Mauvais Garçon, an old colleague, exchanged e-mails with me throughout the Election campaign. He is not impressed with the result. I suggested it was not so bad before enquiring what he thought should happen and, on the 9th May, before the coalition was settled, he replied with the following polemic:
"You, as is in deed he, are in denial, this result was a disaster: at least Hague and Howard had the decency to resign following their failure to secure an election win, even though both of them managed to increase the vote and the number of seats.
This time with the aid of millions of pounds, and against the most loathed PM and discredited administration he cannot even manage to secure enough seats to form a workable government! Why is no one looking at this and calling it as it is a failure? In 1992 just over 14 million voted Tory, in 2010 just under 11 million, I am one of the missing 3.3 million, who refused to vote for this Marxist led party, and while you may feel it ludicrous to call Cameron a Marxist, just take a look at his progressive agenda and the authors of this agenda. From 1979 to 1992 the Conservative Party never polled less than 13 million votes in a General Election, then it drop off a cliff; people like me are effectively disenfranchised. This 3% vote for UKIP which, depending on your view of linking the BNP vote to UKIP, could have denied between 17 to 21 seats to the Conservatives.
So, down to what I want, I would firstly have liked the Conservative Party to say nothing and let Brown, with his much discussed constitutional right, thrash around trying to form a government, this would have been doomed to fail and even if Brown had managed to cobble up an agreement with the unprincipled LibDems, it would have ended in a complete disaster, leaving the Conservative Party untainted. Then ideally, Cameron would have been forced to leave or to accept there was a need to bring into the party those excluded for holding centre right to right wing views, ditch the nonsense of the progressive A list system, aimed to foist ethnically and sexually alternative candidates on to the constituency regardless of their wishes. [Were you helping to elect just such a candidate? PR will make this all common place].
I want to have a mainstream party to vote for, though I doubt I will ever have the opportunity again in my lifetime. Like Blair, who forced the Labour Party to give up their socialist beliefs in a craven dash for power, Cameron has tried to do the same with the Conservative Party and now places his owner personal craving for power over that of the party or the country. It is at this point I struggle with people like you, who know this but, for some reason, think it better to have this, thus altering forever, the very party they are trying to protect, than to let this nonsense run its course to oblivion?
No where in the letter from Cameron is any sign of contrition that the campaign may have been wrong! That he may need to be more inclusive of natural Tories! Not move so far left and not pander to the PC agenda.
He [Cameron] is a failure like Hague and Howard, but with much less integrity, someone so desperate to be in power that he abandons all principles to pursue this one goal.
Ideally, now Clegg will not get the backing of the grass routes and he will then get the deal on PR from the Labour Party and off they go, before there was a chance to have the referendum the government would fall, due to the financial mess we would be in by then."
My reply to Mauvais Garçon follows in my next post
"You, as is in deed he, are in denial, this result was a disaster: at least Hague and Howard had the decency to resign following their failure to secure an election win, even though both of them managed to increase the vote and the number of seats.
This time with the aid of millions of pounds, and against the most loathed PM and discredited administration he cannot even manage to secure enough seats to form a workable government! Why is no one looking at this and calling it as it is a failure? In 1992 just over 14 million voted Tory, in 2010 just under 11 million, I am one of the missing 3.3 million, who refused to vote for this Marxist led party, and while you may feel it ludicrous to call Cameron a Marxist, just take a look at his progressive agenda and the authors of this agenda. From 1979 to 1992 the Conservative Party never polled less than 13 million votes in a General Election, then it drop off a cliff; people like me are effectively disenfranchised. This 3% vote for UKIP which, depending on your view of linking the BNP vote to UKIP, could have denied between 17 to 21 seats to the Conservatives.
So, down to what I want, I would firstly have liked the Conservative Party to say nothing and let Brown, with his much discussed constitutional right, thrash around trying to form a government, this would have been doomed to fail and even if Brown had managed to cobble up an agreement with the unprincipled LibDems, it would have ended in a complete disaster, leaving the Conservative Party untainted. Then ideally, Cameron would have been forced to leave or to accept there was a need to bring into the party those excluded for holding centre right to right wing views, ditch the nonsense of the progressive A list system, aimed to foist ethnically and sexually alternative candidates on to the constituency regardless of their wishes. [Were you helping to elect just such a candidate? PR will make this all common place].
I want to have a mainstream party to vote for, though I doubt I will ever have the opportunity again in my lifetime. Like Blair, who forced the Labour Party to give up their socialist beliefs in a craven dash for power, Cameron has tried to do the same with the Conservative Party and now places his owner personal craving for power over that of the party or the country. It is at this point I struggle with people like you, who know this but, for some reason, think it better to have this, thus altering forever, the very party they are trying to protect, than to let this nonsense run its course to oblivion?
No where in the letter from Cameron is any sign of contrition that the campaign may have been wrong! That he may need to be more inclusive of natural Tories! Not move so far left and not pander to the PC agenda.
He [Cameron] is a failure like Hague and Howard, but with much less integrity, someone so desperate to be in power that he abandons all principles to pursue this one goal.
Ideally, now Clegg will not get the backing of the grass routes and he will then get the deal on PR from the Labour Party and off they go, before there was a chance to have the referendum the government would fall, due to the financial mess we would be in by then."
My reply to Mauvais Garçon follows in my next post
