Stop voting for fucking Tories

[Tichtheid]

The obvious answer to this question is Jeremy Corbyn.

That doesn't really explain all the elections where Corbyn wasn't the leader of the opposition, and in fact in 2017 Corbyn was leader when Labour increased both their number of seats and percentage points of the vote.

[Hal Jordan]

It could be just possible that Reform UK might split the Tory vote, being populist not all their policies are flat-out ugly and their membership has increased lately since Rishi Sunak took over with disgruntled Tory party members leaving for them instead ( read into that what you will ). Whether that will translate into a meaningful rise in people voting for them in parliamentary elections is another matter, but they will appeal to the nostalgic Thatcherites and those who fell for the Truss/Kwarteng promises. Plus you have the twunt Farage fanboy faction. I doubt they would have such an effect as UKIP did in the past but we can hope it's enough to make a difference - but that being the case would likely mean another strong surge to the right from Tory HQ to attract the waverers and opportunists back.

The right of centre in our politics has just progressively moved ever forward in that direction, and without a major permanent split in the Tory party to truly divide support I just fear that not matter what polls say now, people will always be lured into voting for nanny because ultimately she knows best.

Reform UK are basically UKIP but with the emphasis on anti Net Zero rather than Europe.

They will poison the well and shift politics towards their supporters for at least a decade as the traditional parties scrabble for floating votes. And instead of Brexit, we get slow walking on policies needed to stop us completely fucking the environment up, and it will never be enough to please these grifters and the money backing them.

[inactionman]

The obvious answer to this question is Jeremy Corbyn.

That doesn't really explain all the elections where Corbyn wasn't the leader of the opposition, and in fact in 2017 Corbyn was leader when Labour increased both their number of seats and percentage points of the vote.

I'd not necessarily take an uptick to be to do with Corbyn, but to do with voters pissed off with the Brexit vote - the ultimate reason we had a 2107 election.

There are still issues around opposition leaders.

Gordon Brown, to put it mildly, didn't do the most inspiring job prior to the 2010 election, and that - combined with a fair bit of fatigue with New Labour - led to the hung parliament

Which leads us to Clegg backing the wrong horse in many peoples' eyes, such that the Lib Dems' votes collapsed in 2015.

In 2015 Ed Miliband was an empty suit, frankly - the bacon sarnie shouldn't have been a dealbreaker, it should have been the fact that he stabbed the competent Miliband in the back and was as inspiring as, well, an empty suit.

In 2017 Corbyn couldn't capitalise on Cameron's ousting after the slapstick of the brexit vote.

In 2019, Boris vs Corbyn. At least Boris could talk a good game. I can't say anything kinder than that.


Such a shame the Unions backed the wrong Miliband in 2015. Such a shame Clegg went with Cameron. But here we are.

[Torquemada 1420]

The obvious answer to this question is Jeremy Corbyn. Boris was deeply unpopular at the last election, just somewhat less so that Corbyn. He also promised greater stability of financial markets etc (Truss then destroyed that). Labour will win the next election comfortably with a competent leader.

You realise that Rishi had already piloted the ship to the edge of the abyss? Kwarteng & Truss simply opened the throttle and hastened the demise.

[Biffer]

The obvious answer to this question is Jeremy Corbyn.

That doesn't really explain all the elections where Corbyn wasn't the leader of the opposition, and in fact in 2017 Corbyn was leader when Labour increased both their number of seats and percentage points of the vote.

I'd not necessarily take an uptick to be to do with Corbyn, but to do with voters pissed off with the Brexit vote - the ultimate reason we had a 2107 election.

There are still issues around opposition leaders.

Gordon Brown, to put it mildly, didn't do the most inspiring job prior to the 2010 election, and that - combined with a fair bit of fatigue with New Labour - led to the hung parliament

Which leads us to Clegg backing the wrong horse in many peoples' eyes, such that the Lib Dems' votes collapsed in 2015.

In 2015 Ed Miliband was an empty suit, frankly - the bacon sarnie shouldn't have been a dealbreaker, it should have been the fact that he stabbed the competent Miliband in the back and was as inspiring as, well, an empty suit.

In 2017 Corbyn couldn't capitalise on Cameron's ousting after the slapstick of the brexit vote.

In 2019, Boris vs Corbyn. At least Boris could talk a good game. I can't say anything kinder than that.


Such a shame the Unions backed the wrong Miliband in 2015. Such a shame Clegg went with Cameron. But here we are.

I'd refer you to my second point.

[inactionman]

That doesn't really explain all the elections where Corbyn wasn't the leader of the opposition, and in fact in 2017 Corbyn was leader when Labour increased both their number of seats and percentage points of the vote.

I'd not necessarily take an uptick to be to do with Corbyn, but to do with voters pissed off with the Brexit vote - the ultimate reason we had a 2107 election.

There are still issues around opposition leaders.

