BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Where do the Tories go From Here?

 
  

Page: (1)2

 
 
Our Lady of The Two Towers
10:13 / 29.10.03
By 7:00 pm tonight the current leader, Iain Duncan Smith will have lost a no-confidence vote of MPs or he will have won. But even if by some fluke he were to win (as most of the MPs didn't vote for him in the last leadership election) it doesn't seem likely that will stop the mutterers from saying that he's not up to the job.

So, wither the Conservative Party? Can it survive, as Labour seem to have stolen all the polcies that were in any way morally defensible (as well as many more that aren't?) For the last twenty years the Tory party has done little more than simple retrenchment amongst it's core voters, assuming that the core voters consist of most of the country.

Would it be best for the Tory party to die, to free it's constituents to join single minded groups like the UK Independence party, allow New Labour to become the conservative party it is and have the battleground be between Labour on the right and the Lib Dems on the left?

What would 'New Conservatives' look like?
 
 
Quantum
10:30 / 29.10.03
Let it die. Most hardcore Cons are older, so as their support dies off maybe we'll finally be rid of them. It's a shame a respectable political party can become such a laughing stock, but Thatcher was the equivalent of Bubonic plague for them, anyone who grew up in Thatcher's Britain will never vote Tory, even when the Blaire Bitch Project is the option.
I think the Lib Dems would make an excellent Left opposition, and would encourage everyone to vote for them (despite their failings)
 
 
Tryphena Absent
12:47 / 29.10.03
anyone who grew up in Thatcher's Britain will never vote Tory

Well that's not true. I spent my adolescence in Hertfordshire and I can tell you that most of the 18 to 30 year olds there vote conservative or not at all. I was the only left winger in an extremely tory area and it was appalling.

I think the conservatives will be absolutely fine if they can form themselves in to a centre right cohesive party again. Basically Labour is beginning to show signs of wear and tear and they simply have to be more stable and appealing than them. Howard, Clarke or Portillo would be quite capable of strong leadership and bully tactics to the point where it would start to work again but they have to get round to the point where the party elects someone like that. Frankly I don't think that's going to happen until Maggie's dead because they're still too busy feeling her effect. If IDS goes they'll probably get yet another miserable no hoper as leader of the opposition... that doesn't mean they're never going to recover.
 
 
Mourne Kransky
16:06 / 29.10.03
I like Quantum's scenario. I think giving the Liberals a chance would be healthy - it has been in the Scottish parliament. But the Tories, fun though it will be watching them wither further, will eventually find their core group of New Conservative Mandelson, Blair, Brown, whatever, and come up with a few big ideas for a time we haven't arrived at yet. The pendulum will swing but not for another decade or so, perhaps.

I can remember an editorial in The Sunday Times, pre-Murdoch and much more the broadsheet that spoke for The Establishment in those days, predicting that Labour (under Jim Callaghan) would easily win the 1979 election and had become the natural "Party of Government".

But it didn't turn out that way. Thatcher had a fresh face and charisma, much as we unreconstructed lefties might have recoiled from it ourselves, and she conjured rabbits out of hats that other politicos couldn't match: selling council houses, facing down the Unions, fighting a real live war over a colonial possession. That all appealed to a big enough demographic to keep her in power for nearly twelve years and, even when she'd gone, to cough up the Major Years, like the death rattle of a consumptive.

She took Milton Friedman and Monetarism and milked it, pragmatically, just as New Labour would then sweep in, barking about a "Third Way".

There is no way the Tories can pull this one around in the short term and squabbling over IDS, who is pathetic but neither here nor there in the grand scheme of things, is just like Labour eviscerating itself in the early 80's. Michael Howard? David Davies? Don't be daft. Placemen. Dull men. And Howard's slavic pronunciation of the letter "L" is irritating. Portillo will be back eventually, or some other young turk with a smile and the common touch and a "new idea" or two that will connect with the great unwashed, who think very differently from the majority of Barbelites. By which time, Labour will have been in power for so long, nothing will save them. It will be time for a change.

