UK General Election - 12th December 2019 | Con 365, Lab 203, LD 11, SNP 48, Other 23 - Tory Majority of 80

[Fingeredmouse]

The solution for which, apparently, was to provide them with free broadband.

Yeah. That's the totality of that manifesto.

My point is also significantly broader than simply Corbyn (who, incidentally, I did not vote for).

I assume that, as I acquire the wisdom of conservatism in my old age, I too can deliberately miss the point using such zingy one liners.

 

[Badunk]

 

[sullydnl]

 

[spiriticon]

"Most" of their wealth? I assume you're referring to inheritance tax, in which case "most" is not correct.
Personally, I do agree with inheritance tax although where the threshold sits seems a reasonable area of discussion.
Happy to be a minority if that is what I am, anathema though such a concept seems to now be to the voting population this country.
Except, of course, the Tories don't reduce the tax burden proportionally for your "average working man" at all and a desire for low taxation is merely one aspect of the opinions we all seemingly develop as we grow older.

Give a person property and make them fear losing it.
Tell him the other people are coming to take his wealth and watch them hold their riches tight.
Control the press to spin your propaganda and target it well, and threaten media that does not comply, so the people know your truth.
Collapse the social care network so that inherited wealth is ever more important and create a self fulfilling feedback loop.

I have no idea which 18% you refer to and can see no clear evidence that age in of itself leads to increasingly right wing voting that is not anecdotal nor any study that proves causation. I hope it is not true and, if it is, then I hope I do not succumb to this dulling of my social conscience.

I was talking about the 18% of over 65s who voted for Labour in this election. I mean, great props to you for wanting to give your wealth away to the people rather than your kids, but I'm fairly certain you are a rare case. There's politics and there's family and family comes first for many.

 

[Full bodied red]

Yeah. That's the totality of that manifesto.

My point is also significantly broader than simply Corbyn (who, incidentally, I did not vote for).

I assume that, as I acquire the wisdom of conservatism in my old age, I too can deliberately miss the point using such zingy one liners.

It wasn't meant to be a zingy one liner, although now you mention it.....

If Labour had said something along the lines of

' We will spend every pound it takes to eradicate child poverty, homelessness and to improve social care and then, if there's any money left, we'll provide subsidised heating and increased state pensions to those that need it, and and then if there's any money left after that, we'll renationalise utility companies, and with whatever money is left after all that, we'll use it to provide an improved and cheaper internet network throughout the UK '

People might then have voted Labour.

Instead, people were led to believe that free internet and an equal share with 40+million other UK taxpayers in the utility companies and TOCs were more important to Labour than what I think everbody would agree is actually far more important to spend money on - like child poverty, homelessness, improved social care, etc.

 

[EwanI Ted]

Not often I agree with Jones but he’s right here. Labour had lost both Leave and Remain support in large numbers by the summer.

Reality is they spent most of the last few years with a Brexit policy that pleased no one - not letting Brexit happen while refusing to back Remain. Its no surprise they eventually lost votes both ways. It’s fair to say that they were between a rock and a hard place, but what they chose in the end seems to have been the worst possible alternatives.

 

[Stanley Road]

Todays yoof, says it all. I am glad they got brexit. Cnuts

 

[Berbasbullet]

Not often I agree with Jones but he’s right here. Labour had lost both Leave and Remain support in large numbers by the summer.

Reality is they spent most of the last few years with a Brexit policy that pleased no one - not letting Brexit happen while refusing to back Remain. Its no surprise they eventually lost votes both ways. It’s fair to say that they were between a rock and a hard place, but what they chose in the end seems to have been the worst possible alternatives.

Agreed, I think they were snookered. If they backed leave there’s no way they’d eat votes from tories or brexit party.

They could back remain and eat Lib Dem’s votes, and lose the labour leavers, which might have been the best cause.

I think the position they ended up in was best, but they should have set that stall out earlier, no one trusted them in leave and remain camp.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

Agreed, I think they were snookered. If they backed leave there’s no way they’d eat votes from tories or brexit party.

