Tim Montgomerie is a bonnie fighter but his essay in this week’s magazine (Subscribe from as little as £1 a week!) is a splendid example of the pundit’s fallacy: if matters were arranged as I think they should be everything would be for the best and David Cameron would have a thumping majority. Well, maybe even if past experience suggests the kind of “Mainstream” Conservatism (has that label been ditched, yet?) Tim favours had a limited electoral appeal. That was then, however, and this is now. (It’s also fair to note that Tim accepts a good deal of the Cameron Project).
Tim complains that “The Cameroons’ mistake was to combine a moderate leader with a milk-and-water agenda”. Nevermind that milk and water might be deemed appropriate given the austerity of the age or that it’s not even obvious, given that austerity, the public – not to be confused with Tory members – have an appetite for what one might term the kind of “firewater” approach favoured by the Tory right.
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in