« Crocodili lacrimae | Main | Stating the Bleeding Obvious - Eamonn Butler's The Alternative Manifesto »

Why can't Dave seal the deal?

The Tories’ slump in the polls is likely to stoke discontent in the party against the Cameron leadership - Times Online

One senior MP said last night: “The inner circle can crow all they like about how well they are doing, but the elephant in the room is the polls. Cameron spent last week talking about sexualisation of children and nine-year-old girls in suspenders, when there are much more important issues he should be talking about.”
Another backbencher said: “Cameron and his team are panicking. We are not over the line yet. They are trying to mumble their way to the general election, playing it safe, when what people want is real passion.”

The voters have woken up after a horrendous party, the furniture has been smashed, the bailiffs are knocking at the door, their wallet has been emptied and they turn over in bed and see who they have been sleeping with for the last thirteen years for the first time without make up and sober. And outside a fresh faced Dave sings them sweet songs about taking them away from all this. And the voters are still thinking of one more tumble in the filthy sheets rather than trust a Tory future?
There really is something wrong with the brand.

Comments

Have quoted (with acks) and linked with comments of my own.

And that is the Tory issue. When Dave turns around and changes tack noone will believe him. He needs to be replaced and with a true Tory.

I predict a hung parliament with Gordo as leader.

That should bring about the situation we need to cause change.

... And outside a Facebook mob is baying to be let in to do exactly what the last lot did. They'd heard there was a party and though they are a little late they aren't going to leave without having one.

Dave doesn't represent change. He barely represents his party.('resents' is probably a better word. He doesn't want to lead them just tell them what to do.) He doesn't represent this nation. He doesn't represent me.

"Dave" should have been streets ahead by now but we don't trust him. He is not a "conservative" by any definition and he may well resent the party but I get the impression that he hates England and the English. Why does he refuse to listen? Is it Etonian arrogance or was he just badly brought up? In my lengthy life I have found that the Public Schools turned out many with excellent manners, the Peerage, hereditary of course, were equally approachable. Hence I must assume a bad upbringing!

If he loses, he is the one who is to blame.

Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory!

David Cameron cannot seal the deal because he is a Social Democrat in Conservative clothing. Voters gave up on the SDP years ago, but Cameron is trying to recreate it.

The Conservative brand has been broken by Cameron and Steve Hilton. Their arrogance and sheer detachment from what the ordinary voter wants is shocking. They're not in politics because they are passionate about realising a vision for Britain, they're in it because it's a bit of a wheeze.

This is what happens when a party elects a leader on the basis of a few well delivered lines, a man who hid his real views until it was too late for the membership to do anything about it.

Trying to tell the difference between NuLieBore and the Conservatives is like looking at one of those "spot the ball" puzzles. The differences are tiny and well hidden on all major policy areas.

Unless CallMeDave gets some honest-to-god conservative polices pdq and shouts them from the rooftops then a hung Parliament is the very best he can hope for.

Will he do this?

Probably not.

Imminent FAIL.

The Age of Spin with its vacuous politicians who believe being in power is an end itself is on the wane. It has no substance so clearly has a limited life. Obama may well be a one term president, Kevin Rudd may make a second term due to the short three year cycle of Australian Federal Parliaments but may not as people wake up to the fact that he is all talk and no delivery (and he thinks it is alright for government run programmes to kill people because people die in other industrial accidents).

http://www.watoday.com.au/opinion/politics/spin-and-silver-tongues-cant-hide-an-empty-morality-20100217-odtm.html?comments=121

The Conservatives have saddled themselves with a leader designed to compete against other principleless politicians who are willing to adopt any old policies they think will make them popular and electable. Electorates are realising however that one poitician who craves power above everything else is much the same as any other politician who craves power above everything else. The danger for the conservatives is that their core support will not be enthused to wander down to the polling station to vote for someone with whom they feel no connection whatsoever. Conservatives need a leader who genuinely believes in limiting the state (e.g. who understands why ID cards are wrong intuitively not because it might win a few votes), who believes that the state should leave as much money in people's pockets as possible and not take money off the industrious to give to the indolent, who believes that grown adults should be left alone to make their own lifestyle choices without being cajoled by governemnt and that it is not the role of government to socially engineer through taxation or regulation. Dave is not even remotely any of those.

Hilton's whole strategy has been to focus on TV coverage rather than newspapers. This is why so much of the policies are pro-BBC, or at least watered down to the point that it would please the BBC.

I mean, what's any Conservative doing writing in the Guardian. Talk about a total waste of time. You're basically selling your message to pseudo-intellectual lefties who are never going to vote for you in a month of Sundays, who generally live in urban constituencies that aren't where the battleground is.

Little of their strategy is targeted towards "middle England", those provincial constituencies where elections are won. Places where the culture isn't to expect to have the government looking after them, where if you can't get a job, your friends and family will tell you to get on your bike. The only reason that Blair won was that he convinced those people that they could deliver better services in a free market while not increasing their taxes.

Cameron should, from the start, have pointed out the trick of New Labour, that it was all on the never-never and stuck to that as the key policy. He'd be reaping the rewards of that. Yes, he'd have pissed off people in Liverpool and Brent, but he's never going to win there.

Post a comment