They could back remain and eat Lib Dem’s votes, and lose the labour leavers, which might have been the best cause.

I think the position they ended up in was best, but they should have set that stall out earlier, no one trusted them in leave and remain camp.

They should have backed May's deal as it would have kept a weak minority government and leader in power and caused internal war in the Tory party between the ERG and moderates. They would have protected worker's rights and been in a great position to win power in 2020.

I think they should have backed leave again in this election. They've delivered half of their base into Tory hand and nearly wiped out the party.

To say they were 'snookered' isn't entirely accurate as I feel it deflects blame for overall bad strategy.

 

[EwanI Ted]

Agreed, I think they were snookered. If they backed leave there’s no way they’d eat votes from tories or brexit party.

They could back remain and eat Lib Dem’s votes, and lose the labour leavers, which might have been the best cause.

I think the position they ended up in was best, but they should have set that stall out earlier, no one trusted them in leave and remain camp.

I think where they ended up was the worst of both worlds personally, but irrespective of which position was best, he certainly failed in his attempts to convince people. Externally, it was like like he took the view that the Brexit political landscape was immovable, and all Labour could do was to find the least painful position.

Which in one way seems weird, because on austerity & public spending he was successful in changing people's minds. Has Corbyn ever really worried about taking a political view that the wider public don't agree with? Doubtful. In truth, the issue is that the divide was actually internal, with his immediate team (the so called 4 Ms) all backing leave and the majority of members and MPs backing Remain. That meant he ended up drifting down the path of least resistance to a place where no-one outside the party was happy.

 

[EwanI Ted]

They should have backed May's deal as it would have kept a weak minority government and leader in power and caused internal war in the Tory party between the ERG and moderates. They would have protected worker's rights and been in a great position to win power in 2020.

I think they should have backed leave again in this election. They've delivered half of their base into Tory hand and nearly wiped out the party.

To say they were 'snookered' isn't entirely accurate as I feel it deflects blame for overall bad strategy.

From a Westminster perspective, this would have put the issue to bed sooner for sure, but don't underestimate what an impact it would have had internally. Jeremy Corbyn getting in bed with the Tories so they could lead the UK out of the EU together? That could have destroyed the party.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

From a Westminster perspective, this would have put the issue to bed sooner for sure, but don't underestimate what an impact it would have had internally. Jeremy Corbyn getting in bed with the Tories so they could lead the UK out of the EU together? That could have destroyed the party.

Really, how so? The opposition 'get into bed' with the government on many issues. The Labour party was supposedly a Leave party at that point. Corbyn's Labour were happy to prolonged the uncertainty and chaos in the vain and erroneous belief they could force and election and get the Tories out and somehow negotiate a better deal.

 

[Redlambs]

Really, how so? The opposition 'get into bed' with the government on many issues. The Labour party was supposedly a Leave party at that point. Corbyn's Labour were happy to prolonged the uncertainty and chaos in the vain and erroneous belief they could force and election and get the Tories out and somehow negotiate a better deal.

And now instead of being humbled and looking at real change, they are doubling down in their arrogance.

 

[africanspur]

They are just putting pressure on them to be more favourable to the Tories. I agree that they'd be crazy to destroy it because as you say, it is a crown jewel brand for us.

You're right, I think it is to get a more favourable coverage.

Their attempts to strong arm the media are concerning for me if I'm honest.

 

[Redlambs]

You're right, I think it is to get a more favourable coverage.

Their attempts to strong arm the media are concerning for me if I'm honest.

I reckon Trump has been giving him a masterclass.

 

[CassiusClaymore]

They are just putting pressure on them to be more favourable to the Tories. I agree that they'd be crazy to destroy it because as you say, it is a crown jewel brand for us.

There's that and also if they start pointing the finger at the media it makes people think that both sides have equal cause for complaint when this is clearly not the case.

 

[Kaos]

I reckon Trump has been giving him a masterclass.

The Tories have been strong arming the BBC well before Trump.

 

[Redlambs]

The Tories have been strong arming the BBC well before Trump.

Good point.

As Cass says above, it's unbelievable they are claiming bias after the BBC's performance.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

You're right, I think it is to get a more favourable coverage.

