Southwark Aug 16, 2017 19:04:39 GMT
Post by jigger on Aug 16, 2017 19:04:39 GMT
While I think conservativeestimate is taking the Davidson effect down to slightly too localised a level, I don't agree that the Conservative party in England wouldn't vote for her. She's popular, politically successful and has little historical baggage. As good a chance as anyone else, and possibly a better chance than a lot of other contenders.
She's definitely popular in Scotland, but is she popular in England? And more importantly will she be popular in England if she leads the (in effect) English Conservative Party?
She isn't that politically successful. It's true that she led the Tory Party to their best result in Scotland since 1979 but they still only got 28.6% of the vote. To put that in perspective the lowest vote share the Conservative Party (in its modern incarnation) has got in England at a General election is 29.2% of the vote and that was all the way back in 1832 and the Conservative Party hasn't got less than 33% of the vote at a General election in England since 1859.
Furthermore she would have to become an MP and it would almost certainly have to be in England where it would quite clearly be carpet-bagging and could (depending on the safeness of the seat) endanger the seat. Then she would have to come in the top two of the MP ballot and be elected by the Tory party membership. That all requires everything to go unrealistically perfectly at exactly the appropriate time. Thus I think it highly unlikely that Ruth Davidson will ever become leader of the Conservative Party and certainly not until after the next general election.