Tim Montgomerie is a bonnie fighter but his essay in this week’s magazine (Subscribe from as little as £1 a week!) is a splendid example of the pundit’s fallacy: if matters were arranged as I think they should be everything would be for the best and David Cameron would have a thumping majority. Well, maybe even if past experience suggests the kind of “Mainstream” Conservatism (has that label been ditched, yet?) Tim favours had a limited electoral appeal. That was then, however, and this is now. (It’s also fair to note that Tim accepts a good deal of the Cameron Project).
Tim complains that “The Cameroons’ mistake was to combine a moderate leader with a milk-and-water agenda”. Nevermind that milk and water might be deemed appropriate given the austerity of the age or that it’s not even obvious, given that austerity, the public – not to be confused with Tory members – have an appetite for what one might term the kind of “firewater” approach favoured by the Tory right.
Britain’s best politics newsletters
You get two free articles each week when you sign up to The Spectator’s emails.
Already a subscriber? Log in
Comments
Join the debate for just £1 a month
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for £3.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just £1 a monthAlready a subscriber? Log in