Their attempts to strong arm the media are concerning for me if I'm honest.

Its very concerning. Cameron did the same. It looks like Boris will put Cameron's man John Whittingdale back in the Sport, Culture and Media post. He's a critic of the license fee.

 

[Sweet Square]

 

[EwanI Ted]

Really, how so? The opposition 'get into bed' with the government on many issues. The Labour party was supposedly a Leave party at that point. Corbyn's Labour were happy to prolonged the uncertainty and chaos in the vain and erroneous belief they could force and election and get the Tories out and somehow negotiate a better deal.

This isnt a normal issue though, its the most polarising issue of a generation, not a tweak to planning regulations. Besides you're looking at it from the future, as it were, knowing what came next. If Remainers had known back then that failing to vote for May's deal would lead to an even harder Brexit & an election catastrophe, of course they'd have wanted Labour to vote for May's deal. But they didn't know that then, so how could that possibly influence their thinking? Simple fact is that voting for May's deal would have outraged Remain supporters who at the time felt that the outcome was still open to be changed. Had Labour pushed through Brexit at a time when they were riding high in the polls and watching the Tories fall apart, they'd have taken as much blame as the Tories did.

 

[Badunk]

A lot more Labour voters from 2017 either voted for LD/Green or stayed away than voted Tories. Very interesting and thanks for sharing.

 

[Redlambs]

A lot more Labour voters from 2017 either voted for LD/Green or stayed away than voted Tories. Very interesting and thanks for sharing.

I said it the other day, all this "feck off and vote Tory" shit just alienated so many people who Labour really needed onside.

The fact they didn't vote Tory, sums up what a spectacular backfire that attitude was. And of course, will be in the future as it won't change.

 

[Guy Incognito]

I said it the other day, all this "feck off and vote Tory" shit just alienated so many people who Labour really needed onside.

The fact they didn't vote Tory, sums up what a spectacular backfire that attitude was. And of course, will be in the future as it won't change.

True. Same goes for Brexit and remain/leave. Added fuel to the fire.

Reality is Corbynistas are in no position to judge Blair's premiership or look down their nose at his conduct when he won elections. Yes he dragged us to war but Corbyn is hardly whiter than white which they seem oblivious to.

 

[Boycott]

I think where they ended up was the worst of both worlds personally, but irrespective of which position was best, he certainly failed in his attempts to convince people. Externally, it was like like he took the view that the Brexit political landscape was immovable, and all Labour could do was to find the least painful position.

Which in one way seems weird, because on austerity & public spending he was successful in changing people's minds. Has Corbyn ever really worried about taking a political view that the wider public don't agree with? Doubtful. In truth, the issue is that the divide was actually internal, with his immediate team (the so called 4 Ms) all backing leave and the majority of members and MPs backing Remain. That meant he ended up drifting down the path of least resistance to a place where no-one outside the party was happy.

I strongly believe had Remain won in 2016 Corbyn would be in pole position to beat David Cameron's anointed successor in 2020. Brexit changed the timeline and political landscape completely and we might never recover.

In this election of 2019 he tried to make it about anything but brexit but as the Sky News ticker kept reminding everyone, this was about putting brexit to bed.

 

[Sweet Square]

Over the last 3 decades

 

[FlawlessThaw]

Those population changes have completely changed the map for Labour and it has to appeal to those Boomer towns.

 

[EwanI Ted]

I strongly believe had Remain won in 2016 Corbyn would be in pole position to beat David Cameron's anointed successor in 2020. Brexit changed the timeline and political landscape completely and we might never recover.

In this election of 2019 he tried to make it about anything but brexit but as the Sky News ticker kept reminding everyone, this was about putting brexit to bed.

