Inexplicable Interval
Camilla Cavendish in the Times sums up Ken’s bid in three short sentences:
Mr Clarke is a jovial bruiser. But his speech was old hat in suede shoes. He seems to think that his job is simply to take up where he left off after an inexplicable interval. It is not.Why should we support the prodigal leader?
posted by Serf @ 1:14 pm
2 comments
2 Comments:
While the title of this site makes your mission clear, you will probably have to work out who you do want.
Your attack on Ken is entirely based around his strong independence of opinion and lack of interest in clear blue water. But you have no suitable rightward candidate - I suspect you don't like any of them.
If Ken gets further, he'll drop the cigarette interest. So stop wasting time on what is hardly a Tory issue in any case.
I would contest the idea that Ken is some form of un-Tory. He just isn't a big Faith, Flag and Family man. This puts him in the one nation side, where some of the greatest Conservatives reside. Little Englanders aren't the only flavour the works.
Ken actually has done a job in real poltics. Under a real Tory too. You could create a reason to distrust him - but you maybe more convincing if you present his realistic alternative. Otherwise you are just another dead hand pulling down the sinking boat.
De. As an occasional contributor to the David Davis for Leader Blog, I know who I want.
Ken's cigarette interests do not bother me personally, although I think that the anti smoking nazis who have taken over Britain will have much to say about this issue.
Ken's only selling point is that he can win over more voters than the others. No reasons for that, just a confident statement that he will win. You don't have to be a cynic to want to ask where's the meat in all of this.
As for being a Conservative, Conservativism is about evolutionary adaptation versus Socialisms revolutionary approach. A man who wishes the end of our nation can hardly be said to fit into the former of those two camps.
Post a Comment
<< Home