aftershavedave
Well-known member
"Jenrick is just a turd in human form" bravo!
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Politics] Tory voters- where do you go from here?
- Thread starter stewart12
- Start date
- Oct 17, 2008
- 15,023
Completely agree
Indeed.
And it is mainly those who find that the party they voted for is not (part of) the government and who can't cope with this who are the ones who want PR, not to obtain better representation but to obtain a different government (that includes the party they support).
If we had PR it would either be a government of Labour plus (plus loony left fringe parties and the liberals and greens) or a government of Tory plus (plus Reform, other looney right wing parties, and the Liberals and possibly even the Greens). Plus ça change....
All those who support labour or tory and who can't cope with their party being out of government will continue to bitch about how unfair. or unrepresentative the system is, whatever the system, albeit I don't think many Labour or Tory supporters are that craven they want a new system when their party is out of power. I may be wrong of course.
And all those who support minority parties that can't get enough support to win more than a few seats by FPTP will bask in their new found importance as minority partners in a coalition for a bit, until they find that most of their manifesto policies are not part of planned legislation. Because they are the minor member of the coalition. Then they will turn on their leader. What say you. Mr Clegg?
Pavilionaire
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 31,313
I seriously wonder how close the Tory moderates are to binning off this cod-UKIP incarnation of the Tory Party and forming their own party, one that can rid itself of much of the Tory 'baggage', including sleaze, Rwanda, Covid mishandling and Brexit.
The pool of voters who might be receptive to a right of centre, post-Brexit, pro-business, benign paternalistic party is potentially huge; these were the voters who elected Heath, Thatcher, Major and Cameron, indeed many would have voted for Blair and Clegg too.
Given the size of the task facing Labour Britain needs a coherent, united Opposition that is not The Nasty Party, obsessed with Nigel Farage.
The pool of voters who might be receptive to a right of centre, post-Brexit, pro-business, benign paternalistic party is potentially huge; these were the voters who elected Heath, Thatcher, Major and Cameron, indeed many would have voted for Blair and Clegg too.
Given the size of the task facing Labour Britain needs a coherent, united Opposition that is not The Nasty Party, obsessed with Nigel Farage.
- Oct 17, 2008
- 15,023
I could get behind that. It’s what we thought we were getting from Starmer (we may still yet)
Randy McNob
> > > > > > Cardiff > > > > >
- Jun 13, 2020
- 4,732
Badenoch all the way
Got to have a person of colour if they wanna keep pushing their racist agenda
Got to have a person of colour if they wanna keep pushing their racist agenda
Pavilionaire
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 31,313
Labour haven't got those ties to business in their DNA. They are about the lot of the working man, and the worry is that Labour do not understand and cannot foster and nurture what business needs because of their prioritisation on people and welfare.
The core moral issue for the Tories is how they square their tradition for being the party of business with the single biggest act of sabotage on business, which was Brexit.
Leaving aside personal politics, you cannot get better than the Single Market on your doorstep with frictionless borders and an absence of red tape, access to a huge pool of labour, capital, goods and services.
I get that outside of the EU 'yolk' we are free to pursue global deals, but we've seen this is not as easy as envisaged, and countries prefer to be dealing with blocs rather than single countries. Much of the safe money we were making in the EU has gone, and that net loss of revenue means we can't afford the stuff we need (NHS, social care, potholes), let alone the stuff we want (HS2, a bigger military).
If Badenoch / Jenrick are pro-Brexit far right then they are simply Farage without the charisma and the Tories are simply the Reform Party without the freshness. Macron managed to get a new party up and running and into power in 14 months, and it is that sort of dynamism required in centre-right politics now that they have been cut adrift by the rump that remains of Tory MPs.
- Oct 17, 2008
- 15,023
What I want doesn’t exist. Centre-right fiscally, liberal socially, with a strengthened military. Basically I think I just described New Labour
Can’t the Tories do New Conservatism with a complete rebrand and getting the nut jobs out?
seagullwedgee
Well-known member
- Aug 9, 2005
- 3,086
Pav, your ability to cut through a multitude of complex issues, and present it in a clear and understandable way, is a real talent. You should be in the spin room. Seriously, it’s a really thoughtful analysis, regardless of anyone’s pre-conceived political persuasion. Well done Sir/Ma’am.
Pavilionaire
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 31,313
I think you've described the political space occupied by Rory Stewart who was the Chairman of the House of Commons Defence Committee.
Yet I see little hope of a grown-up political debate in this country while our media seem to want a leader who can perform an economic miracle whilst at the same time never going to a corporate event such as a pop concert or football match where they might meet some important and influential people to help get the recovery kick-started.
Yet it's how our Royal Family have been operating for decades- with great success - but never questioned by the media because they are "The Royal Family" and entitled to free shit by birth. Maybe Starmer should become a 'patron' of Arsenal / Wembley / Taylor Swift and then it would all be fine?
At the moment we have LEFT, CENTRE LEFT, RIGHT and FAR RIGHT. There is a gaping chasm where CENTRE RIGHT should be, arguably a space where - in England - the largest bloc of voters actually exist.
