A mixed bag

Cicero

Team Cameron needs to come out categorically (i) in favour of effective control of UK population numbers (basically restriction of net immigration), (ii) with an unambiguous declaration of withdrawal from the ever-extending political aims of the EU (and from the EPP), and (iii) with a clear commitment to reform public services and stop the government from wasting my tax-money ("Northern Wreck" being but just one example). All that and something tangible to be seen from the "anti-Westminster approach" might just keep my vote.

The Chocolate Orange Chameleon

David Cameron just doesn't have any leadership qualities, and his visionis blurred and all over the place. I cannot see people rallying to his call unless, instead of trying to demonstrate how very like New Labour they are, he draws sharp lines of differentiation. This may not be what they want in Islington, but it's what the ordinary voter is looking for. I have voted Tory all my life, but I won't be voting for them as long as Cameron is the - for want of a better term - "leader".

Anan

Haha! So Chocolate Orange and Cicero, you'll vote for bald losers like Hague and IDS, but not for the only Conservative leader in a generation who could bring the Conservatives to power? Are you actually this stupid or just insane?

The Chocolate Orange Chameleon

Anan - As it happens I have a cat called Anan and he has more intelligence in one paw than you have in the zillion hair follicles which presumably cover your entire head and face, and probably your back, given the respect you appear to have for the hirsute. What on earth does being bald have to do with having good judgement and leadership qualities? David Cameron has a weak face. He beliefs are Labour Lite. He's scared to be a real Conservative because he fears if he said anything of a truly conservative nature, he'd never get to be prime minister. He's the Hair to Blair, in fact. He has never said anything spontaneously amusing or witty during his period in public life. You're enough to make a cat laugh.

Nicholas

Anan I think their judgement is based on perception and prejudice rather than on actually listening to what he says.

The Chocolate Orange Chameleon

I see the Heir to Blair, the smooth, flabby-faced Cameron has managed to manufacture some faux outrage at what Mancroft said. (Thank God for the unelected Lords, by the way!) I recall he also manufactured some baseless outrage when he sacked Patrick Mercer (a soldier who had put his life on the line and seen action on the battlefield, as opposed to Dave whoseaction seems to be limited to jolly boating weather and wrecking other people's premises while dressed in his Bullingdon Club outfit)for a "prejudice" against black soldiers - an accusation which shocked the black soldiers previously under Mercer's command enough to speak out in his defence in public. For Dave, there's no business like show business, especially if it includes snow business, as in the photo op with those two intelligent looking huskies who were feeding him his lines in Norway. Dave's party trick of giving a speech without an autocue frankly never delivered a thrill to anyone outside Westminster Village. No other Tories gave a monkey's whether he read his speech or not. What trick is Dave going to do for an encore? Deliver his next speech hanging from a chandelier? This man is as driven obfuscation, sleight of hand and cheap tricks as the king of sleaze, Tony Blair.

Fergus Pickering

Hair? Face? There's no art To find the mind's construction in the face. The whole Bacon industry is based on the idea that Shakespeare (bald) doesn't LOOK like a poet. Anthony Eden LOOKED the part, handsome, distinguished. Ernest Bevin and Churchill were fat and ugly. Dear me. A weak face.

Cicero

Nicholas: perception, yes, and prejudice, well possibly. Do I trust what a politician says - at best I am deeply suspicious, so it is what Mr Cameron does which is likely to influence me the more. What is the point of bringing to power a group such as Team Cameron if it doesn't aim to deliver the goods I am seeking? So, cynical about its verbally communicated aspirations, I look for hard evidence of its real intentions. Anan, with respect, the comparisons you make seem of little relevance, but if I had a preference it would be for Michael Howard. My voting intentions are clouded - perhaps I shall not vote, or if I feel sufficiently infuriated by gaps in the Tory message, I could cast it for UKIP or some such.