I liked Mark Lawson's recent article in the Guardian, expounding the theory of "Narrative Politics". He or she who can give us a Hollywood ending will win in modern political contests. He was suggesting, entertainingly, in G2 that Boris Johnson would be the best choice for next Tory leader, to keep the public interested in them sufficiently that they will have a chance at power when their next Messiah comes to deliver them.
 
 
Ganesh
17:00 / 29.10.03
Na na na na.

Na na na na.

Hey heyyy.

Goo-oodbye.
 
 
sleazenation
18:05 / 29.10.03
And the parlimentary party seems anxious to avoid a devisive leadership campaign by uniting behind a new leader - thus alienating grass roots conservatives who will be left without a say in the leadership of their own party.

The Tories really are like paraplegic looking for extra limbs to shoot themselves in.
 
 
Not Here Still
19:16 / 29.10.03
For fuck's sake, what a bunch of total incompetents.

The Labour party is probably at its weakest since 1997; the war in Iraq and its attitude towards issues such as private finance for those on the Left; the hysteria over asylum whipped up by the right wing press; and problems with public services, law and order, and the furore over the Hutton Inquiry and the death of David Kelly have left it weakened further than it has been since it came to power.

Not exactly an open goal, and maybe one which the Lib Dems will fare better at attacking, but if I were a Tory supporter I would be a touch angry tonight.

Fight Labour, or each other? It seems fairly obvious what the Tories in Parliament want to do... I'll wager if this hadn't been a secret ballot, few MPs would have had the guts to face up to the blue rinse brigade in their constituencies - but as it was, grubby little deals will be being struck throughout the next few days instead.

"Something of the night," as Widdecombe once claimed, never seemed so right about Howard. An undead leader for a party that seems increasingly zombified - but will, as some have noted, rise again.

Boris for Tory leader, Charles Kennedy for Prime Minsiter come next election, eh? I reckon one of those has a chance of happening, you know....
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
19:50 / 29.10.03
I must say, I find myself torn on this one. I hate the Tories, and all that they stand for, but at the same time wish they wouldn't keep making themselves such a fucking joke, cos until Kennedy sorts his shit out there is NO opposition, and Mr Tony can do what the fuck he wants without having to actually care about the electorate too much.

I don't know why they haven't already got Boris Johnson or Kenneth Clarke leading them... although I think Mr Tony himself would probably make the ideal Tory leader, if he could only rid himself of this bizarre syndrome he has which makes him think he's somehow on the left...
 
 
Mourne Kransky
19:52 / 29.10.03
The most galling thing is that, whether or not they ever form a government again, they should be doing a proper job of opposition at the moment and they're all too busy squeezing their heads up their arses. There's so much Labour has fucked up in the past while and all this ridiculous infighting (like a few moribund old vultures pecking over the carcass of sheep long dead of scrapie) is letting Blair of the hook when he should be being hounded mercilessly over the fiasco in Iraq, tuition fees, the new mental health bill, and so on and so forth.

A few of his own troops have turned on him but, in the way of these things, backbenchers waiting for preferment are less likely to throw well-aimed darts than an effective opposition doing its job. The Tories are all too busy stabbing each other in the back to capitalise on the aftermath of Hutton and Robin Cook's disclosures.

Charlie Kennedy needs to give his pipes a skirl and lead the charge.
 
 
Mourne Kransky
19:59 / 29.10.03
Stoatie is a Betazoid and obviously beamed those thoughts into my mind and made me post the same argument at the same time. Or else we might both be right.

Kenneth Clarke is too pro-Europe, I think, ever to win the vote in the Tory party at large (the foam-flecked denizens of the shires who're still more upset about foxhunting than Iraq). He seems to have all the necessary prerequisites in terms of public speaking and leadership /management to do the job but he does always wear brown shoes. Bad sign, brown shoes. His jazz programmes are not at all bad, on Radio 4 though.
 
 
■
20:40 / 29.10.03
I'll tell you where we go from here.
We go where just about every European country has gone recently. In goes Michael Howard and in 18 months time we take a big step to the right.
Please can we campaign on every TV poll that comes out between now and the next election to get the Paxman "Did you threaten to overrule him?" interview voted the funniest/scariest/most-Abba-est TV broadcast ever. It will then be repeated lots, as people need to se this slimy little shite in all his glory.
 
