2001 UK General Election - Ken Clarke v Tony Blair

[Huey Long is a Republican]

In the 1997 Tory Leader Election, William Hague is believed to have been the only man possible to beat noted Europhile Ken Clarke and thus, he became Leader of the Conservative Party Leader. However, initially, many believed Hague would run for Deputy Leader and Party Chair instead while Howard runs for Leader. Let's say this happens and Clarke wins on the 2nd or third round of balloting. How does the 2001/2002 election goes for the tories and labour? If Clarke decides to step down as leader after him, who replaces him and how do they do in the next election?

[brucejoel99]

The result wouldn't change a great deal from that which occurred in real life. On one hand, more infighting could turn even more voters away from voting for the Tories, & they could lose a few more seats to Labour, but not that many, seeing as they were already at rock bottom in '97 anyway. On the other, Clarke was popular with the electorate, & him leading the fight against the right of his party could very well have boosted his personal popularity even more. People would still be turned off by the infighting, but his personal popularity could see them make very small gains compared to real life, perhaps even gaining a maximum of up to 20 seats. Either way, it'd be a disappointing outcome for the Tories, & given their ruthlessness with their leaders at that time, Clarke would immediately be kicked to the curb, & would likely be replaced with somebody (at least a bit) more Eurosceptic (if not much more), like IDS, Hague, or even Portillo.

And if Clarke had indeed managed to play his cards right & avoid alienating enough people wherein he would keep Blair below 400 seats in 2001, then I think the resultant butterflies could very well pave the way for (among other outcomes) a hung parliament in 2005, to be potentially followed up by a Tory minority at the snap election (2006?) thereafter.