Tory - The caring conservatives

[Deleted member 22389]

Hope you're joking. If you're not you're a bloody fool. The tw@s spitting at journalists, who were conveniently covered up, were there in the name of anarchy, not Labour. The TUC & the PA marched peacefully through Manchester. I was there at the beginning, and at the end.

Every demo gets knobheads rocking up uninvited.

Yes I am joking. I am just getting my own back for all the rubbish that was written about UKIP by focusing on a few individuals instead of the actual message.

 

[LargeHadronZugzwang]

It would seem that having a conscience is not really relevant to the Tories at all: otherwise why are they totally indifferent to the selling of billions of pounds worth of weapons to a medieval state which proceeds to kill over 500 children ?

Homelessness has risen by 36% in the last five years.
Abolition of Independent living fund for disabled is causing untold misery.

In view of the many concessions given to the extremely wealthy and the willingness to sign draconian legislation, it is quite evident that working or otherwise, they have no interest in vulnerable poor citizens whatsoever.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Of course there is.

What a strange comment.

I think you understand my point.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

It would seem that having a conscience is not really relevant to the Tories at all: otherwise why are they totally indifferent to the selling of billions of pounds worth of weapons to a medieval state which proceeds to kill over 500 children ?

Homelessness has risen by 36% in the last five years.
Abolition of Independent living fund for disabled is causing untold misery.

In view of the many concessions given to the extremely wealthy and the willingness to sign draconian legislation, it is quite evident that working or otherwise, they have no interest in vulnerable poor citizens whatsoever.

This.

 

[Chicken Run]

I'm not going to get embroiled in the general debate of "Caring" What I will say is that some of those protesters up in Manchester will do no good for the Labour party with their disgusting behavior, spitting at people and calling them scum? Oh the irony.

 

[drew]

I'm not going to get embroiled in the general debate of "Caring" What I will say is that some of those protesters up in Manchester will do no good for the Labour party with their disgusting behavior, spitting at people and calling them scum? Oh the irony.

Spitting is disgusting, no call for it but let's be honest, it was only a handful of insignificant morons. A leading pressure group closely aligned to many Tory MPs coming out and saying that you don't need to worry about people that wont' be around to vote for you or those that won't remember what you have done is far worse. Still, you seem more upset by a bit of spital! Would you have worried more if they came out with something along the lines of withdrawing support for people with terminal cancer because they won't be around at the next election either.

 

[drew]

Yes I am joking. I am just getting my own back for all the rubbish that was written about UKIP by focusing on a few individuals instead of the actual message.

It's a bit different comparing individuals with no affiliation to a party with the actions of elected councilors or members of a party's hierarchy.

 

[maltaseagull]

Also, don't believe a word of what the papers say about JC being the most unpopular. All of the polls they ran returned 80+% favour for JC. So they were repeatedly closed down and replaced by other ones. The process was rinsed and repeated three to four times, each time favouring JC. Until the papers finally declared him "most unpopular".

Do you know this as 100% accurate?

If not, it's a pretty dangerous statement to make.

 

[Hastings gull]

It's a bit different comparing individuals with no affiliation to a party with the actions of elected councilors or members of a party's hierarchy.

There you have it, as always; when there is bad publicity, it is outsiders as ever.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

There you have it, as always; when there is bad publicity, it is outsiders as ever.

Was it an outsider who put his cock in a pig?

 

[Hastings gull]

Was it an outsider who put his cock in a pig?

Are you being very clever this morning? There is always someone to dumb it all down, I suppose.

 

[mikeyjh]

It's only the Tories that could tell the workers they're not working hard enough at the some time the Sports Direct news comes out. Long hours are a sign of an efficient, modern and productive economy? Yeah right.....

 

[Uh_huh_him]

With all these swathes, how on earth did they win the election outright? You just can't beat a spot of incisive political judgement.

In my view, the reason that the Tories won the election is because a slight majority of the people, who choose to vote, believed they will be looked after to a greater extent by the conservative party.

IMO this is due mainly to the memory of the success of Thatcherism. It's aim was to support and incentivise small to medium enterprise and the aspirational upwardly mobile. It built a generation of Tories who hold the balance of power still in this country. They have switched allegiance before and may do again.
This demographic continue to believe the Tories are looking out for them. I suspect they believe that once the "need" for austerity is over, then they will start to see some benefit again.

The calls for cuts in welfare and the waste within the public sector ring true for this group. The question is who is actually benefitting from these cuts? Currently very few of the core Tory voters are seeing any benefit.

IMO this current crop of Tories do not have any link to the aspirational middle classes, in the same way that Thatcher did. She was a Grocer's daughter and felt a strong connection with the small businessman. The current crop of Tories do not have the same links to the aspirational middle class, it is not who they are looking out for this time around.

Thatcherism did deliver genuine prosperity for this group within a 10 year term of office.
IMHO, If the current government are still calling for radical cuts to "clear" the deficit in 2020, whilst still not delivering any benefit for their core voters, I suspect the election may have a different outcome.

