Election Night 2015

[Awol]

 

I think it's a national trait for political matters that if you vote Tory, you keep quiet about it or you're slightly embarrassed if you do

I guess I don't make up the demographic, but I'm certainly not in anyway embarrassed. It probably has more to do with Birmingham being labour, and this site being a villa site.

Besides we Tories are more dignified than to take to the streets fighting with police, and desecrating war memorials over who we vote for

 

What, you don't remember the great Conservative riots of 1997, 2001 and 2005? Oh...yeah. 

[hycus-flange]

I think it's a national trait for political matters that if you vote Tory, you keep quiet about it or you're slightly embarrassed if you do

I guess I don't make up the demographic, but I'm certainly not in anyway embarrassed. It probably has more to do with Birmingham being labour, and this site being a villa site.

Besides we Tories are more dignified than to take to the streets fighting with police, and desecrating war memorials over who we vote for

It's certainly true in London. I did vote Tory (that's not an invitation for a political debate with me, my reasons are my own. I'm not going to it, I'm just using that fact as an example) but the office was adamant that anyone that voted Tory are self serving, money obsessed baby killers. That maybe true of the actual members and cabinet, but not the voters.

If you think that the actual members and cabinet in the Tory party are self serving, money obsessed baby killers then why did you vote for them? Doesn't make sense to me.

[markavfc40]

 

That's certainly how its coming across.

It seems anyone who voted Tory is getting mocked.

Even if we are, I couldn't give a rats in honesty. The party I voted for are in power now, and I'm laughing all the way to the bank providing they keep the manifesto promises.

Mock me all they want, I'm bloated on disabled kids anyway

 

 

I don't really have a problem with people who voted for this reason. You have done it knowing exactly the reason you have voted for that particular party. I can see the attraction as I would imagine in terms of money in my pocket I will be better off under the Tories as well. If your biggest concern is a few extra quid in your own pocket then, whilst it wouldn't sit right with me to vote for that reason, I can certainly appreciate why it does with others.

I suspect though there will be a number of voters, given we haven't seen a Tory majority government for 18 years, that will be surprised at just how destructive towards our public services the Tories will be and just how much they will target those already with the least.

Edited May 10, 2015 by markavfc40

[islingtonclaret]

I think it's a national trait for political matters that if you vote Tory, you keep quiet about it or you're slightly embarrassed if you do

I guess I don't make up the demographic, but I'm certainly not in anyway embarrassed. It probably has more to do with Birmingham being labour, and this site being a villa site.

Besides we Tories are more dignified than to take to the streets fighting with police, and desecrating war memorials over who we vote for

It's certainly true in London. I did vote Tory (that's not an invitation for a political debate with me, my reasons are my own. I'm not going to it, I'm just using that fact as an example) but the office was adamant that anyone that voted Tory are self serving, money obsessed baby killers. That maybe true of the actual members and cabinet, but not the voters.

If you think that the actual members and cabinet in the Tory party are self serving, money obsessed baby killers then why did you vote for them? Doesn't make sense to me.

I did say it was a statement of fact and that I didn't want to discuss it...

[sharkyvilla]

They failed miserably.

That's it for me, labour made a right mess of things, the main figures couldn't inspire confidence, they went far too offensive with telling me how bad the Tories were but did little to tell me why they were better

They simply didn't give me a reason to vote for them, I'd be interested to see if there was a way of telling how many of the votes labour got was purely for anti Tory reasons rather than pro labour

 

Spot on. The Tories fought a far better campaign. 

 

But don't you agree that actually, they just did a better job of slagging off Labour, than Labour did to them? 

 

Their record on the Economy, Immigration and Welfare reforms were shocking in the past 5 years, but they have been re-elected again based on the Economy and Welfare reforms (with a side portion of fear over the SNP)!

 

To call the Conservatives record on the Economy in the past 5 years "shocking" is a ridiculous statement. Shows clear bias.

