Ah that word 'could' again

Politicians are inordinately fond of the word 'could' along with 'might' as they often use it to justify their political position as if it were the definite article, rather than a qualifier.
One of the reasons they do this of course is just in case at a later date someone comers along after the position they held has changed and called them a liar.
Telegraph.

Britain could lose out from trade deal if we pull out of EU, says David Cameron
Britain “would not directly benefit” from a multi-billion pound European Union trade deal with the United States if it pulled out of Europe, David Cameron has said.
Mr Cameron has pledged to give Britons a vote on whether to remain part of the EU if he is Prime Minister after the 2015 general election. The Prime Minster was questioned about new EU trade talks with the US that could be worth £11 billion to Britain, the equivalent of £384 for every household, bringing two million new jobs and “lower prices in the shops. If Britain weren’t in the EU you would not directly benefit from an EU/US trade deal because we would not be in the EU. 

 Actually we won't lose out on any trade deal, both the EU and the USA will still wish to trade with us and we won't have any problem making our own deals to the benefit of us both.
Cameron I suspect knows this, but has to pander to the EUphiles in the Conservative party who are getting very edgy about the way public sentiment is going and the fact that their scare stories no longer appear to be working.
His other problem is that most people know he agrees with such sentiments but risks a leadership challenge if he openly comes out and says such a thing. A leadership challenge I suspect both he and the EUphiles know he cannot win.
So, he has to keep neutral on the scare stories and try to keep the EUskeptics on board as well, a balancing act he's supremely unsuited too.
Still, I expect him to make the effort qualifiers and all, the taste for power is strong in him...