Conservative party

Wednesday

David Blackburn

Taking the attack to Vince

With Cable’s and Clegg’s personal ratings being so high, the trick is to play the ball not the man. Ken Clarke and George Osborne achieved that at this morning’s press conference. Clarke said: “(Nick Clegg’s father was) a very nice, very wise guy, he was a very successful City guy, but he wasn’t a flashy guy… he was a Tory. It would have been better if Nick had stuck to the political principles of his father. (Nick Clegg) must regret going into the strange wastelands of Liberal Democrat politics.” He added that whilst he agreed with “70 percent” of Vince Cable’s analysis on the financial collapse, Cable’s solutions left him

David Blackburn

The Tories need to get economical

Nick Clegg handed Gordon Brown a lifeline in one respect: the economy’s old hat compared to the Clegg frenzy. Not any more. The news that unemployment rose by 43,000 between December and February, together with yesterday’s dramatic inflation rise, has dumped the economy back onto the front pages. The Tories must keep it there; this election should be about the economy and nothing else. Obviously, these figures, which are worse than expected, lend weight to the argument that Brown’s policies impair recovery. Also, they demolish Brown’s claim that he ran up a deficit in the boom years to protect employment: unemployment is now higher than it was 16 years ago.

Tuesday

James Forsyth

What happens if this is the result?

Tonight’s YouGov poll has the Lib Dems three point ahead. They are on 34, the Tories on 31 and Labour on 26. In terms of working out what this would mean in seats, I doubt that uniform national swing is that useful. But for the sake of argument, let’s imagine that did occur. These poll numbers would leave Labour as the largest party in the Commons and the Lib Dems as the third party. One wonders what on earth happens then.   The Palace would pretty much have to summon Brown, he’s the sitting Prime Minister and would be the leader of the party with the most seats. But I

Peter Hoskin

A poster that cuts to the chase

This feels like a first for this election campaign: a poster which gets quite specific on policy – and not another party’s policy either.  It comes courtesy of the Conservatives, and, as you can see above, carries the message: “Let’s cut benefits for those who refuse work”. You can expect plenty of handwringing about whether this message is too tough, or whether it represents the Tories shifting rightwards in the aftermath of the Lib Dem surge.  But I imagine it will play well with the many voters who are frustrated at the unfairnesses and inconsistencies of the welfare system.  And it does, at the very least, present one reason to

Daniel Korski

Where is the killer poster?

Most politicos agree that a vote for Nick Clegg will likely prop up a Labour government, even if it will be led by someone else than Gordon Brown. Most voters, however, may not realise this. So what the Tories need is a poster which shows in easy-to-understand ways, the causal link. CoffeeHousers, surely the idea of the Lib Dems propping up Labour lends itself to a number of images – if you have any ideas then either mention them below, or send them in to dblackburn @ spectator.co.uk or phoskin @ spectator.co.uk and we’ll post a selection of the best. 

Monday

James Forsyth

Clegg the politician

Every time a Conservative is asked by the media about Nick Clegg they should reply, ‘Nick Clegg’s a clever politician, a formidable opponent.’ This formulation won’t make the voters think that the Toires are being nasty about their opponent but it will remind them that Clegg is a politician which is a problem for him because so much of his popularity stems from being seen as not just another politician. This, obviously, isn’t the whole answer to stopping and then reversing the surge in Lib Dem support. But it would be of use and, to borrow a phrase, in the current situation every little helps.

James Forsyth James Forsyth

The growing sense that the worst is behind the Tories

These have been a grim few days for the Conservative party. But there is a sense, just a sense mind, that the worst might be behind them. Today’s ICM poll shows the Lib Dems still surging, up 3 to 30, but Tory support is only down one from Sunday’s ICM poll to 33. Labour is in third on 28, down one. Obviously, these polls numbers would have been considered pretty darn awful a week ago and no one would pretend that they are what the Tories would like to see right now. But they are not as bad as some feared they might be and as Julian Glover writes, “the

David Blackburn

Where will Clegg meet his Waterloo?

The FT’s Jim Pickard writes: ‘Cameron will be cursing the order of the debates. He’d much prefer to be attacking Nick Clegg on domestic issues than foreign affairs on Thursday.’ I’m not so sure. Foreign Policy is the arena where the Tories are concrete, populist and accessible. The same is not true for the Lib Dems. Along with Iain Martin and John Rentoul, Pete noted that Ed Davey is vague on the Lib Dem Trident replacement policy. Davey’s vague with good reason: the policy is hopelessly confused. The manifesto says: ‘Rule out the like-for-like replacement of the Trident nuclear weapons system. At a cost of £100 billion over a lifetime

Peter Hoskin

Cameron’s two-pronged counterattack

A freewheeling, shirt-sleeve kind of speech from Cameron in Kennington this morning. But not one that was without substance. His main purpose was, as he put it, to “redouble the positive” – which meant more about the Big Society. Cameron has fashioned a persuasive narrative out of this, but question marks still remain over whether it will mean much to voters who just want CHANGE, without the nuance and jargon. As I suggested earlier, this is perhaps the biggest question hanging over the election campaign right now. The other part to Cameron’s speech was a warning about a hung parliament. Or as he put it: “If we get any other

Peter Hoskin

Can the Tories turn things from personality to policy?

