Touchy Feely Tories
David Cameron:
"The big idea is not for more state cash but to encourage more voluntary and community action - the welfare society. In order to deal with social breakdown, everybody, and I mean everybody, has got their part to play."
I'm not a big fan of Cameron banging on about poverty, as I've touched on in the past, but I won't go over that ground again. But I will point out that this is an interesting way to sell your party - the implication is almost "if we win the election, then you will have to give your time to voluntary organisations designed to reduce poverty." Also, it completely forgets the other issues that affect the country, like education, terrorism, the NHS. "Social breakdown" - that nebulous, almost meaningless, term is being pushed by the Tories as far more important than how our children are educated or the fact that people have tried to drive cars filled with explosives into airports.
Ignoring the party politics and ideological concerns (and, indeed, the passion that these concerns create) if this is Cameron's big plan for the next election then it is an audacious one to say the least. He is going after the Guardian reading, Liberal Democrat supporting voter. But in doing so he may well alienate the Telegraph reading traditional Tory. It will be fascinating to see how this one pans out - after the next election we could be praising Cameron's genius at electioneering. Or sneering at the elementary mistake he made in chasing the middle ground. However from a popularity point of view I can't help but think of Hague's blunder in 2001 of fighting the election based on saving the pound - people wanted to save the pound, but it didn't matter to them enough to change their vote. For Cameron the question is not whether people care about social breakdown or not, but rather how much it matters to them.
Labels: Cameron, Conservatism
1 Comments:
My Guardian reading, LibDem supporting friends have the same attitude to Cameron as the Jihadists have to their apologists who, not coincidentally, come from the same stable: what a laugh! How can these idiots misunderstand us so deeply? My friends will not vote for Cameron for two simple reasons: (1) they are viscerally opposed to voting Conservative (much like, for instance, Simon Schama who is quoted in one of the Sunday colour supps - sorry no link - that "he could never vote Tory"), and (2) if they want touchy-feely, go-with-the-(supposed)-flow policies there are at least two other major parties out there who they can vote for and one of those is already in government.
Cameron is "audacious" all right: I would describe him as Sir Humphrey would, "courageous" ie grandstanding, ineffectual and doomed to fail.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home