Tory candidate says 'Theresa May has totally f***** it up' as Labour closes gap in the polls

Candidates campaigning for re-election say PM has 'shattered' confidence in her ability

Caroline Mortimer
Thursday 01 June 2017 08:02
Election 2017: The highlights from the BBC leaders' debate

Conservative candidates are reportedly furious with Theresa May for running a faltering election campaign which they say has “shattered” confidence in her ability as Prime Minister.

One candidate seeking re-election told the Huffington Post that if Jeremy Corbyn was not Labour leader the party would likely lose the election “and we would deserve to”.

Another candidate for reelection agreed: “It’s a completely different experience to what it was four weeks ago. It’s made my job a hell of a lot harder. It’s a completely different experience. I’m pretty f****d off.

“People on the doorstep are telling me: ‘She’s going after pensioners, she doesn’t know what she’s doing, she doesn’t answer questions on the TV.’ I’ve switched from saying ‘vote for her’ to ‘vote for me’.

“It’s hard to understand how people in London who get paid a lot of money made such a clusterf***.

“People voted for her because of what they thought she was like rather than what she is like. It’s totally shattered the confidence of the parliamentary party.

“She said she wasn’t going to call a general election, and they’ve totally f***** it up.”

However, polls show the Tories are on track to win a majority in the election on 8 June.

When Ms May first announced the early election, despite previous saying she would not, the Tories were 20 points ahead in the polls, but this lead has gradually narrowed over the course of the campaign.

One recent poll even predicted a hung parliament.

Ms May was forced into an embarrassing U-turn just days after the release of the Conservative manifesto when critics attacked her social care plans as a “dementia tax”.

Under the proposal, elderly people would be able to delay paying for their care until after their death so they could remain living in their own home.

But critics said this penalised people who had the misfortune to suffer a slow decline from illness, such as dementia, rather than dying suddenly and being able to pass on everything to their heirs.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Join our new commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies


Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in