[Originally posted at joeotten.blogspot.com]

I confess to being somewhat bewildered by the current behaviour of Cameron and the Tory Party. Cameron is obviously staking a claim to the centre ground, and this is a tactically sound thing to try to do. But ventures like Lib Dems for Cameron www.libdems4cameron.co.uk stretch credulity.

We keep hearing things like the party being liberal, green, in favour of redistribution, suspicious of big business. It is hard to believe that the rest of the party isn't choking on its cornflakes every morning at each new announcement.

Try not to be the nasty party, by all means. But deal with the fact that everybody who wants to be in the nasty party is in your party. Become more moderate, by all means, but it has to be plausible that you actually believe it.

It is hard to see why, if Cameron does believe the "New Tory" message, he ever joined the Conservative Party at all. The alternative is that it is what he thinks he has to say to be electable.

Sure, he might be making life a little bit difficult for Blair, Brown and Kennedy. But the Tories will not tolerate so much wetness for such meagre rewards for long. I think Cameron knows this, and he is playing another game. Cameron wants to appear as genuinely nice; genuinely caring, so that when he proposes or implements regular Tory nasty policies, it can be spun as necessary, hard choices. Cares about you and can make tough decisions, the best of both worlds, etc.


But this suggests very strongly that he is approaching the leadership like a game of chess, manipulating pieces and perceptions to gain an advantage on the board. This approach is doubtless very useful from time to time, but if it is all you do, people will see you as cynical and won't identify with your values.

I think the halo effects of youth and good looks have dazzled the conservative party into electing a visionless waffler as their leader. Getting on for twice his age, the Tory party membership somehow thinks he can identify with 'young people'. And worse, he thinks so too.

Cameron has learned from Blair to concentrate on style rather than substance, and he's astute enough to pick up on New Labour's perceived failings in the middle-ground: redistribution, environment etc. But these are clearly hollow promises; there is no conviction.
The question remains whether the electorate will fall for the hollow politics of the party brand yet again - even if the brand in question is a different one to the one they fell for last time.
These are areas where Liberal Democrats have substance and conviction in depth; where the LD brand is backed by goods of solid quality. The tragedy is that the collective leadership of the (LD) party has been unable to capitalise on them. How much more convincing would a Liberal Democrat leader be who could say the things that Cameron has been saying with his charisma...

I guess the calculation is that with Blair 1 gone, the people will vote for Blair 2. There is some expectation that Brown will be different to Blair. Perhaps he will, but I don't see it. And if Brown is much like Blair, where is Cameron's unique selling point?

There is likely to be a perception that Cameron's positioning matters to the Lib Dem's choice of leader. I don't think it does becuase I think Cameron's positioning is shallow and ephemeral. But these are interesting times.

I disagree that www.libdems4cameron.com does stretch credulity.

His point isn't to get real names, or even members to defect. Its part of the mood music which he's seeking to build up.

Its certainly got more coverage than anything Kennedy had done since the General Election (apart from resigning)

Y