Who should lead the Tory Party ?

[The Large One]

Clarke is in the lead in this poll at present (after 'they are all scum' - naturally). Doesn't that lead to the question, how can the Tories possibly modernise and look forward when their potential leader will be 69 years old at the next election?

 

[Hunting 784561]

Clarke is in the lead in this poll at present (after 'they are all scum' - naturally). Doesn't that lead to the question, how can the Tories possibly modernise and look forward when their potential leader will be 69 years old at the next election?

By letting Clarke win the next election then handing over to Cameron ?

Expect immediate tax cuts on real ale, hush puppies and jazz CDs if Clarke gets in.

 

[Pavilionaire]

Apart from Clarke the Tories are bereft of politicans with clear thought, dynamic policies and the common touch.

They really need to sit down and go back to the drawing board, offer radically different policies on issues like recycling, energy, defence, taxation.

 

[Scoffers]

Sounds sensible to me Pavilionaire

 

[Grendel]

Clarke should lead them if they want to become an effective opposition, but won't. The hardline Tories won't go for him because of his pro-European past, although he's managed to do a U-turn on that now that he's in the frame for the job. Electing him as leader also provides Labour with ready-made ammunition about the last Conservative administration he served in.

 

[Pavilionaire]

Clarke can counter with 4 years of steady growth while he was Chancellor before Brown, 3 election victories, 11 awful years under New Labour etc etc. It is not a dealbreaker.

What makes this race interesting is that because Clarke is old he would probably only serve one term, so the likes of Cameron might be prepared to do a deal with Clarke, and this could shaft Davis.

Clarke, I feel, is destined to be either king or king-maker.

 

[Blackadder]

Ken Clarke.

Failing that Tony Blair.

 

[looney]

Wibble wibble.

 

[looney]

Well you obviously didn't watch newsnight last night. They assessed the contenders in front of a mixture of swing voters.


Rifkind, Davies and Clarke all got negative responses. (As if the tories are going to take advice of a bunch of lefties who to elect.)

Liam Fox had a positive response but Cameron walked it by a mile.


I reckon Cameron will trash Brown at the poles.

What some of the mugs like Looney don't understand is that the party didn't lose votes to the right, or not in any significant numbers. The majortiy of votes they lost went to Lib Dem and Labour,

Not true, In 97 there was virtually no real swing to labour(As a percentage of all voters), just millions of tories who didn't vote. As well as those that went to UKIP.


Your still talking crap I see Enema.

 

[Dandyman]

I reckon Cameron will trash Brown at the poles.

Yes, but what will the BRITISH electorate make of him ?

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

If the Tories don't give it to Ken Clarke this time they may as well close the party down and open some bowling greens around the country. Ken's the man.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Expect immediate tax cuts on real ale, hush puppies and jazz CDs if Clarke gets in.

I think that is one of the best manifestos ever Now if he puts Harveys on the NHS he gets my vote

 

[looney]

If the Tories don't give it to Ken Clarke this time they may as well close the party down and open some bowling greens around the country. Ken's the man.

Yea I'm sure the tories will elect a leader that will be deeply divisive, I know parties dont "split" any more since the commies at the BBC reclasified "Decent" in New/OLD Pro/anti War/EU Labour, but those fags will jump on the tories in a Nano second if they fear a tory win.

Tories aint stupid, they got f***ed by the miners in the 70's so they waited till the oppertunity came to deal with em. ditto the BBC, it will get its comuppance, they just aint going to sing about it and there not going to give the bastards the oppertunity.


If the lefties here want Clarke thats a good enough reason to dump him. He wont make the final. FACT.

 

[Barnet Seagull]

As far as I'm concerned, if the Conservatives want to win, it's got to be David Cameron.

 

[Grendel]

Not true, In 97 there was virtually no real swing to labour(As a percentage of all voters), just millions of tories who didn't vote. As well as those that went to UKIP.


Your still talking crap I see Enema.

Labour were 8.81% up, the Conservatives 11.24% down compared to 1992. The Conservatives lost about 3.5 million votes and the Lib Dems about a million while Labour gained around 2 million. About 2.5 million of the lost Conservative votes could be put down to a turnout 7% down on 1992. Assuming (unrealistically) that every one of those 7% would have voted Conservative, and every lost Lib Dem voter put a cross by Labour, Labour still gained 1 million votes from the Tories.

Of course, this didn't happen and there was a swing of 10% away from the Tories. Which is actually quite large.

 

[Hatterlovesbrighton]

Ken and Cameron dream ticket. I see myself as a natural tory voter but haven't done so in the 3 elections i've been eligible for the vote. I'd vote for Ken next time and I'd like to think that cameron would be a good guy to take over the reins.

All academic really. The blue rinse brigade will vote for davis and we'll be doing this all over again in 4 years time.

 

[looney]

About 2.5 million of the lost Conservative votes could be put down to a turnout 7% down on 1992.

In 97 there was virtually no real swing to labour(As a percentage of all voters), just millions of tories who didn't vote

Spot the difference.............................

 

[Dandyman]

Yea I'm sure the tories will elect a leader that will be deeply divisive, I know parties dont "split" any more since the commies at the BBC reclasified "Decent" in New/OLD Pro/anti War/EU Labour, but those fags will jump on the tories in a Nano second if they fear a tory win.

Tories aint stupid, they got f***ed by the miners in the 70's so they waited till the oppertunity came to deal with em. ditto the BBC, it will get its comuppance, they just aint going to sing about it and there not going to give the bastards the oppertunity.


If the lefties here want Clarke thats a good enough reason to dump him. He wont make the final. FACT.

Hard to see how any Tory leader could fail to be divisive given the major fault line running through the Tory Party on Europe, let along between the social liberals and the bulk of the party members who still have not got over decriminalising homosexuality.

At the last election the Tories won another 33 seats at a time when Labour were deeply unpopular with their core vote. To win power they need to win an additional 126 seats. I find it very ahrd to see them doing that in one elction.

 

[Hatterlovesbrighton]

Yea I'm sure the tories will elect a leader that will be deeply divisive, I know parties dont "split" any more since the commies at the BBC reclasified "Decent" in New/OLD Pro/anti War/EU Labour, but those fags will jump on the tories in a Nano second if they fear a tory win.

Tories aint stupid, they got f***ed by the miners in the 70's so they waited till the oppertunity came to deal with em. ditto the BBC, it will get its comuppance, they just aint going to sing about it and there not going to give the bastards the oppertunity.


If the lefties here want Clarke thats a good enough reason to dump him. He wont make the final. FACT.

Tony Blair was divisive (remember Clause 4!!) and look what happened.

 

[enigma]

So Looney, you think the answer is for the Tories to go further right?