 
Not Here Still
20:45 / 29.10.03
And who cares if he sells ciggies to kids and invests in very dodgy regimes, eh? (allegedly (cough))

Of course, if he becomes leader, he quits or so he said last time...

Howard is a shoe-in, I'd say, but the Tories' won't get elected with him as leader in 18 months...

There is a chance Kennedy will get it together and become a credible opposition leader, even PM; a large part of the Labour vote, at least among people I know, seems to be switching more towards wee Chaz. Not scientific in any way, I know, but I have a feeling in my whisky and water about a swing towards the Lib Dems...
 
 
Not Here Still
20:47 / 29.10.03
Just to clarify; Clarke is the tobacco-pushing scumfuck; Howard's just a big scumfuck...
 
 
Colonel Kadmon
23:12 / 29.10.03
Howard is getting to lead them because he's a link with the Thatcher years, which was the last time that it was cool to be Tory. They know that they're fucked, that's why they're harking back to history.

They have no policies, nor any charismatic figures to rally around - that leaves the party members as their only identity. And who would want to have 'aging capitalist' as their identity? No, the Tories are fucked, at least for a while. And don't forget that the Liberals and the Tories were the two-party system for a long time - it's Labour who are the wippersnappers, not the Lib-Dems! It's their turn, perhaps...

Changing leader again is the worst thing they could do. Their identity is bases on authority, rule and tradition.

Also, as a Scot, it should be academic - we've had one tory MP in the last 8 years - that's less than England has had BNP. Still, if you guys vote for them, we're stuck with it, eh?!
 
 
Colonel Kadmon
23:14 / 29.10.03
PS - Boris for leader!
 
 
■
05:22 / 30.10.03
Anyone who works in the press should always remember that whenever Howard tries to get tough on refugees to refer to him as "Michael Howard, whose father was granted asylum in the 40's".
 
 
Ganesh
07:51 / 30.10.03
An anonymous MP quoted in this morning's Guardian said "One coffin out, one coffin in". Full of his native soil, one supposes.
 
 
illmatic
09:15 / 30.10.03
Saddened by this, because as a few other people have said above we really need a credible opposition. In a sense, I think it has to come from the Left ie. Kennedy, as the Tories will never deign to attack the core New Labour issues which are deeply unpopular - PFI, Iraq, tuition fees. What is the real difference here between Labour and the Tories?

I think the British people (not Barbeloids)are conservatives with a small "c", in a sense, and the essence of the New Labour project was to steal these votes, what was essentially the Tories core constiuency by appearing safe for middle England and big business. The Tories have got a huge job on their hands to win these back over, which they only will do if they appear credible again. This whole fiasco makes that seem pretty distant. As someone said in the Guardian, "if the answer is "Michael Howard" you have to look very closely at the question" ". I think the most likely scenario is as Xoc said, growing unpopularity and staleness for Labour over a few years, then a swing back to the Tories, if they manage to get their act together. Possibly Labour will avoid this by installing Gordon Brown - I think he's trying to generate a different political identity for himself already to seperate himself form the New Labour project and it's unpopularity - ie his recent "best when we were Labour" speech. What's people's opinions on GB, by the way - secret socialist or just another slimey, lying, git?
 
 
Quantum
09:36 / 30.10.03
Secret socialist, and gradually easing his way towards a PR coup. When the Blair Bitch Project collapses, Old Labour will probably rise again and he'll be best placed to take the reins with feigned reluctance. Probably as an opposition leader against Kennedy, hah hah haha hah!
 
 
Lurid Archive
09:49 / 30.10.03
Well, at least Howard is not an incompetent politician in the way that IDS is. He will get some media attention, motivate core Tories and score the odd victory over Blair at PMQs. Having said that, you can't imagine him having wide appeal.