Nick Kaplan

Chocolate Orange; I understand where you are coming from, I too used to feel the same way about Cameron and shortly after he became leader I withdrew my support from the party. However, recently I have come to realize Cameron is a genius. If you actually listen to the kind of ideas the torries are now putting forward (with the exception of Lansley) they have actual got a very sensible agenda that is more Right-Wing then Thatcher, they have just packaged it a a way that is acceptable to the electorate. For example, when Cameron says “share the proceeds of growth” this is a well packaged way of saying tax-cuts. When Cameron speaks of “social responsibility” what he means is ‘personal responsibility’ and rolling back the ‘nanny state’. He has also made promises for a huge reduction in inheritance tax which Thatcher could never have got away with. In addition, he is now talking about a voucher system in schools. This is a Conservative Party that any sensible (right-wing) person who believes in a smaller state and individual responsibility should vote for. The genius comes in where Cameron has made this appeal also to an electorate who are deeply suspicious of what Labour have told them are nasty sounding policies. Cameron has managed to drop the ‘nasty image’ whilst keeping the great content!

The Chocolate Orange Chameleon

Kaplan - I take your point, but I don't really like to have to read the runes of political messages. I want the candidate to tell me unequivocably what he stands for so I can hold him to account. If the message is too misty, he can always say, "Oh, but you misunderstood what we were saying!" Thanks, but no sale.

Anan

Ah Chocolate Orange, looks like I touched a nerve there. Are you bald also? Is that why you are so obsessed with voting for people who don't have hair? Who are unpresentable and unelectable? Because they remind you of yourself?

My my. Firstly, how can a chameleon have a pet that is about 10 times bigger than it? Anyway, if your cat is so much more intelligent than me, he must be an Einstein compared to you! So obsessed with hair... strange indeed. I think you've answered my question: you are insane.

What on Earth have you got against the only person that could bring the conservatives to power? I take it its because he's so useless that for the first time in a decade the Conservatives are finally ahead of Labour in the polls?

Judgement? HAH! Let's look at the Foetus' judgement: "the POUND, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD VOTE FOR ME AND SAVE THE POUND!!!! If you don't the day before the election Blair and Brown will convert us to Euros." Hmmm... let's work this one out together, since you have obviously got lots of hair: inside your skull. It's now 7 years later and what currency do we use? Ah yes, the Sterling Pound. And did the Conservatives win? Lemme just go and check in London. Oh wait, nevermind the news is now featuring a piece about PM Hague about the Iraq war--Wait a minute... Brown's the prime minister Orange, not Hague. What's going on you might ask? Well I'll explain in English you might just understand. Hague l-o-s-t the election, the Conservatives l-o-s-t the election.

More judgement?I know, how about when Hague thought he could coverup his baldness using a wig... Wait, no not a wig the most sensible thing, but instead - he decided to use a baseball cap! I bet that gave you a great idea eh Orange? I bet you are so enraged by my earlier comment that you in fact turned your baseball-cap back to front just to see the keyboard more clearly so you could type better!

OK time to move on to IDS and his judgement, since he's a slightly older foetus I guess he should have better judgement. What were his policies... Can't actually remember any of them! Oh yes I remember his judgement, to vote for the Iraq war and then come out like a poodle from Downing Street, deluding himself that he's some important figure, to announce that he spoke to Blair and decided to vote for the war - the only time in his life that anyone had ever wanted to listen to his ridiculous voice. Where was his judgement? Maybe your cat had it? All he did was flirt with Blair in PMQs and then sit around with a team that could never win. The less said of that embarassment the better. Thank god for the coup - Vive la revolution!

I was somewhat tempted to sit here and actually explain in a Bush-style tutorial (since you obviously can't grasp the simple fact that Dave is actually winning) why I support DaveC, but then I thought I'm not going to fall into your trap. You may watch those L'Oreal ads and for some reason that their tagline applies to you - Important announcement: You are not worth it.