Gordon Brown, to put it mildly, didn't do the most inspiring job prior to the 2010 election, and that - combined with a fair bit of fatigue with New Labour - led to the hung parliament

Which leads us to Clegg backing the wrong horse in many peoples' eyes, such that the Lib Dems' votes collapsed in 2015.

In 2015 Ed Miliband was an empty suit, frankly - the bacon sarnie shouldn't have been a dealbreaker, it should have been the fact that he stabbed the competent Miliband in the back and was as inspiring as, well, an empty suit.

In 2017 Corbyn couldn't capitalise on Cameron's ousting after the slapstick of the brexit vote.

In 2019, Boris vs Corbyn. At least Boris could talk a good game. I can't say anything kinder than that.


Such a shame the Unions backed the wrong Miliband in 2015. Such a shame Clegg went with Cameron. But here we are.

I'd refer you to my second point.

I thought I'd answered it.

"I'd not necessarily take an uptick to be to do with Corbyn, but to do with voters pissed off with the Brexit vote - the ultimate reason we had a 2107 election."

Nothing's linear, and everyone has different reasons for voting one way or t'other, but Corbyn clearly wasn't the man to exploit the disarray of the Tories after the brexit vote. They got some uptick, but not enough.

[I like neeps]

The answer to why people vote Conservative is most Tory voters own a home and every single Tory policy for the past 10 years except brexit has been an effort to inflate property prices and therefore the wealth of homeowners (their voters). I'd vote for a political party whose sole pursuit was to make me rich.

[Paddington Bear]

The obvious answer to this question is Jeremy Corbyn.

That doesn't really explain all the elections where Corbyn wasn't the leader of the opposition, and in fact in 2017 Corbyn was leader when Labour increased both their number of seats and percentage points of the vote.

Explains the last two elections which seemed pertinent to the question and the current government

[_Os_]

Which leads us to Clegg backing the wrong horse in many peoples' eyes, such that the Lib Dems' votes collapsed in 2015.

That's not entirely what happened. The Lib Dems took a beating in 2015, largely because Cameron convinced many 2010 Lib Dem voters that it was safe to vote Tory. It's counterintuitive but many who had voted Lid Dem in 2010, voted Tory in 2015 to preserve the coalition (this is how the Lib Dems lost some of their safest seats to the Tories), to prevent "chaos under Ed Miliband". In other words they lost the voters happy with the direction under Clegg, which meant they couldn't eat the left of the Tory party. In the years that followed these voters then discovered the Tories had in fact not changed, but they had successfully holed the the Lib Dems below the waterline, leaving them with the choice of either the Tories or Labour (in seats where it's often Tories and Lib Dems as the only possible winners, and only one of those can win a GE). Almost all marginals the Lib Dems can win are Tory facing, the demographic that votes Lib Dem and the left of the Tory party (which has now been purged) is basically the same.

The Lib Dems won a lot of these voters back by 2019, it didn't translate into seats but they had the biggest increase in votes and reduced Tory majorities especially in the South West. Back up to 3.6m, but still far off their 5m-6m. The Tory gamble was that they could replace these largely remain supporting voters with leave supporting voters in Northern England, which worked.

It's only in Scotland where negative views on the Clegg era coalition gives a 1:1 relationship in the Lib Dems going from 11 seats in 2010 (the second largest Scottish total after Labour), to 1 in 2015, to 4 in 2017 and 2019. siding with the Tories has fucked them there. It's different in Southern England, where many voters thought Clegg backed the right horse so much so that they switched to voting for that horse directly.

The problem for the Tories now, is that Brexit is a mountain of lies but their new supporters in Northern England still expect everything they were promised. Polling shows 2016 remain voters are much more consolidated against the Tories (whereas 2016 leave voters are equally split between Labour and the Tories, very few remainers back the Tories). Meaning the Tories could lose all their new supporters in Northern England they won in 2019, and fail to convince the Lib Dem/Tory swing voters in Southern England who they squeezed in 2015 (who are now well on their way to becoming Lib Dem/Labour swing voters). Which would send them back to a 2010 or 2017 result at best. If they don't have the UKIP/Labour inclined leavers from 2019, or the Lib Dem inclined remainers from 2015, then they have no majority.

Usually when Labour have a leader from Labour's right, the Lib Dems get a poll boost (because Lib Dem/Tory swing voters don't fear Labour, and feel they can elect a Lib Dem without worrying about Labour winning an election). Polling is showing the Tories are losing support direct to Labour this time though and no Lib Dem boost, which shows how much the Tories now depend on borrowed Labour votes, and how weak the Lib Dems are (not all the Lib Dem's fault they have far less resources than the other two).

... What threatens to hurt the Tories next, is a party to the right of the Tories (Reform UK etc). It's the only part of the spectrum where the Tories haven't bled yet. I'm guessing a lot of UKIP/Brexit types that vote Tory didn't do so with the expectation the UK could reach its highest ever immigration levels, fight seemingly a losing battle against boat people, and have the most racially diverse government in its history. Quite a lot of recent polls have Reform UK on 5%-7%, and that's with the Tories getting back up to 25%-29%. Which ironically would start putting the Tories back to where they were before Cameron launched the EU referendum to destroy UKIP and consolidate the right wing vote.

