No Tory majority since 1992


In 1992 John Major won 14 million votes and 41.9% of the vote. Conservatives haven’t come close since. For twenty years the party has struggled to win more than a third of the popular vote.

February 1974 37.2%
October 1974 39.2%


It’s been forty years since a Prime Minister won a bigger share of the vote after first being elected. And then Harold Wilson, in 1974, only added 2%. Conservatives need something like an extra 5%.

Unpopular George Osborne is making more cuts than Margaret Thatcher


Conservatives will be looking to increase their vote after making deeper spending cuts than anything Margaret Thatcher ever managed. The cuts won’t be finished either. They’ll continue well into the next parliament.

Grassroots membership down to about 150,000 plus Readership of centre right newspapers at record lows


The Conservative Party’s infrastructure is weak and that includes a hugely depleted grassroots membership and a less powerful and less loyal centre right press. If The Sun (Telegraph, Mail and Express) ever did win it for the Conservatives, it probably won’t ever win it for them again.

Tory support lower in the North today that in Margaret Thatcher's days


Scotland is almost a no-go area for Tories. The idea that the Tory brand is toxic is spreading south of Hadrian’s Wall into significant parts of northern England. Conservatives are weaker in the North of England than in Margaret Thatcher’s day and, of course, much weaker in Scotland. They are third-placed in many urban Northern seats, a long way from recovery.

In the 1980s the Left-wing vote was split. Under today's Coalition the Right is splitting between Tories and UKIP.


Compared to Margaret Thatcher’s time when the Right was united and the Left divided, the Coalition has reversed things. The Left is currently united in the Labour column while the Tory vote is leaking to UKIP.

Cameron wins 36% of the vote and falls 20 short of a majority. Blair gets 35% and wins a 66 seat majority.


Blair could win a 66 seat majority with 35% of the vote while Cameron fell twenty short with 36% of the vote. The failure of the boundary review means that none of this disadvantage will be ameliorated. Conservatives are now 20 seats further away from the finishing line than if the boundary review had passed.

Capitalism in crisis (and we're the party of capitalism)


Faith in free market economics has been badly shaken by the great crash of 2008. People have grave questions over the capitalist system with which Conservatives are most associated.

The decline, fall and ebb of the two party system


The two party system and party loyalty are in long-term decline, suggesting hung parliaments and coalitions may be more frequent features of UK election results. The headwind facing the two party system is strong and getting stronger.

The Liberal Democrats are laking the credit for all the compassionate things the Coalition does


Coalition is limiting Cameron’s ability to take credit for the new priorities of his modern, compassionate Conservatism. Commitments to the basic state pension, inner city schooling and the NHS budget, for example, are being credited to the Liberal Democrats by large numbers of floating voters.

Voters don't believe Tory modernisation was real


Cameron is not seen to have kept faith with his early modernising commitments on the organisation of the NHS, combating climate change and promoting women ministers.

What if Labour changed leader?


Labour look beatable so long as Ed Miliband is their leader but what if they change leader to someone more prime ministerial and who represents a real break with the Brown/Blair years? A change is unlikely but it’s a bet rather than a strategy to place too much hope in Miliband’s survival.

Lib Dems likely to choose Labour in event of another hung parliament


Most Lib Dem activists describe themselves as Left-wing and in order to maintain the idea of equi-distance between the Conservatives and Labour it is very likely that they will want a Lib/Lab pact in the event of another hung parliament.

Setting out the mountain to climb

If the Conservative Party could have designed an opponent it would probably have come up with something that looks an awful lot like the Labour Party led by Ed Miliband.

Whenever they hold focus groups on their opponents, Tory strategists return with broad smiles across their faces. Two years after the trade unions chose him as the successor to Gordon Brown, there has been no statistically significant increase in the small percentage of voters who think Mr Miliband has prime ministerial qualities. Just 3% think he is charismatic. 4% say that he’s a natural leader. 5% agree that he’s strong. It will take a political earthquake to substantially alter these numbers and last week’s ‘one nation Labour’ speech by Mr Miliband, while impressive, was not a game-changer.

And it’s not just Mr Miliband who encourages the Conservatives. The Conservatives pinch themselves whenever they think of the yesteryear quality of the Shadow Cabinet and of Labour’s failure to detoxify its economic reputation. After it lost the last election — winning, it should not be forgotten, an even smaller percentage of the vote than was gleaned by the Tories in their landslide defeat of 1997 — it was imperative that Labour broke free from its association with debt, waste and taxes. Nothing better illustrates its failure to achieve this than the fact that Ed Balls — Gordon Brown’s leading economic adviser throughout the boom-to-bust years — is back in charge of Labour’s economic brief.

The Tories would be very foolish however to rely on Labour weakness to win the next election. It would be a bet rather than a strategy. The Tories have struggled to win a third of the national vote at four successive general elections. There is something fundamentally wrong with the Tory brand. For all of the reasons set out below the next election is going to be difficult for the party to win. Small steps are not an option. Bold changes are required if the party is to win a majority.