davis supporters (as found on his website). ConservativeHome appear to have had him on their list in error (he was removed days ago).
Davis has 65 declared supporters (including himself) + (possibly) Michael Fabricant, who was listed but had to be removed because he is a whip.
146. Yep, the facilitation of the session was quite bizarre, I thought, and was clearly not designed to prompt a neutral reaction from the group. Not necessarily saying there was a conspiracy afoot but methodology seemed odd to me
148 - Fox Blogger - I didn’t at any stage say that the American right uses what I view (and you don’t view) as extremist “moral” issues as a smokescreen for military involvement in Iraq. Re-read my post. I say they are smokescreen for something else don’t I?
My posts aren’t very good I concede - but please don’t misquote them to make me look even sillier!
151. Very convenient Fabricant suddenly remembered that after DD’s conference flop, and not while he was still riding high.
Can I just say to all the Conservative posters - ‘please, please, please elect Fox!’ It will ensure you are out of power for a generation or more.
The neo-con agenda is floundering in the USA and will never take hold in this country. The sneering reference to social liberalism, the flag fetish, Brussels as ‘an oppressive foriegn regime’. When will the Tories realise that they already have the votes of people who think that way? It’s the other 70% they need to worry about.
154 - Fine theory, except Fabricant was removed from the list before even Cameron’s speech. Maybe he decided to back Rifkind…
[148] The point you need to address is that in Bri