Super Steve Earle
Well-known member
I agree Labour is about the working man. I just don't understand why 24 hrs after the working man retires, he shifts to become a target to grab all he has worked and planned for while working and instantly derided as a pensioner, or worse still a boomer. Whilst still probably being a retired member of the same union as when he was working. Words that like the p word, n word and others should now be banned. P.S. I understand racism isn't on the same page as ageism, but no 'isms are good 'isms.
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,969
There is of course a fundamental split within the Tories about what Brexit means.
You have the sovereignty / making your decisions / put the drawbridge lot who are fundamentally opposed to other lot who want to drop all the regulation, make the state really tiny and create a two tier society with mass immigration doing the rubbish jobs with little protection.
Fundamentally why Liz Truss and Braverman fall out.
This has also led to the grifter Farage who has got to where he by simply saying both positions are possible (which they are aren't) in a way really really stupid people agree with.
I suspect Badenoch is within the Liz Truss/Ress Mogg disaster economics Singapore model wet dream whilst Jenrick (who I would trust to clean my windows) blames everything on immigrants.
What a mess that party has become.
Half Time Pies
Well-known member
You are a dying breed though aren't you, as someone who is a member of one of the main two political parties. I think FPTP was better suited for the days when people had a strong lifelong allegiance to a single party, which was often passed down through family generations. Now there is much more diversity and changeability in peoples political views, very few people are members of parties these days and a lot of people wouldn't consider themselves a 'labour voter' or 'conservative voter' like they used to.I am no tory but the tory supporters seems to be jubilant when Johnson was elected.
And as a Labour member I was jubilant when Labour won this year.
I accept that even many Tories became disillusioned with Johnson and his Lilliputian successors.
And I am already somewhat m'eh about Starmer.
But that doesn't mean I want to change the electoral system in the expectation that if only there were a few liberals and Greens in the cabinet coalition, Starmer and chums would be able to lead us on to a bright new tomorrow.
Disappointment with political leaders is part of life. Aside from anything else, we cannot all expect to get exactly what we want. Politics is the art of the possible and involves compromises (except if you are a fringe bullshit grifter like Farage).
Look, PR may make things better, but how much better? There are no guarantees. And is it even needed? Changing the system is always risky.
And things are 'bad' only because we have been living in interesting times: The global finance crash, Brexit, Covid, the emergence of a charismatic charlatan, the influence of fake news, and the sad fact that far too many educated people live in social, and social media silos.
My ex-wife is convinced we are being destroyed by a global capital conspiracy. One of my brothers seems to think Israel is destroying the world. The latter puts the blame firmly at the feet of Blair who betrayed socialism. OK . . . mates.
I am raising an eyebrow about all this. And holding my nerve. The last thing we need now is to sweep away our electoral system and replace it with one that will give the Farage gang 50 seats and an opportunity to form a coalition with Badenoch. The black and white minstrels ride again
(It also saddens me that I am apparently in conflict with many of NSC's voices of moderation and reasonsuch as yourself)
As a labour member I suppose I can understand why you would favour the status quo, but with FPTP political diversity is suppressed and the reality for many people including myself is that when the election comes along they have to hold their nose and vote for the party that they dislike the most. This makes people feel like they don't have a voice and is not good for democracy.
Pavilionaire
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 31,313
Labour would argue that their priority - along with economic recovery - is the NHS, and that the group that would benefit most from a healthy NHS is pensioners.
I don't think Labour have it in for pensioners per se, and the jury is out on where they stand until we've seen the detail in Rachel Reeves first Budget.
Most groups in society are facing hardship of one sort or another. I read today that some lenders are about to increase their mortgage rates, so with landlords selling it is harder to find rental accommodation, yet rents are going up, mortgages are expensive so tough for first-time buyers or renters trying to save for a deposit.
- Oct 17, 2008
- 15,023
And to this I ask what I always ask; does that extend to the seats and influence that Reform and UKIP prior to them would’ve gained? UKIP alone would’ve gained between 60-82 seats based on their 12.6% share.
People think that PR would provide some amazing diversity with the greens, libs and palatable “nice” parties getting representation.
Statistically based on historical voting, it would let in the very people that the lovely, considerate modernisers so despise - namely the Reforms and UKIPs of this world.
Half Time Pies
Well-known member
Where did I mention PR?
The biggest obstacle to this is the Tory grassroots membership who are essentially zealots at this stage. They’ve seen entryism far worse than anything Labour saw under Corbyn, and would now no more elect a moderate leader than fly in the air. They’re driving at full speed down the Trumpian, nativist tunnel.
This is their Corbyn moment, they’ve drawn all the wrong lessons from their defeat and are essentially drifting into their own echo chamber where the impure are purged. It’ll take something pretty spectacular to drag them back.
Half Time Pies
Well-known member
Yes absolutely, I think it would be great for democracy if sections of society that feel that their voices are not currently being heard had more representation in parliament, regardless of their views. Imagine some of the low calibre reform candidates that were thrown together to stand at the last election actually had to have their views properly scrutinised within parliament, it wouldn't be long before their bigoted and racists opinions came out and discredited their party.