It's hard to think of a constituency that switched support to the Tories, who weren't immediately betrayed by the Tories.

[C T]

The answer to why people vote Conservative is most Tory voters own a home and every single Tory policy for the past 10 years except brexit has been an effort to inflate property prices and therefore the wealth of homeowners (their voters). I'd vote for a political party whose sole pursuit was to make me rich.

There may well be truth to this.

I don't completely understand people's thinking though. As a home owner myself, the value of my house going up doesn't really help me buy a better house, if that better house has also shot up.

I guess however if I were downsizing then it would free up more cash, or of course wanting to leave as much inheritance as possible. Neither of these have massively crossed my personal consciousness yet as I'm approaching 40. Can't say I'm in any great rush to vote Tory, even if they promise my house value will go up and up.

[_Os_]

It could be just possible that Reform UK might split the Tory vote, being populist not all their policies are flat-out ugly and their membership has increased lately since Rishi Sunak took over with disgruntled Tory party members leaving for them instead ( read into that what you will ). Whether that will translate into a meaningful rise in people voting for them in parliamentary elections is another matter, but they will appeal to the nostalgic Thatcherites and those who fell for the Truss/Kwarteng promises. Plus you have the twunt Farage fanboy faction. I doubt they would have such an effect as UKIP did in the past but we can hope it's enough to make a difference - but that being the case would likely mean another strong surge to the right from Tory HQ to attract the waverers and opportunists back.

The right of centre in our politics has just progressively moved ever forward in that direction, and without a major permanent split in the Tory party to truly divide support I just fear that not matter what polls say now, people will always be lured into voting for nanny because ultimately she knows best.

Reform UK are basically UKIP but with the emphasis on anti Net Zero rather than Europe.

They will poison the well and shift politics towards their supporters for at least a decade as the traditional parties scrabble for floating votes. And instead of Brexit, we get slow walking on policies needed to stop us completely fucking the environment up, and it will never be enough to please these grifters and the money backing them.

That seems to be the plan. But once onshore wind and solar are facts and are everywhere, then the NIMBY aspect falls away. Once development happens there's no case for anti-development. No one is actually going to give a shit about solar farms or windmills once they're built.

They'll be back to immigration very soon. If/when Labour win, all the right wing media will be blaming Labour for immigration too. Probably more nasty this time, as they can't hide behind blaming the EU. The UK's long term demographic trend isn't favourable for this platform though, so the billionaires that don't want to pay taxes will have to think of something new eventually.

[Tichtheid]

The obvious answer to this question is Jeremy Corbyn.

That doesn't really explain all the elections where Corbyn wasn't the leader of the opposition, and in fact in 2017 Corbyn was leader when Labour increased both their number of seats and percentage points of the vote.

Explains the last two elections which seemed pertinent to the question and the current government

The question was why people are voting Tory, if Jeremy Corbyn was the answer, we'd have seen a collapse in the Labour vote during his tenure.

Labour vote
1997 - 13.5 million Blair
2001 - 10.7 million Blair
2007 - 9.5 million Blair
2010 - 8.6 million Brown
2015 - 9.3 million Milliband
2017 - 12.8 million Corbyn
2019 - 10.2 million Corbyn

Even in 2019 with the worst Labour result in decades in terms of seats, he was still leader of the party when they won more votes than with the most recent leaders.
Yes, they lost those elections, but I don't think pointing the finger solely at Corbyn is accurate, there was a wider picture of Brexit and Johnson's deceitful populism which led people to vote for the Tories.

[Paddington Bear]

That doesn't really explain all the elections where Corbyn wasn't the leader of the opposition, and in fact in 2017 Corbyn was leader when Labour increased both their number of seats and percentage points of the vote.

Explains the last two elections which seemed pertinent to the question and the current government

The question was why people are voting Tory, if Jeremy Corbyn was the answer, we'd have seen a collapse in the Labour vote during his tenure.

Labour vote
1997 - 13.5 million Blair
2001 - 10.7 million Blair
2007 - 9.5 million Blair
2010 - 8.6 million Brown
2015 - 9.3 million Milliband
2017 - 12.8 million Corbyn
2019 - 10.2 million Corbyn

Even in 2019 with the worst Labour result in decades in terms of seats, he was still leader of the party when they won more votes than with the most recent leaders.
Yes, they lost those elections, but I don't think pointing the finger solely at Corbyn is accurate, there was a wider picture of Brexit and Johnson's deceitful populism which led people to vote for the Tories.

I’m not disputing that Corbyn engaged the left, he massively energised them and gave people of those views something to believe in.
He also engaged people who disagreed with him, which was a lot of people, and a lot of those were not true blues but were willing to overlook a lot about the Tories to keep him out. Hence the same voters now are fleeing in their droves to Starmer’s Labour

[Lobby]

That doesn't really explain all the elections where Corbyn wasn't the leader of the opposition, and in fact in 2017 Corbyn was leader when Labour increased both their number of seats and percentage points of the vote.