The cultural separation of middle class city dwelling Labour voters and those in working class midlands/northern towns predates Brexit and Corbyn and has been going on since long before 2015. Indeed it was always a pairing based on a common cause rather than shared values. Corbyn accelerated that separation, and Brexit was the cleaver that finally separated them, but I'm not convinced that everything was okay beforehand. Insofar as many leave voters saw it as a way of pushing back against what they saw as a London elite who didn't understand them, you might even argue that its one part of the Labour movement rebelling against another. So if Brexit hadn't happened then the traditional coalition might have carried on for a bit longer, but a reckoning would have arrived eventually. So I'm not totally convinced that Corbyn would have avoided the issues he's faced here, it may just have materialised in a different way.

 

[RedChip]

That's really interesting, thanks.
The analysis makes clear Labour would have been walloped even harder had they not changed stance on second referendum.

 

[Boycott]

Thirty years ago Labour used to appeal strongly to the elderly population in those constituencies. In fact it was Labour who used to win elderly working people in the 1980s while the Conservatives appealed to the young, middle class down south. Tony Blair changed that around when he realised that the old reliable voting bloc of Labour is dying out and their jobs in the old industries are gone. The family lineage of working class people voting Labour continued however because people were brought up seeing the Thatcher government decimate their communities in working class Northern areas. They didn't forget. Blair hedged his bet that those people would still vote Labour for the foreseeable future and instead focused on reaching out to the growing middle class. He became a young, charismatic leader promising to lead Britain into the 21st Century by making the case that in the Digital Age the need for jobs in professional sectors would become more paramount. Therefore higher education and job training was prioritised.

 

[EwanI Ted]

That's really interesting, thanks.
The analysis makes clear Labour would have been walloped even harder had they not changed stance on second referendum.

Yeah, this section highlights it very starkly

1. Around a quarter of its Leave-supporting voters in the old heartlands - the so-called “Red Wall” - transferred their vote to the Conservatives; we estimate the number at 700,000-800,000 voters, based on hundreds of thousands of polling responses and the YouGov public MRP. Hundreds of thousands more may have stayed at home, although we need to wait for more definitive evidence on this point.

2. But crucially, a larger number of Labour’s 2017 voters seem to have switched to other Remain parties. We estimate that over 1.1 million of 2017 Labour Remainers switched to the Liberal Democrats, the Greens or the SNP. And importantly, 200-250,000 of the 2017 Labour Leavers also seem to have switched to these parties, whether because of “Bregret” or concerns about the Labour leadership or manifesto.

 

[Irwin99]

My nephew has been on zero hour contracts and moaned about it consistently, has moaned about erosion of worker rights, moaned about being poor and.... has just voted conservative.

How the feck do you not get exasperated by this and want to yell when they vote for the party that enables/contributes to all of those things? You can try and debate and argue but it's no use. It feels like banging your head against the wall. People then say you're just arrogant and think you're superior etc. but it just seems so basic to me.

 

[EwanI Ted]

Thirty years ago Labour used to appeal strongly to the elderly population in those constituencies. In fact it was Labour who used to win elderly working people in the 1980s while the Conservatives appealed to the young, middle class down south. Tony Blair changed that around when he realised that the old reliable voting bloc of Labour is dying out and their jobs in the old industries are gone. The family lineage of working class people voting Labour continued however because people were brought up seeing the Thatcher government decimate their communities in working class Northern areas. They didn't forget. Blair hedged his bet that those people would still vote Labour for the foreseeable future and instead focused on reaching out to the growing middle class. He became a young, charismatic leader promising to lead Britain into the 21st Century by making the case that in the Digital Age the need for jobs in professional sectors would become more paramount. Therefore higher education and job training was prioritised.

Good point. Their traditional heartlands were never enough to continually win elections in the first place, something that will be easily forgotten in coming months. Whatever thinking Labour does on this topic, it has to consider how to constantly win elections, not just win back the seats it lost this time round. Winning back enough votes to get to the ~250 seat mark cannot be the extent of their strategy.

 

[Drifter]

BBC Exit poll 1992-2017

 

[finneh]

My nephew has been on zero hour contracts and moaned about it consistently, has moaned about erosion of worker rights, moaned about being poor and.... has just voted conservative.

How the feck do you not get exasperated by this and want to yell when they vote for the party that enables/contributes to all of those things? You can try and debate and argue but it's no use. It feels like banging your head against the wall. People then say you're just arrogant and think you're superior etc. but it just seems so basic to me.

