“A humiliating setback for the Conservative leader” (updated)
Written by Mark Pack on 18th April 2007 – 8:38 pmThat’s the verdict of the FT on David Cameron’s idea of asking the Liberal Democrats if he could stand a joint candidate with us for London Mayor.
The Daily Mail is hardly nicer, calling it a “disaster for Cameron” whilst the Sun says “David Cameron was left red-faced”. For variety, the Evening Standard goes for Cameron being “humiliated” and quotes a Conservative saying, “the whole thing has now descended into farce. It is very embarrassing for David Cameron and shows how badly he is handling the whole contest.”
Ooops. Mind you, I guess it was a better idea than asking Jeffery Archer.
Posted in News 5 Comments »
18th April 2007 at 11:13 pm
Snzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
18th April 2007 at 11:51 pm
What it tells you is that having looked at the figures Caameron has decided we ( The Conservative Party) cannot win alone . Of course obviously the Liberal Party can`t but one assumes Liberals don`t care.
Nonetheless a shameful disaster for us . What was he thinking
19th April 2007 at 12:57 am
Well Done to Sir Menzies – I was shocked at the Conservative’s desperation.
Ed Davey’s right – more and more Londoners are turning to the party – We must give them a Liberal Choice!
The Tory effort is dead in the water – the Lib Dems have answered one coalition question and Cameron is looking more desperate by the day.
Just like many places in the North – the Conservatives are seen as unelectable – scrabbling to rescue an opportunist, vote grabbing effort. It is inconceivable that they will get over this. So well done the Lib Dems – Good Work!
Dave Hennigan
Rochdale
19th April 2007 at 7:43 am
AMERICA’S NOW DOING EVERYTHING THE COMMUNISTS DID TO THEIR PEOPLE. LOOKS LIKE THE CONSERVATIVES LOST: dinoberry.googlepages.com/home
19th April 2007 at 7:47 am
Well Done us!!!! However, Ming’s excuse of giving people a choice is a bit feeble (Tatton, Kidderminsters etc…) – we should NEVER pull out to fuel the ego of a so-called Independent or, worse, a Tory (although according to Dale, Dykes is a socialist anyhow).