Suppose either Michael Portillo had kept his seat in 1997 and won the leadership or he had outlasted one of IDS or Clarke to get it in 2001?
Suppose either Michael Portillo had kept his seat in 1997 and won the leadership or he had outlasted one of IDS or Clarke to get it in 2001?
Depends on when the facts about his dalliances in college get leaked to The Sun. At some point someone will mention it and that would kill his leadership chances stone dead. IF he somehow overcomes this then he'd beat Clarke and SID. Can't see him winning in 2001 no matter what happens.
Portillo without the '97 defeat is not the Portillo we know today. He would be much more "righteous" in his beliefs rather than the somewhat centre-ist figure he portrays today.
More likely to lead the Tories after 1997 but less likely to challenge NuLab
True, but a more fiercely right-wing Tory party might even lose seats in 2001 (Hague achieved a net gain of just 1, remember, and one of those was that wafer-thin margin in Galloway). With that, the next leadership election is probably more open, and might go to someone like Clarke instead of IDS.
Ken Clarke was never going to be elected leader. He was a Europhile in a Eurosceptic party.
The way really to make him Leader and PM is for Major to slightly worse in 1995 leadership election against Redwood, Major withdraws after the first ballot, Portillo gets in, and beats Redwood in the 2nd ballot to become PM.
I think the Tories would do better in 1997 under him rather than Major, but he would still take them down to defeat say a 100 majority rather than 170. I think as well that in his heart of hearts he knew the party was going to lose the next election in 95 anyway, one of the reasons he didn't challenge Major and waited anyway.