Gav's View

Yes, it was an interesting debate.

I didn’t like the fact that Cameron was moaning about ‘labour policy created for the front page of newspapers’, as thats how I see him working.

Davis had the better policies and he came across well.

Oh and Gavin, its very grown up of you not to make any posts about Blunket. There’s a lot of material there you could have mined but not a single mention.

You run “Blogger’s for Cameron” for crying out loud! Don’t be indecisive please, I came here for you to steady me!

The key issue is that we always thought although Davis was great, he’d never be able to convince voters he wasn’t just another public sector wrecker.

But the case he put yesterday for tax relief (for that is what we should always call it) suggests that he does know how to frame a genuine conservative message that could convince voters.

So now I’m as indecisive as you are.

Well, I thought Cameron was pretty poor. He seemed overly reliant on parroting excerpts fromhis speeches and just couldn’t cope with cross examinantion. He also looked really uncomfortable.

Davis did very well though. He was confident, assured and cogent. Hopefully he showed for a lie the line that he can’t connect with people. Certainly his line on tax was better explained than Cameron’s formualtion (why did Cameron stick to that line when he knew Davis would cite the IFS?).

Perhaps it’s time to take down your “bloggers for Cameron” flag?

I am affraid I only half-listened (and not watched) the debate. Perhaps I should put it on again.

I cam away with the impression that Davis was stuck in the 90′s and Cameron didn’t want to announce anything too radical so he could put his thinking cap on over the next few years (and possibly to woo the floating voters). If I get the time over the weekend, I will take stock.

Thanks for the advice James

I’m not sure what to do about Bloggers for Cameron. I do think as Daniel and Lascivious have suggested, that Cameron’s being reasonable in being cautious… But I did see more in Davis than the media had previously allowed…

I suppose neither are perfect and neither are awful. I’ll write more later…

Cameron will win – you wait and see!

He’s a Tony Blair clone! Is that what you want? Back DD before it’s too late other wise there will be no point voting next election.

So David Cameron has refused to be interviewed by Paxman next week. What does that tell us? I guess if he becomes leader, the next election will be the first one for twenty years where we haven’t demanded a television debate between the leaders…

Why Cameron should win — Charles Moore @ The Telegraph

Charles Moore doesn’t have the best trac krecord in these matters. He backed Redwood in ’95, Lilley in ’97, IDS in ’01. Now we have “Cameron the closet Thatcherite”: this is the strangest Moore endorsement to date.

What shows his argument up as a sham is his status as Thatcher’s official biographer. Thatcher stood for leader because Keith Joseph decided not to. She wanted to make sure that at least one candidate represented their viewpoint. David Cameron is representing the modernisers’ viewpoint – the part of the Conservative Party which is the least enthusiastic about applying Thathcerite ideas to taxes and the public services.

So calling Cameron a closet Thatcher is an oxymoron of the highest order.

James,

While Charles Moore said “Mr Davis wants to maintain the Tories’ membership of the Europhile European People’s Party at the European Parliament, while Mr Cameron says he will stop it.” Davis explained this today.

He said that the Tory MEPs have been asked to join the EPP for four years and they cannot withdraw before then but, then, he would call for the ED (European Democrats) to separate and create a new party bloc.

Quite clearly this is said from a genuine position but for Cameron to be so openly calling for the exit from the EPP shows a real desire to make the EU work for England.

Thatcher did not decentralise and had some nanny-ish attitudes to social liberalism but as a general yardstick she is the sort of person that the country always needs. She brought the UK from the position as the “Sick man of Europe” to being the envy of the world. Major damaged that quite severely and Blair continued the trend, but Blair’s tarnishing of Thatcher’s record must not be left to stick.

Regardless of your current opinions of Cameron I am quite sure he is not as left-wing as the press is making him out to be and, with a strong cabinet, he will run the UK the way it should be.

Of course there is always the problem of English Devolution that hasn’t been tackled yet and which neither contender appears willing to grasp properly. At a meeting this morning this subject came up entirely without my (obviously biased) intervention. Though of course leaflets were given to anyone who would listen after that!

Davis was far more assured on Question Time than he has been previously. He is a strong politician worthy of a senior position.

However, what image does Davis as leader give out to the general public? You can argue about whether policy x or policy y represents a significant detour from previous Conservative policy, but as far as the public is concerned he is more of the same – “same old, same old” as I have put it elsewhere.

What the Conservative Party needs more than anything is a change in perception – we have lost voters in spades since 1983, and they have failed to return (even when they agree with our policies!) because they have ceased to believe that we empathise with them, that we understand their aspirations… David Cameron offers a change from that. He will sell the Conservative cause to those floating voters in a way that Davis, even with the best policies in the world, simply could not do.

Quite right Iain.

I disagree entirely with Iain. It’s just an assertion of his that the public would see Davis as “more of the same”. How a party is perceived stems from the agenda it adopts. At the last two elections, the Conservative Party adopted a strident and narrow agenda (‘Yurp in 2001 and immigration in 2005). Although there were other issues, these were the ones we talked about and therefore the ones on which we were judged. As the issues were low priority, stressing them made us seem out of touch, and as they were stridently expressed they made us appear mean spirited even to those who agreed with us. Cameron has not said anything about policy to suggest that he understands this or will address the problems of the policy mix. He’s already reaffirmed his support for the immigration policy. If anyone offers more of the same, then it’s Cameron (who was, let us not forget, the architect of Howard’s slippery response to Hutton and the author of our slimline manifesto).

By contrast the way Davis has talked about even core issues marks him out as not “more of the same”. On taxes and public services, his ficus has been unremittingly on how the current settlement fails those who have no choice but to rely on state services, or whose low incomes are gobbled up by the state. This focus on the vulnerable is hardly “more of the same”.

I think we’ll have to agree to disagree. I believe that the majority of Britons CANNOT have any idea what the party’s relative merits are, otherwise the Tories would have won in 2001 and 2005.

You don’t have to have an idea of the parties relative merits to see that in 2001 and 2005 we fought the elections on narrow agendas that didn’t matter to people. Europe and immigration were both low on people’s list of priorities, but they were the drums we banged in the respective elections. That set the tone for us being seen as irrelevant and mean spirited. The way to address that is through adopting an agenda that matters to people, not through PR fakery.

I’m sorry James, I should have been clearer. I do agree that we campaigned on the wrong issues but I think that is only half the story.

The other half is the image problem that I hope both Davis and Cameron can resolve. At the moment, though, I think Cameron has a more realistic chance of doing that.

If Davis wins I am sure we will have more success at the election than we did in 2005 and I will support him to the full.