Which bit is ridiculous CV? The fact that debt has risen from £811bn to £1,451bn in 5 years? That as a % of GDP it has now risen from under 50% to around 80% with more to come? That George has spent more in the past 5 years than Gordon did in the previous 10? That they missed all of their reduction targets in the previous Parliment?

Dave kept pulling out that bit of paper about there being 'no money left', so what did they do? They borrowed a load more. Which apparently is what got us into the mess in the first place, but as long as they are borrowing it and not Labour then it's more responsible?

Please.

Bugger me! The deficit was £170bn. That's how much more we were spending than getting in in 2010. It is an inevitability that you have to borrow to cover that shortfall, unless you raise taxes to an unthinkable amount or cut in a seriously vicious way. Even with the cuts we had, on average that deficit was only cut to £128bn per year for those five years according to your figures. I really don't understand how anyone can seriously use the borrowing against the Tories, what else could they possibly have done?

[Rodders]

not cut at the rate they have, increased taxes on those who can afford to pay for them. Scrap crap like Trident and re-invest properly. Invest in infrastructure - creating proper jobs not relying on an evironment of temporary short term contracts, be it zero hours or agency based work ( as a standard, having them as an option for those who wish to work that way is of course fine ). No job security / protection, no protection against unaffordable increases in rent whilst at the same time allowing the housing market to rise to absurdly high levels.  Long and short of it, I fail to see how any proper long term recovery takes effect if people don't have the wages to pay their rent, the jobs to pay their bills, or the support network for their health and kids. You introduce paying for services into the NHS, that's suddenly a potentially extra burden for people who have - in the public sector at least - suffered wage repression for years for example. You also - if you are imposing stringent cuts, then offer a **** TAX BREAK for the already rich - i.e. inheritance tax.  Personally, given that it was a recession caused by a global bank **** up starting in America, I think the top lot ought to really make up far more of the shortfall than they have done.

 

I do not for one minute think everyone is just suddenly rosy if Labour had won, but I do believe there would be more long term thinking than the imposition of a strict libertarian love for the free market approach. Thinking the market solves everything.

 

As for the message being sold, I also think it's a lot easier to sell one of fear, rather than hope, oddly enough - people who are insecure look out for things getting worse - and I suppose there was a trust issue with Labour - completely overblown in my view but there we go.  Certainly going on the size of the votes - not for everyone I obviously qualify that with but look at the messages in the papers - which I don't think it's a conspiracy theory to suggest that the likes of the Sun Telegraph, Mail - with their large circulation figures have a substantial influence - on stupid rubbish like "aaah the snp, and nonsense about legitimacy, or the inference that it was a labour caused recession rather than a Global banking crisis - the narrative has been very effective as it always is with the Murdoch lot.

 

 

 

Anyway have mildly calmed down since the other night, I think a couple of my posts may have been a bit over the top, and for that I apologise, but the sense of concern about the future remains substantial, I think the reality of the next few years for plenty of people remains bleak. There are checks and balances for government, there are none for fans of privatisation - where money changes hands there is always risks of corruption and abuse - applicable to government spending too of course - but for me - another serious issue is how likely will a tory govt pursue transparency laws - and ensure lobbying is open and transparent - I suspect not much at all.

Edited May 10, 2015 by Rodders

[wazzap24]

 

 

 

 

 

They failed miserably.

That's it for me, labour made a right mess of things, the main figures couldn't inspire confidence, they went far too offensive with telling me how bad the Tories were but did little to tell me why they were better

They simply didn't give me a reason to vote for them, I'd be interested to see if there was a way of telling how many of the votes labour got was purely for anti Tory reasons rather than pro labour

 

Spot on. The Tories fought a far better campaign. 

 

But don't you agree that actually, they just did a better job of slagging off Labour, than Labour did to them? 

 

Their record on the Economy, Immigration and Welfare reforms were shocking in the past 5 years, but they have been re-elected again based on the Economy and Welfare reforms (with a side portion of fear over the SNP)!