More importantly, I think he won't really be able to be very effective as an opposition leader. I think I disagree with Illmatic here, in the sense that I think Blair can be effectively criticised from the right, as he has been fairly inept at introducing right wing reforms (markets, part privatisations, PFI etc). But if you ever watch Blair speak, he is actually quite good and convincing if attacked from a position that is *significantly* to the right of him. In that sense, Howard will not work well.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
09:54 / 30.10.03
Oh really, I'm so confused by you people. IDS was never going to be the leader of a party that could oppose Blair's government. The sense that I'm getting is that you all believe that the Tory party under his power could acheive anything and that simply was not going to happen. Good for them for throwing him out, at least Howard has the ability to attack and can stand up for himself, he's a man with political timing and that's precisely what an opposition party needs. You can whine about him all you like but he's a good, old fashioned Tory and that's better than IDS who was just... unremarkable. At least you know where you are with Michael Howard (in fascist land but where's the difference).

Brown has happily supported New Labour and his leadership, should it ever happen, will be as leader of New Labour. He's no more a socialist than Blair and he's not a decent person, he's sacrificed his political ideals to the altar of middle class conservatism and frankly if you put your faith in him you will be disappointed. He's supported and backed up the evil treatment of the firefighters, he'll do the same with the postal workers. He's thrown full support behind an illegal war, he's reallocated funds for African relief to Iraq. I don't want Brown, I don't want Blair, I don't want the Tories, I don't want the Liberal Democrats who only come forward at the last moment. No one is better than anyone else and I'm through pretending that they are. I've voted Tory for the entire time that I've been voting and I've ticked two different boxes. Screw them all! I'm spoiling ballot papers until I see some socialism in this country, I'd rather have Kenneth Clarke than any of them and let's not go in to how much that worries me.
 
 
illmatic
09:56 / 30.10.03
I think Blair can be effectively criticised from the right, as he has been fairly inept at introducing right wing reforms (markets, part privatisations, PFI etc)

Very interesting, Lurid, I'd not considered that - I suppose most of th critques I've read of Blair are from the Left so I'm not really aware of this kind of commentary. Have you got any more info - links, names of prominent critics etc?
 
 
illmatic
10:02 / 30.10.03
He's thrown full support behind an illegal war.

I agree with most of your points about Brown, Anna - or rather I expect to agree, as any optimism projected onto Brown, especially from my perspective will be proved wrong, but I don't know about the war - I think Brown has kept a relatively "low profile" with regard to this, well, as low as anyone in his position can keep, I think he's happy that it's seen as Blair's war - not that he would have done any different if the chips were down.

And while I wouldn't want Clarke as PM, I would be happy if he were to lead the Tories - he could give Tone a bit of a slap, I think. And when you start rooting for Ken Clarke, these really are the last days.
 
 
Mourne Kransky
11:25 / 30.10.03
Michael Bleeding Howard. How desperate must the poor, languishing Tories be?

Humorous moment on Newsnight last night when Tory woman was asked by Jeremy Paxman "But what about Howard's Transylvanian heritage?"

Missing the point, Tory woman replies, "I don't see where his family came from as being of any relevance..."

"Something of the night about him," mutters Paxo, sprinkling holy water and biting on a garlic clove.

Hehe. Good for a laugh these days, the Tories, and not much else.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
12:28 / 30.10.03
And when you start rooting for Ken Clarke, these really are the last days.

Anti-war, pro-Europe. These are the last days. New political party please!
 
 
DaveBCooper
13:53 / 30.10.03
I can’t help but think it looks like a move to emulate Labour’s return to electability over the last 20 years or so.. but in reverse :

Harmless, vaguely likable, but no real chance of being elected : Hague and IDS.. or Kinnock.

Popular with the ‘ideological core of the party’ but wildly unelectable : Howard .. or Foot.
 
 
Quantum
13:56 / 30.10.03
Like what? I back the libdems because they're the only ones with a consistent agenda for electoral reform, I'm against party politics and have conscientiously not voted at every opportunity because there's never been anyone I could bear to vote for- next time I will vote because I think it might actually make a difference, even though I don't agree with the majority of policies of any party.
 