Explains the last two elections which seemed pertinent to the question and the current government

The question was why people are voting Tory, if Jeremy Corbyn was the answer, we'd have seen a collapse in the Labour vote during his tenure.

Labour vote
1997 - 13.5 million Blair
2001 - 10.7 million Blair
2007 - 9.5 million Blair
2010 - 8.6 million Brown
2015 - 9.3 million Milliband
2017 - 12.8 million Corbyn
2019 - 10.2 million Corbyn

Even in 2019 with the worst Labour result in decades in terms of seats, he was still leader of the party when they won more votes than with the most recent leaders.
Yes, they lost those elections, but I don't think pointing the finger solely at Corbyn is accurate, there was a wider picture of Brexit and Johnson's deceitful populism which led people to vote for the Tories.

That doesn't tell the whole story though. For example % of votes cast paints a rather different picture

1997 - 43.2% Blair [Cons - 30.7%]
2001 - 40.7% Blair [Cons - 31.7%]
2007 - 35.2% Blair [Cons - 32.4%]
2010 - 29% Brown [Cons - 36.1 %]
2015 - 30.4% Milliband [Cons - 36.8]
2017 - 40% Corbyn [Cons - 42.3%]
2019 - 32.2% Corbyn [Cons 43.6%]

[Tichtheid]

Explains the last two elections which seemed pertinent to the question and the current government

The question was why people are voting Tory, if Jeremy Corbyn was the answer, we'd have seen a collapse in the Labour vote during his tenure.

Labour vote
1997 - 13.5 million Blair
2001 - 10.7 million Blair
2007 - 9.5 million Blair
2010 - 8.6 million Brown
2015 - 9.3 million Milliband
2017 - 12.8 million Corbyn
2019 - 10.2 million Corbyn

Even in 2019 with the worst Labour result in decades in terms of seats, he was still leader of the party when they won more votes than with the most recent leaders.
Yes, they lost those elections, but I don't think pointing the finger solely at Corbyn is accurate, there was a wider picture of Brexit and Johnson's deceitful populism which led people to vote for the Tories.

That doesn't tell the whole story though. For example % of votes cast paints a rather different picture

1997 - 43.2% Blair [Cons - 30.7%]
2001 - 40.7% Blair [Cons - 31.7%]
2007 - 35.2% Blair [Cons - 32.4%]
2010 - 29% Brown [Cons - 36.1 %]
2015 - 30.4% Milliband [Cons - 36.8]
2017 - 40% Corbyn [Cons - 42.3%]
2019 - 32.2% Corbyn [Cons 43.6%]

Don’t those figures tell exactly the same story wrt the Labour vote?
The percentage of the vote cast is in proportion to the actual numbers, more or less.

I’m not disputing that Corbyn was the wrong leader, as I’ve said many times, if you have the Telegraph urging its readers to join the Labour party and vote for him in the leadership election, you have to know what was coming.

What I’m disputing is the simplistic idea that he is solely responsible for English people voting Tory.

[Biffer]

The obvious answer to this question is Jeremy Corbyn.

That doesn't really explain all the elections where Corbyn wasn't the leader of the opposition, and in fact in 2017 Corbyn was leader when Labour increased both their number of seats and percentage points of the vote.

Explains the last two elections which seemed pertinent to the question and the current government

Um, no.

We haven’t voted Tory in Scotland for nearly seventy years, England keeps putting them into power. This isn’t about the last couple of elections. It’s about decades.

[Paddington Bear]

That doesn't really explain all the elections where Corbyn wasn't the leader of the opposition, and in fact in 2017 Corbyn was leader when Labour increased both their number of seats and percentage points of the vote.

Explains the last two elections which seemed pertinent to the question and the current government

Um, no.

We haven’t voted Tory in Scotland for nearly seventy years, England keeps putting them into power. This isn’t about the last couple of elections. It’s about decades.

Well the historic trend is much more obvious - they tend to make the sections of society that vote for them better off and their main opponents have a patchy economic record. We have had a two party system for the whole of that 70 years and so it’s one or the other for most people. Pretty standard politics really. The factors behind England being more Tory than Scotland are numerous, I read an interesting journal article a while back that labelled the decline of the independent Unionist Party, the lower salience of Protestantism and the end of the National industries and a large military (by no means pretending to be an expert here), but one thing I would add is that FPTP makes the difference starker than it often has been in reality, certainly more true of historic elections than (some) more recent ones.

[Slick]

Williamson gone

[tabascoboy]

Williamson gone

Yep, this is the government that just keeps on giving, funny how often they resign claiming having not "done anything wrong". They only regret being caught out.

Sir Gavin Williamson has resigned as a government minister after allegations of bullying, saying he aims to clear himself of "any wrongdoing”.

[petej]

Explains the last two elections which seemed pertinent to the question and the current government

Um, no.