 

[BLOCK F]

In my view, the reason that the Tories won the election is because a slight majority of the people, who choose to vote, believed they will be looked after to a greater extent by the conservative party.

IMO this is due mainly to the memory of the success of Thatcherism. It's aim was to support and incentivise small to medium enterprise and the aspirational upwardly mobile. It built a generation of Tories who hold the balance of power still in this country. They have switched allegiance before and may do again.
This demographic continue to believe the Tories are looking out for them. I suspect they believe that once the "need" for austerity is over, then they will start to see some benefit again.

The calls for cuts in welfare and the waste within the public sector ring true for this group. The question is who is actually benefitting from these cuts? Currently very few of the core Tory voters are seeing any benefit.

IMO this current crop of Tories do not have any link to the aspirational middle classes, in the same way that Thatcher did. She was a Grocer's daughter and felt a strong connection with the small businessman. The current crop of Tories do not have the same links to the aspirational middle class, it is not who they are looking out for this time around.

Thatcherism did deliver genuine prosperity for this group within a 10 year term of office.
IMHO, If the current government are still calling for radical cuts to "clear" the deficit in 2020, whilst still not delivering any benefit for their core voters, I suspect the election may have a different outcome.

The main reason Labour lost the election was because they were not trusted with the economy and Ed Miliband was seen as unsuitable to be PM of this country.
They also ran a crap campaign and people didn't like the idea of an SNP/ LABOUR mafia.

 

[drew]

There you have it, as always; when there is bad publicity, it is outsiders as ever.

Look it up. There's plenty of references to anarchists. You seem to forget it wasn't a labour march, it was an anti austerity.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

How is it democratic for a government to make one rule for union mandates, but a different rule for its own mandate? The rules they are introducing are not designed to increase democracy, they are designed to reduce strike action. Some may think this an acceptable aim, but admit the truth of its intent. It is insulting to limit freedom whilst wrapping it up in Newspeak and calling it an increase in democracy.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32870930

If the same mandate requirements were made for the general election, this government would not be in power and I don't believe that any previous UK government would has been elected with 80% of the vote.

Sigh ..... it's like going round in circles. So, if no candidate gets 50% of the vote in a GE what do you propose happens ? Should that part of the electorate go unrepresented ?

If a strike action doesn't doesn't get 50% ( or whatever is proposed ) what happens ? Ah, nothing, everyone carries on as is. You're not comparing two like things.

 

[Hastings gull]

In my view, the reason that the Tories won the election is because a slight majority of the people, who choose to vote, believed they will be looked after to a greater extent by the conservative party.
IMO this is due mainly to the memory of the success of Thatcherism. It's aim was to support and incentivise small to medium enterprise and the aspirational upwardly mobile. It built a generation of Tories who hold the balance of power still in this country. They have switched allegiance before and may do again.
This demographic continue to believe the Tories are looking out for them. I suspect they believe that once the "need" for austerity is over, then they will start to see some benefit again.

The calls for cuts in welfare and the waste within the public sector ring true for this group. The question is who is actually benefitting from these cuts? Currently very few of the core Tory voters are seeing any benefit.

IMO this current crop of Tories do not have any link to the aspirational middle classes, in the same way that Thatcher did. She was a Grocer's daughter and felt a strong connection with the small businessman. The current crop of Tories do not have the same links to the aspirational middle class, it is not who they are looking out for this time around.

Thatcherism did deliver genuine prosperity for this group within a 10 year term of office.
IMHO, If the current government are still calling for radical cuts to "clear" the deficit in 2020, whilst still not delivering any benefit for their core voters, I suspect the election may have a different outcome.

Thanks for this -what a breath of fresh air after all the doom-laden exaggerated claims (1% and 99%) as to why they are not caring. You may be right in this, who knows. I assume you mean by the "current crop" people like Osborne and Cameron, who would not be on the same wavelength as Margaret Thatcher was, given that they were at Eton etc. Perhaps you answered the dilemma in your first para - conservatism is what folk believe will look after them, irrespective of who fronts the party. Time will tell.

 

[Hastings gull]

Look it up. There's plenty of references to anarchists. You seem to forget it wasn't a labour march, it was an anti austerity.

There may well be plenty of references -there would, wouldn't there, if you wanted to shift a bit of blame.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

The main reason Labour lost the election was because they were not trusted with the economy and Ed Miliband was seen as unsuitable to be PM of this country.
They also ran a crap campaign and people didn't like the idea of an SNP/ LABOUR mafia.

Yes agreed. The point I am raising is that the question will need to be asked whether the Tories can be trusted with the economy in 2020.
The electorate won't be buying "5 more years of Austerity" and" it's still the last Labour governments fault" When they have had 10 years to sort it out.

 

[drew]

There may well be plenty of references -there would, wouldn't there, if you wanted to shift a bit of blame.