Maybe people say you're arrogant / superior because getting exasperated and metaphorically banging your head against the wall is an arrogant / superior action in response to someone seeing things differently to yourself.

Why not have an actual discussion with him whereby you digest what he says, question the evidence upon which he's drawn his conclusions, look at counter evidence and put forward a cohesive and grown up response? Then if he still believes that his vote was informed and legitimate ask if in 4.5 years time his situation is similar and a large Brexit delivering Conservative majority hasn't helped him would he reconsider?

 

[berbatrick]

Do you mean your mum's editor told them to hold back to be tasteful or is it because they fear repercussions?

She was told by one editor to avoid directly naming the PM, in the other paper she found her columns slightly edited after sending.

There are a few high-profile columnists who can and do openly criticise Modi, and there is one paper (ironically, called the Telegraph) which is pathologically anti-Modi. But others are under pressure - as the carrot, this govt has massively increased its advertisement budget and withdraws it for hostile papers, and as the stick, the govt puts pressure directly on the owners in ways we don't know (probably threatening with tax investigations).

 

[Sweet Square]

My nephew has been on zero hour contracts and moaned about it consistently, has moaned about erosion of worker rights, moaned about being poor and.... has just voted conservative.

How the feck do you not get exasperated by this and want to yell when they vote for the party that enables/contributes to all of those things? You can try and debate and argue but it's no use. It feels like banging your head against the wall. People then say you're just arrogant and think you're superior etc. but it just seems so basic to me.

Jesus thats depressing. What were his reasons for voting tory ?

 

[fergieisold]

My nephew has been on zero hour contracts and moaned about it consistently, has moaned about erosion of worker rights, moaned about being poor and.... has just voted conservative.

How the feck do you not get exasperated by this and want to yell when they vote for the party that enables/contributes to all of those things? You can try and debate and argue but it's no use. It feels like banging your head against the wall. People then say you're just arrogant and think you're superior etc. but it just seems so basic to me.

What would Labour have done? Get rid of zero hours contracts (and his job) and increase the minimum wage to below the level of the tories and also increase taxes. Which workers rights have been eroded specifically?

I'm not trying to be a tory twat, there's just some odd ideas about what Labour will do for the working class.

 

[Maticmaker]

there's just some odd ideas about what Labour will do for the working class.

There certainly are, this is the fundamental mistake Labour has been making for many years, people now don't vote according to their 'class', neither do they vote for the benefit of others, they vote for themselves, at least the majority do. Its not what the Government does for my 'class' its what it will do that affects me as an individual that persuades them where to put their 'X'.

It may surprise some in the current Labour leadership, but many of their previous 'cannon-fodder' voters have woken up to 'the state runs everything', idea',to the instruction to "keep still, do as your told and vote for us, we will house you, feed you, educate you, etc." Many now see that in years gone by, in particular to their grandparents/great grandparents age range, to those who suffered misery and in many cases abject poverty in both food, shelter and in terms of spirit, that in many areas around the UK this seemed a welcome, if restricted message.

In its early days Labour did represent a way forward for the 'masses', but it has long since lost that value. There maybe a resurgence in poverty, homelessness, etc. but nothing akin to the days of the 'workhouse' and sustained period of degradation that the poor suffered years ago. Labours underlying 'one size fits all' political thinking is dead, because most people now do have some aspiration that goes beyond just surviving, even those who are in such situations want more for themselves and their families, and they don't want state handouts they want opportunities for themselves. Only a small part of Labours promises touch on this personal aspirational idea, the idea of spending billions to renationalise various industries and services cuts no ice with a vast swathe of traditional labour voters, as the party found out in this election.

The Labour Party has to radically rethink its purpose, who its natural voters might be, but above all what is it that persuades people to vote, at all and in particular what will attract individuals, not anonymous masses.

 

[SteveJ]

"And tonight on Uncontacted Tribes: Labour's Jemima Bellington-Rowe attempts to 'reach out' to The Lost People of the North, 'even if they throw spears at me'."