We haven’t voted Tory in Scotland for nearly seventy years, England keeps putting them into power. This isn’t about the last couple of elections. It’s about decades.

Well the historic trend is much more obvious - they tend to make the sections of society that vote for them better off and their main opponents have a patchy economic record. We have had a two party system for the whole of that 70 years and so it’s one or the other for most people. Pretty standard politics really. The factors behind England being more Tory than Scotland are numerous, I read an interesting journal article a while back that labelled the decline of the independent Unionist Party, the lower salience of Protestantism and the end of the National industries and a large military (by no means pretending to be an expert here), but one thing I would add is that FPTP makes the difference starker than it often has been in reality, certainly more true of historic elections than (some) more recent ones.

The national press mostly ignores Scottish. Northern Irish and Welsh voters so they aren't the target of right wing propaganda to the same extent as English voters. Westminster and Fleet Street are a joined fetid sewer. Fptp favours them massively as well particularly in the last election which was a dodgy fix with the brexit party standing down. If the libdems stood down and the brexit party didn't you would get a very different result.

[C69]

Williamson gone

Yep, this is the government that just keeps on giving, funny how often they resign claiming having not "done anything wrong". They only regret being caught out.

Sir Gavin Williamson has resigned as a government minister after allegations of bullying, saying he aims to clear himself of "any wrongdoing”.

The level of Civil War on the Tory Party is quite astounding.
There were reports on the Beeb last night of Tory MP plots to break into Williamgone's HOC office, realise Williamgone's pet tarantula and stamp on it into the carpet.

He does seem a particularly nast piece of work.


When is the inquiry by the standards committee into Boris's partying starting?

[Insane_Homer]

[Insane_Homer]

[Paddington Bear]

Um, no.

We haven’t voted Tory in Scotland for nearly seventy years, England keeps putting them into power. This isn’t about the last couple of elections. It’s about decades.

Well the historic trend is much more obvious - they tend to make the sections of society that vote for them better off and their main opponents have a patchy economic record. We have had a two party system for the whole of that 70 years and so it’s one or the other for most people. Pretty standard politics really. The factors behind England being more Tory than Scotland are numerous, I read an interesting journal article a while back that labelled the decline of the independent Unionist Party, the lower salience of Protestantism and the end of the National industries and a large military (by no means pretending to be an expert here), but one thing I would add is that FPTP makes the difference starker than it often has been in reality, certainly more true of historic elections than (some) more recent ones.

The national press mostly ignores Scottish. Northern Irish and Welsh voters so they aren't the target of right wing propaganda to the same extent as English voters. Westminster and Fleet Street are a joined fetid sewer. Fptp favours them massively as well particularly in the last election which was a dodgy fix with the brexit party standing down. If the libdems stood down and the brexit party didn't you would get a very different result.

The problem with including Wales in this is that most of Wales votes like a left leaning region of England rather than having a largely separate politics (this could change of course). The truth is that the national press ignore everything outside the SE, which is one of the reasons why Liz Truss' morning with local radio was such a disaster. By focussing on the national press she was so out of touch she didn't know the extent of the Trans Pennine rail fiasco, the fact that thousands of dead fish were washing up on shore in the North East or the roof is falling off her local hospital!
Fully agree on FPTP. I suspect if we had a properly proportional system the Tories would keep 20-35% of the vote.

[Tichtheid]

Explains the last two elections which seemed pertinent to the question and the current government

Um, no.

We haven’t voted Tory in Scotland for nearly seventy years, England keeps putting them into power. This isn’t about the last couple of elections. It’s about decades.

Well the historic trend is much more obvious - they tend to make the sections of society that vote for them better off and their main opponents have a patchy economic record. We have had a two party system for the whole of that 70 years and so it’s one or the other for most people. Pretty standard politics really. The factors behind England being more Tory than Scotland are numerous, I read an interesting journal article a while back that labelled the decline of the independent Unionist Party, the lower salience of Protestantism and the end of the National industries and a large military (by no means pretending to be an expert here), but one thing I would add is that FPTP makes the difference starker than it often has been in reality, certainly more true of historic elections than (some) more recent ones.

"Well the historic trend is much more obvious - they tend to make the sections of society that vote for them better off "


I've been thinking about this sentence this morning and I can't help but think there is more to it. The Home Counties aren't stuffed with Premiership footballers, stockbrokers and 70s rock stars, though they are there. The majority in those counties are surely teachers, plumbers, shop workers, bin men, hairdressers, post workers, nurses, gardeners, etc? Same goes for Somerset - not everyone is sitting on a country pile, the majority will be in the same lines of work as in the Home Counties, just as they are all over the country, whether rural or in the cities.

Yet, for sure there are particular counties where a Tory seat is a safe seat. If a teacher in, say, Taunton is voting Tory, why is the teacher in Peckham voting Labour?

[Paddington Bear]

Um, no.

We haven’t voted Tory in Scotland for nearly seventy years, England keeps putting them into power. This isn’t about the last couple of elections. It’s about decades.

