Duncan Smith faces leadership vote

[DaBeeeenster]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3221105.stm

Iain Duncan Smith faces a vote of confidence in his leadership of the Conservative Party.

The declaration follows weeks of speculation about Mr Duncan Smith's future as Tory leader.

The Tory leader had called on plotters against him to either have gathered by Wednesday the 25 names they need to call for a vote of confidence or fall in line behind his leadership.

What are people's thoughts on this? Personally I cant see the Tories surviving as the main opposition party for much longer. The only credible candidate they have for leading the party is Clark, and he is staunchly pro-Euro, so he's a no-no.

Other than that who else is there? Letwin? Portillo?

[luke313]

Well, I can't see IDS staying for much longer. Didn't he say that if he got the 25 votes that he was going to leave anyway?

Grrr, hypocritical politicians

[Big RICHARD]

The Tories are knackered if they don't get rid of him. Too little confidence in him from all the Tory supporters. I personally am beginning to think that we need a revolution, so we can get a REAL democracy in, not this dictatorship we like to believe is our democracy. Why should I vote for one of 3 terrible choices? Why can't I vote for my mate Jamie, if I really thought he would be a good prime minister?

[Pezza]

You can do... provided he stands for election as your MP as a member of a decent-sized political party, and then provided that party puts him in charge!

You couldn't have a system where everyone could vote for anyone willy-nilly; you'd have a million candidates, all with about 20 votes each! And even if he did get elected, what would he be prime minister of? You'd eventually have to get to some sort of consensus on everything, people would usually vote along the same lines, and hey presto you've got yourselves a group of political parties again.

Back on topic, I think that whether IDS stays or goes will make very little difference to the next election. Labour will still win (despite the inevitable tax rises hitting us poor hard workers coming at the next budget), and I'm sure there's sufficient Tory grass-roots support in the country for the LibDems to be beaten into third place.

As for likely candidates, you've got Michael Howard, Oliver Letwin and David Davis (IDS' deputy, not the football association guy). None of whom will particularly appeal to the public, unfortunately.

[DaBeeeenster]

Originally posted by Big RICHARD
The Tories are knackered if they don't get rid of him. Too little confidence in him from all the Tory supporters. I personally am beginning to think that we need a revolution, so we can get a REAL democracy in, not this dictatorship we like to believe is our democracy. Why should I vote for one of 3 terrible choices? Why can't I vote for my mate Jamie, if I really thought he would be a good prime minister?

You can do. Just apply, pay the deposit, and away you go.

Big Richard. It does appear that you are making this statement just for the sake of argument. The UK has one of the oldest, most well established and best democracies on the planet. How would you suggest it can be bettered? Just because you feel no affiliation to any of the major political parties is not a response. You are completely free to start your own party. I think you need to read up a little on the system before you deride it as a "dictatorship".

[Saracen]

I'm not convinced that this necessarily means the end of the Tories, but I'm far from convinced that they can win the next election. I'm also of the opinion that their chances are better without IDS at the helm than they are with him there.

IF there hadn't been intense speculation of a leadership challenge and/or vote of no confidence, then maybe IDS would have been able to get away with leading the Tories into an election. But I can't help but feel that all the rumours and speculation have put paid to him being a credible leader, whether he wins tomorrow's vote or not. Even if he wins, I think he's been severely holed, and below the waterline at that.

What confidence are voters likely to have in him when, at the least, it's clear a goodly percentage of his own party's MP's haven't got any?

If the Tories are to have any chance of winning the next election, I think they need rid of IDS. The problem is ..... is there a credible alternative?

If there was an obvious replacement, I think there'd have been a revolt long ago. The only thing holding the disaffected back was the lack of alternative. As I understand it, Ken Clarke has eliminated himself from candidacy, and Portillo has said much the same on TV (in recent weeks).

I don't think the Tories can win the next election. I DO, however, still think that Labour can manage to lose it - and that would probably put the Tories in power, rather than LibDem's (IMHO).

So what's worse - a hypocritical New Labour led by President Blair, or an ineffectual and divided Tory party led by ..... erm, whoever fails to step backwards fast enough when they call for volunteers.

Portillo made an interesting point on TV a week or two ago. With the party in the state it is in at the moment, anyone accepting the leadership is probably accepting a poison chalice. Maybe that's why neither he nor Clarke are interested. Biding their time, maybe?

[DaBeeeenster]

A good point in the final paragraph there Saracen. I agree that if I was Portillo, who clearly has a good 20 years left in politics, I would not want to kill my political career by stepping forward at this point. Having said that, the problem then is that by not providing a decent and reasonable leader, the Tories face sliding into the abyss altogether. A very delicate situation.

Clark is out, for certain. His Euro stance is an immediate no-no. As I said, I dont really know who else there is.

I dont think the Tories can win the next election, but I feel (in a biased manner as I vote for them) that the LibDems are probably in the best position at this moment in time, in terms of increasing their subscriber base. They are the only party to firmly oppose unilateral action in Iraq, and I think that has done them a lot of favours.

The Tory voter base is slowly getting older (and this slowly dieing, to be perfectly frank). They need to appeal to the younger generation of voters, and I really cant see them (or any party, to be fair) doing that.

[DaBeeeenster]

Hmmm. The Groniad reckons that Michael Howard is in with a shout

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/conse...073086,00.html

Not a good idea IMHO! (Well, I'd be happy to see him win the vote as it would mean certain doom for the Tories, and I've been waiting a LONG time for that to happen )

[Kilrov]

Daily Mail reported today that Howard was 'hot' favourite to become leader.

I agree with DaBeeeenster that Clarke has no chance. I heard someone today saying that Howard was getting a bit old (62 I think), but then he's no older than many other leading politicians, and I think he'd be reasonably competant at running the party. I personally think Davis has a good chance.

On a different note I got a questionnaire from the Tories today since I've just turned 18 wanting to know 'young peoples' views, unfortuantely didnt ask about leadership