Bluestreak wrote:
"Anyone who votes this current lot it again and hasn’t got a fucking load of money pugged away somewhere, or a brilliant pension plan and private health care provision wants their fucking head looking at"
I find it difficult to disagree with your comments Mr Talbot and the full unedited paragraph would look great on a poster next to the big Tescos roundabout.
I often wonder why some ordinary people vote conservative. There would be no economic or social reasons for the decision and certainly those who i have spoken to never really put forward a positive reason why they do. Often they quote only negatives comments relating to the other parties.
I can only conclude that they do it to set themselves apart from the "rest" which gives them a feeling of superiority as they have a link with the rich and powerful. Bit like political sadomasochism.
Living in a predominately Conservative-voting area, I understand some of the reasons. Where I am is predominately rural, and the whole "Tory Shires" thing is very much a reality; they are seen as the party that best understands rural issues, and more protective of them. This is partly historical - the Labour movement effectively started in the industrial towns and cities, and even now rarely takes seats in the more rural areas, who if they aren't Tory (or possibly Plaid or SNP) are more likely Lib Dem than Labour.
This is also partly because (at least until now) Conservative has been not just a political position, but a social one. Where I am is very much socially conservative: a respect for historical institutions and ways of doing things, and a feeling that what's wanted is not progress, but stability. (I don't necessarily agree with this being the choice, but I think many round here do think like this.) In some of these areas, before the coming of the Welfare State, the rich landowners were also often great benefactors in the community - what you might call a "Social Contract" where money gave you rights, but there was also a sense of obligation - so someone who'd worked their whole life on a farm would expect - and receive - help from their employer once they retired or were ill, rather than from the state. (Incidentally, this was where Thatcher came from in many ways; she expected those doing well to be philanthropic, and was highly disappointed when mainly they weren't....) The rapacious capitalism of say the Manchester Mill-owners, who were much more likely to simply discard those unable to work, was much less of a reality in the shires - and even now there are still signs of that, for example a local former business owner recently built a new Medical Centre for his village - yes at a point that the still family-owned business were trying to play fast and loose with some planning restrictions so it got good publicity, but nevertheless a lot more than just a gesture. So in many areas, there was a feeling that it all worked so why change, and that lingers on.
One of the problems for Boris is that he's effectively hoping that a lot of people who would never consider voting Tory will do so purely because of Brexit - a single-issue election. The reality is that it's unlikely they will, or even if they do, five years later they will go back to their old voting pattern once the single issue is in the past. Farage could split the vote for them unless Boris actually stands up and says that he is not seeking to leave with a deal - that's what the Brexit Party's stated aim is; he can hope that the Brexit Party will take seats across Leave supporting constituencies in the North, but that's far from a foregone conculsion given that even the slightest examination of Farage's past statements reveal that if he gets a share of power, he will pursue the sort of right wing agenda that would have horrified even Thatcher.
Login
Register
FAQ