Well the historic trend is much more obvious - they tend to make the sections of society that vote for them better off and their main opponents have a patchy economic record. We have had a two party system for the whole of that 70 years and so it’s one or the other for most people. Pretty standard politics really. The factors behind England being more Tory than Scotland are numerous, I read an interesting journal article a while back that labelled the decline of the independent Unionist Party, the lower salience of Protestantism and the end of the National industries and a large military (by no means pretending to be an expert here), but one thing I would add is that FPTP makes the difference starker than it often has been in reality, certainly more true of historic elections than (some) more recent ones.

"Well the historic trend is much more obvious - they tend to make the sections of society that vote for them better off "


I've been thinking about this sentence this morning and I can't help but think there is more to it. The Home Counties aren't stuffed with Premiership footballers, stockbrokers and 70s rock stars, though they are there. The majority in those counties are surely teachers, plumbers, shop workers, bin men, hairdressers, post workers, nurses, gardeners, etc? Same goes for Somerset - not everyone is sitting on a country pile, the majority will be in the same lines of work as in the Home Counties, just as they are all over the country, whether rural or in the cities.

Yet, for sure there are particular counties where a Tory seat is a safe seat. If a teacher in, say, Taunton is voting Tory, why is the teacher in Peckham voting Labour?

What you’ve got to bear in mind in the Home Counties is how wealthy very ordinary people in certain age brackets have been made by rising house prices. I think of the jobs a lot of my mate’s parents have/had and on the back of buying at the right time and taking a few risks you find teachers retiring at 60 to go travelling with a 4 bed with a nice garden back at home, builders/plumbers etc doing similar with the addition of driving a mercedes or an audi. You don’t have to have worked your arse off in a prestige profession to have become very comfortable, is the reality for a lot of people.

Low interest rates were the other critical factor to this coalition, enabling people to do up their house and get that bigger car at very competitive rates makes people feel much wealthier and that the country is working for them.

This also explains the ‘red wall’ falling - the part of the country where the lifestyle of the big house, nice car etc is still viable on a middle income is up north.

Addressing your point on Peckham vs Somerset, it’s a fair one. A few things I would say:
- there is an element of self selection. The kind of person who wants to teach in a rural setting is likely more conservative with a small c than the person who wants to teach in an inner city.
- people with all sorts of political views live everywhere! More people voted to leave the EU in Islington than Boston, few parliamentary seats give more than 60% of the vote to any party etc
- teachers only really swung to a core Labour vote during the coalition. Biffer wants a 70 year sweep, at points in that at least a plurality of teachers voted Tory. Not to labour my initial point but they were made wealthier by New Labour and poorer by the Tories, which is a crucial factor.

[Tichtheid]

Well the historic trend is much more obvious - they tend to make the sections of society that vote for them better off and their main opponents have a patchy economic record. We have had a two party system for the whole of that 70 years and so it’s one or the other for most people. Pretty standard politics really. The factors behind England being more Tory than Scotland are numerous, I read an interesting journal article a while back that labelled the decline of the independent Unionist Party, the lower salience of Protestantism and the end of the National industries and a large military (by no means pretending to be an expert here), but one thing I would add is that FPTP makes the difference starker than it often has been in reality, certainly more true of historic elections than (some) more recent ones.

"Well the historic trend is much more obvious - they tend to make the sections of society that vote for them better off "


I've been thinking about this sentence this morning and I can't help but think there is more to it. The Home Counties aren't stuffed with Premiership footballers, stockbrokers and 70s rock stars, though they are there. The majority in those counties are surely teachers, plumbers, shop workers, bin men, hairdressers, post workers, nurses, gardeners, etc? Same goes for Somerset - not everyone is sitting on a country pile, the majority will be in the same lines of work as in the Home Counties, just as they are all over the country, whether rural or in the cities.

Yet, for sure there are particular counties where a Tory seat is a safe seat. If a teacher in, say, Taunton is voting Tory, why is the teacher in Peckham voting Labour?

What you’ve got to bear in mind in the Home Counties is how wealthy very ordinary people in certain age brackets have been made by rising house prices. I think of the jobs a lot of my mate’s parents have/had and on the back of buying at the right time and taking a few risks you find teachers retiring at 60 to go travelling with a 4 bed with a nice garden back at home, builders/plumbers etc doing similar with the addition of driving a mercedes or an audi. You don’t have to have worked your arse off in a prestige profession to have become very comfortable, is the reality for a lot of people.

Low interest rates were the other critical factor to this coalition, enabling people to do up their house and get that bigger car at very competitive rates makes people feel much wealthier and that the country is working for them.

I live in the South East. We are comfortably in the top ten percent of earners, or were before retirement, we've paid off the mortgage and don't have a penny of debt. I drive a 20 year old car and we don't go on fancy holidays.

The only way I can see others who do have the Mercs and the holidays to wherever, the new kitchens and all those trappings is if they are saddled with massive debts. The next few years are going to sting.

