Time for Cameron to reflect

notoxford

I really want the Conservatives to win the next election because I'm a Labour supporter.

James T Kirk

"... because the piece of paper listing the improvements that New Labour (of which Brown is a central figure) has brought to my family's life remains blank". 41% of the electorate disgree: discuss.

I. M. Brainless

“I really want the Conservatives to win the next election because I'm a Conservative and Conservatives always support the Conservative Party, don't they?"

Nicholas Keen

...because I want a Britain that is plagued by relative decline on the global stage, unthinking materialism, personal irresponsibility, the fragmentation of families; drunkenness; drug use; societal disintegration; and a generalized fear and suspicion among neighbours to dedicate itself to competing successfully with the strongest economies in the world; to encouraging stable families; to enhancing self-respect and self-discipline among the young; to valuing obedience to the rule of the school, the law, and to traditional standards of behaviour; and to rewarding the creativity and honest endeavour that a better, more respectful society would nurture.

Fraser Nelson

James T Kirk, I fully agree that Labour's record has been lamentable - much of it due to Brown and his defective social experiments. But I was rather hoping for someone to offer a positive reason for voting Conservative...

Alex M

“I really want the Conservatives to win the next election because no party should ever be entrusted with more than three consecutive terms in office.” Hmmm, not exactly a vigorous endorsement of the Tories is it?

Og

.... because they are unlikely to be quite as bad as the current government and will do it for 99p against Labour's pound, which over five years makes a difference.

Richard, Northwich

because 5 more years of the man responsible for the destruction of pensions, massive tax hikes, incredibly wasteful spending etc will be an unmitigated disaster for the country. Why are the media seemingly in awe of this man? A worse spinner than Blair, a coward with some severe personality problems. The way you all carry on you would think we were witnessing the second coming of Jesus.

RCA

because I’d like to think that this Lib Dem pseudo agenda is exactly just that: a ruse to attract non-Conservative votes. I have no doubt in my mind that Cameron is acutely aware of the need to balance ‘core’ Conservative values with the need to look refreshed and electable. Cameron may not be perfect - no leader is, but think back to the poor showings and failed campaigns of the recent past. Like it or not, Cameron’s way is the only way unless we want to remain the party of opposition. Conservatives need to unite behind their leader, because any challenge now would wreck the party’s chances of election for a generation at least. Once elected, I’m confident that the values Conservatives hold dear to them will be addressed more than satisfactorily.

RCA

because I’d like to think that this Lib Dem pseudo agenda is exactly just that: a ruse to attract non-Conservative votes. I have no doubt in my mind that Cameron is acutely aware of the need to balance ‘core’ Conservative values with the need to look refreshed and electable. Cameron may not be perfect - no leader is, but think back to the poor showings and failed campaigns of the recent past. Like it or not, Cameron’s way is the only way unless we want to remain the party of opposition. Conservatives need to unite behind their leader, because any challenge now would wreck the party’s chances of election for a generation at least. Once elected, I’m confident that the values Conservatives hold dear to them will be addressed more than satisfactorily.

David Parker

because-- if Labour are re-elected the British Parliament will merely become an extravagant and unnecessary charade enforcing the dictats of Brussels.

Michael Huntsman

.....because it is the only way to guarantee a Referendum on Europe allowing the British people to give or to withhold their whole-hearted consent to the ending of our status as a Sovereign Nation State, which voting LibDem or UKIP will singularly fail to do.

James T Kirk

It's a fair cop, Fraser, but wasn't much of Blair's 1997 landslide simply due to the fact he wasn't leader of the Conservative Party? As it happens, though, Cameron's speeches under the overarching theme of social responsibility show a genuine understanding of how to try (at least try!) to change society for the better. That is why he should be PM. His mission carries so much more relevance and purpose than any of his three predecessors, and more than Labour's soundbite 1997 manifesto. But, the message isn't getting through - clearly. Certainly much of the media is enjoying a laugh at his expense (ITN positively has it in for him at the moment), and I wonder whether the essential re-branding has had the side-effect of clouding the content. Charles Moore's piece in the DT on Saturday was truly enlightening, because it explains how good policy can be drowned out by the ethereal Story. It would only take a shift by the BBC or the Sun to change Cameron's prospects. But I am not optimistic that any such change will take place.

Scott

One of the key reasons that the Cameron Project has slipped away in the past 3 months, is because he has failed to communicate the politics of aspiration. Thatcher achieved this by promoting home and share ownership. Blair did this by sounding and acting young, fresh, different and modern. What is Cameron offering us? Under the Conservatives you will not pay less tax; you will be encouraged to holiday in Margate or Blackpool rather than flying abroad to enjoy other cultures, food, sun etc.

Seasurfer1

because the Special Relationship between the US (United States) and GB (Great Britain) would be better off with DC (Dave Cameron) and GB (George Bush), than GB (Gordon Brown) and GB (George Bush) in Washington DC (District of Columbia, for all of US (us).

Seasurfer1

because the Special Relationship between the US (United States) and GB (Great Britain) would be better off with DC (Dave Cameron) and GB (George Bush), than GB (Gordon Brown) and GB (George Bush) in Washington DC (District of Columbia, for all of US (us).

Janice Small

because: We need to mend our broken society, improve education and stop people languishing on benefits. We have to stop sending children to third rate universities and leaving with first class loans,recognising that they need a first class education to compete with China and India whose graduate rate is phenomenal, to stop us becoming a third world economy in two generations. We need to tell teenagers that it is unacceptable to have babies on the state. Teenagers are not financially and emotionally capable of bringing up children. We have to break the 4/5th generation cycle of benefit claimants that encourages teenage parents, just because the mother, grandmother and great-grandmother chose this route - it has to stop. Boys have to be made held responsible for their actions. We should adopt the US stance on this, "one strike on the state". Other babies will be paid for but in the form of a loan that the parents will have to pay back. We have to put people to work, to work for their benefits. To tell them that it is unacceptable to claim benefits without contributing to society. We need a more robust system of assessing long term disability (the move from short term benefits to total dependancy). We need to close our porous borders and consult with industry what numbers and professions are needed to work our economy. Only once that is known and the unemployed and uneducated are put to work do we open our borders. Employers would rather have the well-spoken, educated, willing Pole than the un-educated, surly native teenager who is not prepared to work for the minimum wage. The above will start to transform our society. Then we can start with Europe, foreign affairs etc. As David Cameron said this week, it will take a generation to sort out our broken society, but this is a start.