At all costs?
Is it really worth it? The Conservatives and commentators (characterised by Peter Oborne's article in this week's Spectator) may be considering choosing Ken Clarke as the next leader.
The reason, apparently, would be that he is the most likely candidate to win at the next election. Apparently 40% of the British people want Ken Clarke to be the Tory leader. As more than 40% of the British public voted for Blair and the Lib Dems at the last two elections, we can only assume that that 40% doesn't know what's good for them, so why should the Tories listen to them?
Possibly, too, there is some benefit to the Tories in having an electable leader (which would make a nice change), but why on earth would the Tories want to gain power at the expense of their excellent post-Thatcher/Major ideology? David Cameron is cited as being liberal, but only on social issues - which can only be a damn good thing. On economic issues, his supporter, George Osborne, has announced "an independent commission to look at the implications... of flat tax[es]" which is a move in direction the country and, therefore, the Conservatives should be moving. David Davis is a little less liberal, despite the media's implication that he is a whole lot more so, and equally right-wing on economic issues; he is also continuing to work and allowing the leadership not to distract, as much as he can, from Labour's failings. Liam Fox, the Scot, is weak on English issues but a typically good egg, generally.
Ken Clarke is socially inconsistent, as I said before, and economically Gordon Brown's bed-fellow! Not only that, but he has a penchant for giving away our sovereignty and currency that no-one in England and in their right mind believes is the best thing for Britain or England.
The Tories must embrace, advertise and act-upon ideology and not, repeat not, seek power at any cost. Especially if this results in another Conservative government, typified by Major's floundering Prime Minister-ship (though he really is a good speaker in person), that reconfirms and damages further the public's opinion of Conservative economic mismanagement.
I've said it before, and I'll say is again, anyone but Clarke (though preferably David Davis).
The reason, apparently, would be that he is the most likely candidate to win at the next election. Apparently 40% of the British people want Ken Clarke to be the Tory leader. As more than 40% of the British public voted for Blair and the Lib Dems at the last two elections, we can only assume that that 40% doesn't know what's good for them, so why should the Tories listen to them?
Possibly, too, there is some benefit to the Tories in having an electable leader (which would make a nice change), but why on earth would the Tories want to gain power at the expense of their excellent post-Thatcher/Major ideology? David Cameron is cited as being liberal, but only on social issues - which can only be a damn good thing. On economic issues, his supporter, George Osborne, has announced "an independent commission to look at the implications... of flat tax[es]" which is a move in direction the country and, therefore, the Conservatives should be moving. David Davis is a little less liberal, despite the media's implication that he is a whole lot more so, and equally right-wing on economic issues; he is also continuing to work and allowing the leadership not to distract, as much as he can, from Labour's failings. Liam Fox, the Scot, is weak on English issues but a typically good egg, generally.
Ken Clarke is socially inconsistent, as I said before, and economically Gordon Brown's bed-fellow! Not only that, but he has a penchant for giving away our sovereignty and currency that no-one in England and in their right mind believes is the best thing for Britain or England.
The Tories must embrace, advertise and act-upon ideology and not, repeat not, seek power at any cost. Especially if this results in another Conservative government, typified by Major's floundering Prime Minister-ship (though he really is a good speaker in person), that reconfirms and damages further the public's opinion of Conservative economic mismanagement.
I've said it before, and I'll say is again, anyone but Clarke (though preferably David Davis).
<< Home