My eldest is currently texting me about moving from a rented flat above a takeaway to a rented house, the rent on a two bed terrace is more than we paid on a mortgage. The only chance she and her siblings have of buying a home is when we peg it.

This also explains the ‘red wall’ falling - the part of the country where the lifestyle of the big house, nice car etc is still viable on a middle income is up north.

I'm convinced that the Red Wall was about Brexit, in the main

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng ... sual-guide

[Biffer]

All I'm really picking up from these replies is that people have been conditioned into accepting stereotypes and tired old fashioned reasoning for why things are as they are. Once again the class system doesn't enter into people's heads, because they've been conditioned to think of it as normal, and 'the way of things' when it's a fundamental flaw in British, and in particular English, society.

[Paddington Bear]

All I'm really picking up from these replies is that people have been conditioned into accepting stereotypes and tired old fashioned reasoning for why things are as they are. Once again the class system doesn't enter into people's heads, because they've been conditioned to think of it as normal, and 'the way of things' when it's a fundamental flaw in British, and in particular English, society.

That suggests you either don’t buy the analysis (fair enough) or have already made a conclusion that won’t be dislodged.

It’s worth considering what links the only two times a government has been removed at the ballot box since 1980 - when homeowners were struggling and many were in negative equity

[Insane_Homer]

Sunack: but but but Jeremy Corbyn

[tabascoboy]

Sunack: but but but Jeremy Corbyn

[JM2K6]

Why do the English keep voting Tory? Are they really that fucking stupid?

I know the two automatic answers -

1. It’s the media! But we get most of the same media and we don’t vote for them. And if that’s your excuse you’re just saying the entire country is gullible and unable to actually discern truth from bullshit.

2. But Labour are rubbish! But the Tories aren’t any better. Particularly recently. And that suggests they’d rather vote for people who rip them off and neglect them but who are a bit more competent - even though they’ll use that competence to make their lives worse.

Both of these answers just suggest the entire country is fucking stupid.

It's because the entire discourse surrounding the country, its place in the world, the monarchy, the political classes, voting, policies, history, and essentially anything meaningful is fundamentally dishonest.

But honestly if anyone is going to argue that "well, you're just all gullible" because a majority of the population believe the lies, propaganda, half truths, and bullshit spewed day after day after day after day from the government, from the papers, from the news channels, from social media... sorry, you're not as smart as you think you are. This shit works. It's always worked. It works incredibly well. There's nothing special about the Scottish that means it doesn't work as well on them; all it means is it's not as prevalent and there's more counters to it.

Most people don't want to spend too much time thinking about stuff that doesn't interest them. They won't do it if literally everything is telling them the same thing.

[GogLais]

All I'm really picking up from these replies is that people have been conditioned into accepting stereotypes and tired old fashioned reasoning for why things are as they are. Once again the class system doesn't enter into people's heads, because they've been conditioned to think of it as normal, and 'the way of things' when it's a fundamental flaw in British, and in particular English, society.

That suggests you either don’t buy the analysis (fair enough) or have already made a conclusion that won’t be dislodged.

It’s worth considering what links the only two times a government has been removed at the ballot box since 1980 - when homeowners were struggling and many were in negative equity

Aroused my curiosity as I was a house buyer at the time. House prices were level in the early 90s but by 94/95 they were heading upwards. Hard to remember but I don’t recall housing being a big issue in 97, it was more a case of the Tories having outstayed their welcome and Blair/Brown were a decent looking proposition.

[Ovals]

Why do the English keep voting Tory? Are they really that fucking stupid?

I know the two automatic answers -

1. It’s the media! But we get most of the same media and we don’t vote for them. And if that’s your excuse you’re just saying the entire country is gullible and unable to actually discern truth from bullshit.

2. But Labour are rubbish! But the Tories aren’t any better. Particularly recently. And that suggests they’d rather vote for people who rip them off and neglect them but who are a bit more competent - even though they’ll use that competence to make their lives worse.

Both of these answers just suggest the entire country is fucking stupid.

It's because the entire discourse surrounding the country, its place in the world, the monarchy, the political classes, voting, policies, history, and essentially anything meaningful is fundamentally dishonest.

But honestly if anyone is going to argue that "well, you're just all gullible" because a majority of the population believe the lies, propaganda, half truths, and bullshit spewed day after day after day after day from the government, from the papers, from the news channels, from social media... sorry, you're not as smart as you think you are. This shit works. It's always worked. It works incredibly well. There's nothing special about the Scottish that means it doesn't work as well on them; all it means is it's not as prevalent and there's more counters to it.

Most people don't want to spend too much time thinking about stuff that doesn't interest them. They won't do it if literally everything is telling them the same thing.

It's fairly simple in Scotland - Tories are the 'English' party so they don't vote for them.

[Biffer]

Why do the English keep voting Tory? Are they really that fucking stupid?

I know the two automatic answers -

1. It’s the media! But we get most of the same media and we don’t vote for them. And if that’s your excuse you’re just saying the entire country is gullible and unable to actually discern truth from bullshit.