 

To call the Conservatives record on the Economy in the past 5 years "shocking" is a ridiculous statement. Shows clear bias.

Which bit is ridiculous CV? The fact that debt has risen from £811bn to £1,451bn in 5 years? That as a % of GDP it has now risen from under 50% to around 80% with more to come? That George has spent more in the past 5 years than Gordon did in the previous 10? That they missed all of their reduction targets in the previous Parliment?

Dave kept pulling out that bit of paper about there being 'no money left', so what did they do? They borrowed a load more. Which apparently is what got us into the mess in the first place, but as long as they are borrowing it and not Labour then it's more responsible?

Please.

Bugger me! The deficit was £170bn. That's how much more we were spending than getting in in 2010. It is an inevitability that you have to borrow to cover that shortfall, unless you raise taxes to an unthinkable amount or cut in a seriously vicious way. Even with the cuts we had, on average that deficit was only cut to £128bn per year for those five years according to your figures. I really don't understand how anyone can seriously use the borrowing against the Tories, what else could they possibly have done?

 

 

They missed their own fiscal target in the last parliament by around £250 billion. £250 billion on top of the increased borrowing they had already forecast. 

 

We can argue about why and what the alternatives might have been, but ultimately their plan failed. By a long way. 

Missing your own fiscal target by an amount that sizeable cannot be described as anything other than a failure. 

 

Argue the others would have been worse by all means, but not that this plan has worked so far. 

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

Daniel Hannan ‏@DanHannanMEP 18m18 minutes ago

This is the least representative Commons since 1926. Electoral reform seems inevitable. Conservatives shouldn't leave that debate to others.

 

 

Something terrible has happened: I'm in agreement with this berk.

[PompeyVillan]

So the SNP shouting loudly already. I'm English and pro union, I think further devolution is a good thing. Scotland clearly feel neglected by the 'Westminster' system and in particular Labour, who took their support far granted.

What is interesting is that Cameron painted Sturgeon as the boogy woman pre election, and the SNP a threat to English national interests. Interestingly, now, if he gives the SNP everything they want his critics will accuse him of doing what he scared the country away from with labour. If he doesn't, he'll jeopardise the union and seriously rile Scotland. He'll do well to come away unscathed.

That along with a tricky referendum on Europe, a small majority and a potentially troublesome back bench, it could be a difficult tern for Cameron and his party.

Edited May 10, 2015 by PompeyVillan

[mjmooney]

My mother was working class (but slightly embarrassed about it). She voted Conservative almost all her life. Why? Because she thought they were 'respectable', and Labour were 'common'. Until late in her life and she needed some help and appealed to councillors from both parties. The penny finally dropped.

[bickster]

They failed miserably.

That's it for me, labour made a right mess of things, the main figures couldn't inspire confidence, they went far too offensive with telling me how bad the Tories were but did little to tell me why they were better

They simply didn't give me a reason to vote for them, I'd be interested to see if there was a way of telling how many of the votes labour got was purely for anti Tory reasons rather than pro labour

I would absolutely agree that Labour failed to get their message across or should I say the message they SHOULD have been getting across. They spend far too much time talking shite about, theirs isn;t funded and ours is etc Who really gives a shite about than unprovable nonsense. They deserved to lose in that respect

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

the real issue: who did tim lovejoy vote for?

[TOM_VILLA_SCO]

So the SNP shouting loudly already. I'm English and pro union, I think further devolution is a good thing. Scotland clearly feel neglected by the 'Westminster' system and in particular Labour, who took their support far granted.

What is interesting is that Cameron painted Sturgeon as the boogy woman pre election, and the SNP a threat to English national interests. Interestingly, now, if he gives the SNP everything they want his critics will accuse him of doing what he scared the country away from with labour. If he doesn't, he'll jeopardise the union and seriously rile Scotland. He'll do well to come away unscathed.

