|
Post by Zany on Aug 29, 2024 6:47:07 GMT
I have no interest in the Tory leadership election, and haven't even bothered to inform myself of who the contenders are. I have no vote in it anyway, and whatever two it is whittled down to, the membership will inevitably back the most right wing headbanger out of the two, which will probably make them unelectable for longer. At the moment, the contest for Tory leader looks somewhat akin to a contest to decide who will replace the captain of the Titanic after the iceberg has already been hit. And about as relevant. I have no interest for a different reason. That I see no sign that they have learned any lessons, so they are electing another washed up nothing to lead a crap party. They need to look at the party root and branch and decide where they stand politically, then elect a leader who reflects that.
|
|
|
Post by vinny on Aug 29, 2024 9:54:11 GMT
They need a Michael Howard type but young. A tough on crime no nonsense traditional Conservative with a side order of fiscal Conservatism as a bonus.
|
|
Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 2,556
|
Post by Steve on Aug 29, 2024 10:03:42 GMT
They need a Michael Howard type but young. A tough on crime no nonsense traditional Conservative with a side order of fiscal Conservatism as a bonus. That would be the unelectable Michael Howard type. Couldn't even beat post Iraq outcome Blair. IE just what Labour would love to see as a Conservative leader
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Aug 29, 2024 10:04:31 GMT
Howard was very much to the right of “traditional” conservatives. That may be where they decide they now want to be of course.
Current leading candidates are pretty uninspiring. Surprised there isn’t an unknown young buck ready to lead them forward. Wonder if the inside track is better to bide time, let the new leader fail and then be ready to be next new leader?
|
|
Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 2,556
|
Post by Steve on Aug 29, 2024 10:16:29 GMT
Howard was very much to the right of “traditional” conservatives. That may be where they decide they now want to be of course. Current leading candidates are pretty uninspiring. Surprised there isn’t an unknown young buck ready to lead them forward. Wonder if the inside track is better to bide time, let the new leader fail and then be ready to be next new leader? At only 44 I beleive they see Kemi Badenoch as that very person. IMHO she's still half baked and will regret becoming the 2020s version of William Hague who also took the role too soon and was ruthlessly played by Blair into electoral calamity in 2001.
|
|
|
Post by vinny on Aug 29, 2024 10:40:19 GMT
They need a Michael Howard type but young. A tough on crime no nonsense traditional Conservative with a side order of fiscal Conservatism as a bonus. That would be the unelectable Michael Howard type. Couldn't even beat post Iraq outcome Blair. IE just what Labour would love to see as a Conservative leader Short of a miracle, whoever is the next Tory leader will not be PM. Whoever comes after, may be. Michael Howard gained 33 seats and gave the Tories an air of professionalism again with just two years in the job (after the fiasco of the "quiet man" IDS). After him came David Cameron, a man who built on what Michael Howard had given him, and returned the Tories to office.
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Aug 29, 2024 10:44:08 GMT
I think Jenrick is roughly the same age. Cleverley, Patel and Tugendhat all early 50s. I was looking for a genuine unknown newbie to emerge as a fresh new face. All the current candidates are pretty uninspiring in truth. I do genuinely think Badenoch would be a disaster for them - lets hope she wins.....
|
|
Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 2,556
|
Post by Steve on Aug 29, 2024 11:35:44 GMT
That would be the unelectable Michael Howard type. Couldn't even beat post Iraq outcome Blair. IE just what Labour would love to see as a Conservative leader Short of a miracle, whoever is the next Tory leader will not be PM. Whoever comes after, may be. Michael Howard gained 33 seats and gave the Tories an air of professionalism again with just two years in the job (after the fiasco of the "quiet man" IDS). After him came David Cameron, a man who built on what Michael Howard had given him, and returned the Tories to office. Cameron didn't build on Howard's platform. He got to be leader and then elected (twice) by pushing back on it and taking the Tories into the 21st century. Worth reading again that game changing speech he made that won him the leadership www.theguardian.com/politics/2005/oct/04/conservatives2005.conservatives3Howard would have cut his own tongue out rather than say these words: 'I want to be able to say to the mum who's thinking, "How will I pay for Christmas?" and worrying how to get the kids to school: "Yes, we want to leave more money in your pocket, but we know the value of good public transport, too, so we'll share - that's right, we'll share - the fruits of economic growth between tax reduction and public services"; to the people living in our inner cities of all races and religions, grappling with the problems caused by family breakdown, poor housing, and low aspirations: "We know we have a shared responsibility, that we're all in this together, that there is such a thing as society; it's just not the same thing as the state."
|
|
|
Post by vinny on Aug 29, 2024 11:37:35 GMT
Howard and gave them back a sense of professionalism after the farce of Iain Duncan Smith. Without the groundwork done by Howard, Cameron would have had a harder job.
Just curious Steve, how did you vote in 2005 & 2010? Labour? Lib Dem?
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Aug 29, 2024 11:54:30 GMT
Arguably Vinny, Cameron would have had an easier job if his predecessor had espoused policies more in line with the desires of the then electorate. Anyway that is all in the past.
As someone broadly on the "right" of politics, which (and why) of the current six candidates do you think will help most in the Tories effort to eventually regain power?
|
|
Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 2,556
|
Post by Steve on Aug 29, 2024 12:01:48 GMT
Howard and gave them back a sense of professionalism after the farce of Iain Duncan Smith. Without the groundwork done by Howard, Cameron would have had a harder job.
Just curious Steve, how did you vote in 2005 & 2010? Labour? Lib Dem? Libs in 2005 and Conservative in 2010
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Aug 29, 2024 19:12:48 GMT
They need a Michael Howard type but young. A tough on crime no nonsense traditional Conservative with a side order of fiscal Conservatism as a bonus. At least back then we knew what they stood for.
|
|
|
Post by AvonCalling on Sept 4, 2024 15:30:49 GMT
They need a Michael Howard type but young. A tough on crime no nonsense traditional Conservative with a side order of fiscal Conservatism as a bonus. At least back then we knew what they stood for. Exploiting the many for the benefit of the few...preferably their donors
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Sept 4, 2024 19:36:19 GMT
At least back then we knew what they stood for. Exploiting the many for the benefit of the few...preferably their donors Solid. I have met enough rich people to know that is what they really do believe. That the poor are there to be milked and anyone being milked is a fool.
|
|
Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 2,556
|
Post by Steve on Sept 4, 2024 20:58:16 GMT
Not that you're one for stereotyping eh?
|
|