2. But Labour are rubbish! But the Tories aren’t any better. Particularly recently. And that suggests they’d rather vote for people who rip them off and neglect them but who are a bit more competent - even though they’ll use that competence to make their lives worse.

Both of these answers just suggest the entire country is fucking stupid.

It's because the entire discourse surrounding the country, its place in the world, the monarchy, the political classes, voting, policies, history, and essentially anything meaningful is fundamentally dishonest.

But honestly if anyone is going to argue that "well, you're just all gullible" because a majority of the population believe the lies, propaganda, half truths, and bullshit spewed day after day after day after day from the government, from the papers, from the news channels, from social media... sorry, you're not as smart as you think you are. This shit works. It's always worked. It works incredibly well. There's nothing special about the Scottish that means it doesn't work as well on them; all it means is it's not as prevalent and there's more counters to it.

Most people don't want to spend too much time thinking about stuff that doesn't interest them. They won't do it if literally everything is telling them the same thing.

That's kind of my point - I don't believe the two answers I put there either, for exactly that reason. But a heck of a lot of the answers on this thread are kind of similar to one of those two.

[Biffer]

All I'm really picking up from these replies is that people have been conditioned into accepting stereotypes and tired old fashioned reasoning for why things are as they are. Once again the class system doesn't enter into people's heads, because they've been conditioned to think of it as normal, and 'the way of things' when it's a fundamental flaw in British, and in particular English, society.

That suggests you either don’t buy the analysis (fair enough) or have already made a conclusion that won’t be dislodged.

It’s worth considering what links the only two times a government has been removed at the ballot box since 1980 - when homeowners were struggling and many were in negative equity

Aroused my curiosity as I was a house buyer at the time. House prices were level in the early 90s but by 94/95 they were heading upwards. Hard to remember but I don’t recall housing being a big issue in 97, it was more a case of the Tories having outstayed their welcome and Blair/Brown were a decent looking proposition.

Yeah, house prices fell from 89-92 yet the Tories won that election. They went up in 96 and 97 , then the Tories lost the election. Fair enough they took a battering in 2007-8 and Labour lost after that. The Nominal house price went up about 25% in 78-79 before Labour lost that election as well.

[JM2K6]

Why do the English keep voting Tory? Are they really that fucking stupid?

I know the two automatic answers -

1. It’s the media! But we get most of the same media and we don’t vote for them. And if that’s your excuse you’re just saying the entire country is gullible and unable to actually discern truth from bullshit.

2. But Labour are rubbish! But the Tories aren’t any better. Particularly recently. And that suggests they’d rather vote for people who rip them off and neglect them but who are a bit more competent - even though they’ll use that competence to make their lives worse.

Both of these answers just suggest the entire country is fucking stupid.

It's because the entire discourse surrounding the country, its place in the world, the monarchy, the political classes, voting, policies, history, and essentially anything meaningful is fundamentally dishonest.

But honestly if anyone is going to argue that "well, you're just all gullible" because a majority of the population believe the lies, propaganda, half truths, and bullshit spewed day after day after day after day from the government, from the papers, from the news channels, from social media... sorry, you're not as smart as you think you are. This shit works. It's always worked. It works incredibly well. There's nothing special about the Scottish that means it doesn't work as well on them; all it means is it's not as prevalent and there's more counters to it.

Most people don't want to spend too much time thinking about stuff that doesn't interest them. They won't do it if literally everything is telling them the same thing.

That's kind of my point - I don't believe the two answers I put there either, for exactly that reason. But a heck of a lot of the answers on this thread are kind of similar to one of those two.

I guess I was led astray by the idea that if you "fall for" this stuff you're inherently stupid. It isn't that simple. Human beings are complex emotional, social, and intellectual people and what influences their beliefs and opinions is an enormously complex and lucrative industry.

Of course, some people are just inherently very conservative.

[I like neeps]

https://unherd.com/2022/11/meet-britain ... new-right/

You have the boomers shooting up migrant centres and the youngsters go full American Incel. What exactly is the right in Britain up to these days?

[fishfoodie]

https://unherd.com/2022/11/meet-britain ... new-right/

You have the boomers shooting up migrant centres and the youngsters go full American Incel. What exactly is the right in Britain up to these days?

He tells his story about Brexit. He wanted Britain to become “a genuine global trading power again”.

Was there anyone in the audience that had the wit to ask him; "Trade what exactly ?"

The frog faced fuck is the UKIP version of Corbyn; full of moronic shite, which he spouts with complete confidence, because there isn't a snowballs chance of him ever getting into a position of having to deliver on his bullshit; but his bullshit is seductive to those lacking in the critical thinking skills to just ask those basic questions.

[petej]

https://unherd.com/2022/11/meet-britain ... new-right/

You have the boomers shooting up migrant centres and the youngsters go full American Incel. What exactly is the right in Britain up to these days?

The right in UK and USA are victims of their own electoral success and these are the by products.