That along with a tricky referendum on Europe, a small majority and a potentially troublesome back bench, it could be a difficult tern for Cameron and his party.

i voted SNP, give it 10 years, max, and we will be free. labour is nothing up here, much like the tories. 

[Awol]

 

So the SNP shouting loudly already. I'm English and pro union, I think further devolution is a good thing. Scotland clearly feel neglected by the 'Westminster' system and in particular Labour, who took their support far granted.

What is interesting is that Cameron painted Sturgeon as the boogy woman pre election, and the SNP a threat to English national interests. Interestingly, now, if he gives the SNP everything they want his critics will accuse him of doing what he scared the country away from with labour. If he doesn't, he'll jeopardise the union and seriously rile Scotland. He'll do well to come away unscathed.

That along with a tricky referendum on Europe, a small majority and a potentially troublesome back bench, it could be a difficult tern for Cameron and his party.

i voted SNP, give it 10 years, max, and we will be free. labour is nothing up here, much like the tories. 

 

Tom, you are free now mate. The Scots were offered the chance to walk away from the Union no questions asked and the majority said "no thanks, we're just fine as we are".  You are not a nation of prisoners being oppressed by the English against their will. You get that, right?  

 

 If the Tories are smart (in a political cunning sense) they will now grant Scotland all the fiscal autonomy the SNP want, tax raising powers etc and Holyrood can crack on with running all of Scotland's affairs minus defence and foreign policy. I think that would leave you with a revenue vs spending shortfall of about £7.5 billion per annum at the moment but at least you can raise your own taxes on the Scots to cover it.  I've no doubt people north of the border will love the SNP for engineering that situation and show their appreciation in the next elections to the Scottish Parliament. 

[Wainy316]

 

So the SNP shouting loudly already. I'm English and pro union, I think further devolution is a good thing. Scotland clearly feel neglected by the 'Westminster' system and in particular Labour, who took their support far granted.

What is interesting is that Cameron painted Sturgeon as the boogy woman pre election, and the SNP a threat to English national interests. Interestingly, now, if he gives the SNP everything they want his critics will accuse him of doing what he scared the country away from with labour. If he doesn't, he'll jeopardise the union and seriously rile Scotland. He'll do well to come away unscathed.

That along with a tricky referendum on Europe, a small majority and a potentially troublesome back bench, it could be a difficult tern for Cameron and his party.

i voted SNP, give it 10 years, max, and we will be free.

 

 

[tonyh29]

 

 

So the SNP shouting loudly already. I'm English and pro union, I think further devolution is a good thing. Scotland clearly feel neglected by the 'Westminster' system and in particular Labour, who took their support far granted.

What is interesting is that Cameron painted Sturgeon as the boogy woman pre election, and the SNP a threat to English national interests. Interestingly, now, if he gives the SNP everything they want his critics will accuse him of doing what he scared the country away from with labour. If he doesn't, he'll jeopardise the union and seriously rile Scotland. He'll do well to come away unscathed.

That along with a tricky referendum on Europe, a small majority and a potentially troublesome back bench, it could be a difficult tern for Cameron and his party.

i voted SNP, give it 10 years, max, and we will be free.

 

 

 

lets hope we get the same outcome with Sturgeon at Smithfield

[MakemineVanilla]

 

 

So the SNP shouting loudly already. I'm English and pro union, I think further devolution is a good thing. Scotland clearly feel neglected by the 'Westminster' system and in particular Labour, who took their support far granted.

What is interesting is that Cameron painted Sturgeon as the boogy woman pre election, and the SNP a threat to English national interests. Interestingly, now, if he gives the SNP everything they want his critics will accuse him of doing what he scared the country away from with labour. If he doesn't, he'll jeopardise the union and seriously rile Scotland. He'll do well to come away unscathed.

That along with a tricky referendum on Europe, a small majority and a potentially troublesome back bench, it could be a difficult tern for Cameron and his party.

i voted SNP, give it 10 years, max, and we will be free. labour is nothing up here, much like the tories. 