If the Lib Dem surge shows anything, then it’s the growing power of personality politics in this country.  A few days ago, they’re languishing in third place with around 20 percent of the vote.  One dose of TV razzmatazz later, and they’re topping the polls on over 30 percent.  Yes, even though I admire much of what Nick Clegg has done with his party, there’s little doubt that all this has been catalysed by simply putting him in front of the cameras.  Like someone with an okay singing voice reaching the X-Factor final, the Lib Dem leader triumphed in what was essentially a clash of personalities. Further evidence for this

Sunday

Peter Hoskin

YouGov have the Lib Dems on top

Tonight’s YouGov tracker has the Lib Dems on 33 percent (up 4), the Tories on 32 percent (down 1) and Labour on 26 percent (down 4).  So the topsy-turviness continues – but for how long?

Daniel Korski

Overseas aid could be a Tory winner in Con-Lib fights

As the Conservatives start looking at areas where the Liberal Democrats are weak, or where differences can be drawn between the parties, they are honing in on international development. In the Independent on Sunday, David Cameron and anti-poverty star Jeffrey Sachs lay out the party’s plans if they win power. It includes a commitment to spending 0.7 of GDP on overseas aid, an emphasis “on greater transparency, ensuring the money reaches the people who need it most” and “action on women” as a conduit to development. The op-ed is clearly inspired by the work of Tory aid spokesman, Andrew Mitchell, who has written a piece for ConservativeHome this evening. The

James Forsyth James Forsyth

How Cameron can stem the Lib Dem tide

If the Tories are to beat back this Lib Dem surge, there are three things they need to do. First, they need to establish Cameron as the insurgent, anti-establishment candidate. It might seem odd to urge the leader of the Conservative party to be the anti-establishment cadidate, but the establishment in this country is now essentially soft-left. Just look at how senior police chiefs are threatenting to resign over Cameron’s plans for elected police commissioners who would be accountable to the public and set the priorities of the local force (another transformative Tory policy that Cameron didn’t mention during the debate) Cameron needs to run against these people. He should

Fraser Nelson Fraser Nelson

Cameron has a policy agenda to change Britain – he should tell us about it

Cameron has not, alas, broken free of the never-ending opinion poll bungee jump which is the story of his leadership of the Conservative Party. Cleggmania is a bubble – but the thing about bubbles is that one can never quite tell when they will burst. The Tories, who have lost the most votes due to this bubble, will have their needles out. But in my News of the World column today I suggest they focus on policy because they do have hard ideas that could radically change Britain. Cameron missed a trick by failing to mention his single best policy, Gove’s school reform, last week.  On immigration, his plan for reducing it

James Forsyth James Forsyth

Brown’s mindset on full display

Labour high command will be very satisfied with Brown’s performance on Marr this morning. There was far less of the tetchiness that we usually see from Brown in interviews and by being invited to talk about the ash cloud and the government’s response to it at the beginning, Brown was able to assume some of the aura of his office as Prime Minister. The interview saw the debut of Brown’s latest rewriting of history. Apparently he has always been for bringing in the liberals (exact quote to follow when the BBC release the transcript) and a ‘progressive consensus’. This will come as a shock to anyone who has read Paddy

Peter Hoskin

Mandelson contra Cameron

So far as the Tories are concerned, Peter Mandelson is the political equivalent of an itch that you can’t scratch: irritating, elusive and impossible to ignore.  And he’s at it again today, with an article in the Independent on Sunday chiding the Tories’ over their Big Society agenda.   It’s not the “agenda of abandoment” attack that Mandelson made a few days ago.  But, rather, a return to the “cross-dressing” territory of last year.  As Mandelson puts it, “[Cameron’s] tightly knit group of associates has simply pinched a few ideas from our campaign manual, rather than fundamentally reforming the party to make it fit for office.”  And he even tries

Saturday

Peter Hoskin

Responding to the Lib Dem surge

We’ve had the insta-polls and that eyectaching YouGov poll, and now we get the political reaction to Thursday’s TV debate.  Interviewed in the Times, Alan Johnson plays up what Labour and the Lib Dems have “in common,” and opens the door on a potential coalition.  While, in the Telegraph, David Cameron sets about Lib Dems policies – attacking, for instance, the “flimsy backing” to their plan for making the first £10,000 of income tax-free These different responses to the Lib Dem surge are stiking, if predictable.  Labour see Clegg as an opportunity: an opportunity to whitewash Brown’s mechanical performance in the TV debate, and to keep the Tories out of

Friday

David Blackburn

A gentle fightback

The consensus is that David Cameron made a mess of last night’s TV debate. And whilst he wasn’t bad, he certainly wasn’t good, especially to watch. In a post over at Cappuccino Culture, I make the point that Cameron was the most static and soulless feature of a static and soulless piece of television. Undoubtedly the Tories’ greatest presentational asset, his subdued performance is inexplicable. Whilst there is no cause for panic the Tories are rightly trying to regain the initiative. Gary Barlow’s appearance with Cameron at a school this morning didn’t relight Dave’s, or anyone else’s, fire. But Paul Waugh reports that the Tories are beginning to point out

Peter Hoskin

So what’s changed?

The question is: how much has really changed after last night?  And the answer is hard to pin down.  There are the plastic, surface changes, of course.  Nick Clegg may now be recognised by more that one-third of the nation.  His party will probably come under greater scrutiny from the media and his opponents.  And the leaders’ debate is here to stay; a defining feature of this election which will become a standard feature of future contests. But what about deeper change?  Well, I can understand the argument – made punchily by Gideon Rachman here – that this will increase the likelihood of a hung Parliament.  That’s probably true.  But