If you really want to help the party the only thing you can do is change colour to blue and sit in a public place with your pet cat and remind people that blue=conservative. But I can see you through your multicoloured plastic fantastic smoke and mirrors game - you Labour supporting coward. Labour is finished, as is Red Ken, and you will never be back again. You have failed, your insurrection has failed. You lose you pathetic fool. I feel sorry for you, really. Maybe you can spend your time now shaving your cat's fur off so you can look at him and console yourself that being bald is better than not having any body hair at all! However, better to be a completely hairless cat than to have no higher brain functions!

Now don't bother replying to me because I am not going to be reading your messages.

The Chocolate Orange Chameleon

Anan who predicates his decisions about who he's going to vote for on whether they are bald or have hair, has written a stream of abuse about me, who he doesn't know at all, that I am surprised got through moderation. I think the moderator should take a closer look at personal abuse if The Speccie wants to continue to attract intelligent, literate, courteous debate.

Nicholas

Cicero: "What is the point of bringing to power a group such as Team Cameron if it doesn't aim to deliver the goods I am seeking?" Because the alternative is to leave in government a party that has had 10 years to deliver the goods and hasn't but on the other hand has done a great deal of damage to Britain. Not being prepared to vote for a party that may not deliver in preference to one that does not deliver and has not delivered seems odd logic. Without giving them the opportunity how are you ever going to know whether they can deliver? You want another 7 years of Brown and his tribe? Sheesh.

Cicero

Nicholas: Well it is my logic, odd though it may appear to you. I am not keen on just handing support to an unknown and untried clique unless there are some cogent reassurances to hand. My point is that Team Cameron has not yet convinced me of its position; it may well eventually do so. Your logic is "anything is better than Nulab, and the Tories are the only viable alternative". But I am not wedded to Team Cameron, I'm not even engaged to it, nor even to the Tory Party as a whole. I do not like the risk of falling from the pot into a fire and it is up to Team Cameron to demonstrate that no such risk exists.

Nick Kaplan

Chocolate Orange; I also wish politicians could be honest and say what they think, but unfortunately this is no longer a political reality, sadly Tony Blair and ten years of spin have killed this. I would like nothing more than for a second Thatcher to come to power on a platform of personal responsibility and rolling back the state. However the electorate is now, sadly, addicted to what I call ‘fluffy Puppy’ politics, they simply will not vote for anything unless it sounds cute and cuddly. I agree this is completely pathetic and it is the main reason why political realities cannot be stated explicitly, if you tell people the truth it doesn’t sound nice and they call you nasty. For example Blair’s minimum wage has been a disaster for youth unemployment in Britain, but explaining the economic reality of minimum wages does not appeal to the electorate who will not allow their bubble of economic illiteracy combined with feel good rhetoric to be burst. Cameron has recognized this and has cleverly found a way to disguise sensible policies that, at the last election, Labour portrayed as “Nasty” (and then incidentally went on to adopt for themselves) for example the whole “social responsibility” thing. Instead of dismissing Cameron because his message is more subtle, please listen to what he truly means, vote for him at the next election and hopefully the Tories can rescue us from the dreadful mess we are in after, by then, 13 years of Labour. The only alternative is another 5 years of Labourite disasters.

TGF UKIP

Some great posts and Orange you won game, set and match. Moderation only kicks in on this site, though, if you are beastly about politicians (never put "Gordon" and "gay" in the same sentence) and never, ever mention Richard Branson. Nowt like a bit of personal abuse to spice it up though. So far as the poll is concerned I note that this time there is no geographical breakdown which is just as well for you Tories. As I recall the last YouGov/Telegraph poll did provide one which showed that more than Dave's entire lead is concentrated in the South East. Fortunately, that means Dave can't win an election. Which brings me to the question of why I will not vote for the Cameron Tories even if that means five more years of Brown. The answer is simple - after undermining Hague, IDS and Howard, the Tory SocDem Left now have one of their own as Leader. If he were to be elected they would use his election as "proof" for decades to come that the Conservative Party can only win elections as social democrats not as conservatives. I will enthusiastically vote for a Conservative Party that makes the case for conservative (and compassionate) policies. Dave's lot are a long, long way from that though.