The Tories second safest seat

**BobTheCrate** · 30 June 2006, 10:30

In Bromley UKIP managed just over 2,300 votes. So they did not contribute much at all to the Tory vote plummeting. It was due to a LibDem surge.

It is a surprising result given the LibDem polls have had Men Campbell flat lining ever since he headed them up.

By-elections invariably though, are a notoriously bad benchmark. Protest voting etc.

The chief criticism against Cameron to-date seems to be his unwillingness to publicise policy. So what ? We're only 1 year into a new Parliament. And of course if the Tories do publicise their policies too early, Blair's/Liebour's instinct is to steal them & pass them off as his own.

For me the danger is if Cameron tries to emulate Blair too much. Tries too hard to be all things to all people. If Labour are going to fall at the next GE, the public would certainly not turf them out just to opt for a Blair 'look-alike'. Least I don't think so .

ps : Knowing the LDs though - they would have concentrated every last molecule of their party resources into the Bromley by election. I doubt they'll come anywhere this close in the GE.

**malvolio** · 30 June 2006, 10:58

Loved Blears the Midget's quote on the Bromely result - "Clearly there was a move to vote anything but Tory" - which is why Labour came fourth out of four then, since clearly nobody wanted to vote NL either.

Politicians - a different breed from real people...

**premiere** · 30 June 2006, 11:07

Anyone here Lib Dem? Or Raving Looney? Or both?

Had a Lib Dem rep on my doorstep yesterday afternoon and she was a raving looney...Obviously she is confused.

**Bagpuss** · 30 June 2006, 11:23

Forget Labour we know people are sick of them...

Why are Cameron's Tories doing poorly in the second safest seat though? You'd expect a modest drop, given the time of year. But Bromley is true blue as they come and the candidate was old school. What has happened?

**hyperD** · 30 June 2006, 11:32

Basically the turnout was quite low: dropped from 65% to 40% - Wimbledon? Footie? Disillusionment at not having a traditional Tory candidate?

Still, I noticed blears went straight on the BBC Breakfast prog to quickly highlight the “disaster” of the Tories, while pretending not to talk about the devastating liebour loss from 10,241 votes last year to 1,925!

Ming had the balls to state:

"complete rejection of the Labour government".

Also from Times:

But Mr Neill used his acceptance speech to round on the Lib Dems’ campaign tactics: "A minority of candidates, principally the Liberal Democrats, have chosen to fight this campaign with the most vigorous and underhand example of cynical personal abuse that I have encountered in 30 years of politics."

He told the Lib Dems: "If you sometimes wonder why it is that people in this country are turned off by politics, get a mirror and look at yourselves."

I feel it was a protest vote about not having an old Tory in the seat and Cameron's hand picked central guy plus voter apathy.

Agree that Cameron has to be careful and not emulate bliar.

The Tories second safest seat