THERE is nothing quite like a policy wobble to liven up an election campaign.

Theresa May appeared to be sailing serenely towards the victory line when an element of over-confidence or carelessness or both lurched the Conservative vessel into choppy waters.

With the polls having repeatedly given the Tories a bumper lead and even Labour stalwarts like Tom Watson and Len McCluskey all but throwing in the towel, one can imagine how Conservative HQ was brimming with braggadocio; the champagne was already on ice.

The seemingly unassailable lead no doubt encouraged the Prime Minister to believe that unlike David Cameron, who was facing the prospect of yet another hung parliament in 2015, she could be bold and even propose policies that might squeeze the Tories’ core vote: the well-heeled pensioners of Middle England.

So were conceived the plans to means-test the winter fuel payment and to cause elderly people to have to stump up more money to pay for social care.

In Halifax last week, Mrs May never mentioned a cap on paying for social care. One at £72,000, suggested by economist Andrew Dilnot, was knocked back. Jeremy Hunt, the Health Secretary, insisted one would be "unfair".

Instead the Tories proposed a £100,000 floor, meaning anyone needing care would still be able to leave a six-figure sum to their children and not have to sell their house during their lifetime.

But, of course, not having a ceiling would mean people needing care could, potentially, be faced with bills much higher than £72,000; in some cases, possibly hundreds of thousands of pounds.

Initial resentment materialised because the policy appeared in the manifesto without prior agreement by the Cabinet.

Over the weekend, Damian Green, the Work and Pensions Secretary, took to the airwaves to insist the policy was the policy and nothing would change.

But Tory HQ received the clear message from candidates, who were getting it in the ear from disgruntled punters; the words “balloon” and “lead” were mentioned.

The labelling of the Tory policy by Labour and the Lib Dems as a “dementia tax” was gaining traction.

So at the launch of the Welsh Conservatives' manifesto, the PM slipped in the key phrase “absolute limit” albeit without any detail of where the cap would be set.

Mrs May protested repeatedly that “nothing has changed”; the principle still applied and there would be consultation on the details. But no one was fooled.

After the Budget reverse-ferret, it seems the lady is for turning; unlike her iron predecessor.

With the PM’s opponents revelling in the Tory “meltdown”, her mantra of “strong and stable leadership” is now ringing rather hollow.

Yet despite the May wobble, many people still believe they want neither Jeremy Corbyn in No 10 nor his socialist revolution.

However, another Tory campaign gaffe will seriously jangle nerves at Conservative HQ and could narrow the polls even further.

That final stretch of water towards the election finishing line could turn out to be far more turbulent than any of us could have imagined.