 
DaveBCooper
14:24 / 30.10.03
Agree with you there, Quantum – ‘none of the above’ box would get me voting.

I heard it said recently that spoiled papers etc are no longer counted in the totals for UK elections – they just say the totals for the candidates (say, x and y and z) and that the total is then x+y+z. Anyone know if this is true ? Hope not, cos if it is, it draws a rather nasty and all-too-clear distinction between the idea of ‘democracy’ and that of ‘parliamentary democracy’…
 
 
Tryphena Absent
14:40 / 30.10.03
next time I will vote because I think it might actually make a difference

But what difference do you think it will make?

The Lib dems in opposition at the moment would be hopeless, every stance they take on important issues seems to be whipped up at the very last second and that means they will never answer important questions about their major (reactive) policies. They may agree reluctantly with Labour but they usually end up agreeing. Oh no more! I'm not throwing my hat in with any of those idiots until I agree with 50% of the policies.
 
 
sleazenation
15:15 / 30.10.03
and what happens if there are no parties you agree with 50%? Surely the smart move is to support the least worst party until the cease to be the least worst constantly berating them all the while to clean up their act.
 
 
Our Lady of The Two Towers
16:23 / 30.10.03
Pah, Anna DeL with her noncy 'ticking two boxes' rubbish, round our way they go to the toilet and use the ballot paper as paper, now that's spoiling the ballot.

For every person who can't be bothered to vote or who spoils her ballot paper that's a vote that's not going to help prevent the really nasty right-wingers such as the BNP get seats.

And to whoever it was that wondered why the Tories are spending so much effort fighting amongst themselves rather than Labour, someone on News 24 explained it last night: The Tories believe themselves to be the party of Government. They don't need to bother about such piddling things as what the Labour party is doing because their presence in power is just a momentary abheration, and any election now the British population are going to wake up and realise that they were wrong, and vote the Tories back in again, as is their job.
 
 
the laowai with the golden arm
16:43 / 30.10.03
The Tories will make no substantial progress until Thatcher kicks the bucket. The party is still struggling over its connection with her ideological shadow and their feelings about role in her downfall. Only after the battleaxe's demise will the Consevatives be able to reinvent themselves to recapture middle England. A gut feeling on my part, and one that will undoubtably slightly mar my celebration on the blessed day.
Speaking of creatures of the night: Michael fucking Howard! The Swansea boy has no chance of winning an election, but his experiance and ability at the dispatch box are attributes IDS sorely lacked. He could be quite useful in fulfilling a Kinnock/Smith role, recharging the party with its old sense of discipline. The plan to win hearts and votes will have to come from somebody else. However don't underestimate the Tories, like any good villian they'll be back.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
18:46 / 30.10.03
Well living in a Tory safe seat I have 1)no one to vote for 2)3 candidates to choose between (sometimes 2) and 3)no BNP. That sorts that one out.

and what happens if there are no parties you agree with 50%? Surely the smart move is to support the least worst party

That's fine until you start to believe there is no least worst party. If I was living somewhere with a BNP candidate I would tactically vote because they're extremely awful but to be honest with you I'm sick of voting and I'm not doing it anymore. I'm not voting for any of the three major parties who have about two policy differences between them. I can't vote Tory but my local MP voted against the war. In Watford the Labour MP voted for the war. See how much I don't care? I'm going to vote again when there's a socialist party to vote for... hopefully Galloway and co. will act on what they said last night and I'll shortly be leafleting for them.

Oi, you, stop stealing my Thatcher speech!
 
 
knickers
19:22 / 30.10.03
In case you haven't found it yet, Paxo pummelling Mr Howard is available online for you to watch as many times as you like.
 
 
Colonel Kadmon
00:29 / 31.10.03
Yeah! Scottish Socialist for government! They will shake shit up, garuanteed. My personal favourite was "my alligance is to the Scottish people". Okay, so they're probably as big a bunch of untrustworthy fucks as the rest of the parties, but at least they're entertaining.

(PS I'm not being sarcastic.)
 
  

Page: (1)2

 
  
Add Your Reply