 

Tom, you are free now mate. The Scots were offered the chance to walk away from the Union no questions asked and the majority said "no thanks, we're just fine as we are".  You are not a nation of prisoners being oppressed by the English against their will. You get that, right?  

 

 If the Tories are smart (in a political cunning sense) they will now grant Scotland all the fiscal autonomy the SNP want, tax raising powers etc and Holyrood can crack on with running all of Scotland's affairs minus defence and foreign policy. I think that would leave you with a revenue vs spending shortfall of about £7.5 billion per annum at the moment but at least you can raise your own taxes on the Scots to cover it.  I've no doubt people north of the border will love the SNP for engineering that situation and show their appreciation in the next elections to the Scottish Parliament. 

 

 

I find the fact that Scotland has virtually become a one-party state a bit scary.

 

Governments with big majorities are prone to be immoderate and arrogant.

 

The whole point of having an opposition is to put a brake on the excesses of the party in power but when there is no opposition, what then?

 

Given the power to determine the level of their own taxes, the temptation for the SNP to avenge themselves on the much despised rich will be great.

 

Trying to find a cure for the massive levels of inequality in Scotland is obviously a huge priority but throwing the baby out with the bathwater, is a clear danger.

 

Although it is predictable that the rich should be resented, it always has to be remembered that three fifths of UK income tax payers don't actually pay the full whack of what the government spends on their behalf.

 

It definitely will be interesting as I am sure Cameron is determined to hand them enough rope to do themselves harm.

[TOM_VILLA_SCO]

 

 

So the SNP shouting loudly already. I'm English and pro union, I think further devolution is a good thing. Scotland clearly feel neglected by the 'Westminster' system and in particular Labour, who took their support far granted.

What is interesting is that Cameron painted Sturgeon as the boogy woman pre election, and the SNP a threat to English national interests. Interestingly, now, if he gives the SNP everything they want his critics will accuse him of doing what he scared the country away from with labour. If he doesn't, he'll jeopardise the union and seriously rile Scotland. He'll do well to come away unscathed.

That along with a tricky referendum on Europe, a small majority and a potentially troublesome back bench, it could be a difficult tern for Cameron and his party.

i voted SNP, give it 10 years, max, and we will be free. labour is nothing up here, much like the tories. 

 

Tom, you are free now mate. The Scots were offered the chance to walk away from the Union no questions asked and the majority said "no thanks, we're just fine as we are".  You are not a nation of prisoners being oppressed by the English against their will. You get that, right?  

 

 If the Tories are smart (in a political cunning sense) they will now grant Scotland all the fiscal autonomy the SNP want, tax raising powers etc and Holyrood can crack on with running all of Scotland's affairs minus defence and foreign policy. I think that would leave you with a revenue vs spending shortfall of about £7.5 billion per annum at the moment but at least you can raise your own taxes on the Scots to cover it.  I've no doubt people north of the border will love the SNP for engineering that situation and show their appreciation in the next elections to the Scottish Parliament. 

 

45% of the population aint going away, and looking at the demographics of no voters, the majority were elderly. and free in the sense where we are governed by a party who got 1 seat out of a possible 59. Scotland and england are too different to carry on in the one union, we are far more left wing, we are pro europe, recognise the free state of palestine and are against trident. the tories to not represent scotland the SNP do

[Jon]

You're not wrong, Tom.

 

Could be an interesting few years.

[bickster]

...we are far more left wing, we are pro europe...

So why did you all vote for a party whose policies were less anti-austerity than Labour and will blindly lead you out of Europe like the Pied Pier if you get independence?

Another shining example of how the people believe a message but don't look at the actual substantive policy.

Scottish independence is a ridiculous notion. Wanting independence and being a part of the EU? How does that square itself, even if they'd let you join, which they won't.

If the Scottish are more left wing than the English they should have voted Labour

If the Scottish are pro-European independence is an utter nonsense.

Sorry but the SNP sold you all a pup